Carbon capture options for refiners
An outline methodology identifies the most appropriate way to achieve a refinery’s carbon capture goal
SUZANNE FERGUSON and MIKE STOCKLE Foster Wheeler
egardless of how well designed and operated a refinery is, there are always some unavoidable energy demands and carbon emissions. As concern over the impacts of carbon emissions grows and, around the world, government legislation controlling or putting a cost on carbon emissions comes into force, refineries are becoming increasingly concerned with cost-effectively minimising their carbon footprint. Greenfield development projects have the advantage of being able to design their processes for reduced CO2 emissions through process selection and choice of primary energy supply. However, both new and existing plants can consider the following options to reduce their carbon footprint:1 • Efficiency improvements • Fuel substitution • Feedstock substitution • Configuration modifications • Carbon capture and storage. In this article, we will consider
the application of carbon capture to the refinery for carbon footprint reduction. It should be noted that a potentially profitable market for captured CO2, such as enhanced oil recovery, may also lead to the consideration of carbon capture and storage. Assuming that fugitive carbon losses are negligible, most of the carbon that enters the refinery leaves again in the form of hydrocarbon products, most of which will be combusted as fuels, emitting that carbon to the atmosphere. The processing of these products also contributes to their carbon footprint, since carbon is emitted due to the energy demand, or chemistry, of the refinery processes. Typically, around 5-10% of the crude feed to a refinery is lost as fuel in the refinery. The carbon emitted from the refinery is much easier to reduce than that emitted from, say, the exhaust pipe of a car. Hence, carbon captured from a refinery not only
reduces the refinery’s overall emissions and carbon footprint, but also the embedded carbon of its products.
Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is the process of removing or reducing the CO2 content of streams normally released to the atmosphere and transporting that captured CO2 to a location for permanent storage. CCS can be applied to a wide range of large single-point sources, such as process streams, heater and boiler exhausts, and vents from a range of high CO2 footprint industries, including power generation, refining, natural gas treating, chemicals, cement production and steel production. There are three main classifications of technologies employed: • Pre-combustion capture • Post-combustion capture • Oxyfuel combustion capture.
Introduction to carbon capture and storage
Vent Lean solvent
Drying and compression
Direct contact cooler
Figure 1 Post-combustion flow scheme
PTQ Q2 2012 77
The solvent then returns to the absorption column. Each CCS route described below comprises a group of technologies based on similar process flow schemes. FCC. medium. blower and absorber located as close as possible to each source (or group of sources). leaving an essentially pure hydrogen stream and a CO2-rich solvent stream. Post-combustion CO2 capture is a simpler system than pre-combustion. post-combustion carbon capture could be applied to a number of refinery flue gas sources at the same time (such as fired heaters. and the syngas cooling train can be used to raise a significant quantity of high-. ammonia. The highlight of the post-combustion process is that it is suited not only to new installations but may also be retrofitted to existing plants (see Figure 1). For each method. Very large single-point sources such as utilityscale power plants present a challenge in terms of maximum scale-up in a single leap. There are variations on this postcombustion scheme: • A range of processes exists utilising different solvents: MEA. where it is converted to syngas. while the released CO2 is dried and compressed for export. the CO2 is compressed. The CO2-rich solvent is then heated against lean solvent and regenerated in a stripping column. as it generates a pure.or air-blown pressurised gasifier or reformer. The flue gas is scrubbed of up to 90% of its CO2 content and is returned to the combustor stack and released to atmosphere. with the rich solvent then pumped to one or multiple solvent regeneration units and one or multiple compression units. fuel oils. The flue gas enters the absorption column. which increases the hydrogen and CO2 content of the syngas. described below. The syngas is then passed through a shift reactor. which can be dried and compressed for export. hydrogen production units). high-temperature syngas is then cooled before being washed with a solvent to absorb the CO2. sterically hindered MEA and even seawater • For high-sulphur feeds. depleted oil field (where enhanced oil recovery could be employed) or depleted gas field. There are variations on this precombustion scheme: • A range of coals. where it is washed with a physical solvent such as monoethanolamine (MEA). This high-pressure. the
Depending on the specific site.com
A hydrocarbon feedstock is fed to an oxygen. allowing the direct contact cooler to be eliminated. This process offers a high degree of integration potential.and lowpressure steam (see Figure 2). dried and transported to a suitable storage location such as a saline aquifer. petcoke. high-pressure hydrogen stream. Some of these plants are already at an appropriate size to capture CO2 from point sources the size of refinery-fired heaters and boilers.
the cooler.eptq. This offers flexibility to fit in the large capture equipment around the existing. The solvent regeneration process then releases a CO2 stream. often crowded plot.Air
Drying and compression Heat recovery AGR process SRU and tail gas treating
HP MP LP Steam
Figure 2 Pre-combustion flow scheme
Once captured. an example process description and flow scheme are given and the key variations highlighted.
Pre-combustion CO2 capture
Post-combustion CO2 capture
Combustion flue gas is cooled by direct water contact before entering a blower designed to overcome the absorption system pressure drop.3 Depending on the specific site. municipal solid waste and biomass can be used as gasifier feedstock • Natural gas and light liquid feedstocks can be used with a reformer • A range of CO2 solvent removal systems are available such as
78 PTQ Q2 2012
process may be coupled with a flue gas desulphurisation unit. and can be combined with almost any type of combustion system. post-combustion carbon capture could be applied to a number of refinery flue gas sources at the same time
the scheme shown above has already been demonstrated for many years for the production of CO2 for use in the food and chemicals industries.2. However.
sealing the system against air ingress and burner modification. different fuels and different methods will result in a variety of flue gas compositions and conditions. natural gas treating and ammonia production. For example. the scheme above could similarly be used on a refinery for co-generation of low embedded carbon hydrogen. The acid gas removal step is typically characterised by its high-pressure syngas feedstock composed of mainly hydrogen. Careful consideration must be made with respect to design temperatures and pressure of the existing boiler or heater when applying oxyfuel carbon capture as a retrofit. can allow any boiler or fired heater to be converted to oxy-
PTQ Q2 2012 79
. This route could also be used for decarbonisation of refinery fuel gas. sulphur removal by limestone scrubbing and water removal by cooling and condensation. which can then be purified. However. This therefore results in smaller volumes of equipment and fewer processing steps. This is done in order to remove the process step in both the pre. dried and compressed for export (see Figure 3). steam and heat to be supplied to other refinery units or with a steam turbine to raise power.
Where is the carbon emitted on a refinery?
The processing of crude oil into products requires energy in the form of heat and power. as well as alternative technologies such as membranes and pressure swing absorption.
Addition of an air separation unit can allow any boiler or fired heater to be converted to oxy-firing
Variations on the oxyfuel flow scheme are: • A range of fuels can be used in an oxyfuel flow scheme • A similar scheme has also been proposed for the conversion of gas turbines to use oxygen in place of air. CO2 and carbon monoxide. large-scale power production. however.
combusted with oxygen from an air separation unit. an air separation unit must be added. The temperature in the boiler is moderated by recycling a portion of the flue gas back to the combustion chamber. The remaining flue gas has a high concentration of CO2. with or without burner modification.and post-combustion carbon capture flow schemes in which CO2 must be separated from a stream largely composed of other gases. gas turbine generator (GTG) flue gas will be characterised
Nitrogen Flue gas recycle
Drying and compression Sulphur removal Cooler/ condenser
Figure 3 Oxyfuel flow scheme
www. addition of an air separation unit. However. in a steam turbine to form a combined-cycle plant such as an integrated gasification combined cycle (IGCC) plant. The most discussed application of oxyfuel carbon capture is for newbuild.Selexol and methyl-diethanolamine (MDEA). The pre-combustion scheme can also be used for repowering an existing gas turbine power island or any burner that is capable of switching to decarbonised syngas.eptq. However. as well as some chemical reactions. The same acid gas removal process can therefore also be applied to similar syngases in processes such as steam methane reformer (SMR) hydrogen production. The flue gas passes through particle removal by electrostatic precipitator. if necessary. the fuel
All combustion-based power generation will emit CO2. all of which result in the emission of CO2 to the atmosphere from the refinery site (assuming power is produced on site from the combustion of hydrocarbons or coke). Oxyfuel carbon capture aims to increase the partial pressure of the combustion flue gas by effectively eliminating the large volume flow of nitrogen found in systems fired using air as their oxidant.
Utilities area: power and steam production
Oxyfuel combustion CO2 capture
In this process. The most frequently considered application of pre-combustion carbon capture is a power plant in which the hydrogen-rich stream is combusted in a gas turbine and the steam raised during syngas heat recovery is utilised. along with heat recovered from the gas turbine exhaust.
Fluidised catalytic cracker
The catalyst used in the FCC process becomes coated in coke in the FCC reactor and is continuously regenerated by burning this coke off the catalyst in an adjacent vessel. Pre-combustion carbon capture can allow either a single fuel to a single unit to be decarbonised.
For those refineries that have one or more hydrogen production units (HPUs). and the resulting decarbonised fuel gas used anywhere on the refinery site. depending on the methods employed on a particular site. such as sulphur removal unit tail gas treatment.or coke-fired boiler will have a much higher CO2 content (10%) and potentially much higher sulphur content. it may be more sensible to add precombustion CO2 capture by reforming the natural gas. this can be collected and reformed at a central location. assuming there is space to add the necessary equipment elsewhere on the site. This is due to the chemistry of the hydrogen production process.by low CO2 concentration (3%). The resulting exhaust gas is therefore high in CO2. Oxyfuel CO2 capture can be applied to all of those steam and power systems that can be sealed to air ingress and whose burner systems and design conditions can tolerate switching to operation in a fuel-CO2-water + oxygen regime as opposed to a fuel + air regime. which results in the atmospheric emission of nearly 100% of the carbon content of the feedstock stream. Some carbon capture methods are more appropriate than others. If a site has a large power island fired on a single fuel. Alternatively. Units with often particularly large process heaters include the CDU. instead.
Some carbon capture methods are more appropriate than others. although some may be more appropriate than others if there is. This is done by decarbonising the fuel gas
feeding the remaining hydrogenrich gas to the CHP. The characteristics of the flue gases and the fired heaters should be considered carefully when selecting the best option for each process unit. post-. a significant sulphur content or very low CO2 partial pressure. The current state-of-theart post-combustion capture technologies can be applied to any flue gas. this is mostly limited to boilers and fired heaters. low temperature (if a heat recovery steam generator is also used) and low sulphur content. whereas a coal. the only feasible option for reduction of the unit’s CO2 footprint may be to decarbonise the refinery fuel gas to this unit. Units with smaller heaters include the NHT. VDU. then removing the CO2 before
Carbon capture options for process unit heaters
Similar to the discussion for the utilities area. proving there is plot space available for ducting and/or the absorption section of the process close to the flue gas source(s).and oxyfuel CO2 capture could all be applied to process unit heaters. depending on the methods employed on a particular site
upstream of the combustion location using the process described in the previous section. For this capture method. shifting the syngas to hydrogen and CO2. while other emissions are waste streams from the unit operation processes. DHT and SRU. oxy-combustion may be a good option. for example. Case-by-case technology selection is therefore recommended. Most emissions are due to the combustion of hydrocarbon fuels for process heating. CCR
Emissions from the process units are characterised by their variety. the carbon capture equipment can be located remotely and the decarbonised fuel transported to the utilities area. Applying oxy-combustion to an existing heater requires review
PTQ Q2 2012 81
. Post-combustion CO2 capture can be applied to all combustion-based
If a process unit’s heaters are fired on various fuels or waste streams generated within the unit.
Process unit emissions: CDU. such as a natural gas-fired combined heat and power unit. VDU. effectively decarbonising all refinery fuel gas users at once. from coal or heavy fuel oil boilers to natural gas-fired gas turbine generators. this unit contributes a significant proportion of the site’s carbon emissions. although research is ongoing into the modification of gas turbines to fire in oxyfuel mode.
If a process unit contains several small heaters fired on refinery fuel gas in a very congested plot. At the moment. Pre-combustion CO2 capture can be applied to any steam and power systems that can be fired on a high hydrogen content gas.
methods of steam and power generation. or it could be applied to the whole refinery fuel gas system. If the heaters can be sealed against air ingress and an air separation unit added to the site. if the utilities systems are fired on refinery fuel gas. pre. it is not necessary to have the carbon capture equipment located adjacent to the boiler or gas turbine. either post-combustion or oxyfuel combustion are likely to be more appropriate if space is available for the capture equipment.
Carbon capture options for steam and power generation in the general utilities area
Post-combustion and oxy-combustion
Steam and power generation in the utilities area is achieved using a broad range of different fuels and methods. since it treats the flue gas downstream of the emission source with little or no impact on the upstream operations. CCR and visbreaker.
Post-combustion CO2 capture is often likely to be the simplest capture method to add to an existing unit. Ducting must also be added in order to recirculate the CO2-rich recycle stream to the heater inlet along with the addition of particulates and sulphur removal
(depending on the fuel used).eptq. water removal. depending on the fuel composition and capture technology selection). the CO2 absorption step. Applying post-combustion capture requires re-routing the flue gas to
cooling and sulphur removal (if sulphur removal is required.Reformer flue gas
aMDEA syngas scrubbing
CO2 compression and drying
CO2 export New scope
Decarbonised syngas Natural gas feed Natural gas for reformer firing Syngas
Figure 4 SMR with PSA — pre-combustion carbon capture
Decarbonised flue gas CO2 lean MEA Captured CO2
Reformer flue gas
CO2 compression and drying
CO2 export New scope
CO2 rich MEA Natural gas feed Natural gas for reformer firing Syngas Syngas
Figure 5 SMR post-combustion carbon capture
Captured CO2 Reformer flue gas
CO2 compression and drying
CO2 export New scope
Natural gas feed Natural gas for reformer firing
Figure 6 SMR non-PSA pre-combustion carbon capture
and likely modification of the burners. It is necessary to minimise the distance between the
82 PTQ Q2 2012
. then returning the scrubbed flue gas to the stack and sending the absorption media for either local or central regeneration. as well as careful checking that the equipment can tolerate safe operation at modified temperatures and pressures without exceeding the design conditions. and CO2 purification and compression. as long as its plot and/or surroundings are not too congested.
6 and 7. since in most SMR hydrogen plants almost all the carbon in the feed gas is ultimately discharged as CO2. CO2 absorption and the stack. Most current state-of-the-art postcombustion processes can allow for the absorption media to be transported some distance to be regenerated at a remote location. Since the reformer is natural gas-fired. in turn. Two main SMR process routes are currently in use.
Alternatively.and post-combustion carbon capture
flue gas source. These capture options are shown in Figures 4. post-combustion capture can be applied instead to the SMR reformer flue gas in order to capture 90% of the CO2. However. In these plants.com
PTQ Q2 2012 83
. as this minimises pressure drop and hence minimises the blower power.eptq.
Carbon capture options for the hydrogen plant
SMR hydrogen plants contribute a significant proportion of the overall
CO2 footprint of many refineries and are a major single-point CO2 emission source.2 bar in the existing plant and can go straight to compression/drying.Decarbonised flue gas CO2 lean MEA Reformer flue gas
CO2 compression and drying
CO2 export New scope
CO2 rich MEA Natural gas feed Natural gas for reformer firing Syngas
Figure 7 SMR non-PSA pre. with the vast majority of more modern plants using the PSA-based process route. reduces the parasitic power load from CO2 capture to a minimum. making them very attractive for post-combustion CO2 capture. typically 50% of the CO2 can be captured. Foster Wheeler has previously compared the following options: • Pre-combustion capture on HPU syngas between the shift reactor and the PSA unit • Post-combustion capture on the HPU reformer itself (where the reformer is fired on PSA tail-gas) • Post-combustion carbon capture
Treated flue gas
Catalyst to FCC reactor
Lean solvent Steam
Compression and dehydration
Catalyst from FCC reactor
Figure 8 Refinery FCC post-combustion case
www. This. By this route. Some older hydrogen plants use liquid wash (typically. The emissions from the hydrogen plant have a high partial pressure of CO2 compared to most flue gases. a convenient solution for capturing most of the CO2 is the installation of a new aMDEA amine wash unit between the existing CO shift and the PSA unit. This second consideration allows economies of scale for the absorbent regeneration and CO2 compression steps in the capture process. the CO2 removed is available as a concentrated stream at around 1. 5. amine or Benfield) to remove CO2 from the shifted gas instead of the PSA unit. the SMR process can be easily modified for pre-combustion carbon capture. postcombustion CCS can optionally be applied. For the PSA-based plant. This is particularly useful if space is limited around the CO2 source or if it is required to capture CO2 from a number of sources that are distributed around different areas of a site. so the choice of technology is not obvious.
both of the HPU carbon capture options (first and second options) delivered significant CO2 emissions reductions at a lower project cost (both capital and operating) than applying postcombustion capture to the other refinery-fired heaters on the site. This allows the largest single-point emitters to be identified as well as potential groupings of smaller emitters. mediumand large-scale duties • Review decarbonising refinery fuel gas using pre-combustion capture facilities to maximise the hydrogen content of fuel and allow partial decarbonisation of small CO2 point sources • Review pre-combustion and postcombustion capture options for the hydrogen plant • Review of capture technology options on the FCC unit.
Applying carbon capture to the refinery Setting the goal
When applying carbon capture to a specific refinery. since its carbon source is the process of regenerating the FCC catalyst. with sufficient space nearby) at the top of the list and those to which it would be much more difficult to apply carbon capture (small quantity and low concentration. Typical sitespecific studies to be undertaken in order to do this would include: • Pre-combustion. This information allows the CO2 emissions sources to be prioritised for carbon capture. with those with easiest capture (high quantity and or concentration of CO2. it is also important to ensure that a destination for the captured CO2 will be available. In this particular study. as described in
84 PTQ Q2 2012
www. the concentration of CO2 in the stream is higher. similar sources. fired on natural gas. Both post-combustion and oxycombustion are feasible options for the FCC unit. However. they can be applied to typical sources and then their results extrapolated to the other. or group of sources. and hence the absorption column and cooler can be smaller in diameter. or
Once the goal of the capture project has been set. However. typically using LP modelling. it may be most appropriate to select the best case by using LP modelling. Otherwise.
The most appropriate method of carbon capture should then be identified for each CO2 emissions source.
Carbon capture options for FCCU
The FCC unit is another key CO2 emitter. with significant impurities and very constrained plot) at the bottom of the list. Application of oxyfuel combustion to the FCC regenerator is also similar to the boiler application (see Figure 9). more sulphur removal is likely to be required compared with a coal or natural gas boiler flue gas. The CO2 concentration. At this stage.eptq.Air
Nitrogen Flue gas recycle
Limestone slurry CO2
Oxygen Catalyst to FCC reactor
Compression and dehydration
Catalyst from FCC reactor
Figure 9 FCC with oxyfuel combustion carbon capture
on other refinery-fired heaters. for example. impurities content and other key factors such as nearby plot constraints should also be noted for each CO2 source.com
. a set target carbon capture percentage. These studies need not be performed for every emission source on the refinery. for minimum effort and investment. it should be easy to identify where quick wins can be made in terms of reducing the refinery carbon footprint and maximising the quantity of CO2 captured. post-combustion and oxyfuel capture options for power generation in the general utilities area • Post-combustion capture versus oxyfuel capture for existing refinery heaters — review heaters or groups of heaters covering small-. it is important to consider what the goal of the project will be. or even the quantity of capital to invest. If there are a number of different options.
a mass rate of carbon dioxide “product”. Instead. the post-combustion scheme is identical to the boiler flue gas process (see Figure 8). At the end of this stage of the project. This might be a customer who intends to use the CO2 for enhanced oil recovery. For the post-combustion case.
Propose design solution
Once the technology selection stage has been completed. an action plan for applying carbon capture in order to achieve the goal of the project can be identified. or a pipeline and saline aquifer for permanent sequestration. pre-combustion carbon capture is not an option. the carbon balance of the refinery should be quantified.
The material balance shows that CO2 is emitted in the breakdown of areas in Table 1. the refinery could need to install: • A new amine wash unit • Additional steam and power capacity • Additional cooling water capacity • Solvent-based capture and regeneration facilities (possibly multiple absorbers) • CO2 compression • Significant large-scale ducting to get the flue gases to the capture facilities. with
shift unit and acid gas removal unit (AGRU) common to both syngas producers • Modify heavy fuel oil boilers to fire on decarbonised refinery fuel gas • Modify process unit heaters to fire on decarbonised refinery fuel gas. limited space available Natural gas/refinery Large plot area can be made available to fuel gas boilers 39 200 (total) 8. many of the challenges can be overcome in the design phase.0 Variable. existing utilities and infrastructure.5 the north of the process. The refinery is powered by gas turbine generators with additional power imported over the fence. CO2 concentration. Depending on the technologies selected.9 VDU 9213 7. which is emitted due to the generation of additional steam and power used by the capture and compression facilities). capturing 46 260 kg/h CO2
Apply a dedicated 90% postcombustion capture unit to the HPU reformer flue gas (absorption. but the barriers are not just economic. stripping and low-pressure CO2 compression) • Install high-pressure CO2 compression. The refinery has a 50 000 b/d FCC unit and a single 40 000 Nm3/h PSA-based SMR hydrogen production unit. close to boundary FCC 51 400 16 200 ppm sulphur HPU 32 000 20 Space available to south if storage area relocated CDU 31 182 7.com
.9 Visbreaker 16 950 13.4
Our case study refinery is based on a theoretical FCC/visbreaker-based refinery processing 235 000 b/d of Urals crude. but converting this theoretical reduction of carbon into something that can actually be achieved faces a number of challenges.9 CCR 28 352 7.9 DHT 5044 7. stripping and low-pressure CO2 compression) with tailored sulphur removal by hydroxide dosing in the direct contact cooler. High-level design and economic analysis of a number of options showed that the lowest-cost solution to achieve the project goal was to: • Apply a dedicated 90% postcombustion capture unit to the FCC flue gas (absorption.eptq.0 NHT 4040 7. stripping and low-pressure CO2 compression) capturing 28 800 kg/h CO2 • Duct the flue gases from the 3 x 150 MMBTU natural gas-fired boilers in the utilities area to a single dedicated 90% post-combustion capture unit (absorption. For a new refinery. The overall material balance shows that applying this scheme delivers a CO2 footprint reduction of 31% for the overall site (including 25 200 kg/h additional CO2.9 SRU 125 n/a
detail in a previous Foster Wheeler paper. stripping and lowpressure CO2 compression) • Decarbonise refinery fuel gas and eliminate heavy fuel oil firing by adding a refinery fuel gas reformer and a heavy fuel oil gasifier.5 Fuel oil boilers 10 435 13.
Challenges in implementation
We have seen that the technologies exist to allow a significant reduction in the carbon emissions from a refinery.Characterisation of CO2 emission sources
CO2 mass rate. to make capture economic compared to emitting the carbon. If further CO2 capture were required for future development. The target for the carbon capture project is to identify the lowest cost (capital and operating) method for capturing 100 t/h of CO2 to be exported to a pipeline and utilised by a third party for enhanced oil recovery. and on refinery operations can drive which solutions are most economic or even which are viable. a carbon tax or subsidy is required. but recent Foster Wheeler studies indicate this needs to be $60/tonne of CO2 or more to make projects economically viable. the recommended next steps might be to: • Duct the flue gases from gas turbine generators in the utilities area to a single dedicated 90% post-combustion capture unit (absorption. Notes kg/h mol% GTGs 10 145 8.
86 PTQ Q2 2012
www. dehydration and pumping facility common to all three capture units adjacent to utility boiler capture unit. The costs both in capital and operating terms for carbon capture are significant and. high-sulphur content. if modification required • Slightly expand sulphur unit capacity to process the additional stream from refinery fuel gas decarbonisation AGRU. We have already seen that the economics of these projects require a value of carbon higher than that currently being achieved in most locations. with steam generation by one old heavy fuel oil boiler and 3 x 150 MMBTU new natural gas-fired boilers. but for existing plants the impacts on plot plan.9 FCC NHT 3607 7. The level of tax required is dependent on many factors.
This is where an experienced contractor who is used to working in congested locations with difficult access can be invaluable in ensuring a viable.
that are not advantaged in this way.mhi. PTQ. FEED and pre-FEED projects.co.com
PTQ Q2 2012 87
www. An outline methodology has also been described as a starting point for identifying the most appropriate way to achieve a given carbon capture goal for a refinery.eptq.Often the biggest challenge will be the plot layout and constructability issues associated with the facilities.fwc. UK.html 3 http://www. pre-. April 2010.com Mike Stockle is Chief Engineer. She is a chartered chemical engineer with an MEng (Hons) in chemical engineering from the University of Surrey. where she has worked on a range of CCS studies.jp/en/products/expand/ km-cdr_experiences_03. 2 http://www. post. Planning for carbon capture.and oxyfuel-combustion capture. in Foster Wheeler’s Business Solutions Group in Reading. Q1 2008. a case study has been included in order to illustrate one potential scheme for reducing the CO2 emissions from an example refinery. Carter D. Email: suzanne_ferguson@fwuk. with the goal of exporting 100 tonnes per hour of CO2.
Suzanne Ferguson is Leader of the Carbon Capture team in Foster Wheeler’s Business Solutions Group.com/econamine/Pages/ faqs. The hurdles to wide-scale implementation of carbon capture on refineries are now more about economics and where the carbon is disposed of rather than the technical challenges of capturing the CO2. constructible option is selected. He is an experienced LP modeller and has undertaken a number of feasibility and front-end studies. to the range of different CO2 emission sources.
This article has discussed the application of carbon capture and storage technology to a refinery. Jones L.aspx 4 Stockle M.fluor. Refining Technology. Optimising refinery CO2 emissions. Finally. Where the carbon is stored is critical. and has considered the merits of the main methods of capture.
Selexol is a trademark of UOP. This methodology is characterised by the following steps: • Set the target • Perform carbon balance • Select applicable technologies • Propose design solutions to achieve goal (including assessing constructability) • Assess a number of possible solutions by LP modelling. Significant capital and operating costs are associated with carbon capture on the refinery and these costs would need to be offset against the cost of carbon emissions or other forms of subsidy to make capture projects economically viable. He graduated from Nottingham University and is a Fellow of the IChemE. and locations with easier access to oil fields needing EOR or those facilities that are able to share in larger carbon storage pipeline networks will be able to adopt the technology more readily than those
References 1 Ferguson S. PTQ.