The document discusses the challenges European refineries face in meeting new fuel specifications by 2005. Stricter limits on diesel sulfur, cetane and distillation points will reduce diesel production capacity by 5-10% unless refineries modify their configurations. Adding a mild hydrocracker could help meet these challenges by:
1) Increasing diesel and matching projected demand which is up 18% over 10 years.
2) Raising the cetane number in diesel and fuel oil pools to meet 2005 standards of 52-54 without extreme hydrotreating.
3) Cutting sulfur levels in naphtha to 10-50ppm needed to comply with low sulfur gasoline demands.
The document discusses the challenges European refineries face in meeting new fuel specifications by 2005. Stricter limits on diesel sulfur, cetane and distillation points will reduce diesel production capacity by 5-10% unless refineries modify their configurations. Adding a mild hydrocracker could help meet these challenges by:
1) Increasing diesel and matching projected demand which is up 18% over 10 years.
2) Raising the cetane number in diesel and fuel oil pools to meet 2005 standards of 52-54 without extreme hydrotreating.
3) Cutting sulfur levels in naphtha to 10-50ppm needed to comply with low sulfur gasoline demands.
The document discusses the challenges European refineries face in meeting new fuel specifications by 2005. Stricter limits on diesel sulfur, cetane and distillation points will reduce diesel production capacity by 5-10% unless refineries modify their configurations. Adding a mild hydrocracker could help meet these challenges by:
1) Increasing diesel and matching projected demand which is up 18% over 10 years.
2) Raising the cetane number in diesel and fuel oil pools to meet 2005 standards of 52-54 without extreme hydrotreating.
3) Cutting sulfur levels in naphtha to 10-50ppm needed to comply with low sulfur gasoline demands.
many challenges that may signifi- cantly affect refinery processing schemes over the next five years and beyond. First, the recommendations of the European Auto-Oil I and II pro- grammes have resulted in unprecedent- ed gasoline and automotive diesel fuel quality requirements (Table 1). In 2005, the maximum automotive diesel sulphur level will be reduced to 50ppm. Sulphur levels as low as 10ppm will be the rule in some countries. At the same time, the specified cetane number, polyaromatics, specific gravity and 95 per cent distillation point will also undergo changes. These will directly affect the refinery diesel pool formulation. The probable reduction of 10C to 20C of the diesel 95 per cent distillation point will impact on the refinery diesel output. For example, a 10C reduction in diesel cut-point will diminish the diesel pool volume by about 5 per cent. Second, as a result of increasing road transport in Europe and the success of diesel automobile engines, particularly in France, the projected demand for diesel fuel shows an increase of at least 18 per cent over the next 10 years, and even more in some scenarios, while the market share for naphtha is expected to decline slightly (Table 2). Jet fuel demand is also climbing rapidly (+40 per cent) due to the expan- sion of air transport. Demand for domestic fuel oil continues its long-term decline. European refineries must there- fore adapt their product slate signifi- cantly, considering that diesel production capacity is already bottle- necked while the previously projected diesel end-point specifications will result in a 5 to 10 per cent loss of current production. These long-term trends will compel refiners to modify their processing con- figurations in order to increase higher- quality middle distillate production. In the past, the prevailing market forecasts and economics led refiners to invest in FCC complexes to satisfy the more immediate gasoline needs, which is why most European refinery conversion schemes were limited to FCCs and visbreakers. To produce high yields of high-quality middle distillates from vacuum gasoil (VGO), refiners will have to invest in hydrocrackers to meet future market demand. Although they are not likely to shut down FCC operations on the sole premise that FCC units do not produce high yields of high quality middle distil- lates, they will have to implement some reduction in FCC throughputs. A realis- tic case study will include an FCC unit and a hydrocracker. Hydrogen management is another key point to consider when comparing technical solutions in addressing the dif- ficult problem of diesel quantity and quality. The optimum overall scheme will be one that selectively adds hydro- gen into the diesel pool. Case studies The European refinery case studies detailed in this article processes 10 megatons/year of a North Sea crude. The refinerys bottom-of-the-barrel units include: An FCC plant A vacuum residue visbreaking unit A diesel HDT plant, sized for year 2000 specifications (not shown in the figures that follow). The residue from the visbreaker is used for production of 40cSt fuel oil. The effects of adding the follow- ing hydrocracking technologies were analysed: Mild hydrocracking High pressure hydrocracking IFP hydroconversion technology (Hytail). The study draws upon information gathered from over 40 industrial units. The results, primary product distribu- tion, diesel and domestic fuel oil pool constitution, and main product charac- teristics prior to hydrotreatment, are given in Tables 3 to 5. A hydrocracking strategy for a competitive market A description of a novel hydrocracking technology that offers refiners a cost effective way of complying with European 2005 diesel specifications, taking into account new configurations necessary to meet capacity and quality targets P Marion D Due E Benazzi IFP REFI NI NG PTQ SUMMER 2001 www. ept q. c om 23 1996 Current 2005 (expected) Sulphur, ppm max 500 350 1050 Cetane number, min 49 51 5254? Polyaromatics, wt% max 11 16? Sp. Gr, max 0.860 0.845 0.825 0.845? ASTM D-86 360 340350? 95% vol, C max Table 1 Diesel oil specifications in Europe Current 2005 (expected) 2010 (expected) Ten-year difference MTPA Market MTPA Market MTPA Market MTPA Market share,% share,% share,% share,% Naphtha 166 38 171 37 177 37 11 -1.6 Jet fuel 41 9 49 11 57 12 16 +2.4 Diesel 142 33 156 34 168 35 26 +2.1 Domestic 84 20 82 18 80 16 -4. -2.9 fuel oil Total 433 100 458 100 482 100 49 Table 2 European demand and market share for middle distillates Base case Refinerys year 2000 configuration (Figure 1) The refinery produces slightly more naphtha and less diesel than European demand. With a cetane number of 49 and a sulphur content of 2400ppm, the entire diesel pool must be sent to a deep HDS plant where the specifications of 51 cetane and 350ppm sulphur are easily obtained with the North Sea crude oil. The domestic fuel oil (DFO) charac- teristics are close to the specifications. To obtain the minimum cetane number required for this stream, one third of the domestic fuel oil will be hydrotreated. The deep diesel HDS flow is therefore 2.82 MTPA for the refinery's crude oil throughput of 10 MTPA. Case 1 After 2005 (no change in configuration) The impact of year 2005 specifications on refinery performance was studied. Primarily due to the reduction of diesel oil ASTM D-86 95 per cent point from 360C to 340C, diesel fuel production is reduced from 30 per cent of the total napht ha- pl us - mi ddl e- di s t i l l at es obtained in year 2000, to 27.9 per cent in year 2005. Considering the market share of 34 per cent given in Table 2 for the same year, the gap between refinery produc- tion and market need for 2005 will have more than doubled compared with that for the year 2000. By 2005, with the same refinery con- figuration, the FCC throughput will have been increased by 12 per cent, which, of course, does not fit well with the need to increase both diesel pool quantity and quality (Figure 2). Because of the increased light cycle oil (LCO) production, the cetane in the pool is also deeply affected. Diesel oil cetane number before hydrotreating is only 47.9, which repre- sents a gap of 4 to 6 points compared with the expected 2005 specifications. With this type of feedstock, such an increase in cetane number requires extremely severe operating conditions that cannot be achieved in the existing HDT plant, even after revamping. In case a minimum cetane number is required for the domestic fuel oil, the entire DFO oil pool must also be deeply hydrotreat- ed. In these conditions, the total middle distillates hydrotreating throughput is increased by 24 per cent, and a new high-pressure HDT must be installed. The average naphtha pool sulphur level will be 270ppm, which implies adding high-severity, post-treatment units to attain the required sulphur lev- els of 1050ppm. This level of severity will be accompanied by some octane loss, which means that, in some cases, the octane balance could well become tight and will require more investment. Case 2 Mild hydrocracker Based on preliminary studies, the addi- tion of a high-pressure hydrocracking unit was not an economic solution due to the high investment requirement and high hydrogen consumption. In the alter- native case, a mild hydrocracker (designed for 30 per cent conversion and a residue maximum sulphur content of 0.05 wt%) is added to the refining scheme upstream of the FCC unit (Figure 3). The advantages of this configuration on FCC operation are well known: Reduced FCC coke, slurry and LCO yields in favour of LPG and naphtha yields Increased LCO cetane number FCC naphtha sulphur levels reduced to 15ppm Reduction in FCC SOx emissions. PTQ SUMMER 2001 25 REFI NI NG Future 2005 with Future 2005 MHDC and Current Future (2005) with MHDC Hytail wt% wt% wt% wt% Diesel DFO Diesel DFO Diesel DFO Diesel DFO Straight run 78.4 12.0 71.4 13.2 66.1 57.0 diesel Kerosene 13.8 73.3 20.2 66.2 11.7 71.6 9.4 60.3 LCO 14.7 20.6 5.7 VB diesel 7.8 8.4 7.0 6.4 MHDC diesel 15.2 22.7 - 39.7 Hytail diesel 27.2 Total 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 100.0 Table 4 Diesel and domestic fuel oil pool constitution Future 2005 with Current Future (2005) Future 2005 MHDC and with MHDC Hytail* MTPA % MTPA % MTPA % MTPA % Naphtha 3.17 41.0 3.32 43.5 3.07 38.9 3.26 37.3 Jet fuel 0.73 9.4 0.82 10.7 0.84 10.6 0.93 10.7 Diesel 2.32 30.0 2.13 27.9 2.57 32.6 2.98 34.1 Domestic 1.50 19.4 1.36 17.9 1.41 17.9 1.56 17.9 fuel oil Total 7.72 100.0 7.63 100.0 7.89 100.0 8.73 100.0 * Including 1.2 MTPA of imported atmospheric residue Table 3 Refinerys product distribution (crude =10 MTPA) Figure 1 The refinerys current situation Adding a mild hydrocracker signifi- cantly increases the diesel-to-naphtha ratio and the refinery product slate almost matches market requirements. The results from the refinery simula- tion in this configuration show that most of the LCO produced by the FCC can be used to control fuel viscosity. Under these conditions, the cetane numbers in the diesel and DFO pools are significantly increased (Table 5). With a cetane number of 39 and a sul- phur content of 600ppm, the DFO meets specifications without further hydrotreatment, even in countries where a cetane number of 40 is speci- fied. In this case, a small amount of cetane booster will be added to the pool. The diesel fuel, with a cetane number of 48.2 before HDT, will still require severe hydrotreating to attain a mini- mum of 52. The necessary cetane gain of 3.8 points cannot be accomplished in the existing unit without revamping. Depending on the case, the cetane gain can be achieved in a new high-pressure HDT plant (preferably), or in the most favourable cases, in the existing plant after extensive revamping. Total HDT throughput is 9 per cent lower compared to the current situation. A sulphur level as low as 15ppm in the FCC naphtha will result in a diesel pool well below the most stringent foresee- able specification of 10ppm, achieved with virtually no octane loss. Case 3 New technology Hytail is a new IFP hydrocracking tech- nology specifically developed to solve European refining problems (Figure 4). It is optimised for cracking heavy atmo- spheric gasoils or light vacuum gasoils that will be in excess in refineries in 2005 after reducing diesel 95 per cent point specification. Because it operates under much milder operating condi- tions than a conventional hydrocracker, and the process flow scheme is much simpler, this unit investment cost is remarkably low, and the economics are attractive. The key feature of this process is that it operates at pressure levels and requires capital investment comparable to those of a mild hydrocracker, but still offers the high conversion levels and the high diesel quality of a high pressure hydroc- racker. If we plot diesel quality (ie, poly- aromatics in this example) as a function of hydrogen partial pressure for the same conversion level of 80 per cent, a zeolite catalyst can be used, enabling the unit to operate at a 25-bar lower hydro- gen partial pressure, for the same level of quality (Figure 5). This is explained by the zeolites greater activity, which requires a much PTQ SUMMER 2001 26 REFI NI NG Future 2005 with Future 2005 MHDC and Current Future (2005) with MHDC Hytail Diesel Sulphur, ppm 2400 2300 2100 1900 Cetane 49.1 (spec 51) 47.9 (spec 52) 48.2 (spec 52) 50.7 (spec 52) DFO Sulphur, ppm 2100 2600 600 500 Cetane 37.7 37.0 39 40.7 Naphtha sulphur, ppm FCC naphtha 250 250 15 15 Naphtha pool 105 110 <10 <10 Diesel HDT overall Base Base + 24% Base 9% Base 23% throughput Diesel HDT Existing Existing plus Existing plus Revamp new HP unit probable new HP existing unit Table 5 Main product characteristics prior to hydrotreatment Figure 2 Refinery situation after 2005 Figure 3 Adding a mild hydrocracker lower operating temperature, and which in turn favours more efficient hydro- genation. Zeolite catalyst systems appear as the best choice in Europe where the emphasis is on maximum quality diesel fuel. Moreover, selecting a light feedstock (LVGO or HGO) instead of the usual hydrocracking feed (HVGO) makes pos- sible an additional 20- to 25-bar reduc- tion in hydrogen partial pressure. The result is that, in the Hytail pro- cess, which basically cracks light feed- stocks on a zeolite catalyst, the operating pressure can be about 50 bar lower than in conventional plants. The process offers the same product yield slate and quality as the HP hydrocrack- er, but with a much lower hydrogen par- tial pressure resulting in a lower investment cost (Table 6). Another characteristic of this low investment process is that its flowscheme is simpler than that of an HP hydrocracker. It is similar to a diesel HDT plant with an additional column, the dieselresidue splitter). The combination of these features results in attractive economics (Table 7). Hytail investment cost is only about 40 per cent of the investment of an HP hydrocracking unit, while H 2 consumed in the unit is only 28 per cent of the HP hydrocracker. The last case in this study concerns the addition of a Hytail plant having previously installed a mild hydrocracker. Feedstock to the Hytail plant is the lighter third of the total vacuum gas oil (TBP cut: 350410C), while feedstock to the mild hydrocracking unit is the 410- 565C cut. Taking into account the con- version in the mild hydrocracker, the FCC throughput is reduced to 55 per cent of design. To maintain a minimum FCC feed rate at 70 per cent of design, an extra 1.2 MTPA of atmospheric residue was imported. Owing to the high quality of diesel fuel from the Hytail unit, the diesel pool and domestic fuel oil pool cetane num- bers are increased to 50.7 and 40.7, respectively, before the HDT step. The domestic fuel oil meets specifications. With such a high quality level, the diesel fuel can be reasonably upgraded to the sulphur specification by the revamped diesel HDT plant. Taking into account that Hytail diesel is sent directly to the diesel pool, the new HDT units throughput is only 77 per cent of its original design. Economics Table 8 provides the results of an eco- nomic comparison between a mild hydrocracking unit, a mild hydrocracker plus a Hytail unit, and an FCC unit plus an upstream high pressure hydrocracker that replaces the Hytail and mild hydro- cracking units. The high pressure hydrocracker con- version level is adjusted in order to obtain a refinery material balance and PTQ SUMMER 2001 28 REFI NI NG Figure 4 The Hytail process Figure 5 Comparison of zeolite and amorphous catalyst performance High Hytail pressure HDC Crude oil Brent Brent Feedstock TBP 350410 350565 cut points, C Unit capacity, BPSD 23000 73000 Conversion Full Full Operating pressure, bar P50 P Residence time, h 1 0.80xBase Base ISBL capital 95 235 investment, 10 6 $ H 2 consumption, TPA 21400 75400 Table 7 Hytail economics High Hytail pressure HDC Crude oil Brent Brent Conversion Full Full LPG, wt% 3.00 3.10 Naphtha, vol% 34.7 35.5 Diesel, vol% 77.8 78.3 H 2 consumption, wt% 1.85 2.05 Diesel properties ASTM D-86, 340 340 95% vol, C max Flash point, C 70 70 Cetane number 56 55 Sulphur, ppm <10 <10 Polyaromatics, wt% <1 <1 Table 6 Product yields and characteristics product quality pattern equivalent to those obtained with a mild hydrocrack- er plus a Hytail unit. Because both Hytail and mild hydrocracking units operate at much lower pressures, the investment for these two units is lower than the investment for a high-pressure hydrocracker of the same capacity. The hydrogen consumption is much higher in the HP hydrocracking case because this unit operates at higher pres- sure and hydrogenates the residue that is sent to the FCC to a high degree. In the mild hydrocracking-plus-Hytail scheme, hydrogen is selectively added to the diesel fuel with as little hydrogen as possible going to the unconverted residue being sent to the FCC. Conclusion Hydroconversion, whether or not com- bined with some degree of reduction in the FCC throughput, is the key option for European refineries when their objec- tive is to meet diesel 2005 specifications and production requirements. While diesel sulphur specifications are often achievable by revamping existing diesel HDT units, the required cetane level (a characteristic that is not easily improved) appears as the refinery bottleneck. Mild hydrocracking is a cost effective option that will solve part of the prob- lem. It also leads to very low sulphur content in the FCC naphtha, enabling the most stringent sulphur specification in the naphtha pool to be met. Hytail is a new hydrocracking tech- nology that fits well with the European constraints. When the mild hydrocrack- er is combined with a Hytail unit, the refinerys diesel-to-naphtha ratio increases to meet the projected Euro- pean yield slate, while the total produc- tion of naphtha, jet, diesel and domestic fuel oil is increased by 14 per cent. In that case, the diesel oil pool prop- erties attain values that enable them to meet the 2005 target, using the existing diesel HDT units, after a moderate revamp. The comparison between the com- bined Hytail-plus-mild-hydrocracking units and a stand-alone high pressure hydrocracking unit, operating at par- tial conversion and offering the same refinery material balance and product quality, shows that Hytail-plus-mild- hydrocracking is the more effective solu- tion in terms of capital investment and hydrogen management. PTQ SUMMER 2001 29 REFI NI NG MHDC plus Stand-alone MHDC Hytail at HP hydrocracker at full conversion 50% conversion VGO capacity, MTPA 2.88 3.68 3.68 ISBL capital Investment, 10 6 US$ 119 214 235 H 2 consumption, t/year 22000 39100 59600 Table 8 Economics Hydroconversion, whether or not combined with some degree of reduction in the FCC throughput, is the key option for European refineries when their objective is to meet diesel 2005 specifications