163

program

How linear programming helps to develop the Czech Refining Co.

HugoHow
Kittel,
Ph.D..
Strategy andhelps
Long to
Term
Technical
Development
linear
programming
develop
the Czech
RefiningManager
Co.
Czech Refining Co. (CRC), O.Wichterleho 809, 278 52 Kralupy n.Vlt.
Hugo Kittel,tel.+420
Ph.D.. Strategy
and Long
Termhugo.kittel@crc.cz
Technical Development Manager
315 718306,
e-mail
Czech Refining Co. (CRC), O.Wichterleho 809, 278 52 Kralupy n.Vlt.
tel.+420 315 718306, e-mail hugo.kittel@crc.cz

Introduction
Introduction

This paper discusses application of linear programming technique (LP) in refineries generally and
This
of linear
programming
techniqueCo.
(LP)(CRC)
in refineries
generally and
describes
thepaper
rolediscusses
of LP inapplication
management
of the
Czech Refining
specifically.
describes the role of LP in management of the Czech Refining Co. (CRC) specifically.

Selection
of the ofrefinery
modelling
tool
to the
theaccuracy
accuracy
execution
efficiency.
LP
Selection
the refinery
modelling
toolisiscritical
critical to
andand
execution
efficiency.
LP
represents
well proven
practice
in in
refineries.
mainadvantages
advantages
complexity,
universality,
represents
well proven
practice
refineries. The
The main
are are
complexity,
universality,
accuracy,
and quick
response.
accuracy,
and quick
response.
LP was
modelofficially
was officially
instituted
theCRC
CRC ten
ten years
of this
has been
LP model
instituted
in inthe
yearsago.
ago.Capability
Capability
of model
this model
has been
improved progressively, in cooperation with software licensor and shareholders. Transformation
improved
progressively,
in cooperation
licensor
and shareholders.
Transformation
of CRC
to a join venture
refinery in with
2003 software
strengthened
significantly
role of LP modelling
on
of CRCoperative
to a join
venture
refinery
in
2003
strengthened
significantly
role
of
LP
modelling
on
level. Furthermore, new challenges for CRC related to production of clean fuels,
operative
level.
Furthermore,
new
challenges of
forbiocomponents,
CRC related
production
of clean
soaring
consumption
of diesel,
implementation
andtorequest
of shareholders
to fuels,
increase
profit
of
CRC
significantly
fostered
application
of
LP
for
searching
response
to
these
soaring consumption of diesel, implementation of biocomponents, and request of shareholders to
definition
of potential
new development
alternatives.
Some
of these activities
increasechallenges
profit ofand
CRC
significantly
fostered
application
of LP for
searching
responseareto these
listed in this paper.
challenges and definition of potential new development alternatives. Some of these activities are
listed in this paper.
Implementation of linear programming in refineries
A lot of different
reasons
exist why toinmodel
for optimization of refineries [ROMANOW,
Implementation
of linear
programming
refineries

2001]. Specialists claim that the great part of the efficiency increase reported by refineries in the
last decade is due to application of modeling tools.

A lot of different reasons exist why to model for optimization of refineries [ROMANOW,
2001]. Specialists
that the
great part
efficiencyand
increase
reported
by represents
refineries in the
Optimizationclaim
of refinery
operations,
dueoftothe
its complexity
huge economic
facet,
last decade
is due
to application
of modeling
tools. accurately requires consideration of several
a really
difficult
task. Modeling
the entire refinery
thousands components, regardless toll implemented.

Optimization of refinery operations, due to its complexity and huge economic facet, represents
Modeling tools vary considerably in sense of rigorousness, complexity, and methods based on a reallyfrom
difficult
task. Modeling the entire refinery accurately requires consideration of several
spreadsheets to high fidelity models [NAGEL, GUERRA, 2002]. Selection of a tool is
thousands
components,
regardless
toll implemented.
critical
to the accuracy
and execution
efficiency.
Linear
programming
techniquein(LP)
can of
be characterized
as follows
[ANDERSON,
SWEENEY,
Modeling
tools
vary considerably
sense
rigorousness,
complexity,
and methods
based on WILLIAMS,
2000;
HARTMANN,
2002;
TUCKER,
2001]:
from spreadsheets to high fidelity models [NAGEL, GUERRA, 2002]. Selection of a tool is
critical to the accuracy and execution efficiency.
It was developed at the end of 40s to help managers make decisions. G.B.Dantzing is
universally recognized as a father of LP he developed simplex algorithm.
Linear programming
(LP) can
be characterized
follows performance.
[ANDERSON, SWEENEY,
x Utilization technique
of LP has expanded
adequately
to growth ofascomputers
x

WILLIAMS, 2000; HARTMANN, 2002; TUCKER, 2001]:

x
x

It was developed at the end of 40s to help managers make decisions. G.B.Dantzing is
universally recognized as a father of LP he developed simplex algorithm.
Utilization
LP has expanded
APROCHEM 2006of
Odpadov
frum 2006  adequately
24.27. 4. 2006 Milovy
1333to growth of computers performance.

program

x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

Original LP models were non-recursed, no pooling considered, yield driven, with fixed
stream properties.
LP modeling progressed implementing non-linear distributive recursions technique,
improving pooling (linkage between quality of upstream changes and downstream pool),
embedding process simulation, and enhancing multi-period and multi- side capabilities.
In consequence to recursion technique, process unit representation changed from multiple
mode type yielded structure to base-delta representations.
Local optimums or non-convergence can be problems now, resulting from intense
application of recursion technique and can contribute to lack of confidence.
A LP model is significantly influenced by initial and legacy model structure, follow-up
maintenance, and modeler knowledge and experience.
Accuracy depends on implemented model structure, regular updating of data, and
repeated tuning
The biggest models involve 7000 rows and to 600 recursions now.
Development is focused to provide more accuracy, realism, plug-and-play features (to
make easier modification of model), and users friendliness.
More commercial systems are available.

For the review of the main pros and cons of LP modeling of refineries see the exhibit 1:
Exhibit 1: Pros and cons of LP modeling of refineries
Pros
Well proven and generally accepted technique by
refiners
Linearity: Facilitates constructing complex and quickly
responding models of refineries
Complexity, as concerns number of units, type of
operations, and feature of data involved. It allows really
entire refinery modeling:
Universality, as concerns scope of issues solved
Versatility; material balances (inclusive refinery wide
systems - hydrogen balance, fuel gas supply, and sulfur
balance) and economics (GRM, cost of utilities etc.) are
parallel outputs.
It gives very quick response, in seconds
Multi-sites and multi-period models can be developed
It plays role of a rule setter in joint venture refineries

Cons
Linearity. Many processes in refineries show strongly
non-linear features. Fortunately some non-linearity can
be successfully mastered
Due to complexity optimum is often flat; existence of
sub-optimums cannot be excluded
Data intensive approach, in consequence to linearity
and complexity
High quality data requested

Tough analysis of results, more time demanding than

calculation itself
Limited predictive capability

As concerns implementation of LP in refineries, following point are stressed in the literature

[BRUNO, HILEMAN, 2005; HARTMAN, 2004; RAGHAV and others, 2006; SAHDEV, M.K.;
JAIN, K.K.; SRIVASTAVA, P.; SLOLEY, FRASER, 2003; TUCKER. 2001; VALLEUR, M.;
GRUE, J.L, 2004]:
x

Each refinery LP model situation is unique. LP model represents particular refining

configuration and involves economic drivers, availability of feed (crude diet) and utilities,

APROCHEM 2006 Odpadov frum 2006 

1334

24.27. 4. 2006 Milovy

program

x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

logistical operational constraints, process unit simulation, product blending, and product
portfolio optimization.
Preparation of data for LP models has been automated (for example transfer of crude
assays into LP assays). Vendors crude assays can be utilized. Now has been added
features allowing side-cut overlap, utilizing of multiple assays table, and assisting in
calculation of properties.
Swing cuts for cut point optimization were implemented, substituting multiple quality
streams.
Multiple capacity constraints are considered for unit simulation.
Commercial data, based on real operational results, are utilized rather than laboratory data
now to adjust LP model.
Exploited model needs to be trusted. Therefore, to have real values for a refinery, LP
model must be accurate, regularly up-dated (yields, stream properties), well documented,
and properly filed.
Successful implementation requires well organized communication and cooperation
across a company, with partners, technical service providers, and other external
institutions to gather all necessary data.
Usually GRM is maximized as an objective for modeling of refineries. However,
objective function can be set differently, for example to minimize operative costs,
maximize performance of selected units, etc.
Simulators help to generate shift vectors for scenarios where the refinery has little or no
operating data, what is typical situation for development projects. However these
simulators must be tuned somewhere as well.
Exploiting of LP modeling can lead to hundred million CZK of annual profit resulting
from right managerial decision.

For application of LP modeling in refineries exist following important areas:

x
x
x

Planning for different time horizons, e.g. evaluation of future performance of existing
assets, fulfilling production premises of owners.
Backcasting, e.g. comparing past performance and allocating product to Processors,
which is in parallel very important activity for continuous improvement of LP models
accuracy.
Rationalization activities, e.g. looking for new opportunities in the frame of existing
technological scheme (so called what if cases) - alternative streams, diverse modes of
operation representing new practices, several blending strategies, variant product slates,
improved process unit efficiency, capacity improvements (revamps and / or
decommissioning), alternate pricing scenarios, etc.
Development projects, first of all assessing impact of new process units (often called
case / configuration studies) or radically new product specifications (clean fuels).

Assessing benefits of rationalization and development activities, it is important to prepare a

robust base case.

APROCHEM 2006 Odpadov frum 2006 

1335

24.27. 4. 2006 Milovy

program

CRC practice in linear programming

In the Kralupy refinery a simple LP model was available already in 1974 as part of software
package of IBM 1800 control computer. CRC has started to utilize the LP technique intensely
and professionally in 1996, in connection to its privatization. Change to a joint venture refinery
mode in 2003 has significantly strengthened the role of LP modeling for management of CRC.
Crucial
information
related
to
LP
modeling
Inputs
Outputs
illustrates
exhibit
2. The
Crude oil assays and availability of crude Volume of feeds
main current applications
oils
Internal transfers between refineries
Logistical constraints
of LP modeling in CRC
Balance of products
Data book, describing performance of Consumption of utilities
are as per exhibit 3. CRC
technological units
Variable costs
developed and exploits
Availability of units maintenance plan
GRM
multi-sites LP model
Material premises volume and quality
two refineries or three
of products
refinery complexes are
Financial premisesexchange rates, price
embraced in one LP
of crude oils and refinery products
model, to simulate actual
operation of the Company. It exploits multi-period capability of software as well.
Exhibit 2: The important inputs and outputs of CRC LP models

Strategic Plan and Development Projects represent a specific example of LP model application,
because new processes or practices are thoroughly investigated as target of modeling, which is
not standard and even more not allowed practice in operative planning. For this specific purpose
so called CRC Development LP Model (DLP) has been created in the last three years, to
support strategic decisions and to help develop new ideas. The features of this model can be
characterized as follows:
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x

It involves promising technologies, not available in CRC now (alkylation, steam

reformer, hydrotreating of heavy or residual streams, delayed coking, etc.)
It implements new technological regimes, catalysts, and additives not exploited in current
operations (for example high conversion mode of Visbreaking, ZSM-5 / GSR / Desox
additives for FCC).
Capacities need not to strictly comply with approved data-book; in some cases even more
can go above possible revamp of units.
Streams can be routed differently.
Crude oils diet on input to LP model is reduced however new crude oils can be tested.
Other feeds list is reduced however new feeds can be considered (bioethanol, RME;
external alkylate).
Portfolio of products is reduced to the main ones, however new products can be
considered (ETBE, alkylate, benzene, etc.).
Seasonality is approximated by average properties (crude oils pour point) and products
expected for different seasons are blended in parallel.
Premises are defined directly as common for all Processors.
Model is tightly joined with other CRCs managerial decision tools (Justification of new
investments, computing benchmark indexes, etc.).

APROCHEM 2006 Odpadov frum 2006 

1336

24.27. 4. 2006 Milovy

program

Exhibit 3: Applications of LP modeling in CRC

Application
Strategic Plan (SP)

Development Projects
(DP)

Business Plan (BP)

Operative Plan (OP)

Allocation
of
products, backcasting
(AP)

Characteristic

Horizon / Period

MANAGERIAL PLANNING
Base document for developing of CRC
Checks future possible exploitation of CRCs assets
Implements mission and visions of CRC
Reacts to challenges of changing oil industry environment
Calculates benchmark indexes, comparing these indexes with goals
set by shareholders, identifies gaps, and defines activities covering
these gaps.
Initialized to reflect the trends of the oil industry, to cover
performance gaps, or to elaborate step change ideas. Need on
additional data (mined from literature, research studies, test runs on
existing units, or from dialogue with licensors and engineering
companies)
The problem solving potential of LP modeling favorably exploited
Base document for managing of CRC
Detailed material balance and financial results
Asses impact of winter and summer quality of motor fuels and
seasonal demand picks on performance of CRC
OPERATIVE PLANNIG
Obligatory document
The identical LP model is utilized parallel by Processors, to define
their individual feasible demand and by CRC, to prepare final
consolidated solution. In special case not feasible request can be
converted into feasible solution running joint model. Consolidation
of premises for joint CRC LP model needs mastery in refinery
operations.
ALLOCATION
Final obligatory allocation of materials and cost to shareholders
Checks-up the LP model accuracy and gives historical review of
CRCs performance
LP model exploited simply as a material balance model.

Exhibit 4: Implementation of LP in CRC

Activity
SP, DP
BP
OP
AP
Maintenance and upgrade
Total

Model type
Development
Operative planning
Operative planning
Operative planning
All models in use
Two models

# of specialists
0,5
0,5
3
4
2
8

5 years / one year

Future oriented

3 10 years
Future oriented
SP as a measure

1 year / 1 month
Future oriented
SP as a measure
Month / day
Future oriented
BP as a measure

Month, year
Backwards orient.
OP and BP as
measures

Exhibit 5: Characteristics of CRC

Development LP Model
Characteristic
Number of row
Number of columns
No zero cells (%)
Number of recursion coefficients

2712
2951
0.68
877

LP models in CRC are developed, maintained, and run as described in the exhibit 4. From
mathematical point of view CRC Development LP Model can be characterized as per exhibit 5:
DLP has been exploited to solve following interesting issues:
x

To assess implementation of bioethanol blended into mogas directly and / or in form of

ETBE. Results of ETBE batch run have been utilized to populate the model with

APROCHEM 2006 Odpadov frum 2006 

1337

24.27. 4. 2006 Milovy

program

x
x

necessary data [KITTEL, 2002]. Under studied price scenario, direct blending of
bioethanol and continuing in MTBE production has represented the best choice, e.g.
different result has been achieved in comparison to common practice in Europe now.
Furthermore, negative impact of bioethanol on blending value of isomerate has been
highlighted.
Similar study has been prepared for direct blending of RME into diesel. Significant
negative impact on balance of kerosene, from kerosene derived JET production, and
GRM, has been stated, all related to high density or purchase price of RME.
To analyze competitive position of the Hydrocracking unit vs. the FCC complex
within CRC for production of clean fuels. Revamp alternatives of both main CRCs
conversion technologies, consuming partially similar type of feed, have been assessed
considering all existing (reformate, isomerate, FCC gasoline, MTBE) and potential
(bioethanol, ETBE, alkylate, RME) components of motor fuels. In scenario of soaring
consumption of diesel, Hydrocracking unit revamp will deliver higher benefit [KITTEL,
PELANT, 2004].
Continuing in task above, impacts of varying capacity and conversion of the
Hydrocracking unit on production of motor fuels, maximal possible yield of diesel, and
GRM have been deeply researched. Yields and quality shift vectors for LP model have
been taken from an external feasibility study. Hydrocracking unit represents significant
supplier of Chemopetrols Steam Cracker unit (SCU) and maximization of diesel
production reduces hydrowax delivery to SCU. There is a possible conflict of interest.
Results of simulation, based on lots of LP model runs, have confirmed advantage of
revamp (+25%), high conversion regime (from 55% to 73%) and delivered possible
production of diesel. GRM from simulation has been utilized as base for justification of
investment.

The DLP was further exploited to assess:

x
x
x
x

Possible implementation of alkylation technology

Revamp of existing MTBE unit
Increase propylene production in FCC unit
Desulphurization of feed for FCC now, which represents the most sophisticated and
complex application of the DLP in CRC till now.

The most illustrative example of DLP role represents CRCs solution for Clean Mogas 10 ppm
S. This project started in CRC in year 2000. Original proposal, based on a 3-cut splitter (3CS) of
FCC gasoline and next processing of cuts by already existing technologies, was later identified as
not optimal for full 10 ppm S mogas production scenario. Therefore CRC re-initialized the
project during 2003. Answers after following issues were looked:
x
x
x
x
x

Which will be an optimal technological scheme?

Which will be the role of 3CS in this scheme? Should CRC start the construction
activities on 3CS or to stop the investment?
Will be an additional Selective desulphurization (SDS) needed?
If yes, which will be the best SDS technology for CRC?
Which will be an optimal SDS capacity?

APROCHEM 2006 Odpadov frum 2006 

1338

24.27. 4. 2006 Milovy

program

x
x

Phasing of change (Two steps 50 and 10 ppm S or target directly 10 ppm S in mogas)?
Which will be related risks?

FCC complex, commissioned in 2001 in the Kralupy refinery, processes mixture of vacuum
distillates and long residue from sweet crude oils. Feed is not pretreated. Original
desulphurization scheme of FCC gasoline illustrates the exhibit 6.
Exhibit 6: Simplified original scheme of FCC mogas desulphurization
Originally, heavy gasoline was hydrotreated
unselectively, then re-blended and full
gasoline stream meroxed utilizing non
extractive mode. This mode fit neither 50 ppm
S Mogas scenario nor 10 ppm S.

MEROX

Stabiliser

LPG, C3=

180 ppm S

To meet mandated term for 50 ppm S mogas

(January 1, 2005), 3CS construction was only
2500 ppm S
viable solution, starting in 2003. Scheme with
340 ppm S
3CS illustrates the exhibit 7. Interesting part of
this solution, exploited in CRC now,
represents routing of FCC heart cut gasoline to
Naphtha Hydrotreater (NHT). Reactor of NHT
unit was equipped with a new liquid quench, to manage highly exothermic character of reactions.
Facility was commissioned on the end of 2004, see the exhibit 8. The role of DLP was to assess
impact of this scheme on mogas production and quality, to calculate volume of 10 ppm S mogas
available from this solution, and to delivers arguments to justify the investment.
Main fractionator

HDS

Mogas

Exhibit 7: Scheme with 3-cut splitter 50 ppm S Mogas

LPG, C3=

Stabiliser

20 ppm S

180 ppm S

2500 ppm S
340 ppm S

590 ppm S
NHT

Redistillation

HDS

Mogas

3-cut splitter

Main fractionator

MEROX-E

Steam cracker

1 ppm S
Mogas
SRR
Mogas
180 ppm S

APROCHEM 2006 Odpadov frum 2006 

1339

24.27. 4. 2006 Milovy

program

Exhibit 8: CRCs 3-Cut Splitter

To achieve full 10 ppm S Mogas production,

three schemes have been further researched,
applying the DLP:
x

Scheme 1: Utilizing existing 3CS, adding

new small SDS unit, relocating MEROX
put into extractive mode, and relocating
existing HDS unit with added new
stabilization section, see the exhibit 9.
Scheme 2: Utilizing 3CS as 2CS only,
adding new SDS of moderate capacity,
relocating MEROX put into extractive
mode, and mothballing existing HDS unit,
see the exhibit 10.
Scheme 3: Adding new full range SDS
unit, mothballing new 3CS, existing HDS
unit, and MEROX (or alternatively use it
downstream of the new SDS, to remove
recombinant mercaptans), see exhibit 11.

The role of DLP was clear check feasibility,

calculate material balance of different
schemes, deliver economical impacts (GRM).
Exhibit 9: Mogas 10 ppm S, scheme 1 utilizing 3-cut splitter
LPG, C3=
15 ppm S
Stabiliser

Mogas
MEROX-E

Mogas
SDS

HDS

Stabiliser

3-cut splitter

Main fractionator

10 ppm S

15 ppm S
Mogas
Diesel

APROCHEM 2006 Odpadov frum 2006 

1340

24.27. 4. 2006 Milovy

program

Exhibit 10: Mogas 10 ppm S, scheme 2 utilizing 3-cut splitter as 2-cut splitter
LPG, C3=
15 ppm S

Stabiliser

Mogas
MEROX-E

2-cut splitter

Main fractionator

10 ppm S
Mogas
SDS

Exhibit 11: Mogas 10 ppm S, scheme 3 not utilizing 3-cut splitter

Stabiliser

LPG, C3=

Main fractionator

10 ppm S
Mogas
SDS

Four technologies have been assessed in all three schemes, utilizing technological data from
bids of licensors and CAPEX normalized according to list of equipments. Feasibility have been
checked, OPEX, GRM, NPV, and IRR have been calculated for each scheme and technology,
based on DLP outputs. Individual schemes have been assessed as per exhibit 12 (for selected
technology only). Based on these results:
x
x

Scheme 1 has been selected finally as the most proper for CRC, due to the best IRR
and advantages stated in the exhibit 12. Decision represents an apparent trade-off between
CAPEX, OPEX (3CS is energy demanding), and blending value of components.
Licensor for technology has been selected

APROCHEM 2006 Odpadov frum 2006 

1341

24.27. 4. 2006 Milovy

program

Exhibit 12: Selection of the best scheme of FCC gasoline desulphurization

Scheme
1

CAPEX
100%

OPEX
100%

NPV
100%

IRR
Base

111%

82%

107%

-6%

160%

109%

94%

-62%

Pros
Cons
Utilization of all already existing
High complexity
High OPEX, related to high
units
Opportunity to optimize blending complexity
of FCC cuts and to increase
diesel production
Minimal CAPEX
Moderate CAPEX
Moderate OPEX
Lower number of units in
Regret investment into HDS
operation
Low complexity
High CAPEX
Low OPEX (however later not
Significant regret investments,
proven by simulation)
related to the new 3CS,
MEROX, and HDS unit
Not proven scheme in the time
of decision making

A SDS unit, implemented according to the exhibit 9, will be commissioned in the middle of
2007. DLP has significantly contributed to give answer to all issues related to 10 ppm mogas
production in CRC, see the exhibit 13:
Exhibit 13: CRC response to 10 ppm S mogas
Question
Which will be an optimal technological scheme?
The role of 3CS in this scheme? Start the construction
activities or cancel the investment?
Will be an additional SDS needed?
If yes, which will be the best SDS technology for CRC?
Calculation of the optimal SDS capacity?
Timing of change (Two steps 50 and 10 ppm S or target
directly 10 ppm S in Mogas)?
Which will be related risks?

Response
The scheme 1, as per exhibit 9
3CS exploited as a fast track solution for 50 ppm S
mogas production, it will continue in operation under 10
ppm S mogas scenario as well
Yes, definitely!
It was selected based on DLP results
Will be related to the selected scheme 1
Two steps, 3CS already in operation, SDS will be
commissioned by 2007
Minimal; mandated quality achieved, existing units will
continue in operation, and CAPEX delivered in level
acceptable for owners

Conclusion
LP modeling in CRC is exploited intensely for different types of activities. Separate operative
planning and development models have been worked out in the past few years, reflecting first of
all specialized request on LP modelling after transformation of CRC to the joint venture refinery.
CRCs Development LP model has been applied to assess impact of the main challenges for CRC
for example biofuels, increasing demand of diesel, and production of clean mogas. Model
represented the central tool applied to identify for CRC the best technological scheme of FCC
gasoline desulphurization and select the best technology. The scheme including new 3-cut
splitter, new SDS unit, relocation and reconstruction of two other units will be fully realized in
the middle of 2007.

APROCHEM 2006 Odpadov frum 2006 

1342

24.27. 4. 2006 Milovy

program

References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.

ANDERSON, David R.; SWEENEY, Dennis J.; WILLIAMS, Thomas A.: "An introduction to Management
Science". South-Western College Publishing, Cincinnati, 2000. ISBN 0-324-0321-8
BRUNO, Joe; HILEMAN, Michael J.: "Canadian refiner uses improvement program to increase refining
profits". Oil Gas Journal 2005/103/09/56
HARTMANN, J.C.M.: "Planning models for joint venture refineries function as a contract". Hydrocarbon
Processing 2002/81/08/13
HARTMAN, J.C.M.: "Ramp up LP models with audits and transparent reporting methods". Hydrocarbon
Processing 2004/83/09/91
JNICKE, W.: "Computergesttzte Produktionsplannung fr Erdlraffinerien". Erdl und Kohle
1992/108/05/225
KITTEL, Hugo: "Experience with production of ETBE in CRC". Preprints of the International Conference
Motor fuels 2002. Vyhne, Slovakia, 17-20.6.2002 (in Czech)
KITTEL, Hugo; PELANT, Pavel: "Hydrocracking versus Fluid Catalytic Cracking for production of clean
fuels". Preprint of the International CHISA Conference 2004, Prague 2004-08-24/28.
NAGEL, Ewe; GUERRA, Maria, Jesus: "Rigorous modeling". Hydrocarbon Engineering 2002/07/03/69
RAGHAV, O.P. and others.: "Refinery LP modeling". Petroleum Technology Quarterly, 2006/11/Q1/95
ROMANOW, Stephany: "What is optimization for the HPI?". Hydrocarbon Processing 2001/80/06/11
SAHDEV, M.K.; JAIN, K.K.; SRIVASTAVA, P.: "Petroleum Refinery Planning and Optimization Using
Linear Programming". http://www.cheresources.com/refinery_planning_optimization.shtml
SLOLEY, Andrew; FRASER, Alastair "Maximizing benefits". Hydrocarbon Engineering 2003/08/03/65
TUCKER, Michael A: "LP Modeling - Past, Present and Future". NPRA 2001 Annual Meeting. March 18-20,
2001, Marriott Hotel, New Orleans, L.A.
VALLEUR, M.; GRUE, J.L.: "Optimize short-term refinery scheduling". Hydrocarbon Processing
2004/83/06/46

Index of abbreviations
2CS
3CS
AP
BP
CAPEX
CRC
DLP
DP
ETBE
FCC
GRM
HDS
IRR
LP
MEROX-E
MTBE
NHT
NPV
OP
OPEX
RME
SCU
SP
SDS

2-Cut-Splitter
3-Cut-Splitter
Allocation of Products
Business Plan
Capital Expenditures
Czech Refining Company
CRCs Development LP Model
Development Project
Ethyl Tertiary Butyl Ether
Fluid Catalytic Cracking
Gross Refinery Margin
Hydrodesulphurization
Internal Rate of Return
Linear Programming
Mercaptane Oxidation in Extractive mode
Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether
Naphtha Hydrotreater
Net Present Value
Operative Plan
Operating Expenses
Rape-seed Methyl Ester
Steam Cracker Unit
Strategic Plan
Selective Desulphurization

APROCHEM 2006 Odpadov frum 2006 

1343

24.27. 4. 2006 Milovy