BONUS REPORT: GAS TREATING PLANTS

Improve amine unit efficiency

by optimizing operating conditions
D. SATYADILEEP, A. S. BERROUK and C. J. PETERS, The Petroleum Institute, Abu Dhabi, UAE;
and A. A. AZIZ, Abu Dhabi Gas Industries Ltd., Abu Dhabi, UAE

How can the efficiency of an amine gas sweetening unit be RESULT AND ANALYSIS
improved without additional capital investment? Operation at Optimum performance of the amine sweetening unit depends
optimum conditions is the first key to enhance the performance on proper tuning of the operating conditions. These generally in-
of the unit, as revealed by a case study performed on a commer- clude feed gas pressure and temperature, lean amine temperature
cial gas plant using a kinetics-based simulation analysis. and amine concentration. However, for the plant in this study,
Lower amine temperature provides a significant reduction raw natural gas is directly fed to an absorption column with-
in solvent circulation rate, steam consumption rate, pumping out being compressed or heated within the battery limits of the
duty and dehydration unit load while posing no risk of hydro- amine sweetening unit. Therefore, the operator cannot manipu-
carbon condensation or hydrate formation. Also, higher amine late the feed gas pressure and temperature, as they are governed
strength is best suited for the unit under study, as it results in by the upstream sections. The scope of this study focuses on the
potential savings of operating costs without increasing the analysis of the effects of lean amine temperature and amine con-
risks of corrosion and fouling. centration on the amine sweetening unit performance.
In recent years, there has been emphasis on improving
amine gas sweetening plant efficiency due to the increased ex- Lean amine temperature. Lean solvent temperature has al-
ploitation of highly sour gas fields. This triggers the develop- ways been a point of interest, as it is the only parameter avail-
ment of several optimization techniques to maintain the prof- able for controlling the absorber temperature. Low operating
itability of gas plants. Schemes involving operational changes
alone are most preferred, due to the simplicity and flexibility TABLE 1. Simulation model inputs
in restoring plant operations and for the low retrofitting costs
attached to them. Parameter Plant operating data
To this end, a case study was performed for a commercial CH4, % 74.6
gas sweetening unit to analyze the effect of various operating C2H6, % 7.6
conditions on the plant efficiency. Operating data for this unit
C3H8, % 4.8
was used to quantify the impact of tuning various process con-
ditions and to provide guidelines to achieve optimum opera- H2S, % 4.3
tion of the amine sweetening unit. CO2, % 5
C4+, % 3.5
PROCESS SIMULATION MODEL Sour gas capacity, MMscfd 300
To investigate the effect of various process conditions,
a process simulation model is developed for a commercial Temperature, °C 42.3
amine sweetening unit. TABLE 1 provides the plant operating Pressure, bar 67.5
data used to develop the simulation model. 3
Solvent rate, m /hr 675
The process simulation model developed using a commer-
MDEA strength, % 42
cial process simulator follows an “ideal-stage” approach, cou-
pled with kinetic modeling for CO2. With an ideal-stage model, Lean amine temperature, °C 63.3
each stage is assumed to reach thermodynamic equilibrium, and
a real column is modeled by determining the number of ideal TABLE 2. Comparison of model results with plant operating data
stages that yields the same performance as the real column.
Parameter Plant operating data Model prediction
The kinetics model accounts for varying absorption rates
of the relatively slow absorption of CO2 , which is kinetically Sweet gas H2S, ppm 4.4 4.2
limited. Residence time for this calculation is computed based Sweet gas CO2, % 1.5 1.3
on column hardware and total number of trays. A customized 3
Sweet gas rate, kNm /hr 330 315
Peng-Robinson model is used as the thermodynamic method
Absorber temperature, °C 65.3 64.9
in this study. The simulation model predictions are validated
against plant operating data, as shown in TABLE 2. Reboiler temperature, °C 132.3 130.2

Gas Processing | SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 201439

BONUS REPORT: GAS TREATING PLANTS

temperatures are generally preferred for better performance of
the absorption column due to the increased acid gas absorp-
tion governed by vapor-liquid equilibrium. However, there are
also detrimental effects on the absorber operation associated
with low lean amine temperatures.
The optimum choice of lean amine temperature entering
the absorber is not a straightforward exercise, and it should be
handled carefully to ensure the right balance between maxi-
mum performance possible in terms of acid gas removal, and
smooth operation. To this end, a thorough quantitative inves-
tigation of the impact of varying lean amine temperature on
several operational parameters of the amine sweetening unit is
required. These operational conditions are:
• Sweet gas H2S content
• Sweet gas CO2 content
• Foaming due to hydrocarbon condensation
• Hydrate formation
• Lean solvent pumping duty
• Sweet gas water vapor content.
Analysis is performed using the process simulation model
that is developed based on the operating data of a commer-
cially operating amine sweetening unit, as shown in TABLE 1.
The table shows that the operating temperature of the lean
amine is 63.3°C. The sensitivity analysis was carried out by
varying the lean amine temperature in the range of 63.3°C to
4.5
H2S
4.0 CO2
Sweet gas H2S, ppm
47.3°C. The lower bound of this range is dictated by the gas
feed temperature, which is 42.3°C, as stated in TABLE 1.
The 5°C value is a difference that is widely recommended
as a general rule for the gas feed and lean amine temperatures.1
The impact of varying the lean amine temperature in the range
of 63.3°C to 47.3°C is detailed below for the abovementioned
operation parameters.
Effect on H2S and CO2 absorption. Low lean solvent tem-
perature is generally sought in gas sweetening plants due to
its positive impact on H2S absorption driven by equilibrium.
However, MDEA solvents are known to react kinetically with
CO2 , and any lowering of the lean amine temperature should
reduce the reaction rate constant, thereby increasing the CO2
slip. For this reason, lowering the lean amine temperature may
be ruled out due to its undesirable effect on sweet gas CO2
content. Therefore, for any change in lean amine tempera-
ture, the resulting additional CO2 slippage must not cause the
sweet gas CO2 content to exceed the plant’s product specifica-
tions. If this cannot be ensured, it may cause significant reduc-
tion in the gas calorific value and/or dry ice formation in the
downstream units.
FIG. 1 shows the evolution of sweet gas H2S and CO2 con-
tents as functions of lean amine temperature. As expected,
H2S absorption is favored with lower lean amine temperature,
while CO2 concentration in the sweet gas increases from 1.2%
to 2%. The sweet gas profile for the lowest lean amine temper-
2.4 ature (47.4°C) considered in this analysis is found to be com-
pliant with the abovementioned plant requirements in terms
2.2 of acid gas contents, despite the additional CO2 slippage.
2.0 Therefore, reducing the lean amine temperature does not

Sweet gas CO2, %

3.5 make objectionable changes in the sweet gas CO2. It is worth

1.8
noting that a decrease in lean amine temperature results in a
3.0 1.6 decrease in sweet gas H2S content from 4.2 ppm to 2.8 ppm.
However, this decrease is not needed since the sweet gas H2S
1.4
2.5 content is already below the plant specification.
1.2 In the following analysis, while decreasing the amine lean
2.0 1.0 temperature, the sweet gas H2S content will be kept at 4.2 ppm
45 50 55 60 65 by decreasing the energy requirement for stripping and de-
Lean solvent temperature, °C creasing the amine circulation rate.
FIG. 1. Effect of lean solvent temperature on sweet gas H2S and Effect on foaming and hydrate formation. Low column
CO2 contents. temperatures promote undesired condensation of hydrocar-
bons. Indeed, accumulation of hydrocarbons in amine solvent
70
often results in foaming that leads to poor column operation
and to total shutdown, in some cases. Therefore, gas temper-
60 ature must be sufficiently higher than the hydrocarbon dew-
point to prevent the occurrence of foaming.
50 Another ill effect associated with column temperature, but
less frequently encountered, is hydrate formation, which can
Temperature, °C

40 Gas hydrate temperature lead to catastrophic failure. Generally, hydrate formation tem-
Dewpoint perature is far below the operating temperature. However, for
Sweet gas temperature
30 columns operating at high pressures and low temperatures, hy-
drate formation temperature should be monitored.
20 Hydrocarbon condensation temperature, hydrate formation
temperature and gas operating temperature are plotted against
10 lean amine temperature for the amine unit under study (FIG. 2).
45 50 55 60 65
Lean amine temperature, °C For the lowest lean amine temperature that can be considered,
the sweet gas temperature is 25°C higher than the hydrocarbon
FIG. 2. Effect of lean solvent temperature on foaming and dewpoint, which eliminates any possibility for the absorber to
hydrate formation.
foam due to hydrocarbon condensation. Likewise, hydrate for-
40SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2014 | GasProcessingNews.com
 BONUS REPORT: GAS TREATING PLANTS

mation is obviously not a possibility, since the hydrate formation
temperature is much lower than the hydrocarbon dewpoint.
Effect on lean solvent pumping duty. As the solvent vis-
cosity increases with decreasing temperature, pumping loads
are expected to be higher at lower lean amine temperatures.
Therefore, pumping power must always be less than the avail-
able pumping power in the plant.
FIG. 3 shows the total electric load for pumping the lean sol-
vent from the regenerator to the absorber. The pumping load
is at its minima at the lowest lean amine temperature (47.4°C),
which seems counter-intuitive. This is, in fact, due to the reduc-
tion in solvent circulation rate at a lower lean amine tempera-
ture, which is needed to meet the same acid gas removal level
(4.2 ppm of H2S).
The reduction in amine circulation rate is more pronounced
than the increase in solvent viscosity, thereby reducing the
net pumping duty. It can be concluded that lowering the lean
amine temperature will reduce the pumping cost, if the same
sweet gas specifications are to be achieved.
Effect on sweet gas water vapor content. It is well known
that lower column temperature causes higher water vapor con-
densation in the absorber. This can have a potential benefit due
to the reduced load on the dehydration unit downstream of the
sweetening unit. FIG. 4 shows that sweet gas water vapor con-
tent decreases monotonically with lean amine temperature. As
the lean amine temperature is decreased from 63.3°C to 47.4°C,
half of the water vapor that should be carried by the sweet gas to
the dehydration unit will condense and remain in the absorber.
This results in a significant reduction in the operating cost of
the dehydration unit.
Summary of potential savings. Analysis of the effect of low-
ering the lean amine temperature on various operational param-
age lean amine operating temperature to quantify the savings
resulting from the proposed case.
TABLE 3 presents a detailed quantitative summary of the ma-
jor operational parameters for both cases. Besides the benefits
discussed in the preceding sections, a significant reduction in
steam consumption rate and solvent circulation rate can be ob-
served for the proposed case. This is attributed to the increased
acid gas holding capacity, which is due to the vapor-liquid equi-
librium shift at low solvent temperatures. Also, the lean solvent
cooler load is expected to be higher in the proposed case, as
the outlet lean amine temperature is lower. However, this is
outweighed by the lower solvent circulation rate, resulting in a
lower solvent cooler duty, as shown in TABLE 3.
Therefore, this study concludes that lower amine tempera-
ture (47.3°C) provides significant reductions in solvent circula-
tion rate, steam consumption rate, pumping duty and dehydra-
tion unit load while posing no risk of hydrocarbon condensation
or hydrate formation.
Amine concentration. Amine concentration is of significant
importance, primarily due to its impact on the sweet gas profile,
since the former dictates the number of amine molecules that
must be in contact with gas in the absorber. Industrial literature2, 3
has documented that poor choice of amine concentration leads
to corrosion and fouling. Therefore, it is essential to maintain
optimum amine strength to achieve a fine balance of the afore-
mentioned associated effects.
0.75
0.70
Pumping energy, MW

eters of the absorber results in potential benefits without disturb- 0.65

ing the smooth operation of the absorber. Therefore, lower lean
amine temperatures with a minimum of 47.3°C are recommend- 0.60
ed for the operation of the amine sweetening unit being studied.
For this case, simulations have been performed and process
0.55
optimization has been carried out while maintaining the sweet
gas H2S concentration at the same level as that in the operating
0.50
case. Also, simulations have been performed for the plant’s aver- 45 50 55 60 65
Lean amine temperature, °C
TABLE 3. Comparison of major parameters for operating case
FIG. 3. Effect of lean solvent temperature on solvent pumping energy.
and proposed case
Average lean amine
1,100
Parameter temperature case Proposed case
Lean solvent temperature, °C 59 47.3 1,000
Sweet gas water content, Kg/hr

Sweet gas H2S, ppm 4.2 4.2

900
Sweet gas CO2 , % 1.4 2
Solvent circulation rate, m3/hr 785 630 800
Pumping load, MW 0.7 0.55
700
Steam consumption rate, t/hr 117 91
Lean solvent cooler load, MW 44 39 600
Hydrate formation temperature, °C 18.7 18.6
500
Sweet gas temperature, °C 60.4 49.3 45 50 55 60 65
Lean amine temperature, °C
Hydrocarbon dewpoint, °C 24.4 24.1
Sweet gas H2O content, kg/hr 858 522 FIG. 4. Effect of lean solvent temperature on sweet gas water vapor.

Gas Processing | SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 201441

BONUS REPORT: GAS TREATING PLANTS
TABLE 4. Comparison of major parameters for different
amine concentrations
Amine H2S, CO2, Steam, Amine Rich Lean
strength, % ppm % t/hr rate, m3/hr loading loading
42 4.2 1.2 120 785 0.44 0.002
45 4.2 1.3 110 720 0.44 0.002
47.5 4.2 1.3 104 675 0.44 0.002
50 4.2 1.4 98 630 0.44 0.002
Lower amine concentrations are generally considered to be an
industrial precaution against corrosion. However, low amine con-
centrations, in combination with under-circulation of amine, lead
to higher rich acid gas loading, thereby causing severe corrosion
in the rich amine line.1 Also, low amine concentrations require a
higher amine circulation rate and/or a higher reboiler steam rate
to achieve sweet gas specifications in terms of acid gas removal.
On the other hand, higher amine concentrations often sig-
nificantly minimize the operating cost as an implication of lower
amine circulation rate and steam rate. However, higher amine
concentrations promote corrosion rates on lean amine lines with
time, due to acid gas flashing and the formation of layers of FeS
and FeCO3.4 However, this risk can be mitigated with proper se-
lection of solvent circulation rate and steam rate.
To summarize, the optimum choice of amine concentration
can be made only through an investigation of its effect on sev-
eral parameters:
• Sweet gas H2S and CO2 concentrations
• Steam consumption rate
• Amine circulation rate
• Rich amine loading (corrosion on rich amine lines)
• Lean amine loading (corrosion on lean amine lines).
To this end, the impact of amine strength on the preceding
parameters has been analyzed through process simulations us-
ing different amine solvent concentrations:
• 42% (present operating condition)
• 45% (average lean amine strength in the plant)
• 47.5%
• 50% (plant design limit).
Simulations for the four cases were optimized to meet the
operating value of sweet gas H2S concentration (4.2 ppm) to
provide a candid comparison of the remaining parameters.
TABLE 4 shows that sweet gas CO2 content is compliant with
the requirements of the plant’s downstream section in all three
cases. Rich and lean amine loadings are always less than the al-
lowable limits (0.5 and 0.01, respectively1 ), which guarantees
corrosion-free operations. Also, it can be concluded from the
results that steam consumption and amine circulation rates
significantly decrease as the amine strength increases, with the
lowest values for steam use and amine circulation rate occurring
at the highest amine strength (50%).
In summary, amine strength of 50% is best suited for the plant’s
operating conditions, as it results in potential savings of operating
costs without increasing the risk of corrosion and fouling.
Recommendations. Optimization of amine sweetening plants
through operational changes has been a point of discussion due
to the easy adoptability of changes without additional capital ex-
pense. This article investigated the impact on the plant perfor-
42SEPTEMBER/OCTOBER 2014 | GasProcessingNews.com
mance of tuning the lean amine temperature and amine strength.
Process simulations of an industrial gas sweetening unit are per-
formed to analyze the possible benefits and detrimental effects
that prevail as the two operating conditions are adjusted.
Lean amine temperature lower than the present operating
condition is proposed as an optimum value based on simulation
analysis. The proposed condition promotes H2S absorption
with additional CO2 slippage, but within acceptable levels. This
results in a reduction in steam consumption rate and solvent
circulation rate to achieve the same sweet gas H2S specification.
Moreover, both the lean solvent pumping energy and the
load on the dehydration unit decrease due to the reduction in
the solvent flowrate and the higher degree of water vapor con-
densation in the absorber, respectively. The study also shows
that the proposed operating conditions do not increase foam-
ing tendency and hydrate formation.
The design limit for amine strength is recommended as the
optimum value for the amine plant in this study. The process
simulation model is optimized for this amine strength while
meeting the desired levels of acid gas absorption. The results
show that significant reductions in the steam consumption rate
and the solvent circulation rate are achieved without increasing
the risk of corrosion for the rich and lean amine streams. GP
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This study was financially supported by The Petroleum Institute’s Gas Research
Center in Abu Dhabi, UAE.
REFERENCES
1
Sheilan, M. H., B. H. Spooner and E. van Hoorn, Amine Treating and Sour Water
Stripping, 3rd Ed., Amine Experts, Calgary, Canada, 2007.
2
Patil, P., Z. Malik and M. Jobson, “Retrofit design for gas sweetening processes,”
Proceedings of the 2006 IChem E Symposium, Series 152.
3
Rechtien, R. and G. Duggan, “Identifying the impact of amine contamina-
tion on crude units,” Proceedings of 61st annual conference and exposition,
Corrosion 2006, Houston, Texas.
4
Pandey, M., “Process optimization in gas sweetening unit—A case study,”
Proceedings of the International Petroleum Technology Conference, Doha,
Qatar, 2005.
DARA SATYADILEEP is a research engineer at The Petroleum Institute, with
responsibilities including industrial research on gas processing technologies.
He received a master’s degree in chemical engineering from the Indian Institute
of Technology in Madras. He previously worked as a process engineer at General
Electric for five years. His areas of interest include acid gas removal with physical and
chemical solvents, sulfur recovery units, gas dehydration systems and gasification.
One patent application has been filed in his name.
DR. ABDALLAH SOFAINE BERROUK is an assistant professor at The Petroleum
Institute’s chemical engineering department. He was awarded a PhD from the
University of Manchester in the UK. He holds master’s degrees in engineering
(energetics), research in solid mechanics, and oil and gas management. Dr. Berrouk’s
expertise covers computational fluid dynamics, large eddy simulation, gas sweetening,
aerosol dispersion and deposition, and computational flow modeling for chemical
reactor engineering. Dr. Berrouk has published two books, three book chapters and
more than 50 papers for peer-reviewed international journals and conferences.
ALAA ABDUL AZIZ is head of the process engineering section of the technical
services division at Abu Dhabi Gas Industries Ltd.’s Habshan gas complex. He
received his bachelor’s degree in petroleum refinery engineering. He has 30 years of
experience in the gas processing industry. His major areas of expertise include amine
sweetening, gas dehydration, sulfur recovery units and natural gas fractionation.
DR. CORNELIS PETERS is a chair professor of The Petroleum Institute’s chemical
engineering department. He earned his PhD from the Delft University of Technology
in the Netherlands. Dr. Peters is an expert in the areas of thermodynamics, phase
equilibria, ionic liquids, hydrogen storage, gas hydrates and CO2 sequestration. He is
the author of more than 200 publications in peer-reviewed journals and is an editor or
co-editor of six books and 13 book chapters. Two patents have been filed in his name.