DOCSLIB.ORG

Oil and Gas Processing: a Primer I Acknowledgments and Disclaimer

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Oil and Gas Processing: a Primer I Acknowledgments and Disclaimer PI Processing COVER 6/18/04 12:17 PM Page 1 Pembina Oil & Gas A PRIMER Processing Environment & Energy in the North About the Pembina Institute The Pembina Institute is an independent programs. More information about the non-profit research, education and advocacy Pembina Institute is available at organization. It promotes environmental, social www.pembina.org or by contacting and economic sustainability through the development of practical solutions for The Pembina Institute businesses, governments, individuals and Box 7558 communities.The Pembina Institute provides Drayton Valley, AB policy research leadership on climate change, T7A 1S7 energy policy, green economics, renewable Tel: 780-542-6272 energy, and environmental governance, as well Fax: 780-542-6464 as extensive formal and public education E-mail: [email protected] About the Author / Chris Severson-Baker Chris Severson-Baker is Director of the opportunities to strengthen environmental Pembina Institute’s Energy Watch Program. He regulation, and encouraging industry to adopt graduated from the University of Alberta with a better practices. Chris has represented the BSc in Environmental and Conservation Science Pembina Institute on numerous provincial and in 1996, joining the Pembina Institute that same federal multi-stakeholder committees focussed About Pembina year. He has worked to reduce the impacts of on developing environmental management the oil and gas industry on the environment — policy for the oil and gas sector. providing recommendations to government on Oil and Gas Processing: A Primer i Acknowledgments and Disclaimer The Pembina Institute would like to recognize ■ Lewis Rifkind (Yukon Conservation Society) the staff who have directly contributed to the ■ Wayne Sawchuk completion of this series of primers, including (Chetwynd Environmental Society) Tom Marr-Laing for writing and for guidance, ■ Megan Christie (Yukon Fish and Wildlife Niki Wilson and Mary Griffiths for research and Management Board) writing, Dave Mussell for providing illustrations ■ Mac Hislop (Canadian Parks and Wilderness and images, Michael Benson for research Society – Yukon Chapter) support, former colleague Janet Sumner for ■ Jennifer Walker-Larsen graphic presentation, our senior editor (Gwich’in Renewable Resource Board) Randee Holmes for writing and editing, ■ Jody Snortland Alison MacAlpine and Janet Shorten for editing (Sahtu Renewable Resources Board) and Hal Retzer for assisting with research and ■ Petr Cizek (Ecology North) writing of early drafts of the documents as a ■ Adrian Paradis Pembina Institute volunteer. (Mackenzie Valley Land and Water Board) The Pembina Institute would also like to thank ■ Robert Jenkins, Sarah Aho the numerous individuals working in industry, and George McCormick government and the environmental community (Indian and Northern Affairs Canada) who took the time to review one or all of primers ■ Alisha Chauhan (Inuvialuit Game Council) and to provide comments and information. ■ Russ Nelson (Shell Canada Limited) Thank you also to the numerous behind-the- ■ Brian Heppelle (Environment Canada) scenes reviewers who provided comments by ■ Bruce Hanna and Pete Cott way of the primary contact people listed below: (Fisheries and Oceans Canada). ■ Peter Ewins and Celeste Booth The Pembina Institute is especially grateful (World Wildlife Fund) to the Walter and Duncan Gordon Foundation, ■ Kevin O’Reilly, Clive Tesar and Mary McCreadie who provided a grant that made the research (Canadian Arctic Research Committee) and writing of this report possible. ■ Peter Millman (Devon Canada Corporation) The contents of this document are entirely the ■ Douglas Mead (Mead Environmental Services responsibility of the Pembina Institute and do (formerly Shell Canada Limited) not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of ■ Doug Iverson (Encana) those acknowledged above. ■ Terry Forkheim (Anadarko Canada) ■ Mike Doyle (Canadian Association © Pembina Institute of Geophysical Contractors) for Appropriate Development. ■ Cynthia Pyc (BP Canada Energy Company) ISBN: 0-921719-49-3 Acknowledgements ii The Pembina Institute Contents About the Pembina Institute.....................................................................................................................i About the Primers .........................................................................................................................................3 Introduction .....................................................................................................................................................5 What is Oil and Gas Processing?.............................................................................................................7 ❚ Gas Plant ............................................................................................................................................8 Environmental Impacts ............................................................................................................................18 ❚ Disturbance of the Land Surface............................................................................................18 ■ Wildlife ...............................................................................................................................19 ■ Permafrost ........................................................................................................................19 ■ Vegetation ........................................................................................................................19 ❚ Damage to Soil and Water........................................................................................................20 ■ Spills and Leaks...............................................................................................................20 ■ Waste ..................................................................................................................................20 ■ Water Use..........................................................................................................................20 ❚ Damage to Air Quality................................................................................................................21 ❚ Cumulative Impacts ....................................................................................................................24 of Contents Table ❚ There is still a lot we don’t know............................................................................................25 Using the Best Practices Available......................................................................................................26 ❚ Planning...........................................................................................................................................27 ■ Integrated Land Use Planning ..................................................................................27 ■ Limiting the Number of Processing Facilities......................................................27 ■ Local and Regional Air Quality Monitoring..........................................................28 ■ Managing Surface Water.............................................................................................29 ■ Groundwater Management.......................................................................................29 Oil and Gas Processing: A Primer 1 ❚ Selection, Handling and Storage of Materials ...................................................................30 ■ Storage Vessel Spill Prevention.................................................................................30 ■ Preventing Tank Sludge...............................................................................................30 ■ “Zero Drip” Policy............................................................................................................30 ❚ Minimizing Air Emissions..........................................................................................................31 ■ Acid Gas Injection..........................................................................................................31 ■ Sulphur Recovery...........................................................................................................31 ■ Reducing Flaring at Gas Plants .................................................................................32 ❚ Facility Flaring Decision Tree....................................................................................................34 ■ Remote Shut-down Capability of Gas Field.........................................................32 ■ Blowdowns and Depressuring..................................................................................35 ■ Benzene Emission Reductions — Glycol Dehydrators.....................................35 ■ Methane-controlled Pneumatic Devices...............................................................36 ■ Leak Detection and Repair.........................................................................................37 ■ Tank Vapour Control and Recovery.........................................................................38 ■ Dry Low-NOx Burners...................................................................................................39 ■ Industry Best Practice Commitment to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions ........................................................................................39 ■ Co-generation and Heat Integration......................................................................39
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Geothermal Steam Economic H2S Abatement and Sulfur Recovery
    Proceedings World Geothermal Congress 2005 Antalya, Turkey, 24-29 April 2005 Geothermal Steam Economic H2S Abatement and Sulphur Recovery Wayne D. Monnery Xergy Processing Inc., Calgary, Alberta, Canada [email protected] Keywords: H2S abatement the H2S quantity is above about 100 – 200 kg/d due to the high operating cost associated with replacement and ABSTRACT disposal of the non-regenerable chemical. A serious problem that occurs in geothermal steam power projects is the emission of hydrogen sulfide. This problem 1.2 New H2S Abatement Technology is not easily rectifiable and as a result, the geothermal steam industry has a need for H2S abatement technology that is In the geothermal industry, most of the same technology as suitable and economic for use in geothermal steam the petroleum industry has been considered as well as facilities. Current technology has proven to have high limestone-gypsum technology. Unfortunately, existing capital and/or operating costs and some processes are technology has shown to have relatively high capital and difficult to operate. operating costs and often produces byproducts (waste streams) and poor quality products that are difficult and In answer to the requirement for new technology and for expensive to dispose of (Nagl, 2003; Takahashi and companies to be environmentally responsible, Xergy Kuragaki, 2000). Processing Inc. has developed a gas phase direct oxidation process for treating H2S in the range of 0.1 to 20 t/d which As a result, there is a need for a technology with lower has several applications. The process is ideally suited for capital and operating costs that produces a saleable quality H2S abatement in geothermal power processes.
    [Show full text]
  • Economical Sulfur Removal for Fuel Processing Plants Challenge Sulfur Is Naturally Present As an Impurity in Fossil Fuels
    SBIR Advances More Economical Sulfur Removal for Fuel Processing Plants Challenge Sulfur is naturally present as an impurity in fossil fuels. When the fuels are burned, the sulfur is released as sulfur dioxide—an air pollutant responsible for respiratory problems and acid rain. Environmental regulations have increasingly restricted sulfur dioxide emissions, forcing fuel processors to remove the sulfur from both fuels and exhaust gases. The cost of removing sulfur from natural gas and petroleum in the United States was about DOE Small Business Innovation $1.25 billion in 2008*. In natural gas, sulfur is present mainly as hydrogen sulfide gas (H2S), Research (SBIR) support while in crude oil it is present in sulfur-containing organic compounds which are converted enabled TDA to develop and into hydrocarbons and H2S during the removal process (hydrodesulfurization). In both cases, commercialize its direct oxidation corrosive, highly-toxic H2S gas must be converted into elemental sulfur and removed for sale or process—a simple, catalyst-based safe disposal. system for removing sulfur from At large scales, the most economical technology for converting hydrogen sulfide into sulfur is natural gas and petroleum—that the Claus process. This well-established process uses partial combustion and catalytic oxidation was convenient and economical enough for smaller fuel processing to convert about 97% of the H2S to elemental sulfur. In a typical application, an amine treatment plants to use. unit concentrates the H2S before it enters the Claus unit, and a tail gas treatment unit removes the remaining 3% of the H2S after it exits the Claus unit. This multi-step process has low operating costs but high capital costs—too expensive for TDA Research, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • ASPEN HYSES V8.8 Design for the Simultaneous Removal of Thiols
    1st International Conference on Advances in Engineering and Technology (ICAET-2018) Contribution ID: 49 Type: Poster Presenter ASPEN HYSES V8.8 Design for the simultaneous removal of thiols, hydrogen sulfide and carbon dioxide from natural gas stream using DEA + MDEA + Piperazine aqueous solutions Natural gas and petroleum industries are dealing with raw materials containing variable concentrations of acid gases (CO2, H2S) and traces of mercaptans and dimethyl disulfide and many others. Treatment processes have to remove not only H2S and CO2 but also OSS and prohibited compounds because worldwide regulations for environmental protection are forcing the petroleum industry to decrease the sulfur content in petroleum fluids. Furthermore, any mercaptans (RSH), carbonyl sulfide (COS), and carbon disulfide (CS2), not absorbed with from the sour gas through amine purification units, complicate the process scheme for downstream liquid treatment. In this work case studies have been carried out on Aspen HYSYS V8.8 for the simultaneous removal of H2S and organic sulfur species for natural gas. Solvent concentration in the aqueous solution has been varied from 0-60 % by volume for simultaneous removal of H2S, Methyl mercaptan, Ethyl mercaptan and n-Propyl mercaptan. While using DEA as the solvent the simulation results show an increase of 14 % Ethyl mercaptan, 49 % Methyl mercaptan and 111 % CO2 removal while a decrease of 41.82 % and 40.66 % was observed in H2S and n-Propyl mercaptan removal respectively vis a vis MDEA. Primary authors: Mr KHAN, Hashim (Punjab University, Lahore); Mr QADRI, Ishaq (Punjab University, Lahore ); Prof. AWAN, Javeed (Punjab University, Lahore) Presenters: Mr KHAN, Hashim (Punjab University, Lahore); Mr QADRI, Ishaq (Punjab University, Lahore ) Track Classification: Chemical & Material Engineering.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydrogen Sulfide Formation in Oil and Gas
    Canadian Journal of Chemistry Hydrogen Sulfide formation in Oil and Gas Journal: Canadian Journal of Chemistry Manuscript ID cjc-2015-0425.R1 Manuscript Type: Article Date Submitted by the Author: 18-Nov-2015 Complete List of Authors: Marriott, Robert; University of Calgary Pirzadeh, Payman; University of Calgary Marrugo-Hernandez, Juan; University of Calgary Raval, Shaunak;Draft University of Calgary Keyword: hydrogen sulfide, sulfur, conventional, unconventional, sulfate reduction https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com/cjc-pubs Page 1 of 32 Canadian Journal of Chemistry Hydrogen Sulfide formation in Oil and Gas Robert A. Marriott, * Payman Pirzadeh, Juan J. Marrugo H. and Shaunak Raval Department of Chemistry, University of Calgary 2500 University Drive NW, Calgary, Alberta * E-mail: [email protected] , Tel: +1-403-220-3144 Draft 1 https://mc06.manuscriptcentral.com/cjc-pubs Canadian Journal of Chemistry Page 2 of 32 Abstract Hydrogen sulfide (H 2S) can be a significant component of oil and gas upstream production, where H2S can be naturally generated in situ from reservoir biomass and from sulfate containing minerals through microbial sulfate reduction (MSR) and/or thermochemical sulfate reduction (TSR). On the other hand, the technologies employed in oil and gas production, especially from unconventional resources, also can contribute to generation or delay of appearance of H2S. Steam assisted gravity drainage (SAGD) and hydraulic fracturing used in production of oil sands and shale oil/gas, respectively, can potentially convert the sulfur content of the petroleum into H2S or contribute excess amounts of H 2S during production. A brief overview of the different classes of chemical reactions involved in the in situ generation and release of H 2S is provided in this work.
    [Show full text]
  • 1983: Fundamentals of Gas Sweetening
    FUNDAMENTALS OF GAS SWEETENING K, F, BUTWELL L, KROOP UNION CARBIDE CORPORATION TARRYTOWN, NEW YORK Natural gas has a wide range of acid gas concentrations, from parts per million to 50 volume percent and higher, depending on the nature of the rock formation from which it comes. Because of the corrosiveness of H2S and CO 2 in the presence of water and because of the toxicity of H2S and the lack of heating value of C02, sales gas is required to be sweetened to contain no more than a quarter grain H2S per 100 standard cubic feet (4 parts per million) and to have a heating value of no less than 920 to 980 Btu/SCF, depending on the contract. The most widely used processes to sweeten natural gas are those using the alkanol- amines, and of the alkanolamines the two most common are mono- ethananolamine (MEA) and diethanolamine (DEA). THE AMINE SWEETENING PROCESS The monoethanolamine and diethanolamine sweetening processes are similar in their flow schemes and operations. They are used as aqueous solvents to selectively absorb H2S and CO 2 from sour natural gas streams. The sour gas is introduced at the bottom of an absorber and flows up the tower countercurrent to an aqueous amine stream. Within the tower the acid gases are ab- sorbed by the amine. The amine is described as being lean in acid gas as it enters the top of the absorber, and rich as it exits the bottom, loaded with acid gas. From the absorber the rich amine is directed to the top of a stripping tower where a drop in pressure and application of heat enables the solvent to be stripped of the acid gases.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hydrodesulfurization of Diesel Fuel to Meet New Epa
    THE HYDRODESULFURIZATION OF DIESEL FUEL TO MEET NEW EPA REQUIREMENTS By FAUSTO ISRAEL MARES-DAVILA ____________________ A Thesis Submitted to The Honors College In Partial Fulfillment of the Bachelors degree With Honors in Chemical Engineering THE UNIVERSITY OF ARIZONA M A Y 2016 Approved by: ____________________________ Dr. Kim Ogden Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering Abstract In December 1, 2010 the EPA reduced the allowable sulfur content in diesel fuel to 15 ppm, which is now known as ultra-low sulfur diesel (ULSD). In order to reach the 15 ppm sulfur maximum, the hydrodesulfurization unit in many refineries had to be upgraded. The group has been tasked with developing an upgrade catalytic hydrodesulfurization unit for a refinery in the Delaware Valley that can treat 35,000 barrels per stream day (BPSD) of liquid feedstock containing 1.9 wt % sulfur. Performance data from the existing catalytic hydrodesulfurization unit was used to predict the performance of the upgraded unit. ChemCAD software was used for the process calculations and the feed was modeled using boiling curve data. The desulfurization reaction kinetics were based on the reduction of dibenzothiophene. The project goals are to achieve a 99% recovery of diesel fuel while reducing the sulfur content below 15 ppm. The liquid feedstock will be run through a packed bed reactor filled with CoMo/Al2O3 catalyst where the sulfur compounds will react with hydrogen gas to form hydrogen sulfide gas. An amine contactor will be used to remove sour gas from the recycle hydrogen stream and a distillation column will produce diesel. The work presented in this report is the combined effort of Fausto Mares-Davila, Jason Green, Toluwani Omotinugbon, and Jun Terashima.
    [Show full text]
  • The Changing Paradigm in Sour Gas Treating Processes
    Recent Advances in Petrochemical Science ISSN: 2575-8578 Mini Review Recent Adv Petrochem Sci Volume 3 Issue 2 -september 2017 Copyright © All rights are reserved by Madhusree Kundu DOI: 10.19080/RAPSCI.2017.03.555608 The Changing Paradigm in Sour Gas Treating Processes Madhusree Kundu* Department of Chemical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, India Submission: September 18, 2017; Published: September 22, 2017 *Corresponding author: Madhusree Kundu, Department of Chemical Engineering, National Institute of Technology, Rourkela, Orissa, India, Email: Mini Review hybrid solvents are in use for gas treating. Among the different technologies available for CO mitigation, capture of CO by (H S), carbon dioxide (CO 2 2 2 The sour gas treating2 is the removal of hydrogen sulfide chemical absorption is the technology that is closest to get ), and organo sulfides from gases. It implemented commercially. The technology was patented in petrochemical plants, natural gas processing plants, and is a common unit process used in refineries, and is also used other industries. Currently, removal of carbon dioxide from for natural gas sweetening as early as 1930 by R.R. Bottoms commercially available and used in early gas-treating plants. as well, which generically is different from natural gas and [2]. Triethanolamine (TEA) was the first alkanolamine thermal power plant flue gas seems to be a great challenge In the present context, the role of alkanolamine solvents in sour gas treating research should be revered. Chemical technologies and their changing spectrum in sour gas treating, refinery off gas treating technology. Before chronicling the absorption processes for gas treating may be divided into the author would like to have a brief opportunity to discuss three conceptual categories distinguished by the rate at which simply the plight of non-treating of sour gas.
    [Show full text]
  • Flow Impairment by Deposited Sulfur - a Review of 50 Years of Research
    Flow Impairment by Deposited Sulfur - A Review of 50 Years of Research Bruce E. Roberts Rock Isle Consulting Services Ltd., Calgary, Alberta, Canada Received March 30, 2017; Accepted May 11, 2017 Abstract: Sulfur deposition in the reservoir formation and its impact on well productivity and ultimate recovery has been investigated for close to 50 years. Experimental measurements and numerical modeling studies have focused on the phase behavior of the sulfur-sour gas mixture system and the flow of sulfur and natural gas through the formation. The key results from these investigations are reviewed in this paper. The implementation of the insights gained over these 50 years of research into the field development planning and operation of sour gas fields is described. Keywords: Sulfur deposition, sour gas, hydrogen sulfide, formation damage 1 Introduction Elemental sulfur is often present in significant quantities in sour gas at reser- voir pressure and temperature conditions. The equilibrium sulfur content of reservoir fluids decreases with pressure and temperature. Deposition of sulfur will occur in the reservoir, well tubulars, or surface equipment when the equili- brium solubility of sulfur becomes less than the sulfur content of the fluid. Although sulfur deposition in the well and surface equipment is a signifi- cant operational problem, it is deposition in the formation that most signifi- cantly impacts well productivity and ultimate recovery. Estimation of the performance of wells producing reservoir fluid containing elemental sulfur requires an understanding of the phase behavior of sulfur in sour gas mixtures coupled with aspects of the flow of sulfur and gas through the formation.
    [Show full text]
  • Production and Processing of Sour Crude and Natural Gas - Challenges Due to Increasing Stringent Regulations
    Production and processing of sour crude and natural gas - challenges due to increasing stringent regulations Darkhan Duissenov Petroleum Engineering Submission date: June 2013 Supervisor: Jon Steinar Gudmundsson, IPT Norwegian University of Science and Technology Department of Petroleum Engineering and Applied Geophysics Production and processing of sour crude and natural gas – challenges due to increasing stringent regulations Darkhan Duissenov Petroleum engineering Submission date: June 2013 Supervisor: Jon Steinar Gudmundsson Norwegian University of Science and Technology Faculty of Engineering Science and Technology Department of Petroleum Engineering and Applied Geophysics Trondheim, Norway Abstract The worldwide demand for petroleum is growing tremendously. It is expected that the demand will have incremental capacity of 20 mb/d for crude oil, reaching 107.3 mb/d, and demand for natural gas will rise nearly 50% to 190 tcf in 2035, compared to 130 tcf now. According to the International Energy Agency 70% of crude oil reserves and 40% of natural gas reserves are defined as having high content of organosulfur compounds. Obviously, for decades to come, to satisfy the growing global needs for fossil fuels, reservoirs with sour contaminants will be developed intensively. The sulfur compounds in crude oils and natural gas generally exist in the form of free sulfur, hydrogen sulfide, thiols, sulfides, disulfides, and thiophenes. These compounds can cause considerable technical, environmental, economic, and safety challenges in all segments of petroleum industry, from upstream, through midstream to downstream. Currently, the sulfur level in on-road and off-road gasoline and diesel is limited to 10 and 15 ppm respectively by weight in developed countries of EU and USA, but this trend is now increasingly being adopted in the developing world too.
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamentals of Gas Treating
    PERRY GAS PROCESSORS, INC. TECHNICAL BULLETIN NO. 76-002 ODESSA, TEXAS APRIL 1, 1977)<. REVISED FEBRUARY 15, 1982 FUNDAMENTALS OF GAS TREATING MANUAL FOR DESIGN OF GAS TREATERS Robert S. Purgason Perry Gas Processor~ Inc. Odessa, Texas Presented To The Gas Conditioning Conference, , 1976, 1978, 1979, 1980, 1981, 1982 Norman, Oklahoma i Page i to 45 FUNDAMENTALS OF GAS TREATING Introduction .••••.••.••...••.• Section 1: Monoethanol/Diethanol Amine Process 2 A. Description of the Process . 2 B. Design Calculations 3 1. Input Data. • ••• 4 2. Circulation .•.••. 4 3. Contactor ••••••••• 5 4. Regeneration Vessels • • ••• 5 5. Heat Loads • • • • . • •••• 5 a. Re boiler . 5 b. Solution Exchangers .•••• 5 c. Solution Coolers •••• 5 d. Reflux Condenser •••••••••••. 5 c. Cost •••••..••• 6 1. Capital Investment • 6 2. Operating Expenses • 6 D. Graphs and Tables Table 1-1: Amine Unit Operating Costs 7 Table 1-2: Regeneration Vessel Sizes • 8 Figure 1-2: Typical Flow Sheet 9 Figure 1-3: Contactor Capacities 10 Figure 1-4: Cost Curve •••• 12 Sectoin 2: Iron Sponge Process 13 A. Description of Process 13 B. Design Calculations •• . ••••• 14 1. Linear Velocity ••• 14 2. Space Velocity •••••••••••• 14 3. Bed Life •••.• 15 4. Air Regeneration ••••• 16 c. Cost •••••.••• 16 1. Capital Investment • 16 2. Operating Expenses . 16 D. Graphs and Tables Table 2-1: Bed Capacity for Various Vessels 17 Figure 2-1: Typical Flow Sheet . • • . • • . 18 Figure 2-2: Bed Life • • • • • • • • • • 19 Figure 2-3: Bed Capacities . • • . • • 20 ii FUNDAMENTIALS OF GAS TREATING - Continued Section 3: Proprietary Liquid Processes . 2 1 A. Diglycolamine (Econamine) (Description, Advantages and Applications) . 21 B. Sulfinol (Description, Advantages and Applications) .
    [Show full text]
  • Acid Gas Cleaning Using DEPG Physical Solvents: Validation with Experimental and Plant Data
    WHITE PAPER Acid Gas Cleaning using DEPG Physical Solvents: Validation with Experimental and Plant Data Jennifer Dyment, Product Marketing, Aspen Technology, Inc. Suphat Watanasiri, Senior Director R&D, Aspen Technology, Inc. Introduction Acid gas removal is an important process in various branches of the hydrocarbon processing industry, primarily in natural gas processing and refining. Acid gas removal is also an essential part of other processes, such as coal gasification where carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, carbonyl sulfides, mercaptans, and other contaminants need to be removed. Acid gas is defined as gas containing significant amounts of contaminants, such as hydrogen sulfide (H2S), carbon dioxide (CO2), and other acidic gases. Sour gas is gas contaminated with H2S. This term comes from the rotten smell due to sulfur content (1). Thus, “gas sweetening” refers to H 2S removal, because it improves the odor of the gas being processed, while “acid gas removal” refers to the removal of both, CO2 and H2S. Acid gases need to be removed in order to comply with sales gas quality regulations. These regulations are in place to minimize environmental impact and ensure gas transport pipeline integrity, avoiding undesired occurrences, such as corrosion caused by H2S and CO2 in the presence of water. Acid gases also need to be removed due to the toxicity of compounds, such as H 2S, and the lack of the heating value of CO2. Typically, “pipeline quality” or sales gas is required to be sweetened to contain concentrations of H2S that’s no more than 4 parts per million (ppm), and a heating value of no less than 920 to 1150 Btu/SCF, depending on the final consumer requirements (2).
    [Show full text]
  • Petroleum Refining: Introduction, Products, Refinery's Configurations, Hydrogen Technologies
    Faculty of Chemical Engineering and Technology University of Zagreb Petroleum Refining: Introduction, Products, Refinery's Configurations, Hydrogen Technologies Ante Jukić ZAVOD ZA TEHNOLOGIJU NAFTE I PETROKEMIJU HR-10000 Zagreb, Savska cesta 16, p.p. 177 / Tel. +385-1-4597125 / E-adresa: [email protected] Gasoline, Diesel, and LPG Technologies In this section we will be describing the different refining technologies relating to Gasoline, Diesel and LPG. Although these are labeled as conventional technologies, refineries today have become increasingly more efficient and efforts across the globe are being made to invest in better performing technologies and processes that save energy and decrease each refineries environmental impact whilst meeting increasingly more stringent fuel product specifications. As can be seen below a basic refinery typically produces a variety of products including: LPG; petrochemicals; gasoline; jet fuel; paraffin for lighting and heating; lubricating oils, waxes and polishes; heavy fuel oil, and bitumen for roads and roofing. Products Produced by Refineries Processing units used in refineries • Crude Oil Distillation unit: distills the incoming crude oil into various fractions for further processing. • Vacuum Distillation unit: further distills the residue oil from the bottom of the crude oil distillation unit. • Naphtha Hydrotreater unit: uses hydrogen to desulfurize the naphtha fraction from the crude oil distillation or other units within the refinery. • Catalytic Reforming unit: converts the desulfurized naphtha molecules into higher-octane molecules to produce reformate, which is a component of the end-product gasoline or petrol. • Alkylation unit: converts isobutane and butylenes into alkylate, which is a very high-octane component of the end-product gasoline or petrol.
    [Show full text]