View
221
Download
2
Category
Preview:
Citation preview
De mystifying GHG Monitoring andDe-mystifying GHG Monitoring and Reporting – Improved Mass and Energy Balances Using Sigmafine to Achieve Benefits from CompliancePatrick TruesdaleSenior Solution ConsultantEmerson Process ManagementEmerson Process Management
Sigmafine Users ConferenceSan Francisco, April 26, 2010
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010© Copyright 2010, Emerson Process Management. 1
Presentation Objectives
• Industry ChallengesSol tions• Solutions
• Incentives (Current and Future)• Wrap-up and Questions
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010 2© Copyright 2010, Visiant Pimsoft Inc. All rights reserved.
1 G h d t t F i (1824)
Global Warming: Fact or Fiction?
1. Greenhouse dates to Fourier (1824)2. CO2 is not a pollutant but a plant food; halting all
combustion will not measurably affect atmospheric CO21
3 40 CFR P t 86 87 89 t l “M d t3. 40 CFR Parts 86, 87, 89 et al. “Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gases; Final Rule” has ca. 275,780 words (ca. 4.5 kg of 1.75 MT CO2e/ton paper2)
4 A $1 gasoline price increase would reduce4. A $1 gasoline price increase would reduce obesity and save 16,000 lives and $17 billion/year3
Interesting points for debate BUT reality is that:1 Th l t fi ti ( 50%)1. The largest refinery operating expense (ca 50%)
is energy,2. Major product loss is due to understatement of
fuel production consumption3 L C t l d E ffi i j t3. Loss Control and Energy efficiency projects are
TRIPLE WINNERS!!! Reduce Costs, Improve Safety, and Aid in Regulatory Compliance
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
1. Pierre R . Latour PhD. PE 3rd Industry Forum, Hydrocarbon Processing, Houston, Dec. 3, 20092. Jim Ford, “Carbon Neutral Paper – Fact of Fiction?” Climate for Ideas and Environmental Paper Network, 2009 3. Charles Courtemanche, Washington University, St. Louis, Sept. 10, 2007
1. Pierre R . Latour PhD. PE 3rd Industry Forum, Hydrocarbon Processing, Houston, Dec. 3, 20092. Jim Ford, “Carbon Neutral Paper – Fact of Fiction?” Climate for Ideas and Environmental Paper Network, 2009 3. Charles Courtemanche, Washington University, St. Louis, Sept. 10, 2007
The GHG MRR Challenge
• Major facilities: – Petrochemical (X), Refineries (Y), Oil and Gas (W)
• Stationary combustion units (C)Stationary combustion units (C) • H2 units (P) • Petroleum Suppliers (MM)• Natural Gas Suppliers (NN)
• Measure CO CH4 N O (GWP = 1 21 310 )• Measure CO2, CH4, N2O … (GWP = 1, 21, 310, …) – Measurement standards and procedures to use – Industry Accepted Standards – ASTM, API, etc.– Can use Mass Balance calculations in special cases
• Report CO2e (MT) only. – Reduction levels to be developed
• Monitoring started January 1, 2010. – First report due March 31, 2011 for CY 2010
• Strict QA/QC, documentation and reporting required• Penalties (Civil and Criminal) could arise
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Emissions Defined – What’s Important?
Combustion
FugitiveProcess
Fugitive
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Meeting the challenge
G
1. Enhance key equipment performanceControl loops
Most economical ways to meet GHR Regulations:
– Control loops– Measurement systems – Identify and repair leaks
2 Improve energy efficiency of key combustion units2. Improve energy efficiency of key combustion units– Furnaces/Heaters– Distillation Columns
3 Enhance loss control (business process and procedures)3. Enhance loss control (business process and procedures)– Follow established measurement standards
• Fiscal Controls and Legal Metrology• Customs and Excise (FTZ), ATF (ethanol), etc
– Mass and energy balances (Sigmafine)– Establish and monitoring KPI’s
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Follow Consensus Industry Standards
• Tanks Measurements:– API MPMS Chapter 2 Tank Calibration– API MPMS Chapter 3 Tank (Storage, Tank Cars, Marine Vessels, Hybrid) Gauging
• Flow Measurements– API MPMS Chapter 4, Proving Systems– API MPMS Chapter 5, Metering (Displacement, Turbine, Coriolis, Ultrasonic)– API MPMS Chapter 6, Metering Assemblies– API MPMS Chapter 14, Natural Gas Fluids Measurement
• Quality Measurements– API MPMS Chapter 7, Temperature Determination– API MPMS Chapter 9, Density Determination– API MPMS Chapter 11, Physical Properties Data (CTPL Factor)– API MPMS Chapter 12, Calculation of Petroleum Quantities
• Other– AGA – Gas Measurement– OIML R117 Hydrocarbon Liquid Metering– OIML R137 Gas Metering
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Tank Gauging and Temperature Accuracy
• API Chapter 3.1B requirements
Lab Installed
• API Chapter 7 requirements
API Chapter 7 ±0.25 °C/0.5°F ±0.5 °C/1.0°F
ISO 4266 part 4 ±0.25 °C/0.5°F ±0.5 °C/1.0°F
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 20108
OIML R85* N/A N/A
Step 1: Identify Custody Boundaries
BOL
Load Port Unload Port Load Port
BOL
Shore Ship
Raw Material Production & Supply Refining Complex
Ship Shore ShoreShip TransportationLoss
Consumers Transportation LossShore
Unload Port
Ship
Logistics
pShore Ship
BOL$ “The Cash Register” plus
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Upstream Emissions
Step 2: Define Process Boundaries
CrackingFurnaces
Hydrogen 1%-9%
Methane 6%-28% (fuel)Steam
SteamFeeds (60%)
Ethane (C2)
20 °C5 bar
50 °C2 bar
Example Ethylene Complex: Mass and Heat Balances
Cold Box C2 Splitter
Ethylene 23%-76%
( )Propane (C3)Butane (C4)Naphtha (C5 – C12)Gas Oil (C10 – C15)
Steam (40%)
800-900 °C1.5 bar
-20 °C20 bar
-30 °C20 bar
FiredHeater Cryogenic
DistillationHydrogenation
ReactorC2 Hydrogenation
C3 Splitt
Cracked Gas Compressor
Ethane 3%-20% (recycle)
Propylene 3%-16%Steam & Waste Heat
Fuel Gas
Dem
ethzer
350 °C1.5 bar
10 °C1.5 bar -100 °C
32 bar
-10 °C30 bar
35°C16 bar
-6 °C20 bar
Distillation
TurboD
epropanzer
terDeethaniz
erQuench Tower Propane 2%-10%
C4s 2%-9%hani
Drying and Chilling
Quench Water Circuit
Fuel Oil
Tar
30 °C1.5 bar 10 °C
10 bar-10 °C30 bar
75 °C30 bar
45°C5 bar
45°C16 bar
80 °C
DistillationCompressor
ni
C3 Hydrogenation
Debutaniz
er
C4s 2% 9%
Gasoline <1%-35%
Ethylene and Propylene Refrigeration Systems
Oil / Tar Fractionator
30 bar
70 °C8 bar
90 °C5 bar
80 °C1.5 bar
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Step 3: Validate/select Measurement Systems
• With poor instrumentation and procedures:= 1.5 - 2.5% Mass losses
With i t t ti d d• With average instrumentation and procedures:= 0.7 – 1.5% Mass losses
• With good instrumentation and procedures:< 0 5% Mass losses= < 0.5% Mass losses
•• Pacesetter = <0.2%Pacesetter = <0.2%Pacesetter look at Solomon KPI; Others such Shell Global Services, Juran, etc.Others such Shell Global Services, Juran, etc.
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Step 4: Develop KPI Reporting
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Where are the Incentives?
Industry Sector Process Energy: MM BTU/Ton Product
10% Reduction:
$/Tonkg CO2e/Ton2
(@$7/MMBTU)
Petroleum Refining1 4.4 3.1 23.4
Ethylene 15.0 10.5 80.0
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
1. Assumes 67.7% for combustion fuel and 25.2% from cat coke
2. For illustration purposes only. Estimated assuming Tier 1 calculations
Improving Accuracy: The Big Benefit
L C t M d %1 R lit %Loss Category Measured %1 Reality %
1. Custody transfer (receipt, shipments)0.5 to 0.6 0.4
2. Flare, evaporation, spills/leaks, FCC coke make calculation, carbon dioxide, other
0.4 to 0.5 0.3other
3. Fuel and H2 internal consumption understated – not real oil loss butaffects overall balances!
1.1 to 1.5 0.7
Total 2.0 to 2.6 1.4
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Note: 1. Mass Basis converted from volume data.2. 100,000 BPD; 5.8MM BTU/Bbl; $7 MMBTU; Tier 1 Calc; No CO2 trading credits
Measurement Losses: What is it worth?
Assume 0.2% Loss Reduction
•Product •Capacity •Price •Margin •Utilization factor •Amount•Ethylene •900 kMT/yr •1 150 $/t •500 $/t •93% •47 774 $/hr•Propylene •450 kMT/yr •1 150 $/t •500 $/t •93% •23 887 $/hr
$•$71 661•0.2% •$143/hr•1 hr
•1 yr •$1 255 500y
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Energy Savings: Increased H2 Yields
Patent: 6,758,101 B2; Jul 6, 2004
Objective: Control S/C ratio as close to 3.2 as possible but avoid going belowDisturbance: Fuel gas C1 (77 – 85%); C2 (6.8 – 15); N2, CO also fluctuateTest: Std Orifice plus GC max error = 0.2; MMI (Coriolis) max error = 0.02Benefits: Moving 0.2 ratio closer to limit worth 8 BTU/SCF of H2;
80 MMSCFD plant; $7 MM BTU gas – $1.6 MM per year1
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
1. Excludes CO2e benefits
Energy Savings: Heater Efficiency/Yields
TI071
CO A l
HIC353D
PIC359D
PIC357D
F
Damper ActuatorKey Operating Objectives
◦ Constant outlet temp◦ Min excess air◦ Maintain within constraints
FIC101
H306
FIC102
TI069
CO AnalyzerAIC354D
O2 AnalyzerAIC356D
TIC362D
TI
TI072
TIC361
TI067
Feed
ProductPI
365
Draft PressureTI066
TubeT t
C b ti
FuelDemand
AirDemand
PassBalance
MultivariableControl
069
FIC103
TI069
FIC104
TI070TI
075
TI073
TI043
Temperature
BTU
Combustion Control
FIC361 Fuel
PIC360A
PIC360B
AI360
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Energy Savings: Fired Heater Benefits
• Example: 100 mmBtu/hr heater; for illustration assume:– Natural Gas = $7/Mscf– Apply rule 40CFR 98 Subpart C: Tier #1– CO2e market value = $2/MT
CO2e Natural Gas Natural Gas Item (MT/yr) Flow (scf/hr) Flow (Mscf/yr)Before Energy Savings 44,630.9 97,276 817,121 After Energy Savings 44,184.6 96,304 808,949 Delta 446.3 973 8,171 ,Savings 893$ 6,809$ 57,198$
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Energy Savings: Boiler Efficiency
Figure 4 Desired O2 Setpoint vs. Steam Load, f3 (x), for Boiler 3 B rning GasBoiler 3 Burning Gas
10
12
14
16
ess
O2
Original Setpoint
125,000 lb/ hr 400 psig steam;1% Fuel Savings;
$140 000 per year0
2
4
6
8
% E
xce New Setpoint
Actual Data
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
$140,000 per year($7/ MMBTU)
00 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
% Steam Flow
Oil and Natural Gas Systems
Separator Skid Cryogenic
Compressor SkidDeh drators
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Compressor SkidDehydrators
Future Mass/Energy Balance Risk/Rewards
$
$90
$100Source: EPA preliminary analysis of Waxman-Markey
$50
$60
$70
$80
$20
$30
$40
$50
$0
$10
$20
2015 2020 2030 2040 2050
• Small Facility (25,000 tpy) $1,250,000 Value at Risk
• Large Facility (1,000,000 tpy) $50,000,000 Value at Risk Projected cost of carbon allowances (in 2005 constant dollars)Projected cost of carbon allowances (in 2005 constant dollars)
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
j ( )j ( )
Summary
• Process plants have large incentives to reduce losses and optimize energy usage. These two KPI are interrelated,
• Focus on big picture and longer term vision but go after “low hanging fruit”,• Combine HSE, operations, engineering, and maintenance objectives as team,Combine HSE, operations, engineering, and maintenance objectives as team, • Leverage existing industry standards, • Significant technological improvement in measurement systems has
occurredS t I t t d Wi l t h l dditi l b fit f th• Smart Instruments and Wireless technology opens additional benefits for the future,
• Improved accuracy of Production Data (Mass and Energy Balance Reconciliation) impacts many KPI’s,
• Establish and monitor correct KPI’s to achieve continuous improvement that sustains benefits,
• The solution “is Greenis Green” provides significant benefits now both from Loss and Energy efficiency perspective but future GHG emission perspective. gy y p p p p
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Wrap-up
• Questions/Comments?• Thank You.
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010
Thank you
Sigmafine User Conference – San Francisco April 26, 2010© Copyright 2010, Visiant Pimsoft Inc. All rights reserved.
Recommended