de-mystifying ghg monitoring andmystifying ghg · pdf file– api mpms chapter 2 tank...

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


Emissions Defined – What’s Important?

Combustion

FugitiveProcess

Fugitive


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


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


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


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


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


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.


Step 4: Develop KPI Reporting


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


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


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


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


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


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$


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


$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


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)


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


Wrap-up

• Questions/Comments?• Thank You.


de-mystifying ghg monitoring andmystifying ghg · pdf file– api mpms chapter 2 tank...

Documents