A computational simulation study for techno-economic comparison of conventional and stripping gas methods for natural gas dehydration

doi:10.1016/j.cjche.2020.03.013

Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering ›› 2020, Vol. 28 ›› Issue (9): 2285-2293.DOI: 10.1016/j.cjche.2020.03.013

• Separation Science and Engineering • Previous Articles Next Articles

A computational simulation study for techno-economic comparison of conventional and stripping gas methods for natural gas dehydration

Muhammad Salman¹, Liangliang Zhang¹, Jianfeng Chen^1,2

1 Research Center of the Ministry of Education for High Gravity Engineering and Technology, Beijing University of Chemical Technology, Beijing 100029, China;
2 StateKey Laboratory of Organic-Inorganic Composites, Beijing University of Chemical Technology, Beijing 100029, China

Received:2019-11-06 Revised:2020-02-29 Online:2020-10-21 Published:2020-09-28
Contact: Liangliang Zhang
Supported by:
This work was financially supported by the National Research and Development Program of China (2017YFC0210900) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (21978011).

A computational simulation study for techno-economic comparison of conventional and stripping gas methods for natural gas dehydration

Muhammad Salman¹, Liangliang Zhang¹, Jianfeng Chen^1,2

1 Research Center of the Ministry of Education for High Gravity Engineering and Technology, Beijing University of Chemical Technology, Beijing 100029, China;
2 StateKey Laboratory of Organic-Inorganic Composites, Beijing University of Chemical Technology, Beijing 100029, China

通讯作者: Liangliang Zhang
基金资助:
This work was financially supported by the National Research and Development Program of China (2017YFC0210900) and the National Natural Science Foundation of China (21978011).

Abstract

Abstract: In the present work, the conventional natural gas dehydration method (CDM) and stripping gas method (SGM) are technically and economically analyzed, utilizing Aspen HYSYS and Aspen Process Economic Analyzer (APEA), respectively. To optimize the CDM and SGM, the sensitivities of the water content of dry gas, reboiler duty and raw material loss are analyzed against solvent rate and stripping gas rate. The optimized processes are set to achieve a targeted value of water content in dry gas and analyzed at optimized point. The analysis shows that SGM gives 46% lower TEG feed rate, 42% lower reboiler duty and 99.97% pure regenerated TEG. Moreover, economic analysis reveals that SGM has 38% lower annual operating cost compared to CDM. According to results, from both technical and economic point of view, SGM is more feasible for natural gas dehydration compared to CDM.

Key words: Natural gas dehydration, Technical analysis, Parametric optimization, Economic study, Aspen HYSYS

摘要： In the present work, the conventional natural gas dehydration method (CDM) and stripping gas method (SGM) are technically and economically analyzed, utilizing Aspen HYSYS and Aspen Process Economic Analyzer (APEA), respectively. To optimize the CDM and SGM, the sensitivities of the water content of dry gas, reboiler duty and raw material loss are analyzed against solvent rate and stripping gas rate. The optimized processes are set to achieve a targeted value of water content in dry gas and analyzed at optimized point. The analysis shows that SGM gives 46% lower TEG feed rate, 42% lower reboiler duty and 99.97% pure regenerated TEG. Moreover, economic analysis reveals that SGM has 38% lower annual operating cost compared to CDM. According to results, from both technical and economic point of view, SGM is more feasible for natural gas dehydration compared to CDM.

关键词: Natural gas dehydration, Technical analysis, Parametric optimization, Economic study, Aspen HYSYS

Muhammad Salman, Liangliang Zhang, Jianfeng Chen. A computational simulation study for techno-economic comparison of conventional and stripping gas methods for natural gas dehydration[J]. Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, 2020, 28(9): 2285-2293.

References

[1] M. Neagu, D.L. Cursaru, Technical and economic evaluations of the triethylene glycol regeneration processes in natural gas dehydration plants, J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 37(2017) 327-340.
[2] BP Energy Outlook, https://www.bp.com/en/global/corporate/energy-economics/energy-outlook/demand-by-fuel/oil.html 2018, Accessed date:1 January 2019.
[3] K. Hayhoe, H.S. Kheshgi, A.K. Jain, D.J. Wuebbles, Substitution of natural gas for coal:climatic effects of utility sector emissions, Clim. Chang. 54(2002) 107-139.
[4] N. Kasiri, S. Hormozdi, Improving performance of absorption tower in natural gas dehydration process, Eur. Symp. Comput. Aided Process Eng. 15(2005) 1-11.
[5] F. Liang, M. Ryvak, S. Sayeed, N. Zhao, The role of natural gas as a primary fuel in the near future, including comparisons of acquisition, transmission and waste handling costs of as with competitive alternatives, Chem. Cent. J. 6(2012) S4.
[6] Z.Y. Kong, A. Mahmoud, S. Liu, J. Sunarso, Revamping existing glycol technologies in natural gas dehydration to improve the purity and absorption efficiency:available methods and recent developments, J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 56(2018) 486-503.
[7] M.R. Rahimpour, S.M. Jokar, P. Feyzi, R. Asghari, Investigating the performance of dehydration unit with Coldfinger technology in gas processing plant, J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 12(2013) 1-12.
[8] A.L. Kohl, R.B. Nielsen, Gas Purification, Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, 1997.
[9] M. Netusil, P. Ditl, Comparison of three methods for natural gas dehydration, J. Nat. Gas Chem. 20(2011) 471-476.
[10] M.A. Isa, U. Eldemerdash, K. Nasrifar, Evaluation of potassium formate as a potential modifier of TEG for high performance natural gas dehydration process, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 91(2013) 1731-1738.
[11] H.A. El-Mawgoud, T.M. Elshiekh, S.A. Khalil, Process simulation for revamping of a dehydration gas plant, Egypt. J. Pet. 24(2015) 475-482.
[12] T.K. Ibrahim, R.K. Abdulrahman, F.H. Khalaf, I.M. Kamal, The impact of stripping gas flow rate on triethylene glycol losses from glycol regeneration unit:Simulation study, J. Chem. Eng. Process Technol. 8(2017) 0-6.
[13] S. Baktash, R. Khorramirad, M. Abbasi, K. Paymooni, M.R. Rahimpour, Improvement of TEG Regeneration in Natural Gas Dehydration Using a Hydrocarbon Solvent, in:CHISA 2010 ECCE7, Prague, 2010.
[14] K. Paymooni, M.R. Rahimpour, S. Raeissi, M. Abbasi, M.S. Baktash, Enhancement in triethylene glycol (TEG) purity via hydrocarbon solvent injection to a TEG + water system in a batch distillation column, Energy Fuel 25(2011) 5126-5137.
[15] K. Mohamadbeigy, Studying the effectivness parameters on gas dehydration plant, Pet. Coal. 50(2008) 47-51.
[16] N.C.G. Jacob, Optimization of triethylene glycol (Teg) dehydration in a natural gas processing plant, Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol. 3(2014) 346-350.
[17] A. Nemati Rouzbahani, M. Bahmani, J. Shariati, T. Tohidian, M.R. Rahimpour, Simulation, optimization, and sensitivity analysis of a natural gas dehydration unit, J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 21(2014) 159-169.
[18] M.M. Ghiasi, A. Bahadori, S. Zendehboudi, I. Chatzis, Rigorous models to optimise stripping gas rate in natural gas dehydration units, Fuel. 140(2015) 421-428.
[19] M.R. Rahimpour, M. Saidi, M. Seifi, Improvement of natural gas dehydration performance by optimization of operating conditions:a case study in Sarkhun gas processing plant, J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 15(2013) 118-126.
[20] J. Carroll, Dehydration of natural gas, Nat. Gas Hydrates. 3(2014) 175-195.
[21] C.H. Twu, W.D. Sim, V. Tassone, A versatile liquid activity model for SRK, PR and a new cubic equation-of-state TST, Fluid Phase Equilib. 194-197(2002) 385-399.
[22] S. Watanasiri, Dehydration with Aspen HYSYS ^®:Validation of the CPA Property Package, http://www.aspentech.com/en/resources/white-papers/clehydrationwith-aspen-hysys-validation-of-the-cpa-property-packages.
[23] C.H. Twu, V. Tassone, W.D. Sim, S. Watanasiri, Advanced equation of state method for modeling TEG-water for glycol gas dehydration, Fluid Phase Equilib. 228-229(2005) 213-221.
[24] E.D. Smith, F. Szidarovszky, W.J. Karnavas, A.T. Bahill, Sensitivity analysis, a powerful system validation technique, 2, Open. Cybern. Syst. J. 2(2018) 39-56.
[25] Price of TEG provided by Shandong Baovi Energy Technology Co., Ltd., China, https://www.alibaba.com/product-detail/Maximum-discount-Polyester-and-industrial-grade_60815904405.html?spm=a2700.7724838.2017115.9.4b16338beVUZc6&s=p2019, Accessed date:1 January 2019.
[26] Average price of natural gas provided by The Public Policy Institute of New York State, http://www.ppinys.org/reports/jtf2004/naturalgas.html 2018, Accessed date:1 January 2019.

A computational simulation study for techno-economic comparison of conventional and stripping gas methods for natural gas dehydration

A computational simulation study for techno-economic comparison of conventional and stripping gas methods for natural gas dehydration

PDF (PC)

Knowledge

Abstract

Cite this article

share this article

References

Related Articles 0

Recommended Articles

Metrics

Comments