eliminating smaller flares james banister process technologist heatric
TRANSCRIPT
Eliminating smaller flares
James BANISTER
Process TechnologistHeatric
Natural gas field sizesExploitation technologies
• LNG and Big GTL100
10
2
0.4
0.8
0.2
0.05
TCF
15
6000
1000
• Big methanol
• Re-injection
or conversion
1000 mmscf/d
150 mmscf/d
< 50 mmscf/d
Natural gas field sizesExploitation technologies
100
10
2
0.8
0.4
0.2
0.05
TCF
15
6000
1000
• LNG and Big GTL
• Big methanol
• Re-injection
1000 mmscf/d
150 mmscf/d
< 50 mmscf/d
<0.4
Natural gas field sizesExploitation technologies
• 7% of fields <0.4 TCF• Approximately half would
be considered stranded– No viable gas market
• Associated gas requires alternatives to flaring
100
10
2
TCF
<0.4
The choice
• Re-injection or conversion?–Conversion brings an additional revenue stream–Recover capital cost of plant
Methanol or GTL?
Product Value and PricingExploitation technologies
• GTL–Product value linked to
energy price–A small price premium
may be possible from refiners
–Economics of the process driven by cheap energy supply
TechnologyProduct value
Principle driver
GTL EnergyCheap energy
source
Product Value and PricingExploitation technologies
• Methanol–Product carries price
premium –Smaller unit fit with
smaller chemicals market• Up to 150mmscf/d
–Use of methanol offshore• Hydrate suppression
–Process enhanced by carbon dioxide in feed gas
TechnologyProduct value
Principle driver
GTL EnergyCheap energy
source
Methanol ChemicalAdded value
product
Size and Weight offshore Methanol vs GTL reactors
• Reformer is common to both technologies
• GTL reactor is big–10m diameter reactor for
100mmscf/d
• Methanol is smaller–3m diameter reactor for
100mmscf/d
Offshore gas conversion The technical challenges
• Minimise capital cost• Minimise size and weight• Designed for the operating environment
Methanol has real advantages over GTL
–Cheaper, lighter and smaller process
–Higher value product
Heatric compact methanol process Using diffusion bonded exchanger technology (DBX)
Heatric compact methanol process The reformer
• Process Simulation• Proof-of-concept• Component Analysis• Laboratory Trial Facility• Industrial Prototype
0.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
2.0
2.5
051015202530
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Y D
ata
FCO2 = 0.80 L.min-1
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 middle block
Heatric compact methanol process The reformer
Heatric compact methanol process Methanol synthesis
• Process Simulation• Demonstration and development unit• Design of unit for a conventional plant
Heatric compact methanol process Product advantages
• Reformer– Utilises Heatric multiple adiabatic bed concept– Simplifies control– Catalytic combustion
• Methanol– No recycle compressor– Reduced catalyst volume
• Advantages– Compact packaged process– No oxygen plant– Cost-effective for 5-50 mmscf/d– k$140-k$200 per tpd capacity– Experience in manufacturing for off-shore
Conclusion
• Methanol production can provide revenue to eliminate flaring
• Challenge in the offshore environment is size and weight reduction
• Heatric is developing the technology for the most cost-effective offshore gas conversion
www.heatric.com