emission assessment
TRANSCRIPT
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
1/17
1
Development of anEmissions Assessment
BMP for Storage TanksPTACAir Issues Forum
CalgarySeptember 30, 2009By D. Colley
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
2/17
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
3/17
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
4/17
Potential Emissions Flashing, breathing and working losses.
Flashing losses occur primarily at production facilities: In-tank boil-off of dissolved gas absorbed by the liquid
product during contact with natural gas at elevatedpressures in separators and other vessels.
Breathing and working losses are most important inapplications involving storage of stabilized orweathered product: Breathing losses are attributed to diurnal temperature
changes that cause expansion and contraction of the gasvolume in the vapor space.
Working losses result from physical displacement ofaccumulated evaporation and evaporation of productresidue on the tank walls above the liquid or floatingroof.
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
5/17
Potential Emissions Unintentional gas carry-through to storage
tanks: Leakage past the seats of drain and dump valves. Malfunctioning level controllers.
Inefficient upstream gas/liquid separation.
Operational changes resulting in unstabilized liquid product.
Malfunctioning vapor control or recoverysystems: Faulty blanket gas regulators or pressure controllers.
Leaking pressure-vacuum valves and thief hatches.
Undersized of systems due to neglect of diurnal temperature effects. Fouled vapor collection lines.
Damaged floating roofs or seals.
Inconsistently applied Directed Inspection & Maintenance (DI&M).
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
6/17
Storage Tank Emissions
Field measurement results for 9 gas plants.
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
7/17
Needs
A protocol for assessing flashing losses fromproduction tanks. Significantly different results depending on the
assumptions made when applying E&P TANKS or processsimulators.
TVP weathers down to values less than local atmosphericpressure but flash calculations are often only taken toatmospheric pressure.
Lack of metering to show liquid flow rates from eachseparator and scrubber at a facility:
Assuming all liquids come from the lowest pressuresource may underestimate emissions.
Assuming all liquids come from the highest pressuresource may overstate emissions.
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
8/17
Needs
Instantaneous emissions rates, not average values,
to assess potential air quality impacts. US EPA TANKS is intended for predicting annual average
emissions for inventorying purposes, not instantaneousemissions for VRU sizing or air quality predictions.
A database to predict emissions of traceconstituents, such as reduced sulphur compounds,CH4 and other compounds, that do not show up in
typical liquid analyses but are of an air quality oremissions concern. Generally increasing levels of H2S and mercaptans in crude
oil streams are resulting in concerns for odour issues.
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
9/17
Needs
A model that accounts for continuous convective
breathing losses that occur during cold weatherperiods when the ambient air is colder than thetemperature of the stored product and the ullagespace (not currently accounted for in US EPA
TANKS) : Stratification in the vapor space tends to inhibit
evaporation losses during summer period.
Continuous convective mixing with ambient air duringthe winter significantly enhances breathing losses: Dense (cold) ambient air continuously flows into the
ullage spaced displacing the lighter (warm) air-vapormixture and this action promotes further evaporation dueto the dilution effect.
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
10/17
Needs
Guidance on measurement techniques that can be
used to verify predicted emission estimates. Methods and related guidance to regularly monitor
tanks for emissions upsets or deterioratedemissions control systems (especially for floating
roof tanks): Downwind air quality monitoring tends to identify
problems after the fact and does not necessary pinpointthe source.
Headspace monitoring not widely used. DIAL is used in Europe but at infrequent intervals due to
the high expensive (e.g., once every 5 years).
Roof-top vapor sensors are usually used only after issuesarise.
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
11/17
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
12/17
Work Done to Date Initial Literature Review
Estimation and measurement
techniques. Wind effects.
Initiated sampling program: Crude Oil:
Physical properties (density, RVP). Detailed liquid compositions (C1 to C30+
and sulphur content).
Vapors: C1 to C12+ and reduced sulphur
compounds (GC/TCD, GC/FID, GC/MS
and GC/SCD). Measurement of vertical concentration
profiles in the ullage space to examinestratification and mixing.
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
13/17
Tank Fluid StratificationTank Fluid E xam ple 1 (Liquid Analyses )
0
20000
40000
60000
80000
100000
120000
140000
160000
Input
Bottom
Middle
Top
Conce
ntration(ppm)
Isobutane (iC4)
Butane (nC4)
Isope ntane (iC5)
Pentane (nC5)
Hexane (C6)
Heptane (C7)
Methylcyc lohexane (C8)
Octane (C8)
Nonane (C9)
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
14/17
Ullage Space StratificationUllageSpaceExample1(GasAnalyses)
0.00
0.05
0.10
0.15
0.20
0.25
0.30
0.35
0.40
0.45
0.50
Halfwaytothetop Topoffloatingroof
ppm
Hexane(C6)
Cyclohexane(C6)
Heptane(C7)
Methylcyclohexane
(C8)
Toluene(C8)
Nonane(C9)
oXylene(C9)
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
15/17
Emissions During Roof FloatingVOC Data
0
25
50
75
100
125
150
175
200
8/15/2009 12:43 8/15/2009 13:12 8/15/2009 13:40 8/15/2009 14:09 8/15/2009 14:38 8/15/2009 15:07 8/15/2009 15:36
VOCasIso
butleneConcent
ration
m
Min (ppm)
Avg (ppm)
Max (ppm)
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
16/17
Next Steps Continue testing program to examine:
Flashing loss issues.Thermally enhanced emission issues.
Floating roof emission behavior.
Floating roof landing and re-floatingemission characteristics and issues roofs.
Development and testing ofmonitoring systems.
-
8/7/2019 Emission Assessment
17/17