LNG Process Reliability--LNG几种工艺的选择及其可靠性

1、May 9 - 11, 2006“Impacts of Process Selection on LNG Plant Reliability” Attilio J. Praderio May 9 - 11, 200621920, Air liquefaction cryogenics developed1930s, (early) Helium recovery from natural gas for military purposes (military balloons). After Helium recovery, Natural Gas was revaporized and so

2、ld as pipeline gas.1934, W.J. Podbielniak filed and received a patent for a mixed component refrigerant system having three stages of fluid throttling and a single compressor in a closed system.1939, first LNG manufacturing and storage plant built by Hope Natural Gas Co. a subsidiary of Consolidated

3、 Natural Gas Systems.1941, East Ohio Gas Co. built a peak shaving plant in Cleveland.1944, Accident in 2nd Storage tank of Cleveland plant arrested the growth of USA LNG industry for 20 years. The failure was caused by inadequate metallurgy used in the tank.1956, Haselden considered a mixed refriger

4、ant process utilizing two compressors in a closed cycle for liquefaction of natural gas. He pointed out the advantage of obtaining the refrigerant components from natural gas itself.1959, A. P. Kleemenko of the Institute of Gas Research Academy of Sciences (U.S.S.R) described a working apparatus emp

5、loying either an open or closed single fluid, mixed component refrigeration. LNG Historical Development May 9 - 11, 200631964, Oct 7, first cargo export from the vanguard plant Camel located in Arzew (Algeria). Cascade - TEAL. LNG exported to U.K.1965, fisrt two U.S. LNG plants commissioned 21 years

6、 after Cleveland incident, built by Alabama Gas and Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Corp.1966, J. Perret, Technips Scientific Director described mixed refrigerant processes for natural gas 1969, Kenai plant (Alaska) using Cascade Phillips Optimized (Gas Turbines used as drivers for the first time )197

7、0, Gaumer and Newtown described a Multi Component Refrigerant APCI (MCR)1970, Marsa El Brega plant (Libya) using Single Mixed Refrigerant APCI MCR (low thermal efficiency)1972, Skikda (Algeria) plant using Dual Pressure MR TEAL1972, Lumut plant (Brunei) using C3 / MR APCI1972 1981, 6 plants C3 / MR

8、APCI1981 & 1982, Skikda (Algeria) using PRICO Pritchard1983- 1999, 14 plants C3 / MR APCI1999, Atlantic LNG 1, Trinidad Cascade - Phillips Optimized CascadeLNG Historical Development May 9 - 11, 20064600 600 psipsi300 300 psipsi-132 F-132 F-28 F-28 F50 F50 F200 200 psipsiTreatedTreatedNaturalNat

9、uralGasGas600 600 psipsi300 300 psipsi-132 F-132 F-28 F-28 F50 F50 F200 200 psipsiTreatedTreatedNaturalNaturalGasGas1964 (Cascade), 1969 Closed Loop Optimized Cascade1970, 72, 81,82 = Single Mixed Refrigerant (3 processes)1972 + = C3 /MR predominanceMid 90s Open Loop Optimized Cascade (process chang

10、es discussed later)May 9 - 11, 20065600 600 psipsi300 300 psipsi-132 F-132 F-28 F-28 F50 F50 F200 200 psipsiTreatedTreatedNaturalNaturalGasGas1964 (Cascade), 1969 Closed Loop Optimized Cascade1970, 72, 81,82 = Single Mixed Refrigerant (3 processes)600 600 psipsi300 300 psipsi-132 F-132 F-28 F-28 F50

11、 F50 F200 200 psipsiTreatedTreatedNaturalNaturalGasGas121231972 + = C3 /MR predominance34Mid 90s Open Loop Optimized Cascade (process changes discussed later)C3 MR Cycle is in reality a Cascade, BUT- 3 Compressors without “2 in 1” configuration = Less Availability = Less Tonnes/Year = Less Income ($

12、)- 3 Refrigerants: 1 pure and 2 mixed (LMR 7 HMR) = More Complicated Operation = Bigger OPEXMay 9 - 11, 200661964: First LNG Plant using Classical Cascade at 0.3 mmtpa/train (Camel)1969: Phillips Optimized Cascade at 1.5 mmtpa/train (Kenai) First Gas Turbines as drivers First “2 in 1” Configuration

13、Significant Cost Reductions and Reliability improvements (“2 in 1”) Technology Reserved to “Equity Projects”LNG Historical Development (Cont.)Process selection based on: Properties / behavior of refrigerants well known and easy to control Heat exchange design is straightforward Cycle is easy to desi

14、gn and operateMay 9 - 11, 20067Early 70s: Single Mixed Refrigerants (SMR) LNG Historical Development (Cont.)Goals:Reduce number of compressorsReduce number of heat exchangersProcess Changes:Use of ONE single mixed refrigerant (N2, C1, C2, C3, c4s, C5)Use of ONE exchanger (multistream) with one or tw

15、o refrigeration pressure level 3 technologies: APCI, TEALARC, PRICOResults:Projects failed to achieve design LNG production capacity (Lower thermal efficiency)Problems revealed after commissioningProduction capacity below Phillips Cascade, Cost Higher.May 9 - 11, 200681972 mid 90s: APCI C3-MR predom

16、inance (no competition) Goals: Overcome Single Mixed Refrigerant capacity and inefficiencies Process Changes: Pre cooling similar to Cascade Liquefaction/ SubCooling: SMR is divided in two mixtures Light (LMR) and Heavy (HMR) Process License requires buying Special Heat Exchanger (SWHE) from the lic

17、ensor. LNG Historical Development (Cont.)May 9 - 11, 20069 1972 mid 90s: APCI C3-MR predominance (no competition) Results: Increased Capacity Efficiency better than SMR but no better than Cascade Very High Capital Cost compared to Phillips Cascade due to: Monopolistic supply of SWHE Conservative Pro

18、cess Design Margins Restricted # of Contractors with LNG experience Applied EPC bidding strategyTheoretical thermal efficiency improvement generally not achieved in real operations: Real Feed Conditions require a constant change in MR composition Thermal Efficiency very sensitive to MR composition c

19、hanges Precise composition LMR and HMR require more complicated control and operation Lower Plant Availability (on stream days) than Phillips because no “2 in 1” configuration. Drivers / Compressors are in series. If one fails, the whole train shuts down Higher operating costs due to venting and mak

20、e-up of refrigerants When drivers / compressors trip To adjust MR (almost not done). Normally plant feed is controlled to avoid changingLMR and HMR compositions.May 9 - 11, 200610Mid to Late 90s: Effective Cost Reduction is achieved due to: Higher Gas Prices around the world promoted LNG interest du

21、e to better economies Competition amongst Licensors re surges: Phillips Technology is open to 3rd parties (Atlantic LNG 1) New licensors appear and old licensors develop scale ups Linde MFC (Snohvit), Shell DMR (Sakhalin), APCI (AP-X Qatar), Axens Competition amongst Contractors increases: Bechtel b

22、uilding Phillips Cascade Bechtel Open Book EPC contract strategy More realistic plant design margins are used.LNG Historical Development (Cont.)May 9 - 11, 20061101234567196019701980199020002010AlgeriaUSALibyaAlgeriaBruneiAbu DhabiAlgeriaIndonesiaIndonesiaMalaysiaIndonesiaAustraliaIndonesiaAbu Dhabi

23、IndonesiaMalaysiaQatarNigeria, Qatar & TrinidadNigeriaMalaysiaQatarEgyptAustraliaNigeriaEgyptOmanAustraliaTrinidadRussiaEq. GuineaAlgeriaIndonesiaTrinidadNorwayAverage Capacity (MTPA)LNG Trains Worldwide - Installed to date and Firm ProjectsLNG Train Sizes Past and Future TrendsLNG trains instal

24、led within the last ten years have a capacity ranging from 2.0 - 4.5 mtpa.New LNG processes are being developed and have among their primary objectives To double the capacity of actual trains (5.2 - 8+ mmtpa) Improve process efficiency Reduce unit capital costs and operating costs (economy of scale)

25、Nevertheless, train complexities are increasing also exponentiallyAND most of the newer technologies that have been developed, have still not been proven in a commercial project.May 9 - 11, 200612LNG Processes Plant Capacity Flagships(only plants indicating a change in process capacity or indicating

26、 a new process)May 9 - 11, 200613May 9 - 11, 200614May 9 - 11, 200615CoP Technology Reserved for Projects where Cop could have participation C3-MR as the other option for large scale plants. C3-MR requiring the purchase of the special Heat Exchanger Monopolistic supply of SWHE Reduced # EPC contract

27、ors with experience- Competition has caused capital cost to converge = Competitive FEEDS today consume time (approx 1 year) and money- Optimized Cascade is getting approx. 50% of new proven technology Grassroot Projects- Next Technical Selection Criterias: 1.- Total Production / Year = Availability,

28、 Maintainability, Product & Refrigerants Loss during process upsets and maintenance 2.- Construction Schedule = CoP Technology has the shortest Construction Schedule 3.- Operating Costs = annual operating expenses below industry estimation of 3% total capital expendituresMay 9 - 11, 200616Consid

29、erations for Future LNG Projects: Factors tending to increase CAPEX cost In 2005, 2006 75 Billion$ are expected to be required for LNG projects against 27 available in 2004International Steel Price Workload on EPC contractors Project Finance Demands May 9 - 11, 200617CoP Technology Reserved for Proj

30、ects where Cop could have participation C3-MR as the other option for large scale plants. C3-MR requiring the purchase of the special Heat Exchanger Monopolistic supply of SWHE Reduced # EPC contractors with experience- Competition has caused capital cost to converge = Competitive FEEDS today consum

31、e time (approx 1 year) and money- Optimized Cascade is getting approx. 50% of new proven technology Grassroot Projects- Next Technical Selection Criterias: 1.- Total Production / Year = Availability, Maintainability, Product & Refrigerants Loss during process upsets and maintenance 2.- Construct

32、ion Schedule = CoP Technology has the shortest Construction Schedule 3.- Operating Costs = below industry estimations of 3% of CAPEXMay 9 - 11, 200618Note: The cost of 2 LNG tanks (120.000 m3/each) is approx. 73 MM$ 1.- Total Production year AvailabilityMay 9 - 11, 200619C3 MR Cycle is in reality a

33、Cascade, BUT- 3 Compressors without “2 in 1” configuration = Less Availability = Less Tonnes/Year = Less Income ($)- 3 Refrigerants: 1 pure and 2 mixed (LMR 7 HMR) = More Complicated Operation = Bigger OPEX1.- Total Production year Availability600 600 psipsi300 300 psipsi-132 F-132 F-28 F-28 F50 F50

34、 F200 200 psipsiTreatedTreatedNaturalNaturalGasGas1212334May 9 - 11, 200620Typical “2 x 1” configuration applied in Kenay and Trinidad600 600 psipsi300 300 psipsi-132 F-132 F-28 F-28 F50 F50 F200 200 psipsiTreatedTreatedNaturalNaturalGasGas1.- Total Production year AvailabilityMay 9 - 11, 200621Sour

35、ce: “LNG Technology Selection”, Dr. Tariq Shukri, Hydrocarbon Engineering, Feb 2004Source: “Relibility Study of an LNG Complex” Hamad (Qatar LNG), Wilson (Brown &Root), Duchemin (Total), Vega (KBR)Source: Relibility and Capacity Improvement of a Base Load LNG Plant” Hadiono, Harsono, Djamil, Per

36、tamina, Arun LNGSource: “Avaiilability of Refrigeration Process of Baseload LNG Plants”, Kikkawa, Chiyoda Corporation, AIChE Spring Meeting 20051.- Total Production year AvailabilityMay 9 - 11, 200622Source: http:/ MR Availability: Oman = 92 94.2%1.- Total Production year AvailabilityMay 9 - 11, 200

37、623Source: “20 Years operating experience of steam-driven sea water cooling in Badak LNG plant”. Sutopo, Musamma, LNG 12 Conference.Note: Capacity Factors are above 100% due to plant capacity debottlenecking projects including uprating propane and MCR compressors. See source.1.- Total Production yea

38、r AvailabilityC3- MR Availability: Badak = 84 95 %May 9 - 11, 200624Sources:http:/www.gastech.co.uk/page.cfm/link=148C3- MR Availability: Algeria, GL-1Z, 12 years 60 %1.- Total Production year AvailabilitySource: “LNG 1 Plant Revamping Project: Improvement and debottlenecking”, LNG 12 Conference, Bo

39、unouara, Benmoulai, Sonatrach, Bethioua, Algeria, GL1Z LNG PlantMay 9 - 11, 200625CoP Technology Reserved for Projects where Cop could have participation C3-MR as the other option for large scale plants. C3-MR requiring the purchase of the special Heat Exchanger Monopolistic supply of SWHE Reduced #

40、 EPC contractors with experience- Competition has caused capital cost to converge = Competitive FEEDS today consume time (approx 1 year) and money- Optimized Cascade is getting approx. 50% of new proven technology Grassroot Projects- Next Technical Selection Criterias: 1.- Total Production / Year =

41、Availability, Maintainability, Product & Refrigerants Loss during process upsets and maintenance 2.- Construction Schedule = CoP Technology has the shortest Construction Schedule 3.- Operating Costs = annual operating expenses below industry estimation of 3% total capital expendituresMay 9 - 11,

42、 200626Source: BG Group plcCoP Optimized Cascade are the shortest2.- Construction SchedulesMay 9 - 11, 200627Egypt Idku-2 (CoP ) will be concluded 6 months aheadhttp:/ Construction SchedulesThe Value of: Standardization Template Design Incorporation of Lessons Learned(See paper “Egyptian LNG, The Va

43、lue of Standardization”, Gastech 2005, Redding, Hernandez, Qualls, Avidan)May 9 - 11, 200628C3- MR Power Consumption: Sensitivity to Optimum MR compositionSource: CoP Bechtel LNG Product Development CenterSource: LNG Liquefier Cycle Efficiency, Liu, Daugherty, Brofenbrenner, APCI, LNG 12 Conference,

44、 Perth Australia 4-7 May 1998Although, in design, C3/MR requires a little less work than Cascade to produce LNGAny small variation in MR composition or Feed Gas condition (pressure, temperature, composition) will offset the optimum point and the C3/MR will require even more energy than cascade3.- Op

45、erating ExpendituresMay 9 - 11, 200629- In theory, the “continuous” closer approaches, reduces the required kW/Ton LNG- In practice, changes in composition will require changes in MR composition, hence:1.- MR composition is changed, affecting negatively the thermal efficiency (see review of thermal efficiency above)Or2.- MR composition is not changed, affecting also the thermal efficiency (see slide Power Consumption and MR Composition)C3- MR Power Consumption: “Continuous”