C2+ Recovery 1

[procengIV]

A plant with 4.0 BSCFD of moderate-rich ethane (about 8% c2)feed is to be designed to get maximum recovery of C2+(>80%)there are two feeds to the plant:

1. A gas that free of H2S & CO2 and has only 4 ib of water per MMSCF. Rate is 2.4 BSCFD
2. A gas that free of H2s and has 2% CO2 and also contains only 4 Ib of water per MMSCF. Rate is 1.6 BSCFD

to go with Ortloff Gas Sub-Cooled Process, we have to remove CO2 to less than 100 ppm to met NGL spec of maximum 1500 ppm CO2.

what are the best way to remove CO2 without wetting the gas again and is there any commercially proven process can achieve high ethane recovery with CO2 presence in the feed?
we need your hel. this is the first post for me, so please let us share our experience...

thank you in advance.....

 

[Montemayor]

procengIV:

4 Billion Sdfd is a healthy flowrate of natural gas.

Ortloff, Howe-Baker Engineers, etc. are knowledgeable and capable of handling this size of gas stream efficiently and with the latest, competitive technology. Removing the CO2 AND the 4.0 lb H2O/MMscfd (translates to 2 tons H2O/day) is "no sweat" to the two mentioned engineering companies. I worked for one and know the products and services of the other well. You should have no problem dealing with organizations such as these.

We can tell you of processes we know - like selective adsorption (both PSA & TSA) - that avoid any Amine step, but that would be pre-empting them on specific processes and conditions that they design, build, and warrant in performance. Why don't you go directly to them? They certainly are in a much better position to deal with your specific data quicker and with authoritative experience.

Art Montemayor
Spring, TX

 

[MortenA]

Maybe you should look at the IFPEXOL process.

This may solve your recovery in one step.

http://www.ifp.fr/IFP/en/files/rechercheindustrie/ifpex2.pdf

Allthough its big disadvantages is that there are not many reference plants around - and ofcorse its a different type of process.

Best regards

Morten

 

[procengIV]

Thank you Montemayor& MortenA,

PSA & TSA still in the early stage and when i called them, they said that they haven't design for such huge feed. also we looked for molecular gate but still they don't have the capability for manufacutring for more than 100 MMSCFD. the only problem with Ortloff is thier license and they can't get a recovery more than 80% unless remove the CO2.

 

[gks]

Your concern for not wetting the gas is quite logical. You can approach Molecular Sieve Manufacturers as Molecular Sieve 13X has the ability to adsorb both H2S and CO2.

 

[dcasto]

If you have a big enough market for ethane, ethylene, and the market will pay for additional ethane, then you need to treat the CO2 rich gas with an amine and pay for more dehydration. If the market won't pay the price, go with a high pressure demethanizer with a out of patent GSP type column. You can survive with up to 3% CO2 and still get over 80% ethane, plus save on recompression.

Good Luck

 

[edouardc]

Hello everybody, hello MortenA !

My friends are currently looking for the marketing study in order to estimate the strengths and weaknesses of the IFPEXOL process used to extract liquid hydrocarbons from natural gaz.

They have already considered the Prosernat (

http://www.prosernat.fr)

implementation of the process. They would like to know is there another contractor(s) making equipments for IFPEXOL.

Could you give some contacts of people or organisations that could help in this situation?

Thank You

Edouard

http://www.edouard.su