GAS TECHNOLOGY

Gas turbines for crude oil heating and cogeneration

An overview of the parameters to be taken into account in the evaluation of cogeneration projects based on crude oil heating. This article includes a case study of such a project, with technical details of its design aspects
Edwin Goudappel A H Herfkens Tammo Beishuizen Stork Engineers & Contractors BV

efining of crude oil and processing of finished oil products to meet todays high quality and environmental requirements consumes a great deal of energy. Traditionally, a refinery uses gas and oil it has produced itself in furnaces and boilers, and imports electricity to run pumps, compressors, air coolers and other equipment. Over the years, refineries have started to produce their own electricity by generating HP steam, initially through the application of steam turbines. Later, gas turbines entered the refineries, especially in cogeneration applications generating steam. Typically 47 per cent of a refinerys crude oil intake is used to cover its own energy demand. Employing hot fluegases from a power generation gas turbine to heat the crude oil is an alternative energy-saving option. At the same time, this offers additional opportunities to generate electricity for refineries that are gradually developing more and more power-generating activities. This concept has been in use since 1992 in the Shell Fredericia Refinery, engineered and constructed by Stork Engineers & Contractors and successfully operating without any problems. After six years of operation, no fouling or coke formation has been detected. A crude oil heating cogeneration plant is unlike a processing unit in a refinery, both in terms of exploitation and operation. The cost and availability of fuel,

heat and electricity, as well as run length and fouling, affect the economics of a crude oil heating cogeneration project, compared to the use of a conventional furnace. The use of a cogeneration unit in a refinery increases the total amount of fuel to be used and, therefore, the fuelrelated emissions. However, on a global scale, emissions of SO2, CO2 and NOx will be reduced, due to the increased total efficiency and the selection of fuel type. As a result of increased efficiency, the refinery will improve its Energy Intensity Index (EII). A case study of a typical crude oil heating cogeneration project illustrates the opportunities available and provides technical details on the design aspects of such a cogeneration plant. The starting points used for the evaluation are summarised in the adjoining panel. Although this application is described purely as a crude oil heating concept, the same principles are applicable to other process heaters and furnaces.

Starting points for evaluation

Technical Gas turbine efficiency Furnace efficiency Boiler efficiency Number of operating hours per year Financial 1 Euro Gas price Electricity price Steam price Crude price Emissions Efficiencies power stations coal Efficiencies power stations natural gas CO2 emissions: Coal Heavy fuel oil Gas SOx emissions: Coal Heavy fuel oil Gas NOx emissions: Coal-fired power plant Gas-fired power plant Oil-fired furnace/boiler Gas-fired furnace/boiler 34% 85% 92% 8500

US$1.05 2.9 euro/GJ 3.4 euro ct/kWhr 8.4 euro/ton 3.4 euro/GJ

40% 55% 93kg/GJ 76 kg/GJ 56 kg/GJ 0.19 kg/GJ 0.19 kg/GJ 0 kg/GJ 0.03kg/GJ 0.045kg/GJ 0.12kg/GJ* 0.04kg/GJ*

Concept
Before describing the cogeneration concept, we will first briefly describe the characteristics of the reference refinery, used for the evaluation of the generic benefits of this cogeneration concept. This reference refinery comprises a crude oil distillation unit, as described in Table 1. Cogeneration concept The cogeneration concept described here is fully integrated within the crude oil heating system of a refinery distillation unit and, together with the crude oil furnace, brings the crude oil up to the required feed temperature for the distillation column. In doing so, the cogeneration concept takes over (a part of) the functionality of the crude oil furnace. The main components are briefly described in Figure 1 (on following page). A gas turbine using liquid or gaseous fuel produces power and supplies hot exhaust gases to a combined waste-heat

*Based on Dutch regulations

Reference refinery distillation unit

Crude capacity Crude oil temperature increase over furnace Nominal furnace duty 200kbsd

Assume 100C Assume approx 115MWth Furnace efficiency 85% HP steam boiler efficiency 92%

Table 1

recovery unit, called an HRU/HRSG unit. As the name suggests, the HRU/HRSG consists of two parts. The HRU (heat recovery unit) section heats up the crude oil before it is sent to the distillation unit. The HRSG section (heat recovery steam generation) utilises the waste heat in the fluegases leaving the HRU, by generating steam. Alternatively, a district heating system could make use of the waste heat of the fluegases leaving the HRU. Because there is no or in some

99
P T Q SPRING 2000

GAS TECHNOLOGY
cogeneration plant in Table 2 would assume 40 per cent of the original furnace duty in the reference refinery. Effects on fuel balance When the HRU/HRSG cogeneration plant takes over (part of) the duty of the existing furnace, this furnaces load will be reduced, also reducing its fuel consumption. The fuel saved is typically a mixture of liquid and gaseous fuels which become available for other purposes, such as: 1. Use in other boilers/furnaces, reducing the need for more expensive fuels, such as natural gas or liquid fuels. 2. Use as feed for further processing. 3. Use as fuel in the new cogeneration plant. It is essential to check the impact on the refinery fuel balance when developing such a cogeneration product, in order to maximise the profits from these potential impacts and check whether enough flexibility in the refinery fuel balance remains. If required, the gas turbine can be equipped with a fuel system suited to accept a variety of fuels, as realised in the PER+ project a cogeneration plant designed and built by Stork for the Shell Pernis refinery in the Netherlands [Van
Kooten, Power plant function in refinery upgrading, HTI Quarterly, Autumn 1995].

Figure 1 Simplified process flow diagram of HRU/HRSG cogeneration plant

applications only little supplementary firing upstream of the HRU coil, the heat transfer is mainly convective. Temperature levels in the gas turbine exhaust gases are typically 500600C. Because of this, less peaks in heat transfer occur, compared to a traditional furnace with a radiative heater section. As a result, longer run lengths are to be expected, compared to a conventional furnace. In Figure 1, the HRU of the cogeneration unit is lined up in parallel with a conventional crude furnace, both bringing the crude oil coming from the preheat train up to the required feed temperature for the distillation column. In principle, however, it is also possible to line up the HRU and furnace in series: with the HRU responsible for the first part of the required temperature rise, and the furnace responsible for the final part. The choice between series and parallel configuration depends on factors such as turn-down characteristics of the furnace (hydraulically), and turn-down characteristics of the furnace burners The case study is based on the parallel configuration, as shown in Figure 1. Within the reference refinery, the HRU/HRSG cogeneration plant used for the generic evaluation and the case study can be characterised by the data shown in Table 2.

Integration aspects
When an HRU/HRSG cogeneration plant is integrated within a refinery, it affects a number of systems. If we envisage an HRU/HRSG plant partly replacing the function of the existing crude oil furnace, as described in the parallel configuration shown in Figure 1, the following aspects are drawn to our attention. Operational flexibility One of the most important characteristics of the cogeneration plant, affecting its operational flexibility, is the size of the cogeneration unit. The more crude oil duty it takes over from the conventional furnace, the more this furnace will operate at part-load. The HRSGs steam production has the same effect on the existing boiler facilities. In general, the optimal size of the cogeneration plant is a trade-off between economy and flexibility of operation. The

Separate generation of power and heat

Cogeneration of (combined heat and power)

Effects on steam balance The HRU/HRSG cogeneration plants successful operation and economic viability depend upon its optimal integration within the refinery steam system (or, less commonly, the district heating system). The utilisation of gas turbine exhaust gases for a high-temperature heat application (the HRU section heating the crude oil) results in relatively high-temperature fluegas leaving the HRU. In the HRSG, steam is produced to utilise this heat to the extent determined by the steam level selected. The potential tie-in of this steam into the refinery steam grid has different consequences for the various steam levels possible. As the HRU affects the operation of the existing furnace, the steam production from the HRSG has an impact on the existing boilers load. This again affects the refinery fuel balance. A potential opportunity, resulting from the steam produced in the HRSG, is the reduction of flows through let-down stations and steam-turbine extraction, as part of the refinery steam system. All

HRU/HRSG cogeneration unit

Gas turbine power output 70MWe HRU duty 45MWth HRSG capacity 60t/h (30 bar, 340C)

Figure 2 Separate generation vs cogeneration

Table 2

100
P T Q SPRING 2000

GAS TECHNOLOGY
amount of electricity that would normally be produced by a stand-alone power plant outside the refinery. In order to quantify the fuel savings and reduction of CO2 emissions, it is helpful to have Figure 2 in mind. The fuel that is saved and reduction of CO2 emissions associated with this amount of electricity depends upon the quantity and type of fuel that is saved within the refinery, used in the gas turbine of the cogeneration plant, and saved in the stand-alone power plant. For illustration purposes, both the fuel saved globally and the typical reduction of CO2 emissions for the HRU/HRSG cogeneration unit in Table 2 have been quantified for a case in which the gas turbine uses natural gas and the stand-alone power plant is either a gas-fired combined-cycle power plant (CC power plant), with an electrical efficiency of 55 per cent, or a coal-fired power plant, with an efficiency of 40 per cent. The fuel saved in the refinery is assumed to be either heavy fuel oil (HFO) or natural gas. Both the fuel saved and the resulting annual reduction of CO2 emissions is presented in Table 3. Some obvious conclusions can be drawn from this table. When implementation of the cogeneration plant results in savings of HFO, the reduction of CO2 emissions is at its largest especially when the power produced by the cogeneration plant results in less power being required from stand-alone coal-fired power plants. On the other hand, it can be seen that the reduction of CO2 emissions is less when the refinery fuel saving is purely natural gas, and the power produced by the cogeneration plant results in less power production in a modern gas-fired combined-cycle power plant. Nevertheless, even in an all-natural-gas situation, the reduction of CO2 emissions resulting from this cogeneration plant is significant. In many countries, cogeneration projects are being stimulated by national governments, due to the reduction in CO2 emissions. In such cases, project-investment subsidies may be available, or remuneration for the electricity produced by cogeneration plants. These same governments often have rules on how the replaced electricity production of the stand-alone power plants can be calculated in terms of the reduction in CO2 emissions. NOx and SOx The global reduction of NOx and SOx emissions depends on the same factors as those for CO2. The local effects (the direct emissions from the refinery) seem easier to quantify, but still depend on the fuel saved in the furnace and the furnace burner type (low NOx burner, or other), and are therefore site specific. Table 4 shows the reduction of NOx

Figure 3 Improvement on Energy Intensity Index

these factors must be taken into account if the waste heat is to be utilised efficiently, in order to maximise the economic viability of such a project. In fact, they are so important that we would recommend consideration of an HRU/HRSG cogeneration plant first, before considering steam-only cogeneration projects. This allows maximum freedom for an optimal integration of the HRU/HRSG cogeneration plant within the refinery, and a larger part of the cogeneration potential to be developed. The fact that typical furnace efficiencies are 5-10 per cent lower, compared to boiler efficiencies, is also worth considering. Consequently, fuel savings resulting from a load reduction for a furnace, with cogeneration taking over this duty, are usually higher than those produced by the same load reduction for a boiler. Emissions The effects of the HRU/HRSG cogeneration concept on emissions can be divided into two categories: CO2; and NOx and SOx. The impact of a cogeneration plant on these emissions must be evaluated on a global scale, as will be explained below. This implies that we must also take into consideration the avoided emissions of a stand-alone power plant, that no longer needs to generate the power produced by the cogeneration plant. CO2 When a cogeneration plant is installed as part of a refinery, the first obvious conclusion is that the combination of cogeneration plant and refinery will consume more fuel than the refinery alone. So where is the advantage? The answer lies in the electricity produced by the cogeneration plant, which replaces the same

Fuel savings and reduction of CO2 emissions

Fuel savings (1000GJ/yr) Cogeneration reduces power production in: Combined cycle power plant Coal-fired power plant Reduction of CO2 emissions (kton/yr) Refinery fuel mix 0%HFO 100%HFO 44 324 109 389

778 2239

Table 3

Reduction of NOx emissions

Reduction of NOx emissions (tons/yr) Cogeneration reduce power production in: Combined cycle power plant Coal-fired power plant Refinery fuel mix 0%HFO 100%HFO Reduction of SOx emissions (tons/yr) Refinery fuel mix 0%HFO 100%HFO

25 10

270 255

0 1010

620 1640

Table 4

102
P T Q SPRING 2000

GAS TECHNOLOGY
Solomon method uses the Energy Intensity Index [Solomon Associates, Comparative fuels refinery performance analysis methodology, 1993]. EII represents the

Figure 4 Cost of crude oil heating as a function of electricity price

and SOx emissions in the same way that Table 3 does for CO2. Because combinedcycle power plants and coal-fired power plants have very similar NOx emissions when corrected for the power plants efficiency (refer to Starting points panel), the two reduction of NOx emissions figures show lines similar tendency, as can be seen Table 4. The large difference between natural gas-related and HFO-related reductions of NOx emissions is due to the large difference in NOx emissions from a gas-fired boiler/furnace, compared to an HFO-fired boiler/furnace (see panel again). As a result, the reduction of NOx emissions is far less for a refinery saving natural gas than for a refinery saving HFO. Since the natural gas is assumed to be sulphur-free, the implementation of a cogeneration unit has no impact on SOx emissions when the power production of the cogeneration plant reduces the power production of a stand-alone gas-fired combined-cycle power plant and the refinery saves natural gas (Table 4). Maximum reduction of SOx emissions is realised when the cogeneration plant results in HFO savings, within the refinery, and a reduction in power required from a stand-alone coal-fired power plant. Additionally, it is worth noting that a refinery operating under an SOx bubble may have the potential to produce more high-sulphur feed stack (for example, to FCCU) if it reduces its HFO consumption. Solomon index A widely applied method of refinery benchmarking is the Solomon index. This compares refineries in several respects, using a standardised methodology. One aspect covered is a refinerys energy consumption. To quantify a refinerys performance in terms of its energy consumption, the

energy consumption of the refinery divided by its standard (equivalent) refining capacity. Typical ratings range from 60 (very efficient) to 160 (less efficient) [Brown, Linhoff March, The drive for refinery energy efficiency, ERTC, Berlin, 1998] For a number of 200 000bpd refineries, with various energy efficiencies and, therefore, varying EII ratings, the expected impact of a cogeneration plant, assuming 50 per cent of the conventional furnace duty, on Solomons EII is illustrated in Figure 3. These figures could be further substantiated, especially for less efficient refineries with which we are less familiar. As can be seen, significant improvement is already achieved when a cogeneration unit assumes 50 per cent of a conventional furnaces duty. Figure 3 also shows the impact on the EII for the situation in which a two-train HRU/HRSG cogeneration scheme takes over the full functionality of a conventional furnace. Especially in situations where major furnace modifications/ revamps are expected, this option should be considered. A two-train scheme, equipped with supplementary firing on both HRUs for control purposes, can also provide full backup in case one train trips or is unable to operate.

Economics
Payback period For the purposes of this article, a simple method of economic evaluation is used. One way of expressing the benefits of a cogeneration concept, such as the one described, is a comparison of the crude oil heating costs resulting from a conventional furnace with the crude oil heating fuel costs resulting from an HRU/HRSG cogeneration plant. Using this method, the cost of fuel used in the cogeneration plant is reduced by the revenues earned from exporting electricity to the public grid at a commercial price and the commercial price of the cogeneration plants steam production, based on an avoided-costs principle. The remaining costs are the fuel costs, to be attributed to the crude oil duty of the HRU/HRSG cogeneration plant. In a simple formula: Ccrude = CF - RE - RST (1)

Figure 5 Net revenues and Simple Pay-Out Time (SPOT) in years, as a function of electricity price

Where: Crude = Annual fuel costs made for the crude oil duty generated in a cogeneration plant (euro/year) CF = Annual fuel costs (euro/year) RE = Annual electricity revenues (euro/year) Annual steam revenues RST = (euro/year) Consequently, the specific costs for

104
P T Q SPRING 2000

GAS TECHNOLOGY
crude oil heating can be calculated using the following formula: Ccrude, spec = Ccrude Qcrude (2)

Where: Ccrude, spec = Specific costs for crude oil heating (euro/GJ) Ccrude = Annual costs for crude oil duty generated in a cogeneration plant (euro/year) Qcrude = Annual amount of crude oil heat delivered by a cogeneration plant (GJ/year) In Figure 4, the results are presented as a function of the electricity price. The figure shows the fuel costs for crude oil heating in a conventional furnace as a horizontal line, independent from the electricity price. These costs are based on the furnace efficiency, as shown in Table 1, and further points detailed in the Starting points panel. As expected, however, the fuel costs for crude oil heating in the cogeneration alternative are very much dependent on revenues from electricity production (Equation 1) and, therefore, on the price of electricity. The higher the electricity price, the lower the remaining fuel costs to be attributed to crude oil -heating. The difference in the crude oil heating costs of a furnace and an HRU/HRSG

Figure 6 Simple pay-out time as a function of gas price and electricity price
cogeneration plant is the basis for the savings obtained by applying the HRU/HRSG cogeneration concept. From these savings, evaluated against the project investment, a payback period can be calculated. From Figure 5 it can be concluded that for electricity prices below 2.7 euro ct/kWhr, the economics of the HRU/HRSG concept become marginal, but above 2.7 euro ct/kWhr they are good to very good. Both Figures 4 and 5 have been calculated for a fixed fuel price (natural gas) of 2.9 euro/GJ. In order to gain a better overview of the window of favourable economics, we have calculated various simple pay-out times (SPOT) as a function

105
P T Q SPRING 2000

GAS TECHNOLOGY
of both electricity price and HRU design gas price. These are presented The prime function of the in Figure 6. HRU is to transfer heat from All of the above economic the gas turbine fluegases to information is based on revthe crude oil, to heat it to the enues from fuel savings only. required temperature. As explained under the earlier Typically, the crude oil sub-heading,Effects on steam enters the HRU section as a balance, careful integration single-phase liquid flow and within the refinerys steam leaves heated to temperatures grid can produce additional at which it is 4060 per cent fuel savings, further improvvaporised. In other words, ing project economics. Addithere is essentially a twotional opportunities lay in phase flow within the HRU debottlenecking situations, as section, with an increasing briefly described below. amount of vapour towards Debottlenecking the end of the HRU section. In debottlenecking situaOne aspect to be taken into tions, the application of the account is that crude oil HRU/HRSG cogeneration velocities inside the HRU concept not only produces must be sufficient to achieve the fuel savings and related Figure 7 3D computer model of an HRU/HRSG cogeneration plant stable flow regimes over the revenues described above, (overview) units (normal) operating but also makes other investrange. At the same time, ments to eliminate certain bottlenecks per cent of its nominal capacity, in paral- crude oil velocities influence heat transfer lel with the HRU section of the cogenera- to the inside of the tubes and thus tubesuperfluous. tion plant. The typical economics of such wall film temperatures. Film temperatures Examples of such bottlenecks include: Limitations on furnace load, such as a project have been illustrated in the pre- should remain at a low enough level to those caused by deposits on the outside ceding paragraphs. Specifics on the eco- prevent coking. of the furnace tubes, originating from the nomics of this project cannot be On the fluegas side, the HRU designer refinery fuel oil. In this case, an disclosed at present, but a summary of its has other parameters to juggle. Increasing HRU/HRSG cogeneration plant lined up environmental performance and the amount of fins reduces the number of in parallel with the furnace immediately improvement on Solomons EII follow. tubes or passes required to realise the increases crude oil heating capacity and Reduction of fuel emissions required duty, but increases tube-wall temavoids or reduces additional investment Reduction of NOx emissions by approx- peratures at a certain point. imately 50 tons NOx/year in the existing furnace. This is all very similar to the design of Shortened run lengths running on full Negligible impact on SOx/emissions, crude oil sections in a conventional furfurnace capacity. An HRU/HRSG cogener- because the refinery fuel savings are nace. In this case, however, the combinaation plant reduces the load on the con- mostly natural gas tion of fins and the number of tubes not ventional furnace and, therefore, has a 240280kton CO2/year. only affects costs, but also the fluegas presOn the Solomon EII, an improvement sure and thus the gas-turbine perforpositive effect on the furnace run length. Hydraulic limitations of the convention- of 8 per cent is expected. mance. The same applies to tube length al furnace. Plant layout and tube spacing. In such projects, Stork Limits to the flexibility of the refinerys Figure 7 shows a printout of the 3D plant executes the optimisation of the HRU operation, due to limited flare capacity. model being used for the engineering of design, taking into consideration operaThe HRU/HRSG cogeneration unit could the cogeneration plant. The equipment tional flexibility/stability requirements, consume the fuel (gas) which would oth- shown in detail is all part of the plant. crude oil film temperatures and gas-turerwise be flared. The large white box is the volume taken bine performance. Limits to the existing steam production up by the existing crude furnace. The Integration in the crude oil system capacity. Installing an HRU/HRSG cogen- white column in the upper-left corner is Traditionally, the temperature of the crude eration unit not only produces additional the refinerys crude distillation column. oil leaving the furnace is controlled by the crude oil heating capacity, but also addiThe plant has a footprint of approxi- furnace burners, while crude oil throughtional steam generating capacity. This mately 4580m and is situated approxi- put is determined by flow controllers at avoids or reduces the investment needed mately 80m from the distillation column the furnaces inlet. The HRU/HRSG cogenfor additional boiler capacity. and furnace. eration plant in this case study has a

Case study
The company is currently working on a new HRU/HRSG cogeneration project of approximately 70MWe. Behind the gas turbine, an HRU/HRSG unit is situated, without supplementary firing. The HRU transfers approximately 45MWth of heat from gas turbine fluegases to the crude oil. Fluegases leaving the HRU section are utilised in the production of approximately 60t/h of HP steam. The existing conventional furnace will remain in operation at approximately 60

40

Figure 8 Crude outlet temperature of HRU during startup

106
P T Q SPRING 2000

GAS TECHNOLOGY
slightly different setup. In this particular case, the gas turbine is intended to run continuously at base load. The HRU is equipped with a temperature gauge at the HRU (coils) outlet. This outlet temperature sets the flow control valves at the inlet of the HRU section. In other words, the HRU accepts as much crude as it can heat to the required outlet temperature of a given gas turbine load. Part of this control philosophy involves the conventional furnace operating within the traditional furnacecontrol scheme, by accepting the remaining crude oil flow and controlling the crude oil furnace outlet temperature by means of its burners. In the case of a gas turbine trip, the conventional furnace takes over and increases its load to maximum, allowing the refinery to maintain full throughput to the crude oil distillation unit. Startup A dynamic simulation was carried out in order to check the dynamic behaviour of the HRU and its controls during various start-up scenarios. Figure 8 shows the increase in crude oil outlet temperature of the HRU, based on one of the startup scenarios, aiming at minimum disturbance of the crude oil distillation units operation. This startup scenario is characterised by the following philosophy: 1. Establish a minimum flow of crude oil through the HRU. 2. Allow gas turbine fluegases to enter the HRU section. Gas turbine runs at minimum load. 3. When bypass damper is fully opened, increase gas turbine load to 6070 per cent. This causes the crude oil outlet temperature rise. 4. Wait until crude oil outlet temperature reaches the normal process value. 5. Activate temperature controller on HRU. 6. Slowly increase load on gas turbine. From Figure 8 it can be concluded that, following steps 1 to 5, the crude oil leaving the HRU reaches the required temperature approximately 30 minutes after the HRU becomes operational. It should be noted that the changes in HRU outlet temperature do not necessarily reflect those of the distillation column. If furnace control and HRU control were to be integrated, the furnace outlet temperature could be adjusted to compensate for fluctuations in the HRU outlet temperature. So, from Figure 8, it can also be concluded that startup represents a relatively short disturbance in the normal operation of the crude oil distillation unit. When it becomes operational, this plant will considerably strengthen the refineries market position by reducing crude oil heating fuel costs by more than 150 per cent, improving fuel-associated emissions and improving the Solomon index by approximately 8 per cent

Conclusion
For a typical refinery, crude oil heating fuel costs amount to tens of millions of euros per year. From this article, the following conclusions can be drawn: Significant fuel savings on crude oil heating will be achieved using the HRU/HRSG cogeneration concept, resulting in financially attractive projects. Since optimal integration in the refinerys steam system is essential, it is recommended that HRU/HRSG cogeneration be considered first, before considering steamonly cogeneration projects. This allows maximum exploitation of the refinerys cogeneration potential.

It is expected that run lengths will be improved through the application of the HRU/HRSG cogeneration concept.

This article is based on a paper presented at the European Refining Technology Conference, Paris, 2224 November 1999.

Edwin Goudappel is senior process engineer with Stork Engineers & Contractors, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. A H Herfkens is business manager, energy, and Tammo Beishuizen is business development manager, refinery projects.

109
P T Q SPRING 2000