SPE-175250-MS

Flare Gas Recovery Using Innovative Unconventional Technology,

Avoiding the use of Compressors
Syed M Peeran, and Dr N. Beg, Caltec Ltd

Copyright 2015, Society of Petroleum Engineers

This paper was prepared for presentation at the SPE Kuwait Oil & Gas Show and Conference held in Mishref, Kuwait, 1114 October 2015.
This paper was selected for presentation by an SPE program committee following review of information contained in an abstract submitted by the author(s). Contents
of the paper have not been reviewed by the Society of Petroleum Engineers and are subject to correction by the author(s). The material does not necessarily reflect
any position of the Society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this paper without the written
consent of the Society of Petroleum Engineers is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to an abstract of not more than 300 words; illustrations may
not be copied. The abstract must contain conspicuous acknowledgment of SPE copyright.

Abstract
Legislation, the environment, economic and corporate social responsibility are some of the key factors that
are governing the recovery of flared gas worldwide. There is growing awareness of the issues associated
with flaring and efforts are being made globally by operators and governments to minimise it. There are
several technologies for reducing flaring at source or in a processing plant. The choice of technology
depends on the economics of the project, frequency of flaring, infrastructure available and location of the
producing facility. This paper covers innovative Flare Gas Recovery Systems using Surface jet Pumps and
avoiding the use of compressors.
Conventional Flare gas Recovery systems usually comprise of one or more compressors, which
compress the collected flare gas and route it for further processing. The compressor design is critical and
determines the systems capacity and turndown capability. However compressor based solutions can be
quite large, complex and have high capital and operating costs. They are also very sensitive to changes
in gas composition and MW.
Surface jet pumps (SJPs) are simple, low cost passive devices that can also be used to recover flare gas.
They use a high pressure (HP) fluid as the motive force to boost the pressure of the LP or LLP flare gas
and deliver it for processing. The high pressure fluid that is needed as the source of energy or motive flow
is usually gas taken from the discharge of a compressor or from the export gas line. However HP liquids,
such as oil or injection water can also be used. Advantages of using SJPs include low cost, no moving
parts, zero maintenance, zero power or fuel gas usage, small footprint and varying layout configurations.
SJPs are well suited to liquid ingestion and to changes in process conditions (without affecting performance).
This paper discusses the use of Surface Jet Pumps as an alternative to compressors for flare gas
recovery and cites several case studies of where this technology has been successfully utilised. The design
and operational criteria of SJPs, as well as the economics is also highlighted.

Introduction
Flaring is the controlled burning of low pressure natural gas produced in the course of routine oil and gas
production operations. Currently there is no legal or environmental definition of flaring.

SPE-175250-MS

A great deal of gas flaring is done at many oil and gas production sites, onshore and offshore, when
crude oil and associated gas are extracted. In certain areas of the world, lacking pipeline, expensive
compressors and other gas transportation infrastructure, vast amounts of such associated gas are commonly flared as waste or unusable gas. The flaring of associated gas may occur at the top of a vertical flare
stack or it may occur in a ground-level flare in a burn pit.
In industrial plants, such as refineries, chemical plants, natural gas processing facilities as well as oil
& gas production sites, flaring is primarily carried out on a temporary basis for safety reasons i.e.
burning off flammable gas released during unplanned (emergency) over-pressuring of plant equipment or
during plant start-ups and shut-downs. However flaring is also carried out on a continuous basis for
burning purge, pilot and leakage gases or on an operational basis during process unit trips or maintenance.
The flaring in industrial plants (refineries, chemical plants etc.) normally occurs via a vertical stack.

Reasons to Recover Flare Gas

There are several important reasons why flared gas should be recovered. The following are usually the
main drivers for flare gas reduction:

Environmental reduce emission of gases (including CO2/NOx/ SOx) and carbon footprint,
reduce flaring light, noise and odour, reduce visual image of flaring
Economic loss and waste of a valuable resource. Good payback. Some flared gas may also
contain significant amounts of valuable NGLs. Reduce Fuel gas consumption, reduce steam
consumption, and extend flare tip life.
Legislation. Governments and state authorities are increasingly introducing tougher legislation to
limit discharges to the atmosphere.
Corporate Social Responsibility improved PR and company image
No impact on existing relief system

Zero Flaring Vs Flaring Minimisation

Some operators and governing authorities have started to implement zero flaring initiatives with the aim
of eliminating flaring completely. Others are looking at minimisation or to reduce flaring to as low as
reasonably practicable and not at total elimination. Flaring will always occur during emergency scenarios
for safety reasons. Flaring will also occur during unplanned process unit trips. Both these will be
temporary and short-term in nature.
The trigger points for implementing flaring solutions also differ from operator to operator. Some
operators will consider flare gas recovery when more than 1MMscfd is being discharged. For others the
trigger is much higher and is influenced by local regulations.

Challenges with Recovering Flare gas

Gas reserves are often located far from existing pipeline and process infrastructure and there may be low
volumes of gas produced at low pressure. For this reason flare gas recovery at remote locations is difficult.
During oil production there may be variability of the gas produced with the oil and the gas may have
impurities which may make the gas difficult to use, the recovered flare gas may have to be re-treated due
to the impurities. Depending on the economic climate, natural gas can have a much lower relative value
than oil. A large differential between the prices for oil and gas acts as a deterrent for developers in natural
gas utilisation. Companies with limited working capital have a strong incentive to put their money into
oil production.
Early oil production facilities will tend to flare associated gas for up to two years until compressors or
gas recovery methods can be realised (production has outpaced infrastructure investment). Short cycle
investment process of the oil industry is at odds with the long-cycle nature of the gas business.

SPE-175250-MS

Governments or state authorities need to invest in gas infrastructure but often there are insufficient
resources and expertise to launch capital and technology intensive gas projects. In countries with weak
environmental regulations companies are likely to flare large amounts of gas. The problem is made worse
by inadequate enforcement measures.

Technology for Flare Reduction

There are several technologies for reducing flaring at source or in a processing plant. These include:

Compressed Natural Gas (CNG)

Gas Re-injection
LNG
Power Generation
Flare Gas Recovery Systems (FGRS)/Vapour Recovery Units (VRUs)

The choice of technology depends on the economics of the project, frequency of flaring, infrastructure
available and location of the producing facility.

Emergency versus Continuous Flaring in a Processing Plant

Emergency Flaring can occur during plant upset conditions when equipment is over-pressurised. Released
gases and liquids are quickly and safely evacuated to the flare system. This occurs infrequently and may
involve discharging the full throughput of the plant to flare.
Continuous or Operational flaring occurs due to planned shutdown of process units, leakage of valves,
purging of flare headers and cold venting from storage tanks.
Flare Gas Recovery Systems (FGRS) or Vapour Recover Units (VRUs) are normally provided to
recover gas from continuous or operational flaring. Normally it is uneconomic to provide FGRS or VRUs
to recover gas from emergency flaring due to the rapid response required, the large volumes of gas
involved and infrequency of operation.
Of the gas that is flared, the proportion of operational flaring is approximately 57%, purge gas amounts
to 40% and pilot gas is 1%, although this may vary widely depending on the operator and location.
FGRS and VRUs are often used to mean the same thing, although VRUs are normally associated with
recovering gas in locations where no proper flare systems exist, e.g. storage tanks, offloading facilities etc.
Continuous or operational flaring can occur in a processing plant due to gas releases from the following
sources:

Flare Header Purge gas

Pilot gas
Passing control valves or gas traps
Passing relief valves
Passing compressor casing vents
Compressor stuffing box lines
Compressor suction knock-out drum drain
Sudden Perturbations in flow or pressure
Cold venting from storage tanks
Planned shutdown or maintenance of process units

Location of Flare Recovery Systems in a Processing Plant

Typically, flare-gas recovery systems are located on the main flare header downstream of all unit header
tie-ins and at a point where header pressure does not vary substantially with load. Locations upstream of
process unit tie-ins should be carefully examined because of the potential for back flow and high oxygen

SPE-175250-MS

concentrations. Some Flare gas Recovery Systems are located upstream of the flare knock-out drum
although in many cases they are located downstream of the knock-out drum and upstream of the water seal
drum (or rupture pin device).
See Figure 1 below.

Figure 1Location of FGRS in a Processing Plant

Flare systems are used for both normal process releases and emergency releases. Emergency streams,
such as those from pressure-relief valves, depressuring systems, etc., need to have flow paths to the flare
available at all times. The design of flare-gas recovery systems should not compromise this path. Several
methods of accomplishing this are available.
Because flare-gas recovery systems usually take their suction directly from the flare header, the
potential for back flow of air from the flare into the recovery system at low flare-gas loads should be
considered. Typically, oxygen content of the flare gas stream is measured and provisions made to shut
down the FGRS if potentially dangerous conditions exist.

Overview of Flare Gas Recovery Systems

Typically, the system consists of one or more devices (compressors or Surface Jet Pumps) to compress
the flare gas and whose suction is connected directly to the flare header or venting system. The
compressed gas is usually routed to some type of treating system appropriate for the gas composition, then
to fuel-gas or processing systems. Flare-gas recovery systems are seldom sized for emergency flare loads
The design of FGRS/VRUs is usually done in accordance with API standard 521 (ISO 23251).
According to the standard a major consideration in flare-recovery-system design is preservation of a path
to the flare for emergency releases. The flare gas recovery system shall be designed as a side stream from
the flare header. The main flare flow should not be through any flare gas recovery system and the tie-in
line to the flare gas recovery system should come off the top of the flare line to minimize the possibility
of liquid entrance.
Some method of ensuring a positive pressure on the flare header is also required, whilst maintaining
the free path to flare. This is usually achieved by a seal drum or fast opening control valve situated on the
main flare line downstream of the FGRS. The advantage of using a seal drum is that it provides a positive
pressure and avoids air ingress but can have complications associated with the water system maintaining
the seal. The fast opening control valve has to be fail-open, extremely reliable and have a minimum SIL
3 classification. The free path to flare should be maintained by having a relief valve or rupture pin valve
in parallel to the fast opening control valve. Refer to Figure 2, below.

SPE-175250-MS

Figure 2Maintaining Positive Pressure in Flare Headers

Flare Gas Recovery Using Compressor Technology

Conventional Flare gas Recovery systems usually comprise of one or more compressors, which
compress the collected flare gas and route it for further processing. The compressor design is critical
and determines the systems capacity and turndown capability. The compressors are usually equipped
with several stages of unloaders and a recycle valve. Suction pressure is maintained by pressure
control of the recycle valve with additional loading and unloading of the compressors when limits of
valve opening/closing or suction pressure are reached. Refer to Figure 3 below for a typical FGRS
using reciprocating compressors. Flare systems may have significant liquids that are discharged from
process units. Liquid knock-out drums are usually provided upstream of the compressors with
automatic compressor shutdown on high liquid levels in the drums. API standard 618 gives guidance
on compressor protection.

SPE-175250-MS

Figure 3FGRS Using Reciprocating Compressors

Liquid ring compressors are commonly used as the preferred mode of compression within the recovery
systems. See below typical schematic

Figure 4 FGRS Using Liquid Ring Compressors

Flare Gas Recovery Using Surface Jet Pumps (SJPs)

Surface jet pumps (or eductors/ejectors) are simple, low cost passive devices that can also be used to recover
flare gas. They use a high pressure (HP) fluid as the motive force to boost the pressure of the LP or LLP flare
gas and deliver it for processing. The high pressure fluid that is needed as the source of energy or motive flow
is usually gas taken from the discharge of an existing compressor or from the export gas line.

SPE-175250-MS

Figure 5FGRS Using Surface Jet Pumps (ejectors) and HP Gas as Motive Force

Advantages of using Surface Jet pumps include:

No moving parts
Zero fuel gas & power consumption
Use energy readily available within the process
Minimum or zero maintenance
Internals can be changed easily to suit changing process conditions
Varying layout configurations, (Vertical, Horizontal or Angled)
Designed around available footprint and plant requirements
Designed to Pipe Codes (ANSI B31.3)

Surface Jet Pump Operation

Figure 6 shows the general configuration of the surface jet pump and key components of the system.
Surface Jet pumps are also known as eductors, ejectors or gas jet compressors, depending on their
application in various industries. In oil and gas production applications, onshore or offshore, it is preferred
to refer to them as surface jet pump or SJP for short, and use this abbreviation for simplicity.

Figure 6 Key Components of Surface Jet Pump

SPE-175250-MS

The HP fluid passes through the nozzle of the surface jet pump (SJP) where part of potential energy
(pressure) is converted to kinetic energy (high velocity). As a result, the pressure of the HP fluid drops
in front of the nozzle. It is at this point where the LP flow is introduced. The mixture then passes through
the mixing tube where transfer of energy and momentum takes place between the HP and LP fluids. The
mixture finally passes through the diffuser where the velocity of fluids is gradually reduced and further
recovery of pressure takes place. The pressure at the outlet of the jet pump will be at an intermediate value
between the pressure of the HP and LP fluids. The level of boost in the pressure of the LP fluids depends
on a number of factors which include:

HP/LP flow ratio and pressure ratio

Density or molecular weight of the HP and LP fluids

Figure 7SJP Principle of Operation

There are also secondary factors such as the operating temperature and whether the jet pump is
operating under its optimum design conditions. Figure 8 shows the performance of the SJP in gas/gas
applications at different HP/LP pressure ratios.

SPE-175250-MS

Figure 8 Typical Performance Curves for Surface Jet Pumps-Gas/Gas application

In the case of gas/applications, the presence of liquids in the LP flow can be tolerated so long as the
volumetric flow rate of liquids is below 1% to 2% of the volumetric flow rate of the LP gas at the
operating pressure and temperature. Beyond these values, the effect on the achieved boost i.e. discharge
pressure - LP pressure, could be significant, requiring the LP liquids to be separated upstream of the SJP
and be boosted separately. Alternatively, the LP liquids can be sent to a part of the process system which
operates at a lower pressure, if such a source is available.
Presence of liquids in the HP gas also has a similar limitation, beyond which the liquids need to be
separated upstream of the SJP. The main reason in this case is that the performance and sizing of the
nozzle is affected based on whether the HP flow is liquid or gas phase. A further point is that if the HP
flow is multiphase (a mixture of gas and liquids) the fluctuating flow regime associated with multiphase
flow reduces further the efficiency of the SJP significantly as the mixture is not usually homogeneous.
The exceptions in these cases are transient conditions such as start-up, when the system may be
subjected to a high flow rate of liquids passing through the SJP. The SJP recovers quickly in such cases,
as soon as the liquids pass through it without causing any mechanical damage to it.
If no HP gas is unavailable, the HP source can be a high pressure liquid (oil or water). In this case the
solution is viable and economical mainly when the LP gas flow rate is small and is limited to a few
MMscfd (refer to Figure 9).The reason for this limitation is the relatively high volumetric flow rate of
liquids needed for each MMscfd of the LP gas.

10

SPE-175250-MS

Figure 9 Typical Performance Curves for Surface Jet Pumps-Gas/Gas application

Figure 10 shows a typical example of using liquid as the HP source for the SJP. In all cases involving
HP liquid, a gas/liquid separator is required for the mixed liquid/gas stream from the SJP discharge.

Figure 10 Using Liquid as the Motive Fluid for SJP in Recovering Flare Gas

Figure 10 illustrates a process where a small slipstream of injection water is taken from the discharge
of the HP injection pumps and is routed to the SJP as the motive fluid. The SJP recovers the flare gas and
the combined gas/liquid is routed to the water/oil/gas separator where gas & liquid are separated; the gas
is sent for further processing and the water is recycled and becomes the source for the injection pumps.

SPE-175250-MS

11

Using Two SJPs in series to Achieve a Higher Boost

The performance of the jet pump can be presented by the level of boost achieved for the LP pressure. The
said boost in pressure is usually presented by the pressure ratio of the discharge (Pd) and the LP pressure
(Pd/Plp). The level of boost in the LP pressure or the achievable value of Pd/Plp is mainly dependent on
the following factors;

Php/Plp; Where Php and Plp are the HP and LP pressures respectively.
Qlp/Qhp; Where Qlp and Qhp are the mass flow rates of LP and HP gas.

Figure 8 shows the relationships between the above said factors for jet pumps operating at their
optimum efficiency. These graphs are a good help for the initial review of applications. The graphs
should not, however, be used for the final design purposes as in any application other factors such
as the Z factor, gas specific heat ratio (Cp/Cv value) and the operating temperature of LP and HP gas
could also affect the performance. These graphs also indicate that in most cases the Pd / Plp ratio does
not exceed 2 to 2.5.
There have, however, been cases when this ratio has exceeded 4 for cases where HP/LP pressure ratios
are very high and the Qlp/Qhp ratio is low. In applications where a pressure boost ratio of 5 or above is
needed, two jet pumps in series may be used as shown in Figure 11. In this case the total amount of HP
gas needed will be quite significant and the viability of the solution will depend mainly on the amount of
HP gas available for this purpose.

Figure 11Two SJPs in Series

Noise Generation
In gas/gas applications, Surface Jet pumps operating in sonic mode can generate noise in excess of levels
allowed by operators. The Surface jet pumps can be acoustically lagged or in-line silencers can be
provided on the LP and discharge side to reduce noise levels to 85 dbA or below. Silencers are not
required for liquid/gas applications.

12

SPE-175250-MS

In gas production applications, generally two issues are checked and are considered in the design
of the system. At high HP/LP pressure ratios above 2, noise generated by the SJP could exceed 85
dBA, which is generally the acceptable level onshore and offshore. Noise is measured at one meter
away from the axis of the SJP. Noise also travels through the LP and the discharge lines of the SJP.
Silencers are therefore needed to prevent noise travelling beyond the SJP along these lines.
Silencers are flanged spool pieces which are installed at the LP inlet and the discharge line of the SJP.
In some cases the noise emitting through the body of the SJP may be beyond the permitted limit. In this
case the body of the SJP can be acoustically lagged. Silencers can be designed to limit the noise to lower
than the quoted 85 dBA in cases where the SJP is close to populated onshore areas

Hydrate Formation & Joule-Thompson Cooling

A significant drop in the HP gas pressure at the outlet of the nozzle of the SJP could cause a drop
in the temperature of gas at the outlet of the SJP. This is a complex phenomenon beyond that expected
under pure Joule-Thomson cooling principle, as immediately after the nozzle, LP gas is combined
with HP gas, and further recovery of the pressure takes place. There is also the generation of shock
waves within the SJP in most cases, which affect the resultant temperature. Analytical tools are
available to predict the temperature at the outlet of the SJP at each stage of operation, including the
start up.
In general, the temperature of the gas at the outlet of the SJP is well above that calculated by
considering only the Joule-Thomson cooling effect as a result of HP pressure dropping to the LP pressure
in front of the nozzle. In exceptional cases where the temperature at the outlet of the SJP is expected to
be within the hydrate formation band, introduction of hydrate suppressant such as Glycol or MEG, or
equivalent will be advised upstream of the SJP. Presence of liquids in the HP or LP gas also reduces the
cooling effect.
In oil production application cases where HP liquid is the motive flow, neither noise, nor temperature,
poses any problems. Silencers are therefore not required in such cases.

Control of Surface Jet Pumps

Surface Jet Pumps require very little control and are self-adjusting to varying pressures and flowrates. The
main concern when recovering LP/LLP gas from flare headers or storage tanks is the creation of a vacuum
in the flare headers or tanks if the flare gas pressure or flow drops significantly and the high pressure
motive fluid keeps flowing through the Surface Jet Pump. This is usually catered for by a pressure control
valve connecting Surface |Jet Pumps discharge to its LP with a small re-cycle line. If the motive force
is liquid, vacuum in the headers is prevented by controlling the pressure/flow of the HP fluid. There are
also other simple solutions if for any reason further control of the operation is needed. These issues are
usually site specific and are addressed in detail during the design stage and are fully reviewed as part of
the HAZOP study carried out in each case.
Refer to Figure 11 for the range of control schemes that can be used. Note not all methods shown are
required for control at the same time.

SPE-175250-MS

13

Figure 12SJP Control Schemes

Changing operating conditions

The operating conditions of both the HP and LP sources may change during the service life of the SJP.
The SJP system is initially designed for a base case agreed with the client. This condition often relates to
the operating conditions within the initial life of the SJP.
The SJPs supplied can be of flexible design allowing changes of HP nozzle and the mixing tube
sections if needed. Figures 6 & 7 shows the key features of the replaceable internals. If the HP pressure
or flow rate changes significantly, only the nozzle of the SJP needs changing.
If, however, the total HP and LP flow rate changes beyond 20% to 25%, a change of the mixing tube
may become necessary to optimise the performance of the system.
Change-out of the internals is a relatively simple operation and can be carried out by platform crew
within a matter of a few hours. Detailed procedures are available for change-out operation. It is worth
noting that in practically all cases experienced so far, the cost of replacing the internals has been recovered
over a few weeks from the enhanced production achieved by optimising the design of the SJP.

MOC (Material of Construction)

The SJP can be supplied in a variety of materials as required by the specific applications. The materials
covering pipe work, flanges, forgings and fittings normally meet the standards of the oil and gas industry
such as ASME/ANSI codes. The selected materials need to meet two basic requirements;

Suitability based on the nature and composition of produced fluids

Compatibility with the existing equipment and pipe work on the platform or fields.

The selected materials could therefore range from simple carbon steel to high grade duplex. In case of
sand production, parts of the internals which are subject to high velocities and erosion, such as the nozzle
or the mixing tube, can be coated with hard wearing materials such as tungsten carbide, or ceramic lining
is added which has the highest level of resistance to erosion. The modularization of the SJP allows easy
modification and the change-out of the key components.
For the design of the system, normally ASME/ANSI B31.3, ASME B16.5 and the Pressure Equipment
Directive (PED) are used. In exceptional cases and at the request of the clients other codes such as
Stoomwezen (Netherlands) or the pressure vessel code ASME VIII or BS 5500 have been used. There is

14

SPE-175250-MS

no specific limit for the design pressure which is usually dictated by the operating conditions and safety
considerations.
Fabrication and welding is carried out to the high standard of the oil and gas industry meeting all the
requirements of the codes and specific company regulations. All units are normally tested to 1.5 times
their design pressure. These, together with the simple and robust design of these units, make them one of
the safest equipment used in the oil and gas industry.

SJP Performance
The performance of the SJP is assessed simply by noting the pressure boost the difference between the
discharge and the LP pressure of the SJP. The discharge pressure is not controlled by the SJP and is mainly
dictated by the downstream pipeline and production system. The SJP, however, responds to changes in the
parameters which affect its performance by adjusting the LP pressure which it generates.
Operators often require measurement of both the motive gas flow and the flow of the LP recovered gas.
Flowmeters are therefore installed on the HP and LP lines to the SJP.

Economics/Payback
The use of any boosting system requires sufficient economic justification. The simplest way to assess the
economics of using a SJP system is to compute the payback period needed to recover the capital costs,
and bear in mind that in practically all cases, there is little to no operation cost. The capital cost includes
the cost of the SJP and the silencers, if needed. There are also the costs of the additional interconnection
piping, valves, instrumentation and the installation of the system. In many cases these costs are more than
the cost of the SJP, but, never the less; they are costs which need to be considered for economic
assessment.
The costs of the total system may increase significantly if for any reason high grade materials and high
pressure rating are required. The many field applications so far have proven that the economics are very
attractive and in practically all cases the payback period has been a matter of a few weeks to a few months.
The economics are so attractive that in many cases even using the SJP for a few months could be
economical. These relate to cases when the HP motive flow is not sustainable and their pressure may drop
rapidly over a short period. Past field experiences have proved that even in such cases the jet pump would
be an economical solution despite the fact that both the nozzle and the mixing tube may need to be
modified more than once within a short period such as four to six months. This is in response to changes
in the pressure and flow rates of the HP and LP gas as described in the field example below.
In addition to the economic benefits related to increased production, other issues such as environmental
benefits, particularly in the case of the prevention of flaring should be taken into account. In scenarios
when the de-bottlenecking of the compressors or similar are involved, even deferring the adoption of high
cost solutions such as the upgrading of the existing compression system have economic benefits. The field
examples and the applications discussed in this paper show that jet pumps complement what the
compressors can do, but at a fraction of the cost, with a short delivery period.

Conclusion
The use of Surface Jet Pumps does not usually involve the major capital and operating expenditures which
many compressor based FGR systems require. So long as a high pressure motive source is available, this
simple device offers very cost effective solutions to boost LP/LLP gas on many onshore and offshore
processing facilities. It has no moving parts and consumes zero fuel gas/electric power. The payback
period for the recovery of the capital has in many cases been a matter of a few weeks to a few months.
SJPs can also work effectively combined with other compressor based techniques and compliment
these techniques to achieve the flare gas recovery.

SPE-175250-MS

15

REFERENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.

API RP 521 - Guide for Pressure Relieving and Depressuring Systems

API STD 618 - Reciprocating Compressors for Petroleum, Chemical, and Gas Industry Services
Information on Surface Jet Pumps can be obtained via Caltec web site; www.caltec.com.
GPSA Engineering Data Book, 13th edition, Chapter 13 section Jet Pump (1346)
Beg, N and Sarshar.S, 2014, Surface Jet Pumps (SJPs) for Enhanced Oil & Gas Production
Engineers Handbook, First Edition 2014, Rev 1.1 (ISBN 978 09571821 0 3)
6. World Bank Global Gas Flaring Reduction (GGFR), A Public-private partnership (
http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTGGFR/Resources/
GGFR_NewBrochure%28Oct2011%29.pdf)

16

SPE-175250-MS

Appendix
Case Study 1 - Mexico

SPE-175250-MS

Case Study 2 UK North Sea

Case Study 3 Nigeria

17