Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Hydrate Prevention using MEG instead of MeOH: Impact of experience from major
Norwegian developments on technology selection for injection and recovery of MEG
S. Brustad, K.-P. Lken, and J.G. Waalmann, Aker Kvrner Engineering and Technology
This paper was selected for presentation by an OTC Program Committee following review of
information contained in a proposal submitted by the author(s). Contents of the paper, as
Part 1 Selecting hydrate inhibitor: Comparing MEG
presented, have not been reviewed by the Offshore Technology Conference and are subject to and MeOH
correction by the author(s). The material, as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
position of the Offshore Technology Conference, its officers, or members. Papers presented at
OTC are subject to publication review by Sponsor Society Committees of the Offshore
Technology Conference. Electronic reproduction, distribution, or storage of any part of this
Chemical hydrate inhibitors
paper for commercial purposes without the written consent of the Offshore Technology
Conference is prohibited. Permission to reproduce in print is restricted to a proposal of not
more than 300 words; illustrations may not be copied. The proposal must contain conspicuous Chemical hydrate inhibitors can be arranged in two main
acknowledgment of where and by whom the paper was presented. Write Librarian, OTC, P.O.
Box 833836, Richardson, TX 75083-3836, U.S.A., fax 01-972-952-9435.
categories:
Thermodynamic Hydrate Inhibitors (THI)
Abstract Low Dosage Hydrate Inhibitors (LDHI)
The four Norwegian gas/condensate field developments Troll,
Snhvit, Ormen Lange and sgard are used together with The latter category consists of Anti Agglomerants (AA) and
amongst others Britannia Satellites (ConocoPhillips) and Shah Kinetic Hydrate Inhibitors (KHI). These new and promising
Deniz (BP) to illustrate experience and technology status chemicals are becoming popular in the GoM and on the UK
related to injection and recovery of MEG (Mono Ethylene sector. However, for long distance gas-condensate tie-backs,
Glycol). especially in cold waters, they have serious limitations. AAs
generally require a certain amount of condensate (continuous
A comparison between MEG and MeOH is presented. oil phase) in order to be effective. KHIs can only give a
Advantages, limitations and cost elements (CAPEX/OPEX) by limited suppression of the hydrate formation point, and they
use of glycol (MEG) vs. alcohols (Methanol/Ethanol) are are not proven to be fully effective at higher pressures.
reviewed and discussed in relation to their applicability.
Thermodynamic inhibitors cost
Based on experience, typical operational problems within
closed loop MEG systems with salt- and water removal are This means that THIs are the robust choice for long distance
carbonate scale deposits in pipeline and recovery systems, gas-condensate tie-backs. The thermodynamic inhibitors of
accumulation of corrosion products and other small particles widest use are methanol (MeOH) and monoethylene glycol
and carry-over/foaming. A holistic approach for proper design (MEG). Other alcohols and glycols may be used, but two main
and prevention of these and other incidents are presented. factors making methanol and MEG the most common
thermodynamic inhibitors are hydrate suppression
Introduction performance (see Table 2) and cost.
Proper hydrate management is vital for all field developments.
For short and moderate tie-backs, flowline insulation Rough costs are given in Table 1, where it is seen that the
(maintaining fluid temperature above the hydrate formation common thermodynamic inhibitors are relatively cheap per
temperature) combined with a depressurisation strategy, is unit volume. However, since large quantities may be necessary
normally the basic method. For developments with cold well to suppress the equilibrium temperature below the lowest
fluids, systems which are difficult to depressurise or restart operational temperature expected in the system, the
(deep water), and for general improvement of the field infrastructure cost may add up to significant amounts.
regularity, flowline heating is an additional element. For Necessary considerations to make when designing for a
deepwater developments, the hydrate management is often hydrate strategy with thermodynamic inhibitors are storage
based on displacement with stabilized oil, or built around a volumes and regeneration facilities.
subsea separation concept /4/. For appropriate fluids, Cold
Flow may turn out to be the next quantum leap. However, for
long distance gas-condensate tie-backs with complex subsea
2 OTC 17355
o
Table 1 - Rough costs for common thermodynamic inhibitors Table 2 - Calculated values of depression of hydrate point ( C) for
based on ICIS-LOR (February 2005) various thermodynamic inhibitors (Kelland 2000 /7/).
Depression of hydrate point [oC]
Chemical Cost USD/Metric Tonne MeOH EtOH MEG DEG TEG NaCl
Concentration
MeOH 300 of inhibitor
MEG 900 [wt%]
Offshore shipping cost is approximately 150-200 USD/tonne 5 2.0 1.4 1.05 0.63 0.46 1.96
of chemical. 10 4.2 3.0 2.25 1.4 1.05 4.3
20 9.3 6.6 5.2 3.3 2.7 10.7
It should be noted that the cost numbers tend to fluctuate over 30 15.3 10.7 9.0 5.9 5.0 15.0
time. Lately the price of MEG has shown a rising tendency 35 18.6 13.0 11.35 7.5 6.5 -
due to an increasing demand from the Chinese textile industry
40 22.2 15.4 14.0 9.3 8.2 -
in particular.
It is also important to realize that the actual OPEX is
significantly governed by the chemical losses and the make-up THI regeneration
required to cover for these losses (see Table 3).
Both MEG and MeOH may be readily regenerated, although
THIs and suppression performance there are limitations regarding salinity of the produced water
for conventional MEG regeneration facilities. However, e.g.
The lower the molecular weight, the better the hydrate Kvaerner Process Systems (KPS) has overcome this with their
suppression performance, hence, MEG yields better continuos reclamation facilities, which is installed on the
performance per mass basis compared to TEG (triethylene sgard B semi. Apart from some possible, field-specific
glycol), and methanol yields better performance than ethanol aromatics and phenols following the water-phase, the water
etc. Figure 1 shows the relative performance of some leaving such a regeneration facility is very clean. Also, as the
thermodynamic inhibitors; NaCl, methanol and MEG. The glycol has rather low solubility in the gas phase, the
more the equilibrium line is shifted to the left, the more contamination of the gas phase using MEG as a hydrate
effective is the inhibitor, and the larger is the safe area inhibitor is insignificant. When it comes to MeOH, the losses
(conditions where hydrate formation will not take place). to the gas phase are significant, and the methanol
concentration in the water leaving the regeneration facilities
must be evaluated against the height of the distillation column.
A distillation process can reclaim both chemicals, but also due
to the low vapour pressure of MEG, a smaller, high-
temperature-recovery column may be used for MEG
regeneration compared to MeOH regeneration.
A rough guide to compare the performance of a number of THI losses and product contamination
thermodynamic inhibitors is given below.
E. D. Sloan /8/ presents the following rules-of-thumb in order
to account for the inhibitor losses to the gas and condensate
phases:
OTC 17355 3
Table 3 - Rules-of-thumb for estimating inhibitor losses to the gas number of developments are today basing the corrosion
and condensate phases (Sloan 2000 /8/).
philosophy on carbon steel pipelines, MEG and pH
Loss to gas phase Loss to condensate stabilization. MeOH gives no benefit on corrosion resistance.
phase
Methanol At 4oC and pressures The methanol THIs and HSE
higher than 70 bar, the concentration dissolved in
methanol lost to the condensate is 0.5 weight%.
vapour phase is 16 kg per MEG is non-flammable, with a flash point at 111 oC. MeOH is
106 Sm3 gas for every highly flammable with a flash point at 11 oC. This clearly
weight% methanol in the indicates that MeOH presents a greater safety risk with respect
water phase. to handling and storage (especially on offshore installations
MEG At 4oC and pressures The mole fraction of MEG with limited area). Furthermore, MeOH burns with an
higher than 70 bar, the in a liquid hydrocarbon at invisible flame, making fire detection a more difficult
maximum amount of MEG 4oC is 0.03 % of the water- problem.
lost to the gas is 0.3 kg per phase mole fraction of
106 Sm3 gas. MEG. MEG regeneration plants with de-salting (reclamation) will
produce a waste product that mainly consists of salt. MeOH
Based on the above rules-of-thumb, the total methanol loss regeneration, on the other hand, does not produce any solid
from a field, with typical 30 wt% MeOH in the water phase, waste. It is however possible to re-dissolve the salts from a
will be app. 500 kg per 106 Sm3 gas and 50 kg per 1000 kg MEG reclaimer before disposal to sea.
condensate. As Table 3 shows the MEG lost to the gas is only
is 0.3 kg per 106 Sm3 gas, independent of the weight% of THIs and viscosity
MEG in the water phase. Hence the MEG losses are negligible
compared to the MeOH losses. The MeOH losses also MEG is significantly more viscous than MeOH, especially at
increases substantially with increased temperaure. At 10oC the low temperatures (which is the case for the most relevant field
loss to the vapour phase is app. 25 kg per 106 Sm3 gas for developments). This means that a MEG injection system will
every weight% methanol in the water phase. require a larger diameter injection line and/or more pumping
horsepower.
This also raises operational and environmental issues with
respect to methanol regeneration. In addition, depending on THIs combined with KHIs
the customer, there might be a need for decontaminating the
gas phase because of the high MeOH content (as described For the Nuggets development in UK (tie-back to the Alwyn
above). This might also introduce a significant investment cost North platform), Total has investigated a hydrate inhibitor
that must be included in the comparison. Alternatively there strategy combining MEG with KHI for the peak water
might be a cost penalty due to pollution of the product. production period. The reason is a requirement to limit the
MEG injection to a given rate, and add KHI to make up the
Product contamination and LNG difference to the required subcooling. The investigations have
concluded that MEG is better suited than MeOH for this kind
Because of the large distances between the major gas of mixing strategy /1/.
producers and the consumers, gas export pipeline cost has
been a showstopper for a number of planned developments. THIs and dehydration
Over the last few years, the LNG market has opened up,
presenting LNG transport as an enabling technology for In the GoM, some developments use MEG for hydrate control
development of remote gas-condensate fields. As a result of in the gathering system, at the same time dehydrating the gas
this trend, a large number of the ongoing and planned gas enough to meet export pipeline specifications (typically 7
developments are planned with LNG facilities. Gas lb/MMSCF) without a topside contactor.
contaminated with MeOH is unacceptable in the cryogenic
Cold Box part of a LNG plant. MeOH has a freezing point THI selection - conclusion
that is well above the temperature in the LNG plant. For this
reason MeOH is generally avoided for LNG based In view of the factors listed above, it is obvious that a general
developments. Should MeOH be chosen, this would require an ranking of the two inhibitors, based on a direct CAPEX
additional pre-treatment system removing the MeOH from the comparison between a standard MEG regeneration unit and a
gas (IFPEXOL or similar). corresponding standard MeOH regeneration unit, is inadequate
for selection in a specific project. Not only does the loss of
THIs and corrosion management MeOH to the gas phase add substantial OPEX, it may also
impose a price penalty on the product. Furthermore, the
For long distance tie-backs, the pipelines are major cost requirements for salt removal (reclamation) in the MEG case
drivers. Material selection and corrosion management are or gas cleaning in the MeOH case will be project specific cost
important elements in the overall Flow Assurance evaluations. drivers of significant order.
MEG is corrosion protective in itself, and reduces operational
costs with respect to corrosion inhibitors for the pipelines. A
4 OTC 17355
In South America, ethanol is commonly used as a hydrate anti- The Aker Kvaerner approach is built on six main
freeze since it is cheap and available in large quantities from steps:
sugar fermentation. Generally ethanol has the same
disadvantages as methanol compared to MEG for continuous 1. Design basis
inhibition. Establishment of the correct design basis figures is extremely
important and must be performed in co-operation with the oil
Part 2 The holistic approach to the closed loop companies. I.e. reservoir and well flowing conditions,
MEG system production profiles over the field lifetime including formation
water production potential, fluid compositions, environmental
Although continuous MEG injection is found as the most conditions etc.
reliable and cost-effective method of hydrate inhibition on The strategy for hydrate (and ice) prevention, Rich and Lean
numerous gas/condensate field developments, the closed loop MEG content will be based on such input.
MEG system is complex and represents a number of chemical,
physical and hence operational challenges. Consequently, it is 2. Subsea architecture and components
extremely important to approach a closed loop MEG system Pending on the chosen subsea production system and pipeline
from a holistic point of view. The consequence of neglecting network, utilisation of, or in some instances development of,
this will in many cases be severe operational problems leading proper technology must be done. Separate MEG line(s) or
to plant downtime and losses of income. MEG lines integrated in the umbilical(s) are options for
carrying MEG to the destination for injection. A multipurpose
Continuous experience from the conventional MEG umbilical, actually an illustration of an Integrated Production
regeneration plant at the Kollsnes onshore facility and the full Umbilical (IPU), from Kvaerner Oilfield Products (KOP) is
reclamation unit on the sgard B semi, combined with shown below /2/. For MEG distribution, an ISU (Integrated
comprehensive investigations performed in the Snhvit and Service Umbilical) with a 3-4 centre line may be sufficient.
Ormen Lange projects, have given the Norwegian E&P
industry a frontrunner position with respect to understanding
of the totality in the closed loop MEG system /5/.
A schematic illustration of a typical on-shore Closed Loop
MEG system with a slip-stream desalination unit is shown in
Figure 2.
The type of injection valves and proper subsea flow 4. Precipitation chemistry
measurement devices (water cut meter/multiphase flow meter) Understanding the chemistry and physics of the carbonates
must also be chosen. and sulphates in combination with the different divalent
cations (Ca2+, Fe2+, Mg2+, Ba2+, Sr2+, etc.) is important to
3. Corrosion design the on-shore/topside MEG plant properly. A picture of
Establishment of a proper corrosion inhibition philosophy carbonate scale before and after cleaning is shown in the
must be based on the input from design basis combined with figure below.
the chosen hydrate inhibition strategy. In most cases the
production pipeline(s) will be made of carbon steel due to
cost. Although the MEG itself represents a reduction of the
corrosion rate, additional means are almost always required to
avoid unacceptable pipeline corrosion rates.
Reclaimer. The main disadvantage is that impurities will large amounts of NaAc could be dissolved in the Flash
accumulate in the closed MEG loop. The impurities are mainly Separator (more than 300 g/l). It is important to control the
solid particles and salts. The salts will exist either as ions or in concentrations to avoid increasing the viscosity and the boiling
precipitated form. The solubility of the different salts in the temperature and also to avoid massive precipitation during
MEG/water solution will vary, and therefore require different shut-down and cool-down.
treatment for removal. In addition different salts will
A 3-D model overview of the KPS slip-stream reclaimer at
precipitate in different parts of the system. The MEG/water
Ormen Lange is shown in the illustration below.
phase particles will mainly consist of corrosion particles,
precipitated salts from formation water and completion fluids,
salts from acetic acids and fines. Although it is possible to run
the system with some particles in the regenerated lean MEG,
most of the particles must be removed to avoid problematic
accumulation in process equipment and flowlines.
Scale, in this context, consists of precipitated carbonates and
sulphate salts. These salts are partly soluble and the solubility
will vary with fluid pH and temperature. When the
MEG/water feed is depressurised or heated CO2 will boil off
and thus increasing the pH. To control the precipitation and
minimise scaling on locations giving operational problems or
being labour intensive with respect to cleaning is very
essential for a slip-stream salt removal plant. In the MEG
regeneration process scaling on hot surfaces in heaters and
precipitation on the column internals are the main concerns.
Since the solubility of iron- and calcium carbonate (FeCO3 and
CaCO3) is low, most of the incoming iron and calcium will
precipitate at the operating conditions of a regeneration unit /
reboilers. The Ormen Lange plant will therefore be designed
to provoke precipitation of FeCO3 and CaCO3 upstream the
reboilers. The Flash Drum and the Rich MEG Tank will be Figure 9 - 3-D model overview of the slip-stream reclaimer at
operating at high temperature (app. 80 oC). Combined with Ormen Lange (KPS)
long retention time, due to uncertainties regarding
supersaturation/kinetics, it is anticipated that all the iron and 6. System design
most of the calcium will precipitate in the two tanks. The high System design includes calculation of MEG demand, from day
operating temperature in the Rich MEG Tank will also one and in the future, determination of corrosion and scale
increase the settling velocity of particles due to a lower liquid inhibition philosophy over the field lifetime, and design of
viscosity. In other words; the Ormen Lange Rich MEG Tanks MEG injection points and injection devices. Design of the
will be designed for the purpose of being a buffer tank but also MEG distribution network, pumps, particle removal
a tank for settling of small particles. The particles, present as a alternatives and MEG storage tanks, in many cases being part
Rich MEG slurry in the bottom of the tank, can be removed of the plants regularity philosophy, are also contributors to an
during regular maintenance and sent to special treatment. The overall system. Finally, the selection of a proper MEG
Rich MEG slurry may also be sent to high speed Centrifuges. regeneration process must be done. System design for the
These full flow Centrifuges is placed in the rich MEG stream whole loop also includes sparing philosophy for critical
downstream of the Rich MEG Tank to normally remove more systems and sufficient capacity margins.
of the particles that are not settling in the tank. At Snhvit the For sizing of the MEG tanks and the recovery capacity, input
particles will be removed by micro filtration. from pipeline sizing governing liquid accumulation is
The slip-stream Reclaimer at Ormen Lange is sized to important. In this context, the sizing of slug catchers, and the
maintain a maximum salt content in the lean MEG of 20 g/l. liquid handling capacity from slug catchers to the Rich MEG
The reclaimer shall also ensure a maximum acetate tank are important factors in the total loop logistics /4/.
concentration of below 2.36 g/l in lean MEG to control top of The required redundancy and sparing of components, rich and
line corrosion after a change in corrosion strategy from pH lean MEG storage capacity and the MEG plant capacity
stabiliser to corrosion inhibitor. The design of a slip-stream margins must be based on availability analysis. OREDA data
reclaimer is more or less based on the same evaluations as a has shown to be insufficient for a MEG system, hence the
full stream reclaimer. The main difference between the availability analysis must be based on actual experience from
reclaimers described earlier and the Ormen Lange slip-stream the plants in operation together with input from the oil
reclaimer is that the distillation column is not required as companies.
water is removed in the conventional reboilers. An additional
consideration made at Ormen Lange is the high acetate
concentration in the feed. Organic acids will accumulate in the
Flash Separator. Experiments performed by IFE shows that
10 OTC 17355
Acknowledgements
References