Technology 4.
The next generation
In the first quarter of 2006, the first truly worldscale GTL facility, Oryx GTL, will be com-
pleted at Ras Laffan Industrial City, Qatar. This will be a significant step for GTL tech-
nology and its financing as well as a milestone in Qatar’s drive to be the GTL capital of
the world. By Paul Hayward, senior process engineer, Foster Wheeler
T
HE NEXT generation of GTL projects for Qatar is under
development with final GTL product volumes for each
project typically in the range of 100,000-140,000
barrels a day (b/d), through multiple GTL trains. The direc-
tion of these future projects, both in Qatar and the rest of
the world, involves the integration of the downstream GTL
process with associated upstream gas treating and off-
shore facilities, offering additional gas-plant derived prod-
ucts (typically around 70,000-90,000 b/d).
SasolChevron (a joint venture between Sasol and
ChevronTexaco) is investigating the opportunity for a
130,000 b/d (based on GTL products only) integrated
GTL facility, as part of its drive to realise 230,000 b/d
of GTL production in Qatar. Foster Wheeler has gained
experience across a number of different GTL technolo-
gies over the last 10 years. Having executed the front-
end engineering and design (Feed) for the Oryx and
Escravos GTL (Nigeria) projects, and as single-point
licensor for the Sasol Slurry Phase Distillate™ (Sasol
SPD™) process, the company has been instrumental in
providing the necessary expertise and experience to
assist with this world-scale project.
The addition of gas treatment and offshore
facilities to a GTL project’s scope ensures
both security and quality of the gas supply
to the downstream GTL facility
The production of liquid hydrocarbon products from
synthesis gas (syngas) through the Fischer-Tropsch (FT)
reaction is proved technology; as is the production of
syngas from a methane-rich feed stock. Similarly, the
production of a methane-rich product from a gas plant,
feeding either a pipeline or numerous downstream pro-
cess technologies, is equally well-established. The addi-
tion of gas treatment and offshore facilities to a GTL pro-
ject’s scope ensures both security and quality of the gas
supply to the downstream GTL facility.
Gas plant and GTL plant synergies
Furthermore, this coupling allows synergies between the
two facilities, including common offsite and utility sys-
tems. Figure 1 presents a simplistic schematic for the
blocks associated with an integrated facility.
To develop a 130,000 b/d GTL facility, natural gas sup-
plies in excess of 1.5bn cubic feet a day are required,
processed through two gas-plant trains, to generate the
desired feed. A typical gas-plant configuration for such a
facility can be split into three simplified blocks:
Feed separation: Reservoir fluid requires three-phase
separation to facilitate downstream processing. This gen-
erates the following process streams:
● Rich sour gas requiring further processing prior to
feeding to GTL;
Petroleum Economist
● Hydrocarbon condensate requiring sweetening
before export; and
● Aqueous glycol stream requiring further processing
before the reuse of glycol and recovery of water.
Gas clean-up: Compared with previous projects, future
Middle East offshore gas compositions will probably have
higher quantities of less-desirable components (including
nitrogen, carbon dioxide (CO2), hydrogen sulphide (H2S),
carbonyl sulphide (COS) and mercaptans (RSH)). Any gas Paul Hayward
plant providing methane-rich feed to a downstream GTL
facility must ensure these components are removed to
suitable levels. In particular, removal of sulphur species is
required to maintain the life of the downstream GTL relat-
ed catalysts; and
NGLs extraction: Separation of ethane and higher hydro-
carbons (C2+) provides associated-products revenue
streams, adding significant overall commercial value.
Additionally, removal of these heavy components has the
potential to simplify the syngas production process by lim-
iting the need for pre-reforming.
Six-train plant
To achieve a throughput of 130,000 b/d of GTL products,
the Sasol SPD™ process is configured as six trains utilising
the three technology-types typical of all GTL processes:
Syngas production: Six trains using Haldor Topsøe’s
autothermal reforming (ATR) technology are required to
convert the methane-rich feed to syngas (hydrogen and
carbon monoxide); additionally, six air-separation units
(ASUs), each with a nominally capacity of 4,500 tonnes a
day, provide the required oxygen for the ATR reactor;
FT synthesis: The licensed Sasol SPD™ process is used
to produce liquid hydrocarbons from syngas through the
FT reaction. Through process intensification and further
catalyst development, an increase in the Sasol SPD™ pro-
cess’ reactor capacity from 17,000 b/d for the Oryx GTL
process to a value in excess of 20,000 b/d can be
achieved. This is significantly higher than can be achieved
through multi-tubular fixed-bed reactor designs. The Sasol
SPD™ process, therefore, requires significantly fewer
reactors to achieve the same capacity; and
Product work-up: Upgrading of FT synthesis products
into saleable products can be achieved in two 65,000 b/d
trains using a combination of ChevronTexaco’s hydroc-
racking, hydrotreating and isodewaxing technologies –
well within proved conventional refining practice. These
units produce GTL diesel (an ultra-clean diesel product),
GTL naphtha and FT base-oil products.
In addition to the above, a number of hydrogen pro-
duction packages are required to provide the necessary
hydrogen feedstock for the GTL processes.
Economic drivers
The costs associated with integrated GTL projects have
typically been quoted in the range of $4bn to $6bn. Such
large investment decisions require clear economic incen-
Fundamentals of Gas to Liquids, 2005 45
 4.2 Technology
tives and drivers. Broadly speaking, for the next genera-
tion of integrated GTL projects these can be classified as:
Premium GTL process fuels: Marketing trials by Sasol
and other GTL manufacturers have already established
that GTL diesel will command a slight price premium over
conventional products, because of performance enhance-
ments and environmental benefits. Given the large and
increasing global demand for diesel, potential demand for
GTL-diesel products is almost unlimited;
Feedstock costs: Increased revenue through gas-plant
derived products and no external payment for GTL feed-
stock leading to an overall greater internal rate of return;
Economies of scale: Reducing $/b construction and pro-
duction costs;
Reliability of feedstock: Feedstock quality and provision
remain in the control of the integrated facility; and
Product diversification: Exploitation of gas reserves into
products that tap existing, mature hydrocarbons markets
– allowing divergence from oil-based products and provid-
ing the host country with an expanded products portfolio.
Premium products
Notwithstanding the economic drivers highlighted above,
a project is only viable if its products have a competitive
advantage and existing markets are not saturated. For
premium GTL products both these criteria are satisfied.
The recent trend in the oil price to above $50/b demon-
strates that demand for crude and its derived products
outweigh available supply.
GTL facilities, while not adding significantly to the world’s
effective refining capacity, will command a small premium
for their products through the remarkable properties of GTL
products – low in aromatics; almost zero sulphur, nitrogen
and metals; and primarily paraffinic – which ensure they
Figure 1: Simplistic integrated GTL schematic
Gas plant Sulphur
Reservoir fluid Feed
separation
Field condensate
GTL plant
Methane-rich gas
Syngas
production
Oxygen
Gas plant and GTL utilities integration (power/steam/fuel)
Gas plant and GTL integrated offsites/infrastructure
46 Fundamentals of Gas to Liquids, 2005
have added value above equivalent refinery products:
GTL diesel: Typically, this has a cetane number of around
70, making this a premium blend stock for conventional
refinery diesel (typical cetane number of 50) to ensure
environmental criteria can be met;
GTL naphtha: Premium petrochemicals feedstock (for
example for an ethylene cracker); and
FT base oils: These exhibit a very high Viscosity Index
and very high purity, making them excellent blending
components for lube markets.
Volumes of ethane, propane, butane and
condensate are generated in the gas plant
that yield considerable revenues
While maintaining production of GTL products at their
design capacity is the intent of the complex, significant
product volumes are also generated in the gas plant
(ethane, propane, butane and condensate) that yield
considerable product revenues.
Merging the blocks
Standalone GTL plants have primarily been developed
through merging specific licensor technologies. With these
licensor technologies now well-defined, the challenges
have become combining them in the most economic
manner – requiring expertise and knowledge in gas pro-
cessing, refining, chemicals and petrochemicals, power
generation, FT technology and water management.
Through the Oryx GTL Feed execution, Sasol and Foster
Wheeler brought their expertise in all areas together to
deliver a world-class project.
Gas NGL
clean-up extraction C2, C3, C4,
Plant condensate
Light ends
GTL diesel
GTL naphtha
Product
FT synthesis
work-up
By-products
Petroleum Economist

The next generation of integrated GTL plants combines
gas-plant and GTL-plant blocks into a single project scope,
allowing further optimisation and cost-reduction opportu-
nities. The addition of these gas-plant blocks includes off-
shore facilities, gas separation and treating (including H2S
and CO2 removal), sulphur recovery, RSH/COS removal,
water removal and NGLs recovery.
The merging of the gas-plant blocks with the licensed
GTL technologies requires additional expertise in offshore
development and natural gas treating, as well as an under-
standing of the interactions between the gas and GTL plant
requirements. Furthermore, the effect of these new blocks
on the previously defined offsites and utility requirements
for a standalone GTL plant needs to be investigated and
understood to ensure these supporting systems are sized
appropriately and the whole facility is optimised.
Process drivers
As with any process optimisation, the interaction between
capital and operating costs is essential in evaluating options.
For mature facilities, such as refineries and gas plants, these
optimisations are relatively well understood. However, when
combining a gas plant with a GTL plant the new optimum
configuration shifts from that for the equivalent standalone
plants. Defining this point is critical to a successful design
and a significant number of studies have been undertaken
to achieve this through the evaluation of key process drivers:
Capital cost: Driving down capital cost with consideration
of other critical parameters, such as operating cost and
availability/reliability is essential in any evaluation;
Energy management: While GTL plants consume signifi-
cant quantities of energy, the high-temperature processes
allow significant quantities of heat to be recovered from
the process in the form of steam generation, which can in
turn be used to generate power. Because gas plants are
net energy consumers, this provides the opportunity for
energy integration and synergies across the two plants;
Water management: GTL plants produce significant
quantities of water requiring upgrading and management
to ensure an efficient and environmentally robust
design, maximising reuse of water as far as is reason-
able. The relatively small water-management systems
required by gas plants means these can be accommo-
dated with only modest increases in the systems
required for a standalone GTL plant;
GTL feedstock cost: Including the offshore facilities and
gas plant in the overall scope shifts the cost of methane-
rich gas downwards from an intermediate profit-driven
cost to an internal cost, changing the dynamics for ener-
gy integration, including fuel and power costs;
GTL feedstock composition: Considerations are some-
what different to those for gas pipeline projects, placing
different requirements and burdens on the gas and GTL
plants alike; and
Start-up costs: Minimisation of equipment specified
solely for start-up was a significant area of optimisation for
Oryx GTL and can be further extended to facilitate the
start-up requirements for an integrated project.
In evaluating these and other process drivers, Foster
Wheeler and Sasol sought to deliver cost effective solu-
tions to improve the efficiency and availability of the over-
all facility whilst ensuring environmental and safety
requirements are met or surpassed.
Project challenges
The development of an integrated facility requires many
challenges to be overcome and addressed to successful-
ly execute such a project:
Petroleum Economist
Technology 4.2
Long-term sulphur management: With high sulphur
content in the reservoir fluid and uncertainty in the long-
term drift in these compositions, ensuring adequate
capacity is critical both commercially and environmen-
tally. Here, oxygen-based GTL schemes, such as the
Sasol process, offer significant advantages through the
potential for relatively simple de-bottlenecking of the
sulphur-recovery units (SRU) by future retrofitting of oxy-
gen-enrichment technology;
CO2 optimisation: CO2 can be selectively slipped in a
gas plant within a range of 0.0-1.5% with the slipped
CO2 passing through the gas plant forming a component
in the GTL plant feed. The degree to which CO2 is
slipped needs to be investigated for a given project
within the constraints of the H2S content in the reser-
voir feed and its associated effect on the SRU.
Additionally, retaining CO2 through the facility effective-
ly takes up capacity and affects recycle streams within
the GTL plant. These effects must be understood to
ensure the effect of CO2 throughout the entire process-
ing plant is rationalised;
NGL plant operation: The effect of a possible expander
failure must be catered for within the context of availabil-
ity and installed capital. Design configurations have been
developed to handle this situation;
Availability: The availability of an entire wellhead-to-mar-
ket facility requires critical evaluation to ensure this is
maximised cost effectively;
Operating and maintenance: Such large facilities, with
multiple integrated and interdependent trains, require a
robust and credible operating and maintenance plan to
ensure their longevity;
Materials management: With multiple large-scale, inte-
grated GTL projects planned, a detailed understanding of
the fabrication and procurement capacities available in
world markets will be vital to the timely execution of any
single integrated GTL project;
Contracting strategy: A detailed understanding of the
appropriate contracting strategy for such projects is
required to ensure delivery to schedule and budget;
Construction: Large, complex projects such as these
require a detailed understanding of construction-manage-
ment strategies and planning to ensure successful and
safe execution;
Commissioning: Start-up and commissioning sched-
ules will be critical to the successful completion of an
integrated project. A detailed understanding and analy-
sis of how this can be executed in a time-efficient man-
ner is fundamental to reduce the overall time required
to start-up the facility; and
Operational sustainability: Through the Oryx GTL pro-
ject, an in-depth appreciation of the interactions between
the process and utility systems in various operating situa-
tions have been developed, including start-up and trip
scenarios. This has allowed significant value to be added
in maintaining the operational sustainability of the facility
and is readily transferable to an integrated plant.
Moving forward
The successful financing, cost management, technical
integrity and project execution of the Oryx GTL project
has been followed with great interest by the industry.
With the planned development of worldscale integrated
GTL facilities, another major step change is on its way.
Foster Wheeler and Sasol’s experience through Oryx
GTL, and other GTL developments, provides the neces-
sary vision to implement the next generation of inte-
grated GTL facilities.
Fundamentals of Gas to Liquids, 2005 47