Energy Optimization

© 2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

Rian Reyneke, Senior AdvisorDecember 1, 2010

Energy OptimizationEnergy efficiency through the asset lifecycle in the Petroleum Industry

© 2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved | 2

What is Energy Optimization

$80 billion per year $680 billion per year $20 trillion total

• $80 bn/year global capex through 2020, to capture energy efficiency savings, with >10% IRR

• Refining & chemical industry annually spends $50-100M on energy per plant

• 70% of oil companies rank energy efficiency as the best method to meet CO2 caps

*Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, whose reports drive initiatives like the Kyoto ProtocolSources: McKinsey Investing In Energy Productivity, Global GHG abatement study; Daily Telegraph “A clean sweep for coal”; International Energy Agency reports; WRI 2005 report; Hydrocarbon Publishing 2010 report

• $680bn/year incremental investment by 2020, to achieve IPCC* target of 35% below 1990 emissions levels

• $5-10bn/year estimated market for CCS (carbon capture & storage) in 2030

• Process industries account for 36% of global GHG emissions

• $20 trillion total global investment through 2030 in alternatives

• Alternative energy accounts for 13% of global energy supply, and is growing 2-3 times faster than traditional sources

• 53% of oil companies currently involved in some type of renewable energy project

Energy Efficiency GHG Mitigation Alternative Energy

Energy Optimization


Energy Optimization Projects

92%

59%53%

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

Energy Efficiency GHG Mitigation* Renewable Energy

Energy Optimization Policies & Strategies: Global Survey of 53 Oil Companies% of companies with projects in each area

Source: Hydrocarbon Publishing, “Refinery CO2 Management Strategies”, 2010

Energy Efficiency reduces costs & CO2emissions


Energy Costs are Significant

Typical Refinery Operating Costs

Typical Olefins Plant Operating Costs

Note: Feedstock costs are excluded

Energy Costs 50 – 58%

Energy Costs 40 – 45%

Refinery energy costs: $75 -140M p.a.Global spend on energy: $57 – 108B p.a.

Chemicals energy costs: $75 -125M p.a.Global spend on energy: $20B p.a.


Industry Response and Key Activities

Planning & Scheduling

Energy Performance Management

Advanced Process Control

Run Existing Plant as

Efficient as Possible

Design/Process Improvement

Invest Capital

Life

cycl

e

Revamps, re-designs & models to continuously increase energy efficiency


AspenTech Delivers 10-30% Energy Savings

Current energy use

Design Planning & Scheduling

Performance Management


Future energy use

3-5%2-10%

5-20%

Typical Energy Savings*

100% 70-90%

Total energy savings:

10 - 30%**

* Typical savings based on 26 energy efficiency case studies** Total savings depends on overlap & synergies

aspenONE Energy Efficiency Solutions

2-10%

Sequencing varies based on priorities


AspenTech in Energy Efficiency

Production Planning & Scheduling

Energy Performance Management


Plant Design


ChallengeChallenge ChallengeImpact

Design Plants for Energy Efficiency

How to identify and screen the best design options

How to balance equipment, costs & energy usage

Energy/yield trade-off

Technology selection

Utility system design

Sub-optimal decisions

Takes longer to develop alternatives

Retrofits more costly than needed

Higher Capital & Energy Costs

Reduce capital & energy costs and improve asset ROI

Solution

Identify best design alternatives including

equipment, capital costs & energy efficiency


Technology

Services

AspenTech’s Global Services Process Consulting Services

Process Consulting

Process improvement

Energy & emissions reduction

Debottlenecking

Steady state modeling

Industry Sectors

Refining

Chemicals

Energy

Process Synthesis

Pinch analysis

Column analysis

Distillation systems

Column sequencing

Heat/mass exchange

Conceptual Design

Economic analysis

Process Simulation

Steady stateDeliver superior results


Asset Engineering Lifecycle and Workflow

Process Consulting Service Focus

Research and Development

Conceptual Engineering

Basic Engineering

Detailed Engineering

PlantOperations

Planning andScheduling

ConceptualEngineering

Develop ProcessTechnology

Select ProcessTechnology

Produce ConceptualProcess Design

Produce ConceptualEngineering Design

Construct and Pre-commission Plant

Commission andHandover Plant

Daily PlantOperations

MaintainEquipment

Procure and Control Equipment,Materials and Services

Produce DetailedEngineering Design

Identify PlantCapital Projects

Produce DetailedProcess Design

FEED

Plant Operations

Select Crude Oilsand Feedstocks

Issue OperatingTargets

Monitor and GuidePlant Performance


Refining

Process Consulting Services


Process Consulting Services - Refining

Process Performance Improvement Reviews•Primary focus on yield, conversion & energy performance •Process unit performance reviews•Process and energy KPI’s / scope for improvement •Utilities system (steam, power, fuel) review•Recommendations / areas for improvement•No/low cost improvement, high cost modifications

What we offer

Performance review defines yield, conversion and energy performance.

Refinery margins are often low. Incremental yield and energy improvements can directly increase profit.

Many unit operating conditions are not routinely scrutinised.

Processing flexibility maintained.

AspenTech’s process consultants recommended operational improvements toa 100,000 bbl/d refinery CDU/VDU and saved 20 cents/bbl with no investment.



Energy Reduction Studies•Model based (process and utility systems), tuned to observed performance•Process technology, yield and energy performance assessment•Equipment performance and scope for improvement•Utility system design and operations review•Pinch / column thermal analysis – process modifications development•Process technology improvement modifications development based on our experience•Cost v benefits assessment for modifications. Ranking and selection•Preparation of feasibility study or pre-basic engineering package•Investment roadmap development

What we offer …

AspenTech’s process consultants have recommended modifications saving 20% energy worth $MM50/y on a modern refinery aromatics complex using this approach.



Design Studies•Process flowsheet development and design•Design of CDU / VDU and other fractionation systems

– Feasibility study / Independent design review– Preheat train design– Debottlenecking, yield improvement

•Optimal Heat Exchanger Network design (Pinch Analysis)•Optimal site wide utility system design accounting for process heating and power demands•Comparative capital & operating cost assessment of design options. Identification of most cost effective design.•Feasibility study level of detail•New design and retrofit

What we offer …

Independent design consultancy.

Leveraged by full use of AspenTech’s engineering, simulation and design tools.

Optimise the process then design the utility system to best supply the process demands.

Process / Utility system interface can often be improved.


Refinery Configuration Studies

• Optimise:– Choice of unit (e.g. FCC, RFCC or HCU, HVCU etc)– Unit capacities– Unit operating mode (e.g. high / low conversion)– Refinery margin, either with fixed/floating product yields, dependent

upon actual market product constraints, alternative feed stocks etc.

• Identify:– Utility requirements– Operating margin for alternative configurations

• Using industry standard linear modelling

• LP vectors updated using Heat and Mass balanced kinetic models for FCC, CCR, ISOM, HCU or from licensor data

• Independent of Licensor

• Independent of EPC contractors

• Experienced personnel in LP Optimisation, refinery configuration studies and refinery unit design

Independent of process licensors and EPC contractors

Industry standard linear modelling system (PIMS)

Assay cuts based on rigorous and tuned simulation

Process Consulting Services - RefiningWhat we offer …


>50 Refinery studies in last 10 years

Recent Energy Studies•Site-wide energy reduction study (South Korea)•Site-wide energy reduction study (Europe)•Grass Roots refinery EII reduction Study (Vietnam)• CNOOC Grassroots EII reduction Study (China)•FCC energy performance benchmarking (USA)•CDU and HDS / Reformer revamp (USA)•HCU Revamp (China)•CDU / VDU Performance monitoring and optimisation application (Italy)•2 x CDU revamp (Korea)•Site-wide hydrogen optimization (USA)•CDU grassroots design (Middle East)•CDU revamp (UK)

Energy study benefits •Both demand (process) and supply (utility system) sides considered•Process technology and design, operational and equipment performance considered and improved•Studies tailored to client requirements

For more details contact: [email protected]

Process Consulting Services - RefiningExperience …

mailto:[email protected]�


Energy OptimizationProcess Consulting ServiceEnergy Study Approach


Approach to Process Improvement

Pinch and Column AnalysisIdentify design improvements

TEMPERATURE COMPOSITES (Real T, No Utils)

Case: PX1Simplified

HOT

COLD

ENTHALPY X10 3 kW

TE

MP

ER

ATU

RE

C

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

400.0

DTMIN =10.00

Heat Balance

Design Definition and Equipment specification

Model Idea, develop Scope/Benefits/Cost

•Operating data•Design data

Process and utilities modelling

Identify operating improvement opportunities

Equipment RatingUnderstand performance


Evaluation of current operation and equipment performance

Process and utilities modelling

Identifying operating improvement opportunities:

•Are columns over-refluxed?•If multiple column feed nozzles, is current feed location optimum?•Are column operating pressures optimal?•Exchangers underperforming/bypassed?•Compressor recycles open?


Methodology: Pinch Technology

Pinch Analysis purpose:– Establish minimum utility targets– Develop efficient heat exchanger

network (new designs)– Locate inefficiencies in network

(existing units) and develop viable energy saving projects

Process Modeling (A+ or HYSYS) Targeting (Aspen Energy Analyzer)

HEN (re)design to minimize cross-pinch

Data Extraction


Methodology: Column Targeting

Thermal and hydraulic analysis of distillation columns

CGCC represents ideal minimum stage-wise heating and cooling demands in a distillation column

Use to indentify feed or side heating /cooling options, optimize # stages, feed location and separation targets (both new design and retrofit)

Minimum Thermodynamic Condition

H

Reboiler

Condenser

Column Grand Composite Curve

Min Dutyin Temp Interval

Condenser

Reboiler


Methodology – Inter-Unit Integration

T T

HH

AIR/CW

Process with low temperature source that cannot generate steam

Process with low temperature sink

LP steam useDirect Heat Integration

Process A Process B

Direct inter-unit integration

• Direct inter-unit integration by changing the rundown temperature Transfer product from Process A to Process B so temperature of product is below Process A pinch and above Process B pinch

T T

HHCW

Process with low temperature source that cannot generate steam

Process with low temperature sink

LP steam useIndirect Heat Integration thru a local steam header

Process A Process B

Indirect inter-unit integration


Methodology - Site-Wide Pinch Analysis

BLACK BOX UNITS

INITIAL PINCH STUDY

Unit by Unit Pinch Analysis

Process Streams(Heat Sinks)

Process Streams(Heat Sources)

Site WidePinch Analysis

T

Q

Hot utilities

Cold utilities


Methodology - Site-Wide Pinch Analysis

LP

MP

HPHP

MP

LP

Fuel

+

+

Are your steam levels/loads optimum?

What is the optimum cogeneration system?

LP

MPHPHP

MP

LP

Fuel

+

LLP LLP

IP

+

+

Power generationincreased

Reduction in fuelconsumption

Opportunity for new LLP steam level – increases heat recovery

Opportunity for additional turbine to

exploit IP steam sink

Smaller boilers!

Smaller CW towers!


Energy OptimizationProcess Consulting ServiceProject Examples


Project Example: Design for Energy Efficiency

Energy Design Study (Aromatics)

Relatively new (1997) Aromatics facility Modeled entire plant Evaluated alternative projects and

paybacks STC Implemented key projects Achieved 20% energy savings $12MM/yr. energy saving

Site-wide energy management improvements


Target Energy Use

Refinery Design for Energy Efficiency

Energy Savings and throughput Increase

Design energy efficiency into a new grassroots refinery. Reduce the Energy Intensity Index (EII) from initial design value of 71 :

Energy efficiency achieved by inter-unit integrations

Reduction of EII by 6 points equivalent to $16 million/year in energy costs

Guang-Dong Refinery now in Top 3% worldwide in energy efficiency


Project Example- GasSep Unit

Base Case– Depropanizer, Deethanizer and C3 Splitter in series– Total hot utility use = 26.9 MW– Total cold utility = 26.9 MW

E0025414 kW

C001Depropanizer35

1

A0015268 kW

69

100

59

200

101

E00418892 kW

E0032274 kW

C002Deethanizer33

1

E0051960 kW

57

E008650 kW

E001329 kW

A00219167 kW

1

C003C3 Splitter

20.0 bar48.8 C

30 bar50.6 C

20 bar48.3 C

45.7 C40.9 C

46.0 C

58.0 C

70.2 C

107 C67.0 C

40.0 C

64.7 C 76.3 C


Project Example - GasSep Unit

Pinch analysis shows very limited energy saving scope

Column analysis shows some scope for feed tray optimization and side reboiling scope for C3 Splitter

TEMPERATURE GRAND COMPOSITE (With Utils)

Case: pinch

PROCES

UTIL

ENTHALPY MW

TE

MP

ER

ATU

RE

C

0.0

5.0

10.0

15.0

20.0

25.0

30.0

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

140.0

DTMIN =20.00

Heat Balance

Block C001: Column Grand Composite Curve (T-H)

Tem

pera

ture

C

Enthalpy Deficit MW

5055

6065

7075

8085

9095

100

105

110

0 0.25 0.5 0.75 1 1.25 1.5 1.75 2 2.25 2.5 2.75 3 3.25 3.5 3.75 4 4.25 4.5 4.75 5 5.25

Ideal ProfileActual Profile

Move the feed tray downwards


Tem

pera

ture

C

Enthalpy Deficit MW

4550

5560

6570

75

-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 1.6 1.7 1.8 1.9 2 2.1 2.2 2.3


Move the feed tray upwards


Tem

pera

ture

C

Enthalpy Deficit MW

4748

4950

5152

5354

5556

5758

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16 16.5 17 17.5 18 18


Move the feed tray upwards Side reboiling

scope


Project Example - GasSep Unit

Proposed design change

Feed tray optimization Column resequence - Requires lower depropanizer pressure & Save one

exchanger – vapor feed to C3 Splitter

Both hot/cold utility savings are 2.4 MW each

E0024642 kW

C001Depropanizer35

1

A0014076 kW

69

100

59

200

101

E00416306 kW

E0033198 kW

C002Deethanizer33

1

E0052039 kW

57

E008650 kW

E0010 kW

A00217528 kW

1

C003C3 Splitter

19.3 bar48.2 C

30 bar46.5 C

17.5 bar42.5 C

46.9 C40.5 C

41.2 C

52.0 C

105.9 C63.0 C

40.0 C 64.7 C

34

42


Project Example - FCC Unit targeting


Case: FCC-TargetNoLP

PROCES

UTIL

ENTHALPY X10 3 kW

TE

MP

ER

ATU

RE

C

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

MPGEN

LLP

HW1

BFW

COLD

DTMIN =20.00

Heat Balance

FCC GCCPotential to increase MPS gen by 13.7 t/h by increasing LLPS use by 7.7 t/hPotential to increase hot water gen by 7.7 MW

C3Splitter

Deethanizer

Depropaniser

Deisobutanizer

Debutanizer

Indirect integration of FCC-GasSep-AlkyPotential to save 6.5 t/hr of LLPS


Case: FCCBase

PROCES

UTIL

ENTHALPY X10 3 kW

TE

MP

ER

ATU

RE

C

0.0

10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

0.0

50.0

100.0

150.0

200.0

250.0

300.0

350.0

MPGEN

HW1

BFW

COLD

DTMIN =20.00

Heat Balance

Base GCC

Target GCC Indirect integration


Project Example - FCC Unit

• Proposed flowsheet• Remove feed heater from slurry pumparound and increase heat duty of steam

generator • Switch LCO pumparound from stripper reboiler and hot water heating into MP BFW

heating and into feed heating • Increase heat duty on the stripper reboiler and switch the other stripper reboiler from

LCO pumparound into LLP steam.

From high pressure receiver

D301

To wet gas compresssor

C301Primary Absorb

er

StripperC302

Debutanizer

C303

E304

E310

E309

E202

E304

E203

E204A202

NEW1

E201X

E208

To reactor

Feed

E306

E303AE303B

E305

E307C304

Sponge Absorb

er

E303B E206 E203 E209

To E210

D203

D202

LCO product

C202A

C202B

129oC85oC 80oC

252oC229oC

171oC

308oC 250oC

330oC

275oC

150oC

200oC

108oC40oC

186oC

127oC 63oC 40oC

117oC

131oC131oC

168oC

130oC

48oC

40oC

40oC60oC

244oC

MP Steam

200oC

LLP Steam

New Exchanger

Existing Exchanger on New Service

244oC

292635 kg/hr

49oC

120oC E205X99oC

40oC

70oC

127oC

79oC


Project Example - FCC Unit + GasSep

Project Option achieves the following benefits:– Increases MP steam generation by 12.6 t/h– Increases the LLP steam use in the FCC by 6.9 t/h. – Increases the hot water generation duty by 3 MW which results in 5.2 t/h of

LLP steam saving in the Gas Separation unit

With Gas Separation unit option– Change column sequence (Saves capital and energy)– When combined with FCC project, the Hot Water system can provide

enough duty required by the C3 splitter reboiler


AspenTech Energy Optimization Conclusions

Optimize Energy & Emissionslower costs & meet environmental

requirements

Energy efficiency can be addressed in all phases of plant life cycle Design efficiency into your plant (new or existing) Include energy and GHG in planning and scheduling solution Employ an energy performance management system to operate utility

system better, manage contracts, improve decisions APC strategy should include energy and GHG

AspenTech offers a comprehensive suite of products and expert services to help reduce energy in all these areas


Questions?


Additional slides


Track Record - Refinery

Company Country Project Type Type of Study Details Unit Project StartYPC, Nanjing China Aromatics Plant Energy Reduction Study Site-wide energy study Energy Site 2009

ENI, Sannazaro ItalyRefinery Atm/Vac Unit Operational Energy Optimisation

Energy and Capacity CDU 2009

FW/Client, VietnamGrassroots refinery EEI reduction, process & central utility system

Energy Site 2008

SK Corp Korea Energy reduction Unit Energy Study Energy CDU 2007

Total, Flandres France CDU revampCombined study with Total in-house engineering (CERT)


APS engineering, Sudan Sudan CDU grassroots design Study for APS Engineering in Rome Energy CDU 2006Total, Port Arthur USA FCC energy performance benchmarking - 1 site Study done for CERT, not for PAR Energy FCC 2006Total, Port Arthur USA Steam network energy improvement Site-wide utility study Energy Site 2006Total, Lindsey Oil - Humberside UK CDU1 Energy Study CDU Energ Study Energy CDU 2006Saras Italy Energy reduction Unit Energy Study Energy FCC 2006Saras Italy Energy reduction Hot Water Loop Energy Utilities 2006COP, Borger USA CDU and HDS/Refomer energy revamp Scoping and preliminary projects Energy CDU / HDS 2005GS Caltex, Yosu Korea 2 x CDU revamp Scoping and preliminary projects Energy CDU 2005CNOOC, Nanghai China Grassroots refinery site-wide energy reduction Total Site Energy and Hydrogen Site 2005Saras, Sardinia Italy Phase 2 hydrogen optimisation Site-wide hydrogen study Hydrogen Site 2005

Total, Immingham UK CDU revampCombined study with Total in-house engineering (CERT)


Holborn, Hamburg Germany Energy pinch training and consultancy Targeting / preheat model Energy CDU 2005

Total, Multiple Europe FCC energy performance benchmarking - 5 sitesCombined study with Total in-house engineering (CERT)

Energy FCC 2005

BP, Whiting USACDU preheat train monitoring and decision support

Energy CDU 2005

Total, Normandy France Steam network energy improvement Site-wide utility study Energy Site 2005Total, Provence France Steam network energy improvement Site-wide utility study Energy Site 2005Total, Grandpuits France Steam network energy improvement Site-wide utility study Energy Site 2005Total, Feyzin France Steam network energy improvement Site-wide utility study Energy Site 2005Total, Vlissingen Holland Steam network energy improvement Site-wide utility study Energy Site 2005GS Caltex, Yosu Korea Site-wide water and effluent reduction Site-wide utility study Water Site 2005

Total, Immingham UK CDU revampCombined study with Total in-house engineering (CERT)


GS Caltex, Yosu Korea CDU revamp Combined study with LG E&C Energy CDU 2004

Process Consulting Services - Refinery Experience


Track Record - Refinery (ctd)

Company Country Project Type Type of Study Details Unit Project StartTamoil, Columbey Switzerland Site-wide hydrogen optimisation Scoping study Hydrogen Site 2004

Total, Feyzin France CDU revampCombined study with Total in-house engineering (CERT)


Rompetrol, Constanta Romania Site-wide hydrogen optimisation Scoping study Hydrogen Site 2004FW, Rabigh Middle East Grassroots refinery site-wide energy reduction Total Site Energy Site 2004

Total, Antwerp Belgium CDU revampCombined study with Total in-house engineering (CERT)


OMV, Schwechat Austria Fuel gas network optimisation Site-wide fuel gas design study Energy Site 2004PPMSB, Melaka Malaysia CDU revamp Revamp study Energy and Capacity CDU 2004

Total, Lindsay UK CDU revampCombined study with Total in-house engineering (CERT)


COP, Borger USA Site-wide hydrogen optimisation Site-wide hydrogen study Hydrogen Site 2003COP, Ponca City USA Site-wide hydrogen optimisation Site-wide hydrogen study Hydrogen Site 2003

Saras, Sardinia Italy Site-wide CO2 reductionSite-wide energy and Hydrogen study

Energy and Hydrogen Site 2003

COP, Rodeo USA Site-wide hydrogen optimisation Site-wide hydrogen study Hydrogen Site 2003Irving Oil, New Brunswick Canada Hydrogen reduction Site-wide hydrogen study Site 2002OMV, Schwechat Austria Hydrogen reduction Site-wide hydrogen study Site 2002SINOPEC, Yanshan China Site-wide water and effluent reduction Site-wide water study Water Site 2002Citgo, Texas USA Hydrogen reduction Site-wide hydrogen study Site 2001Texaco, Pembroke UK Capital cost reduction - hydrogen Combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 Site 2001Statoil, Mongstad Norway Energy and CO2 reduction Total Site Site 2000

Lyondell-Citgo, Houston USA Energy reduction Total SiteAdditional Benefits through Capacity increase

Site 1999

OMV, Schwechat Austria Energy reduction and capital Combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 HDS 1999Sunoco, Marcus Hook USA Energy reduction Total Site Site 1998Sunoco, Point Breeze USA Energy reduction Total Site Site 1998Sunoco, Girard Point USA Energy reduction Total Site Site 1998Sunoco, Tulsa USA Energy reduction Site 1998Sunoco, Toledo USA Cooling tower debottlenecking CDU/VDU/FCC Site 1998Sasol, Secunda South Africa Hydrogen reduction Site-wide hydrogen study Site 1998

Lindsey Oil, Humberside UK Energy and yieldCombined study and PDP development with Foster Wheeler

CDU 1998

Petronas, Melaka Malaysia Capital cost reduction - hydrogenCombined site study and PDP development with Foster Wheeler

Site 1998

Marathon Ashland, Robinson USA Energy reduction Total Site Site 1997

Phillips, Texas USA Yield and capacity Combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 Additional Benefits through Energy improvement

CDU 1997

Crown , Texas USA Energy reduction Combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 FCC 1997

Engen, Durban South Africa Energy reduction Total SiteAdditional Benefits through Capacity/Yield improvement

CDU/VDU/Visbreaker

1995

Process Consulting Services - Refinery Experience


Track Record – Ethylene

Company Feedstock When built Licensor Type of study Preliminary or Study Year(approx.) detailed study

Samsung-Total Chemicals, Daesan S Korea Naphtha 1990 Lummus Debottlenecking Detailed 2009Samsung Total, Daesan, S Korea Naphtha 1990 Lummus Energy Detailed 2008LG Chem, Ltd, Daesan, S. Korea Naphtha 1999 KBR Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed 2008Lotte Daesan Petroch Corp., S Korea Naphtha 1999 KBR Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed 2008Honam Petrochem. Corp., Yeosu S Korea Naphtha 1990 Lummus Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed 2008LG Petrochemicals Co. Ltd., S Korea Naphtha 1991 Lummus Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed 2007Lyondell, Corpus Christi, USA Ethane/Propane/Liquids 1975 KBR Energy Detailed 2007Total-Fina FAO NC3, Antwerp Naphtha 1989 MW Kellogg Energy Detailed 2007Lyondell, Clinton, USA Ethane/Propane 1989 MW Kellogg Energy Detailed 2007Lyondell, Morris, USA Ethane/Propane 1989 Lummus Energy Detailed 2007Hunstman Port Neches, USA Ethane/Propane 1970's S&W Performance Improvement Detailed 2007Huntsman, Port Arthur, TX E/P/Liquids 1975/1987 Lummus/S&W Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed (all cases) 2006Total Petrochemical, Gonfrevil le, France Naphtha 1988 S&W Energy Detailed 2006Lotte, Daesan, S Korea Naphtha 1999 KBR Debottlenecking Detailed 2005CPC, Lin Yuan, Taiwan Naphtha 1984 Lummus Performance Improvement Detailed 2005Huntsman Odesa, TX Ethane/Propane 1969/1996 Braun/S&W Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed (all cases) 2005Innovene (2), Choc Bayou, TX E/P/Liquids 1976 Braun/S&W Modeling / Perf Improvement Detailed 2005Nanhai, China Naphtha - S&W Quench modelling only - 2004KPIC, Ulsan, S Korea Naphtha 1991 Lummus Debottlenecking Detailed 2004Shell, Berre, France Naphtha 1980 TPL Modelling only - 2004Will iams Olefins, TX Ethane 1975 Lummus Modelling only - 2004Samsung Total, Daesan, S Korea Naphtha 1990 Lummus Debottlenecking Detailed 2004Huntsman Odesa, TX Ethane/Propane 1969/1996 Braun/S&W Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed 2004

Process Consulting Services - Ethylene ExperienceAbout the plant About the study


Track Record – Ethylene (ctd)

Company Feedstock When built Licensor Type of study Preliminary or Study Year(approx.) detailed study

BP Refinery Offgas Offgas - - Grass Roots Design Detailed 2003Rayong Olefins Co., Thailand Naphtha/LPG 1998 Lummus Revamp/Perf Impro Detailed 2003Samsung General Chemicals LPG/N/AGO 1991 Lummus Modelling only Detailed 2002Yangzi (Chinese Petro. Co.) N/AGO 1990 Lummus Modelling only - 2002Yeochun NCC Co., Yeosu, S. Korea Naphtha 1991 S&W Debottlenecking / Energy Detailed 2001Equate, Kuwait Ethane 1997 B&R Modeling / Perf Improvement Detailed 2001LG PC, S. Korea Naphtha 1989 Lummus C2 Splitter Study Detailed 2001BP GO E/P/B/N Concept BP Grass Roots Detailed 2001-4Honam Naphtha 1990 Lummus Energy Detailed 2000Exxon (BOP), TX Gas / Liquids 1980's Exxon Revamp Detailed 2000Westlake (P-I PFP) Ethane 1990 MW Kellogg Performance Improvement Detailed 2000Westlake (P-II PFP) Ethane/Propane/C4 1998 Lummus Debottlenecking Detailed 2000Equistar Choc. Bay., TX Naphtha 1982 Lummus Debottlenecking Detailed 2000ExxonMobil Chemicals Liquid - - Grass Roots Detailed 2000Equistar Chan. View OP2, TX Naphtha 1978 Lummus Debottlenecking Detailed 2000Westlake (P-II PFP) Ethane/Propane/C4 1998 Lummus Perf, improvement / modelling Detailed 1999Huntsman Ethane/Propane 1997(Revamp) S&W Modelling only - 1999BASF (PA) Naphtha New Lummus Modelling only - 1999Hanwha, Yosu, S. Korea Naphtha 1992 S&W Energy / Debottlenecking Detailed 1999Condea Vista Ethane 1989 S&W Debottlenecking Preliminary 1999Exxon (FAO), Belgium Naphtha 1968 S&W Debottlenecking Preliminary 1999Sunoco Ethane 1967 Lummus Energy Detailed 1999BP Amoco (1), Choc Bay, TX E/P/Liquids 1975 Braun Debottlenecking Detailed 1999BP Amoco (2), Choc Bay, TX E/P/Liquids 1976 Braun/S&W Debottlenecking Detailed 1999Philips 66 (U24), Sweeney, TX Ethane/Propane 1976 Braun Debottlenecking Detailed 1998Titan Petro (TPC 1),Malaysia Naphtha 1994 S&W Debottlenecking Detailed 1998Nippon Petrochemical Naphtha 1975 S&W Energy Part of Total Site 1998Mitsui Chemical Naphtha 1975 Special (exergy analysis) Preliminary 1997DSM Naphtha 1975 Lummus Debottlenecking Preliminary 1997Showa Denko Naphtha 1970 S&W Energy Preliminary 1997Polifin (1), S. Africa Ethane/Propane 1985 KTI / Linde Debottlenecking Preliminary 1997Polifin (2), S. Africa Ethane 1972 S&W / Linde Debottlenecking Preliminary 1997

Process Consulting Services - Ethylene ExperienceAbout the plant About the study


Track Record – Other Chemicals

Company Country Process Type of Study Details Study Year

Honam Petrochemical Daesan, Korea Total Site Energy reduction Pinch only 2009Huntsman Texas, USA Ethylene Oxide, Ethylene Glycol Energy reduction Detailed 2009Tessenderlo Belgium VCM EDC Section Energy Reduction Detailed 2009YPC China Aromatics / pXylene Modelling / Energy Reduction Detailed 2009Huntsman Texas, USA DiGlycolAmine / Morpholine Energy reduction Detailed 2008TPC (Port Neches) Texas, USA Butadiene recovery (C4's) - NMP Energy reduction Detailed 2008Huntsman Texas, USA Ethylene Oxide, Ethylene Glycol Energy reduction Pinch only 2007Huntsman Texas, USA PO-MTBE Energy reduction Detailed 2007Lyondell Texas, USA Butadiene recovery (C4's) - ACN Energy reduction/expansion Detailed 2007Kraton Germany C5/C6 Solvent Separation Debottlenecking Detailed 2007KP Chemicals Korea pXylene Energy Reduction Detailed 2006Samsung Total Korea Aromatics / pXylene Modelling Detailed 2006GS Caltex Korea Aromatics / pXylene Energy Reduction Detailed 2006TPC (Houston) Texas, USA Butadiene recovery (C4's) - DMF, Furfural Energy reduction/reconfiguration Detailed 2005Equistar Texas, USA Isoprene recovery (C5's) Energy reduction/expansion Detailed 2005Starchem Texas, USA Methanol Modeling/process development Detailed 2005PIC Kuwait Ammonia / Reformer Modelling Detailed 2005GE New York, USA Cresol and Xylenol Modelling and Process Improvement Detailed 2005KMI Indonesia Methanol Modelling Detailed 2005Celanese Texas, USA Vinyl Acetate Monomer Energy reduction Detailed 2004BP UK Acetyls / Acetic Acid Energy Reduction Preliminary 2004Tuntex Thailand Purified Terephthalic Acid Modelling / Partial revamp Detailed 2004KPI Indonesia Ammonia / Reformer Modelling Detailed 2004Chevron Phillips Texas, USA n-Alpha Olefins Modelling Detailed 2004Celanese Kentucky, USA Polyvinyl Alcohol Energy/Debottlenecking Azeo Sepn 2003SK Chemicals Korea Purified Terephthalic Acid Modeling/Expansion Detailed 2002Sasol South Africa Chem-FT Process development Detailed 2001SK Chemicals Korea Dimethyl Terephthalate Energy reduction Detailed 2001Samsung Korea Aromatics / pXylene Energy Detailed 2001YPF Argentina Linear Alkyl Benzene Energy reduction Detailed 1999Huntsman Texas, USA Linear Alkyl Benzene Debottlenecking/Energy reduction Detailed 1998

Process Consulting Services - Chemicals Experience

Energy Optimization

Documents

total inhouse

c003 c3 splitter

port arthur

advanced process

process consulting

low temperature

c3 splitter

utility system