17th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION ON

17th INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE & EXHIBITION

LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS (LNG 17)
ON LIQUEFIED NATURAL GAS (LNG 17)

Lean LNG Plants Heavy Ends Removal

and Optimum
of Liquid
<Title
ofRecovery
Presentation>
<Title
of
Presentation>
Hydrocarbons
for
Refrigerant
Make-up
By:
Name>,
<Organization>
By:<Author
<Author
Name>,
<Organization>
By: Laurent Brussol & Dominique
Gadelle, Technip France
<Date>
<Date>
April 17, 2013

Summary

1.

The trends towards liquefaction of lean gas

2.

Scrub column or turbo-expander based NGL recovery

3.

Technico-economic comparison

4.

Conclusions

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

The trends towards liquefaction of lean gas

New LNG provinces lean gas reserves

New LNG provinces pipeline gas

Lean gas feed high methane content.

3

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle
3

Refrigerant make-up requirements

C3/MR Liquefaction process requires continuous make-up
Nitrogen
From utility generation

Methane
From feed gas

Ethane
Extracted from feed gas

Propane
Extracted from feed gas
NG

Extraction of C2 and C3 is desirable and is a challenge for

lean gas
4

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

Economics of Lean gas liquefaction

Pipeline gas liquefaction

High cost feed stock
No revenue from condensate or LPG

Lean gas from non associated gas fields

Challenging separation of traces of heavy HC
No revenue from condensate or LPG

Penalized economics need to be compensated by best

efficiency through high pressure liquefaction
5

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

Scrub column or turbo-expander

based NGL recovery

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

Scrub Column
The most commonly used method with long history
Scrub column operation at liquefaction pressure
Reflux generated by the main refrigeration cycles
Works well with rich gas
More difficult with lean gas

Low NGL extraction rates

Low density difference between L&V

Uncertain heavy ends removal

NG

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

NGL Recovery : Single or Dual Reflux

Used in several recent LNG plants and FLNG
T1 operates at low pressure

High NGL extraction rates

No integration with refrig. Cycles

Opportunity to use a d/s booster

compressor & High pressure liquefaction

No risk of C5+ / Benzene carry-over

Treated
Gas

Treated
Gas
M

Ethane

Ethane

NG

NG

T1

T1

To Fractionation
Unit

To Fractionation
Unit

Single Reflux

Dual reflux selected for comparison study

8

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

Dual Reflux

Technico-economic Comparison

Main assumptions

Equipment count

Production / Efficiency

CapEx

Operability

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

Main assumptions

Lean Feed Gas Composition

C3/MR Liquefaction Process

Fixed 4.8 MTPA LNG Production

Heavy Duty Gas Turbines + Helpers
No LPG production
Air-cooling

Component
CO2
Nitrogen
Methane
Ethane
Propane
i-Butane
n-Butane
i-Pentane
n-Pentane
C6+ incl. Benzene

Representative of many lean gas liquefaction plants

10

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

Mol. %
50 ppm
0.30
97.27
1.60
0.35
0.20
0.20
0.02
0.02
0.04

More equipment in an NGL Recovery unit

compared to a the Scrub Column

NG

NG

Yet the return on investment is improved

11

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

....compensated by OPEX savings

Higher liquefaction pressure requires less energy consumption
for a given quantity of LNG

Refrigeration Power (C3+MR Compressors)

Liquefaction pressure
Total power (C3+MR+Booster Compressors)
Specific power (C3+MR Compressors)
Specific power (C3+MR+Booster Compressors)
Fuel Gas consumption

NGL Recovery
vs
Scrub column
-16%
+30 bar
-4%
-16%
-4%
-4%

NGL Recovery means lower auto-consumption

12

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

... without increasing overall CapEx

Cost Comparison /
Method
NGL Extraction Unit
Liquefaction Unit
(including refrigeration)
Fractionation Unit

Overall Installed Cost

NGL recovery
vs
Remark
Scrub Column
+300%
Additional equipment
-10%

Smaller equipment

Similar

Similar

Liquefaction > 90% of

investment cost in both
cases

Liquefaction CapEx is reduced when an NGL Recovery Unit is used

13

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

 and with improved operability

Criteria

Sensitivity to feed gas

composition variations
Refrigerant make-up
production when
liquefaction shutdown
Availability

Scrub Column

NGL recovery

Cannot handle
> 97% methane

Robust reflux

Relies on main
refrigeration

Independent of
liquefaction

Simplicity

With JT mode
and sparing

The NGL recovery unit is a happy combination of operating

flexibility and reduced energy consumption
14

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

Summary of main advantages and disadvantages

CapEx
Robustness to composition
variation
Refrigeration drivers duty
Refrigerant make-up
production
Efficiency
Availability

Scrub column

NGL recovery

=
+

=
++
++
++
++
-

NGL Recovery is more attractive overall

15

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

Main conclusions
Consider savings in the liquefaction unit when selecting the NGL
Recovery method
Overall efficiency is better when a NGL Recovery is considered
NGL Recovery offers better operability and flexibility as it is
decoupled from refrigeration cycles
Overall layout is similar for both options
For a given installed refrigeration power the LNG production can be
increased by installing an upfront NGL Recovery unit

Turbo-expander based NGL Recovery should always be

considered for plants liquefying lean gas

16

LNG 17 Lean Gas Liquefaction Processes Laurent Brussol & Dominique Gadelle

Thank you

Visit us at Technip booth #545

17

www.technip.com