Fuels For The 21st Century
Fuel Sulfur Solutions Hydrogen Solutions
Deciding which benzene-
management strategy to
use depends on the value
of hydrogen, total gaso-
line, and premium gaso-
line. It also depends on
the type of reformer, the
feedstock processed in the
reformer, and the refinery
configuration. Finally,
the benzene-management
strategy depends on the
target benzene level in the
final gasoline pool as
well as the other blend-
stocks used in making
gasoline.
Penex and Platforming
Synergy for Efficient
Naphtha Processing and
Benzene Control
More on the BenSat process
More on the Penex Plus
Process
MTBE Solutions Benzene Solutions
Benzene Solutions
Managing benzene in gasoline has become an important worldwide
issue because of health and environmental concerns. Because the
major source of benzene in gasoline is the napththa reformer, naph-
tha processing is the major focus for benzene reduction.
Two basic approaches may be used to reduce benzene from the
reformer and thereby reduce the benzene content of the gasoline
pool:
1. Prefractionation - By adjusting the cutpoint of the naphtha
splitter benzene and benzene precursors can be removed from
the reformer feed. Options for processing the light naphtha
are:
Blending - Light naphtha can be blended directly into the
gasoline pool if its benzene content is acceptable and if
there is no need for additional octane.
Isomerization - The octane of the light naphtha is
increased, and the benzene is saturated.
Saturation - Benzene is removed without upgrading the
light naphtha octane. Octane lost in saturating benzene
must be made up from other sources.
2. Postfractionation - Remove benzene from the reformate.
Processing options are:
Saturation - Benzene in the light reformate is saturated.
Octane must be made up from other sources.
Isomerization - Light reformate is processed together
with light naphtha in an isomerization unit. The octane
of the combined light naphtha and light reformate
streams is increased, and benzene is saturated..
Extraction - Benzene is removed from the reformate for
sale as a petrochemical feed.
 Penex and Platforming Synergy
for Efficient Naphtha Processing
and Benzene Control
J J J J J J J J J J

William H. Keesom
Paul C. Kuchar

Print This Section

r Te c h n o l o g y
Ou

ou

T

ch d
e s t h e W o rl
 r Te c h n o l o g y
Ou

ou

T
ch d
e s t h e W o rl

Penex and Platforming Synergy

for Efficient Naphtha Processing
and Benzene Control
J J J J J J J J J J

William H. Keesom
Paul C. Kuchar

Introduction
Managing benzene in gasoline has become an important worldwide issue, especially
in the United States, because of concerns about health and the environment. Reform-
ulated gasoline regulations in the United States and regulations in some European
countries include specific limits on the amount of benzene in the gasoline pool. In
addition, some U.S. refineries may find they must reduce benzene even further to
meet limits on toxic emissions from reformulated and conventional gasoline. Other
parts of the world are also considering limits on the benzene content of gasoline.
Because the major source of benzene in gasoline is the naphtha reformer, naphtha
processing is the major focus for benzene reduction.

Two basic approaches may be used to reduce the benzene from the reformer and
thereby reduce the benzene content of the gasoline pool:

J Prefractionation: The naphtha splitter cutpoint can be adjusted to remove

benzene and benzene precursors from the reformer feed. Figure 1 illustrates
the prefractionation options for light naphtha:

Blending: Light naphtha can be blended directly into the gasoline pool if
the light naphtha benzene content is low and octane is not needed.

Isomerization: The octane of the light naphtha is increased, and the ben-
zene is saturated.

Saturation: Benzene is removed without upgrading the light naphtha

octane.

1995 UOP, Des Plaines, Illinois. All rights reserved

 Figure 1
Prefractionation Options
Blending

C5-C6
Penex Isomerization

Feed
Naphtha
Splitter
BenSat Saturation

Platforming
C7+ Naphtha
UOP 2298-7
UOP 2230C-37

J Postfractionation: Benzene is removed by fractionating reformate in a refor-

mate splitter and processing the light reformate stream to eliminate benzene.
Figure 2 identifies the postfractionation options for benzene management. In
addition to processing the light reformate with the isomerization or satura-
tion options, two more options are available for controlling light reformate
benzene:

Alkylation by the Alkymax* process, which uses FCC propylene to con-

vert benzene to C9 aromatics. Benzene is removed without consuming
hydrogen, and light reformate octane is increased.

Extraction, which removes benzene for petrochemical use with Carom*

or Sulfolane* technology. This option is limited to refineries with a mar-
ket for benzene.

Penex and Platforming Technologies

As the worlds leading supplier of catalytic reforming and C5-C6 naphtha processing
technologies, UOP understands how to combine the best technologies to meet the
naphtha processing needs of each refinery. Combining the Penex* and Platforming*
technologies can effectively manage the benzene requirements of most refineries. The
variables important in efficiently processing naphtha to control benzene are the sub-
ject of this paper, and some guidelines for choosing a benzene-reduction strategy are
also discussed.

2
J J J
 Figure 2
Postfractionation Options

Penex-Plus
or TIP-Plus Isomerization

BenSat Saturation

C6+ Naphtha
Platforming Alkymax Alkylation

Carom Extraction

Reformate Benzene
Splitter
Heavy Reformate
UOP 2298-8
UOP 2320C-38

Isomerization Technology
Light naphtha isomerization can achieve complete benzene saturation as well as a
significant octane upgrade for C5-C6 feedstocks. UOP offers a choice of amorphous or
zeolitic catalyst systems for isomerization with either once-through or recycle hydro-
carbon flow schemes. Octane upgrades of 10 to 20 research octane number clear
(RONC) can be attained for the C5-C6 stream, depending on the isomerization flow
scheme used. UOP licenses isomerization technology under the following process
names: the Penex process for once-through and recycle isomerization using amor-
phous catalyst technology, the Hysomer* process for once-through zeolitic catalyst
technology, and the TIP* process for recycle isomerization with zeolitic catalyst tech-
nology. UOPs commercial experience with C5-C6 paraffin isomerization represents
more than 90,000 metric tons per day (MTD) (900,000 barrel per day [BPD]) of on-
stream capacity since the start-up of the first unit in 1958.

Typical product octanes for the various catalyst and isomerization flow schemes
licensed by UOP are shown in Figure 3. One major benefit of isomerization is that the
difference between RONC and motor octane number clear (MONC) is generally about
3 octane numbers, which is lower than that from many other gasoline processing
technologies. The selection of an isomerization flow scheme depends on the octane
needs of the refinery. The lowest octane upgrades result from the Hysomer and Penex
once-through hydrocarbon flow schemes. Higher octane upgrades can be obtained
with recycle schemes that use fractionation, molecular sieves, or both to separate the
lower-octane components for recycle back to the isomerization reactor. In the Penex-
DIH* option, a deisohexanizer (DIH) column is used for fractionation and recycle. In

3
J J J
 Figure 3
Isomerization Product Octane

95
92
90 89
88 88
Octane, RONC

85 84

80 79

75

70
Hysomer Penex TIP Penex- Penex- Penex-
DIH Molex DIH-
Pentane
PSA UOP 2320C-41

the Penex-Molex* and the TIP options, molecular sieve separations are used to re-
move and recycle the low-octane components back to the isomerization reactor.

UOPs latest isomerization innovation, the Penex-DIH-Pentane PSA scheme, is

shown in Figure 4. Fractionation is combined with adsorptive separation to recycle
the low-octane normal pentane, normal hexane, and methylpentane components
back to the isomerization reactor. Product octanes up to 92 RONC can be achieved.

Conventional isomerization schemes typically handle up to 5 volume-percent (vol-%)

benzene in the feed. Feeds with a higher benzene content are not optimally processed
because the highly exothermic saturation of benzene to cyclohexane increases the
reactor temperature. As shown in Figure 5, thermodynamic equilibrium favors low
temperature to achieve the maximum octane from isomerizing C5-C6 paraffins.

UOP introduced the Penex-Plus* and TIP-Plus* technologies in 1991 to optimize

conditions for both benzene saturation and paraffin isomerization within the same
unit. Benzene saturation takes place in a separate reactor section upstream of the
isomerization reactors. Controlling the temperatures of the two reactions indepen-
dently achieves the highest possible octane from the isomerization process and also
eliminates benzene.

The highly selective benzene-saturation catalyst used in the Penex-Plus and TIP-Plus
processes is well proven in similar petrochemical applications. UOPs proprietary
hydrogen once-through (HOT) Penex process has been extended to the Penex-Plus

4
J J J
 Figure 4
Penex-DIH-Pentane PSA Unit

nC5

Pentane
PSA

Light Isomerate
Penex
Naphtha
Deisohexanizer

Methylpentanes + nC6

C7+ Drag
UOP 2298-12
UOP 2320C-42

Figure 5
Effect of Processing Temperature on Octane

88
C5
Paraffins
Octane, RONC

84
Total C5-C6
80
C6
Paraffins
76

72

100 150 200 250 300

(212) (302) (392) (482) (572)
Temperature, C (F) UOP 2320 C-55

5
J J J
 process to eliminate the need for a recycle gas compressor, product separator, and
associated equipment. Five Penex-Plus units have been licensed since the technology
was announced in 1991, and the first Penex-Plus unit will start up in 1995.

Platforming Technology
Two types of catalytic reforming technologies are most prevalent in refineries: semi-
regenerative and continuous regeneration. In the semiregenerative process, the cata-
lyst undergoes a degradation in performance over time. As a result of depositing coke
on the catalyst, C5+ yield declines over time, and the reactor temperature must be
increased to maintain activity. At a certain point, the catalyst must be regenerated. In
contrast, the catalyst is continuously regenerated in the CCR* Platforming* process,
and neither yield nor product properties change over time. Because refiners need to
obtain a reasonable catalyst life (most refiners target 12 months between regenera-
tions), the practical limit on octane from semiregenerative units is 100 RONC. Contin-
uous catalyst regeneration enables a CCR Platforming unit to be operated at higher
octane: typically 102 RONC for motor fuel applications and 105 RONC for petrochemi-
cal applications.CCR Platforming units achieve higher yields than semiregenerative
units do. Platforming conditions favor low-pressure operation for maximum yield and
octane production. However, coke deposition increases as pressure is reduced. To
obtain reasonable catalyst life, semiregenerative units are usually designed to oper-
ate at pressures greater than 10.5 kilograms per square centimeter (kg/cm2) (150
pounds per square inch gauge [psig]). Older units designed to operate with previous
generations of less-stable semiregenerative catalysts may operate at pressures as
high as 31.6 kg/cm2 (450 psig). Higher reformer operating pressure results in reduced
C5+ and hydrogen yields and increased reformate Reid vapor pressure (RVP). Modern
ultra-low-pressure (3.5 kg/cm2 [50 psig]) CCR Platforming units achieve maximum
yields of both C5+ material and hydrogen at low reformate RVP.

Benzene formation is higher in semiregenerative Platforming units than in CCR

Platforming units. Benzene concentrations in the reformate depend on the amount of
benzene in the feed and the amount of benzene formation in the Platforming unit.
Benzene formation occurs by conversion of cyclohexane and methylcyclopentane to
benzene and through the dealkylation of heavy aromatics to benzene. Dealkylation is
favored at higher operating pressures and severities. The lower operating pressure of
CCR Platforming units means less dealkylation of heavier aromatics to benzene. Anoth-
er reason that benzene formation is lower with the CCR Platforming process is that
the catalyst is more selective to heavier aromatics than are semiregenerative cata-
lysts. Thus, because refiners who operate CCR Platforming units start at a lower ben-
zene content in their gasoline pool than refiners who operate semiregenerative units,
they can more easily meet the benzene specifications in gasoline.

The semiregenerative Platforming process was commercialized by UOP in 1949,

and the CCR Platforming process was commercialized in 1971. More than 700
Platforming units 600 licensed semiregenerative and 127 operating CCR Platforming
units that range in size from 580 to 6,400 MTD (5,000 to 55,000 BPD) have been
licensed by UOP. An additional 42 CCR Platforming units and 6 semiregenerative
Platforming units are in design and construction.

6
J J J
 Benzene-Control Strategies
Prefractionation is often considered the common-sense approach to benzene re-
duction. After all, why make benzene only to destroy it? However, precursor removal
is not always effective, and in some situations, postfractionation is a better choice.
Postfractionation should be considered under the following circumstances:

J Extensive benzene formation in the reformer as a result of dealkylation of

heavy aromatics

J Large variation in reformer feed composition (paraffins, naphthenes, and

aromatics)

J High cost for failing to adequately control benzene

Postfractionation should be considered if extensive dealkylation of heavy aromat-

ics to benzene occurs in the reformer, for example, when operating high-pressure
semiregenerative reformers or when the reformer operating severity is high. Post-
fractionation should also be considered if the reformer feed composition (paraffin,
naphthene, and aromatic content) changes significantly, as may occur when different
crudes are processed or when the reformer feed comes from multiple sources in the
refinery. Postfractionation may also be a better strategy when the penalty for not
adequately controlling benzene is high, for example, when the refinery would be pro-
hibited from selling the gasoline or when high fines would be levied against the refin-
ery by a regulatory agency.

Benzene-Reduction Case Study

Choosing the right benzene-reduction strategy requires an understanding of the
impact that each strategy has on such factors as overall gasoline production, refinery
hydrogen balance, and economics. To thoroughly examine prefractionation versus
postfractionation, UOP conducted a study that tested the effect of fractionation cut-
point changes on the overall gasoline pool. The Penex process was selected to
process the light naphtha from prefractionation as well as the light reformate from
postfractionation. The effect of reformer type on choice of prefractionation versus
postfractionation was also considered. Two types of reformers were used in this
study: a 21.1 kg/cm2 (300 psig) semiregenerative Platforming unit operating with the
R-62* catalyst and a 3.5 kg/cm2 (50 psig) CCR Platforming unit operating with the
ultra-stable, low-platinum R-134* catalyst. Gasoline yield, hydrogen production, and
gasoline properties are compared to the base case.

Base-Case Definition
Light Arabian naphtha is used in this study. In the base case, the reformer feed is
deisohexanized and processed in the semiregenerative Platforming unit just

7
J J J
 described. The reformer feed has an initial boiling point of 87C (188F); its proper-
ties are shown in Tables 1 and 2. The octane of the base-case reformate is 100 RONC.
The light straight-run (LSR) naphtha is blended directly into the gasoline pool, which
contains five other components: light and heavy fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) naph-
thas, alkylate, methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE), and butane. The composition of
the base-case gasoline pool is shown in Table 3.

Table 1
Reformer Feed Composition for the Base Case

Paraffins, Naphthenes, Aromatics,

Components vol-% vol-% vol-%
C5 0 0 0
C6 5.2 2.2 0.2
C7+ 64.9 18.8 8.7
Total 70.1 21.0 8.9

Table 2
Reformer Feed Distillation for the Base Case

% Evaporated,
ASTM D86 Temp., C (F)
IBP 87 (188)
10 92 (198)
30 110 (230)
50 122 (252)
70 146 (295)
90 170 (338)
Endpoint 191 (376)

Overall gasoline production is summarized in Table 4 for the base case, which
serves as the reference point for evaluating the other benzene-reduction options. The
benzene level in the base-case gasoline pool is 1.86 vol-%; the gasoline pool octane is
95.0 RONC and 85.4 MONC; the RVP of the gasoline pool is 0.63 kg/cm2 (9.0 psi); and
the oxygen level in the gasoline pool is 1.0 wt-%. These octane, RVP, and oxygen tar-
gets are maintained for all subsequent gasoline pools of the study.

8
J J J
 Table 3
Gasoline Pool Composition for the Base Case

Octane RVP
Volume, Benzene, Arom., Oxygen, Sulfur,
vol-% RONC MONC kg/cm2 psi vol-% vol-% wt-% ppm

Butane 3.7 93.8 89.6 4.15 59.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0

Light naphtha 8.2 70.9 69.5 1.09 12.2 0.56 0.6 0.0 0

Reformate 34.3 100.0 88.6 0.35 5.0 4.71 65.2 0.0 0

Light FCC naphtha 22.4 91.9 79.4 0.71 10.1 1.07 9.2 0.0 200
C5-132C (C5-270F)

Heavy FCC Naphtha 11.2 92.5 81.8 0.01 0.2 0.00 76.2 0.0 2,350
132-221C (270-430F)

Alkylate 14.6 94.4 91.6 0.35 5.0 0.00 0.0 0.0 0

MTBE 5.5 117.0 100.0 0.56 8.0 0.00 0.0 18.2 0

Total 100.0 95.0 85.4 0.63 9.0 1.86 33.0 1.0 347

J
J
9
J
 Table 4
Summary of Base Case
Base Case:
Semiregen Unit
Reformer feed IBP, C (F) 87 (188)
Reformer C5+ RONC 100.0
Gasoline pool properties:
RONC 95.0
MONC 85.4
Benzene, vol-% 1.86
Aromatics, vol-% 33.0
Oxygen, wt-% 1.0
RVP, kg/cm2 (psi) 0.63 (9.0)
Reformate properties:
Benzene, vol-% 4.71
Aromatics, vol-% 65.2
C5+ yield, % of feed 66.9
H2, Nm3/m3 (SCFB) of total naphtha:
Platforming unit 122 (723)
Penex unit 0

The yield of C5+ material from the Platforming unit at 100 RONC is 66.9 vol-%.
Hydrogen yield is 122 normal cubic meters per cubic meter (Nm3/m3) (723 standard
cubic feet per barrel [SCFB]) of total naphtha processed. Hydrogen production is
based on volume of total naphtha rather than reformer feed because the volume of
reformer feed changes as feed is removed from the unit as a result of precursor
removal. Total naphtha, which is the sum of light naphtha plus reformer feed, does
not change in this study.

Prefractionation for Benzene Control

Removing benzene precursors from the reformer feed results in less reformer feed
and more low-octane LSR naphtha that must be blended into the gasoline pool. To
compensate for this decrease in available octane, either the reformate octane must
be increased, or the LSR naphtha octane must be increased by processing it through
a Penex unit. The route chosen in this study was to process the LSR naphtha through

10
J J J
a Penex unit because the 12 RONC increase in LSR naphtha octane as a result of Penex
processing allows a reduction in reformate octane and reformate yield increases.

The flow scheme for evaluating prefractionation in this study is shown in Figure 6.
A new naphtha splitter is required to process the full-boiling-range naphtha because
the feeds to both the Penex and the Platforming units must be hydrotreated. In the
base case, only the Platforming feed was hydrotreated, and the light naphtha was
simply blended into gasoline.

Figure 6
Prefractionation Option for Study

Base Case: LSR to Blending

Penex or
Penex-Plus

Naphtha
Splitter

Platforming
Unit

UOP 2320C-43

Impact of Cutpoint on Benzene Reduction

The removal of benzene precursors is proportional to the initial boiling point (IBP) of
the reformer feed (Figure 7). About 100% of the cyclohexane and 50% of the methyl-
cyclopentane are converted to benzene in the reformer. Benzene is also formed to
some extent from C6 paraffins and from the dealkylation of heavier aromatics; dealky-
lation increases with reformer pressure.

At a reformer feed IBP of 87C (188F), nearly all of the benzene precursors go to
the reformer, and about 14% of the naphtha splitter feed is processed in the Penex
unit. The concentration of benzene in the refinery gasoline pool with the semiregen-
erative Platforming unit is 1.66 vol-%. For the refinery with the CCR Platforming unit,
the benzene in the gasoline pool was 1.40 vol-%. As precursors are removed from the
reformer feed, the level of benzene in the gasoline pool is reduced. However, the

11
J J J
 Figure 7
Benzene Precursor Distribution vs. Cutpoint

100
Cyclohexane
% of Feed in Naphtha

80
Splitter Bottoms

Benzene
60

40

20 Methylcyclopentane

0
85 90 95 100 105
(185) (194) (203) (212) (221)
Reformer Feed IBP, C (F) UOP 2320C-70

octane of the reformate must be increased to meet the gasoline-pool octane require-
ments. Figure 8 shows the level of benzene in the gasoline pool and the reformer
octane needed to meet the gasoline-pool octane requirements as precursors are
removed from the feed to the reformer. Because of lower C5+ yield, the semiregenera-
tive cases require higher reformate C5+ octane to meet the gasoline-pool octane needs
and to produce the same number of octane-barrels as the CCR Platforming unit does.

As discussed earlier, the limit on reformate octane from the semiregenerative unit
is around 100 RONC. For CCR Platforming units designed to make motor fuel, this
octane limit is around 102 RONC. Thus, as shown in Figure 8, prefractionation will
meet the 0.95 vol-% benzene target for the CCR Platforming unit but will not meet the
benzene target for the semiregenerative Platforming unit of this study. (Achieving the
benzene target may be possible with lower-pressure semiregenerative units.)

Hydrogen Yield
As precursors are removed from the feed to the Platforming unit, hydrogen yield
decreases despite increasing the reformate octane to meet the gasoline pool-octane
requirements (Figure 9). In fact, with semiregenerative Platforming units, a hydrogen
deficit from the base case exists. The deficit, which depends on the amount of pre-
cursor removal, ranges from 8 to 12 Nm3/m3 (50 to 75 SCFB) of total naphtha processed
relative to the base-case hydrogen production. Hydrogen yield from CCR Platforming
units is greater than that from semiregenerative units, and a relative hydrogen sur-
plus that ranges from 97 to 77 Nm3/m3 (573 to 456 SCFB) of total naphtha processed
exists. The ability to manufacture more hydrogen and still achieve high gasoline yield

12
J J J
 Figure 8
Impact of Prefractionation on Gasoline-Pool Benzene

1.9 102
Semiregen
Gasoline Benzene, vol-% Benzene

Reformate C5+ RONC

Semiregen
RONC

1.4 CCR Platforming 100

RONC

Benzene Target
0.9 98
CCR
Platforming
Benzene
0.4 96
85 90 95 100 105
(185) (194) (203) (212) (221)
Reformer Feed IBP, C (F) UOP 2320C-44

Figure 9
Impact of Prefractionation on Incremental H2 Yield

150 102
Reformate C5+ RONC

CCR Platforming H2
H2, Nm3/m3 Naphtha

100 CCR Platforming

RONC 100
Semiregen RONC
50

98
0
Semiregen H2

-50 96
85 90 95 100 105
(185) (190) (203) (212) (221)
Reformer Feed IBP, C (F) UOP 2320C-45

13
J J J
 makes the CCR Platforming technology especially valuable as hydrogen demand in
the refinery grows because of increased pressure to desulfurize refinery products.
Thus, the CCR Platforming process should be considered when hydrogen demand
increases.

Total Gasoline Yield

Overall gasoline yield actually increases slightly with semiregenerative Platforming
units as precursors are initially removed from the feed (Figure 10). The increase in
gasoline yield with precursor removal can be explained as follows. Figure 11 shows
that the C5+ yield increases as precursors are removed from the reformer feed at con-
stant C5+ octane. The C5+ octane for the points shown in Figure 11 is 100 RONC. The
increase in C5+ yield is greater with the semiregenerative unit than with the CCR
Platforming unit because more C6 paraffins are cracked in the semiregenerative unit.
With CCR Platforming units, gasoline yield decreases with precursor removal.

Figure 10
Impact of Prefractionation on Incremental Gasoline Yield

12 CCR Platforming Gasoline 102

Gasoline, % of Base

10

Reformate C5+ RONC

8 100
Semiregen
RONC CCR
6 Platforming
RONC
4 98
Semiregen Gasoline
2

0 96
85 90 95 100 105
(185) (194) (203) (212) (221)
Reformer Feed IBP, C (F) UOP 2320C-46

However, the benefit of precursor removal on C5+ yield is only part of the story.
What must also be considered is the yield of octane-barrels. When precursors are
removed, feed to the Platforming unit is reduced; and at constant C5+ octane, the
octane-barrel production decreases (Figure 12). However, the octane-barrel yield
from the Penex unit increases as precursors are removed from the Platforming unit.
Combining the octane-barrels from the Penex and Platforming units shows that the
overall octane-barrel yield from these two units actually goes through a maximum
with benzene-precursor removal (Figure 13). The optimal cutpoint for the semiregen-
erative Platforming unit is higher than that of the CCR Platforming unit.

14
J J J
 Figure 11
Impact of Cutpoint on Reformate C5+ Yield

85
Reformate C5+ Yield, %
80 CCR Platforming: 100 RONC

75

Semiregen: 100 RONC

70

65
85 90 95 100 105
(185) (194) (203) (212) (221)
Reformer Feed IBP, C (F) UOP 2320C-47

Figure 12
Impact of Cutpoint on Octane-Barrels

80
CCR
Platforming:
60 100 RONC
Octane-Barrels

Semiregen:
100 RONC
40
Penex

20

0
85 90 95 100 105
(185) (194) (203) (212) (221)
Reformer Feed IBP, C (F) UOP 2320C-48

15
J J J
 Figure 13
Impact of Cutpoint on Total Octane-Barrels

85

80
Octane-Barrels

Penex-CCR
Platforming:
100 RONC
75

Penex-Semiregen:
70 100 RONC

65
85 90 95 100 105
(185) (194) (203) (212) (221)
Reformer Feed IBP, C(F) UOP 2320C-50

Summary of Prefractionation
Gasoline production from the Penex and Platforming process combination depends
on the type of reformer and the type of feed processed. Removing C6 components
from the reformer feed can achieve a greater increase in gasoline yield from semire-
generative units than from CCR Platforming units because of the greater cracking of
these components in semiregenerative units.

The optimal cutpoint for gasoline production when processing naphtha through a
Penex and Platforming process combination depends on the reformer type (Figure 13).
For the semiregenerative unit of this study, the optimal reformer feed cutpoint is
around 98C (208F). For the CCR Platforming unit in this study, the optimal cutpoint
is around 93C (200F). The optimal cutpoint for gasoline production also depends on
the type of feed, and the processing done to the light naphtha.

Although prefractionation seems to be the simplest solution for benzene control,

it will not be adequate when significant benzene formation occurs, as it does in semi-
regenerative units. The lower benzene formation with CCR Platforming units, coupled
with the higher C5+ yield from these units, enables prefractionation to successfully
achieve the necessary benzene reduction.

Postfractionation for Benzene Control

Postfractionation is an alternative to prefractionation for benzene control. Instead of
removing benzene precursors from the reformer feed, a reformate splitter is used to
produce a benzene-rich light reformate stream. This light reformate stream and the
LSR naphtha can be processed in the Penex unit. The flow scheme for postfractiona-

16
J J J
tion used in this case study is shown in Figure 14. The straight-run naphtha for this
study was fractionated to achieve a reformer feed IBP of 94C (201F). About 24% of
the naphtha is processed in the Penex unit, and 76% is processed in the Platforming
unit. This cutpoint is a compromise between the best cutpoint for each type of
reformer when operated in conjunction with a Penex unit. This reformer feed cut-
point was held constant for the postfractionation study.

Figure 14
Postfractionation Option for Study

Penex or
Penex-Plus

Naphtha
Splitter Reformate
Splitter

Platforming

UOP 2320C-52

Gasoline Benzene
The impact of benzene control with postfractionation is shown in Figure 15. Gasoline
benzene levels decrease as more light reformate is processed in the Penex unit. Ex-
tremely low levels of benzene can be achieved in the gasoline pool with postfraction-
ation because the point of benzene control now occurs after the reformer. The initial
lag in benzene reduction with reformate fractionation shown in Figure 15 occurs be-
cause the C5-C6 paraffins are removed before the benzene is removed. Additional
light reformate must be removed before benzene reduction begins.

A greater volume of light reformate must be removed with semiregenerative units

than with CCR Platforming units to achieve the same level of benzene reduction be-
cause more C5-C6 paraffins are in the reformate from semiregenerative units. Figure 16
shows the relative distribution of C5-C6 and C7+ components from CCR Platforming
and semiregenerative units. At 100 RONC, the C5-C6 yield is about 20% for semiregen-
erative units and about 13% for CCR Platforming units. In addition, the C7+ yield from
CCR Platforming units is 67%, but the yield of this material from semiregenerative
units is only 48%.

Gasoline Yield
Gasoline yield increases with postfractionation. As shown in Figure 17, gasoline yield
actually reaches a maximum with both types of Platforming units at the same point
that the reformate octane needed to meet the gasoline-pool octane requirements

17
J J J
 Figure 15
Impact of Postfractionation on Gasoline-Pool Benzene

1.4
Semiregen Benzene
Gasoline Benzene, vol-%

1.2

1.0
CCR Platforming
Benzene
0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2
0 5 10 15 20
Light Reformate, % of Total Naphtha
UOP 2320 C-53

Figure 16
Platforming Unit Yield at 100 RONC

100
C5-C6 Yield
Yield, % of Reformer Feed

80 C7+ Yield

60

40

20

0
Semiregen CCR
Platforming Platforming
UOP 2320 C-71

18
J J J
reaches a minimum. The maximum in gasoline yield can be explained in the following
manner. The initial increase in gasoline yield occurs because as C5-C6 paraffins are
removed from the reformate and upgraded by the Penex unit, less reformate octane
is needed to meet the gasoline-pool octane requirements. The Penex unit increases
the octane of the C5-C6 paraffins that are removed from the reformate because the
operating temperature used in isomerization is lower than the temperature used in
reforming. As more octane is made available from the Penex unit, less is needed from
the Platforming unit. Reformate yield increases as reformate octane is reduced, and
overall gasoline production increases. With further postfractionation, benzene begins
to be removed from the reformate and saturated in the Penex unit. Reformate octane
must be increased as benzene is removed from the reformate and saturated. The
increase in reformate octane means less C5+ yield from the reformer and lower over-
all gasoline yield (Figure 17).

Figure 17
Impact of Postfractionation on Incremental Gasoline Yield

12.0 101
CCR Platforming
10.0 Gasoline

Reformate C5+ RONC

Gasoline, % of Base

Semiregen
8.0 RONC 99
CCR Platforming
6.0 RONC
4.0 97
2.0
Semiregen Gasoline
0.0
95
0 5 10 15 20
Light Reformate, % of Total Naphtha
UOP 2320 C-54

The impact of postfractionation on gasoline-pool yield is greater with semiregener-

ative units than with CCR Platforming units for the following reasons. First, the
semiregenerative reformate contains more C5-C6 paraffins and more octane will be
produced by processing these paraffins in the Penex unit. More octane is available
from the Penex unit, and less is needed from the Platforming unit. Second, the benefit
of reducing C5+ octane is greater for semiregenerative units because the yield-octane
curve is steeper for semiregenerative units than for CCR Platforming units, and the
benefit on yield from reducing octane is greater.

19
J J J
 Comparison of Prefractionation with Postfractionation
Evaluating the two benzene-reduction strategies requires putting them on a common
basis, such as the benzene level in the overall gasoline pool. The impact of each
strategy on gasoline production is shown in Figure 18, which plots incremental gaso-
line production versus benzene in the overall gasoline pool. Although the overall
gasoline production is higher for CCR Platforming units, the impact of postfractiona-
tion on increasing gasoline yield is greater for semiregenerative units. Incremental
gasoline yield increases by about 2% using postfractionation in refineries with semi-
regenerative units. (Prefractionation could not achieve the 0.95 vol-% benzene target
of this study.) The benefit of postfractionation on overall gasoline production is less
than 1% in refineries using CCR Platforming units.

Figure 18
Impact of Strategy on Incremental Gasoline Yield

14

12
Gasoline, % of Base

Postfrac. CCR Platforming

10
Prefrac. CCR Platforming
8

6
Postfrac. Semiregen Prefrac.
4 Semiregen

2
0.2 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8
Gasoline Benzene, vol-%
UOP 2320C-56

Hydrogen Yield
Hydrogen yield declines with benzene reduction (Figure 19). Less hydrogen is avail-
able with postfractionation than with prefractionation for two reasons: first, hydro-
gen consumption in the Penex unit is greater as a result of benzene saturation; and
second, the production of hydrogen in the Platforming unit is lower because lower
reformate C5+ octane is needed to meet the gasoline-pool octane requirements.
Overall hydrogen production with the CCR Platforming process is still much higher
than with the semiregenerative Platforming process.

Postfractionation to Reduce Gasoline Aromatics

The concentration of aromatics in gasoline is coming under increased scrutiny in
many parts of the world. In the United States, outside of California, aromatics are
indirectly controlled in reformulated gasoline by the two emission models: the Simple

20
J J J
 Figure 19
Impact of Strategy on Incremental H2 Yield

150
H2, Nm3/m3 Naphtha
100
Prefrac. CCR
Platforming
50 Postfrac. CCR
Platforming
Prefrac.
Postfrac. Semiregen
0 Semiregen

-50
0.2 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8
Gasoline Pool Benzene Content, vol-%
UOP 2320C-57

and Complex Models. Other parts of the world have either imposed limits or are con-
sidering imposing direct limits on aromatics in gasoline. Sweden has set an aromatics
limit using an equation that fixes the sum of benzene plus aromatics divided by 13 at
less than 5.5. California has set a specific limit of 25 vol-% aromatics in gasoline that
goes into effect in March 1996.

Postfractionation is one way to minimize aromatics in gasoline. Processing the C5-

C6 components from the reformate in the Penex unit increases their octane and means
that less octane is needed from the reformer. As the reformate C5+ octane is reduced,
the C5+ yield increases, and aromatics production decreases. The result is that the
aromatics level in the gasoline pool decreases. As shown in Figure 20, postfractiona-
tion can reduce gasoline aromatics by up to 2 vol-% with semiregenerative units and
about 1 vol-% with CCR Platforming units. The reduction in gasoline-pool aromatics is
greater with semiregenerative units than with CCR Platforming units because pro-
cessing the light reformate from semiregenerative units in a Penex unit has a greater
impact on reducing reformate octane as a result of its higher C5-C6 content.

Postfractionation to Increase Gasoline Yield

One interesting conclusion of the study is that postfractionation should be considered
to improve overall naphtha yield from the Penex and Platforming unit combination
even if no benzene control is needed. An evaluation of the yield benefit from post-
fractionation is shown in Figures 21 through 24. In all of the cases, the naphtha was
fractionated to produce a reformer feed IBP of 94C (201F). The light naphtha was
processed in a Penex unit, and the heavy naphtha was processed in the Platforming
unit. The reformer octane was adjusted so that the gasoline-pool octane specifica-

21
J J J
 Figure 20
Impact of Strategy on Gasoline-Pool Aromatics
34
Gasoline Aromatics, vol-%
Prefrac. CCR
33 Platforming

Postfrac. CCR
32 Platforming

31
Postfrac.
Semiregen Prefrac.
30 Semiregen
29

28
0.2 0.6 1.0 1.4 1.8
Gasoline Benzene, vol-%
UOP 2320C-73

tions of the base case (Table 3) were met. Figure 21 shows the yield from the Penex
and the semiregenerative Platforming units. Figure 22 shows the benefit on yield from
adding a reformate splitter and processing the light reformate and light naphtha
together in the Penex unit. The yield from the combination of Penex and semiregen-

Figure 21
Penex and Semiregen Yield

Penex Product*
23.7 volumes
Penex 82.0 RONC
Light Naphtha 80.4 MONC
24.1 volumes
66.9 RONC Penex and
65.6 MONC
Platforming Product
77.1 volumes
94.1 RONC
Naphtha 85.8 MONC
Splitter 2.26 vol-% benzene
Naphtha 45.2 vol-% aromatics
100.0 volumes
72.5 octane-barrels
Reformate
Semiregen 53.4 volumes
Platforming 99.5 RONC
Reformer Feed 88.2 MONC
75.9 volumes 3.26 vol-% benzene
94C (201F) IBP 65.3 vol-% aromatics

*Penex product has been debutanized

Overall gasoline pool at 95 RONC and 85 MONC UOP 2320C-59

22
J J J
erative Platforming units is 2.4% greater with postfractionation than without post-
fractionation. The same analysis was done for Penex-CCR Platforming units and
is shown in Figures 23 and 24. The benefit of postfractionation is smaller with the
CCR Platforming unit, and the yield increase from the two units is only 0.5%.

Figure 22
Penex and Semiregen Yield with Postfractionation

Penex Product*
Penex or 37.8 volumes
Penex-Plus 82.0 RONC Penex and
Light Naphtha 80.4 MONC
24.1 volumes Platforming Product
66.9 RONC 79.5 volume
65.6 MONC Light Reformate 94.2 RONC
14.5 volumes 86.0 MONC
73.3 RONC 1.51 vol-% benzene
71.9 MONC
Naphtha 2.75 vol-% benzene 41.8 vol-% aromatics
Splitter 2.7 vol-% aromatics Reformate
Naphtha Splitter 74.9 octane-barrels
100.0 volumes

Semiregen
Platforming
Reformer Feed Unit Reformate Heavy Reformate
75.9 volumes 56.2 volumes 41.6 volumes
94C (201F) IBP 97.0 RONC 105.3 RONC
86.1 MONC 91.1 MONC
2.84 vol-% benzene 2.87 vol-% benzene
59.8 vol-% aromatics 79.7 vol-% aromatics

*Penex product has been debutanized

Overall gasoline pool at 95 RONC and 85 MONC UOP 2320C-60

Figure 23
Penex and CCR Platforming Yield

Penex Product*
23.7 volumes
Penex 82.0 RONC
Light Naphtha 80.4 MONC
24.1 volumes
66.9 RONC Penex and
65.6 MONC
Platforming Product
86.2 volumes
94.0 RONC
Naphtha 85.5 MONC
Splitter 1.81 vol-% benzene
Naphtha 49.5 vol-% aromatics
100.0 vol
81.1 octane-barrels
Reformate
CCR 62.5 volumes
Platforming 98.6 RONC
Reformer Feed 87.4 MONC
75.9 volumes 2.49 vol-% benzene
94C (201F) IBP 68.3 vol-% aromatics

*Penex product has been debutanized

Overall gasoline pool at 95 RONC and 85 MONC UOP 2320C-61

23
J J J
 Figure 24
Penex and CCR Platforming Yield with Postfractionation

Penex Product*
Penex or 32.5 volumes
Penex-Plus 81.6 RONC Penex and
Light Naphtha 80.1 MONC
24.1 volumes Platforming Product
66.9 RONC 86.5 volumes
65.6 MONC Light Reformate 94.0 RONC
9.3 volumes 85.6 MONC
73.7 RONC 1.28 vol-% benzene
72.3 MONC
Naphtha 3.97 vol-% benzene 47.6 vol-% aromatics
Splitter 4.0 vol-% aromatics Reformate
Naphtha Splitter 81.4 octane-barrels
100.0 volumes

CCR
Platforming
Reformer Feed Unit Reformate Heavy Reformate
75.9 volumes 63.3 volumes 54.0 volumes
94C (201F) IBP 97.4 RONC 101.5 RONC
86.5 MONC 88.9 MONC
2.33 vol-% benzene 2.04 vol-% benzene
65.6 vol-% aromatics 76.2 vol-% aromatics

*Penex product has been debutanized

Overall gasoline pool at 95 RONC and 85 MONC UOP 2320C-72

Combining the Penex and Platforming Processes

The impact of using the Penex process to increase the octane of the LSR naphtha is
shown in Table 5 for both semiregenerative and CCR Platforming units. Gasoline vol-
ume increases because the additional octane achieved from processing the LSR
naphtha in the Penex unit allows the reformate octane to be decreased. Reducing
reformate octane means higher yield from the reformer and more gasoline from the
refinery. The benefit of adding the Penex process is greater with semiregenerative
units because the yield-octane curve is steeper for semiregenerative than for CCR
Platforming units. The installation of a Penex unit in a refinery with a semiregenera-
tive unit enables the reformate octane to be decreased from 100 to 96.8 RONC. The
reformer C5+ yield is increased by about 4.9 vol-%, and overall gasoline production
for the refinery is increased by about 2.4%.

Overall gasoline production for the refinery with a CCR Platforming unit is 9%
greater than with a semiregenerative unit. However, adding a Penex unit to the refin-
ery with a CCR Platforming unit results in a reduction in reformate octane from 98.9
to 96.4 RONC. The reformer C5+ yield is increased by about 2.6 vol-%, and overall
gasoline is increased by about 1 vol-%.

Hydrogen production must also be considered in any naphtha processing or ben-

zene-reduction study. Net hydrogen yield from the CCR Platforming unit is almost
90% higher than that from the semiregenerative unit. The octane achieved from
adding a Penex unit results in a lower demand for octane from the reformer, and net

24
J J J
 Table 5
Use of Penex Process to Increase Gasoline Yield

Semiregen CCR Platforming

Base Case with Penex No Penex With Penex
Reformer feed IBP, C (F) 87 (188) 87 (188) 87 (188) 87 (188)
Reformer C5+ RONC 100.0 96.8 98.9 96.4
Incremental gasoline,
% of base Base 2.4 9.3 10.4
Gasoline pool properties:
Benzene, vol-% 1.86 1.66 1.54 1.40
Aromatics, vol-% 33.0 31.1 35.2 33.2
Reformate properties:
Benzene, vol-% 4.71 3.96 3.48 3.06
Aromatics, vol-% 65.2 57.5 67.1 61.0
C5+ yield, % of feed 66.9 71.8 80.7 83.3
H2, Nm3/m3 (SCFB) of
total naphtha:
Platforming unit Base - 7.4 (- 44) 110 (655) 97.2 (577)
Penex unit Base - 0.5 (- 3) 0 - 0.5 (- 3)
Total Base - 7.9 (- 47) 110 (655) 96.7 (574)

hydrogen production from the refinery (production in the Platforming unit and con-
sumption in the Penex unit) decreases by about 6%. However, gasoline aromatics can
be reduced by about 2 vol-% as a result of adding a Penex unit to the refinery.

Economics of Benzene Reduction

Choosing the right benzene-reduction strategy requires an evaluation of the overall
economics of each strategy. Three cases were chosen for this analysis. All three meet
the specification of less than 0.95 vol-% benzene in the gasoline pool. The three cases
for this economic study are postfractionation with a semiregenerative unit and pre-
fractionation and postfractionation with a CCR Platforming unit. (With the semiregen-
erative unit, prefractionation was not an option for meeting the benzene target.) The
cases are summarized in Table 6. Incremental gasoline and hydrogen production are
shown relative to the base case.

Income from the sale of products is balanced against the purchase of naphtha and
hydrogen. The overall economics are evaluated against the base case, and incremen-
tal income is reported relative to base-case income. Although the quantity of naphtha

25
J J J
 Table 6
Comparison of Benzene-Reduction Strategies

Semiregen CCR Platforming

Postfrac. Prefrac. Postfrac.
Reformer feed IBP, C (F) 94 (201) 97 (207) 94 (201)
Reformer C5+ RONC 97.6 100.7 98.0
Gasoline pool properties:
Benzene, vol-% 0.93 0.94 0.91
Aromatics, vol-% 29.2 32.7 32.1
Incremental gasoline, % of base 4.2 9.9 10.4
Incremental H2, Nm3/m3 (SCFB)
of total naphtha:
Platforming unit 12.7 (- 75) 82.6 (490) 81.3 (482)
Penex unit 5.9 (- 36) 3.2 (- 19) 4.6 (- 27)
Total 18.6 (-111) 79.4 (471) 76.7 (455)

purchased is held constant for all cases, gasoline production and hydrogen produc-
tion vary. Hydrogen must be purchased for the semiregenerative Platforming case to
bring the total available hydrogen back up to the level in the base-case. Hydrogen
produced by the CCR Platforming unit in excess of base-case hydrogen generates a
credit. Prices used in this evaluation are shown in Table 7.

Income is defined as follows:

J Net income equals gasoline sales minus naphtha purchase minus hydrogen
purchase. (A credit is added if excess hydrogen is produced.)

J Hydrogen purchase equals base-case hydrogen minus case-study hydrogen

Table 7
Study Prices

Streams Price
Gasoline, $/MT ($/gal) 181 (0.51)
Naphtha, $/MT ($/gal) 177 (0.48)
Hydrogen, $/MT ($/SCF) 4,310 (0.0018)

26
J J J
 J Incremental net income equals case-study net income minus base-case net
income

The economics of benzene reduction were evaluated in two ways. First the eco-
nomics were determined for all new units: new naphtha splitter, new reformate split-
ter, and new Penex and Platforming units. Next, the economics were evaluated for
replacing the existing semiregenerative Platforming unit with a new CCR Platforming
unit.

As shown in Table 8, incremental income is greater with the CCR Platforming unit
than with the semiregenerative Platforming unit. Process unit capacities are shown in
Table 9 on the basis of total naphtha processed: approximately 3,000 MTD (26,350 BPD).
(Total naphtha is light naphtha plus reformer feed.) Postfractionation generates slight-
ly greater income than prefractionation for the CCR Platforming unit. Inside battery
limits (ISBL) capital costs given in Table 10 for the new units are on the basis of total

Table 8
Incremental Income for Benzene Reduction

Semiregen CCR Platforming

Cash Flow, $/bbl Naphtha Postfrac. Prefrac. Postfrac.

Naphtha purchase 20.2 20.2 20.2

Hydrogen purchase 0.2 - 0.8 - 0.8

Gasoline sales 37.7 39.8 40.0

Net Income 17.4 20.5 20.6

Table 9
Process Unit Capacity

Unit Capacity, % of Total Semiregen CCR Platforming

Naphtha Postfrac. Prefrac. Postfrac.

Naphtha splitter 100.0 100.0 100.0

Penex unit 38.8 28.0 33.1

Platforming unit 75.9 72.0 75.9

Reformate splitter 55.6 58.3 62.9

27
J J J
 naphtha processed. In preparing the economic analysis, an additional 50% was added
to the ISBL costs to account for off-sites. The internal rate of return is calculated for
each benzene-reduction option. Investment is assumed to take place over two years:
60% of the investment is made in the first year and the rest in the second year.
Income is generated over 10 years.

Table 10
Benzene-Reduction Economics for New Refinery

Semiregen CCR Platforming

Postfrac. Prefrac. Postfrac.
ISBL capital cost, $/bbl total naphtha:
Naphtha splitter 233 233 233
Penex unit 464 428 445
Platforming unit 2,092 2,554 2,613
Reformate splitter 164 0 177
Total 2,953 3,215 3,468
Internal rate of return, % 7 36 35

The internal rate of return shown at the bottom of Table 10 is about five times
higher for benzene reduction using the CCR Platforming unit than for the semiregen-
erative Platforming unit. Although with the CCR Platforming process, postfractiona-
tion gives slightly higher gasoline yields and slightly higher incremental income than
prefractionation, the higher capital costs of postfractionation make it less attractive
than prefractionation.

The analysis in Table 10 shows clearly that the CCR Platforming process is more
economic than the semiregenerative process when considering new Platforming units.
Usually, a refinery already has an existing semiregenerative unit and is considering
benzene-reduction options. One solution is to add a naphtha splitter, a reformate
splitter, and a Penex unit to the existing semiregenerative unit. Another solution is
to replace the semiregenerative unit with a modern CCR Platforming unit and to con-
vert the existing semiregenerative unit to a Penex unit. Replacing the existing semire-
generative unit with a CCR Platforming unit adds value and flexibility to the overall
naphtha-processing scheme because benzene reduction can be achieved with either
prefractionation or postfractionation when coupled with Penex isomerization.

The investment for benzene reduction with an existing semiregenerative unit is less
than half that shown in Table 10 because the refiner does not have to invest in a new
Platforming unit. Another way to reduce benzene is to convert the existing semiregen-
erative unit to a Penex unit and install a new CCR Platforming unit. Converting the

28
J J J
semiregenerative unit to a Penex unit reduces the Penex investment costs by nearly
75%. When benzene control is important, the higher gasoline yield from a CCR
Platforming unit coupled with its higher hydrogen production makes replacement of
an existing semiregenerative unit attractive even for the conditions of this study
(Table 11). When achieving even-lower levels of benzene in the gasoline pool is neces-
sary, replacing existing semiregenerative units with CCR Platforming units becomes
even more economically attractive.

Table 11
Benzene-Reduction Economics for Existing Refinery

Semiregen. CCR Platforming

Postfrac. Prefrac. Postfrac.
ISBL capital cost, total $/bbl total naphtha:
Naphtha splitter 233 233 233
Penex unit 464 107 111
Platforming unit 0 2,554 2,613
Reformate splitter 164 0 177
Total 861 2,894 3,134
Internal rate of return, % 40 40 38

Conclusion
Prefractionation is the most-economic route for benzene management with modern
CCR Platforming units. However, prefractionation may be difficult to accomplish with
semiregenerative Platforming units because of the higher yield of benzene and the
limit on reformate octane. Postfractionation is better suited for benzene management
with semiregenerative units. Gasoline yield can actually be increased using postfrac-
tionation because the octane of the C5-C6 paraffins in the reformate can be increased
by processing them in a Penex unit with no yield loss. The benefit of postfractiona-
tion is greater for semiregenerative than for CCR Platforming units because more C5-
C6 paraffins are produced and the yield-octane curve for semiregenerative units is
steep. Replacing semiregenerative units with modern CCR Platforming units is partic-
ularly attractive economically when significant benzene reduction is needed, for ex-
ample, when processing rich feeds, when meeting low levels of benzene in the gasoline
pool, or when reformate is a significant portion of the gasoline pool.

29
J J J
 The results of this study show that higher gasoline yield can be achieved by coor-
dinating the operating targets of the naphtha splitter, the reformate splitter, and the
Penex and Platforming units. Factors that affect this coordination include feed com-
position, the type of reforming technology used, and the other gasoline blend compo-
nents that are available. Feeds richer in naphthenes and aromatics make benzene
control more difficult. Determining the optimal split of naphtha between the Penex
and Platforming units, the best octane target for the Platforming unit, and the best
Penex target is a computationally complex task in refinery planning and operation.
The problem becomes even more complex when solved in light of constraints
imposed by the physical plant of the refinery.

Because feed composition changes regularly in almost any given refinery, advanced
controls and on-line optimization can help maintain optimal production of gasoline
components and can increase refinery profits. The paper Refinery Multiunit Opti-
mization: A Case Study, presented at the 1995 UOP Refining Technology Conference,
describes how naphtha processing control has been commercialized and the antici-
pated benefits from using better control strategies to achieve maximum benefit from
naphtha processing.

Deciding which benzene-management scheme to use depends on the value of

hydrogen, total gasoline, and premium gasoline. It also depends on the type of
reformer, the feedstock processed in the reformer, and the refinery configuration.
Finally, the target benzene level in the final gasoline pool must be considered.

In the end, the benzene-management strategy must be tailored to meet the needs
of the individual refinery. As the worlds leading supplier of technology for processing
naphtha, UOP can provide the expertise and guidance to help each refinery meets its
needs for efficient naphtha processing to achieve optimal benzene management.

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Anderson, G. C., Gray, G. L., McBride, T. K., Rachford, R. H., and Raghuram, S., New
Platforming Technology for Changing Needs and Increased Profitability, UOP
Refinery Technology Conference, 1995.
Crowe, T. J., Milner, S. S., Eriksson, P., Wallberg, T., and Mason, A.A., Refinery
Multiunit Optimization: A Case Study, UOP Refinery Technology Conference, 1995.
Keesom, W. H., Kelly, A. P., Raman, P .K., and Bozzano, U. G., "Benzene Reduction
Alternatives," NPRA Meeting, Mar. 1991.
Moy, C. L., Sullivan, D. K, and Huebner, A. L., "Benzene Removal for Reformulated
Gasoline," AICHE Meeting, Mar. 1992.
Shiferli, W. J., and Raghuram, S., "Using Isomerization and Platforming to Make High-
Octane, Low-Benzene Gasoline," AIChE Meeting, Apr. 1991.
Wilcher, F. P., Cusher, N. A., and Keesom, W. H., "Benzene-Reduction Strategies for
Reformulated Gasoline," Japan Petroleum Institute, Tokyo, Oct. 1994.

* Penex, Platforming, Penex-Plus, Hysomer, TIP, TIP-Plus, Alkymax, CCR, CCR Platforming, Molex, and Carom are
trademarks and/or service marks of UOP. Sulfolane is a service mark of Shell Oil Company.

30
J J J
 31
J J J