Green Car Congress  
Go to GCC Discussions forum About GCC Contact  RSS Subscribe Twitter headlines

« Hyundai introduces 2015 Sonata Eco with 1.6L Gamma turbo; 32 mpg combined | Main | Intelligent Energy joins H2USA »

Print this post

Study suggests GTL blending could increase overall US refinery efficiency by improving diesel efficiency

20 June 2014

Master.img-005
Impact of GTL diesel blending (5% penetration relative to refinery crude input) on US average overall refinery efficiency. Credit: ACS, Forman et al. Click to enlarge.

A team from Sasol Synfuels, Jacobs Consultancy and Argonne National Laboratory has used results from a US industry-wide linear programming (LP) modeling study of individual US refineries to examine the impacts of a number of significant and looming changes—such as shifts in refinery crude slates; regional and seasonal variation; gasoline/diesel (G/D) production ratio; and GTL diesel blending—on US refinery, unit, and product efficiencies. (LP is the the primary tool for analysis and optimization in the refining industry.)

Results of their study, which appear in the ACS journal Environmental Science & Technology, suggest that refinery and product-specific efficiency values are sensitive to crude quality; seasonal and regional factors; and refinery configuration and complexity—which in turn are determined by final fuel specification requirements and regulations. Additional processing of domestically sourced tight light oil could marginally increase refinery efficiency, but these benefits could be offset by crude rebalancing, they found.

Master.img-006
Impact of GTL diesel blending (1%, 3%, and 5% penetration relative to refinery crude input) on product-specific efficiency. Base = Basecase efficiency without GTL blending; Pen = penetration (of GTL diesel). The results suggest that only diesel efficiency is positively affected by GTL blending. Credit: ACS, Forman et al. Click to enlarge.

To respond to future demand requirements, refiners will need to reduce the G/D production ratio, which will likely result in greater volumes of diesel being produced through less efficient pathways resulting in reduced efficiency, particularly on the marginal barrel of diesel, they found.

Diesel efficiency appears to be intimately related to the number and severity of units required to produce diesel. Tighter diesel fuel specifications such as CARB diesel result in a lower diesel efficiency. In the future, if refineries produce incremental diesel through relatively inefficient pathways, diesel efficiency within a refinery would be expected to decrease.

—Forman et al.

The decline in diesel efficiency could be offset by blending of Gas-to-Liquids (GTL) diesel, which could allow refiners to uplift intermediate fuel streams into more efficient diesel production pathways, thereby allowing for the efficient production of incremental barrels of diesel without added capital investment for the refiner.

The study. While earlier studies have investigated product-specific energy and GHG emissions intensities, these were based on generic or average refinery models that do not accurately represent the various complexities and operational flexibilities in actual operations, the team noted. The new study aimed to provide a broad view of the current US refining industry with a focus on current operations of large refineries; the work was based on the analysis of 43 US refineries that have an individual capacity of greater than 100,000 bbl/day. This data set represents approximately 70% of total US refining capacity in 2012.

The researchers refined and calibrated the LP model to highly refined fuels such as reformulated and CARB gasoline and low-sulfur diesel fuels. For each refinery to be analyzed, process submodels represented the existing refinery configuration.

The product slate was developed based on knowledge of the markets being served by each refinery. Models were constructed to produce on-specification fuels, including low-sulfur (30 ppm) gasoline; low-benzene (0.62 vol %) gasoline; ethanol 10% (E10) gasoline; Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD, 10 ppm); Texas Low Emissions Diesel (LED); and CARB products for California.

The researchers optimized the refineries in the models for profit margin, not for emissions—i.e., they represent as accurately as possible current US refinery operations. Price set is thus a significant driver for the LP model and an important element of the study.

They calculated refinery, unit, and product-specific efficiencies.

  • Refinery efficiency is a roll-up of the energy in all refinery end products divided by energy in all refinery inputs. Refinery inputs include crude oil, natural gas, hydrogen, electricity, blendstocks, and unfinished oils.

  • Unit efficiency is calculated by considering each unit in a refinery. Output streams can be end products, intermediates, and/or utilities; input streams include refinery inputs, intermediates, and utilities.

  • Product-specific efficiency is the efficiency of producing an end product: energy in an end product divided by energy associated with the production of the end product.

The results showed significant variation in refinery and product-specific efficiency depending on a number of seasonal and regional factors. Based ont the varied results, the researchers suggested that average refinery carbon intensity values should not be relied upon for policy implementation.

Master.img-003
Regional variation of product-specific efficiency for gasoline, diesel, and jet fuel. P = PADD Region. Credit: ACS, Forman et al. Click to enlarge.

Among their findings was that the processing of incremental amounts of domestic tight oil by US refiners is likely to have a neutral to slightly positive impact on refinery efficiency. Refining of additional amounts of domestic tight light oil could increase crude API gravity, reduce sulfur content, reduce heavy products, and reduce complexity.

However, a rebalancing of crude dieet based on the financial realities associated with optimal unit operation (e.g., fundamental changes in refinery configuration to accommodate incremental domestic tight oil) could offset the positive impact.

To conclude, currently US refineries are operated to optimize profit margin. In the context of possible future legislative requirements to reduce CO2 emissions from refining and to satisfy changes in demand and quality constraints, US refiners may be also be required in the future to optimize for efficiency. The dynamic relationship between efficiency and key parameters such as crude API gravity, sulfur content, heavy products, and refinery complexity are key to understanding any future changes in US refinery efficiency.

—Forman et al.

Resources

  • Grant S. Forman, Vincent B. Divita, Jeongwoo Han, Hao Cai, Amgad Elgowainy, and Michael Wang (2014) “US Refinery Efficiency: Impacts Analysis and Implications for Fuel Carbon Policy Implementation,” Environmental Science & Technology doi: 10.1021/es501035a

  • Elgowainy, A.; Han, J.; Cai, H.; Wang, M.; Forman, G. S.; DiVita, V. B. (2014) “Energy efficiency and greenhouse gas emissions intensity of petroleum products at US refineries,” Environ. Sci. Technol doi: 10.1021/es5010347

June 20, 2014 in Diesel, Emissions, Fuels, Gas-to-Liquids (GTL) | Permalink | Comments (4) | TrackBack (0)

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c4fbe53ef01a3fd225032970b

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Study suggests GTL blending could increase overall US refinery efficiency by improving diesel efficiency:

Comments

product-specific efficiency values are sensitive to crude quality

I would say the efficiency of making gasoline and diesel at various percntages is different for ultra light North Dakota versus tar sands.

Honestly this study reveals nothing new to most anyone in the refining industry. Since US refineries are, on average, the most advanced in the world in terms of secondary conversion capability (as measured by the Nelson Complexity Index), and moreover can operate with a broad spectrum of feedstock, I find it difficult to believe that the general news in this study comes as a surprise.

As far as GTL blending is concerned, the Advanced Refining Concepts "GDiesel" approach looks very promising and has been providing 200 kgal/day for awhile now. I'm sure there are some challenges that are not known to outsiders, but you can tour the facility and see the low-temperature (120deg C or so) processing. Early on they were using ratios like 3 parts Diesel to 1 part NG, although I believe (but do not know for sure) it is currently more like 9:1. Still, we are talking about stretching Diesel production by more than 10% with a clean catalytic process. Moreover, users (mostly civil agencies) report VERY clean combustion.

Oddly it seems that no one has licensed the process, so caveat emptor. Still, it is not the only catalytic Diesel + NG = more Diesel process out there.

I'm even less surprised since methane is a huge byproduct of refineries and is always recycled. Wheeling natural gas to refineries has been done for decades. If not for the Public Utilities act of 1936, refineries would be selling gas electricity too (and cogeneration would be bigger.)

The real trick is to utilize LPG in an efficient way, which is usually flared off (speaking of the world as a whole) and not too compatible with our transport networks. I would be interested if Advanced Refining Concepts would do that. Why tie oneself to a landfill when an oilfield will do?

Seeing flares go extinct should be a goal. In my prior life I've seen (and made) many proposals for use of flare gas as part of debottlenecking and regulatory capex. Not a lot of interest, generally, but I have faith this will eventually turn.

As for using oilfield sources, ARC says this on their site:
"The modular design of the units allows for distributed upstream or downstream refining and new options for environmental initiatives such as the use of flared or vented gas from oil platforms and oil production fields or methane from landfills and waste treatment plants depending on the purity of the gas." Part of the rationale for using landfill gas is purely regulatory: in some states the use of landfill gas makes it an "alternative" fuel and thus qualifies the product for tax relief or subsidy. Somehow if you utilize methane that would otherwise be wasted, that's not interesting enough.

Anyhow, I think during a previous exchange in which I waxed hopefully (maybe quixotically) about power generation from oilfield effluents, we mentioned that liquid and particle separation is always an issue. But by no means is it insurmountable.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Green Car Congress © 2014 BioAge Group, LLC. All Rights Reserved. | Home | BioAge Group