Author:
Abdel Hamid Mahmoud Farag,Aboul-Fotouh Tarek M.,El-Shafie Masoud A.
Abstract
AbstractA sulfur recovery process is one of the most important processes in the oil and gas industry to get rid of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) which is produced from the acid gas removal process of sour natural gas to convert it into sweet natural gas. Actual data from a gas field is used to obtain a realistic comparison between two sulfur recovery techniques, through which researchers and/or manufacturers can obtain information that will help them choose the most appropriate and cheapest method. A total feed acid gas flow rate of 5.1844 MMSCFD with an H2S concentration of 24.62% by mole percent was produced from amine acid gas removal units. Claus sulfur recovery technique is a traditional chemical process that uses thermal and catalytic reactors. Therefore, an acid gas enrichment unit is applied to increase the H2S concentration to approximately 50% mole to provide reliable and flexible operation in the thermal and catalytic reactors. Moreover, a tail gas treatment unit is applied to increase the overall conversion efficiency to 99.90% with the Claus technique instead of 95.08% without it to achieve high sulfur recovery and reliable operation through the conversion of carbonyl sulfide (COS) and mercaptans. Studies on the safety and simplicity of the Claus technique revealed many important hazards and a large number of transmitters (379) and control loops (128) in one Claus train. THIOPAQ sulfur recovery as a new technology is a biological desulfurization process that uses a natural mixture of sulfide-oxidizing bacteria. It is also a unique H2S removal process with an efficiency of 99.999%. In addition, studies on the safety and simplicity of the THIOPAQ technique have shown that the hazards, the number of transmitters (74), and the number of control loops (29) of a one THIOPAQ train are lower. The THIOPAQ technique showed higher efficiency, was safer, simpler, and had lower CAPEX and OPEX. This study was conducted using Aspen HYSYS V11 and actual data.
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference39 articles.
1. Jamekhorshid A, Davani ZK, Salehi A, Khosravi A (2021) Gas sweetening simulation and its optimization by two typical amine solutions: an industrial case study in Persian Gulf region. Nat Gas Ind B 8(3):309–316
2. Liu Z, Liu Y, Liu G, Qiu W, Koros WJ October (2019) Cross linkable semi-rigid 6FDA-based polyimide hollow fiber membranes for sour natural gas purification, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research by American Chemical Society. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.9b04821
3. Raabe T, Mehne M, Rasser H, Krause H, Kureti S (2019) Study on iron-based adsorbents for alternating removal of H2S and O2 from natural gas and biogas. Chem Eng J 371:738–749
4. Klok JB, Van Heeringen G, Shaunfield P (2018) Desulfurization of amine acid gas under turndown: performance of the biological desulfurization process, in: Laurence Reid Gas Conditioning Conference, Norman, Oklahoma USA, Google Scholar
5. Syed M, Soreanu G, Falletta P, Béland M (2006) Removal of hydrogen sulfide from gas streams using biological processes – a review. Can Biosyst Eng 48:2
Cited by
1 articles.
订阅此论文施引文献
订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献