Anda di halaman 1dari 65

521

A Successful Approach to Improve Energy Utilization in Ethylene Units

Jack Buehler
Energy Management Program Manager
Shell Global Solutions US (Inc)

Nicolas Genty
Olefins Process Specialist
Deer Park Chemicals Plant
Shell Chemical Company

Abstract

Energy represents a significant portion of the cost to produce ethylene in an


olefins plant. With the recent increases in energy costs and corporate
commitment to reducing CO2 emissions, Shell Chemical Company has embarked
on a program to identify and implement quick payback energy reduction
opportunities in its ethylene plants through the Shell Global Solutions1 energy
management program. The energy management program has successfully
reduced energy and variable costs by 3 to 5 % at the ethylene plants with short
implementation time, quick payback projects. In this paper, the energy
management program will be referred to as the Energize Program. Energize
projects identified and implemented at the ethylene plants include operational
changes, and expense and low capital cost projects that have resulted in energy
reduction, reliability improvement, yield improvement, and capacity creep.

Our experience is that the plant engineers and specialists are very busy
operating the units and do not have sufficient time to work on energy
improvement projects. Many good ideas that staff and operators have that
require further evaluation and development tend to not get worked on. The
Energize team brings additional process engineer resources into the plant to
work with the staff to scope and implement the projects. Working closely with
plant personnel insures staff ownership of the projects and will help sustain the
savings after the Energize team leaves. The paper will discuss the makeup of an
Energize team, the methodology of study, and the timeline for implementing a
plant program.

1
Shell Global Solutions is a trading style used by a network of technology companies of the Shell Group.

509
522

In the chemical plants and in the ethylene units, projects have ranged from
simple equipment improvements (turbine efficiency, furnace efficiency, steam
trap/leak maintenance) to more complex projects like adjusting fractionation
conditions, optimizing steam headers, and improving process heat integration.
Several examples of Energize projects implemented at ethylene plants will be
discussed in the paper:
o Optimizing pump-around on pyrolysis fractionator (pyrofrac)
o Balancing of low pressure steam header supply/demand
o Installation of liquid pumping trap to permit lowering of process gas
compressor suction pressure
o Troubleshooting and improving vacuum on surface condensers
o Improve insulation in furnace penthouses and burner repairs to reduce
excess air leakage into firebox.

510
523

A Successful Approach to Improve Energy Utilization in Ethylene Units

Introduction:
Energy represents a significant portion of the cost to produce ethylene in an
olefins unit. With the recent increases in energy costs and the Shell Chemical
Company commitment to improve energy efficiency by 7.5% from 2002 to 2007,
Shell Group has embarked on an energy program to identify and implement
quick payback energy reduction opportunities in its ethylene plants. The Energy
Management Program is offered by Shell Global Solutions2 and is currently
providing support to both Shell Group and external clients. In this paper the
Energy management program will be referred to as the Energize Program.
Energize programs have successfully reduced energy usage and variable costs by
5 to 7 % at refineries and by 3 to 5 % at chemical sites and three ethylene
crackers. The first cracker realized a 3.9% reduction; the second saw a 4.2%
reduction and the third cracker that had a partial review saw a 2.5% reduction in
energy usage. Benefits identified and implemented at the crackers have ranged
from US$7.0MM/yr to US$23MM/yr. The program focuses on short
implementation time, quick payback projects. Projects identified and
implemented at the ethylene units include operational changes, and expense and
low cost capital projects that have resulted in energy reduction, reliability
improvement, yield improvement, and capacity creep.

Our experience is that the plant engineers and specialists are very busy
operating the units and do not have sufficient time to work on energy
improvement projects. Many good ideas that staff and operators have that
require further evaluation and development tend to not get worked on. The
Energize team brings additional process engineer resources into the plant to
work directly with the staff to identify, scope and implement the projects. The
team has extensive operating experience and brings a structured methodology to
review plant operations. Working closely with plant personnel insures staff
ownership of the projects which will help sustain the savings after the Energize
team leaves. Monitoring tools and operating procedures are deliverables to
support the sustainability of the energy savings. This paper will discuss the
makeup of an Energize team, the methodology of study, and the timeline for
implementing a plant program.

In the chemical plants and in the ethylene crackers, projects have ranged
from simple equipment improvements (turbine efficiency, furnace efficiency,
steam trap/leak maintenance) to more complex projects like adjusting
fractionation conditions, optimizing steam headers, and improving process heat
integration. Several examples of projects implemented at the ethylene plants will
be discussed.

2 Shell Global Solutions is a trading style used by a network of technology companies of the Shell Group

511
524

Energy Management Program:

Resources:
The Energize Team is staffed with experienced olefins personnel and typically
has two process engineers and a working program manager on site plus part-
time specialist support as required from Shell Global Solutions. The unit
manager usually will provide an experienced staff operator on a part time basis
to work with the team. Having the Shell Global Solutions Energize team on site
moves the program forward without impacting greatly on scarce unit staff
resources. Most importantly the Team remains on site after identifying the
opportunities to insure that projects are implemented and not just dumped on
the overloaded unit staff for future implementation. Working as an integrated
team with the unit staff insures unit ownership of the projects and helps insure
sustainability of benefits.

Two Phase Approach:


The Shell Global Solutions Energy Management Program, formerly called an
Energize Program, typically lasted 12 15 months and consisted of an
Assessment Phase and an Implementation Phase. This intense schedule drives
the program to work on Quick Hit projects which can quickly return significant
savings and which require little or no cost to implement. Projects involving
simple operational change and low implementation cost are stressed.

Assessment Phase:
The assessment phase follows a structured methodology and lasts 2 3 months.
Objective is to identify new energy savings opportunities and to build and further
develop existing ideas that staff members have. The Team concentrates on
Operational Excellence and low capital projects that can be implemented in 12
months or less. For idea generation the team uses several tools and techniques.
Shell Global Solutions has developed Checklists for various types of equipment
and for the different sections of an Ethylene unit to help quickly screen
opportunities. Also the team can draw on the project reports from earlier
cracker energy studies that have been completed. Migrating of ideas from
previous studies is encouraged no need to reinvent the wheel.
Interviews with key staff and operators are conducted during this phase to help
identify ideas and understand current operational practices. A high level review
of the plant major energy losses to air and cooling water is done to identify
opportunities. A plant steam balance is prepared.
After the initial observations are captured, a funneling approach is used to
categorize these into possible projects for further evaluation and then finally into
Project proposals for detailed study and implementation. Typically 200
observations may lead to 40 projects for further evaluation and then to 15 20
projects recommended for implementation during the 12 month Implementation
phase.

512
525

At the end of Assessment the Team presents the short list of ideas proposed for
further study/ implementation along with the anticipated benefits and costs and
then a decision is made on whether to proceed to the Implementation Phase.

Observations
Raw Opportunities
Developed Ideas
Project Proposals
Conceptual
Packages

Project Development Funnel

Implementation Phase:
During the Implementation Phase, which typically last 12 months, the projects
are further evaluated, scope is developed and projects are implemented.
Energize has a well-developed work process and management system. After
ideas are approved for further study, they are written up in project development
worksheets (PDW). The PDW goes through several revisions during the course of
the project and becomes the tracking document for each project. Revision 0
means the idea is accepted for further study. Revision 1 means the idea has
been quantified and approved for implementation. Revision 2 is prepared after
the project is implemented and documents the benefits and how they were
calculated. At each step in the process, the unit and the Energize team approve
the PDWs. To insure alignment and monitor progress, frequent meetings are
held with the plant. Implemented projects include energy reduction, reliability
improvement, and capacity creep.

513
526

ENERGIZE PROGRAM HAS A TWO PHASE APPROACH

ASSESSMENT IMPLEMENTATION

2 Month Phase 12 Month Phase

Identify Energy Opportunities Implement Projects

Implement any Quick Hit Training and Operating Procedures MOC

Select Projects to Implement Document Benefits

Decision on Whether to Proceed Develop Sustain Tools


To Implementation

Sustain the Savings:


Monitoring tools and operating procedures are prepared to help the plant
maintain the energy savings after the Energize team leaves. Sustain tools
include:

Energy Advisor: This is an Excel based tool available for the board operator to
monitor performance of the units including sustaining the benefits realized with
the energy projects. In this tool the energy related Key Performance Indicators
(KPIs) and calculations are monitored on-line using real time plant data. When a
process variable is out of the normal range established, the tool estimates the
Lost energy opportunity and gives advice on things for operator to review.
This allows the operator to monitor equipment performance and make
adjustments that are suggested by the Energy Advisor.
The summary screen of an Energy Advisor lists the Process units and the number
of Advice messages based on energy KPIs outside of target range. Refer to the
two figures below. The red, yellow and green indicator colors on the number of
advice messages reflects the magnitude of the Energy loss. When the
Operator clicks on the process unit name, a second unit specific screen is
displayed. Only KPIs outside of the target range are listed. The target value,
low range limit, high range limit, and actual process value appear. The potential
savings to get back to target value is expressed in $/yr so that the magnitude
gets the operators attention. The Energy Advisor suggests things for the
Operator to check to get back within the target range.

514
527

Energy Tracker: This is an Excel workbook tool that shows the estimated
savings status for each project on a daily and monthly basis. This tool allows the
plant engineer or manager to monitor and report performance and analyze
whether there has been any erosion of benefits.

Tools and Methodology:

Checklists:
Checklists have been developed to help the team identify possible opportunities.
Checklists cover different sections of the ethylene unit and different pieces of
equipment. A partial list of checklists includes:
Furnace combustion side
Furnace Process side
Quench/ Pyrofractionator system
Cracked gas compression
Propylene (C3R) and Ethylene (C2R) Refrigeration
Turbine drives backpressure and extraction/ condensing
Separations distillation, Acetylene reactors
Steam / Water systems
Cooling Water/ Flares/ Miscellaneous systems

515
528

Each of the checklists includes items for the team to evaluate in plant operation.
For example some of the items to be reviewed in the Quench / Pyrolysis
fractionation system include:
Maximize heat recovery in the lower (hotter) pumparound loop to recover
heat at the highest possible level. For example generate 175# steam
from the hotter Cracked Heavy Gas Oil (CHGO) loop rather than generate
20# steam in the cooler Cracked Light Gas Oil (CLGO) circulation loop.
Minimize dilution steam pressure to recover more CHGO heat in Dilution
Steam Generators (DSG) as usable dilution steam
Monitor the performance of the heat exchangers in the pumparounds to
determine when cleaning is justified to maintain heat recovery.
Investigate heat loss to air (fan coolers) or to cooling water in the
overhead of the fractionator. Look for opportunities to use heat for boiler
feed water (BFW) heating, feed preheating, etc.

Benchmarking:
The Team can benchmark the crackers energy usage (BTU/lb product) against
several benchmarks including:
Internal Energize equipment performance benchmarks
Design data of equipment in the cracker
Solomon study
Energy usage of sister crackers within the company
Energy usage targets for new ethylene cracker design

The benchmarking exercise will help the team understand the magnitude of the
gap and help identify areas to study. Start by looking for Gap contributors like
inter-unit process stream transfers, hardware differences, feedstock yield effects
and furnace efficiency (high stack temperature, excess air). Next the team will
do a process analysis looking for things like internal recycles, excessive reflux,
kickback on compressors, steam header letdown and steam vents, high
temperature streams being cooled against air or cooling water without heat
integration. This Benchmarking exercise helps frame the magnitude of potential
energy savings and indicates where to look more closely.

Review the previous Energize Projects Library:


All of the projects implemented during previous Energize studies at Shell Group
plants are well documented in the PDW files. Projects are listed by area and
type of equipment to make the search easier. An example was a project to
install better design insulating sleeves in the furnace penthouses at one plant
based on work done at another plant.

516
529

Understand the Steam and Power System within the Plant:


One of the first things that is done is to get a good understanding of the plant
steam header balances and develop a simulation model. This exercise will help
uncover steam letdowns and steam venting and identify opportunities to better
balance steam loads between backpressure turbines, condensing turbines and
motor drivers. The model also will verify that energy savings projects found in
the olefins unit will in fact end up saving the site energy.

Understand the Large Heat Losses:


There is already a lot of heat integration within an ethylene unit. For example a
portion of the furnace fired heat duty generates HP steam, preheats feed to
furnace, and generates dilution steam through pyrofractionator heat recovery.
Propylene compressor inner stage vapor is used to provide reboil on the
ethylene/ethane splitter and the demethanizer. The team needs to look at
where the large heat losses are in the unit and see if there might be an
opportunity to recover a portion of this lost heat by changes in operating
conditions or whether capital investment will be needed for further heat
integration. Pinch Analysis techniques are helpful in this exercise.
Examples of large heat losses in a gas oil cracker and possible projects could be:

Heat Loss Potential project


-Pyrofrac overhead heat loss preheat BFW, furnace feed preheat
-Turbine surface condensers eductor performance, cooling water temp,
hotter inlet throttle steam temp.
-Furnace stack loss Reduce Excess air, clean convection section
-Steam vents/ letdown Balance steam hdrs, operate pump with motor
and leave turbine as spare, use steam to
preheat feed.

517
530

Discussion of Projects:

A summary of results from Energize studies at three of the Shell Group crackers
follows:

Plant #Projects % Energy Energy Savings


Completed Reduction MM US$/yr (1)
Plant 1 18 4.2 15.0
Plant 2 (Ph1) 11 2.5 7.1
Plant 3 23 3.9 6.8

(1) Project savings at fuel price of $6.50/MMBTU. Non-energy benefits


identified and implemented by team have not been included. For example
Plant 1 total benefits were $23.0MM US$/yr.

Several projects from these studies will be discussed in this section. Key points
were extracted from the PDW documents mentioned earlier.

Optimize Pyrofrac CHGO Pumparounds:

Cracked gas from the furnaces is quenched in the pyrolysis fractionator


(pyrofrac) before going to the cracked gas compressor. The purpose of the
pyrofrac and its auxiliaries is to quench the cracked gas, knock out the gas oil
fractions and the quench oil, knock out the pyrolysis gasoline fraction in the
overhead, and remove as much heat as possible to generate dilution steam and
15# steam.
The Pyrofrac removes heat with two pumparound loops. The lower (hotter)
cracked heavy gas oil (CHGO) loop generates dilution steam and 175# steam for
the furnaces. Heat not removed in the lower loop is removed in the upper
(cooler) cracked light gas oil (CLGO) loop that generates 15# steam. To maintain
175# header pressure, it is necessary to let down 600# steam to the 175# level.
Any 175# steam savings will result in a reduction of 600# steam demand. The
unit has an excess of 15# steam and vents to atmosphere. The figure below is a
simplified schematic of the plant 1 pyrofrac system.

518
531

Simplified Schematic of Pyrofrac

Must maintain Project Objective:


To overhead temp above Increase heat recovery in CHGO loop
coolers 240F and reduce heat recovery in CLGO loop
Maintain min CHGO press and col ovh min temp

Reflux
CLGO Loop 15# Stm gen

CLGO Product Must maintain


60 PSIG min.
on CHGO
Pyrofrac CHGO Loop

Tray 9
DS Gen DSG 175# Stm Gen CHGO to
Quench

CHGO product

Cracked gas
from furnace

To quench loop

The CHGO circulates through the Dilution Steam Generators (DSG) and the 175#
steam generator operating in parallel. Controllers adjust flow to each. The plant
must make up with 175# steam to supply sufficient dilution steam. The plant is
long on low pressure (LP) steam and vents 15# steam. A review of historical
data and design data indicated that the175# generators had additional capacity
that was not being used. The team saw an opportunity to increase total CHGO
flow and get additional heat recovery in the 175# generators. Increased heat
removal in the CHGO loop would lower tray 9 Temperature, but calculations
showed that the tray temperature would remain within the established operating
window. The maximum CHGO pumping rate was constrained by the need to
maintain at least 65PSIG pressure for the quench system. Operations personnel
agreed this could be reduced to 60PSIG. Review of the CHGO pump data
showed that flow could be increased and still maintain adequate pressure above
the minimum 60PSIG required for the quench system. A test run showed that
there was an optimum CHGO circulation rate. Heat removal increased as CHGO
flow was increased, but above 14,500 Mlb/hr the CHGO temperature leaving the
heat exchangers began to increase indicating that we had reached the heat
removal capacity in the exchangers. Based on test runs, the total CHGO flow
was increased by 3.5 percent. Operating guidelines provided a target CHGO flow
to the DSG and a target flow to the 175# generators. An additional
15MMBTU/hr was recovered in the CHGO system and reduced the need for
17Mlb/hr of 600#steam (600# lets down to 175#) worth $1.2 million per year.
With less heat to recover in the CLGO circulation loop, the 15# steam production

519
532

was reduced and 15# steam venting was reduced. Thus 15# vented steam was
in effect upgraded to a reduction in 600# steam demand.
This project demonstrates how a review of equipment capacity to permit
improved heat integration and working with operations to expand the operating
window can open up energy saving opportunities.
The following figure plots CHGO heat duty and pressure vs CHGO flow rate. The
figure shows original and new target operating points.

A similar project was done at plant 2 to increase the CHGO circulation to the
dilution steam generators (DSG) and shift more heat duty into the CHGO loop.
A review of equipment data showed there was additional heat removal capacity
in the DSG and sufficient CHGO circulating pump capacity to increase flow and
maintain the minimum pressure required to supply the quench system.
Increased heat removal in the CHGO loop would lower the tray 7 Temperature
below the low range of the tray temperature transmitter (TT). Working with
operations, the team reviewed the operation of the pyrofrac and conducted a
MOC and then lowered the range of the TT. The CHGO circulation rate was
increased and the heat duty increased on the DSG by 21MMBTU/hr and the
200# steam makeup decreased by 24Mlb/hr. The 15# steam generation in the
CLGO loop decreased. At $6.50/MMBTU the 200# steam savings is $1.3million
per year. The Pyrofrac stream density targets and heavy boilers all remained
within target guidelines.

520
533

Reduce Cracked Gas Compressor Suction Pressure

A new furnace and cracked gas compressor (CGC) was added in one of the
plants. The CGC was designed to operate with 10 PSIG/0.7barg suction pressure.
The compressor was always operating with kickback to prevent surge. Shortly
after startup, operations noticed an excessive amount of condensed liquid
dropping out in the suction line between the 1st stage suction scrubber and the
1st stage suction inlet to the CGC. The operators had to drain the header liquid
boot 3 or 4 times per shift to the liquid collection system. Eventually the suction
pressure was increased to 20 PSIG/1.4 barg and the drain line was cracked open
to continuously drain the liquid. This worked well but now the furnace coil outlet
pressure (COP) was 10 PSI/0.7 barg higher and the ethylene yield on the furnace
was adversely affected. Reducing the COP back to the original design pressure
would increase the ethylene yield by 3.2 lb/100lb feed thus requiring less feed
and less cracked gas volume to be processed to produce same amount of
ethylene.
The Energize team working with operations proposed the installation of a
condensate pumping trap which used N2 as a motive force and collected and
pumped the liquid back to the liquid collection system. The pumping trap
required no electrical supply or instrumentation and could be installed quickly.
Tests were conducted to measure the amount of condensed liquid and properly
size the trap.
The pumping trap was installed and the suction pressure has been lowered to 12
PSIG/ 0.8barg. There was no increase in power usage on the CGC.
Normally one would expect higher compression horsepower (HP) when operating
with a lower suction pressure. The minimum flow (mass) required to keep the
1st stage out of surge decreases with lower pressure. The compressor has a
variable speed electric driver. During test runs at 9.5PSIG(0.6barg) suction the
compressor speed increased 560RPM to produce the higher pressure ratio
required and the surge controller reduced the kickback flow to the 1st stage
suction by 20M lb/hr. Motor amperage and kW use actually decreased slightly at
the lower suction pressure so there was no additional compression energy cost.
The improved ethylene yield pattern based on model prediction and confirmed
with spot analysis increased the unit variable margin by over US$1.0 million per
year. The total cost of this project was US$100K with payback of 1.2 months.
This project is a good example of how Operations was able to identify a known
problem and Energize team was able to provide the engineering resource and a
relatively simple solution to correct the problem. The chart below shows the
reduction in suction pressure and motor amperage remaining constant.

521
534

Improving Condensing Turbine Performance:

Two examples involving improvement of condensing turbine performance will be


discussed.

Plant 1 Process Gas Compressor (PGC):


The PGC is a nominal 60,000 horsepower (Hp) compressor train that compresses
cracked gas from the furnaces from 9PSIG to 590PSIG for processing in the
demethanizer. The PGC driver is a condensing turbine and uses 440M lb/hr of
1250# steam to condensing.

As part of the plant Energize study, all of the large turbine drives were looked at.
A field inspection of the turbine, surface condenser and eductor system was
conducted with an operator. On the PGC the turbine vacuum was 2 to 3 in Hg
worse than would be expected for the cooling water supply (CWS) temperature.
It is CWS temperature that determines the condensing pressure in the turbine.
The cooling water flow to the surface condenser was verified to be near design

522
535

using an ultrasonic clamp on meter. At the cooling water flow rate, the observed
cooling water temperature rise was correct for the condensing duty on the
surface condenser. There did not appear to be a problem with the condenser.
On the PGC it was noted that the approach between the surface condensate
temperature (equilibrium with vacuum on turbine) and the cooling water return
(CWR) temperature from the surface condenser was 19F. This temperature
approach is typically 10 F. Since there did not appear to be a problem with the
surface condenser, the larger temperature approach indicated possible air
leakage into the system or problems with the eductor system. The PGC surface
condenser has two parallel sets of primary and secondary eductors for removing
inerts (air ingress) from the surface condenser. With good eductor performance
and nominal air ingress, only one primary and one secondary eductor should be
operated. See figure below.

Schematic of Primary and Secondary Eductor Lineup

50# motive
steam

50# motive open In Serv open


steam Secondary
Eductor
open In Serv open open
Primary Inerts
Eductor to air
open closed
CWR
Out Serv.
Non Condensables open Secondary Outter Condenser
From Surface Condenser CWR closed Eductor closed
"Idle"
Primary 50# motive CWS
Inner Condenser
closed eductor open steam
Surface Condensate
50# motive CWS to Sewer
steam
Surface Condensate
Back to Surface Path of Inerts
Condenser Hotwell
Incorrect Recycle

The "Idle" Primary Eductor was not properly taken out of service.
While the motive steam was closed, the inlet and outlet Process valves were left open.
This created an unintended recycle of inerts from disch of In Serv eductor back thru the "Idle" eductor
thus reducing capacity to remove inerts and resulting in higher vacuum on surface condenser
The Out of Service Secondary Eductor is properly isolated on the process side and there is no recycle.

Only one set of primary and secondary eductors was in service. On the backup
set of eductors the steam was properly shutoff off to both the primary and
secondary eductors and the process inlet was closed to the secondary eductor.
However, the process inlet and outlet valves on the idle backup primary
eductor were left open. The inlet valve should have been closed. With the idle
primary eductor inlet and outlet valves both open this provided a path for inerts
to re-circulate from the discharge of the operating primary eductor back through
the idle eductor to the suction of the operating primary eductor. This recycle
of inerts reduced the effective capacity of the operating primary eductor and
caused the surface condenser pressure to increase until the operating primary

523
536

eductor was able to develop the required pressure ratio to move the nominal
inert load plus the recycle load. The eductor valve set up had been like this for
months since the last turbine outage. The outside operator informed the board
operator and then blocked in the process inlet valve to the idle primary.
Immediately the vacuum improved so dramatically the board operator was on
the radio asking if everything was ok at the turbine.
The vacuum improved from 23.8 in Hg to 25.8 in Hg for a 2.0 in Hg
improvement. Refer to the figure below for a plot of vacuum and turbine water
rate. The surface condensate temperature showed a corresponding reduction of
13.5F decreasing from 139.5F to 126F. The condensate temperature approach to
the CWR was now 6F. Most importantly the turbine water rate improved from
6.48 #/Hp to 6.3 #/Hp for a 2.8 percent improvement. The 1250# steam
consumption decreased by 12M lb/hr from 444 to 432 M LB/HR. The steam
savings is worth US$1.0 million /yr with $6.50/MMBTU fuel price. With the
turbine Hp limit relieved the plant now had the ability to increase throughput.
This example shows the dramatic effect a small operational change that was
implemented in 10 minutes can make to reducing energy cost. The findings
were reviewed with all the shifts and a sign posted at each eductor bank.

524
537

Plant 2 Process Gas Compressor (PGC):

Turbine efficiency improvements were also made on the plant 2 PGC. This
turbine is also a 1250# steam to condensing turbine with the source of most of
the 1250# steam being produced off the olefin furnaces. The steam produced
from some of the furnaces was de-superheated. After some review, it was
determined that the superheat temperature could be increased by 10F from 860F
to 870F. The hotter 1250# steam temperature going to the turbine inlet
improved the turbine efficiency by 1.7% and reduced the 1250# steam usage by
7.0Mlb/hr for constant shaft power loading. You should always look for
opportunity to get as much steam superheat to the turbine inlet throttle without
exceeding steam header or turbine case temperature limits.
The Team also found that the PGC vacuum was running about -25 in Hg and
should be 2 to 3 in Hg better based on the CWS temperature. A check of the
surface condenser and eductors found that there was an excessive inerts flow,
which was overloading the eductors. Additional resources from Shell Global
Solutions were brought in to do Helium leak testing around the system to find
the source of the air ingress. Air was found to be leaking into the turbine seal on
the vacuum end of the turbine. Making a local set point change and increasing
the turbine sealing steam pressure by 3 PSIG stopped the air ingress. The
vacuum improved by 2 in Hg and improved the turbine efficiency by 2.4%. For a
constant process Hp load, the 1250# steam usage was reduced from 400 to
391Mlb/hr for a 9 Mlb/hr savings of 1250# steam.
The total 16M lb/hr of steam savings was worth US$1.5 million /yr and was
accomplished by operational changes and required no capital expenditure.

Balancing Steam Header Load To Reduce Steam Letdown


and Reduce Venting:

This project demonstrates how switching process heat duty from one steam level
to another can help balance steam headers and reduce venting.
At plant 1 the CLGO pumparound loop on the pyrofrac generates more 20#
steam than the unit reboilers can consume resulting in an excess 20# steam
vent of 45M lb/hr. The 175# to 50# steam letdown station was continuously
letting down 29M lb/hr of 175# steam to maintain the 50# header pressure.
The Energize team working with Operations saw an opportunity to balance the
two steam headers and began looking for an opportunity to transfer an existing
process heat duty from 50# steam user to 20# steam user.
The gas oil feed to furnaces is preheated with low-pressure steam and this
system looked like it might be a good fit. The gas oil was designed to be
preheated with a 20# steam heater followed in series with a 50# steam heater.
After field walking the system and talking with operators it was learned that

525
538

many months before the 20# heater had been removed from service and was
being bypassed with all duty on the 50# heater. The concern was that the 20#
heater had developed tube leaks, but this was not documented.
Working with operations, the 20# heater was pressure tested and found to not
have any leaks. The 20# heater was then returned to service and a reduced
steam flow was maintained on the 50# heater to insure sufficient gas oil outlet
temperature.

The figure below is a simplified sketch of the feed preheat system.

The figure shows steam flows before and after the 20# heater was returned to
service. The process side gas oil heat duty is constant for the comparison. The
20# steam flow lined out at 25Mlb/hr and the 20# steam vent was reduced by
corresponding 25M lb/hr. The 50# steam flow was reduced from 35 to 11
Mlb/hr for a 24Mlb/hr reduction. The reduced 50# steam demand decreased the
175# to 50# letdown by 24 M lb/hr. The 24Mlb/hr of 175# steam savings was
worth US$1.4million/yr at a fuel price of US$6.50/MMBTU. The project had
turned a steam vent into a 175# steam savings.

This non-capital project is a good example of looking for opportunities to swap


process duty to a lower level steam supply if the unit is long on low pressure
(LP) steam. This can sometimes be done by switching the steam supply to
select reboilers if you have sufficient surface area, but most often will require
capital for steam header and control valve revisions.

A similar opportunity exists on pump drivers. Often a plant will have the primary
pump driven by a backpressure steam turbine exhausting into the LP steam
header and the spare pump will be an electric drive. If plant is long on LP

526
539

steam and venting, then capital investment can often be justified to install auto-
start capability on the turbine drive. Then the electric driven pump can be
operated as the primary pump and the turbine driven pump with new auto-start
capability can be operated as the spare. The turbine steam exhausting into the
LP steam header is minimized and venting of LP steam is reduced.

Improve Furnace Efficiency:

The cracking furnace fired duty can represent 60-70% of the energy consumed
in an ethylene unit. About 30 to 40% of the fired duty can be recovered in the
convection section of the furnace with feed preheating, HP steam generation,
and dilution steam superheating. If the convection section heat transfer drops
off with fouled tubes, then flue gas temperature leaving the stack can be in
excess of 400F/200C. Total furnace stack heat loss is a function of stack
temperature and excess air and can be 400MMBTU/hr for a large ethylene plant.

Energy projects in the furnace area need to concentrate on three items:


1) Improve or maintain the heat recovery in the convection section
2) Minimize excess air by maintaining good burner operation and burner air
register control. Reset draft and air registers with O2 analysis.
3) Minimize excess air by correcting tramp air leaks into the furnace

Work was done on furnace A at plant 1 during the scheduled furnace


preventative maintenance (PM) to demonstrate the potential for furnace energy
savings. In addition to the normal furnace maintenance work three energy-
related projects were done
1) Clean the convection section tube banks on flue gas side
2) Repair the air registers on the C bank floor burners. Inspect and repair all
floor burners.
3) Install new design insulating sleeves in the furnace penthouse.

Furnace A has a nominal fired duty of 300MMBTU/hr with all floor burners. For
control purposes the floor burners are arranged in three banks. Furnace draft is
controlled with a variable speed induced draft (ID) fan. The air registers on A
bank burners are mechanically linked so all A bank registers can be adjusted with
one controller. B bank burners are set up the same way. The operator must
individually adjust each of the C bank burner air registers. Operators adjust the
burner air registers based on O2 reading. The convection section recovers more
than 100MMBTU/hr of flue gas heat by preheating feed, heating BFW, generating
HP steam, superheating dilution steam, and heating feed before it enters the
radiant cracking coils.

527
540

Clean Convection Section:


The external finned tubes of the convection section tube banks were cleaned to
recover lost heat transfer. Inspection doors at different levels of the convection
section permitted spraying the tube banks with a water lance. A plastic tarp was
installed at the bottom of the convection section to collect water before it
reached the radiant section refractory. After convection section cleaning the
stack temperature decreased by some 25F/14C which improved furnace
efficiency by 0.8% equal to 2.9MMBTU/hr worth US$150K/yr in reduced fuel.
Based on three major furnace PMs per year when the convection section could
be cleaned, this can result in US$450K/yr of fuel savings. Furnace PMs are done
roughly every 5 years. Payback was 2 months. It is recommended that
convection section cleaning be included in the scope of each furnace major
turnaround unless there has been no measurable increase in stack temperature.

Repair of C bank burner air registers and floor burners:


The floor burners and burner blocks were inspected with operations and the
vendor field representative. Fuel spuds were inspected and replaced. Burner
repairs were made based on field inspection.
The C bank burner air registers must all be manually adjusted by the operator at
each burner. Many of the C bank air registers were hard to operate or stuck in
the open position such that they could not be properly adjusted. This resulted in
estimated 30% excess air being pulled into the firebox at the C bank burners
compared with 15% excess air at the A and B bank burners. This was confirmed
by firebox O2 readings. This condition existed on all of the unit furnaces. The C
bank air registers were repaired so they could be easily adjusted.
The effect of these changes was to significantly reduce the C bank burner excess
air and reduce the stack O2 by 0.7 percent and this improved furnace efficiency
by 0.4% equivalent to 1.5MMBTU/hr worth US$78K/yr. Payback was 3 months.
The potential benefit of repairing the C bank air registers on all furnaces will be
US$1.0million /yr. The figure below shows one C bank burner muffler assembly.
The air register is inside the muffler and is adjusted with the lever. The
inspection window allows the operators to see how much the air register is open
when making adjustments.
Only one-third of the floor burner air registers required repair since the A and B
bank were operated with mechanical linkage and found to be working well. On a
furnace with all the floor burner air registers in the same condition as the C bank
burners the potential fuel savings could be three times as large or $230K/yr on
each furnace.

528
541

Install new insulating sleeves in furnace penthouse:


Furnace A has vertical cracking coils contained in the radiant firebox. The
penthouse is located directly above the firebox. The cracking coils enter and
leave the firebox through the firebox roof (penthouse floor). The coils are
supported by hangers, which also penetrate the firebox roof. Each coil has
several thermocouples, which also penetrate the roof. In all there are well over
100 openings that have the potential to leak tramp air into the firebox. As the
coils and furnace heat up and cool down, the coils push against the insulating
blanket and over time will create air gaps between the blanket and the coil. As
the insulating blanket ages and becomes less flexible the size of the air gap will
increase. The air gaps allow cool air to be pulled into the firebox at the top of the
roof. The cool air is heated to firebox temperature and reduces furnace
efficiency.
The Energize team inspected all of the furnaces at plant 1 and proposed
installing new design insulating sleeves similar to what plant 2 was using. The
new insulating sleeve rests on top of the insulating blanket and moves with the
tube while still covering any air gap between the tube and the insulating blanket.

Two furnaces were retrofitted for demonstration. Based on the observed size of
air gaps on the furnaces, the heat loss was estimated to be 1.4MMBTU/hr, which
is 0.4% of the fired duty and is worth US$78K/yr. The improved furnace
efficiency was confirmed by observing a reduction in stack O2 of 0.6%. Payback
for installing the sleeves was 3 months. When insulating sleeves are installed in
all the furnaces, the potential fuel savings will be US$1.0milliion /yr. The figure
below shows the new sleeve design around the coil support hangers. Note that
the new insulating sleeve rests on top of the insulating blanket.

529
542

Furnace Summary:
Maintaining convection section heat recovery by periodic cleaning, minimizing
excess air by eliminating tramp air leaks, and better adjustment of air registers
have resulted in Furnace A fuel savings estimated at US$300K/yr. Total furnace
fuel savings at plant 1 will be US$2.4million /yr when all of the work is
completed.

530
543

Concluding Comments:

The Shell Global Solutions Energy Management Program has been successfully
implemented at several petrochemical plants and Ethylene units with an energy
reduction of 3-5% realized at the ethylene units. The program concentrates on
operational change and low cost, fast payback projects. Projects that have been
implemented in the ethylene crackers include energy reduction, variable cost
improvement, and capacity (debottlenecking) projects.
Shell Global Solutions brings an experienced team that works closely with the
unit staff. This insures that program moves forward with minimal impact on
scarce unit staff resources. The Team remains on site after identifying the
opportunities to help the plant implement the projects. Working as an integrated
team with the unit staff insures unit ownership of the program and the
implemented projects.

The program uses a structured approach and methodology including use of


process checklists, a library of previous successful projects, Benchmarking, and
consulting with Shell Global Solutions specialists as required. Some important
deliverable of the Program are well documented projects and a set of
Sustainability tools including an Energy Advisor and an Energy Tracker to help
the plant sustain the realized benefits over the longer term.

Key Points of Shell Global Solutions Energy Management Program:


1) Energy Savings of 3-5% in ethylene crackers have been achieved
2) Limited Time Frame drives results
3) Low cost, low tech solutions- operational excellence
4) Program has access to Shell Group experience and process knowledge
5) Emphasize Operational change and low cost, fast payback projects
6) Three person experienced team supplements unit staff
7) Structured approach and methodology
8) Working closely with unit staff as one integrated team ensures unit
ownership of results
9) Sustainability tools include Energy Advisor and Energy Tracker

Shell Global Solution works with many third party customers and the Energy
Management Program is available to non-Shell Group ethylene producers.

531
A Successful Approach to Improve
Energy Utilization in Ethylene Units
Jack Buehler
Energy Management Program Manager
Shell Global Solutions US (Inc.)

Nicolas Genty
Olefins Process Specialist
Deer Park Chemicals Plant
Shell Chemical Company LP

Prepared for Presentation at the 2007 AICHE Spring National


Meeting
Houston, Texas, April 25, 2007

Paper 91F
Introduction:
Energy represents a significant portion of ethylene production cost

Shell Chemical Company committed to improve energy


efficiency by 7.5% from 2002 to 2007
Commitment to additional 10% reduction wells to wheels
Shell Global Solutions offers an Energy Management
Program referred to as Energize Program
Energize Programs have reduced energy and variable costs
by 5 - 7% at refineries and 3 5% at chemical sites

Ethylene Plant Experience


o 3.9 to 4.2% energy reduction
o Savings including non-energy benefits ranged from USD
$7.0 to $23.0 million/yr.
Key Points of Energize Program:
Focus on short implementation time, quick payback
projects
Operational change, expense, low capital projects
Benefits energy reduction, reliability improvement, yield
improvement, capacity creep
Minimize Impact on very busy Unit staff
Energize team works with staff on site insures unit
ownership and helps sustain benefits
Energize team stays to implement projects!!!
Structured methodology
Access to SHELL GS Experience and Process knowledge
Deliverables include monitoring tools and training to
sustain savings
The Energy Management Program:

Resources:
Two process engineers and Program Manager
on site.
Unit may supply experienced operator
Minimal impact on staff resources
Work as integrated team with staff
Access to Shell Global Solutions Experience
and Process Knowledge
Team available to implement projects
Two Phase Approach (1215 months):

Assessment Phase 2-3 months & Implementation Phase 12


months

Assessment Phase:
o 2-3 months
o Identify new ideas and build on existing staff ideas
o Focus on Projects can implement in <12 months
o Emphasize Operational excellence, low capital
o Use checklists, benchmarking, and previous studies
o Interviews with staff
o Review major energy losses to air and cooling water.
o Steam balance is prepared.
o Implement any easy Quick Hits
Assessment Phase (continued):
o Funneling approach to categorize observations for further
study
o 200 observations leads to 40 opportunities to study then
leads to 15-20 projects to implement
o End of Assessment Report Out Decision made to
proceed with Implementation Phase
Observations
Raw Opportunities
Developed Ideas
Project Proposals
Conceptual
Packages

Project Development Funnel


Implementation Phase:

o Projects further evaluated, scope developed and


projects implemented
o Energize work process and management system.
o Project Development Worksheet (PDW) is Key
Management tool - Rev 0, 1, 2 track project progress
o At each step the unit and team approve the PDW.
o Implement the Projects
o Develop Training
o Develop the Sustain Tools
o Close Out Meeting Celebrate Success
ENERGIZE PROGRAM HAS TWO PHASE APPROACH

Assessment Implementation

2-3 Month Phase 12 Month Phase


Identify Energy Opportunities Implement Projects
Implement any Quick Hit Training and Operating Procedures
Select Projects to Implement Conduct MOC
Decision on Whether to Proceed To Document Benefits
Implementation
Develop Sustain Tools
Sustain the Savings:
o Monitoring tools developed to sustain the savings
Energy Advisor
o Excel based tool for Operator
o Monitors energy KPIs with real time data. KPI Target
and high/low range for KPI.
o Calculates Lost energy opportunity USD$/yr
o Red, yellow, green colors
o Provides Advice messages to operator things to check
o Operator can monitor equipment and make adjustments
Energy Tracker
o Excel based tool for staff
o Monitors each projects lost opportunity daily,
monthly, quarterly.
o Helps staff report, and analyze any erosion of benefits.
Tools and Methodology:

Checklists:
o Checklists help team identify possible opportunities
o Partial listing of checklists includes:
o Furnace combustion side
o Furnace process side
o Quench / Pyrofractionator
o Cracked gas compression
o Propylene & Ethylene refrig.
o Turbine drives - backpressure, extraction/condensing
o Distillation, Acetylene, MAP hydrogenation
o Steam / water systems
o Cooling water, flare, misc.
Benchmarking:
Team can use several benchmarks including:

o Internal Energize Equipment Performance benchmarks


o Design data of Equipment
o Solomon study
o Sister crackers within company
o Energy usage targets for new ethylene cracker design
o Determine size of Gap and identify Gap contributors.
o Understand reasons for Gap and identify real opportunities
to go after
o Benchmarking helps frame potential savings and where to
look more closely for opportunities.
Energize Projects Library:
All previous Energize projects are documented in PDW files

Look at Steam and Power system:


o Develop steam header balances using excel.
o Helps uncover steam header imbalances, quantify letdowns
and steam venting
o Helps identify opportunity to better balance steam loads
between backpressure and condensing turbines and motor
drives
o Balances will verify that new projects actually result
in site savings
Look at Large Heat Losses:
o Look at large heat losses to air and cooling water for
opportunities
o Consider change in operating conditions, or minor
capital to further heat integration
o Pinch Analysis is useful tool

Examples heat losses:


Pyrofrac overhead preheat BFW or feed
Turbine surface condenser- eductors, CWS temp, inlet
steam temp
Furnace stack loss Excess air, clean convection section
Steam vents/ letdowns operate motor driven pump
with the turbine driven pump as spare; steam to preheat
feed.
Discussion of Projects:

Savings from three Ethylene Plant Energize Studies

Plant #Projects % Energy Savings (1)


Completed Reduction MM US$/yr
Plant 1 18 4.2 15.0
Plant 2 (Ph1) 11 2.5 7.1
Plant 3 23 3.9 6.8

(1) Project energy savings at fuel price of $6.50/MMBTU. Non-energy


benefits identified and implemented by team not included. Plant 1 total
savings were $23.0MM US$/yr.
Optimize Pyrofractionator CHGO Pumparound:

Project Objective:
Increase Pyrofrac heat recovery and generate more
Dilution Steam and save 175# steam.

Background information:
o Lower (hotter) CHGO loop generates dilution steam
and 175# steam
o Upper (cooler) CLGO loop generates 15# steam.
o Short on DS. Makeup with 175# steam
o Plant lets down 600# to 175# steam
o Plant is long and vents 15# steam.
o CHGO pressure must be above 65psig
o Simplified schematic of Pyrofrac loops
Simplified Schematic of Pyrofrac

Must maintain Project Objective:


To overhead temp above Increase heat recovery in CHGO loop
coolers 240F and reduce heat recovery in CLGO loop
Maintain min CHGO press and col ovh min temp

Reflux
CLGO Loop 15# Stm gen

CLGO Product Must maintain


60 PSIG min.
on CHGO
Pyrofrac CHGO Loop

Tray 9
DS Gen DSG 175# Stm Gen CHGO to
Quench

CHGO product

Cracked gas
from furnace

To quench loop
Opportunity :
Increase total CHGO circulation through the DSG and 175#
Generator
Additional duty available on 175#
CHGO pumps can circulate more
Minimum pres lowered from 65 to 60psig
Test run conducted after MOC

Results:
Increased CHGO circulation by 3.5%
Maintained Pres at 62psig
Found optimum CHGO flow
Increased DS generation, reduced 600# steam usage
by 17Mlb/hr. Reduced 15# steam venting
Savings are USD$1.2Million/Yr.
See attached chart
Improve Condensing Turbine Performance

Project Objective:
To improve vacuum on PGC condensing turbine and
reduce 1250# steam consumption.

Background:
Looked at large condensing turbines
PGC turbine vacuum 2-3 in Hg worse than expected
for CWS temperature.
Could be surface condenser problem, or air
leakage, or eductor problem
Ultrasonic flow confirmed near design CWS flow
CWR temperatures were normal.
CW temperature rise correct for condensing load.
Did not appear to be a condenser problem
Approach between CWR temp and surface
condensate temp was 20F vs typical 10F.
Indicates air leakage or eductor problems
Conducted field check of turbine

Opportunity:
Identify and correct air leakage source or fix possible
eductor problem.
Findings 1:
Field check of eductors found improper lineup
One of primary eductors was open on process side
with steam shut off.
Resulted in recycle of inerts thru out of service
primary eductor
Reduced capacity to remove inerts
Condenser Pres had to increase for eductor to
develop required pressure rise
See schematic of eductor lineup.
Schematic of Primary and Secondary Eductor Lineup

50# motive
steam

50# motive open In Serv open


steam Secondary
Eductor
open In Serv open open
Primary Inerts
Eductor to air
open closed
CWR
Out Serv.
Non Condensables open Secondary After condenser
From Surface Condenser CWR closed Eductor closed
"Idle"
Primary 50# motive CWS
Inner Condenser
closed eductor open steam
Surface Condensate
50# motive CWS to Sewer
steam
Surface Condensate
Back to Surface Path of Inerts
Condenser Hotwell
Incorrect Recycle

The "Idle" Primary Eductor was not properly taken out of service.
While the motive steam was closed, the inlet and outlet Process valves were left open.
This created an unintended recycle of inerts from disch of In Serv eductor back thru the "Idle" eductor
thus reducing capacity to remove inerts and resulting in higher vacuum on surface condenser
The Out of Service Secondary Eductor is properly isolated on the process side and there is no recycle.
Results 1:
Blocked in primary eductor
Vacuum immediately improved from 23.8 in Hg to
25.8 in Hg
Surface condensate temp dropped from 139F to 126F
Approach between surface condensate and CWR
temperature dropped to 7F.
Turbine water rate improved 2.8% from 6.48 to 6.3
lb stm/Hp.
1250# steam usage decreased 12Mlb/hr
Savings of USD$1.0million/yr
Plant was able to process more feed and increase
margin.
Findings 2:
A PGC at another location also had higher vacuum
than expected
Inspection of eductors showed a high inert flow
Eductors were set up properly
SGS did a He leak test around turbine seals and
expansion joint
Found air leaking in at turbine seal

Results 2:
Increased turbine sealing steam pressure by 3psig
and air ingress stopped
Vacuum improved 2 in Hg
1250# steam usage reduced 9Mlb/hr
Savings of USD$750,000/yr
Balancing Steam Header

Project Objective:
Switch process heat duty from 50# steam level to 20#
to balance steam headers and reduce steam venting

Background Information:
Developed plant steam header balances
Plant venting 20# steam
Plant letting down 175# to 50# level
Gas oil feed is preheated with low pressure steam.
Plant has a 20# and 50# steam gas oil heater in series
Opportunity:
Swap more load from 50# feed HX to 20# feed HX.

Results:
Found the 20# feed HX had been bypassed for
months. Suspect leak
Pressure tested 20# HX and confirmed no leaks
Put 20# HX in service
50# steam usage reduced by 24Mlb/hr
175# to 50# letdown decreased by 24Mlb/hr.
20# steam vent reduced by 25Mlb/hr
175# steam savings worth USD$1.4million /yr
See schematic
Schematic showing Steam flow Before and After 20# Steam Feedheater Placed in Service

bypass open closed

Gas Oil Feed Gas Oil to Furn


20# Fd htr 50# Fd htr
closed closed open open

0 cond. 35 cond
25 closed 11
20# vent to air
open 29 175# to 50# letdown
closed 45 5
20
45 6
20# Steam 45 6 50# steam supply

All Steam flows in Mlb/hr


35 Black is flow before 20# heater placed in service
11 Red is flow after 20# heater in service
Position of valves is original before 20# heater placed in service
Other Opportunities
Similar opportunity to balance steam headers with
choice of pump drivers
If backpressure turbines and excess LP steam may
have opportunity
Operate motor driven pump and keep steam turbine
driven pump as spare

Can justify capital for auto-start capability on turbine if


venting LP steam.
Concluding Remarks:

Energy Management Program successful in Ethylene plants


Energy reduction of 3 5% achieved
Savings including non-energy benefits range from USD$7.0 to $23
million/yr
Limited time frame drives results
Emphasize Operational Change, low cost, fast payback projects
Projects include energy reduction, variable cost improvement,
Debottleneck
Experienced Team integrated with Unit staff Insures Ownership
Team stays to Implement projects
Structured approach and Methodology
Access to Shell Global Solutions experience and process knowledge
Sustainability Tools Energy Advisor, Energy Tracker
Program available to non-Shell Group Ethylene Producers
Improve Furnace Efficiency

Furnace fired duty can be 60% of energy consumed


in ethylene plant
Stack loss is function of stack temp and excess air
Total stack heat loss can be 400MMBTU/hr

Energy projects for furnace area:


Heat recovery in convection section
Minimize excess air. Good burner operation, O2
control dampers
Correct tramp air leaks into furnace
Background Information Furnace A :
Use Furnace A as a Demonstration Furnace.
Work done during Furnace Preventive Maintenance
Fired duty 300MMBTU/hr
All floor burners. Three banks burners
Air registers A bank mechanically linked. Same for B bank
Air registers C bank manually adjusted at each burner
Many of C registers are not operable
30% excess air at C burners vs 15% at A and B
Convection section recovers more than 100MMBTU/hr
Observed gradual stack temp increase
Furnace has vertical cracking coils
Coil hangers, thermocouples supported in penthouse.
Over 100 openings between penthouse and roof of firebox.
Opportunity on Furnace A:

Clean convection section tubes


Repair C bank burner air registers, repair floor burners
Install new insulating sleeves in penthouse

Results Convection Section cleaning:


Cleaned external finned tubes
Used water lance, tarp to divert water
Stack temp decreased by 25F/14C
Recover 2.9MMBTU/hr per furnace
Furnace efficiency improved 0.8%
Savings USD$150,000/yr per furnace; clean 3 furnaces/yr.
Total benefit USD$450,000/yr
Payback was two months
Results Repair C bank air registers:

Inspected all floor burners, burner blocks and repaired


Fuel spuds were inspected & replaced
C bank burner air registers all repaired so could be
adjusted based on O2%
C bank excess air reduced from 30% to 15%
% O2 in stack decreased by 0.7%
Furnace efficiency improved 0.4%
1.5MMBTU/hr per furnace fuel savings
Total fuel savings all furnaces will be USD$1.0million per year.
Payback was three months
Picture of C bank air register
Results New Insulating Sleeves:
Temperature cycles result in air gaps
As insulating blanket ages, size of air gap can increase
Cool air pulled into firebox reduces furnace efficiency
Installed new design insulating sleeve on three
furnaces
Reduced heat loss by 1.4MMBTU/hr
Observed a stack O2 reduction of 0.6% .
Furnace efficiency improved 0.4%
Payback is three months
When installed on all furnaces, fuel savings will be
USD$1.0million / yr.
See picture of penthouse with sleeves
Demonstration Furnace A Summary:
Demonstration furnace concept works
Plant will install projects on all furnaces
Total potential fuel savings in furnace:
USDK$/Yr
o Convection cleaning 450
o C zone air registers 1,000
o Insulating sleeves 1,000
o Total benefit 2,450
Reduce Cracked Gas Compressor Suction Pressure

Project Objective:
Reduce CGC suction pressure and improve furnace
ethylene yield.

Background Information:
Expansion furnace and CGC
Design CGC suction pres 10psig (0.7barg)
Liquids collecting in 1st stage suction header boot
Pressure raised to 20psig (1.4barg)
Furnace COP is 10psig (0.7barg) higher design
Variable speed electric drive
Compressor operates with kickback to prevent surge
Opportunity:
Install a condensate pumping trap to remove liquids
and reduce suction pressure.

Results:
New pumping trap installed.
Suction pres now 12psig (0.8barg)
Minimum flow(mass) required to keep compressor
out of surge decreases with lower suction pressure
Compressor speed increased 560RPM
Kickback decreased 20Mlb/hr
No increase in motor amperage
C2H4 Yield improved 3.0lb/100lb feed
Project cost USD$100,000
Variable margin increase of USD $1.0million /yr
See chart
Concluding Remarks:

Energy Management Program successful in Ethylene plants


Energy reduction of 3 5% achieved
Savings including non-energy benefits range from USD$7.0 to $23
million/yr
Limited time frame drives results
Emphasize Operational Change, low cost, fast payback projects
Projects include energy reduction, variable cost improvement,
Debottleneck
Experienced Team integrated with Unit staff Insures Ownership
Team stays to Implement projects
Structured approach and Methodology
Access to Shell Global Solutions experience and process knowledge
Sustainability Tools Energy Advisor, Energy Tracker
Program available to non-Shell Group Ethylene Producers