KBR Purifier Technology & Project Execution Executi on Options for Ammonia Plants KBR Conference | May May,, 2013 | Dubai
Agenda
Introduction Introduc tion to Purifier™ Process Technology Features and Benefits of Purifier™ Process Purifier™ Experience, Energy Consumption & Reliability
Project Execution Options
Summary
2013 KBR, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Agenda
Introduction Introduc tion to Purifier™ Process Technology Features and Benefits of Purifier™ Process Purifier™ Experience, Energy Consumption & Reliability
Project Execution Options
Summary
2013 KBR, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Conventional Process Steam
CO2
Air
PRIMARY
SECONDARY
REFORMER
REFORMER
WHB SHIFT & CO2 REM
METHANATION & DRYERS
COMPRESSION
MAGNETITE SYNTHESIS
NH3 Product PURGE GAS
To Fuel
Natural Gas
RECOVERY
Loop Purge
KBR Purifier Process Steam
H/N=3 Inerts ~0.3%
H/N=2 CH4 ~2-3% H/N=2
CO2
Excess Air
Recycle Purge
PRIMARY
SECONDARY
WHB SHIFT
METHANATION
REFORMER
REFORMER
& CO2 REM
& DRYERS
PURIFIER
COMPRESSION
To Fuel
T = 710 C CH4 CH4 ~27-29%
Natural Gas
SYNTHESIS
NH3 Product
P = 155 bar T = 890 C CH4 CH4~1.5-2.5%
No purge gas unit needed!
Proprietary KBR Cryogenic Purifier Waste Gas to Fuel
2C
2C
‐180 C Syngas from Dryers
H2 N2 CH4 A
4C
Vol% 62‐68 30‐35 2‐3 ~0.5
Syngas to Compressor
H2/N2 = 3 Inert <0.3%
Purifier™ Cold Box Arrangement Waste Gas To Fuel
A
H2
Purified Syngas to Compressor
Syngas From Dryers
P
Generator Expander
HIC
HIC
Feed‐Effluent Exchanger
Rectifier
L
Nitrogen
Proprietary Cryogenic Purifier
Equipment Includes – Feed/Effluent exchanger
– Column – Cold Box Enclosure – Expander/Generator (non proprietary)
Purifier Expander & Generator
Agenda
Introduction to PurifierTM Process Technology Features and Benefits of PurifierTM Process PurifierTM Experience, Energy Consumption & Reliability
Project Execution Options
Summary
2013 KBR, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Key Process Features of Purifier Process
Mild (low temperature) primary reforming
Gas turbine-drive on air compressor (optional)
Secondary reforming with excess air
CO2 removal with 2-stage aMDEA process
Cryogenic purification of syngas
Reduced equipment count in synloop
Key Mechanical Features of Purifier Process
Down-fired primary reformer
Reforming at 42 bar exit SMR
Secondary reformer with no metallic burner
Vertical thermosiphon waste heat boiler
Brazed aluminum Purifier in cold box enclosure
Horizontal, 3-bed ammonia converter
Unitized chiller in synloop
Gas Turbine Driven Air Compressor Air to GT Process Air
Fuel
Gas Turbine Process Air Compressor
GTE 525 °C
Process Air to Secondary Reformer
Saves 0.4-0.5 Gcal/mt Used since 1966
Radiant Section
Primary Reformer with Gas Turbine
Mild Primary Reforming Air to Secondary Reformer Fuel
To Feed Treatment
Feed Air Reformer Outlet 710 o C
HP BFW
Steam ID Fan
Mixed Feed
Superheated Steam
Primary Reformer – Smaller Size & Milder Conditions
Secondary Reforming with Excess Air
Excess Air
Primary Reformer Effluent
710 o C
890 oC
To Reformed Gas Boiler
Primary Reformer Comparison
Secondary Reformer Comparison Secondary Reformer Outlet Temperature, C Methane Leakage, % dry
Purifier 890 1.7
Conventional 1000 <0.3
Gas Turbine / Air Compressor Reduce start-up steam and size of off-plot boiler Reduce cooling water requirement Energy efficient cogeneration system Save 0.4 – 0.5 Gcal/t with GT
Proprietary KBR Boiler & Superheater BFW Make-up
125 bar 328 C
KBR Proprietary Natural circulation floating head design Removable bundle
Syngas from Secondary Reformer
890
oC
360 C
Cooled Syngas to Shift
Steam to superheat coil
Waste Heat Boiler - References Client
Location
Start Up-Year
Capacity
Methanex
Chile
1988
NA
SCW
China
1990
600
Pusri 1B
Indonesia
1992
1350
Sherritt (1)
Canada
1993
1350
Gresik
Indonesia
1993
1350
Korashan
Iran
1995
1000
PLNL
Trinidad
1998
1850
PCS Nitrogen
Trinidad
1998
1850
Norsk Hydro (1)
Norway
1999
~
Zepu
China
2000
600
CNC
Trinidad
2002
1850
CNOOC
China
2003
1500
Waste Heat Boiler – References Client
Location
Start Up-Year
Capacity
N2000
Trinidad
2004
1850
PIM2
Indonesia
2004
1200
Kujiang 1B
Indonesia
2005
1000
BFPL
Australia
2006
2200
EBIC
Egypt
2009
2000
MHTL
Trinidad
2009
1850
Jianfeng
China
2010
1500
Pequiven, Moron
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Pequiven, Jose
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Pequiven, Puerto Nutrias
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Matix
India
U/C
2200
Waste Heat Boiler - References Client
Location
Start Up-Year
Capacity
Matix
India
U/C
2200
Petrobras
Brazil
U/C
2200
Jaypee
India
U/C
2200
Tierra Del Fuego
Argentina
U/C
1500
BCIC
Bangladesh
U/C
1000
Kima
Egypt
U/C
1320
IFC
USA
U/C
2200
EPCL
Nigeria
U/C
2300
PAU
Indonesia
U/C
1900
Pusri
Indonesia
U/C
2200
Dyno Nobel
USA
U/C
2300
Shift Conversion 370 C
210 C
Syngas from Boiler
Low Temperature Shift Reactor
High Temperature Shift Reactor
430 C
To CO2 Removal
230 C
Separator
70 BFW Heating & Steam Generation
C Water Cooler
Process Cond.
BASF Carbon Dioxide Removal (OASE Process using MDEA Solvent) Flash Gases to Fuel ~ 7 bar-g
Syngas to Methanator
CO2 @ ~0.6 bar‐g
LP Flash Column
HP Flash Column
Absorber Stripper
Hydraulic Turbine
Syngas from LTS LP Steam or HP BFW
Reboiler
Demin Water
Process Cond.
BASF aMDEA CO2 Removal Systems Used by KBR in New Ammonia Plants Client
Location
Year
System
Heat Input Kcal/Kgmole of CO2
BASF
Germany
1982
2-Stage
10,200
Yara # D
Netherlands
1982
2-Stage
10,200
Yara # E
Netherlands
1987
2-Stage
10,200
Sinopec
China
1997
2-Stage
13,900
CNOOC
China
2003
2-Stage
7,700
PIM2
Indonesia
2004
1-Stage
22,000
Kujang 1B
Indonesia
2004
1-Stage
19,900
BFPL
Australia
2006
2-Stage
8,700
MHTL
Trinidad
2009
1-Stage
21,000
Jianfeng
China
2010
2-Stage
~7,000
BASF aMDEA CO2 Removal Systems Used by KBR in New Ammonia Plants Client
Location
Year
Capacity mtpd
Pequiven, Moron
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Pequiven, Jose
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Pequiven, PN
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Matix
India
U/C
2200
Tierra Del Fuego
Argentina
U/C
1500
Petrobras
Brazil
U/C
2200
Jaypee
India
U/C
2200
Kaltim 5
Indonesia
U/C
2700
BASF aMDEA CO2 Removal Systems Used by KBR in New Ammonia Plants Client
Location
Year
Capacity mtpd
BBCI
Bangladesh
U/C
1000
Kima
Egypt
U/C
1320
IEPCL
Nigeria
U/C
2300
IFC
USA
U/C
2300
YPFB
Bolivia
U/C
1200
Pusri IIB
Indonesia
U/C
2000
PAU
Indonesia
U/C
1900
Dyno Nobel
USA
U/C
2300
Methanation & Drying Cryogenic Purifier Dryers
Waste Gas to Fuel
Methanator 4 oC
Syngas from CO2 Absorber
CW
NH3
Pure, Dry Syngas to Compressor
Synloop Purge
Process Condensate to Stripper
Proprietary KBR Cryogenic Purifier Waste Gas to Fuel
2C
2C
-180 C Syngas from Dryers
H2 N2 CH4 A
4C
Vol% 62-68 30-35 2-3 ~0.5
Syngas to Compressor
H2/N2 = 3 Inert <0.3%
Purifier™ Cold Box Arrangement Waste Gas To Fuel
A
H2
Purified Syngas to Compressor
Syngas From Dryers
P
Generator Expander
HIC
HIC
Feed‐Effluent Exchanger
Rectifier
L
Nitrogen
Proprietary Cryogenic Purifier
Equipment Includes – Feed/Effluent exchanger
– Column – Cold Box Enclosure – Expander/Generator – (non proprietary)
Purifier Expander & Generator
Syngas Purification Comparison
Synthesis Loop Syngas from Purifier HP Steam
Synloop Purge
Syngas Compressor
2C 31 bar
BFW
Refrigeration Compressor 155 bar
Unitized Chiller Horizontal Converter
Let Down Drum
CW
To Ammonia Accumulator
HP Separator
Horizontal Converter - Features
Three stages of catalytic synthesis – 3rd stage divided in to two beds
Cold wall design
Feed to 1st bed heated by 2 internal exchangers
Shell flanged at one end for basket removal
41 horizontal converters operating or in design
3-Bed Horizontal Intercooled Ammonia Converter Man ways
BYPASS INLET
OUTLET
BED 3B
BED 3A
BED 2
BED 1
MAIN INLET
KBR can prov ide single converter up to 3,500 mtpd ammonia plant – cold wall design NO HOT WALL CONVERTER
Flange TI
Proprietary Ammonia Converter 2200 mt/d Plant
Horizontal Converter - Benefits
Fewer pieces of equipment & less piping – Lower capital cost – Lower maintenance cost Cold Wall Design – Made of 1.25 Cr – Less prone to cracking than hot wall designs Lower loop pressure drop – Lower operating cost Basket Removal – Expensive overhead crane not needed – Basket rolls out on tracks
Horizontal Synthesis Converter References Client
Location
Start Up-Year
Capacity
Nihon
Japan
1971
1650
Sherritt-Gordon
Canada
1983
1000
UCAM
Netherlands
1984
1360
Ocelot
Canada
1986
545
Koch Nitrogen
USA
1986
1530
NCFC
Saudi Arabia
1988
1500
Kemira Oy
UK
1989
825
SCW
China
1990
600
Pusri 1B
Indonesia
1992
1350
Gresik
Indonesia
1993
1350
Korashan
Iran
1995
1000
Inner Mongolia
China
1997
1000
Jiu Jiang
China
1997
1000
Horizontal Synthesis Converter References Client
Location
Start Up-Year
Capacity
Lanzhou
China
1997
1000
Pak-American
Pakistan
1997
600
Chambal
India
1999
1350
Zepu
China
2000
600
CNOOC
China
2003
1500
PIM2
Indonesia
2004
1200
Kujiang 1B
Indonesia
2005
1000
BFPL
Australia
2006
2200
Jianfeng
China
2010
1500
Pequiven, Jose
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Pequiven, Puerto Nutrias
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Horizontal Synthesis Converter References Client
Location
Start Up-Year
Capacity
Pequiven, Puerto Nutrias
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Matix
India
U/C
2200
Petrobras
Brazil
U/C
2200
Jaypee
India
U/C
2200
TDF
Argentina
U/C
1500
Kaltim 5
Indonesia
U/C
2700
BCIC
Bangladesh
U/C
1000
Kima
Egypt
U/C
1320
IEPCL
Nigeria
U/C
2300
IFC
USA
U/C
2200
PAU
Indonesia
U/C
1900
Pusri 2
Indonesia
U/C
2000
Refr efrige igerat ration ion Syst System em - 4-s 4-stag tage e Design Design Condenser Refrigeration Compressor
A m m o n i a Am Ac A c c u m u l at ato o r
HP Case
LP Case
NH3 from Letdown Drum
Unitiz Uniti zed Chi Chill ller er 30-40o C
Warm NH3 Product
-33o C
Cold NH3 Product
Uniti Un itize zed d Excha Exchang nger er - Fea eatu ture res s
Replaces several several chillers, chiller s, recycle exchangers ex changers and separators
Numb Nu mber er of st stag ages es = 2 - 4
Reduces expensive HP pipe & fittings
Lowers loop pressure drop
Uses less plot area
Ease of operation
52 Unitized Chillers operating or in design
Unitized Exchanger System NH3 Refrigerant
From NH3 Converter
To Syngas Compressor
To Refrigeration Compressor
~
~
~
Unitized Exchanger - Benefits
Fewer pieces of equipment – Lower capital cost – Lower maintenance cost
Less piping & fewer fittings – Lower capital cost
Lower loop pressure drop – Lower operating cost
Operator friendly
Unitized Chiller - References Client
Location
Start Up-Year
Capacity
Ocelot
Canada
1986
545
Kemira Oy
UK
1989
825
SCW
China
1990
600
Pusri 1B
Indonesia
1992
1350
Gresik
Indonesia
1993
1350
Korashan
Iran
1995
1000
Inner Mongolia
China
1997
1000
Jiu Jiang
China
1997
1000
Lanzhou
China
1997
1000
Pak-American
Pakistan
1997
600
PLNL
Trinidad
1998
1850
PCS Nitrogen
Trinidad
1998
1850
Unitized Chiller – References (continued) Client
Location
Start Up-Year
Capacity
Zepu
China
2000
600
CNC
Trinidad
2002
1850
CNOOC
China
2003
1500
N2000
Trinidad
2004
1850
PIM2
Indonesia
2004
1200
Kujiang 1B
Indonesia
2005
1000
BFPL
Australia
2006
2200
EBIC
Egypt
2009
2000
MHTL
Trinidad
2009
1850
Jianfeng
China
2010
1500
Pequiven Moron
Venezuela
U/C
1850
Pequiven Jose
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Unitized Chiller – References (continued) Client
Location
Start Up-Year
Capacity
Pequiven PN
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Matix
India
U/C
2200
Petrobras
Brazil
U/C
2200
Jaypee
India
U/C
2200
Kaltim 5
Indonesia
U/C
2700
BCIC
Bangladesh
U/C
1000
TDF
Argentina
U/C
1500
Kima
Egypt
U/C
1320
IEPCL
Nigeria
U/C
2300
IFC
USA
U/C
2200
PAU
Indonesia
U/C
1900
Pusri 2
Indonesia
U/C
2000
Proprietary Unitized Chiller
Syngas Conversion Comparison Pu r if ie r
Compressor Power, kWh/mt Syngas 210-230 Refrigeration (warm) 60-70 H.P. Steam Superheater
yes
Catalyst Life, years Inerts in Converter feed
>18 3%
Co n v e n t i o n a l
240-300 100-130 no 10 8-12%
Agenda
Introduction to PurifierTM Process Technology Features and Benefits of PurifierTM Process Purifier Experience, Energy Consumption & Reliability
Project Execution Options
Summary
2013 KBR, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Purifier™ Plant Experience Plant
Location
Year
MTPD
Unocal
USA
1966
680
Kemira
Netherlands
1968
1360
First Miss
USA
1968
900
Asahi
Japan
1971
900
Yara # C
Netherlands
1971
900
PCS N2
USA
1978
1360
BASF
Germany
1982
1360
Yara # D
Netherlands
1984
1500
Yara # E
Netherlands
1987
1750
Yara TR2
Trinidad
1988
1360
Purifier™ Plant Experience (Continued) Plant
Location
Year
MTPD
Jinxi
China
1993
1000
Jianfeng
China
1993
1000
Sichuan
China
1995
1000
Sinopec/UGPW
China
1997
1000
Safco
Saudi Arabia
1999
1500
CNOOC
China
2003
1500
BFPL
Australia
2006
2200
Jianfeng
China
2010
1500
Pequiven Jose
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Pequiven Puerto Nutrias
Venezuela
U/C
1800
Purifier™ Plant Experience (Continued)
Plant
Location
Year
MTPD
Kribhco Revamp # 1
India
2012
1890
Kribhco Revamp # 2
India
2012
1890
NFL
India
U/C
950
Matix
India
U/C
2200
Jaypee
India
U/C
2200
Tierra Del Fuego
Argentina
U/C
1500
Petrobras
Brazil
U/C
2200
Purifier™ Plant Experience (Continued) Plant
Location
Year
MTPD
Kaltim 5
Indonesia
U/C
2700
BCIC
Bangladesh
U/C
1000
Kima
Egypt
U/C
1320
IEPCL
Nigeria
U/C
2300
IFC
USA
U/C
2200
YPFB
Bolivia
U/C
1200
Pusri IIB
Indonesia
U/C
2000
PAU
Indonesia
U/C
1900
Dyno Nobel
USA
U/C
2300
History of Energy Consumption 11 10
V H 9 L t 8 m / l a 7 c G 6 5
THEORETICAL MINIMUM
1970
1975 1980
1985
1990
1995
2000
Proven Low Energy Consumption BASF - 1982 Gcal/MT of NH3 Natural Gas Feed Fuel Subtotal Export Steam Net Electricity Total Energy
Expected 6.06 1.72 7.78 -1.52 6.26 0.27 6.53
CNOOC Performance Test Data -2003 (ISBL, with Feed Gas Compressor, GT, warm NH 3)
Gcal/Metric Ton of NH3 (LHV)
Proven Reliability – KBR Ammonia Plants
Plant Survey International worldwide survey for 2000-`01 – Top 3 longest runs are for KBR plants – 4 of the top 5; 6 out of top 10 longest runs are KBR plants – KBR Purifier plants have 3.6% service factor advantage over
non-KBR plants Service factor
Longest run
Non-KBR Plants
90.6%
385 days
KBR Conventional
92.7%
432 days
KBR Purifier
94.2%
624 days
All Plants
91.5%
424 days
Proven Reliability – KBR Ammonia Plants
Ammonia Plant in USA ran for 1395 days Ammonia Plant in The Netherlands – has averaged 95.5% stream factor – ran for 934 consecutive days – ran for 1375 days consecutive days Ammonia Plant in The Netherlands – has averaged 97.3% stream factor – ran for 960 consecutive days
Purifier Process Summary
KBR Purifier™ technology is one of the best ammonia technology
Proven lowest energy consumption
Highest proven reliability
Design features like Purifier, smaller primary reformer, and optimized synthesis loop also lower capital cost
Flexibility of Purifier Design
Allows variable steam production – Vary primary reformer outlet temperature – Vary amount of process air
Able to handle feed variations – CNOOC feed N2 ranges from 15% to 19% – CNOOC feed CO2 ranges from 16% to 26%
Gas turbine simplifies start-up – GT is a self contained power unit – Minimizes start up steam needed
Flexibility of Purifier Design (Cont’d)
Simple and precise H2/N2 ratio control Maintain production despite catalyst deactivation
Protects syn catalyst from water breakthrough
Purifier stabilizes entire plant operation
Bottom line - user friendly process
Agenda
Introduction to Purifier™ Process Technology Features and Benefits of Purifier™ Process Purifier Experience, Energy Consumption & Reliability
Project Execution Options
Summary
2013 KBR, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Project Execution Options
Project Execution Options depend upon one major decision by Owner – Owner selects first technology – Owner does not select first technology
Project Execution Options
If owner selects technology first, Licensors prepares BED and then owner has following options – Option A: Reimbursable or Cost Plus – Option B: Open Book - Convertible LSTK – Option C: Competitive EPC Bidding based on Licensor’s BED
Project Execution Options
If owner does not select technology first, Owner – Prequalifies contractors for various technologies
– Prepares ITB – Invites LSTK bids from contractors – This is Option D
Project Execution Options Option A
Option A: Reimbursable or Cost Plus. Licensor executes BED. Owner – Selects DEC to develop material take offs (MTO) – Procures equipment with assistance of Licensor/DEC
– Selects & contracts for the construction
Project Execution Options - Option B
Open Book Contract – Convertible LSTK – License and BED fees are fixed – Engineering fees/rates for reimbursable work fixed
– Fee for profit, residual risk, contingency determined
– Agreement on LDs, contract terms and conditions
Option B: OPEN BOOK CONTRACT CONVERTIBLE LSTK
MANAGE AND CONTROL LICENSOR/EPC CONTRACTOR
-
Phase 1 TENDER PERIOD
PHASE 2 EXECUTION PERIOD ENGINEERING PROCUREMENT (IF REQUIRED)
-
OPEN BOOK ESTIMATE -
PHASE 3 EXECUTION PERIOD
CONVERT TO LUMP SUM
ENGINEERING PROCUREMENT CONSTRUCTION COMMISSIONING
Lump Sum
Project Execution Options - Option C
Competitive EPC Bidding based on Licensor’s BED – Licensor executes BED – Licensor prepares requisitions for Long Lead Items (LLI)
– Licensor does sufficient FEED work to prepare MTO for critical and large ticket items
– Owner/Licensor prepare ITB for LSTK bids – Owner selects LSTK contractor
Option C – Competitive EPC Bidding based Licensor’s BED
OWNER Phase 1 BED/FEED
LICENSOR
-
-
PHASE 1 AWARD PHASE ISUUE ITB TO SELECTED CONTRACTORS PROCUREMENT (LLI) SELECT CONTRACTOR AWARD LUMPSUM CONTRCT
PHASE 2 EXECUTION PHASE
ENGINEERING PROCUREMENT CONSTRUCTION COMMISSIONING
Project Execution Options Option D - LSTK
Owners goes for LSTK contract – Owner pre-qualifies contractors 4~6 months – Owner prepares a detail ITB requiring time and efforts – usually 4~6 six months – Contractors submits bids in 4~6 months – Technical & commercial clarifications lasting 2~3 months – Final Commercial bids 2~3 months – Contractor Selection – Total time 12 ~ 18 months – Contractor executes Project in 33~36 months – Total Schedule 46~60 months
Comparison of Options Option A
Option B
Option C
Option D
Select Technology First
Yes
Yes
Yes
No
Description of EPC Phase
Cost Plus or Reimbursable
OBE converted to LSTK
LSTK bids based on Licensor BED
LSTK bid for entire scope
TIC
Lowest
Medium
Medium (-)
Highest
Schedule
30~32 months
32~34months
34~36 months
+ 48 months
Quality
Highest
Highest (-)
Medium
Medium
Owners Risk
Highest
Medium (-)
Medium
Lowest
Agenda
Introduction to Purifier ™ Process Technology Features and Benefits of Purifier™ Process Purifier Experience, Energy Consumption & Reliability
Project Execution Options
Summary
2013 KBR, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Summary
Option “A” is best in a competitive environment. However client should have capability to accept risk and strong project management team. In case client can’t accept risk then it should be better to explore option “B” or “C” LSTK option is the most expensive option and takes longest time to implement KBR has extensive basic/detail design available for long lead equipment for plant sizes 1500 ~2,700 MTPD ammonia plant. This will result in lowest TIC and shortest schedule to implement
