Environmental study of waste energy recovery by using exergy and economic analysis in a fluid catalytic cracking unit

E. GhasemiKafrudi, S. Yousefi, F. Goodarzvand-Chegini
{"title":"Environmental study of waste energy recovery by using exergy and economic analysis in a fluid catalytic cracking unit","authors":"E. GhasemiKafrudi, S. Yousefi, F. Goodarzvand-Chegini","doi":"10.22104/AET.2018.2450.1123","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"An increase in fossil fuel consumption has significantly increased the concentration of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Waste energy recovery can reduce GHGs by reducing fossil fuel consumption. In the FCC unit in refineries, the catalyst is continuously regenerated by burning off the deposited coke with air and a large flux of waste gas with high temperature is generated which is vented into the atmosphere. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of waste heat/pressure recovery of the waste gas on the reduction of GHGs and air pollutant emissions. Based on this objective, exergy and economic analysis were carried out for two scenarios (S-1 and S-2). The S-1 scenario involved the installation of a Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG), while S-2 applied the simultaneous usage of HRSG and a turbo-expander to evaluate electricity production using waste gas pressure. The exergy of waste gas was formulated and an in-house code was developed for solving the equations via a trial and error method. The results showed that exergy loss of the waste gas was higher than 660 MW and it was possible to recover about 64 MW and 75 MW in the S-1 and S-2, respectively. The amount of steam and the electrical energy produced were found to be about 88 ton/h and 8323 MWh/month, respectively. The results also showed that S-1 can reduce 72227 tCO2e of GHGs and 327 ton of air pollutant and S-2 can reduce 143464 tCO2e of GHGs and 649 ton of air pollutant annually. The economic indexes were evaluated and the results indicated that the internal rates of return (IRR) were found to be 33.18% and 36.76% for S-1 and S-2, respectively. This showed that the two scenarios were economically feasible, but from an environmental, economic and energy recovery standpoint, S-2 was the best scenario and the economic analysis on S-2 certified that there was no economic risk.","PeriodicalId":7295,"journal":{"name":"Advances in environmental science and technology","volume":"45 1","pages":"229-242"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"6","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Advances in environmental science and technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22104/AET.2018.2450.1123","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 6

Abstract

An increase in fossil fuel consumption has significantly increased the concentration of greenhouse gases (GHGs). Waste energy recovery can reduce GHGs by reducing fossil fuel consumption. In the FCC unit in refineries, the catalyst is continuously regenerated by burning off the deposited coke with air and a large flux of waste gas with high temperature is generated which is vented into the atmosphere. The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of waste heat/pressure recovery of the waste gas on the reduction of GHGs and air pollutant emissions. Based on this objective, exergy and economic analysis were carried out for two scenarios (S-1 and S-2). The S-1 scenario involved the installation of a Heat Recovery Steam Generator (HRSG), while S-2 applied the simultaneous usage of HRSG and a turbo-expander to evaluate electricity production using waste gas pressure. The exergy of waste gas was formulated and an in-house code was developed for solving the equations via a trial and error method. The results showed that exergy loss of the waste gas was higher than 660 MW and it was possible to recover about 64 MW and 75 MW in the S-1 and S-2, respectively. The amount of steam and the electrical energy produced were found to be about 88 ton/h and 8323 MWh/month, respectively. The results also showed that S-1 can reduce 72227 tCO2e of GHGs and 327 ton of air pollutant and S-2 can reduce 143464 tCO2e of GHGs and 649 ton of air pollutant annually. The economic indexes were evaluated and the results indicated that the internal rates of return (IRR) were found to be 33.18% and 36.76% for S-1 and S-2, respectively. This showed that the two scenarios were economically feasible, but from an environmental, economic and energy recovery standpoint, S-2 was the best scenario and the economic analysis on S-2 certified that there was no economic risk.
流体催化裂化装置废能回收的环境研究与经济分析
化石燃料消耗的增加大大增加了温室气体的浓度。废物能源回收可以通过减少化石燃料的消耗来减少温室气体。在炼油厂的催化裂化装置中,用空气将沉积的焦炭燃烧掉,使催化剂不断再生,产生大量的高温废气排放到大气中。本研究旨在探讨废气余热/压力回收对减少温室气体和大气污染物排放的影响。基于这一目标,对两种方案(S-1和S-2)进行了能源和经济分析。S-1方案涉及安装热回收蒸汽发生器(HRSG),而S-2方案同时使用HRSG和涡轮膨胀器来评估利用废气压力发电。制定了废气的火用,并制定了内部代码,通过试错法求解方程。结果表明,S-1和S-2的废气火用损失大于660 MW,可回收的分别为64 MW和75 MW。产生的蒸汽量和电能分别约为88吨/小时和8323兆瓦时/月。S-1年可减少温室气体排放72227 tCO2e和大气污染物327 t, S-2年可减少温室气体排放143464 tCO2e和大气污染物649 t。经济指标评价结果表明,S-1和S-2的内部收益率分别为33.18%和36.76%。这表明两种方案在经济上是可行的,但从环境、经济和能源回收的角度来看,S-2是最佳方案,对S-2的经济分析证明没有经济风险。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信