Techno-Economic Analysis of a Natural Gas Dehydration System: A Case Study of an “X” Processing Plant in Niger Delta

Year 2024, Volume: 3 Issue: 1, 40 - 46, 31.03.2024

Musa Shittu Aniefiok Livinus

Abstract

The presence of water in the natural gas stream could cause pipeline corrosion, limit pipeline flow capacities, pipeline blockages and possible damage to process filters, valves, and compressors. The absorption gas dehydration system with Triethylene Glycol (TEG) as an inhibitor is the most widely used and reliable gas dehydration system for non-cryogenic pipeline operation. TEG losses have been a serious concern to the operation personnel in “X” dehydration Plant in the Niger Delta region of Nigeria.
This study therefore presents the economic analyses of gas dehydration by the introduction of a stripping (sales) gas to the TEG regenerator-reboiler to enhance the vapor separation and scrub off any gaseous impurities that may still exist in the rich TEG. The existing dehydration units were modeled and process parameters were simulated using Aspen HYSYS® software. An instance from the simulation results shows that, for a TEG flow rate of 0.4543 m3/h, 97% of TEG was recovered. However, with the introduction of a dry natural gas to the reboiler, 99.98% of the TEG was recovered. This significant improvement, which represents 10.2 kg/h of TEG recovery, translates to a cost saving of approximately $89,352 per year.

Keywords

Gas processing plants, Niger Delta, TEG Absorption units, Gas Dehydration

References

• 1. Marques, M. R. (2014). Modelling the Natural Gas Sweetening and Dehydration Prior to Liquefaction, Masters Dissertation, Isti-tuto Técnico, Lisbon, Portugal.
• 2. Ahmad Syahrul, M. (2009). Natural Gas Dehydration using Tri-ethylene Glycol (TEG), Masters Dissertation, University of Ma-laysia Pahang, Malaysia.
• 3. Faramawy, S., Zaki, T., and Sakr, A. A. E. (2016). Natural gas origin, composition, and processing: A review. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 34, 34–54. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2016.06.030
• 4. Kidnay, A. J. and Parish, W. R. (2006). Fundamentals of natural gas processing, Baco Raton: Taylor & Francis Group, 2006.
• 5. Siti S. B. M. R. (2009). Natural gas dehydration using silica gel: fabrication of dehydration unit. Masters Dissertation, Universiti Malaysia Pahang, Malaysia.
• 6. Guo, B. G. (2005). Natural gas engineering handbook. 1st Edition, Gulf Publishing Company, Houston, Texas, USA.
• 7. Haque, M.E. (2012). Ethylene glycol regeneration plan: A sys-tematic approach to troubleshoot the common problems. Journal of Chemical Engineering, 27, 21-26.
• 8. Indarti, A., Nugroho, N.K.A., Zaini, A.R. (2023). Glycol losses calculation in a gas dehydration unit. Gema Wiralodra, 14(2), 736-741 https://doi.org/10.31943/gw.v14i2.501
• 9. Marfo, S.A., Opoku A.P., Morkli, C. and Issah, S. (2020). Natural Gas Dehydration Process Simulation and Optimisation - A Case Study of Jubilee Field, Proceedings of 6th UMaT Biennial Inter-national Mining and Mineral Conference, Tarkwa, Ghana, 127-136.
• 10. Salman, M., Zhang, L., and Chen, J. (2020). A computational simulation study for technoeconomic comparison of convention-al and stripping gas methods for natural gas dehydration. Chinese Journal of Chemical Engineering, 28(9), 2285–2293. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjche.2020.03.013
• 11. Kong, Z.Y., Ahmed, M., Liu, S., Sunarso, J., (2018). Revamping existing glycol technologies in natural gas dehydration to improve the purity and absorption efficiency: Available methods and re-cent developments. Journal of Natural Science and Engineering, 56: 486-503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2018.06.008
• 12. Anyadiegwu, C. I. C., Kerunwa, A. and Oviawele, P. (2014). Natural Gas Dehydration using Triethylene Glycol (TEG), Petro-leum & Coal, 56(4), 407-417.
• 13. Okafor, E., and Evwierhurhoma, A. O. (2020). Improving the performance of a natural gas 54 dehydration plantusing a combi-nation of solvents. 44–54. https://doi.org/10.9790/1813- 0903014454
• 14. Chidiebere, O.O., Inyang, U.E. and Oboh.I.O (2023). Modelling and Optimization of Natural Gas Dehydration System using TEG Glycol. Journal of Engineering Research and Reports. 24(12), 89-102. https://doi.org/10.9734/jerr/2023/v24i12862
• 15. Neagu, M. and Cursaru, D. L. (2017). Technical and economic evaluations of the Triethylene glycol regeneration process-es in natural gas dehydration plants. Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering, 27(1), 327-340. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2016.11.052
• 16. Appah, D. and Nwachukwu, F. O. (1998). Rapid method for dehydrating crude oil. Journal of Natural Science, 16, 14-23.
• 17. Csendes, V. F., Egedy, A., Leveneur, S., & Kummer, A. (2023). Application of Multi-Software Engineering: A Review and a Ki-netic Parameter Identification Case Study. Processes, 11(5), 1503. https://doi.org/10.3390/pr11051503
• 18. Peter H. K., Thomas E. D., Alexander ‘Sasha’ O., Erik K. W., Scott M. Paap and Steven W. (2020). Techno-Economic Analysis: Best Practices and Assessment Tools. Sandia National Labourato-ries. 13473. https://doi.org/10.2172/1738878
• 19. Awotiku, I., (2011). Quantification of Risks and Uncertainty for developing Marginal Fields in the Niger Delta. Masters Disserta-tion, African University of Technology, Abuja, Nigeria
• 20. Adeogun, O. and Iledare, O. (2015). Developing a Framework for Maximising Marginal Oil and Gas Field Economics. Paper SPE-178347-MS presented at the SPE Nigeria Annual International Conference and Exhibition, Lagos, Nigeria, August.