Solutions for upgrading gasoline products to comply with Euro V specifications in Dung Quat refinery
PETROVIETNAM
PETROVIETNAM JOURNAL
Volume 10/2020, p. 49 - 59
ISSN 2615-9902
SOLUTIONS FOR UPGRADING GASOLINE PRODUCTS
TO COMPLY WITH EURO V SPECIFICATIONS
IN DUNG QUAT REFINERY
Le Hong Nguyen, Tran Vinh Loc, Nguyen Thanh Sang, Dang Thi Tuyet Mai, Luu Thi Anh Trinh
Vietnam Petroleum Institute
Email: nguyenlh.pvpro@vpi.pvn.vn
Summary
Dung Quat refinery is under the management of Binh Son Refining and Petrochemical Joint Stock Company (BSR). Currently, Dung
Quat refinery is facing opportunities and challenges from macroeconomic policies as well as the development trend of the oil and gas
industry including the issue of improving product quality, enhancing operational efficiency and competitiveness to be able to survive and
develop in a new situation.
In this article, the authors suggest solutions to upgrade Dung Quat refinery gasoline products to satisfy more stringent standards
and environmental regulations. Standards here mean the Euro V standards set out in the EN 228:2008 applicable to gasoline/petrol
respectively. Solutions proposed to overcome problems relate to benzene, sulfur and olefin content in BSR gasoline products.
The article proposes two basic solutions to upgrade the gasoline product quality of Dung Quat refinery with some preliminary
estimates. Each solution has its own advantages and disadvantages. Depending on specific situations, the more suitable one will be
selected. Detailed calculation will be performed if the product quality upgrading project is implemented.
Key words: Product quality upgrade, Euro V specifications, gasoline, Dung Quat refinery.
1. General information
procurement, etc., the specific ratio of crude oils will be
adjusted to ensure technical constraints and economic
benefit.
Dung Quat refinery, the first oil refinery in Vietnam,
started construction in 2005 and was officially put into
operation in 2009. The Vietnam Oil and Gas Group (PVN)
was assigned by the Vietnamese Government to proceed
with construction investment in Dung Quat Industrial
Zone, with a total design capacity of 6.5 million tons of
crude oil (equivalent to 148,000 barrels per stream day,
BPSD). Dung Quat refinery processes either 100% of Bach
Ho crude oil or a mix of 85% of Bach Ho crude oil and 15%
of Dubai crude oil [1]. Raw materials of Dung Quat refinery
are quite diverse, including domestic crude oils from Bach
Ho, Te Giac Trang, Su Tu Den, and Chim Sao, etc., and also
other imported crude oils from Southeast Asia, America,
Nigeria, Azerbaijan, and Russia, etc. The refinery can blend
various types of crude oil together to form a mixture to
feed into the Crude Distillation Unit (CDU). Depending on
the calculation, evaluation, and plans of production and
- Dung Quat refinery's products include [1]:
Polypropylene (PP), LPG, Mogas RON 92 (M92), Mogas
RON 95 (M95), Jet A1/kerosene, diesel oil (DO), fuel oil,
and sulfur.
- Products of the refinery are mainly consumed
domestically.
This article deals with the specification issue of sulfur
benzene and olefin, which is regarded as a gasoline
product. Therefore, the analysis and evaluation are mainly
related to gasoline products. The refinery's M92 and M95
gasoline blends include [1]:
+ C4s: Mixed C4 from the gas plant;
+ Isomerate: Products from the Light Naphtha
Isomerisation Unit (IZOM);
Date of receipt: 28/8/2020. Date of review and editing: 28/8 - 19/9/2020.
Date of approval: 21/9/2020.
+ RFCC Naphtha: Naphtha from the Residue Fluid
Catalytic Cracker (RFCC);
PETROVIETNAM - JOURNAL VOL 10/2020
49
PETROLEUM PROCESSING
+ Reformate: Products of CCR unit.
2. Analysis of gasoline product quality
Recently, Dung Quat refinery is facing various
opportunities and challenges resulted from macro-
economic policies as well as current general trends in the
petroleum sector and oil processing industry as shown in
Figure 1.
Table 1 summarises the key parameters for current
Dung Quat refinery gasoline products and the comparison
with the Vietnam National Standard (as regulated in
QCVN 1:2015/BKHCN) as well as with international quality
standards (EN 228 for unleaded petrol).
Governments in the world have been mapping out
roadmaps to meet the stringent requirements of fuel
properties to reduce emissions, protect the health and
quality of the air. Accordingly, Euro or equivalent standards
will be used to assess fuel quality, emissions, and safety
requirements. The European emission standards consist of
Euro I, Euro II, Euro III, Euro IV, Euro V and Euro VI, which are
different, from low to high, in some main properties such
as sulfur content, olefin contents, aromatics and benzene
contents. Vietnam has planned to apply Euro V for gasoline
with maximum sulfur content of 10 ppm soon (2021 - 2022).
In general, Dung Quat refinery gasoline product
quality has some important characteristics as follows:
+ At present, Dung Quat refinery gasoline
specifications adhere to Level 3 of gasoline standards
stated in Vietnam National Standard QCVN 1:2015/
BKHCN [3];
+ Compared to Euro V specifications, the quality of
Dung Quat refinery gasoline products do not satisfy the
following requirements: Total sulfur content (ppm wt.%),
aromatic content (vol%), and olefin content (vol%).
2025
2009
Start up
Blue
whale
gas
2020
IMO
2017 IPO
First refinery oil in
Vietnam
Before 2020: The State owned
≤ 50% of BSR's charter capital
Sulfur content in
> 1 billion cubic meter of
net hydrocarbon per year
marine oil < 0.5 wt %
→ RFCC Unit
2010
2015
2020
2025
2030
> 2025: The import
tariffs for fuels will
be about 0%
Import tariffs rate: 10%
for gasoline, 0% for DO
> 2021: Adopt tighter
on fuel quality standard
Note:
Opportunity
Challenge
2016
VKFTA, ATIGA
> 2021
Level 4/
Euro V
2024:
ATIGA
Figure 1. Opportunities and challengers for BSR.
Table 1. Important specifications of Dung Quat refinery gasoline products compared to standards [2, 3]
M92
M95
Level 3
(QCVN,
2015)
Euro V/Level 5
Level 4
(QCVN,
2015)
No.
Speciꢀcation
Actual value
(QCVN, draft
version, 2020)
Min. 92/95
≤ 10
Min. Average Max. Min. Average Max.
1
2
3
4
5
RON
92
92.1
39
1.1
34.4
19.6
92.4
95
95
15
95.2
31
2.1
30
95.5 Min. 92/95 Min. 92/95
Total sulfur content (ppm wt.) 16
Benzene (vol%)
Oleꢀn content (vol%)
Aromatic (vol %)
95
2.47
36
≤ 150
≤ 2.5
≤ 30
≤ 50
≤ 1
≤ 30
≤ 40
0.78
28.9
19.3
1.87
38
20.2
1.3
21.6
30
≤ 1
≤ 18
≤ 35
31.6
35
≤ 40
PETROVIETNAM - JOURNAL VOL 10/2020
50
PETROVIETNAM
Therefore, with the goal of blending gasolines to
meet Euro V specifications and ensuring that all produced
components are blended, a technical solution should be
considered.
it is necessary to invest in a new treating unit to handle
sulfur content of RFCC naphtha. Then, the sulfur content
of final gasoline products will meet the target of less than
10 ppm wt. According to the 2016 production plan, the
RFCC naphtha would reach the highest flow rate of about
43,000 BPSD when the plant was running at 105% of
design capacity. In this project, if Dung Quat refinery runs
at 115% capacity, the RFCC naphtha output will reach
47,000 BPSD roughly. For more flexibility in many cases,
it is necessary to invest in a new treating unit with design
capacity of about 50,000 BPSD.
3. Technical solutions to upgrade gasoline product
quality
As aforementioned, in order to meet Euro V
specification, the sulfur, benzene and olefin contents of
Dung Quat refinery gasoline must be reduced. Technical
solutions are considered as follows.
Gasoline Hydrotreating Technology (GHDT) and
GTC Technology are proposed in the article to upgrade
RFCC naphtha. GHDT uses hydrogen and catalysts
for reducing both sulfur and olefin contents in RFCC
naphtha. However, GHDT technology also reduces RON of
its products. By controlling the relation of olefin content
and RON reduction in operation based on the range of
technical design, it can harmonise RON and olefin content
for gasoline blending to meet Euro V standards. Thus,
GHDT technology can be a suitable technical solution to
upgrade gasoline quality for Dung Quat refinery.
3.1. Solutions for reducing total sulfur content of
gasoline products
According to the Dung Quat refinery gasoline product
analysis data in 2017, the sulfur content in gasoline
normally ranges from 39 ppm wt. to over 150 ppm wt.,
depending mainly on crude oil quality and technology
parameters. Among the gasoline components, RFCC
naphtha has the highest sulfur content, which results in its
most considerable effect on the sulfur content of gasoline
products. Othercomponentssuchasreformate, isomerate,
and C4 mixture have lower sulfur content (less than 10
ppm wt.). Therefore, in order to reduce sulfur content of
the commercial gasoline, it is necessary to deeply treat
sulfur content of RFCC naphtha. Presently, RFCC naphtha
is still being processed by the RFCC Naphtha Treating Unit
(NTU) (Merichem's Technology) without using catalysts,
so the treatment is hardly to decrease the sulfur content
down to the required level (lower than 10 ppm wt.). Thus,
There are many GHDT licensors in the world such as
UOP, Axens, and Haldor Topsoe, etc. Each technology has
its own advantages and disadvantages. In this article, the
database of a similar GHDT unit has been used to calculate.
The detailed technology and licensor will be selected by
the next steps if the upgrading project is carried out.
The process diagram of GHDT is shown in Figure 2.
Reactor
Fresh feed
Recycle gas compressor
Heater
Wash water
Separator
Light ends
Stripper
Steam
Hydrogen makeup
Makeup compressor
Sour water
Desulfurized product
Figure 2. The general process scheme of GHDT unit [4].
PETROVIETNAM - JOURNAL VOL 10/2020
51
PETROLEUM PROCESSING
GHDT products ensure sulfur content is lower than 10
technology requires adding a solvent extraction unit
and the products have higher olefin content than those
treated by GHDT.
ppm wt., satisfying Euro V specifications. However, there
is also a disadvantage that after processing sulfur, it also
reduces RON.
The GTC general process scheme is presented in
Figure 3.
Another solution to be considered is the GTC's
technology (GTC-BTX-Plus). RFCC naphtha stream flows
into the existing NTU. Then, the NTU output stream is
separated by 3 segments, including:
3.2. Solutions for olefin content of gasoline products
According to the analysis of gasoline products, the
olefin content of Dung Quat refinery Mogas 92 gasoline is
often much higher than that of Mogas 95 (olefin in Mogas
92 is usually >30 vol%). The reason is that the composition
ofRFCCnaphtha(thehighestolefincomponents)occupies
a large proportion in Mogas 92. Olefin content of Mogas
95 is typically less than 30 vol%, lower than stated in Euro
V specifications. The olefin contents of other components
(C4s, isomerate, reformate) are lower than 30 vol%.
- RFCC light naphtha (C5 - C6-) (LCN) to gasoline
blending;
- RFCC medium naphtha (70 - 150 oC) (MCN) flows to
sulfur and aromatic extraction module (solvent extraction
technology). The aromatic stream with high RON is then
treated with HDS module before going to the gasoline
pool. The aromatic extracted MCN comes to the gasoline
pool.
Therefore, it is necessary to have a solution. The
solution will basically focus on RFCC naphtha, which is the
component of the highest olefin content (about 40 - 50+
vol%). GHDT can reduce both sulfur and olefin content
of RFCC naphtha to less than 30 vol%. Olefin reduction
causes RON decrease, which will be customised for each
specific case to balance the olefin content and RON of
RFCC naphtha. Besides, adjusting RFCC catalyst quality or
adding additives can also diminish the olefin content in
RFCC naphtha.
- RFCC heavy naphtha (>150 oC) (HCN) is also sent to
HDS module to decrease sulfur and olefin content before
coming to the gasoline pool.
In comparison to traditional gasoline hydrotreating
unit, by separating naphtha by three fractions, GTC
technology will minimise the octane loss due to olefin
saturation reaction, which in turn limits the reduction of
naphtha RON. The GTC unit will also reduce hydrogen
consumption in the HDT module. By experience, the
hydrogen consumption could even reduce by about
50%. It is very important because there is no hydrogen
manufacture plant in Dung Quat refinery. However, GTC
GTC also has HDS modules. The whole or a part of
HCN stream enters HDS module to lessen olefin content.
LCN
Gasoline blending
C5-iC6-
Raffinate: Paraffins + Olefins
Extract: Sulfur + Aromatics
MCN
RFCC naphtha
after NTU
70 - 150oC
Aromatics
HDS
H2
H2S
Solvent
GT-BTX Plus®
HCN
150oC-EP
ULS gasoline blending
Severe HDS
Figure 3. General process scheme of GTC unit [5].
PETROVIETNAM - JOURNAL VOL 10/2020
52
PETROVIETNAM
3.3. Solutions for benzene content of gasoline products
of the gasoline will meet the benzene requirement (≤ 1
vol%). Based on the collected data, normally the content
of benzene and benzene precursor in the HN segment
is about 4 - 6 vol% and similar in reformate (benzene is
hardly converted through CCR). Therefore, it is possible
to change the amount of C6 from HN segment into LN
segment to ensure that the benzene content in the
reformate will be no more than 2 vol%. However, due to
the capacity and benzene content limitation of IZOM feed
(≤5 - 6 vol%), if moving C6 into IZOM feedstock without
other solutions, some problems in operation will arise,
especially when using the crudes that have high yield of
LN as well as C6 content.
In terms of technological configuration, the full range
naphtha stream from CDU was passed through a naphtha
hydrotreater (NHT) to remove sulfur and nitrogen, etc.,
then put into the naphtha splitter. The naphtha splitter is
responsible for separating the treated full range naphtha
stream into two fractions:
+ Light naphtha segment (LN) is used as raw material
for IZOM;
+ Heavy naphtha segment (HN) is used as raw
material for CCR.
Adjusting the operating parameters of naphtha
splitter can affect the benzene and benzene precursor
composition in LN and HN depending on single case.
Benzene content in gasoline products is mostly from
reformate (commonly 4 - 6 vol%). RFCC naphtha also has
benzene content of less than 1 vol%. Most C4 mixture and
isomerate do not contain benzene. The refinery's M92
meets Level 2 of QCVN standard and the M95 meets the
Euro 3 standard equivalent. The mandatory standard for
benzene content of gasoline of the refinery is up to 2.5
vol%. According to the market demand, M95 gasoline
consumption is quite large. Usually, the M95’s price is
higher than M92’s.
Considering the current situation, the standard for
gasoline’s benzene content of the refinery is ≤ 2.5 vol%,
the adjustment of C6 to LN/HN at naphtha splitter is
much easier and more flexible. However, if moving most
C6 to LN and feeding to IZOM, the whole RON will be lost
because of benzene saturation. If C6 is moved to HN, the
benzene content in reformate will be high and thus will
affect the gasoline blending, especially M95. This will
lead to a reduction in M95 gasoline blending because of
benzene content constraint.
Thus, the following solutions for optimising the
benzene content in the gasoline components should be
considered.
In the current situation, the refinery's gasoline has a
benzene content of ≤ 2.5 vol%, equivalent to Level 3 of
QCVN [3]. M95 gasoline has an average benzene content
of about 2.1 vol%. The reason is that M95 has a high
composition of reformate components.
- Adding C6 into LN to saturate and reduce benzene
in gasoline:
Currently, IZOM can run up to 150% of design
capacity. According to calculations, if cutting most C6 into
IZOM, the unit will operate at 145 - 150% of the design
capacity and IZOM can still handle it. There are advantage
and disadvantage of this solution as follows:
Considering the improvement of the refinery’s
gasoline quality to meet Euro V standards, according to
the calculations, if the benzene content in reformate is not
more than 2 vol% (safe level), then the complete blend
Make-up
Light
Isomerisation
Saturation
Light naphtha
benzene, C6
naphthenes
hydrogen
ends
to FG
Preheater
Stabiliser
(For start-up only)
Reactor
Straight run
naphtha
Naphtha splitter
Feed/effluent
exchanger
Low pressure
reforming unit
Product
Feed
Figure 4. The general process diagram of BSU [6].
PETROVIETNAM - JOURNAL VOL 10/2020
53
PETROLEUM PROCESSING
+ Advantage: No additional investment is required to reduce
the benzene content in gasoline products;
BenzOUTTM also consumes an amount of
propylene to produce higher quality gasoline
in a similar form of alkylation. Heavy reformate
stream is sent to gasoline blending. According
to the data from the licensor, the benzene
content of the BenzOUTTM product is dropped to
< 0.62% vol% [4]. Investment cost is about USD
19 million for a capacity of 5,578 BPSD [6].
+ Disadvantage: The benzene content of IZOM feedstock is
required not to exceed 6 vol%. Therefore, if transferring too much
C6 into LN and exceeding the limit of IZOM feed requirement, the
performance of the unit will be affected. In addition, if the flowrate
of LN is high, the unit will be overloaded. On the other hand, IZOM
saturates benzene and causes RON reduction in the gasoline
blending component.
The general technology diagram of the
BenzOUTTM is presented in Figure 5.
- Investing in a new Benzene Saturation Unit (BSU):
Advantages
and
disadvantages
of
BSU is responsible for benzene saturating in the LN fraction.
The benzene content of the BSU product can be reduced to below
0.62 vol%. Investment cost is about USD 12 million for a capacity of
15,000 BPSD [6].
BenzOUTTM are as follows.
+ Advantage: BenzOUTTM unit separates
light reformate from CCR reformate and send to
the BenzOUTTM reaction system to combine with
propylene with the goal of reducing benzene
content in reformate. In addition, BenzOUTTM
product is a high RON component (RON >110).
It can increase the total RON of reformate
after BenzOUTTM up from 1.5 - 3.0 [4] and will
contribute to increase the M95 quantity. The
solution also helps the flexibility of the refinery
increase by diversifying crude oil feedstock
and following the direction of continuously
improving product quality in the future.
The general process diagram of BSU is shown in Figure 4.
+ Advantage: More benzene and benzene precursor can be
added to the LN fraction to reduce benzene content of the CCR
reformate. BSU can solve the benzene problem as well as the IZOM
capacity limitation, especially in the case where crude oil feed or full
range naphtha has a high yield of LN segment that is over IZOM's
capacity ability. This option increases flexibility with crude oil feeds
and meets the requirements of product quality improvement
roadmap.
+ Disadvantage: Investment is a must. BSU saturates benzene
and causes the loss of RON in gasoline blending. BSU also consumes
additional hydrogen.
+ Disadvantage: Investment costs are
required. BenzOUTTM consumes propylene.
- Investing a new BenzOUTTM unit
After considering the related issues,
BenzOUTTM investment is the most suitable
for Dung Quat refinery to handle the benzene
problem in gasoline product of the refinery.
This solution is both in line with the direction
of improving the quality of gasoline products
to meet Euro V standards in the future as well
as enhancing the flexibility and efficiency of
the plant in many cases. Therefore, the plan
of installing BenzOUTTM is selected for further
evaluation for the next sections.
BenzOUTTM is a technology of ExxonMobil Licensor. The role
of BenzOUTTM is to reduce the Benzene content of reformate in
the case of change almost of C6 into the HN segment at naphtha
splitter. BenzOUTTM unit will separate the light reformate segment
in the total CCR reformate including benzene and other C6. Then,
light reformate is fed into the BenzOUTTM reaction section. The
LPG
Light reformate
Refinery grade propylene
3.4. Other indirect solutions for upgrading
gasoline products to meet Euro V specifications
BenzOUTTM
reaction
Reformate
In addition, other solutions such as
investment of Alkylation, ETBE Unit, or importing
ethanol, etc., can be considered to improve the
gasoline product quality.
Reformate
splitter
Stabiliser
Heavy reformate
Mogas
Figure 5. The general process diagram of BenzOUTTM. Source: www.exxonmobilchemical.com [7].
PETROVIETNAM - JOURNAL VOL 10/2020
54
PETROVIETNAM
4. The configuration of Dung Quat refinery before and
after upgrading
overall material balance and operational efficiency of the
refinery for 2 options by LP model. The product property
constraints in the model are based on EuroV specifications.
The process constraints refer to the current data of Dung
Quat refinery’s existing units. New units input data based
on similar projects or technical documents [4, 5]. From the
model calculation results, options 1 and 2 are compared
in terms of the following:
In this article, the authors mainly use data from a
project of VPI [8].
The existing general process flow diagram of Dung
Quat refinery is shown in Figure 6.
There are 2 options studied in this article as follows:
- Option 1: Invest BenzOUTTM, Alkylation and GHDT;
- Option 2: Invest BenzOUTTM, Alkylation and GTC.
- Operating/design capacity and investment cost;
- Typical properties of components and key
specifications of gasoline products.
The Dung Quat refinery general process flow diagram
for GHDT, BenzOUTTM and Alkylation (option 1) is proposed
in Figure 7. Besides, a solution for diesel is also proposed
in the scheme.
5.1. Capacity and preliminary investment cost
estimation of new units for gasoline upgrade in 2 options
According to the calculation results, the operating
capacity/design capacity and preliminary investment cost
for gasoline upgrading of the new units are presented
on Table 2. The existing units run within the limits of the
allowed capacity.
After installing BenzOUTTM, GTC, and Alkylation (option
2), the general process diagram is described in Figure 8.
5. Comparison of key features between option 1 and
option 2
As the data fromTable 2, the investment cost of option
1 is higher than option 2. The cost will be calculated more
precisely in the next steps.
Based on the data [8], the refinery capacity was
at 110% of design capacity. The authors calculate the
PP
PRU
LTU
P
Gas plant
NHT
ISOM
CCR
L P G
M95
KO
CDU
LGO
KTU
M92
CT
JETA1
HGO
NTU
SPM
DO
FO
LCO
HDT
RFCC
Figure 6. Existing general process flow diagram of Dung Quat refinery.
PETROVIETNAM - JOURNAL VOL 10/2020
55
PETROLEUM PROCESSING
New unit
PRU
PP
P
LTU
Existing unit
C3=
Gas plant
NHT
ALK
ISOM
CCR
L P G
M95
LREF
BenzOUT
HREF
KO
CDU
KTU
LGO
M92
CT
JETA1
HGO
SPM
GHDT
NTU
DHDT
DO
FO
LCO
HDT
RFCC
Figure 7. Dung Quat refinery general process flow after investing BenzOUTTM, GHDT, Alkylation for upgrading gasoline quality to meet Euro V specifications.
New unit
PP
P
PRU
LTU
Existing unit
C3=
Gas plant
L P G
M95
ALK
ISOM
NHT
LREF
BenzOUT
HREF
KO
CCR
CDU
KTU
LGO
M92
CT
NTU
GTC
JETA1
HGO
SPM
DHDT
DO
FO
LCO
HDT
RFCC
Figure 8. Dung Quat refinery general process flow after investing BenzOUTTM, GTC, and Alkylation for upgrading gasoline quality to meet Euro V specifications.
PETROVIETNAM - JOURNAL VOL 10/2020
56
PETROVIETNAM
Table 2. New units operating capacity, design capacity and preliminary investment cost estimation [4]
ꢀnitꢃ
oꢄꢂrꢅtinꢆ
cꢅꢄꢅcitꢇ oꢈ cꢅꢄꢅcitꢇ oꢈ
oꢄtion 1
ꢉꢊꢋꢌꢁꢍ
ꢀnitꢃ
oꢄꢂrꢅtinꢆ
ꢏꢂꢐ unitꢃ
dꢂꢃiꢆn
cꢅꢄꢅcitꢇ
ꢉꢊꢋꢌꢁꢍ
ꢋrꢂꢑiꢒinꢅrꢇ
ꢂꢃtiꢒꢅtꢂd
inꢓꢂꢃtꢒꢂnt coꢃt
ꢉꢔꢔꢀꢌꢁꢍ
ꢀnit
ꢁꢂꢃcriꢄtion
ꢕꢂꢒꢅrꢖꢃ
oꢄtion ꢎ
ꢉꢊꢋꢌꢁꢍ
RFCC gasoline
hydrotreating unit
10% margin of highest
operating capacity in 2 options
10% margin of highest
operating capacity in 2 options
10% margin of highest
operating capacity in 2 options
10% margin of highest
operating capacity in 2 options
GHDT
ALK
50,000
11,950
3,510
89.9
35.4
12.8
72.5
45,335
-
Alkylation unit
10,864
3,100
-
10,214
3,193
BenzOUTTM BenzOUTTM unit
GTC GTC unit
22,667
24,930
Estimated investment cost in option 1
Estimated investment cost in option 2
138.1
120.7
Based on Figures 9 and 10, the number
of components in option 2 (9 components)
is more than the number in option 1 (6
components). Among them, there are 5
similar components: C4s, isomerate, heavy
reformate, BenzOUTTM gasoline and alkylate.
The main difference in the 2 options is GHDT/
GTC technology. In the case of GTC, there are
4 components: LCN, aromatic extracted MCN,
HCN, GTC HDS aromatic while only GHDT
gasoline in the case of GHDT.
C4s
Isomerate
GHDT naphtha
Mogas 92
Mogas 95
Gasoline pool of
Option 1
Heavy reformate
BenzOUT gasoline
Alkylate
Figure 9. Simple gasoline blending sketch of option 1.
The advantages and disadvantages of
GTC and GHDT are mentioned in Part III.
There will be more suitable selections and
considerations depending on the specific
situations. This article mainly proposes
solutions and does not concentrate in
technology selection. It will be done in the
next steps in case the project is implemented.
C4s
Isomerate
Mogas 92
Mogas 95
LCN
Aromaticextracted MCN
HCN
Gasoline pool
of option2
GTC HDS aromatic
Heavy reformate
BenzOUT gasoline
From calculation results, some typical
properties and proportions of gasoline
components in options 1 and 2 are presented
in Tables 3 and 4.
Alkylate
The data in Tables 3 and 4 show that
gasoline output in the 2 options is almost
equal. The quantity of M95 in option 2 is
slightly higher than in option 1. Gasoline
products of the 2 options comply with Euro
V specifications and Level 5 (QCVN, draft
version, 2020).
Figure 10. Simple gasoline blending sketch of option 2.
5.2. The typical properties and gasoline products’ key specifications
in 2 options
Gasoline components in 2 options appear in the following
sketches. Gasoline blending sketch of option 1 is described in Figure
9. Figure 10 shows gasoline blending sketch of option 2.
The above is the preliminary calculation
result. A more detailed assessment will be
carried out in the next phases.
PETROVIETNAM - JOURNAL VOL 10/2020
57
PETROLEUM PROCESSING
PETROVIETNAM - JOURNAL VOL 10/2020
58
PETROVIETNAM
6. Conclusion
This article has analysed the issues and proposed two
[2] BSR, “Regulatory for fuel quality standards and
Mogas and DO product of Dung Quat refinery”, 2016.
[3] Ministry of Science and Technology of Vietnam [Bộ
Khoa học và Công nghệ Việt Nam], “QCVN 1:2015/BKHCN:
Quy chuẩn kỹ thuật quốc gia về xăng, nhiên liệu diesel và
nhiên liệu sinh học”, 11/11/2015.
basic upgrade options for Dung Quat refinery gasoline
products. Both solutions achieve the target of gasoline
product quality reaching Euro V specifications with the
investment cost estimated of about USD 140 million
in option 1 and about USD 120 million in option 2. The
difference between 2 options is that option 1 uses GHDT
technology while option 2 uses GTC's technology to
upgrade RFCC naphtha to reduce the sulfur content and
olefin content. Both options use BenzOUTTM Technology,
which not only reduces the benzene content but also
increases RON of reformate. Besides, the authors also
present alkylation investment to produce alkylate that
is a high-quality gasoline component. Both options are
compatible with the production of E5 gasoline to supply
to the market when needed.
[4] Robert A. Meyers, Handbook of petroleum refining
process, 4th edition. Mc Graw Hill Education, 2016.
[5] Anil Khatri, “Refining/petrochemical integration
- A new paradigm”, Coking and CatCracking Conference,
New Delhi, India, 30 September - 4 October 2013. [Online].
uploads/2017/07/Refining-Petrochemical-Integration-
A-New-Paradigm-Khatri-GTC-Technology-FCCU-New-
Delhi-2013.pdf.
[6] Ronald F. Coldwell, "Benzen in gasoline regulation
and remedies", 2009. [Online]
This article mostly uses input data from 2017 -
2018. The calculation is at a preliminary level. Detailed
calculation and investment estimation of the solutions
will be performed thoroughly in the next steps if the
project is implemented.
[7] Exxonmobil Chemical, “Mogas production
(BenzOUT™)”.
[Online].
Available:
exxonmobilchemical.com/en/catalysts-and-technology-
licensing/fuel-production/mogas-production.
[8] Vietnam Petroleume Institute (VPI), Study the
solutions to upgrade the Dung Quat refinery petroleum
products quality meets Euro5 standards, 2018.
References
[1] Technip, “Dung Quat refinery technical
documents”, 2007.
PETROVIETNAM - JOURNAL VOL 10/2020
59
11 trang
16/04/2022
3520
Bạn đang xem tài liệu "Solutions for upgrading gasoline products to comply with Euro V specifications in Dung Quat refinery", để tải tài liệu gốc về máy hãy click vào nút Download ở trên
File đính kèm:
- solutions_for_upgrading_gasoline_products_to_comply_with_eur.pdf
