Upload
phunganh
View
292
Download
12
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
(Vapor Recovery Unit : VRU)
Map Ta Phut Tank Terminal Co., Ltd. (MTT)
Content
1.Project background
2.VRU method
3.Result
1. Project background
� To control emission and reduce environmental
impact to community
� To build community trust
� Terminal was considered as one of risk
VOC emission sources
� Cost/ Loss reduction
Management Policies
1. Project background
Export to vessel
TankVOCs
VOCsVOCs
VOCsVOCsVOCs
VOC emission about 16.54 tons/year
(in 2013)
No VOC emission
TankVOCs
VOCsVOCs
VOCsVOCsVOCsMembrane
Flare
Activated Carbon
Technique BAT- associated values Remark
Membrane separation 90 -> 99.9% recovery VOC < 20 mg/m³ Range 1 ->10g VOC/m3
Adsorption
(Activated Carbon)
95 -99.99 % recovery Regenerative adsorption:
Flow 100 ->100000 m3/h,
0.01 - 10g VOC/m3, 1 – 20 atm.
Non regenerative adsorption:
Flow 10 ->1000 m3/h,
0.01 - 1.2g VOC/m3
Flaring Elevated flares > 99 %
Ground flares > 99.5 %
In case of marine loading :
Due to vapors have more
concentration of oxygen. Vapors
are conditioned by adding LPG to
“enrich” the mixture at least
170% above the upper
flammability limit (UFL). Due to ( increase in operating cost)
1. Project background
Typical Investment cost & Operating cost(Membrane separation, Adsorbtion and Flare)
Membrane
Adsorption
Flare
Membrane
separation
Adsorption
(Activated carbon)Flare
Investment cost (MB) 125 110 72
Operating cost (MB/Year) 2.5 3.6 12
Flare
Adsorption
Membrane
1 2 3
1. Project background
1 Year 15 Years
125110
72
2.5
3.6
12
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
Membrane
Separation
Adsorption
(Activated Carbon)
Flare
Investment and Operating Cost of each
Technology
Investment Cost Operating Cost
Co
st (
M B
ah
t)
125 11072
38 54
180
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Membrane
Separation
Adsorption
(Activated Carbon)
Flare
Investment and Operating Cost of each
Technology
Investment Cost Operating Cost
Co
st (
M B
ah
t)
Investment cost & Operating cost (1 Year & 15 Years)
163 164
252
1. Project background
Generate wasteGenerate waste
Safety ConcernsSafety Concerns
Safety ConcernsSafety Concerns
High Operating costHigh Operating cost
Easy processEasy process
1. Project background
Technique Efficiency of
reduce VOCs
Investment
cost
Operating
cost
Operator
EasinessSafety
Membrane
separation
Adsorption
(Activated Carbon)
Flaring
����
����
����
=> Good => Bad=> Fair
1. Project background
Drum
20 m3 Head 90 m
Flow rate 100 m3/h
Head 50 m
Flow rate 100 m3/h 6”
6”
10”
Treated vapour vent to ATM
10”
10”
12”
Pyrolysis Gasoline
DSU
DSU
VRU
= Dock Safe Unit
= Vapour recovery Unit
= Scope of work
Jetty 1
VRU
Jetty 2
Jetty 3
Jetty 4
DSU 1
DSU 2
DSU 4
10”
10”
10”
Vapor Recovery Unit(VRU)
LiquidLoading
Gas
Loading
LiquidLoading
LiquidLoading
2. VRU method
Jetty 2
DSU
VRU
= Dock Safe Unit
= Vapour recovery Unit
= Scope of work
Treated vapor vent to ATM
Product
Benzene
Toluene
C9+Mixed xylene
VRU : Vapour Recovery Unit2. VRU method
Scrubber
Spay
Shower
Packing
media
C9+
HC
+
Air
Air + HC
2. VRU method (Scrubber)
Membrane2. VRU method (Membrane)
2. VRU method
Gas detector online
3. Result
3. Result
16.54
0.330.00
4.00
8.00
12.00
16.00
20.00
2013 2014
VOCs (tons/year)