Pinch Technology/

Process Optimization

Volume 7:Case Study A Wax Extraction Plant

CEC Report CR-105238

Prepared by
LinnhoffMarch, lnc.
9800 Richmond Avenue, Suite 560
Houston, TX 77042
May 1995

REPORT SUMMARY
PINCH TECHNOLOGY/PROCESS OPTIMIZATION
Volume 7: Case Study - A Wax Extraction Plant
A wax extraction plant case study demonstrates how process
integration or pinch technology can identify practical and costeffective ways to substantially reduce energy costs. Suggested costsaving measures include steam and power system improvements,
yield improvement, reduction of NOx emissions and optimum heat
exchanger network design. Low capital cost projects were
identified to improve wax yield by 8%, increase refrigeration
capacity by 10%and reduce steam usage by 22%.

BACKGROUND Improved industrial process efficiency is of

INTEREST CATEGORIES

Industrial
Demand-side Planning

KEYWORDS

Pinch technology
Heat recovery
Energy efficiency
Heat pumps
End use
Industry

great importance to electric utilities. It enhances customer

competitiveness and profitability, thereby fostering load
retention and strategic load growth. By understanding the
energy use patterns and options at an industrial site, the utility can
work together with its customer to define mutually beneficial
investment and operating options. The technique of
choice is pinch analysis, an innovative and effective
method for analyzing industrial sites. Since 1988,
EPRT and member utilities have cosponsored over twenty
such studies around the country in various industries, with a
high degree of success.

OBJECTIVES To identify opportunities for energy savings using

pinch technology; to develop technically and economically viable
projects to achieve these targets.
APPROACH Project team was formed consisting of consultants,
plant and electric utility representatives. The team visited the plant
to define and collect process, utility and economic data. The
consultants developed appropriate material, heat and steam
balances, and using pinch technology, characterized each refinery's
heating and cooling needs. After quantifying the scope of potential

improvements, the site was screened for specific projects based on

processing changes, heat recovery and heat pump applications.

RESULTS The study indicates that substantial operating cost

savings could be achieved using conventional technologies and
investment payback criteria(typical1y two years or less). Projects
were identified to reduce energy cost, increase product yield,
increase refrigeration capacity and reduce NOx.
EPRI PERSPECTIVE The study shows that process integration
or pinch technology is an effective tool to improve industrial energy
efficiency. Utilities can use pinch methodology to promote load
stability in their service territories. Information on energy use
options and interactions and their sensitivity to economic factors
can also be used to foster successful demand-side management
programs.
EPRI has published additional case studies of pinch technology on
a variety of industries. These are documented in reports TR101147, Volumes 1 through 5. Other related work is documented
in EPRI reports EM-6057, CU-6334, CU-6775, CR105237, and
CR105239. An EPRI brochure on pinch technology is numbered
BR-102466.

PROJECTS
RP3879-4
EPRI Project Manager: K. R. Amarnath
Customer Systems Division
Contractor: Linnhoff March, Inc
For further information on EPRI research programs, call EPRI
Technical Information Specialists (415) 855-2411.

.\r

PINCH TECHNOLOGY/PROCESS OPTIMIZATION

Volume 7: Case Study - A Wax Extraction Plant

Final Report, November 1994

Prepared by
Linnhoff March, Inc.
9800 Richmond Avenue, Suite 560
Houston, TX 77042

Prepared for
Electric Power Research Institute
3412 Hillview Avenue
Palo Alto, CA 94304

For technical information, contact:

EPRl Chemicals & Petroleum Office
1775 St. James Place, Suite 105
Houston, Texas 77056
(713) 963-9307
Fax: (713) 963-8341

For ordering information, contact:

EPRIAMP Customer Assistance Center (ECAC)
1-800-4320-AMP

Disclaimer of Warranties and Limitation of Liabilities

NEITHER EPRI, ANY MEMBER OF EPRI, ANY COSPONSOR, NOR ANY PERSON OR ORGANIZATION
ACTING ON BEHALF OF ANY OF THEM:
(A)MAKES ANY WARRANTY OR REPRESENTATION WHATSOEVER, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED,
(I)WITH RESPECT TO THE USE OF ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR
ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT, INCLUDING MERCHANTABILITY AND FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR
PURPOSE, OR
(1I)THAT SUCH USE DOES NOT INFRINGE ON OR INTERFERE WITH PRIVATELY OWNED RIGHTS,
INCLUDING ANY PARTY'S INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY, OR
(1II)THAT THIS REPORT IS SUITABLE TO ANY PARTICULAR USERS CIRCUMSTANCE; OR
(B)ASSUMES RESPONSIBILITY FOR ANY DAMAGES OR OTHER LIABILITY WHATSOEVER (INCLUDING ANY
CONSEQUENTIAL DAMAGES, EVEN IF EPRl OR ANY EPRl REPRESENTATIVE HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE
POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGES) RESULTING FROM YOUR SELECTION OR USE OF THIS REPORT OR
ANY INFORMATION, APPARATUS, METHOD, PROCESS, OR SIMILAR ITEM DISCLOSED IN THIS REPORT.

ABSTRACT

industrial manufacturing facilities in the United States are facing increasing competition
in today's global marketplace. In order to protect their industrial manufacturing base,
many electric utility revenues have adopted the strategy of providing technical
assistance to help selected customers improve their competitive position.
Petrowax Corporation produces high grade waxes for use in a variety of commercial
and consumer markets. Petrowax was keen to modernize its facilities in order to
reduce operating costs, increase manufacturing flexibility, and to achieve compliance
with a NO, abatement order at minimum capital cost.
The present study employed the techniques of Pinch Analysis to identify a
comprehensive process improvement strategy that improved wax yield by 8%,
debottlenecked refrigeration capacity by I O % , and reduced total steam demand by
22%. Operating margins are projected to improve by over $1 MM/yr. Furthermore, the
reduced fuel requirement automatically reduced NO, emissions, enabling compliance
with the NO, abatement order without installing expensive end-of-pipe controls.
Past studies undertaken by EPRl in cooperation with member utilities have shown
comparable results over a broad range of industries.

...

Ill

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

A comprehensive energy study was performed at Petrowax's oil processing facility

in Smethport, PA, using process integration techniques based on Pinch Analysis.
Petrowax produces high grade waxes for use in a variety of commercial and
consumer products. Waxy crudes and distillates are first fractionated in a vacuum
distillation unit (VDU) t o separate the oil into several distinct cuts. The VDU
bottoms stream is treated with propane in the PDA unit t o separate out the
asphaltenes (or heavy resin fraction), and the main oil fraction is recovered for
further processing. The side cuts from VDU and recovered oil from PDA are then
subjected t o solvent extraction using MEK to separate wax from oil. The waxes
are purified by bauxite filtration. The residual oils are sold as byproducts t o lube
oil processors and heating oil dealers, and asphalt is used an-site as fuel.
Plant management had several objectives in mind when commissioning this study:
1.

Improve operating economics

- lowe: energy consumption
- increased product yield

2.

Debottleneck processing capacity

- VDU
- MEK refrigeration

3.

Evaluate feasibility of hydrotreating versus bauxite filtration for the wax

finishing operation.

4.

Determine the optimum Combined Heat and Power (cogeneration) strategy

for this site, paying particular heed to Compliance with rather stringent NOx
abatement requirements.

The major findings were as follows:

0

iv

The most economic way to achieve NOx compliance is t o shut down t w o of

the four boilers. Firm steam savings of 40,000 Ib/hr are required in order to
comfortably operate the plant with the remaining t w o boilers. The tank

insulation program recommended previously by PCI is a necessary, but not

sufficient, part of the required steam savings.
It is possible to reduce the VDU furnace load by 35%, thereby debottlenecking
its capacity, through HEN retrofit. As an incidental benefit, the increased heat
recovery reduces energy costs by approximately $60 K/yr.

Instead of capturing energy savings, it is possible t o translate the reduced VDU

furnace heat load into increased throughput or into increased yield. Detailed
simulation runs using HYSIM showed that VDU product yield can potentially be
increased by about 8 % in t w o alternate ways:
(a) continue t o operate the furnace at its current firing rate, and increase
reflux ratio proportionately.
(b) lower column operating pressure, and increase steaming rates in the side
strippers.
Column hydraulics would have t o be checked t o make sure that the tower can
handle the increased vapor and liquid traffic. HEN retrofit would be an
essential pre-condition t o yield improvement if the furnace capacity is limiting.
By using wastewater instead of cooling water t o absorb VDU waste heat, it is
possible to save 10,000 lb/h of steam elsewhere in the plant. Cost savings are
$240 K/yr at a payback of less than 1 year.
The MEK refrigeration system capacity can be debottlenecked by about 10%.
In addition, steam savings of nearly 20,000 Ib/hr are possible. A key element
of the HEN retrofit is an MVR heat pump across the HP flash drum. Although
the payback on this project does not meet investment criteria, it is critical to
achieving Petrowax's strategic objective of shutting down t w o of the four
existing boilers in order t o comply with NOx emission limits.

.
.

The potential for steam savings through heat recovery in the PDA plant is
minimal.
A new hydrotreater to replace the existing bauxite filter system would not be
economical, and is not recommended; it would be better t o continue with the
existing system.

The economics of cogeneration at this site are not good, since the cost of fuel
to generate one k w h of power exceeds the sale price of that kwh.

Overall economics for the proposed HEN retrofits are summarized below:
Payback

MEK

I
I

Tank Insulation
Total

4.2

I
I

1.0
2.0

I
I

The predicted savings represent 22% of total site energy costs. The actual
savings will be somewhat higher, if credit is taken for savings in labor,
maintenance, etc. from shutting down t w o boilers.
Accordingly, we suggest that Petrowax pursue a 2-stage revamp strategy.
Staae 1

- VDU HEN Retrofit

- VDU yield improvement
- Tank insulation

We recommend immediate implementation of these projects because of the

outstanding benefits.
Staae 2

- MEK HEN Retrofit

This project requires additional investigation, particularly with respect to funding

subsidies that could help reduce the payback. As it stands, the main attraction is
that it will enable Petrowax to shut down the t w o least efficient boilers, thereby

reducing NO, emissions by 30-50% without having t o install end-of-pipe controls.

vi

CONTENTS

Page

Section

Executive Summary ................................................................................

iv

introduction .........................................................................................
Background and Objectives .............................................................................

1-1
1-1

Scope of Work .................................................................................

Task I .Data Collection ................................................................

1-2
1-2

Task 2 .Design Basis ...................................................................

1-2
1-3

Task 3 .Pinch Analysis .................................................................

Task 4 .Project Definition .............................................................
Task 5 Reports ..........................................................................

1-4
1.4

....................................................................................

1-5

Deliverables
2

Study Basis ..........................................................................................

2-1

2-1
Process Description ..........................................................................
CHP System .................................................................................... 2-1
Capital Costs ...................................................................................
3

2-4

Results ................................................................................................

3-1

Vacuum Distillation ...........................................................................

Simulation Model and Yield Analysis ...............................................
Finch Analysis .............................................................................

3-1
3-1
3-4

Solvent De-Oiling ..............................................................................

3-9

Propane De-Asphalting ....................................................................

Wax Finishing ................................................................................

3-20

3-22

CONTENTS

Section

viii

Page

Offsites ........................................................................................
Combined Heat and Power System ....................................................

3-23
3-23

Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................

.4-1

FIGURES

Figure

Page

3.1
3.2
3.3

Process Block Flow Diagram ...............................................................

CHP System Schematic .....................................................................
Simplified Flowsheet of VDU Process ..................................................

2-2
2.3
3-5

Composite Curves .VDU ...................................................................

Grand Composite Curve - VDU ...........................................................

3-6
3-7

3.4
3.5
3.6

Recommended HEN Retrofit for VDU (Grid) ........................................3-10

Recommended HEN Retrofit for VDU (Flowsheet) ................................
3-11
Simplified Flowsheet of De-Oiling (MEK) Process .................................
3-12

3.7
3.8

Composite Curves - MEK .................................................................

Grand Composite Curve - MEK .........................................................
Recommended HEN Retrofit for MEK (Grid).........................................

2.1
2.2

3.9
3.1Oa Recommended HEN Retrofit for MEK (Flowsheet) ................................
3.10b Recommended HEN Retrofit for MEK (Flowsheet) ................................
3 . 1 0 ~ Recommended HEN Retrofit for MEK (Flowsheet) ................................
3.11 Simplified Flowsheet of PDA Process .................................................

3-13
3-14
3-15
3-16
3-17
3-18
3-21

IX

TABLES

Table
3.1

3.2

Page

Summary of VDU Simulation Results ................................................... 3-2

Comparison of Cogeneration Options .................................................
3-25

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

BPD

Barrels Per Day

BW

Boiler Feedwater Makeup

British Thermal Units

Btu

DT

Combined Heat and Power

Cooling Water
Minimum Approach Temperature in the HEN

EPRl

Electric Power Research Institute, Palo Alto, CA

GCC
HEN

Grand Composite Curve

HMB
HP

Heat and Material Balance

High Pressure (steam); Horse Power (electricity)

HRSG
HVGO

Heat Recovery Steam Generator

Heavy VGO
Gallons per minute (liquid flow)

CHP

cw

gpm
IBP
K
KW
KWH

Heat Exchanger Network

Initial Boiling Point

Thousand
Kilowatts
Kilowatt-hours

LPW
MEK
MM

Low Pressure (Steam)

Methyl Ethyl Ketone

MP(S)
MVR

Medium Pressure (Steam)

Mechanical Vapor Recompressor

MW

Megawatts

MWH

Megawatt-hours

Million

xi

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

NOX
PCI
PDA

Nitrogen Oxides
PCI Engineers Inc, Houston, TX
Propane De-Asphalting

PO

Rf g

Press Oil
Refrigeration (ammonia)

SCFD

Standard Cubic Feed per Day (gas flow)

SW
TBP

Slack Wax

VDU

True Boiling Point

Vacuum Distillation Unit

VGO

Vacuum Gas Oil

xii

I
INTRODUCTION

As part of its Business Partnership program, Pennsylvania Electric Company

(Penelec) sponsored this study t o help Petrowax develop a modernization plan for
its wax extraction and refining plant in Smethport, PA. The focus of this work
was to improve energy efficiency and reduce NOx emissions using the methods of
Pinch Analysis. This project was partially funded by EPRI, who also had
responsibility for administering and managing this pinch study on behalf of
Penelec.

This study was begun in April 1994, and completed in July 1994.

Background and Objectives

Petrowax produces petroleum based wax using crude oils and distillates as raw
materials. After wax extraction using MEK solvent, the dewaxed oil is sent to
other refineries for further processing.
Petrowax is keen t o modernize its production facilities and reduce processing cost
per barrel of throughput. The company's first priority is to implement quick
payback projects such as insulation of storage tanks, and pick off other such "low
hanging fruit". The important considerations are cost and compliance with NOx
related regulations. Petrowax is limited on the amount of investment it can make,
which will have a major influence on the type of projects that could be considered
for implementation. Options include replacing t w o of the existing boilers with a
more efficient gas-fired package boiler as well as third party cogeneration.
Longer term, there are three critical priorities:
a)

Improve wax yield by fine tuning VDU operation.

b)

Debottleneck MEK unit refrigeration capacity.

c)

Replace the bauxite filters with a hydrotreater unit; possibly adapting

the existing moth-balled platformer for this purpose.

1-1

introduction

Consistent with this background, the objectives of the energy study were to
determine the optimum steam and power generation strategy for the Smethport
site under the following scenario:
Modified process - MEK unit debottlenecked, bauxite filters replaced
by hydrotreating, and vacuum distillation unit operated at maximum
yield.
Reduction in process steam demand through heat integration (pinch
analysis), tank insulation, and possible replacement of steam by
electricity in certain applications.
0

Compliance with existing and expected future NOx emissions

regulations.
Capital investment limit, as specified by Petrowax.

The study report should be sufficiently comprehensive and detailed for Petrowax
to make a sound decision on how to proceed forward with the modernization
program.

Scope of Work
Linnhoff March, Inc. was contracted to provide the following services:
A.

Task I

- Data Collection

Visit the Petrowax plant to develop an understanding of the facilities

available on the site and how they can be best utilized for plant
modernization. This task included discussing economic and other
constraints to be taken into account in the analysis, and defining the data
that needed to be collected and/or verified by Petrowax.
B.

Task 2 - Design Basis

During this same site visit, LMI was to obtain or develop the following
information to be used as the Design Basis:

1-2

a.

Process flow diagrams for the existing facilities, including proposed

process modifications.

b.

Develop Heat and Material balance models of both the process and
the CHP system using appropriate software tools.

il

lntroduction

c.

Initial estimates of the size and/or overall heat transfer coefficients for
each heat exchanger.

d.

The relationship between exchanger capital cost and heat transfer

area for each type of exchanger.

e.

Representative 12-month steam/power consumption profile.

f.

The marginal cost of site utilities.

C.

Task 3 - Pinch Analysis

1.

Perform a Pinch Analysis of the VDU and MEK units as follows:

a.

Extract the heat load, temperature and heat transfer

information, together with heating and cooling costs in the
form required for a pinch analysis.

b.

Determine the optimum extent of heat integration for the plant

using pinch analysis.

c.

Construct hot and cold composite curves, and the grand

composite curve, for the plant.

d.

Evaluate economically optimized heating and cooling duties for

the plant, from these, define the potential for energy savings by
passive heat integration.

e.

Establish targets for steam and fuel consumption in the

process.

f.

Identify pinch violations in the plant's existing Heat Exchanger

Network (HEN). Design a Heat Exchanger Network (HEN)
retrofit that satisfies the pinch energy targets.

g.

Determine the steam savings possible from optimum tank

insulation.

h.

Review with Petrowax the proposed optimization concepts and

obtain feedback on constraints and operability, layout, or
product quality. Revise projects accordingly.

i.

Assess the combined heat and power potential at the site

based on rates provided by Penelec. For possible combined
heat and power applications, indicate the potential capacity
1-3

Introduction

(kW), the potential annual energy production (kWh) and an

estimate of the generator installation costs.

1.

Assess the impact of proposed projects on NOx emissions.

2.

Submit a draft report summarizing Task 3 activities for review by

EPRI, Penelec, and the host site. Interim project reviews shall be held
as appropriate t o keep all parties appraised of the study's progress.

D.

Task 4 - Project Definition

1.

As a result of performing the pinch analysis and discussing with all of

the participants, develop a list of recommendations for capital
projects and/or process changes that meet the operating and
economic criteria established by the plant.

2.

Identify capital projects including preliminary estimates of equipment

sizes, costs, and general process configuration, but short of detailed
engineering design.

3.

Prepare a non-proprietary draft report documenting generic

conclusions of all the work performed t o date.

E.

Task 5 - Reports

1.

Give a detailed presentation of the results of the analysis to plant

pers-onnel, EPRI, and Penelec.

2.

Following approval of the draft, non-proprietary (generic) reports by

Penelec and EPRI project managers, submit a final report suitable for
widespread distribution.

3.

Prepare an "innovator" to publicize the key results from the study.

Petrowax's responsibilities on this project consisted of:

1-4

A.

Providing flow sheets, diagrams, or other information necessary t o

carry out the analysis.

B.

Measuring or verifying key data t o the best of their ability.

introduction

Deliverables
1.

Process Heat and Material Balance simulation model (electronic copy

only).

2.

S t e a d p o w e r system simulation model (electronic copy only).

3.

Report.

4.

Innovator.

1-5

2
STUDY BASIS

The Smethport plant uses a solvent dewaxing process t o produce several

grades of wax from heavy crude oil and distillates. The plant operates
continuously, 24 hours per day, with an average full-rate onstream time of
8000 hours per year.
Process Description
An overall block flow diagram of the process is shown in Figure 2-1.
Crude oil feedstock is fractionated into four main cuts by vacuum
distillation. These are called 127P, 140P, 152P, and 160P. Vacuum tower
bottoms go t o a propane de-asphalting unit for removal of asphalt, and
recovery of the heavy waxy distillate. Dewaxing of the four oil cuts from
the VDU and recovered distillate from the PDA unit is accomplished by
mixing the oils with MEK, which has a high solubility for oil but l o w
solubility for wax. The wax-solvent-oil solution is chilled t o precipitate out
the wax, and filtered. MEK solvent is recovered from the oil and the wax,
by steam stripping, and reused. The lube oils and waxes are further purified
by bauxite filtration, and sold for specialized markets.
Heat and material balance simulation models were developed for both the
VDU and MEK plants. Both t h e VDU and MEK process simulations were
done using HYSIM. The simulation models gave reasonably good agreement
with measured plant data, and were used as the basis for subsequent pinch
analysis and project design.

CHP System
The plant Combined Heat and Power (CHP) system is depicted schematically
in Figure 2-2. It consists of 4 steam boilers, all operating at 240 psig:

There are 3 steam headers - 240 psig, 140 psig, and 25 psig. A number of
small backpressure steam turbines are used t o drive process pumps and

2- 1

Y
N

VGO
Crude Oil
Feedstock

I
3

VDU

Side

r
I

Dewaxed Oil

Crude

...

LTu

Vac. Bottoms

treating
(new)

+-

Resin
(asphalt)

Figure 2-1
Process Block Flow Diagram

Deresined oil

Waxes

Study Basis

BFW

Desuperheat

Direct to
Process

J.

240 Ib IT

>
Direct t o
Process

140 Ib
I

Desuperheat

ii

25 Ib - 1

V
Flash
Tank

Direct to
Process

'

Condensate

LOSSES

-=

BFW makeup

Figure 2-2
CHP System Schematic

2-3

>
Study Basis

compressors. These have been lumped together into 3 categories for

simplicity, on the basis of the pressure levels between which they operate.
In addition, some fuel oil used in the VDU and Rerun plants, and fuel gas
used in the PDA, MEK, and Filter/flare units.
The cost of steam produced by different boilers was provided by Petrowax.
Assuming that Petrowax will shut down the most expensive boiler first, the
value of steam savings used for evaluating project economics is as follows:

@ $3.80/Klb

First 25,000Ib/hr

Second 35,000 Ib/hr QS2.1O/Klb

Additional Savings

@ S I .80/Klb

This yields an average steam price of $2.81/Klb for the first 60,000 Ib/hr of
savings. No distinction is made between the cost of MP and LP steam, as
the power credit between those t w o levels is quite small and does not affect
any of the conclusions. Cooling costs were taken t o be $0.5O/MMBtu.
Capital Costs

For purposes of pinch analysis, it was assumed that all heat exchangers
would be Shell & Tube carbon steel, for which the installed cost can be
represented as
$ = 10000

+ 700 (area, ft2)0-67

The capital cost of gas turbines with HRSGs was taken t o be:
MMS = 0.82

2-4

1.16 (MW)

3
RESULTS

The plant analysis was broken down into several distinct tasks, which will
be described in turn.
Vacuum Distillation Unit

Simulation Model and Yield Analysis

In order to study possibilities for yield improvement, a simulation model was
developed using HYSIM. The stream cutkharacterization was performed
based on the D1160-ATM profile provided by Petrowax, and the calculated
pseudo-component properties were fed into the simulator.

The model was validated by comparing simulation output with several sets
of plant data. Very good agreement was obtained with process flow rates
and compositions, except that we could not get an exact match on the
column temFerature profile.
The results of three significant runs are summarized in Table 3-1.
Case 1:

Base case, current operation

Case 2:

Increase reflux ratio

Case 3:

Reduce column pressure

Case 2 represents the maximum yield increase possible (8.5%) at the given
column pressure conditions while maintaining present product quality
specifications. This benefit is achieved a t the cost of 3.0 MMBtu/h
increased heat input to the base of the column. Since this heat must be
supplied at a high enough temperature to strip off the desirable fraction, one
would have to increase fuel t o the furnace. If the additional duty is supplied
through the furnace, the outlet temperature will be 910OF. It will be
necessary to verify whether this is feasible, both with regard to possible

3-1

'

Results

Table 3-1
Summary of VDU Simulation Results
Case 2
(Increase Reflux &
Stm)

Case 1
(Base)

Case 3
(Column

High vac

I
I

A Cooling Duty (MMBtu/h)

1.547

0
.
8
5
7
1
1.161

3.00

127 prod. flow (B/D)

25 1

275

140 prod. flow (B/D)

705

152 prod. flow (B/D)

439

529

160 prod. flow (B/D)

80

205

519
210

1475

1624

1620

A Heating Duty (MMBtu/h)

Total product flow (B/D)

61 5

I 127 product

J '

6
2
9
1

641 /79 1

1 (5/95%loF
1 140 product
(5/95%)"F

7 5 7/8 7 5

7 7 2/8 73

77 1/873

844/970

845/970

845/970

'

152 product
(5/95%)OF

93 7/ 1090

160 product
(5/95 %) O F
~

Note:

3-2

Feed rate is the same in all cases; product flow rates have been
scaled t o show relative magnitude only in order t o protect
confidential client information.

'

thermal cracking, and equipment limitations (eg. tower hydraulics). Case 3

represents an attempt to offset the energy penalty in Case 2 by reducing
column operating pressure from 1.34 psia to 0.8 psia (40 M M Hg). In this
case, a yield increase of 8 % is possible with an energy (furnace duty)
penalty of only 1.22 MMBtu/h. The energy penalty in the jet systems
associated with increasing the vacuum was not considered, however.
To summarize, it appears that yield increases of up to 8-9% are indeed
possible, but a number of practical issues remain to be investigated and
resolved before a firm conclusion can be reached.
The following observations and comments may be useful in this regard:
(a)

The TBP curves provided by Petrowax (32OOF at IBP and 66OOF a t

80%) indicate the presence of low molecular weight compounds.
This could be due to feed cracking in the furnace. Operation a t
higher vacuum will tend t o minimize such cracking.

(b)

Furnace operation could be improved by adding instrumentation for

monitoring tube-skin temperatures, tube flow rate, and pressure drop.

(c)

Good temperature and pressure measurements on the draw trays are

essential to validating the simulation model and understanding column
performance, and should be given priority.

(d)

30
Most lube oil vacuum columns operate at a pressure drop of 20
mm Hg. The actual AP is considerably higher, indicating possible
fouling (coking) or other mechanical pinches in the column, and may
account for some of the discrepancies between simulated and
measured data.

Finally, it should be noted that the energy intensity of PDA is almost 2

orders of magnitude higher than VDU, when expressed as Ib of steam per
bbl of feed. Thus, increasing VDU yield will actually result in steam savings
in the PDA plant, as illustrated below (feed flow rate normalized to 1800
BPD to protect confidential information):

3-3

Results

Current
1,800

VDU feed rate, BPD

I

VDU product yield, %

Proposed
1,800
I

82

90

VDU bottoms flow, BPD

324

180

Furnace Heat Duty, MMBtu/h

8.6

11.6

2,700

2,700

0.1507

0.1907

1.29

1.29

Total Steam Usage, Ib/h

Energy Intensity, MMBtu/bbl

- VDU (steam & fuel)

- PDA (steam)

Total Energy Consumption, MMBtu/h

- VDU
- PDA

11.3

14.3

17.4

9.7

- Combined

28.7

24.0

4.7

- Savings (avg)

In short, the energy cost of 3 MMBtu/hr due t o increasing VDU yield is more
than offset by reduced steam cost in the PDA plant.
Pinch Analysis

A simplified version of the existing flowsheet is shown in Figure 3-1. The

simulation data for the base case were considered representative of current
operations and therefore used as the basis for pinch analysis.
The stream data for pinch analysis are considered confidential by Petrowax,
but the composite and grand composite curves are shown in Figures 3-2
and 3-3.

3 -4

'

Results

I0

v)
vc

P
T

3-5

'

.,

Results

9
cv

'0

'Eo

9
F

'd
.
r

9
'(v

.9
Eo

.9
W

E3

c\l

I a J

m u

.
I
-

0
0

3-6

In

0
0
d

0
0

cv

I
I

'

Results

m a
I E
m o

IL

9)

M a
3 6

3 -7

The corresponding "stand-alone" utility targets and potential cost savings

are:

Air

Utility
cost
K$/yr

0.48

218

MMBtu/h

cw

LPS

Oil
Existing (base case)

8.60

Target @ D T = 8 0

5.51

7.92

0.48

160

Savings

3.09

-0.96

2.11

58

(27%)

(27%)

-0.96 10.03

n/a

(36%)

As far as energy savings go, the impact on the CHP system is fairly minimal.
It can be seen, though, that through proper process integration, the furnace
can be debottlenecked by 3 MMBtu/h, which is almost exactly the amount
of extra heat required t o obtain a yield increase of 8% (per section 3.1.I).

The VDU process GCC shows clearly that on a stand-alone basis, a large
amount of heat at fairly high temperatures (300-450'F) must be dumped
into cooling water. A t the same time, there are other processes at the site
where steam is being used t o supply fairly low level heat. This suggests
opportunities for inter-unit heat integration.
The most obvious and convenient use for surplus VDU heat is for
wastewater heating, which currently requires 10,000Ib/hr steam. If this is
done, almostthe entire cooling water duty in VDU can be eliminated, and
nearly 9000 Ib/hr of LP steam saved. When cross-unit heat integration is
employed, the combined savings are significantly greater, as follows:

Existing

oil I
8.60

8.37

1
I 10.03 I 0.48 I
cw I

Air

cost
KS/vr

427

MMBtu/h

LPS I

Design

5.55

127

Savings

3.05

8.37

10.03

0.48

300

(35%)

I (70%)

Note that direct process steam consumption has been excluded from the
foregoing cost comparison, as it does not change.
Several retrofit strategies are possible - eg. minimize repiping, maximize
operating flexibility, optimize utilization of existing HX surface, etc. The

3 -8

Results

recommended retrofit design is shown in grid diagram format in Figure 3-4,

and as a flowsheet schematic in Figure 3-5. It seeks t o minimize changes to
the existing system, and consists of:
0
0

repiping 4 interchangers
switching 5 coolers from cooling water to wastewater

It should be noted that the recommended retrofit does not involve purchase
of any new equipment, just redeployment of existing equipment.
Furthermore, four of the existing heat exchangers would be rendered
surplus, and become available for use in other services. Capital costs are
difficult t o estimate, since they will involve mainly piping and controls, but
are estimated to be less than $300K, for a I-year payback.

Solvent De-Oiling (MEK)

The MEK unit is the single largest process steam user. As such, it was the
principal focus of pinch analysis. A simplified flowsheet of the process is
shown in Figure 3-6. The corresponding composite and grand composite
curves are shown in Figures 3-7 and 3-8.
This process is characterized by a double pinch - one at about 25OOF and
another at about 205OF, which makes for a rather difficult design. The
existing heat recovery scheme involves a considerable amount of "crosspinch" heat transfer, and fails t o fully utilize the high grade heat available in
the HP flash vapor. In the proposed retrofit, t w o small but significant
process modifications have been incorporated which make the heat recovery
task a lot easier:
(a)

The LP flash temperature has been reduced in order to shift available

heat from LP to HP flash vapors.

(b)

A heat pump is proposed for upgrading the temperature of HP flash

vapor by 38OF.

The proposed HEN retrofit is depicted schematically in Figure 3-9 as a grid

diagram. The corresponding flowsheet is shown in Figures 3-10a, b and c.

3-9

Results

I
I
I
I

I
I

I
I

I
I

I
I
I

I
I

I
I

I
I

I
1
I

I
I

I
I
I

I
I
I
I

I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I

I
I

I
I

I
I
I

I
I
I

I
I

I
I
I
I
I
I
I

;
I
I
I

'

00
I

I
I

I
I
I
I
I

I
I

I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I

I
I

I
I
I
I
I

I
I

I
I

I
I

'?I
I

I
I

I
I

---

h
I
I

i- - - I-I

I
I

I
I

I
I

3-10

I
I

I
I

Ri

rrjl

&

I
I
I
I

I
I
I

I
I

I
I

I
I
1

LO
I

I
I
I

I
I

I
1

I
Tu,
I------l

I
I

.rl

I
;

*aJ

l a

Results

Y-

3-1 I

w
c

t3

Dry
Solvent
Tank

I
sw
Stripper

Storage

Figure 3-6
Simplified Flowsheet of De-Oiling Process

LP 196'
Flash

I
slackwax

9
'

HP
Flash

08,Feb,95 11:59
File:MEK422.ST2

(c) Linnhoff March

SUPERTARGET V3.006 SN1020

Petrowax MEK Unit:4212 Major Streams -Existing Network
Composite Curves (Real temperatures)
DT=40.00F
Temperature [F]
400-

350-

300-

250-

W
I
c

0.00E00

1.00E07

Figure 3-7
Composite Curves

2.00E07

MEK

3.00E07

4.00E07
5.00E07
Enthalpy [Btu/hr]

6.00E07

7.00E07

8.0

07

w
I

(c) Linnhoff March

SUPERTARGET V3.006 SN1020
Petrowax MEK Unit:4212 Major Streams -Existing Network
Process Utility Grand Composite Curve (Shifted temperatures)
DT=40.00F
Interval Temperature [F]
I

450-

02,Nov,94 13:32
File:MEK422.ST2

HP steam
400-

350-

LP steam

300-

250-

200-

150-

100-

Cooling water

50Refrigeration

00.0

5.0dE06

Figure 3-8
Grand Composite Curve

1.OdE07

1&E07
Enthalpy [Btulhr]

2.0dE07

2.5dE07

3.O

07

MEK
I

02,Nov.94 17:06
File:MEK42HP1.ST2
Page 111

SUPERTARGETVB3.01 SN1020

(c) Linnhoff March

Petrowax MEK Unit:4212 Heat Pump
WARNING: OBJECTS MARKED WITH ** NEED ATTENTION

Global DTmin = 10.0 [fl

73.
E32
37.
E2641.

100.

N2

100.

et Solvent Dilution

H:1166624.0

ry Solvent Chilling

:ed Mix Chilling

Flash Vapors

P Flash Vapors

H:23M:
150.
E6

ilProduct

8.0
100.

olvent Vapors

14.4
170

lax Product

t-iltrate Heating

.O. Feed

IP Flash Feed
.W. Remelt
eboiler Feed
H:4225603.0
vaporator Feed

:ooling Water

Figure 3-9
Recommended HEN Retrofit for MEK (Grid)

Results

3-16

t '

'

Results

3-17

Results

3-18

' 9

~~~

Results

Overall utility cost savings are:

'

Proposed

- actual

3.97

MMBtu/h
LPS
CW

Rfg

cost
KWyr

3.1

22.8

12.6

988

4.55

2.35

9.4

11.3

536

15.7

0.75

13.4

1.3

452

3.97 20.22

Existing

Savings

MPS

Io

(77%) (24%) (58%) (10%) (45%)

Direct process steam consumption for stripping has been excluded from
utility steam duties.
The recommended retrofit was developed using a "minimum repipe"
philosophy. In other words, existing matches were left intact as much as
possible even if they were not optimally placed. New exchangers were
added, or existing units redeployed, only when absolutely essential to
achieve the desired savings.
The new

HEN has the following features:

5 new exchangers, named N1 through N5
1 shell added to existing unit E-26
2 existing exchangers redeployed
All other exchangers left in place, as is, with a minor repipe on

E-

26
1 new MVR heat pump
9

It should be noted that alternate schemes of a comparable nature could also

have been developed. For example, one could do a bit more heat recovery
by spending more capital. One could explore the tradeoffs between piping
cost versus new exchangers purchase cost, and so on. The proposed
design has considered known site constraints in so far as possible within the
time and budget limitations of the study workscope. However, a more
rigorous and detailed "project-oriented" analysis is recommended prior t o
proceeding with implementation.

3-19

Results

The estimated utility savings, by project, are summarized below:

MPS

I Charge oil feed heater

I HP flash feed heater

I SW remelt heater

I
I

I
I

MMBtu/h
LPS
cw

I
I

0
13.7

cost
K$/yr

Rfg

(1.76)

268

2.0

45
45

0.5

11

-2

(0.55)

1Dry solvent chillers

1.20

27

Process steam duties for MEK, PO and wax stripping remain unchanged.
The difference in energy savings between the heating and cooling duties
(16.44 vs 14.60) is attributed t o the vapor compression work. The MVR
heat pump consumes 686 HP (512 kW) of additional power, which reduces
net operating cost savings by $102,00O/yr from $450,00O/yr to
$348,00O/yr.
Capital costs (installed) are estimated t o be about $1.5 MM, giving an
overall payback of over 4 years. While this does not meet Petrowax's
hurdle rate for new investments, this revamp is critical t o achieving the
strategic objective of reducing NOx emissions by shutting down one or more
of the existing boilers.

Propane De-Asphalting Unit

The PDA unit was excluded from the original workscope because a previous
consultant had indicated that it would have little or no impact on the
decision on what to do about boiler replacement. In conducting this study,
however, w e became concerned t h a t this might not be so. Accordingly, a
quick targeting exercise was undertaken, using "as is" data.
A schematic flowsheet is shown in Figure 3-1 1. The pinch analysis revealed
that maximum potential savings are about 3.5 MMBtu/h, worth an estimated
$93,000 per year. The economic feasibility of achieving these savings was
not investigated, as it was outside the workscope of the present study.

3-20

1 7

11,

Results

ti

Y-

3-2 1

The main conclusion for present purposes was that the potential steam
savings in PDA are small compared to total site steam consumption, and
therefore a future HEN retrofit will not impact the design of the CHP system.
Wax Finishing

The existing wax purification process involves bauxite filtration, with total
utility costs estimated to be between $300-350 K/year.
The possibility of replacing this process with a new hydrotreater was
investigated. Two options were considered:
Purchase/build new unit
Retrofit existing mothballed platf ormer
For a wax hydrofinishing rate matched to current operations, capital and
operating costs were obtained from the literature, as follows:
Capital Cost (new):

$2.7- 4.2 M M

Operating Costs

With a payback on expected savings over 10 years, this does not seem
attractive. The second alternative, involving reuse of the existing
platformer, fared no better. According to vendors who specialize in this
technology, it would be impractical t o retrofit the existing platformer
equipment.
Finally, it will be necessary in both cases to build a small hydrogen plant on
site to ensure a secure supply. Assuming a 1 MM SCFD plant capacity, the
capital cost would be about $3 MM. The impact on site utilities would be
minimal.
To summarize, the operating costs for a hydrofinishing process would be
roughly comparable to the existing bauxite filtration process. The minimum
total capital investment required will be about $6.5 MM. Clearly, the

3-22

justification for a new hydrotreater would have to be some compelling

reason other than economics (eg. quality, environmental compliance, etc.).
Therefore, for purposes of the CHP analysis, it has been assumed that
Petrowax will continue t o operate the bauxite filtration process for the
foreseeable future.
Offsites
A detailed analysis of tank insulation was conducted during a previous study
by PCI. Their report was reviewed by Petrowax, and nine tanks were
selected for insulation, with estimated savings of 9.2 MMBtu/h.
Additional LP steam savings of 8.4 MMBtu/h were achieved by utilizing
process waste heat from VDU to heat up wastewater from 75O to 125OF,
as described previously in sections 3.1.2and 3.2.
Combined Heat and Power System
One of the principal motivations for this study was t o determine the
optimum CHP system configuration for the Smethport site, assuming that
high payback heat recovery projects within the process would be
implemented. In particular, management wished to explore the economics
of alternate cogeneration strategies.
Total average steam savings from the recommended revamp projects are
about 40,00O,Ib/hr, which is more than the current load on the t w o least
efficient boilers. Thus, it would be safe to conclude that they can be shut
down during normal operation, and brought into service only during
emergencies, such as periods of extreme cold weather. We shall call this
case "option zero".
Approximate economics for average operation under Option Zero are as
follows :

I CHP Capital Cost

I Base Case Enerav Cost =

1 Option Zero Enerav Cost =
V .

I Heat DumD debit

Net Savings =

lo

14.132
I
I 2.907
I
10.102
I
I $1.123MM/yr
I
I

All cogeneration options must be compared against this option zero.

3-23

'U

Results

Three potential cogeneration scenarios were evaluated in detail. However,

these details cannot be revealed here as they are considered confidential.
Instead, a summary of the results and major conclusions is provided.
ODtion 1: Minimum Investment Keeping in mind that the incremental cost
of purchased power is $25/MWH, and that the credit for power exported t o
Penelec is $21/MWH, the first strategy was to minimize power import
without going into export mode. A 1.13 M W gas turbine (Solar Saturn 20)
with an unfired HRSG was selected for evaluation. Approximate economics
are as follows:
Capital Cost =
Average Energy Cost =
Payback vs Option Zero =

$2.2 MM
$2.94 MM/yr
negative

ODtion 2: Replace Boilers with GT and Unfired HRSG In this scenario, it

will be necessary t o purchase significant amounts of gas, and export surplus
power t o Penelec, ranging from 16.25 - 18.50 MW. A 21 M W turbine is
required. Approximate economics are:

Capital Cost =
Averaae Enerav Cost =
Payback vs Option Zero =

$25.2 MM (installed)
$3.51 MM/w
I negative

ODtion 3: Redace Boilers with GT and Fired HRSG The gas turbine size is
smaller than in Option 2, because fired HRSGs produce relatively more
steam. The power export t o Penelec will be about 6.6 MW. Once again the
economics are unfavorable.
GT Capital Cost =
Average Energy Cost =
Payback vs Option Zero =

$10.8 MM (installed)
$3.77 MM/yr
negative

The three cogeneration options are compared against Option Zero in Table
3-2. None of them showed favorable economics. This is because gas costs
are relatively high at $3.14 per MMBtu, and electrical export credits are low.
A quick calculation makes this abundantly clear. Assuming a heat rate of
10,000 Btu/kwh, the power export credit is 2.1 C/kwh, whereas the cost of
gas is 3.2C/kwh. Under this economic environment, cogeneration cannot
possibly be attractive.

3-24

>

Results

Table 3-2
Comparison of Cogeneration Options
ODtion Number
1
2

#I ,#2

#I ,#2

No

No

1 .I3

21

8.6

none

unfired

unfired

fired

2.2

25.2

10.8

Fuel

2.11

Electricity

0.80
2.91

2.36
0.58
2.94

6.05
12.541
3.51

4.48
(0.711
3.77

nla

-0.03

-0.60

-0.86

Coal Boilers in operation

GT Size, M W
HRSG Type
Capital Cost, MMS
Energy Cost, MMS/yr

Savings, MMSIyr

3 -25

CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

The main conclusions of this study are as follows:

It is possible t o boost VDU wax yield b y about 8 % points by making
relatively minor modifications to VDU tower operation. Increased
energy cost in VDU is offset by additional heat recovery, and reduced
energy cost in PDA area.
The MEK refrigeration capacity bottleneck can be relieved by about
10% through the recommended HEN revamp.
Economics of replacing the existing bauxite process with a
hydrotreater are not good.
Economics of cogeneration involving gas turbines are not good.
By implementing the recommended HEN retrofit in VDU and MEK
process areas, steam savings of about 40,000 Ib/hr are possible.
This will enable shut down of boilers #3 and 4, and reduce NOx
emissions by 30-50%.
Economics for the proposed HEN retrofit are approximately as
follows:

4- 1

Conclusions and Recommendations

It is recommended that Petrowax proceed forward with implementation of

the revamp in t w o stages:

Stage 1

- VDU HEN retrofit

Stage 2

VDU yield improvement

Tank insulation

- MEK HEN retrofit

While the stand-alone economics of MEK revamp are not very attractive,
this project is essential in order t o enable shutting down boilers #3 and 4
and achieve low-cost NO, reduction.

4-2

( 1