Evaluation of Condensate

Stabilization Processes
Sanket Jadhav &
Yugandhara Prabhu
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization Processes
Petrofac at a glance
- 30 years experience of supporting oil & gas production and processing
- a constituent of the FTSE100 Index
- currently largest of the oil services sector listed in the UK by market
capitalisation
- group revenue backlog circa US$ 6.4 billion as of end April 2011
CAGR ~ 25% for the last 5 years
- around 15,000 personnel representing around 60 nationalities
Milan
Abu Dhabi
Beijing
London
Woking
Aberdeen
Moscow
Doha
Houston
Sharjah
Mumbai
Chennai
Jakarta
Kuala Lumpur
Lagos
Basra
Algiers
Tunis
Damascus
Tehran
Bishkek
Khartoum
Atyrau
Sakhalin
Khobar
Main operational centers
Other operating locations
Corporate services
Current active project locations
Ahmadi
Cairo
Muscat
Ashgabat
Well spread out in MENA &
CIS
EPC experience
predominantly in upstream,
onshore oil & gas sector
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization processes
Snapshot of Geographical footprint
Delhi
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization processes
Condensate stabilization
Process of separating the lighter components (mainly C1 to C3) from the
liquid phase
Sweetens the condensate by removing the H
2
S contents
Normal acceptable limits for Reid Vapour Pressure and Sulfur (H
2
S) content
in the final condensate are 7-10 psia & 7-20 ppmv respectively.
Condensate stabilization can be performed by :
a) Multistage flashing
b) Using Stabilizer column & re-boiler.(with and without gas stripping)
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization processes
Condensate Stabilization
Stabilization methods discussed in the form of Case Studies to
evaluate their,
-Selection criterias
-advantages & disadvantages.
Each case analyzed with respect to,
- Operational Feasibility
- Loss
- Costing (capital operating)
- energy consumption
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization processes
Case study
Case-I : Stabilization using multistage separators
Case-II : Stabilization by Stabilizer column without reflux
Case-III : Stabilization considering stabilizer column aided
with fuel gas stripping
Actual gas composition considered for analysis is as below along with product
specifications targeted,
Feed Parameters
Operating Pressure (barg) 14
Operating Temperature (C) 60
Mass flow rate (Kg/hr)
(BOPD)
355200
(59340)
GOR (Scf/bbl) 876
Product specifications
H
2
S concentration (ppmv )
< 20
RVP in condensate, Psia <10
Temperature (C) 50
1
st
Stage
separator
2
nd
Stage
separator
Dehydrator-1
Dehydrator-2
3
rd
Stage
separator
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization processes
Case-1: Multistage stabilization
For this method, in addition to two inlet separator(14 barg / 3.3 barg), Third
Separator operating at 0.69 barg is used for stabilization.
Analysis Case-1 Multistage stabilsation
120 C
700 ppmv
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization processes
Results Case-1 Multistage stabilization
Inlet temperature of 3
rd
stage separator is gradually increased to meet product
specifications.
For H
2
S concentration upto 700 ppmv in feed, specifications are meet easily
Further increase of sulfur in feed, solicits temperature rise above 120 C
which poses a constraint w.r.t the MOC of separator & pipeline.
800 ppmv H
2
S concentration in feed requires 137C temperature at the inlet of
3
rd
stage separator which indicates that this stabilization method is less
feasible for higher concentrations.
H
2
S above 700 ppmv in Feed seeks for migration from Multi-stage
separation to use of Stabilizer column.
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization processes
Case-2 stabilizer column
Introduction of Stabilizer column(without reflux) downstream of dehydrator
instead of third stage separator.
1
st
Stage
separator
2
nd
Stage
separator
Dehydrator-1
Dehydrator-2
Stabilizer
column
Analysis Case-2 stabilizer column
205 C
30000
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization processes
Results Case-2 stabilizer column
Column reboiler temperature is gradually increased to meet product specifications with
increase of H
2
S concentration in Feed.
Higher reboiler duties are required for removal of increased H
2
S concentration.
Higher temperatures generate more stable condensate-with lower RVP
Shrinkage increases with rise in re-boiler temperature.
Utility used for heating purpose & cracking of Condensate becomes constraints at
higher temperatures. (Considering the most common industry practice of heating
medium used, the reboiler temperature is limited upto 200 deg C. )
Based on above factors optimized solution needs to be arrived at, in consideration of
required RVP-H2S, Cost & Oil shrinkage.
Based on limitation of Reboiler temperature (Heating Medium Temperature),
stabilization using column is feasible for feed containing
H
2
S upto 3 vol. %.
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization processes
Case-3 : Stabilizer column with fuel gas stripping
Fuel gas was used in stabilizer column (reboiler stage) to reduce the partial
pressure of H
2
S & lighter HC, thus enhancing H
2
S removal.
Stabilizer
column
1
st
Stage
separator
Dehydrator-1
Dehydrator-2
2
nd
Stage
separator
Analysis Case-3 Stabilizer column with
fuel gas stripping
Fuel gas
loss
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0
2000
4000
6000
8000
10000
12000
1000 2000 5000 8000 15000 30000 50000 80000
L
o
s
s

m
3
/
h
r
F
u
e
l

g
a
s

K
g
/
h
r
H2S in Feed
ppmv
Fuel gas loss
Presentation title
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization processes
Results Case-3 Stabilizer column with fuel gas stripping
Reboiler temperature is kept constant at 150 C
Fuel gas flow rate was adjusted in-order to achieve the desired specification, with
increase in the H
2
S concentration in feed
Reboiler duty reduces with increase in fuel gas quantity
Stabilizer column size needs to be increased to take care of the increased gas flow.
For H2S concentration of 5 vol. % and above, fuel gas stripping in stabilizer column
can be performed to achieve desired specification.
An optimal between fuel gas flow (availability) and column size needs to be performed
to arrive at the best configuration.
Fuel gas stripping in stabilization column can be used effectively to
meet product specifications for wide range of H
2
S in feed but this
method has its pros & cons.
Heat input in (kW)
H
2
S in ppmv Multi stage
separator
Stabilisation
with column
Stabilisation
with column &
stripping gas
50
5739
- -
200
5738
- -
300
8076
- -
600
15755
- -
800
17815
- -
2000 -
24962 17314
5000 -
25271 17309
15000 -
27084 17196
30000 -
28337 16977
50000 -
29319 16639
80000 -
30165 16128
Heat Input increase with
increase of H2S in Feed
Heat Input increase with
increase of H2S in Feed
Heat Input decreases
with increase of H2S in
Feed. This is due to
increase of stripping gas
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization processes
Cost comparison
31.0
151
182.0
39.7
140
179.7
0.0
20.0
40.0
60.0
80.0
100.0
120.0
140.0
160.0
180.0
200.0
Operating Cost Fixed cost Total cost
M
i
l
l
i
o
n

U
S
D
Stabiliser Column v/s Column with Fuel Stripping
Stabiliser column Stabiliser column with fuel gas stripping
Stabilizer column v/s Column with fuel stripping
Evaluation of Condensate Stabilization processes
Summary
Condensate stabilization is carried out to maximize stock tank oil
recovery while meeting the specifications of Vapour Pressure & H
2
S
Content
Multistage flashing process is feasible for lower H
2
S concentration in
Feed composition.
Higher concentrations of H
2
S in Feed demands for Stabilizer column
with reboiler.
Based on temperature limitation of Heating Medium (Utility) and
condensate coking/ Cracking, for removal of H
2
S of higher conc. (above
205 C of reboiler temperature), stabilizer column has to go with gas
stripping (Usually Fuel Gas).
July 12 Presentation title
THANK YOU