A step change in

feed nozzle design

Advances in feed nozzle design lead to a low-
cost FCC unit margin improvement opportunity

Todd Foshee
FCC Licensing Technology Manager,
Shell Catalysts & Technologies
Definitions & cautionary note

The companies in which Shell plc directly and indirectly owns investments are separate legal entities. In this presentation “Shell”, “Shell Group” and “Group” are sometimes used for convenience where references are
made to Shell plc and its subsidiaries in general. Likewise, the words “we”, “us” and “our” are also used to refer to Shell plc and its subsidiaries in general or to those who work for them. These terms are also used
where no useful purpose is served by identifying the particular entity or entities. ‘‘Subsidiaries’’, “Shell subsidiaries” and “Shell companies” as used in this presentation refer to entities over which Shell plc either
directly or indirectly has control. Entities and unincorporated arrangements over which Shell has joint control are generally referred to as “joint ventures” and “joint operations”, respectively. Entities over which Shell
has significant influence but neither control nor joint control are referred to as “associates”. The term “Shell interest” is used for convenience to indicate the direct and/or indirect ownership interest held by Shell in an
entity or unincorporated joint arrangement, after exclusion of all third-party interest.
This presentation contains forward-looking statements (within the meaning of the U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995) concerning the financial condition, results of operations and businesses of Shell. All
statements other than statements of historical fact are, or may be deemed to be, forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are statements of future expectations that are based on management’s current
expectations and assumptions and involve known and unknown risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results, performance or events to differ materially from those expressed or implied in these statements.
Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning the potential exposure of Shell to market risks and statements expressing management’s expectations, beliefs, estimates, forecasts,
projections and assumptions. These forward-looking statements are identified by their use of terms and phrases such as “aim”, “ambition”, ‘‘anticipate’’, ‘‘believe’’, ‘‘could’’, ‘‘estimate’’, ‘‘expect’’, ‘‘goals’’, ‘‘intend’’,
‘‘may’’, “milestones”, ‘‘objectives’’, ‘‘outlook’’, ‘‘plan’’, ‘‘probably’’, ‘‘project’’, ‘‘risks’’, “schedule”, ‘‘seek’’, ‘‘should’’, ‘‘target’’, ‘‘will’’ and similar terms and phrases. There are a number of factors that could affect
the future operations of Shell and could cause those results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements included in this presentation, including (without limitation): (a) price fluctuations in
crude oil and natural gas; (b) changes in demand for Shell’s products; (c) currency fluctuations; (d) drilling and production results; (e) reserves estimates; (f) loss of market share and industry competition; (g)
environmental and physical risks; (h) risks associated with the identification of suitable potential acquisition properties and targets, and successful negotiation and completion of such transactions; (i) the risk of doing
business in developing countries and countries subject to international sanctions; (j) legislative, judicial, fiscal and regulatory developments including regulatory measures addressing climate change; (k) economic and
financial market conditions in various countries and regions; (l) political risks, including the risks of expropriation and renegotiation of the terms of contracts with governmental entities, delays or advancements in the
approval of projects and delays in the reimbursement for shared costs; (m) risks associated with the impact of pandemics, such as the COVID-19 (coronavirus) outbreak; and (n) changes in trading conditions. No
assurance is provided that future dividend payments will match or exceed previous dividend payments. All forward-looking statements contained in this presentation are expressly qualified in their entirety by the
cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section. Readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Additional risk factors that may affect future results are contained in Shell plc’s
Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2020 (available at www.shell.com/investor and www.sec.gov). These risk factors also expressly qualify all forward-looking statements contained in this presentation and
should be considered by the reader. Each forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date of this presentation, 21 April 2022. Neither Shell plc nor any of its subsidiaries undertake any obligation to publicly
update or revise any forward-looking statement as a result of new information, future events or other information. In light of these risks, results could differ materially from those stated, implied or inferred from the
forward-looking statements contained in this presentation.
The content of websites referred to in this presentation does not form part of this presentation.
We may have used certain terms, such as resources, in this presentation that the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) strictly prohibits us from including in our filings with the SEC. Investors are
urged to consider closely the disclosure in our Form 20-F, File No 1-32575, available on the SEC website www.sec.gov.
Speakers

Presenter Moderator

Todd Foshee Daniel Shiosaki

FCC Licensing Market Specialist
Technology Manager Refining
Shell Catalysts & Shell Catalysts &
Technologies Technologies
Agenda

 Introduction

 Three common challenges

 Rerun or replace?

 The benefits of improving atomisation

 Feed nozzle design advances and benefits

 Audited results

 Integration opportunities

 What can we offer?

 Key takeaways

Copyright of Shell Catalysts & Technologies

Introduction – Improve fluidised catalytic cracking (FCC) unit
margins with minimal capital investment
Are you seeking low-cost opportunities to:

Process cheaper, lower-quality feeds such as

residues and difficult-to-crack materials?

Increase yields by:

 Reducing dry-gas yield;
 Increasing conversion; and
 Shifting the yield structure to more valuable products? Upgrading feed nozzles is a
low-capital opportunity with a
quick payback that boosts
Maximise operating severity?
margins and adds flexibility to
the FCC and catalytic feed
hydro-treating units.
Is your unit limited by wet gas compressor
and/or air blower capacity?
Three common challenges

We would like to increase conversion

and propylene yield but are constrained
by the air blower or regenerator
temperature limit.

We would like to improve

margins by taking advantage of
opportunity crudes and want to
limit slurry production but are
constrained by the air blower.

We want to increase FCC

unit severity but are
constrained by the wet
gas compressor limit.
Is it better value to rerun or replace feed nozzles?

Many feed nozzles are robust enough to operate for more than one cycle.

RERUN

Getting another run from feed nozzles is an

obvious way to make a modest capital saving.

However, in most cases, this saving is far

outweighed by the loss in performance.
Is it better value to rerun or replace feed nozzles?

Many feed nozzles are robust enough to operate for more than one cycle.

RERUN REPLACE

Getting another run from feed nozzles is an Replacing feed nozzles provides a shift in yields
obvious way to make a modest capital saving. and feed flexibility that enables significantly
higher profitability over the entire cycle.
However, in most cases, this saving is far
outweighed by the loss in performance. Payback time is typically less than a year.

The capital cost of replacing feed nozzles is equivalent, in many cases, to

the operating expense of trialling a new catalyst1 – but without the risk.

1Assumes evaluating a new catalyst in a medium-sized FCC unit would involve about $2 million in operating costs (4 t of catalyst a day, at $3,000/t including disposal, for 6 months)
The benefits of improving atomisation

 More riser volume for catalytic cracking reactions

 Increased conversion and improved product yield
 Less slurry oil
 Less thermal cracking, thereby minimising dry gas
production and improved product distribution for
more high-value products
 Lower wet gas compressor and air blower loading
through lower dry gas and coke yields

Large droplets and poorly

Greater surface area
atomised ligaments take
for faster vaporisation
longer to vaporise.
The benefits of improving atomisation
Why D32 does not tell the whole story
Case 1, D32 = 1.1 mm
Ligaments = 34%
Shadowgraph particle image velocimetry (PIV) at
the Shell Technology Centre Houston, USA, FCC
facility has characterised droplets and revealed
previously unidentified liquid content (globules).

Case 2, D32 = 1.2 mm

Ligaments = 65%
Shell Max Atomisation Feed Nozzle benefits – Performance

Better spray coverage with less liquid

volume for faster vaporisation results in:
Measured riser radial temperature profile
 better catalyst–oil contact (a more even
riser temperature distribution);
 more riser volume for catalytic cracking

Temperature
New Shell nozzle
reactions and therefore higher conversion;
 more catalytic and fewer thermal reactions
(better selectivity); and
Conventional nozzle
 higher catalyst circulation for the same riser
outlet temperature (higher severity). Radial distance
Shell Max Atomisation Feed Nozzle benefits – Reliability

Reliability is another key to good feed nozzle

performance.
 A protective shroud shields the feed nozzles from
the riser environment.
 Shell feed nozzles experience minimal erosion
during the full cycle.
 Minimal erosion leads to consistent, high
performance over the entire cycle.
 A shroud slot designed for full nozzle spray
prevents catalyst ingress and coking between the
nozzle and the shroud.
 SITE 1 RESULTS

Shell Energy and Chemicals Park Singapore (1/2)

(formerly Pulau Bukom refinery)

Challenge: Increase long residue catalytic Value delivered:

cracker conversion and yields 1. Higher gasoline yield and conversion;
2. Lower slurry, light cycle oil, dry gas; and
Solution: New Shell Max Atomisation 3. Lower mid-riser (mix zone) temperature, design temperature
Feed Nozzle constraint relieved

Riser temperature one-third from the injection zone Component Yield shift,* wt%

Dry gas (0.4)

Propylene/propane (PP) (0.1)

Temperature, °C

Conventional nozzles
Butane/butylene (BB) (0.5)
3 Gasoline 1 3.7

New Shell nozzles Light cycle oil (LCO) (0.9)

2
Slurry oil (1.8)

Conversion 2.7
Time, d
*Audited at constant coke yield
 SITE 1 RESULTS

Shell Energy and Chemicals Park Singapore (2/2)

Key results
Value delivered: Lower slurry yield is also confirmed by the
higher specific gravity [1] and aromatic content [2] of slurry 27° F 1.8% 3.7%
after the nozzle change.
Riser temperature shift: Slurry yield: Gasoline yield:
27°F (15°C) 1.8% decrease 3.7% increase

1.10 65
Specific gravity at 60/60° F (15 .5 / 15 .5 ° C)

1.08 60
Post-turnaround
Post-turnaround
55

Total aromatics, wt%

1.06
Pre-turnaround 50
1.04 1 2
45
Pre-turnaround
1.02
40

1.00 35

0.98 30
 SITE 2 RESULTS

Puget Sound refinery, US

Challenge: Optimise the economics of the FCC unit, Value delivered:

which processes a blend of vacuum gas oil and 1. Lower slurry yield;
unhydrotreated heavy coker gas oil 2. High conversion;
3. Regenerator temperature 39°F (22°C) lower; and
Solution: New Shell Max Atomisation Feed Nozzle 4. Enabled refinery to crack more heavy coker gas oil

Component Yield shift,* wt%

Dry gas (0.3)

PP 0.2 Key results

BB 0.4

Gasoline (0.4) 39° F 1% 0.4% 0.2%

LCO 1 (1.0) Regenerator bed Slurry yield: BB yield: PP yield:

Slurry oil 0.1 temperature reduction: 1% decrease 0.4% increase 0.2% increase
39°F (22°C)
Conversion 2 0.6
*Audited at constant coke yield
 SITE 3 RESULTS

Sarnia refinery, Canada

Challenge: FCC unit operations Value delivered:

limited by air rate throughout the 1. Lower dry gas and coke yields;
year, particularly during the summer 2. Increased feed rate at constant conversion: 2.5% higher feed rate at
constant conversion for the six months of the year when the unit was air
blower (coke burn) constrained; and
Solution: New Shell Max 3. Increased conversion at maximum feed rate: 0.19 vol% more conversion at
Atomisation Feed Nozzle maximum feed rate during the remaining six months

Key results

15° F 15% 2.5% 0.19%

Riser temperature shift: Dry gas reduction: Feed rate: Conversion:

15°F (8.3°C) 15% 2.5% increase 0.19 vol% increase
at constant conversion at maximum feed rate
Integration opportunities

FCC pretreatment (PT) and FCC optimisation should be evaluated to maximise value.

An FCC-PT unit can provide the FCC unit with:

 Upgraded feed quality for improved crackability and product yield selectivity;

 Lower feed sulphur for producing lower-sulphur products and reduced flue gas sulphur oxide emissions;

 Lower catalyst usage rates because of the removal of contaminant metals;

 Reduced carbon content in the feed, thereby relieving air-blower-constrained FCC operations; and

 Reduced flue gas stack nitrogen oxide emission concentrations by removing precursors.
 SCENARIO

Integration opportunities – Example* (1/4)

Background
A refiner operates an FCC-PT–FCC
unit complex in which:
 A high-pressure FCC-PT unit
operates at constant feed
hydrodenitrogenation for a 32-
month cycle that aligns with the
mid-cycle for the FCC unit
operation
 The FCC unit cracks 100% of the
FCC-PT product at 60,000 bbl/d
under partial-burn regeneration.

*SHARC, Shell Catalysts & Technologies’ FCC kinetic model for simulation and optimisation, was used to develop the example. SHARC is a Shell trademark.
 SCENARIO

Integration opportunities – Example (2/4)

SOR FCC-PT, start of run (SOR) FCC-PT, end of run (EOR)

Riser temperature, °F (°C) 985 (529) 985 (529)

Regenerator temperature, °F (°C) 1,356 (736) 1,360 (738)

Catalyst–oil ratio, wt/wt 6.1 6.0

Conversion, wt% yield 70.7 71.2

Slurry 14.4 13.2

LCO 14.9 15.6

Gasoline 47.3 47.9

BB 8.1 8.0

PP 5.0 5.0

Dry gas 4.2 4.2

Coke 6.1 6.1

Dry gas, MMscf/d (m3/h) 25.7 (30,300) 25.7 (30,300)

Wet gas, MMscf/d (m3/h) 45.1 (53,100) 45.0 (53,000)

 SCENARIO

Integration opportunities – Example (3/4)

SOR Existing nozzles New Shell Max Atomisation Feed Nozzle

Riser temperature, °F (°C) 985 (529) 985 (529) 995 (535)

Regenerator temperature, °F (°C) 1,356 (736) 1,337 (725) 1,350 (732)

Catalyst–oil ratio, wt/wt 6.1 6.5 6.6

Conversion, wt% yield 70.7 71.1 71.6

Slurry 14.4 14.2 14.0

LCO 14.9 14.7 14.4

Gasoline 47.3 47.9 47.8

BB 8.1 8.4 8.3

PP 5.0 5.2 5.4

Dry gas 4.2 3.5 4.0

Coke 6.1 6.1 6.1

Dry gas, MMscf/d (m3/h) 25.7 (30,300) 21.7 (25,600) 24.3 (28,600)

Wet gas, MMscf/d (m3/h) 45.1 (53,100) 41.9 (49,300) 44.7 (52,600)
 SCENARIO

Integration opportunities – Example (4/4)

EOR Existing nozzles New Shell Max Atomisation Feed Nozzle

Riser temperature, °F (°C) 985 (529) 985 (529) 995 (535)

Regenerator temperature, °F (°C) 1,360 (738) 1,348 (731) 1,359 (737)

Catalyst–oil ratio, wt/wt 6.0 6.4 6.4

Conversion, wt% yield 71.2 71.8 72.2

Slurry 13.2 12.9 12.7

LCO 15.6 15.3 15.1

Gasoline 47.9 48.6 48.5

BB 8.0 8.4 8.3

PP 5.0 5.2 5.3

Dry gas 4.2 3.5 4.0

Coke 6.1 6.1 6.1

Dry gas, MMscf/d (m3/h) 25.7 (30,300) 21.9 (25,800) 24.5 (28,900)

Wet gas, MMscf/d (m3/h) 45.0 (53,000) 42.0 (49,500) 44.8 (52,800)
What can we offer?

30+ years of continuous FCC unit improvement Equipment design

Shell Technology Center Houston Continuous

improvement Implementation
 One of the world’s largest, best-equipped industrial
technology installations
FCC
 FCC centre of expertise with an FCC pilot plant technology
evolution

Research and Operational

development experience

Troubleshooting and inspection

The only FCC technology licensor with FCC operational experience + FCC research and
development expertise and facilities + design capabilities
Not just nozzles Shell Low Erosion Cyclone
Technology (with Vortex Stabiliser)
 Highly reliable designs
 High efficiency over wide range of
Shell Low Erosion Cyclone Technology regenerator superficial velocities
(with Vortex Stabiliser/Coke Catcher)
 Lower dry gas and less coking of spent catalyst
 Less thermal cracking; improved liquid yields
 Wet gas compressor relieved
 Lower regenerator temperature; higher catalyst–oil ratio

Shell High Efficiency PentaFlow Stripper Shell Third Stage Separator (TSS)
 Improved product recovery; lower delta coke  Highly efficient fines removal
 Lower regenerator temperature; higher catalyst–oil ratio  Turboexpander protection
 More coke burn available for cracking reactions  Stack particulate control technology
 High performance over a wide range of flux rates  Fourth stage/fines collection options

Riser internals
 Reduced riser back mixing; lower riser pressure drop Shell Catalyst Circulation Technology
 Improved turndown operation  Degases catalyst entering standpipe
 Improves standpipe pressure build
 Higher catalyst circulation capability
Shell Max Atomisation Feed Nozzles
 Improved atomisation; quicker vaporisation
 Lower coke and dry gas; better yield selectivities Shell Spent Catalyst Distributer
 Wet gas compressor relieved  Highly reliable designs
 Lower regenerator temperature; higher catalyst–oil ratio  Effective mixing of air and spent catalyst
 More coke burn available for cracking reactions  Uniform catalyst regeneration
 Mitigated afterburning
Key takeaways

 New Shell Max Atomisation Feed Nozzle technology provides a low-cost opportunity for refiners to:
 Process cheaper, lower-quality feeds such as residues and difficult-to-crack materials;
 Increase yields by reducing dry-gas yield, increasing conversion and shifting the yield structure; and
 Maximise operating severity by unlocking compressor and heat balance constraints.

 The new nozzles have been implemented and audited at several assets, where the results have included a:
 39°F (22°C) reduction in regenerator bed temperature;
 3.7% increase in gasoline yield;
 15% reduction in dry gas; and
 2.5% increase in feed rate.

 The technology complements the benefits already provided by FCC feed hydrotreaters and expands the
options for upgrading an FCC-PT unit to optimise an FCC-PT–FCC unit complex.