A sensitivity analysis and a comparison of two simulators performance for the process of natural gas sweetening

Gutierrez, Juan Pablo; Benitez, Leonel Alberto; Ruiz, Elisa Liliana Ale; Erdmann, Eleonora

doi:10.1016/j.jngse.2016.04.015

Cited by 40 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Gutierrez et al. compared the results of the sweetening process by different simulation software and performed a sensitivity analysis to determine the optimal operating condition . Gu et al.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Gutierrez et al compared the results of the sweetening process by different simulation software and performed a sensitivity analysis to determine the optimal operating condition [9]. Gu et al established a novel method based on the yield-energyselectivity indicators to evaluate and enhance the energy efficiency of the sweetening process for high-sulfur natural gas [10].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Economic Evaluation and Environmental Assessment of the Shale Gas Sweetening Process

Zhuang

Liu

et al. 2019

Chem Eng & Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An appraisal on economic and environmental performance of shale gas processing is significant for energy utilization. A framework on economic evaluation and environmental assessment of the shale gas sweetening process is proposed. The sweetening process is simulated by Aspen Plus, coupled with Claus sulfur recovery by energy integration. The economic evaluation is conducted by purchased cost curves. In environmental assessment, a hybrid life cycle inventory model is established to investigate the emissions from upstream manufacture and process operation. The results demonstrate that exhaust gas is the dominant source in carbon emission while utility consumption produces more SO2 and NOx. The study provides guidance in energy management and pollution control for shale gas plants.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Economic Evaluation and Environmental Assessment of the Shale Gas Sweetening Process

Zhuang

Liu

et al. 2019

Chem Eng & Technol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Zhao et al [16] studied different concentrations of amine to absorb acid gas, but the energy saving was not very good. Gutierrez et al [17] used Aspen HYSYS and Aspen plus to simulate the process of natural gas sweetening in northern Argentina and analyzed CO 2 mole fraction in absorber and regenerator; however, they did not say how to effectively reduce process energy consumption. Roy et al [18] used Aspen HYSYS to simulate the Bakhrabad gas processing plant at Sylhet and compared the simulated results with the plant data.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Techno-Economic Analysis of a Novel Two-Stage Flashing Process for Acid Gas Removal from Natural Gas

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Excessive CO2 content will reduce the natural gas calorific value and increase the energy consumption of the regenerator in natural gas desulfurization and decarbonization. This paper uses Aspen HYSYS to model a novel two-stage flash process of acid gas removal process from natural gas. According to the results from the simulation, as well as running experiences in a natural gas processing plant in the middle east, it can be demonstrated that this new process, which has been used in the field of natural gas desulfurization and decarbonization, can meet the requirement of product specifications. Based on the steady state simulation, Aspen HYSYS sensitivity function is used to evaluate influence of key operating parameters, such as the second flash pressure and temperature, on the energy consumption. Compared to the traditional acid gas removal process and acid gas enrichment process, the new two-stage flash acid gas removal process has less energy consumption (2.2 × 109 kJ·h−1). In addition, two-stage flash acid gas removal process also improves the efficiency of acid gas enrichment, while the overall energy consumption is less than combination process of traditional process and acid gas enrichment process.

show abstract

“…The incorporation of a variety of configurations to study the performance and energy consumption is difficult in practice; so, the best method for measuring the energy consumption is simulation. By comparing these two types of simulation software (Aspen Plus and Aspen HYSYS), Gutierrez et al 33 showed that the simulations did not produce any significant difference in results, with errors of less than 15%. Muhammad et al 31 used Aspen HYSYS to simulate the effect of the acidic gas content on the total cost of the procedure.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Roy et al 32 performed a simulation of the Bakhrabad gas processing plants using the Aspen HYSYS process simulator to validate the proposed model. By comparing these two types of simulation software (Aspen Plus and Aspen HYSYS), Gutierrez et al 33 showed that the simulations did not produce any significant difference in results, with errors of less than 15%. Based on the validation of the model embedded in Aspen Plus, it is now the most commonly used simulation method in research.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Process simulation of CO₂ capture from CO₂‐EOR associated petroleum gas with aqueous MEA and MDEA solvents

Liu

Zhang

Wang

et al. 2019

Energy Science & Engineering

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Associated petroleum gas produced by CO2‐enhanced oil recovery (CO2‐EOR) has a complex composition, high CO2 content, and is unstable. To date, no integrated process simulation for CO2 capture of the EOR associated petroleum gas has been developed. Based on the analysis of the associated petroleum gas obtained from the Shengli oilfield, a new full‐simulation model of CO2 capture from 100 000 Nm3/d of the associated petroleum gas was developed for the process design of chemical absorption of blended amine solvents and an analysis of the relationship between different process parameters and the targeted result—low circulation flow and energy consumption—was performed using Aspen Plus (Version 8.6). A 90% CO2 removal rate was achieved using 0.2 mol CO2/mol of a blended amine as solvent, with an energy consumption of 3.16 GJ/tCO2. By analyzing the influence of absorption pressure, temperature, and packing height on the circulation flow, the influence of absorption and desorption pressure on the energy consumption of the system was determined. It can be concluded that the optimal parameters are as follows: packing height of absorption column, 10 m; absorption temperature, 308.15 K; desorption pressure, 0.12 MPa; and CO2 loading, 0.2 mol/mol of lean solvent, with an absorption pressure of 0.3‐0.6 MPa.

show abstract

A sensitivity analysis and a comparison of two simulators performance for the process of natural gas sweetening

Cited by 40 publications

References 9 publications

Economic Evaluation and Environmental Assessment of the Shale Gas Sweetening Process

Economic Evaluation and Environmental Assessment of the Shale Gas Sweetening Process

Techno-Economic Analysis of a Novel Two-Stage Flashing Process for Acid Gas Removal from Natural Gas

Process simulation of CO₂ capture from CO₂‐EOR associated petroleum gas with aqueous MEA and MDEA solvents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

A sensitivity analysis and a comparison of two simulators performance for the process of natural gas sweetening

Cited by 40 publications

References 9 publications

Economic Evaluation and Environmental Assessment of the Shale Gas Sweetening Process

Economic Evaluation and Environmental Assessment of the Shale Gas Sweetening Process

Techno-Economic Analysis of a Novel Two-Stage Flashing Process for Acid Gas Removal from Natural Gas

Process simulation of CO2 capture from CO2‐EOR associated petroleum gas with aqueous MEA and MDEA solvents

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About

Process simulation of CO₂ capture from CO₂‐EOR associated petroleum gas with aqueous MEA and MDEA solvents