1 / 13

CONTROL OF VOC EMISSION FROM CRUDE OIL TANKERS

CONTROL OF VOC EMISSION FROM CRUDE OIL TANKERS. Otto M.Martens, MSc. Norwegian Marine Technology Research Institute (MARINTEK) Ole Oldervik, MSc. PhD. SINTEF Civil and Environmental Engineering Bengt Olav Neeraas, MSc. PhD. SINTEF Energy Research Terje Strøm, MSc. SINTEF Applied Chemistry.

bernad
Download Presentation

CONTROL OF VOC EMISSION FROM CRUDE OIL TANKERS

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. CONTROL OF VOC EMISSION FROM CRUDE OIL TANKERS Otto M.Martens, MSc. Norwegian Marine Technology Research Institute (MARINTEK)Ole Oldervik, MSc. PhD. SINTEF Civil and Environmental EngineeringBengt Olav Neeraas, MSc. PhD. SINTEF Energy ResearchTerje Strøm, MSc. SINTEF Applied Chemistry

  2. Results from study on reduction of VOC emission from Crude oil tankers • Focus on shuttle tankers and FSO/ FPSO • Simulation of : • evaporation rates for individual volatile compounds • gas emission rates • composition of emitted gas • Reduced emission by combination of control techniques: • sequential transfer of tank atmosphere (STTA) • reliquefaction of VOC • absorption of VOC in cargo oil

  3. INTRODUCTION • The VOC emission represents: • a loss of considerable monetary value • harmful consequences to the environment • National goal of 30 % NMVOC emission • 50 % of emission in Norway from offshore loading • Actions taken: • gas return and recovery plant at the Sture terminal • absorption plant on M/T “Anna Knutsen” • recondensation plant on M/T “Navion Viking” • several R&D projects and measurement series performed • VOC diluted in inert gas creates a problem

  4. Sponsors Statoil UBT/PRA Saga Petroleum ASA BP International Ltd Shell Expro Norsk Hydro Kværner Ship Equipment Aker Engineering, Umoe Technology Sandsli Bergesen DY AS Navion Norwegian Petroleum Directorate Det Norske Veritas Norwegian Council of Research Norwegian Maritime Directorate MARINTEK/SINTEF Performed by SINTEF Content : Emission measurements onboard Developed emission simulation program Evaluated concepts for VOC emission control Required 75 % reduction of NMVOC emission The VOCON RESEARCH PROJECT

  5. The Simulation Program HCGas • Typical components considered : • C1, C2, C3, i-C4, n-C4, i-C5, n-C5, C6, C7, C8, C9, C10+, N2, CO2 ,O2 • Transportation in liquid and gas phases by solving one dim diffusion/ convection equation for each component • Local equilibrium at the free surface gives mass transfer of each component between the phases • Mass continuity eq. for each tank and flow eq. for each pipe used to compute flow • Loading and discharging rates specified • Temperature specified in liquid phase as f(time, space) • Temperature specified in gas phase as f(time, space) or computed

  6. Simulated cases • 140300 m3 cargo capacity all ships • shuttle tanker and STL loaded and discharged from 3 similar tank groups in series • average sea condition offshore • fairly volatile crude • shuttle tanker • loading rate 2.2 m3/s • discharge rate 2.7 m3/s

  7. SHUTTLE TANKER - BASE CASE

  8. SHUTTLE TANKER - BASE CASE

  9. SHUTTLE TANKER - STTA • Emission of NMVOC: • base case 193000 kg • base case with STTA 169000 kg • Compared to base case STTA gives: • reduced flow rate • reduced emission • reduced running time and better condition for recovery plant

  10. Shuttle Tanker with STTA and liquefaction plant

  11. Shuttle Tanker with STTA and absorption plant

  12. Gas Return from Shuttle Tanker to FSOwith STTA on shuttle tanker and liquefaction plant on FSO

  13. CONCLUSIONS • STTA combined with recovery plant reduces : • required peak power • energy consumption • process equipment dimensions (slightly) • Economy of combination must be evaluated for each ship • Compared to absorption plant a reliquefaction plant : • requires higher power • becomes more complex • produces VOC to be used as fuel • Gas return to FSO requires small plant to satisfy specified reduction of NMVOC emission • HCGas is a powerful tool for computing evaporation and emission from various crude types and cargo handling procedures

More Related