Removing High Sulphur Bunker from the Refineries: Eni s case study

Transcription

1 Removing High Sulphur Bunker from the Refineries: Eni s case study Raffaele Fronteddu Proposal Manager Licensing Commercial Development Refining & Marketing - Eni S.p.A CIS Downstream Summit Vienna, 28 th - 30 th November, 2016

2 Content 1 IMO new regulation for Bunker and impact on Refineries 2 Bottom of the Barrel conversion: Eni s novel approach 3 Case Study: EST Project in Sannazzaro Refinery 2

3 International Maritime Organization: new regulation for Bunker In all Emission Controlled Areas the limit on sulphur content in Bunker is 0.1%wt Starting from 2020, the global sulphur content in Bunker will be limited to 0.5%wt 3

4 Why a new Bunker specification? About 1/3 of the world s total shipping traffic either trades to seaports or passes through the Mediterranean (less than 1% world water surface) Low sulphur Bunker will have significant impact on SO 2 emission reduction in all coastal areas 4

5 Impact on Bunker market According to a CE Delft study, in 2020 (base case projection): Global marine fuel demand will be 320 Mt/y The use of HSFO for ships equipped with scrubbers will be limited to 36 Mt/y The demand of LNG as alternative fuel will be limited to 12 Mt/y» The shift to low sulphur marine bunker in 2020 will result in the substitution of up to 233 Mt/y of heavy high sulphur fuel oils Shipping Industry alternatives: Scrubbing technology (Exhaust Gas Cleaning Systems) on board to limit SOx Adapt to alternative fuels (LNG, methanol, biofuels, LPG, DME, etc.)» expensive retrofitting of existing fleets + need for new port infrastructure 5

6 Impact on Refineries Refinery side alternatives: Change in crude diet for ultra low sulphur crudes processing (North Sea, Africans, Siberian Light, Azery, CPC Blend)» ULS crudes price (sweet/sour spread increasing) = lower margin Destroy (Gasification)» economically sustainable? Upgradation: Coking» Petcoke issue (moreover after COP21) Fixed bed hydroconversion» limited in feed flexibility, low conversion LC Fining» low conversion with high S residue (problem reduced but not solved) Slurry Hydrocracking» Eni s novel approach 6

7 Eni s experience Tar Gasification by Shell G.S. 400,000 TPY MWe since 2005 Product is electric energy Fixed Bed RHU by Shell 25,000 BPSD - since 1995 Low bottom conversion Low feed flexibility Limited run length Delayed Coking by Kellogg 4,600 TPD - since 1963 Delayed Coking by Conoco 3,300 TPD - since 1990 Loss of liquid yield Coke disposal Ebullating Bed LC-Finer by CLG 25,000 BPSD - since 1998 Residue unstable at high conversion Unconverted bottom disposal 7

8 Content 1 IMO new regulation for Bunker and impact on Refineries 2 Bottom of the Barrel conversion: Eni s novel approach 3 Case Study: EST Project in Sannazzaro Refinery 8

9 Eni s novel approach: E.S.T. Development Road Start of R&D activities Pilot Plant start-up Commercial Demonstration Plant start-up First Commercial Plant Start-up First License Agreement Research and Development activities Pilot Plant activities Demo Plant activities Commercial Unit in Operation 9

10 Eni s novel approach: catalyst, reactor and scheme EST Catalyst Nanometric Catalyst EST Reactor 6 nm Slurry bubble column reactors homogeneous and isothermal No risk of runaway (intrinsically safe) Recycling scheme for stability and high conversion EST Scheme 10

11 EST vs. Other Processes volumetric yields comparison Higher conversion to desidered products (>95%wt FF) Coke (as wt.%) LC Bottom Pitch 35% products yields (in volume) higher than DC and EB Delayed coking Ebullated bed EST 11

12 Content 1 IMO new regulation for Bunker and impact on Refineries 2 Bottom of the Barrel conversion: Eni s novel approach 3 Case Study: EST Project in Sannazzaro Refinery 12

13 Case Study: EST Project in Sannazzaro Refinery 13

14 Sannazzaro Refinery - flow scheme before EST C D U TIP VACUUM HDS1/2 VSB Reformer 1/2/3 HDC1/2 DEASP MTBE FCC HDS3 IGAS ALK LPG Gasoline Kero Diesel Syngas Fuel Oil Bitumen Pitch P R O D U C T L O G I S T I C S 14

15 Sannazzaro Refinery - flow scheme with EST integration C D U DEASP LPG EST Bitumen P R O D U C T L O G I S T I C S 15

16 EST Complex Timeline and Lay-out FEED start Site Activities Steam Reformer Start-up EST Commissioning EST Oil-in Jan 2009 Nov 2010 Jan 2013 Jul 2013 Oct 2013 Auxiliaries: - Steam Reforming - Sulphur Recovery - Amine Treatment - Cooling Water - Flare Slurry section Diesel and VGO Hydrotreating section Bunkerized control room Pitch Storage and loading station 16

17 EST product yields and quality Hydrogen make-up Vacuum Residue + FCC Oil Catalyst make-up EST LPG Naphtha AGO VGO Purge Naphtha Sulfur <5 wtppm Nitrogen <5 wtppm Diesel (Euro V spec) Sulfur < 5 wtppm Nitrogen <5 wtppm Cetane Index min 51 Polyaromatics < 8.0 wt% Hydrotreating VGO (new IMO Bunker spec or to HDC/FCC) Sulfur <500 wtppm Nitrogen <500 wtppm Metals <1 wtppm 17

18 EST feed flexibility: SNZ Experience Vacuum Residue from 19 different crudes 18

19 Eni s approach to fuel quality evolution Eni policy approach on product quality is to anticipate environmental legislation Specification Eni commitment (year) Legislation Endorsement (year) Zero Lead Gasoline %vol max Benzene wtppm S Diesel wtppm S Gasoline %wt PNA Diesel 2010 locally, 2016 To be defined 10% renewable Diesel ,1%wt S Bunker Thanks to the implementation of EST, Eni has achieved the sulfur specifications in all fuels responsible for large amounts of SO 2 emissions 19

20 Conclusion A new product specification will impact on oil refining business. The new sulphur specification completes the sulphur removal in all fuels, with very beneficial effects on the environment Eni has heavily invested in R&D of new deep conversion technologies. This has originated EST technology, suitable for the production of light distillates and low sulfur bunker fuel <0.5% and/or <0.1%. Eni is already capable of producing today from its Sannazzaro Refinery over 400 kt/year of Bunker with sulfur less than 0.5% S (0.1% for ECAs areas). 20

21 Raffaele Fronteddu 21