Advertisement

H2S Absorption from Syngas in Physical Solvent DMEPEG

  • Ashok Dave
  • Bhumika PathakEmail author
  • Medha Dave
  • Poonam Kashyap
  • Ye Huang
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 757)

Abstract

H2S is removed from sour syngas upstream of CO2 capture, thus producing sweeter syngas. Simulation results of H2S absorption in a physical or chemical solvent may be unreliable due to assumptions like the equilibrium-based modelling, theoretical number of stages, tray efficiency, height equivalent of theoretical plate, as also due to the lack of prior experience and the lack of pilot plant data at appropriate scale of operation. Rate-based process simulations carried out using ProTreat software are described in this publication using process flow diagram (PFD) and simulation flow sheet—to describe the packed tower design and process design for H2S Absorption from syngas in physical solvent DMEPEG. Consideration of physical model of packed tower (packing type, size and material) imparts credibility to the simulation results. Sensitivity analysis is conducted for process parameters. Performance of packer tower is analysed and compared with process requirement and recommended practice. Similar performing tower internals is suggested.

Keywords

H2S absorption Packed tower HETP DMEPEG PFD 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The Author acknowledges the support of DECARBit Project funded by European Union (FP7 Grant No. 2119171) for part of this work.

References

  1. 1.
    IEA flagship publication World Energy Outlook (WEO). http://www.iea.org/weo/
  2. 2.
  3. 3.
    Dave, A.: Ph.D. thesis titled “Techno-Economic assessment of IGCC systems with CO2 capture using novel absorption/ desorption technologies”, ISNI 0000 0004 5372 1661, uk.bl.ethos.675929 (EThOS ID). http://ethos.bl.uk/OrderDetails.do?uin=uk.bl.ethos.675929
  4. 4.
    A webpage of Digital Refining website regarding acid gas removal by physical solvent DMEPEG. http://www.digitalrefining.com/data/digital_magazines/file/1767276991.pdf
  5. 5.
    Dave, A., Dave, M., Rezvani, S., Huang, Y., Hewitt, N.: Process design for H2S Enrichment in physical solvent DMEPEG. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 50, 261–270 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2016.02.004CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    ProTreat software for rate-based mass-transfer simulation from Optimized Gas Treatment (OGT), USA. http://ogtrt.com
  7. 7.
    ProTreat Software Publications. http://ogtrt.com/information/publications
  8. 8.
    Dave, A., Dave, M., Rezvani, S., Huang, Y., Hewitt, N.: Process design for CO2 absorption from syngas using physical solvent DMEPEG. Int. J. Greenhouse Gas Control 49, 436–448 (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijggc.2016.03.015CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burr, B., Lyddon, L.: A Comparison of Physical Solvents for Acid Gas Removal. Bryan Research & Engineering, Inc., Bryan, Texas, U.S.A. http://www.bre.com/portals/0/technicalarticles/a%20comparison%20of%20physical%20solvents%20for%20acid%20gas%20removal%20revised.pdf
  10. 10.
    Sciamanna, S.F., Lynn, S.: Solubility of hydrogen sulfide, sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, propane, and n-butane in poly(glycol ethers). Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 27, 492–499 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Greene, P.A., Kutsher, G.S.: Carbon dioxide removal and recovery new polyglycol ether processes. In: Proceedings of the 1965 Laurance Reid Gas Conditioning Conference, Norman, OKGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Hartel, G.H.: Low-volatility polar organic solvents for sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, and carbonyl sulfide. J. Chem. Eng. Data 30, 57–61 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Sweny, J.W.: High CO2-high H2S removal with SELEXOL solvent. In: Proceedings of the 59th Annual Gas Processors Association Convention, pp. 163–166Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Aionicesei, E., Skerget, M., Knez, Z.: Measurement and modeling of the CO2 solubility in poly(ethylene glycol) of different molecular weights. J. Chem. Eng. Data 53, 185–188 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Xu, Y., Schutte, R.P., Hepler, L.: Solubilities of carbon dioxide, hydrogen sulfide and sulfur dioxide in physical solvents. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 70, 569–573 (1992)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
  17. 17.
    Sciamanna, S.F., Lynn, S.: Solubility of hydrogen sulfide, sulfur dioxide, carbon dioxide, propane, and n-butane in poly(glycol ethers). Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 27, 492–499 (1988)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hartel, G.H.: Low-volatility polar organic solvents for sulfur dioxide, hydrogen sulfide, and carbonyl sulfide. J. Chem. Eng. Data 30, 57–61 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kolev, N., Nakov, S., Ljutzkanov, L., Kolev, D.: Institute of Chemical Engineering, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Acad. G. Bonchev St., Bl.103, 1113 Sofia, Bulgaria. Comparison of the effective surface area of some highly effective random packings third and forth generation. Symposium Series No. 152, IChemE (2006) http://www.nt.ntnu.no/users/skoge/prost/proceedings/distillation06/CD-proceedings/paper073.pdf
  20. 20.
    Page No. 3 technical report. Natural Gas Specification Challenges In The Lng Industry, on http://www.kbr.com/Newsroom/Publications/Technical-Papers/Natural-Gas-Specification-Challenges-in-the-LNG-Industry.pdf
  21. 21.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ashok Dave
    • 1
  • Bhumika Pathak
    • 2
    Email author
  • Medha Dave
    • 3
  • Poonam Kashyap
    • 4
  • Ye Huang
    • 4
  1. 1.Mechanical Engineering DepartmentSchool of Engineering, Indrashil UniversityMehsanaIndia
  2. 2.Pramukh Swami Medical CollegeKaramsadIndia
  3. 3.California State UniversityLong BeachUSA
  4. 4.CSTUlster University JordanstownNewtownabbey, AntrimUK

Personalised recommendations