Elsevier Radarweg 29, PO Box 211, 1000 AE Amsterdam, The Netherlands The Boulevard, Langford Lane, Kidlington, Oxford OX5 1GB, UK First edition 2009 Copyright © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted in any form or by any means electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise without the prior written permission of the publisher Permissions may be sought directly from Elsevier’s Science & Technology Rights Department in Oxford, UK: phone (+44) (0) 1865 843830; fax (+44) (0) 1865 853333; email: [email protected]. Alternatively you can submit your request online by visiting the Elsevier web site at http://elsevier.com/locate/permissions, and selecting Obtaining permission to use Elsevier material Notice No responsibility is assumed by the publisher for any injury and/or damage to persons or property as a matter of products liability, negligence or otherwise, or from any use or operation of any methods, products, instructions or ideas contained in the material herein. Because of rapid advances in the medical sciences, in particular, independent verification of diagnoses and drug dosages should be made British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalog record for this book is available from the Library of Congress ISBN: 978-0-444-53292-3 ISSN: 1876-0147 For information on all Elsevier publications visit our web site at books.elsevier.com Printed and bound in Hungary 09 10 11 12 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 Preface Natural gas is one of the cleanest sources of fossil energy and is gaining a growing share in the global energy market. It is estimated that about 23% of the World’s energy usage is provided by natural gas. Driven by environmental, economic, and supply issues, this share is expected to increase over the next two decades. Natural gas is also becoming a key feedstock to many industrial processes. As such, it is important to develop efficient and effective technologies for processing the gas into various usable forms. There are numerous processing pathways and associated technologies that are being developed and refined to enhance the efficiency and added value of processing and utilization of natural gas. This book provides state-of-the-art advances in the area of gas processing. The chapters in this book were selected from contributions presented at the Gas Processing Center First Annual Symposium held in Doha, Qatar from January 10 to 12, 2009. A key theme in the Symposium was Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) because of its growing importance of the global energy market. The Symposium also covered the following gas processing applications in parallel sessions (cid:120) Natural Gas Processing and treatment (cid:120) Gas To Liquid (GTL) (cid:120) Gas To Petrochemicals, including olefins, ammonia and methanol Several engineering areas pertaining to gas processing are covered. These include: (cid:120) Design, including debottlenecking and retrofitting (cid:120) Operation, including plantwide control; process, supply-chain, reliability and enterprise-wide optimization (cid:120) Process Safety (cid:120) Environmental Sustainability, including clean production and efficient use of Natural resources and energy The book contains nine chapters clustered into the following categories: - Liquefied Energy Chain - Natural Gas Process Equipement Design -Process Design -Process Synthesis and Optimization -Process Control - Acid Gas Removal -Sustainability, Safety and Asset Management in LNG Industry - Gas-to-Liquids -Gas to Petrochemicals Preface xi Several individuals and organizations have been instrumental in supporting the Symposium and the book. Grateful acknowledgement is given to His Highness Sheikh Tamim Bin Hamad Al-Thani, the Heir Apparent of the State of Qatar under whose patronage this Symposium was held. Her Excellency Professor Sheikha Al-Misnad, President of Qatar University and the many university departments are gratefully acknowledged for extending unwavering administrative and financial support. All employees of Qatar University Gas Processing Center are also acknowledged. We would also like to acknowledge the support provided by sponsors and co-sponsors including Qatar Petroleum, Qatargas, RasGas, ExxonMobil, the American Institute of Chemical Engineers (AIChE), the European Federation of Chemical Engineering (EFCE), and the Gas Processors Association – Gulf Countries Chapter (GPA – GCC Chapter). Special thanks are due to Engineer Omnia Abdel-Gawad, the Symposium Manager for her outstanding efforts in smoothly organizing the various aspects of the Symposium and the book. We would also like to thank the members of the International Technical Committee and the many reviewers from around the world who provided much advice to the direction and content of the book. Finally, our deep appreciation to the authors of the various chapters for sharing their knowledge and expertise and for their cooperation during the editing of the book. Hassan Alfadala, Qatar University, Qatar G. V. Rex Reklaitis, Purdue University, USA Mahmoud El-Halwagi, Texas A&M University, USA Annual Gas Processing Symposium Editors International Technical Committee Symposium Chairman Hassan Alfadala, Gas Processing Center, Qatar Technical Committee Members Ahmed Al-Thani, QatarGas, Qatar Andrzej Kraslawski, Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland Dennis Spriggs, Matrix Process Integration, U.S.A Dominic Foo, University of Nottingham, Malaysia Campus Ernest Du Toit, Sasol, Qatar Fadwa Eljack, Qatar University, Qatar Farid Benyahia, Qatar University, Qatar Fotis Rigas, National Technical University of Athens, Greece G. V. Rex Reklaitis, Purdue University, USA Ghanim H. Al-Ibrahim, Qatar Fuel Additives Company Limited, Qatar Hamad Al Mohanadi, RasGas, Qatar Hasan Al-Hammadi, University of Bahrain, Kingdom of Bahrain Iftikar Karimi, National University of Singapore, Singapore Kenneth Hall, Texas A&M, U.S.A Mahmoud El-Halwagi, Texas A&M, U.S.A Mark R. Pillarella, Air Products, U.S.A Martin Picon Nunez, University of Guanajuato, Mexico Mert Atilhan, Qatar University, Qatar Nafez Bsesio, RasGas, Qatar Pedro Medellín-Milán, Universidad Autónoma de San Luis Potosí, Mexico Per Gerhard Grini, StatOilHydro, Norway Rafiqul Gani, Technical University of Denmark, Denmark Rakesh Agrawal, Purdue University, USA International Technical Committee xiii Robin Smith, The University of Manchester, UK Saad Al Kaabi, Qatar Petroleum, Qatar Simon Perry, The University of Manchester, UK Sigurd Skogestad, Norwegian University of Science & Technology, Norway Truls Gundersen, Norwegian University of Science & Technology, Norway Proceedings of the 1st Annual Gas Processing Symposium H.E. Alfadala, G.V. Rex Reklaitis and M.M. El-Halwagi (Editors) © 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved. A Multi-Paradigm Energy Model for Liquid Natural Gas Analysis Bri-Mathias S. Hodgea, Joseph F. Peknya,b and Gintaras V. Reklaitisa aSchool of Chemical Engineering, Purdue University, 480 Stadium Mall Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA be-Enterprise Center, Discovery Park, Purdue University, 203 S. Martin Jischke Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907, USA Abstract The current complex world energy system dictates that energy policy decisions can have far reaching and often unintended consequences. Therefore, sophisticated modeling techniques which allow possible future scenarios to be simulated and analyzed in advance are necessary in order to improve the decision making process. Multi- paradigm modeling allows different parts of the system under consideration to be represented using the modeling technique most appropriate. This approach has been applied to the United States natural gas system and the future prospects of liquid natural gas imports over a medium term time frame have been examined. Keywords: Energy Systems, Multi-Paradigm Simulation, Agent-based Modeling, Systems Dynamics 1. Introduction The current global energy system is both highly complex and increasingly coupled. Changes in the energy supply or demand in one region of the world, or one sector of the economy, can have far reaching and often unforeseen consequences. Energy policy decisions at both the government and corporate level play a critical role in the determination of energy usage and the availability of suitable forms of energy where necessary. These policy decisions may only benefit from a deeper understanding of the interactions of entities within the system as well as the system capabilities and limitations. As the size and importance of the system prevents direct experimentation, insights must be gleaned through the modelling and simulation of energy systems. The most prominent large scale energy system models already in use come from international and national organizations such as the International Energy Agency (IEA, 2007) and the United States Energy Information Administration (EIA, 2007). Both of these models are highly detailed mathematical programming models which produce single solutions to the given problem instead of the spectrum of possible future scenarios which the large uncertainty involved should dictate. System Dynamics, which uses highly aggregated data with defined feedback loops to forecast system behaviour, has also been widely used in energy modelling. Typical system dynamics models for energy systems analysis are the Energy 2020 (Backus et al., 1995) and Fossil2 (Naill, 1992) models. Agent-based models work from a bottom-up approach, as opposed to the 2 B-M. Hodge, et al. top-down approach of system dynamics, and specify the behaviour and the means of interaction between individuals within the system. With the individual’s behaviour specified it is then the combination of the interactions between system components that is studied in order to better understand the system. A framework for an agent-based overall energy system model has been developed and applied at the sub-national level (Hodge et al., 2008), while the agent-based system concept has also been applied to electricity systems (Koritarov, 2004). A more comprehensive review of past work in energy systems modelling can be found in (Wei et al., 2006) which contrasts the approaches which have been examined and gives examples of applications at varying geographical scale. All of the modelling paradigms mentioned above have some inherent limitation. Agent- based methods with their disaggregated approach can suffer from scaling problems when there are a very large number of individual entities which must be modelled separately. Mathematical programming produces only individual solutions instead of looking at multiple possible future scenarios and is often limited to linear model components. In many cases the formal mathematical relationship necessary for a system dynamics model may not be readily apparent. The aggregation that is common in system dynamics models may miss key differences between system components which help to explain the system behaviour. It is thought that by combining these, and other, techniques in a multi-paradigm modelling system each modelling standard may be allowed to work on only those segments of the problem for which it is most suited. Instead of allowing the choice of modelling technique to dictate the structure of the problem we can allow the structure of the problem to drive the decision of which modelling paradigms are used. The multi-paradigm approach allows the development of models with multiple objectives, multiple levels of aggregation and multiple perspectives (Zeigler & Oren, 1986). Hybrid systems, which mix continuous and discrete time, may be considered an important subset of multi-paradigm models that has received much attention. A good review of hybrid systems theory may be found in (Barton & Lee, 2002). This approach has been applied to physical systems (Mosterman & Biswas, 2002) such as supply chains (Pathak et al., 2003), as well as software systems (de Lara & Vangheluwe, 2002). The combination of multiple modelling paradigms allows the level of abstraction and the formalism used in sub-models to differ from that of the meta-model with the intended goal of a more realistic representation of the system under study. An overview of the concepts behind multi-paradigm modelling, abstractions and transformations between formalisms can be found in (Vangheluwe et al., 2002). 2. A Multi-Paradigm Energy Model Framework A decomposition of the energy system must be undertaken in order to allow the use of multiple modeling paradigms within the same model. Subsystems must be characterized so that the modeling style which best fits each component of the system may be determined. The system has been broken down into three critical components: markets, supply and demand. An agent based modeling structure is used in order to represent each of these modules of the energy system at the highest level of abstraction. This paradigm was chosen for the ease with which communication between different modules may be facilitated. Messages may be sent between subsystems through standardized ports which can recognize relevant information and ignore non-relevant A Multi-Paradigm Energy Model for Liquid Natural Gas Analysis 3 noise. The agent based methods of communication are the most natural fit for integrating multiple modeling styles of the methods considered. At the meta-model level agents act as communication wrappers which encompass modules of the system, allowing sections of the model generated through varied modeling paradigms to effectively share the information which is needed by diverse subsystems. Figure 1: Model Framework Overview 2.1.Market The market modules are at the center of the energy system framework. Markets serve as a meeting place for supply and demand and are thus the main means by which information is exchanged between the two. The market facilitates communication between diverse supply and demand modules through the use of a common language: the bid. Bids to buy or sell an energy product may be submitted and contain all the information relevant to the prospective trading partner. Bids consist of six important pieces of information: the bidder’s name, the market to which the bid is submitted, the product type for which a bid is placed, whether the bidder is buying or selling as well as the offered or requested amount and price. The market module operates as a double blind auction in which each participant receives the equilibrium price and bids may be partially fulfilled. The fulfillment of a bid can be seen as a contract to supply or receive an amount of the product during the next time frame. The auction mechanism is not dynamic but operates once per each discrete time step, or for each tick in the meta- model agent-based framework. Once supply has been matched with demand and a market price has been established the market must then communicate the results of the auction to the participants. This is again easily accomplished by sending bid messages to those participants whose bid has been accepted notifying them directly of the amount of their bid which has been fulfilled and the market price that they will pay or receive per unit of commodity. 2.2.Supply The producers who supply the product within an energy system have been modeled using an agent-based approach. The agent-based approach represents suppliers as autonomous entities which make their production decisions based upon rules established to govern their behavior and interactions with the other players within the system. Since the supply side consists of a small number of large producers as opposed to the large number of small users on the consumption side, individual behavior is more easily generalized into rules such as profit maximization. In addition the utility of the product to the suppliers, the money received from the sale, is much simpler than the 4 B-M. Hodge, et al. utility of the myriad possible uses for the product on the consumption side. This reduces the complexity of strategic decisions and helps make the case for using agent based modeling to represent the supply side. 2.3.Demand The system dynamics modeling approach has been chosen as the most applicable paradigm for the demand side of the energy system under study. System dynamics works with aggregated groups of entities instead of representing individuals. Stocks and flows are individual units, from which feedback loops are built, and form the basis for system dynamic models. Stocks represent physical entities, such as people or machinery that participate in the energy system while flows account for changes between stocks. All stocks in a system dynamics model are homogenous; there is no differentiating between members of a stock set. In addition, certain parameters are needed in order to help determine the flow values. For a system with as many individual users as an energy system this approach is preferable due to the nature of the data used in the system. The collection of individual user consumption data and behavior patterns is extremely difficult at best and thus the data available is already highly aggregated. Due to the large number of users and their varied behavior and consumption patterns, construction of agents for each individual user type was judged to be excessively time consuming for the possible gains in consumption accuracy. Additionally, the sheer number of individual agent instances necessary for such a large demand system would be computationally prohibitive. 3. Example: The United States Natural Gas System Natural gas is an important energy commodity within the United States because of its use in residential and industrial heating, power generation and as a feedstock for industrial chemical production. The United States is the largest consumer of natural gas in the world (EIA, 2007). The United States is also the second largest natural gas producer in the world; however, the total production does not completely fulfill the domestic demand. The United States contains the sixth largest proven reserves of natural gas in the world, though this amounts to only three percent of world reserves. The high levels of production of natural gas in the United States along with the enormous domestic demand make the United States market an important part of the world natural gas system. The difference between domestic demand and production means that imports are required to make up the shortfall. Imports by pipeline from Canada are insufficient to cover the deficit and therefore liquid natural gas imports are required. 3.1.Market For the purposes of this initial model the United States natural gas system has been treated as one large national market. In reality this assumption is flawed. The difference between the Henry Hub price and any local city gate price should differ, if only due to transportation and distribution costs. However, differences in transportation costs are accounted for within the supply module, as explained below, and the single national market assumption can be modified if simulation results indicate that further granularity could be useful. 3.2.Supply Following the principle that aggregation should be used until it is shown that further detail would be beneficial, the supply to the United States natural gas system has been divided into three sectors: domestic supply, near international supply and far A Multi-Paradigm Energy Model for Liquid Natural Gas Analysis 5 international supply. Near international and far international supply are differentiated by the transportation method necessary for supplying the product. Near international supply arrives via pipeline, and thus includes Canada and Mexico as potential suppliers, while far international supply must be imported via liquid natural gas. Each supply sector is represented by a supply region agent. The primary decision to be made for each supply region is the quantity of natural gas that it should produce in the next time frame. This is accomplished by providing the cost at which sections of capacity may provide the product. Each lot of capacity is assigned a series of costs, the sum of which is the total cost of one unit of natural gas delivered to the consumer from this capacity. The unit of natural gas used within the model is 1000 cubic feet. There are five costs which pertain to all of the supply regions and three which are particular to the international region. The lifting cost is the cost of extracting a unit of natural gas from the ground. The tax cost, which can vary greatly by region, combined with the lifting cost together form the well known wellhead cost. In addition there are transmission and distribution costs which account for the costs of delivering the product to the end use customers. The assumption is also made that for the medium term time frame of the model, ten years, reserves are held at a constant level for each region. This assumption necessitates the inclusion of a replacement cost for each unit of natural gas produced. These finding costs can be a large fraction of the total cost, but vary greatly from region to region. In addition, the costs of liquid natural gas must be included for the far international region. These additional costs are represented by the liquefaction, shipping and gasification costs associated only with liquid natural gas. For each lot of capacity the applicable costs are randomly generated using a beta distribution with appropriate upper and lower bounds as well as shape parameters which mimic the behavior of a bounded normal distribution. Once all of the above cost factors have been determined, overhead and profit factors are used to determine the final total production cost. Each lot of capacity then has an associated total cost which may be bid to the market. The international supply region has an additional constraint in that there is a finite capacity for liquid natural gas to be imported into the United States through existing terminals. Therefore only the most competitive bids up to the point of full import capacity for liquid natural gas are actually submitted to the market. As the supply only provides a cost at which an amount of the product may be delivered, it is the market module that ultimately decides the capacity each region uses through the matching of supply and demand. Once this determination has been made a bid message is passed to the supply region agent informing it of its contractual obligations for the next time frame. 3.3.Demand In the United States natural gas is an important energy source for heating and electricity generation as well as a feedstock used in chemical production. While the use of natural gas as a feedstock has fallen due to a shift toward off-shore chemical production, the generating capacity of power plants which use natural gas as the primary energy source has risen dramatically. In addition natural gas is used in many parts of the country as the main energy source for winter heating, as well as other household uses. For the purposes of the model the United States natural gas demand has been divided into four groups of users: residential, commercial, industrial and electric. Each of these user groups are represented in the demand system dynamics model as stocks of natural gas customers. The stocks of residential, commercial and industrial