DEGASSINGOFSTORAGETANKS

DISCUSSIONOFLIMITATIONSOFTECHNOLOGIES
DonaldJ.Schaezler,Ph.D.,P.E.,CIH
ETCInformationServices,LLC

INTRODUCTION
Degassing of large stationary storage tanks that contain volatile organic compounds is of great
significanceinindustrialareasbecauseofthepotentialforlarge emissionsofthevaporsinthetanks.
TheprocesshasbeenregulatedbyTCEQunder30TACChapter115SubchapterFDivision3:Degassing
orCleaningofStationary,Marine,orTransportVessels.TCEQisnowconsideringcommentsrelevantto
these regulations. The purpose of this paper is to explore some of the limitations to the technologies
beingusedinthedegassingprocess.

LIMITATIONSOFTECHNOLOGIES
Limitations intankdegassingoperationsinclude theflowrateof the technology,theinherentlimiting
removalrateofthetechnology,andthemixingofthetankcontents.
ItistemptingtoconsiderastoragetankbeingdegassedasanideallymixedContinuousStirredReactor
(CSTR). However, the geometry of the tank volume, the layout of nozzles and vaporrelief valves, and
thelowvelocitiesandenergygenerallyappliedtothetankcontentsmakeachievementofidealmixing
difficult. The parameters indicate that stratification of the contents and channelization of flow from
vaporreliefvalvestodegassingnozzleswilleasilyoccur.
In addition to mixing limitations, each technology must be considered for its inherent processing
limitation. For combustion devices, the limitation is the maximum heat release in the furnace. For
condensers,thelimitationisthemaximumheattransfercapacity.

ILLUSTRATIVEEXAMPLES
Thefollowingexamplecaseswereused:
SUMMARYOFCASESCONSIDERED
Case Description
CaseswithIdealMixing
1 Dilutionventilationat1000cfm
2 degassinglimitedbycombustionat2.4millionBtu/hr
3 degassinglimitedbycondensationat98,562Btu/hr
CaseswithNonIdealMixing
4 Dilutionventilationat1000cfmNonIdealMixing
5 degassinglimitedbycombustionat2.4millionBtu/hrNonIdealMixing
The results of simple models for each of these cases is shown below for a 100ft diameter gasoline
storagetankwiththefloatingroofsitting4.5feetabovethetankbottomandwiththeinitialgasoline
contentinthevaporphaseof50%.
Themodelsaresimpleandarenotintendedtobemechanistic.Theyareintendedtobeconceptualand
preliminary and to illustrate basic concepts that apply to the real world. They do not include
considerationsofsuchfactorsasregenerationofvaporsfromresidualliquidpoolsorliquidtrappedin
scaleatthebottomofthetank.Theyalsodonotconsiderthedetailedhydraulicsofinletandoutletflow
regimes.

IdealMixing
ThesecasesconsiderthreeexampleswiththeassumptionofidealmixinginCSTRs.

DegassingCasesforIdealMixing
GasolineVaporConcn,%

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

C1(t)

0.2

C2(t)

0.1

C3(t)

0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Time,minutes

Where:
C1(t)istheconcentrationvs.timeforCase1,dilutionventilationat1000cfm
C2(t)istheconcentrationvs.timeforCase2,combustionat2.4MMBtu/hr
C3(t)istheconcentrationvs.timeforCase3,condensationat98,562Btu/hr.

NonIdealMixing
Twoexamplecasesassumenonidealmixing,firstforsimpledilutionventilationandthenforthemore
complexcaseofdegassingwithdestructionofgasolinevaporsbycombustionwithdistinctstratification
andchannelingofflow.

GasolineVaporConcn,%

DegassingbyVentilation
NonIdealMixing
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2

C1(t)

0.1

C4(t)

0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Time,minutes

Where:
C1(t)istheconcentrationvs.timeforCase1,dilutionventilationat1000cfm
C4(t)istheconcentrationvs.timeforCase4,dilutionventilationat1000cfmbutwithnonideal
mixinginthetank.
Inthiscase,C4referstotheaverageconcentrationinthetank,wherestratificationandchanneledflow
havecreatedseparatevolumeswithdifferentconcentrations,onerelativelyleanandonerelativelyrich.
ThisconceptisillustratedinasketchpreparedbyHilliardEmissionControls,reproducedbelow.


Thisconceptdrawsuponstratificationofairandchannelingofinletflowinairconditioningdistribution
systems,asillustratedinIndustrialVentilation,23rdedition,ACGIH,1998(seeFigure21,poormixing
case),andinseveralindustrialhygienereferences.Inthecaseofambientoutdoorairenteringavapor
spacerichingasoline,thestratificationwouldbemuchstronger,almostasintwophaseflowsystems.

GasolineVaporConcn,%

DegassingbyCombustion
NonIdealMixing
0.6
0.5
0.4
C1(t)

0.3
0.2

C5v1(t)

0.1

C5v2(t)
C5avg(t)

0
0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

Time,minutes

Where:
C2(t)istheconcentrationvs.timeforCase2,combustionat2.4MMBtu/hr

C5v1(t)istheconcentrationvs.timeforthestratifiedleanvolumeforCase5
C5v2(t)istheconcentrationvs.timeforthestratifiedrichvolumeforCase5
C5avg(t)istheconcentrationvs.timeforthevolumeweightedaverageinthetank.
In this case, we considered a tank that develops stratification, with relatively lean vapor near the top
andnearthedegassingnozzle,andrelativelyrichgasolinevaporsnearthebottomandinmostofthe
tank.ThisTwoVolumeModelassumedpartialmixing,suchasinthenonidealmixingcase,withvapor
beingdrawnfromtherelativelyleanvaporvolume.RefertotheHilliardEmissionControlssketchabove.

The condenser alternative has a distinct advantage with respect to mixing, because most of the
volumetricflowisreturnedtothetankatarate,velocitypattern,andlocationconducivetotankmixing.

CONCLUSIONS&RECOMMENDATIONS
1. Limitations in tank degassing operations include the flow rate of the technology, the inherent
limitingremoval/destructionrateofthetechnology,andthemixingofthetankcontents.
2. Thelimitationsofthetechnologyusedfordegassingmustberecognizedinapplicationofthat
technology. The application must consider and be consistent with simple mass and energy
balances.
3. Thelimitationsofnonidealmixingmustalsoberecognized.Ifstratificationandchanneledflow
occur,thentheprogressofdegassingmaybedifficulttomeasure.
4. If degassing is terminated prematurely, because of mixing limitations and inaccurate vapor
measurements,thenthevolumeofcontaminantsultimatelyflushedtotheenvironmentmaybe
muchgreaterthananticipated.
5. The State should consider these limitations, as illustrated in this paper. They may consider
incorporation of requirements for mixing and testing that are consistent with the potential
limitationsdiscussed.