SAFETY ASPECTS CONSIDERED ECONOMIC & POWER CONSUMPTION STUDY

OF CONVENTIONAL & LNG INTEGRATED AIR SEPARATION UNIT

a) Muhammad Naqi Raza, a) Dr. Zahoor-ul-Hussain Awan, a) Dr. Saud Hashmi,
b) Ali Raza
a. Chemical Engineering Department
NED University of Engineering & Technology Karachi
b. Environmental Studies Department
Federal Urdu University of Art, Science & Technology Karachi

ABSTRACT
Regasification terminal is the final destination of LNG supply chain where LNG is converting
back in gaseous state for distribution networks as per required pressure. Due to high potential of
cold energy, integration of LNG regasification with Air separation process is point of interest. This
research is the study for the use of cold energy in ASU and economic analysis along with
comparative study with conventional ASU. Important results of this study are high purity >99.7%
LOx product and by product LN of 5ppm O2. With safety consideration, 43% improvement found
in total capital investment and 70.14% reduction in power consumption for integrated process.
Another point is 5 ton/hr drained water in direct contact tower, recovered in integrated one due to
use of closed loop water-ethylene mixture solution. Effect of coolant mixture in integrated one
results contribution of 7.6% in reduction of power consumption. Specific power for the simulated
model is 0.40 kW/Nm3-hr with considering safety aspects.
Keywords: LNG, regasification, air separation process, economic analysis, power consumption

INTRODUCTION

Natural gas accounts to one quarter of the global energy demand, of which approximately 10.7%
supplied as liquefied natural gas [1]. Global LNG trade become more than double by 2040 from
2017[2]. Japan, China and South Korea has the biggest market share for import of LNG in world
by 25.4%, 16.7% and 13.6% respectively [1]. While Pakistan started LNG import from 2015 and
now with strong growth of 7.1MT it has market share of 2.2% in the list of LNG import countries
[1].
In 2018, with increase of 28.2 MT LNG global trade reached up to 316.5 MT and this represents
growth of 9.8% [1,3]. As of March 2019, 92 MTPA of liquefaction capacity is under
construction worldwide and expected about one-third to come on line in same year [1]. 22% of
growth in global nominal liquefaction capacity is expected by 2024 from February 2019 [1]

As of February 2019, global LNG regasification capacity was 824 MTPA, while 129.7 MTPA
receiving terminals are under construction [1]. Pakistan has 09 MTPA nominal regasification
capacity, utilizing 76% of total capacity [1].

LNG supply chain consist of four steps, liquefaction, transportation, regasification and
distribution. At user end regasification normally done by using open rack vaporizers and
submerged combustion vaporizers [4]. Regasification by conventional process destroyed the
low temperature cold exergy without any use.

Due to great energy potential numerous configurations have been studied by different
researchers for integration of LNG regasification to conventional double column ASU or novel
air separation process such as single column or three column techniques.

LITRATURE REVEIEW

XU et al [5] make comparison of traditional LNG integration in ASU with their suggested
novel scheme and found energy efficiency up to 66% by the increase of 28%. Maximum
operating pressure of system reduced from 2.6MPa to 1.5Mpa. At the same interval column
pressure also reduce from 0.5Mpa to 0.35Mpa. Power consumption also reduced from
0.358KWh/kg to 0.313 KWh/kg. But in traditional unit inlet temperature for nitrogen
compressor is -830C and in novel one air, nitrogen and LNG are in same exchanger this may
be safety hazard

Tesch et al [6] make exergy analysis of the LNG integrated ASP and compare two designs and
found energy efficiency of 64% for design 2 as compare to design 1 efficiency of 58% with
LNG pressure of 120 bar. While with LNG pressure of 20 bar found energy efficiency of 53%
for design 2 as compare to 49% for design 1. In this work they neglect safety aspects by using
LNG in intercoolers of compressors and also use with air in main heat exchanger.
Ebrahimi et al [7] evaluate LNG integrated ASU by thermodynamic and economic analyses
and found 17% capital cost and 8.064% electrical energy cost improvement, while also make
pinch analysis of main heat exchangers. In this paper they also neglect safety aspects and use
LNG and air in same exchanger.

E. Querol et al [8] consider a simple simulation of two column air separation unit and study the
novel application for exergy and thermo economic analysis of process simulated in APEN Plus.

Chao Fu et al [9] perform the exergy analysis for the double column distillation column.
Theoretical specific power consumption was 0.049 KWH/kg, while the actual power
consumption was around 4.7 times the theoretical minimum. A 19% reduction in specific
power consumption could achieve if isentropic efficiency of compressor increased from 0.74
to 0.9.

Tesch et al [10] make exergetic and economic evaluation of four LNG integrated ASU. Two
units with nitrogen liquefaction block while remaining two are without nitrogen liquefaction
block. Safety related concepts are considered in two units while remaining two are without
safety aspects, found that safety related concepts reduce exergetic efficiency from 53.4% to
51.8%. While economic analysis found that system with nitrogen liquefaction block is 10%
more expensive and system with safety concept is 9% more expensive. In this work all products
are low purity except LN in two cases with nitrogen liquefaction block. While LOx and GOX
has purity less than 98% in all cases. Another GN also has only purity of 99% in two units with
nitrogen liquefaction block.

It is found from literature review that maximum researchers [5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10] neglect safety
aspects of plant during simulation of models. In air separation unit several kinds of potential
risks are considering during operation. The main category of risks are related to electricity,
pressurized gases, low temperature, presence of pure or enriched oxygen which could
accelerate combustion.

While safety issues related with LNG depends on pressure and leakage could lead different
hazards for example, pool fire, vapor cloud explosion, flash fire, jet fire or a boiling liquid
expanding vapor explosion[13].
Safety aspects considering in [10] also has low purity of products and due to market, there are
different needs for different locations. Researchers must have to design plant of LOx, LN, GOX
and GN separately This research focus is to design LNG integrated ASU of LOx with LN as a
byproduct with considering safety aspects

PROCESS DESCRIPTION

Air separation unit consist of five blocks

1) Compression

2) Purification

3) Main heat exchanger

4) Column

5) Refrigeration block

Air with ambient conditions enter into three stage compression block where it is compress up
to 5.6bar pressure. To reduce power consumption due to high specific volume compressor unit
consist of intercoolers. These intercoolers also increase the isothermal efficiency of
compressor. Finally air discharge at pressure of 5.5 bar and pass through after cooler. And
temperature results is 400C and enters into purification block.

Purification block consist of direct contact air cooling tower and direct cooling tower. ACT
and DCT is gas absorption column and consist of packing. Water chiller is also part of system
and pumps. ACT reduce the temperature of air and results in condensation of moisture content.
Another part of purification block is absorbers. There are two absorbers one is in action while
another is in regeneration step. Absorber remove contaminants of feed air like CO2, SO2, etc.
After purification block air enters into main heat exchanger where its temperature is reduced
up to -1730C by waste nitrogen from top column and recycle nitrogen from high pressure
column. Then air enters into HPC of column block.

Column block has two sections high pressure column and low pressure column. Both columns
are interconnected by evaporator/condenser, an exchanger, evaporator for low pressure column
and condenser for high pressure column. Air enters into high pressure column, distillate is pure
nitrogen while bottom product known as Rich Liquid has >35% O2 and <65% N2. RL enters
into LPC where it separate into LOx and waste nitrogen. Distillate is waste nitrogen and bottom
product is LOx.

Another important part is Refrigeration block. This is main source for providing cooling to
system. This is consist of Nitrogen recycle compressor, booster/turbine, nitrogen chiller and
heat exchanger. In this nitrogen from HPC after transferring cooling to feed air enter into NRC
and after further compression in booster its pressure increase up to 30 bar. Approximately 80%
of recycle nitrogen enters into turbine and after expansion transferring cooling to remaining
20% flow of recycle nitrogen. This 20% recycle nitrogen enters into HPC as a reflux.

In LNG integrated system booster/turbine and nitrogen chiller are completely vanished due to
cooling transfer by LNG, results in reduction of capital up to appreciable extent. While another
side this integration reduce power consumption of Nitrogen recycle compressor up to 81%. Fig
1 to 2 are simulated cases of Conventional and LNG integrated Air Separation unit.

PROCESS SIMULATION

ASPEN PLUS was used for simulation and modelling. The equation of state selected was Peng-
Robinson. Air enters at ambient conditions T=250C and P=1.0bar. LNG is fed to the system
with a pressure PLNG,in = 1.2bar and a temperature of TLNG,in = -1630C. Air flow rate is
6600 Nm3/hr. the composition of feed air and LNG streams were reported in Table 1 and 2
respectively. Two cases were simulated both consist of nitrogen liquefaction system.
Conventional air separation unit and approach related to the integration of LNG regasification
studied in this research work.

Table 1: Air Composition

Components Mole Fraction

Nitrogen 0.79

Oxygen 0.21

Air Flow 6600 Nm3/hr

 Table 2: LNG Composition

Composition Mole Fraction

Methane 0.8698

Ethane 0.0935

Propane 0.0233

Butane 0.0063

Nitrogen 0.0071

EQUIPMENTS DESIGN & COST ESTIMATION

Turbo Machines
Group contains the air compressor and nitrogen recycle compressors. All compressors are
centrifugal and electrical motor driven. Centrifugal compressor efficiency has range of 75-85
[11] therefore efficiency assumed for compressors is 72%.

The pump for the incoming LNG and the pump for the water ethylene glycol cycle are
centrifugal pumps. Efficiency range of 40-80% reported in [11]. Assumed efficiency for pump
is 72%. Equations use for costing of turbo machines are [12]:
Centrifugal compressors

PEC = 7.90(HP)0.62 K$, 200 <HP< 30,000

Pumps

PECP = 800 (WP/10)0.26((1-eff)/eff)

Expander

C = 378(HP)0.81 K$, 20 <HP <5000

Heat Exchangers

Heat exchanger use in cold box are brazed aluminum exchangers while intercoolers are shell
& tube. Pressure drop assumed is 5KPa for each stream while for waste nitrogen consider is
2KPa. For recycle nitrogen assumed total pressure drop of 135KPa. Minimum temperature

approach assume is 100C for shell and tube while for brazed aluminum is 10C. To estimate the

area of heat exchangers heat duty is taken from ASPEN plus simulation. Additional the
logarithmic mean temperature difference is calculated based on the results of simulations and
the overall heat transfer coefficient is assumed based on literature [10]. For interstage coolers

U = 42.5 W/m2-K, for brazed aluminum HE U= 50 W/m2-K, For MHE U = 70W/m2-K and

for condenser/reboiler U = 2000 W/m2-K are assumed.

Equation use for costing of Heat Exchanger is [12]:

PECH = 130 (A/0.09)0.78

Distillation Column

Pressure drop consider in high pressure column is 5 Kpa. While both columns consist of sieve
trays. Heat of condenser of HPC is using in reboiler of LPC. Assumed pressure for top of LP
column is 40 Kpa.

Cost estimation divided into two parts. First of all cost of empty shell for HP Column and LP
Column are determined followed by the estimation of costs for the trays. Both simulated as a
sieve tray column.

The cost of the shell of the column depend on the height and diameter of column. Average
distance between the two trays is assumed 400mm [10]. Diameter assumed in [10] is 3m
therefore in this research 1m is assumed due to low flow rate of air.

The cost for shell and trays are determined by a cost chart [11], as a function of height and diameter.
For the trays cost depends on the diameter of the column and are also determined by cost charts
The material and pressure factor for shell and the trays are determined by the data given in
[11].
Purification Block

Pre-cooling side consist of ACT and DCT in conventional unit while in LNG integrated unit
Heat Exchanger of Water Ethylene Glycol mixture is use for pre-cooling of air. Mixture
composition is shown in Table 3. Outlet conditions of streams are reported in Table 4.
Adsorbers for both cases are same. While for contribution in purchase equipment cost assumed
cost is 13% of the total purchase equipment cost [8].
Table 3: Water Ethylene Glycol Mixture

Component % Composition

Water 50%

Ethylene Glycol 50%

Table 4: Outlet Conditions of Purification System

Parameter Conditions

Temperature 80C

Free From Contaminants

Air Composition
CO2, H2O, SO2

Fig 1: Simulated Model of Conventional Air Separation Unit

Fig 2: Simulated Model of LNG integrated Air Separation Unit

Fig 3: Water Circulation Unit of LNG integrated Air Separation

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
Simulation Results of Conventional Air Separation Unit
General results of conventional ASU simulation are shown in Table 5. Physical properties and
composition are also indicated in this table. With 6600 Nm3/hr of feed air, temperature after
main heat exchanger (AR-4) entering in bottom of HP column is -1730C.

Table 5: Stream Result of Conventions Air Separation Process

Table 4: Outlet Conditions of Purification

Temperature Pressure Stage
Mole Flow Mole Fraction
Streams
0
C bar Nm3/hr N2 O2

AIR-1 25 1.00 6600 0.79 0.21

AR-2 40 5.60 6600 0.79 0.21

AR-3 8 5.50 6600 0.79 0.21

AR-4 -173 5.45 6600 0.79 0.21

RL-5 -173.9 5.45 3500 0.604 0.396

RL-6 -176 5.45 3500 0.604 0.396

RL-7 -188 1.60 3500 0.604 0.396

LN-8 -177.9 5.45 3100 1 8 PPM

LN-9 -181 5.45 3100 1 8 PPM

LN-10 -192.8 1.40 3100 1 8 PPM

WN-11 -192.8 1.40 3060 1 8 PPM

WN-12 -192.7 1.40 5190 0.997 0.003

WN-13 -185.2 1.40 5190 0.997 0.003

RN-14 7 1.38 5190 0.997 0.003

RN-15 -177.9 5.45 2880 1 8 PPM

RN-16 -177.9 5.45 1220 1 8 PPM

RN-17 7 4.10 1220 1 8 PPM

RN-21 35 4.10 1660 1 8 PPM

RN-22 -113 29.25 11200 1 8 PPM

 RN-23 -171.2 4.25 11200 1 8 PPM

RN-26 25 4.10 11200 1 8 PPM

RN-27 24.6 4.10 14080 1 8 PPM

RN-28 40 22.95 14080 1 8 PPM

RN-29 72 29.35 14080 1 8 PPM

RN-30 40 29.35 14080 1 8 PPM

RN-31 3.6 29.30 14080 1 8 PPM

RN-32 -15 29.25 14080 1 8 PPM

RN-35 -160 29.20 2880 1 8 PPM

RN-36 -177.8 5.50 2880 1 8 PPM

LOX-37 -180 1.40 1370 trace 1

PROD-LOX -182 1.40 1370 trace 1

PROD-LN -192.8 1.40 40 1 8 PPM

Simulation Result of LNG Integrated Air Separation Unit

As discussed booster/turbine and N2 Chiller are completely vanished in LNG integrated unit
while flow of NRC reduced upto almost 80% [Fig: 5]. Table 6 shows physical properties and
composition of streams. According to stream RN-18 in Table 6, it is clear that after integration
with LNG in E-02 almost all the useful cold energy of LNG transferred to recycle nitrogen of
ASU and its temperature reduced from 35 to -162C.

Table 6: Stream Result of LNG Integrated Air Separation Process

Temperature Pressure Mole Flow Mole Fraction
Streams
0
C bar Nm3/hr N2 O2 CH4 C2H6 C3H8 C4H10

AIR-1 25 1 6600 0.79 0.21

AIR-2 8 5.55 6600 0.79 0.21

AIR-3 -173 5.5 6600 0.79 0.21

RL-4 -173.9 5.45 3500 0.604 0.396

 RL-5 -178 5.4 3500 0.604 0.396

RL-6 -189.4 1.4 3500 0.604 0.396

LN-7 -177.9 5.45 3100 1 8 PPM

LN-8 -184.9 5.45 3100 1 8 PPM

LN-9 -192.8 1.4 3100 1 8 PPM

LN-10 -192.8 1.4 2496 1 8 PPM

WN-11 -192.7 1.4 4625 0.997 0.003

WN-12 -175 1.38 4625 0.997 0.003

WN-13 -7.8 1.36 4625 0.997 0.003

RN-14 -177.9 5.45 2880 1 8 PPM

RN-15 -163 5.4 2880 1 8 PPM

RN-16 -7.8 5.35 2880 1 8 PPM

RN-17 30 30.2 2880 1 8 PPM

RN-18 -161 30.15 2880 1 8 PPM

RN-19 -167.7 30.1 2880 1 8 PPM

RN-20 -177.8 5.5 2880 1 8 PPM

LOX-21 -180 1.4 1371 trace 1

LNG-22 -163 5 1800 0.007 0.87 0.094 0.023 0.01

LNG-23 12.4 4.95 1800 0.007 0.87 0.094 0.023 0.01

PROD-LOX -184 1.4 1371 trace 1

PROD-LN -192.8 1.4 605 1 8 PPM

Required % of O2 in Rich Liquid is >35% in both simulated cases and to achieve this feed air
temperature must be below dew point. RL is bottom head product of HP column and Table 5
& 6 indicating mole fraction is reported in Fig 4.
 0.7
0.604 0.604
0.6
0.5
0.396 0.396
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
Conventional LNG Integrated
O2 N2

Fig 4: Components Mole Fraction in Rich Liquid

Table 4: Outlet Conditions of Purification Stage

Nitrogen recycle compressor is main source for providing refrigeration to system. Recycle
nitrogen flow is 2880Nm3/hr for LNG integrated case while 14080 Nm3/hr in conventional
mode [Fig: 5]. Flow in LNG integrated one is low, due to use of cold energy of LNG and this
vanished the need of expander/turbine and N2 chiller. Reflux quantity for bottom column is
same for both units.

15000 14080

12000

9000
Nm3/hr
Flow

6000
2880
3000

0
Conventional LNG Integrated
Nitrigen Recycle Compressor

Fig 5: Flow of Nitrogen Recycle Compressor

Fig 5.11: Components Recovery & Loss

In LNG integrated unit quality of reflux for bottom column is enhanced by adding sub cooler
SUB2. This sub cooler reduce the inlet temperature before expansion valve HC-3 [Fig: 3].
Parameter to check the reflux quality is vapor fraction and enthalpy. Table 7 briefly described
the condition of the reflux for high pressure column. This high quality reflux reduce load of
condenser/reboiler of distillation column. This results, greater amount of nitrogen as a
byproduct in LNG integrated unit [Fig: 6].

Table 7: Stream Result of Bottom Column Reflux for Both Simulated Models

Fig 5.5: Components Recovery & Loss Condenser/

Vapor Mole
Simulated Stream Temperature Pressure Enthalpy Reboiler
Fraction Flow
Models ID Duty
0
C bar Nm3/hr Watt Watt
LNG
RN-20 -177.8 5.5 0.136 2880 -370050 ±275708
Integrated

Conventional RN-36 -177.8 5.5 0.258 2880 -349070 ±296911

Product recovery in comparison of reference values of feed air is reported in Fig: 6. Almost
99% of LOX recovered in both units while 12% of LN as a byproduct recovered in LNG
integrated unit and in conventional unit only 1% recovered.[Fig: 7] .

6000
5214
5000

4000

3000

2000
1386 1370 1371
1000 605
40
0
Oxygen Nitrogen
Feed Conventional LNG Integrated

Fig 6: Feed/Production of Components

 120%

99% 99%
100%

80%

60%

40%

20% 12%
1%
0%
Oxygen Nitrogen
Conventional LNG Integrated

Fig 7: Components Recovery & Loss

Product mole fraction composition reported in [Fig: 8] is same for both units and LOX is sub
cooled to -1840C for LNG integrated unit and -1820C for conventional unit. LN is recovered at
-192.80C. Pressure for both products is 0.4 bar.

1 1 1
0.9
0.8
0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
8 ppm 8 ppm
0
Oxygen Nitrogen
Conventional LNG Integrated

Fig 8: Product Composition

In considering safety aspects, coolant with composition reported in Table 3 is circulating in
inter-coolers and after coolers, of air compressor and nitrogen recycle compressor. LNG cold
energy use in this system also vanish the use of air pre cooling system and cooling towers. In
conventional mode air pre-cooling system is consist of ACT and DCT. Almost 5Ton/hr water
is draining out from ACT. Simulation results of coolant circulation system of LNG integrated
unit is reported in Table 8 & 9.

Table 8: Stream Result of Water-Ethylene Glycol Coolant of LNG Integrated Unit

Temperature Pressure Mass Flow Mole Fraction

Streams
0
C bar kg/hr H2O Ethylene Glycol

W-0 (Water In) 6 1 80,082 0.5 0.5

W-4 (Water Out) 18.9 5 80,082 0.5 0.5

Table 9: Stream Result of Coolant Circulation System of LNG Integrated Unit

Mole Mass
Temperature Pressure Mole Fraction
Flow Flow
Streams
0
C bar Nm3/hr kg/hr N2 O2 CH4 C2H6 C3H8 C4H10

AIR-IN 25 1 6,600 8,496 0.79 0.21

AIR-OUT 8 5.55 6,600 8,496 0.79 0.21

8
RN-IN -7.8 5.35 2,880 3,600 1
PPM
8
RN-OUT 30 30.2 2,880 3,600 1
PPM

LNG-IN -163 5 4,000 3,276 0.007 0.87 0.094 0.023 0.006

LNG-OUT 17.2 5 4,000 3,276 0.007 0.87 0.094 0.023 0.006

 Energy Analysis
Classic parameter to estimate the efficiency of air separation unit is specific power of plant.
Specific power is the ratio of power consumed to unit product produce. Total power
consumption and specific power of both units reported in Table 10. Power consumption for
LNG integrated system is 70.14% efficient as compare to conventional unit. Furthtur more
power consumption for conventional unit is higher because of nitrogen recycle compressor.
This is associated to the different molar flow rate of gaseous nitrogen and water ethylene glycol
mixture as a coolant in nitrogen recycle compressor (Fig: 05).

EQUIPMENT NAME CONVENTIONAL LNG INTEGRATED

Compressors/Expanders 1735.00 773.00

Pumps 77.00 12.00

Refrigeration Unit 50 -
Cooling Tower 32.00 0.00
Total Power
KW-hr
1894.00 785.00

Specific Power
1.34 0.40
KW-hr/Nm3

As reported in Fig: 9 Main Components in ASU, consume maximum power are air compressor
and nitrogen compressor. In Conventional unit about 91% power is consumed by these two
components while in LNG integrated system almost 98% is consumed by these components.

Cooling Tower 0
32

Refrigeration Unit 0
50

Pumps 12
76

Compressors/Expanders 773
1735
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000

LNG Integrated Conventional

Fig 9: Power Consumption of Equipment

Water Ethylene Glycol mixture, which have inlet temperature of 60C [Table: 9], reduced the
power consumption of Air compressor upto 5.3% [Fig: 10]. Nitrogen recycle compressor
power consumption reduced up to 82% which is mainly due to low flow of nitrogen but also
constitute the effect of coolant. As compare to conventional unit total specific power for LNG
integrated unit improved up to 70.14% [Fig: 12].

225
Nitrogen Recycle Compressor
1172

548
Air Compressor
563

0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

LNG Integrated Conventional
Fig 10: Compressors Power Consumption in kW

2000 1894
1800
1600
1400
1200
KW-hr

1000
785
800
600
400
200
0
Conventional LNG Integrated

Fig 11: Total Power Consumption kW-hr

1.60
1.40 1.34
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.40
0.20
0.00
Conventional LNG Integrated
Fig 12: Specific Power kW-hr/Nm3

LNG Consumption

LNG flow required for LNG exchanger of ASU and total LNG consumption, consist of LNG
exchanger and water-ethylene circulation system both are shown in Fig 13. In design
simulation ratio for recycle nitrogen to air is 0.265, results obtained from this figure the amount
of LNG required for LNG integration with ASU is 26. 51% of feed air while considering
recycle nitrogen to air ratio of 0.265. Ratio of total LNG consumption to feed air of ASU is
0.87, therefore total LNG required for any system is almost 87% of feed air.

35000

30000

25000
LNG Flow

20000

15000

10000

5000

0
0 5000 10000 15000 20000 25000 30000 35000
Air Flow

LNG EXCHANGER LNG CONSUMPTION

Fig 13: LNG Consumption per Unit Feed Nm3/hr of Air

Economic Analysis
The results achieved from economic analysis [Table 11] show that total capital investment is
lowest for LNG integrated system with considering safety aspects. Furthermore in LNG
integrated system large quantity of LN is also producing as a byproduct. Estimated PEC for
different Units are reported in Fig 14. The absorbtion block has same cost for both simulated
models. However cost of heat exchangers and nitrogen recycle compressor vary. Therefore cost
of heat exchangers and compressor for conventional and LNG integrated unit are shown in Fig:
18 to 19 respectively.

The heat exchanger with highest cost are main heat exchanger (MHE) in LNG integrated unit
and E-02 in conventional unit [Fig: 18 & 19]. Due to safety consideration [Fig: 3] heat
exchanger LNG EXCH is added in LNG integrated unit. As the incoming air cooled to same
temperature, therefore the heat transfer within MHE is almost same for both cases. By
overlooking the safety aspects, from the economic point of view, it is positive to take out LNG
from stream from MHE, because of this component cost decreases. To enhance the quality of
bottom column reflux in LNG integrated unit, a new heat exchanger SUB2 is added to the
system [Fig: 3].

The PEC of the compressors have a greater impact on the total component cost than the PEC
of heat exchangers. These cost are determined by the power consumption, which depends on
the mass flow rate and the difference in enthalpy. As compare to LNG integrated unit, the mass
flow rate of the recycle nitrogen is higher for conventional unit and difference in power
consumption is mainly due to this fact.

Table 11: Estimated Cost for Both Simulated Models

LNG
CONVENTIONAL
INTEGRATED

Direct Cost Million US$ (December 2019)

Total Purchase Equipment Cost 5.79 3.84

Purchase Equipment Installation Cost

2.72 1.81
(47% of PEC)
Piping
3.94 2.61
(68% PEC)
Instrumentation & Control
2.08 1.38
(36% PEC)
Electrical Equipment & Maintenance
0.64 0.42
(11% PEC)

Total Direct Cost 15.16 10.07

Indirect Cost Million US$

Engineering & Supervision

1.21 0.81
(8% of DC)

Construction Cost & Contractors Profit

2.27 1.51
(15% of DC)

Contingency
0.52 0.35
(15% of above sum)

Total Indirect Cost 4.01 2.66

Fixed Capital Investment 19.17 12.73

Date of Operation (December 2021)

Plant Facilities Investment 1 First year of

11.50 7.64
construction (60% of FCI)

Plant Facilities Investment 2 Second year of

7.67 5.09
construction (40% of FCI)

Interest for PFI 1 2.42 1.60

Interest for PFI 2 0.77 0.51

Total Capital Investment 22.35 14.85

 Adsorption Unit 0.44
0.67

0.00
Pumps
0.00

Refrigeration Unit 0.00

0.10

Column 0.98
0.98

Heat Excahnegrs 1.32

1.85

Compressors/Expanders 1.09
2.18

0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 2.50

LNG Integrated Conventional

Fig 14: Purchase Equipment Cost of Blocks of Air Separation Unit

1400 1.20
1.11
1200
1.00

1000
0.80

800 0.70
1172
0.60
600

0.40
400 563
0.20
200

0 0.00
Cost ($) Power Input KW

Fig 15: Total Purchase Equipment Cost of Compressors in Conventional ASU

600 0.80
548
0.70
500
0.60
400
0.50

300 0.40
0.69 225
0.30
200

0.40 0.20
100
0.10

0 0.00
Air Compressor Nitrogen Recycle Compressor

Cost ($) Power Input KW

Fig 16: Total Purchase Equipment Cost of Compressors in LNG Integrated ASU

7.00

6.00 5.79

5.00

4.00
3.84

3.00

2.00

1.00

0.00 CONVENTIONAL LNG INTEGRATED

Fig 17: Total Purchase Equipment Cost of Air Separation Unit

3000 0.60

0.54
2500 2416 0.50

0.43
2000 0.40
1799

1500 0.30

0.22
1000 0.20
770

0.09 0.09 0.09

500 0.05 0.06 0.05 0.09 0.10
0.02
247 226
0.09 118 241 242 243 0.04
27 138 107 73
0 0.00
E-01 E-02 E-03 AIC-1 AIC-2 AAC NIC-1 NIC-2 NIC-3 NAC

Area Cost

Fig 18: PEC & Area of Heat Exchangers Conventional ASU

3000 0.55 0.60

2461

2500 0.50

2000 0.40
Million US$
Area m2

1500 0.21 0.30

735 0.16

1000 511 0.20

0.09
0.04 245
500 0.03 0.05 0.04 0.01 0.04 98 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.10
69 104 74 90 70
7 9 33 33 33
0 0.00

Area Cost

Fig 19: PEC & Area of Heat Exchangers LNG Integrated ASU
CONCLUSION

In this research two options of Air separation unit were studied and evaluated, a conventional
and integrated with LNG regasification. It is cleared that power consumption and total capital
investment for LNG integrated ASU are very low. Key point that distinguish research work
with others is considering safety aspects and high purity >99.7% LOX Product while LN <5ppm
O2 is by product.

It is also found that in comparison of LNG integrated with conventional, a closed loop of
ethylene glycol and using LNG for cooling of this also results in reduction of power
consumption up to 7.6%. While in conventional simulation 5 ton/hr water use in ACT is
draining out otherwise need treatment plant. This issue also overcome in LNG integrated unit.

Reflux quality for high pressure column is enhanced by adding subcooler (SUB2). This reduce
the load of condenser and results in increase the LN production as a byproduct, effect the
specific power to maximum extent.

Overall reduction in power consumption found was 70.14% in LNG integrated unit as compare
to conventional unit. Specific power for simulated LNG integrated unit is 0.40 KW-hr/Nm3
(0.29 KW-hr/Kg). This result is 7.60% more improved as compare to reported in [5] with
safety aspects considerations.

Fixed capital investment of LNG integrated unit is 66% of Conventional unit means 44%
improvement found in LNG integrated unit. This is due to reduction of power consumption of
NRC.
References:

1. International Gas Union, World LNG report 2019 (2019) [cited January 02,
2020]. URL http://www.igu.org/publications/2019-world-lng-report
2. BP, BP Energy Outlook - 2019 edition: Outlook to 2040 (2019) [cited 20 December,
2019]. URL www.bp-energy-outlook-2018.pdf
3. International Group of Liquefied Natural Gas Importers, The LNG Industry, 2019
edition (2019) [cited January 22, 2020].
URL
http://www.giignl.org/sites/default/files/PUBLIC_AREA/Publications/giignl_2019_
annual_report.pdf
4. B. Eisentrout, S. Wintercorn, B. Weber, Study focuses on six LNG regasification
systems, LNG Journal (2006) 21–22.
5. Process Study and Exergy Analysis of a Novel Air Separation Process Cooled by LNG
Cold Energy XU Wendong, DUAN Jiao1, MAO Wenjun
DOI: 10.1007/s11630-014-0679-5
6. Advanced exergy analysis applied to the process of regasification of LNG (liquefied
natural gas) integrated into an air separation process Stefanie Tesch, Tatiana Morosuk,
George Tsatsaronis
7. Optimal design and integration of a cryogenic Air Separation Unit (ASU) with
Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) as heat sink, thermodynamic and economic analyses
Armin Ebrahimi, Masoud Ziabasharhagh
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2017.02.145
8. Querol E, Gonzalez-Regueral B, Ramos A, Perez-Benedito JL. Novel application for
exergy and thermoeconomic analysis of processes simulated with Aspen Plus®. Energy
2011;36:964e74.
9. Fu C, Gundersen T. Using exergy analysis to reduce power consumption in air
separation units for oxy-combustion processes. Energy 2012;44:60e8.
10. Exergetic and economic evaluation of safety-related concepts for the regasification of
LNG integrated into air separation Stefanie Tesch, Tatiana Morosuk, George
Tsatsaronis 10.1016/j.energy.2017.04.043
11. Plant Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers Fifth Edition by Max S. Peters,
Klaus D. Timmerhaus, Ronald E. West Published by McGraw-Hill
12. Conventional and advanced exergoeconomic assessments of a new air separation unit
integrated with a carbon dioxide electrical power cycle and a liquefied natural gas
regasification unit Mehdi Mehrpooyaa, Hojat Ansarinasabb, Mohammad Mehdi
Moftakhari Sharifzadehb, Marc A. Rosene
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2018.02.016

13. T. Morosuk, G. Tsatsaronis, LNG – Based Cogeneration Systems: Evaluation Using

Exergy-Based Analyses, in: S. Gupta (Ed.), Natural Gas - Extraction to End Use,
InTech, 2012, pp. 235–266.
doi:10.5772/51477.