Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Process Safety and Environmental Protection

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/psep

Simultaneous energy and environment-based optimization and

retrofit of TEG dehydration process: An industrial case study
Zainab Al Ani, Ashish M. Gujarathi ∗ , G. Reza Vakili-Nezhaad
Department of Petroleum & Chemical Engineering, College of Engineering, Sultan Qaboos University, P.O. Box 33, Al-Khod, P.C. 123, Muscat, Oman

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Carbon dioxide emissions (CO2 ) during the dehydration process of natural gas are of important concerns
Received 13 September 2020 as this gas negatively affects the climate and environment in general. Dehydration process also encoun-
Received in revised form 4 January 2021 ters many heating, cooling and pumping units, which leads to high energy consumption. Reducing these
Accepted 11 January 2021
emissions along with minimizing the utilized energy while keeping the high production is a complex
Available online 18 January 2021
problem that can be solved by multi objective optimization (MOO). This study focuses on minimizing
CO2 emissions, energy consumption (ENG) along with water content in the gas (WT). This means that
Keywords:
the performance of the plant is improved from operational, environmental and energy point of view. The
Dehydration
Retrofitting process is simulated with ProMax 4.0 and approved to be valid with the real plant data. Non-dominated
Evolutionary algorithms sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II) was used for attaining the Pareto fronts for the decided MOO cases.
Energy The affecting decision variables and limitations are decided based on the capacity of the plant and indus-
Global warming trial practice. Two bi-objective cases and a tri-objective case are considered, which are; minimizing CO2
CO2 emissions emissions and WT (case 1), minimizing ENG and WT (case 2) and minimizing WT, ENG and CO2 emis-
Pareto ranking sions simultaneously (case 3). An attempt to retrofit the current process is also proposed and the cases
are carried out with the modified process. Results showed noticeable improvements and enhancements
in the given process.
© 2021 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Natural gas is an essential source of energy for the world. The
importance of this energy source has increased in the recent years
due to the price competition driven by the shale gas boom (Arnold
and Stewart, 1999; Mac Kinnon et al., 2018). The rapid increase of
natural gas production during the last fifteen years in the Chinese
energy market represents a valid proof for its importance. China
production of natural gas in 2016 is 500 % higher than 2000 pro-
duction. The expansion of natural gas pipelines exports to Mexico is
another proof, as they were increased by 400 % between 2010 and
2016 (Mac Kinnon et al., 2018). Natural gas is cleaner compared
to other fossil fuels, safe and the most useful (Arnold and Stewart,
1999).
Natural gas consists of a mixture of hydrocarbons that is mainly
methane (CH4 ) (Arnold and Stewart, 1999; Carroll, 2010; Faramawy
et al., 2016; Jacob, 2014) and some ethane (C2 H6 ), propane (C3 H8 )
and butane (C4 H10 ) and gases like helium, nitrogen, hydrogen sul-
∗ Corresponding author.
E-mail addresses: ashishg@squ.edu.om, ashishgujrathi@gmail.com
(A.M. Gujarathi).
fide (H2 S), carbon dioxide (CO2 ) and water vapor (Abdullah, 2009).
Earlier in the 19th century, natural gas was locally utilized for light-
ening. But later, due to the industrial developments that allowed
constructing gas pipelines for long distances, it was extensively
used (Kidnay et al., 2011; Speight, 2007). Nowadays, it is used for
heating in residential, commercial, and industrial areas. In addi-
tion, it is utilized for generating electricity and as a raw material for
producing ethylene. It is also used for ammonia production, which
is used in manufacturing fertilizers. Furthermore, natural gas can
be employed to produce hydrogen, sulfur and carbon black (Al-
Sobhi et al., 2018; Faramawy et al., 2016; Mokhatab and Poe, 2012;
Schoell, 1983; Tabak, 2009).
Raw natural gas goes through several processes to achieve the
desired properties for domestic and industrial use. The purpose of
these processes are to purify the raw gas from any impurity that
will adversely affect its quality (like water, H2 S, etc) and to sep-
arate the compounds that can be used as raw materials for some
petrochemical processes. The final stage in gas processing is the liq-
uefaction, which will ease transporting and storing the produced
natural gas (Al-Sobhi et al., 2017; Faramawy et al., 2016; Kidnay
et al., 2011; Tikadar et al., 2020a,2020b). During the processing of
naturel gas, the presence of water and its vapor can cause severe
serious problems in the plant, as the reduction in gas pipelines

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2021.01.018
0957-5820/© 2021 Institution of Chemical Engineers. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Z. Al Ani et al.
temperature under the water vapors dew point causes water con-
densation (hydrate) (Netusil and Ditl, 2012). When a mixture of
natural gas and liquid water is presented in the pipelines, there is
a possibility of methane hydrate formation. This hydrate is in solid
form, where large quantity of methane is incubated inside a water
crystal creating an ice similar solid (Abdullah, 2009). The forma-
tion of ice, liquid slugs and pipeline’s plugging are prevented by
dehydration, which will result in increasing the efficiency of the
pipeline. The methane hydrate may plug the pipelines, fittings and
valves (Netusil and Ditl, 2012).
Corrosion and erosion may also take place when a contact
between water and its vapor happens with H2 S and CO2 , which
are presented in all gas streams (Jacob, 2014; Lyons and Plisga,
2011; Netusil and Ditl, 2012). Slug flow, in addition to erosion,
can be caused by the condensed water. These water impurities
may adversely affect the produced natural gas as they will increase
its volume and reduces its heating value, which will reduce the
pipelines efficiency (Carroll, 2014; Netusil and Ditl, 2012). Gas
dehydration process is required to remove these water impurities
(Jacob, 2014; Katz and Lee, 1990). Several dehydration methods are
used in the industry nowadays such as, gas permeation, absorption,
refrigeration and adsorption. Because of their advantages and mer-
its, absorption and adsorption are the most widely used processes
(Abdullah, 2009). The glycol absorption dehydration is the mostly
used technique to achieve the product specifications (Campbell,
1979; Hernandez et al., 2001; Jacob, 2014; Lyons and Plisga, 2011;
Netusil and Ditl, 2012).
Gas absorption can be done using organic liquids like diethylene
(DEG) or triethylene glycol (TEG) and salt aqueous solutions such
as lithium chloride (Hicks and Senules, 1991; Speight, 1993). Solid
absorption can be also applied using solid absorbent like lime and
magnesium perchlorate. In adsorption solid adsorbents are used,
for example but not limited to: activated alumina and molecular
sieves (Campbell, 1979). In the gas permeation process, membranes
are used. This method is applied in low pressure natural gas plants
(Faramawy et al., 2016). Absorption dehydration with glycol is the
most economic process (Alnili and Barifcani, 2018). Among all avail-
able and applicable glycol products for water removal purpose, TEG
is the paramount successfully used glycol (Abdullah, 2009; Netusil
and Ditl, 2012).
Generally, in the dehydration process, the lean glycol solvent
enters an absorber from the top to be in contact with the wet natu-
ral gas. The rich solvent that leaves the absorber is then treated and
regenerated by removing the absorbed water and hydrocarbons.
This is done initially using flash vessel to reduce the solvent pres-
sure and allow the formation of hydrocarbons’ vapor phase. The
glycol solvent is then sent to a stripper (a regenerator) after heat-
ing it in a shell and tube heat exchanger. This regenerator usually
attached to a re-boiler for thermal regeneration. This step is essen-
tial for efficient water removal from the glycol. The regenerated
solvent is then cooled in the shell and tube heat exchanger. Decom-
position of glycol solvent may take place in case of overheating
(Abdullah, 2009; Netusil and Ditl, 2012).
During natural gas production and processing of natural gas,
CO2 (which is a greenhouse gas) is produced and emitted to the
atmosphere during the regeneration of the used solvent (TEG)
(Energy, 2015). Greenhouse gasses that are emitted in cities from
the industrial activities are the major reason for the phenomena of
global warming (Aresta, 2010). Many materials that cause allergy,
like pollens, and several infections, like meningitis, diarrhea and
malaria, are affected by global warming (Bartholy and Pongrácz,
2018; Patz et al., 2005). Global warming has a negative impact on
the world’s climate, which can cause squeaky calamity because
it may cause a heavy increase or sharp decrease in rain levels
(Bartholy and Pongrácz, 2018). Regions like India, Middle East and
East-Africa with heavily condensed cities are directly affected by
973
Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984
changes in climate like the increase in intensity and frequency of
the heat waves. Heat waves have attracted more attention recently
because of the unusual summer heat that has been generating in
the recent years. In addition to the global warming, these anthro-
pogenic activities are also the main source of air pollution, which
has a severe impact on health (Faramawy et al., 2016; Patz et al.,
2005). These environmental facts show the importance of mini-
mizing the CO2 emissions in the selected process. In addition to
the environmental problems caused by the dehydration process,
the energy used in the process for heating and cooling in addition
to the pumping energy is another important concern in such pro-
cesses. The minimization of total heat (ENG) was done in an MOO
problem that is related to acid gas removal from gas using DEPG
by Non-dominated sorting genetic algorithm (NSGA-II). The study
found that ENG is affected by the operating pressure, gas flow rate,
and the solvent temperature (Al Ani et al., 2020a). NSGA-II was
also used to optimize the styrene manufacturing process where the
objectives considered were styrene selectivity, flow and total heat
duty of the process (Gujarathi and Babu, 2010; Guria et al., 2005).
In 2015, Felicia and Evbuomwan (Felicia and Evbuomwan, 2015)
optimized a natural gas dehydration process using Aspen HYSYS
and regression analysis for single objective, which is minimizing
the water content. They found that quadratic model correlate with
HYSYS data and it was used to determine the optimal TEG flow
rate. Similar work was done by Lei et al. (Lei et al., 2013), but the
process was simulated in ChemCAD 6.0.1. While a sensitivity anal-
ysis was carried out to get the optimum TEG flow rate using HYSYS
only (Jacob, 2014) in addition to many other studies were done
for single optimization (Ghiasi et al., 2015; Ranjbar et al., 2015).
Rouzbahani et al. (Rouzbahani et al., 2014) studied a natural gas
dehydration unit that utilized DEG as an absorption solvent. The
objectives were to get the parameters those are majorly affecting
the process and their impact on its efficiency. Steady state flowsheet
simulator was used to simulate the whole unit. Results showed
that volatile organic compounds (VOC) emissions are enormously
affected by any increase in the purity or molar flow rate of DEG.
Another recent study that focused on comparing three different
configurations of absorption units, were they were compared based
on the purity of the regenerated TEG, TEG loss, and the amount
of volatile organic compounds emissions (Kong et al., 2020). Fur-
thermore, a TEG dehydration process was evaluated based on its
economic and environmental impacts. The study investigated the
effect of theoretical number of stages and TEG concentration on
the trade-off between the total annual cost of the process and CO2
emissions conflicting objectives (Li et al., 2019b).
Due to the increase in the concern of the operating costs,
environment and process quality, several processes have been
studied for retrofitting like heat exchangers network (Al-Mayyahia
et al., 2019; Al-mutairi and Merghani, 2019; Čuček et al., 2019;
Kang and Liu, 2014; Lakshmanan and Bañares-Alcántara, 1996; Li
et al., 2019a), steam cracking furnace (Rebordinos et al., 2019),
water treatment and supply plants (Guven et al., 2019; Marossy
et al., 2019), and several other processes (Devecioğlu and Oruç,
2020; Farzad et al., 2019; Harkins, 2019; Jagannath et al., 2018;
Mehrpooya et al., 2019; Uerdingen et al., 2005). Retrofitting studies
can be coupled with MOO for further enhancement (Subraveti et al.,
2019). No MOO study was found related to a retrofitting of a natural
gas dehydration plant, which makes it a rich and suitable environ-
ment for such work. Conducting an MOO study can be easily and
successfully done using any algorithm from the evolutionary algo-
rithms (like NSGA-II), which proved their effectiveness in solving
complex MOO problems in the area of chemical process engineer-
ing (Al-Siyabi et al., 2017; Al Ani et al., 2020a,2020b; Gujarathi and
Babu, 2009, 2010, 2011; Gujarathi et al., 2013).
The carried out literature review showed that many studies
have been done to improve the dehydration process, but they were
Z. Al Ani et al. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984

mostly concerned about sensitivity and single objective optimiza- Table 1

Error% of several streams’ parameters between the real plant data and the simulation
tion studies. In addition, most of the studies focused on minimizing
results for process validation.
the water content in the gas only. Other problems those are related
to the environment, safety, energy and exergy were not consid- Error %
Parameter
ered. Due to the importance of the dehydration process, minimizing 62−010 62−021 62−100 62−160 62−909
the problems associated with environment and energy along with
Temperature, K 0.50 0.10 0.30 0.72 0.48
enhancing its main objective, water removal, is essential for a Pressure, kPa 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.13 0.21
cleaner and more economical plant. The most effecint way to solve Mole Fraction 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
these problems is by employing the concept of MOO by coupling Vapor
two or more of any of these objectives. The considered enviromen- Molar Flow, kmol/h 0.00 0.15 0.18 0.22 0.21
Mole Fraction, %
tal objective is CO2 emissions and the energy utilized (ENG). The Nitrogen 0.00 3.04 1.29 1.70 1.76
MOO study is done with three cases considering defferent decision CO2 0.00 2.72 2.87 1.89 2.63
variables and constraints. Case one is the minimzation of water H2 S 0.00 2.67 1.00 1.69 1.01
content (WT) in the gas and CO2 emissions, while case two is the Methane 0.00 1.04 2.91 1.88 1.26
Ethane 0.00 2.80 0.99 2.70 2.03
minimization of WT along with ENG. A three objective MOO case
Propane 0.00 2.51 2.44 2.91 0.63
that combines these three objective (WT, ENG and CO2 emissions) i-Butane 0.00 2.87 2.24 1.90 1.12
is also conducted. A retrofitting strategy is also proposed, and to n-Butane 0.00 2.79 2.61 1.75 0.80
highlight its eficciency, the same MOO cases are carried out for the i-Pentane 0.00 1.18 3.01 1.86 1.11
retrofitted plant. The used multi-objective optimization algorithm n-Pentane 0.00 1.90 3.01 1.77 1.49
n-Hexane 0.00 1.99 1.95 2.02 1.72
is NSGA-II that is coupled in Microsoft excel (Sharma et al., 2013).
n-Heptane 0.00 1.10 2.06 2.87 1.04
n-Octane 0.00 1.41 2.93 1.97 1.95
Cyclopentane, 0.00 2.74 1.88 2.58 0.94
2. Problem formulations for case studies on Methyl-
Cyclohexane 0.00 1.01 2.50 2.82 1.58
multi-objective optimization
Benzene 0.00 2.15 1.78 2.70 2.04
H2 O 0.00 2.61 2.05 2.88 0.83
2.1. Process description TEG 0.00 1.02 1.02 0.22 1.38
Other traces (8 0.00 27.13 19.46 15.37 7.09
The real world considered plant for the study is a typical dehy- components)
Average of other 0.00 3.39 2.43 1.92 0.89
dration process (Fig. 1). The process aims to produce 1.83E+07
traces
SCMD of natural gas with heating value above 42.55 MJ/m3 . The
wet gas enters the three-stage absorber from the bottom at a tem-
perature of 313.15 K and a pressure of 9.60E+03 kPa, while the lean K (Eldemerdash and Kamarudin, 2016). According to literature, the
TEG enters from the top at 318.15 K. After the contact between both circulation rate of TEG should be around 15−40 L of solvent/kg of
fluids, the dry gas leaves the absorber from the top to be cooled later H2 O in the wet gas. The plant operates for 348 days/ yr. The purity
in the heat exchanger to enter the next process. On the contrary, of the TEG is also a measure concern for the plant, as it should be
the rich TEG that leaves from the bottom of the absorber is fur- higher than 99.85 %. The units of the plant were designed to operate
therly processed for regeneration. First, 25 % of the rich solvent is with 30–125 % of the plant normal capacity.
heated from 318.15 to 336.15 K and then mixed with the remain- The process was simulated with ProMax® 4.0 and the used pack-
ing 75 %. The pressure of the solvent is reduced with a valve to 800 age is Peng-Robinson (which is the vapour package as well). The
kPa and is sent to a two phase separator to release some of the selected model for the binary interaction between the components
absorbed gases from the TEG (waste gas). The pressure is furtherly is BR&E ProMax Peng-Robinson EOS Class.
reduced to 645 kPa by the means of two consecutive valves. For To validate the process, the simulation model results were com-
more efficient and easier separation, the liquid is heated again to pared to those of the real plant data and the error% are repoterd in
405.15 K in a cross heat exchanger and its pressure is reduced fur- Table 1. It can be noticed that, generally, the errors% are less than 3%.
ther to 110 kPa. With these conditions, the TEG enters the stripper Stream 62−010 is the feeding stream, thus it is controllable and the
(or regenerator). A stripping gas with low water content sent to a difference between the real plant data and the simulation results
re-boiler after heating it to 463.15 K where it will exchange heat is the smallest amongest all other streams. These findings indi-
with the TEG leaving the stripper from the bottom. This stripping cate that the work done using this model is valid and the obtained
gas helps in minimizing the amount of TEG needed to achieve the outcomes are reliable.
desired water removal from the wet gas as well as reducing the
duty of the reboiler (Rouzbahani et al., 2014; Sakheta and Zahid, 2.2. Process retrofitting
2018; Torkmahalleh et al., 2016). The remaining water and gases in
the solvent are stripped in the stripper as it comes in contact with Since achieving a high TEG purity is essential to enhance the
the heated gas that is sent from the re-boiler (at 473.15 K). The gas absorption process, introducing a new unit to the process can help.
leaves the stripper to go through two knock out drums to separate The use of stripping gas has proven its effectiveness in reaching
the liquid and gas wastes (waste gas 2). The gas waste from the higher TEG purity levels (Piemonte et al., 2012), which is the case
stripper and the two phase separator, which is a mixture of hydro- in the original process. The contact of TEG with the stripping gas
carbons is then burned and converted to CO2 and then released to can be done with two steps instead of the one-step contact (strip-
the atmosphere. While the lean TEG is then cooled in a sequence per) in the original process (Fig. 1). The two-step contact (polishing
of heat exchangers and then pumped with a small portion of fresh column and the stripper) offers more advantages compared to the
TEG (make-up) and recycled to be reused again. The plant require- one-step contact as the fresh stripping gas initially encounters the
ment is to reduce the water content in the gas to less than 100 mg already regenerated hot solvent, which will help in preserving the
H2 O/Sm3 . The temperature in the gas lines are also of major con- dryness of the gas as much as possible. In this work, a retrofitting
cern as they should be higher than the water dew point in the line suggestion is presented to the process model (see Fig. 3). The pol-
by 10 K at least. In addition, the temperature of the TEG should not ishing column, which is outlined with red, is added to the process.
exceed 475.15 K in the re-boiler as it starts to decompose at 480.15 In this arrangement, the hot lean solvent will come in contact with

974
Z. Al Ani et al. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984

Fig. 1. TEG dehydration process flow diagram.

a dry gas, this will improve the purity of the solvent and hence, the Table 2
Optimization cases, decision variables and constraints for the dehydration plant.
water removal from the product. At the same time, it will reduce the
load on the reboiler, and less electricity will be consumed, which Cases Decision variables Constraints
will minimize the greenhouse gas emissions from this utility unit. TEG T < 475.15 K
1.32E + 04 < TEG Flow,
TEG purity > 98.5
kg/ hr < 2.01E+04
2.3. Multi-objective optimization formulation • Min. CO2 emissions 15 < TEG Flow, L /kg of
vs. Min. WT 6.07 < 62−750 Flow, H2 O in Wet Gas < 40
• Min. ENG vs. Min. kmol/hr < 10
The dehydration process is optimized for enhancing the quality
WT 310.15 < T Wet Gas, K < gas lines T – water dew
of the produced gas by minimizing (Min) the total water content, • Min. CO2 emissions 323.15 point > 10 K
WT, with one environmental based objective which is related to vs. Min. WT vs. Min.
CO2 gas released from the plant. The third objective is ENG of the ENG 313.15 < T6, K < 323.15
0.20 < X 62−101 < 0.30 H2 O content in dry gas
plant, which is an energy based objective. WT can be calculated
328.15 < T 62−906, K < < 100 mg/Sm3
according to the following: 353.15
328.15 < T 62−145, K <
WT (mg/Sm3 ) = Wt H2 O /Vgas (1)
343.15
where Wt H2 O and Vgas are the total water mass in kg and the stan- 433.15 < T Reboiler, K <
473.15
dard volume in Sm3 of stream 62−021 respectively.
The environmental objective, which is the amount of CO2
released, is used and it is calculated by the following equation:
tonne 
CO2 emissions ( )= equivelant CO2 mass released (2)
yr
where the summation includes the gas released from the streams
and that released as a result of using utility units like the pumps
and the reboiler.
The total heat of the system is found by calculating the difference
between energy utilized and energy released (Al Ani et al., 2020a; Fig. 2. EMOO mechanism of work (Sharma et al., 2013).
Ochieng et al., 2013).

ENG (kW ) = (Qpumps + Qrecompressor + Qheaters − Qcoolers ) (3) The parameters for NSGA-II are 200 generations, a population
size of 150, two-point crossover (CR) with 0.75 probability, bit-
where Q is the energy utilized in the unit in kw. wise mutation (F) with 0.05 probability, tournament selection,
The decision variables are selected based on their impact on and random seed of 0.5. The working mechanism of the opti-
the overall process and the decided objectives by carrying out a mization method between excel and ProMax® 4.0 (Excel-based
sensitivity study. TEG is responsible for absorbing the water and multi-objective optimization (EMOO)) is shown in Fig. 2.
increasing the quality of the gas, as the quality of the gas improves
with increasing the solvent flow. Also, the Dry gas flow is playing a
3. Results and discussion
major role in altering the considered objectives. Since the process
is mainly absorption and stripping, the temperatures of the Wet
The considered MOO cases were carried out and they are dis-
Gas, TEG, Reboiler, etc. play an important role in this MOO study.
cussed consequently in the following. The presented plots show
The considered operational decision variables and their limits were
the results of the original and the retrofitted process for comparison
decided based on the capacity of the plant. The process constraints
purposes.
were set based on the literature limitations and process specifi-
cations, which were explained in the process description (section
2.1). Table 2 epitomizes the problem formulation for the plant. • Case 1: Min. CO2 emissions vs. Min. WT

975
Z. Al Ani et al. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984

Fig. 3. TEG dehydration process flow diagram with retrofitting.

Table 3 half of the range to meet the constraints. T62−906 (Fig. 4i) and
The decision variables results and objective function values for selected points from
T62−145 (Fig. 4j) converged in a scatter pattern over their ranges.
Fig. 4a.
The other main factor causing the conflict between WT and CO2
Property A B C D E emissions objective functions is T Reboiler shown in Fig. 4k and l
T Wet Gas, K 316.16 316.17 316.22 320.15 321.98 since increasing it leads to more energy consumption (more CO2
X 26−101 0.26 0.28 0.27 0.25 0.23 emissions) and higher stripping efficiency, and hence, more pure
TEG Flow, kg/hr 13422.58 13510.26 13200.00 13442.82 13914.96 TEG. WT is found to be 48.28 mg/Sm3 at 473.15 K and the corre-
62−750 Flow, 9.52 6.70 6.70 6.70 6.70
sponding CO2 emissions is 15851.59 tonne/hr (point B in Table 3).
kmol/hr
T6, K 313.55 316.35 316.41 313.89 313.50 These values are changed to 72.02 mg/Sm3 and 15583.00 tonne/hr
T62−906, K 344.84 329.57 329.57 332.30 328.83 when T Reboiler is reduced to 469.75 K (point E). Table 3 supports all
T62−145, K 328.75 336.43 332.59 329.26 329.62 of these observations and trend regarding the impact of the decision
T Reboiler, K 473.03 473.15 469.67 469.75 469.75
variables on the objective functions.
CO2 emissions, 17116.05 15851.59 15675.21 15617.25 15583.00
tonne/yr This process was retrofitted with the addition of polishing col-
WT, mg/Sm3 45.19 48.28 51.99 64.82 72.02 umn and Fig. 4a demonstrates its influence on the Pareto front.
The range of both objectives was improved quantity and quality
wise. 77.14–44.64 mg/Sm3 and 15556.89–17322.77 tonne/hr are
the ranges of WT and CO2 emission in the original case. For the
For the original process results, Fig. 4a shows the results for min-
retrofitted case, the range is changed to 74.94–15.83 mg/Sm3 and
imizing both of CO2 emissions and WT. Some points were selected
14056.75–17071.28 tonne/yr. The decision variable results are also
from the original case Pareto front shown in Fig. 4a and tabulated
shown in Fig. 4b-l and it is clear that the only decision variable
with their corresponding decision variable results in Table 3. In
which was affected by the retrofitting proposal is the T Reboiler
Fig. 4b, as T Wet Gas increases, WT increases due to the adverse
as it converged to lower values compared to the original process
relationship between temperature and absorption capability of the
(Fig. 4k-l). At T Reboiler T of 474 K, WT is 45.01 mg/Sm3 in the orig-
solvent. For example, at T Wet Gas value of 316.22 K, WT is found
inal case and 20.05 mg/Sm3 in the retrofitted case. Regarding CO2
to be 51.99 mg/Sm3 (point C in Table 3). When T Wet Gas operat-
emissions at the same temperature, it is 17161.81 tonne/hr in the
ing condition changes to 321.98 K, WT is 72.02 mg/Sm3 (point E in
original case and 15751.25 tonne/hr after retrofitting.
Table 3). On the contrary, increasing T Wet Gas helps in minimizing
CO2 emissions for the same reasons (Fig. 4c). At T Wet Gas value of
• Case 2: Min. ENG vs. Min. WT
316.22 K (point C), about 15675.21 tonne/yr of CO2 is emitted to the
atmosphere, which is reduced to 15583.00 tonne/yr at T Wet Gas of
321.98 K (point E). × 62−101 decision variable results are scattered For the original process results, Fig. 5a shows the results for
along the decision variable range indicating that it’s not affecting minimizing both of ENG and WT. It is clear that there is a conflict-
the objectives (Fig. 4d). TEG Flow decision variable results are found ing nature between both of the objectives, which is a result of the
around the lower range value as seen in Fig. 4e. The flow of the impact of some of the selected decision variables. In Fig. 5b, T Wet
dry gas as seen in Fig. 4f and g is a key factor in this optimization Gas converged to the lower possible temperature (316 K) to sat-
case. Increasing it leads to an improvement in WT minimization isfy the constraints and minimize WT and ENG. × 62−101 decision
(Fig. 4f), but to a deterioration in CO2 emissions (Fig. 4g). When variable has no impact on the considered objectives as the results
the flow is 6.70 kmol/hr, WT achieved is 48.28 mg/Sm3 (point B in are scattered along the decision variable range with no noticeable
Table 3) and when it increases to 9.52 kmol/hr, WT is reduced to trend (Fig. 5c). TEG Flow decision variable results are mostly found
45.19 mg/Sm3 (point A in Table 3). CO2 emissions changed from around the lower range value (1.32E+04 kg/hr) as seen in Fig. 5d.
15851.59 to 17116.05 tonne/yr for 6.70 and 9.52 kmol/hr of dry gas But, a slight increasing trend can be seen with this decision vari-
respectively. Fig. 4h represents the results of T6 decision variable able, which is a results of T Reboiler impact. The flow of the dry gas
with WT and it can be seen that they are, generally, on the lower (62−750 Flow) as noticed in Fig. 5e converged to the maximum pos-

976
Z. Al Ani et al. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984

sible value (10.00 kmol/hr) to minimize the load on the reboiler and
maximize stripping efficiency of the column. Fig. 5f represents the
results of T6 decision variable with WT and it can be seen that they
are, generally, on the lower half of the range. This is needed to mini-
mize WT. T62−906 (Fig. 5g) and T62−145 (Fig. 5h) converged to the
upper range value to minimize the energy consumed in the coolers
(XCHG-101 and E-6240). The main reason for the conflict between
WT and ENG objective functions is T Reboiler shown in Fig. 5i and
j since increasing it leads to more energy consumption and higher
stripping efficiency, and hence, more pure TEG. For instance, when

Fig. 4. Case 1 Pareto front (a) and the corresponding decision variables (b-l) for the original and retrofitted process (minimization of CO2 emissions and WT).

977
Z. Al Ani et al. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984

Fig. 4. (Continued)

T Reboiler is 468.22 K, WT is 49.95 mg/Sm3 and ENG is 2200 kW.
When T Reboiler increases to 473.15 K, WT is 44.91 mg/Sm3 and
ENG is 2400 kW.
This process was retrofitted by adding the polishing column and
Fig. 5a illustrates the impact of this addition on the Pareto front. The
range of both objectives was improved quantity and quality wise.
In the original case, WT results are found to be between 51.82 and
44.91 mg/Sm3 . This range is changed to 16.05–51.31 mg/Sm3 in
the retrofitted case. The same thing is observed with ENG objective
function as its range changed from 2100 to 2400 kW to 1100–2220

978
Z. Al Ani et al. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984

kW as a result of retrofitting. The decision variable results are also 466.15 K, but this value is reduced to 440.38 K in the retrofitted
shown in Fig. 5b-j and it is clear that all of the decision variable are case.
not affected by the retrofitting proposal, except the reboiler tem-
perature as it converged to lower values compared to the original • Case 3: Min. CO2 emissions vs. Min. WT vs. Min. ENG and ranking
(Fig. 5i-j). In the original case, T Reboiler values where all above of solutions

Fig. 5. Case 2 Pareto front (a) and the corresponding decision variables (b-j) for the original and retrofitted process (minimization of ENG and WT).

979
Z. Al Ani et al. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984

Fig. 5. (Continued)

Fig. 6 displays the Pareto fronts, which were obtained from the
three objective case study for the original (Fig. 6a) and retrofitted
(Fig. 6b) dehydration process. By comparing between Fig. 6a and
b, the differences in the range of each objective can be observed.
These differences do not only indicate the improvement that the
retrofitted process provides, but they also show the wider options
of Pareto solutions that the decision maker can select from. Since
more objectives are considered in this case, the obtained solutions
are more industrially practical. Three methods were used to rank
the best solution from case 3 results by giving the same weight
for all of the objectives (1/3), which are Technique for Order of
Preference by Similarity to Ideal Solution (TOPSIS), Simple Additive
Weighting (SAW) and Multiplicative Exponent Weighting (MEW)
(Wang and Rangaiah, 2017). The selected point according to TOPSIS
for the original process shown in Fig. 6a is 20455.83 tonne/yr of CO2
emissions, 47.70 mg/Sm3 for WT objective and 2310 kW for ENG
objective function. For the other two methods (SAW and MEW) the
selected optimum solution is the same (20694.12 tonne/yr, 45.18
mg/Sm3 and 2400 kW). Similarly, the best point with the three
method was selected for the retrofitted dehydration process and

980
Z. Al Ani et al. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984

Fig. 6. Case 3 Pareto front for the original (a) and the retrofitted process (b) (minimization of CO2 emissions, WT, and ENG) with the best solution using different methods.

Fig. 7. Two objective and three objective Pareto fronts for original (a) and retrofitted (b) dehydration process (minimization of WT and CO2 emissions).

Table 4 well, since the retrofitted minimum (17429.91 tonne/yr) is smaller

The maximum and minimum values for case 3 for the original and retrofitted dehy-
than the original process (18945.34 tonne/yr).
dration process.
Fig. 7 shows the Pareto fronts between WT and CO2 emissions for
Maximum Minimum original (Fig. 7a) and retrofitted (Fig. 7b) dehydration process. It can
Objective
Original Retrofitted Original Retrofitted be clearly seen that the two objective case Pareto set of solutions
are better than that of the three objective case, especially for the
WT, mg/Sm3 77.63 77.21 45.01 16.25
ENG, kW 2720 2550 2200 1120 CO2 emissions objective. This is predictable, since adding a third
CO2 emissions, tonne/yr 20712.51 20443.59 18945.34 17429.91 objective, generally, affects other objectives. Table 5 displays the
comparison between the two objective case (case 1) and the three
objective case (case 3) for the original and retrofitted dehydration
process. For the competition purpose, particular WT values were
the best solution according to TOPSIS is 19606.80 tonne/yr, 28.40 selected as shown in Fig. 7. For the original case, it can noticed
mg/Sm3 and 1700 kW. With SAW and MEW, the same point was that CO2 emissions values are, generally, higher in the three objec-
selected as the best solution (20443.59 tonne/yr, 16.25 mg/Sm3 and tive case. For example, at point A in the original process, when WT
2250 kW). is 45.19 mg/m3 , CO2 emissions value is 17116.05 tonne/yr in the
To highlight the differences between the original and the two objective case. In the three objective case (point A’), this value
retrofitted results for case 3, the ranges of each objective are tabu- increased to 20694.12 tonne/yr. On the other hand, ENG objective
lated in Table 4. The maximum WT value that can be achieved from function values improved from 2644.31 kW in the two objective
the original process is 77.63 mg/Sm3 and the minimum is 45.01 case to 2395.91 kW in the three objective case. The same obser-
mg/Sm3 . Although the maximum value for the same objective in vation is noticed in the retrofitted process results. For instance,
the retrofitted process is close to the original one (77.21 mg/Sm3 ), at point D in the retrofitted process where WT is 46.16 mg/Sm3 ,
but the improvement is shown in the minimum WT value which the CO2 emissions value is 14336.79 tonne/yr. this value increase
is 16.25 mg/Sm3 . This observation applies for the other two objec- to 17792.93 tonne/yr in the three objective case (point D’). But,
tives. For example, the minimum values in the ENG range are 2200 the ENG objective value improved from 1625.23 kW at point D to
and 1120 kW for the original and retrofitted process respectively. 1534.49 kW at point D’ in the retrofitted process.
There is an improvement in CO2 emissions objective function as

981
Z. Al Ani et al. Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984

Table 5
Comparison of the two objective and three objective optimization results for selected values of WT from Fig. 7 (original and retrofitted process).

WT vs. CO2 emissions WT vs. CO2 emissions vs. ENG

WT mg/Sm3 CO2 emissions tonne/yr ENG kW (calculated) WT mg/Sm3 CO2 emissions ENG kW
tonne/yr

A 45.19 17116.05 2644.31 A’ 45.18 20694.12 2395.91

B 48.28 15851.59 2608.44 B’ 48.29 19271.42 2682.58
Original C 51.99 15675.21 2547.37 C’ 52.00 19635.72 2284.46
D 64.82 15617.25 2632.30 D’ 64.75 19006.33 2492.60
E 72.02 15583.00 2654.43 E’ 72.08 18970.58 2571.29
A 16.41 16849.42 2475.68 A’ 16.41 20417.50 2261.81
B 24.98 15296.15 2263.13 B’ 24.96 18697.57 2165.67
Retrofitted C 35.05 14767.47 1913.53 C’ 34.91 18303.05 1762.83
D 46.16 14336.79 1625.23 D’ 46.06 17792.93 1534.49
E 50.93 14178.27 1583.55 E’ 50.89 17604.10 1372.80

Fig. 8. Two objective and three objective Pareto fronts for original (a) and retrofitted (b) dehydration process (minimization of WT and ENG).

Table 6
Comparison of the two objective and three objective optimization results for selected values of WT from Fig. 8 (original and retrofitted process).

WT vs. ENG WT vs. ENG vs. CO2 emissions

3
WT mg/Sm ENG kW CO2 emissions tonne/yr WT mg/Sm3 ENG kW CO2 emissions tonne/yr
(calculated)

A 45.06 2385.81 27335.19 A’ 45.18 2395.91 20694.12

B 46.01 2348.81 27276.60 B’ 46.00 2397.33 20413.12
Original C 47.01 2317.10 27229.02 C’ 46.98 2391.02 20143.44
D 49.10 2247.80 17125.05 D’ 49.13 2365.47 19588.74
E 51.83 2165.54 16993.22 E’ 51.84 2260.74 19947.74
A 16.45 2202.92 20413.25 A’ 16.41 2261.81 20417.50
B 25.03 1786.58 19794.83 B’ 24.96 2165.67 18697.57
Retrofitted C 35.09 1455.44 19279.64 C’ 34.91 1762.83 18303.05
D 45.25 1219.06 18924.99 D’ 45.26 1280.20 18602.91
E 50.86 1104.68 18714.04 E’ 50.89 1372.80 17604.10

The Pareto optimal set of solutions between WT and ENG in the
two objective case (case 2) and the three objective case (case 3)
are shown in Fig. 8a for the original process and Fig. 8b for the
retrofitted process. It is quite clear that, in general, the three objec-
tive case provides wider range of Pareto solutions, which is more
industrially practical than the two objective case. The ENG objec-
tive function values in three objective case can be as good as the
two objective one. To compare between the two and three objective
cases (original and retrofitted), Table 6 was generated at selected
WT values. The improvement in CO2 emissions objective function
values can be immediately observed. Its values in the original pro-
cess, at WT of 46.01 mg/Sm3 (point B), is 27276.60 tonne/yr. This
value was reduced to 20413.12 tonne/yr at point B’. The cost of this
improvement is a rise in the ENG objective function values. Where
it increased from 2348.81 to 2397.33 kW at points B and B’ respec-
tively. These findings applies for majority of the selected points
with original and retrofitted dehydration process. In point B and
B’ (retrofitted), CO2 emissions objective function values reduced
from 19794.83 to 18697.57 tonne/yr respectively. While ENG val-
ues increased from 1786.58 kW in point B to 2165.67 kW in point B’.
In addition, both of Tables 5 and 6 show the improvement provided
for all the objectives by the proposed retrofitted process.
4. Conclusions
In this study, a real plant dehydration process was considered for
retrofitting and MOO. The optimization was conducted for the orig-
inal and the retrofitted process. The studied MOO cases were the
simultaneous minimization of CO2 emissions and WT (case 1) and
the minimization of both of ENG and WT (case 2). A three objective

982
Z. Al Ani et al.
case was also carried out that combines the three objectives con-
sidered in this study (WT, ENG and CO2 emissions). The ranking of
solutions was selected based on three methods (TOPSIS, SAW and
MEW) for the three objective case study (case 3). Several decision
variables were selected in this MOO study based on their influence
on the process and the needed limitations and constraints were
also taken into account. NSGA-II with EMOO were used to obtain
the needed Pareto fronts.
Results revealed that wet gas temperature decision variable is
an important factor in both cases. Increasing it led to an increase in
WT objective function. For example, in case 1, increasing it from
316.22 to 321.98 K increases WT from 51.99 to 72.02 mg/Sm3 .
The other impactful decision variable was found to be Reboiler T,
since it caused the conflict between the objectives. For instance, in
case 2, at T Reboiler of 468.22 K, WT is found to be 49.95 mg/Sm3
and ENG is 2200 kW. As T Reboiler increases to 473.15 K, WT and
ENG reach values of 44.91 mg/Sm3 and 2400 kW respectively. Dry
gas flow (62−750 Flow) decision variable affected the results of
case 1 due to its reversible effect on CO2 emissions and WT. The
suggested retrofitting proved to be successful with respect to the
studied objectives. It reduced the values of the Pareto solutions of
WT remarkably in all cases. The addition of the polishing column
also improved CO2 emissions and ENG Pareto solutions because it
minimized the load on the reboiler. Thus, the retrofitting affected
the convergence of T Reboiler, which, in turn, affected the objective
values. In both bi-objective cases, T Reboiler converged to values
higher than 464.15 K in the original process configuration. On the
other hand, in the retrofitted configuration, this value is reduced
to 440.38 K. On the other hand, generally, the other decision vari-
ables converged to the same range of values in both original and
retrofitted cases.
The three objective case study (case 3) results also provided an
improvement in the retrofitted process compared to the original
one. Three objective cases studies provides more useful Pareto solu-
tions that can be implemented industrially. In total, these findings
can be implemented in the real industrial plant for enhancement
and can also be used to provide a better understanding for any
similar dehydration process.
Declaration of Competing Interest
The authors report no declarations of interest.
References
Abdullah, K.R., 2009. Gas Dehydration Process by Using Triethylene Glycol and Silica
Gel. UMP.
Al Ani, Z., Thafseer, M., Gujarathi, A.M., Vakili-Nezhaad, G.R., 2020a. Towards process,
energy and safety based criteria for multi-objective optimization of industrial
acid gas removal process. Process. Saf. Environ. Prot. 140, 86–99, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.psep.2020.03.023.
Al Ani, Zainab, Gujarathi Madhukar, Ashish, Vakili-Nezhaad, Gholamreza, 2020b.
Hybridized multi-objective optimization approach (HMODE) for lysine fed-
batch fermentation process. Korean Journal of Chemical Engineering 38, 8–21,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11814-020-0642-y.
Al-Mayyahia, M.A.T., Albadrana, F.A., Faresb, M.N., 2019. Retrofitting design of heat
exchanger networks using supply-target diagram. Chem. Eng. 75, 625–630,
http://dx.doi.org/10.3303/CET1975105.
Al-mutairi E.M., Merghani A.A. (2019). Method and system for retrofitting heat
exchanger networks: Google Patents.
Alnili, F., Barifcani, A., 2018. Simulation study of sweetening and dehydration of
natural gas stream using MEG solution. Can. J. Chem. Eng. 96 (9), 2000–2006,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/cjce.23132.
Al-Siyabi, B., Gujarathi, A.M., Sivakumar, N., 2017. Harmonic multi-objective dif-
ferential evolution approach for multi-objective optimization of fed-batch
bioreactor. Mater. Manuf. Process. 32 (10), 1152–1161, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1080/10426914.2017.1279308.
Al-Sobhi, S.A., Shaik, M.A., Elkamel, A., Erenay, F.S., 2017. Integrating simulation in
optimal synthesis and design of natural gas upstream processing networks.
Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 57 (17), 5792–5804, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.
7b02624.
983
Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984
Al-Sobhi, S.A., Elkamel, A., Erenay, F.S., Shaik, M.A., 2018. Simulation-optimization
framework for synthesis and design of natural gas downstream utilization net-
works. Energies 11 (2), 362–380, http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/en11020362.
Aresta, M., 2010. Carbon dioxide as chemical feedstock John Wiley & Sons.
Arnold, K., Stewart, M., 1999. Surface Production Operations, Volume 2:: Design of
Gas-Handling Systems and Facilities, Vol. 2. Elsevier.
Bartholy, J., Pongrácz, R., 2018. A brief review of health-related issues occurring in
urban areas related to global warming of 1.5◦ C. Curr. Opin. Environ. Sustain. 30,
123–132, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cosust.2018.05.014.
Campbell, J.M., 1979. Gas Conditioning and Processing, Vol. 2.
Carroll, J.J., 2010. Acid Gas Injection and Carbon Dioxide Sequestration, Vol. 42. John
Wiley & Sons.
Carroll, J., 2014. Natural Gas Hydrates: a Guide for Engineers. Gulf Professional Pub-
lishing.
Čuček, L., Boldyryev, S., Klemeš, J.J., Kravanja, Z., Krajačić, G., Varbanov, P.S., Duić,
N., 2019. Approaches for retrofitting heat exchanger networks within processes
and Total Sites. J. Clean. Prod. 211, 884–894, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.
2018.11.129.
Devecioğlu, A.G., Oruç, V., 2020. Retrofitting of R-22 Air-conditioning System with
R1234ze (E) Environmentally-benign Energy Solutions. Springer, pp. 87–96.
Eldemerdash, U., Kamarudin, K., 2016. Assessment of new and improved solvent for
pre-elimination of BTEX emissions in glycol dehydration processes. Chem. Eng.
Res. Des. 115, 214–220, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2016.09.030.
Energy, I., 2015. Climate Change: World Energy Outlook Special Briefing for COP21.
International Energy Agency., Paris.
Faramawy, S., Zaki, T., Sakr, A.-E., 2016. Natural gas origin, composition, and process-
ing: a review. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 34, 34–54, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.
2016.06.030.
Farzad, M., Shafieifar, M., Azizinamini, A., 2019. Retrofitting of bridge columns using
UHPC. J. Bridge Eng. 24 (12), 04019121, http://dx.doi.org/10.1061/(ASCE)BE.
1943-5592.0001497.
Felicia, R., Evbuomwan, B., 2015. Optimization of natural gas dehydration using
triethylene glycol (Teg). Journal of Multidisciplinary Engineering Science and
Technology 2 (10), 2776–2779.
Ghiasi, M.M., Bahadori, A., Zendehboudi, S., Chatzis, I., 2015. Rigorous models to
optimise stripping gas rate in natural gas dehydration units. Fuel 140, 421–428,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2014.09.084.
Gujarathi, A.M., Babu, B., 2009. Optimization of adiabatic styrene reactor: a hybrid
multiobjective differential evolution (H-MODE) approach. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.
48 (24), 11115–11132, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ie901074k.
Gujarathi, A.M., Babu, B.V., 2010. Multi-objective optimization of industrial styrene
reactor: adiabatic and pseudo-isothermal operation. Chem. Eng. Sci. 65 (6),
2009–2026, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2009.11.041.
Gujarathi, A.M., Babu, B.V., 2011. Multiobjective optimization of Industrial processes
using elitist multiobjective differential evolution (Elitist-MODE). Mater. Manuf.
Process. 26 (3), 455–463, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2010.527413.
Gujarathi, A.M., Motagamwala, A.H., Babu, B., 2013. Multiobjective optimization of
industrial naphtha cracker for production of ethylene and propylene. Mater.
Manuf. Process. 28 (7), 803–810, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10426914.2012.
746706.
Guria, C., Verma, M., Mehrotra, S.P., Gupta, S.K., 2005. Multi-objective optimal syn-
thesis and design of froth flotation circuits for mineral processing, using the
jumping gene adaptation of genetic algorithm. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44 (8),
2621–2633, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ie049706i.
Guven, H., Fakioglu, M., Sinop, I., Ozturk, I., 2019. Retrofitting of five preliminary
wastewater treatment plants in Istanbul (Turkey) to high-rate activated sludge
system and/or post oxidation. Ozone Sci. Eng., 1–12, http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/
01919512.2019.1654362.
Harkins C. (2019). System and method for retrofitting a refrigeration system from
HCFC to HFC refrigerant: Google Patents.
Hernandez, V., Hainvinka, M., Bullin, J., 2001. Designing Glycol Units for Maximum
Efficiency. Bryan Research and Engineering, Inc.
Hicks, R., Senules, E., 1991. New gas-water-TEG equilibria. Hydrocarbon Processing
70 (4), 55.
Jacob, N.C.G., 2014. Optimization of Triethylene Glycol (Teg) Dehydration in a natural
gas processing plant. Int. J. Res. Eng. Technol. 3 (6), 346–350, http://dx.doi.org/
10.15623/ijret.2014.0306064.
Jagannath, A., Madhuranthakam, C.M.R., Elkamel, A., Karimi, I.A., Almansoori, A.,
2018. Retrofit design of hydrogen network in refineries: mathematical model
and global optimization. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 57 (14), 4996–5023, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1021/acs.iecr.7b04400.
Kang, L., Liu, Y., 2014. Retrofit of heat exchanger networks for multiperiod operations
by matching heat transfer areas in reverse order. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 53 (12),
4792–4804, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ie4041143.
Katz, D.L.V., Lee, R.L., 1990. Natural Gas Engineering: Production and Storage.
McGraw-Hill Economics Department.
Kidnay, A.J., Parrish, W.R., McCartney, D.G., 2011. Fundamentals of Natural Gas Pro-
cessing. CRC press.
Kong, Z.Y., Melvin Wee, X.J., Mahmoud, A., Yu, A., Liu, S., Sunarso, J., 2020. Devel-
opment of a techno-economic framework for natural gas dehydration via
absorption using tri-ethylene glycol: a comparative study between DRIZO and
other dehydration processes. South Afr. J. Chem. Eng. 31, 17–24, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.sajce.2019.11.001.
Lakshmanan, R., Bañares-Alcántara, R., 1996. A novel visualization tool for heat
exchanger network retrofit. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 35 (12), 4507–4522, http://
dx.doi.org/10.1021/ie960372+.
Z. Al Ani et al.
Lei, B., Li, X., Fan, Z., Li, W., Li, Z., 2013. Simulation of natural gas dehydration system
and optimization of main equipment. Chem. Eng. (China) 41 (2), 74–78.
Li, B.-H., Castillo, Y.E.C., Chang, C.-T., 2019a. An improved design method for
retrofitting industrial heat exchanger networks based on pinch analysis. Chem.
Eng. Res. Des. 148, 260–270.
Li, W., Zhuang, Y., Zhang, L., Liu, L., Du, J., 2019b. Economic evaluation and envi-
ronmental assessment of shale gas dehydration process. J. Clean. Prod. 232,
487–498, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2019.05.361.
Lyons, W.C., Plisga, G.J., 2011. Standard Handbook of Petroleum and Natural Gas
Engineering. Elsevier.
Mac Kinnon, M.A., Brouwer, J., Samuelsen, S., 2018. The role of natural gas and
its infrastructure in mitigating greenhouse gas emissions, improving regional
air quality, and renewable resource integration. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 64,
62–92, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2017.10.002.
Marossy, Z., Visescu, M., Florescu, C., 2019. Rehabilitation and retrofitting of water
supply systems in western part of Romania. Paper Presented at the IOP Confer-
ence Series: Materials Science and Engineering.
Mehrpooya, M., Taromi, M., Ghorbani, B., 2019. Thermo-economic assessment and
retrofitting of an existing electrical power plant with solar energy under dif-
ferent operational modes and part load conditions. Energy Rep. 5, 1137–1150,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.egyr.2019.07.014.
Mokhatab, S., Poe, W.A., 2012. Handbook of Natural Gas Transmission and Process-
ing. Gulf professional publishing.
Netusil, M., Ditl, P., 2012. Natural Gas Dehydration. Natural Gas-Extraction to End
Use: InTech.
Ochieng, R., Berrouk, A.S., Elkamel, A., 2013. Multiobjective optimization of a Benfield
HiPure gas sweetening unit. J. Ind. Math. 2013, 1–11, http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/
2013/260918.
Patz, J.A., Campbell-Lendrum, D., Holloway, T., Foley, J.A., 2005. Impact of regional
climate change on human health. Nature 438, 310–317, http://dx.doi.org/10.
1038/nature04188.
Piemonte, V., Maschietti, M., Gironi, F., 2012. A Triethylene Glycol–water System:
a study of the TEG regeneration processes in natural gas dehydration plants.
Energy Sources Part A Recovery Util. Environ. Eff. 34 (5), 456–464, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1080/15567031003627930.
Ranjbar, H., Ahmadi, H., Sheshdeh, R.K., Ranjbar, H., 2015. Application of relative sen-
sitivity function in parametric optimization of a tri-ethylene glycol dehydration
plant. J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 25, 39–45, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2015.04.
028.
Rebordinos, J.G., Herce, C., González-Espinosa, A., Gil, M., Cortés, C., Brunet, F., Ferré,
L., Arias, A., 2019. Evaluation of retrofitting of an industrial steam cracking fur-
nace by means of CFD simulations. Appl. Therm. Eng. 162, 114206, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.applthermaleng.2019.114206.
984
Process Safety and Environmental Protection 147 (2021) 972–984
Rouzbahani, A.N., Bahmani, M., Shariati, J., Tohidian, T., Rahimpour, M., 2014. Sim-
ulation, optimization, and sensitivity analysis of a natural gas dehydration unit.
J. Nat. Gas Sci. Eng. 21, 159–169, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jngse.2014.07.025.
Sakheta, A., Zahid, U., 2018. Process simulation of dehydration unit for the compar-
ative analysis of natural gas processing and carbon capture application. Chem.
Eng. Res. Des. 137, 75–88, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cherd.2018.07.004.
Schoell, M., 1983. Isotope techniques for tracing migration of gases in sedimen-
tary basins. J. Geol. Soc. 140 (3), 415–422, http://dx.doi.org/10.1144/gsjgs.140.
3.0415.
Sharma, S., Chao Lim, Z., Rangaiah, G.P., 2013. Process design for economic, envi-
ronmental and safety objectives with an application to the cumene process.
In: Multi-Objective Optimization in Chemical Engineering: Developments and
Applications., pp. 449–477.
Speight, J.G., 1993. Gas Processing: Environmental Aspects and Methods.
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Speight, J.G., 2007. Natural Gas: a Basic Handbook. Elsevier.
Subraveti, S.G., Pai, K.N., Rajagopalan, A.K., Wilkins, N.S., Rajendran, A., Jayaraman, A.,
Alptekin, G., 2019. Cycle design and optimization of pressure swing adsorption
cycles for pre-combustion CO2 capture. Appl. Energy 254, 113624, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.113624.
Tabak, J., 2009. Natural Gas and Hydrogen. Infobase Publishing.
Tikadar, D., Gujarathi, A.M., Guria, C., 2020a. Multi-objective optimization of indus-
trial gas-sweetening operations using economic and environmental criteria.
Process. Saf. Environ. Prot. 140, 283–298, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2020.
05.006.
Tikadar, D., Guria, C., Gujarathi, A.M., 2020b. Simultaneous optimization aspects in
industrial gas sweetening process for sustainable development. In: Materials
Physics and Chemistry: Applied Mathematics and Chemo-Mechanical Analysis.,
pp. 191.
Torkmahalleh, M.A., Magazova, G., Magazova, A., Rad, S.J.H., 2016. Simulation of
environmental impact of an existing natural gas dehydration plant using a
combination of thermodynamic models. Process. Saf. Environ. Prot. 104, 38–47,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.psep.2016.08.008.
Uerdingen, E., Fischer, U., Gani, R., Hungerbühler, K., 2005. A new retrofit design
methodology for identifying, developing, and evaluating retrofit projects for
cost-efficiency improvements in continuous chemical processes. Ind. Eng. Chem.
Res. 44 (6), 1842–1853, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/ie049065r.
Wang, Z., Rangaiah, G.P., 2017. Application and analysis of methods for selecting
an optimal solution from the pareto-optimal front obtained by multiobjective
optimization. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 56 (2), 560–574, http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/
acs.iecr.6b03453.