Abstract
Abstract Currently, different technologies are being employed to remove CO 2 and H 2 S from the natural gas. Based on chemical phenomenon, the absorption using alkanolamines is probably the most extended process for the acid gas removal. However, membrane technologies are considered as an alternative in specific cases for their better performances, cleanness, energy requirements, operative costs and location flexibility. The aim of this article is to estimate, compare and analyze the energy requirements, greenhouse gases (GHG) emissions and investment costs of three Natural Gas Sweetening processes. For the study, a regular process using methyldiethanolamine (MDEA), the absorption process using recompressed vapor and a membrane system were simulated using Aspen Hysys v8.8. For the first case, real data from the gas plant Aguarague (Argentina) was used to validate the model. To establish a proper comparison, a natural gas with 4 mol.% of CO 2 is considered as the inlet stream of each configuration. Specifically, compression and pump power, specific total heat, removed CO 2 , CH 4 wastes and capital costs were estimated and compared for each case. Additionally, a discussion including different aspects in regard to the energy efficiency of the processes was conducted. Although the proposed membrane system demonstrated to reduce the energy requirements (77% and 72%) and emissions (80% and 76%) in respect to both absorption processes, the CH 4 losses were higher by more than 6 factor. Moreover, the investment cost of the technology is 12% higher than the required capital of a conventional amine process.
Full Text
Topics from this Paper
Greenhouse Gases Emissions
Aspen Hysys V8
Energy Requirements
Absorption Process
Natural Gas
+ Show 5 more
Create a personalized feed of these topics
Get StartedTalk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Similar Papers
iScience
Feb 1, 2022
iScience
Feb 1, 2023
Joule
Oct 1, 2020
One Earth
Dec 1, 2021
Energies
Oct 1, 2017
BMC Public Health
Feb 20, 2018
Energy Strategy Reviews
Jan 1, 2021
Joule
Mar 1, 2023
Energy
Aug 1, 2013
Qatar Foundation Annual Research Conference Proceedings Volume 2016 Issue 1
Mar 21, 2016
American Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
Mar 31, 2010
Environmental Health Perspectives
Sep 1, 2008
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering
Dec 1, 2022
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering
Dec 1, 2022
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering
Dec 1, 2022
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering
Dec 1, 2022
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering
Dec 1, 2022
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering
Dec 1, 2022
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering
Dec 1, 2022
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering
Dec 1, 2022
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering
Dec 1, 2022
Journal of Natural Gas Science and Engineering
Dec 1, 2022