Towards a zero gasoline production
refinery: part 1
Integrating products from the steam cracker, aromatics complex and FCC unit to
produce petrochemicals without gasoline may offer more attractive margins
BLASIS STAMATERIS
Foster Wheeler
I
n some regions, the traditional
export markets for gasoline-
focused refineries are diminish-
ing. In this environment,
investments in new refining
projects (or in significant refinery
upgrades) need to be optimised to
fulfil market requirements. An
opportunity exists to integrate the
value chain from crude oil process-
ing in refineries to the production
of petrochemicals in line with
market requirements.
The objective of this article is to
present alternative refinery configu-
rations that are able to process
relatively heavy crudes, producing
middle distillates, petrochemicals
and aromatics, without producing
any gasoline at all. The article will
demonstrate how, by relying on
well-proven refining process tech-
nologies, configurations could be
adapted in an existing FCC-based
refinery or can be applied to a
grassroots project. It will show how
to integrate products from the
steam cracker, aromatics complex
and FCC unit while rationalising
investments.
Part 1 of the article presents ways
of upgrading streams produced in
refineries that have traditionally
been oriented towards the produc-
tion of transportation fuels to
produce petrochemicals, which
may offer more attractive margins,
allow diversification of product
slates and reduce the impact of
refined product market volatility.
Streams from the FCC unit offer
building blocks towards propylene
and aromatics production. Part 2,
to be published in a forthcoming
issue of PTQ, will show the impact
of these processes on the overall
www.eptq.com
product slate of the refinery for should be balanced with increased
different refinery configurations. plant costs due to larger vessel
requirements.
FCC unit: not just a gasoline-making Propylene is produced in the FCC
machine unit by cracking of olefinic naphtha
In addition to gasoline, the refinery to lighter olefins. The cracking reac-
FCC process also produces tions that take place in the initial
one-third of the global propylene reaction step on the lower section
supply. Propylene yields from the of the riser with the feed and hot
FCC unit when operating in petro- regenerated catalyst are endother-
chemical mode can be at least mic. The catalyst supplies the
10 wt% of the feed. necessary heat to reaction tempera-
In order to maximise propylene ture. The riser is no more than a
production in the FCC unit, the straight pipe, the diameter of which
following technical aspects need to is set to provide the feed with a
be considered:1 certain residence time.
• Feed quality: hydrogen content of Other converting reactions occur
the feedstock strongly correlates to in a later step in the middle or
the propylene yield upper section of the riser. In the
• Increased riser outlet temperature sequential reactions, olefins that are
(ROT) and high catalyst-to-oil ratio: initially produced from cracking
increased severity yields higher reactions are consumed by subse-
conversion and a higher propylene quent secondary reactions yielding
yield iso-paraffins and/or aromatics. The
• Catalyst system: use of ZSM-5 reactions producing light olefins are
zeolite, which converts the C7+ controlled by an equilibrium mecha-
olefins into light olefins with high nism and thermodynamics limit the
catalyst Micro Activity Testing propylene production from the FCC
(MAT) activity unit. Table 1 summarises the FCC
• Hydrocarbon partial pressure in unit’s operating conditions as
the reactor: shifts the reaction equi- compared with steam cracking.
librium to favour low molecular As Table 1 shows, cracking in
weight olefins. This is achieved the FCC/DCC units occurs at
though a low operating pressure moderate temperatures compared
and the addition of steam, and with steam cracking, which makes
FCC unit operating conditions as compared with steam cracking2
Parameters Units FCC unit Deep catalytic cracking Steam cracking
Residence time Seconds 1-3 10-16 0.1-0.2
Catalyst/oil wt/wt 5-10 9-15 -
Steam wt% of the feed 1-10 10-30 30-80
Reaction temp °C 510-550 550-590 760-870
Pressure KPa 15-30 10-20 15
Table 1
PTQ Q3 2013 11
 synergy that can be exploited for
Yield comparison of naphtha cracking in FCC units versus steam cracking4,5
aromatics production.3

Products FCC, wt% Steam cracking, wt% Processing of light catalytic

Ethylene 1.5-4.5 25-30.8 naphtha (LCN)
Propylene 12-17 17-14
C4s 14.4-17 About 12 The direct cracking of C5-C6-type
Naphthas 65.4-51.2 11.3-4.7 molecules contained in the LCN to
form light olefins requires initial
Table 2 dehydrogenation to form olefins
that can then be cracked through
the process very efficient from an The addition of ZSM-5 zeolite, olefin reaction pathways and
energy consumption perspective. with its characteristic pore size, require high severity (temperatures
Coke that is deposited in the cata- which provides shape selectivity by of about 650°C) and a high catalyst-
lyst is burnt to regenerate the limiting access to the interior of to-oil ratio. So, because of the
catalyst and provides the heat the catalyst to mostly linear selectivity of ZSM-5 zeolites to
required by the cracking reaction. non-branched paraffin and olefin crack larger molecules, the cracking
Also, since the feedstocks molecules, gears the resulting equi- of the lighter molecules is regarded
employed, such as gas oils and librium distribution of the C3 and more as a thermal cracking process.
residues, are relatively cheap lighter olefins towards propylene, Coke make when cracking LCN is
compared to steam cracking (tradi- the olefin product with higher low. Therefore, in order to achieve
tionally naphtha fed in Europe), yields. a significant increase in propylene
the process can be economically Ethylene is also produced, but its production, large amounts of LCN
attractive. In addition, the DCC yield is largely dependent on reac- need to be processed.
unit requires very clean (desul- tion conditions, as mentioned One option is to process the LCN
phurised, low metals content, low above. The reaction chemistry and into the same riser as the main
Conradson carbon) feedstocks with the use of ZSM-5 catalyst favour feedstock. In this case, the LCN
a high hydrogen content. conversion of the olefinic molecules would be injected slightly below
The increase in the ROT brings in the C7-C10 range to olefinic LPG. the main feedstock for it to detect a
increased production of olefinic This depletes the catalytic naphtha high catalyst-to-oil ratio. This
liquefied petroleum gas (LPG), dry of olefins, which, along with the option, although relatively low in
gas and coke. Ethylene produced in fractionation of the light catalytic cost, is not recommended, as the
the FCC unit (typical yield <2 wt% naphtha (LCN) typically composed relatively large amounts of naphtha
of the feed) could be recovered of C5-C6 molecules, contributes to required to significantly increase
instead of using it in the fuel gas the high aromatics content of the the propylene yield (say by about
system. heavy catalytic naphtha — another 2%) would cool down the catalyst

1
Butadiene saturation
Selective
hydrogenation1 C4s processing into FCC.
Direct recycle vs. oligomerisation.
Mixed C4s Simplicity vs. selectivity

Mixed C4s from Butadiene Raffinate-1 Total

refinery and extraction hydrogenation Steam cracker feed/LPG
petrochemicals

Butadiene

MTBE
decomposition Isobutylene

Raffinate-2

Butene-1
fractionation Butene-1
Co-monomer for polyethylene production

Butene-2
fractionation Metathesis feed

Figure 1 C4s processing options

12 PTQ Q3 2013 www.eptq.com

 and the lower temperature would
not allow complete vaporisation of
the main feedstock, leading to
unnecessary coke formation and
deposition in the feed zone.
Another option is to use a sepa-
rate riser, where the temperature
and catalyst-to-oil ratio can be opti-
mised and where the processing of
the LCN does not interfere with the
cracking of the main feedstock. In
this case, the increase in propylene
yield is still relatively small (about
2 wt% on top of the one achieved
with the main feedstock), with low
conversion per pass, a high gas
yield and a great portion of the
olefins produced being further
converted due to secondary reac-
tions into aromatics. Another
option to dispose of the LCN is to
send it along with the straight-run
light naphtha to a steam cracker.
Table 2 compares the yields that
can be obtained when cracking
naphtha on a steam cracker versus
in a separate riser on a FCC unit.
The trends are similar in both
cases. As the severity increases, the
14 PTQ Q3 2013
ethylene yield increases; the
propylene yield in the steam
cracker decreases with increased
severity, whereas it increases in the
FCC unit. C4 yields remain about
the same, but the naphtha yield
decreases with increased severity,
hence the once-through conversion
of naphtha on the steam cracker is
higher than on the FCC unit.
From a yields perspective, dispos-
ing of the LCN through the steam
cracker versus a separate riser in
the FCC could yield better
economic returns, but this needs to
be further investigated for each
specific case.
Processing C4s
There are several commercially
proven ways to upgrade C4s
produced from the FCC unit and
steam crackers.6 Figure 1 illustrates
some of the options.
Although the butadiene content
of C4s from the steam cracker is
significantly higher than that of the
FCC unit, the potential to recover
butadiene is lost when the light
recovery section of the steam
cracker and FCC unit are
integrated, because of the dilution
effect that the C4s from the FCC
unit have on the combined C4s
stream.
The main options for the produc-
tion of on-purpose propylene are:
• Direct recycle of C4s to a separate
FCC riser
• Via metathesis
• Oligomerisation combined with
recycle of the oligomerate to be
processed in a separate riser of the
FCC unit.
The direct recycle of the C4s cut
involves a secondary high-severity
riser parallel to the main riser
designed to upgrade the C4s into
ethylene, propylene and catalytic
naphtha. Some fuel gas is also
produced. The products from both
risers merge at the reactor outlet
and travel as a common stream to
the main fractionator.
An advantage of this process is
that selective hydrotreatment for
the diene conversion of the C4s
stream as well as the removal of
www.eptq.com
 Mid/heavy
naphtha PyGas
Light
reformate
C5–
HT Medium
reformate
C6/C7
Reformate
CCR splitter
Heavy
reformate
C8+
Reformate
stabiliser
Raffinate
HCN
FCC HT
CCR Continuous catalytic reformer
HT Hydrotreater
HCN Heavy catalytic naphtha
Figure 2 Configuration of the aromatics plant
impurities is not required. Also, as
with the cracking of the LCN, the
aromatics content of the catalytic
naphtha increases significantly
compared with the catalytic naph-
tha produced from the cracking of
vacuum gas oil (VGO) and residue
feedstocks, which helps increase
the production of benzene, toluene
and xylenes (BTX).7 From the
investment perspective, it is a rela-
tively low-cost option, but the
cracking towards propylene is not
selective.
In the metathesis case, which is
essentially an equilibrium dispro-
portionation reaction between two
olefins, the n-butenes react with
ethylene to produce mainly propyl-
ene and other byproducts. The
vapour phase reactions take place
in a single fixed-bed reactor. The
per-pass conversion is greater than
60%, with overall selectivity to
propylene exceeding 90% when the
feed is rich in 2-butene. This is a
simple process to upgrade the
value of n-butenes to high-value
propylene. The paraffins pass
through the system as inerts and,
once recovered as non-reactive light
materials, can be sent along with
www.eptq.com
Raffinate
Aromatics
Mixed
aromatics
Benzene/
toluene
splitter
C7–
C8
C7+ Xylene
loop
C8+
Toluene
column C8+
Xylene
Aromatics column
C9+
extraction
heavier naphtha-type products to a
steam cracker.
In order to maximise propylene
yields, the C4s need to be selec-
tively hydrogenated to convert the
butadiene into butenes and to
isomerise the isobutylene and
1-butene into 2-butenes. The isobu-
tylenes isomerisation reaction is
equilibrium limited with a  conver-
sion of isobutylenes of about 62%
and selectivity to n-butenes of
about 90%.
To maximise the propylene yield,
the remaining isobutylene should be
removed from the metathesis feed
either through fractionation or
methyl tertiary butyl ether (MTBE)
decomposition (if pure isobutylene
is to be produced) because the
isobutylenes react with the available
n-butenes competing with ethylene
in the production of propylene.
In the recycle of oligomerate, the
idea behind the process is that
oligomer cracking, with a catalyst
that has ZSM-5 zeolite additive, is
more selective, resulting in higher
propylene yields when recycled to
extinction than the recycle and
cracking of C4s in a separate FCC
riser.8
Naphtha/
gasoline
Benzene
Toluene
Light ends
Mixed Benzene
xylene mixed
xylene
Purify Paraxylene
Trans Light
alkylation
ends
C9–C10–C11
C6–
Heavy aromatics
The oligomerisation process can
be applied to the C4s from the
steam cracker and FCC units.
The reaction steps are:
• Convert C4s olefins into C8-C12
oligomers in a polynaphtha unit
• Recycle the oligomers into a
separate riser in the FCC unit to
selectively crack them into propyl-
ene. The separate riser allows
adjustment of the operating condi-
tions to maximise propylene yield
through a high reaction tempera-
ture and high catalyst-to-oil ratio.
As an alternative, since the
polynaphtha unit could be run to
produce 100% gasoline-type mate-
rial or 30% gasoline/70% distillates,
this option offers the flexibility to
increase the production of kero-
sene-type material, which, after
hydrotreating to saturate the
olefins, would have a relatively low
freezing point (-60°C) and high
smoke point (>33 mm).
With this option, the increase in
propylene yield would be 3-5
percentage points over the propyl-
ene yield provided by cracking the
heavy feed into the main riser,
depending on the amount of
oligomers recycled.
PTQ Q3 2013 15
 The incremental capital invest-
ment required by the polynaphtha
unit is moderate and its economic
justification competes with the direct
recycle of the C4s to a separate riser.
However, the process is selective
towards the production of propyl-
ene mainly because of the operating
conditions and catalyst additive
(ZSM-5) used to crack the oligomers.
Configuration of the aromatics plant
The configuration of the aromatics
complex, which is used to convert
naphtha and pyrolysis gasoline
(pygas) into  BTX, includes the
following process technologies:
• Continuous catalytic reformer
(CCR) for the production of
aromatics from naphtha at high
severity
• Extractive distillation for the
recovery of benzene and toluene
• Paraxylene purification for the
recovery of  paraxylene by continu-
ous adsorptive separation from a
mixed xylenes stream
• C8 aromatics isomerisation for the
isomerisation of xylenes and the
conversion of ethylbenzene
• Transalkylation  for the conver-
sion of toluene and heavy aromatics
to xylenes and benzene.
In order to exploit potential
synergies with the refinery and
steam cracker, the heavy FCC
naphtha, which is highly aromatic
and naphthenic, as well as the
pygas, are attractive feedstocks for
aromatics production. Coupling
aromatics production with a high
olefin yield FCC maximises the
value added from the FCC unit;
with a aromatics content of >55
wt%, FCC gasoline becomes a
desirable aromatics feedstock.
On the other hand, pygas compo-
sition varies widely with the type
of feedstock being cracked in an
ethylene plant. Light steam cracker
feedstocks tend to produce a pygas
that is rich in benzene but contains
almost no C8 aromatics. Substantial
amounts of C8 aromatics are found
only in pygas from ethylene plants
cracking naphtha feedstocks. All
pygas contains significant amounts
of sulphur, nitrogen and dienes
that must be removed by two-stage
hydrotreating before being
processed in an aromatics complex.
16 PTQ Q3 2013
Figure 2 shows the configuration of
the aromatics plant.
The salient features of the configu-
ration of the aromatics complex are:
• Hydrotreat the straight-run naph-
tha to remove sulphur and nitrogen
compounds and send it to a CCR,
where paraffins and naphthenes are
converted to aromatics
• Stabilise the reformate product
and send it along with the pygas to
a reformate splitter column. The C7
fraction from the overhead is sent
to the extractive distillation unit for
extraction of benzene and toluene.
The C8+ fraction from the bottom of
the reformate splitter is clay-treated
and then sent directly to the xylene
recovery section of the complex
• Hydrotreat the heavy catalytic
naphtha to remove impurities and
send to a separate aromatics extrac-
tion unit. The extract is combined
with extract from the reformate and
sent to the BTX fractionation
section to recover high-purity
benzene and toluene products
• Send the raffinate from the heavy
catalytic naphtha aromatics extrac-
tion unit to the straight-run naphtha
hydrotreater to remove traces of
extraction solvent and convert the
naphthenes into aromatics in the
CCR, whereas the raffinate from the
reformate aromatics extraction unit
is used as feedstock for the steam
cracker plant
• The rest is a conventional aromat-
ics plant, which includes a C8
aromatics isomerisation unit, parax-
ylene purification unit, a heavy
aromatics column and transalkyla-
tion unit, where toluene is blended
with C9 and C10 aromatics (A9-)
from the overhead of the heavy
aromatics column and processed for
the production of additional xylenes
and benzene, which are recovered in
the BTX fractionation section.
The incorporation of a transalkyl-
ation unit into the aromatics
complex allows the C9 aromatics of
the heavier straight-run/catalytic
naphtha with an end point of above
170°C to be converted into addi-
tional xylenes.
Overall, the steam cracker effi-
ciently converts light paraffins and
rejects aromatics and unconverted
naphthenes in pygas, whereas an
aromatics unit efficiently converts
naphthenes and efficiently recovers
aromatics, but rejects light paraffins
in fuel gas, light ends and raffinate
streams, allowing exploitation of
the composition of the streams to
maximise the production of valua-
ble products while minimising the
investment cost.
Integration of refining and
petrochemicals
The drivers for integration between
refining and petrochemical facilities
have been extensively discussed
elsewhere.9 While olefins require
further integration into polyolefins
or other olefin derivatives, since they
are not readily transportable, the
aromatics are directly marketable.
The key is to have refining units,
steam crackers and aromatics
complexes on the same site.
From the revenue perspective,
having integrated refining and
petrochemicals complexes mini-
mises the impact of the volatility of
crude oil price, the primary driver
of petrochemical costs and prices.10
From the pricing perspective, it is
observed that:
• Price differentials between
naphtha and gasoline are relatively
narrow, compared with naphtha
and aromatics and naphtha and
ethylene or propylene
• The spread between these price
differentials has been increasing
over time.
Many new refinery projects,
including some of those under
development in China and the
Middle East, include integrated
refinery and petrochemicals
complexes, addressing growth
needs in the Asia Pacific, Middle
East and European markets.
The other aspect that needs to be
considered for refinery/petrochem-
ical integration to be successful is
the yields versus capital required,
since it affects the revenues and the
profitability of the facility and, in
the case of the steam cracker, the
yields are heavily influenced by
feedstock selection.
Figure 3 shows the yields for
steam cracker feeds versus FCC
and CCR for petrochemicals. It
shows that naphtha cracking gives
a far wider range of products than
gas-based steam cracking. From the
www.eptq.com
 Ethylene

n-C2 (ethane)
n-C3 (propane)
Propylene
n-C4 (normal butane)
i-C4 (ISO butane)
Light naphtha
AGO (atmospheric gas oil)
Butenes
FCC (fluid catalytic cracker)
CCR (continuous catalytic reformer)

BTX

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90

Figure 3 Yields for steam cracker feeds vs FCC and CCR for petrochemicals

capital investment perspective, cracker can be processed in the

naphtha cracking is also far more
complex. However, it makes sense
when integrated with refineries that
produce aromatics, because of the
synergies that can be exploited with
other facilities within the refinery,
such as:
• Hydrogen produced in the steam
cracker in the refinery, the CCR
and in steam reforming can be used
to supply the requirements of the
hydrotreating units
• The raffinate stream produced in
the aromatics complex is a perfect
steam cracker feedstock: light mate-
rial, low in aromatics, high in
paraffins
• The pygas produced in the steam
aromatics complex to recover BTX
components.
So, liquid-based steam crackers
can be economically competitive
because of the credits obtained with
the byproduct slate that the
naphtha-based cracker produces,
which maximise the revenues.
Another aspect of integration that
leads to lower investments but
needs careful consideration during
design is the use of combined light
ends recovery facilities between the
steam cracker and the FCC unit.
In terms of investment, there are
different levels of integration. For
instance, the minimum would be to
send off-gas from the FCC unit to

Ethylene
Ethane Steam cracker
C3+
Hydrogen fuel
shared utilities
Light ends

Propylene
Petrochemical Wet Unsaturated gas
FCC gas plant MIxed C4s to
C4 complex

VGO FCC gasoline C5+

Gasoline
Crude Refinery Kerosene
Diesel
Fuel oil

Figure 4 Integration opportunities to maximise olefins production

18 PTQ Q3 2013 www.eptq.com

the steam cracker to recover FCC naphtha in a secondary riser of the FCC 9 Allen A, Refinery/petrochemical integration:
ethylene or use a  common propyl- unit for maximum propylene production, Fuel past, present and look into the future, Offshore
ene-propane splitter for full Processing Technology, 2008 (89), 864-873. World, 29 Dec 2007-Jan 2008, 29-34.
integration with only the front end 5 Ethylene, Chemsystems PERP program, PERP 10 Scott A, et al, Using microeconomics to
08/09-5, Sept 2009. guide investments in petrochemicals, McKinsey
of the FCC unit (consisting of reac-
6 Kantorowicz S, C4 processing options to on Chemicals, No 4, Spring 2012, 47.
tor, regenerator and main
upgrade steam cracker and FCC streams, 2nd 11 Dharia D, et al, Catalytic cracking for
fractionation) with overhead sent to Asian Petrochemicals Technology Conference, integration of refinery and steam cracker,
the wet gas compressor, whereas Korea, 7-8 May 2002. Advances in Fluid Catalytic Cracking, CRC Press,
the olefins unit water quench tower 7 Niccum P K, et al, KBR catalytic olefins 2010, 119-126.
goes to the cracker gas compressor technologies provide refinery/petrochemical Blasis Stamateris is Downstream Business
sharing the product recovery balance, 25th JPI Petroleum Refining Consultant in the Business Solutions Group
systems.11 Conference, Recent Progress in Petroleum of Foster Wheeler, Reading, UK. He has over
Figure 4 shows examples of Process Technology, 26-27 Oct 2010, Tokyo. 25 years’ experience in the oil refining and
streams that are produced in refiner- 8 Dupraz C, (R)FCC product flexibility with upgrading business, and holds a degree in
ies that can be used on steam FlexEne, ARTC 2012, Bangkok. chemical engineering.
crackers such as LPG and/or the
use of common facilities for the
recovery of ethylene and propylene.
In summary, refinery and petro-
chemical integration:
• Allows the upgrade of low-value
streams to high-value products
• Minimises the cost of petrochemi-
cal feedstocks, since they are
readily available from the refinery
• Provides stability over the value
creation chain by diversifying the
product slate, which dampens
cyclic profitability impact
• Reduces hydrogen production in
steam reformers by recovering the
hydrogen produced by the steam
cracker and catalytic reformer
• Optimises capital, operating costs
and resources through shared infra-
structure for utilities supply,
off-sites (tankage allows transfer of
refinery intermediate products
to petrochemicals, common flare,
wastewater treating facilities)
and infrastructure (buildings, labo-
ratory), leading to lower
investments.
The second part of this article
will demonstrate that the full inte-
grated scheme leads to significant
savings in investment and operat-
ing costs, but has a lot of design
challenges to guarantee the opera-
bility of all process units.

References
1 Knight J, Mehlberg R, Maximise propylene
from your FCC unit, Hydrocarbon Processing,
Sep 2011, 91-95.
2 Kayode Coker A, Modelling of Chemical
Kinetics and Reactor Design, Gulf Professional
Publishing, 237.
3 Bedell M, Ruziska P A, Steffen T R, On purpose
propylene from olefinic streams, Tulane
Engineering Forum, Sept 2003, 3-4.
4 Wang G, C Xu, Jinsen G, Study of cracking

www.eptq.com PTQ Q3 2013 19

 Towards a zero gasoline production
refinery: part 2
Refinery configurations can suit various processing objectives, such as variations to
the propylene-to-ethylene ratio and production of middle distillates and aromatics

BLASIS STAMATERIS Foster Wheeler, UK

DAN GILLIS Foster Wheeler, USA

T
he objective of this article is to
present alternative refinery
configurations that are able to
process relatively heavy crudes,
producing middle distillates, petro-
chemicals and aromatics, without
producing any gasoline at all. By
relying on well-proven refining
process technologies, the configura-
tions could be adapted to an
existing fluidised catalytic cracker
(FCC)-based refinery or used in a
grassroots project. The article illus-
trates options for integrating
products from the steam cracker,
aromatics complex and FCC unit
while rationalising investments.
Part 1 (PTQ, Q3 2013) presented
ways of upgrading streams
produced in refineries that have
traditionally been oriented towards
the production of transportation
fuels to petrochemicals. These solu-
tions may offer more attractive
returns and allow for diversifica-
tion of a refinery’s product slate.
The possibilities offered by the
streams from the FCC unit in terms
of propylene production and
aromatics production were also
illustrated.
The benefits of refinery and
petrochemical integration were
highlighted, in particular, diversify-
ing the product slate while
optimising capital costs, operating
costs and resources through fully
integrated production and shared
infrastructure for utilities supply
and offsites.
This second part outlines the
impact of these processes on the

LPG
Crude Heavy Benzene
Crude naphtha Aromatics
oil distillation SR naphtha Naphtha Naphtha
unit hydrotreater splitter Light complex Paraxylene
Kerosene
naphtha LPG
Diesel Fluidised
Raffinate catalytic
cracker Pygas
Kerosene Kerosene Steam naphtha
hydrotreater cracker Pygas Pygas and
Atmospheric catalytic
residue naphtha
Middle Diesel
hydrotreater
distillate
Propylene
hydrotreater
Diesel
Ethylene
ARDS Naphtha
Kerosene

Hydrotreated Diesel
residue C2 C4S
C3
C4
processing

Naphtha C 4S
To C4 sales
Propylene
Residue
fluidised Ethylene
catalytic
cracker

Diluted crude oil Light cycle oil

To fuel oil
sales

Figure 1 Refinery configuration with ARDS + RFCC

www.eptq.com PTQ Q4 2013 17

 LPG

Crude Heavy Benzene

Crude naphtha Aromatics
oil distillation SR naphtha Naphtha Naphtha
unit hydrotreater splitter Light complex Paraxylene
Kerosene
naphtha LPG
Diesel Fluidised
Raffinate catalytic
cracker Pygas
Kerosene Kerosene Steam naphtha
hydrotreater cracker Pygas Pygas and
Atmospheric catalytic
residue naphtha
Middle Diesel
hydrotreater
distillate
Propylene
hydrotreater Naphtha
Light Ethylene
vacuum LPG
gas oil Hydro- Kerosene Kerosene
cracker + diesel
Vacuum Diesel
distillation Kerosene
Heavy
unit vacuum + diesel
C2 C4S
gas oil Naphtha C3
Vacuum residue Diesel C4
Vacuum residue desulphurisation processing
Hydrotreater
residue
Naphtha C 4S
To C4 sales
Propylene
Residue
fluidised Ethylene
catalytic
cracker

Diluted crude oil Light cycle oil

To fuel oil
sales

Figure 2 Refinery configuration with HCU + VRDS + RFCC

product slate of the integrated
refinery/petrochemical complex for
different configurations.
Refinery configurations
A wide range of refinery configura-
tions for the production of
petrochemicals, aromatics and trans-
portation fuels has been studied.
Example material balances, devel-
oped with a linear programming
model, are presented to illustrate
ways to vary the product slate (C3=/
C2= ratio, aromatics, middle distil-
lates) and to demonstrate the effect
of C4s processing on the production
of propylene while optimising capi-
tal investment.
The basis for the cases presented
here are:
• Crude processing: 15 million t/y,
about 300 000 b/d
• Middle Eastern-type crudes of
around 28 API; capacities of process
units and/or product slates can be
adjusted to process heavier crudes
(17-22 API)
Complex configuration with
ARDS + RFCC
This configuration is typically used
for maximising gasoline and, more
recently, propylene yields from
atmospheric residues. For heavy
sour residues, such as those being
considered in this study, pretreating
the residue fluidised catalytic
cracker (RFCC) feed in an atmos-
pheric residue desulphurisation
(ARDS) unit is required to maximise
conversion to the desired products.
Figure 1 shows the schematic of a
refinery configuration, where an
ARDS unit is followed by the RFCC
unit.
The key feedstock properties that
impact the performance of an RFCC
unit are:
• Conradson carbon residue (CCR):
CCR is the main feed quality indica-
tor that affects the heat balance of
the reaction section, in particular the
regenerator temperature, which can
also affect the performance of the
catalyst (high temperatures produce
catalyst sintering with a negative
impact on yield pattern). The higher
the CCR content, the higher the coke
make and the higher the regenerator
temperature. For residues with a
CCR content under 8 wt%, the
RFCC unit could be equipped with
catalyst coolers to control the regen-
erator temperature
• Metals (mainly nickel and vana-
dium): these metals, especially
vanadium, reduce catalyst activity.
Additionally, nickel will non-
selectively crack the feed to undesir-
able light fractions. The higher the
metals content in the feed, the
higher the catalyst make-up to
maintain the high MAT activity
required to maximise the propylene
yield. (Note: Micro Activity Test
(MAT), defined by ASTM Procedure
D-3907, is widely used to determine
the relative activity and selectivity
of FCC catalysts for conversion of a
standard feedstock.)
• Hydrogen content: This affects
the RFCC feed’s conversion and

18 PTQ Q4 2013 www.eptq.com

 yield selectivity, in particular the
propylene yield. The higher the
hydrogen content, the higher the
propylene yield.
For the types of crude oil that
have been considered here, the
typical CCR content of atmospheric
residues is about 12-14 wt%, and
metals are 80-90 wtppm. Thus,
pretreatment of the feed is required.
The ARDS unit is a specially
designed hydrotreater that pretreats
the feed to the RFCC unit to reduce
contaminants including sulphur,
nitrogen, organometallic metals and
CCR. Additionally, it increases the
hydrogen content of the atmos-
pheric residue, thus improving the
crackability and selectivity of the
residue. For a typical ARDS HDS
rate of 90%, the CCR reduction is
about 65-70% and the metals reduc-
tion (HDM rate) is about 85-90
wt%. The HDT RFCC feed will
then have a CCR content of less
than 6 wt% and metals content of
less than 10 wtppm.
Due to the feed rate, nature of the
feed, and processing objectives, a
relatively high pressure and low
space velocity design is required
compared to other hydroprocessing
technologies. Even so, the cycle
length of the ARDS unit is typically
only one year. For the case evalu-
ated and ARDS operating
objectives, at least two reactor
trains, each with three to five very
large and thick-walled reactors, will
be required. Consequently, both the
20 PTQ Q4 2013
initial investment and on-going
catalyst replacement cost will be
much higher than for most hydro-
processing units.
The other key features of this
configuration to maximise the
production of petrochemicals are:
• Process straight-run light naph-
tha along with light catalytic
naphtha (LCN) in the steam cracker
• Process heavy straight-run naph-
tha in a catalytic reforming unit
(CRU) to produce reformate
• Process heavy catalytic naphtha
(HCN), pygas and reformate
through the aromatics complex to
produce paraxylene and benzene
• The C4s with relatively high
olefins content are either sold or
recycled to the second riser of the
FCC (directly or through oligomeri-
sation) to maximise propylene
production
• Products from the RFCC unit and
steam cracker are combined in a
single light ends recovery section to
produce ethylene and propylene,
minimising the capital investment
• Hydrogen from the CRU and
steam cracker is supplemented by
further hydrogen production from
steam reforming to be used in the
hydrotreaters.
Complex configuration with
HCU + VRDS + RFCC
The intention of this refinery config-
uration is to increase the production
of middle distillate at the expense of
petrochemicals. Relative to the first
configuration of ARDS + RFCC, the
LVGO fraction of the crude is
routed to a VGO hydrocracker
(HCU) to shift the yields in the
desired direction. Figure 2 shows a
schematic of the refinery.
The key features of this refinery
configuration are:
• A vacuum tower is installed to
produce a diesel-type cut to be
processed in the distillate hydro-
treater, a LVGO cut to be processed
in a two-stage, almost full-conver-
sion hydrocracker unit oriented
towards the production of middle
distillates
• The HVGO is combined with
vacuum residue to be pretreated in
the vacuum residue desulphurisa-
tion (VRDS) unit before processing
it in the RFCC unit
• Depending on the quality of the
combined vacuum residue and
HVGO feed to the VRDS unit, a
slip stream of vacuum residue
could be taken and blended with
diluents such as RFCC decanted oil
(DCO) and light cycle oil (LCO) to
produce some fuel oil. The VRDS
unit would then be able to reduce
the CCR to the levels required by
the RFCC feed, especially when the
CCR content of the feed to the
VRDS unit exceeds 24 wt%.
Complex configuration with
SDA + DCU + HCU + RFCC
The refinery configurations illus-
trated above, where residue
hydrotreaters reduce the feed
www.eptq.com
contaminants to levels required for
the RFCC unit to operate in an
economic manner, while increasing
the hydrogen content of the feed to
maximise high-value products, tend
to be capital intensive and have
high operating costs because of:
• The difficulty of removing
contaminants such as organometal-
lic and nitrogen compounds in the
heavier asphaltenic compounds
contained within vacuum residues.
This results in relatively high pres-
sures (160-200 bar(g)) and relatively
low space velocity (0.1-0.2 hr-1)
• The need to replace large
volumes of catalyst in the hydro-
treating unit (typically once a year)
• The RFCC unit requires a
two-stage regenerator, catalyst
cooler(s) and CO boiler, adding to
the cost of the unit
• A high catalyst make-up on the
RFCC unit to keep a high MAT
activity to favour the propylene
yield
• Additional investments required
in tankage to store hydrotreated
feed to continue running the RFCC
while the ARDS/VRDS catalyst is
changed in each reaction train
because of the comparatively longer
RFCC cycle length versus ARDS or
VRDS units.
An alternative solution would be
to have a refinery configuration
with unit processes capable of
separating the components of the
vacuum residue into two fractions:
one more easily hydrotreated,
which would then be processed in
a more conventional FCC unit, and
another where the impurities such
as polynuclear aromatics (PNA),
metals, CCR and asphaltenes could
be concentrated then processed in a
non-catalytic thermal conversion
process such as a delayed coking
unit (DCU).
Solvent deasphalting (SDA) is an
attractive solution for this type of
application, as it separates residues
by molecular type. An SDA unit is a
robust, relatively low-cost residue
separation process that uses an
aliphatic solvent (typical light
paraffinic solvents with carbon
chains of three to five) to separate
the more valuable oils and resins
from the aromatic and asphaltenic
components of its residue feedstock.
www.eptq.com
Sulphur
CCR
Contaminant in DAO, %
Nickel
Vanadium
DAO, vol%
Figure 3 DAO contaminants versus DAO yield
Residue hydrotreating options
Option: VGO Light DAO Heavy DAO VR
% of VR N/A 35-50 50-75 100
Feed CCR, wt% 0-1 5-10 10-15 18-28
Feed C7 insolubles, wt% 0 <0.02 <0.05 5-30
Feed C5 insolubles, wt% 0 <0.1 <0.3 20-30+
% HDS 95+ 90-95 85-92 85-90
LHSV, hr-1 0.75-1.5 0.3-0.5 0.2-0.4 0.1-0.2
Pressure, bar(g) 70-100 100-125 120-140 160-200
Catalyst cycle, months 24+ 24 18-24 12
Table 1
The paraffinic solvent precipitates DAO yield. Although not shown in
the more polar, higher molecular Figure 3, even at DAO yields of 70
weight components, such as resins wt%, the DAO will be relatively
and asphaltenes, typically called free of asphaltenes, which are a
pitch, from the higher-quality, rela- significant factor in setting the
tively low contaminant and higher hydrotreater’s severity.
hydrogen content components When an SDA is integrated with
called deasphalted oil (DAO). The a DCU, the combination allows
heavier the solvent, the higher the DAO from the SDA unit and heavy
DAO yield and the higher the level coker gas oil (HCGO) from the
of contaminants it will contain. DCU to be sent along with the
This process has relatively low VGO from the vacuum distillation
capital and operating costs, as it unit to the FCC feed hydrotreating
operates at relatively low pressures unit and subsequently to a conven-
and temperatures, and no catalysts tional FCC unit.
are used. A well-designed SDA Foster Wheeler has taken this
unit, such as the UOP/Foster concept and optimised the integra-
Wheeler Solvent Deasphalting tion of SDA with delayed coking
Process, is highly reliable and will (see Figure 5). In this type of flow
typically have very long run scheme, the various streams are
lengths between planned shut- routed to where they are most
downs for inspections and general effectively processed. Another
maintenance. synergy that can be exploited with
Figure 3 shows the impact of this configuration is to eliminate
DAO yield on the percentage of the production of slurry oil from
feed contaminants in the DAO. For the FCC unit by processing it in the
most residues and from a hydro- DCU. This also has a side benefit of
treating processing perspective, the decreasing the coker feed’s viscos-
contaminants in the DAO are rela- ity, which would be relatively high
tively low, up to about 70 wt% of if only the SDA pitch was sent to
PTQ Q4 2013 21
 SDA + 2 3
DAO
20%
HL coking 70 7 VGO
SDA + 7 6
Distillate
25%
ML coking 50 14 Naphtha

Coking 30%
29 29 14

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 0 20 40 60 80 100
ML = Medium lift – 50% Coke, wt% Liquid products, wt%
HL = High lift – 70%

Figure 4 Optimised SDA + DCU integration

the DCU’s heater. Likewise, uncon-
verted oil from the VGO
hydrocracker can be selectively
separated in the SDA unit. This
option would typically be used
when DAO is processed in a VGO
hydrocracker.
Due to the improved quality of
the feed to the hydrotreater, its
severity will be much lower in
comparison to the residue hydro-
treating configuration operations.
Table 1 shows the relative ranges of
process conditions when comparing
residues and VGO hydrotreating
options.
The benefits of this process
configuration are illustrated in
Figure 4; the combined liquid prod-
uct yields increase as the SDA lift
increases. (DAO yield is increased.)
Also, the coke yield decreases as
the SDA lift is increased.
Although there are two residue
processing units with SDA + DCU,
the overall capital cost is similar to
the cost of the DCU alone due to
the relatively low cost of a SDA
Coker
fractionator
Coke
drums
Heavy coker gasoil
Coke
Heavy
HCGO
Coker
feed
Heater
SDA pitch +
multiring aromatics
Figure 5 Integration between SDA and DCU: liquid yields versus coke production1
compared to a DCU, and because
the capacity of the DCU is lower
when combined with the SDA unit
versus a standalone DCU.
Figure 6 shows a schematic of a
refinery configuration that uses
SDA + DCU instead of VRDS +
RFCC to upgrade residues, elimi-
nating the operational/catalyst
management challenges of a VRDS
unit and a complex reactor/regen-
erator section associated with an
RFCC unit.
The key features of this refinery
configuration are:
• A vacuum tower is installed to
produce a diesel-type cut to be
processed in the distillate hydro-
treater, and a LVGO cut to be
processed in a two-stage, almost
full-conversion hydrocracker unit
oriented towards the production of
middle distillates. As an alternate
case, the impact of a partial-conver-
sion HCU, whose unconverted oil
is fed directly into the FCC unit, is
also presented
• The HVGO is combined with
Gas
Naphtha
Light coker gasoil
HDT/FCC
Hydrocracking
DAO
SDA
extractor HCU
unconverted
oil (UCO)
FCC slurry
oil (CSO)
Residue
feed
DAO and the HCGO to be
pretreated in a conventional VGO
HDT unit before its processing in
the FCC unit
• The vacuum residue is processed
in the SDA unit, and the pitch
combined with the FCC slurry is
processed in the DCU
• If the facility is located where
low-cost natural gas is not availa-
ble, the coke instead of being
exported could be used to generate
steam/electricity in circulating
fluidised bed boilers (CFBB).
Processing of mixed C4 streams:
metathesis
Metathesis is essentially used as a
way to adjust the propylene-to-
ethylene product ratio of the refin-
ery, thus upgrading the value of
butenes to high-value propylene,
improving economics and consum-
ing ethylene in addition to butenes.
In order to maximise propylene
production, the key to processing
C4 olefinic streams through metath-
esis is to prepare the feed such that
it is rich in 2-butenes, because
every molecule of ethylene that
reacts with a molecule of 2-butene
gives two molecules of propylene,
whereas all of the other C4 olefins
give only one molecule of propyl-
ene and other by-products,
competing with 2-butene for the
ethylene available.
The challenge is that the C4
components have close boiling
points and are difficult to separate
through fractionation (see Table 2).
Therefore, other means have to be
used to prepare the rich 2-butene
stream for metathesis.
Several processing routes have
been proposed to upgrade the C4
olefinic streams.2 The processing
steps to be taken to include

22 PTQ Q4 2013 www.eptq.com

 LPG

Crude Heavy
Crude naphtha Benzene
oil distillation SR naphtha Naphtha Naphtha Aromatics
unit Kerosene hydrotreater splitter Light complex
naphtha LPG Paraxylene
Diesel
Fluidised
Raffinate catalytic
cracker Pygas
Kerosene Kerosene
naphtha
hydrotreater Pygas Pygas and
Atmospheric catalytic
residue Steam naphtha
Middle cracker hydrotreater
Diesel
distillate
Propylene
hydrotreater Naphtha
Light Ethylene
vacuum LPG
gas oil Hydro- Kerosene Kerosene
cracker + diesel
Vacuum Diesel
distillation Kerosene
Heavy
unit vacuum + diesel
C2 C4S
gas oil Naphtha C3
Diesel C4
Vacuum processing
residue Naphtha Vacuum Hydrotreated feed
gas oil Naphtha C 4S
To C4 sales
Solvent hydrotreater
deasphalting Propylene
+ delayed Fluidised
coking unit catalytic
Ethylene
cracker
Light coker gas oil
Heavy coker gas oil
Coke Deasphalted oil Diluted crude oil Light cycle oil
To fuel oil
sales
Circulating Power
fluidised bed
boilers Steam

Figure 6 Refinery configuration with SDA + DCU

metathesis in the refinery configu-
rations are shown in Figures 1, 2
and 5:
• Extract butadiene from steam
cracker C4s and selectively hydro-
genate the raffinate-1 or selectively
hydrogenate the whole C4 olefinic
stream to reduce the butadiene
content to less than 10 wtppm. In
this case, the catalyst system and
operating conditions of the selec-
tive hydrotreating unit are adjusted
to isomerise 1-butene to 2-butene
• Remove iso-butylene through
MTBE decomposition: in this case,
separation by reaction takes advan-
tage of the fact that only the
iso-butylene reacts with alcohols to
produce ethers, which can be
converted back to high-purity
iso-butylene. This step could also
be required if high-purity 1-butene
is desired (for instance, as co-
monomer for the production of
polyethylene)
• Removal of 1-butene and lighter
components: this process consists of
two super fractionators. First, the C4
stream is fed to the first column to
remove as a bottoms product the
n-butane along with the bulk of
2-butene and some 1-butene.
Second, from the top, the bulk of
1-butene and other light compo-
nents are taken to the second
column, where iso-butane is
removed with some 1-butene and
Normal boiling point of C4 olefins
Component Normal boiling point, °C
Iso-butane) -11.7
1-butene -6.3
Isobutylene
(2=-methyl propene) -6.9
1-3 butadiene -4.4
n-butane -0.5
Trans-2-butene 0.9
Cis-2-butene 3.7
Table 2
sent to the steam cracker. The
bottom product is high-purity
1-butene
• If high-purity iso-butylene and/
or 1-butene are not required, only
the first super fractionator would
be required to produce the feed to
the metathesis unit. For the rest of
the C4s, there is potential to further
increase the production of ethylene
and mainly propylene through
direct cracking or oligomerisation,
followed by cracking in a separate
riser in the (R)FCC unit.
Results
Table 3 summarises the material
balances produced for each of the
configurations shown in Figures 1,
2 and 5. The results show that,
regardless of the refinery configura-
tion, when deep conversion units
are considered and under certain
operating conditions designed to
maximise the production of petro-

www.eptq.com PTQ Q4 2013 25

 higher middle distillates produc-
Material balances for different complex configurations tion than the ARDS + RFCC
configuration can achieve.
Product ARDS + ARDS + RFCC HCU + VRDS HCU + HCU + SDA/DCU
In the first case, propylene
RFCC with + RFCC SDA/DCU + + DAO HDT +
metathesis DAO HDT/FCC FCC + partial production decreases mainly due to
conversion HCU reduced FCC capacity, which in
+ metathesis this case was about 59 000 b/d as
C4s, KTA 1151 974 792 625 551
compared to the ARDS + RFCC
Gasoline, KBPD 0 0 0 0 0
Jet fuel, KBPD 15.6 15.6 23.5 36.2 27.4 configuration. The flexibility of the
Diesel, KBPD 128.8 128.8 147.3 131.6 128 SDA + DCU configuration in terms
Fuel oil, KBPD 7.2 7.2 6.1 1.3 1.3 of product slate is shown in the last
Ethylene, KTA 1123 907 1081 1106 975
case. Where the partial-conversion
Propylene, KTA 1100 1558 838 800 1312
Paraxylene, KTA 1600 1587 1573 1754 1830 HCU is feeding the unconverted
Benzene, KTA 490 501 509 563 582 bottoms to the FCC unit, the capac-
Coke 348 353 ity of the unit increases to 76 000
b/d. This, plus the metathesis,
Table 3 allows for an increase in propylene
production.
chemicals, world-scale production of direct cracking or oligomerisation In relation to paraxylene produc-
ethylene, propylene and aromatics of the C4s, followed by cracking in tion, since the amount of
with crude processing of 15 million a separate riser in the RFCC unit. straight-run material is the same
t/y — about 300 000 b/d — can be Paraxylene production is world for all cases, the contribution of the
produced. Choosing between the scale and is likely to require two naphtha produced in mid- and
ARDS + RFCC, VRDS + RFCC and trains of paraxylene recovery. deep conversion should be
SDA + DCU configurations is not The refinery configuration with analysed to understand the varia-
easy, as all can be adjusted to VRDS + RFCC shows the contribu- tions in paraxylene production.
produce similar amounts of distil- tion the HCU brings to the increase It should be noted that besides
lates, petrochemicals and aromatics. in middle distillates production, (R)FCC capacity, the feed quality
For the refinery configuration compared with the ARDS + RFCC also has a significant influence on
with ARDS + RFCC, both units are case, at the expense of propylene the catalytic naphtha yield. An
relatively large. The capacity of production, which decreases mainly RFCC unit processing a full range
ARDS and RFCC are 121 000 b/d because of the reduced RFCC unit of treated residue feedstock with a
and 108 000 b/d, respectively. capacity (in this case, about 65 000 relatively high content of resins and
Two cases were developed: one b/d). asphaltenes in the feed, as in the
where all of the C4s are sold and For the refinery configuration ARDS or VRDS + RFCC configura-
another one to show the impact a with SDA + DCU, two cases are tion, cannot be expected to produce
metathesis-based olefins conversion presented to show the flexibility the same naphtha yields as those
unit (OCU) has on the production this configuration offers to adjust that can be obtained in an FCC unit
of ethylene and propylene. the product slate to suit market with a VGO + DAO deeply hydro-
As can be observed, in the first requirements: a configuration treated feed.
case, both ethylene and propylene oriented to maximising middle The other key differentiator is the
production exceeds 1.1 million t/y. distillate production with a quantity and aromatics content of
In the second case, where an OCU full-conversion HCU, and another the heavy (R)FCC naphtha. It would
has been incorporated, propylene where the unconverted bottoms of be highly aromatic and naphthenic
production is increased by about a 70% conversion HCU are fed to because of the high severity and the
40% at the expense of ethylene. In the FCC unit and a metathesis unit use of additives required to maxim-
both cases, there is potential to is incorporated to maximise the ise propylene production. The
further increase the production of propylene production. aromatics content of the heavy cata-
ethylene and propylene through Both SDA + DCU cases show lytic naphtha produced from the
RFCC would be slightly higher than
Order of magnitude total installed cost (TIC) estimates that produced from an FCC unit
under similar operating conditions.
Fuel oil production is signifi-
[US$ million] ARDS+RFCC VRDS+RFCC SDA+DCU
ARDS/VRDS 601 465 - cantly reduced, as expected. Coke
RFCC 444 318 - can be either exported or used on
HCU - 371 371 site to produce steam/electricity in
VGO HT - - 235 a circulating fluidised-bed boiler.
FCC - - 169
SDA+DCU - - 360
Total 1045 1154 1135 Impact of capital investment costs
With regards to capital investment
Table 4 costs, Table 4 summarises the order

26 PTQ Q4 2013 www.eptq.com

of magnitude total installed cost
(TIC) estimates that have been
prepared, based on Foster
Wheeler’s in-house cost estimating
database.
As can be seen, the investments
for the upgrading section of the
refinery configurations are of the
same order of magnitude. With
similar product slates and invest-
ments, the differences in economic
indicators between the refinery
configurations will not be signifi-
cant enough to clearly favour one
configuration over another.
Therefore, when it comes to the
decision of which refinery configu-
ration to choose, other factors
besides the product slate and
investments, such as operating
complexity and associated reliabil-
ity of the units, should be taken
into consideration.
Ultimately, the selected option is
based on an individual refiner’s
objectives. The SDA + DCU options
represent well-proven technologies.
If there is a suitable outlet for the
coke produced, this is a viable
www.eptq.com
and competitive configuration.
Certainly, if the objective is to
maximise revenues with proven
technology, in a reliable environ-
ment, the configuration that has
been developed by Foster Wheeler
utilising its SDA + DCU combina-
tion offers a competitive advantage.
How to make the right decision
The integration of refining and
petrochemical facilities offers
several opportunities for adding
value to refinery streams by
exploiting synergies between differ-
ent process units while rationalising
investments that can positively
impact project economics.
Different refinery configurations
can be tailor-made to suit a range
of processing objectives, including
variations to the propylene-to-
ethylene ratio, and the production
of middle distillates and aromatics.
Capacities of the process units can
be adjusted to accommodate differ-
ent crude oils.
The concepts outlined are appli-
cable to grassroots projects and
potentially to the revamp of exist-
ing facilities. The zero gasoline
production refinery is a practical
and viable reality.
References
1 Gillis D, Unique opportunities with proven
technologies to maximise residue conversion
& refinery margins, Asia Technology forum,
Bangkok, 10-11 Oct 2012.
2 Edwards S M, et al, Relative economics of
mixed C4s processing routes, PTQ, Q1 1998, 1.
Blasis Stamateris is Downstream Business
Consultant in the Business Solutions Group
of Foster Wheeler, UK, participating in refinery
configuration studies, feasibility studies
and FEED work for grassroots refineries, CTL
facilities and refinery upgrades. A graduate in
chemical engineering, he has over 25 years’
experience in oil refining and upgrading.
Email: blasis_stamateris@fwuk.fwc.com
Dan Gillis is Director, Refining for Foster
Wheeler, US. He provides technical direction
and applications development for Foster
Wheeler’s proprietary heavy oil technology. He
is an engineering graduate of the University of
Saskatchewan, Canada.
Email: dan_gillis@fwhou.fwc.com
PTQ Q4 2013 27