Hydrocarbons are found in a variety of gases, such as natural gas, refinery gas, and synthetic gas streams obtained from other hydrocarbon materials such as coal, crude oil, naphtha, oil shale, tar sands, and lignite. In many cases, the gas streams from these sources are contaminated with high concentrations of carbon dioxide, making the gas streams unsuitable for use as fuel, chemical plant feedstock, or other purposes. There are a variety of processes that have been developed to remove the carbon dioxide using chemical, physical, and hybrid solvents. Other processes have been developed that use a refrigerated absorbent stream composed of heavy (C4-C10 typically) hydrocarbons to remove the carbon dioxide in a distillation column, such as the process described in U.S. Pat. No. 4,318,723. All of these processes have increasingly higher capital cost and operating cost as the carbon dioxide concentration in the gas stream increases, which often makes processing of such gas streams uneconomical.
One method for improving the economics of processing gas streams containing high concentrations of carbon dioxide is to provide bulk separation of the carbon dioxide from the gas stream prior to processing with solvents or absorbents, so that only a minor fraction of the carbon dioxide must then be removed from the gas stream. For example, semi-permeable membranes have often been used for bulk removal of carbon dioxide. However, a significant fraction of the lighter hydrocarbons in the gas stream are often “lost” in the carbon dioxide stream that is separated by bulk removal processes of this type.
A better alternative for bulk removal of carbon dioxide is to use distillation to fractionate the gas stream into a light hydrocarbon stream and a carbon dioxide stream, so that removal of the residual carbon dioxide from the light hydrocarbon stream is all that is required to produce pipeline-quality gas for use as fuel, chemical plant feedstock, etc. The majority of the carbon dioxide that is removed is recovered as a liquid rather than a vapor, allowing the carbon dioxide to be pumped (rather than compressed) for subsequent use in tertiary oil recovery operations or for other purposes, resulting in substantial reductions in capital cost and operating cost.
The present invention is generally concerned with the removal of the majority of the carbon dioxide from such gas streams. A typical analysis of a gas stream to be processed in accordance with this invention would be, in approximate mole percent, 44.3% hydrogen, 13.0% carbon monoxide, 4.0% methane, and 38.5% carbon dioxide, with the balance made up of nitrogen and argon. Sulfur containing gases are also sometimes present.
In a typical distillation process for removing carbon dioxide, a feed gas stream under pressure is cooled by heat exchange with other streams of the process and/or external sources of refrigeration such as a propane compression-refrigeration system. The gas is condensed as it is cooled, and the high-pressure liquid is expanded to an intermediate pressure, resulting in further cooling of the stream due to the vaporization occurring during expansion of the liquids. The expanded stream, comprising a mixture of liquid and vapor, is fractionated in a distillation column to separate residual methane, nitrogen, and other volatile gases as overhead vapor from the carbon dioxide and the heavier hydrocarbon components as bottom liquid product. A portion of the liquid carbon dioxide can be flash expanded to lower pressure and thereafter used to provide low-level refrigeration to the process streams if desired.
The present invention employs a novel means of condensing the distillation column overhead vapor to increase the carbon dioxide removal efficiency. Instead of cooling the column overhead vapor to condense reflux for the fractionation column, the overhead vapor is compressed to higher pressure and then cooled to partially condense it. The resulting condensate is mostly liquid carbon dioxide, which can be flash expanded to intermediate pressure and used to provide mid-level refrigeration to the process streams before being returned to the distillation column at a mid-column feed point. In addition, the residue gas that remains after the condensate has been removed is suitable to be sent to treating without requiring further compression. Surprisingly, applicants have found that this novel process arrangement not only allows removing more of the carbon dioxide, but also reduces the power consumption required to achieve a given level of carbon dioxide removal, thereby increasing the process efficiency and reducing the operating cost of the facility.
In accordance with the present invention, it has been found that more than 75% of the carbon dioxide can be removed while leaving more than 99.8% of the methane and lighter components in the residue gas stream. The present invention, although applicable at lower pressures and warmer temperatures, is particularly advantageous when processing feed gases in the range of 400 to 1500 psia [2,758 to 10,342 kPa(a)] or higher under conditions requiring distillation column overhead temperatures of −50° F. [−46° C.] or colder.
For a better understanding of the present invention, reference is made to the following examples and drawings. Referring to the drawings:
In the following explanation of the above figures, tables are provided summarizing flow rates calculated for representative process conditions. In the tables appearing herein, the values for flow rates (in moles per hour) have been rounded to the nearest whole number for convenience. The total stream rates shown in the tables include all non-hydrocarbon components and hence are generally larger than the sum of the stream flow rates for the hydrocarbon components. Temperatures indicated are approximate values rounded to the nearest degree. It should also be noted that the process design calculations performed for the purpose of comparing the processes depicted in the figures are based on the assumption of no heat leak from (or to) the surroundings to (or from) the process. The quality of commercially available insulating materials makes this a very reasonable assumption and one that is typically made by those skilled in the art.
For convenience, process parameters are reported in both the traditional British units and in the units of the Système International d'Unités (SI). The molar flow rates given in the tables may be interpreted as either pound moles per hour or kilogram moles per hour. The energy consumptions reported as horsepower (HP) and/or thousand British Thermal Units per hour (MBTU/Hr) correspond to the stated molar flow rates in pound moles per hour. The energy consumptions reported as kilowatts (kW) correspond to the stated molar flow rates in kilogram moles per hour.
The feed stream 31 is cooled to −20° F. [−29° C.] in heat exchanger 10 by heat exchange with column reboiler liquids at 49° F. [9° C.] (stream 37), column side reboiler liquids at 34° F. [1° C.] (stream 42), and propane refrigerant. Stream 31a is further cooled in heat exchanger 50 by heat exchange with cool carbon dioxide vapor at −56° F. [−49° C.] (stream 43), cold residue gas at −60° F. [−51° C.] (stream 35), and pumped liquid at −60° F. [−51° C.] (stream 36a). The further cooled stream 31b enters separator 11 at −27° F. [−33° C.] and 1049 psia [7,233 kPa(a)] where the vapor (stream 32) is separated from the condensed liquid (stream 33).
The vapor from separator 11 (stream 32) enters a work expansion machine 12 in which mechanical energy is extracted from this portion of the high pressure feed. The machine 12 expands the vapor substantially isentropically to the operating pressure (approximately 665 psia [4,583 kPa(a)]) of fractionation tower 15, with the work expansion cooling the expanded stream 32a to a temperature of approximately −48° F. [−45° C.]. The typical commercially available expanders are capable of recovering on the order of 80-88% of the work theoretically available in an ideal isentropic expansion. The work recovered is often used to drive a centrifugal compressor (such as item 13) that can be used to re-compress the residue gas (stream 35b), for example. The partially condensed expanded stream 32a is thereafter supplied to fractionation tower 15 at its top column feed point. The separator liquid (stream 33) is expanded to the operating pressure of fractionation tower 15 by expansion valve 14, cooling stream 33a to −28° F. [−33° C.] before it is supplied to fractionation tower 15 at an upper mid-column feed point.
Overhead vapor stream 34 leaves fractionation tower 15 at −48° F. [−45° C.] and is cooled and partially condensed in heat exchanger 18. The partially condensed stream 34a enters separator 19 at −60° F. [−51° C.] and 658 psia [4,535 kPa(a)] where the vapor (cold residue gas stream 35) is separated from the condensed liquid (stream 36). Liquid stream 36 is pumped to slightly above the operating pressure of fractionation tower 15 by pump 51 before stream 36a enters heat exchanger 50 and is heated to −26° F. [−32° C.] by heat exchange with the feed gas as described previously. The heated stream 36b is, thereafter supplied as feed to fractionation tower 15 at a lower mid-column feed point.
Fractionation tower 15 is a conventional distillation column containing a plurality of vertically spaced trays, one or more packed beds, or some combination of trays and packing. It also includes reboilers (such as the reboiler and the side reboiler described previously) which heat and vaporize a portion of the liquids flowing down the column to provide the stripping vapors which flow up the column to strip the column bottom liquid product (stream 38) of methane and lighter components. The trays and/or packing provide the necessary contact between the stripping vapors rising upward and cold liquid falling downward, so that the bottom product stream 38 exits the bottom of the tower at 50° F. [10° C.], based on reducing the methane concentration in the bottom product to 0.47% on a molar basis.
Column bottom product stream 38 is predominantly liquid carbon dioxide. A small portion (stream 39) is subcooled in heat exchanger 21 by cool residue gas stream 35a. The subcooled liquid (stream 39a) at −20° F. [−29° C.] is expanded to lower pressure by expansion valve 22 and partially vaporized, further cooling stream 39b to −65° F. [−54° C.] before it enters heat exchanger 18. The residual liquid in stream 39b functions as refrigerant in heat exchanger 18 to provide cooling of stream 34 as described previously, with the resulting carbon dioxide vapor leaving at −56° F. [−49° C.] as stream 43. Since stream 39b could contain small amounts of heavier hydrocarbons, a small liquid purge (stream 44) may be drawn off from heat exchanger 18 to prevent an accumulation of heavier hydrocarbons in the refrigerant liquid that could elevate its boiling point and reduce the cooling efficiency of heat exchanger 18.
The cool carbon dioxide vapor from heat exchanger 18 (stream 43) is heated to −28° F. [−33° C.] in heat exchanger 50 by heat exchange with the feed gas as described previously. The warm carbon dioxide vapor (stream 43a) at 74 psia [508 kPa(a)] is then compressed to high pressure in three stages by compressors 23, 25, and 27, with cooling to 120° F. [49° C.] after each stage of compression by discharge coolers 24, 26, and 28. The remaining portion (stream 40) of column bottom product stream 38 is pumped to high pressure by pump 29 so that stream 40a can combine with the high pressure gas (stream 43g) leaving discharge cooler 28, forming high pressure carbon dioxide stream 41 which then flows to reinjection at 82° F. [28° C.] and 1115 psia [7,688 kPa(a)].
The cool residue gas (stream 35a) leaves heat exchanger 50 at −28° F. [−33° C.] after heat exchange with the feed gas as described previously, and is further heated to −8° F. [−22° C.] in heat exchanger 21 by heat exchange with liquid carbon dioxide stream 39 as described previously. The warm residue gas stream 35b is then re-compressed in two stages, compressor 13 driven by expansion machine 12 and compressor 17 driven by a supplemental power source. Residue gas stream 35d then flows to treating at 90° F. [32° C.] and 1115 psia [7,688 kPa(a)].
A summary of stream flow rates and energy consumption for the process illustrated in
In the simulation of the
The vapor from separator 11 (stream 32) enters a work expansion machine 12 in which mechanical energy is extracted from this portion of the high pressure feed. The machine 12 expands the vapor substantially isentropically to the operating pressure (approximately 640 psia [4,413 kPa(a)]) of fractionation tower 15, with the work expansion cooling the expanded stream 32a to a temperature of approximately −54° F. [−48° C.]. The partially condensed expanded stream 32a is thereafter supplied to fractionation tower 15 at its top column feed point. The separator liquid (stream 33) is expanded to the operating pressure of fractionation tower 15 by expansion valve 14, cooling stream 33a to −30° F. [−35° C.] before it is supplied to fractionation tower 15 at an upper mid-column feed point.
Overhead vapor stream 34 leaves fractionation tower 15 at −52° F. [−47° C.] and is compressed in two stages, compressor 13 driven by expansion machine 12 and compressor 17 driven by a supplemental power source. The compressed stream 34b is then cooled and partially condensed in heat exchanger 18. The partially condensed stream 34c enters separator 19 at −60° F. [−51° C.] and 1130 psia [7,791 kPa(a)] where the vapor (cold residue gas stream 35) is separated from the condensed liquid (stream 36). Liquid stream 36 is expanded to slightly above the operating pressure of fractionation tower 15 by expansion valve 20 before stream 36a enters heat exchanger 21. The expanded stream 36a is heated from −59° F. [−51° C.] to 20° F. [−7° C.] and partially vaporized by heat exchange with liquid carbon dioxide stream 39 (which is described further below in paragraph [0028]). The partially vaporized stream 36b is further vaporized in heat exchanger 10 by heat exchange with the feed gas as described previously, and stream 36c at 38° F. [3° C.] is thereafter supplied as feed to fractionation tower 15 at a lower mid-column feed point.
Fractionation tower 15 is a conventional distillation column containing a plurality of vertically spaced trays, one or more packed beds, or some combination of trays and packing. It also includes reboilers (such as the reboiler described previously, and optionally a reboiler 16 heated by an external source of heat) which heat and vaporize a portion of the liquids flowing down the column to provide the stripping vapors which flow up the column to strip the column bottom liquid product (stream 38) of methane and lighter components. The trays and/or packing provide the necessary contact between the stripping vapors rising upward and cold liquid falling downward, so that the bottom product stream 38 exits the bottom of the tower at 48° F. [9° C.], based on reducing the methane concentration in the bottom product to 0.30% on a molar basis.
Column bottom product stream 38 is predominantly liquid carbon dioxide. A minor portion (stream 39) is subcooled in heat exchanger 21 by flash expanded liquid stream 36a as described previously. The subcooled liquid (stream 39a) at −33° F. [−36° C.] is expanded to lower pressure by expansion valve 22 and partially vaporized, further cooling stream 39b to −65° F. [−54° C.] before it enters heat exchanger 18. The residual liquid in stream 39b functions as refrigerant in heat exchanger 18 to provide a portion of the cooling of compressed overhead vapor stream 34b as described previously, with the resulting carbon dioxide vapor leaving at 22° F. [−6° C.] (stream 39c).
The warm carbon dioxide vapor (stream 39c) at 78 psia [536 kPa(a)] is then compressed to high pressure in three stages by compressors 23, 25, and 27, with cooling to 120° F. [49° C.] after each stage of compression by discharge coolers 24, 26, and 28. The remaining portion (stream 40) of column bottom product stream 38 is pumped to high pressure by pump 29 so that stream 40a can combine with the high pressure gas (stream 39i) leaving discharge cooler 28, forming high pressure carbon dioxide stream 41 which then flows to reinjection at 84° F. [29° C.] and 1115 psia [7,688 kPa(a)].
The cold residue gas (stream 35) from separator 19 enters heat exchanger 18 and is heated to 30° F. [−1° C.] by heat exchange with compressed overhead vapor stream 34b as described previously. Cool residue gas stream 35a is further heated to 72° F. [22° C.] in heat exchanger 10 by heat exchange with the feed gas as described previously. The warm residue gas stream 35b then flows to treating at 1115 psia [7,688 kPa(a)].
A summary of stream flow rates and energy consumption for the process illustrated in
A comparison of Tables I and II shows that, compared to the prior art, the present invention provides better methane recovery (99.85%, versus 99.44% for the prior art), much better carbon dioxide removal (75.15%, versus 63.10% for the prior art), much lower carbon dioxide concentration in the residue gas (13.47%, versus 18.79% for the prior art), and better carbon dioxide purity (99.69%, versus 99.50% for the prior art). In addition, further comparison of Tables I and II shows that this superior process performance was achieved using less power per unit of carbon dioxide removed than the prior art. In terms of the specific power consumption, the present invention represents an 8% improvement over the prior art of the
The improvement in energy efficiency provided by the present invention over that of the prior art of the
Second, the greater quantity of liquid condensed in stream 36 for the present invention provides a process stream that can be used more effectively for mid-level refrigeration within the process. The resulting flashed stream 36a has 72% more flow than pumped stream 36a in the prior art process, allowing it to subcool a larger quantity of liquid carbon dioxide in stream 39 (39% more than the prior art) to a lower temperature (−33° F. [−36° C.], versus −20° F. [−29° C.] for the prior art), so that the resulting flashed carbon dioxide stream 39b for the present invention contains a much larger quantity of liquid that can be used as refrigerant to condense carbon dioxide from overhead vapor stream 34 in heat exchanger 18.
The net result of these two factors is to capture significantly more of the carbon dioxide in column bottom product stream 38 (19% more compared to the
As described earlier for the embodiment of the present invention shown in
Feed gas conditions, plant size, available equipment, or other factors may indicate that elimination of work expansion machine 12, or replacement with an alternate expansion device (such as an expansion valve), is feasible. Although individual stream expansion is depicted in particular expansion devices, alternative expansion means may be employed where appropriate. For example, conditions may warrant work expansion of liquid streams 33, 36, and/or 39a.
In accordance with the present invention, the use of external refrigeration to supplement the cooling available to the inlet gas and/or compressed overhead vapor stream 34b from other process streams may be employed, particularly in the case of a rich inlet gas. The use and distribution of separator liquids and/or demethanizer side draw liquids for process heat exchange, and the particular arrangement of heat exchangers for inlet gas cooling must be evaluated for each particular application, as well as the choice of process streams for specific heat exchange services. For instance, some circumstances may favor supplying partially vaporized stream 36b directly to fractionation tower 15 (via stream 44 in
Depending on the temperature and richness of the feed gas and the amount of methane allowed in liquid product stream 38, there may not be sufficient heating available from feed stream 31 to cause the liquid leaving fractionation column 15 to meet the product specifications. In such cases, the fractionation column 15 may include one or more reboilers (such as reboiler 16) heated by an external source of heat.
In some circumstances, the portion (stream 39) of column bottom product stream 38 that is used to provide refrigeration may not need to be restored to high pressure after it has been heated (stream 39c). In such cases, the compression and cooling shown (compressors 23, 25, and 27 and discharge coolers 24, 26, and 28) may not be needed, and only stream 40a flows to stream 41.
The present invention provides improved separation of carbon dioxide from hydrocarbon gas streams per amount of utility consumption required to operate the process. An improvement in utility consumption required for operating the process may appear in the form of reduced power requirements for compression or re-compression, reduced power requirements for pumping, reduced power requirements for external refrigeration, reduced energy requirements for tower reboiling, or a combination thereof.
While there have been described what are believed to be preferred embodiments of the invention, those skilled in the art will recognize that other and further modifications may be made thereto, e.g. to adapt the invention to various conditions, types of feed, or other requirements without departing from the spirit of the present invention as defined by the following claims.
This invention relates to a process and apparatus for the separation of a gas containing hydrocarbons and carbon dioxide. The applicants claim the benefits under Title 35, United States Code, Section 119(e) of prior U.S. Provisional Application No. 61/351,059 which was filed on Jun. 3, 2010.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
33408 | Turner et al. | Oct 1861 | A |
2952984 | Marshall, Jr. | Sep 1960 | A |
3292380 | Bucklin | Dec 1966 | A |
3675435 | Jackson et al. | Jul 1972 | A |
3837172 | Markbreiter et al. | Sep 1974 | A |
3983711 | Solomon | Oct 1976 | A |
4061481 | Campbell et al. | Dec 1977 | A |
4140504 | Campbell et al. | Feb 1979 | A |
4157904 | Campbell et al. | Jun 1979 | A |
4171964 | Campbell et al. | Oct 1979 | A |
4185978 | McGalliard et al. | Jan 1980 | A |
4251249 | Gulsby | Feb 1981 | A |
4278457 | Campbell et al. | Jul 1981 | A |
4284423 | Eakman et al. | Aug 1981 | A |
4318723 | Holmes et al. | Mar 1982 | A |
4322225 | Bellinger et al. | Mar 1982 | A |
4445917 | Chiu | May 1984 | A |
4519824 | Huebel | May 1985 | A |
4525185 | Newton | Jun 1985 | A |
4545795 | Liu et al. | Oct 1985 | A |
4596588 | Cook | Jun 1986 | A |
4600421 | Kummann | Jul 1986 | A |
4617039 | Buck | Oct 1986 | A |
4657571 | Gazzi | Apr 1987 | A |
4687499 | Aghili | Aug 1987 | A |
4689063 | Paradowski et al. | Aug 1987 | A |
4690702 | Paradowski et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
4698081 | Aghili | Oct 1987 | A |
4705549 | Sapper | Nov 1987 | A |
4707170 | Ayres et al. | Nov 1987 | A |
4710214 | Sharma et al. | Dec 1987 | A |
4755200 | Liu et al. | Jul 1988 | A |
4851020 | Montgomery, IV | Jul 1989 | A |
4854955 | Campbell et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
4869740 | Campbell et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
4889545 | Campbell et al. | Dec 1989 | A |
4895584 | Buck et al. | Jan 1990 | A |
4966612 | Bauer | Oct 1990 | A |
5114451 | Rambo et al. | May 1992 | A |
5275005 | Campbell et al. | Jan 1994 | A |
5291736 | Paradowski | Mar 1994 | A |
5335504 | Durr et al. | Aug 1994 | A |
5363655 | Kikkawa et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5365740 | Kikkawa et al. | Nov 1994 | A |
5555748 | Campbell et al. | Sep 1996 | A |
5566554 | Vijayaraghavan et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5568737 | Campbell et al. | Oct 1996 | A |
5600969 | Low | Feb 1997 | A |
5615561 | Houshmand et al. | Apr 1997 | A |
5651269 | Prevost et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5675054 | Manley et al. | Oct 1997 | A |
5685170 | Sorensen | Nov 1997 | A |
5755114 | Foglietta | May 1998 | A |
5755115 | Manley | May 1998 | A |
5771712 | Campbell et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5799507 | Wilkinson et al. | Sep 1998 | A |
5881569 | Campbell et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5890377 | Foglietta | Apr 1999 | A |
5890378 | Rambo et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5893274 | Nagelvoort et al. | Apr 1999 | A |
5983664 | Campbell et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
5992175 | Yao et al. | Nov 1999 | A |
6014869 | Elion et al. | Jan 2000 | A |
6023942 | Thomas et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6053007 | Victory et al. | Apr 2000 | A |
6062041 | Kikkawa et al. | May 2000 | A |
6116050 | Yao et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6119479 | Roberts et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6125653 | Shu et al. | Oct 2000 | A |
6182469 | Campbell et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6244070 | Lee et al. | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6250105 | Kimble | Jun 2001 | B1 |
6269655 | Roberts et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6272882 | Hodges et al. | Aug 2001 | B1 |
6308531 | Roberts et al. | Oct 2001 | B1 |
6324867 | Fanning et al. | Dec 2001 | B1 |
6336344 | O'Brien | Jan 2002 | B1 |
6347532 | Agrawal et al. | Feb 2002 | B1 |
6361582 | Pinnau et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6363744 | Finn et al. | Apr 2002 | B2 |
6367286 | Price | Apr 2002 | B1 |
6453698 | Jain et al. | Sep 2002 | B2 |
6516631 | Trebble | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6526777 | Campbell et al. | Mar 2003 | B1 |
6565626 | Baker et al. | May 2003 | B1 |
6578379 | Paradowski | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6604380 | Reddick et al. | Aug 2003 | B1 |
6694775 | Higginbotham et al. | Feb 2004 | B1 |
6712880 | Foglietta et al. | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6742358 | Wilkinson et al. | Jun 2004 | B2 |
6907752 | Schroeder et al. | Jun 2005 | B2 |
6915662 | Wilkinson et al. | Jul 2005 | B2 |
6941771 | Reddick et al. | Sep 2005 | B2 |
7069743 | Prim | Jul 2006 | B2 |
7155931 | Wilkinson et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7159417 | Foglietta et al. | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7165423 | Winningham | Jan 2007 | B2 |
7191617 | Cuellar et al. | Mar 2007 | B2 |
7210311 | Wilkinson et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7216507 | Cuellar et al. | May 2007 | B2 |
7219513 | Mostafa | May 2007 | B1 |
7565815 | Wilkinson et al. | Jul 2009 | B2 |
7666251 | Shah et al. | Feb 2010 | B2 |
20020166336 | Wilkinson et al. | Nov 2002 | A1 |
20040079107 | Wilkinson et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040172967 | Patel et al. | Sep 2004 | A1 |
20050229634 | Huebel et al. | Oct 2005 | A1 |
20050247078 | Wilkinson et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050268649 | Wilkinson et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060032269 | Cuellar et al. | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060086139 | Eaton et al. | Apr 2006 | A1 |
20060283207 | Pitman et al. | Dec 2006 | A1 |
20080000265 | Cuellar et al. | Jan 2008 | A1 |
20080078205 | Cuellar et al. | Apr 2008 | A1 |
20080190136 | Pitman et al. | Aug 2008 | A1 |
20080271480 | Mak | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20080282731 | Cuellar et al. | Nov 2008 | A1 |
20090100862 | Wilkinson et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090107175 | Patel et al. | Apr 2009 | A1 |
20090282865 | Martinez et al. | Nov 2009 | A1 |
20100236285 | Johnke et al. | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20100251764 | Johnke et al. | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100275647 | Johnke et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100287982 | Martinez et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100287983 | Johnke et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100326134 | Johnke et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110067441 | Martinez et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110067442 | Martinez et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110067443 | Martinez et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110226011 | Johnke et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110226012 | Johnke et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110226013 | Johnke et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110226014 | Johnke et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
20110232328 | Johnke et al. | Sep 2011 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
0 182 643 | May 1986 | EP |
1 114 808 | Jul 2001 | EP |
9937962 | Jul 1999 | WO |
0033006 | Jun 2000 | WO |
0188447 | Nov 2001 | WO |
0214763 | Feb 2002 | WO |
Entry |
---|
B.C. Price et al., “LNG Production for Peak Shaving Operations”, Proceedings of the Seventy-eighth Annual Convention of the Gas Processors Association, Nashville, Tennessee, Mar. 1-3, 1999, 8 sheets. |
Fig. 16-33, on p. 16-24 of the Engineering Data Book, Twelfth Edition, published by the Gas Processors Suppliers Association 2004. |
Finn et al., “LNG Technology for Offshore and Mid-scale Plants”, Proceedings of the Seventy-ninth Annual Convention of the Gas Processors Association, Atlanta, Georgia, Mar. 13-15, 2003, 23 sheets. |
Kikkawa et al., “Optimize the Power System of Baseload LNG Plant”, Proceedings of the Eightieth Annual Convention of the Gas Processors Association, San Antonio, Texas, Mar. 12-14, 2001, 23 sheets. |
International Search Report issued in International Application No. PCT/US 06/18932 dated Sep. 26, 2007—1 page. |
International Search Report issued in International Application No. PCT/US 07/76199 dated Mar. 3, 2008—1 page. |
International Search Report issued in International Application No. PCT/US 11/38303 dated Sep. 2, 2011—2 pages. |
International Search Report issued in International Application No. PCT/US2008/052154 dated Oct. 14, 2008—1 page. |
International Search Report issued in International Application No. PCT/US2008/079984 dated Dec. 19, 2008—1 page. |
International Search Report issued in International Application No. PCT/US2010/046953 dated Oct. 25, 2010—3 pages. |
International Search Report issued in International Application No. PCT/US2010/046966 dated Oct. 15, 2010—1 page. |
International Search Report issued in International Application No. PCT/US2010/046967 dated Oct. 20, 2010—2 pages. |
International Search Report issued in International Application No. PCT/US2011/029409 dated May 17, 2011—2 pages. |
Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US 06/18932 dated Sep. 26, 2007—7 pages. |
Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US 07/76199 dated Mar. 3, 2008—28 pages. |
Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US 11/38303 dated Sep. 2, 2011—7 pages. |
Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2008/052154 dated Oct. 14, 2008—18 pages. |
Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2008/079984 dated Dec. 19, 2008—5 pages. |
Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2010/046953 dated Oct. 25, 2010—11 pages. |
Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2010/046966 dated Oct. 15, 2010—19 pages. |
Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2011/029409 dated May 17, 2011—12 pages. |
Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2010/046967 dated Oct. 20, 2010—4 pages. |
“Dew Point Control Gas Conditioning Units,” SME Products Brochure, Gas Processors Assoc. Conference (Apr. 5, 2009)—2 pages. |
“Fuel Gas Conditioning Units for Compressor Engines,” SME Products Brochure, Gas Processors Assoc. Conference (Apr. 5, 2009)—2 pages. |
“P&ID Fuel Gas Conditioner,” Drawing No. SMEP-901, Date Drawn: Aug. 29, 2007, SME, available at http://www.sme-llc.com/sme.cfm?a=prd&catID=58&subID=44&prdID=155 (Apr. 24, 2009)—1 page. |
“Fuel Gas Conditioner Preliminary Arrangement,” Drawing No. SMP-1007-00, Date Drawn: Nov. 11, 2008, SME, available at http://www.sme-llc.com/sme.cfm?a=prd&catID=58&subID=44&prdID=155 (Apr. 24, 2009)—2 pages. |
“Product: Fuel Gas Conditioning Units,” SME Associates, LLC, available at http://www.smellc.com/sme.cfm?a=prd&catID=58&subID=44&prdID=155 (Apr. 24, 2009)—1 page. |
Mowrey, E. Ross., “Efficient, High Recovery of Liquids from Natural Gas Utilizing a High Pressure Absorber,” Proceedings of the Eighty-First Annual Convention of the Gas Processors Association, Dallas, Texas, Mar. 11-13, 2002—10 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2010/21364 dated Mar. 29, 2010—20 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2010/26185 dated Jul. 9, 2010—20 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2010/29331 dated Jul. 2, 2010—15 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2010/33374 dated Jul. 9, 2010—18 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in corresponding International Application No. PCT/US2010/35121 dated Jul. 19, 2010—18 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2010/37098 dated Aug. 17, 2010—12 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2011/028872 dated May 18, 2011—6 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2011/29234 dated May 20, 2011—29 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2011/029034 dated Jul. 27, 2011—39 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2011/029409 dated May 17, 2011—14 pages. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion issued in International Application No. PCT/US2011/029239 dated May 20, 2011—20 pages. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110296867 A1 | Dec 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
61351059 | Jun 2010 | US |