Gas to Liquids (GTL).

Technology and Economics

Widodo W. Purwanto

Departemen Teknik Kimia

Universitas Indonesia

Natural Gas Economics 2016

 Outline
What is GTL

The GTL Process

Key Technical Issues

Syngas Production

FT synthesis

Product Upgrading

GTL Economics

Product Quality & Market

GTL Projects

The Future
 Motivation:
Net export/import petroleum fuel

(eksport/import petroleum
Source: OPEC, 2013, processed
fuel)/domestic production 3
Future Fuel Supply

CTL/

Source:APEC
 Natural gas transportation

Pipeline

Liquefied natural gas (LNG)

Compressed natural gas (CNG)

SUPPLY MARKETS
Gas to Solid (GTS)
Gas to Liquids (GTL)

Gas to Chemicals (GTC)

Gas to Wire (GTW)

Physical conversion : pipeline, CNG, LNG, GTS

Chemical conversion : GTL, GTC, GTW

 What is GTL?
Professor Franz Fischer .. and
Dr Hans Tropsch, the
inventors of a process to
create liquid hydrocarbons
from carbon monoxide gas
and hydrogen using metal
catalyst

Gas-to-Liquid (GTL) fuels can be produced from natural gas using a Fischer-
Tropsch chemical reaction process. The liquids produced include diesel,
naphtha, and chemical feedstocks. GTL diesel can be used neat or blended
with today’s diesel fuel and used in existing diesel engines and infrastructure.
These fuels provide an opportunity to reduce dependence on petroleum-based
fuels and reduce tailpipe emissions. GTL fuel has virtually no sulfur,
aromatics, or toxics. It can be blended with non-complying diesel fuel to make
the fuel cleaner so it will comply with new diesel fuel standards.
FT-Diesel
 Why Synthetic fuels?

– Substitute petroleum fuels

– Infrastructure ~ petroleum based fuels
– Ultra-clean fuels: near-zero sulfur and
aromatic, high Centane number

but
Need chemical conversion
Diesel Quality Regulation

Source: Sasol
The GTL Process
 Feedstock
H/C 1 2 4 0.1

H/C= 2

Source: Sasol, modified

 Indirect process conversion
Synthetic fuels
Biomassa XTL

Gasification
Feed + O2 + H2O
H2/CO DME
Coal

Syngas MeOH Synthesis MeOH

(H2+CO)
SMR (CH4+H2O)

POX (CH4+O2)
Gas
CO2R (CH4+CO2)
Electricity
Combined Ref. Olefins

NH3
Source: widodo, 2004
 Direct process conversion
Pyrolisis
Synfuels (liquid/gas)
Coal
Hydrogenation
Ethylene

Heat
Methanol
Formaldehyde

CH4

Aromatics

Hydrogen
nanocarbon
Source: widodo, 2004
 GTL Flow Diagram
H2S, CO2, H2O Electricity

CH4
Natural
Gas Desulphurizer Syngas Cogeneration
Unit Production Unit Unit

O2 H2,CO Tail
Air Gas
Air Separation Polybed PSA
Unit Unit
H2 Light
H2/CO=2 Ends

N2 FT Synthesis Upgrading
Unit Unit
Catalyst
Separation Naphtha,
Syncrude Diesel

Source: widodo, 2004

Source: Wood, 2012
Source: Wood, 2012
Source: Wood, 2012
Key Technical Issues
Carbon and Energy Efficiency

Source: Foster Wheeler

 Carbon and Energy Efficiency
Fuel Losses (CO2)
23 Btu
23 Carbon

GAS FEED HC Product

100 Btu GTL plant 60 Btu
100 Carbon 77 Carbon

Water Make
EE: 60% 17 Btu
CE: 77% 0 Carbon

Source: Foster Wheeler

Carbon and Energy Efficiency

Source: widodo, 2004

Plant efficiency

Source: IEA
Product-Feeds-Technology

Source: Sasol
 Poly-generation
(Fuels, Chemicals & Power)
• Natural gas composition: CO2 content
• Syngas production technologies: H2/CO, Energy
• - SMR: H2/CO >, E++
• - CO2R: H2/CO <, E ++
• - POX: H2/CO ~, E-
• - Combined (SMR+POX=ATR) H2/CO ~, E~
• FT synthesis: H2/CO, catalyst type, temperature
• Excess light ends & steam: Electricity
• Excess of H2 or CO: chemicals as co-products
Heat Integration

Source: Foster Wheeler

Syngas Production
 Syngas reaction
• Steam Reforming of Methane (SRM)

CH4 + H2O  CO + 3 H2 Endo

• Partial Oxidation (POX)
CH4 + ½ O2  CO + 2 H2 Exo

• CO2 Reforming (CO2R)

CH4 + CO2  2CO + 2 H2 Endo

Syngas quality is ratio of H/C

 Syngas Reformer

Tubular Reactor

HE Reactor Fixed Bed

FT Synthesis
 FT Reactions
Main Reactions
Paraffin : (2n+1) H2 + n CO CnH2n+2 + n H2O
Olefin : 2n H2 + n CO  CnH2n + n H2O
Alcohols : 2n H2 + n CO  CnH2n+2O + (n-1)H2O

Side Reactions
Water gas shift
Surface carbonaceous material
Dis-proporsionation Boudouard
Oxidation-reduction of catalyst
Carbide formation
: H2O + CO  CO2 + H2
: (x+(y/2)) H2 + x CO  CxHy + x H2O
: CO + CO  CO2 + C
: y H2O + x M  MxOy + y H2
y CO2 + x M  Mxoy + y CO
: y C + x M  MxOy + y CO
 Reaction Performances
•Conversion: reactant converted/initial reactant

•Product Selectivity:
Anderson–Flory–Schulz kinetics

log (Wn/n) = n log  + log [(1-)2/]

with a growth chance  , carbon number n, Wn mass fraction

 =0.8 premium/gasoline
 >0.9 diesel
Parameter Impacts
Nilai  tinggi, produk mengarah diesel

Katalis. Nilai  yang tinggi diperoleh dari:

Pemilihan logam : Co > Ru > Fe
Penyangga : TiO2 > AL2O3 > SiO2
Promotor : K2O, V2O5, ZrO2, Cr2O3 menaikkan
nilai 
Konsentrasi logam : loading lebih tinggi, nilai  naik
Ukuran partikel : ukuran lebih kecil, nilai  naik

Kondisi Proses.
Rasio H2/CO : rasio H2/CO naik, nilai  turun
Suhu (T) : suhu naik, nilai  turun
Tekanan (P) : tekanan naik, nilai  naik

Reaktor : Kontrol suhu

Fixed bed : hot spot menurunkan nilai 
Fluidized bed : suhu tinggi, nilai  rendah
Slurry : suhu rendah, nilai  tinggi
 Catalyst Comparison
Fe Co

Pembuatan Presipitasi Presipitasi

Penyangga - TiO2, Al2O3,SiO2, MgO
Daya tahan Rendah Tinggi
Syngas H2/CO 0.7 – 2 2 (tanpa reaksi shift)
Fasa aktif Fe  Fe3C  Fe5C2 Co
Selektifitas Lebih bersifat olifinik Lebih bersifat parafinik
Produk  rendah  lebih tinggi
Produk samping >>CO2 >>H2O
Luas tergantung Terbatas (tanpa reaktor
Fleksibilitas
kondisi Shift)
Umur Pendek (orde minggu) Panjang (orde tahun)
Regenerasi Tidak/Jarang Ya
Harga Murah Mahal (supply limited)
 Typical FT Reactor

Fixed Bed Circulating Bed Slurry Bed

 FT Reactor Characteristics
Fixed Bed Circulating Slurry Bed
Bed
Transfer panas Transfer panas Transfer panas baik/
terbatas baik uniform
Disain sederhana Dapat mengganti Dapat mengganti
katalis selama katalis selama
proses proses
Problem hot spot, Problem dimensi Problem Separasi
pressure drop reaktor besar wax/katalis
Produk fraksi Produk fraksi Produk fraksi
berat/diesel ringan/nafta, berat/diesel
gasoline
1,500 – 5,000 bpd 1,600 – 6,500 bpd 10,000 – 17,000 bpd
 Sasol FT Reactor types

High Advanced
temperature Synthol
(350oC) Synthol
Gasoline &
olefins

Low
temperature Arge Slurry
(250oC)
Waxes &
diesel

Conventional technology Advanced technology

Source: Sasol
FT Reactor Capacity

Source: Sasol
 Pilot Slurry Phase Reactor (SPD)

1 m diameter x 20 m high
demonstration reactor:
Hydrodynamic and
Engineering Data

Source: Sasol
 Slurry Phase Reactor (SPD)

Commercially proven
Designed, developed, operated and
licensed by Sasol
2500 bbl/day unit operated since
1993 first run - 7 months
5 years commercial operation
98% availability
Uses high efficiency catalyst

Designed for integration with steps 1

& 3 on a scale of 15 000 bbl/day

Source: Sasol
Typical Flow Regime

Source: Krishna
 Reactor photos

Petro SA, Mosselbay, Synthol SMDS, Bintulu, Fixed bed

Multitubular
SPD reactor - Qatar

Oryx GTL

Source: Sasol
Reactor GTL shell
Product Upgrading
 Upgrading process
Tail Gas

Gas Sintesis
REAKTOR
Air FISCHER Steam
TROPSCH

Gas

Wax/Slurry
Katalis
H2 Nafta
SEPARASI UNIT SEPARASI
KATALIS HYDRO - PRODUK
& WAX PROCESSING
Diesel

Wax
Upgrading Process
GTL Economics
Gap between Gas-oil price

Source: Glebova, 2013

 Capacity of Single Train of GTL Plant

Current Single-Train Capacity

ASU = Syngas = FT
3,500 tpd 17,000 BPD

Future Single-Train Capacity

ASU = Syngas = FT
5,000 tpd 25,000 +BPD

Future Integrated Complex Capacity

1 Gas Plant = 3 ASU = 3 Syngas = 3 FT = 1 Upgrade
800-900 MMSCFD 75-90,000 BPD

Source: Foster Wheeler

Range of capital investment costs
for synthetic fuel plant
( 1000 USD per daily barrel of capacity)

Source: EIA, DOE

 Capex vs. Capacity
100
CAPEX (1000 US$/BPD)
80

60

40

20

0
0 20 40 60 80 100 120
Kapasitas Plant GTL (1000 BPD)

Sasol Other Trendline

 Capital Cost vs. year
Capex (Total cost to owner): 20 000 - 30 000US $ / dbbl
80
Unit Capex (1997 K$/daily barrel)

New Historical RAND 1997 Poll of

Zealand Extrapolation model Experts
70 Qatar
(base case)
60 adjusted to
50 MBPD
($25M/db)
50 Malaysia
startup in
2005

South
40 Africa
Target
30 Exxon
Qatar

20
New Petroleum Refineries
10

0
1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015

Source: Sasol, Foster Wheeler

Estimated Production Cost

Source: IFP
Indicative Capital Cost Breakdown

20%
30% Syngas Production
F-T Synthesis
Product Work-up
Other Process units
15%
Utilities
Offsites
10% 15%
10%

Source: Foster Wheeler

 Discounted Cash Flow
Breakdown (25 years)
2%

22%
52% Capex
Gas Price
$0.5/MMBtu
~ $4.5/bbl
Opex
Capex
~ $9.0/bbl
Opex
~ $4.5/bbl Feed Costs

Other Costs


24%
$18/bbl
Portions of NPV (Discount Rate = IRR)

Source: Foster Wheeler

Cost of Product

Source: Foster Wheeler

 Product Cost
80
70
60
50
US$/b

40
30
20
10
0
PR30 PR50 GTL20 GTL35 CTL4 CTL8

Feedstocks Capex Opex Dist. Cost Taxes

Distribution cost = 15% of production cost

Taxes = 15%
Source: Sasol, IFP, Foster Wheeler
Source: Glebova, 2013
Sensitity of Oryx GTL

Source: Glebova, 2013

Source: Glebova, 2013
Product Quality
and Market
Blend stock opportunities

Source: C. Brown, 2013

FT diesel properties

Source: Morita, 2001

Tail-pipe emissions

Source: Foster Wheeler

FT Diesel Emission Test

Source: Sasol
 Product value
and potential markets

Source: Sasol
Adding value of GTL products

Source: C. Brown, 2013

Market Strategy

Source: Sasol
GTL Project
Existing dan Proposed GTL project

Source: C. Brown, 2013

 Sasol Scheduling GTL Plant
year 01 year 02 year 03 year 04 year 05 year 06 year 07

Pre Feasibility

Feasibility

FEED

Contract bidding & award

Engineering & Procurement Construction

Commissioning

Onstream

-20 -12 0 9 14 47 50
MONTHS
GTL Project Performance Improvement

Thermal Constructed Project

Efficiency Cost Schedule

1996 1996 1996

45-50% 25k - 30k $/Bbl 36 - 42 months

2001 2001 2001

60-65% 17k - 25k $/Bbl 30 - 33 months

Source: Foster Wheeler

Integrated GTL-Matindok
GTL Qatar

Source: Sasol
Source: Sasol
ORYX Progress at Site

Source: Foster Wheeler

ORYX Progress at Site

Source: Foster Wheeler

GTL Oryx
Pearl GTL
GTL pearl
 Technology Developers

• Syngas Technology Licensors ( Haldor Topsoe,

Lurgi, others)

• FT Synthesis Oil Companies & Licensors (Sasol, Shell,

Syntroleum, Rentech)

• Product Upgrade Refinery Licensors (UOP,CHEVRON)

• Oxygen Package Vendors (Air Products, BOC)

• Integration Engineering Contractors (Foster Wheeler,

Technip, )

Source: Foster Wheeler

 Technology Providers - Syngas
Technology Provider Process Name Provider Category
Foster Wheeler SMR Contractor
KTI/Technip SMR Technology Company
Kellogg (Ammonia) SMR Contractor
bp/Kvaerner SMR Oil Major
Linde SMR Technology Company
Kruppe Udhe SMR / UCAR (ATR) Contractor
ZAK ATR Technology Company
Syntroleum ATR Technology Company
Haldor Topsøe ATR & SMR Technology Company
ExxonMobil ATR / Fluid Bed Oil Major
JMC- One Synergy GHR Other
Shell POX Oil Major
ChevronTexaco POX Oil Major
Conoco POX Oil Minor
Lurgi POX, ATR & SMR Technology Company
OTM Alliance Ceramic Membrane Industry Alliance
ITM Alliance Ceramic Membrane Industry Alliance
BOC Ceramic Membrane Other
Synergy Corporation Plasma (GlidArc) Technology Company

Source: Foster Wheeler

 The Future

Monetize stranded gas

Substitute petroleum based fuels
Produce ultra-clean fuels
Secure fuels supply
Source: Wood, 2012
Thank You
Sasol Visit, 2003
Integrated GTL - Scenario 1
(ATR-FT-UREA-POWER)
Integrated GTL - Scenario 2
(SMR-FT-UREA-POWER)
 Integrated GTL - Scenario 3
(ATR-FT-DME-POWER)

Nat.Gas
Integrated GTL - Scenario 4
(SDR-FT-ACETIC ACID- POWER)
 Integrated GTL - Scenario 5
(DR-FT-ACETIC ACID-POWER)

Nat.Gas
CO2