\

PERGAMON

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

Economics of hydrogen recovery processes for the

puri_cation of hydroprocessor purge and o}!gases
S[ Peramanu\ B[G[ Cox\ B[B[ Pruden
University of Calgary\ Calgary\ Alberta\ Canada

Abstract
Pressure swing adsorption\ membranes and countercurrent gas!liquid contacting were evaluated for the puri_cation
of hydrocracker and hydrotreater purge and o}!gases[ Industrial cases relevant to upgrading and re_ning were examined\
and the most economic and technically suitable options were determined[
For pressure swing adsorption "PSA#\ surprisingly\ the best economics were at lower recoveries\ when tail gas met
fuel gas pressure requirements[ This eliminated tail gas compression which is relatively expensive[ Membranes were
marginally better than PSA at higher feed pressures "6[9 MPa#\ and there was no advantage in combining these
processes due to loss of economies of scale[ Countercurrent gas!liquid contacting\ which recovers hydrogen near feed
pressure\ has an advantage over both PSA and membrane when the feed pressure is high[
A sensitivity analysis indicated that high feed gas capacity\ high purity\ and a low fuel gas price favor hydrogen
recovery processes[ The impact of increased recovery and purity on the economics of hydrogen recovery was negligible
compared to the e}ect of unit sizes "economy of scale#[ 0888 International Association for Hydrogen Energy[
Published by Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved[
Abbreviations] CC!ABS\ Countercurrent packed column absorber unit^ MEMB\ Membrane unit^ MIX!SEP\ Mixer!
separator unit^ NO!HRU\ No hydrogen recovery unit^ PSA!HP\ Pressure swing adsorption unit with high pressure tail
gas^ PSA!LP\ Pressure swing adsorption unit with low pressure tail gas[

0[ Introduction
The need for hydrogen in re_ning is expected to grow
due to more stringent environmental regulations\ pri!
marily in the decrease in aromatics in automotive fuels[
Hydrocracking processes will come on stream and be
expanded to upgrade more low quality heavier feed
stocks\ and hydrotreating processes are needed to
improve the quality of gasoline\ diesel and furnace fuels[
As the demand for hydrogen grows\ its management and
conservation as a basic raw material is becoming increas!
ingly more important to ensure optimum economics[
Additionally\ recent studies by the Other Six Leasing
Operations "OSLO# group and by the Alberta Chamber
of Resources "ACR# identi_ed high pressure hydro!
cracking as the most economic options for future upgra!

 Corresponding author[ E!mail] subodhacs[ucalgary[ca

ding of plants[ These plants will use more hydrogen at

higher pressures than existing plants\ and as the hydrogen
facilities can represent over one!third of the upgrader
cost\ it is important to carefully study hydrogen man!
agement options[
Hydrocracking and hydrotreating operations generate
an o}!gas stream of unreacted hydrogen\ combined with
the gas!make from the reactor[ This stream which is at
pressures of 02[719[6 MPa typically contains 6974)
hydrogen\ with C0C5\ H1S and other impurities[ To pre!
vent a buildup of these impurities during recycle to the
hydroprocessing reactor\ either a purge stream is taken
or the entire stream is processed as shown in Fig[ 0[
The resultant o}!gas stream is combined with makeup
hydrogen from a hydrogen plant and recycled to the
hydroprocessor unit at constant hydrogen purity[ If the
purge gas stream is of high enough purity and pressure it
can be cascaded to downstream hydrotreaters\ and if it
is low pressure or low purity it will likely be used as
fuel gas[ Neither of these practices is always the most

9259!2088:88:,19[99 0888 International Association for Hydrogen Energy[ Published by Elsevier Science Ltd[ All rights reserved
PII] S 9 2 5 9 ! 2 0 8 8 " 8 7 # 9 9 0 9 4 ! 9

395

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

Fig[ 0[ CANMET hydrocracker high pressure hydrogen recovery scheme[

economic and it may be economically advantageous to

recover hydrogen from this purge gas in a hydrogen
recovery unit "HRU# and use it as part of the makeup
requirements[
To justify recovering hydrogen from purge or o}!gas\
it is important to clearly identify the cost and incentives
on which the comparisons will be based[ If the capacity
of an existing hydrogen plant is limited\ recovery of
hydrogen from waste streams may postpone the need for
incremental hydrogen production facilities or additional
hydrogen plants[ Any hydrogen that can be recovered
will reduce the size of a new hydrogen plant\ which can
reduce the investment for this new plant or lower the
operating costs for natural gas feed and fuel to an existing
plant[ It will also be advantageous to recover the hydro!
gen at the highest possible pressure to reduce compression
costs[ Depending on the pressure of the recovered hydro!
gen\ the size and operating horsepower of the makeup
compressor may be reduced if recovered hydrogen is
available as feed to it|s second or third stage[ The tail gas
from the hydrogen recovery unit is used either as fuel
or as feed to hydrotreaters\ depending on its hydrogen
content and pressure[ Its value as fuel gas will probably
be less than hydrotreater feed gas[ Fuel gas is valued for
its energy content as equivalent natural gas\ and hydro!
treater feed gas is valued for its hydrogen content[ The
economic incentives for recovering hydrogen may di}er
for a new plant vs a retro_t to an existing plant where
equipment already exists[ For a new plant\ depending on
reliability and operating factors\ the designer may not
want to downsize the hydrogen plant based on HRU
capability[ In this case\ if hydrogen makeup capacity
and compression is already installed\ only operating cost
savings are realized by the HRU[
The most common processes for recovering hydrogen

from hydrocracker o}!gas are pressure swing adsorption\

selective permeation using polymer membranes\ cryo!
genic separation\ and gas!liquid contacting[ To select
which technology is best for a given application\ a
detailed evaluation is required that examines related pro!
cess parameters\ project considerations and economics[
Recovery of hydrogen has been studied extensively
by academia and industry[ The selection of hydrogen
puri_cation processes for various re_nery applications
and the need to use the right type of equipment for a
given situation have been studied by number of authors
0\ 1\ 2[ Bollinger et al[ 3 analysed how membranes can
improve the economics of using purge in a hydrocracker
application and Spillman 4 discussed how the use of
membranes can justify the recovery of hydrogen in vari!
ous re_nery applications[
Suppliers of puri_cation equipment market di}erent
processes to recover hydrogen\ and provide assistance
in choosing the right system for each application[ The
commonly known suppliers are UOP\ Air Products and
Dupont[ An article 5 was published by UOP that dis!
cusses the principles of operation of each process\ the
project characteristics to be considered and the selection
guidelines for various applications[ UOP have also pub!
lished an article 6 that discusses the strategies for man!
aging hydrogen for various feeds and products[ The sup!
pliers of puri_cation equipment have done extensive
research on improving the e.ciency of existing sep!
aration technologies[ However\ as manufacturers con!
tinue to improve the e.ciency and reduce the cost of their
puri_cation equipment\ the selection and optimization of
a hydrogen puri_cation process must be re!evaluated to
re~ect current economics[
The primary objective of this study was to identify
fruitful areas for hydrogen separation research\ and to

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

show where di}erent commercial schemes could be more

economic[ Four industry case studies were undertaken
in order to compare the separation technologies under
di}erent feed purity and pressure conditions[ Speci_c
results from each study case were used to reach some
overall conclusions\ and a number of sensitivity cases
were run to analyse the impact of project size\ feed purity\
fuel gas price\ improved recovery and the potential for
new technology[

396

for high ~ow rates and when high purity is required[ The
adsorbents are very durable and normally last the life of
the project[
PSA systems are insensitive to changes in feed com!
position giving constant product purity and recovery[
They also have a good turndown ratio\ and are very
reliable despite their complex valve system[ Expansion
will likely require a complete new unit\ and bed diameters
are limited\ as plug ~ow operation is desirable[
1[1[ Membrane separation

1[ Separation processes
The separation processes\ namely pressure swing
adsorption\ polymeric membranes\ cryogenic separation
and gas!liquid contacting are based on di}erent sep!
aration principles\ and therefore the process charac!
teristics di}er signi_cantly[ New separation technologies
are also emerging that could improve recoveries or pro!
duce hydrogen at higher product pressures[
1[0[ Pressure swin` adsorption "PSA#
PSA is a hydrogen recovery process in which the
impurities "CH3\ CO1\ CO\ H1O etc[# in a gas stream are
removed in adsorbent beds[ The adsorbents are normally
made of molecular sieve\ activated carbon\ activated alu!
mina or silica gel depending on speci_c application[ The
impurities adsorbed at higher partial pressure are
desorbed at lower partial pressure[ Since very little hydro!
gen is adsorbed relative to methane and other light hydro!
carbons\ high pressure hydrogen is recovered[ The
adsorber beds are regenerated by reducing the pressure
from feed to tail gas pressure and then purging with a
portion of the product hydrogen[ The operation is on a
cyclic basis where each bed is controlled at a di}erent
step in its sequence[ Since there is a low pressure drop
"9[96 MPa# through the PSA unit\ product hydrogen is
available near feed pressure[ The process features very
high product purity "88)# and moderate hydrogen
recovery "5489)# depending on the tail gas pressure[
The recoveries are moderate because a part of the product
hydrogen is normally utilized for regenerating the beds[
A correlation by UOP 5 indicated that recovery is fairly
insensitive to feed pressure with 02[6816[47 MPa being
about the optimum[ It was also found that tail gas pres!
sure has the greatest e}ect on recovery\ with low pressure
"9[923 MPa# tail gas having 0419) better recovery than
9[30 MPa tail gas[ However the cost to compress low
pressure tail gas to enter the 9[30 MPa fuel gas system
can be signi_cant and the operating pressure of a PSA
system must be optimized[
PSA systems require an elaborate interconnecting pip!
ing system with process control to continually cycle the
valves through their pressurization and depressurization
sequence[ Up to 01 adsorbers can be operated in concert

Membrane separation processes use di}erences in rela!

tive permeation rates of the feed gas to e}ect a separation[
Faster permeating components in the feed\ such as hydro!
gen\ pass through the membrane to the low pressure side
by dissolving into the polymer membrane on the high
pressure side and di}using through to the low pressure
side[ The slower permeating hydrocarbons are retained
on the high pressure side[ High permeation rates are due
to high solubilities\ high di}usivities\ or both[ The driving
force is the di}erence in partial pressure\ with the highest
driving force giving the highest recovery[ The polymeric
membranes used for separation are cellulose acetate\
polyacetate\ polysulfonate\ polyamide and polyimide[
Membrane systems recover hydrogen at moderate purity
"8984)# and moderate recovery "7489)#[ Additional
membrane area is required for higher recoveries[ A cor!
relation by UOP 5 indicated a tradeo} between recovery
and purity\ with a signi_cant decrease in recovery with a
slight increase in purity[
A membrane unit is installed as a skid!mounted mod!
ule having either hollow tubes or ~at sheets for the mem!
brane itself[ A preheater exchanger and separator is
required to knock out any heavy components that could
condense and damage the membrane[ Hydrogen sulphide
can damage the membrane and must be removed from
the feed gas\ usually by amine treating[ The membranes
have to be replaced every _ve years[ The permeate hydro!
gen pressure is usually taken as low as possible to max!
imize the pressure di}erential[ This pressure is usually
the same as that of the hydrogen plant so both streams
can be fed to the _rst stage of the makeup compressor[
The tail gas pressure is near feed pressure and is let down
for use as fuel gas[ Energy from the let down in pressure
could drive a turbine if the ~ow rate is signi_cant[
Changes in feed composition will have a large a}ect
on product purity[ A unit can be turned down with little
penalty in recovery[ Membranes have no moving parts
and are extremely reliable[ Additional modules can be
added for expansion or increased recovery[
1[2[ Cryo`enic separation
The cryogenic separation processes 1 utilize partial
condensation to remove the hydrocarbon impurities from

397

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

the product hydrogen[ The process takes advantage of

the di}erences in volatilities of the feed components to
e}ect the separation[ Hydrogen has a high volatility com!
pared to methane and other light hydrocarbons[ The
hydrocarbon impurities are condensed by Joule!Thomp!
son refrigeration derived from throttling the condensed
liquid hydrocarbons[ The process is best used when the
feed pressure is low\ the feed hydrogen content is less
than 39) and there are higher concentrations of heavier
hydrocarbons which can be easily condensed[ There is
also a trade!o} between hydrogen purity\ recovery\ and
tail gas pressure with moderate purities "8984)# being
achieved with high recoveries "8984)# when the tail gas
pressure is kept low "9[96 MPa#[
Cryogenic separation is best at high throughputs or
when hydrocarbon components must be isolated[ How!
ever it is cost intensive and has less ~exibility in processing
varying feed compositions[ Sometimes the process
requires supplemental refrigeration[ The process is con!
sidered less reliable than PSA or a membrane and the
feed needs pretreatment or else freezing can occur[ Due
to apparent disadvantages of cryogenic separation for
hydrogen puri_cation\ it was not considered in this study[
1[3[ Gas!liquid contactin`
Gas!liquid contacting has been used for many years to
purify gas streams[ The absorption of light hydrocarbons
from a hydrogen stream into hydrocarbon solvents is
termed the sponge oil process[ The hydrocarbon solvents
used for absorption can be either pure or mixed[ The
mixed solvents are obtained from re_nery streams which
lie in the range of gasoline to gas oil[ One important
advantage of this process is that the product hydrogen
leaving the system is near feed pressure which reduce
makeup compression requirements[ In the mixer!sep!
arator gas!liquid contacting process the high pressure
hydrogen stream is contacted with a liquid in a high
pressure unit where the hydrocarbon gases are selectively
absorbed in the liquid[ The gas and liquid phases are then
separated in a high pressure separator to obtain puri_ed
hydrogen[ The liquid containing dissolved gas is regen!
erated by ~ashing at a low pressure[ The regenerated
liquid is recycled to the mixer[ The desorbed gas from the
low pressure separator will be at a lower hydrogen con!
tent and is typically used as fuel gas[
An advanced form of this process has been researched
by Peramanu 7 to identify process improvements using
a countercurrent contacting unit and better solvents[ This
project was carried out at the University of Calgary as a
part of the Industrial Hydrogen Chair Program[ Coun!
tercurrent contacting provided higher purity and recov!
ery than a mixer!separator unit because of a higher con!
centration driving force[ Solvents such as iso!octane\ n!
octane\ 0!octane and methyl cyclohexane are most
e.cient and selective for absorbing light hydrocarbons

than conventional solvent which is modeled by toluene

8[ It is expected that re_nery and chemical streams con!
taining components with a structure similar to these sol!
vents would be good candidates for the sponge oil
process[ It was also identi_ed 09 that the presence of
ethane in the hydrogen stream increases methane sel!
ectivity and the addition of a heavier para.n compound
"eicosane# in toluene increases the absorption capacity
of a toluene solution[ Mass transfer measurements were
carried out 00 as well\ in a high pressure packed column
absorber\ to collect design data up to 06[13 MPa and at
11>C[
The countercurrent absorption process provides a
moderate purity "7484)# and high recovery "7484)#[
Pretreatment is generally not required since the recir!
culating solvent is normally insensitive to the impurities
present[
1[4[ New technolo`ies
New technologies are being developed such as vacuum
swing adsorption "VSA#\ advanced pressure swing
adsorption "APSA# and selective surface ~ow "SSF#
membranes[ The performance and cost expectations indi!
cate further potential for improving the economics of
hydrogen recovery[
1[4[0[ Vacuum swin` adsorption
This process is under development by Air Products
and Chemicals Ltd[ In this process the tail gas side of the
adsorber is under partial vacuum\ with normal pressures
on the feed side[ This may not be attractive for hydrogen
separation as the tail gas requires an extensive recom!
pression[ It would\ perhaps\ be better in a separation
where the tail gas can be vented[
1[4[1[ Advanced pressure swin` adsorption
An advanced pressure swing adsorption for hydrogen
recovery is currently under development by Highquest
Engineering 01[ This system operates at low working
pressures and will separate hydrogen from low con!
centration o}!gases[ The system uses a proprietary con!
trol operation using multiport valves instead of multiple
bed cycles with pressure equalization between beds
undergoing pressurization and depressurization steps[
The rotary multiport valve design allows higher cycle
frequencies and smaller beds[
1[4[2[ Selective surface ~ow membrane
Selective surface ~ow membranes are being developed
by Air Products and Chemicals Ltd[ and are now com!
mercially available[ The hydrogen separation e.ciencies
of selective surface ~ow membranes in the presence of
other components have been studied 02\ 03[ Unlike
other polymeric membranes the selective surface ~ow
membranes allow non!hydrogen components "CH3\ CO1\

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

CO\ H1S etc[# to ~ow through and thereby retain the

product hydrogen near feed pressure[

2[ Factors in~uencing the economics

Process variables which must be de_ned and analysed
include feed composition\ feed and process pressure\ ~ow
rate\ HRU product purity\ makeup compressor feed and
makeup compressor interstage pressures[ Higher purity
hydrogen is usually more valuable for hydrotreater feed
or as makeup hydrogen[ Higher pressure product hydro!
gen will be more valuable as this reduces makeup com!
pression costs 04[ Tail gas from the hydrogen recovery
unit will be more valuable as fuel gas if its pressure is
above 9[3 MPa[ Any tail gas at lower pressure will require
compression to enter the fuel gas system[ The feed and
interstage pressures of the makeup compressor are also
very important and set the optional product pressures[
Project related factors are not as well de_ned but
should be included as part of the decision criteria in
selecting a hydrogen recovery unit[ These include opera!
ting ~exibility\ turndown\ reliability\ maintenance\ and
the capability for future expansion[ If the pressure or
composition of the o}!gas changes as a result of variation
in the hydroprocesssor operation\ the hydrogen recovery
unit will need to maintain performance[ When a com!
bination of purge streams are sent to the hydrogen recov!
ery unit\ a change in composition or ~ow rate of any one
stream will a}ect the overall feed composition[ A good
hydrogen recovery unit must be able to handle less than
099) feed capacity[ Operation of a hydroprocessor
depends on a reliable supply of hydrogen feed and if part
of the makeup hydrogen is coming from the hydrogen
recovery unit\ this unit must have close to 099)
reliability[ If there could be a need to expand the hydro!
gen recovery unit later\ this will have to be factored into
the unit design[

3[ Study basis
Four case studies were analysed to evaluate the econ!
omics of di}erent recovery process options]
"0# CANMET Hydrocracker "High pressure o}!gas#[
"1# Petro!Canada Hydrocracker "High pressure purge
gas#[
"2# Imperial Oil Upgrader "Moderate pressure o}!gas#[
"3# Syncrude Hydrotreater "Low pressure purge gas#[
In order to make a fair comparison each case study
and its recovery option were evaluated in the same
manner[ The material balance for each recovery option
was simulated using the HYSIM process simulator sof!
tware to develop the feed basis\ calculate the product and

398

tail gas rates and composition\ and compute compressor

horse power requirements[ The material balance infor!
mation was then used to calculate utility requirements\
the sizing basis for each major piece of equipment\ and
capital and operating costs[ All the costs represented in
this article are in Canadian dollars[ A material balance
was made around the hydroprocessor based on the con!
sumption of hydrogen in the reaction\ gas make in the
reactor\ solution losses and recycle gas rate to determine
the o}!gas rate and composition[

3[0[ Capital cost

Capital costs were based on total installed costs that
included all equipment costs and transportation\ instal!
lation costs\ indirect costs such as project management
and support facilities\ and other non!equipment such as
civil\ electrical\ instrumentation\ piping and engineering[
Capital costs for the hydrogen puri_cation system\
incremental makeup hydrogen plant\ makeup and recycle
compressor\ and fuel gas compressor were costed using
Imperial Oil|s cost correlations and vendor input[
Di}erent equipment is used for each hydrogen recov!
ery process depending on the process conditions[
Depending on the recovery option this may include all
or part of the following]
, a complete stand!alone steam methane reforming
hydrogen plant
, a PSA unit or a membrane unit with feed knockout
drum and product cooler
, countercurrent absorption column and liquid cir!
culation pump
, static mixer and high pressure separator
, high and low pressure separators
, amine absorption and regeneration towers with recir!
culating pumps
, 2 stage reciprocal compressor with interstage coolers
"makeup compressor#
, 2 stage reciprocal compressor with interstage coolers
"hydrogen product compressor#
, oil injected screw compressor "fuel gas compressor#

3[1[ Operatin` cost

Operating costs included raw materials\ utilities\
energy\ replacements costs and other _xed and variable
costs such as labor and maintenance[ The energy costs
depend on the predicted price for natural gas and elec!
tricity[ The natural gas and the fuel gas were valued
for their energy content[ Operating costs were calculated
based on Cdn ,1[9:GJ for natural gas feed and fuel to
the hydrogen plant\ and Cdn ,9[93:kwh for electrical
power[

309

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

3[2[ Lost fuel `as cost

When a HRU is used the tail gas is used as fuel gas\
whereas\ for the option of not using any HRU "{no
HRU|# the entire feed stream is used as fuel gas[ There!
fore\ the fuel gas from {no HRU| will be of high volume
and hydrogen purity than HRU fuel gas[ The tail gas
when used as fuel gas was valued same as that of natural
gas at Cdn ,1[9:GJ[ Since it was necessary to account the
HRU fuel gas credits with respect {no HRU| fuel gas
credit\ the lost fuel gas cost for each HRU was calculated
by subtracting it|s fuel gas credit from that of {no HRU|[
3[3[ Economic comparison
The process recovery options for each case study were
compared on the same economic basis[ The capital charge
was calculated by depreciating the total capital cost over
09 years at 09) return on investment and no salvage[
The total processing cost\ which is the sum of the capital
charge and the operating cost\ could not give a fair com!
parison since it did not include the lost fuel gas cost[
Therefore\ the economic comparison was made using the
resultant cost which is the sum of capital charge\ opera!
ting cost and lost fuel gas cost[

4[ CANMET hydrocracker
The CANMET|s hydrocracking process was used as a
basis for the _rst case study[ The hydrocracker plant was
assumed to process 2079 m2:d of Cold Lake vacuum
bottoms[ The hydrocracker o}!gas has a purity of 63)
hydrogen at 02[23 MPa[ A simpli_ed process ~ow diag!
ram is shown in Fig[ 0 where the dotted lines represent
optional streams or units depending on the HRU used[
The product hydrogen is mixed with makeup hydrogen
from a high purity steam methane reforming unit to
adjust the recycle stream to 74) hydrogen and 4[986
std Mm2:d[ These constraints together with a makeup
hydrogen purity of 88[8) limit the recovery of hydrogen
by the HRU for a given purity[
Recovery options were PSA with 9[0 MPa tail gas
and 76) recovery\ PSA with 9[3 MPa tail gas and 56)
recovery\ membrane with 89) recovery\ mixer!separator
with toluene solvent and 89) recovery\ countercurrent
absorber with iso!octane solvent and 85) recovery\ and
the option of {no HRU|[ In the PSA and membrane
options\ a small purge stream is processed to remove gas
make impurities\ whereas the whole o}!gas stream is
treated using gas!liquid contacting[
Table 0 gives the material balance for each option and
Table 1 gives the cost sheet[ Figure 1 gives the combined
capital\ operating and lost fuel gas costs on an annual
cost basis[ The gas!liquid contacting processes gave better
economics than the membrane and PSA options due to

Fig[ 1[ CANMET hydrocracker high pressure hydrogen recov!

ery economics[

reduction in the cost of compression as given in Table 1[

The countercurrent absorber has better economics than
the mixer!separator since both mixing and phase sep!
aration occur in a single unit[ With higher recovery the
countercurrent absorber needed a smaller hydrogen
plant[ It was found that PSA with a low tail gas pressure
"9[0 MPa# gives higher costs than that with a high tail gas
pressure "9[3 MPa# because of the cost of compression[
Overall\ recovery of hydrogen from the hydrocracker
would realize annual savings of Cdn ,00 million with
implementation of a countercurrent absorber system[

5[ Petro!Canada hydrocracker
A Petro!Canada hydrocracker was used as the basis
for the second case study[ The simpli_ed diagram in Fig[
2 also shows the hydrogen recovery from low pressure
o}!gas[ This is considered in the sensitivity analysis[ Cur!
rently 9[005 std Mm2:d of high pressure o}!gas is purged
from a total o}!gas of 4[893 std Mm2:d to remove 9[9954
std Mm2:d of impurities not removed elsewhere as low
pressure solution o}!gas in the process[ The recycle gas
returned to the reactor is adjusted to 5[628 std Mm2:d
and 84) purity by adding 9[840 std Mm2:d of 88[7)
makeup hydrogen[ The o}!gas stream from the hydro!
cracker has a purity of 83[3) hydrogen and a pressure
of 06[47 MPa[ Currently this hydrocracker purge gas
stream\ containing 9[009 std Mm2:d of makeup hydro!
gen\ is used as part of the makeup hydrogen to a distillate
hydrotreater[
In the analysis the rate of purge gas feed to the HRU is

300

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

Table 0
CANMET hydrocracker o}!gas material balance
Units

PSA!LP

PSA!HP

MEMB

MIX!SEP

CC!ABS

NO!HRU

Feed basis
Volumetric rate
Temperature
Pressure
H1 purity

std Mm2:d
>C
MPa
)

0[194
26[85
02[23
62[5

0[194
26[85
02[23
62[5

0[238
26[85
02[23
62[5

3[365
26[67
02[23
62[5

3[365
26[67
02[23
62[5

0[191
27[99
00[66
62[5

HRU
H1 recovery
Product rate
Product pressure
Product H1 purity
Tail gas rate
Tail gas pressure
Tail gas H1 purity
Liquid circulation rate
Pump power

)
std Mm2:d
MPa
)
std Mm2:d
MPa
)
m2:h
kW

75[86
9[685
1[65
88[7
9[398
9[03
11[6
9[9
9[9

55[43
9[598
1[65
88[7
9[485
9[44
35[7
9[9
9[9

78[87
9[845
1[65
85[1
9[282
6[33
07[6
9[9
9[9

78[82
2[615
02[96
68[4
9[609
0[27
35[6
441
203[65

84[58
2[805
02[96
79[4
9410
0[27
16[1
397
121[54

9[9
9[9
9[9
9[9
0[191
00[66
62[5
9[9
9[9

Amine scrubber
Feed rate
Feed pressure
Product rate
Amine rate
Pump power

std Mm2:d
MPa
std Mm2:d
m2:h
kW

3[355
02[37
042[45
69
28[81

3[355
02[37
042[45
69
28[81

3[355
02[37
042[45
69
28[81

9[609
0[27
11[36
69
28[81

9\410
0[27
04[68
69
28[81

9[336
02[37
042[45
69
28[81

H1 recycle
Recovered H1 rate
SMR H1 rate
Bypass H1
Total recycle H1 rate
Recycle H1 purity

std Mm2:d
std Mm2:d
std Mm2:d
std Mm2:d
)

9[683
0[046
1[270
3[221
74[99

9[597
0[233
1[270
3[221
74[99

9[808
0[039
1[162
3[221
73[88

1[852
0[258
9[9
3[221
73[88

20[42
00[79
9[9
3[221
74[99

9[9
0[838
1[272
3[221
74[99

Electric power
HRU
HRU tail gas compressor
H1compressor stage 0
H1compressor stage 1
H1compressor stage 2

kW
kW
kW
kW
kW

0[5
0106
1524
1323
2642

0[5
9[9
1823
1600
2646

9[6
9[9
1714
1509
2644

9[9
9[9
0664
0696
2685

9[9
9[9
0429
0361
2685

9[9
9[9
1415
1329
2648

Cooling water
Product cooler
Intercooler stage 01
Intercooler stage 12

m2:h
m2:h\
m2:h

0[0
57
51

9[8
57
51

05[4
62
56

9[9
35
30

9[9
28
25

9[9
54
51

Steam
HRU

kg:h

0269

kept constant at 9[005 std Mm2:d[ Recovery of hydrogen

from an HRU would be combined with the maximum
production of the hydrogen plant "9[840 std Mm2:d# to
increase the total hydrogen feed to the hydrocracker\
allowing increased throughput to that unit[ The options
analysed were PSA with 9[0 MPa tail gas and 78) recov!
ery\ PSA with 9[3 MPa tail gas and 65) recovery\ mem!
brane with 89) recovery\ countercurrent absorber with
iso!octane solvent and 89) recovery and {no HRU|[ The
tail gas from each option was used as fuel gas\ although the

tail gases from some of the options were rich in hydrogen[

The material balance for each recovery option is sum!
marized in Table 2 and the cost sheet is given in Table 3[
The comparison of combined capital\ operating and lost
fuel gas costs on an annual cost basis is represented in
Fig[ 3[ An absorber operated at 89) recovery is shown
to be the best process option[ However\ it is evident
that there is little incentive to add an HRU due to poor
economies of scale for the HRU relative to the cost of
the hydrogen plant and makeup compressor[

301

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

Table 1
CANMET hydrocracker o}!gas cost sheet
Basis

PSA!LP

PSA!HP

MEMB

MIX!SEP

CC!ABS

NO!HRU

59[91
01[47
02[46

55[04
09[77
02[46

48[34
6[19
02[46

55[85
8[12
00[94

59[79
8[94
09[69

73[13
9[9
02[46

6[721
40[24
026[41

9[9
32[41
023[01

9[9
34[23
014[45

9[9
24[89
012[03

9[9
22[42
003[97

9[9
32[99
039[70

,1[9:GJ
,9[93:kWh
,9[355M:y
,9[585M:y

00[55
9[14
9[41
9[66

02[43
9[18
9[59
9[78

00[38
9[14
9[40
9[65

02[79
9[29
9[50
9[80

00[78
9[14
9[42
9[67

08[53
9[31
9[76
0[29

,3[28:t
,9[92:m2
,9[93:kWh
09) of cap

9[9
9[9
9[990
9[9

9[9
9[9
9[990
9[9

9[9490
9[993
9[9
9[619

9[9
9[9
9[094
9[9

9[9
9[9
9[966
9[9

9[9
9[9
9[9
9[9

,9[93:kWh
,1[9:GJ

9[902
9[249

9[902
9[249

9[902
9[249

9[902
9[249

9[902
9[249

9[902
9[249

,9[93:kWh
,9[93:kWh
,9[93:kWh

9[394
1[825
9[922
05[82

9[9
1[825
9[922
07[55

9[9
2[959
9[928
06[13

9[9
1[312
9[911
07[42

9[9
1[152
9[908
05[07

9[9
1[890
9[921
14[42

,1[9:GJ

09[14
5[40

00[68
3[86

09[17
5[37

02[36
2[18

00[81
3[73

05[65
9[9

24[56
05[82
5[40
48[00

23[68
07[55
3[86
47[31

21[46
06[13
5[37
45[18

20[83
07[42
2[18
42[65

18[48
05[07
3[73
49[50

25[41
14[42
9[9
51[94

Capital costs "Cdn M,#

H1 plant
HRU
Amine unit
COMP:HX
HRU tail gas compressor
Makeup H1 compressors
Sub!total
Operating costs "Cdn M,:y#
H1 plant
Natural gas
Electricity
Other "per std Mm2:d#
Fixed "per std Mm2:d#
HRU
Steam
Cooling water
Power
Replacement capital
Amine unit
Lean pump
Steam
COMP:HX
HRU tail gas compressor
Makeup compressor
Cooling water
Sub!total
Lost fuel gas costs "Cdn M,:y#
Fuel gas value credit
Lost fuel gas
Economics "Cdn M,:y#
Capital charge
Operating costs
Lost fuel gas
Total

6[ Imperial oil upgrader

A representative heavy oil upgrader\ based on Imperial
Oil|s planned project for Cold Lake\ was used as the basis
for the third case study[ A preliminary design had been
completed for a plant but the project was later shelved[
Data from this preliminary design\ which are internally
consistent and realistic\ were used for this case[ A sim!
pli_ed process diagram is shown in Fig[ 4[ Hydrogen is
recovered from high and low pressure purge gases from
the high conversion MICROCAT hydroprocessor
"MRC#\ naphtha distillate hydrotreater "NDHT# and gas
oil hydrotreater "GOHT# units[ The low pressure purge
gases are compressed and combined with the high pres!

sure gases for feed to the HRU[ For a feed of 5259 m2:d\
a combined purge of 0[234 std Mm2:d at 7[85 MPa is fed
to the HRU[
Recovery options were PSA with 9[0 MPa tail gas
and 76) recovery\ PSA with 9[3 MPa tail gas and 56)
recovery\ membrane with 89) recovery and {no HRU|[
The gas!liquid contacting processes were not evaluated
for this case because these processes are not economical
for feed pressures less than 09[23 MPa[ All purge gases
have been presweetened in their own amine scrubber
units to remove H1S[ High purity makeup hydrogen from
two steam methane reforming plants is added to the
recovered hydrogen to return 5[062 std Mm2:d of hydro!
gen to the hydroprocessors[ This makeup is compressed

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

302

Fig[ 2[ Petro!Canada hydrocracker high and low pressure hydrogen recovery schemes[

to 06[13 MPa in a three!stage reciprocal compressor[ Tail

gas from the HRU is sent to fuel gas in all the options[
It was identi_ed 05 that recovery systems with combined
PSA and membrane would not be advantageous since
they su}er from economies of scale[
Table 4 gives the material balance for the upgrader
and Table 5 gives the cost sheet[ Figure 5 compares the
combined capital operating and lost fuel gas costs on an
annual cost basis[ PSA with high pressure tail gas is the
most economic process compared to other options[ In
summary\ recovery of hydrogen from the hydroprocessor
could realize annual savings of Cdn ,1[4 million[

7[ Syncrude hydrotreater

Fig[ 3[ Petro!Canada hydrocracker high pressure hydrogen

recovery economics[

Syncrude|s hydrotreater purge gas was used as the

basis for the fourth case study[ A simpli_ed process ~ow
diagram is shown in Fig[ 6[ To maintain purity in the
recycle loop of their hydrotreaters\ 0[305 std Mm2:d of
low pressure o}!gas is purged at 72) hydrogen to remove
9[128 std Mm2:d of impurities[ The purge gas has a pres!
sure of 1[37 MPa and is currently used as fuel gas[
The HRU options were PSA with 9[0 MPa tail gas

303

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

Fig[ 4[ Imperial Oil upgrader moderate pressure hydrogen recovery scheme[

pressor compared to PSA\ which inputs its product

hydrogen directly into the _rst stage of the makeup com!
pressor[ Figure 7 compares combined capital\ operating
and lost fuel gas costs on an annual cost basis[ A PSA
unit operated at high tail gas pressure has the lowest cost[
In summary\ recovery of hydrogen from the hydrotreater
purge gas stream would realize annual savings of at least
Cdn ,00 million relative to {no HRU| option[

8[ Sensitivity analysis

Fig[ 5[ Imperial Oil upgrader moderate pressure hydrogen recov!

ery economics[

and 74) recovery\ PSA with 9[3 MPa tail gas and 64)
recovery\ membrane with 89) recovery and the option
of {no HRU|[ Again\ since the o}!gas pressure was quite
low the gas!liquid contacting processes were not
considered[ The recovery systems were modeled to deter!
mine product compression requirements\ utilities and the
capital cost basis[
The material balance for each recovery option is given
in Table 6 and the cost sheet is given in Table 7[ The
membrane option requires an additional product com!

A number of sensitivity analyses were carried out to

study the economic e}ect due to various factors[ Project
size\ feed purity\ fuel gas price and improvement in recov!
ery were studied for Petro!Canada|s low pressure o}!gas
and the impact of the ideal recovery process was studied
with the basis of Petro!Canada|s high pressure o}!gas[
The schematic diagram of Petro!Canada|s low pressure
and high pressure o}!gas recovery processes is given in
Fig[ 2[
A number of low pressure o}!gas streams are produced
in the re_nery that are potential candidates for hydrogen
recovery[ The hydrocracker generated 9[981 std Mm2:d
of low pressure o}!gas from the hot and low pressure
separators and the naphtha reformer produced 9[172 std
Mm2:d of low pressure hydrogen[ The hydrocracker o}!
gas has 76[3) hydrogen at a pressure of 1[10 MPa\ and
the naphtha reformer o}!gas has 72) hydrogen and a
pressure of 0[27 MPa[ Both of these streams are currently
used as fuel gas[ If the hydrogen is recovered from these
o}!gases it can be added to the hydrogen makeup stream
from the hydrogen plant[ However a hydrogen com!
pressor will be required to bring the product hydrogen

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

304

Fig[ 6[ Syncrude hydrotreater low pressure hydrogen recovery scheme[

Fig[ 7[ Syncrude hydrotreater low pressure hydrogen recovery

economics[

up to 1[96 MPa\ the pressure of the makeup hydrogen

from the hydrogen plant[
8[0[ Project size and feed purity
Petro!Canada|s low pressure o}!gas was chosen as the
feed basis for this sensitivity[ The results of the economic
study 05 for this case indicated that it is not economical
to recover hydrogen from only 9[264 std Mm2:d of low
pressure o}!gas using either a PSA or membrane[
Figure 8 compares the cost per ton of recovered hydro!

Fig[ 8[ Sensitivity analysis of project size and feed purity[

gen for 9[172\ 9[455\ 9[749 and 0[022 std Mm2:d of low
pressure o}!gas containing 79) hydrogen and 74)
hydrogen in the feed[ The price of new hydrogen was
assumed to be Cdn ,699:t and therefore the economic
cut!o} "hurdle cost# is Cdn ,699 per ton of recovered
hydrogen[ It can be seen that project sizes more than
9[455 std Mm2:d are required to make the 74) feed
economic[ At 79) hydrogen purity\ the hurdle cost can
be met by a ~ow rate of at least 9[697 std Mm2:d\ thereby
allowing an extra 9[031 std Mm2:d of lower purity feed
to be added[ In summary\ the larger the hydrogen recov!

305

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

Table 2
Petro!Canada hydrocracker purge gas material balance
Units

PSA!LP

PSA!HP

MEMB

CC!ABS

NO!HRU

Feed basis
Volumetric rate
Temperature
Pressure
H1 purity

Std Mm2:d
>C
MPa
)

9[011
26[67
5[30
83[3

9[022
26[67
5[30
83[3

9[011
26[67
6[58
83\3

9[206
26[67
06[47
83[3

9[005
26[67
06[47
83[3

HRU
H1 recovery
Product rate
Product pressure
Product H1 purity
Tail gas rate
Tail gas pressure
Tail gas H1 purity
Liquid circulation rate
Pump power

)
std Mm2:d
MPa
)
std Mm2:d
MPa
)
m2:h
kW

77[40
9[091
5[16
88[7
9[919
9[03
55[5
9[9
9[9

65[36
9[985
5[16
88[7
9[926
9[41
79[2
9[9
9[9

78[89
9[094
1[03
88[6
9[907
5[78
46[8
9[9
9[9

78[78
9[179
06[06
85[9
9[926
0[27
71[10
31
13[12

9[9
9[9
9[9
9[9
9[005
06[47
83[3
9[9
9[9

H1 recycle
Recovered H1 rate
SMR H1 rate
Bypass H1
Total recycle H1 rate
Recycle H1 stream purity

std Mm2:d
std Mm2:d
std Mm2:d
std Mm2:d
)

9[091
9[742
4[347
5[303
84[06

9[985
9[769
4[337
5[303
84[07

9[092
9[741
4[347
5[303
84[06

9[158
9[769
4[163
5[303
84[06

9[9
9[838
4[353
5[303
84[05

Electric power
HRU
HRU tail gas compressor
H1 compressor stage 0
H1 compressor stage 1
H1 compressor stage 2

kW
kW
kW
kW
kW

4[9
56
0774
1092
628

4[9
9[9
0812
1017
628

1[9
9[9
1974
1015
628

9[9
9[9
0787
0833
628

9[9
9[9
1987
1980
628

Cooling water
Product aftercooler
Intercooler stage 01
Intercooler stage 12

m2:h
m2:h
m2:h

0[6
38
43

0[5
49
43

0[7
43
43

9[9
38
49

9[9
43
42

Steam
HRU

kg:h

0269

ery unit\ the better the economics will be\ due to economy
of scale[
8[1[ Fuel `as price
The study cases assumed that fuel gas would have the
same energy value as natural gas at Cdn ,1[9:GJ[ The
lost fuel gas from feed is a signi_cant component of the
annual cost[ The higher the fuel gas price\ the higher the
loss[ It may be optimistic to assume that fuel gas has the
same value as natural gas[ If there is a high percentage
of hydrogen in the fuel gas\ the ~ow rates per GJ will be
higher than natural gas[ Also\ if there are signi_cant
volumes of heavier hydrocarbons\ the fuel gas may not
burn as clean unless modi_cations are made to the
burners[

Petro!Canada|s low pressure feed to PSA with low

pressure tail gas was chosen as a basis to show the impact
on the cost of recovery for a range of fuel gas prices[
Figure 09 shows that the hurdle cost of Cdn ,699:t could
be met if the assumed value of fuel gas was reduced to
Cdn ,0[3:GJ[ A lower fuel gas price will improve the
economics of all study cases[

8[2[ Improved recovery

The economic e}ect of having very high recovery has
been identi_ed in each case study for a theoretical PSA
unit having 099) recovery 05[ However\ this option is
not economic because the capital cost of such a unit is
probably higher than a conventional unit\ which is also

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

306

the unit[ For PSA with low pressure tail gas\ improving
recovery from 7484) reduces the capital cost of recov!
ery by only about 4)[ The cost to develop these necessary
improvements to the conventional PSA process may not
be justi_ed[ Again for the membrane\ improvements in
recovery result in only a small reduction in recovery costs[
Unlike a PSA unit\ a polymeric membrane will have
a _nite maximum possible recovery[ When the partial
pressure on both sides of the membrane are equal the
membrane has reached its maximum recovery[ Therefore\
for a low pressure o}!gas feed at 1[96 MPa and a tail gas
of 9[923 MPa\ the maximum recovery is 82)\ compared
with the base case of 89) recovery[
8[3[ Ideal recovery

Fig[ 09[ Sensitivity analysis of fuel gas price[

true for a theoretical membrane unit having 099)

recovery[
Petro!Canada|s low pressure o}!gas was chosen as the
feed basis for the sensitivity analysis of improved recov!
ery[ Figure 00 shows the economic impact of having
improved recoveries for a PSA and membrane units hav!
ing the same capital cost as the base recovery case[ It is
assumed that improvements in recovery would come
from future process improvements and optimization to

Fig[ 00[ Sensitivity analysis of improved recovery[

The ideal hydrogen recovery process\ if it could be

developed through continued research and development\
would feature 84) hydrogen recovery\ 88[8) product
hydrogen purity\ a pressure near the feed pressure and at
least 9[3 MPa tail gas pressure[ This sensitivity study
attempted to examine the economic impact if an ideal
PSA\ membrane or absorption process were developed\
with capital costs kept the same as the previous case with
the same recovery but lower purity[
Petro!Canada|s high pressure purge gas was used as
the feed basis[ This stream is 06[37 MPa at 9[005 std
Mm2:d containing 83[3) hydrogen[ If the operating
objective is to replace new hydrogen from a hydrogen
plant with recovered hydrogen from a hydrogen recovery
unit\ the economic objective is to recover hydrogen for
less than the operating cost to make new hydrogen\ which
is Cdn ,275:t\ based on a 0[305 std Mm2:d size hydrogen
plant[
Recovery cases at 74\ 89 and 84) were run for each
of the three recovery processes\ each assuming that
hydrogen could be recovered at 88[8) purity[ This target
is easier achieved with a PSA than a membrane or a
column absorber[ A membrane recovering 88[8) pure
hydrogen in its permeate stream would reach its partial
pressure driving force limit at 84) recovery[ Achieving
high purity and recovery in an absorber system is more
di.cult and would require a highly selective and e.cient
solvent[ In all cases\ the capital cost was kept the same
as the base recovery case[ These conventional tech!
nologies will need to be optimized without increasing
their capital or operating cost[
Figure 01 shows that none of the processes make the
hurdle cost of Cdn ,275:t when the feed rate is only 9[005
std Mm2:d[ Even if the PSA and membrane systems could
be operated at higher product pressure to eliminate the
need for their makeup compression\ these technologies
don|t make it[ The biggest lever to improving any of these
processes is to reduce their capital cost[ This may be
possible in the future with further improvements in tech!
nology but likely only marginal[ Increasing the feed rate

307

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

Table 3
Petro!Canada hydrocracker purge gas cost sheet
Basis

PSA!LP

PSA!HP

MEMB

CC!ABS

NO!HRU

38[17
3[68

38[80
3[53

38[11
1[40

38[80
0[65

41[71
9[9

9[83
14[02
79[03

9[9
14[41
79[96

9[9
15[42
67[14

9[9
13[10
64[77

9[9
15[28
68[19

,1[9:GJ
,9[93:kWh
,9[355M:y
,9[585M:y

7[509
9[073
9[271
9[457

7[670
9[077
9[289
9[468

7[481
9[073
9[270
9[456

7[670
9[077
9[289
9[468

8[468
9[194
9[314
9[521

,3[28:t
,9[93:kWh
09) of Cap

9[9
9[991
9[9

9[9
9[991
9[9

9[94
9[990
9[140

9[9
9[997
9[9

9[9
9[9
9[9

,9[93:kWh
,9[93:kWh
,9[93:kWh

9[911
0[463
9[915
00[24

9[9
0[483
9[915
00[45

9[9
0[537
9[916
00[69

9[9
0[414
9[914
00[38

9[9
0[539
9[916
01[40

,1[9:GJ

9[15
9[67

9[39
9[53

9[13
9[79

9[21
9[61

0[93
9[9

19[68
00[24
9[67
21[81

19[66
00[45
9[53
21[86

19[29
00[69
9[79
21[79

08[57
00[38
9[61
20[78

19[43
01[40
9[9
22[91

Capital costs "Cdn M,#

H1 plant
HRU
COMP:HX
HRU tail gas compressor
Makeup H1 compressors
Sub!total
Operating costs "Cdn M,:y#
H1 plant
Natural gas
Electricity
Other "per std Mm2:d#
Fixed "per std Mm2:d#
HRU
Steam
Power
Replacement capital
COMP:HX
HRU tail gas compressor
Makeup compressor
Cooling water
Sub!total
Lost fuel gas costs "Cdn M,:y#
Fuel gas value credit
Lost fuel gas
Economics "Cdn M,:y#
Capital charge
Operating costs
Lost fuel gas
Total

to 9[172 std Mm2:d improves the economies of scale

shown in Fig[ 02[ Now both the membrane and the
absorber system meet the hurdle rate of hydrogen plant
operating cost[
If the capacity of an existing hydrogen plant is limited\
a new plant would need to be built that would add about
Cdn ,203:t for capital depreciation[ The capital
depreciation of Cdn ,203:t and the operating cost of
Cdn ,275:t add up to Cdn ,699:t[ However\ purchased
hydrogen from an outside source would probably exceed
Cdn ,699:t[ It is evident from the sensitivity studies that
higher hydrogen costs always favor installation of hydro!
gen recovery units[

09[ Conclusions
It was found that CANMET|s hydrocracker would
save Cdn ,00M:y with implementation of a counter!

current absorber using solvent properties similar to iso!

octane[ This is a reduction of Cdn ,2M:y over the current
mixer!separator design using an aromatic solvent simu!
lated by toluene[ A countercurrent absorption system is
shown to have a small cost advantage over other options
for recovery from Petro!Canada hydrocracker high pres!
sure purge gas[ There is no advantage to recover hydro!
gen if this purge stream continues to be used as hydrogen
feed to their distillate hydrotreater[ Imperial Oil|s
upgrader could save Cdn ,1M:y if either a PSA with high
pressure tail gas or a membrane recovery system was
implemented[ Syncrude|s hydrotreater would realize
annual savings of Cdn ,02 million relative to new hydro!
gen at Cdn ,699:t if a PSA\ operated at high tail gas
pressure\ was installed[
PSA systems recover hydrogen at 88[8) purity which
minimizes the purge rate in a recycle system[ The
highest recovery occurs when the tail gas pressure is
the lowest "usually 9[923 MPa#[ Compression of the tail

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

Fig[ 01[ Sensitivity analysis of ideal recovery for small size project[

Fig[ 02[ Sensitivity analysis of ideal recovery for large size project[

308

319

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

Table 4
Imperial Oil upgrader o}!gas material balance
Units

PSA!LP

PSA!HP

MEMB

NO!HRU

Feed basis
Volumetric rate
Temperature
Pressure
H1Purity

std Mm2:d
>C
MPa
)

0[234
25[67
1[85
56[9

0[234
25[67
1[85
56[9

0[234
25[67
8[06
56[9

0[234
25[67
1[85
56[9

HRU
H1Recovery
Product rate
Product pressure
Product H1 purity
Tail gas rate
Tail gas pressure
Tail gas H1 purity

)
std Mm2:d
MPa
)
std Mm2:d
MPa
)

74[9
9[663
1[72
88[9
9[460
9[03
12[6

55[9
9[590
1[72
88[9
9[633
9[41
30[1

89[9
9[751
1[72
83[9
9[372
7[85
07[7

9[9
9[9
1[72
88[9
0[234
1[85
56[9

H1 recycle
Recovered H1 rate
SMR H1 rate
Total recycle H1rate
Recycle H1 purity

std Mm2:d
std Mm2:d
std Mm2:d
)

9[655
4[283
5[062
88[68

9[483
4[456
5[062
88[70

9[709
4[294
5[062
88[97

9[9
5[056
5[062
88[89

Electric power
HRU feed compressor
HRU tail gas compressor
H1 compressor stage 0
H1 compressor stage 1
H1 compressor stage 2

kW
kW
kW
kW
kW

9[9
0544
8414
8202
3985

9[9
9[9
8414
8202
3985

0443
9[9
8405
8294
3983

9[9
9[9
8414
8202
3985

Cooling water
Feed compressor cooler
Product cooler
Intercooler stage 01
Intercooler stage 12

m2:h
m2:h
m2:h
m2:h

9[9
02
579
237

9[9
09
579
237

32
04
573
249

9[9
9[9
579
237

Steam
Feed preheater

kg:h

0489

0489

0489

9[9

gas to 9[3 MPa\ for use as fuel gas\ is expensive and

tips the scale in favor of low recovery with high tail
gas pressure[ Membranes are interesting because of the
simplicity of the process\ with no moving parts and
good turnaround capability[ However the membrane
must have a positive hydrogen partial pressure driving
force\ which limits recovery\ and the pressure of the
recovered hydrogen is low which adds compression
costs[ Countercurrent absorption has shown renewed
potential as an economic hydrogen recovery process
when the feed pressure is high[ This system also features
removal of hydrogen sulphide[ Conventional PSA and
membrane systems have probably been optimized to
their greatest extent[ Further stepwise improvements
will likely require newer technology such as vacuum

swing adsorption\ advanced pressure swing adsorption

and selective surface ~ow membranes[
The sensitivity analysis showed that the higher the pro!
ject size and the purity of the feed gas the more is the
advantage of using hydrogen recovery processes[ Since lost
fuel gas is a major component of operating costs\ there is
even more incentive to recover hydrogen if fuel gas cost is
low[ Conventional PSA and membrane systems would
realize very little economic bene_t if process recovery only
is improved through research[ An analysis of the ideal
recovery process\ where maximum product purity and tail
gas pressure is obtained at no increase in capital cost\
showed that recovery from high pressure purge gas will
still require an economy of scale to be competitive with
incremental hydrogen from a hydrogen plant[

310

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

Table 5
Imperial Oil upgrader o}!gas cost sheet
Basis

PSA!LP

PSA!HP

MEMB

NO!HRU

084[93
8[99

087[65
6[63

082[00
4[03

100[24
9[9

9[9
7[87
55[19
9[1
168[32

9[9
9[9
55[19
9[1
161[89

6[07
9[9
55[04
9[1
160[66

9[9
9[9
55[19
9[9
166[44

,1[9:GJ
,9[93:kWh
,9[355M:y
,9[585M:y

45[70
0[10
1[41
2[64

47[52
0[14
1[59
2[76

44[77
0[08
1[37
2[58

53[84
0[28
1[77
3[17

,3[28:t
,9[92:m2
,9[93:kWh
4) of cap

9[947
9[992
9[991
9[349

9[947
9[992
9[991
9[276

9[947
9[993
9[990
9[146

9[9
9[9
9[9
9[9

,9[93:kWh
,9[93:kWh
,9[93:kWh
,9[93:kWh

9[9
9[440
6[523
9[146
62[13

9[9
9[9
6[523
9[146
63[58

9[406
9[9
6[517
9[158
60[85

9[9
9[9
6[523
9[146
70[28

,1[9:GJ

05[18
5[29

06[69
3[78

03[04
7[33

11[48
9[9

61[37
62[13
5[29
041[91

69[67
63[58
3[78
049[25

69[38
60[85
7[33
049[78

60[88
70[28
9[9
042[27

Capital costs "Cdn M,#

H1 plant
HRU
COMP:HX
Feed compressor
HRU tail gas compressor
Makeup H1 compressors
HRU product cooler
Sub!total
Operating costs "Cdn M,:y#
H1 plant
Natural gas
Electricity
Other "per std Mm2:d#
Fixed "per std Mm2:d#
HRU
Steam
Cooling water
Power
Other capital related
COMP:HX
Feed compressor
HRU tail gas compressor
Makeup compressor
Cooling water
Sub!total
Lost fuel gas costs "Cdn M,:y#
Fuel gas value credit
Lost fuel gas
Economics "Cdn M,:y#
Capital charge
Operating costs
Lost fuel gas
Total

311

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

Table 6
Syncrude hydrotreater purge gas material balance
Units

PSA!LP

PSA!HP

MEMB

NO!HRU

Feed basis
Volumetric rate
Temperature
Pressure
H1 purity

std Mm2:d
>C
MPa
)

0[313
26[67
1[47
72[0

0[329
26[67
1[47
72[0

0[588
26[67
1[47
72[0

0[305
26[67
1[47
72[0

HRU
H1 recovery
Product rate
Product pressure
Product H1 purity
Tail gas rate
Tail gas pressure
Tail gas H1 purity

)
std Mm2:d
MPa
)
std Mm2:d
MPa
)

73[49
0[991
1[92
88[8
9[312
9[03
32[3

64[90
9[782
1[92
88[8
9[426
9[41
44[2

78[58
0[219
9[41
85[9
9[268
9[41
27[3

9[9
9[9
1[92
88[4
0[305
9[41
72[0

H1 recycle
Recovered H1 rate
SMR H1 rate
Total recycle H1 rate
Recycle H1 stream purity

std Mm2:d
std Mm2:d
std Mm2
)

0[999
9[9
0[999
88[8

9[781
9[9
9[781
88[8

0[156
9[9
0[156
85[9

9[9
0[066
0[066
88[8

Electric power
HRU
HRU product compressor
HRU tail gas compressor
H1 compressor stage 0
H1 compressor stage 1
H1 compressor stage 2

kW
kW
kW
kW
kW
kW

4[9
9[9
0274
0773
0784
2845

4[9
9[9
9[9
0568
0578
2414

1[9
3932
9[9
3932
4803
4050

9[9
9[9
9[9
1105
1117
3543

Cooling water
Product aftercooler
Intercooler stage 01
Intercooler stage 12

m2:h
m2:h
m2:h

06
38
38

04
32
32

12
093
041

9[9
46
46

Steam
HRU

kg:h

9[9

9[9

0269

9[9

312

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

Table 7
Syncrude hydrotreater o}!gas cost sheet
Basis

PSA!LP

PSA!HP

MEMB

NO!HRU

9[9
02[13

9[9
01[25

9[9
6[28

59[69
9[9

9[9
7[51
12[79
34[55

9[9
9[9
10[10
22[46

05[88
9[9
14[02
38[40

9[9
9[9
16[88
77[58

,1[9:GJ
,9[93:kWh
,9[355M:y
,9[585MM:y

9\9
9[9
9[9
9[9

9[9
9[9
9[9
9[9

9[9
9[9
9[9
9[9

00[75
9[14
9[42
9[67

,3[28:t
,9[92:m2
,9[93:kWh
09) of Cap

9[9
9[993
9[991
9[9

9[9
9[993
9[991
9[9

9[94
9[995
9[990
9[628

9[9
9[9
9[9
9[9

,9[93:kWh
,9[93:kWh
,9[93:kWh
,9[93:kWh

9[9
9[350
0[142
9[993
0[62

9[9
9[9
0[010
9[993
0[02

0[235
9[9
2[203
9[995
4[35

9[9
9[9
0[368
9[9
03[80

,1[9:GJ

7[22
7[01

8[18
6[05

6[52
7[71

05[34
9[9

00[73
0[62
7[01
10[58

7[60
0[02
6[05
06[99

01[73
4[35
7[71
16[01

12[99
03[80
9[9
26[80

Capital costs "Cdn M,#

H1 plant
HRU
COMP:HX
HRU product compressor
HRU Tail gas compressor
Makeup H1 compressors
Sub!total
Operating costs "Cdn M,:y#
H1 plant
Natural gas
Electricity
Other "per Mm2:d#
Fixed "per Mm2:d#
HRU
Steam
Cooling water
Power
Replacement capital
COMP:HX
HRU product compressor
HRU tail gas compressor
Makeup compressor
Cooling water
Sub!total
Lost fuel gas costs "Cdn M,:y#
Fuel gas value credit
Lost fuel gas
Economics "Cdn M,:y#
Capital charge
Operating costs
Lost fuel gas
Total

References
0 Schendel RL\ Mariz CL\ Mak JY[ Is Permeation Com!
petitive<[ Hydrocarbon Processing 0882^August]47[
1 Wang SI\ Nicholas DM\ DiMartino SP[ Analysis Dictates
H1 Puri_cation Process[ Oil and Gas J[ 0873^February]000[
2 Tomlinson TR\ Finn AJ[ H1 Recovery Processes
Compared[ Oil and Gas J[ 0889^January]24[
3 Bollinger WA\ Long SP\ Metzger TR[ Optimizing Hyd!
rocracker Hydrogen[ Chem[ Eng[ Prog[ 0873^May]40[
4 Spillman RW[ Economics of Gas Separation Membranes[
Chem[ Eng[ Prog[ 0878^January]30[
5 Miller GQ\ Stoecker J[ Selection of a Hydrogen Separation
Process\ NPRA Annual Meeting\ San Francisco\ Cali!
fornia\ 0810 March\ 0878[
6 Haun EC\ Anderson RF\ Kau} DA\ Miller GQ\ Stoecker J[
The E.cient Re_nery*Hydrogen Management in 0889|s[
Spring Technology Conferences\ 0889[

7 Peramanu S[ Absorption!Stripping Process for the Puri!

_cation of High Pressure Hydrogen] Solubility\ Mass
Transfer and Simulation Studies\ Ph[D[ Dissertation\ Uni!
versity of Calgary\ Canada\ 0887[
8 Peramanu S\ Pruden BB[ Solubility Study for the Puri!
_cation of Hydrogen from High Pressure Hydrocracker
O}!gas by an Absorption!Stripping Process[ Can[ J[ Chem[
Eng[ 0886^64]424[
09 Peramanu S\ Pruden BB[ Mass Transfer Coe.cients in a
Packed Column Absorber from the High Pressure Data of
Sponge Oil Absorption Process[ IIChE Proceedings
0886^0]265[
00 Peramanu S\ Pruden BB\ Clarke PF[ High Pressure Solu!
bilities of Hydrogen and Methane in Toluene in the Pres!
ence of Ethane and Eicosane[ J[ Chem[ Eng[ Data
0887^32"4#]754[
01 Keefer B\ Guenkel A\ Wolfs W[ Hydrogen Recovery from
Re_nery O}gases by Advanced Pressure Swing Adsorp!

313

S[ Peramanu et al[ : International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 13 "0888# 394313

tion\ 33th Canadian Chem[ Eng[ Conference\ 14 October\

0883[
02 Parrillo DJ\ Thaeron C\ Sircar S[ Separation of Bulk
Hydrogen Sul_de*Hydrogen Mixtures by Selective Sur!
face Flow Membrane[ AIChE J[ 0886^32]1128[
03 Paranjape M\ Clarke PF\ Pruden BB\ Parrillo DJ\ Thaeron
C[ Sircar S[ Separation of bulk Carbon!dioxide!Hydrogen
Mixtures by Selective Surface Flow Membranes[ Accepted
in ADSORPTION\ 0886[

04 Cox BG\ Pruden BB[ The Cost of Hydrogen Compression\

Industrial Hydrogen Chair Program\ University of
Calgary\ Canada\ Report No[ 86!90\ 0886[
05 Cox BG\ Peramanu S\ Pruden BB[ Puri_cation of Hydrogen
from Hydroprocessor Purge and O}!gases\ Industrial
Hydrogen Chair Program\ University of Calgary\ Canada\
Report No[ 85!90\ 0885[