The Catalyst Review February 2020 - 11

SPECIAL FEATURE
Another example we
highlight, which we think
stands out with some
interesting conclusions, is
the revamp for the Polish
refiner Grupa LOTOS, when
in 2011 it installed and made
operational a new generation
of DAO hydrocracking
technology as part of a major
resid upgrading project
called the 10+ Programme.
In this case, it raised refining
capacity by 75%, focused on
higher margin diesel fuels to
increase market share and
enhanced margins by $5 per
barrel.

Table 1. Announced Oil-to-Chemicals Investments 2019.

In this case, the two units
added by Shell Global
Solutions were a 45,000
bpd DAO hydrocracker using
50/50 VGO/DAO straight off
Source: TCGR, 2019.
these units, with the added
DAO unit. What is interesting
using Urals feedstock is that the hydrocrackers, inclusive of both HDM, HDS and HDN, were able to increase conversion to 85% from
60% with a recycle mode.
Based on the information from these examples and assuming the VDU and ADU are already in place investments, then, an SDA unit
(KBR, Rose, or Axens Hyvahl or SELEX-Asp) depending on the product slate chosen, is a considered first step at a lower approximate
cost of $250-280 MIL. The following issue depends on how much existing HDM, HDS and HC capacity that exist.
Recommendations and Conclusions

In summary, there has been a long history in the incremental developments (decades in fact) leading to what can be described as
"Oil-to-Chemicals (OtC)." For a long period of time, building larger and larger world scale and more complex refineries and steam
cracking (SC) plants was the economic solution best suited to the fundamentals of medium to heavy crude oil conversion, and in
some countries, this will still be the case. However today, we have entered a different era, where the socioeconomic, as well as
supply/demand trends are shifting, and the traditional business models of segregated refining vs chemicals production no longer
hold true
The ongoing drive for improved profitability profiles, derived by producing petrochemicals as opposed to fuels, has justified the
increased pace of the O-t-C movement.  Not only are demands for olefins and aromatics growing more quickly than gasoline and
diesel, the profit margins for these petrochemicals are also higher, and even more so when made directly via O-t-C conversion routes.
Although moderate to date, the commitments to these plant configurations will require retrofits as well as new CAPEX using skilled
laborers and EPCs. As the former are limited and the latter is notoriously cyclical (as is the energy/fuels industry), it is important to
assess how large and when these events will impact the availability of (and price for) skilled labor. To what degree will envisioned
projects be delayed or their price increase, as a result?
The two O-t-C approaches - carbon out and hydrogen in - have implications across related technologies.  Coking will remain a "go
to" for carbon-out with any advances having outsized impacts (due to the breath of implementation, e.g., delayed coking); hydrogen
supplies will need to increase or become more flexible (without additional energy/CO2 impacts) in order to address the range of
upgrading requirements.
The Catalyst Review 										

	

February 2020

11
The Catalyst Review February 2020

Table of Contents for the Digital Edition of The Catalyst Review February 2020
