Question 31: With heavy gas oil hydrotreating and mild hydrocracking units producing diesel product with 30 to 50 ppm sulfur, what options do you employ to recover maximum volume of ULSD? Are there other diesel quality concerns, and how are they resolved? How does the yield and quality change over the cycle?

We have many customer examples of FCCPT units and mild hydrocracking (MHC) units directly producing on-spec ULSD with Criterion catalyst systems. Many refiners who are making 30 to 50 ppm sulfur diesel from hydrotreating and/or mild hydrocracking units are able to blend this into the diesel pool and still have the whole pool meet the less than 15 ppm diesel sulfur specification.

Question 30: What technologies do you use for mild hydrocracking of heavy gas oil over a range of conversions and product selectivity? Please elaborate on commercial experiences.

The theory and key considerations in utilizing mild hydrocracking (MHC) in an FCCPT unit were covered very thoroughly in Question 77 in the 2009 Answer Book, so I will not repeat what I consider to be the basic background information. Instead, I will try to compare the actual results achieved commercially from the various options. Several different technologies are available, and I will only highlight the keys.

Question 29: What level measurement technology is used in the hydrotreater high-pressureseparator? Is the recommendation different if the unit runs in block modes (with feeds of varying densities)? What design considerations should be taken into account when selecting a high-pressure separator level control valve?

Like any instrumentation, there are advantages and disadvantages for different types of instrumentation in almost any service; therefore, there is no single choice of a Best Practice in all situations. Experiences vary from refiner to refiner, and even sometimes from unit to unit within a refinery depending on many factors, both technical and non-technical. It is important to understand the choices within both contexts. As the non-technical factors –such as instrument technician experience, refinery standards, etc. –are too general, they will not be addressed directly.

Question 27: What methods do you use to reduce particulate loading on or debottleneck of existing filtration equipment in a HPU unit without reducing catalyst cycle life?

The use of feed filters is highly recommended, but it is important to choose a filter size that will be manageable; meaning that if a 5-micron filter is used, it will most likely have to be replaced or backflushed several times per day, which is not practical. However, if a too-large filter size is used, it will not be effective. The only way to reduce the particulate loading on a feed filter is to increase the filter size, thus allowing more material to slip through.

Question 26: We are interested in minimizing our black oil production from the FCC by recycling heavy cycle oil and/or slurry to our FCC feed hydrotreater for aromatic saturation and further cracking. Do you have any experience with this operating mode or recommendations for reduced slurry make via optimization of an FCC pretreat unit?

Limiting the discussion to HCO, if phenanthrene or anthracene are hydrotreated, one ring readily saturates and a second ring is relatively easy to saturate. A three-ring aromatic with one terminal ring saturated readily opens the saturated ring in an FCC riser, which makes a diesel boiling range diaromatic. If two rings are saturated, gasoline can be produced from this ring opening. As long as the molecule is linear (not Poly condensed), the saturated ring can enter the zeolite cage.

Question 25: For refinery complexes considering grassroots or brownfield expansion of gas oil conversion capacity, what are your typical capital expenditure (capex) costs and relative refinery margin improvement between FCC (fluid catalytic cracking) and hydrocracking? What are the key technology features that impact your economic decision? What are the crucial considerations that, if they include both technologies, to allow for future integration, especially around the changing gasoline/diese

In general, Marathon’s economic viewpoint is that hydrocrackers have better projected margins going forward than FCCUs, as they maximize higher valued ULSD over gasoline and have higher volume expansion (see Figure 1). This is driven by many factors mentioned in the primary response and is particularly attractive when ULSD is strong relative to gasoline and when natural gas or hydrogen) is inexpensive. Each company has a different viewpoint on this topic, so the opinion will vary somewhat across the industry.

Question 24: How do you manage reactor maldistribution once identified?

Reactor maldistribution is a phenomenon that is typically caused by inadequately designed or installed reactor internals, improperly/unevenly loaded catalyst bed, catalyst migration from an upstream bed, or process fouling. The main problems generated by flow maldistribution are the overuse of part of a catalyst inventory and the formation of hot spots, which can create a process safety risk, as well as limit the performance of the cycle.

Question 23: How do you operate mid-distillate selective recycle hydrocracking units to generate more naphtha while minimizing fuel gas/liquefied petroleum gas without catalyst replacement?

Maintaining flexibility to make gasoline versus ULSD (ultra-low sulfur diesel) is very important to most refiners today due to the volatile nature of the market. Understanding the economic goals of your process unit and building in the flexibility through your catalyst selection process is the best way to set up your process for flexibility in the coming run.