Life Cycle Cost Analysis of Coke Production from Delayed Coking Process

Abstract:

Life cycle cost (LCC) analysis was performed for a 1.6 million tons per year (30,000 BPD) delayed coking unit. The results show that the LCC of coke production is higher than the price of coke and profits are obtained at the expense of environmental costs. The feedstock cost accounts for a majority of LCC. The variability impacts of processing expenses and carbon dioxide (CO₂) price on LCC are relative similar. This suggests that if a higher CO₂ price is imposed on coke production, it is unlikely that the producer will make any effort to reduce the CO₂ emissions either by improving the efficiency of coking process or implement CO₂ remediation initiatives. The CO₂ price increase will be considered as a processing cost increase. The green factor (GF) is predominantly dependent on coke price; an increased coke price improves the GF significantly. Increased CO₂ price has a negative impact on GF, but the relative incremental impact of CO₂ price on GF is less at high CO₂ prices. Hence, there is little can be done to improve the GF of coke production, since the coke price is beyond the control of coke producer.

• Periodical: Advanced Materials Research (Volume 849)
• Pages: 380-386
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMR.849.380
• Online since: November 2013
• Authors: Ren Jin Sun*, Keng H. Chung, Siauw Ng, Hao Wang
• Keywords: Environment, Green Factor, Life Cycle Cost (LCC), Petroleum Coke

References

[1] H.P. Barringer, A Life Cycle Cost Summary, International Conference of Mainte, (2003).

[2] Hydrocarbon Processing, 2011 Handbook of Refining Processes, p.67.

[3] Dalian West Pacific Petrochemical Company Ltd., Environmental Impact Assessment Report: 1. 6 mt/a delayed coking unit, http: /dlhjgzw. com/jsxmgs. aspx?idss=939.

[4] Sichuan Publishing House of Science and Technology, Chongqing, Environment Statistical Manual, 1985, p.247.

[5] Economic Evaluation Parameters of Construction Project in CNPC, 2008, p.77.

[6] China Gold Investment, http: /www. cngold. org/shjy/list_107_all. html.

[7] F. Tang, and M. Zhang, Product cost distribution and control method of refinery enterprise, J. Southwest Petroleum Institute, 1999, 21(2), pp.92-94.

[8] H. Wang, Z. Xiao, and X. Li, and Y. Yang, China and foreign refinery energy consumption calculation method and comparison, SINOPEC Economics and Development Research Institute, (2008).

[9] PetroChina Refining and Chemicals Company, Basic data compilation of refining production device, May (2011).

[10] Y. Qian, Z. Huang, and Y. Jiang, Life cycle costing of the chemical products, Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2006, 25(2), 126-130.

[11] Z. Huang, and Y. Qian, Life cycle cost analysis and its application, Chemical Industry and Engineering Progress, 2007, 26(8), 1186-1190.

[12] M.D. Bovea, and R. Vidal, Increasing product value by integrating environmental impact, costs and customer valuation, Resources, Conservation and Recycling, 2004, 41, 133-145.

DOI: 10.1016/j.resconrec.2003.09.004

[13] H. Wang, Z. Xiao, X. Li, and Y. Yang, Energy efficiency and optimization of Delayed coking Unit, Sino-Global Energy, 2010, 15(1), 112-115.