IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jsusta/v14y2022i15p9612-d880513.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Feasibility Study, Exergy, and Exergoeconomic Analyses of a Novel Flare Gas Recovery System

Author

Listed:
  • Mohammad Mehdi Parivazh

    (Department of Chemical Engineering, Amirkabir University of Technology (Tehran Polytechnic), Tehran P.O. Box 15875-4413, Iran)

  • Milad Mousavi

    (Department of Chemical Engineering, School of Chemical, Petroleum and Gas Engineering, Shiraz University, Shiraz P.O. Box 71946-84334, Iran)

  • Mansoor Naderi

    (Department of Energy System Engineering, Petroleum University of Technology, Abadan P.O. Box 63187-14317, Iran)

  • Amir Rostami

    (Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of Petroleum, Gas and Petrochemical Engineering, Persian Gulf University, Bushehr P.O. Box 75169-13798, Iran)

  • Mahdieh Dibaj

    (Department of Engineering, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QF, UK)

  • Mohammad Akrami

    (Department of Engineering, University of Exeter, Exeter EX4 4QF, UK)

Abstract

One of the challenging issues that has always attracted the attention of the experts is how to control and reduce greenhouse gas emissions because of their overwhelming negative environmental impacts. Although burning the hazardous gaseous products in the flare systems boosts the safety of gas and oil fields and diminishes the internal pressure of the extraction systems, it has a catastrophic impact on the surrounding environment. In this study, a new system was designed to recover flare gas. In this system, ejectors and compressors are used in parallel to compress flare gas. One of the aims of this system is to minimize environmental disadvantages and prevent the waste of national capital. The described system is firstly simulated using the HYSYS software based on Peng–Robinson state equations. The efficiency and exergy destruction can be calculated through exergy analysis, which is the second step in the process. Finally, by considering investment and fuel cost to each exergy flow, exergoeconomic analysis was evaluated. From the exergy analysis results, it can be concluded that the ejectors have the highest exergy efficiency (99.87%) compared with other devices in the process, and their total exergy destruction rate is 8458.35 kW. Findings from exergoeconomic analysis suggest that the highest exergy destruction cost for flare system is associated with EJ-3 ejector which is 89.01 USD/h. Furthermore, a sensitivity analysis was applied to specify the dependency of the exergy and exergoeconomic results of this process on the flow rate of recovered gas and flare gas pressure as important input plant feed parameters. By this study, we aim to evaluate the feasibility of the implementation of this system in an industrial plant.

Suggested Citation

  • Mohammad Mehdi Parivazh & Milad Mousavi & Mansoor Naderi & Amir Rostami & Mahdieh Dibaj & Mohammad Akrami, 2022. "The Feasibility Study, Exergy, and Exergoeconomic Analyses of a Novel Flare Gas Recovery System," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-23, August.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:15:p:9612-:d:880513
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9612/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/2071-1050/14/15/9612/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Garousi Farshi, L. & Mahmoudi, S.M.S. & Rosen, M.A., 2013. "Exergoeconomic comparison of double effect and combined ejector-double effect absorption refrigeration systems," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 103(C), pages 700-711.
    2. Lazzaretto, Andrea & Tsatsaronis, George, 2006. "SPECO: A systematic and general methodology for calculating efficiencies and costs in thermal systems," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 31(8), pages 1257-1289.
    3. Comodi, Gabriele & Renzi, Massimiliano & Rossi, Mosè, 2016. "Energy efficiency improvement in oil refineries through flare gas recovery technique to meet the emission trading targets," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 109(C), pages 1-12.
    4. Naderi, Mansoor & Ahmadi, Gholamreza & Zarringhalam, Majid & Akbari, Omidali & Khalili, Ebrahim, 2018. "Application of water reheating system for waste heat recovery in NG pressure reduction stations, with experimental verification," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 1183-1192.
    5. Mohamadi-Baghmolaei, Mohamad & Hajizadeh, Abdollah & Zahedizadeh, Parviz & Azin, Reza & Zendehboudi, Sohrab, 2021. "Evaluation of hybridized performance of amine scrubbing plant based on exergy, energy, environmental, and economic prospects: A gas sweetening plant case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 214(C).
    6. Rivero, Ricardo & Rendón, Consuelo & Gallegos, Salvador, 2004. "Exergy and exergoeconomic analysis of a crude oil combined distillation unit," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 29(12), pages 1909-1927.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Zhao, Yajing & Wang, Jiangfeng, 2016. "Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of a flash-binary geothermal power system," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 179(C), pages 159-170.
    2. Silva, J.A.M. & Flórez-Orrego, D. & Oliveira, S., 2014. "An exergy based approach to determine production cost and CO2 allocation for petroleum derived fuels," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 490-495.
    3. Cao, Yan & Habibi, Hamed & Zoghi, Mohammad & Raise, Amir, 2021. "Waste heat recovery of a combined regenerative gas turbine - recompression supercritical CO2 Brayton cycle driven by a hybrid solar-biomass heat source for multi-generation purpose: 4E analysis and pa," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 236(C).
    4. Fidelis. I. Abam & Ogheneruona E. Diemuodeke & Ekwe. B. Ekwe & Mohammed Alghassab & Olusegun D. Samuel & Zafar A. Khan & Muhammad Imran & Muhammad Farooq, 2020. "Exergoeconomic and Environmental Modeling of Integrated Polygeneration Power Plant with Biomass-Based Syngas Supplemental Firing," Energies, MDPI, vol. 13(22), pages 1-27, November.
    5. Silva, J.A.M. & Oliveira, S., 2014. "An exergy-based approach to determine production cost and CO2 allocation in refineries," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 67(C), pages 607-616.
    6. Yosaf, Salem & Ozcan, Hasan, 2018. "Exergoeconomic investigation of flue gas driven ejector absorption power system integrated with PEM electrolyser for hydrogen generation," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 163(C), pages 88-99.
    7. Wei, Zhiqiang & Zhang, Bingjian & Wu, Shengyuan & Chen, Qinglin & Tsatsaronis, George, 2012. "Energy-use analysis and evaluation of distillation systems through avoidable exergy destruction and investment costs," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 424-433.
    8. Charalampos Michalakakis & Jonathan M. Cullen, 2022. "Dynamic exergy analysis: From industrial data to exergy flows," Journal of Industrial Ecology, Yale University, vol. 26(1), pages 12-26, February.
    9. Shokati, Naser & Ranjbar, Faramarz & Yari, Mortaza, 2015. "Exergoeconomic analysis and optimization of basic, dual-pressure and dual-fluid ORCs and Kalina geothermal power plants: A comparative study," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 83(C), pages 527-542.
    10. Zhao, Yajing & Wang, Jiangfeng & Cao, Liyan & Wang, Yu, 2016. "Comprehensive analysis and parametric optimization of a CCP (combined cooling and power) system driven by geothermal source," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 97(C), pages 470-487.
    11. Farshi, L. Garousi & Khalili, S., 2019. "Thermoeconomic analysis of a new ejector boosted hybrid heat pump (EBHP) and comparison with three conventional types of heat pumps," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 170(C), pages 619-635.
    12. Abdolalipouradl, Mehran & Mohammadkhani, Farzad & Khalilarya, Shahram, 2020. "A comparative analysis of novel combined flash-binary cycles for Sabalan geothermal wells: Thermodynamic and exergoeconomic viewpoints," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 209(C).
    13. Janghorban Esfahani, Iman & Yoo, Changkyoo, 2014. "A highly efficient combined multi-effect evaporation-absorption heat pump and vapor-compression refrigeration part 2: Thermoeconomic and flexibility analysis," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 75(C), pages 327-337.
    14. Olusegun David Samuel & Peter A. Aigba & Thien Khanh Tran & H. Fayaz & Carlo Pastore & Oguzhan Der & Ali Erçetin & Christopher C. Enweremadu & Ahmad Mustafa, 2023. "Comparison of the Techno-Economic and Environmental Assessment of Hydrodynamic Cavitation and Mechanical Stirring Reactors for the Production of Sustainable Hevea brasiliensis Ethyl Ester," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 15(23), pages 1-27, November.
    15. Seyed Mohammad Seyed Mahmoudi & Ramin Ghiami Sardroud & Mohsen Sadeghi & Marc A. Rosen, 2022. "Integration of Supercritical CO 2 Recompression Brayton Cycle with Organic Rankine/Flash and Kalina Cycles: Thermoeconomic Comparison," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(14), pages 1-29, July.
    16. Oyekale, Joseph & Petrollese, Mario & Cau, Giorgio, 2020. "Modified auxiliary exergy costing in advanced exergoeconomic analysis applied to a hybrid solar-biomass organic Rankine cycle plant," Applied Energy, Elsevier, vol. 268(C).
    17. Roque Díaz, P. & Benito, Y.R. & Parise, J.A.R., 2010. "Thermoeconomic assessment of a multi-engine, multi-heat-pump CCHP (combined cooling, heating and power generation) system – A case study," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 35(9), pages 3540-3550.
    18. Raúl Arango-Miranda & Robert Hausler & Rabindranarth Romero-López & Mathias Glaus & Sara Patricia Ibarra-Zavaleta, 2018. "An Overview of Energy and Exergy Analysis to the Industrial Sector, a Contribution to Sustainability," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 10(1), pages 1-19, January.
    19. Moein Shamoushaki & Mehdi Aliehyaei & Farhad Taghizadeh-Hesary, 2021. "Energy, Exergy, Exergoeconomic, and Exergoenvironmental Assessment of Flash-Binary Geothermal Combined Cooling, Heating and Power Cycle," Energies, MDPI, vol. 14(15), pages 1-24, July.
    20. Sadi, M. & Arabkoohsar, A., 2019. "Exergoeconomic analysis of a combined solar-waste driven power plant," Renewable Energy, Elsevier, vol. 141(C), pages 883-893.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jsusta:v:14:y:2022:i:15:p:9612-:d:880513. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.