1

ABSTARACT
The purpose oI this project is to design the process Ior producinga DME. This was done using two
diIIerent approaches, the direct method and the indirect method. The required capacity was 3000
ton/yr and the desired purity oI the product was 99 wt. Throughout this project the main emphasis
was on how to structure and simulate a process plant, and on the construction oI an economic analysis
Ior the plant. The other considerations in this project were maximizing the energy recovery and
minimizing the raw material consumption.








































2


Contents

1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 4

2 DME Production: Direct method

2.1 Project basis ........................................................................................................... 6
2.2 Process description ................................................................................................ 7
2.2.1 Flowsheet ......................................................................................................... 7
2.2.2 Process consepts ............................................................................................... 9
2.2.2.1 ReIorming process ................................................................................. 9
2.2.2.2 Adiabatic prereIorming ....................................................................... 10
2.2.2.3 Autothermal reIorming ........................................................................ 10
2.2.2.4 DME production in the Fluidized-Bed Reactor .................................. 13
2.3 Simulation in UniSim .......................................................................................... 16
2.3.1 Pre-reIorming ......................................................................................... 16
2.3.2 Auto thermal reIorming .......................................................................... 17
2.3.3 Producing high, medium and low pressure steam .................................. 18
2.3.4 Production oI DME in Iluidized-bed reactors ........................................ 19
2.3.5 Separation ............................................................................................... 20
2.3.6 Heat integration ...................................................................................... 22
2.3.7 Case studies ............................................................................................ 24
2.4 Equipment description ........................................................................................ 26
2.4.1 Reactors .................................................................................................. 26
2.4.2 Separator ................................................................................................. 26
2.4.3 Distillation towers .................................................................................. 27
2.4.4 Storage tanks .......................................................................................... 28
2.4.5 Heat exchangers ..................................................................................... 28
2.4.6 Reactor exchangers ................................................................................ 29
2.4.7 Fired heaters ........................................................................................... 29
2.4.8 Pumps ..................................................................................................... 30
2.4.9 Turbine ................................................................................................... 30

3

2.5 Mass and Energy balance .................................................................................. 31
2.6 Economic estimation ........................................................................................... 33
2.6.1 Fixed capital cost .................................................................................... 33
2.6.2 Working capital cost ............................................................................... 34
2.6.3 Operating cost ........................................................................................ 34
2.7 Investment analaysis ........................................................................................... 40
2.7.1 Evaluation parameters ............................................................................ 40
2.7.2 Sensitivity analysis Ior variation and ROI ............................................. 41
2.7.3 Breakeven analysis ................................................................................. 42

3 DME Production: Indirect method

3.1 Project basis ......................................................................................................... 44
3.2 Process description .............................................................................................. 45
3.2.1 Flowsheet ....................................................................................................... 45
3.2.2 Process consepts ............................................................................................. 46
3.3 Simulation in UniSim .......................................................................................... 48
3.3.1 Feed conditioning ................................................................................... 48
3.3.2 Production oI DME in Iixed-bed reactor ................................................ 49
3.3.3 Separation ............................................................................................... 50
3.4 Equipment description ........................................................................................ 51
3.4.1 Reactor ................................................................................................... 51
3.4.2 Storage tanks .......................................................................................... 51
3.4.3 Compressor ............................................................................................. 51
3.4.4 Heat exchangers ..................................................................................... 51
3.4.5 Pumps ..................................................................................................... 52
3.4.6 Towers .................................................................................................... 52
3.5 Mass and Energy balance .................................................................................. 53
3.6 Economic estimation ........................................................................................... 55
3.6.1 Fixed capital cost .................................................................................... 55
3.6.2 Working capital cost ............................................................................... 56
3.6.3 Operating cost ........................................................................................ 56
3.7 Investment analaysis ........................................................................................... 57
3.7.1 Evaluation parameters ............................................................................ 57

4

3.7.2 Sensitivity analysis Ior variation and ROI ............................................. 58
3.7.3 Breakeven analysis ................................................................................. 60
4 Discussion ................................................................................................................ 61
5 Conclusion and recommendation ......................................................................... 63
List of symbols ........................................................................................................... 64
References .................................................................................................................. 66
Appendices ................................................................................................................. 66



























5

1 Introduction

Natural gas can be used to produce a large amount oI petrochemicals, including methanol and
ammonia. These substances however, use a relatively small percentage oI the gas reserve and
have limited markets. Liquids and other petroleum products are cheaper to transport, market,
and distribute. These can be moved in existing pipelines or product tankers Ior NG and even
blended with existing crude oil or product streams. Further, no special contractual
arrangements are required Ior their sale with many suitable domestic and Ioreign markets.
New technology is being developed and applied to convert natural gas to liquids in gas to
liquids technology (GTL
1
). As a generalization however, GTL is not competitive against
conventional oil production unless the gas has a low opportunity value and is not readily
transported. The GTL process not only adds value, but is capable oI producing products that
could be sold or blended into reIinery stock to reduce superior products with Iewer pollutants
Ior which there is growing demand.
Catalytic conversion oI NG
2
to more useIul chemicals and Iuels is a challenge Ior the 21
st

century. Dimethyl ether (DME) made Irom natural gas is one such possible process. As DME
is so easily liqueIied at ambient temperature (GTL process), and the Iact that liquids are easier
to transport over great distances than compressed gases makes DME an interesting substance.
LPG
3
existing inIrastructures such as tanks and tankers could be used with minor
modiIications.
DME is potentially a highly competitive renewable alternative to today`s Iossil Iuels. DME
has several properties that make it attractive as a Iuel Ior diesel engines, including no sulIur
emission, very low particulate emission and high cetane number. Combustion and emission
tests have proven that aIter minor modiIications oI a diesel engine, DME can be added to
diesel Iuels, thus lowering smoke and NOX

emissions, but with the same thermal eIIiciency.
Traditionally DME has been used to produce intermediate chemicals such as dimethyl sulIate
or oxygenated compounds. Today DME is used mainly as a propellant Ior spray cans, but the
beneIicial properties oI using DME as a substitute Ior LPG (industrial and residential) and

1 Gas to liquid
2 Natural gas
3 LiqueIied petroleum gas

6

LNG
4
in power plants, and as diesel oil substitute in vehicles makes DME one oI the superior
candidates Ior high-quality Iuel Ior the next generation.
What is DME?
Dimethyl ether (DME) is the simplest ether having the chemical Iormula: CH
3
OCH
3
. Table
1.1 contains physical properties and combustion characteristics oI DME and relating Iuels oI
current interest.
Table 1.1: Physical properties of DME and other relevant fuels
1]

Properties DME Propane Methane Diesel fuel
Chemical Iormula CH
3
OCH
3
C
3
H
8
CH
4


Boiling Point |
o
C| -25,1 -42,0 -161,5 180 - 370
Liquid density |g/cm
3
|at 20
o
C 0,67 0,49 0,42 0,84
Liquid viscosity |kg/ms| at 25
o
C 0,12 - 0,15 0,2 - 2 - 4
Relative density oI gas |ratio air| 1,59 1,52 0,55 -
Vapor pressure |Mpa| at 25
o
C 0,61 0,93 - -
Explosion limit || 3,4 - 17 2,1 9,4 5 - 15 0,6 6,5
Cetane number 55-60 5 0 40 - 55
Net caloriIic value |kcal/Nm
3
| 14,200 21,800 8,600 -
Net caloriIic value |kcal/kg| 6,900 11,100 12,000 10,000

DME is a chemically stable and colourless gas. It has a boiling point oI - 25.1
o
C and a vapour
pressure oI about 0.6 MPa at ambient temperature, which makes DME easily liqueIied. The
physical properties oI DME are very similar to those oI LPG, thus DME can be distributed
and stored (etc.) using LPG handling technology.
DME decomposes in the troposphere and does not aIIect the greenhouse eIIect and ozone
layer. The substance does not corrode any metals. However some elastomers would swell in a
liquid DME. In addition DME is non carcinogenic and harmless in any way as demonstrated
by decades oI use in human care products.
DME plants
The worldwide production and use oI DME has been relatively small. Approximately
10 000 ton/yr are produced in Japan, and no more than 150 000 ton/yr worldwide. Existing
DME plants are small and selling DME in high price chemical market. Table 1.2 describes the
world production oI DME per company and country.


4 LiqueIied natural gas

7

Table 1.2: Existing DME plants in the world per 1une 2006
2].
Company Country Capacity ton/yr]
Shell/RWE Germany 60 000
Hamburg DME Co Germany 10 000
AKZO The Netherlands 10 000
DuPont West Virginia, USA 15 000
MGC Sumitomo, Japan 10 000
Australia 10 000
Taiwan 15 000
Liutianhua group Luthianhua, China 110 000 - Ior Iuel
Jiutai group Jiutai etc. China 120 000 - Ior Iuel Irom coal
Ningxia Coal Group China 210 000 ton/yr - Ior Iuel Irom coal

To be competitive in the Iuel marked the DME-plant has to have a capacity oI at least
1-2 millions ton/yr (about 3000 ton/d). The two plants considered in this report both have a
capacity oI about almost 2880 ton/day. DME commercial plant projects around the world are
listed below
|2|
.

China: Liutianhua group completed a 10 000 ton/yr DME plant in September 2003. This
group also successIully started up a 110 000 ton/yr DME plant that was Iinished in 2006 in
Sichuan Province. Ningxia Coal Group also started up a 210 000 ton/yr DME plant Irom coal
in 2007. In Addition Jiutai group plans to build a 1 million ton/yr DME plant Irom coal in
Mongolia.

Iran: Zagros Petrochemical has reported to construct 800 000 ton/yr DME plant in Bandar
Assaluyeh. (European Chemical News - June/July, 2004). The current situation is not clear.

1apan: Three big groups (JFE, Mitsubishi, Mitsui) are separately planning production oI
about 2 000 000 ton/yr DME in the Middle East, Australia or South East Asia. These
companies want to import DME to Japan.

Fuel DME Production Co., Ltd. ('FDME), a joint venture Irom Japan made its Iirst delivery
oI DME to its customers in January 2009. In June 2008, FDME successIully completed a trial
operation oI the Fuel DME Promotion Plant (Niigata City, Japan) with a capacity oI
80 000 ton/yr. The Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) is courting three major Japanese companies,
including Marubeni Corp, Ior a possible tie-up Ior setting up a $600 million plant Ior
producing DME Ior use as alternate Iuel in power plants. The 1.8 million tonne capacity DME

8

plant would be located in one oI the natural gas producing Middle-East Asian countries and
would be built at an estimated cost oI $500 million.

Preparation of DME
Nowadays, DME is commercially prepared by dehydration oI methanol using acidic porous
catalysts such as zeolites, silicaalumina, alumina, etc. Using synthesis gas as a starting
material, DME can be prepared in a one-step process (Wen-Zhi Lu, 2004).This method is
more thermodynamically and economically Iavourable than the two-step process. In this
process both the methanol Iormation reaction and the methanol dehydration reaction, to Iorm
DME, takes place in the same reactor over a dual catalyst. In the two-step process synthesis
gas is Iirst converted to methanol and then Iurther to DME. This project has investigated both
processes. Figure 1.1 present both synthesis pathways.

Figure 1.1: The indirect method above, and the direct method below
2]
.

DME Market
As the world population is growing, the increase in Iuel demand is taking oII. The Iuels used
in the world today consist mainly oI Iossil Iuels, which is harmIul to the environment. Today
the climate changes have come to an extreme point (there are seen large environmental
changes). For example the CO
2
concentration in the atmosphere has increased with
approximately 36 during the last 250 years
|3|
. See Iigure 1.2 Ior the supposed increase in
CO
2
emission in the Iuture. This is considered the most important contribution to the
increasing atmospheric greenhouse eIIect.

9


Figure 1.2: CO
2
emission in millions ton from 1973 till today, and the supposed emission in year 2010
4]

Almost 5 oI the natural carbon cycle is man-made emission, which is around 32 billion ton
oI CO
2
pr year. Burning oI Iossil Iuels, like coal, oil and gas, is one oI the largest
contributions. The world leaders have taken action and restricted the amount oI emission oI
pollution. As the population is growing and the people oI the world is getting more
enlightened and engaged about the environment, major companies have seen the possibilities
and advantages oI more environmentally benign Iuels such as DME.

As mentioned, DME decomposes in the troposphere and does not aIIect the greenhouse eIIect
and ozone layer. The substance does not contain sulphur or ash. When burned it has lower
CO
2
-emission and does not generate any SO
x
or particulate matter. It is a clean Iuel oI high
cetane, has excellent combustion characteristics and extremely low toxicity. ThereIore it has
more environmentally attractive properties than existing Iuels. Thus DME is potentially a
highly competitive renewable alternative to today`s Iossil Iuels and other disadvantageous
chemicals. In the LPG market DME/LPG blend (up to 30) appear promising. The
technology Ior storage and transportation already exist. Only minor modiIications are needed.
For the power generation market DME is oIten competing with other Iuels such as LNG, coal,
and nuclear.
The diesel market is the most promising area. The diesel engines need only minor changes to
run on liquid DME. However the concept might need more time to grow. Considering the Iuel
cell market much depends on the Iuel cell development. As petrochemical Ieedstock DME has
potential. One example is the production oI oleIin Irom DME. There is a growing oleIin
market in Asia.

10

2 DME Production: Direct method

2.1 Project basis

A preliminary block diagram Ior a DME process is shown in the in Figure 2.1. The raw
materials are natural gas, water and oxygen. Natural gas is Ied to the plant at 50C and 70 bar.
Water, at 25C and 1 bar, is coming Irom the sea which has been processed and puriIied by
the desalination membrane. It is assumed that oxygen, as the third Ieed, is entered the plant at
50C and 30 bar. DME as a Iinal product should be almost pure. The target oI our project is
producing 3000 metric tons per day oI 99 wt purity DME.

The other considerations in this project are maximizing the energy recovery by producing
HPS
5
, MPS
6
and LPS
7
or heat integration in the plant, as well as minimizing the raw material
consumption. The location Ior the two plants considered in this project is chosen to be the
available land at Tjeldbergodden (industrial site near the sea).


Figure 2.1 Block diagram

5 High pressure steam
6 Medium pressure steam
7 Low pressure steam

11

2.2 Process description
2.2.1 Flowsheet

The detailed Ilowsheet Ior the production oI DME Irom natural gas (direct method) is shown
in Iigure 2.2. The Ieed Ior the process is natural gas with given composition (see appendix A)

and condition (50
o
C, 70 bar), and water, Ied to the process at 25
o
C and 1 bar. To reach the
pre-reIormer reactor conditions (455
o
C and 30 bar) the natural gas had to be expanded by
using K-100 and heated. The water stream had to be compressed by P-100 and heated. It is
assumed that there is no pressure drop in any oI the heat exchangers including E-100 and
E-101.In the pre-reIorming part, the alkane steam reIorming and water gas shiIt reaction take
place.

In the autothermal reIormer part, oxygen and the pre-reIormer product had to be heated to
550c beIore entering the autothermal reIormer. In the autothermal reIormer, partial oxidation
oI methane is conducted in order to produce the heat required Ior the endothermic reIorming
reactions. The product oI ATR has high temperature (1000C).

In order to cool the high temperature gaseous product and separating water, this stream is
entered to the series oI heat exchangers (E-104, E-105 and E-106) Ior producing high,
medium and low pressure steam. AIter cooling the gases, waste water is separated in V-100.

Because oI the FBR
8
conditions, the gaseous outlet oI V-100 is heated to 260c, in E-107, and
is combined with recycled reactant, stream 49, and then the mixture is Ied to the three parallel
Iluidized-bed reactors (FBR series). A series oI reactions takes place in the reactors and the
end products are DME, methanol, CO
2
, H
2
, CO and H
2
O.

The product is sent to a 3-phase separator V-101 Ior primary separation. The gaseous outlet,
stream 34, is sent to the V-102 in order to separate DME Irom the gases, stream 53.
Stream 35, mostly DME and CO
2
, is mixed with stream 53 and then they are conducted to the
Iirst distillation column, T-100. In T-100, the bottom outlet, stream 41 consists oI DME and
methanol and has to be sent to T-103 Ior separation oI DME Irom methanol. The overhead oI
T-100 is sent to T-101 and then top stream oI T-101 is conducted to T-102 Ior separating
DME Irom CO
2
. T-104 is Ior separating methanol Irom water.

8 Fluidized-Bed reactor

12



Figure 2.2 PFD


13

2.2.2 Process Concepts
2.2.2.1 Reforming Process
A typical way Ior production oI synthesis gas based on ATR is shown in Figure 2.3. The key
steps in the process scheme are desulphurization (Ior raw materials such as coal or oil),
adiabatic pre-reIorming, autothermal reIorming, and heat recovery.



Figure 2.3 Process Concepts for Synthesis Gas Production by
Adiabatic Pre-reforming and Autothermal Reforming

Production methods Irom natural gas to syngas are largely divided into three types: steam
reIorming, oxyreIorming, and CO
2
reIorming.

The steam reIorming process is mainly used Ior hydrogen and syngas production.
Syngas produced Irom steam reIorming has the high synthetic ratio (H2/CO) oI 3 and is thus
usually consumed by hydrogen production or ammonia synthesis processes. For methanol
production, with a primary synthetic ratio oI 2, it is adjusted the synthetic ratio by lowering
the hydrogen concentration through a water-gas shiIt reaction, or by a secondary reIorming
reaction, such as autothermal reIorming (Wilhelm, D.J, 2001).For DME production, a
synthetic ratio oI 1 is preIerred.


14

The oxyreIorming process (e.g., autothermal reIorming) uses oxygen as a reactant to produce
syngas and is generally used to adjust the synthetic ratio. Oxygen, or air with a high
concentration oI oxygen, is Ied into the autothermal reIorming reaction (or 'ATR) by
oxidant, and to the case, steam is added with the Ieedstock. This reaction is the most
preIerable when taking into account the thermodynamics (AH 0) among several reIorming
processes and can produce syngas with a lower synthetic ratio. This H
2
/CO ratio can be
obtained through recirculation oI CO
2
or a CO rich oI gas, as well as by reducing the amount
oI steam in the Ieed (Ruiz, J. et al, 2008). In this project, the autothermal reIorming process
was used to produce syngas with a synthetic ratio oI 2, which is being used in a DME pilot
plant (50 kg/d) by the Korean gas company (Chul-Jin Lee, et al, 2009).

2.2.2.2 Adiabatic pre-reforming
Adiabatic pre-reIorming is used Ior the reIorming oI natural gas. The process is carried out in
a Iixed-bed upstream the tubular reIormer. Higher hydrocarbons are completely converted
into CO, H
2
and CH
4
. The reactions taking place in the pre-reIormer are (Dybkjr, I., 1995):

C
n
H
m
nH
2
O nCO (nm/2)H
2
(2.1)

In case oI natural gas as Ieedstock, the overall process is endothermic, and thereIore will
result in a temperature drop since the reactor is adiabatic. For higher hydrocarbon Ieed stocks,
the pre-reIorming is exothermic or thermo neutral. With installing a pre-reIormer, all higher
hydrocarbons are completely converted into CO, H
2
and CH
4
(Dybkjr, I., 1995).

2.2.2.3 Auto thermal reforming
In autothermal reIorming (ATR), partial oxidation oI methane is conducted in order to
produce the heat required Ior the endothermic reIorming reactions. Characteristic oI the
autothermal process is that the oxygen added to generate heat is chemically bound in the
product gas, which makes the H
2
/CO ratio in the product gas lower than in other processes.
Typical operating conditions are 8501000 C and 20100 bar (Moulijin, J., et al, 2001).The
maximum temperature is not limited by the tube material but by the stability oI the catalyst
and the reIractory lining oI the reactor.
There are two types oI autothermal reIormers: pure catalytic, and with a pre-combustion unit.
In the pure catalytic reIormer, the reactants (methane, oxygen and steam) enter the catalyst
bed directly aIter mixing. This perIormance, without any residence time in the empty space

15

above the catalyst bed, results in no carbon Iormation, even at low preheat temperatures oI the
Ieedstock (methane). Steam reIorming reactions take place more quickly than the Boudouard
reaction equilibrium is tuned in. Boudouard reaction is:

2CO CO
2
C (2.2)

This makes it possible to use less steam, and hence less oxygen, which results in a higher
CO/CO
2
ratio in the product gas. The drawbacks with this purely catalytic process are high
thermal and mechanical loads on the catalyst in the immediate vicinity oI the burner.
Temperature variations during start-up and shut-down and high gas velocities lead to attrition
and catalyst disintegration, which in turn makes it necessary to replace the catalyst every two
years (K. Sommer, 1989).

ReIorming with pre-combustion in the empty space above the catalyst bed is preIerred Ior
gases that have very low risk oI carbon deposition, i.e. gases with high H
2
content and low
hydrocarbon content. This type oI reIorming requires slightly more oxygen than the pure
catalytic type, and the gas velocities must be lower (K. Sommer, 1989). For natural gas
autothermal reIorming, the concept with the pre-combustion zone is preIerred, and will be
described Iurther.

ATR
1
, as a concept, is a stand-alone process in which the entire natural gas conversion is
carried out by means oI internal combustion with oxygen. Secondary reIorming is a process in
which partially converted process gas Irom a tubular steam reIormer is Iurther converted by
means oI internal combustion. The secondary reIormer in an ammonia plant will be air-blown,
while that oI a methanol plant will be oxygen blown (Dybkjr, I., 1995).

The autothermal reIorming is usually not used on its own, due to high investment costs Ior
separation oI the oxygen Irom air. It is rather used downstream a steam reIormer, i.e. as a
secondary reIormer, in order to reIorm the unreacted methane Irom the steam reIormer. This
makes it possible to increase the pressure without increasing the temperature in the steam
reIormer, which is not Iavourable Ior the equilibrium but economically Iavourable iI the
syngas will be used Ior a high-pressure chemical synthesis.
The ATR and the secondary reIormer are, however, very similar in reactor design. They
consist oI a reIractory-lined pressure vessel (and thereIore stands higher pressures and
temperatures than the steam reIormer) with a burner, combustion chamber and catalytic bed.

1 Auto thermal reIorming

16

The reactor space can be divided into three zones (see Figure 2.4) in which diIIerent reactions
take place according to Table 2.1(Dybkjr, I., 1995).

Table 2.1 Reaction zones in an ATR
Reactor equipment Reaction zones
Burner provide mixing
Combustion chamber Combustion zone - Thermal zone
Catalyst bed Catalytic zone


Figure 2.4 Schematic picture of an ATR (Moulijin, 1., et al, 2001).

Burner
The burner provides the mixing oI the Ieed streams in a turbulent diIIusion Ilame. The core oI
the Ilame has a high temperature, oIten above 2000 C. This is why it is important to
minimize the transIer oI heat back to the burner Irom the Ilame.

Combustion zone
This is the turbulent zone in which the hydrocarbon and oxygen are mixed and combusted.
The exothermic combustion reactions are very Iast. The overall oxygen to hydrocarbon ratios
in the combustion zone varies between 0.55 and 0.6, which means that the conditions are
substoichiometric with respect to complete combustion. The combustion reactions are

17

numerous complex radical reactions, but Ior modeling purposes, it is oIten enough to describe
the reactions by an overall one molecular reaction. In case oI natural gas (Dybkjr, I., 1995):

CH
4
3/2 O
2
CO 2H
2
O (2.3)

All oxygen is consumed in the combustion zone, and the unconverted CH
4
will continue down
to the thermal zone. In case oI a secondary reIormer, also H
2
will be burnt to water in the
combustion zone according to reaction.

Thermal zone
In the thermal zone, the conversion oI the hydrocarbon proceeds via homogeneous gas phase
reactions. The main reactions are thermal methane reIorming (2.4) and WGS (2.7).

CH
4
H
2
O CO 3H
2
(2.4)

Catalytic zone
The catalytic zone is a Iixed-bed, in which the methane is Iinally converted through
heterogeneous catalytic reactions. At the exit oI the catalytic zone, the gas mixture will be in
equilibrium with respect to reactions (2.4) and (2.7) at the exit temperature and pressure.
The syngas is completely Iree oI oxygen.

2.2.2.4 DME production in the Fluidized-Bed Reactor

Three reactions take place in the syngas-to-DME process, namely:

Methanol synthesis:
CO2 3H2 CH3OH H2O AH 56.33 kJ/mol (2.5)

Methanol dehydration:
2CH3OH CH3OCH3 H2O AH 21.255 kJ/mol (2.6)

Water gas shift:
CO H2O H2 CO2 AH 40.9kJ/mol (2.7)

Overall reaction
3CO 3H2 CH3OCH3 CO2 AH 256.615 kJ/mol (2.8)


18

Reactions (2.5) and (2.7) are catalyzed by a methanol synthesis catalyst (Cu/ZnO/Al2O3) and
reaction (2.6) by an acidic catalyst (e.g. HZSM-5). These three reactions Iorm a synergistic
system yielding higher syngas conversion or greater productivity when compared to the
syngas-to-methanol process. The synergy works in the Iollowing manner: methanol, which
would otherwise be near its equilibrium value, is consumed by reaction (2.6), and water
Iormed by reactions (2.5) and (2.6) is consumed by reaction (2.7), while reaction (2.7)
generates hydrogen which improves reaction (2.5) but consumes CO which is not Iavorable.
All the three reactions are reversible and exothermic.

Moreover, the catalyst Ior reactions (2.5) and (2.7) is subject to severe deactivation when
overheated to above 270 C. To avoid thermodynamic limitations and excessive catalyst
deactivation, conventional gas-phase reactors must be operated at a low per-pass conversion
to maintain reactor temperature below 270 C, implementing a high-syngas recycle rate, and
resulting in large capital investments and operating costs. In addition, in order to avoid serious
pressure drop, the diameter oI catalyst particles in Iixed-bed reactor is usually over 4mm,
which brings a certain inner mass-transIer resistance.

The Iluidized-bed reactor is proposed as an ideal reactor Ior the DME synthesis
(Xiao, W.D., et al, 2002).Compared with the slurry reactor and Iixed-bed reactor, the gas
solid mass transIer resistance in a Iluidized-bed reactor is so small that it can be neglected,
and excellent temperature control is also achievable due to the vigorous mixing oI catalyst
particles in the bed.

Effect of reaction temperature (Wen-Zhi Lu, et al, et al, 2004)

The eIIect oI temperature is shown in Figure 2.5, which reveals that with the increase oI
temperature, there exists an optimum temperature Ior CO conversion and DME productivity
between 280 and 290 C. The existence oI optimum is partly due to the declining equilibrium
value oI CO conversion with temperature increase, and more due to the synergy oI the
diIIerent methanol synthesis and methanol dehydration catalyst component with diIIerent
active temperature regions. But it should be noted that the catalyst has to be exposed to lower
temperatures, less than 270 C, to avoid excessive deactivation. Moreover, DME selectivity
increases a little, because higher temperature is more Iavorable Ior the activity oI methanol
dehydration catalyst rather than methanol synthesis catalyst.

19


Figure 2.5 Effect of temperature on reactor performance H2/CO 1, SV 3000 ml/gcat/h, P 3MPa.

Effect of reactor pressure (Wen-Zhi Lu, et al, et al, 2004)

As is shown in Figure 2.6, increasing the pressure results an increase in CO conversion and
DME productivity, because the increase oI pressure accelerates the methanol synthesis and
the whole reaction as well. In addition, because methanol dehydration reaction approaches to
equilibrium catalyzed by HZSM-5 catalyst, DME selectivity keeps a high level with the
increase in pressure.

Figure 2.6 Effect of pressure on reaction results: SV 3000 ml/gcat/h, H2/CO 1, T 260 -C.


20

2.3 Simulation in UniSim
Production oI DME Irom natural gas has been simulated using UniSim with PRSV
1
Iluid
package. There are several useIul thermodynamic packages in UniSim such as SRK and PR.
(UniSim doesn`t recommend PR and SRK Ior DME).
These Iluid packages allow us to predict properties oI mixtures ranging Irom well deIined
light hydrocarbon systems to complex oil mixtures and highly non-ideal (non-electrolytic)
chemical systems. UniSim provides enhanced equations oI state Ior rigorous treatment oI
hydrocarbon systems; semi empirical and vapour pressure models Ior the heavier hydrocarbon
systems; steam correlations Ior accurate steam property predictions; and activity coeIIicient
models Ior chemical systems. All oI these equations have their own inherent limitations and
one has to become Iamiliar with the application oI each oI them. For the Chemical industry
due to the common occurrence oI highly non-ideal systems, the PRSV EOS is a good
alternative. It is a two-Iold modiIication oI the PR equation oI state that extends the
application oI the original PR method Ior highly non-ideal systems.
We divided the simulation into several parts, namely pre-reIorming, auto thermal reIorming,
producing high-, medium- and low pressure steams, production oI DME in Iluidized-bed
reactors, separation and heat integration as new simulation.

2.3.1 Pre-reforming

The Ieed Ior the process is natural gas with given composition and condition (50
o
C, 70 bar),
and water, Ied to the process at 25
o
C and 1 bar. To reach the pre-reIormer reactor conditions
(455
o
C and 30 bar) the natural gas Ieed had to be expanded and heated. The water stream had
to be compressed and heated. It is assumed that there is no pressure drop in E-100 and E-101.

There are three conversion reactions and one equilibrium reaction taking place in the pre-
reIormer. To simulate the pre-reIormer in UniSim we thereIore added both a conversion
reactor and an equilibrium reactor. Two reaction sets had to be deIined, one set Ior the three
conversion reactions and one Ior the equilibrium reaction. Also we deIined the reactors
adiabatically and with no pressure drop.

The operating pressure oI the pre-reIormer is 30 bar. Three main components has to be
present in the reIormer make the reactions occur. These are natural gas ,stream 2 ,which

1 Peng Robinson-Stryjek-Vera

21

contains methane, ethane, propane and n-butane, steam (stream 4) and catalyst (NiO). The
catalyst are not directly modelled in the reactor because these components are not consumed
during the reIorming reactions.

Shell and tube heat exchangers were used to simulate the E-100 and E-101. HPS and MPS,
produced Irom the hot gas leaving the ATR, were used Ior heating. The hot steams run
through the shell side and the Iluids being heated run on the tubes.

Figure 2.8 Pre-reforming unit

The temperature oI the outIlow steam was set by using an Adjust loop. This Adjust loop
calculated the amount oI MPS needed to reach the speciIied temperature in the outIlow steam.
OutIlow steam temperature was Iound by recognising that AT between cold stream in and hot
stream out should be approximately 25 C. Finally, the product is leaving the pre-reIormer at
455 C and 30 bar through stream 7.

2.3.2 Auto thermal reforming

To Iurther lower the synthetic ratio a secondary reIorming process was added, namely
autothermal reIorming. This oxyreIorming process uses oxygen as a reactant to produce
syngas at 1000 C. So oxygen had to be added as a Ieed stream. To meet the reactor
conditions the oxygen stream had to be heated (E-103).The stream leaving the pre-reIormer
also had to be heated (E-102).To reach a high enough temperature in this stream a non-reactive

22

Iired heater had to be added. In UniSim this is simulated by a general heater. The reactions
happening in the reactor were added and one set was deIined Ior them. There are three
equilibrium reactions thus the ATR is simulated by an equilibrium reactor. As the oxidation oI
methane is highly exothermic, the stream leaving the reactor has a high temperature.The ATR
product is leaving the reactor at 1000C and 30 bar. This stream was utilized to produce HPS,
MPS and LPS.

Figure 2.9 Autothermal unit


2.3.3 Producing high, medium and low pressure steam

As illustrated in Iigure 2.10, outlet oI ATR has high temperature (1000

C) and this stream
can be utilized to produce HPS, MPS, and LPS. Water at ambient temperature and pressure,
was compressed and heat exchanged with the hot stream Irom the ATR. Shell and tube heat
exchangers were chosen to simulate this process.
The speciIications Ior the diIIerent steams were given to us by our supervisor |14|.The
pressures in the outIlow steams were set and the temperatures were set by using an Adjust
loop. This Adjust loop calculated the amount oI water needed to reach the speciIied
temperature in the HPS, MPS and LPS. The water being heated runs through the shell side,
and the hot gas runs through the tubes.

23


Figure 2.10 Producing HPS, MPS and LPS

AIter the autothermal reIorming process there was a lot oI water in the stream. This had to be
removed because oI the reactions in FBR reactors. A gas-liquid phase separator was chosen
Ior separating the water. The temperature in outlet oI the separator was set as a speciIication.

2.3.4 Production of DME in fluidized-bed reactors

The problem with Iluidized bed reactors is that they do not correspond to any oI the easily-
modelled ideal reactors. While most oI the gas Ilows upward through the liquid-like
suspended particles, some passes through in bubbles with scant contact with any catalyst
particles. In addition, there is generally some circulation and turbulent back-mixing. Since
Unisim is not set up to model this, we had to use an approximate method. Thus three parallel
CSTR-reactors were chosen to simulate the FBR reactors.

The stream had to be split into three equal streams beIore entering the reactors. There are
three reactions taking place in the reactor and a set oI these reactions were added. In addition,
the reaction kinetics was loaded into UniSim (see appendix B). The speciIications Ior the
reactors were temperature oI outlet streams, volumes and assuming there is no pressure drop.
AIter the reactor the three streams had to be mixed.


24


Figure 2.11 Production of DME in fluidized-bed reactors


2.3.5 Separation

In order to puriIy DME Irom other components one three-phase separator, two general
separators, one cooler, one heater, three mixers and Iive distillation columns are used. The
outlet oI reactors is consisting oI DME, CO
2
, methanol, water and hydrogen. The three-phase
separator is used as primary separator. We used the V-102 to separate the gases, especially
H
2
, Irom the DME.

T-100 is used to puriIy stream 37 Irom methanol and water. In the overhead stream oI T-100
there are only DME and CO
2
. First, we wanted to separate CO
2
by using CO
2
capture unit.
But the UniSim didn`t recommend Amin package Ior DME, Thus two distillation columns are
used to separate CO
2
Irom DME. The specs Ior distillation columns are illustrated in table 2.2.




25

Table 2.2 The specs of distillation columns
Column Specs
T-100 ReIlux ratio Temperature oI condenser
T-101 ReIlux ratio Mole Iraction oI DME in bottom outlet
T-102 ReIlux ratio Mole Iraction oI DME in bottom outlet
T-103 ReIlux ratio Mole Iraction oI DME in bottom outlet
T-104 ReIlux ratio Mole Iraction oI H
2
O in bottom outlet



Figure 2.12 Separation unit


26

T-103 is used to separate DME Irom methanol and water. Methanol Ior recycle, is separated
Irom water in T-104. (For all the distillation columns except Irom T-100, the pressure drop is
assumed to be 5 kpa. For T-100, it is assumed to be 10 kpa). For more inIormation see
appendix C.

2.3.6 Heat Integration

(We did the heat integration separately as new simulation and all cost estimations are based on
producing HPS, MPS and LPS, see appendix D).

The natural gas and water had to be heated to 455 C, oxygen and pre-reIormer products are
needed to reach to 550 C. Some other streams had to be heated. In the other side autothermal
eIIluent has high temperature, 1000C, and needs to cool to 50 C. Thus there are some
opportunities Ior heat integration.

As illustrated in the Iigure 2.13, the autothermal eIIluent is used to heat oxygen Irom 50C to
550C and then Ior heating the pre-reIormer products Irom 297C to 550 C and water Irom
25 C to 455 C.

This stream aIter heating water is used Ior preheating natural gas Irom 50C to 340C and
V-100 outlet Irom 50 C to 165 C. Finally recycle stream is preheated Irom 10 C to 165 C
by this hot stream.

Note: The AT for the heat exchangers should be all around 25C because of economical
considerations. But Here we didn`t have time to take this into consideration. Finally, we
will send the simulation with heat integration in 1 week.


27



Figure 2.13 Heat integration








28

2.3.7 Case studies

Effect of reactor volume on DME production

As illustrated in Iigure 2.14, Ior reactor volumes less than 7000 m
3
, the production oI DME
increases with increasing the reactor volume with the high slope. AIter this volume the slope
will decrease rapidly. The optimal amount oI 7200 m
3
is selected. (Three parallel reactors
with 2400 m
3
volume)



Figure 2.14 Effect of reactor volume on DME production


Effect of natural gas as a feed on DME production

According to Iigure 2.15, the production oI DME increases and then decreases with increasing
the molar Ilow oI natural gas. For this plant 7500 is selected.



29


Figure 2.15 Effect of natural gas(molar flow) on DME production



Effect of oxygen as a feed on DME production

As we will see in Iigure 2.16, oxygen has the same eIIect oI natural gas. During the increasing
the molar Ilow oI oxygen there are optimal points. We will suggest 5800-6000 kgmol/h, in
current condition.

Figure 2.16 Effect of natural gas (molar flow) on DME production

30

2.4 Equipment description

All oI the equipments used in the plant are chosen to be constructed oI stainless steel. This is
due to corrosive water in the streams and high pressure.

2.4.1 Reactors

ATR
The ATR (autothermal reIormer) consists oI a Iixed bed reactor (assumed to be a process
vessel in our cost calculations) in which the reIorming process takes place. The catalyst used
in this process is assumed to be ruthenium
| 6|
.

FBR (FBR-1, FBR-2, FBR-3)

The FBR reactors consists oI vessel (assumed to be a process vessel in our cost calculations),
a compressor (to reach the high velocities needed Ior Iluidization), and a heat exchanger
(discussed in another section). In the FBR (Iluidized bed reactor), the gas is passed through a
granular solid material (here the dual Cu-ZnO-Al
2
O
3
/HZSM-5 catalyst) at high enough
velocities to suspend the solid and cause it to behave as though it were a Iluid. This process is
known as Iluidization.

To be able to estimate the cost oI the reactors according to appendix E, the volume |m
3
| oI the
vessel had to be estimated. This was done by assuming the vessel volume to be 50 oI the
volume that a tank can be Iilled by liquid in 30 min. The standard ideal liquid volumetric Ilow
rate oI the outIlow was used. To Iind the pressure Iactor the diameter oI the vessel was
assumed to be 0.3 oI the volume (volume |m
3
|0.3 diameter |m|).

2.4.2 Separators

Three phase separator (V-101)
V-101 is a three phase separator, separating the gases Irom the organic compounds (DME and
methanol) and water (methanol as well). For the cost estimation this separator was assumed to
be a vertical process vessel, see the next section.

31

General separators (V-100, V-102, V-103)

Gas-liquid phase separators are usually vertical. A vapor-liquid separator drum is a vessel into
which a liquid and vapour mixture (or a Ilashing liquid) is Ied and wherein the liquid is
separated by gravity, Ialls to the bottom oI the vessel, and is withdrawn. The vapour travels
upward and exits the top oI the vessel. Figure 2.17 shows a schematic representation oI the
gas-liquid separator.

Figure 2-17: A schematic representation of the gas-liquid separator.

The vessels are assumed to be process vessels. To be able to estimate the cost oI the
separators according to appendix E, the volume |m
3
| oI the vessel had to be estimated. This
was done by assuming the vessel volume to be 50 oI the volume that a tank can be Iilled by
liquid in 30 min. The standard ideal liquid volumetric Ilow rate oI the liquid outIlow was
used. To Iind the pressure Iactor, the diameter oI the vessel was assumed to be 3 oI the
volume (volume |m
3
| 3 diameter |m|).

2.4.3 Distillation towers (T-100, T-101, T-102, T-103, T-104)
All oI the towers are distillation columns with sieve trays. The ideal numbers oI trays were
Iound by scaling up the number oI trays Iound in UniSim. This was done by assuming 50
tray eIIiciency (N
actual
N
UniSim
/0.5). To estimate the cost oI the columns as described in
appendix E, the diameter and the volume oI the towers needed to be Iound. UniSim has a
deIault size Ior the diameter oI the towers, and the volume was Iound by multiplying the
volume between trays (Irom UniSim) with the actual number oI trays.

32

2.4.4 Storage tanks
We have to use storage tanks Ior NG, O
2
, CO
2
, DME, H
2
and Gas recycle. All oI the storage
tanks are assumed to be API, Iixed rooI tanks. Cost calculations Ior the storage tanks are
based on tank volume |m
3
|. To Iind the volume oI the storage tanks, the density oI the
diIIerent Iluids being stored had to be estimated. This is because the volume Ilow is not
available in Unisim, so the volume Ilow must be calculated Irom the mass Ilow (Volume
mass/density). The Iluids entering the tanks are assumed to be at STP. AIter Iinding the
volume Ilow Ior STP the gases are assumed to be compressed to 1/100 oI the volume at STP.
2.4.5 Heat exchangers
Stream exchangers (E-101, E-103, E-104, E-104, E-105, E-106, E-107, E-108, E-109)
For the cost estimation all oI the heat exchangers in our plant are assumed to be shell and
tube, Iloating head and stainless steel. The conIiguration gives a large heat transIer area in a
small volume, has a good shape Ior pressure operations, is easily cleaned and can be
constructed Irom a wide range oI materials. The Iloating head type is chosen because the
thermal expansion oI the Iluids running through the heat exchanger might be signiIicant. We
have chosen to use exhangers with one shell per tube pass. The reason Ior this choice is the
temperature diIIerences (AT
H
and ATc), described in Iigure 2-18. The most economical
diIIerence was set to be 25

C
|5|
. An even number oI tube passes is usually the preIerred
arrangement, as this positions the inlet and outlet nozzles at the same end oI the exchanger,
which simpliIies the pipe work, however the temperature diIIerences in our case Iavours the
arrangement oI one shell per tube pass.

Figure 2-18: Illustration of the temperature differences that determines the ratio between number of
shells and number of tubes.

33

Steam is Ilowing through the tube side. This is because oI the advantages involved with
having the most corrosive Iluid in the tubes to reduce the cost oI expensive alloys, and
because the tubes are easier to clean. In addition steam has the highest temperature so placing
steam in the tubes will reduce the shell surIace temperature and hence the need Ior lagging to
reduce heat loss.
To be able to estimate the cost oI the exchangers according to appendix E, the heat transIer
areas had to be estimated. This was done using a simulation program called ASPEN B-jac.
The parameters added to the program were temperature, heat Ilow, mass Ilow, and
components in both the cold and hot stream.
2.4.6 Reactor exchangers (ATR, FBR-1, FBR-2, FBR-3)
In addition to the stream exchangers there are one heat exchanger in each oI the reactors. The
reactions taking place in the ATR and the three FBR`s are exothermic, so the reactors have to
be cooled. The heat transIer area in these reactors was estimated based on the duties Ior these
reactor coolers (which can be Iound in UniSim) and the duties oI the exchangers that we did
Iind the area Ior. A more detailed description and the cost estimation oI these exchangers is
provided in the section above.
2.4.7 Fired heaters
Direct Iired heaters are generally used in processes where the process temperature required is
greater than 400 C. This is the case Ior the stream entering the ATR, and thereIore E-102 is
chosen to be a non-reactive Iired heater. The pre-reIormer reaction process is endothermic and
the operating temperature oI the reactor is 455

C. This means that the reactor is requiring a
high level oI heat input.
Pre-reformer (PRE-C, PRE-E)
The pre-reIormer consists oI a vessel (with catalyst Iilled tubes), a reIormer Iurnace and a NG
Iired burner
|7|
. The Iurnace may 'stand alone, or operate in conjunction with the pre-
reIormer. In the Iurnace, the reIorming oI steam-hydrocarbon mixtures is accomplished in
catalyst-Iilled tubes. A variety oI catalyst (nickel-based) is available Ior a given Ieed and
product requirement. We chose the NiO catalyst
|7|
.

34

To be able to estimate the cost oI the pre-reIormer according to appendix E, the volume |m
3
|
oI the vessel had to be estimated. This was done by assuming the vessel volume to be 50 oI
the volume that a tank can be Iilled by liquid in 30 min. The standard ideal liquid volumetric
Ilow rate out oI the reactor was used. Cost estimations had to be done Ior the Iired heater as
well. A reIormer Iurnace was assumed and the capacity needed Ior the cost calculations was
the duty |kW| (collected Irom UniSim).

Furnace (E-102)
E-102 is assumed to be a non-reactive Iired heater. Cost estimations Ior this type oI
equipment are done according to appendix E. The capacity needed Ior the cost calculation is
the duty |kW| (collected Irom UniSim).
2.4.8 Pumps (P-1, P-100, P-101, P-102)
All oI the pumps used in our plant is assumed to be centriIugal, electric drive and made oI
stainless steel. Pump selection is based on Ilow rate and head required. In addition special
care should be made when considering corrosion (in our process water is present, and the
pressure is high). To be able to estimate the cost oI the exchangers according to appendix E,
the shaIt power |kW| had to be Iound. This is Iound directly Irom UniSim.
2.4.9 Turbine (K-1)
Where high pressure gas process streams are being throttled to lower pressures, energy can be
recovered by carrying out the expansion in a suitable turbine. The energy recovered by
expansion is oIten used to drive a compressor directly (Richard Turton, 2009). It is assumed
that this is being done in our plant. It is assumed that the energy required to compress a gas is
the energy Iound in the Workbook in UniSim. In reality there is an eIIiciency Iactor involved.
This Iactor has not been counted in when estimating the electric power needed Ior the plant.
The K-1 expander in the Ilow sheet is assumed to be an axial-Ilow gas turbine. For the cost
estimations (appendix E) the capacity needed is the shaIt power |kW|. This is Iound in
UniSim.

35


2.5 Mass and energy balances

It is important to check that the mass and energy balances Irom the Ilowsheet in Unisim are
correct. The mass balances are correct when the Iollow the equation given below:

0
in out
mass mass =
0
in out
Energv Energv =
- Mass balance
The total mass balance is shown in table 2.3. For the mass balances Ior all important units see
appendix F.

Table 2-3: Total mass balance

TOTAL MASS BALANCE
STREAM ton/day
IN
NG 3019.76
Water 3242.72
Oxygen 4992
OUT
DME 2888.2
48 1133.9
CO2
1623.42
Water.out 1238.
18 4368.7
STREAM ERROR 0.002


The error is because oI recycle unit in simulation.

- Energy balance
The total energy balance is shown in table 2.4. For the energy balances Ior all important units
see appendix F.



36




Table 2-4: Total energy balance

TOTAL ENERGY BALANCE
IN
STREAM K1/h MW
ln -102 318633.1969 0.144063
ln -103 0 0
ln -104 0 0
ln -10S 178212993,8 49,30361
ln -106 40369260.34 11.26924
ln -107 -1122281319,44 -311,7448
ln -108 1607271.638 0.446464
ln -109 313827.2243 0.08773
ln -110 696036.8196 0.193344
ln -111 -8.38L-07 -2.3L-13
ln -112 133420843.6 37.06133
ln -113 -194142936 -33.9286
ln -114 -194142936 -33.9286
ln -11S -194142936 -33.9286
ln -116 -330763793 -97.4349
ln -117 -18664380.9 -3.18433
ln -120 38211887.8 16.16997
ln -122 26060870.22 7.239131
ln -124 2894420.343 0.804006
ln -126 31339077.88 8.760833
ln -128 2139903444 399.9737
ln -129 -39313813.4 -10.9203
ln -130 47072878.81 13.0738
ln 13 -1944311269 -340.142
ln 16 -1304391431 -362.331
ln 19 -4387680430 -1218.8
ln 21 -1720478069 -477.911
ln 22 -649848844.2 -180.314
ln NG -368412498.3 -137.892
ln Water -2141996179 -394.999
ln Cxygen 3203961.418 0.889989


TOTAL ENERGY BALANCE
OUT
STREAM K1/h MW
Cu1 -101 10293338.36 2.839872
Cu1 -118 30229632.11 8.397126
Cu1 -119 1369170.143 0.433881
Cu1 -121 3388403.373 0.941224
Cu1 -123 3317347.633 0.977097
Cu1 -12S 6833337.768 1.90376
Cu1 -127 2064134384 373.3762
Cu1 18 -2866242403 -796.178
Cu1 2S -2137410063 -399.281
Cu1 32 -819336302.8 -227.399
Cu1 48 -373238090.4 -104.238
Cu1 DML -2141996179 -394.999
Cu1 nS -1343279817 -428.689
Cu1 MS -1033413971 -287.06
Cu1 LS -3609663120 -1002.68
Cu1 Gas -398484813.2 -110.69
Cu1 CC2 -606142681.9 -168.373
Cu1 Water.out -767461818.3 -213.184




























37

2.6 Economic estimation

2.6.1 Fixed capital cost

The Iixed capital cost is estimated to get an approximate price Ior the total plant installed and
up and running. These calculations are based on given percentages (West, Ronald E., et al,
2003). Major equipment costs are calculated as described in appendix G. The major costs Ior
the direct method plant are shown in table 2.7.

Table 2.7: Major equipment in the plant for direct method
Equipment Cost $]
Vessels 4 517 498
Pumps 561 891
Turbins 664 705
Heat exchangers 9 435 518
Fired Heater 118 423 412
Reactor vessels 309 977 437
Towers+trays 5 248 523
Storage tanks 1 831 894
Major equipment cost 450 660 879

The Iixed capital costs Ior the direct method are listed in table 2.8.

Table 2.8: Fixed Capital cost for the DME direct plant
Fixed Capital cost Factor] cost M$]
Major equipment cost 0,219 450,46
Purchased equipment installation 0,083 169
Instrumentation and controls (installed) 0,092 189
Piping (installed) 0,073 150
Elecrical systems (installed) 0,046 95
Buildings (including services) 0,046 95
Yard improvements 0,018 37
Service Iacilities (installed) 0,138 284
Land 0,01 21

Engineering and supervision 0,073 150
Construction expenses 0,092 189
Legal expenses 0,018 37
Contractor`s Iee 0,018 37
Contingency 0,073 150

Fixed Capital cost 0,999 2057


38

2.6.2 Working capital cost

The working capital is the amount oI capital required to start up the plant and to Iinance the
Iirst couple oI months oI operation beIore the plant starts earning. This capital is used to cover
salaries, raw material inventories, and contingencies. It will be recovered at the end oI the
project and represents a Iloat oI money to get the project started. These costs are necessary at
start-ups and it implies raw materials and intermediates in the process. The working capital
was assumed to be 3 oI the Iixed capital cost (West, Ronald E., et al, 2003).The total
investment Ior the plant is listed in table 2.9.

Table 2.9: The total investment for the direct method
Investment Cost M$]
Fixed Capital cost 2057
Working capital cost 61,71
Total investment 2119

2.6.3 Operating cost
The operating cost Ior the direct method is listed in appendix H. The main costs are listed in
table 2.10.

Table 2.10: Operating cost for the DME-direct plant
Item Cost M$/yr]
Sales revenue total 1094
ManuIactoring cost 485
Fixed cost 285
Operating cost 771

For the calculation oI the operating cost we needed to Iind the price Ior the utilities needed in
the two plants (direct and indirect), and also the catalyst price Ior the plants. These
calculations are described below Ior both plants.

39

Stream factor
To be able to calculate the yearly cost oI raw materials and utilities, on needs to know the
Iraction oI time that the plant is operating in a year. This is the stream Iactor and can be
calculated as described below:

Stream Iactor # days a plant operates per year
365
Our calculations are based on an SF oI 1. This is not realistically. Even the most reliable and
well managed plants must expect to be shut down Ior two weeks a year Ior maintenance,
giving an SF oI 0, 96 (Richard Turton, 2009).
Utilities
Steam
In the direct plant HPS (510 C, 100 bar), MPS (480 C, 30 bar), and LPS (250 C, 20 bar),
are produced. These utilities can either be used in the plant or sold. For the two Iirst heat
exchangers in the Ilow sheet MPS and HPS is used as a heating medium. The rest oI the steam
is being sold at the price oI 30 $/ton (Richard Turton, 2009). The price is based on the Iact
that all oI the steams, produced in our plant, have higher temperature and pressure than the
ones described in the source. To Iind the amount oI MPS we need to buy, an energy balance
over each heat exchanger was set up, eqn. 2.1. AH
vap
Ior steam is 1699,3 kJ/kg (Richard
Turton, 2009).
steam
vap
Q
m
H
=

& (2.1)
Table 2.11 show the diIIerent Q`s and the corresponding mass Ilows Ior the diIIerent heat
exchangers.
Table 2.11: Heat flows and mass flows for the different heat exchangers.
Heat exchanger E-103 E-109 E-108 E-107
Q |kJ/yr| 3,55 E11 4,12 E11 2,65 E11 1,17 E12
Mass Ilow |ton/yr| 208910 242453 155947 688520

Table 2.12 shows how much steam is being produced, how much is used Ior the plant and
how much we can sell


40


Table 2.12: The amount of steam produced, used and the amount of steam we can sell/buy.
Steam
HPS MPS LPS
Amount produced |ton/yr| 1074852 720773 2424768
Amount used |ton/yr| 452454 2495950 0
Amount to sell |ton/yr| 622398 -1775177 2424768

Table 2.12 show that we can sell HPS and LPS, and that we need to buy some MPS. Table
2.13 show the sales revenue and the cost Ior the diIIerent steams.

Table 2.13: Sales revenue and cost for the three different steams.
Steam
HPS MPS LPS
Price |$| 30 30 30
Sales revenue |$/yr| 18671940 72743040
Cost |$/yr| 53255310

NG for fired heaters
To calculate the yearly cost Ior natural gas required Ior the Iired heaters in the direct plant we
assume that the heaters are indirect, Iired heaters, and that the thermal eIIiciency is 90 . The
cost oI natural gas is 11,10 $/GJ (Richard Turton, 2009), and the heating value is
0,0377GJ/m
3
(Richard Turton, 2009). To Iind the yearly cost oI natural gas we use eqn. 2.2.

NG
Q Cost
Cost
efficiencv

= (2.2)

Table 2.14 show the yearly cost oI natural gas Ior the diIIerent heaters.

Table 2.14: Duty and cost (of natural gas as a heating medium) for the different heaters.
Heater E-102 Pre-reformer furnace
Q |GJ/yr| 76562 1436640
Yearly cost |$/yr| 944265 17718560


41


Cooling water
To estimate the yearly cost Ior cooling water we assume water at 30 C, and a AT
cw
10 C
(Richard Turton, 2009), and a price oI 0,354$/GJ Ior the cooling water (Richard Turton,
2009). To calculate the cost eqn. 2.3 is used.

cw
Cost Q Cost = (2.3)

Table 2.15show the cost Ior cooling water Ior the diIIerent coolers.

Table 2.15: Duty for the different coolers and the yearly cost for cooling water.
Cooler FBR-100 FBR-101 FBR-102 ATR
Q |GJ/yr| 170069 170069 170069 2337274
Yearly cost |$/yr| 60204 60204 60204 827395

Electricity
To estimate the cost Ior the electricity to run the two plants Ior a year all oI the remaining
duties were summed together (the duty Ior the compressors, pumps and reboilers are added
and the duty Ior turbines and condensers are subtracted). The cost Ior the electricity was
Iound by assuming 90 eIIiciency and an electrical power price oI 0,06 $/kWh (Richard
Turton, 2009) Ior both the direct and the indirect method. Eqn. 2.4 was used to estimate the
cost Ior a year.

el el
W Cost
Cost
efficiencv

= (2.4)

Table 2.16 show the yearly cost Ior electrical power Ior both the direct plant and the indirect
plant.

Table 2.16: Amount of electrical power needed and the yearly cost for the direct and indirect plant.
Direct
Amount oI electrical power needed |kW| 53325
Yearly cost |$/yr| 31141935
Indirect
Amount oI electrical power needed |kW| -29148
Yearly cost |$/yr| -17022491

42

Now it should be mentioned that all oI the duties Ior the indirect method is assumed to be
electricity. This is done Ior simplicity. II we on the other hand had concidered the use oI
steam and cooling water Ior heating and cooling processes then the project would have
become more proIitable (the electricity assumption is just a gross estimate).

Catalyst price
To Iind the price Ior the catalysts Ior the two plants we Iirst had to Iind the volume |m
3
| oI
catalyst in the reactor and then the amount |kg|. To Iind the volume oI the catalyst in the
reactor we had to assume a void Iraction. The assumed void Iractions and the densities Ior the
diIIerent catalysts in direct method are listed in table 2.17. For the indirect method the void
Iraction and the density oI the catalyst is given in table 2.18.

Table 2.17: Density and void fraction for the three different catalysts, and the volume of the three
different types of reactors used in the plant for the direct method.
Reactor
Pre-reformer
(NiO)9]
ATR
(ruthenium)6]
FBR
(Cu-ZnOAl
2
O
3
/HZSM-5)
Void Iraction |-| 0.55 0.55 0.50
Density |kg/m
3
| 6670 12370 1982.5
Volume oI reactor |m
3
| 460.9 434.2 7200

Table 2.18: Density and void fraction for the catalyst, and the volume of the reactor used in the plant for
the indirect method.
Reactor PFR (HZSM-5)
Void Iraction |-| 0.5
Density |kg/m
3
| 1982.5
Volume oI reactor |m
3
| 2483

Eqn. 2.5 is used to Iind the volume oI the catalyst.

(1 )
cat reactor
Jolume voidfraction volume = (2.5)

To Iind the amount oI catalyst needed eqn. 2.6 was used.

cat cat cat
Amount volume = (2.6)

43

To estimate the price oI catalyst one has to take into account that the catalysts get deactivated.
ThereIore the catalyst price should be included in the Iixed operating costs. One can assume
that the catalyst lasts Ior Iour years beIore it has to be replaced. So the price per year can be
estimated as described in eqn. 2.7.

1
4
cat cat
price
Cost amount
kg
= (2.7)

Table 2.19 shows the amount oI catalyst needed and the estimated price per year Ior the direct
method. Table 2.20 shows the amount oI catalyst needed and the estimated price per year Ior
the indirect method. (1 NOK 0,18 USD
|10|
)


Table 2.19: Amount of catalyst needed and the price for catalyst per kg
and per year for the direct method.
Catalyst NiO Ruthenium Cu-ZnO-Al
2
O
3
/HZSM-5
Amount |kg| 1383391 2416974 6423300
Price |$/kg|
|7|
18 18 18
Price |$/yr| 6225260 10876383 28904850


Table 2.20: Amount of catalyst needed and the price for catalyst per kg
and per year for the direct method.
Catalyst HZSM-5
Amount |kg| 3103750
Price |$/kg| 18
Price |$/yr| 11075732







44

2.7 Investment analysis

2.7.1 Evaluation parameters

The cumulative cash Ilow and the discounted cash Ilow are both shown in Iigure 2-19. The
payback time Ior the two cash Ilows is 8 years Ior the non-discounted and 14 years Ior the
discounted. The proIit made aIter 15 years at a discount rate oI 10 is 68.69 M$. The
discount rate is chosen on the basis oI the interest rate that a central bank charges depository
institutions that borrow reserves Irom it. We have chosen to double that rate Ior our discount
rate.


Figure 2-19: Cash flow diagram


The economic evaluation parameters, net present worth, net Iuture worth and the discounted
cash-Ilow rate oI return, were Iound by using excel and the results are listed below in table
2.21. Detailed calculations Ior Iinding these parameters are described in appendix I.




45

Table 2.21: Economic evaluation parameters
Evaluation method Result
Net present worth (NPW) |M$| 68.69
Net Iuture worth (NFW) |M$| 238
Discounted cash Ilow rate oI return (DCFRR) || 10.62

2.7.2 Sensitivity analysis for variations and ROI (return on investment)

Payback time is a useIul criterion Ior judging projects with short liIetimes. It deIines the time
required aIter the start oI the project to pay oII the initial investment Irom income. The
calculations Ior Iinding the payback time and the ROI are shown in appendix J. The payback
time result is shown in table 2.22. The payback time when we varied the prices Ior raw
materials, product (DME, H
2
), electrical power, major equipment and in addition varied the
utility price oI the plant is listed in table 2.23. The variations were 20 increase and decrease.
The graphical result is shown in Iigure 2-16. The time Ior paying back the invested cost
without variation was 8.9 years.

Table 2.22: Payback time result
Calculation for Payback time
Investment |M$| 2119
Operating costs |M$| 771
Sales revenue |M$| 1094
Depreciation |M$| 18.6
Payback time |yr| 8.9


Table 2.23: Payback time for variation in different variables
Payback time for variation in different variables
Variation|} -20 0 20
Raw material price |yr| 7.4 8.9 10.06
Product price |yr| 19.04 8.9 5.5
electrical power price |yr| 8.38 8.9 8.69
Utility price |yr| 8.62 8.9 8.44
Equipment cost |yr| 6.518 8.9 10.74


46

The return on investment result is shown in table 2.24.

Table 2.24: Return on investment result
ROI
Total sales revenue |M$| 1094
Operating cost |M$| 771
Investment |M$| 2119
ROI || 0.15



Figure 2-16: Payback time for variation in different variables method

2.7.3 Break even analysis
The break even method is used to determine the point at which sales revenue will cover
operating cost. Figure 2-17 shows the breakeven point Ior the direct plant case. The operating
cost, which is a sum oI the Iixed cost and the variable cost, is plotted in the same graph as
sales revenue. The intersection is where the revenue, generated Irom the sales, just covers the

47

total operating cost. The variable cost is the sum oI the costs that vary with production oI
DME, and the Iixed cost is the sum oI the costs that does not.


Figure 2-17: Break even chart for the direct plant














48

3 DME Production: Indirect method


3.1 Project basis

The block diagram Ior DME production Irom methanol is shown in the in Figure 3.1. The raw
material is methanol. Methanol arrives at the plant at 25C and 1bar. Methanol dehydration
takes place in the Iixed-bed reactor and then DME as Iinal product is puriIied in separation
unit. As we saw in last chapter producing 3000 metric tons per day oI 99 wt purity DME is
the target oI our project. The other consideration in this project is maximizing the energy
recovery by using partial heat integration in the plant.





Figure 3.1 Block diagram











49

3.2 Process description
3.2.1 Flow sheet
A PFD oI the process is shown in Figure 3.2 and the belonging stream conditions are given in
appendix A. The essential operations in the process are the preheating oI the raw material
(nearly pure methanol), dehydration oI methanol to Iorm DME, product separation and
methanol separation and recycle.

Figure 3.2 Production of DME from Methanol

Methanol as a liquid pumped up to 15.5 bar. The stream 2 preheated with streams 14 and 7.
AIter preheating the stream 4 combined with Stream 17, methanol recycle stream. Stream 5 is
then sent into heat exchanger E-103 where it is heated to a temperature oI 250C beIore
sending to the Iixed-bed reactor, R-101, to Iorm DME. The reaction is slightly exothermic and
the reaction products are heated to approximately 365C beIore leaving the reactor.


50

The reactor eIIluent is cooled in E-102 and then throttled to 10.4 bar beIore entering T-100.
Here, the dimethyl ether is separated Irom the other components as distillate, Stream DME.
The bottom product, Stream 10, is throttled to 7.4 bar and sent to T-101 where the methanol
are separated Irom the waste components. The waste components exit as the bottoms stream,
Stream 14. Methanol exits the column as a distillate, Stream 13. This stream is then
compressed to 15.5 bar and recycled back to mix with methanol, Stream 17 in mixer
MIX-101.

3.2.2 Process Concepts

The production oI DME is via the catalytic dehydration oI methanol over an amorphous
alumina catalyst treated with 10.2 silica. A methanol conversion oI about 80 is achieved
in the reactor. DME is produced by the Iollowing reaction:

2CH3OH CH3OCH3 + H2O

The reaction is equilibrium limited. Based on the catalyst and reaction kinetics, the reactor
must operate at 15 bar. The reactor operates adiabatically, and, since the reaction is
exothermic, the reactor eIIluent temperature will be above 250C.

Reaction Kinetics and Reactor Configuration

The reaction taking place is mildly exothermic with a standard heat oI reaction:

Hreac(25C) -11,770 kJ/kmol

The equilibrium constant Ior this reaction at three diIIerent temperatures is given in table 3.1.

Table 3.1
T K
p
200C 34.1
300C 12.4
400C 6.21


51

The corresponding equilibrium conversions Ior pure methanol Ieed over the above
temperature range are greater than 83. This reaction is kinetically controlled at the
conditions used in this process.
In the temperature range oI normal operation, there are no signiIicant side reactions, and the
equilibrium conversion Ior pure methanol Ieed exceeds 92. ThereIore, the reactor is
kinetically controlled in the temperature range oI normal operation. Above 250C, the rate
equation is given below (Bondiera and Naccache, 1991):

Where k0 1.21106 kmol/(m
3
reactor.h.kPa), Ea 80.48 kJ/mol, and Pmethanol partial
pressure oI methanol (kPa). SigniIicant catalyst deactivation occurs at temperatures above
400C, and the reactor should be designed so that this temperature is not exceeded anywhere
in the reactor. Since the DME reaction is not highly exothermic, the proper temperatures can
be maintained by preheating the Ieed to no more than 250C and running the reactor
adiabatically.















52

3.3 Simulation in UniSim

Production oI DME Irom methanol has been simulated using UniSim with PRSV
1
Iluid
package and three pure components consisting oI methanol, water and DME are added.
In order to explain, the simulation is divided into several parts, namely Ieed conditioning,
production oI DME in Iixed-bed reactor, separation.

3.3.1 Feed Conditioning

The Ieed Ior the process is methanol at 50
o
C and 70 bar. To reach the Iixed-bed reactor
conditions (260
o
C and 15 bar) the Ieed had to be compressed and heated.


Figure 3.3 Feed conditioning

Equipments in feed conditioning:

Pump (P-100):
This pump increases the pressure oI the Ieed to a minimum oI 15 bar.

Heat Exchanger (E-101 and E-102):
These units are used Ior preheating the Ieed.(It is assumed that the pressure drop in heat
exchangers is between 20-30 kpa.)

Heat Exchanger (E-103):
This unit heats, vaporizes, and superheats the Ieed to 250C at 14.7 bar.



1 Peng Robinson-Stryjek-Vera

53

3.3.2 Production of DME in fixed bed reactor

Since Unisim is not set up to model Ior the Iixed-bed reactors, we had to use an approximate
method such as plug Ilow reactor is selected. One reaction takes place in the Iixed-bed
reactor. We deIined the reaction as a kinetic reaction and also one set Ior the reaction.
The speciIications Ior the reactor were temperature oI outlet stream, rating parameters such
as: tube dimensions and tube packing. Also we deIined the reactor adiabatically and with no
pressure drop.

AIter running the simulation, we Iound the conversion oI 100 Ior methanol. As we know
conversion oI methanol is about 80 in the reactor. We checked all articles and probably
there is some mistake in the kinetic. Finally the conversion reactor is used instead oI the
Iixed-bed reactor. OI course, we deIined a conversion reaction with 80 conversion oI
methanol.


Figure 3.4 Fixed-Bed Reactor

E-102 cools and partially condenses the reactor eIIluent. The valve aIter this heat exchanger
reduces the pressure. This exit pressure may be at any pressure below the reactor pressure, but
must be identical to the pressure at which next distillation column, T-100, operates.




54

3.3.3 Separation

The Iirst distillation column, T-100, separates DME Irom methanol and water. The
temperature oI the distillate is the temperature at which DME condenses at the chosen column
pressure.


Figure 3.5 Separation Units

E-204 is used Ior decreasing the temperature oI stream 11 beIore entering to the second
distillation column, T-101. This distillation column separates methanol Ior recycle Irom
water. Water stream is actually a waste water stream, and there is a cost Ior its treatment but
this stream is used Ior preheating the Ieed. The temperature oI the distillate is the temperature
at which methanol condenses at the chosen column pressure. The valve beIore T-101 is
optional. It is needed iI the pressure oI T-101 is chosen to be lower than that oI T-100. II the
pressures are the same, the valve can be eliminated.







55

3.4 Equipment description

All oI the equipments used in the plant are chosen to be constructed oI stainless steel. This is
due to corrosive water in the streams and high pressure.

3.4.1 Reactor
For cost estimations the PFR is assumed to be a process vessel. The capacity needed Ior the
cost estimations is the volume oI the reactor. This was Iound the same way as Ior the pre-
reIormer and ATR in the direct method. The same cost estimation method as in the direct
method is used here.

3.4.2 Storage tanks
For the cost estimations all oI the storage tanks are assumed to be API, Iixed rooI tanks made
oI stainless steel. The cost calculations Ior the tanks needed to store methanol and water are
done in the same way as Ior the storage tanks in the direct method.

3.4.3 Compressor (K-100)
The compressor used in the plant is assumed to be a centriIugal compressor made oI stainless
steel. It is assumed that the energy required to compress a gas is the energy Iound in the
Workbook in UniSim. In reality there is an eIIiciency Iactor involved. This Iactor has not
been counted in when estimating the electric power needed Ior the plant. For the cost
estimations (see appendix E) the capacity needed is the shaIt power |kW|. This is Iound
directly Irom UniSim.

3.4.4 Heat exchangers (E-101, E-102, E-103, E-104)
All oI the heat exchangers in the plant are assumed to be shell and tube, Iloating head and
stainless steel. The reason Ior this choice is the same as Ior the direct plant.The estimation oI
the cost Ior the heat exchangers is done the same way as Ior the exchangers in the direct plant.


56

3.4.5 Pump (P-100)
The pump used in the plant is assumed to be centriIugal, electric drive and made oI stainless
steel. Pump selection is based on Ilow rate and head required. In addition special care should
be made when considering corrosion (in this process some water is present, and the pressure
is high). To be able to estimate the cost oI the exchangers according to appendix E, the shaIt
power |kW| had to be Iound. This is Iound directly Irom UniSim.

3.4.6 Towers (T-100, T-101)
The towers in the plant are distillation columns with sieve trays. The ideal numbers oI trays
were Iound by scaling up the number oI trays Iound in UniSim. This was done by assuming
50 tray eIIiciency (N
actual
N
UniSim
/0.5). To estimate the cost Ior the columns as described
in appendix E, the same procedure was utilized as described in section 2.4.3 Ior the direct
plant.












57

3.5 Mass and energy balances

- Mass balance

It is important to check that the mass and energy balances Irom the Ilowsheet in Unisim are
correct. The mass balances are correct when the Iollow the equation given below:

0
in out
mass mass =
0
in out
Energv Energv =
- Mass balance
The total mass balance is shown in table 2.3. For the mass balances Ior all important units see
appendix F.

Below gives an overwiev over the mass streams coming in and out for the total process










The error is because oI recycle unit in simulation.

- Energy balance
The total energy balance is shown in table 2.4. For the energy balances Ior all important units
see appendix F.






TOTAL MASS BALANCE
STREAM ton/day
IN Methanol 4133.20808
OUT
DME 2880.0672
Water 1232.84232
18 44.76
STREAM ERROR 0.004

58


Below gives an overwiev over the energy streams coming in and out for the total process

















TOTAL ENERGY BALANCE
STREAM K1/h MW
ln -101 331668.3246 0.147686
ln -102 201371100.6 33.99197
Cu1
-104 7327602193 2091.001
ln -10S 7309172377 2030.326
Cu1
-106 17849461.63 4.938184
Cu1
-107 2033394.708 0.370943
ln -108 103903043.3 29.41731
ln -109 9132633.033 2.336848
Cu1
18 -16313274.04 -4.38702
Cu1
DML -479839333.3 -133.294
Cu1
Water -770389022.2 -214.033
ln Methano| -1344839261 -373.366


59

3.6 Economical estimation
3.6.1 Fixed capital cost

The Iixed capital cost is estimated to get an approximate price Ior the total plant installed and
up and running. These calculations are based on given percentages (West, Ronald E., et al,
2003).Major equipment costs are calculated as described in appendix G. The major costs Ior
the indirect method plant are shown in table 3.2.
Table 3.2: Major equipment for the indirect plant
Equipment Cost[$]
Pumps 62689
Heat exchangers 2955726
Reactor 1886663
Towers and Trays 738060
Compressors 779594
Storage tanks 838627
Major equipment 7261360

The Iixed capital costs Ior the direct method are listed in table 3.3.

TabIe 3.3: Fixed capitaI cost for the indirect plant
Item Factor[%] cost [M$]
Major equipment cost 0.219 7.26
Purchased equipment installation 0.083 3
nstrumentation and controls (installed) 0.092 3
Piping (installed) 0.073 2
Elecrical systems (installed) 0.046 2
Buildings (including services) 0.046 2
Yard improvements 0.018 1
Service facilities (installed) 0.138 5
Land 0.01 0

Engineering and supervision 0.073 2
Construction expenses 0.092 3
Legal expenses 0.018 1
Contractor`s fee 0.018 1
Contingency 0.073 2

Fixed Capital cost 0.999 33


60

3.6.2 Working capital cost

The working capital is the amount oI capital required to start up the plant and to Iinance the
Iirst couple oI months oI operation beIore the plant starts earning. This capital is used to cover
salaries, raw material inventories, and contingencies. It will be recovered at the end oI the
project and represents a Iloat oI money to get the project started. These costs are necessary at
start-ups and it implies raw materials and intermediates in the process. The working capital
was assumed to be 3 oI the Iixed capital cost

(West, Ronald E., et al, 2003).The total
investment Ior the plant is listed in table 3.4.

Table 3.4: The total investment for the indirect method

Item Cost M$/yr]
Fixed Capital cost 33
Working capital cost 0.99
Total investment 34


3.6.3 Operating cost

The operating cost Ior the direct method is listed in appendix H. The main costs are listed in
table 3.5.
Table 3.5: Operating cost Ior the indirect plant
Item Cost M$/yr]
Sales revenue total 986
ManuIactoring cost 527
Fixed cost 44
Operating cost 571


For the calculation oI the operating cost we needed to Iind the price Ior the utilities needed in
the plant and also the catalyst price Ior the plant.






61

3.7 Investment analysis

3.7.1 Evaluation parameters

The cumulative cash Ilow and the discounted cash Ilow are both shown in Iigure 3.6. The
payback time Ior the two cash Ilows is under one year Ior both the non-discounted and Ior the
discounted. The proIit made aIter 15 years with discount rate oI 10 is 2245.8 M$. The
discount rate is chosen on the basis oI the interest rate that a central bank charges depository
institutions that borrow reserves Irom it. We have chosen to double that rate Ior our discount
rate.




Figure 3.6: Cash flow diagram


The economic evaluation parameters, like the net present worth, the net Iuture worth and the
discounted cash-Ilow rate oI return, were Iound by using excel and the results are listed in
table 3.6. Detailed calculations Ior Iinding these parameters are described in appendix I.


62


Table 3.6: Economic evaluation parameters
Evaluation method Result
Net present worth (NPW) [M$] 2246
Net Iuture worth (NFW) [M$] 299
Discounted cash Ilow rate oI return (DCFRR) || 911

3.7.2 Sensitivity analysis for variations and ROI (return on investment)

Payback time is a useIul criterion Ior judging projects with short liIetimes. It deIines the time
required aIter the start oI the project to pay oII the initial investment Irom income. The
calculations Ior Iinding the payback time and the ROI are shown in appendix B. The payback
time result is shown in table 3.7. The payback time when we varied the prices Ior raw
materials, product (DME), electrical power and major equipment oI the plant is listed in table
3.8. The variations were 20 increase and decrease. The graphical result is shown in Iigure
3.7. The pay back time Ior the invested cost without variation was 0.1 year.

Table 3.7: Payback time result
Calculation for Payback time
nvestment [M$] 34
Operating costs [M$] 571
Sales revenue [M$] 986
Depreciation [M$] 0.30
Payback time [yr] 0.11


Table 3.8: Payback time for variation in different variables
Payback time for variation in different variables
Variation [%} -20 0 20
Raw material [yr] 0.09 0.11 0.15
Product [yr] 0.21 0.11 0.08
Electrical power [yr] 0.12 0.11 0.11
Equipment cost [yr] 0.09 0.11 0.14
Variation [%} -20 0 20


63


The return on investment result is shown in table 3.9.

Table 3.9: Return on investment result
Item Result
Total sales revenue [M$] 986
Operating costs [M$] 571
nvestment [M$] 34
ROI [%] 12.1





Figure 3.7: Payback time for variations in different variables




64

3.7.3 Break even analysis

The break even method is used to determine the point at which sales revenue will cover
operating cost. Figure 3.8 shows the break even point Ior the direct plant case. The operating
cost, which is a sum oI the Iixed cost and the variable cost, is plotted in the same graph as
sales revenue. The intersection is where the revenue generated Irom the sales just covers the
total operating cost. The variable cost is the costs that vary with production oI DME, and the
Iixed cost is the costs that does not.



Figure 3.8: Break even chart for indirect plant

65

4 Discussion

4.1 Direct method

The overall reaction Ior the plant is given in reaction 4.1.

2CH
4
C
2
H
4
C
3
H
8
C
4
H
10
13H
2
O 3/2O
2
7CO
2
22H
2
2DME (4.1)

This reaction illustrates that a lot oI CO
2
is produced in this plant. Absorption oI CO
2
should
be a part oI the process. This was not done. We wanted to separate CO
2
by using a CO
2

capture unit. However UniSim didn`t recommend the Amin package, needed Ior the capture,
Ior DME, thus two distillation columns are used to separate CO
2
Irom DME. For the
puriIication oI DME the separation method chosen is somewhat radical. This is due to no
ideal gas mixtures in the product out oI the FBR. In the simulation there are Iive distillation
columns. It is possible with only three distillation columns (where the distillation towers, T-
101 and T-102 become one and T-100 and T-103 become another one), but then the purity oI
the DME as a Iinal product will decrease. In UniSim however this was not Ieasible. A lot oI
diIIerent approaches were tried. The method chosen is the simplest and the one we ended up
with in UniSim. In addition CO
2
could have been recycled, but when applying a recycle
stream the DME production was reduced. This is because the overall reaction taking place in
the reactor is shiIted towards syngas when the partial pressure oI CO
2
is increased. It is
interesting that the separation unit in our plant is smaller than many of the existing plants.

To Iind the optimal conditions Ior the plant, several 'Case Studies were made in UniSim.
The result can be read in section 2.3.8.

One oI the results Irom the case studies was that producing 3000 ton/d required a large
reactor. This is not Iavorable, and is probably due to the nature oI the kinetics used.
Three parallel FBR reactors, each 2400 m
3
, are needed to produce the required amount oI
DME. This is because tanks larger than 2500 m
3
are not easily transported. II one big reactor
was to be needed, then this reactor would probably have to be constructed on site. In almost
all cases it is more convenient to use one big reactor than three in parallel, but there could be
some advantages with the tree in parallel conIiguration. For example, consider that something
goes wrong. Then maybe only one oI the reactors would have to be shut down, whilst the
other two could still be running. On the other hand the type oI reactor is Iluidized-bed and

66

constructing a FBR oI the dimensions needed could become very diIIicult and is not realitic.
Since UniSim is not set up to model the circulation and turbulent back-mixing that occurs
when gas and catalyst particles collide, we had to use an approximate simulation method.
Thus three parallel CSTR-reactors were chosen to simulate the FBR reactors.

4.2 Indirect method

Instead oI producing synthesis gas Iirst, DME can be produced directly Irom methanol. The
overall plant reaction is shown in equation 4.2.

2CH
3
OH DME H
2
O (4.2)

Simulation structure Ior this plant is more clear and the only problem was the kinetic Ior the
reaction (discussed in section 3.3.2).

4.3 Economical evaluation

Major equipment cost contributes with 21 to the total investment. This means that when the
goal is to reduce the total cost Ior the plant one should look into reducing the size oI some oI
the equipment (when calculating the cost Ior the FBR reactors, the equations used has an
upper limit Ior the reactor diameter oI 4 m. OI course a reactor oI our magnitude could not
have a diameter oI this size, but this was the only way to be able to calculate the cost).

The sensitivity analysis with 20 increase and decrease oI the most important cost variables
shows that the eIIect oI varying the product price has the largest eIIect on the two results Ior
the two plants. The utility price aIIects the results to the smallest degree.

The plant Ior the indirect method shows uncertainty in the economic assessment. In reality it
will not be possible to have a processing Iacility with a payback time in just one month. It is
clear that the diIIerence between sales revenue and the total investment cost is high. It is
important to note that the product price is almost three times larger than the raw material.
Another important assumption made Ior this plant is to use electricity Ior all the duties instead
oI steam and cooling water Ior the heat exchangers. However, this assumption should weaken
the proIitability, due to the Iact that electricity is more expensive than heat integration and
steam and cooling water consumption.

67

5 Conclusions and recommendation

The total investment needed Ior putting up the direct plant is 2119 M$ and the proIit made at
the end oI the plant liIe will be 238 M$. The payback time Ior this plant is 8.9 years and the
return on investment 15 . It is clear that there are huge risks related to the direct method
plant investment. The sensitivity analysis results shows that the product price Ior DME is the
most sensitive parameter in this project (DME price 948 $/ton). The project depends on a
good and stable price Ior DME. The variation in utility price had minimum eIIect on payback
time.

The heat integration part was done Iirst aIter we calculated the plant cost. II we had done the
cost calculations based on a better heat integration (like the one described in section 2.3.7) the
operating costs would decrease.

The indirect plant has a total investment oI 34 $ and a payback time less than one year. The
sensitivity analysis results shows that the product price Ior DME is the most sensitive
parameter in this project. The proIit made at the end oI the plant liIe will be 299 M$.

Our results strongly indicate that the indirect plant is more proIitable than the direct plant.
However, there are large uncertainties in our calculations.





















68

List of symbols

Symbol Unit Description
A m
2
Area
A - Capacity Ior cost estimation
A - Pre exponential Iactor
a - Declining balance rate
B
1
, B
2
- Constants Ior Iinding the bare module cost
C
0
$ investment
C
0
p
$ Bare cost oI equipment
C
1
,C
2
,C
3
- Constants Ior pressure Iactor estimation
C
BM
$ Bare module cost oI equipment
D m Diameter
D $ Depreciation
E J/mol Energy
F
bm
- Bare module Iactor
F
m
- Material Iactor
F
p
- Pressure Iactor
F
p,vessel
- Pressure Iactor Ior process vessels
Fq - Quantity Iactor
F
T
- Superheat correction Iactor Ior steam boilers
AH kJ/mol Standard enthalpy change oI reaction
AH
vap
kJ/mol Enthalpy oI vaporization
i - annual interest rate
K
i
- Adsorption constant Ior component i
K
n
- chemical reaction constant
K
P,n
- Equilibrium constant Ior reaction n
K
1
, K
2
, K
3
- Constants Ior bare cost estimation
k kgmol/m
3
h Rate constant
k
0
kgmol/m
3
h.kpa Rate constant
m
steam
ton/yr Mass Ilow
N - Number oI trays
N m
3
/h Flow rate
N
id
- Ideal number oI trays
N
Unisim
- Actual number oI trays
n - Index
n - year
P barg Pressure



69

Symbol Unit Description
P
i
kPa Partial pressure oI component i
p kg/m
3
Density
Q kJ/h Duty/ power
R J/Kmol Gas constant
r - Discount rate
r
n
kgmol/m
3
h Reaction rate Ior reaction n
s - Tax rate
T C Temperature
AT
H
C Temperature diII. between hot stream in and cold stream out
AT
c
C Temperature diII. between cold stream in and hot stream out
AT C Amount oI superheat
T year Payback time
AT
cw
C Temperature diII. Between cooling water in and cooling water out
t
vessel
m Vessel thickness
V m
3
Volume
v m
3
/h Flow rate
W kW ShaIt work
W
el
kW Electric power















70

References

|1|. Aasberg-Petersen, K., Christensen, T., Nielsen, C., Dybkjaer, I. (2003), Recent
developments in autothermal reforming and pre-reforming for svnthesis gas production in
GTL applications, Fuel. Proc. Tech., 83, 253-261.


|2|. Biesheuvel, P., Kramer, G. (2003), Two-section reactor model for autothermal reforming
of methane to svnthesis gas, AIChe Journal, 49, 1827-1837

|3|. Bondiera, J., and C. Naccache. (1991), Kinetics of Methanol Dehvdration in
Dealuminated H-Mordenite. Model with Acid and Base Active Centres, Applied Catalysis, 69,
139-148.

|4|. Chul-Jin Lee, Youngsub Lim, Ho Soo Kim, and Chonghun Han (2009). Optimal Gas-To-
Liquid Product Selection from Natural Gas under Uncertain Price Scenarios. Ind. Eng.
Chem. Res., 48, 794800.
|5|. Dybkjaer, I. (1995), Tubular reforming and autothermal reforming of natural gas an
overview of available processes, Fuel. Proc. Tech., 42, 85-107.
|6|. Lu, W.Z., Teng, L.H., Xiao, W.D. (2003). Theoretical analvsis of fluidi:ed-bed reactor
for dimethvl ether svnthesis from svngas. International Journal oI Chemical Reactor
Engineering, 1, 1-10.

|7|. Moulijn, J., Makkee, M., van Diepen, A. (2001), Chemical Process Technologv, John
Wiley & Sons Ltd, England

|8|. Richard Turton, Richard C. Bailie, Wallace B. Whiting, Joseph A. Shaeiwitz (2009).
Analysis, Synthesis, and Design oI Chemical Processes, Third Ed., Prentice Hall PTR, New
Jersey.

|9|. R. K. Sinnott (2008). Chemical Engineering Design, Fourth Ed., Elsevier, China.


71

|10|. Ruiz, J., Passos, F., Bueno, J., Souza-Aguiar, E., Mattos, L., Noronga, F. (2008).
Svnthesis gas production bv autothermal reforming of methane on supported platinum
catalvst. Appl. Catal., 334, 259267.

|11|. Sigurd Skogestad. (2009). Chemical and energv process engineering, Taylor & Francis,
Boca Raton.

|12|. K. Sommer. (1989). Ullmans Encvclopedia of Industrial Chemistrv, A 12, FiIth Ed.,
VCH, Germany.

|13|. Wen-Zhi Lu, Li-Hua Teng,Wen-De Xiao. (2004). Simulation and experiment studv of
dimethvl ether svnthesis from svngas in a fluidi:ed-bed reactor. Chemical Engineering
Science, 59, 5455.

|14|. Wihelm, D. J., Simbeck, D. R., Karp, A. D., Dickenson, R. L. (2001) Svngas production
for gas-to-liquids applications. technologies, issues and outlook. Fuel Process. Technol., 71,
139148.

|15|. Xiao, W.D., Lu, W.Z. (2002). A novel technologv of DME svnthesis from svngas.
Chemical Engineering Science, 47, 3769-3776.
|16|. West, Ronald E., Peters, Max S., Timmerhaus, Klaus D. (2003). Plant Design and
Economics for Chemical Engineers, FiIth Ed., MCGraw Hill Book Co., New York.










72


Other references

1.http://www.isope.org/publications/proceedings/ISOPE/ISOPE202005/papers/008NGGT09.pdI

2.http://www.igu.org/html/wgc2006pres/data/wgcppt/pdI/WOC20Working20Committees/WOC
201/Challenges20oI20new20Irontier20gas/1.3EF.07.pdI

3. http://www.miljostatus.no/Tema/Klima/Klimagasser/

4.http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2007/Ieb/21/climatechange.climatechangeenvironment

5. Mehdi Panahi, conversation.

6. http://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ruthenium

7.http://www.Iosterwheeler.it/pub/Ih/HYDROGEN20PLANT20STEAM-
HYDROCARBON20REFORMERGLOBALE.pdI

8.http://www.topsoe.com/Businessareas/Methanol/Processes/~/media/PDF20Iiles/Ammonia/Topso
esecreIcatRKS202.ashx

9. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nickel(II)oxide

10. http://www.kortogkontant.no/valutakurs-valuta/norske-kroner-nok/
























73

APPENDIX A
Stream Condition - Direct Method

CONDITIONS NG Water Oxygen 1 2 3 4
vapour/Phase lracLlon 1 0 1 1 1 0 1
1emperaLure [C] 50 25 50 -0.2147 455 25.27 455
ressure [bar] 70 1 30 30 30 30 1
Molar llow [kgmole/h] 7500 7500 6500 7500 7500 7500 7500
Mass llow [kg/h] 125823.25 135113.25 208000 125823.25 125823.25 135113.25 135113.25
Std Ideal Llquld volume llow [m3/h] 411.5416 135.3859 182.82 411.5416 411.5416 135.3859 135.3859
COMPOSITION (Mole Fraction)
Methanol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
H2O 0 1 0 0 0 1 1
DME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Methane 0.960774 0 0 0.960774 0.960774 0 0
Hydrogen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ethane 0.030181 0 0 0.030181 0.030181 0 0
Propane 0.00502 0 0 0.00502 0.00502 0 0
n-Butane 0.004024 0 0 0.004024 0.004024 0 0
CO2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 0 0 1 0 0 0 0

CONDITIONS 5 6 7 8 9 10 11
vapour/Phase lracLlon 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1emperaLure [C] 279.2 250 455 1000 550 650 400
ressure [bar] 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Molar llow [kgmole/h] 16372.79 6500 29999.98 30531.69 29999.98 30531.69 30531.69
Mass llow [kg/h] 260936.69 208000 260942.82 468930.60 260942.82 468930.60 468930.60
Std Ideal Llquld volume llow [m3/h] 581.27 182.82 601 868.41 601 868.41 868.41
COMPOSITION (Mole Fraction)
Methanol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
H2O 0.416154 0 0.374707 0.333982 0.374707 0.333982 0.333982
DME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Methane 0.440109 0 0.440109 0.004138 0.440109 0.004138 0.004138
Hydrogen 0.101815 0 0.143262 0.407527 0.143262 0.407527 0.407527
CO 0.041922 0 0.000476 0.171255 0.000476 0.171255 0.171255
Ethane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Propane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n-Butane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO2 0 0 0.041447 0.83098 0.041447 0.83098 0.83098
Oxygen 0 1 0 0 0 0 0


74


CONDITIONS 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
vapour/Phase lracLlon 1 0 0 1 0 0 0
1emperaLure [C] 50 25 25.92 50 25 25.27 50
ressure [bar] 30 1 100 30 1 30 30
Molar llow [kgmole/h] 20430 6809 6809 30531.69 4567 4567 10100
Mass llow [kg/h] 286900 122700 122700 468930.60 82280 82280 182000
Std Ideal Llquld volume llow [m3/h] 686 122.9 122.9 868.41 82.44 82.44 182.4
COMPOSITION (Mole Fraction)
Methanol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
H2O 0.004791 1 1 0.333982 1 1 0.999787
DME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Methane 0.006185 0 0 0.004138 0 0 0
Hydrogen 0.609016 0 0 0.407527 0 0 0.000003
CO 0.255924 0 0 0.171255 0 0 0.000008
Ethane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Propane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n-Butane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO2 0.124084 0 0 0.83098 0 0 0.000202
Oxygen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CONDITIONS 19 20 21 22 HPS MPS LPS
vapour/Phase lracLlon 0 0 1 1 1 1 1
1emperaLure [C] 25 25.18 480 510 510 480 250
ressure [bar] 1 20 30 100 100 30 20
Molar llow [kgmole/h] 15360 15360 7604 2867 6809 4567 15360
Mass llow [kg/h] 276800 276800 137000 51650 122700 82280 276800
Std Ideal Llquld volume llow [m3/h] 277.3 277.3 137.3 51.75 122.9 82.44 277.3
COMPOSITION (Mole Fraction)
Methanol 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
H2O 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
DME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Methane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Hydrogen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Ethane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Propane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n-Butane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Oxygen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0



75


CONDITIONS 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
vapour/Phase lracLlon 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
1emperaLure [C] 260 258 50 258 258 258 260
ressure [bar] 30 30 30 30 30 30 30
Molar llow [kgmole/h] 20430 21280 7604 7093 7093 7093 3545
Mass llow [kg/h] 286900 313300 137000 104433.33 104433.33 104433.34 104400
Std Ideal Llquld volume llow [m3/h] 686 718.8 137.3 239.6 239.6 239.6 150.9
COMPOSITION (Mole Fraction)
Methanol 0 0.031278 0 0.031278 0.031278 0.031278 0.06531
H2O 0.004791 0.009915 1 0.009915 0.009915 0.009915 0.279201
DME 0 0.000773 0 0.000773 0.000773 0.000773 0.250366
Methane 0.006185 0.005960 0 0.005960 0.005960 0.005960 0.011923
Hydrogen 0.609016 0.584756 0 0.584756 0.584756 0.584756 0.158725
CO 0.255924 0.245725 0 0.245725 0.245725 0.245725 0.001844
Ethane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Propane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n-Butane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO2 0.124084 0.121593 0 0.121593 0.121593 0.121593 0.232711
Oxygen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CONDITIONS 30 31 32 33 34 35 36
vapour/Phase lracLlon 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
1emperaLure [C] 260 260 20 260 10 10 10
ressure [bar] 30 30 100 30 30 30 30
Molar llow [kgmole/h] 3545 3545 2867 10640 3673 3412 3552
Mass llow [kg/h] 104400 104400 51650 313300 88710 151700 72930
Std Ideal Llquld volume llow [m3/h] 150.9 150.9 51.75 452.8 160.9 213.6 78.25
COMPOSITION (Mole Fraction)
Methanol 0.06531 0.06531 0 0.06531 0.0002 0.0204 0.1756
H2O 0.279201 0.279201 1 0.279201 0.0004 0.0139 0.8223
DME 0.250366 0.250366 0 0.250366 0.113 0.6587 0.0003
Methane 0.011923 0.011923 0 0.011923 0.0308 0.004 0
Hydrogen 0.158725 0.158725 0 0.158725 0.4556 0.0044 0
CO 0.001844 0.001844 0 0.001844 0.0052 0.0002 0
Ethane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Propane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n-Butane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO2 0.232711 0.232711 0 0.232711 0.3948 0.2985 0.0019
Oxygen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




76


CONDITIONS 37 38 39 40 41 42 43
vapour/Phase lracLlon 0.0002 1 0.0599 1 0 0 0
1emperaLure [C] 3.207 40 0 0.048 97.44 95.95 93.83
ressure [bar] 30 29.9 29.9 29.85 30 29.95 29.9
Molar llow [kgmole/h] 4285 2146 2146 1599 2139 2047 32.79
Mass llow [kg/h] 19050 94280 94280 69150 96250 93700 1510
Std Ideal Llquld volume llow [m3/h] 265.5 122.9 122.9 85.44 142.7 139.6 2.252
COMPOSITION (Mole Fraction)
Methanol 0.0164 0.0002 0.0002 0 0.0326 0.0046 0
H2O 0.0114 0.001 0.001 0 0.0219 0.0079 0
DME 0.608 0.2717 0.2717 0.0259 0.9455 0.9874 0.9975
Methane 0.0043 0.0087 0.0087 0.0116 0 0 0
Hydrogen 0.0043 0.0086 0.0086 0.0115 0 0 0
CO 0.0002 0.0004 0.0004 0.0006 0 0 0
Ethane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Propane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n-Butane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO2 0.3553 0.7094 0.7094 0.9504 0 0 0.0025
Oxygen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

CONDITIONS 44 45 46 47 48 49 50
vapour/Phase lracLlon 0 0 0 0.9130 1 1 0
1emperaLure [C] 93.74 195.1 17.83 110.3 10 260 10
ressure [bar] 29.95 30.05 30 29.95 29.95 30 29.95
Molar llow [kgmole/h] 547.1 92.27 36.44 3591 2743 848.3 848.3
Mass llow [kg/h] 25130 2547 75480 73760 47330 26430 26430
Std Ideal Llquld volume llow [m3/h] 37.43 3.076 81.33 138.5 105.7 32.8 32.8
COMPOSITION (Mole Fraction)
Methanol 0.0009 0.6536 0.1877 0.1864 0.0014 0.7848 0.7848
H2O 0.0041 0.3314 0.8099 0.0315 0 0.1334 0.1334
DME 0.99 0.015 0 0.0164 0.0155 0.0194 0.0194
Methane 0 0 0 0.0301 0.0393 0.0005 0.0005
Hydrogen 0 0 0 0.465 0.6087 0.0003 0.0003
CO 0 0 0 0.0052 0.0068 0 0
Ethane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Propane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n-Butane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO2 0.005 0 0.0019 0.2653 0.3283 0.0616 0.0616
Oxygen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




77


CONDITIONS 51 53 Gas Methanol Water.out CO2 DME
vapour/Phase lracLlon 1 0 1 1 0 1 0.7845
1emperaLure [C] 260 -25 -25 196.2 233.7 -5.668 95.2
ressure [bar] 30 30 30 29.95 30.05 29.8 29.9
Molar llow [kgmole/h] 848.3 873.6 2799 791.9 2852 1566 2627
Mass llow [kg/h] 26430 38850 49870 23904 51580 67640 120300
Std Ideal Llquld volume llow [m3/h] 32.8 51.95 109 29.53 51.8 83.19 179.3
COMPOSITION (Mole Fraction)
Methanol 0.7848 0.000639 0.000001 0.845551 0.005 0 0.003799
H2O 0.1334 0.001836 0.000013 0.142975 0.995 0 0.007025
DME 0.0194 0.410219 0.020232 0.002929 0 0.00554 0.988099
Methane 0.0005 0.005752 0.038664 0.000001 0 0.00863 0
Hydrogen 0.0003 0.004056 0.596503 0.000018 0 0.011757 0
CO 0 0.000271 0.006684 0.000001 0 0.000573 0
Ethane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Propane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
n-Butane 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO2 0.0616 0.577227 0.337902 0.008526 0 0.970268 0.001076
Oxygen 0 0 0 0 0 0 0




























78

Stream Condition - Indirect Method

CONDITIONS Methanol 2 3 4 5 6 7
vapour/Phase lracLlon 0 0 0 0 0.3439 1 1
1emperaLure [C] 25 25.3 49.97 142.9 160.7 250 352.2
ressure [bar] 1 15.5 15.2 14.9 14.9 14.7 14.7
Molar llow [kgmole/h] 5426 5426 5426 5426 7905 7905 7905
Mass llow [kg/h] 173133.67 173133.67 173133.67 173133.67 233432.44 233432.44 233433.21
Std Ideal Llquld volume llow [m3/h] 217.3 217.3 217.3 217.3 286.9 286.9 303.1
COMPOSITION (Mole Fraction)
Methanol 0.990465 0.990465 0.990465 0.990465 0.820947 0.820947 0.164189
H2O 0.009535 0.009535 0.009535 0.009535 0.179053 0.179053 0.507432
DME 0 0 0 0 0 0 0.328379

CONDITIONS 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
vapour/Phase lracLlon 1 1 0 0.0429 0 1 0
1emperaLure [C] 180 175.1 169.3 155.7 139 154.4 165.9
ressure [bar] 14.4 10.4 10.4 7.4 7.4 7.3 7.6
Molar llow [kgmole/h] 7905 7905 5296 5296 5296 2551 2745
Mass llow [kg/h] 233433.21 233433.21 113430.39 113430.39 113430.39 62061.95 51368.43
Std Ideal Llquld volume llow [m3/h] 303.1 303.1 124.1 124.1 124.1 71.55 52.59
COMPOSITION (Mole Fraction)
Methanol 0.164189 0.164189 0.242606 0.242606 0.242606 0.44979 0.05
H2O 0.507432 0.507432 0.757394 0.757394 0.757394 0.55021 0.95
DME 0.328379 0.328379 0 0 0 0 0



CONDITIONS 15 16 17 18 DME Water
vapour/Phase lracLlon 1 1 1 1 1 0
1emperaLure [C] 154 241.3 241.3 241.3 47.6 70
ressure [bar] 7.3 15.5 15.5 15.5 10.3 7.3
Molar llow [kgmole/h] 2555 2555 2479 76.66 2609 2745
Mass llow [kg/h] 62163.68 62163.68 60298.77 1865 120002.8 51368.43
Std Ideal Llquld volume llow [m3/h] 71.67 71.67 69.52 2.15 178.9 52.59
COMPOSITION (Mole Fraction)
Methanol 0.449881 0.449881 0.449881 0.449881 0.005 0.05
H2O 0.550119 0.550119 0.550119 0.550119 0 0.95
DME 0 0 0 0 0.995 0




79

APPENDIX B
Kinetics
1

Several sources were studied to obtain the most plausible kinetics Ior the DME-reactor. The
choice oI kinetics is supported by the Iact that most oI the sources contained errors that made
it impossible to obtain any DME. The chosen source included a reasonable reaction
mechanism, with rate expressions and rate constants that are well documented. This
documentation made it possible to double check the equations to make sure that they did not
contain any errors. For the direct method three reactions take place in the syngas-to-DME
reactor, namely:

Methanol synthesis:
CO2 3H2 CH3OH H2O AH 56.33 kJ/mol (B.1)

Methanol dehydration:
2CH3OH CH3OCH3 H2O AH 21.255 kJ/mol (B.2)

Water gas shift:
CO H2O H2 CO2 AH 40.9kJ/mol (B.3)

Overall reaction
3CO 3H2 CH3OCH3 CO2 AH 256.615 kJ/mol (B.4)

All tree reactions, as well as the overall reaction, are reversible and exothermic. The catalyst
that is used is the dual catalyst CuZnOAl
2
O
3
/HZSM-5, manuIactured by co-precipitation
deposition method. The component Ior methanol synthesis is CuZnOAl
2
O
3
, and that Ior
methanol dehydration is HZSM-5.

The reaction mechanism that the rate expressions are based on is described below. The
reaction mechanisms Ior CO
2
hydrogenation to methanol and water gas shiIt reaction are as
Iollows:

1Wen-Zhi Lu, Li-Hua Teng and Wen-De Xiao, 'Simulation and experiment study oI dimethyl ether synthesis
Irom syngas in a Iluidized-bed reactor, Chemical Engineering Science 59 (2004) 5455 5464.

80



Reaction (c) and (i) are assumed to be the rate determining steps individually

The reaction mechanism Ior the Iormation oI DME is as Iollows:





81

Here reaction (m) is assumed to be the rate determining step. Based oh these kinetics one
could obtain the Iollowing rate expressions:

The reaction rate Ior the methanol Iormation reaction is:

( )
2 2 2
,1 2
1 1 3
2 2 2 2
1
W M
CO H
P H
CO CO CO CO H H
P P
P P
K P
r K
K P K P K P

=
+ + +
(B.5)

The reaction rate Ior the methanol dehydration reaction is:
2
2 2
,2
M D
W P
P P
r K
P K

=



(B.6)
The reaction rate Ior the water gas shiIt reaction is:
( )
2 2
,3
3 3
2 2 2 2
1
CO H
W
P CO
CO CO CO CO H H
P P
P
K P
r K
K P K P K P

=
+ + +
(B.7)

The constants K
1
, K
2
, K
3
(kinetic parameters), K
CO2,
K
CO
, K
H2
(adsorption constants), K
P,1
,
K
P,2
and K
P,3
(equilibrium constants) are deIined as:



Inserting these equations into UniSim we have to use the Iollowing nomenclature.
The rate expressions in Unisim have to be in the Iorm as described in equation B.7:

82

min
Numerator
rate
Deno ator
= (B.7)
Where the numerator and denominator is in the Iorm described in eq. B.6 and B.7:

' '
( ) ( ) Numerator k f basis k f basis = (B.8)
min (1 1 1( ) 2 2( ) ( ))
n
Deno ator K f basis K f basis Kn fn basis = + + + (B.9)

n is the denominator exponent. I, I`, I1 and I2 are Iunctions oI the basis used in Unisim. When
projecting the data Irom the rate expressions into Unisim the Iunctions are partial pressures oI
the components in the reactions to the power oI the speciIied components. The rate constants
k and k` is Ior the Iorward and backward reaction respectively. From rate expression to
Unisim it will be k K
1
, K
2
, K
3
and k`
1
,1 P
K
K
,
2
,2 P
K
K
,
3
,3 P
K
K
. The constants in Unisim Ior the
reversible reaction is deIined below:
exp| |
E
k A T
RT

=
'
' '
' exp| |
E
k A T
RT

= (B.10)
1
1 1 exp| |
E
K A
RT

=
2
2 2 exp| |
E
K A
RT

= (B.11)

The constants K, A and E have indexes which indicates the numbers in the denominator term
in the rate expression. The equations describes the dependence oI the rate constants on
temperature and activation energy E, which is deIined as the Arrehenius equation. The term
exp| |
E
RT

will be the probability that any given collision will result in a reaction.







83

APPENDIX C

The McCabe-Thiele method

How to construct a McCabe-Thiele diagram is explained below and to Iind the operating lines
the reIlux ratio must be set. Total reIlux means that R goes to inIinity, and this gives the
operating line in equation C.3 and is a 45 straight line.

1
1 1
D
n n
X R
v X
R R
+
= +
+ +
(C.1)

1
D
n n
X
v X
+

= +

(C.2)

(C.3)


In a column, the Ieed enters the column at the top as liquid and Ilows down the column to the
boiler beIore the distillation begins. Liquid and vapor streams enter a tray, are equilibrated,
and leave, see Iigure C.1:


Figure C.1, A Principe sketch over what happens in the column.

Liquid and vapour streams enter a tray, are equilibrated, and leave, see Iigure C.1. The
stripping line and the enriching line were not calculated only drawn with respect to the
equilibrium line.

1 n n
v X
+
=

84

McCabe Thiele Diagram

For the separation we needed several distillation columns or the simulation would not run.
Since we have multi components and not only a binary mixture the molar basis composition
Ior the light key component and the heavy key component were plotted. Figure C.2 - Figure
C.6 shows the equilibrium composition including the operating lines, enriching and stripping
lines Ior each distillation column.



Figure C.2: McCabe Thiele diagram for CO
2
(L)-H
2
O(H)










85



Figure C.3: McCabe Thiele diagram for CO
2
(L)-DME(H)



Figure C.4: McCabe Thiele diagram for CO
2
(L)-DME(H)


86



Figure C.5: McCabe Thiele diagram for DME(L)-H
2
O(H)



Figure C.6: McCabe Thiele diagram for MeOH(L)-H
2
O(H)

87

APPENDIX D - Flowsheet with heat integration



88

APPENDIX E
Economical equipment study of DME plants

To obtain an estimate oI the capital cost oI the plants, the costs associated with major plant
equipment must be known. The most accurate estimate oI the purchased cost oI a piece oI
major equipment is provided by a current price quote oI a suitable vendor. The method that
was used Ior the plants in this project is a good alternative when the cost data on previously
purchased equipment oI the same type are used.

Module costing technique
The equipment module costing technique was used to estimate the total equipment cost. This
is a common technique to estimate the cost oI a new chemical plant. This costing technique
relates all costs back to the purchased costs oI equipment evaluated Ior some base conditions.
Deviations Irom these base conditions are handled by using multiplying Iactors that depend
on the speciIic equipment type, the speciIic system pressure and the speciIic materials oI
construction.

Equation 2 is used to calculate the bare module cost, C
BM,
which includes both direct and
indirect costs Ior each piece oI equipment.

0
BM p BM
C C F = (E.1)

C
p
0
is the purchased cost Ior base condition, which means condition where equipment is made
oI the most common material, usually carbon steel and operating at near ambient pressure.
F
BM
is the bare module cost Iactor, which is a multiplying Iactor Ior: Direct project expenses
(equipment Iree on board costs, materials required Ior installation and labor to install
equipment and material), indirect project expenses (Ireight insurance, taxes, construction
overhead and contractor engineering expenses), contingency and contractor Iee and auxiliary
Iacilities (site development, auxiliary buildings, oII sites and utilities) plus the speciIic
materials oI construction and operating pressure.



89

Purchased equipment cost

Data Ior the purchased cost oI the equipment, at ambient operating pressure and using carbon
steel construction, C
p
0
were Iitted to Iollowing equation E.2:

log
10
C
p
0
K
1
K
2
log
10
(A) K
3
|log
10
(A)|
2
(E.2)

Where A is the capacity or the size parameter Ior the equipment and K
1
, K
2
and K
3
are some
constants dependent on the equipment type and the size oI the capacity.

Pressure factors:
As the pressure at which a piece oI equipment operates increases, the thickness oI the walls oI
the equipment will also increase.

Process vessels
The relationship between cost oI a vessel and its operating pressure is a complex one. With all
other things being constant, the cost oI the vessel is approximately proportional to the weight
oI the vessel, which in turn is proportional to the vessel thickness. Equation 4 give the
pressure Iactor Ior horizontal and vertical process vessels and is based on diameter D meters,
operating at pressure P barg (1 barg 100 kPa) and carbon steel construction.

,
( 1)
0, 00315
2|850 0, 6( 1)|
0, 0063
p vessel
P D
P
F
+
+
+
= Ior 0, 0063
vessel
t m > (E.3)

For F
p, vessel
less than 1, then F
p,vessel
1

Other process equipments
The pressure Iactors Irom the other equipments are given by equation 5 on its general Iorm:

2
10 1 2 10 3 10
log log (log )
P
F C C P C P = + + (E.4)


90

The units oI pressure P is barg. The constants C
1
, C
2
and C
3
are dependent on the equipment
type and pressure range.

The value predicted Irom this equation gives values oI F
p
much smaller than those Ior vessels
at the same pressure. This diIIerence arises Irom the Iact that Ior other equipment, the
internals oI equipment make up the major portion oI the cost.

Some equipments, like Ior example tower trays and packing, is unaIIected by pressure. Tower
trays and packing is not subjected to signiIicant diIIerential pressure because it is surrounded
by process Iluid. Compressors do not have corrections Ior pressure because such data is not
available.

Bare module and material factors
The costs oI equipment change with the change oI diIIerent material oI construction.

The choice oI which materials oI construction to use depends on the chemicals that will
contact the walls oI the equipment, and the operating temperature and operating pressure.

To account Ior the cost oI diIIerent materials oI construction, it is necessary to use the
appropriate material Iactor, F
m
, in the bare module Iactor. This material Iactor is not simply
the relative cost oI the material oI interest to that oI carbon steel. The reason is that the cost to
produce a piece oI equipment is not directly proportional to the cost oI the raw materials.

Heat exchangers, process vessels and pumps

The material Iactors, F
M
Ior heat exchangers, process vessels and pumps are given in a Iigure
(Richard Turton, 2009) with the appropriate identiIication number listed in a table in the same
book (Richard Turton, 2009). The bare module costs C
BM
are given by the Iollowing
equation:

0 0
1 2
( )
BM P BM P M P
C C F C B B F F = = + (E.5)

B
1
and B
2
are some constants (Richard Turton, 2009).

91


B
1
F
0
BM
1 I
P&I
and B
2
1 I
P&I
(E.6)

Where I
P&I
are modiIied values that accounts Ior the Iraction oI the installation cost that is
associated with piping and instrumentation.

Since it probably is desirable to separate the equipment costs and the costs that have to be
considered in the evaluation oI the total capital cost oI a chemical plant, equation E.5
becomes:

0
BM P M P
C C F F = (E.6)

Where only the operating pressure and the speciIic material oI constructions are taken into
account. First we calculated the equipment cost by using equation E.5. Then the costs Ior
some oI the pieces became unreasonably large. Then we removed the B1, B2 and the FBM
Iactor. This reduced the costs equipment by 60 . As mentioned above F
BM
is the bare
module cost Iactor, which is a multiplying Iactor Ior: Direct project expenses (equipment Iree
on board costs, materials required Ior installation and labour to install equipment and
material), indirect project expenses (Ireight insurance, taxes, construction overhead and
contractor engineering expenses), contingency and contractor Iee and auxiliary Iacilities (site
development, auxiliary buildings, oII sites and utilities) plus the speciIic materials oI
construction and operating pressure. This Iactor could be removed, because all oI this
equipment related costs are calculated as a percentage oI the total Iixed capital. ThereIore we
use equation E.6 instead oI equation E.5 to calculate the equipment cost.

Fired heaters
Equation E.7 gives the module cost Ior Iired heaters:

0
BM P BM P T
C C F F F = (E.7)
Where F
T
is the superheated correction Iactor Ior non-reactive Iired heaters is 1

Equation E.9 with only the operating pressure, the superheated correction Iactor and the
speciIic material oI construction taken into account is given below:

92

0
BM P M P T
C C F F F = (E.8)

Sieve trays
The bare module costs oI the sieve trays are given in the equation below:

0
BM P BM q
C C NF F = (E.9)

Where N is the number oI trays and F
q
is quantity Iactor given by equation E.10:

2
10 10 10
log 0, 4771 0, 085161log 0, 3473(log )
q
F N N = + Ior N 20 (E.10)
F
q
1 Ior N _ 20

Equation E.9 with only the operating pressure and the speciIic material oI construction taken
into account is given below:

0
BM P M q
C C NF F = (E.11)

Towers
Equation E.12 gives the module cost Ior towers:

0
BM p BM
C C F = (E.12)

Equation E.12 with only the operating pressure and the speciIic material oI construction taken
into account is given below:

0
BM p M P
C C F F = (E.13)

The bare module Iactors were Iound in a Iigure (Turton book, year 2009) with the appropriate
identiIication number listed in a table (Turton book, year 2009). Then the F
BM
Iactors were
removed Ior reasons discussed above.



93

Storage tanks
The volume oI the storage tank Ior water in the indirect process was too small to be calculated
the same way as the other tanks. It had to be scaled up by using one oI the other tanks as a
basis and the equation:

n
A
A B
B
J
C C
J

=


(E.14)
where n was given as 0,6
|mehdi|
, C
A
the cost oI the tank Ior water, C
B
the cost oI the basis tank,
V
A
the volume oI the tank Ior water and V
B
the volume oI the basis tank.


Effect of time on purchased equipment cost
All cost-estimating methods use historical data, and are themselves Iorecasts oI Iuture costs.
The method usually used to update historical cost data makes use oI published cost indices.
These relate present costs to past costs by taking the economic conditions into account. This
Iollowing equation:

2008
,2008 ,2001
2001
BM BM
I
C C
I

=


(E.15)

Where C
BM
purchased bare module cost and I Cost index.
Subscripts: 2001 reIers to base time when cost is known. 2008 reIer to time when cost is
desired.







94

APPENDIX F

Mass and Energy balance

- Mass balance for the direct method
It is important to check that the mass balances Irom the Ilowsheet in Unisim are correct. The
mass balances are correct when the Iollow the equation F.1 given below:

0
in out
mass mass =
(F.1)

Below gives an overwiev over the mass streams coming in and out for the different
processes and for the total process. The stream error is also given.
PRE REFORMER
STREAM ton/day
IN
NG 3019.76
Water 3242.72
OUT 7 6262.63
STREAM ERROR 0.0024

ATR
STREAM ton/day
IN
Oxygen 4992
7 6262.63
OUT 8 11234.33
STREAM ERROR 0.0026

FBR
STREAM ton/day
IN
23 6883.63
49 634.44
OUT 33 7319.96
STREAM ERROR 0.0014

V-100
STREAM ton/day
IN 15 11234.33
OUT
18 4368.7
12 6883.63
STREAM ERROR 0

V-101
STREAM ton/day
IN 33 7319.96
OUT
34 2129.06
35 3640.47
36 1730.43
STREAM ERROR 0

V-102
STREAM ton/day
IN 34 2129.06
OUT
53 932.28
Gas 1196.78
STREAM ERROR 0

V-103
STREAM ton/day
IN 47 1770.34
OUT
50 634.43
48 1133.9
STREAM ERROR 0

T-100
STREAM ton/day
IN 37 4372.73
OUT
41 2309.98
38 2262.76
STREAM ERROR 0


95

T-101
STREAM ton/day
IN 39 2262.76
OUT
44 603.1
40 1639.67
STREAM ERROR 0

T-102
STREAM ton/day
IN 40 1639.67
OUT
43 36.23
CO2
1623.42
STREAM ERROR 0



T-103
STREAM ton/day
IN 41 2309.99
OUT
45 61.13
42 2248.86
STREAM ERROR 0


T-104
STREAM ton/day
IN 46 1811.36
OUT
Water.out 1238.
Methanol 373.36
STREAM ERROR 0


TOTAL MASS BALANCE
STREAM ton/day
IN
NG 3019.76
Water 3242.72
Oxygen 4992
OUT
DME 2888.2
48 1133.9
CO2
1623.42
Water.out 1238.
18 4368.7
STREAM ERROR 0.002


















96

- Energy balance for the direct method

It is also important to control that the energy balances Irom the Ilowsheet in Unisim is correct.
The energy balances are correct when the Iollow equation F.2 below:

0
in out
Energv Energv = (F.2)

Below gives an overwiev over the energy streams coming in and out for the total process






TOTAL ENERGY BALANCE
IN
STREAM K1/h MW
ln -102 318633.1969 0.144063
ln -103 0 0
ln -104 0 0
ln -10S 178212993,8 49,30361
ln -106 40369260.34 11.26924
ln -107 -1122281319,44 -311,7448
ln -108 1607271.638 0.446464
ln -109 313827.2243 0.08773
ln -110 696036.8196 0.193344
ln -111 -8.38L-07 -2.3L-13
ln -112 133420843.6 37.06133
ln -113 -194142936 -33.9286
ln -114 -194142936 -33.9286
ln -11S -194142936 -33.9286
ln -116 -330763793 -97.4349
ln -117 -18664380.9 -3.18433
ln -120 38211887.8 16.16997
ln -122 26060870.22 7.239131
ln -124 2894420.343 0.804006
ln -126 31339077.88 8.760833
ln -128 2139903444 399.9737
ln -129 -39313813.4 -10.9203
ln -130 47072878.81 13.0738
ln 13 -1944311269 -340.142
ln 16 -1304391431 -362.331
ln 19 -4387680430 -1218.8
ln 21 -1720478069 -477.911
ln 22 -649848844.2 -180.314
ln NG -368412498.3 -137.892
ln Water -2141996179 -394.999
ln Cxygen 3203961.418 0.889989


TOTAL ENERGY BALANCE
OUT
STREAM K1/h MW
Cu1 -101 10293338.36 2.839872
Cu1 -118 30229632.11 8.397126
Cu1 -119 1369170.143 0.433881
Cu1 -121 3388403.373 0.941224
Cu1 -123 3317347.633 0.977097
Cu1 -12S 6833337.768 1.90376
Cu1 -127 2064134384 373.3762
Cu1 18 -2866242403 -796.178
Cu1 2S -2137410063 -399.281
Cu1 32 -819336302.8 -227.399
Cu1 48 -373238090.4 -104.238
Cu1 DML -2141996179 -394.999
Cu1 nS -1343279817 -428.689
Cu1 MS -1033413971 -287.06
Cu1 LS -3609663120 -1002.68
Cu1 Gas -398484813.2 -110.69
Cu1 CC2 -606142681.9 -168.373
Cu1 Water.out -767461818.3 -213.184





















97

Mass and Energy balance for the indirect method

- Mass balance

Below gives an overwiev over the mass streams coming in and out for the total process
R-101
STREAM ton/day
IN 6 3602.37836
OUT 7 3602.39704
STREAM ERROR 0.0003


T-100
STREAM ton/day
IN 9 3602.39704
OUT
10 2722.32936
DME 2880.0672
STREAM ERROR 0


T-101
STREAM ton/day
IN 12 2722.32936
OUT
13 1489.4868
14 1232.84232
STREAM ERROR 0


TEE-100
STREAM ton/day
IN 16 1491.92832
OUT
17 1447.17048
18 44.76
STREAM ERROR 0.0001


TOTAL MASS BALANCE
STREAM ton/day
IN Methanol 4133.20808
OUT
DME 2880.0672
Water 1232.84232
18 44.76
STREAM ERROR 0.004














98

- Energy balance


Below gives an overwiev over the energy streams coming in and out for the total process


















TOTAL ENERGY BALANCE
STREAM K1/h MW
ln -101 331668.3246 0.147686
ln -102 201371100.6 33.99197
-103 0 0
Cu1
-104 7327602193 2091.001
ln -10S 7309172377 2030.326
Cu1
-106 17849461.63 4.938184
Cu1
-107 2033394.708 0.370943
ln -108 103903043.3 29.41731
ln -109 9132633.033 2.336848
2 -1344307393 -373.419
3 -1322446221 -367.346
4 -1236623378 -343.307
S -1770334372 -491.821
6 -1368983471 -433.829

7 -1368999039 -433.833

8 -1634819882 -439.672
9 -1634819882 -439.672
10 -1393417926 -387.061
11 -1393417926 -387.061
12 -1411267387 -392.019
13 -338692496.6 -133.192
14 -748727630.6 -207.98
1S -339373120.9 -133.438
16 -330442467.8 -132.901
17 -333929193.8 -148.314
Cu1
18 -16313274.04 -4.38702
Cu1
DML -479839333.3 -133.294
Cu1
Water -770389022.2 -214.033
ln Methano| -1344839261 -373.366


99

APPENDIX G - Major equipment cost-direct method
VesseIs V [m3] K1 K2 K3 logCP,0 CP,0 [$] D [m] P [barg] Fp,vessel Fm B B2 FBM Cbm [$]
V-100 Separator 1 (PV, vertical, SS) 91.2 3.4974 0.4485 0.1074 4.78904 61523.83 2.7 29 8.3 3.1 0 1 1588667
V-101 Separator 2 (PV, vertical, SS) 73.7 3.4974 0.4485 0.1074 4.70971 51251.89 2.2 29 6.8 3.1 0 1 1085268
V-102 Separator 3 (PV, vertical, SS) 38.0 3.4974 0.4485 0.1074 4.47415 29795.65 1.1 29 3.8 3.1 0 1 347675
V-103 Separator 4 (PV, vertical, SS) 16.4 3.4974 0.4485 0.1074 4.20076 15876.81 0.5 29 1.9 3.1 0 1 93907

Pumps Shaft power [kW] K1 K2 K3 logCP,0 CP,0 [$] C1 C2 C3 P [barg] logFp Fp Fm B1 B2 FBM Cbm [$]
P-1 (Centrifugal, ED, SS) 156.4 3.3892 0.0536 0.1538 4.24731 17672.9 -0.3935 0.3957 -0.00226 29 0.18034 1.5 2.25 0 1 1 60232
P-100 (HPS) (Centrifugal, ED, SS) 458.4 3.3892 0.0536 0.1538 4.62109 41791.6 -0.3935 0.3957 -0.00226 99 0.38717 2.4 2.25 0 1 1 229321
P-101 (MPS) (Centrifugal, ED, SS) 88.3 3.3892 0.0536 0.1538 4.07584 11908.1 -0.3935 0.3957 -0.00226 29 0.18034 1.5 2.25 0 1 1 40585
P-102 (LPS) (Centrifugal, ED, SS) 183.0 3.3892 0.0536 0.1538 4.29772 19848.2 -0.3935 0.3957 -0.00226 19 0.10881 1.3 2.25 0 1 1 57373
Turbins Shaft power [kW] K1 K2 K3 logCP,0 CP,0 [$] C1 C2 C3 P [barg] logFp Fp Fm B1 B2 FBM Cbm [$]
K-1 (Axial gas tubine, SS) 2859.9 -21.77 13.218 -1.528 5.66126 458417.1 0 0 0 29 0 1.0 1 458417.1

Heat exchangers A [m2] K1 K2 K3 logCP,0 CP,0 [$] C1 C2 C3 P [barg] logFp Fp Fm B1 B2 FBM Cbm [$]
E-108 (FH, S&T, SS) 1885 4.8306 -0.8509 0.3187 5.46254 290097.7 0.03881 -0.1127 0.08183 99 0.13975 1.4 2.8 0 1 1 1120617
E-101 (FH, S&T, SS) 1150 4.8306 -0.8509 0.3187 5.21179 162851.9 0.03881 -0.1127 0.08183 29 0.04897 1.1 2.8 0 1 1 510413
E-107 (FH, S&T, SS) 1050 4.8306 -0.8509 0.3187 5.16883 147513.3 0.03881 -0.1127 0.08183 29 0.04897 1.1 2.8 0 1 1 462339
E-103 (FH, S&T, SS) 447 4.8306 -0.8509 0.3187 4.81404 65169.37 0.03881 -0.1127 0.08183 29 0.04897 1.1 2.8 0 1 1 204255
E-105 (MPS) (FH, S&T, SS) 122 4.8306 -0.8509 0.3187 4.44258 27706.7 0.03881 -0.1127 0.08183 29 0.04897 1.1 2.8 0 1 1 86839
E-106 (LPS) (FH, S&T, SS) 975 4.8306 -0.8509 0.3187 5.13457 136323 0.03881 -0.1127 0.08183 29 0.04897 1.1 2.8 0 1 1 427266
E-104 (HPS) (FH, S&T, SS) 143 4.8306 -0.8509 0.3187 4.47714 30001.08 0.03881 -0.1127 0.08183 99 0.13975 1.4 2.8 0 1 1 115891
E-109 (FH, S&T, SS) 35 4.8306 -0.8509 0.3187 4.27658 18905.14 0.03881 -0.1127 0.08183 29 0.04897 1.1 2.8 0 1 1 59253


100

Continue - Major equipment cost-direct method
Heat exchangers A [m2] K1 K2 K3 IogCP,0 CP,0 [$] C1 C2 C3 P [barg] IogFp Fp Fm B1 B2 FBM Cbm [$]
Heat exchanger ATR (FH, S&T, SS) 2000 4,8306 -0,8509 0,3187 5,49456 312293,8 0,03881 -0,1127 0,08183 29 0,04897 1,1 2,8 0 1 1 978796
Heat exchanger FBR-1 (FH, S&T, SS) 1500 4,8306 -0,8509 0,3187 5,34297 220276,4 0,03881 -0,1127 0,08183 29 0,04897 1,1 2,8 0 1 1 690394
Heat exchanger FBR-2 (FH, S&T, SS) 1500 4,8306 -0,8509 0,3187 5,34297 220276,4 0,03881 -0,1127 0,08183 29 0,04897 1,1 2,8 0 1 1 690394
Heat exchanger FBR-3 (FH, S&T, SS) 1500 4,8306 -0,8509 0,3187 5,34297 220276,4 0,03881 -0,1127 0,08183 29 0,04897 1,1 2,8 0 1 1 690394
E-108 (FH, S&T, SS) 1067 4,8306 -0,8509 0,3187 5,17634 150087,2 0,03881 -0,1127 0,08183 29 0,04897 1,1 2,8 0 1 1 470406

Fired Heater Q [m3] K1 K2 K3 IogCP,0 CP,0 [$] C1 C2 C3 P [barg] IogFp Fp FBM B1 B2 FT Cbm [$]
Pre-reformer (Reformer furnace, SS) 454722 3,068 0,6597 0,0194 7,42141 26388271 0,1405 -0,2698 0,1293 29 0,02247 1,1 2,8 1 77810102,8
E-102 (Non-reactive fired heater, SS) 24272 7,3488 -1,1666 0,2028 6,13281 1357720 0,1347 -0,2368 0,1021 29 0,00676 1,0 2,8 1 3861216,19
Reactor vesseIs V [m3] K1 K2 K3 IogCP,0 CP,0 [$] D [m] P [barg] Fp,vesseI Fm B1 B2 FBM Cbm [$]
FBR-100 (PV, vertical, SS) 2400 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 6,24056 1740038 4 29 11,9 3,1 0 1 64442904
FBR-101 (PV, vertical, SS) 2400 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 6,24056 1740038 4 29 11,9 3,1 0 1 64442904
FBR-102 (PV, vertical, SS) 2400 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 6,24056 1740038 4 29 11,9 3,1 0 1 64442904
ATR (PV, vertical, SS) 434,2 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 5,42763 267691,5 4 29 11,9 3,1 0 1 9914047
PRE- E&C (PV, vertical, SS) 460,9 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 5,45401 284452,1 4 29 11,9 3,1 0 1 10534784

Towers V [m3] K1 K2 K3 IogCP,0 CP,0 [$] D [m] Nid [tray] Nac [tray] P [barg] Fp,vesseI Fm B1 B2 FBM Cbm [$]
T-104 (tray and packed) N = 10+2 25,3 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 4,33776 21765 1,5 12 24 29,00 4,8 3,1 1 1 345128
T-101 (tray and packed) N = 30+2 64,1 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 4,65868 45569,76 1,5 32 64 29,00 4,8 3,1 1 1 722600
T-100 (tray and packed) N = 40+2 83,6 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 4,75628 57052,72 1,5 42 84 29,00 4,8 3,1 1 1 904685
T-102 (tray and packed) N = 30+2 64,1 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 4,65868 45569,76 1,5 32 64 29,00 4,8 3,1 1 1 722600
T-103 (tray and packed) N = 30+2 64,1 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 4,65868 45569,76 1,5 32 64 29,00 4,8 3,1 1 1 722600

101

Continue - Major equipment cost-direct method
Tower trays
Area/tray
[m2]
K1 K2 K3 IogCP,0 CP,0 [$] D [m] Nid [tray] Nac [tray] P [barg] Fq Fm B1 B2 FBM Cbm [$]
T-104 (ST, SS) N = 10+2 1,8 2,9949 0,4465 0,3961 3,12938 1347,053 1,5 12 24 29,00 1 1,7 1 16165
T-101 (ST, SS) N = 30+2 1,8 2,9949 0,4465 0,3961 3,12938 1347,053 1,5 32 64 29,00 1 1,7 1 43106
T-100 (ST, SS) N = 40+2 1,8 2,9949 0,4465 0,3961 3,12938 1347,053 1,5 42 84 29,00 1 1,7 1 56576
T-102 (ST, SS) N = 30+2 1,8 2,9949 0,4465 0,3961 3,12938 1347,053 1,5 32 64 29,00 1 1,7 1 43106
T-103 (ST, SS) N = 30+2 1,8 2,9949 0,4465 0,3961 3,12938 1347,053 1,5 32 64 29,00 1 1,7 1 43106

Storage tanks FIow [m3/h] V [m3] K1 K2 K3 IogCP,0 CP,0 [$] C1 C2 C3 P [barg] IogFp Fp Fm B1 B2 FBM Cbm [$]
NG (AP fixed roof, SS) 411 1382 4,8509 -0,3973 0,1445 5,0284 106757,4 0 0 0 29 0 1 3,1 0 1 330948
Oxygen (AP fixed roof, SS) 183 614 4,8509 -0,3973 0,1445 4,86655 73543,9 0 0 0 29 0 1 3,1 0 1 227986
CO2 (AP fixed roof, SS) 83,9 282 4,8509 -0,3973 0,1445 4,74491 55578,6 0 0 0 29 0 1 3,1 0 1 172294
DME (AP fixed roof, SS) 164 549 4,8509 -0,3973 0,1445 4,84709 70321,8 0 0 0 29 0 1 3,1 0 1 217997
H2 (AP fixed roof, SS) 124 416 4,8509 -0,3973 0,1445 4,80167 63338,5 0 0 0 29 0 1 3,1 0 1 196349
Gas recycle (AP fixed roof, SS) 9 31 4,8509 -0,3973 0,1445 4,57979 38000,2 0 0 0 29 0 1 3,1 0 1 117801

TOTAL2001
I2001 397
310800606
TOTAL2008
I2008 575,4
450465160








102

Major equipment cost-indirect method
Pumps Q kW] K1 K2 K3 logCP,0 CP,0 $] C1 C2 C3
P
barg]
logFp Fp Fm Cbm 2001 $] I 2001 I 2008 Cbm 2001 $]
P-100 (CentriIugal/electric drive, SS) 147,7 3,3892 0,0536 0,1538 4,2293 16954 -0,394 0,3957 -0,00226 15,5 0,0743 1,2 2,15 43253 397,0 575,4 62689
Heat exchangers A m2] K1 K2 K3 logCP,0 CP,0 $] C1 C2 C3
P
barg]
logFp Fp Fm Cbm 2001 $]
E-101(Iloating head, shell and tube, SS) 1032 4,8306 -0,851 0,3187 5,1608 144803 0,0388 -0,113 0,0818 15,3 0,0201 1,05 2,8 424674 397,0 575,4 615510
E-102 (Iloating head, shell and tube, SS) 1122 4,8306 -0,851 0,3187 5,2001 158509 0,0388 -0,113 0,0818 13,9 0,0169 1,04 2,8 461414 397,0 575,4 668760
E-103 (Iloating head, shell and tube, SS) 1200 4,8306 -0,851 0,3187 5,2322 170700 0,0388 -0,113 0,0818 13,9 0,0169 1,04 2,8 496901 397,0 575,4 720194
E-104 (Iloating head, shell and tube, SS) 1530 4,8306 -0,851 0,3187 5,3531 225468 0,0388 -0,113 0,0818 13,9 0,0169 1,04 2,8 656328 397,0 575,4 951263
Reactor Flow m3/h] V m3] K1 K2 K3 logCP,0 CP,0 $] C1 C2 C3
P
barg]
D Fp Fm Cbm 2001 $]
CRV-101 (Process vessels, vertical, SS) 303,1 151,5 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 4,9860 96831 0 0 0 15,1 2,52 4,3 3,1 1301712 397,0 575,4 1886663
Towers V m3] K1 K2 K3 logCP,0 CP,0 $] C1 C2 C3
P
barg]
D Fp Fm Nid Nact Cbm 2001 $]
T-100 (25 SS sieve trays plus reboiler and condenser) 50,54 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 4,5732 37428 0 0 0 7,6 1,5 1,7 3,1 25 50 198620 397,0 575,4 287873
T-101 (20 SS sieve trays plus reboiler and condenser) 40,82 3,4974 0,4485 0,1074 4,4986 31519 0 0 0 10,5 1,5 2,1 3,1 20 40 207520 397,0 575,4 300773
Trays in towers A m2] K1 K2 K3 logCP,0 CP,0 $] C1 C2 C3
P
barg]
logFp Fp Fm N Fq Cbm 2001 $]
Trays Ior T-100 (25 SS trays) 1,7671 2,9949 0,4465 0,3965 3,1296 1348 - - - - - - 1,7 25 1 57272 397,0 575,4 83008
Trays Ior T-101 (20 SS trays) 1,7671 2,9949 0,4465 0,3965 3,1296 1348 - - - - - - 1,7 20 1 45817 397,0 575,4 66406
Compressors V kW] K1 K2 K3 logCP,0 CP,0 $] C1 C2 C3
P
barg]
logFp Fp Fm Cbm 2001 $]
K-100 (centriIugal, SS) 2536,8 2,2897 1,3604 -0,103 5,7307 537885 0 0 0 15,5 0 1,0 - 537885 397,0 575,4 779594
Storage tanks Flow m3/h] V m3] K1 K2 K3 logCP,0 CP,0 $] C1 C2 C3
P
barg]
logFp Fp Fm Cbm 2001 $]
methanol (API Iixed rooI, SS) 220,0 739 4,8509 -0,397 0,1445 4,9003 79496 0 0 0 29 0,0 1,0 3,1 246439 397,0 575,4 357181
Water (API Iixed rooI, SS) 54,1 182 - - - - - - - - - - - 106168 397,0 575,4 153877
DME(API Iixed rooI, SS) 178,9 601 4,8509 -0,397 0,1445 4,8628 72906 0 0 0 29 0,0 1 3,1 226008 397,0 575,4 327570

Total equipment cost 4966757 7261360

103

APPENDIX H
Basis and operating cost for the DME-direct method(Richard Turton, 2009)

1$ = 5,626 NOK Capacity unit Price Unit
cost at fuII
production capacity
unit
Basis
Fixed capital cost 2 057 000 000 [$]
Working capital 61 710 000 [$]

Production capacity 1054120 [tonne/ yr]
Sales revenue for DME 948 [$/tonne] 9,99E+08 [$/yr]
Sales revenue for HPS 622398 [tonne/yr ] 30 [$/tonne] 18671940 [$/yr]
Sales revenue for LPS 2424768 [tonne/yr ] 30 [$/tonne] 72743040 [$/yr]
Sales revenue for Hydrogen 719800 [kg/yr ] 3,87 [$/kg] 2785626 [$/yr]
SaIes revenue totaI 1094 [M$/yr]

1. Manufactoring cost
raw materials
Natural gas 1012656 [tonne/yr] 225 [$/tonne] 2,28E+08 [$/yr]
Oxygen 182208 [tonne/yr] 190 [$ pr yr/tonne] 34564858 [$/yr]

catalyst
NiO
Ruthenium 1383391 [kg] 18 [$/kg] 6225260 [$/yr]
Cu-ZnO-Al2O3 2416974 [kg] 18 [$/kg] 10876383 [$/yr]
6423300 [kg] 18 [$/kg] 28904850 [$/yr]
Utilities
Cost for stream (MPS) 1775177 [tonne/yr] 30 [$/tonne] 53255310 [$/yr]
Natural gas for heaters 1513202 [GJ/yr] 11 [$/GJ] 18662825 [$/yr]
Cooling water 2847481 [GJ/yr] 0,354 [$/GJ] 1008008 [$/yr]
Electricalpower 53325 [kW] 0,06 [$/kWh] 31141800 [$/yr]

product cost
Packaging per tonne DME 11 [$/tonne DME] 11384496 [$/yr]
Packing and storage 11 [$/tonne DME] 11384496 [$/yr]
Royalties 5 % of sales revenue for DME 49965288 [$/yr]
TotaI manufactoring cost 485 [M$/yr]

2. Fixed cost
Annual maintenance: 5% of fixed capital cost 102850000 [$/yr]
Salary, incl. social expences 51546 [$/yr]
Operators: 5.5 shifts 174 operators 49329522 [$/yr]
Foremen and daymen: 50 % of operator cost 24664761 [$/yr]
Laboratory cost: 20 % of operator cost 9865904 [$/yr]
Administration 98659044 [$/yr]
sales cost 0 [$/yr]
TotaI fixed costs 285 [M$/yr]

Operating costs 771 [M$/yr]

104

Basis and operating cost for the DME-indirect method(Richard Turton, 2009)

1$ = 5,626 NOK Capacity unit Price Unit
cost at fuII
production capacity
unit
Basis
Fixed capital cost 33 000 000 [$]
Working capital 990 000 [$]

Production capacity 1022000
[tonne/
yr]

Sales revenue for DME 948 [$/tonne] 969 [M$/yr]
Sales revenue for electrical power 29148 [kW] 0,06 [$/kWh] 17 [M$/yr]
SaIes revenue totaI 986 [M$/yr]

1. Manufactoring cost
raw materials
methanol 1516651
[tonne/
yr]
294 [$/tonne ] 445895394,00 [$/yr]
catalyst( Amorphous alumina catalyst ) 2461274 [kg] 18 [$/kg] 10934209,75 [$/yr]

product cost
Packaging per tonne DME 11
[$/tonne
DME]
11037600,00 [$/yr]

Packing and storage 11
[$/tonne
DME]
11037600,00 [$/yr]
Royalties 5 % of sales revenue for DME 47
[$/tonne
DME]
48442800,00 [$/yr]
TotaI manufactoring cost 527,35 [M$/yr]

2. Fixed cost
Annual maintenance: 5% of fixed capital cost 1650000 [$/yr]
Salary, incl. social expences 51546 [$/yr]
Operators: 5.5 shifts 31 operators 8788593 [$/yr]
Foremen and daymen: 50 % of operator cost 4394297 [$/yr]
Laboratory cost: 20 % of operator cost 1757719 [$/yr]
Administration 17577186 [$/yr]
sales cost 9690000 [$/yr]
TotaI fixed costs 44 [M$/yr]

Operating costs 571 [M$/yr]


105

APPENDIX I
Direct method
Year
Basic data -1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Fixed capital cost 2 057
Working capital 62

Alt 1: Fixed rate of depreciation, 10 0
The fixed rate of depreciation is 10, and
the reducing balance rate is 0

Alt 2: Reducing balance method of
depreciation 20
20
The fixed rate of depreciation is 0, and the
reducing balance rate is 20


Depreciation factor, reducing balance
method
a*(1-a)`(i-1) 0.2 0.1600 0.1280 0.1024 0.0819 0.0655 0.0524 0.0419 0.0336 0.0268 0.0215 0.0172 0.0137 0.0110 0.0088

Fixed capital cost -2057
Working capital -61.71
Recovered working capital 61.71
Annual sales revenue 1 094 1094 1094 1094 1094 1094 1094 1094 1094 1094 1094 1094 1094 1094 1094 1094
Annual operating cost 771 771 771 771 771 771 771 771 771 771 771 771 771 771 771 771
Gross operating profit 323 323 323 323 323 323 323 323 323 323 323 323 323 323 323

Depreciation 411 329 263 211 169 135 108 86 69 55 44 35 28 23 18
Profit before tax -88 -6 60 112 154 188 215 237 254 268 279 288 295 300 305
Tax. precentage 28 28 0 0 17 31 43 53 60 66 71 75 78 81 83 84 85
Net profit -88 -6 43 81 111 135 155 170 183 193 201 207 212 216 220

Depreciation 411 329 263 211 169 135 108 86 69 55 44 35 28 23 18
Net cash flow (NFW) -2057.00 323 323 306 292 280 270 263 257 252 248 245 242 240 239 238 NFW
Cumulative net cash flow 0 -2118.71 -1796 -1473 -1166 -875 -595 -325 -62 195 447 756 1001 1244 1484 1723 1961

Rent of interest(")/Discount factor 10.00 1.00 0.91 0.83 0.75 0.68 0.62 0.56 0.51 0.47 0.42 0.39 0.35 0.32 0.29 0.26 0.24
Discounted net cash flow 0 -2057 294 267 230 199 174 153 135 120 107 96 86 77 70 63 57 68.7
Internal rate of return 0 -2057.00 -1763.36
-
1496.42
-
1266.31
-
1067.18
-893.48 -740.90 -606.07 -486.31 -379.48 -283.86 -198.01 -120.76 -51.10 11.81 68.69
Net present worth (NPW) 68.69101


106

Indirect method
Year Basic
data
-1 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Fixed capital cost 33
Working capital 1

Alt 1: Fixed rate of depreciation, 10 0
The fixed rate of depreciation is 10, and the
reducing balance rate is 0

Alt 2: Reducing balance method of
depreciation 20
20
The fixed rate of depreciation is 0, and the
reducing balance rate is 20


Depreciation factor, reducing balance
method
a*(1-a)`(i-1) 0,2 0,1600 0,1280 0,1024 0,0819 0,0655 0,0524 0,0419 0,0336 0,0268 0,0215 0,0172 0,0137 0,0110 0,0088

Fixed capital cost -33
Working capital -0,99
Recovered working capital 0,99
Annual sales revenue 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986 986
Annual operating cost 571 571 571 571 571 571 571 571 571 571 571 571 571 571 571 571
Gross operating profit 415 415 415 415 415 415 415 415 415 415 415 415 415 415 415

Depreciation 7 5 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0
Profit before tax 408 410 411 412 412 413 413 414 414 414 414 414 415 415 415
Tax, precentage 28 28 114 115 115 115 115 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116 116
Net profit 294 295 296 296 297 297 298 298 298 298 298 298 298 299 299

Depreciation 7 5 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0
Net cash flow (NFW) -33,00 301 300 300 300 300 299 299 299 299 299 299 299 299 299 299 NFW
Cumulative net cash flow 0 -33,99 267 567 867 1167 1466 1766 2065 2364 2663 2963 3262 3561 3860 4159 4458

Rent of interest(")/Discount factor 10,00 1,00 0,91 0,83 0,75 0,68 0,62 0,56 0,51 0,47 0,42 0,39 0,35 0,32 0,29 0,26 0,24
Discounted net cash flow 0 -33 273 248 225 205 186 169 154 140 127 115 105 95 87 79 72 2245,8
Internal rate of return 0 -33,00 240,32 488,48 713,86 918,59 1104,59 1273,60 1427,18 1566,75 1693,61 1808,90 1913,70 2008,96 2095,54 2174,25 2245,80
Net present worth (NPW) 2245,805


107

APPENDIX 1

Profitability analysis

ROI (Return on investment)
Determining projects proIitability implies also to evaluate the investment by comparing the
magnitude and timing oI expected gains to the investment cost. ROI can be improved by
reducing cost and increasing gains. Return on investment reIers to how much money you get
back per invested dollar. The equation J.1 below shows how ROI was calculated.


ROI sales revenue - operating costs (J.1)
Total investment

II an investment does not have a positive ROI, or iI there are other opportunities with a higher
ROI, then the investment should be rejected.

Payback time
Payback time is a useIul criterion Ior judging the proIitability oI projects with a short liIetime.
It deIines the time required aIter the start oI the project to pay oII the initial investment Irom
income. Calculation oI payback time is shown in eqn J.2:

(Sales revenue - Operating cost) (1 )
Investment
T
s Depreciation s
=
+
(J.2)

Where s is the tax rate oI 28 oI the taxable income. The depreciation is given below in
eqn.J.3:

( )
n 1
0
Depreciation C a 1 a

= (J.3)

Where a is declining balance rate oI 20 p.a. Ior the not discounted capital, C
0
is the
investment and n is the liIetime oI the plant.


108

NFW (Net future worth)
Net Future worth (NFW) is the total Iuture worth oI all cash Ilows Ior n years. Net Future
Worth is an estimate oI what the investment cost will be in the Iuture. A positive Net Future
Worth indicates a proIitable investment. However, given that Iuture cash Ilows are estimates,
the NFW is only as accurate as the estimated Iuture cash Ilows.

The Iuture value oI an investment aIter n years is given in equation J.4:
(Present worth) (1 )
n
NFW i = + (J.4)
Where i is the annual interest rate.
NPW (Net Present Worth)
Net present worth is the Iuture worth oI the net cash Ilow in year, n. The money earned in any
year can be put to work (reinvested) as soon as it is available and start to earn a return. Money
earned in the early years oI the project is more valuable than that earned in later years. The net
cash Ilow in each year oI the project is brought into its 'present worth at the start oI the
project by discounting it at some chosen compound interest rate. The total NPW oI project is
given in equation J.5:
Total NPW oI a project
1
(1 )
n t
n
n
NFW
r
=
=
+

(J.5)
Where r is the discount rate.

DCFRR (Discounted cash flow rate of return)
The discounted cash Ilow analysis, that we used to calculate the present worth oI Iuture
earnings, is sensitive to the interest rate assumed. By calculating the NPW Ior various interest
rates, it is possible to Iind an interest rate at which the cumulative net present worth at the end
oI the project is zero. This particular rate is called the 'discounted cash Ilow rate oI return
and is a measure oI the maximum rate that the project could pay and still breakeven by the
end oI the project liIe.

1
0
(1 ')
n t
n
n
NFW
r
=
=
=
+

(J.6)
Where r` is the discounted cash Ilow rate oI return, NFW is the Iuture worth oI net cash Ilow
in year n, and t is the liIe time oI the project.