The effect of regenerated MEG on hydrate inhibition performance over multiple regeneration cycles

Mono-ethylene glycol (MEG) is a favorable gas hydrate inhibitor mainly due to its recoverability through MEG regeneration facilities, and thus reducing costs. However, it is not clear how the hydrate inhibition performance of MEG is affected by multiple regeneration cycles. In this study, MEG sample...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Fuel
Main Authors: Alef, K., Smith, C., Iglauer, Stefan, Gubner, Rolf, Barifcani, Ahmed
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:unknown
Published: Elsevier Ltd 2018
Subjects:
Online Access:https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/67383
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.02.190
id ftcurtin:oai:espace.curtin.edu.au:20.500.11937/67383
record_format openpolar
spelling ftcurtin:oai:espace.curtin.edu.au:20.500.11937/67383 2023-06-11T04:14:01+02:00 The effect of regenerated MEG on hydrate inhibition performance over multiple regeneration cycles Alef, K. Smith, C. Iglauer, Stefan Gubner, Rolf Barifcani, Ahmed 2018 restricted https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/67383 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.02.190 unknown Elsevier Ltd http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/67383 doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2018.02.190 Journal Article 2018 ftcurtin https://doi.org/20.500.11937/6738310.1016/j.fuel.2018.02.190 2023-05-30T19:52:34Z Mono-ethylene glycol (MEG) is a favorable gas hydrate inhibitor mainly due to its recoverability through MEG regeneration facilities, and thus reducing costs. However, it is not clear how the hydrate inhibition performance of MEG is affected by multiple regeneration cycles. In this study, MEG samples that were regenerated and reclaimed over multiple cycles using an innovative bench-scale MEG pilot plant which can simulate field-like MEG operations, were assessed on their hydrate inhibition performance. The cycled MEG samples were carefully analyzed in the laboratory for their composition, and each sample was tested in a high-pressure sapphire cell for methane hydrate inhibition performance. The study found a directly proportional relationship between the number of cycles and the shift in hydrate equilibrium phase boundary. A maximum equilibrium shift of 2.21 °C was recorded for a 20 wt% MEG/deionized water sample that had experienced 9 regeneration cycles compared to pure MEG. The analysis suggests that the shift in hydrate equilibrium phase boundary was due to thermal degradation of MEG within the regeneration and reclamation units due to the presence of acetic acid. The study found that even though the operation was below MEG degradation temperature range, repeated heating of MEG may have caused its degradation. Additionally, the phase equilibria are empirically modeled as a function of the number of cycles to aid MEG end-users. Application of the model to experimental results provided accurate outcomes, and had an average relative difference of 1.24% when determining equilibrium temperatures. Article in Journal/Newspaper Methane hydrate Curtin University: espace Fuel 222 638 647
institution Open Polar
collection Curtin University: espace
op_collection_id ftcurtin
language unknown
description Mono-ethylene glycol (MEG) is a favorable gas hydrate inhibitor mainly due to its recoverability through MEG regeneration facilities, and thus reducing costs. However, it is not clear how the hydrate inhibition performance of MEG is affected by multiple regeneration cycles. In this study, MEG samples that were regenerated and reclaimed over multiple cycles using an innovative bench-scale MEG pilot plant which can simulate field-like MEG operations, were assessed on their hydrate inhibition performance. The cycled MEG samples were carefully analyzed in the laboratory for their composition, and each sample was tested in a high-pressure sapphire cell for methane hydrate inhibition performance. The study found a directly proportional relationship between the number of cycles and the shift in hydrate equilibrium phase boundary. A maximum equilibrium shift of 2.21 °C was recorded for a 20 wt% MEG/deionized water sample that had experienced 9 regeneration cycles compared to pure MEG. The analysis suggests that the shift in hydrate equilibrium phase boundary was due to thermal degradation of MEG within the regeneration and reclamation units due to the presence of acetic acid. The study found that even though the operation was below MEG degradation temperature range, repeated heating of MEG may have caused its degradation. Additionally, the phase equilibria are empirically modeled as a function of the number of cycles to aid MEG end-users. Application of the model to experimental results provided accurate outcomes, and had an average relative difference of 1.24% when determining equilibrium temperatures.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Alef, K.
Smith, C.
Iglauer, Stefan
Gubner, Rolf
Barifcani, Ahmed
spellingShingle Alef, K.
Smith, C.
Iglauer, Stefan
Gubner, Rolf
Barifcani, Ahmed
The effect of regenerated MEG on hydrate inhibition performance over multiple regeneration cycles
author_facet Alef, K.
Smith, C.
Iglauer, Stefan
Gubner, Rolf
Barifcani, Ahmed
author_sort Alef, K.
title The effect of regenerated MEG on hydrate inhibition performance over multiple regeneration cycles
title_short The effect of regenerated MEG on hydrate inhibition performance over multiple regeneration cycles
title_full The effect of regenerated MEG on hydrate inhibition performance over multiple regeneration cycles
title_fullStr The effect of regenerated MEG on hydrate inhibition performance over multiple regeneration cycles
title_full_unstemmed The effect of regenerated MEG on hydrate inhibition performance over multiple regeneration cycles
title_sort effect of regenerated meg on hydrate inhibition performance over multiple regeneration cycles
publisher Elsevier Ltd
publishDate 2018
url https://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/67383
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2018.02.190
genre Methane hydrate
genre_facet Methane hydrate
op_relation http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/67383
doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2018.02.190
op_doi https://doi.org/20.500.11937/6738310.1016/j.fuel.2018.02.190
container_title Fuel
container_volume 222
container_start_page 638
op_container_end_page 647
_version_ 1768391518250336256