(Vapor Recovery Unit : VRU)

Map Ta Phut Tank Terminal Co., Ltd. (MTT)

Content

1.Project background

2.VRU method

3.Result

1. Project background

� To control emission and reduce environmental

impact to community

� To build community trust

� Terminal was considered as one of risk

VOC emission sources

� Cost/ Loss reduction

Management Policies

1. Project background

Export to vessel

TankVOCs

VOCsVOCs

VOCsVOCsVOCs

VOC emission about 16.54 tons/year

(in 2013)

No VOC emission

TankVOCs

VOCsVOCs

VOCsVOCsVOCsMembrane

Flare

Activated Carbon

Technique BAT- associated values Remark

Membrane separation 90 -> 99.9% recovery VOC < 20 mg/m³ Range 1 ->10g VOC/m3

Adsorption

(Activated Carbon)

95 -99.99 % recovery Regenerative adsorption:

Flow 100 ->100000 m3/h,

0.01 - 10g VOC/m3, 1 – 20 atm.

Non regenerative adsorption:

Flow 10 ->1000 m3/h,

0.01 - 1.2g VOC/m3

Flaring Elevated flares > 99 %

Ground flares > 99.5 %

In case of marine loading :

Due to vapors have more

concentration of oxygen. Vapors

are conditioned by adding LPG to

“enrich” the mixture at least

170% above the upper

flammability limit (UFL). Due to ( increase in operating cost)

1. Project background

Typical Investment cost & Operating cost(Membrane separation, Adsorbtion and Flare)

Membrane

Adsorption

Flare

Membrane

separation

Adsorption

(Activated carbon)Flare

Investment cost (MB) 125 110 72

Operating cost (MB/Year) 2.5 3.6 12

Flare

Adsorption

Membrane

1 2 3

1. Project background

1 Year 15 Years

125110

72

2.5

3.6

12

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

Membrane

Separation

Adsorption

(Activated Carbon)

Flare

Investment and Operating Cost of each

Technology

Investment Cost Operating Cost

Co

st (

M B

ah

t)

125 11072

38 54

180

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Membrane

Separation

Adsorption

(Activated Carbon)

Flare

Investment and Operating Cost of each

Technology

Investment Cost Operating Cost

Co

st (

M B

ah

t)

Investment cost & Operating cost (1 Year & 15 Years)

163 164

252

1. Project background

Generate wasteGenerate waste

Safety ConcernsSafety Concerns

Safety ConcernsSafety Concerns

High Operating costHigh Operating cost

Easy processEasy process

1. Project background

Technique Efficiency of

reduce VOCs

Investment

cost

Operating

cost

Operator

EasinessSafety

Membrane

separation

Adsorption

(Activated Carbon)

Flaring

����

����

����

=> Good => Bad=> Fair

1. Project background

Drum

20 m3 Head 90 m

Flow rate 100 m3/h

Head 50 m

Flow rate 100 m3/h 6”

6”

10”

Treated vapour vent to ATM

10”

10”

12”

Pyrolysis Gasoline

DSU

DSU

VRU

= Dock Safe Unit

= Vapour recovery Unit

= Scope of work

Jetty 1

VRU

Jetty 2

Jetty 3

Jetty 4

DSU 1

DSU 2

DSU 4

10”

10”

10”

Vapor Recovery Unit(VRU)

LiquidLoading

Gas

Loading

LiquidLoading

LiquidLoading

2. VRU method

Jetty 2

DSU

VRU

= Dock Safe Unit

= Vapour recovery Unit

= Scope of work

Treated vapor vent to ATM

Product

Benzene

Toluene

C9+Mixed xylene

VRU : Vapour Recovery Unit2. VRU method

Scrubber

Spay

Shower

Packing

media

C9+

HC

+

Air

Air + HC

2. VRU method (Scrubber)

Membrane2. VRU method (Membrane)

2. VRU method

Gas detector online

3. Result

3. Result

16.54

0.330.00

4.00

8.00

12.00

16.00

20.00

2013 2014

VOCs (tons/year)