Controle de H2S (Sulfeto de Hidrogênio) e CO2 (Dióxido de Carbono) em uma planta de produção da camada pré-sal Brasileira
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.5902/2179460X40400Keywords:
Gás Natural. Planta de Amina. Camada Pré-sal. Regressão MúltiplaAbstract
O objetivo desta pesquisa é a otimização da operação da planta de amina em operação no FPSO Capixaba através de um estudo de caso. Utilizou-se a construção de gráficos de dispersão baseado em dados históricos para encontrar a concentração ideal em que o sistema opera com a melhor eficiência com relação a remoção de H2S e CO2, menor adição de amina e água tratada diariamente, resultando em uma economia na ordem 75,8% amina e 76,0% de água tratada mensalmente. Foi construído um modelo de regressão múltipla para estudo da relação entre a concentração de água/amina e a concentração de H2S e CO2. Obteve-se um total de amostras de 245 dias para concentração de amina e buscou-se uma equação que estimasse a sua relação com a concentração de CO2 e H2S. Os resultados obtidos no modelo indicam uma boa relação nos estimadores estudados (R2ajust. = 0,8051) e um erro padrão de 0,029.
Downloads
References
AGRESTI A, FINLAY B. Métodos estatísticos para ciências sociais. 4 ed., Porto Alegre: Penso2012;664 p.
AMARAL RA. Remoção de CO2 e H2S do Gás Natural por Contactores com Membranas. [Tese de Doutorado]. COPE/UFRJ, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, Brasil, 2009.
ANDERSON TW. An introduction to multivariate statistical methods. 2. ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, 1984.
ANP (AGÊNCIA NACIONAL DO PETRÓLEO). Boletim mensal do gás natural. Available from: www.anp.gov.br/?dw=2237.
______. Especificação do Gás Natural de origem nacional ou estrangeira a ser comercializado em todo o território nacional. Portaria número 104 de 08 de Julho de 2002.
______. Gás Natural. Resolução n. 16/2018.
CTGAS. Uso e vantagens do Gás Natural, 2011, Available from: http://www.ctgas.com.br/.
CAMPBELL & CO, Betteralternative for Gas Natural Sweetening, 2006, Available from: www.jmcampbell.com/.
CHEN Z, WANG YG. Efficient Regression analysis with Rancked-Set-Sampling. Biometrics. 2004; 60(4), p. 327-355.
COSTA, GS. Extração de espécies metálicas de resíduos sólidos proveniente da pirólise de borra de petróleo. [Dissertação de Mestrado]. Universidade Federal do Paraná, Curitiba, 2010.
DOW Chemistry. Oil and Gas Solutions. Disponível em: <http://www.dow.com/products/market/oil-and-gas/>. Acesso em Junho de 2012.
HAIR Jr JF, BABIN B, MONEY AH, SAMOUEL P. Análise multivariada de dados. 5 ed. Porto Alegre: Bookman, 2005.
LUNSFORD KM, BULLIN JA. Optimization of Amine Sweetening Units. Bryan Research & Engineering, Inc. 1994.
MENDIETA LFF. Estudo da absorção de H2S e CO2 do gás combustível. [Monografia em Engenharia Química]. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, 2011.
PANSEI ARQ. Fundamentos da Eficiência Energética. 1 ed., São Paulo: Ensino Profissional, 2006.
PETRÓLEO BRASILEIRO S.A. - PETROBRAS, Informação & Tecnologia. Edição: Centro de Pesquisa e Desenvolvimento Leopoldo Américo Miguez de Mello (Cenpes), 2011.
POLASEK JC, IGLESIAS-SILVA GA, BULLIN JA. Using mixed Amine Solutions for Gas sweetening, In: 71st GPA Annual Convention, 1992:58.
POLASEK JC, BULLIN JA. Selecting Amines for Sweetening Units. Energy Progress, 1984;4(3):146.
SELLEY RC. Elements of Petroleum Geology, 2 ed., San Diego: Academic Press, 1998.
STRAZISAR BR, ANDERSON RR, WHITE CM. Degradation of Monoethanolamine Used in Carbon Dioxide Capture from Flue Gas of a Coal-fired Electric Power Generating Station. National Energy Technology Laboratory Clean Air Technology Division P.O. Box 10940 Pittsburgh, PA 15236. 2000.
TISSOT BP, WELTE DH. Petroleum formation and occurrence. 2 ed., New York, 1984.
VME PROCESS. FPSO Capixaba Amine Sweetening Unit. Operators Tranining Manual. 2010.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
To access the DECLARATION AND TRANSFER OF COPYRIGHT AUTHOR’S DECLARATION AND COPYRIGHT LICENSE click here.
Ethical Guidelines for Journal Publication
The Ciência e Natura journal is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles.
Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
In particular,
Authors: Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review Articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The Authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding Author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all Co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors: Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An Editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the Author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers: Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that Authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
