Heat Transfer Developments

R. O. PELHAM, Merrick & Co., Aurora, Colorado

Improve your plantwide steam network

It is a formidable task to optimize a plantwide hydrocarbon processing industry (HPI) steam network. Such systems
are complex, and they provide services to multiple processing
units. Too often, the system network is revamped in pieces
to meet the needs for new processing units without considerations for the whole steam system. When optimizing an
existing steam network, design and process engineers need a
complete understanding of all aspects of the existing system.
Accurate energy and material balances must be established to
define the HPI complexs baseline. Likewise, a current definition of the specific steam-system behavior, in response to shifts
in supply and demand, is critical information.

UNDERSTANDING THE TOTAL STEAM SYSTEM

Unlike process units, there is no process flow diagram
(PFD) for plant-wide steam systems. Likewise, there is neither
a total material balance nor a control schematic. Too often, a
PFD of the steam system must be constructed in a step-by-step
process, and it involves interviewing all of the HPI sites processing unit employees.
Organizationally, the steam system is viewed only in pieces.
The biggest single consistent difficulty in optimizing steam
systems is that no individual within the HPI complex commands complete full knowledge and understanding of the total
steam systems. Too often:
Rarely is there anyone who knows the total steam system
from the standpoint of configuration, normal steam/water
flows and the steam control system
Utilities operators understand only the boiler house (and
cogeneration unit, if installed)
Process area operators know the steam system as it impacts their process area only.
Process water (cooling/makeup water and condensate
handling) is managed by another group within the utilities
area
Rarely does a single group know the location for all of the
steam-system control valves and how the system is configured.
Infrequently does a single group know where all of the
letdown stations are located.
DEFINING THE STEAM SYSTEM BASE CASE
In 90% of the worlds HPI complexes, the present steam system has evolved over the history of the site. This steam system
evolution is influenced by installing new process units, scrapping older equipment, replacing steam-system assets, changes
in ownership, economics, etc. The end result is:
System drawings and equipment lists become fragmented

Firm knowledge of in-service and out-of-service equipment is uncertain

Flowmetering is limited and insufficient to provide good
mass balances
Steam-system control valves are scattered across the refinery and are under the control of local process area operators.
Steam flowrate (and actual direction of steam flow) in
some lines can become a point of conjecture.
Developing the total knowledge for the steam system becomes an investigative problem. For the young utilities engineer, this can prove to be an overwhelming task. To define and
understand the complete refinery steam system, TABLE 1 summarizes several beneficial steps. The ease of pulling this information together depends on the quality of prior efforts, and
the elapsed years since the subject was last seriously tackled.
TABLE 1. Required information to fully dene an HPI plantwide
steam network.
Dene all the renery steam headers by pressure level.
Add makeup water system and condensate recovery headers
to steam headers
Visually trace all steam/network lines. Know the physical locations
Develop lists of all steam producers at each pressure level and header,
and include:
Steam from a red boiler
Steam imported across the renery boundary
Steam from a process waste-heat steam generator
Steam exhausting from a back-pressure turbine
Steam let down from a higher pressure through a letdown valve
Establish presence of letdown stations by interviewing each process area.
Most reneries and petrochemical complexes have more letdown stations
than are actually listed or generally known. Carefully clarify the pressure
that the controller at the letdown station is sensing and controlling
Develop lists of steam users at each pressure level and categorized as:
Driver steamsteam turbines
Heating steamreboilers and heaters
Process steamsteam consumed in the process units
(stripping operations)
Letdown and vented steam
For condensate systems, establish presence (or not) of condensate ash
drums, where steam is ashed to, and where the condensate is sent
Establish the system water balance. It should include condensate
recovered plus fresh makeup water and steam condensed in the
deaerators should equal total steam production, plus blowdown.
Dene, when possible, all uid ows. This involves a combination
of metered data and calculated ratescolumn heat balances for
a reboiler; HP and water owrates for turbines, valve sizes and
characteristics for letdown stations.
Hydrocarbon Processing|JANUARY 201375

Heat Transfer Developments

The objective of this task is to develop a reasonable big picture of the total system, containing three key elements:
1. Physical inventory of the steam system
2. A reasonable material balance
3. System controls and how the system responds to changes in steam supply and demand.
To clarify and present the big picture of the plantwide
steam network, utilities unit engineers should:
Create a large PFD-type drawing
Make a change in the system, and, (by hand) on the PFD
follow through the sequence of control and heat balance changes that then occur. Now, we can finally observe how the system
will respond from changes in steam supply and demand.
What is a refinery steam system PFD? It is a very large

drawing, typically developed onsite, and it shows:

Steam headers
At each header, all producers and users of steam
Letdown systems
All vents to atmosphere
Condensate systems
Makeup water system
All flowsthousand lb/hr (Mlb/hr) or tph
Mass balance at each header (in vs. out)
Blowdown rates
Total boiler water demand and total boiler feed supply
Steam header pressure controls at boilers and at letdown
stations, in particular, showing the pressure is being sensed/
controlled.
FIG. 1 lists the basic elements of such a steam-system PFD.
This PFD can become exceedingly too complex and busy;
thus, selected equipment groupings may be necessary to organize the steam network. For example, all reboilers using
medium-pressure (MP) steam in one particular process area
can be grouped together.
Waste-heat
boilers

Boilers

STEAM SYSTEM BEHAVIOR

We will investigate three examples on how a system rebalances in response to a change:
1. Reducing process-steam demand (stripping steam) by
10 Mlb/hr
2. Reducing reboiler demand by 10 Mlb/hr
3. Replacing a back-pressure turbine using 10 Mlb/hr
steam with an electric driver.
FIGS. 24 illustrate these cases. In this particular steam system,
the boiler blowdown is 7%, and condensate recovery is 60%.
Case 1. In this case, demand for 150-psi process steam is re-

duced by 10Mlb/hr. Process steam is defined as steam consumed in the process units and not recovered as lower-pressure steam or condensate. As shown in FIG. 2, these conditions
are present:
Letdown to 150-psi header reduced by 10 Mlb/hr. Assume the boiler output also reduces by 10 Mlb/hr.
Blowdown reduces by 0.7 Mlb/hr, so the deaerator feed
to the boilers reduces to 10.7 Mlb/hr. At the first iteration, the
boiler makeup water reduces to 10.7 Mlb/hr.
The 10-psi steam is used to preheat cold makeup water for
the deaerator. If the deaerator operating temperature is 230F,
then the treated makeup water at 70F will require 160 Btu/lb.
Assume the steam H is 970 Btu/lb. If the deaerator feed
water is reduced by 10.7 Mlb/hr, then the deaerator steam is
reduced by 1.8 Mlb/hr. (10.7 160/970). Since the reduced
deaerator steam backs up to the boiler, then the boiler output
is reduced by 11.8 Mlb/hr. This is not close with the initial assumption of 10 Mlb/hr boiler output reduction.
At the second iteration, assume the boiler output is reduced by 11.8 Mlb/hr. The boiler feed and blowdown are now
reduced by 12.7 Mlb/hr and 0.9 Mlb/hr. The makeup water by
material balance is reduced12.7-1.8 = 10.9 Mlb/hr.
Doing the deaerator heat balance, the steam required to
heat 10.9 Mlb/hr make water is 1.8 Mlb/hr. The heat and material balances are satisfied.
In summary, saving 10 Mlb/hr process steam enabled saving 11.8 Mlb/hr of fired-boiler steam.

PC

HP steam
Waste-heat
boilers

PC

MP steam
Waste-heat
boilers

PC

Backpressure
turbines

To process
Reboiler

To process

Backpressure
turbines

Reboiler

LP steam

To process
PC

Reboiler

Vent to atm
Flash
BFW

Deaerator

FIG. 1. Basic elements of an HPI steam system.

76JANUARY 2013|HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Condensate
recovery
system
Treated BFW

Case 2. A young engineer has a good idea to recover heat from

a waste-heat stream, which will eliminate 10 Mlb/hr of 150-psi
reboiler steam. How does the system rebalance? Three factors
are in play:
1. Reboiler demand is reduced by 10 Mlb/hr
2. Boiler blowdown loss is reduced by 7%
3. Condensate to 150-psi condensate flash drums is reduced by 10 Mlb/hr, which, in turn, reduces 10-psi flash steam
production by 0.8 Mlb/hr. The condensate supply is lowered
by 9.2 Mlb/hr. Assume condensate recovery is 60%.
FIG. 3 illustrates the actual effect on the system. In sequence,
the iterate calculations are:
Reboiler demand is cut by 10 Mlb/hr. Therefore, condensate and 10-psi steam production are reduced by 9.2 Mlb/
hr and 0.8 Mlb/hr, respectively
Assume at closure the boiler output is reduced by 10.5
Mlb/hr
At 7% blowdown, the deaerator feed water to the boiler
feed is reduced by 11.3 Mlb/hr.

Heat Transfer Developments

Steam to the deaerator is reduced by 0.5 (reduction in
boiler output minus reduction in steam to reboiler) plus 0.8
Mlb/hr (reduction in condensate flash) for a total of 1.3 Mlb/
hr. The reduction in cold makeup water is (11.3 1.3 5.5) =
4.5 Mlb/hr.
Doing the deaerator heat balance (FIG. 3) steam required
is only 0.9 reduction.
Iterating again, closure is obtained at the boiler output of
10.1 Mlb/hr.
In summary, in saving 10 Mlb/hr reboiler steam, the firedboiler steam output is reduced by 10.1 Mlb/hr. (In real plant
situations, this varies based on actual plant blowdown and condensate recovery levels).

-11.3 Mlb/hr
(-10.9)
-10.5 Mlb/hr
(-10.1)

-10.7 Mlb/hr
(-12.7)
-10 Mlb/hr
(-11.8)

Blowdown 7%
-0.7 Mlb/hr
(0.9)

Fired
boiler

PC

PC

-0.5 Mlb/hr (-0.1)

PC

50 psi
-10 Mlb/hr

Condensate
ash

10 psi
-1.3 Mlb/hr
(-0.9)

-9.2 Mlb/hr
Condensate
-3.7 Mlb/hr Loss 40%
-5.5 Mlb/hr

-11.3 Mlb/hr
(-10.9)

Deaerator

-10 Mlb/hr
-10 Mlb/hr
Steam
stripper

FIG. 3. System effects in a reduction of 10 Mlb/hr of reboiler steam,

Case 2.

-1 Mlb/hr

Blowdown

Fired
boiler

7%
600 psi

PC

150 psi
-10 Mlb/hr

+9 Mlb/hr
50 psi

PC

-1.8 Mlb/hr

50 psi

+9 Mlb/hr

PC

10 psi

PC

-10 Mlb/hr

Condensate
-1.8 Mlb/hr

-10.7 Mlb/hr
(-12.7)

Makeup water

-4.5 Mlb/hr
(-4.5)
Deaerator heat balance = (5.5x30 - 4.5X160)/970 = -0.9

Note: Values related to change in mass owrate. First value is the rst iteration in the calculation. The second value in
parentheses represents the second iteration in the calculation.

150 psi

PC

-10 Mlb/hr
-10 Mlb/hr

Steam
stripper

-1 Mlb/hr

PC

-1.8 Mlb/hr

150 psi

-0.5 Mlb/hr (-0.1)

600 psi

-10 Mlb/hr (-11.8)

600 psi

-0.5 Mlb/hr (-0.1)

Case 3. In this case, a 150-psi to10-psi back-pressure turbine is

replaced by an electric motor. The turbine steam consumption

was 10 Mlb/hr of 150-psi steam, as shown in FIG. 4. Demand for
150-psi steam is reduced by 10 Mlb/hr. However, demand for
10-psi steam has not changed, so the letdown will increase. On
a pure material balance basis, the boiler output is unchanged.
However, in this situation, relative enthalpies at the deaerator
of letdown steam and turbine-exhaust steam must be considered. Most of the steam consumed in the deaerators is for heating cold water. Actual O2 stripping requires much less steam
than is consumed. Assuming the 10-psi turbine exhaust is just
at saturation, the steam enthalpy will be around 1,160 Btu/lb.
Replacing the turbine will require additional 600-psi letdown
steam. Since the letdown is at constant enthalpy (adiabatic),
and assuming the fired-boiler steam is at 100F superheat, then

Blowdown 7%
-0.8 Mlb/hr
(0.8)

Fired
boiler

Deaerator

-1 Mlb/hr

Loss 40%

Note: Values related to change in mass owrate. First value is the rst iteration in the calculation. The second value in
parentheses represents the second iteration in the calculation.

FIG. 2. System effects in a reduction of 10 Mlb/hr of stripping steam,

Case 1.

Condensate
Loss 40%

Makeup water
-10.7 Mlb/hr
(-10.9)

10 psi

-11.3 Mlb/hr

Deaerator

Makeup water

Note: Values related to change in mass owrate.

FIG. 4. System effects in a reduction of 10 Mlb/hr to a back-pressure

turbine, Case 3.
Hydrocarbon Processing|JANUARY 201377

Heat Transfer Developments

Demineralized makeup water
Power cost for electric drivers to operate in place of steam
turbines. This applies only when there are steam turbines and
electric motor are used spares.
Economically, the steam system is optimized when all legitimate process steam and hp demands are met. The sum of these
three costs is minimum. Steam-system savings actually occur only when fired fuel is backed out of a boiler.
In practice, the total operating cost is only obThe biggest single consistent difficulty in
tained from a detailed model of the steam system. It
optimizing steam systems is that no person
may be a detailed spreadsheet simulation, with multiple cases to determine the lowest cost. The model
in the refinery or petrochemical complex
can be a linear program (LP) based on an optimizer,
knows and understands the total system.
which will drive the system to an optimum, i.e., lowest total operating cost. More frequently, specific
projects and modifications are based on cost of steam
($/Mlb) and costs to run steam and electric drivers ($/hp-yr).
deaerators. In particular, each case is also dependent on the
presence of letdown steam between headers. The examples assume there is letdown between headers. In cases where there
Local costs for steam. Incentives for some process modifiis excess production of low-pressure (LP) steam, and letdowns
cation, change in operating practice, or local project are based
are closed, or steam is vented, saving from the first two cases
on steam steam price, and driver hp hp price. Conwill be 5%10% less. However, savings from a back-pressure
sider steam pricing followed by costs for hp:
turbine removal can be nearly 10 Mlb/hr as credit.
Price of steam. The price of steam is based on makeup
water and produced steam enthalpy, makeup-water cost,
boiler efficiency, blowdown rates and cost for internal boiler
STEAM SYSTEM ECONOMICS
plant steam/power consumption for boiler auxiliaries (feed
What are the energy costs to operate the steam system?
pumps, FD, ID fans, etc.) A quick and dirty cost for steam is:
Long-term depreciation and system maintenance expenses
are excluded in this example. Steam-system economics are not
Steam cost, $/Mlb = Fuel price $/MMBtu 1.5
fundamentally difficult. However, they can get complicated
This cost reflects the equivalence of approximately 1 MMfrom three conditions. First is long-term pricing for fuel vs.
Btu vs. 1 Mlb of steam, plus costs for listed factors. The value is
electric power. The second factor is the value of LP steam. The
within 10% of the rigorous value for most steam systems. Using
third is horsepower (hp) cost for steam drivers.
$5/MMBtu as the fuel price yields a fired-steam price of approximately $7.50/Mlb. Proper use of these values, however,
Fuel-price basis. The largest cost to operate a refinery steam
requires more understanding, as discussed here.
system is the expenses for fuel to fire steam boilers, which is typi Steam value at lower pressure levels. As steam drops
cally refinery and natural gas. In April 2012, fuel-gas prices were
in pressure from the HP systems to lower pressures, its value
around $2.50/MMBtu in the US, about $9/MMBtu in Europe
becomes an it depends factor. Considering a scheme to save
and $12/MMBtu$14/MMBtu in the Asian-Pacific region.
10 Mlb/hr of LP steam, what are the incentives? The benefits
The US price is lower than the normal price from 20 years
will depend on:
ago. At present, US natural gas prices are 75% lower than from
0 If the steam supply is let down through a turbine drivtwo years ago. With such variability in cost, what price should
er, then the LP steam will have lower enthalpy and, thus, less
be used to estimate boiler firing expenses? Present predictions
value, since heat has been removed.
for long-term US gas pricing are about $5/MMBtu; this will
0 If the letdown occurs across a letdown station (a conbe used as the basis in this example. In real-life situations, users
stant enthalpy process), then the LP steam will have the same
may scale results up or down to reflect local specific prices. For
value as HP steam.
similar reasons, 5/kWh is used for electric-power costs.
0 If the LP steam is already being vented to atmosphere,
and saving further steam simply increases the vent rate, then
Steam-system total operating cost. The total operating
steam saved will have no value. Note: This does not imply that
cost for the steam system has three cost components:
vented steam has no cost.
Fuel burned to heat water and generate steam
So what price should be used? The answer will be derived
from knowing the total steam system and pricing steam based
TABLE 2. Summary of the three cases in steam networks
behavior changes
on the system consequences due to the proposed change.
the enthalpy will be 1,290 Btu/lb. The fired-boiler output will
be reduced by about 10% of 10 Mlb/hr or 1 Mlb/hr. TABLE 2
summarizes these three cases.
The exact numbers are dependent on the specific refinery
situation, and are sensitive to blowdown rates, condensaterecovery rates and temperature of treated makeup water to the

Savings 10 Mlb/hr steam

by eliminating

Reduction in red-boiler
steam output

Process steam

11.8

Reboiler steam

10.1

Steam to back-pressure turbine

78JANUARY 2013|HydrocarbonProcessing.com

Prices for driver hp. All HPI pumps, compressors, etc., have

a drivereither a steam turbine or an electric driver. For a

new installation, how do you select which driver has the lower
operating cost? Where there is already a steam-driver spared
with an electric driver, how do you choose which one to op-

Heat Transfer Developments

erate? In this example, we will only consider driver operating
cost. This is typically quoted as $/hp-yr. Other factors that
come into play, not considered here, including electric vs.
steam supply reliability, individual driver reliability, relative
size (hp) of steam and electric spared combination, capacity of
electric supply system, and boiler capacity.
Electric driver operating cost. To calculate from direct
equivalence of electric consumption per hp-yr, we will use the
following conversions:

1 hp-hr = 0.7547 kWh

Multiplying by 8,760 hr/yr, assuming 92% motor efficiency
and electric cost of 5/kWh,
Electric driver operating cost = $360/hp-yr.
Back-pressure turbine operating cost. The cost to run a

back-pressure turbine is very dependent on what happens to

the exhaust steam. When there is a valid process use for the
exhaust steam, then the hp-yr cost is only related to the energy
extracted from the steam in the turbine. At the other extreme, if
there is no use for the exhaust steam, and it is simply vented to
atmosphere, then the turbine operating costs bear the full expense of generating steam, not simply the energy extracted in
the turbine. Consider a 600-psi to 150-psi turbine in two cases.
For this example, assume the HP steam is from boiler output,
and has 100F of superheat.
Valid process use for exhaust steam. In this case the turbine converts energy (Btu) into work (hp-yr). The steam exhausted simply backs up through the system equivalent steam
that would otherwise have had to be let down or generated in
parallel to satisfy the need for LP steam. So, turbine operating
cost is simply the direct cost for energy extracted by the turbine.
From conversion tables, 1 hp-hr = 2,546 Btu
and 1 hp-yr = 22.3 MMBtu
At $5/MMBtu fuel cost, the theoretical cost is $112/hp-yr.
However, this is based on a 100% efficient turbine. The correct turbine efficiency must be used. Turbine efficiencies are
largely a function of size. Efficiency can vary from as little as
25% for a small, single-wheel pump turbine up to 80% for large
machines. We will assume a range of 50%80%.
For a 50% efficient turbine, annual cost = 112/0.5 = $220/yr
For an 80% efficient turbine, annual cost =112/0.8 = $140/yr.
Back-pressure turbine operating cost = $140/hp-yr $220/
hp-yr.
Note: The operating cost for a back-pressure turbine, with
a valid process use for the exhaust steam, is lower than the cost
for an electric driver. This follows from the cogeneration principle. Instead of making steam, producing hp in a turbine, and
condensing the steam (losing all the energy), in cogeneration
the exhaust steam has full value for application within the HPI
process. However, other steam turbines do not compare as well
with electric drivers.
Excess LP steam and venting exhaust steam. When exhaust steam from a back-pressure turbine is then let down
and vented to atmosphere, there is no recovery of the exhaust
steam enthalpy. From the Mollier diagram or steam tables at
100% turbine efficiency:

Inlet steam enthalpy = 1,280 Btu/lb

Exhaust steam enthalpy = 1,140 Btu/lb
H = 140 Btu/lb
From conversion tables, 1 hp-hr = 2,546 Btu
and 1 hp-yr = 22.3 MMBtu
Steam cost/yr = [(22,300,000/140)/1,000] 7.50
= $ 1,190/hp-yr.
The steam cost of 7.50/Mlb is based on fuel at $5/Mlb.
However, this is based on a 100% efficient turbine.
For a 50% efficient turbine, annual cost = 1,190/0.5 =
$2,380/yr
For an 80% efficient turbine, annual cost =1,190/0.8 =
$1,490/yr.
The hp cost to run a turbine against a back pressure, and
then to let the exhaust steam vent to atmosphere is brutally
expensive. When turbines are running in a steam system that
vents LP steam (possibly in a different location), then there
are huge incentives to use electric drivers in place of backpressure turbines.
Also, if the turbine can be allowed to vent directly to atmosphere, then efforts should effectively reduce the back pressure
from 150 psi to 15 psi. This can halve the steam rate and annual
operating costs.
Condensing turbine. In a condensing turbine, there is no
valid process use for the exhaust steam. Exhaust-steam enthalpy is lost in the condensing system. To reduce the loss and
improve efficiency, the exhaust is at a minimum pressure obtained by a vacuum system. Assume the exhaust is to a vacuum
at 100 mm Hg (from the Mollier diagram or steam tables at
100% turbine efficiency), then:

Inlet steam enthalpy = 1,280 Btu/lb

Exhaust steam enthalpy = 910 Btu/lb
H = 370 Btu/lb
From conversion tables, 1 hp-hr = 2,546 Btu
and 1 hp-yr = 22.3 MMBtu
Steam cost/yr = [(22,300,000/370)/1,000] 7.50
= $450/hp-yr.
The steam cost of $7.50/Mlb is based on fuel at $5/Mlb.
However, this is based on a 100% efficient turbine.
For a 50% efficient turbine, annual cost = 450/0.5 = $900/yr
For an 80% efficient turbine, annual cost = 450/0.8 = $560/yr.
Condensing turbines are not typically cost-effective compared to electric drivers. Their use in HPI facilities is rare.
Next month. A short tutorial investigates how to improve per-

formance of existing plantwide steam networks.

ROGER O. PELHAM serves as a senior consultant with The
Merrick Consultancy, a Merrick & Co., business sector that further
expands the firms services within the energy market, specifically
refining, bioprocessing and utilities markets. He has more than
40 years of diversified consulting and management experience
in the petroleum refining industry. He has served in the capacity
of president, vice president and process engineer in various roles
supporting the refining industry. Mr. Pelham has authored over 17 technical papers.
He received the National Petrochemical and Refining Association Lifetime Service
award and is a member of IChemE and AIChE. Mr. Pelham holds a BSc degree in
chemical engineering from the University of Birmingham, an MSc degree in
chemical engineering from the University of Toronto, and an MBA from the
University of Southern California.
Hydrocarbon Processing|JANUARY 201379