Mercury removal processes

A careful evaluation of the options for removing mercury from natural gas plant
feed and product streams is a prudent exercise
Neil Eckersley and David Radtke UOP, a Honeywell Company
Leon Rogers and Shawn Brennan Enterprise Products

ercury is present in many of the worlds

natural gas fields. Process plants with
brazed aluminium heat exchangers,
including LNG facilities and nitrogen rejection
units, are particularly susceptible to corrosive
attack by mercury. There is an increased awareness on the part of gas processors to better
protect their assets and address environmental
concerns by removing mercury at the most
appropriate location from their facilities
The use of sulphur-impregnated activated
carbon has been prevalent in protecting process
plant equipment from mercury ingress via natural gas streams. However, over the last decade,
carbon-based options have been replaced in
many facilities by the use of more specific base
and noble metal- promoted, non-regenerative
and regenerative solutions.
A comparison of these more up-to-date
mercury removal process solutions is made in
three case studies, and the individual plant drivers leading to the requirement to remove
mercury are discussed.

Why remove mercury?

Mercury is a naturally occurring element found
in small but measurable concentrations in an
increasing number of hydrocarbons globally.
From refineries to natural gas plants, from coalfired power stations to petrochemical production
facilities, mercury is becoming more prevalent
and problematic, and technologies to mitigate
against the effects of mercury are in demand
more than ever before. Mercury is often associated with natural gas, condensates, C3-C6 refinery
product streams (such as naphtha, gasoline and
LPG) and petrochemical feed streams. Each of
these hydrocarbons is challenged in various ways

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000725

when mercury is present, and process plants and

pipeline assets often require a complete removal
of mercury as a result.
Removal and capture of mercury is important
for a number of reasons:
Process plants with brazed aluminium heat
exchangers are susceptible to corrosive attack by
mercury, and alloys of aluminium are prone to
liquid metal embrittlement (LME), causing serious structural damage, particularly when liquid
mercury comes into contact with air or water
Product streams such as condensates, LPG,
NGL and naphtha (in the case of refineries) are
less valuable when distressed by mercury
Many refinery and petrochemical catalysts are
poisoned by mercury. Mercury has the ability to
manifest itself in many crude column products
and is measurably present in many downstream
unit operations. Since increasingly refiners are set
up to sell downstream crude fractions to analogous petrochemical customers, consideration
should be given in removing mercury even from
trace levels to gain more value from individual
petrochemical feed streams
Mercury may have health and safety impacts
in certain applications.

Types of mercury associated with hydrocarbon

streams
Mercury takes on several different chemical
forms, depending on the hydrocarbon in question. Figure 1 lists four forms of mercury. These
discrete categories exist in natural gas, condensate and crude oil.
Elemental and organic mercury fall into the
category of being hydrocarbon soluble. Ionic
mercury species are water soluble and comprise
examples that include both sulphate and chlo-

Gas 2013 1

Levels of mercury in natural gas

Natural gas

Trace suspended

Different areas of the world have

varying levels of mercury in their
natural gas reservoirs. Figure 2
shows average mercury levels
that have been reported to UOP.
In recent years, mercury levels
have increased from typical
highs of 30 or 40 ug/Nm3 to
levels exceeding 1000 ug/Nm3 in
the Pacific Rim area. With a
greater understanding of levels
in specific geographical areas has
come a greater level of expectation in terms of what is required
to remove mercury both on- and
off-shore in a variety of locations
worldwide.

Condensate

Trace ionic

Some organic
Some suspended

Elemental
Prevalent

Some ionic
Trace organic
Trace suspended

Crude oil
Figure 1 Forms of mercury in common process plant hydrocarbon streams

ride salts of mercury (HgSO4 and HgCl2).

Suspended mercury is a broadly defined
descriptor comprising particulates including
mercury-containing species such as HgS.

Need to protect cryogenic

equipment

A well-known reason to remove mercury in a

natural gas processing plant is to protect brazed
aluminium heat exchangers and the cold box in
nitrogen rejection units, to prevent the
Europe

1-500g/Nm3

North Africa
1-130g/Nm3

Asia-Pacific

200-2000g/Nm3

The Americas
1-100g/Nm3

Gulf
Off-shore

Australia

50-200g/Nm3

Figure 2 Mercury levels reported in natural gas reservoirs in various geographic locations

2 Gas 2013

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000725

compromising of these valuable pieces of equipment. In the early 1970s, trace levels of mercury
accumulating in the cryogenic recovery section
of an LNG production plant at Skikda, Algeria,1
caused catastrophic failure of a heat exchanger.
It was found that a combination of mercury and
water at temperatures around 0C caused corrosion in aluminium tubes constructed from
aluminium alloy 6061. Subsequent studies
revealed far more data on the mechanistic
details of how mercury reacts with aluminium,
with aluminium diffusing into the mercury droplet followed by conversion to Al2O3 by reaction
with air and water.
The consequence is that mercury bores into
aluminium and significantly compromises
aluminium-containing equipment. Specifically,
LME has been responsible for a number of failures in the 40 years since the Skikda incident.
LME can cause crack initiation and propagation,
particularly in the proximity of a weld.2 In order
to safeguard against the catastrophic failure of
cryogenic equipment, typical maximum levels of
mercury are now required in and around these
valuable cold boxes within gas processing trains.
One level that has found prominence is that the
gas entering cryogenic equipment contains no
more than 10 ngHg/Nm3 gas.

Importance of measuring mercury

Mercury needs to be measured in order to determine which mercury removal option will provide
the most cost-effective solution to meet desired
results. Whether it is simply removing the
mercury from a process stream to meet specification, protecting the entire plant or ensuring
mercury removal for environmental compliance,
mercury levels must be known. In order to properly design a mercury removal system, accurate
mercury measurement is critical to properly size
the system and to avoid having a system that is
overly large and uneconomical or too small to
satisfy
the
required
outlet
mercury
specifications. For existing units, mercury levels
in the feed must be monitored for changing inlet
levels that might exceed the designed capabilities of the mercury removal unit (MRU). Finally,
monitoring the mercury levels exiting the
mercury removal unit is critical to verifying
proper performance and protection of downstream equipment.
Where the sampling and testing is conducted

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000725

is also critical to the collection of mercury data

that will be valuable in the evaluation of the
plant. It is not just a matter of selecting the most
convenient sample point. Configuration of piping
and dead legs, or stagnant flow sections of
piping, must be taken into consideration when
selecting locations for sampling. Not all plants
and processes are alike; understanding the
differences will help ensure that the correct data
are gathered from locations that will provide
valuable information for the challenge at hand.
Overall process knowledge is crucial, as this
helps not only with knowing where to look for
mercury but how the process could affect the
distribution of mercury throughout the system.
Once the appropriate sampling locations have
been identified, the most important task in
mercury analysis begins: sampling. It is critical
to have as little process piping (or tubing) as
possible between the process pipe containing the
flowing process stream to be tested and the
sample collection system. In fact, zero would be
ideal. As much metal as possible must be eliminated from the sampling path in order to
minimise interferences that can be caused by
mercury adhering to metal surfaces and then
being transportable in unpredictable ways that
can result in false high mercury measurements.
If any part of the sampling system must be
metal, the metal should be heated. This will
minimise or eliminate the ability of the mercury
to stick to the metal portions of the sampling
system and drastically reduce measurement
errors caused by this phenomenon of mercury.
Current gas-phase analysis methods generally
require that the pressure during testing be
reduced to essentially atmospheric pressure. As
soon as the pressure is reduced, all efforts
should be made to switch the sample system
components to Teflon, which has proven to be
very resistant to the hold-up of mercury. The
goal is to eliminate the possibility of transient
mercury depositing in the sampling system,
which could move during sample collection and
cause inaccurate mercury readings. In addition,
it is crucial that the sample point be purged
using a continuous flow of process fluid. This
purging establishes a steady state in the sample
point, allowing the greatest probability of obtaining a sample that is truly representative of the
process stream being tested. It is also recommended to heat the trap used to collect the

Gas 2013 3

mercury sample in order to reduce any chance of

interference, such as hydrocarbons blinding the
surface of the trap and reducing the efficiency of
mercury capture.
Once the sample is collected, it must be
analysed for mercury. There are a number of
mercury analysers available using various analytical techniques. The two most common analytical
techniques for mercury analysis are cold vapour
atomic fluorescence spectroscopy (CVAFS) and
atomic absorption with Zeeman correction. The
analyser most commonly used by UOP is the
Tekran Model 2600. It is favoured due to its
high sensitivity, which reduces sample size
requirements, and, in turn, allows for quicker
sample collection and more frequent sampling.
With appropriate sampling techniques, both
methods can be used for analysis of gas or liquid
samples. Many have found the CVAFS method to
be the most reliable, with no interference issues
encountered to date. The CVAFS method
includes dual-stage traps, which allows for two
purge steps and ensures contaminants that may
affect accuracy are eliminated. Operation of the
various mercury analysers is straightforward and
the results of the sample are generally available
within 15 minutes after the sample is taken.

liquids and condensates are also prone to mercury

as a contaminant, and systems capable of both
gas- and liquid-phase mercury removal are
required by todays gas processor.
Apart from the basic requirement to ensure
that adequate mercury removal can be achieved
on gases at or close to their dew points, it is
important to ensure that MRU reactor volumes
are minimised where possible, to reduce capital
cost and minimise plot space. This is particularly important when positioning an MRU
offshore, where spatial constraints are critical.
The contact times required by sulphur-impregnated carbon products often lead to a larger
than practical MRU footprint. The drive to
reduce capital budgets and avoid large volumes
of spent material has led to gas processors
examining technologies other than sulphurimpregnated carbon.

Concerns around mercury in natural gas

The protection of aluminium heat exchangers

can be accomplished using a layer of silver-containing molecular sieve inside the dehydration
vessels. The active silver forms an amalgam with
the mercury, and its zeolitic substrate adsorbs
moisture in the gas to be treated. This article
later examines a case study at Enterprise
Meeker, describing this system in operation.
This approach offers flexibility in being regenerable, as the mercury-containing gas is bypassed
around any cryogenic equipment into the sales
gas. If necessary, condensed mercury can be
collected and the mercury-entrained gas further
treated with a small, non-regenerative guard
bed, so that it is not passed to the sales gas.

Mercury in natural gas and natural gas liquid is

likely to be in the form of elemental mercury.
Although mercury has a high boiling point
(357C), it also has a high vapour pressure,
which means that it is very mobile. This leads to
a specific issue for todays gas processor, in that
it can disperse throughout gas plant assets and
present issues in terms of how and where it
should be removed. Left unchecked, mercury
will deposit on surfaces, including those
common to pipelines and plant assets. Mercury
can then desorb back into gas streams, passing
through contaminated pipelines. As a result of
this, prolonged periods of time can elapse
between the installation of an upstream MRU
and the complete purging of a pipeline.3 This
creates a difficult situation for a gas processor
and one that requires a lot of thought as to how
best to remove mercury, often as close to the
front end of a natural gas processing or gas
transmission system as is practicable.
The issue of mercury ingress into natural gas is
not confined to the gas phase either. Natural gas

4 Gas 2013

Mercury removal process options

The global market has a number of approaches
for mercury removal. These options can be categorised as regenerative adsorbents and nonregenerative adsorbent solutions for mercury
contaminant removal.

Regenerative adsorbents for mercury removal

Non-regenerative adsorbents for mercury

removal
There are two types of non-regenerative MRU:
carbon systems and metal sulphide beds. The
common and traditional approach to mercury
removal has historically been through the use of
sulphur-impregnated carbon beds. Existing
sulphur-impregnated activated carbon options

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000725

tend to be less effective at posiImpact of liquids on mercury removal using activated carbon
tions upstream of molecular
in the gas phase
sieve drying systems or glycol
injection due to the risk of capilBed
Total volatiles Total S, wt% Total Hg, wt% Hg/S on
Hg/S on a
% Sulphur
lary
condensation
in
the
position (200C), wt% (dry basis)
(dry basis)
w/w basis molar basis, % utilisation
micropores
of
the
carbon
Layer 1
21.1
7.02
1.89
0.27
0.0429
4.29
sub-structure. The pore size
Layer 2
21.0
6.57
1.71
0.26
0.0414
4.14
Layer 3
26.8
8.32
2.12
0.25
0.0406
4.06
distribution of carbon products is
Layer 4
24.4
7.97
0.29
0.04
0.0057
0.57
such that this has been problematic in the past, particularly
where MRU locations have been Table 1
in the up-front position, where
raw gas is often at or close to its dew point and percentage of utilised sulphur was also measured
entrained liquids are common. This is where on a molar basis. The percentage of sulphur
fixed-bed, metallic-based MRU products find utilised in the equilibrium section of the vessel
greatest success in their ability to treat wet gas (layers 1, 2 and 3) was measured at ~4 wt%. By
comparison, on a dry natural gas without the
streams in up-front positions.
Non-regenerative metal sulphides can success- attendant issues of liquid entrainment, this
fully remove mercury from raw gas, upstream of percentage utilisation would be expected to be
the amine unit and the dehydration vessels. >>10 wt%. The data confirm that sulphur-imUtilising larger MRU vessels, this approach pregnated activated carbon is prone to sulphur
protects the brazed aluminium heat exchanger dissolution and micropore blocking when treating
and ensures significantly less mercury contami- wet gas.
The data also strongly suggest that the carbon
nation in and around the process plant. This
option has become increasingly popular, since it has co-adsorbed a significant quantity of liquid
minimises the total mercury present before there (20-30%) from the raw natural gas. This contribis any opportunity for mercury to migrate to uted to its shortened service life.
various locations within a gas processing plant
and avoids the risk of subsequent partitioning Reclaiming mercury from spent adsorbents
into processed natural gas and condensate Activated carbon
streams.4 It also avoids subsequent adsorption After the carbon is discharged from an MRU, it
onto any pipeline asset or piece of equipment is usually sent to a specialised plant, where
mercury is reclaimed via vacuum distillation.
downstream.
There is no useful purpose for the remaining
carbon and it undergoes high-temperature
Liquids carry-over onto sulphur-impregnated
incineration.
activated carbon
The degree of liquid adsorbed onto carbon during
the life of a sulphur-impregnated carbon-based Metal sulphides
MRU is shown in Table 1. The MRU can be Specialised processes are used for mercury
shown in terms of total wt% volatiles (200C). reclaiming from metal sulphides. For both
Layer 1 represents carbon recovered from the carbon-based and metal sulphide-based adsorinlet portion of the bed, and layers 2, 3 and 4 bents, controls are in place to ship material
represent subsequent layers. Each layer was internationally from source (gas processing
bagged upon discharge, following a lifetime meas- plant) to destination (reclaim facility). The
paperwork and experience required to accomured in months rather than years, as per design.
The total wt% of active sulphur was measured plish such transportation is complex and
on each layer of discharged carbon. While sulphur requires very careful consideration.
levels on newly installed activated carbon are
typically 10-18 wt%, the levels on the spent mate- Molecular sieve-based adsorbents
rial were measured at 6-9 wt%. In order to As the mercury is passed to the regeneration
measure the mercury removal efficiency of gas in properly regenerated beds, the spent
sulphur-impregnated activated carbon, the adsorbent contains no mercury, and therefore

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000725

Gas 2013 5

Inlet filter
Inlet
scrubber

Trim heater

Raw
natural
gas

Mercury
guard bed

Inlet
dehydrators
Cryo
feed

Dust filter

Figure 3 Enterprise Pioneer dehydration and MRU process

Booster

Gas/gas Reflux
exchanger exchanger

Compressor
Expander

Residue gas
compressor
Demethaniser
TIC

Cryo feed

Bottom-side
reboiler

Top-side
reboiler
Cold
separator

Figure 4 Enterprise Pioneer cryogenic plant

mercury reclamation is not an option.

Reclamation could be evaluated for the recovery of silver.

Case studies
The following case studies represent real examples of the use of various forms of mercury
removal media outlined above and offer examples of the types of circumstances different
facilities may be required to deal with to address
mercury contamination.

Case 1: Enterprise Pioneer

The Enterprise Pioneer cryogenic gas plant
located in Opal, Wyoming, is a single-train plant

6 Gas 2013

that processes up to 750

MMscfd of natural gas. Gas is
supplied to the plant from the
Jonah and Pinedale fields.
Construction began in 2006 and
the plant was started up on 1
February 2008. Plant design
includes inlet liquids separation,
gas dehydration and mercury
removal (see Figures 3 and 4).
As part of the initial plant
design, sulphur impregnated
carbon was chosen as a mercury
guard bed adsorbent.
Since start-up, Enterprise
Pioneer has had four turnarounds. The sequence of events,
observations and corrective
measures is:
February
2009:
repair
mercury guard bed inlet screen
September
2009: replace
mercury guard bed adsorbent
(sulphur- impregnated carbon)
December 2010: install stainless steel top-side/bottom-side
reboilers, repair demethaniser
trays, and inlet dehydrator mol
sieve replacement
June 2011: replace mercury
guard bed adsorbent.

NGLs

Initial experiences post

start-up
Shortly after plant start-up,
operating issues were observed
with the inlet screen in the
mercury guard bed. Investigations revealed
incorrect design of the inlet screen, which caused
abnormal flow patterns and adsorbent attrition.
Mercury adsorbent attrition resulted in the
generation of dust, causing the failure of several
filter elements and fouling in the inlet heat
exchangers due to fine particulates. As a corrective measure, the mercury guard bed inlet screen
was replaced. However, inlet heat exchangers
were not cleaned.
A review of approach temperature trends
observed over the three turnarounds can be
summarised:
A dramatic increase in the approach temperature can be seen, starting in September 2008,

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000725

Approach temperature, F

due to the increased adsorbent

60
attrition related to faulty inlet
screen design
3rd TA
1st TA 2nd TA
4th TA
50
The
first turnaround, in
Changes in
February 2009, stopped accelerC recovery
Hg bed
40
screen
ated attrition of the mercury
problems
guard bed adsorbent, but the
30
heat transfer of the reflux
20
exchanger did not improve as
the exchanger was not cleaned
10
During the second turnaround
in September 2009, all of the
0
inlet exchangers were cleaned
(back puffed) to remove
particulates. Approach temperatures of only 1-2F degrees were
achieved in the first few days Figure 5 Reflux exchanger approach temperature
after start-up
However, the approach temperature quickly
increased without any particulate fouling of the aluminium top side/bottom side reboilers of
exchanger between the period of time between the demethaniser. As a result, these were
the first and second turnarounds (see Figure 5).
blinded off from the process equipment.
Blinding of side reboilers not only resulted in
September 2009 shutdown observations
significant ethane recovery losses, this also
A powder coating was discovered in the top of masked the continued loss of heat transfer in
the tower and on the liquid redistribution trays the reflux exchanger (due to the continued foulfor beds 1 and 2 during the September 2009 ing from the MRU adsorbent beds). In
turnaround.
December 2010, stainless steel reboilers were
As the first step of investigation, samples of installed and demethaniser tower modifications
the dust were collected and analysed by mass were made to improve ethane recovery. The
spectrometer (mass spec), scanning electron reflux exchanger was not cleaned at this time
microscope (SCEM), and carbon, hydrogen, and this significantly impacted ethane recovery
nitrogen and sulphur (CHNS). The analytical after the December 2010 start-up.
results are shown in Table 2.
Demethaniser tower inspections in December
Based on analytical results from two of the 2010 revealed the same coating of powder in
three samples, initial inference was that a major the top of the tower and liquid redistributors.
fraction of the contamination could be due to The layer of powder was thicker than was
molecular sieve attrition along with some carbon observed in 2009. Powder samples were
on the surface. However, there was not a good analysed at two different labs and the results
explanation for the fouling
showed sulphur (86.6% and
Analysis of dust samples from
mechanism of mole sieve
89.5%) as the major component of
a September 2009 shutdown at
dust. Also, with the new
the foulant. Given one sample
Enterprise Pioneer
adsorbent bed and screens in
analysis in 2009, followed by two
place, it was hoped that the
results in 2010, it was confirmed
Mass spec
SCEM
CHNS
fouling
of
the
reflux
Sodium
Sodium Sulphur (75%) that the majority of the sample
Aluminum
Aluminum Carbon (8%)
exchanger would stop.
was sulphur. Significant efforts
Iron
Oxygen
were then put forth to determine
Calcium
Silca
Minor components Calcium
March 2010 shutdown
the source of the sulphur.
Iron
observations
Discussions with the mercury
Sulphur
During the March 2010
guard bed adsorbent vendor
shutdown, the plant experi(sulphur-impregnated
carbon)
enced failure of the brazed Table 2
revealed that liquid hydrocarbons

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000725

13

12

20

5/

20

6/

18

/1

0/

12

20

1/

4/

01

14

/9

/2

01

26

/2

/2

01

/2

/8

10

22

/1

/2

01

09

08

20

7/

20

6/

08

2/

20

18

/1

07

6/

1/

20

1/

/1

14

28

/4

/2

00

Gas 2013 7

PTT GSP-5 MRU process conditions

Gas treated
Gas flow rate
Operating pressure
Operating temperature
Hg influent range
Hg effluent specification

Natural gas
530 MMscfd
48 kg/cm2
18C
50-200 g/Nm3
<0.01 g/Nm3

Table 3

Figure 6 GB-562 parallel flow reactors at PTT Thailand

leached elemental sulphur from the carbon beds.

Cooling this gas led to sulphur crystallisation
and thus fouling of the metal surfaces of downstream process equipment. Further analysis of
approach temperatures made it obvious that
fouling of the reflux exchanger was increasing,
resulting in reduced ethane recoveries.
Efforts were made to determine the source of
the hydrocarbon through dewpoint estimation.
Simulations revealed that the hydrocarbon
dewpoint was ~30F lower than the actual
stream temperature; however, the sulphur fouling was still ongoing.
Efforts were made to find a mercury adsorbent
that did not contain elemental sulphur. UOP
GB-562 contains copper sulphide, which is insoluble in liquid hydrocarbons. The carbon/sulphur

8 Gas 2013

material was replaced by

GB-562 in June 2011 and the
inlet exchangers were cleaned.
Reflux
exchanger
approach
temperature showed a dramatic
improvement, 40-0.5F. The
approach
temperature
has
remained stable since June
2011.

Case 2: PTT Thailand

The PTT GSP-5 gas plant located
at Map Ta Phut, Rayong,
Thailand, was commissioned
and started up in 2004. The
on-shore facility processes raw
gas via a pipeline from off-shore
gas fields in the Gulf of Thailand.
The raw gas entering GSP-5 is
conditioned to remove CO2, H2O
and Hg, and the total gas flow
treated is 530 MMscfd. The
MRU is designed to protect an
NGL recovery plant, which
incorporates a cryogenic unit
that includes a brazed aluminium heat exchanger. The initial
charge of mercury removal
adsorbent used from plant
start-up was sulphur-impregnated activated carbon. The gas
plants
MRU
configuration
consists of two parallel reactors
each designed to process 265
MMscfd of gas.
The MRU is located upstream of the amine
plant and the dryers, and is positioned to treat
raw gas as it enters the facility. Historically, the
gas entering the MRU has contained some liquid
hydrocarbon with a TEG carry-over component.
The initial charge of activated carbon experienced a premature mercury breakthrough after
two years in service. Table 3 is a summary of the
MRUs process conditions.
After the activated carbon was discharged
from the reactors, the MRU was refilled with
UOP GB-562 adsorbent (metal based). The
GB-562 parallel flow reactors at GSP-5 are
shown in Figure 6.
Since the UOP GB-562 was commissioned, the
plant has continuously recorded effluent
mercury levels below the required specification

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000725

Case 3: Enterprise USA

Mercury concentration,
g/Nm3

and maintained the start-of-run

Enterprise Meeker I and II
pressure drop, which is a priority for PTT. This successful
Gas treated
Natural gas
performance has been achieved
Gas flow rate to mol sieve vessels
750 MMscfd
despite the UOP GB-562 treatGB-562 operating temperature
30-40C
ing
a
liquid-entrained,
GB-562 operating pressure
70 kg/cm2
Raw gas Hg concentration to HgSIV 1
Up to 800 ng/Nm3
water-saturated natural gas.
Regeneration gas Hg concentration to GB-562
Up to 2000 ng/Nm3
Figure 7 shows the actual
Effluent Hg concentration from GB-562
<10 ng/Nm3
mercury influent and effluent
levels at the GSP-5 facility since
the start-up of the GB-562 Table 4
MRU.
Despite
fluctuating
mercury inlet levels, the GB-562
150
continues to meet desired efflu140
MRU inlet
130
ent specification.
MRU outlet
120
110
100
90
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0

The Enterprise Meeker I gas

plant, located in Colorados
Piceance Basin, started up in
2007 with an initial gas processing capacity of 750 MMscfd,
incorporating 35 000 b/d of
NGL recovery. A phase II
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10 11 12
expansion in the form of sister
Months online
plant, Meeker II, started up in
2008, resulting in a doubling of Figure 7 Mercury inlet and outlet levels of a GB-562 MRU at PTT
capacity to 1.5 Bscfd gas and 70
provide favourable Opex for the plant and this
000 b/d of produced NGL.
Both Meeker I and Meeker II condition raw could have a severe impact on plant profitability
gas to remove carbon dioxide using amines. UOP in the long run. This article has presented cases
Molsiv UI-94 Adsorbent and Hg-SIV1 molecular where the effect of feed stream quality, coupled
sieves are used in the drying vessels to remove with operating factors, influence the perforwater and mercury, respectively, from the raw mance of an adsorbent in a gas plant and
gas prior to it passing to the cryogenic system. A demonstrate how an incorrect selection of adsornon-regenerative mercury guard bed adsorbent bent can lead to frequent and unwanted
(UOP GB-562) is installed to remove mercury shutdowns coupled with a reduced operating
efficiency of the unit. A prudent approach is
from the molecular sieve regeneration stream.
The molecular sieve dryers are configured such needed for selecting the right mercury removal
that two vessels are in adsorption mode and one technique.
vessel in regeneration mode at any given time.
Each molecular sieve vessel processes 375
MMscfd of feed gas. Table 4 is a summary of the With thanks to the co-operation of the PTT Thailand GSP-5 facility
mercury removal process conditions for the and to the Enterprise Meeker facility.
molecular sieve and the GB-562 MRU.

Conclusion
There are various treatment options available for
mercury removal from natural gas plant feed
and product streams. A careful evaluation of
pros and cons of these options is a prudent exercise. A favourable Capex solution may not

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000725

References
1 Oil & Gas Journal, 15 Sept 1975, 192.
2 Willhelm M S, Risk analysis for operation of, AIChE, April 2008,
New Orleans.
3 Jt. UOP/Equistar paper, Hg removal from cracked, 2004
Ethylene Producers Conference.
4 Edmonds B, Moorwood R A S, Szcepanski R, Mercury

Gas 2013 9

partitioning in natural gas, GPA European Chapter Meeting,

London, March 1996.
Neil Eckersley is the Integration Leader responsible for
integrating all aspects of the Thomas Russell Company into
UOP. He holds a BS degree in applied chemistry from Sheffield
Hallam University in England.
David Radtke is a Senior Adsorbents Technical Engineer
responsible for customer and sales support and preparation
of adsorbent designs for UOP adsorbent products. He holds a
BS degree in chemical and petroleum refining engineering from
Colorado School of Mines in Golden, Colorado.
Leon Rogers is the Plant Manager for Enterprise Products
Pioneer Cryo Gas Plant in Opal, Wyoming. He holds a BS degree

10 Gas 2013

in chemical engineering from Brigham Young University and a MS

degree in chemical engineering from Oklahoma State University.
Shawn Brennan is the Plant Manager for Enterprise Products
Meeker Gas Plant located in Rifle, Colorado. He holds a BS
degree in chemical engineering from Worcester Polytechnic
Institute (WPI) in Worcester, Massachusetts.

More articles from: UOP - A Honeywell Company

More articles from the following category:
Gas Processing/Treatment

www.digitalrefining.com/article/1000725