Dealing with the Gasoline Surplus – Naphtha to Chemicals Technologies as Competitive Differentiation in the Downstream Industry

Introduction and Context

The current scenario present great challenges to the crude oil refining industry, prices volatility of raw material, pressure from society to reduce environmental impacts and refining margins increasingly lower. The newest threat to refiners is the reduction of the consumer market, in the last years became common, news about countries that intend to reduce or ban the production of vehicles powered by fossil fuels in the middle term, mainly in the European market. Despite the recent forecasts, the transportation fuels demand is still the main revenues driver to the downstream industry, as presented in Figure 1, based on data from Wood Mackenzie Company.

Figure 1 – Relation of Petrochemical Feedstock/Transportation Fuels Feedstock and Installed Capacity (Wood Mackenzie, 2019)

According to Figure 1, the transportation fuels demand represents close to five times the demand by petrochemicals as well as a focus on transportation fuels of the current refining hardware, considering the data from 2019. Despite these data, is observed a trend of stabilization in transportation fuels demand close to 2030 followed by a growing market of petrochemicals. Still according to Wood Mackenzie data, presented in Figure 2, is expected a relevant growth in the petrochemicals participation in the global oil demand.

Figure 2 – Change in the Profile of Global Crude Oil Demand (Wood Mackenzie, 2019)

The improvement in fuel efficiency, growing market of electric vehicles tends to decline the participation of transportation fuels in the global crude oil demand. New technologies like additive manufacturing (3D printing) have the potential to produce great impact to the transportation demands, leading to even more impact over the transportation fuels demand. Furthermore, the higher availability of lighter crude oils favors the oversupply of lighter derivatives that facilitate the production of petrochemicals against transportation fuels as well as the higher added value of petrochemicals in comparison with fuels.

 Figure 3 present an overview of the trend of growing to the petrochemical market in short term.

Figure 3 – Growing Trend in the Demand by Petrochemical Intermediates (Deloitte, 2019) - Note: Bars represent total demand (million metric tons or MMT), circles represent total capacity (MMT).

As presented in Figure 3, some of the most promising petrochemical intermediate is the aromatics benzene and p-xylene. The maximization of aromatics in the refining hardware is possible through the installation of catalytic reforming technologies associated with a separation unit.

Beyond the aromatics production, in markets with surplus of gasoline, some alternatives like blend the heavier fraction of naphtha with diesel and jet fuel can be an interesting strategy, but this alternative presents limitations due to the middle distillates specifications like volatility and Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP). In this case, technologic routes capable to manage naphtha molecules aiming to direct these streams to petrochemical intermediates can ensure closer integration with petrochemical assets as well as higher added value to refiners. Some markets already are facing with the gasoline surplus, in these cases, directing naphtha to petrochemicals against gasoline can be an attractive way to ensure competitiveness to refiners. Figure 4 present the evolution of gasoline surplus in the Russian domestic market, as an example.

Figure 4 – Evolution of Gasoline Surplus to the Russian Domestic Market (IHS Markit, 2020)

Again, being a high demand and most profitable market, the alternative to convert naphtha to petrochemicals should be a trend to refiners inserted in markets with gasoline surplus in the next years.

Catalytic Reforming Technologies – Naphtha to Aromatics

The main objective of the Catalytic Reforming unit is to produce a stream with high aromatics hydrocarbons content that can be directed to the gasoline pool or to produce petrochemical intermediates (benzene, toluene, and xylenes) according to the market served by the refiner, due the high content of aromatics compounds the reformate can raise significantly the octane number in the gasoline, in the current scenario this a less attractive route.

A typical feedstock to the catalytic reforming unit is the straight run naphtha, however, in the last decades due to the necessity to increasing the refining margin through installation of bottom barrel units, hydrotreated coke naphtha stream have been consumed like feedstock in the catalytic reforming unit.  

The catalyst generally employed in the catalytic reforming process is based on platinum (Pt) supported on alumina treated with chlorinated compounds to raise the support acidity. This catalyst has bifunctional characteristics once the alumina acid sites are actives to molecular restructuring and the metals sites are responsible for hydrogenation and dehydrogenation reactions.  

The main chemical reactions involved in the catalytic reforming process are:

·      Naphthene Compounds dehydrogenation;

·      Parafinns Isomerization;

·      Isomerization of Naphthene Compounds;

·      Paraffins Dehydrocyclization;

Among the undesired reactions can be cited hydrocracking reactions and dealkylation of aromatics compounds.

Figure 5 present a basic process flow diagram for a typical semi-regenerative catalytic reforming unit. 

Figure 5 – Typical arrangement to Semi-regenerative Catalytic Reforming Process Unit 

The naphtha feed stream is blended with recycle hydrogen and heated at a temperature varying 500 to 550 oC before to enter in the first reactor, as the reactions are strongly endothermic the temperature fall quickly, so the mixture is heated and sent to the second reactor and so on. The effluent from the last reactor is sent to a separation drum where the phases liquid and gaseous are separated. 

The gaseous stream with high hydrogen content is shared in two process streams, a part is recycled to the process to keep the ratio H2/Feed stream the other part is sent to a gas purification process plant (normally a Pressure Swing Adsorption unit) to raise the purity of the hydrogen that will be exported to others process plants in the refinery.

The liquid fraction obtained in the separation drum is pumped to a distillation column wherein the bottom is produced the reformate and in the top drum of the column is produced LPG and fuel gas.

The reformate have a high aromatics content and, according to the market supplied by the refinery, can be directed to the gasoline pool like a booster of octane number or, when the refinery has aromatics extraction plants is possible to produce benzene, toluene and xylenes in segregated streams, which can be directed to petrochemical process plants.  The gas rich in hydrogen produced in the catalytic reforming unit is an important utility for the refinery, mainly when there is a deficit between the hydrogen production capacity and the hydrotreating installed capacity in the refinery, in some cases the catalytic reforming unit is operated with the principal objective to produce hydrogen.   

The main process variables in the catalytic reforming process unit are pressure (3,5 – 30 bar), which normally is defined in the design step, in other words, the pressure normally is not an operational variable. The temperature can vary from 500 to 550 oC, the space velocity can be varied through feed stream flow rate control and the ratio H2/Feed stream that have a direct relation with the quantity of coke deposited on the catalyst during the process. To semi-regenerative units, the ratio H2/Feed stream can vary from 8 to 10, in units with continuous catalyst regeneration this variable can be significantly reduced.   

Due to the process severity, the high coke deposition rate on the catalyst and consequently the quick deactivation leaves to short operational campaign periods to semi-regenerative units that employ fixed bed reactors.   

To solve this problem some technology licensors developed catalytic reforming process with continuous catalyst regeneration steps.  

The process Aromizing? developed by Axens company apply side by side configurations to the reactors while the CCR Platforming? developed by UOP apply the configuration of stacked reactors to catalytic reforming process with continuous catalyst regeneration. Figure 6 presents a flow diagram to Aromazing? catalytic reforming unit.

Figure 6 – Aromizing? Reforming Technology by Axens Company

Both technologies are commercial and some process plants with these technologies are in operation around the world. Figure 7 presents a basic process flow diagram to CCR Platforming? developed by UOP Company.

Figure 7 – CCR Platforming? Reforming Technology by UOP Company

In the regeneration section the catalyst is submitted to processes to burn the coke deposited during the reactions and treated with chlorinated compounds to reactivate the acid function of the catalyst. 

Despite the higher capital investment, the rise in the operational campaign and higher flexibility in relation of the feedstock to be processed in the processing unit can compensate the higher investment in relation of the semi-regenerative process.   

The catalytic reforming technology gives a great flexibility to the refiners in the gasoline production process, however, in the last decades there is a strong restriction on the use of reformate in the gasoline due to the control of benzene content in this derivate (due to the carcinogenic characteristics of this compound). This fact has been reduced the application of reformate in the gasoline formulation in some countries.  Furthermore, the operational costs are high, mainly due to the catalyst replacement and additional security requirements linked to minimize leaks of aromatics compounds.  

As aforementioned, in markets where there is demand, the production of petrochemical intermediates is economically more advantageous than the production of transportation fuels, especially in countries with easy access to lighter oils. The production and separation of aromatics are processes with great capacity of adding value to crude oil.

The aromatics production complex is a set of processes intended to produce petrochemical intermediates from naphtha produced in the catalytic reforming process or by pyrolysis process. An aromatics production complex can take on different process configurations, according to the petrochemical market to be served.

The naphtha rich in aromatics, produced in catalytic reforming or pyrolysis units (in some cases from both), is fed to an extractive distillation column where the separation of aromatic compounds is conducted, which are withdrawn in the extract phase, are recovered at the bottom of the column while the non-aromatic compounds are withdrawn from the top in the raffinate phase.  The aromatics are separated from the solvent in the solvent recovery column and directed to the fractionation section of aromatics where the essentially pure benzene and toluene streams and xylenes blend are obtained. The raffinate is sent to a wash column and the non-aromatic hydrocarbons are usually sent to the refinery's gasoline pool.

          The growing demand for high-quality petrochemical intermediates and the higher added value of these products have made it necessary to develop conversion processes capable of converting lower interest aromatics (Toluene) into more economically attractive compounds (Xylenes).

Aromatics separation, mainly xylenes, is a great challenge to the modern engineering. The similarities between the molecules make the separation through simple distillation very hard, for this reason, several researchers, and technology licensors dedicate their efforts to develop new processes which can lead to pure compounds with lower costs.

The xylenes blend is fed to a distillation column where the ethylbenzene is separated in the top and sent to styrene production market while the bottom stream is pumped to another column where the mixture of Meta and Para-xylenes is withdrawn in the top and the Ortho-xylene and heavier compounds are removed in the bottom.

Ortho-xylene is separated from heavy aromatics in another distillation column while the Meta and Para-xylene are fed to a crystallization process, where is obtained a stream with a high concentration in Meta-xylene and the residual stream is directed to an isomerization unit, aiming to promote the conversion of residual Meta and Orto-xylenes in Para-xylene. The aromatics production units are normally optimized to maximize the Meta-xylene production because this is a petrochemical intermediate with higher interest, this compound is raw material to produce terephthalic acid that is used to produce PET (Polyethylene terephthalate).

To raise the production of higher commercial and economic interest compounds (P-Xylene and Benzene), technology licensors developed several processes to convert streams with low added value in these compounds. One of the main developers of this technology is the UOP Company, the PAREX? process apply the separation through adsorption to obtain high purity P-xylene from xylenes blend.  

 Another UOP technology is the ISOMAR? process, which promotes the xylenes isomerization to Para-xylene raising the recovery of this compound in the aromatic complex. TATORAY ? process was developed to convert toluene and heavy aromatics (C9+) in benzene and xylenes through transalkylation reaction. Another economically attractive technology is the SULPHOLANE? process that applies liquid-liquid extraction operations and extractive distillation to reach high purity aromatics separation from hydrocarbon mixture.  

The UOP Company developed an integrated aromatics complex aiming to maximize the production of benzene and p-xylene, which lead to a higher profitability to the refiner. A UOP Aromatics Complex scheme is presented in Figure 8. 

Figure 8 – Aromatics Complex by UOP Company 

Other companies have attractive and efficient technologies to produce high purity aromatics, the Axens Company license an aromatics production complex also based on separation and conversion processes, called ParamaX? that can be optimized to produce P-xylene. This process is presented in Figure 9. 

The ParamaX? technology offers the possibility of Cyclohexane production (Raw material to synthetic fibers) through benzene hydrogenation beyond raise the production of this component through toluene HydroDealkylation (HDA).  

Figure 9 – Schematic Process Flow Diagram for ParamaX? technology, by Axens Company. 

As aforementioned, the capital investment to installation of aromatics production complexes is high, however, the obtained products have high added value and rely on great demand, and even the compounds with low interest can be commercialized with high margin. In countries with easy access to light oil reserves as Saudi Arabia and United States (Tight Oil) the installation of these process plants is even more economically attractive.

Fluid Catalytic Cracking Technologies – The Maximum Olefins Operation Mode

According to the market demand, the FCC units can be optimized to produce the most demanded derivatives, refiners facing gasoline surplus markets can operate the processing unit in maximum olefins operation mode, in order to minimize the production of cracked naphtha.

In this operation mode the FCC unit operates under high severity translated to high operation temperature (TRX), high catalyst/oil ratio. The catalyst formulation taking into account higher catalyst activity through addition of ZSM-5 zeolite. There is the possibility to a reduction in the total processing capacity due to the limitations in blowers and cold area capacity.

           It’s observed an improvement in the octane number of cracked naphtha despite a lower yield, due to the higher aromatics concentration in the cracked naphtha. In some cases, the refiner can use the cracked naphtha recycle to improve even more the LPG yield.

           In the maximum LPG operation mode, the main restrictions are the cold area processing capacity, metallurgic limits in the hot section of the unit, treating section processing capacity as well as the top systems of main fractionating column. In markets with falling demand by transportation fuels, this is the most common FCC operation mode.

Through changing the reaction severity, it is possible to maximize the production of petrochemical intermediates, mainly propylene in conventional FCC units, as shown in Figure 10.

Figure 10 - Optimization of Process Variables in FCC Units to Improve the Yield of Petrochemicals Intermediates.

The use of FCC catalyst additives such as ZSM-5 can increase unit propylene production by up to 9,0%. Despite the higher operating costs, the higher revenues from the higher added value of derivatives should lead to a positive financial result for the refiner, according to current market projections. A relatively common strategy also applied to improve the yield of LPG and propylene in FCC units is the recycling of cracked naphtha leading to an over cracking of the gasoline range molecules.  

The Petrochemical FCC Alternative – Complying with Current Market Demand

As quoted earlier, in markets with high demand by petrochemicals, the petrochemical FCC can be an attractive alternative to refiners aiming to ensure higher added value to bottom barrel streams. An example of FCC technology developed to maximize the production of petrochemical intermediates is the RxPRO? process by UOP Company, this process combines a petrochemical FCC and separation processes optimized to produce raw materials to the petrochemical process plants, as presented in Figure 11. Other available technologies are the HS-FCC? process commercialized by Axens Company, and INDMAX? process licensed by Lummus Company. The basic process flow diagram for HS-FCC? technology is presented in Figure 12.

Figure 11 – RxPRO? Process Technology by UOP Company. 

It’s important to taking into account that both technologies presented in Figures 11 and 12 are based on Petrochemical FCC units that presents especial design due to the sever operating conditions.

Figure 12 – HS-FCC? Process Technology by Axens Company. 

To petrochemical FCC units, the reaction temperature reaches 600 oC and higher catalyst circulation rate raises the gases production, which requires a scaling up of gas separation section. The higher thermal demand makes advantageous operates the catalyst regenerator in total combustion mode leading to the necessity of installation a catalyst cooler system.

Figure 13 presents the results of a comparative study, carried out by Technip Company, showing the yields obtained by conventional FCC units, optimized to olefins (FCC to olefins), and the HS-FCC? designed to maximize the production of petrochemical intermediates. 

Figure 13 – Comparative Study between Conventional FCCs and Petrochemical FCC (HS-FCC?)

It’s observed a higher reaction temperature (TRX) and a cat/oil ratio five times higher when are compared the conventional process units and the petrochemical FCC (HS-FCC?), leading to a growth of the light olefins yield (Ethylene + Propylene + C4=’s) from 14 % to 40%.

           The installation of petrochemical catalytic cracking units requires a deep economic study taking into account the high capital investment and higher operational costs, however, some forecasts indicate growth of 4,0 % per year to the market of petrochemical intermediates until 2025. In this scenario can be attractive the capital investment aiming to raise the market share in the petrochemical sector, allowing then a favorable competitive positioning to the refiner, through the maximization of petrochemical intermediates. Figure 14 presents a block diagram showing a case study demonstrating how the petrochemical FCC unit, in this case the INDMAX? technology by Lummus Company, can maximize the yield of petrochemicals in the refining hardware.

Figure 14 – Olefins Maximization in the Refining Hardware with INDMAX? FCC Technology by Lummus (SANIN, A.K., 2017)

In refining hardware with conventional FCC units, further than the higher temperature and catalyst circulation rates, it’s possible to apply the addition of catalysts additives like the zeolitic material ZSM-5 that can raise the olefins yield close to 9,0% in some cases when compared with the original catalyst. This alternative raise the operational costs, however, as aforementioned can be economically attractive considering the petrochemical market forecasts. 

Among another petrochemical FCC technologies, it’s possible to quote the Maxofin? process developed by KBR Company and the SCC? technology developed by Lummus Company.

Due to the higher production of light olefins, mainly ethylene, another important difference between conventional and petrochemical FCC units is related to the gas recovery section, while in conventional FCC is applied absorber columns, in petrochemical units is applied cryogenic processes though refrigeration cycles in similar conditions which are applied in steam cracking units, as presented in Figure 15 for the ACO? technology developed by KBR Company.

Figure 15 – Olefins Recovery Section of ACO? Technology by KBR Company (TALLMAN et. al., 2010)

The cryogenic processes applied to olefins recovery raises, even more, the capital requirement to petrochemical FCC units when compared with conventional FCCs, despite this, the growing market for petrochemicals and falling demand for transportation fuels, tends to compensate the higher investment.

Propylene Recovery Section

The growing demand by petrochemicals lead some refiners to install propylene recovery units aiming to allow the maximization of light olefins yield in his refining hardware. Among the light olefins, the propylene is one of the most relevant petrochemical intermediate due to the high demand and added value.

The propylene can be applied as intermediate to the production some fundamental products, for example:

·      Acrylonitrile;

·      Propylene Oxide;

·      Cumene;

·      Acrylic Acid;

·      Polypropylene;

Propylene can be produced through conventional processes like Steam Cracking and Fluid Catalytic Cracking (FCC) or through directed processes like metathesis of ethylene and butane, propane dehydrogenation, olefins cracking, Methanol to Olefins processes (MTO), among others. Currently the major part of the propylene market is supplied by steam cracking units, but close to 28 % of the global propylene demand is from the separation of LPG produced in Fluid Catalytic Cracking Units (FCC).

           Normally, the LPG produced in FCC units contain close to 30 % of propylene and the added value of the propylene is close to 2,5 times of the LPG. According to the local market, the installation of propylene separation units presents an attractive return over investment. Despite the advantage, a side effect of the propylene separation from LPG is that the fuel stays heavier leading to specifications issues, mainly in colder regions, in these cases alternatives are to segregate the butanes and send this stream to gasoline pool, add propane to the LPG or add LPG from natural gas. It’s important take into account that some of these alternatives reduce the LPG offer, which can be a severe restriction according to the market demand.

A great challenge in the propylene production process is the propane and propylene separation step. The separation is generally hard by simple distillation because the relative volatility between propylene and propane is close of 1.1. This fact generally conducts to distillation columns with a large number of equilibrium stages and high internal reflux flow rates.

There are two technologies normally employed in propylene-propane separation towers that are know like Heat-Pump and High Pressure configurations.

The high pressure technology apply a traditional separation process that uses a condenser with cooling water to promotes the condensation of top products, in this case, it’s necessary to apply sufficient pressure to promote the condensation of products in the ambient temperature. Furthermore, the reboiler uses steam or another available hot source. The adoption of high pressure separation route requires a great availability of low pressure steam in the refining hardware, in some cases this can be a restrictive characteristic and the heat pump configuration is more attractive, despite the higher capital requirements.

The application of heat pump technology allows decrease the operating pressure by close of 20 bar to 10 bar, this fact increase the relative volatility propylene-propane, making the separation process easier and, consequently, reducing the number of equilibrium stages and internal reflux flow rate required for the separation.

           Normally, when the separation process by distillation is hard (with relative volatilities lower than 1.5) the uses of heat pump technology shows more attractive.

           Furthermore, some variables needs to be considerate during the choice of the best technology for the propylene separation process like availability of utilities, temperature gap in the column and installation cost.

           Normally, the propylene is produced in the refineries with to specifications. The polymer grade that is most common and have higher added value with a purity of 99,5 % (minimum) this grade is directed to polypropylene market. The chemical grade where the purity varies between 90 to 95% is normally directed to other uses. A complete process flow diagram for a typical propylene separation unit applying heat pump configuration is presented in Figure 16.

Figure 16 – Typical Process Flow Diagram for a FCC Propylene Separation Unit Applying Heat Pump Configuration

The LPG from FCC unit is pumped to a depropanizer column where the light fraction (essentially a mixture of propane and propylene) is recovered in the top of the column and sent to a deethanizer column while the bottom (butanes) is pumped to LPG or gasoline pool, according to the refining configuration. The top stream of the deethanizer column (lighter fraction) is sent back to FCC where is incorporated to refinery fuel gas pool, or in some cases can be directed to petrochemical plants to recover the light olefins (mainly ethylene) present in the stream while the bottom of the deethanizer column is pumped to the C3 splitter column, where the separation of propane x propylene is carried out. The propane recovered in the bottom of the C3 splitter is sent to LPG pool where the propylene is sent to propylene storage park. The feed stream passes through a caustic wash treating aiming to remove some contaminants that can lead to deleterious effect to petrochemical processes, an example is the carbonyl sulfide (COS) that can be produced in the FCC (through the reaction between CO and S in the Riser).

Naphtha Steam Cracking Process – More Olefins and Less Fuels

           The Steam cracking process has a fundamental role in the petrochemical industry, nowadays the most part of light olefins light ethylene and propylene is produced through steam cracking route. The steam cracking consists of a thermal cracking process that can use gas or naphtha to produce olefins, in this review we will describe the naphtha steam cracking process.

           The naphtha to steam cracking is composed basically of straight run naphtha from crude oil distillation units, normally to meet the requirements as petrochemical naphtha the stream needs to present high paraffin content (higher than 66 %). Figure 17 presents a typical steam cracking unit applying naphtha as raw material to produce olefins.

Figure 17 – Typical Naphtha Steam Cracking Unit (Encyclopedia of Hydrocarbons, 2006)

Due to his relevance, great technology developers have dedicated his efforts to improve the steam cracking technologies over the years, especially related to the steam cracking furnaces. Companies like Stone & Webster, Lummus, KBR, Linde, and Technip develop technologies to steam cracking process. One of the most known steam cracking technology is the SRT? process (Short Residence Time), developed by Lummus Company, that applies a reduce residence time to minimize the coking process and ensure higher operational lifecycle.

            The cracking reactions occurs in the furnace tubes, the main concern and limitation to operating lifecycle o steam cracking units is the coke formation in the furnace tubes. The reactions carry out under high temperatures, between 500 oC to 700 oC according to the characteristics of the feed. For heavier feeds like gas oil, is applied lower temperature aiming to minimize the coke formation, the combination of high temperatures and low residence time are the main characteristic of the steam cracking process. Despite be possible to operate with naphtha, nowadays the steam cracking operators have chosen to operate with ethane or LPG against naphtha due to the competitive prices related to the new sources of NGL (Natural Gas Liquid), despite this trend over the last years, in markets where is observed a gasoline surplus, naphtha can still an attractive alternative as feedstock to steam crackers.

Maximum Added Value to Naphtha – Integrated Refining Schemes

           Beyond the refining technologies quoted above, there are alternative solutions to minimize the naphtha production in the refining hardware. Refining hardware relying on FCC units can operate and severer conditions aiming to minimize the naphtha yield and maximize the production of light olefins like propylene, furthermore, the cracked naphtha can be recycled to the FCC reactor aiming to raise, even more, the olefins yield. Another common optimization route, as aforementioned, is the installation of straight run naphtha splitters aiming to promote the separation into light and heavy naphtha, in this case, the light portion is sent to petrochemical market while the heavy portion is directed to diesel or jet fuel, according to the market demand.

            Recently, due to the increasing trend of reduction in transportation fuels demand, especially gasoline, the refiners have look for alternatives to ensure more added value to naphtha and the petrochemical sector appears like an attractive alternative. Licensors of refining technologies like UOP Company offers integrated refining schemes, as presented in Figure 18.

Figure 18 – Integrated Refining Scheme to Maximum Petrochemicals (UOP Company, 2019)

In the refining configuration presented in Figure 18, the synergy between catalytic reforming (aromatic complex) and steam cracking units ensures higher added value to the naphtha streams through the maximization of petrochemicals intermediates like aromatics and light olefins, being an interesting alternative to refiners inserted in markets with oversupply of gasoline.

          As aforementioned, face the current trend of reduction in transportation fuels demand at the global level, the capacity of maximum adding value to crude oil can be a competitive differential to refiners. Due to the high capital investment needed for the implementation that allows the conventional refinery to achieve the maximization of chemicals, capital efficiency becomes also an extremely important factor in the current competitive scenario as well as the operational flexibility related to the processed crude oil slate.  

           Although the advantages presented by closer integration between refining and petrochemical assets, it’s important to understand that the players of downstream industry are facing with a transitive period where, as presented in Figure 1, the transportation fuels are responsible by great part of the revenues. In this business scenario, it’s necessary to define a transition strategy where the economic sustainability achieved by the current status (transportation fuels) needs to be invested to build the future (maximize petrochemicals). Keep the eyes only in the future or only in the present can be a strategic mistake.

Conclusion

           The trend of reduction in transportation fuels demand is the main driver for closer integration between refining and petrochemical assets. Considering this scenario, the refining alternatives capable to minimize the naphtha production to gasoline can be an attractive way to ensure higher added to the refiner and closer integration with the petrochemical sector.

           Despite the relatively high capital investment, the installation of refining units capable to add value to the naphtha can be a significant competitive advantage among the refiners, especially those players inserted in market with gasoline surplus.

References:

Deloitte Company. The Future of Petrochemicals: Growth Surrounded by Uncertainties, 2019.

Encyclopedia of Hydrocarbons (ENI), Volume II – Refining and Petrochemicals (2006).

GARY, J. H.; HANDWERK, G. E. Petroleum Refining – Technology and Economics.4th ed. Marcel Dekker., 2001.

LAMBERT, N.; OGASAWARA, I.; ABBA, I.; REDHWI, H.; SANTNER, C. HS-FCC for Propylene: Concept to Commercial Operation. PTQ Magazine, 2014.

MALLER, A.; GBORDZOE, E. High Severity Fluidized Catalytic Cracking (HS-FCC?): From concept to commercialization – Technip Stone & Webster Technical Presentation to REFCOMM?, 2016.

OYEKAN, S.O. Catalytic Naphtha Reforming Process. 1st ed. CRC Press, 2019.

Refinery-Petrochemical Integration (Downstream SME Knowledge Share). Wood Mackenzie Presentation, 2019

SARIN, A.K. – Integrating Refinery with Petrochemicals: Advanced Technological Solutions for Synergy and Improved Profitability – Presented at Global Refining & Petrochemicals Congress (Mumbai, India), 2017.

SILVA, M. W. – More Petrochemicals with Less Capital Spending. PTQ Magazine, 2020.

TALLMAN, M. J.; ENG, C.; SUN, C.; PARK, D. S. - Naphtha Cracking for Light Olefins Production. PTQ Magazine, 2010.

VU, T.; RITCHIE, J. Naphtha Complex Optimization for Petrochemical Production, UOP Company, 2019.

ZHOU, T.; BAARS, F. Catalytic Reforming Options and Practices. PTQ Magazine, 2010. 

Dr. Marcio Wagner da Silva is Process Engineer and Project Manager focusing on Crude Oil Refining Industry based in S?o José dos Campos, Brazil. Bachelor’s in chemical engineering from University of Maringa (UEM), Brazil and PhD. in Chemical Engineering from University of Campinas (UNICAMP), Brazil. Has extensive experience in research, design and construction to oil and gas industry including developing and coordinating projects to operational improvements and debottlenecking to bottom barrel units, moreover Dr. Marcio Wagner have MBA in Project Management from Federal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ) and is certified in Business from Getulio Vargas Foundation (FGV).