15/10/2012

Hi EMarket: Global Chemicals Industry!!

Hi EMarket Focus!! is on the Chemical Industry Projects By Region: Africa: Egypt;


Egyptian Indian Polyester (EIPET) is constructing a polyethylene terephthalate (PET) resin plant in the port town of Ain Sokhna, Egypt.
The plant broke ground in June 2011 and is expected to be completed by the end of 2012. The estimated cost of the project is $160m.
 
Facility layout diagram of EIPET's PET resin plant in Ain Sokhna.
"DTPL owns a 70% interest in the new plant while Echem and Enppi hold 23% and 7% respectively."
The manufacturing facility will produce 1,200t of PET resin a day and 420,000mt of PET plastic chips a year.
The products will be used to make packaging bottles for food and fast moving consumer goods (FMCG).
About 20% of the produce will be used locally and the remaining amount will be exported to European and North American markets. The plant is expected to generate $700m in revenues when fully operational.
The PET resin plant will contribute towards the local community by creating 800 jobs during construction and another 500 permanent jobs when fully operational. In addition, it will create foreign exchange reserves for Egypt.

Location of the polyethylene terephthalate (PET) resin plant;

The new facility is being constructed in sector two of the Eldorado Integrated Development and Free Zone, located northwest of the Suez Gulf. The facility was originally planned in 2010 to come up at Port Said.
The implications involved in obtaining approval from the Ministry of Defence has, however, prompted the company management to change the location and postpone construction until March 2011.
Political unrest in Egypt in 2011 resulted in further delays to the project.
The plant will come up on a 470x300m plot in the free zone.
The site is connected to the Red Sea coastal highway. Raw materials and products will be transported along the highway directly from the Ain Sokhna port located in the south of the industrial park.
The site comes under Category B of the International Finance Corporation's (IFC) environmental and social review procedures.
This means the facility may result in certain social and environmental issues which can be mitigated by following the given procedures and guidelines.
The plant will conform to generally recognised performance standards and Egyptian regulatory requirements.

EPC contractor

Oerlikon Barmag of Germany is the engineering, procurement and construction (EPC) contractor of the project. The contract was awarded in August 2010.

EIPET facility details;

The plant will include PET production units, two HTM heaters, four monoethylene glycol (MEG) tanks (20m diameter and 16m height), three chimneys and six PET chip storage silos (6m diameter and 32m height).
"Egyptian Indian Polyester (EIPET) is constructing a polyethylene terephthalate (PET) resin plant."
In addition to the main production building, the plant will have two administrative buildings, two utility buildings, a utility substation, two raw water and fire water tanks, high tension power room, two weighbridge rooms, two effluent treatment plants, two cooling towers and raw material and finished goods storage rooms.
The plant will consume 360,000t/y of purified terephthalic acid, 142,000t/y of MEG, 1100t/d of water, 67,200MWh/y of power from a local gas-fired power plant and 6000NM3/hr of natural gas from the national gas network for process heating.
During the process of PET resin production, the plant will generate 124t/d of waste water which will be treated and recycled for further use.
The other solid and hazardous waste resulting from the plant will be transported to the disposal centre in Alexandria for recycling and disposal.

Owners of the PET resin manufacturing plant

EIPET was formed in February 2008 as a joint venture between India's Dhunseri Petrochem and Tea (DPTL) and two Egyptian state-owned companies, Egyptian Petrochemicals Holding (Echem) and Engineering for the Petroleum and Process Industries (Enppi).
DTPL owns a 70% interest in the new plant while Echem and Enppi hold 23% and 7% respectively.
DTPL is the second largest manufacturer of PET resin in India and the new plant is its fir
st international venture.
The company also operates a 200,000 ton per annum (tpa) capacity plant in Haldia, India.

EIPET's production facility will manufacture 420,000t of PET chips a year:

Financing Egyptian-Indian Polyester's facility;

The project construction is being carried out from the loan proceeds of $35m approved by IFC in May 2011.
In addition, the Commercial International Bank and Ahli United Bank are also providing financial assistance through $65.5m of capital and $11.3m of working capital loans.

- "The Egyptian Propylene & Polypropylene Company (EPPC) propylene / polypropylene (PP) complex is located in Port Said in Egypt, about 170km northeast of Cairo".
In January 2007, Egyptian Propylene & Polypropylene Company announced it was to build a propylene / polypropylene (PP) complex in Port Said, Egypt.
The company invested $680m in the complex, which was expected to become operational during late 2009. The commissioning was, however, delayed and the complex began production in the second half of 2010.
- "Uhde's Star process technology is used by EPPC to convert propane into propylene.

Construction contract:

"The company invested $680m in the complex, which was expected to become operational during late 2009."
The turnkey contract for building the complex was awarded to Germany's Uhde at the end of 2006.
Along with the propylene and PP plant, each with a capacity of 350,000tpa, the complex also includes utilities and offsites, as well as air fractionation and refrigeration units.
The contract includes a technology licence, basic and detailed engineering, supply of equipment, construction, training of operating personnel and commissioning.

Propylene process technology;

Uhde provided its proprietary steam active reforming (Star) process technology which will be used for the commercial-scale production of propylene from the feedstock propane.
"The turnkey contract for building the complex was awarded to Germany's Uhde at the end of 2006."

Uhde's Star process is used for the dehydrogenation of light hydrocarbons such as propane to propylene or butane to butylenes.
Uhde said this project will mark the first time that the Star technology will be used for the commercial-scale production of propylene from propane.
Uhde originally acquired the Star process technology from US company Phillips Petroleum in 1999. Since that time Uhde has developed the technology further.

Polypropylene (PP) process technology;

Germany's Basell provided its Spheripol process technology for the 350,000tpa PP plant, which produces "a wide range of high-quality PP pellets".
The process is said to be the "world's most widely used technology" for the production of polypropylene. EPPC will supply the PP to both the domestic and export market.

- "Germany's Basell provided its Spheripol process technology for the 350,000tpa PP plant".

Feedstock and background;

Propane feedstock is sourced from Egypt's natural reserves.
EPPC is a 50:50 joint venture between Egypt's Oriental Petrochemicals Company and the state-owned Egyptian Petrochemicals Holding Company.
The PP pellets will have a wide range of market applications, including textiles, rigid flexible packaging, consumer goods and automotive. Products from EPPC's plant will meet domestic and export demands.

Hi Blog Translate

Hi Engineering Jobs!.

Hi Engineering Jobs!.
Hi Search Jobs >Industry Sector > Region > Job Function > Over 100's Of Jobs

Hi Wikipedia Search.

Search results

Hi Contact Form.

Name

Email *

Message *

Hi Source - Latest Category Technical Articles.

Hi Green Tip #4: Hi Size and Select Fans Near Their Peak Total Efficiency.

Even the most efficient fan models can operate inefficiently if improperly sized.Fans selected close to their peak total efficiency (pTE) will use less energy. The 2012 International Green Construction Code requires selections within 10% of peak efficiency, and ASHRAE Standard 90.1,

Energy Standard for Buildings Except Low-Rise Residential Buildings, is considering language that would require a 15% allowable range. If a fan is selected to operate more than 15 point below its peak efficiency, it is probably undersized to result in the lowest purchase price (first cost). The smaller, less-expense fan will have to run much faster with higher levels of internal turbulence than its larger cousin to meet the required air flow, thus consuming a lot more energy.The cost difference to select a larger fan closer to peak operating efficiency is very small when compared to the energy saved.

Simple payback for 10% selections is usually less than one year. Smaller fans operating faster will also require more maintenance and earlier replacement. Smaller fans generate more noise as well.Below is a table showing the output from a fan manufacturer's sizing and selection program. All of the fans in the table would "do the job" of providing the required airflow at the required pressure.

The fan sizes range from 18-inches in diameter to 36-in. Notice that as the fan diameter increases, the fan speed decreases, as does the fan power (expressed as "brake horsepower"). The red region of the table indicates poor fan selection practice - none of these fans have an actual total efficiency (at the airflow and pressure required) within 15 points of peak total efficiency. The green region indicates proper fan selection process - all have an actual total efficiency within 15 points of peak total efficiency.

Note that the 30-in. diameter fan consumes roughly half the power of the 18-in. fan. The lowest cost fan shown is probably the 20-in. fan, with an efficiency of 49%, 29 points off the peak. If this fan runs 6,000 hours per year at a utility rate of 10 cents per kwh, it will cost $4,300 a year to operate. A more efficient selection might be the 24-in. fan because it is "Class I" and complies with both ASHRAE 90.1 and the Green code requirements. It has an actual efficiency of 69%, 10 points less than the peak efficiency of 79%. This fan would cost $3,100 to operate, which is probably more than the fan itself costs. A more efficient 30 inch selection is only 1 point from its peak efficiency of 83% and will consume only $2,600 per year, saving $500 a year relative to a 24-in. fan, and $1,700 a year over the lowest cost fan. Generally, the difference in initial cost of the most efficient fan selection is paid back in less than 5 years over more common less efficient alternatives. Perhaps this observation will bring it home.

Most fans consume more each year in energy cost than they are worth. So, when you buy a fan, think of it as a liability, not an asset. Your objective should be to make the liability placed on those who will pay future energy bills as low as possible. The leverage implicit in choosing a larger, more efficient fan is much greater than most people appreciate. And fans last a long time – 20 years plus – so choose wisely.The bottom line is this. Right-sizing a fan can yield energy savings and generate a lot of operating cost savings for the facility owner or occupants for many, many years.

Hi Total Pageviews.