FCC Catalyst: Cost-Cutting vs. Value-Add
The business cycle beckons, reminding refiners that staying competitive means keeping costs in check. As the tide pulls back, every line item comes under scrutiny, and engineers are called on to use all their skills to navigate the waters effectively. Catalyst and chemicals are always among the first areas to be reviewed more closely during these cycles.
Fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) catalyst is one such cost that demands evaluation. A 30 thousand barrels/day FCC unit can use 4-5 tons/day depending on feed quality, which adds up to a yearly budget of over $6 million. This number will get some attention when efforts are underway to reduce dollars-per-barrel costs. For a 140 thousand barrels/day refinery, this is roughly $0.12/bbl of crude.
And so, how do you answer to the inevitable question from the management team: Does the unit have to use so much catalyst?
If microactivity test (MAT) activity is reduced by 2% on the unit, with all other things being equal:
- Catalyst usage drops by ~1 ton/day
- C3+ liquid volume yield (LVY) decreases by 0.2%
- Conversion is reduced by ~1.6%
- Regenerator bed temperature goes down by ~15°F
- At $60/bbl crude, the lost incremental volume swell (valued at crude) is $1.26 million/year – and if the value of the lost incremental product is closer to 70/30 gasoline/diesel, the volume swell is more like ~$2 million/year
- At $3500/ton of catalyst, the cost is reduced by $1.22 million/year
With a good linear programming (LP) model, the planning engineer can quickly answer this for the management team. Such a model can also see the impacts of feed quality when the pressure is to lower feedstock costs.
What are the systemic impacts of this change across the refinery? With a good unit monitoring program, the unit engineer can answer this quickly. For example, the unit may have recently experienced a period when the catalyst loader malfunctioned and real yield loss was identified quickly. Using a kinetic model to support unit monitoring can pay dividends in troubleshooting as well as fielding the “cost vs. value” question. Catalyst reformulation is another area that benefits from having a well-monitored unit and can add significant value to an FCC operation.
Without an effective way to address these types of benefit-related questions, the site is left with the need to reduce costs now, which can lead to value destruction.
This example illustrates many of questions that may be raised when evaluating cost reduction without losing value. Sites with up-to-date LP models and robust unit monitoring programs will be better prepared answer these critical questions, and others like them.
Are the programs and systems at your site ready to handle a downturn? Maybe it’s time to sharpen your tools with an assurance review from Becht. Contact us to find out how.
Like what you just read? Join our email list for more expert insights and industry updates.
