Using the shell dry coal powder gasification technology to produce 300,000 tons of synthetic ammonia without urea production – is 1.4 billion sufficient as capital investment?

The list is considered confidential company information and cannot be provided. However, I can give you a brief comparison: among SHELL’s top five projects, one involves the complete construction of a facility ranging from the gasifier to the ammonia synthesis unit; the ammonia synthesis equipment in this project is mainly second-hand, and the total investment for this project exceeds 1.5 billion yuan. Moreover, those were prices from a few years ago; considering the sharp rise in costs of various items such as raw materials (especially imported special alloys widely used in SHELL furnaces) and labor, the original investment amount is absolutely unaffordable nowadays.

I agree with the opinion from the second floor: the investment in shell gasification furnace systems is currently over 700 million yuan. In terms of gasifier selection, currently in China, Shell gasifiers are used for gasification, but their operation cycle is short; due to the lack of backup gasifiers, continuous production cannot be achieved. It is necessary to investigate the current operating conditions of enterprises that have invested in shell gasifiers. See if using a shell gasifier is the most suitable option. Personally, I believe that using a water-coal slurry gasifier is superior to a Shell gasifier. The technical bottleneck that shell gasifiers currently cannot overcome is the carbon deposition on the inner surface of the heat exchange tubes in the waste heat boiler. The current solution is to use high-pressure nitrogen for purging, which requires a large amount of compression work.

The list of equipment is classified information; it’s unlikely to be found online. For the current investment level of 300,000 tons per year, the cost for implementing drying in the SHELL gasification process (that is, before the raw gas is produced) is generally around 800–900 million. If the quality of the coal is poor and the drying costs are high, the investment amount will increase further; therefore, even without taking into account the costs associated with urea production, 1.4 billion is not sufficient. It is estimated to be around 2 billion

The investment in gasification needs to be re-evaluated. It was said at the time that the renovation of the Dongting Nitrogen Fertilizer Plant would cost only 1.13 billion, but only the boss of Sinopec knows how much money was actually spent. They don’t say it now, for fear you’ll laugh your head off.

Investment alone is certainly not enough; the investment required for a SHELL gasifier was already estimated at 900 million in 2001. The conversion process alone costs at least 800 million, purification costs 230 million, ammonia synthesis requires another 150 million, not to mention the costs related to utility systems and land acquisition； Around 2 billion on the 4th floor is about right.

Currently, the prices of various raw materials are rising, labor costs are increasing as well, it’s becoming harder to acquire land, and investments in environmental protection measures are also getting higher. Therefore, depending on the manufacturing process chosen, the investment required can exceed 2 billion. In many cases, it’s not possible to rely entirely on official figures.

Currently, the operating cycle of Shell gasifiers used for gasification in China is not long; it is recommended to opt for other technologies

The GE coal-water slurry gasification process uses a wet feed; in the gasifier, water accounting for 35–40% of the raw material volume must be heated and vaporized to 1350°C. Approximately 18.5% of the energy in the raw coal is consumed in this process. Coal-water slurry gasification requires 15% more oxygen compared to dry powder coal gasification, as well as 2–3% more raw coal. Based on the production of synthetic ammonia from 2,000 tons of raw coal per day, the cost per ton of ammonia increases by 66.5 yuan. Dry powder gasification also requires superheated steam to dehydrate the coal powder; taking 2,000 tons of raw coal per day as an example, and assuming a 10% dehydration rate of the coal, approximately 15 tons of superheated steam are needed per hour (at 80 yuan per ton), which results in an additional cost of 19 yuan per ton of ammonia. The multi-nozzle coal water slurry gasification technology has raw material consumption rates that are higher than those of Shell’s gasification method, but lower than those of GE’s coal water slurry gasification method. At present, China’s multi-nozzle gasifiers achieve a 2.2% reduction in coal consumption compared to GE’s gasifiers ； An 8% reduction in oxygen consumption is worth further attention. The effective gas composition (H2+CO) in Shell gasification is about 90%, whereas that in GE gasification is about 80%. The typical composition of syngas produced by Shell gasification and GE gasification is shown in the gas composition comparison table. Comparison table of gas composition. Typical components of syngas at the outlet of the gasifier: vol%. Shell powder coal gasification, GE water-coal slurry gasification: H2 – 28.18%, 34.00%; CO – 61.12%, 45.12%; CO2 – 3.8%, 18.55%; H2S – 1.55%, 1.55%; N2 – 5.23%, 0.45%; Ar – 0.12%, 0.14%; CH4 – 0.10%. The composition of the effective gas produced by the two processes differs by 10%, and based on this figure alone, it is clear that dry powder coal gasification is superior. However, the water vapor generated by GE coal-water slurry gasification actually undergoes transformation reactions within the gasifier. Therefore, the syngas from GE water-coal slurry gasification has a lower CO content, resulting in a lower CO conversion load in subsequent processes compared to Shell pulverized coal gasification. In the coal slurry gasification process combined with water cooling, the water-to-gas ratio at the exit of the gasification unit is 1.4. Assuming a daily processing capacity of 2000 tons of raw coal, this corresponds to 150 tons of saturated steam per hour; Shell gasification generates 100 tons of medium-pressure steam, with a water-to-gas ratio of 1.1. Therefore, the water-coal slurry and water-quenching processes generate 50 tons more steam than the Shell gasification process, which is advantageous for the production of synthetic ammonia and hydrogen. Placing the shift reaction first is advantageous for the production of synthetic ammonia and methanol synthesis gas, as it allows for the reduction of the number of shift reactors and thus saves on capital investment. However, it has an adverse effect on the production of carbonyl synthesis gas. In shell powder coal gasification, high-pressure N2 is used to transport the coal powder, resulting in a high N2 content in the syngas, which is also unfavorable for the production of synthetic ammonia and methanol synthesis gas. In the combined heat and power plants in the Netherlands that use the Shell powder gasification process, the syngas produced is mainly used for generating electricity via gas turbines; therefore, a high content of useful gases in the syngas is required. Therefore, it is not possible to simply judge the superiority or inferiority of a technology based on some consumption metrics; its applicable scenarios also need to be taken into account. Additionally, there is the issue of pressure levels; currently, GE’s water-coal slurry gasification units come in industrial versions with pressures of 45 kg/cm2, 65 kg/cm2, and 87 kg/cm2, while Shell’s powder coal gasification units have a maximum design pressure of 40 kg/cm2. For methanol synthesis, it is more economical to use a gas generation system with a pressure level of 65 kg/cm2; a single recycle compressor is sufficient to meet the requirements of the low-pressure synthesis process. For existing plants of the 87 kg/cm2 class that use residue oil or natural gas as feedstocks, it is more reasonable to modify the feedstock by opting for water-coal slurry gasification. Therefore, the selection of the gasification process should be based on the intended use of the syngas, to ensure a proper connection between subsequent processes.

Choosing SHELL is simply an endless pit

It’s not enough. The original poster will know if they go to Yima, Henan and visit Kaixiang Chemical. It has 200,000 tons of methanol, produced via SHELL gas generation. So far, 1.5 billion has been invested, yet the car still hasn’t been properly launched. Can you produce 300,000 tons of synthetic ammonia?

About 2 billion would be needed just to get things running basically. The construction period should also be short.

It’s not even certain that the 300,000-ton synthetic ammonia plant owned by Shell can be built at 2 billion yuan; it would likely cost around 2.2 billion yuan. The gasification islands for shell require all equipment to be imported (with domestic processing involved), while some are processed in India before being shipped to China (Yuntianhua is an example of this). Those on the first floor, it’s better to think it over carefully – don’t get deceived, haha; otherwise it will be too late to cry (the boss will use you as a scapegoat).

This amount is far from enough for the shell