Do LNG tanks at LNG receiving stations require accident ponds?
Thread Content
Do LNG tanks at LNG receiving stations require accident ponds? “Code for Design of Natural Gas Liquefaction Plants 13.2.4 In recent years, petrochemical companies have frequently caused water pollution due to leakage incidents, prompting relevant authorities to establish a series of regulations and guidelines regarding the collection and treatment of waste liquids and wastewater resulting from such accidents. However, natural gas liquefaction plants differ from other petrochemical enterprises in that both their raw materials and products are clean substances. Natural gas has good volatility and diffusibility; in the event of a leak, it does not remain in liquid form for long, nor does it mix with water when fire suppression systems are activated. Therefore, LNG storage areas do not generate waste liquids or wastewater containing pollutants in the event of leaks or fires. ” According to this view, is it not necessary to have an accident pool?
The accident pool is definitely open, and once LNG leaks, it will vaporize in large quantities; it’s unlikely to stay inside the accident pool. So personally, I don’t think it’s necessary. It’s fine as long as it has the feeling of properly collecting rainwater.
Yes, the existing receiving stations in the country are all equipped with storage tanks and accident collection ponds
It’s not necessary; pay attention to the premise – it’s mainly to prevent water pollution. LNG will vaporize in case of a leak, so this problem won’t arise. Moreover, LNG is extremely dangerous if it leaks; it should be vaporized within a confined area, and it’s best not to use any substances that could cause fragmentation
You all didn’t look carefully; the first thing needed is an accident pool. Because the accident pool needs to take into account all the process equipment in the plant. It’s not just the tank area. The refrigerant you use, along with the heavy hydrocarbons, sulfides, and other oils that are released, all constitute pollutants. Second: The title posted by the original poster makes it clear that it is not necessary in the tank area; the tank area already has dikes in place that are sufficient for containing accidents. If those are not adequate, then an accident pool should be considered. Third: After an LNG leak, most of it does not vaporize and remains in liquid form inside the containment structure. It will simply vaporize rapidly after initial leakage. Therefore, the leaked LNG must be collected. Put another way, he used the cofferdam as an accident pool as well.
I have been in contact with fully enclosed LNG storage tanks, which are equipped with collection tanks for capturing small amounts of leakage; these collection tanks are not as large as those used in oil tanks in the event of accidents
LNG does not vaporize immediately; it remains in liquid form. A collection tank needs to be installed in the storage area to capture this liquid, but the tank must not contain any water, as LNG can explode when it comes into contact with water!
Then may I ask, when calculating the size of the accident liquid storage tank, does the LNG tank farm also need to be taken into consideration? If the tank area is the part of the facility that requires the most fire-fighting water, then when determining the size of the accident pool, should only the fire-fighting wastewater and rainwater from the tank area be taken into consideration, or should the leakage volume from the largest tank in the area also be considered, along with the fire-fighting wastewater and rainwater?
What determines the size of that collection tank? If it’s a small leak, it should all vaporize; only in the case of a large leak will it not vaporize immediately, and a collection tank is needed
An accident collection tank is necessary, and there are also specifications regarding its size.