Refining Community Logo

process licensor DCU

Home Forums Coking process licensor DCU

This topic contains 13 replies, has 2 voices, and was last updated by  Charles Randall 9 years, 1 month ago.

  • Author
    Posts
  • #2814

    Freddy Martinez
    Participant

    can some one list out who all are the process licensors for DCU

  • #5859

    Charles Randall
    Participant

    Listing “ALL” Delayed Coke Unit  process licensors is a tall order since nearly all the major refiners or process unit vendors have developed patents on improvements in one aspects or are of DCU.
     
    But some of the major players are Foster Wheeler, ConocoPhillips, Sinopec Engineering, ExxonMobil, CB&I/Lummus, Petrobras and Bechtel or ABB.
     
    Foster Wheeler sites over 80 refineries it has licensed from 1977-2009 (I have only counted 62 thusfar but some might be drum replacements & licensing that are not on their contract list and they have not posted all cokers still in Planning/Feed process for 2010-2015 yet).
     
    ConocoPhillips has over 47 refineries it has licensed since 1982-2009 (their site has list but like FW some next cycle are not posted yet) and they also operate over 15 of their own coking refineries which use or were converted to use DCU after being acquired.
     
    ExxonMobil has Fluid/Flexicoking continous process which they have licensed in over 22 refineries (~9 now S/D, 6 are Flexicokers counting new Hellenic coker 2008, 7 are Fluid cokers – including the 3 upgrade Fluid cokers at Syncrude).
    They also have some patents on the DCU process (ie Mobils waste oil injection) but not on full DCU coking process.
     
    Sinopec Engineering has DCU process which they have done on nearly all the Chinese Government owned refineries for Sinopec/ PetroChina which counts over 43 DCU sites (may also have done it for the nearly 44 independent coking refineries but I am not sure about that).  However many of the new Joint Venture refineries with MidEast or global refiners are using some the western DCU licensors now. 
     
    Petrobras developed their own DCU process in Brazil for many of their own existing DCU units (~5 cokers) and few to other countries but several of newly completed or now in EPC process will be using either FW or COP licenses.
     
    Several other global refineries like Shell, Chevron, Total, and ect also have patents on some aspect of the DCU process or a combined process using one alternate process to coking. But I do not believe they are providing a complete DCU process license in competition with major players.
     
    CB&I/Lummus has their own DCU process now – CBI was major coke drum supplier previously and they acquired Lummus which also had a DCU process the combined company became more active in this area. I am not sure of total Lummus licenses but believe it is on order of XOM or Petrobras count.
     
    Many of the Engineering or EPC companies like Bechtel (sometimes partner with COP), ABB, Fluor and others sometimes also do DCU process license but do not comprimise their relationship with the major DCU licensors.
     
    CB&I (since 1969 ~120 drums) , SHI (Sumitomo Heavy Industries ~160 drums since 1985) have been the major coke drum suppliers with newcomers like Mangiarotti (6 drums since 2000) now providing coke drums for process.
     
    Hope this helps
    Regards
     
     
     
     

  • #5851

    Anonymous

    To add and clarify some of the information posted on DCU process licensors….
     
    Lummus Technology has over 70 years of experience in the design of delayed coking units. Our designs are based on the continuous refinement of the technology utilizing accumulated data and feedback from more than 60 commercial/installations processing a variety of feedstocks and meeting various product goals including fuel coke, anode coke, and various grades of needle coke. Since 1990, Lummus has completed more than 30 DCU projects and more than 20 grass-roots licensed units.  These projects included advanced features for personnel safety and efficient designs to minimize investment and operating costs while maintaining operating flexibility.
     
    Lummus also designs and supplies the essential heat transfer equipment for the DCU.  Lummus Heaters and Helixchangers have proven reliability and performance not only in the Lummus licensed DCUs, but in numerous cokers and other process units throughout the global refining industry.
     
    As noted, the CB&I parent of Lummus is one of the largest coke drum suppliers in the world.  Their design advances — namely the vertical plate coke drum and the T-Rex skirt-to-shell attachment design — have established major improvements in coke drum reliability and operating life.

  • #5850

    Charles Randall
    Participant

    Thanks to CBI/Lummus guest who posted the information on about DCU process licensors & background – most other the top players listed can also make the same sort of brochure / advertisement claims about years of experience in design coking units, accumulated commercial data feedback from operating units and involvements in many coking projects outside their coke licensing ….including a lot of those integrated companies mentioned but not credited with doing coke licensing. (Course we would soon run out of space).
     
    The key piece of information I see relating to coke licensing question is that Lummus/CBI-Lummus has done ~20 DCU process licensed units (my estimate/SWAG had been somewhere between 5-22). 
     
    While the 30 DCU projects & feedback from the 60 DCU installation is good info – they weren’t licensed by CBI-Lummus and could be missleading. No one should doubt that any of the companies I mentioned are long time players with a lot depth in Coking areas.
    Regards
     
     

  • #5849

    Anonymous

    Apparently you did not fully appreciate my brief description of Lummus’s experience as a DCU licensor. Nevertheless it bares repeating, your numbers are way low and need updating.

  • #5847

    Charles Randall
    Participant

    CBI-Lummus Guest,
    It is an easy problem to solve if you do have better numbers then either put up or shut up about the count. All your competitors take bragging rights about how many delayed coke units that they have licensed for their coker technology & which ones they are. Whenever a company doesn’t and quotes a lot of related experience it is usually because they don’t have the numbers / a very large count and want to try level the field thru using related fields areas
     
    If the Lummus number is not 20 DCU process technology license you mentioned then what is your total? And for this total we don’t count Coker Furnace projects, Coker drum verticle plates, and all the other process tweaks – just the DCU Technology license on the coking process for whole unit?
     
    I am sure of my numbers & they dont leave you with lot room. I know there are just short of 230 coking “sites” Globably (counting Upgraders) and the companies I mentioned (including Lummus 20) total to about 218 DCU coke license. And there are about 20 that have older process technology from Russia/Romaina/Asia that will not be used in future or in revamps today that I didnt mention for that reason.  
     
    Now there is some overlap at sites where refineries changed from one supplier technology to another or had one newer units at mutiple coke unit site done by a competitor which might give few additional units but not enough for Lummus to claim 30-60 DCU technology licenses.  

  • #5605

    Anonymous

    Let me add Larsen & Toubro India in the list of COke Drum manufactured. They have supplied coke drums to both FW and ABB technologies.
    Prsently executing coke drums of 625MT each with FW techniology.
     

  • #5604

    Anonymous

    let the discussion run in a healthier environment. All we are discussing
    about the numbers. In my opinion numbers does not establish the quality
    of the technology. If there is clear difference, then only one will be able to
    sell the licence.
    We all know many factors plays when it comes to selection of technology.
     

  • #5603

    Anonymous

    Charlie,
     
    Can you tell me  how many licenses has been sold for the project which
    are yet to start. What I gather from the market – FW claims to be the leader in
    this field.

  • #5602

    Charles Randall
    Participant

    The discussion item was around companies that provide Delayed Coker License Technology not companies that make coke drums.

  • #5601

    Charles Randall
    Participant

    Guest – healthier environment.
    I totally agree which is why Registered sites were created so please post there instead.
     
    Guest – licenses for projects yet to start.
    Same answer as previous guest – post on Registered site. Info on future projects in non-EPC stages is confidential so cannot comment until its in public realm. FW and COP are top market & switch places on race track often but you would never be wrong calling FW a leader in Coker Technology field.

  • #4732

    Anonymous

    thnx

  • #4671

    Anonymous

    Charlie:
    I was wondering if you have an updated count of delayed coker licenses worldwide, since your 2010 dialog?

  • #4670

    Charles Randall
    Participant

    Guest – no I dont really track “Coker License” – I track coker projects but since the license leads installation of coking unit by at least 2-5 years before unit startup its good way firm up project list & coker count.
     
    When/if I give update on coking units it will be under registered coker section so you need sign up there also.
    Tracking got lot harder post 2009 since we had lot Drum manufacturing and Engineering-Procurement-Construciton (EPC) firms taker more active roll in coker license (hence lot discussion thread on this site).
    We also had ConocoPhillips hive off its Coking Technology & some of its people to Bechtel who was EPC company that used partner on COP for lot early drums ……… unfortunately they have yet to post even 2010
     
    COP coker license tables & several of 2010-2014 coker license have not been announced yet.
    CBI-Lummus doesnt really publish a “public” list of coker license – but does have the mixed project list for clients that I havent seen recently.  Make more complicated couple of China Government EPC-Coker license firms have gone global (Sinopec & CNPC) doing units in Sudan & Middle East in addition to JV projects in China. 
     
    As I mention in Refining section – the Oil & Gas WW Refinery summary tables on coking units has really gone to crap also. The Jan 2012 (2011 Capacity) tables US & WW are basically just same as last years with few of name changes on refinery sales/mergers……..which includes all those errors & omissions. China was good example where they only show ~44 Refineries (mostly Government) with 8 cokers and ~500MBD coker capacity. I’ve been chasing real numbers for about 3 years now which mentioned in last years recap where there are in fact ~87-92 coking refineries (~62 operating & 25 idle/partial idle) with 1.5-2.0 MMBD coker capacity/ 32MM mtpy petcoke capacity operating at 87% on government refineries & about 47% on independent refineries. Confirmation last year that petcoke production 2010 was 12MM mtpy & 2011 petcoke production was ~ 19.5MM mtpy!
     
    Even though 2011 was end of 2006-2011 coking cycle on new coker additions – many on EPC & Planning list were delayed into the new coker cycle starting 2012-2017 some carryover is typical (like this years Motiva Pt Arthur, BP Whiting & several others) …… for your purpose most of these coker license would already have been in the 2010 count since the license would have been sold back in 2006-2008 time frame.
    Sorry be vague but if this were easy – people would ask me …… and with so much one way communication at this site I’m not giving as many freebies anymore.
    Regards

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Refining Community