Jump to content

Featured Articles

Check out the latest featured articles.

File Library

Check out the latest downloads available in the File Library.

New Article

Product Viscosity vs. Shear

Featured File

3-Stage Propane Ref Performance

New Blog Entry

Steam Tracing Design- posted in Ankur's blog

Gv Co2 Removal Process

This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
4 replies to this topic
Share this topic:
| More

#1 Satyajit


    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 87 posts

Posted 29 February 2008 - 04:27 AM

Anybody has any experience in using Giammarco-vetrocoke process with Aresnic oxide as activator for CO2 removal . Recently I have been working for an old plant for the improvement in their system. They do face deposits in CO2 absorber top and bottom beds very often. It is true that Arsenic is not environmentally friendly but it has many advantages in terms of CO2 absorption. The cost of replacing Arsenic is too costly with very high payback period.
Can any one share his /her experiences on this: problems, troubleshooting, improvement etc.
Kind regards,

#2 Art Montemayor

Art Montemayor

    Gold Member

  • Admin
  • 5,481 posts

Posted 02 March 2008 - 03:44 PM


I believe you're being naive when you say "It is true that Arsenic is not environmentally friendly". I place much more importance and priority on my fellow human beings than on the environment. What you haven't said is that arsenic is a deadly POISON - and that's not the only reason that the Giammarco-Vetroke Process is obsolete. It was a "loser" from the outset and never was used by any one (that I know of) other than the Italian patent holder. It caused process problems from the beginning and never really delivered what it was said to be capable of. I personally have classed MEA above the G-V process in over-all CO2 removal efficiency. No one in the industry that I have known would ever dare to operate a G-V process.

I think you are trying to ride a dead horse and should seriously consider revamping your process to employ a different CO2 removal solution or re-design the entire process from the ground up.

Unless your company is out of funds and is unable to do what I state above, then you have to continue on with this obsolete process that is a very viable and dangerous hazard to operations personnel.

Good Luck -- and stay safe.

#3 pawan


    Gold Member

  • ChE Plus Subscriber
  • 162 posts

Posted 08 March 2008 - 04:24 AM

I agree with you reg 'As' as a deadly posion & do not recommend using it.

However GV process without As is as successful as MDEA process & is far better than handling of MEA process. I have been in both units.

Currently V2O5 + DEA combination used in GV solutions as activator & promoter ( Though I am loosing my memory in this younger age).

The energy performance parameters are so comparable that a complete retrofit of an existing plant is not viable unless its too Old (Obviosuly As using plant will be too old So it will be useful for them to switch over to better version). However Capital needs may prefer switching to V2O5/DEA based GV against MDEA process.

I will not suggest MEA systems bcoz of hell lot of problems related to corrosion & iron pickup in the system. Also they are not so energy efficient.

If U need to know more for ammonia plant CO2 system U can go thru my article on my blog.

#4 Satyajit


    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 87 posts

Posted 12 March 2008 - 03:51 AM

Thanks Mr Art Montemayor and Mr Pawan for all the feedbacks. I do agree with you on the concerns expressed by you. I have been in ammonia industries over 20 years and have the experiences of working in almost all different types of processes like benfield,UOP LO heat, GV,AMDEA,MEA,Rectisol,water scrubbing,methanol wash,PSA etc. But at certain moments, economic feasibility may not allow somebody to change the system overnight considering the plant's life and payback period. I do agree for a swap to MDEA system. But again, no system is full proof and had pros and cons.
Kind regards,

#5 pawan


    Gold Member

  • ChE Plus Subscriber
  • 162 posts

Posted 12 March 2008 - 11:08 PM

U r 100% right Stayajit Ji,
Thats what I said.
Deposits may be due to some other impurities which are reacting with CO2 & may be forming carbonates.

Similar Topics