Applied Energy 88 (2011) 37823790

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Applied Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/apenergy

Abatement costs of CO2 emissions in the Brazilian oil rening sector

David A. Castelo Branco , Alexandre Szklo, Gabriel Gomes, Bruno S.M.C. Borba, Roberto Schaeffer
Energy Planning Program, Graduate School of Engineering, Federal University of Rio de Janeiro, Centro de Tecnologia, Bloco C, Sala 211, Cidade Universitria, Ilha do Fundo, Rio de Janeiro, RJ, 21941-972, Brazil

a r t i c l e

i n f o

a b s t r a c t
This study aims at estimating the abatement costs of CO2 emissions of the Brazilian oil rening sector. For greeneld reneries that will be built until 2030, mitigation options include the modication of rening schemes and efciency gains in processing units. For existing reneries and those already under construction, only mitigation options based on efciency gains in processing units are evaluated. The abatement cost of each mitigation option was determined on the basis of incremental costs compared with a reference scenario. Two discount rates were applied: one adopted by the Brazils government ofcial long term plan (8% p.a.), and another typically adopted by the private oil sector (15% p.a.). Findings indicate that reneries face high abatement costs. The cost of changing the processing scheme of greeneld plants reaches US$100/tCO2 at 15% p.a. discount rate. Even at 8% p.a. discount rate the abatement cost is higher than US$50/tCO2. The most promising alternative is thermal energy management, whose abatement cost equals US$20/tCO2 at 8% p.a. discount rate. However, private investors perceive this option at US$80/ tCO2, which is still high. This difference in cost indicates the need for public policies for promoting carbon mitigation measures in Brazilian oil reneries. 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Article history: Received 16 November 2010 Received in revised form 25 April 2011 Accepted 27 April 2011 Available online 18 May 2011 Keywords: Brazilian oil rening CO2 emissions Abatement costs

1. Introduction Reneries are intrinsically carbon dioxide (CO2) emitters. The rening activity involves stages of separation, which is not a thermodynamically spontaneous process [1]. It consumes a large amount of energy in reducing the carbon to hydrogen ratio (C/H2) and adding hydrogen (H2) [2]. Furthermore, the rening sector worldwide is facing challenges related to the increasing demand for ultra-specied oil products, despite the limited access to new sources of conventional oil [3,4]. Therefore, reners need to install and operate oil processing units that increase CO2 emissions in two ways: rst, due to their own energy consumption, and second, as a result of their H2 requirements [2]. The Brazilian oil rening sector includes new projects, designed to serve a growing market for medium distillate fuels and petrochemical products (typical of developing countries) and to absorb the foreseen increase in national oil production (typical of oil producer countries). Brazils petroleum rening sector currently presents 12 reneries, mainly concentrated in the southeast region of the country [5].1
Corresponding author. Tel.: +55 21 25628760; fax: +55 21 25628777.
E-mail address: davidbranco@ppe.ufrj.br (D.A. Castelo Branco). The Brazilian reneries are: REPLAN (SP) Paulnia renery; REDUC (RJ) Duque de Caxias renery; REGAP (MG) Gabriel Passos renery; RPBC (SP) Presidente Bernardes renery; RECAP (SP) Capuava renery; REVAP (SP) Henrique Lage renery; REFAP (RS) Alberto Pasqualini renery; RLAM (BA) Landulpho Alves renery; REMAN (AM) Manaus renery; LUBNOR (CE) Northeast Lubricants; REPAR (PR) Presidente Getlio Vargas renery; IPIRANGA Ipiranga renery S.A.
1

The number of reneries has not increased substantially over the past 30 years, and one small renery, Manguinhos, located in city of Rio de Janeiro, has stopped operations in the last decade. Petrobras, the Brazilian oil company, has however invested in extending its facilities and in increasing rening capacity since the inauguration of the Henrique Lage Renery in 1980, from 1.1 million barrels to 1.9 million barrels a calendar-day [5]. In 2005, the emissions from Brazilian reneries were estimated in 14 million tonnes of CO2e (Mt), which represents 5% of Brazils energy Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions.2 This scenario would change in the next years. Brazils Ofcial Long Term Energy Planindicates that the country will need at least seven more reneries by 2030 to cope with a growing domestic demand [7].3 The rst of these, constructed by Petrobras, is almost complete and start-up is forecast for 2012. The remaining units are still at the planning stage, with two of them scheduled to begin operations between 2014 and 2020. The remaining four are expected to come on stream between 2020 and 2030 [7]. It is worth noting that

2 According to Diringer [59], in 2005, the Brazils energy GHG emissions were around 362 MtCO2e. It is worth noting that GHG emissions from fuel combustion represent 16% of Brazils total GHG emissions, since most of it (around 58%) comes from deforestation [6]. 3 The EPE study [7] predicts an increase in demand for petroleum derivatives in Brazil of 3.4% per annum between 2005 and 2030, particularly for diesel and jet fuel, both of which are forecast to grow above average. On the other hand, the study conducted by [8] indicates an even greater demand for petrochemical products by 2020. Consumption of petrochemical products is growing rapidly, particularly for propane (7.2% per annum) and ethylene (5.7% per annum).

0306-2619/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.apenergy.2011.04.052

D.A. Castelo Branco et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 37823790

3783

for these four reneries the preliminary feasibility studies do not include yet any calculations of GHG emissions. In view of the potential impacts on climate change, Brazil has a responsibility to contribute actively to international efforts to stabilize GHG concentrations [9]. This underscores the importance of studying the special features and peculiarities of the Brazilian energy system and to plan its development on the basis of scene setting exercises focused on the emissions arising from the production and consumption of energy. In this way it will be possible to identify the potential for reducing emissions in the sector and the related costs of abatement. This study aims at estimating the average abatement costs (AAC) of CO2 emissions in the Brazilian oil rening sector in the 2030 horizon. The AAC of a project is by denition the difference between the cost in a reference scenario and the cost in a scenario with GHG mitigation (or a low carbon scenario), expressed in monetary terms per tonne (metric ton) of CO2 equivalent (US$/ tCO2e). The AAC could be seen as the carbon prices that would enable, from an economic standpoint, the implementation of the considered emission reduction measures. This method has been widely used in several studies to estimate the costs and potential abatements of different economic sectors in many countries, such as [1013]. The Brazilian rening sector was divided in this study into two parts: existing reneries, which includes the reneries in operation and two reneries already under construction; and the new rening, which includes all new reneries in the 2030 National Energy Plan [7]. The existing reneries group comprises reneries more rigid for innovations, because these reneries are already installed and there are even space limitations. Reneries under construction have its rening scheme already dened. Therefore, they were included in the group of existing reneries. On the other hand, for new reneries (not under construction), in their conceptual phase, there is still a certain degree of exibility in choosing processing units and alternative production routes. In this case, the most relevant result of the simulation is the choice of the rening scheme (or production routes) in light of a need to reduce GHG emissions. Therefore, analyzing the impact of CO2 emission costs on new projects in their design phase is very different from evaluating emission reduction alternatives to adapt or retrot existing facilities. For this purpose, we ran simulations of two complex renery congurations through a linear programming (LP) optimization model. The aim of this simulation was to determine the magnitude of the CO2 price necessary to signicantly change the emissions of the proposed congurations. Note that here the introduction of a carbon-emission price on conceptual reneries is similar to evaluating the costs of carbon abatement for different emissions limits. As the economic analysis indicates, at the boundary, Pigouvian taxes (such as a carbon tax) and the abatement costs converge [14]. The paper is organized as follows: the next section elaborates the countrys oil reneries carbon emissions inventory. Section 3 describes the mitigation measures considered, and Section 4 presents the two scenarios for estimating mitigation costs (baseline scenario and low carbon scenario). Section 5 presents the estimates of average abatement costs for each option listed in Section 3. Finally, Section 6 presents the concluding remarks of the study by analyzing the barriers to the implementation of the envisaged measures.

Table 1 Energy consumption prole. Groups Process heat (PH) Sources Fuel oil (FO) Renery gas (RG) FCC cokeb(FC) Natural gasc (NG) Total Hydrogen (HY) from natural gas Total Grid electricity (EG) Self-generated Electricityd(EO) Total
a a

% 27 17 14 42 100 100 100 24 76 100

Hydrogen (HY) Electricity (EE)

Includes consumption of fuel oil, vacuum residue and asphalt residue. b Product generated in the reaction of cracking and that is deposited on the catalyst. c Includes import/export of steam and consumption of LPG. d Includes electricity generated in shale plants.

consumption and elaborates the CO2 emissions inventory of all Brazilian reneries. The methodology applied is based on IPCC [16]. CO2 emissions were calculated using the energy consumed per barrel and the respective capacities of each process unit, for each renery, including the RENEST and COMPERJ reneries that are still under construction. COMPERJ was designed to consume initially 150,000 barrels per day of Marlin crude oil. Petrobras decided to expand the rening capacity to 165 thousand barrels per day (1st rening unit) plus a 2nd unit of rening with the same capacity (165 thousand barrels per day of oil). RENEST has a nominal capacity around 200,000 barrels/day and will use technology based on delayed coking. This rening scheme allows processing heavy oils, extracted primarily from the Brazilian Marlim oil eld (in the Campos Basin) and the Venezuelan Merey type oil [7]. The rst step of the inventory is based on the rening sector prole as of 2009. Additionally, an estimative of CO2 emissions in 2015 is performed considering that RENEST and COMPERJ will start their operation before that year. The rening proles for RENEST and COMPERJ are based on [5,17,18]. Reneries use different inputs as sources of energy for their processes and the prole of these inputs can vary signicantly among reneries. In this study, reneries carbon emissions were estimated using the average energy consumption prole of a Brazilian renery, REDUC, between 2000 and 2005. The electricity can be imported from the grid or can be produced in the renery. All hydrogen is considered to be obtained from the steam reforming of natural gas. Table 1 summarizes this information. The nal energy consumption gures for each renery unit were based on [1921]. The average energy consumption prole was applied to the total fuel and electricity consumption in each rening unit. The energy consumption (ECRU) of each rening unit, which is represented by Eq. (1), was divided into: energy consumption in the process (EC1), energy consumption as hydrogen (EC2) and energy consumption as electricity (EC3).

ECRUi kJ=barrel

X
j

ECj

i = AD, VD, FCC, RFCC, RC, HCC, CR, MTBE, DSF, HDTL, HDTQ, HDTN, HDTI, LUB, HDSG, HDSD, ALQ.4 j = PR, HY, EE 2. Co2 emissions in Brazilian oil reneries The Brazilian rening sector can be described as a typical cracking renery scheme [15]. This study estimates the energy
4 AD atmospheric distillation unit; VD vacuum distillation unit; FCC uid catalytic cracking unit; RFCC residue uid catalytic cracking unit, RC catalytic reforming, HCC hydrocracking unit, CR delayed coking, HDTL hydrotreating unit, LUB lubricants, HDS hydrodesulfurization unit, ALQ alquilation unit.

3784

D.A. Castelo Branco et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 37823790

Table 2 Estimation of carbon emissions for the years 2009 and 2015. Emissions Nominal capacity (millions of barrel/year)a Energy consumption (TJ/year)b kg CO2/barrel 2009 764.4 214.702 22.3 2015 768.9 396.473 28.5

3. GHG emissions mitigation measures All measures considered in this paper are directly related to oil rening i.e. are located inside battery limits of oil renery plants (for example, the production of liquid biofuels to supplement or replace petroleum products are not considered). GHG emissions mitigation measures are divided into two groups. The rst set of mitigation options includes measures that can be adopted by existing rening facilities. The second set of mitigation options involves the optimization of a possible new renery in Brazil with the aim of minimizing its production costs (including an additional cost for carbon emissions) to satisfy a specic demand in the Brazilian market. The average abatement cost of each mitigation option was determined on the basis of incremental costs compared with a baseline scenario at two discount rates: the one adopted by the Brazilian Ofcial Long Term Plan (8% p.a.) [7]; and the one typically adopted by the private oil sector (15% p.a.), which provides the private agents opportunity cost. 3.1. Mitigation options for existing reneries According to Petrick and Pellegrino [24], it is possible over the medium to long term to establish a target for reducing energy use in existing reneries by between 15% and 20% (and, consequently, CO2 emissions). The recovery and reuse of thermal losses is the main option in the short run, while mitigating incrustation and fouling are of crucial importance over the medium to long term. Therefore, based on [25], two basic options for carbon emissions mitigation in existing Brazilian facilities are considered: thermal energy management and fouling mitigation.6 Thermal energy management is the main option for saving fuels in Brazilian existing reneries in the short term. Although chemical plants in Brazil and other parts of the world have already successfully adopted thermal energy management techniques, there are no large efforts in research and development associated to this option [26]. The Brazilian reneries have an impressive fuel savings potential as can be noted by their average Solomon Index (EII) values, which totaled 101, 105 and 106 in 2004, 2005, and 2006, respectively [27]. The Solomon Index EII is used to evaluate the energy efciency of reneries around the world, by comparing a given renery with a reference plant with the same level of technological complexity (the reference renery is normalized as 100). An index higher than 100 indicates that the given renery has a higher primary energy consumption than the reference renery. For example, between 2004 and 2006 the average EII values hovered around 94 and 95 for exxon [28], 95 and 96 for BP [29], and 84 and 85 for shell [30]. Several measures associated with thermal energy management were considered to be implemented in the Brazilian oil reneries:  Use of low quality exhaust heat in refrigeration cycles by absorption [31].  Use of thermal residues for preheating feedstock (for example recovery systems can recover the heat produced in coking processes).  Design of energy and/or mass (water and hydrogen) integration basically employing the Pinch Techniques [32,33]; the use of Pinch Techniques provides energy savings in reneries of 20% [24]. According to [32,33], typical values would be between 10% and 25% (as a percentage of total fuel consumption only).  Improving burners through better burning control [34].
6 Other innovative options for mitigating carbon emissions, which are based on technologies under development, are discussed in the last section of this paper, but are not valued in terms of abatement costs.

a The average utilization factor of nominal processing capacity of Brazilian rening was 88% in 2008 [22]. b Based on [15,1921,23].

The energy consumption (ECj) was separated according to the composition of energy feedstock, which was provided by Table 1 (see Eq. (2)):

ECj kJ=barrel

X
k

ECk

k FO; RG; FC; NG; HY; EG; EO

where ECFO (kJ/barrel) = energy consumption from fuel oil, ECRG (kJ/ barrel) = energy consumption from renery gas, ECFC (kJ/barrel) = energy consumption from FCC coke, ECNG (kJ/barrel) = energy consumption from natural gas, ECHY (kJ/barrel) = energy consumption to produce hydrogen, ECEG (kJ/barrel) = energy consumption from grid electricity, ECEO (kJ/barrel) = energy consumption from self-generated electricity. CO2 emissions (EMi) from each rening unit are represented by Eq. (3). Emission factors (EF) used to calculate EMi for each unit derives from IPCC [16]. Besides, all hydrogen was assumed to be produced by natural gas reforming process. For this reason the emission factor of natural gas was used to hydrogen production.

EMitCO2 =m3

X
k

ECk EFk

i = AD, VD, FCC, RFCC, RC, HCC, CR, MTBE, DSF, HDTL, HDTQ, HDTN, HDTI, LUB, HDSG, HDSD, ALQ.

k FO; RG; FC; NG; EG; EO:

CO2 Emissions of each Brazilian renery (EMref) is represented by Eq. (4).

EMref tCO2 =m3

X
i

EMi

i = AD, VD, FCC, RFCC, RC, HCC, CR, MTBE, DSF, HDTL, HDTQ, HDTN, HDTI, LUB, HDSG, HDSD, ALQ. Finally, CO2 Total Emissions of Brazilian rening sector (EMtotal) is estimated by the sum of the each renery emission, represented by Eq. (5).

EMtotal tCO2 =m3

X
k

EMk

k = REDUC, RPBC, RECAP, REVAP, REFAP, REGAP, REPLAN, RLAM, REMAN, LUBNOR, REPAR, IPIRANGA, RENEST, COMPERJ.5 The estimation of carbon emissions is presented in Table 2. Based on these results, measures to reduce GHG emissions in the Brazilian rening sector are suggested.
5 COMPERJ (RJ) petrochemical renery; RENEST (PE) Abreu e Lima renery; REPLAN (SP) Paulnia renery; REDUC (RJ) Duque de Caxias renery; REGAP (MG) Gabriel Passos renery; RPBC (SP) Presidente Bernardes renery; RECAP (SP) Capuava renery; REVAP (SP) Henrique Lage renery; REFAP (RS) Alberto Pasqualini renery; RLAM (BA) LandulphoAlves renery; REMAN (AM) Manaus renery; LUBNOR (CE) Northeast Lubricants; REPAR (PR) PresidenteGetlio Vargas renery; IPIRANGA Ipiranga renery S.A.

D.A. Castelo Branco et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 37823790

3785

 Direct feeding of intermediate products to the processes, without cooling and storage, aiming at recovering part of the residual heat in these products. For example, the thermal energy of the products of the distillation column can be directly recovered in the downstream units, thereby avoiding storage and cooling [23].  Using heat pumps [35].  Increasing turbulence in the heat exchange surfaces.  Adoption of a steam management system [35]. For example, the quality of steam used in stripping and vacuum generation is normally lost in the cooling water or wasted to the atmosphere. Normally steam used for stripping ensures the ashpoint temperature and improves the fractioning of products, increasing the yield of the rening units. Two studies developed in the Brazilian REPLAN renery [31,36] and a study undertaken in the Brazilian REDUC renery [37] analyze the technical potential for using Pinch Techniques in Brazil in reneries for energy (energy integration) and water (mass integration). These studies conrm that energy and mass integration networks are feasible options over the short term for the two Brazilian reneries. However, not all the hot waste streams are available for heat exchange. Volatile products that need to be rapidly cooled by water quench, intermittent streams [31] and streams containing suspended solids (e.g. catalysts) can be cited as examples. Finally, some streams in inaccessible parts of the renery [31] are difcult to recover (e.g. FCC exhaust gases). According to Moreira et al. [38], which assessed a thermal energy management network for a Brazilian renery, around 60% of the fuel consumption in the distillation tower can be saved. Considering the estimated share of atmospheric distillation units in the nal energy consumption of Brazilian, this would correspond to a fuel savings of approximately 17%. The second group of measures assessed for existing Brazilian reneries includes the control of fouling at heat exchangers. Besides reducing the area of heat exchangers fouling causes maintenance problems and risk of accidents. Heat exchange networks with incrustations have approach temperatures higher than 40 C [33] when typical values in reneries hover between 10 C and 20 C. Estimates done in the early 1980s for a typical renery of its period with a primary processing capacity of 100 thousand barrels per day suggest that fuel consumption could be 30% less in the atmospheric distillation column by controlling fouling in the heat exchangers [39]. A more recent study, however, pointed to a lower potential. Although still signicant, the reduction was only 10% [40]. Yet, incrustation in heat exchange networks is a bottleneck impeding the application of heat recovery systems. The gains achieved from reducing fuel consumption by controlling incrustation were estimated at 2% for reneries in the United States [24]. This percentage was similar to that obtained by [41] for Brazil. Meanwhile, Panchal and Huangfu [42] analyzed the effects of incrustation in a 100 kbpd atmospheric distillation column and found an additional energy consumption of 13.0 MJ per barrel processed (or around 3.4% of specic energy consumption in Brazilian reneries). In sum, adopting the estimates of [25], the potential fuel savings of each option considered to be installed in Brazilian existing reneries are resumed in Table 3. 3.2. Mitigation options for greeneld reneries Our analysis was based on the results obtained by the simulation of [43] through a linear programming model representing two types of new reneries in Brazil: a renery with focus on diesel and other with focus on petrochemicals. These are precisely the two reneries that are listed in Brazils Ofcial Energy Plan [7].

Table 3 Fuel savings for existing facilities. Options Thermal energy management Fouling mitigation Fuel savings (%) 15 2

The model is a static, single-renery LP, based on the Generateur de Matrices pour ModelesEnergie (GEMME), from the Institute Frances du Ptrole (IFP). GEMME was modied to consider the rening congurations proposed by [43], their respective yields from processing Brazilian crude oils, and the output of rened products suitable for consumption in the Brazilian market. The optimization model considered monetary values for the cost of CO2 emissions in order to seek viable solutions for avoiding such emissions. Fig. 1 presents in simplied form the main units pre-dened in the model. The following procedure was adopted7: 1. Adjustment of the linear programming model for two basic rening congurations. 2. Optimization of these two congurations without considering carbon prices. 3. Optimization of the two congurations with the insertion of a carbon price (US$25/tCO2, US$50/tCO2, US$100/tCO2 and US $150/CO2). The outputs of the reneries were kept unaltered in terms of products (quantity and quality). 4. Identication of the carbon price that altered the renery scheme in the optimized model. The most relevant result of the simulation was the choice of the rening schemes (or the routes to obtain oil products) for new reneries, at different carbon prices. The ndings of the optimization model indicated that the renery schemes changed in the same direction for both discount rates adopted in our study. However, the abatement cost at 8% p.a. was 58 US$/tCO2, while it was 100 US$/tCO2 at 15% p.a. Therefore, we found that the technical possibilities to change the renery schemes without altering the renery yield are limited, mainly focusing on replacing FCC units by hydrocracking ones and switching fuels with high carbon content. In sum, abatement costs changed according to the discount rates adopted, but not because of the choice of a different scheme at a lower (or a higher) discount rate. The 100 US$/tCO2 is the carbon price that leads to the modication of the original rening scheme (at 15% p.a. discount rate and useful life of 30 years). Actually, the two proposed reneries (focused on diesel or basic petrochemicals) signicantly reduce their emissions starting at a price of US$ 100/tCO2 see Table 4. At prices under 100 US$/tCO2, the proposed reneries reduced their operational margins, but did not alter their schemes. After reaching US$ 100/tCO2 at 15% p.a. (or US$ 58/tCO2 at 8% p.a.), the basic alterations of the original renery schemes were [43]: 1. Switching of carbon-intensive fuels with natural gas. 2. Hydrogen is used both as a fuel and as input for hydroconversion processes. Hydrocracking gains importance, while FCC loses. The former is less energy-intensive than the latter. This result shows that there is not much room for curbing carbon emissions through changing new reneries conguration at low abatement costs. Actually, when considering CO2 prices, reneries have little margin to alter their process conguration at values be7

For further details, see [43].

3786

D.A. Castelo Branco et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 37823790

Fig. 1. Initial scheme of the proposed rening units.

Table 4 Emissions per barrel for new reneries with and without carbon prices (kgCO2/ barrel). Source: [43]. Low carbon scenario Without carbon prices (original scheme) With carbon prices (US$ 100/tCO2 at 15% p.a or US$ 58/tCO2 at 8% p.a.) Petrochemical 54.8 37.7 Diesel 30.7 17.3

Table 5 Carbon emissions of existing reneries reference scenario (MtCO2/year). Emissions MtCO2/yr 2007 13.8 2015 25.5

low US$100/tCO2. This is a very high gure when compared to the current carbon price in the European market (around US$25/tCO2) or even to the forecasted price of US$50/tCO2 [44]. 4. Co2 emissions abatement scenario The estimates of average abatement cost (AAC) require the comparison of CO2 emissions between scenarios. For this reason two scenarios were adopted: a reference scenario and a low carbon scenario. 4.1. Reference scenario The Reference Scenario considers the investments proposed by Petrobras up to 2015 for existing reneries. In this case, the calculated GHG specic emissions of existing reneries are depicted in Table 5. For greeneld reneries, the reference scenario was based entirely on the Brazilian Government Ofcial Long Term Plan [7] (Fig. 2). GHG emissions from new reneries were calculated using the specic emissions of new reneries (without carbon prices) as depicted in Table 4. As such, total carbon emissions of new reneries are summarized in Table 6. 4.2. Low carbon scenario The low carbon scenario considers the implementation of the proposed mitigation options in new and existing Brazilian reneries. Two stages of mitigation measures implementation are considered for the existing reneries. The rst stage occurs in 2015 at the following Brazilian reneries: REPLAN, REDUC and

REGAP. The second stage is implemented in the other reneries up to 2020: RPBC, RECAP, REVAP, REFAP, RLAM, REMAN, LUBNOR, REPAR and IPIRANGA. Considering only the thermal energy management in Brazilian reneries using the data obtained from two major reneries, the potential fuel savings hover around 10% (of total fuel consumption). The implementation cost, based in [45], is approximately 13 US$/GJ a year, considering a project of 15 years of life and a discount rate of 15% p.a. (this cost equals 9 US$/GJ a year at 8% p.a.). Around 90% of these costs derive from investments in the beginning of the project [25,46]. This gure can be considered slightly conservative when compared with those from [38], between 15% and 21%.8 In sum, the fouling of heat exchange network is a bottleneck for application of heat recovery systems. The gains from saving fuels only controlling the fouling have been estimated at 2% to US reneries [24] an amount that is consistent with those obtained in [41] for Brazil. A higher value, however, is provided in [42], indicating the need for further studies. These authors analyzed the effects in an atmospheric distillation column of 100 kbpd. They found an additional consumption of 13.0 MJ per barrel processed (or about 3.4% of the specic energy consumption in Brazilian reneries). Alsema [45] estimates the annual costs of operation and maintenance of approximately 21 US$/GJ and 15 years of useful life of technology, while the investment cost can be considered zero. These numbers are also consistent with the experience of a renery in India with thermal energy management systems [47].
8 Results in [47] show a 10% fuel saving for a crude oil renery with a capacity of 1 MMTa. This value was obtained considering a 6.5% self-consumption (based on its similarity to the Brazilian REGAP renery). Since the measures associated with energy thermal management save 6450 SRFT (Standard Renery Fuel Tonne), they saved exactly 10% of fuel at the renery, conrming the value used in this article. The data from [47] also conrm the economic forecasting from [45].

D.A. Castelo Branco et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 37823790

3787

Fig. 2. Expansion of rening capacity in Brazil. Source: [6].

Table 6 Carbon emissions of new planned reneries reference scenario (MtCO2/year). 2015 2.8 2020 8.6 2025 11.4 2030 14.2

Table 7 Capital cost and O&M cost for implementing mitigation measures in existing Brazilian reneries. Year Cost (US$) Mitigation measures Thermal energy management 2015 Total capital costa Total O&M costb Total capital cost Total O&M cost 367,340,552 40,815,617 321,512,072 35,723,564 Fouling mitigationc 0 90,701,371 0 79,385,697

The results are summarized in Table 7 and Table 8, respectively. For the new reneries, mitigation options are associated with the modication of the rening scheme for the carbon price of US$100/tCO2, as calculated in Section 4 see Table 9. The carbon price of US$100/tCO2 was obtained at a 15% p.a. discount rate. As mentioned before, this is the rate typically adopted by the private oil sector, and used by Pertusier [48]. Yet, the same scheme was also optimized at 8% p.a. discount rate. In this case the average abatement cost equaled US$58/tCO2 i.e., at 8% p.a. discount rate and US$58/tCO2 new reneries would abate the same amount of carbon that they would abate at 15% p.a. and US$100/ tCO2. 5. Average abatement cost The Low Carbon Scenario considers the 20102030 period. However, mitigation measures for existing reneries can have a lifetime that goes beyond this period of analysis. For this reason, a levelized cost (LC) was adopted to estimate the average abatement cost (AACa) of each measure,9 according to Eq. (6):

2020

a Total capital cost in the year of implementation of measures in all Brazilian reneries. b Total O&M cost per year. c Fouling mitigation was treated as a operational cost (such as maintenance costs).

Table 8 Annual carbon emissions avoided in existing reneries low carbon scenario (tCO2/ year). Year 2015 2020 Thermal energy management 2,021,760 3,831,053 Fouling mitigation 269,568 510,807

P2030 i2010 LCi AACa P2030 i2010 Ei

Table 9 Carbon emissions from new reneries low carbon scenario. Total emissions (tCO2/year) 2015 1,580,685 2020 5,225,979 2025 6,806,664 2030 8,387,349

where AACa = average abatement cost per ton of CO2 avoided. LC = levelized cost for mitigation option. E = annual avoided emissions for each option considered. i = period of analysis (20102030). The LC of an option represents the difference of the levelized investment cost (LIC) and annual nancial results (AFR) of the mitigation option implementation (Eq. (7)). The AFR is given by total revenue (RE) less the expenditures in operation and maintenance cost (OM) for each mitigation option (Eq. (8)). The levelized investment cost (LIC) and annual nancial results (AFR) for each option is related to the reference scenario.

AFRi REoption REreference i OMoption OMreference i

LCi LICi AFRi

where LC = levelized cost for mitigation option. LIC = levelized investment cost. AFR = annual nancial results. RE = total revenue. OM = operation and maintenance cost. i = period of analysis (20102030). Finally, the levelized investment cost (LIC) is the differential cost of annual investment required for the option implementation multiplied by the capital recovery factor (CRF) in each scenario (Eq. (9)).

9 The average life considered in the case studied was 15 years for existing reneries and 30 years for new reneries.

LICi CIoption i CRFoption CIreference i CRFreference

3788

D.A. Castelo Branco et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 37823790 Table 10 Average abatement costs.

where

CRFoption

1 tnoption t 1 tnoption 1

CRFreference

1 tnreference t 1 tnreference 1

Mitigation options

(US$/tCO2) 8% discount rate 15% discount rate 99.9

Emission reduction (1000 tCO2)

LIC = levelized investment cost. CRF = capital recovery factor. CI = cost of annual investment. t = discount rate. n = lifetime of the project. i = period of analysis (20102030). As mentioned before, the estimation of the average abatement costs followed two approaches:  The rst aimed to compare the alternatives according to the discount rate used by the Brazilian government (8% p.a.). This is a good proxy of a social discount rate [49]. Although the discussion about an intergenerational equitable discount rate is controversial, the discount rate used here is in line with those pointed out by [50,51]. Furthermore, the gure used is equivalent to the opportunity cost of capital for the Brazilian government. Actually, as of today, the long term opportunity cost for the Brazilian government is around 1.52.5% spread over the US treasury T-Bond 30, which pays 45% p.a. [52].10  The second aimed to estimate the carbon price (break-even carbon price) that guarantees the feasibility of the mitigation option compared to the reference scenario, according to the internal rate of return (IRR) required by the Brazilian oil sector. The IRR considered was 15% p.a. Table 10 summarizes the results. The additional cost of investment between 2010 and 2030 in present values is also calculated for the discount rates of 8% and 15% p.a. (Table 11). At 15% p.a., the reduction in GHG emissions still shows a high abatement cost. This result is consistent with the current experience of several rening plants worldwide, which are exposed to targets for reducing GHG emissions; they face major technical challenges to realize these goals and frequently prefer to pay nes of around 100 euros/tCO2 (or around 140 US$/tCO2) [56,57]. However, Holmgren and Sternhufvud [58] found lower CO2 MAC for two Sweden oil reneries. These authors considered the following major alternatives: LPG replacing fuel oil, and natural gas replacing butane and fuel oil. They based their economic analysis on a 612% p.a. discount rate, which is lower than the one adopted in this paper for describing Brazils oil sector opportunity cost. Thus, ndings presented in [58] are not easily comparable with our results. Actually, the measures are not the same, and Holmgren and Sternhufvud [58] identied for their specic case studies huge carbon abatement potential by replacing fuel oil with natural gas or LPG. In this case, the relative fuel prices drive most of CO2 MAC found by these authors. In [58], natural gas and LPG relative prices tend to favor their use for hydrogen production and heat generation, respectively. This is not the case in Brazilian oil reneries.

Changing design of new reneries

58.3

51,796

Improving energy use of existing renery units Thermal energy 20.2 77.3 management Fouling mitigation 115.6 210.8

52,250 6967

Table 11 Additional investments for mitigating carbon emissions (20102030). Mitigation options Net present values (1000 US$) 8% discount rate Changing design of new reneries 1,587,206 Improving energy use of existing renery units Thermal energy management 2,159,889 Fouling mitigation 479,975 15% discount rate 831,3906 1,332,723 296,161

derivatives produced and of increasing the conversion of heavy crudes into high-quality medium and light products. The main investments made so far have been to adapt existing units and to install deep conversion (delayed coking) and hydrotreatment units. The Brazilian case is thus emblematic, as it involves new complex rening projects, conceived to satisfy a growing market for medium derivatives and petrochemical feedstocks, typical of developing countries, and to absorb the forecast increase in domestic crude output, typical of oil producing countries. On top of these factors, Brazil may assume carbon emission reduction targets after 2012, along with the other BRICs [59]. Considering the set of mitigation options assessed in this paper, Brazilian oil reneries (existing and planned ones) should face relatively high carbon abatement costs. The most promising alternative is thermal energy management. Private investors perceive this option at around US$80/tCO2, which is still high. The different perceptions of abatement costs according to the discount rate used indicate the need of public polices for promoting carbon mitigation measures. Indeed, oil companies usually prefer to focus on their core business. Therefore, the deployment of the mitigation options faces several barriers:  The degree of maturity of some of the technologies considered in the study negatively affects the risk perception of private agents i.e., could lead to higher transaction costs.  Even for the commercially available technologies, a huge difference exists between the discount rate used by the private segment of the petroleum industry and the discount rate used by the State for comparing infrastructure investments. This gives an idea of the high opportunity cost of oil companies. To overcome these barriers, public policies could be deployed or reinforced. Actually, as of today, several fuel savings programs exist under the aegis of the National Program for Rationalizing the Use of Petroleum Derivatives and Natural Gas (CONPET), which is a program run by the Brazilian Ministry of Mines and Energy [60]. Nevertheless, the current annual budget of CONPET is relatively low under US$2.5 million per year [61], and thus other sources of nance have to be tapped. For instance, CONPET activities could be improved if assistance from the Brazilian

6. Final remarks Brazils responsibility to actively contribute to international efforts to stabilize concentrations of greenhouse gases, in addition to the new oil renery projects, makes the study of abatement costs an important issue. The existing reneries in Brazil are being modied to meet the objectives of reducing the sulfur content of the oil
10 Rambaud and Torrecillas [50] listed discount rates varying from 2 to 10% p.a. However, the justication for choosing one rate is controversial [53]. As stressed by Dixon et al. [54], approaches that avoid subjectivity whendening this rate include: the opportunity cost of capital, donor lending agency requirements, and cost of money to the government. Finally, 8-9% seems to be consistent with the cost of capital of oil companies [51,55].

D.A. Castelo Branco et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 37823790

3789

National Bank for Economic and Social Development (BNDES) programs were forthcoming. BNDES is linked to the Ministry of Development, Industry and Foreign Trade. It normally nances large industrial and infrastructure developments. Finally, a further group of mitigation alternatives analyzed in this paper involves the modication of the optimum rening scheme of greeneld reneries. Yet, new plants only modied its rening scheme at US$100/tCO2. However, as proposed by [43], this result is different when the possibility of capturing and sequestering carbon (CCS) is taken into consideration. Several sources contributed to overall GHG emissions of an oil renery: steam boilers and process heaters, regenerators of FCC units, and hydrogen production units. Catalysts regeneration in FCC units is a large emitter (coke deposited on a catalyst is burnt with air). However, the scientic literature indicates that capturing CO2 from this post-combustion stream is very expensive due to low concentration11 and low pressure of ue gas streams [6265]. In order to deal with this issue, experts propose to use the oxy-red FCC catalyst regeneration concept [6264], or the chemical looping combustion concept CLC [63,66,67]. In the oxy-red FCC option, which is already under a development phase,12 pure oxygen, instead of air, is used to burn the coke in the regenerator and ue gas is partly recycled to avoid temperature runaway. De Mello et al. [64] showed a 45% decrease in CO2 capture cost for oxy-ring technology compared to the amine absorption alternative. The CLC option is a novel (or still immature) technology, which is based on a solid carrier able to chemically adsorb oxygen from air (oxidation in the air reactor) and release it in the presence of a gaseous fuel (reduction in the fuel reactor). In sum, as of today, capturing CO2 from FCC post-combustion streams is too expensive and would require the development and deployment of novel concepts, such as oxy-ring or CLC. On the other hand, hydrogen production allows a single point source for CO2 capture [65]. This indicates that CCS could become a key measure for reducing CO2 emissions from reneries in the future, altering the unit rening operations and the renery scheme. However, new CCS concepts, especially focused on FCC emissions, should be addressed by R&D investment. In this case, the so-called Brazilian CT-Petro Sectoral Fund should well be a key instrument. This fund is nanced with a fraction of the Brazilian government take (royalties) related to the petroleum production [68]. It could also be used for promoting research in other innovative techniques. For instance, two promising alternatives could be developed as well: the bio-desulfurization and oxidative desulfurization (ODP) of diesel. The former involves a set of promising processes designed to reduce the sulfur content of petroleum products under moderate conditions (with less energy consumption). The latter is a non hydrogen consuming desulfurization technique [25]. The ODP process, although still at the development stage, holds out good prospects for diesel [69]. ODP would also save hydrogen that could be diverted to heat generation in the renery.

would like to thank Christophe de Gouvello, the Senior Energy Specialist of World Bank.

References
[1] Suphanit B, Bischert A, Narataruksa P. Exergy loss analysis of heat transfer across the wall of the dividing-wall distillation column. Energy 2007;32(11): 212134. [2] Sigaud B. Novel approaches to improve energy efciency at reneries. In: 19th World Petroleum Congress (WPC) Spain: Madrid; 2008. [3] Bentley RW. Global oil & gas depletion: an overview. Energy Policy 2002;30(3):189205. [4] Adelman MA. The real oil problem. Regulation 2004;27(1):1621. [5] Petro&Qumica. A expanso do parque nacional [The expansion of the national rening park]. Petro&Qumica; 2008. p. 306. <http://www.editoravalete. com.br/site_petroquimica/edicoes/ed_306/306.html>. [6] MCT. Inventrio Brasileiro das Emisses e Remoes Antrpicas de Gases de Efeito Estufa [Brazilian inventory of anthropogenic emissions and removals of greenhouse gases]. Ministry of Science and Technology (MCT), Brazil; 2009. [7] EPE. Plano Nacional de Energia 2030 [National Energy Plan 2030]. Brazilian Government Enterprise for Energy Planning (EPE). Rio de Janeiro. Brazil; 2007. <http://www.epe.gov.br/PNE/20080111_1.pdf>. [8] ABIQUIM. Demanda de matrias-primas petroqumicas e provvel origem at 2020 [Demand for petrochemical raw materials and probably rise by 2020]. Brazilian Chemical Industry Association (ABIQUIM), Brazil; 2007. [9] MMA. Plano nacional sobre mudana do clima [National Plan on Climate Change]. Brazilian Ministry of the Environment (MMA).Interministerial Committee on Climate Change; 2007 http://www.mma.gov.br/sitio/index. php?ido=conteudo.monta&idEstrutura=141&idConteudo=7466&idMenu= 7555. [10] Hasanbeigi A, Menke C, Price L. The CO2 abatement cost curve for the Thailand cement industry. J Cleaner Product 2010;18(2010):150918. [11] Ribbenhed M, Thore M, Sternhufvud C. CO2 emission reduction costs for iron ore-based steelmaking in Sweden. J Cleaner Product 2008;16:12534. [12] Cai W, Wang C, Wang K, Zhang Y, Chen J. Scenario analysis on CO2 emissions reduction potential in Chinas electricity sector. Energy Policy 2007;35: 644556. [13] Ko F, Huang C, Tseng P, Lin C, Zheng B, Chiu H. Long-term CO2 emissions reduction target and scenarios of power sector in Taiwan. Energy Policy 2010;38:288300. [14] Turner RK, Pearce D, Baterman I. Environmental economics. New York: Harvester Wheatsheaf; 1993. [15] Szklo AS, Uller VC. Fundamentos do Reno de Petrleo Tecnologia e economia [Fundamentals of petroleum reningtechnology and economics]. second ed., Intercincia, Rio de Janeiro; 2008. [16] IPCC. Intergovernmental panel on climate change guidelines for national greenhouse gas inventories; 2006. <http://www.ipcc-nggip.iges.or.jp/public/ 2006gl/index.html>. [17] Soares G, Barros F, Gonalves N, Pala D, Nadolni A. Desenvolvimento da tecnologia de processamento de resduo atmosfrico em unidade de coqueamento retardado [Development of processing technology of atmospheric residue in delayed coking unit]. In: Rio oil & gas expo and conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2008. [18] dos Santos M, Seidl P, Guimares M. Metodologias para a Maximizao de olenas nas unidades de processamento do COMPERJ [Methodologies for maximizing olens in processing units of COMPERJ]. In: Rio oil & gas expo and conference, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2008. [19] Meyers RA. Handbook of petroleum rening process. 3rd ed. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2003. [20] Energetics. Energy and Environmental Prole of the US Petroleum Rening Industry, US Department of Energy.Industrial Technologies Program; 2007. [21] Gary JH, Handwerk GE, Kaiser MJ. Petroleum rening: technology and economics. 5th ed. Techno; 2007. [22] Petrleo Brasileiro S.A. Conrmada mais uma importante descoberta de gs e leo leve no Pr-Sal [Conrmed another important discovery of oil and gas in the pre-salt]; 2008. <http://www2.petrobras.com.br/ri/spic/bco_arq/ DescobertaJ%C3%BApiter-Port.pdf>. [23] EIPPCB. Reference document for BAT for mineral reneries. Integrated pollution and control, Belgium: European Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control Bureau; 2001. <http://eippcb.jrc.ec.europa.eu/>. [24] Petrick M, Pellegrino J. The potential for reducing energy utilization in the rening industry; 1999. <http://www.osti.gov/bridge/servlets/purl/750806VEO9Ej/native/>. [25] Szklo AS, Schaeffer R. Fuel specication, energy consumption and CO2 emission in oil reneries. Energy 2007;32(7):107592. [26] Szklo AS, Soares JB, Tolmasquim MT. Economic potential of natural gas-red cogeneration analysis of Brazils chemical industry. Energy Policy 2004;32(12):141528. [27] Petrleo Brasileiro S.A. Gesto de Emisses Atmosfricas Relatrio de Desempenho [Air emissions management performance report]; 2003. <http://www2.petrobras.com.br/portugues/index.asp>. [28] Exxon Mobil Corporation. Summary Annual Report; 2006. <http:// www.exxonmobil.com/corporate/les/corporate/XOM_2006_SAR.pdf>.

Acknowledgments The authors thank the Brazilian National Council for Scientic and Technological Research (CNPq) for nancial and institutional support. This paper derives from a more comprehensive study carried on with support from the World Bank. Therefore, the authors
11 Fluid catalytic cracking units are operated in two modes: (1) full CO burn mode, where all CO is combusted to CO2 within the regenerator. The exhaust gas contains less than 1% CO; (2) partial burn mode, where the regenerator exhaust gas contains less than 68% CO [49,62]. 12 Particularly noteworthy is the small pilot held by Petrobras at Landulpho Alves renery [63,6].

3790

D.A. Castelo Branco et al. / Applied Energy 88 (2011) 37823790 [49] Szklo AS, Carneiro JTG, Machado G. Break-even price for upstream activities in Brazil: evaluation of the opportunity cost of oil production delay in a nonmature sedimentary production region. Energy 2008;33(4):589600. [50] Ramabud S, Torrecillas MJ. Some considerations on the social discount rate. Environ Sci Policy 2005;8:34355. [51] Antill N, Arnott R. Oil company crisis: managing structure protability and growth. SP15. Oxford: Oxford Institute for Energy Studies; 2002. [52] IPEA. Ipeadata [Ipeadata]. Institute for Applied Economic Research (IPEA); 2007. <http://www.ipeadata.gov.br>. [53] Mishan E. Elements of cost-benet analysis. London: George Allen &Unwin Ltd.; 1972. [54] Dixon J, Scura L, Carpenter R, Sherman P. Economic analysis of environmental impacts. London: Earthscan; 1994. [55] Osmundsen P, Mohn K, Misund B, Asche F. Is oil supply choked by nancial market pressures? Energy Policy 2007;35:46774. [56] Ellerman AD, Joskow PL. The European Unions Emissions Trading System in perspective, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Prepared for the Pew Center on Global Climate Change; 2008. [57] McKinsey. Reducing US greenhouse gases emissions: how much at what cost? Executive report; 2007. <http://www.mckinsey.com/en/Client_Service/ Sustainability/Latest_thinking/Reducing_US_greenhouse_gas_emissions. aspx>. [58] Kristina Holmgren K, Sternhufvud C. CO2-emission reduction costs for petroleum reneries in Sweden. J Cleaner Product 2008;16(3):38594. [59] Diringer E. Statement of Elliot Diringer Pew Center on Global Climate Change regarding International Climate Change Negotiations: Bali and the Path Toward a Post-2012 Climate Treaty, Submitted to the Committee on Foreign Relations United States Senate, Washington, DC; 2008. <http:// foreign.senate.gov/testimony/2008/DiringerTestimony080124p.pdf>. [60] CONPET. Programa nacional da racionalizao do uso dos derivados de petrleo e do gs natural [National programme of rational use of petroleum products and natural gs] Ministry of Mines and Energy (MME); 2008. <http:// www.conpet.gov.br/home_conpet.php?segmento=conpet>. [61] REA. Ecincia Energtica. O que faz o Brasil? [Energy efciency. What Brazil is doing?] EnergiaAlternativa 2008;2:125. [62] URS. Opportunities for further greenhouse gas emission reductions for the BAAQMD stationary sources. Technical report prepared for: Bay area air quality management district, Oakland, USA; 2007. [63] Miracca I, Asen K, Assink J, Coulter C, Curran L, Lowe C, et al. The CO2 capture project (CCP): results from phase II (20042009). Energy Procedia 2009;1(1):5562. [64] de Mello L, Pimenta R, Moure G, Pravia O, Gerahart L, Milios P, et al. A technical and economical evaluation of CO2 capture from FCC units. Energy Procedia 2009;1(1):11724. [65] Phillips G. CO2 management in reneries. Technical paper, Gasication V, 2002; Noordwijk. [66] Diego L, Ortiz M, Ad_anez J, Labiano F, Abad A, Gay_an P. Synthesis gas generation by chemical-looping reforming in a batch uidized bed reactor using Ni-based oxygen carriers. Chem Eng J 2008;144:28998. [67] Kronberger B, Johansson E, Lfer G, Mattisson T, Lyngfelt A, Hofbauer H. A two-compartment uidized bed reactor for CO2 capture by chemical looping combustion. Chem Eng Technol 2004;27(12):131826. [68] FINEP. Fundo setorial do petrleo e gs natural (CT-PETRO) [oil and gas fund]; 2008. <http://www.nep.gov.br/fundos_setoriais/ct_petro/ct_petro_ini.asp>. [69] L et al. Ultra deep desulfurization of diesel by selective oxidation with [C18H37N(CH3)3]4[H2NaPW10O36]catalyst assembled in emulsion droplets. J Catal 2006;239(2):36975.

[29] British Petroleum. Sustainability Report; 2006. <http://www.bp.com/ liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/STAGING/global_assets/downloads/B/bp_ sustainability_report_2006.pdf>. [30] Royal Dutch Shell plc. Annual Report and Form 20-F; 2006. <http:// www.shell.com/home/content/media/news_and_media_releases/archive/2007/ ling_2006_annualreport_20f_13032007.html>. [31] Olim J, Haddad J, Viana A, Martins A. Conservao de energia em renarias de petrleo [Energy conservation in oil reneries]. In: 2 PD Petro. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2002. [32] Hallale N. Burning bright: trends in process integration. Chemical Engineering Progress 2001;97(7):3041. [33] CTEC. Lanalyse Pinch: pour lutilisationefcace de lnergie, de leau et de lhydrogne [Pinch analysis: for the efcient use of energy, water and hydrogen], Centre de la technologie de lnergie de CANMET, Canada; 2003. [34] API. American Petroleum Institute. Technological Roadmap. Houston, USA; 2000. [35] Worrell E, Galitsky C. Energy efciency improvement and cost saving opportunities for petroleum reneries. An ENERGY STAR guide for energy and plant managers; Energy Analysis Department.University of California. Berkeley, CA; 2005. [36] Amorim, R. Abastecimento de gua de umaRenaria de Petrleo: CasoReplan [Water supply of an oil renery: REPLAN case]. Fluminense Federal University. Rio de Janeiro, Brazil; 2005. [37] Schor A. Riscos e alternativas para o abastecimento de gua em uma renaria de petrleo.Estudo de caso: renaria Duque de Caxias REDUC [Water supply risks and alternatives in an oil renery. Case Study: Renaria Duque de Caxias REDUC]. Federal University of Rio de Janeiro; 2006. <http://wwwp.coc.ufrj.br/ teses/mestrado/inter/2006/Teses/SCHOR_AR_06_t_M_rhs. pdf>. [38] Moreira AM, Pellanda AP, Veloz CS, Butrimavicius PJ, Porto MF, Ahn VRR et al. Estudo da integrao energtica de uma unidade de destilao atmosfrica e a vcuo [Study of energy integration of an atmospheric and a vacuum distillation units] Petro & Qumica; 2008. p. 306. [39] Exxon. Economic penalties associated with the fouling of renery heat transfer equipment. In: Fouling of heat transfer equipment, Sommerscales and Knudsen. New York: McGraw Hill; 1981. [40] ANL. Effects of fouling mitigation on the energy efciency of crude oil distillation. AIChE National Spring Meeting, New Orleans; 1998. [41] Negro COR, Madi M, Massoqueti R. Simulao do desempenho de redes de trocadores de calorsujeitas incrustao [Simulation of thermal performance of heat exchangers networks subject to fouling]. Petro Qumica 2004;265:736. [42] Panchal C, Huangfu E. Effects of Mitigating fouling on the energy efciency of crude-oil distillation. Heat Transfer Eng 2000;3:21. [43] Gomes GL, Szklo AA, Schaeffer R. The impact of CO2 taxation on the conguration of new reneries: an application to Brazil. Energy Policy 2009;37:551929. [44] IEA International Energy Agency. World Energy Outlook; 2008. [45] Alsema E. ICARUS-4 Sector study for the Reneries. The Netherlands: Department of Science, Technology and Society. Utrecht University; 2001. [46] Hydrocarbon Processing. Advanced control and information systems. Hydrocarbon Process 2001;9:73159. [47] Energy Manager Training. Guwahati Renery, Guwahati, Assam: Indian Oil Corporation Limited; 2004. <http://www.energymanagertraining.com/ eca2004/award2004/Reneries/Indian%20Oil%20Corporation%20Guwahathi% 20Renery.pdf>. [48] Pertusier RR. Fundamentos do mercado de petrleo: como analisar o comportamento dos preos [Oil market fundamentals: how to analyze the behavior of prices]. GE-MC/MKT/PREOS 2008, Rio de Janeiro. Brazil.