Energy Optimization

Energy efficiency through the asset lifecycle in the Petroleum Industry

Rian Reyneke, Senior Advisor December 1, 2010

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

What is Energy Optimization

Energy Optimization

Energy Efficiency $80 billion per year $80 bn/year global capex through 2020, to capture energy efficiency savings, with >10% IRR Refining & chemical industry annually spends $50-100M on energy per plant 70% of oil companies rank energy efficiency as the best method to meet CO2 caps

GHG Mitigation $680 billion per year $680bn/year incremental investment by 2020, to achieve IPCC* target of 35% below 1990 emissions levels $5-10bn/year estimated market for CCS (carbon capture & storage) in 2030 Process industries account for 36% of global GHG emissions

Alternative Energy $20 trillion total $20 trillion total global investment through 2030 in alternatives Alternative energy accounts for 13% of global energy supply, and is growing 2-3 times faster than traditional sources 53% of oil companies currently involved in some type of renewable energy project

*Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, whose reports drive initiatives like the Kyoto Protocol Sources: McKinsey Investing In Energy Productivity, Global GHG abatement study; Daily Telegraph A clean sweep for coal; International Energy Agency reports; WRI 2005 report; Hydrocarbon Publishing 2010 report 2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved |

Energy Optimization Projects

Energy Optimization Policies & Strategies: Global Survey of 53 Oil Companies % of companies with projects in each area

100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0%

92%

Energy Efficiency reduces costs & CO2 emissions 59%

53%

Energy Efficiency

GHG Mitigation*

Renewable Energy

Source: Hydrocarbon Publishing, Refinery CO2 Management Strategies, 2010

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved |

Energy Costs are Significant

Typical Refinery Operating Costs Typical Olefins Plant Operating Costs

Energy Costs 50 58%

Energy Costs 40 45%

Refinery energy costs: $75 -140M p.a. Global spend on energy: $57 108B p.a.

Chemicals energy costs: $75 -125M p.a. Global spend on energy: $20B p.a.

Note: Feedstock costs are excluded

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved |

Industry Response and Key Activities

Invest Capital Design/Process Improvement Planning & Scheduling Run Existing Plant as Efficient as Possible Energy Performance Management Advanced Process Control
Revamps, redesigns & models to continuously increase energy efficiency

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

Lifecycle
|

AspenTech Delivers 10-30% Energy Savings

Typical Energy Savings*

5-20%

3-5%

2-10%

2-10%

Total energy savings: 10 - 30%**

100%
aspenONE Energy Efficiency Solutions

70-90%

Current energy use

Design

Planning & Performance Scheduling Management

Advanced Process Control

Future energy use

Sequencing varies based on priorities

* Typical savings based on 26 energy efficiency case studies ** Total savings depends on overlap & synergies
2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved |

AspenTech in Energy Efficiency

Plant Design

Production Planning & Scheduling

Energy Performance Management

Advanced Process Control

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

Design Plants for Energy Efficiency

Challenge How to identify and screen the best design options How to balance equipment, costs & energy usage Energy/yield trade-off Technology selection Utility system design

Impact Challenge Sub-optimal decisions Takes longer to develop alternatives Retrofits more costly than needed Higher Capital & Energy Costs Identify best design alternatives including equipment, capital costs & energy efficiency Solution

Reduce capital & energy costs and improve asset ROI

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

AspenTechs Global Services

Process Consulting Services

Technology Services
Process Synthesis Pinch analysis Process Consulting Process improvement Energy & emissions reduction Debottlenecking Steady state modeling Column analysis Distillation systems Column sequencing Heat/mass exchange Conceptual Design Economic analysis Industry Sectors Refining Chemicals Energy

Deliver superior results

Process Simulation Steady state

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

Process Consulting Service Focus

Asset Engineering Lifecycle and Workflow
Research and Development
Develop Process Technology

Conceptual Engineering
Select Process Technology

Basic Engineering

Detailed Engineering

Plant Operations
Identify Plant Capital Projects

Planning and Scheduling

Produce Conceptual Process Design

Produce Detailed Process Design

Commission and Handover Plant

Daily Plant Operations

Select Crude Oils and Feedstocks Issue Operating Targets

Produce Conceptual Engineering Design

Produce Detailed Engineering Design

Monitor and Guide Plant Performance

Construct and Precommission Plant

Maintain Equipment

FEED
Procure and Control Equipment, Materials and Services

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

10

Process Consulting Services

Refining

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

11

Process Consulting Services - Refining What we offer

Process Performance Improvement Reviews
Primary focus on yield, conversion & energy performance Process unit performance reviews Process and energy KPIs / scope for improvement Utilities system (steam, power, fuel) review Recommendations / areas for improvement No/low cost improvement, high cost modifications Refinery margins are often low. Incremental yield and energy improvements can directly increase profit. Many unit operating conditions are not routinely scrutinised. Processing flexibility maintained.
AspenTechs process consultants recommended operational improvements to a 100,000 bbl/d refinery CDU/VDU and saved 20 cents/bbl with no investment.
2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved |

Performance review defines yield, conversion and energy performance.

12

Process Consulting Services - Refining What we offer

Energy Reduction Studies
Model based (process and utility systems), tuned to observed performance Process technology, yield and energy performance assessment Equipment performance and scope for improvement Utility system design and operations review Pinch / column thermal analysis process modifications development Process technology improvement modifications development based on our experience Cost v benefits assessment for modifications. Ranking and selection Preparation of feasibility study or pre-basic engineering package Investment roadmap development
AspenTechs process consultants have recommended modifications saving 20% energy worth $MM50/y on a modern refinery aromatics complex using this approach.
2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved |

13

Process Consulting Services - Refining What we offer

Design Studies
Process flowsheet development and design Design of CDU / VDU and other fractionation systems
Feasibility study / Independent design review Preheat train design Debottlenecking, yield improvement

Independent design consultancy. Leveraged by full use of AspenTechs engineering, simulation and design tools. Optimise the process then design the utility system to best supply the process demands. Process / Utility system interface can often be improved.

Optimal Heat Exchanger Network design (Pinch Analysis) Optimal site wide utility system design accounting for process heating and power demands Comparative capital & operating cost assessment of design options. Identification of most cost effective design. Feasibility study level of detail New design and retrofit

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

14

Process Consulting Services - Refining What we offer

Refinery Configuration Studies
Optimise:
Choice of unit (e.g. FCC, RFCC or HCU, HVCU etc) Unit capacities Unit operating mode (e.g. high / low conversion) Refinery margin, either with fixed/floating product yields, dependent upon actual market product constraints, alternative feed stocks etc.

Independent of process licensors and EPC contractors

Identify:
Utility requirements Operating margin for alternative configurations

Industry standard linear modelling system (PIMS)

Using industry standard linear modelling LP vectors updated using Heat and Mass balanced kinetic models for FCC, CCR, ISOM, HCU or from licensor data Independent of Licensor Independent of EPC contractors Experienced personnel in LP Optimisation, refinery configuration studies and refinery unit design

Assay cuts based on rigorous and tuned simulation

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

15

Process Consulting Services - Refining Experience

>50 Refinery studies in last 10 years Recent Energy Studies
Site-wide energy reduction study (South Korea) Site-wide energy reduction study (Europe) Grass Roots refinery EII reduction Study (Vietnam) CNOOC Grassroots EII reduction Study (China) FCC energy performance benchmarking (USA) CDU and HDS / Reformer revamp (USA) HCU Revamp (China) CDU / VDU Performance monitoring and optimisation application (Italy) 2 x CDU revamp (Korea) Site-wide hydrogen optimization (USA) CDU grassroots design (Middle East) CDU revamp (UK) Energy study benefits Both demand (process) and supply (utility system) sides considered Process technology and design, operational and equipment performance considered and improved Studies tailored to client requirements

For more details contact: consulting.services@aspentech.com

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved |

16

Energy Optimization Process Consulting Service

Energy Study Approach

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

Approach to Process Improvement

Operating data Design data Identify operating improvement opportunities Pinch and Column Analysis Identify design improvements
TEMPERATURE COMPOSITES (Real T, No Utils) Case: PX1Simplified 400.0 Heat Balance DTMIN =10.00 350.0

300.0

TEMPERATURE C

250.0

200.0

Process and utilities modelling

150.0

100.0

50.0

0.0 0.0 20.0 40.0 60.0 80.0 100.0 HOT 120.0 COLD 140.0

ENTHALPY X10 3 kW

Equipment Rating Understand performance

Design Definition and Equipment specification

Model Idea, develop Scope/Benefits/Cost

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

19

Evaluation of current operation and equipment performance

Identifying operating improvement opportunities: Are columns over-refluxed? If multiple column feed nozzles, is current feed location optimum? Are column operating pressures optimal? Exchangers underperforming/bypassed? Compressor recycles open?

Process and utilities modelling

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

20

Methodology: Pinch Technology

Process Modeling (A+ or HYSYS) Targeting (Aspen Energy Analyzer)

Data Extraction

HEN (re)design to minimize cross-pinch Pinch Analysis purpose:

Establish minimum utility targets Develop efficient heat exchanger network (new designs) Locate inefficiencies in network (existing units) and develop viable energy saving projects

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

21

Methodology: Column Targeting

Thermal and hydraulic analysis of distillation columns CGCC represents ideal minimum stage-wise heating and cooling demands in a distillation column Use to indentify feed or side heating /cooling options, optimize # stages, feed location and separation targets (both new design and retrofit)
Reboiler Reboiler

Min Duty in Temp Interval

Condenser Condenser
H

Column Grand Composite Curve Minimum Thermodynamic Condition

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved |

22

Methodology Inter-Unit Integration

Direct inter-unit integration

Process with low temperature source that cannot generate steam
Direct Heat Integration

Indirect inter-unit integration

Process with low temperature sink
LP steam use

Process with low temperature source that cannot generate steam Indirect Heat
Integration thru a local steam header

Process with low temperature sink

LP steam use

AIR/CW

Process A

Process B
CW

Process A

Process B

Direct inter-unit integration by changing the rundown temperature Transfer product from Process A to Process B so temperature of product is below Process A pinch and above Process B pinch
2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved |

23

Methodology - Site-Wide Pinch Analysis

Unit by Unit Pinch Analysis

INITIAL PINCH STUDY

Site Wide Pinch Analysis T

Hot utilities

Process Streams (Heat Sources)

BLACK BOX UNITS

Cold utilities

Process Streams (Heat Sinks) Q

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

24

Methodology - Site-Wide Pinch Analysis

Are your steam levels/loads optimum? What is the optimum cogeneration system?
+

Fue HP l

HP MP

MP LP

LP

Smaller boilers!
Reduction in fuel consumption
+

Fuel

HP MP

+ +

HP MP IP

Opportunity for additional turbine to exploit IP steam sink

LP

Smaller CW towers!

LP LLP LLP

Power generation increased

Opportunity for new LLP steam level increases heat recovery

|

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

25

Energy Optimization Process Consulting Service

Project Examples

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

Project Example: Design for Energy Efficiency

Energy Design Study (Aromatics)
Relatively new (1997) Aromatics facility Modeled entire plant Evaluated alternative projects and paybacks STC Implemented key projects Achieved 20% energy savings $12MM/yr. energy saving

Site-wide energy management improvements

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

27

Refinery Design for Energy Efficiency

Design energy efficiency into a new grassroots refinery. Reduce the Energy Intensity Index (EII) from initial design value of 71 :
Energy efficiency achieved by inter-unit integrations Reduction of EII by 6 points equivalent to $16 million/year in energy costs Guang-Dong Refinery now in Top 3% worldwide in energy efficiency

Energy Savings and throughput Increase

Target Energy Use

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

28

Project Example - GasSep Unit

Base Case Depropanizer, Deethanizer and C3 Splitter in series Total hot utility use = 26.9 MW Total cold utility = 26.9 MW
20 bar 48.3 C
200

A002 19167 kW
46.0 C

A001 5268 kW
20.0 bar 48.8 C

45.7 C 30 bar 50.6 C

E005 1960 kW

40.9 C

101 69 57

E008 650 kW
40.0 C

E001 329 kW
35

64.7 C

76.3 C

C001 Depropanizer

33

C002 Deethanizer

100

59 1 1

C003 C3 Splitter

67.0 C

107 C

E002 5414 kW
70.2 C

E003 2274 kW E004 18892 kW

58.0 C

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

29

Project Example - GasSep Unit

Pinch analysis shows very limited energy saving scope Column analysis shows some scope for feed tray optimization and side reboiling scope for C3 Splitter
TEMPERATURE GRAND COMPOSITE (With Utils) Case: pinch 140.0 Heat Balance DTMIN =20.00 120.0

100.0

TEMPERATURE C

100 105 110

Block C001: Column Grand Composite Curve (T-H)

80.0

Ideal Profile Block C002: Column Grand Composite Curve (T-H) Actual Profile

95

Temperature C 70 75 80 85

90

60.0

70

75

58

Block C003: Column Grand Composite Curve (T-H)

40.0

Move the feed tray Ideal Profile downwards

Actual Profile

Ideal Profile Actual Profile

65

56

57

Temperature C 55 60

20.0

Move the feed tray Side reboiling upwards scope

20.0 25.0 PROCES UTIL 30.0

60

55

0.0 0.0 5.0

10.0

15.0

ENTHALPY MW

0.25

0.5

0.75
45

1.25

1.5

Temperature C 51 52 53

50

50

1.75
50

54

Move the feed tray upwards

65

55

2.25

2.5 2.75 3 Enthalpy Deficit MW

3.25

3.5

3.75

4.25

4.5

4.75

5.25

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

47

48

-0.2

-0.1

0.1

0.2

0.3

49
0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1 1.1 1.2 1.3 Enthalpy Deficit MW

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

1.8

1.9

2.1

2.2

2.3

0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 5.5 6 6.5 7 7.5 8 8.5 9 9.5 10 10.5 11 11.5 12 12.5 13 13.5 14 14.5 15 15.5 16 16.5 17 17.5 18 18 Enthalpy Deficit MW

30

Project Example - GasSep Unit

Proposed design change
17.5 bar 42.5 C
200

A002 17528 kW
41.2 C

A001 4076 kW
19.3 bar 48.2 C

46.9 C 30 bar 46.5 C

E005 2039 kW

40.5 C

101 69 57

E008 650 kW
40.0 C 64.7 C

E001 0 kW
35 34

42

C001 Depropanizer

33

C002 Deethanizer

100

59 1 1

C003 C3 Splitter

63.0 C

105.9 C

E002 4642 kW

E003 3198 kW E004 16306 kW

52.0 C

Feed tray optimization Column resequence - Requires lower depropanizer pressure & Save one exchanger vapor feed to C3 Splitter Both hot/cold utility savings are 2.4 MW each

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

31

Project Example - FCC Unit targeting

TEMPERATURE GRAND COMPOSITE (With Utils) Case: FCCBase
350.0

Heat Balance

DTMIN =20.00

300.0

250.0

MPGEN

TEMPERATURE C

Base GCC

200.0

150.0

100.0

HW1

50.0

BFW

COLD
0.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 40.0 50.0 60.0 70.0 80.0

TEMPERATURE GRAND COMPOSITE (With Utils) PROCES Case: FCC-TargetNoLP

350.0

UTIL

ENTHALPY X10 3 kW Heat Balance

DTMIN =20.00

300.0

250.0

MPGEN

TEMPERATURE C

200.0

Target GCC
LLP

Debutanizer

Indirect integration

Deisobutanizer Depropaniser

150.0

100.0

HW1

Deethanizer
50.0

BFW

C3Splitter
COLD

0.0 0.0

FCC GCC
10.0

20.0

30.0

40.0

50.0

60.0

70.0

80.0

PROCES ENTHALPY X10 3 kW

UTIL

Potential to increase MPS gen by 13.7 t/h by increasing LLPS use by 7.7 t/h Potential to increase hot water gen by 7.7 MW

Indirect integration of FCC-GasSep-Alky

Potential to save 6.5 t/hr of LLPS

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

32

Project Example - FCC Unit

From high pressure receiver D301 E202 E204 129oC 200oC 200oC NEW1 252oC Feed 150oC D203 244 C
o

E203 79oC 40oC To wet gas compresssor

40oC

108oC A202 80oC

85oC 292635 kg/hr

C301 Primary Absorb er C202A

E309 40oC E307 60oCE310 40oC C304 Sponge Absorb er

171oC 229oC E201X E304 250oC

LCO product 127oC 63oC E206 E203 E209 40oC

E305

48oC

308 C

C202B

49oC 120oC 99oC E205X 130oC E306 127oC Debutanize r C303

E303B

186oC D202 To E210 E303B 131oC

70oC

330oC

MP Steam 244oC E208

Stripper C302 131oC E304 LLP Steam E303A 168oC

To reactor

275oC

117oC

New Exchanger Existing Exchanger on New Service

Proposed flowsheet
Remove feed heater from slurry pumparound and increase heat duty of steam generator Switch LCO pumparound from stripper reboiler and hot water heating into MP BFW heating and into feed heating Increase heat duty on the stripper reboiler and switch the other stripper reboiler from LCO pumparound into LLP steam.
2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved |

33

Project Example - FCC Unit + GasSep

Project Option achieves the following benefits: Increases MP steam generation by 12.6 t/h Increases the LLP steam use in the FCC by 6.9 t/h. Increases the hot water generation duty by 3 MW which results in 5.2 t/h of LLP steam saving in the Gas Separation unit With Gas Separation unit option Change column sequence (Saves capital and energy) When combined with FCC project, the Hot Water system can provide enough duty required by the C3 splitter reboiler

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

34

AspenTech Energy Optimization Conclusions

Energy efficiency can be addressed in all phases of plant life cycle Design efficiency into your plant (new or existing) Include energy and GHG in planning and scheduling solution Employ an energy performance management system to operate utility system better, manage contracts, improve decisions APC strategy should include energy and GHG AspenTech offers a comprehensive suite of products and expert services to help reduce energy in all these areas

Optimize Energy & Emissions lower costs & meet environmental requirements

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

38

Questions?

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

39

Additional slides

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

40

Track Record - Refinery

Process Consulting Services - Refinery Experience
Company YPC, Nanjing ENI, Sannazaro FW/Client, SK Corp Total, Flandres APS engineering, Sudan Total, Port Arthur Total, Port Arthur Total, Lindsey Oil - Humberside Saras Saras COP, Borger GS Caltex, Yosu CNOOC, Nanghai Saras, Sardinia Total, Immingham Holborn, Hamburg Total, Multiple BP, Whiting Total, Normandy Total, Provence Total, Grandpuits Total, Feyzin Total, Vlissingen GS Caltex, Yosu Total, Immingham GS Caltex, Yosu Country China Italy Vietnam Korea France Sudan USA USA UK Italy Italy USA Korea China Italy UK Germany Europe USA France France France France Holland Korea UK Korea Project Type Aromatics Plant Energy Reduction Study Refinery Atm/Vac Unit Operational Energy Optimisation Grassroots refinery EEI reduction, process & central utility system Energy reduction CDU revamp CDU grassroots design FCC energy performance benchmarking - 1 site Steam network energy improvement CDU1 Energy Study Energy reduction Energy reduction CDU and HDS/Refomer energy revamp 2 x CDU revamp Grassroots refinery site-wide energy reduction Phase 2 hydrogen optimisation CDU revamp Energy pinch training and consultancy FCC energy performance benchmarking - 5 sites CDU preheat train monitoring and decision support Steam network energy improvement Steam network energy improvement Steam network energy improvement Steam network energy improvement Steam network energy improvement Site-wide water and effluent reduction CDU revamp CDU revamp Type of Study Site-wide energy study Details Energy Energy and Capacity Energy Unit Energy Study Combined study with Total inhouse engineering (CERT) Study for APS Engineering in Rome Study done for CERT, not for PAR Site-wide utility study CDU Energ Study Unit Energy Study Hot Water Loop Scoping and preliminary projects Scoping and preliminary projects Total Site Site-wide hydrogen study Combined study with Total inhouse engineering (CERT) Targeting / preheat model Combined study with Total inhouse engineering (CERT) Energy Energy and Capacity Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy and Hydrogen Hydrogen Energy and Capacity Energy Energy Energy Site-wide utility study Site-wide utility study Site-wide utility study Site-wide utility study Site-wide utility study Site-wide utility study Combined study with Total inhouse engineering (CERT) Combined study with LG E&C Energy Energy Energy Energy Energy Water Energy and Capacity Energy Unit Site CDU Site CDU CDU CDU FCC Site CDU FCC Utilities CDU / HDS CDU Site Site CDU CDU FCC CDU Site Site Site Site Site Site CDU CDU Project Start 2009 2009 2008 2007 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2006 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2004 2004

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

41

Track Record - Refinery (ctd)

Process Consulting Services - Refinery Experience
Company Tamoil, Columbey Total, Feyzin Rompetrol, Constanta FW, Rabigh Total, Antwerp OMV, Schwechat PPMSB, Melaka Total, Lindsay COP, Borger COP, Ponca City Saras, Sardinia COP, Rodeo Irving Oil, New Brunswick OMV, Schwechat SINOPEC, Yanshan Citgo, Texas Texaco, Pembroke Statoil, Mongstad Lyondell-Citgo, Houston OMV, Schwechat Sunoco, Marcus Hook Sunoco, Point Breeze Sunoco, Girard Point Sunoco, Tulsa Sunoco, Toledo Sasol, Secunda Lindsey Oil, Humberside Country Switzerland France Romania Middle East Belgium Austria Malaysia UK USA USA Italy USA Canada Austria China USA UK Norway USA Austria USA USA USA USA USA South Africa UK Project Type Site-wide hydrogen optimisation CDU revamp Site-wide hydrogen optimisation Grassroots refinery site-wide energy reduction CDU revamp Fuel gas network optimisation CDU revamp CDU revamp Site-wide hydrogen optimisation Site-wide hydrogen optimisation Site-wide CO2 reduction Site-wide hydrogen optimisation Hydrogen reduction Hydrogen reduction Site-wide water and effluent reduction Hydrogen reduction Capital cost reduction - hydrogen Energy and CO2 reduction Energy reduction Energy reduction and capital Energy reduction Energy reduction Energy reduction Energy reduction Cooling tower debottlenecking Hydrogen reduction Energy and yield Type of Study Scoping study Combined study with Total inhouse engineering (CERT) Scoping study Total Site Combined study with Total inhouse engineering (CERT) Site-wide fuel gas design study Revamp study Combined study with Total inhouse engineering (CERT) Site-wide hydrogen study Site-wide hydrogen study Site-wide energy and Hydrogen study Site-wide hydrogen study Site-wide hydrogen study Site-wide hydrogen study Site-wide water study Site-wide hydrogen study Combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 Total Site Total Site Combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 Total Site Total Site Total Site CDU/VDU/FCC Site-wide hydrogen study Combined study and PDP development with Foster Wheeler Combined site study and PDP development with Foster Wheeler Total Site Combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 Combined Phase 1 and Phase 2 Total Site Additional Benefits through Capacity/Yield improvement Additional Benefits through Energy improvement Details Hydrogen Energy and Capacity Hydrogen Energy Energy and Capacity Energy Energy and Capacity Energy and Capacity Hydrogen Hydrogen Energy and Hydrogen Hydrogen Unit Site CDU Site Site CDU Site CDU CDU Site Site Site Site Site Site Site Site Site Site Site HDS Site Site Site Site Site Site CDU Project Start 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2003 2003 2003 2003 2002 2002 2002 2001 2001 2000 1999 1999 1998 1998 1998 1998 1998 1998 1998

Water

Additional Benefits through Capacity increase

Petronas, Melaka Marathon Ashland, Robinson Phillips, Texas Crown , Texas Engen, Durban

Malaysia USA USA USA

Capital cost reduction - hydrogen Energy reduction Yield and capacity Energy reduction

Site Site CDU FCC CDU/VDU/ Visbreaker

1998 1997 1997 1997 1995

South Africa Energy reduction

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

42

Track Record Ethylene

Process Consulting Services - Ethylene Experience
Company Samsung-Total Chemicals, Daesan S Korea Samsung Total, Daesan, S Korea LG Chem, Ltd, Daesan, S. Korea Lotte Daesan Petroch Corp., S Korea Honam Petrochem. Corp., Yeosu S Korea LG Petrochemicals Co. Ltd., S Korea Lyondell, Corpus Christi, USA Total-Fina FAO NC3, Antwerp Lyondell, Clinton, USA Lyondell, Morris, USA Hunstman Port Neches, USA Huntsman, Port Arthur, TX Total Petrochemical, Gonfreville, France Lotte, Daesan, S Korea CPC, Lin Yuan, Taiwan Huntsman Odesa, TX Innovene (2), Choc Bayou, TX Nanhai, China KPIC, Ulsan, S Korea Shell, Berre, France Williams Olefins, TX Samsung Total, Daesan, S Korea Huntsman Odesa, TX About the plant When built (approx.) Naphtha 1990 Naphtha 1990 Naphtha 1999 Naphtha 1999 Naphtha 1990 Naphtha 1991 Ethane/Propane/Liquids 1975 Naphtha 1989 Ethane/Propane 1989 Ethane/Propane 1989 Ethane/Propane 1970's E/P/Liquids 1975/1987 Naphtha 1988 Naphtha 1999 Naphtha 1984 Ethane/Propane 1969/1996 E/P/Liquids 1976 Naphtha Naphtha 1991 Naphtha 1980 Ethane 1975 Naphtha 1990 Ethane/Propane 1969/1996 Feedstock Licensor Lummus Lummus KBR KBR Lummus Lummus KBR MW Kellogg MW Kellogg Lummus S&W Lummus/S&W S&W KBR Lummus Braun/S&W Braun/S&W S&W Lummus TPL Lummus Lummus Braun/S&W About the study Preliminary or Study Year detailed study Debottlenecking Detailed 2009 Energy Detailed 2008 Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed 2008 Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed 2008 Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed 2008 Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed 2007 Energy Detailed 2007 Energy Detailed 2007 Energy Detailed 2007 Energy Detailed 2007 Performance Improvement Detailed 2007 Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed (all cases) 2006 Energy Detailed 2006 Debottlenecking Detailed 2005 Performance Improvement Detailed 2005 Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed (all cases) 2005 Modeling / Perf Improvement Detailed 2005 Quench modelling only 2004 Debottlenecking Detailed 2004 Modelling only 2004 Modelling only 2004 Debottlenecking Detailed 2004 Debottlenecking/Energy Detailed 2004 Type of study

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

43

Track Record Ethylene (ctd)

Process Consulting Services - Ethylene Experience
Company BP Refinery Offgas Rayong Olefins Co., Thailand Samsung General Chemicals Yangzi (Chinese Petro. Co.) Yeochun NCC Co., Yeosu, S. Korea Equate, Kuwait LG PC, S. Korea BP GO Honam Exxon (BOP), TX Westlake (P-I PFP) Westlake (P-II PFP) Equistar Choc. Bay., TX ExxonMobil Chemicals Equistar Chan. View OP2, TX Westlake (P-II PFP) Huntsman BASF (PA) Hanwha, Yosu, S. Korea Condea Vista Exxon (FAO), Belgium Sunoco BP Amoco (1), Choc Bay, TX BP Amoco (2), Choc Bay, TX Philips 66 (U24), Sweeney, TX Titan Petro (TPC 1),Malaysia Nippon Petrochemical Mitsui Chemical DSM Showa Denko Polifin (1), S. Africa Polifin (2), S. Africa About the plant When built Licensor (approx.) Offgas Naphtha/LPG 1998 Lummus LPG/N/AGO 1991 Lummus N/AGO 1990 Lummus Naphtha 1991 S&W Ethane 1997 B&R Naphtha 1989 Lummus E/P/B/N Concept BP Naphtha 1990 Lummus Gas / Liquids 1980's Exxon Ethane 1990 MW Kellogg Ethane/Propane/C4 1998 Lummus Naphtha 1982 Lummus Liquid Naphtha 1978 Lummus Ethane/Propane/C4 1998 Lummus Ethane/Propane 1997(Revamp) S&W Naphtha New Lummus Naphtha 1992 S&W Ethane 1989 S&W Naphtha 1968 S&W Ethane 1967 Lummus E/P/Liquids 1975 Braun E/P/Liquids 1976 Braun/S&W Ethane/Propane 1976 Braun Naphtha 1994 S&W Naphtha 1975 S&W Naphtha 1975 Naphtha 1975 Lummus Naphtha 1970 S&W Ethane/Propane 1985 KTI / Linde Ethane 1972 S&W / Linde Feedstock About the study Preliminary or detailed study Grass Roots Design Detailed Revamp/Perf Impro Detailed Modelling only Detailed Modelling only Debottlenecking / Energy Detailed Modeling / Perf Improvement Detailed C2 Splitter Study Detailed Grass Roots Detailed Energy Detailed Revamp Detailed Performance Improvement Detailed Debottlenecking Detailed Debottlenecking Detailed Grass Roots Detailed Debottlenecking Detailed Perf, improvement / modelling Detailed Modelling only Modelling only Energy / Debottlenecking Detailed Debottlenecking Preliminary Debottlenecking Preliminary Energy Detailed Debottlenecking Detailed Debottlenecking Detailed Debottlenecking Detailed Debottlenecking Detailed Energy Part of Total Site Special (exergy analysis) Preliminary Debottlenecking Preliminary Energy Preliminary Debottlenecking Preliminary Debottlenecking Preliminary Type of study Study Year 2003 2003 2002 2002 2001 2001 2001 2001-4 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 2000 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1999 1998 1998 1998 1997 1997 1997 1997 1997

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

44

Track Record Other Chemicals

Process Consulting Services - Chemicals Experience
Company Honam Petrochemical Huntsman Tessenderlo YPC Huntsman TPC (Port Neches) Huntsman Huntsman Lyondell Kraton KP Chemicals Samsung Total GS Caltex TPC (Houston) Equistar Starchem PIC GE KMI Celanese BP Tuntex KPI Chevron Phillips Celanese SK Chemicals Sasol SK Chemicals Samsung YPF Huntsman Country Daesan, Korea Texas, USA Belgium China Texas, USA Texas, USA Texas, USA Texas, USA Texas, USA Germany Korea Korea Korea Texas, USA Texas, USA Texas, USA Kuwait New York, USA Indonesia Texas, USA UK Thailand Indonesia Texas, USA Kentucky, USA Korea South Africa Korea Korea Argentina Texas, USA Process Total Site Ethylene Oxide, Ethylene Glycol VCM Aromatics / pXylene DiGlycolAmine / Morpholine Butadiene recovery (C4's) - NMP Ethylene Oxide, Ethylene Glycol PO-MTBE Butadiene recovery (C4's) - ACN C5/C6 Solvent Separation pXylene Aromatics / pXylene Aromatics / pXylene Butadiene recovery (C4's) - DMF, Furfural Isoprene recovery (C5's) Methanol Ammonia / Reformer Cresol and Xylenol Methanol Vinyl Acetate Monomer Acetyls / Acetic Acid Purified Terephthalic Acid Ammonia / Reformer n-Alpha Olefins Polyvinyl Alcohol Purified Terephthalic Acid Chem-FT Dimethyl Terephthalate Aromatics / pXylene Linear Alkyl Benzene Linear Alkyl Benzene Type of Study Energy reduction Energy reduction EDC Section Energy Reduction Modelling / Energy Reduction Energy reduction Energy reduction Energy reduction Energy reduction Energy reduction/expansion Debottlenecking Energy Reduction Modelling Energy Reduction Energy reduction/reconfiguration Energy reduction/expansion Modeling/process development Modelling Modelling and Process Improvement Modelling Energy reduction Energy Reduction Modelling / Partial revamp Modelling Modelling Energy/Debottlenecking Modeling/Expansion Process development Energy reduction Energy Energy reduction Debottlenecking/Energy reduction Details Pinch only Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Pinch only Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Preliminary Detailed Detailed Detailed Azeo Sepn Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Detailed Study Year 2009 2009 2009 2009 2008 2008 2007 2007 2007 2007 2006 2006 2006 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2005 2004 2004 2004 2004 2004 2003 2002 2001 2001 2001 1999 1998

2010 Aspen Technology, Inc. All rights reserved

45