The most efficient and secure method for producing urea fertilizer in Qatar

Final Report

Khadega Al-Askari 60098609

Sohayla ElMokadem 60105401

School of General Studies, University of Doha for Science and Technology

COMM3010: Research and Reporting

Dr. Cristina Fabretto

November 17, 2024

 1

ABSTRACT

This research report reviews the various urea production methods in Qatar to identify the

most ecologically and energy-efficient approach. The traditional urea production methods in

Qatar require a lot of energy and emit a lot of greenhouse gases, which have an effect on the

economy and the environment. Given Qatar's commitment to sustainability, it is imperative to

look at greener options that lower emissions and operating costs. This report compares the

energy use, effectiveness, environmental impact, and cost implications of three modern urea

production techniques: Stamicarbon, Snamprogetti, and ACES (Advanced Process for Cost and

Energy Saving). The ACES method is the most cost-effective and environmentally friendly

choice due to its high energy recovery, enhanced CO₂ conversion rate, and reduced long-term

operating expenses. According to the study, implementing the ACES technique might

significantly reduce Qatar's environmental effect from urea production while also increasing

economic viability.
2
 3

I. INTRODUCTION
According to Noorhana Yahya [1], there is little doubt that using conventional fertilizer

plants to produce urea has an impact on the environment and the economy. Since urea is a

nitrogen based fertiliser, its production is vital to Qatar's industrial and agricultural sectors.

However, the security and effectiveness of the current production techniques must be reviewed

in light of the growing environmental concerns and the demand for sustainable energy sources.

Moreover, according to A. M. Motasim et al, [2], the use of urea has a notable impact on

greenhouse gas emissions from agricultural soils, specifically carbon dioxide, nitrous oxide, and

methane. The goal of this proposed report is to determine the safest and most effective way to

produce urea while minimizing its negative effects on the environment and maximizing

productivity. Urea fertiliser is produced in Qatar using a traditional method. However, these

traditional methods have a number of significant negative effects on the environment, including

high emissions and energy waste. Although Qata is one of the major producers of urea fertiliser

in the Gulf, there are various processes that increase their energy and economic efficiency while

reducing their adverse environmental consequences. This research attempts to evaluate and

recommend the safest and most efficient urea production technique with an emphasis on

sustainability and economic feasibility.

 4

II. BACKGROUND
i. Problems of Current Methods

The traditional methods of producing urea in Qatar utilize a lot of energy and release

harmful pollutants into the atmosphere, such as CO2. Moreover, these processes usually use

huge amounts of water and other resources which can making them unsustainable in the long

term. Concerns regarding the need for new sustainable production methods have been

highlighted by the negative environmental effects of these traditional processes. As noted by

Dalmau, Berbel, and Fernández [3], this growing use of urea leads to negative impacts on the

environment, particularly the growth in atmospheric quantities of nitrous oxide (N₂O), a

greenhouse gas that is 298 times more powerful than carbon dioxide.

ii. Overview of Urea Manufacturing in Qatar

In 2020 [4], Qatar, through QAFCO, achieved the highest recorded production levels of

urea, reaching 5.8 million metric tons (MT). With this achievement, Qatar solidified its position

as a significant participant in the world market for urea. These plants typically operate using

conventional methods that focus on ammonia synthesis followed by urea production. The

ammonia production process itself is energy-intensive and emits a considerable amount of CO2.

With global environmental regulations tightening, there is increasing pressure on industries in

Qatar to shift toward greener alternatives.

Figure 1Urea Plant

Mesaieed QAFCO
 5

iii. The Importance of Selecting the Safest and Most Secure Process

According to Pratap John [5], While Qatar stands out as the second-top global

exporter of urea, with urea constituting 43.6% of the GCC’s total nutrient production in 2022,

traditional urea manufacturing techniques use a lot of natural gas and are resource-intensive.

The process used to produce urea involves ammonia synthesis, which raises carbon emissions

considerably. In addition to protecting the environment, choosing a safe and secure urea

production method is crucial for maintaining the stability of Qatar's urea supply. Selecting a

technique that improves operational security and reduces hazards, like chemical spills or

accidents, is essential. To guarantee a sustainable production process, the technique should

also be dependable in terms of cost-effectiveness and efficiency. D. Bose [6], highlights that

by implementing technology such as carbon capture and storage into practice, CO2 emissions

may be greatly decreased while urea production remains efficient. Additionally, integrating

renewable energy into the production process offers promising alternatives for minimizing the

carbon footprint of Qatar’s urea industry. Given Qatar’s commitment to environmental

sustainability, as outlined in its National Vision 2030, exploring these alternative, greener

production methods is essential.

 6

Figure 2
 7

III. DISCUSSION

i. Comparison of the Processes

Several alternative methods have been identified as more environmentally friendly and

efficient compared to the traditional process. These methods include:

 Stamicarbon Process
According to KUMAR [7], an inventive and efficient method for the agriculture industry to

create urea is the Urea Fertilizer Plant, which uses the Stamicarbon technology. This method's

great efficiency and low emissions are well-known. It comprises a two-step synthesis process in

which carbon dioxide and ammonia react at high temperatures. The Stamicarbon technique is

renowned for its low energy use and small plant architecture.

Figure 3

 Snamprogetti Process
Acoording to Dr. Amar [8], another alternative process that has drawn interest is the

Snamprogetti Process, which integrates heat effectively and emits few emissions. It works by

removing ammonia from the urea solution and recovering it in a closed-loop system, both of

which dramatically lower ammonia losses and improve energy efficiency. Compared to

conventional techniques, it is able to achieve better energy utilisation by recovering and reusing

heat throughout the process. The reduction of ammonia emissions, a significant environmental
 8

concern in the production of urea, is one of its primary benefits. However, compared to other

methods, this one may be more difficult to implement and need a larger initial capital

expenditure, which could be a deterrent for certain firms.

Figure 4

 ACES Process
According to MUKESH [8], ACES, which stands for Advanced Process for Cost and

Energy Saving, was developed by the Japanese Toyo Engineering Corporation. These

processes usually entail reactor design advancements, the employment of sophisticated

catalysts, and heat recovery system optimisation. Heat integration, which permits the

recycling and reuse of heat generated at different stages during the urea synthesis process, is

an essential part of the system. This not only uses less energy, but it also reduces the overall

carbon effect. Since these innovative technologies can also lower the operational costs of

urea synthesis, they are ultimately economically attractive. However, they may be more

expensive up front, like other cutting-edge technologies, which could deter some companies

from making the transition.

 9

Figure 5
Comparison processes is provided in this table.

Table 1
 10

ii. Selection of the Most Suitable Process

The primary goal of the original ACES Process was to reduce the amount of energy used

in the urea plant by combining the advantages of the stripping and solution recycle

processes, which resulted in a high CO2 conversion and extremely effective unreacted

material separation. When compared to previous processes, the ACES Process significantly

decreased the amount of steam used. According to, SAKATA [9], the ACES Process

produces the highest CO2 conversion rate among contemporary urea processes, 68%, by

guaranteeing an NH3 to CO2 molar ratio (N/C ratio) of 4.0 and an operating temperature of

190 °C in the reactor. The high conversion of CO2 lowers the energy needed for the

breakdown of unconverted elements. The ammonium carbamate and surplus ammonia in the

urea synthesis solution are effectively broken down and separated from the reactor by the

specially built tray-falling film Stripper. In Qatar, where energy prices are high and

production processes must be optimised for efficiency, this process is particularly crucial.

iii. Why This Process is Selected

Selection Criteria:

Table 2: Selection criteria

of the processes
 11

Every method has pros and cons of its own, as indicated by the information provided in

the previous tables. Because the stamicarbon process balances its benefits and

drawbacks,there are two for each that might be chosen. Because the snamprogetti process

has more drawbacks than benefits, it is less likely to be chosen. The ACES process has more

benefits than drawbacks. In addition to being cheap cost of production and high energy

recovery, it is also highly efficient and ecologically benign when compared to the first two

methods. Without a doubt, the ACES process is the most efficient and environmentally

responsible option. Because of its enhanced sterilisation reaction integration, which enables

higher energy recovery, the ACES process uses less energy than the Stamicarbon and

Snamprogetti processes. The ACES process is consequently the most ecologically friendly

of the three since it consumes less energy and generates fewer pollutants. The ACES

method is ultimately the most cost-effective choice because to the long-term operational

savings brought about by its energy efficiency and highly effective process design, despite

having a higher initial capital cost than the other processes. Thus, the Advanced Process for

Cost and Energy Saving is the most effective approach for our project.
 12

IV. CONCLUSION

This proposal aims to find the most secure and effective way to produce urea to support

Qatar's sustainability goals. The project's goal is to preserve economic efficiency while reducing

the urea production's negative environmental effects. The transition to more efficient and

environmentally secure urea production methods is critical for Qatar’s sustainability efforts.

Among the alternatives evaluated, the ACES process offers the best balance of cost savings,

energy efficiency, and environmental protection. Its selection will contribute to Qatar’s goal of

reducing its carbon footprint while maintaining high production standards in urea

manufacturing.In addition to helping the environment, this technique promotes Qatar's long-term

industrial and economic development. This study examines the environmental problems caused

by conventional urea production techniques in Qatar and assesses more sustainable alternatives.

The ACES process's suggestion is in line with Qatar's objectives to lower emissions and boost

fertiliser industry energy efficiency.

 13

V. REFERENCES

[1] N. Yahya, “Urea Fertilizer: The Global Challenges and Their Impact to Our Sustainability,”
in Green energy and technology, 2018, pp. 1–21. doi: 10.1007/978-981-10-7578-0_1.

[2] A. M. Motasim et al., “Urea application in soil: processes, losses, and alternatives—a
review,” Discover Agriculture, vol. 2, no. 1, Jul. 2024, doi: 10.1007/s44279-024-00060-z.

[3] J. Martínez-Dalmau, J. Berbel, and R. Ordóñez-Fernández, “Nitrogen fertilization: A review

of the risks associated with the inefficiency of its use and policy responses,” Sustainability, vol.
13, no. 10, p. 5625, May 2021. doi: 10.3390/su13105625.

[4] QAFCO, “Sustainability Report 2021,” QAFCO, [Online]. Available:

https://www.qafco.qa/sites/default/files/publications/QAFCO_Substainability_Report_20210407
_FINAL.pdf. [Accessed: Oct. 23, 2024].

[5] P. John, “Qatar second-top global exporter of urea,” Gulf Times, [Online]. Available:
https://www.gulf-times.com/article/681475/qatar/qatar-second-top-global-exporter-of-u.
[Accessed: Oct. 23, 2024].

[6] D. Bose et al., “Innovative approaches for carbon capture and storage as crucial measures for
emission reduction within industrial sectors,” Carbon Capture Science & Technology, vol. 12, p.
100238, Jun. 2024. doi: 10.1016/j.ccst.2024.100238.

[7]“KUMAR BHASKAR & PRATAP CHANDRA DAS,” MANUFACTURE OF UREA, 1991.

[Online]. Available: http://ethesis.nitrkl.ac.in/4237/1/Manufacture_of_Urea.pdf

[8]Dr. Amar Nath Giri--Greenko group. (2015, August 9). The Snamprogetti urea Process
Description. https://dramarnathgiri.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-snamprogetti-urea-process.html?
m=1#google_vignette

[9]Urea project. (n.d.). In MUKESH M. CHAUHAN. (2022). In UREA

PROJECT. https://ureaknowhow.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/2022-Chauhan-Urea-Project-
Report.pdf
 14

[10]SAKATA. (n.d.). In Latest Urea Technology for Improving Performance and Product
Quality. TOYOENGINEERINGCORPORATION. https://www.toyo-eng.com/jp/en/products/
petrochmical/urea/technical_paper/pdf/
2001_Latest_Urea_Technology_for_Improving_Performance_and_Product_Quality.PDF

Fig 1 Urea Plant mesaieed QAFCO. (n.d.). https://www.mesit.com/en/projects/3/urea-

plant-mesaieed-qafco.html

Figure 2 QNA/Doha, “Qatar eyes sustainable future with eco initiatives,” Gulf Times, Jun. 19,
2024. [Online].Available: https://www.gulf-times.com/article/685079/qatar/qatar-eyes-
sustainable-future-with-eco-initiatives

Figure. 3 K. M. N. I. Ripon, “Urea Plant (Part-1),” Nov. 10,

2023. https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/urea-plant-a-k-m-nazrul-islam-ripon-cfknf

Figure 4 Dr. Amar Nath Giri--Greenko group. (2015, August 9). The Snamprogetti urea Process
Description. https://dramarnathgiri.blogspot.com/2015/08/the-snamprogetti-urea-process.html?
m=1#google_vignette

Figure 5 Urea project. (n.d.). In MUKESH M. CHAUHAN. (2022). In UREA

PROJECT. https://ureaknowhow.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/2022-Chauhan-Urea-Project-
Report.pdf
 15

VI. APPENDIX

Gantt Chart

Task Name Duration(days) Start Finish

Method of Producing Urea in 79 06-10-2024 23-11-2024

Qatar
Report Proposal 10 02-10-2024 11-10-2024
Final Report Outline Draft 5 12-10-2024 16-10-2024
Annotated Bibliography 5 19-10-2024 23-10-2024
Gannt Chart 1 17-10-2024 18-10-2024
Final Report Presentation 5 18-11-2024 23-11-2024
Final Report 45 24-10-2024 23-11-2024
Fig. 1. The overall project schedule displaying various assignments.

Fig

. 2. A Gantt chart displaying an estimated timeline for the completion of each assignment.