Comparative Study and Analysis of Cryogenic Storage Tanks with Different Storage Energy Media

Abstract

Liquefied natural gas (LNG), ethylene, ethane, propane, and other clean energy are often stored in a cryogenically frozen state on a large scale. As the core equipment of cryogenic energy storage tanks, if different cryogenic energy media are stored, there are certain differences in the design of the storage tanks. Although the design specifications differ little, there is a lack of systematic research. This paper compares the material, process, structure, construction, and commissioning of cryogenic storage tanks such as ethylene, ethane, propane, and LNG storage tanks, and studies the feasibility of replacing C2 and C3 refrigerated hydrocarbon storage tanks with LNG storage tanks. The results show that different refrigerated hydrocarbon storage tanks have common points in terms of design and construction standards, design processes, outer tanks, and cold insulation materials, while differences in internal tank materials, medium density, temperature, and other aspects lead to differences in technology, structure, construction, start-up, and commissioning. It is concluded that C2 cryogenic storage tank is theoretically feasible to replace with the LNG storage tank, while C3 cryogenic storage tank is not suitable to replace with the LNG storage tank due to the high design temperature of the inner tank material.