New Catalysts Emerge

A variety of processes will benefit.

By Seán Ottewell, Editor at Large

Share Print Related RSS
Page 3 of 4 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 View on one page

Richard Gay, BASF Qtech acting general manager, notes, "In developing the technology, we did not find one coating that would meet the needs of all crackers, all feedstocks, and all operating conditions. So we are advancing two coatings, a low-catalytic gasifier (LCG) and a high-catalytic gasifier (HCG). The LCG coating we believe is what is required in conventional ethane/propane cracking given the coking profile that is observed in the field. For naphtha crackers, we currently use the LCG coating where coking rates are low, and install the HCG coating where they are significantly higher. The Gen-2 products that are under development will build on this foundation."

"The Gen-1-ethane product is expected to be available commercially by year-end with the completion of one lifecycle field testing, and as we complete our assessment of coil samples and operating results, we will undertake any further optimization that may be warranted before commercial introduction."

The Gen-1-ethane product is delivering its expected benefits and Gen-1-naptha and Gen-2 are on target to achieve theirs, too, he adds. Specific results and goals include:

• Furnace run-length — Gen-1 achieved 1–2 years for lighter feedstocks and 100–400 days for heavier feedstocks, much better than the typical run of 10–90 days for uncoated coils; Gen-2 targets are 1,000+ days for lighter feedstocks and 200–500 days for heavier feedstocks;

• Energy and greenhouse-gas reductions — Gen-1 gave a 3–12% decrease for both lighter and heavier feedstocks; Gen-2 aims for a further 5–20% decrease for both feedstocks;

• Furnace coil lifetime: Gen-1-ethane provided one full lifecycle exceeding 4 years, which is on par with uncoated coils, while the Gen1-naptha is still undergoing its first lifecycle field testing, which should be completed in 2013; the goal for Gen-2 is 6–12 years for both feedstocks;

• Process temperature reduction: Gen-1 cut temperature by 20–60°C with both feedstocks; Gen-2 targets a 40–100°C reduction with both feedstocks.

FASTER RATES
Meanwhile, Velocys, Plain City, Ohio, is working on design and development of Fischer-Tropsch (FT) microchannel reactors (Figure 3) that enable reactions to occur at rates 10–15 times quicker than in conventional systems. The reactors consist of blocks containing thousands of narrow process channels filled with FT catalyst, which are interleaved with water-filled coolant channels. This provides much faster dissipation of the heat produced by the highly exothermic FT reaction than in conventional systems — and thus allows use of more-active FT catalysts, ones made by the proprietary organic matrix combustion (OMX) process of sister company Oxford Catalysts.

"Our OMX method allows us to produce highly controlled particle sizes with narrow distributions. So, therefore, the catalyst is highly active, stable and selective. In FT catalysis, all three are challenges — and especially in the microchannel business where catalysts need to be vastly more productive," says Kai Jarosch, Veolocys' manager, catalyst and material sciences.

"Our catalysts are head-and-shoulders above what is seen anywhere else. For example, in a typical slurry bed you would be looking at a catalyst producing 250 kg/m3/h of product. Our OMX catalyst achieved 1,500 kg/m3/h in a demonstration project," he notes.

This and other demonstration projects are opening up a host of opportunities for microchannel FT, particularly in gas-to-liquid (GTL) related activities, Jarosch adds.

"The growing disconnect between the price of gas and the price of oil is really helping us. The continued increase in gas discoveries, for example the huge recent shale gas find in the U.S., [is] increasing the differential between the two prices. The gas people want to convert their product into oil.

"On offshore GTL, we generate a real bang for the buck because we can achieve high productivity with a compact footprint. For example a 2,000-bbl/d GTL reactor takes up only one-quarter the space on a deck of a floating production vessel. Conventional technologies cannot meet the footprint, weight and height restrictions for floating production."

Page 3 of 4 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 View on one page
Share Print Reprints Permissions

What are your comments?

Join the discussion today. Login Here.

Comments

No one has commented on this page yet.

RSS feed for comments on this page | RSS feed for all comments