REFERENCES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. Bartle, K. D., Jones, D. W. and Pakdel, H., "Separ<strong>at</strong>ion and Spectros<strong>co</strong>py <strong>of</strong> Paraffinic Hydrocarbons from Coalt1 in "Analytical Methods for Coal and Coal Products", C. Karr, Jr., ed., Academic Press, NY, NY, 1978. Burke, F. P., Winschel, R. A. and Pochapsky, T.C., Fuel 1981, 60, 562. Winschel, R. A., Robbins, G. A. and Burke, F. P., Fuel 1986, 65(4), 526. Consolid<strong>at</strong>ion Coal Company, "Pilot Scale Development <strong>of</strong> the CSF Process", U.S. Department <strong>of</strong> Interior, OCR RED Rep. No. 39, Vol. 5, Book 3, November, 1971. Plumlee, K. W., Zaczepinski, S., and Hu, A. Y., Proceedings <strong>of</strong> the Seventh Annual EPRl Contractors' Conference on Coal <strong>Liquefaction</strong>, EPRl Report No. AP-2718, p. 12-1. Cronauer, D. C., Jewell, D. M., Shah, Y. T. and Kuesar, K. A., Ind. Eng. Chem. Fundam. 1978, 17, 291. Curran, C. P., Struck, R. T. and Corin, E., Ind. Eng. Chem. Dev. 1967, 6, 166. Clarke, J. W., Rantell, T. D. and Snape, C. E., Fuel 1984, 63, 1476. Proc. Des. Youtcheff, J. S., Given, P. H., Baset, Z. and Sundaram, M. S., Org. Ceochem. 1983, 5(3), 157. Chemical Marketing Reporter, December 23, 1985. Zurcher, P., "Dewaxing" in "Petroleum Refinery Engineering", Fourth Edition, W. L. Nelson, ed., McCraw-Hill Book Co., Inc., NY, NY, 1958. Burke, F. P., Winschel, R. A. and Robbins, C. A., "Recycle Slurry Oil Characteriz<strong>at</strong>ion - Final Report", DOE Contract No. DE-AC22-80PC30027, March, 1985. Winschel, R. A., Robbins, C. A. and Burke, F. P., "Coal <strong>Liquefaction</strong> Process Solvent Characteriz<strong>at</strong>ion and Evalu<strong>at</strong>ion - Technical Progress Report for July 1, 1985, through September 30, 1985", DOE Contract No. DE-AC22-84PC70018, December, 1985. Maxwell, J. R., Pillinger, C. T. and Eglington, C., 4. Rev., Chem. SOC. 1971, 25, 571. 263
TABLE 1 EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS AND PRODUCT YIELDS Conditions Yields, wt % Experiment Feed O i l Acetone/ Dewaxed Mass No. I.D. T, OC Oil, v/v Wax Oi 1 Balance --- Urea Adduction Method 2 #1 Ketone Method 4 #1 5 #1 Room 5.0 88.8 93.8 -20 2.0 9.1 90.7 99.8 -50 3.3 20.6 79.3 99.9 14 #2 -50 3.0 47.4 52.0 99.4 7 #3 -20 3.0 14.5 83.2 97.7 13 9 #3(a) #4 -50 -20 3.0 3.0 32.7 5.2 66.5 93.9 99.1 99.1 10 11 #4 #5 -50 -50 3.0 3.0 9.2 3.2 90.0 96.3 99.1 99.5 12 #6 -50 (C) 7.9 90.7 98.6 (a) Redistilled to 1000°F- immedi<strong>at</strong>ely before experiment (98.3% distill<strong>at</strong>e). (b) Urea phod used, see Experimental section. (c) 85OOF residual <strong>oil</strong> used as feed, see Experimental section. Experiment No. 2 4 5 14 7 13 TABLE 2 MICROAUTOCLAVE TEST RESULTS Coal Conversion, wt % MAF Waxes Feed Oil Dewaxed Oil - 80.9 80.9 80.9 84.9 87.1 88.2 70.8 80.1 87.1 83.7 55.1 - 79.2 55.7 55.7 63.3 86.2 55.4157.2 60.5 65.6 62.5 - 264
- Page 1 and 2:
ABSTRACT LIQUEFACTION CO-PROCESSING
- Page 3 and 4:
eaction temperature, 1000-1500 psig
- Page 5 and 6:
6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15
- Page 7 and 8:
I 0" 100- I I I WyO-3 P 3: 1500 psi
- Page 9 and 10:
11.3 A-6 yJ 600 OF, 1500 psig CO, 3
- Page 11 and 12:
Experimental UDqradinq and Cooroces
- Page 13 and 14:
catalytic to the thermal hydrogenat
- Page 15 and 16:
the reaction with oil production re
- Page 17 and 18:
TET did not promote the production
- Page 19 and 20:
MICROAUTOCLAVE DESCRIPTION AND PROC
- Page 21 and 22:
FEEDSTOCK PROPERTIES Some propertie
- Page 23 and 24:
CONCLUSIONS HRI's microautoclave ha
- Page 25 and 26:
176
- Page 27 and 28:
100. 2 8%. M = ?8. 38. .... . . . .
- Page 29 and 30:
CATALYTIC CO-PROCESSINS OF OHIO NO.
- Page 31 and 32:
CATALYST COMPARISON STUDY The premi
- Page 33 and 34:
fractions and a decrease of heavier
- Page 35 and 36:
TABLE 2 Coal Analyses I1 1 i noi s
- Page 37 and 38:
Temperature WHSV, G/hr/cc TABLE 6 C
- Page 39 and 40:
z FIGURE 3 COAL REACTIVITY SCREENIN
- Page 41 and 42:
COPROCESSING USING HzS AS A PROMOTE
- Page 43 and 44:
- 3 - that product yields depend on
- Page 45 and 46:
- 5 - occurs in the yields of aspha
- Page 47 and 48:
Table 1 Analysis of Feedstocks Fore
- Page 49 and 50:
THO-STAGE COPROCESSING OF SUBBITUMI
- Page 51 and 52:
esult in retrogressive reactions ta
- Page 53 and 54:
8. 6. Ignasiak, L. Lewkowicz, G. Ko
- Page 55 and 56:
Table 4 OVERALL MASS BALANCE FOR TH
- Page 57 and 58:
BACKGROUND COAL LIQUEFACTION/RESID
- Page 59 and 60:
system, which could be operated wit
- Page 61 and 62: TABLE 1 EFFECT OF LC-FINING~"' TEMP
- Page 63 and 64: Figure 1. SCHEMATIC OF LCI CO-PROCE
- Page 65 and 66: SIMULATION OF A COAL/PETROLEuII RES
- Page 67 and 68: 20 pseudocomponents was developed t
- Page 69 and 70: ottoms is less sensitive to the num
- Page 71 and 72: Low Pressure Separator A temperatur
- Page 73 and 74: 7. Gallier, P.W., Boston, J.F., Wu,
- Page 75 and 76: I I I I I I I I I 100- --- Experime
- Page 77 and 78: Coprocessing Schemes The coprocessi
- Page 79 and 80: processing 25,000 and 150,000 bbl/d
- Page 81 and 82: FIGURE 1 I DISTRIBUTION OF REFINERI
- Page 83 and 84: Table 1. Samples Analyzed PNLNumber
- Page 85 and 86: the coal itself. The chemical compo
- Page 87 and 88: - - ITSL PAH Fraction PAH Fraction
- Page 89 and 90: PROCESS DEVELOPMENT STUDIES OF TWO-
- Page 91 and 92: SUMMARY e The major effect of close
- Page 93 and 94: omw '??h 4NO WNID ?N? 000 wmm c9'1'
- Page 95 and 96: tl f 246
- Page 97 and 98: 248
- Page 99 and 100: qkCqQ r! o! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 I-UH ')I
- Page 101 and 102: Materials The catalyst was shell 32
- Page 103 and 104: CONCLUSIONS Separation of a light h
- Page 105 and 106: Table 3. Results of activity testin
- Page 107 and 108: feed coal and plant configuration a
- Page 109 and 110: P1 #2 #3 114 115 #6 ITSL subbitumin
- Page 111: temperature, time and solvent power
- Page 115 and 116: la Figure 1. lH-NMR spectra of samp
- Page 117 and 118: PERFORMANCE OF THE LOW TEMPERATURE
- Page 119 and 120: BENCH UNIT DESCRIPTION Process deve
- Page 121 and 122: Recycle Residuum Hydrogenati On Res
- Page 123 and 124: FIRST STAGE HRI'S CATALYTIC TWO STA
- Page 125 and 126: FIRST-STAQ COAL CONVERSION (W I IIA
- Page 127 and 128: REACTOR SOLIOS HTOROGEN/CARBON ATOl
- Page 129 and 130: TRANSPORTATION FUELS FROM TWO-STAGE
- Page 131 and 132: Process Identification LV% Of AS- R
- Page 133 and 134: Table I11 HYDROTREATING TESTS WITH
- Page 135 and 136: Table IV HYDROTREATING TO 0.2 PPM N
- Page 137 and 138: Table VI EFFECT OF BOILING RANGE ON
- Page 139 and 140: (4) In all cases studied, the jet f
- Page 141 and 142: 292
- Page 143 and 144: INTEGRATED TWO-STAGE LIQUEFACTION:
- Page 145 and 146: are over-riding features in its fav
- Page 147 and 148: Complementary fundamental studies o
- Page 149 and 150: Comparative Economics of Two-Stage
- Page 151 and 152: The variation in hydrotreating cost
- Page 153 and 154: FIGURE 1: COMPARISONS OF ILLINOIS N
- Page 155 and 156: Process TABLE 1: TWO-STAGE PROCESSE
- Page 157 and 158: Abstract Temperature-Staged Catalyt
- Page 159 and 160: Results and Discussion Reactions in
- Page 161 and 162: 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Derbyshire, F. J. an
- Page 163 and 164:
I LL a rJJW ., .. ;> 0 i s W 8 a 31
- Page 165 and 166:
Materials Feeds to the WGS-solvent
- Page 167 and 168:
products. Thus, coupling the WGS an
- Page 169 and 170:
5. R. J. Xottenstette, Sandia Natio
- Page 171 and 172:
ENHANCED COAL LIQUEFACTION WITH STE
- Page 173 and 174:
change in weight being compared to
- Page 175 and 176:
I I aromatic ring. The group of sig
- Page 177 and 178:
T,\llI.l< I ASAI,YSIS OP \\YOl)Al\:
- Page 179 and 180:
00 3000 2000 le00 1600 1400 1200 IO
- Page 181 and 182:
THE EFFECT OF REACTION CONDITIONS O
- Page 183 and 184:
and may ultiontely form methyl-subs
- Page 185 and 186:
! 5. Narain, N.K., Utz, B.R., Appel
- Page 187:
4 (u I t + 9 (u I 337 - Q 0