Liquefaction co-processing of coal shale oil at - Argonne National ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

9. H. D. Schindler. J. M. Chen and J. 0. Potts. "Integrated Two-Stage Liquefaction", Final Technical Report - DOE Contract No. PC 50021-911, July 1985. 10. B. R. Rodgers. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Private Communication, 1983. 11. J. H. Shinn, "From Coal Single-Stage and Two-Stage Products: Model of Coal Structure, Fuel, Vol. 63, 1187, 1984. 12. J. M. Chen and H. D. Schindler, "A Lumped Kinetic Model for Hydroprocessing Coal Extract," AIChE Spring National Meeting, Houston, TX, April 1985. 13. A Reactive R. F. Sullivan, "Two-Stage Hydrocracking of ITSL Oil for Jet Fyel and Naphtha." Proceedings of Direct Coal Liquefaction Contractors Review Meeting, Albuquerque, NM, Page 238, October 1984. 14. R. A. Winschel and F. P. Burke, "Recycle Slurry Oil Characterization" Second Annual Report, October 1, 1981 through September 30, 1982, DOE Contract PC 30027-39, August 1983. 299
Comparative Economics of Two-Stage Liquefaction Processes David Gray, Glen Tomllnson, Abdel El Sawy and Abu Talib The MITRE Corporation. 1820 Dolley Madison Blvd. Mclean, Va. 22102 Background It has been recognized in research and development carried out by Lummus-Crest (1). that two stage liquefaction provides an attractive route to coal liquefaction by optimizing the discrete stages in conversion of solid coal to distillate. While improvements in process efficiency, product yield and quality have been demonstrated, the current limited kowledge of coal structure and liquefaction chemistry still necessitates empirical testing of process alternatives. A number of promising process alternatives have been developed and are under current investigation at a bench or process development unit (PDU) scale by a number of contractors under DOE sponsorship. The contractors include Lummus-Crest, Southern Services (Wilsonville) (2), Hydrocarbon Research Inc., (3) and Amoco (4). The process variations under current investigation are as follows: 0 Production of a major part of the distillate product in Stage 1 versus Stage 2. Catalytic first and second stage versus thermal first stage and catalytic second stage. Critical Solvent Deashing versus Anti-Solvent Deashing. Direct coupling of Stages 1 and 2 without intermediate deashing. DOE requested that MITRE undertake a comprehensive technical and economic analysis of all the two-stage coal liquefaction configurations currently under development in order to quantify the improvements made in the production of high quality distillates from coal. Table 1 lists the processes that were analyzed in this task. The methodology used to perform this analysis was as follows: 0 0 0 0 Review teat data. Select most representative run for each process using both Illinois #6 and Wyoming coals. Scale test data to develop material balances for conceptual commercial plants processing 30,000 tons per day of moisture free coal to the liquefaction units. Identify unit operations for commercial plants. Compute coal and energy requirements for plant balance. Estimate capital and operating costs for commerciai plants. 300 i
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 and 112: temperature, time and solvent power
Page 113 and 114: TABLE 1 EXPERIMENTAL CONDITIONS AND
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: Complementary fundamental studies o
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
show all

Liquefaction co-processing of coal shale oil at - Argonne National ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?