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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

The overall mass balance of the optimized two-stage CO/H 0-K CO - H coal/ bitumen process is presented in Table 4. The soluble extrast (3523°C) &counts for 12.3% of the feedstock (coal + bitumen) as compared with about 19% (see Table 3) obtained from simulated two-stage autoclave tests. The reduction in generation of extractable matter was achieved through more advanced hydrogenation compared to autoclave tests. As a result the distillable oil yield after optimization was increased to 70.1% (see Table 5) compared to 66.2% obtained in an autoclave (Table 3). Equally important, the process generates mainly light (-375OC) oil. which accounts for about 90% of total oil produced. It is expected that in a continuous operation higher yields of distillable oils can be obtained. catalyst should have a major impact on further improvement of the ARC process concept. Recently completed economic feasibility studies on two-stage coal/bitumen coprocessing (14) indicate that the Alberta Research Council concept to carry out the solubilizatign stage in CO/steam atmosphere adds about $100 million to the cost of the coprocessing plant and this accounts for approximately 8% of total plant cost. However, when the feasibility studies were completed (early 1985) the data indicating that the CO/steam-K CO solubilization results in higher yield of distillable oils compared to hy&og%n solubilization (see Table 3) were not available. It is noteworthy that 4% higher oil yield in plant production could readily offset the additional cost associated with CO/steam solubilization. Furthermore, there are other factors (like reaction kinetics) which seem to favor CO/steam solubilization and which do not seem to be fully accounted for in the feasibility studies. Under the circumstances it is concluded that there is a need for further verification of the effectiveness of the CO/steam-K CO versus H solubilization. It is essential to carry out continuous two-s?ag$ coal/bit&en tests in both (CO/steam-K CO - H versus H -H modes in order to obtain more reliable yield data and cbnv&sior? values f& Aonomic analysis. ACKNOULEDGEUENT The authors would like to thank Mr. C. Gietz and Dr. S. Chakrabartty for reviewing the manuscript. REFERENCES Progress in development of an active, inexpensive and disposable 1. Reserves of Coal, Province of Alberta, December 31, 1980, Energy Resources Conservation Board. 2. Alberta's Reserves of Crude Oil, O i l Sands, Gas, Natural Gas Liquids and Sulphur, December 31, 1983. Energy Resources Conservation Board Report No. 84-18. 3. E. Boomer and A. Saddington, Canadian Journal of Research, 1935, 2, p. 825. 4. J. Varga, J. Karolyi, Gy. Rabo, P. Steingaszner, A. Szekely and A. Zalay, Petroleum Refiner, 1957, Sept., p. 198. 5. United States Patent. 4,330,393, May 18. 1982. 6. Canadian Patent, 269,020, December 31. 1976. 7. J. Varga, J. Karolyi, P. Steingasmer. A. Zalay, R. Birthler and Gy. Rabo, Petroleum Refiner, 1960, April, p. 182. 203
8. 6. Ignasiak, L. Lewkowicz, G. Kovacik, T. Ohuchi and 14.P. du Plessis, 5. Kaliaguine and A. Makay (Editors), Catalysis on the Energy Scene, 1984 Elsevier Science Publishers B.V., Amsterdam. 9. J.H. Shinn, A.J. Dahlberg, C.W. Kuehler. J.W. Rosenthal Proceedings; Ninth Annual EPRI Contractor's Conference on Coal Liquefaction, EPRI AP-3825-SR, March 1985, p. 33-1. 10. M. Gawlak, D. Carson, 14. Holuszko and D. Vernon, Report No. YCLQ-7, April 1982, Alberta Research Council, Edmonton, Canada. 11. G. Kovacik. P.D. Clark, and T. Ohuchi; Studies on Coprocessing Highvale Coal and Bitumen, ENR-ARC Coal Conversion Research Program Final Reports for 1984/85, Volume I, June 27, 1985, Alberta Research Council, Edmonton, Canada. 12. W. Pawlak, J. Janiak. K. Szymocha, A. Turak and B. Ignasiak; Pipeline Agglomeration of Coal, Final Report for the Alberta/Canada Energy Resources Research Fund, July, 1984, Alberta Research Council, Edmonton, Canada. 13. G.J. Perry, Coal Corporation of Victoria - personal communication. 14. CoallHeavy Oil Hydrogenation Plant Feasibility Study, Volume 11, Cost Estimate and Financial Evaluation, April 1985, Prepared for Contar Systems Engineering Ltd. by Kilborn Kellogg Rust Ltd. Table 1 DEOXYGENATION OF THE FEEDSTOCK (COAL AND BITUMEN) AND HYDROCARBON GAS YIELDS ON SOLUBILIZATION OF HIGHVALE COAL I N BITUMEN USING CO/STEAM OR He AT 390°C Hydrocagbon Gas Yield (C1-C4) (XI CO/Steam H, 1 .o 0.9 Deoxygenationb (%) 86 94 a) on daf feedstock b) defined as: _. - 0 in (distillable + extractable) products 0 in (coal + bitumen) feedstock 204
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: esult in retrogressive reactions ta
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 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
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?