Advertisement

Catalysis Letters

, Volume 149, Issue 1, pp 272–282 | Cite as

Manufacture Process Scale-Up and Industrial Testing of Novel Catalysts for SOx-Emissions Control in FCC Units

  • R. Quintana-SolórzanoEmail author
  • A. A. Neri-Gómez
  • H. Armendáriz-Herrera
  • Jaime S. ValenteEmail author
Article
  • 21 Downloads

Abstract

Novel SOx-reducer (ReSOx) catalysts containing an Mg–Al–Fe anionic clay as precursor and primary constituent have been scaled-up for commercial application in fluid catalytic cracking (FCC). The catalysts are manufactured, on a large scale, through a facile, energy-wise, environment-friendly and economical procedure which, advantageously, does not require external binding agents to produce fluidizable microspheroidal particles. Ce is added into the catalysts’ composition in varying amounts to extend their flexibility for usage in partial or full combustion regenerators. When tested industrially in a 40 MBPD (1000 barrels per day), 180 ton of catalyst inventory, partial combustion FCC unit, ReSOx-catalysts exhibit a notably high SOx reduction activity removing around 35 kg SO2 per kg of catalyst, without detecting upsets neither in the base cracking performance nor in coke production in a continuous 48-days run.

Graphical Abstract

Keywords

Catalytic cracking FCC unit SOx emissions ReSOx-catalysts Cracked products Efficiency for SOx removal 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Technical aid from the staff of the Area de Plantas Piloto at IMP (Ing. Lázaro M. García). Administrative and technical facilities from PEMEX-Refinación (Ing. Víctor García) and Refinería of Salina Cruz, Oax. (Ings. Jorge Valdivieso and Alejandrino Toledo.)

Funding

Mexican Institute of Petroleum by means of the Research Project No. D.00355.

Compliance with Ethical Standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. 1.
    Levy A, Merryman EL, Reid WT (1970) Mechanisms of formation of sulfur oxides in combustion. Environ Sci Technol 4(8):653–662CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    The World Bank Group: Washington D.C (1998) Pollution Prevention and Abatement Handbook. World Bank Group. http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/ 58631468314701365/pdf/multi0page.pdf. Accessed 14 July 2018
  3. 3.
    Sánchez-Cantú M, López-Salinas E, Valente JS, Montiel JR (2005) SOx removal by calcined MgAlFe hydrotalcite-like materials: effect of the chemical composition and the cerium incorporation method. Environ Sci Technol 39(24):9715–9720CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sánchez-Cantú M, Pérez-Díaz LM, Maubert AM, Valente JS (2010) Dependence of chemical composition of calcined hydrotalcite-like compounds for SOx reduction. Catal Today 150:332–339CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Harding RH, Peters AW, Nee JRD (2001) New development in FCC catalyst technology. Appl Catal A 221:389–396CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Ming-Yuan H (2002) The development of catalytic cracking catalysts: acidic property related catalytic performance. Catal Today 73:49–55CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wollaston EG, Forsythe WL, Vasalos IA (1971) Sulfur distribution in FCU products. Oil Gas J 69(31):64–69Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Maya-Yescas R, Villafuerte-Macías EF, Aguilar R, Salazar-Sotelo D (2005) Sulfur oxides emission during fluidized-bed catalytic cracking. Chem Eng J 106:145–152CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Siddiqui MAB, Aitani AM (2007) FCC gasoline sulfur reduction by additives: a review. Pet Sci Technol 25:299–313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Cheng WC, Kim G, Peters AW, Zhao X, Rajagopalan K (1998) Environmental FCC technology. Catal Rev-Sci Eng 40:39–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Gough M, Pope JC, Lin LTX (2017) Nanoporous materials forge a path forward to enable sustainable growth: technology advancements in fluid catalytic cracking. Microporous Mesoporous Mater 254:45–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Roncolatto RE, Cardoso MJB, Lam YL, Schmal M (2006) FCC SOx additives deactivation. Ind Eng Chem Res 45:2646–2650CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Vasconcellos CM, Goncalves MLA, Pereira MM (2015) Iron doped manganese oxide octahedral molecular sieve as potential catalyst for SOx removal at FCC. Appl Catal A 498:69–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Scherzer J (1989) Octane-enhancing zeolitic FCC catalysts: scientific and technical aspects. Catal Rev-Sci Eng 31(3):215–354CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Cheng WP, Yu XY, Wang WJ, Liu L, Yang JG, He MY (2008) Synthesis, characterization and evaluation of Cu/MgAlFe as novel transfer catalyst for SOx removal. Catal Commun 9:1505–1509CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cheng WP, Xue CL, Yang JG (2015) Influence of the chemical composition of MgAlFeCu mixed oxides as catalysts for SO2 removal. Sep Sci Technol 50(1):10–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Salerno-Polato CM, Assumpcao-Henriques C, Camacho-Rodrigues AC, Fontes-Monteiro JL (2008) De–SOx additives based on mixed oxides derived from Mg,Al-hydrotalcite-like compounds containing Fe, Cu, Co or Cr. Catal Today 133:534–540CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Kong J, Jiang L, Huo Z (2013) Influence of the preparation process on the performance of three hydrotalcite-based De-SOx catalysts. Catal Commun 40:59–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Basile F, Vaccari A (2001) Applications of hydrotalcite-type anionic clays (layered double hydroxides) in catalysis. In: Rives V (ed) Layered double hydroxides: present and future. Nova Science Publishers, New York, pp 323–365Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    William GR, Khan AI, O’Hare D (2006) Mechanistic and kinetic studies of guest ion intercalation into layered double hydroxides using time-resolved, in-situ x-ray powder diffraction. In: Duan X, Evans DG (ed) Layered double hydroxides: structure and bonding, vol 119. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, pp 161–192CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cavani F, Trifiro F, Vaccari A (1991) Hydrotalcite-type anionic clays: preparation, properties and applications. Catal Today 11:173–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Valente JS, Sánchez-Cantú M, Figueras F (2008) Simple environmentally friendly method to prepare versatile hydrotalcite-like compounds. Chem Mater 20(4):1230–1232CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Valente JS, Sanchez-Cantú M, Lima E, Figueras F (2009) Method for large-scale production of multimetallic layered double hydroxides: formation mechanism discernment. Chem Mater 21:5809–5818CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Valente JS, Sánchez-Cantú M, López-Salinas E (2010) Process for preparing multimetallic anionic clays in products thereof. US Patent, 7,807,128 B2, assigned to Mexican Institute of PetroleumGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Valente JS, López-Salinas E, Sánchez-Cantú M (2010) Obtaining multimetallic oxides derived from hydrotalcite type compounds. US Patent, 7,964,175 B2, assigned to Mexican Institute of PetroleumGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Valente JS, Quintana-Solórzano R, García-Moreno L, Mora-Vallejo RJ, Hernández-Beltrán FJ (2015) Multimetallic anionic clays and derived products for SOx removal in the fluid catalytic cracking process. CA Patent, 2,752,425 C, assigned to Mexican Institute of PetroleumGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Valente JS, Quintana-Solórzano R (2011) Novel SOx removal catalysts for the FCC process: manufacture method, characterization, and pilot-scale testing. Energy Environ Sci 4:4096–4107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    dos Santos RP, Guatiguaba B, Herbst MH (2015) Vanadium-potassium-alumina additives for SOx removal in FCC: effect of vanadium content. Catal Lett 145(7):1382–1387CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Huling GP, McKinney JD, Readal TC (1975) Feed sulfur distribution in FCC product. Oil Gas J May 19:73–79Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Instituto Mexicano del PetróleoCiudad de MéxicoMexico

Personalised recommendations