4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

A novel approach to CO2 capture in Fluid Catalytic Cracking-Chemical Looping Combustion

期刊

FUEL
卷 244, 期 -, 页码 140-150

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2019.01.168

关键词

CO2 Capture; Fluid Catalytic Cracking; Chemical Looping Combustion; Oxygen carrier

资金

  1. Republic of Turkey, Ministry of National Education

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Oil refineries collectively account for about 4-6% of global CO2 emissions and Fluid Catalytic Cracking (FCC) units are responsible for roughly 25% of these. Although post-combustion and oxy-combustion have been suggested to capture CO2 released from the regenerator of FCC units, Chemical Looping Combustion (CLC) is also a potential approach. In this study, the applicability of CLC for FCC units has been explored. A refinery FCC catalyst (equilibrium catalyst-ECat) was mixed mechanically with reduced oxygen carriers; Cu, Cu2O, CoO, and Mn3O4. To identify any detrimental effects of the reduced oxygen carriers on cracking, the catalyst formulations were tested for n-hexadecane cracking using ASTM D3907-13, the standard FCC microactivity test (MAT). To investigate the combustion reactivity of coke with physically mixed oxidised oxygen carriers, CuO, Co3O4 and Mn2O3, TGA tests were conducted on a low volatile semi-anthracite Welsh coal, which has a similar elemental composition to actual FCC coke, with various oxygen carrier to coke ratios over the temperature range 750-900 degrees C. The results demonstrated that, whereas Cu was detrimental for cracking n-hexadecane with the ECat, Cu2O, CoO, and Mn3O4 have no significant effects on gas, liquid and coke yields, and product selectivity. Complete combustion of the model coke was achieved with CuO, Co3O4 and Mn2O3, once the stoichiometric ratio of oxygen carrier/coke was higher than 1.0 and sufficient time had been provided. These results indicate that the proposed CLC-FCC concept has promise as a new approach to CO2 capture in FCC.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据