4.6 Review

Minireview: direct catalytic conversion of sour natural gas (CH4 + H2S + CO2) components to high value chemicals and fuels

期刊

CATALYSIS SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 7, 期 14, 页码 2919-2929

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/c7cy00272f

关键词

-

资金

  1. UNCAGE-ME, an Energy Frontier Research Center - U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Basic Energy Sciences [DE-SC0012577]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The abundance of natural gas reserves can facilitate the transition from fossil derived to fully renewable chemical and fuel generation. Natural gas, however, can contain more than 10% sour gas molecules (chiefly CO2 and H2S), especially in the Middle East and Russia. Currently, the most common sour natural gas separation technologies rely on the use of various amine-based absorption-desorption cycles in absorption towers, membrane separation and cryogenic processes. However, these processes are quite expensive and, unfortunately, result in the necessity for further processing of the sour gas stream. We feel that the implementation of catalytic activation of the sour gas stream, so as to form useful products, has been underexplored and thus has yet to be fully developed. In this paper, we present a series of catalytic reactions for the sour gas components so as to obtain useful chemicals or fuels, such as carbon disulfide (CS2), hydrogen (H-2), ethylene (C2H4), ammonium sulfate ((NH4)(2)SO4) and ammonium thiosulfate ((NH4)(2)S2O3). Particular catalytic reactions which can form those products are (a) CH4 reforming with H2S on supported metal oxide catalysts, (b) CO2 + H2S + H-2 catalytic reaction on K2O/WO3/Al2O3 to yield a CH3SH intermediate, (c) olefin production via CH3SH coupling on zeolites and supported metal oxides and (d) H2S + NH3 catalytic reaction to yield ammonium sulfate ((NH4) 2SO(4)) and ammonium thiosulfate ((NH4)(2)S2O3) on partial oxidation catalysts. Thermodynamic considerations, together with catalyst design techniques, are discussed for each reaction.

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

4.6
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