Comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of alkylation technology

Are there anyone who has worked on sulfuric acid alkylation units? ?

Which technology providers, both domestically and internationally, have mature alkylation technologies? ?

The mainstream methods for alkylation in China are the DuPont alkylation method and the Rums method; most processes are based on these two or represent variations of them. There are also hydrofluoric acid alkylation, ionic liquid alkylation, and solid acid alkylation. As for hydrofluoric acid alkylation, it’s obvious that it should have been phased out long ago； Alkylation using ionic liquids has also been phased out; I won’t go into details here. Alkylation with solid acids is the trend, but it remains to be seen whether it can operate stably over the long term – solid acids are not yet fully developed ； There are significant differences between the DuPont method and Rums’ alkylation approach, in terms of initial investment, production and operation costs, daily maintenance, and long-term stable operation. In terms of a comprehensive comparison, I think the Rums version’s alkylation is quite good.

There are already many companies engaged in alkylation in the domestic market, and competition for raw materials is becoming increasingly fierce; it is crucial to have reliable connections to obtain these raw materials. Many enterprises are facing shortages of raw materials, and some large state-owned enterprises are also installing alkylation units, leading to more intense competition for these raw materials.

We have our own raw materials, so there’s no need to purchase them from outside. Could you explain, in terms of those aspects you mentioned, why Rummsby DuPont is better?

Are there any domestic technology companies that are doing well? ?

Does the Rumsalylation technique have any requirements regarding the isobutylene content in the raw material? ?

The alkylation process is a relatively mature technology; both Lums and DuPont in China have advanced expertise in this area, and the principle behind it remains the same. Isobutylene is simply a more reactive alkene, and proper control during production poses no issues. It is also necessary to consider the long-term implications: if MTBE plants are phased out, the isobutylene feedstock will be used in alkylation processes, and this factor should be taken into account from the outset of the project. When the isobutylene content is between 4 and 8, the product quality can remain normal; it mainly affects the dry point. Currently, working at levels below 205 is no problem and it doesn’t affect sales.

We have no plans to use MTBE; instead, the mixed C4 products obtained from ethylene cracking are sent to the alkylation unit after butadiene extraction. This feedstock contains a high level of isobutylene. When we communicated with DuPont, they said that only they are capable of handling feedstocks with such a high isobutylene content – it’s not clear whether this is true or not.

His approach is nothing more than a scheme for feeding material at multiple points in a targeted manner; what is your isobutylene content? The DuPont process I have here isn’t capable of handling high-isobutylene feedstocks.