Who knows whether the catalyst used in FMTP is ZSM-5 or SAPO-34

It seems that SAPO uses a fluidized bed to extract heat, with the catalyst being produced itself through spray molding

Since it is SAPO (an MTO catalyst that yields olefins as the main product due to its few pores), yet it is said to produce propylene (FMTP), is it just a matter of terminology? How high is the selectivity for propylene?

FMTP uses a SAPO catalyst; its main feature is that propylene is the only product produced. It is also possible to obtain ethylene through changes in the separation process, but there are no C4 or C5 olefin products. All olefins other than propylene can be returned to the reactor as needed to be converted back into propylene. Its catalyst is produced by itself. The main reason why the pilot plant has not been put into operation yet is that there are some issues with the equipment supplied by the equipment vendor, and repairs are currently in progress. This post was last edited by renchy2000 on 2009-3-22 09:41]

1. FMTP uses SAPO34-type catalysts; ZSM has larger pore sizes than SAPO, resulting in poorer selectivity for the production of olefins. It should be noted that ZSM does not rule out fluidized-bed reactors; the use of ZSM5 does not necessarily require a fixed-bed reactor. For the conversion of methanol to olefins, the large-scale screening of catalysts has been completed, and the consistent conclusion is that small-pore molecular sieves of the SAPO type are suitable. The current efforts focus on how to improve their hydrothermal stability, enhance their strength, and reduce manufacturing costs. 2. FMTP uses a downflow fluidized bed and also has a riser reactor structure; in principle, the reactor used in DMTO (inspired by FCC units) is also a fluidized reactor. However, the FMTP reactor has a return system and a downward fluidized bed. 3. The use of a fluidized bed reactor is required by the reaction mechanism for the conversion of methanol to olefins, as it can **reduce the time between the reactants and the catalyst. Otherwise, the charring rate will be very high. For SAPO catalysts, in the case of a fixed-bed reactor, the olefin yield will also be very low due to rapid coking. 4. The principle governing the production of ethylene and propylene is determined by the reaction temperature, which is also why DMTO states that the ratio can be adjusted. 5. The challenges facing the methanol to olefins reactor are heat removal and rapid separation. From this perspective, oil and petrochemical companies that are very familiar with FCC will not be able to gain much advantage in this regard before they have experience operating large-scale industrial demonstration facilities. 6. It is predicted that the next development direction for reactors will be toward multi-point feeding, regardless of the conversion technologies used abroad or domestically. 7. I am not a member of any group involved in FMTP or DMTO technology; all information comes from publicly available sources as well as engineering and theoretical considerations.

The hydrothermal stability and strength enhancement of SAPO-type molecular sieves still seem to be key areas of research at present, right?

The development of such technologies essentially involves the development of catalysts; whether it is SAPO-34 or ZSM-5, they should all be developed through imitation by Tsinghua University

It seems that the MTP technology in use today generally employs ZSM-5 catalysts in combination with fixed-bed reactors. If SPAO-34 is used, then the resulting products are roughly half ethylene and half propylene, which isn’t similar to the MTO technology? And although the sulfurized bed has advantages over the fixed bed, the selection of the reactor is generally based on the catalyst, right?

Reply to 1# catsina: First of all, I would like to ask what the motivation behind asking this question is? If you want to learn about this technology, it is recommended to read more materials on the subject; there are plenty of articles available online. Unfounded speculation cannot prevent one from understanding the content of a certain technology. As far as I know, FMTP catalysts are not identical to ZSM and SAPO-34, but are more similar to SAPO-34. Additionally, this is FMTP; in terms of the process, it starts from a different premise than MTO, as its goal is to achieve the highest yield of propylene. Therefore, FMTP should be a process that integrates the catalyst of MTO with the process objectives of MTP, namely a process using a fluidized-bed reactor and catalyst with the goal of maximizing propylene production.

It is said that FMTP uses a molecular sieve catalyst similar to SAPO-34. In fact, experimental data show that although the MTO reaction proceeds similarly for ethylene and propylene in SAPO-34, this ratio is actually closely related to the reaction conditions. In the laboratory, when the temperature is reduced to 375 degrees, a considerable amount of propylene is produced; moreover, an increase in the feedstock space velocity also results in more propylene being generated. However, these changes lead to accelerated carbon deposition, so a fluidized bed is a more appropriate option. Therefore, I am more interested in the process parameters of FMTP

FMTP uses SAPO-18/34 interpenetrating phase mixed molecular sieves