Analysis on the economics of MTO
Thread Content
This post was last edited by jordan569 on 2013-1-6 21:50 First of all, the source of methanol in MTO is generally obtained from coal to methanol. Coal is gasified to obtain synthesis gas, mainly carbon monoxide, hydrogen, carbon dioxide, etc., and then through gas purification, methanol is synthesized, that is, an oxygen is added to C. The subsequent process of methanol to olefins is to remove the oxygen in methanol through reaction and lose hydrogen at the same time. Is this process too complicated and uneconomical? Please express your opinions and see how you understand them! .Note $ #, $ $
Coal-syngas-methanol-olefins, this is the basic route of MTO. If the coal-syngas-olefins route is adopted through FT synthesis, it will be one step less than MTO. However, the current selectivity is poor and is not enough to compete with MTO. Directly from coal to olefins, it is currently unrealistic ； In the MTO route, synthesis gas first produces methanol, and then methanol and then olefins. At least the step from synthesis gas to methanol almost completely utilizes the raw materials, and finally generates a large amount of water. Generally speaking, CO+2H2--CH2+H2O ； FT Starting from the synthesis gas, H2 reduces the O in CO to obtain CH2 olefins. This process not only produces a large amount of water, but also generates a large amount of CO2 and methane. For alkenes, it is ultimately CO+2H2--CH2+H2O ； Therefore, it is inevitable to produce olefins while producing water by-products, and there are currently too many by-products from other pathways, so the MTO route still has certain advantages. Of course, it may be replaced in the future. My thoughts are confusing, haha.