Comparison of the advantages and disadvantages of MTP/MTO process routes
Thread Content
This post was last edited by jordan569 on 2013-1-6 at 20:57. Guys, the development of coal-based low-carbon olefins in China is progressing rapidly. In terms of technical approaches, there are basically two main options: MTP/MTO. MTP includes Germany’s LURGI MTP method as well as China’s FMTP method developed by Tsinghua University； MTO includes UOP MTO abroad and the DMTO technology developed by the Dalian Institute of Physical Chemistry in China. I would like to ask the experts here: what are your thoughts on these two technical styles? What are the advantages and disadvantages in terms of raw material sources, product markets, capital investment, operating costs, energy consumption, catalyst properties, and other aspects? Personally, I think MTO products such as propylene and ethylene have a slightly stronger risk resistance ； The base investment is said to be slightly higher than MTP (but it’s not clear by how much) ； There is no concept of operating costs ； The product/raw material consumption ratio is about 1/3.1, which is better than MTP’s 1/3.6 ； I also have no concept of catalyst properties; I’m just starting out in this industry and am not yet clear on many technical details. I would greatly appreciate it if experts could offer some guidance! Thank you. Note # ) # # , . hcbbs
MTO is primarily affected by the large number of polyethylene production facilities in the country; if it is not possible to extend the product chain and produce goods with higher added value, focusing solely on polyethylene will have an impact on economic profitability.
Methanol to Olefins (MTO) and Methanol to Propylene are two important new C1 chemical processes. They refer to chemical technologies that use methanol synthesized from coal or natural gas as a raw material, and employ a fluidized-bed reaction mechanism similar to that in catalytic cracking units to produce low-carbon olefins. In the 1970s, while researching the use of ZSM-5 catalysts to convert methanol into other oxygen-containing compounds, the American company Mobil discovered the Methanol to Gasoline (MTG) reaction. In 1979, New Zealand **built the world’s first MTG plant using natural gas, with a capacity of 750,000 tons per year; it came online in 1985 but was shut down for economic reasons. Based on the analysis of the MTG reaction mechanism, low-carbon olefins are intermediate products in the MTG reaction; therefore, the successful development of the MTG process has facilitated the development of the MTO process. Some well-known international petrochemical companies, such as Mobil, BASF, UOP, Norsk Hydro, and others, have invested heavily in technology development. Based on the ZSM-5 catalyst developed by the company, Mobil was the first to conduct research on the conversion of methanol into ethylene and other low-carbon olefins. However, breakthrough progress was achieved through the UOP/Hydro MTO process, developed through a collaboration between UOP and Norsk Hydro, using the UOP MTO-100 catalyst. Domestic research institutions, such as the Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics under the Chinese Academy of Sciences, the China University of Petroleum, and the Sinopec Research Institute of Petrochemical Technology, have also carried out similar work. Among them, the process route developed by the Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics for producing low-carbon olefins from syngas via dimethyl ether (SDTO) is innovative; compared with the traditional MTO process that uses methanol to produce low-carbon olefins from syngas, it features a higher CO conversion rate of over 90%, and reduces construction costs and operating expenses by 50% to 80%. When the D0123 catalyst is used, the product is mainly ethylene, while when the D0300 catalyst is used, the product is mainly propylene.
Correction: 1.6664 million tons per year of methanol, with 474,000 tons of propylene and 20,000 tons of ethylene produced. The product/raw material for MTP should be 1/3.37