Let’s talk about FMTP

Why are there only onlookers! No one is responding! Those who are aware of this and those who are not but are interested are welcome to chat!

For this project, I think it depends on the quality of the acrylic in the end; otherwise, it’s just copying without any meaning.

Whether you are optimistic about FMTP or not, I am optimistic anyway:lol:lol

FMTP is just a different name; leaders come up with another project to trick people into investing in it, and in the end things remain the same. Even if it succeeds, the benefits won’t be significant. The shortcomings of DMTO have already become apparent, and they represent serious flaws in its design. We’ll have to wait and see how well the catalysts produced by Global and Total perform. Although Total claims that its PP raw materials are of high quality, we’ll have to wait and observe! !

It’s advisable to have some knowledge of PP and PE when studying methanol-to-olefins production

Does the poster mean that the quality of the products produced is not good enough? If that’s the reason, then can’t the catalyst be improved? :)

I think the route of producing olefins from methanol should yield good profits, as long as the technical challenges can be overcome. With the current unfavorable international situation and high oil prices, the markets for PP and PE can only improve. Meanwhile, there is a severe surplus of methanol production in China, and storing or transporting this substance involves significant risks. If **policies allow the use of coal-based olefin production, there will surely be another wave in the domestic market! As long as there is a strong incentive, I believe technology will not be an issue

The key is Tsinghua’s Hu FMTP project! I wonder if there’s some obstacle somewhere! Why haven’t we started yet? Is there something that’s not mature enough? If anyone knows anything, please tell us! If it doesn’t work here, you can add each other as friends to communicate privately! :lol

The problem lies not with Tsinghua, but with Chinese chemistry. There were internal conflicts between Institute 1 and Institute 3, and the performance of the pilot plants was not satisfactory; many of these issues stemmed from design flaws. Since neither Institute 1 nor Institute 3 had experience with fluidization or olefin separation, it’s easy to imagine what the results of the pilot tests would be. The current technology faces challenges in terms of dissemination: firstly, China Chemical invested in the development of pilot-scale production, but the results of these trials were not recognized by the public; Secondly, Tsinghua University also encountered difficulties and is unable to find partners anymore. Institute 1 and Institute 3 scrapped the pilot-scale design, and on top of that, Institute 1 wanted to take things on its own but lacked the capability to do so. . Good technology was wasted because of that hospital.

It seems like the person upstairs is in the know. Given such an outcome, even if Tsinghua University is forced to do so due to constraints such as financial issues or relationships, the responsibility ultimately lies with Tsinghua University. It’s similar to a board of directors in a legitimate company that decides to use a certain technology supplier; if the project fails as a result of problems with that supplier, the responsibility lies with the board of directors, not the supplier. If Tsinghua agreed to let China National Chemicals choose Institute 1 in order to secure investment from them, then didn’t Tsinghua realize that it would end up with no say whatsoever in the project, with no right to intervene at all? When working in China, when a group of people come together for a common goal, their words sound more pleasant than music; their minds are filled with aspirations, their mouths are full of empty promises, and all they are willing to hear is what they want to hear. Without a rigorous risk assessment, the experts in China believe that it’s completely unnecessary. Why? Because we’re from Tsinghua University, because we’re part of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, and because we belong to those top institutions. Looking across the country, in terms of technology, funding, and engineering capabilities, we are the best – so what is there that we can’t accomplish? ? ? ? ? ? The result was still a failure. At that moment, what came to mind immediately, and what was done right away, was to shift blame onto one another and accuse each other. A typical Chinese-style gathering of friends, ending in a breakup like enemies. Even with advanced technology, plenty of money, and excellent design skills, it’s still inevitable to end up with something clichéd. There is also a rather paradoxical aspect in the domestic market: if the technical or design party fails to fulfill the commitments outlined in the contract, at most they will not receive the final payment or the warranty deposit; all other payments are still due to them. This encourages technical suppliers and design service providers to engage in speculative behavior when bidding for projects, and moreover, the cost of such speculation is very low. Is anyone familiar with the situation of engineering insurance in China? It is estimated that in reality, neither the owner nor Party B is willing to take out insurance; both are speculating.