Is propane a good raw material for cracking, or is it better to use it for dehydrogenation to produce propylene?
Thread Content
As the title suggests, some places are currently planning to purchase propane for the production of propylene through dehydrogenation. However, the overall yield of ethylene from propane cracking is also quite high, making propane a good choice as a cracking feedstock. Have any studies been conducted to determine whether dehydrogenation is better or using it as a cracking feedstock is better?
The question posed by the original poster is a bit too biased. Propane cracking generally refers to thermal cracking; in this process, the cracking products are a mixture of olefins containing hydrogen. The main components of these olefins are propylene and ethylene, with small amounts of olefin products with four or more carbon atoms present as well. In other words, thermal pyrolysis is not a pyrolysis process with significant selectivity. Propane dehydrogenation to produce propylene is a process in which propylene is generated through selective dehydrogenation under the action of a catalyst; propylene constitutes the main component of the product, while the proportion of other olefins is relatively low. These are two completely different types of reactions, used in production processes for different purposes; there is no point in comparing them. An apparatus for dehydrogenating propylene to produce propylene, with the sole aim of obtaining propylene. However, the equipment used for thermal cracking is designed to produce various olefin products; it is generally employed in integrated ethylene cracking plants, where the processing volume is very large, there is a wide range of products, the processing process offers great flexibility, and the requirements for raw materials may be more extensive.
I learned it! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !
It mainly depends on the process selection! ! !
I’m wondering that if a large company has both a propane dehydrogenation unit for producing propylene and a propane thermal cracking unit, which approach yields better results – using propane for dehydrogenation or for cracking? Of course, it is related to market conditions under different crude oil prices. I wonder if anyone has done any analysis or comparisons in this area.
If a large company has both a propane dehydrogenation unit for producing propylene and a propane thermal cracking unit, it is certainly more beneficial to use the propane dehydrogenation unit. :lol
Why? Is there a calculation process? The overall yield of ethylene from propane cracking is also over 40%. There is also about 15% propylene, along with around 3% butadiene. The benefits must be considerable as well. I don’t know what the cost of propane dehydrogenation is
Each company selects a production process based on the local conditions, that is, what advantageous resources are available locally; this selection determines the way in which the process will be carried out.
This is influenced by the prices of downstream products, the production scale of the facility, and investment levels; specific economic evaluation analysis is required
The cost of propylene per ton of product is around 6,000 yuan, resulting in a net profit of roughly 1,000 yuan per ton. It’s more difficult to estimate the costs for thermal cracking, as both ethylene and propylene are produced, along with a significant amount of by-products.