Liquid-Phase MethanolProcess (LPMeOH)Jill DeTroye, Brandon Hurn, Kyle Ludwig, and Isaac Zaydens

Overview

● Introduction to LPMeOH● Process● LPMeOH Features● Performance● Commercial Applications● Environment and Economic

Analysis● Conclusion and

Recommendations

Slurry Bubble Column Reactor installation

Image adapted from Kirkland et al.

Introduction● LPMEOH technology was first developed in the 1980’s in LaPorte

Texas

● The DOE wanted to develop a more economic and efficient way to convert coal-derived synthesis gas into methanol

● Over 7,400 hours of test operation in a DOE-owned 10 tons-per-day Process Development Unit

● Eastman Chemical Company in Kingsport, Tennessee was the first commercial-scale plant for LPMEOH technology

Introduction● Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. and Eastman Chemical Company

partnered to form Air Products Liquid Phase Conversion Company, L.P.

● Together and with the DOE they participated in the Clean Coal Technology Program demonstration of LPMEOH technology.

● Purpose was to demonstrate the scale-up and operability of the LPMEOH process with different coal-based syngas feed compositions

Image adapted from Heydorn et al.

Process● Old system

o Catalyst pelletso Gas phase

● LPMEOHo Powder catalyst

slurried in an inert mineral oil

● High heat removal● Higher Syngas

conversion

LPMEOH Features

● Water gas shift reactor needed to adjust stoichiometry of feedstockso 16% CO concentration

● Cannot endure sharp transient operations

● Produce crude methanolo 4%-20% water by weight

● Interrupted operation

● Syngas with large amounts of carbon oxides can be directly processedo Over 50% CO

concentration● Can handle sudden changes

and idling ● Produce high quality methanol

o 1% water by weight● Remove and add catalyst

slurry

Conventional Methanol Production LPMEOH

LPMEOH PFD

Image adapted from Kirkland et al.

Performance

● Produce 260 short tons/day or 80,000 gallons/day during the within 4 days

o Exceed 115% within 6 days

● Catalyst deactivation rate

o Campaign 1 - 0.4% per day

o Campaign 2 to 3 - 0.6% to 0.7% per day

o Campaign 4 - 0.17% per day

o trace amounts of arsenic and sulfur were the main poisons

● Unit plant availability - 97.5%

Commercial Applications● Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC) Coproduction

o Converts coal-derived syngas from power plant to methanolo Flexibility in syngas compositiono Continuous vs. off-peak power shaving

Image adapted from Heydorn et al.

Commercial Applications

Image adapted from Heydorn et al.

Commercial Applications

● Distributed Generation

o No sulfur

o Low NOx

o Energy security

● Turbines

● Diesel engines

● Fuel cells

● Fuel alternative

Environmental Implications● Project developed with alleviation of environmental impacts in mind

● Generally, coal-based or fossil fuel-based (particularly natural gas) methods used for methanol production

o LPMEOH resulted in reduction of carbon emissions o Methanol produced for fuel purposes:

Free of sulfur Contained <1 wt% water

o When used as a fuel, showed significantly reduced NOx emissions with comparable performance

● Start-up process produced no noticeable environmental hazards

● Further improvements possible via “site-specific” design considerations

o Proximity to waste disposal sites

Waste Production● Demonstration unit showed no significant impact to local environment due

to process activity

● June 30, 1995: a Finding of No Significant Impact (FONSI) issued, indicating an environmentally-sound process

● Lower-than-expected production of waste products including:o Spent catalysto Waste Oilo Recovered Distillate liquidso Waste Water

● All waste products easily handled and disposed of effectively.

Economic ● This method would not replace but instead couple with an existing

methanol production method, Integrated Gasification Combined Cycle (IGCC)

● Potential to realize a 25% reduction in variable cost of production to as low as $.50 per gallon of methanol.

● Economic estimates predict a return on investment of roughly 15%

● This process will allow a clean, cost effective transformation of coal into a practical, environmentally-friendly chemical feedstock

● In any case, the co-production of methanol remains economically preferable to offshore natural gas processing

Conclusion and Recommendations ● LPMEOH Demonstration Project accomplished the objectives set out in the

agreement between the DOE, Air Products, and Eastman Chemical Company

● Over 103.9 million gallons of methanol was produced with one month reaching a maximum of 2.5 million gallons

● The addition of catalysts helped with commercial interest and significantly improved the LPMEOH process

● Developments in the processes for removing trace contaminants in coal-derived syngas will extend catalyst life and lead to lower methanol conversion costs

● Additional reductions in syngas costs from a modern coal gasification system will increase market opportunities for the LPMEOH process

References● United States of America. Department of Energy. National Energy Technology

Laboratory. Commercial-Scale Demonstration of the Liquid Phase Methanol Process. By Robert J. Kirkland, Edward Schmetz, and Robert M. Kornosky. Washington D.C.: n.p., 2004. Print.

● United States of America. Department of Energy. National Energy Technology Laboratory. Final Report for the Commercial-Scale Demonstration of the Liquid Phase Methanol Process. By E. C. Heydorn and R. D. Lilly. Washington D.C.: n.p., 2003. Print.