Fast pyrolysis oil from pinewood chips co-processing with vacuum gas oil in an FCC unit for second generation fuel production

The co-cracking of vacuum gas oil (VGO) and bio-oil has been proposed to add renewable carbon into the co-processing products. However, the environmental performance of the co-processing scheme is still unclear. In this paper, the environmental impacts of the co-processing scheme are calculated by the end-point method Eco-indicator 99 based on the data from actual industrial operations and reports. Three scenarios, namely fast pyrolysis scenario, catalytic pyrolysis scenario and pure VGO scenario, for two cases with different FCC capacities and bio-oil co-processing ratios are proposed to present a comprehensive comparison on the environmental impacts of the co-processing scheme. In Case 1, the total environmental impact for the fast pyrolysis scenario is 1.14% less than that for the catalytic pyrolysis scenario while it is only 26.1% of the total impacts of the pure VGO scenario. In Case 2, the environmental impact of the fast pyrolysis scenario is 0.07% more than that of the catalytic pyrolysis and only 64.4% of the pure VGO scenario impacts. Therefore, the environmental impacts can be dramatically reduced by adding bio-oil as the FCC co-feed oil, and the optimal bio-oil production technology is strongly affected by FCC capacity and bio-oil co-processing ratio.

Download Full-text

Corefining of Fast Pyrolysis Bio-Oil with Vacuum Residue and Vacuum Gas Oil in a Continuous Slurry Hydrocracking Process

Energy & Fuels ◽

10.1021/acs.energyfuels.0c01322 ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 34 (7) ◽

pp. 8452-8465

Author(s):

Niklas Bergvall ◽

Linda Sandström ◽

Fredrik Weiland ◽

Olov G. W. Öhrman

Keyword(s):

Fast Pyrolysis ◽

Vacuum Gas Oil ◽

Vacuum Residue ◽

Gas Oil ◽

Hydrocracking Process ◽

Bio Oil

Download Full-text

Catalytic cracking of pyrolysis oil oxygenates (aliphatic and aromatic) with vacuum gas oil and their characterization

Chemical Engineering Research and Design ◽

10.1016/j.cherd.2013.12.005 ◽

2014 ◽

Vol 92 (8) ◽

pp. 1579-1590 ◽

Cited By ~ 22

Author(s):

Desavath V. Naik ◽

Vimal Kumar ◽

Basheshwar Prasad ◽

Babita Behera ◽

Neeraj Atheya ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Catalytic Cracking ◽

Vacuum Gas Oil ◽

Pyrolysis Oil ◽

Gas Oil

Download Full-text

Refinery integration of lignocellulose for automotive fuel production via the bioCRACK process and two-step co-hydrotreating of liquid phase pyrolysis oil and heavy gas oil

Reaction Chemistry & Engineering ◽

10.1039/c9re00352e ◽

2020 ◽

Vol 5 (3) ◽

pp. 519-530 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Klara Treusch ◽

Anna Huber ◽

Samir Reiter ◽

Mario Lukasch ◽

Berndt Hammerschlag ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Liquid Phase ◽

Carbon Content ◽

Pyrolysis Oil ◽

Gas Oil ◽

Fuel Production ◽

Automotive Fuel ◽

Heavy Gas Oil ◽

Heavy Gas

Co-hydroprocessing of liquid phase pyrolysis oil with refinery intermediates was performed for fuel production with 8–9% renewable carbon content.

Download Full-text

Membrane Fractionation of Biomass Fast Pyrolysis Oil and Impact of its Presence on a Petroleum Gas Oil Hydrotreatment

Oil & Gas Science and Technology – Revue d’IFP Energies nouvelles ◽

10.2516/ogst/2013124 ◽

2013 ◽

Vol 68 (5) ◽

pp. 815-828 ◽

Cited By ~ 3

Author(s):

A. Pinheiro ◽

D. Hudebine ◽

N. Dupassieux ◽

N. Charon ◽

C. Geantet

Keyword(s):

Fast Pyrolysis ◽

Pyrolysis Oil ◽

Gas Oil ◽

Membrane Fractionation ◽

Biomass Fast Pyrolysis

Download Full-text

Co-feeding of vacuum gas oil and pinewood-derived hydrogenated pyrolysis oils in a fluid catalytic cracking pilot plant to generate olefins and gasoline

Open Research Europe ◽

10.12688/openreseurope.14198.1 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 1 ◽

pp. 143

Author(s):

Marco Buechele ◽

Helene Lutz ◽

Florian Knaus ◽

Alexander Reichhold ◽

Robbie Venderbosch ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Sulfur Content ◽

Catalytic Cracking ◽

Pilot Plant ◽

Fluid Catalytic Cracking ◽

Vacuum Gas Oil ◽

Pyrolysis Oil ◽

Gas Oil ◽

Hydrocarbon Gases ◽

Process Step ◽

Pyrolysis Oils

Background: The Waste2Road project exploits new sustainable pathways to generate biogenic fuels from waste materials, deploying existing industrial scale processes. One such pathway is through pyrolysis of wood wastes. Methods: The hereby generated pyrolysis liquids were hydrogenated prior to co-feeding in a fluid catalytic cracking (FCC) pilot plant. So-called stabilized pyrolysis oil (SPO) underwent one mild hydrogenation step (max. 200 °C) whereas the stabilized and deoxygenated pyrolysis oil (SDPO) was produced in two steps, a mild one (maximum 250 °C) prior to a more severe process step (350 °C). These liquids were co-fed with vacuum gas oil (VGO) in an FCC pilot plant under varying riser temperatures (530 and 550 °C). The results of the produced hydrocarbon gases and gasoline were benchmarked to feeding pure VGO. Results: It was proven that co-feeding up to 10 wt% SPO and SDPO is feasible. However, further experiments are recommended for SPO due to operational instabilities originating from pipe clogging. SPO led to an increase in the hydrocarbon gas production from 45.0 to 46.3 wt% at 550 °C and no significant changes at 530 °C. SDPO led to a rise in gasoline yield at both riser temperatures. The highest amount of gasoline was produced when SDPO was co-fed at a 530 °C riser temperature, with values around 44.8 wt%. Co-feeding hydrogenated pyrolysis oils did not lead to a rise in sulfur content in the gasoline fractions. The highest values were around 18 ppm sulfur content. Instead, higher amounts of nitrogen were observed in the gasoline. Conclusions: SPO and SDPO proved to be valuable co-refining options which led to no significant decreases in product quality. Further experiments are encouraged to determine the maximum possible co-feeding rates. As a first step, 20-30 wt% for SPO are recommended, whereas for SDPO 100 wt% could be achievable.

Download Full-text