Not applicable.
The present invention generally relates to a method for producing hydrocarbons from biomass. Specifically, the present invention relates to converting naturally occurring triglycerides and fatty acids to a composition including naphtha boiling range hydrocarbons. The present invention also relates to the resultant biorenewable naphtha product, whereby the naphtha is used as chemical feed stock, fuel, fuel blend stock, or solvent.
The term “green chemistry” has been used to describe synthesis of chemicals from biorenewable feed stocks. It is considered a sustainable alternative to petroleum-based chemistry, and may mitigate the effect of high oil prices. One of the challenges facing transition to a green chemical industry is that the existing production facilities and infrastructure are designed around hydrocarbon feed stocks. For example, the building blocks of the chemical industry, olefins and BTX aromatics (benzene, toluene, and xylene), are produced in steam crackers (also referred to as ethylene crackers) and catalytic reformers that run on light hydrocarbons. Synthesis gas, or syngas for short, is another chemical building block. Syngas is a mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen and can be produced by steam reforming of light hydrocarbons. Naphtha is a predominantly C5-C9 hydrocarbon cut that is commonly used as the feedstock for both catalytic reformers and steam crackers. It may also be used as feed for steam reforming units for production of syngas.
In particular, paraffinic naphtha is considered a highly desired feed for steam crackers due to its high ethylene and propylene yields. Production of naphtha from biorenewable sources would enable transition to a green chemical industry without the need to develop new chemistries and build new production facilities.
Naphtha is also a common industrial solvent. Extraction of lipids from seeds (e.g. soybean oil) uses n-hexane from petroleum naphtha. However virgin naphtha distilled from crude oil typically contains 2.5% to 5.0% by weight benzene, a well-known carcinogen. As such, multiple and costly purification steps (e.g. solvent extraction and super-fractionation) are required before food-contact quality hexane is obtained.
The term “sustainable energy” has been used to refer to renewable sources of energy. Biorenewable fuels are a key component of sustainable energy initiatives. Naphtha may be used directly as fuel in industrial furnaces or turbines. It may also be used in small industrial engines such as lawnmowers and chainsaws.
Furthermore, since naphtha hydrocarbons are in the motor gasoline boiling range, they may be used as a gasoline blend stock. Gasoline blends need to meet vapor pressure and octane rating requirements.
One method of producing naphtha hydrocarbons from biomass is by the Fischer-Tropsch (F-T) process. U.S. Pat. No. 7,214,720 to Bayle and co-inventors describes a process involving the steps of (a) gasification, (b) syngas purification, (c) F-T conversion, (d) separation, and (e) recycle of at least a portion of the naphtha to gasifier. Although the process produces the desired hydrocarbon naphtha from a bio-renewable source, gasifiers suffer from a low reliability record. Additionally, the capital costs associated with gasification and F-T conversion are known to be very high. This is in part due to solids handling requirements for the gasifier and heat removal provisions for the highly exothermic F-T reaction. Furthermore, the need to recycle part of the naphtha to the gasifier further reduces the efficiency of this process as a source of bio-renewable naphtha.
U.S. Pat. No. 5,186,722 to Cantrell and Chong describes a catalytic process to convert biomass feeds such as limonene to a composition of cyclic and aromatic compounds in the naphtha boiling range. Although these products are reported to have high octane rating and hence good gasoline blend stocks, they lack the desired properties as a chemical feed stock. As feeds for steam crackers, aromatic compounds give low ethylene and propylene yields. More importantly, the terpene feeds used in the process are among the only biomass sources that to begin with are hydrocarbons. Virtually all other sources of biomass have high oxygen content, typically greater than 10 wt %.
Deoxygenation of biomass feeds such as triglycerides and fatty acids are disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 7,232,935 to Jakkula and co-inventors. A two step process is disclosed which includes hydrodeoxygenation of triglycerides/fatty acids followed by hydroisomerization. The process produces diesel boiling-range isoparaffins.
To this end, there is a need for biorenewable naphtha that can be used as feed stock for existing petrochemical and refining facilities. In particular, the present invention is a method process for converting high oxygen content biomass, such as sources of triglycerides and/or fatty acids, into naphtha boiling-range hydrocarbons using standard refining processes.
The present invention relates to a biorenewable naphtha composition and method for making same. The naphtha composition is useful for producing olefins, BTX aromatics, hydrogen, and also for direct use as gasoline blend stock and solvent. The biorenewable feed stock includes sources of glycerides (i.e. monoglycerides, diglycerides, triglycerides, etc.) and/or fatty acids and combinations thereof, such as animal fats, animal oils, poultry fat, poultry oils, vegetable oils, vegetable fats, plant fats and oils, rendered fats, rendered oils, restaurant grease, brown grease, waste industrial frying oils, fish oils, tall oil, and the like and any combinations thereof.
The method for producing hydrocarbon naphtha includes hydrotreating a renewable feedstock to produce a heavy hydrocarbon fraction. This is followed by hydrocracking of the hydrotreated heavy fraction to produce a distribution of hydrocarbon components, typically C3-C18, which is fractionated to recover the naphtha product. The heavy fraction is optionally recycled to the hydrocracker.
The hydrotreating of triglycerides and fatty acids involves olefin hydrogenation and deoxygenation. Hydrotreating thus converts fatty acids into long chain paraffins as illustrated in Equations 1 and 2 for conversion of oleic acid to n-octadecane and n-heptadecane.
HOOC—C17H33+2H2→n-C18H38+2H2O (1)
HOOC—C17H33+H2→n-C17H36+CO2 (2)
When the fatty acids are supported on a glycerol backbone, for example as triglycerides or diglycerides, the hydrotreating reactions of Equations 1 and 2 produce propane as well as the long chain, heavy hydrocarbon fraction. Depending on the source of the fatty acid/triglyceride, the heavy hydrocarbon fraction is predominantly in the C12 to C22 range.
The heavy hydrocarbons may be hydrocracked into shorter chain hydrocarbons to produce biorenewable naphtha. In the illustrative hydrocracking reactions of Equations 3-5, n-octadecane is hydrocracked into naphtha-range hydrocarbons, nonanes, hexanes, pentanes, and propane/butanes byproducts.
C18H38+H2→n-C9H20+i-C9H20 (3)
i-C9H20+H2→i-C5H12+i-C4H10 (4)
n-C9H20+H2→i-C6H14+C3H8 (5)
The naphtha thus obtained is a biorenewable isoparaffinic composition, free of oxygenates and benzene.
The present invention is directed to a naphtha boiling range hydrocarbon composition derived from a biorenewable feedstock. The biorenewable feedstock having monoglycerides, diglycerides, triglycerides, free fatty acids, and combinations thereof. The biorenewable feedstock is selected from the group including animal fats, animal oils, poultry fat, poultry oil, vegetable fats, vegetable oils, rendered fats, rendered oils, restaurant grease, brown grease, waste industrial frying oils, fish oils, fish fats, and combinations thereof. Broadly, the composition of the present invention includes greater than about 90.0% by weight of total n- and iso-paraffins; and less than about 1.0% by weight of total aromatics. The paraffins include C4, C5, C6, C7, C8, C9, and C10 paraffins. The composition has a boiling range of about 70° F. to about 400° F. The composition has a specific gravity at 20° C. of from about 0.680 to about 0.740. The composition may further include, less than about 0.5% by weight of olefins, less than about 6.5% by weight of naphthenes, and/or less than about 1.0% by weight of total aromatics.
Further, the present invention is directed to a naphtha boiling range hydrocarbon produced from a biorenewable feedstock, wherein the hydrocarbon has a boiling range between about 70° F. and about 400° F.; and a specific gravity at 20° C. of from about 0.680 to about 0.740. The hydrocarbon has greater than about 90% by weight of total n- and iso-paraffins. The hydrocarbon may further include, less than about 0.5% by weight of olefins, less than about 6.5% by weight of naphthenes, and/or less than about 1.0% by weight of total aromatics. The composition and/or hydrocarbon are free of benzene and oxygenates.
The present invention provides a product produced from a biorenewable feedstock. The product includes a naphtha boiling range hydrocarbon having a boiling range between about 70° F. and about 400° F.; and a specific gravity at 20° C. of from about 0.680 to about 0.740, wherein the product is a benzene-free solvent. The hydrocarbon of the product of the present invention may be fractionated into a bio-based hexane product inherently free of benzene.
The present invention relates to a method for producing from a biorenewable feedstock a hydrocarbon product of naphtha boiling point range that can be used as feedstock for olefins, BTX aromatics, and hydrogen plants. The biorenewable naphtha of the present invention may also be used directly as a fuel, a fuel blend stock, or a solvent.
Referring to the process embodiment of
To maintain the active metal sulfide functionality of the catalyst despite absence of organic sulfur in most bio-renewable feeds, feed 101 may be supplemented with a sulfur compound that decomposes to hydrogen sulfide when heated and/or contacted with a catalyst. Two preferred sulfur compounds are dimethyl disulfide and carbon disulfide. Preferred concentration of these in the feed 101 is from about 100 to about 2,000 ppm by weight sulfur. Alternatively, feed 101 may include a biorenewable component and a petroleum fraction wherein the petroleum-fraction provides the sulfur.
Feed 101 may be preheated before entering the hydrotreater 102. The hydrotreater 102 operates from about 300° F. to about 900° F., preferably from about 550° F. to about 650° F., and from about 250 psig to about 3,000 psig. In order to reduce the adiabatic temperature rise from the exothermic hydrotreating reactions and to maintain the hydrotreater 102 in the preferred operating range, a number of methods known in the art may be used. These methods include, but are not limited to, feed dilution with a solvent or other diluent, liquid product or solvent recycle, and use of quench zones within the fixed-bed reactor wherein hydrogen is introduced.
The biorenewable feed 101 liquid hourly space velocity through the hydrotreater 102 is from about 0.2 h−1 to about 10 h−1, preferably from about 0.5 h−1 to about 5.0 h−1. The ratio of hydrogen-rich treat gas 110 to biorenewable feed 101 is preferably in the about 2,000 to about 15,000 SCF/bbl range. The hydrogen-rich treat gas 110 may contain from about 70 mol % to about 100 mol % hydrogen.
A hydrotreater effluent 103 includes a deoxygenated heavy hydrotreater fraction and unreacted hydrogen. The hydrotreater effluent 103 may also include water, carbon oxides, ammonia, and hydrogen sulfide. The long chain, heavy hydrocarbon fraction in the liquid phase is separated from the gas phase components in a separation unit 104.
The separation unit 104 includes a high pressure drum (not shown) operated at hydrotreater discharge pressure (about 1,000 psig to about 2,000 psig in the preferred embodiment), wherein long chain, heavy hydrocarbon liquids are separated from hydrogen and gas phase hydrotreater byproducts. It should be understood that the hydrotreater discharge pressure may be operated from about 200 psig to about 3,000 psig. Depending on the temperature of the separation unit 104, water may be in vapor or liquid phase. In a preferred embodiment, the separation unit 104 has a temperature in the about 350° F. to about 500° F. range whereby water, carbon oxides, ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, and propane are removed with hydrogen in a separator drum vapor phase. To enhance removal of the components from the heavy hydrocarbon fraction, the separation unit 104 optionally includes a stripping section (not shown). Water 111 may be condensed, separated, and the hydrogen-rich gas phase 105 recycled to the hydrotreater 102.
A long chain hydrocarbon product stream 112 from the separation unit 104 is then cracked in a hydrocracker 114. Product stream 112 is optionally combined with unconverted heavies from the hydrocracker 114, and recycled stream 125, to form a hydrocracker feed 113.
The heavy hydrocarbon feed 113 cracks in the hydrocracker 114 to form naphtha-range hydrocarbons. Preferably, the hydrocracker 114 operates from about 250 psig to about 3,000 psig, more preferably from about 1,000 psig to about 2,000 psig. Hydrocracker 114 temperatures are from about 400° F. to about 900° F., preferably from about 580° F. to about 750° F. Suitable catalysts for hydrocracking according to the present invention as described herein are bi-functional catalysts with hydrogenation and acidic functionalities. Such catalysts include Group VIII metals on amorphous (e.g. silica-alumina) or crystalline (e.g. zeolite) supports. Preferred hydrocracking catalysts are platinum, palladium or combinations of same on an amorphous silica-alumina support. However, it should be understood that any catalyst may be used in accordance with the present invention as long as it functions as described herein. Preferred ratios of the hydrogen-rich gas to liquid feed for hydrocracking are in the about 1,000 to about 10,000 SCF/bbl range, and liquid hourly space velocity in the about 0.1 h−1 to about 8 h−1 range, preferably from about 0.2 h−1 to about 4 h−1. Stream 115 is an effluent of the hydrocracker 114 wherein un-reacted hydrogen includes a gas phase. Hydrogen-rich gas is separated from the hydrocarbon product in a separation unit 116.
The separation unit 116 includes a high pressure separation drum (not shown), operating at hydrocracker discharge pressure, about 1,000 psig to about 2,000 psig in the preferred embodiment, where hydrocarbon liquids are separated from hydrogen, hydrocarbon vapors, and any other gas phase cracked products. It should be understood that the hydrocracker discharge pressure may be operated from about 200 psig to about 3,000 psig.
A hydrogen-rich gas 117 from the separation unit 116 is combined with a hydrogen-rich gas 105 from the separation unit 104 and optionally processed through an absorption column or scrubber 108 to remove ammonia, carbon oxides, and/or hydrogen sulfide, before recompression for recycle to the hydrotreater 102 and/or hydrocracker 114. Depending on the contaminant to be removed, the scrubber 108 may use various solvents such as amine and caustic solutions. It is clear to those skilled in the art that other gas cleanup technologies may be used instead of or in addition to the scrubber 108 to remove contaminants that affect the hydrotreater 102 and hydrocracker 114 catalyst activity and selectivity. Examples of alternative gas cleanup technologies include membrane systems and adsorbent beds.
A purge stream 107 may be removed from a recycle gas 106 to prevent buildup of contaminants that are not effectively removed in the scrubber 108. The cleaned hydrogen-rich gas 108a from the scrubber 108 may be combined with makeup hydrogen 109 to form a hydrogen-rich gas stream 110 for the hydrotreater 102 and hydrocracker 114.
Stream 123 is the liquid hydrocarbon phase from the separation unit 116. Stream 123 is processed through fractionator unit 124 to fraction the hydrocracker products into a hydrocarbon vapors product 127, the desired naphtha product 126, and a heavies fraction 125 which is optionally recycled to extinction through the hydrocracker 114.
The fractionator unit 124 is operated to recover biorenewable naphtha, typically with a C4-C9 hydrocarbon distribution. Despite the relatively high oxygen content of the biological feedstock, the naphtha product is free of oxygenates. The biorenewable naphtha includes 80% to 100% by weight n- and iso-paraffins. In preferred embodiments of this invention, biorenewable naphtha n- and iso-paraffin content is greater than 90% by weight. The total aromatics content is in the range of 0 to 2% by weight, preferably less than 1% by weight. Cycloparaffins (or naphthenes as they are more commonly known) may also be present in the biorenewable naphtha at up to 7.0% by weight. The olefin content of biorenewable naphtha is less than 0.5% by weight, preferably in the range of 0 to 0.3% by weight.
No benzene is present in the biorenewable naphtha. The biorenewable naphtha product may thus be used as a solvent for food-contact applications. For example, stream 126 may be subjected to conventional distillation for separating the C6-cut from the C4-C10 paraffinic hydrocarbon distribution, wherein the C6-cut is used as bio-based hexane solvent for vegetable oil extraction.
Referring now to
A fraction of the hydrogen-rich gas 217 is purged as stream 207 and the remaining fraction of the hydrogen-rich gas 217 is cleaned up in scrubber 208. The cleaned hydrogen-rich gas 208a is then combined with makeup hydrogen 209 to form a recycle hydrogen-rich gas as hydrocracker stream 210.
Stream 223, cracked liquids from the separation unit 216, is transferred to a product fractionators unit 224. The illustrative C3-C18 hydrocracked product is fractioned into a C3/C4 gas stream 227, a naphtha product stream 226, a middle distillate stream 228 suitable for use as jet kerosene or diesel, and a heavies recycle stream 225.
The resultant biorenewable naphtha has a boiling point range from about 70° F. to about 400° F. and a specific gravity at 20° C. of from about 0.680 to about 0.740. The naphtha product includes C4-C10 paraffins that are considered superior feed components for steam crackers, and is also an appropriate feed for conversion to BTX aromatics, and hydrogen production. The naphtha composition is also useful as a solvent in applications where low flash point is not a limitation.
As a fuel or fuel additive, the renewable naphtha provides some benefit as a bio-renewable addition to ethanol in that ethanol typically suffers from low vapor pressures and low energy density. The biorenewable naphtha typically has a Reid Vapor Pressure (RVP)>10 psi and may be blended with ethanol in concentrations of 1-30% to make an entirely renewable gasoline replacement for automobiles that has an improved energy density. The bio-renewable naphtha has low octane ratings (typically less than 40 RON) which is offset by the higher octane of the ethanol fuel which is reported to be in the 129 RON range. Thus, the resulting blend easily meets U.S. performance requirements for vapor pressure and octane rating by utilizing the benefits of both fuels.
An alternate approach for using the biorenewable naphtha of the present invention as described herein as a renewable blend stock for motor gasoline is by isomerization of the C5/C6 fraction, which is a standard refinery unit process. The C5/C6 fraction of the biorenewable naphtha composition may be isomerized to raise RON and make it suitable for blending with gasoline stocks. Typical isomerized products include 2-methylbutane and 2,3-dimethylbutane, with RON values of 93.5 and 105, respectively.
The biorenewable naphtha is used as fuel for industrial burners, boilers, and turbines and as an industrial solvent.
Due to its paraffinic nature and its high hydrogen-to-carbon ratio, the bio-renewable naphtha may also be used as a hydrogen source or as a fuel cell fuel.
In order to further illustrate the present invention, the following examples are given. However, it is to be understood that the examples are for illustrative purposes only and are not to be construed as limiting the scope of the subject invention.
The present example demonstrates how naphtha was made from a renewable feedstock. A 100 cc isothermal tubular reactor was filled with 80 cc of a commercial NiMo catalyst and +70-100 mesh glass beads. The catalyst was sulfided with dimethyl disulfide. The sulfiding procedure included step-wise temperature increase to 650° F. After sulfiding, the reactor was cooled to 400° F.
Next a triglyceride/fatty acid feed was introduced to the isothermal reactor. The reactor was slowly heated to 650° F. to achieve full conversion of the triglyceride/fatty acid feed to n-paraffins. The reactor temperature was further increased to 700° F. to maintain good catalyst activity at 80 cc/hr feed rate (1 LHSV).
The hydrotreater performance with beef tallow as the triglyceride/fatty acid feed is summarized in Table 1. The yield of total products on feed basis exceeds 100% in part due to addition of hydrogen and also due to measurement errors associated with gas phase analysis.
The gas chromatogram of the liquid hydrocarbon product confirmed that under the hydrotreater conditions of Table 1 the tallow feed was converted C15-C18 n-paraffins with no detectable oxygenates remaining. No cracked products (C12—) were detected.
The mainly C15-C18 n-paraffin composition obtained from hydrotreating bio-renewable feed stocks was used as feed for a hydrocracking pilot plant. These long chain hydrocarbons were derived via hydrotreating a biorenewable feed in a procedure similar to Example 1. The bio-renewable feed was a blend of chicken fat (45%), brown grease (19%), yellow grease (18%), floatation grease (9%), and miscellaneous waste animal fats from industrial food processing operations (9%). The hydrocracking pilot plant was a prototype of the embodiment of the present invention represented by
The hydrocracker reactor system was loaded with 4.8 liters of a commercial hydrocracking catalyst. The catalyst was platinum-palladium on amorphous alumina/silica support. The reactor was pressurized to 1,000 psig. After catalyst preconditioning, the temperature was increased again to achieve the desired level of hydrocracking to produce the biorenewable naphtha product. The ratio of hydrogen-rich gas (recycle and makeup) to feed was 3,600-3,800 SCF/bbl.
The pilot plant fractionation system included three distillation columns in series. The first stripped off the light hydrocarbons (“debutanizer”) from the hydrocracker effluent, the second (“naphtha tower”) separated the naphtha overhead, and the third (“recycle tower”) separated a middle distillate cut overhead from the heavy bottoms that were combined with the fresh feed and recycled to the hydrocracker.
Table 2 provides the composition and properties of the hydrotreated hydrocarbon fraction and Table 3 summarizes the operating conditions of the hydrocracker, conversion performance thereof, and product properties therefrom.
aND = not detectable
aNM = not measured
Fuel grade bio-ethanol was purchased from Abengoa Bioenergy (Chesterfield, Mo.). The biorenewable naphtha was produced using the Conditions of Examples 1 and 2 with the feedstock of Example 2. Using these blendstocks, an 85 vol % ethanol blend with the bio-renewable naphtha was prepared. Test aliquots of this 100% renewable E-85 gasoline were taken according to ASTM D 2699 and ASTM D 2700 test methods, and Research and Motor Octane Numbers (RON and MON) were measured. The results are summarized in Table 4.
The results of Table 4 indicate that the bio-renewable naphtha composition of this invention is well-suited for producing a high octane, 100% renewable gasoline, containing virtually no aromatic hydrocarbons.
A pilot plant steam cracker designed to model performance of commercial units (Van Geem, K. M.; Reyniers, M.-F.; Marin G. B. AIChE J., 50, 173-183, 2004) was used for this experiment. The experiments were conducted using the biorenewable naphtha composition of this invention produced according to the method of Examples 1 and 2. The steam cracker coil outlet pressure was controlled at 1.7 bar, with steam-to-hydrocarbon ratio of 0.45 w/w. The yields of the bio-derived olefins for selected coil outlet temperature (COT) experiments are presented in Table 5. Also included in Table 5 is comparable data for petroleum distillates of similar boiling range.
(a)Petroleum steam cracking data from Grub J. and Loser, E. Ullmann's Encyclopedia of Industrial Chemistry, John Wiley; 2005.
As observed in Table 5, the biorenewable naphtha cracks more completely to light olefins than do petroleum feedstocks (higher C4-products and lower pyrolysis liquids). Yields of the main olefins (ethylene, propylene, and butadiene) are also generally similar or better than petroleum feeds of similar boiling range.
A sample of the naphtha boiling range product produced in Example 2 was submitted for detailed characterization via GCxGC. This analytical technique, also referred to as “two dimensional GC,” is used for quantitative analysis of complex mixtures. The technique uses two chromatography columns—with a modulator in between—to separate the components based on volatility (x-axis) and polarity (y-axis), thus generating a two-dimensional map of the product composition. As such, compounds with similar volatility but slightly different polarity can be quantified independently (e.g. pentane and methyl-cyclobutane, both having a 36° C. boiling point).
The GCxGC analysis, summarized in Table 6, confirms that the renewable naphtha product of the instant invention is paraffinic, with total of only 0.338 wt % olefins and 0.833 wt % aromatics. Furthermore, no benzene (0.00% C6 aromatics) was observed. Absence of carcinogenic benzene and very low aromatics content makes this biorenewable composition inherently less toxic than petroleum-based naphtha.
A naphtha distillate was produced via hydrotreating of beef tallow according to the process of the instant invention. The naphtha distillate was submitted for analysis at a certified ASTM testing laboratory. The measured properties are summarized in Tables 7a and 7b below.
Thus there has been shown and described a biorenewable naphtha composition, and method for producing the same, that fulfills all objectives and advantages sought therefore. While presently preferred embodiments of the invention have been described for purposes of this disclosure, it will be understood that numerous changes may be made which will readily suggest themselves to those skilled in the art and which are accomplished within the spirit of the invention disclosed and claimed herein. From the above description, it is clear that the present invention is well adapted to carry out the objects and to obtain the advantages mentioned herein as well as those inherent in the invention. While presently preferred embodiments of the invention have been described for purposes of this disclosure, it will be understood that numerous changes may be made which will readily suggest themselves to those skilled in the art and which are accomplished within the spirit of the invention disclosed and claimed.
The present application is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 12/132,915, filed Jun. 4, 2008 now abandoned, entitled “Biorenewable Naphtha”, the entire contents of which are incorporated herein by reference in its entirety.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
2093159 | Schmidt | Sep 1937 | A |
2163563 | Schrauth | Jun 1939 | A |
2915447 | Arabian | Dec 1959 | A |
3144404 | Tyson | Aug 1964 | A |
3496099 | Bridge | Feb 1970 | A |
4049686 | Ringers et al. | Sep 1977 | A |
4151072 | Nowack et al. | Apr 1979 | A |
4233140 | Antonelli et al. | Nov 1980 | A |
4252634 | Khulbe et al. | Feb 1981 | A |
4300009 | Haag et al. | Nov 1981 | A |
4431524 | Norman | Feb 1984 | A |
4432865 | Norman | Feb 1984 | A |
4512878 | Reid et al. | Apr 1985 | A |
4571442 | Cosyns et al. | Feb 1986 | A |
4698185 | Dijkstra et al. | Oct 1987 | A |
4734226 | Parker et al. | Mar 1988 | A |
4746420 | Darian et al. | May 1988 | A |
4937051 | Graven et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
4960960 | Harrison et al. | Oct 1990 | A |
4992605 | Craig et al. | Feb 1991 | A |
5093535 | Harrison et al. | Mar 1992 | A |
5105015 | Lin et al. | Apr 1992 | A |
5135638 | Miller | Aug 1992 | A |
5180868 | Baker et al. | Jan 1993 | A |
5239096 | Rohdenburg et al. | Aug 1993 | A |
5292428 | Harrison et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5298639 | Toeneboehn et al. | Mar 1994 | A |
5475160 | Singleton et al. | Dec 1995 | A |
5502077 | Breivik et al. | Mar 1996 | A |
5578090 | Bradin | Nov 1996 | A |
5647226 | Scaringe et al. | Jul 1997 | A |
5705722 | Monnier et al. | Jan 1998 | A |
5851338 | Pushaw | Dec 1998 | A |
5877358 | Garton et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5882505 | Wittenbrink et al. | Mar 1999 | A |
5906729 | Chou | May 1999 | A |
6123835 | Ackerson et al. | Sep 2000 | A |
6185742 | Doherty | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6190535 | Kalnes et al. | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6203695 | Harle et al. | Mar 2001 | B1 |
6353143 | Fang et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6402935 | Kalnes | Jun 2002 | B1 |
6574971 | Suppes | Jun 2003 | B2 |
6638418 | Kalnes et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6660812 | Kuechler et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6846778 | Johnson et al. | Jan 2005 | B2 |
6855410 | Buckley | Feb 2005 | B2 |
7232935 | Jakkula et al. | Jun 2007 | B2 |
7288685 | Marker | Oct 2007 | B2 |
7511181 | Petri et al. | Mar 2009 | B2 |
7550634 | Yao et al. | Jun 2009 | B2 |
7691159 | Li | Apr 2010 | B2 |
7718051 | Ginosar et al. | May 2010 | B2 |
7754931 | Monnier et al. | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7816570 | Roberts et al. | Oct 2010 | B2 |
7836722 | Magill et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7846323 | Abhari et al. | Dec 2010 | B2 |
7928273 | Bradin | Apr 2011 | B2 |
7968757 | Abhari et al. | Jun 2011 | B2 |
7982076 | Marker et al. | Jul 2011 | B2 |
8003836 | Marker et al. | Aug 2011 | B2 |
8026401 | Abhari et al. | Sep 2011 | B2 |
8187344 | Jakkula et al. | May 2012 | B2 |
8212094 | Myllyoja et al. | Jul 2012 | B2 |
8278492 | Myllyoja et al. | Oct 2012 | B2 |
20040055209 | Jakkula et al. | Mar 2004 | A1 |
20040067856 | Johnson et al. | Apr 2004 | A1 |
20040167355 | Abazajian | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040230085 | Jakkula et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20050150815 | Johnson et al. | Jul 2005 | A1 |
20060161032 | Murzin et al. | Jul 2006 | A1 |
20060186020 | Gomes | Aug 2006 | A1 |
20060199984 | Kuechler et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060207166 | Herskowitz et al. | Sep 2006 | A1 |
20060264684 | Petri et al. | Nov 2006 | A1 |
20070006523 | Myllyoja et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070010682 | Myllyoja et al. | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070131579 | Koivusalmi et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070135669 | Koivusalmi et al. | Jun 2007 | A1 |
20070161832 | Myllyoja et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070170091 | Monnier et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070260102 | Duarte Santiago et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20090077866 | Kalnes et al. | Mar 2009 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1313200 | Jan 1993 | CA |
2149685 | Sep 1999 | CA |
283575 | May 1998 | CZ |
41 16 905 | Aug 1992 | DE |
0 794 241 | Mar 1997 | EP |
1728844 | Dec 2006 | EP |
72435 | Feb 1987 | FI |
73367 | Jun 1987 | FI |
89073 | Apr 1993 | FI |
95391 | Jan 1996 | FI |
2 090 611 | Jul 1982 | GB |
921671 | Dec 1995 | IE |
59-108088 | Jun 1984 | JP |
9700149 | Aug 1997 | SE |
520633 | Aug 2003 | SE |
0011117 | Mar 2000 | WO |
WO-0149812 | Jul 2001 | WO |
WO-03022960 | Mar 2003 | WO |
WO-2004026161 | Apr 2004 | WO |
2004104142 | Dec 2004 | WO |
2005026297 | Mar 2005 | WO |
2007063874 | Jun 2007 | WO |
2007068795 | Jun 2007 | WO |
2007063874 | Jun 2007 | WO |
WO-2008027699 | Mar 2008 | WO |
2008054442 | May 2008 | WO |
2008058664 | May 2008 | WO |
WO-2008067627 | Jun 2008 | WO |
WO-2009085686 | Jul 2009 | WO |
WO-2009117337 | Sep 2009 | WO |
2009151692 | Dec 2009 | WO |
Entry |
---|
“Technical and Economic Aspects of Manufacturing Cetane Enhanced Diesel Fuel from Canola Oil” Wong, Al, Monnier, Jacques, Stumbor, Mark, Hogan, Ed. |
“Paraffinic Naphthas” May 20, 2003 API. |
“Technical and Economic Aspects of Manufacturing Cetane Enhanced Diesel Fuel from Canola Oil” Wong, Al, Monnier, Jacques, Stumbor, Mark Hogan, Ed (1994). |
Final Substantive Examination Report issued for Singapore application No. 201008935-7 dated Feb. 1, 2013. |
Wong, A., et al.; “Technical and Economic Aspects of Manufacturing Cetane-Enhanced Diesel Fuel from Canola Oil”; Bio-Oils Symposium; Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada; Mar. 2-3, 1994. |
Sharma, S.D., et al.; “Latent Heat Storage Materials and Systems: A Review”; International Journal of Green Energy; 2: 1-56; 2005. |
Kalnes, et al.; U.S. Appl. No. 60/973,788, entitled “Production of Diesel Fuel from Biorenewable Feedstocks”, filed Sep. 20, 2007. |
PCT Preliminary Report; PCT/US2009/045404; International Bureau; dated Dec. 16, 2010; 9 pages. |
SG Written Opinion; Application No. 201008935-7; Danish Patent and Trademark Office; dated Sep. 1, 2012; 18 pages. |
First Action Interview Office Action on U.S. Appl. No. 13/742,255 Dtd Jun. 6, 2013. |
Irwin, R.J., et al. 1997. “Environmental Contaminants Encyclopedia.” National Park Service, Water Resources Division, Fort Collins, Colorado. |
Abhari et al., “New Routes to Ethylene,” EEPC Seminar in Berlin, Germany, Oct. 20-22, 2010, pp. 1-38. |
Ali et al., “Fuel Properties of Tallow and Soybead Oil Esters,” JAOCS, 1995, vol. 72, No. 12. |
Antoniassi, R. et al, “Pretreatment of Corn Oil for Physical Refining,” JAOCS, vol. 75, No. 10, 1998, pp. 1411-1415. |
Arroyo et al., “Hydrocracking and isomerization of n-paraffin mixtures and a hydrotreated gasoil on Pt/ZSM-22: confirmation of pore mouth and key013lock catalysis in liquid phase,” Applied Catalysis A: General 192, 2000, pp. 9-22. |
ASTM International, “Standard Specification for Diesel Fuel Oil”, Designation: D975-12, printed Nov. 9, 2012, 26 pages. |
Batts et al., “A Literature Review on Fuel Stability Studies with Particular Emphasis on Diesel Oil”, Energy & Fuels, 1991, vol. 5, pp. 2-21. |
Beare-Rogers, J. et al, “Lexicon of Lipid Nutrition,” Pure and Applied Chemistry, vol. 73, No. 4, 2001, pp. 685-744. |
Bergerioux, C. et al, “Determination of Trace Element Pathways in a Petroleum Distillation Unit by Instrumental Neutron Activation Analysis,” Journal of Radioanalytical Chemistry, vol. 54, No. 1-2,1979, pp. 255-265. |
Burch et al., “Melting-Point Models of Alkanes”, J. Chem. Eng. Data 2004, 49, 858-863. |
Canada Centre for Mineral and Energy Technology, “New Process Yields Cleaner Diesel”, Canmet'95: New Directions, 1995, p. 14. |
Canakci et al., “Biodiesel Production from Oils and Fats with High Free Fatty Acids”, Transactions of the ASAE, 2001, vol. 44(6), pp. 1429-1436. |
Clements, L.D., “Blending Rules for Formulating Biodiesel Fluid.”, Proceedings of the Third Liquid Fuels Conference, Sep. 15-17, 1996, pp. 44-53. |
Cmolik et al., “Effects of plant-scale alkali refining and physical refining on the quality of rapeseed oil”, Eur. J. Lipod Sci. Technol. 2000, 15-22. |
Cooper et al., “Production of Swedish Class I Diesel Using Dual-Stage Process”, Catalytic Hydroprocessing of Petroleum and Distillates, based on Proceedings of the AIChE Spring National Meeting, Houston, Texas, Mar. 28-Apr. 1, 1993, 279-290. |
Corma, et al., “Transformation of Alkanes on Solid Acid and Bifunctional Catalysts”, Catalytic Activation and Functionalisation of Light Alkanes: Advances and Challenges, Editors E.G. Derouane et al., 1998, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers, vol. 44, pp. 35-74. |
Criterion, “Technical Bulletin: CRITERION* Hydrotreating Catalyst In-Situ Presulphiding Guidelines—Liquid Phase (Preferred method)—Gase Phase (alternative method)” Criterion Catalysts, Aug. 1998, 1-9. |
Deem, A.G. et al, “Catalytic Poisoning in Liquid-Phase Hydrogenation,” Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, vol. 33, No. 11, Nov. 1941, pp. 1373-1376. |
Del Gallo et. al. “Comparison of the Effects of Nitrogen Poisoning on Molybdenum Oxycarbide and Pt/B-Zeolite Catalysts in the Isomerization of n-Heptane,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 1996, vol. 35, No. 10, pp. 3302-3310. |
Derrien et al., “The IFP Selective Hydrogenation Process”, Chemical Engineering Process, vol. 70, No. 1, Jan. 1974, 74-80. |
Dynamic Fuels, “About”, http://www.dynamicfuelsllc.com/. Accessed Nov. 12, 2012, 8 pages. |
Dynamic Fuels, “Compare”, http://www.dynamicfuelsllc.com/. Accessed Nov. 12, 2012, 7 pages. |
Dynamic Fuels, “Frequently Ask Questions,” http://dynamicfuelsllc.com/wpnews/frequently-ask-questions/, Accessed Nov. 12, 2012, 4 pages. |
Edgar et al., “Analysis is key to hydrotreater troubleshooting”, Oil & Gas Journal, vol. 82, issue 23, Jun. 4, 1984, 67-70. |
Erickson et al., “Soybead Oil Modern Processing and Utilization”, American Soybean Association, 1990, 20 pages. |
Extended European Search Report issued for European Application No. 09759070.7 dated Nov. 5, 2012. |
Feng et al., “Chemical Composition of Tall-Oil Based Cetane Enhancer for Diesel Fuels”, First Biomass Conference of The Americas: Engergy, Environment, Agriculture, and Industry, Aug. 30-Sep. 2, 1993. 14 pages. |
Filho et al., Catalytic Conversion of Hevea brasiliensis and Virola sebifera Oils to Hydrocarbon Fuels, JAOCS, vol. 69, No. 3, Mar. 1992, 266-271. |
First Action Interview Pilot Program Pre-Interview Communication issued for U.S. Appl. No. 13/742,255 mailed Apr. 12, 2013. |
Galeana et al., “Thermodynamics of Wax Precipitation in Petroleum Mixtures,” AIChE Journal, 1996, vol. 42, No. 1, pp. 239-248. |
Galperin, “Hydroisomerization of N-decane in the presence of sulfur and nitrogen compounds,” Applied Catalysis A: General, 209, 2001 pp. 257-268. |
Garrido et al., “Concentrations of Metal in vegetable edible oils”, Food Chemistry, vol. 50, 1994, 237-243. |
Goering et al., “Fuel Properties of Eleven Vegetable Oils,” Transactions of the ASAE, 1982, pp. 1472-1477, 1483. |
Goodrum et al., “Rheological Characterization of Yellow Grease and Poultry Fat,” JAOCS, 2002, vol. 79, No. 10, pp. 961-964. |
Groschen, R., “Overview of: The Feasibility of Biodiesel from Waste/Recycled Greases and Animal Fats”, Marketing Services Division, Minnesota Department of Agriculture, Oct. 2002, 28 pages. |
Gusmao et al., “Utilization of Vegetable Oils as an Alternative Source for Diesel-Type Fuel,” Catalysis Today, 5, 1989, pp. 533-544. |
Herrera et al., “Catalyst Selection for Hydrotreating Diesel Fuel from Residue Hydrocracking”, ACS Preprints, 1992, vol. 37, No. 4, pp. 1855-1863. |
Hill, C., An Introduction to Chemical Engineering Kinetics & Reactor Design, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1977, pp. 349-380, 382-387. |
Holmgren, et al., “New Developments in Renewable Fuels Offer More Choices”, Hydrocarbon Processing, Sep. 2007, pp. 67-72. |
Iki, et al., “Applicability of Hydrogenated Palm Oil for Automotive Fuels”, 16th Saudi Arabia-Japen Joint Symposium, Dhahran, Saudi Arabia, Nov. 5-6, 2006, 10 pages. |
Kent, J., “Table 8.2”, Riegel's Handbook of Industrial Chemistry, 9th Edition, 1992, pp. 278-279. |
Kirk-Othmer, “Gravity Concentration to Hydrogen Energy”, Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology, Third Edition, vol. 12, Copyright 1980 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 931-937. |
Kriz, et al., “Catalysts for the Isomerization of C7 Paraffins,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 1998, 37:4560-4569. |
Levenspiel, O., Chemical Reaction Engineering, Third Edition, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., 1999, pp. 207-239. |
Lewis, R.J., Hawley's Condensed Chemical Dictionary, 12th Edition, 1993, p. 907. |
Long et al., “Noble Metal (Pt, Rh, Pd) Promoted Fe-ZSM-5 for Selective Catalytic Oxidation of Ammonia to N2 at Low Temperatures”, Catalysis Letters, Mar. 2002, vol. 78, Nos. 1-4, pp. 353-357. |
MacDonald, “Fuel From Fats,” enerG Alternative Sources Magazine, Sep./Oct. 2011, 4 pages. |
Mag, T., “Canola Seed and Oil Processing”, Canola Council of Canada, 1994, 6 pages. |
Mansfield Fuels, “Norfolk Southern Pens Deal with Dynamic Fuels and Mansfield Oil”, http://www.mansfieldoil.com/latest-news-a-press/524-norfolk-southern-pens-deal-with-dynamic-fueis-and-mansfield-oil.html, Accessed Nov. 12, 2012, 2 pages. |
Marker, T.L., “Opportunities for Biorenewables in Oil Refineries Final Technical Report” submitted to U.S. Department of Energy, Apr. 2005, 60 pages. |
Miller, “Studies on Wax Isomerization for Lubes and Fuels, Zeolited and Related Microporous Materials: State of the Art in 1994,” Studies in Surface Science and Catalysts, 1994, vol. 84, pp. 2319-2326. |
Mirante et al., “Cloud point prediction of fuels and fuel blends,” Fluid Phase Equilibria 180, 2001, pp. 247-255. |
Moyse, “Graded Catalyst Systems to Combat Bed-Fouling Problems”, Haldor Topsoe, Inc. 1996, 16 pages. |
Plantenga et al., “Specialized guard-bed technology can improve resid unit operation”, Oil & Gas Journal, Oct. 21, 1991, 74-78. |
Pope et al., “A Study of Catalyst Formulations for Isomerization of C7 Hydrocarbons”, Applied Catalysis A: General 233, 2002, pp. 45-62. |
Prakash, “A Critical Review of Biodiesel As a Transportation Fuel in Canada”, Mar. 25, 1998, 163 pages. |
Proctor & Gamble, “Better Rendering, A Manual Prepared by Proctor & Gamble”, 2nd Ed., 1967, pp. ix-xi, 1-21. |
Przybylski,R., “Canola Oil: Physical and Chemical Properties”, Canola Council of Canada, 1998, 12 pages. |
Rahimi et al., “Effect of Hydrotreating on the Stability of Synthetic Crude from Western Canada,”Symposium on Stability and Oxidation Chemistry of Fuels, Dallas, Spring 1998, ACS Fuels43 (1), pp. 13-17; Available for download athttp://web.anl.gov/PCS/acsfuel/preprint%20archive/43—1—DALLAS—03-98.htm. |
Sanford et al., “Improved Catalyst Loading Reduces Guard Reactor Fouling”, Oil & Gas Journal, Dec. 19, 1988, pp. 35-41. |
Semjkal, et al., “Thermodynamic balance in reaction system of total vegetable oil hydrogenation”, Chemical Engineering Journal 146 (2009) 155-160. |
Simacek, et al., “Hydroprocessed rapeseed oil as a source of hydrocarbon-based biodiesel”, Fuel 88, 2009, 456-460. |
Soveran et al., “The Effect on Diesel Engine Emissions with High Cetane Additives From Biomass Oils,” Proc. American Chemical Society (Division of Fuel Chemistry) Meeting San Francisco, CA, Apr. 1992, pp. 74-85. |
Spataru, “AGTANE (AGricultural ceTANE): An Economically Viable Bioenergy Product for Compression Ignited Engines”, Fuel Chemistry Division Preprints, 2002, vol. 47(1), p. 365. |
Spataru, “Is There a Future for Yellow Grease as a Fuel Additive?,” Render, Feb. 2001, pp. 12-14. |
Spataru, et al., “AGTANE (AGricultural ceTANE): An economically viable bioenergy product for compression ignited engines,” 5th International Biomass Conference of the Americas Sep. 21, 2001, 2 pages. |
SRI, “Sample Analyses Final Report” Southwest Research Institute, Oct. 31, 2008, 2 pps. |
Stork, W.H.J., “Molecules, catalysts and reactors in hydroprocessing of oil fractions”, Hydrotreatment and Hydrocracking of oil fractions, 1997 Elsevier Science B.V., 41-67. |
Stumborg et al., “Hydroprocessed Vegetable Oils for Diesel FuelImprovement.” Bioresources Technology, 1996, vol. 56, pp. 13-18. |
Syntroleum webpage, “Bio-Synfining—Dynamic Fuels Plant”; http://www.b2i.us/profiles/investor/fullpage.asp?BzID=2029&to=cp&Nav=O&LangID=1&s=0&ID=11923 , Accessed Nov. 21, 2012, 4 pages. |
Table 4a. U.S. Crude Oil and Liquid Fuels Supply, Consumption and Inventories, Dec. 2012, 1 pp. |
Taylor et al., Modern Advanced Control Pays Back Rapidly, Hydrocarbon Processing, Sep. 2000 issue, pp. 47-50. |
Tyson et al., “Biomass Oil Analysis: Research needs and Recommendations,” NREL Technical Report, Jun. 2004, 116 pages. |
U.S. Dept. of Agriculture—Oilseeds: World Markets and Trade, “Soybean Oil and Palm Oil Account for an Increasing Share of Word Vegetable Oil Consumption”, (2003), 27 pages. |
U.S. Natural Gas Wellhead Price data and graph from U.S. Energy Information Administration, released Nov. 30, 2012, 1 pp; Available for download at http://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng—pri—sum—dcu—nus—m.htm. |
Vajo, et al., “Steady-State Decomposition of Ammonia on the Pt(110)-(1x2) Surface”, The Journal of Physical Chemistry, 1986, vol. 90, No. 24, pp. 6531-6535. |
Wong et al., “Conversion of Vegetable Oils and Animal Fats Into Paraffinic Cetane Enhancers for Diesel Fuels,” Second Biomass Conference of the Americas: Energy, Environment, Agriculture, and Industry, 1995, pp. 901-910. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20110319683 A1 | Dec 2011 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
Parent | 12132915 | Jun 2008 | US |
Child | 13196768 | US |