The present disclosure relates to systems and methods for converting hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in a gas stream to hydrogen (H2) and sulfur. More particularly, the present disclosure relates to bimetallic alloys usable in systems and methods for generating hydrogen (H2) and sulfur streams from hydrogen sulfide (H2S) streams.
Natural gas, petroleum and coal are primarily utilized as energy sources. However, sulfur compounds such as hydrogen sulfide (H2S) within these fuels limit their use due to the toxic and corrosive nature of such compounds. For example, exposure to H2S can be harmful for humans even at concentrations as low as 10 ppm. In addition, the applicability of these fuels as a feedstock for value-added chemicals is also limited due to catalyst deactivation as a result of sulfur poisoning.
Currently used processes for removing hydrogen sulfide (H2S) are intensive and demand high energy. Additionally, currently used processes cannot recover H2 along with sulfur because H2 is lost in the form of water vapor. Furthermore, the performance of solids used in hydrogen sulfide (H2S) processing can deteriorate after a single cycle. Such systems are inefficient and can require replenishing the solids after one or just a few cycles of sulfur capture and regeneration. Therefore, there is a need for an improved process to effectively convert hydrogen sulfide (H2S) into hydrogen (H2) and sulfur.
Disclosed herein are systems and methods for converting hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in a gas stream to hydrogen (H2) and sulfur. In one aspect, a method utilizes metal alloy composite particles for converting hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in a gas stream to hydrogen (H2) and sulfur. The method is a two-step thermochemical decomposition of H2S into H2 and sulfur. The first step is referred to as the sulfidation operation, wherein H2S reacts with the metal alloy composite particle to form a mixture of metal sulfides and produce H2. The second step is referred to as the regeneration operation, wherein the mixture of metal sulfides is subjected to a high temperature and gas input stream to remove the captured sulfur and regenerate the metal alloy composite particle. Thereby, separate H2 and sulfur streams are produced from an input stream including H2S. Compared to the conventionally used Claus process for sulfur recovery, which only produces sulfur and no H2, the disclosed method is economically favorable. It is also beneficial to the environment as it converts a toxic, poisonous, and corrosive H2S gas to valuable chemicals H2 and sulfur.
There is no specific requirement that a material, technique or method relating to H2S conversion include all of the details characterized herein, in order to obtain some benefit according to the present disclosure. Thus, the specific examples characterized herein are meant to be exemplary applications of the techniques described, and alternatives are possible. Other aspects of the disclosure will become apparent by consideration of the detailed description and accompanying drawings.
I. Definitions
Unless otherwise defined, all technical and scientific terms used herein have the same meaning as commonly understood by one of ordinary skill in the art. In case of conflict, the present document, including definitions, will control. Example methods and materials are described below, although methods and materials similar or equivalent to those described herein can be used in practice or testing of the present disclosure. The materials, methods, and examples disclosed herein are illustrative only and not intended to be limiting.
The terms “comprise(s),” “include(s),” “having,” “has,” “can,” “contain(s),” and variants thereof, as used herein, are intended to be open-ended transitional phrases, terms, or words that do not preclude the possibility of additional acts or structures. The singular forms “a,” “an” and “the” include plural references unless the context clearly dictates otherwise. The present disclosure also contemplates other embodiments “comprising,” “consisting of” and “consisting essentially of,” the embodiments or elements presented herein, whether explicitly set forth or not.
The modifier “about” used in connection with a quantity is inclusive of the stated value and has the meaning dictated by the context (for example, it includes at least the degree of error associated with the measurement of the particular quantity). The modifier “about” should also be considered as disclosing the range defined by the absolute values of the two endpoints. For example, the expression “from about 2 to about 4” also discloses the range “from 2 to 4.” The term “about” may refer to plus or minus 10% of the indicated number. For example, “about 10%” may indicate a range of 9% to 11%, and “about 1” may mean from 0.9-1.1. Other meanings of “about” may be apparent from the context, such as rounding off, so, for example “about 1” may also mean from 0.5 to 1.4.
Definitions of specific functional groups and chemical terms are described in more detail below. For purposes of this disclosure, the chemical elements are identified in accordance with the Periodic Table of the Elements, CAS version, Handbook of Chemistry and Physics, 75th Ed., inside cover, and specific functional groups are generally defined as described therein.
For the recitation of numeric ranges herein, each intervening number there between with the same degree of precision is explicitly contemplated. For example, for the range of 6-9, the numbers 7 and 8 are contemplated in addition to 6 and 9, and for the range 6.0-7.0, the number 6.0, 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 6.5, 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 6.9, and 7.0 are explicitly contemplated. For example, when a pressure range is described as being between ambient pressure and another pressure, a pressure that is ambient pressure is expressly contemplated.
II. Metal Alloy Composite Particles
Disclosed herein are metal alloy composite particles for use in systems and methods for converting H2S into hydrogen (H2) and sulfur (S). Typical metal alloy composite particles disclosed and contemplated herein include metal alloy material, secondary material, and support material. Without being bound by a particular theory, it is believed that each component plays a role in H2S processing. For instance, the metal alloy material captures sulfur generated from dissociation of H2S. Additionally, efficient capture of sulfur appears to be linked to the formation of spinel phase, which thermodynamically favors near, or complete, sulfur capture. The secondary material forms active centers on the surface of the metal alloy composite particle where it catalytically dissociates H2S to H2 and sulfur. The metal alloy material is dispersed in the support material to prevent sintering and agglomeration of the metal alloy composite particle, which could reduce the regenerability of the particle.
A. Metal Alloy Material
Metal alloy material comprises a first metal component and a second metal component. The first metal component comprises a first metal, a first metal sulfide comprising the first metal, a first metal oxide comprising the first metal, or combinations thereof. The second metal component comprises a second metal, a second metal sulfide comprising the second metal, a second metal oxide comprising the second metal, or combinations thereof.
Usually, each of the first metal and second metal is selected from: iron (Fe), chromium (Cr), nickel (Ni), Zinc (Zn), cobalt (Co), manganese (Mn) and copper (Cu). For example, the first metal component may comprise iron and the second metal component may comprise chromium. In some embodiments, the first metal component comprises iron sulfide and the second metal component comprises chromium sulfide.
The metals of the metal alloy material may be dispersed uniformly as this results in high conversion of H2S to H2 and also improves the regenerability of the metal alloy composite particle. Non-uniform dispersion and/or a layered structure may result in diffusion limitations of H2S in the metal alloy composite particle product layer and lower the reaction kinetics.
B. Secondary Material
The metal alloy composite particle may further comprise one or more secondary material components. In some instances, secondary material is a dopant, as that term is typically understood in the art. In some instances, secondary material has similar properties to a dopant and/or imparts similar characteristics as a dopant, but exists as a different phase. In various implementations, the secondary material is dispersed uniformly along the surface of the particle and is surrounded by the alloy material.
Typically, secondary material is in the form of MSx, where M is a metal, S is sulfur, and x is in the range of values between 0 and 2. For example, x maybe 0, 1, or 2. X may also be a non-integer value. For example, x may be 0.5 or 1.5. Example metals M include, but are not limited to, molybdenum, nickel, cobalt, manganese, tungsten, vanadium and combinations thereof.
The secondary material may be a sulfide. For example, the secondary material may be a molybdenum disulfide, a nickel sulfide, a cobalt sulfide, a manganese sulfide, a tungsten sulfide, vanadium sulfide or combinations thereof.
In some instances, secondary material is a metal oxide. For example, the secondary material may be a molybdenum oxide, a nickel oxide, a cobalt oxide, a manganese oxide, a tungsten oxide, a vanadium oxide or combinations thereof.
C. Support Material
The metal alloy composite particle may further comprise one or more support materials. The support material can be any inert material. The one or more support materials can be metals, metal oxides, non-metal oxides, zeolites or metal organic frameworks. Suitable support materials include, but are not limited to, alumina, bauxite, titania, silicon, zirconium, and alumina silicate. For example, the support material may be an aluminum oxide, a silicon oxide, a titanium oxide, a zirconium oxide, and the like.
D. Example Amounts and Sizes
The metal alloy composite particle may comprise any suitable ratio of components to produce the desired effect. For example, the metal alloy composite particle may comprise 10-95% by weight of the first metal component, 5-80% by weight of the second metal component, and 0-50% by weight of the secondary material. For example, the metal alloy composite particle may comprise 10-95% by weight iron, 5-80% by weight chromium, and 0-50% by weight of the secondary material.
For example, the metal alloy composite particle may comprise about 10%, about 15%, about 20%, about 25%, about 30%, about 40%, about 45%, about 50%, about 55%, about 60%, about 65%, about 70%, about 75%, about 80%, about 85%, about 90%, or about 95% by weight of the first metal component. In various implementations, the metal alloy composite particle comprises 10 wt % to 50 wt %; 40 wt % to 95 wt %; 20 wt % to 75 wt %; 30 wt % to 50 wt %; 35 wt % to 65 wt %; 50 wt % to 80 wt %; or 40 wt % to 70 wt % of the first metal component.
The metal alloy composite particle may comprise about 5%, about 10%, about 15%, about 20%, about 25%, about 30%, about 35%, about 40%, about 45%, about 50%, about 55%, about 60%, about 65%, about 70%, about 75%, or about 80% by weight of the second metal component. In various implementations, the metal alloy composite particle comprises 5 wt % to 50 wt %; 45 wt % to 80 wt %; 15 wt % to 65 wt %; 10 wt % to 35 wt %; 35 wt % to 60 wt %; 60 wt % to 80 wt %; or 20 wt % to 45 wt % of the second metal component.
The metal alloy composite particle may comprise about 0%, about 5%, about 10%, about 15%, about 20%, about 25%, about 30%, about 40%, about 45%, or about 50% by weight of the secondary material. In various implementations, the metal alloy composite particle comprises 5 wt % to 45 wt %; 10 wt % to 50 wt %; 20 wt % to 40 wt %; 30 wt % to 50 wt %; 10 wt % to 20 wt %; 15 wt % to 35 wt %; or 20 wt % to 30 wt % of the secondary material.
The metal alloy composite particle has a diameter of between about 100 μm and about 10 mm. For example, the metal alloy composite particle may have a diameter of about 100 μm to about 10 mm, about 1 mm to about 9 mm, about 2 mm to about 8 mm, about 3 mm to about 7 mm, or about 4 mm to about 6 mm.
The grain size of the first metal component, the second metal component, and the secondary material can vary depending on the type of material used and the temperature at which the metal alloy composite particle is sintered. A smaller grain size is preferred as it results in faster reaction kinetics due to elimination of diffusion limitations in the metal alloy composite particle.
The range of grain size for the first metal component, the second metal component, and the secondary material can be between 10−3 μm to 50 μm. For example, the grain size can be about 10−3 μm, about 10−2 μm, about 1 μm, about 5 μm, about 10 μm, about 15 μm, about 20 μm, about 25 μm, about 30 μm, about 35 μm, about 40 μm, about 45 μm, or about 50 μm.
Another parameter that affects the reaction kinetics is the porosity of the metal alloy composite particle which determines the gas diffusion within the metal alloy composite particle. Porosity of the metal alloy composite particle is proportional to the concentration of support material and it can be in the range of 10−3 to 5 cm3/g. The surface area of the metal alloy composite particle is dependent on the grain size as well as the porosity and is in the range of 0.1 to 100 m2/g.
III. Systems and Methods for Converting H2S into Hydrogen (H2) and Sulfur
Disclosed herein are systems and methods for converting H2S into hydrogen (H2) and sulfur. The system for converting H2S into hydrogen (H2) and sulfur may comprise multiple reactors. For example, the system may comprise a sulfidation reactor and a regeneration reactor. The conditions in each of the sulfidation reactor and the regeneration reactor are modified as described below to ensure that the appropriate sulfidation and regeneration reactions occur in each reactor. In other embodiments, the system may comprise one reactor. The conditions in the single reactor may be modified such that the sulfidation and regeneration operations can occur in the single reactor.
Broadly speaking, the disclosed systems and methods reduce the amount of H2S in the input gas stream. For example, the disclosed method can be used to reduce the amount of H2S in the gas stream to below 100 ppm. For example, the disclosed method can be used to reduce the amount of H2S in the gas stream to less than about 100 ppm, less than about 90 ppm, less than about 80 ppm, less than about 70 ppm, less than about 50 ppm, less than about 40 ppm, less than about 30 ppm, less than about 20 ppm, less than about 10 ppm, less than about 5 ppm, less than about 1 ppm, less than about 1 ppm, or less than about 0.1 ppm. For example, the disclosed method can be used to reduce the amount of H2S in the gas stream to less than 0.1 ppm.
A. Sulfidation Operation
The disclosed method comprises a sulfidation operation. The sulfidation operation can be performed in a sulfidation reactor. The sulfidation reactor can be a fixed bed reactor, a fluidized bed reactor, a co-current moving bed reactor, or a counter-current moving bed reactor. A moving bed reactor configuration also includes a packed moving bed, staged fluidized bed, a downer and/or a rotary kiln.
The sulfidation operation comprises contacting a first gaseous stream comprising H2S with a metal alloy composite particle. The first gaseous stream may further comprise additional gases. For example, the H2S-containing gas stream can also include CO, H2, and/or hydrocarbons. Example hydrocarbons include but are not limited to methane, ethane, propane, butane and higher alkanes. The first gaseous stream may contain H2S and additional gases in other proportions or quantities. Usually, the first gaseous stream includes trace amounts or no oxygen (O2).
The sulfidation operation may be performed at any suitable temperature to facilitate sulfidation of the metal alloy composite particle. For example, the sulfidation operation may be performed at about 100° C. to about 950° C. For example, the sulfidation operation may be performed at about 100° C., about 150° C., about 200° C., about 250° C., about 300° C., about 350° C., about 400° C., about 450° C., about 500° C., about 550° C., about 600° C., about 650° C., about 700° C., about 750° C., about 800° C., about 850° C., about 900° C., or about 950° C. In some instances, the sulfidation operation is performed at about 300° C. to about 450° C. As another example, the sulfidation operation is performed at about 350° C. to about 400° C.
The equilibrium of sulfidation reaction favors operating at lower temperatures, but the reaction kinetics is faster at higher temperatures. As such, some embodiments perform the sulfidation operation at a temperature of 300° C. to 450° C. Performing sulfidation at 300° C. to 450° C. can eliminate the need for cooling and reheating the H2S containing gas stream as is done for conventional H2S removal processes such as Selexol, Rectisol, or amine based processes.
The sulfidation operation may be performed at any suitable pressure. For example, the pressure at which sulfidation operation occurs can be about 1 atm to about 150 atm. For example, the pressure can be about 1 atm, about 2 atm, about 3 atm, about 4 atm, about 5 atm, about 6 atm, about 7 atm, about 8 atm, about 9 atm, about 10 atm, about 15 atm, about 20 atm, about 25 atm, about 30 atm, about 35 atm, about 40 atm, about 45 atm, about 50 atm, about 55 atm, about 60 atm, about 65 atm, about 70 atm, about 75 atm, about 80 atm, about 85 atm, about 90 atm, about 95 atm, about 100 atm, about 105 atm, about 110 atm, about 115 atm, about 120 atm, about 125 atm, about 130 atm, about 135 atm, about 140 atm, about 145 atm, or about 150 atm. In various instances, the pressure at which the sulfidation operation occurs is from 1 atm to 30 atm; 1 atm to 5 atm; 1 atm to 60 atm; 5 atm to 20 atm; 2 atm to 10 atm; or 1 atm to 15 atm. Generally, the kinetics of the sulfidation reaction appear to be faster at higher pressures and there is not an effect of pressure on the equilibrium of sulfidation reaction.
The kinetic rate of sulfidation reaction determines the gas residence time in the sulfidation reactor for maximum conversion of H2S. The gas residence time can vary from 0.2 seconds to 45 minutes. It is preferred to have the gas residence time between 0.5 s to 15 min. For example, the gas residence time can be around 0.5 seconds, about 1 second, about 30 seconds, about 1 minute, about 2.5 minutes, about 5 minutes, about 7.5 minutes, about 10 minutes, about 12.5 minutes, or about 15 minutes.
The amount of H2S gas that can be treated by the disclosed process is dependent on the composition of the metal alloy composite particle. The ratio of gas to metal alloy composite particle that can be used in the disclosed systems and methods can be about 1:5 to about 10:1. Preferably, the ratio of gas to metal alloy composite particle ranges from about 1:2 to about 5:1. For example, the ratio of gas to metal alloy composite particle can be about 1:2, about 1:1, about 2:1, about 3:1, about 4:1, or about 5:1.
In the sulfidation operation, the hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in the first gaseous input stream reacts in a sulfidation reaction with the metal alloy composite particle to generate hydrogen gas (H2) and one or more sulfide minerals. The hydrogen gas (H2) may be collected and stored for future use in other processes. The sulfide mineral is selected from the group consisting of a metal sulfide, a thiospinel and combinations thereof. Without being bound by a particular theory, it appears that the presence of thiospinel is responsible for favorable equilibrium towards H2S decomposition and is non-reactive towards other gases that may be present in the H2S containing gas stream. For example, the sulfide mineral may be an iron sulfide, a chromium sulfide, or combinations thereof. In some embodiments, sulfide mineral comprises FeCr2S4.
B. Regeneration Operation
The disclosed method further comprises a regeneration operation. Typically, the regeneration operation occurs at higher temperatures than those used during the sulfidation operation. The regeneration operation can be performed in a regeneration reactor. The regeneration reactor can be a fixed bed reactor, a fluidized bed reactor, a co-current moving bed reactor, or a counter-current moving bed reactor. A moving bed reactor configuration also includes a packed moving bed, staged fluidized bed, a downer and/or a rotary kiln.
The regeneration operation comprises contacting a second gaseous input stream comprising at least one inert gas with the one or more sulfide minerals generated during the sulfidation operation. The regeneration operation thereby generates sulfur gas and regenerates the metal alloy composite particle for subsequent use. The sulfur gas obtained from the regeneration operation can be collected for future use in downstream applications. For example, the sulfur gas can be condensed and removed as solid or liquid sulfur based on its downstream application.
The at least one inert gas can include nitrogen, carbon dioxide and combinations thereof. For example, the at least one inert gas can be nitrogen. For example, regeneration operation can comprise contacting FeCr2S4 produced during the sulfidation operation with nitrogen gas, thereby regenerating iron sulfide and chromium sulfide and producing sulfur gas.
The regeneration operation may be performed at any suitable regeneration temperature to facilitate regeneration of the metal alloy composite particle. The regeneration temperature is dependent on the sulfur pressure in the regeneration reactor. A lower sulfur pressure in the regeneration reactor favors the equilibrium towards removal of sulfur and hence lower regeneration temperatures can be used. The regeneration temperatures can vary from 500° C. to 1100° C. For example, the regeneration operation may be performed at about 750° C., about 800° C., about 850° C., about 900° C., about 950° C., about 1000° C., about 1050° C., or about 1100° C. In various implementations, the regeneration temperature may be from 600° C. to 1000° C.; from 700° C. to 1100° C.; from 800° C. to 1000° C.; or from 700° C. to 900° C.
The regeneration operation may be performed under vacuum. Alternatively, the regeneration operation may be performed under pressure conditions. The pressure conditions in the regeneration reactor can range from 1 atm to 150 atm. For example, the pressure can be about 1 atm, about 2 atm, about 3 atm, about 4 atm, about 5 atm, about 6 atm, about 7 atm, about 8 atm, about 9 atm, about 10 atm, about 15 atm, about 20 atm, about 25 atm, about 30 atm, about 35 atm, about 40 atm, about 45 atm, about 50 atm, about 55 atm, about 60 atm, about 65 atm, about 70 atm, about 75 atm, about 80 atm, about 85 atm, about 90 atm, about 95 atm, about 100 atm, about 105 atm, about 110 atm, about 115 atm, about 120 atm, about 125 atm, about 130 atm, about 135 atm, about 140 atm, about 145 atm, or about 150 atm.
In some instances, a high gas:solids ratio is employed for the regeneration operation as it keeps the sulfur pressure low in the regeneration reactor, thus enabling a relatively lower regeneration temperature. For example, the gas:solids molar ratio can range from 0.2 to 10, preferably, from 0.5 to 5. For example, gas:solids molar ratio can be about 1:2, about 1:1, about 2:1, about 3:1, about 4:1, or about 5:1.
A low gas residence time is preferred to aid in maintaining low sulfur pressures in the regeneration reactor. The gas residence time can vary from 0.05 seconds to about 5 minutes, preferably from about 0.1 s to about 2 minutes. For example, the gas residence time can be about 0.05 seconds, about 0.1 seconds, about 1 second, about 5 seconds, about 10 seconds, about 30 seconds, about 60 seconds, about 90 seconds, about 2 minutes, about 3 minutes, about 4 minutes, or about 5 minutes.
The disclosed method can be operated in batch operational mode, a semi-batch operational mode, or continuous operation mode. The method can further comprise contacting the metal alloy composite particle produced following the regeneration operation, (i.e. the regenerated metal alloy composite particle) with a subsequent first gaseous input stream, thus repeating the process of isolating hydrogen gas (H2) and sulfur from an H2S containing feed stream. The hydrogen gas (H2) production performance of the regenerated metal alloy composite particle can be similar to the performance of the original metal alloy composite particle.
C. Example Configurations of Systems and Method for H2S Conversion
Reactors 202 and 204 are operated as countercurrent moving bed reactors. The residence time of gas and solids in reactors 202 and 204 may be controlled such that there is complete H2S conversion in reactor 202 and complete regeneration in reactor 204. Reactor 208 is a fluidized bed reactor and its main purpose is for transporting solids via a riser back to reactor 202.
D. Example Improvements and Industrial Applications
The systems and methods disclosed herein result in conversion of a poisonous, toxic and corrosive gas like H2S to highly valuable chemicals like hydrogen (H2) and sulfur (S2). The methods can use a two-reactor system with few heat exchangers, or a one reactor system, to produce H2 and sulfur from H2S. Therefore, there are capital cost benefits in using fewer processing units compared to typically used methods. Moreover, the methods described herein are robust towards other gases, like carbon monoxide, hydrogen and hydrocarbons, commonly found in industrial process streams that contain H2S. Therefore, the instant systems and methods typically do not require separating these gases before treating H2S, which allows for savings in energy and capital costs that are usually involved with separating these gases.
The methods described herein allow H2S to be treated at very high temperatures. Treating at high temperatures reduces or eliminates the need for cooling and reheating the H2S containing gas stream as is typically done for conventional H2S removal processes such as Selexol, Rectisol, or amine based processes. Moreover, the disclosed methods and process utilize solids with high recyclability, resulting in the capacity for long term use and minimal replacement and waste management costs.
The methods described herein can be used in multiple industrial applications. For example, the methods described herein can be used for coal gasification to produce synthesis gas (syngas). The major components of synthesis gas are carbon monoxide (CO) and H2 and this gas stream is at >500° C. This gas can be directly sent to the process disclosed herein without the need for cooling the gas stream or removing CO or H2.
The methods described herein can be used in natural gas processing methods. H2S is typically removed from natural gas before it is sent to catalytic processes, such as steam methane reforming, to produce syngas and H2. Steam methane reforming occurs in temperature range of 700-1000° C. and requires very low concentrations of H2S in the gas stream. The methods described herein can be used to reduce H2S concentrations in a gas stream to the desired values before use of the gas stream in catalytic processes such as steam methane reforming.
The methods described herein can be used in crude oil processing. Sulfur from crude oil is typically removed in a hydrodesulfurization unit by treating it with H2 in a temperature range from 300-400° C. The gas from this unit is a mixture of H2S and H2. The gas from such a hydrodesulfurization unit can be directly treated by a method described herein to produce H2 and sulfur.
IV. Systems and Methods for Producing Metal Alloy Composite Particles
Further disclosed herein are systems and methods for producing metal alloy composite particles. The metal alloy composite particle may be produced by mixing the first metal component and the second metal component in their respective desired amounts. The mixture of the first metal component and the second metal component is reacted with H2S at a temperature of about 300° C. to about 900° C. For example, the mixture of the first metal component and the second metal component can be reacted with H2S at a temperature of about 300° C., about 350° C., about 400° C., about 450° C., about 500° C., about 550° C., about 600° C., about 650° C., about 700° C., about 750° C., about 800° C., about 850° C., or about 900° C. The time of the reaction is dependent on the amount of first metal component and the second metal component used. A mixture of thiospinel and higher metal sulfides is formed at the end of the reaction.
Nitrogen is then passed over the reacted mixture in a temperature range of about 600° C. to about 1200° C. For example, nitrogen may be passed over the reacted mixture at a temperature of about 600° C., about 650° C., about 700° C., about 750° C., about 800° C., about 850° C., about 900° C., about 950° C., about 1000° C., about 1050° C., about 1100° C., about 1150° C., or about 1200° C.
Subsequently, a secondary material can be mixed together with the alloy material. Additionally, a support material can be mixed together with the alloy material. The mixture is then sintered at a temperature of about 700° C. to about 1400° C. For example, the mixture may be sintered at a temperature of about 700° C., about 750° C., about 800° C., about 850° C., about 900° C., about 950° C., about 1000° C., about 1050° C., about 1100° C., about 1150° C., about 1200° C., about 1250° C., about 1300° C., about 1350° C., or about 1400° C.
V. Experimental Examples
Iron sulfide (FeSx, 0<x<2) and chromium sulfide (CrSy, 0<y<1.5) were mixed in a molar ratio of 1:2. Iron oxide, chromium oxide, iron metal, chromium metal or a mixture of these compounds can also be taken as the starting material. The said mixture was reacted with gas containing H2S at a concentration of 0.9% in a fixed bed reactor kept in a horizontal tube furnace. The said gas containing H2S was reacted at a temperature of 800° C. After reaction with H2S, the gas was switched to N2 and the temperature was increased to 950° C.
Table 1 shows the inlet and outlet composition of gas sent during sulfidation operation for two different runs at 800° C. in a fixed bed reactor containing Fe—Cr alloy. In run 1, 50 ml/min of 0.9% H2S/N2 and 46.95 ml/min 9.6% methane (CH4)/19% CO/81.4% N2 was co-injected into the fixed bed reactor for 30 min. The reactor outlet gas concentration was measured using a Siemens Ultramat 23 gas analyzer to measure CO, CO2 and CH4 concentrations and Siemens Calomat 6E gas analyzer to measure H2 concentration. In run 2, 100 ml/min of 0.9% H2S/N2 and 100 ml/min of 100% H2 was co-injected into the fixed reactor for 30 min. The reactor outlet gas concentration was measured using a Siemens CALOMAT 6E H2 analyzer. The fact that the inlet and outlet gas compositions are the same indicates that CH4, CO and H2 do not react with the Fe—Cr alloy.
XRD analysis of the sample at the end of the Run 1 and Run 2 shown in
Table 2 shows the comparison of H2S conversion by Fe—Cr alloy material (sample 1) against that of Fe—Cr alloy material added with MoS2 secondary material (sample 2). The primary phases present in the Fe—Cr alloy based on XRD analysis are FeCr2S4 (31.3 wt %), FeCr or 410 L stainless steel (63.4 wt %) and Cr2O3 (5.2 wt %). The composition of sample 2 is 50 wt % of the Fe—Cr alloy (sample 1) and 50 wt % MoS2. For both samples, powder of size less than 125 microns was placed in between quartz wool and supported in the heated region of a 0.5 inch inner diameter ceramic reactor. The samples were heated to a temperature of 800° C. under nitrogen followed by reaction with 0.9% H2S in the sulfidation step, where the gas flow rate was varied to test different gas hourly space velocities (GHSVs). The sulfidation step was followed by a regeneration step under nitrogen flow at 950° C. Multiple sulfidation and regeneration steps were conducted for both the samples where different GHSVs were tested during the sulfidation step. The reactor outlet gas composition was measured using a Siemens CALOMAT 6E H2 analyzer for H2 concentration and intermittently using Interscan's Model RM17-500m Toxic gas monitor for H2S concentration. A high H2S conversion for sample 2 indicates faster reaction kinetics of the solid sample with H2S, which may be a result of addition of MoS2 as the secondary material. The XRD analysis of Sample 2 after reaction is shown in
Table 3 compares the H2S conversion of Fe—Cr alloy (sample 3) with that of Fe—Cr alloy with added MoS2 secondary material and SiO2 as the support material (sample 4). Based on XRD analysis, sample 3 has FeCr2S4 (37.3 wt %), FeCr or 410 L stainless steel (25 wt %) and Fe0.879S (37 wt %) as the major phases. The composition of sample 4 is 37.5 wt % Fe—Cr alloy (sample 3), 25 wt % MoS2 and 37.5 wt % SiO2. Multiple sulfidation-regeneration steps were conducted on both the samples in a 0.5 inch inner diameter ceramic reactor. The sulfidation temperature was 800° C. and regeneration temperature was 950° C. H2S conversion was measured during one of the sulfidation steps at the same H2S flow rate per unit active material weight for both the samples. The active material consists of both the Fe—Cr alloy as well as the secondary material-MoS2. The reactor outlet gas composition was measured using a Siemens CALOMAT 6E H2 analyzer for H2 concentration and intermittently using Interscan's Model RM17-500m Toxic gas monitor for H2S concentration. The H2S conversion of sample 4 is slightly higher than sample 3 which may be a result of faster reaction kinetics with H2S. The H2S conversion for sample 4 may be further enhanced by varying its alloy, secondary material and/or support material composition.
Fe—Cr alloy with 20 wt % MoS2 was tested with four different gas mixtures, shown in Table 4 below, and at a pressure of 1.8 bar.
The Fe—Cr alloy was used in powder form with particle size <125 microns in a ceramic fixed bed reactor of 0.5 inch inner diameter. The reactor was heated using an electrical heater to a temperature of 400° C. under the flow of N2. Once the reactor temperature reached 400° C., mixing of the various gas compositions mentioned in Table 4 was started.
Gas hourly space velocity (GHSV) shown in the second to last column in Table 4 was calculated based on the gas flow rate and metal alloy composite bed volume. H2S conversion was measured based on measuring sulfur content in the alloy before and after the reaction. Sulfur content was measured using a Thermo Fisher Scientific TS 3000 total sulfur analyzer (Waltham, Mass.). The H2S conversion for the different gas mixtures is shown in the last column of Table 4.
For gas mixtures 1 and 3, no oxides were observed in the solids from XRD analysis. Moreover, no carbon deposition was observed for gas mixture 4 based on XRD analysis of the reacted sample. Therefore, the alloy appears to be resistant to oxidation with CO2 and CO along with being resistant to carbon deposition in presence of hydrocarbons at 400° C. This resistance allows for application of the alloy for H2S capture from a variety of process streams that can contain any of the contaminants mentioned in Table 4.
Recyclability of exemplary Fe—Cr alloy particles was tested by performing twelve consecutive sulfidation-regeneration cycles over Fe—Cr alloy with 20 wt % MoS2 in a fixed bed reactor. The fixed bed reactor was made of ceramic material and had an inner diameter of 0.5 inch. The sulfidation temperature was 400° C. and the regeneration temperature was 950° C. The gas feed during sulfidation step was 0.9% H2S balanced with N2 at a GHSV of 1490 hr−1. The reactor pressure was 1 bar for all the sulfidation steps except for the 8th step where the reactor pressure was increased to 1.8 bar. H2S conversion was calculated based on the H2 concentration measured using a Siemens CALOMAT 6E H2 analyzer. Nearly 100% conversion (
Effects of pressure on H2S conversion with a Fe—Cr alloy were tested. Thermodynamic calculations conducted in FactSage 7.3 software demonstrate no effect of pressure on the conversion of H2S. The H2S input was 1 mole, whereas, FeS and CrS input was 1 mole and 2 moles, respectively.
Experimentally, pressure was observed to improve the kinetics of H2S conversion. Fe—Cr alloy powder of particle size <125 microns was reacted with 0.9% H2S in a 0.5 inch inner diameter ceramic reactor. H2S conversion was calculated based on the H2 concentration measured using a Siemens CALOMAT 6E H2 analyzer and intermittently with Interscan's Model RM17-500m Toxic gas monitor for H2S concentration. At 400° C. reactor temperature, the H2S conversion was 32% higher at 1.8 atm compared to 1 atm for a GHSV of 4500 hr−1.
Fe—Cr alloy material with Ni was tested in a fixed bed reactor for H2S conversion. The sample consisted of 45 wt % Fe—Cr alloy, 10 wt % Ni3S2 and 45 wt % SiO2. The Fe—Cr alloy material was used in a powder form in a 0.5 inch inner diameter ceramic reactor, which was heated by an electrical heater to a temperature of 800° C. H2S conversion was calculated by measuring the H2S concentration in the reactor outlet using Interscan's Model RM17-500m Toxic gas monitor. 0.9% H2S balanced with N2 was reacted with Sample 1 at a GHSV of 3800 hr−1. The maximum H2S conversion was >90%.
The present application is a U.S. national stage entry of International Patent Application No. PCT/US2019/045438, filed on Aug. 7, 2019, which claims priority to U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/716,705, filed on Aug. 9, 2018, and U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/734,387, filed on Sep. 21, 2018, the entire contents of each of which are fully incorporated herein by reference.
Filing Document | Filing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
PCT/US2019/045438 | 8/7/2019 | WO |
Publishing Document | Publishing Date | Country | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
WO2020/033500 | 2/13/2020 | WO | A |
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
971206 | Messerschmitt | Sep 1910 | A |
1078686 | Lane | Nov 1913 | A |
1658939 | Parsons | Feb 1928 | A |
2182747 | Marshall, Jr. | Dec 1939 | A |
2198560 | Marshall, Jr. | Apr 1940 | A |
2449635 | Barr | Sep 1948 | A |
2614067 | Reed et al. | Oct 1952 | A |
2635947 | Reed et al. | Apr 1953 | A |
2686819 | Johnson | Aug 1954 | A |
2694622 | Reed et al. | Nov 1954 | A |
2697686 | Leffer | Dec 1954 | A |
2899374 | Gomory | Aug 1959 | A |
2979384 | Weiner et al. | Apr 1961 | A |
3027238 | Watkins | Mar 1962 | A |
3031287 | Benson et al. | Apr 1962 | A |
3338667 | Pundsack | Aug 1967 | A |
3353925 | Baumann et al. | Nov 1967 | A |
3382033 | Kitagawa | May 1968 | A |
3421869 | Benson | Jan 1969 | A |
3442613 | Grotz, Jr. | May 1969 | A |
3442619 | Huebler et al. | May 1969 | A |
3442620 | Huebler et al. | May 1969 | A |
3494858 | Luckenbach | Feb 1970 | A |
3523821 | Bryce et al. | Aug 1970 | A |
3573224 | Strelzoff et al. | Mar 1971 | A |
3619142 | Johnson et al. | Nov 1971 | A |
3726966 | Johnston | Apr 1973 | A |
3801661 | Hart et al. | Apr 1974 | A |
3879514 | Dahl | Apr 1975 | A |
3962409 | Kotera et al. | Jun 1976 | A |
4017270 | Funk et al. | Apr 1977 | A |
4057402 | Patel et al. | Nov 1977 | A |
4075079 | Lang | Feb 1978 | A |
4108732 | Nuttall, Jr. | Aug 1978 | A |
4151124 | Gidaspow et al. | Apr 1979 | A |
4155832 | Cox et al. | May 1979 | A |
4272399 | Davis et al. | Jun 1981 | A |
4318711 | Smith | Mar 1982 | A |
4325833 | Scott | Apr 1982 | A |
4334959 | Green | Jun 1982 | A |
4343624 | Belke et al. | Aug 1982 | A |
4348487 | Goldstein et al. | Sep 1982 | A |
4404086 | Oltrogge | Sep 1983 | A |
4420332 | Mori et al. | Dec 1983 | A |
4439412 | Behie et al. | Mar 1984 | A |
4521117 | Ouwerkerk et al. | Jun 1985 | A |
4594140 | Cheng | Jun 1986 | A |
4778585 | Graff | Oct 1988 | A |
4842777 | Lamort | Jun 1989 | A |
4861165 | Fredriksson et al. | Aug 1989 | A |
4869207 | Engstrom et al. | Sep 1989 | A |
4902586 | Wertheim | Feb 1990 | A |
4895821 | Kainer et al. | Jun 1990 | A |
4957523 | Zarate et al. | Sep 1990 | A |
5130106 | Koves et al. | Jul 1992 | A |
5365560 | Tam | Nov 1994 | A |
5447024 | Ishida et al. | Sep 1995 | A |
5456807 | Wachsman | Oct 1995 | A |
5509362 | Lyon | Apr 1996 | A |
5518187 | Bruno et al. | May 1996 | A |
5529599 | Calderon | Jun 1996 | A |
5584615 | Micklich | Dec 1996 | A |
5630368 | Wagoner | May 1997 | A |
5730763 | Manulescu et al. | Mar 1998 | A |
5770310 | Nogochi et al. | Jun 1998 | A |
5827496 | Lyon | Oct 1998 | A |
5858210 | Richardson | Jan 1999 | A |
5891415 | Alkhazov | Apr 1999 | A |
5965098 | Boegner et al. | Oct 1999 | A |
6007699 | Cole | Dec 1999 | A |
6030589 | Hartweg et al. | Feb 2000 | A |
6143203 | Zeng et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6143253 | Radcliffe et al. | Nov 2000 | A |
6180354 | Singh et al. | Jan 2001 | B1 |
6187465 | Galloway | Feb 2001 | B1 |
6361757 | Shikada et al. | Mar 2002 | B1 |
6395944 | Griffiths | May 2002 | B1 |
6412559 | Gunter et al. | Jul 2002 | B1 |
6444712 | Janda | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6494153 | Lyon | Dec 2002 | B1 |
6506351 | Jain et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6509000 | Choudhary et al. | Jan 2003 | B1 |
6517631 | Bland | Feb 2003 | B1 |
6607704 | Guttridge et al. | Aug 2003 | B2 |
6631698 | Hyppanen et al. | Oct 2003 | B1 |
6642174 | Gaffney et al. | Nov 2003 | B2 |
6663681 | Kinding et al. | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6667022 | Cole | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6669917 | Lyon | Dec 2003 | B2 |
6682714 | Kindig et al. | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6685754 | Kindig et al. | Feb 2004 | B2 |
6703343 | Park | Mar 2004 | B2 |
6797253 | Lyon | Sep 2004 | B2 |
6834623 | Cheng | Dec 2004 | B2 |
6875411 | Sanfilippo et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6880635 | Vinegar et al. | Apr 2005 | B2 |
6936363 | Kordesch et al. | Aug 2005 | B2 |
7001579 | Metzger et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7067456 | Fan et al. | Feb 2006 | B2 |
7244399 | Myohanen et al. | Jul 2007 | B2 |
7404942 | Sanfilippo et al. | Jul 2008 | B2 |
7496450 | Ortiz Aleman et al. | Feb 2009 | B2 |
7749626 | Take | Jul 2010 | B2 |
7767191 | Thomas et al. | Aug 2010 | B2 |
7837975 | Iyer et al. | Nov 2010 | B2 |
7840053 | Liao | Nov 2010 | B2 |
8116430 | Shapiro et al. | Feb 2012 | B1 |
8192706 | Grochowski | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8202349 | Molaison | Jun 2012 | B2 |
8419813 | Hoteit et al. | Apr 2013 | B2 |
8435920 | White et al. | May 2013 | B2 |
8508238 | Mahalingam et al. | Aug 2013 | B2 |
8562928 | Gupta | Oct 2013 | B2 |
8761943 | Lou et al. | Jun 2014 | B2 |
8771549 | Gauthier et al. | Jul 2014 | B2 |
8814963 | Apanel et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
8877147 | Fan et al. | Nov 2014 | B2 |
8877150 | Fan et al. | Nov 2014 | B1 |
9017627 | Gupta | Apr 2015 | B2 |
9290386 | Wasas | Mar 2016 | B2 |
9376318 | Fan et al. | Jun 2016 | B2 |
9382359 | Kanellopoulos et al. | Jul 2016 | B2 |
9518236 | Fan et al. | Dec 2016 | B2 |
9573118 | Colozzi et al. | Feb 2017 | B2 |
9616403 | Fan et al. | Apr 2017 | B2 |
9777920 | Fan et al. | Oct 2017 | B2 |
9790605 | Sheehan et al. | Oct 2017 | B2 |
9903584 | Fan et al. | Feb 2018 | B2 |
10010847 | Fan et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
10081772 | Fan et al. | Sep 2018 | B2 |
20010055559 | Sanfilippo et al. | Dec 2001 | A1 |
20020011428 | Scheuerman | Jan 2002 | A1 |
20020059864 | Janssen et al. | May 2002 | A1 |
20020179887 | Zeng et al. | Dec 2002 | A1 |
20030006026 | Matsumoto et al. | Jan 2003 | A1 |
20030024388 | Scharpf | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030031291 | Yamamoto et al. | Feb 2003 | A1 |
20030102254 | Eijsbouts | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030119658 | Allison et al. | Jun 2003 | A1 |
20030124041 | Neumann et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030130360 | Kindig et al. | Jul 2003 | A1 |
20030153632 | Wang et al. | Aug 2003 | A1 |
20030180215 | Niu et al. | Sep 2003 | A1 |
20030188668 | Bland | Oct 2003 | A1 |
20040028181 | Charles, Jr. et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040030214 | Schindler et al. | Feb 2004 | A1 |
20040092784 | Legendre | May 2004 | A1 |
20040109800 | Pahlman et al. | Jun 2004 | A1 |
20040126293 | Geerlings et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040131531 | Geerlings et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040132833 | Espinoza et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040138060 | Rapier et al. | Jul 2004 | A1 |
20040152790 | Cornaro et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040154223 | Powell et al. | Aug 2004 | A1 |
20040197612 | Keefer et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040213705 | Blencoe et al. | Oct 2004 | A1 |
20040233191 | Mukherjee et al. | Nov 2004 | A1 |
20040244289 | Morozumi et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20040265224 | Papavassiliou et al. | Dec 2004 | A1 |
20050002847 | Maroto-Valer et al. | Jan 2005 | A1 |
20050054880 | Dubois et al. | Mar 2005 | A1 |
20050175533 | Thomas et al. | Aug 2005 | A1 |
20050255037 | Otsuka et al. | Nov 2005 | A1 |
20050265912 | Alvarez, Jr. et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20050274648 | Goldstein et al. | Dec 2005 | A1 |
20060021308 | Merkel | Feb 2006 | A1 |
20060042565 | Hu | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20060094593 | Beech et al. | May 2006 | A1 |
20070010588 | Pearson | Jan 2007 | A1 |
20070049489 | Becue et al. | Mar 2007 | A1 |
20070117714 | Geyer et al. | May 2007 | A1 |
20070157517 | Tsay et al. | Jul 2007 | A1 |
20070258878 | Sanfilippo et al. | Nov 2007 | A1 |
20080031809 | Norbeck et al. | Feb 2008 | A1 |
20080161624 | Glover et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080164443 | White et al. | Jul 2008 | A1 |
20080209807 | Tsangaris et al. | Sep 2008 | A1 |
20080314838 | Becker et al. | Dec 2008 | A1 |
20090000194 | Fan et al. | Jan 2009 | A1 |
20090042070 | Brown et al. | Feb 2009 | A1 |
20090160461 | Zangl et al. | Jun 2009 | A1 |
20100071262 | Robinson et al. | Mar 2010 | A1 |
20100119419 | Sprouse et al. | May 2010 | A1 |
20100184589 | Miyairi et al. | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100187159 | Naunheimer | Jul 2010 | A1 |
20100258429 | Ugolin | Oct 2010 | A1 |
20100293845 | Zeman et al. | Nov 2010 | A1 |
20100332170 | Gao et al. | Dec 2010 | A1 |
20110005395 | Vimalchand et al. | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110011720 | Rinker | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110024687 | White et al. | Feb 2011 | A1 |
20110054049 | Lambert et al. | Mar 2011 | A1 |
20110094226 | McHugh et al. | Apr 2011 | A1 |
20110100274 | Kuske et al. | May 2011 | A1 |
20110138788 | Kanda et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110146152 | Vimalchand et al. | Jun 2011 | A1 |
20110176968 | Fan et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110176988 | Okamura et al. | Jul 2011 | A1 |
20110206469 | Furuyama et al. | Aug 2011 | A1 |
20110289845 | Davis et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110291051 | Hershkowitz et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110300060 | Guillou et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20110303875 | Hoteit et al. | Dec 2011 | A1 |
20120159841 | Fan et al. | Jun 2012 | A1 |
20120167585 | Wormser | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120171588 | Fan et al. | Jul 2012 | A1 |
20120214106 | Sit et al. | Aug 2012 | A1 |
20130071314 | Gupta | Mar 2013 | A1 |
20130085365 | Marashdeh et al. | Apr 2013 | A1 |
20130125462 | Greiner et al. | May 2013 | A1 |
20130149650 | Gauthier et al. | Jun 2013 | A1 |
20130255272 | Ajhar et al. | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20130261355 | Stamires | Oct 2013 | A1 |
20140021028 | Paganessi et al. | Jan 2014 | A1 |
20140034134 | Fan et al. | Feb 2014 | A1 |
20140072917 | Fan et al. | Mar 2014 | A1 |
20140134096 | Angelini | May 2014 | A1 |
20140144082 | Fan et al. | May 2014 | A1 |
20140275297 | Velazquez-Vargas et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20140295361 | Fan et al. | Oct 2014 | A1 |
20150093577 | Fan et al. | Apr 2015 | A1 |
20150238915 | Fan et al. | Aug 2015 | A1 |
20150291420 | Colozzi | Oct 2015 | A1 |
20150343416 | Fadhel et al. | Dec 2015 | A1 |
20160002034 | Fan et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160016137 | Fan et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160016800 | Noyes | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160023190 | Fan et al. | Jan 2016 | A1 |
20160030904 | Fan et al. | Feb 2016 | A1 |
20160115026 | Angelini | Apr 2016 | A1 |
20160268616 | Fan et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20160376512 | Fan et al. | Dec 2016 | A1 |
20170015554 | Siengchum et al. | Jan 2017 | A1 |
20170106355 | Colozzi | Apr 2017 | A1 |
20180296978 | Peck et al. | Oct 2018 | A1 |
20180353933 | Wendland et al. | Dec 2018 | A1 |
20190003704 | Aranda et al. | Jan 2019 | A1 |
20190152778 | Fan et al. | May 2019 | A1 |
20200156032 | Fan et al. | May 2020 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
1329761 | Jan 2001 | CN |
1325319 | Dec 2001 | CN |
1454711 | Nov 2003 | CN |
1501534 | Jun 2004 | CN |
101389734 | Mar 2009 | CN |
101426885 | May 2009 | CN |
102187153 | Sep 2011 | CN |
102388005 | Mar 2012 | CN |
102612625 | Jul 2012 | CN |
102639213 | Aug 2012 | CN |
102686301 | Sep 2012 | CN |
103468322 | Dec 2013 | CN |
102010028816 | Nov 2011 | DE |
0161970 | Nov 1985 | EP |
1134187 | Sep 2001 | EP |
1445018 | Aug 2004 | EP |
1580162 | Sep 2005 | EP |
1845579 | Oct 2007 | EP |
1933087 | Jun 2008 | EP |
2279785 | Feb 2011 | EP |
2441816 | Apr 2012 | EP |
2450420 | May 2012 | EP |
2495030 | Sep 2012 | EP |
2515038 | Oct 2012 | EP |
2601443 | Jun 2013 | EP |
1976633 | Mar 2014 | EP |
2924035 | May 2009 | FR |
H03-68898 | Mar 1991 | JP |
H10249153 | Sep 1998 | JP |
2006-502957 | Jan 2006 | JP |
20060096609 | Sep 2006 | KR |
101364823 | Feb 2014 | KR |
406055 | Sep 2000 | TW |
426728 | Mar 2001 | TW |
WO1990013773 | Nov 1990 | WO |
WO1999065097 | Dec 1999 | WO |
WO2000022690 | Apr 2000 | WO |
WO2000068339 | Nov 2000 | WO |
WO2001042132 | Jun 2001 | WO |
WO2003070629 | Aug 2003 | WO |
WO2007082089 | Jul 2007 | WO |
WO2007122498 | Nov 2007 | WO |
WO2007134075 | Nov 2007 | WO |
WO2008019079 | Feb 2008 | WO |
WO2008071215 | Jun 2008 | WO |
WO2008082312 | Jul 2008 | WO |
WO2008115076 | Sep 2008 | WO |
WO2009007200 | Jan 2009 | WO |
WO2009008565 | Jan 2009 | WO |
WO2009009388 | Jan 2009 | WO |
WO2009021258 | Feb 2009 | WO |
WO2009023515 | Feb 2009 | WO |
WO2009114309 | Sep 2009 | WO |
WO2010037011 | Apr 2010 | WO |
WO2010063923 | Jun 2010 | WO |
WO2010126617 | Nov 2010 | WO |
WO2011021161 | Feb 2011 | WO |
WO2011031752 | Mar 2011 | WO |
WO2011031755 | Mar 2011 | WO |
WO2011084734 | Jul 2011 | WO |
WO2012064712 | May 2012 | WO |
WO2012077978 | Jun 2012 | WO |
2012144899 | Oct 2012 | WO |
WO2012155054 | Nov 2012 | WO |
WO2012155059 | Nov 2012 | WO |
WO2013040645 | Mar 2013 | WO |
2014091024 | Jun 2014 | WO |
WO2014085243 | Jun 2014 | WO |
WO2014152814 | Sep 2014 | WO |
WO2011153568 | Dec 2014 | WO |
WO2014195904 | Dec 2014 | WO |
WO2016053941 | Apr 2016 | WO |
WO2017162427 | Sep 2017 | WO |
2020210865 | Oct 2020 | WO |
Entry |
---|
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 16/634,844 dated Apr. 16, 2021 (5 pages). |
Abad et al., “Chemical-looping combustion in a 300 W continuously operating reactor system using a manganese-based oxygen carrier,” Fuel, 2006, vol. 85, Issue 9, pp. 1174-1185. |
Abad et al., “Reduction Kinetics of CU-, Ni-, and Fe- Based Oxygen Carriers Using Syngas (CO+H2) for Chemical-Looping Combustion,” Energy Fuels, 2007, 21 (4), pp. 1843-1853. |
Abad et al., “The use of iron oxide as oxygen carrier in a chemical-looping reactor,” Fuel, 2007, vol. 86, Issues 7-8, pp. 1021-1035. |
Abdallah et al., “Comparison of mesoporous silicate supports for the immobilisation and activity of cytochrome c and lipase,” J. Mol. Catal. B: Enzym., 2014, 108, 82-88. |
Adanez et al., “Progress in Chemical-Looping Combustion and Reforming technologies,” Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 2012, vol. 38, Issue 2, pp. 215-282. |
Adanez et al., “Selection of oxygen carriers for chemical-looping combustion,” Energy & Fuels, American Chemical Society, 2004, vol. 18, No. 2, pp. 371-377. |
Ahern et al., “Comparison of fenofibratemesoporous silica drug-loading processes for enhanced drug delivery,” Eur. J. Pharm. Sci., 2013, 50, 400-409. |
Alalwan et al., “Co3O4 nanoparticles as oxygen carriers for chemical looping combustion: A materials characterization approach to understanding oxygen carrier performance,” Chemical Engineering Journal, 2017, 319, 279-287. |
Alalwan et al., “α-Fe2O3 Nanoparticles as Oxygen Carriers for Chemical Looping Combustion: An Integrated Materials Characterization Approach to Understanding Oxygen Carrier Performance, Reduction Mechanism, and Particle Size Effects,” Energy Fuels, 2018, 32, 7959-7970. |
Anisimov et al., “Density-functional calculation of effective Coulomb interactions in metals,” Phys. Rev. B, 1991, 43, 7570. |
Azis et al., “On the evaluation of synthetic and natural ilmenite using syngas as fuel in chemical-looping combustion (CLC),” Chemical Engineering Research and Design, 2010, vol. 88, Issue 11, pp. 1505-1514. |
Balasubramanian et al., “Hydrogen from methane in a single-step process,” Chem Engr Science, 1999, 54(15-16), 3543. |
Barreca et al., “Methanolysis of styrene oxide catalysed by a highly efficient zirconium-doped mesoporous silica,” Appl. Catal. A, 2006, 304, 14-20. |
Bell et al., “H2 Production via Ammonia Decomposition Using Non-Noble Metal Catalysts: A Review,” Top Catal, 2016, 59, 1438-1457. |
Burke et al., “Large pore bi-functionalised mesoporous silica for metal ion pollution treatment,” J. Hazard. Mater., 2009, 164, 229-234. |
Cao et al., “Investigation of Chemical Looping Combustion by Solid Fuels. 1. Process Analysis,” Energy Fuels, 2006, 20(5), pp. 1836-1844. |
Carrero et al., “A critical literature review of the kinetics for the oxidative dehydrogenation of propane over well-defined supported vanadium oxide catalysts,” ACS Catalysis, 2014, 4: 3357-3380. |
Cavani et al., “Oxidative dehydrogenation of ethane and propane: How far from commercial implementation?” Catalysis Today, 2007, 127(1): 113-131. |
Cheng et al., “Carbon Dioxide Adsorption and Activation on Ceria (110): A density functional theory study,” J. Chern. Phys. 2013, 138, 014702. |
Cheng et al., “Methane Adsorption and Dissociation on Iron Oxide Oxygen Carrier: Role of Oxygen Vacancy,” Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2016, 18, 16423-16435. |
Cheng et al., “Oxygen vacancy promoted methane partial oxidation over iron oxide oxygen carrier in chemical looping process,” Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 2016, 18, 32418-32428. |
Cheng et al., “Propagation of Olefin Metathesis to Propene on WO3 Catalysts: A Mechanistic and Kinetic Study,” ACS Catal. 2015, 5, 59-72. |
Cho et al., “Comparison of iron-, nickel-, copper- and manganese-based oxygen carriers for chemical-looping combustion,” Fuel, 2004, vol. 83, Issue 9, pp. 1215-1225. |
Chung et al., “Chemically and physically robust, commercially-viable iron-based composite oxygen carriers sustainable over 3000 redox cycles at high temperatures for chemical looping applications,” Energy Environ. Sci., 2017, 10, 2318-2323. |
Coleman et al., “Synthesis and characterization of dimensionally ordered semiconductor nanowires within mesoporous silica,” J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2001, 123, 7010-7016. |
Connell et al., “Process Simulation of Iron-Based Chemical Looping Schemes with CO2 Capture for Hydrogen and Electricity Production from Coal,” Presented at 29th Annual International Pittsburgh Coal Conference, Pittsburgh, PA, Oct. 15-18, 2012, pp. 1274-1281. |
De Diego et al., “Development of Cu-based oxygen carriers for chemical-looping combustion,” Fuel, 2004, vol. 83, Issue 13, pp. 1749-1757. |
De Klerk, “Gas-to-Liquid Conversion.” Natural Gas Conversion Technologies Workshop of ARPA-E. U.S. Department of Energy, Houston, TX. vol. 13 (2012). |
Delaney et al., “Development of chemically engineered porous metal oxides for phosphate removal,” J. Hazard. Mater., 2011, 185, 382-391. |
Delaney et al., “Porous silica spheres as indoor air pollutant scavengers,” J. Environ. Monit., 2010, 12, 2244-2251. |
Denton et al., “Simultaneous Production of High-Purity Hydrogen and Sequestration-Ready CO2 from Syngas,” 2003. |
EIA—Independent Statistics and Analysis. U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Energy Information Administration “Annual Energy Outlook 2015 with Projections to 2040,” Apr. 2015. |
EIA—Independent Statistics and Analysis. U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Energy Information Administration, “How Much Petroleum Does the United States Import and from Where?” <https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=727&t=6> webpage available as early as Mar. 22, 2017. |
EIA—Independent Statistics and Analysis. U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Natural Gas Vented and Flared.” <https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/NG_PROD_SUM_A_EPGO_VGV_MMCF_A.htm> webpage available as early as Feb. 29, 2016. |
EIA—Independent Statistics and Analysis. U.S. Department of Energy, U.S. Energy Information Administration, “Natural Gas Weekly Update.” <https://www.eia.gov/naturalgas/weekly/> webpage available as early as Dec. 4, 2011. |
Environmental Protection Agency, “Geological CO2 Sequestration Technology and Cost Analysis,” Technical Support Document, pp. i-vi & pp. 1-61, Jun. 2008. |
Faezad Othman et al., “Utilization of Low-Grade Iron Ore in Ammonia Decomposition,” Procedia Chemistry, 2016, 19:119-124. |
Faezad Othman et al., “Utilization of Malaysian Low Grade Iron Ore as Medium for Ammonia Decomposition,” ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences, 2015, 10(22):17286-17288. |
Fan et al., “Chemical looping processes for CO2 capture and carbonaceous fuel conversion prospect and opportunity,” Energy Environmental Science, 2012, p. 7254-7280. |
Fan et al., “Utilization of chemical looping strategy in coal gasification processes,” Particuology, 2008, vol. 6, Issue 3, pp. 131-142. |
Fan et al., “Chemical-Looping Technology Platform,” AIChE Journal, 61(1), 2-22 (2015). |
Fan, “Chemical Looping Systems for Fossil Energy Conversions,” Wiley-AIChE: Hoboken, NJ, U.S.A.; 2010. |
Flynn et al., “Pervaporation performance enhancement through the incorporation of mesoporous silica spheres into PVA membranes,” Sep. Purif. Technol., 2013, 118, 73-80. |
Forero et al., “Syngas combustion in a 500 Wth Chemical-Looping Combustion system using an impregnated Cu-based oxygen carrier,” Fuel Processing Technology, 2009, vol. 90, Issue 12, pp. 1471-1479. |
Forzatti, “Present status and perspectives in de-NOx SCR catalysis.” Appl. Catal. A: Gen., 222(1-2), 2001, 221-236. |
Gao et al., “Production of syngas via autothermal reforming of methane in a fluidized-bed reactor over the combined CeO2—ZrO2/SiO2 supported Ni catalysts,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2008, vol. 33, p. 5493-5500. |
Garcia-Labiano et al., “Temperature variations in the oxygen carrier particles during their reduction and oxidation in a chemical-looping combustion system,” Chemical Engineering Science, 2005, vol. 60, No. 3, pp. 851-862. |
Geldart, “Types of Gas Fluidization,” Power Technology, vol. 7, pp. 285-292, 1973. |
Ghanapragasam et al., “Hydrogen production from coal direct chemical looping and syngas chemical looping combustion systems: Assessment of system operation and resource requirements,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2009, vol. 34, Issue 6, pp. 2606-2615. |
Ghoneim et al., “Review on innovative catalytic reforming of natural gas to syngas,” World J. Eng. Technol, 2016, 4(1):116-139. |
Go et al., “Hydrogen production from two-step steam methane reforming in a fluidized bed reactor,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2009, vol. 34, p. 1301-1309. |
Goellner et al., “Baseline analysis of crude methanol production from coal and natural gas,” National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL), US Department of Energy, 2014, 83 pages. |
Goellner, J. F., V. Shah, M. J. Turner, N. J. Kuehn, J. Littlefield, G. Cooney, and J. Marriott, “Analysis of Natural Gas-to Liquid Transportation Fuels via Fischer-Tropsch,” United States Department of Energy/NETL, DOE/NETL-2013/1597, Pittsburgh, PA (2013). |
Grimme et al., “A consistent and accurate ab initio parametrization of density functional dispersion correction (DFT-D) for the 94 elements H—Pu,” J. Chem. Phys., 2010, 132, 19. |
Grimme et al., “Effect of the damping function in dispersion corrected density functional theory,” J. Comput. Chem., 2011, 32, 1456-1465. |
Haque, “Microwave energy for mineral treatment processes—a brief review,” International Journal of Mineral Processing, vol. 57, pp. 1-24, 1999. |
Henkelman et al., “A climbing image nudged elastic band method for finding saddle points and minimum energy paths,” J. Chem. Phys., 2000, 113, 9901-9904. |
Herbst et al., “Relativistic calculations of 4f excitation energies in the rare-earth metals: Further results,” Phys. Rev. B, 1978, 17, 3089. |
Herzog, “Carbon Sequestration via Mineral Carbonation: Overview and Assessment,” MIT Laboratory for Energy and the Environmental, http://sequestration.mit.edu/pfd/carbonates.pdf, Mar. 14, 2002. |
Hildebrandt et al., “Producing Transportation Fuels with Less Work,” Science, Mar. 27, 2009, vol. 323, pp. 1680-1681. |
Hossain et al., “Chemical-looping combustion (CLC) for inherent CO2 separations—a review,” Chemical Engineering Science, 2008, vol. 63, Issue 18, pp. 4433-4451. |
Hua et al., “Three Dimensional Analysis of Electrical Capacitance Tomography Sensing Fields,” 1999 IOP Publishing LTD, vol. 10, pp. 717-725. |
Huijgen et al., “Carbon dioxide sequestration by mineral carbonation,” ECN-C-03-016, www.ecn.nl/docs/library/report/200e/c03016.pdf, Feb. 2003. |
Hung et al., “Zeolite ZSM-5 Supported Bimetallic Fe-Based Catalysts for Selective Catalytic Reduction of NO: Effects of Acidity and Metal Loading,” Advanced Porous Materials, 2016, 4(3): 189-199(11). |
Imanaka et al., “Advances in Direct NOx Decomposition Catalysts,” Appl. Catal. A: Gen., 431-432, 2012, 1-8. |
Ishida et al., “Evaluation of a Chemical-Looping-Combustion Power-Generation System by Graphic Exergy Analysis,” Energy, 12(2), 147-154 (1987). |
Iwamoto et al., “Influence of sulfur dioxide on catalytic removal of nitric oxide over copper ion-exchanged ZSM-5 Zeolite.” Appl. Catal., 69(2), 1991, 15-19. |
Izquierdo et al., “Catalyst Deactivation and Regeneration Processes in Biogas Tri-Reforming Process. The Effect of Hydrogen Sulfide Addition,” Catalysts, 2018, 8(12): 19 pages. |
Jin et al., “Development of a Novel Chemical-Looping Combustion: Synthesis of a Looping Material with a Double Metal Oxide of Co0—NiO,” Energy & Fuels, 1998, vol. 12, 1272-1277. |
Johansson et al., “Combustion of Syngas and Natural Gas in a 300 W Chemical-Looping Combustor,” Chemical Engineering Research and Design vol. 2006, vol. 84, Issue 9, pp. 819-827. |
Kaiser et al., “Precombustion and Postcombustion Decarbonization,” IEEE, Power Engineering Review, Apr. 2001, pp. 15-17. |
Kathe et al., “Modularization strategy for syngas generation in chemical,” AIChE Journal, 2017, 63(8):3343-3360. |
Kathe et al., “Chemical Looping Gasification for Hydrogen Enhanced Syngas Production with in-situ CO2 Capture,” United States Department of Energy, OSTI: 1185194, (2015). |
Kiuchi et al., “Recovery of hydrogen from hydrogen sulfide with metals or metal sulfides,” Int. J. Hydrogen Energy, 1982, 7: 477-482. |
Koulialias et al., “Ordered defects in Fe 1-x S generate additional magnetic anisotropy symmetries,” Journal of Applied Physics, 2018, 123(3): 033902, 10 pages. |
Kresse et al., “Ab initio molecular dynamics for liquid metals,” Phys. Rev. B, 1993, 47, 558. |
Kresse et al., “Efficiency of ab-initio total energy calculations for metals and semiconductors using a plane-wave basis set,” Comput. Mater. Sci., 1996, 6, 15-50. |
Kresse et al., “Efficient iterative schemes for ab initio total-energy calculations using a planewave basis set,” Phys. Rev. B, 1996, 54, 11169. |
Kumar et al., “Direct air capture of CO2 by physisorbent materials,” Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2015, 54, 14372-14377. |
Leion et al., “Solid fuels in chemical-looping combustion using oxide scale and unprocessed iron ore as oxygen carriers,” Fuel, 2009, vol. 88, Issue 10, pp. 1945-1954. |
Leion et al., “Solid fuels in chemical-looping combustion,” International Journal of Greenhouse Gas Control, 2008, vol. 2, Issue 2, pp. 180-193. |
Leion et al., “The use of petroleum coke as fuel in chemical-looping combustion,” Fuel, 2007, vol. 86, Issue 12-13, pp. 1947-1958. |
Li et al., “Clean coal conversion processes—progress and challenges,” The Royal Society of Chemistry, Energy & Environmental Science, Jul. 30, 2008, vol. 1, pp. 248-267. |
Li et al., “Ionic Diffusion in the Oxidation of Iron-effect of Support and Its Implications to Chemical Looping Applications,” Energy Environ. Sci. 2011, 4, 876-880. |
Li et al., “Role of Metal Oxide Support in Redox Reactions of Iron Oxide for Chemical Looping Applications: Experiments and Density Functional Theory Calculations,” Energy Environmental Science, 2011, vol. 4, p. 3661-3667. |
Li et al., “Syngas chemical looping gasification process: Bench-scale studies and reactor simulations,” AICHE Journal, 2010, vol. 56, Issue 8, pp. 2186-2199. |
Li et al., “Syngas Chemical Looping Gasification Process: Oxygen Carrier Particle Selection and Performance,” Energy Fuels, 2009, 23(8), pp. 4182-4189. |
Lin et al., “Novel Magnetically Separable Mesoporous Fe2O3@SBA-15 Nanocomposite with Fully Open Mesochannels for Protein Immobilization,” Chemistry of Materials, 2008, vol. 20, pp. 6617-6622. |
Liu et al., “Enhanced Performance of Alkali Metal Doped Fe2O3 and Fe2O3/Al2O3 Composites as Oxygen Carrier Material in Chemical Looping Combustion,” Energy Fuels. 2013, 27, 4977-4983. |
Liu et al., “Recent Advances in Catalytic DeNOx Science and Technology,” Catalysis Reviews, 48(1), 2006, 43-89. |
Lockwood Greene, “Ironmaking Process Alternative Screening Study, vol. I: Summary Report,” Department of Energy United States of America, Oct. 2000, 153 pages. |
Luo et al., “Shale Gas-to-Syngas Chemical Looping Process for Stable Shale Gas Conversion to High Purity Syngas with H2:CO Ratio of 2:1,” Energy and Environmental Science, 7(12), 4104-4117, (2014). |
Lyngfelt, “Chemical Looping Combustion of Solid Fuels—Status of Development,” Applied Energy, 2014, vol. 113, p. 1869-1873. |
Lyngfelt, “Oxygen Carriers for Chemical Looping Combustion Operational Experience,” 1st International Conference on Chemical Looping, Mar. 2010. |
Makepeace et. al., “Ammonia decomposition catalysis using non-stoichiometric lithium imide,” Chem. Sci., 2015, 6, 3805. |
Mamman et al., “Simultaneous steam and CO2 reforming of methane to syngas over NiO/MgO/SA-5205 in presence and absence of oxygen,” Applied Catalysis A, 1998, vol. 168, p. 33-46. |
Mao et al., “Facile synthesis of phase-pure FeCr2Se4 and FeCr2S4 nanocrystals via a wet chemistry method,” J. Mater. Chem. C, 2014, 2: 3744-3749. |
Marashdeh, Q. et al., “A Multimodal Tomography System Based on ECT Sensors,” IEEE Sensors Journal, vol. 7, No. 3, 2007, 426-433. |
Marashdeh, Q., Advances in Electrical Capacitance Tomography, Dissertation, The Ohio State University, 2006. |
Masui et al..“Direct Decomposition of NO into N2 and O2 OverC-type Cubic Y2O3—Tb4O7—ZrO2,” Materials Sciences and Applications, 3(10), 2012, 733-738. |
Mattisson et al., “Application of chemical-looping combustion with capture of CO2,” Second Nordic Minisymposium on Carbon Dioxide Capture and Storage, Goeteborg, Oct. 26, 2001, pp. 46-51. |
Mattisson et al., “Chemical-looping combustion using syngas as fuel,” International Journal of Greenhouse Gas control, 2007, vol. 1, Issue 2, pp. 158-169. |
Mattisson et al., “CO 2 capture from coal combustion using chemical-looping combustion—Reactivity investigation of Fe, Ni and Mn based oxygen carriers using syngas,” Department of Energy and Environment, Division of Energy Technology and Department of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Division of Environmental Inorganic Chemistry, Chalmers University of Technology, 2007. |
Mattison et al., “Reactivity of Some Metal Oxides Supported on Alumina with Alternating Methane and Oxygen—Application for Chemical-Looping Combustion,” Energy & Fuels, 2003, vol. 17, pp. 643-651. |
Mattisson et al., “The use of iron oxide as an oxygen carrier in chemical-looping combustion of methane with inherent separation of CO2,” Fuel, 2001, vol. 80, pp. 1953-1962. |
Mattisson et al., “Use of Ores and Industrial Products As Oxygen Carriers in Chemical-Looping Combustion,” Energy & Fuels, 2009, vol. 23, pp. 2307-2315. |
Mihai et al., “Chemical looping methane partial oxidation: The effect of the crystal size and O content of LaFeO3,” Journal of Catalysis, 2012, 293:175-185. |
Miller et al., “Toward Transformational Carbon Capture,” AIChE Journal, 62, 1-10 (2016). |
Moreira, “Steam Cracking: Kinetics and Feed Characterization,” Dissertation, 2015, 10 pages. |
NETL, National Energy Technology Laboratory. U.S. Department of Energy, “Quality Guidelines for Energy System Studies—Specification for Selected Feedstocks.” Jan. 2012. |
NETL, National Energy Technology Laboratory. U.S. Department of Energy, “Syngas Contaminant Removal and Conditioning,” webpage accessed on Jul. 8, 2018. |
Nipattummakul et al., “Hydrogen and syngas production from sewage sludge via steam gasification,” Fuel and Energy Abstracts, 2010, 35 (21), 11738-11745. |
Ockwig et al., “Membranes for Hydrogen Separation,” American Chemical Society, Chem. Rev., Oct. 10, 2007, vol. 107, pp. 4078-4110. |
O'Connor et al., “Carbon Dioxide Sequestration by Direct Mineral Carbonation: Results from Recent Studies and Currents Status,” Abstract, USDOE Office of Fossil Energy, 2001. |
Ohio Coal Development Office of the Ohio Air Quality Development Authority, “Ohio Coal Research Consortium (OCRC)—IV, Year 3 Proposal Solicitation,” http://www.ohioquality.org/ocdo/other_pdf/Consortium_IV_Year_3_RFP.pdf (2006). |
Ortiz et al., “Hydrogen Production by Auto-Thermal Chemical-Looping Reforming in A Pressurized Fluidized Bed Reactor Using Ni-based Oxygen Carriers,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2010, vol. 35, p. 151-160. |
OSHA, “Hydrogen Sulfide in Workplaces,” <https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/hydrogensulfide/hydrogensulfide_found.html> webpage accessed Jul. 8, 2018. |
Park et al., “CO2 Mineral Sequestration: Chemically Enhanced Aqueous Carbonation of Serpentine,” The Canadian Journal of Chemical Engineering, 2003, vol. 81, pp. 885-890. |
Park et al., “CQ2 Mineral Sequestration: physically activated dissolution of serpentine and pH swing process,” Chemical Engineering Science, 2004, vol. 59, pp. 5241-5247. |
Perdew et al., “Generalized gradient approximation made simple,” Phys. Rev. Lett., 1996, 77, 3865. |
Pfeifer, “Industrial furnaces—status and research challenges,” Energy Procedia, 2017, 120: 28-40. |
Pröll et al., “Syngas and a separate nitrogen/argon stream via chemical looping reforming—A 140 kW pilot plant study,” Fuel, 2010, vol. 89, Issue 6, pp. 1249-1256. |
Qin et al., “Enhanced methane monversion in mhemical looping partial oxidation systems using a copper doping modification,” Appl. Catal. B, 2018, 235, 143-149. |
Qin et al., “Evolution of Nanoscale Morphology in Single and Binary Metal Oxide Microparticles During Reduction and Oxidation Processes,” J. Mater. Chem. A. 2014, 2, 17511-17520. |
Qin et al., “Impact of 1% Lathanum Dopant on Carbonaceous Fuel Redox Reactions with an Iron-Based Oxygen Carrier in Chemical Looping Processes,” ACS Energy Letters, 2017, 2, 70-74. |
Qin et al., “Nanostructure Formation Mechanism and Ion Diffusion in Iron-Titanium Composite Materials with Chemical Looping Redox Reactions,” J. Mater. Chem. A. 2015, 3, 11302-11312. |
Quin et al., “Improved Cyclic redox reactivity of lanthanum modified iron-based oxygen carriers in carbon monoxide xhemical looping combustion,” Journal of Materials Chemistry A, 2017, 8 pages. |
Rollmann et al., “First-principles calculation of the structure and magnetic phases of hematite,” Phys. Rev. B, 2004, 69, 165107. |
Rostrup-Nielsen, “Syngas in Perspective,” Catalysis Today, 2002, 71(3-4), 243-247. |
Ruchenstein et al., “Carbon dioxide reforming of methane over nickel/alkaline earth metal oxide catalysts,” Applied Catalysis A, 1995, vol. 133, p. 149-161. |
Russo et al., “Impact of Process Design of on the Multiplicity Behavior of a Jacketed Exothermic CSTR,” AICHE Journal, Jan. 1995, vol. 41, No. 1, pp. 135-147. |
Ryden et al., “Synthesis gas generation by chemical-looping reforming in a continuously operating laboratory reactor,” Fuel, 2006, vol. 85, p. 1631-1641. |
Sassi et al., “Sulfur Recovery from Acid Gas Using the Claus Process and High Temperature Air Combustion ( HiTAC ) Technology,” Am. J. Environ. Sci., 2008, 4, 502-511. |
Sattler et al., “Catalytic Dehydrogenation of Light Alkanes on Metals and Metal Oxides,” Chem Rev, 2014, 114(20): 10613-10653. |
Scott et al., “In situ gasification of a solid fuel and CO2 separation using chemical looping,” AICHE Journal, 2006, vol. 52, Issue 9, pp. 3325-3328. |
Shen et al., “Chemical-Looping Combustion of Biomass in a 10k Wth Reactor with Iron Oxide as an Oxygen Carrier,” Energy & Fuels, 2009, vol. 23, pp. 2498-2505. |
Shen et al., “Experiments on chemical looping combustion of coal with a NiO based oxygen carrier,” Combustion and Flame, 2009, vol. 156, Issue 3, pp. 721-728. |
Sheppard et al., “Paths to which the nudged elastic band converges,” J. Comput. Chem., 2011, 32, 1769-1771. |
Shick et al., “Single crystal growth of CoCr2S4 and FeCr2S4,” Journal of Crystal Growth, 1969, 5(4): 313-314. |
Speight, “Gasification processes for syngas and hydrogen production,” Gasification for Synthetic Fuel Production, Woodhead Publishing, 2015, 119-146. |
Sridhar et al., “Syngas Chemical Looping Process: Design and Construction of a 25 kWth Subpilot Unit,” Energy Fuels, 2012, 26(4), pp. 2292-2302. |
Steinfeld et al., “Design Aspects of Solar Thermochemical Engineering—A case Study: Two-Step Water-Splitting Cycle Using the Fe3O4/FeO Redox System,” Solar Energy, 1999, pp. 43-53. |
Steinfeld, “Solar hydrogen production via a two-step water-splitting thermochemical cycle based on Zn/ZnO redox reactions,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2002, vol. 27, pp. 611-619. |
Sun et al., “Review: Fundamentals and challenges of electrochemical CO2 reduction using two-dimensional materials,” Chem, 2017, 3, 560-587. |
Takanabe, “Catalytic Conversion of Methane: Carbon Dioxide Reforming and Oxidative Coupling,” Journal of the Japan Petroleum Institute, 2012, 55, 1-12. |
Thiollier et al., “Preparation and Catalytic Properties of Chromium-Containing Mixed Sulfides,” Journal of Catalysis, 2011, 197(1): 58-67. |
Tian et al., “Thermodynamic investigation into carbon deposition and sulfur evolution in a Ca-based chemical-looping combustion system,” Chemical Engineering Research & Design, 2011, vol. 89, Issue 9, p. 1524. |
Trout et al., “Analysis of the Thermochemistry of NOx Decomposition over CuZSM-5 Based on Quantum Chemical and Statistical Mechanical Calculations,” J. Phys. Chem, 100(44), 1996, 17582-17592. |
U.S. Department of Energy, NCCTI Energy Technologies Group, Office of Fossil Energy, “CO2 Capture and Storage in Geologic Formations,” p. 34, Revised Jan. 8, 2002. |
United States Environmental Protection Agency. “Air Pollution Control Technology Fact Sheet: Selective Catalytic Reforming,” <https://www3.epa.gov/ttncatc1/cica/files/fscr.pdf> (2003). |
Usachev et al., “Conversion of Hydrocarbons to Synthesis Gas: Problems and Prospects,” Petroleum Chemistry, 2011, vol. 51, p. 96-106. |
Velazquez-Vargas et al., “Atmospheric Iron-based Coal Direct Chemical Looping (CDCL) Process for Power Generation”, presented in Power-Gen International 2012, Orlando, FL, Dec. 11-13, 2012, BR-1892, 1-5. |
Vernon et al., “Partial Oxidation of Methane to Synthesis Gas,” Catalysis Letters, 1990, vol. 6, p. 181-186. |
Wang et al., “Highly efficient metal sulfide catalysts for selective dehydrogenation of isobutane to isobutene,” ACS Catalysis, 2014, 4: 1139-1143. |
Wang et al., “Isobutane Dehydrogenation over Metal (Fe, Co, and Ni) Oxide and Sulfide Catalysts: Reactivity and Reaction Mechanism,” ChemCatChem, Jul. 2014, vol. 6, pp. 2305-2314. |
Wang et al., “Study of bimetallic interactions and promoter effects of FeZn, FeMn and FeCr Fischer-Tropsch synthesis catalysts,” Journal of Molecular Catalysis A: Chemical, 2010, 326:29-40. |
Warsito, W. et al., Electrical Capacitance Volume Tomography, 2007, pp. 1-9. |
Watanabe, “Electrical properties of FeCr2S4 and CoCr2S4,” Solid State Communications, 1973, 12(5): 355-358. |
Xu et al., “A novel chemical looping partial oxidation process for thermochemical conversion of biomass to syngas,” Applied Energy, 2018, 222:119-131. |
Yamazaki et al., “Development of highly stable nickel catalyst for methane-steam reaction under low steam to carbon ratio,” Applied Catalyst A, 1996, vol. 136, p. 49-56. |
Yin et. al., “A mini-review on ammonia decomposition catalysts for on-site generation of hydrogen for fuel cell applications,” Applied Catalysis A: General, 2004, 277, 1-9. |
Zafar et al., “Integrated Hydrogen and Power Production with CO2 Capture Using Chemical-Looping ReformingRedox Reactivity of Particles of CuO, Mn2O3, NiO, and Fe2O3 Using SiO2 as a Support,” Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2005, 44(10), pp. 3485-3496. |
Zeng et al., “Metal oxide redox chemistry for chemical looping processe,” Nat Rev Chem., 2018,2,349-364. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US/2007/000956 dated Jul. 24, 2008. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US/2010/048121 dated Mar. 22, 2012. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US/2010/048125 dated Mar. 22, 2012. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US/2011/059736 dated May 23, 2013. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US/2012/037544 dated Nov. 12, 2013. |
International Preliminary Report on Patentability for International Application PCT/US/2012/037557 dated Nov. 21, 2013. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US14/14877 dated May 14, 2014 (10 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US14/25520 dated Jul. 11, 2014 (13 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US14/26071 dated Jul. 10, 2014 (9 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2007/000956 dated Dec. 4, 2007. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2009/058579 dated Aug. 3, 2010. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2010/048121 dated Apr. 1, 2011. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2010/048125 dated Dec. 17, 2010. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2011/059736 dated Mar. 27, 2012. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2012/037544 dated Aug. 10, 2012. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2012/037557 dated Aug. 13, 2012. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2014/027839 dated Jul. 24, 2014 (9 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2014/028217 dated Jul. 28, 2014 (8 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2015/018123 dated May 8, 2015 (10 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2017/027241 dated Jul. 10, 2017 (11 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2017/034503 dated Aug. 15, 2017 (14 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2018/044530 dated Oct. 17, 2018 (13 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2019/045438 dated Oct. 31, 2019 (9 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2020/013823 dated Apr. 9, 2020 (16 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2020/027324 dated Jul. 9, 2020 (10 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2020/046918 dated Nov. 24, 2020 (12 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/394,572 dated Apr. 9, 2014 (26 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/394,572 dated Aug. 26, 2014 (16 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/394,572 dated Dec. 30, 2014 (19 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/394,572 dated Oct. 13, 2015 (21 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 13/394,572 dated Dec. 14, 2015 (10 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 13/394,572 dated Feb. 22, 2016 (8 pages). |
United States Patent Office Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 15/162,199 dated Oct. 21, 2016 (9 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/394,396 dated Dec. 18, 2014 (14 pages). |
United States Patent Office Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 13/394,396 dated Jul. 2, 2015 (15 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/394,396 dated Jan. 15, 2016 (13 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 13/394,396 dated Aug. 3, 2016 (8 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/376,590 dated Mar. 9, 2018 (10 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/376,590 dated Oct. 19, 2018 (8 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 15/376,590 dated Jan. 9, 2019 (6 pages). |
Final Rejection pertaining to U.S. Appl. No. 13/121,009 dated Mar. 14, 2013. |
Advisory Action pertaining to U.S. Appl. No. 13/121,009 dated Jun. 24, 2013. |
Office Action pertaining to U.S. Appl. No. 13/121,009 dated Sep. 13, 2013. |
Final Rejection pertaining to U.S. Appl. No. 13/121,009 dated Jan. 16, 2014. |
Office Action pertaining to U.S. Appl. No. 13/121,009 dated Sep. 6, 2012. |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/504,295 dated Sep. 28, 2015 (10 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/191,249 dated Dec. 28, 2017 (14 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 15/191,249 dated May 22, 2018 (8 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/883,795 dated Jun. 20, 2016 (15 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 13/883,795 dated Jun. 23, 2017 (11 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 13/883,795 dated Jan. 22, 2018 (7 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/116,627 dated Oct. 20, 2016 (6 Pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/116,627 dated Mar. 10, 2017 (5 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/116,627 dated Jun. 14, 2017 (5 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/685,951 dated May 14, 2019 (10 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 15/685,951 dated Aug. 12, 2019 (5 pages). |
United States Patent Office Final Rejection for U.S. Appl. No. 14/116,636 dated Oct. 24, 2016 (10 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/116,636 dated Nov. 7, 2017 (5 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/766,086 dated Jan. 13, 2017 (22 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/766,086 dated Sep. 7, 2017 (19 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/766,086 dated Jan. 2, 2018 (21 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/766,086 dated Aug. 8, 2018 (9 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/166,746 dated May 1, 2019 (9 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 16/166,746 dated Aug. 15, 2019 (8 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/775,044 dated May 30, 2017 (15 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/775,044 dated Feb. 26, 2018 (16 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/774,727 dated Sep. 14, 2017 (10 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 14/774,730 dated Nov. 16, 2016 (10 pages). |
Office Action pertaining to U.S. Appl. No. 12/160,803 dated Jun. 7, 2011. |
Final Rejection pertaining to U.S. Appl. No. 12/160,803 dated Jan. 5, 2012. |
Office Action pertaining to U.S. Appl. No. 12/160,803 dated Jun. 5, 2012. |
Final Rejection pertaining to U.S. Appl. No. 12/160,803 dated Mar. 22, 2013. |
Advisory Action pertaining to U.S. Appl. No. 12/160,803 dated Jul. 11, 2013. |
Examiner's Answer before the Patent Trial and Appeal Board for U.S. Appl. No. 12/160,803 dated Nov. 4, 2013. |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 12/160,803 dated Feb. 23, 2016 (27 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/091,654 dated Jun. 12, 2015 (16 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/091,654 dated Oct. 30, 2014 (14 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/091,654 dated Jan. 4, 2016 (17 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,319 dated Nov. 7, 2016 (7 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 14/634,319 dated Apr. 11, 2017 (9 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/647,084 dated Dec. 26, 2017 (7 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 15/647,084 dated Mar. 19, 2018 (8 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 16/260,447 dated Oct. 21, 2019 (10 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/091,508 dated Feb. 12, 2020 (18 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/216,911 dated Apr. 16, 2020 (6 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/634,844 dated May 12, 2020 (8 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/091,253 dated Jul. 8, 2020 (13 pages). |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 16/634,844 dated Aug. 31, 2020 (4 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 16/216,911 dated Sep. 17, 2020 (8 pages). |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 16/091,253 dated Jan. 27, 2021 (8 pages). |
Pans et al., “Optimization of H2 production with CO2 capture by steam reforming of methane integrated with a chemical-looping combustion system,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2013, 38(27): 11878-11892. |
Ryden et al., “Using steam reforming to produce hydrogen with carbon dioxide capture by chemical-looping combustion,” International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2006, 31(10): 1271-1283. |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2020/049105 dated Jan. 29, 2021 (22 pages). |
International Search Report and Written Opinion for Application No. PCT/US2020/050107 dated Feb. 4, 2021 (15 pages). |
Jadhav et al., “Carbonation of Mg-Bearing Minerals: Kinetic and Mechanistic Studies,” Ohio Coal Research Consortium/Ohio State University Project C3.12, www.ohiocoal.org/projects/year3/c3.12, Jul. 3, 2002. |
United States Patent Office Action for U.S. Appl. No. 15/162,199 dated Jun. 30, 2016 (10 pages). |
“Amine-Bearing Mesoporous Silica for CO2 and H2S Removal from Natural Gas and Biogas,” Youssef Belmabkhout, Guy De Weireld, and Abdelhamid Sayari, Langmuir, 2009, 25 (23), 13275-13278. DOI: 10.1021/la903238y. |
United States Patent Office Notice of Allowance for U.S. Appl. No. 17/602,889 dated Mar. 17, 2022 (8 pages). |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
20210245095 A1 | Aug 2021 | US |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62734387 | Sep 2018 | US | |
62716705 | Aug 2018 | US |