 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Natural Science Forum / Chemistry / Organic Synthesis / November 2003Methane to liquids
I am wanting to build a small methane to liquid converter. I can live with either methanol or a liquid hydrocarbon output. All the research I have done indicates that I need to convert to syngas first, then to the final product using the appropriate temperatures, pressures and catalyst. Steam reforming of the methane appears to be more involved than using partial oxydation due to it being an endothermic reaction, plus it is too enriched in H2 for using to make hydrocarbons with Fischer-Tropsch. Nearly pure oxygen can be obtained using a zeolite for partial oxydation. I have read that several companies are working on catalysts that can convert directly to methanol or a liquid hydrocarbon skipping the syngas step. Do any of these companies have a commercial product available yet? The input stream can be desulfured if necessary by bubbling through NaOH solution so it doesn't poison the catalyst. All the information I can find on the final methane stage indicates that the final product will have to be recirulated due to low conversion efficiency. Also every paper and book I can find seems geared towards a $100 million plant, not a small home unit that could fit in the back of a pickup truck. I was wondering if there are any techniques that have been developed that would work well for small scale. I don't need 95%+ efficiency, I need something that is easy to build, inexpensive, and reliable. Any information would be greatly appreciated. I have a good technical library close, so even references to specific journal articles would be a big help. Thanks, Marshall  SignaturePaul J. Franklin(moderator - sci.chem.organic.synthesis) http://organicworldwide.net/sci.chem.organic.synthesis Georgia State University <chepjf@panther.gsu.edu> Atlanta, GA > I am wanting to build a small methane to liquid converter. I can live > with either methanol or a liquid hydrocarbon output. Can't be directly done - and oh how petroleum companies have desperately tried! The whole Arabian Pensinsula is aflame at night from vented burning methane. Alaska is fat with uselsss natural gas. Anything that would allow methane-to-liquid conversion would be hot stuff. Pipelining a gas is not efficient compared to liquids. Rock-like methane hydrate requires punctiliously dried input - even ppm water is an eventual problem. The best you can do is methane to syn gas to methanol to ZSM-5 high aromatic feedstock. It isn't economic at the wellhead. Bubbling methane into concentrated sulfuric acid plus palladium is silly except as a publication. One might imagine methane plus steam going into a superacid zeolite or hot dispersed scandium triflate, both impregnated with palladium, might give you a direct methanol/methyl ether feedstream, and then into ZSM-5. SignatureUncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net! -- Paul J. Franklin(moderator - sci.chem.organic.synthesis) http://organicworldwide.net/sci.chem.organic.synthesis Georgia State University <chepjf@panther.gsu.edu> Atlanta, GA It can and has been done indirectly as noted by all of the majors on a batch lab / pilot plant basis. However according to recent reports methane to liquids is expensive and only by using economies of scale can it be made at a competitive price. Investment in a plant is estimated to cost 2 billion dollars or more. diesel fuel can be made more economically than gasoline. At current crude prices diesel would probably be economically produced. I have no idea of the energy efficiency of the process e.g. how much btus in product vs. btus in feedstock. Uncle Al wrote: >Marshall Dudley wrote: >>I am wanting to build a small methane to liquid converter. I can live >>with either methanol or a liquid hydrocarbon output. >Can't be directly done - and oh how petroleum companies have >desperately tried! The whole Arabian Pensinsula is aflame at night [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] >Rock-like methane hydrate requires punctiliously dried input - even >ppm water is an eventual problem. >The best you can do is methane to syn gas to methanol to ZSM-5 high >aromatic feedstock. It isn't economic at the wellhead. Bubbling >methane into concentrated sulfuric acid plus palladium is silly except >as a publication. >One might imagine methane plus steam going into a superacid zeolite or >hot dispersed scandium triflate, both impregnated with palladium, >might give you a direct methanol/methyl ether feedstream, and then >into ZSM-5. [Part 2, Text/HTML 49 lines] [Unable to print this part] SignaturePaul J. Franklin(moderator - sci.chem.organic.synthesis) http://organicworldwide.net/sci.chem.organic.synthesis Georgia State University <chepjf@panther.gsu.edu> Atlanta, GA Uncle Al wrote: > Marshall Dudley wrote: > > I am wanting to build a small methane to liquid converter. I can live > > with either methanol or a liquid hydrocarbon output. > Can't be directly done - and oh how petroleum companies have > desperately tried! The whole Arabian Pensinsula is aflame at night [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Rock-like methane hydrate requires punctiliously dried input - even > ppm water is an eventual problem. > The best you can do is methane to syn gas to methanol to ZSM-5 high > aromatic feedstock. It isn't economic at the wellhead. Bubbling > methane into concentrated sulfuric acid plus palladium is silly except > as a publication. > One might imagine methane plus steam going into a superacid zeolite or > hot dispersed scandium triflate, both impregnated with palladium, > might give you a direct methanol/methyl ether feedstream, and then > into ZSM-5. > -- > Uncle Al > http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ > (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) > "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net! Sounds like the suggestion to burn the methane to generate electricity is the best solution. I suggest that continuous burning ("external combustion"), as in steam generation, as compared to internal combustion is more efficent and creates less pollution. Furthermore ther have been improvements of steam engine design that does not require a boiler, as well as improvements in transferring the heat to the water at ane near the hot surface(s). SignaturePaul J. Franklin(moderator - sci.chem.organic.synthesis) http://organicworldwide.net/sci.chem.organic.synthesis Georgia State University <chepjf@panther.gsu.edu> Atlanta, GA Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message news:<blcdn0$5se@panther.Gsu.EDU>... > Marshall Dudley wrote: > > I am wanting to build a small methane to liquid converter. I can live > > with either methanol or a liquid hydrocarbon output. > Can't be directly done - and oh how petroleum companies have > desperately tried! The whole Arabian Pensinsula is aflame at night [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Rock-like methane hydrate requires punctiliously dried input - even > ppm water is an eventual problem. > The best you can do is methane to syn gas to methanol to ZSM-5 high > aromatic feedstock. It isn't economic at the wellhead. Bubbling > methane into concentrated sulfuric acid plus palladium is silly except > as a publication. > One might imagine methane plus steam going into a superacid zeolite or > hot dispersed scandium triflate, both impregnated with palladium, > might give you a direct methanol/methyl ether feedstream, and then > into ZSM-5. We could use a few more of these plants (CH4 -> diesel) http://www.shell.com.my/smds/ ...although building them in California could be a problem. Mike Darrett SignaturePaul J. Franklin(moderator - sci.chem.organic.synthesis) http://organicworldwide.net/sci.chem.organic.synthesis Georgia State University <chepjf@panther.gsu.edu> Atlanta, GA As exposed already earlier (maybe a year ago?), The synthesis of nitromethane from CH4, HNO3 and heat would produce a valuable fuel. I extensively demonstrated that: *Since they have CH4 (as a free garbage), they have heat, H2O and electric cogeneration by combustion. *Since they have free air (O2 and N2), they are able to make HNO3 from it and from electricity and heat. *Since they have potentially cheap HNO3 made on site, and free CH4; they can make nitromethane. Nitromethane racing fuel is in use and would provide good market. Nitromethane is a valuable synthesis reagent and as such when purified by distillation to 99% can cost over 25$/L. Nitromethane is a relatively safe explosive that enters explosive binary mixes. So: Methane --> Heat +Energy +Electricity +Water Water + O2 + N2 --> HNO3 CH4 + Electricity + Energy + Heat --> cooling , pumps, condenser, heaters, distillators, ... Input: CH4, O2, N2 Output CO2 and CH3-NO2 with a big added value and the ease of handling of NM vs CH4! All this instead of the simple spill of CH4, CO, CO2, NOx and H2O. PhZ Uncle Al wrote: > Marshall Dudley wrote: > > I am wanting to build a small methane to liquid converter. I can live > > with either methanol or a liquid hydrocarbon output. > Can't be directly done - and oh how petroleum companies have > desperately tried! The whole Arabian Pensinsula is aflame at night [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Rock-like methane hydrate requires punctiliously dried input - even > ppm water is an eventual problem. > The best you can do is methane to syn gas to methanol to ZSM-5 high > aromatic feedstock. It isn't economic at the wellhead. Bubbling > methane into concentrated sulfuric acid plus palladium is silly except > as a publication. > One might imagine methane plus steam going into a superacid zeolite or > hot dispersed scandium triflate, both impregnated with palladium, [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) > "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net! SignaturePaul J. Franklin(moderator - sci.chem.organic.synthesis) http://organicworldwide.net/sci.chem.organic.synthesis Georgia State University <chepjf@panther.gsu.edu> Atlanta, GA Mike Darrett wrote: > Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote in message news:<blcdn0$5se@panther.Gsu.EDU>... > > Marshall Dudley wrote: > > > I am wanting to build a small methane to liquid converter. I can live > > > with either methanol or a liquid hydrocarbon output. > > Can't be directly done - and oh how petroleum companies have > > desperately tried! The whole Arabian Pensinsula is aflame at night [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Rock-like methane hydrate requires punctiliously dried input - even > > ppm water is an eventual problem. > > The best you can do is methane to syn gas to methanol to ZSM-5 high > > aromatic feedstock. It isn't economic at the wellhead. Bubbling > > methane into concentrated sulfuric acid plus palladium is silly except > > as a publication. > > One might imagine methane plus steam going into a superacid zeolite or > > hot dispersed scandium triflate, both impregnated with palladium, > > might give you a direct methanol/methyl ether feedstream, and then > > into ZSM-5. > We could use a few more of these plants (CH4 -> diesel) > http://www.shell.com.my/smds/ > ...although building them in California could be a problem. Could? Have any of your engineers engaged in heterosexual relationships in the past 50 years? Wymyn's Lip says, "Male orgasm is rape." Bubbling methane into hot oleum plus iodine gives you methylenedisulfate (unimpressive kinetics, but we have lots of chemical engineers). That trivially hydrolyzes to formaldehyde. It's worthless as a wellhead process. Chlorination easily gets you liquids - but then what? Partial combustion of methane and then ZSM-5 is cheap and almost reasonable... but high aromatics fuel is an Enviro-whiner atrocity. Even given the engineer's heaven of ulimited free energy (local methane being flared anyway), it's a pisser of a problem. Generating electricity seems like a good answer until you look for a market. Generating plants are heavy water users, and that doesn't cut it in the Arabian desert. The best spreadsheet answer I can imagine is to plasma condense the methane into CVD diamond dust. Energy efficiency doesn't matter and the product sells for about $(US)0.10/gram - until somebody starts making 1000 tonnes/year. This does not add to fuel inventories, which is where you want the methane to go. -- Uncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/eotvos.htm (Do something naughty to physics) SignaturePaul J. Franklin(moderator - sci.chem.organic.synthesis) http://organicworldwide.net/sci.chem.organic.synthesis Georgia State University <chepjf@panther.gsu.edu> Atlanta, GA On 30 Sep 2003 13:15:12 -0400, Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> wrote: >Can't be directly done - and oh how petroleum companies have >desperately tried! The whole Arabian Pensinsula is aflame at night >from vented burning methane. Alaska is fat with uselsss natural gas. I'm curious, why can the methane not be used to generate electricity? I suppose both the Arabian peninsula and Alaska are thousands of miles from anyplace there's a big enough market for the electricity - is it that expensive/inefficient to transmit it over those distances? Signature"Sore wa himitsu desu." To reply by email, remove the small snack from address. http://www.esatclear.ie/~rwallace -- Paul J. Franklin(moderator - sci.chem.organic.synthesis) http://organicworldwide.net/sci.chem.organic.synthesis Georgia State University <chepjf@panther.gsu.edu> Atlanta, GA Russell Wallace wrote: > On 30 Sep 2003 13:15:12 -0400, Uncle Al <UncleAl0@hate.spam.net> > wrote: [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > from anyplace there's a big enough market for the electricity - is it > that expensive/inefficient to transmit it over those distances? Electricity transmission is the problem. There is no bulk market for at least 1000 miles in any direction - the weather is foul and the traverse is inaccessible. Building and running 550-765 kV power lines is not small stuff - icing in the winter, range fires in the summer. Long haul transmission loses about 30% of input. Enviro-whiners will go ballistic with any of several nugatory horror projections - Save the fragile and endangered Half-Blind Walking Fly for our children! SignatureUncle Al http://www.mazepath.com/uncleal/ (Toxic URL! Unsafe for children and most mammals) "Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?" The Net! -- Paul J. Franklin(moderator - sci.chem.organic.synthesis) http://organicworldwide.net/sci.chem.organic.synthesis Georgia State University <chepjf@panther.gsu.edu> Atlanta, GA |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.