“As a result, an 18% increase of feed rate was achieved while maintaining the
same cycle length under similar operating conditions.”
These results show that higher ppH2 not only improves As a result, an 18% increase of feed rate was achieved while
performance and stability of the RDS catalyst, but is also maintaining the same cycle length under similar operating
beneficial to product quality. This is especially the case with conditions. As shown in Figure 6, Run-B exhibited even better
RFCC feed, since the RDS product is hydrogenated more under stability than Run-A despite the higher feed rate.
high ppH2 with heavier molecules like asphaltene being cracked.
As shown in Figure 4, hydrodenitrogenation (HDN) activity is
HDS normalized WABT, oF
much improved by increasing the ppH2. Since nitrogen 140 Run A
compounds suppress the MAT conversion, low nitrogen content Run B
in the RFCC feed is very important to increase the gasoline yield. 104
Commercial experience in high-pressure RDS unit 68
A KFR-catalyst system was applied in a commercial high pressure 4
RDS unit, i.e. KFR 11/10/20/50 system, designated herein as
“Run-A”, being successfully operated for more than one year. Base
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
However, the refinery requested to further catalyst system
optimization so as to be able to increase the processing severity
using a higher feed rate. Therefore, KFR 22/33/53/70 system Figure 6: HDS normalized WABT.
was proposed as “Run-B” instead. In a subsequent article, we will discuss the development and
unique capabilities of Albemarle's new KFR 23 catalyst,
The differences between catalyst systems “Run-A” and “Run-B” designed for optimal performance in high ppH2 operation.
Contact: Jonnie Verwoert
I KFR 11 KFR 22 – higher HDM activity and metal Email: email@example.com
capacity for high throughput operation
I KFR 10, 20 KFR 33 – HDM/HDS catalyst with higher Contact: Katsuhisa Fujita
HDS activity Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
I KFR 50 KFR 53, 70 – higher HDS activity on KFR 70
Contact: Minoru Takada
with higher metal tolerance than HDS catalyst KFR 53.
Albemarle additives offer excellent
long-term option for SOx reduction
I mproving air quality is a key item on the agenda of many national governments and regulators. Both vehicular and
direct industrial emissions of gaseous pollutants have become targets for more stringent regulation. In most
continents, these new regulations require refiners to reduce their sulfur oxides emissions.
In many cases, the FCC unit is the largest contributor to SOx additives for SOx control. In this article, we study these options
emissions from the refinery so that SOx reductions from the FCC and provide an economic comparison.
have become a key element in the refinery’s compliance strategy.
Albemarle’s SOx reduction portfolio
Albemarle’s unique portfolio of SOx reduction additives offers
an excellent long-term option for meeting these new Albemarle entered the SOx market in the late 1980s with its
requirements. Albemarle’s patented technology forms the patented hydrotalcite-based technology. Commercially, SOx
backbone of over 70% of all SOx reduction additives sold reductions ranging from 25-99% have been reported, depending
worldwide. Many refiners are considering options for FCC SOx on regenerator operation and unit specifics amount of additive
control and are beginning to compare the economics of using an consumed and are being applied in many refineries worldwide.
investment option such as SOx scrubber against the use of
Issue 70 I Courier 13
“Albemarle’s unique family of SOx reduction additives offer an excellent option for
refiners seeking an effective and economically sound approach to emissions compliance.”
KDSOx is recommended as the most cost-effective solution Relative SOx reduction costs for both approaches are
when a relatively small percentage (<5%) of additives is illustrated in Figure 1.
required to achieve the target SOx reduction. SOxDOWN is
now our most active additive for reducing SOx in FCC flue gas
and is the highest activity peak-shaving additive. Flue gas scrubber
Relative costs for sulfur
dioxide reduction, %
Commercial experience has shown that in certain specific 60
applications the performance of standard SOx reduction
additives is not optimal. These applications include FCC 40
operations running in deep partial burn or with very low
replacement rates. For these applications, Albemarle’s
SOxMASTER provides more optimal performance compared to
traditional SOx reduction additives and has shown upto 90% 25% 50% 90%
SOx reductions in deep partial burn applications, where Sulfur dioxide reduction
typically at best 50–60% reductions have been reported.
Figure 1: Relative sulfur dioxide reduction costs.
Another advantage of SOxMASTER in particular is the
significant reduction observed in condensible particulates Even at a 90% reduction level, the additive option is a viable
from the FCC unit stack. one, and not only from a cost point of view. Proper additive
application can help the refiner add value to the bottom line
Economics of additives versus flue gas scrubber
by allowing the processing of high-sulfur feed in the FCC.
The two most widely applied options for SOx reduction in the
Improved energy efficiency
FCC are the use of additives – a non-capital solution – and
installing a capital-intensive solution such as flue gas scrubber. An additional advantage of the additives approach is its
impact on overall energy efficiency. In addition to their
To better understand their relative advantages, a case study was concerns about reducing SOx emissions, refiners are also
conducted comparing the economics of these two options. seeking ways to reduce energy costs per barrel of crude
Economics of the SOx scrubber option were taken from processed.
“Controlling FCCU Regenerator Emissions” by K. Gilman, S.
Eagleson and E. Weaver, WR 2000. Investment costs were Using Albemarle’s SOx reduction additive, which pick up
corrected with a 4% annual increase. No adjustment was made sulfur from the regenerator and release it as hydrogen sulfide
for the operational costs associated with the flue gas scrubber, in the reactor, has a minimal impact on the energy balance,
which include costs for power, process chemicals and sludge while installation of an energy-intensive flue gas scrubber is
disposal. likely to have an adverse impact on the overall energy
reduction program of the refinery.
Specific cost per kg of sulfur dioxide removed were computed
at 25, 50 and 90% reductions respectively, as shown in Table An easy way to demonstrate the efficacy of these additives is to
1. These costs were compared with the cost of achieving the conduct additive trials, which can help the refiner quickly
same objective using an additive option. establish the economics involved with employing additives for
emissions compliance. In most cases this can be done quickly
Sulfur dioxide SOx additive Flue gas scrubber in a period of 4 to 8 weeks. As these comparisons have shown,
reduction specific cost specific cost Albemarle’s unique family of SOx reduction additives offer an
% $/kg sulfur dioxide $/kg sulfur dioxide
excellent option for refiners seeking an effective and
25 0.7 4.1
economically sound approach to emissions compliance.
50 0.9 2.2
90 1.1 1.4
Table 1: Sulfur dioxide removal costs.
Contact: Subramani Ramachandran
14 Courier I Issue 70