PTQ Q2 2026 Issue

Commercial trial results: SaFeGuard vs. U pgrader yield improvements across two independent trials

PetroSIM catalyst factors extracted from commercial data

1.15

1.12

2.7

SaFeGuard U pgrader

1.10

Trial 2 - Customer Z (2025) Trial 1 - BWO (2021)

2.0

1.5

1.05

1.0

0.4

0.3

1.00

0.97

-0.3

0.95

0.93

-1

0.90

-1.4

-2

-2.8

0.85

Activity factor

Coke selectivity

Dry gas selectivity

Bottoms conversion

-3

LPG Gasoline + LCO Bottoms

Dry gas

Catalyst performance factor

Product category

Figure 4 Comparison of commercial trial results

Figure 5 PetroSIM catalysts factors and model validation

Modelling and validation PetroSIM commercial process simulation software was employed to extract catalyst activity and selectivity factors from the commercial operating data and validate yield pre- dictions. The methodology involved: u Development of rigorous FCC reactor-regenerator model calibrated to Customer Z unit configuration. v Regression analysis of operating data from Upgrader period to determine baseline catalyst factors (activity, coke selectivity, dry gas selectivity, and bottoms cracking factor). w Independent regression of SaFeGuard period data to extract corresponding catalyst performance factors. x Side-by-side simulation: running the model with Upgrader factors during the SaFeGuard period and com- paring predicted yields to actual performance. y Sensitivity analysis to quantify impacts of individual cat- alyst factor changes on product yields. This approach allows rigorous ‘apples-to-apples’ com- parison of catalyst performance while accounting for all operating variable changes (such as temperature, cata- lyst-to-oil ratio, and feed quality) that occurred during the trial. Process simulation using PetroSIM provided addi- tional validation and insight into the catalyst performance differences. Figure 5 shows the extracted catalyst factors for Upgrader and SaFeGuard (normalised to Upgrader = 1.00). Activity factor: 1.05 – Representing 5% higher intrinsic activity, consistent with the improved accessibility enabling better access to active sites within the catalyst particles. Coke selectivity: 0.93 – Indicating 7% reduction in coke yield at equivalent conversion, reflecting more selective cracking reactions. Dry gas selectivity: 0.97 – Modest 3% reduction in dry gas formation, consistent with reduced overcracking. Bottoms conversion factor: 1.12 – A substantial 12% improvement in bottoms cracking capability, the key per- formance parameter for Fe-resistant catalysts and directly attributable to preserved accessibility. Model validation was performed by running the simulation

textural properties, indicating that SaFeGuard maintains a pore structure similar to Upgrader under iron attack with- out compromising the access to these pores. Importantly, FST activity increased by 2.2 percentage points, confirming that improved accessibility translates directly to enhanced catalytic performance. Commercial trial evaluation The commercial trial delivered substantial yield improve- ments that directly translate to refinery profitability. Figure 4 compares the results from both the trial at Big West Oil (2021) and the current Customer Z trial (2025), demonstrating the consistency and reproducibility of SaFeGuard performance benefits. Customer Z trial performance (June-July 2025): LPG production increased by +1.5 vol%, a highly valuable yield shift toward light olefins. At typical refinery LPG values ($0.70-0.90/gallon) and the unit’s processing rate, this rep- resents millions of dollars in annual product value improve- ment. Moreover, there was a -1.4 vol% reduction in slurry/ bottoms, which was the primary objective of the trial. Lower bottoms yield enables increased VTB processing capacity, allowing the refinery to run heavier, lower-cost feeds through the FCC unit. This also reduces bottoms handling costs and potential downstream processing requirements. The combination of improved accessibility and main- tained activity provided operational flexibility to either (a) increase feed rate while maintaining conversion, (b) reduce catalyst addition rate while maintaining yields, or (c) increase VTB content in the feed blend while maintaining overall performance. The consistency between the BWO trial and Customer Z trial across different refineries, different FCC configura - tions, and different feed slates validates SaFeGuard’s per- formance benefits. The slight variations reflect differences in unit design, operating conditions, and feed characteris- tics, but the overall pattern of increased light products and reduced bottoms is consistent.

PTQ Q2 2026