PTQ Q3 2024 Issue

Key trial conditions and results

1.4

SSG II

SSG X2

1.2

Comparison summary Additive addition rate, lb/day Additive concentration, wt% Feed sulphur, wt% Slurry sulphur, wt%

SSG II

SSGX2

Delta Delta %

333

295

-38

-11%

1.0

0.8

3.30

3.05

-0.25

-8%

0.6

0.22 0.73 0.39 0.81

0.27 0.94 0.43 0.83

0.05 0.21

24% 30% 10%

0.4

0.2

Ecat Fe, wt%

0 0 6 7

Flue gas O₂, vol% Regenerator temp, F Riser outlet temp, F Uncontrolled SOx, ppm Controlled SOx, ppm SOx reduction, % Pick-up factor (PUF), lb/lb

2% 0% 1%

0.0

Time (days)

1,334 1,005

1,340 1,012

Feed sulphur

Slurry sulphur

235

329

40%

Figure 3 FCC feed and slurry sulphur

21 91 18

22 93 26

1 3 8

3% 3%

(such as 5% H₂/N₂) was used to study the sulphur release of a sulphated sample. The effluent gas was sampled at desired time intervals and analysed by a flame photometric detector (FPD). These results indicate SSG X2 exhibits higher SOx uptake ability in activity evaluation. In breakthrough or one-pass SOx pick-up testing, the fresh and steamed SSG X2 demonstrated a 42% and 50% increase in SOx uptake ability, respectively, compared to SSG II. Additionally, a thermogravimetric analyser (TGA) coupled with a mass spectrometer (MS) was employed to conduct multi-cycle SOx pick-up and release testing. Results revealed a 19% and 32% enhancement in SOx uptake for SSG X2 com- pared to SSG II (see Figure 2 ). Regarding sulphur release, both additives displayed similar onset temperatures and release profiles (Figure 1). These laboratory findings suggest SSG X2 exhibits supe- rior SOx reduction capabilities compared to SSG II. Refinery commercial trial Overview In this case study, SSG X2 was used at a US Gulf Coast refinery. The typical feed sulphur is 0.26 wt%, and the typi- cal slurry sulphur is 0.84 wt%. The refinery uses a dedicated AAS to optimise the daily addition rate of SOx reduction additive to control the FCC flue gas SOx emissions. The trial compared the performance of SSG X2 and SSG II. The trial was closely monitored by the refinery and Johnson Matthey

44%

Table 2

team. A comparison of plant data for the different operating periods was completed. In addition, a comparison of Ecat samples for the different operating periods was completed. The trial operating periods were:  Base line: SSG II

v New additive: SSG X2 * w Back to baseline: SSG II. * The SSG X2 trial period was five months.

Trial results FCC feed sulphur varied between 0.22 and 0.27 wt%, and the slurry sulphur varied between 0.73 and 0.94 wt% (see Figure 3 ). At similar operating conditions, SSG X2 con- trolled the FCC flue gas SOx emissions using 11% less additive (see Figure 4 ), compared to SSG II. Table 2 summarises the key trial conditions and results. At the same slurry sulphur level, SSG X2 demonstrated the potential to control FCC flue gas SOx emissions using up to 25% less additive (see Figure 5 ), compared to SSG II. SOx pick-up factor (PUF) quantifies the efficiency of SOx removal. It is defined as the amount of SOx removed per day per pound of SOx reduction additive added per day. SOx PUF is different for each FCC unit and depends on

650

45 50

300 400 200 100 500 600 700 800

SSG II

SSG X2

SSG II

SSG X2

550

450

350

250

15 10

150

0.40 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.90 1.00 1.10 0

6/1 7/1 7/31 8/30 9/29 10/29 11/28 12/28 5 0

Slurry sulphur (wt%)

Figure 4 FCC flue gas SOx emissions and SOx reduction additive injection rate

Figure 5 SOx reduction additives addition rate vs slurry sulphur

PTQ Q3 2024