Active carbon catalyst for heavy oil upgrading

Liquefaction of Municipal Waste Plastics over Acidic and Nonacidic Catalysts

“…This hydrogen quenching reaction produces the higher middle distillate yield and lower gas and naphtha yield [37]. AC catalysts have also been found to have a better ability to restrict the coke formation and show high activity for the removal of such impurities as sulfur and heavy metals during hydrocracking of heavy oil [32]. Even though no data are available in the literature, it can be suggested that AC as the catalyst is well suited to upgrade the heavy oil derived from MWP:…”

“…The use of activated carbons as a catalyst support offers some advantages over the more traditional acidic oxide supports, such as stability in acidic and basic media, ease of recovery of precious metals supported on them, and the possibility of tailoring their properties to specific needs [29,31]. It has been reported that metal-supported activated carbon (M-AC) catalysts have shown excellent cracking activity in addition to hydrogenation, on petroleum-derived heavy oils and some coal model compounds [32][33][34][35][36][37][38]. The catalytic effects of M-AC catalysts in hydrocracking of vacuum gas oil have been explained by a radical mechanism.…”

Process Intensification of Upgradation of Crude Oil and Vacuum Residue by Hydrodynamic Cavitation and Microwave Irradiation

“…The AC when used as a catalyst for hydrocracking of Middle Eastern VR had been shown to have affinity for the heavy hydrocarbon compounds [42]. It also shows selective adsorption of asphaltenes and exhibits an ability of restricting coke formation during the hydrocracking process.…”

Impacts of vanadium and coke deposits on the CO2 gasification of nickel catalysts supported on activated carbon from petroleum coke

“…In particular, carbon-based catalysts are of interest in terms of a less expensive feedstock, such as petroleum coke that is a by-product of the upgrading process, and spent catalyst disposal [4]. Several studies of carbon-supported catalysts showed higher than or comparable hydrodesulfurization (HDS) and hydrodemetalization (HDM) activity to alumina-supported catalysts [4][5][6][7]. The lower metal-to-support interaction on carbon favors the formation of Type II (fully sulfided) active phases (e.g.…”

“…Ni-Mo-S) compared to the less active Type I (partially sulfided) phases formed on alumina. In addition, catalyst deactivation was slower on carbon-supported catalysts because of lower coke formation [7]. The spent carbon catalysts can be gasified to produce synthesis gas (syngas) and an ash from which the metals can be reclaimed through lower cost processes such as acid-base leaching [8].…”