Hydrogen Sulfide Poisoning of Nitrided and Carbided Iron Catalysts in the Fischer-Tropsch Synthesis

Development of sulfur tolerant catalysts for the synthesis of high quality transportation fuels

“…Moreover, Davis and his coworkers [5] have recently reported that the FTS activity of Fe catalysts is comparable or higher than that of Co catalysts when they are compared at temperatures that produce low levels of CH 4 and at relatively high space velocities. In 1960s, Anderson and coworkers [6][7][8][9] investigated the sulfur poisoning of the Fe-based catalysts and effects of the activation method and the additive on the deactivation rate of the catalysts using the CO-rich syngas. They found that nitrided and CO-pretreated catalysts show lower deactivation rates in the presence of the gaseous H 2 S than H 2 -pretreated catalyst [8].…”

“…In 1960s, Anderson and coworkers [6][7][8][9] investigated the sulfur poisoning of the Fe-based catalysts and effects of the activation method and the additive on the deactivation rate of the catalysts using the CO-rich syngas. They found that nitrided and CO-pretreated catalysts show lower deactivation rates in the presence of the gaseous H 2 S than H 2 -pretreated catalyst [8]. Later the addition of large amounts of Mn oxide (MnO) is found to improve the sulfur resistance much more effectively in both the FTS reactions using the CO-rich and the H 2 -rich syngas [10].…”

Effect of iron and sulfur on thermal regeneration of GAC

“…Phase‐stability diagrams for Fe–H 2 S 32 – 34 show that at 850°C, solid FeS will be stable when the partial pressure of H 2 S is >10 –3 atmospheres (0.1 kPa). Moreover, a surface layer of FeS can form on solid‐phase iron oxide at H 2 S concentrations as low as 10 mg/L by volume 11 , 13 . Physical blockage by a surface layer of S has been explored as a mechanism for poisoning metal catalysts 11 , 35 .…”

Cobalt‐Iron‐Manganese Catalysts for the Conversion of End‐of‐Life‐Tire‐Derived Syngas into Light Terminal Olefins

“…However, making use of ELT‐derived syngas poses serious challenges to a FTS process. Due to the vulcanization process, ELTs contain large amounts of S (typically 1.2–1.8 wt.%), which has long been known as a poison for both Fe and Co FTS catalysts even when present in concentrations as low 1–2 mg m −3 . Hence, the required clean‐up of ELT‐derived syngas to yield an appropriately low S content would become expensive.…”

“…Due to the vulcanization process, ELTs contain large amountso fS(typically 1.2-1.8 wt.%), [18] which has long been known as ap oison for both Fe and Co FTS catalysts even when present in concentrations as low 1-2mgm À3 . [19][20][21][22][23][24] Hence, the required clean-up of ELT-derived syngas to yield an appropriatelyl ow Sc ontentw ould become expensive. In contrast, early reports [25,26] claim that the addition of S( in combination with alkali elements) to catalysts based on Group 8m etals lengthenedl ifetime, increased olefin content and reduced the production of high boilinghydrocarbons, enhancing both activity and selectivity of the treated catalysts.…”