Next generation of polyolefin plastics: improving sustainability with existing and novel feedstock base

Abstract

In this account, we present an overview of existing and emerging olefin production technologies, comparing them from the standpoint of carbon intensity, efficiency, feedstock type and availability. Olefins are indispensable feedstock for manufacture of polyolefin plastics and other base chemicals. Current methods of olefin production are associated with significant CO2 emissions and almost entirely rely of fossil feedstock. In order to assess potential alternatives, technical and economic maturity of six principal olefin production routes are compared in this paper. Coal (brown), oil and gas (grey), biomass (green), recycled plastic (pink) as well as carbon capture and storage (purple) and carbon capture and utilization (blue) technologies are considered. We conclude that broader adoption of biomass based “green” feedstock and introduction of recycled plastic based olefins may lead to reduced carbon footprint, however adoption of best available technologies and introduction of electrocracking to existing fossil-based “grey” olefin manufacture process can be the way to achieve highest impact most rapidly. Adoption of Power-to-X approaches to olefins starting from biogenic or atmospheric CO2 and renewable H2 can lead to ultimately carbon–neutral “blue” olefins in the long term, however substantial development and additional regulatory incentives are necessary to make the solution economically viable. Article highlights In this account, we introduce a color coding scheme to differentiate and compare carbon intensity and feedstock types for some of the main commercial and emerging olefin production routes. Most viable short term improvements in CO2 emissions of olefin production will be achieved by discouraging “brown” coal based production and improving efficiency of “grey” oil and gas based processes. Gradual incorporation of green and recycled feedstock to existing olefin production assets will allow to achieve substantial improvements in carbon efficiency in longer term.

Bioglycerol-to-Propylene Routes: From Fundamental Catalysis to Process Design and Marketing

“…To the best of our knowledge, there are no techno-economic or environmental studies specifically focused on the evaluation of GTP routes technology. The current literature deals instead with the assessment of routes integrating olefin production from industrial and urban organic wastes or general biomass, as a wider context. ,− This might be related to the major progress in research and technology made in the field of these processes. − ,,− Some of these concepts have already entered the testing stage or industrial development; i) SABIC technology (The Netherlands and Saudi Arabia) is based on the cofeeding of “second generation” animal fats and vegetable oils with petroleum feedstocks, , ii) The BRASKEM approach (Brazil) involves sugar cane fermentation to bioethanol followed by dehydration to bioethylene and further dimerization and metathesis to biopropylene, , iii) The MITSUI chemical route (Japan) involves second generation biomass fermentation to biobutanol, followed by dehydration to biobutylene and metathesis with ethylene to produce green propylene, for example. Furthermore, the most developed concept, which is employed by many companies (e.g., ExxonMobil, TotalEnergies, and Shell Global Solutions) involves the initial gasification of second-generation biomass and urban wastes to produce syngas, followed by FTS of methanol.…”

“…Within this aforementioned broad context, numerous specific studies have focused on the development of more eco-friendly technologies for producing sustainable C 2 –C 4 olefins as an alternative to fossil-based ones or ultimately to introduce further flexibility in traditional technologies. There are such examples as the pyrolysis of industrial-urban wastes, − biomass fermentation to bioethanol followed by subsequent dehydration, dimerization and metathesis to propylene, − biomass liquification to crude bio-oil followed by hydrotreatment and cracking to olefins, ,,, or biomass gasification to syngas followed by Fischer–Tropsch (FT) synthesis, and methanol-to-propylene (MTP) or methanol-to-olefins (MTO). ,− …”

“…Within this aforementioned broad context, numerous specific studies have focused on the development of more eco-friendly technologies for producing sustainable C 2 −C 4 olefins as an alternative to fossil-based ones or ultimately to introduce further flexibility in traditional technologies. There are such examples as the pyrolysis of industrial-urban wastes, 18−20 biomass fermentation to bioethanol followed by subsequent dehydration, dimerization and metathesis to propylene, 21−23 biomass liquification to crude biooil followed by hydrotreatment and cracking to olefins, 20,22,24,25 or biomass gasification to syngas followed by Fischer−Tropsch (FT) synthesis, and methanol-to-propylene (MTP) or methanol-to-olefins (MTO). 22,26−29 More recently, novel biobased routes such as bioglycerol-topropylene (GTP) catalysis (Scheme 1) are attracting a great deal of research interest focusing on the following: i) finding a mass application for the widely available crude bioglycerol, which is nonetheless largely considered a waste byproduct in the global biorefinery industry, 30−32 and ii) introducing a new biofeedstock for the global polyolefin manufacturing industry, which is heavily exposed to the so-called "propylene gap"-excess of market demand over its real production.…”

Carbon Dioxide Capture, Utilization, and Sequestration: Current Status, Challenges, and Future Prospects for Global Decarbonization

“…(g) ICCU-Dry Reforming: Prospects: Green Olefins Production: ICCU-dry reforming provides a sustainable pathway to olefin production, aligning with the broader goal of transitioning toward eco-friendly plastics and chemicals. 377 Waste Utilization: The utilization of waste feedstocks, including industrial flue gases and carbon-containing waste streams, offers a promising avenue for waste reduction and circularity.…”

Towards high-quality petrochemical feedstocks from mixed plastic packaging waste via advanced recycling: The past, present and future

“…It can be estimated that the global emission of steam cracking accounts for more than 300 million tons of CO 2 per year [327]. Furthermore, around 30% of the direct CO 2 emissions of the chemical industry stem from olefin production [328]. Around 90% of these emissions can be directly related to the heating of steam cracking furnaces which relies on combustion of a natural gas/hydrogen mixture [329].…”