Abstract
A comparative evaluation of alternative methane reforming processes as an option to steam reforming was performed by carrying out simulations of operations in a fixed bed reactor with a Ni (4.8 wt.%/γ-Al2O3) catalyst at 1023 K under 1.0 bar. Methane reforms, including processing with carbon dioxide (DRM, CH4/CO2), autothermal reform (ATRM, CH4/H2O/O2), and combined reform (CRM, CH4/CO2/H2O/O2) had their operations predicted based on experimental data developed to represent their kinetic behavior, formalized with mechanisms and parametric quantifications. The performance of fixed bed reactor operations for methane conversions occurred with different reaction rates in the three alternative processes, and comparatively the orders of magnitude were 102, 10−1, and 10−4 in CRM, ATRM, and DRM, respectively. According to each process, the methane conversions were oriented towards the predominant productions of hydrogen or carbon monoxide, indicating the kinetic selectivities of H2, 86.1% and CO, 59.2% in CRM and DRM, respectively. Considering the possibility of catalyst deactivation by carbon deposition, its predicted yields are low due to the slow stages of its production and due to its simultaneous consumption through interactions with O2, CO2, and H2O, reflecting favorably in additional productions of H2 and CO.
Highlights
Different reform technologies’ studies and their combinations converge on the production of different intermediate chemicals or final products such as hydrocarbons, methanol, natural gasoline, and diesel oil [1,2,3,4]
Predictions were made for methane reform operations, characterized as dry reform (DRM), autothermal reform (ATRM), and combined reform (CRM), constituting alternatives to steam reform of methane
Simulations were developed using a heterogeneous model for operations in a fixed bed reactor compacted with the catalyst Ni (4.8 wt.%)/γ-Al2O3 at 1023 K and 1.0 bar, considering the reactor fed with CH4/CO2 in Dry methane reform (DRM), CH4/H2O/O2 in ATRM, and CH4/CO2/H2O/O2 in Combined methane reform (CRM)
Summary
Different reform technologies’ studies and their combinations converge on the production of different intermediate chemicals or final products such as hydrocarbons, methanol, natural gasoline, and diesel oil [1,2,3,4]. Due to its characteristics, is the process most employed to convert natural gas into synthesis gas to meet the demand for synthetic liquid fuels via GTL (gas–to–liquids) technologies. This route produces a synthesis gas with high H2/CO ratios (3:1), indicated as feed for ammonia synthesis processes, oil refining (hydrotreating, hydrocracking, etc.), and hydrocarbon synthesis via Fischer–Tropsch, in addition to the hydrogen production itself. Reforms other than steam reforming, here called alternatives, have the potential to produce synthesis gas with different compositions in terms of the H2/CO ratio For each of these processes, aspects that impact its performance can be highlighted. Reactions with H2O, CO2, and O2, characterizing the SRM, DRM, and POM reforms, respectively, may present advantages and disadvantages related mainly to the reaction kinetics and thermality, coke deposition, and intrinsic catalyst regeneration
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
