Subject: Chemical Process Industries 1

Subject code: EHCPI1A

Facilitator: M.Mello

Assessment No.: 04

Total marks:
Due date: 21/06/2024

Surname & Initials Student number Participation (Yes/No)

1.Kganakga DA 222575603 Yes
2.Mahlangu NP 222050616 Yes
3.Mahlangu PL 223000027 Yes
4.Mohahola KR 224118765 Yes
Introduction
Methanol, chemically represented as CH3OH, is the simplest form of alcohol. It is a volatile,
colourless, flammable liquid that is used extensively in numerous industrial applications.
Methanol serves as a crucial chemical feedstock, contributing to the production of a vast
array of products that we use daily. These include plastics, paints, resins, and
pharmaceuticals. Moreover, methanol is increasingly being recognized as a potential fuel and
energy source, offering a cleaner and more sustainable alternative to traditional fossil fuels.
The production of methanol from synthesis gas, commonly referred to as syngas, is a topic of
immense relevance in today’s world. This is particularly true considering the global shift
towards sustainable and renewable sources of energy and chemicals. The process of
converting syngas into methanol is a key aspect of modern industrial chemistry and is central
to the global chemical industry (Spath & Mann, 2000).

Methanol serves as an important primary feedstock chemical for synthesizing a host of

important industrial chemicals. These include acetic acid, which is used in the production of
vinyl acetate monomer (VAM) for paints, adhesives, and coatings; formaldehyde, which is
used in the production of resins and plastics; methyl methacrylate (MMA), which is used in
the production of polymers and plastics; and methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE), which is
used as an octane booster and oxygenate in gasoline. Furthermore, methanol itself can be
used directly as a fuel or in fuel blends, offering a potential solution to the world’s growing
energy needs. The importance of methanol in today’s industrial and energy landscapes cannot
be overstated (Olah, Goeppert & Prakash, 2009).

Background

The production of methanol from syngas has been accomplished using various methods, both
conventional and innovative. Conventional methods typically involve catalytically converting
hydrogen (H2) and carbon monoxide (CO) from coal or natural gas into methanol. This
methanol synthesis process can be conducted using traditional gas-phase processes or the
liquid-phase methanol (LPMEOH™) process developed by Air Products and Chemicals. The
LPMEOH™ process offers advantages such as lower capital costs and higher single-pass
conversion efficiencies. However, newer approaches aim to improve efficiency and
sustainability by focusing on renewable resources like biomass and waste as feedstocks, as
well as developing more efficient and selective catalysts. (Klier, 1982).

The process of producing methanol from syngas involves complex and multi-faceted reaction
mechanisms. It comprises several steps, including the formation of a reactive intermediate, its
reaction with hydrogen to produce methanol, and the regeneration of the catalyst. Typically,
catalyst systems for methanol synthesis consist of copper, zinc oxide, and alumina,
sometimes incorporating magnesia. However, recent advancements in catalyst technology
have led to the development of a novel catalyst consisting of carbon, nitrogen, and platinum,
which offers enhanced activity and selectivity. The synthesis of these catalysts involves
precise combination and treatment of materials, often employing techniques such as
precipitation, calcination, and reduction. Methanol production reactors are typically fixed-bed
reactors operating at high pressures. The synthesis reaction is typically conducted at around
600 to 1,700 psig and 400 to 600°F, depending on the catalyst supplier. These conditions
facilitate the efficient conversion of syngas to methanol while ensuring the catalyst's stability
and longevity. Optimizing these reaction conditions is a crucial area of research in methanol
synthesis to enhance efficiency and sustainability. (Klier, 1982).

In summary, methanol production from syngas involves both conventional and innovative
methods. Conventional approaches use catalytic conversion of hydrogen (H₂) and carbon
monoxide (CO) from coal or natural gas into methanol. The liquid-phase methanol
(LPMEOH™) process offers advantages like lower capital costs and higher conversion
efficiencies. Newer approaches focus on renewable feedstocks (biomass, waste) and more
efficient, selective catalysts. Catalyst systems typically include copper, zinc oxide, and
alumina, but recent advancements introduce novel carbon-nitrogen-platinum catalysts.
Reaction conditions occur in fixed-bed reactors at high pressures and temperatures.
Optimization of these conditions is crucial for efficiency and sustainability (Klier, 1982).

Environmental impact of production of methanol from syngas

The production of methanol from syngas involves significant environmental impacts,
primarily due to the energy-intensive processes and emissions associated with syngas
production and methanol synthesis. Syngas, a mixture of hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and
sometimes carbon dioxide, is typically derived from natural gas, coal, or biomass. The
production process can have various environmental implications, including greenhouse gas
emissions, resource consumption, and waste general

1 Greenhouse gas emission: The development of methanol from syngas can bring about
significant carbon dioxide outflows, particularly when the syngas is gotten from non-
renewable energy sources like coal or flammable gas. Despite the fact that cutting edge
innovations and carbon catch techniques can relieve a portion of these outflows, the general
carbon impression stays a critical concern(netl.doe.gov) (IIETA).

2. Energy Consumption: Over 65% methanol in China is created by a coal-to-methanol

course, which experiences low carbon use, high energy utilization, and serious CO2
discharge. On the other hand, shale gas chemical looping reforming is a good way to make
syngas, but the amount of hydrogen in it is much higher than what is needed to make
methanol. Subsequently, this study proposes an original high-proficient methanol creation
process coordinating coal gasification and shale gas synthetic circling improving and burning
by means of frameworks designing strategy. At the expense of extra shale gas utilization of
0.485 t/t, the coal utilization of the clever cycle is decreased from 1.45 t/t to 0.20 t/t, which
prompts the high exergy proficiency of 71.04% accomplished in the original interaction. Due
to the integration of mass and energy between coal gasification and chemical looping units,
the novel process's abiotic depletion fossil consumption is reduced to 37.2 GJ/t, 41.8% lower
than that of the coal-to-methanol process. The effect proportions of the original cycle/coal-to-
methanol are 0.35, 0.39, 0.53, and 0.59 for the an Earth-wide temperature boost potential,
fermentation potential, eutrophication potential, and photo Chem ozone creation potential,
individually. In conclusion, the coal-based methanol production process's mass-energy
utilization efficiency and emissions of air pollutants can both benefit greatly from the above
coupling process. Luu, Minh Tri, et al. "A comparative study of CO2 utilization in methanol
synthesis with various syngas production technologies." Journal of CO2 Utilization 12
(2015): 62-76

3. Water usage: he substantial amount of water required for methanol production from
syngas is one of its major drawbacks. Particularly in processes involving cooling,
condensing, and other water-dependent operations, the production process may require a lot
of water. This high water use can prompt a few negative natural effects, remembering
expanded pressure for neighborhood water sources, contest with other water needs, and likely
effects on sea-going environments. Liu, Yigang, et al. "Comprehensive analysis of
environmental impacts and energy consumption of biomass-to-methanol and coal-to-
methanol via life cycle assessment." Energy 204 (2020): 117961.

4. Soil Pollution: Catalyst Disposal

5. Spent Catalysts: Removal of spent impetuses, which contain weighty metals, presents
huge soil defilement gambles. These metals can endure in the climate, prompting long haul
soil debasement and possible section into the established pecking order

mechanism of methanol from syngas

The primary methanol synthesis reaction stoichiometries are as follows:

CO+2H2→ CH3OH, ΔH=−90.64 kJ/molCO+2H2→ CH3OH, 𝛥H=−90.64 kJ/mol

CO2+3H2→ CH3OH+H2O, ΔH=−49.45 kJ/mol

The production of methanol from syngas is exothermic. Hence, a low temperature is more
helpful for methanol Notwithstanding, customary modern methanol blend is done under
generally high temperatures and high tensions, so the hypothetical transformation pace of CO
is harmony restricted. The traditional gas-phase synthesis of methanol has been the subject of
numerous reports, and significant efforts have been made to prevent the accumulation of
reaction heat. Typically, the single-pass transformation pace of CO for methanol
amalgamation is still under 20%

This principal thermodynamic balance impediment is hard to survive. During the

hydrogenation of CO2 to produce methanol, a number of side reactions and water are
produced, lowering the purity of crude methanol. The output has a very low concentration of
methanol. Hence, work is expected to refine rough methanol, for example, reusing and
refining, which increments capital and working expenses. Additionally, the most widely used
copper-based catalysts for the production of gas phase methanol typically exhibit thermal
instability. Besides, they are effectively harmed by S, Cl, and different components, requiring
multi-step filtration of the syngas feed. In the event that the response temperature surpasses
the impetus resistance, warm sintering deactivates the impetus. To control the temperature of
the response bed inside a satisfactory reach, the single-pass change rate is kept up with at a
low levelTijm, P.J.A.; Waller, F.J.; Brown, D.M. Methanol technology developments for the
new millennium. Appl. Catal. Gen. 2001, 221, 275–282. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]

1. Process of synthesizing
methanolMarie-Rose, S.; Lemieux,
A.; Lavoie, J.-M. Conversion of
Non-Homogeneous Biomass to
Ultraclean Syngas and Catalytic
Conversion to Ethanol.

figure 1: types of units systems

Most of the time, synthesis gas (syngas) production, conversion, purification, crude methanol
synthesis, and methanol refining are involved in the synthesis of methanol (Figure 1). The
reactor plays a crucial role throughout the methanol synthesis procedure.

Block description used for synthesis of methanol

Name Type description

compressor Compressor compress the gas into 40 bars
reactor Rigorous continues stirred tank reactor with
rate controlled reactions based on the
unknowns
separator Separates gases and liquids
Distillation Separates mixer into its component parts
The syngas is compressed and heated up to the reactor operating temperature and pressure.
Exothermic gas phase reactions are defined in the reactor for synthesis of the methanol.
Zhang, X.; Zhong, L.; Guo, Q.; Fan, H.; Zheng, H.; Xie, K. Influence of the calcination on
the activity and stability of the Cu/ZnO/Al2O3 catalyst in liquid phase methanol synthesis

Development of catalyst

Main catalyst

Fundamental Impetus As of now, there have been many examinations on the low-temperature
fluid stage methanol union interaction, and there are different sorts of impetuses. By and
large, the impetus for the fluid stage methanol process is an indistinguishable composite
framework made out of a carbonylation impetus, hydrogenolysis impetus, dissolvable, and
added substances. Catalytic systems that are homogeneous and heterogeneous can also be
separated from it. Alcohol serves as the solvent in the homogeneous catalysis system, and a
strong alkaline substance acts as the carbonylation catalyst. In heterogeneous synergist
frameworks, Cu impetuses are usually utilized as the super dynamic impetuses and liquor
solvents, or idle solvents are utilized as scattering media

Types of catalyst

1.Carbonylation Catalyst

Made of alkali metal methanolates are currently the most efficient. Sodium methoxide or
potassium methoxide are the most commonly used, taking into account factors such as
activity and price. The high activity and high selectivity of sodium methoxide catalysts are
their most notable advantages. However, there are some drawbacks to sodium methoxide
catalysts, such as their rapid deactivation and the production of undesirable products
(HCOONa, Na2CO3) that could be problematic. As a result, efforts have been made to locate
a carbonylation catalyst that can substitute for sodium methoxide. Carbonylation of alkali
metal formate has a slightly lower catalytic activity than carbonylation of sodium methoxide,
but it is more stable. The most effective catalytic agent is sodium formate [41]. Under
response states of 170 °C, 5 MPa, with a H2 to CO proportion of 2, the single-pass change
pace of CO can be around 84%. The hydrogenation catalyst can regenerate sodium formate
after it has been deactivated, making it a promising carbonylation catalyst. According to
Green and Kiyoshi [42], heterocyclic olefins containing organic nitrogen also function as
catalysts for the carbonylation of methanol. Under the response states of T = 40-80 °C and
DBN (1,5-Diazabicyclo [4.3.0]non-5-ene) as an impetus, the molar yield of methyl formate
came to half to 80%. Because of the great blend cost of DBN, it has not beenmarketed,which
restricts its turn of events and application. CH3ONa and HCOOK, two commonly used
carbonylation catalysts, are sensitive to CO2 and H2O in feed gas. Follow measures of either
can rapidly deactivate the impetuses. The reactions of inactivating sodium methoxide include:
CH3OCOONa (CH3ONa + CO2) (5) CH3ONa+H2O→ CH3OH+NaOH (6) However,
industrial synthesis gas typically consists of CO2 and water, and purification is costly. As a
result, the liquid-phase methanol process has limited industrial applications [47]. Catalyst for
Hydrogenolysis.; Green, M.J. Process for the Production of Formates. European Patent
Office: Munich, Germany, 2020

2. Copper-Based Catalyst

In gas phase medium and low-pressure processes, Cu-based catalysts are the most commonly
used catalysts and the focus of research on methanol synthesis. This kind of impetus has great
action, high methanol selectivity, low working tension, and temperature, so it is a superb
decision for hydrogenation impetuses in fluid stage, low-temperature methanol processes.
Machionna et al. created a catalyst based on copper that was as active and selective as nickel-
based catalysts [55]. Kokubu et al. synthesized methanol in a liquid phase at 120 °C and 5
MPa using Raney Cu, CH3OK, and a solvent [56]. Under 373–453 K and 5 MPa conditions,
researchers at the University of Pittsburgh synthesized methanol with a Cu-Cr2O3/KOCH3
catalyst in a slurry-bed reactor [57]. They all achieved high selectivity and synthesis gas
conversion.
3. Nickel-Based Catalyst

In 1986, Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) [48] reported for the first time that, under
reaction conditions of 373 K and 1–5 MPa, Ni-based catalysts could convert CO in a single
pass to 90 percent. The impetus piece is NaH-RONa-M(OAc)2 (M = Ni, Pd, and Co), in
which sodium alkoxide has CO carbonylation action and follows up on the esterification
response, while the Ni-based impetus has great hydrogenolysis response action. Mahajan et
al. [49,50] integrated methanol utilizing Ni(CO)4/KOCH3/methanol/glyme impetus
framework at 150 °C, 1-3 MPa. The single-pass conversion rate of syngas is greater than
90%, and selectivity to methanol can be greater than 95%. In order to solve the issue of
indirect heat exchange on a large number of surfaces necessary for the reaction mixing
process, an inert coolant that is insoluble in methanol was added to the liquid phase between
0 and 70 °C. Ohyama created two impetuses, NaH/2-methyl-2-butanol/Ni(CH3COO)2 or
Ni(CO)4. Under states of 423 K and 5 MPa, the single-pass transformation pace of CO more
than these impetuses came to 90%, with a methanol selectivity of close to 100%. Ni(CO)4
and [HNi2(CO)6] are toxic, volatile, and flammable intermediates that are easily produced
during the reaction, despite the nickel-based catalyst's high activity and selectivity. As a
result, their research significance and practical value are diminished. Natural nickel/CH3OK
impetus has similar movement and selectivity as the initial two impetuses. The reaction does
not produce any harmful intermediates Notwithstanding, evacuation of remaining water in the
arrangement cycle of natural nickel is confounded, which builds the impetus readiness cost.
Nickel-based catalyst systems are only currently being investigated and developed by Amoco
and Brookhaven National Laboratory.

Catalyst preparation methods

The catalyst's physical and chemical properties, such as crystal size, dispersion degree, and
pore structure, can be directly affected by the catalyst's preparation method. The readiness of
Cu-based impetuses for methanol blend incorporates precipitation, impregnation, ball
processing, and sol-gel techniques.

1. Co-Precipitation Method

The most popular technique for creating copper-based methanol synthesis catalysts is co-
precipitation. Figure 3 illustrates a typical procedure for co-precipitation-based Cu/ZnO
catalyst production. Uniformly distributed metal cations in solution may be quickly solidified
to create organometal/oxide precursors by varying the precipitation temperature and pH level.
A widely distributed and well-mixed solid metal/oxide catalyst is produced following
calcination and reduction. The precipitation method's preparatory steps include aging,
filtering, washing, drying, calcining, granulating, and reducing in addition to precipitation.
The final catalyst's chemical composition and physical structure are impacted by the
adjustments made at each stage.
 Figure 3 above is for preparation of zinc and copper

The control of temperature and pH is crucial to the co-precipitation process. According to

Liu, Yigang, et al. ". the local temperature of the CuO particles would rise during the
exothermic reduction reaction in H2 and cause the aggregation and growth of CuO crystal
particles.

Economic aspects of methanol production from syngas

Methanol production from syngas, or synthesis gas, is a well-established industrial process
with significant economic implications. Syngas, a mixture primarily composed of hydrogen
(H2) and carbon monoxide (CO), is derived from various feedstocks, including natural gas,
coal, biomass, and municipal waste. The economic viability of methanol production hinges
on several critical factors: feedstock availability and cost, process efficiency, market demand,
and environmental regulations

1. Feedstock Availability and Cost

According to Iaquaniello, Gaetano, et al. "Waste-to-methanol: Process and economics

assessment." Bioresource technology 243 (2017): 611-619. One of the main factors that
affect how much it costs to make methanol is the cost of the feedstock. Due to its abundance
and relatively low cost, natural gas is the most common feedstock, particularly in regions
with substantial natural gas reserves like the United States and the Middle East. In any case,
changes in petroleum gas costs can essentially affect the financial achievability of methanol
creation. Conversely, coal and biomass can act as elective feedstocks, particularly in areas
where gaseous petrol is scant or costly. Biomass and waste-inferred syngas offer the extra
advantage of lower carbon impressions, lining up with worldwide patterns towards
supportable and environmentally friendly power sources.

2. Process Efficiency

significantly worked on the productivity of methanol creation from syngas. Current methanol
blend processes work under high-tension and high-temperature conditions, utilizing
progressed impetuses to improve transformation rates and selectivity towards methanol. The
process becomes more economically competitive as a result of these enhancements' reduction
of operational costs and increase in yield. In addition, integrated processes that reduce
production costs by making better use of wasted heat and energy efficiency.
3. Environmental Regulations

The economics of producing methanol are significantly influenced by environmental policies

and regulations. Severe guidelines on ozone depleting substance (GHG) emanations and the
progress towards low-carbon economies drive the reception of cleaner creation advances.
Creating methanol from biomass or using carbon catch and capacity (CCS) innovations can
alleviate ecological effects, possibly fitting the bill for sponsorships or impetuses that work
on monetary reasonability. Furthermore, locales with carbon valuing instruments might find
methanol creation from inexhaustible sources financially invaluable contrasted with
customary petroleum derivative based techniques.

Recent Advances in Methanol Synthesis from Syngas

1. Novel Catalysts

In recent years, researchers have explored innovative catalysts beyond the traditional copper-
zinc oxide-alumina systems. These novel catalysts aim to enhance both activity and
selectivity in the methanol synthesis process. Notably, carbon-nitrogen-platinum catalysts
have shown promising results. The precise design and treatment of these materials play a
crucial role in achieving improved performance.

2. Renewable Feedstocks

Sustainable feedstocks are gaining prominence in methanol production. Biomass-derived

syngas, particularly from lignocellulosic biomass rich in cellulose and hemicellulose, offers
an attractive alternative. Biomethanol produced from such feedstocks has the added benefit of
reducing emissions of nitrogen oxides and carbon dioxide.
3. Plasma-Assisted Synthesis

Cutting-edge methods include plasma-assisted synthesis. Plasma-based reactors enhance

reaction kinetics and allow for lower operating temperatures. Non-thermal plasma promotes
efficient conversion of syngas to methanol.

4. Advanced Reactor Designs

Researchers are exploring advanced reactor designs to improve efficiency. Microchannel

reactors, membrane reactors, and multifunctional reactors are being investigated. Integration
of heat exchangers and separation units optimizes process intensification.

5. In Situ Product Separation

Techniques like reactive distillation and adsorption enable in situ product separation during
methanol synthesis. Continuous removal of methanol from the reaction mixture minimizes
thermodynamic limitations and enhances overall yield.

In summary, recent advancements focus on catalyst innovation, utilization of renewable

feedstocks, and process intensification. As we look to the future, challenges include scaling
up renewable feedstock utilization, addressing catalyst stability, and optimizing reactor
configurations. The transition toward greener methanol production remains a key research
area
Discussion
Stream No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1 11 12 13 14 15
0
Name CO2 H2
inlet inle
t
Mass flow 80.5 8 8 8 8 8 8 11. 8 1 46 46 46 46 46
(t/h) 0 0 0 0 0. 0. 0 0. 1. 7. 7. 7. 7. 7.6
. . . . 5 5 5 0 6 6 6 6
5 5 5 5
Temp (°C) 25 1 3 1 2 1 2 25 1 1 79 98 21 28 23
4 0 3 9 1 8 4 6 0 8 0
0 6 0 7 8
Pres (bar a) 1.01 3 3 9 9 2 2 30. 7 7 78 77 76 75 75.
. . . . 3. 3. 00 8. 8. .0 .2 .3 .8 89
4 2 9 7 3 1 0 0 0 2 9 9
4 5 4 8 1 5 0 0
Vapor 1.00 1 1 1 1 1. 1. 1.0 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1. 1.0
fraction . . . . 0 0 0 0 0 00 00 00 00 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0
Compositio
n (wt%)
MeOH 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 12

H 2O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 7 7

H2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 100 0 1 13 13 13 11 11
0
0
CO2 100 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 75 75 75 58 58
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 0 0 0 0
CO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 12 12 12 12
 N2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

O2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

1. Mass Flow Rates:

The mass flow rates play a crucial role in process engineering. In this case, we have ten
streams, each carrying different components. The total mass flow rate across all streams is
467.6 t/h.

Here’s a summary: Streams 1 to 9 have a consistent mass flow rate of 80.5 t/h.

Stream 10 deviates from the pattern with a mass flow rate of 11.0 t/h.

2. Temperature:

Temperature influences reaction kinetics, phase behavior, and overall process efficiency.
Let’s explore the temperature data:

Stream 1: Inlet temperature of 25°C

Stream 2: Highest temperature at 140°C

Stream 3: 30°C

Stream 4: 136°C

Stream 5: 29°C

Stream 6: 110°C

Stream 7: 28°C

Stream 8: 25°C

Stream 9: 147°C

Stream 10: 168°C

Stream 11: 79°C

Stream 12: 98°C

Stream 13: 210°C

Stream 14: Highest outlet temperature at 288°C

3. Pressure:

Pressure affects phase transitions, equilibrium, and system stability. Let’s examine the
pressure data:

Stream 1: 1.01 bar absolute

Stream 2: 3.44 bar absolute

Stream 3: 3.25 bar absolute

Stream 4: 9.94 bar absolute

Stream 5: 9.78 bar absolute

Stream 6: 23.31 bar absolute (highest pressure)

Stream 7: 23.15 bar absolute

Stream 8: 30.00 bar absolute (highest pressure)

Stream 9: 78.00 bar absolute

Stream 10: 78.00 bar absolute

Stream 11: 78.00 bar absolute

Stream 12: 77.22 bar absolute

Stream 13: 76.39 bar absolute

Stream 14: 75.89 bar absolute

4. Composition (wt%):

The composition reveals the presence of various components in each stream. Let’s break it
down:

MeOH (Methanol): Only in Stream 14, with a weight percentage of 12%.

H2O (Water): Present in Streams 13 and 14, both at 7%.

H2 (Hydrogen): Streams 8 and 10 contain 100% hydrogen.

CO2 (Carbon Dioxide): Found in Streams 1 to 9, with varying weight percentages (58% to
100%).

CO (Carbon Monoxide): Present in Streams 11, 12, and 13, each at 12%.

N2 (Nitrogen): Not detected in any stream.

O2 (Oxygen): Absent in all streams

Methanol Production Process: A Brief Overview

Feedstock Selection:

Methanol is a vital chemical used as a building block for various products, including plastics,
paints, and synthetic fibers.The modern method of methanol production primarily relies on
natural gas (mainly methane) as the primary feedstock.

Water (H2O) is another essential ingredient.

Steam Reforming (Syngas Production):

The first major step is steam reforming, where natural gas reacts with steam (H2O) in the
presence of a catalyst. The catalyst promotes the cracking and reforming of methane (CH4)
and water into hydrogen (H2) and carbon monoxide (CO):CH4 +H2 O→CO+3H2

This mixture of hydrogen and carbon monoxide is known as syngas.

Methanol Synthesis:

In the next step, syngas undergoes methanol synthesis.

The reaction occurs at elevated temperatures (210-270°C) and pressures (5-10 MPa) in the
presence of a suitable catalyst (often copper-based).

The key reaction:CO+2H2 →CH3 OH

Methanol (CH3OH) forms as a liquid product.

Methanol Purification:

After synthesis, crude methanol contains impurities. Purification involves distillation and
other separation techniques to obtain high-purity methanol. The final product is colourless
and has a faint odor.

Mass Flow Rates:

Streams differ in mass flow rates due to process design, equipment limitations, or specific
requirements. Stream 10 deviates from the standard 80.5 t/h, possibly serving a different
purpose or downstream application.
Temperature and Pressure:

Varying temperatures and pressures optimize different reactions.

Stream 2 (140°C) likely involves a high-temperature reaction.

Stream 14 (288°C) represents the highest outlet temperature.

Stream 7 (23.31 bar absolute) operates at high pressure.

Composition:Each stream’s composition reflects the specific feedstock and process

conditions. Stream 8 (pure hydrogen) likely serves as a reactant, while others contain varying
amounts of CO2, H2O, and other components.

References

1. Bahadori, A., Luu, M.T., & Abbas, A. (2015). A comparative study of CO2 utilization
in methanol synthesis with various syngas production technologies. Journal of CO2
Utilization, 12, pp. 62-76.
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212670815000128]
2. Catizzone, E., Freda, C., & Giuliano, A. (2020). Techno-economic assessment of bio-
syngas production for methanol synthesis: A focus on the water–gas shift and carbon
capture sections. Bioengineering, 7(3), p. 70.
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7441416/]
3. EP 0104875 - Green, M.J. Process for the Production of Formates. European Patent
Office: Munich, Germany [https://worldwide.espacenet.com/EP-0104875-B1.html]
4. Fujimoto, K., & Hu, B. (2008). High-performance Cu/MgO–Na catalyst for methanol
synthesis via ethyl formate. Appl. Catal. A Gen., 346(1-2), 174-178.
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0926860X07005333]
5. Giuliano, A., Freda, C., & Catizzone, E. (2020). Techno-economic assessment of bio-
syngas production for methanol synthesis: A focus on the water–gas shift and carbon
capture sections. Bioengineering, 7(3), p. 70.
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7441416/]
6. Green, M.J. (1984). Process for the Production of Formates. European Patent Office:
Munich, Germany [https://worldwide.espacenet.com/EP-0104875-B1.html]
7. Green, M.J. (2020). Process for the Production of Formates. European Patent Office:
Munich, Germany [https://worldwide.espacenet.com/EP-0104875-B1.html]
8. He, L., Liu, H., Xiao, C., & Kou, Y. (2008). Liquid-phase synthesis of methyl formate
via heterogeneous carbonylation of methanol over a soluble copper nanocluster
catalyst. Green Chem., 10(5), 619-622.
[https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2008/gm/b800242g]
9. IntechOpen - Lee S., & Park J.Y.(2011). Conversion of Non-Homogeneous Biomass
to Ultraclean Syngas and Catalytic Conversion to Ethanol
[https://www.intechopen.com/books/biofuel-s-engineering-process-technology/
conversion-of-non-homogeneous-biomass-to-ultraclean-syngas-and-catalytic-
conversion-to-ethanol]
10. Klier, K. (1982). Methanol synthesis. Catalysis Reviews: Science and Engineering,
24(2), 141-202.[https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/01614948208080126]
11. Luu, M.T., Milani, D., Bahadori, A., & Abbas, A.(2015). A comparative study of
CO2 utilization in methanol synthesis with various syngas production
technologies.Journal of CO2 Utilization, 12, pp. 62-76.
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2212670815000128]
12. .Mahajan, D., Sapienza, R.S., Slegeir, W.A., & O'Hare T.E.(1990). Homogeneous
Catalyst Formulations for Methanol Production.U.S. Patent and Trademark Office:
Alexandria, Egypt [https://patents.justia.com/patent/4992480]
13. Mahajan, D., Sapienza, R.S., Slegeir, W.A., & O'Hare T.E.(1986). Low Temperature
Catalysts for Methanol Production.U.S. Patent and Trademark Office: Alexandria,
Egypt [https://patents.justia.com/patent/4619946]
14. Olah G.A., Goeppert A., & Prakash G.K.S.(2009). Beyond oil and gas: the methanol
economy.Wiley-VCH
[https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/book/10.1002/9783527621659]
15. Spath P.L., & Mann M.K.(2000). Life cycle assessment of a natural gas combined-
cycle power generation system.National Renewable Energy Laboratory
[https://www.nrel.gov/docs/fy00osti/22250.pdf]
16. Timilsina M.S., Chaudhary Y., Shah A.K., Lohani S.P., Bhandari R., & Uprety B.
(2024). Syngas composition analysis for waste to methanol production: Techno-
economic assessment using machine learning and Aspen plus Renewable Energy,
228(p120574)
[https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960148120309644]