ISSUE 84 SPRING 2015

ALBEMARLE’S NEW STRUCTURE TO BOOST GROWTH

AND PERFORMANCE
NEW FCC-PT CATALYSTS PROVIDE MORE FLEXIBILITY
TO MEET VARYING DEMANDS
HOW ALBEMARLE’S NEW FCC PROCESS SIMULATOR
PROVIDES REFINERS WITH ACTIONABLE ADVICE

ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 1

 www.albemarle.com

INSIDE THIS ISSUE…

4 NEWS FROM ALBEMARLE
6 CLEAN FUELS TECHNOLOGIES: OPPORTUNITY KNOCKS
8 ACTION™ FCC CATALYST SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVES REFINER’S PROFITABILITY
10 IMPROVING FCC CATALYST SELECTION BY ADJUSTING LABORATORY DATA
13 MAKE THE BEST DECISIONS ABOUT CATALYST TESTING
16 DEVISING THE BEST FCC SOLUTIONS
18 COMBUSTION PROMOTERS ON CALL
20 REACHING FOR THE STARS
22 FLEXIBILITY FOR FCC PRETREATMENT
25 ALBEMARLE’S FCC PRETREATMENT (FCC-PT) SOLUTIONS FOR CUSTOMERS’ CHALLENGES

EVENTS DIARY 2015 Managing editor

Chris Dean
E: chris.dean@albemarle.com
June
Correspondence and distribution for Catalyst Courier
9–11 12th Annual Global Petrochemicals Conference, Dusseldorf, Chris Dean
Germany Albemarle Corporation
Baton Rouge Tower, 451 Florida Street
14–19 NAM24 Pittsburgh, PA, USA Baton Rouge, Louisiana 70801, USA
www.albemarle.com
E: catmaster@albemarle.com
October
4–7 AFPM Q&A and Technology Forum, New Orleans, LA, USA For North and South America, contact:
Albemarle Corporation
28–29 Asian Downstream Week, Singapore T: +1 281 480 4747
E: catmaster@albemarle.com
November For Europe, the Middle East, CIS and the Indian subcontinent, contact:
17–19 ERTC 20th Annual Meeting, Rome, Italy Albemarle BV
T: +31 20 6347300
E: catmaster@albemarle.com
December
For Asia Pacific, contact:
7–9 North Africa Downstream Summit, Cairo, Egypt Albemarle Chemicals (Shanghai) Co., Ltd
9–10 Bottom of the Barrel Technology Conference, Abu Dhabi, UAE T: +86 21 6103 8666
E: catmaster@albemarle.com

The information presented herein is believed to be accurate and reliable but

is presented without guarantee or responsibility on the part of Albemarle
Corporation and its subsidiaries. It is the responsibility of the user to comply with
all applicable laws and regulations and to provide for a safe workplace. The user
should consider any health or safety hazards or other information contained
herein only as a guide, and should take those precautions which are necessary or
prudent to instruct employees and to develop work practice procedures in order
to promote a safe work environment. Further, nothing contained herein shall be
taken as an inducement or recommendation to manufacture or use any of the
herein materials or processes in violation of existing or future patent. No part of
this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted
in any form or any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or
otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner.

Copyright Albemarle Corporation, 2015

2 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84

 SILVIO GHYOOT
PRESIDENT, REFINING SOLUTIONS

In times of market volatility, companies need a more focused approach. Recognizing

this, we have realigned our businesses and strategic assets to help accelerate
growth, boost performance levels and create greater synergies. For example, our
reorganization of Refining Solutions, which now consists of the Heavy Oil Upgrading
and Clean Fuels Technologies businesses, will enable us to deliver a robust portfolio of
catalyst solutions across the entire refinery process.

Volatility is just one of the factors that the industry is currently facing. In this issue of
Catalyst Courier, we examine this and a range of other business and technical themes.

Our first article (page 6) focuses on clean fuels technology and the industry’s response
to market changes such as growing demand for transportation fuels and ever-tighter
fuel standards that have contributed to expansion of the global hydroprocessing
catalyst market.

We consider the shift in refinery economics and operating objectives that have
resulted from North America’s tight oil revolution: the decrease in gasoline demand,
new Renewable Fuel Standard requirements and the USA’s new position as an
exporter of refining products (page 8).

We also look at the limitations of laboratory testing for refinery catalysts with a low
zeolite to matrix (Z/M) ratio (page 10). This shows how carefully conducted back-to-
back tests with low(er) Z/M ratio catalysts can overcome coke artifacts and establish
their true performance, thereby enabling refiners to increase cracking margins.

Our penultimate article (page 22) highlights the importance of flexibility for refiners
that need to produce ultra-low-sulfur gasoline and increase diesel fuel output. To
achieve this FCC pretreatment units need robust and reliable catalyst systems that
provide high activity and good stability. We look at four new catalysts that offer
flexibility against varying commercial demands and feedstock compositions.

Across the industry, operators are facing commercial headwinds, but Albemarle is
responding strongly to these challenges. We are also looking to a more positive future
as we explore plans for expansion in the Middle East.

Whatever the future holds, Albemarle is ready to help its customers transform
challenges into opportunities.

ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 3

 NEWS
FROM ALBEMARLE
ORGANIZATIONAL REALIGNMENT
TO BOOST GROWTH AND
PERFORMANCE
Albemarle has realigned its global
businesses and strategic assets into
a more market-focused structure
in a bid to speed up growth, boost
performance levels and create
greater synergies throughout the
corporation.
The new structure consists of three
global business units: Chemetall
Surface Treatment, Refining
Solutions, and Performance
Chemicals. Chemetall will continue
to supply specialty chemicals
with a focus on processes for the
surface treatment of metals and
plastics. Refining Solutions consists
of the Heavy Oil Upgrading
4 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84
and Clean Fuels Technologies
businesses, and will deliver a
robust portfolio of catalyst
solutions that apply to the entire
refinery process. Performance
Chemicals will combine the
lithium, aluminum alkyls and
derivative catalysts businesses
with the existing Performance
Chemicals unit.
Albemarle has put a senior
leadership team in place to head
the new departments, which
will report directly to President
and Chief Executive Officer Luke
Kissam. The restructuring became
effective at the end of Q1 2015.
ALBEMARLE
AND ASOS
COLLABORATE
ON NEW FCC
CATALYST
FACILITY
Albemarle Corporation has entered
into discussions with Middle Eastern
partner Ali & Sons Oilfield Supplies &
Services LLC (ASOS) on constructing a
manufacturing facility for FCC catalysts
and additives in Abu Dhabi, UAE.
Abu Dhabi is the ideal site for
the proposed facility because it
would enable Albemarle to meet
rapidly growing regional demand
for refinery catalyst solutions and
provide unmatched security of supply
for its customers in the Middle East.
The proposed facility would
manufacture Albemarle’s value-
adding AFX® catalysts, which
promote increased propylene yield
from resid feedstocks.
The plans for the project follow
Albemarle’s successful delivery of
catalysts for the startup of the FCC
unit in Takreer’s newly expanded
Ruwais refinery in Abu Dhabi.
ABU DHABI IS THE IDEAL
SITE FOR THE PROPOSED
FACILITY BECAUSE
IT WOULD ENABLE
ALBEMARLE TO MEET
RAPIDLY GROWING
REGIONAL DEMAND
FOR REFINERY CATALYST
SOLUTIONS.
NICHE CATALYST TO JOIN THE STARS HYDROPROCESSING
Albemarle is gearing up to launch
ALLY UOP HITS A
the latest, leading-edge addition
CENTURY
to its high-activity STARS® catalyst
lineup. The catalyst, Ketjenfine ®
(KF) 870, which is going through
the final stages of pilot plant
testing, is expected to address a
niche in medium-to-high-pressure
hydrocracking pretreatment
operations.
“Extensive testing has shown
that this catalyst is setting new
benchmarks in reducing the
nitrogen content in hydrocracking
ALBEMARLE AND
UTRECHT UNIVERSITY
STRENGTHEN
PARTNERSHIP
EELCO VOGT
Dr Eelco Vogt, Albemarle’s research
and development adviser, has
become a professor of refinery
catalysis at Utrecht University, the
Netherlands. Vogt will research
techniques for improving the
sustainability of refinery processes
through the development of
advanced catalysts.
“The appointment of Dr Vogt is part Solutions Research and Technology
of Utrecht University’s strategic
theme for promoting sustainability
in the broad area of energy
conversion, including the oil refining of catalysis so that we can develop
industry,” said Professor Bert
Weckhuysen, Utrecht University.
pretreatment feed to boost overall
hydrocracking conversion and
performance,” said Edwin Berends,
vice president of Albemarle’s
Refining Solutions Research and
Technology group.
This new STARS technology has
been developed by Albemarle and
Nippon Ketjen, and should be rolled
out worldwide during the second
half of this year. The catalyst will be
available through Albemarle, Nippon
Ketjen and the UOP–Albemarle
Hydroprocessing Alliance.
“Dr Vogt will be a valuable
asset to the university’s
catalysis research program.”
“Albemarle has been fostering
a collaborative partnership
with the catalysis researchers
at Utrecht University for several
years,” added Edwin Berends, vice
president of Albemarle’s Catalyst
group. “With this new chair
appointment, we hope to increase
our fundamental understanding
better technologies that will
promote more sustainable use of
scarce resources.”
UOP LLC, one half of a hydroprocessing
partnership with Albemarle, has
celebrated its 100-year anniversary.
UOP, a Honeywell company, was
established to commercialize the first
conversion technology for upgrading
crude oil. It managed to increase
the amount of gasoline that could
be derived from crude oil fourfold,
thereby creating the foundations
for modern oil refining. Today, a
century later, 31 of the 36 refining
technologies applied worldwide use
UOP’s products.
In 2006, Albemarle and UOP
joined forces to create the
Hydroprocessing Alliance, which
has since supplied technology
and catalysts to about half
the world’s hydroprocessing
projects. The Alliance combines
the strengths of UOP as a leading
developer of hydrotreating and
hydrocracking process technology
and hydrocracking catalysts, and
Albemarle as a leading developer
and supplier of innovative refinery
hydrotreating catalysts and
solutions.
“Albemarle congratulates UOP on
a successful 100 years in business
and looks forward to continuing
to jointly build an even stronger
technology leadership in the coming
years through the UOP–Albemarle
Hydroprocessing Alliance,” says
Edwin van Rooijen, alliance director,
clean fuel technologies, Albemarle.
ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 5
 SPECIAL FEATURE
CLEAN FUELS TECHNOLOGIES:
OPPORTUNITY KNOCKS
Albemarle is ready to take advantage of anticipated
market changes.
With its diverse portfolio
of catalyst solutions,
Albemarle is poised
to take advantage of
the growing global
hydroprocessing catalyst
market, which is being
driven by steady growth in
demand for transportation
fuels and increasingly
stringent fuel standards.
6 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84
Market reports forecast that global
demand for transportation fuel will
continue to grow by between 1 and
2% annually. However, this growth is
not uniform; it is fastest in developing
economies such as Asia and India. As
refiners are continuously investing
to extract more clean transportation
fuels from every barrel of crude and
demand is shifting to the developing
regions, Albemarle’s Clean Fuel
Technologies (CFT) business is well-
positioned to manage the upcoming
opportunities.
Similarly, clean air mandates are
driving above baseline growth
for hydrotreating catalysts in the
CFT business. The next decade
will see increasingly stringent fuel
specifications for sulfur worldwide.
Although the greatest impact from
tightening standards will be driven
by lower sulfur limits in gasoline and
ultra-low-sulfur diesel for light-duty
vehicles, marine fuel specifications and
commercial vehicle specifications will
also have meaningful impacts.
CARL VAN DER GRIFT
VICE PRESIDENT, CLEAN
FUELS TECHNOLOGIES
The implementation of Tier 3 gasoline
in the USA will drive demand for FCC
pretreatment catalysts showing a
higher hydrodesulfurization activity
to enable deeper desulfurization
before the FCC unit or increased
hydrodesulfurization of FCC gasoline
by post-treatment. Similarly, the
introduction of the China V diesel
specification by the end of 2016
will increase the demand for
ultra-low-sulfur-diesel catalysts
and hydrocracking catalysts in
China. Finally, the introduction of
tighter marine fuel specifications
(MARPOL convention) around the
world will drive demand for deeper
desulphurization of bunker fuels.
Consequently, demand from refiners
for Albemarle CFT catalysts continues
to be very strong. The company
believes that its business growth will
keep pace with global hydroprocessing
catalyst demand. With its diverse
product portfolio and key international
partnerships, e.g., with UOP,
Nippon Ketjen and Eurecat, it can
provide tailor-made solutions for all
hydroprocessing operations.
Albemarle also sees growth potential
with tight oil in North America. The
impurities in tight oil necessitate using
improved guard-bed catalysts to trap
the contaminants. Consequently, the
company expects to see a shift in
demand from main-bed catalysts to
guard bed catalysts. The enhanced
portfolio of Ketjenguard® catalysts
should help here. New grades are
available for removing arsenic, iron, and
silicon. These products are getting a
good reception, as they offer customers
longer catalyst cycles through better
protection of the main-bed catalysts.
High quality and know-how
Albemarle continues to develop
high-quality products that can be
manufactured at competitive costs. Its
plants focus on high operating equipment
efficiency and continuous performance
improvement. The company fully utilizes
the collective knowledge of its application
technology experts and sales and
technical service teams as they deepen
their hydroprocessing know-how by
working with customers.
Albemarle’s vast database of global
ALBEMARLE CONTINUES
commercial experiences enables it to TO DEVELOP HIGH-
share performance observations for QUALITY PRODUCTS
catalyst systems operating at various
conditions and processing different THAT CAN BE
feedstocks around the world. This MANUFACTURED AT
application knowledge is very important
for advising refiners on how to optimize COMPETITIVE COSTS.
their unit operations and unlock the total ITS PLANTS FOCUS
potential of their catalyst systems.
ON HIGH OPERATING
Albemarle’s CFT business helps EQUIPMENT EFFICIENCY
refiners to get the most out of their
hydroprocessing assets in a responsible
AND CONTINUOUS
way, not by taking chances but by PERFORMANCE
calculating the limits and operating
close to them for optimal results,
IMPROVEMENT.
regardless of the crude characteristics,
the desired product slate or the
operating conditions.
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Carl van der Grift
Email: carl.van.der.grift@albemarle.com
ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 7
 TECHNICAL FOCUS

ACTION™ FCC CATALYST SIGNIFICANTLY IMPROVES

REFINER’S PROFITABILITY
Boosting margins through improved selectivities

The tight oil revolution, the decrease
in gasoline demand, Renewable
Fuel Standard requirements and
the USA becoming an exporter of
refining products have caused a shift
in refinery economics and operating
objectives. Distillate and alky
feedstock from the FCC unit are now
often more profitable than gasoline,
and cheaper domestic tight crude oils
have overtaken heavier and sourer
crudes as the feedstocks of choice.
These sweet paraffinic crudes generate
FCC feeds with lower distillate
production, gasoline octane and C4
olefinicity. In addition, tight oil feeds are
low in nickel and vanadium but high in
iron, calcium and often sodium, which
create challenges for FCC catalysts.
To overcome these challenges, Albemarle
designed ACTION, a novel FCC catalyst
that combines its renowned matrices,
novel high silica-to-alumina ratio zeolite
technologies and a unique manufacturing
process. This catalyst enables an FCC unit
operator to target the distillate, gasoline,
LPG and C4 olefins yield profile needed
for maximum profitability. ACTION also
promotes isomerization reactions to
improve octane. By utilizing the most
accessible iron- and calcium-resistant
matrix available, ACTION can withstand
these metals while maintaining activity
and bottoms cracking.
Resid feed application
A refiner operating an FCC unit that
processes a light, sweet atmospheric
resid feed has seen an estimated profit
increase of over $1 per barrel of feed
for the unit since switching to ACTION
catalyst. The key economic drivers for
the change were minimizing slurry make
and increasing C4 olefinicity to utilize
the available alkylation capacity. ACTION
provided increased bottoms cracking into
LCO, greatly improved the LPG olefinicity
and boosted the octane rating by almost
one number at near constant gasoline
volume. All of these benefits resulted in
a significant economic gain.
The FCC unit is a large side-by-side unit
and has a combined feed Conradson
carbon level typically of about 1.3
but occasionally over 2.0. Sulfur is
generally about 0.5 wt%, and nickel
and vanadium, at roughly equal
amounts in the feed, combine to deposit
about 5000‑ppm total metals on the
equilibrium catalyst. The daily catalyst
replacement rate is about 3.3% with
ACTION, which resulted in a greater than
50% catalyst changeover in three weeks.
When the previous catalyst was being
used, the riser temperature was
maintained at the maximum limit to
minimize bottoms yield. However, with
the introduction of ACTION catalyst,
bottoms cracking was improved, which
meant the refiner could reduce the riser
temperature by 15°F. This then enabled
the refiner to tune the FCC unit to
optimal LCO and olefin yields.
ACTION has a lower zeolite activity and
a higher matrix activity than the refiner’s
original catalyst. However, when compared
on a constant operating conditions basis,
both the catalysts yielded similar levels
of conversion. This was in part because

Coke selectivity, wt%

Relative conversion, wt% (coke/kinetic conversion shown) LCO/bottoms, LPG olefinicities,
model corrected model corrected wt%/wt% model corrected wt%/wt% model corrected
8 8
3.0 3.0 4.0 4.0 0.85 0.85
6 6 C3 olefinicity
4 4 0.80 0.80

2 2 2.5 2.5 3.0 3.0 0.75 0.75

0 0
0.70 C4 olefinicity 0.70
-2 -2
2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.65 0.65
-4 -4

-6 -6 0.60 0.60

-8 -8 1.5 1.5 1.0 1.0 0.55 0.55

Competitor ACTION Competitor ACTION Competitor ACTION Competitor ACTION

Figure 1: Compared on the basis of constant unit operating conditions Figure 2: ACTION’s high matrix activity converted more bottoms
and feed properties, both catalysts delivered the same unit conversion than the competitor’s catalyst at constant conversion; the ADZT-100
and coke selectivity. zeolite technology maximizes LPG olefinicity.

8 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84

ACTION catalyst additions were lowered
to maintain near constant equilibrium
catalyst activity. Figure 1 shows that high-
matrix catalysts do not show poorer coke
selectivity than low matrix catalysts in
commercial applications, as is often seen
in small-scale laboratory testing.1
The high matrix activity of ACTION provided
a significant advantage in terms of greater
bottoms cracking. Figure 2 clearly shows
a substantial increase in the LCO-to-
bottoms ratio at constant conversion for
ACTION, which satisfied one of the primary
economic goals of the refiner.
With regard to maximizing alky
feed, ACTION also outperformed the
competition. Although ACTION provided
a similar LPG make to the competitor’s
catalyst at equal conditions, Figure 2
shows that the LPG was considerably
more olefinic, especially in C4 olefins.
This olefinicity improvement would be
even greater if the data in Figure 2 were
corrected to account for a ZSM-5 additive
level equal to that used during the
competitive catalyst’s incumbency.
ZSM-5 additive was employed with both
the competitive catalyst and with ACTION
to assist in maximizing LPG production.
However, the amount of additive in the
unit E-cat was slightly lower on average
during the ACTION period.
In a similar way to in other commercial
experiences, ACTION also raised
both RON and MON. In the raw data
corrected only to constant gasoline cut
point, ACTION improved both RON and
MON slightly, which becomes more
impressive when considering the refinery
ran at a 15°F lower riser temperature
with ACTION. Forecasting to constant
operating conditions, ACTION boosted
both octane values by about one number.
A widely known rule of thumb states that
ZSM-5 technology is known to increase
MON at only 50% the rate of RON.
Figure 3 demonstrates the ADZT‑100
zeolite technology isomerization activity
in ACTION helped boost MON by 90% of
the increase seen in RON.
How the data were analyzed
The data for process conditions, feed
properties and product properties and
yields were supplied by the refiner,
beginning with data taken about a
year before the switch to ACTION
catalyst. For both the raw and model-
corrected data in this comparison,
the competitor’s catalyst period and
ACTION period were 47 and 31
individual weekly cases respectively. All
the data points in the ACTION dataset
are at 70% or greater turnover of
ACTION into the inventory.
To correct for changes in operations,
feed and product cut points,
Albemarle employed an FCC
simulator model developed by KBC
to forecast each mass-balanced case
back to a constant basis. This enabled
Albemarle to forecast the data to
a consistent set of unit conditions,
feed rate and properties, and E-cat
properties, thereby removing the
clouding effects of operational and
feed changes from the analysis of
catalyst performance.

Reference
1
Pouwels, C. and Bruno, K.: “Better catalyst
Relative octanes Relative octanes evaluation strategies for maximizing FCCU
raw data model corrected margins”, paper AM-13-05 presented at
2 RON 2 RON the 2013 AFPM International Petrochemical
Conference, San Antonio, USA (March 24–26,
1 1 2013)

0 0

-1 -1 FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:

MON MON Alan Kramer
2 2 Email: alan.kramer@albemarle.com
George Yaluris
Email: george.yaluris@albemarle.com
1 1

Competitor ACTION Competitor ACTION

Figure 3: ACTION increases RON and MON at a lower riser temperature

when looking at the raw data and by about one number over the
competitor’s catalyst when corrected to constant conditions.

ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 9

 TECHNICAL FOCUS
IMPROVING FCC CATALYST SELECTION BY
ADJUSTING LABORATORY DATA
Part 1: The need for and concepts behind coke correction methods
Nowadays, refining companies
apply different approaches
to selecting catalysts for their
FCC units with the objective of
improving performance and
increasing their economic margins.
The most common approaches
are based on laboratory testing
or commercial side-by-side trials.
Figure 1 shows that customers using
testing to select catalysts generally
choose high zeolite to matrix
(Z/M) ratio catalysts for their units,
whereas customers that conduct
commercial trials choose low Z/M
ratio catalysts.1 This is because
the catalyst with the optimum
performance in a commercial
FCC unit is often not necessarily
the catalyst that shows the best
performance in the laboratory.
100
Proportion of catalyst type selected by
90
80
each type of customer (%)
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
Testing
Figure 1: Opposing catalyst choices are seen
in residue applications for refiners that test
and those that do not test.
10 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84
Albemarle works with customers
around the world and has observed that
some have invested considerable time
and effort in improving their catalyst
testing methods and become more
sophisticated in the process. Those
improvements include, for example,
exploring and optimizing different
deactivation protocols or different
performance testing methods.2 However,
even the most sophisticated laboratory
methods are not equivalent to the
conditions in an FCC unit.
For illustrative purposes, Figure 2
presents a general comparison of
the coke selectivity deltas observed
between two catalysts with differing
technologies. The first bar in the top
panel represents the contributions of
deactivation plus testing protocols
toward the total coke selectivity delta
observed in the laboratory. The large
High Z/M COKE SELECTIVITY DELTA BETWEEN TWO CATALYSTS (WT%)
Low Z/M
Contribution to coke delta from legacy
deactivation protocol
Large coke delta measured in the lab, grossly overpredicts FCC unit coke delta
FCC coke delta Large gap between lab and commercial reality “testing artifact”
Non-testing
Contribution Contribution
from advanced from advanced
deactivation protocol testing protocol
Smaller coke in the lab but still larger than in
the FCC unit
FCC unit
coke delta Smaller gap, but still
relevant
Figure 2: Coke selectivity deltas observed in the laboratory compared with those in the FCC unit.
coke selectivity delta observed for
legacy protocols contrasts dramatically
with that expected from commercial
FCC unit performance, as shown in the
second bar.
The gap between laboratory and
commercial performance is a testing
artifact due to known laboratory biases
well documented in the literature.2
Albemarle has found that, despite efforts
to reduce the high coke artifact and
regardless of the continuous efforts to
improve testing protocols, there are still
important discrepancies that can artificially
affect the outcome of the selection
process. This is critical because commercial
FCC unit performance is the definitive
benchmark for measuring the success of a
catalyst, not laboratory results.
Consequently, Albemarle has spent
considerable time and effort in applying
Contribution to coke delta from legacy
testing protocol
Legacy
testing
protocols
Advanced
testing
protocols

the available commercial data to
developing mathematical methods to
close the gap between laboratory testing
and reality.
The underlying concept
Looking at 19 commercial side-by-
side comparisons has shown that
a) there is no difference in regenerator
temperature between low and high
Z/M ratio catalysts on average, i.e.,
there is no difference on average in
coke selectivity when comparing them
at similar activities; and b) it follows
that catalysts based on low Z/M
ratio technology, such as Albemarle’s
UPGRADER™, AFX™, ACTION® and
AMBER™ families, would not result
in excessive increases in delta coke
or regenerator temperatures, thus
contradicting what is typically found
during laboratory testing.3 In short,
the coke selectivity difference between
catalysts is exaggerated in testing and
the evidence clearly demonstrates the
need to develop and apply a coke yield
correction to laboratory data.
ALBEMARLE HAS DEVELOPED AND OFFERS
TWO COKE CORRECTION MODELS TO ADJUST
LABORATORY DATA TO REFLECT A CATALYST’S
PERFORMANCE IN AN FCC UNIT BETTER.
From a reaction mechanism point of
view, it is important to remember there
are five contributors to the amount of
coke an FCC catalyst produces:
a) catalytic coke: a by-product of
catalytic cracking series reactions
b) non-distillable coke resulting from
incomplete feed vaporization
c) contaminant (or metals) coke
catalyzed by metals deposited on the
catalyst
d) feed (or Conradson carbon) coke,
which is typically higher for resid
feedstocks
e) strippable coke, which has been
found to be higher for catalysts with
mass transfer limitations (i.e. low
accessibility).
The catalytic and metal coke
contributions are catalytically driven,
whereas the non-distillable and the
Conradson carbon contributions are, to
differing extents, the result of thermal
coking or high-molecular-weight
material adsorbed on the catalyst
because of incomplete evaporation.
The last one, strippable coke, is the
result of incomplete stripping and is
not due to chemical reactions.
Two models
In light of the above, Albemarle
has developed and offers two
coke correction models to adjust
laboratory data to reflect a catalyst’s
performance in an FCC unit better. It
is well established that metal effects
on laboratory-deactivated catalysts
exaggerate both the hydrogen and
the coke yield compared with those
observed in an FCC unit, so the Metals
Coke Correction Model adjusts the
laboratory coke using a stoichiometric
relationship between coke and hydrogen
yields. This model is very effective in
accounting for metals-driven coke yield
differences between catalysts in the
laboratory and catalysts in the FCC unit.
The second method is a Lumped Coke
Correction Model that accounts for all
five contributions to coke make. The
concept behind this correction model
is for a refiner to develop a correction
factor between laboratory coke and FCC
unit coke. To do this, a refiner needs to
conduct commercial trials with different
catalyst technologies, i.e., a low versus
a high Z/M ratio catalyst, in the
>>>
ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 11
 TECHNICAL FOCUS
>>>
FCC unit. If a refiner does not have such
data, Albemarle offers a robust estimate
of this correction factor based on 19
FCC unit side-by-side comparisons.2
It is important to mention that some
refiners have already begun correcting
their laboratory data to reflect FCC unit
performance better. A few have taken
the first step and have corrected for
metals coke using laboratory hydrogen
yields in a manner similar to that in
Albemarle’s Metals Coke Correction
Model. Others have taken a more
holistic approach similar to that in the
Lumped Coke Correction Model and
have made a total coke (not just metals
coke) adjustment based on differences
in coke make between the laboratory
and their FCC units.
12 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84
This article, to be continued in future
Catalyst Courier issues, describes the
need for and concepts behind coke
correction methods. Future articles
will elucidate these methods and
models in more detail and provide
suggestions for developing correction
factors with application examples.
Albemarle’s goal is to develop and
offer coke correction models that are
commercially validated, scientifically
sound, simple and unbiased in that
they can be applied to any FCC
catalyst manufacturing technology
and to any dataset, regardless of the
deactivation or testing protocol used.
References
1
Pouwels, C. and Bruno, K.: “Deciding on the
best FCC catalyst: The sense and nonsense of
selecting the best FCC catalyst by laboratory
testing. Part 1: Introduction and case study,”
Catalyst Courier (2013) 81, 18–19
2
Pouwels, C. and Bruno, K.: “Better catalyst
evaluation strategies for maximizing FCCU
margins,” paper AM-13-05 presented at
Annual Meeting of the AFPM in San Antonio,
Texas, USA (March 17–19, 2013)
3
Pouwels, C. and Bruno, K.: “Deciding on the
best FCC catalyst: The sense and nonsense of
selecting the best FCC catalyst by laboratory
testing. Part 2: Commercial cases refuting
the laboratory coke penalty for low Z/M ratio
catalysts,” Catalyst Courier (2013/14) 82, 8–9
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Raul Arriaga
Email: raul.arriaga@albemarle.com
Ken Bruno
Email: ken.bruno@albemarle.com
TECHNICAL FOCUS
MAKE THE BEST DECISIONS ABOUT CATALYST TESTING
Where to spend FCC research and development resources for better catalyst selection
Catalyst Courier1, 2, 3 has reported
that refiners selecting their catalysts
through laboratory testing (testing
refiners) predominantly use high
zeolite to matrix (Z/M) ratio
catalysts, unlike refiners that do
not test and have optimized their
FCC operations with moderate or
low Z/M ratio catalysts. These days,
Albemarle sees several “testing
refiners” taking a careful approach
in back-to-back trials on low(er)
Z/M ratio catalysts and successfully
increasing their cracking margins.
Why is there a difference and how can
testing refiners that rely on laboratory
results make the best decisions on the
catalysts to use and not be limited to
high Z/M ratio catalysts? This article
explains several of the shortcomings of
laboratory testing and how these can
be overcome.
Laboratory testing has been shown
to lead to unrealistic coke artifacts for
low Z/M ratio catalysts.3 In addition,
the slurry benefit in the FCC unit is
typically substantially larger than is
seen in laboratory tests. This leads to
smaller economical margins for low Z/M
ratio catalysts. Most deactivation and
testing protocols amplify the sensitive
coke signals and overshadow any slurry
reduction, and refiners often evaluate
their test results on a constant coke
yield basis, which worsens the picture.
The coke artifact
The coke artifact is due to insufficient
simulation in the deactivation
procedure and the testing step.
One refiner compared a high with
a low Z/M ratio catalyst and the
coke selectivity of both catalysts,
represented by the horizontal line in
Figure 1, was the same in the FCC unit.
When equilibrium catalysts (E-cat) of
both were tested in a circulating pilot
plant, a coke penalty was seen. When
tested in a bench-scale ACE unit, this
coke penalty was even larger. This
illustrates that the test introduces a
coke artifact the magnitude of which
is determined by the type of testing
apparatus and the protocol used.
Both catalysts were tested in a pilot
plant (PP) after laboratory deactivation
by cyclic propene steaming (CPS)
and observed a substantial increase
in the coke penalty for the low Z/M
ratio catalyst compared with the
E-cats (Figure 1). This shows that the
deactivation also introduces a coke
artifact. In addition, a comparison
was made by testing the laboratory-
deactivated catalysts in a bench-scale
ACE unit. The difference in coke yield
between both catalysts increased
further, which illustrates how the coke
penalties of deactivation and testing
methods are cumulative.
Contributions to the coke artifact
Although both deactivation and
testing contribute to the coke artifact,
several factors influence the difference
between E-cat and laboratory
deactivation, including
a) insufficient hydrothermal
deactivation of the matrix
2.0
Coke (low Z/M)/coke (high Z/M)
1.8
1.6
1.4
1 unit effect
1.2
1.0
0.8
0.6
E-cat E-cat
PP bench
b) excessive dehydrogenation activity of
metals, which in combination with a)
multiplies the effect
c) improper laboratory conditions for
simulating realistic morphology
changes such as accessibility decline.
Several elements also contribute to the
coke artifact in testing. The following
differences between a real FCC unit
and laboratory testing are important:
a) Too long a contact time causes extra
catalytic and metals coke.
b) If stripping times are too long, the
differences in soft coke cannot be
determined.
c) An unrealistically low hydrocarbon
pressure means that the chemical
reactions, for instance, hydrogen
transfer, are not properly simulated.
Deactivation issues
Laboratory deactivation of FCC
catalysts typically tries to meet E-cat
properties such as surface area, zeolite
unit cell size and catalyst activity, and,
in the case of resid applications, nickel
and vanadium levels. The average
age of deactivated catalyst particles is
several months, but research centers
generally squeeze deactivation into
two days or less. Consequently, they
increase the deactivation temperature
and the steam to speed up deactivation
and meet the target properties. Thus,
>>>
3 unit + deactivation effect
2 deactivation effect Figure 1:
Contribution
of type of
deactivation
and type of
test to the
coke artifact.
E-cat CPS E-cat CPS
PP PP PP bench
ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 13
 TECHNICAL FOCUS
>>>
very severe deactivation takes place
and the catalyst deactivates faster
compared with reality (Table 1).
This generally leads to an imbalance
in deactivation between zeolite and
matrix. Indeed, the deactivation
rate of zeolite is higher than that of
alumina matrices (Figure 2). However,
typical “quick” laboratory deactivation
methods with high temperatures and
short times do not facilitate matching
the E-cat’s zeolite and matrix activity.
Comparing E-cats with laboratory-
deactivated catalysts shows that the
zeolite is relatively over-deactivated
in the laboratory and that the matrix
is relatively too active. Table 2 shows
that although the matrix surface area
is equal, the zeolite surface area from
the laboratory is too low, which is also
reflected in the unit cell size. If quicker
deactivation is applied, the zeolite
surface area can be matched but then
the matrix surface area in the laboratory-
deactivated catalyst is too high.
To get a good match in zeolite and
matrix deactivation, there needs to be
a way to change the relative rates of
deactivation for zeolite and matrix, i.e.,
a method whereby the deactivation of
matrix speeds up to a rate equal to that
of the zeolite or vice versa.
A generic tool laboratories use is the
deactivation temperature. Generally,
laboratories increase the severity by
increasing the temperature rather than
lowering it. As illustrated in Figure 3,
an increase in temperature from 788
to 815°C enhances zeolite deactivation
but has little effect on matrix
deactivation. The imbalance between
zeolite and matrix deactivation is
thus increased. In conclusion, the
temperature should be lower, but
longer deactivation will be required
to match the E-cat. Most laboratories
do not want to take more time to
deactivate the catalyst.
14 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 82
Accessibility
Although most laboratories focus on
mimicking surface area and activity,
they rarely take into account the
physical degradation of catalyst particle
morphology. This process, during which
the particles get denser over time, is
complex and slow and the catalyst
often loses its accessibility (expressed
by the Albemarle Accessibility Index,
AAI), particularly when resid is being
processed. As the AAI is a crucial
catalyst parameter, poor simulation
will lead to incorrect test results. The
difference between good catalysts
(high AAI) and mediocre catalysts (low
AAI) is thus neglected.
Figure 4 shows that E-cat generally has
a lower AAI than the fresh catalyst.
However, for the most common
laboratory deactivation methods, the
AAI may go up or remain relatively
high. This is valid for steaming and
cyclic deactivation, and for CPS. Only
when dedicated and time-consuming
methods are applied under more
realistic deactivation conditions, can
the AAI decline be simulated. One
Albemarle method, CD ALFA,4 includes
metals such as iron and calcium, but
it is time-consuming and seldom
embraced by research centers.
DEACTIVATED CATALYST’S AGE
TEMPERATURE, °C
STEAM, %
PRESSURE, BARG
Table 1: The main differences in process conditions between the laboratory and the FCC unit.
MATRIX SURFACE AREA, M /G 2
ZEOLITE SURFACE AREA, M /G2
UNIT CELL SIZE, Å
Table 2: Imbalance in zeolite and matrix deactivation.
Next steps
Knowing these shortcomings
makes it possible to develop better
deactivation and testing units and
protocols. However, in Albemarle’s
experience, this is time-consuming
and unlikely to solve all the problems.
The issues described are some of the
more important ones, but not all of
them. Moreover, the ideal laboratory
deactivation protocol would take
considerable time to match a real
E-cat, and if an E-cat can be perfectly
mimicked, the test unit and protocols
would need modification.
With decades of experience and
knowledge of FCC units and laboratory
testing, Albemarle believes that no
single deactivation method and test
unit could achieve identical coke and
slurry yields to those in an FCC unit.
It is, however, important to develop
knowledge and experience to relate
test results to commercial performance
using a translation or correction
method. Albemarle recommends
“testing refiners” should expend effort
in developing such relationships and
methods. Albemarle is happy to help
and can offer its models as a first step.
For more information see “Improving
FCC catalyst selection by adjusting
laboratory data,” page 10.
LABORATORY FCC UNIT
5 h to 2 d 2–12 months
788+ 680–740
50–100 5–10
Ambient 1.5–3
E-CAT DEACTIVATED CATALYST
74 74
38 31
24.38 24.35
References
1
Pouwels, C. and Bruno, K.: “Deciding on
the best FCC catalyst. Part 1: Introduction
and case study,” Catalyst Courier (2013) 81,
17–19
2
Pouwels, C. and Bruno, K.: “Deciding on the
best FCC catalyst. Part 2: Commercial cases
refuting the laboratory penalty for low Z/M
ratio catalysts,” Catalyst Courier (2013/14)
82, 8–9
3
Pouwels, C. and Bruno, K.: “Deciding on the
best FCC catalyst. Part 3: The implications of
using test data,” Catalyst Courier 83, 19–21
4
Rainer, D. R., Rautiainen, E. and Imhof, P.:
“Novel lab-scale deactivation method for
FCC catalyst: Inducing realistic accessibility
responses to iron poisoning,” Applied Catalysis
A: General (2003) 249 (1), 69–80

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:

Carel Pouwels
WITH DECADES OF EXPERIENCE AND
Email: carel.pouwels@albemarle.com
Ken Bruno KNOWLEDGE OF FCC UNITS AND
Email: ken.bruno@albemarle.com
LABORATORY TESTING, ALBEMARLE
BELIEVES THAT NO SINGLE DEACTIVATION
METHOD AND TEST UNIT COULD
ACHIEVE IDENTICAL COKE AND SLURRY
YIELDS TO THOSE IN AN FCC UNIT.

High-accessibility catalyst
100 100 20
Matrix Matrix
Surface area retention %

Surface area retention %

80 Zeolite 80 Zeolite 16 Fresh

60 60 12
AAI

Low-accessibility catalyst
40 40 8

4 Fresh
20 20

0 0 4
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 785 790 795 800 805 810 815 820
t
ing

CD

ea

ing

CD

fa
ca

ca

Al
Al

Relative age of fraction, E-cat

E-

E-
m

am

CD

Deactivation temperature, °C
ea

CD

< Fresh young Old >

St

St

Figure 2: Deactivation rates for zeolite and Figure 3: The effect of temperature on the Figure 4: The common laboratory deactivation
matrix over time. deactivation rates of zeolite and matrix. methods cannot simulate catalyst accessibility
properly.

ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 15

 TECHNICAL FOCUS
DEVISING THE BEST FCC SOLUTIONS
Albemarle opts for a new FCC process simulator
Albemarle relies on FCC process
simulations to help it provide the
best possible solutions for customers.
They are used when monitoring the
performance of customers’ FCC units
to help in normalizing refinery data
and projecting them to a constant
basis; for comparing catalyst
changes; when suggesting the best
operational set points to maximize
profitability with Albemarle catalysts;
and when selecting the optimal
catalyst formulation for a particular
refiner’s needs.
In October 2014, Albemarle updated
its FCC process simulator to FCC-SIM,
which was developed by KBC Advanced
Technologies and is widely used by refiners
to simulate FCC units. This replaces the
CatOp FCC simulator also from KBC.
An example of an FCC-SIM flow sheet.
N2 inerts
Inerts mixer
CO2 inerts
CO inerts
Regenerator
steam
Combined
feed
Regenerator
air I
VGO feed
Resid feed
Extra feed
16 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84
Real-world comparison
The decision to adopt a new modeling
platform came after a year of intensive
side-by-side technical evaluations of both
simulators using real-world datasets.
Each model was set up with data taken
before an operational change and then
the predictions of the perturbations
were compared. Both models gave
good predictions of situations where
independent process variables, such as
flow rates, pressures and temperature,
were changed. FCC-SIM, however,
demonstrated a clear advantage when it
came to predicting operational changes
pertaining to the regenerator and
the predictions of feed compositional
changes. This was because the FCC-
SIM model was more sophisticated in
terms of stream synthesis, hardware
configurations and coke burning kinetics.
88.8
FCC meter
FCC
inerts
FCC
coke
FCC
Total
feed
Feed Riser
mixer injection
steam
The benefits
Besides improving predictive capabilities,
sharing the same modeling platform
as our customers provides other
advantages. First, we both start with
exactly the same dataset, which is
already in the proper format for use by
the model. Any necessary assumptions
or corrections to the data are applied
by both of us. Sharing the model
enables us to begin our technical
communications at a deeper level; we no
longer need to discuss whether or not
differences in model results are due to
different models being used to analyze
the dataset. Furthermore, we use the
same terminology when discussing
the modeling process and the model
results. We can also collaborate with our
customers in sharing knowledge and
developing and refining best practices.
Sour water
Flue gas I
Wet
gas
88.8
Reactor Wet gas
steam compressor
Overhead
Effluent liquid
HCN
LCO
ICO
Main
fractionator
HCO
CLO
 The common modeling platform enhances
Albemarle’s ability to bring an external
perspective to day-to-day operations in a
refinery. Our 30 technical specialists located
worldwide bring with them a vast breadth of
experience and, combined with the FCC-SIM
modeling tool, provide refiners with quantified
actionable advice pertaining to catalyst
strategy, troubleshooting and optimization.

We encourage all refiners who license

FCC-SIM from KBC to begin sharing with
us their data in the FCC-SIM format and for
users of version 4 and above to exchange
process flow sheets. The synergistic benefit
of utilizing the same modeling platform
provides greater efficiency in exchanging
data and information; a more transparent
modeling experience for both unit monitoring
and catalyst predictions; and; ultimately;
an unprecedented potential for detailed
technical collaboration to yielding the best
possible profitability for our customers.

Dry
OUR 30 TECHNICAL SPECIALISTS
gas LOCATED ACROSS THE GLOBE
High-pressure
wet gas BRING WITH THEM A VAST
Sour
water BREADTH OF EXPERIENCE AND,
Mixed
II
COMBINED WITH THE FCC-SIM
overhead
Alky MODELING TOOL, PROVIDE REFINERS
feed
WITH QUANTIFIED ACTIONABLE
Overhead
mixer 88.8 ADVICE PERTAINING TO CATALYST
LCN STRATEGY, TROUBLESHOOTING AND
OPTIMIZATION.

FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:

Alan Kramer
Email: alan.kramer@albemarle.com

ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 17

 TECHNICAL FOCUS
COMBUSTION PROMOTERS ON CALL
Albemarle’s combustion promoters can resolve operational and environmental issues in FCC units.
A well-tuned FCC unit will exhibit
exceptional selectivity towards the
desired products and will run against
multiple operating limits dictated
by both equipment and regulatory
law. As a unit ages and refiners
push design limits, acute and chronic
issues can occur. For afterburn,
the prognosis is bright with
proper application of Albemarle’s
combustion promoters.
The afterburn issue
FCC issues can be generally classified
as operational or environmental.
One common operational problem is
afterburn, which plagues some units
chronically and others unexpectedly.
Afterburn is a term describing
significant combustion from carbon
monoxide to carbon dioxide in the
dilute rather than the dense regenerator
phase. The dilute phase becomes too
hot, as little catalyst is present to absorb
the heat of combustion. Heat spreads
throughout the cyclone and plenum
phases causing stress to the refractory
and metallic materials present.
High temperatures present in the dilute
phase may be localized because the
refiner has a damaged air distributor,
which leaves inadequate oxygen
for complete combustion in some
parts of the dense regenerator bed.
High temperatures can also occur
throughout the entire cyclone and
plenum spaces. In this case, a refiner
needs to consider the bed level and
superficial velocity in the regenerator.
Operations may have shifted to create
inadequate residence time for oxygen
in the dense phase.
18 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84
Operation is possible with some level of
afterburn; however, high temperatures
and thermal cycling lead to a decreased
lifetime for the metallurgy in the
plenum and cyclones. These same
effects accelerate deactivation of all
catalysts and result in higher fresh
catalyst consumption. Minor afterburn
may be controllable with additional air,
but the blower capacity or the available
contact time in the dense phase can
limit success.
Afterburn can negatively affect catalyst
circulation and coke make. Energy is
wasted by heating the regenerator’s
metal and is unavailable for cracking
oil in the riser. As a result, the FCC unit
makes more coke and less valuable
products by weight balance, but has a
lower dense bed temperature and higher
catalyst circulation. The regenerator
slide valve provides this circulation
by opening; however, the resultant
Competitor 1
35
30
25
Afterburn, °C
20
15
10
5
0
ay
ar
ay
Ju
No
Se
Ja
M
M
Figure 1: KOC-15 clearly outperforms two different competitors’ platinum-based additives. All the
promoters were added to achieve a constant platinum level of 3 ppm in the circulating inventory.
pressure drop across this valve may
make circulation irregular. Combustion
promoters solve these issues by pushing
the coke burn into the dense phase
where the energy is substantially
absorbed by the recirculating catalyst.
Matching “medicine” to
“malady”
Different solutions work for different
situations, and Albemarle offers a full
portfolio of solutions (Table 1). KOC‑15™
is a platinum-based product with a
demonstrated history of high efficacy. The
key ingredient is delivered on a special
support that provides high average bulk
density and excellent particle integrity.
This same support widely disperses
the platinum and minimizes sintering
under FCC conditions. KOC-15 has
demonstrated more active sites and
reduced afterburn compared with
competitors’ products during commercial
side-by-side trials (Figure 1).
Albemarle Competitor 2 Albemarle
ar
ay
ar
ay
Ju
Ju
No
No
Se
Ja
Se
Ja
M
 A side effect of any platinum-based
promoter is increased NOx emissions,
as the oxidative power is not confined
simply to carbon. For units concerned
with NOx, Albemarle recommends
ELIMINOx™: a non-platinum-containing
combustion promoter. Some refiners
need to limit NOx emissions owing
to agreements with the United States
Environmental Protection Agency.
Others perhaps sell equilibrium catalyst
to refineries where the FCC unit is under
a NOx constraint. Using proprietary
ingredients, ELIMINOx provides effective
afterburn control with 40–70% lower
NOx emissions compared with a
platinum-based promoter.
InsituPro™ technology is an exclusive
product available only to customers
purchasing Albemarle’s FCC catalysts.
The active ingredients are deposited
directly onto the catalyst, so promotion
activity is present on every single
Pt promoter
1200
1100
1000
900
NOx, ppm
800
700
Reduced NOx
600
500
400
-7 0 7
Days
Figure 2: The reduction in NOx emissions by using ELIMINOx can be up to
70%. The 40% NOx reduction shown is typical.
particle in the inventory. InsituPro is In cases calling for ELIMINOx,
an excellent option for refiners dealing afterburn control is again rapid and,
with routine afterburn and desiring as the inventory builds, the achievable
a standard treatment regimen. Dual NOx reduction compared with a
strategies are appropriate in some platinum promoter is observable
circumstances. For example, a refiner within days (Figure 2).
may apply InsituPro regularly and
keep a separate stock of KOC-15 for
emergencies requiring extra promoter.
Fast-acting “medicine” FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Ryan Nickell
Whether the problem is high carbon Email: ryan.nickell@albemarle.com
monoxide emissions or high levels of
afterburn, unhealthy operations can be
quickly remedied. Once a combustion
promoter is applied, afterburn control
may occur within minutes. The
benefits of Albemarle’s technology
compared with competitors’ products
are rapidly apparent. In Figure 1,
afterburn controlled near 35°C with
competitors’ products improved to
below 10°C with KOC-15.
TYPICAL PRODUCT PROPERTIES
ELIMINOx
ADDITIVE NAME KOC-15 ELIMINOx InsituPro
Base NOx
Low NOx
Combustion Combustion
APPLICATION combustion
promotion promotion promotion
ATTRITION INDEX, WT% 1.5 2.7
AVERAGE BULK
0.85 0.88
DENSITY, G/ML
Same
SURFACE AREA, M2/G 105 110
as base
PARTICLE SIZE catalyst
7 10
DISTRIBUTION (0–40), %
14
PARTICLE SIZE
2 1
DISTRIBUTION (0–20), %
Table 1: Albemarle’s combustion promoters.
ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 19
 TECHNICAL FOCUS
REACHING FOR THE STARS
REACT™ technology to achieve a major milestone this year.
Since its introduction in 2003,
REACT technology has become
a very successful and proven
method for optimizing the use of
all STARS® catalysts. Albemarle and
Nippon Ketjen developed REACT
technology to help maximize
catalyst value. The performance of
used STARS catalysts is restored
by a special regeneration process
followed by redispersion of the
active metals. Type II active sites
are recreated and protected by an
organic coating, just as with fresh
STARS catalysts.
In 2015, Albemarle is expecting to reach
a significant milestone: REACT-ivating
50,000 t of spent STARS catalysts.
Eurecat SAS – France
Ecorigen – Italy
Tricat – USA
Eurecat – USA
Porocel – USA
20 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84
Today’s challenging market conditions
for the refining industry ask for
creativity, flexibility and efficiency:
creativity in the sense of collaborating
with partners to optimize products
and minimize waste streams; flexibility
to address rapidly changing market
conditions; and efficiency in working
so that no valuable streams, products
and capital are lost.
Enhancing value and flexibility
Albemarle, with its partners Eurecat
and Porocel have a long history of
optimizing the use of hydroprocessing
catalyst and REACT-ivating Albemarle’s
STARS catalysts close to fresh
activity levels. Proper planning with
good understanding of multi-cycle
economics can extend the lifetimes of
Porocel – Luxembourg
Tricat – Germany
Al Bilad Catalyst –
Saudi Arabia
hydroprocessing catalysts. This greatly
enhances the value and flexibility of
these catalysts for refiners. Depending
on actual metal values, cost savings up
to 60% are achievable. If necessary, a
performance guarantee for combined
REACT–fresh hydrotreater loadings can
be discussed and granted.
Annually, about 40,000 t of valuable
spent hydroprocessing catalyst is
disposed of after just one cycle. A
good part of this catalyst could be
reused by applying regeneration and
REACT technology. In addition to the
obvious economic benefits, reducing
this waste by introducing a virtuous
catalyst recycle loop would also help
to minimize the environmental impact
of the industry.
Figure 1: Global licensed locations for
REACT technology.
Eurecat –
India
Porocel CRS – Nippon Ketjen –
Singapore Eurecat plant Japan
By the end of 2014, more than Recently, Albemarle has become
150 refiners had regularly used REACT aware of alternate rejuvenation
technology in 750 hydrotreaters. technologies for a variety of
hydroprocessing catalysts. The
Multiple Eurecat and Porocel plants
company would like to point out
across the globe are capable of
that it does not endorse these
applying REACT technology to alternative rejuvenation technologies
spent STARS catalysts (Figure 1). or recommend or endorse their use
Some catalyst batches have been with STARS catalysts. Albemarle only
REACT‑ivated three or four times recommends and endorses the use of
(Figure 2). REACT technology for rejuvenation
of STARS catalysts. Using the
All REACT-ivated catalysts are tested for proven REACT technology offered
their chemical and physical properties by Albemarle and Nippon Ketjen
and, on request, for activity and certified licensees around the world,
means refiners can expect maximum
pressure drop. Refiners can discuss the
activity recovery during multiple
options for spent catalyst management
cycles of use of STARS catalysts.
with Albemarle. The emphasis will
lie on the value of collaborating with
Albemarle and its partners in terms of
catalyst pool management and optimal
reactor loading design. The use of
REACT-ivated catalysts in tailored, smart
reactor loading concepts can provide
the flexibility demanded in today’s 400
Weighted average bed temperature, °C

dynamic marketplace. 390

380
With the help of its wealth of 370
experience and specified reference 360
cases, Albemarle can demonstrate 350
how it is possible to reduce catalyst 340 100% fresh
costs efficiently over multiple cycles 330 30% REACT + 70% fresh
for hydrotreating operations without 50% REACT + 50% fresh
320
compromising performance and thus
310
further improve the sustainability of
300
the refining industry. 0 5 10 15 20 25
Time onstream, months
FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
Figure 2: Unit performance over three cycles with KF 848.
Peter-Paul Langerak
Email: peter-paul.langerak@albemarle.com

ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 21

 TECHNICAL FOCUS
FLEXIBILITY FOR FCC PRETREATMENT
Meeting the challenges of clean fuel hydrotreating needs
Refiners increasingly need to
produce ultra-low-sulfur gasoline
and to increase diesel fuel output,
which can be challenging. FCC
pretreatment (FCC‑PT) units are,
therefore, more important than ever
and they require robust and reliable
catalyst systems to give them high
activity and good stability.
However, no single FCC-PT unit caters
equally for all clean fuel hydrotreating
needs. The oil feedstocks come from
many different regions of the world
and have differing compositions and
contaminants. FCC-PT units also
process many types of heavy, dirty oil
across a very wide range of operating
conditions. Individual refiners’ primary
operating objectives can also vary from
targeting constant product sulfur to
maximizing hydrodenitrogenation (HDN)
and hydrodearomatization (HDA), and/
or increasing conversion to produce
more diesel.
Albemarle has determined that
VGO STAX® –FCC-PT is a preferred
technology solution to enable
customers to meet the FCC-PT
challenges in their refineries. It has
wide-ranging global refinery operating
insights that help it to accommodate
customers’ needs, constraints and
opportunities. Strong process and
technology application expertise
also enables Albemarle to advise
customers on the preferred catalyst
systems and operating tactics that
will help them to meet their operating
objectives. To bolster this technical
expertise, Albemarle has a proprietary
computer process modeling capability
that gives highly reliable performance
estimates and is used to generate
and assess catalyst loading design
recommendations for customer units.
22 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84
How FCC-PT can help customers
FCC-PT is an increasingly important
refinery process. Unlike processes that
produce clean fuel products directly,
its economic value largely derives from
how well it improves FCC unit product
yields, product qualities and operations.
Depending on the refinery, the key
objectives for FCC-PT operations may
be to
a) maintain a low product sulfur level
with high hydrodesulphurization (HDS)
to meet environmental regulations on
gasoline sulfur content and FCC unit
SOx emissions
b) reduce nitrogen and aromatics levels
by maximizing HDN and HDA for
improving FCC unit product yields,
selectivities and operations
c) increase the conversion of VGO to
diesel-range products.
In addition, controlling FCC-PT catalyst
fill costs and achieving target cycle
lengths are generally high priorities for
most refiners.
No single FCC-PT unit is characteristic
of this process application as a whole.
The existing units are designed and
operated to fit specific refinery operating
strategies and objectives. As a result,
FCC-PT units cover a broad range of feed
properties and operating variables. These
units can be characterized by operating
objectives and hydrogen partial pressure
(ppH2) (Figure 1). “Low” means inlet
ppH2 <55 bar; “moderate” implies an
inlet ppH2 between 55 and 100 bar; and
“high” means a ppH2 >100 bar.
Figure 1 shows that units in Europe,
the Middle East and India are mostly in
the low-to-moderate pressure range.
These units are typically operated to
achieve deep HDS and, in some cases,
to increase conversion of VGO feed to
diesel product. North American units
tend to fall primarily in the moderate-to-
high pressure range. More than 50% of
the world’s moderate pressure FCC-PT
units and more than 75% of the high-
pressure units are in North America.
Although many of these units focus on
HDS, some focus on maximizing HDN/
HDA. However, there are relatively fewer
units in the Americas that strive to
increase diesel yield compared with the
rest of the world.
Albemarle’s viewpoint
Albemarle has traditionally had most
success in the FCC-PT segment in
supplying CoMo and NiCoMo catalysts
to low-to-moderate pressure FCC‑PT
units where the primary objective
was to achieve a low product sulfur
target. In recent years, product sulfur
targets have become even lower and
the need for more active and stable
catalysts has increased. In addition, for
moderate-to-high-pressure catalytic feed
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
China Asia Europe Middle North Latin
Pacific East & America America
India
High P Mod P Low P
Figure 1: Global segmentation of FCC-PT units by
geographic region and operating pressure.
hydrotreatment (CFHT) units, the need for
deeper HDN and greater HDA to improve
FCC yields and selectivities has increased.
To meet these market needs, Albemarle
has conducted research across a broad
spectrum of customer operations on how
best to help customers meet their needs.
During this research, it became clear that
variations in FCC-PT operating conditions
and unit objectives and constraints
make it practically impossible for a single
catalyst to fulfill all a refiner’s needs
and wants. Consequently, Albemarle
concluded that STAX systems for FCC-PT
are preferable for almost all applications.
STAX technology overview
STAX is Albemarle’s proprietary
process technology for designing a
catalyst system to meet unit objectives
within given operating conditions and
constraints. This technology accounts
for the chemical reactions and reaction
environments encountered in the
different zones of the reactor and
matches the deployment of catalyst
benefits with each zone to optimize the
overall catalyst system’s performance.
Ultra-low-sulfur diesel STAX technology
has been successful in applications with
three reaction zones for more than
10 years. VGO STAX–FCC-PT technology,
however, currently covers only two
reaction zones, as FCC-PT operations
do not go deep enough in HDS/HDN
to achieve the reaction conditions
experienced in Zone 3. Figure 2 illustrates
the basic concepts of VGO STAX–FCC‑PT
technology by showing the types of
reactions occurring in each zone and the
inhibitors slowing these reactions.
Most low-to-moderate pressure units
have constant HDS as their primary
objective. In Zone 1, the top portion of
the reactor where direct desulfurization
(DDS) is the predominant reaction,
CoMo and NiCoMo catalysts are ideal
for boosting HDS reaction rates. HDN
reaction rates tend to be limited by
low pressure, and nitrogen inhibition
further slows HDN and HDA rates in
Zone 1. When intermediate product
sulfur and nitrogen fall to certain levels,
Zone 2 is achieved. HDS reactions can
occur via a combination of DDS and
hydrogenation reactions at an overall
slower rate than in Zone 1. Owing to
the lower concentration of nitrogen,
HDN and HDA reactions will be faster
compared with those in Zone 1, though
still relatively slow. Thus, NiCoMo
catalysts with their balance of HDS and
HDN reactions can be very beneficial
in this part of the reactor, especially at
moderate ppH2. The conversion of VGO
feed to lighter products in these units
is essentially due to thermal conversion
caused by increased temperature.
Units in the moderate-to-high pressure-
operating regime may have any of the
three operating objectives. As ppH2
increases, achieving increased HDN/HDA
tends to become increasingly important.
For applications where overall catalyst
system HDS activity is the primary
objective, using CoMo and/or NiCoMo
catalysts in both zones 1 and 2 can still be
effective for meeting unit objectives. To
achieve moderate levels of HDN and HDA,
using NiCoMo catalyst in Zone 2 with
CoMo or NiCoMo catalyst in Zone 1 may
be sufficient to meet the goals. Achieving
deep levels of HDN/HDA will generally
require NiMo catalyst in Zone 2. However,
for units that are HDS-activity-limited in
any way, CoMo and/or NiCoMo catalysts
are beneficial in Zone 1 and, in some
cases, the upper portion of Zone 2 as well.

ZONE 1 (30–60 VOL%) ZONE 2 (40–70 VOL%) Reaction zones vary in length and
H2 partial pressure Higher Lower
position during cycle

Main HDS reaction Direct + hydrogen Catalyst application strategy

ZONE 1 Direct HDS
Main HDS inhibitor Organic nitrogen must account for Zone 1 growth
Main HDN/HDA reaction Hydrogenation Hydrogenation and Zone 2 shrinkage throughout
Main HDN/HDA inhibitor organic nitrogen, aromatics Organic nitrogen, aromatics the cycle, and operating
HDS reaction rate Fast Slow
conditions and constraints and
HDN/HDA reaction rate Very slow Slow product targets
ZONE 2
CoMo (low to medium P) CoMo (<55 bar ppH2)
Preferred catalyst types (general (Ni)CoMo (medium P) (Ni)CoMo (medium ppH2)
guidance; may vary for specific cases) NiMo (high P) NiMo (>90 bar ppH2)

Figure 2: The VGO STAX-FCC-PT reaction zone concept.

ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 23

 TECHNICAL FOCUS

>>>
VGO STAX–FCC-PT commercial and 2-ppmw nickel plus vanadium. at which the feed must be introduced
examples Its inlet ppH2 is about 100 bar and its and/or require gas-phase sulfiding of
objectives are to produce FCC feed with the catalyst. Both these limitations
This STAX technology solution has
1500-ppmw sulfur and <600-ppmw can cause the organic additive used
had numerous successful applications
nitrogen, and to achieve a four-year to protect and maintain the Type II
in FCC‑PT units around the world.
cycle length. Based on its process model active metal configuration to degrade
A couple of different commercial
projections, Albemarle designed a on STARS catalysts. Using PROTECT®
application examples will help to
guard catalyst system to remove nickel, treatment enables STARS catalysts to be
illustrate the principle and the results.
vanadium and silicon, and to protect fully activated under these constraints,
The first example is a low-pressure
against polymerization causing pressure but it adds to the overall catalyst fill
CFHT unit with an inlet ppH2 of 53 bar
drop build-up, and applied a VGO STAX cost. Conventional Type I catalysts are
(770 psi) that processes a straight-
NiCoMo/NiMo STARS catalyst system in unaffected by these unit constraints
run VGO feed with 2-wt% sulfur and
the main reactor. As shown in Figure 4, and Albemarle has both NiCoMo and
1600-ppmw nitrogen. This unit runs in
this STAX catalyst system is approaching NiMo Type I catalysts in its FCC-PT
constant product sulfur mode targeting
three years on oil and its actual catalyst portfolio to overcome these unit
200-ppmw FCC feed sulfur to produce
performance corresponds very well with limitations, see page 26.
FCC gasoline with 10-ppmw sulfur. Its
the process model projections.
STAX catalyst system is designed with
CoMo and NiCoMo STARS® catalysts
and achieves nearly a six-year cycle Commercial FCC-PT unit
length (Figure 3). start-up constraints
STARS catalysts have a long history
The second example is a high-pressure (15 years) of successful FCC-PT
CFHT unit that processes a feed blend applications worldwide. Despite their FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
containing HVGO and HCGO that has success in numerous units, some units George Anderson
Email: george.anderson@albemarle.com
3-wt% sulfur, 1500-ppmw nitrogen have limitations on the temperature

105 410

400 800
102.5
750 Actual
390 Projection
100 700
380
WABT, °C

650
WABT, °F
HDS, %

97.5
370 600 KF 905

95 550 KFR 22
360 Deactivation = 2.5°F/month
HDS
500 >40-month cycle KFR 647 KF 857
92.5 350
WABT, °C 450

90 340 400
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400

Run time, d Days on stream

Figure 3: Temperature increase rate of reaction profile and Figure 4: Commercial example 2
constant 99% HDS for commercial example 1.

24 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84

TECHNICAL FOCUS

ALBEMARLE’S FCC PRETREATMENT (FCC-PT)

SOLUTIONS FOR CUSTOMERS’ CHALLENGES
Portfolio revamp offers refiners wider-ranging options

Albemarle has determined that

VGO STAX®–FCC-PT is a preferred
technology solution to enable
customers to meet the FCC-PT ALBEMARLE IS CURRENTLY
challenges in their refineries. RECOMMENDING THE USE
This technology leverages the
OF KF 907 PRIMARILY IN
performance benefits of four
recently commercialized catalysts UNITS WHERE THE START-UP
that have optimized the performance CONSTRAINTS MAKE TYPE I
of customers’ units. CATALYSTS PREFERABLE.
To help meet the increasingly challenging
process objectives across the broad
spectrum of feed properties and
operating objectives encountered in
FCC-PT, Albemarle’s four latest FCC‑PT
catalysts (Table 1) provide superior
technology solutions to customers
with units spanning the full range of
FCC-PT market sub-segments. When
utilized in STAX catalyst systems, these
Ketjenfine® (KF) catalysts can help
refiners to optimize performance to
meet multiple objectives and constraints
simultaneously (Figure 1). Toward
this end, Albemarle also continuously
upgrades its proprietary computer-
based process model(s) to ensure
reliable forecasts of unit performance
with its catalysts. Based on testing
conducted by Albemarle and by
customers, these four catalysts are all in Figure 1: Albemarle’s
commercial FCC-PT units. NiMo STAX systems including KF 860 FCC‑PT catalyst portfolio.
HDN and aromatic saturation activity

For FCC-PT reaction Zone 1, where most

KF 861
of the reactions occur via hydrogenolysis,
KF 851
CoMo or NiCoMo catalysts are the
preferred STAX catalyst components STAX systems:
(Ni)CoMo coupled with NiMo
at essentially all pressure levels.
KF 780 STARS with its high relative
volume activity (RVA) for HDS and HDN
and its low loading density is ideal for
this reaction zone where it provides
(Ni)Co Mo STAX systems
10–20% higher hydrodesulfurization
(HDS) RVA than older catalysts. KF 757 KF 780 KF 905 KF 905N KF 907
KF 907 has similar high HDS and
hydrodenitrogenation (HDN) RVAs to HDS activity Type I Type II

>>>
ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 25
 TECHNICAL FOCUS

>>>
KF 780. Because it is a Type I catalyst, STARS compared with KF 757 STARS Adding value for refiners
Albemarle is currently recommending and KF 907 compared with KF 905 As refiners face stiffer challenges in
the use of KF 907 primarily in units STARS were conducted in 2014 at low FCC-PT operations, they need to have
where the start-up constraints make and moderate pressures. These tests reliable and robust catalyst systems
Type I catalysts preferable. included several feeds and multiple available that give them high activity and
conditions to span HDS/HDN severities good stability. Albemarle’s technology
For moderate-to-high pressure ranging from low HDS/HDN conversion portfolio has been revamped with new
applications, (Ni)CoMo catalysts in to deep HDS/HDN conversion. The CoMo, NiCoMo and NiMo catalysts
Zone 1 coupled with NiMo catalysts results are shown in Figure 2, which that individually have high activity
in the bottom portion of the reactor compares RVA average values for and stability, but can give optimized
are often the preferred STAX system HDS and HDN for the four new performance in STAX catalyst systems to
components, especially if HDN and catalysts with older catalysts. However, ensure that customers achieve all their
hydrodearomatization (HDA) are key the actual performance in specific operating objectives.
objectives. KF 861 STARS is the newest applications will depend strongly on
NiMo catalyst and has the highest feed properties, operating conditions However, merely having high activity
HDN activity of any of the four FCC-PT and product property targets. catalysts available is insufficient in today’s
catalysts: generally, a 20% higher HDN
RVA than KF 851 or KF 857 STARS. It
also has relatively low loading density
and provides attractive fill costs.
PROCESS PRESSURE UNIT
KF 905N STARS catalyst is a special- CATALYST SIZES TYPE OBJECTIVE RANGE SALES
purpose trimetallic catalyst with superior
KF 780 1.3Q, 2Q CoMo STARS HDS Low to moderate 3
HDS activity coupled with high HDN
activity that meets or exceeds all the
KF 861 1.3Q, 2Q NiMo STARS HDN/HDA Moderate to high 1
NiMo catalysts except for KF 861.
Because of its high HDS and HDN
RVAs across all operating pressures, KF 905N 1.3Q, 3Q; 1.5E NiCoMo STARS HDS/HDN Low to high 11
its performance can be very good in
Zone 1 and the upper part of Zone 2. KF 907 1.3Q, 2Q; 1.5E NiCoMo Type I HDS Low to moderate 4
KF 905N has been used successfully in 11
commercial catalytic feed hydrotreatment
Table 1: New FCC-PT catalysts commercialized in 2013–2114
units and is manufactured by the Nippon
Ketjen joint venture.

Albemarle’s catalyst recommendations

to refiners for VGO STAX–FCC-PT 160
solutions are tailored to address their CONVENTIONAL STARS
140
specific needs and opportunities, so the
company recommends pilot plant tests 120
to confirm its catalyst recommendations
and performance estimates where the 100
feed and/or conditions are significantly 80
different from its previous commercial
and/or pilot plant experience. 60

40
Market trials
20
Albemarle conducted extensive
(3–5 months) market introduction tests 0
in 2013–2014 that compared KF 861 KF 851 KF 901 KF 907 KF 857 KF 861 KF 757 KF 780 KF 905 KF 905N
STARS and KF 905N STARS with KF 851
HDS RVA HDN RVA
and KF 905 STARS respectively at
moderate and high pressures. Similar
market introduction tests for KF 780 Figure 2: HDS/HDN RVAs for Albemarle FCC-PT catalysts.

26 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84

refining environment. Customers need ALBEMARLE’S TECHNOLOGY PORTFOLIO
those catalysts that best meet their
HAS BEEN REVAMPED WITH NEW
operating objectives and constraints.
To help with this Albemarle uses CATALYSTS THAT INDIVIDUALLY HAVE
its deep refining industry insight to HIGH ACTIVITY AND STABILITY, BUT
identify customers’ needs, constraints CAN GIVE OPTIMIZED PERFORMANCE
and opportunities, and its process
IN STAX CATALYST SYSTEMS TO ENSURE
and technology application expertise
to advise on suitable catalyst systems THAT CUSTOMERS ACHIEVE ALL THEIR
and operating tactics. Toward this end, OPERATING OBJECTIVES.
Albemarle’s proprietary computer process
model gives highly reliable performance
estimates and is used to generate
and assess catalyst loading design
recommendations for customers’ units.

Albemarle is always willing for

customers to test proposed solutions
before they are applied. The company
will conduct pilot plant tests for
individual customer units and/or
provide catalyst samples for customers
to conduct their own assessments.
Where relevant commercial experience
exists, Albemarle will share commercial
results and help prospective customers
contact existing references, if possible.
In addition, Albemarle technical
service specialists can assist customers
in preparing for unit turnarounds,
monitoring catalyst loading and unit
start-ups, monitoring unit operations
throughout the cycle and help to
troubleshoot unit problems that arise
during operations. FOR MORE INFORMATION, CONTACT:
George Anderson
Email: george.anderson@albemarle.com

PPH2 LOW MODERATE HIGH

MAIN OPERATING OBJECTIVE All NiCoMo or (Ni)CoMo/ NiMo All NiMo or (Ni)CoMo/NiMo STAX;
All (Ni)CoMo or CoMo/NiCoMo STAX;
STAX; e.g., KF 905N or KF 780/KF e.g., KF 861 or KF 905N/KF 861 or
MAXIMUM HDN/HDA e.g., KF 780 or KF 780/KF 905N
861 or KF 907/KF 851 KF 907/KF 851

All (Ni)CoMo or CoMo/NiCoMo STAX; All NiCoMo or (Ni)CoMo/NiMo STAX; All NiMo or (Ni)CoMo/NiMo STAX;
INCREASED CONVERSION
e.g., KF 780 or KF 780/KF 905N e.g., KF 905N or KF 780/KF 861 e.g., KF 861 or KF 905N/KF 861

CONSTANT (LOW) PRODUCT SULFUR; All (Ni)CoMo or (Ni)CoMo/NiMo

All (Ni)CoMo or CoMo/(Ni)CoMo All (Ni)CoMo or CoMo/NiCoMo STAX;
HIGH HDS STAX; e.g., KF 905N/KF 861 or KF
STAX; e.g., KF 780 or KF 780/KF 905N e.g., KF 780 or KF 780/KF 905N
907/KF 851

Figure 3: Preferred technology solutions for each FCC-PT operating segment.

ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84 27

 AFX
no matter the feedstock quality, from light gas oils to heavy residues, Albemarle’s AfX
catalysts provide breakthrough performance. If maximizing the propylene yield from your FCC unit is high
on your agenda, you require more than a traditional catalyst. That’s why Albemarle supplies the innovative AFX™ catalyst
technology to a majority of customers who operate to maximize propylene. Through their unique morphology with high
accessibility, highly active and selective matrices and proprietary zeolite technology, AFX catalysts deliver unsurpassed
propylene yield. Ready to raise the bar on your FCC unit’s propylene yield? it’s time to maximize your potential with AfX.

in addition to maximizing C3=, AfX also minimizes dry gas and bottoms
and delivers superior yields of transportation fuels.

For more information on Albemarle AFX catalysts or our exceptional portfolio

of products and services, call (281) 480-4747 or visit www.albemarle.com.

refininG solutions

28 ALBEMARLE CATALYST COURIER ISSUE 84