Gilsonite as a Source of Synthetic Fuels P. It. COTTINGHAM, S. S. TIHEN, J. F. BROWN, E. 0. KINDSCHY, JR., R. E. KELLEY, W. E. SCHUNTER, AND W. I. R. MURPHY Petroleum and Oil-Shale Experiment Station, Bureau of Mines, Laramie, Wyo.
G
ILSONITE (uintaite) is found chiefly in the Uinta Basin of Lhe United States, in a belt about 65 miles long extending from Rio Blanco County, Colo., through Uintah County, Utah, into Duchesne County; most of the important deposits are in Utah (3, 4,1 0 ) . It occurs in vertical veins that vary in width from a few inches up to 22 feet, average 4 to 6 feet, and range in depth from 100 feet near the White River, on the eastern end of the belt, to about 2000 feet near Myton, Utah, on the western end, where it has been mined to a depth of 1500 feet (2'). The veins contain almost no inorganic matter but are sandwiched between sheer sandstone walls and outcrop a t the surface, where they may be traced for several miles in a general direction from southeast t o northwest ( 1 , 10). About the turn of the century, it was estimated that these deposits contained nearly 50,000,000 tons, but more recent appraisal indicates approximately 30,000,000 tons, of which about 16,000,000 tons is considered suitable for commercial development (2). Figure 1 shows the location and direction of the veins (11). The material is an asphaltite ( 1 , 10) characterized by a black color, conchoidal fracture, bright to fairly bright luster, and redbrown streak. Published analyses ( 1 , 5 - 7 , 1 2 )show it contains no solid paraffis and only traces of inorganic matter. Properties of gilsonite are shown in Table I.
Higher grades are used in manufacturing varnish, paint, electrical insulation, and printer's ink; the intermediate grade is used for making battery cases, floor tiles, switch handles, knobs, and buttons of various kinds; and the poorer grade is used in the saturation of felt (8). Recently, gilsonite has been found valuable for insulating and waterproofing high-temperature piping, and this use is developing rapidly into the largest single outlet. Its value as a source of metallurgical coke is being investigated, a use that would yield considerable percentages of distillates and liquefied petroleum gases as by-products (2). The work reported here was done at the Laramie, JVyo., laboratory of the Bureau of >lines, in cooperation with the American Gilsonite Co. to evaluate as a source of liquid fuels a distillate produced in the laboratory coking of gilsonite by J. M. Sugihara of the University of Utah. The coker distillate was prepared in a series of coking operations in which the gilsonite was heated at atmospheric pressure in a gas-fired steel pot until the evolution of oil and gas ceased. This usually required a heating period of 4 to 5 hours, during which the material in the center of the pot reached a maximum temperature in the range 660' to 770' F. Yields of products were 50 to 55 weight % distillate, 15 to 20yo gas, and 30% coke. A s only a small sample of the distillate was available for testing, the results are only in-
Table I. Properties of Gilsonite Specific gravity, F0°/600 F. Hardness (Mohs scale) Melting point, F. Fixed carbon wt. % Ultimate anaiysis, wt. % Carbon Hydrogen Nitrogen Sulfur Oxygen
1.01-1.10 2 250-350 10-20 85-86 8.5-10.0 2.0-2.8 0.3-0.5 0-2
loot
GlLSONlTE VEINS
O L
SCALE IN MILES IO
0
I
I
IO
20
Figure 2.
Figure 1. Gilsonite area of northeastern Utah 328
Ib
A &
A
$0
a0 o; PERCENT EVAPORATED
A3
AIL
ASTM distillations of colter distillates from gilsonite and shale oil
February 1955
INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
329
nitrogen, sulfur, and oxygen c o m p o u n d s ) , and the =me Shale Oil Coker Distillate range of t o t a l c y c l i c c o m Topped Naphtha distilpounds (20 to 25%) that are Total fraction late found in the naphtha portion of 100.0 34.4 65.6 0.8570 0.7767 0.8936 shale-oil coker distillate, Other 33.6 50.6 26.8 2.4 tests show that it has higher 378 octane numbers, i n d i c a t i n g significant differences in molec10 2.19 ular structure not shown by the 7.8 12.0 silica gel method of analysis, 0.65 0.83 0.53 and contains less tar acids, tar 1.55 0.91 1.85 85.32 84.31 bases, sulfur, nitrogen, and gum 12.22 11.75 6.98 7.18 than most shale-oil naphthas (Table 11). 32 1 The topped distillate was black and contained a higher 16 42 percentage of nitrogen and less sulfur than the original coker 58 67 distillate. Only a fourth of 64 t h e f r a c t i o n c o n s i s t e d of 73 paraffin and naphthene hydro123 129 440 carbons, and because of the 269 200 477 370 242 489 high percentages of olefins and 489 311 537 aromatics present it probably 629 371 651 681 387 710 would not have a good cetane 97.0 98.0 97.0 1.0 1.5 3.0 number, but this test ww not made because of the small quantity of stock available. Its value as a catalytic cracking stock is doubtful because of the high nitrogen content (1.7%).
Table 11. Properties of Colcer Distillates and Fractions from Gilsonite and Shale Oil
Yield vol. 7 S ecikc gra&y, 6Oo/6O0 F. A ~ gravity I Reid va or pressure lb /sq inch Gum AETM mg./iOO m1.L Indubtion pe;iod, min.@ Pour point, O F. Viscosity, kin. a t looe F., ca. Carbon res Ramsbottom wt. % T a r acids &d tar bases, Gal. % Ultimate analysis, wt. yo Sulfur Nitrogen Carbon Hydrogen C/H wt. ratio Hydrocarbons in neutral oil, vol. % Paraffins Naphthenes Aliphatic olefine Cyclic olefins Aromatics b Oatane No. Motor method Clear 3 ml. T E L Research method Clear 3 ml. T E L ASTM distn. (cor. to 760 mrn.), F.
Gilsonite Coker Distillate Topped Naphtha distilTotal fraction late 100.0 26.6 73.4 0.8642 0.7581 0.9023 32.2 55.2 25.4 4.3 144 66 50 2.57 0.60 1.8 9.7 0.21 1.37 84.84 12.32 6.89
35 9 6
107 20% 50’7 90%
37
67 76
+ +
I.B.P.
0.17 1.70 85.88 12.09 7.10
0.19 0.22
.
75
.. .
140 309 384 586
evap. evap. evap. ... evap. E.P. evap. 730 Recovery, vol. % 92.8 Residue, vol. % 7.0 Inhibited with 0.01 U.O.P., No. 5. b Includes neutral s u l l r and nitrogen compounds.
1os 197 232 295 365 395 98.0 1.7
418 483 512 609 740 744 93.8 6.2
Q
dicative of some types of motor fuels that could be produced. Much more extensive study would be required if the material were to be evaluated thoroughly. PROPERTIES O F GILSONITE COKER DISTILLATE
Because of the proximity of gilsonite deposits t o the Green River oil-shale beds which underlie the entire region where gilsonite is found, it has been suggested that gilsonite may have had its origin in the kerogen of shale (2). There is disagreement among authors concerning this possibility (11, l a ) , but a comparison of properties of coker distillates derived from the two materials is of interest. The gilsonite coker distillate had a higher boiling range and contained less naphtha, and had higher specific gravity, pour point, and viscosity than the shale-oil distillate. These differences, and also the slightly greater carbon-hydrogen weight ratio of the shale-oil distillate, could be ascribed to a greater depth of cracking of the shale oil during preparation of the coker distillate. Nitrogen contents of the two distillates were in the same range, but sulfur content of the gilsonite distillate was only one third that of the shale-oil distillate, and this difference can be traced to the materials charged to the coking units rather than t o the extent of cracking. These properties are compared in Table 11, and distillation data on the two stocks are plotted in Figure 2. Molecular weight calculations based on distillation data and specific gravities indicate an average molecular weight of 200 for the gilsonite coker distillate and 170 for the shale-oil coker distillate. When fractionated in a batch still the coker distillate yielded, on a no-loss basis, 26.6 volume yo of 395’ F. end-poifit naphtha and 73.4 volume yo of higher-boiling oil. The naphtha was faintly red as i t was collected from the distillation apparatus and became dark red after standing a short time. Analysis, by the silica gel method, shows that it contains about the same percentage of paraffins and aliphatic olefins, the same quantity of cyclic olefins (approximately 5 t o a%), but more naphthenes, only about one third the quantity of aromatics (including
PROCESSING COK ER-DI STI L LATE FRACTIONS
The processing steps applied to the coker distillate for the production of gasoline were : chemically treating the straight-run naphtha fraction; hydrogenating the topped distillate and fractionating the hydrogenated product into naphtha and recycle stock; and rehydrogenating the heavy oil from the first hydrogenation. Products from each of these processing steps were tested to the extent pern#tted by the volume of sample available. Chemical Treatment of Naphtha Fraction. The naphtha fraction was washed with solutions of 10 weight % sodium hydroxide and 10 weight % sulfuric acid to remove t a r acids and t a r bases, treated with 6 pounds of concentrated sulfuric acid per barrel, neutralized with dilute sodium hydroxide solution, washed with water, and redistilled at 40 mm. of mercury absolute pressure, and the distillate was inhibited with 0.01 weight yo UOP No. 5 inhibitor. Properties of the treated naphtha are shown in Table 111. The nitrogen content was reduced but not eliminated by this treatment, probably indicating that only part of the nitrogen is
Table 111. Properties of Chemically Treated Naphtha Acid, lb./barrel Naphtha yield, vpl. % Naphtha properties Specific gravity, 60°/600 F. Sulfur,wt. Yo Nitrogen wt. % Inductio; eriod, min. Gum AST% m ./lo0 ml. Gum’ copper ’disk. mg./100 ml. Hydiocarbon types vol. Paraffins and naihthenea Olefins Aromatics b Octanes Motor, clear 3 ml. T E L Research, clear After removal of tar acids and tar bases. Includes neutral sulfur and nitrogen compounds.
+
0
6.0 97.0 0.7560 0.17 0.10 210 18 24 37 56 7 64 74 74
330
I N D U S T R I A L A N D E N'G I N E E R I N G C H E M I S T R Y
7 LECTRIC WIND I NG €VI-DUTY FURNACE HERMOWELL
TALYST TUBE
LOWJAJJ-~~~~~~~ ICE PRESSURE RECEIVER
4t
LIQUID PRODUCT
Vol. 47, No. 2
experiment was determined from the difference b e t w w t the quantity charged and that found in the exit gas. OPERATION. Cobalt molybdate cataIpst was used a t processing conditions of: average temperalure, 892" F. ; pressure, I000 pounds per square inch; hydrogen flow rate, 3000 cu. feet per barrel of charge; space velocity, 1.0 volume of oil per voluine of catalyst per hour. The reaction was exothermic and catalyst temperature rosr from 879" F. a t the top of the bed t o a maximum of 900' F. in the center. Heat loss thiough the ends of the reactor caused the bottom of the catalyst bed to he slightly cooler than the center. Operating data arc given in Table ITr. The total liquid recovery was 92.8 volume %, and the naphtha fraction 39.2 volume % of the charge. Including the C4fractions from the gas, total liquid yield would be QG.Q% and naphtha yield 43.3% of the charge Based on the latter figure, naphtha yield was 93.3 volume % of conversion. Hydrogen consumption was 770 standard cubic feet per barrel of feed, and the value obtained from gas-volume measurements was in good agreement with that calculated from elemental analysis of charge and products. Results of this calculation show that hydrogen consumption was 1.52 moles per mole of feed, based on an average molecular weight of 236 determined from the gravity and distillation curve of the feed, or about 3.2 moles for each mole of feed converted to other products. Of this, 0.34 mole was combined with nitrogen in the form of ammonia and about 0.01 mole with sulfur as hydrogen sulfide. A catalyst deposit amounting to 1.4 weight % of the charge, or 5.G weight % of the fresh catalyst, was laid down. Although the amount of catalyst deposit obtained in a short experiment is not a true indication of the catalyst deposit that might be obtained in longer cycles, processing periods of great length probably mould be impossible with the charge stock and conditions used here. Lowering the end point of the charge stock or raising the hydrogen pressure might result in lower catalyst deposit. The aro-
Figure 3. Flow diagram of hydrogenation unit
present in basic compounds. Sulfur content as reduced only slightly; but stability, as measured by the induction period, was improved, and the gum content was decreased. Additional improvement in these properties would be desirable before this stock was used in gasoline blends. A small loss in octane number but a very slight increase in tetraethyllead susceptibility occurred during treatment. The high gum content of the treated naphtha may have been due partly to poor fractionation of the treated stock caused by the very small quantity of polymer in the flask a t the end of the distillation. The same type of treatment in a commercial unit probably would produce enough improvement in gum content to permit the use of the naphtha as blending stock for regular-grade gasoline. Hydrogenation of Topped Distillate. The bottoms fraction was hydrogenated, under conditions found suitable for shale-oil ooker distillate, to determine the yield and quality of gasoline that could be obtained by this process.
APPARATUS,X simplified flou- diagram of the hydrogenation apparatus is shown in Figure 3. The stainless steel react,or, containing 500 cc. of catalyst, had five thermocouples uniformly spaced in a central rll extending the length of the catalyst hed. I t \vas heated by an electric furnace that was maintained at constant temperature throughout the run. Charge stock waR me3siired in n buret, pumped by a piston-type pump to the inlet of the stainless steel preheater, mixed with hydrogen, and passed downward through the preheater and reactor. Products passed through a water-cooled condenser and were collected in a water-jacketed, high-pressure receiver where most of the gases were separated and passed through a hack-pressure regulator t o the gas meter and wet-type gas holder. Liquid products were removed through a manually operated valve t o a n ice-cooled, low-pressure receiver maintained a t atmospheric pressure, where they were stored until the end of the run. The quantity of hydrogen consumed in the
Table IV. Operating Conditions and Material Balances for Hydrogenation of Topped Gilsonite Colier Distillate First Pass Cobalt molybdate
Conditions Catalyst Cat. temp., O F. Averaee
Second Pass Cobalt molybdate
892 900 1000 3000 770 1.0 3.8
T'ol.
56
mt. %
of of Product distiibution Charge Charge Charge 100.0 100.0 Synthetic crude 92.8 84.7 32.1 Naphtha 39.2 Recvole oil 53.6 52.6 12.2 GasC a t . deuosit 1.4 Water ,.. 0.3 Ca Cs from gas 4,l .. Ca naphtha 43.3 ... 10-lb. R . v . ~ . gasoline 393 .., Outside Cd required ( - 1 4 , 0 ..
+ +
.
.
882 890 1000 3000 575 1.1 1.5
Gal./ Bbl. of VOl. 70W t . % Coker of of llist. Charge Charge 30.8 100.0 100.0 28.6 93.7 88.R 12.1 38.9 33.0 16.5 54.8 54.9 ,.
..
...
7.8 2 3
,.. 1.3 13.4
4.0 42.9
... ...
12.1 1.3
43.6 0 7
...
0 6
...
Gal./ Bbl. of Coker Ilist.
16.5 15.4
6.4 9.0
.. , .
... 0 7 7 1 7 2 0.1
matic content of the charge, 37%, indicates that higher pressuros may be desirable; however, there was not enough stock availablr with which t o explore other hydrogenating conditions. Properties of the liquid products are shown in Table V. The total liquid product was separated by distillation into naphtha and recycle stock and the naphtha was inhibited beiore it was tested. The naphtha was doctor sweet, had excellent oxidation stability, and had low gum content; it contained only 0.1170 sulfur and 0.14y0nitrogen. Clear motor and research octane numbers were 65 and 74, respectively, but with 3 ml. of tetra-
INDUSTRIAL AND ENGINEERING CHEMISTRY
February 1955
was 93.7 volume %, slightly better than for the first pass; but naphtha yield was 38.9 volume % compared with 39.2% for the first pass. Yield of Cd-plus naphtha was 42.9% or 94.9% of conversion. Catalyst deposit was 2.3 weight yo of the charge, or 3.6% of the fresh catalyst weight, and hydrogen consumption was 575 cubic feet per barrel compared with 770 cubic feet in the first pass. Based on a n average molecular weight of 215 for the oil charged to the second pass, hydrogen consumption was 1.06 moles per mole of charge, or about 2.3 moles for each mole of oil converted t o other products. Most of this was used in saturating hydrocarbons and a relatively small portion in removing nitrogen and sulfur. Properties of the liquid products are shown in Table V and gas analyses for both runs in Table VI. The naphtha was of good quality, with low sulfur content and good oxidation stability. It appeared to have good color stability; but, because the sample was rapidly consumed in test work, no definite conclusions can be stated in this regard. Insufficient sample was available for gum determinations. Octane numbers, determined by the micromethod, were similar t o those of naphtha from the first-pass hydrogenation, although the aromatic content was higher in the recycle naphtha (32% compared with 24). The ASTM distillation indicates t h a t more natural gasoline or other low-boiling stock would be required with recycle naphtha than with first-pass naphtha t o meet motor-gasoline requirements. The high-boiling fraction from recycle hydrogenation had a 90% point by ASTM distillation of 611' F., a pour point of 5O F., and contained only 0.0770sulfur. However, the cetane number (37) and the Ramsbottom carbon residue on the 10% bottoms (0.95%) indicate t h a t this stock would not be good Diesel fuel. Some commercial additives probably would raise the cetane number t o 40, the minimum required for ASTM 1-D and 2-D fuels.
GILSON ITE MINING
DISTILLATE
COKER
TAR ACIDS + TAR BASES 8 BBL./DAY
1000
151 TONS/DAY
BBL./DAY
L BOTTOMS 734 BBL./DAY
I
I DRY ;AS 531 000 SC+/DAY
1
I SU~FUR 294 LBJDAY
I '
I
BUTANE 64.9 BBLJDAY EXTERNAL BUTAN
AMM~NIA 4589 LBJDAY
331
w
TEN-POUND GASOLINE 953.0 B B L J DAY
Figure 4. Yields from plant processing 1000 barrels per day of coker distillate from gilsonite
ethyllead, these were increased to 80 and 85. The boiling range compares favorably with that of most regular-grade gasolines sold i n the far western part of the United States during 1953, and the other properties are also satisfactory for regular-grade gasoline. Table V. Properties of Products from Hydrogenation of Topped There being only a small volume of product Coker Distillate available from the first hydrogenation, the porFirst Pass Recond Pass tion boiling above the naphtha range, 53.6 volume Recycle Re cy c1e oll Naphtha oil Feed Naphtha yo of the charge, was not evaluated completely Specific gravity, 60/60° F. 0.8802 0.9023 0.7375 0.7715 0.8814 as a Diesel fuel. A part of it was distilled and API aravitv. 60' F. 25.4 60.4 29.3 51.9 29.0 t h e distillate fraction, 90 volume %, had an 1.4225 I . 4470 Ref r i c tive 2 ndex, n"2 9.9 5.0 Reid va or press. lb./sq. inch aniline point of 134' F. and a calculated Diesel 3.4 Gum AETM m g h 0 0 m1.G index of 42.4. It was very dark and the aniline 10.1 Gum' Cu dis; mg./100 m1.0 1440 + 1440 + Indubtion period, min.5 point was determined with difficulty. Because sweet sweet Doctor test 2 . 8 of its poor appearance and relatively low Diesel Tar bases' acids vol. 19.7 Tar vol. % % 2.2 index, no further testing was done. The porsulfur wt'. % 0.17 0.08 0.02 0.07 0.11 Nitrop'en wt. % 1.70 0.14 0.61 0.06 0.19 tion not distilled was recharged t o the hydrogenaPour poi& F. 5 b/2.99 3 .1 Vis., kin. a i 100' F., cs. tion unit. Carbon res Ramsbottom, wt. % Hydrogenation of Recycle Oil. The highWhole oii' 0.60 0.04 10% bottoms 0.95 boiling fraction remaining after the gasoline b134 Aniline point, F. 128 b42.4 Diesel index 37.2 formed in the first experiment had been separated 37 Cetane No. was charged t o the hydrogenation unit under 200 Flash point (PM), O F. Hydrocarbons in neutral oil, vol. % conditions similar to those used in the first hydro51 65 Paraffins 19 0 Naphthenes (24 genation; but, because less exothermic heat was 39 Olefins 6 3 available from the reaction, average reaction temAromaticsC 37 24 32 Octane No. perature was 10' F. lower than in the first experi65 63 Motor clear 80 + 3'ml. T E L 80 ment. Conditions were: average temperature, Research, clear 74 . .. 882' F.; pressure, 1000 pounds per square inch; + 3 ml. T E L 85 85 ASTM distn. (cor. to ' 760 mm .) F. hydrogen flow rate, 3000 cu. feet per barrel; 424 Initial b.o. 418 97 115 429 446 112 481 483 158 space velocity, 1.1 volumes of oil per volume of 465 512 160 206 488 catalyst per hour. The highest temperature in 609 546 258 576 807 705 740 357 611 395 the cataIyst bed occurred at a lower level in the 611 723 744 388 406 94.6 fikrcbvery vol. % 93.8 92.0 95.8 89.5 bed than in the first experiment, which may indi5.0 10.0 6.2 0.5 1.2 Residue, $01. % cate a lower reaction rate in hydrogenating re0 Inhibited with 0.01% UOP No. 5. cycle stock. b Pro erties of 90% distdlate. c Inogdes neutral sulfur and nitrogen compounds. Processing conditions and material balance .ape shown in Table IV. Liquid product yield 0
O
I N D U S T R I A L A N D E N G I N E E R I N G CHEMISTRY
332 Table VI.
Gas .4nalyses, Hydrogenation of Gilsonite Coker Distillate
Liquid Vol. Vol. % or of Mole yo Charge First-pass hydrogenation Methane Ethane Propane Butanes Butenes Carbon monoxide Hydrogenation of recycle oil Methane Ethane Propane Butanes Pentanes Ethylene Butenes Carbon dioxide Carbon monoxide a
39.3 22.1 16.5 9.0 2.1 11,O 36.9 23.1 13.8 10.8 4.8 3.1 3.1 1.5 3.1
SCF/Bbl. of Charge*
SCF/Bbl. of Coker Dist.“
Gal./Bbl. of Charge
5.4 3.3 0.8
145 82 62 33 8 40
2.27 1.39 0.33
41 26 16 12
i.05
..
.
..
.
.,
198 112 84 45 10 55
...
104
,
,
..
2.5 2.2 1.1
...
0.7
.,.
.,.
65
40 31 13 9 9 4 9
5 4
4 2 4
. . ... ...
Gal./Bbl. of
Coker Dist.
... ...
1,67 1.02 0.24
...
... 0.92 0.46
. . ~
0.29
,..
...
Measured at 80’ F. and 700 mm.
SIGNIFICANCE O F RESULTS
The yields of raw products obtained from coking gilsonite in pilot sized equipment have been reported (9) t o be approximately 30% by weight coke, 20% gas, and 50% coker distillate. Based on the above yields in the coking operation and the yields obtained in laboratory processing of the coker distillate, the block diagram in Figure 4 has been constructed t o show approximately the output of a plant processing 302 tons of gilsonite (1000 barrels a day of coker distillate) by the processing sequence used in the laboratory. It is assumed that the naphtha yield of 86.1 volume yoof conversion obtained in the hydrogenation of recycle stock in the laboratory will apply for recycling to extinction, producing a total naphtha yield of 85.3 volume % for the hydrogenation process exclusive of Cd and Cg hydrocarbons from the gas, or 94.2% on the Ca-plus basis. Sufficient C, hydrocarbons are contained in gas from the hydrogenation process t o permit production of 10-pound Reid vapor-pressure hydrogenated gasoline, but inrlusion of the acid-treated naphtha requires the addition of 0.4 volume yo of butane (expressed as percentage of the coker distillate) not available from the process. Over-a11 gasoline yield from the eoker distillate on this basis is 95.3 volume % It it were assumed that 50% of the 16,000,000 tons of minable gilsonite were processed as shown here, this could mean the production of over 25,000,000 barrels of gasoline. Although this quantity is too small t o have any great significance in the national fuel supply, it could assume considerable importance as a source of fuels for the Rocky Mountain area. CONCLUSIONS
Distillate prepared by coking gilsonite is similar in many respects to distillate prepared by coking E-T-U shale oil, but it contains considerably less sulfur. I t s high pour point might be troublesome in pipeline transportation. The straight-run naphtha fraction could be used in gasoline blends after mild chemical treatment t o reduce gum and improve stability and color. The straight-run, high-boiling fraction would be a poor Diesel fuel stock and, because of its high nitrogen content, probably a poor catalytic cracking stock. It can be hydrogenated, under relatively mild conditions, to an ultimate yield of approximately 8591,of stable, low-sulfur naphtha that on blending with less than 3 ml. of tetraethyllead per gallon will have octane numbers high enough t o meet regular-grade gasoline specifications. There are insufficient quantities of C4-plus hydrocarbons in the gas formed in t h e two hydrogenation steps t o blend the combined naphthas to a Reid vapor pressure of 10 pounds per square inch The boiling range distribution of the combined naphthas produced
0:i1 0.36 0.18
... ... ...
Moles/100 Nlolez ConverCharge’ slon
Wtf%
2.6 2.8 3.0 2.1 0.5 1.2
34 18 4 23
81
1.4 1.7 1.4 1.4 0.8 0.2 0.4 0.2 0.2
42 27 15 11 5 3 3 2 3
45
Vol. 47, No. 2 in these experiments is such that they might require blending also with other stocks to produce desirable v o l a t i l i t y characteristics. E v e n a f t e r t w o passes through the h y d r o g e n a t i o n unit, the portion of the product boiling above the naphtha range appears t o have poor Diesel-fuel properties. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
This project was part of the Synthetic Liquid Fuels Program of the Bureau of Mines and was performed a t the Petroleum and OilShale Experiment Station under the general direction of H. P. Rue and H. M. Thorne. Special thanks are due various members of the personnel of the station for their valuable assistance in carrying out this project. The gilsonite coker distillate used in this work was provided by the American Gilsonite Co. and was prepared by J. M. Sugihara of the University of Utah. The work was done under a cooperative agreement between the University of Wyoming and the U. S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Mines. 0.11
LITERATURE CITED
(1) Abraham, Herbert, “Asphalt3 and Allied Substances,” Vol. I, pp. 250 -8, New York, D. Van Nostrand Co., 1945. Arnold, Richard, and Potts, Keith, “Gilsonite,” Utah Economic and Business Review, College of Business, University of Utah, pp, 4-5, May 1952. (3) Baker, J. H., “Economics of Gilsonite in the Uinta Basin,” Guidebook to the Geology of Utah, No. 5, Intermountain Association of Petroleum Geologists, Salt Lake City, pp. 119-
(2)
20, 1950.
Ball, J. O., Quart. Col. School Mines, 39, KO.1 , 84-6 (1944). ( 5 ) Bardwell, C., and coworkers,J. IND. ENG.CHEM.,5 , 9 7 3 (1913). (6) Bardwell, C., and coworkers, Trans. Utah Acad. Sci., 1 , 78-95 (7) Botkin, C. W., Chenz. M e t . Eng., 26,443-8 (1922). (4)
(1918).
(8) Fene, W. J., U. S. Bur. Mines, Inform. Circ. 6069 (1928). (9) Goodner, E. F., ilmerican Gilsonite Co., Salt Lake City, private
communication, Oct. 1 3 , 1952.
(IO) Ladoo, R. B., U. 9. Bur. Mines, Rept. Invest. 2121 (1920). (11) Murray, A . N., “Gilsonite Deposits of the Uinta Basin, Utah,” Guidebook to the Geology of Utah, No. 5 , Intermountain
Association of Petroleum Geologists, Salt Lake City, pp. 11318, 1950. (12) Ilichardson, C., J. IKD. EXG.CHFAI.,8, 4 9 3 4 (1916). RECEITBD for review May 7 , 1954. ACCEPTED October 12, 1954. Presented before the Division of Gas and Fuel Chemistry Symposium on Synthetic Liquid Fuels and Chemicals, at the 125th Meeting of the AYERIC A N CHEMICAL SOCIETY, Kansas City, Mo.. 1954.
