a supply of liquid fuels from domestic coal deposits. The first plant for the
hydrogenation of brown coal began in Germany in 1927. Coal conversion to liquids
was a high pressure, 3,000–10,000 psig (207–690 bar) and high-temperature
(700–1,000
F, 371–538
C) catalytic process (Ministry of Fuels and Power
1947). From 1925 to 1930, I.G. Farbenindustrie in Germany in collaboration with
Standard Oil of New Jersey developed hydrocracking technology to convert heavy
gas oils to lighter fuels (Heinemann 1981). Other groups did research work to
develop technology to upgrade heavier petroleum fractions (Pier 1949). After
World War II, the Middle Eastern crudes became available, and their gas oils and
cracked stocks were easily processed in FCC. So hydrocracking became less
important. Catalytic cracking processes proved to be more economical for
converting heavy petroleum fraction to gasoline based on the demands for gasoline
and environmental regulations of that time.
Hydrocracking technology reemerged in the 1950s with the growth of the
transportation industries. In the mid-1950s, the automotive industry began to
make high-performance cars with engines that required high-octane gasoline.
This need caused a large expansion of the catalytic cracking industry to produce
gasoline. But the by-products were large quantities of refractory cycle oils that were
difficult to convert to gasoline and lighter products. Hydrocracking was able to
convert these difficult by-products to desirable gasoline and diesel fractions and so
was adopted in some refineries. Simultaneously, railroads switched from steam to
diesel engines, and commercial aviation, using more jet fuel, began to emerge as a
large industry. All three of these industries increased the demand for refined
petroleum products. The flexibility of the newly developed hydrocracking processes allowed the production of fuels from heavier feedstocks.
In early 1960, Chevron Research Co. announced a new hydrocracking process
called “Isocracking” (Stormont 1959). Unocal, then known as Union Oil Co., in
collaboration with ESSO, introduced the hydrocracking process called
“Unicracking-JHC” (Oil Gas J 1960). In the late 1950s, UOP announced the
“Lomax” hydrocracking process (Sterba and Watkins 1960). By the mid-1960s,
seven different hydrocracking processes were offered for license (Scott and
Patterson 1967).
Presently, various environmental regulations stipulate a low level of sulfur and
in some cases a low level of aromatics in both gasoline and diesel products; this has
spurred a growth in a variety of hydroprocessing complexes around the world. In
the United States, the Tier 2 gasoline sulfur program reduced the sulfur content of
gasoline by up to 90 % from an uncontrolled level. An average sulfur level 30 ppm
was phased in from 2004 to 2007. The final Tier 3 gasoline sulfur program lowers
the sulfur level to 10 ppm. This level is planned but it has not yet been mandated
(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/standards/fuels/gas-sulfur.htm). However, in Europe an
essentially zero sulfur level is the specification, and in Japan, they are moving
toward the 10 ppm S specification (http://transportpolicy.net/index.php?title=EU:_
Fuels:_Diesel_and_Gasoline#Technical_Standards;
http://transportpolicy.net/
index.php?title=Japan:_Fuels:_Diesel_and_Gasoline). As the sulfur level required
in gasoline and diesel reached low levels, a large growth in both hydrotreating and
Hydrocracking in Petroleum Processing
321
hydrogenation of brown coal began in Germany in 1927. Coal conversion to liquids
was a high pressure, 3,000–10,000 psig (207–690 bar) and high-temperature
(700–1,000
F, 371–538
C) catalytic process (Ministry of Fuels and Power
1947). From 1925 to 1930, I.G. Farbenindustrie in Germany in collaboration with
Standard Oil of New Jersey developed hydrocracking technology to convert heavy
gas oils to lighter fuels (Heinemann 1981). Other groups did research work to
develop technology to upgrade heavier petroleum fractions (Pier 1949). After
World War II, the Middle Eastern crudes became available, and their gas oils and
cracked stocks were easily processed in FCC. So hydrocracking became less
important. Catalytic cracking processes proved to be more economical for
converting heavy petroleum fraction to gasoline based on the demands for gasoline
and environmental regulations of that time.
Hydrocracking technology reemerged in the 1950s with the growth of the
transportation industries. In the mid-1950s, the automotive industry began to
make high-performance cars with engines that required high-octane gasoline.
This need caused a large expansion of the catalytic cracking industry to produce
gasoline. But the by-products were large quantities of refractory cycle oils that were
difficult to convert to gasoline and lighter products. Hydrocracking was able to
convert these difficult by-products to desirable gasoline and diesel fractions and so
was adopted in some refineries. Simultaneously, railroads switched from steam to
diesel engines, and commercial aviation, using more jet fuel, began to emerge as a
large industry. All three of these industries increased the demand for refined
petroleum products. The flexibility of the newly developed hydrocracking processes allowed the production of fuels from heavier feedstocks.
In early 1960, Chevron Research Co. announced a new hydrocracking process
called “Isocracking” (Stormont 1959). Unocal, then known as Union Oil Co., in
collaboration with ESSO, introduced the hydrocracking process called
“Unicracking-JHC” (Oil Gas J 1960). In the late 1950s, UOP announced the
“Lomax” hydrocracking process (Sterba and Watkins 1960). By the mid-1960s,
seven different hydrocracking processes were offered for license (Scott and
Patterson 1967).
Presently, various environmental regulations stipulate a low level of sulfur and
in some cases a low level of aromatics in both gasoline and diesel products; this has
spurred a growth in a variety of hydroprocessing complexes around the world. In
the United States, the Tier 2 gasoline sulfur program reduced the sulfur content of
gasoline by up to 90 % from an uncontrolled level. An average sulfur level 30 ppm
was phased in from 2004 to 2007. The final Tier 3 gasoline sulfur program lowers
the sulfur level to 10 ppm. This level is planned but it has not yet been mandated
(http://www.epa.gov/otaq/standards/fuels/gas-sulfur.htm). However, in Europe an
essentially zero sulfur level is the specification, and in Japan, they are moving
toward the 10 ppm S specification (http://transportpolicy.net/index.php?title=EU:_
Fuels:_Diesel_and_Gasoline#Technical_Standards;
http://transportpolicy.net/
index.php?title=Japan:_Fuels:_Diesel_and_Gasoline). As the sulfur level required
in gasoline and diesel reached low levels, a large growth in both hydrotreating and
Hydrocracking in Petroleum Processing
321