Supporting information for

Methanol to Olefins (MTO): From Fundamentals to

Commercialization
Peng Tian†, Yingxu Wei†, Mao Ye†, and Zhongmin Liu* †,‡
†National Engineering Laboratory for Methanol to Olefins, Dalian National Laboratory for Clean
Energy, Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Dalian 116023, China;
‡State Key Laboratory of Catalysis, Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences,
Dalian 116023, China
*
E-mail: liuzm@dicp.ac.cn, Fax: +86-411-84379998.

S1
Table S1. The comparison between DMTO and FCC process
MTO FCC
Feedstock Methanol(DME) Large molecular, heavy oil
Pure & simple Complicated in composition
No impurity S, N, and heavy metals
Reaction feature
Mechanism CH3OH→ C2H4, C3H6… CxHy →gasoline, diesel, LPG,
dry gas, heavier distillate
Chain growth Cracking
First C-C formation unclear, Carbenimum ion mechanism
Possibly carbon pool mechanism
for chain growth
Reaction rate Very fast Fast
Catalysis type Auto-catalysis Not auto-catalysis
Coking rate Relatively low (in hours) Very fast (in seconds)
Deactivation Fast (in hours) Very fast (in seconds)
Catalyst SAPO-34 Re-USY
Highly hydrothermal stable Highly hydrothermal stable
Avoid external impurities Impurity and metal resistance
Products Light olefins Fuel
Simple molecules Complicated in composition, in
distillation
Active molecular Similar to MTO
Lots of water No water formation
Process
Flow pattern Gas-solid flow Gas-liquid-solid
Feeding system Gas distributor Feed nozzles
Reaction heat Exothermal Endothermic
Cat–to-feed ratio Low (<1) High(5-6)
Heat balance between No Yes
Rx-Rg
Gas-solid contact time Shorter contact time favourable ～2 seconds
Catalyst residence time In hours In seconds
Solids separation Two-stage cyclones Two-stage cyclones
Quench tower Necessary Necessary
Regeneration Partial burn Full burn
Reactor type Turbulent fluidized bed Riser
Regenerator Bubbling fluidized bed Turbulent fluidized bed
Stripping efficiency >95% 75%

S2