Catalytic Cracking of Plastic Pyrolysis Waxes with Vacuum Gasoil: Effect of HZSM-5 Zeolite in the FCC Catalyst
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Catalytic cracking of waste plastics is an interesting option for selectively recovering raw materials or for obtaining fuels. In this paper, a new recycling strategy is proposed, which consists of upgrading the waxes obtained by flash pyrolysis of polyolefins in a FCC (Fluidized Catalytic Cracking) unit. The waxes have been obtained by flash pyrolysis of polypropylene at 500 ºC and they have been dissolved (20 wt% wax) in the vacuum gasoil (VGO) of a FCC unit. The runs have been carried out in a CREC-UWO Riser Simulator Reactor (atmospheric pressure; 500-550 ºC; C/O = 5.5; contact times, 3-12 s). A commercial catalyst and a hybrid one (containing HZSM-5 zeolite) have been used. The cracking of the mixture leads to higher yield of gasoline than in the cracking of VGO with a higher content of olefins. The results of the effect of the operating conditions (temperature and contact time) are qualitatively similar to those corresponding to standard feed. Consequently, no difficulties inherent to the presence of waxes in the feed are expected in the treatment of mixtures at industrial conditions. The presence of HZSM-5 zeolite in the catalyst causes a significant increase in the amount of LPG (especially C3-C4 olefins), at the expense of a decrease in the gasoline fraction, whose RON is 1-2 points higher than that corresponding to the commercial catalyst. The gasoline obtained also has a higher content of olefins (especially C5-C7) and benzene at the expense of a decrease in the amount of C6-C10 i-paraffins.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".