Opportunities and challenges for the application of post-consumer plastic waste pyrolysis oils as steam cracker feedstocks: To decontaminate or not to decontaminate?

Thermochemical recycling of plastic waste to base chemicals via pyrolysis followed by a minimal amount of upgrading and steam cracking is expected to be the dominant chemical recycling technology in the coming decade. However, there are substantial safety and operational risks when using plastic waste pyrolysis oils instead of conventional fossil-based feedstocks. This is due to the fact that plastic waste pyrolysis oils contain a vast amount of contaminants which are the main drivers for corrosion, fouling and downstream catalyst poisoning in industrial steam cracking plants. Contaminants are therefore crucial to evaluate the steam cracking feasibility of these alternative feedstocks. Indeed, current plastic waste pyrolysis oils exceed typical feedstock specifications for numerous known contaminants, e.g. nitrogen (∼1650 vs. 100 ppm max.), oxygen (∼1250 vs. 100 ppm max.), chlorine (∼1460 vs. 3 ppm max.), iron (∼33 vs. 0.001 ppm max.), sodium (∼0.8 vs. 0.125 ppm max.) and calcium (∼17 vs. 0.5 ppm max.). Pyrolysis oils produced from post-consumer plastic waste can only meet the current specifications set for industrial steam cracker feedstocks if they are upgraded, with hydrogen based technologies being the most effective, in combination with an effective pre-treatment of the plastic waste such as dehalogenation. Moreover, steam crackers are reliant on a stable and predictable feedstock quality and quantity representing a challenge with plastic waste being largely influenced by consumer behavior, seasonal changes and local sorting efficiencies. Nevertheless, with standardization of sorting plants this is expected to become less problematic in the coming decade.