Effect of boron content in B·BiF 3 and B·Bi composites on their ignition and combustion

Composite powders combining boron with BiF3 and Bi in different amounts were prepared by high energy milling. Thermal analysis in an argon-oxygen mixture showed significant oxidation starting about 200 K lower than for pure boron. Selective oxidation of metallic Bi at low temperatures was observed. Composites containing either Bi or BiF3 ignited more readily than pure boron when heated by a CO2 laser beam. The composites containing BiF3 ignited more readily than boron when in contact with a hot wire. Burn times of particles aerosolized in air and ignited using the CO2 laser were measured as durations of the recorded emission pulses produced by burning particles. Statistical distributions of the measured burn times were correlated with the respective powder's particle size distributions. Compared to elemental boron, burn times of all prepared composites were shorter, including those containing only 10 wt.% of BiF3 or ca. 8 wt.% of Bi, and for most composites combustion temperatures were higher

Carbon Capture and Sequestration from a Hydrogen Production Facility in an Oil Refinery

The project proposed a commercial demonstration of advanced technologies that would capture and sequester CO2 emissions from an existing hydrogen production facility in an oil refinery into underground formations in combination with Enhanced Oil Recovery (EOR). The project is led by Praxair, Inc., with other project participants: BP Products North America Inc., Denbury Onshore, LLC (Denbury), and Gulf Coast Carbon Center (GCCC) at the Bureau of Economic Geology of The University of Texas at Austin. The project is located at the BP Refinery at Texas City, Texas. Praxair owns and operates a large hydrogen production facility within the refinery. As part of the project, Praxair would construct a CO2 capture and compression facility. The project aimed at demonstrating a novel vacuum pressure swing adsorption (VPSA) based technology to remove CO2 from the Steam Methane Reformers (SMR) process gas. The captured CO2 would be purified using refrigerated partial condensation separation (i.e., cold box). Denbury would purchase the CO2 from the project and inject the CO2 as part of its independent commercial EOR projects. The Gulf Coast Carbon Center at the Bureau of Economic Geology, a unit of University of Texas at Austin, would manage the research monitoring, verification and accounting (MVA) project for the sequestered CO2, in conjunction with Denbury. The sequestration and associated MVA activities would be carried out in the Hastings field at Brazoria County, TX. The project would exceed DOE?s target of capturing one million tons of CO2 per year (MTPY) by 2015. Phase 1 of the project (Project Definition) is being completed. The key objective of Phase 1 is to define the project in sufficient detail to enable an economic decision with regard to proceeding with Phase 2. This topical report summarizes the administrative, programmatic and technical accomplishments completed in Phase 1 of the project. It describes the work relative to project technical and design activities (associated with CO2 capture technologies and geologic sequestration MVA), and Environmental Information Volume. Specific accomplishments of this Phase include: 1. Finalization of the Project Management Plan 2. Development of engineering designs in sufficient detail for defining project performance and costs 3. Preparation of Environmental Information Volume 4. Completion of Hazard Identification Studies 5. Completion of control cost estimates and preparation of business plan During the Phase 1 detailed cost estimate, project costs increased substantially from the previous estimate. Furthermore, the detailed risk assessment identified integration risks associated with potentially impacting the steam methane reformer operation. While the Phase 1 work identified ways to mitigate these integration risks satisfactorily from an operational perspective, the associated costs and potential schedule impacts contributed to the decision not to proceed to Phase 2. We have concluded that the project costs and integration risks at Texas City are not commensurate with the potential benefits of the project at this time