Promising Hydrate Formation Promoters Based on Sodium Sulfosuccinates of Polyols

Yulia F. Chirkova (), Ulukbek Zh. Mirzakimov, Matvei E. Semenov, Roman S. Pavelyev and Mikhail A. Varfolomeev ()
Additional contact information
Yulia F. Chirkova: Department of Petroleum Engineering, Kazan Federal University, 420008 Kazan, Russia
Ulukbek Zh. Mirzakimov: Department of Petroleum Engineering, Kazan Federal University, 420008 Kazan, Russia
Matvei E. Semenov: Department of Petroleum Engineering, Kazan Federal University, 420008 Kazan, Russia
Roman S. Pavelyev: Department of Petroleum Engineering, Kazan Federal University, 420008 Kazan, Russia
Mikhail A. Varfolomeev: Department of Petroleum Engineering, Kazan Federal University, 420008 Kazan, Russia

Energies, 2022, vol. 16, issue 1, 1-9

Abstract: The use of natural gas as an energy source is increasing significantly due to its low greenhouse gas emissions. However, the common methods of natural gas storage and transportation, such as liquefied or compressed natural gas, are limited in their applications because they require extreme conditions. Gas hydrate technology can be a promising alternative to conventional approaches, as artificially synthesized hydrates provide an economical, environmentally friendly, and safe medium to store energy. Nevertheless, the low rate of hydrate formation is a critical problem that hinders the industrial application of this technology. Therefore, chemical promoters are being developed to accelerate the kinetics of gas hydrate formation. In this paper, the effect of new sodium sulfosuccinate compounds, synthesized based on glycerol and pentaerythritol, on methane hydrate formation was studied. Experiments under dynamic conditions using high-pressure autoclaves demonstrated that the conversion of water-to-hydrate forms increased from 62 ± 5% in pure water to 86 ± 4% for the best promoter at concentration 500 ppm. In addition, the rate of hydrate formation increases 2–4 times for different concentrations. Moreover, none of the synthesized reagents formed foam, compared to sodium dodecyl sulfate, in which the foam rate was 3.7 ± 0.2. The obtained reagents showed good promotional properties and did not form foam, which makes them promising promoters for gas hydrate technology.

Keywords: methane hydrate; hydrate formation promoters; kinetic promoters; sulfosuccinates; natural gas storage and transportation (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/1/359/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/16/1/359/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:16:y:2022:i:1:p:359-:d:1018174

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().