Vol. 337 No. 3 (2026)
DOI https://doi.org/10.18799/24131830/2026/3/5134
Modeling methanol production via autothermal conversion
Relevance. One of the major challenges for any gas field located in permafrost conditions is the formation of hydrate plugs within field pipelines. The procurement and delivery of the required amount of hydrate inhibitor to the gas site can result in significant operational costs. Therefore, a compact unit for methanol production from synthesis gas via autothermal conversion has been considered and modeled. Aim. Using Aspen Hysys software, to model a unit for synthesis gas production through autothermal conversion, as well as a methanol production unit with a capacity of 50 tons per day. Objects. Synthesis gas, methanol, autothermal conversion of methane, mathematical model of methanol production. Methods. Modeling of a static model using Aspen Hysys software, employing "heterogeneous catalytic reactors" to accurately predict the degree of natural gas conversion into synthesis gas. Results and conclusions. The authors have modeled a methanol synthesis unit with a capacity of 50 tons per day. It was established that autothermal methane conversion is the most preferable method for the second stage of the reactor, due to the lowest methane consumption for heating within this technology. It was determined that carbon dioxide methane conversion is unsuitable because it requires significantly higher methane consumption for reactor heating, as well as necessitating an additional membrane unit for carbon dioxide separation before the reaction. Single-reactor configurations proved ineffective under gas field conditions due to their high water consumption compared to other methods and low methanol productivity. Additionally, the mandatory implementation of distillation columns is required to separate synthesis gas from excess water.
For citation: Chemezov A.D., Gilmanov A.Ya., Shevelev A.P. Modeling methanol production via autothermal conversion. Bulletin of the Tomsk Polytechnic University. Geo assets Engineering, 2026, vol. 337, no. 3, pp. 98–110. https://doi.org/10.18799/24131830/2026/3/5134
Keywords:
synthesis gas, methanol synthesis, autothermal conversion, static model, process simulation in Aspen Hysys, chemical reactor modeling
References:
1. Kitaev S.V., Kolotilov Yu.V., Plotnikov A.Yu. Efficiency study of hydrate formation inhibitors during offshore hydrocarbon production and transport. Bulletin of the Tomsk Polytechnic University. Geo Assets Engineering, 2021, vol. 332, no. 2, pp. 190–199. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.18799/24131830/2021/02/3055
2. Troynikova A.A. Improvement of methods for hydrate formation prevention at gas and gas condensate fields. Cand. Diss. Moscow, 2021. 150 p. (In Russ.)
3. Kemalov R.A., Kemalov A.F. Methanol production and application technologies. Kazan, Kazan University Publ., 2016. 167 p. (In Russ.)
4. LeBlanc J.R., Wilcher S.R. Methanol production technologies and processes. Luxembourg, Springer, 2022. 270 p.
5. Haldor Topsoe A/S. Low-pressure methanol synthesis: technical report. Lyngby, Haldor Topsoe A/S, 2020. 68 p.
6. Methanol Production and Applications. Kirk-Othmer Encyclopedia of Chemical Technology. 5th ed. New York, Wiley, 2019. 38 p.
7. Stepanov A.A., Korobitsyna L.L., Vosmerikov A.V. Investigation of methane non-oxidative conversion over granular Mo/ZSM-5 catalysts. Bulletin of the Tomsk Polytechnic University. Geo Assets Engineering, 2017, vol. 328, no. 10, pp. 59–66. (In Russ.)
8. Stepanov A.A., Korobitsyna L.L., Vosmerikov A.V., Kuvatova R.Z., Vosmerikov A.A., Kutepov,B.I., Ishkildina A.Kh., Travkina O.S. Mo-containing granular ZSM-5 zeolites with varying acidity and hierarchical porosity in non-oxidative methane conversion. Bulletin of the Tomsk Polytechnic University. Geo Assets Engineering, 2022, vol. 333, no. 10, pp. 86–97. (In Russ.) DOI: 10.18799/24131830/2022/10/3679
9. Ma L., Wang B., Fan M., Ling L., Zhang R. A specific defect type of Cu active site to suppress water-gas-shift reaction in syngas conversion to methanol over Cu catalysts. Catalysis Science & Engineering, 2023. DOI: 10.1016/j.ces.2023.118496.
10. Ren B.-P., Xu Y.-P., Huang Y.-W., She C., Sun B. Methanol production from natural gas reforming and CO2 capturing process, simulation, design, and techno-economic analysis. Energy, 2023, vol. 263 (Part C), no. 125879. DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2022.125879.
11. Seider W.D., Seader J.D., Lewin D.R. Product and process design principles: synthesis, analysis, and evaluation. 4th ed. Hoboken, New Jersey, Wiley, 2017. 778 p.
12. Ali A.M., Shahbaz M., Inayat M., Shahzad K., Al-Zahrani A.A., Mahpudz A.B. Conversion of municipal waste into syngas and methanol via steam gasification using CaO as sorbent: An Aspen Plus modeling. Fuel, 2023, vol. 349, no. 128640. DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2023.128640.
13. Rezaei M., Meshkani F. Catalysts for methanol synthesis: a review. Journal of Industrial and Engineering Chemistry, 2015, vol. 21, pp. 1015–1036.
14. Aasberg-Petersen K., Dybkjaer I. Natural gas conversion to methanol. Journal of Natural Gas Chemistry, 2019, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 125–137.
15. Li Y., Ma Z.-Y., Qi Z.-Y., Xue Z.-A., Zhou X.-L., Guo H. Investigation of methanol steam reforming reactors with different catalyst support structures on hydrogen production efficiency and methanol conversion. Fuel, 2025, vol. 393, no. 135079. DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2025.135079.
16. Shu X., Chen H. Optimization of low-pressure methanol synthesis process in small-scale plants. AIChE Journal, 2018, vol. 64, no. 5, pp. 1847–1859.
17. Jo S.-J., Kang T.-H., Shin B.-J., Mun J.-H., Devkota S., Cha J.-Y., Mazari S.A., Kim K.-M., Lee U., Shin C.-H., Moon J.-H. Internal carbon loop strategy for methanol production from natural gas: Multi-objective optimization and process evaluation. Journal of Cleaner Production, 2023, vol. 418, no. 138140. DOI: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2023.138140.
18. Yunusov R.R., Shevkunov S.N., Dedovets S.A., Ushakov S.N., Lyats K.G., Samoilov A.P. Small-scale methanol production plants in gas-producing regions of the Far North. Gas Industry, 2016, no. 12, pp. 45–50. (In Russ.)
19. Zhang H., Smith R. Heat integration in methanol production processes. Chemical Engineering Transactions, 2014, vol. 39, pp. 67–72.
20. Arutyunov V.S., Strekova L.N., Savchenko V.I., Sedov I.V., Nikitin A.V., Eliseev O.L., Kryuchkov M.V., Lapidus A.L. Optimization of low-pressure methanol synthesis process in small-scale plants. Petroleum Chemistry, 2019, vol. 59, no. 4, pp. 370–379. DOI: 10.1134/S0965544119040029
21. Rowshanzamir S., Safdarnejad S.M., Eikani M.H. A CFD model for methane autothermal reforming on Ru/γ-Al₂O₃ catalyst. Procedia Engineering, 2012, vol. 42, pp. 2–24.
22. Zahid U., Khalafalla S.S., Alibrahim H.A., Ahmed U., Jameel A.G.A. Techno-economic evaluation of simultaneous methanol and hydrogen production via autothermal reforming of natural gas. Energy Conversion and Management, 2023, vol. 296, no. 117681. DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2023.117681
23. Gao F., Zhan H., Zeng Z.Y. Methanol autothermal reforming system for enhanced hydrogen production: Process simulation and thermodynamic optimization. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2023, vol. 48, no. 5, pp. 1758–1772.
24. Tang H.Y., Greenwood J., Erickson P. Modeling of fixed-bed copper-based catalyst for reforming methanol: Steam and autothermal reformation. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy, 2015, vol. 40, no. 25, pp. 8034–8050.
25. Nomoto K., Miura H., Shishido T. Inhibitory effect of trace impurities on methanol reforming by Cu/ZnO/Al₂O₃ catalyst: Steam reforming and autothermal reforming of model bio-methanol. Applied Catalysis B: Environmental, 2023, vol. 325, no. 122374.
