Received: 21 June 2021 Revised: 24 October 2021 Accepted: 9 November 2021

DOI: 10.1002/aic.17542

REACTION ENGINEERING, KINETICS AND CATALYSIS

Modular reactors with electrical resistance heating for

hydrocarbon cracking and other endothermic reactions

Vemuri Balakotaiah1 | Ram R. Ratnakar2

1
Department of Chemical and Biomolecular
Engineering, University of Houston, Houston, Abstract
Texas, USA We propose and demonstrate by calculations novel modular reactor configurations
2
Shell International Exploration and
with electrical resistance heating for endothermic reactions such as cracking and steam
Production Inc., Houston, Texas, USA
reforming of hydrocarbons. The basic unit of each module consists of a set of wires,
Correspondence
tubes, plates, monolith, or gauze/wire meshes arranged in parallel or series to satisfy
Vemuri Balakotaiah, Department of Chemical
and Biomolecular Engineering, University of the current–voltage constraints. The smaller dimensions such as spacing and diameter
Houston, Houston, TX, USA.
are selected to obtain nearly uniform heating temperature within the reaction zone.
Email: bala@uh.edu

KEYWORDS
CO2-free chemicals production, parallel wire configuration, process intensification

1 | I N T RO DU CT I O N A N D L I T E RA T U R E addressed in order to develop these future manufacturing processes.

REVIEW
Global warming is one of the most important challenges facing by
mankind in the 21st century. Although the capacity of our planet to
absorb greenhouse gas emissions is already exhausted, the global CO2
emissions are still increasing.1 The Paris Climate Agreement, signed by
most countries, charted a new course in the effort to combat climate
change. Having rejoined the Paris Agreement, the United States has
recently committed to reduce the CO2 emissions in half by 2030.2
However, as the current emissions are far too high and rising, there is
an urgent need to develop CO2-free manufacturing processes. The
chemical industry uses vast amounts of energy to make the basic
chemicals and their derivatives needed in everyday life. At present,
this energy is mostly derived from burning of fossil fuels thereby con-
tributing substantially to the anthropogenic CO2 emissions. For exam-
ple, the current ethane cracking (EC) technology from naphtha
(ethane) releases approximately 1.7 (1.2) tons of CO2 per ton of ethyl-
ene produced.3 Similar amounts of CO2 are emitted from other endo-
thermic processes such as the steam methane reforming (SMR) to
make hydrogen or synthesis gas and other commodity chemicals. As
renewable power costs in the United States are already low in certain
geographic locations and/or periods of the day or seasons, new
manufacturing technologies using electrically heated reactors is an
attractive alternative to replace the conventional fossil fuel-based pro-
cesses to reduce or eliminate (or even go to net negative) CO2 emis-
sions. However, there are many technical challenges that need to be
For chemicals manufacturing, these challenges are associated with
identifying the materials with required catalytic as well as electrical
properties, and design and scale-up of modular reactor units that can
be adapted to the intermittent nature of renewable electric power.
It should be pointed out that electric resistance heating has been
widely used for decades in home appliances (e.g., nichrome wires
in bread toasters and radiation heaters) as well as in industrial app-
lications. Heated metallic wires and gauzes have also been used in
commercial processes to carry out exothermic high-temperature oxi-
dations (e.g., ammonia oxidation in the Ostwald process to make nitric
acid and HCN synthesis using methane, ammonia, and air). They have
also been used in laboratory studies to carry out both exothermic and
endothermic reactions. While we are not aware of any commercial
processes presently that use electrical resistance heating for the pro-
duction of bulk chemicals, it is expected that this is the most likely
path in the future. Thus, the focus of this article is on the design and
scale-up of electrified modular reactors (and with the assumption that
the electrical power is derived from renewable sources).
Since our interest is on carrying out endothermic reactions using
resistance heating, we review here only the literature on this topic
(which is limited to mostly laboratory scale studies). Spagnolo et al.4
studied electro-steam reforming of methane on a metal screen wash-
coated with Ni/Al2O3 and demonstrated energy efficiency compared
to the traditional process. Zhang et al.5 and Zhou et al.6 investigated
steam reforming of methane using electrically heated Ni/Al2O3/Alloy
catalyst in a parallel plate (PP) configuration. Rieks et al.7 investigated

1 of 10 © 2021 American Institute of Chemical Engineers. wileyonlinelibrary.com/journal/aic AIChE J. 2022;68:e17542.

https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.17542

BALAKOTAIAH AND RATNAKAR
dry reforming of methane on an electrically heated FeCrAl alloy wire
coated with LaNiRuO3 catalyst. More recently, Wismann et al.8,9 pres-
ented experimental and modeling studies on electrified methane
reforming using a FeCrAl tube of 6 mm in diameter that was coated
on the inside with a Ni/Al2O3 washcoat. They have also showed that
electrified compact reactor designs could be potentially 100 times
smaller than conventional platforms. There have also been laboratory
studies of hydrocarbon cracking using electrical resistance heating.
Shekunova et al.10 investigated the conversion of C1–C4 hydrocar-
bons to olefins on electrically heated tungsten, molybdenum, and
11
nichrome wires and coils. Porsin et al. investigated methane pyroly-
sis on electrically heated tungsten coils with temperatures of 1800–
2000
C with space (contact) times of about 0.01 s. While these and
other laboratory studies clearly demonstrated the feasibility of carry-
ing out endothermic reactions using resistance heating, they have not
considered the scale-up aspects of these reactors, and how they can
be adapted to renewable electric power.
2 | R E A C T O R CO N F I G U R A T I O N S WI T H
ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE HEATING
As is well known, traditional reactors for endothermic processes typ-
ically include internal flow of reactants through a tube (homoge-
neous case such as EC) or packed-bed reactor configuration
(catalytic case such as SMR) where heat is supplied by burning fossil
12
fuel in a furnace. Therefore, the heating efficiency in these config-
urations is lower because of multiple thermal resistances (furnace to
the external tube surface and to the internal tube/solid surface and
to fluid) before heat is utilized by the endothermic chemistry occur-
ring in the interior of the tube or catalyst. In contrast, in resistance
heating, by generating the heat uniformly in a solid reactor compo-
nent material, which is in direct contact with the fluid, the thermal
resistance can be reduced, leading to potentially higher overall ther-
mal efficiency within the reactor. Figure 1 shows six possible reactor
configurations that include both external and internal flow of reac-
tants. We give a brief description below and refer to Ratnakar
et al.13 for further details:
2.1 | Parallel wire (PW)
In this configuration, the reactor consists of many PWs, where each
wire is subjected to the same potential difference while feed gases
are flowing between the wires. Figure 1A shows a single-layered unit.
One unit may consist of multiple layers of PWs as shown in the figure,
where each layer of wires may also be arranged in staggered way to
reduce the effective hydraulic radius. Such units can be placed along
the flow direction, which we refer to as a “PW module.” In a PW mod-
ule, each unit may be subjected to a fixed voltage difference indepen-
dently, so as to allow for a tailored heating rate and satisfy the
electrical constraints (i.e., limitation on maximum voltage and/or
current).
15475905, 2022, 2, Downloaded from https://aiche.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aic.17542 by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (NON -EAL), Wiley Online Library on [16/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
2 of 10
2.2 | Parallel plate
This configuration is similar to PW, except that one unit in this config-
uration consists of set of PPs instead of wires as shown Figure 1B.
Here, the voltage difference is applied across the length of the plate
while feed gases flow along the width. This configuration has similar
advantage as the PW configuration in terms of the width of the plate.
Equivalently, the number of layers stacked in PW arrangement is simi-
lar to the ratio of width to the thickness of plates in PP arrangements.
Similar to one PW module, one PP module may consist of multiple PP
units in series, providing similar advantages.
2.3 | Short monolith (SM)
As the name suggests, in this configuration, SMs (or thin plates with
holes) are used as one unit (shown in Figure 1C), while one module
may consist of several of such SM units stacked in the flow direction.
The feed gases flow internally through the short channels while
potential difference is applied perpendicular to the flow along one of
the sides of the plate.
2.4 | Wire-mesh/gauze reactor
In this configuration, one unit may be composed of a single wire-mesh
as shown in Figure 1D or few wire meshes stacked in the flow direc-
tion, while one module may consist of multiple such units stacked in
the flow direction. Each unit is subjected to the same potential differ-
ence along one of the sides as in SM configuration. Thus, feed gases
flow through one wire-mesh then others, where partial conversion
takes place in each mesh, leading to the desired conversion at the out-
let of the last mesh.
2.5 | Monolith reactor (MR)
Monoliths, consisting of several parallel channels (with high aspect
ratio – length to diameter ratio) as shown Figure 1E, are widely used
reactors in the automobile industry for treatment of tailpipe emis-
sions. MRs with electrical heating are not a new concept for treating
exhaust gases, but the fact that they can also be utilized for carrying
out endothermic reactions such as EC, SMR, dry methane reforming
(DMR), or reverse water-gas shift (RWGS) reactions has not been
explored in detail.
2.6 | Parallel tube reactor (PTR)
This configuration is similar to the traditional configuration except the
combustion furnace is replaced by electrical heating. Here, the feed
gases flow through each tube and the tubes are stacked parallel but
separated from each other and subjected to the same potential drop
 15475905, 2022, 2, Downloaded from https://aiche.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aic.17542 by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (NON -EAL), Wiley Online Library on [16/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
3 of 10 BALAKOTAIAH AND RATNAKAR

F I G U R E 1 Schematic
diagrams of various modular
reactor configurations with
electrical resistance heating for
carrying out endothermic
reactions (A) parallel wire (PW),
(B) parallel plates/stripes (PP),
(C) metallic short monolith (SM),
(D) wire mesh/gauze reactors
(WMR/GR), (E) long channeled
metallic monolith reactor (MR),
and (F) parallel tubes
reactor (PTR)

between inlet and outlet (see Figure 1F). In this arrangement, the fluid
flow is internal and is aligned with that of current flow. In contrast, in
the PW configuration, the fluid flow is external and perpendicular to
the current flow.
We note that the practical realization of these reactor configura-
tions can be achieved only if they can be scaled up and adapted to the
intermittent nature of the renewable energy. In this context, it should
be pointed out that prior laboratory demonstrations of hydrocarbon
cracking and methane reforming7–11 using electrical resistance heating
as well as the approach followed in these studies using a single wire
or tube do not address the possible intermittent nature of the electri-
fied reactor or module design and the start-up and transient dynamics
of these units. While some studies in the literature5,6 present the
transient dynamics, the scale-up and modular aspects are not dis-
cussed, which are the main focus of this work.
Figure 2A (top) shows a schematic cross-sectional diagram of an
uncoated wire that is electrically heated. Figure 2A (bottom) shows
the same but with a catalytic layer such as Ni/Al2O3 (of appropriate
thickness that is in the range 20–100 μm). Figure 2B shows the cross-
section of a tube that is coated with catalytic layer on the interior wall.
Figures 2C,D show a basic modular unit consisting of several electri-
cally heated wires and tubes, respectively. We note that when the
feed gases flow over the electrically heated wires or tubes, there is
strong coupling between the catalytic (surface/washcoat) reaction
whose rate depends on the density of surface/washcoat sites
(uncoated/coated), the heat flux at the surface, and the local

BALAKOTAIAH AND RATNAKAR
composition and temperature. Depending on the temperature of the
gas phase next to the wire, homogeneous (gas phase) reforming and
other reactions may also occur. A fundamental understanding of the
homogeneous-heterogeneous chemistry coupled to the local flow
conditions and heating rate is essential in identifying the materials
with desired catalytic and electrical properties, interpretation of lab-
oratory experimental results and scale-up of the process. (Remark:
The uncoated wires/tubes may require higher temperatures of oper-
ation but are easier to work as the problem of washcoat adhesion/
flaking and nonuniformity can be eliminated. However, the uncoated
wires/tubes have the disadvantage of a lower concentration of sur-
face catalytic sites.) Analysis of this system requires the characteri-
zation of the transport and catalytic properties of the washcoat and
combining (coupling) the same with homogeneous reactions and
local heating.
15475905, 2022, 2, Downloaded from https://aiche.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aic.17542 by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (NON -EAL), Wiley Online Library on [16/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
4 of 10
F I G U R E 2 Schematic diagram of
external flow perpendicular to current
direction in wire-configuration and
internal flow parallel to the current
direction in a tube-configuration:
(A) cross-sectional view of a single
uncoated wire (top) and catalyst coated
wire (bottom), (B) cross-sectional view of
a single catalyst coated tube, (C) a basic
unit of electrically heated wire
configuration, and (D) a basic unit of
electrically heated tube configuration
Reduced order models that account for this micro-meso scale
coupling with the fluid flow, heat and mass transport may be used to
assess the impact of various design (e.g., wire properties, density of
catalytic sites, spacing between wires/tubes) and operating variables
(e.g., rate of heating, feed composition, inlet temperature, and flow
rate) on the conversion of the limiting reactant. We have used such
recently developed reduced order models for coupled homogeneous–
heterogeneous reactions (see References 14 and 15) to examine the
base reactor units (of Figure 1), using EC as a model reaction scheme
(for further details, please see Supplementary Material).
The calculations shown in the next section are based on the heat
supply rate, uniformity of heating, heat and mass transport time scales
between the different wires, the flow rate and composition of the
reactants and products (or space time and yields), and take into
account the current–voltage constraints imposed due to materials

5 of 10
used or geographical location. An important aspect of these designs is
their flexibility and modularity. For example, the number of wires or
tubes in the basic unit can be adjusted based on the current–voltage
and/or power constraints, along with the target conversion level of
the limiting reactant and heating requirements. The maximum power
supply for each base unit determines the production capacity. For
example, for the case of electrified EC, each base unit can be sized for
100–1000 tons per annum (0.1–1 KTA) of ethylene production. The
number of units in each module can be adjusted based on the avail-
able power and the number of modules can be increased to obtain the
desired capacity.
One advantage of the modular electrified reactor design is that
the transient time (for start-up or shut-down of each unit) is of the
order of seconds compared to the large, traditional fossil fuel-based
reactors that could take several hours to days for start-up. This
allows us to adjust the number of operating units quickly based on
the available power supply. Figure 3 shows an envisioned schematic
F I G U R E 3 Schematic diagram
illustrating (A) a single basic unit, (B) a
single module, and (C) series/parallel
arrangement of modules
15475905, 2022, 2, Downloaded from https://aiche.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aic.17542 by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (NON -EAL), Wiley Online Library on [16/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BALAKOTAIAH AND RATNAKAR
diagram of the reactor units to the renewable power source. In the
next section, we present some transient calculations for the
case of EC.
3 | T H E RM O D Y N A M I C , K I N E T I C , A N D
T R A N S P O R T C O N S I D E R A T I O N S WI T H
ELECTRICAL RESISTANCE HEATING
For the case of a single endothermic reaction or when the dominant
reaction is endothermic, the equilibrium conversion of the limiting
reactant increases with operating temperature.12 Figure 4 shows a
diagram of equilibrium conversion as a function of temperature for
the case of thermal cracking of ethane. (A similar diagram is obtained
for SMR, or DMR or other endothermic reactions.) Also shown in
Figure 4 are the standard isothermal and adiabatic reaction paths. In
the same figure, we also show three other possible reaction paths in a
 15475905, 2022, 2, Downloaded from https://aiche.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aic.17542 by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (NON -EAL), Wiley Online Library on [16/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BALAKOTAIAH AND RATNAKAR 6 of 10

3.1 | Characteristic time scales

As discussed in the literature,16 for the case of a single reaction, there

can be as many as 11 time scales that determine the conversion of
the limiting reactant in a flow reactor. In addition, for electrically
heated reactors, we also need to consider the time scale associated
with the heating process. For example, for the case of PW configura-
tion, the electrical resistance heat source per unit reactor volume
(Q_ eh ) may be expressed as

 2
_ eh ¼ 1 ΔV εs ,
Q ð1Þ
ρe LT

where LT is the length of the wire across which voltage difference

(ΔV) is applied, εs is the volume fraction of solid in the reactor, and ρe
is the resistivity of the wire material. We define the time scale for
resistance heating ðteh Þ as the time needed to raise the temperature
of the fluid by ΔT (which may be taken as one degree). It may be esti-
mated by the relation

ρf Cpf ðΔT Þ
teh ¼ , ð2Þ
_ eh
Q

where ρf and Cpf are average density and specific heat capacity of the
fluid phase. We note that this time scale can vary in a wide range
(106 s to 0.01 s) depending on the material properties and physical
dimensions of the wire as well as the applied voltage. The current
through a wire (of electrical resistivity ρe, length LT and diameter dw)
and the electrical power (P0) generated in the wire that is subjected to
F I G U R E 4 (A) Reactions paths and (B) steady-state conversion a potential difference of ΔV may be expressed as
versus space time for adiabatic (1), isothermal (2), and e-Heated (3a,
3b, 3c) operations with feed temperature of 1100 K. The electrical πd2w jΔV j πd2 ðΔV Þ2
heat supplied in 3a, 3b, and 3c are in the ratio of 0.02:1, 0.2:1, 2:1, I0 ¼ ; P0 ¼ w ¼ jΔV j:I0 ð3Þ
4 ρe LT 4 ρe LT
respectively as compared to the endothermic heat requirement to
maintain isothermal operation at 1100 K
The other important time scales associated with convection
(or space time, tc ), species diffusion in the fluid phase (or external
flow reactor with constant resistance electrical (e-) heating. (It should mass transfer, tm ), species diffusion in the catalytic layer (or internal
be pointed out that depending on flow velocity/space time and kinet- mass transfer time, tmc ), fluid phase thermal diffusion (or heat transfer
ics, the initial conversion in preheated section may be not zero. In this between fluid and solid, th ), and reaction (tR ) are defined by
case, the reaction paths are slightly modified. For example, the adia-
batic paths are parallel while the isothermal paths are unchanged, and L R2 δ2 R2 cref
tc ¼ ; tm ¼ Ω ; tmc ¼ ; th ¼ Ω ;tR ¼ : ð4Þ
e-heated path will follow the new adiabatic path before deviating hui Dm Dme αh Rðcref , T Þ
from it.) We note that when the e-heating rate is constant but lower
or same as compared to the heat requirements of the endothermic (Remark: The external heat and mass transfer time scales may also be
ρf Cpf
reaction, the reaction path may follow the adiabatic line initially and expressed as tm ¼ kc1av and th ¼ hav , where kc and h are the local flow
then approaches the equilibrium line at sufficiently high space times dependent mass and heat transfer coefficients between fluid and
(dashed lines in Figure 4B). In contrast, when the local rate of solid, and, av is the solid–fluid interfacial area per unit reactor volume.)
e-heating is higher, the approach to equilibrium occurs at much The time scale (thR ) associated with the heat sink due to the endother-
shorter space times and the reaction path can go beyond the isother- _ hR ¼ ðΔHÞRðcref , T Þ is defined by
mic reaction: Q
mal line leading to higher conversions. This is a novel feature of the
electrified reaction systems that has not been explored in the litera- ρf Cpf ρf Cpf Rg T 2
thR ¼ _ hR
 : ð5Þ
ture for either the SMR or EC or pyrolysis reactions. ∂Q ðΔHÞRðcref , T Þ Ea
∂T

7 of 10
Here, L is the flow channel (or longitudinal) length; hui is the average
velocity of the fluid; RΩ is the hydraulic radius (defined by the ratio of
flow area to the wetted perimeter); Dm is the diffusivity of the limiting
reactant species in the fluid phase and αh ¼ ρ kCf pf is the thermal diffusiv-
f
ity of the fluid (with kf being thermal conductivity; δ and Dme are the
thickness of and effective diffusivity in the catalyst layer (for coated
wires); Rðcref , T Þ is the rate of reaction at the reference concentration
cref and temperature T; ΔH and Ea are enthalpy and activation energy
of the reaction; and Rg is the universal gas constant. It should be
noted that the characteristic reaction and heat sink time scales
depend strongly (exponentially) on temperature and can vary orders
of magnitude. They can also vary significantly with conversion of the
limiting reactant. For example, for EC, the reaction time scale at
1200 K (1100 K) varies from 10 ms to 0.86 s (0.3–40 s) when conver-
sion varies from 0% to close to equilibrium value (due to volume
change and nonlinear dependence of rate on conversion). Depending
on physical/chemical properties and operating conditions, all these
time scales may have wider ranges ~104 to 106 s (see Reference 16).
We note that these time scales play crucial role in the design and
scale-up of the reactors shown in Figure 1. For example, the tempera-
ture difference between the fluid and solid can be made small
(or higher heating efficiency can be achieved) by setting the local
(transverse) heat Peclet number, ph ¼ tthc < 0:2. Similarly, the local spa-
tial concentration gradient of the reacting species (between wires or
across the channel cross-section) can be made small by requiring the
local (transverse) mass Peclet number, pm ¼ ttmc < 0:2. In addition,
the flow conditions are chosen such that space time is larger than the
reaction time to have sufficient conversion of the limiting reactant
(i.e., by setting Damköhler number Da ¼ ttRc > 1Þ, and the resistance
heating time (teh ) to be of the same order of magnitude as the heat
sink time (thR ) at the operating temperature.
3.2 | Flexibility and modularity
The main advantage of the reactor configurations proposed here is
their modularity, flexibility, and ease of scale-up. For example, for EC
using PW modules, the space time can be selected in the range of
10 ms to 1 s; the inlet temperature can be as low as 300 K to as high
as 1100 K; length of each wire can vary in the range 0.5–2 m
depending on the production target; wire diameter can be selected
between 100 and 1000 μm; the spacing between the wires can
be between 0.1 and 10 mm; the number of wires of each unit can
vary between 50 and 5000; the range of electrical resistivity of the
wire material can be 108 to 106 Ω.m, which spans various common
metallic alloys used in resistance heating (e.g., W, Mo, NiCr, FeCrAl,
SiC, and MoSi2); and the solid to volume fraction can be chosen
between 1% and 20%, and so forth (see Reference 13 for further
details).
We note that the PW configuration has additional flexibility in
design and scale-up compared to other configurations. For example,
when temperature gradient may be present such that the gas near the
wire is hotter than the gas at the centerline, staggered stacking of the
15475905, 2022, 2, Downloaded from https://aiche.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aic.17542 by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (NON -EAL), Wiley Online Library on [16/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BALAKOTAIAH AND RATNAKAR
wire-layers can enable more uniform heating thereby reducing the
apparent hydraulic radius and transverse temperature gradient. Addi-
tionally, flexibility of stacking the layers or multiple units in the flow
direction can reduce the total width of each module without losing
productivity while staying within the electrical constraints. Accord-
ingly, the modular systems of the type shown in Figures 1 and 3 may
be designed to conform to spatial requirements for the specific
deployment in a wide variety of reactor systems.
3.3 | Thermodynamic calculations
The simplest reduced order mathematical models describing the spe-
cies and energy balances for both catalytic and homogeneous reac-
tions for the PW and other configurations (e.g., PP, monolith, wire
mesh/gauze, and PTR) can be represented in terms of multiple con-
centration and temperature modes, corresponding to their averages in
the fluid and solid phases, and interfacial heat/mass fluxes (see Refer-
ences 14–16). The transverse gradients can be captured using transfer
coefficient concepts, which lead to accurate results for the case of
homogeneous and/or catalytic reactions.15 The only differences
include (i) the interfacial heat fluxes including the radiation terms
either through effective transfer coefficient or directly through the
Stefan–Boltzmann's equation, (ii) the source term representing the
electrical resistance heating in the solid phase, and (iii) the sink term
representing the endothermic heat required for gas conversion
process.
Figure 4B shows the steady-state conversion calculated as a func-
tion of space time for the PW configuration for the case of EC using
kinetic models in the literature.17,18 (Remark: Details of the reaction
kinetics and parameter values are provided in the Supplementary
Material.) It can be seen from this figure that with feed at a tempera-
ture of 1100 K (~827
C), conversion that is very close to the equilib-
rium value may be achieved with a space time of about 2 s in the
isothermal operation and 300 s for the adiabatic operation. But when
e-heating is used, much higher conversion (close to 100%) can be
achieved; and, depending on the voltage–current supply (i.e., electrical
power generation), the space time requirement can vary. Figure 4B
shows that when electrical heat supply is smaller than the heat con-
sumption rate (by reaction), the space time required for higher conver-
sion is between isothermal and adiabatic limits (dashed lines 3a and
3b). But when e-heating rate is same or higher than the consumption
rate (dashed line 3c), higher conversion can be achieved at same or
smaller space time (than the isothermal limit). In particular, the equilib-
rium conversion of 80% is achieved in isothermal operation (solid line
2) with space time of 2 s. When e-heating is such that the electric
heat supply is twice the endothermic heat requirement (dashed line
3c), 100% conversion is achieved in 1 s (i.e., half of isothermal case).
Similarly, when electric heat supply is 5 times lower (dashed line 3b)
and 50 times lower (dashed line in 3a) than the endothermic heat
requirement, 100% conversion is achieved at 5- and 50-times higher
space time, that is, 10 s and 100 s, respectively. In these calculations
and following calculations, a pure feed of ethane is assumed, and the
 15475905, 2022, 2, Downloaded from https://aiche.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aic.17542 by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (NON -EAL), Wiley Online Library on [16/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BALAKOTAIAH AND RATNAKAR 8 of 10

operating pressure is 1 atm. Similar calculations can also be performed

when feed may contain other components such as steam (to avoid
coke formation) or when operating pressure is different (i.e., elevated
from ambient).

3.4 | Power requirements and voltage/current

constraints

The power requirement (Q_ t ) for carrying out an endothermic reaction

depends on the flow and reaction parameters such as flow rate, reac-
tant concentration (and/or pressure) inlet/exit temperature, which
constitutes of sensible heat of the feed and heat of reaction, which
can be expressed as follows:

 
Q_ t ¼ F in Cpf ðT f  T fin Þ þ ΔH χ e , ð6Þ

where Fin , T f ,T fin , and χ e are inlet molar flow rate, exit fluid tempera-
ture, inlet fluid temperature, and conversion, respectively. The first
term is the sensible heat required to bring the feed from inlet temper-
ature to the target temperature, while the second part is the heat
required for obtaining target conversion from reaction. As an example,
we consider a large-scale EC plant with ethylene production capacity
of 1MTA, which is equivalent to 1.13 kmol/s of ethylene production
or Fin ~ 1.25 kmol/s of ethane feed (assuming 90% conversion). This
corresponds to the volumetric flow rate qin ~ 100 m3/s of ethane feed

(PW) configuration showing the conversion and temperatures at exit
at 1 atm pressure and 950 K (~677 C). Assuming the target fluid tem-
perature (at exit) of 1200 K (~927
C), the space time (τ) can be
selected based on isothermal operation (at 1200 K) corresponding to
90% conversion, which suggests tc = 0.1 s. Thus, the power require-
ment (Q_ t ) can be calculated from Equation (3), which is approximately
215 MW (with average values for Cpf  140 Jmol/K; and ΔH  145
kJ/mol). Equivalently, it may require approximately 70–75 windmills
(each windmill producing 3 MW renewable power). In addition, the
total fluid volume in the reactor (V f ¼ qin tc ) is approximately 10 m .3
3.5 | Transient simulation results
Figure 5 presents the simulation results for EC at scaled-up PW mod-
ule (with production capacity of 50 kTA of ethylene), with Figure 5A
showing the variation of conversion, fluid temperature and solid tem-
perature with time at the exit of the module, while Figure 5B shows
the variation of the same quantities with axial position at steady state.
This module consists of 212 PW units, where each unit consists of
47  111 wires (i.e., 47 layers in flow direction with each layer con-
taining 111 vertical wires). Figure 3A,B depicts the structure of a basic
unit and module for PW configuration. These wires are of length 1 m,
diameter 100 μm and resistivity 1.4 Ω.μm. In every layer, the vertical
wires are separated by 350 μm (i.e., transverse spacing to wire diame-
ter ratio is 3.5) so that the transverse heat Peclet number, ph ¼ 0:1,
leading to horizontal width of the unit (or module) in transverse direc-
tion to be 0.5 m. Each layer is separated by 100 μm (i.e., axial spacing
F I G U R E 5 (A) Transient simulation of a parallel wire
(B) steady-state conversion and temperature profiles
to diameter ratio is unity), leading to the length of each unit to be
9.3 mm. The spacing between each unit is 20% of the unit length
(i.e., 1.88 mm), which leads to the length of the reaction zone in the
module to be around 2.4 m, or the dimensions of 1 m  0.5 m  2.4 m
(i.e., 1.2 m3). Thus, for 250 kTA plant capacity, five of such modules
will be needed, where the reaction zone will occupy total volume of
6 m3 that is order of magnitude lower than that of the traditional eth-
ane cracker.
For simulation, the desired exit fluid temperature of 1200 K is
selected for demonstration purposes, which requires the space time
to be 0.1 s and could lead to the steady-state conversion of 90%. The
inlet temperature of ethane is assumed to be 950 K (~677
C). It
should be noted that there are only 47  212 (= 9964) wires in the
flow direction, that is, the effective length in flow direction is approxi-
mately 1 m which requires velocity of 10 m/s to achieve space time
of 0.1 s. Thus, the space time based on the total length of the module
is 2.4 times higher, that is, 0.24 s. Each unit is subjected to voltage dif-
ference of 41 V, leading to the total current of 1197 Amp per unit
(or 0.23 Amp per wire), generating 9.43 W per wire or 49 kW per unit
of electric power. Thus, the module requires electric power of
10.4 MW and can produce approximately 50 kTA of ethylene.
For the subject simulation, the two-mode model (see References
15 and 16) as described in the Supplementary Material is used to
obtain the profiles of conversion and fluid/solid temperatures. The

9 of 10
key time-scales corresponding to the simulation case at 90% conver-
sion and 1200 K are: teh = 0.018 s; tc = 0.1 s; tm = th = 0.01 s;
tR = 0.86 s; thR = 0.017 s. It can be seen from Figure 5 that the differ-
ence between fluid and solid temperatures is approximately 60
C
(which is lower than the traditional cracker where the difference could
be in the range of 100–200
C). In addition, Figure 5A shows that the
time to achieve steady-state is around 1 s (which corresponds to very
fast start-up time as compared to hours to few days in conventional
technologies). The spatial profile in Figure 5B suggests that each wire
leads to gradual conversion. The first few units near the inlet contrib-
ute mainly to the sensible heat to increase the temperature of the
feed stream, until temperature reaches around 1120 K (~850
C), then
the conversion accelerates, and e-heating is utilized by reaction.
(Remark: The profiles shown in Figure 5B are generic for any
e-heating system and other reactor configurations. For example, simi-
lar profiles have been computed and observed by Wismann et al.8 for
steam reforming of methane using PTR configuration.)
Similar analysis can be performed with other reactor configura-
tions and endothermic reaction systems. (Our preliminary calculations
for SMR and DMR show that the results are qualitatively similar, the
main difference being longer time scales associated with the catalytic
chemistry at lower temperatures.) Although all the configurations pro-
vide flexibilities and modularity, it is found that the PW arrangement
provides the most uniform heating and flexibility. In addition, the uni-
form heat flux is assured in this configuration (unlike the other config-
uration where the current distribution may be two-dimensional,
leading to nonuniform heat flux). The single electrically (and uniformly)
heated wire may be considered to be the base unit, analogous to the
catalyst particle in the traditional packed-bed reactor.
4 | SUMMARY AND DISCUSSION
In this work, we proposed modular reactor configurations with electri-
cal resistance heating for carrying out endothermic reactions. We
have also examined their feasibility and flexibility based on time scale
analysis. The main advantages of the reactor configurations proposed
may be summarized as follows: (a) If renewable power sources (solar,
wind, geothermal, hydro, and nuclear) are used to produce electricity,
CO2 emissions can be eliminated. (b) The proposed designs may be
used to carry out many endothermic processes, for example, cracking
of hydrocarbons (ethane, propane, naphtha, etc.) or pyrolysis of meth-
ane, SMR or DMR, RWGS, ammonia decomposition, and so forth. For
endothermic reactions requiring a catalyst, the wires or the interior of
the monolith/tube channels can be coated with a thin porous layer of
washcoat containing the catalytic agents. (c) Compared to traditional
furnace-based technologies that have typical thermal efficiency of
about 50%, direct electrical heating of reactors as proposed can lead
to heating efficiencies greater than 90%. (d) The transient time in pro-
posed designs is order of seconds as compared to the traditional reac-
tors that takes several hours to a day. (e) The most appealing feature
of proposed designs is their modularity, flexibility, and ease of scale-
up. The proposed reactor configurations may be sized up based on
15475905, 2022, 2, Downloaded from https://aiche.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aic.17542 by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (NON -EAL), Wiley Online Library on [16/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
BALAKOTAIAH AND RATNAKAR
local (renewable) energy availability and process constraints (including
voltage–current limitations). In particular, PW arrangement provides
the largest flexibility in terms of process/material and geometric
parameters, to satisfy the various constraints related to production,
current/voltage limitations, and so forth. (f) The all-electric heater
design proposed in new configurations leads to uniform temperature
distribution, in contrast to the combustion furnace designs that utilize
radiant fuel burners.
Our preliminary analysis showed that the PW configuration offers
the most flexibility. For example, the layer of wires in a unit can be
arranged staggered in the flow direction. This can reduce the effective
transverse Peclet number leading to smaller difference in solid and
fluid temperature, in turn exhibiting higher thermal efficiency. In addi-
tion, in PW configuration, the current flux distribution is nearly one
dimensional, leading to uniform heat flux, whereas, in other configura-
tions, the current flux may not be uniformly distributed.
There are many possible extensions of this work, but we mention
two important ones: (i) more detailed modeling and analysis using
multi-step chemistry and flow models, and (ii) experimental validation
of the reactor configuration using pilot scale design. We also note that
the practical realization of electrically heated reactors may require
many other considerations such as dealing with coking, catalyst layer
deactivation, possible existence of magnetic fields (that could influ-
ence the free radical chemistry), combining reactor operation with
downstream separation units, and so forth. It is hoped that the prelim-
inary work presented here will lead to further research on these
topics.
ACKNOWLEDG MENTS
We thank Dr. Albert Harvey of Shell International Exploration and
Production Inc. for his input and encouragement to pursue this pro-
ject. The authors would like to thank Shell International Exploration
and production Inc. for permission to publish this work.
AUTHOR CONTRIBU TIONS
Vemuri Balakotaiah: Conceptualization (equal); formal analysis (equal);
investigation (equal); writing – original draft (equal); writing – review
and editing (equal). Ram Ratnakar: Conceptualization (equal); formal
analysis (equal); funding acquisition (lead); investigation (equal); writ-
ing – original draft (equal); writing – review and editing (equal).
DATA AVAILABILITY STAT EMEN T
Data sharing not applicable to this article as no datasets were gener-
ated or analyzed during the current study.
OR CID
Vemuri Balakotaiah https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9187-3901
RE FE RE NCE S
1. Ritchie H, Roser M. CO₂ and greenhouse gas emissions. Our world in
data. 2020 May 11. Published online at OurWorldInData.org. https://
ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions
2. https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/white-house/biden-will-commit-
halving-u-s-emissions-2030-part-paris-n1264892

BALAKOTAIAH AND RATNAKAR
3. Ren T, Patel M, Blok K. Olefins from conventional and heavy feed-
stocks: energy use in steam cracking and alternative processes.
Energy. 2006;31(4):425-451.
4. Spagnolo DA, Cornett LJ, Chuang KT. Direct electro-steam reforming:
a novel catalytic approach. Int J Hydrog Energy. 1992;17(11):839-846.
5. Zhang Q, Nakaya M, Ootani T, Takahashi H, Sakurai M, Kameyama H.
Simulation and experimental analysis on the development of a co-
axial cylindrical methane steam reformer using an electrically heated
alumite catalyst. Int J Hydrog Energy. 2007;32(16):3870-3879.
6. Zhou L, Guo Y, Yagi M, Sakurai M, Kameyama H. Investigation of a
novel porous anodic alumina plate for methane steam reforming:
hydrothermal stability, electrical heating possibility and reforming
reactivity. Int J Hydrog Energy. 2009;34(2):844-858.
7. Rieks M, Bellinghausen R, Kockmann N, Mleczko L. Experimental
study of methane dry reforming in an electrically heated reactor. Int J
Hydrog Energy. 2015;40(46):15940-15951.
8. Wismann ST, Engbæk JS, Vendelbo SB, et al. Electrified methane
reforming: a compact approach to greener industrial hydrogen pro-
duction. Science. 2019;364(6442):756-759.
9. Wismann ST, Engbæk JS, Vendelbo SB, et al. Electrified methane
reforming: understanding the dynamic interplay. Ind Eng Chem Res.
2019;58(51):23380-23388.
10. Shekunova VM, Aleksandrov YA, Tsyganova EI, Filofeev SV. Cracking
of light hydrocarbons in the presence of electrically heated metal
wires. Pet Chem. 2017;57(5):446-451.
11. Porsin AV, Kulikov AV, Amosov YI, Rogozhnikov VN, Noskov AS.
Acetylene synthesis by methane pyrolysis on a tungsten wire. Theor
Found Chem Eng. 2014;48(4):397-403.
12. Froment GF, Bischoff KB, De Wilde J. Chemical Reactor Analysis and
Design. Wiley; 1990.
15475905, 2022, 2, Downloaded from https://aiche.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/aic.17542 by INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY (NON -EAL), Wiley Online Library on [16/05/2024]. See the Terms and Conditions (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/terms-and-conditions) on Wiley Online Library for rules of use; OA articles are governed by the applicable Creative Commons License
10 of 10
13. Ratnakar RR, Harvey A, Balakotaiah V. Modular reactor configuration
for production of chemicals with electrical heating for carrying out
reactions. Shell US provisional patent 63/175384. April 15, 2021.
14. Ratnakar RR, Dadi RK, Balakotaiah V. Multi-scale reduced order
models for transient simulation of multi-layered monolith reactors.
Chem Eng J. 2018;15(352):293-305.
15. Sarkar B, Ratnakar RR, Balakotaiah V. Multi-scale coarse-grained continuum
models for bifurcation and transient analysis of coupled homogeneous-
catalytic reactions in monoliths. Chem Eng J. 2021;1(407):126500.
16. Balakotaiah V, Sun Z, Ratnakar RR. Ignition–extinction analysis of cat-
alytic reactor models. Rev Chem Eng. 2021;000010151520200113.
https://doi.org/10.1515/revce-2020-0113
17. Shah MJ, Jose S. Computer control of ethylene production. Ind Eng
Chem. 1967;59(5):70-85.
18. Sundaram KM, Froment GF. Modeling of thermal cracking kinetics—I:
thermal cracking of ethane, propane and their mixtures. Chem Eng Sci.
1977;32(6):601-608.
SUPPORTING INF ORMATION
Additional supporting information may be found in the online version
of the article at the publisher's website.
How to cite this article: Balakotaiah V, Ratnakar RR. Modular
reactors with electrical resistance heating for hydrocarbon
cracking and other endothermic reactions. AIChE J. 2022;
68(2):e17542. doi:10.1002/aic.17542