E nergy recovery from used cooking oil Lidia Lombardi * , Barbara - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
E nergy recovery from used cooking oil Lidia Lombardi * , Barbara Mendecka ** , Ennio Carnevale ** * Niccol Cusano University, Rome, Italy lidia.lombardi@unicusano.it ** Industrial Engineering Department, Florence University, Italy
* Niccolò Cusano University, Rome, Italy – lidia.lombardi@unicusano.it ** Industrial Engineering Department, Florence University, Italy – barbara.mendecka@unifi.it ** Industrial Engineering Department, Florence University, Italy – ennio.carnevale@unifi.it
4th International Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management, Limassol, 23–25 June 2016
2
4th International Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management, Limassol, 23–25 June 2016
3
4th International Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management, Limassol, 23–25 June 2016 1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
4
4th International Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management, Limassol, 23–25 June 2016 1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
The purpose of this LCA study was to analyse and compare the environmental impacts due to the different alternative ways of energy recovery from UCO. The impact assessment was carried out adopting:
CML‐IA)
exergy. The analysis was carried out, reported and described according to the LCA phases (ISO 14040‐44, 2009).
5
4th International Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management, Limassol, 23–25 June 2016 1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
1 CHP plant fed by regenerated UCO CHP 2 Alkali‐NaOH catalytic conventional biodiesel production NaOH 3 Alkali‐KOH catalytic conventional biodiesel production KOH 4 Acid‐H2SO4 catalytic conventional biodiesel production ACID 5 Non catalytic supercritical biodiesel production Supercritical
6
4th International Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management, Limassol, 23–25 June 2016
transport ‐ oil collection containers washing delivering of UCO to the plants processing at the plants (respectively CHP or biodiesel production)
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
7
4th International Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management, Limassol, 23–25 June 2016
Functional unit: 800 t of UCO per year. (with reference to a study case located in Italy, Prato district). This amount of UCO is considered to feed cogeneration or biodiesel plants. Consequential approach – expansion system – avoided effects:
Additional function
Multi‐functional process CHP Biodiesel Electricity recovery IT electr. mix ‐ Heat recovery IT heat mix ‐ Biodiesel Diesel, petroleum product ‐ Glycerol Glycerol, from epichlorohydrin ‐ 1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
8
Parameter, unit UCO after collection UCO after CHP pre‐treatment Density (15°C), kg/m3 918 916 Flashpoint, °C 245 237 Net Calorific Value, MJ/kg 36.89 37.26 Kinematic viscosity (40°C), mm2/s 20 20 Carbon residue, % mass <0.1 Iodine value, g/100g 114 37 Number of sulfur, mg/kg 3.1 3.2 Total contamination, mg/kg 8.4 8 Neutralization number, mgKOH/g 1.5 1.4 Free fatty acids, % 0.2 0.1 Oxidation stability, H 9 10 Phosphorus content, mg/kg 3.2 <5 Ash content, % mass 0.01 0.003 Water content, % mass 0.075 0.1
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
Table 1 : UCO quality comparison – experimental study (Prato)
9
Inputs/outputs Total Data source Input UCO, t 800 Primary Washing and storage plant Input Water, l 39 000 Primary Electricity – containers washing, kWh 5003 Primary Output UCO, t 800 Primary Wastewater, l 39 000 Primary Transport to plant Input Diesel, l 5 000 Primary
Table 2: Inventory of container washing phase and transportation phase
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
10
Inputs/outputs Total Data source Cogeneration plant ‐ oil regeneration Input UCO, t 800 Primary Electricity ‐ pre‐heating, kWh 18 754 Primary Electricity – sieving, decantation and pumping, kWh 177 Primary Electricity – filtration and extraction, kWh 13 104 Primary Water, l 40 000 Primary Output Regenerated UCO, t 767 Secondary Wastewater, l 40 000 Primary
Table 3: Inventory of the pre‐treatment phase
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
11
Inputs/outputs Total Data source Cogeneration plant –
Input Regenerated UCO, t 767 Primary Output Gross electricity production, kWh 3 167 442 Secondary Heat production, kWh 2 712 670 Secondary Table 4 : Inventory of the operational phase
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
Diesel cycle engine Mechanical power, kW 1 097 Electric efficiency, % 39.9 Thermal efficiency, % 40.2
12
Table 5: Inventory of the alkali‐catalytic conventional biodiesel production from UCO using methanol and NaOH
Inputs/outputs Min Max Data source Biodiesel production Input UCO, t
800 Primary
Methanol, t
97.3 164.0 [9,25,26]
NaOH, t
2.6 8.2 [9,25,26]
KOH, t
‐ ‐ [9,25,26]
H2SO4, t
0.0 7.3 [9,25,26]
H3PO4, t
0.1 2.1 [9,25,26]
CaO, t
0.0 0.1 [9,25,26]
Propane, t
0.0 0.1 [9,25,26]
Glycerol process, t
0.0 13.9 [9,25,26]
Steam (from natural gas), MJ
1.6E+06 5.7E+0.6 [9,25,26]
Electricity, kWh
6.4E+02 7.7E+03 [9,25,26]
Output Biodiesel, t
767.6 799.7 Secondary
Glycerol, t
76.8 81.6 Secondary
Solid waste (salts), t
1.3 12.3 [9,25,26]
Liquid waste (water, methanol, acids, glycerol), t
29.1 99.3 [9,25,26]
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
13
Table 6: Inventory of the alkali‐catalytic conventional biodiesel production from UCO using methanol and KOH
Inputs/outputs Min Max Data source Biodiesel production Input UCO, t
800
Primary Methanol, t
88.9 176.9 [10,14,16]
NaOH, t
‐ ‐ [10,14,16]
KOH, t
0.1 16.6 [10,14,16]
H2SO4, t
0.0 10.2 [10,14,16]
H3PO4, t
0.0 3.9 [10,14,16]
CaO, t
‐ ‐ [10,14,16]
Propane, t
‐ ‐ [10,14,16]
Glycerol process, t
‐ ‐ [10,14,16]
Steam (from natural gas), MJ
0.0 7.2E+05 [10,14,16]
Electricity, kWh
3.27E+04 1.59E+05 [10,14,16]
Output Biodiesel, t
683.8 777.8 Secondary
Glycerol, t
67.1 85.0 Secondary
Solid waste (salts), t
0.0 15.2 [10,14,16]
Liquid waste (water, methanol, acids, glycerol), t
0.0 106.5 [10,14,16]
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
14
Table 7: Inventory of the acid‐catalytic conventional biodiesel production from UCO using methanol and H2SO4
Inputs/outputs Min Max Data source Biodiesel production Input UCO, t
800
Primary Methanol, t
165.2 173.7 [25,26]
NaOH, t
‐ ‐ [25,26]
KOH, t
‐ ‐ [25,26]
H2SO4, t
70.9 115.2 [25,26]
H3PO4, t
‐ ‐ [25,26]
CaO, t
40.5 65.9 [25,26]
Propane, t
‐ ‐ [25,26]
Glycerol process, t
‐ ‐ [25,26]
Steam (from natural gas), MJ
6.8E+06 9.2E+06 [25,26]
Electricity, kWh
7.3E+02 6.9E+03 [25,26]
Output Biodiesel, t
772.7 811.3 Secondary
Glycerol, t
83.3 88.7 Secondary
Solid waste (salts), t
124.4 158.95 [25,26]
Liquid waste (water, methanol, acids, glycerol), t
83.7 133.1 [25,26]
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
15
Table 8: Inventory of the non‐catalytic supercritical biodiesel production
Inputs/outputs Min Max Data source Biodiesel production Input UCO, t
800
Primary Methanol, t
88.5 95.4 [9,25]
NaOH, t
‐ ‐ [9,25]
KOH, t
‐ ‐ [9,25]
H2SO4, t
‐ ‐ [9,25]
H3PO4, t
‐ ‐ [9,25]
CaO, t
‐ ‐ [9,25]
Propane, t
‐ ‐ [9,25]
Glycerol process, t
‐ ‐ [9,25]
Steam (from natural gas), MJ
9.5E+05 6.2E+06 [9,25]
Electricity, kWh
3.2E+03 6.5E+04 [9,25]
Output Biodiesel, t
801.2 803.6 Secondary
Glycerol, t
84.9 94.2 Secondary
Solid waste (salts), t
‐ ‐ [9,25]
Liquid waste (water, methanol, acids, glycerol), t
‐ ‐ [9,25]
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
16
0,5 6,5 8,7 17,4 13,2 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 CEX, GJex/tUCO
CEX
39,4 224,2 234,6 815,0 682,6 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 GWP, kg CO2‐eq/tUCO
GWP
17
0,5 6,5 8,7 17,4 13,2 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 CEX, GJex/tUCO
CEX
39,4 224,2 234,6 815,0 682,6 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 GWP, kg CO2‐eq/tUCO
GWP
Transport CHP‐39% Transport CHP‐55%
18
‐23,28 ‐54,55 ‐43,57 ‐44,88 ‐49,00 ‐70 ‐60 ‐50 ‐40 ‐30 ‐20 ‐10 10 20 CEX, GJex/tUCO
CEX
‐2.274,79 ‐2.858,23 ‐2.404,69 ‐2.327,15‐2.454,16 ‐3500 ‐3000 ‐2500 ‐2000 ‐1500 ‐1000 ‐500 500 1000 GWP, kg CO2‐eq/tUCO
GWP
19
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
Sensitivity Ratio As a general rule:
parameter is relevant for the results;
parameter does not influece significantly the results. ∆ 2 1 1 0 1 2 1 0
(Heijungs, 1994)
+/- 10%
20
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
0,00 0,20 0,40 0,60 0,80 1,00 transport distance heat consumption‐at plant electricity consumption ‐ at plant
CEX‐sensitivity ratio
CHP NaOH ACID KOH Supercritical
21
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
0,00 0,20 0,40 0,60 0,80 1,00 transport distance heat consumption‐at plant electricity consumption ‐ at plant
GWP‐sensitivity ratio
CHP NaOH ACID KOH Supercritical
22
1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
5 10 15 20 25 30 35 GWP CEX Percentage
Coefficient of variation
Supercritical ACID KOH NaOH CHP
23
Scenario comparison: the cogeneration plant has lower values of the environmental impact indicators per unit of processed UCO. Concerning the biodiesel production, the alkali‐ NaOH catalyzed processes is the best solution from CEX and GWP point of view. Avoided effects: High beneficial effects in terms of both CEX and GWP can be achieved. The savings
by the substitution
products in biodiesel production processes are significantly higher than in CHP solution.
4th International Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management, Limassol, 23–25 June 2016 1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
24
Contribution analysis: heat and chemicals consumption are the highest contributor for biodiesel production scenarios For CHP the transportation phase plays a significant role (should be applied locally). Sensitivity analysis: the heat consumption, was the parameter which caused the most significant variations of the resulting effects Uncertainty analysis: the highest CV was observed for the GWP factor in the scenario of biodiesel production with supercritical methanol
4th International Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management, Limassol, 23–25 June 2016 1.Introduction 2.LCA: goal and scope definition 3.LCA: inventory analysis 4.Results and discussion 5.Sensitivity and uncertainty analyses 6.Conclusions
* Niccolò Cusano University, Rome, Italy – lidia.lombardi@unicusano.it ** Industrial Engineering Department, Florence University, Italy – barbara.mendecka@unifi.it ** Industrial Engineering Department, Florence University, Italy – ennio.carnevale@unifi.it
4th International Conference on Sustainable Solid Waste Management, Limassol, 23–25 June 2016