Systematic Approach for Synthesis of Integrated Palm Oil

Subscriber access provided by UNIV ILLINOIS URBANA

Article

Systematic Approach for Synthesis of Integrated Palm Oil Processing Complex. Part 1: Single Owner Rex T. L. Ng, and Denny K. S. Ng Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., Just Accepted Manuscript • Publication Date (Web): 07 Jun 2013 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on June 7, 2013

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research

Systematic Approach for Synthesis of Integrated Palm Oil Processing Complex. Part 1: Single Owner Rex T. L. Ng, †,‡ Denny K. S. Ng*,† †

Department of Chemical and Environmental Engineering / Centre of Excellence for Green

Technologies, University of Nottingham, Malaysia, Broga Road, 43500 Semenyih, Selangor, Malaysia. ‡

GGS Eco Solutions Sdn Bhd, Wisma Zelan, Suite G.12A & 1.12B, Ground Floor, No 1, Jalan

Tasik Permaisuri 2, Bandar Tun Razak, Cheras, 56000 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. KEYWORDS Bioenergy; Integrated biorefinery; Palm oil processing complex; Network synthesis. ABSTRACT

Throughout the palm oil milling process, fresh fruit bunches are converted into crude palm oil and large amount of palm-based biomasses are produced as by-products. Processes that convert palm-based biomass (e.g., empty fruit bunches, palm oil mill effluent etc.) into value added products via single conversion technology (i.e., thermal, biological and physical conversion technologies) is well established. However, integrating multiple conversion technologies to convert palm-based biomasses into value added palm green products (e.g., biofuels, biobased

ACS Paragon Plus Environment


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

chemicals) has not been studied. In this work, a conceptual zone of integrated palm oil processing complex (POPC) which is owned by single owner is introduced to fully utilise palmbased biomass for value-added palm green products production and heat and power generation. In this work, integrated POPC is defined as a complex which integrates palm oil mill (POM), palm oil refinery (POR), palm oil-based biorefinery (POB) and combined heat power (CHP) =at the same site. A systematic generic approach for synthesis and optimisation of integrated POPC to achieve maximum economic performance is developed and presented in Part 1 of this series. The optimised network configuration which achieves the targets can also be determined. Meanwhile, the synthesis and optimisation of integrated POPC which has multiple owners of those processing facilities is further analysed based on industrial symbiosis concept and will be presented in Part 2 of this series.

1.

INTRODUCTION

According to the American Soybean Association (ASA), palm oil which is produced from oil palm fruit is the world’s largest vegetable oil consumption in 2011, accounting for 49.6 million tonnes palm oil out of 150.8 million tonnes vegetable oils consumption.1 Such oil possesses excellent cooking properties and widely used for food application (e.g., cooking oil, margarine, shortening, cocoa butter, etc.) or non-food items (e.g., soap, cosmetics, detergents, etc.).2 In Malaysia, the oil palm planted area reached 5.00 million hectares and total of 92.9 million tonnes of oil palm fruit is harvested in 2011.3 Based on the available oil palm fruits, a total of 18.9 million tonnes of crude palm oil (CPO) and 2.1 million tonnes of crude palm kernel oil (CPKO) are produced.3 In order to produce various value-added products (e.g., cocoa butter equivalent,


Page 2 of 56

Page 3 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


emulsifiers, etc.) from CPO and CPKO, those oils are further processed (e.g., refining, fractionation, hydrogenation, etc.) in palm oil refinery (POR). Figure 1 illustrates the typical flow diagram of palm oil mill (POM) process. Upon harvesting, oil palm fruits, which are also known as fresh fruit bunches (FFBs), are collected from plantations and processed in POMs. FFBs are first sterilised in order to remove the fruits from FFBs in stripper. The steam condensate is discharged as wastewater. Meanwhile, empty fruit bunches (EFBs) are generated. Next, the fruits are being crushed via screw press to extract crude oil from the fruit. Crude oil is then pumped to a clarification tank and purified for crude palm oil (CPO) production. Steam condensate, wastewater and sludge from separator and clarification are discharged as palm oil mill effluent (POME). After that, press cake which produced from screw press is sent to nut/fibre separator to remove palm mesocarp fibre (PMF) from nut. The nut is further cracked in nut cracker and palm kernel shell (PKS) is removed. The remaining palm kernels are collected and sent to crushing plant, which processes the kernels to produce other oil products, crude palm kernel oil (CPKO). It is noted that palm-based biomasses (e.g., EFBs, PMF, PKS, POME, etc.) are produced as waste or by-products throughout the palm oil milling process as shown in Figure 1. The amounts of palm-based biomass generated may differ from mills, and estates, as it highly dependent of the quality of FFBs. However, according to Husain et al.,4 it is estimated that one tonne of FFB produces of 21 % CPO, 6 – 7 % palm kernel, 23 % EFB, 14 – 15 % PMF, 6 – 7 % PKS. Figure 1. Schematic diagram of palm oil mill (POM). CPO and CPKO are further processed in different processes (e.g., refining, fractionation, hydrogenation etc.) in order to meet various specifications of palm downstream products (e.g.,



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Cocoa butter equivalent, emulsifiers etc.). Figure 2 illustrates the typical flow diagram of POR process. As shown in Figure 2, CPO and CPKO can be further refined and fractionated in POR. CPO can be either refined physically or chemically into Refined, Bleached, and Deodorised palm oil (RBDPO) or Neutralised, Bleached Deodorised palm oil (NBDPO) in refining process. Throughout the refining processes of CPO, palm fatty acid distillate (PFAD) are produced which can be used as soap, animal food and bio-diesel industries. Moreover, refined palm oil (RBDPO or NBDPO) is further fractionated to obtain olein (liquid portion) and stearin (solid portion). While, CPKO is first fractionated to produce crude palm kernel olein (CPKOL) and crude palm kernel stearin (CPKS). Next, CPKO, CPKOL and CPKS can be further refined physically or chemically to produce Refined, Bleached, Deodorised palm kernel oil (RBDPKO) or Neutralised, Bleached Deodorised palm kernel oil (NBDPKO). Besides, RBD/NBD palm kernel olein (RBDPKOL/NBDPKOL), RBD/NBD palm kernel stearin (RBDPKS/NBDPKS) and palm kernel fatty acid distillate (PKFAD) are also produced from the refining process. Note that during fractionation of RBDPO or NBDPO, olein is the premium product; while in fractionation of CPKO, stearin is the premium product.2 Figure 2. Schematic diagram of palm oil refinery.

2.

MALAYSIA PALM-BASED BIOMASS With the increasing volume of palm oil production, palm-based biomass is projected to

increase up to 110 million dry tonnes by 2020.5 Palm-based biomass is gaining significant attention to improve energy security as Malaysia is highly dependent on fossil oil as an energy source. To date, there are many mature processes and technologies that convert palm-based


Page 4 of 56

Page 5 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


biomass to value-added palm green products through biological (e.g., anaerobic digestion, fermentation etc.), physical (e.g., drying, densification and pelletising, separation etc.) and thermochemical conversions (e.g., combustion, pyrolysis, gasification etc.). For example, POME can be treated in anaerobic digestion process to convert organic materials in POME into biogas, which mainly consists of methane (approximately 60%) and carbon dioxide (approximately 40%). Biogas is then further fed into conversion devices such as an internal combustion engine for producing electricity or shaft work.6 Meanwhile, dried fibre produced from the drying and sieving processes of EFB can be used as mattresses, seats, insulation, etc.7 EFB and PKS can also be converted to solid fuels such as palm briquette or pellet via screw press technology.4,8 Both palm pellet and briquette can be used as replacement or complement to fossil fuels, such as coal in industrial boiler, residential and commercial heating. Furthermore, PKS and EFB can be fed into gasification system, with a controlled supply of oxygen and/or steam to produce syngas.9,10 Note that syngas can then be used as feedstock for the production of biofuels and biobased chemicals as well as the source for generation of heat and power. In contrast, PKS and EFB can also be used as feedstock of pyrolysis process to produce charcoal and bio-oil.11-13 Biooil can be used to substitute liquid fossil fuels for heat and power generation (e.g., to be burned in diesel engines, turbines and boiler). Besides, it also can be converted to chemicals (e.g., organic acids, fertilisers, sugars, etc.).14,15 Based on abovementioned reasons, there is a continuous increasing interest concerning palm-based biomasses generated from the POM as a source of renewable energy. On the other hand, Malaysia government introduced several palm-based biomass strategies in recent years. Ministry of Energy, Green Technology and Water (KeTTHA) introduced Renewable Energy Policy to enhance the utilisation of local renewable energy resources, leading



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

to sustainable socio-economic development.16 The policy sets a target of 4000 MW of installed renewable energy capacity for 2030.5 Apart from that, the feed-in tariff (FiT) is introduced to help the development of the renewable energy and promote the usage of the renewable energy. FiT is a government incentive and it acts as a catalyst for the entry of renewable energy power generation industries. In addition, Malaysia Innovation Agency (AIM) developed National Biomass Strategy 2020, to capture the potential of palm-based biomass as a source of growth and value for the future through innovation. It focuses the development of national clusters in biofuel and biobased chemicals industries, as well as fulfils the national renewable energy target for biomass to energy.5 The initial strategy focuses on the palm oil industry; yet, the scope maybe later extended to include other industries such as wood, rice husk, etc. Most recently, Malaysia Sixth Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak announced the 1 Malaysia Biomass Alternative Strategy (1MBAS), which strengthen the execution of National Biomass Strategy 2020 and expand the strategy to other sources of biomass such as forestry, municipal waste and rubber.17 The initiative of 1MBAS is to encourage more local and foreign companies to invest in the biomass industry, at the same time enhance the development of new industries through utilisation of biomass. Based on above policies and incentives, Malaysia has made efforts towards the developments of biomass industries and encourages the utilisation of palm-based biomass for value-added products production and electricity generation.

3.

INTEGRATED BIOREFINERY On top of rapid development of different biomass conversion technologies (biological,

physical and thermo-chemical), integrated biorefinery had been proposed to integrate multiple


Page 6 of 56

Page 7 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


biomass conversion technologies and combined heat and power (CHP) to produce numerous bioenergy, biobased chemicals and biofuel.18 Integrated biorefinery emerged as noteworthy concept to integrate several conversion technologies to have more flexibility in product generation with energy self-sustained, and reduce the overall cost of the process. Research works on detailed gasification modelling, process simulation, and process integration in converting biomass to transportation fuels had been carried out.19-22 In addition, different systematic approaches were introduced for the screening and selection of technology pathways for biorefineries, which includes hierarchical approach,23 graphical-based approach,24 mathematical optimisation approach25-27 and combination of both mathematical optimisation and insight-based approaches.28-29 Although the concept of integrated biorefinery had been exploited in soybean oil,30 algae,22,31 switchgrass,21 sewage sludge,32 corn,33,34 hardwood chips35, limited research works had been done in introducing palm oil-based integrated biorefinery. Ng et al.36 presented a modular optimisation approach in solving simultaneous process synthesis and heat and power integration problem in an integrated palm oil-based biorefinery. Kasivisvanathan et al.37 presented the concept of systematic optimisation approach to retrofit a POM into a sustainable integrated palm oil-based biorefinery (POB). However, the paper only focuses the integration of heat and power within POM and palm oil-based biorefinery. In order to facilitate the integration of palm oil processing facilities, Palm Oil Processing Complex (POPC), a conceptual zone that consists of the POM, POB, palm oil refinery (POR) and combined heat and power (CHP) facilities, as shown in Figure 3, is introduced in this work. By integrating all the processing facilities simultaneously, the material and energy recovery within integrated POPC can be enhanced. Note that FFB is processed in POM to generate CPO; CPO is further processed to palm refined



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

products (e.g., PFAD, RBDPO) in refining and fractionation process in POR; palm-based biomasses are fully utilised by either converting to value-added palm green products (e.g., palm briquette, palm pellet, dried long fibre) in POB or heat and power in CHP. For instance, palmbased biomass can be used for electricity generation for self-consumption within POM, POB and POR; palm briquette and pellet as feedstock of biomass boiler; dried fibre for mattress application; biogas for electricity generation; compost for plantation etc. Figure 3. Conceptual zone integrated Palm Oil Processing Complex (POPC). In this work, a systematic approach for synthesis and optimisation of integrated POPC is developed. Based on the proposed approach, product allocation of biomass to be sold or to generate heat and power can be determined. In addition, via systematic strategy utilisation of the biomasses, the biomass value losses can be reduced. The network configuration in integrated POPC that achieves the maximum economic performance is determined. Note that the proposed approach is not limited to palm oil industry and it can be extend to other industries to enhance the interaction of integrated biorefinery and other processing plants. In this work, a typical palm oil industry case study is solved to illustrate the proposed approach.

4.

PROBLEM STATEMENT To ease the synthesis and optimisation problem, the model breaks down the integrated POPC

into four blocks (POM, POR, POB and CHP) that interact with each other through material and energy balances as shown in Figure 4. Figure 4. Block diagram of the integrated palm oil processing complex (POPC).


Page 8 of 56

Page 9 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


The problem definition of an integrated POPC is stated as follows: FFB (WFFB) from palm plantation is sent to POM (Block I) to produce palm oil o ∈ O and palm-based biomass i ∈ I . In POR (Block II), palm oil o ∈ O from POM is sent to refinery processes to produce refined product p ∈ P via technology b∈ B . While in POB (Block III), palm-based biomass i ∈ I is sent to technology j ∈ J to produce intermediate k ∈ K . The intermediate k ∈ K is then upgraded to palm green product q ∈ Q via technology j '∈ J ' . Other than producing intermediate k and palm green product q ∈ Q , primary energy e ∈ E (i.e., biogas) and secondary energy e'∈ E' (i.e., medium or low pressure steams and electricity) can be generated from technologies g ∈ G and g '∈ G ' in CHP (Block IV). Note that the conversion of palm-based biomass is normalised to continuous production. This normalisation also reflects the application of sequential batch processing in order to supply consistent amount of intermediates and products.

5.

PROBLEM FORMULATION In this approach, integrated POPC is categorised into four models: POM, POR, POB and CHP.

Figure 5 shows the allocation of palm-based biomass i can be sent to POB or CHP via technology j, j', g, g' to produce intermediate k, final palm green product q, primary energy e and BIO INT secondary energy e'. The mass flowrate of palm-based biomass Wi , intermediate Wk and

palm green product WqPR , is used to track and determine the detailed allocations of materials and products for the POB. In the following section, detail formulation of the proposed model is presented.

Figure 5. Generic superstructure of Block III and Block IV.36



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 10 of 56

5.1. Material Balance. 5.1.1. Palm Oil Mill (Block I). FFB with flowrate WFFB is sent to OIL BIO POM and converted to palm oil o and palm-based biomass i at the conversion of Xo and Xi ,

respectively:

WoOIL = W FFBXOIL o

∀o

(1)

Wi BIO = W FFBXiBIO

∀i

(2)

BIO As shown in Figure 5, it is noted that each palm-based biomass i with flowrate Wi is split

into the potential technology j in POB with the flowrate of W ijI and potential technology g in CHP with the flowrate of W igI .

J

G

j =1

g =1

Wi BIO = ∑WijI + ∑WigI

∀i

(3)

OIL 5.1.2. Palm Oil Refinery (Block II). Palm oil with the flowrate Wo is split into the potential OIL

technology b (e.g., refining, hydrogenation etc.) with the flowrate of Wob :

B

WoOIL = ∑WobOIL

∀o

(4)

b=1

WobOIL is then processed in technology b to produce palm refined product p at the conversion

rate of X OIL obp .

O

WbpOIL = ∑WobOILXOIL obp

∀b ∀p

o=1


(5)

Page 11 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


The total production rate of palm refined product W pPR is given as:

B

WpPR = ∑WbpOIL

∀p

(6)

b=1

5.1.3. Palm Oil-based Biorefinery (Block III). Palm-based biomass i is converted to intermediate k via technology j at the production rate of I W jkI , with given conversion of Xijk .

I

I W jkI = ∑WijI X ijk

∀j ∀k

(7)

∀k

(8)

i =1

The total production rate of intermediate k is given as: J

INT k

W

= ∑W jkI j =1

Next, the intermediate k can be distributed to potential technology j' to produce palm green product q. The splitting constraint of intermediate k is written as: J'

WkINT = ∑WkjII'

∀k

(9)

j ' =1

Palm green product q can be determined by converting intermediate k at the conversion rate of

X IIkj 'q via the technology j'.

K

W jII'q = ∑WkjII' X IIkj 'q

∀j ' ∀q

k =1


(10)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 12 of 56

The total production rate of palm green product q is written as: J'

PR q

W

= ∑W jII'q

∀q

(11)

j '=1

Note that palm-based biomass i and intermediate k are allowed to by-pass technologies j and j' via a “blank” technology in the circumstances where no technology is required to produce intermediate k or desired final palm green product q without any conversion.

5.1.4. Combined Heat and Power (Block IV). In CHP (Block IV), palm-based biomass i is Gen-CHP converted to energy e via technology g at the production rate of Ee , with given conversion I . The production rate of energy e is given as: of Yige

I

I EgeI = ∑WigI Yige

∀g ∀e

(12)

i =1

G

E eGen -CHP = ∑E geI

∀e

(13)

g =1

Primary energy e such as biogas is needed to convert into other forms of energy (e.g., Gen-CHP electricity) via technology g' , Ee is split and further converted to secondary energy e' via

technology g' with conversion of YegII 'e' . The splitting constraint of energy e is written as:

G'

EeGen-CHP = ∑ EegGen'-CHP

∀e

(14)

g '=1

The total production rate of secondary energy e' through upgrading technology g' is written as:


Page 13 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


E

E gII'e ' = ∑ EegGen'-CHP YegII 'e '

∀g ' ∀e'

(15)

∀e'

(16)

e=1

G'

Gen e'

E

=E

Gen-CHP e'

= ∑EgII'e' g '=1

In order to reduce the complexity of model, all energy correlation in this case study focuses on secondary energy e'. In case where primary energy e (e.g., HPS in POB and MPS in POM) is required in integrated POPC, primary energy e is allowed to by-pass technologies g' or h' via a “blank” process where no conversion occurs. Thus, primary energy e is equal to secondary energy e'. Con − POB 5.2. Energy Balance. The energy consumption in POB, Ee ' is determined based on the

energy consumed in technologies j and j' with the conversions of YeI'ijk and YeII'kj 'q , respectively. The total energy consumption in POB is determined as:

K

J

(

)

Q

J'

(

- POB EeCon = ∑∑ WkINT YeI'ijk + ∑∑ WqPR YeII'kj 'q ' k =1 j =1

)

∀ e'

(17)

q =1 j '=1

Con The total energy consumption Ee' is determined based on the energy consumed in POM -POM -POR -POB (EeCon ) , POR ( EeCon ) and POB ( EeCon ) . The total energy consumption is determined ' ' '

as: -POM -POR -POB EeCon = EeCon + EeCon + EeCon ' ' ' '

∀ e'


(18)


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 14 of 56

Exp In an integrated POPC, the excess energy Ee' can be sold and exported to any third party Gen Con plants if the total energy generation exceeds the total energy consumption ( Ee' > Ee' ) . In Imp contrast, external energy importation ( Ee ' ) is needed for the synthesised integrated POM -POM -POR -POB ( EeImp ) , POR ( EeImp ) and POB ( EeImp ) . if the total energy generated is insufficient for ' ' ' Gen Con Imp the total consumption ( Ee' < Ee' ) . Ee' is determined as:

-POM -POR -POB EeImp = EeImp + EeImp + EeImp ' ' ' '

∀ e'

(19)

To determine the import or export energy e', the energy correlation can be written as: Exp EeCon = EeGen + EeImp ' ' ' − Ee'

∀ e'

(20)

5.3. Economic Analysis. In order to perform economic analysis of an integrated POPC, gross profit (GP) is determined by revenue obtained from final palm refined products, palm green products and export energy subtract the import energy, cost of raw materials (e.g., FFB), processing, power and heat generation. Equation 21 shows GP of an integrated POPC. Q E' E'  P   W PR CPR + W PR CPR + E ExpCExp − E ImpC Imp  ∑ ∑ ∑ ∑ p p q q e' e' e' e'  p =1  q =1 e'=1 e ' =1   K J P B  FFB Raw FFB Proc OIL Proc I Proc  GP = AOT  − W CFFB − W CFFB − ∑∑Wbp Cbp − ∑∑W jk C jk  p =1 b =1 k =1 j =1    Q J ' II Proc E G I Proc E ' G ' II Proc   − ∑∑W j ' q C j ' q − ∑∑ Ege C ge − ∑∑ Eg ' e ' C g ' e '  e = 1 g = 1 e ' = 1 g ' = 1 q = 1 j ' = 1  

(21)

where AOT is annual operating time, C PR and C PR p q are selling price of palm refined and palm Exp Imp green products, Ce' and Ce' are energy export and import costs, C Raw FFB is raw material cost of


Page 15 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Proc Proc FFB, C Proc and C Proc j 'q FFB and Cob are processing cost of POM and technology b per unit oil o. C jk

are processing cost of technologies j and j' per unit k and q, respectively. C Proc and C Proc ge g 'e ' are processing cost of technologies g and g' per unit energy e and e', respectively.

In this work, net present value (NPV) is used to determine the economic performance of an integrated POPC’s profit or loss over its operational lifespan. The NPV is expressed in following equation: t max

NPV = ∑ t

[GP × (1 − TAX) + DEP × TAX − HEDGE + GOV] (1 + ROR )t

(22)

where GP is gross profit, TAX and DEP are the marginal tax rate and depreciation rate, respectively. HEDGE and GOV are expenses associated with hedging against catastrophic market actions and net benefits realised through governmental incentives or penalties, respectively. tmax is the operating lifespan and ROR is the expected rate of return. It is further assumed that the main factor of economic performance is based on GP, thus, Equation 23 can be simplified to: t max

NPV = ∑ t

GP (1 + ROR) t

(23)

In addition, payback period (PP) is calculated to determine the length of time required to recover the total investment cost. The constraint of PP can be introduced in order to constrain the extent of the optimisation model. PP is expressed as total cost of investment over GP and it is showed in following equation:



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

 FFB Cap P B OIL Cap K J I Cap Q J ' II Cap  W C FFB + ∑∑Wbp Cbp + ∑∑W jk C jk + ∑∑W j 'q C j 'q    p =1 b =1 k =1 j =1 q =1 j '=1 AOT  E G  E ' G' II Cap Cap- Fixed  + ∑∑ E geI C Cap  + E C + C ∑∑ ge g 'e ' g 'e '   e = 1 g = 1 e ' = 1 g ' = 1   PP = GP

Page 16 of 56

(24)

Cap Cap Cap Cap Cap where CCap FFB , C bp , C jk , C j 'q , C ge and C g 'e ' are capital investment of POM, technology b per

unit flowrate of p produced, technology j per unit flowrate of k produced, technology j' per unit flowrate of q produced, technology g per unit energy e generated and technology g per unit energy e' generated, respectively; while C

Cap-Fixed

is fixed capital cost needed to be invested in

integrated POPC which including industrial land, vehicles, building, etc.

6.

CASE STUDY A POM with a capacity of 80 t/h of FFB is solved to illustrate the proposed approach. In this

study, it is assumed only CPO is to be further processed and the capacity of POR is then designed according to the availability of CPO produced from POM. Physical refining process is carried out in order to purify the CPO. EFB, PKS, POME and PMF are identified as the potential palm-based biomass feedstock for production of value added palm green products, such as dried long fibre (DLF), pellet, briquette, char coal, compost etc. Figure 6 illustrates the normalised mass balance of the POM and POR. Note that 1 tonne of FFB produces 200 kg CPO, 23 kg EFB, 60 kg PKS, 600 kg POME and 130 kg PMF.4 Based on interview with industrial partner, for every 100 kg of CPO, it produces 76 kg RBDPOL, 19 kg RBDPS and 5 kg palm fatty acid distillate (PFAD). To sustain the energy requirement of POM, POR and POB, energy is generated from the palm-based biomass.


Page 17 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Figure 6. Product conversion of Block I and Block II. Figure 7 shows the superstructure of case study with all the potential pathways for converting palm-based biomass i into palm green product q (pellet, DLF, briquette, PKS charcoal and compost) and energy e' (steam and electricity). Note that throughout the processing of EFB into DLF, short fibre (SF) is produced. SF can be further processed to valuable products through pelletising, briquetting or fermentation process. Meanwhile, PKS can be sent to carbonisation to produce PKS-charcoal as final product. POME either can be fermented with EFB and short fibre to produce compost or can be sent to anaerobic digester for biogas production. Unutilised POME has to be treated in existing pond system before discharge into environment and remaining PKS can be trade directly to market. It is assumed that fermentation and anaerobic digestion processes are normalised into production rate based on hourly basis. This normalisation also reflects the application of sequential batch processing of anaerobic digestion in POB in order to supply consistent amount of biogas. According to Figure 7, palm-based biomass i can be processed via single technology to produce pellet, briquette, charcoal, and compost by by-passing the next technology; While two stages of conversion (e.g., separation and drying (technology j) and DLF processing (technology j') are needed in DLF production. On the other hand, palm-based biomass i can also be converted into high pressure steam (HPS) at 40 bar, 400ºC or biogas via technology g and sent to upgrading technology g' for production of electricity and medium pressure steam (MPS) at 12 bar, 250ºC or low pressure steam (LPS) 4 bar, 145 ºC.

Figure 7. Superstructure of case study. In this study, it is assumed that AOT is given as 8000 h and the processing facility is designed based on an operating life-span of 15 years. The expected rate of return (ROR) is given as 15%.



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 18 of 56

In case where ROR is lower than 15%, the stakeholder will not be interested in investing the project. The price of raw material, palm refined product, palm green product, and energy, the mass conversion factor, economic data (including capital and operating costs) and energy consumption (electricity and steam) for each technology are shown in Table A – D in supporting information. Note that information given in supporting information is collected through the interview with industry partners. In order to maintain the boiler efficiency, the moisture content of palm-based biomasses which feeds into boiler (g = 2) has to be less than 40 % as shown in Equations 25 and 26. Both equations can be linearised by simplifying both equations into Equation 27. I

I

i=1

i =1

MC overall × ∑WigI = ∑ MCiWigI

g=2

(25)

MC overall ≤ 0.4

(26)

I

I

i=1

i =1

0.4 × ∑WigI ≥ ∑ MCiWigI

g=2

(27)

where MCi is moisture content of each palm-based biomass. The amount of HPS produced from boilers in CHP can be determined in following equation: I

E

Gen − CHP HPS

=

(

)

η boiler × ∑ (1 − MC i ) W igI CVi i =1

H T = 400 ° C, P = 40bar − H T =100 ° C, P =1bar

g=2


(28)

Page 19 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


where nominator term is boiler efficiency ηboiler multiplies with calorific value (CV) of dry biomass mixtures fed into boiler; while denominator term is enthalpy H of HPS in CHP or MPS in POM subtract the enthalpy H of feed water at 1 bar, 100ºC. Based on the collected industry data, the boiler efficiency of both palm-based biomass boilers in CHP and POM is given as 55% Based on the collected information from the industry, production capacity of each technology is rounded to the nearest integer of the production rate. Meanwhile, total capital cost of technology in supporting information (Table C) is also normalised based on production capacity Gen-CHP are limited to only integer values of each technology. Therefore, variables of WqPR and Ee'

except palm-based biomass combustion and steam turbine. There is a possibility of unutilised EFB in optimised configuration as the production rate of palm green product and secondary energy are limited to integer values. In order to fully utilise all palm-based biomass, the excess EFB will then be used as feedstock of boiler for steam and electricity generation. In this case study, the capital cost of the boiler with steam turbine is based on design capacity of 5 MW electricity. Therefore, in case where the total amount of electricity produces from steam turbine is lower than 5 MW, the capital cost is still remain as USD 2,500,000, which is similar with 5MW electricity power plant. Note that the design capacity of pellet, DLF, briquette, PKS charcoal, compost and anaerobic digester with biogas system are fixed and their capital cost are based on production capacity of 2 t/h pellet, 1 t/h DLF, 3 t/h briquette, 1 t/h PKS charcoal, 1t/h compost and 1 MW electricity, respectively. To demonstrate the robustness of the proposed work, two scenarios are taken into consideration for this case study. In the first scenario, design of integrated POB and CHP (Block III and Block IV) is presented; while, design of an integrated POPC (Block I, Block II, Block III



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 20 of 56

and Block IV) is presented in Scenario 2. Figure 8 shows the block diagram of both scenarios. MILP models for both scenarios are solved by maximise NPV via LINGO v10 in HP Compaq 6200 Elite Small Form Factor with Intel® Core™ i5-2400 Processor (3.10 GHz) and 4GB DDR3 RAM. Summary of both scenarios are tabulated in Tables 1 and 2.

Figure 8. Block diagram of different scenarios. Table 1: Summary of Case Study. Table 2: Detail of Case Study. 6.1. Scenario 1. In Scenario 1, it is assumed that POM owner would like to implement new POB and CHP (Block III and Block IV) near to the POM. Therefore, variables and parameters Proc

Raw

Proc Con-POM Con-POR Imp-POM Imp-POR related to POM and POR (e.g., CFFB , Cb , Ee' , Ee' , Ee' , Ee' , W pPR , CFFB ,

Cap Raw Cap COIL , W OIL , CFFB , Cb ) are assumed to be zero. In addition, raw material cost of palm-based

BIO

biomass ( Ci

Raw

) is replacing raw material cost of FFB ( CFFB ) as input and Equation 21 is revised

as:

 Q PR PR E ' Exp Exp E ' Imp Imp   ∑Wq C q + ∑ Ee ' C e ' − ∑ Ee ' C e '   q=1  e '=1 e '=1  I  Q J' K J BIO BIO I Proc II Proc   GP = AOT − ∑Wi Ci − ∑∑W jk C jk − ∑∑W j 'q C j 'q  i =1  k =1 j =1 q =1 j '=1    E G I Proc E ' G ' II Proc   − ∑∑ E ge C ge − ∑∑ E g 'e ' C g 'e '  e '=1 g '=1  e=1 g =1 

(29)

Furthermore, all steams and electricity are required to sustain both POB and CHP consumption. Thus, additional constraint (Equation 30) is added in the optimisation model.


Page 21 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


EeGen > EeCon ' '

∀ e'

(30)

In order to linearise the model, a minimum payback period of an integrated biorefinery with CHP is added. In this scenario, payback period is assumed to be less or equal three years. Based on this assumption, Equation 24 is modified and given as: Q J'  K J   ∑∑ W jkI C Cap  + W jII'q C Cap ∑∑ jk j 'q  k =1 j =1  q =1 j '=1 3 × GP ≥ AOT  E G  E' G' II Cap Cap -Fixed   + ∑∑ E geI C Cap + E C + C ∑∑ ge g 'e ' g 'e '   e '=1 g '=1  e =1 g =1 

(31)

A MILP model for Scenario 1 (Equations 1 – 20, 23, 25 – 31) is solved by maximising NPV. Based on the optimised result, the summary is listed in Tables 1 and 2. Note that the maximum NPV of Scenario 1 is located as USD 29.52 million over its operational lifespan (15 years) with GP of USD 4.31 million per year and payback period of 1.93 years. Note also that 80 t/h of FFB is sent to POM and produced 18.40 t/h EFB, 4.80 PKS, 48.00 t/h POME and 10.40 t/h PMF. In this scenario, DLF and compost production pathways are selected to produce palm green products in POB. The optimal network configuration of Scenario 1 is showed in Figure 9. Based on Tables 1 and 2, 17.96 t/h of fresh EFB and 12.49 t/h fresh POME are utilised to produce DLF and compost at the capacity of 5.00 t/h and 3.00 t/h, respectively. 0.91 t/h of unutilised PKS is to be sold to biomass boiler owner. The remaining 35.51 t/h of unutilised POME is sent to existing pond system in POM. Based on the result, 17.50 t/h MPS and 10.50 t/h LPS are required in POB to fulfil the energy requirement.

Figure 9. Optimised pathway for scenario 1.



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 22 of 56

In CHP, all SF collected from DLF production is fully utilised for combustion in boiler. Besides, 10.40 t/h PMF is mixed with 0.44 t/h EFB, 4.15 t/h SF and 3.89 t/h PKS to achieve an overall moisture content equal or less than 40% before feeding to the boiler for generation of 43.75 t/h HPS. The pressure of HPS is then reduced via steam turbine to generate 3.89 MW of electricity. At the same time, 17.50 t/h MPS and 26.25 t/h LPS are produced. It is noted that 1.50 MW of electricity is used for self-consumption within the entire POB. As there is excess of electricity, additional electricity generated from biogas through gas engine is not required. The excess of 2.39 MW of electricity can then be exported for any external demands.

6.2. Scenario 2. In Scenario 2, an integrated POPC is synthesised. It is assumed that new POR, POB and CHP are to be constructed in existing POM. It is further assumed that the design of POB and CHP is only required to supply sufficient electricity to whole integrated POPC and export of electricity is considered only there are excess electricity produced. Thus, Equation 30 is included in this scenario. In addition, steam required in POR can be supplied from existing boilers available in POR. Since the existing POM is not taken into consideration in this scenario,

( ) Proc

( )

( )

Raw

Cap

the processing cost CFFB , raw material cost CFFB and capital cost of existing POM CFFB are BIO

assumed to be zero and raw material cost of palm-based biomass ( Ci

) is considered. It is note

that the revenue gained from POM is excluded in this model as palm-based biomass material cost is considered in both POB and CHP; while CPO material cost is considered in POR. Thus GP is modified as:


Page 23 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


 P PR PR Q PR PR E ' Exp Exp E ' Imp Imp O OIL OIL   ∑ W p C p + ∑ Wq C q + ∑ Ee ' C e ' − ∑ Ee ' C e ' − ∑ Wo C o   p=1  q =1 e '=1 e '=1 o =1  I  P B J I J' K BIO BIO OIL Proc I Proc II Proc   GP = AOT − ∑ Wi Ci − ∑∑ Wbp Cbp − ∑∑ Wij Cij − ∑∑ Wkj ' C kj '  i =1  p =1 b =1 j =1 i =1 j '=1 k =1  G I  G' E I Proc Gen-CHP Proc −  C eg '  ∑∑ Wig Cig − ∑∑ Eeg '  g '=1 e=1  g =1 i =1 

(32)

Besides, payback period of integrated POPC is assumed to be less or equal to five years. Equation 24 is modified and given as: Q J'  P B OIL Cap K J   ∑∑ Wbp C bp + ∑∑ W jkI C Cap + W jII'q C Cap ∑ ∑ jk j 'q   p =1 b=1  k =1 j =1 q =1 j '=1 5 × GP ≥ AOT  E G  E' G' II Cap Cap-Fixed  + ∑∑ E geI C Cap  + + E C C ∑∑ ge g 'e ' g 'e '   e '=1 g '=1  e=1 g =1 

(33)

The optimisation model for Scenario 2 is solved by maximising NPV with the constraints in Equations 1 – 20, 23, 25 – 28, 30, 32 – 33. The maximum NPV is targeted as USD 43.15 million with GP of USD 6.05 million per year and its payback period is around 3.17 years. The optimised production pathway of this scenario is showed in Figure 10. Similar to Scenario 1, 80 t/h of FFB is processed in POM and produced 16.00 t/h of CPO. CPO is then transferred to POR to produce 12.16 t/h RBDPOL, 3.04 t/h RBDPS and 0.80 t/h PFAD. In this scenario, 2.00 t/h of pellet, 3.00 t/h of DLF, and 1.00 t/h of compost in POB are produced. All 2.45 t/h of SF collected from DLF production is further processed in pellet production. PKS charcoal is not produced in this scenario as more energy required from CHP and most of PKS are required to be used for heat and power generation due to its high calorific value. In addition, compost production is lesser as compared with Scenario 1. This is because more EFB is sent to energy generation in CHP.



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 24 of 56

Figure 10. Optimised pathway for Scenario 2. Other than that, 6.13 t/h EFB is sent to boiler and turbine with 4.26 t/h PKS and 10.40 t/h PMF to generate 48.82 t/h HPS, 19.53 t/h MPS, 29.29 t/h LPS and 4.35 MW electricity. In this scenario, biogas production pathway is not chosen since electricity generated from boiler is sufficient to support the energy requirement of the entire integrated POPC (4.35 MW). 43.84 t/h unutilised POME is sent to existing pond system for further treatment. In addition, 0.31 MW of excess electricity can be exported.

7.

CONCLUSION In this work, a systematic approach for the synthesis of an integrated POPC is presented. It is

expected that the concept of integrated POPC will be able to convert palm oil industry into greener industry and as an independent electricity supply to external facilities. The presented concept of integrated POPC can be extended to other industries (e.g., rubber, rice husk and etc.). Besides, the proposed approach can be easily revised and re-formulated to handle different case studies from different industries for systematic allocation of biomass. Note that the generic approach also can be extended to integrate more downstream activities in food-based, oleo and biodiesel plants, which is considered in the future work. In addition, mathematical optimisation model is developed to determine the detail allocation of palm-based biomasses to achieve the maximum economic performance. Further research works on a systematic approach for industrial symbiosis of integrated POPC where different owners of different processing facilities are to be presented in Part 2 of this series.


Page 25 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


AUTHOR INFORMATION Corresponding Author *Email: [email protected]. Telephone: +6(03) 8924 8606, Fax: +6(03) 8924 8017.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT The financial supports from Global Green Synergy Sdn. Bhd., Malaysia and University of Nottingham Research Committee through New Researcher Fund (NRF 5021/A2RL32) are gratefully acknowledged. Authors would like to acknowledge financial support from Minister of Higher Education, Malaysia through LRGS Grant (project code: 5526100). In addition, the authors would also like to acknowledge Mr. Yong Chen Wei for providing helpful industrial data in developing the case study.

SUPPORTING INFORMATION AVAILABLE This information is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org/.

NOMENCLATURE Abbreviation



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

ASA

American Soybean Association

CAMD

Computer-Aided Molecular Design

CHP

combined heat and power

CPKO

crude palm kernel oil

CPKOL

crude palm kernel olein

CPKS

crude palm kernel stearin

CPO

crude palm oil

DLF

dried long fibre

EFB

empty fruit bunch

FFB

fresh fruit bunch

FiT

feed-in tariff

HPS

high pressure steam

LPS

low pressure steam

MPOC

Malaysia Palm Oil Council

MPS

medium pressure steam

NBDPKO

neutralised, bleached, deodorised palm kernel oil

NBDPKOL

neutralised, bleached, deodorised palm kernel olein


Page 26 of 56

Page 27 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


NBDPKS

neutralised, bleached, deodorised palm kernel stearin

NBDPO

neutralised, bleached, deodorised palm oil

NBDPOL

neutralised, bleached, deodorised palm olein

NBDPS

neutralised, bleached, deodorised palm stearin

NREL

National Renewable Energy Laboratory

PFAD

palm fatty acid distillate

PKFAD

palm kernel fatty acid distillate

PKS

palm kernel shell

PMF

palm mesocarp fibre

POB

palm oil-based biorefinery

POM

palm oil mill

POME

palm oil mill effluent

POPC

palm oil processing complex

POR

palm oil refinery

RBDPKO

refined, bleached, deodorised palm kernel oil

RBDPKOL

refined, bleached, deodorised palm kernel olein

RBDPKS

refined, bleached, deodorised palm kernel stearin



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

RBDPO

refined, bleached, deodorised palm oil

RBDPOL

refined, bleached, deodorised palm olein

RBDPS

refined, bleached, deodorised palm stearin

RNFA

Reaction Network Flux Analysis

Sets e

index for primary energy

e'

index for secondary energy

g

index for technology to produce primary energy

g'

index for technology to produce secondary energy

i

index for palm-based biomass

j

index for technology to produce intermediate

j'

index for technology to produce palm green product

k

index for intermediate

o

index for palm oil produced from palm oil mill

p

index for palm refined product

q

index for palm green product


Page 28 of 56

Page 29 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Parameters Cap Cbp

capital cost via technology b per unit product p, USD/t

C Cap jk

capital cost via technology j per unit intermediate k, USD/unit intermediate

C Cap j 'q

capital cost via technology j' per unit product q, USD/t

C Cap ge

capital cost via technology g per unit energy e, USD/t or USD/MW

C Cap g 'e '

capital cost via technology g' per unit energy e', USD/t or USD/MW

CCap FFB

capital cost of palm oil mill, USD/t

C Cap-Fixed

fixed capital cost of POPC, USD

CeExp '

revenue from energy exported, USD/t or USD/MW

CeImp '

cost of imported energy, USD/t or USD/MW

Proc Cbp

processing cost via technology b per unit product p, USD/t

CProc FFB

processing cost of FFB in palm oil mill, USD/t

C Proc jk

processing cost via technology j per unit intermediate k, USD/t



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

C Proc j 'q

processing cost via technology j' per unit product q, USD/t

C Proc ge

processing cost via technology g per unit energy e, USD/t or USD/MW

C Proc g 'e '

processing cost via technology g' per unit energy e', USD/t or USD/MW

CPR q

revenue from palm green product q via pathway kj’, USD/t

CPR p

revenue from palm refined product p, USD/t

DEP

depreciation

GOV

government incentives or penalties

H

enthalpy

HEDGE

expenses associated with hedging against catastrophic market actions

MCi

moisture content of palm-based biomass i

ηboiler

boiler efficiency

R

expected rate of return or cost of capital

tmax

designed lifespan of biorefinery, year

TAX

marginal tax rate

I X ijk

conversion of palm-based biomass i to intermediate k via technology j


Page 30 of 56

Page 31 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


X kjII 'q

conversion of intermediate k to palm green product q via technology j'

XiBIO

conversion of FFB to palm-based biomass i

XOIL o

conversion of FFB to palm oil o

X OIL obp

conversion of palm oil o to palm refined product p via technology b

I Yige

conversion of primary energy per unit of palm-based biomass i via technology g

YegII 'e'

conversion of secondary energy per unit of primary energy e via technology g'

YeI'ijk

conversion of energy required per unit of palm-based biomass i to intermediate k via technology j

YeII'kj 'q

conversion of energy required per unit of intermediate k to product q via technology j'

Variables

EeCon '

total energy requirement of the integrated POPC, MW for electricity and t/h for steam

-POM EeCon '

energy requirement in POM, MW for electricity and t/h for steam



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 32 of 56

-POR EeCon '

energy requirement in POR, MW for electricity and t/h for steam

-POB EeCon '

energy requirement in POB, MW for electricity and t/h for steam

EeExp '

total excess energy that are sold to any third party plants, MW for electricity and t/h for steam

EeGen-CHP

energy generated in CHP, MW for electricity and t/h for steam

EegGen'-CHP

energy generated in CHP to technology g', MW for electricity and t/h for steam

EeGen '

total energy generated of the integrated POPC, MW for electricity and t/h for steam

I Ege

energy generated from technology g, MW for electricity and t/h for steam

E gII'e '

energy generated from technology g', MW for electricity and t/h for steam

EeImp '

total energy that are bought from external facilities, MW for electricity and t/h for steam

-POM EeImp '

energy bought from external to POM, MW for electricity and t/h for steam

-POR EeImp '

energy bought from external to POR, MW for electricity and t/h for steam

-POB EeImp '

energy bought from external to POB, MW for electricity and t/h for steam


Page 33 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


GP

MC

gross profit per unit time, USD/year overall

overall moisture content of total palm-based biomass fed into boiler

NPV

net present value, USD

PP

payback period, year

Wi BIO

flowrate of palm-based biomass i , t/h

WFFB

flowrate of FFB, t/h

W jkI

flowrate of intermediate k produced from technology j, t/h

W jkI

flowrate of intermediate k produced from technology j, t/h

W jII'q

flowrate of palm green product q produced from technology j', t/h

WkjII'

flowrate of intermediate k to technology j', t/h

WkINT

total flowrate of intermediate k, t/h

WoOIL

flowrate of palm oil o, t/h

WobOIL

flowrate of crude palm oil o to technology b, t/h

W bpOIL

flowrate of palm refined product p produced from technology b, t/h

WqPR

total flowrate of palm green product q, t/h



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

W pPR

Page 34 of 56

total flowrate of palm refined product p, t/h

REFERENCES

(1) American

Soybean

Association

(ASA).

http://www.soystats.com/2012/page_35.htm

(Accessed on June 21, 2012). (2) Palm oil & Palm Kernel Oil Applications. Malaysian Palm Oil Council (MPOC): Malaysia, 2006. (3) Malaysia Palm Oil Board (MPOB). Overview of the malaysian oil palm industry 2011. http://www.palmoilworld.org/PDFs/Overview-2011.pdf (Accessed on May 18, 2012). (4) Husain, Z.; Zainac, Z.; Abdullah, Z. Biomass Bioenergy 2002, 22, 505-509. (5) Malaysia Innovation Agency (AIM). National Biomass Strategy 2020: New wealth creation for

Malaysia’s

palm

oil

industry.

http://innovation.my/wp-

content/downloadables/National%20Biomass%20Strategy%20Nov%202011%20FINAL.pd f (Accessed on May 22, 2012). (6) Thong, S.; Boe, K.; Angelidaki, I. Appl. Energy 2012, 93, 648–654. (7) Basiron, Y.; Simeh, M. D. Oil Palm Ind. Econ. J. 2009, 5, 1-10. (8) Nasrin, A. B.; Ma, A. N.; Choo, Y.M.; Mohamad, S.; Rohaya, M. H.; Azali, A.; Zainal, Z. Am. J. Appl. Sci. 2008, 5 (3), 179-183.


Page 35 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


(9) Mohammed, M. A. A.; Salmiaton, A.; Wan Azlina, W. A. K. G.; Mohammad Amran, M. S.; Fakhru’l-Razi, A. Energy Convers. Manage. 2011, 52 (2), 1555-1561. (10) Esfahani, R. M.; Ghani, W. A. W. A. K.; Amran, M.; Salleh, M.; Ali, S. Energy Fuels 2012, 26 (2), 1185-1191. (11) Idris, S. S.; Rahman, N. A.; Ismail, K.; Alias, A. B.; Rashid, Z. A.; Aris, M. J. Bioresour. Technol. 2010, 101, 4584-4592. (12) Sulaiman, F.; Abdullah, N. Energy 2011, 36, 2352-2359. (13) Salema, A. A.; Ani, F. N. Bioresour. Technol.2011, 102, 3388-3395. (14) Bridgwater, A.V. Chem. Eng. J. 2003, 91, 87-102. (15) Demirbas, M.F. Appl. Energy 2009, 86, S151-S161. (16) Ministry of Energy, Green Technology and Water (KeTTHA). National Renewable Energy Policy

and

Action

Plan.

http://www.seda.gov.my/go-

home.php?omaneg=00010100000001010101000100001000000000000000000000&s=31 (Accessed on May 22, 2012). (17) The

Star.

1MBAS

seeks

ways

for

all

to

enjoy

biomass

benefits.

http://biz.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2012/3/23/business/10971028&sec=business (Accessed on May 22, 2012). (18) Fernando, S.; Adhikari, S.; Chandrapal, C.; Murali, N. Energy Fuels 2006, 20 (1), 17271737.



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 36 of 56

(19) Baliban, R. C.; Elia, J. A.; Floudas, C. A. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2010, 49, 7343–7370. (20) Elia, J. A.; Baliban, R. C.; Floudas, C. A. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2010, 49, 7371–7388. (21) Martín M.; Grossmann I. E. AIChE J. 2011, 57(12), 3408 – 3428. (22) Martín M.; Grossmann I. E. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2012, 51(23), 7998–8014. (23) Ng, D. K. S.; Pham, V.; El-Halwagi, M. M.; Jiménez-Gutiérrez, A.; Spriggs, H. D. Proceedings of Seventh International Conference on Foundations of Computer-Aided Process Design; Breckenridge, CO, June 7 - 12, 2009, 425–432. (24) Tay, D. H. S.; Kheireddine, H.; Ng, D. K. S.; El-Halwagi, M. M. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2011, 13 (4), 567-579. (25) Santibañez-Aguilar, J. E.; González-Campos, J. B.; Ponce-Ortega, J. M.; Serna-González, M.; El-Halwagi, M. M. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2011, 50, 8558-8570. (26) Ponce-Ortega, J. M.; Pham, V.; El-Halwagi, M. M.; El-Baz A. A. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res.

2012, 51, 3381−400. (27) Tay, D. H. S.; Ng, D. K. S.; Tan, R.R. Environ Prog Sustain Energy 2012, DOI: 10.1002/ep.10632. (28) Tay, D. H. S.; Ng, D. K. S. J. Clean. Prod. 2012, 34, 38-48. (29) Shabbir, Z.; Tay, D. H. S.; Ng, D. K. S. Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 2012, 90 (10), 1568–1581. (30) Myint, L.L.; El-Halwagi, M.M. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2009, 11 (3), 263-276.


Page 37 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


(31) Pokoo-Aikins, G.; Nadim, A.; Mahalec, V.; El-Halwagi, M. M. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2010, 12 (3), 239-254. (32) Pokoo-Aikins, G.; Heath, A.; Mentzer, R. A.; Mannan, M. S.; Rogers, W. J.; El-Halwagi, M. M. J. Loss Prev. Process Ind. 2010, 23 (3), 412-420. (33) Zamboni, A.; Shah, N.; Bezzo, F. Energy Fuels 2009, 23 (10), 5121-5133. (34) Zamboni, A.; Bezzo, F.; Shah, N. Energy Fuels 2009, 23 (10), 5134-5143. (35) Piccolo, C.; Bezzo, F. Biomass Bioenergy 2009, 33 (3), 478-491. (36) Ng, R. T. L; Tay, D. H. S.; Ng, D. K. S. Energy & Fuels 2012, 26, 7316−7330. (37) Kasivisvanathan, H.; Ng, R. T. L.; Tay, D. H. S.; Ng, D. K. S. Chem. Eng. J. 2012, 200202, 697-709. (38) Malaysia

Palm

Oil

Board

(MPOB).

Monthly

palm

oil

price

2012.

http://econ.mpob.gov.my/upk/monthly/bh_monthly_12.htm (Accessed on October 18, 2012). (39) Vijaya, S.; Chow, M.C.; Ma. A. N. MPOB Palm Oil Engineering Bulletin 2004, 70, 15-22.



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Schematic diagram of palm oil mill. Figure 2. Schematic diagram of palm oil refinery. Figure 3. Conceptual zone Palm Oil Processing Complex (POPC). Figure 4. Block diagram of the integrated palm oil processing complex (POPC). Figure 5. Generic superstructure of Block III and Block IV.36 Figure 6. Product conversions of palm oil mill and palm oil refinery. Figure 7. Superstructure of case study. Figure 8. Block diagram of different scenario. Figure 9. Optimised pathways for Scenario 1. Figure 10. Optimised pathways for Scenario 2.


Page 38 of 56

Page 39 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Figure 1. Schematic diagram of palm oil mill.



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

Figure 2. Schematic diagram of palm oil refinery.


Page 40 of 56

Page 41 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Figure 3. Conceptual zone Palm Oil Processing Complex (POPC).



1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

-POR EeImp '

Wi BIO

Block I: Palm Oil Mill (POM) -POM EeImp '

W pPR

Block II: Palm Oil Refinery (POR)

WrOIL

W FFB

Page 42 of 56

EeGen '

W ijI

Block III: Palm Oil-based Biorefinery (POB)

W igI

EeGen '

-POB EeImp '

EeGen '

Block IV: Combined Heat and Power (CHP)

Figure 4. Block diagram of the integrated palm oil processing complex (POPC).


EeExp '

Wq PR

Page 43 of 56

Palm-based Biomass, i

Block III: Palm Oilbased Biorefinery (POB)

Technology, j

Technology, j’

Palm Green Product, q

i=1

j=1

k=1

j’ = 1

q=1

i=2

j=2

k=2

j’ = 2

q=2

i=3

j=3

k=3

j’ = 3

q=3

k=K Primary Energy, e

j’= J’ Technology, g’

………

………

j=J

………

………

i=I

Technology, g Block IV: Combined Heat and Power (CHP)

Intermediate, k

………

q=Q

Secondary Energy, e’

g=1

e= 1

g’ = 1

e’ = 1

g=2

e=2

g’ = 2

e’ = 2

e=E

g’= G’

Figure 5. Generic superstructure of Block III and Block IV.36


………

………

g=G

………

………

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


e’ = E’


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

EFB = 0.23 FFB FFB

PKS = 0.06 FFB

Block I: Palm Oil Mill (POM)

MF = 0.13 FFB POME = 0.60 FFB

CPO FFB

=

0.20

Block II: Palm Oil Refinery (POR)

RBDPOL = 0.76 CPO RBDPS = 0.19 CPO PFAD = 0.05 CPO

Figure 6. Product conversion of Block I and Block II.


Page 44 of 56

Page 45 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


RBDPOL

Block Palm Oil II: Refinery POR

Block I: POM

FFB

RBDPS PFAD

PKS Market

PKS POME

Existing Pond System

Block IV: CHP

Block III: POB

Biomass, i

EFB

Technology, j

PKS

Biomass, i

POME

EFB

Technology, g

SF SF

POME

SF

HPS

Intermediate, k

Primary Energy, e

Technology, j'

Technology, g'

Product, q

Secondary Energy, e'

Figure 7. Superstructure of case study.


PKS

PMF


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Scenario 2

Scenario 1

Block II Block I

Block III Block I

Block III

Block IV Block IV Electricity export Electricity export

Material Flow

Figure 8. Block diagram of different scenarios.


Energy Flow

Page 46 of 56

Page 47 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


FFB

WFFB

Block I: POM

Block IV: CHP

Block III: POB

Biomass, i

EFB

PKS

POME

Biomass, i

EFB

PKS

PMF

WII0402

Technology, j

Technology, g

SF

Intermediate, k

Primary Energy, e

Technology, j'

Technology, g'

Product, q


Figure 9. Optimised pathway for scenario 1.


47


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 48 of 56

WP1 FFB

WFFB

WOIL

Block I: POM

RBDPOL

WP2

RBDPS

WP3

PFAD

Block IV: CHP

Block III: POB

Biomass, i

Block Palm Oil II: Refinery POR

EFB

PKS

POME

Biomass, i

EFB

PKS

PMF

WII0402

Technology, j

Technology, g

SF SF

Intermediate, k

Primary Energy, e

Technology, j'

Technology, g'

Product, q


Figure 10. Optimised pathway for Scenario 2.


48

Page 49 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Summary of Case Study. Table 2. Detail of Case Study.


49


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 50 of 56

Table 1: Summary of Case Study.

Economic Analysis Net Present Value Gross Profit Raw Material Cost Product Sales Cost Operating Cost Capital Cost Payback Period Block I FFB Inlet CPO Production EFB Production PKS Production POME Production PMF Production Block II RBDPOL Production RBDPS Production PFAD Production Block III Pellet Production DLF Production Briquette Production Charcoal Production Compost Production Block IV Biogas Electricity produced from Biogas Engine HPS Production MPS Production LPS Production Electricity produced from Steam Turbine

Unit

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

Million USD Million USD/year Million USD/year Million USD/year Million USD/year Million USD year

29.52 4.31 4.63 10.93 3.70 8.35 1.93

43.15 6.30 133.38 149.61 10.16 20.00 3.17

t/h t/h t/h t/h t/h t/h

80.00 16.00 18.40 4.80 48.00 10.40

80.00 16.00 18.40 4.80 48.00 10.40

t/h t/h t/h

-

t/h t/h t/h t/h t/h

5.00 3.00

12.16 3.04 0.80 ` 2.00 3.00 1.00

t/h

-

-

MW

-

-

t/h t/h t/h

43.75 17.50 26.25

48.82 19.53 29.29

MW

3.89

4.35


50

Page 51 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Table 2: Detail of Case Study. Term

Scenario 1

Scenario 2

WI01J WI02J WI03J WI0101 WII0102 WI0102 WII0202 SF WI0103 WII0302 WI0203 WI0204 WI0105 WI0305 WPKSSALES WPOMEW

17.96 12.49 13.38 8.96 4.15 4.58 12.49 0.91 35.51

12.27 4.16 2.71 2.49 8.03 5.38 2.49 1.53 4.16 43.84

WI01G WI02G WI03G WI04G WII0402 WTOG1 WTOG2

0.44 3.89 10.40 4.15 18.87

6.13 4.26 10.40 21.33

MPSTEAMCONPOB LPSTEAMCONPOB LPSTEAMCONPOM ELECPOM ELECPOR ELECPOB ELECGEN ELECON ELECIMP ELECEXP

17.50 10.50 1.50 3.89 1.50 2.39

17.50 3.50 24.00 0.96 1.60 1.48 4.35 4.04 0.31

Block III EFB to POB PKS to POB POME to POB EFB to Pellet Production SF to Pellet Production EFB to DLF Production LF to DLF Production SF produced from DLF production EFB to Briquette Production SF to Briquette Production PKS to Briquette Production PKS to Charcoal Production EFB to Compost Production POME to Compost Production PKS for sales POME to pond system Block IV EFB to CHP PKS to CHP POME to CHP PMF to CHP SF to CHP POME to Digester Palm-based Biomass Feedstock to Boiler Energy Balance MPS required in POB LPS required in POB LPS required in POM Electricity required from POM Electricity required from POR Electricity required from POB Total Electricity Generated Total Electricity required Electricity Import Electricity Export


51


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 52 of 56

SUPPORTING INFORMATION

Table A. Price of raw material, palm refined product, palm-based biomass and energy. Table B. Conversion factor for each pathway. Table C. Economic data of each technology. Table D. Energy consumption of each technology.


52

Page 53 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Table A. Price of raw material, palm refined product, palm-based biomass and energy. Price (USD)

Item Raw Material EFB

6 /t

PKS

50 /t

PMF

22 /t

CPO

*Palm Refined Product

1005.80 /t 38

RBDPOL

1147.50 /t

RBDPS

1019 /t

PFAD

813.50 /t

Palm Green Product Pellet DLF Briquette Charcoal Compost

140 /t 210 /t 120 /t 380 /t 100 / t

Energy Electricity (Import)

140 /MWh

Electricity (Export)

90 /MWh

HPS (Import)

26 /t

MPS (Import)

17 /t

LPS (Import) *Based on average price in 2011

12 /t


53


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 54 of 56

Table B. Conversion factor for each pathway and properties of palm-based biomass. Raw Material/ Intermediate i / e or k

Intermediate/Product e or k / e' or q

EFB + SF

Pellet

EFB

LF

0.6695 LF/ EFB

EFB

SF

0.2400 SF / EFB

LF

DLF

0.5580 DLF /LF

EFB + PKS +SF*

Briquette

PKS

Charcoal

EFB + POME*

Compost

POME

Biogas

Biogas

Electricity

0.026 MW electricity / t/h biogas

HPS

MPS LPS Electricity

0.400 MPS / HPS 0.600 LPS / HPS 0.089 MW electricity / t/h HPS

Raw Material i

Moisture Content, MCi(%)

Calorific Value (kJ/kg)53

EFB

67

18838

PKS

12

20108

PMF

37

19068

Value

POB 0.3846 pellet / (EFB + SF)

0.3846 briquette / (EFB + PKS +SF) *Ratio of EFB+SF : PKS = 80 : 20 0.3333 charcoal / PKS 0.1758 compost / ( EFB + POME) *Ratio of EFB : POME = 22 : 60

CHP 0.2781 biogas / POME


54

Page 55 of 56

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60


Table C. Economic data of each technology. Description

Value

Capital Cost DLF Production Pellet Production

USD 550,000 / (1 t/h DLF)

Briquette Production

USD 680,000 / (3 t/h briquette)

PKS Charcoal Production

USD 450,000 / (1 t/h charcoal)

Compost Production

USD 800,000 / (1 t/h compost)

Digester and gas engine

USD 1,400,000 / (1 MW electricity)

Boiler and turbine Fixed capital cost of POB (Structural, land, etc.) Fixed capital cost of CHP (Structural, land, etc.) Palm Oil Refinery Complex Fixed capital cost of POR (Structural, land, etc.) Operating Cost POME treatment in pond system

USD USD USD USD USD

USD 25.00 / (50 t/h POME)

DLF production

USD 44.00 / (1 t/h DLF)

Pellet production

USD 34.00 / (1 t/h pellet)

Briquette production

USD 32.00 / (1 t/h briquette)

Charcoal production

USD 60.00 / (1 t/h charcoal)

Compost production

USD 55.00 / (1 t/h compost)

Digester and gas engine

USD 105.00 / (1 MW electricity)

Boiler and turbine Palm oil refinery

USD 100.00 / (5 MW electricity) USD 58.00 / (1 t/h CPO)

USD 450,000 / (2 t/h pellet)

2,500,000 / (5 MW electricity) 250,000 450,000 650,000 / (1 t/h CPO) 3,500,000


55


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Page 56 of 56

Table D: Energy consumption of each technology. Description

Product

Value

Steam Consumption Palm Oil Mill

CPO

1.5 t/h LPS / t/h CPO

DLF Production

DLF

3.5 t/h MPS / t/h DLF

Pellet Production

Pellet

3.5 t/h MPS / t/h pellet


Briquette

3.5 t/h MPS / t/h briquette

Compost Production Electricity Consumption Palm Oil Mill

Compost

3.5 t/h LPS / t/h compost

CPO

0.06 MW / t/h CPO

Palm Oil Refinery

RBDPOL, RBDPS, PFAD

0.1 MW / t/h CPO

DLF Production

DLF

0.30 MW / t/h DLF

Pellet Production

Pellet

0.25 MW/ t/h pellet


Briquette

0.21 MW / t/h briquette


56

Systematic Approach for Synthesis of Integrated Palm Oil

Recommend Documents