Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
JATROPHA OIL
by
KE12004
KE11004
KE11058
KE11042
DECEMBER 2014
The undersigned certify that they have read, and recommend to the Faculty of
Chemical and Natural Resources Engineering for acceptance, a design project
entitled Production of 50 MTPA Polyhydroxybutyrate from Jatropha Oil
submitted by
NURUL AIN BT IBRAHIM
QASTALANI BT GHAZALI
SHOBANA A/P SINNIAH
NUR FATIN NADIAH BT FAUZI
KE12004
KE11004
KE11058
KE11042
Date:
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
First and foremost, we would like to express our greatest gratitude and
sincere appreciation to our plant design supervisor, Dr. Nur Hidayah Binti Mat
Yassin for his exemplary guidance, monitoring and constant encouragement
throughout the process to complete this Plant Design Project. We appreciated
all efforts of supervisor in advising and be available at right time besides
providing valuable insights leading to the successful completion of our plant
design project. Without her guidance and help of overseeing the whole
progress of the team works until the end, we would not be able to accomplish
this design project successfully.
Besides, we would like to take this opportunity to express a deep sense
of gratitude to Dr Mior Ahmad Khusairi Bin Mohd Zahari and Mr. Rozaimi
Abu Samah for their cordial support, valuable information and guidance,
which helped us in completing this task through various stages especially in
simulation.
Furthermore, we are obliged to thank all panels during 3 stages of plant
design presentations for the valuable comments and information provided by
them in their respective fields. All these useful comments help a lot in
improving our plant design project. In addition, sincere thankful is also
extended to our lecturers who had provided us with assistance and
encouragements at any occasions. In addition, we would like to thank our
parents for their unconditional love in giving us support and motivation which
enable us to be determined and without giving up in completing the plant
design project.
Last but not least, to our beloved course mates and acquaintance,
constant encouragement and exchange of knowledge throughout our struggles
in completing this design project. May this report will benefits all readers not
only us in designing new plant for production of Polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB)
for overall stages.
ii
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
iii
Plant layout which consists of administration building, operational building,
waste treatment plant, laboratory and research center, and other ancillary
buildings has been sketched.
Based on the calculation, the total power usage in plant is 719.008
kWh. Average industrial tariff for electricity from Sarawak is 33.70 sen /kWh.
By applying the industrial tariff of electricity 33.70 sen /kWh, the total
electricity cost per year is equal to RM 4797652.781/year with operation hours
of 8000 per year. All the calculation is based on CEPCI 2014. The total steam
usages for main equipment are 1,186.67kg/h. Based on calculation using the
standard steam charges, the total steam cost is about RM 9140191.175 /year
with operation hours of 8000 per year. By conversion, the total steam cost is
RM 9140191.175 /year. The total water consumption for bioreactors and seed
fermenters is 12,849.51 kg/batch. Through calculation the total cost of water is
RM 7454515.37/year with operation hours 8000 per year. RM
7454515.37/year is needed for water cost. By addition of total cost by
electricity, steam and water cost, the total cost of utilities is RM 4797652.781
+ RM 9140191.175 + RM 7454515.37 = RM 21392359.33 /year.
This plant consists of five major equipment. There are seed fermenter,
fermenter, blending storage, disk stack centrifuge and spray dryer. Each of the
equipment has their own hazard. Hazard identification procedure is used to
identify the types of adverse health effects that can be caused by exposure to
some agent in question, and to characterize the quality and weight of evidence
supporting this identification. Risk assessment includes determination of the
events that can produce an accident, the probability of those events, and
consequences that could include human injury or loss of life, damage to the
environment, or loss of production and capital equipment. Hazard
identification can be performed independent of risk assessment, but it would
obtain best result if they are done together.
Economic and profitability analysis in the form of discounted cash
flow will be evaluated in this report as an effort to estimate profit or loss of
this PHB plant. Grass root capital (GRC) is the cost of equipment installation
in a plant and it costs major portion of total fixed capital cost. From
iv
calculation, it is determined that GRC for this PHB plant is approximately
RM3, 570,000.00. While as for the total capital investment (TCI) for this PHB
plant is approximately RM5, 378, 000.00. Profitability analysis will be
determined in this report by evaluating operating margin. Operating margin is
the ratio of operating profit to sales and it indicates how much of each
Malaysian Ringgit is left after operating expenses. A high operating margin
means that the plant has good cost control and that sales are increasing faster
than costs.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................................................................. i
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................... ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................... v
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................viii
LIST OF TABLES ............................................................................................ ix
CHAPTER 1 ...................................................................................................... 1
INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................. 1
1.1
Background ......................................................................................... 1
1.1.1
Plastics ......................................................................................... 1
1.1.2
Biodegradable plastics ................................................................. 2
1.1.3
Poly-(3-hydroxybutyrate), PHB ................................................... 2
1.1.4
Physical and chemical properties of PHB .................................... 3
1.1.5
Biodegradability of PHB.............................................................. 4
1.1.6
Storage and Handling ................................................................... 5
1.2
Applications of PHB ........................................................................... 5
1.2.1
Medical ........................................................................................ 6
1.2.2
Aquaculture .................................................................................. 6
1.2.3
Pharmaceutical ............................................................................. 7
1.3
Market Survey ..................................................................................... 7
1.3.1
Global Market Demand................................................................ 7
1.3.2
Asian market demand .................................................................. 8
1.3.3
Malaysia market demand ............................................................. 8
1.3.4
Global production ........................................................................ 9
1.3.5
Future Prospect of PHB ............................................................. 10
1.3.6
Prices of Products, Raw Materials and Chemicals .................... 11
1.3.7
Jatropha Oil ................................................................................ 12
1.4
Screening of Synthesis Routes .......................................................... 15
1.4.1
Synthesis routes for PHB production ......................................... 15
1.4.2
Selected synthesis route ............................................................. 24
1.4.3
Utilization of Jatropha oil .......................................................... 24
1.4.4
Type of Microbial Production Strain ......................................... 24
1.4.5
Feeding source of nutrient supply .............................................. 26
1.4.6
PHB synthesis ............................................................................ 26
1.4.7
Downstream Process .................................................................. 27
CHAPTER 2 .................................................................................................... 28
PROCESS FLOW SHEETING ....................................................................... 28
2.1
Selection of raw material and impurities management ..................... 28
2.2
Input and Output Flow Sheeting ....................................................... 28
2.2.1
Mechanical Equipment Description ........................................... 33
2.3
Material and Energy Balances ........................................................... 35
2.3.1
Material Balance ........................................................................ 36
2.3.2
Energy Balance .......................................................................... 64
2.4
Economic Potential ........................................................................... 71
2.4.1
Economic Potential 2 Based On Input and Output Structure .... 71
2.4.2
Economic Potential 3 Based On Recycle Structure .................. 75
2.5
Comparison of Simulation (SuperPro) and Manual Calculation
Results .......................................................................................................... 78
vi
CHAPTER 3.................................................................................................. 79
UTILITIES & HEAT INTERGRATION ........................................................ 79
3.1
Introduction ....................................................................................... 79
3.2
Utilities .............................................................................................. 79
3.2.1
Electricity ................................................................................... 79
3.2.2
Steam.......................................................................................... 80
3.3
Heat Integration ................................................................................. 81
3.4
Economic Potential Level 5: Heat Integration System ..................... 84
CHAPTER 4 .................................................................................................... 85
EQUIPMENT SIZING .................................................................................... 85
4.1
Introduction ....................................................................................... 85
4.2
Heat Sterilizer (ST-101 & ST-102) ................................................... 85
4.3
Media Preparation Tank (P-09) ......................................................... 86
4.4
Splitter (FSP-101 & FSP-102) .......................................................... 86
4.5
Gas Compressor (G-101)................................................................... 87
4.6
Air Filter (AF-101 & AF-102) .......................................................... 87
4.7
Seed Fermenter (V-101) .................................................................... 87
4.8
Main Fermenter (V-103) ................................................................... 89
4.9
Storage Tank (V-104)........................................................................ 90
4.10 Centrifuge (DS-101, DS-102 & DS-103) .......................................... 90
4.11 Pumps ................................................................................................ 91
4.12 Spray Dryer (SDR-101) .................................................................... 92
4.13 Economic Potential Level 4 (EP4): Separation System .................... 92
4.13.1 General Structure of the Separation System .............................. 92
CHAPTER 5 .................................................................................................... 94
PROCESS CONTROL & SAFETY ................................................................ 94
5.1
Introduction ....................................................................................... 94
5.2
Identification of Hazard..................................................................... 94
5.2.1
Material Safety Data Sheet ........................................................ 95
5.2.2
DOW Fire and Explosion Index ................................................ 97
5.2.2
Toxicity .................................................................................... 104
5.3
Hazard and Operability Studies (HAZOP) of Major Equipment .... 106
5.4
Major Equipment Control ............................................................... 108
5.4.1
Objectives of Control System .................................................. 109
5.4.2
Process Control of Major Equipment....................................... 110
5.5
Piping and Instrumentation Diagram .............................................. 113
CHAPTER 6 .................................................................................................. 114
WASTE MANAGEMENT AND POLUTION CONTROL ......................... 114
6.1
Introduction ..................................................................................... 114
6.1.1
Higher Up the Hierarchy .......................................................... 115
6.1.2
Waste Minimization ................................................................. 116
6.1.3
Objective of Waste Minimization ............................................ 117
6.1.4
Waste Sources and Effect to Human and Environment ........... 117
6.1.5
Waste Management Option for Each Waste Produced ............ 118
6.2
JABATAN ALAM SEKITAR (JAS) Schedule B and EQA
ENVIRONMETAL QUALITY ACT, 1974 .............................................. 122
6.2.1
Gaseous Emission .................................................................... 122
6.2.2
Sewage, Industrial Effluent and Leachate Discharge .............. 125
6.3
Waste Treatment Option ................................................................. 128
6.3.1
Biological Method ................................................................... 128
vii
6.3.2
Chemical Method ..................................................................... 129
6.3.3
Physical Method....................................................................... 130
6.3.4
Selection of Method ................................................................. 130
6.4
Process Description ......................................................................... 131
6.5
Waste in Polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB) Plant ................................... 132
CHAPTER 7 .................................................................................................. 135
SITE SELECTION AND PLANT LAYOUT ............................................... 135
7.1
Introduction ......................................................................................... 135
7.2
General Consideration of Plant Location ........................................ 135
7.3
Type of Industry Preferred and Location ........................................ 136
7.3.1
Availability of Raw Material ................................................... 136
7.3.2
Utilities ..................................................................................... 137
7.3.3
Water Supply ........................................................................... 137
7.3.4
Electricity Supply..................................................................... 138
7.3.5
Land Selling Price and Area Still Available ............................ 138
7.3.6
Transportation System ............................................................. 139
7.3.7
Availability of Manpower ........................................................ 140
7.3.8
Research and Development Organization ................................ 140
7.3.9
Geography, Climate and Environment .................................... 140
7.3.10 Government Incentive .............................................................. 141
7.3.11 Waste and Effluent Disposal Facilities .................................... 141
7.4
Site Selection analysis ..................................................................... 141
7.5
Plant Layout .................................................................................... 142
7.5.1
Introduction .............................................................................. 142
7.5.2
Definition ................................................................................. 142
7.5.3
Objectives of Plant Layout....................................................... 143
7.5.4
Factors Affecting the Plant Layout .......................................... 144
CHAPTER 8 .................................................................................................. 150
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ............................................................................. 150
8.1
Introduction ..................................................................................... 150
8.2
Grass Root Capital .......................................................................... 150
8.3
Capital Investment........................................................................... 152
8.4
Manufacturing Cost ......................................................................... 153
8.5
Cash Flow Analysis ......................................................................... 159
8.5.1
Payback Period Analysis.......................................................... 159
8.6
Profitability Analysis....................................................................... 165
8.7
Conclusion ....................................................................................... 166
CHAPTER 9 .................................................................................................. 167
9.1
Conclusion ....................................................................................... 167
9.2
Recommendation ............................................................................. 168
REFERENCES ................................................................................................. vi
APPENDICES .................................................................................................. vi
viii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1. 1: Chemical Structure of Polyhydroxybutyrate .................................. 3
Figure 1. 2: Global Production capacities of bioplastics in 2012 (by region) ... 9
Figure 1. 3: World Biodiesel Production, 2005-2017 (Millions of gallons) in
Indonesia, Argentina, Brazil, U.S, and Europe. ............................................... 10
Figure 1. 4: TEM of Cupriavidus necator showing PHB inclusion bodies ..... 14
Figure 1. 5: Total acreage of jatropha oil plantations in selected countries
(Extracted from: http://www.jatropha-alliance.com) ....................................... 20
Figure 2. 1: Block Flow Diagram of PHB Production..................................... 30
Figure 2. 2: Block Flow Diagram of Upstream Process .................................. 31
Figure 2. 3: Block Flow Diagram from Downstream Process ......................... 32
Figure 2. 4: Process Flow Diagram of PHB plant ........................................... 33
Figure 2. 5: Process Flow Diagram Simulation in SuperPro ........................... 34
Figure 2. 6: Input-output structure of PHB production process....................... 71
Figure 2. 7: Graph of concentration versus conversion of Jatropha oil ........... 73
Figure 2. 8: Diagram of Recycle ...................................................................... 75
Figure 2. 9: Graph of product, biomass, recycled biomass, Jatropha oil, and
urea concentration versus Jatropha oil conversion. ......................................... 76
Figure 2. 10: Graph of economic potential at the second level (EP2), economic
potential at the third level with recycle and economic potential at the third
level without recycle. ....................................................................................... 78
Figure 5. 1: Procedure of hazard identification and risk assessment. (Source:
Guidelines for Hazards Evaluation Procedures: American Institute of
Chemical Engineers, 1985) .............................................................................. 95
Figure 5. 2: General steps in determining DOW Fire and Explosion Index .... 99
Figure 5. 3: Form used in DOW Fire and Explosion Index ........................... 100
Figure 5. 4: Section of P & ID of Seed Fermenter......................................... 111
Figure 5. 5: Section of P & ID of Main Fermenter ........................................ 112
Figure 5. 6: Section of P & ID of Disc Stack Centrifuges ............................. 112
Figure 5. 7: Section of P & ID of Spray Dryer .............................................. 113
Figure 6. 1: Waste management hierarchy .................................................... 114
Figure 6. 2: Conceptual Flow Diagram for Activated Sludge Wastewater
Treatment System .......................................................................................... 131
Figure 7. 1: Plant Layout of PHB plant ......................................................... 146
Figure 8. 1: Undiscounted Cash Flow............................................................ 161
Figure 8. 2: Discounted Cash Flow................................................................ 163
ix
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1. 1: Chemical properties of PHB ............................................................ 4
Table 1. 2: World Bioplastic Demand for 2005 2015 ..................................... 7
Table 1. 3: Media for the production of PHB .................................................. 11
Table 1. 4: The prices of the material components .......................................... 11
Table 1. 5: Properties of Jatropha oil from Bionas Sdn. Bhd. ......................... 13
Table 1. 6: Characteristics of urea ................................................................... 14
Table 1. 7: Raw materials and their prices for production of 50 MTPA PHB
using soybean oil as carbon source. ................................................................. 17
Table 1. 8: Raw materials and their prices for production of 50 MTPA PHB
using crude palm kernel oil (CPKO) as carbon source. ................................... 18
Table 1. 9: Raw materials and their prices for production of 50 MTPA PHB
using Jatropha oil as carbon source. ................................................................ 21
Table 1. 10: Comparison between soybean oil, jatropha oil, and crude palm
kernel oil based on its availability of raw materials, yield of PHB, concerns,
cost and operation mode. ................................................................................. 22
Table 1. 11: comparison between promising microorganisms in PHB
cultivation, an analysis from Choi and Lee (1997). ......................................... 25
Table 2. 1: Input and Output of Heat Sterilizer (ST-101&ST-102) ................. 36
Table 2. 2: Density of Each Components ........................................................ 38
Table 2. 3: Summary of materials used in blending tank................................. 42
Table 2. 4: Amount of input of Seed Fermenter and Main Fermenter ............ 43
Table 2. 5: Input and Output of Compressor (G-101) ..................................... 43
Table 2. 6: Input and Output of Air Filter (AF-101)........................................ 44
Table 2. 7: Summary of material used in seed fermenter ................................ 47
Table 2. 8: Summary of materials used in main fermenter .............................. 48
Table 2. 9: Summary amount of input into Seed Fermenter and Main
Fermenter ......................................................................................................... 54
Table 2. 10: Summary amount of output from fermenter ................................ 55
Table 2. 11: Overall material balance of Seed Fermenter................................ 55
Table 2. 12: Summary of Overall Material Balance of main fermenter .......... 56
Table 2. 13: Input and output of Air Filter (AF-102) ...................................... 57
Table 2. 14: Input and Output of Flat Bottom Tank (V-104) .......................... 57
Table 2. 15: Input and output of Centrifugal (C-101) ...................................... 58
Table 2. 16: Input and Output of Blending Tank (C-101) ............................... 59
Table 2. 17: Input and output streams of mixer (MX-101).............................. 59
Table 2. 18: Input and Output Stream of Disc-stack Centrifuge (P-13/DS-102)
.......................................................................................................................... 61
Table 2. 19: Input and Output Stream of Blending Tank (P-14/V-103) .......... 62
Table 2. 20: Input and output of Disc-stack Centrifugal (C-03) ...................... 62
Table 2. 21: Summary Input Stream of Spray Dryer (P-16/SDR-101)............ 63
Table 2. 22: Summary Output of Spray Dryer (P-16/SDR-101) ..................... 63
Table 2. 23: Summary of energy balance of each stream ................................ 65
Table 2. 24: Heat of formation ......................................................................... 68
Table 2. 25: Heat duty for each equipment ...................................................... 70
Table 2. 26: Values for EP2 calculation .......................................................... 74
x
Table 2. 27: Graph of EP2 versus Jatropha oil conversion .............................. 74
Table 2.27: Table 2. 28: Data for EP2 and EP3 at both with recycle and
without recycle. ................................................................................................ 77
Table 2. 29: Comparison between Simulation and Manual Balance ............... 78
Table 3. 1: Total Power consumption of equipment used in plant design ....... 79
Table 3. 2: Total steam consumption of equipment used in plant design ........ 80
Table 3. 3: Total water consumption of equipment used in plant design ........ 81
Table 4. 1: Sizing Summary of Heat Sterilizer ................................................ 85
Table 4. 2: Sizing Summary of Media Preparation Tank ................................ 86
Table 4. 3: Sizing Summary of Splitter............................................................ 86
Table 4. 4: Sizing Summary of Gas Compressor ............................................. 87
Table 4. 5: Sizing Summary of Air Filter ........................................................ 87
Table 4. 6: Bare Module Cost (CBM) for Centrifuges .................................... 93
Table 5. 1: Degree of Hazard based on DOW Fire and Explosion Index (FEI)
........................................................................................................................ 103
Table 5. 2: Toxicity level ............................................................................... 104
Table 5. 3: Toxicity rating system ................................................................. 105
Table 5. 4: General Guide Words for HAZOP procedures (Crowl and Louvar,
2002) .............................................................................................................. 106
Table 6. 1: Source and Waste Generated in PHB plant ................................. 117
Table 6. 2: Waste Management Options by Our Company ........................... 118
Table 6. 3: Malaysian Standard Guidelines for Air Gaseous Pollutants ........ 119
Table 6. 4: Malaysia, Canada and USA Ambient Air Quality Guidelines .... 120
Table 6. 5: Characterization of Waste Type According to MIDA ................. 121
Table 6. 6: Comparison of Aerobic and Anaerobic Treatment (Mittal, 2011)
........................................................................................................................ 128
Table 6. 7: Total Gaseous Waste ................................................................... 133
Table 6. 8: Total Waste Summary ................................................................. 133
Table 6. 9: Costing for Waste Treatment Option Employed in Our Company
........................................................................................................................ 134
Table 7. 1: Water Provider Based on Location .............................................. 137
Table 7. 2: Electricity Provider Based On Location ...................................... 138
Table 7. 3: Building and Location in the Plant Layout .................................. 147
Table 8. 1: Bare Module Cost of Equipment in PHB Plant ........................... 150
Table 8. 2: Estimation of Grass Root Capital, GRC. ..................................... 152
Table 8. 3: Fixed and Total Capital Investment ............................................. 153
Table 8. 4: Estimation of Operating Labor Cost ............................................ 155
Table 8. 5: Summary of Manufacturing Cost ................................................ 156
Table 8. 6: Cash Flow Analysis for Undiscounted Rate, I% ......................... 160
Table 8. 7: Discounted Cash Flow Summary ................................................ 162
xi
Table 8. 8: Net Present Value for Discounted Rate ....................................... 164
Table 8. 9: Discounted Cash Flow at DCFRR=28.35% ................................ 165
CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1
Background
This chapter will provides overview of Polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB) as
well as other components involved in the plant. The demand and supply of
PHB also was discussed.
1.1.1
Plastics
Plastics are man- made long chain polymeric molecules similar in
many ways to natural resins found in trees and other plants (Scott, 1999). On
the other hand, plastics are uniquely exible materials that have seen them
occupy a huge range of functions, from simple packing materials to complex
engineering components (Jim and Alexandre et al., 2013). The history of
plastic begins from 1862 by Alexander Parkes. The main raw material in
plastic production is petroleum. The properties of plastic which is high
molecular weight and tightly bonded together make the plastic not degradable,
their disposal become difficult and give negative impact on the environment
(Sharmila et al., 2011). During the 1980s, the solid waste problem emerged as
a potential crisis in many areas of the US because of increasing amounts of
municipal solid waste (MSW), shrinking landfill capacity, rising costs and
strong public opposition to new solid waste facility sittings (Regan et al.,
1990). In 1960 plastics made waste less than half a percent of US MSW
generation. By 2010 they made up to 12.4% and only 8.2% is recovered (US
EPA, 2011).
2
1.1.2
Biodegradable plastics
Biodegradable plastics were introduced in the 1980s to find ways to
1.1.3
Poly-(3-hydroxybutyrate), PHB
Polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB) is a polyhydroxyalkanoate (PHA), a
polymer belong to the polyesters class that was first isolated and characterized
in 1925 by French microbiologist Maurice Lemoigne. PHB is produced by
microorganisms (like Ralstonia eutropha or recombinant Escherichia coli)
apparently in response to conditions of physiological stress. The polymer is
primarily a product of carbon assimilation (from glucose or starch) and is
employed by microorganisms as a form of energy storage molecule to be
metabolized when other common energy sources are not available. Microbial
biosynthesis of PHB starts with the condensation of two molecules of acetylCoA
to
give
acetoacetyl-CoA
which
is
subsequently
reduced
to
3
The poly-3-hydroxybutyrate (P3HB) form of PHB is probably the most
common type of polyhydroxyalkanoate, but many other polymers of this
class are produced by a variety of organisms: these include poly-4hydroxybutyrate (P4HB), polyhydroxyvalerate (PHV), polyhydroxyhexanoate
(PHH), polyhydroxyoctanoate (PHO) and their copolymers (Lemoigne, 2009).
Poly-(3-hydroxybutyrate), PHB is one of the most important members
of PHAs. According to Li et al. (1999), PHB is an intracellular carbon and
energy storage material produced by many microorganisms under unfavorable
growth condition such as limitation of (NH4)2SO4, PO32-, Mg2+ and oxygen.
PHB is synthesized from acetyl-CoA using three enzymatic steps (Paramjit
and Nitika, 2011). It is a biodegradable thermoplastic polyester which can be
used in various ways like the conventional non-degradable plastics (Li et al.,
1999). The chemical structure of PHB is shown as in Figure 1.1.
1.1.4
4
Table 1. 1: Chemical properties of PHB
Parameter
Value
171-182
5-10
Crystallinity (%)
65-80
Density (g cm-3)
1.23 - 1.25
6600000
2.2 3
1.465
40
68
UV resistance
Good
Solvent resistance
Poor
45
Biodegradability
Good
1.1.5
Biodegradability of PHB
Biodegradation of PHB is dependent upon a number of factors such as
the microbial activity of the environment and the exposed surface area. In
addition, temperature, pH, molecular weight and crystallinity are important
factors. Biodegradation starts when microorganisms begin growing on the
surface of the plastic and secrete enzymes that break down the polymer into its
molecular building blocks, called hydroxyacids. The hydroxyacids are then
taken up by the microorganisms and used as carbon sources for growth. In
aerobic environments the polymers are degraded to carbon dioxide and water.
The environmental degradation behavior of PHB-g-VAc films (Xg:
0%, 5% and 15%) before and after saponification assessed by the BOD
method in environmental water. Many kinds of PVA-utilizing microorganisms have been found in the water of major rivers (Matsumura et al.,
1994), and it was confirmed that PVA could be degraded in environmental
water from the lake at the Takasaki Advanced Radiation Research Institute.
5
Biodegradation of PHA has also been tested in various aquatic
environments. In one study in Lake Lugano, Switzerland, items were placed at
different depths of water as well as on the sediment surface. A life span of 510 years was calculated for bottles under these conditions (assuming no
increase in surface area), while PHA films were completely degraded in the
top 20 cm of sediment within 254 days at temperatures not exceeding 6C.
1.1.6
1.2
Applications of PHB
There are many applications of PHB besides it is been used in the
6
1.2.1
Medical
Since biodegradability and biocompatibility are properties of PHB, the
1.2.2
Aquaculture
PHB was used as a food add-on to aquaculture animals in order to
7
1.2.3
Pharmaceutical
In pharmaceutical, PHB is applied into slow-released carrier for lasting
1.3
Market Survey
1.3.1
%Annual Growth
2005 - 2010
2010-2015
Bioplastics Demand
130
300
1025
18.2
27.9
North America
34
80
242
18.7
24.8
Western Europe
60
125
347
15.8
22.7
Asia/Pacific
33
83
320
20.3
31.0
Other Regions
12
116
32.0
57.4
8
more than triple to more than 1 million metric tons (1.1 million tons) in 2015,
valued at $2.9 billion. Demand for biodegradable polyesters is said to be
growing by about 27.9% for a five years, and North America is belatedly
catching up with other regions for about 24.8 % of annual growth for 2010 to
2015. This is due to customer demand for more environmentally-sustainable
products, development of bio-based feed stocks for commodity plastic resins,
increasing restrictions on the use of non-degradable plastic products and high
rise of crude oil and natural gas prices.
1.3.2
Asia. The research service presents current and future of the bioplastics market
in Southeast Asia for the period 2004 to 2014. It stated that the bioplastics
market is at a developing stage. The total market for engineering plastics in
Southeast Asia in 2007 was 12 tons. These units are forecast to grow at a rate
of about 129.8 percent per year and reach about 4063 tons by 2014 (Sullivan,
2008).
1.3.3
9
1.3.4
Global production
10
The market of around 1.2 million tons in 2011 may see a five-fold
increase in production volumes by 2016, to almost 6 million tons. The product
expected to contribute most to this growth is bio-based PET (for plastic
bottles), which already accounts for approximately 40% of the global
bioplastics production capacity. The current production volume is expected to
grow to more than 4.6 million tons by 2016 as a result of demand from large
manufacturers of carbonated drinks. Early in 2013 the nova-Institute predicted
that by 2020 bioplastics production could rise to 12 million tons, principally
due to drop-in polymers, particularly bio-PET13. With an expected total
polymer production of about 400 million tons in 2020, the bio-based share
should increase from 1.5% in 2011 to 3% in 2020 (Development, 2013).
1.3.5
11
productions of PHB are still in the developmental stage, but important
applications are beginning to emerge in packaging, food production, and
medicine. We have reached a critical point in the development of PHBs for
many applications. It is, therefore, an opportune time for a comprehensive
report detailing promising new developments in this field. In brief, production
of PHB has good future prospect because:
1. PHB is biodegradable
2. Production of PHB protects the fossil resources
3. PHBs have a positive eco-balance sheet
4. Good example for a sustainable development in the spirit of the
agenda of 21st century
5. Carbon dioxide neutral
6. The use of biodegradable material creates over 20, 000 new and
secure workplaces in Europe and many times over in the world
(social factor)
1.3.6
Table 1.3 while the market prices for PHB, raw materials of culture medium in
PHB production are shown in Table 1.4:
Table 1. 3: Media for the production of PHB
Materials
Amount (g/L)
Jatropha oil
20.00 g/L
Urea
1.00 g/L
Prices (MYR/kg)
Source
Jatropha oil
2.73
12
1.3.7
Urea
1.70
PHB
27.45
Jatropha Oil
Jatropha oil is a potential renewable resource because Jatropha
plantations yield large amounts of oil, are highly resistant to drought and pests
and the oil is relatively cheap and non-edible. Jatropha oil is derived from
Jatropha curcas seeds. This plant was originally found in the Caribbean area
but is now widespread throughout Africa, the Americas and much of Asia. The
plant also is known as hardy Jatropha due to its resistance to pest and
drought, and also its ability to grow almost anywhere. The oil yield of this
plant is almost four times that of soybean, and 10 times that of maize.
Recently, Jatropha oil has been evaluated as a source of high quality biodiesel
production. However, it has not been evaluated as a feedstock for PHA
production (Ko-Sin Ng, 2010).
The genus Jatropha belongs to the Euphorbiaceous family which can
synthesize several toxic compounds, including carcinogenic phorbol ester,
trypsin inhibitor, lectin and saponin. The toxins render the oil non-edible, but
should not affect its utility for bioplastics production. In view of the above, it
is advantageous to use Jatropha oil which is not food-grade oil as the sole
carbon source to produce PHA (Ko-Sin Ng, 2010).
It has three Malaysian entities and six overseas joint ventures which
are Bionas Murabahah Bhd, Bionas Sdn Bhd and Biofuel Bionas Sdn Bhd,
Bionas Philippines, Bionas Indonesia, Bionas Vietnam, Bionas Cambodia,
Bionas Thailand and Bionas Taiwan. Its assets portfolio consists of over
600,000 acres planted areas, 3.3 million acres land bank, 313 seedling
nurseries & harvest collection centers and 3 processing plants.
As a result, the company has monthly supply and production capacity
of 100,000 tons seeds, 90,000 tons seedlings, 33,000 MT Crude Jatropha Oil
(CJO) and 65,000 MT seed cakes (bio-mass). Now the company is extending
13
its global presence by expanding to Taiwan, Thailand, Cambodia, Bangladesh
and Cambodia. With Bionas diverse operational experience and an unrivaled
business heritage, it is now poised to take a leading position in the global
business arena.
In the year 2008 and 2009, Bionas has been actively promoting the
cultivation of Jatropha in Malaysia. The numbers of planters had risen from
28,983 in 2008 to 112,484 in 2009 respectively. Bionas has also increased the
numbers of nurseries from 98 in 2008 to 221 in 2009. The number of planters
had risen to 238,541 and the number of nurseries to 313 in 2010. The company
has also setup four pressing mills in 2010 as part of the companys capacity
building to cater its needs for the production Bionas Jatropha Additives. 2011
has been a productive period for Bionas as the company has invested into the
setting up of two processing, blending plant, and storage facilities for Bionas
Jatropha Additives at two main ports of Malaysia which are located in Prai
Port, Penang and Kuching Port, Sarawak.
Properties
Climate type
Tropical
37%
rd
3.6 MT
Lifespan
50 years
Harvest period
2736.00
By-products
14
Cupriavidus necator was formerly known as Alcaligenes eutrophus is a
motile, rod shaped, Gram negative, non-sporing bacterium and major strains is
H16 and JMP 134 (Larsen and Pogliano, 2007). Larsen and Pogliano (2011)
stated that its optimal temperature is 30C while optimal pH is 7 and it is a
non-halophilic, which cannot live in high salt concentration. It is able to
produce PHB inside the inclusion bodies under limited nitrogen source but
excessive carbon source (Ojumu et al. 2004).
1.3.7.4 Urea
Urea is a white crystalline substance with the chemical formula CO
(NH2)2. It is highly water soluble and contains 46% nitrogen. Urea is
considered an organic compound because it contains carbon. It was the first
organic compound ever synthesized by chemists; this was accomplished in the
early 1800s. Urea supplies more nitrogen per ton of product than any other dry
fertilizer. It contains 46% nitrogen; this means that each ton of urea supplies
920 lbs. of nitrogen.
Table 1. 6: Characteristics of urea
15
Other Name
Urea
Molecular Formula
CH4N2O
Molecular weight
60.06
1.4
1.4.1
excellent carbon source in PHA production. Examples given are soybean oil
(Kahar et al., 2004), palm oil (Kek et al., 2008) and Jatropha oil (Khan et al.,
2013). Kahar et al. (2008) reported that plant oils are desirable as they are also
inexpensive carbon sources. Additionally, due to their high carbon content,
plant oils yield almost two-fold higher than from glucose and they are
appealing feed stocks for industrial PHA production because metabolism of
these compounds can influence the monomer composition of the resulting
PHA (Akiyama et al., 2003).
16
According to Kahar et al. (2008), high yield production of
polyhydroxyalkanoates has been identified from using soybean oil by wildtype strain Ralstonia eutropha or now known as Cupriavidus necator, one of
the best known bacteria among PHA-producing microorganisms. Soybean oil
has a high yield of PHA obtained ranging from 0.72 to 0.76 g PHA/ g soybean
oil used and the PHA productivity obtained here was roughly calculated to be
1.0 g/L.h (Kahar et al. 2008).
According to Global Agricultural Information Network (GAIN) in
2012, there is no commercial cultivation of soybeans in Malaysia despite it is
one of the largest producers of soy drinks in Southeast Asia, with exports
going to neighboring countries as well as Australia, Japan and Europe.
Malaysia has to import soybean oil from U.S, hence this will increase
production cost as shipping and handling cost have to be considered.
Furthermore, contrary to sugar that can be directly utilized by cells,
soybean oil needs to be hydrolyzed by lipase and fatty acids. This would
increase production cost to acquire lipase and fatty acids as well as equipment
such as hydrolyzer. Environmental wise, large scale production from soybean
oil is environmentally friendly as the carbon dioxide emission from soybean
oil are very low compared to the petrochemical polymers if high yield of PHA
is produced (Kahar et al. 2008). However, the use of edible oils in production
of bio plastics may cause depletion of global food supply and sources. Using
soybean oil is considered as unethical as it is wasteful to convert food to bio
plastics. Additionally, Ng et al. (2010) also stated that the edible plant oils
price has increased drastically because of recent crisis of food shortage and
increase of food demand.
1.4.1.1.1
17
Table 1. 7: Raw materials and their prices for production of 50 MTPA
PHB using soybean oil as carbon source.
Raw Material
Price
Price
Source
(RM/kg)
(RM/year)
Soybean oil
2.90
44, 900.00
Ammonium
10.35
12.40
sulphate
18
However, there are issues requiring serious attention such as
deforestation, waste disposals from palm oil mill and energy expenditure when
PHA is to be produced in large scale. In order to fulfill the PHA market
demand solely by using CPKO to produce PHA, approximately 53,000 tons of
CPKO (which is approximately 2.8% of Malaysias total CPKO production) is
required as carbon feed stock for microbial fermentation. In other words, the
production of 52,000 tons of PHA per annum would involve a total of 111,520
hectares of oil palm plantation. As the demand for plant oils increase for PHA
production, it may result in the further expansion of plantations into forests.
Also, like soybean oil, there are concerns about merits of converting foodgrade oil for bio plastics production at the expense of dwindling the worlds
food supply as palm oil provides nearly 30% of the worlds edible vegetable
oil (Carter et al. 2007), with a production volume of 43.12 million tons in year
2008 (MPOB 2008).
1.4.1.2.1
Price
Price
(RM/kg)
(RM/year)
1.25
19, 350.00
Source
Ammonia
8.00
10.20
Petronas
Chemicals
Ammonia Sdn.Bhd
19
= RM 1, 354, 600.00/year
20
21
Teong, 2011). On the other hand, the seeds from the northern part of Malaysia
contain high lipid content of 60% of oil (Salimon and Abdullah, 2008). Using
jatropha as carbon source in PHB production can reduce the recovery cost
(Choi and Lee, 1997) as it yields high PHB content.
1.4.1.3.1
Price
(RM/kg)
(RM/year)
Jatropha oil
2.73
19, 503.00
Urea
1.70
2.75
Raw Materials
Source
22
Table 1. 10: Comparison between soybean oil, jatropha oil, and crude palm kernel oil based on its availability of raw materials, yield of
PHB, concerns, cost and operation mode.
Raw material
Jatropha Oil
Palm Oil
Microbial strain
Cupriavidus necator H16
used
Availability
of Malaysia
has
potential
for
jatropha There
is
no
of
quickly and produces more seed in the Malaysia. Malaysia has to import al. 2011).
tropics (Openshaw, 2000).
Yield high amounts of oil, yielding almost Yield almost two-fold higher than 68 wt% PHB content from crude palm
four times than the soybean and ten times from glucose (Akiyama et al., kernel oil (Kek et al. 2010)
from the maize (Fitzgerald, 2006)
Concerns
2003)
use
of
edible
oils
affect the global food chain crisis and has production of bio plastics may cause more deforestation for palm oil
23
plant
oils
price
than soybeans due to lower fertilizer and increased drastically because of reducing shipping and handling cost.
pesticides requirements (Gui et al. 2008)
recent crisis of food shortage and However, supply for PHA production has
increase of food demand. (Ng et to compete with demand of palm oil as
al. 2010)
Operation mode
Fed-batch fermentation
24
1.4.2
as the main carbon source for PHB production with C. necator H16 as this
route provides more advantage in term of cost reduction and high yield of
PHB.
1.4.3
are very minimal, estimated at approximately 10 15% of the capital cost per
year. In Ghana, for instance, in 2010, whilst the cost of Jatropha oil and
kerosene were estimated to be US$0.085/liter and US$1.23/liter respectively,
the cost of
1.4.4
25
including some substrates that cannot be easily used by most of the
microorganisms, such as lactose (Lee et al., 1997). Table 1.11 shows
comparison between promising microorganisms in PHB cultivation, an
analysis from Choi and Lee (1997). It is shown that PHB concentration, PHB
productivity and PHB yield are higher in C. necator.
Table 1. 11: comparison between promising microorganisms in PHB
cultivation, an analysis from Choi and Lee (1997).
Recombinant
Bacterium
C. necator
A. latus
Carbon source
Glucose
Sucrose
Glucose
Limiting nutrient
Nitrogen
None
None
Fermentation method
Glucose
pH-stat
pH-stat
E.coli
concentration
control
Culture time (h)
50
28.45
39
164
143
110
121
71.4
85
76
50
77.3
2.5
2.18
0.17
0.29
5.88
3.5
substrate)
kg substrate/kg PHB
3.33
Reference
Kim
1994
et
1994
26
cell dry weight of 11.6 g/L was obtained at 55 hour followed by highest PHB
concentration of 8.6 g/L at 61.5 hour. Kadouri et al. (2005) reported that C.
necator can tolerate adverse stress conditions such as heat, osmotic pressure,
UV radiation and toxins such as ethanol and hydrogen peroxide. It should be
clear that C. necator is the most suitable microorganism to be used with
jatropha oil in PHB production.
1.4.5
cell biomass and PHA biosynthesis. They also discovered that both urea and
sodium nitrate resulted in better biomass production compared to other
nutrient supply. Ng et al. (2010) stated that urea is the most suitable nitrogen
source to pair up with Jatropha oil as carbon source. Besides, urea costs much
lower price and has high productivity of PHB (Kek et al., 2008). Khanna and
Srivastava (2005) as well as Sabra and Abou Zeid (2008) discovered that urea
can yield high cell biomass and PHA production significantly. Ng et al. (2010)
also reported that based on their analysis both cell dry weight (CDW) and
PHB accumulation increased when the urea concentration increased. They also
stated that the optimal concentration of urea is 0.54 g/L as CDW remained
constant while PHB accumulation decreased significantly after 0.54 g/L of
urea.
1.4.6
PHB synthesis
There are four methods identified to cultivate PHAs which are; in
27
low concentration, to maximize the biomass yield. Ng et al. (2010) presented
Jatropha oil support the cell growth and PHB production in fed-batch
fermentation and high yield of product per Jatropha oil was obtained.
The fermentation process is relatively simple with multi-staging from
the petri dish to a shaker flask to a small fermenter which is then used to
inoculate the production reactor. In fermentation process, cells were
maintained and pre-cultivated in 2 g/L yeast extract, 10 g/L meat extract and
10g/L peptone (Khan et al., 2013).
1.4.7
Downstream Process
For subsequent process, several methods have been developed for the
recovery of PHAs, mostly PHB from the cells. Solvents such as chloroform,
methylene chloride, propylene carbonate and dichloroethane have been used
for the extraction of PHB (Ramsay et al., 1994). However, it was difficult to
remove the cell residues due to viscosity of 5% (w/v) PHB from extracted
polymer solution (Choi and Lee, 1997). Hahn et al. 1994 suggested that PHB
can be recovered using a dispersion of hypochlorite and surfactant solution.
PHB recovery by this method is more efficient with less polymer degradation.
During recovery of PHB, the harvested cell pellets are treated with
surfactant solution (1%, w/v) at 25C for 1 hour of mean residence time. The
treat mean is then followed by hypochlorite digestion in flow-through manner
and then PHB is separated from supernatant by centrifugation. PHB granules
are rinsed with water and were finally spray-dried. (Lee and Choi, 1997).
28
CHAPTER 2
2.1
and based on 8000 operation hours per year, the raw materials are decided
based on their high yield of product and economy wise, gives advantages to
cost of production. Based on its market availability, crude Jatropha oil is
chosen as the substrate. Urea is selected as nitrogen source as it could produce
high PHB content according to Khan et al. (2013). Meanwhile, the bacteria
strain that used is Cupriavidus necator H16 which previously known as
Ralstonia eutropha. It was obtained from National Collection of Industrial,
Food and Marine Bacteria.
Since we are using crude Jatropha oil with high purity, which also can
be obtained with affordable price locally, there is no need to manage impurity
of substrate. The oil, which contains high carbon source is used directly in
inoculation.
2.2
give clear view of the process. Figure 2.1 illustrates the flow of PHB
production while Figure 2.2 and Figure 2.3 shows upstream and downstream
process, respectively. Upstream process includes early cell isolation and
cultivation, to cell banking and culture expansion of the cells (fermentation)
until final harvest (termination of the culture and collection of the live cell
batch). Downstream process starts from harvesting from fermenter, and then
processed
to
meet
purity
and
quality
requirements.
30
31
32
33
34
33
Figure 2.4 illustrates the process flow diagram based on block flow
diagram, fully labelled of streams and pumps. The upstream process started
with the sterilization of mineral medium and jatropha oil in ST-101 and ST102, respectively and mixed into mixing tank MX-101. The microbes
Cupriavidus necator H16 is inoculated in shake flask for 48 hours before
subjected to seed fermenter. Solution from mixing tank is splitted and 10%
will go to seed fermenter and the rest is fed into main fermenter. Air is
supplied using gas compressor (G-101) and filtered to avoid contamination in
fermenters using air filter AF-101. Vent from main fermenter is filtered using
air filter AF-102.
The downstream process utilizes the centrifugation process only. The
separation stage was based on methodology from Choi & Lee (1997) as well
as Choi & Lee (1999). After the end of the fermentation, the bacterial cells are
harvested via continuous centrifugation (DS-101) of the fermentation broth
which collected in V-103. Microbial cell lysis or disruption is carried out via
combined surfactant-hypochlorite digestion. A surfactant solution (Triton X100) of 1% (w/v) is added to the microbial biomass, charged in stream S-122
and mixed at 25C. This treatment followed by centrifugation in DS-102 to
separate PHB granules and aqueous solution and then added hypochlorite
digestion, charged in stream S-124 in a flow-through manner. This combined
step results in microbial lysis and separation of PHB from residual cell
material. The aqueous solution containing the residual cell material is
separated further by centrifugation in DS-103, where PHB is rinsed with water
beforehand V-105. Finally, PHB granules are purified via washing with water
and drying via a spray-drying step.
2.2.1
34
2.2.1.1
continuously in 121C temperature before being sent to seed fermenter (V102) and main fermenter (V-103). Jatropha oil must be autoclaved separately
from mineral media. Sterilization is essential in bioprocess plant to avoid any
contamination during main process. These heat sterilizers have diameter of
0.10m and 7.42 m length.
2.2.1.2
from S-104 and sterilized mineral media from S-103. V-105 is used to blend
surfactant (S-122) with supernatant (S-121) while V-106 is used to blend
water from stream S-128 and PHB for washing and rinsing of granules. A
stainless steel 20 m3 blending tank with Siemens motors is used in this
process.
2.2.1.3
2.2.1.4
powder from slurry consists of PHB granules and water (S-132). The product
is collected at S-133 while waste is channeled to waste treatment plant through
S-134. The design of this spray dryer is estimated with 0.80 m diameter with
2.39 m in height.
35
2.2.1.5
Fermenter (V-103)
Fermenter with fed-batch mode is chosen to produce PHB from
2.2.1.6
2.2.1.7
2.3
energy balance, and simulation using Superpro software was conducted and
the results was compared accordingly with manual calculation.
36
2.3.1
Material Balance
In this section, we will perform material balance for each process unit
Generation
Output
Consumption
Accumulation
Here, some assumptions have been made to make the calculation more
easily. The design-based assumptions are:
1. No leakage in the pipes and vessels in the system.
2. All the components in the system behave as ideal condition.
2.3.1.1
unit, therefore, we know that Input (S101) = Output (S104) and Input (S102) =
Output (S103)
37
Jatropha Oils
389.828
Urea
0.235
Mineral Medium
153.76463
38
Table 2. 2: Density of Each Components
Density (kg/m3)
Materials
Mineral Medium:
KH2PO4
Na2HPO4.12H2O
MgSO4.7H2O
Urea
Trace elements:
H3BO3,
CoCl2.6H2O,
ZnSO4.7H2O,
MnCl2.4H2O,
Na2MoO4.2H2O,
NiCl2.6H2O
CuSO4.5H2O
Jatropha oil
Nutrient-rich medium:
Yeast
Meat extract
Peptone
1 year
1 kg
year
8000hr
0.001 MT
= 6.25 kg PHB/hr
61.5 hr
Hr
batch
384.375 kg PHB/batch
39
Since the actual operating days is 333 days 8000 operating hours, therefore;
8000 hrs
1 batch
1 year
61.5 hrs
YP/S
= 98.7 %
130 batches/year
Substrate
384.375 kg
required =
Batch
0.987
389.438 kg Jatropha
/batch
: H3BO3
= 0.0003kg/l
: CoCl2.6H2O = 0.0002kg/l
: ZnSO4.7H2O = 0.0001kg/l
: MnCl2.4H2O = 3x10-6kg/l
: Na2MoO4.2H2O = 3x10-6kg /l
: NiCl2.6H2O = 2x10-6kg /l
: CuSO4.5H2O = 1x10-6kg /l
H3BO3:
389.438kg
substrate
Batch
0.0003kg
1m3
1000L
1440kg
1m3
0.0002kg
1m3
1000L
1920kg
1m3
= 0.08113kg H3BO3/
batch
COCl2.6H2O:
389.438kg
substrate
Batch
= 0.04057kg CoCl2.6H2O
/ batch
40
ZnSO4.7H2O:
389.438kg
substrate
0.0001kg
1m3
1000L
1960kg
1m3
3x10-6 kg
1m3
1000L
2010kg
1m3
3x10-6 kg
1m3
1000L
Batch
= 0.01987ZnSO4.7H2O
kg/ batch
MnCl2.4H2O:
389.438kg
substrate
Batch
= 5.8125x10-4
MnCl2.4H2O kg/ batch
Na2MoO4.2H2O:
389.438kg
substrate
Batch
=3.0908x10-4
Na2MoO4.2H2O kg/
3780kg
1m
2x10-6 kg
1m3
1000L
3550kg
1m3
batch
NiCl2.6H2O:
389.438kg
substrate
Batch
= 2.1940x10-4
NiCl2.6H2O kg/ batch
41
CuSO4.5H2O:
389.438kg
substrate
1x10-6 kg
1m3
1000L
2880kg
1m3
Batch
= 3.2910x10-4
CuSO4.5H2O kg/ batch
Only 0.1% of trace elements are used (Khan, 2013). Therefore, total trace
elements used in blending tank is;
0.143kg trace elements/batch X 0.001 = 1.43 x 10-4kg trace elements /batch
1L of mineral medium consists of
: KH2PO4
= 1.5g/l
: Na2HPO4.12H2O
= 9g/l
: MgSO4.7H2O
= 0.2g/l
: Urea
= 1g/l
: Trace elements
= 1ml
KH2PO4:
389.438kg
substrate
0.0015kg
1m3
1000L
2340kg
1m3
Batch
= 0.2496kg KH2PO4
batch
Na2HPO4.12H2O:
389.438kg
substrate
Batch
0.009kg
1m3
1000L
=2.3059kgNa2HPO4.12H2O/batch
1520kg
1m3
42
MgSO4.7H2O:
389.438kg
substrate
Batch
0.0002kg
1m3
1000L
2660kg
1m3
0.001kg
1m3
1000L
=0.02928kg
MgSO4.7H2O /batch
Urea:
389.438kg
substrate
batch
=0.2950kg Urea/batch
L
1320kg
1m3
The total mineral medium required for this blending tank is 2.8799 kg/batch
Table 2. 3: Summary of materials used in blending tank
2.3.1.3
Materials
Mineral medium
2.8799
Jatropha oil
389.438
into 2 output streams. One stream is fed into seed fermenter (10%) while the
other stream goes into main fermenter (90%). Similarly, no mass generation,
consumption and accumulation occur within this unit, thus:
Input(S-105) = Output(S-106 & S-107)
Assumption: We assign 10% of the total amount into seed fermenter
43
Table 2. 4: Amount of input of Seed Fermenter and Main Fermenter
Amount of input (kg/batch)
Main Fermenter
Material
Total
Seed Fermenter
(V-103) (including
(V-102)
Jatropha oil
389.43
38.943
350.494
C.Necator(biomass)
1.597
1.1537x10-3
1.596
Mineral medium
0.028799
0.00288
0.0259
1.7272
1.727
6.906x10-4
Oxygen
2296.0288
229.6
2066.43
CO2
Water
PHB
39.457
39.457
Pre-culture medium
(include biomass)
Air
22960.29
Oxygen
482.1930672
Nitrogen
1813.835933
44
2.3.1.5 Air Filter (AF-101)
We may assume that the filtered particles are of negligible weight.
Therefore, we consider that no mass generation, consumption and
accumulation within this unit.
Input (S109) = Output (S110)
Table 2. 6: Input and Output of Air Filter (AF-101)
Materials
Air
22960.29
Oxygen
482.1930672
Nitrogen
1813.835933
=1g/l
2. Yeast
=2g/l
3. Meat extract
=10g/l
4. Peptone
=10g/l
5. C. Necator
Mineral medium
Conditions:
= 10ml of 1000ml = 1%
45
Temperature of culture medium
: 37oC
Fermentation duration, t
: 61.5 hours
Yp/s
: 98.7% *
Yx/s
: 0.0026 g/g*
10%
batch
100%
kmol
1000mol
batch
86 kg
1 kmol
/batch
46
4469.48mol PHB
batch
Jatropha /batch
1383.74mol
From literature, (Khan, 2013) Yx/s = 0.0026g cell/g substrate, thus total
amount of C.Necator leaving the seed fermenter is:
0.0026 kg cell
282 kg
kmol
kg substrate
kmol
24.6 kg
batch
For 50 MT,
0.0298 mol
1383.74mol
biomass
Jatropha oil
batch
kg
25.83mol
= 1.596kg biomass/
batch
0.002kg
1m3
1000L
= 2.902x10-3kg yeast
batch
1100kg
1m3
/batch
Meat extract:
1.596 kg cell
0.01kg
1m3
1000L
batch
250kg
1m3
/batch
47
Peptone:
1.596 kg cell
0.01kg
1m3
1000L
batch
250kg
1m3
/batch
0.0638kg
peptone
We feed in 10% of the substrate into seed fermenter and we predict the
amount of PHB produced in cell in seed fermenter as:
389.438 kg substrate
10
Batch
100
0.987
39.457kg PHB/batch
Since only 10% of the mineral medium used in seed fermenter, thus the
amount of mineral medium input at the seed fermenter is 0.028799 x 0.1 =
0.00288kg mineral medium/ batch
Input (kg/batch)
C. necator
1.597
Yeast
2.902x10-3
Meat extract
0.0638
Peptone
0.0638
Jatropha oil
38.943
Mineral medium
0.00288
48
2.3.1.8 Main Fermenter (V-103)
From literature (Khan, 2013),
Since only 90% of the mineral medium left, thus the amount of mineral
medium input at the fermenter is 0.028799 x 0.9 = 0.02592kg mineral
medium/ batch
Input(kg/batch)
Pre-culture medium
6.0746x10-4
Mineral Medium
0.028799
Jatropha oil
350.49
49
Assumption: Negligible production of PHB during fermentation and no other
side reactions occur during fermentation. Molecular weight of PHB is
282kg/kmol.
Stoichiometric Equation:
According from journal (Khan, 2013):
The Cupriavidus necator strain was used to synthesize PHB by using Jatropha
oil as carbon source.
C18H34O2 + a O2 + bCH4N2O
Bacteria strains:
Cupriavidus necator
Carbon source:
Jatropha oil
Nitrogen source:
Urea
C4H6O2
= 25.83 g/mol
= 282 g/ mol
= 86 g/ mol
50
Degree of Freedom
6 number of unknown components/stoichiometric coefficients (a,b,c,d,e,f)
-4 number of elements balance (C, H, O, N)
-2 additional equations (YP/S, electron balance equation)
0 DOF
Elemental Balances:
C: 18 + b = c + d + 4
--------- (1)
H: 34 + 4b = 1.8c + 2e +
--------- (2)
O: 2 + 2 a + b = 0.5c + 2d + e +2
--------- (3)
N: 2b = 0.2c
--------- (4)
f = 3.2364
--------- (5)
51
c = 0.0288
---------- (6)
For element N:
2b
= 2c
= 0.0028
For element C:
18 + b
= c + d +4f
18 + 0.1c c - 4f
=d
18 + (0.1-1)0.028 4(3.23)
=d
d = 5.0548
--------- (7)
For element H:
34 + 4b = 1.8c +2e +6f
34 + 4(0.0028) = 0.0504 + 2e + 19.38
e = 7.2904
--------- (8)
For element O:
2 + 2a + b = 0.5c +2d +e +2f
2 + 2a + 0.0028 = 0.5(0.028) + 2(5.0548) + 7.2904
52
a = 7.7056
--------- (10)
a = 7.7056
b = 0.0028
c = 0.028
d = 5.0548
e = 7.2904
f = 3.234
0.028CH1.8O0.5N0.2 +
53
(1+3.7619)
15.0677 kmol O2
10%
1 batch
100%
15.0677 kmol O2
90%
1 batch
100%
CO2/batch
H2O produced
54
For every batch (from mole balance calculation):
CO2 produced = 305.8396 kg/batch
H2O produced = 180.6209 kg/batch
Therefore, total H2O leaving fermenter = 180.6209 kg/batch
To sum up, we may summarize all the feeds into seed fermenters and main
fermenters:
Table 2. 9: Summary amount of input into Seed Fermenter and Main
Fermenter
Amount of input (kg/batch)
Main
Fermenter
Material
Total
Seed Fermenter
(V-102)
(V-101)
(including total
output from
inoculum)
Jatropha oil
389.43
38.943
350.494
-3
C.Necator(biomass)
1.597
1.1537x10
1.596
Mineral medium
0.028799
0.00288
0.0259
1.7272
1.727
6.906x10-4
Oxygen
2296.0288
229.6
2066.43
CO2
Water
PHB
39.457
39.457
Pre-culture medium
(include biomass)
55
Table 2. 10: Summary amount of output from fermenter
Amount of output (kg/batch)
Materials
Seed Fermenter
Main fermenter
Jatropha oil
1.947
17.525
Water
18.0621
162.559
Mineral medium
CO2
30.584
275.256
C. Necator
1.596
1030.7
Oxygen
PHB
39.457
384.375
Input
Input
Output
S-106
S-111
S-114
S-115
Na2HPO4.12H2O
0.23059
KH2PO4
0.02496
MgSO.7H2O
0.002928
CH4N2O (Urea)
0.0295
Trace elements
0.0000143
Jatropha oil
38.9438
1.947
PHB
39.457
Oxygen
229.6
Water
18.0621
CO2
30.584
C.Necator (Biomass)
unknown
1.596
1.727
Materials
Pre-culture medium
(including biomass)
56
Input S-
Input S-
Input S-
Output S-
Input S-
107
112
115
116
118
0.0207531
0.0207531
0.0022464
0.0022464
0.0002635
2
0.002655
0.0000012
87
0.0002635
2
0.002655
0.0000012
87
Jatropha oil
350.494
1.947
17.525
PHB
39.457
384.76
Oxygen
2066.43
Water
18.0621
180.6341
CO2
30.584
30.584
Nitrogen
16324.77
16324.77
1.596
1.013552
C.Necator
(Biomass)
Pre-culture
medium
57
Table 2. 13: Input and output of Air Filter (AF-102)
Materials
2296.0288 kg O2
Material
Input
Output
PHB
384.375
384.375
Biomass
1.01355
1.01355
Nutrient Medium
392.7074
392.7074
Water
180.6341
180.6341
Total (kg/cycle)
958.7301
958.7301
58
Table 2. 15: Input and output of Centrifugal (C-101)
Centrifugal (C-01)
Material
Input(S-119)
Output(S-121) (90%
Output(S-120)
left)
(10% removed)
PHB
384.375
345.9375
38.4375
Biomass
1.01355
0.912195
0.10135
392.7074
353.4367
39.2707
180.6341
162.5707
18.0634
958.73
862.857
95.873
Nutrient
Medium
Water
Total
(kg/cycle)
2.3.1.12
Ramsay et. al. (1990) stated when PHB that containing biomass was
treated at a ratio of 1:1 with surfactant Triton X-100 treatment was followed
by a hypochlorite wash, a higher purity of 98% was achieved. Hence,
Amount of cell with PHB
= 345.9375/batch
= (2 345.9375) kg/batch
= 691.875 kg/batch
59
Table 2. 16: Input and Output of Blending Tank (C-101)
Blending Tank (C-101)
Material
PHB in triton
X
Biomass
Nutrient
Medium
Water
Total
(kg/cycle)
2.3.1.13
left)
removed)
691.875
678.0375
13.8375
0.912195
0.89395
0.0182439
353.4367
346.3679
7.068734
162.5707
159.3193
3.251414
1208.7946
1184.6187
24.1759
Input(S-121)
Mixer (P-12/MX-101)
= 678.0375kg/batch
= (2 678.0375) kg/batch
= 1356.075 kg/batch
60
Material
Mixer (M-101)
Input(S-123)
Input (S-124)
Output (S-125)
PHB
678.0375
1691.6344
Biomass
0.89395
0.89395
Nutrient Medium
346.3679
Water
159.3193
159.3193
Hypochlorite
1356.075
Cell Debris
688.8461
Total (kg/cycle)
1184.6187
1356.075
2540.6933
Once hypochlorite is mixed with cell, it will disrupt the cell wall and
release PHB from cell. Then PHB dissolves in hypochlorite (solubility of PHB
in hypochlorite = 97%) (Sei, 1993).Referring to material balances in MF1
(345.9375PHB/batch), we know that the total amount of PHB dissolved in
hypochlorite is 335.5594 kg PHB/batch. In brief, there is one output stream
from mixer and it contains PHB in hypochlorite and water as well as cell
debris.
2.3.1.14
Output stream from flat bottom tank is fed into downstream processing
unit centrifugation. Separation of medium (cell debris) and cell with PHB
will be carried out in this unit operation. The mass balance for centrifugation
is summarized as follows:
*Assumptions:
1. Well-mixed and constant holdup in filter.
2. Efficiency = 0.90
61
Output (S-127)
Output(S-126)
PHB in hypochlorite
1691.6344
1522.47096
169.16344
Biomass
0.89395
0.80456
0.089395
Nutrient Medium
Water
159.3193
143.3874
15.93193
Cell Debris
688.8461
68.88461
619.9615
Total (kg/cycle)
2540.6933
1735.54753
805.1463
2.3.1.15
Ramsay et. al. (1990) stated when PHB that containing biomass was
washed at a ratio of 1:5 with water, a higher purity of 98% was achieved.
Hence,
= 1831.0299kg/batch
= (5 1831.0299) kg/batch
= 9155.1495 kg/batch
62
Input
Input
Output
(remain in
(S-127)
(S-128)
(S-129)
blending
tank)
PHB in
1831.0299
1794.4093
36.6206
Biomass
0.9873
0.967554
0.019746
Water
175.9681
9155.1495
9209.8131
186.6224
Cell Debris
9.9213
9.7923
0.198426
2761.24444
9155.1495
hypochlorite
Total
(kg/batch)
2.3.1.16
11678.0660
6
238.3279
Output (S-131)
Output (S-130)
1794.4093
1614.9684
179.4409
63
Biomass
0.967554
0.8708
0.106754
Water
9209.8131
920.98131
8288.83179
cell debris
9.7923
0.97923
8.81307
11678.06606
2537.79974
9140.26632
Total
(kg/batch)
2.3.1.17
Permeate stream from S-131 is fed into spray dryer. Hot air(S-132) is
used to dry PHB. The desired product (PHB) will be in powder form.
Hypochlorite and water will be condensed and then are recycled. The input
streams of SDR-101 consist of:
Table 2. 21: Summary Input Stream of Spray Dryer (P-16/SDR-101)
Input S-132
Materials
PHB
316.6493
hypochlorite
1298.3191
Biomass
0.8708
Water
920.98131
Cell debris
0.97923
(kg/batch)
4018.13100
Yield in this unit operation is 98.7%. This is because some of the PHB
powder may retain in dryer wall. Therefore, the final amount of PHB (in
powder form) produced is (0.987 x 316.6493 kg/batch) = 312.5329 kg/batch =
5.0818 kg PHB/hr. We summarize the output stream in the following tables:
*Assumption: All the water and hypochlorite are recovered.
64
Output S134
Output S133
(kg/batch)
(kg/batch)
312.5329
Hypochlorite
1298.3191
Water
920.98131
Air
4018.131
Materials
2.3.2
Energy Balance
The energy balance calculated in this particular proposal will be
performed in the form of heat duty of the equipment. However, the heat duty
of certain equipment is equal to zero. This is because there is neither heat lost
nor heat generated throughout the process. For example, flow splitter and air
filter. We are going to perform energy balances for each stream and each unit
operation. While summary of heat duty of equipment will be shown later.
Basically, energy balance is calculated based on ideal condition. Other
assumptions include:
65
We calculate the energy balance using spreadsheet which is attached in
Appendix A.2. Summary of energy balance for each stream is shown below
(please refer to Appendix A.2 for spreadsheet):
Table 2. 23: Summary of energy balance of each stream
Stream
Temperature (K)
Enthalpy (J)
101
298.15
-1306639.85
102
298.15
-1180029725.77
103
303.15
-1176326364.36
104
303.15
3548.75
105
303.15
-1172440460.13
106
303.15
0.00
107
303.15
0.00
108
298.15
-7174296.70
109
313.15
-7174296.70
110
310.15
0.00
111
298.15
0.00
112
303.15
0.00
113
298.15
0.00
114
298.15
0.00
115
303.15
-292247111.41
116
303.15
-7381773182.23
117
303.15
0.00
118
303.15
129087110064.21
119
303.15
127408976385.49
120
303.15
1678133726.32
121
303.15
127408973282.93
122
298.15
0.00
123
303.15
127408897039.05
124
303.15
-759539.99
125
303.15
21089163.69
126
298.15
991627914.63
127
303.15
3616247.11
66
128
298.15
5735499.15
129
303.15
83140088.79
130
303.15
6956135225
131
303.15
-13573749644.68
132
303.15
-36773140717.38
133
388.15
-351601803.28
134
303.15
130313154.62
67
Air Filtration AF-101
The total heat duty of sterilizer is 7174.296704 kJ. All the manual
calculations are carried out by using spreadsheet. Spreadsheet is attached in
Appendix A.2.
68
fermentation. Therefore, we use the heat of formation method and the energy
balance around the fermenter becomes:
Q = Ws + mout H out min H in
Table 2. 24: Heat of formation
Heat of formation
Material
MW (g/mol)
Na2HPO4.12H2O
1721.52
21798.6
KH2PO4
136.086
19664.8
MgSO.7H2O
120.336
-1374778.7
CH4N2O (Urea)
60.06
-333800
Jatropha oil
282
-853629.792
PHB
6600000
-17795728.250
Water
18.00
-285830.000
CO2
44.00
-393510
Biomass
25.83
466.7
Nitrogen
28.00
-12191.96
(J/mol)
69
Centrifuge DS-101
Heat duty of this equipment is calculated using spreadsheet which is
attached in Appendix A.2. Here, heat duty across microfilter = 1678130.624
kJ.
Centrifuge DS-101
Heat duty of this equipment is calculated using spreadsheet which is
attached in Appendix A.2. Here, heat duty across microfilter = 1678130.624
kJ.
70
Centrifuge DS-102
Heat duty of this equipment is calculated using spreadsheet which is
attached in Appendix A.2. Here, heat duty across microfilter = 987616.301kJ.
Centrifuge DS-103
Heat duty of this equipment is calculated using spreadsheet which is
attached in Appendix A.2. Here, heat duty across microfilter = 13587328.43122kJ.
1310.188603
3703.361416
Compressor G-101
0.00000
7174.296704
7381773.182
3882.355479
-3164170.573
-5.40817E+12
-1678133.679
-76.24388437
184751.8426
71
2.4
Centrifuge DS-101
1678130.624
Centrifuge DS-102
987616.301
Centrifuge DS-103
-13587328.43122
50125601.76340
Economic Potential
Economic potential 1 has been calculated in Chapter 1 to show which
synthesis route is more feasible for this 50 MTPA PHB production. Economic
potential 2 and economic potential 3 are calculated further later.
2.4.1
Figure 2.4 shows input and output structure of PHB process plant
based on 8000 operations hours per year. Conversion of Jatropha oil, XJ, the
reaction rate of PHB and molar fraction of CO2 at the vent are the design
variables. Data report from the empirical are the initial glucose concentration,
SJo, the concentration of urea, SUo, and the initial concentration of ethanol, SEo.
Mass balance is calculated using this following equations.
72
Jatropha oil balance,
(
FCJ +
(2.1)
(2.2)
(2.3)
(2.4)
(2.5)
(2.6)
(2.7)
F=[
)]
(2.8)
(2.9)
73
Concentration
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
20.0
19.5
19.0
18.5
18.0
17.5
17.0
16.5
16.0
15.5
15.0
14.5
14.0
13.5
13.0
12.5
12.0
11.5
11.0
10.5
10.0
9.5
9.0
8.5
8.0
7.5
7.0
6.5
6.0
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
P (g/L)
X(g/L)
J(g/L)
U(g/L)
74
Jatropha oil, XJ. The graph shows that the project is feasible starting from
conversion at approximately 62%.
Table 2. 26: Values for EP2 calculation
t
XJ
P (g/L)
X(g/L)
J(g/L)
U(g/L)
EP2 (MYR/year)
0.000
3.300
0.053
20.000
1.000
1372500.000
10
0.111
3.667
0.058
17.778
0.889
-6304772.727
20
0.222
4.033
0.064
15.556
0.778
-2466136.364
30
0.333
4.400
0.070
13.333
0.667
-1186590.909
40
0.444
4.767
0.076
11.111
0.556
-546818.182
50
0.556
5.133
0.082
8.889
0.444
-162954.545
60
0.667
5.500
0.088
6.667
0.333
92954.545
70
0.778
5.867
0.093
4.444
0.222
275746.753
80
0.889
6.233
0.099
2.222
0.111
412840.909
90
1.000
6.600
0.105
0.000
0.000
519469.658
600000.00
500000.00
EP2 (MYR/year)
400000.00
300000.00
200000.00
100000.00
0.00
0
-100000.00
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
Jatropha conversion, XJ
75
2.4.2
Figure 2.8 shows a block flow diagram that represents PHB production
process with recycle streams. Culture fluid from chemo stat is channelled into
separator. The separation process will produce biomass in another stream and
cell-free supernatant in another stream. Biomass is then recycled back into
chemo stat. Figure 2.9 shows a graph to show the relationship of media and
biomass concentration with addition of recycled biomass concentration versus
conversion of Jatropha oil in certain time. It is clear that recycled biomass
(XR) has slightly larger concentration that X.
76
Concentration
0.2
0.4
0.6
20.0
19.5
19.0
18.5
18.0
17.5
17.0
16.5
16.0
15.5
15.0
14.5
14.0
13.5
13.0
12.5
12.0
11.5
11.0
10.5
10.0
9.5
9.0
8.5
8.0
7.5
7.0
6.5
6.0
5.5
5.0
4.5
4.0
3.5
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.8
P (g/L)
X(g/L)
J(g/L)
U(g/L)
XR g/L
77
The data of calculation of economic potentials at the second level (EP2),
at the third level with recycle (EP3+recycle), and at the third level without
recycle (EP3-recycle) are tabulated in Table 2.27. Further calculation is shown
in Appendix A.3. The relationship between EP2, EP3+recyle, and EP3-recycle
with conversion of Jatropha oil is shown as a graph in Figure 2.8.
Considerably, the process using the recycle makes more profit.
Table 2.27: Table 2. 28: Data for EP2 and EP3 at both with recycle and
without recycle.
t
XJ
EP2 (MYR/year)
EP3+recycle
EP3-recycle
10
0.111
-6304772.727
-2529819.1
-2582962.8
20
0.222
-2466136.364
-599176.64
-635714.22
30
0.333
-1186590.909
47712.257
18359.411
40
0.444
-546818.182
372437.47
347305.49
50
0.556
-162954.545
567921.82
545639.79
60
0.667
92954.545
698626.56
678430.64
70
0.778
275746.753
792233.78
773647.97
80
0.889
412840.909
862609.35
845313.75
90
1.000
519469.658
917469.02
901236.61
78
1000000.00
800000.00
600000.00
400000.00
200000.00
0.00
0
0.1
0.2
-200000.00
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
Jatropha conversion, XJ
EP2
EP3+recycle
EP3-recycle
2.5
Comparison of Simulation (SuperPro) and Manual Calculation
Results
SuperPro version 6.0 had been used to run the simulation and
simulation result is compared to manual calculation result. Table 2.29 shows
the comparison of simulation and manual calculation results. The assumption
in this simulation are as follows;
78
INPUT
(kg/batch)
MANUAL
411.582
INPUT
(kg/batch)
SIMULATION
411.582
ERROR
(%)
OUPUT
(kg/batch)
SIMULATION
389.66
ERROR
(%)
0.0
OUTPUT
(kg/batch)
MANUAL
583.958
384.375
868.072
9.5
384.375
3127.685
69.35
384.375
758.75
1487.15
1855.1468
1831.0299
1794.4093
316.6493
554.546
758.756
3619.699
2183.448
9155.149
9233.36
5098.1
18.9
0.0
58.9
3.5
46.0
99.0
98.3
379.3781
743.575
1855.1468
1831.0299
1794.4093
1771.082
299.303
3247.263
1087.579
1515.433
78.214
9233.36
76.852
3789
82.92
49.28
40.35
98.38
64.82
98.99
99.70
36.47
Justification of Error: There is significant difference between manual and simulation result probably due to unregistered data of jatropha oil and
PHB, hence simulation cannot calculate the reaction kinetics. In the simulation, air flow rate is in default set to 100kg/batch per hour while
manual calculation is about 2200kg/hour needed for the whole process.
79
CHAPTER
3.1
Introduction
Plant utilities are significant in any energy use or supply of services
from main centre of local state to plant such as electricity, steam and water to
complete the plant before plant operation. In economics, utility is a
representation of preferences over some set of goods and services. Preferences
have a (continuous) utility representation so long as they are transitive,
complete, and continuous. Utilities of the entire plant have been calculated in
this chapter to estimate the utility cost of the plant annually. Process of heat
integration is mainly refer to heat which was previously cooled off is
recovered and reused in another unit operation. Heat can be transferred from
one process stream to the other in a single heat exchanger by process of heat
integration. Justification of decision on heat integration was making based of
standard plant design.
3.2
Utilities
3.2.1
Electricity
Electricity in Peninsular Malaysia have been generated and supplied by
Tenaga Berhad (TNB) and this plant is charged based on standard electricity
charge which is 33.70sen/kWh. The table below show all the power
consumption of equipment used in plant design mainly pumps and blowers.
Table 3. 1: Total Power consumption of equipment used in plant design
Equipment
Power Consumption(kW)
P-1/G-101
172.790
P-12/PM-101
174.086
P-15/PM-102
174.086
P-17/PM-103
174.086
80
P-11/PV-105
10.58
P-14/PV-106
13.38
P-11/PV-105
10.58
Total usage
719.008
Total Cost(RM/year)
4797652.781
3.2.2
Steam
Steam is supply for sterilization purpose for killing the entire
P-3/V-101
43.49
P-8/ST-101
187.20
P-7/ST-102
62.50
P-4/V-101
266.95
P-6/V-102
626.53
Total usage
1,186.67
Total Cost(RM/year)
9,140,191.175
The total steam usages for these main equipment are 1,186.67kg/h.
Calculate using the standard steam charges, the total steam cost is about RM
9,140,191.175 /year with operation hours of 8000 per year. By conversion, the
total steam cost is RM 9,140,191.175 /year.
81
3.2.3
Water
In Malaysia, state governments are responsible for the development,
operation and maintenance of water supplies. Entities for States Water Supply
Authorities in Malaysia are; Public Works Department, Water Supply
Department, Water Supply Board and Water Supply Company. According to
Syarikat Bekalan air Johor, the standard industrial water charges is RM
2.93/m. The main equipments which need supply of water is seed fermenters
and bioreactors.
Table 3. 3: Total water consumption of equipment used in plant design
Equipment
P-5/SFR-101
113.840
P-4/V-101
418.062
P-6/V-102
3162.559
P-16/V-104
9155.050
Total usage
12,849.51
7,454,515.37
year
with
operation
hours
8000
per
year.
RM
3.3
Heat Integration
Energy recovery is the main objectives of this design. Energy
82
exchanger network, first, the base case process flow heat exchanger should be
known of its heat exchanger area and energy utilities consumption, in order to
compare it with the utility consumption after heat integration (Rossiter, 2010).
These energy utilities should be optimized in order to reduce the utilities
consumption of the process, which will affect the operating cost of this plant.
Heat exchanger network design and optimization can be a very tedious and
time-consuming task if the improper method is employed. Nevertheless, with
detailed planning, it can be a very rewarding step in reducing the design cost
and annual operating costs of the plant through a substantial reduction in the
energy requirements of a process.
Pinch technology is applied to determine the pinch temperature,
minimum heating and cooling requirements of the plant. Benefits of pinch
technology include:
integration. The most important new feature in Pinch Analysis was the ability
to establish Performance Targets ahead of design only based on information
about the change in thermodynamic state for the process streams. The most
important property of the Heat Recovery Pinch is that it decomposes the
process into a heat deficit region above Pinch and a heat surplus region below
Pinch(Sun & Luo, 2011). There is not enough heat available in the hot streams
above Pinch to satisfy the overall heating demand of the cold streams, and
external heating is required. Below Pinch, there is not enough cooling
available in the cold streams to satisfy the overall cooling demand of the hot
streams, and external cooling is required (Matija, 2002).
According to Pinch Technology Method (Matija, 2002) basic Heat
Exchanger Network Synthesis (HENS) must consist of:
83
1. A set of process stream to be cooled and a set of process stream to be
heated
2. The inlet and outlet flow rates and temperatures for all these process
streams
3. The heat capacities for each of the stream versus their temperature as
they pass through the heat exchanger process
4. The available utilities, their temperature and their costs per unit of heat
provided or removed
84
3.4
cooled and several cold streams that must be heated. The usage of external
cooling and heating utilities (e.g., cooling water, refrigerants, steam, heating
oils, etc.) to address all the heating and cooling duties is not cost effective.
Indeed, integration of heating and cooling tasks may lead to significant cost
reduction.
EP5 = EP4 Heat integration Cost
i.
EP4
Economic potential in level 4 is considering utility, recycle stream,
reactor cost and separation unit cost. The detail calculation is presented in
Chapter 4 and the calculated value is RM 169, 711/year.
ii.
85
CHAPTER 4
EQUIPMENT SIZING
4.1
Introduction
Equipment sizing is where evaluation the specification of each of the
units used in the polyhdroxybutyrate (PHB) production plant from the type of
material used to the size of the units take place. All of the choices made is
based on the most suitable condition for the efficient and economic production
of PHB. This part is important as it enables the subsequent analysis that is
involved in process design such as economic analysis. According to Biegler,
(1997) the sizing will provide the data for the estimating the cost of the
equipment as the cost is increase nonlinearly with equipment size or capacity.
This PHB plant has a total of 12 types of equipment consists of seed
fermenter, main fermenter, gas compressor, air filter, heat sterilizer, splitter,
blending tank, storage tank, centrifuge, pumps, and spray dryer. The complete
summary result of all the equipment specifications are listed out in table form
and the detail sizing calculation is attached in Appendix C.
4.2
Item No.
ST-101 &ST-102
To heat process stream in order to prevent
Function
contamination
Material of construction
Heater:
Heat Duty, Q (kJ)
1340.923 kJ
68.08
0.014
86
Heat Duty, Q (kJ)
-10399540.100
39
4.3
260.93157
4.4
P-09
Raw material sterilization and storage
Stainless steel 316L
Vertical with hemispheral heads
Batch
0.70
1.40
0.53
0.62
Steam
1.1
130
30
40.02
0.34
26.27
43.49
Item No.
Volume, m3
Diameter, m
Height, m
FSP-102
181.23
2.26
9.04
87
4.5
4.6
4.7
0.2
47
PTFE
9.22
0.8591
2.789
88
Type of Culture
Diameter (m)
Height (m)
Working Volume (m3)
Tank Volume (m3)
Batch
0.30
0.60
1.123
1.404
Impeller Specification
Type of Impeller
Rushton Turbine
No of Impeller
4
No of Blades
6
Rotation Speed (rpm)
150
Diameter (m)
0.100
Width (m)
0.020
Length (m)
0.025
Duration (h)
24
Baffles Specification
No of Baffles
4
Diameter (m)
0.03
Height (m)
0.55
Baffles Clearance (m)
0.10
Heating Jacket Specification
Fluid
Steam
SIP Pressure (barg)
1.1
o
SIP Temperature ( C)
130
SIP Duration (min)
30
Average Steam Flow Rate (kg/h)
266.95
2
Heat Transfer Area (m )
2.50
Maximum Heat Capacity (kW)
177.37
Maximum Steam Flow Rate (kg/h)
293.65
89
4.8
90
4.9
4.10
Item No.
DS-103
Function
Cell biomass
separation
Product and
cell debris
separation
Product and
chemical
separation
Material of
Construction
Design Type
Carbon steel
Carbon steel
Carbon steel
Disc stack
Disc stack
Centrifuge Specification
Disc stack
0.33
0.33
0.33
0.16
0.16
0.16
Minimum Disc
63
58
11
45
45
45
100
450
7500
29.1407
24.4627
334.6667
91
4.11
Item No.
Function
Cell disruption
Blending
Material of
Construction
Carbon steel
Carbon steel
Design Type
Vertical with
hemispheral heads
Vertical with
hemispheral heads
Type of Culture
Diameter (m)
Height (m)
Working Volume (m3)
Tank Volume (m3)
Type of Impeller
Diameter (m)
Width (m)
Length (m)
Rotation Speed (rpm)
Motor Power (kW)
4.11
Tank Specification
Batch
0.81
1.62
0.89
1.12
Impeller Specification
Rushton Turbine
0.27
0.05
0.06
92.71
10.58
Batch
0.98
1.96
1.57
1.96
Rushton Turbine
0.27
0.05
0.06
92.71
10.58
Pumps
Table 4.5: Sizing Summary of Pumps
Other Pumps
Centrifugal
Cast iron
50
90
0.5
92
4.12
4.13
93
4.13.1.1
EP3
4.13.1.2
EP4
CBM (MYR)
12,475.32
72,194.35
663,087.65
747,757.33
94
CHAPTER 5
PROCESS CONTROL & SAFETY
5.1
Introduction
According to Institute of Instrumentation and Control, a piping and
5.2
Identification of Hazard
Hazard identification procedure is used to identify the types of adverse
health effects that can be caused by exposure to some agent in question, and to
characterize the quality and weight of evidence supporting this identification.
Risk assessment includes determination of the events that can produce an
95
accident, the probability of those events, and consequences that could include
human injury or loss of life, damage to the environment, or loss of production
and capital equipment. Hazard identification can be performed independent of
risk assessment, but it would obtain best result if they are done together.
Figure 5.1 shows hazard identification and risk assessment procedure.
5.2.1
bulletin as a general guideline about PHB that describes the physical and
96
chemical properties, important characteristics, hazards/symptoms, preventive
measures, fire extinguishing/first aid, spillage and labeling of a chemical. The
precise format of an MSDS is not presently defined by regulation but there are
some minimum requirements. The minimum requirements for MSDS
according to Turton et al. (2009) are as follows;
1. An MSDS is required for each hazardous chemical, any chemicals
assigned a Threshold Limit Value (TLV), or any material
determined to be cancer causing, corrosive, and toxic, an irritant, a
sensitizer, or one that has damaging effects on specific body
organs.
2. Written in English.
3. Identity used on label.
4. Chemical name and common name of all ingredients that are
hazardous and that are present in 1% concentration or that could
be released in harmful concentrations.
5. Chemical name and common name of all ingredients that are
carcinogens and that are present in 0.1% concentration or that
could be released in harmful concentrations.
6. Physical and chemical characteristics of the hazardous chemical.
7. Physical hazards of the hazardous chemical, including the potential
for fire, explosion, and reactivity.
8. Health hazards of the hazardous chemical, including signs and
symptoms of exposure, and any medical conditions that are
generally recognized as being aggravated by exposure to the
chemical.
9. Primary routes of entry.
10. Occupational
Safety
and
Health
Administration
(OSHA)
97
been found to be a potential carcinogen in the International Agency
for Research on Cancer (IARC) Monographs, or by OSHA.
12. Any generally applicable precautions for safe handling and use that
are known to the chemical manufacturer, importer, or employer
preparing the MSDS, including appropriate hygienic practices,
protective measures during repair and maintenance of contaminated
equipment, and procedures for cleanup of spills and leaks.
13. Any generally applicable control measures that are known to the
chemical manufacturer, importer, or employer preparing MSDS,
such as appropriate engineering controls, work practices, or
personal protective equipment.
14. Emergency and first aid procedures.
15. Date of preparation of the MSDS or the last change to it.
16. Name,
address,
and
telephone
number
of
the
chemical
5.2.2
98
number provides a relative ranking of the hazard. Figure 5.2 shows general
steps in calculating DOW Fire and Explosion Index but this chapter will
emphasize until FEI only. It starts with determining the material factor (MF)
that is a function only of type of chemicals used. The MF is the basic starting
value in the computation of the FEI and other risk analysis values. The factor
is ranged from 0 to 60 that indicates the magnitude of the energy release in a
fire or explosion. For non-combustible materials, the factor is zero while for
the combustible materials, the factor can be calculated from the following
equation:
where
special process hazards based on conditions such as storage above the flash or
boiling point, endothermic or exothermic reaction, and fired heaters (Crowl
and Louvar, 2002). In general the higher the value of material factor, the more
flammable and or explosive the material. Figure 5.3 shows form used in the
DOW Fire and Explosion Index
99
100
101
Endothermic processes
A penalty of 0.2 is applied to reactors, only. It is increased to 0.4 if the
Toxic materials
The presence of toxic substances after an incident will make the task of
the emergency personnel more difficult. The factor applied ranges from 0 for
non-toxic materials, to 0.8 for substances that can cause death after short
exposure.
Sub-atmospheric pressure
102
Allows for the hazard of air leakage into equipment. It is only applied
for pressure less than 500 mmHg (9.5 bar).
storage tanks, under conditions where the mixture will be within the explosive
range.
Dust explosion
Covers for the possibility of a dust explosion. The degree of risk is
largely determined by the particle size. The penalty factor varies from 0.25 for
particles above 175 m, to 2.0 for particles below 75 m.
Relief pressure
This penalty accounts for the effect of pressure on the rate of leakage,
should a leak occur. Equipment design and operation becomes more critical as
the operating pressure is increased. The factor to apply depends on the relief
device setting and the physical nature of the process material.
Low temperature
This factor allows for the possibility of brittle fracture occurring in
may arise, both internally and externally. The factor to be applied depends on
the anticipated corrosion rate. The severest factor is applied if stress corrosion
cracking is likely to occur.
103
This factor accounts for the possibility of leakage from gaskets, pump
and other shaft seals, and packed glands. The factor varies from 0.1 where
there is the possibility of minor leaks, to 1.5 for processes that have sight
glasses, bellows or other expansion joints.
above their flash points; so their use in a unit increases the risk of fire or
explosion. The factor to apply depends on the quantity and whether the fluid is
above or below its flash point
Rotating equipment
This factor accounts for the hazard arising from the use of large pieces
Degree of Hazard
1-60
Light
61-96
Moderate
97-127
Intermediate
128-158
Heavy
104
Severe
Calculation of Dow Fire and Explosion Index for urea, Triton X-100
surfactant, and sodium hypochlorite are shown in Appendix D.1.
5.2.2
Toxicity
According to Crowl and Louvar (2002), toxicity of a chemical or
Explanation
Acute
Sub-
acute
Chronic
105
Indicators of toxicity hazards include LD50, LC50, plus a wide range
of in vitro and in vivo techniques for assessment of skin and eye irritation, skin
sensitization, mutagenicity, acute and chronic dermal and inhalation toxicity,
reproductive toxicology, carcinogenicity etc.
The LD50 is the statistically derived single dosage of a substance that
can be expected to cause death in 50% of the sample population. It is therefore
an indicator of acute toxicity, usually determined by ingestion using rats or
mice, although other animals may be used. LD50 is also determined by other
routes, e.g. by skin absorption in rabbits. The values are affected by species,
sex, age, etc. The LC50 is the lethal concentration of chemical (e.g. in air or
water) that will cause the death of 50% of the sample population. This is most
appropriate as an indicator of the acute toxicity of chemicals in air breathed (or
in water, for aquatic organisms). Table 5.3 illustrates the use of LD50 values
to rank the toxicity of substances.
Table 5. 3: Toxicity rating system
Toxicity
Rating
Commonly
Used Term
Extremely
Toxic
Highly
Toxic
Moderately
Toxic
Slightly
Toxic
Practically
non-toxic
Relatively
harmless
2
3
4
5
6
LD50
Single
Oral
Dose for
Rats
(g/kg)
0.001
4hr Vapor
Exposure
Causing 2 to
4 Deaths in 6
Rat group
(ppm)
<10
0.0010.05
0.05-0.5
10-100
0.5-5.0
1000-10000
5.0-15.0
10000100000
>100000
>15.0
100-1000
LD50
Skin for
Rabbits
(g/kg)
0.005
0.0050.043
0.0440.340
0.35-2.81
2.82-22.6
>22.6
Probable
Lethal
Dose for
Humans
Taste (1
grain)
1 teaspoon
(4ml)
1oz (30g)
1 pint
(250g)
1 quart
(500g)
>1 quart
106
5.3
Meaning
The complete
negation of the
intention
MORE,HIGHER,GREATER Quantitative
increase
LESS,LOWER
Quantitative
decrease
Comments
No part of the design
intention is achieved,
nothing else happens
Applies to quantities such as
flow rate and temperature
and to activities such as
heating and reaction.
Applies to quantities such as
flow rate and temperature
and to activities such as
heating and reaction.
107
AS WELL AS
Quantitative
increase
PART OF
Qualitative
decrease
REVERSE
The logical
opposite of
OTHER THAN
Complete
substitution
SOONER THAN
Too early or in
the wrong
order
Too late or in
the wrong
order
In additional
locations
LATER THAN
WHERE ELSE
108
7. Evaluate the consequences of the deviation (if any)
8. Recommend action.
9. Record all information.
5.4
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
109
controlled variables. For feedback control, the disturbance variable is not
measured. Anyhow, a feed forward control configuration measures the
disturbances (load) directly and takes control action to eliminate its impact on
the process output. That is mean a feed forward controllers have the theoretical
potential for perfect control.
5.4.1
Each
equipment has their own hazard. Below is the equipment process control for
each equipment. The primary objectives of the instrumentation and control
schemes are to maintain a process at the desired operating conditions, safety
and efficiently, while satisfying environmental and product quality
requirement;
(i) Safety of plant operation:
-
To get the desired amount and the quality of the final product.
110
overflow or go dry; pumps must be maintained at a certain net
positive suction head.
-
(iv) Economic
-
5.4.2
111
d. Control the temperature of the culture medium at a constant
temperature to counteract the heat generated by aerobic oxidation.
Controlled
Variable
Flow
Manipulated
Variable
Inlet flow rate
Disturbance
Outlet flow rate
Type of
Controller
Feedback
112
Manipulated
Variable
Variable
Flow
Disturbance
Outlet flow rate
Type of
Controller
Feedback
Manipulated
Variable
Variable
Disturbance
Type of
Controller
Programmable
Flow
Logic Controller
(PLC)
113
5.4.2.5 Spray Dryer
5.5
Manipulated
Variable
Inlet flow rate
Disturbance
Outlet flow rate
Type of
Controller
Feedback
PHB plant has been constructed accordingly and is attached in Appendix D.3.
114
CHAPTER 6
WASTE MANAGEMENT AND POLUTION CONTROL
6.1
Introduction
Waste management is the collection, transportation and disposal of
115
6.1.1
more greenhouse gains there are to be made. Reuse requires less energy than
recycling, although designs which are both adaptable and durable are essential
to its success. Other factors, such as the consumer desire for newness, can
conspire against reuse. There are many ways that clothes, cars, books,
buildings and other materials are currently reused, such as:
e-bay
116
Waste treatment may seem to be an economic disadvantage for
processing plant because more money has to be spent on the waste treatment
process. This kind of prospective is wrong. An engineer must be more ethical
in order to ensure our environment is protected in the long run.
As any other chemical plant, polyhdroxybutyrate process plant also
produces wastes in liquids and gaseous form. The main sources of waste are in
liquid form comes from air filter (AF-101 and AF-102) consisting wastewater.
Both the main fermenter and seed fermenter (V-101 and -102) produce CO2
and N2 as waste. This main waste still contain an appreciable quantity of
organic substances and therefore must be purified before it is discharged from
the plant.
6.1.2
Waste Minimization
The best way to minimize waste is through source reduction. Source
ii.
iii.
Technology modification
117
6.1.3
6.1.4
Waste
Carbon dioxide
Carbon dioxide
Centrifuge DS-101
118
Centrifuge DS-102
Centrifuge DS-103
Based on the table shown above, it is clear that seed fermenter and also
fermenter used in the production of 50 MT of PHB per year will emit carbon
dioxide gas as the by-product of the fermentation reaction that took place.
From the mass balance calculation, total amount of carbon dioxide emission
from seed fermenter V-101 and main fermenter V-102 are 31.99kg/batch. For
1st centrifuge, wastewater generated consists of biomass and nutrient medium
that is 353.54 kg/batch. In the second centrifuge, wastewater consist of 635.98
kg/batch of residual liquid produced in that centrifuge, 619.9615 kg/hr
constitutes of cell debris, 0.08935 kg/batch of biomass while water of 15.931
kg/batch. Meanwhile, in the third centrifuge, mass balance calculation
revealed that 5589.20 kg/batch of wastewater is generated from the
centrifugation.
6.1.5
Biomass
Sodium hypochlorite
Water + Surfactant
119
Carbon dioxide gas is the by- product of fermentation reaction that
took place in the seed fermenter and fermenter in our plant. We employed only
one fermenter for our PHB production, where a total of 10244.52 kg/year of
this gaseous residue will be emitted. Initially, the gases will be filtered by air
filter installed in those seed fermenter and fermenter before it is discharged
directly to the environment. This step is very essential in order to prevent any
escape of microorganisms from the reactor. Hence, the safety level of the
emitted gas is very high and it is totally free from any risk of microorganisms
escape. No further treatment is applied to this gas since the concentration of
carbon dioxide gas released is below the discharge limit. The reference used
for comparison of the concentration of carbon dioxide used is The Malaysian
Standard Guidelines for Air Gaseous Pollutants under EQA as shown in Table
Averaging
Malaysian
Malaysian
Time
Guideline
Guideline
(ppm)
(g/m3)
Compliance
CO2
8 hour
5000
90
1997
Particles
24 hours
260
1995
I year
90
Pollutant
Averaging time
Guidelines, g/cm3
24h
150
24h
260
24h
30
Canada
Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
24h
150
120
Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
24h
35
121
filtration, backwashing process will be conducted on the activated carbon in
order to flush out all the sodium hypochlorite that have been accumulated on
top of the filter (DeSilva, 2000). The solution containing sodium hypochlorite
is then sent to Kualiti Alam for further treatment.
The waste that can be send to Kualiti Alam has been categorized
differently by the management and the scheduled waste rates are classified
according to the type of waste. The information is listed as follows:
122
explosion; limiting grease and oils to prevent pipelines from being clogged;
prohibition of the discharge of hazardous substances to protect human health
and the environment. The effluent of the plant must reach the Department of
Environment specification, before it is can discharge to river or to atmosphere.
6.2
6.2.1
Gaseous Emission
Under EQA (1974), industries that are in potential of emitting gaseous
or air pollutants, they are required to ensure that the emission of their gaseous
by-products to comply and obey with the following air emission standards for
the control of air pollution and gaseous emissions. The standards are:
i.
ii.
123
124
125
Under this aspect, our company did comply with all the standards,
where the emission of carbon dioxide gas from our plant is below the
discharge limit and thus no further treatment is needed as it is safe in nature.
6.2.2
ii.
iii.
done.
126
127
128
6.3
production plant. The common and widely used treatment process in the
industry includes a wide range of choice, either biological, chemical or
physical methods. These methods have general criteria and will be further
explained in details.
6.3.1
Biological Method
Biological treatment process is widely adapted by plants that are
Aerobic
Anaerobic
Wastewater with
medium organic
biodegradable
difficult to biodegrade
and beverage
wastewater rich in
Process Principle
Applications
129
starch/sugar/alcohol
Reaction kinetic
Relatively fast
Relatively slow
Relatively low
Relatively high
Typically direct
Post Treatment
discharge or
filtration/disinfection
Capital Investment
Example Technologies
6.3.2
Relatively high
Invariably followed by
aerobic treatment
Relatively low with pay
back
Continuously stirred
Extended Aeration,
tank reactor/digester,
Upflow Anaerobic
e.g. Trickling
Filter/Biotower, BAF,
MBBR or Hybrid
etc.
Chemical Method
Generally, chemical treatment is according to the principle of oxidizing
130
6.3.3
Physical Method
Typical types of physical treatment process includes distillation,
6.3.4
Selection of Method
Based on the criteria laid out of the three methods of treatment process,
it is very clear that the biological processes will be very suitable treatment for
this PHB production plant. For liquid waste treatment, activated sludge system
is chosen. Although it cannot be assured to be cost efficient, it is very effective
for organic waste treatment whilst the waste discharge will be more
environmental friendly.
131
6.4
Process Description
132
maximizing this component, particulate fraction that contributes for eventually
high BOD value of wastewater can be treated. Solid waste from primary and
secondary clarifiers will be sent to Kualiti Alam for disposal. Liquid waste
from secondary clarifier will be recycled to aeration tank. Finally, the treated
wastewater will be disinfected with addition of chlorine dosage and will be
nearly pure water and is safe to discharge into drainage system.
6.5
potential environmental damage that would result from a plant accident or spill
have been considered. Potential emissions to the environment from the
proposed hepatitis B vaccine plant have been assessed in two categories,
airborne emissions and waterborne emissions. As we know the main product
of this plant is polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB), beside this product there are
effluent gaseous stream by-products streams. The effluent gaseous in this plant
is oxygen, carbon dioxide, and nitrogen. These effluents gaseous are treated in
a wet scrubber. The non-dangerous gaseous are released to the atmosphere.
The total amount of money used for waste management is still considerable in
our plant. Besides, we do generate revenue of RM 631,867 per year through
the selling of biomass.
For biomass, cell debris, and unwanted protein waste are sterilized first
in an autoclave to kill bacteria and impurities before send to Kualiti Alam for
waste management. Some of these products have commercial values, we plan
to sell these products. Selling these by-products will add the revenue of the
plant. We also have decided to send to Kualiti Alam for water and Water for
Injection waste for water treatment before they are discharged to environment.
All the wastes above cannot simply discharged to environment because it have
contaminants that can cause the pollution to environment.
Activated carbon filtration system will be purchased directly from the
supplier, Zhucheng Innovation Huayi, China. The cost of purchasing is
approximately RM 6279.48, whereas, the electricity and maintenance cost
133
annually amounts for RM 25,000.00. For the activated sludge wastewater
treatment system, the designs of each component and costing is done
according to W.M. Zahid (2007). The calculation for the cost of Kualiti Alam
Service is shown in Appendix E.
Carbon dioxide
TYPE OF
AMOUNT
WASTE
WASTE
(kg/year)
MANAGEMENT
Gas
4157.92
Wet scrubber
Gas
423,763
Wet scrubber
Gas
109,695
Wet scrubber
(0.80ppm)
Nitrogen
(81.7ppm)
Oxygen
(21.15ppm)
TOTAL
4581.683 kg/year
TYPE OF
AMOUNT
WASTE
(kg/year)
Biomass
Solid waste
45973.45
Cell debris
Solid waste
81851.45
TOTAL
WASTE MANAGEMENT
Sodium
Chemical
189,076.25
hypochlorite
water
TOTAL
Chemical
119,727.4
308,803
Kualiti Alam
= RM611,431 (Kualiti
Alam:RM1980/tonne)
134
Table 6. 9: Costing for Waste Treatment Option Employed in Our
Company
Treatment option/ Equipment
Cost (RM)
6279.48
25,000.00
30.96
1500
Kuching )
TOTAL
483,796
135
CHAPTER 7
SITE SELECTION AND PLANT LAYOUT
7.1
Introduction
One of the crucial stages in the designing of plant is the selection of a
suitable site to create the secure and well developed plant as well as the
selection will result in a process in which the costs are minimized. Serious
consideration must be highlighted before locating a plant in Malaysia. The
site selection is to ensure adequate protection of site personnel, the public and
the environment from the impacts of the construction and operation of the
plant. Therefore, there are three locations that were identified and chose to
setup the polyhydroxybutyrate (PHB) plant which are:
i. Tanjung Langsat, Johor
ii. Sungai Bako area, Kuching, Sarawak
7.2
Utility
Transportation System
Availability of Manpower
Government Incentive
Effluent Disposal
136
7.3
plant, the preferred location is the place that can provide a fully facilities for
running the plant process until the facilities provided for distribute it product
to the customers. It is important because all the facilities and incentives that
provide by federal government and state government are based on the types of
industries that can be run on that industrial area. Johor and Sarawak can be
suitable for bioprocessing plant as this type of the selected location is the
industrial area. So, by choosing these locations as a suggestion for setup a
PHB plant is the most suitable one.
7.3.1
have to pay attention to the distance of the sources of raw material, the purity
of the raw material and the storage system that is applicable and suitable with
the characteristics of the raw material. In running the plant to produce PHB, it
is only one major raw material is used which is Jatropha oil. In Malaysia, there
are many Jatropha oil suppliers. But some of the large scale suppliers are
located in Sarawak, Selangor and Johor which are stated below:
Frozen Food Bhd
137
7.3.2
Utilities
Utility cover the facilities of water supply and electricity supply. These
entire two components are important factors that ensure the smooth operation
of a plant. Most of the bioprocessing plant requires large quantities of water
for cooling and general process usage. Therefore the availability of water
reservoirs nearby must be ensured. Besides, the plant also needs electricity to
operate.
7.3.3
Water Supply
The location of our plant should be near with water supply with
minimum water shortage problem. We also have to consider the water quality
parameter such as temperature, mineral content and the probability of in need
of water treatment.
Table 7. 1: Water Provider Based on Location
Location
Provider
Supply capacity
Tanjung Langsat,
Sg Layang
180 MLD
Johor
Water Treatment
138
Sungai Bako area,
Kuching, Sarawak
Plant
7.3.4
166 MLD
Electricity Supply
Electrical power will be needed at all sites. The plant must be located
Provider
Supply capacity
Sultan Iskandar
630MW
400MW
210MW
114MW
Power Station
(TNB)
YTL Pasir
Gudang
Sungai
Bako
area,
Kuching, Sarawak
Sejingkat Power
Station, Kuching
Tun Abdul
Rahman Power
Station, Kuching
7.3.5
and industrial area. We have to consider factors that make our plant strategic
towards the company production. We also need to consider the price of the
land while keeping in track with our company budget. The land should ideally
be flat, well drained and have suitable load-bearing characteristics.
Furthermore, the chosen site location should provide storage, and handling
infrastructure, emergency and other facilities as well.
139
Table 7.7: Land Prices Based On Location
Location
Land Size
RM 35,000
5 acres
RM 450,000
17.7 acres
7.3.6
Transportation System
The transport of materials and products to and from the plant will be an
Facilities
Ports:
Airport:
Road Network:
Ports:
Airport
Around 17 km to Kuching
International Airport
Road Network:
140
material supplier (Frozen
Food Bhd)
7.3.7
Availability of Manpower
The manpower availability in the vicinity of the proposed site should
7.3.8
7.3.9
141
7.3.10 Government Incentive
Capital grants, tax concessions and other inducements are often given
by the governments to direct new investment to preferred location. The
availability of such incentive can be the overriding consideration in site
selection.
7.4
decided to choose land at Sungai Bako area Kuching, Sarawak as our future
plant site location. It is much bigger than the land at Tanjung Langsat, Johor.
Besides, Sungai Bako area Kuching, Sarawak located closer to our raw
material source. Moreover, there are many other suppliers in Sarawak
compared to in the peninsular Malaysia. This will help us to decrease the
transportation costs and total production costs and also saves time in term of
raw material delivery. The major Jatropha oil supplier will be from Omega
International SDN BHD Malaysia and Frozen Food Bhd. In addition, it also
has adequate supply of energy from Sejingkat Power Station, Kuching and
Tun Abdul Rahman Power Station, Kuching. While as for water supply comes
from Batu Kitang Treatment Plant. This will ensure smooth run of new plant.
The plant location chosen at Sungai Bako area Kuching, Sarawak is the most
strategic site for building new plant for production of PHB.
142
7.5
Plant Layout
7.5.1
Introduction
After deciding above the proper site for locating an industrial unit, next
7.5.2
Definition
Plant layout may be defined as physical arrangements of industrial
facilities. This arrangement includes the space needed for material movements,
storage, indirect labour and all other supporting activities or services as well as
operating equipment and personnel. Plant layout basically:
1. Placing the right equipment.
2. Coupled with the right method.
3. In the right place.
4. To permit the processing of a product unit in the most effective
manner, through the shortest possible distance, and in the shortest
possible time. (Himanshu. K.G, 2013)
143
7.5.3
areas in the most efficient way, and at the same time satisfactory and safe for
the personnel doing the work.
1. Sense of Unity
a. The feeling of being a unit pursuing the same objective.
b. Minimum Movement of people, material and resources.
2. Safety
a. In the movement of materials and personnel work flow.
3. Flexibility
a. In designing the plant layout taking into account the
changes over short and medium terms in the production
process and manufacturing volumes.
These main objectives are reached through the attainment of the
following facts:
Congestion reduction.
144
7.5.4
145
g) Work Areas and Equipment: Work areas are properly designed, so
that workers can move without much difficulty and material can be handled
with least difficulty. Sufficient place should be provide for maintenance
personnel to attend to the repairs or maintenance of the machines.
h) Disposal of waste and dangerous gasses: Proper waste disposal
facilities should be provided at appropriate palces, so that they are disposed to
a remote place, so that they wont be harmful to the workers or the community
living around the plant.
i) Flexibility: Factor of flexibility must be incorporate while preparing
the layout as time pass plant needs a chance. Change in product design or
change in material used or process lead to change in layout.( P. Rama Murthy,
2005)
The plant layout shall be arranged to:
1. Maximize safety;
2. Prevent spread fire
3. Facilitate easy operation and maintenance
4. Consider future expansion
5. Economize project
(KLM Technology Group, Feb 2011)
146
147
The most important factors of plant layout as far as safety aspects are
concerned are those to prevent, limit and/or mitigate escalation of adjacent
events (domino). Designed plant layout will ensure all the safety within on-site
occupied buildings by installation of amount of fire extinguisher. Control
access of unauthorized personnel can be done by security system which is
strictly applied. Emergency door enable facilitate access for emergency
services. Plant layout is designed fully according to all the factors and
objectives in order to reduce the production cost and ensure smooth operation
of whole plant. Table below show all the functions and location of designed
buildings and rooms in plant layout.
Table 7. 3: Building and Location in the Plant Layout
Buildings / Rooms/ Equipment
Offices
Location
Workshop
Workshop
emergency on equipment;
malfunction, breakdown
area of plant
emergency happen
Control room
148
machines and equipment in
operation line
Electrical Room
to process area
Laboratory
Chemical Storage
area
Product Storage
Loading Area
149
Generator Room
Packaging Room
150
CHAPTER 8
ECONOMIC ANALYSIS
8.1
Introduction
Main objective of setting up a feasible plant is to gain profit. In this
8.2
installation in a plant. The term grass roots refers to a completely new facility
in which construction on essentially undeveloped land, a grass field. This
capital cost make up ajor portion of total fixed capital cost. In order to evaluate
the estimate cost of equipment involved in this PHB plant, bare module cost
(BMC) method is used. Table 8.1 summarizes the bare module cost for all
equipment and detailed calculations are shown in Appendix A
Table 8. 1: Bare Module Cost of Equipment in PHB Plant
Equipment
CBM (RM)
34,762.34
12,475.32
12,475.32
40,719.06
151
Flow Splitter FSP-102
1,105,663.95
Mixer MX-101
43,514.64
Mixer MX-102
72,742.71
12,475.32
12,475.32
72,194.35
663,087.65
Storage V-103
55,018.36
12,360.99
91,835.10
Centrifuge DS-101
79,689.43
Centrifuge DS-102
88,198.73
Centrifuge DS-103
81,212.16
Pump PM-101
23,067.68
Pump PM-102
31,239.37
Pump PM-103
5,763.94
Pump PM-104
5,763.94
Pump PM-105
5,763.94
Pump PM-106
5,763.94
17,804.03
2,586,067.58
The total module cost can be evaluated from (Turton et al., 2009)
CTM = 1.18(CTBM)
----- (8.1)
And the grass root costs can be evaluated from (Turton et. al., 2009)
CGR = CTM + Auxiliary Cost ----- (8.2)
In addition to direct and indirect costs, it is necessary to take into
account for other cost such as contingency and fee cost, and auxiliary facility
cost. Table 8.2 shows estimation of GRC.
152
Table 8. 2: Estimation of Grass Root Capital, GRC.
Investment
Cost (RM)
206,886.00
279,295.00
CTBM)
Total Module Cost (CTM)
3,051,560.00
3,356,716.00
8.3
Capital Investment
It is known that a lot of expenses involved in purchasing and installing
equipment and facilities before an industrial plant can fully operate. Land and
service facility must be obtained beforehand followed by installing equipment,
piping and control system, and so forth for smooth operation of plant.
Therefore, money is crucial in the build-up and operation of the plant.
For build-up plant, the capital involved in the expenses of
manufacturing nad plant facilities is called fixed capital investment (FCI). On
the other hand, the capital used for operation of the plant is known as the
working capital. The sum of these capitals is called total capital investment
(TCI).
8.3.1
with all auxiliaries that necessary for the process operation. It is categorized
into two categories; direct and indirect cost. FCI value is obtained by summing
the GRC with the direct and indirect costs. Direct cost is the cost that used for
purchasing and installing equipment with all piping system and control system
and also the expenses on land and service facilities; while indirect cost refers
to the cost pay to contractors and others. The formula to obtain TCI is as
shown in Equation 8.3
153
TCI = FCI + Working Capital + Start Up ----- (8.3)
Working Capital (WC) consists of the total amount of money invested
in raw materials and supplies carried in stock, finished products in stock and
semi-finished products in the process of being manufactured, account
receivable, cash kept on hand for monthly payment of operating expenses, e.g.
salaries, wages and raw material purchases. Table 8.3 shows the amount of
fixed and total capital investment of this PHB plant.
Table 8. 3: Fixed and Total Capital Investment
Total Capital Investment
Factor of GRC
Direct Cost
Onsite
Purchased Equipment Installation
Piping (installed)
Instrumentation and Control (installed)
Electrical and Material (installed)
Offsite
Building
Land
Service Facilities
Total
Indirect cost
Contingency
Construction Expenses
Engineering and supervision
Contractors Fee
Total
Total Cost = Direct Cost + Indirect Cost
Fix Capital Investment (FCI)
Working Capital
Total Capital Investment (TCI)
8.4
Cost (RM)
0.06
0.04
0.02
0.02
214,126.40
142,750.93
71,375.47
71,375.47
0.02
0.01
0.08
71,375.47
35,687.73
285,501.86
892,193.32
Factor of GRC
0.05
0.03
0.02
0.02
Cost (RM)
178,438.66
107,063.20
71,375.47
71,375.47
428,252.79
1,320,446.11
Total Cost + GRC 4,889,219.37
10% FCI
488,921.94
5,378,141.31
Manufacturing Cost
Manufacturing cost comprises of direct manufacturing expenses,
154
This manufacturing cost has to be paid by investors per year in order to
produce constant production of PHB. Direct manufacturing costs are costs
represent operating expenses that vary with production rate. It comprises of
cost of raw materials, waste treatment, utilities, operating labor, direct
supervisory and clerical labor, maintenance and repairs, laboratory charges,
and patents and royalties (Turton et al., 2009).
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
vi.
155
ii.
iii.
ii.
iii.
No. of Equipment
Compressor
Air filter
156
Sterilizers
Fermenters
Centrifuges
Blending Tanks
Spray Dryers
Total (Nnp)
13
Number of operators per shift, NOL can be calculated by using this formula;
NOL = (6.29 + 31.7P2 + 0.23Nnp)0.5
where
P: Number of particulate processing step
Nnp: Number of non-particulate processing step
Number of operators per shift is 22.726 or 23. For three shifts a day,
number of operators required per day is 68 and since average wages for
operators is RM850/month, total labour cost per year is about RM 695,421.61.
Table 8. 5: Summary of Manufacturing Cost
Manufacturing Cost Summary
RM/kg
Amount (kg/year)
350
50000
PHB
Sale Revenue
(RM/year)
17,500,000
130
Amount, kg/batch
Amount,
RM/k
Total
kg/year
(RM/year)
Jatropha oil
390
50700
2.73
138,411.00
Urea
0.25
32.5
10.50
341.25
138,752.25
Waste Treatment
Activated Carbon Filtration System
8,052.50
Electricity + Maintenance
20,000.00
157
Activated Sludge System
451,000.00
2,500,000.00
Transportation
100,000.00
3,079,052.50
Utilities
Power
Equipment
Consumption
(kW/batch)
Industry
tariff
(Tenaga
0.38
MYR/kWh
Nasional)
P-1/G-101
172.79
8000
hour/year
Pumps
522.26
130
btch/year
P-11/PV-105
10.58
23.38
P-14/PV-106
13.38
Total usage
719.01
93,471.09
kW/year
16,813.73
MYR/year
MYR/kW/bat
ch
Industry
Equipment
Steam supply
tariff
(kg/h)
(Malaysian
0.62
MYR/kg
0.1
MYR/m3
1000
kg/m3
Gas)
P-3/V-101
43.49
P-8/ST-101
187.20
P-4/V-101
266.95
P-6/V-102
626.53
Total usage
1,124.17
8,993,360.00
kg/year
5,575,883.20
MYR/year
Industry
Equipment
Water supply
(kg/batch)
Tariff
(Lembaga
Air
Sarawak)
P-5/SFR-101
113.84
P-4/V-101
418.06
P-6/V-102
3,162.56
P-16/V-104
9,155.05
Total usage
12,849.51
Water
density
kg/batch
158
Total usage per year
Total Water Cost
1,670,436.44
kg/year
167.04
MYR/year
5,592,863.98
FCI
4,889,219.37
COL
695,421.61
14,104,604.9
CRM)
2% FCI
97,784.39
0.5% FCI
24,446.10
10% COL
69,542.16
Laboratory charges
10% x COL
69,542.16
6% X COM
846,276.30
Operating supplies
Direct Supervision & Clerical
Labor
10,496,073.75
668,370.40
0.036FCI
0.014FCI
68,449.07
0.1FCI
488,921.94
1,313,747.35
0.177COL +
167,092.60
0.009FCI
0.05COM
705,230.25
2,423,829.39
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
30% ANP
979,904.85
2,286,444.65
Rate of Return, I%
(ANNP + ABD) / TCI
100% =
52%
From Table 8.5, it is determined that the rate of return (ROR) is 52%.
159
8.5
period (PBP), discounted break event point (DBEP), and net present value
(NPV) of the PHB plant. Some assumptions are made in this cash flow
analysis:
i.
ii.
iii.
iv.
v.
Sales income for the first year after start-up is 80% of the targeted
value.
8.5.1
160
Investment
A(I)
Sales Income
Depreciation
AS
AD
Total
Expanses
APC
Cash Income
AS-APC
Net Profit
Federal
(AS-APC)-
Income
AD
Taxes AIT
Net Profit
after Taxes
Net Cash
(AS-APC-
Income
AD)-AIT
Summation
Net Cash
Income
537,814.13
- 537,814.13
- 537,814.13
5,867,063.75
- 5,867,063.75
- 6,404,877.88
14,000,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
- 233,650.50
- 722,572.43
- 36,128.62
- 686,443.81
- 686,443.81
- 7,091,321.69
17,500,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
2,777,427.57
138,871.38
2,638,556.19
2,638,556.19
- 4,452,765.50
17,500,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
2,777,427.57
138,871.38
2,638,556.19
2,638,556.19
- 1,814,209.31
17,500,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
2,777,427.57
138,871.38
2,638,556.19
2,638,556.19
824,346.88
17,500,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
2,777,427.57
138,871.38
2,638,556.19
2,638,556.19
3,462,903.07
17,500,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
2,777,427.57
138,871.38
2,638,556.19
2,638,556.19
6,101,459.26
17,500,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
2,777,427.57
138,871.38
2,638,556.19
2,638,556.19
8,740,015.44
17,500,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
2,777,427.57
138,871.38
2,638,556.19
2,638,556.19
11,378,571.63
10
17,500,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
2,777,427.57
138,871.38
2,638,556.19
2,638,556.19
14,017,127.82
11
17,500,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
2,777,427.57
138,871.38
2,638,556.19
2,638,556.19
16,655,684.01
12
17,500,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
2,777,427.57
138,871.38
2,638,556.19
2,638,556.19
19,294,240.20
13
17,500,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
2,777,427.57
138,871.38
2,638,556.19
2,638,556.19
21,932,796.39
14
17,500,000.00
488,921.94
14,233,650.50
3,266,349.50
2,777,427.57
138,871.38
2,638,556.19
2,638,556.19
24,571,352.58
161
20,000,000.00
15,000,000.00
10,000,000.00
5,000,000.00
0
(5,000,000.00)
(10,000,000.00)
Year
10
11
12
13
14
15
162
Table 8. 7: Discounted Cash Flow Summary
Discounted Factor Cash flow Analysis for 10.00%, 20.00% and 30.00%
Discount
Year
Factor
Discounted Cash
Discounted Cash
Discount
Discounted
Discounted Cash
Discount
Discounted
Discounted Cash
Factor
Cash
Factor
Cash
Cumulative
fd (20%)
Cumulative
fd (30%)
Cumulative
448,178.44
0.77
- 413,703.18
413,703.18
fd (10%)
0
- 537,814.13
0.91
488,921.94
- 5,867,063.75
0.83
- 686,443.81
0.75
2,638,556.19
0.68
1,802,169.38
2,638,556.19
0.62
2,638,556.19
488,921.94
0.83
4,848,813.01
- 5,337,734.95
0.69
- 4,074,349.82
- 4,522,528.27
0.59
-3,471,635.35
3,885,338.53
515,735.40
- 5,853,470.35
0.58
- 4,919,775.84
0.46
- 312,445.98
4,197,784.51
- 4,051,300.97
0.48
1,272,451.87
- 3,647,323.98
0.35
923,831.86
3,273,952.64
1,638,335.80
- 2,412,965.17
0.40
1,060,376.55
- 2,586,947.42
0.27
710,639.90
2,563,312.75
0.56
1,489,396.18
0.33
883,647.13
- 1,703,300.29
0.21
546,646.07
2,016,666.67
2,638,556.19
0.51
1,353,996.53
430,427.54
0.28
736,372.61
966,927.69
0.16
420,496.98
1,596,169.69
2,638,556.19
0.47
1,230,905.94
1,661,333.48
0.23
613,643.84
353,283.85
0.12
323,459.22
1,272,710.48
2,638,556.19
0.42
1,119,005.40
2,780,338.87
0.19
511,369.87
158,086.02
0.09
248,814.78
1,023,895.70
2,638,556.19
0.39
1,017,277.63
3,797,616.51
0.16
426,141.56
584,227.58
0.07
191,395.99
832,499.71
10
2,638,556.19
0.35
924,797.85
4,722,414.35
0.13
355,117.96
939,345.54
0.06
147,227.68
685,272.03
11
2,638,556.19
0.32
840,725.32
5,563,139.67
0.11
295,931.64
1,235,277.17
0.04
113,252.06
572,019.97
12
2,638,556.19
0.29
764,295.74
6,327,435.41
0.09
246,609.70
1,481,886.87
0.03
87,116.97
484,903.00
13
2,638,556.19
0.26
694,814.31
7,022,249.72
0.08
205,508.08
1,687,394.95
0.03
67,013.05
417,889.94
14
2,638,556.19
0.24
631,649.37
7,653,899.10
0.06
171,256.73
1,858,651.68
0.02
51,548.50
366,341.44
923,568.99
448,178.44
397,247.58
163
25,000,000.00
20,000,000.00
15,000,000.00
10,000,000.00
5,000,000.00
0
(5,000,000.00)
(10,000,000.00)
Year
0%
10%
20%
30%
10
11
12
13
14
164
Table 8. 8: Net Present Value for Discounted Rate
Interest, I (%)
NPV (RM)
24,571,352.58
10
7,653,899.10
20
1,858,651.68
30
366,341.44
Discounted break-even point is when the time that used for discounted
cumulative cash flow become positive after decided to proceed which the total
income is higher than total production cost (Ulrich, 1984). Net present value is
the final cumulative of the annual discounted cash flow value at project
conclusion (Saravacos & Kostaropoulos, 2002). When the fractional interest
rate for which net present value equals to zero after number of years, the
discounted break-even point is called discounted cash flow rate of return
(DCFRR). The DCFRR also knows as the profitability index, initial rate of
return or investors rate of return (Saravacos & Kostaropoulos, 2002). This
rate of return is equivalent to the maximum interest rate (which is normally,
after taxes). This is because money could be borrowed to finance the project
under conditions where the net cash flow to the project over its life would be
just sufficient to pay all principal and interest accumulated on the outstanding
principal (Peters & Timmerhaus, 2004). Then, the graph of cumulative
discounted annual cash flow at different rate of return versus time is plotted
and shown in Figure 8-2. The discounted cash flow rate of return is
interpolated from values in Table 8.8 and it is obtained that 28.35%. Based on
the Figure 8.1 and the calculation, the payback period for this PHB plant is 4.5
years.
165
Discount Factor
Discounted Cash
Discounted Cash
fd (28.35%)
537,814.13
0.77912
419,021.53
419,021.53
5,867,063.75
0.60703
3,561,468.12
3,980,489.65
686,443.81
0.47295
324,651.47
4,305,141.12
2,638,556.19
0.36848
972,260.98
3,332,880.14
2,638,556.19
0.28709
757,507.58
2,575,372.56
2,638,556.19
0.22368
590,189.00
1,985,183.56
2,638,556.19
0.17427
459,827.81
1,525,355.75
2,638,556.19
0.13578
358,260.86
1,167,094.89
2,638,556.19
0.10579
279,128.06
887,966.84
2,638,556.19
0.08242
217,474.14
670,492.70
10
2,638,556.19
0.06422
169,438.36
501,054.34
11
2,638,556.19
0.05003
132,012.75
369,041.59
12
2,638,556.19
0.03898
102,853.72
266,187.87
13
2,638,556.19
0.03037
80,135.35
186,052.52
14
2,638,556.19
0.02366
62,435.02
123,617.50
166
167
20,000,000.00
15,000,000.00
10,000,000.00
5,000,000.00
-
(5,000,000.00)
(10,000,000.00)
Year
0%
10%
20%
30%
10
11
12
13
14
165
8.6
Profitability Analysis
A sustainable business and mission requires effective planning and
166
The operating profit margin is:
44.90%
Net Profit Margin
Net Profits After Taxes
13,349,245.05
Sales
17,500,000.00
The net profit margin is:
23.72%
8.7
Conclusion
The Total Capital Investment (TCI) for this PHB plant is RM
167
CHAPTER 9
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION
9.1
Conclusion
The production of 50 MT per annum of Polyhydroxybutyrate has a
bright future. The PHB demand will be increased to 1025 metric tons in 2015
with 27.9% of annual growth. Due to the unique features, production of large
scale of PHB gained a lot of interest globally, with the increasing
environmental awareness among all the nations worldwide. An easy to handle
and low cost production process is fundamental if a successful
commercialization similar to plastics is intended.
For the process synthesis and flow sheeting, base case material and
energy balance has been performed by manual calculation. Simulation was ran
by using Superpro software and the result was compared with manual
calculation. Detailed equipment sizing and design of all major equipment also
had been performed using fundamental chemical engineering principles. A
highly integrated process control system was also included to the proposed
plant.
In respond to the environmental responsibility, the plant has been
designed to achieve the target of waste minimization and cost minimization.
The unwanted side product is being treated to ensure the emission coming out
from the plant has met the standard of environmental act.
On the safety aspect, hazard and operability (HAZOP) study has been
performed to identify on operability problems and providing necessary
resolution. A general safety study includes personal safety, emergency
management and plant start-up and shut down procedures.
The total capital cost needed is RM 5,378,141.31. The manufacturing
cost comprises RM 14,233,650.50. With the current market value for high
purity PHB of RM 35.00/tons, the net revenue has been calculated to attain
168
RM 17,500,000.0, thus it is obvious that the production of 50 metric tons of
PHB is feasible enough to be established. Based on financial analysis done, we
are able to attain 28.35% rate of return with the payback period of 4.5 years.
Finally, it can be concluded that the construction of a 50 MT/year PHB
production plant in the area of Sungai Bako, Kuching, Sarawak is technically
feasible and economically attractive. This plant will get good support and
encouragement from the government.
9.2
Recommendation
As mentioned in previous chapters, complete study had been done in
process,
yet
it
is
not
cost-effective
method.
Thus,
169
phytoremediation technology, which is proven to be easy, inexpensive and
effective can be implemented. All the measures for pollution control must be
always renewed, so that there is no room for causing any harm to environment.
vi
REFERENCES
Abe, H.,Doi, Y (2002), Molecular and material design of biodegradable
polyhydroxylalkonate
Batcha AFM, Prasad DMR, Khan MR, Abdullah H. Biosynthesis of poly(3hydroxybutyrate)(PHB) by Cupriavidus necator H16 from jatropha oil
as carbon
source. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng 2013; DOI
10.1007/s00449-03-1066-4
BIONAS. (2014, April 25). BIONAS. Retrieved April 25, 2014, from BATC
Development Berhad
: http://bionas- usa.com/file/BATC%20%20Company%20Profile.pdf
vii
Christopher J. Brigham, a. A. (2012). Applications of Polyhydroxyalkanoates
in the Medical Industry. International Journal of Biotechnology for
Wellness Industries, 56-58.
Choi JI, Sang YL. Process analysis and economic evaluation for Poly(3hydroxybutyrate)
production by
fermentation.
Bioprocess
Engineering 1997;17:335-342
Daniel
A.
Crowl,
Joseph
F.
Louvar,
(2011),
Chemical Process Safety: Fundamentals with Applications. Hall
International Series in the Physical and
Chemical Engineering Sciences
(3).
D.S. Rosa, N.T. Lotto, D.R. Lopes, C.G.F. Guedes(2004), The use of
roughness for evaluating of poly-b-(hydroxybutyrate) and poly-b(hydroxybutyrate-co-b-valerate),
Polym. Test. 23 .
viii
Kahar, P., Tsuge, T., Taguchi, K., Doi, Y. (2004). High yield production of
polyhydroxyalkanoates from soybean oil by Ralstonia eutropha and its
recombinant strain. Polymer Degradation and Stability. 83(1): 79-86
Kek, Y.K., Chang, C.W., Amirul, A.A., Sudesh, K., (2010) Heterologous
expression of Cupriavidus sp. USMAA2-4 PHA synthase gene in
PHB4 mutant for the production of poly(3-hydroxybutyrate) and
ix
its copolymers. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology.
26(9):1595-1603
Kek YK, Lee WH, Sudesh K. Efficient bioconversion of palm acid oil and
palm kernel oil to
poly(3-hydroxybutyrate)
by
Cupriavidus
necator. Can J Chem 2008;86:533-9
Khan MR, Prasad DMR, Abdullah H, Batcha AFM. Kinetic analysis on cell
growth and biosynthesis of poly(3-hydroxybutyrate)(PHB) in
Cupriavidus necator H16.
International Journal of Bioscience,
Biochemistry and Bioinformatics 2013;3:516518
Ko-Sin Ng, W.-Y. O.-K. (2010). Evaluation of jatropha oil to produce poly(3hydroxybutyrate). Polymer Degradation and Stability, 1.
Lemoigne, M. Produits de dehydration et de polymerisation de lacide oxobutyrique. Bull Soc Chim Biol, 1926, 8, 770782.
x
Loo CY, Lee WH, Tsuge T, Doi Y, Sudesh K.( 2005)Biosynthesis and
characterization of
po;y(3-hydroxybutyrate-co-3hydroxyhexanoate) from palm oil products in a
Wautersia
eutropha mutant. Biotechnol Lett;27:1405-10
Malaysian Palm Oil Board, MPOB (2008). World Production Malaysian Palm
Oil Board,
MPOB
(2008). World production of 17 oils &
fats: 1999 2008. Available online
at
http://econ.mpob.gov.my/economy/annual/stat2008/World6.3.pdf
[accessed
April 2014]
Peters M.S., Timmerhaus K.D., and West R.E. (2004). Plant Design and
Economics for
Chemical Engineers. 5th Ed. McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc. New York.
xi
Regan MJ, Creighton JL, Desvousges WH. Sites for our solid waste: a
guidebook
for
effective
public involvement. Washington,
DC: Ofce of Solid Waste, US
Environmental
Protection
Agency; 1990
xii
Sullivan, F. &. (2008, June 18). Frost & Sullivan. Retrieved April 24, 2014,
from Frost & Sullivan Web site: http://www.frost.com/
Sun, L., & Luo, X. (2011). Synthesis of multipass heat exchanger networks
based on pinch
technology. Computers & Chemical
Engineering, 35(7), 12571264.
doi:10.1016/j.compchemeng.2010.08.005
Turton, R., Bailie, R. C., Whiting, W. B., Shaeiwitz, J. A., & Bhattacharyya,
D. (2001).
Analysis, Synthesis, and Design of Chemical Processes
xiii
(Fourth Edi., Vol. 40, p. 9823).
doi:10.1002/15213773(20010316)40:6<9823::AID-ANIE9823>3.3.CO;2-C
Yamane T, Fukunaga M, Lee YW. Increased PHB productivity by high-celldensity-fed- batch culture of Alcaligenes latus, a growth-associated
PHB producer. Biotech.
Bioengineering
1996;50:197-202
xiv
APPENDICES