Upload
others
View
4
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Diverting FOGs from Wastewater Stream for Biodiesel Production
by:
Qingshi TuPhD student in Environmental Engineering
University of Cincinnati
Ohio WEA-AWWA 2014 Technical Conference & ExpoColumbus, Ohio August 26-29, 2014
Agenda• Problem statement
– Fats, oils and greases (FOGs): issues & opportunities
• Research focus– Technical innovations– Life cycle assessment (LCA)
• Summary• Acknowledgement• References
Problem Statement
Sewer Grease
Trap Grease
Treated in wastewater treatment plants
Collected by grease haulers Landfill
Problem Statement• Significant generation: 3,800 million lbs produced
annually in US (Tyson, 2002)
• Environmental nuisance: −Clogging pipes overflow, corrosion−Landfill burden
• Economical concerns: clean-up and maintenance costs
• Social impacts: odor, contamination, inconvenience
Problem Statement
• Strategies to address the problem:−Reduce waste FOG generation− Improve monitoring−Alternative disposal approaches
• FOG-to-Biodiesel: −Renewable fuel, compatible with diesel engine −Large potential: > 400 million gal/year −Revenue: Renewable Identification Number (RIN)
~$0.3/gal
Problem Statement
• Challenges: −Difficulty in separation: FOGs entrapped in the
scum−Degraded FOGs: contains high concentration of
free fatty acids (FFA)impacts biodiesel yield and cost
−Energy efficiency of the process?−Environmental impacts?
Structure of the PresentationProblem
statement
Technical innovations
In-situ conversionGlycerolysis
LCA
LC energy consumption
Environmental impacts
Structure of the presentation
Problem statement
Technical innovations
In-situ conversionGlycerolysis
LCA
LC energy consumption
Environmental impacts
Structure of the proposal
Technical Innovations
Technical Innovations
11
Trap Grease Sewer GreaseDecanted FOG Entrapped FOG
Up to 60% FFA Difficult to separate FOG
Challenge to address:Reducing FFA
Challenge to address:Separating FOG
Glycerolysis “In-situ Conversion”
Problem statement
Technical innovations
In-situ conversionGlycerolysis
LCA
LC energy consumption
Environmental impacts
Structure of the proposal
http://www.intechopen.com/
High FFA concentration in trap grease leads to:
• Soap formation
• Waste of catalyst
• Reduced yield
• Increased process costhttp://biodiesel.infopop.cc
Glycerolysis
Glycerolysis•Glycerol is a by-production from biodiesel production•Glycerol sales price is decreasing
GlycerolysisEsterification Glycerolysis
# of steps ≥2 1
Temp. low high
Chemicals H2SO4, MeOH glycerol
Separation MeOH/Water NA
• Goal of this study– Reduce FFA% in FOGs derived from trap grease– Novel catalyst production– Parametric analysis and optimization
Glycerolysis
• Materials– Trap grease: obtained from local food processer– Synthetic high FFA oil: oleic acid + waste cooking oil– Crude glycerol: lab-scale biodiesel production– Other chemicals: Fisher Scientific®
• Analytical methods– FFA measurement: AOCS Cd 3d 63– Glycerol purity: modified AOCS method Cc 17-79 (van
Gerpen et al., 2004)
Methodology
Methodology• Preparation of catalyst
– From chemicals (Macierzanka and Szelag, 2004)
– From solids in trap grease• Determine the amount of residual FFA and oil• Calculate the NaOH to saponify the residual FFA and
oil
Left: ZnC Right: ZnC from solids
• Experiment series– Synthetic high FFA oil w/o
catalyst– FOGs w/o catalyst– FOGs w/ catalyst– FOGs w/ catalyst (derived
from solids)
Methodology
Experimental Setup
• Experiment matrix (synthetic high FFA oil)
Methodology
Parameter -1 +1
Gly-FFA molar ratio 1:1 2:1
Temperature 160C 200C
Time 3 hr 6 hr
Glycerol Pure Crude
• Experiment matrix (other experiments)
Methodology
Parameter Value
Gly-FFA molar ratio 1:1
Temperature 200/240°C
Time 3 hr
Glycerol Crude
Catalyst-FFA molar ratio 0.025-0.2:1
• Synthetic high FFA oil w/o catalyst
Preliminary Results
Range of FFA reduction:50.00%-99.49%
Preliminary Results
ExperimentSeries
3-hr FFA Reduction (%)
Catalyst-FFAmolar ratio Temperature (°C)
Synthetic high FFA oil 22.22-82.86 NA 160/200
FOG w/o catalyst 74.66-97.65 NA 200/240FOG w/ catalyst 80.57-87.33 0.025-0.2 200FOG w/ catalyst
(from solids) 80.57-86.45 0.025/0.05 200
Section Summary
• Temperature and time are the most influential parameters
• Catalyst made from trap grease solids can reduce the reaction time and temperature
• Future work– Improve catalyst production process (e.g. time, doses of NaOH
and ZnSO4)– Parametric optimization of glycerolysis: time, temperature and
dose of catalyst
Problem statement
Technical innovations
In-situ conversionGlycerolysis
LCA
LC energy consumption
Environmental impacts
Structure of the proposal
In-situ Conversion
(http://409g4.wikispaces.com/%E2%97%8F+Production+(Biodiesel))
Lam et al. 2010
1) Acid-catalyzed transesterification
2) Acid-catalyzed esterification
• Materials– Sewer grease samples: collected from the skimmers
in the a local WWTP and dried in air for weeks before sent to UC
– Sample pretreatment: heating at 105 °C in the oven for 24 hours remove the moisture
– Chemicals: Fisher Scientific®
Methodology
Hard to separate
FOG
• Analytical methods– FFA: AOCS Cd 3d 63– Oil content (tri-/di-/mono-glycerides): GC/FID ASTM D 6584 – 00
– FAME: GC/MS Restek Rxi®-5ms (Bellefonte, PA) column (30 m,
0.25 mm i.d., and 0.25 μm df)
Methodology
• Experimental Procedure– Preheat and mix the MeOH and
H2SO4
– Add 10 g sewer grease into the liquid mixture
– After reaction, let the mixture settle and filtrate out the solids
– Transfer liquid phase to a rotary evaporator for MeOH recovery
– Remaining liquid is taken up by 25 ml hexane and transfer to a vial for analysis
Methodology
Reactor setup
• Experimental matrix
Methodology
ParameterLevel
- +
Temperature (°C) 55 65
MeOH-to-sewer Grease Ratio (v/wt) 5:1 10:1
H2SO4 % (wt%) 25% 50%
Duration (hr) 2 4
• Characterization of sewer grease samples
Preliminary Results
Properties ValueC (%) 74.36H (%) 12.47N (%) 0.2S (%) 0.14O (%) 8.91
Ash (%) 3.92HHV (Btu/lb) 15,083
Ultimate Analysis
Composition ValueMoisture (%) 49.39
Oil (%) 13.10
FFA(%) 12.64Solids (%) 24.87
Composition Analysis
* Done by a third-party analytical lab
Composition ValueOil (%) 25.88FFA (%) 24.98
Oil+FFA (%) 50.86Solids (%) 49.14
• FAME + oil concentration in the final product
Preliminary Results
* average=11.88% of dry TG
Section Summary• Under selected experiment conditions:
– FAME in the final product: 8.27% of dry sewer grease
– Total converted and extracted (FAME+oil) in the final product:
20.15% of dry TG
– Hydrolysis may be necessary to convert oil into FFA to
expedite the reaction
– Parameter optimization is necessary to improve the formation
of FAME
Section Summary
• Future Work−Test hydrolysis pretreatment
−Alter the 24 full factorial experiment design
−Analyze the impact of each parameter and their
interactions on the in-situ reaction
−Optimize the parameters
Problem statement
Technical innovations
In-situ conversionGlycerolysis
LCA
LC energy consumption
Environmental impacts
Structure of the proposal
LCA
(ISO 14040, 2006)
Problem statement
Technical innovations
In-situ conversionGlycerolysis
LCA
LC energyconsumption
Environmental impacts
Structure of the proposal
• Goal– Assess life cycle energy consumption for trap
grease biodiesel production– Investigate the influence of input variables
• Scope− “Gate-to-gate”− Functional unit: 1 gal BioD
37
Goal and Scope
Approach and Assumptions• Process model for each stage is derived from
references• Material and energy inputs are based on the
regression of data from corresponding references• Assume “perfect” applicability of the model and
regression equations • Life cycle energy (indirect energy included) for
material and energy inputs
Data Source– Transportation stages: grease haulers, MSD– FOG separation stage: personal communication with experts,
journal papers and reports, and online resources– FOG treatment stage: journal papers and reports– Biodiesel production stage: journal papers and reports– Anaerobic digestion stage: journal papers and reports
Process Description (FOG separation)
Energy input:• Heat generated by burning natural gas to facilitate the separation• Electricity to support the transfer of raw trap grease through the systemMaterial input: raw TG
Process Description (Esterification)
Energy input:• Heat generated by burning natural gas to recover the excessive MeOH and to maintain the temperature of the reaction system
• Electricity to support operation of the systemMaterial input:FFA, MeOH, H2SO4, NaOH
Process Description (BioD Production)
Energy input:• Heat generated by burning natural gas to recover the excessive MeOH and to maintain the temperature of the reaction system
• Electricity to support operation of the systemMaterial input:FOG, MeOH, HCl, NaOCH3
Process Description (AD & Transportation)Transportation Distance (miles)
Restaurant-to-hauler’s facility
150
Hauler’s facility-to-WWTP 47.4
WWTP-to-landfill 100
http://www.wtert.eu/default.asp?Menue=13&ShowDok=17
Results and Discussion (Baseline Case)
Results and Discussion (Baseline Case)
Results and Discussion (Baseline Case)
Results and Discussion (Comparison w/ Existing Studies)
Results and Discussion (Sensitivity Analysis)
Results and Discussion (Sensitivity Analysis)
Results and Discussion (Monte Carlo)
• Randomization of variables (e.g. FOG concentration) based on their cdfs
• Generate a range of results • Offer options to evaluate the process based on
possibilities• Construct MC model in PythonTM
• 10,000 lbs raw trap grease• x10,000 runs
Section Summary• Utilizing the solids for AD is vital to reducing the energy
consumption for biodiesel made from trap grease• Typically the energy consumption of trap grease
biodiesel is lower than that of biodiesel made from other feedstocks
• CH4 generation rate, FOG% and FFA% are the three major factors that influence the energy consumption
MJ/gal 5th % 25th % 50th % 75th % 95th %w/ AD -822.05 -21.84 19.36 32.83 47.61w/o AD 3.76 44.65 52.66 62.77 88.12
Problem statement
Technical innovations
In-situ conversionGlycerolysis
LCA
LC energy consumption
Environmental impacts
Structure of the proposal
TG LC Environmental Impact• Goal:
– GHG inventory– Major impact categories: global warming potential
(GWP), acidification potential (AP), ozone depletion potential (ODP), and eutrophication potential (EP)
• Scope:– Same as TG LC Energy
• Software: OpenLCA®
• Emission inventory– National Renewable Energy Laboratory’s (NREL) U.S. Life Cycle
Inventory database– LCA reports from national laboratories, research institutes and
peer-reviewed journal articles
• Characterization factors: – Tool for the Reduction and Assessment of Chemical and Other
Environmental Impacts (TRACI)– ReCiPe
• Sensitivity analysis and MC
Methodology
Summary of the Presentation • Several research projects tied together to
promote FOG-to-Biodiesel practice• Technology development to improve the FOG-
to-biodiesel process• Assess the life cycle energy consumption and
environmental impacts of the trap grease-to-biodiesel process
AcknowledgementFunding support:• US EPA’s P3-“People, Prosperity, and the Planet”
Student Design Competition for Sustainability (Phase I-SU836038; Phase II-SU835291)
In-kind support:• Metropolitan Sewer District of Greater Cincinnati• Bluegrass Biodiesel®
AcknowledgementDr. Mingming Lu (academic adviser), Univ. of CincinnatiDr. Drew C. McAvoy, Univ. of CincinnatiDr. Ting Lu, Black & VeatchBryant McDonnell, ArcadisDr. Ming Chai, Greenleaf Biofuels… and many more…
ReferencesAgnew R, Chai M, Lu M, Dendramis N (2009) Making biodiesel from recycled cooking oil generated in campus dining facilities. Sustainability 2: 303-307.Agriculture Marketing Resource Center (AgMRC). Soybean oil and biodiesel usage projects & balance sheet. http://www.extension.iastate.edu/agdm/crops/outlook/biodieselbalancesheet.pdf, accessed on Oct. 2013.Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC). http://www.afdc.energy.gov/laws/matrix/tech, accessed on Oct. 2013.Austic, G. 2010. Evaluating the profitability of a trap effluent dewatering facility in the Raleigh area. http://www.biofuels.coop/wp-content/uploads/2011/02/ECO-Collections-trap-grease-feasibility.pdf, accessed on May, 2011.Canakci M (2007) The potential of restaurant waste lipids as biodiesel feedstocks, Bioresource Technol 98: 183-190.Canakci, M., and van Gerpen, J. 2003. A pilot plant to produce biodiesel from high free fatty acid feedstocks. Transactions of the ASAE. 46 (4), 945-954.Canoira, L., Rodríguez-Gamero, M., Querol, E., Alc_antara, R., Lapuerta, M., and Oliva, F. 2008. Biodiesel from low-grade animal fat: Production process assessment and biodiesel properties characterization. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 47, 7997–8004.Cassman, KG., Liska, A.J. 2007. Food and fuel for all: realistic or foolish? Biofuels, Bioproducts and Birefining. 1(1): 18-23.Chakrabarti, A. R., Hake, J. M., Zarchi, I., Gray, D. M. D. 2008. Waste Grease Biodiesel Production at a Wastewater Treatment Plant. WEFTEC Report, 2770-2789.Dagher, M., Panicker, R., Myles, E., Bell, N. 2004. Mississippi biodiesel feasibility study. http://www.southeastdiesel.org/Photos/Library/Ag/AlcornSec3_Report.pdf, accessed on Oct. 2013.Diaz-Felix W, Riley MR, Zimmt W, Kazz M (2009) Pretreatment of yellow grease for efficient production of fatty acid methyl esters Biomass Bioenerg 33: 558-563.Eastern Municipal Water District. Biodiesel production from grease waste. http://www.emwd.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=94, accessed on March 2012.Energy Information Adminstration (EIA). 2004. Biodiesel performance, costs, and use. http://www.eia.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/biodiesel/, accessed on Oct., 2013.Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy (EERE). “Energy cost calculator for air-cooled electric chillers”. http://www1.eere.energy.gov/femp/technologies/eep_ac_chillers_calc.html, accessed on March 2012.Haas, M. J. 2010. Alternate feedstocks and technologies for biodiesel production. IN: the Biodiesel Handbook, 2nd edition, AOCS publishing, Urbana, IL. pp. 47-66.Harris, A. 2009 Food for fuel. Engineering & Technology. 4 (19): 53.Hass, M. J. 2011. Extraction and use of DDGS lipids for biodiesel production. In: “Distillers grains: production, properties, and utilization”. CRC Press, Baca Raton, FL. pp 487-502.Huo, H., Wang, M., Bloyd, C. and Putsche, V. 2008. Life-cycle assessment of energy and greenhouse gas effects of soybean-derived biodiesel and renewable fuels. ANL/ESD/08-2. Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, IL. King, C.W., and Webber, M.E. 2008. Water intensity of transportation. Environ Sci & Technol 42, 21: 7866-7872.Kulkarni MG, Dalai AK (2006) Waste cooking oil - An economical source for biodiesel: A review. Ind Eng Chem Res 45: 2901-2913.Lopez, D.E., Mullins, J.C., and Bruce, D.A. 2010. Energy life cycle assessment for the production of biodiesel from rendered lipids in the United States. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 49, 2419-2432.Menendez, M.R. How we use energy at wastewater plants…and how we can use less. http://www.ncsafewater.org/Pics/Training/AnnualConference/AC10TechnicalPapers/AC10_Wastewater/WW_T.AM_10.30_Menendez.pdf, accessed on March 2012.National Biodiesel Board (NBB). Production statistics. http://www.biodiesel.org/production/production-statistics, accessed on Oct. 2013.New York City Department of Environmental Protection. 2010. Preventing Grease Discharges into Sewers. http://www.nyc.gov/html/doh/downloads/pdf/rii/prevent-grease-discharge-sewers.pdf, accessed on Dec. 2012.North Carolina (NC). 2002. Considerations for the Management of Discharge of Fats, Oil and Grease to Sanitary Sewer Systems. http://infohouse.p2ric.org/ref/20/19024/19024-1.pdf, accessed on Dec. 2012.Orange County. 2004. Fact Sheet: Fats, oils and Grease (FOG) Source Control Program. www.ocsd.com/civica/filebank/blobdload.asp?BlobID=6523, accessed on Dec. 2012.Pradhan, A., Shrestha, D.S., McAloon, A., Yee, W., Haas, M., and Duffield, J.A. 2011. Energy life-cycle assessment of soybean biodiesel revisited. Transactions of the ASABE. 54, 3, 1031-1039.Pradhan, A.; Shrestha, D. S.; Van Gerpen, J.; and Duffield, J. 2008. The Energy Balance of Soybean Oil Biodiesel Production: A Review of Past Studies. Trans. ASABE. 51 (1), 185–194.San Francisco (SF) Water, Power, and Sewer. 2011. Brown grease to biodiesel demonstration project. http://www.sfwater.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1540, accessed on Dec. 2012.Services of the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC). Brown grease to biodiesel demonstration project. http://www.sfwater.org/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=1540, accessed on March 2012.Sheehan, J., Camobreco, V., Duffield, J., Graboski, M., and Shapouri, H. 1998. Life cycle inventory of biodiesel and petroleum diesel for use in an urban bus. National Renewable Energy Laboratory, NREL/SR-580-24089.Sills, D.L., Paramita, V., Franke, M.J., Johnson, M.C., Akabas, T.M., Greene, C.H., and Tester, J.W. 2013. Quantitative uncertainty analysis of life cycle assessment for algal biofuel production. Environmental Science & Technology. 47, 687-694.Tashtoush G.M., Al-Widyan, M.I., Al-Jarrah, M.M. 2004. Experimental study on evaluation and optimization of conversion of waste animal fat into biodiesel. Energy Conversion and Management. 45: 2697-2711.Tu, Q., Chai, M., Lu, M., Yang, Y.J.. 2011. Kinetic study on the acid catalytic esterification of high level free fatty acids in the waste cooking oil. A&WMA 104th Annual Conference and Exhibition, June 21- 24, Orlando, Florida, 2011.Tu, Q., Wang, J., Lu, Ml, Chai, M., Lu, T. 2012. Feasibility and practices of making biodiesel out of low quality greases. EM. January Issue, pp26-29.Turner, N. B., Landsburg, E. B., Feldman, E., Varghese, A. R., Blaza, G. 2011. Beneficial reuses of sewer grease: biodiesel production vs. anaerobic digestion. Paper 2011-A-627-AWMA. Air & Waste Management Association 104th Annual Conference, Orlando, FL.AND MORE….