Professional Documents
Culture Documents
capacity of A
capacity of B
0:6
1
For the design of the liposomal plant, the sizes and specifica-
tions of the equipment required for liposome production were
determined in terms of flow per unit time calculated through
the material balances. The estimated equipment cost is sum-
marized in Tab. 1, and the supplementary equipment men-
tioned includes mainly heat exchangers, condensers, and
NaOH solution storage tanks.
The total equipment cost for the liposomal plant with a pro-
duction capacity of 86 400 L/year is ca. $ 134 500, and it is eas-
ily seen that more than 58 % of the equipment cost is asso-
ciated with the five stirred tanks. It is well known that the
equipment price in a chemical industrial process may be af-
fected by different factors, e.g., size, construction material, in-
strumentation, inflation, and other market conditions. In the
biochemical industry, the main equipment employed is fre-
quently constructed of stainless steel, and in this case, capacity
is the aspect that most strongly affects price [32].
The fixed investment cost was based on the total purchased
equipment cost using typical percentages [32] of fixed-capital
investment (FCI), and the results are detailed in Tab. 2. Ac-
cording to the values obtained, the direct investment cost of a
liposome plant of the proposed capacity is ca. $ 0.75 million,
and this capital investment is ca. 5.6 times the cost for equip-
ment purchase. This relation is usually a multiple of 58 times
[32]. The data in Tab. 2 clearly shows that the fixed investment
cost is considerably reduced in this design, mainly due to the
simplicity and low cost requirements of the ethanol injection
technique, and consequently, this is a quite attractive aspect of
this process.
It is known that the ratio of the cost of raw materials to total
production cost varies considerably for different types of
plants. However, the raw materials cost is usually in the range
www.cet-journal.com 2010 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2010, 33, No. 1, 1520
Table 1. Estimated costs of equipment.
Major equipment specification Working capacity Unit Cost ($) Cost ($)
Stirred tank 1 (T1) 15 L 3 000.00 3 000.00
Stirred tanks 2 to 5 (T2, T3, T4, T5) 200 L 19 000.00 76 000.00
Centrifugal pump 1 (P1) 0.5 HP 1 000.00 1 000.00
Centrifugal pumps 2 to 4 (P2, P3, P4) 1 HP 1 500.00 4 500.00
Supplementary equipment (heat exchangers,
condensers and NaOH solution storage tanks)
50 000.00
Total Equipment Cost (EC) 134 500.00
18 O. Rodriguez Justo, . M. Moraes
of 1060 % of the total production cost [34]. Thus, it was esti-
mated that the raw materials cost represented 10 % of the total
production cost in this instance. The amount of raw material
that should be supplied per batch (144 L) was determined
from the material balance in accordance with Fig. 2. The costs
of all chemicals were based on average bulk market prices, as
listed in Tab. 3. The total annual raw materials cost was simply
the sum of the costs of the individual raw materials ($ 283 670/
year). Cholesterol was the most expensive component, consti-
tuting ca. 42 % of the overall raw material cost. In this study,
the use of high-purity raw materials was considered and it is
important to note that the raw materials cost can
vary extensively depending on the required purity.
Therefore, small changes in the quality of the raw
materials can significantly increase or reduce the
total production cost of liposomes using this pro-
cess. Under the proposed conditions, the overall
production cost is ca. $ 32.83 per L of liposomal
suspension at 5 mM.
Other economical factors of importance are
listed in Tab. 4. Based on sales prices of ca. $ 50/L
for the liposomal suspension (meaning an average
increase of this amount in the aggregate value of
the bioactive compound produced at the original
plant) and considering taxes of 40 % on annual
gross profit, the estimated revenues were calculated
as $ 4 320 000/year and the net profit attained
would be $ 889 980/year.
When one possesses estimates of capital invest-
ment, operating costs, and revenues for a project,
it is possible to proceed to profitability and attrac-
tiveness evaluation. To assess the profitability of
this project, the time of return on investment (pay-
back time) was estimated at ca. 1.17 year (ca.
14 months) for an interest rate of 20 % per year.
Based on the preliminary economic evaluation
of the plant for the production of liposomes by the
ethanol injection process through the total invest-
ment cost, annual production cost, annual net
profits, and payback time, it can be considered that
the liposomal suspension plant using the ethanol
injection technique is economically attractive.
4 Conclusions
The profitability of liposome plant production by the ethanol
injection technique with an annual capacity of 86 400 L was
examined. According to the preliminary economic evaluation
analysis of this project, the results attained show that this pro-
cess has good potential for implementation on an industrial
scale with equipment costs, fixed capital investment, and total
capital investment for the project of ca. $ 0.13, $ 0.75 and $
0.86 million, respectively. The annual production cost of the li-
posome plant was ca. $ 2.84 million. The total annual raw ma-
terials cost ($ 0.28 million) was high, mainly due to the high-
purity chemicals required. The results of economic
analysis suggest the economical feasibility for
scale-up of this process with a return on invest-
ment of 1.17 year.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to FAPESP (Research
Foundation of the State So Paulo, Brazil) for its
financial support. A. M. Moraes is a recipient of a
CNPQ fellowship.
The authors have declared no conflict of interest.
Chem. Eng. Technol. 2010, 33, No. 1, 1520 2010 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.cet-journal.com
Table 2. Typical percentages of fixed-capital investment (FCI) used to estimate
the fixed investment cost based on the total cost of purchased equipment.
Cost Item Index Investment ($)
A Total Plant Direct Cost (TPDC)
1. Equipment Cost (EC) 134 500.00
2. Installation 0.50 EC 67 250.00
3. Process Piping 0.40 EC 53 800.00
4. Instrumentation 0.35 EC 47 075.00
5. Isolation 0.03 EC 4 035.00
6. Electrical 0.15 EC 20 175.00
7. Buildings 0.10 x EC 13 450.00
8. Yard Improvement 0.15 EC 20 175.00
9. Auxiliary Facilities 0.35 EC 47 075.00
TPDC 407 535.00
B Total Plant Indirect Cost (TPIC)
10. Engineering 0.25 TPDC 101 883.75
11. Construction 0.35 TPDC 142 637.25
TPIC 244 521.00
C Total Plant Cost (TPC = TPDC + TPIC) 652 056.00
Contractor Fees (CF) 0.05 TPC 32 602.80
Contingency (C) 0.10 TPC 65 205.60
D Direct Fixed Capital (DFC = TPC + CF + C) 749 864.40
Table 3. Raw materials cost summary.
Raw Material Annual Amount (kg) Unit Cost ($/kg) Cost ($/year)
Phosphatidylcholine 90.48 1 000.00 90 480.00
Cholesterol 29.52 4 000.00 118 080.00
Ethanol 1 920.00 20.00 38 400.00
Citric acid 2.30 100.00 230.00
Water 72 960.00 0.50 36 480.00
Total 283 670.00
Ethanol injection method 19
References
[1] M. R. Mozafari, Cell. Mol. Biol. Lett. 2005, 10, 711.
[2] M. U. Uhumwangho, R. S. Okor, J. Biomed. Sci. 2005, 1 (4),
9.
[3] G. Gregoriadis, Liposomes Dermatics - Liposomes in Drug De-
livery: Present and Future, Braun-Falco, Korting 1992.
[4] A. Wagner, K. Vorauer-Uhl, H. Katinger, Eur. J. Pharm. Bio-
pharm. 2002, 54 (2), 213.
[5] S. Batzri, E. D. Korn, Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1973, 298, 1015.
[6] A. Wagner et al., J. Liposome Res. 2006, 16 (3), 311.
[7] K. Vorauer-Uhl et al., Wound Repair Regen. 2002, 10 (6), 366.
[8] K. Vorauer-Uhl, A. Wagner, H. Katinger, Eur. J. Pharm. Bio-
pharm. 2002, 54 (1), 83.
[9] A. A. W. Elzainy, X. Gu, E. R. Simons, K. J. Simons, J. Allergy
Clin. Immun. 2003, 111 (1), Supplement 2, S322.
[10] M. G. Alvarez et al., Biomed. Pharmacother. 2003, 57 (34),
163.
[11] Y. J. Wang, F. M. Winnik, R. J. Clarke, Biophys. Chem. 2003,
104 (2), 449.
[12] T. Fan, K. Takayama, Y. Hattori, Y. Maitani, Pharmaceut. Res.
2004, 21 (9), 1692.
[13] P. Stano et al., J. Liposome Res. 2004, 14 (12), 87.
[14] A. Zhang et al., Int. J. Pharm. 2004, 270, 93.
[15] O. R. Justo, A. M. Moraes, J. Pharm. Pharmacol. 2005, 57, 23.
[16] V. Peikov et al., Int. J. Pharm. 2005, 299 (1-2), 92.
[17] T. Xuan, J. A. Zhang, I. Ahmad, J. Pharmaceut. Biomed. 2006,
41 (2), 582.
[18] M. N. Padamwar, V. B. Pokharkar, Int. J. Pharm. 2006,
320 (1-2), 37.
[19] D. M. Both, K. Goodtzova, D. B. Yarosh, D. A. Brown, Arch.
Dermatol. Res. 2002, 293, 569.
[20] H. Zhong, Y. Deng, X. Wang, B. Yang, Int. J. Pharm. 2005,
301 (1-2), 15.
[21] S. Du, Y. Deng, Drug Dev. Ind. Pharm. 2006, 32 (7), 791.
[22] M. Fan, S. Xu, S. Xia, X. Zhang, Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2008,
227 (1), 167.
[23] S. Ferro et al., J. Photochem. Photobiol., B 2006, 83 (2), 98.
[24] S. Ferro et al., Int. J. Biochem. Cell. Biol. 2007, 39 (5), 1026.
[25] A. M. Tamaddon, F. H. Shirazi, H. R. Moghimi, Int. J.
Pharm. 2007, 336 (1), 174.
[26] W. Guo, M. A. Gosselin, R. J. Lee, J. Controlled Release 2002,
83 (1), 121.
[27] S. Igarashi, S. Hattori, Y. Maitani, J. Controlled Release 2006,
112, 362.
[28] Y. Hattori, W. Ding, Y. Maitani, J. Controlled Release 2007,
120 (1-2), 122.
[29] Y. Maitani, S. Igarashi, M. Sato, J. Hattori, Int. J. Pharm.
2007, 342 (1-2), 33.
[30] W. Ding, Y. Hattori, K. Higashiyama, Y. Maitani, Int. J.
Pharm. 2008, 354 (1-2), 196.
[31] D. D. Lasic, Am. Sci. 1992, 80, 20.
[32] R. G. Harrison, P. Todd, S. R. Rudge, D. P. Petrides, Biose-
parations Science and Engineering, Oxford University Press,
Oxford 2003.
[33] A. S. Domazou, P. L. Luisi, J. Liposome Res. 2002, 12 (3), 205.
[34] M. S. Peters, K. D. Timmerhaus, R. E. West, Plant Design and
Economics for Chemical Engineers, 5th ed., McGraw-Hill,
New York 2003.
[35] W. M. Vatavuk, Chem. Eng.-New York 2005, 7, 33.
[36] Economic Indicators, Chem. Eng.-New York 2008, 115 (7),
64.
www.cet-journal.com 2010 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim Chem. Eng. Technol. 2010, 33, No. 1, 1520
Table 4. Other economical factors of importance for evaluating
the cost of the process.
Item Value
Direct Fixed Capital ($) 49 864.40
Working Capital ($) 74 986.44
Start-up Cost ($) 37 493.22
Total Investment ($) 862 344.06
Annual Raw Materials Cost ($) 283 670.00
Annual Operating Cost ($) 2 836 700.00
Annual Capacity (L) 86 400.00
Product Price ($/L) 50.00
Revenues ($/year) 4 320 000.00
Gross Profit ($/year) 1 483 300.00
Taxes ($) 593 320.00
Net Profit ($) 889 980.00
Payback Time (year) 1.17
20 O. Rodriguez Justo, . M. Moraes