Reports & Statements

Outcome confirm in proposal 2:

Flow: 10~12 m/h.
BSW2%
TPH15%
OIW0.2%

Proposals Comparation as below

1. Total cost: proposal 1 > proposal 2 > proposal 3

2. Operation efficiency: proposal 2> proposal 1 > proposal 3
3. Oil production efficiency: proposal 2 > proposal 1 > proposal 3
4. Oil product purity: proposal 1 = proposal 2 = proposal 3.
5. Total Oil Gain: Proposal 1 = proposal 2 > proposal 3.
6. Environment care: proposal 2 > proposal 3 > proposal 1.

Advice: please take the proposal 2.

Explains & statement (please make proposal 2 as standard.)

1. Total cost: proposal 1 removed one heating mixing tank but add a compressor and filter press.
Total cost increased. Proposal 3 use a big tanks instead of 3 small mixing tank.
Total cost decreased.
2. Operation efficiency: proposal one use compressor and filter press which can remove most of
the big size object. Thus, its easier to do mixing and stiring. By this way, we shorter the time
of mixing. Increase the operation efficiency. Proposal 2 adopted 3 small mixing tank
according to your flow request. Actually, it will work if we use only two mixing tanks, but this
is not the best way. One 10m mixing tank will take 2 hours for full mixing. But if one of the
tanks is in repairing, the user can only produce the oil with a internal of 2 hours. As to
proposal 1, its not possible to take one more compressor and filter press for spare use. Once
we have to wash the machines or once of them stop working. We have to stop production.
3. Oil production efficiency. In proposal 1, though filter press shorter the mixing time, but it
wastes a lots solids. Most of the solids contain oil. In proposal 2, we remain most of the
solids before slurry enter the 3-phase centrifuge. ( we only remove those big useless objects
after the screen). By this way, we increase the production efficiency. In proposal 3, we use a
large mixing tank, but its difficult to do stiring. Too much sediment remains down to the tank
bottom. Oil production reduced, we lose money.
4. Oil product purity: as long as we use DISC separator, BSW will surely be less than 2% and
this is somehow a pessimistic estimate. Positively, it can even be around 1%. so if you focus
on the purity, we must add a DISC separator. If not, the BSW will be 5%
5. Total oil gain: proposal 1 and proposal 3, remove too many solids before enter the centrifuge.
6. In proposal 1. Compossor is open style which do harm to the environment. Both proposal 2
and 3 are enclosed type. This is better for the environment. However, cause proposal 3
decrease the oil production. So it will be more difficult to treat the solids.

Quality test.

All the above outcome is tested by International method. I have to do more communication with
our engineer on your own test method. But they told me theres no big difference on the outcome.
Please note: When you test BSW, we use the oil product out from DISC separator if we adopt one.
Or we use the oil come from the centrifuge.
But when we test the OIW, we have to use the water from centrifuge side, cause the water form
DISC separator is already very small now, and because we are purifying the oil, we have to scarify
a little bit oil. But theres no waste of the oil because the water will finally go the recycle system.