Process Selection Sample

Technological Institute of the Philippines
PROCESS
SELECTION
N
INTRODUCTION
Sodium silicate, usually known as "water

glass" or “liquid glass”, is well-known due to the
wide commercial and industrial application. It is
mostly composed of oxygen-silicon polymer
backbone lodging water in molecular matrix
pores. Sodium silicate products are
manufactured as solids or thick liquids,
depending on proposed use. Sodium silicate is a
versatile, inorganic chemical made by combining
various ratios of raw materials at high
temperature. This process yields a variety of
products with unique chemistry that are used in many industrial and consumer
applications.
Sodium silicate was first observed by Van Helmont, a chemist, in 1640
as a fluid substance made by melting sand with excess alkali (base that dissolves
in water). Water Glass was defined in Von Wagner's Manual of Chemical
Technology, in 1892, as any of the soluble alkaline silicates, which was first
observed by Van Glaber, a German chemist made “fluid silica” in 1648 from
potash and silica. Von Fuchs, another chemist, in 1825, obtained what is now
known as water glass by treating silic acid with an alkali, the result being soluble
in water. Von Wagner distinguished soda, potash, double (soda and potash), and
fix in as types of water glass. The fixing type was "a mixture of silica well
saturated with potash water glass and a sodium silicate" used to stabilize
inorganic water color pigments on cement work for outdoor signs (Sodium
Silicate, 2013).
Hundreds of commercial uses of sodium silicates have evolved as a result
of their versatile functionality and low cost and as well as the source of major
raw material which is the silica sand for sustainability and manufacturability.
Silicates are a key raw material for many chemical processes but are also critical
components in the manufacture of many everyday products such as detergents,
paper stock, textiles, paint, fuel, etc. The chemical activity of soluble silicates is
employed in soil solidification and in catalyst production, as well as in the
manufacturing of silicate derivatives (PQ-Sodium Silicate Liquids, 2016).
339
PROCESS 1
Hydrothermal Process
This section details the systematic route on the production of sodium

silicate using hydrothermal process with silica sand and caustic soda as the raw
material. A process narrative is presented including the data acquired from
various literature available including the process flow diagram.
Process Description
The raw materials of the process are silica sand and sodium hydroxide or
caustic soda. The raw silica sand with a particle size of 100 – 400 µm is milled
to obtain a final particle size of 70 µm. Milled silica sand is then screened using
a vibrating screen to separate the oversized sand. Oversized sand will be recycled
back to the miller to further reduce its particle size. Silica sand must have a purity
of 99 wt % SiO2. On the other hand, caustic soda crystals are mixed with water
to produce a 50 wt% concentration of sodium hydroxide solution that will be
used in this process.
The raw materials are charged to an agitated reaction vessel which is a
nickel-clad cylindrical autoclave. The reaction mixture is heated to a temperature
of about 200°C, it is heated by an exterior steam jacket or by direct injection of
superheated steam of 16 bar. The reaction is completed for about 2.5 – 4.5 hours.
The reaction of caustic soda and silica sand is represented by the following:
heat
2NaOH + 2SiO2 → Na2 O ∙ 2SiO2 + H2 O
The average amount of sand and sodium hydroxide used to produce 1 ton
of liquid sodium silicate are 320 kg and 206.5 kg, respectively (Fawer, 1997).
The reaction is usually performed with an excess of silica sand is necessary to
produce a SiO2/Na2O ratio of 2:1. At the end of the reaction, the steam is shut off
and the reaction vessel is vented. The mixture of sodium silicate and H2O is then
passed into a collecting tank.
The suspension is then filtered to separate the liquid and solid
components. A filter aid in the form of perlite is used to improve the filtration
and remove all sludge that results from the excess sand and impurities (Bauer,
2009). The obtained sodium silicate has solid levels of 48 wt% and a weight ratio
of 2. The concentration of the final product can be adjusted in a mixing vessel by
340
adding either caustic soda or sodium silicate solution depending upon the
specified product. The sludge material from the filter is then dried to remove the
moisture. The dried material is then recycled back to the miller.
The typical product quality of liquid sodium silicate with weight ratio of
2 (SiO2/Na2O =2) produced from the hydrothermal process has a composition of
11.3 % Na2O and 22.0% SiO2. The reaction time and solution purity depend on
chemical and physical features of the sand (Technologies and Solutions : Sodium
Silicate, 2016).
This direct dissolution process, also known as pressure process, runs
under forced conditions, that is, elevated temperature and pressure. The
shortcomings of this process are a product spectrum that is limited to the alkaline
end of silica to sodium oxide ratios and the higher raw material costs of sodium
hydroxide versus sodium carbonate. These disadvantages are usually offset by
the lower energy costs of the autoclave process (Bauer, 2009).
341
Figure 5.2.1: Process Flow Diagram for Hydrothermal Process
342
PLANT ECONOMICS
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT

Estimated fixed capital cost is calculated using the Lang Method, factor
for solid-fluid processing from Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ Handbook 8th ed.
Table 5.2.1: Lang Factors (Green & Perry, 2008)

Lang factors
Type of plant Fixed capital Total capital
investment investment
Solid processing 4.0 4.7
Solid-fluid 4.3 5.0
processing
Fluid processing 5.0 6.0
Adapted from M. S. Peters, K. D. Timmerhaus, and R. West, Plant
Design and Economics for Chemical Engineers, 5th ed., McGraw-Hill,
New York, 2004.
Table 5.2.2: Cost of Equipment Items for Hydrothermal process

Equipment Quantity Delivered PCE
Equipment = DEC x factor
Cost (Php)
(DEC)
Storage Tank 3 ₱27,632,298.39 ₱138,161,491.95
Silo 2 ₱22,136,475.90 ₱88,545,903.60
Mixer 1 ₱38,162,993.71 ₱152,651,974.84
Miller 1 ₱14,322,207.00 ₱57,288,828.00
Screen 1 ₱14,315,172.50 ₱57,260,690.00
Autoclave 1 ₱16,741,878.20 ₱83,709,391.00
Heat Exchanger 2 ₱21,295,810.56 ₱91,571985.40
Filter 1 ₱10,198,819.88 ₱43,854,925.48
Dryer 1 ₱12,193,086.96 ₱48,772,347.84
Holding Tank 1 ₱9,210,766.13 ₱46,053,830.65
Total Purchased Cost of ₱186,209,509.23 ₱807,871,368.77
Equipment (PCE)
343
Total Physical Plant Cost, PCC (Php) ₱2,262,039,832.56

Fixed Capital Cost, FCC (Php) ₱3,166,855,765.59
Working Capital, WCC (Php) ₱158,342,788.28
Total Capital Investment Required, TCI (Php) ₱3,325,198,553.87
Table 5.2.3: Estimation of Fixed Capital Cost (Sinnot, 2005)

Item Process type
Fluids Fluids-solids Solids
1. Major equipment, total purchase cost PCE PCE PCE
ƒ1 Equipment erection 0.4 0.45 0.50
ƒ2 Piping 0.70 0.45 0.20
ƒ3 Instrumentation 0.20 0.15 0.10
ƒ4 Electrical 0.10 0.10 0.10
ƒ5 Building, process 0.15 0.10 0.05
*ƒ6 Utilities 0.50 0.45 0.25
*ƒ7 Storages 0.15 0.20 0.25
*ƒ8 Site development 0.05 0.05 0.05
*ƒ9 Ancillary building 0.15 0.20 0.30
2. Total physical plant cost (PPC)
𝑷𝑷𝑪 = 𝑷𝑪𝑬(𝟏 + ƒ𝟏 + ⋯ + ƒ𝟗 )
= 𝑷𝑪𝑬 𝒙 3.40 3.15 2.80
ƒ10 Design and Engineering 0.30 0.25 0.20
ƒ11 Contractor’s fee 0.05 0.05 0.05
ƒ12 Contingency 0.10 0.10 0.10
𝑭𝒊𝒙𝒆𝒅 𝒄𝐚𝒑𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒍 = 𝑷𝑷𝑪 (𝟏(𝟏 + ƒ𝟏𝟎 + ƒ𝟏𝟏 + ƒ𝟏𝟐 )
= 𝑷𝑪𝑬 𝒙 1.45 1.40 1.35
*Omitted for minor extensions or additions to existing sites
PPC = PCE(1 + f1 + f2 + f3 + f4 + f6 + f7 )
PPC = ₱807,871,368.77(1+0.45+0.45+0.15+0.10+0.45+0.20)
PPC = ₱2,262,039,832.56
FIXED CAPITAL COST (FCC)

FCC = PPC (1+0.25+0.05+0.10)
FCC= ₱2,262,039,832.56 (1+0.25+0.05+0.10)
FCC = ₱3,166,855,765.59
344
WORKING CAPITAL COST (WCC):

WCC=FCC(0.05)
WCC = ₱3,166,855,765.59 (0.05)
WCC = ₱158,342,788.28
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT (TCI):

TCI = FCC + WCC
TCI= ₱3,166,855,765.59+ ₱158,342,788.28
TCI = ₱3,325,198,553.87
The total capital investment required for the construction of a

manufacturing plant of liquid sodium silicate using hydrothermal process is
estimated to be Php 3,325,198,553.87. This includes the fixed capital cost and
working capital cost. A larger percentage of the amount of total capital
investment is allotted for the fixed capital cost which includes the total cost of
the physical plant.
TOTAL ANNUAL PRODUCTION COST

Estimation of fixed capital cost, reference table 6.1, solid-liquid processing
plant,
Figure 5.2.2: Costing and Project Evaluation for Process 1
345
FIXED COSTS CALCULATION:
MAINTENANCE COST:
Maintenance Cost = (0.05)(FCC)
Maintenance Cost = (0.05)( ₱3,166,855,765.59)
𝐌𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱158,342,788.28
OPERATING LABOR COST (OLC):
Figure 5.2.3: Operating Labor Requirements for Chemical Process Industry

(Max Peters, 1991)
For a plant capacity of 76.31 tons of product per day (76,308.07 kg per day), and
having average conditions, the estimated operating labor requirement is 46
employee-hours/day/processing step. Considering a 300 days annual operation
and 3 processing steps:
Operating Labor required

= (46
employee ∙ hours
) x (3 processing steps) x ( 300 days / year operation)
day ∙ processing step
𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐝 = 𝟒𝟏, 𝟒𝟎𝟎 employee ∙ hours / 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫
346
Table 5.2.4: Minimum Wage Rate by Sector and Region as of July 4, 2016,
Binan, Laguna, Philippines (Minimum Wage Rate by Sector and Region, 2016)
Sector
Agriculture Retail and Service
Indicator Non- Establishments
Non-
Agriculture Plantation Employing Not More
Plantation
than 10 Workers
Binan,
Php 366.00 Php 341. 00 Php 321.00 Php 275.00
Laguna
Operating Labor Cost

employee ∙ hours P 366.00
= (41,400 )x( ) x (1 year of operation)
year Employee ∙ 8 hours
𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐋𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱ 𝟏, 𝟖𝟗𝟒, 𝟎𝟓𝟎. 𝟎𝟎
LABORATORY COST:
Laboratory Cost = (0.30)(OLC)
Laboratory Cost = (0.30)(₱1,894,050.00)
𝐋𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱ 568,215.00
SUPERVISION COST:
Supervision Cost = (0.20)(OLC)
Supervision Cost = (0.20)(₱ 1,894,050.00)
𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱ 378,810.00
PLANT OVERHEADS:
Plant Overheads = (0.50)(OLC)
Plant Overheads = (0.50)(₱1,894,050.00)
𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐬 = ₱ 947,025.00
CAPITAL CHARGES:
Capital Charges = (0.10)(FCC)
Capital Charges = (0.10)( ₱3,166,855,765.59)
𝐂𝐚𝐩𝐢𝐭𝐚𝐥 𝐂𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐬 = ₱316,685,576.56
347
LOCAL TAXES:
Local Taxes = (0.20)(FCC)
Local Taxes = (0.20)( ₱3,166,855,765.59)
𝐋𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐓𝐚𝐱𝐞𝐬 = ₱633,371,153.12
INSURANCE:
Insurance = (0.01)(FCC)
Insurance = (0.01)(₱3,166,855,765.59)
𝐈𝐧𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 = ₱31,668,557.66
LICENSE FEE/ROYALTY FEES:

Licence Fee/Royalty Fees = (0.01)(FCC)
Licence Fee/Royalty Fees = (0.01)(₱3,166,855,765.59)
𝐋𝐢𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐅𝐞𝐞/𝐑𝐨𝐲𝐚𝐥𝐭𝐲 𝐅𝐞𝐞𝐬 = ₱31,668,557.66
𝐅𝐢𝐱𝐞𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = 𝐌𝐂 + 𝐎𝐋𝐂 + 𝐋𝐂 + 𝐒 + 𝐏𝐎 + 𝐂𝐂 + 𝐋𝐓 + 𝐈 + 𝐋𝐅
FIXED COSTS = ₱158,342,788.28 + ₱ 1,894,050.00 + ₱ 568,215.00

+ ₱ 378,810.00 + ₱947,025.00 + ₱316,685,576.56
+ ₱633,371,153.12 + ₱31,668,557.66 + ₱31,668,557.66
𝐅𝐢𝐱𝐞𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱1,175,524,733.27
VARIABLE COSTS:
RAW MATERIALS:
Raw Materials Cost
MT ₱1,083.06
= (24.4186 )( ) (300 days)
day MT
MT ₱19,370.00
+ (15.7576 )( ) (300 days)
day MT
𝐑𝐚𝐰 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱99,501,456.27
MISCELLANEOUS OPERATING MATERIALS (MOM):

MOM = 0.10(Maintenance Cost)
MOM = 0.10(₱158,342,788.28)
𝐌𝐎𝐌 = ₱ 15,834,278.83
348
UTILITIES COST:
MT ₱73.66
Water = (49.6340 )( ) (300 DAYS)
day MT
𝐖𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫 = ₱1,096,812.13
kWh ₱7.53
Electricity = (1527.1968 )( ) (300 DAYS)
DAY kWh
𝐄𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐲 = ₱3,436,192.80
MT ₱563.83
Steam = (30.5435 )( ) (300 DAYS)
DAY MT
𝐒𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐦 = ₱5,166,402.48
Utilities Cost = ₱1,096,812.13 + ₱3,436,192.80+₱5,166,402.48

𝐔𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱9,699,407.41
Variable Cost = RMC + MOM + UC

Variable Cost = ₱99,501,456.27 + ₱ 15,834,278.83 + ₱9,699,407.41
Variable Cost = ₱125,035,142.50
DIRECT PRODUCTION COST (DPC):

DPC = Fixed Cost + Variable Cost
DPC = ₱1,175,524,733.27+₱125,035,142.50
DPC = ₱1,300,559,875.77
INDIRECT PRODUCTION COST (IPC):
SALES EXPENSE:
Sales Expence = 0.20(Fixed Cost + Variable Cost)
Sales Expence = 0.20(₱1,175,648,933.27+₱125,035,142.50)
𝐒𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 = ₱260,111,975.15
GENERAL OVERHEADS:
General Overheads = 0.30(Fixed Cost + Variable Cost)
General Overheads = 0.30(₱1,175,648,933.27+₱125,035,142.50)
𝐆𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐬 = ₱390,167,962.73
349
IPC = Sales Expence + General Overheads

IPC = ₱260,111,975.15+ ₱390,167,962.73
IPC = ₱650,279,937.88
ANNUAL PRODUCTION COST (APC):

APC = DPC + IPC
APC = ₱1,300,559,875.77 + ₱650,279,937.88
APC = ₱1,950,839,813.65
ANNUAL PRODUCTION RATE (APR):

₱1,950,839,813.65
APR =
76.30807 MT 300 working days
( )( year )
day
₱𝟖𝟓, 𝟐𝟏𝟕. 𝟕𝟏𝟓𝟐𝟑
𝐀𝐏𝐑 =
𝐌𝐓
350
Table 5.2.5: Summary of Production Costs of Hydrothermal Process

Summary of Production Costs
Cost Computation Total
Direct Production Cost
Variable Costs
From calculation of raw materials’
Raw Materials Php 99,501,456.27
cost
Miscellaneous
0.1(Maintenance Cost) Php 15,834,278.83
Materials
Utilities From calculation of utilities’ cost Php 9,699,407.41
Sub-total A Php 125,035,142.50
Fixed Costs
Maintenance 0.05(Fixed Capital Cost) Php 158,342,788.28
From calculation of operating
Operating labor Php 1,894,050.00
labor
Laboratory costs 0.3(OLC) Php 568,215.00
Supervision 0.2(OLC) Php 378,810.00
Plant overheads 0.50 (Php OLC) Php 947,025.00
Capital charges 0.1(FCC) Php 316,685,576.56
Insurance 0.01(FCC) Php 31,668,557.66
Local taxes 0.2(FCC) Php 633,371,153.12
Royalties 0.01(FCC) Php 31,668,557.66
Php
Sub-total B
1,175,524,733.27
Php
Direct Production Cost (Sub-total A + Sub-total B)
1,300,559,875.77
Indirect Production Cost
Sales Expense 0.20(Fixed Cost + Variable Cost) Php 260,111,975.15
General Overheads 0.30(Fixed Cost + Variable Cost) Php 390,167,962.73
Indirect Production Cost Php 650,279,937.88
Php
Annual Production Cost ( Direct Cost + Indirect Cost)
1,950,839,813.65
𝟕𝟔.𝟑𝟏 𝑴𝑻 𝟑𝟎𝟎 𝒘𝒐𝒓𝒌𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒅𝒂𝒚𝒔
Annual Production Rate ( 𝒅𝒂𝒚
)( 𝒚𝒆𝒂𝒓
) 22,893 MT per year
Annual Production Cost Php 85,217.71523 /
Production Rate
Annual Production Rate MT
351
The annual production cost required for the plant to produce 22,892.42
MT/year of liquid sodium silicate is estimated to be PHP 1,950,839,813.65. Most
of the amount are allotted for direct production cost.
MANUFACTURABILITY OF HYDROTHERMAL PROCESS
The Hydrothermal Process is relatively simple with high purity and high
reaction yield of 88%. It is widely used in China and has been an alternative for
the Furnace process due to its lower electrical consumption (NPCS, 2012). The
process uses only one reactor. Liquid sodium silicate is generally produced batch
wise in an autoclave with an elevated temperature and pressure.
YIELD
Hydrothermal process produces 88% product yield for the production of
sodium silicate from silica sand (Technologies and Solutions: Sodium Silicate,
2016).
BY-PRODUCTS
There are no by-products produced during the process.
PROCESS USAGE
Hydrothermal process has not been used in the Philippines due to the inadequate
availability of the raw materials. All of the raw materials would be imported. This
process is widely used in China.
SUSTAINABILITY OF HYDROTHERMAL PROCESS
It is important to know how a process can survive in a certain country to

decide whether or not it should be chosen. The factors for determining if the
process is sustainable are the availability, and historical and projected demand
and supply of raw materials.
AVAILABILITY OF RAW MATERIALS

The raw materials for the process are Silica sand and Sodium hydroxide.
These raw materials must have an adequate supply to meet its demands. It must
also have an excess supply to meet additional demands for the production of
352
sodium silicate study since it will be a major concern for selecting the best
process to use.
Historical and Projected Demand, Supply and Price of Raw Materials
A. Silica Sand
The table below shows the historical demand and supply of silica sand
in the Philippines.
Table 5.2.6: Supply and Demand of Silica Sand [Security and Exchange
Commission (SEC), Public Reference Unit, 2015]
Weight (MT)
Year
Supply Demand
2006 128,162.11 20,404.25
2007 126,433.59 21,631.09
2008 94,173.33 34,849.07
2009 121,992.45 39,859.63
2010 82,898.36 42,893.50
2011 129,909.22 58,973.66
2012 92,268.06 59,670.20
2013 171,591.84 64,279.07
2014 105,604.03 66,665.66
2015 98,817.87 62,449.38
Using the historical data of supply and demand, we can project the supply
and demand of silica sand for the next ten years. The table below shows the
projected supply and demand of silica sand from 2016 – 2026.
Table 5.2.7: Projected Supply and Demand of Silica Sand

Weight (kg)
Year
Supply Demand
2016 113,019.26 100,821.24
2017 112,625.47 124,470.25
2018 112,231.68 152,060.76
2019 111,837.90 183,592.77
2020 111,444.11 219,066.28
353
2021 111,050.32 258,481.29

2022 110,656.54 301,837.81
2023 110,262.75 349,135.83
2024 109,868.96 400,375.35
2025 109,475.18 455,556.37
Projected Supply and Demand

500,000.00
450,000.00
400,000.00
350,000.00
Weight (MT)
300,000.00
250,000.00
Supply
200,000.00
Demand
150,000.00
100,000.00
50,000.00
0.00
2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026
Year
Figure 5.2.4: Projected Supply and Demand of Silica Sand
From the figure of the projected supply and demand of silica sand, we can
conclude that the supply will be inadequate for the requirement of the
manufacturing process of liquid sodium silicate.
The table below shows the historical price of silica sand, the data will be
used to project the price for the next ten years.
Table 5.2.8: Historical Price of Silica Sand

[National Statistics Office, 2015]
Year Price
2006 0.8477
2007 2.6618
2008 3.9641
2009 4.0173
354
2010 4.3632
2011 5.1830
2012 11.5043
2013 6.3163
2014 2.9440
2015 1.0830
Table 5.2.9: Projected Price of Silica Sand

Year Price
2016 6.23
2017 7.08
2018 8.08
2019 9.22
2020 10.50
2021 11.93
2022 13.50
2023 15.21
2024 17.06
2025 19.06
B. Sodium Hydroxide
The table below shows the historical demand and supply of sodium
hydroxide in the Philippines.
Table 5.2.10: Supply and Demand of Sodium Hydroxide

[Security and Exchange Commission (SEC), Public Reference Unit, 2015]
Weight (MT)
Year
Supply Demand
2006 157,733 1,042.934
2007 157,818 1,087.489
2008 144,562 1,029.111
2009 160,215 1,014.776
2010 146,246 1,033.188
2011 154,321 1,096.440
2012 156,408 1,179.496
355
2013 163,415 1,290.793

2014 317,657 6,089.313
2015 142,876 8,745.718
and demand of sodium hydroxide for the next ten years. The table below shows
the projected supply and demand of sodium hydroxide from 2016 – 2026.
Table 5.2.11: Projected Supply and Demand of Sodium Hydroxide

Weight (MT)
Year
Supply Demand
2006 406,545.90 10,601.41
2007 503,063.19 13,542.56
2008 613,368.66 16,903.88
2009 737,462.32 20,685.36
2010 875,344.16 24,887.01
2011 1,027,014.18 29,508.82
2012 1,192,472.39 34,550.80
2013 1,371,718.79 40,012.94
2014 1,564,753.36 45,895.24
2015 1,771,576.12 52,197.71

2000000
1500000
Weight (MT)
1000000
500000
0
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Year
Demand Supply
Figure 5.2.5: Projected Supply and Demand of Sodium hydroxide
356
From the projected supply and demand of sodium hydroxide, we can

conclude that the supply will be adequate for the requirement of the
The table below shows the historical price of sodium hydroxide, the data
will be used to project the price for the next ten years.
Table 5.2.12: Historical Price of Sodium Hydroxide

Year Price
2006 16.05
2007 14.37
2008 18.53
2009 18.69
2010 11.61
2011 15.29
2012 16.16
2013 16.20
2014 14.99
2015 19.37
Table 5.2.13: Projected Price of Sodium Hydroxide

Year Price
2016 47.42
2017 58.59
2018 71.36
2019 85.72
2020 101.68
2021 119.23
2022 138.38
2023 159.12
2024 181.46
2025 205.40
357
Companies supplying
It is important that the raw materials are locally available. The possible
companies where the raw materials could be purchased here in the Philippines is
presented below:
A.1 Silica Sand

Some of the manufacturing plants of silica sand in the Philippines are the
following:
 OCS Silica Incorporated
Address: Tupaz Street, Pasil, Cebu, Cebu City, 6000
Website: http://www.ocssilicainc.com
Email: silicainc2013@gmail.com
Landline: (032) 266 4630
 Abra Mining and Industrial Corporation ( AMIC )

Address: 3rd Floor Jafer Building 118 West Avenue, Quezon
City 1104
Website: http://www.abramining.com/
Email: amic_101@yahoo.com.ph
Landline: (63)(2)925-1605
 Philippine Mining Development Corporation

Address: 3001B & C West Tower, Philippine Stock Exchange
Center Ortigas Center, Pasig City 1605, Philippines
Website: http://www.pmdc.com.ph
Email: info@pmdc.com.ph
Landline: (632)521-2583
A.2 Sodium Hydroxide

Some of the manufacturing plants of Sodium Hydroxide in the
Philippines is:
 Emerald Chemicals Inc
Address: 61 M. Gregorio St. Bo. Canumay West, Valenzuela
City, Philippines
Website: www.emeraldchemicals.com
Email: sales@emeraldchemicals.com.ph
Landline: +63 (2) 362-2204
358
 International Chemical Industries, Inc.

Address: Km 32 MacArthur highway. Bo. Tuktukan,
Guiguinto, Bulacan, 3015.
Website: http://www.inchem.com.ph/
Email: junjoson@inchem.com.ph.
Landline: +(63 2) 241-6801
 Mabuhay Vinyl Corporation

Address: 3rd Floor, Philamlife Salcedo Building, 126 L.P.
Leviste Street,
Salcedo Village 1227 Makati City, Philippines
Website: http://www.mvc.com.ph/
Email: filvinyl@mvc.com.ph
Landline: (632) 817-8971 to 76
SAFETY
The table below show the operating temperature and pressure of the
equipment involved in the production of liquid sodium silicate via hydrothermal
process. It can be observed that there are 2 equipment that requires elevated
temperature and pressure.
INTENSIVE EQUIPMENT
Table 5.2.14: Equipment for Hydrothermal Process with operating pressure and
temperature
Equipment Tag Operating Operating
Number Pressure Temperature
Storage Tank ST-001 101.325 kPa 30 oC
Silo SL-001 101.325 kPa 30 oC
Mixer MX-001 101.325 kPa 30 oC
Silo SL-002 101.325 kPa 30 oC
Miller ML-001 101.325 kPa 30 oC
Screen SC-001 101.325 kPa 30 oC
Reactor R-001 1,400 kPa 200 oC
359
Holding Tank HT-001 500 kPa 200 oC

Cooler CO-001 151.99 kPa 90 oC
Filter Press F-001 101.325 kPa 90 oC
Dryer DR-001 101.325 kPa 160 oC
Cooler CO-002 101.325 kPa 30 oC
Total Number of Intensive Equipment : 2
For this process, two of these will be under a huge amount of heat. The energy
intensive equipment are the reactor and holding tank.
Handling of Raw Materials:

Silica sand and sodium hydroxide are used as the major raw materials for
the production of liquid sodium silicate via hydrothermal process. Silica sand is
considered not hazardous by OSHA but it can still cause potential health effects
when inhaled. Long term exposure can lead to lung cancer and other respiratory
illnesses. Before handling, it is important that all engineering controls are
operating and that protective equipment requirements and personal hygiene
measures are being followed. Immediately report leaks, spills or failures of the
safety equipment (e.g. ventilation system). In case of accidental release of silica
sand, evacuate the area immediately. For clean-up, avoid dry sweeping and if
necessary, use a dust suppressant such as water.
On the other hand, sodium hydroxide is hazardous in case of inhalation
and skin contact. Sodium hydroxide is highly corrosive and contact can severely
irritate and burn the skin and eyes with possible eye damage. In case of
inhalation, higher exposures may a build-up of fluid in the lungs that results to
pulmonary edema and other pulmonary illnesses. Personal protective equipment
must be used when handling sodium hydroxide. In case of leakage or spills,
immediately evacuate the area, eliminate ignition source and use sand to absorb
the solution.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECT
There are less environmental aspects to consider in the hydrothermal process

since there are no by-products produced and makes naturally occurring end
products.
360
PROCESS 2
Furnace Process
This section details the systematic route on the production of liquid

sodium silicate via furnace process. A process narrative is presented including
the data acquired from various literatures available including all the criteria
process flow diagram.
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
For large-scale production of liquid Sodium silicates, the mixtures of
Na2CO3 and silica sands are fused in an open-hearth regenerative furnaces having
a design that is conventional for the glass manufacturing industry. Silica sand are
drawn from hoppers, dosed via belt weighers and homogenized in screw
conveyor. A normal shrinkage in the weight of the charge approximately 10% is
due to the loss of gases and volatilization of alkali oxides. It has to be
compensated by the initial weight of the feed. The raw material mixture is
adjusted in humidity by the addition of water to get a water content of
approximately 5%. The solid is then fed continuously to the furnaces by means
of cooled screw conveyors and is distributed to the whole surface of the bath to
yield an optimum energy transfer.
The process is characterized by the energy saving principle of preheating
the incoming air by hot combustion gases. Regenerative heat exchangers as well
as recuperative heat recycling systems may be used.
Siemens-type continuous tanks are heated by combinations of heavy fuel
oil and air or gas and air. Cold air is blown into a regenerative chamber set A by
fans, forced air inlet valves, and dampers Thus, it is heated to approximately
1200°C. Then it is mixed with liquid fuel or gas and burned in the respective
burners. The water-cooled burners form flames, which burn across the bath.
Temperatures at the roof above the center of the flame can reach up to 1700°C.
Burners and regenerator chambers operate in pairs. Cross-firing ports in
the sidewalls of the furnace are connected to the regenerator chambers. The hot
combustion gases are withdrawn on the side opposite to the burners into checker
chamber set B and the bricks are heated there. After leaving them, the waste
gases are directed to flues that lead to consecutive waste heat boilers and
eventually to the stacks.
361
When regenerative chambers B achieve a defined temperature, the

burners are switched off and the airflow direction is reversed. Fresh cold air is
conducted to the hot regenerative chambers B. It is heated there, mixed with fuel,
and fed to the burners. Hot waste gas is directed to regenerative chambers A to
be cooled and eventually passed to the stacks.
The direction of gas streams is changed every 15–30 min.
In a recuperator made from metal, the hot flue gases are separated from
one another and led by a countercurrent to cold inlet air.
The melted material flows gradually through the furnace and evolves
carbon dioxide. The fused water glass is continuously drawn from the furnace by
a siphon overflow at a temperature of 1050–1100°C (Zoller Uri, 2004). Soda ash
and SiO2 react when molten to form sodium silicate and carbon dioxide. The
molten mass is then allowed to pass through the discharging end of the melting
chamber to the water-quenching pit (Project Profile: Sodium Silicate, 2016).
Na2CO3(s) + SiO2(s) Na2SiO3(s) + CO2 (g)
The result of fusing of Na2CO3 and silica is carried out to produce a cullet,
a glass-like sodium silicate, with a specific SiO2/Na2O ratio that is usually greater
than 2.5 (standard ± 3.4). The cullet is being temporarily stored in a 1 ton bags.
The quenched mass is passed to a dissolver (constructed either over the channels
of the main furnace or independently connected with pipe line of steam boiler)
for the purpose of dissolving the material with suitable proportions of water under
conditions such as pressure, temperature and time to produce neutral silicate
(Project Profile: Sodium Silicate, 2016)
Steam at 0.7- 0.8 MPa and hot water are then fed into the dissolver under
pressure and are continually fed into the reactor until the cullet has dissolved and
the required concentration of the soluble sodium silicate has been reached. The
dissolution of sodium silicate is under the vapor pressure of 2.0 – 2.5 MPa at a
temperature of 155-166oC for 3 to 4 hours. The dissolved mass is then unloaded
and transferred to an intermediate tank where it is cooled. It will be tested and
sorted in either cement tanks or directly in storage drums for dispatch.
The various grades of liquid sodium silicate are produced by varying the
alkali/silica ratio and the solids content. Sodium silicate could be sold as a
solution where the product is ground and dissolved in water or by steam when
the ratio of silica to alkali is above two. The plant does not emit any pollutant
rejects to the environment (Project Profile: Sodium Silicate, 2016).
From most of the technologies, dry ice manufacturing method is
recommended to the manufacturing plants that produce carbon dioxide as by-
362
product in excess quantity at high pressure. Carbon dioxide is the being released
in the furnace during the melting of silica sand and sodium carbonate. For the
treatment of carbon dioxide gas into dry ice, initially a cooler is used to decrease
the temperature of pressurized gas to ambient temperature by means of cooling
water. The outlet stream of cooler drops to the temperature around 40 oC. An
expander than reduce the pressure by 3.9MPa (throttling through the nozzle)
which leads to phase change of the CO2. Both gas and liquid phases of CO2 at
equilibrium are further cooled to temperature of 4oC using chilled ammonia. The
equilibrium mixture is fed to separator to collect the liquid CO2. The liquid
stream is further throttled to atmosphere pressure and fed to snow tower to
convert liquid CO2 to solid-state dry ice (-10oC). The equilibrium gas from the
snow tower and separator is removed and vented into atmosphere (KK, 2013).
363
Figure 5.2.6: Process Flow Diagram of Furnace Process
364
PLANT DESIGN ECONOMICS
Equipment Cost PLANT DESIGN ECONOMICS

Table 5.2.15 Lang Factors (Green & Perry, 2008)

Lang factors
Fixed capital Total capital
Type of plant
investment investment
Solid-fluid
4.3 5.0
processing
Adapted from M. S. Peters, K. D. Timmerhaus, and R. West, Plant Design
and Economics for Chemical Engineers, 5th ed., McGraw-Hill, New York,
2004.
Table 5.2.16: Cost of Equipment Items

Delivered Fixed Capital
Equipment Cost (FCC)
Equipment Quantity
Cost (Php) = DEC x factor
(DEC)
Storage
3 ₱27,632,298.39 ₱138,161,491.95
Tank
Silo 2 ₱22,136,475.90 ₱88,545,903.60
Washer 1 ₱9,210,766.13 ₱46,053,830.65
Furnace 1 ₱211,500.00 ₱909,450.00
Mixer 1 ₱38,162,993.71 ₱152,651,974.84
Grinder 1 ₱14,322,207.00 ₱57,288,828.00
Water
quenching 1 ₱5,643,600.00 ₱24,267,480.00
pit
Heat
3 ₱31,943,715.84 ₱137,357,978.10
Exchanger
Filter 1 ₱10,198,819.88 ₱43,854,925.48
365
Dryer 3 ₱12,193,086.96 ₱48,772,347.84

Rotary
2 ₱638,166.00 ₱2,744,113.80
cooler
Dissolver 1 ₱9,210,766.13 ₱46,053,830.65
Conveyor 5 ₱15,311,465.63 ₱65,839,302.19
Expander 2 ₱94,060,000.00 ₱404,458,000.00
Condenser 1 ₱47,030,000.00 ₱202,229,000.00
Snow
1 ₱26,027,137.00 ₱111,916,689.00
Tower
Total Purchased Cost
₱363,932,998.60 ₱1,571,105,146.00
of Equipment (PCE)
Table 5.2.17: Estimation of fixed capital cost (Sinnot, 2005)

Process type
Item
ƒ2 Piping 0.70 0.45 0.20
ƒ4 Electrical 0.10 0.10 0.10
*ƒ6 Utilities 0.50 0.45 0.25
*ƒ7 Storages 0.15 0.20 0.25
𝑷𝑷𝑪 = 𝑷𝑪𝑬(𝟏 + ƒ𝟏 + ⋯ + ƒ𝟗 )
= 𝑷𝑪𝑬 𝒙 3.40 3.15 2.80
𝑭𝒊𝒙𝒆𝒅 𝒄𝒂𝒑𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒍 = 𝑷𝑷𝑪 (𝟏(𝟏 + ƒ𝟏𝟎 + ƒ𝟏𝟏 + ƒ𝟏𝟐 )
= 𝑷𝑪𝑬 𝒙 1.45 1.40 1.35
366
𝑃𝑃𝐶 = 𝑃𝐶𝐸(1 + 𝑓1 + 𝑓2 + 𝑓3 + 𝑓4 + 𝑓6 + 𝑓7 )
PPC = ₱1,571,105,146.00(1+0.45+0.45+0.15+0.10+0.45+0.20)
PPC = ₱4,399,094,409.00

FCC = PPC (1+0.25+0.05+0.10)
FCC= ₱4,399,094,409.00(1+0.25+0.05+0.10)
FCC = ₱6,158,732,172.00
WORKING CAPITAL COST (WCC):

WCC=FCC(0.05)
WCC = ₱6,158,732,172.00(0.05)
WCC = ₱307,936,608.60
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT (TCI):

TCI = FCC + WCC
TCI= ₱6,158,732,172.00+ ₱307,936,608.60
TCI = ₱6,466,668,781.00
Estimation of fixed capital cost, reference table 6.1, solid-liquid processing

plant,
367
MAINTENANCE COST:
Maintenance Cost = (0.05)( ₱6,158,732,172.00 )

For a plant capacity of 76.31 tons of product per day (76,308.07 kg per
day), and having average conditions, the estimated operating labor requirement
is 46 employee-hours/day/processing step. Considering a 300 days’ annual
operation and 3 processing steps:
Figure 5.2.8: Operating Labor Requirements for Chemical Process Industry

(Max Peters, 1991)
𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐋𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐝

employee ∙ hours
= (46 ) x (3 processing steps) x (300 days/year operation)
day ∙ processing step
𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐝 = 𝟒𝟏, 𝟒𝟎𝟎 employee ∙ hours / 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫
368
Table 5.2.18: Minimum Wage Rate by Sector and Region as of July 4,2016,
Biňan Laguna, Philippines (Philippine Statistics Authority, 2016)
Secto
Agriculture Retail and
Service
Establishments
Non- Non- Employing Not
Indicator Plantation
Agriculture Plantation More Than 10
Workers
Biňan
Php 366.00 Php 341.00 Php 321.00 Php 275.00
Laguna
Operating Labor Cost

employee ∙ hours P 366.00
= (41,400 )x( ) x (1 year of operation)
year Employee ∙ 8 hours
𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐋𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱ 𝟏, 𝟖𝟗𝟒, 𝟎𝟓𝟎. 𝟎𝟎
LABORATORY COST:
Laboratory Cost = (0.30)(₱1,894,050.00)
𝐋𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱ 568,215.00
SUPERVISION COST:
𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱ 378,810.00
PLANT OVERHEADS:
Plant Overheads = (0.50)(₱1,894,050.00)
𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐬 = ₱ 947,025.00
CAPITAL CHARGES:
Capital Charges = (0.10)( ₱6,158,732,172.00)
369
LOCAL TAXES:
Local Taxes = (0.20)(₱6,158,732,172.00)
𝐋𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐓𝐚𝐱𝐞𝐬 = ₱1,231,746,434.00
INSURANCE:
Insurance = (0.01)(₱6,158,732,172.00)
𝐈𝐧𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 = ₱61,587,321.72

Licence Fee/Royalty Fees = (0.01)( ₱6,158,732,172.00)
𝐅𝐈𝐗𝐄𝐃 𝐂𝐎𝐒𝐓𝐒 = 𝐌𝐂 + 𝐎𝐋𝐂 + 𝐋𝐂 + 𝐒 + 𝐏𝐎 + 𝐂𝐂 + 𝐋𝐓 + 𝐈 + 𝐋𝐅
𝐅𝐈𝐗𝐄𝐃 𝐂𝐎𝐒𝐓 = ₱307,936,608.60 + ₱ 1,894,050.00 + ₱ 568,215.00

+ ₱ 378,810.00 + ₱947,025.00 + ₱615,873,217.20
+ ₱1,231,746,434.00 + ₱61,587,321.72
+ ₱61,587,321.72
𝐅𝐈𝐗𝐄𝐃 𝐂𝐎𝐒𝐓𝐒 = ₱2,282,519,003.00
VARIABLE COSTS:
RAW MATERIALS:
Raw Materials Cost
MT ₱1,083.06
= (45.784845 )( ) (300 DAYS)
DAY MT
MT ₱9,876.30
+ (76.3081 )( ) (300 DAYS)
DAY MT
𝐑𝐚𝐰 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱240,968,826.70

MOM = 0.10(₱307,936,608.60)
𝐌𝐎𝐌 = ₱ 30,793,660.86
370
UTILITIES COST:
m3 ₱73.66
Water = (84.8546 )( ) (300 DAYS)
day m3
𝐖𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫 = ₱1,875,116.951
KWH ₱7.53
Electricity = (2,535.0560 )( ) (300 DAYS)
DAY KWH
𝐄𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐲 = ₱5,726,691.504
L ₱54.00
Furnace Oil = (6,782.8722 )( ) (300 DAYS)
DAY L
𝐎𝐢𝐥 = ₱109,882,529.6
Utilities Cost = ₱1,875,116.951+₱5,726,691.504 + ₱109,882,529.6


Variable Cost = ₱240,968,826.70+₱ 30,793,660.86+₱117,484,338.10
Variable Cost = ₱389,246,825.70

DPC = Variable Cost + Fixed Cost
DPC = ₱389,246,825.70 + ₱2,282,519,003.00
𝐃𝐏𝐂 = ₱𝟐, 𝟔𝟕𝟏, 𝟕𝟔𝟓, 𝟖𝟐𝟗. 𝟎𝟎
SALES EXPENSE:
Sales Expense = 0.20(Variable Cost + Fixed Cost)
Sales Expense = 0.20(₱389,246,825.70 + ₱2,282,519,003.00 )
𝐒𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 = ₱534,353,165.80
GENERAL OVERHEADS:
General Overheads = 0.30(Variable Cost + Fixed Cost)
General Overheads = 0.30(₱389,246,825.70 + ₱2,282,519,003.00 )
371
IPC = Sales Expense + General Overheads

IPC = ₱534,353,165.80+ ₱801,529,748.70
𝐈𝐏𝐂 = ₱1,335,882,914.00

APC = IPC + DPC
APC = ₱1,335,882,914.00 + ₱2,671,765,829.00
𝐀𝐏𝐂 = ₱4,007,648,743.00

₱4,007,648,743.00
APR =
( )( )
day year
₱𝟏𝟕𝟓, 𝟎𝟔𝟒. 𝟒𝟑𝟒𝟖
𝐀𝐏𝐑 =
𝐌𝐓
372
Table 5.2.19: Summary of Production Costs of Regenerative Furnace Process

Variable Costs
Raw Materials From calculation of raw materials’ cost Php 240,968,826.70
Miscellaneous 0.1(Maintenance Cost) Php 30,793,660.86
Materials
Sub-total A Php 389,246,825.70
Fixed Costs
Operating From calculation of operating labor Php 1,894,050.00
labor
Laboratory 0.3(OLC) Php 568,215.00
costs
Supervision 0.2(OLC) Php 378,810.00
Plant 0.50(Php OLC) Php 947,025.00
overheads
Capital charges 0.1(FCC) Php 615,873,217.20
Local taxes 0.2(FCC) Php
1,231,746,434.00
Sub-total B Php 612,469,303.00
Direct Production Cost (Sub-total A + Sub-total B) Php 983,201,943.50
Sales Expense 0.20(Fixed Cost + Variable Cost) Php 534,353,165.80
General 0.30(Fixed Cost + Variable Cost) Php 801,529,748.70
Overheads
Indirect Production Cost Php
1,335,882,914.00
Annual Production Cost (Direct Cost + Indirect Cost) Php
4,007,648,743.00
𝟕𝟔.𝟑𝟎𝟖𝟎𝟕 𝑴𝐓 𝟑𝟎𝟎 𝒘𝒐𝒓𝒌𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒅𝒂𝒚𝒔
Annual Production Rate ( 𝒅𝒂𝒚
)( 𝒚𝒆𝒂𝒓
) 22,892.421 MT/year
Production Annual Production Cost Php 175,064.4348
Production Rate=
Rate Annual Production Rate /MT
373
The annual production cost required for the plant to produce 22,892.42
MT/year of liquid sodium silicate is estimated to be Php 4,007,648,743.00. Most
of the amount are allotted for direct production cost.
MANUFACTURABILITY OF FURNACE PROCESS
The Furnace processPLANT

produces 85%ECONOMICS
DESIGN product yield for the production of
sodium silicate from silica sand (Zoller Uri, 2004). The sodium silicate product
obtained from the process has a 54% solid level and a weight ratio of SiO2/Na2O
of 2.
YIELD
This process has a product yield of 85% (Zoller Uri, 2004).
BY-PRODUCT
Carbon dioxide is the only by-product of furnace process. From most of
the technologies, dry ice manufacturing method is recommended to the
manufacturing plants that produce carbon dioxide as by-product in excess
quantity at high pressure. Carbon dioxide is the being released in the furnace
during the melting of silica sand and sodium carbonate. For the treatment of
carbon dioxide gas into dry ice, initially a cooler is used to decrease the
temperature of pressurized gas to ambient temperature by means of cooling
water. The outlet stream of cooler drops to the temperature around 40 oC. An
expander than reduce the pressure by 3.9MPa (throttling through the nozzle)
which leads to phase change of the CO2. Both gas and liquid phases of CO2 at
equilibrium are further cooled to temperature of 4oC using chilled ammonia. The
equilibrium mixture is fed to separator to collect the liquid CO2. The liquid
stream is further throttled to atmosphere pressure and fed to snow tower to
convert liquid CO2 to solid-state dry ice (-10oC). The equilibrium gas from the
snow tower and separator is removed and vented into atmosphere (KK, 2013).
Seven (7) processing steps are needed to produce a powdered activated carbon at
a price of Php 3.2 per kilogram.
PROCESS USAGE
The furnace process has been used in the Philippines by Integral
Chemical Company with its plant located in Mandaluyong. They can produce
24,000 MT of liquid sodium silicate per year.
374
SUSTAINABILITY OF FURNACE PROCESS

It is important to know how a process can survive in a certain country to
decide whether or not it should be chosen. The factors for determining if the
process is sustainable are the availability, and historical and projected demand
and supply of raw materials.

The raw materials for the process are Silica sand and Sodium Carbonate.
These raw materials must have an adequate supply to meet its demands. It must
also have an
excess supply to meet additional demands for the production of sodium silicate
study since it will be a major concern for selecting the best process to use.
Historical and Projected Demand, Supply and Price of Raw Materials

C. Silica Sand
The table below shows the historical demand and supply of silica sand
in the Philippines.
Table 5.2.20: Supply and Demand of Silica Sand [Security and Exchange
Commission (SEC), Public Reference Unit, 2015]
Weight (MT)
Year
Supply Demand
2006 128,162.11 20,404.25
2007 126,433.59 21,631.09
2008 94,173.33 34,849.07
2009 121,992.45 39,859.63
2010 82,898.36 42,893.50
2011 129,909.22 58,973.66
2012 92,268.06 59,670.20
2013 171,591.84 64,279.07
2014 105,604.03 66,665.66
2015 98,817.87 62,449.38
375
and demand of silica sand for the next ten years. The table below shows the
projected supply and demand of silica sand from 2016 – 2026.
Table 5.2.21: Projected Supply and Demand of Silica Sand

Weight (kg)
Year
Supply Demand
2016 113,019.26 100,821.24
2017 112,625.47 124,470.25
2018 112,231.68 152,060.76
2019 111,837.90 183,592.77
2020 111,444.11 219,066.28
2021 111,050.32 258,481.29
2022 110,656.54 301,837.81
2023 110,262.75 349,135.83
2024 109,868.96 400,375.35
2025 109,475.18 455,556.37

500,000.00
450,000.00
400,000.00
350,000.00
Weight (MT)
300,000.00
250,000.00
Supply
200,000.00
Demand
150,000.00
100,000.00
50,000.00
0.00
2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026
Year
Figure 5.2.9: Projected Supply and Demand of Silica Sand
376
From the figure of the projected supply and demand of silica sand, we can
conclude that the supply will be inadequate for the requirement of the
The table below shows the historical price of silica sand; the data will be
used to project the price for the next ten years.
Table 5.2.22: Historical Price of Silica Sand [National Statistics Office, 2015]
Year Price
2006 0.8477
2007 2.6618
2008 3.9641
2009 4.0173
2010 4.3632
2011 5.1830
2012 11.5043
2013 6.3163
2014 2.9440
2015 1.0830
Table 5.2.23: Projected Price of Silica Sand

Year Price
2016 6.23
2017 7.08
2018 8.08
2019 9.22
2020 10.50
2021 11.93
2022 13.50
2023 15.21
2024 17.06
2025 19.06
377
B. Sodium Carbonate
Table 5.2.24: Supply and Demand of Sodium Carbonate [Security and
Exchange Commission (SEC), Public Reference Unit, 2015]
Weight (Kg)
Year Demand Supply
2006 22,636,288 342,957,043
2007 31,674,182 382,668,437
2008 41,257,674 347,638,746
2009 51,965,428 404,040,809
2010 79,006,140 436,573,136
2011 81,281,670 460,670,419
2012 91,312,974 365,330,949
2013 102,221,336 427,720,981
2014 136,830,344 349,754,223
2015 176,843,660 453,275,380
and demand of sodium carbonate for the next ten years. The table below shows
the projected supply and demand of sodium carbonate from 2016 – 2025.
Table 5.2.25: Projected Supply and Demand of Sodium Carbonate

Weight (kg)
Year
Demand Supply
2016 43,339,991.22 170,414,041.36
2017 48,621,984.94 177,901,675.59
2018 54,547,713.38 185,718,300.70
2019 61,195,630.73 193,878,371.87
2020 68,653,752.61 202,396,979.39
2021 77,020,821.44 211,289,876.59
2022 86,407,613.71 220,573,508.97
2023 96,938,406.63 230,265,044.61
2024 108,752,623.48 240,382,405.93
2025 122,006,679.54 250,944,302.81
378
Projected demand vs. Projected Supply

300,000,000.00
250,000,000.00
200,000,000.00
Weight (MT)
150,000,000.00
Demand
100,000,000.00 Supply
50,000,000.00
0.00
2014 2016 2018 2020 2022 2024 2026
Year
Figure 5.2.10: Projected Supply and Demand of Sodium Carbonate
From the figure of the projected supply and demand of sodium carbonate,
we can conclude that the supply will be adequate for the requirement of the
The table below shows the historical price of sodium carbonate; the data
will be used to project the price for the next ten years.
Table 5.2.26: Historical Price of Sodium Carbonate

Year Price (Php/kg)
2006 1.32
2007 1.47
2008 2.59
2009 2.66
2010 2.72
2011 2.77
2012 3.23
2013 3.14
2014 3.58
2015 4.07
379
Table 5.2.27: Projected Price of Sodium Carbonate

Year Price (Php/kg)
2016 10.46
2017 11.51
2018 11.57
2019 11.64
2020 11.7
2021 11.77
2022 11.84
2023 11.91
2024 11.99
2025 12.07
A. Companies supplying
presented below:
A.1 Silica Sand

Some of the manufacturing plants of silica sand in the Philippines
are the following:
 OCS Silica Incorporated
Address: Tupaz Street, Pasil, Cebu, Cebu City, 6000
Website: http://www.ocssilicainc.com
Email: silicainc2013@gmail.com
Landline: (032) 266 4630
 Abra Mining and Industrial Corporation (AMIC)

Address: 3rd Floor Jafer Building 118 West Avenue, Quezon
City 1104
Website: http://www.abramining.com/
Email: amic_101@yahoo.com.ph
Landline: (63)(2)925-1605
380
 Philippine Mining Development Corporation

Address: 3001B & C West Tower, Philippine Stock Exchange
Center Ortigas Center, Pasig City 1605, Philippines
Website: http://www.pmdc.com.ph
Email: info@pmdc.com.ph
Landline: (632)521-2583
A.2 Sodium Carbonate

Some of the manufacturing plants of Sodium Carbonate in the
Philippines are:
 Arvin International Marketing Inc.
Address: 15th Floor, Unit B, A Place Building, Coral Way,
Pasay, Metro Manila
Website: www.arvinintl.com
Email: info@arvinintl.com
Landline: +63 (2) 843-3676 to 80
 Angle Chemical Company

Address: Manila, Philippines
Website: www.anglechemicalcompany.com
Email: anglechemicals.com
Landline: +(632) 923-1954
SAFETY
EQUIPMENT PARAMETERS FOR WORKERS
The table below show the operating temperature and pressure of the
equipment involved in the production of liquid sodium silicate via furnace
process. It can be observed that there are 7 equipment that requires elevated
temperature and pressure.
381
Table 5.2.28: Equipment for Furnace Process with operating pressure and
operating temperature
Soda Ash Silo SL-001 101.325 kPa 30oC
Silica Sand Silo SL-002 101.325 kPa 30oC
Washer W-001 101.325 kPa 30oC
Dryer of Silica DR-001 101.325 kPa 100oC
Sand
Silica Sand and MX-001 101.325 kPa 100oC
Soda Ash Mixer
Heat Exchanger CO-001 101.325 kPa 1200oC
for regenerative
system
Furnace R-001 101.325 kPa 1100oC
Miller ML-001 101.325 kPa 120oC
Dissolver DS-001 2500 kPa 166oC
Cooler CO-002 101.325 kPa 30oC
Filter F-001 101.325 kPa 30oC
Liquid Sodium ST-003 101.325 kPa 30oC
Silicate Storage
Tank
Cooler CO-003 2000 kPa 130oC
Expander EX-001 101.325 kPa 40oC
Condenser CD-001 3900 kPa 4oC
Flash Tank SP-001 101.325 kPa 4oC
Cooler CO-004 101.325 kPa -10oC
Expander EX-002 101.325 kPa -10oC
Snow Tower SN-001 101.325 kPa -10oC
Number of Intensive Equipment: 7
During manufacturing, workers may potentially be exposed to soluble

silicates by the dermal and respiratory routes. The fusion of sand and alkali
carbonate takes place in a closed furnace. After the fusion process the silicate
lumps pass through alternative processing steps. They are either ground to
powders or granules in a grinder, dissolved in rotating dissolvers or the solutions
382
may be converted to a powder by spray- or drum-drying. All these operations are

performed in closed systems.
In granular products 96 -98 % of the particles are between 200 µm and
1250 µm, in powdered products 80 - 90 % are greater than 50 µm, i.e. well above
the respirable range (Minihan and Lovell 2000; Rhodia 2003 and 2001; Cognis
2003). Particles (too large or too small) which are rejected at the sieving step are
recycled back into the system. This process is under containment. Although
sodium silicate contains mostly of particles in the non-respirable range, mucosal
damage due to the inhalation of alkaline dust particles must be prevented by
wearing dust masks or by operating appropriate exhaust ventilation systems. Dust
measurements at a typical manufacturing site yielded maximum concentrations
of 0.8 mg/m3 (Henkel 2003). Both preparation and packaging of solutions and
solids are automated and performed in closed systems or with local exhaust
ventilation systems in place. For quality control, sampling is performed using a
trap door. Negative pressure kept within the reactor prevents spreading of
particles to the outside. Based on the industrial hygiene assessment, for tasks
where a short-term exposure greater than 2 mg/m3 cannot be excluded, workers
have to wear a portable respiratory device in addition to standard protective
equipment (overalls, goggles, and gloves).
Professional downstream users may be exposed to liquid and/or aerosol
(liquid silicates). Since the primary hazard of soluble silicates is their alkalinity,
the usual precautions must be observed in handling to prevent contact with
clothes, skin and in particular with the eyes. Workers are recommended to wear
protective equipment (safety gloves and glasses, protective clothes, and a
respiratory mask with particle filter when handling fine powders). Information is
provided to the professional users through the safety data sheets.
The production procedures of furnace process cause different emissions
(wastewater, exhaust air and residues). The composition of the exhaust air
depends on the chemical reactions and conditions of the combustion process.
Carbon dioxide, by-product of furnace process, is generated by the reaction of
soda ash and silica sand. Carbon dioxide is also caused by the combustion of gas
and air. The emission of wastewater or residues depends on the desired product
qualities of liquid sodium silicate and the necessity to filter it. Due to steadily
383
increasing product quality requirements, the filtration of the liquid sodium

silicate may become obligatory in the future.
Liquid sodium silicate produced by this process is not persistent in
aquatic systems, but its high pH is acutely harmful to aquatic life. Wastewater
generated from liquid sodium silicate process is characterized by higher pH
values and its neutralization result in semisolid material called silica gel which
clog the sewage system. This process also produces impurities such as iron,
aluminum, calcium and magnesium compounds, probably in the form of silicates
which originate partly in the quartz, sand, and other raw materials used or which
are obtained from the furnace walls by the action of the strongly alkaline silicate
melt. These impurities will contaminate any bodies of water when released
without treatment.
384
PROCESS 3
Rice Husk Process
This section details the systematic route on the production of liquid sodium
silicate and activated carbon from rice husk as the feedstock. A process narrative
is presented including the data acquired from various literatures available
including all the criteria process flow diagram.
PROCESS DESCRIPTION
The feed materials used for this process are rice husk, sodium hydroxide,
hydrochloric acid and phosphoric acid. Rice husk and sodium hydroxide are the
main materials for the production of liquid sodium silicate. Hydrochloric acid is
used to leach the metallic impurities from the rice husk and phosphoric acid is
used to activate the carbon. There are three main processes in the manufacture of
liquid sodium silicate from rice husk: extraction of silica from rice husk,
digestion of silica with NaOH to produce sodium silicate solution and processing
of the carbon cake to produce activated carbon.
Rice husk from rice milling is conveyed to a mill to decrease mesh size
to 200 (Ghosh & Bhattacherjee, 2013). The milled husk is then screened and the
oversize particles returns to the mill while the undersize is conveyed to the silo
for storage. The husk is leached with 3% hydrochloric acid at 90oC for 6 hours
to remove metal impurities such as potassium, iron, manganese, sodium and
calcium (H. Riveros, 1986). The leaching tank is heated by steam to increase the
solubility of metals to the hydrochloric acid and maintained at below the boiling
point of water to prevent grinding between grains.
The slurry is then cooled through a heat exchanger, placed in a holding
tank and sent to a filter in a batch-wise manner where the filtrate containing the
metal impurities is sent to a third party waste treatment and the cake is sent to an
oven and heated at 160oC to ensure a dried husk. Afterwards, it is fired in a
furnace at 700oC to completely carbonize the husk while maintaining its
amorphous structure to remove all the volatile matter effectively (Hotza, 2002;
Siddique, 2008). The heat of the stack gas is recovered and used for producing
steam with its high calorific value (Rathakrishnan, 2010). A clean rice husk ash
rich in SiO2 is now obtained. The ash is then conveyed to a rotary cooler to reduce
the temperature to at least 120oC.
385
The CRHA containing a rich amount of silica and some carbon is

introduced in a continuously stirred tank reactor. Silica is activated in a
continuously stirred reactor with sodium hydroxide (NaOH) to produce sodium
silicate (K.V. Selvakumar, 2014). It is stirred for 2 hours at 90oC for complete
digestion of NaOH (Mamdouh A. Abdel Rahim, 2015). The reaction is as
follows:
2NaOH + 2.063242SiO2 → Na2 O. 2.063242SiO2 + H2 O
After the reaction is completed, the sodium silicate solution with carbon
is sent to a filter press to separate the sodium silicate solution from carbon. The
liquid sodium silicate solution has a weight ratio (SiO2:Na2O) of 2 and 48%
silicon dioxide content (Zoller, 2009). The sodium silicate is then cooled to 31oC
before it is sent to a storage tank while the carbon cake is further processed.
The cake is impregnated with 3 Molar phosphoric acid at 80oC
(Cheenmatchaya & Kungwankunakorn, 2014). After impregnation, it is filtered
to reduce excess phosphoric acid and washed with water until pH=7. It is then
sent to a holding tank for batch-wise filtration. The filtrate, with traces of silica
and phosphoric acid, is sent to a third party wastewater treatment. The
impregnated carbon cake is dried to drive away excess water before carbonizing
in a furnace at 800oC producing an activated carbon (Thomas & George, 2015).
The activated carbon is milled, then sieved and sent to a silo for storage.
Liquid sodium silicate can be used for the manufacture of soaps,
detergents, pulp and paper, adhesives, sealants and silica gel (Elvers, 1985).
Activated carbon produced in this process could be used for wastewater
treatment.
386
Figure 5.2.11: Process Flow Diagram of Process 3
387
PLANT ECONOMICS
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT

Table 5.2.29: Lang Factors

Lang factors
Type of plant Fixed capital investment Total capital investment
Solid-fluid processing 4.3 5.0
Table 5.2.30: Cost of Equipment Items

Delivered Fixed Capital Cost (FCC)
Quan
Equipment Equipment 𝑭𝑪𝑪 = 𝑭𝒂𝒄𝒕𝒐𝒓 𝒙
tity
Cost 𝒅𝒆𝒍𝒊𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒅 𝒆𝒒𝒖𝒊𝒑𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒄𝒐𝒔𝒕
Silo 1 ₱13,486,458.00 ₱57,991,769.40
Hammer Mill 2 ₱1,340,000.00 ₱5,762,000.00
Storage Tank –
concentrated 1 ₱423,000.00 ₱1,818,900.00
HCl
Storage Tank –
1 ₱235,000.00 ₱1,010,500.00
dilute HCl
Storage Tank –
1 ₱201,019.00 ₱864,381.70
NaOH
Storage Tank –
1 ₱705,000.00 ₱3,031,500.00
Sodium silicate
Storage Tank –
1 ₱10,000.00 ₱43,000.00
water
Storage Tank –
1 ₱77,879.00 ₱334,879.70
Phosphoric acid
Mixer 2 ₱846,000.00 ₱3,637,800.00
Leaching Tank 1 ₱1,410,000.00 ₱6,063,000.00
388
Spiral Plate Heat

1 ₱5,640,000.00 ₱24,252,000.00
Exchanger
Plate and Frame
1 ₱940,000.00 ₱4,042,000.00
Filter Press
Rotary Vacuum
2 ₱41,000,000.00 ₱176,300,000.00
Filter
Rotary Dryer 1 ₱1,230,000.00 ₱5,289,000.00
Electric Furnace
(Activated 1 ₱211,500.00 ₱909,450.00
Carbon)
Rice Husk
1 ₱3,055,000.00 ₱13,136,500.00
Furnace
Rotary Cooler 2 ₱638,166.00 ₱2,744,113.80
Continuously
Stirred Tank 1 ₱470,000.00 ₱2,021,000.00
Reactor
TOTAL PURCHASED COST OF
₱309,251,794.60
EQUIPMENT
Table 5.2.31: Summary of costs

TOTAL PHYSICAL PLANT COST (PPC) ₱974,143,152.99
FIXED CAPITAL COST (FCC) ₱1,363,800,414.19
WORKING CAPITAL COST ₱68,190,020.71
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT REQUIRED
₱1,431,990,434.90
(TCI)
Table 5.2.32: Operating Time

OPERATING TIME, PLANT ATTAINMENT 300
(DAYS/YR)
OPERATING TIME, PLANT ATTAINMENT 7200
(HRS/YR)
389
Table 5.2.33: Factors for estimation of project fixed capital cost

Item Process type
ƒ2 Piping 0.70 0.45 0.20
ƒ4 Electrical 0.10 0.10 0.10
*ƒ6 Utilities 0.50 0.45 0.25
*ƒ7 Storages 0.15 0.20 0.25
𝑷𝑷𝑪 = 𝑷𝑪𝑬(𝟏 + ƒ𝟏 + ⋯ + ƒ𝟗 )
= 𝑷𝑪𝑬 𝒙 3.40 3.15 2.80
𝑭𝒊𝒙𝒆𝒅 𝒄𝒂𝒑𝒊𝒕𝒂𝒍 = 𝑷𝑷𝑪 (𝟏(𝟏 + ƒ𝟏𝟎 + ƒ𝟏𝟏 + ƒ𝟏𝟐 )
= 𝑷𝑷𝑪 𝒙 1.45 1.40 1.35
For a fluid-solid processing plant,
PHYSICAL PLANT COST (PPC)

PPC = PCE (1 + f1 + f2 + f3 + f4 + f5 + f6 + f7 + f8 + f9)
PPC = ₱309,251,794.60 (1 + 0.45 + 0.45 + 0.15 + 0.10 + 0.10 + 0.45
+ 0.20 + 0.05 + 0.20)
𝐏𝐏𝐂 = ₱974,143,152.99
FCC = PPC (1+0.25+0.05+0.10)

FCC= ₱974,143,152.99(1+0.25+0.05+0.10)
𝐅𝐂𝐂 = ₱1,363,800,414.19
390
WORKING CAPITAL COST (WCC)
WCC = 𝑃𝑃𝐶 (0.05)

WCC=₱1,363,800,414.19(0.05)
𝐖𝐂𝐂 = ₱68,190,020.71
TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT (TCI)
TCI = FCC + WCC

TCI= ₱1,363,800,414.19 + ₱68,190,020.71
𝐓𝐂𝐈 = ₱1,431,990,434.90
TOTAL ANNUAL PRODUCTION COST

For the estimation of production cost, reference table 6.1, solid-liquid
processing plant,
391
MAINTENANCE COST:
Maintenance Cost = (0.05)( ₱1,363,800,414.19)
Figure 5.2.13: Operating labor requirements for chemical process industries

(Peters & Timmerhaus, 1991)
For a plant capacity of 76.31 tons of product per day (76,308.07 kg per day), for
a fully automated plant, the estimated operating labor requirement is 30
employee-hours/day/processing step.
392
Table 5.2.34: Latest Wage Orders and Implementing Rules Issued by the
Regional Boards as of March 2015 (Department of Labor and Employment,
2015)
SECTOR
Agriculture Retail &
Service
INDICATOR Non- Establishments
Non-
Agriculture Plantation Employing Not
Plantation
More Than 10
Workers
Binan, Laguna PHP 366.00 PHP 341.00 PHP 321.00 PHP 275.00
Calculating for the operating labor costs using the data for manpower:
Operating labor cost
30 employee-hours 300 working days Php 366.00
=( )( )( )
day-processing step year employee-8 hours
(3processing steps)(1 yr operation)
𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫 𝐜𝐨𝐬𝐭 = 𝐏𝐡𝐩 𝟗, 𝟖𝟖𝟐, 𝟎𝟎𝟎. 𝟎𝟎
LABORATORY COST:
Laboratory Cost = (0.30)(₱ 9,882,000.00)
𝐋𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱ 2,964,600
SUPERVISION COST:
𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱1,976,400
PLANT OVERHEADS:
Plant Overheads = (0.50)(₱9,882,000.00)
𝐏𝐥𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐎𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐡𝐞𝐚𝐝𝐬 = ₱4,941,000
CAPITAL CHARGES:
Capital Charges = (0.10)(₱1,363,800,414.19)
393
LOCAL TAXES:
Local Taxes = (0.20)(₱1,363,800,414.19)
𝐋𝐨𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐓𝐚𝐱𝐞𝐬 = ₱𝟐𝟕𝟐, 𝟕𝟔𝟎, 𝟎𝟖𝟐. 𝟖𝟒
INSURANCE:
Insurance = (0.01)(₱1,363,800,414.19)
𝐈𝐧𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 = ₱13,638,004.14

Licence Fee/Royalty Fees = (0.01)(₱1,363,800,414.19)
𝐅𝐈𝐗𝐄𝐃 𝐂𝐎𝐒𝐓𝐒 = 𝐌𝐂 + 𝐎𝐋𝐂 + 𝐋𝐂 + 𝐒 + 𝐏𝐎 + 𝐂𝐂 + 𝐋𝐓 + 𝐈 + 𝐋𝐅

FIXED COSTS
= ₱68,190,020.71
+ ₱9,882,000.00 + ₱2,964,600 + ₱1,976,400 + ₱4,941,000 + ₱136,380,041.42
+ ₱272,760,082.84 + ₱13,638,004.14 + ₱13,638,004.14
𝐅𝐈𝐗𝐄𝐃 𝐂𝐎𝐒𝐓𝐒 = ₱𝟓𝟐𝟒, 𝟑𝟕𝟎, 𝟏𝟓𝟑. 𝟐𝟓
VARIABLE COSTS:
RAW MATERIALS:
Raw Materials Cost
MT ₱4009.92
= [(148.37 )( )
DAY MT
MT ₱23,309.30
+ (53.04 )( )
DAY MT
MT ₱7,990.00
+ (277.17 )( )
DAY MT
MT ₱23,500.00
+ (120.39 )( )] (300 DAYS)
DAY MT
𝐑𝐚𝐰 𝐌𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱2,062,538,525.66
394

MOM = 0.10( ₱𝟔𝟖, 𝟏𝟗𝟎, 𝟎𝟐𝟎. 𝟕𝟏 )
𝐌𝐎𝐌 = ₱ 6,819,002.07
UTILITIES COST:
MT ₱73.66
Water = (190.77 )( ) (300 DAYS)
day MT
𝐖𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫 = ₱4,215,635.46
KWH ₱7.53
Electricity = (0.78 )( ) (300 DAYS)
DAY KWH
𝐄𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐲 = ₱1762.02
Utilities Cost = ₱4,215,635.46 + ₱1762.02


Variable Cost = ₱2,062,538,525.66 + ₱ 6,819,002.07 + ₱4,217,397.48
𝐕𝐀𝐑𝐈𝐀𝐁𝐋𝐄 𝐂𝐎𝐒𝐓 = ₱2,073,574,925.21

DPC = Variable Cost + Fixed Cost
DPC = ₱2,073,574,925.21 + ₱524,370,153.25
𝐃𝐏𝐂 = ₱𝟐, 𝟓𝟗𝟕, 𝟗𝟒𝟓, 𝟎𝟕𝟖. 𝟒𝟔

SALES EXPENSE:
Sales Expense = 0.20(Variable Cost + Fixed Cost)
Sales Expense = 0.20(₱2,597,945,078.46)
𝐒𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐬 𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 = ₱519,589,015.69
GENERAL OVERHEADS:
General Overheads = 0.30(Variable Cost + Fixed Cost)
General Overheads = 0.30(₱2,597,945,078.46)
395
IPC = Sales Expense + General Overheads

IPC = ₱519,589,015.69 + ₱779,383,523.54
𝐈𝐏𝐂 = ₱𝟏, 𝟐𝟗8,972,539.23

APC = IPC + DPC
APC = ₱1,298,972,539.23 + ₱2,597,945,078.46
𝐀𝐏𝐂 = ₱𝟑, 𝟖𝟗𝟔, 𝟗𝟏𝟕, 𝟔𝟏𝟕. 𝟔𝟗

₱3,896,917,617.69
APR =
( )( )
day year
₱𝟏𝟕𝟎, 𝟐𝟐𝟕. 𝟒𝟏
APR =
𝐌𝐓
396
Table 5.2.35: Summary of production costs

Variable Costs
Raw Materials From calculation of raw materials’ cost Php
2,062,538,525.66
Miscellaneous 0.1(Maintenance Cost) Php 6,819,002.07
Materials
Sub-total A Php
2,073,574,925.21
Fixed Costs
Operating labor From calculation of operating labor Php 9,882,000.00
Laboratory 0.3(OLC) Php 2,964,600.00
costs
Supervision 0.2(OLC) Php 1,976,400.00
Plant overheads 0.50(Php OLC) Php 4,941,000.00
Capital charges 0.1(FCC) Php
136,380,041.42
Local taxes 0.2(FCC) Php
272,760,082.84
Sub-total B Php
524,370,153.25
Direct Production Cost (Sub-total A + Sub-total B) Php
2,597,945,078.46
Sales Expense 0.20(Fixed Cost + Variable Cost) Php
519,589,015.69
General 0.30(Fixed Cost + Variable Cost) Php
Overheads 779,383,523.54
Indirect Production Cost Php
1,298,972,539.23
Annual Production Cost ( Direct Cost + Indirect Cost) Php
3,896,917,617.69
397
𝟕𝟔.𝟑𝟎𝟖𝟎𝟕 𝐌𝐓 𝟑𝟎𝟎 𝐰𝐨𝐫𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐝𝐚𝐲𝐬 22,892.421 MT

Annual Production Rate ( 𝐝𝐚𝐲
)( 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫
)
per year
Production Production Rate= Annual Production Cost Php 170,227.41 /
Annual Production Rate
Rate MT
The total annual production cost for this process is Php 3,896,917,617.69.
MANUFACTURABILITY OF RICE HUSK PROCESS
It is important to know how a process can survive in a certain country to decide

whether or not it should be chosen. The factors for determining if the process is
sustainable are the supply and demand of raw materials, energy and water
consumption, manpower, and environmental impact.
YIELD
The liquid sodium silicate product obtained from the process has a
product yield of 90% (Foletto & Gratieri, 2006). It also has a solid content of
48% with a weight ratio of 2 (Bauer, 2009).
BY-PRODUCTS
This process also produces carbon due to the nature of rice husk to have volatile
organic matter, ash and fixed carbon. Carbon from this process can further be
treated and chemically activated to produce activated carbon and sell to the
market. Eight (8) processing steps are needed to produce a powdered activated
carbon at a price of Php 53.28 per kilogram.
PROCESS USAGE
Rice Husk process has been used in the Philippines since 2006 by the company
named Agrigenic Chemicals Inc. located in Bataan. They can produce 820MT
for low Baume every month with a total of 9,840 MT per year. This process has
a product yield of 90% (Foletto & Gratieri, 2006).
398
SUSTAINABILITY OF RICE HUSK PROCESS

The raw materials for the process are rice husk, sodium hydroxide,
hydrochloric acid and phosphoric acid. These raw materials must have an
adequate supply to meet its demands. It must also have an excess supply to meet
additional demands for the production of sodium silicate study since it will be a
major concern for selecting the best process to use.
Historical and Projected Supply and Demand of Raw Materials

A. Rice Husk
The table below shows the historical demand and supply of rice husk in
the Philippines.
Table 5.2.36: Supply and Demand of Rice Husk

Weight (MT)
Year
Demand Supply
2006 391 1,955
2007 419.16 2,096
2008 430.2 2,151
2009 390.88 1,954
2010 421.56 2,108
2011 428.4 2,142
2012 457.12 2,286
2013 474.32 2,372
2014 476.6 2,383
2015 454 2,270
and demand of rice husk for the next ten years. The table below shows the
projected supply and demand of rice husk from 2016 – 2026.
399
Table 5.2.37: Projected Supply and Demand of Rice Husk

Weight (MT)
Year
Demand Supply
2017 3,851.467 6160.37
2018 4,264.286 7584.02
2019 4,531.174 9211.04
2020 4,849.986 11041.45
2021 4,164.548 13075.23
2022 4,674.652 15312.39
2023 5,059.491 17752.92
2024 5,642.534 20396.84
2025 5,846.966 23244.13
2026 5,909.715 26294.81
30,000.00
25,000.00
20,000.00
15,000.00
10,000.00
5,000.00
0.00
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Year
Demand Supply
Figure 5.2.14: Projected Supply and Demand of Rice Husk
From the figure of the projected supply and demand of rice husk, it can
be concluded that the supply will be sufficient for the requirement of the
400
Table 5.2.38: Projected price of rice husk

Year Price
2017 16.36
2018 18.84
2019 21.66
2020 24.84
2021 28.37
2022 32.26
2023 36.50
2024 41.09
2025 46.03
2026 51.33
B. Sodium Hydroxide
The table below shows the historical demand and supply of sodium hydroxide
in the Philippines.
Table 5.2.39: Supply and Demand of Sodium Hydroxide

Weight (MT)
Year
Demand Supply
2006 1,042.934 157,733
2007 1,087.489 157,818
2008 1,029.111 144,562
2009 1,014.776 160,215
2010 1,033.188 146,246
2011 1,096.440 154,321
2012 1,179.496 156,408
2013 1,290.793 163,415
2014 6,089.313 317,657
2015 8,745.718 142,876
401
and demand of sodium hydroxide for the next ten years. The table below shows
the projected supply and demand of sodium hydroxide from 2016 – 2026.
Table 5.2.40: Projected Supply and Demand of Sodium Hydroxide

Weight (MT)
Year
Demand Supply
2017 10601.41 406545.90
2018 13542.56 503063.19
2019 16903.88 613368.66
2020 20685.36 737462.32
2021 24887.01 875344.16
2022 29508.82 1027014.18
2023 34550.80 1192472.39
2024 40012.94 1371718.79
2025 45895.24 1564753.36
2026 52197.71 1771576.12
2000000
1800000
1600000
1400000
Weight (MT)
1200000
1000000
800000
600000
400000
200000
0
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Year
Demand Supply
Figure 5.2.15: Projected Supply and Demand of sodium hydroxide
From the figure of the projected supply and demand of rice husk, it can
be concluded that the supply will be sufficient for the requirement of the
402
Table 5.2.41: Projected price of sodium hydroxide

Year Price
2017 47.42
2018 58.59
2019 71.36
2020 85.72
2021 101.68
2022 119.23
2023 138.38
2024 159.12
2025 181.46
2026 205.40
C. Hydrochloric Acid
The table below shows the historical demand and supply of hydrochloric acid in
the Philippines.
Table 5.2.42: Supply and Demand of Hydrochloric Acid

Weight (MT)
Year
Demand Supply
2006 13,534.096 22,273
2007 13,734.128 20,606
2008 14,034.851 20,769
2009 10,601.813 20,645
2010 13,798.776 20,608
2011 14,696.167 22,410
2012 14,142.914 22,866
2013 13,916.801 23,644
2014 15,155.390 23,607
2015 15,013.954 25,006
403
and demand of hydrochloric acid for the next ten years. The table below shows
the projected supply and demand of hydrochloric acid from 2016 – 2026.
Table 5.2.43: Projected Supply and Demand of Hydrochloric Acid

Weight (MT)
Year
Demand Supply
2017 40202.27 50671.34
2018 49603.20 62285.60
2019 60347.11 75559.03
2020 72434.02 90491.63
2021 85863.92 107083.42
2022 100636.80 125334.39
2023 116752.68 145244.53
2024 134211.54 166813.85
2025 153013.39 190042.35
2026 173158.24 214930.04
250000
200000
Weight (MT)
150000
100000
50000
0
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Year
Demand Supply
Figure 5.2.16: Projected Supply and Demand of Hydrochloric Acid
404
From the figure of the projected supply and demand of hydrochloric acid,
it can be concluded that the supply will be sufficient for the requirement of the
Table 5.2.44: Projected price of Hydrochloric Acid

Year Price
2017 34.93
2018 42.88
2019 51.97
2020 62.19
2021 73.55
2022 86.04
2023 99.67
2024 114.44
2025 130.34
2026 147.38
D. Phosphoric Acid
The table below shows the historical demand and supply of phosphoric acid in
the Philippines.
Table 5.2.45: Supply and Demand of Phosphoric Acid

Weight (MT)
Year
Demand Supply
2006 3,851.467 19,295
2007 4,264.286 18,581
2008 4,531.174 18,074
2009 4,849.986 18,305
2010 4,164.548 18,897
2011 4,674.652 18,449
405
2012 5,059.491 18,569

2013 5,642.534 17,479
2014 5,846.966 17,402
2015 5,909.715 16,256
and demand of phosphoric acid for the next ten years. The table below shows the
projected supply and demand of phosphoric acid from 2017 – 2026.
Table 5.2.46: Projected Supply and Demand of phosphoric acid

Weight (MT)
Year
Demand Supply
2017 14079.50 50725.07
2018 17363.12 62355.17
2019 21115.84 75646.72
2020 25337.64 90599.72
2021 30028.53 107214.15
2022 35188.52 125490.04
2023 40817.59 145427.36
2024 46915.75 167026.13
2025 53483.00 190286.34
2026 60519.34 215208.00
250000
200000
Weight (MT)
150000
100000
50000
0
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025 2026 2027
Year
Demand Supply
Figure 5.2.17: Projected Supply and Demand of phosphoric acid
406
From the figure of the projected supply and demand of phosphoric acid,
it can be concluded that the supply will be sufficient for the requirement of the
Table 5.2.47: Projected price of phosphoric acid

Year Price
2017 82.24
2018 100.43
2019 121.22
2020 144.61
2021 170.60
2022 199.19
2023 230.38
2024 264.17
2025 300.55
2026 339.54
Companies supplying
presented below:
A. Rice Husk
Some of the supplier of rice husk in the Philippines are the following:
 Ako Trading - Kobberstad
Address: B10 Lucky Star Apartelle, Igot Compound, Quezon
Highway, Lapu-Lapu City, Cebu, Philippines
Landline: 63-920-4142413
 Karyl Trading
Address: Unit 2R Jr Bldg, JP Laurel Highway, Lipa City,
Philippines
Landline: 63-0916-5152949
Mobile: 63-09165152949
407
B. Sodium Hydroxide
Some of the manufacturing plants of Sodium Hydroxide in the
Philippines is:
City, Philippines
Landline: +63 (2) 362-2204
 International Chemical Industries, Inc.

Address: Km 32 MacArthur highway. Bo. Tuktukan,
Guiguinto, Bulacan, 3015.
Website: http://www.inchem.com.ph/
Email: junjoson@inchem.com.ph.
Landline: (632) 241-6801

Leviste Street,
Salcedo Village 1227 Makati City, Philippines
Landline: (632) 817-8971 to 76
C. Hydrochloric Acid
Leviste Street, Salcedo Village 1227 Makati City, Philippines
Landline: (632) 817-8971 to 76
 Universal Harvester, Inc.

Address: Carmelray Industrial Park II , Brgys. Punto and Tulo,
Calamba, Laguna
Landline: (049) 549-3282
408
D. Phosphoric Acid
City, Philippines
SAFETY
EQUIPMENT PARAMETERS FOR WORKERS

The equipment used in the process of production of sodium carbonate via
Leblanc process are as follows:
Table 5.2.48: Equipment involved in Rice Husk Process
Storage Tank ST-001 101.325 kPa 30oC
Mixer MX-001 101.325 kPa 30oC
Silo SL-001 101.325 kPa 30oC
Hammer Mill ML-001 101.325 kPa 30oC
Screen SC-001 101.325 kPa 30oC
Silo SL-002 101.325 kPa 30oC
Leaching Tank LT-001 101.325 kPa 90oC
Drier DR-001 101.325 kPa 160oC
Furnace FR-001 101.325 kPa 700oC
Reactor R-001 101.325 kPa 90oC
Heat Exchanger CO-002 101.325 kPa 30oC
Mixer MX-002 101.325 kPa 80oC
Washer W-001 101.325 kPa 30oC
Drier DR-002 101.325 kPa 200oC
409
Furnace FR-002 101.325 kPa 800oC

Mill ML-002 101.325 kPa 30oC
Screen SC-002 101.325 kPa 30oC
Silo SL-003 101.325 kPa 30oC
Total Number of Intensive Equipment = 4
For this process, four of these will be under a huge amount of heat. The energy
intensive equipment are the two driers, and two furnaces involved in this process.
Handling of raw materials:

Rice husk, sodium hydroxide, phosphoric acid and hydrochloric acid are
the main materials used in this process. This materials will also be the ones in the
waste streams. Rice husk is a naturally occurring organic matter. However, its
ashes may be abrasive to the skin, can cause eye irritation, can cause irritation in
the stomach due to abrasiveness of silica and may cause silicosis at prolonged
exposure to respirable crystalline silica. Acute or rapidly developing silicosis
may occur in a short period of time during heavy exposure to crystalline silica.
Respirable crystalline silica is a known human carcinogen. Due to this toxicology
information, it is recommended to use dustless system for handling and employee
engineering controls to reduce concentrations of airborne dust and to avoid spills.
On the other hand, sodium hydroxide is hazardous in case of inhalation
and skin contact. Sodium hydroxide is highly corrosive and contact can severely
irritate and burn the skin and eyes with possible eye damage. In case of
inhalation, higher exposures may cause build-up of fluid in the lungs that results
to pulmonary edema and other pulmonary illnesses. Personal protective
equipment must be used when handling sodium hydroxide. In case of leakage or
spills, immediately evacuate the area, eliminate ignition source and use sand to
absorb the solution.
Phosphoric acid is very hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of eye
contact (irritant), of ingestion. Hazardous in case of skin contact (corrosive,
permeator), of eye contact (corrosive). Slightly hazardous in case of inhalation
(lung sensitizer). Liquid or spray mist may produce tissue damage particularly
on mucous membranes of eyes, mouth and respiratory tract. Skin contact may
produce burns. Inhalation of the spray mist may produce severe irritation of
respiratory tract, characterized by coughing, choking, or shortness of breath.
Severe over-exposure can result in death. Inflammation of the eye is
characterized by redness, watering, and itching. Skin inflammation is
410
characterized by itching, scaling, reddening, or, occasionally, blistering. Personal

protective equipment must be used when handling sodium hydroxide. In case of
leakage or spills, immediately evacuate the area, eliminate ignition source and
use sand to absorb the solution.
Hydrochloric acid is very hazardous in case of skin contact (irritant), of
eye contact (irritant), of ingestion. Hazardous in case of skin contact (corrosive,
permeator), of eye contact (corrosive). Slightly hazardous in case of inhalation
(lung sensitizer). Non-corrosive for lungs. Liquid or spray mist may produce
tissue damage particularly on mucous membranes of eyes, mouth and respiratory
tract. Skin contact may produce burns. Inhalation of the spray mist may produce
severe irritation of respiratory tract, characterized by coughing, choking, or
shortness of breath. Severe over-exposure can result in death. Inflammation of
the eye is characterized by redness, watering, and itching. Skin inflammation is
characterized by itching, scaling, reddening, or, occasionally, blistering. Personal
protective equipment must be used when handling sodium hydroxide. In case of
leakage or spills, immediately evacuate the area, eliminate ignition source and
use sand to absorb the solution.
The rice husk process has lower energy costs since burning the hull to ash
generates a huge amount of energy for making steam (Rathakrishnan, 2010). The
raw material required is also renewable. By using this as a raw material,
excessive rice husk waste can be lessened. The by-product, activated carbon can
be sold at a competitive price. Carbon can further be processed to activated
carbon and sold to the market and thus, avoiding huge amount waste generation.
There’s just only one equipment responsible for carbon dioxide emission.
In terms of waste, the filter after leaching, filter and washer for the
production of activated carbon are the sources of waste. CO2 emissions occur in
the first furnace in which the heat is captured through a boiler. Waste from the
filter after leaching tank contains hydrochloric acid with solubilized metals. The
filtrate in the filter in the chemical activation of carbon contains phosphoric acid
diluted in water with traces of silicon dioxide and sodium hydroxide. Lastly, the
liquid waste from the washer contains traces of phosphoric acid. All of these
liquid wastes can be treated using the wastewater treatment facility in the chosen
plant location.
411
SUMMARY
For determining the process needed, the criteria should be met. Below is
a summary of all processes with their respective characteristics for each criteria:
PROCESS EVALUATION
Table 5.2.49: Summary of the Three Processes

Criteria Process 1: Process 2: Process 3:
PLANT ECONOMICS
Total Capital PHP PHP PHP
Investment 3,325,198,553.87 6,466,668,781.00 1,431,990,434.90
Total Annual
PHP PHP PHP
Production
1,950,839,813.65 4,007,648,748.00 3,896,917,617.69
Cost
MANUFACTURABILITY
88 % yield
90% yield
(Technologies and 85% yield
Yield (Foletto &
Solutions : Sodium (Zoller Uri, 2004)
Gratieri, 2006)
Silicate, 2016)
Dry ice: Php 0.46 Activated carbon:
No by-product
By-products per processing Php 6.66 per
produced
step processing step
There is no Integral Chemical Agrigenic
Process Usage company using Corporation is Chemicals is
this process using this process. using this process.
SUSTAINABILITY
The raw materials
The raw The raw materials
are locally
materials are are locally
available
locally available available and
however, the
however, the adequate for the
Availability of silica sand is
silica sand demand of the
Raw Materials inadequate for the
inadequate for process. The
demand of the
the demand of overall ratio of
process. The
the process. The trade gap to price
overall ratio of
overall ratio of is 8142.248903.
trade gap to price
412
trade gap to price is 7709.6704 but

is this is only high
-33,783,828,404 because of NaOH.
SAFETY
The drier, mixer, The drier and
regenerative furnace for rice
system, furnace, husk operates at
The reactor and dissolver and 160 oC and 700oC
the holding tank cooler for furnace respectively while
both operates at process operates the drier and
o o o
Equipment 200 C at 100 C, 100 C, furnace for
o
Parameters 1200 C,1100 carbon operates at
o
for workers C,166 C and 130 200 oC and 800oC
o
o
(P&T) C respectively. respectively.
The dissolver,
The reactor and All of the
cooler and
holding tank equipment
condenser
operates at 1,400 operates at
operates at 2500
kPa and 500 kPa atmospheric
kPa, 2000 kPa and
respectively. pressure.
3900 kPa.
3 materials
require personal
protective
2 materials 7 materials require
equipment to
require personal personal
protect workers
Hazardous protective protective
from any contact.
Materials equipment to equipment to
1 material
avoid direct avoid direct
requires special
contact. contact.
engineering
controls to avoid
dust spills.
No generation or
8 equipment 3 equipment
Environmental emission of
produces waste produces acid
Aspect hazardous
and 1 equipment waste and 1
wastes.
413
emits carbon equipment emits

dioxide. carbon dioxide.
Evaluation of the Process

Having compared the three processes in the previous section, these
processes are then evaluated to select the best process to be used for the
production of Liquid Sodium Silicate.
In the evaluation of the three processes, the aforementioned attributes are
considered. The table below shows the rating given for each criteria as 5 being
the highest and 1 as the lowest point.
Table 5.2.50: Evaluation of Processes

TRANSMUTED
SCORE TOTAL SCORE
ATTRIBUTES WT. SCORE
P1 P2 P3 P1 P2 P3 P1 P2 P3
Economics
Total Capital
2.15 1.11 5.00 10.77 5.54 25.00
Investment
Total Annual 5 17.88 8.85 18.76
Production 5.00 2.43 2.50 25.00 12.17 12.52
Cost
Manufacturability
Percent Yield 4.89 4.72 5.00 19.56 18.89 20.00
By-products 4 5.00 1.00 4.00 20.00 4.00 16.00 10.89 10.72 14.00
Process Usage 1.00 5.00 5.00 4.00 20.00 20.00
Sustainability
Availability of
4 1.00 3.00 5.00 5.00 15.00 25.00 5.00 15.00 25.00
Raw Materials
Safety
Operating
5.00 0.81 1.08 15.00 2.43 3.23
Temperature
Operating
3 0.27 0.06 5.00 0.80 0.18 15.00 10.27 2.30 8.58
Pressure
Hazardous
5.00 1.43 2.50 15.00 4.29 7.50
Materials
Environmental Impact
Sources of CO2
2 5.00 1.43 2.50 10.00 2.86 5.00 10.00 2.86 5.00
Emissions
TOTAL 54.04 39.73 71.33
*5 being the highest, 1 being the lowest
414
Liquid sodium silicate production has three different methods in

producing the product. These three processes differ in the raw materials and
equipment to be used in producing liquid sodium silicate. One process is
chosen from three choices, one which would be the most economical and as
effective and efficient as the other two processes. Process 1, via hydrothermal
process; Process 2 is via furnace process and Process 3, via rice husk process,
is the chosen process for this design project
All these processes have high percentage yield; Process 1 has 88%
yield, Process 2 has 85% yield while Process 3, rice husk process, the chosen
process has the highest yield which is 90%. However, despite the high
percentage yield of Process 3, the use of rice husk in the process requires a
less expensive total capital investment as compared to Process 1 and Process
2. To put up a liquid sodium silicate production plant that utilizes rice husk
as the main raw material, the capital investment needed is at least 1.4 billion
pesos and an annual production cost of 3.9 billion pesos. Estimated annual
production cost includes Variable Cost, under which is the raw material cost,
utility cost and other miscellaneous operating materials, and the Fixed Cost
which includes operating labor cost, laboratory cost, plant overheads, capital
charges, local taxes, etc. This is less expensive compared to Process 2 which
requires a total capital investment of at least 6.5 billion pesos and an annual
production cost of at least 4 billion pesos, and from Process 1 which requires
a total capital investment of at least 3.3 billion pesos and an annual
production cost of at least 1.95 billion pesos.
Process 3 is the most sustainable among the three processes since it uses
rice husk as its main raw material instead of silica. Rice husk is abundant in
the Philippines and considered as waste which makes the process sustainable
and economical. For Process 1 and Process 2, they are using silica sand as its
main raw material which is inadequate for the production of liquid sodium
silicate. Mining companies that produces silica sand uses their own product
as one of its raw materials to produce another product such as detergents,
soaps etc. which makes the process not sustainable.
Liquid sodium silicate by-product, carbon, in Process 3 is easily
removed by chemical activation using phosphoric acid. Activated carbon is
very expensive because of its uses and this can be sold in the market at a
higher price. Process 1 has no by-product therefore there is less generation of
wastes while Process 2 produces carbon dioxide as by-product however the
415
additional equipment required to process it into a dry ice are very expensive
which makes it uneconomical.
Process 3 which is rice husk process, has lower energy costs since
burning the hull to ash generates a huge amount of energy for making steam.
The raw material required is also renewable. By using this as a raw material,
excessive rice husk waste can be lessened. The by-product, activated carbon
can be sold at a competitive price. Carbon can further be processed to
activated carbon and sold to the market and thus, avoiding huge amount
waste generation. There’s just only one equipment responsible for carbon
dioxide emission. In Process 1, there are less environmental aspects to
consider in the hydrothermal process since there are no by-products produced
and makes naturally occurring end products while in Process 2 the production
procedures of furnace process cause different emissions (wastewater, exhaust
air and residues) and this process also produces impurities such as iron,
aluminum, calcium and magnesium compounds, probably in the form of
silicates which originate partly in the quartz, sand, and other raw materials
used or which are obtained from the furnace walls by the action of the
strongly alkaline silicate melt. These impurities will contaminate any bodies
of water when released without treatment.
Production of liquid sodium silicate via rice husk process is by far the
most widely used method for the production of liquid sodium silicate in the
Philippines. The simplicity and reliability of the process makes the company
chose this process as a route of production of liquid sodium silicate. In
addition, the weighted score based on the attributes in Table 5.2.51, shows
that it is the best process route for liquid sodium silicate production.
416

Process Selection Sample

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Process Selection Sample

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Technological Institute of the Philippines

Sodium silicate, usually known as "water

This section details the systematic route on the production of sodium

Figure 5.2.1: Process Flow Diagram for Hydrothermal Process

TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT

Table 5.2.1: Lang Factors (Green & Perry, 2008)

Table 5.2.2: Cost of Equipment Items for Hydrothermal process

Total Physical Plant Cost, PCC (Php) ₱2,262,039,832.56

Table 5.2.3: Estimation of Fixed Capital Cost (Sinnot, 2005)

FIXED CAPITAL COST (FCC)

WORKING CAPITAL COST (WCC):

TOTAL CAPITAL INVESTMENT (TCI):

The total capital investment required for the construction of a

TOTAL ANNUAL PRODUCTION COST

Figure 5.2.2: Costing and Project Evaluation for Process 1

FIXED COSTS CALCULATION:

OPERATING LABOR COST (OLC):

Figure 5.2.3: Operating Labor Requirements for Chemical Process Industry

Operating Labor required

𝐎𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐥𝐚𝐛𝐨𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐝 = 𝟒𝟏, 𝟒𝟎𝟎 employee ∙ hours / 𝐲𝐞𝐚𝐫

Operating Labor Cost

LICENSE FEE/ROYALTY FEES:

𝐅𝐢𝐱𝐞𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = 𝐌𝐂 + 𝐎𝐋𝐂 + 𝐋𝐂 + 𝐒 + 𝐏𝐎 + 𝐂𝐂 + 𝐋𝐓 + 𝐈 + 𝐋𝐅

FIXED COSTS = ₱158,342,788.28 + ₱ 1,894,050.00 + ₱ 568,215.00

𝐅𝐢𝐱𝐞𝐝 𝐂𝐨𝐬𝐭 = ₱1,175,524,733.27

MISCELLANEOUS OPERATING MATERIALS (MOM):

Utilities Cost = ₱1,096,812.13 + ₱3,436,192.80+₱5,166,402.48

Variable Cost = RMC + MOM + UC

DIRECT PRODUCTION COST (DPC):

INDIRECT PRODUCTION COST (IPC):

IPC = Sales Expence + General Overheads

ANNUAL PRODUCTION COST (APC):

ANNUAL PRODUCTION RATE (APR):

Table 5.2.5: Summary of Production Costs of Hydrothermal Process

MANUFACTURABILITY OF HYDROTHERMAL PROCESS

SUSTAINABILITY OF HYDROTHERMAL PROCESS

It is important to know how a process can survive in a certain country to

AVAILABILITY OF RAW MATERIALS

Historical and Projected Demand, Supply and Price of Raw Materials

Table 5.2.7: Projected Supply and Demand of Silica Sand

2021 111,050.32 258,481.29

Projected Supply and Demand

Figure 5.2.4: Projected Supply and Demand of Silica Sand

Table 5.2.8: Historical Price of Silica Sand

Table 5.2.9: Projected Price of Silica Sand

Table 5.2.10: Supply and Demand of Sodium Hydroxide

2013 163,415 1,290.793

Table 5.2.11: Projected Supply and Demand of Sodium Hydroxide

Projected Supply and Demand

Figure 5.2.5: Projected Supply and Demand of Sodium hydroxide

From the projected supply and demand of sodium hydroxide, we can

Table 5.2.12: Historical Price of Sodium Hydroxide

Table 5.2.13: Projected Price of Sodium Hydroxide

A.1 Silica Sand

 Abra Mining and Industrial Corporation ( AMIC )

 Philippine Mining Development Corporation

A.2 Sodium Hydroxide

 International Chemical Industries, Inc.

 Mabuhay Vinyl Corporation

Holding Tank HT-001 500 kPa 200 oC

Handling of Raw Materials:

There are less environmental aspects to consider in the hydrothermal process

This section details the systematic route on the production of liquid