Biodiesel Production from Rendered

Waste Pork Lard using Calcined Duck

Eggshells as Base-Catalyst
A Life Cycle Analysis
by

Agoylo, Reina Nina Grace

Elarmo, Judy Marl B.

Rodrigo, Jessa Maye H.

Tangarorang, Tanya Joyce B.

In partial fulfillment of
the requirements for the course
ChE 52: Industrial Waste Management and Control

Submitted to:

Engr. Christylene S. Balagtas

Course Instructor

January 13, 2020

 Abstract

Biodiesel is a widely used alternative fuel and various processes use different combinations
of raw materials such as oil, alcohol, and the catalyst for its production processes. The aim of
the project is to produce biodiesel from rendered waste pork lard by using a two-step acid-
base catalytic process with ethanol as the reactant, sulfuric acid (H2SO4) as the acid-catalyst
for esterification, and calcium oxide (CaO) as the base-catalyst for transesterification. This
study will perform a Life Cycle Assessment of rendered waste pork lard biodiesel production
using calcined waste duck eggshells as the base catalyst. Environmental impacts are
evaluated throughout the whole process of the product. This includes the upstream and
downstream process associated in the production. These impacts refer to all pertinent
extractions from the environment and the waste emitted to the surroundings. Comparative
analysis on the environmental impacts between two alternative production process was done
in the study. Utilization of waste has less environmental impacts than using fresh plant based
oil because no agriculture phase is involved. The coverage of assessment used is the gate-
to-gate assessment comparing two processes that differ in the type of equipment and the
amount thereof while using the same amount of raw materials and catalysts. A total amount
of 80 kgs of rendered waste pork lard per day will be used in the production of biodiesel.
Waterwater and gas emissions are the most prominent negative effects in biodiesel
production. Based from the results, it is evident that Process 1 has less water and power
consumption while having a lesser influence on the environment. Process 1 LCA results show
kg CO2-eq 4% less than process 2, a power consumption 20% less, 8.5% less kg SO4-2-eq
and 31% less water consumption. Although there is a minimal difference between Process 1
and 2 on environmental impact, it is in the usage of resources, both power and water, that
shows a significant difference. With regards to having a lower power consumption, it is due to
absence of the tunnel dryer, the evaporators, the crusher, mixing tanks(for washing) and
vibrating screen while lower water consumption is due to omitting washing processes. Overall,
Process 1 is the optimized process.

1
Table of Contents

2
 CHAPTER 1
SCOPE AND BOUNDARIES

(It is not the product, but the life-cycle of the product that determines its environmental impact. In this
chapter, establish the scope and the basis for the life cycle assessment.)

1.1 Purpose and Goals

1.1.1 Background of the Project

The world’s source of energy is mainly produced from fossil fuels. Large consumption of these
natural source has caused a great concern due to its rapid depletion. Due to energy crisis and the
environmental impacts of fossil fuel poses, development for cleaner and renewable fuel alternatives
has increasingly emerge. Biodiesel is known as a good alternative energy source in exchange for
commercial diesel. Several advantages as opposed to commercial diesel is that it has low toxicity, high
oxygen content (10-11%) that would give great combustion efficiency, and it is biodegradable (Chung,
Tan, Chan, Kansedo, & Abdullah, 2019). This project utilizes the use of waste as raw materials such as
the rendered waste pork lard and the waste duck eggshells. Utilizing these waste helps minimize solid
waste and water pollutants but also serves as an alternative source of energy. Processes involved in
producing biodiesel are esterification and transesterification process. A two-step acid-base catalyzed
process is essential in making biodiesel since animal fats contain high levels of free fatty acid. These
free fatty acids will react with the alkaline base, which is the calcined duck eggshells, and produces
soap during the process. This will result to lower biodiesel yield which is undesirable. Esterification will
help lessen these free fatty acid by converting it to esters (biodiesel). After the pretreatment, the
esterified oil will be subjected to the transesterification process where the present triglycerides in the
rendered waste pork lard will be converted to biodiesel and its byproduct, glycerol. Both of the products
can be sold and used for other processes.

1.1.2 Purpose for doing the LCA study and Targeted audience

A life cycle assessment is an analytical method used to quantify inputs and outputs of materials
and energy and the environmental aspects associated with the products manufacturing process,
providing a basis for improvement. It provides information that are essential in exploring decisions
towards each life stage of the subject, be it material, structure, or services. In this case, LCA evaluated
the environmental impacts of the biodiesel manufacturing processes wherein an alternative process is
compared. The targeted audience of this study are the biodiesel production plants, Local Government
Unit, and consumers.

1.2 Basis for Evaluation

1.2.1 Process Description and Process Flow Diagram (PFD)

The figure below presents the process flow diagram of the production of biodiesel from
rendered waste pork lard using calcined eggshells as base-catalyst with the recovery of ethanol
employed.
The inlet stream 1(EtOH) and stream 2(Sulfuric Acid) enters reactors. The reactors operate in
batch at 70 celsius with an agitation speed of 600rpm. Stream 3 (rendered WPL feed) undergoes pre-
treatment process by going through a filter (SC-101), solid particles of food present the oil. The residue,
stream 5 (food particles), is collected as waste while the filtered rendered waste pork lard stream 4

3
proceeds to a storage tank (TK-103). Steam 6 (pretreated WPL) goes directly to the series of reactors
where the esterification process proceeds for 2 hrs.

After the esterification process, the mixture in the reactor is added with water for washing and
undergoes settling for 5 hours to separate in two layers. Stream 8 (mixture of water, excess ethanol,
sulfuric acid) goes to a distillation column (T-101) for ethanol recovery and Stream 7 (esters, FFA and
unreacted triglycerides) goes to Reactor 2 (R-102) to undergo transesterification process.

Inlet Stream 13 for the raw material, unwashed eggshells, passes through a belt washer, to
remove unnecessary dirt. Wastewater from the process proceeds to wastewater treatment. Stream 14
(washed WDE) enters a furnace for calcination and then proceeds to storage. Stream 15 (CDE) along
with Streams 12 (Ethanol) and Stream 7 (Esterification product) proceeds to the transesterification
reactor (R-102), which operate at the same conditions as reactor 1.

Stream 16 (Slurry) passes through a filter press to collect the catalyst Stream 17 (used CDE)
for reuse or product. Stream 19 (Filtrant) enters a mixing tank, initially for decantation and the separation
of glycerol (stream 22). Afterwards a water stream enters the mixing tank and a washing process
initiates. Stream 20 (mixture) from the mixing tank enters the centrifuge to separate Stream 21 (crude
biodiesel) from Stream 22 (water-ethanol mixture). Stream 22 then proceeds to the distillation tower for
Ethanol recovery.

1.2.2 Alternatives under comparison

PROCESS WITH SULFURIC ACID RECOVERY

The rendered waste pork lard reacts with ethanol and sulfuric acid, undergoing esterification.
In this process, the Free fatty acids present in the WPL is converted to WPL Ethyl Esters (biodiesel).
Water, triglycerides, and sulfuric acid are the downstream products thereafter. The triglyceride, along
4
with the WPLEE, is subjected to transesterification wherein the triglycerides are ultimately converted to
biodiesel while having glycerol as the by-product. The upstream products are esters and remaining
unreacted triglycerides, while the downstream products include a mixture of water, ethanol and sulfuric
acid. The second stage includes the process of transesterification, wherein the inlet are the products
from the upstream mixture after decantation and an alcohol-catalyst mixture. The WPLEE and the
remaining unreacted triglycerides, as well as the ethanol and CaO catalyst prepared by pretreatment of
waste duck eggshells (WDE) are mixed together. The mixture is then filtered to recover the CaO
catalyst.

For a fresh batch of CaO catalyst from waste duck eggshells. Washing with water removes dirt
and other foreign solids. The eggshells are mostly composed with CaCO 3 which is then calcined to
convert the CaCO3 to CaO (base catalyst) and CO2.

After esterification, the mixture produced is allowed to settle for separate layers to form which
are then separated by decantation. The downstream mixture after decantation consists of water,
ethanol, sulfuric acid and glycerol and will be subjected to distillation. One alternative in the biodiesel
production is to recover the sulfuric acid used during esterification.

Acid used as a catalyst is often contaminated with organic material. Recovery and
concentration of the spent acid is possible. The sulfuric acid catalyst undergoes a recycling process.
After it is recovered from the initial distillation, the spent acid is pre-heated and a stripping column
removes the organic material using steam. The acid then undergoes evaporation to remove traces of
water to concentrate the acid thoroughly. In the evaporation stage, water is recovered and fed back to
a water storage tank.

1.2.3 Life-cycle stages and unit processes covered

Present the coverage of assessment (i.e. cradle-to-gate) with the corresponding flow diagram
similar to the following:

5
1.2.4 Temporal boundaries

The life expectancy of the biodiesel plant is 15 years. The plant will operate for 313 days per
year. Sundays and Holidays were considered as rest days for the employees. Holiday will vary
depending on which place the plant is situated. The calendar will follow the schedules established by
the national government. Therefore, plant operations will cease during rest days. On the other hand,
workdays from Monday to Saturday will operate 24 hours. These allocated working days (313 days) are
subjected to change due to unprecedented events, such as natural disasters.

1.2.5 Spatial boundaries

The project’s plant is situated in the Northern part of Mindanao specifically in Manolo Fortich,
Bukidnon. The plant is close to one of its raw material suppliers and consumer, SLERS Inc.. The plant
is 40 minutes away from bustling commercial center of Cagayan de Oro City. Bukidnon is characterized
by a moderate dry season with average rainfall. The temperature is relatively cool and humid. It has
three major river systems crisscrossing the upstream and downstream agricultural lands. The river
systems also serve as sources of potable water supply.

1.3 Data Collection Scope

1.3.1 Data sources
Material inlet and outlet values applied to the LCA application are from the biodiesel process
material balance wherein calculation equations are based on theory and experimental data

1.3.2 Analysis software

6
 CHAPTER 2
LIFE-CYCLE INVENTORY (LCI)

(In this chapter, all processes from raw material extraction through waste treatment are mapped out
and connected—mass and energy balances are closed. All emissions and consumptions are
accounted for.)

2.1. Upstream Raw Materials Pretreatment Life-Cycle Stages

2.1.1.1. Raw Material 1 Acquisition/Collection

Waste Pork Lard Oil
RENDERED OIL USED FOR MAKING CHICHARON, 80 kg
AGGREGATION: Daily Average
GEOGRAPHY: Manolo Fortich, Bukidnon
DATA COLLECTION: SLERS INC. directed from factory

2.1.1.2 Raw Material 2 Acquisition/Collection

Waste Duck Eggshells
WASTE DUCK EGGSHELLS FROM BALUT VENDORS, 20-30 kg
AGGREGATION: Daily Average
GEOGRAPHY: Tagoloan Mis. Or
DATA COLLECTION: Balut Vendors from the same location

Table 2.1. Life-cycle inventory of Biodiesel Production from Waste Pork Lard

Inputs to system
Materials:
Waster Pork Lard 80 kg
Waste Duck Eggshell 19.14kg
Sulfuric Acid 3.72 kg
Ethanol 190.65 kg
Water:
Process 236.16 kg
Electricity 91,796.33 kWh
Outputs from the system
Product
Biodiesel 84.58kg
CaOH 14.27 kg
Glycerol 4.85 kg
Emissions to air
CO2 10.89 kg

2.1.1.3 Fuels and process materials

2.1.1.2.1 Electricity
For this analysis, it is assumed that all of the electricity requirement of the process is provided by
BUSECO (Bukidnon Second Electrical Inc.) located in Manolo Fortich, Bukidnon. As biodiesel
production is essentially a semi-continous process with 3 shifts a day, the values that appear in this
report are on a per daily basis. One shift consist of 8 hrs which consumes 26.67 kg of waste pork lard
and produces 28.18 kg crude biodiesel. All equipments uses electricity as main source of power are
evaluated in this analysis and these are the following: Plate and Frame Filter, Centrifuge, Boiler,
Esterification and Transesterification Reactors, Furnace, Reboiler, Condenser and Distillation Tower.

7
 Table 2.2. Estimated Electrical Consumption of Major Equipment per daily production

Equipment Electrical Consumption (kWh)

Process 1 Process 2
Plate and Frame Filter 0.20 -
Centrifuge 1.58 -
Boiler 1.86 1.86
Esterification Tanks 52.0 52.0
Transesterification Tanks 69.7 69.7
Furnace 102.5 102.5
Reboiler 19.40 19.40
Condenser 18.65 18.65
Conveyor Belt 5.40 -
Distillation Colum 22.50 27.90
Screen Filter - 1.60
Mixing Tank - 2.94
Dryer - 5.92
Mill - 0.08
Sieve - 1.42
TOTAL 293.79 303.97

2.2. Manufacturing Life-Cycle Stage

Present the quantitative flow diagram of the project together with the waste streams that are
generated.

8
Figure 2.1. Manufacturing Process Diagram for Process 1

9
 Figure 2.1. Manufacturing Process Diagram for Process 2

Figure 2.3. Gate-to-Gate Process for the Life Cycle Assessment of Biodiesel Production

10
Figures 2.1 and 2.2 above shows the block flow diagram of biodiesel production via the two alternatives
presented, respectively. The main differences of the two alternatives is that the presence of much higher
amount of equipments used for the CaOH processing using the same amount of waste pork lard as
main raw material. Also other equipments are involved such as the presence of dryers and mixing tanks
in Alternative 2, while in Alternative 1, the reactors presented acts as the reactor, mixing tank and
decantation vessel as one, thus reducing energy consumption and utilities used for the process. Figure
2.3 shows the gate-to-gate analysis of the process that is used for the life cycle analysis.

Table 2.3. Material, fuel, and utilities allocations for Alternative Process 1 & Alternative Process 2

Alternative Process 1 Alternative Process 2

In Out In Out
MATERIALS
Waste Pork Lard 80 kg 80 kg
Waste Duck 19.14 kg 19.14 kg
Eggshell
Sulfuric Acid 3.72 kg 3.72 kg
Ethanol 190.65 kg 190.65 kg
Carbon Dioxide 10.89 kg 16.75 kg
Wastewater 205.73 kg 350.87 kg
Solid Waste 4.77 kg 5.89 kg
(Residue)
Vapor 5.31 kg 11.79 kg
FUEL AND PROCESS MATERIALS
Electricity 293.79 kWh 303.97 kWh
Water 101.54 m3 148.56 m3

2.3 LCI Comparison of Alternatives

2.3.1.1 Alternative Process 1 LCI
This process showed a more simplified production process flow of biodiesel using waster pork lard
as raw material so some equipments are reduced (driers, milling equipments and others) in the
production line and also to reduced production of unwanted wastes like vapor, wastewater and solid
waste residues.

Table 2.4. Life Cycle Inventory of Biodiesel Production from Alternative Process 1

Input to the System Output from the system

Material: Emissions to Air:
Waste Pork Lard 80 kg Carbon Dioxide 10.89 kg
Waste Duck 19.14 kg
Eggshells
Sulfuric Acid 3.72 kg Emissions to Water:
Ethanol 190.65 kg Wastewater 205.73 kg

Emissions to Soil:
Solid 4.74 kg
Waste/Residue
Water:
Process: 148.56 m3
Electricity: 303.97 kWh

11
2.3.1.2 Alternative Process 2 LCI

This process showed a more simplified production process flow of biodiesel using waster pork lard as
raw material so some equipments are reduced (driers, milling equipments and others) in the production
line and also to reduced production of unwanted wastes like vapor, wastewater and solid waste
residues.

Table 2.5. Life Cycle Inventory of Biodiesel Production from Alternative Process 2

Input to the System Output from the system

Material: Emissions to Air:
Waste Pork Lard 80 kg Carbon Dioxide 36.86 kg
Waste Duck 19.14 kg
Eggshells
Sulfuric Acid 3.72 kg Emissions to Water:
Ethanol 190.65 kg Wastewater 319.98 kg

Emissions to Soil:
Solid 35.04kg
Waste/Residue
Water:
Process: 148.56 m3
Electricity: 303.97 kWh

12
 CHAPTER 3
LIFE-CYCLE IMPACT ASSESSMENT (LCIA)

(In this chapter, emissions and consumptions are translated into environmental effects. The
environmental effects are grouped and weighted according to their severity.)

3.1 Methodology

3.1.1 Environmental Impacts Assessed

The coverage of assessment is from when the raw materials were collected up to the
generation of the product. It is expected that the environmental impacts are smaller when
using waste as the raw materials. According to , alkaline catalysis has lower overall
environmental impact when using waste oils. The endpoint damage categories consist of
human health, ecosystem quality, and climate change

The WPL raw material, in itself, cannot be directly disposed to the environment. In a
plant scale, oil spills can potentially occur. The wastewater system in the plant handles the
treatment of the solid organic wastes and the wash water from the washing of recovered duck
eggshells and the washing of the transesterification product.

The process involves Sulfuric acid of which there is a pure entering stream and a side
stream that contains a mixture with traces of it after esterification. Its presence is detrimental
to human health in cases of fume leakage and spills. Sulfuric acid is corrosive and can cause
burns when in contact with skin. Sulfuric acid fumes are dealt with by a wet scrubber system.
The scrubber can utilize a wet substance to remove escaping acidic fumes that contribute to
acid rain. Flammable chemicals are also present such as the WPLEE and Ethanol. As such,
appropriate personal protective equipment and caution is required of the maintenance
personnel in-charge of these parts of the plant.

Other potential safety problems may include physical hazards such as slippery floors,
objects in walkways, unsafe or misused machinery, excessive noise, and fire. Ample
personnel training with the appropriate safety procedures will minimize the occurrence of
accidents.

3.1.2 Assessment Method

The assessment method used for this LCA is impact assessment, specifically,
IMPACT 2002+. This methodology, commonly used for the assessment of human toxicity
and eco-toxicity, uses a combined midpoint/damage approach. A midpoint indicator
characterizes the elementary flows and environmental interventions that contribute to the
same impact. A damage indicator is the quantified representation of the results. The
impact assessment methodology was IMPACT 2002+ was used as the results of the said
methodology can be expressed in points, making interpretation of results more
convenient.

13
3.2 LCIA Results

3.2.1 Non-renewable Resource Use (water) comparison

As presented in Figure 3.2., Process 1 consumes more water than Process 2 the use of steam
contributed to the consumption rate. In Process 2, equipment such as evaporators that uses steam are
present while they are replaced by a centrifuge in Process 1.

Water
400

350
Water consumption kg/day

300

250

200

150

100

50

0
Process 1 Process 2

Figure 3.2. Water use of biodiesel production.

3.2.2 Energy Use and Non-renewable resource use (fuel) comparison

Both processes use electricity (non-fuel) for the process equipment and steam production. Process 2
consumes more electricity because of the presence of two Evaporators, a tunnel dryer, a crusher, and
a vibrating screen.

Power
16000

14000
Power consumed kWh

12000

10000

8000

6000

4000

2000

0
Process 1 Process 2

Figure 3.3. Power consumption

14
3.2.3 Global Warming Impacts
The two processes generate carbon dioxide because of the involvement of calcination contributing to
global warming potential. As shown in Figure 3.4., Alternative 2 has a higher global warming potential
than Process 1.

Global Warming Impacts

12

10

8
kg CO2 - eq

0
Process 1 Process 2

Figure 3.4. Global warming potential of each Alternative

3.2.4 Eutrophication Impacts

As presented in the following figure, Process 2 has more eutrophication potential. During
esterification, sulfuric acid was used as a homogenous catalyst. To remove it from the esterification
product solution, water is used for washing where the acid will dissociate to sulfate and hydrogen ions.
The wastewater involved afterwards will contain the sulfate component. With a difference of 0.34 kg
SO4-2- equivalent, there is minimal difference.

Eutrophication Impacts
4.5
4
3.5
3
kg SO4-2 -eq

2.5
2
1.5
1
0.5
0
Process 1 Process 2

Figure 3.5. Eutrophication potential

15
 CHAPTER 4
SUMMARY OF RESULTS

(In this chapter, present tables or figures that would best summarize the results of the LCI and LCIA
for each alternative.)

4.1.1 Process 1 & 2 Results Summary

Life Cycle Analysis application results are shown the following table starting with the
carbon dioxide equivalent being produced per day of process, the overall power consumed,
sulfate equivalent, and the overall process water usage. There is 4% more kg CO -eq, 20% 2

more power consumption, 8.5% more kg SO -eq and 31% more water consumption in
4
-2

Alternative 2 than in alternative 1.

Percentage

Alternative 1 Alternative 2 Alternative 1 Alternative 2

kg CO -eq
2
10.9 11.3 96.460177 100

Power (kWh) 12100 15100 80.13245 100

kg SO -eq
4
-2
3.64 3.98 91.457286 100

Water (kg) 236.16 342 69.052632 100

The figure represents the comparison of consumption and magnitude of environmental

impact between the two processes (Process 1 and Process 2) with Process 2 as the Baseline
because of its results having larger values for all factors. As indicated, Process 1 has less
usage and environmental influence than Process 2.

16
 CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSIONS

(Consult the original goal definition for the purpose of the analysis and the target group. In this
chapter, identify the best alternative and the areas where large improvements can be made with
minimal corporate resource expenditure and low risk.)

5.1.1 General Conclusions

The study evaluates the LCA of rendered waste pork lard biodiesel production with the
use of calcined waste duck eggshells as base catalyst in the transesterification process.
Basing from the data obtained using the LCA software, There is 4% more kg CO -eq, 20% 2

more power consumption, 8.5% more kg SO -eq and 31% more water consumption in
4
-2

17
Alternative 2 than in alternative 1. Overall, Alternative 1 has less usage of equipment and
lesser environmental influence than Alternative 2.

5.2.1 Opportunities for Improvement

5.2.1 Materials

Basing from the product yield from the process 1 and process 2, the former process
produces more product. In terms of the LCA result, process 1 is more eco-friendly compared
to process 2. Process 1 uses less equipment thus energy consumption is also at a minimum.
One possible place of improvement could be the catalyst used in reducing the free fatty acid
of the rendered waste pork lard. Esterification needs an acid catalyst in converting free fatty
acids to esters. Sulfuric acid is the most commonly used acid during esterification. This is due
to its high yield at a short span of time. As of now, many studies conducted experimentation
that uses heterogeneous catalyst that can simultaneously do esterification and
transesterification. This kind of improvement can reduce the use of equipment without
compromising the product yield.

5.2.2 Energy Sources

Two of the processes in the project that consumes a lot of energy is the Calcination and
Distillation processes. These two processes are essential in the biodiesel production since
calcination converts the components in the eggshells to base catalyst CaO while distillation is
used to recover a large amount of excess ethanol used in the production. For a plant that uses
equipment that are energy extensive, renewable energy sources are such great help not just
for the company’s expenses but to the environment as well. Improvements such as the use of
solar panels or the use of biomass can lessen these negative effects. Hydropower can also
be one alternative energy source but due to climate change it is less dependable.

18
 Bibliography
(All the references used and that were cited in the report must be placed in this section in the
American Psychological Association (APA) format in alphabetical order of authors. )

19
 Appendix A
Title of Appendix

(In this section, present all raw data and pertinent information used in the study.)

20