Techno-economic analysis of cleaner alternatives for recovering ammonium chloride from wastewater generated by polyvinyl chloride thermal stabilizer plants

IF 5.3 Q2 ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL
{"title":"Techno-economic analysis of cleaner alternatives for recovering ammonium chloride from wastewater generated by polyvinyl chloride thermal stabilizer plants","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.clet.2024.100787","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>The current conventional process for recovering NH<sub>4</sub>Cl from wastewater generated by organotin mercaptide-based polyvinyl chloride thermal stabilizer plants through evaporative crystallization is energy intensive and has not yet been discussed. Three energy-saving process variants, namely mechanical vapor recompression (MVR), double-effect evaporation (DEE), and thermal vapor recompression (TVR) processes, have been proposed and evaluated in terms of both technical and economic feasibility, treating the case as a cost-cutting project aimed to avoid off-site wastewater treatment costs. Comparative evaluation has also been carried out with the conventional (CON) process used as a reference. Under the studied conditions, the MVR, DEE, and TVR processes provided energy savings in the ranges of 60%–76%, 35%–43%, and 26%–37%, respectively, confirming that applying the three alternative processes for recovering NH<sub>4</sub>Cl results in a significantly cleaner and more sustainable recovery process. Under typical conditions and with a plant capacity of 5000 kg/h, the MVR, DEE, and TVR processes required an additional investment of 2.3, 1.0, and 0.2 million USD, respectively, compared to the CON process. The revenue was primarily driven by cost savings due to the elimination of off-site wastewater treatment, which accounted for 86.9% of the total revenue. Sensitivity analysis showed that the off-site wastewater treatment cost was found to be the most influential factor on economic feasibility. When economic targets can be traded off, MVR process is highly recommended as an alternative to the conventional energy-intensive process. If economic feasibility comparable to the conventional process is still targeted, DEE and TVR are recommended. The results of this study dismiss concerns that cleaner processes would have a negative economic impact.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":34618,"journal":{"name":"Cleaner Engineering and Technology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666790824000673/pdfft?md5=f87f3e4b6d306ea4ed4c18f0860c78a9&pid=1-s2.0-S2666790824000673-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cleaner Engineering and Technology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666790824000673","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ENVIRONMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The current conventional process for recovering NH4Cl from wastewater generated by organotin mercaptide-based polyvinyl chloride thermal stabilizer plants through evaporative crystallization is energy intensive and has not yet been discussed. Three energy-saving process variants, namely mechanical vapor recompression (MVR), double-effect evaporation (DEE), and thermal vapor recompression (TVR) processes, have been proposed and evaluated in terms of both technical and economic feasibility, treating the case as a cost-cutting project aimed to avoid off-site wastewater treatment costs. Comparative evaluation has also been carried out with the conventional (CON) process used as a reference. Under the studied conditions, the MVR, DEE, and TVR processes provided energy savings in the ranges of 60%–76%, 35%–43%, and 26%–37%, respectively, confirming that applying the three alternative processes for recovering NH4Cl results in a significantly cleaner and more sustainable recovery process. Under typical conditions and with a plant capacity of 5000 kg/h, the MVR, DEE, and TVR processes required an additional investment of 2.3, 1.0, and 0.2 million USD, respectively, compared to the CON process. The revenue was primarily driven by cost savings due to the elimination of off-site wastewater treatment, which accounted for 86.9% of the total revenue. Sensitivity analysis showed that the off-site wastewater treatment cost was found to be the most influential factor on economic feasibility. When economic targets can be traded off, MVR process is highly recommended as an alternative to the conventional energy-intensive process. If economic feasibility comparable to the conventional process is still targeted, DEE and TVR are recommended. The results of this study dismiss concerns that cleaner processes would have a negative economic impact.

从聚氯乙烯热稳定剂工厂产生的废水中回收氯化铵的清洁替代品的技术经济分析
目前,通过蒸发结晶从有机锡硫醇基聚氯乙烯热稳定剂工厂产生的废水中回收 NH4Cl 的传统工艺能耗高,尚未得到讨论。我们提出了三种节能工艺变体,即机械蒸汽再压缩工艺(MVR)、双效蒸发工艺(DEE)和热蒸汽再压缩工艺(TVR),并从技术和经济可行性两方面对其进行了评估,将此案例视为旨在避免场外废水处理成本的成本削减项目。此外,还与作为参考的传统(CON)工艺进行了比较评估。在所研究的条件下,MVR、DEE 和 TVR 工艺的节能率分别为 60%-76%、35%-43% 和 26%-37%,这证实了采用这三种替代工艺回收 NH4Cl 可以大大提高回收工艺的清洁度和可持续性。在典型条件下,工厂产能为 5000 公斤/小时,与 CON 工艺相比,MVR、DEE 和 TVR 工艺分别需要额外投资 230 万美元、100 万美元和 20 万美元。收入主要来自于取消异地废水处理所节省的成本,占总收入的 86.9%。敏感性分析表明,异地废水处理成本是对经济可行性影响最大的因素。当经济指标可以权衡时,强烈建议采用 MVR 工艺替代传统的高能耗工艺。如果仍然希望经济可行性与传统工艺相当,则建议采用 DEE 和 TVR 工艺。这项研究的结果消除了人们对清洁工艺会产生负面经济影响的担忧。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Cleaner Engineering and Technology
Cleaner Engineering and Technology Engineering-Engineering (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
9.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
218
审稿时长
21 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信