Assessment of Three Recycling Pathways for Waste Cooking Oil as Feedstock in the Production of Biodiesel, Biolubricant, and Biosurfactant: A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Approach

IF 4.6 Q2 GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Recycling Pub Date : 2023-08-20 DOI:10.3390/recycling8040064
G. De Feo, C. Ferrara, L. Giordano, L. S. Ossèo
{"title":"Assessment of Three Recycling Pathways for Waste Cooking Oil as Feedstock in the Production of Biodiesel, Biolubricant, and Biosurfactant: A Multi-Criteria Decision Analysis Approach","authors":"G. De Feo, C. Ferrara, L. Giordano, L. S. Ossèo","doi":"10.3390/recycling8040064","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The management of waste cooking oil (WCO) often poses significant challenges. The improper disposal of WCO results in negative environmental impacts and economic losses. However, from a circular economy perspective, WCO can be recycled and used as a sustainable feedstock for numerous industrial products, replacing virgin vegetable oils. This approach enables the recovery of resources while simultaneously addressing the problem of WCO disposal. By employing a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach, the study assesses three alternative recycling pathways for WCO used as a feedstock in the production of (A1) biodiesel, (A2) biolubricant, and (A3) biosurfactant. The aim is to identify the optimal alternative, taking into account environmental, economic, and technical factors. The procedure involved a team of chemical engineers working in the WCO recycling sector who were selected as decision makers. The ‘priority scale’ combined with the Paired Comparison Technique was employed as a weighting method to evaluate the selected criteria. The results revealed that the decision makers considered environmental sustainability as the most crucial evaluation criterion, followed by the economic criterion. In contrast, the aspect of process management was deemed less significant. Among the compared alternatives, utilizing WCO as a feedstock for biosurfactant production was assessed as the optimal WCO recycling solution. This alternative not only demonstrated the lowest coefficient variation but was also deemed the most favourable option. Biolubricant production was determined to be the second-best alternative. The adopted MCDA approach proved to be a reliable and effective tool, enabling the clear identification of the preferred WCO recycling alternative among those assessed. This was achieved through the utilization of the decision makers’ expertise and knowledge.","PeriodicalId":36729,"journal":{"name":"Recycling","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Recycling","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/recycling8040064","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GREEN & SUSTAINABLE SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The management of waste cooking oil (WCO) often poses significant challenges. The improper disposal of WCO results in negative environmental impacts and economic losses. However, from a circular economy perspective, WCO can be recycled and used as a sustainable feedstock for numerous industrial products, replacing virgin vegetable oils. This approach enables the recovery of resources while simultaneously addressing the problem of WCO disposal. By employing a multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) approach, the study assesses three alternative recycling pathways for WCO used as a feedstock in the production of (A1) biodiesel, (A2) biolubricant, and (A3) biosurfactant. The aim is to identify the optimal alternative, taking into account environmental, economic, and technical factors. The procedure involved a team of chemical engineers working in the WCO recycling sector who were selected as decision makers. The ‘priority scale’ combined with the Paired Comparison Technique was employed as a weighting method to evaluate the selected criteria. The results revealed that the decision makers considered environmental sustainability as the most crucial evaluation criterion, followed by the economic criterion. In contrast, the aspect of process management was deemed less significant. Among the compared alternatives, utilizing WCO as a feedstock for biosurfactant production was assessed as the optimal WCO recycling solution. This alternative not only demonstrated the lowest coefficient variation but was also deemed the most favourable option. Biolubricant production was determined to be the second-best alternative. The adopted MCDA approach proved to be a reliable and effective tool, enabling the clear identification of the preferred WCO recycling alternative among those assessed. This was achieved through the utilization of the decision makers’ expertise and knowledge.
废食用油作为原料生产生物柴油、生物润滑剂和生物表面活性剂的三种回收途径的评估:多标准决策分析方法
废弃食用油(WCO)的管理往往构成重大挑战。对世界海关组织的不当处置造成了负面的环境影响和经济损失。然而,从循环经济的角度来看,WCO可以回收利用,作为许多工业产品的可持续原料,取代初榨植物油。这种办法能够回收资源,同时解决世界海关组织的处置问题。通过采用多标准决策分析(MCDA)方法,该研究评估了用于生产(A1)生物柴油、(A2)生物润滑剂和(A3)生物表面活性剂的WCO的三种可选回收途径。其目的是在考虑到环境、经济和技术因素的情况下,确定最佳的替代方案。该程序涉及一组在世界海关组织回收部门工作的化学工程师,他们被选为决策者。采用“优先级量表”结合配对比较技术作为加权方法对所选标准进行评价。结果表明,决策者认为环境可持续性是最重要的评价标准,其次是经济标准。相比之下,过程管理方面被认为不那么重要。在比较方案中,以WCO为原料生产生物表面活性剂是WCO回收的最佳方案。这一选择不仅表现出最小的系数变化,而且被认为是最有利的选择。生物润滑剂的生产被认为是第二好的选择。采用的MCDA方法证明是一种可靠和有效的工具,能够在评估的方案中明确确定优选的世界海关组织回收办法。这是通过利用决策者的专门知识和知识实现的。
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
Recycling
Recycling Environmental Science-Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
6.80
自引率
7.00%
发文量
84
审稿时长
11 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