DEPARTMENT OF CHEMICAL ENGINEERING

COMPLEX ENGINEERING PROBLEMS

Assignment
Date:16th September 2020

Group Members & Seat No:

Muhammad Faizan (B1333043)

Fasih Asif (B1333020)
M. Hammad Khalid (B1333044)
Umair Haider (B1433052)
Syed Ateeb Ali (B1433043)
 Objective
Design production unit of ethanol through the fermentation of reducing sugar.

Introduction
Alcoholic fermentation is a biological process in which sugars such
as glucose, fructose, and sucrose are converted into cellular energy and thereby
produce ethanol and carbon dioxide as metabolic waste products.
Alcoholic fermentation is considered and anaerobic process. Sugarcane is rich in
sucrose and thus it is used as a feedstock to produce the biofuel ethanol. Ethanol
is generally available as a byproduct of fermentation. It can be used as
a biofuel alternative to gasoline.
The fermentation process design is central to the overall plant economic
comparison. The fermentation equipment for a conventional 2,000,000,000 L/yr
facility is described. Fermentation has a large direct effect on overall plant costs.

FLOW DIAGRAM WITH P&ID:

Methodology
Two general arrangements of process flows and equipment can be used to
describe all of the designs considered. First simple continuous processes, by
staggering harvest times for batch fermentors to provide a continuous product
flow, Other can also describe a batch production facility. We are selecting batch
fermentation process.
Molasses and added nutrients are taken from storage and mixed with water to
the desired feed concentration and sterilized by direct steam injection in a
continuous sterilizer. Feed from the mixer is then send to the fermenter.
Filtered air is spared into the fomenters to maintain the optimum oxygen
concentration. An absorber is used to recover ethanol from the fermenter vent
gas.
For selective ethanol removal processes, the fermenting beer is cycled through a
selective ethanol recovery device such as membrane separator, extractor or flash
vessel. A portion of the dilute beer is then centrifuged and sent to stripper. The
bottom product of fermentor is mixed with the yeast cream feed to the rotary
dryer as a further nutrient supplement. The rotary steam tube dryer is operated
at high temperature using 600 psig steam to reduce the drying area. The ethanol-
water vapors evaporated from the yeast is then condensed. the condensed
stream in introduced in distillation column.
The distillation system consists of an atmospheric pressure stripper followed by a
vacuum distillation column to produce 95 wt 70% azeotropic alcohol. Vapor reuse
methods are used to achieve a high energy efficiency. The fermentation plant is
designed assuming 330 days/ yr and 24 h/day operation.

Technical & Economical Feasibility

Raw Material Materials. utility, and labor costs Cost in dollars

Molasses 50 wt '70 sugar, 95% utilizable 8S/ton

1.11/ethanol
Nutrients
product
Process water 50.4/1000 gal
 Utilities
600 psig steam 4.41/1000 Ib
50 psig steam 3.15/1000 Ib
1 atm steam exhaust 0.76/1000 Ih
Electricity 8.82/kw h
Cooling water 22.6/1000 gal
Labour
Operator man
10/man h
hours

Batch fermentation purchased

equipment summary
Storage
Molasses 7860000 L, carbon steel 268,000
Ethanol 4240000 L, carbon steel 167,000
Yeast 323000 L, carbon steel, 5 units 247,000
Screw conveyor 0.40 hp, 100 ft long 8,000
690,000

Fermentation

127000 L, stainless steel, 8 units,

Batch fermentor 591,000
residence time = 6.54 h
Fermentor agitator 84 hp, stainless steel, 8 units 433,000
Fermentor cooler stainless steel, 8 units 28,900
Seed tank 12700 L, stainlcss steel, 8 units 166,000
Seed tank agitator 8.4 hp, stainless steel, 8 units 97,100
Air filter glass fiber, 1200 kg/h air 400
42 hp, 30 psig, stainless steel, 1200 kg/h
Air compressor 46,600
air
insulated stainless steel pipes plus heat
Feed-water sterilizer 86,100
exchangers, 113000
Feed mixing tank 9,450 L. stainless steel 17,600
Feed mixer agitator 12.5 hp. stainless steel 15,700
Centrifuge 217 hp, 117000 L/h feed 319,000
Total 1,801,000
Ethanol recovery
Absorber 1 in. Raschig rings, gas rate = 10500 kg/h 67,500
Absorber-water
3500 kg/h water 13,100
sterilizer

Stillage evaporator 37300 ft2, effects 1,590,000

7140 ft ', 27.4 hp, 11600 kg/h water

Rotary dryer 1,374,000
removed, 3 units
115000 kg/h feed, feed EtOH wt % = 8.0,
Distillation 341,000
stripper followed by dirtillation column
Total 3,380,000

Batch fermentation
production cost summary

Raw material Cost $/L Product

Nutrient solution 1.11
Water 7.4 kg/L 0.099
Molasses 3.7 kg/L 34.7
Raw materials subtotal 35.909
 UTITLITES
Power 6710000 kW h/yr 0.592
Cooling water 6S°F, 43.4 kg/L 0.26
Steam 50 psig, 2.38 kg/L 1.654
Steam 600 psig, 0.92 kg/L 0.896
Operating labor $10/nian h 1.348
Operating supervision 15% operating labor 0.202
Maintenance 6% fixed capital 1.46
Operating supplies 15% maintenance 0.22
Laboratory charges 15% operating labor 0.202
Direct production cost 42.743
Depreciation linear, 18 yr, zero salvage 1.348
Property taxes 3% fixed capital 0.73
Insurance 0.7% fixed capital 0.17

Fixed cost 2.248

60% (operating labor + operating

Plant overhead cost 1 ,806
supervision + maintenance)
(direct production + fixed costs +
Manufacturing cost 46.797
plant overhead)
Administrative
15% operating labor 0.202
expenses
Distribution and
5% total production cost 2.474
marketing
Total general expenses 2.676
After-tax profit (15% return on investment) 4.311
Income tax 4.31 1
Yeast credit ($O.l14/kg 50 wt %)yeast product 4.782
Steam credit (75.6C/1000 Ib) 0.268
Total product cost 53.04
 SWOT Analysis :
Large experiences in the production of bioethanol from sugar are available
(especially in Brazil). -- A very broad range of feedstock can be used for ethanol
production

Strengths
Ethanol has a high octane number which is good for combustion properties (the
anti knocking number is enhanced). Ethanol contains 35% oxygen which reduces
particulate and NOx emissions from combustion when compared to the
combustion of petrol. Combustion of ethanol results in low CO emissions.
Bioethanol can be blended with gasoline at any ratio. Ethanol contains no sulfur,
causing no emissions of sulfur oxides. Small amounts of bioethanol are neither
toxic to humans nor to the environment. In Europe the production of ethanol
mainly depends on a single feedstock source: sugar beets. The feedstock costs for
starchy crops are high. Ethanol processing from cellulose is relatively cost
intensive. The feedstock costs for sugar crops are high. -- Ethanol processing from
cellulose is relatively energy intensive. For feedstock cultivation fertilizers and
pesticides are required. There are no experiences for large-scale production of
ethanol from cellulose. Ethanol is characterized by high vapor pressures.

Weaknesses
Weaknesses Blending gasoline with ethanol increases emissions of volatile
organic compounds. Energy input for ethanol processing from sugar is lower than
ethanol processing from starch and cellulose. Energy input for ethanol processing
from starch is lower than ethanol processing from cellulose. Research is carried
out to optimize ethanol processing from cellulose.

Opportunities
Research is carried out to optimize ethanol processing fromstarch.Energy input
for ethanol processing from starch is higher than ethanol processing from sugar.
Energy input for ethanol processing from cellulose is higher than ethanol
processing from sugar or starch. Sugar beets are food crops (competition of
ethanol with food products). Most starchy crops are food crops (competition of
ethanol with food products). Production costs for ethanol from cellulose are
relatively high.

Threats
In most European countries the use of bioethanol is not yet established and thus
limited infrastructure for ethanol distribution exists.

CONCLUSION
Although current industrial fermentation for fuel ethanol production employs two
types of feed stocks such as free fermentable sugars and starch, free sugars
containing juice is more economic than starch feed stocks as the former can
directly be used in fermentation without any prior treatment. However, better
yield also depends somewhat on the selection of microorganisms and
fermentation mode and techniques as well as the influence of several
factors.Selective ethanol removal fermentation processes offer
even greater savings as more concentrated feeds and products can be handled,
further reducing the cost of auxiliary equipment.Very expensive separation
devices can be justified and research should be continued in this area. It should
be noted, however,that much of this savings could also be achieved by employing
s tillage recycle in combination with conventional fermentation processes.
 REFERENCE:
1. Renshaw, S. F. Sapakie, and M. C. Hanson, Chem. Eng.
2. H. H. Topiwala and B. Khosrovi, Biotechrtol. Bioeng., 20, 73
3. E. J. Del Rosario, K. J. Lee, and P. L. Rogers, Biotechnol. Bioeng.,
Prog., 78(5), 33 (1982).
(1978).
4. B. L. Maiorella, “Vacuum Ethanol Distillation Technology,” in
The Ethanol Separation Handbook, L. Douglas, Ed. (Solar Energy
Research Institute, Golden, CO, 1984).
5. S. P. Prescott and C. G. Dunn, Industrial Microbiologv, 2nd ed.,
(McGraw-Hill, New York, 1949).
6. R. Katzen, “Grain Motor Fuel Alcohol Technical and Economic
Assessment Study,” U.S. National Technical Information Service,