Project Process Design and Optimization

Process & Food Technology

Group4

21137005 Helian Tekeste

21078548 Najma Ahmed

22065830 Sabine Brouwer

22003630 Scarlett Lee

1.Summary

Sustainability has become more important over the past years as resources have become more
scarce and global warming increases. One way to increase sustainability is through water and
energy usage reduction by optimization of processes. Therefore, research is important to become
more familiar with optimization and develop new ideas and theories. However, experiments can
be expensive, time consuming and labor intensive. Hence, advanced modeling techniques form a
good alternative to practice with these concepts.

The two most popular commercially available software to simulate these kinds of processes are
SuperPro and ASPEN, each with their own purpose. Hence ASPEN is used to optimize a given
waste incineration process, with a primary focus of the thermodynamic models. While SuperPro
is used to simulate and optimize a given production process of apple juice, with a primary focus
on mass balances and calculating economic gain.

The principal objective of this project is to use SuperPro and Aspen to optimize the design of the
production processes for apple juice and waste gas incinerators, respectively. The waste gas
incinerator will be optimized to reduce utility costs, energy consumption, and while maximizing
the utilization of heat content, minimizing corrosion, generating more steam and mitigating
adverse environmental impacts. The primary subjects of concern for apple juice production will
be minimizing water use, limiting waste, and recycling energy. The project includes developing
base models for both processes, conducting a comprehensive literature review to find optimization
options, evaluating the options based on cost-effectiveness, sustainability, and feasibility, and
optimizing the models in accordance with chosen objectives.
2.Apple juice production
2.1 Base model design
The base model of apple juice process aimed to produce clarified apple juice with a dry matter
content of 10% and an expected yield of 70% at a rate of 1000L/h. The process began with the
transfer of apples from a bulk truck to a storage vessel with a flow rate of 1370 kg/h, followed by
two cleaning processes using processed water and diluted hydrochloric acid (HCl) water. In the
second cleaning step, 0.01% of HCl was added to the water to remove contaminants from the
apples, resulting in a loss of 0.1% of raw fruits. The sorted apples underwent grinding and
extraction, resulting in a juice yield of up to 80% with a dry matter content of 14% to 16%, and
the production of apple pomace as a byproduct at approximately 20% of the initial apple contents.
The extracted apple juice was sent to the enzyme treatment unit, where pectinase was added to
remove pectin from the juice and prevent gelidifying. The pectinase enzyme reacted with the pectin
at 55°C for 1.5 hours, after which the juice was cooled to 15°C for quality assurance. The cooled
juice was then mixed with 0.1% bentonite for pretreatment before undergoing filtration to further
clarify the juice. Approximately 10% of the filtered bentonite cake was discarded, resulting in a
final dry matter content of 10% to 12% in the apple juice. For food safety purposes, the clarified
juice underwent pasteurization at 83°C and was cooled down to 10°C to remove bacteria. The final
clarified apple juice was bottled in 750ml glass jars, with a final yield of approximately 73% and
a dry matter content of 10%.

Most calculations were done using the tools in SuperPro, however a mass balance was required in
order to find the outflow percentages of each individual component to the pomace from the
extraction.
Figure1: Mass balance of extraction
The ratios of apples, pomace, and fruit juice are as given in the assignment, furthermore the 20%
flow rate toward the pomace is easily derived from the 80% flow rate towards the fruit juice. To
simplify calculations an example with 1000 kg apples is taken. First the weight of each individual
component's percentage of the 1000 kg apples is calculated giving the values on the left in red.
Then, the weight of the pomace is calculated which equals to 20% of 1000kg or 200 kg. Next, the
weight of each individual component's percentage of the 200 kg pomace is calculated. Lastly, the
ratio between both weights is calculated. For example, 160 kg of 840 kg water equals 19% meaning
that 19% of water from the apples goes to the pomace after extraction.

2.2 Optimized model design

Introduction

Based on the base model, the optimized model was designed to reduce energy consumption, water
usage and reuse the waste from production. Moreover, for more in-depth solutions, literature
analysis was performed to identify possible optimization options for water and energy
consumption reduction and to reduce waste, mainly focusing on reusing the waste to create other
products. In order to increase sustainability of production and generate turnover.
The objective of the optimized model of apple juice process is exploring various methods and
technologies for improving the efficiency and sustainability of a production process. Specifically,
aimed at investigating methods for recycling bentonite from the cake after filtration for a skincare
product, and identifying potential use for apple pomace waste. The report will also explore
methods for reducing the amount of enzyme used for enzyme treatment and evaluating strategies
for reducing heat consumption by remodeling heat exchanger. Additionally, the necessity of
cooling down the juice between enzyme treatment and filtration process has been evaluated as well
as the exploration of potential alternatives for reducing energy consumption. Lastly, the literature
study identified strategies for reducing waste and water usage in the production process, such as
implementing a waste reduction plan, using water conservation strategies, and implementing a
recycling loop for cleaning water.

Selected optimization objective

Reducing water consumption
One way to reduce the water consumption is to reuse the cleaning water of the process. However,
the cleaning water will be less effective with each cycle because the water gets saturated with soils
like sand from the apples and HCl is consumed during the process. Therefore, it is necessary to
filter the water for apple particles as well as sand and potential other soils and readjust the
concentration of HCl for each cycle of cleaning 2. However, cleaning 1 is a precleaning procedure,
therefore allowing for more soiled water to be used since the apples will be thoroughly cleaned at
cleaning 2.
The World Health Organization (HWO) suggests that a concentration of 0,2-0,5 mg/L of chlorine
is maintained at the outflow for food processes. (Bailone et al., 2022) An inflow of 0,1% HCl
means a concentration of 1000 mg/L of chlorine in the water. Furthermore, it is assumed that the
cleaning water can be reused 3 times while being effective. (Fan et al., 2021) However, a constant
inflow and purge is desired since the process is continuous. Meaning that 0,03% HCl is added to
the reused cleaning water, as well as an outflow of 30% and a filter to retain possible
contaminations like sand and dirt. Cleaning 1 is looped with a purge of 10% since the cleaning
water is not required to be as clean.

Reducing waste
Making a skin care face mask with filtered bentonite cake

The cake left over after the enzyme treatment contains mostly insoluble apples and bentonite.
Bentonite, like other types of clay, is widely used for skincare products claiming to reduce acne.
(Kim et al., 2001) Furthermore, the insoluble from the apples also contains components that are
beneficial in the treatment of acne. Subsequently, companies like Provital produce skin care masks
based on apple pomace. (Romero & Romero, 2022) Additionally, bentonite is often combined with
apple cider vinegar in order to make masks at home to treat acne and other skin blemishes.
Therefore, potential consumers are already familiar with the connection between apples and
bentonite clay.
Consequently, the cake can be used to produce a skincare mask in order to reduce waste from the
production process. In order to produce the facemasks, Propylene glycol and 1,3-Propanediol are
added to the cake. (PomarageTM by Provital - Personal Care & Cosmetics, n.d.) (Ruggeri, 2020)
Propylene glycol is a byproduct from the production of fossil fuel used to retain the moisture in
the face mask, (Hati, 2016) while 1,3-Propanediol is a stabilizer derived from corn used to ensure
a desirable consistency. (Carenzi, n.d.) Thereafter, the mixture is homogenized while being
pasteurized at 105°C for increased shelf life and minimal microbial growth, before being cooled
down to room temperature and lastly packaging. (LG Electronics, 2018)
The formula of the final skin care product includes 38% water content (Making Cosmetics Inc.,
n.d.), 5% 1,3-Propanediol (Making Cosmetics Inc., n.d.-b) and 4% Propylene glycol (Making
Cosmetics Inc., n.d.-c).
Making apple cake mix with apple pomace

Table 1. Process of apple pomace powder and composition of apple cake mix as a new product
Drying Process of Apple Pomace for making Apple Pomace Powder
-Rotary Drum Dryer (The ONIX Corporation, 2018)
-110C for 3 hours (Jung et al., 2015).
-Before drying apple pomace water content 80% with 273 kg/h
-After drying 4.5% water content should be left
Inlet stream of Apple Pomace Powder 57kg/h
Final composition of Cake Mix Flour:39%, Sugar:48.75%, Baking soda:2.5%,
Apple Pomace Powder: 9.75%
Total Out Stream Flow rate 585kg/h
-Flow Rate Calculation of Flour:228.15kg/h
Flour, Sugar and Baking soda Sugar:285.18kg/h
B.S: 14.6kg/h -Total:528.17kg/h

-Composition of Input Flour:43%

Flour, sugar and baking soda Sugar: 54%
B.S: 3%

The consumption of fibers has many health benefits including a reduced risk of cancer, diabetes
type 2 and vascular diseases. A fiber rich diet, furthermore, aids digestion. (Voedingscentrum, n.d.)
Apple pomace is rich in nutrients including fibers, which make up 40% of the dry weight of the
pomace. (Curutchet et al., 2021) Thus indicating that apple pomace can be used as a good source
of fibers.
One way of using the apple pomace is as a fibrous alternative for flour in a cake mix.
To create this apple pomace flour, the apple pomace is dried at 110°C for 3 hours to a moisture
content of 4,5% first to be grinded down after. (Jung et al., 2015) Next baking soda, flour and
sugar are added to make a cake mix. Substituting up to 20% of the flour in a normal cake mix with
this apple pomace flour does not negatively impact the flavor or constancy of the cake while
increasing nutritional value as well as reducing the number of calories in the cake. (Sionek, 2022)
Lastly the mixture is pasteurized at 71°C to guarantee food safety and packaged into food safe
paper bags. (The Association of Food and Drug Officials, 2003)
According to European regulations the cake mix needs to have at least 6 grams of fiber per 100
grams of product in order to make a nutritional claim of a high fibrous food product. (Nutrition
Claims, n.d.) Therefore, 39% flour, 48,75% sugar and 2,5% baking soda are added to 9,75% apple
pomace flour in order to create a high fiber cake mix while using all the pomace and without
negatively impacting flavor or texture of the cake. This cake mix can be sold as a normal cake mix
or marketed as a healthier alternative since it contains more fiber and nutritional value as well as
less calories than regular cake mixes.

Reducing the amount of enzyme

Apple juice filtration process is required for certain types of enzymes called pectinase which
converts pectin in the apple into insoluble compound so that the final apple juice product cannot
be gelidified and is clarified the juice via enzymatic reaction. However, in general, the enzymes
for food processing have relatively higher price than any other food additives because it is required
a special treatment and equipment (Maddon, 2000).

Figure2. Reaction Rate of Pectinase at different temperature, open circle indicated pure pectinase enzyme.
Figure 2 illustrates the reaction rate of the pectinase enzyme at different temperatures. At 55°C,
the reaction rate was approximately 17 μmol/min, and at 60°C, it was about 25 μmol/min. With a
5°C temperature increase, the reaction rate increased by 68%, indicating that raising the
temperature up to 60°C boosted the reaction rate. However, at temperatures above 60°C, the
enzyme started to denature, and the reaction rate decreased significantly until 70°C (Trindade et
al., 2016). It can be assumed that increasing the temperature to 60°C may reduce the amount of
enzyme required, as the base model of enzyme treatment was processed at 55°C. According to
Trindade et al. (2016), the pectinase enzyme has an optimum temperature of 61°C. Therefore,
setting the enzyme treatment at 60°C could potentially reduce the amount of enzyme usage by
half, as the reaction rate was raised by 68% compared to the initial rate at 55°C.
Energy reductions
Uniting a mixer for enzyme and bentonite

For uniting the enzyme and bentonites in one mixer, the composition of mixtures was calculated
using the following steps. After these composition values were fed into the custom mixer and two
mixers were united in one mixer and it was assumed that energy consumption can be reduced.
Table2. finding the composition of bentonites and enzyme for enzyme treatment
Flow Rate 1092.1639 kg/h
Enzymes 0.03g/L => 0.03276 kg/h
Bentonites 0.1% => 1.0921639kg/h
Enzymes + Bentonites (100%) 1.1249239kg/h.
Finding the composition of Enzymes and Bentonites from its mixture (100%)
Composition of Enzymes 0.032761.1249239⋅100=3%0.032761.1249239⋅100=3%

Composition of Bentonites 1.09216391.1249239⋅100=97%1.09216391.1249239⋅10

0=97%

Removing unnecessary heat exchanger

Figure3. Base Model: Heat Exchanger for cooling

Figure4. Optimized model: Without heat exchanger for cooling
Following enzymatic treatment, apple juice was subjected to a depectinization process. It has been
reported that temperature has a significant effect on the viscosity of depectinized apple juice.
Saravacos (1970) showed that higher temperatures result in a greater decrease in viscosity.
Therefore, a cooling step after the enzymatic treatment is deemed unnecessary as higher
temperatures lower the viscosity of the juice, making the filtration process easier than at lower
temperatures, such as 15°C. In the optimized model presented in Figure 4, the cooling heat
exchanger of the base model was removed due to its high-water consumption, making the process
more sustainable and cost-effective.

Remodeling pasteurizer

Figure5. New optimized pasteurizing process

Figure 5 illustrates a new optimized model for the pasteurization process, in which the pasteurizer
from the base model has been removed and replaced with three heat exchangers and one blending
vessel. HX-102 and V-101 are connected in a recycling loop, with HX-102 serving as the heat
exchanger and V-101 as the vessel. The filtered juice is heated from 60°C to 78°C degrees in HX-
102, and then sent to the second heat exchanger, HX-103, where it is further heated to 83°C
degrees. The tempered juice is then transferred to V-101 and recycled back to HX-102 to increase
the temperature of the filtered juice stream again from 60°C to 78°C degrees. This recycling
process is assumed to reduce the amount of energy needed to heat up the liquid, allowing for heat
energy to be recycled. Finally, to reach the desired final product temperature, the pasteurized juice
is passed through heat exchanger HX-104 to cool down the temperature to 10°C degrees.

Cost estimation
A cost estimation is made in order to examine the viability of the implementation of the
optimizations. Therefore, the total capital investment (TCI), fixed operating cost (FOC), variable
operating cost (VOC) and revenue are estimated to find a cashflow and evaluate the amount of
years it will take to have a return on investment.
Subsequently, a more detailed selection of equipment is required in order to collect equipment
prices and make a TCI.

TCI
Equipment selection
Plate and frame filter: Apple juice is slightly acidic as well as a liquid food product. Therefore,
a stainless-steel plate and frame filter was selected. The area of 30,26 m2 was given by SuperPro.
Storage of apples: with an inflow of 1300L/h, 8-hour workdays and resupply once a week, a
storage vessel with a minimum capacity of 84392L including a 10% volume safety measurement
for tanks is required. However, the cost estimation tool requires a minimum volume of 85,6 m2 for
this type of storage vessel. Furthermore, the apples are solid and don't deteriorate metal due to their
skin keeping in the juices and acidity. Therefore, a small carbon steel field-erected tank with a
capacity of 85,6 m3 was selected.
Dryer for the pomace for apple flour: a spraydryer with a diameter of 3,05 is selected based on
the height/diameter of 3 m3 found in the equipment data using SuperPro. Furthermore, a drying
capacity of 0,06 kg/s was given by SuperPro. However, the minimum capacity for this type of
spraydryer in the cost estimation software equals 0,0631 kg/s. Therefore, a drying capacity of
0,0631 kg/s was selected.
Mixing tank for pasteurization of apple juice: Apple juice is slightly acidic as well as a liquid
food product. Therefore, a stainless-steel tank was selected. The capacity of 1,133 m3 is given by
SuperPro.
Enzyme reactor: The reactor is required to withstand a pressure of 151,95 kPa according to
SuperPro and handles slightly acidic fluids aimed for consumption. Therefore, the lowest pressure
stainless steel reactor was selected in the cost estimation software.
Filter for cleaning water: A stainless steel filter is required due to the presence of chlorine ions
in the water. (Lawrence Sintered Metals, n.d.) The required area of 3,12 m 2 was given by
SuperPro.
Pasteurizer: The cost of the pasteurizer was taken from SuperPro since there is no pasteurizer
available in the cost estimation software. However, this value is already adjusted for year analysis
2023 by SuperPro and therefore does not need to be multiplied by the CEPCI value.
Heat recovering heat exchanger within the pasteurization process: A plate heat exchanger was
selected because the substances within the heat exchanger all stay in liquid state, these heat
exchangers have high efficiency and enable easy cleaning which is required because juice flow
through both sides of the heat exchanger. Furthermore, a gasketed heat exchanger was selected
because there are no toxic or flammable liquids inside. Therefore, not forming any serious danger
in case of leakage. Lastly, these compact heat exchangers are cheaper than tube & shell heat
exchangers. The heat transfer area was given by SuperPro.
Eventhough the other heat exchangers do not soil on both sides, since there is water instead of
juice coming in on one of the sides, the same heat exchangers were selected for the remaining
above-mentioned reasons. All heat transfer areas were given by SuperPro.
Grinder: Not all grinders are present in the optimized model in SuperPro due to the student license
of the program not allowing any more equipment to be added. Therefore, two grinders were
removed since the grinders don't change the mass balance of the process and consume relatively
little energy or water compared to for example heat exchangers.
A SAG grinder is required for grinding the apples between sorting and extraction and grinding the
facemask. Both operations use the same type of grinder because the desired particle size after
grinding is higher than 0,074 mm. (JXSC Machine, 2019) Furthermore, SAG grinders are more
efficient and easier to clean than ball or roll grinders. (MSE Supplies LLC, 2020) For both
processes a closed-circuit grinder is selected because a closed circuit has higher mill capacity and
lower energy consumption compared to open circuit grinders. (Michaud, 2016) The capacity for
both grinders is derived from SuperPro and both equal 2,02 kg/s.
The desired output for the apple flour equals 0,017 mm. (Ma et al., 2019) Therefore, a roll grinder
is required as a SAG grinder does not reduce the particle size enough since its maximum grinding
capacity is at 0,074 mm while a ball grinder is only required for the sub-micron level. The
minimum capacity is given by SuperPro and equals 16,57 kg/s.

Calculation
It is presumed that the base model is an already existing factory to which the found optimizations
are implemented.
To find the total capital investment (TCI) and know how much capital is required to implement
the optimizations, the fixed capital investment (FCI) needs to be calculated first. The fixed capital
investment includes all the costs to build the total plant ready for start-up. Therefore, it is required
to find the purchase equipment cost (PEC).
In order to get the correct price for equipment and adjust for inflation and deflation as well as
changes of the relative quality of technology a factor called Chemical Engineering Plant Cost
Index (CEPCI) is used.
The CEPCI from 2002 of 390,4 was taken for old CEPCI since that is the default setting of the
cost estimation software. For the current CEPCI the CEPCI of December 2022 of 808,7 given
during the cost estimation lecture was taken.
The purchase equipment cost (PEC) is calculated by multiplying the price per unit by 1,10 to
account for installation cost as well as the number of units and the current CEPCI divided by the
old CEPCI.
Dividing the PEC by 0,229 gives the FCI since the PEC is equal to 29% of FCI. Subsequently, the
FCI is 85% of the TCI because the production process contains both liquids and solids.
It is assumed that the investment for improvements is done in 3 parts, where the first half is paid
in the first year.

FOC
The fixed operating cost is costs that are made no matter the production rate of the process. These
costs include maintenance, operating labor, laboratory costs, supervision, plant overheads, capital
charges, rates, insurance, and license fees and royalty payments. However, only cost of labor, plant
overheads and maintenance were taken into account since most of these costs were unknown.
These values were taken from the economic evaluation generated by SuperPro and added together
to find the FOC.

VOC
The variable operating cost (VOC) is the costs that are made depending on the production rate.
These costs include the cost for raw materials, miscellaneous operating materials, utilities and
shipping and packaging. However, the cost of shipping and packaging greatly depends on the
location of production as well as the location of distribution, which are both unknown. Therefore,
the cost of shipping and packaging is not taken into account for this cost estimation. Meaning that
only the cost for raw materials, miscellaneous operating materials, and utilities are added up in
order to find the VOC. These values are taken from the economic evaluation generated by
SuperPro.
Total cost estimation
The revenue is found by giving SuperPro a selling price per unit. Based on similar products the
selling price for apple juice per 750 ml was set at $2,84, for skin care facemask per 150 ml $20,
and $ 4,50 per 400 gram. However, only the revenue for apple juice was taken into account for the
first 2 years since there is no production of other products in those years.
Next the gross profit is found by subtracting the TCI, FOC and VOC from the revenue. Thereafter,
the net profit is calculated by multiplying the gross profit by 0,8 because of the tax rate of 20%.
However, no tax is paid in the first 2 years since no profit is made.
Lastly a cash flow for each year is made by adding the net profit to the net profit from the previous
year.
Table3. Cost Estimation Result: Year0,1, and 2 indicated the result of Base model and
Year3,4,5,6,7, 8 are when optimized model is operated. (Green color= +, Red color= -)

As seen in table 3, the juice production on by itself does not operate at a profit. However, profit
can be made by implementing optimizations as well as producing products using the waste since
cake mix and skin care products can be sold at a higher price and use little ingredients on outside
of the waste. Making the business profitable in two years after implementation as well as making
a full return of investment.
2.3 Model results and discussion

Result
Table4. Result table of base model and optimized model
Base Model Optimized Model
Products Apple Juice Apple Juice, Apple Cake Mix, Face
Mask
Heat Exchanger
Energy -1 Pasteurizer for apple juice -3 heat exchangers (recycling loop)
Consumption -1 heat exchanger -1 pasteurizer for face mask process
and Calculation

For calculating total energy

𝑄 = 𝑚̇ ⋅ 𝐶𝑝 ⋅ Δ𝑇
Δ𝐻 =Enthalpy in J/kg
𝐶𝑝 =Specific Heat Capacity

∴ 𝑄 = 414297 𝐽   ∴ 𝑄 = 436845  𝐽

Total Energy 1352705.49 kW/yr 3245966.1 kW/yr

Consumption
One Grinder :1081863.42kw/yr
Enzyme Usage 8.5 $/kg 8.5$/kg
and Cost per year Annual amount:259kg Annual Amount:132kg
Annual Cost: $2,202 Annual Cost: $1,121

Total Water -Production for Apple Juice -Production for Apple Juice,
Consumption Apple cake mix and Face mask

= 8,665,766kg/yr = 1,029,577 kg/yr

Total HCL 79kg/yr 21.4kg/yr

Consumption
Production for -Apple Juice production for -Apple Juice Production for One year
One year one year
=2,920,000 kg/yr
Assumption,
-8hours per day -Apple Cake Mix Production for One
-1000 kg/h year
-588kg/h
𝑘𝑔
8ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 ⋅ 1000  ⋅ 365 𝑑𝑎𝑦𝑠
ℎ
=1,716,960 kg/yr
=2,920,000 kg/yr
-Face Mask Production for One year
-123kg/h
= 359,160 kg/yr

Total waste
-Input: 1370 kg/h -Input: 1370 kg/h

-Waste: 370 kg/h. 27% -Waste: 4.12 kg/h, 0.003%

𝑘𝑔
4.12  ⋅ 8ℎ ⋅ 365𝑑𝑎𝑦𝑠
Calculation of total waste for 1 ℎ 
year
𝑘𝑔
8ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑟𝑠 ⋅ 370  ℎ ⋅ 365𝑑𝑎𝑦𝑠 =
Total Waste =12,030 kg/yr
Total Waste = 1,080,400 kg/yr
Revenue -Apple Juice: 29,847,000 $/yr -Apple Juice: 29,847,000 $/yr

-Apple Cake Mix + Face Mask

=182,385,513 $/yr

Total Revenue: 29,847,000 $/yr Total Revenue: 212,233,000$/yr

Investment Cost
(TCI) $3,750,549 $11,467,053

Total Cost $83,522,899 $110,153,317

(TCI+FOC+VO
C)
Table 5. Simplified Cost Estimation Result: Year0,1, and 2 indicated the result of Base model and
Year3,4,5,6,7, 8 are when optimized model is operated. (Green color= +, Red color= -), NOTE:
some values might seem off due to rounding, see table 3 for a more detailed overview.

Discussion
Table 4 illustrates the differences in energy, water and material consumption, waste, revenue and
production between the base model and optimized model. The main product of base model was
apple juice otherwise in optimized model, apple juice, apple cake mixes, and face mask were
produced by reusing the waste from apple juice process.
For evaluating the energy consumption of heat exchange in both models, the total amount of energy
of heat exchanging units of base model and optimized model were calculated by using formula
𝑄 = 𝑚̇ ⋅ 𝐶𝑝 ⋅ Δ𝑇 . The energy, Q (J) was calculated that mass flow, 𝑚̇ (kg/s) was multiplied by
specific heat capacity, 𝐶𝑝 (J/K or J/℃ ) and the change in temperature, Δ𝑇 ( (℃ )
In the base model, one pasteurizer and one heat exchanger were used for the apple juice
pasteurizing process, and 414297J of energy per second was required. In the optimized model, the
pasteurizer used in the apple juice pasteurizing process from base model was remodeled with three
heat exchangers and one storage vessel. Additionally, a heat recycling loop was installed by
utilizing a shell and tube heat exchanger that was looped with the final heated liquid at 83 ℃
degrees. This recycled heat was then used to heat up 60℃ apple juice from the filtration unit,
resulting in reduced energy consumption. Furthermore, the heat exchanger for cooling between
the enzyme treatment process and filtration process in the base model was discarded as it was
unnecessary. As a result, the optimized model used three heat exchangers for the apple juice
process and one pasteurizer for the face mask process. The total energy consumption for the heat
exchanging units in the optimized model was 436845J, which was only 22548J higher than the
base model. Despite the slight increase in energy consumption, the optimized model showed
remarkable results as it had two more production lines compared to base model and consumed less
energy due to the heat recycling loop from the apple juice process. In summary, one of the
objectives, energy deduction can be concluded that using recycling loop on pasteurizing process
of apple juice in optimized model was effective to reduce the energy consumption.
The total energy consumption of the base model and optimized model for one year was 1352705.5
kW/yr and 3245966.1 kW/yr, respectively. The optimized model required about three times more
energy than the base model. The excel report showed that the equipment which consumed the
highest amount of energy was the grinder, which required 1081863.42 kW/yr of energy.
Furthermore, in the base model, only one grinder was used in the apple juice process, unlike the
optimized model where three grinders were used for the three different product processes.
Therefore, it was assumed that the increase in energy consumption by a factor of three was logical.
However, it seems that further research is necessary to reduce the total energy consumption for
efficiency purposes. Despite the optimized model having more unit operations and production lines
than the base model, it still reduced energy consumption due to the installation of recycling loops
between the heat exchangers. Although the total energy consumed was not reduced compared to
the base model, the reduction in energy consumption of heat exchanger and the amount of water
in the process has been reduced was still noteworthy. Furthermore, it is possible that the optimized
model required more energy due to its additional unit operations and production lines, but this can
be compromised with the perspective of reducing waste and water consumption in the optimized
model.
Enzymatic treatment of fruit juice using pectinase can prevent gelidification and clarify cloudy
juice. Pectinase is an enzyme derived from pectin and breaks down the pectin into insoluble
components, improving the stability of the juice and appearance. The optimized model has shown
that increasing the temperature of the enzymatic reaction from 55°C to 60°C can increase the
reaction rate by up to 50%, resulting in a 50% reduction in the required enzyme amount, thereby
lowering the cost of the process compared to the base model. In general, the cost of enzyme is
higher than other raw materials in apple juice process. Regarding the unit cost, it was $8.5 per
kilogram, in the base model, the total amount of enzyme was 259kg/yr and it was reported that the
annual cost for pectinase was $2,202. Otherwise, due to the reduced amount of enzyme in
optimized model, the annual amount of pectinase was decreased by half and its cost, 132kg/yr and
$1121 respectively. However, this was performed in SuperPro simulations with research reviews.
Therefore, it was assumed that there might be issues with the juice's quality due to increases in its
temperature. Furthermore, experiments regarding the quality assurance of the apple juice were not
performed. Overall, it was concluded that further experiments and research on enzymatic treatment
may be needed to ensure the quality of the juice and identify the most cost-effective conditions.
The optimized model employed recycling loops to reuse cleaning water, leading to a significant
reduction in water consumption. The first cleaning unit recycled 90% of the cleaning water, with
only 10% being purged. The second cleaning unit filtered out apple residues, allowing 70% of the
HCL water to be recycled for the same unit. As a result, the total water usage in the optimized
model was only 1,029,577 kg/yr, representing an eightfold decrease compared to the base model's
consumption of 8,665,766 kg/yr. This reduction in water usage is particularly noteworthy from an
environmental perspective as it addresses the global concerns related to water scarcity. In addition,
the recycling of HCL water in the optimized model not only reduced water consumption but also
resulted in a significant decrease in HCL usage. In the base model, 80 kg/yr of HCL was used in
the second cleaning step in one year, while the optimized model used only 21 kg/yr, representing
a reduction of HCL usage by four times. This reduction in HCL usage was particularly significant
as HCL is known to be harmful to the environment. By recycling HCL water, the optimized model
not only addressed concerns related to water scarcity but also demonstrated a positive step towards
reducing water pollution and decreasing the environmental impact of industrial activities. These
sustainable manufacturing practices can pave the way for a more environmentally conscious
approach to industrial processes and contribute to the development of a greener and more
sustainable future.
The optimized model succeeds in significantly reducing waste production and generating
additional revenue by creating new products from the waste generated in the base model. The base
model produced 1,080,400kg/yr of waste, equivalent to 27% of the total stream of the process, the
optimized model only discarded 12,030kg/yr, representing a mere 4% of the total waste stream.
This remarkable reduction in waste production can be attributed to the optimized model's reuse of
23% of the waste generated in the base model, resulting in a 90-fold decrease in the annual waste
produced. This outcome underscores the potential benefits of implementing sustainable practices,
such as waste reduction and reuse, in industrial processes. In addition, by producing apple juice, it
generated 29,847,000 $/yr of revenue. However, producing two more products created revenues
of 182,385,513 $/yr and combined with apple juice, the total revenue in one year was recorded
212,233,000$/yr. As a result, the optimized model showed 7 times more revenue than the base
model. This was an excellent example of how incorporating sustainability practices into industrial
processes can lead to a more efficient and profitable business model. However, to ensure the
process's overall sustainability, it is recommended to conduct a comprehensive life cycle analysis
that includes the production and disposal of all materials involved. This will help identify areas for
further improvement and ensure that the process has a minimal impact on the environment.
Overall, the optimized model showed a significant improvement over the base model in terms of
waste reduction and revenue generation. By continuing to prioritize sustainability in industrial
processes, we can create more efficient and profitable business models that help both the economy
and the environment.
The investment cost of the optimized model was significantly higher than that of the base model,
costing $11,467,053 compared to $3,750,549. The higher cost of the optimized model may have
been due to the additional production lines for apple cake mix and face mask.
Table 5 describes the cost estimation of the base model from year 0 to year 3 when the optimized
model was not yet implemented. The cash flow for the operation was in negative value until year
3, indicating that the operation was not profitable during this period. However, once the optimized
model was launched and operated from year 4 to year 8, the cash flow started to become positive.
It increased from -62M to +28M, indicating that the operation had reached the break-even point
and started to make a profit margin. It is important to note that the breakeven point may vary
depending on several factors, such as the initial investment cost, production costs, market demand,
and competition. Therefore, it is crucial to conduct a thorough cost-benefit analysis before
implementing any new project or model to ensure its feasibility and profitability.
2.4 Conclusion, recommendation and reflections

In conclusion the implementation of optimizations can decrease water usage, energy consumption
and waste while increasing profit. Even though reducing the use of substances like HCl through
reuse and enzymes by selecting the optimal reaction temperature reduce waste, most profit can be
made by reusing waste in other products. However, since this was the main goal set for this
particular paper, further optimizations regarding energy and water usage could be made. Such as
looping the heat exchangers inside of the cake mix production and the facemask production in
similar fashion to what was done to how the pasteurizer was remodeled. However, it was not
possible to implement these optimizations due to constraints on the amount of equipment allowed
to be implemented because of the student license of SuperPro. This could be further investigated
using the upgraded professional version or by making separate simulations for each part. However,
this was not done for the sake of time, or lack thereof. Similarly, three of the grinders were removed
from the optimized model due to software restrictions. These were removed from the optimized
model over other equipment because they do not influence the mass balance of the process nor is
their energy consumption influenced by temperature like some of the other equipment. However,
all tree grinders are visualized in figures 1,2 and 3 of the Appendix and were taken into account
for the energy consumption of the models as well as the cost estimation.
Furthermore, the cost estimate is not realistic since the cost for FOC and VOC will be higher while
the revenue will be lower in reality. Considering that not all factors for both FOC and VOC have
been taken into account, in addition to the presumption that all produced goods are going to be
sold from the start being not realistic. Nevertheless, a company will probably also not produce
apple juice at a constant net loss. Therefore, making this cost estimation a very rough guesstimate.
Not to mention, the use of simulations operating on statistics requires further testing since values
may differ depending on the real-life circumstances like, for example, wear, human error and
temperature.
Lastly, further research and testing is required before potential production of both the facemasks
and the cake mix since no market research nor testing of the recipes was done.
2.5 References
Bailone, R. L., Borra, R. C., Fukushima, H., & Aguiar, L. K. (2022b). Water reuse in the food industry. Discover

Food, 2(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/s44187-021-00002-4

Carenzi, S. (n.d.). 1,3-propanediol Skin Care | CAS 504-63-2 | Connect Chemicals. connectchemicals.com.

Retrieved April 17, 2023, from https://connectchemicals.com/en/product-finder/13-propanediol

China Polyglycerol Esters of Fatty Acids(PGE) E475 Cas No. 67784-82-1 Manufacturers, Suppliers, Factory -

Food Emulsifiers Price - Yizeli Additive. (n.d.). Zhengzhou Yizeli Industrial Co.,Ltd.

https://www.yizeliadditive.com/emulsifiers/food-emulsifiers/polyglycerol-esters-of-fatty-acids-pge-

e475.html

Curutchet, A., Trias, J., Tárrega, A., & Arcia, P. (2021). Consumer Response to Cake with Apple Pomace as a

Sustainable Source of Fibre. Foods, 10(3), 499. https://doi.org/10.3390/foods10030499

Fan, M., Kim, W., & Heldman, D. R. (2021). Influence of cleaning agent reuse on cleaning effectiveness. Journal of

Food Engineering, 320, 110926. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfoodeng.2021.110926

Hati, A. (2021, November 10). The Important Role Of Propanediol In Your Skincare. skincraft.com.

https://skinkraft.com/blogs/articles/propanediol-for-

skin#:~:text=Propanediol%20works%20as%20a%20humectant,%2C%20eyeliners%2C%20foundations%2

C%20etc.

Jung, J., Cavender, G., & Zhao, Y. (2015). Impingement drying for preparing dried apple pomace flour and its

fortification in bakery and meat products. Journal of Food Science and Technology, 52(9), 5568–5578.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s13197-014-1680-4

JXSC Machine. (2019, November 26). What’s the Difference Between SAG Mill and Ball Mill - JXSC Machine.

JXSCMachine.com. Retrieved April 20, 2023, from https://www.jxscmachine.com/new/difference-

between-sag-mill-ball-mill/
Kim, S., Hwang, S. M., Choi, E. H., Ahn, S. S., & Lee, S. H. (2001). The Effect of Bentonite and Glycolic Acid on

the Stratum corneum. Annals of Dermatology, 13(4), 205. https://doi.org/10.5021/ad.2001.13.4.205

Lawrence Sintered Metals. (n.d.). Stainless Steel Filter Mesh: Filtering Gasses, Liquids, and Solids.

lawrencesinteredmetals.com. Retrieved April 20, 2023, from

https://www.lawrencesinteredmetals.com/filtering-gases-liquids-and-solids-using-stainless-steel-

mesh/#:~:text=316L%20stainless%20steel%20wire%20mesh,gasses%2C%20liquids%2C%20and%20solid

s.

LG Electronics. (2018, July 11). US Patent Application for METHOD FOR PREPARING COSMETIC

COMPOSITION THROUGH ULTRA-HIGH-TEMPERATURE PASTEURIZATION Patent Application

(Application #20210290499 issued September 23, 2021) - Justia Patents Search. patents.justia.com.

https://patents.justia.com/patent/20210290499

Nutrition claims. (n.d.). Food Safety. https://food.ec.europa.eu/safety/labelling-and-nutrition/nutrition-and-health-

claims/nutrition-claims_en

Ma, S., Wang, C., Li, L., & Wang, X. (2019). Effects of particle size on the quality attributes of wheat flour made by

the milling process. Cereal Chemistry, 97(2), 172–182. https://doi.org/10.1002/cche.10230

Maddon, D. (2000). Enzymes in fruit juice production - university of reading. Reading University. Retrieved April
12, 2023, from https://www.ncbe.reading.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2021/10/enzymes-in-fruit-juice-
production.pdf

Making Cosmetics Inc. (n.d.). PDF Formula Public 1579 - AHA Clay Mask [Dataset].

https://www.makingcosmetics.com/on/demandware.static/-/Library-Sites-

makingSharedLibrary/default/dwd0cb34d0/formulas/formula-1579-AHA-Clay-Mask.pdf

Making Cosmetics Inc. (n.d.-b). Propanediol 1,3 1064 | MakingCosmetics. Retrieved April 18, 2023, from

https://makingcosmetics.com/HUM-PROP-01.html?lang=en_US&locale=en

Making Cosmetics Inc. (n.d.-c). Propylene Glycol 163 | MakingCosmetics. Retrieved April 18, 2023, from

https://makingcosmetics.com/HUM-PRGL-01.html?lang=en_US
Michaud, L. D. (2016, October 12). Closed Circuit Grinding VS Open Circuit Grinding. 911metallurgist.com.

Retrieved April 20, 2023, from https://www.911metallurgist.com/blog/closed-grinding-circuits-vs-open-

grinding-circuits

MSE Supplies LLC. (2020). How to Choose Between a Planetary Ball Mill and a Roller Jar Mill for Powder Milling

Applications. MSE Supplies LLC. https://www.msesupplies.com/blogs/products/how-to-choose-between-a-

planetary-ball-mill-and-a-roller-jar-mill-for-powder-milling-applications

PomarageTM by Provital - Personal Care & Cosmetics. (n.d.).

https://www.ulprospector.com/en/na/PersonalCare/Detail/3914/5214118/Pomarage

Romero, M., & Romero, M. (2022, July 27). Beyond the fruit extract for skin: the case of upcycling apple waste for

sustainable beauty. Spreading Clean Beauty. https://blog.weareprovital.com/fruit-extract-for-skin/

Ruggeri, C. (2020, July 12). Propanediol for Skin: Dangerous Additive or Helpful Solvent? - Dr. Axe. Dr. Axe.

https://draxe.com/beauty/propanediol/

Saravacos, G. D. (1970). EFFECT OF TEMPERATURE ON VISCOSITY OF FRUIT JUICES AND PUREES.

Journal of Food Science, 35(2), 122–125. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2621.1970.tb12119.x

Sionek, B. (2022). The use of fruit bio-waste on the example of apple pomace®. Postępy Techniki Przetwórstwa

Spożywczego - Tom Nr 2 (2022) - BazTech - Yadda.

https://yadda.icm.edu.pl/baztech/element/bwmeta1.element.baztech-2e66d439-a82e-4fea-9b95-

1465b3b7eac5

The Association of Food and Drug Officials. (2003). APPLE CIDER PROCESSING OPERATIONS

REQUIREMENTS AND GUIDELINES. In afdo.org. Retrieved April 19, 2023, from

https://www.afdo.org/wp-

content/uploads/2020/11/Apple_Cider_Processing_Operations_Requirements_Guidelines_acc_updated_20

19.pdf
The ONIX Corporation. (2018, June 15). Apple Pomace Drying & Processing | Dryers | The ONIX Corporation.

http://www.theonixcorp.com/apple-pomace-systems/

Trindade, L. V., Desagiacomo, C., Polizeli, M. de L. T. de M., Damasio, A. R. de L., Lima, A. M. F., Gomes, E., &

Bonilla-Rodriguez, G. O. (2016, November 29). Biochemical characterization, thermal stability, and

partial sequence of a novel exo-polygalacturonase from the thermophilic fungus Rhizomucor pusillus

A13.36 obtained by submerged cultivation. BioMed Research International. Retrieved April 12, 2023, from

https://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2016/8653583/

Voedingscentrum. (n.d.). Hoe krijg ik voldoende vezels binnen? https://www.voedingscentrum.nl/nl/service/vraag-

en-antwoord/gezonde-voeding-en-voedingsstoffen/hoe-krijg-ik-voldoende-vezels-binnen-.aspx
3. Waste gas incinerator
3.1 Base model design

The inorganic solid titanium dioxide (TiO2) is essential with many physical qualities making it an
indispensable white pigment that is used extensively in a variety of sectors, including paint and
paper. Tronox is one of the top producers of premium TiO2 pigments on a global scale.
The pigment plant at Tronox produces a waste gas stream containing a mixture of gases, including
CO2 and CH4. Due to the high concentrations of greenhouse gases, the waste stream needs to be
treated before being released to the environment. The current process involves the burning of the
waste stream with specific amounts of natural gas and air. The waste stream is mixed with the
other gases before being sent to the combustion chamber, this is an important part of the system
because it ensures that the air is evenly distributed throughout the combustion chamber, which in
turn helps to ensure that the reactions that take place are effective and efficient. This allows for
more complete combustion as it helps ensure that there is an adequate amount of oxygen available
throughout the fuel mixture. This leads to better flame stability and reduced emissions such as
carbon monoxide (Abdullah et al., 2023).
PENG-Robinson equation of state was chosen as a property method for modelling the base model
as it has been proven highly effective in predicting thermodynamic properties of combustion
reactions under varying conditions, such as high temperature and pressure. The flowsheet for the
base model can be found in figure 4.
The waste stream mixture is directed towards the RSTOIC combustion chamber where it is
subjected at a temperature of 950℃ and a pressure of 1.15 bar (see figure 5). The RSTOIC chamber
is designed to enable the precise control of the stoichiometry of reactants which is a critical
parameter in combustion reactions (see figure 6). Additionally, the chamber is equipped with the
ability to calculate the heat of the reaction which indicates the amount of energy that may be
potentially released during the process (Haydary, J, 2019).
The resulting flue gas is directed towards a reboiler after exiting the combustion chamber. The flue
gas was assigned to the tube side in the reboiler with the assumption that it was fouling. This was
carried out to prevent the deposition of material on the shell side of the reboiler and ensure efficient
heat transfer.
The reboiler has two outlets, one for the generated steam at 17.3 bar and the other for the resulting
flue gas, which is ejected at 230℃. This process is of significant importance, as the steam
produced is utilized in numerous operations at the plant. Steam can be used as a heat transfer
medium for heating a variety of streams. Additionally, the generated steam can be used as a driving
force for turbines that power electrical generators, which provide the necessary electrical energy
for plant operations.
As the flow rate for the boiler feed water was not provided, these calculations were carried out:
𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑓𝑒𝑟𝑟𝑒𝑑 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑚 𝑓𝑙𝑢𝑒 𝑔𝑎𝑠 𝑡𝑜 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 (𝑄ℎ𝑜𝑡 ) =  𝐻𝑒𝑎𝑡 𝑎𝑏𝑠𝑜𝑟𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑏𝑦 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑤𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑟 (𝑄𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 )
𝑘𝐽
The heat capacity of flue gas is assumed to be 1.0  𝑘𝑔⋅𝐾

Qhot = 𝑚ℎ𝑜𝑡 ⋅Cp ⋅ (Tin−Tout)
Qcold = 𝑚𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 ⋅Cp ⋅ (Hout−Hin)

Temperature of flue gas at inlet, 𝑇𝑖𝑛 = 950℃

Temperature of flue gas at outlet, 𝑇𝑜𝑢𝑡 = 230℃

𝑘𝑔
Mass flow rate of the flue gas, 𝑚ℎ𝑜𝑡 = 22601 ℎ𝑟

Pressure of feed water entering,𝑃𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 = 17.3 bar

At 17.3 bar,
𝑘𝐽
Enthalpy of saturated liquid is 763 𝑘𝑔 (𝐻𝑖𝑛 )
𝑘𝐽
Enthalpy of saturated steam is 2790 𝑘𝑔 (𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑡 )
𝑘𝑔 𝑘𝐽
𝑄ℎ𝑜𝑡 = 22601
ℎ𝑟
* 1.0 𝑘𝑔⋅𝐾 * (950℃ - 230℃)
𝑘𝑔 𝑘𝐽
𝑄ℎ𝑜𝑡 = 22601 ℎ𝑟 * 1.0 𝑘𝑔⋅𝐾 * 720K

𝑘𝐽
𝑄ℎ𝑜𝑡 = 16272872 ℎ𝑟

Now solving for 𝑚𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑

𝑄𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 = 𝑚𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 * 𝐻𝑜𝑢𝑡  −  𝐻𝑖𝑛
𝑘𝐽 𝑘𝐽 𝑘𝐽
16272872 ℎ𝑟 = 𝑚𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 * (2790 𝑘𝑔 - 763 𝑘𝑔)
𝑘𝐽
16272872
ℎ𝑟
𝑚𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 = 𝑘𝐽
2027𝑘𝑔

𝑘𝑔
𝑚𝑐𝑜𝑙𝑑 = 8027 ℎ𝑟
Initially, the calculated amount of boiler feed water was determined to be 8027 kg/hr. However,
to validate this result, trial and error was performed and the flow rate was adjusted until the steam
generated had a vapor fraction of 1. This process resulted in a feed water amount of 7750 kg/hr,
which was lower than the initially calculated value. It Is likely that the system’s parameters that
we weren’t able to account for that caused the difference between the two flow rates.
Tronox wants to optimize this process to optimize the utilization of the flue gas heat as it is ejected
to the stack at 230℃. This will allow the company to save on utilities, such as steam. The company
also desires to reduce the incidence of equipment corrosion and to minimize any adverse
environmental impact.

The team’s main objective is to create and improve the base model using the supplied data and the
company’s desires. Literature review will be conducted to gain more knowledge on the process.
This analysis will assist in locating potential solutions for the base model optimization.
The base model will be optimized with a focus on steam generation, carbon emissions and heat
recycling. The results of the optimization will be presented in a written report and will be shared
with the relevant stakeholders.

3.2 Optimized model design

Selected optimization objective

Using heat from the flue gas to generate more steam and heat up air feed

To follow through this optimization objective, the flue gas was redirected to economizers (see
figure 12), to make use of the heat of the flue gas that would otherwise be vented to the atmosphere.
The flue gas was first redirected to the first economizer (HEATER) as can be seen in the flowsheet
(see appendix). The feed water is preheated there before it is sent to the boiler. The property
methods used for the flue gas and feed water were Peng-Robinson and IAPWS-95 respectively.
The exchanger specifications included the hot stream (flue gas) outlet temperature set to 120 C
with a minimum temperature approach of 1 C. This way, the boiler could generate more steam at
a given time.
With a temperature of 120 C, the flue gas from the first economizer was directed to another
economizer to heat up the air for the combustion process (see figure 13). The air that is normally
15 C, is to be heated to 50 C with the flue gas. The hot stream outlet temperature approach is set
to 102 C, which is the temperature high enough to avoid acidic condensate formation.
Reducing amounts of CO2 released into the atmosphere

Carbon capture and storage (CCS) is an effective method for mitigating global warming. It
involves the implementation of various technologies to capture carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions
from energy generation and power plants and storing it underground for long-term storage or
reusing the CO2 to prevent it from entering the atmosphere. The Netherlands relies heavily on
fossil fuels for energy production and thus as part of its efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions
(GHG) and meet its climate targets, the Netherlands has been exploring CCS. The Netherlands has
set itself ambitious targets in terms of reducing GHG. According to The Royal Netherlands
Meteorological Institute (KMNI), the Dutch government aims to reduce emissions by 49% by 2030
(Climate agreement, 2019), with a goal of being carbon neutral by 2050. For this goal to be
achieved, significant effort is required in the reduction of carbon emissions, which is where CCS
comes into play.
There are currently three main carbon capture systems, namely, pre-combustion, oxy-fuel
combustion and post-combustion (Li et al., 2016). Post combustion capture will be the focus of
the optimized model. Post combustion capture refers to the process of removing CO2 from flue
gases generated by power generation processes (Chao et al., 2021). Common solvents that are
widely used are Monoethanolamine (MEA), methyl diethanolamine (MDEA) and Diethanolamine
(DEA). These chemicals all belong to the family of amines, which are mainly used for gas
sweetening and CO2 capture.

However, there are differences in the amine structure of the three compounds. MEA is a primary
amine, DEA is a secondary amine and MDEA is a tertiary amine. MDEA was chosen for the
carbon capture as it offers several advantages over MEA and DEA. MDEA exhibits a high
selectivity for CO2 over other gases like nitrogen and methane, is more resistant to corrosion, has
lower volatility and is more stable under high operating conditions (Polasek and Bullin, 1984).
This makes it a more efficient and cost-effective option for CO2 capture compared to MEA and
DEA.
The flue gas exiting the combustion chamber is directed towards the absorber and the flue gas is
contacted with a 40% wt MDEA solution. MDEA is stable in aqueous solutions up to 60 wt%.
Increasing the concentration of MDEA beyond 60 wt% increases the risk of corrosion and losses
due to evaporation and thus 40 wt% was used as a compromise between gas removal efficiency
and energy consumption (Kohl & Riesenfeld, 1985). The optimized flow sheet can be found in
figure 7.

To accurately model the behavior of the CO2, it was specified as a Henry component. Henry’s law
states that at a constant temperature, the amount of a given gas that dissolves in a liquid is directly
proportional to the partial pressure of that gas in equilibrium with that liquid. This can lead to more
precise predictions of CO2 removal.

A sensitivity analysis was performed to identify the flow rate of the solvent, consisting of MDEA
and water that results in the highest CO2 absorption efficiency (see figure 8). Utilizing an absorber
and a stripper to remove and regenerate the solvent, respectively, was part of the CO2 removal and
regeneration process. Petroleum/wide boiling was used as the convergence for both the absorber
and stripper (see figure 9 and 10). The solvent flows counter-currently through the absorber’s six-
stage packed bed column. The solvent became progressively richer in each stage as portions of the
CO2 were absorbed. The rich MDEA was then sent to the stripper that was configured as a seven-
stage column. The rich solvent was heated to release pure CO2 which resulted in a lean solvent
with little to no CO2 (see figure 15).

Cost Estimation
The following cost estimation was conducted on the optimization objective of using the heat
energy of the flue gas to generate more steam and save energy for heating up cold air. The cost
evaluation aims to compare the profitability of the proposed optimization objective.

The equipment added include the following:

Table 1: Equipment specifications and costs

Equipment Type of Equipment Material of Equipment Cost

number equipment specification constructionin €, 25/04/2023
CE index = 806
1 Air-to-Air Flat 1,7 surface area, Carbon Steel 17336
Plate heat m2
exchanger
1 U-Tubed heat 33,4 surface Carbon Steel 13440
2
exchanger area, m
Total cost: 30776

The Air-to-Air Flat Plate heat exchanger is considered because they have a simple and compact
design and they are cost-effective. Corrosion is not a deterrent as the outlet of the flue gas is 102
°C, which is far higher than the given acidic dew point of 90 °C.

U-Tubed heat exchanger was used because it is robust and can handle high temperature of the flue
gas and high pressure of the water
TCI

To calculate the Total Investment Cost (TCI):

The purchased equipment cost (PEC) is 30.776 €, with January 2023 CEPCI of 806.

10% delivery cost is added, making it 33.854 €.

PEC is considered to be 22.9% of Fixed capital investment (FCI), therefore FCI is 134.393 €
(Peters et al. 2003).
FCI is considered to be 80% of the total capital investment (TCI), therefore TCI is 167.991 €

To calculate the Fixed operational cost (FOC), the cost of maintaining the purchased and installed
equipment was used. These costs include Insurance, contractor’s fee, engineering and supervision,
and contingency planning, which were assumed to be 18.2 % of the FCI (Peters et al. 2003).
Calculation of the Variable operational cost (VOC) is not applicable here as the aim of estimation
is to compare the two models with the same VOC.
Tax rates are also not applicable as the steam generated is the revenue, which is used by other unit
operations within the factory.
Table 2: Cost estimation

Year Year 0 Year 1 Year 2 Year 3

TCI 167.991 € n.a. n.a. n.a.
FOC 0€ 24.500 € 24.500 € 24.500 €
Revenue 0€ 209.950 € 209.950 € 209.950 €
Gross 167.991 € 185.450 € 185.450 € 185.450 €
Profit
Tax rate n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.
Net Profit 167.991 € 185.450 € 185.450 € 185.450 €
Cash Flow 167.991 € 17.459 € 202.909 € 388.359 €

It can be seen from the cash flow table that the investment return is in the first year because the
revenue generated from the steam is significant compared to the costs of the equipment.
3.3 Model results and discussion
The use of the first economizer increased the temperature of the feed water from 100 °C to 205
°C. Therefore more steam was generated in the optimised model with amount of 9000 Kg/hr,
compared to the amount in the base model with 7750 Kg/hr. Although the use of the compressor
increased the temperature of the flue gas, which in turn increased steam generation, its use can be
dismissed as it was found to be not feasible in terms of cost. The air heater economizer heated up
the air feed from 15 °C to 50 °C using the heat of the flue gas. This can relieve other unit operations
used to heat up the air by a heat duty of 429 MJ/hr. The optimisation objective without the
compressor seems to bring fast investment return, and is therefore considered feasible.

The first step towards using the carbon capture process effectively was to decide on the flow rate
of the MDEA solution fed into the absorber. Using the sensitivity analysis, it can be seen that using
220.000 kg/hr of 40% MDEA solution was effective at capturing > 75% of the CO2 from the cooled
flue gas. In the stripper, 99.9% of the CO2 that was in the MDEA solution was released. However,
there was also a significant amount of water from the rich MDEA solution released along with the
CO2. (see figure 11) This is because the working condition of the condenser was not specified,
therefore the in the MDEA regeneration was not able to be condensed and put back to the solution.
This is challenging because there is a significant amount of water in the supposedly pure CO2.
Furthermore, the flow rate of the released steam is more than half of the amount in the solution.
The feasibility and the cost efficiency of this optimisation objective were difficult to be conducted
for several reasons. It would only be cost effective and sustainable if the MDEA solution was
recycled back into the absorber. The captured carbon with significant amount of steam cannot be
stored and used as with pure CO2.

3.4 Conclusion, recommendation and reflections

In can be concluded that the first optimization objective was successful in terms of redirecting the
flue gas to generate more steam. The revenue from the steam generated was able to make the added
equipment worthwhile. In addition, was also able reduce the energy consumption to heat up the
feed air. The second optimization objective ought to be further investigated to make it more
practical. The absorber and the MDEA regeneration could be improved by specifying the number
of trays, packing height, column diameter, pressure drop and operating pressure. It the values can
be examined by using the sensitivity analysis. For the MDEA regeneration, it is easier to have a
separate reboiler and condenser so that the requirement can be specified and also studied to yield
efficiency. The bottom stream of the stripper would be connected to the reboiler and the overhead
vapor from the stripper would be connected to the condenser, removing any water vapor. To
improve the stripping efficiency, a reflux could be implemented using a pump to connect the liquid
from the condenser to the top of the stripper column. Energy efficiency could also employed with
heat integration between the absorber and the regeneration system, by adding a heat exchanger to
heat up the rich MDEA solution entering the stripper by the lean MDEA solution existing the
stripper column. The optimization would be completed with recycling the MDEA solution. The
MDEA solution can be pumped to a mixer, so that the concentration could be adjusted, before
being fed back to the absorber. The concentration of the MDEA to capture CO 2 efficiently can also
be studied using the sensitivity analysis. This would help towards making the operation cost
effective.
3.5 References
Abdullah, M., Guiberti, T. F., & Alsulami, R. A. (2023). Experimental Assessment on the

Coupling Effect of Mixing Length and Methane-Ammonia Blends on Flame Stability and

Emissions. Energies, 16(7), 2955. https://doi.org/10.3390/en16072955

Chao, C., Deng, Y., Dewil, R., & Baeyens, J. (2021). Post-combustion carbon capture.

Renewable & Sustainable Energy Reviews, 138, 110490.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2020.110490

Climate agreement, 2019. Retrieved from National Climate Agreement - The Netherlands |

Publication | Climate agreement (klimaatakkoord.nl)

Haydary, J. (2019). Chemical process design and simulation: Aspen Plus and Aspen HYSYS

applications. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119311478.ch5

Kohl, A. L., & Riesenfeld, F. C. (1985). Gas Purification. Butterworth-Heinemann.

Li, K., Leigh, W., Feron, P., Yu, H., & Tadé, M. O. (2016). Systematic study of aqueous

monoethanolamine (MEA)-based CO2 capture process: Techno-economic assessment of

the MEA process and its improvements. Applied Energy, 165, 648–659.

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2015.12.109

Peters, M. S., Timmerhaus, K. D., & West, R. E. (2003). Plant Design and Economics for

Chemical Engineers

Polasek, J., & Bullin, J. A. (1994). Selecting amines for sweetening units. Retrieved from

https://www.bre.com/PDF/Selecting-Amines-for-Sweetening-Units.pdf
4. Appendix

Figure1.Grinder in apple juice process

Figure2. Grinder in Face mask process

Figure3. Grinder and pasteurizer in apple cake mix process

Figure 4: Base model flow sheet of Aspen

Figure 5: Specifications of RSTOIC reactor

Figure 6: List of reactions obtained from ASPEN

Figure 7: Optimized flow sheet

Figure 8: Sensitivity analysis for the flow rate of the solvent

Figure 9: Specification of the absorber

Figure 10: Specifications of the stripper

Figure 11: Stream results
Figure 12: The water heater economizer
Figure 13: The air heater economizer

Figure 14: Area of the water heater economizer

Figure 15: The absorber and stipper