Biofuels

ISSN: 1759-7269 (Print) 1759-7277 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tbfu20

Optimization of biodiesel production from waste

cooking oil using static mixer technology in
Vietnam

Van Phuc Nguyen*, Huynh Hung My Nguyen, Dong Truc Nguyen, Huu Luong
Nguyen & Thuan Minh Huynh

To cite this article: Van Phuc Nguyen*, Huynh Hung My Nguyen, Dong Truc Nguyen, Huu Luong
Nguyen & Thuan Minh Huynh (2018): Optimization of biodiesel production from waste cooking oil
using static mixer technology in Vietnam, Biofuels, DOI: 10.1080/17597269.2018.1426165

To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/17597269.2018.1426165

Published online: 30 Jan 2018.

Submit your article to this journal

View related articles

View Crossmark data

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at

http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=tbfu20
BIOFUELS, 2018
https://doi.org/10.1080/17597269.2018.1426165

Optimization of biodiesel production from waste cooking oil using

static mixer technology in Vietnam
Van Phuc Nguyen*, Huynh Hung My Nguyen, Dong Truc Nguyen, Huu Luong Nguyen and Thuan Minh Huynh
Biofuels Department, Vietnam Petroleum Institute, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam

ABSTRACT ARTICLE HISTORY

Biodiesel production from waste cooking oil (WCO) was first performed in a static mixer reactor Received 25 September 2017
using sodium hydroxide as a catalyst in Vietnam. The influence of three parameters (methanol- Accepted 7 December 2017
to-oil molar ratio, catalyst concentration and reaction temperature) on fatty acid methyl ester KEYWORDS
(FAME) production was investigated. The optimization was determined by response surface Biodiesel; bioenergy;
methodology (RSM) and the interaction of these parameters was described by a quadratic response surface
model. The results revealed that catalyst concentration had the greatest influence in FAME methodology; static mixer;
yield among the investigated conditions. The highest content of FAME was achieved up to 97.8 waste cooking oil
wt% at the optimized conditions (methanol-to-oil molar ratio of 6, reaction temperature of
60
C, and 1.0 wt% of catalyst). In addition, the obtained biodiesel product fulfilled the
European and Vietnamese biodiesel standards.

Introduction reasonable to use WCO as feedstock for biodiesel pro-

duction in the current situation of Vietnam.
Waste cooking oil (WCO) refers to the residue oil from
Biodiesel production can be carried out in various
restaurants and food-processing industries. Disposal of
reactors (e.g. batch, rotational packed-bed reactor, con-
WCOs and fats (triglycerides) is an emerging problem
tinuous flow, oscillatory flow, microwave reactor,
in Vietnam. Per annum, 600,000 t of WCO are produced
supercritical) and using different catalysts and already
from households and restaurants, and this figure is
presented in detail in relevant papers [5,7–9]. In Viet-
expected to be 1.1 million tons in 2020 [1]. These mix-
nam, there are no commercial biodiesel plants yet. Cur-
tures of triglycerides contaminated with other com-
rently, biodiesel is being studied via pilot and small
pounds are not recyclable for food purposes and need
scale plants in several universities and research insti-
to be treated in an environmentally friendly way [2].
tutes, mainly by batch process using agitator systems
Biodiesel has significant advantages over conventional
[10–12]. This technology presents certain limits such as
petroleum fuels, such as significant reduction in green-
long reaction time, low capacity, product quality assur-
house gas emissions, biodegradability and renewability
ance issues, etc. As a result, its production and opera-
[3,4]. As a result, the Vietnamese government launched
tion costs are high, which in turn indicates the need for
a biofuels program in 2007 with a target of replacing
application of new technologies in biodiesel produc-
5% of domestic consumption of fossil diesel by biodie-
tion [13].
sel by 2025 [5]. The production of biodiesel via trans-
A static mixer, i.e. a mechanical mixer without any
esterification with methanol has become a common
moving parts, is applied to mix highly viscous liquid–
route for conversion of triglycerides from renewables
liquid phases in the chemical and food processing
into automotive fuels. Various sources of triglyceride
industries. Some advantages of static mixers compared
such as vegetable oil (edible, non-edible or waste oil),
to batch reactors are low capital, maintenance and
animal fats and microalgae have been tested and used
operating costs, small space requirement, short reac-
for biodiesel production [6]. Unfortunately, feedstock
tion time and operation in continuous systems [14,15].
for biodiesel production is not available in Vietnam
Some studies on static mixer reactors for biodiesel pro-
due to several reasons. First, 90% of domestic demand
duction have been presented. For example, Thompson
for vegetable oils is supplied by imported sources. Sec-
and He [16] applied static mixers as a continuous-flow
ond, a number of Jatropha planting projects were
reactor for synthesis of biodiesel from canola oil. The
implemented, but these projects have not been suc-
authors reported that static mixer reactors can be used
cessful until now. Third, the use of microalgae is still
for biodiesel production and the most favorable condi-
under research and development steps. Therefore, it is
tions were 60
C, 1.5 wt% of sodium hydroxide (NaOH)

CONTACT Thuan Minh Huynh thuanhm.pvpro@vpi.pvn.vn

* Present Address: Faculty of Chemical Engineering, Ho Chi Minh City University of Food Industry, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam
© 2018 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
2 V. P. NGUYEN ET AL.
as a catalyst for 30 min residence time. Alamsyah et al.
[17] compared the effectiveness of static mixer and
blade agitator reactors in biodiesel production from
refined palm oil. The results showed that in the static
mixer, the reaction rate was much faster and can reach
the high fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) yield in a
shorter time. The optimal conditions with static mixer
reactor was found as follows: 65
C, methanol-to-oil
molar ratio of 10.5 and 1.0 wt% of potassium hydroxide
(KOH) as catalyst for 5 min residence time.
The main objective of this study is to investigate the
application of static mixer technology for biodiesel pro-
duction from WCO in Vietnam. The influence of various
parameters, namely methanol-to-oil molar ratio, cata-
lyst content, and reaction temperature, on the FAME
production was conducted. The response surface
methodology (RSM) was used to determine the opti-
mum conditions in order to obtain the biodiesel with
the highest FAME content.
Materials and methods
Materials
WCO was collected from a Kentucky Fried Chicken
(KFC) restaurant group in Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
The feed was filtrated off solid fraction and used as a
raw feedstock.
Other chemicals and catalysts, including methanol
(purity
99.8%), NaOH (
99%), sulfuric acid (
99%),
and phosphoric acid (
95%) were used as received
without any further purification.
WCO and biodiesel characterization
Fatty acid composition of WCO was analyzed using gas
chromatography (GC) (Agilent 7890A, California, USA)
equipped with a flame ionization detector (FID) (Agi-
lent DB-1701 column, 0.25 mm £ 50 m, 0.25 mm film)
Figure 1. Internal structure of the in-house static mixer reactor
using He as a carrier gas. The following temperature
program was applied: 100
C (1 min), 4 K min–1 to
280
C (5 min).
For FAME analysis, toluene (analytical grade, Sigma-
Aldrich, Darmstadt, Germany) and methyl nonadeca-
noate (Fluka Analytical, Munich, Germany) were used as
a solvent and an internal standard, respectively. A
Supelco 37 Component FAME Mix (10 mg ml–1 in meth-
ylene chloride) used as an analytical standard. FAME
content was calculated using the following equation:
X
A  AEI mEI
FAME ¼   100% (1)
AEI m
where FAME is the fatty acid methyl ester content (wt%);
SA, total peaks area of FAME; AEI, area of the peak corre-
sponding to internal standard, methyl nonadecanoate
(mg); mEI, mass of internal standard (mg); and m, mass of
biodiesel sample (mg).
Properties of WCO and obtained biodiesel were
determined according to ASTM and EU standard meth-
ods as follows: density (D4052), iodine value (D5768),
kinetic viscosity (D445), flash point (D93), cloud point
(D2500), pour point (D97), calorific value (D240), acid
value (D664), and oxidation stability (EN14112). The
detail on the methods have been reviewed in the rele-
vant reports [18–22].
Analyses of WCO compositions and properties were
performed at least three times to ensure the error of
data of less than 7%.
Experimental design
Static mixer reactor
Figure 1 shows the geometrical structure of the hori-
zontally static mixer reactor used in this study. The
reactor was composed of several connected modules
which are tubes with non-moving mixing elements
inside. Mixing elements have 180
-twisted ribbon

Table 1. Structural parameters of the static mixer reactor.
Parameters
Length of static mixer reactor (mm)
Inner diameter, ID (mm)
Outer diameter, OD (mm)
Number of modules
Length of module (with flange) (mm)
Number of elements in a module, E
Length of element, L (mm)
Thickness of element, t (mm)
shapes and their L/ID ratios of 1.5. In the static mixer
reactor, right and left elements are fixed alternately,
adjacent elements being at 90
angles to each other.
Table 1 summarizes some main parameters of the
static mixer reactor. With the above-mentioned ele-
ment, modules and structure, a turbulent flow was
achieved inside the reactor, resulting in an increase the
mixing effectiveness. All the design specifications and
flow calculations will be shown in another publication
and are not given here.
Experimental setup
A schematic diagram of the experimental setup is
given in Figure 2. WCO was preheated in the tank (T1)
to the required temperature by the heater and the cir-
culation pump (P1). The heated WCO was mixed with a
prepared mixture of methanol and catalyst (NaOH) and
fed together into the static mixer reactor. The quantity
of catalyst was predetermined before blending with
methanol. The flowrate of each stream was estimated
and controlled by different pumps. The total feed was
kept constant at 700 l h–1 in all experiments to ensure
a good mixing of reactants in the static mixer reactor.
As a result, the residence time of reactants in the static
mixer reactor is calculated at around 2 s.
T1 T
HT
P F
V
V
P1
T2
P F
V
P2
Figure 2. Schematic setup of the biodiesel production process.
T1, WCO tank; T2, methanol and NaOH tank; T3, product tank; P1, WCO pump; P2, methanol and NaOH pump; HT, heater; T, temperature control; P, pressure
indicator; F, flow indicator; SM, static mixer reactor; V, valve; S, sampling port
BIOFUELS 3
Biodiesel production process
Value
3000 Acid-catalyzed pretreatment of WCO
12.7 The high content of free fatty acids (FFA) present in
17.3
12 WCO would negatively affect both the efficiency of
250 biodiesel production and its product quality. In fact,
12
19.1
the acids possibly react with base catalysts to form
1.5 soaps and water [23,24]. As mentioned above, the acid
value of WCO is typically high (5.08 mg KOH g–1 oil)
and additionally NaOH was used as a catalyst for bio-
diesel production in this study. Therefore, the FFA con-
tent of the WCO should be pretreated to less than 2
wt% or its acid value below 4 mg KOH g–1 [25–28]. In
this study, the WCO was under an acid-catalyzed pre-
treatment. The above-mentioned static mixer setup
was also used in this step. The following conditions
was used: catalyst (sulfuric acid) of 1 wt%, methanol-
to-oil molar ratio of 6:1 at the reaction temperature of
60
C [17,21,29]. The experimental result revealed that
the acid value of obtained WCO was reduced from 5.08
to 2.54 mg KOH g–1 and reached the target.
Trans-esterification reaction
The pretreated WCO was fed together with a mixture
of methanol and catalyst into the static mixer reactor.
The range of parameters for the trans-esterification
reaction were varied as follows: methanol-to-oil molar
(MTO) ratios of 6–10, NaOH concentrations of 0.5–1.0
wt%, and reaction temperatures of 40–60
C. In the
beginning, the system was run for 10 min to achieve
steady-state operation and the starting point was set.
With the reactor design and the fixed total flow of
reactant into the reactor, the residence time of reac-
tants was around 2 s. For purification steps, the crude
biodiesel was collected at the outlet of the static mixer
T
SM
V V
S
T3
4 V. P. NGUYEN ET AL.

reactor. Then, the obtained sample was further sepa-
rated from glycerol and then purified to obtain biodie-
sel product using a procedure described in relevant
reports [30,31]. Typically, crude biodiesel was trans-
ferred into a separation funnel for separating the
methyl ester and glycerol layers. The lower layer (glyc-
erol) was then removed. The upper layer (methyl ester)
was washed with phosphoric acid (0.1 wt%) and then
with distilled water to remove any traces of methanol,
catalyst, and glycerol. The washing process was
repeated until the pH of product solution became neu-
tral. The fraction of methyl ester was finally dried in an
oven for 60 min at 105
C to evaporate the excess water
to get biodiesel. The properties of the obtained prod-
uct were examined by the procedures and methods as
described in Section 2.2.
Test runs were performed at least three times to
ensure the error of data of less than 7% and mass bal-
ance in the range of 93–105%.
Results and discussion
WCO properties
Table 3 shows the fatty acid composition of the WCO in
our study; its average molecular weight is 890 g mol–1.
Obviously, the main fatty acid is in the range from C12
to C20 in which C16 and C18 are two main compo-
nents. Therefore, the WCO composition is nearly similar
to those obtained from palm oils, revealing that WCO is
suitable for biodiesel production. On the other hand,
WCO also consisted of unsaturated fatty acids, result-
ing in instability of those sources. It should be pre-
treated before using for biodiesel production. Other
properties of WCO were also determined and the
results are as follows: acid value of 5.08 mg KOH g–1
oil, viscosity of 43.13 mm2 s–1, iodine value of 80 g I2/
100 g oil, density at 15
C of 917.2 kg m–3, water con-
tent of 0.03 wt%. It can be seen that the Vietnamese
WCO properties are in the range of those from other
sources in the literature [6].

Optimization of biodiesel production by response

surface methodology Regression model development
Modelling tools such as response surface methodology
It is well known the FAME content in the biodiesel
(RSM) are necessary for maximizing the productivity
product is a common factor for evaluation of the trans-
and reducing the production process costs. In addition,
formation of WCO into biodiesel. Table 4 presents the
RSM is suitable for optimizing complex systems where
experimental results of several runs with different
response is influenced by several parameters. The cen-
tral composite design (CCD) consisted of 20 experimen-
tal runs with eight factorial points (2k), six axial points Table 3. Quantitative analysis of fatty acids in the WCO.
(2 £ k), and six replicated center points, the axial point Fatty acids wt% Fatty acids wt%
would have a = 1.68 and k is the number of factors (k Lauric acid (C12:0) 0.10 Linoleic acid (C18:2) 12.87
Myristic acid (C14:0) 1.03 Linolenic acid (C18:3) 0.28
= 3) [32,33]. The range and coded levels of each param- Pentadecylic (C15:0) 0.04 Arasitic acid (C20:0) 0.39
eter, experimental design matrix are listed in Table 2. Palmitic acid (C16:0) 36.25 Paullinic acid (C20:1) 0.29
Palmitoleic acid (C16:1) 0.62 Eicosadienoic acid (C20:2) 0.10
Experimental results were analyzed by the response Margaric acid (C17:0) 0.11 Behenic acid (C22:0) 0.09
surface regression using a quadratic polynomial equa- Stearic acid (C18:0) 6.30 Erucic acid (C22:1) 0.10
Oleic acid (C18:1) 41.35
tion shown in Equation (2):

X
k X
k X
k X
k
Y ¼ bo þ bi Xi þ bii Xi2 þ x bij Xi Xj (2)
i¼1 i¼1 i¼1 j¼1 Table 4. Experimental design and measured values for the
response variables.
where Y is the response (FAME content, wt%); Xi and Xj FAME (wt%)
are the coded independent variables; bo, bi, bii and bij Run T (X1) C (X2) M (X3) Experimental Predicted
1 ¡1 ¡1 ¡1 36.5 37.4
are the intercept, linear, quadratic and interaction coef- 2 1 ¡1 ¡1 51.0 52.2
ficients, respectively, and k is the number of variables. 3 ¡1 1 ¡1 90.1 87.1
Drawing of response surface plots, analysis of variance 4 1 1 ¡1 97.8 98.5
5 ¡1 ¡1 1 68.3 66.1
(ANOVA) and regression analysis were performed to 6 1 ¡1 1 69.0 70.5
find out optimum conditions for the response. The 7 ¡1 1 1 84.9 82.1
8 1 1 1 85.4 83.0
coefficient of determination (R2) was evaluated to 9 ¡1.68 0 0 62.4 65.9
examine the fitness of polynomial model. 10 +1.68 0 0 80.4 79.1
11 0 ¡1.68 0 44.9 43.3
12 0 +1.68 0 92.0 95.7
Table 2. Range and levels of process parameters used for 13 0 0 ¡1.68 71.1 70.4
response surface design. 14 0 0 +1.68 78.8 81.6
Coded levels 15 0 0 0 81.6 81.7
16 0 0 0 82.6 81.7
Process parameters Symbols ¡1.68 ¡1 0 +1 +1.68 17 0 0 0 81.0 81.7
Temperature,
C T (X1) 33.2 40.0 50.0 60.0 66.8 18 0 0 0 81.3 81.7
NaOH content, wt% C (X2) 0.33 0.50 0.75 1.00 1.17 19 0 0 0 81.7 81.7
MTO ratio, mole/mole M (X3) 4.6 6.0 8.0 10.0 11.4 20 0 0 0 82.2 81.7
 BIOFUELS 5

Table 5. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the quadratic model.

Source of variations Sum of squares Degrees of freedom Mean square p-value (Probability > F)
Model 4707.03 9 523.0 <0.0001a
X1-Temperature 1 3.042E-04a
X2-Catalyst content 1 <0.0001a
X3-MTO ratio 1 1.084E-03a
X1X2 1 0.3853c
X1X3 1 0.0205b
X2X3 1 <0.0001a
X12 1 1.005E-03a
X22 1 1.211E-04a
X32 1 0.0180b
Residual 72.588 10 7.259
Cor total 4779.62 19
F-value model = 72.05
R2 = 0.9848
a
Significant at 1% level.
b
Significant at 5% level.
c
Insignificant at p > 0.05.

reaction conditions to understand the relationship and Effects of reaction parameters on the biodiesel
interactions of different parameters. The FAME content production
varies from 36.5 to 97.8 wt% depending on three
The higher in coefficient value of parameters in Equa-
parameters.
tion (3), the more influence on biodiesel production.
To better understand the interaction among these
Indeed, catalyst concentration is the most significant
parameters, a regression model is developed. By using
effect on FAME yield compared to other parameters.
the RSM, dependence of the FAME content on men-
To better understand the relationship of reaction
tioned parameters is described by:
parameters, the effect of each parameter was depicted
Y ¼ 81:6803 þ 3:9319X1 þ15:5634X2 þ3:3055X3 in Figure 4. For example, Figure 4(a) illustrates the
effect of reaction temperature and MTO ratio on FAME
0:8649X1 X2  2:6195X1 X3  8:4309X2 X3  3:2523X21
yield while keeping the other parameter (NaOH con-
4:3038X22  2:0047X23
centration = 0.75 wt%). Raising the temperature from
(3) 40
C to 60
C led to a slight increase in the FAME yield
from 67% to 81%. This can be explained that a high
On the other hand, the ANOVA is normally used to
temperature reduces the viscosity of reaction mixture,
determine significance of the model and the results
leading to a better mixing effectiveness and then facili-
are shown in Table 5. The model probability is found at
tates the reaction. Similarly, the influence of MTO ratio
a very low value (less than 0.0001) indicating that the
shows the same trend with the increase of tempera-
developed model is significant at the 95% confidence
ture. The findings are in agreement with the observa-
level. The value of coefficient of determination (R2) was
tion in studies with static mixer and traditional systems
0.9848 which presents a good fit between the qua-
[11,34,35].
dratic regression model and experimental data in the
Furthermore, a high temperature also accelerates
chosen interval (see Table 5). The p-value is normally
the rate of trans-esterification and esters yield [11,36].
used to check the significance of each regression coef-
It is worth noting that at higher temperature,
ficient. Accordingly, if p-values are less than 0.05,
model terms are significant. In this study, the model
terms X1, X2, X3, X1X3, X2X3, X12, X22 and X32 are signifi- 100
cant whereas the model term X1X2 is insignificant. In
R² = 0.984
other words, the interaction of reaction temperature
Experimental ester content (wt%)

80
and NaOH content (X1X2) can be neglected. However,
the correlation of temperature with MTO ratio (X1X3),
and NaOH content with MTO ratio (X2X3) parameters 60

are very significant.

Figure 3 illustrates the plot of experimental and 40
predicted FAME yield. In fact, the value of R2 is found
to be 0.984, revealing that 98.4% of the experimental
results could be described reasonably by the model. It 20
20 40 60 80 100
can be concluded that the model is in good estima-
tion of the response of the biodiesel production Predicted ester content (wt%)

system. Figure 3. Experimental versus predicted FAME yield plot

6 V. P. NGUYEN ET AL.

Figure 5. Influence of MTO ratio on the FAME yield. NaOH =

0.75 wt%; T = 40–60
C.

finding is in line with the report of Thompson and He.

[16]
Simultaneously, the influence of MTO ratio and
NaOH concentration on the FAME yield can be seen in
Figure 4(c). The catalyst fraction has a strong effect in
the response and its increase leads to a significant
enhancement of FAME yield. On the other hand, the
MTO ratio influences FAME production in a different
way. As can be seen in Figure 6, at low catalyst content,
increasing the MTO ratio leads to an improvement on
the FAME yield. This might contribute to a presence of
excess methanol which helps to shift the trans-esterifi-
cation reaction forward. In contrast, at higher catalyst
content, raising the MTO ratio caused a drop in FAME
yield, implying the dilution of catalyst in the reaction
mixture. Moreover, an excess of methanol in the reac-
tion mixture with a high NaOH fraction might facilitate
a formation of emulsion between glycerol and methyl
esters, indicating more difficulty in separating and puri-
fying the product afterward [37–40].

Figure 4. Three-dimensional plots for the interactions: (a) tem-

perature and MTO ratio; (b) NaOH and temperature; and (c) Optimization of the reaction conditions for
MTO ratio and NaOH.
biodiesel production
A numerical optimization method was used to deter-
mine values of three parameters which create the
effectiveness of an increasing in MTO ratio on the highest FAME content. The optimization was
FAME production will be lower (see Figure 5). In fact, at
60
C, the FAME content of biodiesel product increases
slightly with an increasing MTO ratio, but decreasing
as the ratio exceeds 8.
Figure 4(b) depicts a 3D surface plot for the effect of
catalyst concentration and reaction temperature on
the FAME content of biodiesel. As for keeping the MTO
ratio at zero level, the FAME production is possibly
enhanced with the increase in NaOH concentration or
reaction temperature. Moreover, the influence of
NaOH on the response is much higher than those from
reaction temperature. As a result, the change in cata-
lyst concentration is the most effective way to control Figure 6. Effect of MTO ratio on the FAME. T = 60
C; [NaOH] =
the FAME yield as using the static mixer reactor. This 0.5 wt%, 1.0 wt%.

Table 6. Properties of biodiesel produced from the Vietnamese WCO.
Properties EN14214-2012
Methyl ester content (wt%) 96.5
Density at 15
C (kg m¡3) 860–900
Kinematic viscosity at 40
C (mm2 s¡1) 3.5–5.0
Flash point (
C) >101
Cloud point (
C) - -
Pour point (
C) - -
Higher heating value (MJ kg–1) - -
Free fatty acid (mg KOH g¡1) 0.5
Sulfur content (wt%) <0.001 (10 ppm)
Sulfated ash (wt%) <0.02
Oxidative stability at 110
C (h) >8
(a)
Reaction conditions: Batch reactor, MTO ratio = 7–8, 30–50
C, 0.75 wt% KOH, in 80–90 min.
(b)
Reaction conditions: Static mixer, MTO ratio = 6, 60
C, 1.0 wt% NaOH, in 2 s
(c)
0.2 wt% of hydroquinone as antioxidant was added to biodiesel sample
conducted by varying values of all variables in the qua-
dratic polynomial Equation (3), therein the variables
(X1, X2 and X3) were set in the defined range that was
coded as –1 and +1. As a result, the highest value of
response was obtained at the following conditions:
temperature (60
C), MTO ratio = 6 and 1.0 wt% cata-
lyst. The predicted value of FAME yield at the opti-
mized conditions was 98.5 wt% compared to the
experimental value (97.8 wt%). It is interesting to men-
tion that the optimized conditions are similar to results
obtained from traditional agitators; however, a consid-
erably shorter reaction time is achieved.
Properties of the WCO-based biodiesel
In this study, the properties of WCO-based biodiesel
obtained with the sample tested at optimized condi-
tions were analyzed. Interestingly, all mentioned prop-
erties of the product adapted the specification of the
European and Vietnamese standards of biodiesel (EN
14214:2012 and TCVN 1:2015/ BKHCN, respectively). It
is known that the oxidative stability of biodiesel prod-
uct is normally bad, implying the use of antioxidant.
Therefore, a small amount of hydroquinone (0.2 wt%)
as antioxidant was added in the biodiesel product in
our study. The oxidative stability of the obtained bio-
diesel at 110
C is more than 24 h which is significantly
higher than the required value in the above-men-
tioned standards.
In addition, to better understand the efficiency of
static mixer technology and a traditional batch reactor
(agitator reactor) [5] using the Vietnamese WCO, a
comparison on the properties of the obtained products
was also provided in Table 6. Some detected properties
are similar; however, the reaction time in our study (a
few seconds) is much shorter compared to the batch
reactor (80–90 min).
Conclusions
In this work, we reported on the application of static
mixer technology for biodiesel production from Viet-
namese WCO in Vietnam. The optimization was deter-
mined by RSM, and interactions of the investigated
BIOFUELS 7
TCVN 1:2015/BKHCN Phan and Phan (2008) [2](a) This study (b)
96.5 - 97.8
- 880 877.7
1.9–6.0 4.89 4.93
- 120 190
3 9
0 3
- 35.08
0.5 0.43 0.40
0.005 - 0.0004
<0.02 - 0.017
>6 - 24(c)
parameters could be described by a quadratic model.
The result reveals that catalyst concentration has a
strong effect on the response compared to other
parameters (temperature, MTO ratio) using the static
mixer reactor. It was found that the maximum FAME
content, 97.8 wt%, was obtained at the following con-
ditions: reaction temperature of 60
C, catalyst concen-
tration (1.0 wt%), and MTO ratio of 6. Notably, the
obtained biodiesel properties meet the requirements
of the biodiesel European and Vietnamese standards.
These findings demonstrated that the static mixer
technology has good potential for application in large-
scale production of biodiesel in Vietnam as it is simple
and highly effective, and with a short reaction time.
Acknowledgements
The authors gratefully acknowledge financial support by the
Ministry of Industry and Trade of the Socialist Republic of
Vietnam [contract number 03/HĐ-SXTN.03.14/NLSH].
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
References
[1] Ministry of Industry and Trade. Plan to Develop vegeta-
ble oils in Vietnam to 2020, with a vision to 2030. Hanoi,
Vietnam: Vietnamese Government. 2015.
[2] Vietnam: Oilseeds and Products Annual. USDA (United
States Department of Agriculture) - Foreign Agricultural
Service. Hanoi, Vietnam: Ministry of Agricultural. 2016.
https://www.fas.usda.gov/data/vietnam-oilseeds-and-
products-annual-0
[3] Suresh S. Sinha D, Murugavelh S. Biodiesel production
from waste cotton seed oil: engine performance and
emission characteristics. Biofuels. 2016;7:689–698.
[4] Arslan R, Ulusoy Y. Utilization of waste cooking oil as an
alternative fuel for Turkey, Environ Sci Pollut Res. 2017;
doi: 10.1007/s11356-017-8899-3.
[5] Decision No. 177/2007/QD-TTg of the Prime Minister
dated on 20/11/2017. Approving the scheme on devel-
opment of biofuels up to 2015 with a vision to 2025.
Hanoi, Vietnam: Vietnamese Government. 2007
8 V. P. NGUYEN ET AL.
[6] Mohammed AR, Bandari C. Lab-scale catalytic produc-
tion of biodiesel from waste cooking oil – a review. Bio-
fuels. 2017; doi: 10.1080/17597269.2017.1370882.
[7] Poudel J, Karki S, Sanjel N, et al. Comparison of biodiesel
obtained from virgin cooking oil and waste cooking oil
using supercritical and catalytic transesterification. Ener-
gies. 2017;10:54.
[8] Abidin SZ, Yunus NM, Ghani SAA, et al. Studies on free
fatty acid esterification of used cooking oil: investigation
on the performance of sulphonated cation exchange res-
ins. Biofuels. 2017; doi: 10.1080/17597269.2017.1378990.
[9] Ma Y, Wang Q, Zheng L, et al. Mixed methanol/ethanol
on transesterification of waste cooking oil using Mg/Al
hydrotalcite catalyst. Energy. 2016;107:523–531.
[10] Phan AN, Phan TM. Biodiesel production from waste
cooking oils. Fuel. 2008;87:3490–3496.
[11] Phuong DL, Hoa TT, Boi LV, et al. Production of biodiesel
from Vietnamese Jatropha curcas oil by a co-solvent
method, Bioresour Technol. 2014;173:309–316.
[12] Hong DD, Mai DTN, Thom LT, et al. Biodiesel production
from Vietnam heterotrophic marine microalga Schizo-
chytrium mangrovei PQ6. J Biosci Bioeng. 2013;116:
180–185.
[13] Limousy L, Jeguirim M, Labaki M. Chapter 11: energy
applications of coffee processing by-products, Hand-
book of Coffee Processing By-Products. Amsterdam,
Netherlands: Elsevier; 2017. pp. 323–367.
[14] Albright LF. Albright's Chemical Engineering Handbook.
Florida, USA: CRC Press, Taylor & Francis Group; 2009.
[15] Thakur RK, Vial C, Nigam KDP, et al. Static Mixer In The
Process Industries - A Review. Trans IChemE. 2003;81:
787–826.
[16] Thompson JC, He BB. Biodiesel production using static
mixers. Am Soc Agri Biol Eng. 2007;50:161–165.
[17] Alamsyah R, Tambunan AH, Purwanto YA, et al. Compar-
ison of static-mixer and blade agitator reactor in biodie-
sel production. Agri Eng Int. 2010;12:99–106.
[18] Knothe G. Analyzing Biodiesel: Standards and Other
Methods. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 2006;83:823–833.
[19] Monteiroa MR, Ambrozina ARP, Li~aob LM, et al. Critical
review on analytical methods for biodiesel characteriza-
tion. Talanta. 2008;77:593–605.
[20] Conceiç ~ao MM, Candeia RA, Silva FC, et al. Thermoana-
lytical characterization of castor oil biodiesel. Renew
Sustain Energy Rev. 2007;11:964.
[21] Kraiem T, Ben Hassen-Trabelsi A, Naoui S, et al. Charac-
terization of the liquid products obtained from Tunisian
waste fish fats using the pyrolysis process. Fuel Process
Technol. 2015;138:404–412.
[22] Kraiem T, Ben Hassen-Trabelsi A, Jeguirim M. Production
and characterization of bio-oil from the pyrolysis of
waste frying oil. Environ Sci Poll Res. 2017;24:9951–9961.
[23] Karmakar A, Karmakar S, Mukherjee S. Properties of vari-
ous plants and animals feedstocks for biodiesel produc-
tion. Bioresour Technol. 2010;101:7201–7210.
[24] Van Gerpen J, Shanks B, Pruszko R, Clements D, Knothe
G. Biodiesel Production Technology. Subcontractor
Report. National Renewable Energy Laboratory NREL/
SR-510-36244, 2004.
[25] Ramadhas AS, Jayaraj S, Muraleedharan C. Biodiesel pro-
duction from high FFA rubber seed oil. Fuel. 2005;84:
335–340.
[26] Canakci M, Van Gerpen J. Biodiesel production via acid
catalysis. Trans ASAE. 1999;42:1203–1210.
[27] Canakci M, Van Gerpan J. Biodiesel production from oils
and fats with high free fatty acids. Trans ASAE. 2001;
44:1429–1436.
[28] El-Mashad HM, RZ, Avena-Bustillos RJ. A two-step pro-
cess for biodiesel production from salmon oil. Biosyst
Eng. 2008;99:220–207.
[29] Garcıa-Moreno PJ, Khanum M, Guadix A, et al. Optimiza-
tion of biodiesel production from waste fish oil. Renew
Energy. 2014;68:618–624.
[30] Musa NA, Teran GM, Yaman SA. Characterization of
coconut oil and Its biodiesel. J Sci Res Reports. 2016;
9:1–6.
[31] Ogunwole OA. Production of biodiesel from water-
melon (Citrullus lanatus) seed oil. Leonardo J Sci.
2015;14:63–74.
[32] NIST/SEMATECH e-Handbook of Statistical Methods.
Colorado, USA: National Institute of Standards and Tech-
nology, U.S. Department of Commerce. 2016. http://
www.itl.nist.gov/div898/handbook/
[33] Montgomery D. Design and Analysis of Experiments. 5th
Edition ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2003.
[34] Leung D, Guo Y. Transesterification of neat and used
frying oil: optimization for biodiesel production. Fuel
Process Technol. 2006;87:883–890.
[35] Freedman B, Pryde EH, Mounts TL. Variables affecting
the yields of fatty esters from transesterified vegetable
oils. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 1984;61:1638–1643.
[36] Encinar JM, Gonzalez JF, Rodriguez-Reinares A. Biodiesel
from used frying oil, variables affecting the yields and
characteristics of the biodiesel. Ind Eng Chem Res.
2005;44:5491–5499.
[37] Hamze H, Akia M, Yazdani F. Optimization of biodiesel
production from the waste cooking oil using response
surface methodology. Process Saf Environ Prot. 2015;
94:1–10.
[38] Dwivedi G, Sharma MP. Application of Box-Behnken
design in optimization of biodiesel yield from Pongamia
oil and its stability analysis. Fuel. 2015;145:256–262.
[39] Kafuku G, Mbarawa M. Biodiesel production from Croton
megalocarpus oil and its process optimization. Fuel.
2010;89:2556–2560.
[40] Dharma S, Masjuki HH, Ong HC, et al. Optimization
of biodiesel production process for mixed Jatropha
curcas–Ceiba pentandra biodiesel using response sur-
face methodology. Energy Convers Manage. 2016;115:
178–190.