Techno-Economic Feasibility and Flowsheet Synthesis of Scrap Tire/Plastic Waste Liquefaction
Techno-Economic Feasibility and Flowsheet Synthesis of Scrap Tire/Plastic Waste Liquefaction
复制标题
废轮胎/废塑料液化技术经济可行性及合成流程
DOI：
--
复制
发表时间：
1999
期刊：
影响因子：
--
通讯作者：
M. El‐Halwagi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
M. D. Shelley;M. El‐Halwagi
进行了一项技术经济可行性研究，以评估将废轮胎和消费后塑料废物共同液化为液体运输燃料的可行性。首先，合成了一个通用的工艺流程。接下来，开发了材料和能量平衡以及过程模拟。最后，完成了对所调查的所有流程场景的盈利能力分析。考虑了两种不同的基本情景：(1)废塑料的熔融/解聚和废轮胎的热解；(2)废塑料和废轮胎的热解。为进行技术经济评价，假设废塑料和废轮胎的进料量分别为200吨/天和100吨/天。单个设备的成本要么经过严格计算，要么根据文献资料按比例缩小。除了两个基本情景之外，还考虑了两个独立的模块：(1)单独的废塑料熔融/解聚和升级；(2)单独的废轮胎热解和升级。并对这两个模块的规模经济进行了分析。两种基本情景的结果表明，如果可以确保每吨35- 45美元的废塑料倾倒费，则可以实现15%的投资回报率（ROI）。此外，对两个模块的经济分析表明，轮胎热解的投资回报率为18%，而塑料熔融/解聚的投资回报率要低得多。这一结果是意料之中的，因为废旧轮胎的潜在提示和收入大于废旧塑料。由于规模经济，随着产能的增加，两个模块的过程经济都得到了显著改善。因此，这些结果肯定了废塑料和废轮胎共同液化以及单独液化废轮胎在技术和经济上都是可行的。
A techno-economic feasibility study was undertaken to assess the viability of co-liquefying scrap tires and post-consumer plastic wastes into liquid transportation fuels. First, a generalized process flowsheet was synthesized. Next, material and energy balances as well as process simulations were developed. Finally, a profitability analysis was completed for all process scenarios investigated. Two different base case scenarios were considered: (1) the melting/depolymerization of waste plastics and the pyrolysis of scrap tires and (2) the pyrolysis of both waste plastics and scrap tires. For the techno-economic assessment, waste plastic and scrap tire feed rates of 200 and 100 tons per day respectively were assumed. Costs for individual pieces of equipment were either rigorously calculated or scaled down from literature sources. In addition to the two base case scenarios, two separate modules were also considered: (1) the melting/depolymerization and upgrading of waste plastics alone and (2) the pyrolysis and upgrading of scrap tires alone. The economies of scale for these two modules were also analyzed. The results for both base case scenarios indicate that a 15% rate of return on investment (ROI) can be achieved if a waste plastic tipping fee of $35-$45 per ton can be secured. Furthermore, the economic analysis of the two modules reveals that tire pyrolysis has an ROI of 18% while the ROI of plastic melting/depolymerization is much lower. This result is expected since the potential tips and revenues from scrap tires is greater than those from waste plastics. Due to economy of scale, the process economics for both modules is considerably improved as capacity is increased. Thus, these results affirm that the co-liquefaction of waste plastics and scrap tires as well as the liquefaction of scrap tires alone is both technically and economically feasible.