Chemical Technology February 2015

Figure 3: Impact assessment results of biodiesel from metha- nol using different amounts of alcohol, Eco- indicator 99 (E) V2.08 / Europe EI 99 E/E’ method/ characterisation

Figure 4: LCA results using ECO-indicator 99 analysis method to compare all the experiments

Results Methanol vs. ethanol using KOH as a catalyst (experiment 3 and 4) Figure 1 on page 9 shows the impact assessment associ- ated with the production of 1 kg of biodiesel using the waste cooking oil and KOH using methanol (experiment 3) compared to that of using ethanol (experiment 4) using the ‘ECO-Indicator 99 (E) V2.08 / Europe EI 99 E/E’ method. Out of the 11 impact categories, experiment 3 has higher contributions on radiation, ozone layer depletion, land use and fossil fuels. It shows lower impacts on the human health categories; 80 % carcinogens, 39 % on respiratory organics and 92 % contribution on the respiratory inorgan- ics. Experiment 3 also shows lower impact on toxicity and eutrophication as well as on the minerals.

KOH vs NaOH catalyst, using methanol When comparing biodiesel production using the ‘ECO- Indicator 99 (E) V2.08 / Europe EI 99 E/E’ method, using KOH or NaOH catalysts with methanol for the esterification process, Figure 2, the impact assessment shows that the biodiesel with NaOH as a catalyst has higher contributions on 9 impact categories except the minerals and the radia- tion categories. The use of KOH catalyst has however shown lower contributions for the rest of the impact categories. The respiratory inorganics were reduced by approximately 82 %, climate change by 23 %, while radiation, ozone layer depletion and eco-toxicity were reduced by approximately 29 %, 32 % and 40 % respectively. Eutrophication was reduced by 71 %; land use was reduced by 3,5 % and the use of fossil fuels reduced by almost 7 %.

10

Chemical Technology • February 2015