search.noResults

search.searching

dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
Lube-Tech PUBLISHED BY LUBE: THE EUROPEAN LUBRICANTS INDUSTRY MAGAZINE


Grassroots 165,000 MTA Re-refinery Internal Rate of Return at Various Feed & Base Oil Prices


References: 1. L.M. Magnabosco, M. Falconer & K. Padmanabhan, "The Mohawk/CEP Process", Proceedings of Sixth International Conference on Used Oil, Recovery and Reuse Re-refining Rebirth. Association of Petroleum Re-refiners, San Francisco, California, May 28-31, 1991.


2. L.M. Magnabosco, "Progress in Mohawk/CEP Technology: Reduction in Catalyst Deactivation", Seventh International Conference on Used Oil, Recovery and Reuse. Association of Petroleum Re-refiners, Chicago, Illinois, September 27- October 1, 1992.


3. L. M. Magnabosco, "High Quality Lube Base Stock from Waste Lube Oil Streams via the Mohawk-CEP Process", Presented at the First International Oil, Gas and Petrochemical Congress. Isfahan, Iran, September, 1993.


Again, as with the capital cost vs capacity, the rate of return is much greater for a bigger plant. The return for a 165,000 metric ton per year (MTA) plant at $422 (USD) feed and $1,265 (USD) base oil is about 90% while it is about 45% for the 40,000 MTA plant for the same used oil and the base oil prices. The labour cost is one of the major factors in the operating costs. However, the labour cost does not increase for a higher capacity plant since it takes the same number of people to operate a plant whether it is a 40,000 MTA or 165,000 MTA plant. This is unique for a small re-refinery as compared to larger virgin oil plants. That’s the main reason why the rate of return for a higher capacity plant is greater. Therefore, it is recommended to maximise the capacity of the plant as long as the volume of the feedstock collection allows. However, whether it is a 40,000 MTA or 165,000 MTA plant, the rate of return for a CEP technology re-refinery is very attractive in today’s market. Other factors in the operating cost include utilities such as electricity, natural gas, cooling water, hydrogen and catalysts.


In conclusion, the lube base oil derived from drain oil is a very important resource that should not be wasted by being burned as fuel. Using the best technology available such as CEP’s re- refining process, it can be regenerated into the quality that is equal to or better than virgin base oil refined from crude oil. With process advancements made by CEP, the re-refining process is not only a very efficient and reliable way to recover one of the most important natural resources, but also provides a very attractive business opportunity.


4. L.M. Magnabosco and W.A. Rondeau, "Improved Process for the Production of Base Stock Oils from Used Oil", European Patent EP0574272, (1993).


Joshua H. Park(a) and Louis M. Magnabosco(b)


a) Chemical Engineering Partners (CEP), 2415 Campus Drive, Suite 225, Irvine, CA 92612


b) MAGNA Associates, 22365 El Toro Road, Suite 277, Lake Forest, CA 92630


LINK www.ceptechnology.com


No.84 page 4


26


LUBE MAGAZINE No.111 OCTOBER 2012


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49