Classical and Process Intensification Methods for Acetic Acid Concentration: Technical and Environmental Assessment

Letitia Petrescu and Codruta-Maria Cormos
Additional contact information
Letitia Petrescu: Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Babeș-Bolyai University, 11 Arany Janos, RO-400028 Cluj-Napoca, Romania
Codruta-Maria Cormos: Faculty of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Babeș-Bolyai University, 11 Arany Janos, RO-400028 Cluj-Napoca, Romania

Energies, 2022, vol. 15, issue 21, 1-23

Abstract: This study aims to investigate, from a technical and an environmental perspective, various alternatives for acetic acid concentration for maximizing acetic acid production, its purity, and in the meantime, minimizing the energy usage and the environmental impact. Liquid–liquid extraction followed by azeotropic distillation using different solvents such as: (i) ethyl acetate, (ii) isopropyl acetate, and (iii) a mixture containing isopropyl acetate and isopropanol were first explored, using process flow modeling software. The three cases were compared considering various technical key performance indicators (i.e., acetic acid flow-rate, acetic acid purity, acetic acid recovery, power consumption, thermal energy used, and number of equipment units involved) leading to the conclusion that the usage of the isopropyl acetate—isopropanol mixture leads to better technical results. The isopropanol-isopropyl acetate mixture was furthermore investigated in other two cases where process intensification methods, based on thermally coupled respectively the double-effect distillation process, are proposed. The highest quantity of pure acetic acid (e.g., 136 kmol/h) and the highest recovery rate (e.g., 97.74%) were obtained using the double-effect method. A cradle-to-gate life cycle assessment, involving ReCiPe method, was used to calculate and compare various environmental impact indicators (i.e., climate change, freshwater toxicity potential, human toxicity, etc.). Several steam sources (i.e., hard coal, heavy fuel oil, light fuel oil, natural gas, and biomass) were considered in the environmental evaluation. The results of the life cycle assessment show a reduction, by almost half, in all the environmental impact indicators when the double effect method is compared to the thermally coupled process. The usage of biomass for steam generation lead to lower impacts compared to steam generation using fossil fuels (i.e., hard coal, heavy fuel oil, light fuel oil, natural gas).

Keywords: acetic acid concentration; process intensification; azeotropic distillation; thermally coupled process; double-effect distillation process; life cycle assessment (search for similar items in EconPapers)
JEL-codes: Q Q0 Q4 Q40 Q41 Q42 Q43 Q47 Q48 Q49 (search for similar items in EconPapers)
Date: 2022
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/21/8119/pdf (application/pdf)
https://www.mdpi.com/1996-1073/15/21/8119/ (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:gam:jeners:v:15:y:2022:i:21:p:8119-:d:959321

Access Statistics for this article

Energies is currently edited by Ms. Agatha Cao

More articles in Energies from MDPI
Bibliographic data for series maintained by MDPI Indexing Manager ().