Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science, 2021, 11, 239-249

https://www.scirp.org/journal/aces
ISSN Online: 2160-0406
ISSN Print: 2160-0392

Chemical Plant Design for the Conversion of

Plastic Waste to Liquid Fuel

Yusif Rhule Sam1,2, Lawrence Darkwah1, Derrick Kpakpo Allotey1, Adjei Domfeh1,
Mizpah Ama Dziedzorm Rockson1*, Emmanuel Kwaku Baah-Ennumh1

Department of Chemical Engineering, Kwame Nkrumah University of Science and Technology, Kumasi, Ghana
1

Faculty of Engineering and Applied Sciences, University of Regina, Regina, Canada

2

How to cite this paper: Sam, Y.R., Darkwah, Abstract

L., Allotey, D.K., Domfeh, A., Rockson,
M.A.D. and Baah-Ennumh, E.K. (2021) This paper presents the plant design for fuel production from plastic waste.
Chemical Plant Design for the Conversion The types of plastics to be used for the fuel production include polyethylene,
of Plastic Waste to Liquid Fuel. Advances
polypropylene and polystyrene. All these materials are to be sourced from
in Chemical Engineering and Science, 11,
239-249. Kpone landfill site in Accra, Ghana, where the plant is to be situated. The
https://doi.org/10.4236/aces.2021.113015 major fuels produced are gasoline, diesel and kerosene with a plant capacity
of approximately 1000 tons of plastic waste per day and its attainment is 95%.
Received: April 1, 2021
Accepted: June 28, 2021
The production process involves sorting the municipal solid waste to obtain
Published: July 1, 2021 suitable plastics. The plastics are extruded and cracked thermally in a Pyro-
lyzer and the gases from it are reformed over Zeolite-ZSM 5 as the catalyst in
Copyright © 2021 by author(s) and
a reactor. Resulting vapours are fractionated in a column to obtain the vari-
Scientific Research Publishing Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative ous fuel components. The plant operates 24 hours/day and 347 days/year with
Commons Attribution International 3 shifts per day of 8 hours per shift. Total capital required to build and start up
License (CC BY 4.0). the plant amounts to approximately 17 Million US Dollars. The plant life is 25
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
years with an annual rate of return of 34% and a payback period of 2.9 years for
Open Access
this project, after setting up. Annually, the plant would generate gross and net
profits of approximately 9 Million US Dollars and 6.7 Million US Dollars re-
spectively.

Keywords
Plastic Waste, Extrusion, Pyrolysis, Catalyst, Fuel, Techno-Economic Analysis

1. Introduction
As the world strives to develop, urbanization and industrialization have resulted
in rapid increase in the amount of waste produced every year. Waste manage-
ment has become a global concern as urban population rises. Among the kinds

DOI: 10.4236/aces.2021.113015 Jul. 1, 2021 239 Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science
Y. R. Sam et al.

of solid wastes produced annually, over 300 million metric tons of these wastes
are plastics [1]. The use of plastics for fabrication of various items of domestic
and industrial purposes has increased over the years for reasons including; the
durability and lightweight of plastics [2]. Additives such as stabilizers and an-
ti-oxidants are added to the base materials of plastics to enhance their plastic
properties. Improper disposal of plastic waste has a negative impact on the envi-
ronment due to the presence of these stabilizers and anti-oxidants in plastics [3].
Recycling, landfilling and incineration are the well-known processes for man-
aging plastic wastes [4]. In modern and developed societies, thermochemical con-
version has been adopted to manage solid waste. Thermochemical conversion is
also the safest technology available for converting plastic waste into energy. This
method is characterised by the use of heat energy to transform plastic waste
physically and chemically [5]. The renowned processes utilized under this tech-
nology are liquefaction, gasification and pyrolysis. Pyrolysis is the combustion of
materials in the limited amount of oxygen. The main feedstock for plastics pro-
duction is crude oil. Naphtha obtained from fractionating crude oil is subjected
to catalytic cracking where hydrocarbons of smaller molecular weights are pro-
duced. These hydrocarbons include ethylene, propylene, butane and other hy-
drocarbons. These hydrocarbons are further refined to produce the base plastic
materials. The refined hydrocarbons are processed together with additives to
give the desired plastic properties [6].
Few types of plastics are suitable for producing clean fuel oil. Polyethylene,
polypropylene and polystyrene contain mainly carbon and hydrogen. Moreover,
their compounds have high heating values. These properties render these plastics
suitable for the production of clean fuel oil. Polyvinyl Chloride (PVC) contains
chlorine which is corrosive and hazardous for that process. Like PVC, Polyethy-
lene terephthalate (PET) is commonly found in Municipal Solid Waste (MSW)
streams. However, PET yields benzoic acid and terephthalic acid during pyroly-
sis. These properties render PET and PVC unsuitable for the pyrolysis process
[7].
Methane, ethane, propane and butane are the main refinery gases from the
pyrolysis of plastic wastes. The gases are by-products and because of their high
energy content, they are used in the plant as fuel to provide heat energy for
processes that require heating. Moreover, the gases serve as an alternative source
of fuel to the plant, thus making the process cost-effective. Solid residue, char,
can be produced in the pyrolysis process. However, this is highly dependent on
the level of contaminants such as organic matter, sand, etc. that are attached to
the feedstock [8]. One of the fuel products from plastic waste obtained by pyro-
lysis and further catalytic upgrading is the fuel oil. It is a mixture of C5 - C30 hy-
drocarbons. The fuel oil obtained is further homogenized to produce kerosene,
diesel and petrol.
Therefore, designing a chemical processing plant to produce liquid fuels i.e.
diesel, gasoline, kerosene and residual fuel oil, from the plastic waste in the Kpone
Landfill, is the main motivation for undertaking this project. The construction of

DOI: 10.4236/aces.2021.113015 240 Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science

 Y. R. Sam et al.

the plant would contribute to the effective management and utilization of plastic
waste at the Kpone landfill, Moreover, the quality of petrol and diesel produced
from these suitable plastic wastes are of good quality as the regular fuel oil from
crude oil refineries [8]. Hence, fuel oil from plastic wastes needs no additives to
improve its functional properties. Moreover, fuel oil from plastics is free from
contaminants such as lead and sulphur. This makes fuel from plastics cleaner [9].
This study provides a detailed techno-economic analysis that includes the de-
scription of the selected process, a Process Flow Diagram (PFD), a simulated 3D
layout of the plant incorporating piping systems, detailed and systematic materi-
al and energy balances on each major equipment as well as the specification of the
safety and pollution control measures as required [10]. The economic viability of
the plant was also duly assessed using different economic indicators namely Rate
of Return (ROR), Payback period, Discounted Cash Flow Rate of Return
(DCFRR) to determine the feasibility of the plant [10]. A sensitivity analysis [11]
was also carried out.

2. Design Methodology
A feasible process was selected from the various production processes obtained
from the literature. The selected process was modified and the process flowsheet
(PFS) for the plant was drawn using Microsoft Visio. The 3D model of the process
flowsheet was designed using AutoCAD Plant 3D®. The mass and energy bal-
ances for the entire process were performed on the major process units to quan-
tify the amount of raw material, utilities, fuel required as well as products pro-
duced. Balances over individual process equipment specify the compositions and
rate of process stream flows. The balances were carried in Microsoft Excel Work-
sheet. The design took into consideration the factors affecting safety of the plant,
environment and employees to ensure the plant meets general safety standards
and protocols outlined by the environmental and safety authorities. The plant
location took into consideration the material safety and datasheet of the feeds-
tock and products. This is to ensure the safety and efficacy of the plant and its
neighbouring communities.
For the economic analysis, the total capital investment, which takes into account
the physical plant cost (equipment cost, installation cost, etc.), indirect costs (su-
pervision cost, contractor expenses, contingency fee) and working capital in-
vestment (revenue needed to kick start the production) was computed to deter-
mine the total investment needed for plant installation and start-up. The annual
total production cost was also estimated as a sum of the manufacturing costs
(raw material cost, labour costs, and heating/cooling utility cost, local taxes) and
general expenses (distribution cost, administrative charges, research and devel-
opment costs) [11].
Profitability analysis was conducted using the cumulative cash flow plot, ROR,
pay-back period, DCFRR, break-even point. Sensitivity analysis was used to de-
termine the financial feasibility of the plant. The ROR is computed as the ratio of

DOI: 10.4236/aces.2021.113015 241 Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science

Y. R. Sam et al.

the net annual profit to the total capital investment which serves as a simple in-
dex to evaluate the performance of the investment made. DCFRR considers the
time value of money based on the amount of the investment that is unreturned
at the end of each year during the estimated life of the project [10]. The break-
even point simply estimates the point in the lifetime of the plant where the cu-
mulative annual profit becomes equal to the production costs as well as the
quantity of the products (liquid fuel) produced at that time. The pay-back period
is the number of years it takes to redeem the initial total investment [11].

3. Analysis of the Process Plant

3.1. Process Description
The process begins with sorting of the MSW. There are two manual sorting
processes. The primary sorting section recovers the various components of the
MSW while the secondary section recovers only plastics. After primary sorting,
the residual waste is conveyed into the Trommel screen which recovers the fine
particles from the coarse ones. The oversize waste materials from the rotary
screen move onto the magnetic belt for separation of ferrous metals from non-
ferrous materials. Recovered plastics are conveyed onto the near-infrared (NIR)
sorting machines to identify and sort plastics. Suitable plastics are then shredded
for extrusion to be effective. The extruders have screws which rotate to effec-
tively mix the molten plastics and eject it out into their respective pyrolyzers.
Molten plastics from the extruders flow into the reactors. The reactors are equipped
with agitators to enhance even heat distribution in the reactor. Each reactor has
a screw auger conveyor for removing solid residues accumulated during the py-
rolysis process. Fuel gases from the pyrolyzers are compressed and then flow in-
to the catalytic reactors. These gases are further cracked and reformed in the cat-
alytic reactors to commercial grade fuel gases which are later condensed and
fractionated in a fractional distillation column. Liquid fuel from the distillation
column is then cooled using heat exchangers and the cold gas is then stored.
These processes are summarised in Figure 1 below. The simulated 3D layout for
the processing plant is also shown in Figure 2 and Figure 3.

3.2. Material Balance

The plant is built to process 1000 tonnes per day of MSW. The plant attainment
is 95% with all units operating 24 hours per day. The figures below show tabu-
lated values that summarise material balance around each major equipment in
the process plant. The flow rates used in the calculation and represented in table
is in kg/day.
Figures 4-16 shows the material balances over individual major units for the
processing plant.

3.3. Energy Balance

The energy balance on the plant is presented below with tabulated values of the

DOI: 10.4236/aces.2021.113015 242 Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science

 Y. R. Sam et al.

Figure 1. Process flowsheet of the processing plant.

Figure 2. Simulated 3D design layout of the processing plant (View 1).

Figure 3. Simulated 3D design layout of the processing plant (View 2).

DOI: 10.4236/aces.2021.113015 243 Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science

Y. R. Sam et al.

• Recovered = 227357.3 kg/day

• Papers = 46886.9 kg/day
Primary • Plastics = 92004.5 kg/day
• MSW = 931220 kg/day
Sorting • Metals = 27424.4 kg/day
• Glass = 24770.5 kg/day
• Leather & Rubber = 18577.8 kg/day
• Textiles = 17693.2 kg/day

• Residual = 703,634.40 kg/day

Figure 4. Material balance on primary manual sorting.

Trommel
• MSW = 703,862.8 kg/day • Oversize = 172,978.4 kg/day
Screen

• Undersize = 530,884.40 kg/day

Figure 5. Material balance on trommel screen.

Magnetic
• MSW = 172,978.40 kg/day • Ferrous Metals Recovered = 214.6 kg/day
Separator

• Residual Waste = 172,764 kg/day

Figure 6. Material balance on magnetic separator.

Secondary
• MSW = 172,764 kg/day • Plastics Recovered = 4,600 kg/day
Sorting

• Residual Waste = 168,164 kg/day

Figure 7. Material balance on secondary manual sorting.

• Plastics = 96,604.70 kg/day NIR • LDPE Recovered = 24,737.3 kg/day

Sorting I

• Residual Plastics = 71,867.4 kg/day

Figure 8. Material balance on LDPE NIR sorting.

NIR
• Plastics = 71,867.4 kg/day Sorting • HDPE Recovered = 20,691.1 kg/day
II

• Residual Plastics = 51,176.4 kg/day

Figure 9. Material balance on HDPE NIR sorting.

DOI: 10.4236/aces.2021.113015 244 Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science

 Y. R. Sam et al.

NIR
• Plastics = 51,176.4 kg/day Sorting • PP Recovered = 9,471.9 kg/day
III

• Residual Plastics = 41704.3 kg/day

Figure 10. Material balance on PP NIR sorting.

NIR
• Plastics = 41,704.3 kg/day Sorting • PS Recovered = 3,862.3 kg/day
IV

• Residual Plastics = 37,842 kg/day

Figure 11. Material balance on PS NIR sorting.

• LDPE = 24,737.3 kg/day

• HDPE = 20,691.1 kg/day
Extrusion • Molten Plastic = 58,762.6 kg/day
• PP = 9,471.9 kg/day
• PS = 3,862.3 kg/day

Figure 12. Material balance on extrusion.

• Molten Plastic = 58,762.6 kg/day Pyrolysis • Pyrolyzed Gases = 58,673.60 kg/day

Solid Residue, Char = 89.0 kg/day

Figure 13. Material balance on pyrolysis.

Catalytic
• Pyrolyzed Gases = 58,673.60 kg/day • Reformed Gases = 58,673.60 kg/day
Cracking

Figure 14. Material balance on catalytic cracking.

• Refinery Gases (NCG) = 8801 kg/day

• Gasoline = 28163.3
• Reformed Gases = 58,673.60 kg/day
Fractional • Diesel = 9387.8 kg/day
Distillation • Kerosene = 9387.8 kg/day
• Residual = 2933.6 kg/day

Figure 15. Material balance on fractional distillation.

enthalpies of components in all flow and streams. The reference temperature

chosen was 25˚C (298K) at which values of specific heat capacities were selected
for calculations unless stated otherwise. The enthalpies are presented in kJ/day.
Figures 17-21 show the simplified version of energy balances over individual
major units for the entire process.

DOI: 10.4236/aces.2021.113015 245 Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science

Y. R. Sam et al.

• Cooling water = 2,891,724 kg/day

Heat
• Liquid Fuel = 58,673.6 kg/day • Hot water = 2,891,724 kg/day
Exchangers

• Liquid Fuel = 58,673.6 kg/day

Figure 16. Material balance on heat exchangers.

• LDPE = 13,964,252.6 kJ/day

• HDPE = 23,430,565.6 kJ/day Extrusion • Molten Plastics = 35,229,504.7 kJ/day
• PP = 19,277,825.9 kJ/day
• PS = 9,423,586.0 kJ/day

Figure 17. Energy balance on extrusion.

• Molten Plastics = -962,036.2 kJ/day Pyrolysis Gases = 28,155,520.2 kJ/day

Figure 18. Energy balance on pyrolysis.

Catalytic
• Gases = 28,058,219.3 kJ/day • Reformed Gases = -49,691,997.3 kJ/day
Cracking

Figure 19. Energy balance on catalytic cracking.

Refinery Gases = -6,598,598.0 kJ/day

Gasoline = -195,574,709.8 kJ/day
Fractional Kerosene = -6,775,854.9 kJ/day
• Gases = -962,036.2 kJ/day Diesel = -9,707,327.6 kJ/day
Distillation
Residual = -1,123,980.4 kJ/day

Figure 20. Energy balance on fractional distillation.

• Liquid Fuel = 41,837,612.1 kJ/day Heat • Liquid Fuel = 4,019,105.3 kJ/day

• Cooling water = 10,117,193.0 kJ/day Exchangers • Hot Water = 54,632,842.2 kJ/day

Figure 21. Energy balance on heat exchangers.

3.4. Economic Analysis

From the assessment of the various economic variables concerning the feasibility
and profitability of this project, a total capital of $16,985,305 invested into the
project would yield an annual rate of return of 34%. This ROR value is well
within the range of businesses looking to make appreciable profits in Ghana
since the current inter-bank interest rate is 15.22% [12]. The project is therefore
economically feasible for the 25-year period of the plant’s operation. Also, the
time that would be required to pay back the initial investment is approximately 3
years from start of production, as can be seen from Figure 22 below. This dura-
tion is financially healthy and falls within the optimum payback period for
chemical plants to pay off their initial investment and break even.

DOI: 10.4236/aces.2021.113015 246 Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science

 Y. R. Sam et al.

A graph of cumulative cash flow against plant life

160.00
140.00
120.00

Cumulative Cash
Flow, million $
100.00
80.00
60.00
40.00
20.00
-
-5 -20.00 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
-40.00
Plant Life, Years

Figure 22. Cummulative cash flow curve.

The sensitivity analysis on the project proved that upon the 16 cases considered
there were two instances which varied significantly with respect to the pay-back
period at normal conditions. One is 10% decrease in annual sales while raw ma-
terial cost remained the same and the other is 10% decrease in annual sales and
raw materials cost. This indicates that, when the plant is in operation for some
years and the cost of raw materials and annual sales vary by 5% or 10% except
for the two cases described above, the company will suffer no loss in paying off
its initial investment and breaking even. This makes this project a viable one to
an investor.

3.5. Safety Consideration and Plant Location

Any chemical industry is obliged morally and legally to safeguard the health and
well-being of its employees, the general public and the environment. Operating
under safe working environment is also good business. Moreover, the good
management practices needed to attain safe operation will also ensure efficient
operation [11].
Safety measures such as effective communication of hazards and safety proto-
cols, strategies for accident prevention, obeying rules on the material safety and
data sheet of the catalysts and the liquid fuels in the plant were all considered in
designing this plant. To this end, the various equipments would be tested and
maintained regularly to prevent them from deteriorating. Storage tanks con-
taining fuels would be coated with a heat reflecting agent to minimize external
heating. Level, temperature and pressure control devices are mounted on process
units to keep all process variables with design specifications. All tanks containing
flammable liquids would be clearly labelled and adequate firefighting substances
would be installed.
With respect to pollution prevention and control, stacks were specified at heights
of 70 m. At such heights, the flue gas containing primarily CO2 and sometimes CO
disperse in a large area so that their ground level concentrations are within per-
missible levels not harmful to the environment [13]. The wastewater from the
plant would be pumped to a quiescent stabilizing pond for monitoring before

DOI: 10.4236/aces.2021.113015 247 Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science

Y. R. Sam et al.

discharge to ensure it meet the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)-Ghana

guidelines. The guidelines regulating the maximum permissible level before dis-
charge are pH (6 - 9), COD (<250 mg/L), Total Dissolved Solids (<1000 mg/L),
Total Suspended Solids (<50 mg/L), Sulphate (<250 mg/L) Conductivity (750
µS/cm), Turbidity (75 NTU) [14].
The suitable location for the plant is Kpone near Tema-Accra in Ghana. Plastic
waste, the main raw material can be sourced from the Kpone landfill, Kpone.
The factors that favoured the siting of the plant were nearness of plant to source
of raw materials, closeness to the product’s market, availability of transportation
networks, easy access to utility and labour supply-a greater proximity to other
industries can be a good factor as recruitment of persons with necessary skills
sets becomes relatively easy from such a large pool of human resource [11]. Kpone
is within the Tema free zone region. The conditions at the chosen location meet
the safety and environmental requirements and Ghana Government’s industrial
policy. Hence, production and distribution will be cost-effective and feasible in
Kpone.

4. Conclusion and Recommendation

From the economic analysis, the plant for conversion of waste plastics into fuel
is economically viable. The technology needed to operate this plant is also availa-
ble. The plant will not pose any environmental threats. The main feedstock
needed is in abundance at the Kpone landfill site. The products of the plant have
a ready market locally and in neighboring countries. Plastics are non-biodegradable
materials that may cause environmental pollution when disposed haphazardly to
the environment. However, this technology protects the environment by convert-
ing plastics to commercial-grade fuels. In the face of the energy transition taking
place globally, it would be expedient to recycle the plastic waste fraction of MSW
into clean useful fuel. Given the techno-economic viability of such a plant, it can
therefore be recommended that a feasibility study can be pursued to advance the
realisation of using a plastic pyrolysis plant to produce commercial-grade fuel.

Acknowledgements
The authors hereby acknowledge persons from the 2019 Graduating Class of
Chemical Engineering who took part in the design project. These are Ayi Charles
Kofi, Appiah-Kubi Millicent, Asante Raymond, Boadi Rachael, Asiedua-Ahenkorah
Lois and Owiredu Alfred.

Conflicts of Interest
The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

References
[1] Sharma, P.V. and Singh, P. (2015) Integrated Plastic Waste Management: Environ-
mental and Improved Health Approaches. Procedia Environmental Sciences, 35,

DOI: 10.4236/aces.2021.113015 248 Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science

 Y. R. Sam et al.

692-700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.proenv.2016.07.068
[2] Blanco, I., Loisi, R.V., Schettini, E., Sica, C. and Vox, G. (2018) Agricultural plastic
waste mapping using GIS—A case study in Italy. Resources, Conservation and Re-
cycling, 137, 229-242. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2018.06.008
[3] Snigdha, C. (2003) Economics of Solid Waste Management: A Survey of Existing
Literature.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/285232859_Economics_of_Solid_Waste_
Management_A_Survey_of_Existing_Literature
[4] Teye, R.N. (2012) Plastic Waste Management in Accra. Degree Thesis, Acarda Uni-
versity of Applied Science, Acard.
[5] Arena, U. (2012) Process and Technological Aspects of Municipal Solid Waste Ga-
sification Review. Waste Management, 32, 625-639.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wasman.2011.09.025
[6] Gheewala and Liamsanguan (2008) Incineration and Landfilling.
https://sites.google.com/a/owu.edu/ecology-project/home/incineration-and-landfilli
ng
[7] UNEP (2009) Converting Plastic Waste into Resources: Compendium of Technologies
Osaka.
https://wedocs.unep.org/bitstream/handle/20.500.11822/8638/WastePlasticsEST_Co
mpendium_full.pdf?sequence=3&isAllowed=y
[8] Mani, M., Nagarajan, G. and Sampath, S. (2011) Characterisation and Effect of Us-
ing Waste Plastic Oil and Diesel Fuel Blends in Compression Ignition Engine.
Energy, 36, 212-219. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.energy.2010.10.049
[9] Ajo, I.J., Anand, S., Amal, J., Cighil, T. and Sildarth, J. (2017) Waste Management
by Pyrolysis. International Journal of Advanced Research in Engineering and Man-
agement, 3, 60-64.
https://1library.net/document/q51x4k3y-waste-management-by-pyrolysis.html?utm
_source=related_list
[10] Sinnott, R.K. (2005) Coulson & Richardson’s Chemical Engineering Design. Elsevi-
er Coulson & Richardson’s Chemical Engineering Series, 6, 231, 477.
[11] Sinnot, R.K. (2013) Coulson and Richardson Chemical Engineering Design. 3rd
Edition, Butterworth Heinemann, London, 794-848.
[12] Bank of Ghana (2019) Monthly Interest Rates.
https://www.bog.gov.gh/economic-data/interest-rates/
[13] Daniel, A.C. and Joseph, F.L. (2011) Chemical Process Safety: Fundamentals with
Applications. 3rd Edition, Prentice Hall, Boston, United States.
[14] Agyemang, E.O., Awuah, E., Darkwah, L., Arthur, R. and Osei, G. (2013) Water Quality
Assessment of a Wastewater Treatment Plant in a Ghanaian Beverage Industry. In-
ternational Journal of Water Resources and Environmental Engineering, 5, 272-279.

DOI: 10.4236/aces.2021.113015 249 Advances in Chemical Engineering and Science