Hi Keith, --- Keith Addison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello Michael
> >And I think it is also thumbs up for Alek's > >esterification-transesterification process with the > >same CPO. (At least with a few local > modifications). > >Right now, the brew is in its finishing stages down > in > >the lab. I'll let you know how it goes. > > How did it go? A little perplexing. It worked quite well . . . on that occasion. But efforts to simplify the process have failed. It seems that someone out there keeps shifting the goal posts! Perhaps we did not note down a critical value or two . . . . . . . I think we have a time-temperature-concentration problem where several side reactions are possible. I also think we have established that there must always be excess methanol present so if temperatures rise to 70C, . . . . well we must be in trouble. And we find tht there are several products which will be quite stable at 70C . . . . shower-gel, shampoo, hard soap . . . . Incidentally, the identical process as gives trouble with 9% FFA works very well with 2.6% FFA CPO's We are still working on the problem. But thanks to you, we now have a relatively simple process which can be applied commercially (even if the losses are substantial). I refer to your saponification-transesterification proces (S=>T ??). For us, this process has the added advantage that it provides some feedback to the CPO producers about the excessive amounts of FFA they are producing. Much of this XS can be avoided by proper plant management anyway. It is also a simple extension of the process they already carry out to reduce FFA in their product (so why doesn't that produce the necessary feedback ????) > Bad news. That's what Aleks was saying about > stearin. He doesn't want > to have anything to do with it. And yet, perhaps due to its low FFA, we get a great product from palm-oil stearin. (We use the simple transesterification process). The product is still running that locomotive from Hadyai to Sungei Golok and back each day. But one early batch was "a tad crook" as my southern hemisphere friends might say. Incomplete reaction caused stearin to precipitate out and block the loco fuel filters. Not too serious but caused a premature oil filter change. The trick with stearin is to keep the temperature close to (or above) 65C. A cunning ploy is to introduce the methoxide into the bottom of a deep reactor. The hydrostatic pressure keeps the methanol liquid for a while and, as it boils, it exposes a much larger surface area to the oil. But a condenser is a useful addition to such a reactor anyway. We are now exploring a total reflux system in which the condensed methanol is pumped back to the bottom of the reactor rather than just letting it trickle back to the top surface. > Regards > > Keith And to you Michael Allen Thailand __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Sell a Home with Ease! http://us.click.yahoo.com/SrPZMC/kTmEAA/MVfIAA/9bTolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuels at Journey to Forever http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuel at WebConX http://www.webconx.dns2go.com/2000/biofuel/biofuel.htm List messages are archived at the Info-Archive at NNYTech: http://archive.nnytech.net/ To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
