Solvent Recovery Strategies for the Sustainable Design … Presentation/Prof... · 1 BMS...

1 BMS Confidential PUBD 13745

Solvent Recovery Strategies for the

Sustainable Design of APIs

Mariano J. Savelski and C. Stewart Slater

Rowan University, Department of Chemical Engineering

USA

The 11th Annual Green Chemistry & Engineering Conference

Chemspec Europe

Green Chemistry & Engineering Workshop

Munich, Germany

June 5, 2013


Rowan University

• Located in New Jersey

• Formerly Glassboro State

College

(September 4, 1923)

• Summit between

President Lyndon Johnson

& Soviet Premier

Aleksei Kosygin in 1967


Rowan

Engineering

• Henry Rowan Gift in 1992

of $100 Million

• First Graduating Class in 2000

• Primary focus on undergraduate

education

– Small class sizes

– Student-faculty interaction

– Educational innovation

and novel pedagogy


Overview

• Introduction to Solvent Use

• Life Cycle Analysis

• Solvent Reduction / Recovery

• Rowan Green Engineering Case Studies

– Bristol-Myers Squibb

– Pfizer

• Selamectin

• Hydrocortisone

• Nelfinavir

– PennAkem

• Software Tool


Academic-Industrial Interaction

• Process case studies with a green chemistry and engineering component

• Three pharmaceutical company partners

– Bristol-Myers Squibb*

– Pfizer

– PennAKem (Memphis, TN)

• Project outcomes show P2 impact

– Waste reduced

– Energy saved

– Carbon footprint reduced

– Cost saved

B

R

P

Slater and Savelski, “Partnerships between Academia and the Pharmaceutical Industry to Advance Green Engineering,” EPA

Conference on Creating Business Value: Green Quality through Green Chemistry and Green Engineering in the Pharmaceutical

Industry, New York, NY, January 2008


Pharmaceutical Industry

• Highly regulated

• Long R&D timeline

• High valued final product (API)

• Batch processes

• Multi-step transformations and isolations

• Solvents used vary in quantity and complexity for each step

• High E-factor

– High solvent use and waste generated per final product


Typical Drug Synthesis – “Campaigns”

• Multi-step transformations – Intermediate compounds

• Isolations (purification)

ReactionCrystallization/

Recrystallization

Filtration or

Wash StepDIstillation

R-1 API

WasteWaste

I-1 I-1

Crystallization/

Recrystallization

I-5 I-5

S-16 R-5 S-15 S-2 S-1

Filtration

Waste

S-17

I-5

Reaction

I-1 I-5

S = Solvent – vary in number and complexity for each step

R = Reactant – vary in number and complexity for each step

I = Intermediate

API = Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient


Solvent Issues

• Solvent use can account for up to 80-90% of total mass of an API synthesis

– Majority are organic solvents

• Solvent implications over life cycle

– Purchase cost, energy, waste generated

– Cost to use (energy and associated costs)

– Disposal cost and emissions

• E-Factor 25->100 kg/kg of API

• Not optimal by any standard

Sheldon, Chem . Indus., 1 (1997) 12

Slater and Savelski, J. Environ. Sci. Health, A42 (2007) 1595-1605


Pharma Industry Profile

• US EPA Toxic

Release Inventory

(TRI) 2010

• 71 MM kg waste

• Top ten solvents

account for 94% of

waste

TRI.NET. Washington (DC): Environmental Protection Agency (US), Office of

Environmental Information. 2010

Methanol

Dichloromethane

Toluene

Acetonitrile

Chloroform

Formic Acid

N,N-Dimethylformiamide

N-methyl-2-pyrrolidone Cyclohexane

Ammonia MTBE

Other Solvents


Pharma Industry Profile

Between 2001 and 2010,

the mass of waste from

the top 20 TRI chemicals

from the pharmaceutical

sector has decreased

from 227 MM kg to 71

MM kg

From 2001 to 2010, the

top 4 TRI chemicals were

the same

0

50

100

150

200

250

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Mass o

f S

olv

en

t W

aste

(M

Mkg

)

Year

0.0

20.0

40.0

60.0

80.0

100.0

120.0

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2010

Mas

s o

f So

lven

t W

aste

(M

Mkg

/yr)

Top 4 TRI Organic Solvents

Methanol Toluene Dichloromethane Acetonitrile


Life Cycle System Boundaries

Raw Materials

Solvent

Manufacturing

Utilities

API

Manufacture

Waste

Incineration

Emissions

Emissions

Emissions

Emissions

Slater and Savelski, Innov. Pharma. Tech., 29 (2009) 78-83.

CRADLE GRAVE


Life Cycle Emissions

• Based on values for a single

pharmaceutical production

facility (from average of reported

historic TRI data)

• Life cycle emissions equal

3.4 MM kg/year

– 75% of emissions result from

manufacture and incineration

of solvents

– Solvent use may account for

80-90% of the total mass in an

API synthesis

• High potential for “green”

process improvements

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

Manufacture Incineration In Process Use

Emis

sio

ns

(MM

kg)

36%

39%

25%

Manufacture

Incineration

In Process Use

Emissions = 3.4 MM kg

Jimenez-Gonzalez, Curzons, Constable, and Cunningham, Int J LCA, 9 (2) (2004) 114-121


Water6%

Air94%

Solvent Life Cycle Inventory - Cradle

Total Air Emissions kg 1.78

CO2 Emissions kg 1.75

CO Emissions kg 2.61E-03

Methane Emissions kg 1.28E-02

NOX Emissions kg 4.42E-03

NMVOC Emissions kg 1.97E-03

Particulate Emissions kg 1.40E-03

SO2 Emissions kg 5.89E-03

Total Water Emissions kg 1.22E-01

VOC Emissions kg 5.01E-07

Total Soil Emissions kg 1.66E-04

Total Emissions kg 1.91

Based on

manufacture of 1 kg

of “Generic”

Solvent Soil

<0.01%

CO2 is 92% of life

cycle emissions

SimaPro 7.1 (Pré Consultants, Amersfoort, Netherlands)


In-Process Use – Energy Profile

• Energy use

– Mixing

– Fluid transport

– Pumping, Conveying

– Temperature control

– Heating, Cooling

– Drying

– Filtration

– Other unit operations

– Mechanical Equipment

Kim and Overcash, J Chem Technol Biotechnol, 78 (2003) 995-1005

Emissions depend on

source of energy

generation (fuel, etc)


Solvent Life Cycle Inventory - Grave

Total Air Emissions kg 2.24

CO2 Emissions kg 1.49

CO Emissions kg 2.29E-05

Methane Emissions kg 0.00

NOX Emissions kg 2.73E-03

NMVOC Emissions kg 3.13E-06

Particulate Emissions kg 3.81E-05

SO2 Emissions kg 0.00

Total Water Emissions kg 3.44E-04

VOC Emissions kg 0.00

Total Soil Emissions kg 0.00

Total Emissions kg 2.24

Based on

Incineration of 1 kg

of “Generic”

Solvent

Water and Soil

<0.01%


Optimization of Solvent Use

• Greener solvent selection / solvent

substitution – Reduce solvent’s carbon footprint

– Elimination of highly hazardous solvents

• Solvent reduction – Recovery techniques

– Novel approaches to separations

– Telescoping

– Novel reaction media (ionic liquids)

– Biocatalytic routes

– Solid-state chemistry

Slater, Savelski, Carole, Constable, Chapter 3, in Green Chemistry in the Pharmaceutical

Industry, Dunn, Wells, Williams, Eds., Wiley-VCH Verlag Publishers, (2010) 49-82.


Green Eng the “Avg” Pharma Facility

• Solvent Recovery Scenario – 80% of solvent waste is recovered and

recycled back into the process

• “Greener” Solvent Scenario – Solvents that release fewer emissions during

manufacture and incineration are employed in the process, replacing the original solvents

• Telescoping Scenario – A process employing multiple steps is

reduced to a process employing 2/3 the number of steps

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6


MM

kg

of

Em

issi

on

s

BASE BA SE

GREENGREEN

UNCHANGED

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6


MM

kg

of

Em

issi

on

s

BASE

BASE

UNCHANGED

GREENGREEN

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6


MM

kg

of

Em

issi

on

s

BASE BASE

GREENGREEN

BASE

GREEN

Solvent Recovery Scenario “Greener” Solvent Scenario

Telescoping Scenario


Green Eng the “Avg” Pharma Facility

• Total Life Cycle

Emissions: 78%

reduction

– Base Case Scenario:

3.4 MM kg

– Best Scenario: 0.76

MM kg

– Total Reduction:

2.65 MM kg

Best Scenario

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6


MM

kg o

f E

mis

sion

s

GREENGREENGREEN

BASE BASE BASE

• Manufacture Emissions: 96% reduction

• Incineration Emissions: 90% reduction

• In Process Use Emissions: 34% reduction

Best case: Implementation of all three green scenarios


Solvent Waste Management Trends

• ~70% of waste is treated or recycled*

• ~30% of waste is used for energy recovery*

• Only a small percent is directly released into

the environment

• Incineration remains the disposal method of

choice

– CO2 emissions

– Heat recovery

• Increasing trend towards solvent recovery

Lopez, Toxic Release Inventory, US EPA, 2006


Solvent Recovery

• Solvent recovery has increased, On-site and Off-site

recovery facilities

• Distillation still dominates - straightforward separation

for ideal mixtures

• Pharmaceutical wastes typically contain

– Multiple solvents

– Azeotropic mixtures

– Unconverted reactants, etc

• Complex separation trains to obtain high quality

solvent for reuse

• Centralized solvent recovery facility > New approach -

integrate separation processes at the point of use

Slater, Savelski, Carole, Constable, Chapter 3, in Green Chemistry in the Pharmaceutical Industry,

Dunn, Wells, Williams, Eds., Wiley-VCH Verlag Publishers, (2010) 49-82.


Solvent Recovery

• Azeotropic separations pose the most

challenge in processing

• Entrainer-based distillation

– More energy intensive

– Entrainers pose additional source of

pollution

• Membrane pervaporation is a “greener”

alternative for azeotropic separations

Wilson Pressure Analysis

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Mass Fraction IPA in Liquid

Mass F

racti

on

IP

A in

Vap

or

760 torr

150 torr

3 bar

10 bar

25 bar

45 deg


Pervaporation Membrane Processes

Water = blue

Solvent = green

www.sulzerchemtech.com

• Applications: - Selective solvent-water

separations / Dehydration

- Azeotrope separations

• Advantages: - Energy savings over distillation

- No entrainer (e.g., benzene) needed for azeotropic separations

- Solvent reuse; solvent savings

- Avoid solvent disposal / solvent thermal oxidation


PV Process Integration

Solvent-water

waste stream

Pervaporation

Dehydrated

solvent for reuse

Solvent-water

azeotropic mixture

Low flow rate

stream: water with

some solvent

Typical Solvents

• Isopropanol (az)

• Ethanol (az)

• Methanol

• Ethyl acetate

• Butyl acetate

• Acetone

• Acetronitrile (az)

• Tetrahydrofuran (az)

• n-Butanol

• Methylethylketone (az)

Slater and Savelski, Innov. Pharma. Tech., 29 (2009) 78-83.


Case Studies

Solvent Recovery

• Bristol-Myers Squibb – THF/Water

• Pfizer – Celecoxib – IPA/Water

• Pfizer – Selamectin – Acetone/Acetonitrile

• Pfizer – Nelfinavir – THF/IPA

• Pfizer – Hydrocortisone – Acetone/Toluene

Green Solvent Assessment

• PennAkem – MeTHF vs THF


Bristol-Myers Squibb

• Integration of PV technology with a Constant

Volume Distillation (CVD) operation

• One step in synthesis of new oncology drug

• Current process: Decrease water content in

THF solvent phase to 0.5%

– Requires 13.9 kg THF/kg API

7.85 kg THF entrainer/kg API

– Generates 9.2 kg Waste/kg API

• LCI / LCA analysis indicates emissions are

significant based on solvent life cycle

Slater, Savelski, Moroz, Raymond, Green Chem. Lett. Reviews 5 (2012), 55-64

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.istockphoto.com/file_thumbview_approve/338082/2/Drugs___pills.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.istockphoto.com/imageindex/338/0/338082/&h=203&w=270&sz=10&tbnid=_YZBDkmgNzkJ:&tbnh=81&tbnw=108&hl=en&start=1&prev=/images?q=drugs+pills&svnum=10&hl=en&lr=&sa=G


Bristol-Myers Squibb cont.

Basis: 68 kg API / batch

6.1 kg THF/kg API; 56% reduction

0.65 kg Waste/kg API; 93% reduction

0 kg THF Entrainer/kg API; 100% reduction


CVD PV

Proposed CVD-PV Hybrid Process





1615

19

267

3697

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

THF Waste Disposal

Co

st (

$)

With Pervaporation Current


• Reductions in THF

used and waste

produced

• Environmental

savings

• Cost savings

• But this is only one

part of story

414

44

626

948

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

THF Purchased Wastekilo

gra

ms

With Pervaporation Current


.


Life Cycle Inventory Comparison

Total CVD Life Cycle Emissions:

4,390 kg, 64.6 kg waste/kg API

Total CVD-PV Life Cycle Emissions:

272 kg, 4.0 kg waste/kg API


Waste = 5.5%

THF = 68.5%

Steam 26%

Total Emissions Due to Waste Treatment

Total Emissions Due to THF

Total Emissions Due to Steam

Waste < 1%

Electricity = 9.2%

Steam = 82%

THF = 8.3%

Total Emissions Due to Waste Treatment

Total Emissions Due to THF

Total Emissions Due to Electricity

Total Emissions Due to Steam


Pfizer – Celecoxib

• Investigate solvent recovery

alternatives to minimize waste from

the Celecoxib manufacturing

process

• Compare current process route

with green engineering options

– Recovery of isopropanol from water, other alcohols and dissolved solids

– Multiple waste streams with varying compositions

– Azeotropic mixtures add complexity

Wilson Pressure Analysis

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1

Mass Fraction IPA in Liquid

Mas

s F

racti

on

IP

A i

n V

ap

or

760 torr

150 torr

3 bar

10 bar

25 bar

45 deg


Pfizer – Celecoxib cont.

• IPA solvent recovery from

final purification steps

• Segregate waste streams for best process design – Dryer Distillates and

(Centrifuge) Wash

– Mother Liquor

• Pre-concentration for Incineration or Sale

• Integration of existing

separation equipment

inventory at plant

Slater, Savelski, Hounsell, Pilipauskas, Urbanski, Clean Technol. Environ. Policy, 14 (2012) 687-698

Centrifuge

IPA / Water

Washes

50% IPA

50% Water IPA / Water Washes

49.2% IPA

49.6% H2O

0.71% MeOH & EtOH

0.5% TDS

Mother Liquor

34.5% IPA

45.2% H2O

8.45% MeOH

2.71% EtOH

9.10% TDS

Dryer

Wet Product

Solids

Dryer Distillates

50.7% IPA

48.8% H2O

0.47% MeOH & EtOH

0% TDS

Celecoxib

Conc.

& Sell ML

Recovery

Solvents

Water

API

Other



• Base case

• Various design alternatives simulated with ASPEN

– Distillation (Distill)-Pervaporation (PV) and Distill-PV-Distill

– Distill-Molecular Sieve Adsorption

• Sale of Mother Liquor or incineration options

• Detailed analysis shown for

– Distill–PV–Distill with Mother Liquor (ML) Sold




• Purification for only part of waste stream

– Centrifuge wash and Dyer distillates for recovery

– Mother liquor for (sale) use as generic solvent

• Overall 57% IPA recovered @ 99.1 wt% for reuse in process

• Other options of Distill-PV or PV only, yield different recoveries and purities

Water Waste

With TDS

Celecoxib

Waste

IPA

Product

Initial Distillation

Alcohol Waste

Second Distillation

Vacuum Pump Vacuum Pump

Design basis of 1000 kg waste/hr


Proposed Distillation-PV-Distillation Process


Life Cycle Inventory Comparison

IPA Manufacture 40%

Incineration 60%

ML Distillation

19%

IPA Manufacture

59%

Dist-PV-Dist 22%

Total Base Case Emissions: 13.7 MM kg/yr

Total Dist-PV-Dist Emissions:

1.12 MM kg/yr


12.63 MM kg/y emissions reduced

(92% decrease)

11.55 MM kg/y CO2 reduced

(95% decrease)


Economic Analysis

-1,000,000

0

1,000,000

2,000,000

3,000,000

4,000,000

5,000,000

6,000,000

Base Case Distil-PV-Distil-Sell ML

Design Case

An

nu

al

Co

st

ML Concentrate sale

Membrane Modules

Operating Labor

Maintenance

Cooling Water

Electricity

Steam

Waste Disposal

Fresh IPA

72% Annual Cost

Savings


$3.82 MM/yr operating cost saving


Case Study - Pfizer’s LVWS

Case Selamectin Nelfinavir Hydrocortisone

Waste Composition

Acetone-

Acetonitrile

(28-72 wt.%)

THF-IPA

(14-86 wt.%)

Acetone-Toluene

(9-91 wt.%)

Waste Mass (kg/yr) 84,500 78,700 257,600

Desired Recovery Acetonitrile at

99 wt.% IPA at 98 wt.%

Toluene at

99 wt.%

Life Cycle Carbon

Footprint Savings

(MMkg CO2eq./yr)

235.8 220.2 1,161

Cumulative Energy

Savings (TJ/yr) 3.9 3.5 16.3

Cost Savings (k$/yr) 215.5 98.7 271.1

Recovery Method: Simple Distillation


Pfizer’s LVWS

0

2,00,000

4,00,000

6,00,000

8,00,000

10,00,000

12,00,000

14,00,000

Base Case Recovery Case Base Case Recovery Case Base Case Recovery Case

Selamectin Nelfinavir Hydrocortisone

To

tal L

ife

Cyc

le E

mis

sio

ns

(k

g/y

r)

Utilities

Incineration

Raw Materials


PennAKem Case – Green Solvent

Solvent Chemical

THF ecoTHFTM ecoMeTHFTM

Total Raw Materials Used, kg 4.01E+00 5.33E+02 1.21E+02

Total CED, MJ-Eq 1.32E+02 6.15E+00 -2.00E+01

Total Air Emissions, kg 5.52E+00 1.45E+00 1.62E-01

CO2, kg 5.46E+00 1.39E+00 1.50E-01

Total Water Emissions, kg 1.26E-01 3.41E-02 2.73E-02

Total Soil Emissions, kg 2.31E-03 2.08E-03 1.94E-03

Total Emissions, kg 5.65E+00 1.49E+00 1.91E-01

Production Routes

• Chemical THF: 1,4 butanediol => THF

• ecoTHFTM : Corn Cobs Waste => Furfural => Furan => THF

• ecoMeTHFTM : Corn Cobs Waste => Furfural => Methyl Furan => 2-MeTHF

ecoMeTHFTM is 30 times more environmentally friendly than chemical THF

ecoMeTHFTM as a green solvent – Manufacture LCA


Pennakem Case – Green Solvent

0.00E+00

2.00E-01

4.00E-01

6.00E-01

8.00E-01

1.00E+00

1.20E+00

1.40E+00

ecoTHF (Extractive Distillation) ecoTHF (Dist+PV) ecoMeTHF

kg

to

tal

life

cyc

le e

mis

sio

ns

/ k

g

so

lve

nt

Recovery

Raw Materials and Incineration

ecoMeTHFTM as a green solvent – Recovery from water

• 2-MeTHF is more easily recovered than THF due to

heterogeneous system

• Pervaporation shows an environmental advantage over

extractive distillation (in THF recovery)


Case Studies Conclusions

• Solvent recovery / reduction systems can be designed to

target the most common and/or environmentally unfriendly

solvents

• Solvent manufacture and incineration play a significant

role in the life cycle emissions of an API

• These emissions can be reduced by implementing a

solvent recovery / reduction system

• The environmental potential of implementing the solvent

recovery system is significantly increased by examining all

possible applications

• By looking at the entire life cycle these emission

reductions become apparent


R.SWEED Software tool

• Modular software to be implemented in industry

– Combine design software (ASPEN®) and LCA software

(SimaPro®)

– User friendly interface (Excel®)

• Aid design of solvent recovery systems

– Determines recovery process based on thermodynamics

• Predict resulting emissions reductions

• Predict economic benefits

• Environmental and economic optimization



ASPEN Plus®

ASW/Excel

Simple Distillation



y = 2,13,154x5 - 9,70,290x4 + 17,64,345x3 - 16,01,961x2 + 7,26,280x - 1,31,529 R² = 1

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

0.8 0.825 0.85 0.875 0.9 0.925 0.95 0.975 1

Wa

ter

Flu

x (

kg

/m2h

)

XIPA

Pervaporation Modeling – Transport through membrane

Data Fitting – Pervaporation membrane Sulzer’s PERVAP 2201

T = 90 °C



A1 A2 A3 A4 A5

P1 P2 P3 P4 P5

F,T1R1,T2 R2,T3 R3,T4 R4,T5 R5,T6

Pervaporation Modeling – Unit Design

Mass Balance

Energy Balance



Pervaporation Modeling – Tool Screenshot



Maximum Life Cycle Emissions Avoided RR = 9

LC E

mis

sio

ns

Avo

ide

d (

kg/h

r) &

Op

erat

ing

Co

st S

avin

gs (

$/h

r)

Process Optimization – Optimum Reflux Ratio


0.0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2 3 4 5 6 7 8

LC

Em

iss

ion

s A

vo

ide

d (

kg

/hr)

& O

pera

tin

g C

ost

Sa

vin

gs

(U

SD

/yr)

Feed Stage

Operating Cost Savings

LCA Avoided Emissions

Recovery

Re

cove

ry


Process Optimization – Optimum Feed Stage

Maximum Life Cycle Emissions Avoided and Cost Savings Feed Stage = 4


“Plant of the Future”

• Green concepts integrated in drug

development → more sustainable

manufacturing platform

• Limited number of ‘universal’ green solvents

utilized

– Properties allow for easy recovery

– Used with other campaigns

• Integrated solvent recovery systems

• Continuous processing simplifies recovery

design strategies

• Energy exchange networks

Slater and Savelski, Innov Pharma Tech, 29 (2009) 78


Acknowledgements

Bristol-Myers Squibb

San Kiang, Thomas LaPorte, Lori Spangler, Stephan Taylor

Pfizer

Peter Dunn, Greg Hounsell, Daniel Pilipauskas, Frank Urbanski

PennAKem

Steve Prescott, Dave Aycock, Bogdan Comanita, Jeff Shifflette

U.S. EPA Region 2

Grants NP97257006-0 and NP97212311-0 Rowan University

Students

UPDATE Scott Barnes, William Carole,

Anthony Furiato, Kyle Lynch, Colleen McGinness, Timothy Moroz, Michael Raymond, David Walsh


Further Reading


How the Tool Works Solvent Recovery Processes

Mixture

Classifier

Solvents in

Waste

Solvent Recovery

Process Selection


Economic Analysis

-$2,000,000.00

-$1,500,000.00

-$1,000,000.00

-$500,000.00

$0.00

$500,000.00

$1,000,000.00

$1,500,000.00

$2,000,000.00

0 10000 20000 30000 40000 50000 60000 70000 80000 90000 100000

kg Solvent

$

TAS

NPV

• Not economical

at pilot scale

• Economic

feasibility

NPV=TAS

– 12,000 kg API/yr

– 72,000 kg/yr THF

or other solvent

processed


THF

Water THF

Trace water

1,2-

Propanediol

WASTE

Extractive

Distillation

Pervaporation

THF

Water

THF

Trace Water

Water

THF

No

Recovery

THF

Water

THF

Water

WASTE RECOVER

Y

RECOVER

Y

RECOVER

Y

Green Integration Illustrative Example Process optimization

Emissions reduction

Cost savings

Energy savings

Date post:	06-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	nguyenquynh
View:	223 times
Download:	3 times

Solvent Recovery Strategies for the Sustainable Design … Presentation/Prof... · 1 BMS...

Documents