86 / 222
البحـث الأول
مجلة النفط والتعاون العربي
161
العدد
- 2017
أربعون
المجلد الثالث و ال
2016
أوابك العلمية لعام
�
ص لبحوث العلمية الفائزة بجائزة
�
عدد خا
79
69
All these questions have to be answered up front before alternative processes can
be pursued.
Different processing schemes were compared in a report that was presented to the
European Union in 2001 by the consultants TN Sofres
1
after surveying the
existing re-refining plants at the time. The results of this important report found:
-
New plant economics were not favourable without an initial subsidy of
10 to 100 Euros per ton of feed.
-
Re-refining plants cannot compete with the fuel combustion option due
to its low investment and sometimes tax advantages over lubricants.
Thermal cracking to make fuels were economic and needed no
subsidies.
-
The collection and delivery cost was in the range of 25 to 100 Euros per
ton of feed.
-
Consumers are apprehensive about re-refined lubricants which makes
re-refined base oil prices 10 to 25% less than those of virgin base oils.
The data presented in the study was used to generate parameters for 100 thousand
tons a year re-refinery using different processing scheme as shown in Table (14).
The so called waste oil fee or used oil fee is the difference between cost and
revenue. When this parameter is negative it means the plant does not need subsidy
contrary to when the value is positive. The breakeven point is when the used oil
fee is zero. If all conditions remain the same and the re-refining plant size reduced
to 35 thousand tons a year all the processing schemes will need subsidies to be
viable as shown in Table (15).