Discussion

In this section, we assess and examine the sustainability of conventional and creative

method in terms of environment, social and energy aspect. Life Cycle Assessment is

used to quantified the sustainability on a life cycle basis. LCA is a compilation and

evaluation of the inputs, outputs and the potential impacts of a product or a service

throughout its life cycle.

By judging these three aspects, they will then be compared between conventional and

creative method before concluding which method is more sustainable

Environment Aspect
Similarity

Conventional Creative

Global impact

 Resource depletion

 Fossil fuel is being harvested constantly for energy generation. It

causes decreased resources for future generations.

 Global warming

 Carbon emission increases due to the burning of fossil fuel.

Accumulation of green house gases resulted in more heat being

trapped in the earth.

  Near the poles, ice and frozen ground are melting. This causes

changes in the habitat and resources for plants and animals living

there.

 Ocean warming, rising sea levels, runoff, and coral diseases are

causing change in shallow marine environments such as coral reefs.

Local impact

 Air pollution

 Dust and burned solid waste from burning cause the Air Pollution

Index (API) in the local area rises significantly.

 Presence of dust and solid particulate may block the plant

respiration.

 Harmful pollutants can be absorbed from the water or soil and thus

disturb the surrouding ecosystem.

Differences

Conventional Creative

No hazardous chemical Flammable chemical

 Only water is used for the  It is highly flammable therefore it

purification. Thus this process must be stored in a insulated

does not contain any harmful container at low temperature to

chemical. prevent fire.

 Below is the Material Safety Data

Sheet (MSDS).

Used fossil fuel for heat Used by-product for energy

generation. generation.

 Fossil fuels does not obtain from  By-product, methanol produced

the system’s process. It is less from glycerol process is used for

environmental friendly as a new heat generation. It is

resource is introduced for heat environmental friendly as it does

generation. not outsource other energy

resources.

No recycle system Recycle system

 No recycled is used for the  Resin is being recycled continuosly

process. for the ion exchange process. It

minimises the resin input in

overall.

After justification, we concluded that the creative method is more sustainable in terms

of environment aspect because the creative method uses its own by-product to

generate enegry while conventional method uses fossil fuel to generate energy.

Besides, the creative method has a recycle system to minimise the resin input for ion
exchange process. In long term, creative method is more eco-friendly as it does not

produce much waste while the conventional method produces high amount of waste

as the chemical materials are not being reused.

Social Aspect

Photochemical smog

Smog is released from the combustion chamber. Both innovative and

conventioanl processes uses combustion method to generate energy. Presence

of smog decreases the public’s visibility. It may increase the rate road accidents

in the local area.

Besides, local public health will be affected and may have increased possibility

of getting lung disease such as asthma, bronchitis, emphysema, and possibly

cancer.
Energy Aspect

Energy Yield (Only include the

manufacturing process)

160
140
120
Energy Yield

100
80
60
40
20
0
Conventional Process Innovative Process
Series1 9.44 149

Based on the chart above, we can clearly see that the innovative process has higher

energy yield compared to conventional process. The energy yield of innovative process

is more than conventional process by 139.56. This is because the innovative process

uses ion exchange process for purification which does not require much heat energy

(121 KJ used). However, the conventional uses distillation process which requires high

amount of heat enegry (1.91 MJ used). This shows that innovative process has

successfully created a new method to purify the glycerol with high energy yield.
 Energy Yield (From crade to grave)

260
250
240
Energy Yield

230
220
210
200
190
Conventional Process Innovative Process
Series1 213 252

This chart shows the overall energy yield ranging from milling, biodiesel production,

transportation through piping, glycerol purification and transporatation through tank.

The previous energy yield could not be used for justification because it does not

include other indirect or direct process related to glycerol purification. In this crade to

grave analysis, the energy yield of innovative process is more than conventional

process by 39. The difference of energy yield has reduced compared to manufacturing

processes’ energy yield is because the indirect and direct process such as

transportation and milling requires high energy input. Therefore, the innovative

process is more sustainable in terms of energy yield.

Based on environemnt and energy aspect, innovative process is more susitainable

than conventional process. However, we could not justify it in terms of social aspects

due to lack of real scenario data. In conclusion, by neglecting the social factor, we

justify that the innovation process is more sustainable than conventional process in

overall.