Data similar to that presented above have also been accumulated on the Dodge pickups and used Chevrolet Malibus. The results of the oil analyses show no obvious differences from the wagons and trucks and are not presented in this preliminary report. Iowa Farm Survey One hundred farmers in each of four Iowa counties were selected at random and asked to complete a questionnaire. About 20 percent of the questionnaires were considered valid returns. Comparison with demographic and previous agricultural surveys showed very close agreement and indicated a representative sample. The average oil consumption per farmer is 50 gallons per year, with a range of 5 to 200 gallons per year. The mode is 30 gallons per year. This translates to an average of one quart per acre of land per year. The most common uses of the waste oil are prevention of rust, preservation of wood, and control of weeds and dust. A significantly large fraction (11 percent) of the farmers dump their oil on the ground in the farm yard area. The farmers who were collecting and using their waste oil for one of the above uses felt that they would continue to do so even if a recycle/collection service were established. two of the respondents felt that their method of disposal was harmful to the environment. Only Although generalizations on the reasons for purchasing a particular oil are of uncertain validity, the reasons cited by the respondents were (in order of frequency of response): Society of Automotive Engineers' service designation, the brand their dealer handles, the equipment manufacturers' recommendation, and the brand name. There was a decided reluctance to indicate willingness to purchase re-refined oil because of the large equipment investment involved and because of doubt that waste oil could be restored to original quality. The economics of collecting oil from farmers on a "milk route" type of operation are quite unfavorable. Assuming an operator could collect 20 gallons per location and could stop at another location every 10 minutes, the transportation cost alone would be $0.31 per gallon, based on standard trucking industry costs of $1.86 per mile [3]. Pickup by the local service station delivery truck would therefore seem to be the only viable method of collection. A maximum of about 1.3 million gallons per year would be available from farmers in Iowa by any collection method. This represents about 20 percent of their total consumption. Conclusion These results are preliminary, and final conclusions will not be drawn until deposit and wear ratings are completed. The re-refined oils are now performing satisfactorily in extended oil drain operation. The total base number of the virgin oil is substantially lower than that of the re-refined products, but no operational difficulties have been observed as a result. The most serious observation (but not a new observation) is that operating performance of an oil may not be adequately insured by any bid specifications in use today, whether the oil is from virgin or re-refined stock. Low-cost methods of testing for quality are needed for both virgin and re-refined products. References [1] Whisman, M. L., et al., Waste Lubricating Oil Research, Some Innovative Approaches to Reclaiming Used Crankcase Oil, U.S. Bureau of Mines, RI:7925 (1974). [2] [3] Asseff, P. A., Used Engine Oil Analyses, SAE Paper No. 770642 (Review, Environmental Quality Systems, Inc., Waste Oil Recovery Practices, State of the Art, Report to the Environmental Protection Agency, PB-229-801 (1972). National Bureau of Standards Special Publication 556. Proceedings of PHILLIPS RECYCLED OIL PROGRAM R. E. Linnard Phillips Petroleum Company 430 TRW Building Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74004 Many of you are aware that Phillips has announced the commercialization of used automotive oil re-refining technology aimed at restoring these lubricants to their "virgin" oil quality. If you have noted the press and trade journal announcements of recent months, you also know that Phillips has a recycled oil plant under construction for 1978 delivery to the State of North Carolina. Since we are here to exchange ideas and experiences on used oil recycling for the benefit and advancement of the National Bureau of Standards' (NBS) program under Mr. Donald Becker's charge, I have agreed to provide you with some background on the Phillips Re-refined Oil Process (PROP), to tell you why Phillips chose to become involved, to address the principal technical concerns that now impede progress in this recycling movement, and to present data including engine sequence test results on the recycled North Carolina waste oil as processed in our pilot plant at the Phillips Research Center. Phillips' decision to commercialize the PROP process is based in part on (1) recognition of its potential contribution to resource and energy conservation, and (2) our development of advanced technology that provides for economical restoration of waste automotive oils to the high quality of their "virgin" oil counterparts. The rerefining processes involved are innovative, sufficiently sophisticated so as to avoid environmental and ecological pitfalls, provide for a high degree of oil recovery, are economically attractive to major re-refining interests. and Phillips' management supports this program as being consistent with the resource conservation goals of our Federal Government as reflected in section 383 of the Energy Policy and Conservation Act of 1975, and as being supportive of the intent of the bills introduced in the 95th Congress, most often referred to as the "Mitchell Bill" (H.R. 5350), which require preferential emphasis on recycled oils in Federal procurement of lubricants beginning in 1978. We expect that used lubricating oils will be classified as hazardous materials within the solid wastes definitions arising out of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Certainly, this gives added impetus to the urgency of the NBS charge to develop test procedures for the determination of substantial new and recycled oil equivalency that would encourage further activity in the re-refining area. Used automotive oils deserve some thing better than ultimate disposal as hazardous materials. They become waste materials only if they are wasted--as they are when disposed of in municipal and industrial wastes eventually incinerated or included in sanitary landfills. Today I want to deal with what I see as the three principal concerns that are inevitably expressed when discussing the acceptability of recycled oils. These concerns are not necessarily unlike those associated with the refining and blending of virgin basestocks with additives as premium-quality motor oils. The general areas to which I refer are (1) the constancy of acceptable raw material or charge stock for the refining process, (2) the sophistication and efficacy of the processing, and (3) the blending with additives and the testing of the end product to demonstrate the attainment of desired quality. The Phillips PROP technology and our contractual approach to the recycling of used automotive oils impinges on all three concerns, and I want to comment on each. The first is the matter of charge stock to the PROP process. In the manufacture of virgin base oils, we have long told ourselves that the constancy of the crude source as a charge stock to the refining process is a desirable ingredient. Certainly, we must all agree to this principle. Yet in recent times, many refiners have been forced to make minor to major adjustments in crude sources for continued operation. These range from imported crude substitution to more subtle changes in production sites or producing zones of individual fields within the industry-recognized but broad geographical descriptions indicated on the application forms for formulation approvals. The degree to which these changes, as they affect lubricant quality, have been evaluated and revealed to those issuing approvals can only by individual marketers. answered I make these comments to suggest the possibility of a double standard in this matter of charge stocks to the refining or re-refining process. I hope you have noted in my earlier remarks that the PROP process is being offered initially for the recycling of drain oils from automotive equipment--and that this is a significant condition of our PROP performance assurances to those who contract for our technology with the intent of ultimately blending oils of premium quality. With American Petroleum Institute service SE and military specification quality in mind, the intent at this time is to purposely exclude the intrusion of substantial amounts of industrial and processing oils, metal-working oils, and similar materials that might substantially alter the high viscosity index, paraffinic nature of recycled automotive oils. Thus, with the used oil charge stock essentially restricted to automotive sources, we anticipate an acceptable constancy in charge stock composition to the PROP process. Date shown in table 1 indicate the variability of the used oils charged to the many batches of oil processed in our pilot plant during the past several months. Major variations involved degree of water (and antifreeze) contamination, fuel dilution, lead levels, and viscosity. Keep these variations in mind. Processed oil data that I will show you later indicate that the PROP process can easily absorb these variations in charge stock without significant differences in recycled product quality. This Certainly, we expect this will be true for our North Carolina venture. 2,000,000 gallons-per-year plant will be operated initially by Prison Enterprises on a single-shift, 5-day-per-week basis, at an anticipated 500,000 gallons-peryear output. Its charge stock will be comprised of the oil drainings from the 97,000 pieces of State-owned equipment, ranging from passenger cars to dump trucks. North Carolina's used oil collection and recycled oil delivery procedures dove-tail into already established Statewide county delivery systems. However fortuitous this may be for our first PROP plant, this advantage is not necessarily unique to the State of North Carolina, nor is it essential to the economic viability of the PROP program. The second area of concern is the matter of confidence in the re-refining process itself if you are to accept its products on a par with "virgin" oil quality. Many of us have long been scripted, to use transactional analysis terminology, to look with a jaundiced eye on re-refined oils. At this group's first conference last year, Mr. Hugh Kaufman had words of admonishment on this very point. Past experience suggests some re-refiners marketed products that were little more than oil drainings processed only to the extent necessary to restore some degree of color and clarity. This is an unfortunate legacy to which Phillips intends to make no contribution. Ours is not a marginal process. PROP plants will provide for the elimination of contaminants and degredation products of prior use and for the neutralization and finishing so as to restore the inherent properties of the original base oils. These data (table 2) show the range of physical characteristics for the recycled base oil products of a dozen or more pilot-plant runs, most of which represent North Carolinasupplied oil drains, but which also include representative samples of waste oils currently being collected by several domestic re-refiners. A quick comparison to our virgin base oil suggests it is very difficult to distinguish between the properties of the re-refined oil and the base oil. This is similarly indicated by comparing the infrared scan (figure 1) for our premium-quality motor oil basestock and a similar scan (figure 2) for a PROPprocessed composite sample of the same oil after use, as collected by a local service station. Solvent extraction and/or acid/clay processes are not incorporated in the PROP process, thus avoiding the environmental and ecological concerns that may be involved with such processes. Ninety-percent oil recovery is realized in this continuous process design. Solid wastes, low in volume, are suitable for conventional disposal in sanitary landfills; gaseous and liquid effluents are either recycled in the process or are dischargeable into municipal sewers. The third area and one of greatest concern to many of you here is that of proof of performance quality. Our alternative to divulging proprietary details of the re-refining process is assurance of plant performance in terms of demonstrated quality of the final blended product. In the case of the North Carolina project, this means American Petroleum Institute service SE/CC or perhaps SE/CD quality. At this point I wish I could tell you we also have the answer to Mr. Becker's prayer, namely, inexpensive, simple test procedures for the determination of substantial equivalency of re-refined oils with new oil for all end uses. We do not have this simple, inexpensive answer. The timetables of our process development program and our contractual commitments do not allow for our awaiting for this cooperative accomplishment yet to come from conferences such as this and the technical society involvements they engender. But do not misunderstand me--to us, as well as to the NBS, the need is obvious. In lieu of such yet-to-be found tests, we simply proceeded with the evaluation of recycled-re fortified oil formulations in the same manner that we develop motor oils blended with our "virgin" base oils. |