- Introduction split into biodiesel + glycerol part.

- 240 C can't go into compressor

- Peristaltic pump can't for continuous operation?

- Relook into block diagram, with regard to column naming and output directions (up = vapor, down = erthing else)

- Change the everything with the "for simulation purposes" bullshit into something else, like assumptions or sources. For example, "as specified by IEM" -> "source: IEM"

- Need to give source for conversion ratio

- Use consistent naming, don't use general terms EVER (like soap, don't use that term)

- Need residence time and density/specific gravity of liquids, during the multiphase formation period

- HOTWATER can be directly used to heat up glycerol at the start, no need compression or heating

- Need to specify pressure drop at the vacuum to go from 0 barg to whatever 0.1 atm is in barg

- "additional supply to the heat exchanger" -> "additional heat supply to the..."

- Need to mention hydrogen gas is at 15 MPa (or whatever it is in barg)

- Rename "compressor 1" to just "screw gas compressor"

- Remove "in our case", replace with "on the basis of".

- Follow HEX conventions; cooling is going down thru the heater, and heating is going up thru the heater.

SIMULATION

- Inconsistencies in unit operations use with regards to operating conditions set. Some numbers such as the pressure and temperature of the screw gas compressor suction does not make sense. More work needs to be done on improving the simulation numbers and optimizing the unit ops used.

-  Not developed the PFD but just extracted from simulation

- Since extracted, no criterias are met.

- Safety and environment aspects are not considered in designing the plant. In addition, lack of
technical support/references for thermodynamics feasibility.

- Not much evidence of justification of certain unit ops used.

- Explanations are covered but not really the correct concern, i.e. feed temperature is increased in order to reduce reboiler's duty.

- Students shall relook into the suggetion to purge 20% into the atmosphere. It was found that heat exchanger network is not considered in this plant design.  Thus far, only two suggestions are implemented in the study. Carbon foot print are not indicated in this study.

- If I take it as it is, the numbers does add up in = out. However, since the assumptions on certain unit ops were wrong so I would say that the M&E balance is not reflecting what it should be.

-  No physical properties are provided

- Unable to demonstrate pressure in gauge, unit in ATM are given. Has to use those commonly being practised in industry (kPag/Barg).

- Not appreciating the decimal points because it is a raw data from simulation results.

- No comparison between hand calculations and simulation results.

- No justification between simulation, manual calculation results and phases of each stream. Relatively low marks are allocated to this group as there is no justification between simulation and manual calculation results.

- Fixed Purge rate in splitter is not desirable, Deviation in H2 & H20 molar balance exists