Il biodiesel100.80.00 60.00 40.00 20.00 0.00 KOH NVOZYME 435 NaOH NaOCH3 A.n. lipaseCatalysts and enzymes made use of for transesterification Error bars: +/-1 SDFigure 2: Optimized palm oil biodiesel yield ( ) and ?standard deviation for chemical and enzymatic transesterification.Primarily based upon chosen quadratic response surface design the optimized predicted biodiesel yields have been utilised for the validation of actual experimental biodiesel yields, namely, 47.six ?1.five, 92.7 ?2.five, and 95.four ?two.0 (Figure 2) for chemical transesterification using NaOH, KOH, and NaOCH3 , respectively, whereas 94.2 ?three.1 and 62.8 ?2.four , respectively, for NOVOZYME-435 in addition to a.n. lipase catalyzed transesterification of palm oil (Figure two). Experimental biodiesel yields were depicted to become properly in agreement with predicted values.The Scientific Globe JournalTable two: Optimized reaction parameters for biodiesel production using chemical and enzymatic transesterification of under-study feedstock.2-Amino-5-bromobenzene-1-thiol manufacturer Catalyst/enzyme NaOH KOH NaOCH3 NOVOZYME-435 A.n.Lipase C/E concentration 0.five 0.75 0.75 1.0 1.25 Reaction time 75 Min 90 Min 90 Min 60 Hrs 96 Hrs Reaction temperature 52.5 C 45.0 C 45.0 C 32.five C 30.0 C Methanol : oil molar ratio 7.five : 1 6:1 six:1 6:1 9:1 Biodiesel yield 47.six 92.7 95.4 94.two 62.8Table 3: Response surface quadratic model evaluation of variance (ANOVA) table for chemical transesterification of palm oil. Source Model -catalyst concentration -reaction time -reaction temperature -alcohol : oil molar ratio two two 2 two Residual Lack of match Pure error Cor total df 14 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 15 10 five 29 SS (MS)a 76.24 (5.45) 12.54 (12.54) 7.72 (7.72) 0.77 (0.77) 19.21 (19.21) 0.092 (0.092) 0.42 (0.42) 2.17 (two.17) 0.66 (0.66) 0.47 (0.47) 0.21 (0.21) 0.80 (0.80) two.81 (2.81) 0.58 (0.58) 23.45 (23.45) five.52 (0.37) three.11 (0.31) two.41 (0.48) 81.76 SS (MS)b 799.32 (57.09) 436.91 (436.91) 0.74 (0.74) 3.23 (3.23) 32.67 (32.67) 7.02 (7.02) 22.09 (22.09) 17.64 (17.64) two.10 (2.ten) 23.52 (23.52) 18.49 (18.49) 222.79 (222.79) 23.47 (23.47) three.86 (3.86) 19.82 (19.82) 18.02 (1.20) 16.27 (1.63) 1.75 (0.35) 817.35 SS (MS)c 118.98 (8.50) 27.05 (27.05) 15.33 (15.33) 7.17 (7.17) 7.66 (7.66) 2.86 (two.86) 11.53 (11.53) 0.0025 (0.0025) 11.39 (11.39) 0.41 (0.41) five.00 (five.00) 0.11 (0.11) 0.69 (0.69) 0.015 (0.015) 27.13 (27.13) 20.23 (1.35) 17.81 (1.78) two.42 (0.48) 139.20 worth ( worth)a 14.80 (0.0001) 34.09 (0.0001) 20.98 (0.0004) 2.08 (0.1694) 52.21 (0.0001) 0.25 (0.6252) 1.14 (0.3026) 5.89 (0.0282) 1.79 (0.2003) 1.28 (0.2748) 0.58 (0.4576) two.16 (0.1621) 7.65 (0.0144) 1.57 (0.2288) 63.75 (0.0001) 0.64 (0.7415) worth ( worth)b 47.51 (0.0001) 363.60 (0.0001) 0.61 (0.4463) two.2-(1H-Pyrazol-3-yl)propan-2-ol web 69 (0.PMID:23415682 1221) 27.19 (0.0001) five.84 (0.0288) 18.38 (0.0006) 14.68 (0.0016) 1.75 (0.2057) 19.58 (0.0005) 15.39 (0.0014) 185.41 (0.0001) 19.53 (0.0005) three.21 (0.0934) 16.49 (0.0010) 4.64 (0.0521) worth ( value)c 6.30 (0.0005) 20.06 (0.0004) 11.37 (0.0042) 5.32 (0.0358) 5.68 (0.0308) 2.12 (0.1662) eight.55 (0.0105) 0.001854 (0.9662) 8.45 (0.0109) 0.30 (0.5896) 3.70 (0.0734) 0.081 (0.7805) 0.52 (0.4839) 0.011 (0.9176) 20.12 (0.0004) 3.69 (0.0813)SS (MS) = sum of squares (imply square). Model a represents quadratic model primarily based on experimental outcomes of KOH catalyzed transestrification of under-study feedstock. Model b represents quadratic model primarily based on experimental results of NaOH catalyzed transestrification of under-study feedstock. Model c represents quadratic model primarily based on experimental final results of NaOCH3 catalyzed transestrification of under-st.