PHD, Thesis-Abdullah Abuhabaya

Investigation of engine performance and exhaust gas
emissions by using bio-diesel in compression ignition

engine and optimisation of bio-diesel production from
Feedstock by using response surface methodology
ABDULLAH ALI A ABUHABAYA
A Thesis submitted to the University of Huddersfield in

partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of
Doctor of Philosophy
University of Huddersfield
March 2012
ABSTRACT
Bio-diesel, derived from the transesterification of vegetable oils or animal fats with
simple alcohols, has attracted more and more attention recently. As a cleaner burning diesel
alternative, bio-diesel claims to have many attractive features including: biodegradability,
nontoxicity, renewability and low emission profiles. Free fatty acid (FFA) esterification and
triglyceride (TG) transesterification with low alcohols molar ratio are the central reactions for
the bio-diesel production. This study presents an experimental investigation into the effects of
running biodiesel fuel and its blends on conventional diesel engines. Bio-fuels provide a way
to produce fuels without redesigning any of the engine technology present today, yet allowing
for green house emissions to decrease.
Bio-diesel is one of these types of emerging bio-fuels, which has an immediate
alternative fuel, while providing a decrease in green house gas emissions, as well as a
solution to recycling used Waste Vegetable Oils which are otherwise disposed. This study
shows how by blending bio-diesel with petroleum diesel at intervals of B5, B10, B15, and
B20 decrease green house gas emissions significantly while maintaining similar performance
output and efficiency with respect to 100% petroleum diesel.
The focus of this research is to optimize the biodiesel production from crude sunflower
oil. The effect of variables including methanol/oil molar ratio, NaOH catalyst concentration,
reaction time, reaction temperature, and rate of mixing on the bio-diesel yield was examined
and optimized by response surface methodology (RSM). Besides, a second-order model was
deduced to predict the biodiesel yield. Confirmation experiment was further conducted,
validating the efficacy of the model.
Transesterification of sunflower oil was carried out using low molecular weight
alcohols and sodium hydroxide. For sunflower oil, a central composite design with eight
factorial, six center and six axial points was used to study the effect of catalyst concentration,
molar ratio of methanol to sunflower oil and reaction temperature on percentage yield of the
biodiesel. Catalyst concentration and molar ratio of methanol to sunflower oil were the most
influential variables affecting percentage conversion and percentage initial absorbance.
Maximum percentage yield of 95 % is predicted at a catalyst concentration of 1.1 % (wt/wt)
and methanol to sunflower oil molar ratio of 6.8:1 at reaction time of 66 min and temperature
of 35C. In general, the sunflower oil biodiesel exhibited friendly environmental benefits and
acceptable stability, demonstrating its feasibility as an alternative fuel.
DEDICATION
I would like to dedicate my dissertation to my beloved parents, my wife and my children.
To my parents, Nuor Abualkhair and Ali Abuhabaya who made all of this possible through
the endless words of encouragement and undoubted confidence in me. Particularly, to my
considerate wife, Aziza Ali, whose love, support, and inspiration have enlightened and
entertained me throughout the course of this journey. To my children Omar, Nora, Salma,
Halah, Abdulrahman, Aesha, Khadijah, Abdulaziz and Abdulmalek for bright future.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
It is always hard to look back and try to remember all of those kind individuals who have
helped me during my graduate studies. I would like to say thank you to all of them.
First, I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my supervisor, Professor John
Fieldhouse, for his instruction, encouragement, advice, and support throughout my graduate
education. Thanks for trusting me and my capabilities. Thanks for forming my knowledge,
and for instilling in me the engineering way of thinking.
I am very thankful to my second supervisor, Professor David Rob Brown. Thank you for
starting my scientific life and for introducing me to the secrets and challenges of the
scientific field of bioenergy and biomaterials. Thanks you for giving me the educational
foundation and the opportunities that will result in my accomplishment of a Ph.D. and
additional thanks go to Dr. Christopher Talbot for valuable support.
I would also like to thank and value support and friendship of Mrs. Gwen Wood and Mrs.
Trudy Lockwood in the School Research office of Computing and Engineering and Mr. Eko
Andrijanto, Mr. Ibrahim George, Mr. Mohammed Shabbir and Mrs. Natasha Reed, in School
of Applied Sciences and Dr. Ehab Hamad, Mr. Keith Mallinson and Dave Andrews in School
of Computing and Engineering.
I am very grateful for my parents for their patience and continuous prayers for me while I
am away for my study. Their prayers were supportive to me throughout all my life. My
special thanks are due to my family especially my wife who supported me a lot to finish this
project. My love to all my kids, I really love all of them and I want to thank them for their
patience when I am not with them doing this work.
Many thanks to my friends and colleagues at University of Huddersfield for everything
they did for me. Their advices and the friendly environment they created were truly helpful
for me.
Finally, I gratefully acknowledge financial supports from Ministry of Higher Education
in Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and from Royal Embassy of Saudi Arabia Cultural Bureau in
London. My thanks also go to my advisers, Dr, Elsadig Widaa and Dr. Fatin Mandoora.
PUBLICATIONS
1. Abdullah Abuhabaya and John Fieldhouse Variation of Engine Performance and
Emissions using Ethanlo Blends. The 14th International Conference on Machine
Design and Production. Volume II, ISBN 978-975-429-282-4, pp 687-700. June 29
July 02 2010, Gzelyurt, Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus. Publisher UMTIK.
2. Abdullah Abuhabaya, John Fieldhouse, David Rob Brown Variation of Engine
Performance and Emissions using Biodiesel Fuels.
The 2nd International
Conference on Nuclear & Renewable Energy Resources ISBN 978-605-88549-0-1, pp
580-585. July 4 July 7 2010, Gazi University Golbasi, Convention Centre, Ankara,
Turkey. Publisher Vizyon Publishing House, Ankara, Turkey.
3. A. Abuhabaya and J. D. Fieldhouse VARIATION OF ENGINE PERFORMANCE
AND EMISSIONS USING ETHANOL BLENDS The 36th International
MATADOR Conference , ISBN 978-1-84996-431-9, pp 413-416. July 14 July 16
2010, Manchester University , Springer, London Dordrecht Heidelberg, New York.
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data. A catalogue record for this book is
available from the British Library.
4. A. Abuhabaya, J. D. Fieldhouse, D. R. Brown Evaluation of Properties and use of
waste vegetable oil (WVO), pure vegetable oils and standard diesel as used in a
compression ignition engine. Computing and Engineering Annual Researchers
Conference 2010, ISBN 978-1-86218-093-2, pp 71-76. CEARC10, December 2010,
University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, UK.
5. Abdullah Abuhabaya, John Fieldhouse, and Rob Brown The Effects of Using Biodiesel as Fuel on Compression Ignition (CI) Engine and Its Production from
Vegetable Oils. 2011 International Conference on Environmental, Biomedical and
Biotechnology (ICEBB 2011). ISBN 978-981-08-9168-8, IPCBEE vol. 16 (2011),
(2011) IACSIT Press, Singapoore, pp 41-46. August 19-21, 2011, Shanghai, China.
6. Abdullah Abuhabaya, Jafar Ali, John Fieldhouse, Rob Brown and Eko Andrijanto
The Optimisation of Bio-diesel Production from Sunflower Oil using RSM and its
Effect on Engine Performance and Emissions. Proceedings of the 17th International
Conference on Automation & Computing, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield,
UK, 10 September 2011. ISBN 978-1-4673-0000-1, pp 310-314.
7. Ali, Jafar, Abuhabaya, Abdullah, Fieldhouse, John Infrared thermography study of
thermal plume. Proceedings of the 17th International Conference on Automation &
Computing, University of Huddersfield, Huddersfield, UK, 10 September 2011. ISBN
978-1-4673-0000-1, pp 234-239.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABSTRACT............................................................................................................................................ 2
DEDICATION ........................................................................................................................................ 3
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT ...................................................................................................................... 4
PUBLICATIONS .................................................................................................................................... 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS ........................................................................................................................ 6
LIST OF TABLES ................................................................................................................................ 10
LIST OF FIGURES .............................................................................................................................. 12
TERMINOLOGY ................................................................................................................................. 15
CHAPTER - 1 ....................................................................................................................................... 16
INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................................ 16
1.1
Global perspective ................................................................................................................ 16
1.2
Fuel demands past present and future ................................................................................... 20
1.3
Current primary sources of fuel ............................................................................................ 22
1.3.1
Solar Energy.................................................................................................................. 23
1.3.2
Wind Energy ................................................................................................................. 23
1.3.3
Standard Diesel Fuel ..................................................................................................... 24
1.3.4
Bio-diesel Fuel .............................................................................................................. 25
1.3.5
Methanol as Fuel ........................................................................................................... 30
1.3.6
Ethanol as Fuel .............................................................................................................. 30
1.3.7
Electric Vehicles ........................................................................................................... 30
1.3.8
Fuel Cell ........................................................................................................................ 31
1.4
First and second generation bio-fuel ..................................................................................... 31
1.4.1
First Generation bio-fuel ............................................................................................... 31
1.4.2
Second Generation bio-fuel .......................................................................................... 33
1.4.3
Recycled Fuels .............................................................................................................. 34
1.5
Crop yield.............................................................................................................................. 35
1.6
Properties of Vegetable Oils ................................................................................................. 36
1.6.1
Types of base vegetable oil for bio-diesel production .................................................. 38
1.6.2
Transesterification process ............................................................................................ 39
1.6.3
Reactants and Product of Transesterification Process................................................... 41
1.6.4
Chemical Reaction of the Base Catalyzed Transesterification Process ........................ 42

6
1.6.5
Physical Properties of Bio-diesel .................................................................................. 45
1.7
Aims ...................................................................................................................................... 46
1.8
Objectives ............................................................................................................................. 46
1.9
Outline of Thesis ................................................................................................................... 46
1.10
Conclusions ........................................................................................................................... 48
CHAPTER - 2 ....................................................................................................................................... 49
LITERATURE SURVEY ..................................................................................................................... 49
2.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 49
2.2 Impacts of Bio-fuels on Agriculture and Environment ............................................................... 50
2.3 Land Use Change ........................................................................................................................ 51
2.4 Bio-diesel production Methods ................................................................................................... 52
2.4.1 Direct use and blending........................................................................................................ 52
2.4.2 Microemulsions.................................................................................................................... 52
2.4.3 Thermal cracking (pyrolysis) ............................................................................................... 53
2.4.4 Transesterification (Alcoholysis) ......................................................................................... 53
2.5 The challenge for the current bio-diesel production ................................................................... 58
2.6 Lower-cost Feedstocks for Bio-diesel Production and using it as Fuel ...................................... 59
2.6.1 Bio-diesel Production from Waste Cooking Oil .................................................................. 60
2.6.2 Bio-diesel Production from Waste Grease ........................................................................... 62
2.6.3 Bio-diesel Production from Soapstock................................................................................. 65
2.6.4 Bio-diesel Production from Jatropha Oil ............................................................................. 68
2.7 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................. 70
CHAPTER 3 ...................................................................................................................................... 72
BIO-DIESEL PRODUCTION PROCESS............................................................................................ 72
3.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 72
3.2 Materials and Methods ................................................................................................................ 74
3.2.1 Materials .............................................................................................................................. 74
3.2.2 Fatty Acid Profile ................................................................................................................. 74
3.3 Experimental Setup Design ..................................................................................................... 74
3.3.1 Titration Process .................................................................................................................. 76
3.3.2 Oil Titration Test Procedure (see Figure A.3) ..................................................................... 76
3.3.3 Methanol and Sodium Hydroxide Mixture Prepare ............................................................. 77
3.3.4 Kinematic Viscosity Measurement ...................................................................................... 77
3.3.5 Iodine Number ..................................................................................................................... 77
7
3.3.6 Calorific Value Measurement .............................................................................................. 78

3.3.7 Test Procedure ..................................................................................................................... 80
3.3.8 Calculations.......................................................................................................................... 81
3.4 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................... 83
3.4.1 Glycerol Separation and Bio-diesel Washing ...................................................................... 83
3.4.2 Conversion Efficiency and Effect of Catalyst Content ........................................................ 83
3.4.3 Fatty Acid Content Analysis ................................................................................................ 85
3.4.4 Viscosity and Density of Vegetable Oils and Methyl Ester ................................................. 85
3.4.5 Separations of Bio-diesel and Glycerol................................................................................ 86
3.4.6 Cloud point, Pour point and Flash point .............................................................................. 87
3.4.7 Cetane, Iodine Number and Calorific Value ........................................................................ 89
3.4.8 Economic Assessment for Bio-diesel Based on the Vegetable Oil ...................................... 90
3.5 Conclusions ................................................................................................................................. 90
CHAPTER 4 ...................................................................................................................................... 92
OPTIMISATION OF FUEL MANUFACTURE PROCESS ............................................................... 92
4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................. 92
4.2 Materials and Methods ................................................................................................................ 94
4.2.1 Materials used and Fatty Acid Profile of Vegetable Oils..................................................... 94
4.2.2 Experimental Design ............................................................................................................ 95
4.2.3 Statistical Analysis ............................................................................................................... 97
4.3 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................... 98
4.3.1 Fractional Factorial Design .................................................................................................. 98
4.3.2 Response Surface Mothodology Analysis of Transesterification ........................................ 99
4.3.3 Effect of Parameters ........................................................................................................... 103
4.3.4 The Response Surface and Ridge Max Analysis ............................................................... 105
4.4 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 109
CHAPTER 5 .................................................................................................................................... 110
ENGINE PERFORMANCE AND EMISSIONS USING METHYL ESTER FROM VEGETABLE
OILS AND STANDARD DIESEL..................................................................................................... 110
5.1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 110
5.2 Material and Methods ............................................................................................................... 111
5.3 Engine Experiments .................................................................................................................. 111
5.3.1 Gas Analysis System.......................................................................................................... 112
5.4 Results and Discussion ............................................................................................................. 114
5.4.1 Petroleum Diesel Benchmark............................................................................................. 114

5.4.2 Methyl Ester from Waste Vegetable Oil ............................................................................ 117
5.4.3 Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions of Waste Vegetable Oil Bio-diesel Blends .................. 125
5.4.4 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Emissions of Waste Vegetable Oil Bio-diesel Blends ................ 128
5.4.5 Hydrocarbon (THC) Emissions of Waste Vegetable Oil Bio-diesel.................................. 129
5.4.6 Oxide of Nitrogen (NOx) Emissions of Waste Vegetable Oil Bio-diesel Blends.............. 130
5.4.7 Torque and Power for Waste Vegetable Oil Bio-diesel Blends ......................................... 133
5.4.8 Engine Performance for a Range of B100 Bio-diesels ...................................................... 135
5.5 Cost Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 141
5.5.1 Fundamentals of a cost analysis ......................................................................................... 141
5.5.2 Two-Step Optimization Process......................................................................................... 143
5.5.3 Considerations for Two-Step Optimization ....................................................................... 148
5.5.4 Two-Step Optimization ...................................................................................................... 151
5.6 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 153
CHAPTER 6 .................................................................................................................................... 154
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR FUTURE WORK ......................................... 154
6.1 Conclusions ............................................................................................................................... 154
6.1.1 Bio-diesel Production and Fuel Properties......................................................................... 154
6.1.2 Exhaust Gas Emissions and Engine Performances ............................................................ 154
6.1.3 Cost Analysis ..................................................................................................................... 155
6.1.4 Optimisation Process.......................................................................................................... 156
6.2 Recommendation for Future Work ........................................................................................... 157
References ........................................................................................................................................... 158
APPENDICES .................................................................................................................................... 176
APPENDIX A ..................................................................................................................................... 176
APPENDIX B ..................................................................................................................................... 182
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.1: The Worlds Major Bio-fuel Producers During 2008 [1, 3, 247-250]....................20
Table 1.2: Oil Yield for Various Products...23
Table 1.3: European FAME standards EN 1421429
Table 1.4: Fuel injection Equipment-Potential Problems with FAME30
Table 1.5: Properties of vegetable oils [15].....37
Table 1.6: Physical properties of bio-diesel [15].....46
Table 3.1: American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standards of maximum
allowed quantities in diesel and bio-diesel [205,206]......74
Table 3.2: Percentage of FFA Content.....86
Table 3.3: Properties of vegetable oils commonly used in bio-diesel production.......88
Table 3.4: Properties of diesel fuel and bio-diesel fuels produced from different vegetable
oil......88
Table 4.1: Independent variable and levels used for CCRD in methyl ester
production.....96
Table 4.2: CCRD arrangement and responses for methyl ester production.....97
Table 4.3: Regression coefficients of predicted quadratic polynomial model for methyl ester
production.......101
Table 4.4: Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the quadratic model.....103
Table 4.5: Central composite design......107
Table 4.6: Overall results & recommended production values..110
Table 5.1: Horiba Exsa 1500 and BG3 micro dilution tunnel for transient diesel
particulate...114
Table 5.2: Petroleum Diesel Benchmark (1)..116
Table 5.3: Petroleum Diesel Benchmark (2)..117
Table 5.4: Waste Vegetable Oil Blends Compiled Data (1)..119
10

Table 5.8: Standard Deviation for Blends of Bio-diesel Waste Vegetable Oil..125
Table 5.9: Percentage difference of WVO with respect to petroleum diesel.....126
Table 5.10: Overall Percentage Difference127
Table 5.11: Price of raw materials for bio-diesel production.....144
Table 5.12: Cost per litre of bio-diesel blends...144
Table 5.13: 2-Level-4-Factor Experimental Design..147
Table 5.14: Responses for methyl ester production in hours.........148
Table 5.15: Taguchi Matrix (Initial Matrix)...149
Table 5.16: 2-Level 4-Factor Taguchi Matrix L16 (Expanded Matrix).....150
Table 5.17: Mean and S/N values..152
Table 5.18: 2-Level-4-Factor Taguchi Matrix L16 (Completed Matrix)...152
Table 5.19: S/N ratio response...153
)........153
Table 5.20: Mean value response (
.....154
Table 5.21: Importance of the four factors for S/N and
........154
Table 5.22: Response interaction for S/N and
11
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1.1: General energy distribution...18
Figure 1.2: Current Global Automotive Production 18
Figure 1.3: World Production of Ethanol and Bio-diesel (billion gallons) [1-3].....19
Figure 1.4: Conventional process of producing first generation bio-fuels [36]...33
Figure 1.5: Conventional of vegetable oils to bio-diesel..33
Figure 1.6: Second generation bio-fuel [44]....35
Figure 1.7: Oil Yield for Various Products..36
Figure 1.8: Example of a fluid draining into a line [16]...38
Figure 1.9: General overview of transesterification process [www.bio-diesel.org]........41
Figure 1.10: Flow chart for transeseterification process [15]......41
Figure 2.1: Triglyceride transesterification reaction....54

Figure 2.2: Carboxylic acid esterification....64
Figure 3.1: Fuelpod for transesterifying oils76

Figure 3.2: Flow chart for transesterification process..76
Figure 3.3: Bio-diesel and glycerol separation.77
Figure 3.4: Benzoic acid and fuse wire for bomb calorimeter.83
Figure 3.5: Temperature versus time for sample combustion of benzoic acid.83
Figure 3.6: Calculation of the change in temperature due to the combustion process.84
Figure 3.7: Effect of catalyst concentration on ester yield conversion85
Figure 3.8: Separation of bio-diesel and glycerol87
Figure 4.1: (a) A theoretical response surface showing the relationship between yield of a
chemical process and the process variable reaction time ( ) and reaction temperature ( ).
(b) A contour plot of the theoretical response surface [242]94
Figure 4.2: Chemical reaction for sunflower bio-diesel production....96
Figure 4.3: Response surface and contour plot of the effects of methanol/oil molar ratio and
catalyst on the yield of bio-diesel...103
12
Figure 4.4: Effect of methanol/oil molar ratio and catalyst concentration on methyl ester
production with temperature 65oC and reaction time 70 min105
Figure 4.5: Effect of reaction time and catalyst concentration on methyl ester production with
temperature 65oC and methanol/oil molar ratio 6.0:1106
Figure 4.6: Effect of methanol/oil molar ratio and reaction time on methyl ester production
with temperature 65oC and catalyst concentration 1%...........................................................107
Figure 4.7: Response surface and contour plot of the effects of methanol/oil molar ratio and
catalyst concentration on the yield of bio-diesel with temperature 35oC and reaction time 60
min..108
production with temperature 35oC and reaction time 60 min....108
Figure 4.9: Effect of reaction time and catalyst concentration on methyl ester production with
temperature 35oC and methanol/oil molar ratio 7.7:1....109
Figure 4.10: Effect of methanol/oil molar ratio and reaction time on methyl ester production
with temperature 35oC and catalyst concentration 1.0%........................................................109
Figure 5.1: Carbon dioxide emissions for different bio-diesel blends...126

Figure 5.2: Normalized carbon dioxide emission against bio-diesel blend for engine speed
3300 rpm127
Figure 5.3: Average carbon monoxide emission for different bio-diesel blends...129
Figure 5.4: Normalized carbon monoxide emissions for different bio-diesel blends........129
Figure 5.5: Average total hydrocarbon emissions for different bio-diesel blends.130
Figure 5.6: Normalized total hydrocarbon emissions for different bio-diesel blends....131
Figure 5.7: Average emissions of oxides of nitrogen for different bio-diesel blends....131
Figure 5.8: Normalized Oxide of Nitrogen for different bio-diesel blends ...132
Figure 5.9: Normalized NOx for different bio-diesel blends (Medium RPM)..132
Figure 5.10: Normalized Oxide of Nitrogen for different bio-diesel blends
(High RPM)....133
Figure 5.11: Average power output for different bio-diesel blends...134
Figure 5.12: Torque output for different bio-diesel blends....135
Figure 5.13: Normalised decrease in Torque output for different bio-diesel blends at 3300
rpm.135
Figure 5.14: Average power output against engine speed at full load with petroleum diesel
13
and bio-diesels as fuel....136

Figure 5.15: Average torque output against engine speed at full load with petroleum diesel
and bio-diesels as fuel....137
Figure 5.16: Average brake specific fuel consumption with engine speed at full load with
petroleum diesel and bio-diesels as fuel.....138
Figure 5.17: Average brake thermal efficiency against engine speed at full load with
petroleum diesel and bio-diesels as fuel.....139
Figure 5.18: Hydrocarbon emissions against engine load at 1500 rpm.140
Figure 5.19: Carbon monoxide emissions against engine load at 1500 rpm..140
Figure 5.20: Carbon dioxide emissions against engine load at 1500 rpm..141
Figure 5.21: Emission of oxides of nitrogen against engine load at 1500 rpm......................141
Figure A.1: Free Fatty Acid Content Test......177

Figure A.2: Supplies used for the titration process....178
Figure A.3: Oil titration test...178
Figure A.4: Manufacture laminated card (manufacture manual)...179
Figure A.5: Methanol and sodium hydroxide mixture preparation....180
Figure A.6: Container holding mixture of methanol and sodium hydroxide connected with the
system.....180
Figure A.7: Equipment for measuring kinematic viscosity....181
Figure A.8: Iodine number test apparatus......181
Figure A.9: Bomb calorimeter apparatus...182
Figure A.10: Chemical reaction for sunflower bio-diesel production....183
Figure B.1: Photo of test rig, Schenk dynamometer fitted with Ford Puma engine......183
Figure B.2: View of Ford Puma Engine as used in testing....184
Figure B.3: Data acquisition system visual displays and inputs....184
Figure B.4: Horiba exhaust gas analyzer EXSA-1500L....185
14
TERMINOLOGY
BDC
BP
BSFC
BUT
B5, B10, B15, B20
CC
CI
CO
CO2
C2H5OH
CVf
Eff
EISA
ETBE
FAAE
FAEE
FAME
FFA
gal
GLY
h
THC
H2SO4
HVO
IC
KOH
M/O
MeOH

MG
min

NaOH
NOx
O2
ppm
RPM
RSM
SI
SOx
T
TDC
TG
Vst

wt. %
Bottom-dead-centre
Brake power, kW
Brake specific fuel consumption, g/kW/h
British thermal unit (1.06 kilojoules)
Bio-diesel and standard diesel blend of 5, 10, 15 and 20% bio-diesel by volume
Cubic centimetre
Compression ignition engine
Carbon monoxide, percentage (%)
Carbon dioxide, percentage (%)
Ethanol
Calorific value, MJ/kg
Brake thermal efficiency, %
Energy Independence and Security Act
Ethyl tertiary butyl ether
Fatty acid alkyl ester
Fatty acid ethyl ester
Fatty acid methyl ester
Free fatty acid
Gallon
Glycerol
Hour
Total Hydrocarbon emission, part per million (ppm)
Sulphuric acid
Hydrogenated vegetable oil
Internal combustion engine
Potassium hydroxide
Methanol to Oil molar ratio, 1 mol Methanol = 32g and 1 mol Oil = 91g
Methanol
Fuel consumption, g/sec
Monoglyceride
Minute
Engine speed, revolutions per minute (rpm)
Sodium hydroxide
Oxide of nitrogen
Oxygen, %
Part-per-million
Revolution-per-minute
Response surface methodology
Spark ignition engine
Sulphur oxide
Torque, Nm
Top-dead-centre
Triglyceride
Stroke volume, m3
Fuel density, kg/m3
Dynamic viscosity, Pa/s
Kinematic viscosity, mm2/s
Weight percentage
15
CHAPTER - 1
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Global perspective
Energy is very important for society as it is used to sustain and improve well-being. It
exists in various forms, from many different sources. Historically, with economic
development, energy needs grew, utilizing natural resources such as wood, hydro, fossil
fuels, and nuclear energy in the preceding century. However, rising concerns on energy
security, economic development, and climate change in the recent past have focused attention
on using alternative sources of energy such as bio-fuels. Bio-fuels are the fuels produced
from renewable resources, particularly plant derived materials. There are mainly two types of
bio-fuels, first generation and second generation bio-fuels. The first generation bio-fuel is
bio-diesel and bio-ethanol. Bio-diesel produced by transeseterifiction or reforming of
vegetable oils and bio-ethanol produced by sugars/starch fermentation. On the other hand,
second generation bio-fuel from lignin and cellulose such as wood straw etc. by hydrolysis to
liquid fuel (not yet viable).
The drive towards low carbon emissions, and the recognition that current fossil fuel
supplies are predicted to last possibly only 40 years, has focussed the attention of the
automotive industry to towards alternative fuels supplies. Figure 1.1 shows the general
energy distribution where it is seen that road transportation demands almost 16% of the
available fuel sources. This is distributed between commercial vehicles and domestic vehicles
as indicated in Figure 1.2. It can be seen that in general terms the industry is producing some
90 million units per year into a global market that already supports some one billion (10 )
units. Based on fundamental and conservative figures of 10,000 miles/year per unit this gives
10 10 miles per year. If a consumption of 7 miles/litre is assumed then this represents a
fuel demand of 1.4 10 litres per year. Clearly with such demands, and increasing, then
there is a need to seek an alternative fuel source to fossil fuels [254].
16
Figure 1.1: General energy distribution
Figure 1.2: Current Global Automotive Production
17
Bio-fuels have become a high priority in the European Union, Brazil, the United States
and many other countries, due to concerns about oil dependence and interest in reducing
greenhouse gas emissions. All these regions have provided massive subsidies, tax credits,
tariff imposition and/or mandates for renewable energy production from agricultural sources.
The impacts of these incentives and mandates reach far beyond the borders of these
economies. In 2009, Brazil and the United States were the leading producers of ethanol, and
their production is expected to reach 6.5 and 10.5 billion gallons, respectively, which
accounts for more than 90 percent of the worlds production, in 2008. As seen in Figure 1.3,
world ethanol production has grown at a compound growth rate of 10 percent per annum
since 1975, and it grew rapidly at 19 percent per annum from 2001 through 2008, which is
attributed to the push towards ethanol in the United States. Similarly, world bio-diesel
production has grown at a rate of 42 percent per annum since 1991; the majority of the boom
coming from the bio-fuel initiative in the European Union countries [1-3].
Figure 1.3: World Production of Ethanol and Bio-diesel (billion gallons) [1-3]
The passing of bio-fuel-friendly legislation in several countries has resulted in an
exponential growth in global bio-fuel production. For instance, the Energy Independence
and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 in the United States, mandates a renewable fuels standard
(RFS) to use 36 billion gallons of renewable fuels per year by 2022. This includes a cap on
18
corn starch-derived ethanol at 15 billion gallons and a 3 billion gallon increment of advanced
bio-fuels every year starting 2015 until 2022 [4].
The European Union Bio-fuels Directive required that member states realize a 10%
share of bio-fuels (on energy basis) in the liquid fuels market by 2020 [5]. The Renewable
Energy Directive set an important framework for the future growth of the industry and paves
the way for a stable investment climate. New technologies and applications of bio-fuels will
be developed and marketed up to 2020. With this stimulation of the industry and a further
coordinated development of bio-fuels throughout the EU and the possibilities of significantly
reducing the oil dependence in the transport sector over the next years, the European biofuels industry is committed to reach the share of 10 % bio-fuels by 2020 [246].
However many member states such as Germany and France are marching towards
greater use of bio-fuels. As seen from Table 1.1, Germany is the leading producer of biodiesel (36% share in EU market) with the production of 851 million gallons during 2008,
followed by the United States (700 mgy), France (540 mgy), Italy (180 mgy) and other
countries (561 mgy). Also, the Table 1.1 shows bio-fuel as a proportion of fuel used.
Table 1.1: The Worlds Major Bio-fuel Producers During 2008 [1, 3, 247-250]
Ethanol Production
Country
Million
gallon
Bio-diesel Production
World
Share
Country
(%)
Million
gallon
USA
9,000
51.9
USA
Brazil
6,472
37.3
EU-27
EU-27
734
4.2
Germany 851(36%)
China
502
2.9
France
Canada
238
1.4
Thailand
90
Colombia
Fuel used
World
Share
Country
(%)
Bio-fuel to Fuel used
Million
Proportion
gallon
(%)
700
19.4
Brazil
37,573
17.23
2,342
65.0
USA
294,809
3.29
Germany
38,847
2.19
548(23%)
Colombia
4,127
1.91
Italy
180(8%)
Portugal
4,369
1.85
0.5
Belgium
84(4%)
France
30,032
1.82
79
0.5
Poland
83(4%)
Italy
24,781
0.73
India
66
0.4
Portugal
81(3%)
Canada
34,191
0.70
Australia
26
0.2
other EU 515(22%)
Thailand
14,106
0.64
Other
128
0.7
other
World
17,335
100
561
15.6
China
118,404
0.42
1,929
100
India
44,785
0.15
19
Brazil invested heavily in ethanol production during the energy crisis of 1970s and now
has one of the world's most advanced production and distribution systems. Brazil is aiming to
replace 10% of bio-fuel consumed worldwide by 2012, which requires it to export 20% of its
current production [6]. For production of ethanol, France, Germany, Russia, United States,
China, and Canada mainly use corn as their main feedstock, whereas, Brazil and India use
sugarcane, which is more energy efficient as their production with 645 million tonnes and
348 million tonnes in 2011 respectively [251]. In China, about 80% of the ethanol is cornbased, with the remainder produced from cassava and wheat and in the United States, about
90% of the ethanol is produced from corn (about 22% of total corn production in 2007) [7].
For bio-diesel production, most of the European countries use rapeseed and sunflower
oil as their main feedstock, soybean oil is the main feedstock in the United States. Palm oil in
South-east Asia (Malaysia and Indonesia) and coconut oil in the Philippines are being
considered. In addition, some species of plants yielding non-edible oils, e.g. jatropha, karanji
and pongamia may play a significant role in providing resources.
1.2 Fuel demands past present and future

Due to the increasing global energy demand and limited fossil fuel reserves, one of the
most daunting challenges facing science in the 21st century is to deliver solutions for future
global energy needs in a sustainable manner [12]. There is also an increasing awareness that
the utilization of fossil raw materials and fuels increases the net discharge of carbon dioxide
(CO2) into the atmosphere and contributes to the green house effect [13]. Thus, beside the
energy problem, the other important challenge is to predict how Earths ecosystems will
respond to global climate change. On the other hand methane (CH4) is considered to be the
most prevalent greenhouse gas, and the build up of CH4 causes global climate change [14].
The concentration of methane in Earths atmosphere in 1998, was 1745 ppb (part per billion),
up from 700 ppb in 1750. By 2008, however, global methane levels, which had stayed mostly
flat since 1998, had risen to 1,800 ppb [14]. The desire to maintain sustainable development
has led to an increasing interest in society for bio-fuels and the conversion of renewable
biomass resources to liquid fuels.
Bio-fuels are biomass-based components of transport fuels, and are an interesting
sustainable option for the transport sector. Unlike the combustion of fossil fuels which
releases CO2 that was captured several hundred million years ago, CO2 released by during the
20
utilization of a biomass based fuel is balanced by CO2 captured in the recent growth of the
biomass, resulting in far less net impact on greenhouse gas levels such as cellulosic materials,
mostly wood, feedstock [15]. Since biomass utilization can be considered as a closed carbon
cycle, the production and usage of bio-fuels is expected to reduce the net CO2 emission
significantly.
Generally, until recently, the need for bio-fuels remained a low priority, as petroleum
supply and demand curves were satisfactorily addressed. Nonetheless, global petroleum
demands have increased steadily from 56.2 x 106 barrels/day in 1975 to 85.9 x 106
barrels/day in 2007 [16]. The impact of this growth in demand, and limited global production
capacity has been foretold by several organizations and individuals [12,17]. Coupled with
these concerns, the contribution of combustion CO2 from fossil fuels to climate change has
been noted in several recent reviews [18,19], not to mention the use of fossil fuels also
contributes to water pollution.
As described by Hoffert et al. [20], future reductions in the ecological footprint of
energy will require a multi-faceted approach that includes the use of hydro, wind, nuclear,
solar power, and fossil fuels (from which carbon is sequestered) and bio-fuels. In addition to
the need to develop novel green technologies to reduce carbon emission in the future, existing
green and low impact energy generation technologies should be implemented in existing
industrial practices. A review by Pacala and Socolov [18], shed light on a portfolio of
existing technologies capable of meeting the world's energy needs over the next 50 years and
of limiting atmospheric CO2 to a trajectory that avoids a doubling of the preindustrial
concentration. By upgrading current industrial practices while implementing already existing
green technologies at an industrial scale or increasing the amount and quality of
implementation in industry, it is proposed that over the next fifty years the atmospheric CO2
concentration can be limited to 50050 ppm to prevent the most damaging climate change
[18].
To be able to cover our global energy needs, the chosen renewable resources must have
high energy content, be available in high volumes and be easily accessible at an affordable
cost. Without meeting these four requirements the economical viability of any proposed
renewable resource is questionable [12].
21
1.3 Current primary sources of fuel

Fossil fuels such as gasoline and diesel fuel are the most important source of energy for
our society today, providing the bulk of global energy requirements for transportation,
construction, heating, and agriculture. The excessive use of energy resources was a result of
the belief that our energy resources would last for a considerably long period. This has
resulted in the abusive use of our non-renewable energy sources like fossil fuels. The
machines that use the non-renewable energy were not designed to use fuels efficiently and
hence ended up accelerating the consumption of these resources. Given the finite amount of
non-renewable energy, it is imperative to conserve the current sources or to use renewable
sources to compliment the use of the non-renewable resources.
Many new developments in technology have made alternative sources of energy more
economically feasible including advances in solar, wind, geothermal and nuclear energy. The
advancement of technology has consistently increased the viability of these alternative
sources as serious supplements to the world's energy needs [21].
Renewable energy is consumed across all energy use sectors - residential, commercial,
industrial, transportation and the electric power industry as shown in Figure 1.1. The two
sectors which consume the most are electric power and industrial, though patterns are
changing. In 2008, the electric power sector accounted for 51% of renewable energy
consumption and the industrial sector 28%, down from 56% and 30%, respectively, in 2004.
This was due in some measure to the substantial change in the transportation sector, whose
share rose from 5% to 11% between 2004 and 2008. The increase was due to increased
consumption of bio-fuels, primarily ethanol derived from corn, but also to a lesser extent biodiesel.
Table 1.2: Oil Yield for Various Products
Crop
Corn
Cashew nut
Oats
Cotton
Soybean
Coffee
Yield - US gallons/acre
18
19
23
35
48
49
22
Estimation of Water
Requirement inches/acre
20-25
15-20
15-20
30-40
15-20
30-45
pumpkin seed
mustard seed
Rice
sunflowers
Cocoa
Peanuts
Rapeseed
Olives
castor beans
pecan nuts
Jatropha
macadamia nuts
brazil nuts
Coconut
Oil palm
57
61
88
102
110
113
127
129
151
191
202
240
255
287
635
25-30
25-30
30-40
20-30
35-45
20-30
25-30
15-20
15-20
15-20
20-30
15-20
15-20
30-40
20-30
Bio-diesel is a type of bio-fuel that is derived from vegetable oils, animal fats or
recycled grease. However, as many people have already realized, using corn as a fuel source when so many people in the world are starving - is not the wisest solution to meet the need
for renewable energy. In addition the yield from edible food-stock is not really the best to use
unless there is surplus stock see Table 1.2.
1.3.1
Solar Energy
Concentrated solar thermal power plants produce power by converting the sun's energy
into electricity. High temperatures are generated through concentration of the suns rays via
mirrors. Solar thermal plants then transfer this energy through some heat transfer medium
which in turn is used to rotate a turbine and generate electricity. The concept of using the
sun's electromagnetic radiation to convert to other forms of energy has been used for many
centuries. The sun supplies a significant amount of energy to the surface of the earth, and
forty minutes of irradiance is enough to match the world's annual needs. The solar constant is
the amount of incoming solar electromagnetic radiation per unit area, measured on the outer
surface of Earth's atmosphere. The Solar constant is 1367 Watts.m-2 [22].
1.3.2
Wind Energy
Wind energy has been used since early history, propelling boats in 5000 B.C. along the
Nile River. The popularity of wind energy tends to rise with the rise in oil prices. Wind is a
form of solar energy, as they result from uneven heating of the atmosphere by the sun, the
23
irregularities of the earth's surface, and rotation of the earth. Modern wind turbines fall into
two basic groups: the horizontal-axis variety and the vertical axis design. Horizontal-axis
wind turbines typically either have two or three blades. These three-bladed wind turbines are
operated upwind, with the blades facing into the wind. Utility-scale turbines range in size
from 100 kilowatts to as large as several megawatts. Larger turbines are grouped together
into wind farms, which provide bulk power to the electrical grid.
Wind turbines don't produce emissions (except noise) and wind is a domestic source of
energy, with an unlimited potential. Wind energy is one of the lowest-priced renewable
energy technologies available today, costing between 3.8 and 5.5 pence per kilowatt-hour,
depending upon the wind resource and financing of the particular project. Wind turbines can
be built on hillsides, thus benefiting the economy in rural areas, where many of the best wind
sites are found. Farmers can continue to work the land because the wind turbines use only a
fraction of the land. Wind power plant owners make rent payments to the farmer or rancher
for the use of the land. The major disadvantage is that wind power must compete with
conventional generation sources on a cost basis. Despite technological developments through
the years, the cost of production is still relatively expensive. Wind energy is not available at
all times and this is a limiting factor, batteries must be used to store energy for times when
the wind is unavailable. Other concerns include the production of very loud noise and
vibration by the rotor blades, the adverse visual impacts of having wind mills scattered across
the land, and many birds killed by flying into the rotors [23].
1.3.3
Standard Diesel Fuel

Diesel fuel is used in high-compression engines. Air is compressed until it is heated
above the auto-ignition temperature of diesel. Then the fuel is injected as a high pressure
spray. There is no separate ignition source. As a result, diesel is required to have a high flash
point and a low auto-ignition temperature. The flashpoint of a fuel is the lowest temperature
at which it can form an ignitable mix with air. The high flash point of diesel fuel means that it
does not burn as easily as gasoline, which is a safety factor. Too low a flash point is a fire
hazard because ignition may continue and lead to explosion. Auto-ignition temperature is the
temperature at which a substance can be ignited without any external source, such as a spark
or flame.
The problem of generating harmful combustion products such as particulate matter
(PM), aldehydes, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), CO, NOx, and unburned
24
hydrocarbons is of great health and environmental concern. Although the level of these
emissions has been falling with technical improvements, any further reduction of these
pollutants through the traditional combustion process requires disproportionately greater
efforts and expenditure of resources. Accordingly, a new revolutionary method is required to
solve these problems [25].
1.3.4
Bio-diesel Fuel
Bio-diesel, as defined by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), is
a fuel comprised of mono-alkyl esters of long chain fatty acids derived from vegetable oils or
animal fats. Due to the great molecular similarities between bio-diesel and petroleum-based
diesel, this alternative fuel has a chance of fulfilling the technical requirements of diesel fuel
[26]. It is a domestic, clean-burning, renewable liquid fuel that can be used in compressionignition engines instead of petroleum-based diesel with little or no modifications. The
dominant bio-diesel production process, namely transesterification, typically involves the
reaction of an alkyl-alcohol with a long chain ester linkage in the presence of a catalyst to
yield mono-alkyl esters (bio-diesel) and glycerol.
The idea of using vegetable oil as a fuel dates back to 1895, when Dr. Rudolf Diesel
developed the first diesel engine with the intention of running it on a variety of fuels [27].
The engine was demonstrated at the World Exhibition in 1900 in Paris operating on oil
extracted from peanuts. Since his death in 1913, his engine has been modified to run on
petroleum-based diesel fuel and it was not until the 1970's that interest in bio-diesel was
instigated. Today, bio-diesel fuels have been commercialised in many countries, including
Austria, Czech Republic, Germany, France, Italy, Slovakia, Spain, and the USA.
The difference between bio-diesel and petroleum diesel lies in the name itself.
Petroleum diesel is 100% petroleum based and considered as a fossil fuel. On the other hand
bio-diesel is created from live feedstock such as vegetable oil, peanut oil, coconut oil, even
algae oil. Bio-diesel can be used as a direct fuel considered B100, or in its unrefined form of
vegetable oil. Many of these vegetable oils are similar in properties to those of petroleum
diesel, the main difference is that vegetable oils and bio-diesels have a lower oxidative
stability state, a higher viscosity coefficient, and a higher volatility point. These properties
make bio-diesel blends a suitable candidate for an immediate alternative energy fuel [28].
25
Bio-diesel blends are more commonly used than pure B100 fuels. The main reason for
this is that running 100% bio-diesel sometimes requires modifications to the engine, due to
the higher content of alcohol present in bio-diesel. These modifications require fuel lines to
be changed to steel, as alcohol will corrode the rubber lines more commonly used. Because
only 1 percent of petrol is toxic enough to prevent the formation of mould it is common to
use B99 (99 % bio-diesel and 1% petroleum diesel) instead of B100. The letter "B"
designates the type of fuel, in this case Bio-diesel, while the number after it designates the
percentage of bio-diesel. B5 contains 5% bio-diesel mixed with 95% petroleum diesel.
Following this rule, B20 has 20% bio-diesel and 80% petroleum diesel. Blending the two
different diesel fuels, allows the fuel to have the benefits of the lower emissions present in
bio-diesel, while allowing for a lower concentration of alcohol which allows for the engine to
run without any modifications.
The cost of bio-diesel production, however, is higher than that of petroleum-based
diesel production: UK 0.24-0.40 per litre bio-diesel compared to UK 0.17-0.25 per litre
petroleum diesel. Commercial scale bio-diesel production utilizes homogeneous basecatalysed technologies requiring highly refined virgin vegetable oils as raw materials.
Conversely, acidic-catalysed processes allow for the use of lower cost feedstocks such as
waste cooking oils that contain significant amounts of free fatty acid (FFA). Krawczyk [27]
stated that almost 70-95% of the total bio-diesel production cost arises from the cost of the
raw materials, and that reducing the cost of feedstock is necessary for bio-diesel's long-term
viability. Waste cooking oils are a more economically viable source of biomass than pure
vegetable oils and are a promising alternative to vegetable oils for bio-diesel production [29].
The advantages of bio-diesel used as diesel fuel are [30]:
Liquid nature-portability.
Ready availability.
Renewability.
Higher heat content (about 88% of diesel fuel).
Lower sulphur content.
Lower aromatic content.
Bio-degradability.
Bio-diesel has similar Cetane number to diesel fuel; this indicates a potential for
higher engine performance close to that of diesel fuelled engines.
The superior lubricating properties.

26
Their higher flash point makes them safer to store.
They contain higher amount oxygen (up to 11%) that ensures more complete
combustion of hydrocarbons and better auto-ignition processes.
Bio-diesel almost completely eliminates lifecycle carbon dioxide emissions.
Some of the drawbacks are: [30]
Bio-diesel tends to affect rubber hoses and gaskets.
Possible concerns with engine warranties.
Special measures that must be taken to use Bio-diesel in cold climates.
Higher cost than petro-diesel.
Limited commercial availability.
Higher viscosity.
Lower volatility.
The reactivity of unsaturated hydrocarbon chains.
Under certain load conditions Bio-diesel has higher fuel consumption compared to
conventional diesel.
1.3.4.1 Fuel injection equipment (FIE)

Diesel fuel injection equipment (FIE) manufactures fully support the development of
alternative sources of fuel for compression ignition engines. In Europe and the United States
of America, as well as other countries, fuel resources such as rapeseed methyl ester and
soybean methyl ester, collectively known as fatty acid methyl esters (FAME), are being used
as alternatives and extenders for mineral oil derived fuels.
The FIE manufactures are aware of issues particular to bio-diesel fuels, and have been
active in the generation of standards for these fuels. At the time of first common position
statement in 2000 there existed national standards for vegetable oil methyl esters in Austria,
Italy, Germany and France. The European FAME standard EN14214 shown in Table 1.3 was
ratified in 2003 and supersedes these national standards. EN 14214 provides the minimum
requirements for FAME quality whether used as pure FAME or as a blend component.
To date, experience in Europe has been mainly associated with the methyl esters of
rapeseed oil. Whether or not the service experience with these fuels will apply/extend to all
FAME (like those derived from soybean, tallow and used frying oil) has yet to be determined.
27
1.3.4.2 FIE manufactures concerns

FAMEs are derived from a wide range of base stocks, resulting in a similarly wide
range of fuel characteristics. Amongst the concerns of the FIE manufactures are the following
fuel characteristics:
Free methanol
Water
Free glycerine
Mono, di- and triglycerides
Free fatty acids
Total solid impurity level
Alkali/alkaline earth metals
Oxidation stability
Table 1.3: European FAME standards EN 14214
EN 14214 - Property
Units
Ester content
Density at 15C
Viscosity at 40C
Flash point
Sulfur content
Tar remnant (at 10% distillation
remnant)
Cetane number
Sulfated ash content
Water content
Total contamination
Copper band corrosion (3 hours at 50 C)
Thermal Stability
Oxidation stability, 110C
Acid value
Iodine value
Linolic Acid Methylester
Polyunsaturated (>= 4 Double bonds)
Methylester
Methanol content
Monoglyceride content
Diglyceride content
lower
limit
upper
limit
Test-Method
% (m/m) 96,5
kg/m
860
900
mm/s
C
mg/kg
% (m/m)
3,5
> 101
-
5,0
10
0,3
EN 14103
EN ISO 3675 / EN ISO
12185.
EN ISO 3104
ISO 3679
EN ISO 10370
% (m/m)
mg/kg
mg/kg
rating
hours
mg
KOH/g
% (m/m)
% (m/m)
51,0
Class 1
6
-
0,02
500
24
Class 1
0,5
EN ISO 5165
ISO 3987
EN ISO 12937
EN 12662
EN ISO 2160
EN 14112
EN 14104
120
12
1
EN 14111
EN 14103
-
% (m/m) % (m/m) % (m/m) -
0,2
0,8
0,2
EN 14110
EN 14105
EN 14105
28
Triglyceride content
Free Glycerine
Total Glycerine
Alkali Metals (Na+K)
Phosphorus content
% (m/m)
% (m/m)
% (m/m)
mg/kg
mg/kg
0,2
0,02
0,25
5
10
EN 14105
EN 14105 / EN 14106
EN 14105
EN 14108 / EN 14109
EN 14107
All FAMEs are less stable than mineral oil derived fuels. FAMEs are readily biodegradable in the event of accidental spillage or leakage, which is claimed to be a marketing
advantage. On the other hand, the reduced thermal oxidative stability is of major concern to
the FIE manufactures, as the products of fuel ageing can be potentially harmful to the fuel
system, see to the Table 1.4.
Table 1.4: Fuel injection Equipment-Potential Problems with FAME
Fuel characteristic
Fatty acid methyl ester
Free methanol in FAME

FAME process chemicals
Effect
Softening, swelling hardening and
cracking of some elastomers including
nitrile rubbers (physical effect depends
upon elastomer composition)
Displacement of deposits from diesel
operation
Corrosion of aluminium and zinc
Low flash point
Failure mode
Fuel leakage
Filter plugging
Corrosion of FIE
Entry of potassium and sodium and

Filter plugging
water hardness (alkaline earth metals)
Entry of free fatty acids hastens the
corrosion of non ferrous metals, e.g. zinc Corrosion of FIE
Salt formation with organic acids
(soaps)
Sedimentation
Filter plugging
Sticking moving parts
Free water
Free glycerine
Mono-,di- and tri-glyceride

Higher modulus of elasticity
High viscosity at low
temperature
Reversion (Hydrolysis) of FAME to

fatty acid and methanol
Corrosion
Sustainment of bacterial growth
Increase of electrical conductivity of the
fuel
Corrosion of non-ferrous metals
Soaking of cellulose filters
Sediment on moving parts and
lacquering
Similar to glycerine
Increase of injection pressure
Generation of excessive heat locally in
rotary type distributor pumps
29
Corrosion of FIE
Filter plugging
Filter plugging
Injector coking
Injector coking
Injector coking
Fuel delivery problems
Pumps seizures
Higher stressing of components

Solid impurities / particles
Ageing products
Corrosive acids (formic &
acetic)
Higher molecular organic acids
Polymerisation products
1.3.5
Potential lubricity problems
Corrosion of all metal parts

May form simple cell
Similar to fatty acid
Deposits, precipitation especially from
fuel mixes
Early life failures

Poor nozzle spray atomization
Reduced service life
Nozzle seat wear
Blocked nozzles
Corrosion of FIE
Filter plugging
Lacquer formation by soluble
Polymers in hot areas
Methanol as Fuel
Methanol is an alcohol made from natural gas [31]. The first step in its production
uses steam re-forming to convert the natural gas to synthesis gas (syngas). In a second step,
and after removal of impurities, carbon monoxide and hydrogen are catalytically removed to
give methanol. It can also be produced from biomass, i.e. cellulosic materials, mostly wood
[32]. The raw material must first be prepared by milling, grinding and drying, and is then
converted into syngas and then into methanol.
1.3.6
Ethanol as Fuel
Ethanol can be produced from biomass (crops rich in sugar, starch or cellulosic
material) rather than from natural gas [33]. Its manufacture involves the fermentation of
sugar, using yeast. Because sugar (glucose) occurs as such in only very few plants, larger
carbohydrate molecules have to be cracked by hydrolysis to fermentable sugar, after the raw
material has been size controlled by splintering and milling. Varied hydrolysis techniques
reflect the most important differences in production methods required by different feed
stocks. Both spark ignition and diesel engines can use ethanol. It can be used mixtured with
gasoline, both as a fuel, or after conversion into ETBE (Ethyl Tertiary Butyl Ether), an antiknock additive. Ethanol yields lower carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions than gasoline and
diesel. It produces low carbon monoxide (CO) and unburned hydrocarbons (HCs) emissions
compared with gasoline but higher ones compared with diesel.
1.3.7
Electric Vehicles
Decreased fuel consumption, or the elimination of the direct use fossil fuel all
together can be seen as the biggest overall benefit of electric vehicles. This reduction or
30
elimination of combustion potentially reduces overall green house gas emissions and
pollution. Electric vehicles have the ability to provide emission free urban transportation. If
the power plants that generate the electricity are taken into consideration, overall emissions
are still greatly reduced [34]. Electric vehicles also greatly reduce the level of noise pollution.
The design of electric vehicles involves the integration of mechanical and electrical systems
and, as such, a thorough understanding of the components that make up the vehicles is
important.
Electric vehicles come in many forms using many different technologies, but is
mainly comprised of three sections: (i) an energy storage device, (ii) an electric drive and (iii)
an electric motor. There may also be a mechanical transmission that will link the electric
motor to the drive wheels of the vehicle. The electric drive has the job of controlling the flow
of energy through to the traction motor. The drive may also have the capability of controlling
the flow of energy from the drive tyres through to the energy storage device. This is known as
regenerative braking [35].
1.3.8
Fuel Cell
Hydrogen in either a compressed or liquid form can be converted into electrical
energy by a hydrogen fuel cell through catalysis. Fuel cells are considered to be the most
promising but least developed technology for automobile propulsion. A simple way to
describe a fuel cell is as an easily refillable electric battery. Although fuel cells do not store
energy, they converted the energy by combining the hydrogen with oxygen. The technology
is promising as there are no direct green house gas emissions or by-products. The result of the
hydrogen-oxygen catalysis is pure water.
1.4 First and second generation bio-fuel

1.4.1
First Generation bio-fuel

First-generation bio-fuels are produced in two ways. One way is through the
fermentation of either a starch-based food product, such as corn kernels, or a sugar-based

food product, such as sugar cane, into ethanol, also known as ethyl alcohol, or "gasohol."
Another way is by processing vegetable oils, such as soy, rapeseed and palm, into bio-diesel,
a nonpetroleum-based diesel fuel. The conventional process is shown in Figure 1.4. The oil is
obtained using the conventional techniques of production. Some of the most popular types of
first generation bio-fuels are: Bio-diesel: This is the type of bio-fuel most commonly used in
31
Europe and is mainly produced using a process called transesterification. This fuel if very
similar to mineral diesel and is chemically known as fatty acid methyl. This oil is produced
after mixing the biomass with methanol and sodium hydroxide in a chemical reaction which
produces bio-diesel. Bio-diesel is very commonly used for diesel engines after mixing up
with mineral diesel, so much so that in many countries the manufacturers of diesel engines
ensure that the engine works well with bio-diesel.
Figure 1.4: Conventional process of producing first generation bio-fuels [36]

Vegetable oil: These kinds of oil can be used not only for cooking purpose but also as
fuel. The main fact that determines the usage of this oil is its quality with good quality oil
generally retained for cooking purpose. Vegetable oil can be used directly in most old diesel
engines, but only in a warm atmosphere. In most countries, vegetable oil is mainly used for
the production of bio-diesel, see Figure 1.5.
Figure 1.5: Conventional of vegetable oils to bio-diesel

32
Biogas: Biogas is mainly produced after the anaerobic digestion of organic materials.
Biogas can also be produced from the biodegradation of waste materials which are fed into
anaerobic digesters and which yield biogas. The residue or the by-product can be used as
manure or fertilizers for agricultural use. The biogas produced is very rich in methane which
can be easily recovered through the use of mechanical or biological treatment systems. A less
clean form of biogas is landfill gas which is produced by the use of naturally occurring
anaerobic digesters, but these gases can be a severe threat if they escape into the atmosphere.
Bioalcohols: These are alcohols produced by the use of enzymes and micro organisms
through the process of fermentation of starches and sugar. Ethanol is the most common type
of bioalcohol whereas butanol and propanol are some of the less common ones. Butanol is
produced using the process of acetone-butanol-ethanol (ABE) fermentation, and experiments
have demonstrated that butanol is a more energy efficient fuel and can be directly used in the
various gasoline engines. Thus biobutanol is sometimes referred to as a direct replacement for
gasoline [36].
Syngas: This is a gas that is produce after the combined process of gasification,
combustion and pyrolysis. Bio-fuel used in this process is converted into carbon monoxide
and then into energy by pyrolysis. During the process, a very little oxygen is supplied to keep
the combustion under control. In the last step known as gasification the organic materials are
converted into gases such as carbon monoxide and hydrogen. The resulting gas, syngas, can
be used as a fuel of internal combustion engines or as an intermediate for the production of
other chemicals.
1.4.2
Second Generation bio-fuel

Second-generation bio-fuels (hydrogenated vegetable oil (HVO), synthetic diesel,
bioethanol (more advanced than 1st generation) can be produced from plant biomass which
tends to refers to lignocellulosic materials (whole parts of plants). These second-generation,
or "advanced," bio-fuels, are made from non-food sources, and hold significant promise as a
low-carbon, renewable transportation fuel that can complement traditional petroleum-based
fuels in meeting the world's future some of energy needs. The process of making alcohol
from lignocellulosic biomass, in principle, is relatively simple: after hydrolysis and a
subsequent fermentation, the ethanol can be refined by distillation as shown in Figure 1.6
[43].
33
Figure 1.6: Second generation bio-fuel [44]

Although using cellulosic biomass as a source of new transportation fuels has obvious
advantages, these materials have different chemical structural bonds than food-based crops
and are difficult to break down, especially on a large scale. However, these second-generation
fuels may play an important role in diversifying the world's energy sources and curbing
greenhouse gas emissions [37].
1.4.3
Recycled Fuels
Waste vegetable oil (WVO) is known as a second generation bio-diesel. WVO is
collected from restaurants, and while usually is free to the user requires extensive cleaning
and refining before it can be turned into a bio-diesel fuel. One of the main advantages to
WVO is the ability to recycle a product. Waste vegetable oil needs to be disposed of properly
and usually requires an added cost to the restaurant to do so. By using these base oils as a fuel
the restaurants save money, and the oil is further utilized. Production of bio-diesel using pure
vegetable oil means that large quantities of agricultural resources like corn, palm, and canola
are required. This usually causes, on larger scales, a fight for the rights to these agricultural
products. These pure vegetable oils are extracted from food, and as bio-diesel becomes more
popular and its price rises, farmers tend to reserve their crops for the fuel industry to obtain a
steady income.
34
1.5 Crop yield

There is growing concern that diversion of agricultural land for biomass plantations or
the direct conversion of food to fuel could lead to decreased availability of land for food
production, particularly in low-income countries [38,39]. In particular, the use of arable land
for production of food crops as a feedstock for bio-fuels has received widespread
international criticism. A United Nations spokesperson on the right of food, Jean Siegler,
reported by the BBC, recently characterized the practice of using land to grow bio-fuel crops
as a crime against humanity that would bring more hunger to the world [41]. Such analyses
are increasingly common as global food price rise sharply, in part due to the use of arable
land for bio-fuel crop production as shown in Figure 1.7.
700
Yield- US gallons/acre
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
Crop
Figure 1.7: Oil Yield for Various Products
Nonhebel [40] showed that in developing countries there is insufficient land to meet
the needs for both food and energy when biomass plantations are substituted for arable land.
He does, however, conclude that biomass energy will be the most likely renewable energy
source in the near future; therefore, there is a need for research to find a way to resolve this
tension.
35
Virgin oil feedstock, rapeseed and soybean oils are commonly used for bio-diesel
production. Soybean oil alone accounts for about ninety percent of all relevant fuel stocks in
the United States [45]. At the same time, the positive attributes of pure vegetable oil need to
be balanced against the limited global production of plant oils since the production of
vegetable oils for use as fuels is limited by the agricultural capacity of a given economy. It is
important to note that soybeans are also a food resource; if not used to produce bio-diesel,
81% of the soybeans yield is protein such as textured vegetable protein (soybeans produce
significantly more protein per acre than most other uses of land) will be used for either
human consumption or animal feed [46]. Due to production limitations of feedstock, there is
a constant search for next generation technologies that may address these problems by
technological advances and/or increase soybean yields from existing acreage [47].
1.6 Properties of Vegetable Oils

The physical fuel properties of vegetable oils are listed in Table 1.5. This table
indicates that the kinematic viscosity of vegetable oils varies from 30-40 mm/s2 at 38oC. The
high viscosity of these oils is due to their larger molecular mass than that of diesel fuel. The
flash point of vegetable oils is very high (above 200oC). The calorific heating values are in
the range of 39-40 MJ/kg, while diesel fuel is about 44 MJ/kg. This explains the higher fuel
consumption with bio-diesel under some operating conditions. The presence of chemically
bound oxygen in vegetable oils lowers their heating values by about 10%. The Cetane
numbers are in the range of 32-40, which is close to that of diesel [15].
Table 1.5: Properties of vegetable oils [15]
Vegetable
Oil
Kinematic
Viscosity
At 38oC
(mm2/s)
Cetane
Number
Heating
Value
(MJ/kg)
Cloud
Point
(oC)
Pour
Point
(oC)
Flash
Point
(oC)
Density
(kg/l)
Corn
34.9
37.6
39.5
-1.1
-40.0
277
0.9095
Cottonseed
33.5
41.8
39.5
1.7
-15.0
234
0.9148
Crambe
53.6
44.6
40.5
10.0
-12.2
274
0.948
Linseed
27.2
34.6
39.3
1.7
-15.0
241
0.9236
Peanut
39.6
41.8
39.8
12.8
-6.7
271
0.9026
Rapeseed
37
37.6
39.7
-3.9
-31.7
246
0.9115
Safflower
31.3
41.3
39.5
18.3
-6.7
260
0.9144
36
Sesame
35.3
40.2
39.3
-3.9
-9.4
260
0.9133
Soya Bean
32.6
37.9
39.6
-3.9
-12.2
254
09138
Sunflower
33.9
37.1
39.6
7.2
-15.0
274
0.9161
Palm
39.6
42
31.0
267
0.9180
Babasu
30.3
38
20.0
150
0.9460
Diesel
3.06
50
43.8
-16.0
76
0.8550
The biggest and probably most important difference in properties is the high viscosity
coefficient of vegetable oil, typically about ten times the value for diesel. This property alone
makes bio-diesel a superior fuel than its petroleum counterpart, and suggests that bio-diesel
can prevent wear and tear on engine parts and components, while decreasing harmful
emissions. The coefficient of viscosity is a number that refers to the capability of a liquid to
drain by gravity. This is further explained as a fluid's internal resistance to flow or considered
to be fluid friction. The coefficient of viscosity is known either as kinematic viscosity (v)
[mm2/s], or dynamic viscosity () [Pa.s]. Figure 1.8 shows this phenomenon more clearly.
Consider a liquid flowing steadily over a smooth horizontal surface. It will be observed that
the liquid flows in layers or planes parallel to the bottom. The layer which is in immediate
contact with the bottom surface is at rest. The velocity of the different layers increases
gradually (Laminar flow) as the reference plane moves away from the bottom (static surface)
towards the top of the fluid (main flow plane), where it is a maximum. The viscous or drag
force on a fluid layer is proportional to the viscosity of the fluid and difference in velocity
between the top and bottom of the layer. The velocity profile shown in Figure 1.8 will
generally be parabolic.
Figure 1.8: Example of a fluid flow into a line [16]

37
Dynamic viscosity provides the properties observed in bio-diesel fuels which

prevent high friction between the fuel and the engine. Lower friction means less frictional
force to be converted to heat, and thus less wear and tear. Dynamic viscosity is given by the
Equation (1.1):
/
(1.1)
!"#$% $& " ' ( )
Where:
. +,#$ - "-!, . /

0'$ " !1' %$,' 2'#& "#-'' ( )

1'$ '%" !, ($ !"# '%" !,)31'' 4 5 $# ()$- -1"3# !1' &6'

-
The Kinematic viscosity is as shown in Equation (1.2):
/
Where:
7#$$! - "-!, 8
(1.2)

9
-
. +,#$ - "-!, . /

:&
+'#-!, " !1' %6 . ; /

Bio-diesel is created by a process which the industry refers to as esterification or
transesterification: here the chemical properties of the base vegetable oil are modified.
Transesterification leads to engine combustion benefits which include a reduced viscosity, a
complete removal of glycerin, a higher boiling point, a higher flash point and a lowered pour
point [17]. All benefits which provide a more stable fuel and allow the diesel engine to have a
more complete air fuel mixture before combustion.
1.6.1
Types of base vegetable oil for bio-diesel production

First-generation bio-diesel can be produced straight from vegetable oil, also called
pure plant oil, a refined oil which has not been used for cooking. This allows for the biodiesel to be produced in less time, since refining and cleaning are eliminated. The pure base
vegetable oil also has a lower acidic level which, in turn, requires less methanol and catalyst
38
for a successful chemical reaction. The second type of base vegetable oil is known as a
second generation of bio-diesel and is made from WVO which requires extensive cleaning
and refining before it can be turned into a bio-diesel fuel. One of the main advantages to
WVO is that a product is recycled.
1.6.2
Transesterification process
Due to their high viscosity and low volatility, vegetable oils do not burn completely and
tend to form deposits in the fuel injector of diesel engines. Different ways have been
considered to reduce the high viscosity of vegetable oils:
Dilution using regular diesel.
Micro emulsions with short chain alcohols such as ethanol or methanol.
Thermal decomposition, which produces alkanes, alkenes, carboxylic acids and

aromatic compounds.
Catalytic cracking, which produces alkanes, cyclo alkanes and alkyl benzenes.
Transesterification with ethanol or methanol.

In order to reduce the higher viscosity of bio-fuels and enhance its performance, the
most effective method is a process called transesterification. In this process glycerol, which
makes the fuel denser, is extracted to obtain a fuel that is less viscous. There are three basic
routes to ester production from oils and fats:
Base catalyzed esterification of the oil with alcohol.
Direct acid catalyzed esterification of the oil with methanol.
Conversion of the oil to fatty acids, and then to alkyl esters with acid catalysis.
For several economic reasons, the majority of alkyl esters produced today is by the base
catalysed reaction. Some of the reasons for this are:
Low temperature (65oC) and pressure (2 bar) required for the process.
High conversion rate with (98%) minimal reaction time.
Direct conversion to methyl ester without any intermediate steps.
Reactants required are readily available.
39
Figure 1.9 shows the effectiveness of the process. As seen, the conversion rate of this
reaction is almost 100% i.e. no reactants are wasted. For the transesterification process shown
in Figure 1.10, 1 kg of pure bio-fuel oil is taken in a round bottom flask; a separately
prepared mixture of 8 gm of sodium hydroxide (NaOH) is dissolved in 240 gm of methanol
and is added to this round bottom flask. The mixture is stirred and maintained at 65C for 1
hour and then allowed to settle under gravity in a separating funnel. Ester forms the upper
layer in the separating funnel and glycerol forms the lower layer. The separated ester is mixed
twice with 0.25 kg of hot water and allowed to settle under gravity for 24 hours. The catalyst
dissolved in water, forms the lower layer and can be separated. Moisture is removed from this
ester using silica gel crystals. About 0.905 kg of purified ester was obtained at the end. The
entire process takes 48 hours. The purified bio-fuel oil methyl ester is then blended with
petroleum diesel fuel in various concentrations for preparing bio-diesel blends to be used in
the engine [15].
Figure 1.9: General overview of transesterification process [www.bio-diesel.org]
Figure 1.10: Flow chart for transeseterification process [15]

40
1.6.3
Reactants and Product of Transesterification Process

The process of transesterification yields two reactants. The first of these is the
triglycerides found in the vegetable oil while the second of these reactants is alcohol.
Triglycerides can have different alkyl groups as bio-diesel can be made out of different kinds
of straight or waste vegetable oils. In order to have the triglycerides react a compatible
alcohol must be used. For production of bio-diesel the alcohol is likely to be either methanol
or ethanol. These two alcohols are used in particular for this chemical reaction because there
is very little space between triglycerides atoms for the alcohol to react [17].
When these two reactants are in contact they yield two products: glycerin and methyl
ester or ethyl ester depending whether methanol or ethanol was used as an alcohol. Glycerin
is seen as a by-product and considered waste, though it is usually recycled by other
companies for their products. The resulting product is considered the fuel, in this case biodiesel. Since the glycerin is denser than the bio-diesel fuel, when it separates it sinks,
allowing for its easy extraction from the fuel. This reaction can be seen by the following
Equation (1.3):
<=>=?@AB= CDB E FBGCHCB I JBG=KDL E MDC N OD=P=B
(1.3)
As stated above the use of this transesterification process yields a 79% efficient
reaction. This means that the following statement holds true for most bio-diesel productions.
RS% <=>=?@AB= CDB E S% FBGCHCB I UV% MDCOD=P=B E % JBG=KDL
(1.4)
Under ideal conditions almost all of the base fuel will be converted to a bio-fuel. The
glycerin accounts for only a small part of the reaction. When the reaction is complete, the
reactants used to produce glycerin and bio-diesel can return themselves into reactants and
allow a chemical reaction to produce triglycerides and alcohol. Since the use of WVO is
common, it should be noted that WVO contains some free fatty acids (FFAs) that have been
dislocated during the cooking processes. As with the base oil these FFAs have to be
neutralized because they can lead to undesired reactions, which could make the bio-diesel
unusable.
The catalyst and methanol must be added in exact quantities to neutralize the acidic
levels of the reactants. If this is not done, the reaction results in high quantities of glycerine or
soaps and no usable fuel will be obtained. The catalyst used in this reaction can be one of two
41
types: sodium hydroxide (NaOH) or potassium hydroxide (KOH). Since these catalysts have
high base levels, they help speed-up the reaction, and allow for bio-diesel to begin to be
produced in as little as 15 minutes [13]. In order to find the right ratio of catalyst to be used a
titration process is required, which will be considered later on. Having a strong base catalyst
allows for the neutralization of the free fatty amino acids and will deprotonate the alcohol and
consequently allow the transesterification process to occur.
Since the reaction needs to find an equilibrate state, addition of excess alcohol is
added to the base oil, which guarantees a complete reaction. The excess alcohol will be
removed and can be used for another batch of bio-diesel production. To ease the reaction, a
heated element is added to the batch to maintain a temperature of 50-65C. This allows for
the transesterification process to speed-up, and is why bio-diesel production can be created in
a short period of time. This heated element is usually hot water circulating through a copper
coil submerged in the batch.
1.6.4
Chemical Reaction of the Base Catalyzed Transesterification Process

Transesterification refers to a chemical process of transformation of an ester. This
reaction finds an equilibrate state, requiring the base catalyst to be efficient. The production
of bio-diesel for this study is based on methanol only which yields methyl ester, for this
reason only the reaction of this fuel will be considered. An ester is a class of chemical
compounds and functional group, usually acids, in which at least one -OH group is be
replaced by an -o-alkyl group. Alkyls are chemical compounds that consist of carbon and
hydrogen atoms arranged in a chain [18].
The chemical formula of methanol is CH4O and its semi-developed formula is CH3OH. The chemical formula for the methyl group is CH3. Since the base catalyst deprotonates
the alcohol, a reaction between the two reactants can take place. Deprotonate refers to the
removal of a proton (hydrogen H+) from a molecule, forming the conjugate base [18]. In the
presence of NaOH, methanol deprotonate in the form shown in Equation (1.4):
WX; N YX E $YX I WX; YZ E X [
WX; N Y WX; YZ
(1.4)
Once the methanol is deprotonated and converted into methoxide, it has a slight
negative charge. This is important for the reaction to continue. From Equation 1.4 it is clear
42
that the dissolution of the lye (NaOH) and the methanol will yield the first product and a
Hydrogen atom with an extra positive charge.
The second stage of this reaction depends on the chemical composition of the base oil
being used. Since a diverse group of oils can be used, the equation shown is generalized to
represent the triglycerides present in these oils. The main difference between one oil to
another will be in the different types of alkyl groups. For simplification the different alkyl
groups are denoted by R1, R2 and R3. Equation 1.5 shows the chemical composition of this
oil:
\
\;
WY
WY
Y N WX N WX N WX N Y
WY
(1.5)
\
Note that C=O has a slight positive charge.

After deprotonisation of methanol in the presence of lye the methoxide will be added
to the triglyceride and the transesterification process can begin. Equation 1.6 shows the
reaction based on the catalyzed transesterification of triglycerides with the alkyl groups
specified previously as R1, R2 and R3, with methanol. The catalyst used here is NaOH, and
the product of this chemical reaction is the bio-diesel: methyl ester, and the by-product
glycerin.
\
WY
\;
WY
Y N WX N WX N WX N Y E 3^WX; N YX_

WY
\
a&%, ''
b'!1$#"%
YX
\,,;
NYX E WX; " N W
YX
c%, '#
(1.6)
b'!1,% d-!'
Since the methanol has been deprotonated it now contains some particles with a slight
negative charge, while some of the elements of the triglycerides have a slightly positive
charge as noted previously. Electrostatic forces cause the negative charged particles to attach
themselves to the positive charged particles. Equation 1.7 shows the reactants before the
transesterification process:
43
\
\;
WY
WY
3WX; YZ E 3X [ E Y N WX N WX WX N Y

WY
(1.7)
\
The first step of this reaction has the particles of the triglycerides charged positively,
which attracts the negative charged particle present in the deprotonisation of the methanol.
This can be seen by Equation 1.8:
WX; YZ
\
W Y[
\
WX; YZ
W Y[
(1.8)
X [ Y N WX N WX N WX N Y X [
WX; YZ W Y[ X [
\
After this step because the oxygen has a pair of electrons and carbon cannot contain
more than it has, it will break the double bond it contains with the oxygen. This is seen in
Equation 1.9.
\
WX; Y N W YZ
Y
N WX N
WX
WX; Y N W YZ
N WX N
WX; Y N W YZ
\
\;
E 3^X [ _
(1.9)
The three H+ (positively charged hydrogen atoms) from the deprotonisation of

methanol are attracted to the oxygen atom which is negatively charged. This reaction seen in
Equation 1.10 and accounts for the formation of glycerine.
X[
X[
Y N WX N WX N WX N Y E 3^WX; Y N

X[
\,,;
W
N YZ _
(1.10)
From the reaction two final products are produced, one is of highest interest; the
methyl ester - the bio-diesel fuel and the second is the glycerin by-product which will be
discarded. This glycerin has a dark brown colour while the bio-diesel fuel is a light caramel
44
yellow, similar in colour to apple juice. Equation 1.11 shows the chemical reactions for these
two final products:
YX
YX
\
\
\;
WX N WX N WX E WX; Y N W Y E WX; Y N W Y E WX; Y N W Y

YX
(1.11)
|g c%, '# g | |g g g g g g b'!1,% d-!' g g g g g g g |
This is the final reaction plus some excess alcohol which was added to ensure a
complete reaction. The alcohol can also be removed and then recycled. Leaving the final
product of methyl ester or 100% bio-diesel, B100, this can be used directly or mixed with
petroleum diesel [17].
1.6.5
Physical Properties of Bio-diesel

The properties of bio-diesel and diesel fuels, see Table 1.6, are very similar to each
other and therefore bio-diesel rates as a strong candidate as an alternative or extender for
diesel. This is due to the fact that the conversion of triglycerides into methyl or ethyl esters
improves the properties of base oil by decreasing its density and viscosity. The cetane
numbers for bio-diesel is close that of diesel, suggesting similar combustion behaviour as that
of diesel.
Table 1.6: Physical properties of bio-diesel [15]
Vegetable
Oil Methyl
Ester
(Bio-diesel)
Kinematic
Viscosity
(mm2/s)
Cetane
Number
Heating
Value
(MJ/kg)
Cloud
Point
(oC)
Pour
Point
(oC)
Flash
Point
(oC)
Density
(kg/l)
Peanut
4.9
54
33.6
176
0.883
Soya Bean
4.5
45
33.5
-7
178
0.885
Palm
4.7
62
33.5
13
164
0.880
Sunflower
4.6
49
33.5
173
0.860
Tallow
12
96
Diesel
20% Blend
Bio-diesel
3.06
50
43.8
-16
76
0.855
3.2
51
43.2
-16
128
0.859
45
1.7 Aims
The aim of this research is to investigate the viability of using bio-diesel as an
alternative, or additive, to basic diesel fuel. The engine performance is to be evaluated along
with the emission characteristics for an engine running with bio-diesel and traditional fuels.
Also, the research will study the effect of reaction temperature, catalyst concentration (wt.%),
molar ratio of alcohol:oil (mol/mol) and reaction time on the percentage conversion. The
response surface methodology (RSM) was used to optimize the conditions for the maximum
conversion to bio-diesel and understand the significance and interaction of the factors
affecting the bio-diesel production.
1.8 Objectives
The objective of this research was to find an immediate alternative energy solution,
which does not involve a drastic overhaul of the world's engine structure. Obtaining a viable
solution is one which can reduce the global green house emissions over the petroleum diesel
counterpart, while maintaining a similar output in performance, and efficiency. It should also
be noted that this study will look at how these bio-fuels compare in cost to petroleum diesel,
and what benefits are provided by recycling used vegetable oil (WVO). Further objective of
this research was to optimize bio-diesel production from crude sunflower oil by using
conventional transesterification method. The use of crude sunflower oil as raw material for
bio-diesel production will enhance the viability of the sunflower oil industry, making
sunflower oil preferred renewable bio-base ingredients for existing or new industrial
application.
1.9 Outline of Thesis

An introduction to the problem, description of alternative fuels used in the study,
some of their associated advantages and disadvantages will be discussed, global perspective,
and automotive industry, fuel demand past present and future, and discussion of the aims and
the objectives is given Chapter 1.
Chapter 2 presents the literature survey; description of impact of used bio-fuels on
agriculture and environment and presents the methods of bio-fuel production from feedstock
and non feedstock by using transesterification process.
46
Chapter 3 presents the experimental techniques and instrumentation used in the biodiesel production by Fuelpod for transesterifying oil at non-optimize conduction. The
details validation of the experimental setup and, material and method to characterize the oil
properties tested fuels and describes the results for the oils and fuels properties. This includes
viscosity, free fatty acid content and perhaps degree for the oils and viscosity, cloud point and
pour point for the fuels.
Chapter 4 presents the experimental techniques used in bio-diesel production at
optimize conduction by using RSM strategy. The chapter describes the optimisation of the
fuel manufacture process and discussion the results for the bio-diesel optimal production
yield. This includes, alcohol to oil molar ratio, concentration of catalyst, rate of mixing and,
reaction time and temperature.
Chapter 5 presents the experiment setup used in the compression ignition engine
investigation, the results and discussion for the experimentally obtained data involving the
engine performance and exhaust gas emissions. This includes measured brake power, torque
and fuel consumption, concentration of exhaust gas emissions such as carbon monoxide,
oxide of nitrogen, hydrocarbon and carbon dioxide. The cost analysis for bio-diesel blends as
fuel discusses as well in this chapter.
Finally, in Chapter 6 a general discussion of the dissertation is given followed by
recommendations for future studies.
47
1.10
Conclusions
In summary, with economic development, energy needs grew, utilizing natural
resources such as hydro, fossil fuel, wood, and nuclear energy in the preceding century. Biofuels were suggested alternative resource as fuel in internal combustion engines. There are
two types of bio-fuels, first generation bio-fuel, such as bio-diesel and bio-ethanol. Bio-diesel
produced by transesterification or reforming of vegetable oil and bio-ethanol produced by
fermentation of sugars or starch. However, second generation bio-fuel produced from lignin
and cellulose such as wood, straw.
The physical properties of vegetable oils, bio-diesel and standard diesel were showed
in this chapter. The greatest difference between vegetable and diesel oil was their viscosity,
typically about 10 times the value for diesel. The high viscosity of the vegetable oil may
contribute to formation of carbon deposits in engines, incomplete combustion and reduced
life of an engine. Thus, it is important to know the properties of vegetable oil before use it in
the engine. The viscosity of vegetable oils were varies from 30-40 mm2/s and 38o, whereas it
was just 4.7 mm2/s in average for bio-diesel and 3.06 mm2/s for diesel fuel. The calorific
heating values for vegetable and bio-diesel oils were in the range of 39-40 MJ/kg, while
diesel fuel was about 44 MJ/kg. The Cetane numbers were in the range of 32-40, which is
close to that of diesel fuel.
The next chapter presents the literature survey, which will be description of impact of
used bio-fuels on agriculture and environment and presents the methods of bio-fuel
production from feedstock and non feedstock by using transesterification process.
48
CHAPTER - 2
LITERATURE SURVEY
2.1 Introduction
Nowadays, the world energy demand has increased significantly due to the global
industrialization and increase of population. As a result, the current limited reservoirs will
soon be depleted at the current rate of consumption. The Oil and Gas Journal (O&GJ)
estimates that at the beginning of 2004, the worldwide reserves still had 1.27 trillion barrels
of oil and 6,100 trillion cubic feet of natural gas left. However, at todays consumption level
of about 85 million barrels of oil per day and 260 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day, the
current reserves can only be used for another 40 years for the oil and 64 years for the natural
gas [59].
Moreover, increase of pollutant emissions from the use of petroleum fuel will affect
human health, such as respiratory system, nervous system and skin diseases etc. Both the
increased energy needs and environmental consciousness have stimulated the research of
searching an alternative fuel. Bio-diesel may be the best answer due to its following
advantages:
Reduces the countrys dependence on imported petroleum.
Being renewable and it contributes less to global warming than petroleum fuel due to
its closed carbon cycle. The primary feedstocks are sustainable and most of the carbon
in the fuel can be removed from the air by the plant.
Provides good engine performance and can be used without engine modification.
Provides the market with bio-diesels from sufficient production of vegetable oils and
animal fats, thus enhancing the rural economies.
Biodegradable and nontoxic.
Exhibits lower combustion profile, especially sulphur oxide (SOx).
49
2.2 Impacts of Bio-fuels on Agriculture and Environment

Since bio-fuels are produced from agricultural sources their production impacts on
food security, the environment, natural resources, ecosystems, and the livelihood of possibly
billions of people. Traditionally, agriculture has been the source of food, animal feed and
fibre, but the connection between energy and agriculture was weak and largely confined to
links through production costs of diesel and fertilizer and other agro-chemicals, which are all
energy intensive. This linkage was a concern mainly in the developed countries. But now a
new linkage is being established through a demand-pull from the energy sector. It is being
pulled by the opportunity to gain massive bio-fuel subsidies due to high oil prices. This new
link has led to higher commodity prices with the growth in bio-fuel production.
The growing popularity of bio-fuels has fuelled the debate on the price of food. For
instance, the United States bio-fuel boom has led to a rapid increase in the price of corn, from
$2.20/bushel in September 2006 to a peak of $7.40/bushel in June 2008. In the same period,
soybean prices also experienced rapid increase from $5.20/ bushel to $16.40/bushel. Since
corn and soybeans are major ingredients in livestock feed, their higher prices increase the
cost of milk, meat, eggs, etc., which are all passed on to consumers. In terms of annual food
bill, it has been estimated that United States consumers paid $22 billion more for food in
2007, of this two thirds was due to bio-fuels [60]. Food grains and oilseeds form the major
source of bio-fuel feedstock and this competes directly with their use as food and feed, and
indirectly for land, water, and other resources.
Since both agricultural supply and the demand for food are highly inelastic in the
short-run, any surge in demand for bio-fuel feedstock puts upward pressure on commodity
prices in global agricultural markets. Higher commodity prices can benefit farmers and
improve their well-being depending on whether they are net-sellers or net-buyers of food, and
the impact of higher commodity prices on those earning rural wages. Growing food crops for
energy purposes can foster rural economic activities and generate employment and income
sources for the poor, but higher food prices can also severely affect the purchasing power of
smallholder farmers, landless labourers, and the urban poor. Bio-fuels are promising but pose
serious challenges.
Advocates for bio-fuels argue that they are a suitable strategy for improving energy
security of a country, especially when that country depends largely on geo-politically
50
unstable energy suppliers [61, 62]. Several studies have shown that greater use of bio-fuels
and other liquid and gaseous fuels for transport could reduce green house gas emissions,
improve vehicle performance and protect ecosystems [63-66]. Hill et al. [67] by using lifecycle analysis (Life-cycle analysis is an emerging popular technique particularly for
analyzing environmental aspects of, for example, green house gas emissions of a product by
accounting for all stages of its life cycle), they found that the corn-ethanol yields 25% more
energy and generates 12% less greenhouse gas emissions, and soybean bio-diesel yields 93%
more energy and generates 41% less greenhouse gas emissions, relative to fossil fuels.
However, several studies in the recent past have argued that bio-fuels produced on converted
land can be much greater net emitters of greenhouse gas emissions than fossil fuels because
use of the land for bio-fuels leads to land conversion elsewhere in the world, and that land
conversion releases carbon and reduces future carbon sequestration [68, 69].
Growing demand for bio-fuel feedstock particularly in EU and the U.S. has resulted in
soaring feedstock prices, which have been partially transmitted to many developing countries.
Apart from hurting the net purchasers of food, higher prices also lead to deforestation in
places such as Brazil [70], Indonesia and Malaysia [71]. Worry is being expressed at the
potential land degradation in the develop countries due to withdrawal of land from agriculture
[72]. Though there are various views on the beneficial aspects of different types of bio-fuels,
Pagel [73] reports that the United Nations supports the Brazilian bio-fuel model as it wins
both environmentally and commercially, as well as from a developmental perspective.
2.3 Land Use Change

Bio-fuel production removes CO2 from the atmosphere and thus reduces greenhouse
gas emissions relative to fossil fuels, which take carbon from the ground. However, some
researchers argue that whether or not bio-fuels offer carbon savings depends on how they are
produced. They argue that the increasing demand of bio-fuel production will lead to increase
in demand for feedstock, which in turn will either require bringing undisturbed land into
cultivation (e.g. forest, grassland) or to divert existing croplands into bio-fuels. A direct land
use change converts native land cover, such as forests or grasslands or other natural
ecosystems, to bio-fuel production. The expansion of bio-fuel production into forests and
grasslands releases carbon stored in the plants and soil into the atmosphere through
decomposition or burning, which will result in a net increase in greenhouse gas emissions.
Indirect land use change diverts existing food and feed croplands into bio-fuels, which may
51
result in clearing more forests or grasslands elsewhere to replace crops for animal feed and
food [69].
2.4 Bio-diesel production Methods

There are four primary options for making bio-diesel from fats and oils.
2.4.1 Direct use and blending
The possibility of direct use of vegetable oils as fuel has been recognized since the
beginning of the diesel engine. In 1893, Rudolf Diesel successfully demonstrated his
innovation, the diesel engine, by running it on peanut oil (a biomass fuel), and for the first
time, the possibility of utilizing biomass as for engine fuels was established. However, the
straight use of vegetable oils to replace conventional fuels meets operational problems due to
its high viscosity. Polymerization, as a result of reactivity of C-C double bonds that may be
present, lower its volatility which causes the formation of carbon deposits in engines due to
incomplete combustion, and oil ring sticking, due to thickening and gelling of the lubricating
oils as a result of contamination [74].
The great advancement in petroleum industry technologies meant fossil fuels could be
produced much cheaper than the biomass alternatives, resulting in, for many years, the near
elimination of the biomass fuel production infrastructure. However, interest in the use of
vegetable oils for engine fuels has been reported periodically. For instance, during the World
War II, vegetable oils were used and tested in diesel engines in several countries, e.g.,
Belgium, France, the United Kingdom, Germany, Japan, etc. Vegetable oils can be used by
blending with the diesel fuel, given rise to improvement in the physicochemical properties of
the former. Nevertheless, the long term use of this blending in a modern diesel engine has
become impractical because of the reduction in power output and thermal efficiency by
carbon deposits [74, 75].
2.4.2 Microemulsions
A microemulsion is technically defined as a stable dispersion of one liquid phase into
another, which has a droplet diameter approximately 100 nm or less. Microemulsion
processes have been studied for bio-diesel production as a means to improve the viscosity of
vegetable oils by blending with a simple alcohol such as methanol or ethanol [76, 77].
However, significant carbon deposits, incomplete combustion, increase in the viscosity of
52
lubricating oils, and sticking of the injector needle are all reported as long term consequences
of using fuel produced by this process [77].
2.4.3 Thermal cracking (pyrolysis)
Pyrolysis is defined as the conversion of one substance into another by means of heat
in the absence of air or oxygen at temperatures ranging from 450 C to 850 C or by heat
with the aid of a Lewis acid catalyst. The Lewis acid catalysts used in this process include
zeolites, clay montmorrilite, aluminum choride, aluminum bromide, ferrous choride, and
ferrous bromide. However, the removal of oxygen during thermal processing also eliminates
the environmental benefits associated with using an oxygenated fuel [75]. In addition, these
fuels are produced more like gasoline than diesel.
2.4.4 Transesterification (Alcoholysis)
Among the present methodologies, transesterification is considered as the best
process. Transesterification reactions are reversible reactions that involve the transformation
of one ester into another different ester. For manufacturing bio-diesel, transesterification is
performed to lower the viscosity of vegetable oils. Specifically, a triglyceride (TG) molecule
(primary compound in vegetable oils) reacts with a low molecular weight alcohol, yielding a
mono alkyl ester and by-product glycerine, which is used in pharmaceutical and cosmetic
industries. The transesterification reaction for bio-diesel synthesis is shown in Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1: Triglyceride transesterification reaction
53
Since transesterification is a reversible reaction, alcohols are usually present in excess

to assist in rapid TG conversion and ensure complete conversion. Methanol and ethanol are
commonly used, especially methanol because of its low cost. The rate of the reaction can be
significantly improved by the presence of acid or basic catalysts. In general, the use of basic
catalysts is more desirable since it provides satisfactory conversion within a short time.
Currently, most commercial bio-diesel production is performed by alkali-catalyzed
transesterification since it can be operated under mild conditions to achieve significant
conversion with minimal reaction time and side reactions. However, the standard bio-diesel
production suffers from the presence of water and free fatty acids (FFAs) in feedstocks. The
presence of water favours the formation of FFAs by hydrolysis of TGs and esters products
(bio-diesel). Formation of FFA in the presence of basic homogeneous catalysts gives rise to
soap, creating serious problems for product separation and ultimately hindering catalytic
activity. As a result, highly refined vegetable oils are required for the process otherwise pretreatment is required for the feedstocks to reduce the acid and water concentrations to below
optimum threshold limits, i.e., FFAs < 1 wt% and water < 0.5 wt% [78]. Various factors
affect the process of transesterification, and the more important ones are described in the next
section.
2.4.4.1 Catalyst type and concentration
Catalyst type and catalyst concentration are the most important factors in the
transesterification reaction. Commonly used and very effective alkali catalysts are sodium
hydroxide (NaOH), sodium methoxide (NaOCH3), potassium hydroxide (KOH), and
potassium methoxide (KOCH3) [97]. A previous study investigated the methanolysis of beef
tallow with catalysts NaOH and NaOMe [98]. The results indicated that NaOH was
significantly better than NaOCH3. Sodium hydroxide (NaOH) and potassium hydroxide
(KOH) are generally used for alkaline transesterification in concentrations from 0.4 to 2%
(wt/wt) of oil. Methanolysis or ethanolysis of most vegetable oils with 1% (wt/wt) of
potassium hydroxide gives the best yields and lowest viscosities of the esters [43]. Generally,
increasing catalyst concentration (in range 0.5 to 1.5% wt/wt) has a curvilinear effect on the
conversion obtained, with yield inhibited at high catalyst concentration [99]. The best yield is
obtained at about 1% (wt/wt) catalyst concentration and a reduction in yield is observed as
catalyst concentration is increased. The reduction in yield is due to reversible reactions being
favoured at high catalyst concentrations [99].
54
Meka et al. [105] studied the effect of catalyst (NaOH) concentration on reaction time
at two temperatures 50 and 60 C for safflower oil, when the methanol/oil molar ratio was
kept at 6:1. The authors found that in both cases, reaction time decreased proportionally with
increase in catalyst concentration from 1% to 2%, but soap was formed when catalyst
concentration was above 2%. Ataya et al. [106] performed canola oil transesterification
experiments and found TG conversion increased when the catalyst (NaOH) concentration
increased from 1% to 3%.
Rashid et al. [107] evaluated the effect of catalyst type and concentration on the
rapeseed oil ester yields, and observed that the hydroxides gave rise to higher yield than the
counterpart methoxides. The results showed that 1% KOH was the optimal value when the
concentration was varied between 0.25% and 1.5%. This was in accordance with the result
obtained by Tomasevic et al. [99] and Meher et al. [104]. The same trends were observed
when varying the concentration of NaOH from 0% to 1.5%. The best ester yield was
achieved for NaOH concentration of 1%, which was also recommended by Freedman et al.
[101]. In contrast, Vicente et al. [109] drew a conclusion that bio-diesel yields after
separation and purification steps were higher for methoxide catalysts (NaOCH3, KOCH3)
than for hydroxide catalysts (NaOH, KOH) when methanolysis of sunflower oil was
performed. This phenomenon of yield loss was ascribed to the fact that hydroxide catalysts
could cause more TG saponification and methyl ester dissolution in glycerol. Moreover,
among these catalyzed transesterifications, the reactions using NaOH were fastest.
Alkaline catalysts are more sensitive to the presence of free fatty acid and water.
Their application in vegetable oil transesterification can cause soap formation by neutralizing
the free fatty acid in the oil, which can partially consume the catalyst, thus decreasing the biodiesel yield. Usually in basic conditions, the acceptable total FFA and water content are 0.5%
and 0.1%-0.3%, respectively [110]. Acid catalysts were preferred for bio-diesel production
when the FFA content is high. The acids could be sulphuric acid (H2SO4), phosphoric acid,
hydrochloric acid (HCl) or organic sulphonic acid. H2SO4 and HCl are commonly preferred.
Goff et al. [111] studied a single step acid-catalyzed alcoholysis of soybean oil using
sulphuric, hydrochloric, formic, acetic, and nitric acids at 0.1 and 1 wt.% loadings and
temperatures of 100 C and 120 C in sealed ampules, only sulphuric acid was found to be
effective. Further kinetic studies demonstrated that at 100 C, 0.5 wt.% sulphuric acid
catalyst, and nine times methanol stoichiometry, >99 wt.% conversion of TG was achieved in
55
8 h. The same conversion could be obtained at less than 4 h if FFA concentrations were less
than 0.8 wt%. Reaction conditions near 100 C at 0.1 to 0.5 wt.% were identified as
providing the necessary conversions in a 24 h batch cycle.
Zullaikah et al. [91] undertook a two-step acid-catalyzed process for the production
of bio-diesel from rice bran oil. The first step was carried out at 60 C and the second step at
100 C. In their work, the organic phase of the first step reaction product was used as the
substrate for a second acid-catalyzed methanolysis. By this two-step sulphuric acid catalyzed
reaction, the yield could be more than 98% in less than 8 h. Williams et al. [110] successfully
prepared bio-diesel from waste vegetable oil by 1% sulphuric acid catalyzed reaction at 117
C in which butanol was selected as the alcohol. Al-Widyan et al. [112] evaluated the effect
of different concentrations of HCl, H2SO4, and excess ethanol on the transesterification of
waste palm oil. The authors reported that higher catalyst concentrations (1.5-2.25 M)
produced bio-diesel with lower specific gravity in a much shorter reaction time than lower
concentrations. The specific gravity served as an indicator for the effectiveness and
completeness of the conversion process. Lower values meant more complete reaction since
more of the heavy glycerol was removed. At 2.25 M, the H2SO4 performed better than HCl.
2.4.4.2 Molar ratio of alcohol to oil and type of alcohol
The molar ratio of alcohol to oil is another important variable affecting the yield of
bio-diesel from oil (A molar ratio is ratio between the amounts in moles of any two
compounds involved in a chemical reaction, one mole of methanol = 32 grams and one mole
of oil = 900 grams). Based on reaction stoichiometry, only three moles of alcohol are
required to transesterify a molecule of triglyceride and produce three moles of fatty acid alkyl
esters (bio-diesel) and a mole of glycerol. Generally, 100-200% excess alcohol is used, which
drives the reaction in the forward direction and favours bio-diesel production. However, a
very high molar ratio of alcohol to vegetable oil is avoided because it might interfere with the
phase separation of bio-diesel and glycerol post transesterification reaction. Additionally,
when high molar ratios are used, the reverse reaction is favoured, lowering the yield of esters.
In a previous study, the transesterification of cynara oil with ethanol as an alcohol
source was studied at molar ratios of alcohol to oil between 3:1 and 15:1. The conversion
increased as the molar ratio increased up to a value of 12:1. The best conversions were
obtained at molar ratios between 9:1 and 12:1. For lower molar ratios, the reaction was not
completed and for higher molar ratios, the yield of esters decreased because of improper
56
phase separation [100]. However, the optimal molar ratio will vary from one oil source to
another.
Zhou et al. [103] studied the effect of alcohol/oil molar ratio on the single-phase basecatalyzed ethanolyses of sunflower oils. In that study, four molar ratios of ethanol to
sunflower oil (6:1, 20:1, 25:1, and 30:1) were examined. The authors found that at ethanol/oil
molar ratios of 20, 25, and 30:1, equilibrium was reached in 6 to 10 min at 23 C when 1.4%
of potassium hydroxide was used; While at the molar ratio of 6:1, equilibrium could not be
reached even after 30 min. Increasing the molar ratio did favour the formation of esters, but
the difference for the range of molar ratios from 25:1 to 20:1 was small.
Meher et al. [104] concluded that the reaction was faster with higher molar ratio of
methanol to oil whereas a longer time was required for a lower molar ratio (6:1) to get the
same conversion. In their research, the molar ratio of methanol to oil, i.e., 6:1, 9:1, 12:1, and
24:1, were investigated for optimizing bio-diesel production from Karanja oil.
Canakci et al. [65] investigated the effect of different alcohol types on
transesterification. Methanol, ethanol, 2-propanol, and 1-butanol were tested for a 48-h test
period, with sulphuric acid catalyst concentration equal to 3% and the molar ratio of alcohol
to oil at 6:1. The conversion was 87.8%, 95.8%, 92.9%, and 92.1% for methyl ester, ethyl
ester, 2-propyl ester, and 1-butyl ester, respectively. A higher conversion rate was observed
for the longer chain alcohols compared with methanol. The authors attributed this to the fact
that higher reaction temperatures were chosen due to the higher boiling point of the long
chain alcohols. Also, long chain alcohols can increase the solubility between the oil and
alcohol since they are more non-polar than shorter chain alcohols.
2.4.4.3 Effect of temperature and reaction time
Temperature influences the rate of the reaction and percentage conversion [99]. In one
study refined oil was transesterified with methanol, with a 6:1 molar ratio of methanol to oil,
1% (wt/wt) NaOH, and three different reaction temperatures [60]. After 6 minutes, yields of
94, 87 and 64% were obtained respectively for 60, 45 and 32 C. However, after an hour,
yields were similar at 60 and 45 C and only slightly lower at 32C. As expected conversion
increases with reaction time. In the same study, the effect of reaction time on conversion was
also studied. For cottonseed, soybean, sunflower and transesterified peanut oil, with methanol
to oil molar ratio 6:1, 0.5% (wt/wt) sodium methoxide catalyst, and 60 C reaction
57
temperature, an approximate percentage yield of 80% was obtained after a minute for
sunflower and soybean oils. After 60 minutes, the yield was similar (93 to 98%) for all four
oils studied [101].
With beef tallow, the reaction was slow during the first minute possibly due to initial
mass transfer limitations of methanol in the beef tallow. However, the reaction proceeded at a
faster rate from 1 to 5 minutes, with the highest conversion reached at about 15 minutes
[113]. The boiling point of methanol is 64.8 C. At reaction temperatures higher than this the
alcohol will burn and this will cause reduced yield. Leung et al. [114] indicated that reaction
temperature higher than 50 C had a negative impact on the product for neat oil.
2.4.4.4 Mixing intensity
Mixing is an important transesterification factor as low molecular weight alcohols like
methanol and ethanol are immiscible with oil at the room temperature. Hence, the reaction
mixtures are often agitated mechanically to facilitate mass transfer of alcohol into the oil. In a
prior study, the effect of mixing on transesterification of beef tallow was studied [61]. The
results showed that the reaction did not proceed without mixing the two reactants, however,
when NaOH-methanol mixture was added to the melted beef tallow in the reactor with
continuous mixing, stirring speed was found to be insignificant suggesting that the mixing
speeds studied were way above the threshold requirement for mixing. A mixing speed of 600
rpm was concluded as optimum in some previous studies.
2.5 The challenge for the current bio-diesel production

The major obstacles to current bio-diesel production are the cost and limited
availability of fat and oil resources. There are two aspects relevant to the cost of bio-diesel
synthesis; the raw material cost and the processing cost. In term of the processing cost, the
current bio-diesel synthesis involves the use of homogeneous alkali catalysts operating in a
batch-type process followed by an additional effort to remove the liquid catalysts and
saponified products. To make bio-diesel commercially viable and compete with petroleumbased diesel, a continuous process needs to be developed to replace the time-consuming batch
process since the latter presents high capital costs, is labour intensive, and it is difficult to
control the process and product quality. In addition, replacing liquid catalysts with
heterogeneous catalysts would minimize the separation steps, and other benefits; for instance,
58
it is environmentally friendly, easily recovered, and can potentially be re-used. Eventually,

the production costs can be substantially reduced.
Regarding raw material costs, the cost of highly refined vegetable oils, which
accounts for 80% of total production cost [79], can be significantly lowered by substituting
with more economical feedstocks such as restaurant waste and animal fats. However, the
quality of these low-cost feedstocks can generate processing problems in standard bio-diesel
production because the alkali-catalyzed system is very sensitive to water, free fatty acids and
other impurities. Even refined oils and fats could contain small amounts of free fatty acids
[75].
Moreover, the current increased production of animal fats, waste cooking oils
(WCOs), and greases from household and industrial sources is a growing problem and an
opportunity. According to the National Renderers Association, about 9.3 billion tons of fats
and greases, including inedible tallow, yellow grease, edible tallow, lard, and poultry fat, are
processed by the rendering industry annually [80]. All these waste greases and fats can be
sold commercially for inclusion in livestock feed. However, since 2002, the European Union
has enforced a ban on feeding such rendered by-products to certain animals, because it has
the potential to pass animal diseases such as Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy to other
animals or humans.
Since these feedstocks are readily available at a low price, the use of such biomass for
the synthesis of bio-diesel provides a means to convert waste fats and oils into a more
valuable product. However, the use of such feedstocks in the standard process is challenging
due to high concentrations of FFAs, water, and other impurities. Pre-treatment stages, acidcatalyzed esterification integrated with water separation, are necessary to minimize the acid
and water content to less than the threshold limits set by the subsequent alkali-catalyzed
transesterification.
2.6 Lower-cost Feedstocks for Bio-diesel Production and using it as Fuel

Though bio-diesel has many advantages compared with petroleum diesel, its high
production cost has become the primary barrier to its commercialization. Currently, biodiesel unit price is 1.5-3.0 times higher than that of petroleum derived diesel fuel depending
on feedstock [78, 79].
59
Bio-diesel can be produced from TGs present in naturally occurring fats and oils by
transesterification
with
alcohol,
usually methanol,
in
the presence of catalyst.
Transesterification is a reversible process and glycerol is the by-product. The feedstocks used
for bio-diesel production currently are mainly high quality food-grade vegetable oils, such as
sunflower oil and rapeseed oil in European, soybean oil in United States, and palm oil in
Malaysia [115]. However, to compete with diesel fuel and survive in the market, lower-cost
feedstocks are required, including WCO, grease, soapstocks, as feedstock costs are more than
85% of the total cost of bio-diesel production [79]. Non-edible oils, like Jatropha, can also be
used to produce bio-diesel [155,156]. In addition, growing interest has arisen concerning
algae-based bio-diesel [123].
2.6.1 Bio-diesel Production from Waste Cooking Oil
Waste vegetable oils are generally low cost. They usually can be collected from large
food processing and service facilities. However, due to the very high temperature that occurs
during the food frying process, chemical reactions such as hydrolysis, polymerization and
oxidation will have taken place, and these can lead to an increase of free fatty acid (FFA)
level. Hence, acid catalysis is preferred since it is insensitive to FFA [101].
Zheng et al. [95] studied the reaction kinetics of acid-catalyzed transesterification of
waste frying oil. They found that at the methanol/oil molar ratio of 250:1 at 70 C or in the
range 74:1-250:1 at 80 C, the reaction was a pseudo-first-order reaction. High yield of
991% could be achieved at both 70 C and 80 C and a stirring rate of 400 rpm, using a feed
molar ratio oil:methanol:acid of 1:245:3.8. In contrast, Wang et al. [88] investigated a twostep catalyzed processes for synthesis of bio-diesel by using WCO from Chinese restaurants.
In the first step, ferric sulphate-catalyzed methanolysis was carried out, while potassium
hydroxide catalysis was performed in the second step. The authors concluded that compared
with one-step sulphur acid catalysis the two-step catalyzed process provided a simpler and
more economic method to produce bio-diesel from WCO.
Moreover, the by-products of glycerol and soapstock in this process could be easily
handled. Similarly, Issariyakul et al. [125] also used the two-step process to transesterify
WCO, except that sulphuric acid was selected as acid catalyst and mixtures of methanol and
ethanol were used for transesterification in order to use the better solvent properties of
ethanol and a more rapid equilibrium using methanol. More than 90% ester was obtained by
60
using the two-stage method compared with yield of ~50% ester by using the single stage
alkaline catalyst.
In the above mentioned two-step process that was developed by Canakci et al. [90],
acid catalyst (usually sulphuric acid) was first chosen to reduce the FFA to less than 1%, then
the pre-treated feedstock was transesterified under alkaline catalysis. The advantage of this
two-step process relies on the fact that it can increase the reaction rate by using alkaline
catalyst and avoid soap formation by applying acid catalyst.
The performances of bio-diesel obtained from WCO in terms of engine performance
and emissions have been studied by many researchers. etinkaya et al. [126] investigated the
engine performance of bio-diesel fuel originated from used cooking oil in a Renault Mgane
automobile with four stroke, four cylinder, 75 kW diesel engine in winter conditions for 7500
km road tests in urban and long distance traffic. The results showed that the torque and brake
power output obtained from the used cooking oil bio-diesel were 3-5% less than those of No.
2 diesel fuel. The engine exhaust gas temperature at each engine speed of bio-diesel was less
than that of No. 2 diesel fuel. Higher values of exhaust pressures were found for No. 2 diesel
fuel at each engine speed. The injection pressures of both fuels were similar. Based on the
experimental results, the authors concluded that used cooking oil bio-diesel could be
recommended as a No. 2 diesel fuel alternative for winter conditions.
Lin et al. [127] also used WCO to prepare bio-diesel and then conducted a study in
which the exhaust tail gas of bio-diesels were compared when the engine was operated using
different fuel types, including neat bio-diesel, bio-diesel/diesel blends, and normal diesel
fuels. Among the collected data, the authors found that B20 and B50 were the optimum fuel
blends.
Al- Widyan et al. [128] used the ethyl ester of waste vegetable oils as a fuel in diesel
engines and initiated a study to investigate its potential to substitute oil-based diesel fuel. The
fuels evaluated included 100% ester, several ester/diesel blends and diesel fuel as the baseline
fuel. The tests were run on a standard test rig of a single-cylinder, direct-injection diesel
engine. The results indicated that the blends burned more efficiently with less specific fuel
consumption, resulting in higher thermal efficiency. Moreover, less CO and unburned
hydrocarbons (HCs) than diesel fuel were produced by the blends. The blends and 100% ester
surpassed the diesel fuel in essentially all aspects of engine performance considered. Overall,
100% ester and 75:25 ester/diesel gave the best results regarding performance, while for
61
emissions the 50:50 blends exhibited the best results. The ester fuel demonstrated a good
potential as fuel for diesel engines.
Similar trends for emission results were observed by Dorado et al. [129], who
characterized exhaust emissions from a diesel engine fuelled with transesterified waste olive
oil and found lower emissions of CO, carbon dioxide (CO2), nitrogen oxides (NOx), and
SO2. The particulate emissions from used cooking oil bio-diesel were also evaluated by
another research group [130]. The bio-diesel fuels were tested in a DI diesel commercial
engine either pure or in 30% and 70% v/v blends with a reference diesel fuel. A sharp
decrease was observed in both smoke and particulate matter (PM) emissions as the bio-diesel
concentration increased. This was attributed to the fact that the oxygen content of the biodiesel improved the oxygen availability in rich-zone flames in the combustion chamber.
Recently, an environmental approach was suggested by Nas et al. [131], who
presented an overview of energy potential of bio-diesel generated from WCO. The authors
finally drew a conclusion that bio-diesel could reduce nearly all forms of air pollution,
especially air toxics and cancer-causing compounds.
2.6.2 Bio-diesel Production from Waste Grease
Esterification is the central reaction to reduce the levels of FFA in the low-cost
feedstock to an acceptable range, making the feedstock suitable for further processing in the
standard bio-diesel synthesis. Esterification is a reversible reaction between carboxylic acids
and alcohols in the presence of strong acid catalyst, resulting in the formation of water and at
least one ester product, see Figure 2.2. The mechanism of homogeneous catalyzed
esterification has long been established; a protonated carboxylic acid is nucleophilically
attacked by an alcohol molecule from the bulk phase yielding an ester and water.
Esterification can be carried out by a catalyst free method, enzymatic method, or use of
homogeneous and heterogeneous acid catalysts.
62
Figure 2.2: Carboxylic acid esterification.
Non-catalytic esterification is normally performed under supercritical conditions for

alcohol, i.e., the critical temperature and pressure of methanol are 239 C and 8.09 MPa.
Under such reaction conditions, the alcohol itself starts acting as a catalyst [24], the degree of
alcohol solubility in oil is increased, thereby favouring the transition from a solubility-limited
reaction to a rate-limited reaction [82,83]. As a result, transesterification of TGs with ethanol
can be simultaneously performed. Additional benefits from a supercritical alcohol method are
the separation of esters and glycerol from the reaction mixture becomes much easier since in
the presence of water and glycerol will be in the water portion while esters are in the upper
portion. Saka and Kusdiana [26] reported a fast and high conversion of rapeseed oil into
methyl esters by using supercritical methanol without the aid of any catalyst. However, in this
process, high energy intensity is required with additional safety hazards.
It is well known and widely documented that lipase, a glycerol ester hydrolase, can be
used for various esterification reactions in different fields such as oil and fat restructuring
[84-87]. The advantages of using an immobilized lipase as a biocatalyst for esterification
reactions include enhanced solubility of hydrophobic substrates, elimination of side reactions
caused by water, facilitation of product recovery, and protection from microbial
contamination [85]. For instance, using low reaction temperatures, 98% conversion of
carboxylic acid was achieved within 12.5 h for methanolysis of oleic acid [86]. The half-life
of the lipase used was reported to be 15 days. However, lipase is relatively more expensive,
in addition to producing insufficient reaction yields, higher sensitivity to the reaction
conditions, as well as, long reaction times when compared to the use of homogeneous or
heterogeneous acid catalysts. The use of homogeneous and heterogeneous acid catalysts for
FFA esterification has been extensively researched due to its insensitivity to a wide range of
63
feedstocks, high production yields, relatively low cost, and potentially being recoverable for
re-use.
The most common approach for processing waste greases in bio-diesel synthesis is a
two-step acid pre-treatment before the successive base-catalyzed transesterification [88-91].
By using a two-step sulphuric acid-catalyzed pre-esterification, Canakci and Van Gerpen [90]
were able to reduce the acid levels of the high FFA feedstocks (reaction mixtures containing
20-40 wt% FFA) below 1 wt% within 1 h, making the feedstocks suitable for subsequent
alkali-catalyzed transesterification. Recently, the two-step catalyzed process was shown to be
an economic and practical method for bio-diesel production from WCOs where acid values of
75.9 mg KOH/g were presented [88].
Employing a ferric sulphate catalyzed reaction followed by potassium hydroxide
(KOH) catalyzed transesterification, a yield of 97.3% fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) was
achieved within 4 h. By integrating the heterogeneous catalyst in the pre-treatment process,
several advantages were introduced such as no acidic wastewater, higher efficiency, lower
equipment cost, and easy recovery compared to corrosive liquid acids. Another reaction route
for a two-step process was proposed and proven by Saka and his co-workers [81,92,93],
where the first step involves hydrolysis with subcritical water at 270 C and subsequently
followed by methyl esterification of the oil products at the same temperature. In this process,
TGs were hydrolyzed with subcritical water to yield FFAs, which further reacted with
supercritical methanol, resulting in a completed reaction within 20 min.
Besides catalyzing the esterification, acid catalysts are able to perform TG
transesterification; however, acid catalysts are 3 orders of magnitude slower than basic
catalysts [38], thus allowing FFA esterification and TG transesterification to be catalyzed
simultaneously [78,79,95,96]. The slow activity can be traded off with a decrease in process
complexity, equipment pieces, and the amount of waste stream. For instance, Zhang et al.
[78,79] have shown that, in bio-diesel production using WCOs, a one-step acid catalyzed
process offered more advantages over the alkali-catalyzed process with regard to both
technological and economical benefits. It was also proved to be a competitive alternative to a
two-step acid pre-esterification process.
64
2.6.3 Bio-diesel Production from Soapstock

Soapstock, known as a by-product of refining vegetable oils, is another low value
feedstock for bio-diesel production. Soapstock contains a substantial amount of water, which
can be emulsified with the lipid constitutes and is difficult to remove. In addition, the
presence of both FFA and acylglycerols makes the transesterification reaction more
complicated. Alkaline catalysis cannot be utilized due to the high FFA level [90]. Haas et al.
[132] developed a simple, high-efficiency method for synthesis of bio-diesel from soybean
oil soapstock. The process involved two steps: the first step, alkaline hydrolysis of all lipidlinked fatty acid ester bonds and the second step, acid-catalyzed esterification of the resulting
fatty acid sodium salts. In the first step, all glycerides and phosphoglycerides in the soapstock
could be completely saponified. After water removal, the resulting FFA sodium salts were
rapidly and quantitatively converted into fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) by incubation with
methanol and sulphuric acid at 35 C and ambient pressure in the second step. The
specifications of the FAME produced could meet the current specifications for bio-diesel.
This bench-scale method was further developed to the small pilot scale, producing about 2.5
litres of material per run [133].
All variables examined for the ester product, including flash point, water and
sediment, carbon residue, sulphated ash, density, kinematic viscosity, sulphur, cetane
number, cloud point, copper corrosion, acid number, free glycerin, and total glycerin were
within the provisional bio-diesel specifications of the ASTM. Density and iodine values were
comparable to those of commercial soy-based bio-diesel. The emission profile was quite
similar to that of bio-diesel produced from refined soy oil, showing reductions of total
hydrocarbons, particulates and CO, compared with petroleum diesel fuel.
However, Haas et al. [134] found that though this method could achieve the efficient
production of high-purity bio-diesel, substantial amounts of solid sodium sulphate were
generated as a by-product. The cost related to the disposal of this waste material could be
high. Therefore, they only used acid catalyzed esterification to produce bio-diesel from
soapstock. The optimal conditions for the maximum esterification were found to be at 65 C,
26 h, a molar ratio of total FA/methanol/ sulphuric acid of 1:1.5:1.5. Further economic
analysis by Haas [135], suggested that the production cost of soapstock bio-diesel would be
approximately US$ 0.41/l, a 25% reduction relative to the estimated cost of bio-diesel
produced from soy oil.
65
Jin et al. [136] developed a three-step process for producing bio-diesel from the
mixture of oil sediments (OS) and soapstocks (SS), at the same time, phosphatides were
obtained. In the first step, the OS-SS mixture was extracted with ethyl ether and the mixture
was divided into three phases. Cooled acetone was chosen to extract the organic top phase,
including TGs and phosphatides. Phosphatides were separated from TGs since they were
insoluble in the acetone. In the second step, soap phase was acidified with sulphuric acid to
yield fatty acid. Then the so called high acid oil was efficiently converted into methyl
esters by acid-catalyzed esterification. The esterification reaction was carried out with 5:1
methanol/oil (mol/mol) in the presence of 3% sulphuric acid as an acid catalyst at 85 C for 5
h. Bio-diesel recovery under these conditions was 92.1% of theoretical. Alkaline catalyzed
transesterification process was performed in the third step to convert the TGs into bio-diesel
and glycerol. The maximum ester yield of 94% was obtained under the optimal variables: 6/1
methanol/oil (mol/mol), 1% NaOH (wt.%), 65 C, and 1 h. Five important fuel properties of
bio-diesel from the OS-SS mixture, including density (at 15 C), kinematic viscosity (at 40
C), flash point, calorific value, and acid value, were found to be comparable to those of the
No. 2 diesel fuel and conforming to both the American and German standards for bio-diesel.
Recently, Wang et al. [137] pointed out three major disadvantages of the process
developed by Haas [135]: (1) High temperature steam is required since conventional
acidulation method is needed to recover acid oil from soapstock; (2) An additional process,
saponification of the glycerides, is needed to convert them to free fatty acid salts; (3) The
esterification reaction time is too long, leading to low productivity. The authors developed an
attractive method to produce bio-diesel from soybean soapstock. Separation of extracted acid
oil from soapstock was performed with only sulphuric acid solution under an ambient
temperature of 252 C. A maximum acid oil recovery yield of 97% could be achieved based
on the total fatty acids of the soapstock. The acid oil could be directly converted into biodiesel at 95 C in a pressurized reactor within 5 h and the yield of purified bio-diesel was
94% based on the total fatty acids of the soapstock. The optimal esterification conditions
were determined to be a weight ratio of 1:1.5:0.1 of acid oil/methanol/sulphuric acid.
Besides soybean oil soapstock, other soapstocks are also of interest to be utilized to
produce bio-diesel, thus increasing the potential supply of this fuel. Usta et al. [138] first used
hazelnut soapstock/waste sunflower oil mixture to produce bio-diesel. The process involved
two steps, including acid (sulphuric acid) and base (sodium hydroxide) catalysis. The
66
hazelnut soapstock/waste sunflower oil mixture was first heated to 100 C to remove the
water. Then, the mixture was cooled down to 35 C before the 2nd-step catalysis. The effects
of the bio-diesel addition to the diesel fuel on the performance and emissions of a four cycles,
four cylinder, turbocharged indirect injection diesel engine were investigated at both full and
partial loads. Experimental results indicated that the hazelnut soapstock/waste sunflower oil
methyl ester could be partially substituted for diesel fuel at most operating conditions without
any engine modification and preheating of the blends.
Keskin et al. [139] used cottonseed oil soapstock to produce bio-diesel. The
cottonseed oil soapstock bio-diesel was blended with diesel fuel and the blends were tested in
a single cylinder direct injection diesel engine. It was reported that high calorific value and
cetane number, low sulphur and aromatic content, and similar characteristics were observed
for the blends. The power output and torque of the engine with blends decreased by 6.2% and
5.8%, respectively. Particulate material emission of the engine with blends at maximum
torque speed was decreased by 46.6%. It was concluded that blends of cottonseed oil
soapstock bio-diesel and diesel fuel could be used as alternative fuels in conventional diesel
engines without any major changes. However, since bio-diesel has a solvent effect that may
release deposits accumulated on tank walls and pipes from previous diesel fuel usage, which
may end up in fuel filters, these would need to be checked more frequently.
In summary, WCO, grease, and soapstock are potential feedstocks for bio-diesel
production, which can lower the cost of bio-diesel since they are inexpensive. However, since
all these feedstocks contain high FFA, it will cause soap and water formation when using an
alkaline catalyst, which could decrease the ester yield and make the separation of ester,
glycerol, and wash water more difficult. Acid catalysts can convert FFAs into esters, but the
reaction rate is too slow. Moreover, this process requires more alcohol and large reactors and
is corrosive [65]. The two-step process, of which the first step serves as a pre-treatment, is
usually preferred. However, this will increase the units cost. Supercritical transesterification
process can be an alternative method because of the following advantage: the pre-treatment
step, soap and catalyst removal are not necessary since a catalyst is not required [134-137].
The reaction duration is significantly shorter than traditional transesterification reaction [26].
The reaction is not sensitive to either FFA or water [81,136]. However, this method requires a
high molar ratio of alcohol to feedstock [26,134.135] and high reaction pressure and
temperature, which will cause higher operating costs.
67
2.6.4 Bio-diesel Production from Jatropha Oil

There is growing interest for bio-diesel production from non-edible oil sources, like
Jatropha curcas L. (JCL). JCL is a plant belonging to Euphorbiaceae family, which is a nonedible oil-bearing plant widespread in arid, semi-arid and tropical regions of the world [88].
JCL has an estimated annual production potential of 200 000 metric tonnes in India and can
be grown in waste land [74]. Singh et al. [145] gave detailed information on the use of
different components of JCL fruit for energy purposes. It was found that the shell could be
for combustion, hull/husk for gasification, cake for production of biogas, spent slurry as
manure, oil and bio-diesel (made from Jatropha oil) for running CI engines. The kernels of
JCL contain about 50% oil. The oil recovery in a mechanical expeller was about 85%, while
more than 95% recovery of oil could be achieved when extracted by solvent method. The biodiesel from JCL oil has a great potential because of its comparable properties to diesel, such
as calorific value and cetane number [146]. Therefore, many researchers have shown great
interest in using Jatropha oil to produce bio-diesel.
Azam et al. [147] found FAME of Jatropha curcas were most suitable for use as biodiesel and met the major specification of bio-diesel standards of the European, Germany and
USA Standards Organization. Sarin et al. [148] made appropriate blends of Jatropha and
palm bio-diesel to improve oxidation stability and low temperature properties because
Jatropha bio-diesel has good low temperature property and palm bio-diesel has good
oxidative stability. It was found that antioxidant dosage could be reduced by 80-90% when
palm oil bio-diesel is blended with Jatropha bio-diesel at about 20-40%. Tiwari et al. [117]
used response surface methodology to optimize three important reaction variables, including
methanol quantity, acid concentration, and reaction time. The optimum combination for
producing bio-diesel and reducing the FFA of Jatropha oil from 14% to less than 1% was
found to be 1.43% v/v sulphuric acid catalyst, 0.28 v/v methanol-to-oil ration and 88 min
reaction time at 60 C. The properties of Jatropha oil bio-diesel conform to European and
American standards.
Berchmans et al. [118] developed a two-step pre-treatment process in which the high
FFA (15%) of Jatropha curcas seed oil was reduced to less than 1%. In the first step, the
reaction was carried out with 0.60 w/w methanol-to-oil ratio in the presence of 1 wt.%
sulphuric acid as an acid catalyst in 1 h at 50 C. In the second step, the transesterification
reaction was performed using 0.24 w/w methanol-to-oil ratio and 1.4 wt% sodium hydroxide
68
(NaOH) as alkaline catalyst to produce bio-diesel at 65 C. A final bio-diesel yield of 90% in

2 h was reported. As well as experimental studies, theoretical studies of reaction mechanism
have been conducted regarding base-catalyzed transesterification of the glycerides of the
Jatropha oil [119]. In that study, semi-empirical AM1 molecular orbital calculations were
used to investigate the reaction pathways of base catalyzed transesterification of glycerides of
palmitic, oleic and linoleic acid. The researchers concluded that the reaction mechanism
included three steps: Step 1- Nucleophilic attack of the alkoxide anion on the carbonyl group
of the glyceride to form a tetrahedral intermediate. Step 2-Breaking of the tetrahedral
intermediate to form the alkyl ester and the glyceride anion. Step 3-Regeneration of the active
catalyst, which may start another catalytic cycle. This study suggested that the Step 2,
decomposition of the tetrahedral intermediate, determined the rate of base-catalyzed
transesterification of glycerides.
Meanwhile, many researchers have attempted to evaluate the performance, emission,
and combustion characteristics of Jatropha oil and Jatropha oil bio-diesel in a diesel engine
[130, 134-136]. Haldar et al. [150] found that Jatropha oil gave the best results related to the
performance and emissions, such as CO, CO2, HC, smoke and particulates, at high loads
when injected 45 before Top Dead Center when compared with non-edible straight vegetable
oils of Putranjiva, Jatropha and Karanja. Kumar et al. [151] used Jatropha oil and methanol in
various methods, such as blending,
transesterification
and dual fuel operation
(methanol/Jatropha oil=3:7, v/v) to compare with performance, emission and combustion

parameters. Experimental results indicated that Jatropha oil and methyl ester showed higher
diffusion combustion compared to standard diesel operation. Jatropha oil could be used as
fuel in diesel engines directly and by blending it with methanol. Use of methyl ester of
Jatropha oil and dual fuel operation with methanol induction could give better performance
and reduced smoke emissions than the blend.
Similar observations have been reported by other researchers [145], who found that
bio-diesel from Jatropha oil offered higher brake thermal efficiency than blended de-waxed
de-gummed Jatropha oil or even diesel. Jatropha oil bio-diesel could be blended with diesel
in any proportion or could be used as pure bio-diesel successfully in CI engine without any
problem. In spite of above-mentioned advantages related to engine emissions, higher NOx
exhaust levels with Jatropha based bio-diesel have been reported by several researchers
[146,147]. To solve this, Pradeep et al. [98] effectively employed a low cost technique, hot
69
exhaust gas recirculation (HOT EGR). Compared with COOLED EGR, this method was costeffective and easy to implement. The optimal EGR level was 15%, based on adequate
reduction in nitric oxide emissions, minimum possible smoke, CO, HC emissions and
reasonable brake thermal efficiency.
Though attracting substantial interest due to its general characteristics and potential, it
is recommended by some researchers that more and better data are urgently needed to guide
investment since uncertainties do exist, based on the fact that Jatropha curcas is a wild plant
which exhibits a lot of variability in yield, oil content and oil quality [155]. An extensive
study on Jatropha bio-diesel fuel sustainability, including the three inseparable dimensions:
environmental, economic and social, emphasized the situation-specific interactions between
different sustainability dimensions and consideration of the political and ethical side of bioenergy production [156]. Achten et al. [156] pointed out that based on the available
information it is still difficult to conclude whether JCL bio-diesel will meet the two essential
minimum requirements for bio-fuels: to be a more sustainable alternative than fossil fuels
(i.e. produced from renewable raw material and that their use has a lower negative
environmental impact.
2.7 Conclusions
In summary, several studies have shown that use of bio-fuels for transport could
reduce exhaust gas emissions and improve engine performance. There were four primary
options for making bio-diesel from vegetable oils. In a previous study, the best option to
conversion the vegetable oils to bio-diesel was transesterification process. For making biodiesel, transesterification process is performed to lower viscosity of vegetable oils and
complete conversion.
Various factors affect on the transesterification process, and the more important ones
were described in this chapter. Catalyst type and its concentration, molar ratio of alcohol to
oil and type of alcohol, effect of temperature and reaction time, and rate of mixing are the
most important factors affect in the transesterification reaction. Commonly used alkali
catalysts are sodium hydroxide (NaOH), sodium methoxide (NaOCH3), potassium hydroxide
(KOH), and potassium methoxide (KOCH3).
In general, increasing catalyst concentration (in range 0.5 to 1.5% wt/wt) had
curvilinear effect on the conversion obtained, with yield inhibited at high catalyst
70
concentration. The yield best was obtained at around 1% (wt/wt) catalyst concentration and a
reduction in yield observed as catalyst concentration is increasing. 100-200% excess alcohol
is used, which drives the reaction in the forward direction and favours bio-diesel production.
Methanol and ethanol are commonly used, especially methanol because of its low cost. But, a
very high molar ratio of alcohol to vegetable oil is avoided due to it might interfere with the
separation of bio-diesel and glycerol post transesterification reaction which is caused
reduction of yield.
While bio-diesel has many advantages compared with petroleum diesel, its high
production cost has become the primary barrier to its commercialization. Currently, biodiesel unit price is 1.5-3.0 times higher than that of petroleum derived diesel fuel depending
on feedstock. However, waste vegetable oils are generally low cost and usually can be
collected from restraints.
The other low cost feedstocks for bio-diesel production are from waste grease, from
soapstock, and from jatropha oil. However, since all these feedstocks contain high FFA, it
will cause soap and water formation when using an alkaline catalyst, which could decrease
the ester yield and make the separation of ester, and glycerol more difficult. Acid catalysts
can convert FFAs into esters, but the reaction rate is too slow. Moreover, this process requires
more alcohol and large reactors and is corrosive.
The next chapter presents the experimental techniques and Fuelpod machine at
University of Huddersfield used in the bio-diesel production from pure and waste vegetable
oils by using trasesterification process.
71
CHAPTER 3
BIO-DIESEL PRODUCTION PROCESS
3.1 Introduction
Bio-diesel is a mixture of mono-alkyl esters of long chain fatty acids derived from
vegetable oils or animal fats which conforms to the requirements of ASTM D6751 [205,206].
Table 3.1 lists comparable properties of Bio-diesel and conventional diesel. It can be seen
that bio-diesel can be used either as a substitute for conventional diesel fuel or, more
commonly, in fuel blends. Bio-diesel has advantages over petroleum-based diesel including
higher lubricity which prolongs engine life and reduces the frequency of engine component
replacement, a higher cetane number and a higher flash point, meaning better and safer
performance, and the presence of oxygen (~10%) which improves combustion and reduces
CO and hydrocarbon emissions.
The ASTM standards ensure both safety in the production of bio-diesel and quality of
the end product. The following generalization which can be defined as follows:
Complete reaction to establish an equilibrium
Removal of all free fatty acids
Removal of all traces of glycerol, base catalyst and excess alcohol.

Following ASTM standards allows production of bio-diesel fuel of repeatable quality
sufficient to be used for testing. Bio-diesel produced in our lab from vegetable oils exhibited
gave improved engine performance and reduced exhaust emissions. Its stability was
acceptable according to the ASTM D6751, which was correlated to the content of pigments,
such as gossypol [207,208].
72
Table 3.1: American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Standards of maximum
allowed quantities in diesel and bio-diesel [205,206].
Property
Diesel
Bio-diesel
Standard
ASTM D975
ASTM D6751
Composition
HCa (C10-C21)
FAMEb (C12-C22)
Kinematic viscosity (mm2/s) at 40 C
1.9-4.1
1.9-6.0
Boiling point (C)
188-343
182-338
Flash point (C)
60-80
100-170
Cloud point (C)
-15 to 5
-3 to 12
Pour point (C)
-35 to -15
-15 to 16
Water (vol %)
0.05
0.05
Carbon (wt %)
87
77
Hydrogen (wt %)
13
12
Oxygen (wt %)
11
Sulphur (wt %)
0.05
0.05
Cetane number (ignition quality)
40-55
48-60
Stoichiometric air/fuel ratio (AFR)
15
13.8
HFRRc (m)
685
314
BOCLEd scuff (g)
3600
>7000
Hydrocarbons. bFatty Acid Methyl Esters. cHigh Frequency Reciprocating Rig. dBall-on-Cylinder
Lubricity Evaluator.
73
3.2 Materials and Methods

3.2.1 Materials
Methanol
and
sodium
hydroxide
were
purchased
from
Fisher
Scientific
(Loughborough, Leicestershire, UK). Pure vegetable oils such as sunflower oil, rapeseed oil,
corn oil and soybean oil were bought from local shops in Huddersfield, United Kingdom.
Waste cooking oil was supplied by Huddersfield University Catering Services. The diesel oil
(B0) was obtained for specialist oil suppliers as commercially available diesel is B5.
3.2.2 Fatty Acid Profile
3 mg of oil was weighed and mixed with 50 ml of ethanol. The mixture of oil and
alcohol was heated on a hotplate, until almost boiling. At this stage 3 drops of
phenolphthalein were added to the mixture as a pH indicator. Then 0.025M ethanolic NaOH
was added drop by drop for transesterification, this give the solution a faint permanent pink
colour. While titrating the contents of the flask was swirled by magnetic stirrer to thoroughly
mix the contents. The end point of the titration was when the pink colour shown in Figure
A.1 (the same colour as in the neutralised ethanol) persisted for about 20-30 seconds.
3.3 Experimental Setup Design
A commercial bio-diesel processor Fuelpod manufacturer was used for the
production of bio-diesel from rapeseed oil, sunflower oil, soybean oil, corn oil and waste
vegetable oil, see Figure 3.1. Batches of fifty litres of each type of vegetable oil were used in
the transesterification vessel. For the transesterification process shown in Figure 3.2, 50 L of
vegetable oil was taken in a single tank section and heated at 65oC for 2-3 hours. The NaOH
required for the transesterification was added to the tank as a mix of 200 gm of NaOH
dissolved in 8 L of methanol (the amount of NaOH was increased if the oil contained a
measurable amount of free fatty acid, since free fatty acid consumes NaOH, converting it to
the sodium salt). Oil Methyl Ester forms the upper layer in the separating funnel and glycerol
forms the lower layer, see Figure 3.3.
The machine processor which converted vegetable oil to bio-diesel in this study is a
complete system used at the University of Huddersfield automotive laboratory for making
bio-diesel.
74
Figure 3.1: Fuelpod for transesterifying oils
Figure 3.2: Flow chart for transesterification process
After at least 2 hours the amount of glycerol in the bottom of the drain pan was
measured. If there is a 10 to 12 % separation the base oil has reacted properly. Glycerol has a
dark brown colour, while bio-diesel fuel has a clear yellow appearance somewhat like apple
juice, see Figure 3.3 below.
75
Figure 3.3: Bio-diesel and glycerol separation

3.3.1 Titration Process
Titration was used to determine the acidic level of the base oil and calculate the amount
of base catalyst required for reaction. This step was necessary to determine the correct
amount of catalyst to use, to avoid undesired results and unusable fuel. The equipments and
materials were used for the experimental of titration process is shown in Figure A.2.
3.3.2 Oil Titration Test Procedure (see Figure A.3)

Placed a clean glass beaker in each circle on the laminated card, squirt methanol into
the left hand beaker about 5 deep, squirt titrant solution into the right hand beaker about
5 deep, use a clean eyedropper to place 10% of methanol into the centre beaker, added 3
drops of pH indicator to the centre beaker (should appear yellow), used a clean eyedropper to
place 1ml of oil into the centre beaker, mix thoroughly used a squirting action with the
eyedropper (should appear yellow/ orange), use the wheel on the pipette handle to draw
titrant into the pipette up to exactly the zero mark, Slowly drip titrant until a stable blue/green
is seen (as in Figure A.3). This was achieved after 15-20 seconds, and read the pipette to
determine how much titrant was added. The instruction manual for the Fuelpod specified
how much catalyst was needed (as seen in Figure A.4 manufacture laminated card).
76
3.3.3 Methanol and Sodium Hydroxide Mixture Prepare

The first step after titration result was to prepare the mixture of methanol and sodium
hydroxide, see Figure A.5. For this a plastic container was used to avoid the risk of the
alcohol corroding the container over time. 8 litres of methanol was added to the container
along with either 200 grams or 400 grams of sodium hydroxide for pure oils and waste oil
(high FFA content about 4.4%) respectively. This process can be seen in Figure A.5. After
that the container was connected with the system as shown in Figure A.6.
3.3.4 Kinematic Viscosity Measurement
The greatest difference between vegetable and diesel oils is their viscosities. The high
viscosity of crude oil may contribute to the formation of carbon deposits in engines,
incomplete fuel combustion and reduced life of an engine. Thus it is important to know the
viscosity of vegetable oil before it is use it as fuel. Figure A.7 shows the equipment used to
measure kinematic viscosity. According to ASTM Bio-diesel standard D6751 test method
D445, the kinematic viscosity for bio-diesel will be between 1.9 and 6.0 mm2/s at 40oC. For
this range of viscosities, a B size U-tube viscometer is suitable as it has range of between 2 to
10 mm2/s [222].
Also used was U-tube viscometer size D, which is suitable for vegetable oils, and has a
kinematic viscosity range 20-100 mm2/s [222]. The results obtained are as a results section.
The U-tube viscometers were kept in a water bath which provided stable temperatures of
20oC, 40oC and 70oC.
3.3.5 Iodine Number
Iodine numbers were subsequently measured using the Wijs titration method. Samples
were dissolved in 1.0 ml cyclohexane and mixed with iodine monochloride (the Wijs
solution), after which a cork was inserted and the solution was allowed to stand for 30
minutes. Subsequently, 2 ml potassium iodide and 10 ml distilled water were added, and the
prepared sample solutions were titrated using 0.1 mol/litre thiosulphate. The experiment
apparatus is shown in Figure A.8.
77
3.3.6 Calorific Value Measurement

During this study, the energy content of bio-diesel fuels and vegetable oils was
determined by practical experiment using the bomb calorimeter shown in Figure A.9. The test
process required the following supplies:
Parr Bomb calorimeter and power supply,
Pellet press,
One 18-30oC thermometer graduated to 0.01oC,
Timer,
Oxygen tank,
Towel,
4-litre beaker,
2000 ml graduated cylinder,
Fuse, and
Bomb Calorimeter Manual.
The amount of sample was exactly 1 g and the oxygen pressure was exactly 30 atm.
The ignition leads were connected, and the bomb immersed in 2 litres of water. The final
steady temperature of the can is then determined by extrapolation and recorded. The water
heat equivalent of the calorimeter was found using heat benzoic acid and then determines the
heat of combustion of naphthalene and the unknown.
The standard enthalpy of combustion for a substance is defined as the enthalpy
change (HTo) which accompanies a process in which the given substance undergoes reaction
with oxygen gas to form specified combustion products such as CO2(g), H2O(l), N2(g),
SO2(g), all reactants and products being in their respective standard states at the given
temperature T.
Thus the standard enthalpy of combustion of benzoic acid at 298.15K is Ho
298. 15
for the process:

Wi Xj WY X() E k
j
l (m)
7WY (&) E 3X 0(%)
(3.1)
The enthalpy of combustion can be calculated from the temperature rise, which results
when the combustion reaction takes place under adiabatic conditions in a calorimeter. It is
78
important that the reaction in the calorimeter take place rapidly and completely. To this end,
the material is burned in a steel bomb with oxygen under a pressure of about 30 atm. A
special acid-resistant alloy is used for the construction of the bomb because water and acids
are produced in the reaction.
The first law of thermodynamics,
p q N 3
Where: p = internal energy change for system,
(3.2)
q energy transfer into system by heat flow, and
N3 = work done by system may be applied to the actual calorimeter process, for adiabatic
conditions, q 0.
In the present experiment, w, which consists mainly of the work of stirring, can be
neglected and Eq. (3.2) then becomes:
pr 0
Where: pr energy change for the actual calorimeter process.
(3.3)
Since the energy change is independent of path by which the change occurs:
pr ps E ts l Wa
s
Where: ps internal energy change for system,
(3.4)
a initial temperatures in the calorimeter process,
a final temperatures in the calorimeter process, and
W heat capacity of can and contents under the conditions of the experiment.
Since the temperature change is small, it is usually valid to consider W to be constant, so
that the integral becomes equal to W(a N a ). One then obtains:

ps NW(a N a )
(3.5)
It may be observed that a temperature rise corresponds to a negative ps, that is, to a
decrease in energy for the imagined isothermal process.
The next step is to calculate vps " from ps. Although the energy is not sensitive to
changes in pressure, the correction to standard states, called the Washburn correction, may
amount to several tenths of one percent and is important in work of high accuracy. The
principal Washburn correction terms allow for the changes in p associated with (1) changes
79
in pressure, (2) mixing of reactant gases and separating product gases, and (3) dissolving
reactant gases in, and extracting product gases from, the water in the bomb.
The standard enthalpy change Xs " may then be calculated. The definition of H leads
directly to:
Xs " ps " E (wx)
(3.6)
Since the standard enthalpy and energy for a real gas are so defined as to be the same,
respectively, as the enthalpy and energy of the gas in the zero-pressure limit, the ideal-gas
equation may be used to evaluate the contribution of gases to (wx) in Eq. (3.6). The result
is:
(wx) (# N # )\a
(3.7)
Where: # number of moles of gaseous products and # number of moles of gaseous

reactants.
3.3.7 Test Procedure

1 g of the sample is formed into a pellet by means of a pellet press; this is done to
prevent an incomplete reaction due to scattering of material during combustion. The pellet is
weighed and placed in the sample pan. The fuse wire, of measured length about 10 cm and
known heat of combustion per unit length, is attached to the two terminals and adjusted to
give firm contact with the pellet. It is important to avoid getting kinks in the fuse wire since
fusion may occur at such points before the portion of wire in contact with the pellet becomes
hot enough to initiate combustion. The surfaces at which closure of the bomb is to be effected
must be kept scrupulously clean and every precaution taken to avoid marking them. The parts
of the dismantled bomb should be placed on a clean, folded towel.
The cover is carefully assembled with the bomb and tightened. The bomb is then
connected to the oxygen tank, and oxygen is admitted slowly until the pressure is 30 atm. The
valves are then closed, the pressure in the line is released, and the bomb is removed. 2000 ml
of water is then placed in the calorimeter can, within the adiabatic jacket. The temperature of
this water was adjusted so as to be at least several degrees below the upper limit of the
thermometer range and preferably close to room temperature. The ignition leads were
connected and the bomb is immersed in the water. The water in the can must cover the bomb.
If gas bubbles escape, the assembly ring may require tightening, or the gaskets may need to
be replaced.
80
The cover of the adiabatic jacket is set in place and the thermometer lowered into
position. The thermometer in the can is read for a few minutes to be sure that equilibrium has
been attained. This temperature is recorded as the initial temperature T1. The ignition switch
is then closed until fusion of the wire is indicated by extinction of the lamp. However, the
switch should not be held closed for more than about 5 sec because damage to the ignition
unit or undue heating by passage of current through the water may result. If combustion has
occurred, the temperature of the water in the can will be seen to rise within a few seconds.
Otherwise the leads should be examined, the voltage output of the ignition circuit checked, or
the bomb opened and examined for possible problems. After a successful ignition, the
temperature of the calorimeter rises quickly. After several minutes the rate of change of the
temperature becomes small. The final steady temperature of the can is then determined by
extrapolation and recorded as T2.
3.3.8 Calculations
Two runs were made with benzoic acid for determination of the heat capacity of the
calorimeter, and two with oil sample for determination of the enthalpy of combustion.
Calculations for the heat capacity (C) may be written as:
Where:

W Wyk E Wz
(3.8)
= mass of water in can, and
Wyk heat capacity of water per gram = 0.999 cal deg-1 g-1 at room temperature.
Wz
represents the heat capacity of the calorimeter (bomb and contents, can, immersed
portion of thermometer, etc.). The value of Wz is assumed to be the same for all runs.
For the tests using benzoic acid, internal energy change for the system (UT1) is
known, and Co may be calculated from the measured temperature rise. The value of UT1 is
calculated from 6318 cal per gram of benzoic acid burned and the value specified by the
manufacturer for the wire burned (2.3 cal cm-1 for Parr 45C10 No. 34 B & S gauge Chromel
C), see Figure 3.4.
The data for the naphthalene runs were used to calculate the standard enthalpy change
(UT1o) and the standard heat of combustion (HT1); for student work, the difference
between UT1 and UoT1 may be considered negligible. The values of UT1, and HT1
should be reported for 1 mole of sample. The standard enthalpy of formation of naphthalene
is then calculated from the values -94.05 and -68.32 kcal mole-1 for the standard enthalpies of
81
formation of CO2(g) and H2O(I), respectively, at 25. If the experimental values of T1 are
within a few degrees of 25, the correction of the enthalpy of combustion from T1 to 25 may
be omitted.
Figure 3.4: Benzoic acid and fuse wire for bomb calorimeter
T is determined for each run as follows: the temperature is plotted as a function of
time using a spread sheet program. A linear least square fit is performed over the pre- and
post-ignition periods and the results extrapolated over the entire time period as shown in
Figure 3.5.
Figure 3.5: Temperature versus time for sample combustion of benzoic acid
82
Draw a vertical line such that areas A and B shown in Figure 3.6 are equal. The top and
bottom of the line correspond to temperatures T2 and T1, respectively, and the length of the
line is (T2 - T1), is taken as T for the combustion reaction.
Figure 3.6: Calculation of the change in temperature due to the combustion process
3.4 Results and Discussion

3.4.1 Glycerol Separation and Bio-diesel Washing
Washing of final ester products is a very important activity during bio-diesel
processing. The ester was washed several times through the distilled water creating fine mist
from the top through a spray. Kemp [209] reported that fine mist washing produces less
agitation with less soap formation. Washing can be improved by using hot wash water of 5060oC [210].
3.4.2 Conversion Efficiency and Effect of Catalyst Content
The experimental ester production was repeated for each batch of pure and waste
cooking oils to determine the yield of ester and glycerol. The ester conversion was obtained
from the Fuelpod system. The average yield of ester was found to be 49 litres and 35 litres
from pure and waste cooking oil respectively. Thus, the average yield of ester obtained after
transesterification process was about 98 % by volume from the pure oils and 70 % from the
83
waste oil. On the other hand, the average amount of glycerol obtained as a by-product from
50 litres of oil was 8 litres, as shown in Figures 3.2 and 3.3.
Issariyakul et al. [125] obtained an ethyl ester conversion of waste cooking oil
contained approximately 5-6% by weight of free fatty acid of up to 97%. The authors used a
two stage acid and alkali catalyzed transesterification. Leung et al. [114] reported that the
conversion of waste cooking oil using sodium hydroxide catalysts was approximately 86%.
Zheng et al. [95] showed that methyl ester conversion of waste cooking oil in acid catalyzed
transesterification can reach up to 99% using a very high methanol to oil ratio (250:1).
Transesterification for waste cooking oil was carried out using 0.4%, 0.6%, 0.8%, 1.0% and
1.2% catalyst concentration. With 0.4 % of catalyst concentration, no reaction was observed
as there was no separated layer of ester and glycerol. With the catalyst concentration of 0.6%,
0.8% and 1.0%, ester yield were approximately 50%, 91% and 40%, respectively (see Figure
3.7).
It was observed that the ester yield decreased with the increase in sodium hydroxide
concentration. With 1.2% catalyst concentration, a complete soap formation was observed.
This is because the higher amount of catalyst caused soap formation [110]. The rise in soap
formation made the ester dissolve into the glycerol layer (see Figure 3.7).
Figure 3.7: Effect of catalyst concentration on ester yield conversion

84
3.4.3 Fatty Acid Content Analysis

Fatty acid contents are the major indicators of the properties of bio-diesel since the
amount and type of fatty acid content in the bio-diesel largely determine its viscosity.
Duplicate samples were used to determine the fatty acid content of the bio-diesel product.
Table 3.2 shows the Free Fatty Acid (FFA) content (calculated as oleic acid) of each type of
oil used in this experiment. Bio-diesel from the waste cooking oil contained the highest
amount of FFA content, an average 4.4%. The pure vegetable oils contained only about
0.15%, which are within permitted levels for being used directly for reaction with an alkaline
catalyst to produce bio-diesel. The qualitative and quantitative analyses of fatty acid content
are comparable with the study reported by Issariyakul et al. [125].
As mentioned earlier when FFAs react with an alkaline catalyst they cause soap and
water formation which decrease the ester yield and prevent the separation of ester, glycerol,
and wash water. Moreover, soap formation raises the viscosity and causes gel formation [90,
101,113,135]. If FFA concentration of the vegetable oil is higher than 0.5%, alkaline catalysts
should not be used in the transesterification due to soap formation [90,98,218-220].
Nevertheless, some authors state that an alkaline catalyst can be used in transesterification up
to an FFA level of 5% [216].
Table 3.2: Percentage of FFA Content

Type of oil
FFA Content (%) (calculated as oleic acid)
Sunflower
0.13
Rapeseed
0.12
Soybean
0.16
Corn
0.17
Waste Vegetable
4.4
3.4.4 Viscosity and Density of Vegetable Oils and Methyl Ester

High viscosity is the major problem preventing the use of vegetable oils and animal fats
directly in diesel engines. The high viscosity of these oils is due to their large molecular mass
85
(in the range of 600-900) which is about 20 times higher than that of diesel fuel [55]. The
reduction in viscosity during the transesterification process reduces the problems associated
with using vegetable oil in the engine. The viscosity of the pure and waste cooking oil was
determined by using U-tube viscometer. Three samples of each type were used for the
experiments. The average viscosity of pure and waste cooking oil sample was measured to be
52 mm2/sec and 70 mm2/sec at 20C respectively. The measured viscosity of bio-diesel
methyl ester at 40oC was 4.92 mm2/sec, which is in the range recommended by ASTM (1.96.0 mm2/sec at 40oC, see Table 3.1).
The density of pure and waste cooking oil measured at 15oC was 915 kg/m3. The
density of bio-diesel at 15oC was found to be 883 kg/m3. Tate et al. [211] reported that
density is a function of temperature and decreased linearly for canola methyl esters, soy
methyl esters, and fish oil ethyl esters by 1.23 kg/m3 for temperatures between 20300oC.
3.4.5 Separations of Bio-diesel and Glycerol
Figure 3.8 shows the vessel in which the reaction mixtures were allowed to cool after
completion of transesterification. After the mixture had cooled, crude bio-diesel and glycerol
phases could be seen clearly. This phase separation occurred within a few minutes. However,
the crude bio-diesel was cloudy and opaque. Clear separation was observed after 12-24 hours
of settling.
Bio-diesel
Glycerol
Figure 3.8: Separation of bio-diesel and glycerol

86
3.4.6 Cloud point, Pour point and Flash point

The samples were tested to determine the fuel characteristics according to ASTM Biodiesel Fuel Quality Assurance Standard Test (ASTM shown in Table 3.1). Tables 3.3 and 3.4
show the summary of the test results.
The cloud and pour point are also the important properties of bio-diesel fuel. Cloud
point is the temperature at which a cloud of wax crystals first appears in the oil when it is
cooled. The pour point is the lowest temperature at which the oil sample can still be poured as
a liquid. These properties are related to the use of bio-diesel in cold temperatures. Table 3.3
shows a number of these properties for vegetable oils commonly used in bio-diesel
production.
Table 3.3: Properties of vegetable oils commonly used in bio-diesel production
Calorific
value
(MJ/kg)
Cloud
point
(oC)
Pour
point
(oC)
Flash
point
(oC)
Iodine
number
910
Kinematic
viscosity
(mm2/s at
40oC)
37.98
37.37
-3.9
-6.7
246
103.8
Corn
920
39.3
37.37
-1.1
-40.0
277
94.4
Soybean
915
35.28
36.75
-3.9
-12.2
254
102.8
Sunflower
920
33.72
37.26
7.2
-15.0
274
96.8
Waste oils
910
41.7
37.16
-39.7
279
81.57
Type of
vegetable
oil
Density
(kg/m3 at
15oC)
Rapeseed
Table 3.4: Properties of diesel fuel and bio-diesel fuels produced from different
vegetable oils
Density
(kg/m3
at
15oC)
880
Kinematic
viscosity
(mm2/s at
40oC)
4.47
Corn oil methyl ester
880
Soybean oil methyl ester
Fuel type
Rapeseed oil methyl ester
Calorific Cloud
value
point
(MJ/kg)
(oC)
Pour
point
(oC)
Flash
point
(oC)
Cetane
number
37.70
-1
-11
163
57
4.78
37.45
-10
167
59
885
5.23
37.34
-7
178
55
Sunflower oil methyl ester
885
4.53
37.50
-6
173
60
Waste oil methyl ester
885
5.58
37.90
-7
179
62
Diesel
845
2.4
42.54
-5
-17
67
50
87
Table 3.4 shows the same properties for the methyl ester produced from rapeseed oil,
corn oil, soybean oil, sunflower oil and waste cooking oil. The cloud point ranged between 1oC and 2oC. Lang et al. [212] reported the cloud point of ethyl esters of linseed oil, canola,
sunflower and rapeseed oil were -2oC, -1oC, -1oC and -2oC, respectively whereas the
corresponding methyl esters had cloud point of 0oC, 1oC, 1oC and 0oC. The cloud point of
ethyl esters were approximately 2oC lower than those of the corresponding methyl esters.
This indicates that the ethyl esters perform marginally better in cold temperatures than the
corresponding methyl esters. For diesel the cloud temperature is -5oC, which means it will
perform better at low temperatures than any of the bio-diesel fuels.
The pour points from rapeseed, corn, soybean, waste and sunflower oils ranged
between -11oC and -6oC. Lang et al. [212] reported the pour point of ethyl esters of linseed
oil, canola, sunflower and rapeseed oil were -6oC, -6oC, -5oC and -15oC respectively whereas
the methyl esters of corresponding oils were reported to be -9oC, -9oC, -8oC and -15oC
respectively. Lee et al. [213] argued that the cloud points were affected by the presence of
mono-glycerides, however, the pour points were not affected. Moreover, the cis double bond
present in the erucic acid of rapeseed oil hampered the lowering of the pour point for esters.
The type of fatty acid branched chain available in the original oil has an impact on the pour
point.
The flash point is the temperature at which the fuel will start to burn when it comes to
contact with a flame or hot surface [215]. It is an important temperature from the safety point
of view during storage and transportation. This temperature is correlated with its volatility,
which is an important fuel feature for engine starting. The combination of high viscosity and
low volatility of a fuel causes bad cold engine start up, misfire and ignition delay [217]. A
fuel with high flash point may cause carbon deposits in the combustion chamber.
As shown in Table 3.4, the flash point of all bio-diesel fuels are far above that of diesel
fuel, reflecting the non-volatile nature of these fuels. In spite of the fact that the flash points
of vegetable oils were reduced through transesterification, they were still higher than those of
diesel fuel, regardless of whether the bio-diesel was from pure vegetable oils or from waste
cooking oil. However, if they are compared with each other, it was seen that the flash points
of bio-diesels from waste oils was higher than those from pure vegetable oils since they have
relatively more saturated fatty acids in their composition. The higher the cetane number and
lower the volatility, smaller the amount of fuel that burns in the premixed combustion
88
because the ignition delay ends sooner and less fuel evaporates. Therefore, NOx emission
decreases due to lower combustion pressure and temperature [216].
3.4.7 Cetane, Iodine Number and Calorific Value
Cetane numbers are the indicators of ignition properties of the fuel. The higher the
cetane number, the more efficient the ignition is. Because of its higher oxygen content, biodiesel has a higher cetane number compared to petroleum diesel. The cetane number of
rapeseed, corn, soybean, sunflower and waste cooking oil from experiment were found to be
59, 57, 59, 55, 60 and 62, respectively. Hilber et al. [214] reported the cetane number of
methyl esters of rapeseed oil, soybean oil, palm oil, lard and beef tallow to be 58, 53, 65, 65
and 75 respectively. Among these bio-diesel feedstocks, beef tallow has the highest cetane
number. The higher cetane number indicates the higher engine performance of beef tallow
compared to other fuels, resulting in lower emission of all pollutants other than oxides of
nitrogen (NOx). As beef tallow has the higher amount of saturated fatty acids, the increase in
the saturated fatty acids content positively enhanced the cetane number of the bio-diesel. The
oxidative stability of bio-diesel fuels also increases due to the presence of higher amount of
saturated fatty acids. However, the drawback of higher amount of saturated fatty acid content
in bio-diesel fuel is that the cold filter plugging point occurs at a higher temperature.
The traditional measure of the degree of bonds was given by the iodine number and can
be determined by adding iodine to the vegetable oil. The amount of iodine in grams absorbed
per 100 ml of vegetable oil was then the iodine number. The higher the iodine number, the
more unsaturated (the greater the number of double bonds) the vegetable oil and the higher is
the potential for the vegetable oil to polymerise. The iodine number of rapeseed, corn,
soybean, sunflower and waste cooking oil from experiment were found to be 104, 94, 103, 97
and 82, respectively. The iodine number can be easily reduced by transesterification of
vegetable oil with methanol using sodium hydroxide as catalyst. The methanol breaks the
double bond and converts the vegetable oil into more saturated oil which reduces the
tendency to polymerise.
On the other hand, the calorific values of methyl esters of vegetable oils were found to
be about 37 MJ/ kg, while the calorific value of diesel fuel was 42.5 MJ/kg. The presence of
chemically bound oxygen in vegetable oils lowers their calorific values by about 12 % as
shown in the Tables 3.3 and 3.4.
89
3.4.8 Economic Assessment for Bio-diesel Based on the Vegetable Oil

Bio-diesel is currently produced from high quality food-grade vegetable oils (rapeseed
oil in Europe and soybean oil in the USA) using methanol and an alkaline catalyst. The end
cost of the bio-diesel mainly depends on the price of feedstock. The high cost of the foodgrade oils increases the cost of bio-diesel and prevents its usage. Unfortunately, bio-diesels
economic viability has gone from bad to worse because of the recent increases in the
vegetable oil prices. In the middle of 1990s, the cost of feedstock accounted for 6075% of
the total cost of bio-diesel fuel [27], but today about more than 85% of the costs of
production are tied up in feedstock costs [79, 116]. Haas et al. [116] investigated the
dependence of bio-diesel production costs on the cost of the feedstock and found a linear
relationship between the two, with a change of US $0.020/l in the product cost per US
$0.022/kg change in oil cost. This means that the relationship between the feedstock mass
input and bio-diesel mass output is about 1:1.
To become an economically viable alternative fuel and to survive in the market, biodiesel must compete economically with diesel fuel. However, the raw material cost of biodiesel is already higher than the final cost of diesel fuel. Nowadays, bio-diesel unit price is
1.53.0 times higher than that of petroleum derived diesel fuel depending on feedstock
[78,79,124].
In order to make bio-diesel an economically suitable fuel and increase its marketability,
its high cost must be lowered. Low cost and profitable bio-diesel can be produced from low
cost feedstocks such as used waste vegetable oils, animal fats, soapstocks, and greases
[78,90]. Using such resources will affirmatively affect the bio-diesel break-even price and the
difference between the prices of bio-diesel and diesel fuel could be lowered to an acceptable
value. In the literature, there are several studies about cost accounting of bio-diesel from
various feedstocks [88, 95, 101, 125-131], (see literature survey in chapter 2).
3.5 Conclusions
In summary, the Fuelpod machine was use for bio-diesel production from pure and
waste vegetable oil without any optimization process. The experiments results were shown
that the maximum yield was 98% and 75% for pure vegetable oil and waste vegetable oil
respectively. These results were obtained by using methanol: oil molar ration of 4.5:1 and
catalyst concentration of 0.4% (wt/wt) at a reaction temperature of 65o and time of 180 min.
90
On the other hand, the experimental oils prosperities were shown, that the greatest difference
between vegetable and diesel oil was their viscosity. It was between 34-40 mm2/s for
vegetable oil and 2.4 mm2/s for diesel oil. After esterification of vegetable oil, there was
significant reduction of viscosity and it was only about 5 mm2/s. The next chapter will be
presenting the experimental technique for optimization of bio-diesel production process by
using response surface methodology (RSM). The results of yield from optimization condition
will be comparing with yield from non-optimization condition.
91
CHAPTER 4
OPTIMISATION OF FUEL MANUFACTURE PROCESS
4.1 Introduction
As explained previously, bio-diesel is derived from vegetable oils or animal fats
through transesterification (also called alcoholysis) [85,109,208,212,232-234,244] which uses
alcohols in the presence of a catalyst (e.g., base, acid or enzyme depending on the free fatty
acid (FFA) content of the raw material) that chemically breaks the molecules of triglycerides
into alkyl esters as bio-diesel fuels with glycerol as a by-product. The commonly used
alcohols for the transesterification include methanol, ethanol, propanol, butanol, and amyl
alcohol. Methanol and ethanol are adopted most frequently, particularly methanol due to its
low cost.
Commonly used feedstocks (vegetable oil) for transesterification include soybean oil,
rapeseed oil, etc. Recently there has been substantial research on bio-diesel production from
sunflower oil [109,124,207,208,232,235,243,244], and a conversion rate of between 72% and
94% was obtained by enzyme catalyzed transesterification when the refined sunflower oil
reacted with short-chain primary and secondary alcohols. The application of solid acid
catalysts to sunflower oil transesterification was investigated by Demirbas [243] who showed
that the yield of methyl ester was above 90% after 1200 second of reaction at a molar ratio of
methanol to sunflower oil of 41:1, a temperature of reaction 525 K and different percentages
of catalyst concentration.
In contrast, transesterification of sunflower oil by different basic catalysts (sodium
methoxide, potassium methoxide, sodium hydroxide and potassium hydroxide) produced a
bio-diesel yield in the range 86.5-99.7% under the same reaction conditions [109]. All these
studies had the one aim of producing a high yield of bio-diesel by optimized reaction
conditions based on optimized parameters in terms of alcohol/oil molar ratio, catalyst
concentration, reaction temperature, and time. However, in nearly in all the studies there
existed complex interactions among the variables that substantially affected the bio-diesel
yield.
Response Surface Methodology (RSM), is an experimental strategy first described by
Box and Wilson in 1951 for determining optimal conditions for multivariable systems, and is
92
considered an efficient technique for process optimization [236]. RSM is useful in the
solution of many types of industrial problems. Generally, one of these problems is
optimization of the response in chemical process. In the industrial world, a very important
problem is determining the conditions that optimize the process.
In the chemical process of Figure 4.1b, this implies determining the levels of time and
temperature that result in maximum yield. An RSM study that began near point A in the
Figure 4.1b would eventually lead the experimenter to the region near point B. A secondorder model could then be used to approximate the yield response in a narrow region around
B, and from examination of this approximating response surface the optimum levels or
condition for time and temperature could be chosen [242].
Figure 4.1: (a) A theoretical response surface showing the relationship between yield of
a chemical process and the process variable reaction time ( ) and reaction temperature
( ). (b) A contour plot of the theoretical response surface [242].
In this study, RSM was applied to optimize the chemical reactions of transesterification
of sunflower oil with methanol in the presence of sodium hydroxide to produce the highest
yield of bio-diesel.
RSM addresses optimisation by:
1) Providing an understanding of how the test variables affect the selected process
response;
2) Determining the interrelationships between the test variables;
3) And characterises the combined effect that all the influential test variables may have
on process response.
93
Because of these qualities, RSM has been increasingly used in bio-diesel production.
For example, Ghadge and Raheman [237] used this method to optimize the pre-treatment
process for reducing the FFA content of mahua oil to below 1% for maximum bio-diesel
production. In their study, it was found that the three variables, methanol quantity, acid
catalyst concentration, and reaction time could significantly affect the acid value of the
product. Similarly, Tiwari et al. [117] deduced a quadratic polynomial model using RSM to
optimize these same three parameters to reduce acid value of the jatropha oil (Jatropha
curcas) before its conversion to bio-diesel.
Li et al. [238] applied RSM to develop a polynomial model which was used to predict
the yield of bio-diesel when using whole cell biocatalyst. The authors adopted central
composite design to study the effect of tert-butanol quantity, methanol quantity, water content
and dry biomass of the immobilized cell on bio-diesel (methyl ester) yield. Most recently,
RSM has been used for optimizing bio-diesel production from waste rapeseed oil with high
FFA [239].
4.2 Materials and Methods

4.2.1 Materials used and Fatty Acid Profile of Vegetable Oils
The materials used and their acquisition is described in Section 3.2.1. The process of
titration is described in Section 3.2.2 and the equipment shown in Figure 1.4.
In accord with the approved method of the American Oil Chemists Society (AOCS)
[240], the following equation was used to calculate the percentage FFA content of vegetable
oils:
%'' $!!, 0 ($- "%' $ )
Where:
a b 28.2
}
T = Titration value (ml of NaOH),

M = Molarity of NaOH (0.025M or 0.025 mol/ml)
W = Mass of oil sample (g), and
28.2 = Molar mass of sample (g/mol)
94
(4.1)
4.2.2 Experimental Design

To optimize the reaction condition to produce a high yield of bio-diesel with high
purity, the response surface regression (RSREG) method was adopted in the design of the
experiment. This methodology is a sequential process that usually starts at one reasonable
operating condition, and then requires three stages to achieve a set of better conditions as
rapidly and efficiently as possible.
The sunflower oil reacted with methanol in the presence of NaOH to produce methyl
esters of fatty acids (bio-diesel) and glycerol as shown in Figure 4.2. In this study, the
reaction temperature was kept constant, at 60oC or 35oC.The amount of methanol needed was
determined by the methanol/oil molar ratio as following:
^32(&) (m) b: Y "%$ $!"_, where 1mol of methanol equal to 32(g) and 1mol of
k~(m)
vegetable oil equal to 900(g). An appropriate amount of catalyst dissolved in the methanol
was added to the precisely prepared sunflower oil. The percentage of the bio-diesel yield was
determined by comparing the weight of up layer bio-diesel with the weight of sunflower oil
added.
Figure 4.2: Chemical reaction for sunflower bio-diesel production
95
Experiments were conducted in a laboratory-scale setup. A 500 ml, three-necked flask

equipped with a condenser, a magnetic stirrer and a thermometer was used for the reaction.
The flask was kept in the 60oC or 35oC water bath and stirring speed was maintained at 350
rpm. The reaction production was allowed to settle before removing the glycerol layer from
the bottom, and using a separating funnel to obtain the ester layer on the top, separated as
bio-diesel, (Figure 4.2).
Optimization of the transesterification process was conducted via a 3-factor experiment
to examine effects of methanol/oil molar ratio (M), reaction time (T), and catalyst
concentration (C) on yield of methyl ester using a central composite rotatable design
(CCRD). The CCRD consisted of 20 experimental runs (2 E2: E , where : is the number
of factors and the number of replicated centre points), eight factorial points (2 ), six axial
points (2 :), and six replicated centre points ( 6). Here : is the number of
independent variables, and k=3 should provide sufficient information to allow a full second-
order polynomial model [15]. The axial point would have $ 8/ 1.6818. Results from
previous research [239] were used to establish a centre point of the CCRD for each factor.
The centre point is the median of the range of values used: 6/1 for methanol/oil molar ratio,
1% catalyst concentration and 70 min reaction time. Table 4.1 shows the levels used for each
factor, and to avoid bias, the 20 experimental runs were performed in random order as shown
in Table 4.2. Design-Expert 8.0 software was used for regression and graphical analyses of
the data obtained.
Table 4.1: Independent variable and levels used for CCRD in methyl ester production
Independent Variable
Symbol
Codes and Levels

-1.6818
-1
1.6818
Reaction Time (min)
(X1)T
53
60
70
80
86.8
Methanol/oil Molar Ratio (mol/mol)
(X2)M
0.95
11
Catalyst Concentration (wt.%)
(X3)C
0.16
0.5
1.5
1.8
96
Table 4.2: CCRD arrangement and responses for methyl ester production
Run
Treatment
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Random
6
14
5
10
7
17
20
12
2
4
3
11
18
8
1
15
13
19
9
16
CCRD
component
Factorial
Factorial
Factorial
Factorial
Factorial
Factorial
Factorial
Factorial
Axial
Axial
Axial
Axial
Axial
Axial
Center
Center
Center
Center
Center
Center
Level of Variables
(X1)T
(X2)M
(X3)C
(min)
(mol/mol)
(wt.%)
(-1)60
(-1)3
(-1)0.5
(1)80
(-1)3
(-1)0.5
(-1)60
(1)9
(-1)0.5
(1)80
(1)9
(-1)0.5
(-1)60
(-1)3
(1)1.5
(1)80
(-1)3
(1)1.5
(-1)60
(1)9
(1)1.5
(1)80
(1)9
(1)1.5
(-1.68)53
(0)6
(0)1
(1.68)86.8
(0)6
(0)1
(0)70
(-1.68)0.95 (0)1
(0)70
(1.68)11
(0)1
(0)70
(0)6
(-1.68)0.16
(0)70
(0)6
(1.68)1.8
(0)70
(0)6
(0)1
(0)70
(0)6
(0)1
(0)70
(0)6
(0)1
(0)70
(0)6
(0)1
(0)70
(0)6
(0)1
(0)70
(0)6
(0)1
Yield (%)
(response)
Experi- Predicted
mental
22.9
24.6
23.9
15.56
76.8
70.39
86.8
88.34
63.6
66.61
41.7
52.65
73.3
86.19
95.5
98.79
97.0
92.80
98.4
96.17
10.0
8.10
90.3
85.77
21.5
30.80
91.0
75.27
96.0
97.52
98.0
97.52
98.0
97.52
97.0
97.52
97.0
97.52
98.0
97.52
4.2.3 Statistical Analysis

The experimental data presented in Table 4.2 was analyzed using RSREG procedure in
the statistic analysis system (SAS) that fits a full second-order polynomial model [15,16],
;
, E E

E

(4.2)
Where , is % methyl ester yield, and are the independent study factors, and , , ,
and are intercept, linear, quadratic, and interaction constant coefficients, respectively. A
confidence level of = 5% was used to examine the statistical significance of the fitted
polynomial model. The RSREG procedure uses canonical analysis to estimate stationary
values for each factor. Using the fitted model, response surface contour plots were
constructed for each pair of factors being studied while holding the third factor constant at its
estimated stationary point. Confirmatory experiments were carried out to validate the model
97
using combinations of independent variables that were not a part of the original experimental
design but within the experimental region.

Since higher amounts of FFA (>1% w/w) in the feedstock can directly react with the
alkaline catalyst to form soaps, which can then form stable emulsions and prevent separation
of the bio-diesel from the glycerol fraction and decrease the yield [245], it is better to select
reactant oils with low FFA content or to reduce FFA in the oil to an acceptable level before
the reaction. Nevertheless, the FFA (calculated as oleic acid) content of the sunflower oil
used in this experiment was, on average, only 0.13% which was within acceptable levels to
be directly used for reaction with the alkaline catalyst to produce bio-diesel [221].
The remaining main factors affecting the transesterification include reaction time,
temperature, alcohol/oil molar ratio, rate of mixing, and catalyst concentration. In order to
optimize the reaction condition to produce a high yield of biodiesel with high purity, response
surface method was adopted to design the experiment. This methodology is a sequential
process that usually starts at one reasonable operating condition, and then requires three
stages to achieve a set of better conditions as rapidly and efficiently as possible. The first
stage is to conduct experiments to determine the direction so as to take the next move towards
the optimal value. The second stage is to perform several runs along the direction as indicated
by the first stage until an optimal value was approached. The last step is to deduce a
mathematical model (equation) and profile the response surface to determine the optimal
condition, which should be validated by the actual process.
4.3.1 Fractional Factorial Design
Based on experience and previous work [245] and since high catalyst concentration can
facilitate soap formation, an upper level of the catalyst/oil concentration of 1.8 wt.% was
chosen. Table 4.2 shows the experimental matrix for the 2k factorial design, of which k was
the number of factors. Here, k equals 3: T, M and C, which correspond to the uncoded values
of the time (min), methanol/oil molar ratio and catalyst concentration (%), respectively. X1,
X2, and X3 are coded values corresponding to the uncoded values of T, M and C,
respectively. The data in the next to last column of Table 4.2 indicates the response Y (%)
(yield of bio-diesel) obtained from each experimental run.
98
4.3.2 Response Surface Mothodology Analysis of Transesterification
Table 6.3 lists the regression coefficients and the corresponding -values for the
second-order polynomial model. It can be that the regression coefficients of the linear terms
for methanol/oil molar ratio and catalyst concentration (M and C, respectively), the quadratic
terms in M2 and C2, and the interaction terms in TC and TM had significant effects on the
yield (-value <0.05). Among these, M, C, C2 and MC were significant at the 1%

significance level, while M2 and TM were significant at the 5% level.
Using the coefficients determined from Design-Expert 8.0 software program (Table
4.3), the predicted model in terms of uncoded factors for methyl ester yield is:
~ N121.52 N 1.29a E 32.05b E 183.66W E 0.49ab N 0.59aW N 4.44bW

N 0.05a N 1.99b N 62.91W
(4.3)
Where ~ is the methyl ester yield, and T, M and C are the actual values of the test
variables.
The results presented in Table 4.3 suggest that linear effects of changes in molar ratio
(M) and catalyst concentration (C) and the quadratic effect C2 were primary determining
factors on the methyl ester yield as these had the largest coefficients. That the quadratic
effect, M2 and the interaction effect MC were secondary determining factors and that other
terms of the model showed no significant effect on ~ . Positive coefficients, as with M
and C, enhance the yield. However, all the other terms had negative coefficients.
99
Table 4.3: Regression coefficients of predicted quadratic polynomial model for methyl
ester production
Terms
Regression Coefficients*
-value
Intercept
-121.52
0.0001
(molar ratio)
-1.2865
0.6891
; (cat. conc.)
+32.050
0.0001
+183.66
0.0003
(time)
(molar ratio)
-0.05293
0.6598
;; (cat. conc.)
-1.9870
0.0001
-62.906
0.0001
; (timeand cat. conc. )
+0.49167
0.0628
-0.59444
0.6821
-4.4417
0.0001
(time)
Linear
Quadratic
(time and molar ratio)
Interaction
; (molar ratio and cat. conc.)
* Because these are calculated values any number of significant figures could be given. However, in
the real world an accuracy of 0.01% would be very good so the coefficients are cited to only five
significant figures.
The 3D response surface profile and its contour of the optimal production of bio-diesel
based on the equation above is shown in Figure 4.3. This is for the central coded level,
Time=70 min. The values in the picture have been transformed back to the uncoded (real)
values. Figure 6.3 clearly shows that the catalyst concentration around 1.0% (or within the
range of 0.9~1.2%) would most likely yield maximal production of bio-diesel. The yield
decreased when the catalyst concentration was outside this range. Since the methanol and
triglyceride in the sunflower oil are immiscible, addition of catalyst can facilitate the
transesterification reaction, and rapidly increase the yield. However, when the catalyst
concentration was too high, soap could be quickly formed which made the separation of
glycerol from bio-diesel more difficult, this reduced the yield. In contrast, inadequate usage
of catalyst could result in an incomplete reaction and a lower yield.
The RSM shown in Figure 4.3 shows the optimal value of the methanol/oil molar ratio
for the yield, and that too high or too low values of the methanol/oil ratio have negative
100
effects. This can be explained by the fact that the transesterification is an equilibrium reaction
in which excess alcohol will, on the one hand, drive the reaction to the right, increasing yield;
but on the other hand will help increase the solubility of glycerol resulting in the reaction
driven to the left, thus decreasing the yield. Too low a methanol/oil molar ratio also led to an
incomplete reaction. Therefore, both catalyst concentration and methanol/oil molar ratio
exhibited optimal values. The RSM demonstrated that the optimal conditions for catalyst
concentration and methanol/oil molar ratio were about 1% and 6:1, respectively, very close to
the SAS ridge max analysis results that will be discussed in the following section.
Figure 4.3: Response surface and contour plot of the effects of methanol/oil molar ratio
and catalyst on the yield of bio-diesel
101
The ridge max method computes an estimate of the ridge of optimum response with
increasing radii from the original centre, to give an optimal condition or set of conditions for
maximum bio-diesel production. The ridge max analysis showed that theoretically the
maximum yield could approach 100% at a methanol/oil molar ratio of 7.9 and catalyst
concentration of 1.0%. Using these suggested optimal conditions bio-diesel yield was 97% very close to the theoretical value. When the methanol/oil ratio was decreased to 6.0 while
keeping all other parameters the same as those mentioned above, we found that the bio-diesel
yield reached 95%. Although the yield decreased from 97% to 95%, on the basis of costefficiency and processing safety considerations we suggest using a molar ratio of methanol to
oil at 6.0:1 for bio-diesel production.
Table 4.4 shows the analysis of variance (-test) and the -value for this model. The -
value is 24.73 and the -value is smaller than 0.0001, demonstrating the suitability of the
deduced model. The \ value (=0.9570) indicates that the quadratic model was able to
predict 95.7% of the total variance and only 4.3% of the total variance was not explained by
the model.
Table 4.4: Analysis of variance (ANOVA) for the quadratic model

Variance Source
Sum of
Squares*
Degrees of
Freedom
Mean Square*
Regression
17903
1989.3
Linear
7281.6
Quadratic
4608.9
Interaction
-value
-value
24.73
< 0.0001
7281.6
90.51
< 0.0001
4608.9
57.29
< 0.0001
355.11
355.11
4.38
0.0620
Residual error
804.53
10
80.450
\ 0.9570
18708
19
Total error
*Quoted to five significant figures.
102
4.3.3 Effect of Parameters

Figures 4.4-4.6 present contour plots of methyl ester yield (wt.%) in terms of coded
factors to show the relationships between the dependent and independent variables of the
developed model. Each contour curve presents the effect of two variables on the methyl ester
yield, holding the third variable at constant level. Remarkable interaction between the
independent variables can be observed if the contour plots have an elliptical profile.
Figure 4.4 shows the strong interaction between methanol/oil molar ratio (M) and
catalyst concentration (C). This can also be confirmed by the small -value (0.0001) for MC
term. It can also be seen from the figure that starting from low catalyst concentrations, the
methyl ester yield increased with increasing catalyst concentration.
Yield (%)
production with temperature 65oC and reaction time 70 min
103
However, once the catalyst concentration was greater than its centre point value, the
reverse trend was observed. A similar pattern was observed when increasing the methanol/oil
molar ratio. This could be due to the fact that the positive coefficient for C and M played a
major role when the catalyst concentration and methanol/oil molar ratio were at lower levels,
while at higher levels, the interaction term MC and quadratic terms M2 and C2 had a more
significant negative effect, leading to a decrease of yield. This was consistent with physical
considerations; that since the methanol and triglyceride in the sunflower oil are immiscible,
addition of catalyst can facilitate the transesterification reaction, and rapidly increase the
yield. However, when the catalyst concentration became too high, soap could be quickly
formed which made the separation of glycerol from bio-diesel more difficult, thus reducing
the yield. Similarly, the increase of the amount of methanol will, on one hand, drive the
reaction to the right since the transesterification reaction is an equilibrium process; but on the
other hand excess methanol will help increase the solubility of glycerol resulting in the
reaction being driven to the left, decreasing the yield.
Yield (%)
Figure 4.5: Effect of reaction time and catalyst concentration on methyl ester
production with temperature 65oC and methanol/oil molar ratio 6.0:1
104
Figure 4.5 shows the effect of changes in the reaction time and catalyst concentration
on the methyl ester yield. At a fixed level of catalyst concentration, there appears to be no
significant change in methyl ester yield with increasing reaction time, within the limits set.
Similar results are observed in the Figure 4.6 when the catalyst concentration is fixed. This
could explain the high -value (0.6891) for the T term in the model, indicating the nonsignificance of this parameter.
Yield (%)
Figure 4.6: Effect of methanol/oil molar ratio and reaction time on methyl ester
production with temperature 65oC and catalyst concentration 1%
4.3.4 The Response Surface and Ridge Max Analysis

Twenty additional centre-point runs were performed to check the curvature of the
response surface. The additional experiments (Table 4.5) were carried out with a coded
distances of -1.68 , -1.0 , 0.0 , 1.0 and 1.68 when the reaction temperature and stirring speed
were fixed at 35oC and 200 rpm respectively. Then eight factorial points, six axial points and
six centre points were found. The matrix corresponding to the central composite design is
shown in Table 4.5. Using the Design-Expert program, a second-order polynomial equation
(4.4) was deduced for the experimental data:
105
~ N259.30 N 1.18a E 90.98b E 136.78W N 0.02ab E 0.06aW E 5.99bW E 0.01a

N 7.05b N 83.34W
(4.4)
The analysis of variance revealed that this model was adequate to express the actual
relationship between the response and significant variables, with a satisfactory coefficient of
determination (R2=0.81), which indicated 81% of the variability in the response could be
explained by the 2nd-order polynomial predictive equation (4.4).
Table 4.5: Central composite design

Level of Variables
Run
Treatment
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Random
7
12
8
2
16
6
5
9
15
4
18
20
10
19
17
13
14
3
1
11
CCRD
component
Factorial
Factorial
Factorial
Factorial
Factorial
Factorial
Factorial
Factorial
Axial
Axial
Axial
Axial
Axial
Axial
Center
Center
Center
Center
Center
Center
(X1)T
(min)
(-1)50
(1)70
(-1)50
(1)70
(-1)50
(1)70
(-1)50
(1)70
(-1.68)43.2
(1.68)76.8
(0)60
(0)60
(0)60
(0)60
(0)60
(0)60
(0)60
(0)60
(0)60
(0)60
(X2)M
(mol/mol)
(-1)5
(-1)5
(1)7
(1)7
(-1)5
(-1)5
(1)7
(1)7
(0)6
(0)6
(-1.68)4.32
(1.68)7.68
(0)6
(0)6
(0)6
(0)6
(0)6
(0)6
(0)6
(0)6
(X3)C
(wt.%)
(-1)0.5
(-1)0.5
(-1)0.5
(-1)0.5
(1)1.5
(1)1.5
(1)1.5
(1)1.5
(0)1
(0)1
(0)1
(0)1
(-1.68)0.16
(1.68)1.8
(0)1
(0)1
(0)1
(0)1
(0)1
(0)1
Yield (%)
(response)
51.09
56.60
67.94
72.71
54.08
60.75
82.93
88.87
92.27
93.17
54.63
94.45
26.51
42.60
93.49
93.49
93.49
93.49
93.49
93.49
The response surface profile and its contour of the optimal production of yield based on
equation 4.4 is shown in Figures 4.7, 4.8, 4.9 and 4.10, for which the temperature set 35C,
and the rate of mixing was 200 rpm. The RSM demonstrated that the optimal conditions for
catalyst concentration and methanol/oil molar ratio were about 1% and 7.5, respectively, very
close to the SAS ridge max analysis results discussed early.
106
Figure 4.7: Response surface and contour plot of the effects of methanol/oil molar ratio
and catalyst concentration on the yield of bio-diesel with temperature 35oC and reaction
time 60 min
RSM analysis of the second experimental results suggested optimal conditions as:
methanol/oil molar ratio, 6.8; temperature, 35C; time, 66 min; catalyst concentration, 1.1 %;
and rate of mixing, 200 rpm. This optimized condition was validated with actual bio-diesel
yield of 95%. The decrease of the methanol/oil molar ratio from 6.8/1 to 6.0/1 while keeping
the other variable parameters at their respective optimal values produced bio-diesel with a
yield of 94%. Thus bio-diesel yield increased by 1% but at the cost of significantly increasing
the molar ratio of methanol versus oil from 6.0 to 6.8, which does not appear to be costeffective. We suggest using a methanol/oil molar ratio at 6.0 for the optimal production of
bio-diesel from sunflower oil.
production with temperature 35oC and reaction time 60 min
107
Figure 4.9: Effect of reaction time and catalyst concentration on methyl ester
production with temperature 35oC and methanol/oil molar ratio 7.7:1
Figure 4.10: Effect of methanol/oil molar ratio and reaction time on methyl ester
production with temperature 35oC and catalyst concentration 1.0%
108
4.4 Conclusions
In summary, RSM is useful in the solution of many types of industrial problems.
Generally, one of these problems is optimization of the response in chemical process. In this
study, RSM was used to optimization of transesterification process. The study intended to
make use of the RSM process to maximize the production of bio-diesel (methyl ester in this
experiment) from sunflower oil using the conventional transesterification method. In addition
to using the RSM for optimizing the methanolysis of sunflower oil it was a desire to develop
a mathematical model which would describe the relationships between the variables and so
allow yield to be predicted before the production process was finalised.
A 20 experimental runs were conducted via a 3-factor experiment to examine effects of
methanol: oil molar ratio, reaction time, and catalyst concentration on yield of methyl ester.
The experimental results were showed that the optimal condition as methanol: oil molar ratio,
6.8:1, and catalyst concentration, 1.1%, at reaction time 66 min, and temperature 35oC. This
optimized condition was validated with actual bio-diesel yield of 95%. The decreased of
methanol: oil molar ratio from 6.8:1 to 6.0:1 while keeping the other variable parameters at
their respective optimal values produced bio-diesel with a yield of 94%. By comparison the
results of yield from optimization conduction and non-optimization conduction, it was
conclude as shown in the Table 4.6 below.
Table 4.6: Overall results & recommended production values
Before
After
Yield
98%
100%
Time (min)
180
68
M:O molar ratio
4.5:1
6.8:1
Catalyst Concentration
1.0%
1.1%
Temperature
65C
35C
The next chapter will be presenting the experimental set up for testing an engine
performance and exhaust gas emissions by using bio-diesel from non-optimized condition in
compression ignition engine. The results of engine performance such as engine brake power,
torque, brake specific consumption and thermal efficiency and exhaust gas emissions such as
CO, THC, CO2, and NOx by using pure bio-diesel and bio-diesel blends will be comparing
with standard diesel.
109
CHAPTER 5
ENGINE PERFORMANCE AND EMISSIONS USING
METHYL ESTER FROM VEGETABLE OILS AND
STANDARD DIESEL
5.1 Introduction
Increased environmental awareness has helped prompt the development of bio-diesels
in an effort to reduce environmental pollution. As described earlier in chapter three of this
thesis, generally bio-diesels contain 10% to 11% oxygen by weight, have a higher cetane
number than petroleum diesel, have no aromatics, and have attractive environmental benefits,
such as lower emissions of CO, CO2 and unburned hydrocarbons (HC) [223, 224].
Engine performance testing of bio-diesels and their blends is indispensible for
evaluating their relevant properties. Several research groups [223, 226] have investigated the
properties of a bio-diesel blend with soybean oil methyl esters in diesel engines and found
that particulate matter (PM), CO, and soot mass emissions decreased, while NOx increased.
Labeckas et al. [224], examined the performance and exhaust emissions of rapeseed oil
methyl esters in direct injection diesel engines, and found that there were lower emissions of
CO, CO2 and HC. Similar results were reported by Kalligeros et al. [227], for methyl esters of
sunflower oil and olive oil when they were blended with marine diesel and tested in a
stationary diesel engine.
Raheman et al. [228], studied the fuel properties of karanja methyl esters blended with
diesel from 20% to 80% by volume. It was found that B20 (a blend of 20% bio-diesel and
80% petroleum diesel) and B40 (a blend of 40% bio-diesel and 60% petroleum diesel) could
be used as an appropriate alternative fuel to petroleum diesels because they apparently
produced less CO, NOx emissions, and smoke density. Lin et al. [229], confirmed that
emission of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) decreased when the ratio of palm biodiesel increased in a blend with petroleum diesel. In general, bio-diesel demonstrated
improved emissions by reducing CO, CO2, HC, PM, and PAH emissions though, in some
cases, NOx increased. In the literature survey, there are several studies of compression
ignition engines running on diesel fuel and bio-diesel from various feedstocks [190-138,208].
110
In this study, five bio-diesel products produced from corn oil, rapeseed oil, soybean oil,
sunflower oil and waste vegetable oil (WVO) were tested on a diesel engine located in the
Engine Testing Automotive Laboratory at the University of Huddersfield in Huddersfield,
UK. The engine performance and emissions were evaluated and compared with that obtained
using standard diesel fuel.
5.2 Material and Methods

Sunflower oil methyl esters SOME A and SOME B were produced from the same
crude sunflower oil through two different reaction conditions to prepare the SOME with the
highest conversion. Based on response surface methodology an optimized transesterification
reaction (i.e., temperature 60oC, catalyst of NaOH 1.0% based on weight of crude sunflower
oil, methanol/oil molar ratio at 6:1, and reaction time of 70 min) with conversion rate of 97%
was used to prepare SOME A, while SOME B was obtained from non-optimized conditions
(i.e., temperature 65oC, catalyst of NaOH 0.4% based on weight of crude sunflower oil,
methanol/oil molar ratio at 4.5:1 and reaction time of 60 min) with percentage yield of 90%
SOME B of crude sunflower oil. Briefly, a certain amount of crude sunflower oil was
weighed and added to a fixed Erlenmeyer, then a calculated amount of catalyst (NaOH)
dissolved in the required amount of methanol was added. The reaction flask was immersed in
a water bath to keep the temperature constant throughout the reaction with defined agitation.
The bio-diesels, sunflower oil bio-diesel (B.Sun.oil) from non-optimized condition,
rapeseed oil bio-diesel (B.Rap.oil), soybean oil bio-diesel (B.Soy.oil), corn oil bio-diesel
(B.Cor.oil), fresh waste vegetable oil (B.WVOF) and old waste vegetable oil bio-diesel
(B.WVOO) were evaluated for engine performance and exhaust gas emissions compared to
standard diesel (St.Diesel). On the other hand waste vegetable oil (WVO) was blended at B5
(5% of bio-diesel to 95% of standard diesel by volume), B10, B15 and B20 and evaluated for
engine performance and emissions compared to standard diesel as well.
5.3 Engine Experiments

The steady state engine test runs were carried out on an engine test bed using a 2009
2.2L Ford Puma engine from the Ford Transit van. The test engine and dynamometer were
controlled by a microprocessor system equipped with data acquisition and logging. Sensors
were fitted to the engine and the dynamometer, to measure relevant parameters and send the
data to the control system. The sensors measured engine load, engine speed, inlet air
111
temperature, exhaust gas temperature, lubrication oil temperature, fuel consumption and the
cooling water temperature. The system allows for highly accurate measurement of the main
exhaust emission components. The test bed instrumentation is described in the Appendix B.
The specifications of the four-stroke, Ford Puma 2.2 V348 140 PS direct injection
diesel engine, turbocharged diesel test engine were: bore = 89.9 mm, stroke = 94.6 mm,
engine capacity = 2402 cc, compression ratio = 17.5:1, fuel injection release pressure = 135
bar, max power = 130 kW @ 3500 rpm, max torque = 375.0 Nm @ 2000-2250 rpm. See also
Figures B.1 and B.2.
The engine was tested in a series of steady state operating conditions at engine speeds
of 1500, 2200, 2600, 3000 and 3300 rev/min and engine loads of 25%, 50%, 75% and 100%
open throttle valve. It should be noted that 100% throttle valve conduction of operation
means full load operation of the engine. This gave a total of 20 stage readings. At each of
these conditions the engine was allowed to settle and warm up for about 15 minutes and then
the results acquired at a rate of 15 per second with the values averaged over the last 10
minutes of operation. During the experiments, the cooling water and engine oil temperatures
were constant at about 80C, and the laboratory temperature was within 20-25C. The gas
analysers and the measuring equipment were calibrated before each experiment.
The operating conditions were automatically programmed into a test cycle using the CP
Engineering Cadet V12 software. This test cycle was used for each of the different fuels
tested. During the test cycles the data for the parameters discussed in the next sections and
the Introduction above were logged constantly, see Figure B.3.
The performance parameters measured included brake torque (Nm) and fuel
consumption (kg/s). Brake power (kW), specific fuel consumption and fuel thermal
efficiency where evaluated by using Equations (B.1), (B.2) and (B.3), respectively.
5.3.1 Gas Analysis System
During these experiments emission concentrations of carbon monoxide (CO), carbon
dioxide (CO2), oxygen (O2), hydrocarbons (HCs) and the oxides of nitrogen (NOx) were
measured (Table 5.1). CO2 and O2 were measured in percentage of total volume (%), while
CO, HC and NOx, were measured in parts per million (ppm). The emissions were measured
112
using a Horiba exhaust gas analyser EXSA 1500 system (Figure B.4). The system claims
highly accurate measurement of the main exhaust emission components.
As shown in Table 5.1 the concentrations of the carbon monoxide CO in the exhaust
samples were measured by a Horiba Exsa-1500 non-dissipative infrared (NDIR) analyser,
with measurements range of 0 5,000 ppm. The concentrations of the total hydrocarbons
THC in the exhaust samples were measured by a Horiba heated flame ionisation detector
(FID) analyser, with measurements range of 0 50,000 ppm. The FID analyser needs to be
configured to be used with samples containing oxygen, as in the case of engines fuelled with
bio-diesel. The reason is that the presence of oxygen reduces analyser response by slowing
down ion production.
The concentrations of oxides of nitrogen in the exhaust samples were measured by a
Horiba chemiluminescent (CLA) analyser, with measurement range of 0 5,000 ppm. Based
on the specifications given by the manufacturers, the span repeatability of the three analysers
is less than 1% of the relative scale, and the span drift is less than 1% of the full scale over
a 24 hour period.
Table 5.1: Horiba Exsa 1500 and BG3 micro dilution tunnel for transient diesel
particulate
Constituent
Symbol
Analyser Method
Analyser Range
Carbon monoxide
CO
NDIR
0 - 5000ppm, 0 10 vol%
Carbon dioxide
CO2
NDIR
0 - 10, 20 vol%
Nitrogen/ oxides of nitrogen
N/NOx
CLD (dry)
0 - 100, 500, 1000, 5000 ppm
Oxygen
O2
MPA
0 - 10, 25 vol%
Total hydrocarbons
THC
Heated FID (wet)
113
0 - 100, 500, 1000, 5000, 10,000,

50,000 ppmC

The experimental results obtained from the tests carried out on engine performance and
exhaust emissions are presented in this section. These include results at different speeds and
loads for the different fuels i.e. standard diesel fuel and the five bio-diesel products. The
results are discussed from the viewpoint of using bio-diesel as an alternative fuel for
compression ignition engines.
5.4.1 Petroleum Diesel Benchmark
As the purpose of these tests was to compare bio-diesel and bio-diesel blend fuels with
their petroleum diesel counterpart the engine was first tested using petroleum diesel as the
fuel to establish a base line for comparison. Petroleum diesel is a fossil fuel and is notorious
for appearing to be a dirty fuel, but has a high energy content of about 44 MJ/kg. With diesel
engines the air and fuel is not premixed, instead they mix as they enter the combustion
chamber and combustion is initiated by the temperature rise due to compression alone.
Diesel engine combustion is never perfect and dissociation occurs. This causes the
engine to produce and emit pure carbon particles, which can cause the exhaust to appear
black in colour. This in itself proved a problem for the sensor, as the carbon particles clogged
the filters of the Horiba exhaust analyser faster than expected, and they (and the hoses
connected to the exhaust) needed cleaning prior to any run.
Tables 5.2 and 5.3 show the results for the petroleum diesel for 4 runs at engine speeds
1500, 2200, 2600, 3000 and 3300 rpm. From this data only a min, mean, and max values was
found for each engine speed, and these formed the benchmark results.
114
Table 5.2: Petroleum Diesel Benchmark (1)

RPM
RPM
1500
2200
CO2 %
2600
3000
3300
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
7.2501
7.4056
7.6611
6.4164
6.4329
6.4494
5.4407
6.0958
6.7509
6.5903
7.0706
8.5508
5.0373
5.3705
5.7038
1500
2200
CO
ppm
3000
3300
2200
THC
ppm
2600
3000
3300
43.5310
45.4941
47.4572
19.1934
20.1533
21.1133
27.7987
27.8411
27.8836
20.0524
24.7022
29.3519
26.1330
26.9771
27.8211
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
555.6114
560.6207
565.6300
422.3955
439.0035
455.6114
306.7931
337.6360
368.4790
620.2169
661.1953
672.1738
804.4765
805.1109
805.7453
RPM
RPM
1500
2600
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
35.4325
39.4293
43.4261
30.9360
33.0090
37.0820
31.1878
33.4268
41.6658
31.3537
32.8494
38.3451
33.0904
33.3163
40.5423
115
1500
2200
NOx
ppm
2600
3000
3300
Table 5.3: Petroleum Diesel Benchmark (2)

RPM
1500
2200
O2
%
2600
3000
3300
RPM
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
11.1912
13.4051
13.4190
12.4190
14.6318
14.8446
13.9510
15.0117
15.0723
13.9748
14.9685
15.9622
14.3614
16.8174
17.2734
1500
2200
Power
kW
3000
3300
RPM
1500
2200
Torque
Nm
2600
3000
3300
2600
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
20.1206
22.0933
24.0659
28.0008
28.3628
28.7248
20.1206
25.4864
30.8522
18.6850
19.3277
19.9703
17.3181
17.4904
17.6628
RPM
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
128.0958
140.6042
153.1126
121.5369
123.1069
124.6770
107.8078
110.5596
113.3115
59.4899
61.5274
63.5650
50.1144
50.6116
51.1087
1500
2200
SFC
g/kWh
2600
3000
3300
116
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
175.0043
217.6848
260.3653
207.3771
234.7209
262.0646
237.1376
261.4010
285.6644
310.6533
341.4114
372.1696
321.6966
360.6600
399.6234
5.4.2 Methyl Ester from Waste Vegetable Oil

The first fuel tested was the bio-diesel from WVO, B5, B10, B15, and B20 blends of
this were tested. The oil in these tests had been mainly used for deep fries for only about
three weeks and was provided free. Most fast food restaurants use their oil for longer,
because with time the heated oil becomes more acidic which has too beneficial consequences
the time taken to reach frying temperature is reduced and, as it begins to contain more hydro
carbons, the fried food takes on a more golden look. It is common practice for restaurants of
this nature to leave some used oil when adding new oil, this allows the old oil to be
contaminated and speeds the process of making the new oil more acidic.
Each of the four blends was run twice on the engine at 1500, 2200, 2600, 3000 and
3300 rpm. The dynamometer load setting was fixed for all runs. Tables 5.4 to 5.7 show the
combined results of running the bio-diesel WVO. Over 300 data points were taken for each
rpm and blend. The data was cleaned of any noise and only three values were taken into
analysis. The minimum, mean, and maximum values were taken from the average of the two
runs, to provide a more baseline result.
117
Table 5.4: Waste Vegetable Oil Blends Compiled Data (1)

RPM
1500
2200
CO2
%
2600
3000
3300
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
B5
7.3985
7.8618
7.9251
6.6389
6.7983
6.9576
6.3732
6.5612
6.7492
8.4393
8.5221
8.6049
6.3306
6.7385
7.1463
B10
7.6427
7.7965
7.8503
7.288
7.6017
7.9153
6.2678
6.536
6.8042
8.3203
8.4798
8.6394
6.1959
6.416
6.6362
B15
7.7065
7.8329
7.8592
7.2793
7.4309
7.5826
6.2553
7.0101
7.6925
8.119
8.4253
8.7316
6.1693
6.1878
6.2063
B20
6.6347
6.6969
6.7591
5.6879
6.2569
6.8259
5.3433
5.4841
5.6249
5.5642
5.7642
5.9642
4.2767
4.6009
4.9251
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
B5
41.531
43.494
45.457
19.093
19.153
24.113
25.799
26.841
27.884
21.052
23.702
27.352
24.133
25.077
28.821
B10
41.145
42.615
43.385
19.273
19.697
23.82
23.912
26.134
26.356
19.161
23.276
25.392
21.235
24.544
25.853
B15
40.677
40.865
41.053
19.008
19.417
22.527
19.158
24.311
24.463
18.843
22.246
23.648
17.805
23.915
22.025
B20
40.038
40.8
41.562
17.851
19.066
20.281
18.775
24.18
24.586
17.947
21.684
20.421
17.077
23.33
17.582
RPM
1500
2200
CO
ppm
2600
3000
3300
118

RPM
1500
2200
THC
ppm
2600
3000
3300
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
RPM
1500
2200
NOx
ppm
2600
3000
3300
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
B5
35.78
38.066
38.951
25.807
31.379
33.951
27.07
31.411
31.752
30.107
31.706
40.305
30.503
31.439
33.375
B5
560.8456
563.2078
571.5700
440.2031
441.1200
443.0369
330.7853
338.4238
342.0624
660.7023
663.3685
667.0348
818.7010
820.0553
826.4095
119
B10
35.494
36.624
38.753
23.038
30.336
30.635
25.438
29.015
30.592
28.804
31.055
39.306
26.804
27.815
32.826
B10
563.8930
565.7700
570.6470
444.9288
446.1520
454.4921
328.4038
339.7305
341.0572
668.2092
668.4008
671.5924
820.3886
823.7204
830.0522
B15
31.368
33.43
35.493
23.089
27.649
29.209
20.702
28.892
30.082
26.193
30.459
34.725
23.415
25.686
30.957
B15
566.0218
570.9784
573.9351
446.6325
446.7898
446.9472
332.9416
341.2159
345.4901
669.7857
670.8460
673.9062
827.6678
830.5262
833.3846
B20
29.466
31.408
30.351
19.18
24.359
26.537
20.185
27.279
28.374
18.857
25.241
29.625
17.188
25.253
23.318
B20
569.1154
572.0343
583.9532
450.1110
451.5786
465.0462
337.5019
343.5423
345.5826
668.8105
671.9464
673.0823
829.3783
830.9918
836.6053

RPM
1500
2200
O2
%
2600
3000
3300
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
RPM
1500
2200
Power
kW
2600
3000
3300
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
B5
10.8650
10.9788
11.0927
12.4181
12.4626
12.5072
13.5880
14.2570
14.9261
11.1874
12.4131
13.6387
13.5134
13.7192
13.9250
B5
20.4430
21.9734
26.5039
27.4873
28.1796
30.8719
24.2632
25.3839
31.7046
18.9797
19.2465
20.5133
16.0829
17.3899
18.4970
120
B10
11.3796
11.7356
12.0916
12.5871
12.8075
13.0279
13.8544
14.0148
14.1753
11.3711
11.8730
12.3750
13.8694
14.1222
14.3749
B10
20.1462
21.7496
24.7529
27.2985
27.8999
28.9013
23.1437
25.0677
30.5917
17.5500
18.9574
20.1649
15.6063
17.2982
17.9901
B15
11.7187
12.0524
12.3860
12.6762
13.3702
14.0641
13.9540
14.6645
15.3750
11.7049
12.8290
13.9530
13.9725
14.8432
15.7139
B15
18.8092
21.5587
24.9081
23.9765
27.2337
28.4910
21.8553
24.8850
30.1147
15.2516
18.7293
19.4069
14.7186
17.1861
17.0537
B20
13.1057
13.3547
13.6038
14.4121
14.6023
14.7925
12.1896
12.7739
13.3581
14.4860
14.5065
14.5270
16.0909
16.2594
16.4280
B20
17.2489
21.5149
23.5810
20.7634
27.1937
28.6240
20.7692
24.6776
30.5861
15.0338
18.5509
19.2681
13.6518
17.1335
17.0152

RPM
1500
2200
Torque
Nm
2600
3000
3300
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
B5
139.3160
139.4772
141.6384
121.9931
122.5086
127.0241
109.8284
110.0284
115.2285
59.6004
61.4455
65.2907
44.3246
50.4644
52.6042
B10
136.6673
137.4757
139.2840
120.8288
121.2385
125.6482
107.7109
109.5309
112.3510
56.2316
60.5378
62.8440
41.9452
50.2868
51.6284
B15
133.5394
135.6322
136.7250
120.4308
120.4635
122.4962
105.6521
107.2442
110.8364
52.2793
60.4597
61.6401
40.3780
49.4815
48.5850
B20
130.9702
133.6227
134.2752
118.5112
119.7753
120.0395
103.3388
105.3709
109.4029
50.5813
60.0269
61.4725
40.1862
49.4504
48.9146
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
min
Mean
max
B5
236.7470
238.5646
240.3822
256.2700
256.6119
256.9537
279.6171
279.9062
280.1953
374.2292
374.5271
374.8250
396.7245
397.4386
398.1527
B10
240.7708
241.1980
241.6253
259.1789
259.8715
260.5642
288.0495
289.1014
290.1532
375.7091
376.8853
378.0615
398.1989
399.7837
401.3685
B15
242.1002
243.0680
244.0357
260.0473
260.2087
260.3700
289.3730
289.9560
290.5391
375.5214
376.3592
377.1970
409.7252
410.0502
410.3752
B20
242.4072
244.5997
244.7921
260.4020
260.6743
261.9466
290.0286
292.1929
292.3571
376.0627
376.3964
378.7300
410.1843
411.5685
413.9528
RPM
1500
2200
SFC
g/kWh
2600
3000
3300
121
When comparing the means of sets of data it is necessary to know the standard
deviations of the data Equation 5.4 shows the formula for standard deviation:
1

( N )
N1
(5.1)

Where: = the mean of the values

The mean is defined by equation 5.5:
1
E E g E

(5.2)
Where: is the number of data points
The results of these calculations can be seen in Table 5.8.

From the Table 5.8 the values yielded for the standard deviation, it is apparent that the
data taken from the runs is accurate enough and has a high level of repeatability that it can be
used in a direct comparison with the petroleum diesel benchmark.
The first step into comparing these data versus the benchmark is to establish a
percentage difference in the means of the data sets taken for the benchmark. Table 5.9 shows
us the results in percentage difference for all values, which include, 1500, 2200, 2600, 3000
and 3300 for the rpm ranges for all four bio-diesel blends.
122
Table 5.8: Standard Deviation for Blends of Bio-diesel Waste Vegetable Oil
#
CO2
CO
O2
THC
NOx
Power
Torque
SFC
RPM
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
B5
0.23
0.13
0.22
0.07
0.33
1.60
2.35
0.85
2.58
2.02
0.09
0.04
0.55
1.00
0.17
1.34
3.40
2.13
4.48
1.20
4.60
1.18
4.70
2.60
3.36
2.57
1.46
3.28
0.67
0.99
1.06
2.26
2.50
2.37
3.51
1.48
0.28
0.24
2.60
0.58
B10
0.09
0.26
0.22
0.13
0.18
0.93
2.05
1.10
2.59
1.94
0.29
0.18
0.13
0.41
0.21
1.35
3.51
2.16
4.51
2.63
2.85
4.25
5.68
1.55
4.01
1.91
0.66
3.16
1.07
1.00
1.09
2.18
1.91
2.74
4.28
0.35
0.57
0.86
0.96
1.29
123
B15
0.07
0.12
0.59
0.25
0.02
0.15
1.57
2.47
2.02
2.55
0.27
0.57
0.58
0.92
0.71
1.68
2.60
4.17
3.48
3.16
3.26
0.13
5.21
1.75
2.33
4.99
1.90
3.41
1.82
1.13
1.32
0.97
2.17
4.16
4.10
0.79
0.13
0.48
0.68
0.27
B20
0.05
0.46
0.11
0.16
0.26
0.62
0.99
2.65
1.55
2.84
0.20
0.16
0.48
0.02
0.14
0.79
3.09
3.63
4.42
3.44
6.42
6.72
3.43
1.81
3.10
2.64
3.42
4.04
1.85
1.61
1.43
0.67
2.52
4.83
4.25
1.08
0.67
1.06
1.81
1.56
Table 5.9: Percentage difference of WVO with respect to petroleum diesel

#
CO2
CO
O2
THC
NOx
Power
Torque
SFC
RPM
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
1500
2200
2600
3000
3300
B5
0.76
1.02
1.07
0.73
1.27
-4.40
-4.96
-3.59
-4.05
-7.04
-18.10
-14.83
-5.03
-17.07
-18.42
-3.46
-4.94
-6.03
-3.48
-5.64
0.46
0.48
0.23
0.33
1.86
-0.54
-0.65
-0.40
-0.42
-0.57
-0.80
-0.49
-0.48
-0.13
-0.29
9.59
9.33
7.08
9.70
10.20
B10
1.23
2.62
0.66
1.54
0.85
-6.33
-2.27
-6.13
-5.77
-9.02
-12.45
-12.47
-6.64
-20.68
-16.03
-7.12
-8.10
-13.20
-5.46
-16.51
0.92
1.63
0.62
1.09
2.31
-1.56
-1.63
-1.64
-1.92
-1.10
-2.23
-1.52
-0.93
-1.61
-0.64
10.80
10.72
10.60
10.39
10.85
124
B15
0.37
1.52
1.88
2.19
0.32
-10.17
-3.65
-12.68
-9.94
-11.35
-10.09
-8.62
-2.31
-14.29
-11.74
-15.22
-16.24
-13.57
-7.28
-22.90
1.85
1.77
1.06
1.46
3.16
-2.42
-3.98
-2.36
-3.10
-1.74
-3.54
-2.15
-3.00
-1.74
-2.23
11.66
10.86
10.92
10.24
13.69
B20
-1.47
-2.74
-2.82
-1.50
-1.48
-10.32
-5.40
-13.15
-12.22
-13.52
-0.38
-0.20
-14.91
-3.09
-3.32
-20.34
-26.21
-18.39
-23.16
-24.20
2.04
2.86
1.75
1.63
3.21
-2.62
-4.12
-3.17
-4.02
-2.04
-4.97
-2.71
-4.69
-2.44
-2.29
12.36
11.06
11.78
10.25
14.12
Further simplifying the information, an average of the values was taken to provide an
overall aspect of the difference between the WVO and the petroleum benchmark. This can be
seen on Table 5.10.
Table 5.10: Overall Percentage Difference
CO2
CO
O2
THC
NOx
Power
Torque
SFC
B5
0.97
-4.81
-14.69
-4.71
0.67
-0.52
-0.44
9.18
B10
1.38
-5.90
-13.65
-10.08
1.31
-1.57
-1.38
10.67
B15
1.26
-9.56
-9.41
-15.04
1.86
-2.72
-2.53
11.47
B20
-2.00
-10.92
-4.38
-22.46
2.30
-3.19
-3.42
11.91
5.4.3 Carbon Dioxide (CO2) Emissions of Waste Vegetable Oil Bio-diesel Blends
As was stated previously the results of bio-diesel blend fuels over the petroleum diesel
should show decrease in the emissions of CO, HC, with a slight increase in NOx, and overall
similar values for CO2. This trend can be seen in Figure 5.1.
Figure 5.1: Carbon dioxide emissions for different bio-diesel blends
125
Focusing on only one speed (3300 rpm) allows for a clearer picture of what is
happening during the change from B5 to B20 bio-diesel blends. To have a clearer picture the
values are normalized to those for petroleum diesel. In this case as seen in Figure 5.2 as well,
petroleum diesel is denoted by B0, meaning there is zero % bio-diesel present in the blend.
Normalizing the graph will show more clearly how the effects of running bio-diesel fuel
blends have on the emissions of a diesel engine. To normalize the values the following
relation was used equation (5.2):
^(}xY $%6' w'!"%'6 '-'% $%6')/ w'!"%'6 '-'% $%6'_ 100%.
(5.3)
Figure 5.2: Normalized carbon dioxide emission against bio-diesel blend for engine
speed 3300 rpm
To understand why this initial increase in CO2 occurs it is important to understand the
chemical reaction of combustion and how the products are formed - in this case the
emissions. Petroleum diesel fuel consists of 86.5% Carbon (C), 13.2% Hydrogen (H) and
0.3% Sulphur (S) and air consists of 78.08% Nitrogen (N), 20.95% Oxygen (O2) and 0.93%
Argon (Ar). The molecular weight of carbon is rounded to 12 and hydrogen to 1. So the
number of moles of carbon and hydrogen in the fuel are respectively:
86.5/12 7.21
13.2/1 13.2
126
The sulphur will be neglected from this analysis as it composes a very small
proportion, and is not present in bio-diesel. Equation 5.6 shows the chemical reaction that
occurs in the combustion chamber. This chemical equation is equilibrated with respect to the
stoichiometric balance.
W X E .Y E
0.79
,
0.79
/ WY E X Y E $ .
/
0.22
2
0.22
(5.4)
Where:
$
In the case of petroleum diesel these values:

$
E,
4
7.21 E 13.2
5.10
4
For diesel fuel W12X23, 12 $# 23
Bio-diesel has a chemical equation WX; YYW\,,;, and provides a new combustion
equation:
(W X ) % E (WX; YYW\) (1 N %) E $ .Y E

,
0.79
WY E X Y E $ .
/
2
0.22
0.79
/
0.22
When bio-diesel is present there is additional carbon, hydrogen and oxygen to be added
to the reaction. The resulting problem is seen at B5, this additional carbon caused the emitted
CO2% to increase. This then falls as the proportion of bio-diesel is increased and a state
similar to that for petroleum diesel is reached at about B20. Following this trend it is
estimated that at higher concentrations of bio-diesel blends (> B20) the CO2% emitted would
actually be lower than for petroleum diesel.
127
5.4.4 Carbon Monoxide (CO) Emissions of Waste Vegetable Oil Bio-diesel Blends
The second emission to be analyzed is CO. Carbon Monoxide is present when
dissociation is present in the combustion due to incomplete combustion. Figure 5.3 shows the
CO emission for the bio-diesel obtained from WVO. From the data it was clear that the CO
emission decreased as the bio-diesel blend increased.
Figure 5.3: Average carbon monoxide emission for different bio-diesel blends
Figure 5.4: Normalized carbon monoxide emissions for different bio-diesel blends
128
From Figure 5.4 it was clear that as the bio-diesel blend increase the normalised CO
emission decreases almost linearly. From the previous chemical reaction equations of
combustion, it was clear to see that the addition of bio-diesel fuel to the petroleum diesel
provides more oxygen which allows for a more complete reaction and combustion, with less
dissociation. Since CO was a main by-product of dissociation more complete combustion
causes this to decrease as was seen in the data. Bio-diesel has both a higher cetane number
(ignition quality) and a higher oxygen content which contribute to a shorter ignition delay
period which is important in reducing CO emission.
5.4.5 Hydrocarbon (THC) Emissions of Waste Vegetable Oil Bio-diesel
Total hydro-carbon emission should be reduced by the use of bio-diesel fuel blends.
From the data in Table 5.6 was significant and substantial decrease in THC emissions with
respect to the benchmark, see Figure 5.5.
Figure 5.5: Average total hydrocarbon emissions for different bio-diesel blends
As was explained earlier, these WVOs were used for cooking and the hydrocarbons
contained in them were slowly eaten away by the high temperatures required to fry food.
Thus the proportion of hydrocarbons would naturally be lower than that found in petroleum
diesel, i.e. the same reason why CO was decreased. As the combustion becomes more
complete less dissociation occurs yielding fewer hydrocarbons in the emissions. The decrease
in THCs from over 40 ppm to less than 30 ppm is good for a fuel which is as efficient as
petroleum diesel but friendlier to the environment.
129
Figure 5.6: Normalized total hydrocarbon emissions for different bio-diesel blends
5.4.6 Oxide of Nitrogen (NOx) Emissions of Waste Vegetable Oil Bio-diesel Blends
An oxide of nitrogen (NOx) was the only emission which did not seem to show a
decrease relative to petroleum diesel. In fact it increasing steadily as the percentage of biodiesel blend increased, see Figure 5.7. From the data it was apparent that the change is only
being incremented at B20 by a maximum value of 3.21%, yet with a mean more resembling
that of 2.33%.
Figure 5.7: Average emissions of oxides of nitrogen for different bio-diesel blends
130
Normalizing the NOx allows for a clearer picture of what is going on, Figures 5.8
5.10 show the NOx trend for each of the three RPM ranges, low, medium, and high.

(Low RPM)
Figure 5.9: Normalized NOx for different bio-diesel blends (Medium RPM)
131

(High RPM)
At low and middle speeds there is clear increase in NOx emissions as the blend goes
from B10 to B20. For these speeds it was estimated that as the increase in proportion of
WVO increases the NOx emission will be increase at a similar rate. However at high engine
speeds there appears to be a limit to the NOx emissions, and if this trend continues there
would be little further increase in NOx emissions as the proportion of WVO in the blend
increased.
Increase in NOx could be due to an increase temperature due to high oxygen content of
the combustion with increase in proportion of bio-diesel. This may be due to experimental
design. Since the engine was not being running, there is no airflow over it to cool it and there
is a consequent temperature rise. This increase in temperature may be the cause of the slight
increase in NOx emissions. The toxicity level of this green house gas makes any increase in
its emission a concern.
However, bio-diesel blend contains no sulphur, and technologies exist to control NOx
emissions where sulphur is not present. Furthermore, newer electronically controlled diesel
engines manage to decrease NOx emissions by 80-90%.
132
5.4.7 Torque and Power for Waste Vegetable Oil Bio-diesel Blends
Sunflower oil itself has a relatively low energy content, but the bio-diesel fuel produced
from it has a value (about 37.5 MJ/kg, see Table 4.1) close to that of petroleum diesel; this
means that efficiency and output is lower but only by a small percentage. Figure 5.11 and
5.16 show the curves for power and torque respectively.
By simple proportions it the energy content of the blend can be calculated. Energy
content of blend = (%diesel x 42.5 + %bio-diesel x 37.5). It can be seen from Figure 5.11 that
the loss in power is close to the value predicted. At 20% bio-diesel the calculated power is
41.5 MJ/kg, a decrease of 2.35% compared to petroleum diesel, the measured decrease was
about 1.72%.
Figure 5.11: Average power output for different bio-diesel blends
133
Figure 5.12: Torque output for different bio-diesel blends
The same trend in the results was seen for torque, there was a progressive decrease in
torque as the proportion of bio-diesel in the blend increased, see Figures 5.12 and 5.13. The
decrease in torque was more apparent than that of the power, because diesel engines are more
focused on torque curves than power curves.
Figure 5.13: Normalised decrease in Torque output for different bio-diesel blends at
3300 rpm
134
5.4.8 Engine Performance for a Range of B100 Bio-diesels

Figure 5.14 shows the variation in the brake power with the engine speed of the test
engine operated at full load with standard petroleum diesel and five bio-diesels produced
from corn oil, rapeseed oil, soybean oil, sunflower oil and WVO. The brake power reached
its peak value at the speed of about 2600 rpm for all fuels. The brake power of the engine
with standard diesel was higher than for any bio-diesel. Standard petroleum diesel produced
8.4% and 5.6% more power than rapeseed bio-diesel at engine speed 2600 and 3300 rpm,
respectively. Because the bio-diesels have lower calorific values than that of standard diesel,
both torque and brake power is reduced. However, difference in brake power between
standard diesel and the bio-diesels were very small in most cases.
Figure 5.14: Average power output against engine speed at full load with petroleum
diesel and bio-diesels as fuel
135
Figure 5.15: Average torque output against engine speed at full load with petroleum
diesel and bio-diesels as fuel
Figure 5.15 shows the variation in the torque of the engine fuelled with standard diesel
and different type of bio-diesel versus engine speed. It was observed that the engine yields
the maximum torque for all fuels in the speed range of 1500 to 2000 rpm, while the minimum
torque was obtained in the range of 3000 to 3300 rpm. The torque of the engine fuelled with
standard diesel was higher than for bio-diesel. The reason for the reduction of torque with
bio-diesel can also be attributed to the lower calorific value of the bio-diesel. The mean
increase in the torque between standard diesel and bio-diesel was determined as 8.2%.
136
Figure 5.16: Average brake specific fuel consumption with engine speed at full load with
petroleum diesel and bio-diesels as fuel
Figure 5.16 shows the variations in the BSFC in g/kWh for both standard diesel and
bio-diesels with respect to the engine speed. The BSFC is the ratio of the fuel consumed in
g/sec to the engine brake power. The BSFC for bio-diesel operation was on an average 11.6%
higher than that for standard diesel operation. This increase may be attributed to the
collective outcomes of the higher fuel density, higher fuel consumption and lower brake
power due to lower calorific value of the bio-diesel. The highest BSFC was obtained using
bio-diesel from WVO. Compared to bio-diesel from WVO, the BSFC was, on average,
13.2% and 12.8% lower for standard diesel and rapeseed bio-diesel, respectively.
Brake thermal efficiency for standard diesel and bio-diesel as a function of engine
speed are shown in Figure 5.17. The maximum thermal efficiency for standard diesel and biodiesels (with the exception of B.Rap.oil) was observed to occur close to 1500 rpm. It was
seen that bio-diesel has higher thermal efficiency than standard diesel and the mean
difference in thermal efficiency between them was about 1.5%. The improvement of thermal
efficiency with bio-diesel can be attributed to the oxygen content and higher cetane number
of bio-diesel. These properties lead to favourable effects on the combustion process and a
slight improvement thermal efficiency for bio-diesel operation in spite of the lower calorific
value of bio-diesel.
137
Figure 5.17: Average brake thermal efficiency against engine speed at full load with
petroleum diesel and bio-diesels as fuel
Figure 5.18 shows the variation of THC emission with load for standard diesel and six
different types of bio-diesel and it can be seen that all the bio-diesels produced relatively
lower THC emissions compared to standard diesel. This may be attributed to the availability
of oxygen in bio-diesel, which facilitates better combustion. THC emission for bio-diesel was
almost identical. On average over the four loads used in the tests, there was a reduction of
33.9% in hydrocarbon emission for WVO bio-diesel, whereas it was 25.9% and 26.4% for
sunflower oil bio-diesel and rapeseed oil bio-diesel respectively.
138
Figure 5.18: Hydrocarbon emissions against engine load at 1500 rpm
Figure 5.19: Carbon monoxide emissions against engine load at 1500 rpm
The variation of CO emission at different loads for standard diesel and six bio-diesels at
1500 rpm is shown in Figure 5.19. At 25% and 50% loads CO emissions of the petroleum
diesel were not too much different from those of bio-diesel. However, at 75% full load CO
emissions from standard diesel rose sharply, while the CO emissions from the bio-diesels fell.
139
At full load the CO emission from standard diesel again rose sharply, but the CO emissions
from the bio-diesels rose even more sharply. CO emissions for bio-diesel operation were
substantially lower than those for standard diesel operation because bio-diesel has both a
higher cetane number and a higher oxygen content which contribute to a shorter ignition
delay period which is important in reducing CO emission.
Figure 5.20: Carbon dioxide emissions against engine load at 1500 rpm
Figure 5.21: Emission of oxides of nitrogen against engine load at 1500 rpm
The variation of CO2 emission at constant speed 1500 rpm and different loads for
standard diesel and bio-diesel is shown in Figure 5.20. The trends are much the same and, in
most cases, CO2 emissions for the petroleum diesel were not much different from those of
140
bio-diesel. Typically, the greater the load the bigger the difference between the CO2 emitted
for standard and the bio-diesels. At full load CO2 emissions from bio-diesel operations were,
on average, 22% lower than those of standard diesel operation. CO2 emissions are reduced for
the same reasons CO emissions are reduced, the bio-diesels have a higher cetane number and
higher oxygen content compared to standard diesel.
Figure 5.21 shows variation in the emission of oxides of nitrogen with engine load at
1500 rpm, for standard diesel and six bio-diesels. The NOx emission with bio-diesel was
higher than that with standard diesel at most engine loads. It is known that formation of NOx
emissions are strongly dependent upon the equivalence ratio, oxygen concentration and
burned gas temperature. Many researchers have confirmed that oxygenated bio-diesel causes
an increase in NOx emissions. The oxygen content of bio-diesel is the main reason for higher
NOx emissions because the oxygen in the bio-diesel can react easily with nitrogen during the
of combustion process, thus causing higher emissions of NOx. Normally, complete
combustion causes higher combustion temperature, which results in higher NOx formation.
In bio-diesel operation, there was an average of 12.5% increase in the NOx emission was
measured compared to standard diesel operation.
5.5 Cost Analysis

An alternative fuel despite improvements it may offer in, say reducing greenhouse
emissions, enters the world market under the same conditions as established fuels. A product
needs to be competitive to be a viable and immediate alternative fuel. Although it might be
possible to create a fuel with zero emissions and an output similar to those of 100%
petroleum fuels, the cost of such a fuel could over weight its perceived benefits. Any type of
alternative fuel needs to be competitive for it to have a real chance of being effective. For this
reason, when providing an alternative fuel the cost must be such that the fuel is competitive
in the market, while the more important features of the fuel demanded by the customers are
optimised. Thus while maintaining costs similar to those of petroleum fuels, reduced
emissions is the primary factor demanded by today's world fuel market from any immediate
alternative energy solution.
5.5.1 Fundamentals of a cost analysis
Given the similarities of the different bio-diesel blends tested, the question changes into
which of these would provide the cheapest solution. Experimental data has shown that six
141
different oils (sunflower oil, corn oil, rapeseed oil, soybean oil, WVOF and WVOO) tend to
have similar emission results, with the new and used oils having only a slightly higher
margin. Output power and efficiency on average is very similar to that of the petroleum
counterpart.
The cost analysis follows a very simple procedure, to determine the unit cost (the price
of 1 litre) of the bio-diesel blend. This price must be close to the price of 100% petroleum
diesel. In order to obtain this information it is important to first analyze what factors affect
the cost of production. Table 5.11 shows the process of the constituents necessary to produce
bio-diesel.
Table 5.11: Price of raw materials for bio-diesel production
Material
Batch Capacity
/Batch
/Litre
WVOF/WVOO
50 Litres
Sunflower Oil/Corn Oil
50 Litres
53.33
1.07
Rapeseed Oil/Soybean Oil
50 Litres
40.00
0.80
Methanol
8.50 Litres
6.38
0.75
NaOH
NaOH
0.200 kg
0.400 kg
1.10
2.20
5.50 /kg
The purpose of this cost analysis is to produce a table of the cost/litre of B5, B10,
B15, and B20 for each of the six oils tested. The cost of petroleum diesel, although it changes
constantly it can initially be omitted from the analyses. It is assumed that on average for
every 50 litres of base oil, 8.5 litres of methanol and 200 grams of catalyst concentration is
required for pure vegetable oil and 400 grams of catalyst concentration is required for waste
vegetable oil were to be used. These numbers will change depending on the FFA level of the
base oil, but the variation will be sufficiently small to allow for the cost of methanol and
catalyst to be assumed constant. On the other hand each kilogram of pure vegetable oil and
WVO need 0.02 and 0.05 of NaOH respectively. Table 5.12 shows the cost of each of the
blends on a per litre bases.
142
Table 5.12: Cost per litre of bio-diesel blends

Fuel
100%
B5
B10
B15
B20
*Petroleum Diesel
1.40
WVO Bio-diesel
0.80
1.37
1.34
1.31
1.28
Sunflower/Corn oil Bio-diesel
1.84
1.42
1.44
1.47
1.49
Rapeseed/Soybean oil Bio-diesel
1.57
1.41
1.42
1.43
1.44
* Petroleum diesel prices based on average price in UK garages Monday 21st March 2011
[230].
Table 5.12 shows the overall cost of production for one litre of bio-diesel blend. It is
clear to see that obtaining free WVO decreases the price of the bio-diesel blend significantly
as the proportion of bio-diesel increases. A highest cost of blended diesel was for sunflower
oil and Corn oil bio-diesel with a price of 1.49 for B20, making it almost 9 pence per litre
more expensive than petroleum diesel and 5 pence per litre more expensive than rapeseed oil
and soybean oil bio-diesel. Although the WVO was free, more time is required produce the
bio-diesel. Most used oil has to be refined and filtered a number of times. Filtering can take
from two hours to five hours before the WVO is ready for bio-diesel production. Although
this process can be automated, the time spent during this process can allow for there to be a
smaller price difference between the free oil and the purchased refined oil.
5.5.2 Two-Step Optimization Process
Two-step optimization is one of the methods used to obtain a cost effective design for a
product. Although there are many processes which can be used to create similar results the
two step optimization process using the Tagushi method is one of the most accurate methods.
This powerful tool, allows a product to be quickly and accurately optimized providing the
best alternative to the market.
The following steps highlight the process conducted to obtain a functional optimization:
(1) Obtain four characteristics of the bio-diesel, which have an impact on the use, production,
time, and cost. (2) Identify the market requirements. (3) Develop a detailed matrix that
matches the customer requirements and characteristics. (4) Set up a transformation process
for each characteristic such as identity the output and target and identify the input variables
143
and the levels. (5) Collect the data. (6) Generate response tables for Signal Noise Ratio (S/N)
response and average response.
To be able to begin the optimization process for a bio-diesel the production functions
must be known. To obtain a competitive bio-diesel blend, the fuel must be shows to decrease
emissions, maintain an output of performance similar to that of the petroleum fuels, give
similar efficiency to that of the petroleum fuels and, most importantly, be readily available.
These features encapsulate the user's perspective of what qualities an alternative fuel for
immediate application should possess. Here the bio-diesel decreases emissions, but it also
decreases power output and efficiency and has a higher cost/litre. Bio-diesel is regarded as an
immediate alternative energy because it can be used in conventional diesel engines to
decrease emissions. This is regarded as the strong suit behind bio-diesel.
The six bio-diesel blends in question are going to go through a two step optimization
process to obtain the basest oil to use, while maintaining the cost of the fuel within market
competition. For this process it is important to be able to analyze the factors involved which
are needed by the bio-diesel itself to be successful. The four factors were established to be as
follows: A - Base Oil, B - Quality of Oil, C - Acidity and D - Availability. These four factors
were chosen because they determine the qualities of the end product. The base oil was
important because with this, one can see how much the overall cost will impact the final
production, also the selection of base oil defines the other four factors. From this view there
are two types of base oils with which to produce bio-diesel, free used WVO and base oil not
used before but which needs to be purchased.
The second factor to be taken into consideration is the quality of the base oil. New oil is
refined and clean while free used oil needs to be filtered and cleaned. Acidity levels of the
base oil impact on production of bio-diesel and time required for production. Base oils which
have been used, tend to have higher acidic levels than those which have not been used, yet in
some cases the acidity levels vary from new oil to new oil. Higher acidity levels require a
higher amount of methanol and catalyst to create a successful reaction. This also creates more
glycerine and soap, which requires more time to be able to remove them from the final fuel,
which caused decreased bio-diesel yield.
Finally the availability of the base oil is important factor on the production of biodiesel. Availability controls how much bio-diesel can be created without waiting for delivery.
144
These four factors have been found to be the most influential with respect to the time required
to produce a bio-diesel blend. The four factors (A, B, C and D) were given two levels (1,2)
each. As previously discussed for every design there will be compromise between these
factors. The two different levels for each factor will allow for the two step optimization to
work, and are as shown in Table 5.13. Each one of these levels will be designated by either
1 or 2 to simplify the analysis of the optimization, so there are 24 possible combinations.
Table 5.13: 2-Level-4-Factor Experimental Design

#
Factors
Level
Base Oil
(A)
Quality
(B)
Acidity
(C)
Availability
(D)
Free WVO
Used
High
Low
Purchased
Refined
Low
High
The properties are all required for the bio-diesel to be competitive in a market
dominated by petroleum fuels, while possible sacrifices in strength of the factors are
available. These sacrifices will be seen in the difference between e.g. refined oil which has
a cost to the user versus a used WVO which will be free. The higher acidity levels of used oil
means a higher ratio of methanol and catalyst concentration for the base oil to successfully
produce a usable bio-diesel blend.
On the other hand there's the advantage of having a free base oil as a starting point, as it
allows the user to help recycle a waste product, while still maintaining similar results in
emission output as its counterpart.
With this information to hand a set of response has to be created for these situations
(WVO and pure oils). All the responses (R1, R2 and R3) were based on a similar factor
which affects the end product: time in hours. This data can be seen in Table 5.14.
145
Table 5.14: Responses for methyl ester production in hours

Waste
vegetable oil
R1
12
10
8
8
9
9
11
5
9
7
7
2
8
6
7
3
Sunflower
oil/Corn oil
R2
10
13
10
7
11
9
8
6
7
5
4
4
9
8
6
3
Rapeseed
oil/Soybean oil
R3
11
11
8
7
10
10
9
8
9
5
5
3
9
7
9
5
Now that data has been tabulated the first step into the two step optimization is to create
a detailed matrix of the requirements with the respective characteristics. This matrix allows
one to create an easy-to-visualize response table for the four factors and how they are interact
with each other. A total of 16 cells will be generated each carrying three responses, which
gives the data the simulation of more than one trial run which all different combinations of
factors, this simulation represents what will happen during the production and sustainability
of a bio-diesel production. Table 5.15 represents the initial matrix outline.
146
Table 5.15: Taguchi Matrix (Initial Matrix)

Base Oil
Level
Acidity
Acidity
Level
Availability
Availability
Availability
Availability
Free WVO
Quality
1
12
10
11
8
10
8
9
11
10
11
8
9
Purchased
Quality
2
10
13
11
8
7
7
9
9
10
5
6
8
1
9
7
9
7
4
5
8
9
9
7
6
9
2
7
5
5
2
4
3
6
8
7
3
3
5
From Table 5.16 an expanded table is created which shows the exact combinations,
which total 16, and their response of length of production in terms of hours. The table will
help obtain the needed information to be able to proceed on the two step optimization process
by finding out the Signal Noise Ratio (S/N) and Mean values (). As can be seen by Table
5.16 below, all 16 combinations of factors show their respective responses in hours. This
helps the visualization of how these different factors affect the production and eventually the
end product of the bio-diesel fuel blend.
147
Table 5.16: 2-Level 4-Factor Taguchi Matrix L16 (Expanded Matrix)

Run
L=16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Base Oil
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Quality
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Acidity Availability
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
2
1
2
2
1
2
1
2
2
2
2
Production time in hours

R1
12
10
8
8
9
9
11
5
9
7
7
2
8
6
7
3
R2
10
13
10
7
11
9
8
6
7
5
4
4
9
8
6
3
R3
11
11
8
7
10
10
9
8
9
5
5
3
9
7
9
5
Just by glancing over the responses in Table 5.16 it is clear that the hours required for
production range from a minimum of 2 to a maximum of 13 hours. This is a positive
statement, as it allows for a clear picture of what types of factor will make a major
contribution to the final product. The two step optimization process will now allow this data
which is so close in value, to provide the optimal solution of the four factors (A,B,C and D)
and their two levels (Level 1 and Level 2).
5.5.3 Considerations for Two-Step Optimization
To be able to continue, the Signal to Noise (S/N) ratio must be calculated. Assume
there are n data points, y1, y2, ... yn. The S/N is given by:
1
( N x )
#
10 log
(5.5)
Where Ve is the variance;
148
(, N ,)
x
#N1
(5.6)
,
(5.7)
, is the mean:
and
, E , E g E ,
#

a"!$%
#
(5.8)
Taguchis Signal to Noise ratio, is a log function of the desired output serves as an
objective functions for optimization, provides help in data analysis and production of
optimum results [231].
Once the S/N ratio is obtained, the optimization process can be completed to provide
the factors which would be the best choice. Using the equations above Table 5.17 shows the
results of the calculations.
The following step shows how to create the S/N and ,

response tables. The summation
of the desired factor and its level must then be divided by its quantity. As shown in Table
5.18 now depicts the final matrix of response values as well as the S/N ratio and the mean,
which allows for the two step optimization process to be completed.
149
Table 5.17: Mean and S/N values

Run
R1
12
10
8
8
9
9
11
5
9
7
7
2
8
6
7
3
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
R2
10
13
10
7
11
9
8
6
7
5
4
4
9
8
6
3
363.0
385.3
225.3
161.3
300.0
261.3
261.3
120.3
208.3
96.33
85.33
27.00
225.3
147.0
161.3
40.33
R3
11
11
8
7
10
10
9
8
9
5
5
3
9
7
9
5
11
11
9
7
10
9
9
6
8
6
5
3
9
7
7
4
<=
1.00
2.33
1.33
0.33
1.00
0.33
2.33
2.33
1.33
1.33
2.33
1.00
0.33
1.00
2.33
1.33
/
20.8
17.4
17.5
22.1
20.0
24.2
15.7
12.3
17.1
13.8
10.7
9.38
23.5
16.9
13.6
9.89
Table 5.18: 2-Level-4-Factor Taguchi Matrix L16 (Completed Matrix)

Run
L=16
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Base Oil
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
Quality
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
1
2
Acidity
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
Availability
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
1
1
2
2
150
Production Response
in hours
R1
R2
R3
12
10
11
10
13
11
8
10
8
8
7
7
9
11
10
9
9
10
11
8
9
5
6
8
9
7
9
7
5
5
7
4
5
2
4
3
8
9
9
6
8
7
7
6
9
3
3
5
Responses
S/N
20.8
17.4
17.5
22.1
20.0
24.2
15.7
12.3
17.1
13.8
10.7
9.38
23.5
16.9
13.6
9.89
11
11
9
7
10
9
9
6
8
6
5
3
9
7
7
4
5.5.4 Two-Step Optimization

The values in Table 5.18, are each given a ranking from 1- 4, with 1 being the highest
importance based on the highest range produced. This information is used to create the final
response tables and the respective rankings:

S/N and ,
matrix from which the optimal solution can be established. Tables 5.19 and 5.20 show the
Table 5.19: S/N ratio response

#
Factor
Level
18.73
17.37
16.10
19.20
14.36
15.72
16.99
13.88
Range
4.37
1.644
-0.899
5.321
Rank
)
Table 5.20: Mean value response (
Factor
Level
9.167
8.583
7.583
8.917
6.125
6.708
7.708
6.375
Range
3.042
1.875
-0.125
2.542
Rank
Table 5.21 shows how S/N and ,

affect the optimization process, disregarding values
which are out of range.
151

Table 5.21: Importance of the four factors for S/N and
,
S/N
Factor
Importance
A
B
C
D
4.3735
No Variance
Disregard
Factor
High
3.0417
1.6435
-0.8985
A
B
C
D
5.3209
Middle
Low
Disregard
1.8750
-0.1250
2.5417
Tables 5.19 and 5.20 allow the user to see which factors at which level would provide
the optimal solution to create a product which can maintain a high standard in fuel, while
decreasing the time for production. These variables were used to create Table 5.22 which
shows how the values in Table 5.21 interact.
Factor
A
B
C
D
Affect
S/N
X

Table 5.22: Response interaction for S/N and
,
Affect
X
S/N + ,
Affect
S/N
A1
Affect
Affect
Cost Reduction
(Affect neither)
A1
B1,2
C1,2
D1
Since factors "B and C" does not appear in either table these can be used as either level
one or two without any implications for the final product. The final two step optimization
design yields the following combination of factors and levels:
A1 B1,2 C1,2 D1
Base oil: Free used WVO
Quality: Refined
Acidity level: Low
Availability: High
152
5.6 Conclusions
In summary, the emissions from the blends and pure bio-diesel, it was found that CO,
THC, and CO2 were reduced significantly, whereas NOx increased slightly, when compared
to those of standard diesel. Also, from the combustion analysis it was found the performance
of the B20 was as good as that of standard diesel. Taking these facts into account, a blend of
20% methyl ester of WVO and pure vegetable oil can be used as an alternative suitable fuel
in compression ignition engines.
On the other hand for the cost analysis, it was the two-step optimization process has
shown that to obtain a quality bio-diesel blend while minimizing the time required for
production the following factors were preferable: free WVO (which decreases the cost),
refined oil (which decreases the time it would take to clean for processing), low acidity level
(which means less catalyst and methanol would be used), and finally a high availability.
153
CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION FOR FUTURE
WORK
6.1 Conclusions
6.1.1 Bio-diesel Production and Fuel Properties
The Fulpod processor was used for the production of bio-diesel from vegetable oils
by using the alkali-catalyzed transesterification process. The maximum ester yield was
obtained by using 16% methanol and 0.4% NaOH at a reaction temperature of 65oC. The fuel
properties, such as kinematic viscosity, density, calorific value and cloud, pour and flash
point, were measured and listed in Tables 3.3 and 3.4. After esterification of vegetable oils,
the kinematic viscosity was reduced from 40 mm2/s to 5 mm2/s. For the analyzed samples,
the properties were similar in some cases and divergent in others.
Sustainability will always be an issue with replacement fuels as it may affect foodstock
supply. There is a need to find alternative fuels but the quantities available from recycled oils
will not provide the significant, and increasing, levels needed 9 trillion litres per year. There
is potential with second generation fuels but as this did not form part of the study comment is
limited.
6.1.2 Exhaust Gas Emissions and Engine Performances
One of the purposes of this study was to analyze the emissions present by running biodiesel fuels and its blends on a conventional diesel engine. From the literature review it was
apparent that by running a bio-diesel blend fuel there would be a decrease in emissions
present while a slight decrease in engine efficiency. The experiential data did confirm these
claims showing decreases in almost all the emissions (CO, THC and CO2) except for NOx.
The study has shown that no matter what type of feedstock is used there will be very
similar decreases in emissions and performance of the engine. These performance decreases
are neglect able since in real life conditions a decrease of around 2% will not be noticed by
the average consumer. Although the purchased refined oils provided better results than those
of the waste vegetable oil, the results difference was not of any concern to make decision on
which of the fuels would be more useful. On the other hand, from the combustion analysis it
154
was found the performance of the B20 was as good as that of standard diesel. Taking these
facts into account, a blend of 20% methyl ester of WVO and pure vegetable oil can be used
as an alternative suitable fuel in compression ignition engines.
6.1.3 Cost Analysis
This analysis concluded that the use of bio-diesel lies in a cost analysis rather than a
performance aspect. Since the fuels provide similar results a cost analysis was conducted to
see what alternative would provides better results. Form the analysis it was clear from the
start that obtaining the modified waste vegetable oil not only helped recycle this waste, but
was significantly cheaper than running modified pure oils such as sunflower oil, corn oil,
rapeseed oil and soybean oil as were used in this study. Furthermore the price difference
between a B20 modified waste vegetable oil blends and standard diesel was 12 pence,
making it a very cost effective solution.
The biggest problem was seen with the refinement of these oils. Since it takes
substantially more time to clean and refine the waste vegetable oil than the straight unused
oil. For this a two step optimization process was conducted using the Tagushi method. The
function of a two step optimization analysis is to determine if there is a more significant
difference between the six different types of feedstock's used accounting for a wider range of
parameters. From data analysis, it is still cost effective and time consuming to obtain a free
waste vegetable oil. Although the parameters also indicated that the preference of this oil
should be abundant, and fairly clean.
Huge quantities of waste cooking oils and animal fats are available throughout the
world, especially in the developed countries. Management of such oils and fats pose a
significant challenge because of their disposal problems and possible contamination of the
water and land resources. Even though some of this waste cooking oil is used for soap
production, a major part of it is discharged into the environment. In the EU countries, the
total waste cooking oil production was approximately 700,000-1,000,000 tons/yr [29]. The
UK produces over 200,000 tons of waste cooking oil per year [252]. The Energy Information
Administration in the United States estimated that some 100 million gallons of waste cooking
oil is produced per day in USA [42]. As large amounts of waste cooking oils are illegally
dumped into rivers and landfills, causing environmental pollution [253], the use of waste
cooking oil to produce bio-diesel substitute offers significant advantages because of the
reduction in environmental pollution.
155
6.1.4 Optimisation Process

In summary of this part of study, RSM proved to be a powerful tool for the
optimization of methyl ester production at a fixed temperature. A second-order model was
successfully developed to describe the relationships between methyl ester yield and test
variables, including methanol/oil molar ratio, catalyst concentration, reaction temperature,
rate of mixing and reaction time. The optimal conditions for the maximum methyl ester yield
were found to be at methanol/oil molar ratio of 6.8:1, NaOH catalyst concentration of 1.1%
(by the weight of sunflower oil), reaction temperature 35oC, rate of mixing 200 rpm and a
reaction time of 66 min. This optimized condition was validated with actual bio-diesel yield
in 95%. Moreover, the decrease of the methanol/oil molar ratio from 6.8/1 to 6.0/1 while
keeping the other variable parameters at their respective optimal values produced bio-diesel
with a yield of 94%. Thus bio-diesel yield increased by 1% but at the cost of significantly
increasing the molar ratio of methanol versus oil from 6.0 to 6.8, which does not appear to be
cost-effective. It is suggested that using a methanol/oil molar ratio at 6.0 for the optimal
production of bio-diesel from sunflower oil.
156
6.2 Recommendation for Future Work

This study initiated the work for the optimization and characterization of biodiesel
production from refined cooking oils such as sunflower, rapeseed, soybean and corn oil, and
waste vegetable oil. The engine performance was to be evaluated along with the emission
characteristics for an engine running with bio-diesel and traditional fuels. Following future
work is recommended:
Use RSM in another feedstock to leads at generic effects.
Optimization and characterization of biodiesel production from sunflower oil with

equimolar mixture of ethanol and methanol and assess the effect of temperature on the
gossypol concentration in the biodiesel produced.
Studies to optimize and characterize biodiesel production from canola oil, jatropha
oil, and algae oil.
With the engine test results provided by this study, more steps should be taken to
further analyze this immediate alternative fuel. Future work should be conducted on
actual road vehicles, to see how the impact of driving a car in varying weather, driver
affects the emissions, efficiency and performance of the oil. Along these lines
different engines should be used to see if NOx emissions do in fact decrease on some
type of engines.
Busses are a likely candidate for test subjects as they run heavy duty diesel engines,
and tend to idle a lot of the time while waiting for researchers. Obtaining a set of 3-4
buses or trucks and equipping each with a bio-diesel blend for 1-2 months will
provide results which cannot be duplicated under lab conditions.
157
References
[1] European Bio-diesel Board (2007). Data available at: http://www.ebb-eu.org/stats.php
[2] FAPRI (2009) US and World Agricultural Outlook, Food and Agricultural Policy
Research Institute, Iowa State University, University of Missouri-Columbia, Ames,
Iowa. FAPRI Staff Report 09-FSR 1, January 2009.
[3] RFA (2009) Growing Innovation: Americas Energy Future starts at Home 2009
Ethanol Industry Outlook. Renewable Fuels Association (RFA). Available at:
http://www. ethanolrfa.org/objects /pdf/outlook/RFA_Outlook_2009.pdf
[4] Yacobucci, B.D. and Schnepf, R. (2007) Ethanol and Bio-fuels: Agriculture,
Infrastructure, and Market Constraints Related to Expanded Production. CRS Report
for Congress, Order Code RL 33928, March 16, 2007.
[5] European Commission (2007). Impact Assessment of the Renewable Energy Roadmap
March 2007, Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development, European
Commission,AGRI,G-2/WMD,(2007),Available,at:
http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/analysis/markets/bio-fuel/impact042007/text_en.pdf
[6] Valdes, C. (2007) Ethanol Demand Driving the Expansion of Brazils Sugar Industry.
Sugar and Sweeteners Outlook, Economic Research Service, United States Department of
Agriculture, SSS-249, June 4, 2007. pp: 31-38.
[7] Konishi, K., Koizumi, T. (2007) Bio-fuels Policies in Asia, Presented at the Eighth
Meeting of the Global Club of Directors of Agricultural Economics Research Institutes
and Agency, Chicago, June 10-11. Available at: http://www.aeriasonline.org/
[8] Olsen, B., Cabadas, J. (2002) The American Auto Factory. St. Paul, MN: MBI
Publishing Company.
[9] Banham, R. (2002) The Ford Century, Ford Motor Company and the Innovations that
Shaped the World. New York:Artisan.
[10] Erjavec, J. (2005) Automotive Technology, a Systems Approach (4th ed.). New York,
NY: Thomas Delmar Learning.
[11] Womack, J.P., Jones, D.T., Roos, D. (1990) The Machine that Changed the World. New
York, NY: Rawson Associated.
[12] Ragauskas, A.J., Williams, C.K., Davison, B.H., Britovsek, G., Cairney, J., Eckert, C.A.,
Frederick, W. Jr, Hallett, J.P., Leak, D.J., Liotta, C.L., Mielenz, J.R., Murphy, R.,
Templer, R, Tschaplinski, T. (2006) The Path Forward for Bio-fuels and Biomaterials.
Science. 311: 484-489.
158
[13] DOE. (2009) Carbon Cycling and Biosequestration, Integration Biology and Climate
Through Systems Science. DOE/SC-108; DOE Office of Science: Washington, 2008 see
also: http://genomicsgtl.energy.gov/carboncycle/ (July, 2009)
[14] Carbon Dioxide, Methane Rise Sharply in 2007. NOAA, NATIONAL OCEANIC AND
ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION, United States Department of Commerce. April
23, 2008.
[15] EERE (2005). U.S. Department of Energy/Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy
http://www.eere.energy.gov/biomass/biomass_benefits.html (2009).
[16] EIA(EnergyInformationAdministration)(2005)http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/internationa
l/petroleu.html#IntlConsumption.
[17] Hirsch, R.L., Bezdek, R., Wendling, R. (2006) Peaking of World Oil Production and its
Mitigation. AIChE Journal. 52: 2-8.
[18] Pacala, S., Socolow, R. (2004) Stabilization Wedges: Solving the Climate Problem for
the Next 50 Years with Current Technologies. Science 305: 968-972.
[19] CADIA
(Carbon
Dioxide
Information
Analysis
Center)
data
base
(2009)
http://cadiac.ornl.gov.
[20] Hoffert, M.I., Caldeira, K., Benford, G., Criswell, D. R., Green, C., Herzog, H., Jain,
A.K., Kheshgi, H.S., Lackner, K.S., Lewis, J.S., Lightfoot, H.D., Manheimer, W.,
Mankins, J.C., Mauel, M.E., Perkins, L.J., Schlesinger, M.E., Volk, T., Wigley, T.M.L.
(2002) Advanced Technology Paths to Global Climate Stability: Energy for a
Greenhouse Planet. Science. 29: 981-987.
[21] EIA. (2009) Renewable Energy Consumption and Electricity Preliminary Statistics
(2008) http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/alternate/page/
renew_energy_consump/rea_prereport.html.
[22] IPS.gov.
Solar
Energy,
http://www.ips.gov.au/Category/Educational/The%20Sun
%20and%20Solar%20 Activity / General%20Info / Solar-Constant. pdf.

[23] Energy.gov.
Wind
Turbines,
http://wwwl.eere.energy.gov/windandhydro/wind_
technologies. html.
[24] MacLean, H.L., Lave, L.B. (2003) Evaluating Automobile Fuel/propulsion System
Technologies. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science. 29: 1-69.
[25] DOE, RFP on Energy Frontiers Research Centers, 2008.
[26] Saka, S., Kusdiana, D. (2001) Bio-diesel Fuel from Rapeseed Oil as Prepared in
Supercritical Methanol. Fuel. 80: 225.
159
[27] Krawczyk, T. (1996) Bio-diesel: Alternative Fuel Makes Inroads but Hurdles Remain.
INFORM. 7: 800.
[28] Official Site of the National Bio-diesel Board, http://www.bio-diesel.org/
[29] Kulkarni, M.G., Dalai, A.K. (2006) Waste Cooking Oil - An Economic Source for Biodiesel: A Review. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 45: 2913.
[30] Subramanian, M., Malhotra, R.K., Kanal, P.C. (2004) Performance Evaluation of Biodiesel Diesel Blends in Passenger Car. SAE Technical Paper No 2004- 28-0088.
[31] Walwijk, M., Buckmann, M., Troelstra, W.P., Elam N., Friedman K., Landwehr, M.
(2000) Automotive Fuels for the Future, International Energy Agency, Head of
Publications Division, Public Affairs and Communication Directorate, 2 rue AndrPascal, 75775 Paris, Cedex 16, France.
[32] Chum, H. L., Overend, R. P. (2001) Biomass and Renewable Fuels. Fuel Processing
Technology. 71: 187 195.
[33] Sun, Y., Cheng, J.J. (2002) Hydrolysis of Lignocellulosic Materials for Ethanol
Production: a Review. Bioresource Technology. 83:1 11.
[34] Chan, C.C. (2002) The State of the Art of Electric Vehicle Technology. Proceedings of
the IEEE. 90: 247-275.
[35] Laeminie, J., Lowry, J. (2003) Electric Vehicle Technology Explained. John Wiley &
Sons.
[36] http://www.ifpenergiesnouvelles.com/axes-de-recherche/carburants
diversifies/biocarburants-de-1ere-generation
[37] http://www.chevron.com/deliveringenergy/biofuels/?gclid=CNuKvvDP054CFU0B4wod
q2vcqw
[38] Ignaciuk, A., Vohringer, F., Ruijs, A., van Ierland, E.C. (2006) Competition Between
Biomass and Food Production in the Presence of Energy Policies: a Partial Equilibrium
Analysis. Energy Policy. 34: 1127-1138.
[39] Peters J., Thielmann, S. (2008) Promoting Bio-fuels: Implications for Developing
Countries. Energy Policy. 36: 1538-1544.
[40] Nonhebel, S. (2005) Renewable Energy and Food Supply: Will There be Enough Land?
Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews. 9: 191-201.
[41] Ferrett, G. (2007) Bio-fuels crime against humanity. Retrieved April, 2008, from
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7065061.stm.
[42] Radich, A. Biodiesel performance, costs, and use. US Energy Information
Administration, 2006. http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/analysispaper/biodiesel/index.html.
160
[43] Ragauskas, A.J., Nagy, M., Kim, D.H., Eckert, C.A., Hallett, J.P., Liotta, C.L. (2006)
From Wood to Fuels: Integrating Bio-fuels and Pulp Production. Ind Biotechnol. 2: 5565.
[44] http://www.baff.info/english/ (2004).
[45] Nagy, M., Kerr, B.J., Ziemer, C.J., Ragauskas, A.J. (2009) Phosphitylation and
Quantitative
31
P NMR Analysis of Partially Substituted Bio-diesel Glycerols. Fuel. 88:
1973-1977.
[46] Estill, L. (2005) Bio-diesel Power. Gabriola Island: New Society Publishers.
[47] Chisti, Y. (2007) Bio-diesel from Microalgae. Biotechnol Adv 25: 294-306.
[48] Chevron Products Company (1998) Diesel Fuels Technical Review. Report No. FTR-2.
[49] Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry (ATSDR) (1995) Toxicological
Profile for Fuel Oils. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health
Service.
[50] McCormick, R., Graboski, M., Alleman, T., Herring, A. (2001) Impact of Bio-diesel
Source Material and Chemical Structure on Emissions of Criteria Pollutants from a
Heavy-Duty Engine. Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 35, pp. 1742-1747.
[51] Strong, C., Erickson, C., Shukla, D., 2004, Evaluation of Bio-Diesel Fuel: Literature
Review, Montana Department of Transportation Report FHWA/MT-04-001/8117-20,
Montana State University.
[52] Annamalai, K., Puri, I., 2007, Combustion Science and Engineering, CRC Series in
Computational Mechanics and Applied Analysis, CRC Press, New York, New York, pg.
988.
[53] USEPA Tier 2, 2007 Emission Standards.
[54] Yun, H., Reitz, R.D. (2005) Combustion Optimization in the Low-temperature Diesel
Combustion Regime. Int. J. Engine Res. 6, 513-524).
[55] Barnwal, B.K., Sharma, M.P. (2005) Prospects of Bio-diesel Production from Vegetable
Oils in India. Elsevier Publications Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews 9 363
378.
[56] Tritton, D.J. (1998) Physical Fluid Dynamics. Clarendon Press. New Jersey, 1988.
[57] Demirbas, A. (2008) Bio-diesel: A Realistic Fuel Alternative for Diesel Engines,
Springer, New York.
[58] Lide, D.R. (2002) CRC Handbook of Chemical and Physics. CRC Press. New York.
[59] Vasudevan, P.T., Briggs, M. (2008) Biodiesel Production-Current State of the Art and
Challenges. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol, 35, 421-430.
161
[60] Alexander, C., Hurt, C. (2007) Bio-fuels and Their Impact on Food Prices. Bioenergy,
Purdue Extension, ID-346-W. http://www.ces.purdue.edu/extmedia/ ID/ID-346-W.pdf
[61] Gardner, B. (2003) Fuel Ethanol Subsidies and Farm Price Support: Boon or
Boondoggle? Working Paper 03-11, Department of Agricultural and Resource
Economics, University of Maryland, College Park, MD.
[62] Hazel, P., Pachauri, R.K. (2006) Bioenergy and Agriculture: Promises and Challenges
Overview Focus 2006:14, December. International Food Policy Research Institute
(IFPRI).
[63] Yoon, S. H., Ha, S. Y., Roh, H. G., Lee C. S. (2009) Effect of bioethanol as an
alternative fuel on the emissions reduction characteristics and combustion stability in a
spark ignition engine, Journal of Automobile Engineering, 223: 941-951.
[64] Cataluna, R., Silva, R., Menezes, E. W., Ivanov, R. B. (2008) Specific consumption of
liquid bio-fuels in gasoline fuelled engines , Fuel, 87: 3362-3368.
[65] Canakci, M., Sanli, H. (2008), Bio-diesel production from various feedstocks and their
effects the fuel properties. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol,, 35: 431-441.
[66] EFRAC (2006) Climate Change: The Role of Bioenergy. Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs Committee (EFRAC), the House of Commons, London, UK, HC 965-1.
[67] Hill, J., Nelson, E., Tilman, D., Polasky, S., Tiffany, D., (2006) Environmental,
Economic, and Energetic Costs and Benefits of Bio-diesel and Ethanol Bio-fuels.
Proceedings of the National Academy of Science, 103(30): 11206-11210.
[68] Fargione J. (2008) Land Clearing and the Bio-fuel Carbon Debt. Science, 319(5867):
1235-1238.
[69] Searchinger, T. R. (2008) Use of US Croplands for Bio-fuels Increases Greenhouse
Gases through Emissions from Land-Use Change. Science 319 (5867): 1238- 1240.
[70] Altieri, M.A., Bravo, E. (2007) The Ecological and Social Tragedy of Crop-based Biofuel Production in the Americas. http://www.foodfirst.org/node/1662. March 20, 2007.
[71] FOE (2005) The Oil for Ape Scandal: How Palm Oil is threatening Orang-utan Survival.
Friends of Earth, September, 2005.
[72] Dufey, A. (2007) International Trade in Bio-fuels: Good for Development? And Good
for Environment?
Environment for the MDGS An International Institute for
Environment and Development (IIED) Briefing. www.iied.org.

[73] Pagel, Geovana (2008) For UN, Brazils Biofuel Model is a Win, Win, Win Strategy.
International
Centre
for
Trade
and
Sustainable
Development
(ICTSD),
Geneva,Switzerland.http://ictsd.net/i/trade-and-sustainable-development agenda/34226/.
162
[74] Srivastava, A., Prasad, R. (2000) Triglycerides-based diesel fuels Renewable &
Sustainable Energy Reviews, 4: 111-113.
[75] Ma, F.R. and Hanna, M.A. (1999) Bio-diesel production: a review Bioresour. Technol.,
70: (1999) 1-15.
[76] Schwab, A.W., Bagby, M.O., Freedman, B. (1987) Preparation and Properties of Diesel
Fuels from Vegetable-Oils Fuel, 66: 1372-1378.
[77] Ziejewski, M., Kaufman, K.R., Schwab, A.W., Pryde, E.H. (1984) Diesel engine
evaluation of a nonionic sunflower oil-aqueous ethanol microemulsion J. Am. Chem.
Soc. 61: 1620-1626.
[78] Zhang, Y., Dube, M.A., McLean, D.D., Kates, M. (2003) Bio-diesel production from
waste cooking oil: 1. Process design and technological assessment Bioresour. Technol.
89: 1-16.
[79] Zhang, Y., Dube, M.A., McLean, D.D., Kates, M. (2003) Bio-diesel production from
waste cooking oil: 2. Economic assessment and sensitivity analysis Bioresour. Technol.
90: 229-240.
[80] National Renderers Association (2005), www.renderers.org.
[81] Kusdiana, D., Saka, S. (2004) Effects of water on bio-diesel fuel production by
supercritical methanol treatment Bioresour. Technol. 91: 289-295.
[82] Warabi, Y., Kusdiana, D., Saka, S. (2004) Reactivity of triglycerides and fatty acids of
rapeseed oil in supercritical alcohols Bioresour. Technol. 91: 283-287.
[83] Bunyakiat, K., Makmee, S., Sawangkeaw, R., Ngamprasertsith, S. (2006) Continuous
production of bio-diesel via transesterification from vegetable oils in supercritical
methanol Energy & Fuels 20: 812-816.
[84] Hsu, A.F., Jones, K.C., Foglia, T.A., and Marmer, W.N. (2004) Continuous production
of ethyl esters of grease using an immobilized lipase J. Am. Chem. Soc. 81: 749-752.
[85] Fukuda, H., Kondo, A., Noda, H. (2001) Bio-diesel fuel production by transesterification
of oils J. Biosci. Bioeng. 92: 405-416.
[86] Deng, L., Nie, K.L., Wang, F., Tan, T.W. (2005) Studies on production of bio-diesel by
esterification of fatty acids by a lipase preparation from Candida sp. 99-125 Chinese J.
Chem. Eng. 13: 529-534.
[87] Chang, H.M., Liao, H.F., Lee, C.C., Shieh, C.J. (2005) Optimized synthesis of lipasecatalyzed bio-diesel by Novozym 435 J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 80: 307-312.
[88] Wang, Y., Ou, S.Y., Liu, P.Z., Xue, F., Tang, S.Z. (2006) Comparison of two different
processes to synthesize bio-diesel by waste cooking oil J. Mol. Catal. A. 252: 107-112.
163
[89] Lepper, H., Friesenhagen, L. (1986) Process for the production of fatty acid esters of
short-chain aliphatic alcohols from fats and/or oils containing free fatty acids 1986 U.S.
[90] Canakci, M., Van Gerpen, J. (2001) Bio-diesel production from oils and fats with high
free fatty acids Trans. ASAE 44: 1429-1436.
[91] Zullaikah, S., Lai, C.C., Vali, S.R., Ju, Y.H. (2005) A two-step acid-catalyzed process
for the production of bio-diesel from rice bran oil Bioresour. Technol. 96: 1889-1896.
[92] Minami, E., Saka, S. (2006) Kinetics of hydrolysis and methyl esterification for biodiesel production in two-step supercritical methanol process Fuel 85: 2479-2483.
[93] Saka, S., Kusdiana, D., Minami, E. (2006) Non-catalytic Bio-diesel Fuel Production with
Supercritical Methanol Technologies J. Sci. Ind. Res. 65: 420-425.
[94] Freedman, B., Butterfield, R.O., Pryde, E.H. (1986) Transesterification Kinetics of
Soybean Oil J. Am. Chem. Soc. 63: 1375-1380.
[95] Zheng, S., Kates, M., Dube, M.A., McLean, D.D. (2006) Acid-catalyzed production of
bio-diesel from waste frying oil Biomass & Bioenergy 30: 267-272.
[96] Lotero, E., Liu, Y.J., Lopez, D.E., Suwannakarn, K., Bruce, D.A., Goodwin, J.G., Jr.
(2005) Synthesis of bio-diesel via acid catalysis Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44: 5353-5363.
[97] Fangrui, Ma, Milford A., Hanna M. (1999) Bio-diesel production: a review. Bioresource
Technol. 70: 1- 15.
[98] Fangrui, Ma, Clements, L.D., Hanna M. A., (1998) The effects of catalyst, free fatty
acids, and water on transesterification of beef tallow. Trans ASAE. 4: 1261-1264.
[99] Tomasevic, A. V., Marinkovic, S. S. (2003) Methanolysis of used frying oils. Fuel
Processing Technology. 81:1-6.
[100] Enciner, J. M., Gonzalez, J. F., Rodriguez, J. J., Tejedor, A. (2002) Bio-diesel fuels
from vegetable oils: Transesterification of Cynara cardunculus L. Oils with ethanol.
Energy Fuels. 16: 443-450.
[101] Freedman, B., Pryde, E. H., Mounts, T. L. (1984) Variables affecting the yield of fatty
esters from trasnsesterified vegetable oils. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 61: 1638-1643.
[102] Fangrui, Ma, Clements, L.D., Hanna M. A., (1998) The effect of mixing on
transesterification of beef tallow. Bioresour Technol. 69: 289-293.
[103] Zhou, W.Y., Konar, S.K., Boocock, D.G.B. (2003) Ethyl Esters from the SinglePhase Base-Catalyzed Ethanolysis of Vegetable Oils. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 80: 367-371.
[104] Meher, L.C., Dharmagadda, V.S., Naik, S.N. (2006) Optimization of Alkaline
Catalyzed Transesterification of Pongamia Pinnata Oil for Production of Bio-diesel.
Bioresour Technol. 97: 1392-1397.
164
[105] Meka, P.K., Tripathi, V., Singh, R.P. (2007) Synthesis of Bio-diesel Fuel from
Safflower Oil Using Various Reaction Parameters. J Oleo Sci, 56: 9-12.
[106] Ataya, F., Dub, M.A., Ternan, M. (2006) Single-Phase and Two-Phase Base
Catalyzed Transesterification of Canola Oil to Fatty Acid Methyl Esters at Ambient
Conditions. Ind Eng Chem Res. 45: 5411-5417.
[107] Rashid, U., Anwar, F. (2008) Production of Bio-diesel through Base-Catalyze
Transesterification of Safflower Oil Using an Optimized Protocol. Energy Fuel, 22:
1306-1312.
[108] Freedaman, B., Mounts, T.L. (1984) Variables Affecting the Yields of Fatty Esters
from Transesterified Vegetable Oils. J Am Oil Chem Soc 61: 1639-1643.
[109] Vicente, G., Martnez, M., Aracil, J. (2004) Integrated Bio-diesel Production: a
Comparison of Different Homogeneous Catalysts Systems. Bioresour Technol 92: 297305.
[110] Williams, P., Mulcahy, F., Ford, J.T., Oliphant, J., Caldwell, J., Soriano, D. (2007)
Bio-diesel
Preparation
via
Acid
Catalysis
and
Characterization.
Journal
of
Undergraduate Chemistry Research. 6: 87-96.

[111] Goff, M.J., Bauer, N.S., Lopes, S., Sutterlin, W.R., Suppes, G.J. (2004) Acid
Catalyzed Alcoholysis of Soybean Oil. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 81: 415- 420.
[112] Al-Widyan, M.I., Al-Shyoukh, A.O. (2002) Experimental Evaluation of the
Transesterification of Waste Palm Oil into Bio-diesel. Bioresour Technol. 85: 253-256.
[113] Ma, F.R., Clements, L.D., Hanna, M.A. (1999) The Effect of Mixing on
Transesterification of Beef Tallow. Bioresour Technol. 69: 289-293.
[114] Leung, D.Y.C., Guo, Y. (2006) Transesterification of Neat and Used Frying Oil:
Optimization for Bio-diesel Production. Fuel Process Technol. 87: 883- 890.
[115] Azam, M.M., Waris, A., Nahar, N.M. (2005) Prospects and Potential of Fatty Acid
Methyl Esters of Some Non-Traditional Seed Oils for Use as Bio-diesel in India.
Biomass Bioenerg. 29: 293-302.
[116] Haas, M.J., McAloon, A.J., Yee, W.C., Foglia, T.A. (2006) A Process Model to
Estimate Bio-diesel Production Costs. Bioresour Technol. 97: 671- 678.
[117] Tiwari, A.K., Kumar, A., Raheman, H. (2007) Bio-diesel Production from Jatropha
Oil (Jatropha Curcas) with High Free Fatty Acids: An Optimized Process. Biomass
Bioenerg. 31: 569-575.
165
[118] Berchmans, H.J., Hirata, S. (2008) Bio-diesel Production from Crude Jatropha Curcas
L. Seed Oil with a High Content of Free Fatty Acids. Bioresour Technol. 99: 17161721.
[119] Tapanes, N.C.O., Aranda, D.A.G., Carneiro, J.W.D.M., Antunes, O.A.C. (2008)
Transesterification of Jatropha Curcas Oil Glycerides: Theoretical and Experimental
Studies of Bio-diesel Reaction. Fuel. 87: 2286-2295.
[120] Kachhwaha, S.S., Maji, S., Faran, M., Gupta, A., Ramchandran, J., Kumar, D. (2006)
Preparation of Bio-diesel from Jatropha Oil Using Ultrasonics. Energy 1-5.
[121] Shah, S., Gupta, M.N. (2007) Lipase Catalyzed Preparation of Bio-diesel from
Jatropha Oil in a Solvent Free System Process. Biochem. 42: 409-414.
[122] Rathore, V., Madras, G. (2007) Synthesis of Bio-diesel from Edible and Non- Edible
Oils in Supercritical Alcohols and Enzymatic Synthesis in Supercritical Carbon Dioxide.
Fuel. 86: 2650-2659.
[123] Aresta, M., Dibenedetto, A., Carone, M., Colonna, T., Fragale, C. (2005) Production
of Bio-diesel from Macroalgae by Supercritical CO2 Extraction and Thermochemical
Liquefaction. Environ Chem Lett. 3: 136-139.
[124] Demirbas, A. (2007) Importance of Bio-diesel as Transportation Fuel. Energ Policy.
35: 4661-4670.
[125] Issariyakul, T., Kulkarni, M.G., Dalai, A.K., Bakhshi, N.N. (2007) Production of Biodiesel from Waste Fryer Grease Using Mixed Methanol/Ethanol System. Fuel Process
Technol. 88: 429-436.
[126] etinkaya, M., Ulusoy, Y., Tekn, Y., Karaosmanoglu, F. (2005) Engine and Winter
Road Test Performances of Used Cooking Oil Originated Bio-diesel. Energy Convers
Manage. 46: 1279-1291.
[127] Lin, Y.F., Wu, Y.P.G., Chang, C.T. (2007) Combustion Characteristics of Waste-Oil
Produced Bio-diesel/Diesel Fuel Blends. Fuel. 86: 1772-1780.
[128] Al-Widyan, M.I., Tashtoush, G., Abu-Qudais, M. (2002) Utilization of Ethyl Ester of
Waste Vegetable Oils as Fuel in Diesel Engine. Fuel Process Technol. 76: 91-103.
[129] Dorado, M.P., Ballesteros, E., Arnal, J.M., Gmez, J, Lpez, F.J. (2003) Exhaust
Emissions from a Diesel Engine Fueled with Transesterified Waste Olive Oil. Fuel. 82:
1311-1315.
[130] Lapuerta, M., Rodrguez-Fernndez, J., Agudelo, J.R. (2008) Diesel Particulate
Emissions from Used Cooking Oil Bio-diesel. Bioresour Technol. 99: 731-740.
166
[131] Nas, B., Berktay, A. (2007) Energy Potential of Bio-diesel Generated from Waste
Cooking Oil: An Environmental Approach. Energ Sources. Part B, 2: 63-71.
[132] Haas, M.J., Bloomer, S., Scott, K. (2000) Simple, High-Efficiency Synthesis of Fatty
Acid Methyl Esters from Soapstock. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 77: 373-379.
[133] Haas, M.J., Scott, K.M., Alleman, T.L., McCormick, R.L. (2001) Engine Performance
of Bio-diesel Fuel Prepared from Soybean Soapstock: A High Quality Renewable Fuel
Produced from a Waste Feedstock. Energ Fuel. 15: 1207-1212.
[134] Haas, M.J., Michalski, P.J., Runyon, S., Nunez, A., Scott, K.M. (2003) Production of
FAME from Acid Oil, a By-Product of Vegetable Oil Refining. J Am Oil Chem Soc.
80: 97-102.
[135] Haas, M.J. (2005) Improving the Economics of Bio-diesel Production through the Use
of Low Value Lipids as Feedstocks: Vegetable Oil Soapstock. Fuel Process Technol. 86:
1087-1096.
[136] Jin, B., Zhu, M., Fan, P., Yu, L.J. (2008) Comprehensive Utilization of the Mixture
of Oil Sediments and Soapstocks for Producing FAME and Phosphatides. Fuel Process
Technol. 89: 77-82.
[137] Wang, Z.M., Lee, J.S., Park, J.Y., Wu, C.Z., Yuan, Z.H. (2007) Novel Bio-diesel
Production Technology from Soybean Soapstock. Korean J Chem Eng. 24: 1027-1030.
[138] Usta, N., ztrk, E., Can, ., Conkur, E.S., Nas, S., on, A.H. (2005) Combustion of
Bio-diesel Fuel Produced from Hazelnut Soapstock/Waste Sunflower Oil Mixture in a
Diesel Engine. Energy Convers Manage. 46: 741-755.
[139] Keskin, A., Gr, M., Altiparmak, D., Aydin, K. (2008) Use of Cotton Oil Soapstock
Bio-diesel-Diesel Fuel Blends as an Alternative Diesel Fuel. Renew Energ. 33: 553-557.
[140] He, H.Y., Wang, T., Zhu, S.L. (2007) Continuous Production of Bio-diesel Fuel from
Vegetable Oil Using Supercritical Methanol Process. Fuel. 86: 442- 447.
[141] Demirbas, A. (2002) Bio-diesel from Vegetable Oils via Transesterification in
Supercritical Methanol. Energy Convers Manage. 43: 2349-2356.
[142] Kasteren, J.M.N.V., Nisworo, A.P. (2007) A Process Model to Estimate the Cost of
Industrial Scale Bio-diesel Production from Waste Cooking Oil by Supercritical
Transesterification. Resour Conserv Recy. 50: 442-458.
[143] Han, H.W., Cao, W.L., Zhang, J.C. (2005) Preparation of Bio-diesel from Soybean
Oil Using Supercritical Methanol and CO2 as Co-Solvent, Fuel. 84: 3148-3151.
[144] Chhetri, A.B., Tango, M.S., Budge, S.M., Watts, K.C., Islam, M.R. (2008) NonEdible Plant Oils as New Sources for Bio-diesel Production. Int J Mol Sci. 9: 169-180.
167
[145] Singh, R.N., Vyas, D.K., Srivastava, N.S.L., Narra, M. (2008) SPRERI Experience on
Holistic Approach to Utilize All Parts of Jatropha Curcas Fruit for Energy. Renew
Energ. 33: 1868-1873.
[146] Sirisomboon, P., Kitchaiya, P., Pholpho, T., Mahuttanyavanitch, W. (2007) Physical
and Mechanical Properties of Jatropha Curcas L Fruits. Nuts and Kernels. Biosyst Eng.
97: 201-207.
[147] Azam, M.M., Waris, A., Nahar, N.M. (2005) Prospects and Potential of Fatty Acid
Methyl Esters of Some Non-Traditional Seed Oils for Use as Bio-diesel in India.
Biomass Bioenerg. 29: 293-302.
[148] Sarin, R., Sharma, M., Sinharay, S., Malhotra, R.K. (2007) Jatropha-Palm Bio-diesel
Blends: An Optimum Mix for Asia. Fuel. 86: 1365-1371.
[149] Sivaprakasam, S., Saravanan, C.G. (2007) Optimization of the Transesterification
Process for Bio-diesel Production and Use of Bio-diesel in a Compression Ignition
Engine. Energ Fuel. 21: 2998-3003.
[150] Haldar, S.K., Ghosh, B.B., Nag, A. (2008) Studies on the Comparison of Performance
and Emission Characteristics of a Diesel Engine Using Three Degummed Non-Edible
Vegetable Oils. Biomass Bioenerg, doi:10.1016/j. biombioe.2008.01.021.
[151] Kumar, M.S., Ramesh, A., Nagalingam, B. (2003) An Experimental Comparison of
Methods to Use Methanol and Jatropha Oil in a Compression Ignition Engine. Biomass
Bioenerg 25: 309-318.
[152] Sharma, R.P. (2003) Bio-diesel and E-diesel in Transportation-An OEM Perspective.
Biomass Bioenergy, 25: 309-318.
[153] Chairman. (2003). Report of Committee on Development of Bio-fuels.
[154] Pradeep, V., Sharma, R.P. (2007) Use of HOT EGR for NOx Control in a
Compression Ignition Engine Fueled with Bio-diesel from Jatropha Oil. Renew Energ.
32: 1136-1154.
[155] Achten, W.M.J., Mathijs, E., Verchot, L., Singh, V.P., Aerts, R., Muys, B. (2007)
Jatropha Bio-diesel Fueling Sustainability. Bio-fuels, Bioproducts & Biorefining
1:
283-291.
[156] Achten, V., Franken, M., Singh A. (2008) Jatropha bio-diesel production and use.
Biomass and Bioenergy 32:1063-1084.
[157] Heywood, J. B. (1988) Internal Combustion Engine Fundamentals: McGraw-Hill.
[158] Hecklinger, R. S. (2000) Combustion, The Engineering Handbook. Ed. Richard C.
Dorf Boca Raton: CRC Press LLC.
168
[159] Adapted from www.arb.ca.gov

[160] Ashen, R., Cushman, K. (2007) Chemical Kinetic Simulation of the Combustion of
Bio-Based Fuels. Report number ORNL/PTS-8239, 2007.
[161] Agarwal, D., Sinha, S., Agarwal, A. (2006) Experimental investigation of control of
NOx emissions in bio-diesel-fueled compression ignition engine. Renewable Energy.
31:23562369.
[162] Hasimoglu, C., Ciniviz, M., Ozsert, I., Icingur, Y., Parlak, A., Salman, M. (2008)
Performance characteristics of a low heat rejection diesel engine operating with biodiesel. Renewable Energy. 33:17091715.
[163] Bolszo, C. D., McDonell, V. G. (2009) Emissions optimization of a bio-diesel fired
gas turbine. Proceedings of the Combustion Institute. 32:29492956.
[164] Muncrief, R. L., Rooks, C. W., Cruz, M., Harold, M. P. (2008) Combining bio-diesel
and exhaust gas recirculation for reduction in NOx and particulate emissions. Energy
and Fuels. 22:12851296.
[165] Metcalfe, W., Dooley, S., Curran, H., Simmie, J., El-Nahas, A., Navarro, M. (2007)
Experimental and modeling study of C5H10O2 ethyl and methyl esters Journal of
Physical Chemistry. 111:40014014.
[166] Hashimoto, N., Ozawa, Y., Mori, N., Yuri, I., Hisamatsu, T. (2008) Fundamental
combustion characteristics of palm methyl ester (PME) as alternative fuel for gas
turbines. Fuel. 87:33733378.
[167] Tsolakis, A., Megaritis, A., Wyszynski, M., Theinnoi, K. (2007) Engine performance
and emissions of a diesel engine operating on diesel-RME (rapeseed methyl ester) blends
with EGR (exhaust gas recirculation). Energy. 32:20722080.
[168] Dagaut, P., Gail, S., Sahasrabudhe, M. (2007) Rapeseed oil methyl ester oxidation
over extended ranges of pressure, temperature, and equivalence ratio: Experimental and
modeling kinetic study, in 31st International Symposium on Combustion, vol. 31 II,
CNRS, Laboratoire de Combustion et Systemes Reactifs, 1C, 45071 Orleans Cedex 2,
France, Elsevier Ltd, Oxford, OX5 1GB, United Kingdom, ISBN 1540-7489, 29552961.
[169] Lee, M. C., Seo, S., Chung, J., Joo, Y., Ahn, D. (2008) Combustion performance test
of a new fuel DME to adapt to a gas turbine for power generation, Fuel. 87:21622167.
[170] Sidhu, S., Graham, J., Striebich, R. (2001) Semi-volatile and particulate emissions
from the combustion of alternative diesel fuels. Chemosphere. 42: 681690
169
[171] Marinov, N. (1999) Detailed chemical kinetic model for high temperature ethanol
oxidation. Int. Journal of Chemical Kinetics. 31:183220.
[172] Karabektas, M. (2009) The effects of turbocharger on the performance and exhaust
emissions of a diesel engine fuelled with bio-diesel. Renewable Energy 34:989993.
[173] Arcoumanis, C. Bae, C., Crookes, R., Kinoshita, E. (2008) The potential of dimethyl
ether (DME) as an alternative fuel for compression-ignition engines: A review. Fuel.
87:10141030.
[174] Obert, E.D. (1973) Internal combustion engines and air pollution, Harper and Row
Publishers.
[175] Stone, R. (1992) Introduction to internal combustion engines, SAE International,
second Edition.
[176] Taylor, C.F. (1982), The internal combustion engines in theory and practice, MIT
Press, Vol. 2, Cambridge, MA.
[177] Li L., Liu Z., Wang H., Deng B., Xiao Z., Wang Z., Gong C., Su Y. (2003),
Combustion and Emissions of Ethanol Fuel (E100) in a Small spark ignition Engine.
SAE Technical Paper Series. SAE 2003-01-3262.
[178] Bayraktar, H. (2005) Experimental and theoretical investigation of using gasoline
ethanol blends in spark-ignition engines. Renewable Energy. 30: 17331747
[179] Al-Hasan M. (2003) Effect of ethanolunleaded gasoline blends on engine
performance and exhaust emission, Energy Conversion and Management. 44: 5471561.
[180] Wu C.W., Chen R., Pu J., Lin T. (2004) The influence of airfuel ratio on engine
performance and pollutant emission of an SI engine using ethanolgasoline-blended
fuels, Atmospheric Environment. 38:70937100.
[181] Jia L.W., Shen M., Wang J., Lin M. (2005) Influence of ethanolgasoline blended
fuel on emission characteristics from a four-stroke motorcycle engine, Journal of
Hazardous Materials. A123: 2934.
[182] Song C.L., Zhang W., Pei Y., Fan G., Xu G. (2006) Comparative effects of MTBE
and ethanol additions into gasoline on exhaust emissions, Atmospheric Environment.
40:19571970.
[183] Wunning, J. A., Wunning, J. G. (1997) Flameless oxidation to reduce thermal NOformation, Progress in Energy and Combustion Science. 23: 8194.
[184] Gupta, A. K. (2004) Thermal characteristics of gaseous fuel flames using high
temperature air Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power. 126: 919, URL
http://dx.doi.org/10.1115/1.1610009.
170
[185] Katsuki, M., Hasegawa, T. (1998) The science and technology of combustion in
highly preheated air Symposium (International) on Combustion. 27:31353146.
[186] Joannon, M. D., Cavaliere, A., Faravelli, T. Ranzi, E., Sabia, P., Tregrossi, A. (2005)
Analysis of process parameters for steady operations in methane mild combustion
technology Proceedings of the Combustion Institute. 30: 26052612.
[187] Awosope, I. O. Kandamby, N. H. Lockwood, F. C. (2005) Flameless oxidation
modelling: On application to gas turbine combustors Journal of the Energy Institute 79:
7583.
[188] Schutz, H., Luckerath, R., Kretschmer, T., Noll, B., Aigner, M. (2008) Analysis of the
pollutant formation in the FLOX [registered trademark] combustion
Journal of
Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power 130: 011503.

[189] Levy, Y., Sherbaum, V., Arfi, P. (2004) Basic thermodynamics of FLOXCOM, the
low-NOx gas turbines adiabatic combustor, Applied Thermal Engineering 24: 1593
1605.
[190] Zheng, M., Mulenga, M. C., Reader, G. T., Wang, M. D., Ting, S.-K. Tjong, J. (2008)
Bio-diesel engine performance and emissions in low temperature combustion Fuel. 87:
714722.
[191] Xu, M., Fan, Y., Yuan, J., Sheng, C., Yao, H. (1999) Modeling of Combustion
Characteristics and NOx Emission in Highly Preheated and Diluted Air Combustion
International Journal of Energy Research. 23: 683693.
[192] Flamme, M. (2001) Low NOx combustion technologies for high temperature
applications Energy Conversion and Management. 42: 19191935.
[193] Lefebvre, A. H. (1983) Gas turbine combustion Hemisphere Pub. Corp. Washington,
ISBN 007037029X.
[194] Plessing, T., Peters, N. Wnning, J. G. (1998) Laseroptical investigation of highly
preheated combustion with strong exhaust gas recirculation Symposium (International)
on Combustion. 27:31973204.
[195] Blasiak, W., Yang, W. H., Narayanan, K., von Scheele J. (2007) Flameless oxyfuel
combustion for fuel consumption and nitrogen oxides emissions reductions and
productivity increase Journal of the Energy Institute. 80: 311.
[196] Ellul, C., Pourkashanian, M., Williams, A., Rabea, K. A. M. (2008) Effects of fuel
composition in high temperature air combustion Journal of the Energy Institute 81: 143
148.
171
[197] Fuchihata, M., Katsuki, M., Mizutani, Y., Ida,T. (2007) Observation of the flame
structures emerging at low Damkhler number fields. Proceedings of the Combustion
Institute 31: 13531359.
[198] Duwig, C., Stankovic, D., Fuchs, L., Li, G., Gutmark, E. (2008) Experimental and
numerical study of flameless combustion in a model gas turbine combustor Combustion
Science and Technology. 180: 279295.
[199] Galletti, C., Parente, A., Tognotti, L. (2007) Numerical and experimental
investigation of a mild combustion burner. Combustion and Flame. 151: 649664.
[200] Tabacco,D., Innarella, C., Bruno,C. (2002) Theoretical and numerical investigation on
flameless combustion Combustion Science and Technology 174: 135.
[201] Nicolle, A., Dagaut, P. (2006) Occurrence of NO-reburning in MILD combustion
evidenced via chemical kinetic modeling Fuel 85: 24692478.
[202] Hamdi, M., Benticha, H., Sassi, M. (2008) Detailed chemical modelling of a flameless
combustion turbine for pollution prevention. International Journal of Environment and
Pollution. 32:410421.
[203] Murphy J.D., McCarthy K. (2005) Ethanol production from energy crops and wastes
for use as a transport fuel in Ireland. Applied Energy. 82: 148 166.
[204] Sun Y., Cheng J. J., (2002) Hydrolysis of lignocellulosic materials for ethanol
production: a review. Bioresource Technology. 83: 1 11.
[205] Lotero, E., Liu, Y.J., Lopez, D.E., Suwannakarn, K., Bruce, D.A., and Goodwin, J.G.,
Jr. (2005) Synthesis of bio-diesel via acid catalysis. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 44: 53535363.
[206] Kiss, A.A., Dimian, A.C., and Rothenberg, G. (2008) Bio-diesel by catalytic reactive
distillation powered by metal oxides. Energy & Fuels 22: 598-604.
[207] Ahmad, M., Ahmed, S., Ul-Hassan, F., Arashad, M., Khan, M., Zafar, M. and
Sultana, S. (2010) Base catalyzed transesterification of sunflower oil Bio-diesel. African
Journal of Biotechnology. 9: 8630-8635.
[208] Abuhabaya, A., Fieldhouse, J., Brown, D. (2010) Variation of Engine Performance
and Emissions using Bio-diesel Fuels. The 2nd International Conference on Nuclear &
Renewable Energy Resources. 580-585.
[209] Kemp, W.H. (2006) Bio-diesel basics and beyond. A comprehensive guide to
production and use for the home and farm. Aztext Press: Ontario, Canada.
[210] Rywotycki, R. (2002) The effect of fat temperature on heat energy consumption
during frying of food. Journal of Food Engineering. 54: 257-261.
172
[211] Tate, R.E., Watts, K.C., Allen, C.A.W., Wilkie, K.I. (2006) The densities of three biodiesel fuels at temperatures up to 300oC. Fuel. 85: 10041009.
[212] Lang, X.; Dalai, A.K.; Bakhsi, N.N.; Reaney, M.J.; Hertz, P.B. (2001) Preparation
and characterization of bio-diesels from various bio-oils. Bioresource Technology. 80:
53-62.
[213] Lee, I.; Johnson, L.A.; Hammond, E.G. (1995) Use of branched-chain esters to reduce
the crystallization temperature of bio-diesel. JAOCS . 72: 1155-1160.
[214] Hilber, T.; Mittelbach, M.; Schmidt, E. (2006) Animal fats perform well in bio-diesel.
Render. 16-18.
[215] Ali, Y., Hanna, M.A., Cuppett, S.L. (1995) Fuel properties of tallow and soybean oil
esters. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 72: 15571564.
[216] Canakci, M., Sanli, H. (2005) An assessment about the reasons of NOx rise in biodiesels exhaust emissions. J Naval Sci Eng. 3: 8192.
[217] Szybist, J.P., Song, J., Alam, M., Boehman, A.L. (2007) Bio-diesel combustion,
emissions and emission control. Fuel Process Technol. 88: 679691.
[218] Aksoy, H.A., Kahraman, I., Karaosmanoglu, F., Civelekoglu, H. (1988) Evaluation of
Turkish sulphur olive oil as an alternative diesel fuel. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 65: 936938.
[219] Feuge, R.O., Kraemer, E.A., Bailey, A.E. (1945) ModiWcation of vegetable oils: IV.
ReesteriWcation of fatty acids with glycerol. Oil Soap 22: 202207.
[220] Liu K (1994) .Preparation of fatty acid methyl esters for gas-chromatographic analysis
of lipids in biological materials. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 71: 11791187.
[221] Gerpen JV (2005) Bio-diesel processing and production. Fuel Process Technol.
86:10971107.
[222] Fisher Scientific Laboratory Catalogue 2009-2010.
[223] Chang, D.Y.Z., Gerpen, J.H.V., Lee, I., Johnson, L.A., Hammond, E.G., and Marley,
S.J. (1996). Fuel Properties and Emissions of Soybean Oil Esters as Diesel Fuel. J Am
Oil Chem Soc 73: 1549-1555.
[224] Labeckas, G., and Slavinskas, S. (2006). The Effect of Rapeseed Oil Methyl Ester on
Direct Injection Diesel Engine Performance and Exhaust Emissions. Energy Convers
Manage. 47: 1954-1967.
[225] Muniyappa, P.R., Brammer, S.C., and Noureddini, H. (1996). Improved Conversion
of Plant Oils and Animal Fats into Biodiesel and Co-product. Bioresour Technol. 56: 1924.
173
[226] Graboski, M.S., and McCormick, R.L. (1998). Combustion of Fat and Vegetable Oil
Derived Fuels in Diesel Engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci, 24, 125-164.
[227] Kalligeros, S., Zannikos, F., Stournas, S., Lois, E., Anastopoulos, G., Teas, Ch., and
Sakellaropoulos, F. (2003). An Investigation of Using Biodiesel/Marine Diesel Blends
on the Performance of a Stationary Diesel Engine. Biomass Bioenerg. 24: 141-149.
[228] Raheman, H., and Phadatare, A.G. (2004). Diesel Engine Emissions and Performance
from Blends of Karanja Methyl Ester and Diesel. Biomass Bioenerg. 27: 393-397.
[229] Lin, Y.C., Lee, W.J., and Hou, H.C. (2006). PAH Emissions and Energy Efficiency of
Palm-Biodiesel Blends Fueled on Diesel Generator. Atmos Environ. 40: 3930-3940.
[230] http://www.petrolprices.com/
[231] http://www.ee.iitb.ac.in/~apte/CV_PRA_TAGUCHI_INTRO.htm
[232] Antoln, G., Tinaut, F.V., Briceo, Y., Castao, V., Prez, C., and Ramrez, A.I.
(2002) Optimisation of biodiesel production by sunflower oil transesterification.
Bioresour Technol. 83: 111-114.
[233] Hu, J.B., Du, Z.X., Tang, Z., and Min, E.Z. (2004) Study on the solvent power of a
new green solvent: biodiesel. Industry and Engineering Chemistry Research. 43: 79287931.
[234] Shieh, C., Liao, H., and Lee, C. (2003) Optimization of lipase-catalyzed bio-diesel by
response surface methodology. Bioresour Technol. 88: 103-106
[235] Encinar, J. M., Gonzalez, J. F., Rodrguez, J. J. and Tejedor, A. (2002) Biodiesel
fuels from vegetable oils: transesterification of cynara cardunculus L. oils with ethanol.
Energy & Fuels. 16: 443-450.
[236] Kong, Q., He, G.Q., Chen, Q.H., and Chen, F. (2004) Optimization of medium
composition for cultivating clostridium butyricum with response surface methodology. J
Food Sci. 69: M163-M168.
[237] Ghadge, S.V., and Raheman, H. (2006) Process optimization for biodiesel production
from mahua (madhuca indica) oil using response surface methodology. Bioresour
Technol. 97: 379-384.
[238] Li, W., Du, W., and Liu, D.H. (2007) Optimization of whole cell-catalyzed
methanolysis of soybean oil for biodiesel production using response surface
methodology. J Mol Catal B-Enzym. 45: 122-127.
[239] Yuan, X.Z., Liu, J., Zeng, G.M., Shi, J.G., Tong, J.Y., and Huang, G.H. (2008)
Optimization of conversion of waste rapeseed oil with high FFA to biodiesel using
response surface methodology. Renew Energ. 33: 1678- 1684.
174
[240] American Oil Chemical Society (AOCS) official method Ca 5a-40. (1997).
[241] Mason R. L., Gunst, R. F., Hess, J. L. (2003) Designs and analyses for fitting
response surfaces. In: Statistic design and analysis of experiments: with applications to
engineering and science. 2nd edn. John Wiley & Sons, New York, pp 568-606.
[242] Myers, R., Montgomery, D., Anderson-Cook, C. (2009) Response surface
methodology, process and product optimization using designed experiments. 3rd edn.
John Wiley & Sons, New Jersey, pp 219-264.
[243] Demirbas, A. (2007) Biodiesel from sunflower oil in supercritical methanol with
calcium oxide. Energy Conversion and Management. 48: 937941.
[244] Abuhabaya, A. A., Fieldhouse, J. D., Brown, D. R. (2010) Evaluation of properties
and use of waste vegetable oil (WVO), pure vegetable oils and standard diesel as used in
a compression ignition engine. Computing and Engineering University of Huddersfield,
Huddersfield, UK. 71-76.
[245] Demirbas, A. (2003) Biodiesel fuels from vegetable oils via catalystic and noncatalytic supercrtitical alcohol transesterification and other methods: A survey. Energy
Convers Manage. 44: 2093-2109.
[246] EREC European Renewable Energy Council (2008), Renewable Energy House,
Renewable Energy Technology Roadmap 20% by 2020.
[247]
[248]
[249]
[250]
[251]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum#cite_note-40
http://205.254.135.7/countries/country-data.cfm?fips=CO
http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=pt&product=oil&graph=consumption
http://www.indexmundi.com/energy.aspx?country=th&product=oil&graph=consumption
Crop production. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations.
Retrieved 2010-06-17.
[252] Carter, D.; Darby, D.; Halle, J.; Hunt, P. How To Make Biodiesel; Low-Impact
Living Initiative, Redfield Community, Winslow, Bucks, 2005, ISSN 0-9649171-0-3.
[253] Yang, H-H.; Chien, S-M.; Lo, M-Y.; Lan, J.C.-W.; Lu, W-C.; Ku, Y-Y. Effects of
biodiesel on emissions of regulated air pollutants and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons
under engine durability testing. Atmospheric Environment 2007, 41, 72327240.
[254]
http://oica.net/wp-content/themes/default/scripts/view-diagram-larger.php?/wp-content/uploads/co2.bmp
175
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A
Figure A.1: Free Fatty Acid Content Test
Titration Process Equipment as Following:
1) Three clean glasses beakers,

2) One clean plastic beaker,
3) Two clean eyedroppers,
4) Pipette handle,
5) Phenolphthalein (pH) indicator solution,
6) Methanol,
7) Titrant solution,
8) Gloves, and
9) Goggles
176
9
1
Figure A.2: Supplies used for the titration process
Equipments of Oil Titration Test:
Figure A.3: Oil titration test
177
Figure A.4: Manufacture laminated card (manufacture manual)
178
Figure A.5: Bomb calorimeter apparatus
Figure A.6: Container holding mixture of methanol and sodium

hydroxide connected with the system
179
Figure A.7: Equipment for measuring kinematic viscosity
Figure A.8: Iodine number test apparatus
180
Figure A.9: Bomb calorimeter apparatus
Figure A.10: Experimental equipment for transesterification

181
APPENDIX B
The test bed instrumentation is described below:
Type: Schenck W230 Eddy Current Dynamometer
Maximum Speed: 7500 rpm
Maximum Power: 230 kW from 2200 rpm to 7500 rpm
Maximum Torque: 750Nm from 600 rpm to 2200 rpm
Rotor Inertia: 0.53 kgm2
Speed Measurement: 60 tooth wheel with inductive pickup
Torque Measurement Load cell via swing frame torque arm
Control System Description
CP Engineering Cadet V12 Control and Data logging System designed specifically for
engine testing.
Potential Capability of 512 Data.
Logging Channels and 64 PID loops for secondary control hardware.
Figure B.1: Photo of test rig, Schenk dynamometer fitted

with Ford Puma engine
182
Figure B.2: View of Ford Puma Engine as used in testing
Figure B.3: Data acquisition system visual displays and inputs
183
The engine brake power (BP) in kW was calculated as:

w
a
2

1000
60
(. 1)
a Measured brake torque of the engine ( ),

Where:
Measured engine speed ().
The brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) in kgh-1kW-1 was calculated as:
Where:
W

3600
w
(. 2)
= Measured fuel consumption 4 5.

m
The brake thermal efficiency (d, %) was calculated as:
Where:
d
w 1000
100
W. x.
(. 3)
W. x Calculated calorific value of the fuel 4 5.
Figure B.4: Horiba exhaust gas analyzer EXSA-1500L
184

PHD, Thesis-Abdullah Abuhabaya

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

PHD, Thesis-Abdullah Abuhabaya

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

PHD, Thesis-Abdullah Abuhabaya

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Investigation of engine performance and exhaust gas

emissions by using bio-diesel in compression ignition

ABDULLAH ALI A ABUHABAYA

A Thesis submitted to the University of Huddersfield in

Global perspective ................................................................................................................ 16

Fuel demands past present and future ................................................................................... 20

Current primary sources of fuel ............................................................................................ 22

Wind Energy ................................................................................................................. 23

Standard Diesel Fuel ..................................................................................................... 24

Bio-diesel Fuel .............................................................................................................. 25

Methanol as Fuel ........................................................................................................... 30

Ethanol as Fuel .............................................................................................................. 30

Electric Vehicles ........................................................................................................... 30

Fuel Cell ........................................................................................................................ 31

First and second generation bio-fuel ..................................................................................... 31

First Generation bio-fuel ............................................................................................... 31

Second Generation bio-fuel .......................................................................................... 33

Recycled Fuels .............................................................................................................. 34

Properties of Vegetable Oils ................................................................................................. 36

Types of base vegetable oil for bio-diesel production .................................................. 38

Transesterification process ............................................................................................ 39

Reactants and Product of Transesterification Process................................................... 41

Chemical Reaction of the Base Catalyzed Transesterification Process ........................ 42

Physical Properties of Bio-diesel .................................................................................. 45

Outline of Thesis ................................................................................................................... 46

3.3.6 Calorific Value Measurement .............................................................................................. 78

5.4.1 Petroleum Diesel Benchmark............................................................................................. 114

Table 5.6: Waste Vegetable Oil Blends Compiled Data (3)..121

Figure 2.1: Triglyceride transesterification reaction....54

Figure 3.1: Fuelpod for transesterifying oils76

Figure 5.1: Carbon dioxide emissions for different bio-diesel blends...126

and bio-diesels as fuel....136

Figure A.1: Free Fatty Acid Content Test......177

there is a need to seek an alternative fuel source to fossil fuels [254].

Figure 1.1: General energy distribution

Figure 1.2: Current Global Automotive Production

Bio-fuel to Fuel used

1.2 Fuel demands past present and future

1.3 Current primary sources of fuel

Standard Diesel Fuel

Higher heat content (about 88% of diesel fuel).

Lower sulphur content.

Lower aromatic content.

The superior lubricating properties.

Their higher flash point makes them safer to store.

Bio-diesel almost completely eliminates lifecycle carbon dioxide emissions.

Some of the drawbacks are: [30]

Bio-diesel tends to affect rubber hoses and gaskets.

Possible concerns with engine warranties.

Special measures that must be taken to use Bio-diesel in cold climates.

Higher cost than petro-diesel.

Limited commercial availability.

The reactivity of unsaturated hydrocarbon chains.

1.3.4.1 Fuel injection equipment (FIE)

1.3.4.2 FIE manufactures concerns

Mono, di- and triglycerides

Free fatty acids

Total solid impurity level

Alkali/alkaline earth metals

!"#$% $& " ' ( )

0'$ " !1' %$,' 2'#& "#-'' ( )

+'#-!, " !1' %6 . ; /

RS% <=>=?@AB= CDB E S% FBGCHCB I UV% MDCOD=P=B E % JBG=KDL

Y N WX N WX N WX N Y E 3^WX; N YX_

3WX; YZ E 3X [ E Y N WX N WX WX N Y

Y N WX N WX N WX N Y E 3^WX; Y N

WX N WX N WX E WX; Y N W Y E WX; Y N W Y E WX; Y N W Y

|g c%, '# g | |g g g g g g b'!1,% d-!' g g g g g g g |