Professional Documents
Culture Documents
pubs.acs.org/est
The Eects of Neat Biodiesel and Biodiesel and HVO Blends in Diesel
Fuel on Exhaust Emissions from a Light Duty Vehicle with a Diesel
Engine
Adam Prokopowicz,*, Marzena Zaciera, Andrzej Sobczak,, Piotr Bielaczyc, and Joseph Woodburn
Institute of Occupational Medicine and Environmental Health, Koscielna 13, 41-200 Sosnowiec, Poland
School of Pharmacy with Division of Laboratory Medicine in Sosnowiec, Medical University of Silesia, Poniatowskiego 15, 40-055
Katowice, Poland
BOSMAL Automotive Research and Development Institute Ltd, Sarni Stok 93, 43-300 Bielsko-Biala, Poland
S Supporting Information
*
INTRODUCTION
In the past decade interest in usage of renewable fuels has
increased sharply, due to limited fossil fuel resources and the
opportunity to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. This also
involves transport fuels, which for example, in the EU, have the
highest contribution to general energy consumption (about
40%) and of which 56% originate from renewable sources.1 In
the case of diesel engines, commonly used both in heavy
transportation vehicles and passenger cars, fatty acid methyl
esters (FAMEs), known as biodiesel, are the main biocomponents which are blended and used with conventional petroleum
diesel fuel.2 FAMEs are produced mainly by transestrication of
vegetable oils such as soybean, rapeseed, and palm oils with
glycerol as a byproduct in an alkali-catalyzed process.3 Although
methanol and ethanol are most frequently used as a alcohol, the
former is mainly employed because of its low cost and
physicochemical advantages but, in contrast to ethanol,
methanol originates mostly from fossil feedstock. Production
may lead to the presence of some catalyst poisons in biodiesel,
like Na, K, or P. The fats for FAME production also may
originate from postfrying oils, waste animal fats, or microalgae
oil, which fulll the greenhouse gas emission criteria better than
edible vegetable oils and do not compete with food
2015 American Chemical Society
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
7473
February 5, 2015
April 30, 2015
May 20, 2015
May 20, 2015
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00648
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 74737482
Article
B0 (100%
DF)
B7 (93.1% DF + 6.9%
FAME)
B100(100%
FAME)
HVO30 (70% DF +
30% HVO)
0.836
2.632
59.5
8.0
55.2
70
28
38.7
0.838
2.637
61.0
7.1
52.5
82
27
41.1
0.842
0.847
0.816
2.737
25
17
0.875
4.64
178
6.0
56.1
350
8
98.8
95.7
339.8
347.5
42.6
3.0
37.0
42.9
2.2
17
DF, diesel fuel; FAME, fatty acid methyl esters; HVO, hydrotreated vegetable oil.
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00648
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 74737482
Article
Figure 1. Relative emissions of CO, HC, NOx, PM, CO2, and absolute values of fuel consumption for the fuels tested. * p < 0.05.
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00648
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 74737482
Article
UDC
EUDC
fuel
CO
NOx
HC
PM
CO
NOx
HC
PM
CO
NOx
HC
PM
NEDC
UDC
EUDC
B0
B7
B15
B30
B100
HVO30
121
159
145
167
426
59
221
211
219
220
211
224
30
36
40
45
97
25
33
29
29
26
16
30
323
428
391
448
1152
154
257
234
241
249
206
266
69
83
90
103
246
51
34
32
27
25
31
30
4
4
4
4
4
5
201
197
207
204
213
200
8
8
11
12
10
10
33
27
31
26
8
31
162.8
164.3
161.4
163.4
169.7
161.9
214.0
212.1
207.9
211.3
226.9
207.3
133.4
136.7
134.6
135.7
136.6
135.6
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00648
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 74737482
Article
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00648
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 74737482
Article
Figure 2. Total carbonyl emissions for the test fuels over the UDC,
EUDC, and complete NEDC cycles. * p < 0.05.
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00648
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 74737482
Article
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00648
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 74737482
Article
ASSOCIATED CONTENT
S Supporting Information
*
Figure 3. Total PAH emissions for the test fuels over the UDC,
EUDC, and complete NEDC cycles.
AUTHOR INFORMATION
Corresponding Author
ABBREVIATIONS
CVS
constant volume sampling
EUDC Extra Urban Driving Cycle
NEDC New European Driving Cycle
UDC Urban Driving Cycle
REFERENCES
7480
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00648
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 74737482
Article
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00648
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 74737482
Article
7482
DOI: 10.1021/acs.est.5b00648
Environ. Sci. Technol. 2015, 49, 74737482