Diya‟uddeen Basheer Hasanconference.khuisf.ac.ir/DorsaPax/userfiles/file/...The 1 th th...
-
Upload
truongthuan -
Category
Documents
-
view
214 -
download
1
Transcript of Diya‟uddeen Basheer Hasanconference.khuisf.ac.ir/DorsaPax/userfiles/file/...The 1 th th...
The 1th
International and The 4th
National Congress on Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture
26 – 27 April 2012 in Isfahan, Iran
A REVIEW OF BIODIESEL POTENTIAL FEED STOCK SOURCES
Diya‟uddeen Basheer Hasan*, A.R. Abdul Aziz, W.M.A.W. Daud, M. H. Chakrabarti
Chemical Engineering Department, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya,
50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia.
*E-mail: [email protected]
ABSTRACT
At present, a global problem of increased fossil fuel prices is being witnessed necessitating the need and
search for the development of future alternative fuels. Biodiesel, a promising and feasible substitute to fossil
fuel in the transportation sectors is, however, bedeviled with high cost of a raw material. The estimated cost
of feedstock is in excess of 70% of the total production plant cost. However, there are several sources that
avail for the production of biodiesel. Harnessing other forms of feedstock not only alleviate the burden on
fossil fuel exploitation but would significantly contribute to the realization of attaining the forecasted annual
production rate of 227 billion liters of biofuels by the most active stakeholders in the biodiesel industry and
attaining the 2020 and 2030 goal of substituting approximately 20% and 30% of petrol-diesel with biofuels
in US and EU, respectively. The sources are categorized as waste cooking oil (WCO), municipal solid waste
(MSW), agricultural and industrial waste. The current study examines the various potential offered by these
sources and suggests an informed conclusion based on the research findings.
Keywords: Biodiesel; Feedstock Sources; Frying Oil
1. INTRODUCTION
Environmental concerns, production cost, associated hazards and sustainability issues have bedeviled fossils
utilization. However, biodiesel usage is less affected by most of these factors as it‟s renewable,
environmentally friendly and can be produced from varieties of feedstock in respective regions. Thus, the
clamor for replacement of 20% and 30% of petro-diesel with biofuels in the US and EU by 2020 and 2030,
respectively can be justified. However, the interest of attaining the annual targeted production rate of 227
billion liters calls for increased production of the biodiesel. Despite the efforts being made by the EU, it is
not self-sufficient to meet its biodiesel target. The fact that current biodiesel requirements would not be fully
met from traditional feedstock, exploring other relatively cheaper feedstock sources would significantly
contribute towards augmenting future demand and this issue has become of paramount importance. Thus the
search for more alternative feedstock that minimizes the production cost, which the feedstock represents 70-
90% of total production cost, is a continual one.
The performance of the biofuel is adjudged to be comparable to fossil fuels (Felizardo et al., 2006). It is
engine application requires little or no modification of the Diesel engines (Çetinkaya et al, 2005), is an
environmentally friendlier form of fuel, being renewable it offers the merit of reduction in greenhouse
emissions and the waste cooking oil (WCO) is available everywhere. Moreover, indicators show that
sources of fossil energy are rapidly depleted, and the future forecast is not encouraging. This would go a
long way in attaining the 2020 and 2030 target by several key players in biodiesel production. For instance,
the US planned to replace utilization of both diesel and petrol with biofuels by 30% (2030) and similarly
20% are planned by EU member countries (2020) in the transport sector. This necessitates setting
machineries for increased production by all the most active players in the industry, i.e. the European Union,
The 1th
International and The 4th
National Congress on Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture
26 – 27 April 2012 in Isfahan, Iran
China, Australia and New Zealand. Currently, the annual biofuel production target is approximated at 227
billion liters (Blake et al., 2008).
The objectives of this review were to give an overview of potential sources of feedstock for biodiesel
production, their merits and demerits, and the environmental incentives for promoting biofuel generation
from such a source. The benefit analysis of use of WCO as a fuel source was further discussed. The
summary of our findings clearly indicated the many merits of the generation of biodiesel from WCO as a
sustainable, most potential and yet to be fully exploited energy source. The research findings further
establish the need to harness WCO in biodiesel production.
2. BIODIESEL
Simply, biodiesel can be defined as a monoalkyl ester of long chain fatty acids derived from a renewable
lipid feedstock, such as vegetable oil or animal fat. The word „„Bio‟‟ relates to its being renewable and of
biological origin while „„diesel‟‟ relates to the application in diesel engines (Zhang et al., 2003).
Various biodiesel standards, such as EN 14214 (Europe) and ASTM D 6751 (North America), were drawn
out to ensure proper quality control of the fuel to satisfy engine and equipment manufacturers worldwide.
Adherence to these standards made it easier for automobile manufacturers to issue engine warranties for the
implementation of biodiesel fuel in the engine (Lin, Cunshan, Vittayapadung, Xiangqian, & Mingdong,
2011). Continuous revision and updates of the standards became necessary as automobile manufacturers
evolved newer engine designs with the passage of time. As a consequence of strict quality control on
biodiesel fuel, service outlets started frequenting many parts of Europe and US during the 2000s. However,
the cost of biodiesel fuel has limited its widespread commercialization and various research and
development programmes are ongoing throughout the globe to bring the cost factor down (Lin et al., 2011).
Thus, identifying cheaper and sustainable sources would always be a welcomed progress.
2.1 Production
Biodiesel production from oils is attained through four main processes: direct use and blending of raw oils
with petroleum diesel (Adams et al., 1983; Engler et al.,1983; Peterson et al., 1983; Strayer et al., 1983),
formation of micro-emulsions (Schwab et al., 1987), thermal cracking of vegetable oils or animal fats
(Chang & Wan, 1947; Crossley et al.,1962; Niehaus et al., 1986) and transesterification (Chakrabarti &
Ahmad, 2008; Ma & Hanna, 1999). Transesterification is the most widely used for the conversion process.
A typical schematic representation of the process is depicted in Figure 1 (Felizardo et al., 2006).
Figure 1: Reaction scheme of transesterification process (Felizardo et al., 2006)
The 1th
International and The 4th
National Congress on Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture
26 – 27 April 2012 in Isfahan, Iran
3. POTENTIAL FEEDSTOCK SOURCES FOR BIODIESEL
The need to examine and harness potential feedstock for biodiesel production is hinged on the fact that the
petrol-diesel sources are associated with myriad of problems. They range from possible depletion of the
fossil fuel sources (estimated at 41 years) (Agarwal, 2007) to adverse effect on environment as a
consequence of their utilization (Ahmad et al., 2011). In fact, a major problem that arises from the
exploration and consumption of the fossil based fuels is the steady decline in underground-based carbon fuel
reserves (Melvin et al., 2011).
There are many potential sources for biodiesel production from biomass. By definition, biomass includes all
biodegradable fractions of products, waste and residues from agriculture (vegetable and animal substance),
forestry and related industries and the biodegradable components of industrial and municipal waste
(Balanosky et al., 2000). Some of these sources would be briefly analyzed in the proceeding sections.
The high cost of biodiesel is incurred in production plant in the form of feedstock cost, which ranges from
70–95% of total operating costs. The limits of 75% for cost of raw materials have also been reported
(Ahmad et al., 2011; Lim & Teong, 2010) and shown graphically in Figure 2. This higher production cost
necessitates the search for more economically attractive alternatives of feedstock which via their utilization
effectively lowers the production cost (Ahmad et al., 2011).
Figure 2: Cost analysis of production of biodiesel (Ahmad et al., 2011) .
3.1 Industrial
These categories of waste are known to be the most problematic of all the waste dispose/generated. This is
associated with their great complexity and the serious environmental hazards (Fabiyi & Skelton, 1999;
Pidou et al., 2009; Tsai, 2010). They are an unattractive source of generating energy as they are known to
contain toxic contaminants in quantities sufficient for adversely affecting the environment and quality of
life. Equally, non-hazardous waste is generated from sources such as food processing waste, scrap plastics,
waste rubber, waste paper, organic/inorganic sludges, coal ash and others. (Tsai, 2010). However, most of
these wastes are non-biodegradable. Thus, they lack the potentials for biodiesel production as they fail to
meet the “biodiesel from biomass” criteria (Balanosky et al., 2000). On the other hand, there are industry
discharges of wastes that are non-hazardous with potentials for biodiesel generation, especially from the
palm oil industry. Among such are palm oil fatty distillate (Hayyan et al., 2011), tobacco seed oil (Usta et
The 1th
International and The 4th
National Congress on Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture
26 – 27 April 2012 in Isfahan, Iran
al., 2011), rubber seed oil (Melvin Jose et al., 2011) and low grade oils such as sludge palm oil (Hayyan et
al., 2011). Again, issue of sustainability of some of these sources becomes their bane.
3.2 Agricultural
Production of biodiesel from agricultural, non-food feedstock sources are another viable option that
potentially reduces utilizing edible oils. Such crops reportedly used includes: rubber seed (Melvin et al.,
2011), jatropha (Jain & Sharma, 2010; Juan et al., 2011), mahua (Saravanan et al., 2010), tobacco seed
(Usta et al., 2011), castor (Chakrabarti & Ahmad, 2008), eruca sativa (Chakrabarti & Ahmad, 2009) and
pongame (Kumar & Sharma), among others. It could be argued that these sources of biodiesel feedstock
have minimal effect on the competition for food and that some species are adaptable to growth in the
wasteland (Ahmad et al., 2011). However, the viscosity of neat vegetable oil (range of 28–40 mm2/s) is
high; its direct use had led to diesel engine problems such as deposits formation and injector coking arising
from poor atomization (Knothe, 2010).
Of interest is Jatropha curcas oil, as it comprises a non-edible oil, coming from a perennial plant, with high
oil content in the seed and with good productivity per hectare (Zanette et al., 2011). However, this feedstock
availability is more in Africa and India (Table 1). Accordingly, for EU‟s utilization of the Jatropha curcas
importation factors comes in. From an economic point of view, this is unattractive and contributes to the
figures reported by Predojevic (2008) that vegetable oil biodiesel cost 10 to 50% higher than petroleum-
based diesel fuel.
To attain the biodiesel production target using rapeseed (the main European feedstock), about 60% of
Europe‟s arable land would be utilized. Based on this figure it is vivid the target cannot be met (Balanosky
et al., 2000). Even the previous targeted quota (2010 EU‟s target of replacing 5.75% of diesel fuel with
biofuel) which appears small translates to very large scales in practice. Still, on these figures, Skelton
(Skelton, 2007), has highlighted the scenario involved with attaining the previous 2010 EU‟s target of
replacing 5.75% of diesel fuel with biofuel to include competition with food crops and the destruction of
rain forests at the expense of new plantations. For palm oil, a report raised by Marcel Silvanus (Balanosky et
al., 2000) has shown that as a sustainable source the use of palm oil is unattractive from an environmental
perspective. This was based on the release of massive amounts of carbon dioxide, and the oil is far from
being carbon-neutral. Although, several articles have questioned the credibility of the data generated and
subsequent analysis, the fact is that in Europe several calls have been made for banning its use.
TABLE 1. GLOBAL DISTRIBUTION OF BIODIESEL FEEDSTOCK ACCORDING TO COUNTRIES (AHMAD ET AL., 2011).
Country Feedstock Oil yield
(L/ha/yr)
Land use
(m2 year/kg biodiesel)
Biodiesel prdctivity
(kg/ha/yr)
USA Soybeans 636 18 321
Europe/EU Rapeseed, Sunflower 1070 11 946
Western Canada Canola Oil 974 12 809
Africa Jatropha 741 15 656
India Jatropha 741 15 656
Malaysia/Indonesia Palm 5366 2 4747
Philippines Coconut - - -
China Waste Cooking oil NA 0 NA
Spain Linseed - - -
Greece Cotton Seed - - -
The 1th
International and The 4th
National Congress on Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture
26 – 27 April 2012 in Isfahan, Iran
3.3 Municipal
The production of biodiesel from these sources which includes animal fat and beef tallow has been well
documented in many referenced literature (Liu, Wang, Oh, & Herring, 2011; Fangrui Ma, Clements, &
Hanna, 1999; Nelson & Schrock, 2006; Soldi, Oliveira, Ramos, & César-Oliveira, 2009; Zheng & Hanna,
1996). It offers the merit of being a cheap form of alternative renewable energy source to mineral fuel.
Generally, they are classified into mainly edible and inedible and generated by the meat packing, poultry,
and edible/inedible rendering industries (Nelson & Schrock, 2006). Technically, the use of this feedstock as
biodiesel sources presents difficulties with production. They contain a high amount of saturated fatty acids
(SFA) which leads to difficult esterification process. Typical example is beef tallow with an average SFA
representing approximately 50% of the total FA, thus accounting for high melting point and high viscosity
of the final biodiesel. Additionally, biosafety consideration is another factor limiting the viability of such
sources as contaminated animals are not discriminated in the fat application (Ahmad et al., 2011).
3.4 Forestry
For feedstock of forestry origin, many socio-economic and environmental issues adversely affect the large
scale exploiting of this form of resources for biodiesel production. Among others, are policies involved in
primary forest destruction, issues with non-governmental organizations (NGO), displacement of natural
habitat and conflict with the indigenous population (Balanosky et al., 2000).
4. USED WASTE COOKING OILS (WCO)
Literature is replete with studies on WCO for biodiesel production. Among the several sources are
cottonseed oil, soybean oil, sunflower oil, tobacco seed, and palm oil (Dorado, Ballesteros, Arnal, Gómez,
& López, 2003; Hamasaki, Kinoshita, Tajima, Takasaki, & Morita, 2001; Phan & Phan, 2008; Tashtoush,
Al-Widyan, & Al-Shyoukh, 2003; Wu, Wang, Chen, & Shuai, 2009). The use of WCO are a more attractive
alternative low-cost feedstock for biodiesel in comparison to the vegetable oils as they are not affected by
land policies as witnessed in some countries, especially EU (González Gómez, Howard-Hildige, Leahy, &
Rice, 2002), price is half that of vegetable oil and huge amounts are generated (approximately 0.4 Mt from
EU countries and estimated amount stands at 0.7-1.0 Mt) (González Gómez et al., 2002). In a recent review
by Zanette and co-workers (Zanette et al., 2011), several advantages of WCO were highlighted, which
ranged from a decrease in demand competition with food items, overcoming problems associated with
planting and harvesting, a minimum or negligible land area requirements, minimum use of fertilizers, and
other factors, which result in the significant decrease in the price of feedstock. A detailed breakdown of
feedstock statistics was given by Ahmad et al. (Ahmad et al., 2011) for each of the major producers of
biodiesel.
The detrimental effect of the use of WCO in domestic animals feeding formulations have resulted in
banning this formulation in the EU from 2002 (Cvengros & Cvengrosová, 2004). This provides further
justification for the necessity of diversification and intensification of WCO conversion to biodiesel. In
comparison to beef tallow, the WCO applications are limited against the tallow where it‟s inedible form
finds usefulness among others as an additive in animal feed, use in fatty acids, soap manufacture, lubricants,
and other uses (Nelson & Schrock, 2006). Moreover, the use of waste oils for biodiesel production saves
cost significantly as it is almost free or approximately 60% less than vegetable oils (Predojevic, 2008).
The 1th
International and The 4th
National Congress on Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture
26 – 27 April 2012 in Isfahan, Iran
4.1 Generation
These categories of waste oil are generated from mostly edible of vegetable matter origin. Of all the
available sources of domestic waste, used waste cooking oils (WCO) are arguably the most widely
generated in substantial amounts. This could be associated with the new trends in proliferations of fast food
outlets (on a small and industrial scale) and affinity to the fast food in this generation (Cvengros &
Cvengrosová, 2004). Merits of these wastes include less separation and purification steps. Here,
pretreatment is basically water and gum filtration by hydrogenation followed by deacidification (Kalam et
al., 2011).
The frying process exposes the oil during the cooking and food preparation renders the oil detrimental to
further human consumption (Kalam et al., 2011). Moreover, biodiesel production using WCO is more
universal as fast food outlets are abundant everywhere while a use of edible/non edible oils are restricted to
certain countries and regions. This is further buttressed by the amount of WCO generated from some
countries (Table 1). Based on Table 2, it is clearly evident that disposal of these large amounts of WCO
through direct discharges into drains or sewers will lead to significant contribution to environmental
problems as watercourses and wildlife would be directly affected (Kalam et al., 2011).
Table 2. Used domestic waste oil generation by countries (Kalam et al., 2011; Thamsiriroj & Murphy,
2010).
5. CONCLUSIONS
The utilisation of waste cooking oil (WCO), a waste hitherto meant for disposal would go a long way in
minimizing importation of biomass in several countries. In addition, attendant problems of heavy
environmental loading of the WCO that makes the disposal option unattractive would be eliminated.
Conversion of the ECO offers the merits of greenhouse gas emission (GHG) reduction, potentials for
enhancing fuel diversification and a qualitatively comparable energy to fossil diesel fuels.
For proper utilization of WCO a ban is not sufficient. It is recommended that governments should support
the initiative with incentives. By providing adequate incentives, 70% of the used cooking oil could be
recovered from restaurants and other sources thus resulting in waste to energy for various economies
throughout the world. A holistic look at the use of WCO in generating biodiesel transcends beyond
addressing waste disposal management through healthier approach but also serves as a window for poverty
reduction and meeting the global demand.
Country Quantity (million tons/yr)
China 4.5
Malaysia 0.5
United States 10.0
Taiwan 0.07
Europe 0.7-10
Canada 0.12
Japan 0.45-0.57
Ireland 0.153
The 1th
International and The 4th
National Congress on Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture
26 – 27 April 2012 in Isfahan, Iran
REFERENCES
Adams, C., Peters, J., Rand, M., Schroer, B., & Ziemke, M. I. (1983). Investigation of soybean oil as a
diesel fuel extender: endurance tests. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society, 60, 1574–1579. Agarwal, A. K. (2007). Biofuels (alcohols and biodiesel) applications as fuels for internal combustion
engines. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 33(3), 233-271. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.pecs.2006.08.003
Ahmad, A. L., Yasin, N. H. M., Derek, C. J. C., & Lim, J. K. (2011). Microalgae as a sustainable energy source for biodiesel production: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(1), 584-593. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2010.09.018
Balanosky, E., Herrera, F., Lopez, A., & Kiwi, J. (2000). Oxidative degradation of textile waste water. Modeling reactor performance. Water Research 34 (2), 582-596.
Blake A, S., Dominique, L., & Harvey W, B. (2008). Next-generation biomass feedstocks for biofuel production. Genome Biology 9.
Çetinkaya, M., Ulusoy, Y., Tekìn, Y., & Karaosmanoglu, F. (2005). Engine and winter road test performances of used cooking oil originated biodiesel. Energy Conversion and Management, 46(7-8), 1279-1291. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2004.06.022
Chakrabarti, M. H., & Ahmad, R. (2008). Transesterification studies on castor oil as a first step towards its use in Biodiesel production. Pakistan Journal of Botany(40), 1153–1157.
Chakrabarti, M. H., & Ahmad, R. (2009). Investigating possibility of using least desirable oil of Eruca sativa L., in biodiesel production. Pakistan Journal of Botany, 41, 481–487. Chang, C., & Wan, S. (1947). China‟s motor fuels from tung oil. Ind Eng Chem, 39, 1543–1548.
Crossley, A., Heyes, T., & Hudson, B. (1962). Hudson B. The effect of heat on pure triglycerides. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society 39, 9–14.
Cvengros, J. J., & Cvengrosová, Z. (2004). Used frying oils and fats and their utilization in the production of methyl esters of higher fatty acids. Biomass and Bioenergy, 27(2), 173-181. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2003.11.006
Dorado, M. P., Ballesteros, E., Arnal, J. M., Gómez, J., & López, F. J. (2003). Exhaust emissions from a Diesel engine fueled with transesterified waste olive oil[small star, filled]. Fuel, 82(11), 1311-1315.
Engler, C., Johnson, L., Lepori, W., & Yarbrough, C. (1983). Effects of processing and chemical characteristics of plant oils on performance of an indirect-injection diesel engine. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society, 60, 1592–1596.
Fabiyi, M. E., & Skelton, R. L. (1999). The application of oscillatory flow mixing to photocatalytic wet oxidation. Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology A: Chemistry, 129(1-2), 17-24.
Felizardo, P., Neiva Correia, M. J., Raposo, I., Mendes, J. F., Berkemeier, R., & Bordado, J. M. (2006). Production of biodiesel from waste frying oils. Waste Management, 26(5), 487-494. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.wasman.2005.02.025
González Gómez, M. E., Howard-Hildige, R., Leahy, J. J., & Rice, B. (2002). Winterisation of waste cooking oil methyl ester to improve cold temperature fuel properties. Fuel, 81(1), 33-39. doi: Doi: 10.1016/s0016-2361(01)00117-x
Hamasaki, K., Kinoshita, E., Tajima, S., Takasaki, K., & Morita, D. (2001). Combustion characteristics of diesel engines with waste vegetable oil methyl ester. In: The 5th International Symposium on Diagnostics and Modeling of Combustion in Internal Combustion Engines.
Hayyan, A., Alam, M. Z., Mirghani, M. E. S., Kabbashi, N. A., Hakimi, N. I. N. M., Siran, Y. M., & Tahiruddin, S. (2011). Reduction of high content of free fatty acid in sludge palm oil via acid catalyst for biodiesel production. Fuel Processing Technology, In Press, Corrected Proof. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.fuproc.2010.12.011
Jain, S., & Sharma, M. P. (2010). Prospects of biodiesel from Jatropha in India: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(2), 763-771. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2009.10.005
Juan, J. C., Kartika, D. A., Wu, T. Y., & Hin, T.-Y. Y. (2011). Biodiesel production from jatropha oil by catalytic and non-catalytic approaches: An overview. Bioresource Technology, 102(2), 452-460. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.biortech.2010.09.093
The 1th
International and The 4th
National Congress on Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture
26 – 27 April 2012 in Isfahan, Iran
Kalam, M. A., Masjuki, H. H., Jayed, M. H., & Liaquat, A. M. (2011). Emission and performance characteristics of an indirect ignition diesel engine fuelled with waste cooking oil. Energy, 36(1), 397-402. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.energy.2010.10.026
Knothe, G. (2010). Biodiesel and renewable diesel: A comparison. Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, 36(3), 364-373. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.pecs.2009.11.004
Kumar, A., & Sharma, S. Potential non-edible oil resources as biodiesel feedstock: An Indian perspective. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(4), 1791-1800.
Lim, S., & Teong, L. K. (2010). Recent trends, opportunities and challenges of biodiesel in Malaysia: An overview. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 14(3), 938-954. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2009.10.027
Lin, L., Cunshan, Z., Vittayapadung, S., Xiangqian, S., & Mingdong, D. (2011). Opportunities and challenges for biodiesel fuel. Applied Energy, 88(4), 1020-1031. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.09.029
Liu, S., Wang, Y., Oh, J.-H., & Herring, J. L. (2011). Fast biodiesel production from beef tallow with radio frequency heating. Renewable Energy, 36(3), 1003-1007. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2010.09.015
Ma, F., Clements, L. D., & Hanna, M. A. (1999). The effect of mixing on transesterification of beef tallow. Bioresource Technology, 69(3), 289-293.
Ma, F., & Hanna, M. (1999). Biodiesel production: a review. Bioresour Technol, 70(1), 1-15. Melvin Jose, D. F., Edwin Raj, R., Durga Prasad, B., Robert Kennedy, Z., & Mohammed Ibrahim, A.
(2011). A multi-variant approach to optimize process parameters for biodiesel extraction from rubber seed oil. Applied Energy, In Press, Corrected Proof. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.apenergy.2010.12.024
Nelson, R. G., & Schrock, M. D. (2006). Energetic and economic feasibility associated with the production, processing, and conversion of beef tallow to a substitute diesel fuel. Biomass and Bioenergy, 30(6), 584-591.
Niehaus, R., Goering, C., Savage Jr, L., & Sorenson, S. (1986). Cracked soybean oil as fuel for a diesel engine. Trans Am Soc Agric Eng 29, 683–689.
No, S.-Y. (2011). Inedible vegetable oils and their derivatives for alternative diesel fuels in CI engines: A review. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews, 15(1), 131-149. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.rser.2010.08.012
Peterson, C., Auld, D., & Korus, R. (1983). Winter rape oil fuel for diesel engines: recovery and utilization. Journal of the American Oil Chemists’ Society, 60, 1579-1587.
Phan, A. N., & Phan, T. M. (2008). Biodiesel production from waste cooking oils. Fuel, 87(17-18), 3490-3496.
Pidou, M., Parsons, S. A., Raymond, G., Jeffrey, P., Stephenson, T., & Jefferson, B. (2009). Fouling control of a membrane coupled photocatalytic process treating greywater. Water Research, 43(16), 3932-3939.
Predojevic, Z. J. (2008). The production of biodiesel from waste frying oils: A comparison of different purification steps. Fuel, 87(17-18), 3522-3528. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2008.07.003
Saravanan, N., Nagarajan, G., & Puhan, S. (2010). Experimental investigation on a DI diesel engine fuelled with Madhuca Indica ester and diesel blend. Biomass and Bioenergy, 34(6), 838-843. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.01.028
Schwab, A., Bagby, M., & Freedman, B. (1987). Preparation and properties of diesel fuels from vegetable oils. Fuel, 66, 1372–1378.
Skelton, B. (2007). Special Issue: Bio-fuels. Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 85(5), 347-347. Soldi, R. A., Oliveira, A. R. S., Ramos, L. P., & César-Oliveira, M. A. F. (2009). Soybean oil and beef
tallow alcoholysis by acid heterogeneous catalysis. Applied Catalysis A: General, 361(1-2), 42-48. Strayer, R., Blake, J., & Craig, W. (1983). Canola and high erucic rapeseed oil as substitutes for diesel fuel:
preliminary tests. (60), 1587–1592. Tashtoush, G., Al-Widyan, M. I., & Al-Shyoukh, A. O. (2003). Combustion performance and emissions of
ethyl ester of a waste vegetable oil in a water-cooled furnace. Applied Thermal Engineering, 23(3), 285-293. doi: Doi: 10.1016/s1359-4311(02)00188-6
Thamsiriroj, T., & Murphy, J. D. (2010). How much of the target for biofuels can be met by biodiesel generated from residues in Ireland? Fuel, 89(11), 3579-3589. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.fuel.2010.06.009
Tsai, W.-T. (2010). Analysis of the sustainability of reusing industrial wastes as energy source in the industrial sector of Taiwan. Journal of Cleaner Production, 18, 1440-1445.
The 1th
International and The 4th
National Congress on Recycling of Organic Waste in Agriculture
26 – 27 April 2012 in Isfahan, Iran
Usta, N., Aydogan, B., Çon, A. H., Uguzdogan, E., & Özkal, S. G. (2011). Properties and quality verification of biodiesel produced from tobacco seed oil. Energy Conversion and Management, 52(5), 2031-2039. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.enconman.2010.12.021
Wu, F., Wang, J., Chen, W., & Shuai, S. (2009). A study on emission performance of a diesel engine fueled with five typical methyl ester biodiesels. Atmos Environ, 43, 1481–1485.
Zanette, A. F., Barella, R. A., Pergher, S. B. C., Treichel, H., Oliveira, D., Mazutti, M. A., . . . Oliveira, J. V. (2011). Screening, optimization and kinetics of Jatropha curcas oil transesterification with heterogeneous catalysts. Renewable Energy, 36(2), 726-731. doi: DOI: 10.1016/j.renene.2010.08.028
Zhang, Y., Dubé, M. A., McLean, D. D., & Kates, M. (2003). Biodiesel production from waste cooking oil: 1. Process design and technological assessment. Bioresource Technology, 89(1), 1-16. doi: Doi: 10.1016/s0960-8524(03)00040-3
Zheng, D., & Hanna, M. A. (1996). Preparation and properties of methyl esters of beef tallow. Bioresource Technology, 57(2), 137-142.
[1]