Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorPala-En, Natchanok
dc.contributor.authorSattler, Melanie L.
dc.contributor.authorDennis, Brian
dc.contributor.authorChen, Victoria
dc.contributor.authorMuncrief, Rachel L.
dc.date.accessioned2016-12-14T02:19:35Z
dc.date.available2016-12-14T02:19:35Z
dc.date.issued2013-08
dc.identifier.citationPublished in the Journal of Environmental Protection 4: 74-82, 2013en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10106/26311
dc.description.abstractBiodiesel has generated increased interest recently as an alternative to petroleum-derived diesel. Due to its high oxygen content, biodiesel typically burns more completely than petroleum diesel, and thus has lower emissions of hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM). However, biodiesel may increase or decrease nitrogen oxide (NOx) and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, depending on biodiesel feedstock, engine type, and test cycle. The purpose of this study was to compare emissions from 20% blends of biodiesel made from 4 feedstocks (soybean oil, canola oil, waste cooking oil, and animal fat) with emissions from ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD). Emissions of NOx and CO2 were made under real-world driving conditions using a Horiba On-Board Measurement System OBS-1300 on a highway route and arterial route; emissions of NOx, CO2, HC, CO, and PM were measured in a controlled setting using a chassis dynamometer with Urban Dynamometer Drive Schedule. Dynamometer test results showed statistically significant lower emissions of HC, CO, and PM from all B20 blends compared to ULSD. For CO2, both on-road testing (arterial, highway, and idling) and dynamometer testing showed no statistically significant difference in emissions among the B20 blends and ULSD. For NOx, dynamometer testing showed only B20 from soybean oil to have statistically significant higher emissions. This is generally consistent with the on-road testing, which showed no statistically significant difference in NOx emissions between ULSD and the B20 blends.
dc.description.abstractBiodiesel has generated increased interest recently as an alternative to petroleum-derived diesel. Due to its high oxygen content, biodiesel typically burns more completely than petroleum diesel, and thus has lower emissions of hydrocarbons (HC), carbon monoxide (CO), and particulate matter (PM). However, biodiesel may increase or decrease nitrogen oxide (NOx) and carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions, depending on biodiesel feedstock, engine type, and test cycle. The purpose of this study was to compare emissions from 20% blends of biodiesel made from 4 feedstocks (soybean oil, canola oil, waste cooking oil, and animal fat) with emissions from ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD). Emissions of NOx and CO2 were made under real-world driving conditions using a Horiba On-Board Measurement System OBS-1300 on a highway route and arterial route; emissions of NOx, CO2, HC, CO, and PM were measured in a controlled setting using a chassis dynamometer with Urban Dynamometer Drive Schedule. Dynamometer test results showed statistically significant lower emissions of HC, CO, and PM from all B20 blends compared to ULSD. For CO2, both on-road testing (arterial, highway, and idling) and dynamometer testing showed no statistically significant difference in emissions among the B20 blends and ULSD. For NOx, dynamometer testing showed only B20 from soybean oil to have statistically significant higher emissions. This is generally consistent with the on-road testing, which showed no statistically significant difference in NOx emissions between ULSD and the B20 blends.
dc.language.isoen_USen_US
dc.publisherScientific Research Publishingen_US
dc.rightsAttribution 3.0 United States*
dc.rights.urihttp://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/*
dc.subjectAlternative Fuel -- Biodieselen_US
dc.subjectOn-Road Testing -- Emissionsen_US
dc.subjectPortable Emission Measurement System (PEMS)en_US
dc.subjectDynamometeren_US
dc.titleMeasurement of Emissions from a Passenger Truck Fueled with Biodiesel from Different Feedstocksen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.publisher.departmentDepartment of Civil Engineering, The University of Texas at Arlingtonen_US
dc.identifier.externalLinkDescriptionThe original publication is available at Article DOIen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.4236/jep.2013.48A1010


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail


This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record

Attribution 3.0 United States
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as Attribution 3.0 United States