diya‟uddeen basheer hasancrowa.khuisf.ac.ir/dorsapax/userfiles/file/pazhohesh/crowa91/4.pdfthe 1...

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,

mailto:[email protected]

The 1th




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




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




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




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




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




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




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




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]

diya‟uddeen basheer hasancrowa.khuisf.ac.ir/dorsapax/userfiles/file/pazhohesh/crowa91/4.pdfthe 1...

Documents