Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
Contents lists available at ScienceDirect
Energy Conversion and Management
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/enconman
Review
Production and comparison of fuel properties, engine performance,
and emission characteristics of biodiesel from various non-edible
vegetable oils: A review
A.M. Ashraful ⇑, H.H. Masjuki, M.A. Kalam, I.M. Rizwanul Fattah, S. Imtenan, S.A. Shahir, H.M. Mobarak
Centre for Energy Sciences, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Faculty of Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
a r t i c l e
i n f o
Article history:
Received 28 October 2013
Accepted 21 January 2014
Available online 13 February 2014
Keywords:
Biodiesel
Non-edible oils
Fuel properties
Performance
Emission
Renewable energy
a b s t r a c t
Energy demand is increasing dramatically because of the fast industrial development, rising population,
expanding urbanization, and economic growth in the world. To fulfill this energy demand, a large amount
of fuel is widely used from different fossil resources. Burning of fossil fuels has caused serious detrimental
environmental consequences. The application of biodiesel has shown a positive impact in resolving these
issues. Edible vegetable oils are one of the potential feedstocks for biodiesel production. However, as the
use of edible oils will jeopardize food supplies and biodiversity, non-edible vegetable oils, also known as
second-generation feedstocks, are considered potential substitutes of edible food crops for biodiesel production. This paper introduces some species of non-edible vegetables whose oils are potential sources of
biodiesel. These species are Pongamia pinnata (karanja), Calophyllum inophyllum (Polanga), Maduca indica
(mahua), Hevea brasiliensis (rubber seed), Cotton seed, Simmondsia chinesnsis (Jojoba), Nicotianna tabacum
(tobacco), Azadirachta indica (Neem), Linum usitatissimum (Linseed) and Jatropha curcas (Jatropha). Various aspects of non-edible feedstocks, such as biology, distribution, and chemistry, the biodiesel’s physicochemical properties, and its effect on engine performance and emission, are reviewed based on
published articles. From the review, fuel properties are found to considerably vary depending on feedstocks. Analysis of the performance results revealed that most of the biodiesel generally give higher brake
thermal efficiency and lower brake-specific fuel consumption. Emission results showed that in most
cases, NOx emission is increased, and HC, CO, and PM emissions are decreases. It was reported that a diesel engine could be successfully run and could give excellent performance and the study revealed the
most effective regulated emissions on the application of karanja, mahua, rubber seed, and tobacco biodiesel and their blends as fuel in a CI engine.
Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Contents
1.
2.
Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.1.
Current energy scenario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Resources of non-edible vegetable oils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.
Biology, distribution, and chemistry of the selected non-edible sources. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.1.
Karanja . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.2.
Polanga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.3.
Mahua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.4.
Rubber seed oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.5.
Cotton seed oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.6.
Jojoba oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.7.
Tobacco oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.8.
Neem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
⇑ Corresponding author. Tel.: +60 1 02577943; fax: +60 3 79675317.
E-mail address: alam.ashraful31@gmail.com (A.M. Ashraful).
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.enconman.2014.01.037
0196-8904/Ó 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
203
203
205
205
205
205
205
205
205
206
206
206
203
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
2.1.9.
Linseed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.1.10.
Jatropha. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fuel properties of various non-edible biodiesels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.1.
Density . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.2.
Kinematic viscosity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.3.
Flash point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.4.
Cloud point and pour point . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.5.
Cetane number (CN) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.6.
Calorific value . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Fatty acid composition of various non-edible oils . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Engine performance of a diesel engine using non-edible vegetable biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.1.
Karanja biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.2.
Polanga biodiesel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.3.
Mahua biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.4.
Rubber seed biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.5.
Cotton seed biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.6.
Jojoba oil biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.7.
Tobacco oil biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.8.
Neem biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.9.
Linseed oil biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.10.
Jatropha biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Engine emission performance when non-edible vegetable biodiesel is used in a diesel engine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.1.
Karanja biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.2.
Polanga biodiesel. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.3.
Mohua biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.4.
Rubber seed oil biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.5.
Cotton seed biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.6.
Jojoba oil biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.7.
Tobacco oil biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.8.
Neem biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.9.
Linseed oil biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.10.
Jatropha biodiesel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Conclusion and summary of results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Acknowledgments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
Reference . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
206
207
207
207
207
207
207
207
208
208
208
208
210
210
210
213
213
213
214
214
214
216
216
216
216
218
218
220
220
220
225
225
225
225
226
226
1. Introduction
Since the industrial revolution, different forms of energy have
become essential for human beings to maintain a standard of living
and to conserve economic growth. In the past few decades, fossil
fuels, mainly petroleum-based liquid fuels, natural gas and coal,
have played an important role in fulfilling this energy demand.
However, because of their non-renewable nature, these fossil fuels
are projected to be exhausted in the near future. This situation has
worsened with the rapid increase in energy demand with significant worldwide population growth. Therefore, the demand for
clean, reliable, and yet economically feasible renewable energy
sources has led researchers to search for new sources. In this context, biodiesel derived from vegetable oil has drawn attention as a
potential alternative for diesel fuel for diesel engines.
1.1. Current energy scenario
Gobal energy demand is increasing dramatically because of rising population. In 1980, fuel consumption was 6630 million tons of
oil equivalents (Mtoe). It almost doubled in 2012 at 12,239 Mtoe,
as shown in Table 1 [1]. According to the International Energy
Agency estimation, global energy demand is expected to increase
by 53% by 2030. Currently, a major part of energy demand
(88.6%) is fulfilled by fossil fuels, in which crude oil accounts for
33.7%, coal for 30.5%, and natural gas for 24.4% [2]. Conversely, nuclear energy and hydroelectric energy contribute only small proportions at 4.6% and 6.8%, respectively. Over the past 25 years,
total energy supply has increased steadily. However, with the cur-
Table 1
World primary energy consumption and percentage of share [1].
Source
Petroleum
Coal
Natural gas
Nuclear
Hydropower
Total
1980
2012
Mtoe
Share (%)
Mtoe
Share (%)
2979.8
1807.9
1296.8
161
384.3
6629.8
44.9
27.3
19.6
2.4
5.8
100
4130.5
3730.1
2987.1
560.4
831.1
12239.2
33.7
30.5
24.4
4.6
6.8
100
rent consumption rates, the reserves of crude oil and natural gas
will diminish after approximately 41.8 and 60.3 years, respectively.
The total primary fuel consumption was estimated to reach
approximately 12,239 Mtoe in 2012; the estimate is 70% higher
than that in 1987, as shown in Fig. 1 [1]. Globally, we consume
the equivalent of more than 11 billion tons of oil in fossil fuel every
year. Crude oil reserves are vanishing at a rate of 4 billion tons a
year. If this rate continues, oil deposits will be exhausted by
2052 [3]. However, if increased gas production can fills up the energy gap left by oil, then those reserves will give an additional
backup of eight years until 2060. The world has enough coal reserve to a last century, but production is necessary to fill the gap
caused by depleting oil and gas reserves. Coal deposits will give
us enough energy to last as long as 2088. Moreover, the rate of energy consumption in the world is not steady, as it increases dramatically with the increase in global population and living
204
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
Fig. 1. World’s primary energy consumption [1].
standards. Therefore, fossil fuel stock will run out in the near future. Fig. 2 shows the global energy reserves for coal, gas, and oil
and marks the point at which fossil fuel could run out in the future.
Consequently, the world is moving toward an energy crisis,
driving the world to look for alternatives [4–6]. Many renewable
energy sources have drawn the attention of researchers. Among
these sources, biodiesel is the most popular choice. Biodiesel is derived from renewable resources that can be produced by a simple
chemical process using edible, non-edible, waste vegetable oils and
animal fats. Biodiesel is usable in diesel engines in pure form or by
blending it with petroleum diesel. Biodiesel is environment
friendly and non-toxic, and it emits lesser pollutants [7–9]. Many
potential feedstocks are available for biodiesel production. Currently, more than 95% of biodiesel produced globally is from edible
vegetable oil because of its abundant agricultural production [10].
The various types of edible vegetable oils and biodiesel as substitutes for conventional fuels are considered in many countries
depending on the climate condition. For instance, palm oil in
Southeast Asia, soybean oil in the United States, coconut oil in
the Philippines, and rapeseed and sunflower in Europe are being
Fig. 2. World’s energy reserves for coal, gas, and oil [3].
produced [4]. Although biodiesel produced from edible vegetable
oil has many advantages, it also has disadvantages, such as inferior
storage and oxidation stability, high feedstock cost, low heating value and higher NOx emission compared with diesel fuel. Moreover,
60–80% of biodiesel production cost depends on feedstock cost
[11,12]. The use of edible oils for biodiesel production may lead
to a self-sufficiency problem in vegetable production. The use of
non-edible vegetable oils is significant because edible oil is necessary as food. The demand for both food and biofuel has increased
rapidly because of population growth.
To minimize the reliance on edible vegetable oil feedstocks for
biodiesel production, alternative sources, such as non-edible feedstocks, have been sought for biodiesel production. The use of nonedible vegetable oils compared with edible vegetable oils is significant in developing countries because of the tremendous demand
for edible vegetable oils as food; these edible vegetables oils are
expensive for biodiesel production [13]. Globally, a huge amount
of non-edible vegetable oil plants is naturally available [14]. Energy crops such as Jatropha curcas, Maduca indica, Pongamia pinnata, Simmondsia chinesnsis, Linum usitatissimum, Nicotianna tabacum,
Calophyllum inophyllum, Hevea brasiliensis, Corton megalocarpus,
Carmellia, Simarouba glauca, Desert date, Alagae, Sapindus mukorossi
etc. represent second-generation biodiesel feedstocks. Biodiesel
production from non-edible feedstock-based oils has been extensively investigated over the past few years. Non-edible vegetable
oil is not suitable for human consumption because of the presence
of toxic components in these feedstocks. Furthermore, non-edible
vegetable oil crops are grown in wastelands, and their cultivation
cost is much lower than that of edible vegetable oil crops because
intensive care is not required to sustain a reasonably high yield
[15]. As wastelands are not suitable for edible crop cultivation, this
review focuses on biodiesel produced only from non-edible vegetable oils as alternative fuel.
Reviewing the existing reviews on the selection of non-edible
oils for possible alternative diesel fuel is essential. M. Balat [16] reviewed potential alternatives to edible oils for biodiesel production
and selected five sources of non-edible vegetable oils. These
sources are jatropha, karanja, rice bran oil, microalgae, mahua,
and selected waste cooking oil and animal fats.
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
In a review of oil production, vegetable oils, and their methyl
ester characterization as alternatives to diesel fuel [7], four nonedible vegetable oils, namely, jatropha, karanja, polanga, and rubber seed oils, were suggested as sources for biodiesel production.
Silitonga et al. [17] recently reviewed the general properties of
biodiesel blend from edible and inedible feedstocks, such as palm
oil, Alurietas mollucana, Jatropha curcas, Sterculiafoetida, Calophyllu
inophyllum, Ceiba pentandra, Cerbere manghas, Pangium edule and
Hevea brasilinensis, as potential alternatives to diesel fuel. They recommended that these fuel meet the biodiesel standards of US
ASTM D 6751 and European EN 14214. Moreover, they found that
jatropha and karanja vegetable oils are suitable for used in cold climate conditions compared with other vegetable oils.
In a critical review of biodiesels, Balat et al. [18] found that
more than 350 oilseed crops have been indentified. They argued
that edible oils such as rapeseed, soybean, sunflower, peanut, and
safflower are potential alternative sources of diesel fuel for diesel
engines. They also recommended other non-edible vegetable oils
such as jatropha, tobacco, karanja, rice bran, rubber seed, and mahua. However, only jatropha, karanja, and mahua oils were briefly
explained in this review on the progress in biodiesel processing.
A recent review discussed the sources of non-edible vegetable
oils, as well as their production and characterization, as sustainable
petroleum diesel fuel [19] and the performance of non-edible oils
as sources of fuel. Moreover, 15 oilseed crops were recommended
as sources of biodiesel in India.
Non-edible vegetable oils have high potential for biodiesel production. Olivera et al. [15] identified nine vegetable oils and examined their fuel properties and biodiesel production methods. They
found that biodiesel production using jatropha, karanja, mahua,
and castor oil is commonly used in biodiesel synthesis.
Based on the review works considered in this study, several
trees that are naturally available can be exploited for the production of sustainable fuel for petrodiesel engine. The raw materials
of the biofuel being exploited commercially and scientifically by
several researchers are the non-edible oils derived from jatropha,
mahua, karanja, rubber seed, linseed, neem, tobacco seed, polanga,
cotton seed, castor, jojoba, moringa, poon, desert date, crambe,
mango and so forth [6,8,9,20]. The selection of non-edible oils as
possible fuel for use in a diesel engine is based on the literature.
Some of the non-edible vegetable oils that are promising substitutes for petroleum diesel and the acceptable non-edible biodiesel
feedstocks for biodiesel production include karanja, polanga, mahua, rubber seed, cotton seed, Simmondsia chinensis (jojoba), tobacco, neem, linseed, Jatropha carcus, and so on [20–25]. The objective
of this paper is to present the various sources of non-edible oils
that can replace edible oils and fossil fuels for biodiesel production
as well as their fuel properties. This study also compares their
physicochemical properties, engine performance, and emission
characteristics in a diesel engine through a review and discussion.
2. Resources of non-edible vegetable oils
Non-edible oils have several advantages over edible oils. Nonedible oils possess toxic components that make them unsuitable
[26]. The use of non-edible oils for biodiesel production solves
the food-versus-fuel concern and other issues [27]. Moreover,
unproductive lands, degraded forests, cultivators’ fallow lands, irrigation canals, and boundaries of roads and fields can be used for
the plantation of non-edible oil crops. Biodiesel development from
non-edible oil can become a major poverty alleviation program for
the rural poor apart from providing energy security for the masses.
This development can upgrade the rural non-farm sector and help
in the sustainable biodiesel production. Many researchers have
recommended non-edible oils to be a sustainable alternative to
205
edible oils for biodiesel production [6,28–31]. Researchers have
identified several non-edible crops that can be used for biodiesel
production [28,32]. Fig. 3 shows the various non-edible vegetable
oil feedstocks for biodiesel.
2.1. Biology, distribution, and chemistry of the selected non-edible
sources
2.1.1. Karanja
Karanja is a medium-sized green tree from the legumnosae family. It grows approximately 15–25 m in height. Flowering starts
three to four years after plantation, and it matures four to seven
years after. Recently, karanja has been recognized as an invaluable
source of oil. A single tree is said to yield 9–90 kg of seeds. Several
researchers have discovered the large variability of oil content in
karanja seed oil. The seed contains approximately 25–40 wt.% oil
[16,36–38]. Karanja mainly grows in Southeast Asia and has been
successfully introduced in humid tropical regions of the world
and part of China, the United States, and Australia [39,40]. Karanja
oil mainly contains oleic acid (44.5–71.3%), followed by linoleic
(10.8–18.3%) and stearic acids (2.4–8.9%) [41–43].
2.1.2. Polanga
Polanga is a large- or medium-sized green tree that grows in
deep soil or on exposed sea sand. It belongs to the Clusiaceae family. The rainfall requirement of polanga seed plantation is 750 mm/
year to 5000 mm/year. The tree has multiple origins, such as
Southeast Asia, India, East Africa, and Australia [36,39,44,24,45].
Its growth rate is 1 m in height, and it yields approximately 100
fruits/kg to 200 fruits/kg. Oil yield per unit area is approximately
2000 kg/ha (cite). The seed has a high oil content of 65–75 wt.%.
The oil is thick and nutty smelling [5,44,24,45,46], and it contains
mainly unsaturated fatty acids, that is, approximately 34.09–
37.57% oleic acid and 26.33–38.26% linoleic acid. Saturated acids,
such as stearic (12.95–19.96%) and palmitic (12.01–14.6%) acids,
can also be found in this oil [47,48].
2.1.3. Mahua
Mahua is a large-sized evergreen or semi-evergreen tree from
the Sapotaceae family. Mahua is a forest-based tree largely produced in India [4,16,49,50]. It is cultivated in warm and humid regions for its oleaginous seeds (producing 20–200 kg of seeds
annually per tree, depending on maturity), flowers, and wood. Mahua oil fat (solid at ambient temperature) has been used in skin
care and in manufacturing soap or detergents. The mahua tree
starts producing seeds 10 years after plantation and continues to
do so up to 60 years. Tree growth is approximately 20 m in height,
and its seed has an oil content of 35–50 wt.% [16,24,50,51]. Mahua
oil contains approximately 41–51% oleic acid. Other fatty acids are
also present in the oil, such as stearic (20.0–25.1%), palmitic (16.0–
28.2%), and linoleic acids (8.9–18.3%) [52–54].
2.1.4. Rubber seed oil
Rubber seed oil comes from the Euphorbiaceae family. This tree
originates from Brazil. It is a forest-based tree largely produced in
Malaysia, India, Thailand, and Indonesia. In the wild, plant height
can reach up to 34 m [55]. The tree requires heavy rainfall and
non-frost climate condition. Rubber seed contains 50–60 wt.% oil,
and its kernel contains 40–50 wt.% of brown oil [4,39,24,56]. Rubber seed oil is high in unsaturated constituents, such as 39.6–40.5%
linoleic acid, 17–24.6% oleic acid, and 16.3–26% linolenic acid
[55,57].
2.1.5. Cotton seed oil
Cotton seed oil is extracted from the seeds of the cotton plant of
various species, mainly Gossypium hirsutum and Gossypium herba-
206
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
pongamia pinnata (karanja)
calophyllum inophyllum (polanga)
madhuca indica (mahua)
hevea brasiliensis (rubberseed)
cotton seed
simmondsia chinensis (jojoba)
nicotiana tabacum (tobacco)
azadirachata indica (neem)
Linseed
Jatropha
Fig. 3. Various non-edible vegetable oil feedstocks for biodiesel [24,33–35].
ceum, which are grown for cotton fiber. Cotton plant grows mainly
in China, the United States, and Europe. Crude cotton seed oil contains several types of non-glyceride materials, such as gossypol,
phospholipids, sterols, resins, carbohydrates, and related pigments.
Cotton seed oil has a density that ranges from 0.917 g/cm3 to
0.933 g/cm3. The seed contains 17–25 wt.% oil. The fatty acid composition of cotton seed oil is mainly linoleic (55.2–55.5%), palmitic
(11.67–20.1%), and oleic acids (19.2–23.26%) [58–60].
2.1.6. Jojoba oil
Jojoba is native to the Mojave and Sonoran deserts of California,
Arizona, and Mexico. The jojoba tree is from the Simmondsiaceae
family. Jojoba has been grown commercially for its oil, a liquid
wax ester, extracted from the seed. The plant has been used to
combat and prevent desertification in some parts of India. The jojoba tree grows to a height of 1–2 m, and it has a broad and dense
crown. The leaves are oval in shape, approximately 2–4 cm long
and 1.5–3 cm broad; they are thick, waxy glaucous grayish green
[61,62]. The seed contains approximately 40–50 wt.% oil [63] with
a fatty acid composition of 43.5–66% oleic acid and 25.2–34.4% linoleic acid [24,63,64].
2.1.7. Tobacco oil
Tobacco belongs to the Solanaceae family, and it is cultivated in
several countries worldwide, such as Turkey, Macedonia, North
America, South America, India and Russia [37,65,66]. The tree is
commonly grown for leaf collection. The physical and chemical
properties of tobacco oil are comparable with those of other vegetable oils, and tobacco is considered a new potential feedstock for
biodiesel production [66–68]. The seed contains approximately
35–49 wt.% oil with fatty acid composition of 69.49–75.58% of linoleic acid [67,69].
2.1.8. Neem
Neem is a medium-sized evergreen tree from the Meliaceae
family. The tree grows 12–18 m in height. The neem tree can grow
in all kinds of soil, including saline, clay, dry, shallow, alkaline, and
stony soils, and even in highly calcareous soil. Neem grows in several Asian countries, such as Sri Lanka, Pakistan, India, Bangladesh,
Japan, Malaysia, Indonesia, and Burma, and in the tropical regions
of Australia. Normally, neem thrives in areas with sub-arid to subhumid conditions and with an annual rainfall of 400–1200 mm. It
reaches a maximum productivity of 15 years after plantation, with
a life span of approximately 150–200 years. Neem seed contains
20–30 wt.% oil, and its kernels contain 40–50% brown oil
[24,36,39,70]. Neem oil has high-unsaturated constituents, such
as linoleic acid (6–16%) and oleic (25–54%) acid, and saturated oil
like stearic acid (9–24%) [71,72].
2.1.9. Linseed
Linseed is an herbaceous annual-type plant that grows in countries such as India, Canada, Argentina, and some parts of Europe.
Linseed contains 35–45 wt.% oil and is high in unsaturated constituents, such as linoleic (13.29–14.93%), oleic (20.17–24.05%), and
linolenic acids (46.10–51.12%). Other fatty acids found in linseed
oil include saturated species such as stearic (5.47–5.63%) and palmitic (5.85–6.21%) acids [73,74].
207
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
2.1.10. Jatropha
Jatropha is a small tree from the Euphorbiaceae family, and it
grows 5–7 m in height [23,28,30,75–77]. Jatropha thrives in
arid, semi-arid, and tropical areas with an annual rainfall of
1000–1500 mm. The jatropha plant is native to the United States,
Brazil, Bolivia, Argentina, Mexico, Africa, Paraguay, and India
[23,28,36,24,78]. The jatropha seed contains 20–60 wt.% oil.
Jatropha produces seeds after 12 months of plantation, reaches
maximum productivity by 5 years, and can live for 30 years to
50 years [29]. Jatropha oil contains mainly unsaturated constituents, such as linoleic (31.4–43.2%) and oleic acids (34.3–44.7%),
and some unsaturated species, such as stearic (7.1–7.4%) and
palmitic acids (13.6–15.1%) [79,80].
of fuel has been proved to decrease with the increase in temperature. Kinematic viscosity is determined using the ASTM D445 and
EN ISO 3104 test methods [91]. Table 2 shows that some non-edible biodiesels, such as jojoba, neem, and linseed, have high viscosity that ranges from 19.2 mm2/s to 25.4 mm2/s, 20.5 mm2/s to
48.5 mm2/s, and 16.2 mm2/s to 36.6 mm2/s, respectively, which
are higher than that of diesel fuel [86–89,92]. However, the viscosity of jatropha, tobacco, and mohua biodiesels ranges from
3.7 mm2/s to 5.8 mm2/s, 3.5 mm2/s to 4.23 mm2/s, and 3.98 mm2/
s to 5.8 mm2/s, respectively, which are close to that of diesel at
2.5–5.7 mm2/s [66,68,93–96]. Therefore, these biodiesels can give
better atomization and provide improved combustion than others.
3.3. Flash point
3. Fuel properties of various non-edible biodiesels
Density, viscosity, flash point, cetane number, cloud and pour
point, and calorific value, among others are the most important
fuel properties considered in the application of non-edible biodiesels in diesel engines. Many researchers have reported that fuel
properties of non-edible biodiesels vary depending on their fatty
acid and chemical composition [51,69,81–83]. Therefore, before
using non-edible-based biodiesels in diesel engines, measuring
the fuel properties of selected biodiesels is necessary. The fuel
properties of biodiesels are specified by different standardization
organizations; the ASTM D6751 and EN14214 are the most popular
standards for biodiesel. Fuel properties of various non-edible biodiesels are shown in Table 2. The following section discusses the
fuel properties of the reviewed biodiesels.
Flash point is the most important property that must be considered in assessing the overall flammability hazard of a material. At
this temperature, vapor stops burning if the source of ignition is removed. Each biodiesel has its own flash point. Many factors affect
the change in biodiesel flash point, with residual alcohol content
being one of them [97]. Moreover, flash point is influenced by
the chemical compositions of the biodiesel, including the number
of double bonds, number of carbon atoms, and so on. [98]. The flash
point of biodiesel is measured using the ASTM D93 and EN ISO
3697 test methods [85]. Table 2 shows that biodiesel has a higher
flash point than diesel fuel. The ASTM D6751 standard recommends a minimum flash point of 130 °C for biodiesel, as clearly
illustrated in Table 2. With the exception of neem, linseed, and jojoba, all biodiesels meet the ASTM specification.
3.1. Density
3.4. Cloud point and pour point
The molecular weight of biodiesel is one of the factors that contribute in the increase in biodiesel density [84]. Biodiesel density is
measured using the ASTM standard D1298 and EN ISO 3675 test
method. According to these standards, density should be tested at
15 °C [85]. Table 2 shows that biodiesel density is usually higher
than that of ordinary diesel fuel. Neem biodiesel has the highest
density ranging from 912 kg/m3 to 965 kg/m3 [86,87], and jojoba
biodiesel has the lowest density ranging from 863 kg/m3 to
866 kg/m3 [88,89]. Diesel has a density range of 816–840 kg/m3
[90].
Biodiesel has higher cloud and pour points than conventional
diesel fuel [99,100]. Cloud and pour points are measured using
the ASTM D2500 and D97 test methods, respectively. Table 2 illustrates that linseed and cotton seed biodiesels have the lowest cloud
point of 1.7 °C, whereas jojoba oil has the highest cloud point range
of 6–16 °C. On the contrary, cotton seed and linseed biodiesel have
the lowest pour point range of 10 °C to 15 °C and 4 °C to
18 °C, respectively, whereas mohua has the highest pour point
range of 1–6 °C.
3.5. Cetane number (CN)
3.2. Kinematic viscosity
Viscosity is the most important property of fuel that must be
considered to maintain engine performance that is close to diesel
operation. High viscosity causes poor flow of fuel in the engine
combustion chamber during intake stroke and takes a long time
to mix with air. Therefore, it results in delayed combustion. Viscosity
CN is the most important property of fuel that directly affects its
combustion quality. Ignition quality of fuel in a power diesel engine is measured by CN. Higher CN implies shorter ignition delay.
The CN of pure diesel fuel is lower than that of biodiesel [39,101].
The CN of biodiesel is higher because of its longer fatty acid carbon
chains and the presence of saturation in molecules. CN is based on
Table 2
Fuel properties of various non-edible biodiesel.
Vegetable oil
Density at
40 °C (kg/m3)
Viscosity at
40 °C (mm2/s)
Flash
point (°C)
Cloud
point (°C)
Pour
point (°C)
Cetane
number
Calorific value
(MJ/kg)
Refs.
Karanja (Pongamia pinnata L.)
Polanga (Calophyllum inophyllum)
Mohua (Madhuca indica)
Rubber Seed oil (Hevea brasiliensis)
Cotton seed
Jojoba oil (Simmondsia chinensis)
Tobacco oil (Nicotiana tabacum)
Neem (Azadirachta)
Linseed oil (Linum usitatissimum)
Jatropha (Jatropha curcas L.)
Diesel
876–890
888.6–910
904–916
860–881
874–911
863–866
860–888.5
912–965
865–950
864–880
816–840
4.37–9.60
4–5.34
3.98–5.8
5.81–5.96
4–4.9
19.2–25.4
3.5–4.23
20.5–48.5
16.2–36.6
3.7–5.8
2.5–5.7
163–187
151–170
127–129
130–140
210–243
61–75
152–165.4
34
108
163–238
50–98
13–15
13.2–14
3–5
4–5
1.7
6–16
–
–
1.7
–
10 to 5
3 to 5.1
4.3
1–6
8
10 to 15
6 to 6
12
–
4 to 18
5
20 to 5
52–58
57.3
51–52
37–49
41.2–59.5
63.5
49–51.6
51
28–35
46–55
45–55
36–38
39.25–41.3
39.4–39.91
36.5–41.07
39.5–40.1
42.76–47.38
38.43–39.81
33.7–39.5
37.7–39.8
38.5–42
42–45.9
[38,39,47,108,109]
[39,48,110]
[39,95,107,96,111]
[55,105,112,113]
[83,114,115]
[61,64,70,88,89]
[65,67,68]
[72,83,86,87]
[73,83,92]
[94,116]
[6,90,117]
0.045
5.85–6.21
0.3
5.47–5.63
20.17–24.05
13.29–14.93
46.10–51.12
0.2
0.3
35–45
0.2–0.26
16–33
0.24
9–24
25–54
6–16
0.56
1.04
0.3
20–30
–
3–16
–
0.5–6.5
43.5–66
25.2–34.4
0
_
–
40–50
–
3.7–7.9
–
2.4–8.9
44.5–71.3
10.8–18.3
–
2.2–4.1
4.2–5.3
25–40
Tetradecanoic acid
Hexadecanoic acid
9-Hexadecanoic acid
Octadecenoic acid
9-Octadecenoic acid
9,12-Octadecenoic acid
6,9,12-Octadecenoic acid
Eicosanoic acid
Docosanoic acid
C14H28O2
C16H32O2
C16H30O2
C18H36O2
C18H34O2
C18H32O2
C18H32O2
C20H40O2
C22H44O2
Myristic acid (C14:0)
Palmitic acid (C16:0)
Palmitoleic acid (C16:1)
Stearic acid (C18:0)
Oleic acid (C18:1)
Linoleic acid (C18:2)
a-Linolenic acid (C18:3)
Arachidic acid (C20:0)
Behenic acid (C22:0)
Oil content (wt%)
0.09
12.01–14.6
2.5
12.95–19.96
34.09–37.57
26.33–38.26
0.27–0.3
0.94
–
65–75
–
16–28.2
–
20.0–25.1
41.0–51.0
8.9–18.3
14.74
0.0–3.3
–
35–50
2.2
8.7–10.6
–
8.0–12
17–24.6
39.6–40.5
16.3–26
–
–
50–60
0.7
11.67–20.1
–
2.6–3.15
19.2–23.26
55.2–55.5
0.6–6.31
–
–
17–25
0.09–0.17
8.46–10.96
0.2
2.64–3.34
11.24–14.54
69.49–75.58
0.69–4.20
0.25
0.12
35–49
Linseed oil
Neem
Tobacco oil
Jojoba oil
Cotton seed
Rubber
seed oil
Mohua
Polanga
Karanja
Systemic name
Chemical
formulae
Fatty acid (xx:y)
Table 3
Typical fatty acid composition of various non-edible vegetable oils (wt.%) [18,36,38,41,42,55,61,64,71,87,89,52,123–132].
1.4
13.6–15.1
–
7.1–7.4
34.3–44.7
31.4–43.2
–
0.2–0.3
–
20–60
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
Jatropha
208
two compounds, namely, hexadecane and heptamethyl nonane.
The CN of biodiesel is measured by the ASTM D613 and EN ISO
5165 test methods [85]. Table 2 shows that most biodiesel fuels
have higher CN than diesel fuel (45–55), except for rubber seed
and linseed biodiesels, which have low CN that is equal to 37–49
and 28–35, respectively [55]. Jatropha, mohua, neem, and tobacco
have CN close to that of diesel fuel. Jojoba, karanja, and polanga
usually have higher CN than other biodiesels; thus, they are more
superior.
3.6. Calorific value
Calorific value is the measure of heat energy content of a fuel.
Higher calorific value of fuel is desired because it releases higher
heat and consequently improves engine performance during combustion [102–104]. Biofuel usually has lower calorific value than
diesel fuel because of its higher oxygen content [105–107]. Table 2
shows that the calorific values of jojoba and jatropha are 42.76–
47.38 MJ/kg and 38.5–42 MJ/kg [93,94], respectively, which are
close to that of diesel at 42–45.9 MJ/kg. Jojoba biodiesel has the
highest calorific value of 47.38 MJ/kg among all reviewed biodiesels;
this value is also much higher than that of diesel fuel. Therefore, jojoba gives better engine performance than other biodiesel fuels.
4. Fatty acid composition of various non-edible oils
Fatty acid composition, such as the type and percentage, determines the fuel properties of biodiesel. It depends on the fatty acid
composition of the parent oil. Non-edible-based biodiesel mainly
contains C16 and C18 acids. However, some feedstocks have a significant amount of fatty acids other than C16 and C18 acids [118].
Palmitic acid (C16:0), stearic acid (C18:0), oleic acid (C18:1), linoleic acid (C18:2), and linolenic acid (C18:3) are the common fatty
acids in vegetable oils [119]. The quality of biodiesel and its fuel
properties highly depend on the presence of fatty acid composition
in the fuel blend. The presence of monounsaturated fatty acid in a
biodiesel blend at low temperature may improve ignition quality,
fuel flow properties, and fuel stability [39]. Several researchers
have found that biodiesel oxidation stability and fuel flow properties increase with the presence of capric acid [120,121]. However,
Sahoo et al. [122] reported that fuel CN, cloud point, and stability
increase with the presence of saturated fatty acid alkyl ester in fuel
blend. Biodiesel viscosity and freezing point increase with the increase in carbon chain length and decrease with the increase in
double bond chain. Table 3 shows the average fatty acid composition of the reviewed non-edible vegetable oils [121].
5. Engine performance of a diesel engine using non-edible
vegetable biodiesel
Availability and economic aspects are first considered when
selecting biodiesel. The characteristics of engine performance are
then considered, indicating the applicability of the biodiesel in engines. Brake power, brake torque, brake thermal efficiency (BTE),
and brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) are the performance
indicators. Factors such as air–fuel mixture, fuel injection pressure,
fuel spray pattern, and fuel properties affect performance. These
parameters are tested against engine load or engine speed in the
literature review [42,43,47]. Engine performance characteristics
of the reviewed biodiesel are discussed below.
5.1. Karanja biodiesel
Karanja gives higher BTE at higher load condition and higher
BSFC with the increase in blend ratio [42,95,133]. However, the
Table 4
Engine performance results using karanja (Pongamia pinnata L.) biodiesel compared with diesel fuel at different test condition.
Engine type
1- Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, RP:
7.5 kw, CR: 16:1, CI engine
1- Cylinder, 4S, RP: 3.75 kw, D:
553 cm3, CR: 16.5, DI, WC, CI
engine
1- Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, D:
553 cm3, RP: 4.476 kw, CR:
16.5:1, CI engine
4-Cylinder, DI, D: 3298 cm3,
CR: 17.5:1, RP: 70 kw, WC,
CI engine
1- Cylinder, DI, WC, 4S, CR:
17.5:1, RP: 3.5, CI engine
Result
Refs.
Power/torque
BTE
BSFC
Full/part throttle at different speeds
(1200 rpm, 1800 rpm and 2200 rpm)
and different blends (20%, 50% and
100%)
Constant speed (1500 rpm) and
different blends (5%, 10%, 20% and 30%)
Slightly reduction in the range of 0.44–
1.93% and 1.2–2.55% using 20% and 40%
biodiesel blend at higher speed engine
operation
–
–
Increases with increase of blend ratio and
decreases with increase engine speeds. For part
throttle experiment BSFC decrease with use higher
biodiesel blend
Slightly Higher (Min 0.313 kg/kw h) as compared
to diesel fuel
[47]
Different blends (10%, 20%, 50%, 75%)
and constant speed (1500 rpm) and
different load condition
Constant speed (1500 rpm), 20% blend
and different load condition
Different blends (5%, 10%, 15% and 20%)
and different load (0%, 20%, 40%, 60%,
80% and 100%), constant speed
(1500 rpm)
Different loads (10%, 25%, 50%, 75%, 85%
and 100%), different blends (20%, 40%,
60%, 80%) and constant speed 3000 rpm
Different loads (33.3%, 66.6% and 100%),
different blends (20%, 40%, 60% and
80%) and constant speed 1500 rpm
Different blends (10%, 25%, 50% and
100%) and constant speed (1200 rpm)
–
Improve (0–25%) compared with
diesel fuel and use without preheating
biodiesel blends
BTE is higher in all loads condition
Improve use preheated lower biodiesel blend up to
50%
[42]
Decreases with the increases engine load
[133]
Slightly Improve at lower loads and
reduce at higher loads condition as
compared to neat petroleum based
diesel fuel
Increase with increases engine load
Slightly increases as all blends compared with neat
petro-diesel
[43]
0.8–7.4% lower at 20% and 40% blend, and higher
with higher percentage of blend ratio
[109]
Slightly decrease with uses higher
percentage of biodiesel bland ratio
Increase with up to 40% bland ratio used in diesel
engine
[135]
–
Almost unchanged compared with
diesel fuel
–
[136]
Constant speed, different loads and
blend (B100, B90M10)
–
Increase 4.2% at high load condition
–
[137]
Constant speed (1500 rpm) and
different load condition
–
Increase significantly at higher load
condition
Decrease 12% at higher load condition compared
with other biodiesel blend, but increase 14.7%
compared with diesel fuel
[134]
At similar performance compared with
diesel fuel
–
Engine power increases on average 6% up
to biodiesel blend used 40% and increases
with decreases blend ratio
–
Reduce 5.72% as compared with diesel
fuel
[41]
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
3-Cylinder, AVL make CI
engine, D: 3.44 l, CR: 18.1,
WC, RS: 2200 rpm, P:
44.1 kw
2-Cylinder, 4S, petter Kirloskar
CI engine, RP: 10HP, RS:
1500 rpm, DI, WC, CR:
16.5:1,RP: 7.5 kw
1-Cylinder,AV-1, 4S, CS, WC, DI,
CI engine, RP: 3.67 kw, D:
552.92 cm3, CR:17.5
1- cylinder, 4S, RP: 5.9 kw, CR:
17.5, CI engine
1- Cylinder, 4S, DI, RP: 6 kw,
WC, CI engine
Test condition
Engine codes: S = stock; DI = direct injection; AC = air cooled; WC = water cooled; IC = intercooled; TC = turbocharger; CI = compression ignition; CR = compression ratio; RP: rated power; D: displacement; RS: rated speed; EGR:
exhaust gas recirculation.
Performance analysis codes: BTE: Brake thermal efficiency; BSFC: Brake specific fuel consumption; BSEC: Brake specific energy consumption.
Emission analysis codes: CO: Carbon monoxide; HC: Hydrocarbon; NOx: Nitrogen oxide; BSU: Bosch smoke unit.
209
0.1% Increase with
increase of blend
ratio
Increase with
addition additives in
the biodiesel fuel
blend
Slightly increase compared with diesel fuel
–
1- Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, CI
engine
Most experiments show that BSFC is higher when rubber seed
biodiesel is used in a diesel engine. However, higher BTE and brake
power were observed with increased percentage of biodiesel in
fuel blend and with engine load [106,141]. Table 7 shows the engine performance when rubber seed biodiesel is used in different
test conditions. BTE increases at about 1.14–1.33% in a full load
condition. The following conclusions can be made from the analysis of the different experimental results:
Full/part throttle at different speeds
(1200 rpm, 1400 rpm and 2200 rpm)
and different blends (20%, 50% and
100%)
Different loads (0%, 20%, 40%, 60%, 80%
and 100%) and different blends (20%,
40%, 60%, 80% and 100%)
Different blends (B10, B20, B30 and B40)
and constant speed (1500 rpm)
5.4. Rubber seed biodiesel
3 Cylinder, AVL make CI
engine, D: 3.44 l, CR:
18.1, WC, RS: 2200 rpm,
P: 44.1 kw
1-Cylinder, 4 S, WC, DI
A 20% biodiesel blend gives about 1–32.5% higher BTE at higher
engine load condition than any other blend.
BTE is reduced with the presence of a higher percentage of biodiesel in the fuel blend.
BSFC increases by 4.1% with the increased proportion of biodiesel in the fuel blend.
Result
Mahua biodiesel gives poor results in terms of engine performance. Most researchers found that it has high BSFC and low
BTE [96,107,111,138]. However, some test conditions gave higher
thermal efficiency [53,54,139]. Different experimental results
using mahua biodiesel in different test conditions are shown in Table 6. The following conclusions can be made by analyzing the different experimental observations:
Test condition
5.3. Mahua biodiesel
Engine
Engine power is slightly reduced when a lower biodiesel fuel
blend is used but increases when a medium percentage of biodiesel fuel blend is used.
BTE increases with the use of higher biodiesel blend and added
additives in the fuel.
Lower BSFC is observed when the biodiesel blend has added
additives and when the engine is operated at high speed.
Table 5
Different experimental engine performance results using polanga (Calophyllum inophyllum) biodiesel compared with diesel fuel.
Polanga biodiesel usually gives high power output, high BTE,
and low BSFC when used in a diesel engine [44]. However, some
researchers obtained the opposite trend [47]. Table 5 presents
the engine performance parameters using polanga biodiesel in a
diesel engine. The following conclusions can be made by analyzing
the results:
[48]
Increases with increase of blend ratio and
decreases with increase engine speeds. For part
throttle test BSFC decrease with more than 20%,
blend
Reduce with using higher biodiesel blend ratio and
engine speeds
–
Slight reduction in power 1.93% using 20% biodiesel blend but
improve 0.19–0.88% using 50% biodiesel blend compared with
diesel fuel during the entire range of engine operation
5.2. Polanga biodiesel
Decreases with added additives in the fuel blend
BSFC
BTE
Engine power increases by about 6% with the presence of higher
biodiesel percentage in fuel blend.
Higher engine speed and lower biodiesel concentration give
higher engine power.
BTE increases with higher engine load and decreases when a
lower percentage of biodiesel is used in the fuel blend.
BSFC decreases about 0.8% with used lower biodiesel blend ratio
and higher engine speed.
BSFC decreases significantly when pre-heated biodiesel fuel
blends are used.
[47]
Refs.
opposite trend was observed by some researchers [47,109]. Srivastava et al. [41] experimented different karanja biodiesel blends
using a two-cylinder CI engine. They concluded that pure biodiesel
gives lower BTE than diesel fuel, but biodiesel blend gives higher
BTE than pure biodiesel. Jindal et al. [134] found that karanja
biodiesel blend gives better BTE and BSFC than other biodiesels.
Table 4 shows different experimental results of engine performance
using karanja biodiesel. The following conclusions were drawn
based on the result analysis:
[44]
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
Power/torque
210
Table 6
Different experimental engine performance results using mahua (Madhuca indica) biodiesel compared with diesel fuel.
Engine type
3-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, D:
2826 cm3, CR: 17:1
Result
Refs.
Power/
torque
BTE
BSFC
Different blends (B20, B40, B60 and B80), different loads (25%,
50%, 75% and 100%) and constant speed (1500 rpm)
Different blends (10, 20 and 30%), different loads and constant
speed (1500 rpm)
Different loads, different blends (B20, B40, B60) and constant
speed (1500 rpm)
Constant speed (1500 rpm)
–
Increase 1% with using 20% biodiesel blend and
Decrease 10.1% with used 100% biodiesel
Increased 0–30% with increased of biodiesel
percentage in the fuel blend
Increased 32.5% using 20% biodiesel blend
compared with diesel fuel
13% Lower than that of diesel fuel
Increased min 4.1% with the increased
proportion of biodiesel in the blends
–
[96]
Increase with increase in the proportion of
biodiesel in the fuel blends and engine loads
20% Higher than the ordinary diesel fuel
[111]
Constant speed (1500 rpm)
–
–
Increase about 6% and 14% compared with diesel
fuel
Higher compared to diesel fuel
[54]
Constant speed (1500 rpm)
Gradually increase 26.42%-28.307% for both ester
used compared to diesel fuel
1.95% higher than that of diesel fuel
Blend (B20), constant speed (1500 rpm), and steady state
condition
Different loads, different blends (B10, B20, B40, B60, B80) and
constant speed (1500 rpm)
–
20% biodiesel blend gave higher efficiency than
diesel fuel at higher load condition
Decrease with increase of blend ratio. Maximum
efficiency obtained at use B20 bland
–
[139]
Increase with increase biodiesel blend ratio
compare with diesel
[138]
–
_
–
–
[53]
[107]
[140]
Table 7
Different experimental engine performance results using rubber seed oil (Hevea brasiliensis) biodiesel compared with diesel fuel.
Engine type
Test condition
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, RP: 5.5 kw, WC,
CI engine, RS: 1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, RP: 5.5 kw, WC,
CI engine, RS: 1500 rpm
Different loads, different blends (B20, B40, B60, B80 and B100)
and constant speed (1500 rpm)
Different loads, different blends (B10, B20, B50, B75 and B100)
and constant speed (1500 rpm)
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, RP: 4.4 kw, CR:
17.5:1, D: 661.5 cm3, RS:
1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, DI, 4S, RP: 5.5 kw, CI
engine, WC, RS: 1500 rpm
1-cylinder, AC, CR: 17.5:1, 4S, DI, CI
engine, RP: 4.4 kw, RS:
1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, WC, 4S, DI, RS:
1500 rpm, RP: 5.5 kw, CR:
16.5:1
Constant speed (1500 rpm) and different load (25%, 50% 75%,
100%), Duel fueling with hydrogen induction (25%, 50% and 75%)
Result
Refs.
Power/torque
BTE
BSFC
Increase with increase
of biodiesel blend ratio
Increased with the
increased in engine
load
–
Increase with the increase of biodiesel blend
ratio compared to diesel fuel
3% Increase using 20% biodiesel blend with
increase in engine loads
Higher compare with diesel
fuel
Increased 12% using 100%
biodiesel compared with diesel
fuel
–
Constant speed (1500 rpm)and different load condition
–
Using net RSO and Various diethyl ether with RSO (50 g/h,
100 g/h, 150 g/h, 200 g/h and 250 g/h) and full load condition
–
Reduce for incomplete combustion compared
with diesel fuel
3.4% Lower than that of diesel fuel using net RSO.
But improved at using RSO with DEE injection
Higher than that of diesel fuel
for duel fuel operation
–
Different loads and constant speed 1500 rpm
Less than that of diesel
fuel
4.95% Lower than that of diesel fuel at full load
condition
34.8% Higher than that of
diesel fuel at 70% load
condition
Increase about 1.33% and 1.14% at full load
condition with hydrogen induction using RSOME
[141]
[106]
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, CR: 18:1, P:
9 kw, CI engine
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, CI engine, RP:
4 kw
6- Cylinder, 4S, AC, D: 5.9 L, CR:
17.6:1, HP: 158, CI engine
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, CR: 16.5:1,
RP: 3.7 kw, D: 553 cm3
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, CR: 16.5:1,
RP: 3.7 kw, D: 553 cm3
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, CR: 16.5:1,
RP: 3.7 kw, D: 553 cm3
1- Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, HP: 7,
Test condition
[113]
[142]
[143]
[144]
211
212
Table 8
Different experimental engine performance results using cotton seed biodiesel compared with diesel fuel.
Engine type
Test condition
Result
Refs.
BTE
BSFC
1-Cylinder, WC, 4S, DI, CR: 19.8:1,
RS: 4500 rpm
6-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, D: 5958 ,
CR: 18:1, RP: 177 kw, RS:
2600 rpm
1-Clynder, 4S, DI, WC, CR: 17:1,
D: 770 cm3, RP: 8 HP, RS:
2000 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, D: 406 cm3,
RP: 10 HP, RS: 3600 rpm, CR:
18:1
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, NA, D:
553 cc, CR: 16.5:1, RP:
4.476 kw, RS: 1800 rpm
6-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, TC, D:
5958 cc, CR: 18:1, RP: 177 kw,
RS: 2600 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, CR: 18:1, NA,
RS: 3600 rpm,
Constant speed 2000 rpm, Different blends (10% and
20%) medium and high load condition
Different speeds (1200 and 1500 rpm), different
loads (20%, 40%, 60% and full load)
Same compared with diesel
fuel all load condition
_
Same compared with diesel fuel all
load condition
Similar compared with neat diesel fuel
Higher than that of diesel fuel at medium and
higher load condition
Little higher than that of diesel fuel with the
higher percentage of biodiesel in the blend
[114]
Full load and different speeds (900–1800 rpm)
Reduced about 3%
compared with diesel fuel
–
[115]
Different speeds (1250–2500 rpm) and different
blends (B5, B20, B50, B75 and B100)
Increase at higher engine
speed but less then diesel
fuel
–
–
SFC of methyl ester has lower compared with raw
oil fuel, Higher fuel consumption due to lower
energy contain
Lower at full load operation and 2000 rpm speed
for using 5% and 20% biodiesel blend
1-Cylinder, DI, 4S, AC, CR: 18:1, D:
395 cc, RS: 3600 rpm, RP:
6.25 kw
4-Cylinder, 4S, DI, NA, WC, CR:
16.8:1, RP: 51 kw, RS:
2400 rpm,
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, CR: 18:1,
RP: 6.25 kw, RS: 3600 rpm,
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, CR: 18:1,
RP: 6.25, RS: 3600 rpm
Full load and different speeds (2800–1300 rpm)
[147]
[145]
Increase with the increased in engine
torque, but decreased due to the
maximum torque
Same compared with diesel fuel at all
load condition
Decrease with increase in engine torque
[59]
Littlie higher than that of neat diesel fuel
[148]
Decrease compared with
diesel fuel at all operating
temperature
3–9% Lowers than that of
diesel fuel
Increase 6.34% at high operating
temperature
–
[149]
–
8–10% Higher than that of diesel fuel
[150]
Full load and different speeds (1200–2400 rpm)
Increase with the increased
of engine speed
Improved slightly both NA and TC
operation compared with diesel fuel
Slightly higher both NA and TC operation
compared with diesel fuel
[146]
Full load and different speeds (1700, 2000, 2300,
2600 and 3000 rpm)
Full load, varied injection pressure and constant
speed
2.2–2.3% Increased at full
load operating condition
3–6% Decreased than diesel
fuel at all injection pressure
Increased 6% at B20 and 3.5% at B40
biodiesel
_
Increased compared with diesel fuel
[151]
3–7% Increased compared with diesel fuel
[60]
Constant speed 850 rpm and different blends (B10,
B20, B30)
Different blends (B10, B20), different speeds
(1200 rpm and 1500 rpm) and different load
condition (20%, 40% and 60%)
Different speeds and preheated blend (30°, 60°, 90°,
120 °C)
–
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
Power/torque
[152]
[64]
8.2% and 9.8% lower at engine speed 1200
and 1600 rpm compared with diesel fuel
Decreased 8% with EGR and 14% increased
without EGR operation
Slightly higher compared with diesel
fuel with the increase of engine speed
Decreased 6% and 13% with EGR and
without EGR operation
Slightly higher than that of diesel
fuel with the increase of engine
speed
Increased 5% with EGR operation
2-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, D: 2266 cc,
CR: 16.4:1, RS: 1500 rpm, RP:
26HP
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, NA, CR: 17:1,
RP: 5.775 kw, RS: 1500 rpm
Various loads (no load, 1/3, 2/3 and full load),
different blends (B20, B40, B60) and different
speeds
Different speeds (1000–1900 rpm) and full load
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, CR: 17:1, RP:
5.775 kw, RS: 1500 rpm
Different speeds and injection timing of 24 CAD
BTDC
[61]
Slightly increased with increased of
biodiesel percentage in fuel blend
–
Slightly decreased with increased of
biodiesel percentage in fuel blend
Test condition
Engine type
Table 9
Engine performance results using jojoba oil based biodiesel at different test condition.
Result
BSFC
Refs.
BTE
Power/torque
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
213
Engine power increases with the increased percentages of biodiesel in the fuel blend and higher engine speed condition.
A 20% biodiesel blend ratio and higher engine speed give higher
BTE.
Diethyl ether (DEE) injection with rubber seed oil-based biodiesel blend shows high peak pressure and gives high BTE.
BSFC increases with increased engine load and higher biodiesel
percentages in the fuel blend.
5.5. Cotton seed biodiesel
Cotton seed biodiesel gives poor engine performance results
compared with other biodiesel fuels. BSFC is high in most test conditions, along with lower brake power and BTE [115,145], but it
gives high thermal efficiency in some specific conditions [59,146].
Table 8 presents the engine performance results using cotton seed
biodiesel in different test conditions. The following conclusions
can be made by analyzing the different experimental results:
Engine power increases by about 2.2–2.3% in a full load operating condition.
Engine power decreases with the use of preheated biodiesel
blend and higher injection pressure.
BTE improves in both naturally aspirated and turbo-charged
operations, the increment of which is about 6.34% with fuels
at elevated temperature.
BTE increases by about 6% with low biodiesel present in the
blend and with high engine torque condition.
BSFC increases by about 3.7% with increased engine load and
high percentage of biodiesel present in the fuel blend.
BSFC decreases with the lower percentage of biodiesel present
in the fuel blend.
5.6. Jojoba oil biodiesel
Jojoba oil-based biodiesel can be considered a good alternative
fuel because of its give higher brake power using in diesel engine.
Moreover, its thermal efficiency and BSFC decrease at different
speeds and in a full load condition [64,152]. However, it gives higher BSFC in some specific conditions [61]. Different engine performance results using jojoba oil-based biodiesel in a diesel engine
are shown in Table 9. The following conclusions can be made from
the analysis of the different experimental results:
Engine power increases by 5% using jojoba oil methyl ester with
EGR operation.
Engine power slightly decreases when the fuel blend used has a
high percentage of biodiesel in the fuel blend.
BTE slightly increases in a full load condition and with high
engine speed but decreases by 6% with EGR operation.
BSFC decreases about 8% when jojoba oil methyl ester is used in
EGR operation and with high engine speed.
5.7. Tobacco oil biodiesel
Tobacco oil biodiesel has shown excellent results in terms of engine performance, with high brake power and BTE, and low BSFC
[66,68,153]. However, it gives high BSFC in some specific conditions [154,155]. Different engine performance results using tobacco oil-based biodiesel in a diesel engine are shown in Table 10. The
following outcomes can be concluded by analyzing the results:
Engine power increases by about 3.13% with high engine load
and low biodiesel percentage in the fuel blend.
At high engine speed and low biodiesel percentage, BTE
increases by 2.02%.
4-Cylinder, 4S, TC, WC, IDI, CR:
21.5:1, D: 1.753, RP: 55 kw, RS:
2200 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, NA, RS: 1500 rpm,
RP: 5 HP
1-Cylinder, 4S, NA, DI, RP: 14.7:1,
RS: 2500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, RP: 5.2 kw,
CR: 17.5:1
Constant speed 1500 rpm, different loads and
different blends (B2 and B5)
Full load and different speeds (1200, 1400, 1600,
1800, 2000, 2200 and 2400 rpm)
Different injection pressures (205, 220, 240 and
260 bar)
Increased with the increased of engine speed
and full load condition
–
Lower compared with diesel fuel at
lower injection pressure
[155]
[154]
9.8% Lower that of diesel fuel low
biodiesel percentage in the blend
Increased slightly compared with
diesel fuel at lower engine speed
Decreased with increased of
break power and lower injection
pressure
[153]
[68]
Slightly increased with low load
condition
3.13% Higher than that of diesel fuel at higher
load and lower blend ratio used in diesel
engine
–
[66]
Increased with the increased of
engine speed
0.272–0.292% Increased with increased
of engine speed and higher load
condition
2.02% Higher compared diesel fuel
with lower biodiesel percentage in the
fuel
1.69% Increased than that of diesel fuel
at higher load condition
–
Increased with the increased of engine speed
and higher load condition
Different loads (50%, 75% and 100%), different
blends (B10, B17.5 and B25) and speed (1500–
3000 rpm)
Different loads (50%, 75% and 100%), different
blends (B10, B17.5 and B25)
4-Cylinder, 4S, TC, WC, RP: 55 kw,
RS: 2200 rpm
Result
Test condition
Engine type
Table 10
Engine performance results using tobacco oil based biodiesel at different test condition.
Power/torque
Refs.
BSFC
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
BTE
214
High engine load condition, high injection pressure, and biodiesel percentage affect the BTE of an engine.
BSFC slightly decreases because of high brake power and low
injection pressure.
Engine load and speed also affect specific fuel consumption.
5.8. Neem biodiesel
Neem biodiesel generally gives slightly lower BTE and higher
BSFC [86,156–158] but gives higher BTE than diesel fuel in
some conditions [87,159,160]. Different experimental engine
performance results are shown in Table 11. Its low calorific value
causes neem biodiesel to give low BTE with high fuel consumption
in most cases. The following deductions can be made based on
Table 11:
BTE significantly increases with increased biodiesel percentage
in the fuel blend and engine load.
In a part load condition, the BTE of an increases about 63.11%
compared with that of diesel fuel. However, it decreases in a full
load condition.
BSFC decreases by about 8.25% at constant speed in a part
load condition but significantly increases in a full load
condition.
5.9. Linseed oil biodiesel
The use of linseed oil biodiesel in diesel engine gives excellent
results, such as high BTE, high power output, and low BSFC. Some
experimental results also show its high BSFC and low BTE
[73,92,164]. Table 12 shows the engine performance results using
linseed oil-based biodiesel in a diesel engine in different conditions. The following conclusions can be made from the analysis
of the different experimental findings:
Engine power increases with the presence of high engine load
and high percentage of biodiesel in the fuel blend.
BTE increases because of improved atomization and better mixing process at a high injection pressure.
BTE increases by about 10–12% with increased biodiesel concentration in the fuel blend and high engine load condition.
BSFC decreases by about 4–6% with high engine load and high
biodiesel percentage in the fuel blend. It significantly increases
with at a high injection pressure in the engine.
5.10. Jatropha biodiesel
Jatropha biodiesel gives high thermal efficiency with high
fuel consumption [116,166–168]. Its blends give better brake
power than diesel fuel in some cases [47]. It also exhibits
low BTE in some conditions [116,169]. Engine performance
results in different test conditions are shown in Table 13. The
following deductions can be made by analyzing the results in
Table 13:
A 20% biodiesel blend gives better engine power, which is about
0.09–2.64% higher, than diesel fuel.
Engine power decreases with increased biodiesel percentage in
the fuel blend.
BTE slightly improves (percentage) in medium engine speed
and improves by 0.1–6.7% in high engine speed. However, it
decreases when a high biodiesel percentage is present in the
fuel blend.
BSFC increases by 6.8% with increased engine speed and high
biodiesel percentage in the fuel blend.
Table 11
Engine performance results using neem biodiesel at different test condition.
Engine type
Test condition
Refs.
Power/
torque
BTE
BSFC
Constant speed 1500 rpm, duel fueling
–
5% lower than that of diesel fuel
–
[161]
Different blends (B5, B10 and B15), different
speed (600–1200 rpm) and different BMEP
Different loads (4, 8, 12, 16 and 20 kg) and
constant speed 1500 rpm
Constant speed and different loads (1000–4000
Watt) condition
Different BMEP (100, 200, 300, 400, 500, 600 and
650) and constant speed 1500 rpm
Constant speed and different BP (0–5 kw)
–
–
[162]
–
Increased with increased of fuel supply up to 1000 rpm
and decreased when engine speed above 1000 rpm
Increased with the increased of engine load
Decreased with the increased of engine load
[87]
–
Slightly lower at higher loads compared with diesel fuel
[156]
_
63.11% higher than that of diesel fuel at part load
condition and 11.2% lower at full load condition
Lower than that of diesel fuel at all loads condition
Slightly higher at low load condition compared
with diesel fuel
8.25% Lower at part load and 27.25% higher at
full load condition than that of diesel fuel
–
Different blends (B10, B20, B30, B40 and B50),
constant speed and different break power
Different blends (B20, B40, B60, B80 and B100),
Different BMEP and constant speed 1500 rpm
Different blends (B5, B10, B15, B20), different
loads and constant speed 1500 rpm
Different loads, constant speed 1800 rpm and
different blends (B10, B20)
–
–
–
–
–
Decreased with the increased of biodiesel percentage in
the blend
Increased 7.01% at full load condition and lower biodiesel
percentage in the fuel blend
Increased with the increased of percentage of biodiesel in
the fuel blend at all load condition
Decreased with higher biodiesel in the blends compared
with diesel fuel
Slightly higher for B20 and all biodiesel nearly
closed to diesel fuel
27.75% Higher at full load condition and higher
biodiesel percentage in the blend
–
Increased 23.38% and 12.12% of B10 and B20
compared with diesel fuel
[163]
[157]
[158]
[159]
[160]
[86]
Table 12
Engine performance results using linseed oil biodiesel at different test condition.
Engine type
1-Cylinder, WC, 4S, DI, D:
662 cc, RP: 4 kw, RS:
1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, RP:
4.4 kw, CR: 17.5:1, RS:
1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, RP:
4.4 kw, D: 661 cc, CR:
17.5:1, RS: 1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, WC, 4S, Di, RP:
3.5 kw, CR: 17.5:1, RS:
1500 rpm
Test condition
Different blends (B10, B20, B30 and B50, v/
v), constant speed 1500 rpm and different
loads
Different loads, constant speed 1500 rpm
and different injection pressure (200, 220
and 240 bar)
Different loads and constant speed
1500 rpm
Different blends (B5, B10, B15 and B20),
constant speed 1500 rpm and different
loads
Result
Refs.
Power/torque
BTE
BSFC
–
Increases with the increase of engine loads and concentration of
biodiesel in the fuel blend
Lower by used blend B50
compared with others blends
[164]
–
Increases at full load condition are closer to diesel fuel because of
improved atomization and better mixing process at higher
injection pressures
Lower compare with others biodiesel blend at full load condition
Higher than that of diesel fuel
at all load and higher injection
pressure
Similar compare with others
biodiesel blend
[92]
Increases 10–12% with the increase of engine power and
increasing concentration of biodiesel in the fuel blend
Decreased 4–6% with the
increase biodiesel percentage in
fuel blend
[165]
–
Decreases with increasing
biodiesel concentration in the
fuel blend
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, RP: 5.2 kw, CR:
17.5:1, RS: 1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, NA, WC, RP: 9.8 kw,
CR: 20:1, RS: 2000 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, D: 425 cc, CR: 15.5:1,
RP: 7.5HP, RS: 1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, RS: 1500 rpm, RP:
3.7 kw, CR: 16.5:1
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, CR: 17.5:1, D:
661 cc, RP: 5.2 kw, RS: 1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, NA, WC, RP: 5HP, RS:
1500 rpm, CR: 16.5:1
1-Cylinder, AC, DI, CR: 17.5:1, RP: 4.4 kw,
RS: 1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, DI, WC, RP: 5.2 kw, RS:
1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, NA, DI, CR: 16.5:1, RP:
3.5 kw, RS: 1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, RP: 8 HP, CR:
16.5:1, RS: 1800 rpm
Result
[73]
215
[171]
Higher than that of diesel fuel and increased
with the increased of blend ratio
Decreased with the increased of
percentage of biodiesel in the fuel
compared with diesel
[94]
Higher than that of diesel fuel
Lower compared with diesel fuel
[166]
[169]
Increased with the increased of percentage of
biodiesel in the fuel
Average 9.3% and 6.8% increased for 1500 rpm
and 2000 rpm
7% Decreased compared with diesel fuel
for B100
0.2–3.5% and 0.1–6.7% increased for
1500 rpm and 2000 rpm
Biodiesel is an oxygenated fuel. Therefore, it produces a complete combustion, provides excellent emission properties, and creates less negative environmental effects [82,172]. Different
experimental investigations on engine emission characteristics
using the reviewed non-edible oil biodiesels are presented.
6.1. Karanja biodiesel
Engine operating condition and biodiesel percentage in the
blend significantly affect engine emission characteristics. Although
some experimental results show high CO and NOx emissions, others present low CO, HC, and smoke emission [41,42,47]. Table 14
shows the engine emission results using karanja biodiesel in different test conditions. The following conclusions can be made by analyzing the different experimental results:
CO emission decreases by approximately 4–46.5% in a high load
condition but increases with the presence of a high percentage
of biodiesel in the fuel blend.
HC emission decreases with a low percentage of biodiesel present in the fuel blend and in a high load condition.
PM decreases with increased biodiesel content in the fuel blend.
NOx emission increases by 4.15–14.18% with increased biodiesel percentage in the fuel blend. However, it decreases by 4–39%
with the presence of low biodiesel percentage in the fuel blend.
Smoke level is reduced (20–43%) with a high engine load and
high biodiesel concentration in the fuel blend.
–
–
Different blends (B5, B10, B20, B30 and
B100) and different loads (20%, 40%, 60%,
80% and 100%)
–
Different blends (B25, B50, B75 and B100)
and constant speed
Different speeds (1500 and 2000 rpm) and
different load
–
Only a few researchers conducted experiments using polanga
biodiesel in a diesel engine. These researchers found that it gives
low-criteria engine emission. Table 15 presents the engine emission results using polanga biodiesel in different operating conditions. Clearly, biodiesel blends greatly affect emission. The
following deductions can be made based on the analysis of the different experimental results:
Different speeds (1800, 2500 and
3200 rpm)
[80]
Higher than that of diesel fuel
Almost same compared with diesel fuel
6. Engine emission performance when non-edible vegetable
biodiesel is used in a diesel engine
6.2. Polanga biodiesel
4-Cylinder, 4S, DI, TC, D:
1609 cc, RP: 84.5 kw, CR:
18.5:1, RS: 3800 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, RP: 8 HP,
RS: 1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, D:
815 cc, RP: 8.82 kw, CR: 17:1,
RS: 2000 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, AC, CR: 18:1,
D: 395 cc, RP: 5.59 kw, RS:
3600 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, AC, D:
947.8 cc, CR: 17.5:1, RP:
7.4 kw, RS: 1500 rpm
Decreased compared with diesel fuel
Higher than that of diesel fuel about
(20–80%) blends
[170]
Increase with increased of percentage of
biodiesel in the fuel blend, but decreased with
higher engine speed
Lower compared with diesel fuel when B20
used, for other blends almost same as diesel
_
Increased 0.09–2.64% used 20%
biodiesel blend with entire range of
engine operation
–
Different speeds (1200, 1800 and
2200 rpm) and different blends (B20, B50
and B100)
Different blends (B20, B40, B50, B60, B80
and B100) and different loads (25%, 50%
75% and 100%)
Different speeds and full load condition
[79]
Higher than that of diesel fuel
Lower compared with diesel fuel
Decreased with increased of
percentage of biodiesel in the fuel
Different blends (B10, B20, B50 and B100)
and different speeds (1000–2400 rpm)
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, D:
1007 cc, CR: 18.5:1, RS:
2400 rpm
3-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, D:
3440 cc, CR: 18:1, RS:
2200 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, CR: 16.5:1,
RP: 5HP, RS: 1500 rpm
BSFC
BTE
Power/torque
Result
Test condition
Engine type
Table 13
Engine performance results using jatropha biodiesel at different test condition.
[47]
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
Refs.
216
Higher biodiesel blend ratio gives higher CO emission.
HC emission significantly decreases with the presence of high
biodiesel percentage in the fuel blend.
Polanga biodiesel produces a low reduction of PM at about
9.88–42.06% with increased biodiesel percentage in the fuel
blend.
NOx emission increases when a fuel blend is used with high biodiesel percentage. However, it decreases by 4% in a high load
condition.
Smoke level decreases at a maximum of 35% at high biodiesel
blend and high engine speed condition.
6.3. Mohua biodiesel
Experimental results on engine operation using mohua oilbased biodiesel show that it gives low CO, HC, NOx, and smoke
emission [54,95,107,139,140] but produces high NOx emission in
some cases [53,96,111]. An emission characteristic of the different
experimental results using Mohua biodiesel and its blends is
shown in Table 16. The following conclusions are attained by analyzing the different experimental results:
CO emission decreases by 0.02–0.16% with the increase in biodiesel concentration in the fuel blend.
Table 14
Engine emission results using karanja biodiesel at different condition.
Engine
Test condition
Emission
Refs.
HC
PM
Nox
Smoke
Full throttle at different speeds
(1200 rpm, 1400 rpm and 2200 rpm)
and different blends (20%, 50% and
100%)
Constant speed (1500 rpm) and
different blends (5%, 10%, 20% and
30%)
Improvement 2.93–5.87% less than
that of diesel fuel using 20% 50% and
100% biodiesel blend entire range of
engine operation
Slightly Increase about 0.03% at
increases of blend ratio
Reduce range of 4.30–
20.64% with increase of
bland ratio
Slightly increase with
range of 4.15–14.18%
with increase of blend
ratio
Increase 12%
compared with diesel
fuel
Reduction with increase
of blend ratio
[47]
–
[41]
Different blends (10%, 20%, 50%, 75%)
and constant speed (1500 rpm)
Increase min 10 g/kw h use without
preheating blend
–
–
Reduce with use of net biodiesel and
blend
–
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, RP: 6 kw,
WC, CI engine
Different blends (5%, 10%, 15% and
20%) and different load (0%, 20%,
40%, 60%, 80% and 100%)
Approximately 4% decreases with
higher load condition
Lower at 10% blend and
70% load
–
Smoke was significantly
reduce for all blends
[43]
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, RP:
7.5 kw, CR: 16:1, CI engine
Different loads (10%, 25%, 50%, 75%,
85% and 100%), different blends
(20%, 40%, 60%, 80%) and constant
speed 3000 rpm
Different loads (33.3%, 66.6% and
100%), different blends (20%, 40%,
60% and 80%) and constant speed
1500 rpm
Different blends (10%, 25%, 50% and
100%) and constant speed
(1200 rpm)
Constant speed, different loads and
blend (B100, B90M10)
Reduce 60% at low load condition
_
––
Increases 10–25%
compared with
conventional diesel
At 20% blend and 80%
load give 4% lower
Nox compared to
diesel
Average 26%
reduction as
compared to diesel
Smoke density almost
same compared with
diesel fuel
Reduce with use of net
biodiesel and blend
[42]
Constant speed (1500 rpm), 20%
blend and different load condition
Exhibited 11.76%
higher HC emission
with the increased
biodiesel percentage
Lower as use of lower
blends compared than
diesel
Reduce with use of net
biodiesel and blend
Reduce range of
16.43–45.48%
with increase of
bland ratio
–
[109]
Slightly higher than baseline diesel
Reduce 2.85%-12.8% for
20% and 40% biodiesel
blends used in diesel
engine
–
–
Decrease 28%-39%
with 20% and 40%
biodiesel blends used
Smoke density min 20%
decrease and maximum
80% decrease with high
engine load
–
–
Increases 15% Nox
emission
B100 reduce smoke
opacity by 43%
[136]
Slightly higher at low
load condition
–
–
Lower at high load (80%)
condition
[137]
Reduce 50% compared
with diesel fuel
–
48% reduction in NOx
compared with diesel
fuel
Lower (20%) as compared
with diesel fuel
[134]
3 Cylinder, AVL make CI
engine, D: 3.44 l, CR: 18.1,
WC, RS: 2200 rpm, P:
44.1 kw
2-Cylinder, 4S, petter
Kirloskar CI engine, RP:
10HP, RS: 1500 rpm, DI,
WC, CR: 16.5:1, RP: 7.5 kw
1-Cylinder, 4S, CS, WC, DI, CI
engine, RP: 3.67 kw, D:
552.92 cm3, CR: 17.5
1-Cylinder, 4S, RP: 5.9 kw, CR:
17.5, CI engine
1-Cylinder, 4S, RP: 3.75 kw,
D: 553 cm3, CR: 16.5 DI,
WC, CI engine
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, D:
553 cm3, RP: 4.476 kw, CR:
16.5:1, CI engine
4-Cylinder, DI, D: 3298 cm3,
CR: 17.5:1, RP: 70 kw, WC,
CI engine
1-Cylinder, DI, WC, 4S, CR:
17.5:1, RP: 3.5, CI engine
Constant Speed (1500 rpm) and
different load condition
Reduce 50% compared with diesel
Decrease significantly at higher load
condition, maximum 46.5% decrease at
full load condition
Lower 23% compared with diesel fuel
emission
[133]
[135]
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
CO
217
[48]
[47]
–
–
Reduction with increase
of blend ratio and engine
speeds
35% reduce with B60
biodiesel used as
compared to diesel
–
Increase 14.87–22.5%
with increase of
blend ratio
4% Reduce for B100
biodiesel used at full
load
Marginally increase
Reduce 9.88–42.06%
with increase of
bland ratio
–
Reduce 6.75% with
use of higher bland
ratio
–
Smoke
PM
HC
Nox
[44]
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
Refs.
218
HC emission dramatically decreases by 35-60% with the
increase in biodiesel percentage in the fuel blend and in high
engine load condition.
NOx emission increases (6–16%) with increased engine load and
high biodiesel percentage in the blend. However, it decreases
(9–27%) when mohua ethyl ester is used.
Smoke level decreases (5–46%) in a full load condition and with
high biodiesel percentage present in the fuel blend.
6.4. Rubber seed oil biodiesel
Rubber seed biodiesel produces lower emission than diesel fuel
[106,113,141]. However, it produces high emissions in some specific conditions [142]. The emission characteristics of rubber seed
biodiesel are presented in Table 17. The following deductions can
be made by analyzing the findings of the different experiments:
CO emission decreases by about 0.13–1.13% with a low biodiesel concentration in the blend and a high load condition.
With the DEE additive, high load, and low biodiesel percentage
concentration, CO and HC emission is considerably decreased.
NOx emission increases by about 13% with a high biodiesel percentage in the blend and a high load condition.
Smoke opacity decreases by 37.09% with a low load condition
and high biodiesel concentration present in the fuel blend.
The volatility and oxygen enrichment provided by DEE are beneficial in improving fuel evaporation and smoke reduction.
The presence of oxygen and the better mixing of DEE with air
lead to an improved combustion rate.
–
Slightly improvement
12.96% with higher
biodiesel blend ratio
–
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, CI engine
Full throttle at different speeds (1200 rpm,
1400 rpm and 2200 rpm) and different blends
(20%, 50% and 100%)
Different loads (0%, 20%, 40%, 60%, 80% and
100%) and different blends (20%, 40%, 60%, 80%
and 100%)
Different blends (B10, B20, B30 and B40),
Constant speed (1500 rpm) and added additives
3 Cylinder, AVL make CI engine, D:
3.44 l, CR: 18.1, WC, RS:
2200 rpm, P: 44.1 kw
1-Cylinder, 4 S, WC, DI
Emission
Test condition
Engine
Table 15
Engine emission results using polanga biodiesel at different condition.
CO
6.5. Cotton seed biodiesel
Some studies examined the use of cotton seed-based biodiesel
in a diesel engine, and the emission results showed low emissions
of CO, HC, NOx, and smoke opacity [145,146,173]. However, some
conditions also showed high emissions [145,148]. Table 18 presents the different experimental results of emission characteristics
using cotton seed biodiesel and its blends. The table also shows
that the maximum reduction of cotton seed biodiesel of CO, HC,
and smoke emission is 45%, 67%, and 14%, respectively, with NOx
decreasing by 25% in some conditions compared with diesel fuel.
The following conclusions can be made from the analysis of the different experimental results:
CO and NOx emissions decrease with the increase in fuel injection pressure.
CO and HC emissions drastically decrease with high BMEP and
turbo charging operation.
CO emission decreases by about 4–45.66% depending on different conditions.
HC emission increases with increased percentage of biodiesel
present in the fuel blend.
PM emission decreases (24–69%) because of high BMEP.
Higher NOx emission is emitted (6–39.5%) because of low
engine load condition. However, low emission is produced with
a high concentration of biodiesel present in the fuel blend.
NOx emission decreases by about 10–25% in a full load
condition.
NOx emission increases with increased BMEP in the combustion
chamber.
Low smoke emission is produced because of the low percentage
of biodiesel present in the fuel blend. However, it increases in a
high load condition.
Table 16
Engine emission results using mohua (Madhuca indica) biodiesel at different condition.
Engine type
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, CI engine, RP:
4 kw
6-Cylinder, 4S, AC, D: 5.9 L, CR:
17.6:1, HP: 158, CI engine
Different blends (B20, B40, B60 and
B80), different loads (25%, 50%, 75%
and 100%) and constant speed
(1500 rpm)
Different blends (10%, 20% and 30%),
different loads and constant speed
(1500 rpm)
Different loads, different blends (B20,
B40, B60) and constant speed
(1500 rpm)
Emission
HC
PM
Nox
Smoke
Reduce 0.02–0.2% comparison of
diesel fuel with the increase of
biodiesel concentration in the
blends
–
–
–
Increased 6% compared
with diesel fuel
Reduce 5–46% with increase of
percentage of biodiesel in the
blends
[96]
–
–
Higher at lower load
compared to diesel fuel
–
[53]
Reduce with increase
of blend ratio
compared with diesel
fuel
Reduce 35% compared
with diesel
49%-60% lesser
compared to diesel
fuel.
–
Increased 11.6% with
increase proportion of
biodiesel in the blends
–
[111]
–
–
[107]
–
[54]
Lower than that of
diesel
–
–
Reduced 11% compared
with diesel
Reduced 9% for methyl
ester and 27% for Ethyl
ester compared to
diesel.
Lower compared to
diesel fuel
–
_
[140]
Higher compared with diesel fuel
[139]
–
4% Lower than diesel
fuel
[95]
–
16% Increase with
increase of
concentration of
biodiesel in diesel fuel
At part load 30% reduction and full
load condition there about 15%
reduction compared with diesel
fuel
–
Reduce 0.02–0.16% with the
increase of biodiesel blends
compared with diesel fuel
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, CR: 16.5:1, RP:
3.7 kw, D: 553 cm3
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, CR: 16.5:1, RP:
3.7 kw, D: 553 cm3
Constant speed (1500 rpm)
Constant speed (1500 rpm) and used
MME and MEE
Reduce 30% compared with diesel
fuel
Reduce 67%-79% for both ester
used compared with diesel fuel
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, CR: 16.5:1, RP:
3.7 kw, D: 553 cm3
1- Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, HP: 7,
Constant speed (1500 rpm)
0.34% lower compared with diesel
Blend (B20), constant speed
(1500 rpm), and steady state condition
Constant speed (1500 rpm) and
different loads (0%, 25%, 50%, 75% and
100%)
––
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, CR: 17.5:1, RP:
4.4 kw
3-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, D: 2826 cm3,
CR: 17:1
Different loads, different blends (B10,
B20, B40, B60, B80) and constant speed
(1500 rpm)
Refs.
CO
At full load condition CO
reduction, about 26% compared
with diesel fuel
Lower compared to diesel fuel
Reduce gradually
with increase of load
compared with diesel
fuel
Lower than that of
diesel fuel
–
–
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, CR: 18:1, P: 9 kw,
CI engine
Test condition
[138]
219
220
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
13% Higher using DEE in biodiesel
compared with diesel fuel
[144]
–
Decrease with using DEE
operation compared
with diesel fuel
Lower compared with
diesel fuel
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, RP:
4.4 kw, CR: 17.5:1, D:
661.5 cm3
1-Cylinder, DI, 4S, RP:
5.5 kw, CI engine, WC
1-cylinder, AC, CR: 17.5:1,
4S, DI, CI engine, RP:
4.4 kw, RS: 1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, WC, 4S, DI, RS:
1500 rpm, RP: 5.5 kw,
CR: 16.5:1
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, RP:
5.5 kw, WC, CI engine
Constant speed (1500 rpm)and
different load condition
Various diethyl ether (DEE)(50 g/h,
100 g/h, 150 g/h, 200 g/h and 250 g/h)
and full load condition
Different loads and constant speed
1500 rpm
Decrease with increasing
percentage of biodiesel in the
fuel and low load condition
Reduced at all load condition
with the induction of hydrogen
for all injected fuel
Higher than that of diesel in all
operation condition
Decrease 26% with using
injection of DEE compared with
RSO
0.037% lower than compared
with diesel fuel
–
Higher compared with diesel fuel but
lower 6.02–20.1% compare to other
biodiesel at all load condition
[143]
[142]
Increase 1.01% with hydrogen energy
shear
Reduced with the
induction of hydrogen
for all injected fuel
–
Higher than that of diesel with
high load condition
Large reduction in smoke opacity
about 34.4% using DEE
[106]
20% Biodiesel blend gave lower
about 17% smoke opacity
compared with diesel fuel
Reduced smoke level 37.09% at
full load condition
Increase with the increasing biodiesel
blends
–
[113]
[141]
Increase with increase of engine
load
–
–
0.13–1.13% Lower compared to
diesel fuel
Different loads, different blends (B20,
B40, B60, B80 and B100) and constant
speed (1500 rpm)
Different loads, different blends (B10,
B20, B50, B75 and B100) and constant
speed (1500 rpm)
Constant speed (1500 rpm) and
different load (25%, 50% 75%, 100%)
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, RP:
5.5 kw, WC, CI engine
HC
Emission
CO
Test condition
Engine type
Table 17
Engine emission results using rubber seed oil biodiesel at different condition.
Nox
Smoke
Refs.
6.6. Jojoba oil biodiesel
Studies have been conducted on the use of jojoba biodiesel in a
diesel engine, and jojoba biodiesel has been found to give higher
emission than diesel fuel [61,64,152]. Table 19 shows the different
experimental results of the emission characteristics of jojoba biodiesel. Jojoba biodiesel produces high CO, HC, and NOx emissions
in most cases but produces low CO emission in some specific conditions. The following conclusions can be deduced from the analysis of the different experimental results:
CO emission increases (12–14%) with the increase in biodiesel
percentage in the fuel blend and with EGR operation. However,
it decreases in a high engine speed condition.
CO emission decreases dramatically because of high engine
speed.
HC emission decreases significantly in a low engine speed condition and increases with EGR operation.
NOx emission (14–16%) increases with increased engine speed
but decreases by about 11–13% when jojoba methyl ester is
used without EGR operation.
6.7. Tobacco oil biodiesel
Tobacco biodiesel in diesel engine produces better emission
performance compared with diesel fuel in most studies. Table 20
shows that blends of tobacco biodiesel reduce CO and increase
HC and NOx emissions. However, HC and NOx emissions
significantly decrease in some special conditions. The following
deductions can be made from the analysis of the different
experimental results:
With the increase in engine load and biodiesel content in the
fuel blend, CO and HC emissions decrease. However, increase
with high injection pressure.
With a full load and in a high injection pressure condition, NOx
increases by about 5–6% but significantly decreases with low
content of biodiesel in the fuel blend.
Smoke emission slightly decreases with a full load and in high
engine speed condition.
6.8. Neem biodiesel
Many researchers have used Neem biodiesel in a diesel engine
and have found low emission characteristics [156,158–160,162].
Some specific condition show high emissions of CO, HC, NOx, and
smoke opacity [157,161]. Table 21 shows the different experimental engine emission results using neem biodiesel in a diesel engine
in different conditions. The following conclusions can be made
from the analysis of the different experimental results:
CO decreases with increased percentage of ethanol content in
the fuel blend. However, with higher BMEP and engine load,
CO emission increases by about 20–40%.
Engine operation with dual mode condition produces high CO
emission.
HC emission increases by 24–54% with the increase in engine
load and decreases by 2.59–5.26% in full load and half load
conditions.
HC emission is higher with the addition of ethanol in fuel blends
in all operating load conditions.
NOx emission decreases by 3.2–6.06% in half load and full load
conditions.
NOx emission decreases by 37% when pure oil is used and by
19% when methyl ester is used in a full load condition.
Table 18
Engine emission results using cotton seed biodiesel at different condition.
Engine type
Test condition
Emission
Refs.
CO
HC
PM
NOx
Smoke
Constant speed (2000 rpm), different
blends (10% and 20%), medium and high
load condition
Different speeds (1200 and 1500 rpm),
different loads (20%, 40%, 60% and full load)
Increase compared with
neat diesel fuel at
medium and high loads
Reduced with increasing
biodiesel percentage in
the blend
–
Lower as compare with
neat diesel fuel in both
medium and high loads
Slightly increases with
higher percentage of
biodiesel in the fuel blend
Increase compare with neat
diesel fuel at medium and
high loads
–
[114]
Full load and different speeds (900–
1800 rpm)
Increase compared with
diesel fuel
Slightly increase with
using 10% biodiesel in the
fuel blend
Slightly increase with
increase of biodiesel
percentage in the fuel
blend
–
–
–
[115]
Different speeds (1250–2500 rpm) and
different blends (B5, B20, B50, B75 and
B100)
Different speeds and different blends (B10,
B20, B30)
Decrease with increase of
biodiesel percentage in
the fuel blend
Lower than that of diesel
fuel
–
–
Decrease at high engine
speed condition
Higher than that of diesel
fuel but lower compare with
other biodiesel blends
Increase with increase of
blend ratio
–
10% increases with
increase engine torque
Reduced 14% at used 10%
biodiesel blend
[59]
Constant speed 1500 rpm, different BMEP
and different methyl ester used
Average 4–16% reduced
at high BMEP
Average 45–67% reduced
compare with diesel fuel
Increases 10–23% at
higher BMEP
–
[174]
6-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, TC,
D: 5958 cc, CR: 18:1, RP:
177 kw, RS: 2600 rpm
Different blends (B10, B20), different
speeds (1200 rpm and 1500 rpm) and
different load condition (20%, 40% and 60%)
Reduced with the increase
of percentage of oil in the
fuel blend
[148]
Different speeds and preheated blend at
(30°, 60°, 90°, 120 °C)
Increase slightly with
increase biodiesel
percentage in the fuel
blend
–
Slightly increase with
higher percentage of
biodiesel in the blend
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, CR: 18:1,
RS: 3600 rpm, NA,
Slightly increase with
higher percentage of
biodiesel in the fuel
blend
Decreases 14.40%-45.66%
compare with diesel fuel
Reduced 24%
compare with neat
diesel fuel
Reduced 53–69%
on average
compare with
diesel fuel
–
–
–
[149]
1-Cylinder, DI, 4S, AC, CR:
18:1, D: 395 cc, RS:
3600 rpm, RP: 6.25 kw
4-Cylinder, 4S, DI, NA, WC,
CR: 16.8:1, RP: 51 kw,
RS: 2400 rpm,
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, CR:
18:1, RP: 6.25 kw, RS:
3600 rpm,
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, CR:
18:1, RP: 6.25, RS:
3600 rpm
Full load and different speeds (2800–
1300 rpm)
Decrease about 35%
compare with diesel fuel
–
–
Increase approximately
11.21%-39.1% as compare
with diesel fuel
10–22% decrease
compare with diesel fuel
–
[150]
Full load and different speeds (1200–
2400 rpm)
Decrease 5% compare
with diesel fuel
–
–
Increase 6% compare with
diesel fuel
–
[146]
Full load and different speeds (1700, 2000,
2300, 2600 and 3000 rpm)
17–21% decrease for both
engine test
–
–
6.5–7.4% increase for
engine test
Lower emission compared
with diesel fuel
[151]
Full load, varied injection pressure and
constant speed
Reduction about 30%
compare with diesel fuel
–
–
Reduction 25% compare
with diesel fuel
–
[60]
1-Cylinder, WC, 4S, DI, CR:
19.8:1, RS: 4500 rpm
1-Clynder, 4S, DI, WC, CR:
17:1, D: 770 cm3, RP: 8
HP, RS: 2000 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, D:
406 cm3, RP: 10 HP, RS:
3600 rpm, CR: 18:1
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, NA,
D: 553 cc, CR: 16.5:1, RP:
4.476 kw, RS: 1800 rpm
6-Cylinder, 4S, DI, TC, D:
5.9, CR: 17.5:1, RP:
136 kw, RS: 2500 rpm
–
[147]
[145]
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
6-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, D:
5958 cm3, CR: 18:1, RP:
177 kw, RS: 2600 rpm,
221
222
Table 19
Engine emission results using jojoba biodiesel at different condition.
Engine type
Various loads (no load, 1/3, 2/3 and full
load), different blends (B20, B40, B60)
and different speeds
Different speeds (1000–1900 rpm) and
full load
Different speeds and injection timing of
24 CAD BTDC
Emission
Refs.
CO
HC
Nox
Smoke
Increase with the increase
of biodiesel percentage in
the fuel blend
Decrease with increase of
engine speed compare with
diesel fuel
Increase 12% and 14% with
EGR and without EGR
–
Increase with the increase of engine speeds
–
[61]
Higher at low speed condition and EGR
operation but at higher engine speed give
lower emission than diesel fuel
–
Increase about 16% and 14% at engine speed
1200 rpm and 1600 rpm but 33% reduction in
NOx with EGR operation
Decrease about 11% and 13% with EGR and
without EGR operation
–
[152]
–
[64]
Table 20
Engine emission results using tobacco oil biodiesel at different condition.
Engine type
4-Cylinder, 4S, TC, WC, RP: 112 kw,
RS: 9000 rpm
4-Cylinder, 4S, TC, WC, IDI, CR:
21.5:1, D: 1.753, RP: 55 kw, RS:
2200 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, NA, RS: 1500 rpm,
RP: 5 HP
Test condition
Emission
Refs.
CO
HC
Nox
Smoke
Different loads (50%, 75% and 100%), different
blends (B10, B17.5 and B25) and speed (1500–
3000 rpm)
Different loads (50%, 75% and 100%), different
blends (B10, B17.5 and B25)
Reduced 100–1600 ppm
at medium load
condition
Decrease at full load
condition
–
Slightly increase at full load
–
[66]
–
5% Increase at full load
condition
–
[68]
Constant speed 1500 rpm, different loads and
different blends (B2 and B5)
Decrease with the
increase of biodiesel
percentage
Decrease with increase
of engine speed
Increase with the increase of
biodiesel percentage in the fuel
blend
Decrease with increase of engine
speed
Decrease with increase of
biodiesel percentage in the fuel
blend
6% Increase compared with
diesel fuel
–
[154]
[153]
Slightly higher
compared with diesel
fuel
Higher than that of diesel fuel
Increase with increase of
engine load
Reduced slightly at
higher engine speed
condition
–
1-Cylinder, 4S, NA, DI, RP: 14.7:1,
RS: 2500 rpm
Full load and different speeds (1200, 1400, 1600,
1800, 2000, 2200 and 2400 rpm)
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, RP: 5.2 kw,
CR: 17.5:1
Different injection pressures (205, 220, 240 and
260 bar)
[155]
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, CR:
17:1, RP: 5.775 kw, RS:
1500 rpm
2-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, D:
2266 cc, CR: 16.4:1, RS:
1500 rpm, RP: 26HP
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, NA,
CR: 17:1, RP: 5.775 kw,
RS: 1500 rpm
Test condition
Table 21
Engine emission results using neem biodiesel at different condition.
Engine type
1-Cylinder, 4S, NA, DI, CR:
16.5:1, RP: 3.5 kw, RS:
1500 rpm
Emission
Refs.
CO
HC
PM
Nox
Smoke
Constant speed 1500 rpm, duel
fueling
Increase at dual mode operation
Increase with the increase
of engine load
–
–
Lower as compare with diesel fuel
[161]
Different blends (B5, B10 and B15),
different speed (600–1200 rpm) and
different BMEP
Constant speed and different loads
(1000–4000 watt) condition
Reduced compare with diesel
fuel
–
–
Increase compare with diesel
fuel
Reduced compare with diesel fuel
[162]
Lower compared with diesel fuel
Slightly reduced compare
with diesel fuel
–
Lower than that of diesel fuel
Slightly reduced all load condition
[156]
Increase at increase of BMEP
–
Decrease about 3.22% at part
load and 6.06% at full load
condition
37% reduction for pure oil and
19% reduction for methyl ester
at full load condition
Increases with the increase of
engine load
–
[163]
Higher than that of diesel fuel
[157]
Lower at all load compared with
diesel fuel
Reduced 5.26% at part load
and 2.59% at full load
condition
Increase 54% and 24% for
pure oil and methyl ester at
full load condition
Lower compared with diesel
fuel
[158]
–
Reduced 2.59% at full load
–
Reduced 6.06% at full load
Increase with the increase of
percentage of biodiesel in the fuel
blend and increase engine load
18.39% reduction at full load
condition
Lower with the higher
percentage of ethanol in the fuel
blend at high loads condition
Higher with the addition of
ethanol in the blends at all
loads
–
Increase slightly at full loads
condition
Different BMEP (100, 200,
300,400,500,600 and 650) and
constant speed 1500 rpm
Constant speed and different BP (0–
5 kw)
Different blends (B10, B20, B30, B40
and B50), constant speed and
deferent break power
Different blends (B20, B40, B60, B80
and B100), Different BMEP and
constant speed 1500 rpm
Different blends (B5, B10, B15, B20),
different loads and constant speed
1500 rpm
Increase 40% for pure oil and 20%
for methyl ester at full load
–
–
Decrease at higher engine load with
the addition of ethanol in the fuel
blends
[159]
[160]
Table 22
Engine emission results using linseed biodiesel at different condition.
Engine type
Test condition
Emission
Refs.
CO
HC
NOx
Smoke
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, RP:
4.4 kw, CR: 17.5:1, RS:
1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, AC, DI, RP:
4.4 kw, D: 661 cc, CR:
17.5:1, RS: 1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, WC, 4S, Di, RP:
3.5 kw, CR: 17.5:1, RS:
1500 rpm
Different loads, constant speed 1500 rpm
and different injection pressure (200,220
and 240 bar)
Different loads and constant speed
1500 rpm
Lower than that of diesel fuel at all the
injection pressure
HC emission decreases with the
increase of fuel injection pressure
Higher compare with others biodiesel at
high load condition
Increase with the increase of engine
loads
Increase by the increase in
engine loads but near the
diesel fuel
Higher than that of others
biodiesel
Different blends (B5, B10, B15 and B20),
constant speed 1500 rpm and different
loads
Decrease with the increase of load and
increase of biodiesel concentration in
the fuel blend
Increase with the increase of biodiesel
concentration in the fuel blend and
engine loads
Lower emission
compare with diesel
fuel
Higher emission
compare with
others biodiesel
–
Slightly increase compare
with the diesel fuel
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, RP:
5.2 kw, CR: 17.5:1, RS:
1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, NA, WC,
RP: 9.8 kw, CR: 20:1, RS:
2000 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, RS:
1500 rpm, RP: 3.7 kw,
CR: 16.5:1
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, CR:
17.5:1, D: 661 cc, RP:
5.2 kw, RS: 1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, NA, WC,
RP: 5HP, RS: 1500 rpm,
CR: 16.5:1,
1-Cylinder, AC, DI, CR:
17.5:1, RP: 4.4 kw, RS:
1500 rpm
1-Cylinder, DI, WC, RP:
5.2 kw, RS: 1500 rpm
Test condition
[92]
[73]
[165]
223
224
Table 23
Engine emission results using jatropha biodiesel at different condition.
Test condition
Emission
Refs.
CO
HC
Nox
Smoke
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, D:
1007 cc, CR: 18.5:1, RS:
2400 rpm
3-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, D:
3440 cc, CR: 18:1, RS:
2200 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, CR:
16.5:1, RP: 5HP, RS:
1500 rpm
4-Cylinder, 4S, DI, TC, D:
1609 cc, RP: 84.5 kw, CR:
18.5:1, RS: 3800 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, WC, RP: 8
HP, RS: 1500 rpm
Different blends (B10, B20, B50 and
B100) and different speeds (1000–
2400 rpm)
Different speeds (1200,1800 and
2200 rpm) and different blends (B20,
B50 and B100)
Different blends (B20, B40, B50, B60,
B80 and B100) and different loads
(25%, 50% 75% and 100%)
Different speeds and full load
condition
6.51–12.32% Reduced with the
increase of blend ratio
3.29–10.75% Increases compared with
diesel fuel
Increased 20.54% with 20% biodiesel
blend used and 15.65% increased with
used 50% biodiesel
Lower compared with diesel fuel
Reduced compared with
diesel fuel at higher
percentage of biodiesel blend
Reduced with the increase of
biodiesel percentage in the
fuel blend
–
[79]
Reduced 5.57–35.21% with the
increase of percentage of
biodiesel in the fuel blend
Lower compare with diesel fuel
14.91–27.53% Decreases with
the increase of biodiesel
percentage in the fuel blend
Reduce about 18.19–
32.28% with lower percentage of
biodiesel blend used
Lower than that of diesel fuel
10–40% Reduced compare with
diesel fuel
Lower than that of diesel fuel at
full load condition
5–10% Reduction with full load
condition
Reduce compared with diesel
fuel
[80]
Different blends (B25, B50, B75 and
B100) and constant speed
Higher than that of diesel fuel at
high load
[169]
Different speeds (1500 and 2000 rpm)
and different load
Lower compare with diesel fuel
at pick load condition
Increases with the increase of biodiesel
percentage in fuel blend and higher
than that of diesel fuel
Lower with the increase of engine
speed
Lower than that of diesel fuel
1-Cylinder, 4S, WC, DI, D:
815 cc, RP: 8.82 kw, CR:
17:1, RS: 2000 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, AC, CR:
18:1, D: 395 cc, RP:
5.59 kw, RS: 3600 rpm
1-Cylinder, 4S, DI, AC, D:
947.8 cc, CR: 17.5:1, RP:
7.4 kw, RS: 1500 rpm
Decreases with the increase of
biodiesel percentage in fuel
blend
Decreases with the increase of
engine speed
–
[166]
Different speeds (1800, 2500 and
3200 rpm)
Lower than that of diesel fuel
Lower than that of diesel fuel
Higher than that of diesel fuel
Lower compared with diesel
fuel
[94]
Different blends (B5, B10, B20, B30
and B100) and different loads (20%,
40%, 60%, 80% and 100%)
Decreases with the increase
percentage of biodiesel in the
fuel blend
Decreases with the increase of
biodiesel blend ratio
Higher than that of diesel fuel
Decreases with the increase
of biodiesel concentration in
the fuel blend
[171]
[47]
[170]
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
Engine type
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
Smoke opacity decreases by 18.39% with the addition of ethanol
in fuel blends and high load condition. However, it increases
significantly when a high percentage of biodiesel is present in
the blend.
6.9. Linseed oil biodiesel
The emission behavior of linseed oil-based biodiesel used in a
diesel engine depends on the engine’s operating condition. Emission results using linseed based biodiesel in a diesel engine show
low emissions of CO, HC, NOx, and smoke [73,92]. However, it produces a high emission in some specific cases. Table 22 shows the
emission characteristics affected by different blend ratios. The following deductions can be made from the analysis of the different
experimental results:
CO decreases when a high content of biodiesel is present in fuel
blends and in a high engine load condition.
Linseed biodiesel produces higher HC emission when higher
biodiesel content is present in the fuel blends and in a higher
load condition.
HC emission dramatically decreases with the increase in fuel
injection pressure.
NOx emission generally increases when used high biodiesel
percentage in the fuel blned.
Smoke level decreases but NOx emission increases with
increased fuel injection pressure.
6.10. Jatropha biodiesel
Low emissions of CO, HC, NOx, and smoke opacity were observed when jatropha biodiesel was used [47,94,166,169]. However, engine emission decreases significantly in some specific
conditions [47,94,169]. Table 23 shows the different experimental
engine emission results. Specifically, emissions of CO, HC, and
smoke opacity decrease, with NOx emission decreasing in most
cases. As jatropha biodiesel lowers the heating value, NOx emission
significantly decreases. The following deductions can be made
from the analysis of the different experimental results:
CO and HC emissions increase because of high engine load with
EGR operation and gradually decrease because of a high percentage of biodiesel concentration present in fuel blends.
CO emission decreases by 5.57–35.21% and HC emission
decreases by 14.91–32.28% because of high biodiesel content
in fuel blends.
NOx emission decreases with EGR operation but increases with
increased engine load and biodiesel content in fuel blends.
NOx emission increases by 3.29–10.75% in some specific conditions. However, it reduces in a full load condition.
Smoke opacity increases in a high engine load condition but
decreases with the increase in biodiesel concentration in fuel
blends.
7. Recommendations
Driven by energy security and other environmental concerns,
research on biodiesel is rapidly growing around the globe. Apparently, the demand for biodiesel will significantly increase in the future. Although edible oils are available as feedstock sources for
biodiesel production, they may not be sustainable sources. Therefore, reliable, economical, and sustainable feedstocks for biodiesel
production must be sought. As mentioned in previous sections,
there are many potential non-edible sources of oil that can compete with edible oils, considering that most non-edible oil-growing
plants can be cultivated in non-arable lands. Therefore, wasteland
225
can be used for oil–crop cultivation for biodiesel production to
minimize the use of limited arable lands for growing edible oil
crops for biodiesel production. When all these factors are considered, non-edible oils may definitely overrun edible oils as biodiesel
feedstocks. However, feedstocks for biodiesel should have a diversified oil source depending on geographical location. The use of
edible oils as fuels instead of food will certainly affect the price
of the former. Considering all factors, non-edible vegetable feedstocks have more advantages than edible vegetable feedstocks.
Fertile agricultural land should be maintained for planting edible
oil crops, while wastelands should be maintained for cultivating
non-edible vegetable crops that have simple ecological requirements. Developed countries should maximize the utilization of
limited land areas. Variegated resources for biofuel feedstocks will
ensure that the quality of obtained biodiesel is suitable for that
particular region. Therefore, non-edible vegetable oil feedstocks
can ensure sustainable alternative fuel in the future.
8. Conclusion and summary of results
Biodiesel has attracted much research because of its economic
and environmental benefits as well as its renewable origin. Biodiesel produced from non-edible oil resources can defy the use of edible oil for biodiesel production. Therefore, its demand is growing
steadily, and researchers are looking for possible newer sources
of non-edible oil. This review concludes that non-edible oil is a
promising source that can sustain biodiesel growth.
Fuel properties vary depending on feedstock and the biodiesel
conversion process. Most reviewed biodiesel fuels have excellent
kinematic viscosity, except jojoba, neem, and linseed biodiesel.
However, the viscosity ranges of jatropha, tobacco, and mohua biodiesels are close to that of diesel fuel. Rubber seed, jojoba, tobacco,
and jatropha biodiesels are better than others in terms of density.
Except for jojoba, neem, and linseed oil biodiesels, other biodiesels
meet the specified flash point limit. Karanja, polanga, cotton seed,
jojoba, and jatropha oil biodiesels are excellent in terms of CN. Jojoba and jatropha biodiesel have better calorific value than other
biodiesels.
Palmitic acid, stearic acid, oleic acid, linoleic acid, and linolenic
acid are the common fatty acids in vegetable oils. Biodiesel quality
and fuel properties are highly dependent on the presence of fatty
acid composition in the fuel blend. Several researchers found that
the presence of monounsaturated fatty acid in biodiesel blend at
low temperature could improve ignition quality, fuel flow properties, and fuel stability. Moreover, biodiesel CN, cloud point, and stability increase with the presence of saturated fatty acid alkyl ester
in the fuel blend.
Several studies were carried out to determine power output,
BSFC, and BTE of an engine operating with non-edible oil-based
biodiesel. In most cases, cotton seed and jatropha biodiesels gave
higher BSFC but had better thermal efficiency than other biodiesels. Their brake power and torque were closer to those of diesel
fuel because of their calorific value. Karanja, rubber seed, jojoba,
and tobacco biodiesels had higher BTE and power and lower BSFC
than other biodiesels. Moreover, the low percentage of biodiesel
blends (<20%) caused high brake power and reduced fuel consumption because of complete combustion. Therefore, biodiesels with
high calorific value and low viscosity are more suitable for the
improvement of engine performance.
Biodiesel is an oxygenated fuel that leads to complete combustion. Based on several experimental results, the use of karanja, mohua, rubber seed, and tobacco biodiesel in CI engine can reduce CO,
HC, and smoke emission with an increase in NOx emission. The low
HC emission in most cases is usually caused by advanced injection
timing and proper combustion in the combustion chamber. More-
226
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
over, higher oxygen contains and higher CN, which is favored to
lower emission. However, some authors found a significant reduction of NOx emission. Based on the review of the emission characteristics, cotton seed, rubber seed, and karanja biodiesels are
concluded to give better emission characteristics than other biodiesels. Therefore, non-edible vegetable oil resources have good
potential to replace edible oil-based biodiesels in the near future.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to appreciate University of Malaya
for financial support through High Impact Research grant titled:
‘‘Development of Alternative and Renewable Energy Carrier (DAREC)’’
having Grant Number UM.C/HIR/MOHE/ENG/60
Reference
[1] British Petroleum. BP statistical review of world energy. <http://
www.bp.com/statistical review of world energy> (2013).
[2] International Energy Agency (IEA). <http://www.iea.org> (2013).
[3] CIA World Factbook. <https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-worldfactbook/geos/af.html> (2013).
[4] Demirbas A. Progress and recent trends in biodiesel fuels. Energy Convers
Manage 2009;50:14–34.
[5] No S. Inedible vegetable oils and their derivatives for alternative diesel fuels
in CI engines: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15:131–49.
[6] Silitonga A, Masjuki H, Mahlia T, Ong HC, Chong W. Experimental study on
performance and exhaust emissions of a diesel engine fuelled with Ceiba
pentandra biodiesel blends. Energy Convers Manage 2013;76:828–36.
[7] Agarwal AK, Rajamanoharan K. Biofuels (alcohols and biodiesel) applications
as fuels for internal combustion engines. Prog Energy Combust Sci
2007;33:233–71.
[8] Ahmad AL, Yasin NHM, Derek CJC, Lim JK. Microalgae as a sustainable energy
source for biodiesel production: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2011;15:584–93.
[9] Lapuerta M, Armas O, Rodríguez FJ. Effect of biodiesel fuels on diesel engine
emissions. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2008;34:198–223.
[10] Abbaszaadeh A, Ghobadian B, Omidkhah MR, Najafi G. Current biodiesel
production technologies: a comparative review. Energy Convers Manage
2012;63:138–48.
[11] Gui MM, Lee KT, Bhatia S. Feasibility of edible oil vs. non-edible oil vs. waste
edible oil as biodiesel feedstock. Energy 2008;33:1646–53.
[12] Leung DYC, Wu X, Leung MKH. A review on biodiesel production using
catalyzed transesterification. Appl Energy 2010;87:1083–95.
[13] Pramanik K. Properties and use of jatropha curcas oil and diesel fuel blends in
compression ignition engine. Renew Energy 2003;28:239–48.
[14] Demirbas A. Potential resources of non-edible oils for biodiesel. Energy Sour,
Part B 2009;4:310–4.
[15] Banković-Ilić IB, Stamenković OS, Veljković VB. Biodiesel production from
non-edible plant oils. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:3621–47.
[16] Balat M, Balat H. Progress in biodiesel processing. Appl Energy
2010;87:1815–35.
[17] Silitonga A, Masjuki H, Mahlia T, Ong H, Chong W, Boosroh M. Overview
properties of biodiesel diesel blends from edible and non-edible feedstock.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2013;22:346–60.
[18] Balat M, Balat H. A critical review of bio-diesel as a vehicular fuel. Energy
Convers Manage 2008;49:2727–41.
[19] Borugadda VB, Goud VV. Biodiesel production from renewable feedstocks:
status and opportunities. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:4763–84.
[20] Moser BR. Biodiesel production, properties, and feedstocks. Biofuels.
Springer; 2011. pp. 285–347.
[21] Hebbal OD, Reddy KV, Rajagopal K. Performance characteristics of a diesel
engine with deccan hemp oil. Fuel 2006;85:2187–94.
[22] Sahoo PK, Das LM, Babu MKG, Naik SN. Biodiesel development from high acid
value polanga seed oil and performance evaluation in a CI engine. Fuel
2007;86:448–54.
[23] Kibazohi O, Sangwan RS. Vegetable oil production potential from Jatropha
curcas, Croton megalocarpus, Aleurites moluccana, Moringa oleifera and Pachira
glabra: assessment of renewable energy resources for bio-energy production
in Africa. Biomass Bioenergy 2011;35:1352–6.
[24] Kumar A, Sharma S. Potential non-edible oil resources as biodiesel feedstock:
an Indian perspective. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15:1791–800.
[25] Sekhar MC, Mamilla VR, Mallikarjun M, Reddy KVK. Production of biodiesel
from neem oil. Int J Eng Study 2009;1:295–302.
[26] Ahmad A, Yasin N, Derek C, Lim J. Microalgae as a sustainable energy source
for biodiesel production: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2011;15:584–93.
[27] Gui MM, Lee K, Bhatia S. Feasibility of edible oil vs. non-edible oil vs. waste
edible oil as biodiesel feedstock. Energy 2008;33:1646–53.
[28] Syers JK, Wood D, Thongbai P. The proceedings of the international technical
workshop on the feasibility of non-edible oil seed crops for biofuel
production. Mae Fah Luang University, Chiang Rai, Thailand; 2007.
[29] Ong H, Silitonga A, Masjuki H, Mahlia T, Chong W, Boosroh M. Production and
comparative fuel properties of biodiesel from non-edible oils: Jatropha curcas,
Sterculia foetida and Ceiba pentandra. Energy Convers Manage
2013;73:245–55.
[30] Mustafa B. Potential alternatives to edible oils for biodiesel production – a
review of current work. Energy Convers Manage 2011;52:1479–92.
[31] Vedharaj S, Vallinayagam R, Yang W, Chou S, Chua K, Lee P. Experimental
investigation of kapok Ceiba pentandra oil biodiesel as an alternate fuel for
diesel engine. Energy Convers Manage 2013;75:773–9.
[32] Razon LF. Review alternative crops for biodiesel feedstock; 2009.
[33] Chhetri AB, Tango MS, Budge SM, Watts KC, Islam MR. Non-edible plant oils
as new sources for biodiesel production. Int J Mol Sci 2008;9:169–80.
[34] Uriarte FAJ. Biofuels from plant oils; 2010 [cited 24 January 2010]. <http://
www.aseanfoundation.org/documents/books/biofuel.pdf> (2010).
[35] Atabani AE, Silitonga AS, Ong HC, Mahlia TMI, Masjuki HH, Anjum Badruddina
Irfan, et al. Non-edible vegetable oils: a critical evaluation of oil extraction,
fatty acid compositions, biodiesel production, characteristics, engine
performance and emissions production. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2013;18:211–45.
[36] Mohibbe Azam M, Waris A, Nahar NM. Prospects and potential of fatty acid
methyl esters of some non-traditional seed oils for use as biodiesel in India.
Biomass Bioenergy 2005;29:293–302.
[37] Bryan RM. Biodiesel production, properties and feedstocks. Vitro Cell Dev
Biol—Plant 2009;45:229–66.
[38] Karmee SK, Chadha A. Preparation of biodiesel from crude oil of Pongamia
pinnata. Bioresour Technol 2005;96:1425–9.
[39] Pinzi S, Garcia IL, Gimenez FJL, Castro MDL, Dorado G, Dorado MP. The ideal
vegetable oil-based biodiesel composition: a review of social. Econ Tech
Implic Energy Fuels 2009;23:2325–41.
[40] Scott PT, Pregelj L, Chen N, Hadler JS, Djordjevic MA, Gresshoff PM. Pongamia
pinnata: an untapped resource for the biofuels industry of the future.
Bioenergy Res 2008;1:2–11.
[41] Srivastava PK, Verma M. Methyl ester of karanja oil as an alternative
renewable source energy. Fuel 2008;87:1673–7.
[42] Agarwal KRAK. Experimental investigations of performance and emissions of
Karanja oil and its blends in a single cylinder agricultural diesel engine. Appl
Energy 2009;86:106–12.
[43] Bajpai S, Sahoo PK, Das LM. Feasibility of blending karanja vegetable oil in
petro-diesel and utilization in a direct injection diesel engine. Fuel
2009;88:705–11.
[44] Sahoo P, Das L, Babu M, Naik S. Biodiesel development from high acid value
polanga seed oil and performance evaluation in a CI engine. Fuel
2007;86:448–54.
[45] Venkanna B, Venkataramana Reddy C. Biodiesel production and optimization
from Calophyllum inophyllum linn oil (honne oil) A three stage method.
Bioresour Technol 2009;100:5122–5.
[46] Hathurusingha S, Ashwath N, Subedi P. Variation in oil content and fatty acid
profile of Calophyllum inophyllum L. with fruit maturity and its implications
on resultant biodiesel quality. Ind Crops Prod 2011;33:629–32.
[47] Sahoo P, Das L, Babu M, Arora P, Singh V, Kumar N, et al. Comparative
evaluation of performance and emission characteristics of jatropha, karanja
and polanga based biodiesel as fuel in a tractor engine. Fuel
2009;88:1698–707.
[48] Hegde AK, Rao KS. Performance and emission study of 4S CI engine using
calophyllum inophyllum biodiesel with additives. Int J Theor Appl Res Mech
Eng (IJTARME) 2012;1:2319–3182.
[49] Ghadge SV, Raheman H. Biodiesel production from mahua (Madhuca indica)
oil having high free fatty acids. Biomass Bioenergy 2005;28:601–5.
[50] Jena PC, Raheman H, Prasanna Kumar G, Machavaram R. Biodiesel production
from mixture of mahua and simarouba oils with high free fatty acids. Biomass
Bioenergy 2010;34:1108–16.
[51] Balat M. Potential alternatives to edible oils for biodiesel production – a
review of current work. Energy Convers Manage 2011;52:1479–92.
[52] Singh SP, Singh D. Biodiesel production through the use of different sources
and characterization of oils and their esters as the substitute of diesel: a
review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2010;14:200–16.
[53] Agarwal D, Kumar L, Agarwal AK. Performance evaluation of a vegetable oil
fuelled compression ignition engine. Renew Energy 2008;33:1147–56.
[54] Puhan S, Nagarajan G, Vedaraman N, Ramabramhmam B. Mahua oil (Madhuca
indica oil) derivatives as a renewable fuel for diesel engine systems in India: a
performance and emissions comparative study. Int J Green Energy
2007;4:89–104.
[55] Ahmad J, Yusup S, Bokhari A, Kamil RNM. Study of fuel properties of rubber
seed oil based biodiesel. Energy Convers Manage 2014;78:266–75.
[56] Gill P, Soni SK, Kundu K, Srivastava S. Effect of blends of rubber seed oil on
engine performance and emissions; 2011.
[57] Gimbun J, Ali S, Kanwal CCSC, Shah LA, Ghazali NHM, Cheng CK, et al.
Biodiesel production from rubber seed oil using activated cement clinker as
catalyst. Proc Eng 2013;53:13–9.
[58] Fontaras G, Tzamkiozis T, Hatziemmanouil E, Samaras Z. Experimental study
on the potential application of cottonseed oil–diesel blends as fuels for
automotive diesel engines. Process Saf Environ Protect 2007;85:396–403.
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
[59] Nabi MN, Rahman MM, Akhter MS. Biodiesel from cotton seed oil and its
effect on engine performance and exhaust emissions. Appl Therm Eng
2009;29:2265–70.
[60] Ilkilic C, Yücesu H. The use of cottonseed oil methyl ester on a diesel engine.
Energy Sour, Part A 2008;30:742–53.
[61] Huzayyin A, Bawady A, Rady M, Dawood A. Experimental evaluation of diesel
engine performance and emission using blends of jojoba oil and diesel fuel.
Energy Convers Manage 2004;45:2093–112.
[62] Selim MYE, Radwan MS, Elfeky SMS. Combustion of jojoba methyl ester in an
indirect injection diesel engine. Renew Energy 2003;28:1401–20.
[63] Al-Widyan MI, Al-Muhtaseb MtA. Experimental investigation of jojoba as a
renewable energy source. Energy Convers Manage 2010;51:1702–7.
[64] Shehata M, Razek S. Experimental investigation of diesel engine performance
and emission characteristics using jojoba/diesel blend and sunflower oil. Fuel
2011;90:886–97.
[65] Veljković V, Lakićević S, Stamenković O, Todorović Z, Lazić M. Biodiesel
production from tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum L.) seed oil with a high content
of free fatty acids. Fuel 2006;85:2671–5.
[66] Usta N. An experimental study on performance and exhaust emissions of a
diesel engine fuelled with tobacco seed oil methyl ester. Energy Convers
Manage 2005;46:2373–86.
[67] Usta N, Aydoğan B, Çon A, Uğuzdoğan E, Özkal S. Properties and quality
verification of biodiesel produced from tobacco seed oil. Energy Convers
Manage 2011;52:2031–9.
[68] Usta N. Use of tobacco seed oil methyl ester in a turbocharged indirect
injection diesel engine. Biomass Bioenergy 2005;28:77–86.
[69] Giannelos P, Zannikos F, Stournas S, Lois E, Anastopoulos G. Tobacco seed oil
as an alternative diesel fuel: physical and chemical properties. Ind Crops Prod
2002;16:1–9.
[70] Sanford SD, White JM, Shah PS, Wee C, Valverde MA, Meier GR. Feedstock and
biodiesel characteristics report. Renew Energy Group 2009;416.
[71] Anyanwu C, Mbajiorgu C, Ibeto C, Ejikeme P. Effect of reaction temperature
and time on neem methyl ester yield in a batch reactor. Energy Convers
Manage 2013;74:81–7.
[72] Ali MH, Mashud M, Rubel MR, Ahmad RH. Biodiesel from neem oil as an
alternative fuel for diesel engine. Proc Eng 2013;56:625–30.
[73] Puhan S, Saravanan N, Nagarajan G, Vedaraman N. Effect of biodiesel
unsaturated fatty acid on combustion characteristics of a DI compression
ignition engine. Biomass Bioenergy 2010;34:1079–88.
[74] Dixit S, Rehman A. Linseed oil as a potential resource for bio-diesel: a review.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:4415–21.
[75] Openshaw K. A review of Jatropha curcas: an oil plant of unfulfilled promise.
Biomass Bioenergy 2000;19:1–15.
[76] Misra RD, Murthy MS. Performance, emission and combustion evaluation of
soapnut oil-diesel blends in a compression ignition engine. Fuel
2011;90:2514–8.
[77] Silitonga AS, Atabani AE, Mahlia TMI, Masjuki HH, Anjum Badruddin Irfan,
Mekhilef S. A review on prospect of Jatropha curcas for biodiesel in Indonesia.
Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15:3733–56.
[78] Achten WMJ, Verchot L, Franken YJ, Mathijs E, Singh VP, Aerts R, et al.
Jatropha bio-diesel production and use. Biomass Bioenergy 2008;32:
1063–84.
[79] Reksowardojo I, Lubis I, Manggala W, Brodjonegoro T, Soerawidjaja T,
Arismunandar W. Performance and exhaust gas emissions of using
biodiesel fuel from physic nut (Jatropha curcas L.) oil on a direct injection
diesel engine (DI). Training 2013;2007:11–9.
[80] Manickam M, Kadambamattam M, Abraham M. Combustion characteristics
and optimization of neat biodiesel on high speed common rail diesel engine
powered SUV. SAE Technical paper 2009-01-2786, 2009.
[81] Rashid U, Anwar F, Moser BR, Knothe G. Moringa oleifera oil: a possible
source of biodiesel. Bioresour Technol 2008;99:8175–9.
[82] Rizwanul Fattah IM, Masjuki H, Liaquat A, Ramli R, Kalam M, Riazuddin V.
Impact of various biodiesel fuels obtained from edible and non-edible oils on
engine exhaust gas and noise emissions. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2013;18:552–67.
[83] No SY. Inedible vegetable oils and their derivatives for alternative diesel
fuels in CI engines: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15:
131–49.
[84] Alptekin E, Canakci M. Determination of the density and the viscosities of
biodiesel–diesel fuel blends. Renew Energy 2008;33:2623–30.
[85] Masjuki HH. Biofuel engine: a new challange. Kuala Lumpur: International &
Corporate relation office, University of Malaya; 2010. p. 1–56.
[86] Prasad L, Agrawal A. Experimental investigation of performance of diesel
engine working on diesel and neem oil blends. Carbon 2012;86:78.92.
[87] Anbumani K, Singh AP. Performance of mustard and neem oil blends with
diesel fuel in CI engine. Carbon 2006;86:78–92.
[88] Panwar NL, Shrirame HS, Rathore NS, Jindal S, Kurchania AK. Performance
evaluation of a diesel engine fueled with methyl ester of castor seed oil. Appl
Therm Eng 2010;30:245–9.
[89] Ghadge SV, Raheman H. Process optimization for biodiesel production from
mahua (Madhuca indica) oil using response surface methodology. Bioresour
Technol 2006;97:379–84.
[90] Palash S, Masjuki H, Kalam M, Masum B, Sanjid A, Abedin M. State of the art of
NOx mitigation technologies and their effect on the performance and
emission characteristics of biodiesel-fueled Compression Ignition engines.
Energy Convers Manage 2013;76:400–20.
227
[91] Shahabuddin M, Kalam M, Masjuki H, Bhuiya M, Mofijur M. An experimental
investigation into biodiesel stability by means of oxidation and property
determination. Energy 2012;44:616–22.
[92] Puhan S, Jegan R, Balasubbramanian K, Nagarajan G. Effect of injection
pressure on performance, emission and combustion characteristics of high
linolenic linseed oil methyl ester in a DI diesel engine. Renew Energy
2009;34:1227–33.
[93] Chauhan BS, Kumar N, Du Jun Y, Lee KB. Performance and emission study of
preheated Jatropha oil on medium capacity diesel engine. Energy
2010;35:2484–92.
[94] Ganapathy T, Gakkhar RP, Murugesan K. Influence of injection timing on
performance, combustion and emission characteristics of Jatropha biodiesel
engine. Appl Energy 2011;88:4376–86.
[95] Saravanan N, Nagarajan G, Puhan S. Experimental investigation on a DI diesel
engine fuelled with Madhuca indica ester and diesel blend. Biomass Bioenergy
2010;34:838–43.
[96] Raheman H, Ghadge SV. Performance of compression ignition engine with
mahua (Madhuca indica) biodiesel. Fuel 2007;86:2568–73.
[97] Boog JHF, Silveira ELC, De Caland LB, Tubino M. Determining the residual
alcohol in biodiesel through its flash point. Fuel 2011;90:905–7.
[98] Carareto NDD, Kimura CYCS, Oliveira EC, Costa MC, Meirelles AJA. Flash points
of mixtures containing ethyl esters or ethylic biodiesel and ethanol. Fuel
2012;96:319–26.
[99] Fernando S, Karra P, Hernandez R, Jha SK. Effect of incompletely converted
soybean oil on biodiesel quality. Energy 2007;32:844–51.
[100] Sanford S, White J, Shah P, Wee C, Valverde M, Meier G. Feedstock and
biodiesel
characteristics
report.
<http://www.regfuel.com/pdfs/
FeedstockandBiodieselCharacteristicsReport.pdf> (2011).
[101] Krishna BM, Mallikarjuna JM. Properties and performance of cotton seed oil–
diesel blends as a fuel for compression ignition engines. J Renew Sustain
Energy 2009;1:1–10.
[102] Botanic Garden of Indian Republic (BGIR). Data base of oil yielding plants.
<http://www.mnre.gov.in/list/oil-plants.pdfS> (2004).
[103] Yusuf SKKNNAN, Yaakub Z. Overview on the current trends in biodiesel
production. Energy Convers Manage 2010;52:2741–51.
[104] Nwafor O. The effect of elevated fuel inlet temperature on performance of
diesel engine running on neat vegetable oil at constant speed conditions.
Renew Energy 2003;28:171–81.
[105] Ramadhas AS, Jayaraj S, Muraleedharan C. Biodiesel production from high
FFA rubber seed oil. Fuel 2005;84:335–40.
[106] Ramadhas CMuraleedharan, Jayaraj S. Performance and emission evaluation
of a diesel engine fueled with methyl esters of rubber seed oil. Renew Energy
2005;30:1789–800.
[107] Puhan S, Vedaraman N, Ram BV, Sankarnarayanan G, Jeychandran K. Mahua
oil (Madhuca indica seed oil) methyl ester as biodiesel-preparation and
emission characteristics. Biomass Bioenergy 2005;28:87–93.
[108] Sureshkumar K, Velraj R, Ganesan R. Performance and exhaust emission
characteristics of a CI engine fueled with Pongamia pinnata methyl ester
(PPME) and its blends with diesel. Renew Energy 2008;33:2294–302.
[109] Raheman H, Phadatare A. Diesel engine emissions and performance from
blends of karanja methyl ester and diesel. Biomass Bioenergy 2004;27:393–7.
[110] Department of Forestry of The Republic of Indonesia. The Forestry Research
and Development Agency (Badan Penelitandan Pengembangan Kehutanan)
(Nyamplung Calophyllum inophyllum. Lapotential source of biofuel).
Department of Forestry Bogor; 2008.
[111] Godiganur S, Suryanarayana Murthy CH, Reddy RP. 6BTA 5.9 G2-1 Cummins
engine performance and emission tests using methyl ester mahua (Madhuca
indica) oil/diesel blends. Renew Energy 2009;34:2172–7.
[112] Ikwuagwu O, Ononogbu I, Njoku O. Production of biodiesel using rubber
[Hevea brasiliensis (Kunth. Muell.)] seed oil. Ind Crops Prod 2000;12:57–62.
[113] Edwin Geo V, Nagarajan G, Nagalingam B. Studies on dual fuel operation of
rubber seed oil and its bio-diesel with hydrogen as the inducted fuel. Int J
Hydrogen Energy 2008;33:6357–67.
[114] Rakopoulos C, Antonopoulos K, Rakopoulos D, Hountalas D, Giakoumis E.
Comparative performance and emissions study of a direct injection diesel
engine using blends of diesel fuel with vegetable oils or bio-diesels of various
origins. Energy Convers Manage 2006;47:3272–87.
[115] Altin R, Cetinkaya S, Yücesu H. The potential of using vegetable oil fuels as
fuel for diesel engines. Energy Convers Manage 2001;42:529–38.
[116] Chauhan BS, Kumar N, Jun YD, Lee KB. Performance and emission study of
preheated Jatropha oil on medium capacity diesel engine. Energy
2010;35:2484–92.
[117] Palash S, Kalam M, Masjuki H, Arbab M, Masum B, Sanjid A. Impacts of NOx
reducing antioxidant additive on performance and emissions of a multicylinder diesel engine fueled with Jatropha biodiesel blends. Energy Convers
Manage 2014;77:577–85.
[118] Knothe G. Biodiesel and renewable diesel. Inform Champaign 2008;19:149.
[119] Mohammad Fauzi AH, Saidina Amin NA. Optimization of oleic acid
esterification catalyzed by ionic liquid for green biodiesel synthesis. Energy
Convers Manage 2013;76:818–27.
[120] Alptekin E, Canakci M. Characterization of the key fuel properties of methyl
ester–diesel fuel blends. Fuel 2009;88:75–80.
[121] Canakci M, Sanli H. Biodiesel production from various feedstocks and their
effects on the fuel properties. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 2008;35:431–41.
[122] Sahoo P, Das L. Process optimization for biodiesel production from Jatropha,
Karanja and Polanga oils. Fuel 2009;88:1588–94.
228
A.M. Ashraful et al. / Energy Conversion and Management 80 (2014) 202–228
[123] Moser B. Biodiesel production, properties, and feedstocks. Vitro Cell Dev
Biol—Plant 2009;45:229–66.
[124] Sharma YC, Singh B, Upadhyay SN. Advancements in development and
characterization of biodiesel: a review. Fuel 2008;87:2355–73.
[125] Subramanian K, Singal S, Saxena M, Singhal S. Utilization of liquid biofuels in
automotive diesel engines: an Indian perspective. Biomass Bioenergy
2005;29:65–72.
[126] Banapurmath NR, Tewari PG, Hosmath RS. Performance and emission
characteristics of a DI compression ignition engine operated on Honge,
Jatropha and sesame oil methyl esters. Renew Energy 2008;33:1982–8.
[127] Mahanta P, Mishra SC, Kushwah YS. An experimental study of Pongamia
pinnata L, oil as a diesel substitute. Proc Inst Mech Engrs, Part A: J Power
Energy 2006;220:803–8.
[128] Acikgoz C, Kockar O. Flash pyrolysis of linseed (Linum usitatissimum L.) for
production of liquid fuels. J Anal Appl Pyrol 2007;78:406–12.
[129] Lapuerta M, Armas O, Ballesteros R, Fernández J. Diesel emissions from
biofuels derived from Spanish potential vegetable oils. Fuel 2005;84:773–80.
[130] Okieimen F, Bakare O, Okieimen C. Studies on the epoxidation of rubber seed
oil. Ind Crops Prod 2002;15:139–44.
[131] Kasote DM, Badhe YS, Hegde MV. Effect of mechanical press oil extraction
processing on quality of linseed oil. Ind Crops Prod 2013;42:10–3.
[132] Sajjad H, Masjuki H, Varman M, Kalam M, Arbab M, Imtenan S, et al. Engine
combustion, performance and emission characteristics of gas to liquid (GTL)
fuels and its blends with diesel and bio-diesel. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2014;30:961–86.
[133] Baiju B, Naik MK, Das LMA. Comparative evaluation of compression ignition
engine characteristics using methyl and ethyl esters of Karanja oil. Renew
Energy 2009;34:1616–21.
[134] Jindal S, Nandwana BP, Rathore NS. Comparative evaluation of combustion,
performance, and emissions of jatropha methyl ester and karanj methyl ester
in a direct injection diesel engine. Energy Fuels 2010;24:1565–72.
[135] Nagarhalli M, Nandedkar V, Mohite K. Emission and performance
characteristics of karanja biodiesel and its blends in a CI engine and it’s
economics. ARPN J Eng Appl Sci 2010;5:52–6.
[136] Nabi MN, Hoque SMN, Akhter MS. Karanja (Pongamia Pinnata) biodiesel
production in Bangladesh, characterization of karanja biodiesel and its effect
on diesel emissions. Fuel Process Technol 2009;90:1080–6.
[137] Anand K, Sharma R, Mehta PS. Experimental investigations on combustion,
performance and emissions characteristics of neat karanji biodiesel and its
methanol blend in a diesel engine. Biomass Bioenergy 2011;35:533–41.
[138] Godiganur S, Murthy CS, Reddy RP. Performance and emission characteristics
of a Kirloskar HA394 diesel engine operated on Mahua oil methyl ester.
Thammasat Int J Sci Technol 2010;15.
[139] Kapilan N, Reddy R. Evaluation of methyl esters of mahua oil (Madhuca
indica) as diesel fuel. J Am Oil Chem Soc 2008;85:185–8.
[140] Puhan S, Vedaraman N, Rambrahamam B, Nagarajan G. Mahua (Madhuca
indica) seed oil: a source of renewable energy in India. J Sci Ind Res
2005;64:890.
[141] Ramadhas A, Jayaraj S, Muraleedharan C. Characterization and effect of using
rubber seed oil as fuel in the compression ignition engines. Renew Energy
2005;30:795–803.
[142] Ramadhas A, Jayaraj S, Muraleedharan C. Dual fuel mode operation in diesel
engines using renewable fuels: rubber seed oil and coir-pith producer gas.
Renew Energy 2008;33:2077–83.
[143] Geo VE, Nagarajan G, Nagalingam B. Studies on improving the performance of
rubber seed oil fuel for diesel engine with DEE port injection. Fuel
2010;89:3559–67.
[144] Satyanarayana M, Muraleedharan C. Investigations on performance and
emission characteristics of vegetable oil biodiesels as fuels in a single
cylinder direct injection diesel engine. Energy Sour, Part A: Recov, Utiliz
Environ Eff 2011;34:177–86.
[145] Aydin H, Bayindir H. Performance and emission analysis of cottonseed oil
methyl ester in a diesel engine. Renew Energy 2010;35:588–92.
[146] Karabektas M. The effects of turbocharger on the performance and exhaust
emissions of a diesel engine fuelled with biodiesel. Renew Energy
2009;34:989–93.
[147] Rakopoulos C, Rakopoulos D, Hountalas D, Giakoumis E, Andritsakis E.
Performance and emissions of bus engine using blends of diesel fuel with biodiesel of sunflower or cottonseed oils derived from Greek feedstock. Fuel
2008;87:147–57.
[148] Rakopoulos D, Rakopoulos C, Giakoumis E, Dimaratos A, Founti M.
Comparative environmental behavior of bus engine operating on blends of
diesel fuel with four straight vegetable oils of Greek origin: sunflower,
cottonseed, corn and olive. Fuel 2011;90:3439–46.
[149] Karabektas M, Ergen G, Hosoz M. The effects of preheated cottonseed oil
methyl ester on the performance and exhaust emissions of a diesel engine.
Appl Therm Eng 2008;28:2136–43.
_
C. Effect of cotton seed oil methyl ester on the performance
[150] Yücesu HS, Ilkiliç
and exhaust emission of a diesel engine. Energy Sour, Part A 2006;28:389–98.
[151] Hazar H. Cotton methyl ester usage in a diesel engine equipped with
insulated combustion chamber. Appl Energy 2010;87:134–40.
[152] Saleh H. Effect of exhaust gas recirculation on diesel engine nitrogen oxide
reduction operating with jojoba methyl ester. Renew Energy
2009;34:2178–86.
_ Kökkülünk G. Investigation of the effects of steam
[153] Parlak A, Ayhan V, Cesur I,
injection on performance and emissions of a diesel engine fuelled with
tobacco seed oil methyl ester. Fuel Process Technol 2013;116:101–9.
[154] Murthy YS. Performance of tobacco oil-based bio-diesel fuel in a single
cylinder direct injection engine. Int J Phys Sci 2010;5:2066–74.
[155] Rao DA, Govindarajulu K, Mohan C. Experimental investigations on a four
stroke compression ignition engine using neat tobacco seed oil as an
alternate fuel. Global J Res Eng 2013;13.
[156] Sharma D, Soni S, Mathur J. Emission reduction in a direct injection diesel
engine fueled by neem–diesel blend. Energy Sour, Part A 2009;31:500–8.
[157] Sivalakshmi S, Balusamy T. Experimental investigation on a diesel engine
fuelled with neem oil and its methyl ester. Therm Sci 2011;15:1193–204.
[158] Elango T, Senthilkumar T. Effect of methyl esters of neem and diesel oil
blends on the combustion and emission characteristics of a CI engine. ARPN J
Eng Appl Sci 2010;5:80–5.
[159] Ragit S, Mohapatra S, Kundu K. Comparative study of engine performance and
exhaust emission characteristics of a single cylinder 4-stroke CI engine
operated on the esters of hemp oil and neem oil. Ind J Eng Mater Sci
2011;18:204–10.
[160] Sivalakshmi S, Balusamy T. Influence of ethanol addition on a diesel engine
fuelled with neem oil methyl ester. Int J Green Energy 2012;9:218–28.
[161] Banapurmath N, Tewari P, Yaliwal V, Kambalimath S, Basavarajappa Y.
Combustion characteristics of a 4-stroke CI engine operated on Honge oil,
Neem and Rice Bran oils when directly injected and dual fuelled with
producer gas induction. Renew Energy 2009;34:1877–84.
[162] Nabi MN, Akhter MS, Zaglul Shahadat MM. Improvement of engine emissions
with conventional diesel fuel and diesel–biodiesel blends. Bioresour Technol
2006;97:372–8.
[163] Ragit S, Mohapatra S, Kundu K. Performance and emission evaluation of a
diesel engine fueled with methyl ester of neem oil and filtered neem oil. J Sci
Ind Res 2010;69:62–6.
[164] Agarwal DK, Agarwal L, Kumar A. Performance evaluation of a vegetable oil
fuelled compression ignition engine. Renew Energy 2008;33:1147–56.
[165] Jindal S, Salvi B. Sustainability aspects and optimization of linseed biodiesel
blends for compression ignition engine. J Renew Sustain Energy
2012;4:043111.
[166] Huang J, Wang Y, Qin J-B, Roskilly AP. Comparative study of performance and
emissions of a diesel engine using Chinese pistache and jatropha biodiesel.
Fuel Process Technol 2010;91:1761–7.
[167] Agarwal D, Agarwal AK. Performance and emissions characteristics of
Jatropha oil (preheated and blends) in a direct injection compression
ignition engine. Appl Therm Eng 2007;27:2314–23.
[168] Kannan D, Pachamuthu S, Nurun Nabi M, Hustad JE, Løvås T. Theoretical and
experimental investigation of diesel engine performance, combustion and
emissions analysis fuelled with the blends of ethanol, diesel and jatropha
methyl ester. Energy Convers Manage 2012;53:322–31.
[169] Sundaresan M, Chandrasekaran S, Porai PT, combustion Analysis of.
performance and emissions characteristics of blends of methyl esters of
jatropha oil (MEJ) in DI diesel engine. SAE Technical paper 2007-32-0066,
2007.
[170] Choudhury S, Bose P. Jatropha derived biodiesel—its suitability as CI engine
fuel. SAE Int 2008;28:0040.
[171] Chauhan BS, Kumar N, Cho HM. A study on the performance and emission of a
diesel engine fueled with Jatropha biodiesel oil and its blends. Energy
2012;37:616–22.
[172] Al-Dawody MF, Bhatti S. Optimization strategies to reduce the biodiesel NOx
effect in diesel engine with experimental verification. Energy Convers
Manage 2013;68:96–104.
[173] Rakopoulos D. Heat release analysis of combustion in heavy-duty
turbocharged diesel engine operating on blends of diesel fuel with
cottonseed or sunflower oils and their bio-diesel. Fuel 2012;96:524–34.
[174] Wu F, Wang J, Chen W, Shuai S. A study on emission performance of a diesel
engine fueled with five typical methyl ester biodiesels. Atmos Environ
2009;43:1481–5.