An overview: Energy saving and pollution reduction by using green fuel blends in diesel engines

Self Cite

This overview attempts to outline what we currently know about the PCDD/F emission inventories and the source categories therein. Besides the best available control techniques, suggestions are offered on how to reduce the PCDD/F emission factors and emission quantity of some important PCDD/F emission sources. The PCDD/F combustion sources can be classified as either stationary or mobile or minimally/uncontrolled combustion sources. The major stationary sources of PCDD/Fs are metal production processes, waste incineration, heat and power plants, and fly ash treatment plant. Crematories, vehicles, residential boilers and stoves are of key concern due to their proximity to residential areas and their relatively lower lying stacks and exhaust gases, which may result in great impact to their surrounding environment.Moreover, we offered our perspectives on how to improve the quality and representative of the PCDD/F emission factors to attain PCDD/F inventories which correspond more to reality. These points of view include: (1) PCDD/F contributions during start-up procedures of MSWIs should be considered, (2) the sampling times of stack flue gases for EAFs and secondary metal smelters should correspond to whole smelting process stages, (3) longer flue gas sampling time should be executed for power plants, (4) direct exhaust samplings from tailpipes for mobile sources, (5) development of an open burn testing facility that can reflect the real open burning conditions, and (6) long-term sampling techniques like AMESA are suggested to used exclusively for the most contributed PCDD/F stationary sources.

Section: Pcdd/f Emissions From Mobile Sourcesmentioning

confidence: 99%

An Overview of PCDD/F Inventories and Emission Factors from Stationary and Mobile Sources: What We Know and What is Missing

Cheruiyot

Lee

Yan

et al. 2016

Self Cite

“…Some previous studies indicated that the oxygenated additives in diesel can improve the thermal efficiency of engine and reduce the BSFC (Yoshimoto et al, 1999;Lin et al, 2006;Lin et al, 2010;Mwangi et al, 2015a;Tsai et al, 2015b). However, the alternative ratios in the current study were too high to overcome the loss of heating values.…”

Section: Fuelsmentioning

confidence: 46%

Persistent Organic Pollutant Reductions from a Diesel Engine Generator Fueled with Waste Cooking Oil-based Biodiesel Blended with Butanol and Acetone

Tsai

Lin

Chen

et al. 2017

This investigation focuses on the effects on emissions of persistent organic pollutants (POPs) (polychlorinated dibenzop-dioxins and dibenzofurans (PCDD/Fs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), polybrominated dibenzo-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans (PBDD/Fs) and polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs)) from a diesel engine fuelled by 20 vol% waste cooking oil-based biodiesel (W20) blended with various fractions of dehydrate/hydrous butanol (B/B′) and acetone (A/A′). The emission concentrations of the POPs were in the order PBDE ≫ PBDD/F > PCB > PCDD/F, regardless of the blending fuel or engine load. The POP with highest concentration was PBDE, being 2-3 times that of the others. Conversely, the magnitude of emitted toxicity followed the order PCDD/F > PCB ≈ PBDD/F, while PCDD/F emissions had about 10 times the toxicity concentrations of PCBs and PBDD/Fs. Among the dioxin compounds, the emissions of PCDDs represented 46-73% (average 57%) and 50-72% (average 59%) of total PCDD/F mass and toxicity concentrations, respectively, and were which and were thus significantly higher than those of PCDFs. The non-ortho-PCB contributed almost all toxicity (~100%) of 14 dioxin-like-PCBs, even though its contribution in mass was only 9-32% (average 16%) among the congeners. Similarly, PBDFs accounted for ~100% of toxicity of PBDD/Fs. Additionally, deca-BDEs contributed to most of the mass emissions of PBDEs (47.0-90.5%, 82.4% in average), while nona-BDEs and tri-to octaBDEs only contributed 10% and 8%, respectively. The reductions of the absolute mass concentrations of POPs from W20 were in the order PBDEs >> PBDD/Fs > PCDD/Fs ≈ PCBs for all multi-component diesel blends. The reduction fractions of POPs were in the order PCDD/F > PCB ≈ PBDD/F > PBDE, and those of TEQ were PCDD/F > PCB > PBDD/F. Thus, the addition of butanol and acetone, whether pure or hydrous, could further lower the POP emissions from W20.

“…Application of waste cooking oils include soap making, biodiesel production, co-combustion in diesel engines, furnaces and burners (Ramadhas et al, 2004;Zheng et al, 2006;Lu et al, 2013;Chang et al, 2014a;Mahfouz et al, 2015;Tsai et al, 2015aTsai et al, , b, 2016 due to the relatively low cost of waste cooking oil as a raw material (Sabudak and Yildiz, 2010). Conversely, waste cooking oil contains large amounts of free fatty acids (FFA), high water content and impurities, which are major drawbacks in soap making and biodiesel production (Leung and Guo, 2006;Predojević, 2008;Sabudak and Yildiz, 2010), while high viscosity values poses problems in pumping and injection in diesel engines (Kalam et al, 2011;Mwangi et al, 2015). Additionally, the high cost of biodiesel production from raw waste cooking oil presents an obstacle to successfully exploit it as a resource.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, Mahfouz et al (2015) used it in swirl burners with preheating to avoid clogging in the nozzles and reported higher HC and CO 2 emissions compared to diesel fuel. Waste cooking oil can also be used to reduce polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons from mobile and stationary sources (Cheruiyot et al, 2015;Mwangi et al, 2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Therefore, raw waste cooking oil has been directly used as a cheap substitute for conventional petroleum fuels in combustion process (Kalam et al, 2011;Mwangi et al, 2015). Kalam et al (2011) noted that application of 5% waste palm oil and 5% waste coconut oil mixed with 95% diesel fuel in an engine resulted in reductions of the emissions of unburned hydrocarbon (HC) (17-23%), smoke (1.75-3.33%), CO (7.3-21%), and NOx (1%), when compared to diesel fuel operation.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Reduction of Persistent Organic Pollutant Emissions during Incinerator Start-up by Using Crude Waste Cooking Oil as an Alternative Fuel

Chen

Lee

Mwangi

et al. 2017

Self Cite

Illegal harvesting and recycling of waste cooking oil, also referred to as "gutter oil" in many countries, poses a great food safety threat. Thus, in this study the feasibility of using waste cooking oil as an auxiliary fuel in the furnace of laboratory waste incinerator was evaluated in terms of toxic pollutant emissions. Two fuel blends (W20D80 and W40D60) were blended from varying proportions of diesel fuel (D100), and waste cooking oil (W100) and their physio-chemical characteristics were subsequently determined and compared. Thermogravimetry analysis (TGA) and derivative thermogravimetry (DTG) of D100, W100, W20D80 and W40D60 showed that diesel fuel consist of more volatile short aliphatic hydrocarbons, while the waste cooking oil and its blends had more thermal stable unsaturated long chain molecules. After the de novo synthesis window of 200-400°C, 40% of waste cooking oil and 60% of diesel (W40D60) was injected at around 500-700°C, and reduced the toxicity concentrations of PCDD/Fs and PCBs by an average of 86% and 94%, respectively. This study demonstrated that, by using waste cooking oil as a fuel blend, not only can reduce the possibility of "gutter oil" being put in the food to damage the health of human beings, but also can be recycled as a kind of green fuel to reduce the emissions of persistent organic pollutants (POPs).