Energy 35 (2010) 2043–2048

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Energy
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/energy

Saving energy and reducing pollution by use of emulsified palm-biodiesel blends

with bio-solution additive
Kang-Shin Chen a, Yuan-Chung Lin a, *, Lien-Te Hsieh b, Long-Full Lin c, Chia-Chieh Wu d
a
Institute of Environmental Engineering, National Sun Yat-Sen University, Kaohsiung 804, Taiwan
b
Department of Environmental Science and Engineering, National Pingtung University of Science and Technology. Pingtung 912, Taiwan
c
Department of Environmental Engineering, Kun Shan University, Tainan County 710, Taiwan
d
Postgraduate Programs in Management, I-Shou University, Kaohsiung County 840, Taiwan

a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t

Article history: Advances in biodiesel, emulsified diesel and artificial chemical additives are driven by consumer demand
Received 8 October 2009 to save energy and reduce emissions from diesel engines. However, the effect of emulsified bio-solution/
Received in revised form palm-biodiesel/diesel blends in diesel engines has not been assessed. Experimental results in this work
18 December 2009
demonstrate that the emulsified bio-solution/palm-biodiesel/diesel blends have the advantage in saving
Accepted 19 January 2010
Available online 15 March 2010
energy and reducing emissions of both polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) and particulate matter
(PM) from diesel engines. When comparing with P0 (premium diesel fuel as base fuel), E16P20 fuel
(16 vol% bio-solution þ 20 vol% palm-biodiesel þ 64 vol% P0, an additional 1 vol% surfactant) saved 12.4%
Keywords:
Biodiesel fuel consumption and reduced emissions of PM by 90.1%, total PAHs by 69.3%, and total BaPeq
Emulsion (benzo[a]pyrene equivalent concentration) by 69.6%. Emulsified palm-biodiesel with bio-solution can be
Bio-solution additive considered as a clean and alternative fuel.
PAH Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Diesel engine

1. Introduction
Particulate matter (PM), hydrocarbons (HCs), and carbon
monoxide (CO) emissions are strictly regulated by the US Envi-
ronmental Protection Agency. Therefore, developing and seeking
for alternative diesel fuels, without modifying engines, has received
considerable attention in environmental community. Biodiesel is
now playing an important role on the alternative fuel market.
Today, several US states are promoting the use of biodiesel, and US
federal government has instituted a tax credit for companies
developing biodiesel [1]. Biodiesel used in diesel engines can
reduce emissions of CO, carbon dioxide (CO2), total hydrocarbons
(THCs), PAHs (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons), and volatile
organic compounds, but only increase fuel consumption slightly
[2–12]. However, the positive or negative effect on PM emissions
varies among vehicles [2,13,14], biodiesels [13–18], and
loadings [10].
Water in emulsified fuel has been confirmed to play an impor-
tant role in conventional liquid fuel engines [19–26]. This is because
rapid evaporation of water broke fuel into smaller droplets and
* Corresponding author. Tel.: þ886 7 5252000x4412; fax: þ886 7 5254412.
E-mail address: yclin@faculty.nsysu.edu.tw (Y.-C. Lin).
hence increased their surface area causing well-mixed air and fuel
droplets when the temperature of water-in-diesel emulsified diesel
in the cylinder went up to 105  C. The use of water emulsified diesel
can not only improve the brake efficiency, but also significantly
reduce the formation of thermal nitrogen monoxide (NO), soot,
HCs, and PM in diesel engines [19–24]. Effects of additives and fuel
oxygenation on diesel combustion and emissions have also been
investigated [27–33]. An oxygenated diglyme additive was known
to enhance nitrogen dioxide (NO2) emission and combustion effi-
ciency, but decrease fuel consumption rate, brake-specific fuel
consumption, smoke opacity, and CO emission [30]. The use of
coagulant additive was found to significantly improve the opera-
tion time of the media filter by reducing clogging rate and
increasing turbidity removal [32]. Fabfaletti et al. (2005) found that
the average reduction of total BaPeq emissions from a diesel engine
was about 14% for emulsified fuel and about 39% for a cerium-based
additive [33].
In order to achieve low emissions and high combustion effi-
ciency from diesel engines, combining emulsion and additive has
been considered as promising alternatives. Recently, a bio-solution
has been used as an additive in emulsified fuels by our research
group [34]. Bio-solution is much friendlier to the environment than
artificial chemical diesel additives. Bio-solution has a catalytic
effect to increase the combustion efficiency and decrease pollutant

0360-5442/$ – see front matter Ó 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.energy.2010.01.021
2044 K.-S. Chen et al. / Energy 35 (2010) 2043–2048

emissions during the combustion process. The energy saving and
reduction of PM and total BaPeq were 5.88%, 57.8%, and 59.2%,
respectively when the optimal fraction of bio-solution, 16%, was
added in the emulsified diesel [34]. Previous study concluded that
the physico-chemical properties of palm-biodiesel meet the
requirements for diesel-engine combustion, and are comparable
with those of other biodiesels, such as soybean and rapeseed oils
[35]. This study probed into energy efficiency and energy saving of
emulsified palm-biodiesel with 16% bio-solution. Emission reduc-
tion of PM, soluble organic fraction (SOF; defined as soluble organic
matter of PM divided by PM), and PAHs from a diesel engine were
also examined.
2. Experimental section
2.1. Emulsified equipment, test fuels and test diesel engine
Table 1 shows the physical and chemical properties of premium
diesel fuel as base fuel (P0) and pure palm-biodiesel. A bio-solution
(Yung Li Co. Ltd., Taiwan), made of natural organics, was selected as
an additive; details were given in Lin et al. [34]. Diesel, biodiesel
and bio-solution are inherently immiscible. Hence, the surfactant
was used to reduce interfacial tension and increase affinity of those
three materials. The detail information of surfactant can be found in
our previous study [34]. To manufacture each test emulsified fuel
blend, an additional 1 vol% of surfactant was added to the fuel
blend. In this study, a nano-technology microemulsifier (YSK
Chemical Co., Ltd., Japan) was used to generate emulsified fuel
blends. The manufacturing process involves pumping P0, biodiesel,
bio-solution, and surfactant separately into a mixing tank with
a mixing speed of 2100 rpm. This mixed fuel was broken into
droplets by a high-pressure pump, and was then sent to the
microemulsifier. The droplets of mixed fuel then hit a series of
curved metal boards inside the microemulsifier and formed nano-
sized droplets. Finally, the nano-sized droplets were mixed again in
a mixing tank to produce emulsified fuel blends.
The seven test fuels in this study were P0, P10 (10 vol% palm-
biodiesel þ 90 vol% P0), P20, P30, E16P10 (16 vol% bio-
solution þ 10 vol% palm-biodiesel þ 74 vol% P0, an additional 1 vol%
of surfactant), E16P20 and E16P30. Palm-biodiesel was purchased
from Gibson Chemical Corporation in Malaysia. The diesel-engine
generator (non-catalyst) used in this study (QC495, Anhui Quan-
Chai Group Corp., China) was manufactured in 2003 and has the
following characteristics: four cylinders; four strokes; direct
injection; water-cooled; bore and stroke of 95 mm
(Dia.)  105 mm; total displacement of 2976 mL; maximum torque
of 169 Nm at 1950 rpm, and maximum horsepower of 40 kW at
2600 rpm. The injection pump and injector are models BH4Q85R8
and ZCK1555S527, respectively. The injector has four nozzles
(diameter ¼ 0.27 mm) and maximum injection pressure is
19.5 MPa. The testing procedure was under a steady state (125 Nm,
75% of total torque load) for each test fuel. Fig. 1 shows sampling
equipment of generator and continuous emulsified equipment.
2.2. Sample collections
For sample collection, a PAH sampling system installed down-
stream of the diesel engine exhaust was used to collect PM and
PAHs under undiluted conditions at a temperature below 52  C. PM
and particulate-phase PAHs were collected on a glass-fiber filter.
Before sampling, the filter was placed in an oven at 450  C for 8 h to
burn off any organic compounds that might be presented in the
filter. Then, the filter was stored in a desiccator for at least 8 h for
the moisture equilibrium before weighing. After the experiments,
the filters were brought back to the laboratory and left in a desic-
cator for 8 h to remove moisture, then weighed again to determine
the net mass of PM collected. Gas-phase PAHs were collected on
a three-stage glass cartridge packed with a 2.5 cm upper PUF
(polyurethane foam) plug, a 5.0 cm XAD-16 resin, and a 2.5 cm
bottom PUF plug. Silicone glue was used to seal and hold these two
pieces of PUF to prevent the leaks of resins during sampling and
extraction processes. After 8 h of adherence, the PUF/resin cartridge
was cleaned-up by Soxhlet extracting for one day with distilled
water, methanol, dichloromethane and finally n-hexane for a total
of 4 days. Then, the PUF/resin cartridge was placed in a vacuum
oven at 60  C for a 2 h-drying process to evaporate the residual
solvent contents. After the drying process, each PUF/resin cartridge
was wrapped by a hexane-washed aluminum foil and was stored in
a refrigerator at 4  C. Before sampling, it was stored in a clean
screw-capped jar with a Teflon cap liner for transportation. The

Table 1
Physical and chemical properties of premium diesel fuel and pure palm-biodiesel.

Fuel parameter Premium Pure palm- Analytic

diesel fuel biodiesel method
Flash Point,  C 88 172 ASTMa D93
Pour Point,  C 10 15 ASTM D97
Viscosity, cSt at 40  C 2.73 4.40 ASTM D445
Cetane Index 52.2 49.4 ASTM D976
Cetane Number 55.8 63.6 ASTM D613
Sulfur Content, ppmw 26 NDb (<1) ASTM D2622
Poly-aromatic Content, wt% 0.4 ND (<0.1) ASTM D6591
Density, g mL1 at 15  C 0.832 0.873 ASTM D4052
Carbon Residue, wt% 0.06 0.05 ASTM D542
Distillation, T90,  C 317 335 ASTM D86
Ash, wt% 0.001 0.001 ASTM D482
Residue, vol% 0.02 0.01 ASTM D2709
Lower gross heating value (J g1) 44,062 39,159 ASTM D3286
Corrosiveness (3 h at 50  C) 1a 1a ASTM D130
a
American Society for Testing and Materials.
b
Not detected. Fig. 1. The sampling equipment of generator (a) and continuous emulsified equipment (b).
 K.-S. Chen et al. / Energy 35 (2010) 2043–2048 2045

glass-fiber filter was also wrapped with aluminum foil, and was 20
stored in a glass box for transportation. 12.4 11.7

Energy Saving (%)

9.17
10
2.3. PAH analysis

Base -0.222
Each collected sample (including both particulate- and gas- 0
phase PAHs samples) was extracted in a Soxhlet extractor with -0.825
a mixed solvent (n-hexane and dichloromethane; vol/vol, 1:1; -2.75

500 mL each) for 24 h. The extract was then concentrated by pure
nitrogen to about 5–10 mL. Then the concentrated extract was
cleaned-up by silica gel and anhydrous sodium sulfate. Finally, the
cleaned-up extract was reconcentrated by pure nitrogen to exactly
1.0 mL for PAH analysis. The PAH contents were determined by
a Hewlett–Packard (HP) gas chromatograph (GC) (HP 5890A;
Hewlett–Packard, Wilmington, DE, USA), a mass selective detector
(MSD) (HP 5972) and a computer workstation (Aspire C500; Acer,
Taipei, Taiwan). This GC/MSD was equipped with a capillary column
(HP Ultra 2, 50 m  0.32 mm  0.17 mm) and an automatic sampler
(HP-7673A) and operated under the following conditions: the
injection volume of the GC/MSD was 1 mL; the splitless injection
temperature was 310  C; the ion source temperature was 310  C;
the oven was heated from 50 to100  C at 20  C min1, 100–290  C at
3  C min1, then held at 290  C for 40 min. The mass of primary and
secondary PAHs ions were determined by using the scan mode for
pure PAH standards. The PAHs were qualified by using the selected
ion monitoring mode. 21 PAH compounds were determined,
including naphthalene (Nap), acenaphthylene (AcPy), acenaph-
thene (Acp), fluorene (Flu), phenanthrene (PA), anthracene (Ant);
fluoranthene (FL), pyrene (Pyr), benzo[a]anthracene (BaA), chrys-
ene (CHR), cyclopenta[c,d]pyrene (CYC), benzo[b]fluoranthene
(BbF), benzo[k]fluoranthene (BkF), benzo[e]pyrene (BeP), benzo(-
a)pyrene (B[a]P), perylene (PER), dibenzo[a,h]anthracene (DBA),
benzo[b]chrycene (BbC), indeno[1,2,3,-cd]pyrene (IND), benzo[g-
hi]perylene (Bghip), and coronene (COR).
The GC/MSD was calibrated with a diluted standard solution of
16 PAH compounds (PAH mixture-610M; Supelco, Bellefonte, PA,
USA) plus five additional individual PAHs obtained from Merck
(Darmstadt, Germany). Analysis of serial dilutions of PAHs stan-
dards showed that the detection limit for GC/MSD was between
31 pg and 314 pg for the 21 PAH compounds. Ten consecutive
injections of a PAH 610-M standard yielded an average relative
standard deviation of the GC/MSD integration area of 7.22%, within
a range of 4.63–9.96%. In this study, two internal standards
(phenanthrene-d10 and perylene-d12) were used to check their
-10
P0 P10 P20 P30 E16P10 E1 6P20 E16P30
Fig. 2. Mean energy savings in the exhaust of the diesel-engine generator for all test
fuels.
determine the carcinogenic potency of a given PAH compound by
multiplying its concentration with its toxic equivalent factor (TEF)
with reference to BaP. The TEFs given by Nisbet and LaGoy [36] was
used in the study. The total carcinogenic potency for each collected
sample (i.e., total BaPeq) was defined as the sum of BaPeq concen-
trations of the 21 PAH compounds.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Characteristics of emulsified fuel
In this study, all resultant emulsified fuel blends had the same
milk-white color. All emulsified fuels were kept motionless for 120
days to determine the volumetric proportions of the emulsified W/
O layer. No test emulsified fuel separated over at least 30 days. After
120 days, below 1 v/v% of the diesel-in-water layer existed at the
bottom, suggesting that all emulsified fuels are stable for use in
diesel engines.
3.2. Energy efficiency
Energy efficiency (EE) was defined as the output energy divided
by the input energy based on the low gross heat value (GHV) of test
fuel. In comparison with P0 (EE ¼ 27.28%), the mean increase were
not significant for palm-biodiesel blends: 0.512% for P10, 0.648% for
P20, 0.553% for P30; but the mean increase were significant
for emulsified palm-biodiesel blends: 9.93% for E16P10, 10.3% for
E16P20 and 8.88% for E16P30 (t-test, all p-values < 0.05). The
a 600

response factors, the recovery efficiencies for PAHs analysis and to 500

determine final concentrations. The recovery efficiencies of 21 400

m g L -1

individual PAHs and these two internal standards were determined 231
300 209
by processing a solution containing known PAH concentrations 182
through the same experimental procedure used for the samples. 200 126

Recovery efficiency was measured via analyzed mass of PAH 100 25.0 23.0 23.7
divided by input mass of known PAH. This study found the recovery
0
efficiencies for the 21 PAH compounds ranging from 0.785 to 0.966, P0 P10 P20 P30 E16P10 E16P20 E16P30
with an average value of 0.858. The recovery efficiencies of two
internal standards were between 85.7% and 93.2% and were fairly b 200
constant. Analyses of field blanks, including aluminum foil, glass-
fiber filter and an PUF/XAD-16 cartridge, revealed no significant 150
m g k Wh -1

contamination (GC/MSD integrated area < detection limit).

83.4
100 77.6
66.3
2.4. Data analysis 45.5
50
The total PAH concentration was defined as the sum of the 9.52 8.84 9.31

concentrations of the 21 PAH compounds for each collected sample. 0

P0 P1 0 P20 P30 E16P10 E16P20 E16P30
Since some PAH compounds are carcinogens, the carcinogenic
potencies of each PAH sample was also evaluated. In this study, Fig. 3. Mean PM emission factors in the exhaust of the diesel-engine generator for all
benzo[a]pyrene equivalent concentration (BaPeq) was used to test fuels (a) in mg L1 (b) in mg kWh1.
2046 K.-S. Chen et al. / Energy 35 (2010) 2043–2048

80 experimental results indicate that the emulsified palm-biodiesel

with bio-solution increased the EE significantly. This is because
60 rapid evaporation of water broke fuel into smaller droplets and
46.0 45.8
44.3 42.1 hence increased their surface area causing well-mixed air and fuel
35.8 36.5
droplets when the temperature of water-in-diesel emulsified diesel
%

40 33.4
in the cylinder went up to 105  C. Thus, the particulate became
20 smaller due to the combustion of a second nebulization of water-in-
diesel emulsified diesel in the cylinder, thus promoting mixing of
0 particulates with water. These hot particulates reacted with water
P0 P10 P20 P30 E16P10 E16P20 E16P30
and produced flammable gas, CO and H2. Furthermore, bio-solution
Fig. 4. Mean SOF of PM in the exhaust of the diesel-engine generator for all test fuels. had a catalytic effect to increase combustion efficiency and
decrease pollutant emissions. Similar experimental results were
obtained by other studies [22,26,29,34,37,38]. However, the

a 2000
Total PAHs

1500
1160
990
µ g L -1

1000 836
707
538
500 357
263

0
P0 P10 P20 P30 E16P10 E16P20 E16P30

3.0
b Total BaPeq

1.73
2.0
1.49
µ g L -1

1.24
1.04
1.0 0.791
0.525
0.389

0.0
P0 P10 P20 P30 E16P10 E16P20 E16P30

c 600
Total PAHs
500 418
358
400
µ g kW h -1

304
262
300
205
200 137
104
100

0
P0 P10 P20 P30 E16P10 E16P20 E16P30

1.0
d Total BaPeq
0.8
0.622
0.539
µ g kW h -1

0.6
0.449
0.387
0.4 0.302
0.201
0.153
0.2

0.0
P0 P10 P20 P30 E16P10 E16P20 E16P30

Fig. 5. Mean emission factors of total PAHs and total BaPeq in the exhaust of the diesel-engine generator for all test fuels (a, b) in mg L1 (c, d) in mg kWh1.
 K.-S. Chen et al. / Energy 35 (2010) 2043–2048
emulsified palm-biodiesel with bio-solution herein had better
energy efficiency than the previous studies. Therefore, emulsified
palm-biodiesel with bio-solution may have a potential commercial
application.
3.3. Energy saving
The fuel consumption of P0, P10, P20, P30, E16P10, E16P20 and
E16P30 were 0.3605, 0.3613, 0.3634, 0.3707, 0.3817, 0.3840 and
0.3931 L kWh1, respectively. The analytical result reveals that fuel
consumption increased with the increase of palm-biodiesel blends
by considering diesel þ water as total fuel. This is because the low
GHV of palm-biodiesel (39,159 J g1) and water were lower than
that of P0 (44,062 J g1). Therefore, the fuel consumption must be
increased to maintain the same electrical power output. Similar
experimental results for fuel consumption of biodiesel and emul-
sified diesel have been reported [4,8,29,34]. Brassica carinate bio-
diesel and rapeseed-biodiesel had fuel consumption levels at least
9% higher than that petroleum diesel fuel at various air/fuel ratios
[37]. The 50% coconut oil blends had fuel consumption levels at
least 40% higher than conventional diesel at various engine speeds
[8]. Scragg et al. demonstrated that the mean increase of fuel
consumption was 35.9% for the biodiesel-algal emulsion [29]. The
experimental results display that the increase of fuel consumption
for emulsified palm-biodiesel with bio-solution was significantly
lower than that of Brassica carinate biodiesel, rapeseed-biodiesel,
biodiesel-algal emulsion and diesel emulsion. Furthermore, based
on the increase of fuel consumption, it seems like more fuel
consumption was needed for emulsified palm-biodiesel. In fact, 16%
bio-solution (w16% water) exists in emulsified palm-biodiesel
exceeded the increase of fuel consumption of emulsified palm-
biodiesel blends. When considering diesel plus palm-biodiesel as
total fuel, the energy savings (ESs) were 0.222% for P10, 0.825%
for P20, 2.75% for P30, 12.4% for E16P10, 11.7% for E16P20 and
9.17% for E16P30 (Fig. 2). In our previous research, the average ES
were 3.90% for W13, 3.38% for W16, 2.17% for W19, 5.87% for E13,
5.88% for E16, and 4.75% for E19 [34]. The above results clearly
indicate that the energy saving of emulsified palm-biodiesel was
better than that of emulsified diesel. In conclusion, using emulsified
palm-biodiesel instead of P0 can reduce diesel/biodiesel
consumption by 9–12%.
3.4. Emission of PM and SOF in the exhaust of diesel engine
From Fig. 3, PM emissions of the six test fuels were less than that
of the P0 (t-test, all p-values < 0.05). The mean reduction in mg L1
and mg kWh1 were P10 (45.6%, 45.5%), P20 (21.2%, 20.6%), P30
(9.58%, 7.02%), E16P10 (89.2%, 88.6%), E16P20 (90.1%, 89.4%), and
E16P30 (89.8%, 88.8%), as compared to P0 (PM ¼ 231 mg L1,
83.4 mg kWh1) (t-test, all p-values < 0.05). PM emissions were in
order of emulsified palm-biodiesel blends < palm-biodiesel
blends < P0. This experimental result demonstrates that emulsifi-
cation can effectively reduce PM emissions. As mentioned before,
the positive or negative effect on PM emissions varied significantly
among vehicles [2,13,14], biodiesels [13–18] and loadings [10].
Therefore, the problem of PM emissions from diesel engines can be
solved by use of emulsions. Hori et al. (1997) suggested that PM
emissions might be in corresponding to SOF [39]. Therefore, SOF
was measured in this study and similar trend was found (Fig. 4).
The SOF value of P0 was significantly higher than that of both palm-
biodiesel blends and emulsified palm-biodiesel blends (t-test, all p-
values < 0.05). The SOF of emulsified palm-biodiesel was much less
than that of P0. The experimental result clearly suggests that the
emulsified palm-biodiesel with bio-solution additive can enhance
combustion efficiency and it is a novel alternative fuel that
2047
decreases PM and SOF emissions from diesel engines. Since more
fine particles were generated when combustion is more complete,
the size distributions of particles emitted from emulsified fuels
deserves future investigations.
3.5. PAH emissions from the diesel engine
Fig. 5 shows the emission factors for both total PAHs and total
BaPeq. The average reduction of emission factors of total PAHs in
mg L1 and total BaPeq in mg L1 were P10 (14.7%, 13.6%), P20 (28.0%,
28.5%), P30 (39.1%, 39.5%), E16P10 (53.7%, 54.2%), E16P20 (69.3%,
69.6%), and E16P30 (77.3%, 77.5%), as compared to P0 (1.16 mg L1,
1.73 mg L1) (t-test, all p-values < 0.05). This is because the PAH
contents in biodiesel, bio-solution, and surfactant were close to
zero. Hence, a high P0 fraction leaded to a high PAH emissions.
Similar results were also found in other studies [4,8,14,39–41].
Fabfaletti et al. (2005) found that the average reduction of total
BaPeq emissions from a diesel engine was about 14% for emulsified
fuel and about 39% for a cerium-based additive [33]. However, it
should be noted that the PAH reduction of emulsified palm-
biodiesel with bio-solution additive was better than that of
cerium-based additive. Notably, P10, P20, and P30 contained only
90 vol%, 80 vol% and 70 vol% P0, respectively; hence, we expected
that their theoretical reduction should be 10%, 20%, and 30%,
respectively, as compared with that of P0. However, experimental
results reveal that the real reduction (w15, 28, and 39%, respec-
tively) were higher than the theoretical values (10, 20, and 30%,
respectively). Particularly, the real reduction for E16P10, E16P20
and E16P30 (w54, 69, and 77%, respectively) were significantly
higher than their corresponding theoretical values (26%, 36% and
46%, respectively). Hence, using emulsified palm-biodiesel with
bio-solution additive instead of diesel can significantly decrease
PAH emissions from diesel engines.
4. Conclusion
According to the experimental results, the average increase of
energy efficiency (EE) were 0.512% for P10, 0.648% for P20, 0.553%
for P30, 9.93% for E16P10, 10.3% for E16P20 and 8.88% for E16P30, as
compared to P0 (EE ¼ 27.28%). When bio-solution was excluded
from diesel plus palm-biodiesel fuel, the energy savings were
increased by 0.222% for P10, 0.825% for P20, 2.75% for P30,
12.4% for E16P10, 11.7% for E16P20 and 9.17% for E16P30, as
compared to P0. Experimental results clearly indicate that the
emulsified palm-biodiesel with bio-solution can enhance the
combustion efficiency. The average reduction of PM in mg L1 and
mg kWh1 were P10 (45.6%, 45.5%), P20 (21.2%, 20.6%), P30 (9.58%,
7.02%), E16P10 (89.2%, 88.6%), E16P20 (90.1%, 89.4%), and E16P30
(89.8%, 88.8%), as compared to P0 (PM ¼ 231 mg L1,
83.4 mg kWh1). The mean reduction of emission factors of total
PAHs in mg L1 and total BaPeq in mg L1 were P10 (14.7%, 13.6%),
P20 (28.0%, 28.5%), P30 (39.1%, 39.5%), E16P10 (53.7%, 54.2%),
E16P20 (69.3%, 69.6%), and E16P30 (77.3%, 77.5%), as compared to
P0 (1.16 mg L1, 1.73 mg L1). Emulsified palm-biodiesel with bio-
solution can simultaneously save energy and reduce pollutants.
Since more fine particles were generated when combustion is more
complete, the size distributions of particles emitted from emulsi-
fied fuels deserves future investigations.
References
[1] Schmidt CW. Biodiesel: cultivating alternative fuels. Environ Health Persp
2007;115:A86–91.
[2] Wang WG, Lyons DW, Clark NN, Gautam M. Emissions from nine heavy trucks
fueled by diesel and biodiesel blend without engine modification. Environ Sci
Technol 2000;34:933–9.
2048 K.-S. Chen et al. / Energy 35 (2010) 2043–2048
[3] Monyem A, Van Gerpen JH. The effect of biodiesel oxidation on engine
performance and emission. Biomass Bioenergy 2001;20:317–25.
[4] Cardone M, Prati MV, Rocco V, Seggiani M, Senature A, Vitolo S. Brassica
carinata as an alternative oil crop for the production of biodiesel in Italy:
engine performance and regulated and unregulated exhaust emission. Environ
Sci Technol 2002;36:4656–62.
[5] Antolin G, Tinaut FV, Briceno Y, Castano V, Ramirez C. Optimisation of biodiesel
production by sunflower oil transesterification. Biores Technol 2002;83:111–4.
[6] Beer T, Grant T, Williams D, Watson H. Fuel-cycle greenhouse gas emissions from
alternative fuels in Australian heavy vehicles. Atmos Environ 2002;36:753–63.
[7] Durbin TD, Norbeck JM. Effects of biodiesel blends and arco EC-diesel on
emissions from light heavy-duty diesel vehicles. Environ Sci Technol
2002;36:1686–91.
[8] Kalam MA, Husnawan M, Masjuki HH. Exhaust emission and combustion
evaluation of coconut oil-powered indirect diesel engine. Renew Energy
2003;28:2405–15.
[9] Dorado MP, Ballesteros E, Arnal JM, Gomez J, Lopez FJ. Exhaust emission from
a diesel engine with transesterified waste olive oil. Fuel 2003;82:1311–5.
[10] Kalligeros S, Zannikos F, Strournas S, Lois E, Anastopoulos G, Teas CH, et al. An
investigation of using biodiesel/matine diesel blends on the performance of
a stationary diesel engine. Biomass Bioenergy 2003;24:141–9.
[11] Carraretto C, Macor A, Mirandola A, Stoppato A, Tonon S. Biodiesel as alter-
native fuel: experimental analysis and energetic evaluations. Energy
2004;29:2195–211.
[12] Ferreira SL, Santos AM, Souza GR, Polito WL. Analysis of the emissions of
volatile organic compounds from the compression ignition engine fueled by
diesel–biodiesel blend and diesel oil using gas chromatography. Energy
2008;33:1801–6.
[13] Peterson CL, Reece DL, Thompson JC, Beck SM, Chase C. Ethyl ester of rapeseed
used as a biodiesel fuel – a case study. Biomass Bioenergy 1996;10:331–6.
[14] Durbin TD, Collins JR, Norbeck JM, Smith MR. Effects of biodiesel, biodiesel
blends, and a synthetic diesel on emissions from light heavy-duty diesel
vehicles. Environ Sci Technol 2000;34:349–55.
[15] Schumacher LG, Borgelt SC, Fosseen D, Goetz W, Hires WG. Heavy-duty engine
exhaust emission tests using methyl ester soybean oil/diesel fuel blends.
Biores Technol 1996;57:31–6.
[16] Mccormick RL, Graboski MS, Alleman TL, Herring AM. Impact of biodiesel
material and chemical structure on emissions of criteria pollutants from
a heavy-duty engine. Environ Sci Technol 2001;35:1742–7.
[17] Haas MJ, Scott KM, Alleman TL, Mccormick RL. Engine performance of bio-
diesel fuel prepared from soybean soapstock: a high quality renewable fuel
produced from a waste feedstock. Energy Fuel 2001;15:1207–12.
[18] Lee SW, Herage T, Young B. Emission reduction potential from the combustion
of soy methyl ester fuel blended with petroleum distillate fuel. Fuel
2004;83:1607–13.
[19] Selim MYE, Elfeky SMS. Effects of diesel/water emulsion on heat flow and
thermal loading in a precombustion chamber diesel engine. App Thermal Eng
2001;21:1565–82.
[20] Samec N, Kegl B, Dibble RW. Numerical and experimental study of water/oil
emulsified fuel combustion in a diesel engine. Fuel 2002;81:2035–44.
[21] Lin CY, Wang KH. The fuel properties of three-phase emulsions as an alter-
native fuel for diesel engines. Fuel 2003;82:1367–75.
[22] Abu-Zaid M. Performance of single cylinder, direct injection diesel engine
using water fuel emulsions. Energy Conv Manag 2004;45:697–705.
[23] Armas O, Ballesteros R, Martos FJ, Agudelo JR. Characterization of light duty
diesel engine pollutant emissions using water-emulsified fuel. Fuel
2005;84:1011–8.
[24] Kerihuel A, Kumar MS, Bellettre J, Tazerout M. Use of animal fats as CI engine
fuel by making stable emulsions with water and methanol. Fuel 2005;84:
1713–6.
[25] Megaritis A, Yap D, Wyszynski ML. Effect of water blending on bioethanol
HCCI combustion with forced induction and residual gas trapping. Energy
2007;32:2396–400.
[26] Watanabe H, Suzuki Y, Harada T, Matsushita Y, Aoki H, Miura T. An experi-
mental investigation of the breakup characteristics of secondary atomization
of emulsified fuel droplet. Energy 2010;35:806–13.
[27] Yang HH, Lee WJ, Mi HH, Wong CH, Chen CB. Effect of Mn-based additive and
turbocharging on PAH emissions from a heavy duty diesel engine. Environ Int
1998;24:389–403.
[28] Lin CY, Wang KH. Effects of an oxygenated additive on the emulsification
characteristics of two- and three-phase diesel emulsion. Fuel 2003;83:507–15.
[29] Scragg AH, Morrison J, Shales SW. The use of a fuel containing chlorella vul-
garis in a diesel engine. Enzyme Microb Technol 2003;33:884–9.
[30] Lin CY, Wang KH. Effects of a combustion improver on diesel engine perfor-
mance and emission characteristics when using three-phase emulsion as an
alternative fuel. Energy Fuel 2004;18:477–84.
[31] Ozcan H, Soylemez MS. Experimental investigation of the effects of water
addition on the exhaust emissions of a naturally aspirated, liquefied-
petroleum-gas-fueled engine. Energy Fuel 2005;19:1468–72.
[32] Tansel B, Vilar F. Enhancement of media filter performance with coagulant use for
treatment of diesel oil contaminated surface water. Desalination 2005;173:69–76.
[33] Fabfaletti A, Astorga C, Martini G, Manfredi U, Mueller A, Rey M, et al. Effect of
water/fuel emulsion and a cerium-based combustion improver additive on HD
and LD diesel exhaust emission. Environ Sci Technol 2005;39:6792–9.
[34] Lin YC, Lee WJ, Chen CC, Chen CB. Saving energy and reducing emissions of
both polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon and particular matter by adding bio-
solution to emulsified diesel. Environ Sci Technol 2006;40:5553–9.
[35] Wibulswas P, Chirachakhrit S, Keochung U, Tlansuman J. Combustion of blends
between plant oils and diesel oil. Renew Energy 1999;16:1098–101.
[36] Nisbet C, LaGoy P. Toxic equivalency factors (TEFs) for polycyclic aromatic
hydrocarbons (PAHs). Regul Toxicol Pharmacol 1992;16:290–300.
[37] Garo JP, Vantelon JP, Gandhi S, Torero JL. Determination of the thermal effi-
ciency of pre-boilover burning of a slick of oil on water. Spill Sci Technol Bull
1999;5:141–51.
[38] Lin YC, Lee WJ, Chao HR, Wang SL, Tsou TC, Chang-Chien GP, et al. Approach for
energy saving and pollution reducing by fueling diesel engines with emulsified
biosolution/biodiesel/diesel blends. Environ Sci Technol 2008;42:3849–55.
[39] Hori S, Sato T, Narusawa K. Effects of diesel fuel composition on SOF and PAH
exhaust emissions. JSAE Rev 1997;18:255–61.
[40] Bagley ST, Gratz LD, Johnson JH, Mcdonald JF. Effects of a biodiesel fuel on the
chemical, mutagenic, and particle size characteristics of emissions from
a diesel engine. Environ Sci Technol 1998;32:1183–91.
[41] Sidhu S, Graham J, Striebich R. Semi-volatile and particulate emissions from
the combustion of alternative diesel fuels. Chemosphere 2001;41:681–90.