Preparation and Fuel Properties of Field Pennycress (Thlaspi arvense

Subscriber access provided by Flinders University Library

Article

Preparation and Fuel Properties of Field Pennycress (Thlaspi arvense) Seed Oil Ethyl Esters and Blends with Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel Bryan R. Moser, Roque L. Evangelista, and Terry A. Isbell Energy Fuels, Just Accepted Manuscript • DOI: 10.1021/acs.energyfuels.5b02591 • Publication Date (Web): 04 Dec 2015 Downloaded from http://pubs.acs.org on December 4, 2015

Just Accepted “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been peer-reviewed and accepted for publication. They are posted online prior to technical editing, formatting for publication and author proofing. The American Chemical Society provides “Just Accepted” as a free service to the research community to expedite the dissemination of scientific material as soon as possible after acceptance. “Just Accepted” manuscripts appear in full in PDF format accompanied by an HTML abstract. “Just Accepted” manuscripts have been fully peer reviewed, but should not be considered the official version of record. They are accessible to all readers and citable by the Digital Object Identifier (DOI®). “Just Accepted” is an optional service offered to authors. Therefore, the “Just Accepted” Web site may not include all articles that will be published in the journal. After a manuscript is technically edited and formatted, it will be removed from the “Just Accepted” Web site and published as an ASAP article. Note that technical editing may introduce minor changes to the manuscript text and/or graphics which could affect content, and all legal disclaimers and ethical guidelines that apply to the journal pertain. ACS cannot be held responsible for errors or consequences arising from the use of information contained in these “Just Accepted” manuscripts.

Energy & Fuels is published by the American Chemical Society. 1155 Sixteenth Street N.W., Washington, DC 20036 Published by American Chemical Society. Copyright © American Chemical Society. However, no copyright claim is made to original U.S. Government works, or works produced by employees of any Commonwealth realm Crown government in the course of their duties.

Page 1 of 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

1

Preparation and Fuel Properties of Field Pennycress

2

(Thlaspi arvense) Seed Oil Ethyl Esters and Blends

3

with Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel

4 5

Bryan R. Moser,* Roque L. Evangelista and Terry A. Isbell

6 7

United States Department of Agriculture

8

Agricultural Research Service

9

National Center for Agricultural Utilization Research

10

Bio-Oils Research Unit

11

1815 N. University St., Peoria, Illinois 61604, USA

12 13 14

* Tel.: +1-309-681-6511; fax: +1-309-681-6524. E-mail address: [email protected].

15 16 17 18 19 20 21

ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

22

ABSTRACT: Field pennycress (Thlaspi arvense L.) is a widely distributed winter annual with

23

high seed oil content (36%) and is suitable as an off-season rotational crop in the Midwestern

24

United States. Erucic [(13Z)-docosenoic] acid (36.2%) is the most abundant constituent in the

25

oil, with unsaturated and very long chain (20+ carbons) fatty acids comprising most of the

26

remaining content. In a previous study we described field pennycress seed oil methyl esters

27

(FPME). Here we report field pennycress seed oil ethyl esters (FPEE) along with the properties

28

of blends of FPME and FPEE (B2-B20) in petrodiesel. These results are compared to American

29

and European biodiesel and petrodiesel fuel standards. FPEE were characterized by excellent

30

low temperature properties (cloud point -15 oC), high cetane number (61.4), high kinematic

31

viscosity (5.65 mm2/s), and low oxidative stability (induction period of 4.6 h). Both kinematic

32

viscosity and oxidative stability did not meet EN 14214 limits, but were within the ranges

33

prescribed in ASTM D6751. With regard to blends, highly linear correlations (R2 0.99) were

34

noted between blend ratio and density, energy content, kinematic viscosity, moisture content, and

35

specific gravity. Acid value, sulfur content and surface tension were essentially unaffected by

36

blend ratio. Oxidative stability was negatively affected by higher biodiesel content, which is

37

typical for blends. Cold flow properties were minimally impacted by blend ratio, thus

38

representing a significant advantage of FPME and FPEE over other biodiesel fuels. Both FPME

39

and FPEE were excellent lubricity enhancers, as even small amounts (B2) markedly improved

40

the lubricity of petrodiesel. Where applicable, fuel properties of the blends were within the

41

limits prescribed in the petrodiesel standards.

42 43 44


Page 2 of 23

Page 3 of 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

45 46

Energy & Fuels

1.

INTRODUCTION We recently reported fatty acid methyl esters (FAMEs) from field pennycress (Thlaspi

47

arvense L.) seed oil (FPO).1 Here we describe the preparation and fuel properties of the

48

corresponding fatty acid ethyl esters (FAEEs) along with blends of field pennycress seed oil

49

methyl (FPME) and ethyl (FPEE) esters in ultra-low sulfur (< 15 ppm S) diesel (ULSD) fuel.

50

These results are compared to American and European biodiesel (ASTM D6751 and EN 14214)

51

and petrodiesel (ASTM D7467, D975 and EN 590) fuel standards. Ethyl esters were of interest

52

because ethanol is obtained from fermentation of sugars as opposed to petrochemically-derived

53

methanol, thus yielding a biodiesel fuel in the case of FPEE that is composed entirely of

54

renewable carbon.2 Such a study is important due to the limited availability, high cost, and

55

competing food-related applications of commodity lipids typically used for biodiesel

56

production.3 For example, feedstock acquisition represents 80% or more of the production costs

57

of biodiesel.4 Therefore, low-cost, non-food alternatives that do not displace existing food

58

production are attractive options for reducing the cost of biodiesel while simultaneously

59

enhancing the supply of commodity lipids for food use. Recent examples that have gained

60

considerable attention are oils derived from Jatropha (Jatropha curcas L.) and various

61

microalgae.5,6

62

Field pennycress is a winter annual belonging to the Brassicaceae family with a broad

63

distribution throughout temperate North America. With a seed oil content of approximately

64

36%, field pennycress is adapted to a wide variety of climatic conditions and is compatible with

65

existing farm practices and infrastructure. In much of the Midwestern United States it can be

66

planted in the fall after a corn harvest and harvested during spring in time for a full soybean

67

growing season using conventional farming equipment. Field pennycress is tolerant of marginal


Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

68

lands not otherwise suited for traditional agriculture, is not part of the food chain, and requires

69

minimal agricultural inputs such as fertilizer, pesticides and water.7-9 The Brassicaceae family is

70

a prolific source of oilseed crops for production of biodiesel, as evidenced by canola/rapeseed

71

(Brassica napus L.), camelina (Camelina sativa L.) and wild mustard (B. juncea L.), among

72

numerous others.3,10,11

73

Typical seed yields of 1680 kg/ha were reported from T. arvense, which equates to an

74

average of 540 pounds/acre of oil at a seed oil content of 36%.8 For comparison, yields of canola,

75

corn and soybean oils are 647-728, 215-390 and 456-506 pounds/acre, respectively.12 Lipids are

76

readily expelled from the seeds using a conventional heavy duty screw press to yield both liquid

77

(oil) and solid (press cake) fractions.13 Extraction of proteins from T. arvense seeds and press

78

cake was reported, as well as the influence of cold-pressing on composition and functional

79

properties of protein in the press cake.14,15 The press cake also inhibits seedling germination and

80

emergence of agricultural pests, thus suggesting biofumigation properties.16

81

FPO contains a diverse set of fatty acids (FAs) that range in size from palmitic

82

(hexadecanoic) to nervonic [(15Z)-tetracosenoic] acids, with erucic [(13Z)-docosenoic] acid

83

(36%) representing the largest individual component. Most of the remaining FA profile is

84

composed of unsaturated constituents such as linoleic [(9Z), (12Z)-octadecadienoic; 19.5%] and

85

linolenic [(9Z), (12Z), (15Z)-octadecatrienoic; 9%] acids.17 We recently reported enrichment of

86

erucic acid from FPO for potential use in non-fuel industrial applications.18 One such example is

87

as an industrial lubricant, both in the neat form and chemically modified as estolides.19,20

88

Because of the comparatively high content of erucic acid and polyunsaturated FAs relative to

89

commodity lipids such as soybean or canola oils, FPO and the corresponding biodiesel have

90

superior cold flow properties but comparatively high kinematic viscosity (KV) and low oxidative


Page 4 of 23

Page 5 of 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

91

stability.1,17,19 As a consequence, complementary blends of FPME with other biodiesel fuels

92

ameliorated technical deficiencies associated with individual fuels in a previous study.21 For

93

example, soybean oil methyl esters (SME) exhibit poor cold flow properties but satisfactory

94

KV.22 Blends of FPME with SME yielded cold flow and KV values that were within the ranges

95

specified in ASTM D6751 and EN 14214.21 In addition, the combustion and emissions of FPO,

96

FPME, and renewable diesel (RD) resulting from hydrotreatment of FPO were evaluated in a

97

John Deere 4.5 L compression-ignition engine and found to behave similarly to analogous fuels

98

derived from other lipids.23 Lastly, a life cycle assessment of FPO-derived jet fuel and RD

99

revealed that fossil energy consumptions were considerably lower than the corresponding

100

petroleum fuels. Those results indicated that field pennycress-based biofuels should qualify as

101

advanced biofuels and as biomass-based diesel fuels as defined by the Renewable Fuels Standard

102

(RFS2).24

103 104 105

2.

EXPERIMENTAL 2.1.

Materials. Field pennycress seeds were collected from wild populations in

106

Peoria County, IL. Certification-grade ULSD that was free of performance-enhancing additives

107

was donated by a major petroleum company that wishes to remain anonymous. FAME standards

108

(>99%) were purchased from Nu-Chek Prep, Inc. (Elysian, MN). Single element calibration

109

standards for ICP-AES were obtained from SCP Science (Champlain, NY). All other reagents

110

were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich Corp (St. Louis, MO). All materials were used as received.

111

2.2.

Extraction of Field Pennycress Seed Oil. Seeds were cold pressed using a

112

model L250 laboratory screw press from the French Oil Mill Machinery Company (Piqua, OH).

113

Details of this expeller and the extraction are available elsewhere.13,25 Once extracted, crude


Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

114

FPO was filtered to remove solid material. Quantification of oil content by exhaustive hexane

115

extraction of seeds as well as determination of FA profile by GC is described previously.1,17

116

2.3.

Field Pennycress Seed Oil Ethyl Esters. Crude FPO with an acid value (AV) of

117

0.61 mg KOH/g was pretreated with catalytic sulfuric acid (1.0 vol %) and ethanol (40 vol %) as

118

described previously to lower the AV of FPO to 0.09 mg KOH/g.1 Acid-pretreated FPO was

119

then subjected to ethanolysis in a 500 mL three-necked round bottom flask connected to a reflux

120

condenser and a magnetic stirrer set to 1200 rpm. Initially, FPO (180 g; 200 mL; 0.20 mol) and

121

ethanol (110 mL, 1.82 mol) were combined and heated to 70 °C, followed by addition of 1.0 wt

122

% KOH (1.8 g). After 2.0 h the mixture was equilibrated to room temperature and ethanol was

123

removed by rotary evaporation, followed by removal of glycerol via gravity separation. Crude

124

FAEEs were treated with 2.5 wt % Magnesol® at 65 °C for 25 min with continuous stirring (500

125

rpm), followed by vacuum filtration using #54 Whatman (VWR; Radnor, PA) filter paper to

126

remove the adsorbent to provide purified FPEE (160 g, 89%).

127

2.4.

Preparation of Blends. Precisely measured volumes of FPME and FPEE were

128

splash blended with ULSD with continuous stirring (22-24 oC) to ensure homogeneity. FPME

129

and FPEE were blended with ULSD at 2 (B2), 5 (B5), 10 (B10), and 20 (B20) vol %. Samples

130

were stored in amber jars under argon at 4 oC prior to use. Before the samples were analyzed

131

they were equilibrated to room temperature, vigorously stirred to ensure homogeneity, and

132

smaller samples were removed from the middle of the stock solution using a glass pipette.

133

2.5.

Fuel Properties. Properties were measured in triplicate with mean values

134

reported following AOCS, ASTM, and CEN standard test methods using instrumentation

135

described previously:1,10,11,26 acid value (AV, mg KOH/g), AOCS Cd 3d-63; cloud point (CP,

136

o

C), ASTM D5773; cold filter plugging point (CFPP, oC), ASTM D6371; density (kg/m3),


Page 6 of 23

Page 7 of 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

137

AOCS Cc 10c-95; flash point (FP, oC), ASTM D93; free and total glycerol (mass %), ASTM

138

D6584; higher heating value (HHV, MJ kg-1), ASTM D4809; induction period (IP, h), EN

139

15751; iodine value (IV, g I2 100 g-1), AOCS Cd 1c-85; kinematic viscosity (KV, mm2/s), ASTM

140

D445; lubricity (µm), ASTM D6079; moisture content (ppm), ASTM D6304; phosphorous (P,

141

mass %), ASTM D4951; pour point (PP, oC), ASTM D5949; specific gravity (SG), AOCS Cc

142

10c-95; sulfur (S, ppm), ASTM D5453; surface tension (ST, mN/m), ASTM D3825. For greater

143

precision, PP was measured with a resolution of 1 °C instead of the specified 3 °C increment.

144

Elemental analyses (S, P) were performed using inductively coupled plasma optical emission

145

spectroscopy (ICP-OES) using a model 7000DV Optima instrument from PerkinElmer Inc.

146

Waltham, MA). Derived CN (DCN) was determined (n=32) by Southwest Research Institute

147

(San Antonio, TX) following ASTM D6890.

148

Data for each biodiesel/ULSD blend set was analyzed by least-squares statistical

149

regression to yield R2 values for plots of fuel property (y-axis) versus blend ratio (x-axis).

150

Properties modeled in this fashion included density, IP, KV, lubricity, and moisture content of

151

blends (B0-B20) of FPME and FPEE in ULSD. Plots are not shown herein, but R2 values

152

obtained from statistical regression are discussed in the next section. Modeling and statistical

153

analyses were performed using Microsoft (Redmond, WA) Office Excel® 2007 spreadsheets.

154 155 156

3.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION 3.1.

Preparation of Field Pennycress Seed Oil Ethyl Esters. FPO was subjected to

157

homogenous base-catalyzed ethanolysis employing classic conditions elucidated previously to

158

afford FPEE in 89% yield.27 Prior to ethanolysis, crude FPO was pretreated with ethanol and

159

catalytic sulfuric acid to render the oil more amenable to subsequent KOH-catalyzed


Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

160

transesterification. Pretreatment lowered the AV of FPO from 0.61 to 0.09 mg KOH/g. Such a

161

treatment was necessary because free FAs react with alkaline catalysts such as KOH to form

162

soap (potassium salt of FA) and water, thus irreversibly quenching the catalyst and reducing

163

product yield.27 FPME used for comparison in this study was prepared as described previously.1

164

3.2.

Composition and Quality of Field Pennycress Seed Oil Ethyl Esters. Depicted

165

in Table 1 is the FA composition of FPO. As mentioned previously, the most abundant FA was

166

erucic acid (C22:1) at 36.2%, with linoleic (C18:2; 19.5%), oleic (C18:1 9c; 11.0%), gondoic

167

[C20:1; (11Z)-eicosenoic; 10.2%], and linolenic (C18:3; 8.9%) acids also present in significant

168

amounts. Overall, FAs containing 20+ carbons collectively constituted 54.4% of the

169

composition of FPO, with the greatest contributions from erucic and gondoic acids.

170

Monounsaturated FAs, such as erucic, oleic and gondoic acids, comprised 64.6%, while

171

polyunsaturated and saturated FAs were 30.4% and 5.0%, respectively, of the overall content.

172

Quality of FPEE was assessed by determination of free and total glycerol, AV, FP, and

173

moisture content. These results are shown in Table 2. Data for FPME is also depicted for

174

comparison, but its significance is discussed elsewhere.1 Both ASTM D6751 and EN 14214

175

specify maximum limits for free and total glycerol in biodiesel. As seen in Table 2, the values

176

obtained for FPEE were significantly below the prescribed maximum thresholds, thus indicating

177

that ethanolysis proceeded nearly to completion. Furthermore, the AV of FPEE was 0.38 mg

178

KOH/g, which was below the maximum limit specified (0.50 mg KOH/g) in the biodiesel

179

standards. Minimum FPs prescribed in the standards are 130 and 101 oC for ASTM D6751 and

180

EN 14214, respectively. The FP of FPEE (189 oC) was significantly above the minimum limits,

181

thereby indicating it was free of residual ethanol. Lastly, the moisture content of FPEE was 323


Page 8 of 23

Page 9 of 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

182

ppm, which was below the maximum limit of 500 ppm prescribed in EN 14214. ASTM D6751

183

does not contain a dissolved water specification.

184

3.3.

Fuel Properties of Field Pennycress Seed Oil Ethyl Esters. Depicted in Table

185

2 are fuel properties of FPEE along with those of FPME. Also shown are the limits specified in

186

ASTM D6751 and EN 14214, where applicable. Fuel properties measured included cold flow,

187

DCN, density, energy content, heteroatom (S and P) content, IV, KV, lubricity, oxidative

188

stability, SG, and ST.

189

The cold flow properties of FPEE were determined by CP, CFPP and PP, which provided

190

values of -15, -17 and -19 oC, respectively. Such results were significantly lower (better) than

191

the corresponding values obtained for biodiesel prepared from commodity lipids such as

192

soybean, canola, sunflower, and especially palm oils.22 The low level of saturated FAEEs

193

identified in FPEE (5.0%) was in part attributed to its low temperature behavior, as saturated

194

esters have considerably higher melting points than the corresponding unsaturated analogues.29

195

In addition, FAEEs generally have lower melting points than FAMEs, as evidenced by

196

comparison of the CPs of FPME and FPEE.

197

The IP of FPEE was 4.6 h. Addition of antioxidants or blending with more oxidatively

198

stable fuels would be necessary to satisfy the oxidative stability requirement (IP > 6 h) specified

199

in EN 14214.21,22,26 FPEE was within the limit (IP > 3 h) prescribed in ASTM D6751. The

200

failure of FPEE to meet the EN 14214 specification was attributed to its high percentage (30.4%)

201

of polyunsaturated FAEEs, such as ethyl linoleate and linolenate. Polyunsaturated esters are

202

more susceptible to oxidation than monounsaturated and especially saturated esters.30 IV is

203

indirectly related to oxidative stability, as it gives an indication of overall double bond content.

204

In general, biodiesel fuels with high IVs will yield poor IPs and vice versa.22 ASTM D6751 does


Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

205

not contain an IV specification, but IV is limited in EN 14214 to a maximum of 120 g I2/100 g.

206

The IV of FPEE (104 g I2/100g) was within the limit prescribed in EN 14214. FPEE yielded a

207

lower IV than FPME, as seen in Table 2. This is because IV is affected by molecular weight.31

208

The KV of FPEE (5.65 mm2/s) was within the range specified in ASTM D6751 but

209

exceeded limit prescribed in EN 14214. The high KV of FPEE was due to the presence of

210

longer-chain (C20+) FAEE. For example, the KVs of methyl erucate and gondoate are 7.33 and

211

5.77 mm2/s, respectively.32 These constituents as ethyl esters, together with smaller amounts of

212

other C20+ FAEEs, comprised 54.4% of the FA profile of FPEE. As expected, FPEE exhibited

213

a higher KV than FPME. Blending with less viscous fuels represents a viable strategy to satisfy

214

the EN 14214 KV specification.21,22,26

215

Minimum limits for CN (ASTM D613) of 47 and 51 are prescribed in ASTM D6751 and

216

EN 14214, respectively. DCN (ASTM D6890) was measured in this study, as it requires a

217

smaller sample size and is approved as an alternative to CN in ASTM D6751.33 The DCN of

218

FPEE was 61.4, which was considerably higher than the minimum limits specified in the

219

biodiesel standards. DCN is influenced by chain length, degree of unsaturation and branching,

220

with higher DCNs observed for linear saturated chains of longer lengths.3 FPEE yielded a high

221

DCN because it contained a high percentages of ethyl erucate and ethyl gondoate, which we

222

determined in a previous study to have DCNs of 74.2 and 73.2, respectively, as methyl esters.1

223

Lubricity is not specified in the biodiesel standards but is included in the petrodiesel

224

standards ASTM D975, D7467 and EN 590 with maximum wear scars (60 oC) of 520, 520 and

225

460 µm prescribed, respectively. The wear scar generated by FPEE (113 µm) was significantly

226

below the maximum limits listed in the petrodiesel standards, which was in agreement with prior

227

studies indicating that biodiesel possessed inherently good lubricity.1,10,11,34-36 The shorter wear


Page 10 of 23

Page 11 of 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

228

scar observed for FPEE relative to FPME was attributed to the presence of FAs in FPEE (see AV

229

data), as FAs have even better lubricity than alkyl esters.36

230

The concentration of sulfur is limited in ASTM D6751 and EN 14214 to maximum

231

values of 15 and 10 ppm, respectively. The sulfur content of FPEE (7 ppm) was below these

232

maximum limits. The concentration of phosphorous is also limited to a maximum value of 0.001

233

mass %. However, no phosphorous was detected in FPEE.

234

ASTM D6751 does not contain a density specification, but EN 14214 prescribes a range

235

of 860-900 kg/m3 at 15 oC. FPEE provided a density (884 kg/m3) within the range specified in

236

EN 14214. Also measured was SG at 15 oC, for which FPEE yielded a value of 0.885.

237

However, neither ASTM D6751 nor EN 14214 contain limits on SG. The density and SG of

238

FPEE were similar to those reported for several biodiesel fuels and higher than that of ULSD.37,38

239

The HHV of FPEE was 39.44 MJ/kg, which due to its content of C20+ FAEEs provided

240

greater energy content than biodiesel fuels comprised almost exclusively of C16-C18 FAMEs.39

241

FPEE also yielded higher energy content than FPME due to the presence of additional energetic

242

C-H bonds in the ethyl ester moiety. The STs of FPEE at 25 and 40 oC were 31.0 and 29.6

243

mN/m, respectively. Such values agreed closely with previously reported STs of biodiesel fuels

244

prepared from a variety of feedstocks at similar temperatures.1,10,39,40 Neither ASTM D6751 nor

245

EN 14214 contain limits on energy content or ST.

246

3.4.

Fuel Properties of Blends with Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel Fuel. Depicted in

247

Tables 3 and 4 are the fuel properties of FPME and FPEE blended with ULSD at B0, B2, B5,

248

B10, and B20 levels along with a comparison to the petrodiesel standards ASTM D975, D7467

249

and EN 590. Each standard permits a different range of blend levels: biodiesel up to the B5 and

250

B7 levels are allowed by ASTM D975 and EN 590, respectively, whereas ASTM D7467 covers


Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

251

blends from 6-20 vol%. Properties of interest included AV, cold flow, density, HHV, KV,

252

lubricity, moisture, oxidative stability, SG, ST, and sulfur content.

253

The biodiesel-petrodiesel blend standard, ASTM D7467, limits AV to a maximum value

254

of 0.30 mg KOH/g. ASTM D975 and EN 590 do not contain AV specifications. Neither the

255

FPME nor the FPEE blends contained a detectable level of acids, thereby satisfying the ASTM

256

D7467, where applicable. Another parameter that was minimally affected by blend ratio was

257

sulfur content. This was because ULSD (9 ppm), FPME (7 ppm) and FPEE (7 ppm) contained

258

similar concentrations of sulfur. All blends yielded sulfur concentrations that were within the

259

limits specified in the petrodiesel standards.

260

Density is limited in EN 590 to a range of 820-845 kg/m3 (15 oC) but no such limits are

261

specified by ASTM D975 or D7467. As the percentages of FPME and FPEE in ULSD increased

262

from B0 to B20, density increased linearly (R2 0.99) as a result of the higher densities of FPME

263

and FPEE relative to ULSD. The values obtained for the B0-B5 blends were below the

264

maximum threshold listed in EN 590. However, The B20 samples were above the limit but

265

contained too much biodiesel to be covered by EN 590. Analogous to density were the results

266

obtained for SG in which highly linear (R2 = 0.99) increases were noted as the blend ratio

267

increased. These results were in agreement with a previous study that elucidated a linear

268

correlation between blend ratio and SG.37 The petrodiesel standards do not specify limits for SG.

269

Also yielding highly linear correlations (R2 = 0.99) were moisture content and KV. Both

270

FPME and FPEE yielded higher moisture levels and KVs than ULSD, so the corresponding

271

blends afforded progressively higher values with increasing blend ratio. All of the blends were

272

within the ranges prescribed in the standards for moisture content and KV, where applicable. A

273

strongly linear negative correlation (R2 = 0.99) was noted for energy content. Both FPME and


Page 12 of 23

Page 13 of 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

274

FPEE had lower HHVs than ULSD, so the corresponding blends provided progressively lower

275

values with increasing blend ratio. Energy content is not specified in the petrodiesel standards.

276

FPME and FPEE were considerably less stable to oxidation than ULSD, as seen by an IP

277

of 40.1 h for ULSD. Such a result is typical of biodiesel, as biodiesel contains oxidatively

278

susceptible olefinic moieties whereas ULSD does not. As a result, lower IPs were observed as

279

the content of biodiesel increased from B0-20. In agreement with previous studies, the response

280

of IP to ester content was non-linear.34 ASTM D7467 specifies a minimum IP of 6.0 h. The B10

281

and B20 blends met this requirement. A minimum IP of 20 h is specified in EN 590, whereas

282

ASTM D975 does not contain an oxidative stability specification. The B2 blends along with the

283

B5 FPEE blend met the requirement, but the FPME B5 blend did not satisfy the EN 590 limit.

284

The cold flow properties of biodiesel are generally inferior to ULSD, as evidenced by

285

numerous studies on the influence of biodiesel on the low temperature behavior of

286

ULSD.10,34,35,38,39,41 However, FPME and especially FPEE exhibited CP, CFPP and PP values

287

much closer to ULSD than traditional biodiesel fuels. As a result, the deleterious effect of

288

increasing blend ratio on cold flow behavior of ULSD was mitigated. Although CP, CFPP and

289

PP trended toward higher temperatures with increasing content of biodiesel, the changes were

290

minimal compared to other biodiesel fuels. For instance, the CP, CFPP and PP of the B20 FPEE

291

blend increased by only 3 oC relative to ULSD. For comparison, increases of 6-7 oC were

292

reported for the corresponding B20 blends of SME in ULSD.10 The petrodiesel standards do not

293

contain limits on low temperature operability. Instead, ASTM D975 and D7467 offer guidance.

294

As already mentioned, ULSD is inferior to biodiesel with regard to lubricity, as seen by a

295

comparison of the wear scar generated by ULSD (571 µm) to FPME and FPEE and the

296

petrodiesel standards. Accordingly, the blends exhibited significantly shorter wear scars with


Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

297

increasing content of biodiesel. The response of lubricity to blend ratio was non-linear, as small

298

increases in biodiesel content resulted in substantial reductions in wear scar length. Even at the

299

B2 blend level, the blends were well within the limits listed in the petrodiesel standards. As was

300

the case in prior studies, biodiesel was an excellent lubricity enhancer for ULSD.10,11,34,38,39,42

301

Although ST is not among the specifications listed in the petrodiesel standards, it affects

302

fuel atomization in combustion chambers in diesel engines.43 The STs of ULSD at 25 and 40 °C

303

(27.3 and 25.9 mN/m) were lower than both FPME and FPEE. Hence, blends of FPME and

304

FPEE in ULSD displayed progressively higher STs with increasing content of biodiesel, which

305

was in agreement with previous studies.10,11,39,40 The minimal increase in ST among the blends

306

relative to ULSD was not considered significant enough to negatively impact fuel atomization.

307 308

4.

309

FPEE was prepared in 89% yield from pretreated FPO using potassium hydroxide as catalyst.

310

The dominant FA in FPO was erucic acid (36.2%), with linoleic (19.5%), oleic (11.0%), gondoic

311

(10.2%), and linolenic (8.9%) acids also present in significant amounts. FPEE was within

312

ASTM D675and EN 14214 limits, where applicable, for AV, FP, free and total glycerol, and

313

moisture content, thus indicating that high quality esters were prepared. The cold flow properties

314

of FPEE were significantly better than biodiesel from commodity lipids such as soybean, canola,

315

sunflower, and especially palm oils. The low level of saturated FAs identified in FPEE (5.0%)

316

was in part attributed to its excellent low temperature behavior. The failure of FPEE (4.6 h) to

317

meet the EN 14214 oxidative stability specification (> 6 h) was attributed to its high percentage

318

(30.4%) of polyunsaturated FAEEs, such as ethyl linoleate and linolenate. As is the case with

319

most biodiesel fuels, antioxidant additives are recommended. The KV of FPEE (5.65 mm2/s)

CONCLUSIONS


Page 14 of 23

Page 15 of 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

320

was within the range specified in ASTM D6751 but exceeded the maximum limit prescribed in

321

EN 14214. The high KV was caused by the presence of longer-chain (C20+) FAEE. The

322

presence of longer-chain FAEE also resulted in a DCN of 61.4, which was significantly higher

323

than biodiesel prepared from typical commodity lipids and well above the minimum

324

requirements specified by the biodiesel standards. Density, energy content, heteroatom content,

325

IV, lubricity, specific gravity, and surface tension were within the limits of ASTM D6751 and

326

EN 14214, where applicable.

327

Blends (B2, B5, B10, and B20) of FPME and FPEE in ULSD were also prepared and the

328

resulting fuel properties were compared to the petrodiesel standards ASTM D975, D7467 and

329

EN 590. Highly linear correlations (R2 = 0.99) were noted between blend ratio and density,

330

HHV, KV, moisture content, and SG. AV, sulfur content and ST were essentially unaffected by

331

blend ratio. Oxidative stability was negatively affected by blend ratio, which is typical for

332

biodiesel. In contrast to other biodiesel fuels, cold flow properties were minimally impacted by

333

blend ratio, thus representing a significant advantage for FPME and FPEE. Both FPME and

334

FPEE proved to be excellent lubricity enhancers for petrodiesel, as even small amounts (B2)

335

markedly improved lubricity. Where applicable, fuel properties of the blends were within the

336

limits prescribed in the petrodiesel standards.

337 338

AUTHOR INFORMATION

339

Corresponding Author

340

(B.R.M.) E-mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +1-309-681-6511; fax: +1-309-681-6524.

341 342

Disclaimer


Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

343

Mention of trade names or commercial products in this publication is solely for the purpose of

344

providing specific information and does not imply recommendation or endorsement by the U.S.

345

Department of Agriculture. USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

346 347

Notes

348

The authors declare no competing financial interest.

349 350

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

351 352

Kim Ascherl, Benetria Banks, Billy Deadmond, and Jeff Forrester are acknowledged for

353

technical assistance.

354 355

REFERENCES

356

(1)

Moser, B. R.; Knothe, G.; Vaughn, S. F.; Isbell, T. A. Energy Fuels 2009, 23, 4149-4155.

357

(2)

Kim, S.; Dale, B. E. Biomass Bioenergy 2005, 29, 426-439.

358

(3)

Moser, B. R. In vitro Cell. Dev. Biol.-Plant 2009, 45, 229-266.

359

(4)

Haas, M. J.; McAloon, A. J.; Yee, W. C.; Foglia, T. A. Bioresour. Technol. 2006, 97,

360

671-678.

361

(5)

Berchmans, H. J.; Hirata, S. Bioresour. Technol. 2008, 99, 1716-1721.

362

(6)

Chisti, Y. Biotechnol. Adv. 2007, 25, 294-306.

363

(7)

Moser B. R. Biofuels 2012, 3, 193-209.

364

(8)

Isbell, T. A. Ol. Crops Gras. Lipides 2009, 16, 205-210.


Page 16 of 23

Page 17 of 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

365

Energy & Fuels

(9)

366

Royo-Esnal, A.; Necajeva, J.; Torra, J.; Recasens J.; Gesch, R. W. Ind. Crops Prod. 2015, 66, 161-169.

367

(10)

Moser, B. R.; Vaughn, S. F. Bioresour. Technol. 2010, 101, 646-653.

368

(11)

Moser, B. R.; Evangelista, R. L.; Jham, G. Renewable Energy 2015, 78, 82-88.

369

(12)

O,Brien, R. D. Fats and Oils. Formulating and Processing Applications. 3rd Ed; CRC

370

Press: Boca Raton, 2009; p 3.

371

(13)

Evangelista, R. L.; Isbell, T. A.; Cermak, S. C. Ind. Crops Prod. 2012, 37, 76-81.

372

(14)

Selling, G. W.; Hojilla-Evangelista, M. P.; Evangelista, R. L.; Isbell, T.; Price, N.; Doll,

373 374

K. M. Ind. Crops Prod. 2013, 41, 113-119. (15)

375 376

Prod. 2013, 45, 223-229. (16)

377 378

(17)

(18)

Isbell, T. A.; Evangelista, R.; Glenn, S. E.; Devore, D. A.; Moser, B. R., Cermak, S. C.; Rao, S. Ind. Crops Prod. 2015, 66, 188-193.

(19)

383 384

Moser, B. R.; Shah, S. N.; Winkler-Moser, J. K.; Vaughn, S. F.; Evangelista, R. L. Ind. Crops Prod. 2009, 30, 199-205.

381 382

Vaughn, S. F.; Isbell, T. A.; Weisleder, D.; Berhow, M. A. J. Chem. Ecol. 2005, 31, 167177.

379 380

Hojilla-Evangelista, M. P.; Evangelista, R. L.; Isbell, T. A.; Selling, G. W. Ind. Crops

Cermak, S. C.; Biresaw, G.; Isbell, T. A.; Evangelista, R. L.; Vaughn, S. F.; Murray, R. Ind. Crops Prod. 2013, 44, 232-239.

(20)

385

Cermak, S. C.; Durham, A. L.; Isbell, T. A.; Evangelista, R. L., Murray, R. E. Ind. Crops. Prod. 2015, 67, 179-184.

386

(21)

Moser, B. R. Renewable Energy 2016, 85, 819-825.

387

(22)

Moser, B. R. Energy Fuels 2008, 22, 4301-4306.


Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

388

(23)

Drenth, A. C.; Olsen, D. B.; Cabot, P. E.; Johnson, J. J. Fuel 2014, 136, 143-155.

389

(24)

Fan, J.; Shonnard, D. R.; Kalnes, T. N.; Johnsen, P. B.; Rao, S. Biomass Bioenergy 2013,

390

55, 87-100.

391

(25)

Evangelista, R.L. Ind. Crops Prod. 2009, 29, 189-196.

392

(26)

Moser, B. R. Energy Environ. Sci. 2011, 4, 2160-2167.

393

(27)

Freedman, B.; Pryde, E.H.; Mounts, T.L. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 1984, 61, 1638-1643.

394

(28)

Lotero, E.; Liu, Y.; Lopez, D.E.; Suwannakarn, K.; Bruce, D.A.; Goodwin Jr., J.G. Ind.

395

Eng. Chem. Res. 2005, 44, 5353-5363.

396

(29)

Knothe, G.; Dunn, R. O. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 2009, 86, 843-856.

397

(30)

Moser, B. R. J. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 2009, 86, 699-706.

398

(31)

Knothe, GJ. Am. Oil Chem. Soc. 2002, 79, 847-854.

399

(32)

Knothe, G.; Steidley, K. R. Fuel 2005, 84, 1059-1065.

400

(33)

American Society for Testing and Materials. Standard specification for biodiesel fuel

401

blend stock (B100) for middle distillate fuels, ASTM D6751-15. In ASTM Annual Book

402

of Standards; American Society for Testing and Materials: West Conshohocken, PA,

403

2015.

404

(34)

Moser, B.R.; Eller, F. J.; Tisserat, B. H.; Gravett, A. Energy Fuels 2011, 25, 1869-1877.

405

(35)

Moser, B. R.; Williams, A.; Haas, M. J.; McCormick, R. L. Fuel Process. Technol. 2009,

406

90, 1122-1128.

407

(36)

Knothe, G.; Steidley, K. R. Energy Fuels 2005, 19, 1192-1200.

408

(37)

Moser, B. R. Fuel 2012, 99, 254-261.

409

(38)

Moser, B. R.; Vaughn, S. F. Bioenergy Res. 2012, 5, 439-444.

410

(39)

Moser, B. R. Fuel 2012, 92, 231-238.


Page 18 of 23

Page 19 of 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

411

(40)

Doll, K. M.; Moser, B. R.; Erhan, S. Z. Energy Fuels 2007, 21, 3044-3048.

412

(41)

Moser, B. R. Fuel 2014, 115, 500-506.

413

(42)

Moser, B. R.; Dien, B. S.; Seliskar, D. M.; Gallagher, J. L. Renewable Energy 2013, 50,

414 415

833-839. (43)

Ejim, C. E.; Fleck, B. A.; Amirfazli, A. Fuel 2007, 86, 1534-1544.


Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Table 1. Fatty Acid Composition (area %) of Field Pennycress Seed Oil FPO Fatty Acida C16:0 2.4 C18:0 0.2 C18:1 9c 11.0 C18:1 11c 1.2 C18:2 9c, 12c 19.5 (0.1) C18:3 9c, 12c, 15c 8.9 (0.1) C20:0 2.2 C20:1 11c 10.2 C20:2 11c, 14c 1.6 C20:3 11c, 14c, 17c 0.4 (0.1) C22:0 0.2 C22:1 13c 36.2 (0.2) C24:1 15c 3.6 (0.1) b 5.0 Σ saturated c 64.6 Σ monounsaturated 30.4 Σ polyunsaturatedd e 54.4 Σ C20+ a For example, C18:1 9c signifies an 18 carbon fatty acid chain with one cis (c) double bond located at carbon 9 (methyl 9Z-octadecenoate; methyl oleate). Numbers in parenthesis represent standard deviations (n=3). When none is given standard deviation was zero. b

Σ saturated = C16:0 + C18:0 + C20:0 + C22:0.

c

Σ monounsaturated = C18:1 + C20:1 + C22:1 + C24:1.

d

Σ polyunsaturated = C18:2 + C18:3 + C20:2 + C20:3.

e

Σ C20+ = C20:0 + C20:1 + C20:2 + C20:3+ C22:0 + C22:1 + C24:1.


Page 20 of 23

Page 21 of 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60

Energy & Fuels

Table 2. Fuel Properties of Field Pennycress Seed Oil Methyl (FPME) and Ethyl Esters (FPEE) with a Comparison to the Biodiesel Standards ASTM D6751 and EN 14214a ASTM D6751 0.50 max

Acid value, mg KOH/g Glycerol content: Free, mass % 0.020 max Total, mass % 0.240 max Flash point, oC 130 min Cold flow properties: CP, oC Report o CFPP, C PP, oC Oxidative stability: 3 min IP, 110 oC, h Iodine value, g I2/100 g Kinematic viscosity, 40 oC, mm2/s 1.9-6.0 Cetane number 47 min Sulfur, ppm 15 max Phosphorous, mass % 0.001 max Moisture content, ppm Wear scar, 60 oC, µm Density, 15 oC, kg/m3 Specific gravity, 15 oC HHV, MJ/kg Surface tension, mN/m 25 oC o 40 C a min = minimum; max = maximum.

EN 14214 0.50 max

FPME N/Db

FPEE 0.38 (0.04)c

0.020 max 0.250 max 101 min

0.005 0.041 186

0.010 0.069 189

-d Variablee -

-10 (1) -17 -18 (1)

-15 (1) -17 -19

6 min 120 max

4.4 (0.1) 104

4.6 (0.2) 109

3.5-5.0 51 min 10 max 0.001 max 500 max 860-900 -

5.24 (0.01) 59.8 (1.3)f 7 N/D 296 (1) 145 (3) 889 0.890 38.92 (0.03)

5.65 (0.01) 61.4 (2.1)f 7 N/D 323 (3) 113 (2) 884 0.885 39.44 (0.06)

-

31.5 29.8

31.0 29.6

b

None detected.

c

Values in parentheses are standard deviations from the reported means. Where none is given standard deviation was zero.

d

Not specified.

e

Variable by location and time of year.

f

Derived cetane number.


Energy & Fuels

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

Page 22 of 23

Table 3. Fuel Properties of Blends of FPME in ULSD along with a Comparison to the Petrodiesel Standards ASTM D975, D7467 and EN 590a Petrodiesel Standards ASTM D975 ASTM D7467 EN 590 0-5 6-20 0-7 0.30 max 200 max

Biodiesel content, vol % Acid value, mg KOH/g Moisture content, ppm Cold flow properties: -b CP, oC o CFPP, C -b o PP, C Oxidative stability: IP, 110 oC, h Kinematic viscosity: 40 oC, mm2/s 1.9-4.1 Sulfur, ppm 15 max 520 max Wear scar, 60 oC, µm Density, 15 oC, kg/m3 Specific gravity HHV, MJ/kg Surface tension, mN/m 25 oC o 40 C a Refer to footnotes in Table 2. b

B0 0 N/D 17 (1)

Blends of FPME in ULSD B2 B5 B10 2.0 5.0 10.0 N/D N/D N/D 23 (2) 31 (1) 45 (2)

B20 20.0 N/D 73 (1)

-b -b -

-

-18 -19 -24

-18 (1) -19 -23

-16 -17 -20

-16 -17 -20

-15 -15 -20

6 min

20 min

40.1 (1.2)

22.9 (0.7)

19.0 (0.5)

14.3 (0.9)

9.7 (0.1)

1.9-4.1 15 max 520 max -

2.0-4.0 10 max 460 max 820-845 -

2.30 (0.01) 9 571 (4) 837 (1) 0.838 46.23 (0.10)

2.31 9 345 (2) 838 0.839 46.08 (0.09)

2.38 9 237 (3) 840 0.841 45.86 (0.11)

2.47 9 164 (3) 842 0.843 45.50 (0.06)

2.69 8 158 (2) 847 0.848 44.77 (0.08)

-

-

27.3 25.9

27.4 26.0

27.5 26.1

27.6 26.2

27.8 26.6

No limits are specified, but guidance is provided.


Page 23 of 23

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

Energy & Fuels

Table 4. Fuel Properties of Blends of FPEE in ULSD along with a Comparison to the Petrodiesel Standards ASTM D975, D7467 and EN 590a Petrodiesel Standards ASTM D975 ASTM D7467 EN 590 0-5 6-20 0-7 0.30 max 200 max

Biodiesel content, vol % Acid value, mg KOH/g Moisture content, ppm Cold flow properties: -b CP, oC o CFPP, C -b o PP, C Oxidative stability: IP, 110 oC, h Kinematic viscosity: 40 oC, mm2/s 1.9-4.1 Sulfur, ppm 15 max 520 max Wear scar, 60 oC, µm Density, 15 oC, kg/m3 Specific gravity HHV, MJ/kg Surface tension, mN/m 25 oC o 40 C a Refer to footnotes in Tables 2 and 3.

B0 0 N/D 17 (1)

Blends of FPEE in ULSD B2 B5 B10 2.0 5.0 10.0 N/D N/D N/D 23 (1) 32 (1) 48 (2)

B20 20.0 N/D 79 (2)

-b -b -

-

-18 -19 -24

-17 -18 -24

-16 -17 -23

-16 -16 -23

-15 -16 -21

6 min

20 min

40.1 (1.2)

> 24

20.1 (0.9)

15.8 (0.7)

9.9 (0.4)

1.9-4.1 15 max 520 max -

2.0-4.0 10 max 460 max 820-845 -

2.30 (0.01) 9 571 (4) 837 (1) 0.838 46.23 (0.10)

2.32 (0.01) 9 167 (1) 838 0.839 46.09 (0.07)

2.38 9 143 (1) 839 0.840 45.89 (0.10)

2.49 9 135 (1) 842 0.843 45.55 (0.08)

2.73 8 132 (3) 847 0.848 44.87 (0.10)

-

-

27.3 25.9

27.3 26.0

27.5 26.0

27.6 26.1

27.9 26.4


Preparation and Fuel Properties of Field Pennycress (Thlaspi arvense

Recommend Documents