Biodiesel versus Diesel: A Pilot Study Comparing Exhaust Exposures for Employees at a Rural Municipal Facility

Abstract

Many organizations interested in renewable, domestic energy have switched from petroleum diesel to biodiesel blends for use in transportation and heavy-duty equipment. Although considerable evidence exists on the negative health effects of petroleum diesel exhaust exposures in occupational settings, there has been little research examining biodiesel exposures. Working collaboratively with a local municipality, concentrations of particulate matter (PM) and other air toxics were measured at a recycling facility in southwestern New Hampshire while heavy equipment operated first on petroleum diesel and then on a B20 blend (20% soy-based biodiesel/80% petroleum diesel). This pilot study used a combination of established industrial hygiene and environmental air monitoring methods to estimate occupational exposure profiles to PM and air toxics from combustion of petroleum diesel and biodiesel. Results indicate that B20 use dramatically reduces work area respirable particle, PM2.5 (PM ≤2.5 µm in aerodynamic diameter), and formaldehyde levels compared with petroleum diesel. Some volatile organic compound concentrations were higher for petroleum diesel and others were higher for the B20 blend. Overall, this study suggests that biodiesel blends reduce worker exposure to and health risk from petroleum diesel exhaust, but additional exposure research is recommended.

Biodiesel exhaust: The need for a systematic approach to health effects research

“…There have, however, been three attempts (Table 3) at assessing the health effects of biodiesel exhaust exposure via epidemiology. [70][71][72] The first of these has significant drawbacks and is not published in a peer-reviewed journal. 70 In this study, 763 male road workers had their exposure to rapeseed biodiesel estimated from their job title.…”

“…In a more recent study, Traviss et al (2010) measured PM and air toxics (including carbonyls and volatile organics) at a recycling facility in New Hampshire, USA. 72 Heavy machinery at the facility was operated using mineral diesel for 1 day, followed by a blend of 20% soybean biodiesel/80% mineral diesel for 1 day.…”

“…72 Heavy machinery at the facility was operated using mineral diesel for 1 day, followed by a blend of 20% soybean biodiesel/80% mineral diesel for 1 day. During these times, PM and air toxics were measured, and occupational exposures were estimated based on environmental air monitoring results.…”

Occupational Exposures to Emissions from Combustion of Diesel and Alternative Fuels in Underground Mining—A Simulated Pilot Study

“…Previous studies have shown mixed results comparing particulate exposures and DPM across diesel and biodiesel blends, with some finding no difference, (12,17) others showing significant reductions, (13,14,16,(21)(22)(23)(24) and one finding a small increase. (25) Our research revealed increasing tOC and decreasing tEC concentrations associated with B75 use, consistent with previously published studies.…”

Linkages Between Clean Technology Development and Environmental Health Outcomes in Regional Australia

“…Where safer, less toxic, or non-toxic chemical alternatives can be identified and used in place of environmentally hazardous substances, a reduction in chemical waste and public exposures should follow (LCSP, 2010). A good example of this is the use of biofuels: Traviss et al (2010) reported that employee health risks related to exhaust exposures were much lower when biodiesel blends were used to power heavy-duty equipment, compared with regular petroleum diesel. Industries that adopt cleantech principles may also be able to use existing industrial, commercial or domestic waste as process inputs (e.g., feedstock for bio-energy): this further reduces the public health burden associated with waste management from neighbouring sectors.…”