Biofuels: Environment, technology and food security

Escobar, José C.; Lora, Electo Eduardo Silva; Venturini, Osvaldo José; Yáñez, Edgar E.; Castillo, E.; Almazán, Oscar

doi:10.1016/j.rser.2008.08.014

Cited by 617 publications

(323 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

288

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The bulk (71%) of this biofuel capacity is concentrated within five traditionally agriculturally centric states (Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, and Missouri). However, given the environmental concerns of feedstock production and potential displacement of food and feed production (Ajanovic 2011;Escobar et al 2009;Pimentel and Patzek 2005;Tilman et al 2009;Youngs and Somerville 2014), the development of alternative feedstock resources throughout the US could support the near-term RFS growth requirements. As biodiesel production increases in response to energy security concerns (Jacobson 2009), environmental issues (Hill et al 2006;Joly et al 2015;Dale 2003, 2005), and domestic initiatives incorporating economic development programs (Dale et al 2014;Hull et al 2014), the evaluation of viable feedstock alternatives is necessary to ensure production sustainability.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Farm-Gate Life Cycle Assessment of Oilseed Feedstocks in the Northern Great Plains

Moeller

Sieverding

Stone

2017

Biophys Econ Resour Qual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative Farm-Gate Life Cycle Assessment of Oilseed Feedstocks in the Northern Great Plains

Moeller

Sieverding

Stone

2017

Biophys Econ Resour Qual

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The increase in the worldwide energy demand, which in 2050 is likely to be double what it was in the year 2000 [1,2], along with declining resources have led investigators to seek alternative technologies, materials and more sustainable strategies to produce energy, fuels and chemicals. Under this new energetic scenario, the development of new processes and the employment of renewable materials to achieve an environmentally friendly production of energy and chemicals are of paramount importance to satisfy the energy consumption requirements of the present petroleum-based society and the well being of the generations of the future.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bio-oil upgrading in supercritical water using Ni-Co catalysts supported on carbon nanofibres

Remón

Arauzo

García

et al. 2016

Fuel Processing Technology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This work addresses the preparation, characterisation and screening of different Ni-Co catalysts supported on carbon nanofibres (CNFs) for use in the upgrading of bio-oil in supercritical water. The aim is to improve the physicochemical properties of bio-oil so that it can be used as a fuel. The CNFs were firstly oxidised in HNO 3 and afterwards subjected to a thermal treatment to selectively modify their surface chemistry prior to the incorporation of the metal active phase (Ni-Co). The CNFs and the supported catalysts were thoroughly characterised by several techniques, which allowed a relationship to be established between the catalyst properties and the upgrading results.The use of Ni-Co/CNFs for bio-oil upgrading in supercritical water (SCW) significantly improved the properties of the original feedstock. In addition, the thermal treatment to which the fibres were subjected exerted a significant influence on their catalyticproperties. An increase in the severity of the thermal treatment led to a substantial reduction in the oxygen content of the CNFs, mainly due to the removal of the less 2 stable oxygen surface groups, which allowed their surface polarity to decrease. This decrease resulted in less formation of solid products. However, it also reduced the H/C and increased the O/C ratios of the upgraded liquid. Therefore, a compromise between the yield and the properties of the upgraded bio-oil was achieved with a Ni-Co supported on a CNF with a moderate amount of oxygen surface groups.

show abstract

“…For example, a fuel that has 20% biodiesel will be denoted by B20. When comparing biodiesel to petroleum-based diesel fuel, it is clearly evident that biodiesel is a lot more environmentally friendly [17][18][19][20][21][22]. A study sponsored by the United States Department of Agriculture and Department of Energy revealed that "Biodiesel yields 3.2 units of fuel product energy for every unit of fossil energy consumed in its life cycle.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The production of B20 yields 0.98 units of fuel product energy for every unit of fossil energy consumed" [23]. In the literature it is reported that biodiesel is able to save the environment by reducing harmful emissions, and it can also contribute to the economy [17,24,25]. Biodiesel is characterised in generations, namely, first, second and third generation [26].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparative study of diesel engine performance and emission with soybean and waste oil biodiesel fuels

Azad¹,

Rasul²,

Giannangelo³

et al. 2015

Int. J. Automot. Mech. Eng.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study investigated the engine performance and emission using biodiesel from soybean oil and waste cooking oil. The fuel properties of these biodiesels were determined using ASTM D6751and EN 14214 standards. The fuels were tested in a multi-cylinder diesel engine with an electromagnetic dynamometer and a 5-gas analyser was used for emission analysis. The result shows that the thermal performance of the engine slightly decreases with increase of the biodiesel blends ratio (i.e. B5, B10, B15, B20 and B50). On the other hand, emission decreases with the increase of biodiesel blends. The reduction in emissions was different for both biodiesels. Waste oil biodiesel showed better trends of emissions reduction with increase of the biodiesel percentage compared with soybean biodiesel. The brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) of both biodiesels is (6.05%, 9.13%, 12.36% and 18.57% for soybean) and (8.17%, 11.40%, 17.71% and 14.96% for waste cooking oil) higher than diesel, respectively. However, soybean biodiesel consumed less fuel and produced more power and torque compared to waste oil biodiesel. The study concluded that B10 soybean biodiesel blend produced more consistent and expected results than waste oil biodiesel from the performance and emission point of view.

show abstract

Biofuels: Environment, technology and food security

Cited by 617 publications

References 8 publications

Comparative Farm-Gate Life Cycle Assessment of Oilseed Feedstocks in the Northern Great Plains

Comparative Farm-Gate Life Cycle Assessment of Oilseed Feedstocks in the Northern Great Plains

Bio-oil upgrading in supercritical water using Ni-Co catalysts supported on carbon nanofibres

Comparative study of diesel engine performance and emission with soybean and waste oil biodiesel fuels

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About