# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Haley Zaremba

Haley Zaremba is a writer and journalist based in Mexico City. She has extensive experience writing and editing environmental features, travel pieces, local news in the...

In the face of an international movement away from traditional fossil fuels and toward a greener future, many researchers around the world are rushing to find the next big breakthrough in the production of renewable resources, particularly via more and more efficient means of converting biomass. The latest headline to come from efforts of scientists around the globe is a new discovery by a team of scientists based in the west Indian city of Pune at the National Chemical Laboratory (NCL), which offers a quicker, eco-friendly technique for converting industrial biomass into biodiesel.

The key to the scientists' discovery is a new version of a zeolite catalyst - HPW/Meso-HZ-5 - which can be used to make the process of converting industrial biomass into an organic biofuel compound called furfural far more efficient. The current standard process of making furfural starts with biomass sourced from agricultural waste such as bagasse, cotton seed hulls, sawdust, oat hulls, rice hulls, wheat husk and bran, among others. After making the furfural, the current conventional first step toward making it into a viable biofuel is to chemically change it into furfuryl alcohol, which is then further processed to create alkyl levulinates. This process however, is a lengthy and complicated one with many steps. This is where the NCL team's catalyst comes into play by considerably speeding up the process of conversion.

The zeolite catalyst has shown good results in tests with 100 percent furfuryl alcohol conversion along with 97 percent ethyl levulinate biodiesel yield (a type of alkyl levulinate) and 3 percent ethoxy methyl (a food additive) furan yield. Importantly, the new HPW/Meso-HZ-5 catalyst produced better results than its parent catalysts H-ZSM-5 and Meso-HZ-5 when used separately.

As explained by the research team, "due to higher number of active sites and larger pore size the travel distance is reduced, thereby improving accessibility of active sites. Low molar ratio of reactants would do away with the separation cost associated with unreacted ethanol, operational cost and reactor size, making the process economically viable and industrially safe." Related: Why 2019 Could Start With An Oil Rally

The research team that discovered the enzyme is based in India, a country that is the second largest producer of sugarcane in the world and is also among the top producers globally of rice, pulses, and wheat, crops that all create a massive quantity of the agricultural waste necessary to create biofuel by converting into furfural then to biodiesel. If NCL's discovery makes this method viable for production on a mass scale, it could mean major economic opportunity and additional income for farmers in India, as well as potentially creating jobs in poverty-stricken parts of the subcontinent.

This advancement in biofuels research is just one part of a massive campaign on the part of the Indian government to become a global leader in green energy. So far, the initiative has been more than successful, as India has already become the world's single largest renewable energy auctions market and the second biggest attracter of clean energy investments according to numbers from the Climatescope 2018 report by Bloomberg NEF.

(Click to enlarge)

Last year India's investing in its renewable energy sector surpassed spending in traditional fossil fuel-based power production for the first time in history according to the International Energy Agency (IEA)'s World Energy Investment 2018 report. At nearly $20 billion, investment in Indian renewables in 2017 represented more than a third of investments in the power sector, mostly due to investments in solar and wind projects nearly doubling.

India's achievements in the green energy sector are particularly impressive when compared to energy sector spending worldwide, which has been in considerable decline for three consecutive years, landing at just $1.8 trillion in global energy investments in 2017. The IEA projects that the decline with continue over the next few years.

By Haley Zaremba for Oilprice.com
More Top Reads From Oilprice.com: Back to homepage

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
India Makes Breakthrough In Biofuel Development | OilPrice.com

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Haley Zaremba Haley Zaremba is a writer and journalist based in Mexico City. She has extensive experience writing and editing environmental features, travel pieces, local news in the...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Replacing fossil fuels with biofuels-fuels produced from renewable organic material-has the potential to reduce some undesirable aspects of fossil fuel production and use, including conventional and greenhouse gas (GHG) pollutant emissions, exhaustible resource depletion, and dependence on unstable foreign suppliers. Demand for biofuels could also increase farm income. On the other hand, because many biofuel feedstocks require land, water, and other resources, research suggests that biofuel production may give rise to several undesirable effects. Potential drawbacks include changes to land use patterns that may increase GHG emissions, pressure on water resources, air and water pollution, and increased food costs. Depending on the feedstock and production process and time horizon of the analysis, biofuels can emit even more GHGs than some fossil fuels on an energy-equivalent basis. Biofuels also tend to require subsidies and other market interventions to compete economically with fossil fuels, which creates deadweight losses in the economy.

Background

First generation biofuels are made from sugar crops (sugarcane, sugarbeet), starch crops (corn, sorghum), oilseed crops (soybean, canola), and animal fats. Sugar and starch crops are converted through a fermentation process to form bioalcohols, including ethanol, butanol, and propanol. Oils and animal fats can be processed into biodiesel. Ethanol is the most widely used bioalcohol fuel. Most vehicles can use gasoline-ethanol blends containing up to 10 percent ethanol (by volume). Flexible fuel vehicles can use E85, a gasoline-ethanol blend containing up to 85 percent ethanol. There were more than 2300 E85 fueling stations located throughout the US in 2013 (US Department of Energy).

Second generation biofuels, or cellulosic biofuels, are made from cellulose, which is available from non-food crops and waste biomass such as corn stover, corncobs, straw, wood, and wood byproducts. Third generation biofuels use algae as a feedstock. Commercial cellulosic biofuel production began in the US in 2013, while algae biofuels are not yet produced commercially.

Potential economic benefits of biofuel production

Replacing fossil fuels with biofuels has the potential to generate a number of benefits. In contrast to fossil fuels, which are exhaustible resources, biofuels are produced from renewable feedstocks. Thus, their production and use could, in theory, be sustained indefinitely.

While the production of biofuels results in GHG emissions at several stages of the process, EPA's (2010) analysis of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) projected that several types of biofuels could yield lower lifecycle GHG emissions than gasoline over a 30 year time horizon. Academic studies using other economic models have also found that biofuels can lead to reductions in lifecycle GHG emissions relative to conventional fuels (Hertel et al. 2010, Huang et al. 2013). Second and third generation biofuels have significant potential to reduce GHG emissions relative to conventional fuels because feedstocks can be produced using marginal land. Moreover, in the case of waste biomass, no additional agricultural production is required, and indirect market-mediated GHG emissions can be minimal if the wastes have no other productive uses.

Biofuels can be produced domestically, which could lead to lower fossil fuel imports (Huang et al. 2013). If biofuel production and use reduces our consumption of imported fossil fuels, we may become less vulnerable to the adverse impacts of supply disruptions (US EPA 2010). Reducing our demand for petroleum could also reduce its price, generating economic benefits for American consumers, but also potentially increasing petroleum consumption abroad (Huang et al. 2013).

Biofuels may reduce some pollutant emissions. Ethanol, in particular, can ensure complete combustion, reducing carbon monoxide emissions (US EPA 2010).

It is important to note that biofuel production and consumption, in and of itself, will not reduce GHG or conventional pollutant emissions, lessen petroleum imports, or alleviate pressure on exhaustible resources. Biofuel production and use must coincide with reductions in the production and use of fossil fuels for these benefits to accrue. These benefits would be mitigated if biofuel emissions and resource demands augment, rather than displace, those of fossil fuels.

Potential economic disbenefits and impacts of biofuel production

Biofuel feedstocks include many crops that would otherwise be used for human consumption directly, or indirectly as animal feed. Diverting these crops to biofuels may lead to more land area devoted to agriculture, increased use of polluting inputs, and higher food prices. Cellulosic feedstocks can also compete for resources (land, water, fertilizer, etc.) that could otherwise be devoted to food production. As a result, some research suggests that biofuel production may give rise to several undesirable developments.

Changes in land use patterns may increase GHG emissions by releasing terrestrial carbon stocks to the atmosphere (Searchinger et al. 2008). Biofuel feedstocks grown on land cleared from tropical forests, such as soybeans in the Amazon and oil palm in Southeast Asia, generate particularly high GHG emissions (Fargione et al. 2008). Even use of cellulosic feedstocks can spur higher crop prices that encourage the expansion of agriculture into undeveloped land, leading to GHG emissions and biodiversity losses (Melillo et al. 2009).

Biofuel production and processing practices can also release GHGs. Fertilizer application releases nitrous oxide, a potent greenhouse gas. Most biorefineries operate using fossil fuels. Some research suggests that GHG emissions resulting from biofuel production and use, including those from indirect land use change, may be higher than those generated by fossil fuels, depending on the time horizon of the analysis (Melillo et al. 2009, Mosnier et al. 2013).

Regarding non-GHG environmental impacts, research suggests that production of biofuel feedstocks, particularly food crops like corn and soy, could increase water pollution from nutrients, pesticides, and sediment (NRC 2011). Increases in irrigation and ethanol refining could deplete aquifers (NRC 2011). Air quality could also decline in some regions if the impact of biofuels on tailpipe emissions plus the additional emissions generated at biorefineries increases net conventional air pollution (NRC 2011).

Economic models show that biofuel use can result in higher crop prices, though the range of estimates in the literature is wide. For example, a 2013 study found projections for the effect of biofuels on corn prices in 2015 ranging from a 5 to a 53 percent increase (Zhang et al. 2013). The National Research Council's (2011) report on the RFS included several studies finding a 20 to 40 percent increase in corn prices from biofuels during 2007 to 2009. A National Center for Environmental Economics (NCEE) working paper found a 2 to 3 percent increase in long-run corn prices for each billion gallon increase in corn ethanol production on average across 19 studies (Condon et al. 2013). Higher crop prices lead to higher food prices, though impacts on retail food in the US are expected to be small (NRC 2011). Higher crop prices may lead to higher rates of malnutrition in developing countries (Rosegrant et al. 2008, Fischer et al. 2009).

U.S. policy approaches to support biofuel production

The Energy Policy Act of 2005 used a variety of economic incentives, including grants, income tax credits, subsidies and loans to promote biofuel research and development. It established a Renewable Fuel Standard mandating the blending of 7.5 billion gallons of renewable fuels with gasoline annually by 2012.

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) included similar economic incentives. EISA expanded the Renewable Fuel Standard to increase biofuel production to 36 billion gallons by 2022. Of the latter goal, 21 billion gallons must come from cellulosic biofuel or advanced biofuels derived from feedstocks other than cornstarch. To limit GHG emissions, the Act states that conventional renewable fuels (corn starch ethanol) are required to reduce life-cycle GHG emissions relative to life-cycle emissions from fossil fuels by at least 20 percent, biodiesel and advanced biofuels must reduce GHG emissions by 50 percent, and cellulosic biofuels must reduce emissions by 60 percent. EISA also provides cash awards, grants, subsidies, and loans for research and development, biorefineries that displace more than 80 percent of fossil fuels used to operate the refinery, and commercial applications of cellulosic biofuel.

In addition to EISA, numerous other policies have encouraged the production and use of biofuels in the US in recent decades. Tax credits currently support advanced biofuels, including cellulosic and biodiesel.

Related References

Condon, N., H. Klemick, and A .Wolverton. 2013. " Impacts of Ethanol Policy on Corn Prices: A Review and Meta-Analysis of Recent Evidence." NCEE Working Paper 2013-05. (Accessed Sept. 12, 2013)

Hertel, T., A. Golub, A. Jones, M. O'Hare, R. Plevin, and D. Kammen. 2010. "Effects of US Maize Ethanol on Global Land Use and Greenhouse Gas Emissions: Estimating Market-mediated Responses." BioScience 60: 223-231.

Fargione, J., et al. 2008. "Land clearing and the biofuel carbon debt." Science 319: 1235-1238.

Fischer, G., E. Hizsnyik, S. Prieler, M. Shah, and H. van Velthuizen. 2009. Biofuels and Food Security. OPEC Fund for International Development.

Huang, H., M. Khanna, H. Onal, and X. Chen. 2013. "Stacking low carbon policies on the renewable fuels standard: Economic and greenhouse gas implications." Energy Policy 56 (May 2013): 5-15.

Melillo, J., J. Reilly, D. Kickligher, A. Gurgel, T. Cronin, S. Paltsev, B. Felzer, X. Wang, A. Sokolov, and C.A. Schlosser. 2009. "Indirect Emissions from Biofuels: How Important?" Science 326 (5958): 1397-1399.

Mosnier, A. P. Havlik, H. Valin, J. Baker, B. Murray, S. Feng, M. Obersteiner, B. McCarl, S. Rose, and U. Schneider. 2013. "The Net Global Effects of Alternative U.S. Biofuel Mandates: Fossil Fuel Displacement, Indirect Land Use Change, and the Role of Agricultural Productivity Growth." Energy Policy 57 (June 2013): 602-614.

National Research Council. 2011. Committee on Economic and Environmental Impacts of Increasing Biofuels Production. Renewable Fuel Standard: Potential Economic and Environmental Effects of U.S. Biofuel Policy. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.

Rosegrant, M.W, T. Zhu, S. Msangi, T. Sulser. 2008. "Global Scenarios for Biofuels. Impacts and Implications." Review of Agricultural Economics, 30(3), 495-505.

Searchinger, T., et al. 2008. "Use of US croplands for biofuels increases greenhouse gases through emissions from land-use change." Science 319: 1238-1240.

US Department of Energy, Alternative Fuels Data Center. Ethanol Fueling Station Locations. http://www.afdc.energy.gov/fuels/ethanol_locations.html (Accessed Sept. 10, 2013)

US Environmental Protection Agency. 2010. Renewable Fuel Standard Program (RFS2) Regulatory Impact Analysis. (Accessed Sept. 10, 2013).

Zhang, W., E. Yu, S. Rozelle, J. Yang, and S. Msangi. 2013. "The impact of biofuel growth on agriculture: Why is the range of estimates so wide?" Food Policy 38: 227-239.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Replacing fossil fuels with biofuels-fuels produced from renewable organic material-has the potential to reduce some undesirable aspects of fossil fuel production and use, including conventional and greenhouse gas (GHG) pollutant emissions, exhaustible resource depletion, and dependence on unstable foreign suppliers. Demand for biofuels could also increase farm income.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
A new way of refining biodiesel so that it works in standard diesel car engines could help broaden the use of renewable fuels, according to scientists.

Biodiesel made from plant material could present a more eco-friendly alternative to the fossil-fuel-derived diesel, or petrodiesel, that is currently used. In the European Union (EU), commercial diesel already has to contain at least 7 percent biodiesel.

But the molecular makeup of these fuels means they boil at different temperatures from petrodiesel, which means only specially designed engines can run on pure biodiesel or blends that contain considerable amounts of the fuel. [ Top 10 Emerging Environmental Technologies]

Now, scientists in Germany have found a way to transform chemicals derived from plants into a biodiesel that meets the boiling characteristics required by the EN 590 standard, set by the European Committee for Standardization, for commercial diesel sold in the EU.

Lukas Gooßen, a professor of organic chemistry at the Ruhr-Universität Bochum who led the research, said his motivation came during a trip to a biodiesel plant in Rwanda a few years ago. The problem, he said, was that only a single bus had been converted to run on the fuel because of a lack of funds.

"If you're going to use biofuel, you need existing infrastructure you can tap into," he told Live Science. "Anything else will be unaffordable to most countries and societies. This has to be the starting point."

The reason conventional biodiesel doesn't work in standard diesel engines is that about 95 percent of its constituent molecules are the same length and, therefore, boil at roughly the same temperature.

In contrast, petrodiesel is made up of a mixture of hydrocarbons of different lengths and structures that boil at different temperatures, giving petrodiesel a much broader boiling range. Importantly, these are the boiling characteristics for which modern cars have been designed.

"All engines were specifically made to fit this fuel," Gooßen said. "Diesel fuel and diesel engines evolved together."

There are existing processes that can convert plant oils into biofuel suitable for use in standard diesel engines, but a significant proportion of the fuel is burned to carry out the refining. Gooßen and his colleagues decided to find a way to take advantage of catalysts - substances that accelerate chemical reactions - to do the same thing at low temperatures, using very little energy.

In a paper published online today (June 16) in the journal Science Advances, they report that using a combination of three catalysts, they were able to blend rapeseed oil methyl ester (RME) - a common raw material for making biofuels - and ethylene into a fuel with the same boiling profile as petrodiesel. Ethylene is an abundant hydrocarbon that can be generated from plant-derived ethanol or shale gas.

To demonstrate its potential as a motor fuel, the researchers built a model diesel car and used the biodiesel to propel it. The fuel is still a long way from commercialization, though; the first batch cost more than $1,125 per quart to produce. [ Hyperloop, Jetpacks & More: 9 Futuristic Transit Ideas]

The main issue with the current process is that it uses expensive, short-lived catalysts aimed at making small amounts of high-value chemical products, Gooßen said. Finding cheaper, more robust alternatives suitable for commercial production will be a huge challenge, he added, as will designing effective high-throughput industrial processes.

But Gooßen said one of the biggest barriers to wider use of biodiesel is its incompatibility with standard engines. But his new study shows that this challenge can be overcome.

"This boiling point seemed to be a completely insurmountable hurdle," he said. "Now, we are saying, 'How can we make a catalyst that just does this cheaper?' which is a completely different question to, 'How can we even come from biodiesel to something we can put in a car?'"

There is a pressing need to find sustainable fuels that are "drop-in replacements" for current fossil fuels, said Duncan Wass, a professor of catalysis at the University of Bristol in the United Kingdom.

Using a cheap and abundant addition such as ethylene to transform biofuels makes good sense, he said, but he agreed with the study authors that the current catalysts are not fit for that purpose and that finding appropriate replacements will be hard.

"[I]t will be difficult to find a simple, cheap, long-lived, heterogeneous catalyst that can achieve the same results as these very sophisticated systems," Wass told Live Science.

It is also too early to label the technology as "sustainable," he added, until a full life-cycle analysis of the process and products is undertaken.
Original article on Live Science. Copyright 2017 LIVESCIENCE.com, a Purch company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New Biofuel Could Work in Regular Diesel Engines

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A new way of refining biodiesel so that it works in standard diesel car engines could help broaden the use of renewable fuels, according to scientists. Biodiesel made from plant material could present a more eco-friendly alternative to the fossil-fuel-derived diesel, or petrodiesel, that is currently used.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
I have been experimenting with making biodiesel for a few years now, and I am constantly watching what others in this field do as well. I monitor a forum for biodiesel users such as myself, and it's full of practical advice as well as troubleshooting for the problems that sometimes arise. Biodiesel appeals to us because it can be made from plants grown locally and burns far cleaner then ordinary diesel fuel. It results in 67 percent less unburned hydrocarbons (helping to reduce smog and ozone), 48 percent less carbon monoxide and 47 percent less particulate matter, according to an analysis of heavy-duty engines by the Environmental Protection Agency. Only nitrogen oxides, or NO X, slightly increase. It can also be blended with regular diesel in any percentage from B2 (98 percent diesel, 2 percent biodiesel) to B100, which is pure biodiesel. One of the biggest problems we biodiesel makers have experienced recently has nothing to do with the conversion process--it has to do with diesel engines.

Until two years ago, all diesel engines were B100-compatible (biodiesel cannot run in gasoline engines because it needs an engine that ignites by compression). Then standards set by both the Environment Protection Agency and California Air Resources Board, phased in for 2007, required all passenger vehicles to meet the same, stricter emissions. That meant diesel manufacturers had to reduce emissions of NO X and particulate matter to meet those of gas-powered cars. These standards were created with good intentions--to look out for our health by improving the air that we breath. (After all, particulate matter is a known carcinogen.) But the way most manufacturers did this created a setback for those of us trying to use biofuels.

To get rid of particulate matter, the diesel manufacturers came up with what's called a DPF (diesel particulate filter). But this catalytic filter becomes poisoned if sulfur dioxide is pumped through it. So as of 2007, the standard for diesel fuel was revamped as well, and fuel refineries had to reduce sulfur content to no more than 15 parts per million (now known as ultralow-sulfur diesel). The DPF is placed in the exhaust system in front of the muffler and looks like a catalytic converter used on gasoline engines. It captures particulate matter in its inner core. Periodically, the DPF has to be taken up to high temperatures to burn off the matter it has collected. This is called regeneration or postinjection regeneration. The idea is to inject fuel into the exhaust that has been vaporized, and when the fuel comes into contact with the DPF, an exothermic reaction heats it up and incinerates the plug of soot. (Squirting fuel down the exhaust? Gee, I wonder why the newer models have poorer fuel mileage.)

And here is where the pitfall lies for biodiesel users like myself. Most of the manufactures decided to inject fuel into the cylinders just after the cylinder fires and the exhaust valve opens. At this point, the fuel vaporizes and the vapors move down the exhaust to the DPF and clean it. Because biodiesel is denser than conventional diesel fuel (it has a longer hydrocarbon chain) and has a higher distillation temperature and boiling point, it does not vaporize as easily. Some of the fuel ends up adhering to the cylinder wall and runs past the rings, diluting engine oil.

There has been quite a bit of debate on biodiesel forums as to why manufacturers chose this method of injection. Most likely, the answer is cost. Manufacturers would rather utilize existing fuel-injection systems rather than tack on the potentially substantial cost of extra equipment. It is far cheaper to change software then it is to change hardware--just tell your electronic control unit (ECU) to apply an extra squirt of fuel. After all, they have invested a lot of money already, setting up high-pressure multiple precise injections for cleaner combustion.

Still, not all manufactures have gone this route. Some Caterpillar and Cummins engines have an injector that is placed in the exhaust pipe, not in the cylinder (in-stream fuel injection), making them biodiesel-compatible. However, these are large trucks that don't need to meet the same emissions standards as cars. Other engines clean exhaust by diesel exhaust fluid (DEF), an aqueous urea catalytic reduction called Blue Tech, otherwise known as Add Blue in Europe. This system is used on some large Dodges and some large Mercedes-Benz models. The problem with this system is you have to maintain a compartment with urea and they are mostly designed for NO X reduction.

What does this all mean for backyard biodiesel makers? Well, we can no longer brag that B100 will run in any diesel engine: VW, Mercedes, Nissan, Renault, Jeep, Ford Power Stroke, Ford E-series vans, Dodge Rams, Cummins 6.7 and Chevy Duramax will only tolerate small amounts. (For an example of what can happen if you push that limit, check out a biodiesel commercial seller who tried to run B100 in his new 2009 VW.) People in my community would like to see engine manufacturers and biodiesel makers work together to solve the B100 problem while still passing emissions standards--and selling affordable cars. In the meantime, we'll have to watch which vehicle we fill with our fuel.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Biodiesel Barriers: Why New Diesel Engines Aren't Compatible With B100

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
I have been experimenting with making biodiesel for a few years now, and I am constantly watching what others in this field do as well. I monitor a forum for biodiesel users such as myself, and it's full of practical advice as well as troubleshooting for the problems that sometimes arise.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Jonathan Goodwin is an inventor of the sublime. In his workshop in Wichita, Ks., Goodwin has fashioned a red 2005 H3 Hummer into a supercar. The Hummer is green and mean and includes an electric motor and a turbine that burns biodiesel. The former gas guzzler can now travel 60 miles (96.56 kilometers) on 1 gallon of gas. Like Dr. Frankenstein tinkering with his monster, Goodwin takes automobiles and slices and dices them into eco-friendly speeders. He's even working on a car that will get 100 miles to the gallon [source: Thompson].

Most people don't have to go to such extremes to help the environment. Instead, they just have to fill up with ethanol or biodiesel. Not only do biofuels help protect the planet from global warming by emitting less pollution than fossil fuels, but they also add jobs to the economy and by doing so, help farmers, construction workers and those living in poor rural, areas.

As gas prices rise and global warming becomes more pervasive, more people are using biofuels as a way to save money and decrease their consumption of fossil fuels. They release fewer pollutants, such as carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere, helping decrease heat-trapping gases. Biofuels are produced from so-called "energy crops" that include wheat, corn, soybeans and sugarcane, so they are sustainable. And if every nation can grow its own, there is a high likelihood these biofuels will never run out.

While there are some problems with biofuels, there are many advantages, too. Go to the next page to see what they are.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
As gas prices continue to rise and global warming becomes more pervasive, more people are using biofuels as a way to save money and decrease their consumption of fossil fuels. And while they're definitely not perfect, they have many advantages over types of fuels.

# data[].attributes.body
Why biofuel is a great alternative to fossil fuels.

“They release fewer pollutants, such as carbon dioxide, into the atmosphere, helping decrease heat-trapping gases.”

John Perritano, “Top ten advantages of biofuel”, Howstuffworks

# data[].attributes.body
Statistic proof biofuel is cleaner

“Scientists in Australia say biodiesel made from cooking oil reduces greenhouse gas emissions by 87 percent compared with petroleum diesel”

John Perritano, “Top ten advantages of biofuel”, Howstuffworks

# data[].attributes.body
Benefits for drivers

A car that uses biofuel not only emits less pollutants it also becomes more fuel efficient. Cars that run on biodiesel get, on average, 30% better fuel economy than those which run on regular diesel.

# data[].attributes.body
Biofuel and economy

The production of biofuels can help out many rural poorer areas throughout the worlds. A crop grow in Tanzania can be used to make ethanol which can then help reduce poverty in that area. The biofuel industry is also expected to provide many jobs in America aswell.

# data[].attributes.body
Why engines can’t use biofuel continued.

“The reason conventional biodiesel doesn't work in standard diesel engines is that about 95 percent of its constituent molecules are the same length and, therefore, boil at roughly the same temperature.” Vs petrodiesel which has molecule at many different lengths allowing for a wider boiling range

# data[].attributes.body
Improvements

There was already an existing process to make biofuel compatible, but the process used up a lot of the biofuel to create it. Lukas Gooßen and his team are using catalysts to make the process faster and easier.

# data[].attributes.body
What they did

“They were able to blend rapeseed oil methyl ester (RME) — a common raw material for making biofuels — and ethylene into a fuel with the same boiling profile as petrodiesel. Ethylene is an abundant hydrocarbon that can be generated from plant-derived ethanol or shale gas.”

# data[].attributes.body
Future of biofuels

“EPA’s (2010) analysis of the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) projected that several types of biofuels could yield lower lifecycle GHG emissions than gasoline over a 30 year time horizon.”

# data[].attributes.body
Current trend of biofuel

“Ethanol is the most widely used bioalcohol fuel. Most vehicles can use gasoline-ethanol blends containing up to 10 percent ethanol (by volume). Flexible fuel vehicles can use E85, a gasoline-ethanol blend containing up to 85 percent ethanol.”

# data[].attributes.body
Possible economic benefits of biofuel production

"If biofuel production and use reduces our consumption of imported fossil fuels, we may become less vulnerable to the adverse impacts of supply disruptions.”

# data[].attributes.body
Government and bio fuel

The Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) Gave grants and tax credits toward biofuel production aswell  as set standards for efficient biofuels must be.

# data[].attributes.body
The breakthrough

"The key to the scientists’ discovery is a new version of a zeolite catalyst – HPW/Meso-HZ-5 - which can be used to make the process of converting industrial biomass into an organic biofuel compound called furfural far more efficient”

# data[].attributes.body
Progress so far

So far the zeolite catalyst has show great results in first first trials and has great performers compared to its parent catalysts.

# data[].attributes.body
How it works

The catalysts basically increased the avaibility of active sites and decreases the time it takes for the catalyst to find the active site thus increases its accessibility.

# data[].attributes.body
Impacts of new catalyst

This could bring income benefits to farmers as well as helps out poverty stricten parts of the world where farming is dominat

# data[].attributes.body
Cars can switch to biofuel

"Until two years ago, all diesel engines were B100-compatible...standards set by both the Environment Protection Agency and California Air Resources Board, phased in for 2007, required all passenger vehicles to meet the same, stricter emissions [As gas powered cars].”

# data[].attributes.body
Biodiesel is still used

Some companies, like caterpillar, use engines that are compatible with biofuel

# data[].attributes.body
Why new Diesel engines can’t use biofuel

The idea is fuel is injected into an exhaust which is then vaporized and leads to a reaction which cleans the DPF (Diesel particulate filter). Biofuel has a higher boiling point because it is denser than regular fuel and so no vapor is created.

# data[].attributes.body
The manufacturer changes

These manufacturers went the route of more fuel injection because it was cheaper than extra equipment. This is what caterpillar did, they reduced the waste engines put out while still allowing biodiesel compatibility.

# data[].attributes.body
Further drawbacks

The process is way to expensive at 1,125$ Per quart of this biofuel and the catalysts are short lived. They are currently trying to find a catalyst that will make the process much more efficent