Fuel 115 (2014) 88–96

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Fuel
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuel

Application of hydrotreated vegetable oil from triglyceride based

biomass to CI engines – A review
Soo-Young No ⇑
Department of Biosystems Engineering, Chungbuk National University, Cheongju 361-763, Republic of Korea

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

Article history: This review will be concentrated on the application of hydrotreated vegetable oils (HVO) produced from
Received 20 December 2012 the triglycerides based biomass such as vegetable oil, animal fat, waste cooking oil and algae to compres-
Received in revised form 20 June 2013 sion ignition (CI) engines.
Accepted 1 July 2013
Main problem in the application of HVO to CI engines is the poor low-temperature properties. The
Available online 13 July 2013
upgrading technology of cold flow properties of HVO reported in the literature can be categorized with
four ways as isomerization, addition of flow improver, reaction temperature control and co-processing
Keywords:
with petroleum derived raw materials. The advantages of hydrotreating over transesterification are lower
Hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO)
Compression ignition (CI) engine
processing cost, compatibility with infrastructure, NOx emission reduction, and feedstock flexibility.
NOx Combustion and emission characteristics of neat HVO, blends of HVO with petrodiesel and HVO with
Particulate matter additives were widely investigated by many researchers. The use of HVO enables appreciable reductions
Upgrading in NOx, PM, HC and CO emissions without any changes to the engine or its control in heavy-duty engines.
HVO could play an important role in providing an sustainable source of transportation fuels during the
coming decades. In addition, HVO obtained from inedible vegetable oil and application of it to CI engine
will be the subjects of future research in the production and application of HVO. The technologies for the
reduction of NOx and PM in CI engines fuelled with HVO can be categorized with engine optimization and
fuel optimization. The engine optimization technology is more effective than the fuel optimization
technology.
Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Contents

1. Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88
2. Hydrotreated vegetable oil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89
2.1. Fuel properties of HVO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90
2.2. Upgrading methods of low-temperature properties of HVO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91
3. Application of HVO to CI engine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
3.1. Spray characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
3.2. Combustion and emission characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
4. Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94
5. Conclusions. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95
References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95

1. Introduction
As crude oil prices currently continue to increase, it is likely that
biofuels will play an important role in the future energy market of
world. Generally, biomass-derived feedstocks for the production of
⇑ Tel.: +82 4312612583; fax: +82 4312714413.
E-mail addresses: sooyoung@chungbuk.ac.kr, sooyoung@cbnu.ac.kr
liquid biofuels can be classified into the following three categories
according to the source, i.e. triglyceride-based biomass, starch- and
sugar-derived biomass, and cellulosic biomass [1]. A variety of
liquid biofuels can be produced from triglycerides based biomass
such as vegetable oils, animal fats, waste cooking oils and microal-
gal oils as shown in Fig. 1. Currently, vegetable oils may be main
resources for liquid fuels as petroleum alternatives. Straight vege-
table oils (SVO) without any production process can be applied

0016-2361/$ - see front matter Ó 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2013.07.001
 S.-Y. No / Fuel 115 (2014) 88–96
Feedstocks
(Vegetable oils, animal fats, waste materials, algae)
Dilution with
Production Direct
hydrocarbon
Process use
fuel or water
Blended
Straight
Biofuels diesel or
Vegetable oil
emulsion
Fig. 1. Overview of feedstocks and production process for liquid biofuels from triglycerides-based biomass.
directly to CI engines [2]. Considerable efforts have already been
made to develop the vegetable oil derivatives through dilution or
emulsion with petrodiesel [3]. Thermal cracking (pyrolysis) can
be used to convert edible or inedible oils into valuable liquid deriv-
atives called pyrodiesel [4]. Biodiesel, defined as the mono-alkyl
esters of vegetable oils or animal fats, is usually obtained by
transesterification from fatty acids based on triglyceride [5–8].
The application of biodiesel produced from inedible vegetable oils
is of significance because of the great need for edible vegetable oils
as food [9]. However, hydrotreating or hydrogenation process
instead of transesterification is introduced, and therefore, hydro-
treated vegetable oils (HVO) or renewable diesel which is mainly
consisted of paraffinic hydrocarbons are obtained [10,11]. Catalytic
cracking has been used in an effort to control the types of products
generated by triglyceride cracking, using a vast variety of catalysts
and a gasoline-like fuel called bio-gasoline is more likely to be
formed than a diesel like fuel [12].
Liquid biofuels can be applied to typically diesel engine for
transportation [13] and agricultural machinery [14], stationary
diesel engine for power generation [15], gas turbine for power gen-
eration [16] and boiler for heating or power generation [17]. How-
ever, the discussion for the application of liquid biofuels in this
study will be mainly limited to HVO as petroleum alternatives,
vegetable oil as a feedstock, and the diesel engine for transporta-
tion and agricultural machinery. It is expected that in the USA only,
the biofuels such as HVO, biodiesel and BTL (biomass-to-liquid)
together will probably alternate around 4–10% diesel fuel used in
2020 [18]. According to Kuronen et al. classification [19], biodiesel,
HVO and BTL diesel belong to 1st, 2nd and 3rd generation bio-
based diesel fuels, respectively. The 1st generation means the com-
mercial production from 1990s. HVO has been classified as the 2nd
generation biofuel because commercial production began during
this decade. In addition, BTL diesel which is coming into the com-
mercial market during the next decade (2010s) belongs to 3rd gen-
eration biofuel.
Although biodiesel is an environmentally attractive alternative
to petrodiesel, Moser [7] argued that high feedstock cost, inferior
storage and oxidative stability, lower calorific value, inferior low-
temperature operability and in some cases, higher NOx emissions
are the disadvantages of biodiesel. In addition, he had already
89
Biomass based on tryglyceride
Pyrolysis
Trans- Hydro- Catalytic
(thermal
esterification treating cracking
cracking)
Biodiesel Hydro
Pyrodiesel Butobio- treated Bio-gasoline
diesel Vegetable oil
predicted that biodiesel in the coming years may face competition
from non-ester renewable diesel fuel such as HVO. Biodiesel have
the detrimental effect such as increase of NOx emissions, deposit
formation, problem of storage stability, more rapid aging of engine
oil or poor cold properties [20].
The advantages of hydrotreating over transesterification in-
clude lower processing cost, compatibility with infrastructure,
existing engines and fuel standards, and flexibility in terms of feed-
stock [21]. The review by Huber and Corma [1] provides a useful
overview for the production of biofuels by catalytic cracking and
hydrotreating of biomass-derived feedstocks. They introduced
the hydrotreating of biomass-derived feedstocks such as lignin
and triglycerides. A comparison of biodiesel and HVO in a general
aspect such as fuel production and energy balance, fuel properties,
environmental effects including exhaust emissions and co-prod-
ucts was conducted by Knothe [10]. It has been stated in this study
that biodiesel performs appreciably better than HVO in terms of
PM and CO emissions, with HVO having an advantages in terms
of NOx and HC emissions. Hydrotreating of vegetable oils was
classified by Naik et al. [22] as one of conversion processes for
the production of second generation biofuels. However, the discus-
sion in their review was only limited to one specific work related to
HVO produced under a commercial trade name. Hartikka et al. [23]
recently reviewed fuel properties of HVO, engine performance and
emission characteristics of diesel engines fuelled with HVO. Most
data are for papers presented by researchers working for Nestle
Oil Corp., Finland. They concluded that HVO can be used as a
drop-in-fuel for both modern and aged diesel engines.
It is clear from the existing reviews discussed in the above that
review related to the application of HVO for alternative fuel to CI
engines could not be found except the review by Hartikka et al.
[23]. In this work, an attempt has, therefore, been made to review
the researches done on the application of HVO as substitute fuel to
CI engines.
2. Hydrotreated vegetable oil
HVO as an alternative fuel has received remarkable attention for
ground, marine and aviation applications. As renewable or bio-jet
90 S.-Y. No / Fuel 115 (2014) 88–96
fuels, aviation biofuels produced from triglycerides through hydro-
processing are termed as ‘‘hydrotreated renewable jet’’ (HRJ) [24],
‘‘hydroprocessed renewable jet (HRJ)’’ [25–27], ‘‘hydroprocessed
esters and fatty acids (HEFA)’’, ‘‘bio-SPK’’ and ‘‘green jet’’ [25,26].
Besides the aforementioned term, Li et al. [28] recently used the
term ‘‘non-ester biofuels’’ for hydrotreated renewable jet (HRJ).
They pointed out that the benefits of non-ester fuels may include
(1) higher energy content than ester-based fuels such as fatty acid
methyl esters (FAMEs) and alcohols, (2) excellent combustion
quality, similar to Fischer–Tropsch fuels, (3) good low-temperature
properties and superior thermal and storage stabilities. In this case,
the use of HVO for aviation application is mainly in gas turbine en-
gines. In this review, the discussion will be focused on the applica-
tion of HVO to CI engines for ground and marine application only.
The terms ‘‘hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO)’’ [19,20,29–35],
‘‘hydrogenated (hydrogenating) vegetable oil’’ [1] ‘‘renewable die-
sel (fuel)’’ [7,10,18,20,36–38], ‘‘second generation biodiesel’’
[22,39,40], ‘‘paraffinic diesel fuel’’ [41], ‘‘paraffinic renewable
diesel’’ [42,43], ‘‘non-esterified renewable diesel (NERD)’’ [28],
‘‘hydroprocessed vegetable oil’’ [21], ‘‘green diesel’’ [18,44],
‘‘Bio-Hydrogenated Diesel (BHD)’’ [45], ‘‘hydro-treated biodiesel’’
[46] ‘‘super cetane’’ [21], ‘‘biocetano’’ [47] and ‘‘hydrogenation-
derived renewable diesel (HDRD)’’ [39] have been used
interchangeably for bio-based alkanes (formerly called the paraf-
fin)/olefin (recently called the alkene) mixtures, with the chemical
structure Cn H2n+2, originating from vegetable oil or animal fat [30].
It may be noted that ‘‘hydrotreated renewable diesel’’ (HRD) or
‘‘(hydrotreated) algae biofuel’’ are also used for biofuel from
microalgae oil [48–50].
It should be pointed out that paraffinic diesel fuel includes the
diesel fuel produced on the basis of synthesis gas from natural gas,
coal or biomass (GTL, CTL or BTL, respectively), as well as HVO
[41,42]. In addition, Knothe [10] emphasized that renewable diesel
will be the most appropriate term for petrodiesel-like fuels derived
from biological sources. In addition, it should be noted that farne-
sane (an isoprenoid) and all biomass-derived alkanes/olefin mix-
tures through multiple fermentation technologies are also
classified as renewable diesel [51]. It is clear from the literature
that the different terms are used to define the same kind of fuel
produced from triglycerides, and conversely, that one term such
as renewable diesel is applied to different types of fuels. Therefore,
to avoid the misleading, ‘‘hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO)’’ will be
mainly used in this review. In addition, the term ‘‘petrodiesel’’ will
be used for the conventional diesel fuel which is derived from
petroleum, according to the suggestion by Knothe [10].
To obtain the HVO, the triglyceride is hydrogenated in the first
step and broken down into various intermediates, mainly mono-
glycerides, diglycerides, and carboxylic acids. These intermediate
are then converted into alkanes by three different pathways:
decarboxylation, decarbonylation (both removing a carbon atom
from the initial intermediate), and hydrodeoxygenation (with no
carbon removal) at the temperatures above 300–360 °C and pres-
sure at least 3 MPa. Propane, water, carbon monoxide and carbon
dioxide are produced as side-products [40,52]. Table 1 shows the
difference of production process between biodiesel and HVO. It is
clear from Table 1 that HVO can be obtained from the widely dif-
ferent process, co-reagent, catalyst and by-product with biodiesel.
Recently Krar et al. [53] suggested that HVO with more advanta-
Table 1
Comparison of fuel production process between biodiesel and HVO.
Feedstock Process
Biodiesel VOa Transesterification (mainly methanol)
Hydrotreated vegetable oil VO Hydrotreating
a
VO: vegetable oil.
geous low-temperature properties from sunflower oil can be
obtained by CoMo/Al2O3 catalyst. In addition, the effect of six dif-
ferent types of catalysts on the hydroprocessing of soybean oil to
produce HVO were examined by Veriansyah et al. [54]. Out of Ni/
SiO2–Al2O3, Pd/c–Al2O3, Pt/c–Al2O3, Ru/Al2O3, CoMo/c–Al2O3,
NiMo/c–Al2O3, they found that Ni, NiMo and CoMo are suitable
for use in hydroprocessing of soybean oil in terms of higher con-
version, higher oxygen removal capabilities and low cost, etc.
A number of manufacturers around the world, i.e. Neste Oil
(Finland), Conocophillips (United States, Ireland), Syntroleum (Uni-
ted States), Universal Oil Products (UOP)-Eni (UK, Italy), Nippon Oil
(Japan) and SK energy (Korea) have been developed HVO refining
processes and tested them in commercial trials. The NExBTL (an
acronym for ‘‘next generation bio-to-liquid’’) is the trade name of
the HVO produced by Neste Oil Corporation. The HVO produced
by UOP/Eni Ecofining process has the trade name ‘‘Green Diesel’’.
The HVO produced by SK energy was referred to as HBD (hydro-
gen-treating biodiesel) [55]. According to the papers presented in
SAE conferences, Neste Oil Co. had initially used the term ‘‘NExBTL-
biodiesel fuel for the second generation on 2005. In 2007, they
introduced the term ‘‘hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO) for NExBTL
[19] and the term renewable diesel (fuel)’’ after 2008 [20,56].
According to Stumborg et al. [21], the advantages of hydrotreat-
ing over transesterification in the Canadian context include lower
processing cost (50% that of transesterification), compatibility with
infrastructure, engine and fuel standards, and feedstock flexibility.
However, Kann et al. [57] argued that by their calculations the
hydroprocessing costs are higher than those of the transesterifica-
tion process.
2.1. Fuel properties of HVO
The fuel properties of different HVOs are listed in Table 2 and
compared to FAME (fatty acid methyl ester) and petrodiesel (EN
590) as given in Kalnes et al. [58], Kalnes et al. [44] and Arvidsson
et al. [30]. The different names from the commercial trade name or
name given in the literature are addressed in Table 2 for the differ-
entiation of one from another. In particular, the fuel properties of
NExBTL is the summarized one from Rantanen et al. [59], Aatola
et al. [20], Murtonen et al. [29], Arvidsson et al. [30], Hulkkonen
et al. [60], Kopperoinen et al. [61], Sugiyama et al. [62], Lehto
et al. [63] and Imperato et al. [64]. It should be pointed out that
the fuel properties of isomerized NExBTL are also included in the
data of NExBTL. It is clear from Table 2 that HVO is not oxygenated
fuel and density and kinematic viscosity for it are lower than that
of petrodiesel and biodiesel. In addition, HVO has ultra-low sulfur
content and high cetane number and heating value which is much
beneficial in fuel for CI engines. The HVO is also a straight-chain
paraffinic hydrocarbon in the diesel boiling range.
According to Koyama et al. [65], palm HVO had higher oxidation
stability and cetane number than palm biodiesel, but showed poor
low-temperature performance than that of petrodiesel. HVO does
not contain unsaturated compounds because it basically a mixture
of normal- and iso-paraffins. Accordingly, the oxidation stability of
HVO is superior to that of biodiesel [62]. It is known that the prop-
erties of HVO are very similar to GTL and BTL diesel fuel which is
another paraffinic fuel and produced by Fischer–Tropsch synthesis
[20].
Co-reagent Catalyst Co-product
Alcohol Sodium alkyate sodium or potassium hydroxide Gylcerol
Hydrogen NiMo, CoMo, NiW/c–Al2O3, etc. Propane
 S.-Y. No / Fuel 115 (2014) 88–96 91

Table 2 2.2. Upgrading methods of low-temperature properties of HVO

Fuel properties of petrodiesel, biodiesel and renewable diesels.

Petrodiesel Biodiesel HVO Green NExBTL Iso- It is well known that the major problem of HVO is generally
diesel BHD poor low-temperature properties, as displayed by cloud point, pour
Density 835 885 775– 780 780– 777 point and cold filter plugging point (CFPP) in excess of 20 C (see
(kg/m3)a 785 785 Table 2). The main ways of upgrading technology of cold flow prop-
Viscosity 3.5 4.5 2.9– – 3.0–3.5 2.64 erties of HVO reported in the literature can be classified in four cat-
(mm2/s)b 3.5
Cloud point 5 5 to 15 5 to 10 15 5
egories: isomerization, addition of flow improver, reaction
(°C) 30 to 20 temperature control and co-processing with petroleum-derived
Distillation 350 355 295– 265– 295– 293 raw materials as follows.
(°C)c 300 320 300
Heating value 43 38 44 44 44 47
(1) Isomerization: this method is designated as two-stage
(MJ/kg)
Cetane 53 50–65 84–99 70–90 98–99 86 upgrading by Simacek and Kubicka [67] because this process
number is composed of isomerization following the hydroprocessing.
Sulfur content <10 <1 0 <1 <10 <1 Catalytic hydroisomerization may be applied to solve the
(mg/kg) problem of low-temperature properties, i.e. cloud point and
Oxygen 0 11 0 0 0 0
CFPP values [40,45]. The low-temperature properties of
content
(wt%) HVO can be upgraded by subsequent catalytic isomerization
of n-alkanes [37]. The terms ‘‘bio gas oil’’ [53,68], ‘‘iso-HVO’’
Petrodiesel: ULSD (ultra low sulfur diesel).
[45,60] or ‘‘iso-BHD’’ [45] are used to refer to isomerized
HVO: hydrotreated vegetable oil [20,30,59].
NExBTL: next generation biomass-to-liquid [34]. HVO. Even though Pt/ZSM-22, Pt/ZSM-23, Pt/SAPO-11, Pt/
Green diesel: [44,58]. SAPO-41 catalysts were found to be very effective for the
iso-BHD [45]. isomerization of HVO, Hanscok et al. [68] concluded that Pt
a
at 15 °C.
b
anchored to zeolite HZSM 22 at temperatures of 280–370 °C
at 40 °C.
c
90 vol%.
and under the pressure of 3.5–8 MPa is suitable for the isom-
erization of sunflower HVO. While the original CFPP of sun-
flower HVO was +23 °C, they obtained products having the
high cetane number of from 81 to 84 and good cold flow prop-
The blends of HVO with petrodiesel can also applied to CI en- erties, i.e. CFPP of the products ranges from 18 to 14 °C).
gines. The most fuel properties of mixed fuels containing the rape- (2) Addition of flow improver: to improve low-temperature
seed HVO in the range of 5–30 wt% and petrodiesel were similar to properties, the performance of two different flow improvers
or better than those of neat petrodiesel. However, low-tempera- (Keroflux 3566 and Infineum R288) was investigated by
ture properties were worse. To improve it, the performance of Simacek et al. [66]. They found that the addition of flow
two different flow improvers (Keroflux 3566 and Infineum R288) improvers to these blends was ineffective in lowering CFPP.
was investigated by Simacek et al. (2010, 33–51). They found that According to Smiacek et al. [37], most HVO often yields
the addition of flow improvers to these blends was ineffective in n-alkanes with high concentration of n-heptadecane and
lowering CFPP. According to Smiacek et al. [66], most HVO often n-octadecane. The sum of these two hydrocarbons typically
yields n-alkanes with high concentration of n-heptadecane and reaches around 70–90%. While these hydrocarbons have an
n-octadecane. The sum of these two hydrocarbons typically excellent cetane rating, their low-temperature properties
reaches around 70–90%. While these hydrocarbons have an excel- are poor and thus prevent their use as a diesel fuel blending
lent cetane rating, their low-temperature properties are poor and component in concentrations higher than 5–10%.
thus prevent their use as a diesel fuel blending component in con-
centrations higher than 5–10%. The upgrading methods of cold In their subsequent work [37], the effect of content of flow
flow properties of HVO will be discussed in the next section. improvers, i.e. Infineum R288 and Infinneum R591 on CFPP for neat
The use of two different blends of algae-derived HRD had re- sunflower HVO and blends with petrodiesel was studied. They
ceived considerable attention recently for marine application. found that the neat HVO was less sensitive to the addition of flow
One blend of HRD and NATO F-76 Millitray Distillate (F-76) was improvers. Moreover, the effect of both flow improvers in the
recently introduced in the study of spray characteristics in twin- blends containing more than 10 wt% of HVO was negligible.
fluid airblast atomizer [49] and another blend of HRD and ultra
low sulfur diesel (ULSD) was also tested in the marine diesel en- (1) Control of reaction temperature: hydroprocessing of neat
gine [48]. The fuel properties of both blends are summarized in sunflower oil was carried out by Simacek et al. [37] at
Table 3. 360–420 °C and 18 MPa to investigate the effect of reaction
temperature on the cold flow properties of neat HVO and
blends with petrodiesel. In this study, the physico-chemical
Table 3
Fuel properties of different blends of HRD. properties of sunflower HVO obtained at 420 °C were very
close to those of a standard neat petrodiesel. The product
ULSD A50 F-76 Algae HRD/
showed also excellent low-temperature properties (cloud
F-76 blend
point 11 °C, CFPP 14 °C). In this case, they emphasized
Density (kg/m3)a 828.6 804 830.3 811.1
that this excellent low-temperature properties were reached
Viscosity (mm2/s)b 3.48 2.5 3.12 4.56
Surface tension (kg/s2) 0.02876 0.02862 0.02771
without any separate isomerization process without sacrific-
Heating value (MJ/kg) 42.938 43.400 ing the high octane index of 65. They found that the diesel
Cetane index 51 65 fuel blends containing from 10 to 50 wt% of the sunflower
ULSD, A50: [48].
HVO obtained at 420 °C met the diesel fuel specifications.
F-76, Algae HRD/F-76 blend: [49]. (2) Co-processing with petroleum-derived raw materials:
a
at 15 °C. Simacek and Kubicka [67] had classified vegetable oil
b
at 40 °C. co-processing with petrodiesel as one of several ways to
92 S.-Y. No / Fuel 115 (2014) 88–96
improve low-temperature properties of HVO discussed in
the above. The terms ‘‘renewable liquid alkanes’’ [69],
‘‘renewable diesel’’ [36], ‘‘hybrid biofuel’’ [33], ‘‘green diesel’’
[67], ‘‘second generation diesel fuel’’ and ‘‘diesel fuel with
biocomponent’’ [40] have been used interchangeably for
the products from co-processing of vegetable oil and petro-
diesel mixtures. In addition, co-processing triglycerides with
conventional petroleum fractions on an industrial scale has
been developed by Petrobas under the name of H-Bio [67].
H-Bio is produced from hydroprocessing of the blends of
vegetable oils (10 vol%) such as soybean, sunflower, palm
or cottonseed oils with petrodiesel. A comprehensive review
of co-processing vegetable oils with petroleum feedstocks
was recently reported by Al-Sabawi and Chen [70].
Performance and emission characteristics of three different
fuels, i.e., petrodiesel, petrodiesel mixed with biocomponent, and
DF blended with rapeseed methyl ester (RME 5 vol%) and biocom-
ponent (1 vol%) were tested in a vehicle with 5 cylinders DI diesel
engine equipped with unit injector system [40]. Here, biocompo-
nents refer to the products from co-processing of petrodiesel and
rapeseed oil (6.5 vol%). The brake specific fuel consumption for
petrodiesel with biocomponent is slightly higher because of having
lower heating value compared to petrodiesel. As an indicator of
soot emission, opacities of tested fuels with biocomponents com-
pared with petrodiesel decreased. It was found that CO, HC and
NOx emissions of DF with biocomponent were observed to be sim-
ilar in comparison with petrodiesel. In addition, unregulated emis-
sions such as VOC and aldehydes were remarkably reduced in the
case of DF with biocomponents.
3. Application of HVO to CI engine
HVO can be used neat as a diesel fuel, as a blending agent for pet-
rodiesel or as a blended fuel with additives in CI engines. The re-
search on the application of HVO to diesel engines is normally
related to spray, combustion and emission characteristics. There-
fore, in this review, spray characteristics will be discussed at first
and then combustion and emission characteristics will be followed
for blended HVO, neat HVO and HVO with additives in order. In addi-
tion, the renewable diesel produced from algae for the application of
marine engine will be differentiate with HVO by using the term HRD.
3.1. Spray characteristics
Very limited number of papers related to the spray characteris-
tics of HVO in CI engine conditions has been found in the literature.
The comparison of macroscopic spay characteristics such as
spray penetration and spray angle between isomerized HVO and
petrodiesel was conducted by Hulkkonen et al. [60] for two nozzle
orifice diameters of 0.08 and 0.12 mm in common rail injector and
three injection pressures of 45, 100 and 198 MPa. No remarkable
and consistent difference in spray penetration was found between
petrodiesel and isomerized NExBTL. However, it is interesting to
note that no considerable difference in spray penetration for differ-
ent orifice diameters is found. This results are not coincident with
the literature [71,72]. They also found that spray angle of HVO is
slightly higher than that of petrodiesel. This will be due to the low-
er viscosity of HVO. As same as the general results for petrodiesel,
spray angle of HVO increases appreciably with increase in orifice
diameter and diminishes with increase in liquid viscosity and
injection pressure. They emphasized that the macroscopic spray
characteristics of HVO is very similar with those of GTL because
of same paraffinic hydrocarbons. The comparison of their experi-
mental results and empirical or theoretical correlations are not
included. In addition, the researches on microscopic spray charac-
teristics of HVO in CI engine conditions are required.
The influence of neat HVO (NExBTL) on spray characteristics in
a direct injection diesel engine with CRDi were investigated by
Sugiyama et al. [62]. Their results reveal that spray penetration,
spray angle and SMD were virtually the same for HVO and petro-
diesel sprays. The tendency for spray penetration and spray angle
is in agreement with the results of Hulkkonen et al. [60]. In addi-
tion, no major differences in spray structures from ten nozzle holes
at 1 ms after spray start were found.
Chen et al. [38] recently investigated the macroscopic and
microscopic spray characteristics of diesel fuel and several alterna-
tive fuels including HVO from a single hole nozzle using a common
rail injection system. The alternative fuels studied include biodiesel
derived from waste cooking oil (B100), 20% biodiesel blended diesel
fuel (B20), HVO produced from canola oil and jet fuel (Jet-A).
Droplet size decreased around 50% from 30 MPa to 100 MPa
injection pressure increase for all the fuels considered. Spray tip
penetration at injection pressure of 100 MPa were about 40% longer
than those at 30 MPa, and this trend was more pronounced for HVO
and jet fuel. The HVO stands out among the biofuels by showing
smaller SMD than petrodiesel. They found that effect of injection
pressure on spray angle was not evident for all the fuels considered.
This is maybe due to the selection of measurement location of spray
angle. Spray angle generally increases considerably with increase in
orifice diameter and decreases with increase in density of ambient
air, fuel viscosity and injection pressure of fuel [72,73].
Recently, a study on the spray characteristics of HRD blend fuel
was conducted by Legg et al. [49]. In this investigation of atomiza-
tion performance of several alternative fuels in a twin-fluid airblast
atomizer, algae-derived HRD was included for a blend with NATO
F-76 Military Distillate (F-76). Even though the blending ratio
was not clearly explained in their study, it can be assumed with
50:50 blend by volume of HRD with F-76 from the other study
[48]. This specifically designed fuel is the military diesel fuel typi-
cally used by the Navy for ship propulsion [48]. They found that al-
gae HRD/F-76 blend is similar in properties such as density,
viscosity and surface tension to the conventional petrodiesel, with
minor difference in viscosity and density as shown in Table 3.
According to the investigation of breakup process and measure-
ment of droplet size, they concluded that algae HRD/F-76 blend
exhibited very similar atomization characteristics with petrodie-
sels (ULSD and F-76).
It is clear from the literature review that more researches are
required for the effect of HVO on spray characteristics in diesel en-
gines, in particular for the blended HVO with petrodiesel.
3.2. Combustion and emission characteristics
Exhaust emissions of three cars using HVO called NExBTL
blends (5, 15, 20 and 85 vol%) were tested and compared two dif-
ferent petrodiesels by Rantanen et al. [59]. They found that HVO in
petrodiesel blends decreased both regulated and unregulated ex-
haust emission components. Decrease in CO, HC, and PM emissions
was dependent on the proportion of HVO. However, it should be
pointed out that clear NOx emission reduction was not seen with
cars in this study.
Murtonen et al. [29] reported the emission results with biodie-
sel, HVO, F-T diesel (GTL) and petrodiesel in three engines and five
city buses. Biofuels such as biodiesel and HVO were studied as neat
and restrictedly as a 30% blend with petrodiesel. They found that in
most cases all regulated emissions such as NOx, PM, CO and HC de-
creased with HVO and GTL fuel compared to petrodiesel. With bio-
diesel from rapeseed oil, i.e. rapeseed methyl ester, NOx emissions
were higher compared to petrodiesel, but other emissions were
reduced.
 S.-Y. No / Fuel 115 (2014) 88–96
Pflaum et al. [74] reported the experimental results obtained
with neat HVO, different blends of HVO and petrodiesel in CI
engine with CRDi. The measurement of regulated emissions in
two-liter, four-cylinder diesel engine using an engine test rig as
well as chassis dynamometer test bench were also performed in
their study. Their results showed that neat HVO can reduce PM
emissions up to 50% compared to petrodiesel due to its free of aro-
matic compounds. They emphasized that in case of the application
of neat HVO, the reduction in soot emissions is a outcome of par-
ticles with smaller diameter, not because of a reduction in partic-
ulate number. In addition, a reduction of up to 50% in both HC
and CO emissions can be achieved compared to petrodiesel. How-
ever, NOx emission did not show any significant variations on the
chassis dynamometer test, although there was a slight reduction of
NOx emissions on the engine test rig. They pointed out that the en-
gine efficiency can be held constant for diesel 80%: HVO 20% and
diesel 50%: HVO 50% blends. This leads to the reduction of CO2
emissions by around 5%.
The effect of isomerized HVO on exhaust emissions and fuel
consumption in 17 city buses were investigated by Erkkila et al.
[75] with different fuel injection and after-treatment system of ex-
haust emissions. The test in the city buses is meaningful because
the effects of the changes in fuel chemistry and physical properties
depend on the technology, after-treatment system and sophistica-
tion of the engine. They concluded that average emission reduction
for neat HVO compared to petrodiesel were NOx of 10%, PM of 30%,
CO of 29% and HC of 39%. It should be noted that in CRDi engines,
PM emissions of 36% in average can be achieved, while no signifi-
cant difference in NOx between neat HVO and petrodiesel. In addi-
tion, for neat HVO, weight based fuel consumption was decreased
by 2.3%, while the volume based consumption increased 4.6% com-
pared to petrodiesel on an average. For in-line fuel injection sys-
tems of eight buses, NOx and PM emissions were decreased with
increase in HVO content in regular EN 590 diesel fuel. For buses
equipped with common-rail injection systems, the effect of HVO
content in the blended diesel fuel on NOx emission varied remark-
ably by bus type and even by bus individual. Of four buses, NOx
emissions increased with increase in HVO content for one bus with
EGR technology and decreased for one bus with SCR technology.
Two other common-rail buses revealed no effect of HVO content.
However, PM emission decreased significantly with increase in
the HVO content in the blended diesel fuel. In the test of three
fuels, i.e. sulfur free EN 590 diesel fuel, neat HVO and a 30%
HVO + 70% diesel fuel blend (EN590-30 fuel) in a heavy duty DI
diesel engine, Aatola et al. [20] concluded that the use of HVO en-
ables reductions in CO, HC, NOx and smoke emissions without any
changes to the engine or its control. With the default injection tim-
ing settings of the test engine, the use of neat HVO led to 6% lower
NOx and to 35% lower smoke compared with diesel fuel. When
NOx emission of the engine was kept equal with all test fuels,
the use of neat HVO led to 37% lower smoke and to 6% lower SFC
that the use of diesel fuel. In addition, with the constant SFC of
the engine for all fuels, the application of neat HVO led to 16% low-
er NOx and to 23% lower smoke than the use of diesel fuel. These
result is very similar with the effect of neat HVO on exhaust emis-
sions obtained by Kuronen et al. [19]. In addition, Aatola et al. [20]
argued that HVO do not have the detrimental effects of biodiesel
such as the increase of NOx emission, deposit formation, the prob-
lem of storage stability, more rapid aging of engine oil and poor
low-temperature properties.
HVO has potential advantages with respect to both petrodiesel
and biodiesel in terms of production costs, exhaust emissions and
adaptability to current engine designs. In the case of renewable
diesel, all regulated emissions as well as fuel consumption can be
reduced [19,20,59]. However, there are some properties of HVO
that may limit its capability to replace petrodiesel, i.e. too high
93
cetane number for requiring adjustments in the electronic control
of the engine, low lubricity and cold flow property, etc. Blending
HVO with petrodiesel will be expected to depress the cetane num-
ber and cold flow temperatures, as well as to raise the lubricity of
the HVO enough so that it can be used with no engine modifica-
tions. To compromise between lubricity and cetane number, Lapu-
erta et al. [52] suggested the blending strategies that low or
medium HVO concentrations in blends is preferable and blends
more than HVO 50 would not be recommended.
As mentioned above, one of method to avoid the low-tempera-
ture properties of HVO is the introduction of catalytic isomeriza-
tion process. Emission characteristics of palm B5, four B5 blends
with isomerized palm HVO (5%, 10%, 20% and 30%, hereafter iso-
HVO5, iso-HVO20, etc.) were measured in the vehicle with four
cylinder diesel engines equipped with in line injection system
[45]. In this study, HVO was referred to Bio-Hydrogenated Diesel
(BHD) and isomerized HVO to iso-BHD. They found that PM is
remarkably decreased by more than 24% for all iso-HVO blends,
and NOx is also reduced for all iso-HVO blends and by approxi-
mately 14% for the iso-HVO 20. It is likely that reduction in NOx
emission is related to the increase of cetane number with increase
in iso-HVO concentration. They also found that volumetric fuel
consumption and CO2 emission are decreased with increase in
the concentration of iso-HVO in the blends. They also conducted
the experiments on driveability, startability and cold flow field
trial, etc.
For the introduction of new fuels in CI engines, the proper oper-
ation of aftertreatment system for exhaust gas with these fuels
should be guaranteed. It is known that biodiesel have a strong
effect on the lubricant oil dilution during DPF (diesel particulate
filter) regeneration due to deeper spray penetration resulting from
larger droplet diameters and can lead to a significant disadvan-
tages compared to petrodiesel. Due to the different fuel properties
of HVO compared to petrodiesel, Pflaum et al. [74] investigated the
effect of such factors on the lubricant oil dilution in the regenera-
tion of DPF. They found that with increasing of HVO contents in the
mixed fuel with petrodiesel, the amount of large droplets is in-
creased as similar with the case of biodiesel.
The comparison of DPF regeneration frequency with neat HVO,
HVO 30 (30/70 vol% blend of HVO and petrodiesel) and B10 was
conducted in a passenger car by Kopperoinen et al. [61]. In this
study, post-injection system of fuel into cylinders was introduced
for the regeneration of DPF. In this experiment, the lowest soot
accumulation rate was found with neat HVO. Therefore, the regen-
eration frequency would have been about 600 km with neat HVO
instead of about 400 km with other fuels. They concluded that this
has led to the reduction of fuel consumption and CO2 emissions by
about 1.5%.
In a study of bus fleet operation on HVO (NExBTL) conducted by
Makinen et al. [42], emission data on consuming 30% blend of HVO
and 100% HVO were compared to conventional petrodiesel
(EN590) on 300 city buses. In comparison with petrodiesel, usage
of HVO100 in the field test resulted in average 10% reduction in
NOx and 30% reduction in PM. This study has demonstrated that
increase of HVO contents in blends results in decrease in both
NOx and PM.
The influence of HVO (NExBTL) on combustion and emission
characteristics in a direct injection diesel engine with CRDi were
investigated by Sugiyama et al. [62]. Their results reveal that
HVO can reduce HC and PM emissions due to high cetane number
and zero aromatics. However, there was no significant difference in
NOx emissions between HVO and petrodiesel when the measure-
ment carried out in a passenger car without aftertreatment system.
In order to reduce NOx emissions, the test of Miller cycle and
EGR using HVO in high speed diesel engine was performed by Leh-
to et al. [63]. In this study, Miller timing is achieved by early intake
94 S.-Y. No / Fuel 115 (2014) 88–96
valve closing angle. They found that use of Miller timing and EGR
with HVO reduces NOx emissions. Furthermore, advanced injec-
tion timing used together with sufficient Miller timing leads to
considerable reduction in both NOx and PM emissions simulta-
neously. In their subsequent work [64], the combined use of Miller
cycle and internal exhaust gas recirculation (IEGR) using HVO in
medium-speed CI engine at low engine load was conducted. They
summarized that the use of mere Miller cycle at low engine load
is not so beneficial with HVO, because of too long ignition delay
and the occurrence of irregular combustion. Even though the pre-
vious studies on the application of Miller cycle and IEGR was per-
formed at low load, the analysis of the performance and the
combustion of a large-bore single-cylinder medium speed engine
running with HVO at high load was recently reported by the same
research group [76]. They summarized that NOx emission had been
reduced nearly by 50% operating with HVO and proper valve tim-
ing without increasing the fuel consumption and soot emission.
Two truck engines, one was Euro 4 research truck engine with
common rail injection system and EGR and another was Euro pro-
totype with EGR, showed clear reduction of NOx and PM emissions
with HVO compared to petrodiesel [19]. In addition, NOx was lin-
early reduced with the increase of HVO blending ratio and PM
reduction was remarkable at more than 50% blending ratio. The
beneficial effect of HVO on CO and HC emissions was seen from
10% of blending ratio. In their continued test, two city buses, one
with common rail and SCR (bus A) and another with unit injector
and EGR + DOC (bus B), were introduced to test the neat HVO.
NOx emission was reduced with HVO about 7% for bus A and 9%
for bus B compared to EN 590 fuel. PM emission was remarkably
decreased 30% for bus A and 46% for bus B compared to EN 590
fuel. Reduction of CO was seen on both buses fuelled with HVO,
meanwhile differences in HC emission were not significant. It is
noted that they had measured the unregulated emissions and other
fuel properties such as injector fouling, lubricity and oxidation sta-
bility, etc.
The impacts of two biodiesels i.e. a soy-biodiesel and a animal
fat biodiesel, HVO and GTL on NOx emissions from heavy duty en-
gines was studied using a California Air Resources Board (CARB)
certified diesel fuel by Hajbabaei et al. [56]. In this study, the
HVO was a NExBTL produced from palm oil. Two heavy duty diesel
engines, one with no exhaust aftertreatment and another with a
diesel particulate filter (DPF) were tested on an engine dynamom-
eter over four different test cycles. Significant reduction in NOx
emissions with the HVO (R20: 2.9–4.9%, R50: 5.4–10.2% and
R100: 9.9–18.1%) were observed over all the cycles.
It is known that the utilized fuel, engine condition and technol-
ogy affect the surface fine structure and oxidation characteristics of
soot particles. Accordingly, the comparison of oxidation character-
istics and surface structure of soot particles between petrodiesel
and HVO was conducted by Happonen et al. [35]. They found that
even though there are differences in chemical composition for two
fuels, the surface structure of soot particles and their oxidation
characteristics remain unaffected. Therefore, they concluded that
the oxidative aftertreatment devices designed for petrodiesel
should operate well also with the studied HVO.
Murtonen et al. [43] presented the results of a study on emis-
sion reduction with HVO by optimizing engine settings or adding
oxygenate in single cylinder research diesel engine. The introduc-
tion of optimized engine settings with HVO produced 41–61% and
31–54% reduction of PM and NOx emissions, respectively. In addi-
tion to the adjusted engine parameters, the use of a blend of
80 wt% HVO and 20 wt% DNPE (Di-n-pentyl ether) resulted in
the decrease of PM emission without increasing NOx emissions.
They pointed out that the slightly increased aldehyde emission
was a minor demerit for optimized engine setting and oxygenated
HVO.
As another study of engine optimization trial, Happonen et al.
[77] reported the experimental results of PM and NOx emissions
for 50%, 70% and 100% engine loads with adjustments of engine
parameters in single-cylinder research engine fuelled with HVO.
The engine parameters adjusted in this study include intake valve
closing, injection timing, injection pressure and EGR percentage.
The results show that will all the loads considered in this study
both particulate mass and NOx can be reduced over 25% by adjust-
ing engine parameters.
To investigate the effect of oxygenate addition to HVO on NOx
and PM emissions as one of fuel optimization study, Happonen
et al. [78] conducted the experiment with single-cylinder research
engine running with the same fuel blend of Murtonen et al. [43].
Around 25–30% reduction in particulate mass were observed with
HVO + DNPE blend compared to HVO, but NOx emission was in-
creased by 5%. Even though they mentioned that no studies were
found in which oxygenates were blended to HVO, this is the con-
tradict result for NOx emission with Murtonen et al. [43]. In order
to achieve PM and NOx reduction simultaneously, they suggested
that the introduction of EGR is essential. It is worth noting that
the effects of the fuel blend on the hygroscopic properties of pro-
duced exhaust particles were studied. A small increase in the
hygroscopicity of exhaust particles was observed compared to par-
ticles from HVO.
In two studies performed by Khan et al. [48], Ghosh and Risley
[50], performance and emission data from burning 50:50 blend of
ULSD/HRD, designated in this study as A50, were compared to
ULSD on four-stroke marine diesel engine from a Stalwart class
vessel. They found that around 4.5% reduction in overall weighted
fuel consumption was obtained when switching from ULSD to A50.
They explained this better fuel economy is due to the higher heat-
ing value and higher cetane index of A50 as shown in Table 3. The
operation of engine on A50 resulted in significant reduction in pol-
lutant emissions (NOx–10%, PM–25%, CO2–5% and CO–18%).
Accordingly, they concluded that HRD has the potential to substan-
tially reduce pollutant emission without modifying the engine or
infrastructure in the vessel.
4. Results and discussion
Density and kinematic viscosity of neat HVO are lower than that
of petrodiesel and biodiesel. In addition, neat HVO has ultra-low
sulfur content and high cetane number and heating value which
is much beneficial in fuel for CI engines [79]. The blends of HVO
with petrodiesel can also applied to CI engines. The most fuel prop-
erties of mixed fuels containing the rapeseed HVO in the range of
5–30 wt% and petrodiesel were similar to or better than those of
neat petrodiesel. Main problem in the fuel properties of neat
HVO and blends of HVO with petrodiesel is the cold flow proper-
ties. The upgrading methods of low-temperature properties of
HVO can be divided into isomerization, addition of flow improver,
reaction temperature control and co-processing with petroleum-
derived raw materials.
Combustion and emission characteristics of neat HVO and
blends of HVO with petrodiesel were widely investigated by many
researchers. However, few studies have been conducted about the
spray characteristics of neat HVO and blends of HVO with petrodie-
sel in CI engine conditions.
HVO is a paraffinic bio-based liquid, with the chemical structure
Cn H2n+2, originating from vegetable oil or animal fat. HVO can be
used in conventional diesel engines, pure or blended with petro-
diesel. Although largely unproven, it is expected that HVO will sub-
stitute directly for or blend in any proportion with petrodiesel,
without modification of CI engines. HVO is not widely available
at present, but it is likely to become fully commercialized in the
near future.
 S.-Y. No / Fuel 115 (2014) 88–96
Most studies considered in this review have shown that HVO
generally reduces NOx emissions compared to conventional diesel
fuel and biodiesel [19,20,29,56,63,64,74,75]. However, Rantanen
et al. [59] and Sugiyama et al. [62] reported that NOx reduction
shown in heavy- duty engine tests was not clearly seen with
light-duty engine test. In addition, Pflaum et al. [74] observed a
slight reduction of NOx emissions with HVO on the engine test
bench, but no significant variation on the chassis dynamometer
test. Therefore, it can be emerged from this study that reduction
of NOx emissions with the same HVO (NExBTL) cannot be found
only for light-duty engine on particularly chassis dynamometer
test.
HVO could play an important role in providing an sustainable
source of transportation fuels during the coming decades. How-
ever, there exists the limitation of feedstock selection for HVO
production. According to the assessment of three biofuels, i.e. bio-
diesel, HVO and BTL, by Sunde et al. [80], HVO produced from
wastes or by-products such as tall oil, tallow or used cooking oil
is superior to biodiesel and BTL in terms of environmental life cycle
and costs.
The technology to reduce PM and NOx emissions in diesel en-
gine fuelled with HVO can be grouped as engine optimization
[20,43,63,77] and fuel optimization [43,78].
5. Conclusions
This paper reviews the application of HVO produced from tri-
glyceride based biomass to CI engines. Of four upgrading technol-
ogies for low-temperature properties of HVO, isomerization is
more preferably selected in the commercial production of HVO.
To summarize, the use of HVO enables appreciable reductions
in NOx, PM, HC and CO emissions without any changes to the en-
gine or its control in heavy-duty engines. However, the influence of
HVO on NOx emission is not so clear because of various EGR-strat-
egies. In addition, fuel injection system may require recalibration
due to the low density and high cetane number of HVO.
Of the technology to reduce PM and NOx emissions in CI en-
gines fuelled with HVO, the engine optimization technology is
more effective than the fuel optimization.
Due to the problem of feedstock selection for HVO production,
HVO obtained from inedible vegetable oil and application of it to
CI engine will be the subjects of future research in the production
and application of HVO to CI engines.
References
[1] Huber GW, Corma A. Synergies between bio- and oil refineries for the
production of fuels from biomass. Angew Chem Int Ed 2007;46:7184–220.
[2] Russo D, Dassisti M, Lawlor V, Olabi AG. State of the art of biofuels from pure
plant oil. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2012;16:4056–70.
[3] Kumar N, Khare U. Use of macro-emulsion of vegetable oil in compression
ignition engine. SAE paper 2004-28-0040; 2004.
[4] Kubatova A, Stavova J, Seames WS, Luo Y, Sadrameli SM, Linnen MJ, et al.
Triacylglyceride thermal craking: pathways to cyclic hydrocarbons. Energy
Fuels 2012;26:672–85.
[5] Knothe G, Van Gerpen J, Krahl J. The biodiesel handbook. Urbana: AOCS Press;
2005.
[6] Demirbas A. Biodiesel, a realistic fuel alternative for diesel engines. Springer;
2008.
[7] Moser BR. Biodiesel production, properties, and feedstocks. In Vitro Cell Dev
Biol-Plant 2009;45:229–66.
[8] Hoekman SK, Broch A, Robbins C, Ceniceros E, Natarajan M. Review of biodiesel
composition, properties, and specifications. Renewable Sustain Energy Rev
2012;16:143–69.
[9] No SY. Inedible vegetable oils and their derivatives for alternative diesel fuels
in CI engine: a review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 2011;15:131–49.
[10] Knothe G. Biodiesel and renewable diesel: a comparison. Prog Energy Combust
Sci 2010;36:364–73.
[11] Serrano-Ruiz JC, Ramos-Fernandez EV, Sepulveda-Escribano A. From biodiesel
and bioethanol to liquid hydrocarbon fuels: new hydrotreating and advanced
microbial technologies. Energy Environ Sci 2012;5:5638–52.
95
[12] Ong YK, Bhatia S. The current status and perspectives of biofuel production via
catalytic cracking of edible and non-edible oils. Energy 2010;35(1):111–9.
[13] Balat M, Balat H. A critical review of bio-diesel as a vehicular fuel. Energy
Convers Manage 2008;49:2727–41.
[14] Chauhan BS, Kumar N, Cho HM. Performance and emission studies on an
agriculture engine on neat Jatropha oil. J Mech Sci Technol 2010;24(2):
529–35.
[15] Valente OS, da Silva MJ, Pasa VMD, Belchior CRP, Sodre JR. Fuel consumption
and emissions from a diesel power generator fuelled with castor oil and
soybean biodiesel. Fuel 2010;89:3637–42.
[16] Prussi M, Chiaramonti D, Riccio G, Martelli F, Pari L. Straight vegetable oil use
in micro-gas turbine: system adaptation and testing. Appl Energy
2012;89:287–95.
[17] Macor A, Pavanello P. Performance and emissions of biodiesel in a boiler for
residential heating. Energy 2009;34:2025–32.
[18] Wallington TJ, Lambert CK, Ruona WC. Diesel vehicles and sustainable
mobility in the U.S. Energy Policy 2013;54:47–53.
[19] Kuronen M, Mikkonen S, Aakko P, MurtonenT. Hydrotreated vegetable oil as
fuel for heavy duty diesel engines. SAE paper 2007-01-4031; 2007.
[20] Aatola H, Larmi M, Sarjovaara T, Mikkonen S. Hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO)
as a renewable diesel fuel: trade-off between NOx. Particulate emission, and
fuel consumption of a heavy duty engine. SAE paper 2008-01-2500; 2008.
[21] Stumborg M, Wong A, Hogan E. Hydroprocessed vegetable oils for diesel fuel
improvement. Bioresour Technol 1996;56:13–8.
[22] Naik SN, Goud VV, Rout PK, Dalai AK. Production of first and second generation
biofuels: a comprehensive review. Renew Sustain Energy Rev
2010;14:578–97.
[23] Hartikka T, Kuronen M, Kiiski U. Technical performance of HVO (Hydrotreated
Vegetable Oil) in diesel engines. SAE Paper 2012-01-1585; 2012.
[24] Allen C, Valco D, Toulson E, Edwards T, Lee T. Ignition behavior and surrogate
modeling of JP-8 and of camelina and tallow hydrotreated renewable jet fuels
at low temperatures. Combustion and Flame.
[25] Blakey S, Rye L, Wilson CW. Aviation gas turbine alternative fuels: a review.
Proc Combust Inst 2011;33:2863–85.
[26] Hui X, Kumar K, Sung CJ, Edwards T, Gardener D. Experimental studies on the
combustion characteristics of alternative jet fuels. Fuel 2012;98:176–82.
[27] Corporan E, Edwards T, Shafer L, DeWett MJ, Klingshirn C, Zabarnick S, et al.
Chemical, thermal stability, seal swell, and emissions studies of alternative jet
fuels. Energy Fuels 2011;25:955–66.
[28] Li L, Coppola E, Rine J, Miller JL, Walker D. Catalytic hydrothermal conversion
of triglycerides to non-ester biofuels. Energy Fuels 2010;24:1305–15.
[29] Murtonen T, Aakko-Saksa P, Kuronen M, Mikkonen S, Lehtoranta K. Emissions
with heavy-duty diesel engines and vehicles using FAME, HVO and GTL fuels
with and without DOC + POC aftertreatment. SAE paper 2009-01-2693; 2009.
[30] Arvidsson R, Persson S, Froling M, Svanstrom M. Life cycle assessment of
hydrotreated vegetable oil from rape, oil palm and jatropha. J Cleaner Prod
2011;19(2–3):129–37.
[31] Gong Y, Kaario O, Tilli A, Larmi M, Tanner FX. A computational investigation of
hydrotreated vegetable oil sprays using RANS and a modified version of the
RNG k–e model in OpenFOAM. SAE paper 2010-01-0739; 2010.
[32] Bezergianni S, Kalogianni A. Hydrocracking of used cooking oil for biofuels
production. Bioresour Technol 2009;100:3927–32.
[33] Bezergianni S, Kalogianni A, Vasalos IA. Hydrocracking of vacuum gas oil–
vegetable oil mixtures for biofuels production. Bioresour Technol
2009;100:3036–42.
[34] Tilli A, Kaario O, Imperato M, Larmi M. Fuel injection system simulation with
renewable diesel fuels. SAE paper 2009-24-0105; 2009.
[35] Happonen M, Lahde T, Messing ME, Sarjovaara T, Larmi M, Wallenberg LR,
et al. The comparison of particle oxidation and surface structure of diesel soot
particles between fossil fuel and novel renewable diesel fuel. Fuel
2010;89(12):4008–13.
[36] Sebos I, Matsourkas A, Apostolopoulos V, Papayannakos N. Catalytic
hydroprocessing of cottonseed oil in petroleum diesel mixtures for
production of renewable diesel. Fuel 2009;88:145–9.
[37] Simacek P, Kubicka D, Kubickova I, Homola F, Pospisil M, Chudoba J. Premium
quality renewable diesel fuel by hydroprocessing of sunflower oil. Fuel
2011;90:2473–9.
[38] Chen PC, Wang WC, Roberts WL, Fang T. Spray and atomization of diesel fuel
and its alternatives from a single-hole injector using a common rail fuel
injection system. Fuel 2013;103:850–61.
[39] Alternative fuels and advanced vehicles data center (AFDC), <http://
www.afdc.energy.gov/afdc/fuels/emerging_green.html> [accessed 02.08.10].
[40] Mikulec J, Cvengros J, Jorikova L, Banic M, Kleinova A. Second generation diesel
fuel from renewable sources. J Cleaner Prod 2010;18:917–26.
[41] CEN workshop agreement. Automotive fuels-paraffinic diesel from synthesis
or hydrotreatment – requirements and test methods. CWA 15940; Feb 2009.
[42] Makinen R, Nylund N, Erkkilä K, Amberla A, Saikkonen P, Amberla A. Bus fleet
operation on renewable paraffinic diesel fuel. SAE Technical Paper 2011-01-
1965; 2011.
[43] Murtonen T, Aakko-Saksa P, Koponen P, Lehto K, Sarjovaara T, Happonen M,
Heikkila J. Emission reduction potential with paraffinic renewable diesel by
optimizing engine settings or using oxygenate. SAE Technical Paper 2012-01-
1590; 2012.
[44] Kalnes TN, Koers KP, Marker T, Shonnard DR. A technoeconomic and
environmental life cycle comparison of green diesel to biodiesel and
syndiesel. Environ Progr Sustainable Energy 2009;28(1):111–20.
96 S.-Y. No / Fuel 115 (2014) 88–96
[45] Caprotti R, Tang T, Ishibe N, In-ochanon R, Tipdecho C, Silapakampeerapap S.
Performance of diesel containing bio-hydrogenated component. SAE 2011-01-
1953; 2011.
[46] Zhang W. Automotive fuels from biomass via gasification. Fuel Process Technol
2010;91:866–76.
[47] Guzman A, Torres JE, Prada LP, Nunez ML. Hydroprocessing of crude palm oil at
pilot plant scale. Catal Today 2010;156:38–43.
[48] Khan MY, Russel RL, Welch WA, Cocker DR, Ghosh S. Impact of algae biofuel on
in-use gaseous and particulate emissions from a marine vessel. Energy Fuels
2012;26:6137–43.
[49] Legg JM, Narvaez AA, McDonell VG. Performance of algae-derived renewable
diesel in a twin-fluid airblast atomizer, ICLASS 2012. In: 12th Trennial
international conference on liquid atomization and spray systems. Heidelberg,
Germany, September 2–6; 2012.
[50] Ghosh S, Risley T. Alternative fuel for marine application, Final Report. United
States Maritime Administration (MARAD): Washington D.C. February 29;
2012.
[51] Westfall PJ, Gardner TS. Industrial fermentation of renewable diesel fuels. Curr
Opin Biotechnol 2011;22:344–50.
[52] Lapuerta M, Villajos M, Agudelo JR, Boehman AI. Key properties and blending
strategies of hydrotreated vegetable oil as biofuel for diesel engines. Fuel
Process Technol 2011;92:2406–11.
[53] Krar M, Kasza T, Kovacs S, Kallo D, Hancsok J. Bio gas oils with improved low
temperature properties. Fuel Process Technol 2011;92:886–92.
[54] Veriansyah B, Han JY, Kim SK, Hong SA, Kim YJ, Lim JS, et al. Production of
renewable diesel by hydroprocessing of soybean oil: effect of catalysts. Fuel
2012;94:578–85.
[55] Kim DH. The properties and performance of HBD blended diesel as a biofuel.
In: Proc of 2010 Korea–China–Japan petroleum technology congress. 26–27
May. Gyeongju, Korea; 2010.
[56] Hajbabaei M, Johnson KC, Okamoto RA, Mitchell A, Pullman M, Durbin TD.
Evaluation of the impacts of biodiesel and second generation biofuels on NOx
emissions for CARB diesel fuels. Environ Sci Technol 2012;46:9163–73.
[57] Kann J, Rang H, Kriis J. Advances in biodiesel fuel research. Proc Estonian Acad
Sci Chem 2002;51(2):75–117.
[58] Kalnes T, Marker T, Shonnard DR. Green diesel: a second generation biofuel. Int
J Chem Reactor Eng 2007;5:A48.
[59] Rantanen L, Linnalia R, Aakko P, Harju T. NExBTL-biodiesel fuel of the second
generation. SAE paper 2005-01-3771; 2005.
[60] Hulkkonen T, Hillamo H, Sarjovaara T, Larmi M. Experimental study of spray
characteristics between hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO) and crude oil based
EN 590 diesel fuel. SAE paper 2011-24-0042; 2011.
[61] Kopperoinen A, Kyto M, Mikkonen S. Effect of hydrotreated vegetable oil
(HVO) on particulate filters of diesel cars. SAE paper 2011-01-2096; 2011.
[62] Sugiyama K, Goto I, Kotano K, Mogi K, Honkanen M. Effects of hydrotreated
vegetable oil (HVO) as renewable diesel fuel on combustion and exhaust
emissions in diesel engine. SAE paper 2011-01-1954; 2011.
[63] Lehto K, Elonheimo A, Hakkinen K, Sarjovaara T, Larmi M. Emission reduction
using hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO) with miller timing and EGR in diesel
combustion. SAE paper 2011-01-1955; 201.
[64] Imperato M, Tilli A, Sarjovaara T, Larmi M. Large-bore compression-ignition
engines: high NOx reduction achieved at low load with hydro-treated
vegetable oil. SAE paper 2011-01-1956; 2011.
[65] Koyama A, Iki H, Iguchi Y, Tsurutani K, Hayashi H, Misawa S. Vegetable oil
hydrogenating process for automotive fuel. SAE paper 2007-01-2030; 2007.
[66] Simacek P, Kubicka D, Sebor G, Pospisil M. Fuel properties of hydroprocessed
rapeseed oil. Fuel 2010;89:611–5.
[67] Simacek P, Kubicka D. Hydrocracking of petroleum vacuum distillate
containing rapeseed oil: evaluation of diesel fuel. Fuel 2010;89:1508–13.
[68] Hancsok J, Krar M, Magyar S, Boda L, Hollo A, Kallo D. Investigation of the
production of high cetane number bio gas oil from pre-hydrogenated
vegetable oils over Pt/HZSM-22/Al2O3. Microporous Mesoporous Mater
2007;101:148–52.
[69] Huber GW, Connor PP, Corma A. Processing biomass in conventional oil
refineries: production of high quality diesel by hydrotreating vegetable oils in
heavy vacuum oil mixtures. Appl Catal A: Gen 2007;329:120–9.
[70] Al-Sabawi M, Chen J. Hydroprocessing of biomass-derived oils and their blends
with petroleum feedstocks: a review. Energy Fuels 2012;26:5373–99.
[71] Heywood JB. Internal combustion engine fundamentals. Singapore: McGraw-
Hill; 1988.
[72] Lefebvre AH. Atomization and sprays. New York: Hemisphere; 1989.
[73] No SY. How vegetable oils and their derivatives affect spray characteristics in
CI engines – a review. Atomization Sprays 2011;21(1):87–105.
[74] Pflaum H, Hofmann P, Geringer B, Weissel W. Potential of hydrogenated
vegetable oil (HVO) in a modern diesel engine. SAE paper 2010-32-0081; 2010.
[75] Erkkila K, Nylund NO, Hulkkone T, Tilli A, Mikkonen S, Saikkonen P, Makinen R,
Amberia A. Emission performance of paraffinic HVO diesel fuel in heavy duty
vehicles. SAE paper 2011-01-1966; 2011.
[76] Imperato M, Sarjovaara T, Larmi M, Tilli A. Hydrotreated vegetable oil and
miller timing in a medium-speed CI engine. SAE Technical Paper 2012-01-
0862; 2012.
[77] Happonen H, Heikkila J, Murtonen T, Lehto K, Sarjovaara T, Larmi M, et al.
Reductions in particulate and NOx emissions by diesel engine parameter
adjustments with HVO fuel. Environ Sci Technol 2012;46:6198–204.
[78] Happonen M, Heillila J, Aakko-Saksa P, Murtonen T, Lehto K, Rostedt A, et al.
Diesel exhaust emissions and particle hygroscopicity with HVO fuel-
oxygenate blend. Fuel 2013;103:380–6.
[79] Mikkonen S, Hartikka T, Kuronen M, Sakkonen P. HVO, hydrotreated vegetable
oil – a premium renewable biofuel for diesel engines. Neste Oil Proprietary Pub
June 2012.
[80] Sunde K, Brekke A, Solberg B. Environmental impacts and costs of hydrotreated
vegetable oils, transesterified lipids and woody BTL – a review. Energies
2011;4:845–77.