<#www.blt.bmlf.gv.atveroveroeff0100_Tec>
Keith Addison wrote:
> Hello Stephan, Jan and all
>
> I asked Elsbett's Alexander Noack for some comment on what he was
> quoted as saying about soy oil, and got a very brief response from him:
>
>> Hi Keith,
>>
>> this all is nearly correct, but only for direct injection engines.
>>
>> Mit freundlichen Gr٤en / Best regards
>>
>> Alexander Noack
>> ELSBETT Technologie GmbH
>> Weissenburger Stra§e 15
>> D-91177 Thalmaessing
>> Internet: www.elsbett.com
>> e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> phone: +49 (0)9173 77940
>> Fax: +49 (0)9173 77942
>
>
> This was the quote in question:
>
>> "Soybean oil is bad. Whether it is straight vegetable oil or soybean
>> based biodiesel. It is a no-go in diesel engines. Why? In diesel
>> engines you have slight mixing between fuel and lubricating oil.
>> There is a fuel property in soybean oil that makes it reactive when
>> in contact with engine lubricating oil. It supposedly has a
>> polymerizing action with the engine oil, which is detrimental to the
>> life of your lubricating system.
>>
>> "What they do in Europe is use a vegetable-based lubricating oil for
>> the engine to prevent any problems with fuel-lubricating oil
>> intimacy. What else? They do not use soybean oil; They use rape seed
>> also known as canola."
>
>
> Best wishes
>
> Keith
>
>
>
>> Hello Jan
>>
>>> Hello Stephan.
>>> The reason for Elsbett«s people (and several others) for rejecting
>>> soy bean
>>> oil is its high iodine number. As the case with fish oil,
corn oil >>> and
>>> several kinds of sunflower oil. A high iodine number is indicating
>>> that the
>>> oil may be chemically unstable due to its unsaturation level and
>>> therefore
>>> unsuitable as engine fuel both as SVO and BD.
>>
>>
>> In other words, it polymerises - to quote Phillip Calais: "Drying
>> results from the double bonds (and sometimes triple bonds) in the
>> unsaturated oil molecules being broken by atmospheric oxygen and
>> being converted to peroxides. Cross-linking at this site can then
>> occur and the oil irreversibly polymerises into a plastic-like solid."
>> -- From "Waste Vegetable Oil as a Diesel Replacement Fuel" by Phillip
>> Calais, Environmental Science, Murdoch University, Perth, Australia,
>> and A.R. (Tony) Clark, Western Australian Renewable Fuels Association
>> Inc.
>> http://www.shortcircuit.com.au/warfa/paper/paper.htm
>>
>> See:
>> Iodine Values
>> http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_yield.html#iodine
>>
>> But that's not quite what Elsbett's Alexander Noack is quoted as
>> saying at the East Coast Region-United States Elsbett Workshop:
>>
>> "Soybean oil is bad. Whether it is straight vegetable oil or soybean
>> based biodiesel. It is a no-go in diesel engines. Why? In diesel
>> engines you have slight mixing between fuel and lubricating oil.
>> There is a fuel property in soybean oil that makes it reactive when
>> in contact with engine lubricating oil. It supposedly has a
>> polymerizing action with the engine oil, which is detrimental to the
>> life of your lubricating system.
>>
>> "What they do in Europe is use a vegetable-based lubricating oil for
>> the engine to prevent any problems with fuel-lubricating oil
>> intimacy. What else? They do not use soybean oil; They use rape seed
>> also known as canola."
>>
>> So it would seem that Elsbett's reservations are not so much with
>> polymerisation per se because of the high iodine number as with
>> fuel-lubricating oil interactions.
>>
>> Can you shed any light on this?
>>
>>> There are some companies producing me from oil with a high iodine
>>> number,
>>> and there is no practical difference between those products and the
>>> BD:s
>>> with a iodine number around or under 120 for the consumer.
>>
>>
>> Can you quote any research that supports the conclusion that there is
>> no practical difference? I've heard of drying problems with sunflower
>> oil biodiesel, and even with rapeseed oil biodiesel (I don't have the
>> reports, I was told they're in German) and I would not want to use
>> linseed oil or tung oil.
>>
>>> And may I add that
>>> the American B100 standard allows soy bean oil as raw material.
>>
>>
>> Of course they do - how much do you think the soy councils and Big
>> Soy had to do with that? They were involved at every level. Whatever
>> the science may say, do you think it would have been possible for
>> them to develop standards that excluded soy?
>>
>> Similarly, it's often said that the EU standard's stipulating a
>> maximum iodine # of 120 (115 in France and Germany, while the US
>> standard doesn't stipulate anything) is politically based, intended
>> to exclude soy and protect European rapeseed oil production, but is
>> that really all there is to it?
>>
>> If you really wanted to exclude drying problems you'd probably have
>> to exclude rapeseed oil as well and stop at castor oil (85), but no
>> doubt that would be as politically impossible in Europe as excluding
>> soy would be in the US. In both, though less so in Europe perhaps,
>> biodiesel and biofuels are still seen more as agricultural
>> commodities issues than as energy issues.
>>
>> There is a whole side to this that is not to be trusted. In the US,
>> it might not be a clever thing to do career-wise for a researcher to
>> start investigating polymerising problems with soy biodiesel. Quality
>> checks of commercial biodiesel seem to be far from watertight, with
>> one lab attesting ASTM quality and another - after the fuel started
>> causing problems - finding it was not ASTM quality. One commercial
>> produceare repeatedly produced off-spec fuel that caused problems
>> with users' cars, but the NBB didn't seem to be aware of it and
>> proudly presented that producer's plant for delegates to the NBB's
>> annual convention to tour. People at the convention who raised the
>> sub-spec fuel issue were told not to rock the boat.
>>
>> Like Stephan, I too would like some reliable information on this
>> issue. I'm not convinced that it's not a problem.
>>
>> We have discussed this here before, Alexander's statement,
>> polymerisation, and oxidation - see:
>>
>> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/34679/
>>
>> and
>>
>> http://infoarchive.net/sgroup/biofuel/34769/1
>>
>> (Elsbett, by the way, is not anti-biodiesel.)
>>
>> Best wishes
>>
>> Keith
>>
>>
>>> Best regards
>>> Jan Warnqvist
>>> AGERATEC AB
>>>
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>
>>> + 46 554 201 89
>>> +46 70 499 38 45
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "stephan torak" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>> Sent: Monday, March 07, 2005 3:19 AM
>>> Subject: [Biofuel] (Biofuel)[Fwd: Re: soybeanoil a bad choice for BD
>>> making?]
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > >Hi Everyone!
>>> > >I am a recent addition to the biodiesel world, due to
a >>> > >malfunction
>>> > >in my brain (age related no doubt) that caused me to go and buy a
>>> > >190D.(I Love it just as I knew I would) . After I decided that
>>> > >buying the conversion kit from Elsbett wasn't necessarily the best
>>> > >option (due to local WVO quality concerns)....by the way, if you
>>> come to
>>> > >Hawaii, where I live, and decide to eat in a restaurant, make sure
>>> > >you have healthinsurance, the glop they are using here to
fry >>> > >stuff
>>> > >in ......
>>> > >
>>> > >Seriously, though, the WVO I am getting here is is a mix of mostly
>>> > >Soybean oil used 100 times over and other unidentified saturated
>>> > >learned a lot, I am using it....and now I just read that an
>>> > >Elsbett engineer said to stay away from Soybean oil, regardless if
>>> > >used straight or as feedstock for BD.
>>> > >
>>> > >Now, in my (brief) dealings with the Elsbett company I had the
>>> > >distinctive feeling that they have a little bit of an anti- BD
>>> leaning
>>> (maybe I got that because German is my native language)
>>> > >
>>> > But in studying the resources further, and considering the high IV
>>> > >of soybean oil more questions as to its suitability seem to
>>> emerge....
>>> > >
>>> > >Here are some questions: As far as suitability as a long term
>>> > >source for B100, how serious are the concerns in using BD made
