Biodiesel use and experience among state DOT agencies

ASAE Annual International Meeting 2004

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 6635-6647

  Humburg, Daniel S ^a   Hansen, Tonya J ^a   Schumacher, Leon G ^b   Mahapatra, Ajit K ^a   Taylor, Gary L ^a   Adams, Brian T ^b  

^a SOUTH DAKOTA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MISSOURI   (United States)

Author keywords

Biodiesel use; Blend; Filtering; Fleet; Maintenance; Performance issues; Survey; U.S. departments of transportation

Indexed keywords

BLENDING; COMPOSITION; COSTS; ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL EFFECTS; FILTRATION; MAINTENANCE; TRANSPORTATION;

BIODIESEL USE; BLEND; FLEET; PERFORMANCE ISSUES; SURVEY; U.S. DEPARTMENTS OF TRANSPORTATION;

DIESEL FUELS;

EID: 30044434820     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Conference Proceeding    
DOI: None     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (13)

1. Agarwal, A. K., J. Bijwe, and L. M. Das. 2003. Wear assessment in a biodiesel fueled compression ignition engine. Trans. ASME 125 (3): 820-826.
2. Canakci, A. and J. H. Van Gerpen. 2003. Comparison of engine performance and Emissions for petroleum diesel fuel, yellow grease biodiesel and soybean oil biodiesel. Trans. ASAE 46 (4): 937-944.
3. Cardone, M., M. V. Prati, V. Rocco, M. Seggiani, A. Senator, and S. Vitolo. 2002. Brassica carinata as an alternative oil crop for production of biodiesel in Italy: engine performance and regulated and unregulated exhaust emissions. Environ. Sci. Technolo. 36 (21): 4656-4662.
4. Marshal, W., L. G. Schumacher, and S. Howell. 1995. Engine exhaust emissions evaluation of a Cummins L10E when fueled with a biodiesel blend. SAE Paper No. 952363. Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA.: SAE.
5. Minnesota Department of Agriculture. 2002. Economic Impact of Soy Diesel in Minnesota. Agricultural Marketing Services Division, Minneapolis, MN. Available at: http://www.mda.state.mn.us/ams/biodiesel/ecoimpsoydiesel.pdf
6. Monyem, A., J. H. Van Gerpen, and M. Canakci. 2001. The effect of timing and oxidation on emissions from biodiesel fueled engines. Trans. ASAE 44 (1): 35-42.
7. Munack, A., O. Schroeder, J. Krahl, and J. Bunger. 2001. Comparison of relevant exhaust gas emissions from biodiesel and fossil diesel fuel. CIGR J Scientific Res. Devp. Manuscript 01 001, v. III.
8. Schumacher, L. G., N. N. Clark, D. W. Lyons, and W. Marshall. 2001. Diesel engine exhaust emissions evaluation of biodiesel blends using a Cummins 110e engine. Trans. ASAE 44(6): 1461-1464.
9. th National Bioenergy Conference, 113-119, Reno/Sparks, NV.
10. Sharp. C. A. 1996. Emissions and lubricity evaluation of rapeseed derived biodiesel fuels. Southwest Research Institute Study (San Antonio, TX). Sponsored by the Department of Energy and University of Idaho: presented at DOE Biodiesel Emissions Testing Meeting, Seattle, WA, November 25, 1996.
11. South Dakota Agricultural Statistics Service. 2003. South Dakota Agriculture Bulletin 63. Sioux Falls, SD.
12. Tiffany, D. 2001. Biodiesel: A Policy Choice for Minnesota. Department of Applied Economics, College of Agricultural, Food, and Environmental Sciences, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN.
13. Wechel, T., C. R. Gustafson, and F. L. Leistritz. 2003. Economic feasibility of biodiesel production in North Dakota. Report # 505, Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics, North Dakota State University, Fargo, ND.