I am curious how people on here feel about biodiesel. It seems that it would be a good idea to start converting to more and more biodiesel in our pumps. I think it would have two big advantages.

1. From my understanding biodiesel burns cleaner so we could meet better emissions standards easier so we can have a cleaner world and better gas mileage.

2. Using more biodiesel in our mix would also decrease our dependence on foreign oil, while helping our US Farmers. It would also help keep the price of gas(diesel ) steadier because we don’t have to worry about the price of oil as much as we do now.

i'm pretty sure that biodiesel actually decreases fuel milage, it doesn't have as much energy in each gallon as diesel fuel does

Biodiesel? Did you make that up?

I am curious how people on here feel about biodiesel. It seems that it would be a good idea to start converting to more and more biodiesel in our pumps. I think it would have two big advantages.

1. From my understanding biodiesel burns cleaner so we could meet better emissions standards easier so we can have a cleaner world and better gas mileage.

2. Using more biodiesel in our mix would also decrease our dependence on foreign oil, while helping our US Farmers. It would also help keep the price of gas(diesel ) steadier because we don’t have to worry about the price of oil as much as we do now.


I like your thinking!!


www.biodieselpa.com (http://www.biodieselpa.com)

Biodiesel? Did you make that up?

Nope.. even the epa says there's a mileage hit.. of course, they're talking with higher dosages.. B5 is a nice compromise between the engine manufacturers and the farm lobby..

ethanol has the same drawbacks..

Biodiesel is hygroscopic.. it likes moisture, so bacteria, fungus and yeast wil grow like wildfire if not controlled.. that's where the sludge comes from..

biodiesel raises NOx.. it was banned in texas late last year for this reason.. the biodiesel industry has been given one more year to prove it DOESN'T raise NOx levels..

It's also quite unstable, and it turns to something like elmers glue at 40 degrees.

do some reading on what the engine manufacturers association says about biodiesel.. you'll learn about things like injector coking, piston deposits, etc..

and the claimed lubricity benefits stem from the glycerides.. which is what gells in the winter.. so if you refine the BD so it's pure, what happens to lubricity?

The big push behind biofuels comes from places like ADM and con agra, and biofuels only flourish because folks are subsidized to grow it, the gov't mandated a market for it, and people can get a tax credit for using it..

I put some bio in a jug and set it out like my earlier post states. All of the defective attrbutes you list were evident in just a short time to me with the little test I did. The bacteria and water collection that accumulate in an aggressive enviornment have to be dealt with daily in my view. How else can you possibly state it's at a set standard? My local COOP has 20,000 gallons underground only recirculated and tested weekly not for me. My tractor has a black poly fuel tank partially exposed to sunlight under cab. That generates heat sitting out and the breakdown occurs from there in the bio if the tractor sits for 2-3 weeks at times. Not even going to go in this John Deere at $70k!!! Duramax was $35k no way in that tank!!!! Bosch fuel pumps and Duramax injectors are HOW MUCH???? I did the math and looked at the risks and make a fast and SAFE decision to NOT use BIO for the corrosive and detrimental attributes that are solid science like NOX has in front of you reader's eyes. Make your own choices and be lucky and run it if you make out will you paid more and got less mileage per gallon. It has less btu and cetane out here. You have to check this and doctor it all the time to have a STABLE product. That is too much work in our climate where it's cold and hot all in the same day. B-5 screwed up that truck mentioned earlier here as the key subject and my question is the b-20 an on up the content scale just works in warm climates. It will gel I saw it all winter being cold and nasty like it is the trucks were sitting when the guy tried to get by running bio in the FREEZER. Best of luck out there. OUT-----------------------------

Yes, there is a slight increase in NOx emissions when using biodiesel. But, the upside is the technology is out there to completely eliminate NOx emissions from any diesel engine (even petroldiesel has high NOx emissions compared to gasoline engines). Do a search for BlueTec. I know there will be the argument that it is just another layer of complexity to a diesel engine, but compared to all the systems already in place on the engine, it isn't terribly complicated.

It also doesn't just get its lubricity from glycerides (which aren't even present in biodiesel, by the way-only in unreacted fats and oils). The esters themselves provide lubricity benefits.

Yes, methyl esters are hygroscopic, but that isn't as big of deal as opponents make it out to be. Microorganisms only grow in free water. Since the methyl esters absorb the water, there is very little chance of free water collecting in the fuel system-unless you're buying off-spec fuel, then it's your own fault.

Colt49 and LowNox, how many gallons of biodiesel have you guys actually used? How many of the problems you point out have you actually witnessed?

Habo-I have seen the problems we all mentioned here over 2 years and make my choice based on the fact I can't risk the possible damages my equipment could have from exposure to Bio anything. It offers no advantages for me to consume it so let others use it. My choice is solid safe and will run many years just like my equipment is now on Dino fuels and oils. Diesel can be made from other carbon based matter than just oil is the other thing. Montana is going to market with fuel from natural gas and coal, the tar sands in Alberta are being mined and mixed to slurry and piped to refinery right now even though it's high sulpher. You fail to mention and acknowledge these items. Bio is for anyone that wants it so go get it if you are ready to risk it. I don't care what anyone uses for their base fuel stock. I just happened to read on these slots and made a few observations and generated some discussion on Bio vs. Dino. It's only a thread no big deal to me just traveling the web and I'm gone Batman!!!!

...You fail to mention and acknowledge these items....

I'm sorry, I thought the title of the thread was biodiesel, not GTL and tar-sand technology. GTL is a viable technology, as long as you can capture and sequester the CO2 produced by it (I've heard GTL plants referred to as CO2 factories that produce synthetic fuels as a by-product-and I'd have to say I can't disagree).

Anyway, as to the thread at hand, I just get tired of hear-say and myths being passed off as truth. And this NOx thing is the biggest thing that cracks me up. You all drive diesel pickups and start complaining about NOx emissions from bio. If you don't want NOx emissions, drive a gasser.

At any rate, go to your nearest college library and start reading published research on biodiesel fuels (Energy & Fuels published by the American Chemical Society is a good place to start). There is a ton out there. Don't necessarily believe what you read on internet forums as the truth (including my own posts), look at the peer-reviewed science, then make an informed decision.

And this NOx thing is the biggest thing that cracks me up. You all drive diesel pickups and start complaining about NOx emissions from bio. If you don't want NOx emissions, drive a gasser.

Here's why NOx is kinda important... over 400 counties in the US have been designated as " non attainment" for PM 2.5 and NOx. What that means is that states are mandated to come up with ways to reduce Nox & PM levels, or face witholding of federal highway funds..

the 2006 phase III emissions reductions and the change to ULSD are just the beginning of what's to come.. see, the EPA knows that ULSD, 2007 engines, retrofits and biofuels aren't enough to bring the emittant levels down to where they'd like, and NOx is the big target..

back on topic,

The whole NOx & texas air quality thing is kind of important, because the TCEQ ( texas commision for environmental quality) is charged with implementing rules on fleets to bring the state into NOx attainment..

one could make the argument that it's odd that there's a push for a biofuel that raises a pollutant that the state is also mandated to reduce or face fines.. does it make sense yet to wonder or at least be concerned about NOx?

I don't base what I'm saying on message boards.. I'm rather familiar with the 1990 clean air act, the non attainment issue, and what that means to fleets..

Oh, and the US department of agriculture is the outfit that says biodiesels lubricity comes from contaminants.. not heresay, or my wishful thinking..

here's a link :

http://pubs.acs.org/cgi-bin/abstract.cgi/enfuem/2005/19/i03/abs/ef049684c.html

and here's a quote:

"some species (free fatty acids, monoacylglycerols) considered contaminants resulting from biodiesel production are responsible for the lubricity of low-level blends of biodiesel in (ultra-)low-sulfur petrodiesel"

Use it or don't, I don't care, but the driving public deserves to hear the whole story.

and somebody mentioned bluetec as being viable.. good luck paying ther initial price for that, and then buying / maintaining urea..

Yeah I have seen that article before. Hu et. al., though, found that the methyl esters have sufficient lubricity to meet fuel standards in
Fuel, Volume 84, Issues 12-13, September 2005, Pages 1601-
1606. Moral of the story is we're splitting hairs on what components are the most responsible for lubricity.

Back to the NOx issue, in NOx Reduction from Biodiesel Fuels
Fernando, S.; Hall, C.; Jha, S.
Energy & Fuels; (Article); 2006; 20(1); 376-382 it was shown that simply retarding the injection timing slightly significantly improved NOx emissions, though at the price of some performance losses. Water injection also showed promise without the inherent performance hit.

As far as Bluetec is concerned, I haven't really heard any major complaints about the system. Filling the urea tank isn't a big deal-urea is cheap and safe to work with. Yeah, the system adds a little initial cost to the price of the vehicle, but that's a pretty minor point.

As far as Texas' biodiesel rule is concerned, I have my own suspicions about the genesis of that deal. What is Texas' biggest industry and how much political clout do you think it has? I'll give you a hint-it isn't the soybean growers association...

Still suprising to see BD naysayers.........

BD is better than diesel in most ways. <period

Ive run B80 or higher in the truck for 2.5 years and 25k miles. Not a lick of trouble, not even a clogged fuel filter.

The only possible downside for me is that the BD might be so good that it is saving injectors that might have taken a dump had they been run on diesel.

Ive also run B80 and B50 in three other vehicles. Nothing but a smooth running engine from those experiences either.

BTW........biodiesel might have a few less BTU's than diesel, but it has a far greater cetane rating. Thats the reason it runs smoother.

Yeah I have seen that article before. Hu et. al., though, found that the methyl esters have sufficient lubricity to meet fuel standards in
Fuel, Volume 84, Issues 12-13, September 2005, Pages 1601-
1606
. Moral of the story is we're splitting hairs on what components are the most responsible for lubricity.


The correct term is "contaminants" - not "components".. contaminants that impact cold weather operability, and deposit formation under combustion temps..

Back to the NOx issue, in NOx Reduction from Biodiesel Fuels
Fernando, S.; Hall, C.; Jha, S.
Energy & Fuels; (Article); 2006; 20(1); 376-382 it was shown that simply retarding the injection timing slightly significantly improved NOx emissions, though at the price of some performance losses. Water injection also showed promise without the inherent performance hit. So you're saying let's use biodiesel (regardless of unintended consequences), and we'll mitigate whatever impacts we can by just utilizing a performance robbing tune, or bolting on yet another system to mask a problem? yay.. where do i sign up?

As far as Texas' biodiesel rule is concerned, I have my own suspicions about the genesis of that deal. What is Texas' biggest industry and how much political clout do you think it has? I'll give you a hint-it isn't the soybean growers association...Texas is at the focal point now because they have an implementation plan in place to reduce Nox emissions, unlike other states which are still drafting theirs..in other words, the state of texas has a gun to its head.. the oil industry's presence in texas isn't a factor, as hard as that might be to believe..

Nope.. even the epa says there's a mileage hit.. of course, they're talking with higher dosages.. B5 is a nice compromise between the engine manufacturers and the farm lobby..

You'll have to support that with a link. I've read two studies done by the NREL on transit busses and mail trucks running identical routes that show identical mileage using B20.

Here's one.
http://www.nbb.org/resources/reportsdatabase/reports/tra/20061001_tra-55.pdf



Biodiesel is hygroscopic.. it likes moisture, so bacteria, fungus and yeast wil grow like wildfire if not controlled.. that's where the sludge comes from..

That's completey untrue. The solubility limit of water in biodiesel is 1500 ppm versus 500 ppm for diesel. 1500 ppm is nowhere near hygroscopic. You're either confused with ethanol or confused about what hygroscopic means.


biodiesel raises NOx.. it was banned in texas late last year for this reason.. the biodiesel industry has been given one more year to prove it DOESN'T raise NOx levels..

Biodiesel raises NOx a few percent while decreasing every other pollutant significantly. There's also studies showing a small decrease in NOx. It's such a small change either way that it depends quite a bit on the engine and the test methods. And it's never been banned in Texas.


It's also quite unstable, and it turns to something like elmers glue at 40 degrees.

Pure soybean based biodiesel begins to cloud around 32 degrees. Upon warming it returns to its original state. Diesel does the exact same thing albeit at a lower temperature. Unstable? Do you understand gelling even a little?


and the claimed lubricity benefits stem from the glycerides.. which is what gells in the winter.. so if you refine the BD so it's pure, what happens to lubricity?

Biodiesel that meets the ASTM spec for purity exceeds the lubricity spec by a wide margin.

Go easy on the misinformation man.

I am curious how people on here feel about biodiesel. It seems that it would be a good idea to start converting to more and more biodiesel in our pumps. I think it would have two big advantages.

1. From my understanding biodiesel burns cleaner so we could meet better emissions standards easier so we can have a cleaner world and better gas mileage.

2. Using more biodiesel in our mix would also decrease our dependence on foreign oil, while helping our US Farmers. It would also help keep the price of gas(diesel ) steadier because we don’t have to worry about the price of oil as much as we do now. I have run 20% in both trucks in signature, and in farm equipment, no problems at all, Keep some money over here, clean up the enviroment and add lubricity.

You'll have to support that with a link. I've read two studies done by the NREL on transit busses and mail trucks running identical routes that show identical mileage using B20.

Here's one.
http://www.nbb.org/resources/reportsdatabase/reports/tra/20061001_tra-55.pdf


Direct quote from your linked study:

"A small fuel economy reduction is expected due to the lower energy content of B20 as compared to diesel fuel."

some statistical hocus pocus was employed to make the calim of "no difference in mileage", and the test abstract noted a 2% difference in the lab.. also note the API gravity of biodiesel blends - the higher the API, the lower the BTU, and that goes for neat diesel too..

did you actually read this study? the diesel & B20 buses were all different buses, and accumulated different amounts of miles during the test period.

This would never fly for an EPA verification, of course, biodiesel did not have to undergo that testing.. farm lobby checks will do that.

T The solubility limit of water in biodiesel is 1500 ppm versus 500 ppm for diesel. 1500 ppm is nowhere near hygroscopic. You're either confused with ethanol or confused about what hygroscopic means.No confusion - biodiesel enthusiasts say the same thing:

Hygroscopic
The tendency of something to absorb water (usually from humidity in the air). Biodiesel (http://www.boulderbiodiesel.com/biodiesel) absorbs water to about 1200 parts per million (PPM). Methanol (http://www.boulderbiodiesel.com/Glossary/#methanol) and NaOH (http://www.boulderbiodiesel.com/Glossary/#sodiumhydroxide) are also hygroscopic. Keep containers closed.

http://www.boulderbiodiesel.com/Glossary/

The wordwide fuel charter says why it's important:
Being hygroscopic, biodiesel fuels require special handling to prevent high water content and the consequent risk of corrosion and microbial growth.

And it's never been banned in Texas.I guess these guys are lying then
http://www.alternative-energy-news.info/biodiesel-banned-texas/


Pure soybean based biodiesel begins to cloud around 32 degrees. Upon warming it returns to its original state. Diesel does the exact same thing albeit at a lower temperature. Unstable? Do you understand gelling even a little? I understand gelling very well..study up on what the engine manufacturers have to say about winter problems and the instability of the BD itself.

also once you blend biodiesel with petrodiesel, the cloud point of the blend is dependent on the cloud point of the diesel fuel you start with, not to mention the percentage of BD that is blended.... If a fleet is accidentally blending a summer fuel with too much BD, in november, gelling at higher than 32 is quite possible..

Biodiesel that meets the ASTM spec for purity exceeds the lubricity spec by a wide margin.if biodiesel's lubricity is caused by contaminants, how can that be possible? wishful thinking?

1. Did you read the study? This is very first paragraph.

Nine identical 40-ft. transit buses were operated on B20 and diesel for a period of two years – five of the buses operated exclusively on B20 (20% biodiesel blend) and the other four on petroleum diesel. The buses were model year 2000 Orion V equipped with Cummins ISM engines, and all operated on the same bus route. Each bus accumulated about 100,000 miles over the course of the study. B20 buses were compared to the petroleum diesel buses in terms of fuel economy, vehicle maintenance cost, road calls, and emissions. There was no difference between the on-road average fuel economy of the two groups (4.41 mpg) based on the in-use data, however laboratory testing revealed a nearly 2% reduction in fuel economy for the B20 vehicles.

Same buses, same route, same mpg. Biodiesel does show to have slightly less energy in the lab however 900,000 miles of real world evidence shows it's so slight it's not worth mentioning.

2. 1200 ppm water is not much water. I don't know why you compare to methanol or NaOH. That's a completely different ballgame. I just finished using the last of some biodiesel stored in an open top barrel that I made last fall. Crystal clear, no bugs.

3. The biodiesel ban was delayed. http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=47033

4. Biodiesel lubricity is not caused by contaminants. However, the contaminants (free and combined glycerine) are even more lubricating than biodiesel.

Hey LowNox...what is your point....is it you do not like Biodiesel???

Point made.

So why continue with the crusade?

...
4. Biodiesel lubricity is not caused by contaminants. However, the contaminants (free and combined glycerine) are even more lubricating than biodiesel....







Ding ding ding, we have a winner!!! Glad somebody's paying attention...

2. 1200 ppm water is not much water. I don't know why you compare to methanol or NaOH. That's a completely different ballgame. I just finished using the last of some biodiesel stored in an open top barrel that I made last fall. Crystal clear, no bugs.

I didn't do any comparison.. the linked website did, in discussing the definition of hygroscopic..

3. The biodiesel ban was delayed. http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=47033

A fact I mentioned in an earlier post in this thread ( and others ).. and it was delayed to give the BD industry another year to prove it doesn't increase NOx like the EPA says it does..
[/URL]

Biodiesel lubricity is not caused by contaminants.

The US department of agriculture said differently, in the same report that I linked, that you claim to have read.

However, the contaminants (free and combined glycerine) are even more lubricating than biodiesel.

So now you agree with the agriculture department's tests conclusion, that contaminants are responsible for BD's lubricity? that's what it sounds like..

and here's why glycerines aren't so good..

[URL]http://bulktransporter.com/news/ulsd_biodiesel_challenges/ (http://www.renewableenergyaccess.com/rea/news/story?id=47033)













[/quote]

i'm pretty sure that biodiesel actually decreases fuel milage, it doesn't have as much energy in each gallon as diesel fuel does

Biodiesel as I buy it at the pump (B20) has a dramatic effect on mileage. I consistently get 4+MPG better under the same driving conditions over the ULSD that is available. I did not notice much of a different between the B20 and the LSD when it was available.

Tim

Biodiesel as I buy it at the pump (B20) has a dramatic effect on mileage. I consistently get 4+MPG better under the same driving conditions over the ULSD that is available. I did not notice much of a different between the B20 and the LSD when it was available.

Tim

4+MPG????? That's almost unbelievable. I would like to hear some more details on your comparison tests. Average MPG on ULSD, Average MPG on Bio, # of test tanks, driving conditions, etc. Thanks!

4+MPG????? That's almost unbelievable. I would like to hear some more details on your comparison tests. Average MPG on ULSD, Average MPG on Bio, # of test tanks, driving conditions, etc. Thanks!

The 4mpg is a comparison between winter blend ULSD and B20 which I am told by the supplier does not change.

Unloaded, mixed highway and in town full tank tests (until light comes on) hand calculated. Average with ULSD was 14.1mpg (low of 12.7 high of 15.3) Average with B20 18.4 (low of 16.7 high of 19.2). With the old LSD I did not notice much of a difference between LSD and B20. I GUARANTEE you could fill my truck up with fuel (your choice) and not tell me which you chose, and by half a tank I would know. I drive 20 miles one way out of my way to buy B20 and round trip takes a good hour. It is worth it for me. I have nothing to prove!

Tim

Hey Moose, I'm from NH Also, where do you get your bio and have you had any problems with our wonderful climate changes ? I'd love to try it, but this thread is just confusing me at this point !!!

I buy it at Speedway Convenience in Loudon, NH.

http://biodiesel.org/buyingbiodiesel/retailfuelingsites/showstate.asp?st=NH

That is the list of places that sell it in NH. I have NO problems running in any temp. I have run it is 90* summer heat, and -15* winter cold. Absolutely no issue with the biodiesel.

I see you have a 2007, so no worries switching over, just fill it up! If it was older with a lot of miles you need to change the fuel filter a couple times in the beginning. Biodiesel is such a great solvent that it will "scrape" all the sludge and gunk in your fuel tank and it will clog up the filter. I would suggest trying to get the tank as low as possible. I did have an issue with it mixing with ULSD once, but I think that was the ULSD that caused it (which I bought at a Mom & Pop's station in New Jersey).

Tim

Bio will be great in a few years when they perfect it and there is someone regulating the producers.

Bio will be great in a few years when they perfect it and there is someone regulating the producers.
Producers are regulated....EPA, ASTM, IRS, NBB the list goes on and on.

All commercial biodiesel sold in the USA must meet certain specifications and continue to do so. You can not sell Biodiesel unless you have ASTM certification, NBB, cert, EPA cert etc.
AND the astm testing is to assure the consumers that the Biodiesel meets or exceeds ASTM spec.

Bio will be great in a few years when they perfect it and there is someone regulating the producers.

Biodiesel is great now, it will only get better!

Tim

Moose, is that the station that is right down the street from NHIS?

Moose, is that the station that is right down the street from NHIS?

Yes! Just south of NHIS on the opposite side of the road. The pump is around the back. You have to go inside and ask for a key to unlock it.

Tim

Very well put colt49

Yes! Just south of NHIS on the opposite side of the road. The pump is around the back. You have to go inside and ask for a key to unlock it.

Tim

Thanks for the heads up.

Still suprising to see BD naysayers.........

BD is better than diesel in most ways. <period

Ive run B80 or higher in the truck for 2.5 years and 25k miles. Not a lick of trouble, not even a clogged fuel filter.

The only possible downside for me is that the BD might be so good that it is saving injectors that might have taken a dump had they been run on diesel.

Ive also run B80 and B50 in three other vehicles. Nothing but a smooth running engine from those experiences either.

BTW........biodiesel might have a few less BTU's than diesel, but it has a far greater cetane rating. Thats the reason it runs smoother.

I'm with you manny. It is hard to believe there are so many people that hate biodiesel for some reason - and they've never even used it! I've run B100 to B80 for two years and have NO problems with it except it costs a bit more. The naysayers will read a long technical report supporting the exceptional lubricity of BD and will nevertheless pull out a single sentence that simply has the word "contaminants" in it as proof that BD is no good. They will claim that BD has lower cetane, when it has higher; or claim BD is no good because of algae growth and then admit that their fuel tank sits in the sunlight (algae will also grow in #2 in sunlight), or claim that BD solidifies at 40F when it doesn't (it starts to get cloudy, but I've run straight B100 down to 25F, and B80 down to 8F - with NO problems), and they leave out the fact that in cold climes BD is winterized anyway, just like #2. The list goes on.

As far as I am concerned the proof is in the pudding, and I'll drive out of my way to get B100 because my engine runs better and FAR quieter on it, my fuel system is cleaner, it produces much less emissions, it isn't imported, it doesn't contribute to greenhouse gases, my money goes to midwest farmers and not mideast sheiks, I don't smell like a refinery if I splash any on me (OR french fries - let's get rid of that myth), and it won't incinerate me if I'm in a bad accident (BD isn't even classified as a flammable liquid).

4+MPG????? That's almost unbelievable. I would like to hear some more details on your comparison tests. Average MPG on ULSD, Average MPG on Bio, # of test tanks, driving conditions, etc. Thanks!
This is possible because the energy content of BD and #2 can vary so much between lots. #2 you get at one station may have 1X energy, while the stuff you get at the next station may have 0.9X energy. The same goes for BD. If your tests happen to be comparing the worst #2 to the best BD you can get a result like this. Generally though, BD has a bit less energy than #2.

I run B20 without any modifications year round and have no problems. Can I run B100 in the summer without any mods (just put it in the normal fuel tank)? No need for an additional tank and valves switching back and forth?

Thanks, Tim

Texas is at the focal point now because they have an implementation plan in place to reduce Nox emissions, unlike other states which are still drafting theirs..in other words, the state of texas has a gun to its head.. the oil industry's presence in texas isn't a factor, as hard as that might be to believe.. [/LEFT]


Some cities in Texas have big problems complying with NOx rules in the Federal Clean Air Act. They are under the gun alright, not so much to comply with their own plans, but because they stand to lose billions in Federal Highway Funds if they continued to violate Federal Clean Air Act rules for NOx. It isn't so much that Texas is so progressive in air pollution regulation (who would believe that anyway), but that they were forced to develop a very strict mitigation plan for certain cities. Those municipal areas HAVE to focus on reducing NOx above all other contaminants.

The point is that it isn't the BD that is so very, very bad; or that Texas officials are suddenly out in front of the rest of the nation in environmental consciousness - it is simply that Texas can't allow ANY more NOx contaminant sources into their urban areas, no matter how trivial. So it is not correct to use the Texas ban to infer that BD produces really horrible NOx emissions.

As for the Texas oil refining industry not being a factor...that's not quite accurate. Why do you think the NOx was so bad in Texas cities in the first place?

I dont understand people who criticize Bio. Even if everything they say is true and worse the fact is that Biodiesel is still better than petrodiesel simply because it doesnt come from the middle east or other places where they hate us.

I run B20 without any modifications year round and have no problems. Can I run B100 in the summer without any mods (just put it in the normal fuel tank)? No need for an additional tank and valves switching back and forth?

Thanks, Tim

Keep in mind that GM only supports using B5 in their Duramax's (I think), but if you want to use B100 anyway you can just put it in the tank - biodiesel is diesel fuel. If you buy it commercially it is even ASTM certified. Don't confuse BD with veggie oil, which does require special tanks and valves. If I had a 2006 Duramax I'd move to B50 first, then B80 and then B100. Well, that's not really true - if it were my truck I'd just fill it up with B100, but since it's YOUR truck I'd ramp up. :)

if biodiesel's lubricity is caused by contaminants, how can [the statement that ASTM-certified fuel adds lubricity to ULSD] be possible? wishful thinking?

The article (as opposed to the sentence quoted from the abstract) does not say that the contaminant compounds are the exclusive cause of BD lubricity, only that they appear to enhanced it. Nor does it say that these compounds are in any way harmful in trace amounts - in fact just the opposite. It seems clear and obvious that compounds that are considered contaminants at high concentrations may be beneficial in trace amounts. Hence BD can pass ASTM certification, can have trace amounts of "contaminant" compounds, and can have improved lubricity...all at the same time. No "wishful thinking" involved at all.

Saying that traces of these compounds result in contaminated fuel is a lot like saying the peanut butter in my peanut butter cup contaminated the chocolate.

Keep in mind that GM only supports using B5 in their Duramax's (I think), but if you want to use B100 anyway you can just put it in the tank - biodiesel is diesel fuel. If you buy it commercially it is even ASTM certified. Don't confuse BD with veggie oil, which does require special tanks and valves. If I had a 2006 Duramax I'd move to B50 first, then B80 and then B100. Well, that's not really true - if it were my truck I'd just fill it up with B100, but since it's YOUR truck I'd ramp up. :)

Thanks Instarx!

I knew WVO needed a separate tank, wasn't sure about B100, I guess I was thinking they were essentially the same thing, my mistake! I have had no trouble with B20, and wouldn't blame GM if something went wrong due to my using it. I feel confident everything will be fine and will continue to use it, think I might try B100 in a couple months.

Tim