INFLUENCE OF FEEDSTOCK AND PROCESS

CHEMISTRY ON BIODIESEL QUALITY

S. Saraf

and B. Thomas
Exponent Inc., Houston, Texas, USA.
Abstract: Biodiesel production in the United States is anticipated to double by 2010. Biodiesels
characteristics and performance as a fuel vary depending on its composition, and the fuel com-
position has to be stringently monitored to avoid adverse impacts on the environment and
engines. The nal biodiesel composition depends on the initial feedstock, as well as on the reac-
tion conversions and process separation efciencies. The thermo-physical properties depend
upon factors such as chain length, branching, and degree of saturation. Impurities in biodiesel,
either due to side-reactions, unreacted feedstock, or non-fatty acid constituents, may increase
pollutants. This paper focuses on chemical composition of commonly used feedstocks for biodie-
sel manufacturing and provides an overview of the process chemistry.
Keywords: biodiesel, cetane number, TAG, catalysis, soya bean, algae, biodiesel feedstock,
methanol.
INTRODUCTION
Biodiesel production in the United States is
anticipated to double by 2010. Interest in bio-
diesel stems from the fact that it can be mixed
with regular diesel and used in automobiles.
Combustion efciency of biodiesel (like any
diesel-range fuel) in an engine can be
characterized by various propertiescetane
number (CN), heat of combustion, cold ow
behaviour, oxidation stability viscosity and
lubricity. According to a study published by
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA),
NO
x
emissions from Biodiesel blend are
slightly higher than diesel alone (EPA, 2002).
According to the EPA report, the average NO
x
emission for B20 blend increased by 2% com-
pared to petroleum diesel, while particulate
matter (PM), carbon monoxide (CO) and total
hydrocarbons emissions decreased by 10%,
11% and 21%, respectively.
The combustion efciency of a diesel
engine depends upon its calibration for a
given fuel compositionair ratio commonly
referred to as tuning. As discussed below,
the composition and performance character-
istics of biodiesel may vary widely because
of the differences in the specic mix of fatty
acids in the source oil. As a result, it is import-
ant to better understand the effect of biodiesel
quality on engine performance and exhaust
emissions.
The nal biodiesel composition depends on
the initial feedstock, as well as on the reaction
conversions and process separation efcien-
cies. The thermo-physical properties depend
upon factors such as chain length, branching
and degree of saturation. Impurities in biodie-
sel, either due to side-reactions, unreacted
feedstock, or non-fatty acid constituents, may
increase pollutants. This paper focuses on
chemical composition of commonly used feed-
stocks for biodiesel manufacturing and pro-
vides an overview of the process chemistry.
FEEDSTOCK
Biodiesel is manufactured by transesteri-
cation of vegetable oils or animal fats in pre-
sence of a catalyst. The main component of
vegetable oils and animal fats are triacylgly-
cerols (TAGs) a glycerol backbone
esteried with three long chain fatty acids.
TAGs are reacted with an alcohol (mostly
methanol) to produce a mix of fatty acid
methyl esters (biodiesel) and glycerol is a by
product:
The properties of biodiesel produced thus
depend on TAG as well as on alcohol.
ACYLGLYCEROLS: TAGS, DAGS
AND MAGS
Biodiesel can be produced from any veg-
etable oil (such as rapeseed, soybeans, cot-
tonseed, peanuts, corn, olives, sesame
seeds, and so on) or any animal fat. Oils
360 Vol 85 (B5) 360364

Correspondence to:
Dr S. Saraf, Exponent Inc.,
10850 Richmond Ave.,
Suite 175, Houston,
TX 77042, USA.
E-mail: saraf@exponent.com
DOI: 10.1205/psep07025
09575820/07/
$30.00 0.00
Process Safety and
Environmental Protection
Trans IChemE,
Part B, September 2007
# 2007 Institution
of Chemical Engineers
T
a
b
l
e
1
.
C
o
m
p
o
s
i
t
i
o
n
o
f
f
a
t
s
a
n
d
o
i
l
s
.
F
a
t
t
y
A
c
i
d
#
C
:
#
C

C
M
a
m
m
a
l
i
a
n
(
%
)
A
v
i
a
n
(
%
)
M
a
r
i
n
e
(
%
)
P
l
a
n
t
(
%
)
M
i
l
k
(
C
o
w
)
M
i
l
k
(
H
u
m
a
n
)
L
a
r
d
(
P
i
g
)
T
a
l
l
o
w
(
B
e
e
f
)
C
h
i
c
k
e
n
F
a
t
F
i
s
h
O
i
l
(
M
e
n
h
a
d
e
n
)
C
o
c
o
n
u
t
O
i
l
P
a
l
m
O
i
l
C
o
r
n
O
i
l
S
o
y
b
e
a
n
O
i
l
L
o
w
C
1
8
:
3
S
o
y
b
e
a
n
O
i
l
H
i
g
h
C
1
8
:
1
S
o
y
b
e
a
n
O
i
l
H
i
g
h
C
1
8
:
0
S
o
y
b
e
a
n
O
i
l
C
a
n
o
l
a
O
i
l
A
c
e
t
i
c
C
0
2
:
0
P
r
o
p
i
o
n
i
c
C
0
3
:
0
B
u
t
y
r
i
c
C
0
4
:
0
2
.
8
C
a
p
r
o
i
c
C
0
6
:
0
2
.
3
0
.
5
C
a
p
r
y
l
i
c
C
0
8
:
0
1
.
1
7
.
1
C
a
p
r
i
c
C
1
0
:
0
3
.
0
1
.
0
0
.
1
6
.
0
L
a
u
r
i
c
C
1
2
:
0
2
.
9
5
.
4
0
.
1
0
.
1
0
.
1
0
.
4
4
7
.
1
B
r
a
s
s
y
l
i
c
C
1
3
:
0
0
.
2
M
y
r
i
s
t
i
c
C
1
4
:
0
8
.
9
7
.
4
1
.
5
3
.
2
0
.
8
1
0
.
3
1
8
.
5
1
.
0
0
.
1
0
.
1
M
y
r
i
s
t
o
l
e
i
c
C
1
4
:
1
0
.
9
0
.
2
0
.
2
P
e
n
t
a
d
a
n
o
i
c
C
1
5
:
0
0
.
1
0
.
5
0
.
1
1
.
0
P
e
n
t
a
d
e
c
e
n
o
i
c
C
1
5
:
1
0
.
1
P
a
l
m
i
t
i
c
C
1
6
:
0
2
3
.
8
2
6
.
8
2
6
2
4
.
3
2
5
.
3
2
0
.
8
9
.
1
4
4
.
4
1
0
.
9
9
.
7
8
.
3
6
.
3
9
.
3
4
.
1
P
a
l
m
i
t
o
l
e
i
c
C
1
6
:
1
1
.
8
4
.
1
3
.
3
3
.
7
7
.
2
1
2
.
7
0
.
2
0
.
2
0
.
3

C
1
6
:
2
1
.
9
H
i
r
a
g
o
n
i
c
C
1
6
:
3
2
.
3

C
1
6
:
4
1
.
2
M
e
p
t
a
d
e
c
a
n
o
i
c
C
1
7
:
0
0
.
4
1
.
5
0
.
1
0
.
8
0
.
1
0
.
1
0
.
1
H
e
p
t
a
d
e
c
e
n
o
i
c
C
1
7
:
1
0
.
2
0
.
8
0
.
1
0
.
3
S
t
e
a
r
i
c
C
1
8
:
0
1
3
.
2
9
.
7
1
3
.
5
1
8
.
6
6
.
5
3
.
3
2
.
8
4
.
1
2
.
0
3
.
5
4
.
5
3
.
7
2
7
.
2
1
.
8
O
l
e
i
c
C
1
8
:
1
2
9
.
6
3
6
.
0
4
3
.
9
4
2
.
6
3
7
.
7
9
.
8
6
.
8
3
9
.
3
2
5
.
4
2
5
.
2
3
6
.
1
8
4
.
0
1
6
.
7
6
0
.
9
L
i
n
o
l
e
i
c
C
1
8
:
2
n
-
6
2
.
8
7
.
3
9
.
5
2
.
6
2
0
.
6
1
.
6
1
.
9
1
0
5
9
.
6
5
5
.
2
4
5
.
2
1
.
6
3
8
.
6
2
1
a
-
L
i
n
o
l
e
n
i
c
C
1
8
:
3
n
-
3
0
.
5
0
.
4
0
.
7
0
.
8
1
.
9
0
.
1
0
.
4
1
.
2
6
.
4
3
.
4
2
.
4
6
.
5
8
.
8
M
o
r
o
c
t
i
c
C
1
8
:
4
2
.
5
I
s
o
a
r
a
c
h
i
d
i
c
C
1
9
:
0

C
1
9
:
1
A
r
a
c
h
i
d
i
c
C
2
0
:
0
0
.
2
0
.
2
0
.
2
0
.
2
0
.
1
0
.
3
0
.
4
0
.
7
G
a
d
o
l
e
i
c
C
2
0
:
1
0
.
7
0
.
3
0
.
3
1
.
3
1
A
u
r
i
c
o
l
i
c
C
2
0
:
2
0
.
1
0
.
4
B
i
s
h
o
m
o
p
i
n
o
l
e
n
i
c
C
2
0
:
3
0
.
4
A
r
a
c
h
i
d
o
n
i
c
C
2
0
:
4
2
.
3
E
i
c
o
s
a
p
e
n
t
a
e
n
o
i
c
C
2
0
:
5
1
2
.
5

C
2
1
:
5
0
.
7
B
e
h
e
n
i
c
C
2
2
:
0
0
.
2
0
.
1
0
.
1
0
.
3
E
r
u
c
i
c
C
2
2
:
1
0
.
3
0
.
7
A
d
r
e
n
i
c
C
2
2
:
4
0
.
3
C
l
u
p
a
n
o
d
o
n
i
c
C
2
2
:
5
2
.
5
D
o
c
o
s
a
h
e
x
a
n
e
n
o
i
c
C
2
2
;
6
7
.
1
L
i
g
n
o
c
e
r
i
c
C
2
4
:
0
0
.
1
0
.
2
S
e
l
a
c
h
o
l
e
i
c
C
2
4
:
1
0
.
3
C
h
o
l
e
s
t
e
r
o
l
(
m
g
/
T
b
s
p
)
1
4
(
M
i
l
k
)
1
3
7
(
C
r
e
a
m
)
2
0
1
2
9
1
1
3
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
S
a
t
u
r
a
t
e
d
F
a
t
t
y
A
c
i
d
(
%
)
5
8
.
0
5
0
.
3
4
1
.
9
4
8
.
4
3
3
.
1
3
7
.
3
9
1
.
2
5
0
.
0
1
3
.
6
1
3
.
2
1
2
.
8
1
0
.
0
3
6
.
5
7
.
3
M
o
n
o
i
n
s
a
t
u
r
a
t
e
d
F
a
t
t
y
A
c
i
d
(
%
)
3
1
.
4
4
0
.
1
4
8
.
1
4
8
.
3
4
5
.
5
2
4
.
9
6
.
8
3
9
.
5
2
5
.
6
2
5
.
2
3
6
.
1
8
4
.
0
1
6
.
7
6
2
.
9
P
o
l
y
u
n
s
a
t
u
r
a
t
e
d
F
a
t
t
y
A
c
i
d
(
%
)
2
.
8
7
.
8
1
0
.
0
3
.
3
2
1
.
4
3
7
.
6
2
.
0
1
0
.
4
6
0
.
8
6
1
.
6
4
8
.
6
4
.
0
4
5
.
1
2
9
.
8
Trans IChemE, Part B, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2007, 85(B5): 360364
CHEMISTRY ON BIODIESEL QUALITY 361
and fats are primarily composed of triacylglycerols (TAGs)a
form of lipid comprised of three fatty acid molecules attached
to a glycerol backbone. Oils and fats can also contain lesser
amounts of diacylglycerols (DAGs), which contains one gly-
cerol and two fatty acids, and monoacylglycerol (MAGs),
which contains one glycerol and one fatty acid. As shown
in Table 1 the fatty acids attached to the glycerol backbone
are of varying chain lengths.
The chemical composition of Biodiesel, and thereby its
combustion properties. depend upon the composition of the
feed used for manufacturing. Increasing the average chain
length of fatty acids produces a biodiesel with a higher
cetane number that have been reported to correlate with
lower NO
x
exhaust emissions (Knothe et al., 2003; Lee
et al., 1998).
The degree of unsaturation in a fatty acid molecule affects
its reactivity. Saturated fatty acids (SFAs) contain no reactive
double bonds; monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFAs) contain
one double bond, while polyunsaturated fatty acids (PUFAs)
contain two or more double bonds). Unsaturation in a fatty
acid chain signicantly lowers its cetane number (Knothe
et al., 2003) and increases NO
x
emissions. Unsaturation
results in an increased tendency to undergo oxidative degra-
dation (rancidity), may decrease the lubricity of biodiesel, and
contribute to gum formation in the engine.
As appreciated by many gourmets, olive oils from different
geographic areas exhibit distinct avors, as well as differences
in the ratio of saturated versus monounsaturated versus poly-
unsaturated fatty acids (SFAs, MUFAs and PUFAs). Tunisian
olive oil, for instance, is relatively high in SFAs (specically pal-
mitic acid) and low in MUFAs (specically oleic acid), while
Australian (and South African) olive oils are much higher in
MUFAs and lower in SFAs.
From a health perspective, oils that contain unsaturated
fatty acids are preferred, because of the reported role of
such fatty acids (particularly the omega-6 fatty acidlinoleic
acid) in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular disease.
Linolenic acid (C18 : 3) is an 18-carbon chain with three
double bonds. As mentioned, unsaturated fatty acids are
prone to undergo oxidative degradation. However, the differ-
ence between Tunisian and Australian olive oils in this
respect is minimal, suggesting that one should look at the
total content of polyunsaturated fatty acids to gain an idea
of potential oxidative stability. This would include the content
of both linoleic (C18 : 2) and linolenic (C18 : 3) fractions. In
nature one nds that most of the double bonds in the above-
mentioned polyunsaturated fatty acids are of the cis geo-
metrical isomers. This is in contrast to the trans fatty acids
(TFAs) which are more prevalent in articially hardened
fats like margarine. Trans fatty acids yield more linear mol-
ecules, which pack more efciently, consequently yielding
fats that are solid at higher temperatures.
The chemical constituents of a few common fats and oils
are shown in Table 1.
ALCOHOL
The alcohol used for transesterication can be methanol,
ethanol, propanol or butanol. Methanol is the preferred alco-
hol since base catalysed transestercation rates are higher
than any other alcohol. Methanol reacts at room temperature
with vegetable oil to produce biodiesel and glycerol. If a
higher alcohol (such as ethanol or propanol) is used, higher
temperatures or a different catalyst must be employed to
achieve reaction rates comparable to that of methanol.
However, methanol is easily absorbed through the skin,
and is a potent neurotoxicant (e.g., capable of producing per-
manent blindness). In addition, methanol (ash point 528F),
ethanol (ash point 558F), isopropanol (ash point 538F)
are classied as Class IB ammable liquids according to
OSHA 1910.106Class IB substances have ash points
below 738F (22.88C) and boiling point higher than 1008F
(37.88C) and can catch re at room temperature. Therefore,
special care should be taken while handling methanol in a
biodiesel production unit.
It must be noted that fatty acid esters obtained from
branched alcohols have higher cetane numbers than
methyl esters (Knothe et al., 2003); however, the higher
prices of branched alcohol and process modications are
barriers towards producing branched fatty esters for use as
a Biodiesel fuel. In principle, any of the oils/fats in Table 1
can be used as a feedstock for biodiesel manufacturing;
however, the processing conditions have to be modied to
produce quality biodiesel. The next section discusses the
chemistry behind transestrication of oils/fats to better under-
stand the processing requirements.
PROCESS CHEMISTRY
Base-catalysed transesterication or alcoholysis of TAGs is
the most common route to manufacture biodiesel, and pro-
ceeds at a relatively high rate at low temperatures. The trans-
esterication reaction is generally preferred over direct
esterication of fatty acids because the excess alcohol
needed to achieve satisfactory conversion during direct
esterication is considerably higher (more than 10: 1).
Usually, excess methanol is mixed with TAG in presence of
sodium hydroxide or sodium methoxide to produce biodiesel.
Freedman et al. (1986) have reported more than 9398%
conversion in 1-hour for soybean, sunower, peanut and cot-
tonseed oil at 608C with a 6 : 1 methanol : oil ratio. The next
paragraph discusses a simplied conceptual model of the
biodiesel production reaction.
At the start of the reaction, TAGs and methanol form immis-
cible layers, and the concentration of TAG in methanol is low
and the initial rate is low. Therefore, as expected, initial reac-
tion is mass-transfer controlled and mechanical agitation is
required for increasing degree of mixing and thereby transes-
terication rates. The degree of mixing between two phases
can be quantied using a modied Reynolds number (N
Re
):
N
Re

nD
2
r
m
(3)
where n Impeller speed, D Impeller diameter, r
Density, m Viscosity.
Trans IChemE, Part B, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2007, 85(B5): 360364
362 SARAF and THOMAS
As the TAGs are converted to fatty acid esters, viscosity of
the reacting mixture decreases and there is an increase in
N
Re
accompanied by an increase in reaction rates. As more
methyl esters are produced a single phase is formed (Nour-
edini and Zhu, 1997), mixing effects diminish, the reaction
regime changes to kinetic controlled and reaction rate is pri-
marily inuenced by temperature. The two reaction regimes
are qualitatively illustrated in Figure 1. Higher rates will be
obtained by increasing degree of mixing, as well as reaction
temperatures.
Transesterication is a stepwise process and monoacylgly-
cerols (MAGs) and diacylglycerols (DAGs) are produced as
intermediates. TAGs are rst converted to DAGs, and since
they are in methanol they have a greater chance of reacting
rather than moving back into oil phase.
TAGCH
3
OH )DAGR
1
COOCH
3
(4)
DAGCH
3
OH )MAGR
2
COOCH
3
(5)
MAGCH
3
OH )Glycerol R
3
COOCH
3
(6)
Therefore, the concentration of DAG and MAG intermediates
is expected to be less than that for a series reaction.
If butanol is used instead of methanol, the reaction rates
are higher, since the oil and butanol mixture more easily
forms a single phase (Freedman et al., 1986). The use of a
non-reactive cosolvent, tetrahydrofuran (THF) or methyl ter-
tiary butyl ether (MTBE), has been suggested to increase
rate of reaction for methanolysis (Boocock et al., 1998).
With an alcohol/soybean oil molar ratio of 27 : 1, 1% NaOH
catalyst, and THF (0.87 ml ml
21
methanol), 99.4% convers-
tion to methyl esters was obtained in 7 min (Boocock et al.,
1998). However, both THF and MTBE pose chemical
hazards and are difcult to dispose in an environmentally
friendly manner.
Besides transesterication, TAG and free fatty acids (FFA)
can undergo the following side-reactions:
Hydrolysis
TAGH
2
O !FFA Glyerol (7)
Saponification
FFA NaOH !Soap(sodium salt of fatty acid)
Glycerol (8)
The transesterication reaction yield/conversion is affected
by the following variables:
. Molar ratio of alcohol to oil: A molar ratio of 6: 1 (alco-
hol : oil) is recommended for optimum transesterication
(Freedman et al., 1984) of TAG. Less alcohol will result
in lower conversion. Excess alcohol will cause problems
with gravity separation of glycerol and increase cost of
alcohol separation.
. Temperature: Generally, the transesterication reaction is
carried out at the boiling point of alcohol608C for metha-
nol. Although the initial reaction is mass-transfer controlled,
higher temperatures result in higher reaction rates due to
increased solubility of oil and methanol. Please note that
increasing temperature of the reaction mixture will also
result in higher rates for saponication or any other side
reactions.
. Impurities (e.g., moisture and free fatty acids): The base-
catalysed biodiesel process is sensitive to water and free
fatty acids. Free fatty acids present in the TAG react with
the alkali catalyst to produce soap that results in separation
inefciencies downstream of the reactor. It is rec-
ommended that TAG used as a starting material should
have a free fatty acid content of less than 0.5 wt%. TAG
and alcohol should be moisture-free since the presence
of water reduces the biodiesel reaction yields. The waste
cooking oil is generally high in free fatty acids (2 wt%)
and therefore, more prone to saponication side reaction.
A pretreatment step involving reaction with methanol in
presence of acid catalysed esterication has been
suggested (Lepper and Frienenhagen, 1986). Alternatively,
rening of waste oil using steam treatment has been
suggested to reduce the free fatty acid and moisture con-
tent of oil (Supple et al., 2002).
. Catalyst: Sodium or potassium hydroxides or methoxides
are common biodiesel catalysts. Under identical exper-
imental conditions, it has been reported that higher biodie-
sel yields (shown in Table 2) were obtained for the
methoxide-catalyzed transesterication of sunower oil
(Vicente et al., 2004). Hydroxide catalysts resulted in
increased saponication side-reaction and higher solubility
of fatty acid methyl esters in glycerol leading to reduced
biodiesel yields.
Although acid-catalysed transesterication is signicantly
slower than alkaline catalysis, there is no side reaction con-
verting fatty acids to soaps. Therefore, acid catalysis has
been suggested as a pretreatment step for esterication of
FFA present in the feed.
Figure 1. Reaction regimes.
Table 2. Base catalyzed transesterication
10
of sunower oil
Catalyst
Biodiesel
yield (mol %)
Triglyceride
saponication
(mol %)
Methyl ester in
glycerol
(mol%)
Sodium hydroxide 85.19 +0.10 5.65 +0.18 6.04 +0.05
Sodium methoxide 98.64 +0.35 0.04 +0.03 0.11 +0.03
Potassium hydroxide 90.1 +0.36 3.46 +0.11 3.00 +0.11
Potassium methoxide 97.54 +0.27 0.13 +0.05 0.43 +0.07
Trans IChemE, Part B, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2007, 85(B5): 360364
CHEMISTRY ON BIODIESEL QUALITY 363
Freedman et al. (1986) reported that with alcohol/soybean oil
at a molar ratio of 30 : 1 and 1% H
2
SO
4
catalyst, almost 70 h
were required to achieve 90% conversion. It is worth noting
that acid-catalysed ethanolysis and butanolysis were faster
and needed 3 and 22 h, respectively. Although sulphuric
acid is the most economical choice for acid catalysis, it is cor-
rosive and difcult to handle.
FUTURE CHALLENGES
The biodiesel production will increase in the coming years
although the demand for biodiesel is sensitive to diesel price.
The Renewable Fuels Standard (RFS) passed in 2005 puts
additional emphasis on renewables and mandates to
double the use of ethanol and biodiesel by 2012. To be com-
petitive, biodiesel needs subsidies from government and Bio-
diesel quality has to be stringently monitored for it not to have
an adverse impact on the environment and engines. The bio-
diesel producers need to optimize current production pro-
cesses and research into better production options. There
are a few major issues that the biodiesel industry should con-
sider and are briey discussed in the next paragraph.
In the United States, soybean oil is the primary feedstock
for biodiesel. The fuel industry competes with food industry
for soy. In order to keep biodiesel production cost low and
meet additional energy demand, biodiesel producers will
look for alternate feedstocks. In spite of technical challenges,
oil-containing algae represents an attractive feedstock since
algae can be grown on water without utilizing agricultural
land. In order to optimize biodiesel production, the manufac-
tures need to carefully consider processing conditions, con-
tinuous versus batch operations, methanol and glycerol
separation techniques, and catalysis. In this paper, we dis-
cussed homogeneous acid or base catalysis. An ion
exchange resin (IER) based acid or alkali catalyst (or other
solid catalyst) is better than homogeneous catalysts since it
is easy to regenerate and there are no separation costs.
However, acidic IER works only when wetted and this may
have a negative effect on transesterication rates. Alkaline
IER have temperature limitations since they are not stable
above 408C. An improved solid resin or zeolite catalyst is of
interest to biodiesel manufactures. For the end-users, it is
important to remember that biodiesel is not a single, well-
characterized product. Rather, biodiesel products vary
widely in composition and purity, and may require different
engine settings to optimize performance and to minimize pol-
lutant emissions. There remains a need to develop inexpen-
sive and rapid fuel quality tests to characterize biodiesel.
REFERENCES
Boocock, D.G., Konar, S.K., Mao, V., Lee, C. and Buligan, S., 1998,
Fast formation of high-purity methyl ester from vegetable oils,
JAOCS, 79(9): 11671172.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 2002, A Comprehensive
Analysis of Biodiesel Impacts on Exhaust Emissions, EPA420-P-
02-001, October 2002.
Freedman, B., Pryde, E.H. and Mounts, T.L., 1984, Variables affect-
ing the yields of fatty esters from transesteried vegetable oils,
JAOCS, 61(10): 16381643.
Freedman, B., Buttereld, R.O. and Pryde, E.H., 1986, Transesteri-
cation kinetics of soybean oil, JACOCS, 63: 13751380.
Knothe, G., Matheaus, A.C. and Ryan, T.W., 2003, Cetane number of
brached and straight-chain fatty acid esters determined in an
ignition quality tester, Fuel, 82: 971975.
Lee, R., Hobbs, C.H. and Pedley, J.F., 1998, Fuel quality impact on
heavy-duty diesel emissions: a literature review, SAE technical
paper series 982649.
Lepper, H. and Friesenhagen, L., 1986, Process for the production of
fatty acid esters of short chain aliphatic alcohols from fats and/or
oils containing free fatty acids, US Patent 4608202.
Noureddini, H. and Zhu, D., 1997, Kinetics of transesterication of
soybean oil, JAOCS, 74(11): 14571463.
Supple, B., Howard-Hilige, R., Gonzalez-Gomez, E. and Leahy, J.J.,
2002, The effect of steam treating waste cooling oil on yield of
methyl ester, JAOCS, 79(2): 175178.
Vicente, G., Martinez, M. and Aracil, J., 2004, Integrated biodiesel
production: a comparison of different homogeneous catalysts
systems, Bioresource Technology, 92: 297305.
The manuscript was received 19 February 2007 and accepted for
publication after revision 2 July 2007.
Trans IChemE, Part B, Process Safety and Environmental Protection, 2007, 85(B5): 360364
364 SARAF and THOMAS