|
|
|
#121
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
Agreed. Ive seen some pretty scary WVO conversions, and its a shame. I drive my wife and kids in this thing, so I dont take that approach. Ive also met a guy here who runs #2 and has decided to quit changing the engine oil so I guess morons abound...
__________________
Paul Benz-less I need an SDL ! |
#122
|
|||
|
|||
Wow, with a thread this long I figure I could throw in my 2 cents with some you passionate and opinionated people.
To repeat a little of Mr. Induction's comments, biodiesel and any type of vegetable oil are not the same. They are chemically different and both different from petrol diesel beyond viscosity. Some are good, particulate matter and SO2, some are not so good, such as increased smog ozone causing NOx. The vast majority of bio here and around the world is made from virgin soy oil and palm oil. As someone who started and runs a local bio/veg oil co-op and who know several larger producers, it costs more and is harder to use wvo commercially. The cost to commercialize and certify bio was in the millions. The cost This guy alone got a fortune to do studies. Bio producers just rent those credentials from NBB. I recently got my 300SDL and have much to learn about working on MB diesels but I'm looking forward to running B100 this spring. I fully support those who are doing something to improve our social/political/environmental situation by converting to run veg oil but making blanket statements and outright fallacies are doing everyone a disservice.
__________________
1987 300SDL-268k mi |
#123
|
|||
|
|||
Don't remind me.
|
#124
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
The reason for removing the glycerides thru transesterification is to reduce the viscosity. But adding heat ALSO reduces viscosity. So you see, there is more than 1 way to solve the viscosity problem. Using WVO by heating it is a cleaner burning, zero by product method. However, most ppl dont want to install a 2 tank kit in their vehicle, and therefore biodiesel is a great compromise. My contention is that running biodiesel is equivalent to running WVO properly made in a heated 2 tank system. So Im tired of hearing how great bio-D is and how WVO is a hack job. I wouldnt disagree with your flip comment about needing to do more research - all of us need that
__________________
Paul Benz-less I need an SDL ! Last edited by a2t; 01-01-2008 at 07:38 PM. |
#125
|
|||
|
|||
That's only 1/2 of it. The glycerin is harmful to the injection pump and engine.
|
#126
|
||||
|
||||
Backup? Source? I'm not doubting you, just like to know where you got that from.
__________________
'79 300SD '82 Chevy Chevette diesel |
#127
|
||||
|
||||
Hmmmm well after a brief 5 minutes of internet research on the subject, it seems that a2t is correct: glycerin burns up easily in a high-compression reaction and is of very little or no concern as far as the engine goes.
The main reason for biodiesel is simply to bring it to D2 viscosity.
__________________
'79 300SD '82 Chevy Chevette diesel |
#128
|
|||
|
|||
Search.
|
#129
|
||||
|
||||
Yep. Did it. The more I look, the more a2t's position is confirmed.
Glycerin is harmful in that it changes the viscosity of the fuel to much thicker than standard D2. Also, IF not burned correctly (eg switching to VO before at the proper temps) it can cause polymerization and other yucky residues in the engine. So yes, it is once again, a matter of being harmful to an engine IF used incorrectly. But primarily (MUCH more than "1/2" the reason) the reason for the creation of BioD was viscosity.
__________________
'79 300SD '82 Chevy Chevette diesel |
#130
|
||||
|
||||
I wonder if any commercial BioD producers are also in the soap biz...
__________________
'79 300SD '82 Chevy Chevette diesel |
Bookmarks |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|