ARTICLE IN PRESS

Bioresource Technology xxx (2006) xxxxxx

Transesterication of canola oil in mixed methanol/ethanol system

and use of esters as lubricity additive
Mangesh G. Kulkarni, A.K. Dalai *, N.N. Bakhshi
Department of Chemical Engineering, Catalysis and Chemical Reaction Engineering Laboratories, University of Saskatchewan,
Research Annex Bldg., Saskatoon, SK, Canada S7N 5C5
Received 11 July 2005; received in revised form 9 August 2006; accepted 10 August 2006

Abstract
Transesterication of canola oil was carried out with methanol, ethanol, and various mixtures of methanol/ethanol, keeping the molar
ratio of oil to alcohol 1:6 and using KOH as a catalyst. Mixtures of alcohol increased the rate of transesterication reaction and produced methyl as well as ethyl esters. The increased rate was result of better solubility of oil in reaction mixture due to better solvent
properties of ethanol than methanol and equilibrium due to methanol. With 3:3 molar ratio of methanol to ethanol {MEE (3:3)} the
amount of ethyl ester formed was 50% that of methyl ester. Properties (acid value, viscosity, density) of all esters including mixed esters
were within the limits of ASTM standards. Lubricities of these esters are in the order: ethyl ester > methyl ethyl ester > methyl ester.
2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Canola; Biodiesel; Lubricity; Transesterication

1. Introduction
Biodiesel derived from vegetable oils is gaining market
share as a diesel fuel extender all over the world (Meher
et al., 2006a). The reason being environmental benets
and renewable resource of biodiesel. The major hurdle in
commercialization of biodiesel is high raw material cost
(Kulkarni and Dalai, 2006). In European countries biodiesel is sold at prices competitive with petroleum diesel fuel
because of the tax deductions given by the government
for the use of biodiesel (Communication from the commission, 2006). Due to the lack of such tax relief in other countries, the cost of the biodiesel is very high compared to the
petroleum diesel (Holbein et al., 2004). Hence various nonfuel uses of biodiesel have been investigated. One of the
most promising alternatives for biodiesel application is its
use as a diesel fuel lubricity additive.

Corresponding author. Tel.: +1 306 966 4771; fax: +1 306 966 4777.
E-mail address: ajay.dalai@usask.ca (A.K. Dalai).

In January 2001, the Environmental Protect Agency

(EPA) made a rule that sulphur levels in diesel fuel be
reduced from 500 to 15 ppm, a 97% reduction by 2006
(Lang and Dalai, 2001). Such low sulphur, unadditized diesel fuel has very poor fuel lubricity, resulting in shorter diesel injection pump and engine lives. The poor lubricity of
ultra low sulphur diesel is mainly due to the removal of heterocyclic nitrogen and oxygen which are responsible for the
lubricity during hydrotreatment along with sulphur (Barbour et al., 2000). To restore the lubricity of diesel fuel
reners regularly add various lubricity additives into the
diesel fuels.
It is found that mono fatty acid low alkyl esters made
from vegetable oil, are capable of enhancing the fuel lubricity to meet ASTM requirements (Van Gerpen et al., 1999).
Various fatty acid esters such as methyl, ethyl, 2-propyl
and butyl esters prepared from canola and linseed oil were
tested as diesel fuel lubricity additives. At 1% treat rate, the
canola methyl and 2-propyl esters increased the lubricity
number of a reference fuel by 60% (Lang and Dalai,
2001). The eect of individual fatty acid methyl esters on
lubricity of the fuel has been investigated (Geller and

0960-8524/$ - see front matter 2006 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2006.08.025

Please cite this article in press as: Kulkarni, M.G. et al., Transesterication of canola oil in mixed methanol/ethanol system ..., Bioresource Technol (2006), doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2006.08.025

ARTICLE IN PRESS
2

M.G. Kulkarni et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2006) xxxxxx

Goodrum, 2004). It was observed that lubricity of individual fatty acid methyl esters was less compared to that of
mixture of various methyl esters derived from vegetable
oils. The eects of type of alcohol and fatty acid prole
of vegetable oil on lubricity of the ester were analysed by
Drown et al. (2001). Ethyl esters showed noticeable
improvement compared to methyl esters in the wear properties. No correlation was found between the lubricity
improvement and fatty acid prole of the ester. Impact of
various acetoacetic and dicarboxylic acid esters on lubrication properties of automotive diesel fuel was studied by
Anastopoulos et al. (2001). Two of the three acetoacetic
esters used, that were derived from the heavier hexyl and
octyl alcohols, provided satisfactory HFRR mean wear
scar diameter (WS 1.4) of less than 460 lm, at the concentration level of 750 ppm. Among the diesters derived from
the same di-carboxylic acid, with increase in the chain
length of the alcohol, lubricity of the ester also increased.
Conversely, with the constant chain length of the alcohol,
an increase in dicarboxylic acid chain length did not cause
signicant improvement in lubricity. Presently the research
on use of fatty acid esters as lubricity additive is focussed
on methyl and ethyl esters of fatty acids.
Although methyl and ethyl esters are good lubricity
additives, their preparation methods have their own advantages and disadvantages. The formation of ethyl esters is
environmentally attractive because unlike methanol, ethanol is produced from renewable resources. Also, ethanol
has better solvent properties than methanol for solubility
of oil. However, formation of emulsion after the transesterication reaction makes ethanolysis more complicated and
impractical (Meher et al., 2006b). In case of methanolysis
the reaction mixture remains in two phases due to the
low solubility of oil in methanol (Boocock et al., 1996).
Hence, the mass transfer limitations make the rate of the
reaction slower. It was reported that the rate of formation
of methyl esters from soybean oil is 15 times slower than
the butyl esters (Boocock et al., 1996).
The aim of the present work is to synthesize canola oil
esters using methanol, ethanol and mixture of methanol/
ethanol, and use of these esters as lubricity additive. The
purpose of using mixture of methanol and ethanol is to
take the advantage of better solubility of oil in ethanol than
methanol and better reactivity of methoxide ion than ethanoxide to attain the desired equilibrium. Also, mixed
esters may act as a better lubricity additive than pure
methyl esters. Another advantage of using mixture of
methanol and ethanol is, if part of the methanol is replaced
by ethanol, then there would be less dependency on the
synthetic sources for methanol.

SigmaAldrich, Canada. Ethanol (100%) was purchased

from Commercial Alcohols Inc., Ontario. All other
reagents were analytical grade or higher.
2.2. Ester Preparation
2.2.1. Methyl ester
Methyl ester was synthesized in a batch type reactor
using potassium hydroxide as catalyst as per the method
given by Lang et al. (2001). The reaction was carried out
using 100% excess methanol, i.e. molar ratio of methanol
to oil is 6:1 and catalyst concentration of 1%. After completion of reaction, crude glycerol was separated by gravity.
The catalyst was removed by hot water washings. The complete removal of the catalyst was checked by phenolphthalein indicator. Traces of moisture and unreacted methanol
were removed by vacuum distillation. The distillation was
continued until the loss in weight of ester was constant thus
conrming the complete removal of moisture and unreacted methanol. Finally esters were dried over anhydrous
sodium sulphate.
2.2.2. Ethyl ester
Ethyl ester of canola oil was prepared in a similar way as
methyl esters. The transesterication was carried out at
70 C for 2 h with vigorous agitation in order to achieve
full conversion. In order to avoid the emulsion after the
transesterication reaction, 0.1% aqueous tannic acid was
used as a washing solution to remove catalyst. With mild
agitation in a ask, the alcohol and most of the soap could
be removed by three washes. Purication of ester was done
as per the method given in Section 2.2.1.
2.2.3. Mixture of esters
Dierent molar ratios of methanol and ethanol (such as
3:3, 3.5:2.5, 4:2, 4.5:1.5, and 5:1) were used for the transesterication reaction, keeping the molar ratio of oil to alcohol 1:6. The reaction was carried out in a batch type of
reactor. One hundred gram of oil were placed in a dry
Erlenmeyer ask equipped with a magnetic stirrer and thermometer. In another dry Erlenmeyer ask 1.0 g of potassium hydroxide was mixed with mixture of methanol and
ethanol. This mixture was then added to the oil and stirred
vigorously for 40 min at 25 C. After separation of glycerol
in separating funnel, the ester layer was washed 34 times
with warm water to remove the unreacted alcohol and catalyst. Esters synthesized using of 3:3, 3.5:2.5, and 4:2 molar
ratios of methanol and ethanol were washed using 0.1%
tannic acid solution to reduce emulsication. Purication
of the ester was done as per the method given in Section
2.2.1.

2. Methods
2.3. Ester characterization
2.1. Materials
Degummed, rened canola oil was purchased locally.
Methanol, anhydrous (99.8%) was purchased from

Preliminary analysis of the ester phase was carried out

by thin layer chromatography using the solvent system hexane: diethyl ether (90:10 v/v). Fatty acid components of the

Please cite this article in press as: Kulkarni, M.G. et al., Transesterication of canola oil in mixed methanol/ethanol system ..., Bioresource Technol (2006), doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2006.08.025

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.G. Kulkarni et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2006) xxxxxx

puried ester phase were identied using GC-MS (Varian,

Saturn 2000) with stabile wax column.
Fatty acid composition of the puried ester phase was
measured using GC (Agilent 6890) with DB-23 column
using AOCS ocial method Ca 5a-40. The boiling point
distribution of the biodiesel was determined by gas chromatography (GC) simulated distillation (Varian CP
3400 Gas chromatograph, specially congured for simulated distillation). Viscosity of the esters was measured at
40 C using a Brooked model RVTDCP, cone and plate
viscometer (Brookeld engineering Laboratories, Stoughton, MA) which was initially calibrated using a standard.
The properties of biodiesel, such as cloud point (ASTM
D2500; ASTM 1998c), pour point (ASTM D97; ASTM,
1998a), acid value (AOCS ocial method, Te 2a-64;
AOCS, 1997c) gross heat of combustion (ASTM D240;
ASTM 1998b) and density (ASTM D5002; ASTM,
1998d) were measured according to the standard methods.
2.4. Lubricity measurement of esters
Lubricity testing of the biodiesel esters was carried out
by High Frequency Reciprocating Rig (HFRR) using the
ASTM D6079. Wear scar diameter which is an indicator
of lubricity was measured. The conditions used for the
HFRR test are: uid volume 2 mL, storoke length 1 mm,
frequency 50 Hz, uid temperature 60 C, relative humidity
>30%, applied load 200 g, test duration 75 min and bath
surface area 6 cm2. Lubricity of the esters also was measured using Munson Roller on Cylinder Lubricity Evaluator (M-ROCLE) as per the method given by Dmytryshyn
et al. (2004). HFRR test only gives the lubricity measurement in terms of wear scar area however, in terms of fuel
economy and other aspects of engine eciency coecient
of friction and lubricity number is quite important. Lower
the coecient of friction better is the fuel economy and
higher the lubricity number then better is lubricity eciency of the fuel. Wear scar area, coecient of friction
and lubricity number was calculated by M-ROCLE test.
At least six runs were conducted on each fuel/ester sample
to check for reproducibility of the test. In both tests kerosene was used as base fuel. Basic properties of base fuel
were viscosity 1.33 cP at 40 C, density 0.775 g/mL at
15 C, acid value 0.2, and heating value 44.32 MJ/kg. Biodiesel esters were combined at 1 vol% with the base fuel for
the lubricity evaluations.
3. Results and discussion
3.1. Ester formation
After purication step more than 90% of the ester phase
was recovered with all the esters. The formation of ester
was monitored by thin layer chromatography (TLC).
Almost complete conversion of canola oil was conrmed
by disappearance of triacylglycerol spot. Trace amounts
of mono- and diglycerides were detected by TLC. TLC

analysis also showed that the reactions of canola oil with

mixtures of methanol and ethanol were faster compared
to pure methanol especially in the case of ester obtained
by mixing equal moles of methanol and ethanol (3:3).
The puried esters were analysed by GCMS. Fig. 1 shows
the GCMS of methyl ester (ME), ethyl ester (EE) and ester
obtained by mixture of methanol and ethanol (3:3) {MEE
(3:3)}. It is clear from Fig. 1 that the major fatty acid components in all the esters were oleic, linoleic, linolenic, palmitic and stearic with highest percentage of oleic acid. It
is interesting to note that when mixture of alcohols was
used for the reaction, then ethyl esters also were formed
along with methyl. Formation of ethyl esters along with
methyl also was observed with the rest of the mixtures of
methanol and ethanol. Detailed fatty acid compositions
of all the esters are shown in Table 1. Similar fatty acid
compositions were observed in the dierent alkyl esters
originating from the same vegetable oil source. The dominant fatty acid in all the esters was oleic acid (18:1), averaging 60%, which is a characteristic of canola oil. In case
of mixture of esters MEE (3:3) the formation of ethyl esters
was 50% that of the methyl esters. Even though the molar
ratio of methanol to ethanol was 3:3 the formation of ethyl
esters was much lower than the methyl esters. The reason
for this is slow reaction rate of ethanol compared to methanol. As the molar ratio of methanol to ethanol was
increased from 3:3 to 5:1 the formation ethyl esters
decreased. When canola oil was reacted with 5:1 molar
ratio of methanol and ethanol, the amount of ethyl esters
formed was much less. The slower reaction rate of ethanol
can be explained by the reaction mechanisms of alkaline
catalyzed transesterication.
In case of the KOH catalyzed transesterication when
triglyceride molecule is reacted with the monohydroxy
alcohol, the active catalyst species is alkoxide anion, which
is formed by the reaction between potassium hydroxide
and alcohol (Sridharan and Mathai, 1974). In case of methanol, CH3O methoxide and in case of ethanol, C2H5O,
ethoxide anions are formed. This is a preliminary step in
alkaline catalyzed transesterication
OH R0 OH $ R0 O H2 O

The alkoxide anions formed in the preliminary step

attacks the carbonyl carbon atom of the triglyceride molecule to form tetrahedral intermediate in the rst step of the
reaction. This is a rate determining step of transesterication reaction. Therefore, the rate of the alkaline catalyzed
transesterication reaction is determined by the reactivity
of the alkoxide anion. Reactivity of methoxide is more than
the ethoxide anion. The reason for this is, as the length of
the carbon chain increases, nucleophilicity of the alkoxide
anion decreases leading to a decrease in the reactivity of
alkoxide anion (Sridharan and Mathai, 1974). This causes
the slower reaction rate of ethanol than methanol and ultimately less amount of ethyl esters were formed compared
to methyl when mixture of methanol/ethanol was used
for transesterication of canola oil. Even though the

Please cite this article in press as: Kulkarni, M.G. et al., Transesterication of canola oil in mixed methanol/ethanol system ..., Bioresource Technol (2006), doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2006.08.025

ARTICLE IN PRESS
4

M.G. Kulkarni et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2006) xxxxxx

Fig. 1. GCMS spectra of esters showing presence of dierent fatty acid components. A: methyl esters, B: ethyl esters, C: mixture methyl ethyl esters (MEE)
with 3:3 methanol and ethanol mixture in feed.
Table 1
Fatty acid composition (% wt) of esters
Fatty acid

Ester
ME

16:0 (Methyl)
16:0 (Ethyl)
18:0 (Methyl)
18:0 (Ethyl)
18:1 (Methyl)
18:1 (Ethyl)
18:2 (Methyl)
18:2 (Ethyl)
18:3 (Methyl)
18:3 (Ethyl)
Others
a

4.2

2.1

58.5

18.4

8.3

8.7

EE

MEEa (3:3)

MEE (3.5:2.5)

MEE (4:2)

MEE (4.5:1.5)

MEE (5:1)

4.2

2.1

60.6

17.2

6.9
9.0

2.8
1.3
1.4
0.7
41.2
19.7
12.6
6.1
4.6
2.3
7.19

3.0
0.9
1.5
0.5
44.6
13.8
15.0
5.0
6.5
2.0
7.15

3.2
0.7
1.6
0.3
48.4
9.9
15.8
3.9
7.1
1.6
7.5

3.5
0.5
1.9
0.2
52.0
6.7
16.8
2.9
7.7
1.0
6.8

3.7
0.2
1.8
0.2
53.9
4.17
17.5
2.1
8.1
0.6
7.91

Ester obtained by the reaction of canola oil with methanol and ethanol molar ratio (3:3).

formation of ethyl esters was slow, the overall rate of formation of esters was fast. The fast rate of formation of
esters was due to the better solubility of oil in a mixture
of alcohols. Canola oil which is non-polar is more soluble
in ethanol than methanol due to low polarity of ethanol
(0.654) than methanol (0.762) (Zakaria et al., 2004). Hence,
when a mixture of methanol and ethanol was used, ethanol
contributed for better solubility of oil. As the solubility of
oil in mixture of alcohols was more there was less mass
transfer limitations involved in the reaction mixture and
ultimately the formation of esters was fast.

3.2. Ester characterization

The characteristics such as acid value, viscosity, density,
heating value, cloud and pour point of the esters were measured and compared with the diesel fuel. Table 2 shows the
various characteristics of the esters. Acid value is used to
determine the free fatty acid content of the biodiesel which
in most of the cases determines the oxidation stability of
biodiesel. If free fatty acid (especially unsaturated fatty
acids) content of the biodiesel is more, then oxidation stability of biodiesel will be less. Acid value of all the esters

Please cite this article in press as: Kulkarni, M.G. et al., Transesterication of canola oil in mixed methanol/ethanol system ..., Bioresource Technol (2006), doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2006.08.025

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.G. Kulkarni et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2006) xxxxxx

Table 2
Physical characteristics of canola oil, esters, and diesel fuel
Compound

Acid value

Viscosity at 40 C (cP)

Density (gm/cc)

Heating value (MJ/kg)

Cloud point (C)

Pour point (C)

Canola oil
ME
EE
MEE (3:3)a
MEE (3.5:2.5)
MEE (4:2)
MEE (4.5:1.5)
MEE (5:1)
ASTM standard
Diesel fuel #1
Diesel fuel #2

0.4
0.48
0.65
0.70
0.33
0.39
0.42
0.47
<0.8
0.002
0.002

33.4
3.9
4.4
4.1
4.0
4.0
4.0
4.0
1.96.0b
1.75
3.50

0.912
0.875
0.869
0.883
0.884
0.881
0.880
0.880
0.870.89

39.72
40.07
40.29
40.11
40.24
40.20
40.10
39.72

45.0

15
12
15
15
15
15
15

51
15

a
b

1
1
0
1
1
1
1

50
8

Ester obtained by the reaction of canola oil with methanol and ethanol molar ratio (3:3).
mm2/s.

was within the limits of ASTM standard (<0.8 mg KOH/

g). Conventional diesel fuel had very low acid value of
0.002. High acid numbers (>0.8) in a biodiesel may increase
fueling system deposits and the likelihood of corrosion.
However, the acid number of biodiesel within the ASTM
specication, which indicates no problems on the long term
performance of the engine (Weiksner et al., http://www.osti.gov/bridge). Viscosities of canola oil, diesel fuel, and
canola oil esters were compared (Table 2). Viscosity of pure
canola oil was much higher (33.4 cP) than its esters. The
viscosities of the all the esters were in the range of 3.9
4.4 cP, which were well within the limit of ASTM standard.
The viscosity of ethyl esters was higher than that of methyl
esters but the viscosities of mixtures of esters were very
close to that of methyl esters. Viscosity of #1 diesel fuel
was much less (1.75 cP) but that of #2 diesel fuel
(3.50 cP) was comparable that those of canola oil esters.
Heating value of the esters is very important since it measures the energy content of the fuel. As shown in Table 2,
the heating value of all the esters and canola oil ranged
between 39.72 and 40.29 MJ/kg. There was not much difference in heating values of methyl, ethyl and mixed esters.
The cloud and pour point of the esters determines the cold
temperature usability of the esters. The cloud and pour
points of petroleum based diesels are very low (Table 2).
Compared to petroleum based diesel, canola oil esters
had very high cloud and pour point. The pour point of
ethyl esters was 3 C lower than the corresponding methyl

esters of canola oil. The pour point of mixtures of esters

were almost the same (15 C). The cloud point of all
the esters were in the range of 1 to 1 C. The densities
of the esters were signicantly lower than the canola oil
and were well within the limits of ASTM standard (0.87
0.89 g/cc). The density of #1 diesel fuel was 0.82 g/cc and
that of #2 diesel fuel was 0.86 g/cc.
The boiling point distributions of commercial #1 diesel
fuel, canola oil esters and base fuel (kerosene) are shown in
Table 3. Commercial diesel fuel was highly volatile compared to the esters of canola oil but the boiling point
(90% o) of diesel fuel was quite close to those of all the
esters except ethyl ester. Ethyl ester was less volatile than
methyl ester of canola oil. There was not much dierence
in boiling point of mixed esters. Base fuel used for lubricity
testing was more volatile than the commercial diesel fuel.
3.3. Lubricity testing
Lubricity testing was carried out using HFRR and MROCLE test for puried methyl (ME), ethyl (EE), MEE
(3:3) and MEE (4.5:1.5). HFRR testing was done for
ME, EE and MEE (3:3) and performances of two mixed
esters MEE (3:3) and MEE (4.5:1.5) were compared by
M-ROCLE test. Fig. 2 shows the HFRR analysis test
results for 1 vol% ester addition in base fuel. The ASTM
specied an acceptable level for wear scar diameter of
0.45 mm at a concentration of 1 vol% addition. All of the

Table 3
Boiling point distribution of esters, diesel fuel and kerosene
% O

Diesel fuel #1

ME

EE

MEE (3:3)

MEE (3.5:2.5)

MEE (4:2)

MEE (4.5:1.5)

MEE (5:1)

Kerosene

10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90

173.9
184.1
199.2
221.2
242.9
266.6
293.0
319.7
352.1

355.7
358.5
360.4
361.9
363.2
364.3
365.3
366.2
367.1

364.5
368.7
371.3
373.2
374.9
376.4
377.7
378.9
393.2

355.1
357.5
359.1
360.3
361.4
362.4
366.8
368.6
379.6

355.8
358.4
360.1
361.4
362.6
363.7
364.9
368.6
370.4

354.4
356.2
357.8
358.7
359.9
360.7
361.5
364.7
367.2

355.6
358.1
359.7
361.1
362.2
363.2
364.2
365.3
369.0

353.2
354.6
355.4
356.1
356.7
357.3
357.8
358.3
363.0

172.4
174.0
176.7
180.6
187.0
194.4
205.1
223.0
245.7

Please cite this article in press as: Kulkarni, M.G. et al., Transesterication of canola oil in mixed methanol/ethanol system ..., Bioresource Technol (2006), doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2006.08.025

ARTICLE IN PRESS
6

M.G. Kulkarni et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2006) xxxxxx

that better fuel economy can be obtained by addition of

MEE (3:3) or MEE (4.5:1.5) to the diesel fuel. Lubricity
number obtained by addition of 1 vol% MEE (3:3) in base
fuel was 0.979 and of MEE (4.5:1.5) in reference fuel was
0.998, which were higher than that obtained by base fuel
(0.781) which clearly indicates the better lubricity eciency
of these esters.

0.8

Wear Scar Diameter, (mm)

0.7
0.6
0.5
0.4
0.3

4. Conclusions

0.2
0.1
0
Base fuel

ME

EE

MEE (3:3)

ASTM

Test Sample

Fig. 2. Wear scar area at 1% volume addition of ester to base fuel

observed by HFRR.

Table 4
Wear area, coecient of friction, and lubricity number data from average
of six M-ROCLE replicate evaluations
Sample

Average wear
scar area (mm2)

Coecient of
friction

Lubricity
number (LN)

MEE (3:3)
MEE (4.5:1.5)
Base fuel

0.244 0.018
0.242 0.023
0.292 0.016

0.115 0.002
0.114 0.002
0.120 0.001

0.979 0.070
0.998 0.084
0.781 0.041

three esters showed wear scar diameters within the limits of

ASTM specications. The ethyl esters (wear scar diameter
0.22 mm) showed better lubricity than methyl esters (wear
scar diameter 0.34 mm). As discussed in the introduction,
an increase in chain length of alcohol leads to higher lubrication performance (Drown et al., 2001; Anastopoulos
et al., 2001). Similar results also were observed in case of
methyl and ethyl esters of canola oil. Mixed esters MEE
(3:3) showed improved lubricity (wear scar diameter
0.30 mm) over pure methyl esters. It is apparent that
MEE wear scar area is simply the geometric average of
the ME and EE wear scars (see Fig. 2) suggesting no synergistic eect between ME and EE. However, the improved
lubricity of mixed ester is due to the formation of ethyl
esters along with methyl ester. For example, in case of
MEE (3:3), the amount of ethyl esters formed was 50% that
of methyl ester and these ethyl esters formed along with
methyl, have contributed to the improved lubricity.
According to Geller and Goodrum (2004), the reason for
lubricity performance of fatty acid esters was due to the
unique structure of the fatty acid methyl esters which facilitated the formation of hydrogen bonded complexes. These
complexes enhanced the lubricity of mixtures containing
these fatty acid esters.
The data obtained by M-ROCLE test for MEE (3:3)
and MEE (4.5:1.5) are as shown in Table 4. Wear scar area
and coecient of friction obtained by 1 vol% addition of
MEE (3:3) and MEE (4.5:1.5) are almost the same and substantially less than those of the base fuel which concludes

Transesterication of canola oil with mixtures of methanol and ethanol were carried out successfully using KOH
as a catalyst. Rate of transesterication of canola oil with
mixed alcohols was faster than with pure methanol. When
mixtures of methanol and ethanol were used for transesterication reaction, along with methyl some ethyl esters
were formed. However, the formation of ethyl esters
was much slower than the methyl esters. Properties of
mixed esters such as acid value, viscosity, density were
within the limits of ASTM standards. Heating value,
cloud and pour points of mixed esters were close to those
of methyl and ethyl esters. Lubricity of ethyl ester was
better than that of methyl when added 1 vol% to the base
fuel. Similarly, lubricity of mixed ester MEE (3:3) was
better than that of pure methyl ester. Further investigation in use of mixed ester as lubricity additive is in
process.
Acknowledgements
Financial support for this project from BIOCAP, Canada and Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC) and Canada Research Chair
(CRC) funding to Dr. A.K. Dalai is gratefully
acknowledged.
References
Anastopoulos, E.L., Zannikos, F., et al., 2001. Inuence of aceto acetic
esters and di-carboxylic acid esters on diesel fuel lubricity. Tribology
International 34 (11), 749755.
Barbour, R.H., Rickeard, D.J., Elliot, N.G., 2000. Understanding diesel
lubricity. SAE Paper. 01-1919.
Boocock, D.G., Konar, S.K., et al., 1996. Fast one phase oil rich process
for the preparation of vegetable oil methyl esters. Biomass and
Bioenergy 11 (1), 4350.
Communication from the commission, 2006. An EU strategy for biofuels
report.
Dmytryshyn, S.L., Dalai, A.K., et al., 2004. Synthesis and characterization of vegetable oil derived esters: evaluation for their diesel additive
properties. Bioresource Technology 92, 5564.
Drown, D.C., Harper, K., et al., 2001. Screening vegetable oil alcohol
esters as fuel lubricity enhanceres. JAOCS 78 (6), 579584.
Geller, D.P., Goodrum, J.W., 2004. Eects of specic fatty acid methyl
esters on diesel fuel lubricity. Fuel 83, 23512356.
Holbein, B.E., Stephen, J.D., Layzell, D.B., 2004. Canadian Biodiesel
Initiative: Aligning Research Needs and Priorities With the Emerging
Industry. Final Report by Biocap Canada Foundation, Ontario.

Please cite this article in press as: Kulkarni, M.G. et al., Transesterication of canola oil in mixed methanol/ethanol system ..., Bioresource Technol (2006), doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2006.08.025

ARTICLE IN PRESS
M.G. Kulkarni et al. / Bioresource Technology xxx (2006) xxxxxx
Kulkarni, M.G., Dalai, A.K., 2006. Waste cooking oil an economical
source for biodiesel: a review. Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Research 45, 29012913.
Lang, X., Dalai, A.K., 2001. Biodiesel esters as lubricity additives: eects
of process variables and evaluation of low-temperature properties.
Fuels International, 13.
Lang, X., Dalai, A.K., et al., 2001. Preparation and characterization of
bio-diesels from various bio-oils. Bioresource Technology 80, 5362.
Meher, L.C., Dharmagadda, V.S.S., Naik, S.N., 2006a. Optimization of
alkali-catalyzed transesterication of Pongamia pinnata oil for production of biodiesel. Bioresource Technology 97 (12), 13921397.
Meher, L.C., Vidya Sagar, D., Naik, S.N., 2006b. Technical aspects of
biodiesel production by transesterication a review. Renewable and
Sustainable Energy Reviews 10, 248268.

Sridharan, R., Mathai, I.M., 1974. Transesterication reactions. Journal

of Scientic and Industrial Research 22, 178187.
Van Gerpen, J.H., Soylu, S., Mustafa, E.T., 1999. Evaluation of the
lubricity of soybean oil-based additive in diesel fuel. ASAE Paper No
996134.
Weiksner, J.M., Sephen, P.E., Crump, L., et al., Understanding biodiesel
fuel quality and performance. Document prepared by U.S. Department of Energy. Available from: http://www.osti.gov/bridge.
Zakaria, Z.A., Somchit, M.N., et al., 2004. Preliminary investigation on
the antinociceptive properties of Haruan (Channa Striatus) llet
extracted with various solvent systems. Pakistan Journal of Biological
Sciences 7 (10), 17061717.

Please cite this article in press as: Kulkarni, M.G. et al., Transesterication of canola oil in mixed methanol/ethanol system ..., Bioresource Technol (2006), doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2006.08.025