Fuel 93 (2012) 364372

Contents lists available at SciVerse ScienceDirect

Fuel
journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/fuel

Reduction in emissions of nitrogen oxides, particulate matter,

and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon by adding water-containing
butanol into a diesel-fueled engine generator
Sheng-Lun Lin a,b,, Wen-Jhy Lee a,b,, Chia-fon F. Lee c,d, Yo-ping Wu e
a

Department of Environmental Engineering, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan City 70101, Taiwan, ROC
Sustainable Environment Research Center, National Cheng Kung University, Tainan City 70101, Taiwan, ROC
Center for Combustion Energy and State Key Laboratory of Automotive Safety and Energy, Tsinghua University, Beijing 100084, China
d
Department of Mechanical Science and Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign, IL 61801, USA
e
Department of Chemical Engineering and Materials Engineering, National Ilan University, Ilan City 26047, Taiwan, ROC
b
c

a r t i c l e

i n f o

Article history:
Received 7 October 2010
Received in revised form 15 November 2011
Accepted 17 November 2011
Available online 3 December 2011
Keywords:
Butanol
Biodiesel
NOx
PAHs
Carbon dioxide

a b s t r a c t
Three groups of n-butanoldiesel blends with 0, 0.5, and 1.0 wt.% water-content were investigated to
simulate the hydrated butanol produced by acetonebutanolethanol fermentation and a simple distillation treatment. Both 30-day standing and centrifugal test results showed that 15 wt.% n-butanol (BT)
was the minimum additive ratio to stabilize the 1.0 wt.% water content diesel blend, while those blends
that contained 0 or 0.5 wt.% water could remain as stable one-phase clear liquids by adding just 5 wt.%
BT. These stable diesel blends were further examined in a heavy-duty diesel-fueled engine generator
(HDDEG). Using BT-diesel blends increased the indicated specic fuel consumption (ISFC) because of
the lower heating value of n-butanol, while the micro-explosions that occurred could reduce the ISFC
when using 0.5 wt.% water-containing BT-diesel blends. NOx emissions increased with the increasing
BT content at a low additive ratio (515 wt.%), and reduced when adding a higher amount of BT
(>15 wt.%). PM, total-PAHs, and total-BaPeq emissions were all signicantly reduced when the increasing
BT additive ratio contained either 0, 0.5, or 1.0 wt.% water because of the lower sulfur and higher oxygen
fuel contents. On the other hand, the CO emission level went up with the addition of BT. Notably, the diesel blends with 0.5 wt.% water only slightly increased ISFC when low fractions of BT were added, i.e. 0.40%
and 0.81% ISFC increases with the addition of 5 and 10 wt.% BT, respectively. In addition, there were signicantly lower NOx, PM, Total-PAHs and Total-BaPeq, emissions with the blends than with regular diesel.
With the aim of achieving both good energy performance and less pollutant emissions, the 5 and 10 wt.%
BT additive with 0.5% water content blends were the most suitable for practical use in an HDDEG without
any engine modications or changes in controls.
2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction
Since Diesel invented the rst compression-ignition engine in
1892, both researchers and manufacturers have worked to make
such engines operate with greater thermal efciency, higher output power, and lower emissions of carbon monoxide (CO) and unburned hydrocarbon (HC). However, the sharply increasing price of
crude oil and dwindling reserves over the last few decades [1]
show the dangers of over-dependence on fossil fuels. Additionally,
the emissions of particulate matter (PM), sulfur dioxide (SO2),
Corresponding authors. Address: Department of Environmental Engineering,
National Cheng Kung University, Tainan City 70101, Taiwan, ROC. Tel.: +886 6 2757
575x65831; fax: +886 6 275 2790 (S-L. Lin).
E-mail addresses: cbmsgml@gmail.com (S.-L. Lin), wjlee@mail.ncku.edu.tw
(W.-J. Lee).
0016-2361/$ - see front matter 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.fuel.2011.11.042

nitrogen oxides (NOx) and polycyclic aromatic carbons (PAHs) released when burning such fuels cause environmental and public
health problems [24], as well as being associated with global
warming due to the inuence of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions,
especially carbon dioxide (CO2). Therefore, developing cleaner and
renewable energy sources has become a pressing concern.
Biodiesel and bioethanol are the two most popular renewable
and oxygenated fuels currently in use. As extracting fuel from
crops is more environmentally friendly and CO2 conservative than
petroleum processing, several processes have been developed to
transform neat vegetable oil into biodiesel with similar properties
to those of a regular diesel. The transesterication process is the
most practical one, with high production yields of around
8095% and the ability to signicantly decrease the viscosity of
neat vegetable oil [5]. In a study on biodiesel emissions, Scholl
and Sorenson [6] reported that CO, unburned HC, NOx, and smoke

S.-L. Lin et al. / Fuel 93 (2012) 364372

emissions were reduced by utilizing a soybean methyl ester (SME)

in a CI engine, while a 15.1% increase in energy efciency, 3.55%
and 7.49% reductions in PM10 and PM2.5, respectively, and
43.090.2% and 63.189.6% decreases in total-PAH and total-BaPeq
emissions, respectively, were found by using palm-biodiesel and
parafnic-palm-biodiesel blends in Lin et al. [79]. However, land
competition with food crops, pretreatment cost, and secondary
pollutants associated with the transesterication process have
limited the use of crop-based biodiesels.
Bioethanol has a high octane number and has been investigated
for its role in enhancing the combustion reaction and reducing CO,
HC, and PM emissions in gasoline engines [10]. Although pure
ethanol with a lower cetane index is considered to be less suitable
for use in a compression-ignition (CI) diesel engine, low fraction
replacements have also been investigated. For example, Sayin
[11] blended 5% and 10% dehydrated ethanol with a regular diesel,
and tested it in a direct injection diesel engine. Although the use of
ethanoldiesel blends showed reductions in smoke opacity and
emissions of CO and HC, the brake specic fuel consumption (ISFC)
increased because the heating value of ethanol (28.40 MJ kg1) is
signicantly obviously lower than that of a regular diesel
(42.74 MJ kg1). In addition, 99.5% pure ethanol was required to
form a stable ethanoldiesel blend, while the simple distillation
process could only concentrate it to 95.6% [12,13]. Martinez-Frias
estimated that the ethanol dehydration process would cost 14%
in net energy balance over the whole bioethanol production process [14].
Dieselhol is an oxygenated fuel composed of biodiesel, ethanol,
and diesel, in which the low viscosity of the alcohol can balance the
high viscosity of the biodiesel. Furthermore, the low cetane index
and heating value of the ethanol can also be increased by blending
with biodiesel, which has a high cetane index and heating value.
Shi et al. showed that a blend of 80% or 85% diesel with 20% or
15% BE (methanol soyate contains 20 wt.% ethanol) has signicantly lower PM and CO emissions, but higher NOx emission
[15]. Kwanchareon et al. obtained similar results, which showed
that the emissions of CO and HC were obviously reduced, whereas
the NOx emission was increased by using a blend of 80% diesel, 15%
biodiesel, and 5% ethanol at high engine load [16].
However, the high production cost of crop-based dehydrated
ethanol and biodiesel hinder the practical use of dieselhol in diesel
engines. Gnansounou et al. presented a lifecycle assessment of
wheat-to-bioethanol, with the outcome affected by the method
used to allocate the impacts between the co-products, the type
of reference systems and the choice of functional unit. They found
that the GHG emission equivalents increased from 0.047 kg
CO2eq km1 (i.e. grassland to cultivated land) to 0.249 kg
CO2eq km1 (i.e. forested land to cultivated land), that is 80% to
+5% with respect to gasoline, respectively [17]. Additionally, the
water consumption when producing energy crop-based ethanol
(e.g. corn ethanol, 10324 L water L1 ethanol) was reported to
be greater than that of both cellulose-based ethanol (Switchgrass
ethanol, 1.99.8 L water L1 ethanol) and gasoline (US conventional crude, 3.46.6 L water L1 ethanol) by Wu et al. [18]. However, the problems that crop-based biofuels face with regard to
land-use and water demand have hindered their widespread
adoption.
Butanol is another renewable biofuel that is now attracting
more attention, since it is less hydrophilic, has a higher heating value and cetane index, lower vapor pressure, and greater miscibility
than ethanol, which make it more suitable for blending with conventional gasoline or diesel fuel [19]. Szwaja et al. indicated that
the n-butanol can directly substitute for gasoline either as a neat
fuel or in a blended form from a combustion and energy density
perspective for spark-ignition (SI) engines, because of its similar
thermo-physical properties to those of conventional gasoline

365

[20]. The combustion modeling of pure bio-butanol demonstrates

that a higher oxygen content shortens the ignition delay [21,22].
In addition, Rakopoulos et al. indicated that the emissions of soot,
NOx, CO were reduced while those of ISFC and HC increased with
the increasing addition of pure butanol (8%, 16%, and 24%) in both
a Hydra diesel engine and a bus engine [19,23]. Yao et al. also
found similar results, that soot and CO emissions were reduced
by using n-butanol/diesel blends with multi-injections, while the
amount of oxygen did not signicantly affect the NOx emissions
[24].
Acetonebutanolethanol (ABE) fermentation is a developing
technology that transforms molasses, whey permeate, wheat
straw, corn stover, corn ber, and other traditional agricultural
wastes into biofuels (e.g. acetone, butanol, and ethanol). Table 1
shows the recovery rates and fractions of three products of ABE
fermentation obtained in several studies. Generally, the ratio of
ABE used has been 3:6:1, with butanol as the major product
(55.773.9 wt.%) in ABE solution [2530]. Additionally, a byproduct of biodiesel production, glycerol, has been used to produce signicant yields of mainly 1, 3-propanediol and butanol [3133].
Butanol production are attracting more attention, because it is relatively more valuable as either a solvent or a fuel. However, the
techniques for separating butanol from ABE products, especially
dehydration, require both extra cost and energy consumption. A
comprehensive search of the literature shows that are relatively
few studies that examine hydrated butanoldiesel blends. Therefore, the current study xed 0.5 or 1.0 wt.% water content and varied the butanol additive fractions from 5 to 25 wt.% to simulate the
225 wt.% (0.5/255/20) water content in hydrated butanol and
when blended with the regular diesel. The fuel stabilities, engine
performances, and pollutant emissions of these mixtures were also
examined in the current study.

2. Experimental section
2.1. Fuel preparations and stability tests
A premium diesel fuel (D100) produced by Chinese Petroleum
Corporation (CPC) was used as a base fuel in current study. Analytical-grade n-butanol (BT) obtained from J.T. Baker (>99.5% purity)
was utilized to simulate the bio-butanol produced by ABE fermentation. Additionally, to simulate the dehydrated butanol treated by
a simple distillation separation process after ABE fermentation, the
water contents were xed at 0.5 and 1.0 wt.%, while the butanol
additive fractions were varied from 5 to 10, 15, 20, and 25 wt.%.
217 wt.% (0.5/25.51/6) water-containing butanol blends were
investigated in the current study. The hydrated butanoldiesel
blends were prepared by adding the specic ratios of water into
the pure n-butanol, and then blending the hydrated butanol with
a conventional diesel by employing a lab-scale 1-L mixer with
3000 rpm for 15 min. The premixed products were then homogenized in an ultrasonic tank at 40 kHz and 120 W ultrasonic power
output for 15 min. The products were then tested for their stability.
The stability of the diesel blends was examined by two gravitational and centrifugal tests. In the gravitational test, the appearance of each diesel blend was recorded after standing for 30 days
at 25 C to determine the one-month-storage stability. Furthermore, a centrifugal stability test was conducted at 5000 rpm for
15 min to predict the stability changes of diesel blends after longer
term storage. After the two stability tests, the four levels of the
phase appearances of the blended fuels formed an empirical index
of stabilities: (a) one-phase clear liquid; (b) one-phase liquid crystalline; (c) two-phase liquid crystalline; (d) two-phase clear liquid.
The order of stability is (a) > (b) > (c) > (d), so that an unstable
blend will transform its appearance from (a) to (d) over time.

366

S.-L. Lin et al. / Fuel 93 (2012) 364372

Table 1
Recovery rates and compositions of acetone butanol ethanol solution using C. acetobutylicum and/or C. beijerinckii in ABE fermentation.
References

Qureshi et al. [25]

Ezeji et al. [26]
Ezeji et al. [27]
Ezeji et al. [28]
Qureshia et al. [29]
Gu et al. [30]

Acetone

Butanol

Ethanol

1

1

1

gL

wt.%

gL

3.326.12
5.327.4
5.20
4.024.1
3.74
4.60

25.343.6
29.236.1
29.5
22.032.2
31.3
23.0

8.2412.8
11.946.4
11.9
13.456.2
7.40
14.1

Furthermore, a greater ratio of the separate layer in a two-phase

clear liquid means the diesel blend is less stable. On the other
hand, a diesel fuel in a one-phase clear condition is relatively stable, and can be used in a diesel-fueled engine generator.
2.2. Diesel-fueled engine generator test
The brake specic fuel consumption (ISFC) and pollutant emissions were examined in a diesel-fueled engine generator. A fourstroke, single horizontal cylinder engine made by Yanmar S. P.
Co. was employed in this system (Table 2). A direct injection system with 196.2 bar (2845 psi) injection pressure and injecting at
BTDC 17.0 CA was employed in the current study, and there was
no modication to the injection. More details of the whole testing
system can be found in Lin et al. [34], while the generator load was
controlled by a varied resistance with 100 parallel 50 W bulbs that
was equal to maximum 5 kW. The generator loads were xed at
3.2 kW, 80% of the maximum load of the engine output power
(4 kW), because this load is commonly used for a continuous electricity generation process. After the generator load was set, the engine rotational speed was tuned to t the 110 V output voltage,
which is the regulated standard in Taiwan. Additionally, the volume of fuel consumed in the sampling period was measured using
a one liter graduated cylinder inlet unit. The indicated fuel specic
consumption (ISFC) of a generator was then calculated by the ratios of the fuel consumption rate (mL h1) and electricity output
power (kW), as shown in Eq. (1). The indicated efciency (IE,%)
was also calculated using Eq. (2) to analyze the fuel efciency
without the effect of different heating values.
1

ISFC V=Pt mL kW

1

IE Pt=VH %

1
2

where V represents the fuel consumption (mL) during each sampling time, P stand for the power generated (kW) by the dieselfueled engine generator with 110 V, t represents the sampling time
(h) and H stands for the heating value of each diesel blend.

Table 2
Specications of the tested diesel fueled engine.
Specications
Manufacturer
Type
Bore  Stroke
Displacement volume
Rated engine speed
Output power
Torque
Ignition system
Injection type
Injection timing
Injection pressure
Lubrication system
Cooling system

YANMAR S. P. Co., Ltd., Thailand

Four-stroke, single horizontal cylinder engine
88  96 mm
583 c.c.
2400 rpm
4.0 kW
1.63 kg-m
Compression ignition
Direct injection
BTDC 17.0
196.2 bar (2845 psi)
Forced-feed type
Water-cooled

wt.%

gL

55.773.9
61.169.5
67.6
63.273.6
62.0
70.5

0.000.51
0.32.1
0.50
0.61.1
0.79
1.30

Total ABE
wt.%

g L1

wt.%

0.002.74
1.272.82
2.80
1.234.60
6.62
6.50

12.219.2
17.775.9
17.6
18.281.3
11.9
20.0

100
100
100
100
100
100

The gaseous pollutant emissions in the tail pipe exhaust were

monitored online using a portable gaseous pollutants analyzer
(IMR2800). Specically, nitrogen oxides (NOx) were measured
with an electro-chemical detector (ECD) in the ranges of 05000
and 04000 ppm V, while carbon monoxide (CO) was determined
using a non-dispersive infrared (NDIR) analyzer in the ranges of
010 and 020 wt.%. A vacuum pump provided a constant ow rate
to collect the particulate matter (PM) on a silicon glass ber lter.
The PM mass on each lter was determined using an electronic
analytical microbalance (Sartorius ME 5-F) with 0.01 mg accuracy.
2.3. PAH analysis
In the current study, all sampling and analytical processes of
PAHs followed the A730.70C method proposed by the National
Institute of Environmental Analysis (NIEA) in Taiwan.
Particulate-phase PAHs were collected on a glass ber lter, which
was pretreated at 450 C for 8 h in an oven to remove all organic
compounds. The net mass of particles was then determined by subtracting the mass of the initial lter from the nal one. Gas-phase
PAHs were collected in three-stage glass cartridges in preliminary
sampling work. Since the masses of 21 individual PAHs in the third
stage were 0.12.6% of total three stages, the two-stage glass cartridges were utilized to effectively collect the gaseous PAHs in this
study. Specically, the cartridge was packed with 5.0 cm of XAD-16
resin sandwiched between two 2.5 cm polyurethane foam (PUF)
plugs. The new cartridges were pretreated by a Soxhlet extraction
process for 24 h with methanol, dichloromethane, and n-hexane
for a total of 3 days. All glass ber lters and packed cartridges
were transported to and from the sampling eld covered with aluminum foil to avoid PAH photo-dissociation.
After sampling, all samples were extracted using a n-hexane/
dichloromethane mixed solvent of 1:1 volume ratio in Soxhlet
extractors for 24 h. The total solvent volumes used were 250 and
700 mL for particulate and gaseous samples, respectively. The extract was then purged with ultra-pure nitrogen to 2 mL and passed
through the cleanup column packed with silica. The eluents were
then re-concentrated by purging with nitrogen to exactly 1 mL in
vials. The PAH contents were determined with a gas chromatograph (GC, Agilent 6890 N) with a mass spectrometer detector
(MSD, Agilent 5973 N) which was controlled by a computer workstation (Acer Aspire C500). This GC/MSD was equipped with a capillary column (HP Ultra 2; 50 m  0.32 mm  0.17 mm) and an
automatic sampler (Agilent 7683 series).
The masses of primary and secondary PAH ions were determined by using the scan mode for pure PAH standards. The PAHs
were quantied by using the selective ion monitoring (SIM) mode.
The detection limit (DL) estimated using a serial diluted standard
solution of 21 PAHs was 55735 pg. The limit of quantication
(LOQ) is dened as the DL divided by the sampling volume, and
was 0.1091.47 ng m3 for individual PAH compounds in the
current study. Seven consecutive injections of a 10 ng mg1 PAH
standard yielded relative standard deviations (RSD) between
4.608.24% of the GC/MSD integration area. The R2 of calibration

367

S.-L. Lin et al. / Fuel 93 (2012) 364372

lines of the 21 PAH compounds ranged from 0.995 to 0.999. Additionally, the results showed the average recovery (n = 3) of individual PAHs by NIEA A730.70C was 80114%. Analysis of eld blanks,
including glass-ber lters and cartridges, showed all PAH levels
were less than the DL.
The 21 individual PAHs were divided into low-molecular
weights (LM-PAHs containing two- and three-ring PAHs), midmolecular weights (MM-PAHs containing four-ring PAHs), and
high-molecular weights (HM-PAHs containing ve- to seven-ring
PAHs) due to their different physical and chemical properties.
The total-PAH data in the exhaust of a diesel-fueled engine was
the sum of the 21 individual PAHs. The overall toxicity was dened
as the sum of Benzo[a]pyrene equivalent (total BaPeq), which was
each PAH concentration multiplied by its toxicity equivalent factor
(TEF).

3. Results and discussion

3.1. Fuel stability
The results of a preliminary test showed that the pure (>99.5%)
n-butanol was able to mix with diesel fuel in any ratio to form a
one-phase clear liquid. Unfortunately, the diesel blends became
unstable with a water content of 0.5 wt.%. (Table 3), and thus,
the n-butanol became essential to stabilize the water in the
lipophilic diesel blends. For the 0.5 wt.% water-containing butanol
(WBT) diesel blend, the results of both the 30-day and centrifugal
tests showed high stability after adding 525 wt.% n-butanol. The
above results mean that butanol with a water content of 29.1
wt.% (0.5/25.50.5/5.5) could be stably blended with diesel fuel
by 5.5, 10.5, 15.5, 20.5, and 25.5% in mass. Additionally, 1525
wt.% n-butanol could stabilize 1 wt.% water in the diesel blend,
while destabilization occurred when decreasing the n-butanol content to 10 and 5 wt.% (Table 3). It is worth noting that the critical
10 wt.% water-containing butanol here becomes unstable with
the addition of 11 wt.% into the diesel blend (BT10W1). Thus, a
group of different additive fractions, namely 6.6, 7.7, 8.8, and
9.9 wt.%, of 10 wt.% WBT, were further tested. The results indicate
that the diesel blend started to form crystalline water droplets
when the additive ratio was over 6.6 wt.% WBT, and further separated into two layers after the centrifugal test. Consequently,
10 wt.% was the upper limit of water content in butanol, and lead
to the formation of stable blends by adding less than 5.5 wt.%
(5 wt.% pure n-butanol + 0.5 wt.%) to diesel. The fuels with a
one-phase clear appearance after the centrifugal test were further examined in a heavy-duty diesel-fueled engine generator

(HDDEG). Additionally, several other fuel properties, including

density, kinetic viscosity and heating value, are listed in Table 4,
and will be discussed below with regard to the engine performance
and emissions.

3.2. Energy performance

The HDDEG was operated without any engine modications.
The suitability and efciency could thus be determined by the
brake specic fuel consumption (BSFC, mL kW1 h1), with a more
efcient engine having a lower BSFC [9,16,3537]. However, the
testing device in our study was a diesel engine power generator,
which had to produce electricity with a stable voltage (110 V).
Therefore, the engine performance in the current research was
determined by the indicated specic fuel consumption (ISFC,
mL kW1 h1), which has been dened in the experimental section.
The ISFC of each diesel blend increased with the increasing addition of n-butanol, as seen in Fig. 1a, and these results demonstrate
an inverse correlation, with the lower heating value (LHV) decreasing as the alternative BT fractions increased. The highest butanol
content (25%) thus had the highest ISFC of 533, 507, and
531 mL kW1 h1, with 0, 0.5, and 1.0 wt.% water contents, respectively. These values represent 8.0%, 2.9%, and 7.7% increases on that
of D100 (493 mL kW1 h1). It is interesting that the ISFC did not
keep increasing with the water content, which caused lower LHV.
In theory, the ISFC increases were estimated to be 10.0%, 10.6%,
and 11.3% by using BT25, BT25W0.5, and BT25W1, respectively,
since the LHVs of three blends were 37.9, 37.6, and 37.4 MJ kg1.
The above results indicate that the LHV was not the only dominant
factor with regard to ISFC. Notably, different boiling points and volatilities of the components in blended fuel, especially those of
water, would result in micro-explosions, which are reported to
promote a more premixed combustion condition, enhance the energy efciency, and reduce fuel consumption [3844]. In the current study, the diesel blends with 0.5 wt.% water content show a
signicantly lower ISFC curve (Fig. 1) than those with 0 and
1.0 wt.% water. This might be because the strength of the microexplosions was enough to buffer the reduced LHV effect on ISFC
at 0.5 wt.% of water, but not enough when more water (1 wt.%)
was added. To more clearly analyze the combustion efciency of
each fuel blend, the indicated efciency (IE,%), which has also been
dened in Section 2, is shown in Fig. 1b. Obviously, the increasing
oxygen content in BT-diesel blends leads to more complete combustion and improves the indicated efciency of energy transformation from the fuel to electricity. Additionally, the 0.5 wt.% of
water content effectively enhances the indicated efciency by

Table 3
Blending processes and stability tests of WBTD blends.
Blends

W0.5
BT25W0.5
BT20W0.5
BT15W0.5
BT10W0.5
BT5W0.5
BT25W1
BT20W1
BT15W1
BT10W1
BT5W1
BT6W0.6
BT7W0.7
BT8W0.8
BT9W0.9

n-Butanol (wt.%)

0.0
25
20
15
10
5
25
20
15
10
5
6
7
8
9

Water (wt.%)

0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
0.5
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9

Blending processes

Stability tests

Water/butanol (wt.%)

After stirring

After ultrasonic

After 30 days

Centrifuge

2-Clear
O
O
O
O
O
O
Bubbles (1%)
O
2-crystalline
2-crystalline
1-crystalline
1-crystalline
1-crystalline
2-crystalline

2-Emulsion
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
2-emulsion
2-emulsion
1-emulsion
1-emulsion
1-emulsion
2-emulsion

2-Clear
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
2-emulsion
2-emulsion
1-emulsion
1-emulsion
1-emulsion
2-emulsion

2-Clear
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
O
2-clear
2-clear
2-clear
2-clear
2-clear
2-clear

2.0
2.5
3.3
5.0
10
4.0
5.0
7.0
10
20
10
10
10
10

368

S.-L. Lin et al. / Fuel 93 (2012) 364372

3.3. NOx emissions

Table 4
Fuel properties of each diesel blend.
Blends

Density

Kinetic viscosity

Heating value

D
B5
B10
B15
B20
B25
B5W0.5
B10W0.5
B15W0.5
B20W0.5
B25W0.5
B15W1
B20W1
B25W1

0.830
0.829
0.828
0.827
0.826
0.825
0.830
0.829
0.828
0.827
0.826
0.829
0.828
0.827

4.152
3.191
3.241
3.292
3.342
3.393
3.180
3.231
3.281
3.332
3.382
3.270
3.321
3.372

41.66
41.23
40.80
40.37
39.94
37.86
41.02
40.59
40.16
39.73
37.65
39.96
39.53
37.44

Nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions are the major problem with

high energy efciency and stoichiometric conditions in a direct
injection diesel engine. NOx are generally formed by three pathways: (1) fuel-nitrogen conversion, (2) Zeldovich thermal activation, and (3) fuel-rich prompt formation. In comparison to
regular diesel (100 ppm), all three groups of tested fuels had lower
NOx levels in the exhaust, meaning that the addition of BT was
effective in inhibiting the formation of NOx (Fig. 2a). By using
the pure BT-diesel blends (525 wt.%), the NOx concentrations
went up from 86 ppm (BT5) with the increasing amount of BT,
and approached the highest levels (91 ppm) with the addition of
20 wt.% pure BT. The above results may be attributed to more
oxidation occurring with a higher fraction of oxygenated additive,
n-butanol. Furthermore, the NOx level decreased to 87 ppm when
using BT25, 13.5% less than that seen with D100. This result might
be due to the lower combustion temperature, which could be
observed by the exhaust temperature in Fig. 2. The NOx emissions
in this study were the result of a competition between the oxygen
content and the combustion temperature. A similar trend was
found when using 0.5 wt.% water-containing BT-diesel blends, as
the absolute NOx levels of this group were all lower than those
of pure BT-diesel blends. The NOx level when using BT5W0.5
was 78 ppm, representing a 22.5% reduction from that of D100.
Furthermore, the NOx levels increased with the increasing addition
of BT, again with the highest NOx concentration emitted when
using BT15W0.5, which had 5 wt.% lower BT content than that of

Fig. 1. ISFC (a) and IE (b) of three different water content groups of tested diesel
blends.

0.933.22% compared to the addition of pure BT. The above results

indicate that butanol is an energy economic alternative to regular
diesel, especially when there is a small amount of water content.
However, the heating value has to be considered in practical
applications for real diesel engines, as this may present a storage
problem, and thus the ISFC might be the better index of the energy
performance. Fortunately, the ISFCs of BT5W0.5 (495 mL
kW1 h1) and BT10W0.5 (497 mL kW1 h1) did not substantially
increase from D100 (493 mL kW1 h1), and thus could be better
choices than the other blends.

Fig. 2. Nitrogen oxide emissions (a) and exhaust gas temperatures (b) of three
different water content groups of tested diesel blends.

S.-L. Lin et al. / Fuel 93 (2012) 364372

369

the highest NOx producer with the pure BT-diesel blend (BT20).
The reason why the changing blended ratio emitted the highest
NOx concentration was that the existence of 0.5 wt.% water provided extra latent heat and retarded the ignition time, so that it
partially approached low-temperature combustion and inhibited
thermal NOx formation [45]. The exhaust temperatures when
using BT20 (539 K) and BT15W0.5 (540 K) were almost the same,
as shown in Fig. 2b, and this could be the critical factor with regard
to thermal NOx formation. Additionally, the 1.0 wt.% water content
BT-diesel blends were too unstable in 5 and 10 wt.% BT ratios to
test in the engine. Thus in the group with 1.0 wt.% water,
BT15W1 had the highest NOx emissions and this was reduced to
the overall lowest NOx emissions of 65 ppm in the three groups
of diesel blends, 35.5% lower than that of D100, by adding
25 wt.% BT to the blends. Consequently, the 1.0 wt.% water content
could effectively cool the combustion system and inhibit thermal
NOx formation; however, the signicantly higher ISFC of BT25W1
is a major obstacle to practical use. On the other hand, BT5W0.5
had a minimal ISFC increase (+0.44%) and also a signicant NOx
reduction (22.5%), and thus might be a more suitable alternative
diesel blend. Since the injection timing was xed in this HDDEG,
the increasing NOx levels by using low BT additive ratios could
not be avoided because of their higher oxygen content. Tests of
retarding injection timing are suggested in future studies, because
the retarded injection will provide a more premixed air condition
and absorb more heat from the compression stroke. NOx emissions
are thus expected to be reduced with the lower peak temperature
in the cylinder; however, the increase in ISFC will then become another problem. Low levels of BT addition are thus the better choices
when retarding the injection timing, because of their lower increase in ISFC.
3.4. PM and CO emissions
Particulate matter (PM) is a harmful pollutant with regard to
the respiratory system and generally forms by three modes: (1)
nucleation, (2) accumulation/condensation, and (3) coalescence.
In the current study, the amount of n-butanol added had a positive
effect in reducing PM (Fig. 3a). These trends could be due to the
increasing oxygen contained in the BT additive, which further enhanced the oxidation reactions, as supported by the results of a
ethanol-diesel blend investigation conducted by Lapuerta et al.
[46]. Additionally, the decrease in sulfur content of the diesel
blends when adding more sulfur-free additive (n-butanol) could
also inhibit the formation of sulfuric acid, which has been reported
to form PM by accumulating or condensing on the soot or metallic
ash in exhaust gas at a lower temperature than with the in-cylinder conditions [4749]. The PM emissions of the highest BT containing blends (BT25, BT25W0.5, and BT25W1) were 94, 52, and
88 mg Nm3, representing 31.2%, 61.9%, and 35.4% reductions from
that of D100 (135 mg Nm3), respectively. According to the above
sulfur-altered mechanism, BT25W1 should have the lowest PM
level instead of BT25W0.5. This unexpected result might be caused
by the micro-explosion mechanism, which could reduce the formation of nuclei (soot) and enhance the ISFC at the same time
[4244]. Nevertheless, the sulfur content of the tested diesel was
less than 50 ppm, which would lower the effect of the sulfur-altered mechanism to reduce PM, and the regulations regarding sulfur content are now becoming stricter, e.g. a limit of 10 ppm sulfur
came into effect in Europe in 2011. Thus, the mechanism of microexplosions dominates the PM reductions for different water additive ratios. Unfortunately, the PM emissions increased again by
increasing the water content to 1 wt.%, which might be because
the cooling effect retarded the soot oxidization and promoted the
condensation pathway to form PM. Consequently, 0.5 wt.% water
addition is a more efcient approach to reducing PM.

Fig. 3. Emissions of particulate matter (a) and carbon monoxide (b) of three
different water content groups of tested diesel blends.

Complete combustion should transform all hydrocarbons (fuel)

to water and CO2 instead of carbon monoxide (CO). However, the
CO emissions increased 2.3522.5% from D100 with the increasing
amounts of BT additive, which is considered as an oxygenated fuel.
This is because the oxygen content in butanol provided an oxidative
condition and rapidly transformed the fuel into CO. On the other
hand, the lower heating value of the BT-diesel blend led to a lower
combustion temperature, slowed down the oxidation reaction from
CO to CO2, and further increasing the CO level in the exhaust gas.
With regard to the different water contents, the same temperature
effect also occurred, with a higher water content (25 wt.%) having
a higher CO emission curve than that of the lower BT-containing
(0 wt.%) diesel blends. Although the CO emission increased by using
BT-diesel blends, the absolute untreated levels (<313 ppm) were
still much lower than the stationary source regulation (2000 ppm)
in Taiwan, and were easily removed by current catalytic converters.
3.5. PAH emissions
The PAHs and BaP equivalent (BaPeq) emissions of 0.5 wt.% water
containing BT-diesel blends combined solid and gaseous phase
PAHs, as shown in Table 5. The total-PAHs emission concentrations
of 525 wt.% were 387, 382, 363, 353, and 319 lg Nm3, representing 6.67%, 7.92%, 12.5%, 14.9%, and 23.1% reductions, respectively,
from that of D100. The major PAH compounds in the exhaust gas
of the diesel engine were phenanthrene (PA) and naphthalene
(Nap), which contributed 59.660.2% and 17.518.6%. These LMPAH emissions have been found to be affected by the aromatic
content in a fuel [5054]. A higher ratio of BT additive thus resulted

370

S.-L. Lin et al. / Fuel 93 (2012) 364372

Table 5
PAH emission concentration of water-containing butanoldiesel blends.

a
b
c
d
e

Conc. (lg Nm3)

D100
(n = 2)

BT5W0.5
(n = 2)

BT10W0.5
(n = 2)

BT15W0.5
(n = 2)

BT20W0.5
(n = 2)

BT25W0.5
Mean

TEFsa

Nap
AcPy
Acp
Flu
PA
Ant
FL
Pyr
CYC
B(a)A
CHR
B(b)F
B(k)F
B(e)P
B(a)P
PER
IND
DBA
B(b)C
B(ghi)P
COR
P
LM-PAHsb
P
MM-PAHsc
P
HM-PAHsd
Total PAHs
Total BaPeqe

72.5
7.81
3.73
20.7
249
9.19
12.6
31.6
0.82
1.25
1.26
1.33
1.68
0.06
0.17
0.02
0.12
0.03
0.06
0.07
0.02
363
48.9
2.24
415
1.14

69.0
7.01
3.35
19.5
232
8.19
10.9
30.0
0.78
1.15
1.18
1.24
1.60
0.06
0.15
0.01
0.11
0.02
0.06
0.05
0.02
339
45.3
2.08
387
1.05

68.2
6.81
3.00
19.3
229
8.57
10.5
29.7
0.79
1.16
1.18
1.25
1.61
0.05
0.15
0.02
0.09
0.02
0.05
0.05
0.02
335
44.6
2.07
382
1.05

66.8
6.73
2.72
19.1
216
5.76
10.0
29.0
0.81
1.18
1.22
1.11
1.66
0.05
0.16
0.02
0.04
0.02
0.05
0.04
0.02
317
43.4
2.08
363
1.00

65.8
6.13
2.36
18.9
211
5.19
10.1
27.5
0.76
1.02
1.11
1.05
1.56
0.05
0.15
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.04
0.02
309
41.6
1.92
353
0.94

59.1
5.82
2.16
17.2
190
4.74
8.37
25.3
0.79
1.07
1.17
1.06
1.62
0.04
0.14
0.01
0.03
0.02
0.04
0.04
0.02
279
37.8
1.96
319
0.91

0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.001
0.010
0.001
0.001
0
0.100
0.010
0.100
0.100
0
1.000
0
0.100
1.000
0
0.010
0

TEF is abbreviated from Toxicity Equivalency Factor.

LM is abbreviated from Low-Molecular.
MM is abbreviated from Medium-Molecular.
HM is abbreviated from High-Molecular.
BaPeq means the BaP toxicity equivalency of PAHs.

in lower LM-PAH emissions, and further signicantly reduced the

total-PAH levels. However, the toxicities of LM-PAHs (TEF = 0.001)
are much lower than those of MM- and HM-PAHs (TEF = 0.011.0).
Therefore, reducing the MM- and HM-PAHs is more efcient with
regard to reducing the total-BaPeq. In the current investigation,
the reductions in MM- and HM-PAHs were 7.3122.7% and
7.021.44%, respectively, with different water contents. These can
be attributed to the lower PM concentration, as it has been reported
to be a MM- and HM-PAH adsorbent. In addition, the reductions of
all molecular weight PAHs emissions could be partially because
the higher oxygen content in BT-diesel blends promoted more
complete combustion, retarded the LM-PAH formation, especially
the precursor (benzene), and accelerated the MM- and HM-PAH
degradation [55]. Nevertheless, the micro-explosions that could
improve the atomization of fuel droplets also accelerated the
oxidation of PAHs [7,42,44]. Therefore, the total BaPeq emitted was
0.911.14 lg Nm3, representing 7.7820.4% reductions from that
of D100 by using BT-diesel blends with 0.5 wt.% water content.
4. Conclusion
(1) The diesel blends with 0 and 0.5 wt.% water content could
remain as a one-phase clear liquid with 525 wt.% n-butanol
added, while those blends with 1.0 wt.% water needed at
least 15 wt.% n-butanol added as a stabilizer.
(2) The ISFC and CO emissions increased with the increasing BT
fractions, while the PM, total-PAHs, and total-BaPeq levels
reduced in HDDEG. The oxygen contained in BT provided
an oxidative condition to rapidly form CO and inhibit the formation of PM. The lower combustion temperature achieved
by adding BT caused the reduction in NOx, but also increased
the CO. The above trends, which were caused by lower combustion temperature, are all supported by the ndings of Park
et al. [56], who focused on bioethanolblended diesel.

(3) NOx emissions were inversely related to the exhaust temperatures with higher BT additions (1525 wt.%), while
BT20, BT15W0.5, and BT15W1 had the maximum NOx emissions in the 0, 0.5, and 1.0 wt.%-containing blends, respectively. The major mechanism of NOx reduction was the
lower combustion temperature [56] achieved by adding BT
and water.
(4) The 0.5 wt.% water content showed a dramatic reduction of
ISFC from pure and 1.0 wt.% BT addition, which is explained
by the fact that the micro-explosions could provide better
atomization and moderate the ISFC of low-heating value
BT-diesel blends.
(5) The ISFC of BT5W0.5 (495 mL kW1 h1) and BT10W0.5
(497 mL kW1 h1) did not substantially increase from that
of D100 (493 mL kW1 h1). In addition, they reduced NOx
by 22.5% and 16.5%, PM by 41.1% and 44.9%, total-PAHs by
6.67% and 7.92%, and total-BaPeq by 7.91% and 7.78%, respectively, compared to those of regular diesel. In order to consider both energy performance and pollutant emissions,
the 5 and 10 wt.% BT additives with 0.5% water content were
the two most suitable blends for practical use in an HDDEG.
Nevertheless, butanol additive can be utilized by applying
bio-processes that can reduce CO2 emissions over a products life cycle, and which are more environmentally friendly
than those associated with petro-diesel.

Acknowledgments
This research was supported in part by the National Science
Council in Taiwan, Grant Number NSC 98-2621-M-006-007. The
authors also thank Professor S.J. Chen, Dr. S.W. Li, Mr. J.H. Tsai,
Mr. Y.C. Liu, Ms. L.P. Chang, and Mr. S.S. Chang for their insightful
discussions and great help in the experimental work.

S.-L. Lin et al. / Fuel 93 (2012) 364372

371

Appendix A

References
[1] Bureau of Energy, Ministry of Economic Affair, Taiwan. Oil price information;
2009. <http://www.moeaboe.gov.tw/oil102/>.
[2] Williams PT, Abbass MK, Andrews GE. Diesel particulate emission: the role of
unburned fuel. Combust Flame 1989;75:124.
[3] Spencer MT, Shields LG, Sodeman DA, Toner SM, Prather KA. Comparison of oil
and fuel particle chemical signatures with particle emissions from heavy and
light duty vehicles. Atmos Environ 2006;40:522435.
[4] Maricq MM. Chemical characterization of particulate emissions from diesel
engines: a review. J Aerosol Sci 2007;38:1079118.
[5] Agarwal AK. Biofuels (alcohols and biodiesel) applications as fuels for internal
combustion engines. Prog Energy Combust 2007;38:23371.
[6] Scholl KW, Sorenson SC. Combustion of soybean oil methyl ester in a direct
injection diesel engine. SAE paper 930934; 1993.
[7] Lin YC, Lee WJ, Hou HC. PAH emissions and energy efciency of palm-biodiesel
blends fueled on diesel generator. Atmos Environ 2006;40:393040.
[8] Lin YC, Lee WJ, Wu TS, Wang CT. Comparison of PAH and regulated harmful
matter emissions from biodiesel blends and parafnic fuel blends on engine
accumulated mileage test. Fuel 2006;85:251623.
[9] Lin YC, Lee CF, Fang T. Characterization of particle size distribution from diesel
engines fueled with palm-biodiesel blends and parafnic fuel blends. Atmos
Environ 2008;42:113343.
[10] Karuppiah R, Peschel A, Grossmann IE, Martin M, Martinson W, Zullo L. Energy
optimization for the design of corn-based ethanol plants. Aiche J
2008;54:1499525.
[11] Sayin C. Engine performance and exhaust gas emissions of methanol and
ethanoldiesel blends. Fuel 2010;89:34105.
[12] Madson PW, Lococo DB. Recovery of volatile products from dilute high-fouling
process streams. Appl Biochem Biotechnol 2000;8486:104961.
[13] Karuppiah R, Peschel A, Grossmann IE, Martin M, Martinson W, Zullo L. Energy
optimization for the design of corn-based ethanol plants. AIChE J
2008;54:1499525.
[14] Martinez-Frias J, Aceves SM, Flowers DL. Improving ethanol life cycle energy
efciency by direct utilization of wet ethanol in HCCI engine. J Energy Res
Technol 2007;129:3327.
[15] Shi X, Yu Y, He H, Shuai S, Wang J, Li R. Emission characteristics using methyl
soyateethanoldiesel fuel blends on a diesel engine. Fuel 2005;84:15439.
[16] Kwanchareon P, Luengnaruemitchai A, Jai-In S. Solubility of a diesel
biodieselethanol blend, its fuel properties, and its emission characteristics
from diesel engine. Fuel 2007;86:105361.
[17] Gnansounou E, Dauriat A, Villegas J, Panichelli L. Life cycle assessment of
biofuels: energy and greenhouse gas balances. Bioresour Technol 2009;100:
491930.
[18] Wu M, Mintz M, Wang M, Arora S. Water consumption in the production of
ethanol and petroleum gasoline. Environ Manage 2009;44:98197.

[19] Rakopoulos DC, Rakopoulos CD, Giakoumis EG, Dimaratos AM, Kyritsis DC.
Effects of butanoldiesel fuel blends on the performance and emissions of a
high-speed DI diesel engine. Energ Convers Manag [accepted 18.02.20].
[20] Szwaja S, Naber JD. Combustion of n-butanol in a spark-ignition IC engine. Fuel
[Available online 9 September 2009].
[21] Sarathy SM, Thomson MJ, Togbe C, Dagaut P, Halter F, Mounaim-Rousselle C.
An experimental and kinetic modeling study of n-butanol combustion.
Combust Flame 2009;156:85264.
[22] Black G, Curran HJ, Pichon S, Simmie JM, Zhukov V. Bio-butanol: combustion
properties and detailed chemical kinetic model. Combust Flame
2010;157:36373.
[23] Rakopoulos DC, Rakopoulos CD, Hountalas DT, Kakaras EC, Giakoumis EG,
Papagiannakis RG. Investigation of the performance and emissions of bus
engine operating on butanoldiesel fuel blends. Fuel [Available online 10 April
2010].
[24] Yao M, Wang H, Zheng Z, Yue Y. Experimental study of n-butanol additive and
multi-injection on HD diesel engine performance and emissions. Fuel
[Available online 20 April 2010].
[25] Qureshi N, Meagher MM, Huang J, Hutkins RW. Acetone butanol ethanol (ABE)
recovery by pervaporation using silicalitesilicone composite membrane from
fed-batch reactor of Clostridium acetobutylicum. J Membrane Sci
2001;187:93102.
[26] Ezeji TC, Qureshi N, Blaschek HP. Production of acetone, butanol and ethanol
by Clostridium beijerinckii BA101 and in situ recovery by gas stripping. World
J Microb Biot 2003;19:595603.
[27] Ezeji TC, Qureshi N, Blaschek HP. Acetone butanol ethanol (ABE) production
from concentrated substrate: reduction in substrate inhibition by fed-batch
technique and product inhibition by gas stripping. Appl Microb Biot
2004;63:6538.
[28] Ezeji TC, Qureshi N, Blaschek HP. Production of acetone butanol (AB) from
liqueed corn starch, a commercial substrate, using Clostridium beijerinckii
coupled with product recovery by gas stripping. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol
2007;34:7717.
[29] Qureshia N, Sahaa BC, Hectora RE, Hughesb SR, Cottaa MA. Butanol production
from wheat straw by simultaneous saccharication and fermentation using
Clostridium beijerinckii: Part I Batch fermentation. Biomass Bioenergy
2008;32:16875.
[30] Gu Y, Hu S, Chen J, Shao L, He H, Yang Y, et al. Ammonium acetate enhances
solvent production by Clostridium acetobutylicum EA 2018 using cassava as a
fermentation medium. J Ind Microbiol Biotechnol 2009;36:122532.
[31] Johnson DT, Taconi KA. The glycerin glut: options for the value-added
conversion of crude glycerol resulting from biodiesel production. Environ
Prog 2007;26:33848.
[32] Frusteri F, Arena F, Bonura G, Cannilla C, Spadaro L, Di Blasi O. Catalytic
etherication of glycerol by tert-butyl alcohol to produce oxygenated
additives for diesel fuel. Appl Catal A-Gen 2009;367:7783.

372

S.-L. Lin et al. / Fuel 93 (2012) 364372

[33] Rahmat N, Abdullah AZ, Mohamed AR. Recent progress on innovative and
potential technologies for glycerol transformation into fuel additives: a critical
review. Renew Sust Energy Rev 2010;14:9871000.
[34] Lin SL, Lee WJ, Lee CF, Chen SJ. Energy savings and emission reduction of
nitrogen oxides, particulate matter, and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons by
adding water-containing acetone and neat soybean oil to a diesel-fueled
engine generator. Energy Fuels 2010;24:452233.
[35] Wu CW, Chen RH, Pu JY, Lin TH. The inuence of air-fuel ratio on engine
performance and pollutant emission of an SI engine using ethanolgasoline
blended fuels. Amos Environ 2004;38:7093100.
[36] Di Y, Cheung CS, Huang Z. Comparison of the effect of biodieseldiesel and
ethanoldiesel on the gaseous, emission of a direct-injection diesel engine.
Atmos Environ 2009;43:272130.
[37] Capello C, Wernet G, Sutter J, Hellweg S, Hungerbhler K. A comprehensive
environmental assessment of petrochemical solvent production. Int J Life Cycle
Assess 2009;14:46779.
[38] Kimoto K, Namba K, Owashi Y. Observation of combustion behavior for
single droplets of water-in-oil emulsied fuels. Proc Jpn Mech Soc 1995;
61:73843.
[39] Kadota T, Yamasaki H. Recent advances in the combustion of water fuel
emulsion. Prog Energy Combust Sci 2002;28:385404.
[40] Fu WB, Hou LY, Wang L, Ma FH. A unied model for the micro-explosion
of emulsied droplets of oil and water. Fuel Process Technol 2002;79(2):
10719.
[41] Abu ZM. Performance of single cylinder, direct injection diesel engine using
water fuel emulsions. Energy Convers Manage 2004;45(5):697705.
[42] Lin YC, Lee WJ, Chen CC. Saving energy and reducing emissions of both
polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons and particulate matter by adding biosolution to emulsied diesel. Environ Sci Technol 2006;40(17):55539.
[43] Lin CY, Chen LW. Comparison of fuel properties and emission characteristics
of two- and three-phase emulsions prepared by ultrasonically vibrating
and mechanically homogenizing emulsication methods. Fuel 2008;87:
215461.
[44] Chen CC, Lee WJ. Using oily wastewater emulsied fuel in boiler energy
saving and reduction of air pollutant emissions. Environ Sci Technol
2008;42:2705.

[45] Fang T, Lin YC, Foong TM, Lee CF. Biodiesel combustion in an optical HSDI
diesel engine under low load premixed combustion conditions. Fuel
2009;88:215462.
[46] Lapuerta M, Armas O, Garcia-Contreras R. Effect of ethanol on blending
stability and diesel engine emissions. Energy Fuels 2009;23:434354.
[47] Maricq MM, Chase RE, Xu N, Podsiadlik DH. The effects of the catalytic
converter and fuel sulfur level on motor vehicle particulate matter emissions:
gasoline vehicles. Environ Sci Technol 2002;36:27682.
[48] Vogt R, Kirchner U, Scheer V, Hinz KP, Trimborn A, Spengler B. Identication of
diesel exhaust particles at an autobahn, urban and rural location using singleparticle mass spectrometry. J Aerosol Sci 2003;34:31937.
[49] Lyyrnen J, Jokiniemi J, Kauppinen E. The effect of Mg-based additive on
aerosol characteristics in medium-speed diesel engines operating with
residual fuel oils. J Aerosol Sci 2002;33:96781.
[50] Mi HH, Lee WJ, Chen SJ, Lin TC, Wu TL, Hu JC. Effect of the gasoline additives on
PAH emission. Chemosphere 1998;36:203141.
[51] Yang HH, Lee WJ, Mi HH, Wong CH, Chen CB. Environ. PAH emissions
inuenced by Mn-Based additive and turbo-charging from a heavy-duty diesel
engine. Environ Int 1998;24:389403.
[52] Mi HH, Lee WJ, Chen CB, Yang HH, Wu SJ. Effect of fuel aromatic content on PAH
emission from a heavy-duty diesel engine. Chemosphere 2000;41:178390.
[53] Mi HH, Lee WJ, Tsai PJ, Chen CB. A comparison on the emission of polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons and their corresponding carcinogenic potencies from a
vehicle engine using leaded and lead-free gasoline. Environ Health Persp
2001;109:128590.
[54] Lin YC, Lee WJ, Li HW, Chen CB, Fang GC, Tsai PJ. Impact of using shing
boat fuel with high poly aromatic content on the emission of polycyclic
aromatic hydrocarbons from the diesel engine. Atmos Environ 2006;40:
16019.
[55] Song KH, Nag P, Litzinger TA, Haworth DC. Effects of oxygenated additives on
aromatic species in fuel-rich, premixed ethane combustion: a modeling study.
Combust Flame 2003;135:3419.
[56] Park SH, Cha J, Lee CS. Effects of Bioethanolblended diesel fuel on combustion
and emission reduction characteristics in a direct-injection diesel engine with
exhaust gas recirculation (EGR). Energy Fuels 2010;24:387283.