Biodiesel Fumes Health Hazards

[vwrobert51]

Ok Guys I Need Help On This, Dose Any One Out Their Have Any Infomation On Health Hazards From Biodiesel Exhaust Fumes? Please Straight Info , Not Hearsay.

 

[tditom]

So audi was right when he said you guys detect biodiesel use by smell??

 

[tdi_sport]

i dont suggest huffing exhaust from any combustion engine as a form of recreation.

 

[weedeater]

gasoline causes cancer.

 

[nh mike]

Ok Guys I Need Help On This, Dose Any One Out Their Have Any Infomation On Health Hazards From Biodiesel Exhaust Fumes? Please Straight Info , Not Hearsay.

http://www.biodiesel.org/pdf_files/fuelfactsheets/emissions.pdf
(a summary of the EPA's Tier I and II Health & Safety testing on biodiesel)

For the full report:
http://www.epa.gov/otaq/models/analysis/biodsl/p02001.pdf

A quick summary - the emissions are far, far, far less nasty than emissions from diesel. The PAH's and n-PAHs are the really nasty things (non-regulated, of course, since the EPA only tightly regulates the stuff that's easy to reduce on gasoline vehicles, for the most part), which B100 reduces by 80 to 90% compared to diesel, based on the EPA testing. Sulfates go to zero. Particulates, CO, and HCs go way down. NOx goes up slightly - although that could be offset if a person wants by slightly retarding the injection timing.

 

[Lug_Nut]

Liquid gasoline and diesel fuel are known carcinogens. It's not difficult to expect that burned gasoline and burned diesel are carcinogenic.
Liquid biodiesel is not carcinogenic. I expect that the exhaust of burned biodiesel is less carcinogenic than the exhaust of burned gasoline and diesel fuel.

p.s. What have "beige", "beetle" and "restored" in common that you won't capitalize those words?
You used up so many capital letters in your post that tdi sport had none left for his use!

 

[tditom]

...p.s. What have "beige", "beetle" and "restored" in common that you won't capitalize those words?

LOL! That's cold, man...chuckle...hehe

 

[vwrobert51]

Lug Nut!!! So You Can Read It Better!!!!!!

 

[compu_85]

Maybee he'se posting from a Pocket PC?

-J

 

[Audi5000TDI]

I wouldn't want to breath either biodiesel or D2 fumes, period. High temperature combustion causes all kinds of carcenogenics, from burnt oil, to burnt meat to burnt fat or yellow grease. None of it is good for you.

That said, I'd be very much interested in a comparison between ULSD and biodiesel to see the components of elements and carcenogins, now that ULSD is mandated this year. I'd like to see something not formulated or funded by the Biodiesel Council nor US oil for the results.

All the info I find is based on 6 to 10 year old data. ULSD should change the exhaust results, as well as higher pressure injector nozzles providing a more complete burn.

 

[Lightflyer1]

deleted

 

[nh mike]

I wouldn't want to breath either biodiesel or D2 fumes, period. High temperature combustion causes all kinds of carcenogenics, from burnt oil, to burnt meat to burnt fat or yellow grease. None of it is good for you.

Mutagenicity is a measure of the likelihood of the overall emission profile to cause mutation (and potentially cancerous mutation), so looking at the rated mutagenicity of the emissions is the best overall measure for how carcinogenic the emissions are (and yes, to a certain extent, essentially anything you burn can yield carcinogenic emissions - either from incomplete combustion or from the affect of the heat on the air). The EPA testing found that B100 reduced the overall mutagenicity of the emissions compared to diesel by roughly 90% (see the link I gave previously).

That said, I'd be very much interested in a comparison between ULSD and biodiesel to see the components of elements and carcenogins, now that ULSD is mandated this year.

Most emissions comparisons have been made with LSD, but there have been some comparing biodiesel to ULSD - I think mostly EUropean studies. ULSD does of course burn much cleaner than LSD, but in the studies I recall seeing, Biodiesel had a slight edge (although not nearly as much as when compared to LSD). I think biodiesel.org has some of those reports archived on their website.

I'd like to see something not formulated or funded by the Biodiesel Council nor US oil for the results.

What's the Biodiesel Council? Do you mean the NBB? They paid for the Tier I and II H&S testing, but it was done by an independent company (to meet the EPA's requirements). There have been many studies done by university research groups though that have replicated the results.

All the info I find is based on 6 to 10 year old data.

Primarily because there's not really any reason to do more emissions testing, as it's been pretty well established what the emissions profile is with biodiesel. The government won't fund emissions studies of biodiesel anymore, since they view it as a sufficiently studied area.

ULSD should change the exhaust results, as well as higher pressure injector nozzles providing a more complete burn.

True. Still, don't expect to see much in the way of new studies, since the government won't fund them anymore, and companies don't see any reason to pay for it anymore, since it's considered sufficiently studied.

 

[VWScully]

It makes sense that biodiesel exhaust would have significantly less PAHs than regular diesel since PAHs are Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons present only in hydrocarbon based fuel (i.e. gasoline and dino-diesel). So, no matter how look at it, BioDiesel is better .

 

[ikendu]

Ah, biodiesel. The clean, pure fuel.

Petroleum sits in the Earth for millions of years soaking up evil additives like sulfur. Biodiesel is fresh and clean (and pretty much chemically pure)!