Anda di halaman 1dari 129


The Handbook for:

Local Initiatives for Biodiesel from Recycled Oil

Table of Contents
0 Introduction ............................................................................................................... 3 0.1 Rationale ............................................................................................................ 3 0.2 Key Terminology ................................................................................................ 4 0.3 Background ........................................................................................................ 4 0.4 BioDieNet Partners ............................................................................................ 5 0.5 Summary ............................................................................................................ 5 1 The Waste Oil Resource (Part 1).............................................................................. 9 1.1 UCO availability current statistics .................................................................... 9 1.2 Types of collection scheme methodologies, logistics & economics. ................ 16 1.3 Quality implications (Factors that affect UCO quality) ...................................... 26 1.4 Caveats and problems encountered ................................................................ 28 1.5 Table of UCO collection scheme for biodiesel usage. ...................................... 29 1.6 Case studies of schemes known to be in operation: ........................................ 30 1.7 Relevant EU Legislation ................................................................................... 38 2 The Production Plant (Part 2) ................................................................................. 39 2.1 The Plant itself ................................................................................................. 39 2.2 Existing small scale UCOME plants ................................................................. 58 2.3 Relevant Legislation ......................................................................................... 60 2.4 Financing a Biodiesel Plant .............................................................................. 62 3 Fuelling the market (Part 3) .................................................................................... 73 3.1 Why Biodiesel? ................................................................................................ 73 3.2 Viability in Vehicles .......................................................................................... 75 3.3 European Market for biodiesel ......................................................................... 86 3.4 National Markets .............................................................................................. 89 3.5 Local Markets Potential .................................................................................... 94 3.6 Working with manufacturers ............................................................................. 98 3.7 Securing clients .............................................................................................. 105 3.8 Case Studies .................................................................................................. 107 3.9 Relevant European Legislation ...................................................................... 116 4 Fighting Criticism .................................................................................................. 119 4.1 Causes of food price hike ............................................................................... 119 4.2 The Silver Lining ............................................................................................ 121 5 Recommendations ................................................................................................ 124 5.1 Local Authority and Energy Agency participation ........................................... 124 6 Table of figures ..................................................................................................... 127

0 Introduction
The World is faced with a formidable challenge. The hope of the Kyoto Protocol was that industrialised nations would cut their collective emissions of greenhouse gases by 5.2% in 2012 compared to the year 1990. However, it now appears that World governments will not be capable of achieving even this token first-step. And this at a time when all manner of climate-induced disasters are gathering force, and polar ice caps melting at a rate that even the worst-case scenario computer models did not anticipate. Action is needed and action is needed now. Road transport contributes about 20% of the EU27 carbon dioxide emissions, and must play a fundamental role in greenhouse gas emissions reductions if we are to stave off catastrophic impacts on our living planet. Despite the desperate urgency of the situation, alternative fuel producers and environmental technologies are constantly facing resistance, criticism and hostility, which, if the same strict criteria were applied to the present generation of energy technologies, it would make a mockery of them. Biodiesel has not escaped such harsh and ill-informed attacks, particularly in the last year. It is the aim of this handbook to give in-depth information to prospective biodiesel producers, or project managers, to enable correct decision-making and to ensure success for their proposed projects. It seeks to analyse the real potential in the EU27 for biodiesel production from Used Cooking Oil (UCO), and its place in the market.

0.1 Rationale
Biodiesel is an alternative road fuel made from transesterfied fatty acids. The most common form is made from straight vegetable oil, whether that be rapeseed oil, soya oil or others. It can however, also be produced from used cooking oil (UCO) or animal fat such as tallow, and if processed correctly will produce high quality fuel. Although certain diesel engines can run on straight vegetable oil, if transformed into biodiesel it can be used in almost all diesel engines, most importantly in modern high-performance direct injection engines. Despite the knowledge of the possibilities for running diesel engines on vegetable oil having been overlooked for a large part of the last century, Dr Rudolf Diesel first developed the Diesel engine in 1895 with the full intention of running it on a variety of fuels, including vegetable oil. The concept is neither revolutionary nor fanciful. Recent developments at European Union level are transforming both the disposal method of Used Cooking Oil (UCO) and the way in which the EU fuels its road transport vehicles. These combined developments have made the use and production of biodiesel from UCO an increasingly favourable prospect. In May 2003, the European Parliament and the Council adopted the 'Directive on the promotion of the use of biofuels or other renewable fuels for transport'. This Directive requires that Member States in 2005 to replace 2% of their diesel and petrol with biofuels, and replacing 5,75 % by 2010. The EU Animal by-product Regulation 1774/2002 sets restrictions on the use of Used Cooking Oil originating in restaurants, catering facilities and kitchens. The effect is that, except for in special cases, UCO from catering premises can no longer be used as an ingredient in animal feed, which historically was its main disposal route. In parallel, the Landfill Directive 99/31EC requires each Member State to set out a pollution control regime which prohibits the acceptance of certain types of wastes at landfills, including liquid wastes

such as UCO. Furthermore, recent statistics show a huge increase in volume of production of UCO in the last few decades and the number of catering establishments in European countries is on the increase. With a growing amount of UCO in the EU, the disposal problems UCO generators now face, and the concern to remove the UCO from the food chain, the production of biodiesel offers an ideal solution. The waste management exigency and sustainable transport strategy can both be addressed by the production of biodiesel. This is a real opportunity.

0.2 Key Terminology

UCO: Used Cooking Oil. Also referred to throughout the literature as WVO (waste vegetable oil) and UVO (used vegetable oil), RVO (recycled vegetable oil) and RCO (Recycled Cooking Oil). UCO has been chosen as the standard for this document. FAME: Fatty Acid Methyl Ester. The technical acronym for biodiesel. UCOME: Used Cooking Oil Methyl Ester. FAME coming from UCO. B30: The use of B followed by a number such as B30 and B100 is used in this document where appropriate, to identify the various percentages of biodiesel blends. Although historically mainly used in America, the terminology is well understood and it is starting to be used across Europe now too, hence was deemed appropriate. Billion: The Anglo-Saxon use of billion has been chosen. That is to say for the purposes of this document, it represents one thousand million, and not a million million, which is referred to as a trillion. , or .: The Anglo-Saxon use of decimal points and commas to represent numbers has been chosen for the purposes of this document (except in the accompanying excel spreadsheets, and the occasional figure or table derived from excel, where continental numeration has been used). That is to say that a . represents a decimal point, and a , distinguishes between multiples of thousands, millions and billions. References: Where sources have not been given, the information has come directly from BioDieNet consortium partners.

0.3 Background
BioDieNet project is a project by the Intelligent Energy for Europe Programme to facilitate the uptake of used cooking oil to produce biodiesel. The objective of BioDieNet is the promotion of localised biodiesel production for transportation purposes, by means of the active involvement of key local actors in more than 10 European countries: There are essentially four phases to the BioDieNet project: Information gathering and synthesis (WP2) This phase recognises the existence of multiple sources of information and experience from across Europe concerning the supply chain of biodiesel UCOME. It aims to make the first comprehensive analysis of this state of the art to form the basis of the later project phases. The development of tools and resources (WP3)

The second phase takes the results of the first and develops from them a set of tools and resources which provide concise and comprehensible guidance to market actors in any Member State. With this guidance new biodiesel production facilities can be initiated and vehicle fleets converted to biodiesel. The set up of demonstration activities (WP 4-6) Using the tools and resources developed in WP3, Work packages 4-6 focus on bringing collected knowledge and tools into practice. The three work packages reflect three major focal points (and target groups) within the supply chain for establishing successful biodiesel demonstrations on local scale: production of local biodiesel plants (WP4), distribution facilities for biodiesel (WP5), and demand development for fleets (WP6). The demonstration phase forms the heart of the BioDieNet action; WP 2 and 3 are focused on providing deliverables (e.g. tools) that enable successful and efficient demonstration activities. Dissemination (WP 7/8) and Project Coordination (WP1) During the full duration of the project, dissemination activities (WP 7/8) are carried out in which results from the individual work packages are disseminated to relevant target groups including project partners, BioDieNet supporters, EC delegates as well as relevant target groups. This phase covers a wide range of dissemination techniques, from printed and electronic handbooks to workshops and training sessions, ongoing networks, all having the ultimate goal of increasing the uptake of biodiesel among public and private transport fleets across the EU. An overarching work package is concerned with the management of the project from start to finish, ensuring proper coordination, quality assurance and budgetary control (WP1).

0.4 BioDieNet Partners

Most of the partners are energy agencies, but a research institute and a biodiesel producer are also represented. The Partners are:_ Coordinator: Energy Solutions (North West London) ESNWL, CoBeneficiaries: Ecofys, Netherlands; North East London Energy Efficiency Advice Centre NELEEAC UK; Agncia Municipal de Energia e Ambiente de Oeiras OEINERGE, Portugal; Agncia Municipal de Energia de Sintra AMES, Portugal; Western Norway Research Institute WNRI, Norway; Sofia Energy Centre SEC, Bulgaria; Innoterm, Hungary; Agncia Energtica de la Ribera AER, Spain; Agency of Brasov for the Management of Energy & Environment ABMEE, Romania; Brent Community Transport BCT, UK;; Agenzia Veneziana per lEnergia AGIRE,Italy; ENERGIA E TERRITORIO SPA ET, Italy; Bundesverband freier Tankstellen e.V. BFT, Germany; Federation of Scientific & Technical Associations FAST, Italy; Province of Frysln FRYSLAN, Netherlands

0.5 Summary
1. BioDieNet project is a project under the Intelligent Energy for Europe Programme to facilitate the uptake of used cooking oil to produce biodiesel. The objective of BioDieNet is the promotion of localised biodiesel production for transportation purposes: It is the aim of this reference document to give in-depth information to prospective biodiesel producers, or project managers, to enable correct decision-making and to ensure success for their proposed projects. It seeks to analyse the real potential in the EU27 for biodiesel production from Used Cooking Oil (UCO), and its place in the market.

2. Biodiesel is an alternative road fuel made from transesterfied fatty acids. Although certain diesel engines can run on straight vegetable oil, if transformed into biodiesel it can be used in almost all diesel engines, most importantly in modern high-performance direct injection engines. 3. Recent developments at European Union level are transforming both the disposal method of Used Cooking Oil (UCO) and the way in which the EU fuels its road transport vehicles. These combined developments have made the use and production of biodiesel from UCO an increasingly favourable prospect. In May 2003, the European Parliament and the Council adopted the Biofuels Directive requires that Member States in 2005 to replace 2% of their diesel and petrol with biofuels, and replacing 5.75 % by 2010. The EU Animal by-product Regulation 1774/2002 sets restrictions on the use of Used Cooking Oil originating in restaurants, catering facilities and kitchens. The waste management exigency and sustainable transport strategy can both be addressed by the production of biodiesel. 4. There is still very little data available on UCO. Combining total collected with total dumped in the 10 BioDieNet countries gives a figure of 1.92 billion litres this would equate to 1.4 % of their total diesel consumption. Therefore, the potential for UCOME substituting 1 or 3 % of EU diesel consumption is quite possible. 5. The results indicate that restaurants represent the primary UCO source for most of the BioDieNet countries, although the domestic sector and food processing industry are also of importance. Most of the Western European BioDieNet countries have well established collection systems for UCO, but this is not the situation in Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary. Conservative estimates for average litres of recoverable UCO per capita are 8 l/cap and 6.26 l/cap. 6. Total FAME production in the EU-25 in 2005 has been estimated to 3.2 million tonnes. It can thus be concluded that the UCOME production in the ten BioDieNet countries constitutes about 13 % of the FAME produced in EU-25. 7. Local authorities are best placed to operate UCO collection services for catering establishments, but there is no core funding available for this service. Core funding may be available for domestic collection but the logistics make this a difficult endeavour. The food industry, is likely to already have found its solution to UCO waste. However, if a biodiesel producer is able to get hold of this material at the right price, then it could provide a very valuable, high-quality source of UCO. However, the most likely and reliable UCO source for a small-scale biodiesel producer will be from catering establishements. 8. The average cost of 23.4 cpl was estimated for the cost of UCO collection. Costs for a collection will very much depend on UCO generator ie domestic or catering or industry, and the particulars of your locality. Some research suggests that the actual operating costs could be as low as 8cpl to collect UCO from catering establishments if collection is kept in-house. The viability of a biodiesel plant will depend very heavily on the price for which it can obtain its raw material. The ideal scenario would be to be able to operate a free collection service. 9. The main problems encountered in UCO collection schemes were: Pouring of mineral oil in public containers; Low temperatures creating handling problems; Overcooking of oil which increase Free Fatty Acids (FFAs); Too much saturated fats; Illegal collections.

10. Classic industrial steps to biodiesel production are: 1. Oil pre-treatment 2. Free Fatty Acids elimination 3. Drying 4. Transesterification in reactors 5. Separation phase 6. Washing 7. Drying. Glycerine purification 8. Additive injection. 11. Choice of the fats or oils to be used in producing biodiesel is both a process chemistry decision and an economic decision. With respect to process chemistry, the greatest difference among the choices of fats and oils is the amount of FFAs. 12. Options for raw material are: Primary biomass (energy crops); secondary biomass and organic waste. Process catalyst options are: Alkaline catalysis; Acid catalysts; Heterogeneous catalysis; Enzymatic catalysis; No catalysts (Biox Co-Solvent Process & supercritical process). Process options are: Batch or Continuous. Batch processing is most common in small plants of less than 4 million litres/year. 13. For setting-up a biodiesel plant a project must take into account the following leglislation: Health & Safety; Oil Storage; Fire prevention and control; Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC); Planning; Taxation. By far the biggest and most arduous task with regards to legitimising the biodiesel plant is obtaining an Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) licence. The IPPC follows Council Directive 96/61/EC and is applied in each country via its own national laws. Costs of an IPPC licence can vary between 3000 and 35,000, depending on the size of operation. 14. The nature of the business under consideration by the BioDieNet project (small scale, localised biodiesel production), means that each enterprise likely to have 3 or 4 staff. The turnover of such an enterprise however, because of the high value of the end product, is likely to be more than 350,000 a year and could be several times higher. A business of this scale lends itself to the following possible company structures: A simple partnership; A limited company; A non-profit company or social enterprise; A worker co-operative. Energy Agencies are potential key actors, but the type of business they can set up will depend on their legal status which does vary from country to country. 15. Potential sources of funds for a small-scale biodiesel projects are: Bank Loans; Low Interest Loan Schemes; Commercial Credit; Equity financing; Business Angels venture capital. Having a robust Business Plan and financial guarantees are essential elements for securing funding. The European Investment Fund (EIF) of the EIB, offers support in the form of guarantees for SMEs. 16. The arguments for biodiesel are principally for Energy Security and Climate Change. There are other benefits, well documented, such as improvements in most local emissions, its reduced environmental impacts in case of spillage, job creation etc. But above all, biofuels are the only direct substitute for oil in transport that is currently available on a significant scale. 17. There is consensus in the literature that the use of biodiesel in place of petroleum diesel will result in significant GHG savings, with the potential for up to 80% from oil crops. The GHG savings potential of a scheme recycling UCO into biodiesel could be near on 100%. 18. Statistical analyses show a reduction of the local emissions of CO, HC, and PM10 by an average of 27%,36%,24% respectively for neat biodiesel relative to petroleum diesel. It is also predicted that up to around 30% that biodiesel will be NOx neutral although after that will increase. Hence any responsible environmental strategy would include a NOx mitigation policy. There is agreement that the use of biodiesel results in both a decrease in emissions of PAH, and in mutagenic activity.

19. Heated fuel lines are recommended for cold weather as B100 has higher cloud point than fossil diesel. Rubber components should be replace with biodiesel resistant parts and similarly biodiesel should not be brought into contact with brass, bronze, copper, lead, tin, and zinc as this may accelerate oxidation. Normally if warranty is approved for 100% biodiesel this will be provided that the standard engine oil change interval is halved, and similarly the oil and fuel filter change interval is halved. 20. The two cricitcal factors affecting the biodiesel market are taxation and the warranty approval for the vehicles. Although a harmonisation throughout Europe would be beneficial to development of the industry both in terms of taxation and warranty approvals, this is currently not the case. Each country has its specific legislation and tax regime for all fuels, including biofuels, and vehicle manufacturers vary their warranty approval between countries. 21. Germany, has been the leader in the field of biodiesel for over 10 years, with a proactive approach and favourable tax regime. At the end of 2006, total sales of biofuels were 3.1 million tonnes (all biofuels). But Volkswagen Group (VW, Audi, SEAT, Skoda) has stopped issuing warranty approval since the introduction of the EURO 4 engines and selfregenerating particle filters. This could seriously damage the market and reverse the trend. 22. Any assessment of your local market should include: Number of diesel vehicles in your region; Quantity of diesel consumed in your region; Quantity of biodiesel already consumed in your region; Local government fleets composition and fuel usage; Local public transport fleets composition and fuel usage; Number of independent filling stations in your region. 23. There are a number of options for dealing with Warranty issues: Creating consumer pressure by making clear to the manufacturers that providing warranties for biodiesel will be an important factor in decision-making for purchase of new vehicles; Undertaking a liability transfer where the risk is shifted onto the local authority or other public body; Development of your own warranty; Or simply promoting biodiesel for the vehicle pool that is out of warranty. 24. Favourable warranties are found with the following: Mercedes Benz, DaimlerChrysler, MAN and IVECO who have given approvals for EURO-4 and EURO-5 truck engines in commercial vehicles; Almost all agricultural vehicle manufacturers; The French manufacturers PSA Peugeot Citron and Renault approve warranties for their vehicles up to B30 under certain conditions. This offers sales prospects of at least 10 years. The public sector, whether it be bus fleets or waste collection vehicles is likely to be path of least resistance for biodiesel sales. 25. Recommendations: Local Authority and Energy Agency to participate in biodiesel projects; Closing of the loop by uniting the supply chain; Development of a UCO policy to make catering waste the responsibility of local authorities; In-depth EU-wide studies on UCO availability undertaken by official bodies; A fast-track system for IPPC applications for biodiesel plants; Widening of the scope of potential feedstocks in the quality standard EN14214; Development of an EU-wide quality assurance scheme; Making it compulsory that all EC Euro emissions standards be met using biofuels as well as fossil diesel; Promote biodiesel-friendly manufacturers such as PSA group.

1 The Waste Oil Resource (Part 1)

1.1 UCO availability current statistics
Figure 1, m3/year in the 10 European countries Getting hold of meaningful statistics on Used Cooking Oil (UCO) amounts and availability is a very difficult undertaking. 120000 For so long an unregulated industry, it is 100000 only in recent years that there has been an interest in estimating the quantities 80000 generated and amounts available. This is mainly due to the Animal by-Products 60000 Legislation 1774/2002 banning the use of Used Cooking Oils originating in 40000 restaurants, catering facilities and kitchens, including central kitchens and 20000 household kitchens. The effect of this ban is that, from 1st May 2003 (although 0 some countries sought derogation), used Portugal Spain Hungary Norway cooking oils from catering premises can no longer be used as an ingredient in animal feed. The Regulation was put in place following a series of food- and feed-borne crises (related to Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy BSE, dioxins, foot-and-mouth disease and classical swine fever) and introduced a number of safeguards to prevent risks to public and animal health. Figure 2, m3/year UCO collected






0 Holland Italy Portugal Spain Germany Hungary Norway UK

There is still very little data available on this issue. In the document Recycled Cooking Oils: Assessment of risk for public health, by STOA Panel (European Commission - Directorate General of Research, 2000), it is argued that there is a specific need for more information on the extent of Used Cooking Oil production and disposal. It states: At the moment there are no figures on the volume of these oils collected from catering or restaurant chains. Such lack of data does not permit to make decisions nor draw conclusions on the magnitude of the

issue in question. There have been many projects funded through ALTENER and STEER as well as through the LIFE programme which have addressed a varying range of issues concerned with the supply chain of biodiesel, some of which have focused specifically on UCOME and/or on local supply/demand issues. There is, however, no comprehensive and catalogued body of information which brings together the findings of all these projects and others which have not been funded through European Commission programmes. Work Package 2 of the BioDieNet project attempted to collate the information available from the partners of the consortium. The main difficulty in this task was that for some countries there was significant data, such as in the case of the UK, but in other almost nothing was available, particularly in New Member States such as Romania.

1.1.1 UCO- retrievable data Raw data Ignoring the difficulties in accessing accurate data, we can analyse the data collected in the WP2 of the project and estimate a total UCO production of (1,921 billion 1,921,000m3 (thousand million) litres in the countries represented in the BioDieNet consortium (Holland, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Germany, Hungary, Norway, Romania and UK). This is the total annual amount collected (772,000 M3) plus the total amount dumped (1,148,900 M3).
Figure 3, m3/year UCO utilized
120000 100000 80000 60000 40000 20000







Breaking this total by each country, we find that the major quantity of UCO is produced in Figure 4, m3/year in the 10 European countries Spain (with a total of 1,350,000m3), followed by 1400000 Germany (with 250,000m3) and the podium is completed with 1200000 Portugal (with a contribution of 1000000 96.000m3). You can find this 800000 breakdown in Figure 4. Combining total collected with 600000 total dumped gives a figure of 400000 1.92 billion litres. The diesel consumption of the 10 countries 200000 in 2005 was 115 Mt, or about 136 0 billion litres (assuming density of UCO UCOME UCO UCO 0.84 kg/l and 1.01 kgoe of diesel). collected dumped produced utilized So if all the UCO dumped were retrievable and used as fuel alongside the UCO already collected, this would equate to 1.4 % of the BioDieNet countries consumption. Furthermore, it should be borne in mind that the figures for UCO available is almost certainly a good degree higher, as there are some


countries for which much data is lacking. Therefore, these things considered the potential for UCOME substituting 1 or 3 % of EU diesel consumption is quite possible.
Figure 5, UCO summary table UCO collected m3/year Holland Italy Portugal Spain Germany Hungary Norway Romania UK Bulgaria Sum 67 000 60 000 28 600 270 000 250 000 5 500 1 000 n/a 90 000 n/a 772 100 UCO utilized 67 000 60 000 16 000 n/a n/a 5 000 300 n/a 99 000 n/a 247 300 UCO dumped n/a n/a 67 400 1 080 000 n/a 500 1 000 n/a n/a n/a 1 148 900 UCOME produced n/a n/a 16 000 216 346 277 000 n/a 333 n/a 20 400 3 600 533 679

The European Commission (2001) based on the EU 15 provides estimates of 17Mt of total oils and fats oil consumed in Europe (EU-15) (with a rate of increase of 2% per year), about 75% of which is vegetable oils. Austria estimates that 18.5% of the total amount of oil/fat is collectible. Extrapolation of this figure to the rest of EU would give a market size of up to 3 Mt of fats and vegetable oils in 2001, 2.36 Mt of which would be recoverable UCO. Since 2000 the EU has grown by about 31% from 375.55 million to 493.275 million with the acquisition of Member States for the new EU27. Taking this into account and the annual growth of 2%, the total amount of recoverable UCO available in the EU27 should now stand at about 3.55 Mt or 3.95 billion (thousand million) litres. As the EU27 diesel consumption was 214 billion (thousand million) litres in 2007, so assuming 3.95 billion litres of recoverable UCO, this gives a figure of 1.8% of the EU27 diesel consumption that could potentially be replaced by UCOME (ignoring losses in production etc).
Figure 6, Diesel consumption in BioDieNet countries Country Bulgaria Germany Spain Italy Hungary Netherlands Portugal Romania UK Norway Total Diesel Consumption in 2005: in ktoe 1394 26101 25614 23105 2259 6558 4167 2265 21209 2448 115120 Diesel Consumption in 2005: in million litres 1643 30765 30191 27234 2663 7730 4912 2670 24999 2885 135691

This previous study therefore is reiterated in the findings of the BioDieNet study. Therefore despite the gaps in the data, it would appear that there is a theme for the potential segment that UCOME could fulfill in the diesel market.

11 Trends The data on the countries located in Western Europe (Holland, Italy, Portugal, Spain, Germany, Norway and the UK) generally seems to indicate that UCO collection is becoming an institutionalised activity (i.e. no longer sporadic and unusual). Moreover, in some countries (e.g. the UK), UCO collection seems to be highly centralised, as opposed to a country like Norway, where collection seems more sporadic, small-scale and local. The estimated amounts of UCO collected each year vary greatly between the countries, with a maximum of 270,000 m3 a year in Germany and 250,000 m3 a year in Spain. The lowest amounts are the ones stated for Norway (1,000 m3) and Hungary (5,500 m3) of UCO a year. The information from Eastern Europe (i.e. Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary) is scarcer than the information on countries in Western Europe. This could indicate some of the following: that UCO collection is either less widespread in the countries in Eastern Europe, that collection is carried out in less formalised ways or that the information is simply less readily available than in the Western European countries. According to the respondents, dumping of UCO is not done in Holland, Italy (negligible), Germany and the UK (illegal). However, dumping does seem to take place on a rather large scale in Spain in particular, but also in Portugal, whereas Norway and Hungary seem to have a more moderate problem. It should be noted that the reliability of the figures is questionable, due to the sensitive nature of the issue in question. The results indicate that restaurants represent the primary UCO source for most of the BioDieNet countries, although the domestic sector and food processing industry are also of importance. Most of the Western European BioDieNet countries have well established collection systems for UCO, but this is not the situation in Bulgaria, Romania and Hungary. There are substantial variations between the countries in terms of what type of virgin oil is used as cooking oil. Sunflower, palm and soy are the most common types of oil, while rape, olive and peanut oil occurs. Eastern European countries rely rather heavily on sunflower oil. Most of the western European countries have regulations preventing UCO dumping. The main environmental impacts of UCO appear to be water pollution from dumping. Clogging of sewer pipes also constitutes a problem. In addition to biodiesel production, several uses of UCO are found, including heating oil, presswood industry, lubricating oil, soap production, chemical industry, animal feed, and asphalt processing. The following section looks at country and region specific examples of UCO availability, to give a real and clearer picture of the UCO resource that may be available within an area.

1.1.2 Country examples UCO Availability in Portugal by AMES As is the case in most countries, hard data about the quantities going to the public sewer system, or placed in sanitary landfill, is very hard to come by. There are however, some entities that are developing strategies to accurate the UCO availability mainly in restaurant and food processing companies. The previous studies about vegetable oil
Figure 7, UCO in Portugal
Used 56% Waste 44%


consumption in Portugal, carried out by the National Statistic Institute (INE) said it was possible to presume that, in average, each Portuguese citizen consumes 20 kg of oil per year, or 22 litres per year. The Portuguese population is 10.6 million, so its possible to establish an annual consumption of 233 million litres.

Figure 8, UCO by sector in Portugal

Restaurant 45%

Industry 1%

Domestic 54%

According with the National Waste Institute (INR), around 44% of this value is considered waste (the other 56% is considered to be incorporated in the food and loses), so, on that basis we have about 100 million litres of UCO produced every year, with no adequate destination.

UCO collected m3/year Holland Italy Portugal Spain Germany Hungary Norway Romania UK Bulgaria Sum 67 000 60 000 28 600 270 000 250 000 5 500 1 000 n/a 90 000 n/a 772 100

UCO utilized 67 000 60 000 16 000 n/a n/a 5 000 300 n/a 99 000 n/a 247 300

UCO dumped n/a n/a 67 400 1 080 000 n/a 500 1 000 n/a n/a n/a 1 148 900

UCOME produced n/a n/a 16 000 216 346 277 000 n/a 333 n/a 20 400 3 600 533 679

shows us that Portugals diesel use is about 4.9 billion (thousand million) litres per year, of which the 100 million litres of UCO, works out at 2%. This corroborates the conjecture made in Section that between 1 to 3% of the EU27s diesel use could come from UCOME. Breaking down the UCO availability per sector: the domestic sector is responsible for 54% of it (a total of 46,641 tons); the restaurants are responsible for 45% (a total of 38,867 tons); and the industrial sector is responsible for 1% (a total of 864 tons). The ProBio regions The Probio project has also carried out UCO research in its respective regions. These figures only include actual UCO collected by either waste companies or municipal schemes to recycle UCO from schools, hospitals and the domestic sector, and do not necessarily indicate
Figure 9, UCO in ProBio regions


the actual potential recoverable UCO in the regions.

1.1.3 Per capita figures- a guide to calculating the resource in your area
Trying to establish the quantity of UCO available to you in your area is a very inexact science. It will depend on many factors including the eating habits of the country you are in, the population, the number of restaurants and large public buildings and the presence or not of the food industry. The aim of this section is to be able to make some kind of estimate, based on the population in your area, it will not be exact, and significantly more research is needed in each EU country before real accurate data can be used. But it should give you a general idea of the recoverable UCO that may be available in your region and hence will be a starting-point for any project. In Section it was established that the best estimate for the amount of recoverable UCO available in the EU27 is 3.95 billion litres. 3.95 billion litres, for a population of 493.275 million, works out at 8 litres of recoverable UCO per capita. Interestingly enough this figure matches quite closely the findings of the BioDieNet research for the overall average.of the 10 countries (minus Bulgaria and Romania for which there was no data). That is 6.26 litres of recoverable UCO per capita.
Figure 10, Summary table of UCO statistics per capita UCO amount (billion litres) EU27 (recoverable UCO) Country (collected and dumped UCO) Bulgaria Germany Spain Italy Hungary Netherlands Portugal Romania UK Norway Average Region (only collected UCO) Burgos, Spain Avila, Spain Huelva, Spain Pormuja, Solvenia Abruzzo, Italy 3.95 kl n/a 250000 1350000 60000 6000 67000 96000 n/a 90000 2000 Population (millions) 493.275 thousands 7679 82315 44475 59131 10066 16358 10599 21565 60853 4681 UCO litres per capita 8

3,04 30,35 1,01 0,60 4,10 9,06 1,48 0,43 6,26

UCO amount (l) 347160 84258 370000 n/a 801497,7778

Population (actual) 363874 167818 483792 123280 1305307

0,95 0,50 0,76 0,61


Southwark, London (only small catering) Lewisham, London (only small catering) Average

2500000 1000000

244866 248992

10,21 4,02 2,84

You can see in Error! Reference source not found. that the figures do vary significantly between countries. Spain is at the head with 30 litres of UCO per capita, Norway at the bottom with only 0.43. However these lower figures should be treated with much caution. As has been mentioned previously a lot of data is missing for countries and it is highly likely that a lot more UCO is available than is documented. An example of this is in London. Two detailed studies were carried out in 2003 of two London boroughs: Southwark and Lewisham. These two figures are 10.21 and 4.02 litres per capita were the results of the survey of uniquely small catering establishments within the borough, that is to say, excluding large restaurants, government buildings, hospitals, schools, catering industry and domestic use etc etc. Therefore, it is highly likely that the real figures are closer to the Spanish figure of 30 litres. If we then compare this to the official figure for the UK from the BioDieNet research, that of 1.48 litres, we find an enormous disparity. The reverse situation is true for Spain and its Spanish regions studied in the ProBio project. The regions all give very low figures of under 1 litre, compared to the official national statistic from the BioDieNet research of 30 litres. Again the likelihood for this disparity is pure lack of data. Furthermore the ProBio regions only included what is actually collected and not the potential recoverable UCO in the region, which is what has been calculated in the BioDieNet research. It is interesting to note that the studies which could be considered to be the most in-depth, notably the EU-wide study and the Portugal research, both give similar results of 8 litres and 9 litres respectively. Recoverable UCO calculation tool for your region These results leave the decision-maker with some fundamental problems, mainly which figures are to be believed. However, as it has been established that it is highly likely that almost all of the figures are an underestimate of the actual recoverable UCO available within countries and regions, they provide a conservative base for calculating the potential within a specific demographic area. Which figures the decision-maker should use, will depend on the risk aversity. Error! Reference source not found. gives a model for decision-making with regard to which figure to use, according to the level of risk associated. Although not perfect tool for reasons discussed, it should give an indication of the baseline UCO resource for your project.
Figure 11, UCO calculation tool Risk Level High risk Assumptions Much data is missing and that most countries actually will have as much as 30 litres per capita of recoverable UCO.per capita like Spain Presume the EU27 wide figure of 8 litres per capita Litres per capita 30 l/cap

Medium risk

8 l/cap


Low risk

Presume the average of the BioDieNet countries of 6.26 litres per capita The lowest figure for a region of 0.5 litres per capita

6.26 l/cap 0.5 l/cap

Very low risk

1.1.4 UCOME- Current statistics

Total FAME production in the EU-25 in 2005 has been estimated to 3.2 million tonnes (EBB, 2006). The total amount of 533 thousand m3 UCOME in Error! Reference source not found. corresponds to 0.426 million tonnes, when applying an average density of 0.88. It can thus be concluded that the UCOME production in the ten BioDieNet countries constitutes about 13 % of the FAME produced in EU-25. The total annual amount collected UCO in the BioDieNet countries has been estimated to about 772 thousand m3. The amount biodiesel that is produced from this source is about 533 thousand m3. From these figures it would appear that there is not a large surplus of collected UCO collected that could be utilized for producing more biodiesel. One country (Germany) is even producing more UCOME than is being collected, which could be explained by its import of UCO from UK.
Figure 12, UCOME m3/year produced in BioDieNet countries
300000 250000 200000 150000 100000 50000 0 Portugal Spain Germany Norway UK Bulgaria

It appears that UK has the largest potential for increasing its local UCOME production, since very little of the collected UCO is used for UCOME production. This said, this presumes that the figures are complete. There is evidence that the amount of available local UCO is much higher than official statistics suggest. The London studies show that even excluding large restaurants, government buildings, hospitals, schools, catering industry and domestic use, the per capita amount of recoverable UCO is between 3 and 10 times greater than those suggested by the official figures (see Section 1.1.3).

1.2 Types of collection scheme methodologies, logistics & economics.

1.2.1 Types of UCO generators Restaurants &Catering
60 50 40

Figure 30 13, UCO Litres per week by catering type, London

.20 10 0
Other Pub Restaurant Kebab Fast Food

Fish & Chips


The most obvious source of UCO is restaurants and other catering establishments. Data is often also most readily available for these types of sources. Most EU countries have laws in place that require establishments to have their UCO waste collected separately and that it be documented. Results from the BioDieNet work package 2 study, revealed that restaurants constitute the main or primary source of UCO in six countries (Holland, Spain, Germany, Hungary, the UK and Bulgaria), and the secondary source in four countries. In terms of the quantity of UCO per week available from catering establishments will obviously greatly depend on the size of the catering establishment. The studies in London focused on small catering establishments like fish & chip shops, as these were the causing the most problems in terms of waste disposal. For Lewisham in London, an average of 32.6 litres/week per catering establishment was established., and for Southwark, the average quantity was around 45 litres/week. This source of UCO is likely to be the most prolific for any prospective biodiesel producer. Domestic The domestic resource is much harder to calculate as it is not a regulated household waste product in most countries. National statistics suggest that in some countries, such as Spain and Portugal, household generation of UCO is quite high. The main difficulty with the domestic sector is the logistics of collection, and hence UCO in most countries for biodiesel production does not come from this source. Yet as the BioDieNet Work Package 2 research revealed, the domestic sector is the main source of UCO in three countries, Italy, Portugal and Romania. Hence if this potential could be tapped in some way, it could provide a very useful raw material for biodiesel production. Schemes have been underway to tap this part of the UCO resource which are discussed later in the section. Food Industry According the findings of Work Package 2, the food processing industry is only the primary source of UCO in one of the countries, Norway. The food industry, as it will be governed by various environmental and waste laws is likely to already have found its solution to UCO waste. However, if a biodiesel producer is able to get hold of this material at the right price, then it
Figure 15, UCO generator mix in BioDieNet countries
6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Restaurants Domestic sector Food processing industry

Figure 14, UCO disposal methods, London

1 3% 3 8% 6%

collected normal refuse stockpiled drain dont dispose no comment



could provide a very valuable, high-quality source of UCO. This is only likely to be the case in certain circumstances and will depend very heavily on the location of food industry within the relevant locality Figure 15 shows the relative distribution of types of UCO source throughout the 10 BioDieNet countries.

1.2.2 The methodology & logistics of collection for each type of UCO generators: Type of entity to do the collection eg. Local Municipality, Private Waste Collector Currently the collections in operation are mostly by private waste companies. This most probably stems from the previous usage of UCO for animal feed before the Animal ByProducts legislation. Every country therefore has some kind of private operator collecting UCO. Municipalities therefore do not have UCO collection as part of their traditional activities. That is not to say that it would not make sense, in fact some research suggest that they may be the best organisation to deal with the waste resource. The problem is that private companies will be and are very prone to cherry picking. This means that they will collect from the large-scale, high-quality UCO generator (such as large restaurants), yet will overlook with smaller establishments. Or will overcharge the smaller catering establishments for collection, provoking fly tipping down the sewers. The London UCO studies showed that not only could the local Council collect the UCO at a cheaper price than the establishments were currently paying, but also it would be much more efficient. The case in question, revealed that there were a number of UCO collectors coming to the same street that may have 20 to 30 catering establishments, to collect from only a few and then move on to another area. This meant that there were 4 to 5 times as many journeys to collect UCO as was necessary, than if one organisation would collect from all on the same street. Furthermore, the general consensus was that establishment would be very happy for the council to collect their waste oil (see Figure 16). Responses to UCO questionnaire Municipal waste fleets also have the existing infrastructure of a depot, refuelling, waste management licences etc. The main problem identified in the London studies was that there is no core funding is available for a UCO collection service by local councils. There just isnt the same legal responsibility on the municipality as there is for domestic collection. Trade Waste departments must be self-financing and hence so must any UCO collection scheme. The EC may consider legislation for changing this situation, which would put the same kind of responsibility to municipalities for the
Figure 16, Response to: Would you be prepared for
% 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 Yes No no comment
Yes if free cheaper Yes if free No No - council unreliable no No comment - council unreliable Yes no comment Yes if cheaper


management of catering business waste, that would allow for core funding to go to collection. This could help solve a lot of problems of illegal dumping and give a boost to ensuring a supply of UCO to local biodiesel production plants. So effectively this means that any new vans, or infrastructure, plus the actual costs of the UCO must be covered, either by charging collection fees, or by the sale of the UCO to the biodiesel producer. The impacts that this has on costs is discussed in Section 1.2.3. Type and number of vehicles required Cleanaway, a UK waste management company, confirmed that a Luton transit-type van is ideal for the kind of UCO collection scheme envisaged for collecting from a small catering establishment. They suggest it is the most cost-effective type of vehicle for this purpose. Experience in other projects too would seem to indicate that this would be the best type of vehicle. Because unless one is collecting from very large UCO producers, like the food industry, larger vehicles would most likely be unnecessary and cumbersome when going from door to door. For Domestic collection, this will depend very much on the scheme. Whether one is literally collecting from door to door, or whether there are collection points. In terms of number of vehicles. This will obviously depend on the amount of UCO to be collected. The London studies suggested that two vehicles should be amply sufficient to provide the quantities needed initially for the output of 400,000 litres of biodiesel. It was added that this could well be increased, and it is highly likely that at least double the figure of 400,000 litres could actually be collected with full employment of two vehicles. In some areas municipal waste management facilities have installed Clean Spots, such as in the case of Burgos with big containers (1,000 litres volume) where waste-oil from citizens and small producers is stocked. This would require either a large vehicle to carry the container itself, or much more likely, an oil tanker that will suction out the waste oil into the tank of the vehicle. The costs involved for this will be very different as will the vehicle. In general there is a lack of real definitive recommendations into the ideal vehicle for each type of UCO generator, and any prospective UCO collector will have to work within their budget, applying what they may consider to be the best option for their given raw material base. There follows a London example of how the vehicle logistics for a UCO collection scheme could work: At an initial production level of 400,000 litres per annum, this presumes around 8000 litres collected per week, which bearing in mind the average quantity of waste cooking oil produced per week by small catering establishments is 38 litres per week gives 210 establishments output required. However each establishment only needs to be visited at the most once every two weeks as 38 litres is just under two 20l tins. Assuming this, only 105 establishments will need to be visited per week. Southwark Trade Waste estimate that this kind of operation could feasibly average a rate of 7 establishments per hour. This equates to 15 hours, or two days work.

19 Collection vessels required In terms of container types, much more information is available although, experience differs between various schemes. The normal sizes that have been tried in schemes :

o o o o

to families small containers of 3-5 litres to condominiums medium size containers of 50 litres to restaurants, canteens, schools etc, larger containers of 100-200 litres for recycling points containers of 500 to 1000 litres

The containers can be placed both inside and outside the restaurants (in an area that is not accessible to the public). If a big quantity of product is produced bigger cisterns are available. Container Examples Total opening containers. The dimensions of the lid are in line with European standards, they are easy to move and to pile up. They are resistant to the majority of chemical products. The drum and the lid are perfectly shock resistant, high density polystyrene containers. They have a high molecular weight, they are very resistant to chemical products. The seal is made of Zinc and steel. Containers for condominiums OLIVIA is a fixed street container for waste oil collection, to be placed in the separate waste collection site. It is a 500 lt, outside container with a security system to avoid spilling. It is made of polyethylene and it is shock and acids resistant. The material is one piece only without any welding. It can be cleaned and decontaminated. It is specific for permanent exposure to atmospheric agents. It includes a hermetic seal and a removable upper lid. The collection container can be placed inside. It is closed with a pressure leaver lid and a clasp lock. The upper diameter is 95 cm. and the height is 110 cm. The inside container holds 217 lt is airtight, watertight with hermetic seal. It is approved for safe stocking of dangerous liquids. It is made of anti corrosion steel with a removable upper lid. The gasket is high quality, it is provided with a leaver lid and external closing ring. Diameter 60 cm. Height about cm.90. Funnel The funnel is integrated inside the container and it is shaped to avoid spillage. Family containers From 2,2 to 5,5 lt. To be distributed to families In the Pomurje in Slovenia region 3 liters cases were distributed to students, who took those cases home and
Figure 18, Inside container Figure 17, Outside containers


than return them filled up with wasted oils back to the school Use original tin containers Another interesting option was suggested in London by a waste management company. That is to collect waste oil poured back into the original tins may be the best way to operate a UCO collection service. This way traceability can be maintained for each establishment with waste transfer notes for each batch of tins from each establishment. This method is in favour of pouring or pumping the oil into larger containers at source. This also allows a greater control over quality of oil from each establishment. It will also save on costs of purchasing new oil containers. Number of collections required per week This will obviously depend very much on the size of vehicle, the catchment area and the requirement of the biodiesel plant. Lewisham, a municipality of about 250 thousand inhabitants, their Trade Waste department estimated that to collect half a million litres of UCO considers one vehicle working 5 days per week should be sufficient.

1.2.3 The economics of collection for each type of UCO generator:

Work Package 2 of the BioDieNet project revealed the costs of collection to be as shown in Error! Reference source not found.. The UCO collection cost is similar in Portugal 35 c (350 /m3), the 32 c (320/m3), Italy 25 c (250 /m3), Germany 25c (250 /m3), and Spain 24 c (240 /m3). Collection is cheaper in Norway 14 c (140 /m3) and Holland 9 c (90 /m3). UCO collection is claimed to be free in one country, Hungary. It could be noted that there is definitely a cost involved in operating collection vehicles and driving around to collect UCO, although there is no collection fee. There was no applicable data from the Eastern European countries Ignoring Hungary and Romania, this gives an average price of 23.4 cppl for cost of UCO collection. This may be well overstated. It is unclear exactly how these figures were calculated. It is quite likely that the higher figures are actually the cost of purchasing UCO from a UCO collector and does not necessarily match the actually collection costs. Included would the profit margin of the collector. Other research would support this. One previous study suggested a price of 18.5 c pl (de Winne 2001) which was actually for processed UCO. The average cost of 23.4 cpl could be taken as a reference point but for the prospective UCO collector/purchaser the cost of UCO will very much depend on:
Figure 19, Cost of UCO collection/purchase Country Holland Italy Portugal Spain Germany Hungary Norway Romania UK Bulgaria

90 250 350 240 250 0 140 n/a 320 n/a

o If you are purchasing from an existing collector o If the oil is processed or not o What the quality of the oil is, ie where it is coming from


o The current demand for the resource: (Work Package 2 revealed that the main use,
seems to be biodiesel production in most cases, but also for: presswood industry (Holland), heat recovery (Norway), lubricating oils (Italy), soap production (Portugal), fuel for solid boilers (Spain), chemical industries, Biogas plants (Germany), fodder, and finally, chemical industry and asphalt processing (Hungary). Romania, Bulgaria and the UK have listed no alternative current uses.) Set up costs This is much better taken on a case by case basis, as costs will vary tremendously depending on the type of collection scheme, the country and the biodiesel plant requirements. Set up costs will include o Buckets: The business case for BioDieNet estimates the cost of setting up the buckets to be about 15,000 for a collection of about 25,000 litres per week. o Vehicles: The set-up costs of any vehicle will depend on whether it is paid for upfront, in which case a diesel van will probably cost about 30,000. But if paid for by hirepurchase or other means can be included in operating costs. o Buildling/storage: Similarly any building costs will depend on whether storage is hired, or bought prior to operation. o Washing/processing equipment

o Operating costs
Again the operating cost of a UCO collection scheme will depend very much on the type of UCO generator you will collect from ie domestic or catering or industry, and the particulars of your locality. However the following list should be used as an indicator for the costs that you should take into account for a collection scheme: UCO o o o Total amount of UCO to be collected Density of UCO Percentage loss in waste water and solids

Vehicles o Payload of collection vehicle, kg o Number of trips possible per vehicle per day o Cost per vehicle & driver, per day o Days of operation per week o Weeks of collection, per year o Actual number of collection vehicles required o Total cost of UCO collection vehicles & drivers, per week Containers o Volume of UCO bucket o Cost of UCO bucket with lid o Number of UCO buckets needed, per unit volume of UCO o Loss of buckets, per week o Lifetime of buckets, years o Total number of UCO buckets needed o Set up cost of UCO buckets Washing o Water required for cleaning buckets, litres per bucket


o o o o o o o o o

Cost of water, per m3 Cost of wastewater disposal per m3 Cleaning agent required, per five hundred buckets, litres Cost of cleaning agent, per litre Number of buckets washed, per week Amount of water needed for bucket wash Amount of cleaning agent needed Cost of bucket washing, per week Replacement cost of lost UCO buckets, per week

Quality testing o Costs of testing UCO quality, per week Totals o Total cost of UCO collection per week o Cost of UCO, per litre Some research in London suggests that the actual operating costs could be as low as 8cpl to collect UCO from catering establishments, much nearer to that figure from the Netherlands from Work Package 2, of 9cpl. Therefore it is well worth investigating the your UCO collection costs thoroughly rather than assuming the average of 23.4cpl calculated in earlier in the Section., or taking the cost per litre given by existing UCO collectors as an indication of the actual costs of collection. The viability of a biodiesel plant will depend very heavily on the price for which it can obtain its raw material. If keeping collection in-house or motivating the local municipality to undertake a collection scheme, providing you with the material at cost, it could be that the margins for biodiesel production become much more attractive. As an aid, an example of a cost breakdown for one vehicle for UCO collection in the UK (Error! Reference source not found.). However please note that these costs will vary significantly by country and by scheme, but they give an indication of what may be involved.


Figure 20, Example of costs breakdown for UCO collection vehicle

Operating Costs Estimate for 6 tonne GVW Box/Tail- lift Vehicle Vehicle Approximate Capital Cost Specification: Est. Payload Estimated Useful Life Utilisation Est. No of days per year Estimated Annual Mileage 144 (3 per week) 8000 37.500 Chassis cab with GRP box, non-slip sealed floor and full width tail-lift 3000 kgs 10 years

Standing Costs Depreciation Licences Insurances 3125 500 1875 5500 Running Costs Fuel Maintenance Tyres 2995 750 375 4120 Driver Costs Based on current driver 20.000 Based on 144 operational days per year Daily mileage of 55 Fuel cost of 1,3 per litre MPG of 20 per day Driver Cost 138,89 Standing Costs 38,19 Running Costs 28,33 Total Cost Per Day Total Per Year 205,41 32043,70 Charges for collection (if the collector pays the generator) Although it used to be the case in the past, that private companies collecting UCO would pay for the generator for their waste product, since the Animal By-Products legislation, it does no longer seem to be the case, at least in any of the BioDieNet countries. There may be special cases where UCO collectors will pay the food industry for their waste oil, on the basis that it is of extremely high quality, although there is no tangible evidence to support this, that has been forthcoming.

24 Income from collection (if the generator pays the collector) Much more common has been the introduction of a collection fee by private companies. The amount charged for collection of waste cooking oil can vary considerably between different establishments. The London UCO surveys carried out in Southwark and Lewisham revealed that although the average charge was between 7cpl the amount charged in some cases was as much as 15cpl. Charging the UCO generator obviously has its advantages. It enables costs to be covered and obeys the principle of polluter pays. However, if someone is already fly-tipping for free they are unlikely to start paying for the privilege of having their oil taken away. Although this may not bother a private company, any scheme involving a local municipality should take this into account. Furthermore you are much more likely to be able to secure a supply of UCO the less you charge for collection. The ideal scenario would be a free collection service. Offering a free collection UCO is classified as controlled waste, and as such it is legally required to be collected and disposed of by a licensed waste management organisation. Recent changes to European legislation have forbidden the use of UCO in animal feed production. removing one viable disposal option, and increased restrictions and taxes on liquid waste disposed of to landfill. UCO collection services exist, which charge UCO generators a fee for collection. The fee is likely to increase as a result of the regulatory changes. This is generally acceptable for large establishments, such as restaurant chains, hospitals and schools. However, smaller catering establishments may find the cost and effort associated with proper disposal unacceptable, and they resort to dumping it illegally down the drains. Illegal dumping creates problems for Water Authorities, as fat, oil and grease cause blockages in the sewerage systems. While this activity is illegal, enforcement of the law is difficult as small catering establishments tend to be grouped together and it is often impossible to pinpoint the exact source of the UCO that caused a blockage. By introducing a free collection service, engaging the participation of the small UCO generators and working with Environmental Health Officers or equivalent, sound waste management practices could be enforced. A free collection could be the way to alleviate the problem of illegal UCO dumping and simultaneously secure a reliable supply of UCO for biodiesel production. In the areas where free collection is being carried out, this is usually by companies that have agreements with their local authority, as there are external benefits to offering the collection for free. In fact the ideal solution for UCO collection would be free local authority collections (or paid for in existing municipal taxations). The main difficulty with local authorities carrying this out themselves is that at present Trade Waste departments have to be self-financing, as there is currently no core-funding for operation of this type to take place. If there were core funding available it wouldnt be surprising if every municipality would undertake their own UCO collection service. However, as things stand, anyone who wishes to persuade their local authority to undertake UCO


collection, must bear in mind that cost will most likely need to be covered, either by charging the UCO generator or by the sale of the UCO to the bioidesel plant.

1.3 Quality implications (Factors that affect UCO quality)

1.3.1 The type UCO generator
Where the UCO comes from will have a large impact on its quality. In general, the food industry, using the oil probably only once to cook and then disposing of it, with strict quality control standards, is likely to generate generic, consistently high quality UCO. As discussed earlier, though, this source of UCO is often not present within a region and in any case is normally already destined for use by existing companies. Restaurants and catering establishments are more likely to be a reliable source for a new UCO collector. However the quality of UCO can vary significantly too between places. If the oil has been fried to frequently before disposal it is likely to contain a high level of Free Fatty Acids FFAs, water, solids and other impurities. Some may even not be worth collecting for biodiesel used, and would be better burnt in a biomass boiler. Therefore testing of UCO quality beforehand in a form of trial, and continual quality control should be seen as an integral part of any UCO collection business. In terms of domestic UCO, it is likely that it wont be fried as much as in some catering establishments, but the problem will be in the collection logistics.

1.3.2 Type of oils used within countries

As for in the production of biodiesel from virgin feedstock, the characteristics of the biodiesel depend directly on the characteristics of the type of oil used for its production. The type of oil used in turn depends on the eating habits at that time within the particular country.
Figure 21, Mix of saturated fats in oil types


Fatty acid Cetane Number Cloudy Point Stability

Saturated 12:0, 14:0, 16:0, 18:0, 20:0, 22:0, High High High

Monounsaturated 16:0, 18:0, 20:1, 22:1 Medium Medium Medium

Polyunsaturated 18:2, 18:3 Low Low Low

(Source: NREL Biodiesel Handling and Use Guidelines, Third Edition, September 2006)

Work Package 2 of the BioDieNet project revealed that the type of oil that constitutes the main source of UCO varies greatly between the countries. According to the collected data, the most commonly occurring oil types are: sunflower oil (7/10 countries), palm oil (5/10 countries), and soy oil (4/10). Rape seed oil was listed for three countries. Olive oil was listed for two countries, as was corn oil and seed oil. Peanut oil, frying fat, mixed oils and other oils were only listed once. (A clear weakness in this part of the data is that mixed oils, other, seed and frying fat may refer to some of the aforementioned types of oil, blurring the overall profile somewhat). All of the Eastern European countries (Romania, Bulgaria and Hungary) have listed sunflower oil, and Romania has in addition listed palm oil. The three Southern European countries (Spain, Portugal and Italy) have different profiles, but all of them have listed sunflower oil, and two have listed olive oil. Germany and Norway seem to have very similar profiles, with a main reliance on sunflower, palm, soy, and rape. The impacts of feedstock on biodiesel is discussed in detail in Part 2. But one example of how the UCO quality, and ability to collect it can be affected by the type of oil, is with the case of palm oil. Palm oil due to its high level of saturated fats solidifies at much higher temperatures than other oils. In fact at around 35C. This is not good for pouring and hence complicates collection. It is a disposal problem in general as it contributes significantly too to the blockage of sewer systems due to these characteristics. This said, it should be borne in mind that cooking oil is the highest quality vegetable oil available on the commodities market. UCO is a degraded version of this highest quality, which makes it an excellent raw material for producing biodiesel. Cooking oil is is classed as RBD (Refined, Bleached and Deodorised) edible oil, which means it is fully refined and contains no gums or other impurities which large scale industrial producers have to deal with.

1.3.3 Collection methodology

Any collection scheme should encourage frequent changing of the oil. Firstly because it provides a better feedstock for biodiesel, but secondly because some research suggests that too much frying of cooking oil can increase its carcinogenic properties. Water is a major contaminant of UCO and any scheme should minimize the accumulation of water in collection vessels. This will mean that containers should be kept inside where possible, and the lids kept firmly closed. Particular caution should be taken with public recycling containers, whether it be for domestic collection or for restaurants. Many pilot schemes have shown that contamination with mineral oil, by people either dumping irresponsibly or just incorrectly informed. The quality of the oil resulting from such contamination will be basically worthless in terms of its suitability for transformation into biodiesel.


Basically the more quality control within your collection methodology the better. Ensuring a quality UCO supply is quintessential to the success of any UCOME biodiesel production project.

1.4 Caveats and problems encountered

1.4.1 Lack of budgets
In general there is a lack of specific budgets of the local authorities to enforce satisfactory UCO disposal methods. This can be problematic as it is hard to motivate the establishment to dispose of its UCO as required. Most schemes need to be encouraged therefore through goodwill.

1.4.2 Pouring of mineral oil in public containers

A big problem, relevant mainly to public recycling points, is people either erroneously or deliberately pouring mineral oil into the UCO collection containers. This is disastrous for the UCO quality and more or less renders it unuseable.

1.4.3 Low Temperatures

If the outside temperature in winter reaches 0 degrees or less this can have implications on the handling of the UCO. It will be much harder, if impossible, to pour and will complicate any collection scheme. This is likely to be a problem for public collection containers and containers stored outside.

1.4.4 Overcooking of oil

Oil that has been overused will be of much inferior quality to that only used once or twice. It will have more solids and water in and more Free Fatty Acids, complicating its conversion into biodiesel.

1.4.5 Avoiding saturated fats

Too much saturated fat, as is the case with palm oil, significantly raise the temperature at which the oil is solid. This means handling of the oil in normal ambient temperatures can be problematic. The biodiesel it is used to produce will inherit the same characteristics. Hence it is advisable to keep these kinds of saturated oils to a minimum in any collection scheme.

1.4.6 Illegal Collections

In some countries there has been a history of illegal collections. The companies involved do not hold the required licenses and use inappropriate disposal routes or they simply dump. These companies are used to charging customers for collection. Should these outfits be in operation in your country, you should bear in mind that any competing scheme, legitimate or not, will be met with hostility. Having the local authority support for such an undertaking, would be highly advisable.


1.5 Table of UCO collection scheme for biodiesel usage.

Figure 22, Summary table of UCO collection schemes Collection Scheme General public recycling collection points Target Domestic, some catering Logistics One large container. Usually need oil tanker vehicle Advantages Only need to collect from a few points. Disadvantages Tipping of mineral oil and other impurities. Low temperatures in winter causing solidification. Inconsistency in quantities received per week/month. Requires a large amount of stops on a collection round and may be uneconomic Conditions for Success Must have very clear information campaign to the public and safeguards against people tipping in substances other than UCO. Core funding available



Small containers of 2 to 5 litres. Large transit vans.

Easy quality management . Engagement of the general public.


Restaurant s and other catering establishme nts

Outside or inside containers of up to 200 litres. Large transit vans.

Good source of large quantities of UCO. May be able to charge for collection.

Public buildings

Schools, Hospitals, Town Halls etc

Outside or inside containers of up to 200 litres. Large transit vans.

Good source of fair quantities of UCO. Being public sector there is likely to be willingness to cooperate. High quality, consistent raw material.

Outside containers may have problem with low temperature in winter causing solidification. Other bodies, both legal and illegal may already be operating this service. Resource is limited. Outside containers may have problem with low temperature in winter causing solidification.

Best if free, or at least low collection fee.

A good relationship with the local authority and their permission to collect from the public sector buildings. Reaching a contract with the UCO generator for a suitable price.


Food & Catering Industry

Oil tanker most probably required

Possible cost payable to UCO generator due to its desirability. Specialist companies probably already in contracts for this collection.


1.6 Case studies of schemes known to be in operation:

There follows some interesting case studies of trail-blazing UCO collection schemes being undertaken throughout the EU. Finally there is an extract from a progress report for a UCO collection scheme that was being trialled in London. It gives an interesting insight into the logistical issues faced when trying to collect from the catering establishments within the local municipality.

1.6.1 Case Study 1: SPAIN, La Ribera

One of the main goals of AER (Agencia Energtica de la Ribera) is to achieve a sustainable development model for their region. With this aim the AER has developed the project that consists of recycling UCO into biodiesel. In the first phase the biodiesel obtained will be used by public transport and local government transport fleets. In the second phase all citizens will be able to use biodiesel.
Figure 23, Amount of entities (2004)
450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0 407 418



1st quarter

2nd quarter

3rd quarter

4th quarter

The project started in July 2003. An agreement was signed between the Agencia Energtica de la Ribera and the company CENRESA to collect UCO from restaurants and food industries. Furthermore, the Agency also signed an agreement with thirty Town Councils during 2003. In 2004 the collection of industrial UCO was carried out and a report of the total volume collected was sent to all the Mayors. In these reports a summary of the total collected amount and the total entities involved for each town was related. During the year 2004 two new towns signed the agreement. Now the total amount of Town Councils participating in this project is 32. The waste oil collected goes to an enterprise in Reus called Bionet Europe in order to transform it into biodiesel in a chemical process. Then the biodiesel comes back to the county in a public dispenser and council dispersers for their use in municipality vehicles. The total quantity of litter collected and added entities are shown in the next table. The number of restaurants
Figure 24, Amount of UCO collected (2004)

68000 65000 62000 59000 56000 53000 50000





1st quarter

2nd quarter

3rd quarter

4th quarter


and industries added to the program at the end of the year was 418 with 260,698 l collected. In the year of 2004, AER was only collecting wasted oil from industries and restaurants, and, as it can be viewed in the figures above, 418 enterprises collaborated with the AER collecting wasted oil and 260,698 l of wasted oil was collected. The activity has been quite successful because the number of restaurants and industries is increasing and also the volume of oil collected, avoiding it to be thrown to the sewer with the consequent environmental improvement and the energy saving. AER is studying the domestic waste oil collection but it is really complicated because the town hall does not want to put the tanks in the streets because of the risk of accidents. So AER is trying to collaborate with some entities In order to have the oil tanks in their facilities, giving the population the possibility to get there and dispose their UCO. This project is a very positive step but it is not easy to develop because the energy agency is the intermediate between different interests. There are many different partners and that fact increases the possible problems. Nevertheless, it is not very difficult to repeat in other places. The question is to find a waste oil collecting enterprise which provides the oil collecting tanks and be sure that this oil goes to an enterprise in order to transform it into biodiesel. Then, the coming back of the biodiesel is more complicated because the enterprise does not do the distribution. So, AER solved it through a home carburant distribution enterprise that buy the biodiesel to the enterprise and distributes it through all the councils and also sells biodiesel in a public petrol station. About the council dispenser, we have four councils that uses biodiesel in a daily bases. The remaining councils uses less biodiesel because they are small councils with a very small consume of carburant in order to get their own dispenser. The goal of the project was to involve all the town halls of La Ribera and as much number of industries and restaurants as possible. AER managed to get 68% of the town halls and a quite big number of restaurants, so the results can be classified as very good, but there is still space for improvement.

1.6.2 Case Study 2: PORTUGAL, Sintra

Sintras project started in 2003 and was created by the Municipal Energy Agency (AMES) in cooperation with the Municipality (especially with the Education Division). The kick-off of the project was with numerous awareness campaigns in the schools of the Municipality that agreed to participate in the project. The adherent schools go from Kindergardens till Secondary schools. The collection company puts in each school 2 containers. Using 2 containers by school, the company guarantees that the UCO is always collected (if it was
Figure 25, Sintras biodiesel filling station


only one container, when the capacity was fulfil, the UCO collection stopped). In this containers the company collects the UCO from the households of the students and from the canteen of the school. At this moment, the project has 50 schools, with a total of 10 000 students and 550 teachers. In what concerns the amount of UCO collected in the schools, in the scholar year of 2005/2006 the amount collected was 9 105l, in the scholar year of 2006/2007 the total amount collected was 13 355l and for the scholar year of 2007/2008, AMES expects to collect a very similar value (around 14 000l). After this first step, AMES felt that the general population was already aware of the UCO collection scheme in the schools and all the benefits of this collection, and was ready to start collecting UCO in their households. So, AMES implemented a collection scheme in the streets of Sintra. Since October 2005 Sintras inhabitants have 23 containers strategically placed near the collection points of paper, glass and plastic. The street containers were well received by the population, and in the end of 2006 the amount of UCO collected was 18 523l and in 2007 this figure increased for 27 607l. In figure 28 you can find the total amount of UCO collected every month: Clearly one can see that the collection isnt constant. There are numerous peaks (January 2008, February 2007, March 2007) and there are also months with lower amounts (August 2006, July 2006, May 2007). In average, AMES collects 2 900l of UCO/month. The UCO collected is sent to a biodiesel production plant in Setbal (owner: Dieselbase) and then, the biodiesel produced is sent back to Sintra and is used in the municipal fleet (mainly in the Solid Waste Collection fleet). To be able to fill the tank of the trucks, Sintra created the only existent Biodiesel Filling Station in Portugal.
Figure 27, UCO Collection in Sintra (Total =79,958l ) Amount (l)
5000 4500 4000 3500 3000 2500 2000 1500 1000 500 0
Dez-05 Fev-06 Abr-06 Jun-06 Ago-06 Out-06 Dez-06 Fev-07 Abr-07 Jun-07 Ago-07 Out-07 Dez-07 Fev-08
1380 2480 2460 2145 1650 3045 2723 2635 4417 3905

Figure 26, UCO container in the street






Case Study 3: Austria, Graz

Since 2005, the 134 buses of the Grazer Verkehrsbetriebe (Graz transport services) have been running on biodiesel produced from waste cooking oil. The idea was originally conceived in the city environmental department that wanted to prevent used cooking oil from being disposed of into the sewage system. According to an assessment conducted in the year 2000, one litre of old cooking oil in the sewage system cost the sewage treatment plant operator 0.44 euros. Since 1990, waste cooking oil from private households is collected, free of charge, at special collection stations for problematic substances. In 1999, a free collection system was also installed for restaurants and catering businesses in Graz. Around 20 % of the 1,200 catering businesses in Graz with an estimated annual capacity of 200,000 litres of used cooking oil are currently collection is run by the non-profit service company ko-Service that creates useful jobs in ecological areas for long-term unemployed and disabled people. At present, 50 people are employed by ko-Service. The Grazer Verkehrsbetriebe started the project Eco-diesel from old cooking oil already back in 1994. The added consumption for buses is at around 5 %, however, the price for biodiesel is lower. The biodiesel recycling facility is at the South-Styrian energy and protein cooperative SEEG in Mureck. One kilogram of waste cooking oil can be recycled into 0.85 litres of biodiesel. SEEG was the first company in the world ever to produce biodiesel out of waste cooking oil. Bioenergie- Kreislauf Mureck was awarded the World Energy Globe Award in 2001.

1.6.3 Case Study 4: SPAIN, Valencia

The ECO- BUS pilot project was implemented in 1996 by EMT, the publiclyowned Municipal Transport Company of Valencia1. The project initially focused only on the collection of UCO from the citys catering and food service sectors and hotels, so as to reuse it as biodiesel to power buses serving Valencias city centre. All collaborating establishments are identified with a sticker, and they are given containers for the collection of used oil.
Figure 28, Oil containers during a UCO collection

The initiatives scope was later extended to also include UCO from the domestic sector. Containers for collecting the used oil were distributed to all participating establishments. The oil was collected by the local authority, and sent to a transformation plant to produce an ecodiesel fuel mix for use by the citys bus fleet. In the 2nd year of ECOBUS the collections began. A private company collects the UCO and 800 restaurants out of 5000 participated in the program after vast promoting and advertising.


The collections are self-financed as the collection company sell the UCO to the processing plant. All establishments involved can be identified with an ECOBUS sticker and are given containers for which to store their UCO. The oil is then taken to a storage warehouse in Valencia to undergo the oil/water filtering process, which is continuously repeated in order to minimise waste. For example: the leftover waste is returned to a tank and left out in the heat to allow any excess oil to drip out. The waste accumulated during this process is 20%- 15% water and 5% solid proving that this process is thorough. One tank holds 30,000L of oil and is stored for no more than 1 week to avoid the oil absorbing water and the acidity increasing. The oil is then transported to a plant in Barcelona 150miles away in a large tanker to undergo the oil to bio diesel conversion.
Figure 29, Oil + Water seperation

In the initial phase of the pilot project, a plant was to be built in Valencia but funding was not available, so is now part of the future plan for bio diesel use. This whole process from collecting the UCO to distributing the bio diesel (excluding Biodiesel pump at bus depot ECOBUS collection van Oil containers during a UCO collection operational costs) costs about 15 cents per litre and sells for 20 cents per litre and is exempt from tax payments until the review in 2012. Over the two-year period, an average of approximately 53 000 litres of domestic and commercial UCO was collected every month. By the end of the project, 800 commercial outlets and private homes had collected a total of around 800 000 litres of UCO. Tests were performed, running engines on the biodiesel under controlled operating conditions. Data were gathered on the effects of different mixtures of biodiesel fuel with respect to polluting emissions, as well as engine performance and durability. Altogether, 322 654 litres of eco-diesel were used by 264 of the municipals fleet of 480 buses. The projects direct positive impacts on the environment include a reduction in emissions of atmospheric contaminants from EMT bus exhausts (a 22% reduction in particulate matter, 15% less carbon monoxide, up to 13% less nitrate dioxide and 18% less carbon dioxide). Furthermore, a significant decrease in the amount of vegetable oil discharged into the public drainage system was achieved.

This has led to improvements in the sewer systems functioning and has contributed to a reduction in the sewer networks infestation by rodents. For more information, please visti the following website:


1.6.4 Case Study 5: SPAIN, Burgos

The Burgoss project is one of the most developed nowadays. The collection scheme developed is very ambitious and contemplates every sector of activity (restaurants, food industry, domestic sector, schools, etc.). Its not easy to implement such a collection scheme, mainly due to the diversity of sources and the different needs of each sector (in type of container, in collection periodicity, etc.). In the next paragraphs you can find a short description of the project. The current private waste management company in charge of the collection of waste-oil in the province of Burgos is Tags Burgos (Tratamiento de Aceites y Grasas Usadas), whose facilities are located in the Industrial Area called Los Pedernales. The waste oil collection system starts from the moment when oil becomes waste, this means after they are used. The producers/owners of waste-oil must contact the waste-oil management company and request them a collection point. These collection points are usually metal and plastic containers at the producers place. Depending on the producer and the quantity of waste-oil it produces, the management company supplies different types of containers. In some municipal waste management facilities called Clean Spots and owned by municipalities, the waste-oil management company puts big containers (1.000 litres volume) where waste-oil from citizens and small producers is stocked. This waste is monthly collected by the company. The main municipal Clean Spots in the province of Burgos are located in the cities of Burgos (Punto Limpio Norte y Punto Limpio Sur), Briviesca, Medina de Pomar, Villarcayo and Aranda de Duero. In Burgos, the City Council distributed in 2005 several specific small containers (2,5-litre bottles) between citizens in order they can collect the waste-oil at home and bring it to the Clean Spot. There are some big markets in the capital of the province where big containers (250 and 600 litre-volume) for the collection of waste-oil can also be found. As Green Spots are usually located in the outskirts of the city, these collection points make the citizens deposit of waste-oil easier. These markets are Mercado Norte, Mercado Sur, Mercado G 9 and Galeras Mxico. Restaurants and other hotel industry owners can choose the most suitable container to stock waste-oil according to their production and space availability of the place, but the most common system is using metal containers of 50 and 200 litres volume. Almost 850 restaurant establishments from the whole province use the provincial waste-oil collection and management network. The waste-oil from restaurants is collected by the management company periodically, depending on the needs of each establishment.
Figure 31, Municipal Clean Spot Figure 30, Container for the restaurants and hotels


Apart from the programmed collection routes, the restaurants can request for specific collection services if the containers are full. A new provisional collection service is now being offered to municipalities. The waste-oil management company places 200 litre-containers at the public urban waste collection points for recycling. In these points people can usually find specific containers to deposit glass, paper and plastic wastes. Nowadays, the management company has waste-oil collection containers in the municipal waste collection points of four towns of the province.
Figure 32, Container located near the public urban waste collection point

Once the municipal technicians check that the container is full, the management company is called and they collect the waste-oil. The local management company also collects UCO in other different places with a high production of this waste. These places are mainly schools and factories with their own dinning room. Some of these factories are Metalibrica, DFS, Explosivos Ro Tinto, Nuclenor, etc. Moreover, there are some food industries in the province which produce high quantities of UCO (Eurofrits, Cofrits, Matutano, etc.). The local management company also collects this waste-oil. The type of container depends on the needs of each facility. All the collection points described have their own specific container/s. At the end of 2007, the total number of collection points in the province of Burgos was around 1.100. The local management company collects the full containers with different periodicities depending on the type of point (weekly, monthly or once each two months). In any case, the collection is established in different routes around the province: Burgos City: ten different routes. Rest of the province: eight different routes. Once the collectors transport the UCO collected to the stocking area, located in the company facilities in Villagonzalo Pedernales, the waste is analysed and treated to eliminate water and big impurities and it is then delivered to the main biodiesel production plant in the North of Spain, Bionor Transformacin. This plant is located in the neighbouring province of Alava, and uses UCO and pure vegetable oil as raw material for the production of biodiesel. One of its main suppliers of UCO is Tags Burgos, the local waste-oil management company.

1.6.5 Case Study 6: BISTRO Project UCO Collection A progress report

This Report provides a general update on the pilot UCO collection service being undertaken by a London borough. Background The list of catering establishments provided consists of 46 premises. Documentation relating to the Duty of Care has been issued and is gradually being collected in.


The List has been divided into two routes. Early indications are that each collection point averages 43 litres per week. Findings o Some establishments are not entirely happy with the planned service as they have been used to a Call when ready arrangement with their previous collector. All however are pleased about the free service. Other concerns have been raised about the size of the buckets due to them previously using 205 litre drums. Some of these have poorly fitting lids and the oil appears to have water dirt ingress and these are also difficult to handle. The operating times have proved difficult as many of the establishments do not open until the afternoon and evening. Collection rounds have therefore been adjusted however there are cost implications. Arrangements have been established where possible to collect the oil from the rear of the premises while it is shut. On certain occasions it has been necessary to return to the premises as the there are often uniformed about the service and will therefore prevent access. The main issue seems to be the effects of the service on other collection firms. On a number of occasions, another collector has taken the oil before the vehicle arrives. There are reports that the collector says he is working on behalf of and even removes our buckets

o o

o o Vehicle It is already becoming clear that the current vehicle is too small for the operation. This means that the van returns to the depot several times to unload. The vehicle is however useful in terms of reaching the rear of the premises in some cases. Containers o The containers are well used and some of the caterers have remarked on the poor state of them. There are sizes, 15 and 20 litres; however, everyone prefers the 20 litre size The lids are not always a good fit and some have been distorted by pouring hot oil in them Quotations are currently being obtained for some new buckets. To obtain a brand bucket there is a minimum order of 3000 Depot Storage and Collections There were early difficulties in contacting to make arrangements to collect the oil. This is now improving and must continue to be a regular arrangement as there are concerns about storing large quantities at the depot. UCO comes under Oil Storage Regulations that have recently been revised


1.7 Relevant EU Legislation

1.7.1 Animal By-Products Legislation 1774/2002
The main legislation to affect UCO in the European Union, passed in 2002, is the EU Animal by-product regulation 1774/2002. The ban includes the use of Used Cooking Oils originating in restaurants, catering facilities and kitchens, including central kitchens and household kitchens. The effect of this ban is that, from 1st May 2003, (some countries argued for a delay in its implementation) used cooking oils from catering premises can no longer be used as an ingredient in animal feed. The Regulation was put in place following a series of foodand feed-borne crises (related to Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy - BSE, dioxins, footand-mouth disease and classical swine fever) and introduced a number of safeguards to prevent risks to public and animal health.

1.7.2 Landfill Directive 99/31/EC

The Landfill Directive requires each Member State to set out a pollution control regime for the purpose of implementing Council Directive 99/31/EC on the landfill of waste. The Regulations prohibit the acceptance of certain types of wastes at landfills, including liquid wastes.

1.7.3 Waste Incineration Directive 2000/76/EC

Waste incineration and co-incineration processes are subject to stringent controls. The Waste Incineration Directive (WID) has to be implemented in Member States. For example, in Scotland, all new incineration and coincineration installations from 28 December 2002 and all existing installations from 28 December 2005 will need to meet the technical requirements of WID. If an incinerator is burning used cooking oils then it will be required to comply with the WID.

1.7.4 Other legislation

In terms of other legislation relevant to UCO, it depends on the country in question. For example, in the UK The Environmental Protection Act 1990 also places a Duty of Care on every industry to ensure "that all reasonable steps are taken to look after any waste you have and prevent its illegal disposal by others", this includes waste cooking oils and fats. In general the laws are weak and hard to implement.


2 The Production Plant (Part 2)

2.1 The Plant itself
2.1.1 Types of Technologies & scales of operation Oil Feedstock The primary raw materials used in the production of biodiesel are vegetable oils, animal fats, and recycled greases. These materials contain triglycerides, free fatty acids, and other contaminants depending on the degree of pre-treatment they have received prior to delivery. Since biodiesel is a mono-alkyl fatty acid ester, the primary alcohol used to form the ester is the other major feedstock. Typical proportions for the chemicals used to make biodiesel are: Reactants o Fat or oil (e.g. 100 kg soybean oil) o Primary alcohol (e.g. 10 kg methanol) Catalyst o Mineral base (e.g. 0.3 kg sodium hydroxide) Neutralizer o Mineral acid (e.g. 0.25 kg sulphuric acid) Choice of the fats or oils to be used in producing biodiesel is both a process chemistry decision and an economic decision. With respect to process chemistry, the greatest difference among the choices of fats and oils is the amount of free fatty acids. Primary biomass (energy crops): Even though now production is dominated by oils from soy, sunflower and rape, vegetable oils assigned to biodiesel production can be obtained from more than 300 vegetable species. The highest performance is obtained from trees but harvest is more complex than other crops. It is a very important point that performance of crops depend than geographic zone, radiation, temperature and rainfall. Secondary biomass and organic waste: Animal fats, used vegetable oils, crop rests, etc. Advantages from this kind of raw materials is its low cost and extra value in terms of waste reduction. But a fundamental benefit is also its independence from agricultural market destined for food. The inconvenience is the extra refining and processing needed. However new processes and technologies are being developed to optimize this resource. Other materials: This refers to raw materials coming from other sources, like oils coming from microalgae. With similar characteristic to traditional vegetable oils, they have a very efficient yield and the same advantages to secondary biomass. These sources are likely to become a sure option for the future.


Figure 33, Yields for different vegetable species compared with algae. l/ha/year
Kentucky Coffee Tree (Gymnocladus dioica) Cotton (Gossypium hirsutum) Corn (Zea mays) Lesquerella spp Cartamo (Carthamus tinctorius) Linseed (Linum uitassimum) Poppy seed (Papaver sonniferum) Soybean (Glycine max) Tung (Aleurites fordi) Sesame (Sesamum cindicum) Miscanthus Sunflower (Helianthus agnus) Brassica carinata Rice (Oriza sativa) Camelia sativa Crambe abyssinica Rapeseed (Brassica campestres, B.napus, B.juncea) Microalgae 200 252 255 305 335 365 460 420-465 310-880 740 786 755-1000 450-1,110 770 730-1,120 900 525-1,500 95,200 Coconut (Cocos nucifera) Jojoba (Simmomdsia chinensis) Macororo Peanut (Arachis glabrata) Jatropha curcas Castor-oil plant (Ricinos communis) Olive (Olea europaea) Cusi (Attalea speciosa) Avocado (Persea americana) Coconut (Cocos nucifera) Candiri Chinese Tallow Tree (Sapium sebiferum) Totai Coconut plant (Acrocomia aculeate) Brazil nut (Bertholletia excelsa) Palm (Elaeis guineensis) Cynara cardunculus

1,075 1,170 1,200 890-2,000 900-2,000 1,320-1565 1570 1,600 2,460 2,510 3,200 3,800 4,000 4,200 4,500 2,200-5,800 7,000 Alcohol feedstock In terms of the other main raw material, any alcohol (such as methanol, ethanol, isopropanol, and butyl) can be used in a transesterification reaction. It does not make any chemical difference which alcohol is used in the process. Other issues such as cost of the alcohol, the amount of alcohol needed for the reaction, the ease of recovering and recycling the alcohol, fuel tax credits, and global warming issues influence the choice of alcohol. Some alcohols also require slight technical modifications to the production process such as higher operating temperatures, longer or slower mixing times, or lower mixing speeds. A key quality factor for the primary alcohol is the water content. Water interferes with transesterification reactions and can result in poor yields and high levels of soap, free fatty acids, and triglycerides in the final fuel. Unfortunately, all the lower alcohols are hygroscopic and are capable of absorbing water from the air. Usually methanol is used, because methanol is considerably easier to recover than the ethanol. Catalyst feedstock Sodium methoxide has been found to be more effective than sodium hydroxide, presumably because a small amount of water is produced upon mixing NaOH and MeOH.


2.1.2 Production technologies

There are different possibilities to classify the different biodiesel production technologies. One can distinguish according to the type of catalyst between homogenously or heterogeneously catalyzed processes; one can distinguish according to the reaction conditions between low and high temperature and pressure reactions; or between continuous or batch operation. Chemically, biodiesel is equivalent to fatty acid methyl esters or ethyl esters, produced out of triglycerides via transesterification or out of fatty acids via esterification. In Fatty acid methyl esters today are the most commonly used biodiesel types, whereas fatty acid ethyl esters (FAEE) so far have been only produced in laboratory or pilot scale. Typical biodiesel reaction In a transesterification or Figure 34, The basic transesterfication reaction alcoholysis reaction one mole of triglyceride reacts with three moles of alcohol to form one mole of glycerol and three moles of the respective fatty acid alkyl ester. The process is a sequence of three reversible reactions, in which the triglyceride molecule is converted step by step into diglyceride, monoglyceride and glycerol. In order to shift the equilibrium to the right, methanol is added in an excess over the stoichiometric amount in most commercial biodiesel production plants. A main advantage of methanolysis as compared to transesterification with higher alcohols is the fact that the two main products, glycerol and fatty acid methyl esters (FAME), are hardly miscible and thus form separate phases an upper ester phase and a lower glycerol phase. This process removes glycerol from the reaction mixture and enables high conversion. Homogeneous catalysts for transesterification and esterification reactions Alkaline catalysis Most of the biodiesel produced today is done with the base catalyzed reaction for several reasons: o o o o It is low temperature and pressure; It yields high conversion (98%) with minimal side reactions and reaction time; It is a direct conversion to biodiesel with no intermediate compounds; No exotic materials of construction are needed.

Essentially all of the current commercial biodiesel producers use base catalyzed reactions. Base catalyzed reactions are relatively fast, with residence times from about 5 minutes to about 1 hour, depending on temperature, concentration, mixing and alcohol:triglyceride ratio. Most use NaOH or KOH as catalysts, although glycerol refiners prefer NaOH. KOH has a higher cost but the potassium can be precipitated as K3PO4, a fertilizer, when the products


are neutralized using phosphoric acid. This can make meeting water effluent standards a bit more difficult because of limits on phosphate effluents. The main advantage of this form of catalysis over acid-catalyzed transesterifications is high conversion under mild conditions in comparatively short reaction times. It was estimated that under the same temperature conditions and catalyst concentrations methanolysis might proceed about 4000 times faster in the presence of an alkaline catalyst than in the presence of the same amount of an acidic equivalent. This reaction needs a moderate temperature to methanol boiling point (60C). Moreover, alkaline catalysts are less corrosive to industrial equipment, and thus enable the use of less expensive carbon-steel reactor material. The main drawback of the technology is the sensitivity of alkaline catalysts to free fatty acids contained in the feedstock material. Therefore alkali-catalyzed transesterifications optimally work with high-quality, low-acidic vegetable oils, which are however more expensive than waste oils. If low-cost materials, such as waste fats with a high amount of free fatty acids, are to be processed by alkaline catalysis, deacidification or pre-esterification steps are required. Today most of the commercial biodiesel production plants are utilizing homogeneous, alkaline catalysts. Traditionally the alkoxide anion required for the reaction is produced either by using directly sodium or potassium methoxide or by dissolving sodium or potassium hydroxide in methanol. The advantage of using sodium or potassium methoxide is the fact that no additional water is formed and therefore side reactions like saponification can be avoided. The use of the cheaper catalysts sodium or potassium hydroxide leads to the formation of methanolate and water, which can lead to increased amounts of soaps. However, because of the fact that glycerol separates during alcoholysis reactions, also water is removed out of the equilibrium, so under controlled reaction conditions, saponification can be kept to a minimum. For alkalicatalyzed transesteritication, the glycerides and alcohol must be substantially anhydrous because water causes a partial reaction change to saponification, which produces soap. The soap consumes the catalyst and reduces the catalytic efficiency, as well as causing an increase in viscosity, the formation of gels, and difficulty in achieving separation of glycerol. The amount of alkaline catalyst depends on the quality of the oil, especially on the content of free fatty acids. Under alkaline catalysis free fatty acids are immediately converted into soaps, which can prevent the separation of glycerol and finally can lead to total saponification of all fatty acid material. So the alkaline catalysis is limited to feedstock up to a content of approx. 3 % of fatty acids. There are also other alkaline catalysts like guanidines or anion exchange resins described in literature, however, no commercial application in production plants is known so far. Acid catalysts Acid catalysis offers the advantage of also esterifying free fatty acids contained in the fats and oils and is therefore especially suited for the transesterification of highly acidic fatty materials. However, acid-catalyzed transesterifications are usually far slower than alkali-catalyzed reactions and require higher temperatures and pressures as well as higher amounts of alcohol. The typical reaction conditions for homogeneous acid-catalyzed methanolysis are temperatures of up to 100 C and pressures of up to 5 bars in order keep the alcohol liquid. A further disadvantage of acid catalysis, probably prompted by the higher reaction temperatures, is an increased formation of unwanted secondary products, such as dialkylethers or glycerol ethers.


Because of the slow reaction rates and high temperatures needed for transesterification, acid catalysts are only used for esterification reactions. Thus for vegetable oils or animal fats with an amount of free fatty acids larger than approx. 3 % two strategies are possible. The free fatty acids can either be removed by alkaline treatment, or they can be esterified under acidic conditions prior to the alkaline catalyzed transesterification reaction. This so-called preesterification has the advantage that prior to the transesterification most of the free fatty acids are already converted into FAME, thus the overall yield is very high. If the free fatty acids are simply removed prior to the transesterification (similar to the deacidification of vegetable oils during refining) on the one side the transesterification conditions dont have to be changed, however, on the other hand, these fatty acids are lost in the overall yield unless these fatty acid are esterified in a separate step. All acid esterification systems need to have a water management strategy. Good water management can minimize the amount of methanol required for the reaction. Excess methanol (such as the 20:1 ratio) is generally necessary in batch reactors where water accumulates. Another approach is to approach the reaction in two stages: fresh methanol and sulphuric acid is reacted, removed, and replaced with fresher reactant. Much of the water is removed in the first round and the fresh reactant in the second round drives the reaction closer to completion. The cheapest and best known catalyst for esterification reactions is concentrated sulphuric acid. The main disadvantage of this catalyst is the possibility of the formation of side products like dark colored oxidized or other decomposition products. The organic compound p-toluene sulphonic acid can also be used; however the high price of the compound so far prevented broader application. Heterogeneous catalysis Whereas traditional homogeneous catalysis offers a series of advantages, its major disadvantage is the fact that homogenous catalysts cannot be reused. Moreover, catalyst residues have to be removed from the ester product, usually necessitating several washing steps, which increases production costs. Thus there have been various attempts at simplifying product purification by applying heterogeneous catalysts, which can be recovered by decantation or filtration or are alternatively used in a fixed-bed catalyst arrangement. The most frequently cited heterogeneous alkaline catalysts are alkali metal and alkaline earth metal carbonates and oxides. For the production of biofuels in tropical countries, it has been recommended utilizing the ashes of oil crop waste (e.g. coconut fibers, shells and husks). The resulting natural catalysts are rich in carbonates and potassium oxide and have shown considerable activity in transesterifications of coconut oil with methanol and water free ethanol. The application of calcium carbonate may seem particularly promising, as it is a readily available, low-cost substance. Moreover, the catalyst showed no decrease in activity even after several weeks of utilization. However, the high reaction temperatures and pressures and the high alcohol volumes required in this technology are likely to prevent its commercial application. The reaction conditions described sometimes are so drastic, that there might be also conversion without any use of catalyst. Mostly, comparison experiments without any catalyst are missing in the experiments. Similar drawbacks have to be attested for alkali metal or alkaline earth metal salts of carboxylic acids. The use of strong alkaline ion-exchange resins, on the other hand, is limited by their low stability at temperatures higher than 40 C and by the fact that free fatty acids in the feedstock neutralize the catalysts even in low concentrations. Finally, glycerol released during the transesterification process has a strong affinity to polymeric resin material, which


can result in complete impermeability of the catalysts. Most recently, the first technology using heterogeneous catalysts like zinc oxides or zinc aluminates, has been used in a commercial biodiesel production plant in France. The socalled Esterfip-H process was developed by the Institut Franais du Ptrole (IFP) and was designed and commercialized by Axens. The main advantages of the process are described as the production of high quality glycerol and no need for disposal of salts resulting form the catalyst. However, the overall economic advantages have to be proved in long term operation. Enzymatic catalysis The use of extracellular or intracellular lipases from various microorganisms has become a topic in biodiesel production. Some enzymes work on the triglyceride, converting them to methyl esters; and some work on the fatty acids. As compared to other catalyst types, biocatalysts have several advantages. They enable conversion under mild temperature-, pressure- and pH-conditions. Neither the ester product nor the glycerol phase has to be purified from basic catalyst residues or soaps. Therefore phase separation is easier, high-quality glycerol can be sold as a by-product, without any complex process, and also that free fatty acids contained in waste oils and fats can be completely converted to methyl esters. On the other hand, in general the production cost of a lipase catalyst is significantly greater than that of an alkaline one and environmental problems due to alkaline wastewater are eliminated. Moreover, both the transesterification of triglycerides and the esterification of free fatty acids occur in one process step. As a consequence, also highly acidic fatty materials, such as palm oil or waste oils, can be used without pre-treatment. Finally, many lipases show considerable activity in catalyzing transesterifications with long or branchedchain alcohols, which can hardly be converted to fatty acid esters in the presence of conventional alkaline catalysts However, lipase-catalyzed transesterifications also entail a series of drawbacks. As compared to conventional alkaline catalysis, reaction efficiency tends to be poor, so that biocatalysis usually necessitates far longer reaction times and higher catalyst concentrations. The enzyme reactions are highly specific. Because the alcohol can be inhibitory to some enzymes, a typical strategy is to feed the alcohol into the reactor in three steps of 1:1 mole ratio each. The reactions are very slow, with a three step sequence requiring from 4 to 40 hours, or more. The reaction conditions are modest, from 35 to 45 C. The main hurdle to the application of lipases in industrial biodiesel production is their high price, especially if they are used in the form of highly-purified, extra cellular enzyme preparations, which cannot be recovered from the reaction products. One strategy to overcome this difficulty is the immobilization of lipases on a carrier, enabling the removal of the enzymes from the reaction mixture and their reuse for subsequent transesterifications. Immobilization could furthermore be advantageous inasmuch fixed lipases tend to be more active and stable than free enzymes. Traditional carrier materials (such as anion exchange resins or polyethylene) can be replaced by renewable, readily available substances like corn cob granulate. Usually lipases can be specific to 1,3 glycerol bonds. As a result these enzymatic processes the transesterification isnt complete. There are advantages and disadvantages. On the one hand it allows overall oil transformation into a combustable fuel due to monoglycerol characteristics, without any waste production. On the other hand, the principal problem with this method is it wont meet the EN14214 requirements.

44 Transesterification without catalysts Biox Co-Solvent Process Cosolvent options are designed to overcome slow reaction time caused by the extremely low solubility of the alcohol in the TG phase. One approach that is nearing commercialization is the Biox Process. This process uses a co-solvent, tetrahydrofuran, to solubilize the methanol. The result is a fast reaction, on the order of 5 to 10 minutes, and no catalyst residues in either the ester or the glycerol phase. The THF co-solvent is chosen, in part, because it has a boiling point very close to that of methanol. After the reaction is complete, the excess methanol and the tetrahydrofuran co-solvent are recovered in a single step. This system requires a rather low operating temperature, 30 C. Other cosolvents, such as MTBE, have been investigated. The ester-glycerol phase separation is clean and the final products are catalyst and waterfree. The equipment volume has to be larger for the same quantity of final product because of the additional volume of the co-solvent. Co-solvents that are subject to the hazardous and/or air toxic list for air pollutants require special leak proof equipment the entire system including methanol/cosolvent recovery and recycling. Fugitive emissions must be tightly controlled. The cosolvent must be completely removed from the glycerine as well as the biodiesel. Supercritical Process When a fluid or gas is subjected to temperatures and pressures in excess of its critical point, there are a number of unusual properties exhibited. There no longer is a distinct liquid and vapour phase, but a single, fluid phase present. Solvents containing a hydroxyl (OH) group, such as water or primary alcohols, take on the properties of super-acids. Basically, transesterification of triglycerides with lower alcohols also proceeds in the absence of a catalyst, provided reaction temperatures and pressures are high enough. Ester conversion surpassed 85% (m/m) after ten hours of reaction for non-catalytic methanolysis of soybean oil at 235 C and 62 bars. The advantages of not using a catalyst for transesterification are that high-purity esters and soap-free glycerol are produced. Especially in the last years reactions using supercritical methanol without any catalyst have been reported, however, the reaction conditions are very drastic. Since supercritical methanol has a hydrophobic nature with a lower dielectric constant, non-polar triglycerides can be well solvated with supercritical methanol to form a single phase oil/methanol mixture. However, liquid methanol is a polar solvent and has hydrogen bondings between OH oxygen and OH hydrogen to form methanol clusters. Thus, the oil to methyl ester conversion rate was found to increase dramatically in the supercritical state. Free fatty acids contained in crude oils and fats could also be converted efficiently to methyl esters in supercritical methanol, leading to increase of the total yield of methyl esters from used oils. In addition, because the process is non-catalytic, the purification of products after the transesterification reaction is much simpler and more environmentally friendly compared with the alkali-catalyzed method in which all the catalyst and saponified products have to be removed to obtain biodiesel fuel. However, the supercritical methanol method requires a high temperature and pressure, and in addition, large amount of methanol is necessary. Therefore, to employ this method in industrial application further investigations of production process such as continuous operation and scale up are needed. Biodiesel Production Process Options Biodiesel plants can use either batch or continuous flow processing. Batch processing is most common in small plants of less than 4 million litres/year. Batch processing provides the


ability to modify the process for variations in feedstock quality. Continuous flow requires greater uniformity in the feedstock quality, generally requires 24 hour operation, 7 days per week, increase labour costs, and is most suitable for larger operations of greater than 40 million litres/year. Batch Processing The simplest method for producing alcohol esters is to use a batch, stirred tank reactor. Alcohol to triglyceride ratios from 4:1 to 20:1 have been reported, with a 6:1 ratio most common. The reactor may be sealed or equipped with a reflux condenser. The operating temperature is usually about 65 C, although temperatures from 25 C to 85 C have been reported. The most commonly used catalyst is sodium hydroxide, with potassium hydroxide also used. Typical catalyst loadings range from 0.3 % to about 1.5%. Thorough mixing is necessary at the beginning of the reaction to bring the oil, catalyst and alcohol into close contact. Towards the end of the reaction, less mixing can help increase the extent of reaction by allowing the inhibitory product, glycerol, to phase separate from the ester oil phase. Completions of 85% to 94 % are reported. Some groups use a two-step reaction, with glycerol removal between steps, to increase the final reaction extent to 95%. Higher temperatures and higher alcohol:oil ratios also can enhance the percentage of completion. Typical reaction times range from 20 minutes to more than one hour.
Figure 35, Batch reaction process


The oil is first charged to the system, followed by the catalyst and methanol. The system is agitated during the reaction time. Then agitation is stopped. In some processes, the reaction mixture is allowed to settle in the reactor to give an initial separation of the esters and glycerol. In other processes the reaction mixture is pumped into a settling vessel, or is separated using a centrifuge. The alcohol is removed from both the glycerol and ester stream using an evaporator or a flash unit. The esters are neutralized, washed gently using warm, slightly acid water to remove residual methanol and salts, and then dried. The finished biodiesel is then transferred to storage. The glycerol stream is neutralized and washed with soft water. The glycerol is than sent to the glycerol refining section. For UCO and animal fats, the system is slightly modified with the addition of an acid esterification vessel and storage for the acid catalyst. The feedstock is sometimes dried (down to 0.4% water) and filtered before loading the acid esterification tank. The sulfuric acid and methanol mixture is added and the system is agitated. Similar temperatures to transesterification are used and sometimes the system is pressurized or a cosolvent is added. Glycerol is not produced. If a two-step acid treatment is used, the stirring is suspended until the methanol phase separates and is removed. Fresh methanol and sulfuric acid is added and the stirring resumes. Once the conversion of the fatty acids to methyl esters has reached equilibrium, the methanol/water/acid mixture is removed by settling or with a centrifuge. The remaining mixture is neutralized or sent straight into transesterification where it will be neutralized using excess base catalysts. Any remaining free fatty acids will be converted into soaps in the transesterification stage. The transesterification batch stage processes as described above. Continuous Process Systems A popular variation of the batch process is the use of continuous stirred tank reactors (CSTRs) in series. The CSTRs can be varied in volume to allow for a longer residence time in CSTR 1 to achieve a greater extent of reaction. After the initial product glycerol is decanted, the reaction in CSTR 2 is rather rapid, with 98+ completion not uncommon. An essential element in the design of a CSTR is sufficient mixing input to ensure that the composition throughout the reactor is essentially constant. This has the effect of increasing the dispersion of the glycerol product in the ester phase. The result is that the time required for phase separation is extended. There are several processes that use intense mixing, either from pumps or motionless mixers, to initiate the esterification reaction. Instead of allowing time for the reaction in an agitated tank, the reactor is tubular. The reaction mixture moves through this type of reactor in a continuous plug, with little mixing in the axial direction. This type of reactor, called a plugflow reactor (PFR), behaves as if it were a series of small CSTRs chained together. The result is a continuous system that requires rather short reaction times, as low as 6 to 10 minutes, for near completion of the reaction. The PFRs can be staged, as shown, to allow decanting of glycerol. Often this type of reactor is operated at an elevated temperature and pressure to increase reaction rate.


Figure 36, Plug Flow Reactor Process.

2.1.3 Dry washing and polishing the Biodiesel

After the last glycerin removal phase the biodiesel will need to be neutralised, washed and dried or chemically polished. Polishing the the biodiesel involves removing excess methanol and then mixing in a magnesium silicate adsorbent such as Magnesol. The magnesium silicate adsorbent is a polar compound which attracts to itself all the unwanted elements still present in the biodiesel. Water, soap, salts, glycerin and many other trace elements can all be removed or drastically reduced using this method. The magnesium silicate adsorbent has to filtered out of the biodiesel and disposed of responsibly. Filtering can be done using very fine filter bags. Magnesium silicate adsorbents can be used to pretreat your UCO too. The adsorbent will remove some or most of the free fatty acids, water, alkalies and unwanted polymers. Also available are ion-exchange resins like AMBERLITE BD10DRY . Another technology which enhances the quality and purity of the biodiesel without having to water wash. Of course, these steps cost more money than simply water washing and drying the biodiesel but they save money in other ways. Water washing is time consuming unless you have a centrifuge and a vacuum dryer, which means using more energy. Any contaminated water removed has to disposed of responsibly and that can cost money too.

2.1.4 Summary Classic industrial steps to biodiesel production Supply units include: Feedstock, intermediate and final products prestorage tanks (water, methanol, oil, catalyst, glycerol, metilester, etc), energy supply, evaporators, monitoring rooms, laboratory, depuration plant, etc. o Oil Pre-treatment: The oil must be completely cleaned from suspended solids first with decantation and later with centrifugation; this processes are Neutralization, Whiten and Wax elimination.


o o o o o o

o o

Free fatty acids elimination: Can be by Filtered, catalytic o by distillation; or by esterification (with acid catalyst) in a reaction between fatty acid and alcohol. This steps is fundamental to prevent saponification problems Drying. Transesterification in reactors: blend of oil with alcohol and catalyst previously mixed. Two transesterification steps and decantation with a yield of 99%. Phase separation units, to glycerol and ester by centrifugation. Washed. Crude metilester is washed with water with two acidification steps and drying to extract methanol excess, catalyst and possible suspension solids. Drying. Glycerine purifying and concentration. The transesterification produce 10% of brute glycerol. The treatment with sulphuric acid cause potassium sulphate precipitation later is separate by mechanics methods. Dry washing and polishing of biodiesel to remove remaining impurities. Additive injection. methylesters to meet EN14214 requirements. Process Summary table

Figure 37, Process summary table Alkaline Operation factors Feedstock 60C Only highquality, lowacidic vegetable oils Fast 5 min-1 hour Yes Yes Interference Cheap No Acid 100C 5 bars Can be use waste oils, animal fats, etc Slow 10 min-2 hours No No Cheap No Heterogeneous High temp Can be use waste oils, animal fats, etc Variable No No Very cheap Expensive Yes Less expensive Not for fixed Easy Enzymatic 30-40C Can be use waste oils, animal fats, etc Slow 10 min-2 hours No No No influence Expensive Yes Less expensive None Yes-No Supercritical 235-350 C 62 bars High-quality

Reaction velocity Sensitivity to free fatty acids Saponification Water in raw materials Catalysts cost Reused Industrial equipment Purification of methyl esters Glycerol recovery

Very fast 3-5 min No No Relatively expensive Yes

Less Expensive expensive Repeated washing Difficult Yes

2.1.5 Meeting the required standards Oil composition Chemically, vegetable and animal oils and fats are triglycerides, glycerol bound to three fatty acids. The fatty acids can be saturated or unsaturated.


Unsaturated fatty acids have carbon-to-carbon double bonds. In saturated fatty acids all the carbon atoms are linked to two hydrogen atoms and there are no double bonds. Animal fat such as tallow or lard is saturated, meaning that in the fatty acid portion, all the carbon atoms are bound to two hydrogen atoms, and there are no double bonds. This allows the chains of fatty acids to be straighter and more pliable so they harden at higher temperatures (that's why lard is a solid). As you increase the number of double bonds in a fatty acid, you reduce that ability for oils to gain a conformation that would make them solid, so they remain liquid. To test a vegetable oil to see how many double bonds it has (how unsaturated it is) iodine is introduced to the oil. The iodine will attach itself over a double bond to make a single bond where an iodine atom is now attached to each carbon atom in that double bond. Higher iodine values (IV) do not refer to the amount of iodine in the oil, but rather the amount of iodine needed to "saturate" the oil, or break all the double bonds. When the fatty acid chains are broken from the glycerol and then re-esterified to methyl or ethyl groups, those fatty acids still have their double bonds. That means that the more double bonds, the lower the cloud point because they resist solidifying at lower temperatures. So, for instance, if you use lard or tallow, the biodiesel will solidify at a higher temperature because the fat it was formed from also solidified at a higher temperature. Oils with excessive levels of saturated fatty acid chains (Low-IV) oils have higher cetane values and are more efficient fuels than high-IV oils, but they also have higher melting points and are usually solid at room-temperature and therefore can produce biodiesel with a high cold filter plug point making it difficult to use at low temperatures. Oils with high levels of poly unsaturated fatty acid (High-IV) oils can have lower melting points and make better cold-weather biodiesel, but with high-IV oils there is more risk of the biodiesel oxidising and polymerising (drying) into a tough, insoluble plastic-like solid. Biodiesel made from high-IV oils should be stored carefully and used quickly. The type of oil feedstock used in the biodiesel process will therefore directly affect the characteristics of its methyl ester. The proportion of saturated, monounsaturated and polyunsaturated fats that an oil consists of will ultimately have an effect on the biodiesels cetane number, cold filter plug point & cloud point, and oxidative stability (see Error! Reference source not found.). As can be seen in Figure 38 each type of oil has its own relative mixture of fatty acids.


Figure 38, Fatty acid mix per oil type

Type of Oil Rapeseed oil, h. eruc. Rapeseed oil, i.eruc. Sunflower oil Olive oil Soybean oil Cotton seed oil Corn oil Coconut oil Palm kernel oil Palm oil Palm oleine Palm stearine Tallow Lard Melting Range Melting Range Melting Range Oil / Fat Methyl Ester Ethyl Ester 5 -5 -18 -12 -12 0 -5 20 to 24 20 to 26 30 to 38 20 to 25 35 to 40 35 to 40 32 to 36 0 -10 -12 -6 -10 -5 -10 -9 -8 14 5 21 16 14 -2 -12 -14 -8 -12 -8 -12 -6 -8 10 3 18 12 10 Iodine number 97 to 105 110 to 115 125 to 135 77 to 94 125 to 140 100 to 115 115 to 124 8 to 10 12 to 18 44 to 58 85 to 95 20 to 45 50 to 60 60 to 70 Cetane number 55 58 52 60 53 55 53 70 70 65 65 85 75 65

The graphs, (Figure 39, Figure 40, and Figure 41) from the Local & Innovative Biodiesel project of IEE show how the oil characteristics affects the methyl ester characteristics, which in turn affects the fuels performance.


Figure 39, Calorific value of FAMEs

Figure 40, Iodine number of FAMEs

Figure 41, CFPP of FAMEs

In summary one is looking for a balance. An oil with a mixture of fatty acids that are neither too saturated which cause cold weather problems, nor too unsaturated which cause oxidative stability problems and polymerisation risks. This is one of the main reasons why rapeseed oil is used in Europe for the production of biodiesel. It has an iodine number of that isnt too high of just over 100, making it much more


stable than say linseed oil or soy oil, with a lower cold filter plug point than the more saturated palm and coconut oils, meaning it has good cold weather properties1. The European biodiesel standard EN14214 (Figure 42), widely argued to be unnecessarily restrictive, has been developed to ensure that this balance is met and that the fuel will perform efficiently, consistently and reliably without causing problems in engines.
Figure 42, EN14214 parameters EN 14214 - Property Ester content Density at 15 C Viscosity at 40 C Flash point Sulphur content Tar remnant (at 10% distillation remnant) Cetane number Sulfated ash content Water content Total contamination Copper band corrosion (3 hours at 50 C) Cold filter plugging point (CFPP) Oxidation stability, 110 C Acid value Iodine value Linolic Acid Methylester Methanol content Monoglyceride content Diglyceride content Triglyceride content Free Glycerine Total Glycerine Alkali Metals (Na+K) Phosphorus content Units % (m/m) kg/m mm/s C mg/kg % (m/m) % (m/m) mg/kg mg/kg rating C hours mg KOH/g % (m/m) % (m/m) % (m/m) % (m/m) % (m/m) % (m/m) % (m/m) mg/kg mg/kg lower limit 96,5 860 3,5 > 101 51,0 Class 1 6 upper limit 900 5,0 10 0,3 0,02 500 24 Class 1 *** 0,5 120 12 1 0,2 0,8 0,2 0,2 0,02 0,25 5 10

Polyunsaturated (>= 4 Double bonds) Methylester % (m/m)

While most biodiesel is made using methanol, because of its low price (and quick conversion), other alcohols, such as ethanol and iso-propanol, can also be used. Higher alcohols provide superior cold flow properties but are generally more difficult to produce, requiring higher temperatures, lower levels of water contamination, and more complex alcohol recycling due to the formation of azeotropes.

53 Contaminants The contaminants most frequently found in biodiesel are the products of incomplete reaction and residual alcohol, catalyst and free glycerol. Incompletely reacted biodiesel will contain monoglycerides, diglycerides and triglycerides. These compounds are usually detected using a gas chromatograph and then the glycerol portion is summed to yield a total glycerol quantity for the fuel. EN14214 standards require that the total glycerol be less than 0.25%. This means that more than 98% of the original glycerol portion of the triglycerides feedstock must be removed. Excessive amounts of monoglycerides, especially for saturated compounds, may precipitate from the fuel and plug fuel filters. If the biodiesel is not washed with water, it may contain some un-reacted alcohol. The amount will usually be small enough that it does not adversely affect the operation of the engine, but it can lower the flash point of the fuel to where it must be considered flammable and accorded the same safety requirements as gasoline. The residual catalyst can cause excessive ash formation in the engine. Free glycerol can separate from the fuel and collect in the bottom of storage tanks. This glycerol layer can extract mono and diglycerides from the biodiesel and produce a sludge layer that may plug filters and small passages in the fuel system. Elimination of contaminants from the biodiesel fuel is perhaps the most critical part to achieving successful operations and continuation of any biodiesel business. It is contaminants that will block fuel lines, corrode fuel system components and ultimately cause coking and damage to engine parts, particularly in newer high-pressure direct injection engines. Furthermore if your biodiesel contains an unexceptable level of contaminants it is playing directly into the hands of biodiesel opponents who will use it to discredit the industy as a whole, compounding its penetration into an already highly contested market. Producing to EN14214- from the horses mouth The following few paragraphs are quoted directly from an expert in biodiesel production who has worked in the field for many years: EN14214 is not easy to achieve. It is not supposed to be easy to achieve the standard, even for industrial scale producers. Producing biodiesel is simple but producing high quality biodiesel is difficult but not impossible. Like any refining process there are many things which can go wrong no matter what scale of production you have. In fact, large scale production usually means large scale problems when things go wrong. The secret to producing high quality EN14214 biodiesel is to prepare the UCO as best you can. Producers of biodiesel follow the mantra "rubbish in, rubbish out". By ensuring your UCO is of the highest quality then you will have a better chance to produce higher quality biodiesel. The pretreatment of the UCO is arguably the most important step in the production process. Industrial scale biodiesel producers invest a lot of time and effort into preparing the vegetable oil before subjecting it to the transesterification process. It cannot be stressed enough how important it is to have all the water out of the UCO before attempting transesterification. Using an adsorbent, such as magnesium silicate, and proper filtering will vastly improve the quality of the UCO as a feedstock for biodiesel production. The adsorbant will remove some or most of the free fatty acids, water, alkalies and unwanted polymers. Whether using an adsorbent of not, it is very important to filter, as fine as possible, the UCO before start of production.


Catalyst choice is important too. A lot of this depends on which equipment you are using but generally Sodium Methoxide is much better than Sodium Hydroxide. Sodium Hydroxide contains water and this can cause soap problems during production. In some cases it can mean the difference between being inside or outside of the EN14214 standard. Sodium Methoxide costs more than Sodium Hydroxide but it is worth the extra cost if you are trying to achieve EN14214. Sodium Methoxide is more widely available now with more producers, which means more competition and better prices. Caution: Extra safety is required when handling Sodium Methoxide as it is more volatile than Sodium Hydroxide. Make sure whichever alcohol is used for the catalyst, that is contains little or no water. If you decide to water wash your biodiesel then make sure the water is soft and pure enough. Do not just assume your water is of good enough quality to wash with, analyse it regularly. Water can contain impurities which can be left in in your biodiesel resulting in biodiesel outside of the EN14214 standard. It is important to make sure your waste water is disposed of responsibly. Using an adsorbent, such as magnesium silicate, or an ion-exchange resin, such as AMBERLITE BD10DRY, means not having to water wash the biodiesel at all. Adding an anti-oxidant will also be needed. These are all quite similar and cost is usually the main issue when selecting an anti-oxidant. Anti-oxidants help prolong the storage life of the biodiesel and, in some cases, act as inhibitant to bacterial growth. Be sure to add an antioxidant immediately after drying/polishing the biodiesel before sending a sample for full specification testing. Testing your biodiesel at every stage of production is vital for ensuring the EN 14214 standard is achieved. It would be a complete waste of time and money to start washing or polishing the biodiesel if the ester content is not high enough to meet EN14214. Investing in equipment to measure pH levels, ester content, water content and titration are the minimum requirements. If the ester content is very high, the acid value and water content are very low and within the acceptable levels of EN14214, then you will be ready to carry out a full specification test at an approved testing laboratory. Full specification testing of EN14214 is expensive for small producers and it takes time, usually about one week before the full results can be given. ASG Analytik-Service GmbH and Intertek can carry out full EN14214 testing. Check the Internet and local business guides to find a suitable laboratory near you. It is important to contact whichever laboratory you decide to use, about how to send a sample to them. Testing is expensive and packaging your sample correctly is very important. Too many samples are corrupted, resulting in a failed EN14214 analysis because of poor sampling practises. It is also important to remember that CFPP point of fuel is not regulated by EN14214. Each country within the EU determines the operating temperature of biodiesel during the seasons. Most countries have adopted DIN EN 14214 from Germany but producers should check their own countries requirements. Mediterranean countries would have different temperature requirements than Scandinavian countries. Those who produce biodiesel in cold climates can allow their biodiesel to freeze and cold filter from the top of a tank the biodiesel which has not waxed together. CFPP additives are available but do not have the same effect on biodiesel made from blends of vegetable oils as single pure oil. Caution has to be used when using CFPP additives because using too much can actually make the fuel even more vulnerable to the cold. Whos meeting the standard with UCOME? Biodiesel equipment manufacturers, and biodiesel producers will make all kinds of claims on how their plant or equipment reaches EN14214 without a shadow of a doubt. These claims are all very well, however as it has been detailed in the sections above, the qualities of the


biodiesel fuel will depend very heavily on the feedstock it is using. Only then will the type and efficiency of the process determine to what degree the refining will go to meeting the criteria laid down in EN14214. In the BioDieNet Work Package 2, the research showed that there is a great degree of variation between the different countries, with the majority of the ten responding that EN 14214 is the biodiesel quality obtained in the main production facilities. This is true of Spain, Portugal, Norway and the UK. The exceptions to the rule are Holland (not standard EN 14214 but only for direct use by fleet owners) and Germany (UCOME draft standard or better, nearly DIN/EN 14214 by greasoline method).

2.1.6 Available plants and associated costs

For the list of available plants, their specifications, contact details etc, please refer to Annex II, an excel spreadsheet available on the BioDieNet website, with all the necessary data.

2.1.7 Factors of production

Factors affecting production will depend very much on the raw material you are using, the process you choose and the type of biodiesel plant. However the following list should be used as an indicator for the costs that you should take into account for a collection scheme: Raw Material o o o o o o o o o o o Amount of crude UCO feed % of crude UCO feed lost as waste water % of crude UCO feed lost as waste solids Free fatty acid content of UCO, % Conversion of UCO to EN14214 biodiesel Total amount of wastewater from UCO preprocessing Total amount of waste solids from UCO preprocessing Total amount of clean UCO feed to biodiesel plant Cost of UCO, per litre Cost of solid waste disposal Cost of wastewater disposal

Reactants o o o o o Power o o Staff Electrical power needed per batch, Cost of electrical power, per kWh Requirments of any pre-treatment Amount of methanol feed needed Amount of potassium methylate feed needed, Cost of methanol, per tonne Cost of methylate, per kg


o o

Staffing requirements Cost of employing operator, per full time equivalent

Testings o Cost of EN14124 quality testing on product, per week

Maintenance & rates o o o o o Cost of replacement parts and servicing, per year Premises cost (yearly) Annual cost of land Business rates Insurance


2.2 Existing small scale UCOME plants

There follows a couple of examples of existing UCOME plants in the BioDieNet countries. There is a more comprehensive list of identified plants in the Work Package 2 document.

2.2.1 United Kingdom Sundance Renewables Sundance Renewables5 is a community-based biodiesel production plant. The plant was initiated after the founding member and current director conducted a feasibility study, as part of a Masters Research degree, on small scale production of biodiesel. 5 of the members have attended the celebrated LILI (low-impact living initiative, biodiesel training course. As a co-operative, the members decided to pursue a biodiesel venture and try to build their own plant, recycling useful equipment owned by one of the founding members. Meanwhile, they applied for a grant with the local community enterprise group, Foothold (, to help with the purchase of equipment and running costs. They were offered the grant on condition that they also got the CleanStream grant as match funding. Obtaining the CleanStream grant was problematic, as after submission and tentative approval of the application it was decided that projects involving energy from waste eg. biodiesel, were no longer eligible for this grant. When the director with the useful equipment left the Co-op, the people left decided to draw a line under the do-it-yourself idea which wasn't going anywhere, despite the investment of over GBP 20,000 which had practically left them bankrupt. They had to resubmit the Foothold grant to suit the revised equipment plan and seek out additional match funding to cover the costs of a containerised packaged unit that Eurodiesel sell. However, it rocketed in price overnight from GBP 40 000 to over GBP 60 000 they had to abandon this as a plan. The industrial unit where they planned to locate the biodiesel was by now overflowing with UCO that they had been collecting. It was evident that the unit was too small - they needed new premises as well as different equipment. This decision didn't go down well with the Environment Agency. Despite heroic efforts by their local EA officer, the legal judgment from London resulted in that they had to apply again for a new permit, at the cost of GBP 2,500. They continued collecting UCO and with the help of Biofuels ( based in Cambridge and Goat Industries, they eventually completed their biodiesel plant. They had received grant funding for some of the equipment from CREATE Enterprise, Foothold, Enfys ( and Naturesave ( The rest, approx. GBP 40,000, was raised with loans, including members contributions. When Sundance Renewables had the official launch of their plant they were also awarded an Action Earth prize from the UK Environment Agency. They have also won a EuroSolar award for their renewable energy services. The sales of biodiesel started on November 1st 2004. They have produced biodiesel that fulfil the criteria in the European Quality standard EN 14214 for biodiesel. In addition to the biodiesel production, they are running training courses to help others replicate their work and are sharing the secrets of their success. At present they have produced biodiesel for driving approximately half a million miles, with customers choosing to blend our 100% biodiesel from 5% mixtures up to 100%. They are planning to make modifications to their plant to improve its efficiency and increase production to meet growing demand.


Contact: Sundance Renewables, Excal House, Capel Hendre Industrial Estate, Ammaford, Wales, UK, SA18 3SJ, Tel: 01269 842401. Email: The Bolton Greenhouse Project The start of a small scale biodiesel plant, later to become the Greenhouse Project in Bolton operated by Bolton Alternative Fuels Coop ( occurred in September 2005, when a contact was made to the UK Environment Agency and registration was done with HM Revenue and Customs ( The basis of the operation is a reactor from Goldenfuels ( One of the key advantages of the Goldenfuels system is the introduction of methoxides (formed when the bases is dissolved in methanol) via a venturi. This implies that the mixture is sucked into the reactor by the use of a vacuum. It is therefore not necessary to place the methoxide container elevated, but rather safely at ground level. The preparation tank for the UCO at the Bolton Greenhouse Project allows heating to separate oil/water and heavy fats. In addition, it delivers measured, pre-heated batches of UCO to the reactor. Contact: Andrew Boardman, +44 7851936640, Brian Rylance, +44 7749838362,, THE GREENHOUSE PROJECT, 2 Northwood Crescent, Deane, Bolton, BL3 5SE. 1

2.2.2 Austria Mureck The case of Mureck in Austria is of particular interest ( The idea of a biodiesel production facility for biodiesel started in Mureck in 1985. This town is far south in Austria, close to the border with Slovenia. After a pilot project in 1987, a cooperative termed Sdsteirische Energie- und Eiweierzeugungsgenossenschaft (SEEG) was formed in 1989. The building of a small scale plant started 1990 and production was commenced in 1991. The collection and conversion of used cooking oil to methyl ester (UCOME) began in 1993. The year after, fleet tests of UCOME in vehicles were started in Graz and Grossglockner. The plant was established in collaboration with V&N (BDI), a combination plant relying both on virgin rape seed oil and recycled oil from nearby households and businesses. In 1997 this plant had an annual production capacity of 2,500 tonnes biodiesel (BLT, 1997). The operation is also known as the Baerliches RAPS-Projekt. SEEG Mureck was a partner in the Altener pilot study Biodiesel (fatty acid methyl ester extracted from used vegetable oils) for use as motor fuel in the city of Graz in the region of Styria in Austria. The UCOME produced in the esterification-facility in Mureck has been used as fuel in city buses in Graz since 1994. The buses are operated by Grazer Verkehrsbetriebe. Extensive testing of the performance of the buses was conducted by the Technical University of Graz, at the Institute for Combustion Machinery and Thermodynamics, headed by Dr. Theodore Sams..


2.3 Relevant Legislation

2.3.1 Health & Safety
The biodiesel producer will need a safety policy which iterates the responsibilities and procedures. The laws will vary between countries, but the principles remain the same. Annex I contains full details of Health & Safety requirements of biodiesel plants. There follows a short outline of the main critical areas that will need to be addressed in any Health & Safety policy: Use and storage of methanol (flammable and toxic) Use of sodium hydroxide (corrosive and toxic) Use and storage of UCO and biodiesel (flammable) Manual handling of containers Occupational exposure to noise and fumes Use of vehicles off-site (UCO collection vehicles) and on-site (forklift trucks used for lifting IBCs and other large containers) Risks associated with construction and installation activities, including working from heights, manual handling, use of hand and power tools, and use of lifting equipment

See Annex I document

2.3.2 Oil Storage

Each country has its Specific legislation will be in place for. For example, in the UK, The Oil Storage Regulations require minimum standards for oil storage areas, including specifications for bunding

2.3.3 Fire prevention and control

This will entail liaison with the local fire department. The UCO and diesel stored on site will not be an issue in this respect, although the methanol and/or sodium methoxide may be.

2.3.4 Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC)

By far the biggest and most arduous task with regards to legitimising the biodiesel plant is obtaining an Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) licence. The IPPC follows Council Directive 96/61/EC and is applied in each country via its own national laws. The Council Directive 96/61/EC, concerning integrated pollution prevention and control, the so-called IPPC Directive, is central in the environmental legislation for combating emissions from stationary sources. The Directive is based on the view that integrated pollution control is an important part of the move towards a more sustainable balance between human activity and socioeconomic development, on the one hand, and the resources and regenerative capacity of nature, on the other. The objective is protecting the environment as a whole, through simultaneous prevention of the three main forms of pollution: Air pollution; Discharge of dangerous substances into water; Emissions into soil In most countries, as it is a new field, as of yet, there is no standard criteria for accepting biodiesel applications. Hence the normal procedure for IPPC must be followed as carefully


as possible and without omission. The system of Integrated Pollution Prevention and Control (IPPC) applies an integrated environmental approach to the regulation of certain industrial activities. This means that emissions to air, water (including discharges to sewer) and land, plus a range of other environmental effects, must be considered together. It also means that regulators must set permit conditions so as to achieve a high level of protection for the environment as a whole. These conditions are based on the use of the Best Available Techniques (BAT), which balances the costs to the operator against the benefits to the environment. IPPC aims to prevent emissions and waste production and where that is not practicable, reduce them to acceptable levels. In theory there should be no problem. The following is a statement from a granted licence in the east of England: The production of bio-fuel by the base catalysed transesterfication of recycled vegetable oils to produce a bio-fuel product and soap stock. The installation is low impact as the process operates an enclosed system requiring no active abatement and gives rise to no routine releases to air. However in practice the ease at which a licence is obtained will depend on the country, possibly the region and the agency involved in permitting. A fast-track system for approving biodiesel plants is recommended to assist in the take-up of biodiesel across the EU. The following issues should be addressed in any IPPC application: The methanol needs to be properly recovered to prevent the wash water from becoming contaminated. Disposal of glycerol. The solid waste, notably the empty containers, must have a suitable disposal outlet. Methanol must be shown to emit no vapours into the atmosphere, and the storage should be bunded. Noise levels, particularly of vehicles at certain times of day. Vehicle emissions Contamination of surface or groundwater

Costs of an IPPC licence can vary between 3000 and 35,000. The cost will depend on the size of operation.

2.3.5 Other Legal Issues: Planning This will obviously depend upon the site itself. Whether it is just a change of use or a whole new planning application for a new building. Whichever is the case the following must be considered: o o o o o o Development Plans Waste Plans Local Authority relevant policies e.g. renewables, employment, energy Planning Guidance Existing Land Use ie residential/ industrial/ agricultural Impact of increased traffic on highways ie positive/benign/negligible

The responsibility for this will be with the Local Planning Authority. A planning application should then be submitted along with any fee.

61 Taxation If your country charges fuel tax on biodiesel, biodiesel producers will have to register with their relevant tax office and arrange the correct procedure for payment. See Section 3.4 in Part 3 to see what tax law applies to your country. Licences It is highly likely that some Licences will be required for the new operation, including fuel supply licences and waste transfer licences. Requirements will need to be analysed on a country-to-country basis, and licences applied for accordingly.

2.3.6 Case study - IPPC

BioDieNet has a full IPPC application and response from a biodiesel plant application in the UK. To obtain this information you will need to contact the BioDieNet project coordinator, Energy Solutions.

2.4 Financing a Biodiesel Plant

For any prospective biodiesel producer, access to affordable finance is critical to the success of any plant. Throughout the European countries, a variety of funding options exist for establishing UCOME production. These vary in range from business grants, financial incentives, community grants and loans. The assistance varies from countries having a wide range of alternatives to having different sources but limited financial options.

2.4.1 The options for Ownership Structure

The type of finance accessible to an organisation will depend on its structure and mission. The precise legal structure of any production company, however, will have to be tailored to the particularities of each agencys legal status and the company law in force in the relevant Member State. The nature of the business under consideration by the BioDieNet project small scale, localised biodiesel production means that each enterprise is unlikely to provide employment for more than 3 or 4 staff. The turnover of such an enterprise however, because of the high value of the end product, is unlikely to be less than 350,000 a year and could be several times higher. A business of this scale lends itself to the following possible company structures: o o o o A simple partnership where all the individuals involved share risks and profits equally A limited company where all the individuals involved are directors A non-profit company or social enterprise with defined community benefit primary aim A worker co-operative, which can be either profit-making or non-profit Energy Agencies as key actors


The legal status of Energy Agencies varies considerably between Member States, as does the national legislation relating to the establishment and management of biodiesel production from used cooking oils. A DG TREN Study on outputs, performances and future perspectives of SAVE energy agencies carried out by a team of experts coordinated by Marcello Ecuba srl, Bologna, published in 2005, included a question about the legal status of the agencies contacted. The answers to the question on legal status show, as expected, a predominant percentage of non-profit and public organizations: Totally public organisation, or part of a local authority 32 % Non public (or non-totally public) body having a non-profit status 45 % Profit-making organisation 11 %

Others 2%

The implications of these findings for Energy Agencies considering involvement in biodiesel production are: Local authorities and other public bodies are generally constrained from carrying out directly commercial activities. Local authorities could however incorporate biodiesel production into their overall activities if it was for the purpose of supplying their own transport fleets with biofuel. Local authorities also have the power to set up arms length organisations (such as many Energy Agencies are) which can carry out commercial activities and be profitmaking. Such organisations will generally be partly but not wholly controlled by and answerable to the local authority. The constitution of non-profit organizations will vary from one Member State to another, and even within states. In the UK for instance there are many different types of non-profit status, some of which are able to carry out commercial activities directly, others (e.g. registered charities) which would have to set up a separate trading subsidiary company and gift the profits back to the parent charity.

There is in principle therefore no barrier to the involvement of Energy Agencies in biodiesel production. The precise legal structure of any production company however will have to be tailored to the particularities of each agencys legal status and the company law in force in the relevant Member State. Cooperatives There is a long tradition of worker co-operatives in many European countries and the structure is in many ways ideally suited to the ethical and environmental basis of small scale localised biodiesel production. A further benefit of worker co-operatives is that, by their nature, they tend to favour co-operation with other similar enterprises. Because small scale biodiesel production is unlikely to be a highly profitable business, and because its aims are predominantly for the benefit of local communities, co-operation between producers within a city or region could play an important part in the long term viability of the enterprises involved. The options for such co-operation include:

o A single enterprise with a number of production plants across a city or region. This
would have the advantage of better buying power, more scope for marketing and the ability to balance supply and demand across a wider area. The main disadvantage


would be that if one production plant were to experience financial difficulties it could threaten the whole enterprise. o A network of independent enterprises. This would have some but not all the advantages of the single enterprise and without the accompanying disadvantage. There would be no real incentive to share experience and expertise however unless it was a specific aim of the network, and there is a danger that in a difficult marketplace the individual enterprises could end up as direct competitors. o A co-operative of co-operatives. This would be similar to above, but with a stronger incentive to share and a similarly weaker incentive to compete. Such a network is in the process of being established in the UK with the aim to raise investment, offer nationwide services, share information, resources and experience, and support new social businesses. Co-ops currently involved include Sundance Renewables (, Goldenfuels (, (http://www.biodiesel. and Bolton Alternative Fuels Co-op (

2.4.2 Capital Funds and Investors

These last years, some European regions and then European institutions have realised the importance of small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) as instruments of development. However, access to finance often remains one of the key factors in setting up and developing SMEs. It is increasingly recognised that SME access to finance is hampered by a number of market failures. Europe is characterised by its very diverse cultural context. This diversity is also apparent in the fields both of entrepreneurship and of corporate finance. In recent years, the European Commission has become aware of the need to promote the emergence of a genuinely pan-European venture capital market. Between 1998 and 2003, it supported the implementation of a programme called Risk Capital Action Plan aimed at removing existing barriers to the creation of such a European market This said, this section attempts to outline the potential sources of funding for a small-scale biodiesel plant, and the measures to take to ensure successful acquisition of those funds Debt Financing Bank Loans Loans are normally the main sources of funding for SMEs, complementing any seed (startup) capital from the organisations owners/directors. There is an extremely wide range of banking products available to SMEs. Bankers are undoubtedly the most important link in the business finance chain. Significant differences exist across European countries when it comes to the use of bank loans. In some, practically all SMEs have one or more bank credit lines going at any given time, while in others this is true for only 70% of them. There are different types of banks (commercial, cooperative, public, etc.), which are diversely available to listen to SMEs and provide adapted solutions. Low Interest Loan Schemes Often Government bodies, Universities or NGOs will offer low interest loan schemes for SME start-ups. For example, in the Netherlands, Twente University in Overijssel provides interestfree loans of up to 13,600 for teachers and students who want to start a business (more than 425 new businesses created since 1984). In addition to loans, the scheme also provides


access to expert advice and university laboratories. A similar system is also taking place in Maastricht in cooperation with LIOF, . It is worth investigation within your region and country what similar kind so low interest loan schemes may be available. Support from the EIB Following the Lisbon European Council of 23 and 24 March 2000, which called for the creation of a friendly environment for starting up and developing innovative businesses, in particular SMEs, the EIB Board of Governors reached agreement in June 2000 on the constitution of the EIB Group, consisting of the EIB and the EIF and under which the Bank grants medium- and long-term loans and the Fund specialises in venture-capital operations and the provision of guarantees to SMEs. The European Investment Bank (EIB), in a recent communication has declared that Clean Energy is to be a new priority of the European Investment Bank, the Banks President indicated that priority will be given to projects that help in the fight against climate change. Commercial Credit Commercial (or trade) credit is one of the main sources of short-term finance for categories of businesses including micro businesses, small enterprises and start-ups. It is an instrument available to SMEs when: o o o o Banks do no wish to finance them; They want to avoid direct banking costs; They are put off by the intricacies of bank loans; They lack in-house financial competences.

However, although easy to obtain, its main draw back is that it is the most expensive form of financing. Equity financing Venture Capital Venture capital: a broad subcategory of private equity2 that refers to equity investments made, typically in less mature companies, for the launch, early development, or expansion of a business. Business Angels Business angels is a informal venture capital. Business angels are individuals, generally experienced entrepreneurs, who invest their money, skills and time in newly created businesses in exchange for a share of their capital. Typical business angel tickets range between 25,000 and 250,000. Many famous companies, including Ford, AT & T, Apple,, Body Shop, etc., managed their initial growth thanks to the contribution of one or more business angels.
2 Private equity capital is capital made available to companies or investors, but not quoted on a stock market. The funds raised through private equity can be used to develop new products and technologies, to expand working capital, to make acquisitions, or to strengthen a company's balance sheet.


More recently, business angels networks have emerged at regional level to recruit angels and match them with local entrepreneurs looking for finance and advice. The number of such Business Angels Networks (BANs) in Europe has grown measurably since 1999. The European Commission12 and EBAN (European Association of Business Angels Networks: have played an important role in disseminating this concept. EU: EBAN (; UK: NBAN (; LINC Scotland (; One London ; F: France Angels (; D: BAND (; B: Vlerick Business Angels Netwerk (; BAMS (; BeBAN (; I: IBAN (; MC: BusinessAngels.Com (; Corporate Venturing This is a particular form of venture capital addressing businesses at the seed or start-up stage of their development. Indeed, in this market segment, capital is supplied by large businesses to finance both innovative spinouts and other companies set up in industries considered of strategic importance. In Europe, companies such as Belgacom (B), Thompson (F), Siemens (D) and Innovacom (a subsidiary of France Telecom) are also very active on this market segment. In 2004, Siemens for instance had 19 enterprises in its portfolio. Siemens activities in this field is entitled SMAC (Siemens Mobile Acceleration). The total investment made by SMAC, created in 2001, is worth more than 20 million. To what degree existing companies may be interested in small scale biodiesel is not known The Stock Market This would only really be likely to be relevant to a biodiesel company that had already established itself and was looking at financing expansion with a funds of a significantly larger scale. However it is worth mentioning briefly. Fastgrowing SMEs generally aim for an Initial Public Offering (IPO) on either the second march (second market), or new market whose respective distinctive

o Second march: mid-sized companies with a proven track record of profits and
offering the prospect of strong growth looking for up to 50 million in equity. The main second marchs are attached to LSE (London Stock exchange, UK), Euronet (FBNL) and Frankfurt (D).

o New market: companies with a strong potential for growth looking for shareholders
equity. The French new market requires companies applying for an IPO to have own funds amounting to a minimum of 1.3 million prior to listing and to issue at least 100,000 shares for a minimum total value of 1.5 million. Raised equity ranges between 3.2 million and 50 million.

66 Public Sector Assistance The European Commission believes that the role of the public sector should be limited mainly to the improvement of framework financing conditions and should only take limited direct action when justified in the context of market failures. However, it acknowledges the following factors: o Access to equity and loans is difficult being one of the main obstacles faced by SMEs; o Inadequate information, investor and credit provider distaste of risk as well as the limited guarantees that SMEs are able to provide; o Comparatively high due diligence and deal costs compared to funding amounts; may justify public intervention, as these factors can cause market failures justifying State grants. Public authorities may therefore act in one or more of the following ways to promote the development of venture capitalism:

o Setting up investment funds, in which they are partners or investors; o Granting subsidies to existing funds to cover part of their administrative and
management overhead costs;

o Promoting other financial instruments to improve the provision and availability of

equity for investment;

o Guaranteeing venture capital fund investment; o Granting tax incentives to investors in order to encourage them to close venture
capital investment deals. The EC allows such intervention on the venture capital market provided that:

o The existence of a market failure is clearly established; o Venture capital intervention is limited to 500,000-750,000 depending on the region
concerned ( o Other public support can take the form of: o Tax relief; o Support for job creations; o Innovation grants; o Subsidized advice; o Business development support. Other Possible Funding Sources

o o o o o o o o o

Repayable success-linked short-term loans Stock the purchase warrants Convertible bonds Leasing Factoring Awards & Sponsorship Microloans Franchising

See All Money is not the Same, Eurada (2004)


2.4.3 Securing your funds Guarantees European studies on SME funding has identified the following reasons for SMEs being denied a new loan by their bank:

o The bank considered the guarantees to be inadequate; o The bank was not satisfied with the overall businesses performance; o The bank deemed the information supplied to be insufficient.
Guarantees are a crucial tool to improve businesses access to credit. There exist in some countries, guarantee societies. The aim of guarantee societies is to improve the access to professional credit for viable small and medium-sized business projects without the personal collateral required by banks in the hope of building a stable long-term relationship. The AECM (European Association of Mutual Guarantee Societies:, identifies the following types of guarantee schemes:

o Mutual or joint-guarantee societies; o Public guarantee schemes, often set up by national or regional public authorities; o Guarantee or counter-guarantee schemes.
The European Investment Fund (EIF) of the EIB, as mentioned previously, also offers support in the form of guarantees for SMEs. Key criteria to meet In general to successfully obtain third-party finance for your business, there are five key critieria that you should meet o o o o o Business Plan robustness Knowledge of the market A good management team Ability to demonstrate that they are good risk and that investors can actually expect a healthy ROI Guarantees

Figure 43 suggests more detailed criteria for accessing fundings sources the various


Figure 43, Criteria for accessing funding Suppliers of capital Family, Friends and Fools Business angels or informal investors and spin-off corporate venturing Criteria for accessing funding sources Personal relationship based on trust o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o o New capital markets o o o o o o o o o o o o o o Meeting of entrepreneurs with business angels Atmosphere of trust between individuals Credible business plan Good management team Fiscal incentives Market knowledge of the entrepreneur Availability on investment (capital gain) Availability of guarantees or collateral Perceived ability to repay the loan Company track record Rating Good management Innovative nature of business projects Business plan quality Management team Business plan credibility Business plan with patent technology Track record (over previous years) Ability to grow fast and deliver quick ROI Management team quality New jobs Investment in productive tools Stamina as well as technical and financial skills Business plan credibility Readiness to cooperate with a tutor Business plan quality Perception of the innovative nature of the project Intellectual property High growth potential Government tax policies Innovative nature in relation to company business Industry specific usefulness of the project; in particular from a technological standpoint Business plan quality Good management Tax Incentives from government Viability and consolidation At least three years in existence Positive results at least once within 12 months More than 1.5 million Euros in shareholders equity Ability to publish quarterly results Public recommendation by analyst Positive media attention Government tax policies Capable and experienced management team Prominent Board Experienced team of financial/legal advisers New business concept Large market share Record of high growth or high growth potential


Repayable short term loans

Venture capital and financial corporate venturing

Public funding Guarantees Unsecured free of interest loans Seed capital funds

Corporate venturing


Source: Eurada (2004)

2.4.4 Decision tool for funding

The following decision tree in Error! Reference source not found. shows the type of available funding options for SMEs based the particular set of circumstances for the business in question (courtesy of Eurada).
Figure 44, Funding decision tree


2.4.5 A list of Entities to contact

o Business Angel Networks o Regional Development Agencies, European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD), o National schemes of Government Departments schemes (Ministries of Agriculture, Energy, Transport, Industry etc) o Competitiveness and Innovation Program of EC o European Investment Fund o European Private Equity and Venture Capital Association o European Regional Development Fund o EUREFI o Banks o Business development and business plan competitions (eg Carbon Trust, UK)


2.4.6 EU Finance Day for SMEs

The European Commission has a set of measures to help finance innovative and growing small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs). This includes making finance systems more SME friendly, facilitating finance start-ups, innovation and growth as well as to generate more risk capital investments. Through the EU financial instruments of the Competitiveness and Innovation Framework Programme (CIP) a sizeable sum of money has been made available to help SMEs across the EU to access loans and equity to grow and develop their business. These EU financial instruments are operated by the European Investment Fund (EIF) in cooperation with nation, regional and local financial institutions, which compromise the interface with the customer groups. EU Finance Day for SMEs is a series of events in the Member States that the European Commission is organising to inform about the EU financial instruments for SMEs together with the nation financial intermediaries that implement these instruments locally. The aim is to raise awareness about different sources of finance and provide a forum for sharing good practices in helping innovative SMEs get easier access to finance. One-day events will be organised in all Member States capitals in 2008-2009.


3 Fuelling the market (Part 3)

3.1 Why Biodiesel?
The arguments for biodiesel are quite simple and fall mainly into two categories: Energy Security and Climate Change. There are other benefits, well documented, such as improvements in most local emissions (investigated in the following section) and its reduced environmental impacts in case of spillage etc, but these are secondary to the two main headings. Biofuels have a unique role to play in European energy policy. They are today the only direct substitute for oil in transport that is available on a significant scale. Other technologies, such as hydrogen may have important roles to play in the future. However, they are far away from large-scale viability and will require major changes to vehicle fleets and the fuel distribution system. Biofuels can be used today, in ordinary vehicle engines unmodified for low blends, or with minor modifications to accept high blends.

3.1.1 Energy Security

Changing the fuel mix in transport is important because the European Union's transport system is almost entirely dependent on oil. Most of this oil is imported, much of it from politically unstable parts of the world. Oil is the energy source that represents the most severe security of supply challenge for Europe. The EU27 is already about 82% dependent on imported oil, yet this set to rise to over 90% by 2020. Some countries, such as Spain have are 100% dependent on oil imports.

3.1.2 Greenhouse Gas Savings

Biofuels have a second great advantage: the fact that their production and use leads to Greenhouse Gas savings. They are not the cheapest way to get Greenhouse Gas savings. But they are one of the few measures, alongside improvements in vehicle efficiency, offering the practical prospect of large-scale savings in the transport sector in the medium term. Saving Greenhouse Gas emissions in transport is particularly critical because its annual emissions are expected to grow by 77 million tonnes between 2005 and 2020, three times as much as any other sector, and by 2010, transport will be the largest single contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Although there are ways of producing biofuels, that are not ideal in terms of Greenhouse Gas savings (particularly those pathways chosen by the incumbent oil companies), there is a general consensus that biodiesel offers significant Greenhouse Gas savings compared to using petroleum diesel from in-depth wide-reaching studies. However the degree to which it does depends very heavily on method of production, the type of feedstock. Biofuels absorb Carbon Dioxide (CO2) during their production and release it when they are burnt in engines so offering lower CO2 emissions than conventional petrol or diesel, which do not absorb any CO2 in its lifecycle. However in the production of oilseeds for biodiesel, primary energy is used and Greenhouse Gases are emitted, particularly from nitrogen fertilisers. An analysis of 15 studies were collated by Transport for London (TfL), most from the last few years, looking at the global emissions from the production of biodiesel. The GHG savings from biodiesel ranges from near on 100% for local production from UCO (which doesnt involve cultivation,


extraction and refining) to under 40% GHG savings using energy and fertiliser intensive oilseed production pathways. However, even at the lower end of the GHG savings calculations, there is no other fuel currently available that can offer these kinds of savings, and there is unlikely to be in the near future until we see renewable or nuclear generated hydrogen for road transport. Admittedly some of the higher values are potential savings as agricultural production practices will need to change to achieve the full savings, such as the use of low-nitrogen cultivation, the replacement of petroleum diesel with biodiesel in agricultural operations, and the use of byproducts such as straw used for fuel in the biodiesel plants. However the average GHG savings of the studies evaluated in the TfL study, for virgin oil seed production is 61%, and an average of the worst-case scenarios gives 48% GHG savings. Which is still a substantial saving. The hope is that future improvements in agricultural production methods and efficient use of co-products for energy will result in improved GHG balance for the production of biofuels.
Figure 45, Lifecycle GHG savings of biodiesel Greenhouse Gas (GHG) savings Av of worst case scenarios- virgin feedstock Av of all scenarios- virgin feedstock Average scenario- UCO feedstock Best case scenario- UCO feedstock 48% 61% 87% 98%

If we then bear in mind the balance for biodiesel generated from UCO will therefore be very near approaching 100%. This is further reinforced if one assumes that the UCO was previously being collected and processed anyway for use in animal feed as it was in the case of the UK (see Section 1.1.1). To further support the case for biodiesel, Figure 46 shows a basic study carried out by Ecotec in 2002 comparing the various alternative fuels and the favourable GHG performance of biodiesel.
Figure 46, Graph of greenhouse gas savings compared to other fuels

Source: Ecotec 2002

A much more involved study was carried out by the European Commissions Joint Research Centre, Eucar and Concawe in 2003. This shows the Well-to-Wheels GHG emissions for all


the various pathways for road vehicle transport. A simplified version of the results of these studies is shown in Error! Reference source not found.. It is clear that, until we have advance biomass to liquids technology available, or hydrogen from low carbon technologies, the best performers, by a wide margin, are the conventional biofuels. In summary there is consensus that the use of biodiesel in place of petroleum diesel will result in significant GHG savings, with the potential for up to 80% and possibly higher in the future. The GHG savings potential of a scheme recycling UCO into biodiesel for use in road transport could be near on 100%.
Figure 47, Graph of Well-to-Wheels study by JRC

Source: Well-to-Wheels report, Concawe, Eucar, JRC

3.1.3 Non-emissions benefits of biodiesel

o Job Creation: Studies have shown biofuel production would lead to the creation of 16-26 new jobs for each thousand tons of mineral oil fuel replaced per year. That is 50 times more employment than with the production of mineral oil fuels. Replacing 1% of EU fossil fuels with biofuels would create between 45,000 and 75,000 new jobs. Biodiesel can be distributed through existing vehicle infrastructure, no new equipment is needed, and normally requires no vehicle modification. It can be splash mixed in any percentage blend with petroleum diesel either at storage or in vehicle. Biodiesel has enhanced lubrication qualities which eliminates the need for sulphur. It is safely biodegradable and causes little or no pollution if spilt. It is as biodegradable as sugar and less toxic than table salt. Biodiesel works well with new technologies such as catalytic converters, particulate traps and exhaust gas recirculation.

o o o o o

3.2 Viability in Vehicles

Despite what vehicle manufacturers, fuel equipment suppliers and other resistors to the uptake of biofuels may have us believe (see Section 3.6), biodiesel as long as correctly made, works perfectly well in all diesel vehicles, including modern, high pressure direct


injection models. This is usually the case without modification, if modification is required it is generally affordable and feasible.

3.2.1 Local Emissions CO, HC and PM10 CO: Carbon Monoxide (CO) reduces the bloods Oxygen carrying capacity which can reduce availability of Oxygen to key organs. Extreme levels of exposure can be fatal. At lower concentrations CO may pose a health risk, particularly to those suffering from heart disease. HC: Hydrocarbons (HC) contribute to ground level Ozone formation leading to risk of damage to the human respiratory system. In addition, some kinds on HCs are carcinogens and they are also indirect greenhouse gases.

PM10: Particulate matter (PM): Particles suspended in the air; the large particles decrease visibility and increase fouling while the fine particles (PM10), as they are small enough to be inhaled into the lungs, can contribute to the chronic and acute respiratory disease and premature mortality.
In terms of local emissions in addition to its greenhouse gas advantages biodiesel can show significant improvements. Following a literature review carried out by Transport for London, of a total of 34 local emission studies improvements are seen in the major pollutants CO, HC, and PM10 with biodiesel use. The statistical analyses conducted in this study showed a reduction of CO, HC, and PM10 by an average of 27%,36%,24% respectively for neat biodiesel relative to petroleum diesel. There is no concern, in fact there is a lot to be positive about with regards to these three regulated pollutants. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in the US also conducted a comprehensive study of many of the earlier trials involving local emissions from biodiesel. However, almost all of their data was collected from pre 1998 engines. Engines and vehicles have developed rapidly since 1998 with the introduction of Euro 2,3 and currently Euro 4. These have different injection and burning characteristics to earlier technologies. However despite this, the results are surprisingly similar to that of the later studies
Figure 48, Comparison of EPA results and pollutant averages from TFL study CO at biodiesel blend of: 20%/30% 100% HC at biodiesel blend of: 20%/30% 100% PM10 at biodiesel blend of: 20%/30% 100% EPA study (*only 20%) -12%* -47% EPA study (*only 20%) -20%* -67% EPA study (*only 20%) -12%* -48% TfL Study -13% -27% TfL Study -23% -36% TfL Study -8% -24%

76 Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) NOX: Nitrogen oxides, Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) react in the atmosphere to form Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) which can have adverse effects on health, particularly among people with respiratory problems, while long term exposure may affect lung function and increase the response to allergens in sensitive. NOx also contributes to smog formation, acid rain, can damage vegetation and contributes to ground level Ozone formation.
Figure 49, NOx comparison EPA & TfL study NOx at biodiesel blend of: 20%/30% 100% EPA study (*only 20%) +2%* +10% TfL Study 0% +12%

The general results of both studies reveal that Biodiesel does however, tend to increase NOx, at least in neat form. The EPA study shows a linear relationship between biodiesel usage and NOx emissions. However the more recent studies suggest that this may not be the case. Results from the TfL study of the means of emissions variations when using biodiesel showed NOx emissions to: decrease at 5% blend; show little or no change at 20/30% blends; increase by and average of 12% for 100% blends Explaining the reasons
Figure 50, Graph showing NOx change with biodiesel percentage

NOx change for an increase in NOx .4 when using biodiesel is not simple because although much research .3 is being and has been done, the in-cylinder kinetics of the .2 phenomenon are not well understood at this time, even amongst the leading automotive scientists. .1 The most commonly attributed causes are the cetane number and an 0.0 advance in injection timing. Biodiesel is -.1 understood to advance 0.0 .1 .2 .3 .4 .5 .6 .7 .8 .9 1.0 the fuel injection timing in a diesel engine, and the Biodiesel Blend advance in fuel injection timing increases with increasing biodiesel content. The advance in premixed combustion results in a higher bulk cylinder temperature during combustion. One well-documented trend is that NOx increases with increasing peak cylinder pressure and temperature, and advancing fuel injection timing has this effect.

Figure 50 shows the relationship between increased biodiesel percentage and increased

NOx. The trendline is best fitted by a polynomial equation, where the R2 is 0.6794. It predicts slightly better than the linear regression, the equation for which is:


NOx = 0.1699b2 0.0459b where b is the percentage of biodiesel blend This indicates that 68% of the change in NOx emissions is accounted for by the increase in biodiesel blend. But it also predicts that up to around 30% that biodiesel will be NOx neutral. So the most recent research would suggest that up to a limit of a 30% blend, the NOx problem is no greater than that for fossil diesel. It is unlikely to be coincidence that the French car manufacturers will therefore warranty their new vehicles up to 30% of RME. Therefore there is the option for maintaining blends to that level. However this is not ideal, bearing in mind that Nitrogen oxides (NOx) react in the atmosphere to form Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2) which can have adverse effects on health, particularly among people with respiratory problems, while long term exposure may affect lung function and increase the response to allergens in sensitive. NOx also contributes to smog formation, acid rain, can damage vegetation and contributes to ground level Ozone formation. Hence any responsible environmental strategy would include a NOx mitigation policy from diesel vehicles, whether they be running on diesel or biodiesel. The following section investigates in more detail the possibilities for combating the NOx increase.

3.2.2 NOx mitigation

Evaluation of the most recent studies on this issue reveals that there are several ways of going about reducing NOx. o o o o o Use of additives Adapt feedstock Retard Engine timing Fit EGR Fit deNOx technologies Use of Additives Further increasing the cetane number of biodiesel by using cetane improving additives has been shown to be effective in reducing NOx emissions from biodiesel. McCormick et al (2002) observed a NOx reduction of 3.7% with the addition of 1% DTBP and a reduction of 2% with the addition of 0.5% 2-EHN. Thus a nearly NOx neutral biodiesel blend can be achieved. At these treatment rates the incremental cost is approximately 2.3 ppl for DTBP and 0.7 ppl for 2-EHN. Other additives such as polyaromatic nitrates are highly carcinogenic, or poisonous. These are, however very marginal reductions, that would not significantly assist in meeting air quality targets, only for mitigating any adverse impacts of a higher blend of biodiesel. Adapt Feedstock Other approaches are to reduce NOx emissions by modifying biodiesel properties. These might be implemented through chemical modification of the fatty acid chain or through plant breeding to develop oils with more suitable properties. Fatty acids have the greatest impact on the physical properties of an oil. For example, when the chain length increases, the viscosity increases, and when the number of double bonds increases, the viscosity decreases. Based on results from Szybist et al (2003) it is likely that biodiesel made from


high oleic acid soy oil will reduce the inadvertent advance in fuel injection timing caused by biodiesel, but that this effect will be only marginal. The bulk modulus measurements indicate that only marginal reduction of the bulk modulus can be achieved with genetically modified high methyl oleate biodiesel. In other words it is not worth modifying the feedstock genetically to achieve a retarding in the injection timing. The genetic modification of plants also represents a conflict with the precautionary principal, as it is impossible to guarantee that no unpredicted negative environmental effects of this technology will appear in the future. 3. Retard Engine Timing The difficulty in adapting the operating conditions of traditional mechanical injection systems to the kind of fuel used can be easily overcome by employing electronically controlled injection pumps such as the recent Common Rail injection system4. By adopting this solution the control unit could assign the optimal injection advance value according to the composition of the biodiesel blend by making reference to a given map drawn up a priori in the laboratory. In fact biodiesel sensors have already been developed for this purpose including one by VolksWagen. This is not a bad option where it is viable, it has been suggested that reductions of up to a 28% reduction in NOx along with a 25% reduction in PM10 ( Fit EGR Exhaust Gas Recirculation (EGR) consists of a valve that uses the exhaust back pressure to recirculate exhaust gases back through the engine. Fitting EGR can reduce NOx emissions by around 40 to 50% and for maximum benefit should always be fitted with a particulate trap. EGR is an effective way of reducing NOx, but is quite expensive and very expensive for retrofit. It is also not as effective as other deNOx technologies such as Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR). Fit de-NOx after treatment technologies DeNOx catalysts, absorbers and SCR are all possibilities for exhaust aftertreatment. These are currently quite costly as they are new technologies, but their prices will drop quickly over the next few years. They offer massive reductions in NOx. It is likely they will become mainstream in the coming years, and offer a real opportunity to reduce NOx fairly easily in the Capital. NOx absorbers remove NOx from the exhaust through the process of absorption and can reduce NOx by 90 percent. VW has reported NOx reductions of 71% on its diesel Passat car (source: Clean Air Task Force).

The precautionary principal states that if there is such uncertainty for irreversible effects on the environment, the lack of full scientific proof is not a good enough argument for not implementing actions to reduce the effects. 4 Common rail direct injection refers to engines that have a single very high pressure fuel line supplying all of their cylinders. The high pressure of the line facilitates better fuel atomisation, which leads to more efficient combustion. Solenoids located at each cylinder very accurately control the quantity and timing of fuel injection, further adding to overall engine efficiency.


Selective Catalytic Reduction (SCR) differs from the NOx absorber catalyst in that it uses a reductant (ammonia or urea) which is injected into the exhaust gas to reduce NOx. SCR has the potential to reduce NOx emissions by between 30 and 70% although this will be dependent on the duty cycle as the system is extremely temperature dependent. Mercedes Benz predict no adverse impacts on using biodiesel with SCR and that Euro 4/5 emissions standards will be met. In cooperation with the commercial vehicle manufacturer IVECO and the manufacturer of SCR exhaust gas purification system, ARGILLON GmbH, a 1,000-hour biodiesel (Rape Methyl Ester RME) endurance trial was undertaken using a EURO-4 commercial vehicle engine with SCR exhaust gas purification. (source: UFOP) This project proved that the use of customary rapeseed oil methyl esters causes no problems with the engine and the SCR exhaust gas after treatment system. Figure 51, NOx decision tree for fleet managers The study stressed that the biodiesel must comply with EN 14214 and therefore contain as little phosphorous as possible. It was established that the Phosphorous alone is responsible for the deactivation of the catalytic converter and not the biodiesel itself. During the entire duration of the trial, no thermal ageing of the endurance-testing catalytic converter occurred. This revealed that if the potential for further improvement in the quality of biodiesel is exploited to the full, then continuous operation with a modern SCR exhaust gas aftertreatment system should cause no problem. With regard to future sales of biodiesel in the commercial vehicle sector, this project provides important arguments for the future market perspectives of biodiesel as a pure fuel if it is used in EURO-4 and EURO-5 commercial vehicle engines.

Figure 51 shows a decision tree for the various options that a fleet manager can take if they
wish to introduce biodiesel into their fleet, without compromising local air quality goals.

3.2.3 PAHs & mutagenic activity

The concern of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs) is that many PAHs are environmental mutagens shown to be carcinogenic. PAHs are present in ambient air as a mixture of gases and adsorbed particles, both of which can be inhaled and enter the lungs. Occupational studies have shown that long term exposure to mixtures of PAH compounds is associated with an increased risk of lung cancer in humans. PAH compounds are genotoxic carcinogens for which no completely safe level of exposure can be identified, unlike benzene and 1,3-butadiene which below certain levels are considered safe. DEFRA has given PAHs the highest safety factor of 10. Many studies have shown dramatic reductions in PAH emissions when using biodiesel, others more modest improvements. But in general, in the literature there seems to be agreement that the use of biodiesel results in both a decrease in emissions of PAH, and in


the mutagenic activity of the diesel exhaust. Because of the limited number of truly quantitative studies it is not possible to state the magnitude of the PAH decrease that might be expected for a given engine technology or biodiesel source. However one can say with confidence that the overall impact is beneficial.

3.2.4 Other Emission Control Technologies & Biodiesel Oxidisation Catalysts Since 1993 Three-way catalytic converter (TWC) has become the standard after-treatment system for all petrol cars and since 1996, most petrol vans. TWCs typically remove 80% of the three main pollutants CO, HC and NOx from the exhaust gas stream. For light-duty diesel cars and vans, TWCs are not a practical option due to the lean combustion characteristics of the diesel. Oxidisation catalysts are therefore used on most modern light duty engines which reduce CO and HC and which are also effective in reducing smoke and particulate emissions. An oxidisation catalyst will reduce emissions of PM10 from 20-50% and CO and HC emissions by up to 80%. It does not reduce NOx. 80% of the biodiesel5 particulate mass are soluble organic fraction, meaning that only 20% of the particulate mass is soot because biodiesel does not contain any sulphur. Because oxidisation catalysts merely affect the soluble organic fraction of the particulates they are especially advantageous when fuelling the engines with biodiesel Particulate Traps Diesel particulate traps, or filters are most often used on heavy duty vehicles but they can also be fitted to taxis and vans. Fitting a particulate trap can reduce emissions of particulate matter by a staggering 95%. A catalysed trap can also reduce CO and HC by up to 80%. Most particulate filters rely on some means of external regeneration, such as a burner or electrical heater, to periodically burn off accumulated PM10. Catalysed particulate filters are also effective in reducing ultrafine particles, and thus the number of particles in addition to total particulate mass. They also provide the advantage of oxidising and removing much of the toxic hydrocarbons such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) by up to 90%.

3.2.5 Local Emissions versus Sustainability

As these technologies develop and become cheaper along with the continued improvement of Euro standard engines, the problem of local vehicle emissions is quickly being eliminated as a concern for road transport. The focus must therefore now turn to the issue of sustainability. This will inevitably require a shift away from fossil fuels to those alternative fuels which have the lowest life-cycle Greenhouse Gas emissions such as biodiesel. It has been shown that biodiesel not only reduces three of the main regulated pollutants by large amounts (CO, HC, PM10), but also significantly reduces the carcinogenic effects of diesel vehicles in its tendency to drastically cut the amount of PAHs. The only major pollutant that is not abated is NOx.

This refers to Rape Methyl Ester. There may be minor differences between different feedstocks.


The ideal scenario is the fitting of de-NOx technologies, preferably SCR on all vehicles within a fleet. This will have a massive impact on the NOx emissions of a fleet irrespective of which diesel fuel or biodiesel blend is utilised. Thereby increasing the local air quality and getting closer to being within the parameters for attainment of air quality targets. If this is not feasible, or in addition to SCR, the injection timing be adjusted to compensate for the advance in injection and start of combustion to allow 100% biodiesel to be used. This may be best achieved automatically in the near future, by in-line fuel sensors which are under development at VW and elsewhere. Where this is not an option it is recommended that the biodiesel blend be kept no greater than 30% and hence the overall effect will be NOx neutral. These safety measures, combined with the fitting of other emission control technologies such as particulate traps, could offer further improvements upon the benefits gained from biodiesel usage. There is a real opportunity in the very near future to attain a state where the combined use of biodiesel and de-NOx technologies will see a great improvement in local air quality running parallel to dramatic savings in Greenhouse Gas emissions. Sadly the this opportunity is currently being missed. The strategies of the equipment manufacturers particularly in Germany, are currently restricting biodiesel usage in their newest vehicles, which is investigated in Section 3.6.

3.2.6 Biodiesel Handling

The following information comes mainly from Biodiesel. Handling and Use Guidelines (2006) published by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (US). It is very comprehensive and if any more detailed information is required, you are advised to refer to this document, freely available on the internet. Cold Weather handling Biodiesel, freezes at higher temperatures than most conventional diesel fuel and this must be taken into account if handling or using B100. Most B100 starts to cloud at between 1 C and 16 C, so heated fuel lines and tanks may be needed even in moderate climates. As B100 begins to gel, the viscosity also begins to rise, and it rises to levels much higher than most diesel fuel, which can cause increased stress on fuel pumps and fuel injection systems. Cold weather properties are the biggest reason many people use biodiesel blends. If the fuel begins to gel, it can clog filters or can eventually become too thick to pump from the fuel tank to the engine. There are three tests used to measure the cold flow properties of fuels for diesel engines: cloud point, cold filter plug point, and pour point. They are described in more detail below. Cloud Point: The temperature at which small solid crystals are first visually observed as the fuel is cooled. This is the most conservative measurement of cold flow properties, and most fuel can be used without problems below the cloud point but above the cold filter plug point. Cold Filter Plug Point (CFPP): The temperature at which fuel crystals have agglomerated in sufficient amounts to cause a test filter to plug. The CFPP is less conservative than the cloud point, and is considered by some to be a better indication of low temperature operability. Pour Point: The temperature at which the fuel contains so many agglomerated crystals it is essentially a gel and will no longer flow. This measurement is of little practical value to users,


since the fuel has clogged the filter long before reaching its pour point. Distributors and blenders, however, use pour point as an indicator of whether the fuel can be pumped, even if it would not be suitable for use without heating or taking other steps.
Figure 52, Cold weather properties of FAMEs Test Method Cloud Point Pour Point ASTM Cold Filter Plug ASTM D2500 D97 Point IP309 B100 Fuel F C F C F C Soy Methyl Ester 38 3 25 -4 28 -2 Canola Methyl Ester 26 -3 25 -4 24 -4 Lard Methyl Ester 56 13 55 13 52 11 Edible Tallow Methyl Ester 66 19 60 16 58 14 Incredible Tallow Methyl Ester 61 16 59 15 50 10 Yellow Grease 1 Methyl Ester --48 9 52 11 Yellow Grease 2 Methyl Ester 46 8 43 6 34 1 Source: NREL Biodiesel Handling and Use Guidelines, Third Edition, September 2006 NB Canola is the US equivalent of Rapeseed

Biodiesel cannot always be effectively managed with current cold flow additives like some fossil diesel or rapeseed oil based biodiesel. Cold flow additive effectiveness can change dramatically depending on the exact type of biodiesel and the processing it has undergone; much like the situation found with diesel fuel. Cold flow additives have been used much more successfully with biodiesel blends. Contact the major additive manufacturers and work directly with them on this issue. Fuel Lines One issue with biodiesel is that it may have an effect on fuel lines. Biodiesel can soften certain types of rubber. Almost all new vehicles should have no problem with biodiesel as newer cars do not use rubber parts, but old vehicles (older than mid-90s) might require upgrades of fuel lines. Older vehicles, manufactured before approximately 1993, are more likely to contain seals, gaskets, etc., that will be affected by B100 over long periods of time. Modern rebuild kits or engines after 1993 may contain biodiesel compatible materials, but not always. Biodiesel has also been used in many older motors without any problems, but it is a cheap and easy upgrade and should be undertaken if there is any degree of uncertainty. If your existing equipment or engine components are not compatible with B100, they should be replaced with those that are. Materials such as Teflon, Viton, fluorinated plastics, and Nylon are compatible with B100. Oxidative & Thermal Stability Stability is a broad term, but really refers to two issues for fuels: long-term storage stability or aging and stability at elevated temperatures and/or pressures as the fuel is recirculated through an engines fuel system. In the diesel fuel arena, long-term storage stability is commonly referred to as oxidative stability, and thermal stability is the common term for the stability of fuels at elevated fuel system temperatures. In biodiesel, fuel aging and oxidation can lead to high acid numbers, high viscosity, and the formation of gums and sediments that clog filters. If the acid number, viscosity, or sediment measurements exceed the limits in EN14214, the biodiesel is degraded to the point where it is out of specification and should not be used. Biodiesel with high oxidation stability will take


longer to reach an out of specification condition, while biodiesel with low oxidation stability will take less time in storage to reach an out of specification condition. There are some guidelines that help identify fuels and conditions that will provide the highest levels of stability: o The higher the level of unsaturation the more likely it is that the fuel will oxidize. As a rule, saturated fatty acids (such as 16:0 or 18:0) are stable. And each time the level of unsaturation increases (for example from 18:1 to 18:2 to 18:3) the stability of the fuel goes down by a factor of 10. So a fuel composed primarily of C18:3 is 100 times more unstable than a fuel made of C18:1. The points of unsaturation on the biodiesel molecule can react with oxygen, forming peroxides that break down into acids, sediments, and gums. Heat and sunlight will accelerate this process, so it is best not to store biodiesel outside in clear totes in the summer. Certain metals such as copper, brass, bronze, lead, tin, and zinc will accelerate the degradation process. Metal chelating additives, which serve to de-activate these metals, may reduce or eliminate the negative impact of the presence of these metals. Keeping oxygen from the fuel reduces or eliminates fuel oxidation and increases storage life. Commercially, this is done using a nitrogen blanket on fuel tanks or storing biodiesel in sealed drums or totes for smaller amounts of fuel. Antioxidants, whether natural or incorporated as an additive, can significantly increase the storage life or stability of biodiesel.

o o Tankage Most tanks designed to store diesel fuel will store B100 with no problem. Acceptable storage tank materials include aluminum, steel, fluorinated polyethylene, fluorinated polypropylene, Teflon, and most fiberglass. Brass, bronze, copper, lead, tin, and zinc may accelerate the oxidation of diesel and biodiesel fuels and potentially create fuel insolubles (sediments) or gels and salts when reacted with some fuel components. Lead solders and zinc linings should be avoided, as should copper pipes, brass regulators, and copper fittings. The fuel or the fittings will tend to change color and insolubles may plug fuel filters. Affected equipment should be replaced with stainless steel, carbon steel, or aluminum. Transportation As with fossil diesel, it is important that B100 be transported in a way that does not lead to contamination. The following procedures are recommended and are also used by distributors and transporters of petroleum derived diesel. o o Proper inspection and/or washout (washout certificate) Check for previous load carried and residual. Generally only diesel fuel is acceptable as a residual. If the vessel has not gone through a washout, some residuals may not be acceptable like: food products or raw vegetable oils; gasoline; lubricants. No residual water Hoses and seals clean, compatible with B100 Determine need for insulation or method to heat truck or rail car contents if shipping during cold weather.

o o o


Regardless of how the biodiesel arrives, it must be stored and handled using procedures that do not allow the temperature of B100 or blend to drop below its cloud point. The cloud point of the biodiesel, the biodiesel temperature, the ambient temperature, and the time the fuel is in transport are all factors that should be taken into consideration when transporting B100 to insure that the fuel does not freeze in transport. Oil Change Currently the new vehicles are requiring less frequent oil changes than previous technology. It may be necessary to return to more frequent oil changes with biodiesel, which may be a slight disadvantage for the fleet manager or user. Normally if warranty is approved for 100% biodiesel this will be provided that the standard engine oil change interval is halved, and similarly the oil and fuel filter change interval is halved. The reason for this condition is thus: With diesel engines, a small quantity of fuel gets into the engine oil via the piston rings. With fossil diesel this fuel vaporises according to the simmering curve via the ventilation. Biodiesel vaporises only at very high temperatures and can therefore get into the engine oil. Due to the good border lubrication characteristics of biodiesel one assumes that the negative effects of dilution- ie an unsatisfactory formation of the lubricating film- are at least partly removed. Field trials in Heinsburg and Neuwied, Germany, and Graz in Austria with bus fleets have suggested that halving the oil change was not necessary. The halving of oil change intervals required by vehicle manufacturers could be avoided by a continuous monitoring of the lubricating oil. Solvent characteristics Due to its good soluble characteristics, deposits in the tank and fuel systems of vehicles which were already operated with mineral diesel are dissolved. This then leads to blockage of the fuel filter which will need to be changed. This can be done as a preventative measure and is most likely to be a one-off event. Conversion Conversion is simple and nothing like the cost and resources required to convert a vehicle to LPG or CNG. As mentioned above, biodiesel has a tendency to deteriorate rubber fuel systems. It is therefore wise to replace rubber fuel hoses and seals with Viton or another brand of fluroeslastomer hoses and seals. All synthetic hoses and seals resistant to oxygenated fuels, methanol and ethanol are suitable for use with biodiesel. As most diesels that are sold in Europe come with synthetic hoses, seals, and gaskets in the fuel system this is unlikely to be necessary. Most manufacturers warranty is granted providing that the fuel will meet standard EN590. This is not possible for 100% biodiesel. Its flashpoint is much higher and it has only one distilling point as it is a single chemical, whereas petroleum diesel has 3 bands because it is a mixture of different hydrocarbons. Also biodiesel has a cetane number of around 51, petroleum diesel has a cetane number of 49.5. Warranty issues for emission control technologies will most probably need to be dealt with in a similar way to warranties for vehicles. The warranty issue is discussed in more detail in Section 3.6.1, but the biodiesel user should be well aware of the possibility of using any fuel other than EN590 could invalidate the warranty and ideally the manufacturer should be contacted, as their policies are changing on a year by year basis.


These issues mentioned, users considering conversion to an alternative fuel should recognize the following real advantages of switching to biodiesel: o The relative cost of converting an existing fleet to biodiesel blends is much lower than the cost of converting to any other alternative fuel Biodiesel can be distributed through existing vehicle infrastructure, no new equipment is needed, and normally requires no vehicle modification. It can be splash mixed in any percentage blend with petroleum diesel either at storage or in vehicle. Biodiesel has enhanced lubrication qualities which eliminates the need for sulphur. It is safely biodegradable and causes little or no pollution if spilt. It is as biodegradable as sugar and less toxic than table salt. Biodiesel works well with new technologies such as catalytic converters, particulate traps and exhaust gas recirculation (even though they may not be covered under warranty). There are also strategic benefits of biodiesel: oil substitution adds to security of the fuel supply. Emissions are greatly reduced (see Section 4.2.1)

o o o o

o o

For more information see NREL Handbook on Biodiesel Handling, available on the internet.

3.3 European Market for biodiesel

Biofuels have risen to prominence in the wider EU context over the last 5 years. This is fundamentally due to an intentional strategy by the European Commission to address both the issues of Energy Security and Greenhouse Gas emissions from transport. In May 2003 the EU's Biofuels Directive came into force, requiring Member States to set indicative targets for biofuels sales in 2005 and 2010. The Directive included 'reference values' for Member States to take into account in setting their own targets; 2% by energy content in 2005, and 5.75% by 2010. Since then. the Commission took further steps developing the Biomass Action Plan of December 2005, the Biofuels Strategy of February 2006 and the energy Green Paper of March 2006. The EU Strategy for Biofuels has three main aims: To further promote biofuels in the EU and developing countries, ensure that their production and use is globally positive for the environment and that they contribute to the objectives of the Lisbon Strategy taking into account competitiveness considerations To prepare for the large-scale use of biofuels by improving their cost-competitiveness through the optimised cultivation of dedicated feedstocks, research into second generation biofuels and support for market penetration by scaling up demonstration and removing non-technical barriers To explore the opportunities for developing countries including those affected by the reform of the EU sugar regime- for the production of biofuel feedstocks an biofuels, and to set out the role the EU could play in supporting the development of sustainable biofuel production.



Most recently, in its Energy Policy for Europe report submitted to the European Council and Parliament on 10 January 2007, the EU Commission illustrated the urgent need for action and the key aspects to facilitate the alignment of future European energy policy, a prerequisite for fulfilling climate protection obligations. It intends to achieve this by significantly strengthening the EU-27 internal energy market and in particular energy efficiency, through the creation of political and regulatory frameworks. In the report, the EU Commission also emphasised the economic implications using the development of oil prices as an example. With oil now well over $100 dollars per barrel, it is understandable that the EU Commission plans to limit this outflow of currency. Despite the good intentions of the European Commission, and the benefits that biofuels can bring, the proposed changes in our fuel mix has met with scepticism, reluctance and even with a vicious smear campaign, sadly swallowed by many environmental pressure groups, to discredit the very viability and sustainability of the biofuels industry (see Section 4). What these reactions have meant is that the proposed uptake of biofuel in the European market has been far from its potential. However despite its adversaries, the biofuels industry has grown in many European countries and governments are trying to find the best way to stimulate the market.
Figure 53, Progression of Biofuels Use in Member States 2003-5


Another currently very damaging situation is the imbalance in subsidies for biofuels between the EU and the USA. In the USA, trade companies are able to claim subsidies of 1 US dollar per gallon of biodiesel, if the biofuel is mixed with at 1% with diesel. This form of subsidization has led to the export of considerable quantities, estimates range from 30,000 to 70,000 tons per month to the EU and predominantly to Germany, which has further intensified the already existing pricing pressure. UFOP has consequently pointed out this clear misuse of subsidies to both the Federal Government and the EU Commission, and, insofar as possible, has also alerted the relevant trade associations to the problem, the American Soybean Association (ASA) and National Biodiesel Board (NBB), for example. The subject has evidently been taken up by Congress and the Senate with the outcome that the legislation will be changed so that this form of tax credit will now exclusively benefit the domestic use of biodiesel.
Figure 54, European biodiesel capacity


3.4 National Markets

The two cricitcal factors affecting the biodiesel market in each country will be the legislative regime, principally tax, and the warranty approval status for the vehicles. Although a harmonisation throughout Europe would be beneficial to development of the industry both in terms of taxation and warranty approvals, this is currently not the case. Each country has its specific legislation and tax regime for all fuels, including biofuels, and vehicle manufacturers vary their warranty approval between countries.

Germany, has been the leader in the field of biodiesel for over 10 years, with a proactive approach and favourable tax regime. In 2004, an estimated 476 million litres were sold at German filling stations, 32 % more than in the previous year. This was enough to satisfy the annual requirement of approximately 300,000 cars. Biodiesel is available at 1,900 filling stations across Germany, which means that it is in some regions no longer an inconvenience to use biodiesel as a pure fuel. Remarkable is the fact that at the end of 2006, with total sales of 3.1 million tons, more than 10% of diesel consumption in Germany was in the form of biodiesel or vegetable oil. Consequently, in terms of the diesel market, by 2006 Germany had already fulfilled the quantitative target set for 2020. Germany is generally the driver for the rest of Europe in the biodiesel industry and what happens there will have significant impacts on the future of the industry within Europe. However, the flagship of European biodiesel has come upon rough seas. Its continued growth is being hampered principally by the reversal of the position of car manufacturers such as VolksWagen in their warranty approvals. Volkswagen Group (VW, Audi, SEAT, Skoda) has stopped issuing warranty approval since the introduction of the EURO 4 engines and self-regenerating particle filters. As a result, the potential private car customer base will very likely diminish over the next few years. Declining turnover at the filling stations will lead to a reduction in the number of filling stations. Previously a companion of the biofuels industry, the German car manufacturers are now standing in its way. These developments, along side new laws is changing the direction of the German bioidesel industry. Legislation and Taxation The energy tax law in Germany has changed since 1st January 2007. In conjunction with the biofuel quota act which was introduced at the same time. Compliance with the standard EN 14214 is now a fundamental condition for tax relief and for the account on the quota commitment.
Figure 55, German Biofuel Quota Act


The market in general for FAME has shifted in Germany from the former mainly B100 usage to market for biodiesel as a blend component. UFOP (Union for Promoting Oil and Protein Plants) are not in favour of mandatory blending. Their argument being that the marketing of pure fuel will facilitate bigger margins and will have a significant bearing on the sales results and therefore the viability of the biodiesel industry in future. After all at least 50% of biodiesel production, not counting imports, has to be sold through filling stations and fleet operators. However, on 1st of January 2007 the Biofuel Quota Act went into force. As a consequence of that the following gradual reduction of tax privileges for biodiesel and vegetable oil took effect: The commercial vehicle sector is, however, a more promising market. Again the crux of this being the warranty approval of the vehicle and equipment manufacturers. DaimlerChysler, MAN and IVECO gave approvals for EURO-4 and EURO-5 truck engines in commercial vehicles. Moreover, DaimlerChrysler is offering extra equipment (bigger oil sump, separate fuel supply for the auxiliary heating system) to enable the utilisation of biodiesel. Various factors contributed to this marketing policy. One of the main reasons was customer pressure of the freight trade. These developments mean that, although the use of biodiesel in the private car market is in jeopardy in Germany, that B100 can remain the most important alternative fuel in the medium-term for the operation of commercial vehicles. 3.4.2 Spain In Spain the importation of biodiesel from the USA has gone from being practically nonexistent to more than 150,000 tonnes which has already swallowed 50% of the Spanish market (APPA). This has provoked a collapse of the Spanish biodiesel industry almost overnight. Many of Spains 22 biodiesel plants with a combined capacity of 800,000 tonnes are shut down or at minimal production levels. The collapse of the sector will have sunk more than 200 million euros inverted in the industry, much of it with public funds. The problem is the subsidies being offered by the US government for biofuel production, undermining the competitivity of the EU producers, effectively selling well below cost at 750 per tonne, whereas cost is about 850. This means that the Spanish producers are just not able to compete. It is called fiscal dumping. (source There is a piece of draft legislation in the pipe-line which would mean that the oil companies will have to ask for administrative certification of the quantities of biofuels included in their sales (the National Energy Commission will be competent for delivering these certificates, one per equivalent ton sold and proved). In case of a lack of certificates and without prejudice to penalties, the companies will have to make compensating payments (274 euros per lacking certificate of diesel and 437 euros per lacking certificate of gasolines); the sogenerated income will be distributed annually between those companies with an excess of


certificates: by means of these payments, the Administration intends to promote a certificates market. Mandatory blending: percentages on energy basis 2008 1,9% - indicative 2009 3,4% - compulsory 2010 5,83% - compulsory Tax break: 100% under 38/1992 law in fuel sector. Also, they have to fulfill the requirements of EN14214 that it is under the RD 177/2003 and RD 61/2006.

3.4.3 Netherlands
In the Netherlands, B100 is being used mainly in heavy duty trucks and buses and older passenger cars up to Euro 3. B30 is also allowed by some Peugeot and Renault passenger cars under specific conditions. There are currently 8 public filling stations selling B100. Obligation of yearly turnover (dutch volume sold including excise duty). It is possible to count the quota in NL even if the product is exported to another country. trading system: parties can trade shortage or surplus to fulfil own obligation. per 1.1.2008: Introduction of a buy-outsystem. Payment of buy-out price (as sanction) when obligation cannot not be met on reasonable terms (e.g. shortage of biocomponent or strong price increase). Mandatory blending: percentages on energy basis 2007 2008 2009 2010 2% (energy basis) 3,25% 4,5% 5,75%

Tax break: There is no tax break in the Netherlands.

3.4.4 United Kingdom

The UK is also claiming to be suffering from the US biodiesel policies. D1, one of the leading UK firms, announced in April 2008 that it would be closing its newly built refineries and laying off all its staff there because it could not compete against cheap US imports. The UK has developed a Renewable Fuels Obligation, which works by one certificate being awarded for every litre of sold biofuel. From 2010 certificates will be awarded based on their Greenhouse gas saving. From 2010 certificates will only be awarded if the fuels meet certain sustainability standards. Mandatory Blending: 2008: 2,5% 2009 : 3,75% 2010 : 5%


level to rise beyond 5% after 2010. Tax Break: Duty differential (20ppl) is guaranteed to 2010. There is also 15 ppl buy out price (penalty) for the Renewable Fuels Obligation (Mandatory Blending).After that the combined differential (duty differential + buy out price) changes from 35ppl to 30 ppl (probably a reduction in the duty differential).

3.4.5 Portugal
Mandatory blending: The Portuguese government has also set an indicative goal of 10% of biofuels until 2010. This goal isnt written in any Portuguese law yet, its a goal established by the prime minister. Tax break: Small scale producers (less than 3000 tonnes) dont have to pay the Petrol Products Tax. All the other producers have to pay this tax (the value of tax is 364,41 for every 1000l of biodiesel) There is also another law that affects biodiesel use and counteracts the above. It states that you can not sell a blend of more than 5% additives, which isnt specific for biodiesel, but it affects biodiesel. Until this law is changed, biodiesel is considered an additive, and so the filling stations can not blend more than 5%.

3.4.6 Italy
Mandatory Blending : No mandatory or ambitious target on diesel-biodiesel blends, only the objective deriving from the EU Directive on biofuels (5.75%). Tax break: 20% discount on the excise duty in comparison with the full tax of standard diesel oil. No conditions/restrictions apply.

3.4.7 Hungary
Since September 2006 it is allowed to have 5% Bio in the fossil Diesel. It is allowed to import but not to blend. Mandatory blending: None, but from 2007 there will be tax disadvantage for the fuels without biocomponents Tax break: 100% but MOL (the national oil company) is the only customer for the Hungarian biodiesel production since it is the only oil company which has refinery capacities in Hungary (the biodiesel must be blended into to conventional diesel fuel in order to get a tax reduction). Due to the taxation system it is very difficult to sell indepently, and will serious hamper development in the market


3.4.8 Bulgaria
In a National Long-term Programme for Promotion of Biofuels in Transport Bulgaria (November 2007) has adopted quantitative targets for biodiesel share in final transport energy consumption. Mandatory targets: 2008 1,5 %; 2009 2,7 %; 2010 4,4 %; 2015 6,3 % 2020 8,0 % Tax break: Excise Act (as of 13 April 2007) states that there is no excise for biodiesel. On mineral diesel it is 535 (about 274 Euro) leva on 1000 litre.

3.4.9 Romania
No data available

3.4.10 Norway
Mandatory blending: No, but Norway follows EU's goal of 2% biofuel in 2007 and 5,75% in 2010. Tax break: Biodiesel is taxed at 3 NOK per litre, whereas diesel is taxed at 3,54 NOK per litre (includes CO2 tax), both plus VAT.
Figure 56, Summary table of non-BioDieNet countries laws regarding biodiesel


Country Austria

Tax Break

Mandatory Blending

Comments Combined quota on gasoline and diesel not separate. Tax advantage only if share of bio is within the blending plan, otherwise you have no tax advantage. Tax incentives in Belgium are only applicable when biocomponent is purchased at government appointed companies and limited to predefined max quota. Overall excise duties are raised with similar percentages to ensure budget-neutral tax-income operation for the Belgian government. The Decree of April, 2007. If the supplier has not fulfilled committement, he/she is obliged in 2008. to put on the market the obligatory amount for the year 2008. plus the amount that he/she did not put in the year 2007.

100% 2005 2,5% 2007 4,3% 2008 5,75% (energy content) 14,2 /m 2006 3,37% (if 2010 5,75% 4,29%FAME)



2007 0,9% 2010 5,75%


100% for B100 valid only till end 2007 (not for blends) 100% 2005: 33 /hl 2006: 25/hl

2007 = 2% Restart of 100% tax incentives (tax = 0) for 2009 = 4,5% (volume) 100% pure bio product is planned (depends on obtaining EC approvement). All obligation are set by "Air pollution" law no. 86/2002

Estonia France

2008: 5,75% 2010: 7% 2015: 10%

Ireland Lithuania Luxembourg

100% 100% n.s. since 1.1.2007 there is an obligation of 2 % (energy) n.s. tax will be defined at the end of the year 100% selling every liter with Up to 5% Vol-5% blend 2007 4,5 % 0 3-4% (reality none) / Volume 5% 100% 0 In the foreseeable future there will be no marketable production sites for biodiesel O.nly by special permission pilot production sites with capacities of up to 5,000 MT/a are allowed, total capacity for those sites limited to 15,000 MT/a. There already are two pilot production plants but as yet there is no production going on for want of investors.

Poland Slovakia

Slovenia Sweden Switzerland

3.5 Local Markets Potential


The viability for local markets within Member States will depend clearly on the relative legal framework within that country and current warranty position of the car manufacturers. The assessment of your local market will depend on other factors too as well as the national context in which the biodiesel project is proposed. For the purposes of your own local biodiesel project, this kind of investigation will be a necessary inclusion in the business plan, to correctly evaluate the potential market for a biodiesel business. This is the kind of research that was carried out under the ProBio project of the ProBio project of the Intelligent Energy Europe programme, and it is outlined in this handbook to provide an example. It has many synergies with the BioDieNet project, in terms of locally sustainable biodiesel production. ProBio focuses principally on the production of biodiesel from locally produced oilseeds rather than from UCO as is the case with the BioDieNet project. However, the assessment for its use in vehicles will require very similar methodologies and hence its relevance this part of the handbook. For more information visit:

3.5.1 The ProBio project

The total number of vehicles used for transport in the province of Burgos (year 2005) is shown Error! Reference source not found.: This kind of information should be available at the regional government level of your locality.
Figure 57, Vehicles in the province of Burgos (2005) Lorries and vans 34785 Buses 451 Cars 163303 Motorbikes 8018 Industrial tractors 3091 Other vehicles 8951 TOTAL 218599

The ProBio project obtained data from the different biodiesel distributors in the province and was able to compile the statistics in Error! Reference source not found.. Subsequently the rate of biodiesel use (year 2006) could be calculated: This came to 0.32%, which is somewhat below Spains indicative target of 1.9% by 2007. The biodiesel is mainly used by the following groups of vehicles: o Municipal fleet of vehicles in Burgos City: public transport (buses), vans and other municipal vehicles. This is one of the measures carried out by the City Council in the CIVITAS Program (sustainable transport and mobility). Lorries and industrial vehicles of some construction, transport and public work companies. The use of biofuels is highly appreciated in their Environmental Management Systems. Several private vehicles through the biodiesel petrol stations

Figure 58, Biodiesel consumption in Burgos 2006 Type of fuel GOA 4.5% 12% 20% Litres of fuel 60387.294 3.596.565 3.147.762 Litres of biodiesel 287.428 431.588 629.552


30% 100% Total: Total diesel consumption in transport Rate of biodiesel use in 2006 Province of Burgos

455.312 116.491 1.601.653 501.994.118 litres

136.594 116.491


The number of registered vehicles is different in the respective regions of the ProBio project, which consequently leads to different consumption of transport fuels as well as biodiesel. Error! Reference source not found. presents the quantity of diesel and biodiesel consumption in respective regions and the rate of biodiesel consumption in comparison to total diesel consumption.
Figure 59, Ratio of biodiesel use in Burgos Total diesel Biodiesel consumption in litres consumption in litres Burgos 501.944.118 1.601.653 Avila 152.832.052 315.385 Huelva 418.754.012 9.092.762 Pomurje 31.296.155 350.000 Abruzzo 442.857.143* 13.285.714 *The amount is related to diesel consumption by personal vehicles Rate of biodiesel use 0.32% 0.21% 2.13% 1.12% 3.00%

It is clear that the current markets for biodiesel vary significantly between regions, even within the same country. Some explanations for these differences are expounded by the ProBio project: o The legislation in Italy forces diesel producers to mix their products with a 3% of biodiesel and thats why Abruzzos rate is apparently the highest one. This high rate is not directly related to a high number of bio-petrol stations (actually there arent any) or the public awareness about biofuels. In any case, their rate will be 3% until Italian legislation changes. The high rate found in province of Huelva (Spain), 2.13 %, could be caused by the current intensive agriculture in Huelva, which involves an increase in transport fuels consumption that, together with the increasing awareness of the citizens (Andaluca is the Spanish region with the highest biodiesel consumption levels and the highest number of bio-petrol stations), means a higher rate of biodisel consumption than in other provinces of Spain. Moreover, there are two new biodiesel production plants under construction and these companies try to make an intensive promotion of biodiesel consumption among the citizens. In the cases of Pomurje, Burgos and Avila, the rates are lower, in line with the current low national rates in Mediterranean countries.

3.5.2 Researching your local market

The case studies in the following section (Section 3.8) would suggest that the local markets most likely to be utilised for localised UCOME encompass average size transport fleets with 50-100 vehicles. These could be municipal fleets of cars and small lorries, waste collection fleets, buses as well as car rental enterprises.


However it is a new market, and rapidly changing. There are very strong legislative drivers at the European level, and also in some cases at the nation level. The problems lie in the correct application of the legislation, the restrictive warranty stance of the vehicle and equipment manufacturers, and cheap subsidised imports. Public perception will also play a part in the potential market, although this not really a quantifiable factor. Assistance for combating the current climate of criticism which may affect uptake in your local market, is addressed in more detail in Section 4. So each particular locality will have its own respective characteristics that could favour or restrict the potential market for biodiesel, and therefore research should be carried out on an ad-hoc basis. For this purpose, the following checklist has been drawn up to assist as a tool in evaluating the potential local market for biodiesel in your region. Baseline Information o o o o o o Number of diesel vehicles in your region Quantity of diesel consumed in your region Quantity of biodiesel already consumed in your region Local government fleets. Their composition and fuel usage. Local public transport fleets. Their composition and fuel usage. Number of independent filling stations in your region. Potential Drivers o o o National mandatory targets National mandatory blending requirements Tax breaks, and other financial incentives Potential Barriers o o o Warranties: the situation in your country. Which manufacturers are approving warranties for high biodiesel blends and in which models. Quantity of biodiesel coming from imports. Cost of imported biodiesel.

To acquire this kind of information the following bodies should be contacted in your country or localities: o o o o o o o o o o National Institute for Statistics Ministry of Industry Ministry for Transport Regional Government Regional Energy Agency Local Government Local Energy Agency Biodiesel distributors Biodiesel producers Independent filling stations organisations


3.6 Working with manufacturers

3.6.1 Warranties
Original Equipment Manufactruers or OEMs provide a material and workmanship warranty on their products. Such warranties do not cover damage caused by external conditions, such as fuel. Thus, if an engine using biodiesel experiences a failure unrelated to the biodiesel use, it must be covered by the OEMs warranty. The law prohibits the voiding of a warranty just because biodiesel was used, it has to be the cause of the failure. However, if an engine experiences a failure caused by biodiesel or any other external condition, such as bad diesel fuel, it will not be covered by the OEMs warranty. Historically warranty for biodiesel use was less of a problem than it has become today. The main reason for this being the position of the German car manufacturers, notably the VolksWagen group. Since 1996 Volkswagen has approved almost all new diesel vehicles for biodiesel fuelling. This included not only the models of VW, but also those ones the trade marks Audi, SEAT, and Skoda. This was a real encouragement to the uptake of biodiesel in Germany, and although the warranty information was sketchy in other parts of Europe, VWs position had a highly positive effect on the European biofuel market. Since the introduction of EURO 4 engines, however, the Volkswagen group has withdrawn the general approval. The reason is the decision of the member companies of the Volkswagen Group (VW, Audi, SEAT, Skoda) to offer EURO-4-engines in combination with self-regenerating particle filter systems. Their choice of system is incompatible with biodiesel due to post-injection of fuel and the very nature of biodiesel the blow-by causes unacceptable dilution of engine oil. Also Bosch, the leading manufacturer for diesel injection pumps, does not give any assurances for biodiesel fuelling. These developments have serious repercussions on the entire automobile industry. Other manufacturers that were beginning to follow suit, due to competitive pressure, now can sit back knowing that the warranty for biodiesel will no longer be an issue in a consumers choice between choosing a VW car and theirs. As a result of this reversal in policy, it is highly likely that the market segment of passenger cars will gradually lose importance due to the lack of approvals for the operation with biodiesel. Despite having many years to prepare for the uptake of biofuels the manufacturers do not see compatibility with biodiesel an essential part of their engine and vehicle design. It generally comes down to whether an engine geared totally for fossil diesel use, can adapt to use certain blends of biodiesel without affecting performance. This is not ideal. It would be much better, rather than an a posteriori approach, to adapt an a priori strategy whereby all modern diesel engines are deliberately designed for optimum performance with the widest variety of fuels. With the advent of electronic control technologies, it is not a far stretch of the imagination. However there are currently not the economic and legislative drivers to make this a reality. Furthermore there is the general feeling in the industry that this is deliberate ploy by Volkswagen to wipe biodiesel of the roadmap. Warranty approval, or rather the lack of, is the single biggest barrier to successful uptake of biodiesel in Europe. The UFOP website has an up-to-date list of the car manufacturers warranty positions. (in German)


3.6.2 Justified arguments?

The main argument for the non-approval of warranties by car manufacturers and the issue that has been dogging the biodiesel industry for the last few years is that of fuel quality. It is much more difficult to ensure quality from a nascent industry, with a large number of suppliers, using various types of feedstocks, than from a more generic product coming from but a few large refineries. For this reason the main protagonists of biodiesel have emphasized the need for fuel accreditation bodies. In the US this is run by the BQ-9000 program Certification is awarded following a successful formal review and audit of the capacity and commitment of the applicant to produce or market biodiesel fuel that meets the ASTM D-6751 Specification for Biodiesel Fuel (B100) ( In Germany, by the Biodiesel Quality Work Management Group to accredit suppliers producing to European standard EN14214 (

Quality certificate (Germany) The main concerns for the OEMs are: o o o o o o o o Free methanol Water Free glycerine Mono, di- and tri-glycerides Free fatty acids Total solid impurity level Alkali/alkaline earth metals Oxidisation stability

Quality Certificate (USA)

For the Fuel Injection Manufacturers (FIE), a key property of any FAME fuel is the resistance to oxidation. Aged of poor quality FAME contains organic acids like formic and acetic acids and acids of higher molecular weight as well as polymerization products which attack many components, drastically reducing the service life of the equipment. Currently the FIE manufacturers will only warranty up to 5% and only if it meets EN14214.,

Figure 42 Section shows the EN14214 standard parameters and Error! Reference
source not found. below summarises the potential impacts that poor biodiesel quality can have according to the Fuel Injection Equipment manufacturers.


Figure 60, FIE Manufacturers Common Position Statement 2007 Fuel characteristics Fatty acid methyl esters Effect Softening, swelling or hardening and cracking of some elastomers including nitrile rubbers (physical effect depends upon elastomer composition) Displacement of deposits from diesel operation Corrosion of aluminum & zinc Low flash point Entry of potassium & sodium and water hardness (alkaline earth metals ) Entry of free fatty acids hastens the corrosion of non ferrous metals eg zinc Salt formation with organic acids (soaps) Sedimentation Reversion (Hydrolysis) of FAME to fatty acid and methanol Corrosion Sustainment of bacterial growth Increase of electrical conductivity of the fuel Corrosion of non ferrous metal Soaking of cellulose filters Sediment on moving parts and lacquering Similar to glycerine Increase of injection pressure Generation of excessive heat locally in rotary type distributor pumps Higher stressing of components Potential lubricity problems Failure Mode Fuel leakage

Free methanol in FAME FAME process chemicals

Filter plugging Corrosion of FIE Filter plugging Corrosion of FIE Filter plugging Sticking moving parts

Free water

Corrosion of FIE Filter plugging

Free glycerine

Filter plugging Injector coking Injector coking Potential for reduced service life Fuel delivery problems Pump seizures Early life failures Poor nozzle spray atomizer Reduced service life Nozzle seat wear Blocked nozzles

Mono-, di- and tri-glyreride Higher modulus of elasticity High viscosity and temperature

Solid impurities/ particles

Ageing impurities/ particles Corrosive acids (formic & acetic) Higher molecular organic acids Polymerisation products Corrosive of all metal parts May form simple cell Similar to fatty acid Deposits; precipitation especially from fuel mixes Filter plugging Lacquer formation by soluble polymers in hot areas Corrosion of FIE


The standard itself is not without its critics. There are those that argue that some of the parameters were designed more to support the rapeseed industry rather than those that actually will affect the performance of the biodiesel as a fuel. There are certain restrictions that make it difficult for other sources such as sunflower biodiesel and animal tallow biodiesel to meet the fuel quality specifications defined by the standard. The iodine number, for example, is a measure of unsaturation within a mixture of fatty material. Whereas the American norm does not contain regulations on this parameter, iodine number is limited to 120 in Europe. Moreover, EN14214 also regulates the maximum content of linolenic acid methyl ester and polyunsaturated fatty acid methyl esters (i.e. compounds with four or more double bonds) to 12% and 1% respectively. These limits are not undisputed among biodiesel experts world-wide. Engine manufacturers have long argued that fuels with a higer iodine number tend to polymerize and form deposits on injector nozzles, piston rings and piston ring grooves, when they are heated. Moreoveer, unsaturated esters introduced into the engine oil are suspected of forming high-molecular compounds, which negatively affect the lubricating quality and thus result in serious engine damage. However, the results of various engine tests remain inconclusive. According to a tender of DG TREN (TREN/D2-44/2005) the European biodiesel standard needs to be updated in relation to the iodine number. The Commission as part of the Biomass Action Plan is proposing an amendment to the biodiesel standard EN14214 to facilitate the use of a wider range of vegetable oils for biodiesel production.

3.6.3 Options for warranty issues Consumer pressure One option for gaining warranty approval that has been successful for a number of organisations in the past is consumer pressure. If it is made clear to the manufacturers that providing warranties on biodiesel will be an important element in decision-making for purchase of new vehicles, this should favour cooperation. For example working with the Southwark Fleet, London, were initially told by their Citroen dealer in the UK that warranties would not be approved, even for biodiesel blends of 5%. This was contrary to the biodiesel policy in France for the PSA group. Hence Southwark council contacted the Head Office in Paris. The result of which was a full approval of the biodiesel use in the fleet up to a maximum of 30%, so long as the quality requirements were met. Testing each batch of biodiesel is the only way to ensure good quality just like with conventional fuels. The simple tests that consumers may perform such as looking at clarity by filling a clear glass container and doing a visual inspection, cannot determine the quality of the fuel. Fleets should conduct more extensive tests either in-house or by sending the fuel to independent testing laboratories for more specialized testing of fuel properties. In short, the more stringent your quality testing regime, the more confidence you will have in the product and the more likely that you can reach an agreement with the relevant OEM. Circumventing the Manufacturers Warranty An alternative to struggling to attain warranty approval, is circumvent to manufacturers altogether in the form of a liability transfer.


Liability transfer

A liability transfer is where there is a cost and risk shift that is the liability of warranty onto the Local Authority or other public body. This has been done in France in le Club des Villes Diester where more than 30 agglomerations have been using Figure 61, Rouen buses running on biodiesel mixes of up to 30% biodiesel in their transport fleets successfully since 1994. This was until more recently the most prominent and widespread use of biodiesel in fleets in Europe. In Rouen, where incidentally the largest biodiesel production plant in the world is located, the TCAR (Transport en commun de lAgglomeration de Rouen) fleet has been running on biodiesel since 1991 and currently 198 public transport buses are being run on Diester4 and 40 smaller vehicles including the makes Irisbus (RVI), Evobus (Mercedes), Heuliez, Setra (Mercedes), Renault, Peugeot and Citron. The warranties had to be underwritten by the partners involved in the scheme, in Rouens case, the petroleum companies. The risk of underwriting the engine warranties would appear to be a minor one. Similarly the following vehicles have all been involved in successful formal trials in Germany and Austria with no significant difficulties: Mercedes-Benz and MAN buses and lorries. Due to the overwhelming success of these trials in Graz, Austria, by June 2000 15 MercedesBenz Citaro buses equipped with a 353 HP Diesel engine were purchased, for which Mercedes has given full biodiesel warranties. Customers may in fact be satisfied by the following: Damage directly attributable to biodiesel will not be covered by an engine OEMs warranty, however it should be covered by the fuel suppliers general liability insurance. New biodiesel users fears could well laid to rest if biodiesel suppliers provide liability coverage on the biodiesel and its blends. Developing your own warranty

You could take this idea one step further, as has been done by Blooming Futures in the UK for their PPO (Pure Plant Oil) project. They are conducting a bio-fleet project, installing Elsbett vegetable oil conversions to diesel vehicles and providing subsidies for diesel-tovegetable oil conversion costs for vehicles in the South East of England. They offer a comprehensive warranty for truck operators with cover up to 21,000 and also offer affordable warranties for private vehicle owners.


Figure 63, Independent warranty example Warranty

COMPONENTS PROTECTED The following components are covered against Mechanical Breakdown (as defined below) of those items listed below only when their failure can be directly attributed to be as a result of the PPO system. Please note that those parts not listed are specifically excluded. ENGINE Big end bearings, big end shells, con rods, crankshaft, Injector pump,cam followers, cylinder bores, cylinder head (excluding cracks), inlet manifold, air filter box, engine block, distributer drive, flywheel, main bearings, inlet valves, exhaust valves, valve guides, pistons nd rings, tappet gear, timing gears, chains, timing chain tensioners, starter ring gear, oil pump, gudgeon pins, small end bearings valve springs, valve collets, rocker shafts, all internal bushings. Excluding lubricants and filter elements. For vehicles with turbos and intercoolers cover can be offered. ELECTRICS Electronic Control Unit, lambda sensor, throttle sensor, coil pack and associated wiring, ignition switch and air metering devices. VEHICLE HIRE In the event of a valid claim and provided the manufacturers repair time is in excess of 8 working hours, a maximum of 45 per day inclusive of V.A.T. but exclusive of fuel and insurance may be claimed for a maximum of 7 days from the time the repairs are started provided prior approval has been obtained from our warranty suppliers. RECOVERY In the event of a valid claim a maximum of 60 per claim inclusive of V.A.T. will be reimbursed. EUROPEAN USE The limits of the warranty are extended to cover the vehicle whilst outside of the U.K. but within the E.U. for a period of not more than 60 days in any 12 month period. RENEWAL The warranty is renewable subject to the approval of our warranty suppliers. PRICE The cost of the warranty depends on the age of the vehicle that has been converted. Vehicles out of warranty All these issues only apply where an engine is still within its warranty period. If outside then there are no warranty issues and the use of biodiesel in a vehicle fleet poses no considerable problems. Any vehicles out of warranty or maintenance contracts could run on 100% biodiesel, this should not present any problems if indeed there are any vehicles of this nature.

3.6.4 Light at the end of the tunnel?

As previously discussed, the Volkswagen group has deliberately opted for a strategy that will discount uses of any more than 7% biodiesel blend for all its future vehicles. This creates a technical bottleneck which is insurmountable by anything except a change in policy by the manufacturer.


However, one mustnt be blinded by the policy of one, albeit a very important, manufacturer. There are other vehicle manufacturers that currently have a much more favourable attitude towards higher biodiesel blends. Hence are a potential market for biodiesel producers. Commercial vehicles Mercedes Benz, DaimlerChrysler, MAN and IVECO have given approvals for EURO-4 and EURO-5 truck engines in commercial vehicles. Moreover, some can offer extra equipment (bigger oil sump, separate fuel supply for the auxiliary heating system) to enable the utilisation of biodiesel. Various factors contributed to this marketing policy. One of the main reasons was customer pressure of the freight trade. Manufacturers misgivings for biodiesels ability to work with their exhaust after-treatments (SCR, Bluetec) were dispelled so long as the biodiesel complies with the European Biodiesel Standard EN 14214. The question whether the use of the biodiesel sensor leads to a further reduction of NOx/particles leads is under discussion6. There is a similar picture for Agricultural vehicles where nearly all manufactures have given their approval, especially for the latest models. Therefore with regard to the prospects for biodiesel sales in the transport industry, this offers sales prospects of at least 10 years! (Source UFOP) French cars The French manufacturers PSA Peugeot Citron and Renault also have a much more biodiesel favourable strategy. The current understanding is that they will warranty their vehicles up to 30% under certain conditions. These are normally within fleet operations with adequate maintenance and quality controls. If the French manufacturers maintain their probiodiesel policy, then promoting the purchase of French vehicles over German will create consumer pressure, increasing sales and profits of the pro-biodiesel manufacturers, thereby encouraging further developments in favour of biodiesel approved vehicles. Older Vehicles Lest we forget the millions of cars and vehicles running with Euro 2 and Euro 3 engines, which are either possess a biodiesel approved warranty, or our out of warranty, and can run on biodiesel without any difficulties.

3.6.5 Warranty Options

Error! Reference source not found. shows in a table the possible options for vehicle users, or fleet managers at the different biodiesel blends.

A biodiesel sensor has already been developed that would optimize engine performance to meet the required emissions standards for any blend of biodiesel. Unfortunately the biodiesel sensor was rejected by Volkswagen despite its successful trials and operations.


Figure 64, Table of warranty options Percentage of biodiesel B05 B30 Warranty Options Warranty not approved for biodiesel (eg Euro 4 VW) (Blends of up to 5% biodiesel still meet EN590 standards) Vehicle Warrantied (PSA Peugeot Citron) Ad-hoc warranty agreement with vehicle manufacturers (consumer pressure). Warranty circumvented by liability transfer, or own warranty.


Vehicle Warrantied (eg VW pre Euro 4) Reach ad-hoc warranty agreement with vehicle manufacturers (consumer pressure). Circumvent warranty (liability transfer, or purchase own warranty)


Vehicle out of warranty

3.7 Securing clients

For a biodiesel project to be successful it is obvious that you need to secure your market. Relying on latent interest and willingness to use the fuel, particularly in the current atmosphere of skepticism, will just not be sufficient to guarantee that you have enough clients to make your biodiesel project work. The Market In the previous section we have seen the market for biodiesel has suffered a setback very recently with the new position of the large German manufacturer Volkswagen. It is also under severe competition from cheap imports from the United States (see Section 3.3). However there is still a large potential market for biodiesel use. However the most likely scenarios is that it will become, more restricted, shifting away from passenger cars in the short-term future, and more focused on commercial vehicles and French cars. The most successful application of biodiesel so far has been in the public sector, whether it be bus fleets or waste collection vehicles. This is not surprising. They have captive fleets which they can control and monitor, they generally have their fuel depots, and they have a political mandate and ethical responsibility to protect the environment. These things considered they are almost certainly your path of least resistence, and the first port of call for any prospective biodiesel marketer. Furthermore, the quantities for the local small-scale type of project we are dealing with in BioDieNet, would just about meet the needs of one or two of these types of fleets, and so could it fact be a client for all your production! Getting in touch with your local energy agency is a good start to making contact with the local public authorities. Quality Assurance


Whoever your client be, assurance of the quality of your product is quintessential. You must be producing a consistently high-quality product, ideally to the EN14214 standard. Warranties will depend on this, as will performance of the fuel, once in use. One faulty batch could cost your client dear, jeopardise the whole business and ruin biodiesels reputation in your area. If you are unsure of a batch, throw it out, and start again. For this reason it is advisable to have a backup supplier of biodiesel or straight diesel for your client whilst the problem is resolved. Non-financial Incentives: Legislation There is now significant European and national legislation for the implementation of biofuels, led in general by the EU Biofuels Directive 2003/30/EC. This is most likely to hold sway with public authorities and bodies. It is part of a longer term strategy for all of Europe and not just a flash in the pan. Public Opinion The current tide of criticism of biodiesel is discussed in more detail in Section 4. It is very important in any awareness campaigns or when dealing with the public to stress the benefits of biodiesel: its global and local emissions benefits; its non-toxicity; its reduction of importdependence. Public opinion will also have an large impact on local policiticians, that you may be persuading to promote the uptake of biodiesel in the public fleets, so is a critical element in your locality, irrespective of if you are selling the fuel to the public or not. Tax situation The tax situations differ significantly between all the Member States and this presents problems. In some countries there is no tax (eg Spain, in others, Netherlands, it has the same level as fossil diesel (Section 3.4). It is very important to fully understand the tax regime in your country and make sure that you are within the law and will not have repercussions that could end up to you being fined or at worst, shut down. Price Demand for biodiesel will obviously depend greatly on price. If you can sell it cheaper than fossil diesel, you will have much greater probability of securing clients. It is quite amazing how preoccupations with fuel quality and performance suddenly dissolve, once biodiesel is offered at a cheaper price! Suddenly there are no technical difficulties and every is queueing up for it. However, it is strongly advised not to sacrifice quality for the sake of selling your fuel cheaper. This is a false trial and could lead to falling off a cliff. But if you can sell it cheaper without compromising quality, then great, and you will secure your client base. Most critically your demand will be dictated, probably very little by the absolute price, but by the relative price of biodiesel compared to diesel. This will depend on your costs of production and quite critically, the tax regime in your country. It is therefore advisable to


monitor very closely the current price and future price of diesel on the commodity markets, and fully understand the tax regime in your country and any future changes likely to come at the political level (eg Germanys new Energy Tax Law). Supply/demand balance: You need to be matching the supply and demand of your business. The demand levels need to be controlled, and there is a need for a reliable and consistent supply chain. Artificially increasing demand that cannot be matched by supply will only lead to disappointed customers and give biodiesel a bad reputation. At the other extreme, oversupply not matched by demand will damage the sustainability of a biodiesel production facility. Accurate calculations of what your limits on production are, both minimum and maximum. It is always best, if possible, to have a reliable back-up supplier of biodiesel, that you can source reliable fuel from, if for some reason you have production difficulties. Private customers should be able to fill up on fossil diesel during periods of supply problems, however, this may lead to dissatisfied customers, so the demand and supply should be careful managed.
Figure 65, Summary table for securing clients Factor o The Market o o o o o o o Tax situation o Price o Supply/Demand balance o Recommendations Path of least resistance is likely to be public fleets. Work with your local energy agency where possible. Likely shift away from passenger cars to commercial vehicles. French cars are more biodiesel friendly. Dont sacrifice quality for lower prices. Quality is crucial for gaining and maintaining client base. Public sector should be aware of relevant legislation. Public opinion should be favourably influenced wherever possible, it will affect both public and private sales. Tax situations differ enormously between countries. Make sure you know your national law and apply it correctly. Your demand will depend on the price differential between fossil diesel and biodiesel. Keep a very close eye on price movements. Accurate calculations of what your limits on production are, both minimum and maximum. Have a reliable back-up supplier

Quality Assurance Non-financial incentives

3.8 Case Studies

3.8.1 Case Study 1: Biodiesel Taxi Fleet in Graz Background The capital city Graz lies in the southeast of Austria and is the largest city in the Styria region. Graz is situated on the Mur River in a low-lying valley surrounded on three sides by hills, and is predisposed to poor air quality, especially in winter the reduction of vehicle pollution is therefore an important local issue. The citys 240,000 inhabitants are well served


by an extensive public transportation network including a comprehensive bus and tram service. Graz has extensive experience of using biodiesel manufactured from recycled vegetable oils for fuel public service vehicles and, since 2003 has operated its entire fleet of 140 buses on biodiesel fuels. The waste vegetable oils are collected from many of the citys restaurants and private households and locally processed to provide the Fatty Acid Methyl Ester (FAME) biofuel. Given this existing experience and established fuel supply infrastructure, Taxi 878, the citys largest taxi company have also opted to switch from using mineral (fossil) diesel to biodiesel (FAME) and are in the process of converting all of their 225 car fleet. The company have procured vehicles capable of running with 100% FAME and have opened a public-access biodiesel filling station at their central depot. In Austria, Taxi 878 are the first major taxi fleet to switch to pure biodiesel operation.
Figure 66, Taxi 878s biodiesel fleet The biodiesel fuel Until 2005, Taxi 878 sourced its biodiesel from SEEG, the same company that supplies the citys bus fleet with waste oil derived biodiesel, and one of the first companies in the world to produce recycled FAME on an industrial scale. Waste oil from over 250 restaurants and many private households within Graz is collected and stored in a solar-heated 10,000 litre tank, before being transported to SEEGs processing facility in Mureck, about 50 km from Graz. Here the used oil undergoes transesterification to remove the glycerol component of the oil using a process that was originally developed by the University of Graz together with the Austrian company Biodiesel International (BDI). Each year around 10,000 tonnes of used cooking oil is processed, each tonne producing around 850 litres FAME biodiesel fuel. However, since 2005, FAME biodiesel has been sourced from an alternative supplier and now uses crop biodiesel feedstocks such as rapeseed to produce RME (Rape Methyl Ester), one of the most common type of FAME used across the EU. (The change in supplier was not instigated by any difference in fuel quality, but was a decision based on normal business considerations.) In winter, when temperatures are at their lowest, the RME fuel is also blended with 30% fossil diesel to reduce the risk of fuel lines becoming blocked (see next section). In order to increase the impact of the project, and to benefit the wider community, a refuelling station for biodiesel was established at Taxi 878 headquarters. The filling station is also open to the public, thus encouraging other companies as well as private motorists to use biodiesel. In parallel with the use within the vehicle fleet, biodiesel is also used to fuel the companys backup generator. Taxi 878s biodiesel taxi fleet


Taxi 878 is one of the largest private taxi fleets within Graz with around 225 cars. The annual distance travelled by each car is in the region of 70,000-80,000 kilometres. As of 2006, around 33% of the fleet has switched to using biodiesel and the aim is that eventually at least 50%-70% will convert to using 100% biodiesel. Originally, the main car models used within the fleet were manufactured by Mercedes however, since 2005, the fleet has switched to using Skoda Superb automatics as these have proven to perform well on 100% FAME fuels; the Skoda cars in service have already passed 130,000 km without any problems. Initially the taxi fleet of (mainly) Mercedes cars experienced technical problems that delayed the adoption of biodiesel within the fleet, but highlighted important technical and regulatory issues that needed to be addressed. The technical problem was initially thought to be either the direct blocking of fuel filters by the FAME fuel, or that sediment left by the fossil diesel was being dissolved by biodiesel and then clogging the filters, both common problems associated with using biodiesel. If either of these problems had been the case, it would be impossible for cars within the fleet to change between biodiesel and fossil diesel, and would have therefore restricted use of FAME within the fleet. However, analyses showed that fuel filter clogging was not the issue in the end it was found that there was a design error in the test vehicle itself. It took the input of two experts from the local University to finally identify and solve the problem before the conversion to biodiesel could progress. Since this was rectified, there have been no further problems. There were also problems with vehicle warranties that normally limit the percentage of biodiesel that can be used to 5%. Volkswagen Group advise that for the Skoda Superb manufactured from 2002 to 2006, Vehicles built before week 32 (w/c 07/08/2006) RME biodiesel conforming to EN14214 can be mixed in any desired ratio with diesel conforming to the standard EN590 as stated in the relevant Owners Handbook. However, Superbs built after this date, and those models that are fitted with a diesel particulate trap (DPF), such as the Superb 2.0 litre TDi from 2005 onwards, are not approved for use with biodiesel. (RME can also be used in the Skoda Octavia A4 1997-2006 and Skoda Fabia 2000-2006 models built before week commencing 26/06/2006.) Interestingly, the majority of taxi drivers at Taxi 878 are not employees but franchisers, making the switch to biodiesel more of a challenge. In essence, the whole community of drivers needed to be persuaded to use the new fuel voluntarily in their own vehicles and take on any risks involved. This was achieved in part through the use of an information campaign that addressed fuel issues including quality of the biofuel, vehicle compatibility and using the fuel on cold winter days. All drivers were introduced to environmental issues as a part of a one-day training programme for the entire company. This approach was deemed to have been necessary to convince drivers that the risks were minimal. In the event, the technical problems that were encountered did lead to vehicle downtime and loss of income. However, the company succeeded in keeping the drivers on-board as problems were being addressed. Taxi 878s drivers have also been trained to provide biodiesel information to passengers, and are therefore important lay-disseminators. This capitalises on the fact that passengers are often curious about taxis that are driven on renewable fuels. The objective is that this will encourage the adoption of biodiesel by private motorists who may be unaware of its local availability and wider environmental benefits.

109 Environmental benefits Official published vehicle emission data for cars running on 100% FAME is not readily available as vehicles using biodiesel in the EU are type approved using mineral diesel. However, generic vehicle comparisons suggest that, compared to fossil diesel, tailpipe emissions of carbon monoxide, hydrocarbons and particulates are reduced by 15%-20%. However, emissions of nitrogen oxides are increased by around 5%-10%. Most significantly, despite using around 10% more fuel per kilometre (by volume), life cycle greenhouse gas emissions of cars using 100% RME are around half of those using conventional diesel.
Figure 68, Skoda Superb

The original project targets included a reduction in use of fossil diesel use of 1,080 tonnes per year, and a reduction of 2,900 tonnes carbon dioxide and 3.4 tonnes carbon monoxide emissions per year. As of the end of 2006, these have yet to be achieved but are expected to be realised within the near future. Other advantages of using biodiesel include the fact that the fuel biodegrades more quickly than fossil sourced diesel, and removes the environmental risks associated with oil extraction and transport (eg Alaskan pipeline and Exxon Valdez spills). However, this has to be balanced by the environmental impacts associated with the feedstock crop production and processing that usually involves synthetic fertilizer, pesticide and herbicide use (organic production is possible but rare). Cost information As of 2006, RME biodiesel sourced by Taxi 878 retails at around 0.88-0.91 and fossil diesel costs in the range 0.94-0.95 thus RME is typically 0.05-0.08 less than fossil diesel. This slight cost advantage is a direct result of the fact that, in Austria, biodiesel (meeting minimum fuel specifications) is exempt from fuel tax (as is the case in many other EU Member States). The project has proved invaluable in confirming the operational costs (fuel costs, maintenance, etc) associated with biodiesel use as compared to mineral diesel. To date the project concludes that, taken overall, and assuming engine failures are avoided through the sourcing of high quality fuels and biodiesel compatible engines, there are no significant economical differences between biodiesel and mineral fuel operation. The wider benefits are, therefore, positive and include the reduction of the impact on the local, regional and global environment. While biodiesel taxis do not receive any additional benefits, since 2004, drivers of low polluting vehicles in Graz can receive a 0.40/hour discount on the parking fee (the ordinary tariff is 1.20/hour) low-polluting vehicles are defined as vehicles emitting less than 140g (130g for diesel vehicles) CO2 per driven km. By inserting a special token in the parking machine the driver receives the lower tariff. To obtain this so-called Umwelt-jeton, drivers have to register their vehicles at the city council and eligible vehicles must display special sticker on the windscreen.

110 Lessons learnt Taxi 878 has been instrumental in demonstrating that private taxi (as opposed to public bus) fleets can operate effectively and reliably on biodiesel fuels with no loss of service or vehicle performance, and without an increase in operating costs. This has been achieved through the overcoming of apparent technical problems that required expert input, and which turned out not to be a significant barrier to the adoption of biodiesel by a large proportion of the taxi fleet. The experience of Taxi 878 within Europe is unique and could be used by other EU fleets who wish to switch to biodiesel for environmental and/or fuel supply reasons. One important lesson offered by the project is that, although vehicle warranties usually only allow up to 5% biodiesel blends, it is possible to source vehicles (with care) that are able to use high percentage blends or pure biodiesel fuels. Co-operation with vehicle manufacturers and suppliers is also advised. Taxi 878 has also shown that it is necessary to bring users on-board in this case this was achieved through driver education and training, both of which required significant time and cost investment by the company. Not only did this increase the chances of the project succeeding, but it has led to taxi drivers acting as information multipliers and advocates drivers are trained to provide passengers with information about the benefits and practicalities of used biodiesel. This has succeeded in building a wider support base for biodiesel within the city of Graz.
Figure 70, Driver of Taxi 878 biodiesel fleet

While the city of Graz has had a long experience in using biodiesel in public transport, this project has demonstrated that different barriers to the adoption of biofuels exist for private fleets. Whereas the public transport operator may have more capacities for research, private fleets have to buy in expert advice when required, and are more sensitive to the economic penalties associated with some cleaner fuels. These potential barriers were exacerbated in the case of Taxi 878, as the fleet is not centrally owned (all drivers are franchisees). However, even in this regard the project has succeeded in convincing fleet drivers that the benefits of using biodiesel are worth the investment in overcoming initial problems in implementation.

3.8.2 Case Study 2: Biodiesel Bus fleet of the Public Transportation System of Graz, Austria Context Graz is the second largest city in Austria with a population of around 250,000, about 120km south of Vienna. In 1994 the public transportation system of the City of Graz, Grazer Verkehrsbetriebe (GVB) was contacted by several research institutions to allow a field test with a fuel, made from used cooking oil, which was to be used in diesel engines within the bus fleet of the GVB.

111 Process In November 1994 the first field test started, with 2 public buses running on biodiesel produced from used cooking oil. Before the start of this field-test the engines were retrofitted for the use of biodiesel, replacing the rubber and plastic parts of the engine which are in contact with the fuel, such as the fuel hose, gauge glasses, hose connection, with biodieselresistant material. It is essential to ensure that all additional equipment which uses biodiesel, such as an additional heating system and the injection pump system of the diesel engine, are approved for biodiesel use by the manufacturer. Modern vehicles are automatically biodiesel proof, but only became the case in the last decade. Depending on the type of bus, each retrofit cost between between ATS 15.000 and ATS 20.000 which was met by the city government of Graz. The 3 year field test was carried out in co-operation with the Institute of Internal Combustion Engines and Thermodydnamics (University of Technology Graz), the Institute of Organic Chemistry (University of Graz) and the Austrian Biodiesel Institute. The City buses were regularly checked by these institutes, monitoring the exhaust gas emissions, the drive-ability, the effects on engine power and fuel consumption, any changes in the quality of the motor oil, and finally the wear and deposit in the engine. Results Before the start of this research programme the engine of a MAN bus was completely checked and overhauled. After a total mileage 270,000 km with biodiesel, the engine was completely dismantled and thoroughly examined. The result was that no additional, abnormal wear in comparison to the use of mineral oil diesel was found. The consistency of the motor oil was examined at designated intervals during the project. In contrary to earlier technical reports, where a dilution of the motor oil was reported when using Biodiesel, these observations could not be verified during this test. The changes of the motor oil were within the normal range, showing that the use of a special and biodieselapproved motor oil is not needed. Therefore GVB was able to continue using the same motor oil for the whole bus fleet (diesel and biodiesel engines), in addition, the intervals for the change of motor oil were reduced by 25% to every 40,000km in the case of the engines using biodiesel. The only disadvantage observed during the use of biodiesel was a 6% increase in fuel consumption compared to normal diesel. This is caused by the lower heating value of biodiesel compared to mineral oil diesel, which is a function of the content of 10% oxygen in Biodiesel. The GVB considered this slight disadvantage was by far outweighed by the positive benefits. The positive results of the field test encouraged GVB to continue using biodiesel after the end of the field test. In 1997 eight additional buses were changed to biodiesel. In 1999, after 2 more years of successful, unproblematic running on biodiesel, 10 more city buses were converted. A fleet of Mercedes-Benz CITARO buses equipped with a 353 HP Diesel engine have been purchased, for which Mercedes has given full biodiesel warranties. Six years on, GVB now runs its entire bus fleet on biodiesel. All the biodiesel now used in GVBs bus fleet is made from waste oil. This has the advantage of reducing the demands on the sewage system and the waste water treatment plant, whilst transforming waste into a valuable raw material and renewable fuel. The emissions savings resulting from the use of biodiesel in 2002 were calculated as: 2,500 tonnes of CO2 2.9 tonnes of CO 1.0 t particulate matter 2.7 tonnes of SO2


3.0 tonnes of non methane hydrocarbons

3.8.3 Case Study 3: Valencia bus fleet

The Valencia bio diesel pilot Figure 72, Municipal Transport Company EMT project began in October 2002 under the project nameECOBUS. It was approved by the European Commission within the framework of the LIFE Environment 2002 program. It was promoted by the Valencia City Council, with the beneficiary being the Municipal Transport Company (EMT). EMT is responsible for all transportation above ground in the Spanish Regional Capital of Valencia. They have 480 buses covering 57 routes, travelling 52,000 km and transporting 100,000 passengers per year. The projects main aim was to have 120 of their urban buses using the eco friendly bio diesel fuel by the project end date October 2004. Currently they have 100 buses using bio diesel fuel. The motivational tool behind ECOBUS was to recycle a waste product; more specifically used vegetable oil, for use in EMT buses. Thereby reinforcing the City Councils commitment to protecting and maintaining its natural, urban and cultural heritage, which in turn will enhance the populations quality of life. From this commitment and search for a more sustainable transport, the project ECOBUS evolved and spanned over three years. The project consisted of three main stages: engine tests in the 1st year, collections in the 2nd year and tests on buses in the 3rd year.

The engine tests were carried Figure 74, Oil containers during a UCO collection out under controlled operating conditions with the aim being to obtain data on the effects of different mixtures of bio diesel on the environment, on engine durability and performance using three blends of bio fuel (B30, B50 and B70). Tests showed that Carbon Monoxide decreased on average by 15%, which was achieved during all three mixtures used. Carbon Dioxide progressively decreased from 8% with B30 up to 13% with B70. Unburnt Hydrocarbons significantly decreased progressively from 20% with B30 up to 35% with B70. Smoke Opacity was the largest and most significant decrease throughout the tests reaching 22% with B30 and up to 56% with B70. However, Nitrogen Oxide had minimum changes observed during testing.


In the 2nd year of ECOBUS the collections began. A private company collects the UCO and 800 restaurants out of 5000 participated in the program after vast promoting and advertising. The collections are self-financed as the collection company sell the UCO to the processing plant. All establishments involved can be identified with an ECOBUS sticker and are given containers for which to store their UCO. The oil is then taken to a storage warehouse in Valencia to undergo the oil/water filtering process, which is continuously repeated in order to minimise waste. For example: the leftover waste is returned to a tank and left out in the heat to allow any excess oil to drip out. The waste accumulated during this process is 20%- 15% water and 5% solid proving that this process is thorough. One tank holds 30,000L of oil and is stored for no more than 1 week to avoid the oil absorbing water and the acidity increasing. The oil is then transported to a plant in Barcelona 150miles away in a large tanker to undergo the oil to bio diesel conversion.

In the initial phase of the pilot Figure 76, Biodiesel pump at bus depot project, a plant was to be built in Valencia but funding was not available, so is now part of the future plan for bio diesel use. This whole process from collecting the UCO to distributing the bio diesel (excluding operational costs) costs about 15 cents per litre and sells for 20 cents per litre and is exempt from tax payments until the review in 2012. The tests on buses began in the 3rd year of the ECOBUS project and the results showed that the pollutant emission tests carried out in the initial bench tests were confirmed. Only slight variations were observed during vehicle operation with regards to engine power. A slight increase of fuel consumption was observed and no effects were seen on either oil consumption or composition. The tests also showed that there are no significant differences in the reliability of the service through use of bio diesel apart from some engine parts that seem to suffer from minor carbon accumulation. The ECOBUS pilot project (2002-2004) and has proved very successful. It also demonstrates the accessibility of bio diesel use around the world and the extensive benefits attached to this eco-friendly fuel. So what does the future hold for biodiesel use in Valencia? The bus company EMT plan to have 60 buses on CNG, 5 Hydrogen hybrids and 420+ on bio diesel by 2007. At present, they only have private interest with regards to funding but hope to form a partnership between the private and public sector in order to continue and expand on bio diesel use as an alternative to conventional fuel. The next step for Valencia is to have a plant built so that all the stages involved from collecting to distributing can be carried out within the city.

3.8.4 Other projects underway Portugal: The fleets running on biodiesel in Portugal are, in average, composed by 50 to 100 heavy vehicles. In Sintras case-study the use of biofuels is being promoted in the municipal fleet. At the moment, only the waste collection trucks are running on B5 (52


heavy vehicles). However, the goal is to increase this number to the whole municipal fleet (plus 91 heavy vehicles). In Oeiras case-study the use of UCOME is under preparation in the scope of OILPRODIESEL project ( On a first stage, due to the fact that the biodiesel to be used will be locally produced from the collected UCOs in Oeiras (less quantity during the first months), only 10 vehicles will use B5, B10 and B30. On a next stage, the goal is to increase the number of vehicles according to the availability of biodiesel. Belgium Contract: AL/43/95/B Coordinator: Ir Renilde Craps Organisation: VITO NV Total Cost (): 353,000 EC Funds (): 115,00 Collaboration with: University of Graz, Austria Introduction and demonstration of vehicles driving on biodiesel made from used edible oils, i.e. Used Vegetable Oil Methyl Ester (UVOME). The demonstration was to be executed on garbage collector trucks and company passenger cars fleets in daily use. During two years the demonstration will increase progressively the number of vehicles and the blend concentration of UVOME. This is based on experiences from the preceding Altener project XVII/4.1030/93-22. The items to be investigated are: fuel quality and characteristics, fuel consumption, emissions, maintenance costs and technical implications of UVOME use. Special attention is to be given to the wear behaviour of the injection systems and other critical components. In each case these items are to be compared to the corresponding items for mineral diesel. Fuel consumption and emissions are measured using on-the-road emission and energy measuring systems for vehicles. Information on the project is presented to the public and then responsible governments on order to inform them of the usage of this fuel. Expected results: Prove the feasibility of UVOME for heavy duty and light duty applications. Quantification and qualification of possible technical problems, particularly related to wear behaviour. For different levels of concentration of UVOME in the diesel fuel, fuel efficiency and emission measurements will determine the energy efficiency and environmental impact of UVOME use in different types of vehicles. Through the actual use of UVOME, implications in the field of maintenance and costs are to be evaluated in the function of the concentration of UVOME in the diesel fuel. Fuel quality is evaluated as a function of time. Lubrication oil will be evaluated as a function of mileage. The demonstration will inform the public of the feasibility of the utilisation of the fuel.

The prospects for wider use of UVOME will be investigated. The Netherlands The municipality of Breda is driving on Biodiesel from used vegetable oils. The fuel is used in delivery vehicles and 1 truck, and the biodiesel is supplied by the company BioDsl BV. The Dutch monkey zoo (apenheul) has won the Rabobank sustainability trophy of Apeldoorn on April 10th 2008. Their cars drive on biodiesel made from UCO from their own restaurants. It consumes7000 liters UCO annually, supplied by the company Bio-D.


3.9 Relevant European Legislation

The European Commission (EC) has adopted an action plan and two Directives to foster the use of alternative fuels for transport, starting with the regulatory and fiscal promotion of biofuels. The Commission considers that the use of fuels derived from agricultural sources is the technology with the greatest potential in the short to medium term. Air quality is also an issue very high on the ECs agenda and an area where much legislation has been passed.

3.9.1 Action plan

The action plan outlines a strategy to achieve a 20% substitution of diesel and petrol fuels by alternative fuels in the road transport sector by 2020. It concludes that only three options would have the potential to achieve individually more than 5% of total transport fuel consumption over the next 20 years: biofuels which are already available, natural gas in the medium term, and hydrogen and fuel cells in the long term.

3.9.2 Biofuels Directive

Regulation (EC) No 1774/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 3 October 2002, laying down health rules concerning animal by-products not intended for human consumption In May 2003, the European Parliament and the Council have adopted the 'Directive on the promotion of the use of biofuels or other renewable fuels for transport'. This Directive requires member states in 2005 to replace 2% of their diesel and petrol with biofuels, although deviations are possible when justified. In 2004 the member states had to report their measures to promote biofuels for transport, their national target for biofuel use in 2005 and their reasons for any deviation of the 2% target. The Commission, the Parliament and the Council have been encouraging the development of renewable energy and particularly of biofuels for a long time. The Communication entitled "A Sustainable Europe for a Better World: A European Union Strategy for Sustainable Development" presented to the Gteborg Summit in June 2001 highlighted the important role of biofuels in tackling climate change and in the development of clean energies. The Commission Green Paper "Towards a European strategy for the security of energy supply" of November 2000 introduced the objective of substituting 20% of traditional fuels by alternative fuels in the road transport sector by 2020. The recent White Paper on Transport Policy establishes an objective of a 6% market share for biofuels in 2010.

3.9.3 Air Quality Framework Directive

Air Quality is one of the areas in which Europe has been most active in recent years. The EC aim has been to develop an overall strategy through the setting of long-term air quality objectives. A series of Directives has been introduced to control levels of certain pollutants and to monitor their concentrations in the air. In 1996, the Environment Council adopted Framework Directive 96/62/EC on ambient air quality assessment and management. This Directive covers the revision of previously existing legislation and the introduction of new air quality standards for previously unregulated air pollutants, setting the timetable for the development of Daughter Directives on a range of pollutants. The list of atmospheric pollutants to be considered includes sulphur dioxide (SO2), nitrogen dioxide (NOx), particulate matter (PM), lead (Pb) and ozone (pollutants governed by already existing


ambient air quality objectives), and benzene, carbon monoxide, poly-aromatic hydrocarbons, cadmium, arsenic, nickel and mercury. Daughter Directives 43 The Framework Directive was followed by Daughter Directives, which will set the numerical limit values, or in the case of ozone, target values for each of the identified pollutants. Besides setting air quality limit and alert thresholds, the objectives of the Daughter Directives are to harmonise monitoring strategies, measuring methods, and calibration and quality assessment methods to arrive at comparable measurements throughout the EU and to provide for good public information. The first Daughter Directive The first Daughter Directive (1999/30/EC) relating to limit values for NOx, SO2, Pb and PM in ambient air came into force in July 1999. Member States have two years to transpose the Directive and set up their monitoring strategies. Member States have to ensure that up-todate information on ambient concentrations of SO2, NOx, particulate matter and lead is routinely made available to the public. The limit values for NOx for the protection of vegetation must be met by 2001. The health limit values for SO2 and PM must be met by 2005. The other health limit values for NO2 and Pb must be met by 2010. Member States will have to prepare attainment programmes showing how the limit values will be met on time for those areas where attainments by "business as usual" cannot be presumed. These programmes must be made directly available to the public, and must also be sent to the Commission. To facilitate a harmonised and structured way of reporting, detailed arrangements for Member States to submit the information on plans and programmes are laid down in Commission Decision 2004/224/EC. The second Daughter Directive The second Daughter Directive (2000/69/EC) relating to limit values for benzene and carbon monoxide in ambient air came into force on the 13th of December 2000. This Directive establishes limit values for concentrations of benzene and carbon monoxide in ambient air and requires Member States to assess of concentrations of those pollutants in ambient air on the basis of common methods and criteria, as well as to obtain adequate information on concentrations of benzene and carbon monoxide and ensure that it is made available to the public. The limit value for carbon monoxide must be met by 2005. The limit value for benzene must be met by 2010 unless an extension is granted. As with the first Daughter Directive, Member States will have to prepare attainment programmes for those areas where attainments cannot be assumed without further changes. These programmes must be made directly available to the public and must also be sent to the Commission. Annual reporting under the second Daughter Directives must follow Commission Decision 2004/461/EC. The third Daughter Directive The third Daughter Directive relating to ozone 2002/3/EC was adopted on 12 February 2002. It must be transposed by Member States by 9 September 2003. Directive (92/72/EC) will be repealed by that date. The Directive sets long-term objectives equivalent to the World Health Organisation's new guideline values and target values for ozone in ambient air to be attained where possible by 2010. These targets follow Directive 2001/81/EC on national emission ceilings. The fourth Daughter Directive


This most recent Directive 2004/107/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 15 December 2004 relates limiting atmospheric concentrations of arsenic, cadmium, mercury, nickel and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in ambient air.

3.9.4 Road Vehicles

Motor vehicle emissions are regulated by Directive 70/220/EEC (light vehicles) and 88/77/EC (heavy vehicles) and amendments to those directives. A whole series of amendments have been issued to stepwise tighten the limit values. Emissions are measurably falling because of this, even though traffic volumes continue to rise. The implementation of the Auto-Oil Programme will result in a notably improved air quality in our cities. The programme focused on the emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC), nitrogen oxides (NOx) and particulate matter (PM). During the programme stricter limit values will be implemented for light vehicles 2005 (Directive 98/69/EC) and for heavy duty vehicles 2005 and 2008 (Directive 1999/96/EC). In addition legislation has been implemented on the use of on-board diagnostic systems (OBD) which will tell vehicle owners if the emissions of the vehicle is too high, while a light on the instrument panel will indicate that there is a need to repair the vehicle. There is legislation for vehicles in use on periodic inspections at which the vehicle owners maintenance of the vehicle is checked (Directive 96/96/EC). Legislation on durability was introduced through the Auto-Oil Programme, making the manufacturer responsible for the emissions from light vehicles during five years or 80,000 km, whichever occurs first, providing that the vehicle has been properly maintained. A similar legislation is on its way for heavy duty vehicles. To reduce emissions during short trips, when the catalytic converter is less effective, and during wintertime, a separate requirement on "cold start emissions" was introduced. This part of the legislation is of particular importance for city driving where the average trip normally is very short. By amending Directive 1999/24/EC the emissions from motorcycles will be lowered as well. The current legislation will be tightened in 2003 and increased from 2006. This Directive also covers emissions from mopeds.

3.9.5 CO2 tailpipe emissions

The EU's aim is to reach by 2010 at the latest, an average CO2 emission figure of 120 g/km for all new passenger cars marketed in the Union. The current strategy is based on 3 pillars: o Voluntary agreements committing the automobile manufacturers to reduce CO2 emissions from passenger cars, mainly by means of improved vehicle technology o Improvements of consumer information on the fuel-economy of cars o Market-orientated measures to influence motorists' choice towards more fuel-efficient cars

3.9.6 Automotive Fuel Quality

Directive 98/70 as amended by Directive 2003/17/EC contains the environmental fuel quality specifications for petrol and diesel fuels in the Community focusing on sulphur, lead and aromatic levels. This legislation has ensured that from 1 January 2002 all petrol sold in the Member States is unleaded. The sulphur content in diesel and petrol is now currently limited to 50ppm and there is the phasing in of diesel and petrol with a sulphur content of 10 ppm.


4 Fighting Criticism
The years 20072008 saw dramatic world food price rises, bringing a state of global crisis and causing political and economical instability and social unrest in both poor and developed nations. In the media the blame has been laid inexorably on biofuels as the main culprit for this price hike. It is not surprising that in a time of crisis, a scapegoat will be sought to blame for all of the worlds ills. However the effect of this negative press for the biofuels industry has been incredibly damaging for its public image, made particularly bad being that it is still a nascent industry struggling for recognition in the market place. One only needs look beneath the surface to discover that this is, at best a knee-jerk reaction or at worst, a cynical ploy to shift the blame for away from other causes, that stops us from dealing with the much larger issue of food and energy needs for the next 50 years. The fact is that current production of biofuels uses about 1 per cent of global land available for agriculture. FAO estimates that by 2030 this might double. Confirmed by the fund manager of CF Eclectica Agriculture fund quantifying the effect biofuel is having on world commodity markets, quoting: biofuel demand only places 1-1.5% of extra annual demand. In parallel European Environment Agency stated that biofuels provided only 1.2 per cent of the EUs fuel for transport in 2005. Therefore the big question is, if biofuels are causing the recent huge price hike, where are they being produced and where are they being used? Furthermore, since biofuels neednt necessarily take protein, fibre or fat from the food supply, as the seed cake is used in animal feed, the entire argument is disingenuous. UCOME does not have to justify its place in the market as biofuel from virgin feedstocks, being a waste product that does not compete with food production. However the barrage of criticism has seriously corrupted the perception of biodiesel in the market place across the board, irrespective of its raw material source. Hence any prospective biodiesel protagonist must be equipped with the facts and ammunition to deal with any attack on that they may face against the biofuels industry.

4.1 Causes of food price hike

Systemic causes for the world-wide food price increase have been currently identified as: o Demand vs Supply o Oil price increases o Changing diet in Asia o Declining world food stockpiles o Market Speculation

4.1.1 Demand vs Supply

It is unsurprising that global climate change, has been affecting world agricultural production and hence prices of food commodities. On the supply side, in Australia, for example, a six-year drought has helped to reduce rice production by 98%. This has obvious inflationary impacts on world rice prices.


Another supply limiting factor has been declining world food stockpiles. In the past, nations tended to keep more sizable food stockpiles, but more recently, due to the pace in which food could be grown and the ease in which it could be imported, less emphasis was placed on keeping stockpiles stocked. On the demand side, led by China, Asians are buying oil, gas, cement, steel, coking coal and everything necessary to urbanize their populations. The Chinese economy is converting from an export-based, low labour nation to the creation of a gigantic internal economy providing goods and services and highways and urbanisation for its 1.3 billion people. Middle-class populations have grown through Asia over the last 20 years. For comparison, in 1990, the middle class grew by 9.7 in India and 8.6 in China, as a percentage of their populations; whereas in 2008 it has reached a growth rate of nearly 30 percent and 70 percent, respectively. The corresponding increase in affluence has also brought with it a change in lifestyle and eating habits, particularly a demand for greater variety and more meat in the diet, leading to greater demand for agricultural resources. The result of these combined supply-side and demand-side changes, by simple economic laws of supply and demand, will be an increase in the price of basic commodities.

4.1.2 Oil price increases

Basically the price more or less everything in the market is affected by oil. The rise in the price of oil has heightened the costs of fertilizers, the majority of which require petroleum to manufacture. Although the main fossil fuel input for fertilizer comes from natural gas to generate hydrogen, natural gas has its own supply problems similar to those for oil. Because natural gas can substitute for petroleum in some uses, increasing prices for petroleum lead to increasing prices for natural gas, and thus for fertilizer. Oil also provides most energy for mechanized food production and transport. Error! Reference source not found. shows the change in price of oil in the last few years, effectively trebling its value. Our economies are so heavily dependent upon the energy source that this is having far-reaching repercussions throughout the modern world, an inflationary pressure that cant be dealt with in the traditional macro-economic monetary methods. 4.1.3 Financial speculation
Figure 77, The recent oil price hike


Financial speculation on the commodity markets has also been blamed for the recent surge in food prices. To what degree this is a major contributing factor, is much disputed, but the cause stems from the lack of confidence in the monetary markets. It was sparked in the United States. A Subprime mortage crisis caused panic in financial markets and encouraged investors to take their money out of risky mortgage bonds and shaky equities and put it into commodities as "stores of value". Financial speculators seeking quick returns have removed trillions of dollars from equities and mortgage bonds and invested into food and raw materials causing a stock market downturn. In response to the effect this speculation has had the head of the UN Environment Program, Achim Steiner is quoted: We have enough food on this planet today to feed everyone, but the way that markets and supplies are currently being influenced by perceptions of future markets is distorting access to that food. Real people and real lives are being affected by a dimension that is essentially speculative.''

4.2 The Silver Lining

Rising food prices are a threat to many, but they also present the world with an enormous opportunity For as long as most people can remember, food has been getting cheaper and farming has been in decline. In 1974-2005 food prices on world markets fell by three-quarters in real terms. Food today is so cheap that the West is battling gluttony even as it scrapes piles of half-eaten leftovers into the bin. It is true that rising food prices can have a pernicious impact on the poor. Poor people spend a higher portion of their income on food, so higher food prices hurt them more. However, lest we forget that the depressed world prices created by farm policies over the past few decades have had a devastating effect. In the past rich countries have been dumping subsidized grains at below cost prices into poor countries and hurting the local farming industries. There has been a long-term fall in investment in farming and the things that sustain it, such as irrigation. Poor countries that used to export food now import it. It is because of this shift that the developing countries suffer so badly now with rising food prices, the irony that they have been low for so long. The impact is not all negative. Dearer food has the capacity to do enormous good and enormous harm. It will hurt urban consumers, especially in poor countries, by increasing the price of what is already the most expensive item in their household budgets. However, it will benefit farmers and agricultural communities by increasing the rewards of their labour; in many poor rural places it will boost the most important source of jobs and economic growth. As three-quarters of the world's poor live in rural areas, if the negative effects can be successfully managed, longer term higher prices for agricultural products could help lever much of the developing world out of poverty.

4.2.1 The potential for globally sustainable bioenergy


A recent study conducted by the Copernicus Institute, University of Utrecht, the Netherlands showed that total sustainable bio-energy potential is estimated to be maximum 1545 Exajoules (429,167 TWh or 36,902 Mtoe) per year by 2050. 1545 EJ is more than 6 times the current amount of petroleum used by the entire world (total global energy demand today is 420EJ/yr (116,667 TWh or 10,032 Mtoe), of which around 220EJ comes in the form of oil products)
Figure 78, Total world bioenergy potential for 2050

Along with its greenhouse gas savings, production of biomass can bring: o o o o Less of a 'monopolistic' market in terms of diversity of energy supply and agricultural revenues. Benefits to local economies a greater part of any profits staying the local economy Decreased transportation offered stock and end product Proximity of consumers to the products they are using

4.2.2 The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

There are, of course good biofuels and bad biofuels. Chopping down the worlds remaining heritage of virgin forests to provide biofuels for SUVs, devastating habitats, and having dubious effects on tackling climate change, is to be avoided at all costs. It is good that some of these malpractices are being exposed by NGOs and other organisations7. However, this must not create an atmosphere of skeptism and disillusionment, capable of destroying and

In reality, insignificant amounts of palm oil have been used in biodiesel production an estimated 30 000 tons in 2005. By contrast, global palm oil production grew by nearly 10 million tons between 2001/02 and 2005/06. This increase has been driven by the food market, not the biofuel market.


discrediting an industry fighting for its very survival against powerful incumbent vested interests. The brazen sophistry of using unsustainable examples to discredit what is fundamentally a sustainable fuel is like putting a solar panel up in the shade and saying See.. I told you it doesnt work! It is to dishonour the new market opportunities for vast poor rural populations in their ability to generate income; to strengthen rural development; and reduce dependence on imported food and petroleum products. Uglier still and worst of all is to continue with the catastrophic level of emissions of greenhouse gases, constantly stalling progress of real potential alternatives with smear campaigns, and disinformation. Our dependence on fossil fuels has to change, the biofuels industry must develop, it must learn from the last year and develop sustainably, and it must deliver the benefits to the worlds poor that it surely has the capability to provide.


5 Recommendations
5.1 Local Authority and Energy Agency participation
The investigation of UCO costs and collections, established that if the local authorities are very well placed to operate efficient UCO collection services. They have the economies of scale to be gained from existing infrastructure, human capital and skills, and much experience dealing with waste matters.
Figure 79, Closed loop- uniting the supply chain

Local authorities can be involved in the production of biodiesel too, at least in an advisory capacity. Assistance should be available from the Recycling Department for IPPC applications, the Planning Department for planning issues, Environmental Health Department for Health and Safety issues, and Finance Department to deal with VAT and fuel duty. The paperwork and existing experience should be available to allow a smooth process for setting up of a scheme. Then of course, the local authority fleet itself is a prime market for biodiesel production. They have the vehicles to use the fuel and a social and environmentally responsibility towards the public they are serving. Therefore the ideal scenario would involved local authorities at each link in the chain to completely unite the supply chain and close the loop. This kind of ideal locally sustainable solution is shown in Figure 79. There has been much talk of sustainable development since its use was coined in the Brundtland Report in 1987. Agenda 21 is the blueprint for sustainable development agreed by 180 of the worlds leaders at the Rio Earth Summit in 1992. It stresses the importance of involving all sectors of the community in order to move towards more sustainable ways of life and calls for local authorities to develop Local Agenda 21 strategies, in collaboration with their communities. This is an ideal way at municipal level at aiming to meet these objectives. To that end the European network of Energy Agencies should act as key facilitators in any local biodiesel project : Encouraging the participation of local authorities, working with business and with the general public, and using its European network to share information and experiences across the Union. It is strongly recommended to include both local authorities and local energy agencies in any proposed project of this type.


5.1.1 UCO policy

One of the problems identified in Section 1.2.3, was that local authorities have no direct mandate or financing to deal with the UCO resource. The recommendation is to make UCO responsibility of local councils which would put the same kind of responsibility to municipalities for the management of catering business waste as for domestic waste, that would allow for core funding to go to collection. This will mean that operating costs are less critical and there will be an obligation to collect and treat UCO from local businesses, as they do for domestic waste. It will increase efficiency with one operator, rather than several coming to the same street and will clean-up the industry. This could help solve a lot of problems of illegal dumping and give a boost to ensuring a supply of UCO to local biodiesel production plants.

5.1.2 UCO research

There is a dire need for more information on UCO availability by official bodies. Much of the data in WP2 had to be estimated because of a lack of available materials. It is suggested that a full survey of the resource in the EU27 be carried out, with a resulting estimate in the UCO availability per capita across the EU. This will significantly help prospective business calculate the potential for biodiesel production activity within their locality.

5.1.3 IPPC Fast-track

From UK experience, the sheer enormity of the task of having to complete an IPPC application and all the paperwork involved is a serious non-technical barrier to the establishment of biodiesel production plants. It is likely that this bureaucratic barrier exists across the EU. Therefore a fast-track system for approving biodiesel plants for the Environment Agencies or the body responsible is recommended. This will reduce the costs, time and risks involved for prospective small-scale biodiesel producers and assist in the take-up of biodiesel across the EU

5.1.4 Quality standards

There is a real need for creating a globally recognised biodiesel quality standard that limits parameters that genuinely affect the fuels performance, but that isnt used as a lever for trade policy interests or any other side issue. The current standard significantly limits the overall biodiesel potential and work should be done to widen the scope of the resource base for biodiesel production in the EU. Should this not be the case, the risk may arise that the automotive industry could be presented, intentionally or not, with additional arguments that support the call for using vegetable oil in the oil industry co-refining process (hydrotreating). And not only in the EU; in Brazil, for example, given the fact that there are large quantities of vegetable oil available in the country, the national oil company, Petrobras, has developed a corresponding treatment process called H-Bio. This co-refining has dubious greenhouse gas savings, and does not


assist local economies, or promote the concept of local sustainability as in the spirit of Agenda 218. There is also need for a quality assurance scheme either in each country or preferably Europe-wide, that will approve biodiesel producers. The lack of quality assurance for biodiesel, forms the crux of the vehicle manufacturers arguments against uptake of the fuel. A comprehensive scheme, ensuring quality across the Union, and enforcing standards, with support for testing for smaller producers, is strongly recommended.

5.1.5 EC emissions standards obligatory for biofuels

There needs to be joined up policies for Local Vehicle Emissions and Biofuels strategy, so that they run in tandem and not contrary to each other. Up to now, the local emissions such as Euro IV and V are restricting biofuel usage as there is only an obligation to meet the standards using EN590 for diesel motors and EN228. Diesel car manufacturers, therefore, can optimise their new vehicles to meet the standards for EN590, whilst rendering the vehicle incompatible with EN14214. This is exactly what VolksWagen have done for their new Euro IV vehicles, putting a dagger in the heart of the biodiesel industry. With the recommended legislation in place that all Euro emission requirements must be met with both EN590 and EN14214, any arguments by the OEMs against biodiesel usage on the basis of local air quality cannot be justified. One big hurdle overcome.

5.1.6 A competitive issue

The final recommendation is to use competitive pressure to force the OEMs into acceptance and compatibility with biofuels. Active promotion of the most biodiesel-friendly manufacturers, such as the PSA group should be aggressively pursued. The French manufacturers PSA Peugeot Citron and Renault also have a much more biodiesel favourable strategy. The current understanding is that they will warranty their vehicles up to 30% under certain conditions. These are normally within fleet operations with adequate maintenance and quality controls. If the French manufacturers maintain their probiodiesel policy, then promoting the purchase of French vehicles over German will create consumer pressure, increasing sales and profits of the pro-biodiesel manufacturers, thereby encouraging further developments in favour of biodiesel approved vehicles.

According to a tender of DG TREN (TREN/D2-44/2005) the European biodiesel standard needs to be updated in relation to the iodine number. The Commission as part of the Biomass Action Plan is proposing an amendment to the biodiesel standard EN14214 to facilitate the use of a wider range of vegetable oils for biodiesel production.


6 Table of figures
Figure 1, m3/year in the 10 European countries ......................................................... 9 Figure 2, m3/year UCO collected ............................................................................... 9 Figure 3, m3/year UCO utilized ................................................................................ 10 Figure 6, Diesel consumption in BioDieNet countries ............................................... 11 Figure 4, m3/year in the 10 European countries ....................................................... 10 Figure 5, UCO summary table .................................................................................. 11 Figure 7, UCO in Portugal ........................................................................................ 12 Figure 8, UCO by sector in Portugal ......................................................................... 13 Figure 10, Summary table of UCO statistics per capita ............................................ 14 Figure 9, UCO in ProBio regions .............................................................................. 13 Figure 11, UCO calculation tool ................................................................................ 15 Figure 12, UCOME m3/year produced in BioDieNet countries ................................. 16 Figure 13, UCO Litres per week by catering type, London ....................................... 16 Figure 14, UCO disposal methods, London .............................................................. 17 Figure 15, UCO generator mix in BioDieNet countries ............................................. 17 Figure 16, Response to: Would you be prepared for ................................................ 18 Figure 17, Outside containers................................................................................... 20 Figure 18, Inside container ....................................................................................... 20 Figure 19, Cost of UCO collection/purchase............................................................. 21 Figure 20, Example of costs breakdown for UCO collection vehicle......................... 24 Figure 21, Mix of saturated fats in oil types .............................................................. 26 Figure 22, Summary table of UCO collection schemes ............................................ 29 Figure 23, Amount of entities (2004) ........................................................................ 30 Figure 24, Amount of UCO collected (2004) ............................................................. 30 Figure 25, Sintras biodiesel filling station ................................................................. 31 Figure 26, UCO container in the street ..................................................................... 32 Figure 27, UCO Collection in Sintra (Total =79,958l )............................................... 32 Figure 28, Oil containers during a UCO collection .................................................... 33 Figure 29, Oil + Water seperation ............................................................................. 34 Figure 30, Container for the restaurants and hotels ................................................. 35 Figure 31, Municipal Clean Spot............................................................................... 35 Figure 32, Container located near the public urban waste collection point ............... 36 Figure 33, Yields for different vegetable species compared with algae. ................... 40 Figure 34, The basic transesterfication reaction ....................................................... 41 Figure 35, Batch reaction process ............................................................................ 46 Figure 36, Plug Flow Reactor Process. .................................................................... 48 Figure 37, Process summary table ........................................................................... 49 Figure 38, Fatty acid mix per oil type ........................................................................ 51 Figure 39, Calorific value of FAMEs ......................................................................... 52 Figure 40, Iodine number of FAMEs ......................................................................... 52 Figure 41, CFPP of FAMEs ...................................................................................... 52 Figure 42, EN14214 parameters .............................................................................. 53 Figure 43, Criteria for accessing funding .................................................................. 69 Figure 44, Funding decision tree .............................................................................. 70 Figure 45, Lifecycle GHG savings of biodiesel ......................................................... 74 Figure 46, Graph of greenhouse gas savings compared to other fuels .................... 74 Figure 47, Graph of Well-to-Wheels study by JRC ................................................... 75 Figure 48, Comparison of EPA results and pollutant averages from TFL study ....... 76


Figure 49, NOx comparison EPA & TfL study........................................................... 77 Figure 50, Graph showing NOx change with biodiesel percentage .......................... 77 Figure 51, NOx decision tree for fleet managers ...................................................... 80 Figure 52, Cold weather properties of FAMEs .......................................................... 83 Figure 53, Progression of Biofuels Use in Member States 2003-5 ........................... 87 Figure 54, European biodiesel capacity .................................................................... 88 Figure 55, German Biofuel Quota Act ....................................................................... 89 Figure 56, Summary table of non-BioDieNet countries laws regarding biodiesel ..... 93 Figure 57, Vehicles in the province of Burgos (2005) ............................................... 95 Figure 58, Biodiesel consumption in Burgos 2006 .................................................... 95 Figure 59, Ratio of biodiesel use in Burgos .............................................................. 96 Figure 60, FIE Manufacturers Common Position Statement 2007.......................... 100 Figure 61, Rouen buses running on biodiesel ........................................................ 102 Figure 62, UCOME m3/year produced in BioDieNet countries ............................... 102 Figure 63, Independent warranty example ............................................................. 103 Figure 64, Table of warranty options ...................................................................... 105 Figure 65, Summary table for securing clients........................................................ 107 Figure 66, Taxi 878s biodiesel fleet ....................................................................... 108 Figure 67, UCOME m3/year produced in BioDieNet countries ............................... 108 Figure 68, Skoda Superb ........................................................................................ 110 Figure 69, UCOME m3/year produced in BioDieNet countries ............................... 110 Figure 70, Driver of Taxi 878 biodiesel fleet ........................................................... 111 Figure 71, UCOME m3/year produced in BioDieNet countries ............................... 111 Figure 72, Municipal Transport Company EMT ...................................................... 113 Figure 73, UCOME m3/year produced in BioDieNet countries ............................... 113 Figure 74, Oil containers during a UCO collection .................................................. 113 Figure 75, UCOME m3/year produced in BioDieNet countries ............................... 113 Figure 76, Biodiesel pump at bus depot ................................................................. 114 Figure 77, The recent oil price hike ........................................................................ 120 Figure 78, Total world bioenergy potential for 2050 ................................................ 122 Figure 79, Closed loop- uniting the supply chain .................................................... 124


Annex I: Health and Safety. Separate document Annex II: Biodiesel plant suppliers. Separate document