Experimental study reveals waste cooking oil biodiesel blends reduce carbon emissions with minor efficiency loss in diesel engines, indicating a viable sustainable fuel alternative.
This study experimentally evaluated waste cooking oil (WCO) biodiesel–diesel blends in an unmodified single-cylinder direct injection diesel engine operated at 1500 rpm under no load and 1–5 kW load conditions. Diesel and B10–B50 were compared in terms of brake-specific fuel consumption (BSFC), brake thermal efficiency (BTE), exhaust gas temperature (EGT), and CO, HC, CO 2 , and NO x concentrations. Across 1–5 kW, diesel produced a mean BSFC of 310 g kW −1 h −1 , while B20 showed the lowest value among the biodiesel blends at 320 g kW −1 h −1 . Mean BTE decreased from 29.0% for diesel (B0) to 27.8% and 27.0% for B10 and B20, respectively. Relative to diesel, B20 reduced mean CO, HC, and CO 2 concentrations by 17.5%, 13.0%, and 12.2%, respectively, but increased mean NO x by 11.5% and EGT by 5.8%. At 5 kW, B20 limited the BSFC, EGT, and NO x increases to 3.0%, 7.3%, and 8.9%, respectively, while reducing CO by 20.0%, HC by 9.1%, and CO 2 by 10.0%. Blend and load effects were significant for all responses ( p < 0.001). An equal-weight multi-criteria assessment ranked B20 first, followed by B10. B20, therefore, provided the best-balanced performance–emission compromise, whereas B10 was preferred when efficiency retention received dominant weighting.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Amer et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: