Next Article in Journal
Combinatorial Component Day-Ahead Load Forecasting through Unanchored Time Series Chain Evaluation
Previous Article in Journal
A Dynamic Tanks-in-Series Model for a High-Temperature PEM Fuel Cell
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Energies
Volume 17
Issue 12
10.3390/en17122843
energies-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Influence of γ-Fe2O3 Nanoparticles Added to Gasoline–Bio-Oil Blends Derived from Plastic Waste on Combustion and Emissions Generated in a Gasoline Engine

by
Paul Palmay
1,*,
Diego Barzallo
2,
Cesar Puente
1,
Ricardo Robalino
1,
Dayana Quinaluisa
1 and
Joan Carles Bruno
3
1
Facultad de Ciencias, Escuela Superior Politécnica de Chimborazo ESPOCH, Panamericana Sur Km 1 1/2, Riobamba 060155, Ecuador
2
Facultad de Ciencias e Ingeniería, Universidad Estatal de Milagro, Milagro 091050, Ecuador
3
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Avda. Paisos Catalans, 26, 43007 Tarragona, Spain
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Energies 2024, 17(12), 2843; https://doi.org/10.3390/en17122843
Submission received: 26 April 2024 / Revised: 31 May 2024 / Accepted: 5 June 2024 / Published: 9 June 2024
(This article belongs to the Section I1: Fuel)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The environmental pressure to reduce the use of fossil fuels such as gasoline generates the need to search for new fuels that have similar characteristics to conventional fuels. In this sense, the objective of the present study is the use of commercial gasoline in mixtures with pyrolytic oil from plastic waste and the addition of γ-Fe2O3 nanoparticles (NPs) in a spark ignition engine to analyze both the power generated in a real engine and the emissions resulting from the combustion process. The pyrolytic oil used was obtained from thermal pyrolysis at low temperatures (450 °C) of a mixture composed of 75% polystyrene (PS) and 25% polypropylene (PP), which was mixed with 87 octane commercial gasoline in 2% and 5% by volume and 40 mg of γ-Fe2O3 NPs. A standard sample was proposed, which was only gasoline, one mixture of gasoline with bio-oil, and a gasoline, bio-oil, and NPs mixture. The bio-oil produced from the pyrolysis of PS and PP enhances the octane number of the fuel and improves the engine’s power performance at low revolutions. In contrast, the addition of iron NPs significantly improves gaseous emissions with a reduction in emissions of CO (carbon monoxide), NOx (nitrogen oxide), and HCs (hydrocarbons) due to its advantages, which include its catalytic effect, presence of active oxygen, and its large surface area.

1. Introduction

The exponential consumption of chemicals and commercial fuels derived from oil and natural gas has adverse effects on the environment, increasing the amount of waste and gaseous emissions, which contribute to the greenhouse effect and global warming [1]. However, these nonrenewable fuels are the primary source of supply for transport and power generation, which underpins the need for cleaner and renewable sources to achieve energy self-sufficiency in the coming decades [2]. On the other hand, plastic waste generated at the urban and industrial levels has intensified in recent years [3]. Therefore, the use of sustainable environmental technologies such as pyrolysis is being proposed to simultaneously improve the management of this waste and to obtain higher-value products, which include gas, pyrolytic oil, and biochar [4]. In this sense, the approach towards a circular economy of plastics will reduce the annual amount of plastic commonly discarded in landfills and oceans by more than 70% [5]. In addition, it is estimated that by 2040, there will be a drastic decrease in the generation of this waste (an expected production of 70 million tons without revalorization) and a more significant generation of environmentally friendly hydrocarbons [6].
Pyrolysis is a process that decomposes petroleum-derived macromolecules, such as plastic, into smaller molecules in the absence of oxygen at high temperatures, which has several advantages, including (i) minimizing the carbon footprint, (ii) reducing dependence on fossil fuels, and (iii) revalorization of different wastes that include single-use plastics, mixtures of the same, lignocellulosic biomass, tires, and sewage sludge, among others, being a sustainable and versatile alternative [7]. The composition of the compounds generated in this process depends on various factors, such as temperature, heating rate, reaction type, and raw material used. For example, the pyrolysis of polyolefins results in a complex mixture composed of alkanes, alkenes, and aromatics [8]. In contrast, the pyrolysis of plastic waste whose leading chains have aromatic rings as substituents tends to generate a higher production of these compounds due to the cleavage of the beta bond, accompanied by the relative stability of the aromatic ring, causing cracking along the main chain without affecting the aromatic ring [9]. In the case of pyrolytic oil obtained from high-density polyethylene (HDPE), pyrolysis reaches 58.4%, with a recovery of compounds up to C36 and a tendency to form waxes instead of oil. These waxes consist of long chains of linear hydrocarbons (>C20) that solidify at room temperature [10]. In the other hand, polypropylene pyrolysis at temperatures above 400 °C generates a liquid fraction ranging from 42 to 55%, composed mainly of alkanes, naphthalenes, and cyclic compounds, which can even form complexes due to the randomness of the radicals produced in the reaction mechanism [11]. In the case of polystyrene (PS) residues, the production of pyrolytic oils exceeds 80% due to the presence of an aromatic ring in the side chain, with a particularly aromatic composition including styrene, benzene toluene, bibezil, and α-methyl styrene, under working conditions like polypropylene (PP) [12]. In addition, pyrolysis of plastic waste mixtures, including low-density polyethylene (LDPE), PP, and HDPE, at temperatures between 450 and 600 °C, produces a liquid fraction rich in olefin compounds, with yields close to 50% [10]. As observed, the synergistic effect of plastic waste mixtures leads to a reduction in the proportion of the liquid fraction; however, it exhibits a high calorific value ranging between 40 and 51 MJ/kg, making it a promising option to contribute to the development of today’s society [13]. Studies reported in the literature [14,15] indicate that diesel–pyrolytic oil mixtures derived from plastic bags decrease the specific consumption of commercial fuel to achieve the same power. Likewise, diesel–pyrolytic oil blends derived from municipal landfill waste exhibit satisfactory yields compared to conventional diesel using 15 and 30% blends (v, v) [16]. In addition, pyrolytic oil obtained from polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE), PP, HDPE, PS, LDPE, and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) blended with distillate oil from used tires shows an increase in the overall performance of internal combustion engines [17], which is likely due to the presence of PS that contributes to improved performance. However, the emissions generated from this process are very high for the different mixtures. In this context, this obtained biofuel cannot directly replace commercial fossil fuels due to impurities in its composition, which includes a high content of aromatic and unsaturated hydrocarbons and sulfur [18]. Therefore, the direct use of internal combustion engines is not recommended. In addition, the production and marketing of pyrolysis-derived fuels from HDPE are not profitable from a financial perspective, as the cost of production is estimated to be approximately USD 212.52 per barrel [19]. In this sense, its use is recommended as an additive for commercial gasoline, which improves its properties and quality, preventing the formation of engine deposits [20], or as a raw material in the manufacture of petrochemical products. A recent study [18] showed that using pyrolytic oil as an additive in gasoline and diesel mixtures increases the octane index and reduces exhaust emissions (NOx, CO, and CO2). In addition, several experiments in compression engines have shown improved performance and higher energy and energetic efficiencies with diesel–pyrolytic tire oil mixtures (10%, v/v) [21]. In addition, extra-commercial gasoline–biofuel blends (5%, v/v) have been used in internal combustion engines, showing optimal performance, increased power, and significantly reduced gas emissions. CO emissions were decreased to a minimum compared to the standard sample, while hydrocarbons were reduced by 61.90%, keeping CO2 emissions at levels like the normal sample [22]. In any case, these emissions negatively affect the environment, so we seek to combine these proposed methods by adding other promising materials to minimize this negative impact further.
Nowadays, metal oxide nanoparticles are used as an additive in gasoline due to the improvement in the physicochemical properties of fuels [23]. At the molecular level, these materials stand out for their exceptional specific surface and high chemical reactivity, which allows them to interact with gasoline and improve its quality. An illustrative example is iron oxide nanoparticles (Fe2O3 NPs), successfully used as catalysts in hydrocarbon and volatile organic compound (VOC) oxidation reactions. In these reactions, the oxide acts as an active center that facilitates chemical reactions, accelerating the reaction rate and reducing the temperature needed for this to occur [24]. Studies reported in the literature have shown that Fe2O3 NPs influence combustion and reduce fuel consumption since they reduce kinematic viscosity when suspended and dispersed in the intermolecular spaces of fuel droplets [24,25]. The studies allow adjacent layers to slide more efficiently through more precise fuel spraying and better air–fuel mixing. As a result, more complete combustion and efficient use are carried out to minimize the emissions generated [26]. Hence, nano-additives enhance the thermal efficiency of diesel engines while decreasing emissions. The level of all pollutants (NOx, UHC, CO, and smoke) in exhaust gases is due to their catalytic effect on the fuel combustion process, particularly compared to the impact of gasoline/biodiesel blends [25].
In this way, most previous studies have focused primarily on tests involving pyrolytic oil as a substitute for diesel. However, the present work focuses on using commercial gasoline–pyrolytic oil mixtures of plastic waste with the addition of Fe2O3 NPs to analyze the combined effect of the mixing with bio-oil and the use of NPs as additives in the power generated in a gasoline engine and the emissions from the combustion process. The pyrolytic oil was obtained from thermal pyrolysis at low temperatures (450 °C) from a 75% PS and 25% PP mixture [27]. This mixture generates liquid fractions with a relative composition ranging from C6 to C20 and a significant content of aromatic hydrocarbons and paraffin, according to previous research. Moreover, only a few works have been published combining the features mentioned above, which could be a promising alternative to minimize the consumption of fossil fuels and the emissions generated by this process.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Materials

Municipal plastic waste was sampled from a garbage dump (Riobamba, Ecuador) at different periods for ten days over three consecutive months. They were then sorted to obtain PP and PS fractions, which were then washed and crushed to a particle size of 1 mm. These plastic residues were characterized by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) using a FT/IR-4100 spectrometer (JASCO, JAPAN), working range from 4000 to 550 cm−1 and the Spectra Analysis program for data acquisition and processing. Iron oxide nanoparticles (γ-Fe2O3 NPs, 99.5%) were acquired from Luoyang Tongrun (Luoyang, China), and are reddish-brown powder in color with a particle size of 30 nm and a surface area of 75 m2/g.

2.2. Production of Bio-Oil

The pyrolysis process occurs in a batch reactor with an electric resistance heating system, an internal temperature control, and an agitator. The reactor was operated under a nitrogen atmosphere (5 L/min) at 425 °C (heating rate of 15 °C/min) and 50 kPa for 1 h. The pyrolytic gases obtained circulate through a condenser (10 °C) and then pass to a simple separator where the liquid and gaseous fractions are collected, as shown in Figure 1. The experimentation was carried out in triplicate, feeding the reactor with 1000 g of a plastic waste mixture composed of 75% PS and 25% PP.
The liquid fraction obtained was collected, weighed, and characterized under ASTM standards, while the solid fraction was received from the bottom of the reactor. As for the gaseous fraction, this was determined by the difference between the feed mass and the total liquid/solid fraction obtained previously. In order to avoid fluidization problems in the pumping systems due to the presence of waxes and gums in the hydrocarbons from pyrolysis, the pyrolytic oil was distilled at 150 °C under atmospheric pressure and subjected to a drying process with the addition of anhydrous calcium sulfate (2% w/w). Then, the obtained bio-oil was blended with standard gasoline and γ-Fe2O3 NPs, as described in Section 2.3. Finally, the study samples were used to assess the engine performance (power/torque tests) and combustion gas emissions, including HC, CO, CO2, NOx, and NO2.

2.3. Samples

The pyrolytic oil obtained above was blended with 87 octane extra commercial gasoline and γ-Fe2O3 NPs as follows:
1.- STD: Standard sample of extra commercial gasoline.
2.- M0: commercial gasoline + 40 mg of γ-Fe2O3 NPs.
3. M1: commercial gasoline + 2% bio-oil (v/v).
4. M2: commercial gasoline + 5% bio-oil (v/v).
5. M3: commercial gasoline + 40 mg of γ-Fe2O3 NPs + 2% bio-oil (v/v).
6.- M4: commercial gasoline + 40 mg of γ-Fe2O3 NPs + 5% bio-oil (v/v).
All samples are characterized under commercial gasoline standards (ASTM), including density testing at 15 °C (ASTM D 1298), API density (ASTM D 287), flash point (D 93), distillation curve (ASTM D86), and octane number RON (ASTM D2699).

2.4. Power/Torque Tests

The power tests were carried out using a conventional automobile engine, with the following characteristics shown in Table 1. These tests were conducted using an AWD chassis dynamometer Dynocom, AWD-5000-FX (Fort Worth, TX, USA), which consists of a front unit (2WD, 5000 series) connected to a 6-link rear roller bed via a Gates Poly Chain belt. The roller bed has a tread width ranging from 36 to 86 inches and is calibrated according to SAE Standard J1349. Data handling, processing, and all tests were performed using Quantum software under environmental conditions (pressure: 542.036 mmHg, temperature: 20.6 °C, humidity: 29%).
The power tests were carried out as follows: (i) ABC (active body control) of the engine and fuel injection system; (ii) warm-up and stabilization time of the engine until the working temperature of 90 °C is reached; (iii) combustion gas exhaust system is checked for leaks; (iv) power/torque data collection. The test achieved the maximum engine revolutions with a start at 2500 rpm.

2.5. Combustion Emissions

The effect of γ-Fe2O3 NPs on the combustion reaction was studied using an exhaust gas meter for gasoline vehicles (MET 6.1, Haldenwang, Germany) by fully inserting the fixed probe into the exhaust pipe to measure the emissions generated at 4200 rpm. The components measured were HC, CO, and CO2, including the calculation of the octane number and the efficiency of the combustion process, which were obtained using a flue gas analyzer (TESTO 340, Mexico, México). This instrument has interchangeable and precalibrated sensors with temperature control and automatic CO dilution sensor protections.
The measurement of NOx employs the indirect method of Griess reactive NOx binders, which operate a solution A: sulfanilic acid plus acetic acid (5 N) and a B solution: α naphthylamine plus acetic acid (5 N). First, 5 mL of solution A and 5 mL of solution B were placed in the collector tube, which was saturated with the exhaust gases at the time of the dynamometer test, and subsequently, their absorbance was determined using a UV–visible spectrophotometer at a wavelength of 541 nm. The power and emissions tests were conducted at ambient conditions of 18 °C, 60% relative humidity, and an altitude of 2754 m.a.s.l.

3. Results

3.1. Characterization of Plastic Waste

FTIR was used for the chemical characterization of plastic waste, i.e., PP and PS, as shown in Figure 2. The PP spectrum exhibits three distinct band groups at 2900 cm−1 (tension movements C-H), 1350–1470 cm−1 (C-C tension bonds), and 1200-1000 cm−1 (-CH3 bending vibrations). The PS spectrum exhibits absorption bands similar to PP, with additional bending movements of -CH2 and tension vibrations due to aromatic rings between 700 and 800 cm−1. These results coincide with those reported in other studies [28], confirming the nature of the plastic waste used in this work.

3.2. Characterization of Samples

Table 2 presents the physicochemical properties of the prepared mixtures alongside the standards of commercial gasoline. As can be seen, the STD and M0 samples have similar values, which indicates that γ-Fe2O3 NPs do not significantly influence the properties of the fuel. At the same time, the addition of bio-oil (M1 and M2) in combination with γ-Fe2O3 NPs (M3 and M4) generates a slight decrease in API density and viscosity, which is attributed to the presence of aromatic and low-molecular-weight compounds that produce a viscosity cut with a slight increase in relative density due to the presence of additional compounds in the sample [26]. In addition, the flash point of the bio-oil was evaluated using the Pensky–Martens closed cup method. In this way, the flash point revealed similar results for each treatment, demonstrating overall remarkable properties with the pyrolytic oil and its mixture with the nanomaterial, indicating its suitability as an alternative to standard gasoline fuel [29].
The distillation of the samples was also evaluated at different temperatures with respect to the volume of distillate recovered (Figure 3). For mixtures with bio-oil (2 and 5%, v/v), there is a more significant amount of volume at higher temperatures, which is due to the composition of the bio-oil obtained from the random cracking of the pyrolysis process of plastic waste, ranging from C6 to C40 [30]. In addition, the presence of nanoparticles generates a slight increase in the boiling temperature of gasoline compounds. It increases at temperatures above 60 °C, attributed to the interaction of nanoparticles and molecules from bio-oil with a boiling point above that temperature. In addition, the M4 curve has a slightly more significant slope change, attributed to the high number of low-molecular-weight compounds in this pyrolytic oil. According to Torre et al. [31], the most pronounced effect of this phenomenon can be observed between 20% and 50% of the distillation curve (120), as can be seen in the behavior of mixtures with bio-oil and γ-Fe2O3 NPs [32,33].

3.3. Engine Performance

Several strategies have been reported in the literature to improve engine performance, using biodiesel as an additive in diesel or gasoline engines [34,35]. This is likely because biodiesel enhances fuel lubricity and increases the octane amount of gasoline, preventing premature wear on moving parts. In a gasoline engine, power and torque are fundamental parameters to evaluate to describe its performance, with torque essential for rotational force and power for how quickly the vehicle can complete the job. This study assessed engine power using a dynamometer that creates resistance contrary to engine rotation. The resulting dynamometer measurement represents the torque. In a gasoline engine, torque is measured at different speeds and revolutions, making it possible to determine the engine power. Figure 4a,b show the variation in motor momentum as a function of different rotational speeds for each proposed treatment (138 operating points). As shown, there is an increase in engine torque up to 2800 rpm for all fuels evaluated. However, when the engine revs at a higher number of revolutions, a decrease in torque is observed; this is likely attributed to a reduction in volumetric efficiency and increased mechanical losses [20]. Other parameters can also influence engine torque, including calorific value, viscosity, octane number, and density. In this way, the M1 fuel obtained the best results (gasoline and 2% bio-oil) and the M2 sample presents results slightly lower than M1 but both higher than the standard. The difference between M1 and M2 can be attributed to the fact that the presence of bio-oil in the mixture generates a change in the physicochemical properties of the mixture due to the presence of compounds of varied molecular weight in the bio-oil. This generates a process in which there is a good torque at the beginning; however, when the revolutions are increased, there is a pronounced decrease. As expected, the exclusive incorporation of γ-Fe2O3 NPs as an additive in the gasoline mixture (M0) does not positively impact engine torque, as it could affect its ability to atomize efficiently during fuel injection, thus decreasing process performance.
Achieving a proper balance between torque and power is essential for the efficient performance and responsiveness of a gasoline engine [36]. Figure 5a,b show the variations in engine power as a function of engine speeds (138 operating points). At 2800 rpm, the highest engine power was obtained with M1 biofuel, with a 10% increase compared to standard commercial gasoline (STD) at the same speed. On the other hand, at 4000 rpm, the engine powers of bio-oil fuels and commercial gasoline are very similar. However, with the addition of γ-Fe2O3 NPs, a reduction in engine performance values, including torque and engine power, is observed, which can be attributed to a lower calorific value compared to other biofuels [37].

3.4. Evaluation of Emissions in Blended Fuels

The CO and CO2 emissions generated by the engine were analyzed for each of the biofuels used, as shown in Figure 6a. Normal driving conditions were simulated, assessing the performance of a real car at 2500 rpm and under full load. The best results were obtained with the exclusive application of γ-Fe2O3 NPs, with a 2.3% decrease in carbon monoxide emissions compared to the total production of 2.5% by standard gasoline fuel. In addition, gasoline–bio-oil blends with γ-Fe2O3 NPs report similar results, contributing positively to gasoline engine performance and emissions reductions. Studies reported in the literature indicate that adding oxide–metal nanoparticles in gasoline–bio-oil [38] and diesel–bio-oil [37] blends leads to a reduction in atmospheric emissions from the engine and a shortened ignition time. The presence of active oxygen, its catalytic effect, and the high surface-to-volume ratio of nanoparticles improve the combustion efficiency of fuel mixtures and reduce the formation of CO (a byproduct of incomplete combustion), which is considered one of the most dangerous emissions as it generates a tremendous negative impact on human health. In addition, carbon dioxide emissions into the environment (greenhouse gas) contribute to climate change, so they must be monitored and controlled [26]. However, using gasoline blends with bio-oil and γ-Fe2O3 NPs does not significantly change CO2 production compared to standard commercial gasoline. Its effectiveness is mainly influenced by decreasing carbon monoxide production and maintaining CO2 production levels.
On the other hand, the NOx emissions generated in the engine depend on several factors, including the percentage of oxygen in the fuel, engine temperature, and the reaction residence time [39,40]. NOx is composed mainly of nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide, formed due to the interaction of oxygen and nitrogen at high temperatures in the cylinder. The results show that NOx emissions were significantly reduced after adding γ-Fe2O3 NPs in gasoline–bio-oil blends (Figure 6b). This result may be due to the catalytic effect of γ-Fe2O3 NPs improving heat transfer in the combustion chamber [41]. Furthermore, this nanomaterial has the potential to enhance the oxidation stability of gasoline, resulting in a more substantial reduction in NOx emissions.
Unburned hydrocarbons (HCs), along with the products of combustion, are pollutants emitted into the air due to incomplete combustion. Figure 7 shows that nanoparticle additive fuels act as regulating agents and improvers of complete combustion, where the size and concentration of the nanoparticles used in this work influence the combustion process, catalytic activity, oxygen content, reactivity, and calorific value [42]. In addition, studies reported in the literature indicate that using fuel–bio-oil blends in engines leads to complete combustion due to the amount of oxygen present in the composition of the biofuel, resulting in lower HC emissions [43]. In the case of the M1 and M2 samples contained in the bio-oil from pyrolysis, they have a higher concentration of HCs since the polymeric structure of the plastics used contains carbon and hydrogen in their entirety, which provides an excellent caloric value together with several hydrocarbons in the reaction process. Furthermore, as can be observed in treatments M3 and M4, mixtures of pyrolytic oil with the nanomaterial report low amounts of HCs, owing to complete combustion in the gasoline engine, attributable to the high oxygen content present in the fuel.

3.5. Research Octane Number (RON) and Efficiency

The importance of the octane number lies in its significant impact on the performance of spark-ignition engines. The decrease in engine power is attributed to the effect resulting from the reduction in the octane number of the hydrocarbons in the paraffin group, especially those with a linear chain structure. In this context, using bio-oil in conjunction with nanoparticles increases the octane rating of the biofuel, as shown in Figure 8. In both cases, values higher than 88.3 were obtained compared to commercial gasoline, with similar results reported in the literature [42,43], confirming that incorporating both compounds in standard commercial gasoline positively influences fuel quality. As mentioned in the methodology, the gas emission equipment allows the combustion efficiency to be indirectly calculated, which measures theoretical efficiency based on the stoichiometry of emitted gases, as shown in Figure 8. In this way, increased efficiency signifies that the engine is utilizing fuel more effectively to produce mechanical work, potentially resulting in improved performance and greater fuel economy. The results obtained do not show significant variations among the treatments, indicating that the use of pyrolytic oil alone or mixed with the nanomaterial serves as a promising alternative additive to standard commercial gasoline, thereby reducing overall dependence on this nonrenewable fuel.

4. Conclusions

Different samples such as standard commercial gasoline, gasoline blended with bio-oil, and gasoline–bio-oil–γ-Fe2O3 NPs were studied to enhance engine performance and reduce air pollution. The benefits of biodiesel derived from plastic waste include improved fuel economy and positive economic impact, thereby enhancing air quality and engine performance. Additionally, when using γ-Fe2O3 NPs in gasoline engines as a nano-additive, reductions in CO (carbon monoxide), NOx (nitrogen oxide), and HC (hydrocarbon) emissions were observed due to their advantages, including their catalytic effect, presence of active oxygen, and large surface area.
On the other hand, the addition of bio-oil in combination with γ-Fe2O3 NPs generates a slight decrease in API density and viscosity, which is attributed to the presence of aromatic and low-molecular-weight compounds that produce a viscosity cut with a slight increase in relative density due to the presence of additional compounds in the sample.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, P.P.; methodology, R.R., D.Q. and P.P.; software, R.R., D.Q. and P.P.; validation R.R., D.Q., P.P. and D.B.; formal analysis, D.B. and P.P.; investigation R.R., D.Q., P.P. and D.B.; resources, C.P., P.P. and D.B.; data curation, C.P., P.P. and D.B.; writing—original draft preparation, P.P.; writing—review and editing, P.P. and J.C.B.; visualization, P.P.; supervision, P.P. and J.C.B. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Data Availability Statement

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Elsharkawy, E.A.; Al-Sood, M.M.A.; El-Fakharany, M.K.; Ahmed, M. Comparative study of combustion, performance, and emissions of a diesel engine fuelled with biodiesel blend with metallic and organic nano-particles. Int. J. Glob. Warm. 2020, 20, 133–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Gielen, D.; Boshell, F.; Saygin, D.; Bazilian, M.D.; Wagner, N.; Gorini, R. The role of renewable energy in the global energy transformation. Energy Strategy Rev. 2019, 24, 38–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Kibria, M.G.; Masuk, N.I.; Safayet, R.; Nguyen, H.Q.; Mourshed, M. Plastic Waste: Challenges and Opportunities to Mitigate Pollution and Effective Management. Int. J. Environ. Res. 2023, 17, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Czajczyńska, D.; Anguilano, L.; Ghazal, H.; Krzyżyńska, R.; Reynolds, A.J.; Spencer, N.; Jouhara, H. Potential of pyrolysis processes in the waste management sector. Therm. Sci. Eng. Prog. 2017, 3, 171–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Mihai, F.C.; Gündogdu, S.; Markley, L.A.; Olivelli, A.; Khan, F.R.; Gwinnett, C.; Gutberlet, J.; Reyna-Bensusan, N.; Llanquileo-Melgarejo, P.; Meidiana, C.; et al. Plastic Pollution, Waste Management Issues, and Circular Economy Opportunities in Rural Communities. Sustainability 2022, 14, 20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Chaves, I.C.; Allen, V.B.Q.; Puente, A.; Profesor, U.; Ronald, M.E.; Salas, J. Evaluación de las Técnicas SEM y EDS en la Investigación Nanotecnológica de Catalizadores para la Producción de Biocombustibles. 2013. chrome-extension://efaidnbmnnnibpcajpcglclefindmkaj/. Available online: https://core.ac.uk/download/pdf/60992329.pdf (accessed on 4 June 2024).
  7. Al-Rumaihi, A.; Shahbaz, M.; Mckay, G.; Mackey, H.; Al-Ansari, T. A review of pyrolysis technologies and feedstock: A blending approach for plastic and biomass towards optimum biochar yield. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2022, 167, 112715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Klaimy, S.; Lamonier, J.F.; Casetta, M.; Heymans, S.; Duquesne, S. Recycling of plastic waste using flash pyrolysis—Effect of mixture composition. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2021, 187, 109540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Dai, L.; Zhou, N.; Lv, Y.; Cheng, Y.; Wang, Y.; Liu, Y.; Cobb, K.; Chen, P.; Lei, H.; Ruan, R. Pyrolysis technology for plastic waste recycling: A state-of-the-art review. Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2022, 93, 101021. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Jaafar, Y.; Abdelouahed, L.; El Hage, R.; El Samrani, A.; Taouk, B. Pyrolysis of common plastics and their mixtures to produce valuable petroleum-like products. Polym. Degrad. Stab. 2022, 195, 109770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Gebre, S.H.; Sendeku, M.G.; Bahri, M. Recent Trends in the Pyrolysis of Non-Degradable Waste Plastics. Chem. Open 2021, 10, 1202–1226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Maafa, I.M. Pyrolysis of Polystyrene Waste: A Review. Polymers 2021, 13, 225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Wang, Z.; Burra, K.G.; Lei, T.; Gupta, A.K. Co-pyrolysis of waste plastic and solid biomass for synergistic production of biofuels and chemicals-A review. Prog. Energy. Combust. Sci. 2021, 84, 100899. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Yaqoob, H.; Tan, E.S.; Ali, H.M.; Ong, H.C.; Jamil, M.A.; Farooq, M.U. Sustainable energy generation from plastic waste: An in-depth review of diesel engine application. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2024, 34, 103467. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Babayemi, J.O.; Nnorom, I.C.; Osibanjo, O.; Weber, R. Ensuring sustainability in plastics use in Africa: Consumption, waste generation, and projections. Environ. Sci. Eur. 2019, 31, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Mustayen, A.G.M.B.; Rasul, M.G.; Wang, X.; Hazrat, M.A.; Negnevitsky, M.; Jahirul, M.I. Impact of waste-plastic-derived diesel on the performance and emission characteristics of a diesel engine under low load conditions. Energy Convers. Manag. 2023, 283, 116936. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Szwaja, M.; Chwist, M.; Szwaja, S.; Juknelevičius, R. Impact of Pyrolysis Oil Addition to Ethanol on Combustion in the Internal Combustion Spark Ignition Engine. Clean Technol. 2021, 3, 450–461. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Singh, R.K.; Ruj, B.; Sadhukhan, A.K.; Gupta, P.; Tigga, V.P. Waste plastic to pyrolytic oil and its utilization in CI engine: Performance analysis and combustion characteristics. Fuel 2020, 262, 116539. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Zein, S.H.; Grogan, C.T.; Yansaneh, O.Y.; Putranto, A. Pyrolysis of High-Density Polyethylene Waste Plastic to Liquid Fuels—Modelling and Economic Analysis. Processes 2022, 10, 1503. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Yakın, A.; Behçet, R. Effect of different types of fuels tested in a gasoline engine on engine performance and emissions. Int. J. Hydrogen Energy 2021, 46, 33325–33338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Yaqoob, H.; Ali, H.M. Sustainability analysis of neat waste tire oil powered diesel engine: A thermodynamics approach. Process Saf. Environ. Protection 2024, 182, 1121–1129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Al-Mashhadani, H.; Fernando, S.; Al-Mashhadani, H.; Fernando, S. Properties, performance, and applications of biofuel blends: A review. AIMS 2017, 5, 735–767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Abdallah, A.M.; Abdel-Rahman, A.A.; Elwardany, A.E. Analysis of the impact of different nanoparticle metal oxides as fuel additives in compression ignition engine performance. Energy Rep. 2020, 6, 99–105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Valihesari, M.; Pirouzfar, V.; Ommi, F.; Zamankhan, F. Investigating the effect of Fe2O3 and TiO2 nanoparticle and engine variables on the gasoline engine performance through statistical analysis. Fuel 2019, 254, 115618. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Lamore, M.T.; Zeleke, D.S.; Kassa, B.Y. A comparative study on the effect of nano-additives on performance and emission characteristics of CI engine run on castor biodiesel blended fuel. Energy Convers. Manag. X 2023, 20, 100493. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Giuliano, M.; Valsania, M.C.; Ticali, P.; Sartoretti, E.; Morandi, S.; Bensaid, S.; Ricchiardi, G.; Sgroi, M. Characterization of the evolution of noble metal particles in a commercial three-way catalyst: Correlation between real and simulated ageing. Catalysts 2021, 11, 247. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Palmay, P.; Haro, C.; Huacho, I.; Barzallo, D.; Bruno, J.C. Production and Analysis of the Physicochemical Properties of the Pyrolytic Oil Obtained from Pyrolysis of Different Thermoplastics and Plastic Mixtures. Molecules 2022, 27, 3287. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Barzallo, D.; Lazo, R.; Medina, C.; Guashpa, C.; Tacuri, C.; Palmay, P. Synthesis and Application of ZSM-5 Catalyst Supported with Zinc and/or Nickel in the Conversion of Pyrolytic Gases from Recycled Polypropylene and Polystyrene Mixtures under Hydrogen Atmosphere. Polymers 2023, 15, 3329. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Egbosiuba, T.C. Biochar and bio-oil fuel properties from nickel nanoparticles assisted pyrolysis of cassava peel. Heliyon 2022, 8, e10114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Quesada, L.; Calero, M.; Martín-Lara, M.Á.; Pérez, A.; Blázquez, G. Production of an Alternative Fuel by Pyrolysis of Plastic Wastes Mixtures. Energy Fuels 2020, 34, 1781–1790. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Torres, J.; Molina, D.; Pinto, C.; Rueda, F. Study of the blending of petrol with 10% anhydrous ethanol. Evaluation of physicochemical properties. CT&F-Cienc. Tecnol. Y Futuro 2002, 2, 71–82. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Abiyazani, N.K.; Pirouzfar, V.; Su, C.H. Enhancing engine power and torque and reducing exhaust emissions of blended fuels derived from gasoline-propanol-nano particles. Energy 2022, 241, 122924. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Wood, B.M.; Kirwan, K.; Maggs, S.; Meredith, J.; Coles, S.R. Study of combustion performance of biodiesel for potential application in motorsport. J. Clean. Prod. 2015, 93, 167–173. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Awad, O.I.; Mamat, R.; Ibrahim, T.K.; Ali, O.M.; Kadirgama, K.; Leman, A.M. Performance and combustion characteristics of an SI engine fueled with fusel oil-gasoline at different water content. Appl. Therm. Eng. 2017, 123, 1374–1385. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  35. Nouri, M.; Isfahani, A.H.M.; Shirneshan, A. Effects of Fe2O3 and Al2O3 nanoparticle-diesel fuel blends on the combustion, performance and emission characteristics of a diesel engine. Clean Technol. Environ. Policy 2021, 23, 2265–2284. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Yusof, S.N.A.; Sidik, N.A.C.; Asako, Y.; Japar, W.M.A.A.; Mohamed, S.B.; Muhammad, N.M.A. A comprehensive review of the influences of nanoparticles as a fuel additive in an internal combustion engine (ICE). Nanotechnol. Rev. 2021, 9, 1326–1349. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Varatharajan, K.; Cheralathan, M. Influence of fuel properties and composition on NOx emissions from biodiesel powered diesel engines: A review. Renew. Sustain. Energy Rev. 2012, 16, 3702–3710. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Ozgur, T.; Tuccar, G.; Uludamar, E.; Yilmaz, A.C.; Güngör, C.; Ozcanli, M.; Serin, H.; Aydin, K. Effect of nanoparticle additives on NOx emissions of diesel fuelled compression ignition engine. Int. J. Glob. Warm. 2015, 7, 487–498. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Yuan, C.; Rodionov, N.; Mehrabi-Kalajahi, S.; Emelianov, D.A.; Zinnatullin, A.L.; Varfolomeev, M.A.; Zairov, R.; Stepanov, A.; Mustafina, A.R.; Al-Muntaser, A.; et al. Catalytic combustion of heavy oil using γ-Fe2O3 nanocatalyst in in-situ combustion process. J. Pet. Sci. Eng. 2022, 209, 109819. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Küçükosman, R.; Yontar, A.A.; Ocakoglu, K. Nanoparticle additive fuels: Atomization, combustion and fuel characteristics. J. Anal. Appl. Pyrolysis 2022, 165, 105575. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Aklouche, F.Z.; Hadhoum, L.; Loubar, K.; Tazerout, M. A Comprehensive Study on Effect of Biofuel Blending Obtained from Hydrothermal Liquefaction of Olive Mill Waste Water in Internal Combustion Engine. Energies 2023, 16, 2534. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Ding, H.; Wang, C.; Zhu, X. Estimation of the kinematic viscosities of bio-oil/alcohol blends: Kinematic viscosity-temperature formula and mixing rules. Fuel 2019, 254, 115687. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Lachos-Perez, D.; Martins-Vieira, J.C.; Missau, J.; Anshu, K.; Siakpebru, O.K.; Thengane, S.K.; Morais, A.R.C.; Tanabe, E.H.; Bertuol, D.A. Review on Biomass Pyrolysis with a Focus on Bio-Oil Upgrading Techniques. Analytica 2023, 4, 182–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Energies 17 02843 g001
Figure 1. Experimental setup and scheme of the whole process.
Figure 1. Experimental setup and scheme of the whole process.
Energies 17 02843 g001
Energies 17 02843 g002
Figure 2. FTIR of plastic waste. (a) Polypropylene (PP) and (b) polystyrene (PS).
Figure 2. FTIR of plastic waste. (a) Polypropylene (PP) and (b) polystyrene (PS).
Energies 17 02843 g002
Energies 17 02843 g003
Figure 3. Effect of recovered distillate volume percentage for each sample versus temperature.
Figure 3. Effect of recovered distillate volume percentage for each sample versus temperature.
Energies 17 02843 g003
Energies 17 02843 g004
Figure 4. Comparison of torque–speed behavior (rpm): (a) pure gasoline (STD) and treatments of commercial gasoline with percentages of biofuel; (b) treatments of commercial gasoline with γ-Fe2O3 NPs.
Figure 4. Comparison of torque–speed behavior (rpm): (a) pure gasoline (STD) and treatments of commercial gasoline with percentages of biofuel; (b) treatments of commercial gasoline with γ-Fe2O3 NPs.
Energies 17 02843 g004
Energies 17 02843 g005
Figure 5. Comparison of power testing on engine-speed behavior (rpm): (a) pure gasoline (STD) and treatments of commercial gasoline with percentages of biofuel; (b) treatments of commercial gasoline with γ-Fe2O3 NPs.
Figure 5. Comparison of power testing on engine-speed behavior (rpm): (a) pure gasoline (STD) and treatments of commercial gasoline with percentages of biofuel; (b) treatments of commercial gasoline with γ-Fe2O3 NPs.
Energies 17 02843 g005
Energies 17 02843 g006
Figure 6. Change in emissions of (a) CO and CO2 associated with each treatment; (b) NO2 and NOx associated with each treatment.
Figure 6. Change in emissions of (a) CO and CO2 associated with each treatment; (b) NO2 and NOx associated with each treatment.
Energies 17 02843 g006
Energies 17 02843 g007
Figure 7. Variation in HC emissions related to each treatment.
Figure 7. Variation in HC emissions related to each treatment.
Energies 17 02843 g007
Energies 17 02843 g008
Figure 8. Changes in octane number and efficiency associated with each treatment.
Figure 8. Changes in octane number and efficiency associated with each treatment.
Energies 17 02843 g008
Table 1. Characteristics of the used gasoline engine.
Table 1. Characteristics of the used gasoline engine.
ParametersSpecifications
Engine TypeTurbocharged Inline Three-Cylinder
Engine ModelT-GDi—1.0 L
FuelGasoline
Nominal power120 hp or 88 kW
Maximum torque200 Nm
Nominal power6.000 rpm
Nominal voltage48 V
Comprehension ratio10, 5:1
FeedingDirect injection. Turbo. Intercooler.
Displacement998 cm3
Table 2. Physicochemical properties of standard commercial gasoline and gasoline blend with γ-Fe2O3 NPs and bio-oil.
Table 2. Physicochemical properties of standard commercial gasoline and gasoline blend with γ-Fe2O3 NPs and bio-oil.
SamplesAPI Density (°)Relative DensityViscosity (cSt)
at 25 °C		Flash Point (°C)Distillation (%)
T10T50T90
STD58.560.7441.17184581130
M058.560.7441.17184588133
M158.840.7471.061185099161
M257.500.7521.033185199156
M357.460.7481.058185198150
M456.460.7531.0251859103167
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Palmay, P.; Barzallo, D.; Puente, C.; Robalino, R.; Quinaluisa, D.; Bruno, J.C. Influence of γ-Fe2O3 Nanoparticles Added to Gasoline–Bio-Oil Blends Derived from Plastic Waste on Combustion and Emissions Generated in a Gasoline Engine. Energies 2024, 17, 2843. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17122843

AMA Style

Palmay P, Barzallo D, Puente C, Robalino R, Quinaluisa D, Bruno JC. Influence of γ-Fe2O3 Nanoparticles Added to Gasoline–Bio-Oil Blends Derived from Plastic Waste on Combustion and Emissions Generated in a Gasoline Engine. Energies. 2024; 17(12):2843. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17122843

Chicago/Turabian Style

Palmay, Paul, Diego Barzallo, Cesar Puente, Ricardo Robalino, Dayana Quinaluisa, and Joan Carles Bruno. 2024. "Influence of γ-Fe2O3 Nanoparticles Added to Gasoline–Bio-Oil Blends Derived from Plastic Waste on Combustion and Emissions Generated in a Gasoline Engine" Energies 17, no. 12: 2843. https://doi.org/10.3390/en17122843

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop