As alternative fuels gain popularity to power machinery, Perkins Engine Company is fielding more questions surrounding the viability of Hydrotreated Vegetable Oil (HVO).
The renewable fuel is made by a process called hydrotreating where the molecular structure of the vegetable oil is altered via the introduction of hydrogen.
As all Perkins engines are compatible with HVO, the company set out to find a definitive answer to the questions posed by their customers.
“What we have found is there’s a lot of myths and misconceptions about HVO. A lot of people think the tailpipe emissions are massively different to that of diesel,” said Paul Muller, Technical Sales Manager at Perkins Engine Company.
Perkins partnered with generator manufacturer Jubaili Bros to test the differences between HVO and diesel. The testing examined differences in emissions, required maintenance, consumption and if the genset would require modifications to run HVO. Perkins is publishing its findings in a new whitepaper and video on its YouTube channel.
To run the test, Perkins acquired HVO from four different suppliers and found minimal variations in quality.
In terms of fuel consumption, Perkins found a 2.5 per cent difference between HVO and diesel.
“One of the things that comes up often is that people see a big fuel consumption difference with HVO. That’s not really what we found,” Muller said.
While HVO is about 6 per cent less dense than diesel, it delivers a higher heating value equaling more energy per litre.
RELATED: Perkins launches new 13-litre engine
The study found maintenance requirements between HVO and diesel are basically the same. While biodiesel blends can have an impact on service intervals, that wasn’t the case with HVO. As well, HVO is a drop-in fuel that can mix with traditional fuel.
“One of the nice things about HVO is you can move from fossil diesel to HVO without having to clean tanks out and without having to change filters,” Muller said. “If you can’t get HVO one week, and you need to keep running, you can switch back to diesel, as well.”
HVO emissions
Perkins also compared emissions generated from each of the fuel types. While HVO generated less carbon dioxide, nitrogen oxides, soot and hydrocarbons, the differences were minimal.
“Basically, we saw that diesel versus HVO at the tailpipe is pretty similar,” Muller said. “A lot of people think that if they switch to HVO, the CO2 coming out the tailpipe is massively reduced. And that’s not true.”
HVO benefit
The environmental benefit of HVO lies in the carbon lifecycle. Muller explained carbon dioxide is absorbed by the feedstock that is used to make HVO. The carbon dioxide is then released again when it’s burned and subsequently reabsorbed by the new feedstock.
“HVO, I think, is a very useful fuel moving forward for people to reduce their lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions, but they need to be aware that it’s not going to reduce the point of use. Tailpipe (emissions) are likely to be the same,” Muller said. “So, if they’re looking for a solution that could reduce their point of use, tailpipe emissions, HVO might not be solution.”
