Testing NEXBTL renewable diesel in boat use by Boote

FUEL COMPARISON
A special synthetic diesel fuel is supposed to clean up boat engines and,
incidentally, defeat the so-called
„diesel pest“. Now, what does the new
C.A.R.E.-diesel® promise?
Diesel engines and their corresponding
fuel being the first choice as boat engines is out of question.
The advantages such as less consumption, high operational safety and steady
availability of diesel oil at nautical petrol stations are of common knowledge.
Nevertheless, diesel fuel has an Achilles‘ heel that makes many boat owners worry increasingly. We are talking
about the so-called „diesel oil pest“.
This means the increase of microorganisms in diesel fuel after its expiry
date, the consequences resulting in
slick development in the tank. This
bio slick is blocking tubes, filters and
injection nozzles and, consequently,
might cause a complete engine failure.
This holds as well for diesel-operated
heating facilities. The main cause for
this problem, though, are we ourselves.
Biofuel without bio?
Though C.A.R.E.-diesel is
consisting in large parts of
renewable raw materials,
it is no biodiesel.
BOAT: PFEIL 42 WITH 2 X VOLVO PENTA TAMD 60 C
Consumption l/n.m.
Using the boat for only some hours per
year means using little fuel. In case,
the tank capacity of the boat being
high, though, in the worst of cases
more than 1000 liters of fuel are being
taken for a walk without really using
them. In addition, there is the creation
of condense water due to considerable
temperature deviations during summer
and winter storage.
Now, a sustainable solution of the problem is promised by the Finland-based
mineral oil company Neste Oil. Their
so-called C.A.R.E.-diesel is consisting - among others - of fat residues
from the food industry, residues from
plant oil processing and renewable oil
plants such as, e.g., rape, soya or palm
trees. And, what is more, the lack of
aromatics, as, e.g. benzene as well as
a high cetane value (describing the ignition capability of the fuel) of 76. For
comparison: Conventional diesel fuel
has a cetane value between 51 and 56,
with so-called premium diesel fuels, as
available at normal car petrol stations,
it‘s between 58 and 60.
This composition, according to the
manufacturer, eliminates the bacteria
problem and, at the same time, all its
after-effects. Moreover, C.A.R.E.-diesel distributor Toolfuel from Hamburg
promises the fuel to have a definitely
improved resistance to cold of up to
minus 38 degrees Celsius, a quieter
engine run and less smoke generation.
Especially the last item is supposed
to make the owners of older motor
boats sit up and take notice. Because
quite frequently discussions come up
when clouds of smoke of aged diesel
engines during its warm up phase pass
over to the coffee tables of the neighboring berths.
Sound level dB
Improvements in the partial loads area:
With the approximately 30-year-old Volvo Penta TAMD 60 engines, C.A.R.E.-diesel led to measurable emission reductions in consumption and sound. At top
speed, the engines were about 2 dB less noisy, subjectively, were running more
smoothly and consumption was about 15% less.
FUEL COMPARISON
If you believe C.A.R.E.-diesel distributor Fuel-Tool, all these problems will
soon belong to the past. We wanted to
know in detail and started an extensive
test run at the beginning of the 2015
season, the first results of which are
being published here.
BOAT: ANCORA 41 WITH 2 X VOLVO PENTA D 6/310
Consumption l/n.m.
Our questions were the following:
1. Is there indeed an unlimited storage time of C.A.R.E.-diesel?
2. Is there a reduced smoke generation compared to conventional
diesel fuels?
3. What are the consequences for the
running of the engine and thus noise generation?
4. Does C.A.R.E.-diesel have any impact on fuel consumption and/or
the engine power?
5. Can old and new diesel engines be
influenced in different ways?
In order to answer these five questions,
we refueled two approximately similar
two-engine motor yachts of advanced
years with the new „wonder fuel“ and
carried out various measurements
and long-time surveys. Before the
crystal-clear C.A.R.E.-diesel was filled
into the tanks, all measurements were
carried out first with conventional diesel and, subsequently, the tanks were
emptied completely.
As test engines, we chose two about
30-year-old Volvo Penta TAMD 60 C
and two about 5-year-old Volvo Penta D 6 310. This comparison allows
drawing conclusions from possibly
different impacts of the fuel on mechanically controlled injection systems (TAMD-engines) and modern,
electronically controlled diesel engines. Our testing was accompanied by
engine manufacturer Volvo-Penta, making it possible for us to evaluate the
consumption values of the D6-engines
and, moreover, they conferred their
permission for using C.A.R.E.-diesel
with our test engines.
SMOKE GENERATION
As described above, especially older
Sound level dB
Only at low speeds:
With the more modern Volvo D 6 engines, we could detect improvements in the
number of revolutions up to about 1500 r.p.m. Consumption per nautical mile
was about 10% less, sound levels maximum 2 dB below the values with conventional diesel. At full load, the values approximate.
diesel engines are suffering from partly heavy smoke generation during the
warm-up phase.
The nuisances bound up with this are
annoying, but cannot be eliminated
with justifiable technical effort. The
aged TAMD-engines of our Pfeil 42
were suffering from this problem, too.
During the first minutes after starting
the engine, it was impossible avoiding
the generation of clearly visible smoke.
After replacing the conventional diesel
fuel by C.A.R.E.-diesel, the problem remained at first. It was only after several hours under operation that smoke
generation decreased considerably.
This problem is unknown to the D6-engines about 25 years younger. Smoke
generation during cold starting was,
and still is, negligible, so that in this
case, there was no difference between
both fuel types, as expected. With reference to „clean combustion“ we could
only confirm the manufacturer‘s statements. Now, if the C.A.R.E.-diesel will
have a positive impact on the exhaust
system on a long-term basis, we cannot say at this moment, this will be
proved by the inspection to be executed next spring.
ENGINE RUN AND SOUND LEVEL
The Volvo consumption indicator can be equipped subsequently with all D6-engines
without problem
END SMOKE
AND OFFENSIVE
DIESEL SMELL
C.A.R.E. Diesel
There are two criteria for evaluating
the engine run. First, the purely subjective impression for the driver‘s ear and,
secondly, the measurable sound pressure level in dB. C.A.R.E.-diesel could
convince in both points. Here, as well,
the improvements were clearly more
evident than with the D6-engines. The
perceived „smoother“ engine run with
the TAMDs was confirmed by measured values. On an average, sound levels
were about 2 dB lower than with conventional diesel. This deviation could
be measured as well with the D6-engines, subjectively, there were no audible
®
BIO - aber kein Biodiesel
NIE WIEDER DIESELPEST.
Premium Diesel aus
nachwachsenden Rohstoffen.
Infostand auf der Hanseboot:
Wir beraten Bootseigner und Tankanlagenbetreiber
über unseren innovativen C.A.R.E. Diesel®.
FUEL COMPARISON
STORAGE CAPACITy
With reference to the alleged nearly unlimited time of storage of the C.A.R.E.fuel, i.e., after the testing period of
approximately six months, we are not
yet in a position to report final results.
Our bacteria tests via quick testing did
not show any infestation so far. Nevertheless, this fact is not very reliable as
conventional diesel as well can be used
without problems after this period. As
for this, we have to wait for the coming
winter storage and the next summer
season to present reliable results.
Our test candidates: Pfeil 42 (left) with two Volvo Penta TAMD 60 C and Ancora
41 (right) with two Volvo Penta 06-310 diesel engines
changes with these engines.
CONSUMPTION AND PERFORMANCE
We were eagerly waiting for the results
of the consumption and speed measurements. For a better comparison, we
used the testing results to calculate
consumption interdependent from
velocity, resulting in fuel consumption per nautical mile (l/n.m.). with the
TAMD-engines, this value with conventional diesel running in march (approx.
8 kn at 1250 r.p.m.) was about 1 l/n.m.
When using C.A.R.E.-diesel, this value
decreased to approx. 0.85 l/n.m., corresponding to a cut down of around 15%.
When increasing the number of revolutions and approaching sliding cruise,
the savings were reduced and, from
about 12 kn onwards, were lost entirely. In the velocity segment between
13 kn and 16 kn (2200 r.p.m. to 2500
r.p.m.) the picture was even reverse: At
2500 r.p.m. (16 kn) the TAMDs consumed about 0.17 l/n.m. per engine more
C.A.R.E.-diesel than conventional diesel. In the full load area, 18 kn at 2700
r.p.m., C.A.R.E consumption was reduced in order to finally remain slightly (0.07 l/n.m.) below the value of the
conventional diesel. A similar picture
resulted from the measured values of
the more modern D6-engines with the
Ancora 41. here, too, C.A.R.E consumption per nautical mil remained, first in
displacement cruise (8 kn) around
10% below the values of conventional
diesel, in order to then adapt to sliding
cruise, which means in case of this
boat about 3000 r.p.m. In number: At
around 23 kn of top speed about 2.8.l
of fuel per nautical mile are passing
through each of the engines‘ injection nozzles, no matter, if standard or
C.A.R.E- diesel had been refueled. So,
comprehensively, we can ascertain
in this testing unit, that synthetic
THE ONLy DISADVANTAGE: AVAILABILITy
IS STILL LIMITED
C.A.R.E- diesel does definitely lead to
cost cut downs in the lower area of
revolution numbers, which, nevertheless, are adapting then to the normal
values in the full load area. Considering, though, that boats of this size
are generally cruising with lower
velocities and numbers of revolutions
on longer distances, in the end, there
will remain a saving of about 40 Euros for a distance of 2000 n.m.
RESULT
Summarizing all single results, we
come to the following conclusion: The
manufacturer‘s specifications referent
C.A.R.E.- diesel are correct for the area
tested by us. Smoke generation is significantly reduced, the sound level
measured in dB are about 2 dB lower,
fuel consumption is measurably lower
in the partial loads area. And we would
like to stress the fact that the usual
mal odour generated from conventional diesel fuel is not applicable at all.
Due to its composition, C.A.R.E.-diesel cannot smell of diesel fuel. And, in
addition, considering the significantly
higher cetane value as well as its high
resistance to cold of up to minus 38
degrees Celsius, we are quite confident, that C.A.R.E.-diesel will look into
an interesting future, at least in the
maritime field.
But, of course, there is no light without
shadow: Availability of the new fuel is
still limited at nautical petrol stations.
Currently, this fuel is only available at
the petrol station of the Grömitz Marina (Baltic Sea) and at the Yacht Club
Accumersiel (North Sea), though there
are more to come for the start of the
season in 2016. Among them, hopefully inland petrol stations as well. Prices
for C.A.R.E.-diesel are guided by the
market prices of conventional diesel
fuel, in consequence, they are not supposed to be much higher.