Anyone here in California use Propel's Diesel HPR, or "Renewable Diesel" from Chevron and have any issues? Seems like it's kind of like a B100 biodiesel but....not. It's apparently much better than Dino Diesel, and safe to use on all diesel cars (including the GLE300d I'm thinking of buying). I think it may come from Neste.
Renewable diesel is a renewable fuel that can be used in conventional diesel engines as an alternative to petroleum diesel. It is primarily made from non-petroleum renewable sources such as soybean oil, used cooking oil, tallow and other plant- and animal based oils, with a maximum of 0.1% of its composition deriving from conventional petroleum diesel. Renewable diesel is processed in a refinery, similarly to conventional diesel and meets the same standard ASTM D975 specification. Renewable diesel is 100% comparable to conventional Diesel No. 2 and is often referred to as “Biomass-based” diesel. The orange, regulatory decal indicates the percentage of renewable diesel that the fuel contains.
*ASTM International, is an international standards organization that develops and publishes voluntary consensus technical standards for a wide range of materials, products, systems, and services including Petroleum Products, Liquid Fuels, and Lubricants.
Yes, Chevron Renewable Diesel meets the same ASTM D975 specification as Diesel No. 2. I am at a dispenser that identifies the fuel as Diesel No. 2 and only has an orange label that says it contains a certain percentage of biomass-based diesel. What does this mean?
Since Renewable diesel meets ASTM D975 specification, it is Diesel No. 2. Renewable diesel is often referred to as “Biomass-based”diesel because of the renewable sources it is made from. The orange decal indicates that the fuel contains a percentage of renewable diesel which is typically 95% or 99%. Despite how the federally required language on the bottom of the decal may read, this fuel does NOT contain 95% or 99% biodiesel.
Chevron Renewable Diesel has physical properties that benefit the combustion process in diesel engines, resulting in lower engine out emissions of hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide, and particulates than conventional petroleum diesel.
Chevron Renewable Diesel is sourced primarily from renewable sources and has a lower carbon intensity on a life cycle basis. This means a lower sum of greenhouse gases emitted throughout the full fuel life cycle calculated under California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard methodology. Because Chevron Renewable Diesel is derived from renewable feedstocks, it has a lower lifecycle CI than conventional diesel.
From Propel:
Clean Diesel Power
- Increased power and torque
- Higher cetane than regular diesel
- Cleaner combustion and emissions
Diesel HPR meets the ASTM D975 diesel specification for use in diesel engines.
The Benefits of Diesel HPR Fueling with Diesel HPR
Propel Diesel HPR is a premium fuel engineered to maximize performance of your clean diesel engine. Diesel HPR meets the ASTM D975 diesel specification (ULSD) for use in all diesel engines. Refined from recycled fats and oils, Diesel HPR outperforms both petroleum diesel and biodiesel in performance, emissions and value.
Performance
Performance formulated Diesel HPR has a cetane rating up to 75+, 40% higher than regular diesel, for smoother combustion and a better ride. Diesel HPR combusts more efficiently, which means more power and torque for your rig. And unlike biodiesel, Diesel HPR provides uncompromised cold weather performance. Diesel HPR is additized to provide excellent lubricity in all driving conditions and exceeds ULSD lubricity specification.
Renewable
Propel Diesel HPR is not biodiesel, however, it is manufactured from similar renewable biomass sources including recycled fats and oils. Refined from renewable biomass through advanced hydrotreating technology, Propel Diesel HPR meets the toughest specifications required by automotive and engine manufacturers. This allows Diesel HPR to be used by any diesel vehicle.
Air Quality and Environment
The California Air Resources Board classifies Diesel HPR, also known as renewable diesel, as an ultra-low carbon fuel. The fuel can achieve a 40-80% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to fossil diesel. In addition, Propel Diesel HPR:
- Reduces NOx emissions by up to 14% and particulates (PM 2.5) by 29% compared to petroleum diesel
- Is sulfur-free, aromatics-free and virtually odorless, in 100% renewable diesel form
Outperforming B20
Diesel HPR outperforms Biodiesel B20, delivering more power and lower emissions. Diesel HPR is made from 98% renewable content, while B20 biodiesel is 20% renewable and 80% petroleum. Unlike biodiesel, Diesel HPR provides uncompromised cold weather performance.
I've been using it on multiple engines since 2015 when it first arrived. No issues. Idle quieter with fewer regens. None of the warnings about biodiesel apply to renewable diesel. It is a drop-in replacement for #2 diesel. 76, Chevron, Propel and probably a bunch of others offer it now. Starting pop up in Oregon and Washington as well.
There is long topic about it on Sprinter forum
When renewable diesel is good fuel, in last weeks some members reported that it crystalized in not even very cold temperatures.
I've been using it on multiple engines since 2015 when it first arrived. No issues. Idle quieter with fewer regens. None of the warnings about biodiesel apply to renewable diesel. It is a drop-in replacement for #2 diesel. 76, Chevron, Propel and probably a bunch of others offer it now. Starting pop up in Oregon and Washington as well.
Have you noticed lower fuel economy? I saw a few references to this, due to the apparent lower energy density of Renewable Diesel.
Anyone here in California use Propel's Diesel HPR, or "Renewable Diesel" from Chevron and have any issues? Seems like it's kind of like a B100 biodiesel but....not. It's apparently much better than Dino Diesel, and safe to use on all diesel cars (including the GLE300d I'm thinking of buying). I think it may come from Neste.
<sales pitch deleted>
If you want to kill you engine in the shortest possible amount of time, but all means go ahead. Are you aware that the maximum allowed biodiesel content in the OM642 engine is B5?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tjts1
I've been using it on multiple engines since 2015 when it first arrived. No issues. Idle quieter with fewer regens. None of the warnings about biodiesel apply to renewable diesel. It is a drop-in replacement for #2 diesel. 76, Chevron, Propel and probably a bunch of others offer it now. Starting pop up in Oregon and Washington as well.
You are a fück!ng moron. You've been using pure biodiesel and you have the audacity to whine about how the engine oil is somehow responsible for your engine failures?
Have you ever heard of a property called diesel lubricity and do you know what it is? In a nutshell, it indicates how "slippery" the fuel is, and thus how much fuel slips past the piston rings and ends up in the crankcase where it dilutes and oxidizes the oil.
It's not really T-Rex juice anyways. The oil corporations started that myth so they could claim its a limited resource and justify their price gouging. Fresh new oil il is being created right now at the bottom of the sea. Oil is, in fact, a renewable resouce. It's the combustion part that's killing us.
I have a 2016 GLE 300d, and it has been running great on nothing but 76 R99 Renewable Diesel, almost since I bought it. No issues after 5k miles. Average about 35mpg on the highway, 23 around town, which is around what I noticed before I switched from Dino diesel to R99.
I have a 2016 GLE 300d, and it has been running great on nothing but 76 R99 Renewable Diesel, almost since I bought it. No issues after 5k miles. Average about 35mpg on the highway, 23 around town.
I've been sticking metal forks in electrical outlets since June, and it has been great for my muscle tone and prostate health on nothing but 120V 60Hz AC power. No issues after six months.
If you were aware of the reported issues with the modern Mercedes diesel engines in the US (due to the amount of biodiesel present in the fuel there, which is in turn a result of farming subsidies by the government), you would know that the engines crap out prematurely because of excessive fuel dilution of the oil. And excessive fuel dilution happens as a result of the increased lubricity of biofuels - R99 most certainly included - over dinosaur juice diesel, which slips past the piston rings during engine operation and ends up in the crankcase, diluting the engine oil to the point when it can no longer adequately protect the engine internals. Unless you're changing your oil every 2000 miles, it will absolutely lead to premature engine wear and failure of the OM642 and OM651 engines as a result of their design. The Mercedes engineers who designed and built the engines clearly stipulate that no more than 5% (B5) biofuel is to be used, but apparently you know better.
As Einstein said, two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.
you would know that the engines crap out prematurely because of excessive fuel dilution of the oil. And excessive fuel dilution happens as a result of the increased lubricity of biofuels
False. Oil dilution by fuel comes from frequent and incomplete DPF regeneration cycles. Absolutely nothing to do with the fuel or lubricity, its entirely about driving cycle and condition of the EGR system.
B20-100 cannot be used in common rail diesels because it can plasticize at the pressures seen in the fuel rail.
I've been sticking metal forks in electrical outlets since June, and it has been great for my muscle tone and prostate health on nothing but 120V 60Hz AC power. No issues after six months.
If you were aware of the reported issues with the modern Mercedes diesel engines in the US (due to the amount of biodiesel present in the fuel there, which is in turn a result of farming subsidies by the government), you would know that the engines crap out prematurely because of excessive fuel dilution of the oil. And excessive fuel dilution happens as a result of the increased lubricity of biofuels - R99 most certainly included - over dinosaur juice diesel, which slips past the piston rings during engine operation and ends up in the crankcase, diluting the engine oil to the point when it can no longer adequately protect the engine internals. Unless you're changing your oil every 2000 miles, it will absolutely lead to premature engine wear and failure of the OM642 and OM651 engines as a result of their design. The Mercedes engineers who designed and built the engines clearly stipulate that no more than 5% (B5) biofuel is to be used, but apparently you know better.
As Einstein said, two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe.
Renewable diesel meets the same ASTM D975 standard as Dino diesel, has been out for 10+ years (and makes up something like 65%+ of diesel sold in California these days), and I am not aware of some sort of mass tanking of these or any other engines.
False. Oil dilution by fuel comes from frequent and incomplete DPF regeneration cycles. Absolutely nothing to do with the fuel or lubricity, its entirely about driving cycle and condition of the EGR system.
B20-100 cannot be used in common rail diesels because it can plasticize at the pressures seen in the fuel rail.
Please enlighten us just *how* the regen cycle works on the Merc engines in question, and in particular how the fuel gets in the oil during the DPF regen cycles. Do you see a separate dosing valve and system anywhere?
As an engineer who has done statistical failure analyses of the Mercedes engines in question and having investigated thousands of these cases, during which time I have worked with people from the engineers who designed and built the engines, through the tribologists who design and test synthetic oils to engineers that design actual distillation columns / stacks for refineries including those for biofuels and reprocessing, I think I'll take their combined centuries of knowledge and experience over your ASE membership.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OM617.95
The more you talk, the more you're putting yourself into the latter.
Indeed we all do... although I am afraid to even venture a comparison as to where you might be on that particular scale.
Renewable diesel meets the same ASTM D975 standard as Dino diesel, has been out for 10+ years (and makes up something like 65%+ of diesel sold in California these days), and I am not aware of some sort of mass tanking of these or any other engines.
I am not disputing in any way, shape or form that renewable diesel meets ASTM D975. I am disputing the implication that any fuel that meets ASTM D975 is perfectly safe to use long-term in an OM642 or OM651 engine with no ill effects as a result.
If you are unaware of the issues withe Merc diesel engine reliability in the US, there are plenty of discussions on this forum alone.
And before either of you jump on my throat again, nowhere have I ever stated that the design and implementation of the OM642 and OM651 engine DPF regen method is not flawed. Not putting in a separate dosing valve / system was IMHO a massive mistake. That, however, does not negate the fact that in those two particular engines, higher lubricity diesel - which in every properly executed application is a good thing - is the largest single factor contributing to their premature demise. They need a higher lubricity fuel to keep it out of the crank case, and/or much more frequent oil changes to make them last.
Seems like there is a missing key piece of information in this thread. Renewable diesel is chemically identical to petroleum diesel, and not to be confused with biodiesel.
I think if renewable diesel catches on more, it could possibly mean the return of diesels to the US, but maybe that's wishful thinking.
Seems like there is a missing key piece of information in this thread. Renewable diesel is chemically identical to petroleum diesel, and not to be confused with biodiesel.
I think if renewable diesel catches on more, it could possibly mean the return of diesels to the US, but maybe that's wishful thinking.
That is not entirely true. It is still vegetable and animal fat which is processed using hydrotreating and gasification to be "chemically the same as petroleum diesel", but that is akin to Castrol calling hydrocracked dinosaur juice "synthetic oil" in contrast to, say, a synthetic oil made from 100% laboratory-made ester base stock. In other words, we've now come up with a bunch of chemical reaction processes that make green diesel (aka renewable diesel) approximate petroleum diesel as much as possible, but they are not the same in every sense of the word. Moreover, AFAIK pretty much all of it - both domestically made and imported - is being sold in California due to the financial benefits to sell it there under the Low Carbon Fuel Standard and very little anywhere else as it costs more to make than petroleum diesel.
One of the ares where it is not the same with standard dinosaur-juice-derived D2 is in its higher lubricity. While the pistons being able to move in the cylinder bores more easily is a good thing 99.9% of the time, unfortunately in the OM642 and OM651 too much of it gets past the piston rings and ends up in the crankcase mixed with the oil, which is indeed exacerbated during the DPF burn-off cycle as Merc in their infinite wisdom decided to squirt unburnt diesel in the combustion chamber during the exhaust cycle instead of implementing a separate dosing valve for fuel injection in the DPF itself.
Sure, we definitely need to use both cleaner and more available sources of energy, and renewable diesel is arguably a step in the right direction despite the fact that it costs more to make and there is insufficient feed stock to make a sizable dent in our reliance on petroleum fuels. Having said that, renewable diesel is also unfortunately not suitable for use in the 642 & 651 because of their design deficiencies, not because it is not a cleaner and good fuel to burn.
And before either of you jump on my throat again, nowhere have I ever stated that the design and implementation of the OM642 and OM651 engine DPF regen method is not flawed. Not putting in a separate dosing valve / system was IMHO a massive mistake. That, however, does not negate the fact that in those two particular engines, higher lubricity diesel - which in every properly executed application is a good thing - is the largest single factor contributing to their premature demise. They need a higher lubricity fuel to keep it out of the crank case, and/or much more frequent oil changes to make them last.
I wish all the diesels in the US (consumer trucks and cars) had both the injection system and removable DPF cores so they can be cleaned properly on regular basis. Like all the big rigs in the US. Ahh well sucks for us.
Slideshow: A one-of-one U.S.-spec Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren Roadster became even rarer after a factory-backed transformation at McLaren's headquarters.
