Assay of Fuel-Grade Butanol for Total and Potential Sulfate and Total Chloride Per ASTM D7328-07

Importance of the Topic

Growing concerns over fossil fuel dependence and greenhouse gas emissions have driven the development of advanced biofuels. Biobutanol offers superior blending properties, lower water solubility, reduced vapor pressure, and higher energy density compared to ethanol, making it a promising gasoline additive that can improve fuel efficiency without major engine modifications.

Goals and Study Overview

This study presents an ion chromatography (IC) method, conforming to ASTM D7328-07, for determining total and potential sulfate and total chloride in fuel-grade biobutanol. The method aims to meet or exceed ASTM D4806-11A quality benchmarks (≤4 mg/L sulfate, ≤40 mg/L chloride for ethanol) and ensure reliable quantification at trace levels.

Instrumentation Used

• Thermo Scientific Dionex ICS-2100 (or ICS-1100/1600/5000) IC system with a single isocratic pump, vacuum degasser, high-pressure injector, column heater, and suppressed conductivity detector (AMMS 300).
• Dionex IonPac AS4A-SC analytical and AG4A-SC guard columns.
• Dionex AS autosampler, Chromeleon CDS v6.8 or higher.
• Reacti-Vap evaporator and Reacti-Therm heating/stirring module.

Methodology and Sample Preparation

Butanol samples are evaporated under nitrogen at 65 °C to dryness, then reconstituted in water for total analyte determination or in 0.90% H₂O₂ solution for potential sulfate. Calibration standards (0.3–50 mg/L chloride, 0.3–20 mg/L sulfate) are prepared from 1000 mg/L stocks. Samples and standards are injected (5 µL) onto the IC column with 1.8 mM carbonate/1.7 mM bicarbonate eluent at 0.5 mL/min, 30 °C.

Main Results and Discussion

The method exhibited excellent linearity (r²>0.999), with LODs of 5 µg/L (chloride) and 20 µg/L (sulfate), and LOQs of 14.7 µg/L and 60 µg/L, respectively. Repeatability (within-sample RSD <0.8%) and between-preparation precision (RSD <3.4%) confirm robustness. Spiked recovery tests (1–10 mg/L) yielded 97–100% for chloride and 101–105% for sulfate. Common anions (nitrate, nitrite, phosphate, bromide) showed no interference, and potential sulfate quantification was stable in the presence of hydrogen peroxide.

Benefits and Practical Applications

• Rapid 10 min run time enables high throughput.
• Sensitivity and accuracy meet fuel specification limits well below regulatory thresholds.
• Simple sample preparation without complex cleanup steps.
• Applicability to quality control in biofuel production and blending operations.

Future Trends and Opportunities

Second-generation biofuels like biobutanol will gain market share as production costs decline. Integration of hyphenated techniques (IC-MS) may extend speciation capabilities. Automation and miniaturization could further streamline trace analysis in field and industrial settings.

Conclusion

The described IC method provides a reliable, fast, and sensitive approach for quantifying total and potential sulfate and total chloride in biobutanol. It aligns with ASTM standards, supporting quality assurance in emerging biofuel industries.

Reference

• Duke RD, Kammen DM. The Economics of Energy Market Transformation Initiatives. Energy Journal. 1999;20:15–64.
• Nexant. Biobutanol: The Next Big Biofuel. White Plains, NY: Technical Evaluation; January 2009.
• Law L. Production of Biobutanol from White Grape Pomace by Clostridium saccharobutylicum Using Submerged Fermentation. MAppSc Thesis, Auckland University of Technology; 2010.
• Hess G. BP and DuPont Plan ‘Biobutanol’. Chemical & Engineering News. 2006;84(9).
• ASTM D4806-11A. Standard Specification for Denatured Fuel Ethanol for Blending with Gasolines. ASTM International; 2011.
• ASTM D7328-07. Standard Test Method for Determination of Total and Potential Inorganic Sulfate and Total Inorganic Chloride in Fuel Ethanol by Ion Chromatography. ASTM International; 2007.