In recent years, it is noticed that there is high levels of sulfur in the air as air increasingly

polluted with SO2, sulfate (SO4) and particulate matter, and this has a negative effect on the

respiratory system (Asian Clean Fuels Association, 2008). The primary problem is the spread of

high levels of sulfur in oil and coal as well as sulfur in vehicle emissions (Adilakshmi, Venkatesan

& Tamilmani, 2014). Historically, SO2 is seen for decades as a major source of acid rain and air

pollution as well (Adilakshmi, Venkatesan & Tamilmani, 2014). This problem has key global

causes and effects. Sulfur in diesel fuel leads to emission of SO2, SO4 and particulate matter

(Asian Clean Fuels Association, 2008). According to the report of the Asian Clean Fuels

Association (2008), sulfur content is increasing in developing countries, especially in Latin

America and the Caribbean (LAC) as they have high content of sulfur (Adilakshmi, Venkatesan

& Tamilmani, 2014). Moreover, Adilakshmi, Venkatesan & Tamilmani, (2014) state that

international shipping leads to the use of residential fuels with high sulfur content which

culminates in the emission of SO2, SO4 and particulate matter and causes damage to the

environment. Besides, Adilakshmi, Venkatesan & Tamilmani, (2014) indicate that the use of diesel

fuels without controls lead to the emissions of SO2 which is transformed into Sulphate PM.

Moreover, Asian Clean Fuels Association (2008) emphasizes that SO2 has negative effects on the

respiratory system, the function of the lungs, irritation of the eyes and inflation of the respiratory

tracts. Similarly, it indicates that sulfur in fuels leads to increased acid levels and the emission of

pollutants. Sulfur also has major local causes and effects. Al Zubaidy (2013) indicates that the

Middle East is the world’s largest crude oil and natural gas reserve. Furthermore, he emphasizes

that there is leaded petrol in certain countries in the Middle East, especially Jordan, Syria, Yemen

and Iraq. Furthermore, Al Zubaidy (2013) indicates that shortage of petrol leads to difficulty in

improving petrol quality, and he reports that Kuwait has 500 ppm sulfur content limit, however,
Qatar and UAE has more than 100 ppm. This essay explores the problem of sulfur in diesel in

Kuwait and evaluates two solutions to address it; unleaded gasoline by adsorption process and

blending of high speed diesel (HSD) with low Sulphur heavy stock. It will argue that the initial

solution is the most efficient in Kuwait.

The first solution proposed to address the problem of sulfur content is the use of unleaded

gasoline by the use of adsorption process. This approach could be implemented by using a mixture

of diesel oil and 5% mass commercial activated carbon by means of using a flash shaker (Asian

Clean Fuels Association, 2008). According to the Asian Clean Fuels Association (2008), this is a

filtering solution which tends to separate solid adsorbent material and analysis of filtrate. It also

means the use of carbonized date palm kernel powder by means of using the adsorption

desulfurization process. This approach has many advantages. The first advantage of which is that

the use of cleaner fuels and cleaner vehicles helps in improving the environment and urban air

quality (Al Zubaidy, 2013). The second advantage is that increased blending minimizes sulfur and

lowers benzene and aromatics. Al Zubaidy (2013) further emphasizes that matching MTBE makes

petrol quality match Euro III equivalent. He further indicates that adsorptive desulphurization

which is nickel based adsorbent leads to rising capacity and selectivity for the adsorptive.

Moreover, Asian Clean Fuels Association (2008) indicates that cetane index is associated with

good quality and high amount of paraffine. Asian Clean Fuels Association (2008) also states that

this solution improves the quality of diesel and minimizes SO2 by 50%. However, despite its many

advantages, this solution also has many disadvantages. The key disadvantage of this solution is

that it doesn’t achieve total reduction of Sulphur as it achieves only reduction by 54% (Asian Clean

Fuels Association, 2008).

 The second solution is blending high speed diesel (HSD) with low sulfur heavy stock, raw

diesel (RD) and low sulfur heavy stock which leads to light diesel oil (Adilakshmi, Venkatesan &

Tamilmani, 2014). According to Adilakshmi, Venkatesan & Tamilmani, (2014), this solution

could be implemented by blending of high speed diesel (HSD), low sulfur heavy stock (LSHS),

raw diesel (RD) and low sulfur heavy stock which meet specifications of light diesel. They further

indicate that this solution could be implemented by blending of final waste product and distillation

of crude oil. This solution has many advantages. The first advantage of this solution is that it

minimizes emissions from current vehicles and empower advanced control technologies

(Adilakshmi, Venkatesan & Tamilmani, 2014). Furthermore, it enables also control of particulate

matter, SO2 and sulphate particulate matter. Also, this solution is characterized by fuel efficient

designs. Despite its advantages, this solution also has many disadvantages. Adilakshmi,

Venkatesan & Tamilmani, (2014) indicate that the first disadvantage is that blending of high speed

diesel (HSD) and low sulfur heavy stock (LSHS) doesn’t meet specifications. The second

disadvantage is that despite the fact that it has low sulfur, it couldn’t be used directly as fuel

(Adilakshmi, Venkatesan & Tamilmani, 2014).

Although both solutions solve the problem of sulfur content in diesel, there are local factors

which might lessen the effectiveness of both solutions. One of those factors is an economic factor,

as less production of oil leads to inflation (Al Zubaidy, 2013). The second solution is less effective

than the first solution in the context of Kuwait and the Middle East. Al Zubaidy (2013) indicates

this is because it leads to higher emissions than the standard and that LSHS doesn’t meet the

required specifications. The second solution lessens adoption and effectiveness for Kuwait and the

Middle East. The first solution is more effective in Kuwait and the Middle East for many reasons.

The first reason is that it shall minimize sulfur emissions by use of clean vehicles (Al Zubaidy,
2013). The second reason is that it shall minimize sulfur emissions by reducing emissions (Al

Zubaidy, 2013). The third reason is that it will minimize sulfur emissions by minimizing pressure

on the severity of refineries (Al Zubaidy, 2013). Therefore, the first solution minimizes sulfur

emissions in Kuwait/the Middle East.

This essay has discussed the problem of high emissions of sulfur from diesel in Kuwait and

the Middle East and evaluated two solutions to address it, the first solution is the use of the

adsorption process and the second solution is the use of blending ratio. It has been indicated that

the first solution is the preferred solution due to environmental and economic considerations.

Therefore, it is recommended to apply the adsorption process and to adopt further legislation and

further research. If the rules are not followed, this shall lead to an increase in sulfur and to further

pollution.
References:

ACFA. (2012). Clean Air Through Clean Fuels, Asian Clean Fuels Association,
https://www.acfa.org.sg/about_us.html

Al Zubaidy (2013). Adsorption Process of Sulfur Removal from Diesel Oil Using Sorbent
Materials, Journal of Clean Energy Technologies, Vol.1., No.1; http://jocet.org/papers/016-
J30012.pdf

Asian Clean Fuels Association. (2008). Middle East Fuel Quality – Improving, But Challenges
Remain, Asian Clean Fuels Association ACFA News,
https://www.acfa.org.sg/newsletters/acfa0108.pdf

Adilakshmi et. al. (2014). Blending Ratio of Low Sulphur Diesel A Key to Lower Emissions,
Journal of Industrial Pollution Control, retrieved from
www.icontrolpollution.com/articles/blending-ratio-of-low-sulphur-diesela-key-to-lower-
emissions-.php?aid=45320