Some grad student's random dissertation that hasn't even been proofread? >The pour point is the lowest temperature at which the fluid still flows before losing its flow characteristics. **To achieve the desired low temperature properties necessary for most lubricants.** Pour points for bio-based lubricants exhibit the same dependencies as observed with viscosity It's funny because they talk about COF (which, frankly, I find suspect because the entire paper takes an angle that often contradicts itself) but make *no mention* of melting point even of the heralded ionic lubricants they're pushing except to say they're "below 100°C." Awesome, so I get to wait until the temps in my sump are 90°C before I get any lubrication. Same thing with avocado oil; if I'm starting my engine in 20°F, which happens in most of the US annually (or colder, God forbid), I get to wait until the sump heats up before I get lubrication... if my oil pump doesn't burn out from running dry waiting on things to heat up (or cams/crank/pistons seizing, etc.). And even the author notes the more unsaturation present the greater the oxidation and thermal instability risk. So avocado oil might have a nice low COF for the 1st 100 miles, what about the next 10k that synthetic provides with minimal degradation? >Bio-based lubricants have varying properties such as thermal-oxidative stability, viscosity, viscosity index, and low temperature behavior that are dependent on the structure of the molecules and the triacyclglycerol composition. Despite the many favorable attributes of biolubricants, the largest drawback to them are their poor thermaloxidative stability, solidification at low temperatures (high pour points), biological (bacterial) deterioration, and hydrolytic instability (aqueous decomposition), and inconsistent chemical composition [132]. Additionally, many biolubricants particularly ester-based oils are susceptible to rapid oxidative degradation due to the presence of free fatty acids and the presence of double bonds in the carbon chains of the ester molecules This is a classic case of "x cures cancer *in vitro*. But so does a bullet." >Moreover, fully saturated diester oils (*as found in synthetic oil* - my addition) are highly stable towards oxidation, show good low temperature performance, and demonstrate a high viscosity-temperature index So my "better" you meant "offers a lower COF" which may be true. Better as an engine lubricant? Even that dissertation suggests "no." Shit otherwise oil companies would be buying up avocado fields in droves. Or synthesizing oil mixes with similar saturation ratios; it's not *that* hard to replicate MUFAs and PUFAs. But again, they're way more prone to oxidation, which is not desirable in an engine lubricant. Oh and I didn't apologize. I guess your conclusions from this paper go to support your lack of reading comprehension that somehow made you think I did. But I suppose you didn't totally pull it out of your ass. You did cherry pick some words from a random dissertation and ignore a multitude of critical factors in your conclusion though.