Search Results

Their easy availability, lower well-to-wheel emissions, and relative ease of use with existing engine technologies have made ethanol and ethanol-gasoline blends a viable alternative to gasoline for use in spark-ignition (SI) engines. The lower energy density of ethanol and ethanol-gasoline blends, however, results in higher volumetric fuel consumption compared with gasoline. Also, the higher latent heat of vaporization can result in cold-start issues with higher-level ethanol blends. On the other hand, a higher octane number, which indicates resistance to knock and potentially enables more optimal combustion phasing, results in better engine efficiency, especially at higher loads. This paper compares the fuel consumption and emissions of two ethanol blends (E50 and E85) with those for gasoline when used in conventional (non-hybrid) and power-split-type plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs).

Recent advances in fuel-cell technology and low-emission, direct-injection spark-ignition and diesel engines for vehicles could significantly change the transportation vehicle power plant landscape in the next decade or so. This paper is a scoping study that compares total fuel cycle options for providing power to personal transport vehicles. The key question asked is, “How much of the energy from the fuel feedstock is available for motive power?” Emissions of selected criteria pollutants and greenhouse gases are qualitatively discussed. This analysis illustrates the differences among options; it is not intended to be exhaustive. Cases considered are hydrogen fuel from methane and from iso-octane in generic proton-exchange membrane (PEM) fuel-cell vehicles, methane and iso-octane in spark-ignition (SI) engine vehicles, and diesel fuel (from methane or petroleum) in direct-injection (DI) diesel engine vehicles.