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).

The high octane rating and more plentiful domestic supply of natural gas make it an excellent alternative to gasoline. Recent studies have shown that using natural gas in dual fuel engines provides one possible strategy for leveraging the advantages of both natural gas and gasoline. In particular, such engines been able to improve overall engine efficiencies and load capacity when they leverage direct injection of the natural gas fuel. While the benefits of these engine concepts are still being explored, differences in fuel composition, combustion process and in-cylinder mixing could lead to dramatically different emissions which can substantially impact the effectiveness of the engine’s exhaust aftertreatment system. In order to explore this topic, this study examined the variations in speciated hydrocarbon emissions which occur for different fuel blends of E10 and compressed natural gas and for different fuel injection strategies on a spark-ignition engine.