Engineering Papers⌕ Search

SEARCH · Engineering Papers

Results for “Higher Ethanol Blends”

Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 19 records

Comparative Emissions Testing of Vehicles Aged on E0, E15 and E20 Fuels

The Energy Independence and Security Act passed into law in December 2007 has mandated the use of 36 billion ethanol equivalent gallons per year of renewable fuel by 2022. A primary pathway to achieve this national goal is to increase the amount of ethanol blended into gasoline. This study is part of a multi-laboratory test program coordinated by DOE to evaluate the effect of higher ethanol blends on vehicle exhaust emissions over the lifetime of the vehicle.

02 PETROLEUM↗

Compatibility Study for Plastic, Elastomeric, and Metallic Fueling Infrastructure Materials Exposed to Aggressive Formulations of Ethanol-blended Gasoline

In 2008 Oak Ridge National Laboratory began a series of experiments to evaluate the compatibility of fueling infrastructure materials with intermediate levels of ethanol-blended gasoline. Initially, the focus was elastomers, metals, and sealants, and the test fuels were Fuel C, CE10a, CE17a and CE25a. The results of these studies were published in 2010. Follow-on studies were performed with an emphasis on plastic (thermoplastic and thermoset) materials used in underground storage and dispenser systems. These materials were exposed to test fuels of Fuel C and CE25a. Upon completion of this effort, it was felt that additional compatibility data with higher ethanol blends was needed and another round of experimentation was performed on elastomers, metals, and plastics with CE50a and CE85a test fuels. Compatibility of polymers typically relates to the solubility of the solid polymer with a solvent. It can also mean susceptibility to chemical attack, but the polymers and test fuels evaluated in this study are not considered to be chemically reactive with each other. Solubility in polymers is typically assessed by measuring the volume swell of the polymer exposed to the solvent of interest. Elastomers are a class of polymers that are predominantly used as seals, and most o-ring and seal manufacturers provide compatibility tables of their products with various solvents including ethanol, toluene, and isooctane, which are components of aggressive oxygenated gasoline as described by the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) J1681. These tables include a ranking based on the level of volume swell in the elastomer associated with exposure to a particular solvent. Swell is usually accompanied by a decrease in hardness (softening) that also affects performance. For seal applications, shrinkage of the elastomer upon drying is also a critical parameter since a contraction of volume can conceivably enable leakage to occur. Shrinkage is also indicative of the removal of one or more components of the elastomers (by the solvent). This extraction of additives can negatively change the properties of the elastomer, leading to reduced performance and durability. For a seal application, some level of volume swell is acceptable, since the expansion will serve to maintain a seal. However, the acceptable level of swell is dependent on the particular application of the elastomer product. It is known that excessive swell can lead to unacceptable extrusion of the elastomer beyond the sealed interface, where it becomes susceptible to damage. Also, since high swell is indicative of high solubility, there is a heightened potential for fluid to seep through the seal and into the environment. Plastics, on the other hand, are used primarily in structural applications, such as solid components, including piping and fluid containment. Volume change, especially in a rigid system, will create internal stresses that may negatively affect performance. In order to better understand and predict the compatibility for a given polymer type and fuel composition, an analysis based on Hansen solubility theory was performed for each plastic and elastomer material. From this study, the solubility distance was calculated for each polymer material and test fuel combination. Using the calculated solubility distance, the ethanol concentration associated with peak swell and overall extent of swell can be predicted for each polymer. The bulk of the material discussion centers on the plastic materials, and their compatibility with Fuel C, CE25a, CE50a, and CE85a. The next section of this paper focuses on the elastomer compatibility with the higher ethanol concentrations with comparison to results obtained previously for the lower ethanol levels. The elastomers were identical to those used in the earlier study. Hansen solubility theory is also applied to the elastomers to provide added interpretation of the results. The final section summarizes the performance of the metal coupons.

02 PETROLEUM↗

An Update on Ethanol Production and Utilization in Thailand, 2014

In spite of the recent political turmoil, Thailand has continued to develop its ethanol based alternative fuel supply and demand infrastructure. Its support of production and sales of ethanol contributed to more than doubling the production over the past five years alone. In April 2014, average consumption stood at 3.18 million liter per day- more than a third on its way to its domestic consumption goal of 9 million liters per day by 2021. Strong government incentives and the phasing out of non-blended gasoline contributed substantially. Concurrently, exports dropped significantly to their lowest level since 2011, increasing the pressure on Thai policy makers to best balance energy independency goals with other priorities, such as Thailand’s trade balance and environmental aspirations. Utilization of second generation biofuels might have the potential to further expand Thailand’s growing ethanol market. Thailand has also dramatically increased its higher ethanol blend vehicle fleet, with all new vehicles sold in the Thai market now being E20 capable and the number of E85 vehicles increasing three fold in the last year from 100,000 in 2013 to 300,000 in 2014.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Assessing the efficiency implications of renewable fuel policy design in the United States

Abstract Obligated parties have chosen to comply with the Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS) by increasing the blending of biomass‐based biodiesel beyond originally targeted levels rather than increasing blending/consumption of ethanol to targeted levels that would have required pricing higher blends of ethanol (E85) at or below an energy‐equivalent level to E10. This paper develops a welfare‐economic framework to analyze the extent to which the nested design and the accompanying cellulosic waiver credit and biodiesel tax credit contributed to a compliance strategy by blenders that favored blending of biodiesel instead of inducing consumption of E85, and its implications for social welfare.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Michigan E85 Infrastructure

This is the final report for a grant-funded project to financially assist and otherwise provide support to projects that increase E85 infrastructure in Michigan at retail fueling locations. Over the two-year project timeframe, nine E85 and/or flex-fuel pumps were installed around the State of Michigan at locations currently lacking E85 infrastructure. A total of five stations installed the nine pumps, all providing cost share toward the project. By using cost sharing by station partners, the $\$$200,000 provided by the Department of Energy facilitated a total project worth $\$$746,332.85. This project was completed over a two-year timetable (eight quarters). The first quarter of the project focused on project outreach to station owners about the incentive on the installation and/or conversion of E85 compatible fueling equipment including fueling pumps, tanks, and all necessary electrical and plumbing connections. Utilizing Clean Energy Coalition (CEC) extensive knowledge of gasoline/ethanol infrastructure throughout Michigan, CEC strategically placed these pumps in locations to strengthen the broad availability of E85 in Michigan. During the first and second quarters, CEC staff approved projects for funding and secured contracts with station owners; the second through eighth quarters were spent working with fueling station owners to complete projects; the third through eighth quarters included time spent promoting projects; and beginning in the second quarter and running for the duration of the project was spent performing project reporting and evaluation to the US DOE. A total of 9 pumps were installed (four in Elkton, two in Sebewaing, one in East Lansing, one in Howell, and one in Whitmore Lake). At these combined station locations, a total of 192,445 gallons of E85, 10,786 gallons of E50, and 19,159 gallons of E30 were sold in all reporting quarters for 2011. Overall, the project has successfully displaced 162,611 gallons (2,663 barrels) of petroleum, and reduced regional GHG emissions by 375 tons in the first year of station deployment.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Fuel Economy and Emissions of a Vehicle Equipped with an Aftermarket Flexible-Fuel Conversion Kit

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) grants Certificates of Conformity for alternative fuel conversion systems and also offers other forms of premarket registration of conversion kits for use in vehicles more than two model years old. Use of alternative fuels such as ethanol, natural gas, and propane are encouraged by the Energy Policy Act of 1992. Several original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) produce emissions-certified vehicles capable of using alternative fuels, and several alternative fuel conversion system manufacturers produce EPA-approved conversion systems for a variety of alternative fuels and vehicle types. To date, only one manufacturer (Flex Fuel U.S.) has received EPA certifications for ethanol fuel (E85) conversion kits. This report details an independent evaluation of a vehicle with a legal installation of a Flex Fuel U.S. conversion kit. A 2006 Dodge Charger was baseline tested with ethanol-free certification gasoline (E0) and E20 (gasoline with 20 vol % ethanol), converted to flex-fuel operation via installation of a Flex Box Smart Kit from Flex Fuel U.S., and retested with E0, E20, E50, and E81. Test cycles included the Federal Test Procedure (FTP or city cycle), the highway fuel economy test (HFET), and the US06 test (aggressive driving test). Averaged test results show that the vehicle was emissions compliant on E0 in the OEM condition (before conversion) and compliant on all test fuels after conversion. Average nitrogen oxide (NO X ) emissions exceeded the Tier 2/Bin 5 intermediate life NO X standard with E20 fuel in the OEM condition due to two of three test results exceeding this standard [note that E20 is not a legal fuel for non-flexible-fuel vehicles (non-FFVs)]. In addition, one E0 test result before conversion and one E20 test result after conversion exceeded the NO X standard, although the average result in these two cases was below the standard. Emissions of ethanol and acetaldehyde increased with increasing ethanol, while nonmethane organic gas and CO emissions remained relatively unchanged for all fuels and cycles. Higher fraction ethanol blends appeared to decrease NO X emissions on the FTP and HFET (after conversion). As expected, fuel economy (miles per gallon) decreased with increasing ethanol content in all cases.

02 PETROLEUM↗

Well-to-Wheels Greenhouse Gas Emission Analysis of High-Octane Fuels with Ethanol Blending: Phase II Analysis with Refinery Investment Options

Higher-octane gasoline can enable increases in an internal combustion engine’s energy efficiency and a vehicle’s fuel economy by allowing an increase in the engine compression ratio and/or by enabling downspeeding and downsizing. Producing high-octane fuel (HOF) with the current level of ethanol blending (E10) could increase the energy and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions intensity of the fuel product from refinery operations. Alternatively, increasing the ethanol blending level in final gasoline products could be a promising solution to HOF production because of the high octane rating and potentially low blended Reid vapor pressure (RVP) of ethanol at 25% and higher of the ethanol blending level by volume. In our previous HOF well-to-wheels (WTW) report (the so-called phase I report of the HOF WTW analysis), we conducted WTW analysis of HOF with different ethanol blending levels (i.e., E10, E25, and E40) and a range of vehicle efficiency gains with detailed petroleum refinery linear programming (LP) modeling by Jacobs Consultancy and showed that the overall WTW GHG emission changes associated with HOFVs were dominated by the positive impact associated with vehicle efficiency gains and ethanol blending levels, while the refining operations to produce gasoline blendstock for oxygenate blending (BOB) for various HOF blend levels had a much smaller impact on WTW GHG emissions (Han et al. 2015). The scope of the previous phase I study, however, was limited to evaluating PADDs 2 and 3 operation changes with various HOF market share scenarios and ethanol blending levels. Also, the study used three typical configuration models of refineries (cracking, light coking, and heavy coking) in each PADD, which may not be representative of the aggregate response of all refineries in each PADD to various ethanol blending levels and HOF market scenarios. Lastly, the phase I study assumed no new refinery expansion in the existing refineries, which limited E10 HOF production to the volume achievable by the cracking refinery configuration. To be able to satisfy large market demands of E10 HOF, that study arbitrarily relaxed the RVP requirements by replacing reformulated gasoline (RFG) RVP requirement of 7 psi in summer with conventional gasoline (CG) RVP requirement of 9 psi in summer. To examine the response by all refineries in major refinery regions, this phase II of the HOF WTW analysis employed regionally aggregated refinery models for the following six regions: PADDs 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 excluding California (CA) and CA separately. Using aggregate refinery models, this phase II study examined the impacts of ethanol blending and HOF market shares on the refinery operations in these six regions. Also, this study included refinery expansion to produce a pre-determined HOF volume with 10% ethanol blending. In particular, this study examined several refinery expansion options using refinery configuration models to investigate a practical refinery response to the increase in E10 HOF market demand.

54 ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES↗

Maturation of biomass‐to‐biofuels conversion technology pathways for rapid expansion of biofuels production: a system dynamics perspective

Abstract The Biomass Scenario Model ( BSM ) is a system‐dynamics simulation model intended to explore the potential for rapid expansion of the biofuels industry. The model is not predictive — it uses scenario assumptions based on various types of data to simulate industry development, emphasizing how incentives and technological learning‐by‐doing might accelerate industry growth. The BSM simulates major sectors of the biofuels industry, including feedstock production and logistics, conversion, distribution, and end uses, as well as interactions among sectors. The model represents conversion of biomass to biofuels as a set of technology pathways, each of which has allowable feedstocks, capital and operating costs, allowable products, and other defined characteristics. This study and the BSM address bioenergy modeling analytic needs that were identified in recent literature reviews. Simulations indicate that investments are most effective at expanding biofuels production through learning‐by‐doing when they are coordinated with respect to timing, pathway, and target sector within the biofuels industry. Effectiveness metrics include timing and magnitude of increased production, incentive cost and cost effectiveness, and avoidance of windfall profits. Investment costs and optimal investment targets have inherent risks and uncertainties, such as the relative value of investment in more‐mature versus less mature pathways. These can be explored through scenarios, but cannot be precisely predicted. Dynamic competition, including competition for cellulosic feedstocks and ethanol market shares, intensifies during times of rapid growth. Ethanol production increases rapidly, even up to Renewable Fuel Standards‐targeted volumes of biofuel, in simulations that allow higher blending proportions of ethanol in gasoline‐fueled vehicles. Published 2014. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA. Biofuels, Bioproducts, Biorefining published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd on behalf of Society of Chemical Industry.

29 ENERGY PLANNING, POLICY, AND ECONOMY↗

Catalytic conversion of biomass-derived ethanol to liquid hydrocarbon blend-stock: Effect of light gas recirculation

Here, we describe a light gas recirculation (LGR) method to increase the liquid hydrocarbon yield with reduced aromatic content from catalytic conversion of ethanol to hydrocarbons. The previous liquid hydrocarbon yield is ~40% from one-pass ethanol conversion over V-ZSM-5 at 350 C and atmospheric pressure where the remaining ~60% yield is light gas hydrocarbons. In comparison, the liquid hydrocarbon yield increases to 80% when a simulated light gas hydrocarbon stream is co-fed at a rate of 0.053 mol g-1 h-1 with ethanol due to the conversion of most of the light olefins. The LGR also significantly improves the quality of the liquid hydrocarbon blend-stock by reducing aromatic content and overall benzene concentration. For 0.027 mol g-1 h-1 light gas mixture co-feeding, the average aromatic content in liquid hydrocarbons is 51.5% compared with 62.5% aromatic content in ethanol only experiment. Average benzene concentration decreases from 3.75% to 1.5% which is highly desirable since EPA limits benzene concentration in gasoline to 0.62%. As a result of low benzene concentration, the blend-wall for ethanol derived liquid hydrocarbons changes from ~18% to 43%. The remaining light paraffins and olefins can be further converted to valuable BTX products (94% BTX in the liquid) over Ga-ZSM-5 at 500 C. Thus, the LGR is an effective approach to convert ethanol to liquid hydrocarbons with higher liquid yield and low aromatic content, especially low benzene concentration, which could be blended with gasoline in a much higher ratio than ethanol or ethanol derived hydrocarbon blend-stock.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Higher Energy-Content Jet Blending Components Derived from Ethanol (CRADA 467)

This project aims to develop a new sustainable aviation fuel (SAF) that comprises favorable properties, such as high energy density, excellent thermal stability, and favorable cold fold properties. Through catalyst development, this work will provide a route to control the cycloalkane/n-alkane/iso alkane content of a next-generation fuel with minimal or no aromatic content. Combining n-alkane and iso-alkane streams (high specific energy, MJ/kg) with cycloalkanes (higher energy density, MJ/L), is expected to enable at least a 4% net increase in combined (specific (MJ/kg) and volumetric (MJ/L)) energy content without impacting ‘drop-in’ fuel requirements, such as seal swelling. PNNL and LanzaTech have already demonstrated a sustainable, non-petroleum, route to isoalkanes. However, economically attractive cycloalkane production from waste and biomass is challenged by large hydrogen requirements, preferential selectivity to aromatic compounds and low yields to jet fuel range components. Many gaps in understanding cycloalkane properties and performance in complex jet fuel mixtures remain. The close tie and integration of Purdue’s fuel property analysis, with PNNL’s process development, can lead to an economically attractive process. The fuel analysis and testing by Purdue will enable a robust understanding of the properties and behavior of the cycloalkanes produced to inform process development. Additionally, seal-swelling analysis will quantify the ability of fuel blends with zero or minimal aromatics content to satisfy the seal swell requirement of O rings. Lastly, Purdue’s system-level analysis will lead to the development of a roadmap for deployment in key regions that considers system pressures such as hydrogen, water, energy efficiency, and ease of infrastructure access.

10 SYNTHETIC FUELS↗

Summary of High-Octane Mid-Level Ethanol Blends Study

Original equipment manufacturers (OEMs) of light-duty vehicles are pursuing a broad portfolio of technologies to reduce CO 2 emissions and improve fuel economy. Central to this effort is higher efficiency spark ignition (SI) engines, including technologies reliant on higher compression ratios and fuels with improved anti-knock properties, such as gasoline with significantly increased octane numbers. Ethanol has an inherently high octane number and would be an ideal octane booster for lower-octane petroleum blendstocks. In fact, recently published data from Department of Energy (DOE) national laboratories (Splitter and Szybist, 2014a, 2014b; Szybist, 2010; Szybist and West, 2013) and OEMs (Anderson, 2013) and discussions with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) suggest the potential of a new high octane fuel (HOF) with 25–40 vol % of ethanol to assist in reaching Renewable Fuel Standard (RFS2) and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions goals. This mid-level ethanol content fuel, with a research octane number (RON) of about 100, appears to enable efficiency improvements in a suitably calibrated and designed engine/vehicle system that are sufficient to offset its lower energy density (Jung, 2013; Thomas, et al, 2015). This efficiency improvement would offset the tank mileage (range) loss typically seen for ethanol blends in conventional gasoline and flexible-fuel vehicles (FFVs). The prospects for such a fuel are additionally attractive because it can be used legally in over 18 million FFVs currently on the road. Thus the legacy FFV fleet can serve as a bridge by providing a market for the new fuel immediately, so that future vehicles will have improved efficiency as the new fuel becomes widespread. In this way, HOF can simultaneously help improve fuel economy while expanding the ethanol market in the United States via a growing market for an ethanol blend higher than E10. The DOE Bioenergy Technologies Office initiated a collaborative research program between Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL), the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL), and Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) to investigate HOF in late 2013. The program objective was to provide a quantitative picture of the barriers to adoption of HOF and the highly efficient vehicles it enables, and to quantify the potential environmental and economic benefits of the technology.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Analysis of Underground Storage Tanks System Materials to Increased Leak Potential Associated with E15 Fuel

The Energy Independence and Security Act (EISA) of 2007 was enacted by Congress to move the nation toward increased energy independence by increasing the production of renewable fuels to meet its transportation energy needs. The law establishes a new renewable fuel standard (RFS) that requires the nation to use 36 billion gallons annually (2.3 million barrels per day) of renewable fuel in its vehicles by 2022. Ethanol is the most widely used renewable fuel in the US, and its production has grown dramatically over the past decade. According to EISA and RFS, ethanol (produced from corn as well as cellulosic feedstocks) will make up the vast majority of the new renewable fuel requirements. However, ethanol use limited to E10 and E85 (in the case of flex fuel vehicles or FFVs) will not meet this target. Even if all of the E0 gasoline dispensers in the country were converted to E10, such sales would represent only about 15 billion gallons per year. If 15% ethanol, rather than 10% were used, the potential would be up to 22 billion gallons. The vast majority of ethanol used in the United States is blended with gasoline to create E10, that is, gasoline with up to 10% ethanol. The remaining ethanol is sold in the form of E85, a gasoline blend with as much as 85% ethanol that can only be used in FFVs. Although DOE remains committed to expanding the E85 infrastructure, that market will not be able to absorb projected volumes of ethanol in the near term. Given this reality, DOE and others have begun assessing the viability of using intermediate ethanol blends as one way to transition to higher volumes of ethanol. In October of 2010, the EPA granted a partial waiver to the Clean Air Act allowing the use of fuel that contains up to 15% ethanol for the model year 2007 and newer light-duty motor vehicles. This waiver represents the first of a number of actions that are needed to move toward the commercialization of E15 gasoline blends. On January 2011, this waiver was expanded to include model year 2001 light-duty vehicles, but specifically prohibited use in motorcycles and off-road vehicles and equipment. UST stakeholders generally consider fueling infrastructure materials designed for use with E0 to be adequate for use with E10, and there are no known instances of major leaks or failures directly attributable to ethanol use. It is conceivable that many compatibility issues, including accelerated corrosion, do arise and are corrected onsite and, therefore do not lead to a release. However, there is some concern that higher ethanol concentrations, such as E15 or E20, may be incompatible with current materials used in standard gasoline fueling hardware. In the summer of 2008, DOE recognized the need to assess the impact of intermediate blends of ethanol on the fueling infrastructure, specifically located at the fueling station. This includes the dispenser and hanging hardware, the underground storage tank, and associated piping. The DOE program has been co-led and funded by the Office of the Biomass Program and Vehicle Technologies Program with technical expertise from the Oak Ridge National Laboratory (ORNL) and the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL). The infrastructure material compatibility work has been supported through strong collaborations and testing at Underwriters Laboratories (UL). ORNL performed a compatibility study investigating the compatibility of fuel infrastructure materials to gasoline containing intermediate levels of ethanol. These results can be found in the ORNL report entitled Intermediate Ethanol Blends Infrastructure Materials Compatibility Study: Elastomers, Metals and Sealants (hereafter referred to as the ORNL intermediate blends material compatibility study). These materials included elastomers, plastics, metals and sealants typically found in fuel dispenser infrastructure. The test fuels evaluated in the ORNL study were SAE standard test fuel formulations used to assess material-fuel compatibility within a relatively short timeframe. Initially, these material studies included test fuels of Fuel C, CE10a, CE17a, and CE25a. The CE17a test fuel was selected to represent E15 since surveys have shown that the actual ethanol upper limit can be as high as 17%. Later, CE50a and CE85a test fuels were added to the investigation and these results are being compiled for a follow-on report to be published in 2012. Fuel C was used as the baseline reference and is a 50:50 blend of isooctane and toluene. This particular composition was used to represent premium-grade gasoline and was also used as the base fuel for the ethanol blends, where it is denoted by 'C' in the fuel name. The level of ethanol is represented by the number following the letter E. Therefore a 10% blend of ethanol in Fuel C is written as CE10a, where 'a' represents an aggressive formulation of the ethanol that contains water, NaCl, acetic and sulfuric acids per the SAE J1681 protocol.

02 PETROLEUM↗

Effects of dual-alcohol gasoline blends on physiochemical properties and volatility behavior

Biofuels can contribute to reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector. Ethanol is the main additive for gasoline in the United States, and gasoline containing 10 vol% ethanol is the most commonly used transportation fuel. However, the vapor pressure of these blends is significantly higher than gasoline, which contributes to evaporative emissions. One way to circumvent this and other issues is to use a dual-alcohol approach, mixing lower (methanol or ethanol) and higher alcohols with gasoline to obtain a blend with a vapor pressure close to that of the base gasoline. The goal of this study was to evaluate the fuel potential of dual alcohol blends experimentally and theoretically. Ten dual-alcohol blends were tested at blending ratios from 10 to 80 vol%, with methanol and ethanol used as the lower alcohols and iso-butanol and 3-methyl-3-pentanol as the higher alcohols. The corresponding single alcohol-gasoline blends were also evaluated. For each blend, Reid vapor pressure, vapor lock protection potential, distillation curve, lower heating value, kinematic viscosity, and water tolerance at three temperatures were measured. A model of droplet evaporation was also applied to provide insights into the azeotropic volatility behavior and mixing/sooting potential of the blends. The results of this study show that it is advantageous to use dual-alcohol blends containing up to 40 vol% because they have the characteristics necessary for good performance in existing spark-ignition engines, particularly in terms of volatility, kinematic viscosity, and water tolerance. This study is the first to characterize matched vapor pressure, dual-alcohol blends over a wide blending range as drop-in fuels for conventional spark ignition engines. Furthermore, this was the first investigation of the fuel potential of iso-butanol in dual-alcohol blends and of 3-methyl-3-pentanol in single- and dual-alcohol blends.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Geography of Existing and Potential Alternative Fuel Markets in the United States

When deploying alternative fuels, it is paramount to match the right fuel with the right location, in accordance with local market conditions. We used six market indicators to evaluate the existing and potential regional market health for each of the five most commonly deployed alternative fuels: electricity (used by plug-in electric vehicles), biodiesel (blends of B20 and higher), E85 ethanol, compressed natural gas (CNG), and propane. Each market indicator was mapped, combined, and evaluated by industry experts. This process revealed the weight the market indicators should be given, with the proximity of fueling stations being the most important indicator, followed by alternative fuel vehicle density, gasoline prices, state incentives, nearby resources, and finally, environmental benefit. Though markets vary among states, no state received 'weak' potential for all five fuels, indicating that all states have an opportunity to use at least one alternative fuel. California, Illinois, Indiana, Pennsylvania, and Washington appear to have the best potential markets for alternative fuels in general, with each sporting strong markets for four of the fuels. Wyoming showed the least potential, with weak markets for all alternative fuels except for CNG, for which it has a patchy market. Of all the fuels, CNG is promising in the greatest number of states--largely because freight traffic provides potential demand for many far-reaching corridor markets and because the sources of CNG are so widespread geographically.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Global Ethanol-Blended-Fuel Vehicle Compatibility Study

The objective of this study is to understand the impact of ethanol-blended fuel at various blending levels (10%, 15%, and 20% vol.) on "in-operation" vehicles built to differing emissions and manufacturing standards around the world. The study focuses on vehicles used in Canada, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, and Mexico. Historical experience in the United States and Brazil informs the analysis. The primary study question is: Are vehicles in targeted countries physically and operationally compatible with ethanol blended fuel? For a fuel to be compatible with a vehicle, the fuel must perform its function as part of the integrated fuel-vehicle system, meaning: the car should start easily and drive normally, the fuel should not cause catastrophic fuel system leaks, the fuel should not cause corrosion or degradation of any engine or fuel system components (including emissions control components). The history of E10 use in the United States, beginning in 1978, was evaluated and shows no reliability or operability issues for cars dating back to pre-emissions-control times -- and likely included many cars manufactured in the 1960s. This strongly supports the contention that fuel chemistry and property differences between E0 and E10 are so small that any car made to international standards in the last 50 years will have a very high probability of being fully compatible with E10. This conclusion is supported by the experience in Brazil in the 1970s, where E10 was also introduced, and ethanol blending for conventional cars rapidly ramped up to even higher blend levels. A limited number of fuel system and component manufacturers supply the global market, including Bosch, Continental, Denso, Delphi, and Visteon. To reduce complexity, ethanol-compatible materials began to be integrated in fuel system designs globally. Fuel systems evolved over the following decades to incorporate ethanol-compatible materials with core subsystem families, such as in-tank fuel pumps used across several global vehicle original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). A similarly compelling case can be made that all cars at the Tier 1 (or equivalent) emissions-control technology level or higher are fully compatible with E15 blends, based on the data evaluated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Ricardo in 2010. For cars at this technology level, the minor differences in fuel chemistry and properties between E10 and E15 are not significant. For E20, studies are not as extensive but are still highly significant. A long-term durability study conducted on mileage accumulation dynamometers presents convincing evidence that Tier 2 technology level cars have materials of construction and engine control authority for compatibility with E20, although this conclusion is not as strong as those drawn for E10 and E15, which are also partly based on real-world experience.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Synthetic Biology and Metabolic Engineering Employing Escherichia coli for C2–C6 Bioalcohol Production

Biofuel production from renewable and sustainable resources is playing an increasingly important role within the fuel industry. Among biofuels, bioethanol has been most widely used as an additive for gasoline. Higher alcohols can be blended at a higher volume compared to ethanol and generate lower greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions without a need to change current fuel infrastructures. Thus, these fuels have the potential to replace fossil fuels in support of more environmentally friendly processes. This review summarizes the efforts to enhance bioalcohol production in engineered Escherichia coli over the last 5 years and analyzes the current challenges for increasing productivities for industrial applications.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗

Experimental study of flash boiling spray with isooctane, hexane, ethanol and their binary mixtures

The main goal of this study is to understand the effect of fuel properties on flash boiling sprays using multi-hole injectors. Macroscopic characteristics were investigated using Diffused Backlight Imaging (DBI) and quantified with liquid penetration length and spray angles. Phase Doppler Anemometry (PDA) was applied to measure the droplet size and velocity. Behaviors of spray with three single-component fuels (isooctane, hexane, ethanol) under different ambient pressures (100 kPa, 80 kPa, 50 kPa, 22 kPa) as well as their binary mixtures under different blend ratios (10%, 30%, 85%) were reported and analyzed. The results showed that adding ethanol or hexane to isooctane could both promote flash boiling by increasing the overall vapor pressure thus superheated degree. Under mixing ratios of 10% and 30%, sprays with ethanol blends showed more severe flash boiling comparing with sprays with hexane blends. Shorter liquid penetration and better liquid dispersion have been observed. Comparing with isooctane spray, the droplet size continuously decreased with increasing hexane content due to enhanced breakup and faster vaporization. Sprays with ethanol mixtures showed a different trend. Noticeable droplet size reduction has been observed for spray with 10% ethanol content. However, droplet size did not further decrease with higher blend ratios regardless of higher flash boiling intensity. Such observations indicate severe vaporization inhibition caused by the high latent heat of vaporization of ethanol. For sprays with all test fuels, collapsing occurred when the pressure ratio of ambient pressure to saturation pressure (Rp) dropped below 0.3.

03 NATURAL GAS↗

Technoeconomic and Life-Cycle Analysis of Single-Step Catalytic Conversion of Wet Ethanol into Fungible Fuel Blendstocks

Technoeconomic and life-cycle analyses are presented for catalytic conversion of ethanol to fungible hydrocarbon fuel blendstocks, informed by advances in catalyst and process development. Whereas prior work toward this end focused on 3-step processes featuring dehydration, oligomerization, and hydrogenation, the consolidated alcohol dehydration and oligomerization (CADO) approach described here results in 1-step conversion of wet ethanol vapor (40 wt% in water) to hydrocarbons and water over a metal-modified zeolite catalyst. A development project increased liquid hydrocarbon yields from 36% of theoretical to >80%, reduced catalyst cost by an order of magnitude, scaled up the process by 300-fold, and reduced projected costs of ethanol conversion 12-fold. Current CADO products conform most closely to gasoline blendstocks, but can be blended with jet fuel at low levels today, and could potentially be blended at higher levels in the future. Operating plus annualized capital costs for conversion of wet ethanol to fungible blendstocks are estimated at $2.00/GJ for CADO today and $1.44/GJ in the future, similar to the unit energy cost of producing anhydrous ethanol from wet ethanol ($1.46/GJ). Including the cost of ethanol from either corn or future cellulosic biomass but not production incentives, projected minimum selling prices for fungible blendstocks produced via CADO are competitive with conventional jet fuel when oil is $100 per barrel but not at $60 per barrel. However, with existing production incentives, the projected minimum blendstock selling price is competitive with oil at $60 per barrel. Life-cycle greenhouse gas emission reductions for CADO-derived hydrocarbon blendstocks closely follow those for the ethanol feedstock.

09 BIOMASS FUELS↗