See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/263874565

Review of fuels for internal combustion engines in the aspect of economy,

performance, environment and sustainability

Article · January 2009

CITATIONS READS

0 9,950

3 authors, including:

Dr Mohd Faizal Fauzan

Taylor's University
32 PUBLICATIONS   238 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

First Year Experience View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Dr Mohd Faizal Fauzan on 14 July 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Review of fuels for internal combustion engines in the aspect of economy,
performance, environment and sustainability
M. Faizala,b, M. H. Hamzahb, A. Navaretsnasinggamb
a
ADP, Taylor's University Lakeside Campus, 47500 Selangor, Malaysia
b
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Malaya, 50603 Kuala Lumpur,
Malaysia

Abstract

The use of fuels for internal combustion engines had been started during the
middle of the 1800s. The usage of fossil fuels had been developed since that time.
Improvements and developments for hydrocarbon products began as early as 1860s.
However, fossil fuels are depleting fast and will soon run out of source. This motivates
the development of alternative fuels. This paper will review various types of fuels
including fossil fuels like gasoline and diesel and also alternative fuels like LPG, CNG,
Hydrogen, Alcohol, Bio-diesel and P-series fuels. Advantages and disadvantages of each
type of fuels in terms of economics, performances, and environments were discussed.

1.0 Introduction

The world is presently confronted with the twin crisis of fossil fuel depletion and
environment degradation. Indiscriminate extraction and lavish consumption of fossil fuels
have led to reduction in underground based carbon resources. The search for alternative
fuels which promise a harmonious correlation with sustainable development, energy
conservation, efficiency and environment preservation has become highly important.

Developed and developing countries which lack of crude oil reserve countries
spend huge amount of money to purchase crude petroleum oil to quench the need of
energy in their respective country .This huge amount of money spend to import crude oil
has created expenditure liabilities over their income . For example, India is only
producing 30% of the total petroleum fuel required. The remaining 70% is being
imported, which cost Rs 80,000 crore every. It is an astonishing fact that mixing of 5%
bio-diesel fuel to the present diesel fuel is made available in India, around Rs.4000 crore
could be save every year. This huge savings has lead India to launch a bio-fuel project in
200 districts and 18 states by planting 2 plant species for bio fuel production. [Murugesan
et al, 2007]

Environmental concerns have increased significantly in the world over past

decade, particularly after the Earth Summit ’92. Excessive use of fossil fuels has led to
global environment degradation effects such as greenhouse gas (GHG) effects, acid rain,
ozone depletion and climate change. Countries around the world were united to reduce
the GHG emissions. This has lead to the establishment of Kyoto conference on global
climate change and the reduction of GHG. Use of various fuels such as petroleum
products and coal lead to several environment problems such as reduction in underground
–based carbon energy sources, serious modifications in earth surface layer, subsidence of
ground surface after extraction if fuels and minerals. The usage of fossil fuel has lead to
increase in CO2 levels in atmosphere from 280PPM in pre-industrial era to 350 PPM.
The CO2 level are still climbing as a function of fuel burn leading to green house effect,
acid rains, smog and change in world climate.[Agarwal, 2007]. Transportation and
agricultural sector is one of the major consumers of fossil fuels and biggest contributor to
environmental pollution, which can be reduced by replacing mineral –based fuels by bio-
origin renewable fuels. [Murugesan et al, 2007]

The shortcoming and drawback of conventional fuels, has lead to the development
of alternative fuels. For petroleum, it was estimated that the proven amount of reserves
has leveled off at 2.2 trillion barrels. Over the last 150 years we have already used up
more than one-third of that amount, or more than 800 billion barrels which leaves only a
remaining about 1.4 trillion barrels. If compared with the present consumption (about 90
million barrels per day in 2006 in the world), it means that petroleum is available only for
the about next 40 years. Coal is available for the next 250 years and natural gas for the
next 50 years, respectively (Afgan Naim H, Darwish Al Gobaisi, Carvalho Maria G,
Maurizio Cumo, 1998)

1.1 Challenge in the Usage of Alternative fuels

Currently, there are many kinds of alternative fuel being develop to reduce the
dependency on conventional fuels, however; the usage of alternative fuel for mass market
is still facing some challenging issues like:

-Extent of modification that is required in the existing hardware especially engine

blocks which the usage of alternative fuels need extensive modifications which involve
costly modifications. This will become a drawback to implement the usage of the
particular alternative fuel.

-Investment cost for developing the infrastructure for processing these alternative fuels.
Excessive cost for infrastructure may cost the fuel sold to the mass market to be
expensive compared to conventional fuels.

- Environmental compatibility compared to conventional fuels in long run. This happens

when the new fuel is more polluting and creates more harm to the environment in long
run, then it will be unacceptable to use as a fuel.
 -Additional cost to the user in terms of routine maintenance, equipment wear and
lubricating oil life. Excessive additional cost will have an adverse effect on the
widespread acceptance of the particular fuel. [Agarwal, 2007].

2.0 Gasoline fuels

Overview of gasoline fuels

Fossil fuels are fuels that are made from fossils. The three most important fossil
fuels are coal, oil, and natural gas. They contain hydrocarbons, or things that have only
hydrogen and carbon in their chemical compositions. Gasoline (US) or petrol (UK) is a
petroleum-derived liquid mixture which is primarily used as a fuel in internal combustion
engines. It consists mostly of hydrocarbons obtained by the fractional distillation of
petroleum, enhanced with iso-octane or the aromatic hydrocarbons toluene and benzene
to increase its octane rating. Small quantities of various additives are common, for
purposes such as tuning engine performance or reducing harmful exhaust emissions.
Most current or former Commonwealth countries use the term petrol, abbreviated from
petroleum. In North America, the word gasoline is the common term. It is not a genuinely
gaseous fuel (unlike, for example, liquefied petroleum gas, which is stored under pressure
as a liquid, but returned to a gaseous state before combustion).

Gasoline is made up almost entirely of carbon and hydrogen with some traces
other species. It varies from 83% to 87% of carbon and 11% to 14% of hydrogen by
weight. This factor allows the fuel to burn freely and creates extensive heat energy. The
carbon and hydrogen can combine in many ways to form many different molecular
compounds. There are two types of gasoline –leaded and unleaded. Leaded gasoline has
higher octane rating than unleaded gasoline and is more effective. However, the leaded
gasoline has been discontinued because engines that use it emit a great amount of harmful
hydrocarbons that pollute the environment. Engines that use unleaded gasoline emit
fewer combustion chamber deposits and provide longer life for spark plugs, exhaust
systems and carburetors; however, unleaded gasoline emits about the amount of carbon
monoxide and nitrogen oxide as leaded gasoline.

If the temperature of an air fuel mixture is raised high enough in the combustion
chamber of on internal combustion engine (ICE), the mixture will self ignite without the
need of a spark plug or other external igniter. The temperature which this occurs is called
self –ignition temperature. This is the basic of ignition in compression ignition engines.
On the other hand, self ignition (pre-ignition or auto –ignition) is not desirable in spark
ignition (SI) engines. When self ignition occurs in SI engines, higher than the desirable
pressure pulses are generated. These high pressure pulses can cause damage to the engine.
This phenomenon is called knock or ping.

The fuel property which describes how well a fuel will or will not ignite is called
octane number. The two standard reference fuels are used are isooctane which gives
octane number of 100 and n-heptane which gives octane number 0.The higher the octane
number of a fuel, the less likely it will self ignite. Engine with low compressions ratios
can use fuels with lower octane numbers but high compression engines must use high
octane fuel to avoid self ignition and knock. Two most common methods of rating
gasoline and other automobile SI engines fuels are Motor Octane Number(MON) and
Research Octane Number (RON).Mean while anti knocking index (AKI) is often referred
as octane number of the fuel. AKI is actually the average of MON and RON.

Table : The gasoline and other fuel properties

2.1 Economy aspects of gasoline

The increasing industrialization and motorization of the world has led to the steep
rise for the demand of petroleum –based fuels. The petroleum based fuels are fossils fuels
obtained from limited reserves. Therefore, those countries without these resources are
facing energy / foreign exchange crisis mainly due to the import of crude petroleum. The
world reserves for primary energy or fossil fuels are obviously limited. According to an
estimate, the world crude oil reserve will last only 41 years under the current business as
usual scenario. The enormous growth of world population, increased technical
development and stand of living in the industrial nations has led to this critical situation
in the field of energy supply and demand.

The prices of crude oil are keep rising and fluctuating on a daily basis. The crude
oil prices are at near record levels and are stabilizing at about US $65 per barrel. The
variations in the energy prices over the last decade are shown in figure1.
 Figure 1: Crude oil prices fluctuations from 1980 to 2005.

For example, developing countries like India, only produces 30% of the total
petroleum fuels required. The remaining 70% is being imported which cost whopping Rs
80,000 crore every year. This not only causes deficit in India yearly budget also effects
the development of infrastructure due to lack of allocations.

This kind of scenarios has led to the necessity to replace the depicting fossil fuels
with alternative fuels. Alternative fuels are derived from resources other than petroleum.
The alternative fuels are more economically beneficial compared to oil and they are
renewable. The most common fuels that are used as alternative fuels are natural gas,
propane, ethanol, methanol and hydrogen.

2.2 Performance aspects of gasoline

Power and torque mainly depend on an engine’s in-cylinder mixture mass.

Therefore volumetric efficiency plays one of the most important roles among the other
engine parameters. Figure 2 shows the engine volumetric efficiency and brake power for
different fuels. Near the engine speed of 4500 rpm, volumetric efficiency reaches to its
maximum peak and then decreases because of high pressure loss and choking in high
engine speeds. As liquid fuels have latent heat of vaporization, they produce a cooling
effect on intake charge during vaporization. Therefore, there will be an increase in intake
mixture density and consequently in volumetric efficiency, but gaseous fuels which are
vapour in ambient temperature ,not only have no cooling effect, but also cause decease in
volumetric efficiency , due to larger volume of fuel in the inlet mixture.
 Figure 2: Variation of volumetric efficiency and brake power(hp) for different
engine speed(rpm)

Stoichiometric A/F ratio is another important parameter that affects volumetric

efficiency. When stoichiometric A/F ratio is low that means there is more injected fuel in
inlet air and results in decreasing volumetric efficiency. Gasoline has the highest
volumetric efficiency because of high stoichiometric A/F ratio and high heat of
vaporization. Table 1 shows the latent heat of vaporization of methanol is higher than
other fuels but volumetric efficiency of methanol fueled engine is less than gasoline. The
reason is that methanol has the smallest stoichiometric A/F ratio.

The engine operating on methane, methanol, hydrogen, propane and ethanol will
experience an average reduction in volumetric efficiency comparing to gasoline
respectively. The engine maximum power for all fuels happens between 4500 to
5000rpm.The power produced by methane, methanol, hydrogen, propane and ethanol is
less of gasoline by 20%, 13 %, 19%, 10% and 10% respectively. This is because the
engine is designed in operating on gasoline; more power is obtained when gasoline is
applied. All other fuels have a higher octane number than gasoline, so engine
compression ratio could be higher if engine was dedicated to those fuels, and therefore
engine performance could be improved.
 Figure 3: Variation of brake mean effective pressure (bmep) for various kind of
engine speed (rpm) for different kinds of fuels

The figure 3 presents a comparison between brake mean effective pressures

(BMEP) of different fuels. For naturally aspirated SI engines, maximum values of BMEP
are in the range of 850-1050KPa at the engine speed where maximum torque is obtained.
At the speed where maximum power occurred, BMEP values are 10-15% lower. The
variation of BMEP and brake power is primary due to variation in volumetric efficiency.
It can be seen that the shape and trend of BMEP curve follows the volumetric efficiency
curve.
 Figure 4: Variation of brake specific fuel consumption versus engine speed for various
fuels

Brake specific fuel consumption (BSFC) for different fuels are shown in figure 4.
BSFC is a function of heating value of fuel, spark timing, A/F ratio, engine load and
speed. As the engine speed rises, the BSFC rises as well. This is due to more working
cycles in as specific period of time at high speed engines. In figure XX. The BSFC of
Methanol and ethanol fuel is more than gasoline by 91% and 49% respectively. The
reason is that heating value and stoichiometric air/fuel ratio are the smallest for these two
fuels which means for specific air/fuel equivalence ration, more fuel is needed.The BSFC
of methane is 8% lower than gasoline, this is because the methane heating value is higher
than gasoline. Therefore, a specified amount of heat can be released with less amount of
fuel. The BSFC of hydrogen is the lowest as due to highest heating value and
stoichiometric air/fuel ratio.

2.3 Environment aspects of gasoline

The Co concentration in exhaust gases mostly depends on air/fuel ratio. A rich

mixture causes more CO in exhaust gases. The more the operating condition is close to
the stoichiometric point, the less amount of CO is produced. Carbon to hydrogen ratio of
fuel (C/H ratio) is another parameter which affects the formation of CO. Figure 5 shows
the variation of CO concentration for various fuels at different engine speeds. From that
figure it can be clearly seen that highest level of CO is produced when then engine is
burning gasoline. This is due to smaller H/C ratio for gasoline fuels.

Figure 5: Variation of CO concentration (ppm) for various fuels at different engine

speeds.
3.0 Diesel fuel

Diesel fuel, which is widely used in compression ignition engines, operates in

diesel cycle. Due to the high density and weight of the fuels, diesel is commonly used in
large trucks and some automobiles. Like gasoline, diesel is depleting very fast and soon
will run out of source. In India the ratio of diesel to gasoline fuel is 1:7, depicting a
highly skewed situation. Thus, it is necessary to replace fossil diesel fuel by alternative
fuels. (Murugesan, 2007). From crude oil refining and partial distillation, it is estimated
that 47% is gasoline and 23% is diesel.

3.1 Economy aspects of diesel fuels

Priced at RM 1.70 per litre (PETRONAS, 2010), diesel is generally simpler to

refine from petroleum than gasoline. In cold countries, the price of diesel traditionally
rises during colder months as demand for heating oil rises, which is refined in much the
same way. Because of recent changes in fuel quality regulations, additional refining is
required to remove sulphur which contributes to a sometimes higher cost. In mid 2006
the allowable amount of sulfur in diesel fuel in the United States is being lowered from
500 ppm to 15 ppm causing the raise of cost of fuel by about ten cents per gallon. (vol.
109, no. 2, p.240, SAE International, 2001)

3.2 Performance aspects of diesel fuels

Due to the high compression ratio of diesel engine, typically between 12 and 24,
thermal efficiency of diesel engines range from about 35 to 40 percent. (Cengal, Boles,
2007). To increase the efficiency of diesel engines, some development has been made.
Previous work has indicated that the heat lost to in-cylinder heat transfer is approximately
7% lower in the free-piston engine compared to the conventional engine, giving an
indicated fuel efficiency advantage for the free-piston engine of approximately one
percentage point. (R. Mikalsen, A.P. Roskilly, 2008) The density of petroleum diesel is
about 0.85 kg/l (7.09 lb/US gal), about 18% more than petrol (gasoline), which has a
density of about 0.72 kg/l (6.01 lb/US gal). When burnt, diesel typically releases about
38.6 MJ/l (138,700 BTU/US gal), whereas gasoline releases 34.9 MJ/l (125,000 BTU/US
gal), 10% less by energy density, but 45.41 MJ/kg and 48.47 MJ/kg, 6.7% more by
specific energy. (Oak Ridge National Laboratory, 2009)

3.3 Environment aspects of diesel fuels

One environmental problem that occurs with the combustion of diesel fuel is the sulfur
contained in the fuel. The sulfur ends up in the exhaust products where it combines with
water vapor to form acid. Because of this, the allowable amount of sulfur in diesel fuel is
continuously being lowered by emission law standards. In mid 2006 the allowable
amount of sulfur in diesel fuel in the United States is being lowered from 500 ppm to 15
ppm. (vol. 109, no. 2, p.240, SAE International, 2001) European emission standards and
preferential taxation have forced oil refineries to dramatically reduce the level of sulfur in
diesel fuels. U.S. diesel fuel typically also has a lower cetane number (a measure of
ignition quality) than European diesel, resulting in worse cold weather performance and
some increase in emissions. The main exhaust gas emissions from diesel engines are
nitrogen oxides and particulates, of which nitrogen oxides, NOx, are usually the most
critical in large scale engines. (R. Mikalsen, A.P. Roskilly, 2008) The result of recent
development work on diesel engine is Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition
(HCCI). This results in an almost homogeneous air-fuel mixture filling the combustion
chamber before combustion.(Pulkrabek,1988) Homogeneous charge compression ignition
(HCCI) combustion integrates features of both spark ignition (SI) and compression
ignition (CI) engines, obtaining promisingly the high efficiency of a diesel engine with
virtually almost no NOx and soot emissions. (Kimura S, 1999)

4.0 Alcohol fuel

Overview of alcohol fuel

Alcohol is an alternative fuel because it can be obtained from number of resources

both natural and manufactured. Ethanol (ethyl alcohol) and methanol (methyl alcohol) are
two kinds of alcohol that have been widely developed as an alternative fuel for internal
combustion engines.(Pulkrabek, 2004).Indeed, Hendry Ford designed the model T
engine with the expectations that ethanol will be used as a fuel. However, gasoline
emerged as a dominant transportation fuel in early 20 th century due to ease of operations
of gasoline engines with the with the materials then available for engine construction and
growing supply of cheaper petroleum from oil field discoveries.(AK Agarwal, 2006)

Generally, alcohol the chemical formula for alcohol fuel is CnH2n+1OH. The larger n
is, the higher the energy density. The first four aliphatic alcohols (methanol, ethanol,
propanol, and butanol) are of interest as fuels because they can be synthesized
biologically, and they have characteristics which allow them to be used in current
engines. Alcohols have a high octane rating, with ethanol at 109 RON, 90 MON, (which
equates to 99.5 AKI) and methanol at 109 RON, 89 MON (which equates to 99 AKI).
Ordinary European petrol is typically 95 RON, 85 MON, equal to 90 AKI. (S.Szwaja et
all, 2009).

Ethanol is already being used extensively as a fuel additive. Further more, the use of
ethanol fuel alone or as part of a mix with gasoline is increasing. Compared to methanol,
ethanol fuel’s primary advantage is that the fuel is non-toxic, although the fuel will
produce some amount of toxic exhaust emissions. Currently, ethanol fuel is used as the
main automotive fuel in Brazil, and as a gasoline additive for octane number
enhancement and improved combustion in USA, Canada and India. In addition, Brazil
has the most developed technology for alcohol fuel internal combustion engines. .(AK
Agarwal, 2006)

Figure 7: World ethanol fuel production .(AK Agarwal, 2006)

4.1 Economy aspects of alcohol fuels

Alcohol fuels (methanol and ethanol) have similar physical properties and emission
characteristics as petroleum fuels. Table 1 shows the properties and comparisons between
alcohol fuels, gasoline and diesel fuel. (AK Agarwal, 2006)

One of disadvantage of alcohol fuel is its lower heating value(LHV) is much lower
compared to gasoline and diesel fuel. Since the LHV value of gasoline and diesel are
almost twice the LHV of alcohol fuels, this indicates almost twice as much alcohol as
gasoline must be burned to give the same energy input to the engine. Besides that, with
equal thermal efficiency and similar engine output usage , twice amount of fuel need to
be purchased and the distance travelled with a given fuel tank volume would be cut half.
(Pulkrabek, 2004).

However, even with lower LHV of alcohol fuels, the engine power for a given
displacement would be about the same compared to gasoline or diesel engines. This is
because of the lower air –fuel ratio ration needed by alcohol fuels. Alcohol contains
oxygen and thus requires less air for stoichiometric combustion. More fuels can be
burned with the same amount of air. (Pulkrabek, 2004).Besides that, alcohol fuels have
high AKI numbers, therefore internal combustion engines can run more efficiently by
using higher compression ratios. When alcohol fuels are burned, it forms more moles of
exhaust, this gives higher pressure and more power in the expansion stoke.

Alcohol fuel production is cheaper, simple and eco-friendly. Therefore, alcohol fuels
are much cheaper than gasoline fuels. Moreover, alcohol fuels can be produced locally,
cutting down on fuel additional cost due to transportation cost. Alcohols can be used
directly in an engine o it can be blended with gasoline or diesel fuels. Today, alcohols are
successfully used as IC engine fuels directly or by biodiesel.

Table1: Comparison of various properties of primary alcohol with gasoline and

diesel. (AK Agarwal, 2006)

4.2 Performance aspects of alcohol fuels

There is no significant power reduction in the engine operation on the ethanol –diesel
blends (up to 20 %) at a 5% level of significance. Brake –specific fuel consumption
increased by up to 9% (with ethanol up to 20%) in the blends as compared to mineral
diesel. The exhaust gas temperature and lubricating oil temperatures were lower with the
operations on ethanol-diesel blends compared to operation on mineral diesel.(Ajay et al ,
2006).

Ethanol –diesel blends up to 20% can be very well used in present day constant speed
compression ignition (CI) engines without any modifications.
Figure 2: Brake specific fuel consumption (bsfc) for different alcohol –diesel
(diesohol) compared with diesel fuel.

Figure 2 above shows the comparison between brake specific fuel consumption (bsfc)
for different alcohol-diesel blends (diesohol) and diesel fuel. The bsfc is slightly
increased when higher blends of ethanol were used This is due to the lower value of the
fuel LHV as the percentage of ethanol is increased from 5% to 20%.However, there is no
any significant difference in the power produced and the thermal efficiciency of the
engine as shown in figure 3. Moreover, the lubricant oil temperature for higher
percentage of ethanol –diesel blend is much lower than the lubricant oil temperature for
mineral diesels. The relation ship between lubricant oil temperature and the alcohol –
diesel blend temperatures are shown in figure 4. (AK Agarwal, 2006)
Figure 3: Brake thermal efficiency (%) for different alcohol –diesel (diesohol)
compared with diesel fuel.

Figure 4: Lubricating Oil Temperature (degree Celsius) for different alcohol –diesel
blends (diesohol) compared with diesel fuel.

4.3 Environment aspects of alcohol fuels

The exhaust gas temperature were found to be lower for ethanol-diesel blends compared
to mineral diesels as indicated in figure 5.Therefore, this shows that the usage of alcohol-
diesel blends reduces the heat pollution to the environment. Moreover, the usage of 20%
alcohol-diesel blends for internal combustion engines has given up to 62% reduction in
CO emission compared to the usage of diesel alone. The NOx emission were also
reduced up to 24% when the 20% ethanol-diesel were used compared to the usage of
diesel alone. (AK Agarwal, 2006)
Figure 5: Exhaust temperature (degree Celsius) for different ethanol-diesel blends
compared to the usage of diesel fuel alone.

5.0 Propane fuel

Overview of propane fuel

The chemical formula for propane fuel is C3H8.Propane is widely known as Liquefied
petroleum gas (LPG) or auto gas in Europe. Propane is a gas at normal temperatures and
pressures. It is stored onboard a vehicle in a tank pressurized to around 300 pounds per
square inch—about twice the pressure as in an inflated truck tire. Under this pressure,
propane becomes a liquid with an energy density 270 times greater than the gaseous
form. A gallon of propane has about 25% less energy than a gallon of gasoline. In liquid
form propane turns into a colorless & odorless liquid. As pressure is released, the liquid
propane vaporizes and turns into gas that is used for combustion. An odorant, ethyl
mercaptan, is added for leak detection. In liquid state, propane are fast to refill & the
tank to store liquid propane is affordable but the mileage of propane is less compared to
gasoline.(Johnson, 2003)

After gasoline and diesel fuel, propane is the third most used vehicle fuel in United
States. Propane is a single component fuel that allows for high optimization of engine and
catalytic systems. Propane is stored at normal temperatures as a liquid under pressure and
is delivered through a high pressure line to the engine when the propane is vaporized.
Propone is produced as a by product in natural gas production and petroleum refinery
processing. This limits its availability as it is very unlikely these processes would be
increased just to produce propane. (Pulkrabek, 2004).
5.1 Performance aspects of propane fuels

Table 2 shows the properties and comparisons between propane, alcohol fuels and
gasoline (Bayraktar, 2005).

Table2: Comparison of various properties of propane, alcohol fuels with gasoline.

(Bayraktar, 2005)

LPG and other gaseous fuels have common properties that provide them some
advantages and disadvantages relative to gasoline. Propane has lower density and
stoichiometric fuel –air ratio than gasoline, thus it could reduce the specific fuel
consumption (sfc).For a propane fueled SI engine operates the same equivalence ratio as
a similar gasoline fueled engine, higher effective power could be expected due to higher
lower heating value(LHV) .However, this advantage may be balanced by decreasing
volumetric efficiency. On the other hand, propane can be used at higher compression
ratios due to higher octane number as a consequence of this property, engine
performance, power and thermal efficiency would be improved.(Ozcan, 2005)

The above mentioned properties make propane an attractive alternative fuel for spark
ignition engines. However, the most important drawback of this fuel is that propane
reduces the engine volumetric efficiency and consequently the fresh charge mass, which
is mainly due to its rising inlet temperature and its entering the intake system in the
gaseous state. (Bayraktar, 2005).

In the case LPG is used in SI engines, the burning rate of the propane is faster than
the burning rate of gasoline. On other words, propane burns more rapidly and thus the
burning process in the engine occurs in shorter times than gasoline engine. Thus, the
combustion duration of propane is decreased. Figure 6 shows the comparison between
burned mass fraction for gasoline and propane. As a consequence of rapid combustion of
propane, the cylinder pressures and temperatures predicted for LPG are higher than those
obtained for gasoline. The increase in the cylinder pressure is about 1-20%.
Figure 6: Comparison between burned mass fraction for gasoline and propane

Figure 7a and 7b shows the comparison between maximum cylinder pressure for
various engine speed and equivalence ratio. Mean while, the maximum burned gas
temperature for gasoline and propane are compared in figure 8a and 8b. The increment
in cylinder temperatures is about 1.5-1.6% for various rpms and 8-39% for various
equivalence ratios. When, the maximum temperature and pressure of LPG combustion
are higher than gasoline and this may cause damage on engine structural elements.
(Bayraktar, 2005)

Figure 7a: Comparison of maximum cylinder pressure for gasoline and propane
combustion at various engine speeds.
Figure 7b: Comparison of maximum cylinder pressure for gasoline and propane
combustion at various equivalence ratios.

Figure 8a: Comparison of maximum burned gas temperature for gasoline and
propane combustion at various engine speeds
Figure 8b: Comparison of maximum burned gas temperature for gasoline and
propane combustion at various equivalence ratios.

The influences of LPG on the engine performance are shown in figure 9a & 9b for
different engine speeds and various equivalence ratios. Both the figures show that the
effective power of the gasoline fuelled engine is higher than propane fueled engine.
Decrements of about 3-4% in the engine power output ware determined for various
engine speeds. The negative effects of LPG on engine power can be seen more evidently
from figure 12.In this case; decrements are about 2.44%-4% in engine power. This
resulted from the reductions in volumetric efficiency of the propane fuelled engine.
(Bayraktar, 2005)
Figure 9a: Comparisons between effective power, kW for Gasoline and Propane for
various engine speeds.

Figure 9b: Comparisons between effective power, kW for Gasoline and Propane
for various equivalence ratios

Comparisons relating to the effective efficiencies obtained at various engine speeds

and equivalent ratios are given in figure 10a & 10b respectively. In both cases, the
effective computed for the propane fueled engine are lower than those for gasoline. This
is also results of decreasing of the volumetric efficiency.

Figure 10a: Comparisons between effective efficiency, % for Gasoline and Propane
for various engine speeds.
 Figure 10b: Comparisons between effective efficiency, % for Gasoline and
Propane for various equivalence ratios

5.2 Economic aspects of propane fuels

Furthermore, the decrease in volumetric efficiency also reduces the engine effective
efficiency and consequently increases the specific fuel consumption. Figure 11a & 11b
shows the specific fuel consumption for various engine speeds and equivalence ratios.

Figure 11a: Comparisons between specific fuel consumption, g/kWh for Gasoline
and Propane for various engine speeds
 Figure 11b: Comparisons between specific fuel consumption, g/kWh for Gasoline
and Propane for various equivalence ratio.

5.3 Environment aspects of propane fuels

As for the environment aspects of propane fuel, comparisons have been made between
gasoline fuel and propane fuel. The mole fractions of carbon monoxide (CO) and
nitrogen oxides (NO) on the exhaust emissions were determined at various engine speeds
and difference equivalence ratio. Figure 12 and figure 13 shows the comparison
between CO & NO mole fractions for both gasoline and propane fuel. In all cases, the
mol fraction of CO and NO predicted for propane are lower than gasoline. The decrement
in the mole fractions are about 4-5.3% for varied rpm and about 5.3-30% for varied
equivalence ratios. Decrements in the NO mole fractions are about 1-50% for varied
engine speeds and about 4.3 -8.64% for the varied equivalence ratios were determined.
(Bayraktar, 2005)
Figure 12a: Comparisons between carbon monoxide CO mole fractions %, for
Gasoline and Propane for various engine speeds

Figure 12b: Comparisons between carbon monoxide CO mole fractions %, for

Gasoline and Propane for various equivalence ratio.
 Figure 13a: Comparisons between nitrogen oxides NO mole fractions %, for Gasoline
and Propane for various engine speeds

Figure 13b: Comparisons between nitrogen oxides NO mole fractions %, for Gasoline
and Propane for various equivalence ratios.

6.0 Hydrogen fuels

The production of hydrogen is an appropriate environmental solution. Hydrogen

is the most abundant element in the universe. It cannot be destroyed unlike hydrocarbons,
and it simply changes state from water to hydrogen and back to water during
consumption. (Magdalena Momirlan, T.N.Veziroglu, 2004). Hydrogen for internal
combustion engine offers high octane number and heating value and no CO, CO 2, or HC
emissions. Storage and cost is the only problem with hydrogen but when mass produced,
hopefully this problem can be solved. Some companies like Ford, BMW and Mazda has
already developed some ranged of hydrogen fuelled vehicles. (BMW’s Hydrogen
Message, 2002)

6.1 Economy aspects of hydrogen

The cost of hydrogen is about 3 times higher than gasoline. This includes the
costs of production and storage. The easiest and best way to produce hydrogen is from
water electrolysis but this process consumes a lot of electrical energy. 80% of the world
electrical energy comes from boiler power plants which use coal and hydrocarbon fuels.
Unless the electrolysis process uses green energy sources like solar energy, production of
hydrogen will not solved the energy crisis. The current price of hydrogen fuel, available
in California by Air Products Inc is 1 USD per litre which is equals to RM 3.30 per litre.
Another main problem of hydrogen fuel is storage. Being at gas state at room
temperature, like other gas type fuel, is low in volumetric efficiency. The technology for
the process of cooling at cryogenic temperature and thermal isolation, being, at this day,
very expensive, needing economical and environmental analysis. (De Witt MP, Faaij
APC, 2007)

6.2 Performance aspects of hydrogen fuels

Hydrogen, being highly reactive, offers wide range of advantages in performance.

One of the principal advantages that hydrogen has a fuel is the wide flammability limits
(see Table 1). These wide limits allow that the combustion occurs with different
equivalence ratios, in particular with slight mixtures, which makes relatively easy to
operate an engine with hydrogen. (M.A. Escalante Soberanis, A.M. Fernandez, 2009)

Another benefit is the high energy density of the fuel, around 120 MJ/kg, superior value
to that of gasoline. (SørensenB, 2005) The minimum ignition energy and the wide range
of flammability of hydrogen allow the presence of combustion at lower equivalence
ratios than those with gasoline, and it can obtain a higher power at specific equivalence
ratios. The higher power output of the engine, running with hydrogen, was about 80% of
the power reached with gasoline. From the experiment conducted by R Ganesh et. all,
2008, volumetric efficiency was plotted versus power output and thermal efficiency
versus equivalence ratio. In the first case, a higher volumetric efficiency, compared with
that of gasoline, with a power output between 2 and 7 kW, was observed. In the case of
thermal efficiency, it was reached a maximum of about 27%, at different speeds, over
that with gasoline which is about 25%. (Ganesh R, Subramanian V, Balasubramanian V,
Mallikarjuna JM, Ramesh A, SharmaRP, 2008) It can be observed that the major
efficiency (27.5%) is reached with the diesel/hydrogen mixture, using TPI technique.
(Saravanan N, 2008) When the compression ignition engine is fueled with hydrogen, in
order to fulfill a homogeneous mixture, it will obtain a better combustion. (Martı´nez-
Martı´nez S, Sa´nchez-Cruz FA, Riesco-A´ vila JM, Gallegos-Mun˜ oz A, Aceves SM,
2008) Masood et al. 2007, made experimental and computational work on a hydrogen
diesel dual fuel engine, with hydrogen presence from 10 to 80% Vol. It was noticed that
with the increase of hydrogen load the pressure increases at high compression ratios due
to the high flammability and rate of combustion of hydrogen. Moreover, hydrogen has a
major flame velocity at stoichiometric conditions, which makes the engine getting closer
to the thermodynamically ideal engine. Hydrogen injection during compression stroke
prevents knocking, increases thermal efficiency and maximizes the power output.
(Mohammadi A, 2007) Knock, or spark knock (Topinka JA, 2004), is defined as
autoignition of the hydrogen–air end-gas ahead of the flame front that has originated
from the spark. The high autoignition temperature, finite ignition delay and the high
flame velocity of hydrogen (i.e., the latter two effects translate to less residence time for
the end-gas to ignite) means that knock, as defined, is less likely for hydrogen relative to
gasoline, and hence the higher research octane number (RON) for hydrogen (RON>120)
(Tang X, 2002) in comparison to gasoline (RON=91− 99) (Heywood JB, 1988)

6.3 Environment aspects of hydrogen fuels

The hydrogen is the most abundant material in the universe and during its
combustion with air only produces nitrous oxides (NOx) gas, which can collect and avoid
their emission to the atmosphere. (M.A. Escalante Soberanis, A.M. Fernandez, 2009)
Hydrogen is considered as a clean way of powering vehicles for the future since neither
carbon-based pollutants nor GHG would be emitted when hydrogen produced from
renewable sources is used. (C. Sopena et all, 2009) The results of UHC emissions showed
that, using hydrogen as a fuel, the levels were near zero. For the case of nitric oxides
emissions, it was reported higher levels in hydrogen combustion. The emissions of the
first mixture were about 8000 ppm at an equivalence ratio of 0.85, while for gasoline it
was reported 2000 ppm at an equivalence ratio of 1.03, approximately. (Ganesh R,
Subramanian V, Balasubramanian V, Mallikarjuna JM, Ramesh A, SharmaRP, 2008) In
Riverside, University of California, a research about exhaust gas recirculation technique
in a hydrogen engine at different fuel flows was carried out. This technique was shown as
an effective method to reduce emissions of nitric oxides to less than 10 ppm, getting a
better power output than that with lean mixtures (f< 0.45, i.e., 14% Vol. or less of
hydrogen), with thermodynamic efficiencies near 31%. (International Journal of
Hydrogen Energy, 2003) Hydrogen is sometimes used as additive to hydrocarbon fuels, It
was observed that adding hydrogen to NG, hydrocarbon emissions are well reduced.
(Bysveen M, 2007) In terms of emissions, nitric oxides have an important role when
hydrogen is introduced in the mixture, because authors observed higher levels at 2500
rpm, with a brake power output of 4 kW, while emissions of UHC reduced to
approximately 25% of the air/diesel mixtures emissions. Carbon monoxide emissions
also were reduced in the same percentage of the UHC. (Saravanan N, 2008)

7.0 Natural Gas fuel

Natural gas, being in gaseous phase at normal conditions is ideal and poses very
few problems in using them in internal combustion engines. Natural gas mix more
homogeneously with air and eliminate the distribution and starting problems that are
encountered with liquid fuels. Even though the gaseous fuels are the most ideal for
internal combustion engines, storage and handling problems restrict their use in
automobiles. Natural gas is commonly stored as compressed natural gas (CNG) or
Natural Gas for Vehicles (NGV) in Malaysia.

Table 1. Typical Natural Gas Composition

(Kalam, M. A., H. H. Masjuki, M. A. Maleque, M. A. Amalina, H. Abdessalem, and T. M. I. Mahlia. 2004.
Air-Fuel Ratio Calculation for a Natural Gas-Fuelled Spark Ignition Engine. SAE Technical Paper 2004-
01-0640.)
7.1 Economy aspects of natural gas fuels

Natural gas is widely used in automobiles these days and the usage is increasing.
There are approximately 3 317 036 NGV in the world, and Malaysia has 8300 NGV as
up to January 2004. (UTM, 2008) Due to the low cost of Natural Gas, more gasoline
fuels vehicles choose to convert to NGV. Natural gas, comprise of mainly methane, is by
product from cracking of crude fossil oil. Even so, natural gas can be obtained from other
sources like biomass. Even if natural gas cannot prove itself as an intrinsically better
fuel than gasoline and Diesel fuels in terms of engine emissions, natural gas vehicles that
operate on CNG fuel are expected to find widespread use because the sources of natural
gas are far bigger than those of oil, and natural gas will be available at a competitive cost
for a long time. (Einewall P, Tunestal P, Johansson B, 2005) Today NGV price in
Malaysia is RM 0.68 per litre and can be considered as very cheap and economical thanks
to the government subsidy. (PETRONAS, 2010)

7.2 Performance aspects of natural gas fuels

Natural gas offers some advantages in terms of performance if the engine is

designed correctly and accordingly. Natural gas has relatively wide flammability limits.
The lower peak combustion temperatures under ultra lean conditions in comparison to
stoichiometric conditions. (King. SR, 1992) This will lead to a lower knock tendency of
natural gas engines, allowing a higher power for the same engine displacement by
increasing the boost pressure level. (Borges LH, Hollnagel C, Muraro W.) Natural gas
(NG), which is primarily composed of methane, is regarded as one of the most promising
alternative fuels due to its interesting chemical properties with high H/C ratio and high
research octane number (about 120). (H.M. Cho and B.Q. He, 2006) Accordingly, NG
engines using high compression ratio, lean burn mixture or high exhaust gas recirculation
would be expected to outperform gasoline engines in torque, power and can allow a
remarkable reduction in pollutant emissions and an improvement in thermal efficiency.
(Sobiesiak A, Zhang S, 2003)

7.3 Environment aspects of natural gas fuels

The important or main advantage of using natural gas for internal combustion
engines is the lower emissions compared to gasoline or diesel fuels. Comprise of mainly
methane, it has higher hydrogen over carbon (H/C) ratio. CO2 is a greenhouse gas in the
exhaust gases from SI engines. Improving fuel economy, using a fuel with higher
hydrogen to carbon ratio (H/C) or using a renewable fuel can all reduce CO2 emissions
from engines. (H.M. Cho and B.Q. He, 2006) Experiments were carried out by Bates and
Germano (1994) in a vehicle equipped with a 1.4-l engine converted to operate with
natural gas. The objective was to compare exhaust emissions from natural gas and
gasoline operation. Exhaust hydrocarbons for natural gas operation consisted primarily of
methane, due to its high content in the fuel, of about 90%. Natural gas was demonstrated
to significantly reduce HC and CO emissions. In the meantime, natural gas engines can
achieve CO2 levels below those of Diesel engines at the same air–fuel ratio, while
keeping almost the same thermal efficiency under very lean conditions. (Mtui PL, Hill
PG, 1996) CO2 emissions of natural gas engines can be reduced by more than 20%
compared with gasoline engines at equal power. (Kato T, Saeki K, Nishide H, Yamada T,
2001) NG engines produce lower PM than Diesel engines do. (Frailey M, Norton P,
Clark NN, Lyons DW, 2000) A relatively low flame speed and low temperature
combustion of NG engines help to mitigate engine out NOx emissions when operating
with high compression ratio or when the engine is supercharged. (Varde KS, Asar GMM,
2001) Very low levels of NOx and carbon monoxide (CO) emissions can be achieved at
lean equivalence ratios. (Varde KS, Patro N, Drouillard K, 1995) A study published by
the U.S. Department of Energy estimates that natural gas fuelled vehicles reduced toxic
emissions by 70–85%, in comparison with gasoline and diesel oil. (Paola Helena Barros
Za´ rante , Jose´ Ricardo Sodre´, 2009)

8.0 Bio-Diesel fuel

8.1 Overview:

The idea of using vegetable oil for fuel has been around as long as the diesel
engine. Rudolph Diesel, the inventor of the engine that bears his name, experimented
with fuels ranging from powdered coal to peanut oil. In the early 20th century, however,
diesel engines were adapted to burn petroleum distillate, which was cheap and plentiful.
In the late 20th century, however, the cost of petroleum distillate rose, and by the late
1970s there was renewed interest in biodiesel. Commercial production of biodiesel in the
United States began in the 1990s.

The most common sources of oil for biodiesel production in the United States are
soybean oil and yellow grease (primarily, recycled cooking oil from restaurants). Blends
of biodiesel and petroleum diesel are designated with the letter “B,” followed by the
volumetric percentage of biodiesel in the blend: B20, the blend most often evaluated,
contains 20 percent biodiesel and 80 percent petroleum diesel; B100 is pure biodiesel. By
several important measures biodiesel blends perform better than petroleum diesel, but its
relatively high production costs and the limited availability of some of the raw materials
used in its production continue to limit its commercial application.

As the fossil fuels are depleting day by day, there is a need to find out an
alternative fuel to fulfil the energy demand of the world. Biodiesel is one of the best
available sources to fulfil the energy demand of the world. The petroleum fuels play a
very important role in the development of industrial growth, transportation, agricultural
sector and to meet many other basic human needs. However, these fuels are limited and
depleting day by day as the consumption is increasing very rapidly. Moreover, their use is
alarming the environmental problems to society. Hence, the scientists are looking for
alternative fuels. India is importing more than 80% of its fuel demand and spending a
huge amount of foreign currency on fuel. Biodiesel is gaining more and more importance
as an attractive fuel due to the depleting nature of fossil fuel resources. The purpose of
transesterification process is to lower the viscosity of the oil. The main drawback of
vegetable oil is their high viscosity and low volatility, which causes poor combustion in
diesel engines. The transesterification is the process of removing the glycerides and
combining oil esters of vegetable oil with alcohol. This process reduces the viscosity to a
value comparable to that of diesel and hence improves combustion. Biodiesel emits fewer
pollutants over the whole range of air–fuel ratio when compared to diesel. Biodiesel can
produce by using different techniques such as ultrasonic cavitation, hydrodynamic
cavitation, microwave irradiation, response surface technology, two-step reaction process
etc. Experiments had been conducted for different types of combustion chambers. It was
found that spherical combustion chamber gives better results than other type of
combustion chambers. The scientists tested a number of different raw and processed
vegetable oils like rapeseed oil, sunflower oil, palm oil, soybean oil. In this paper, the
results of some of the researchers has compared and summarized.

8.2 History:

Rudolph Diesel was educated at the predecessor school to the Technical

University of Munich, Germany. In 1878, he was introduced to the work of Sadi Carnot,
who theorized that an engine could achieve much higher efficiency than the steam
engines of the day. Carnot envisioned a cycle in which a gas is compressed, heated,
allowed to expand, and then cooled. After the gas is cooled, the cycle begins anew.
Mechanical energy is used to compress the gas and thermal energy to heat it. In turn,
expansion of the gas yields mechanical energy, and its cooling yields thermal energy. The
net result is conversion of thermal energy to mechanical energy. [Deutsches Museum,
web site www.deutsches-museum.de]

Diesel sought to apply Carnot’s theory to the internal combustion engine. The
efficiency of the Carnot cycle increases with the compression ratio—the ratio of gas
volume at full expansion to its volume at full compression. Nicklaus Otto invented an
internal combustion engine in 1876 that was the predecessor to the modern gasoline
engine. Otto’s engine mixed fuel and air before their introduction to the cylinder, and a
flame or spark was used to ignite the fuel-air mixture at the appropriate time. However,
air gets hotter as it is compressed, and if the compression ratio is too high, the heat of
compression will ignite the fuel prematurely. The low compression ratios needed to
prevent premature ignition of the fuel-air mixture limited the efficiency of the Otto
engine.

Rudolph Diesel wanted to build an engine with the highest possible compression
ratio. He introduced fuel only when combustion was desired and allowed the fuel to
ignite on its own in the hot compressed air. Diesel’s engine achieved efficiency higher
than that of the Otto engine and much higher than that of the steam engine. It also
eliminated the trouble-prone electric-spark ignition system. Diesel received a patent in
1893 and demonstrated a workable engine in 1897. Today, diesel engines are classified as
“compression-ignition” engines, and Otto engines are classified as “spark-ignition”
engines.

Diesel’s motivation was not only to improve efficiency but also to bring the
benefits of powered machinery to smaller companies. Steam engines were so large that
only the biggest firms could afford them, and Diesel wanted to enable smaller firms to
compete against larger, steam-powered firms. He used peanut oil as the fuel for his
demonstration engines at the 1900 World’s Fair and thought that oils from locally grown
crops would be used to power his engines.

The early 20th century saw the introduction of gasoline-powered automobiles. Oil
companies were obliged to refine so much crude oil to supply gasoline that they were left
with a surplus of distillate, which is an excellent fuel for diesel engines and much less
expensive than vegetable oils. On the other hand, resource depletion has always been a
concern with regard to petroleum, and farmers have always sought new markets for their
products. Consequently, work has continued on the use of vegetable oils as fuel.

Early durability tests indicated that engines would fail prematurely when
operating on fuel blends containing vegetable oil. Engines burning vegetable oil that had
been transesterified with alcohols, however, exhibited no such problems and even
performed better by some measures than engines using petroleum diesel. The formulation
of what is now called biodiesel came out of those early experiments.

The energy supply concerns of the 1970s renewed interest in biodiesel, but
commercial production did not begin until the late 1990s. The National Biodiesel Board
reported production of 500,000 gallons (32.6 barrels per day) in 1999 and 6.7 million
gallons (437 barrels per day) in 2000. In 2003, the U.S. Congress proposed that, for tax
purposes:

The term “biodiesel” means the monoalkyl esters of long chain fatty acids derived
from plant or animal matter which meet (A) the registration requirements for fuels and
fuel additives established by the Environmental Protection Agency under section 211 of
the Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7545), and (B) the requirements of the American Society of
Testing and Materials D6751.

That definition of biodiesel is used here, although other processes also can be
used to produce high-quality diesel fuel from vegetable oil or animal fat.

8.3 Performance and Emissions Characteristics

One of the most important characteristics of diesel fuel is its ability to auto ignite,
a characteristic that is quantified by a fuel’s cetane number or cetane index, where a
higher cetane number or index means that the fuel ignites more quickly. U.S. petroleum
diesel typically has a cetane index in the low 40s, and European diesel typically has a
cetane index in the low 50s.

Graboski and McCormick have summarized several experimental studies of

biodiesel characteristics. They report that the cetane number for biodiesel ranges from
45.8 to 56.9 for soybean oil methyl esters, with an average of 50.9. In comparison the
cetane index for petroleum diesel ranges from 40 to 52. They imply that careful
production control could result in biodiesel products with cetane numbers in the high end
of the range, whereas petroleum diesel tends toward the low end of the range. U.S.
refiners use the catalytic cracking and coking processes to increase gasoline output from
oil refineries, yielding high-octane gasoline material but low-cetane diesel material.

Lubricity, another important characteristic of diesel fuel, is a measure of

lubricating properties. Fuel injectors and some types of fuel pumps rely on fuel for
lubrication. One study, published in 1998 and cited by the National Biodiesel Board,
found that one-half of samples of petroleum diesel sold in the United States did not meet
the recommended minimum standard for lubricity [National Biodiesel Board, “Lubricity
Benefits,” ] Biodiesel has better lubricity than current low-sulphur petroleum diesel,
which contains 500 parts per million (ppm) sulphur by weight. The petroleum diesel
lubricity problem is expected to get worse when ultra-low-sulphur petroleum diesel (15
ppm sulphur by weight) is introduced in 2006. A 1- or 2-percent volumetric blend of
biodiesel in low-sulphur petroleum diesel improves lubricity substantially. It should be
noted, however, that the use of other lubricity additives may achieve the same effect at
lower cost.

Biodiesel also has some performance disadvantages. The performance of

biodiesel in cold conditions is markedly worse than that of petroleum diesel, and
biodiesel made from yellow grease is worse than soybean biodiesel in this regard. At low
temperatures, diesel fuel forms wax crystals, which can clog fuel lines and filters in a
vehicle’s fuel system. The “cloud point” is the temperature at which a sample of the fuel
starts to appear cloudy, indicating that wax crystals have begun to form. At even lower
temperatures, diesel fuel becomes a gel that cannot be pumped. The “pour point” is the
temperature below which the fuel will not flow. The cloud and pour points for biodiesel
are higher than those for petroleum diesel.

Vehicles running on biodiesel blends may therefore exhibit more drivability

problems at less severe winter temperatures than do vehicles running on petroleum diesel
[Graboski and McCormick , 2001]This is a potential concern during the winter in much
of the United States. The solvent property of biodiesel can cause other fuel-system
problems. Biodiesel may be incompatible with the seals used in the fuel systems of older
vehicles and machinery, necessitating the replacement of those parts if biodiesel blends
are used. The initial use of B20 or B100 in any vehicle or machine requires care.
Petroleum diesel forms deposits in vehicular fuel systems, and because biodiesel can
loosen those deposits, they can migrate and clog fuel lines and filters [National Biodiesel
Board, “Biodiesel Usage Checklist]
 Another disadvantage of biodiesel is that it tends to reduce fuel economy. Energy
efficiency is the percentage of the fuel’s thermal energy that is delivered as engine output,
and biodiesel has shown no significant effect on the energy efficiency of any test engine.
Volumetric efficiency, a measure that is more familiar to most vehicle users, usually is
expressed as miles travelled per gallon of fuel (or kilometres per litre of fuel). The energy
content per gallon of biodiesel is approximately 11 percent lower than that of petroleum
diesel. Vehicles running on B20 are therefore expected to achieve 2.2 percent (20 percent
x 11 percent) fewer miles per gallon of fuel.

About 11 percent of the weight of B100 is oxygen. The presence of oxygen in

biodiesel improves combustion and therefore reduces hydrocarbon, carbon monoxide,
and particulate emissions; but oxygenated fuels also tend to increase nitrogen oxide
emissions. Engine tests have confirmed the expected increases and decreases of each
exhaust component from engines without emissions controls. Biodiesel users also note
that the exhaust smells better than the exhaust from engines burning conventional diesel.

The increase in nitrogen oxide emissions from biodiesel is of enough concern that
the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) has sponsored research to find
biodiesel formulations that do not increase nitrogen oxide emissions. Adding cetane
enhancers— di-tert-butyl peroxide at 1 percent or 2-ethylhexyl nitrate at 0.5 percent—can
reduce nitrogen oxide emissions from biodiesel, and reducing the aromatic content of
petroleum diesel from 31.9 percent to 25.8 percent is estimated to have the same effect.
In the case of petroleum diesel, the reduction in aromatic content can be accomplished by
blending fuel that meets U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) specifications
with fuel that meets California Air Resource Board (CARB) specifications. EPA diesel
contains about 30 percent aromatics, and CARB diesel is limited to 10 percent aromatics.

Nitrogen oxide emissions from biodiesel blends could possibly be reduced by

blending with kerosene or Fischer-Tropsch diesel. Kerosene blended with 40 percent
biodiesel has estimated emissions of nitrogen oxide no higher than those of petroleum
diesel, as does Fischer-Tropsch diesel blended with as much as 54 percent biodiesel [R.L.
McCormick, 2003]. These results imply that Fischer-Tropsch diesel or kerosene could be
used to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions from blends containing 20 percent biodiesel,
although the researchers did not investigate those possibilities. Blending di-tert-butyl
peroxide into B20 at 1 percent is estimated to cost 17 cents per gallon (2002 cents), and
blending 2-ethylhexyl nitrate at 0.5 percent is estimated to cost 5 cents per gallon.

Oxides of nitrogen and hydrocarbons are ozone precursors. Carbon monoxide is

also an ozone precursor, but to a lesser extent than unburned hydrocarbons or nitrogen
oxides. Air quality modelling is needed to determine whether the use of biodiesel without
additives to prevent increases in nitrogen oxide emissions will increase or decrease
ground-level ozone on balance.

Most biodiesel emission studies have been carried out on existing heavy-duty
highway engines. The effects of biodiesel on emissions from heavy diesel engines
meeting EPA’s stringent Tier II emissions standards (slated for introduction in model
year 2007) have not been determined, and the EPA has concluded that the results of
biodiesel tests in heavy-duty vehicles cannot be generalized to light-duty diesel vehicles
or off-highway diesel engines [U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, A Comprehensive
Analysis of Biodiesel Impacts on Exhaust Emissions]

Biodiesel from virgin vegetable oil reduces carbon dioxide emissions and
petroleum consumption when used in place of petroleum diesel. This conclusion is based
on a life cycle analysis of biodiesel and petroleum diesel, accounting for resource
consumption and emissions for all steps in the production and use of the fuel. NREL
estimates that the use of soybean B100 in urban transit buses reduces net carbon dioxide
emissions by 78.45 percent [J. Sheehan, 1998]. The comparison of carbon dioxide
emissions and energy use begins with soybean cultivation and petroleum extraction,
proceeds with all applicable processing and transportation, and ends with combustion in
the bus engine. The growth of the soybean plant is assumed to absorb as much carbon
dioxide as is emitted by decomposition of crop residue after the harvest and by
combustion of biodiesel in the engine, [Sheehan et al.,1998] Petroleum-based chemicals
and fuels are used to produce the soybeans, but soybean oil biodiesel contains energy
from other sources, including solar energy. NREL estimates that B100 reduces life cycle
petroleum consumption by 95 percent relative to petroleum diesel [Sheehan et al., 1998]
assuming that the quantity of biodiesel is small enough not to affect production levels of
soybeans or other crops. If crop production patterns changed significantly, then NREL's
analysis might not be valid.

8.4 Biodiesel Production and Costs

Biodiesel can be produced by several processes. Vegetable oils or fats can be

converted to fatty acids, which in turn are converted to esters. Oils or fats can also be
converted to methyl or ethyl esters directly, using an acid or base to accelerate (catalyze)
the transesterification reaction. Base catalyzation is preferred, because the reaction is
quick and thorough. It also occurs at lower temperature and pressure than other
processes, resulting in lower capital and operating costs for the biodiesel plant.

The most common method of producing biodiesel is to react to animal fat or

vegetable oil with methanol in the presence of sodium hydroxide (a base, known as lye or
caustic soda). This reaction is a base-catalyzed transesterification that produces methyl
esters and glycerine [National Biodiesel Board, “Biodiesel Production and Quality]. If
ethanol is substituted for methanol, ethyl esters and glycerine are produced. Methanol is
preferred, because it is less expensive than ethanol.

The Energy Information Administration (EIA) uses a process-costing approach to

model the impacts of net feedstock production costs plus capital and operating costs. The
feedstock cost of the oil or grease is the largest single component of biodiesel production
costs. Yellow grease is much less expensive than soybean oil, but its supply is limited,
and it has uses other than fuel—for example, yellow grease is used as an animal feed
additive and in the production of soaps and detergents. From 1993 to 1998, the average
supply of yellow grease in the United States was 2.633 billion pounds, enough to make
344 million gallons (22,440 barrels per day) of biodiesel [G.G. Pearl, 2001]. EIA,
however, assumes that competing uses would limit biodiesel production from yellow
grease to 100 million gallons per year (6,523 barrels per day).

EIA’s price projections for soybean oil are based on data from the U.S.
Department of Agriculture (USDA), Office of Energy Policy and New Uses [U.S.
Department of Agriculture, “Effects on the Farm Economy of a Renewable Fuels
Standard for Motor Vehicle Fuel” ].The USDA estimated the effect on agricultural
markets of a renewable fuels requirement for gasoline and diesel fuel by constructing two
agricultural market forecasts: a renewable fuels standard case with, and a reference case
without, biodiesel production from soybean oil. The EIA forecasts of soybean oil prices
are based on an assumed quantity of oil used for biodiesel production in each forecast
year (Table 1).

Table 8.1. Soybean Oil Prices as a Function of Soybean Oil Use for biodiesel
Production, 2004-2013
(2002 Dollars per Gallon)

Soybean Oil Prices as a Function of Soybean

Oil Use for biodiesel Production, 2004-2013
(2002 Dollars per Gallon)

50 Million 200 Million

Gallons Gallons of
of Soybean Oil Soybean Oil
Used for Used for
Marketing Biodiesel Biodiesel
Year Production Production
2004/05 1.95 2.22
2005/06 1.91 2.17
2006/07 1.87 2.15
2007/08 1.84 2.12
2008/09 1.86 2.20
2009/10 1.89 2.25
2010/11 1.94 2.35
2011/12 1.99 2.41
2012/13 2.06 2.47

In the renewable fuels standard case, the quotient of the increase in soybean oil
prices and the quantity of soybean oil used for biodiesel production provides the rate of
change in soybean oil prices with respect to the quantity of soybean oil input to biodiesel
production. The most current baseline soybean oil prices, assuming no biodiesel
production, are also obtained from the USDA [U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA
Agricultural Baseline Projections to 2012]. The baseline forecast and the estimated rate
of change are used to construct a cost curve for soybean oil relative to biodiesel
production.

The USDA does not forecast yellow grease prices, although in the past the prices
of yellow grease and soybean oil have moved together. Monthly soybean oil price data
are obtained from the USDA, and monthly yellow grease price data are obtained from the
Jacobsen Publishing Company. Un-weighted averages are used to construct annual
prices. The results of a linear regression are:

Yellow grease price = 0.49 x Soybean oil price.

Table 8.2. Projected Prices for Yellow

Grease, 2004-2013
(2002 Dollars per Gallon)

Marketing Year Price

2004/05 1.09
2005/06 1.07
2006/07 1.05
2007/08 1.04
2008/09 1.08
2009/10 1.10
2010/11 1.15
2011/12 1.18
2012/13 1.21

Table 8.3 Projected Production Costs for

diesel Fuel by feedstock, 2004-2013
(2002 Dollars per Gallon)

Marketing Soybean Yellow

Year Oil Grease Petroleum
2004/05 2.54 1.41 0.67
2005/06 2.49 1.39 0.78
2006/07 2.47 1.38 0.77
 2007/08 2.44 1.37 0.78
2008/09 2.52 1.40 0.78
2009/10 2.57 1.42 0.75
2010/11 2.67 1.47 0.76
2011/12 2.73 1.51 0.76
2012/13 2.80 1.55 0.75

Yellow grease price projections (Table 2) are estimated by using soybean oil price
projections in the above equation.

NREL provided estimates of other components of biodiesel production costs,

based on transesterification of oil with methyl alcohol catalyzed by sodium hydroxide,
yielding methyl esters (biodiesel) and glycerol. Operating expenses were estimated at 31
cents per gallon (2002 cents), excluding the cost of the oil or grease and energy, and the
sale of the glycerol was estimated to reduce the cost by 15 cents per gallon of biodiesel.
[R. Teall,2002]

The biodiesel production process uses, for each gallon, 0.083 kilowatt hours of
electricity and 38,300 British thermal units (Btu) of natural gas [K. Shaine Tyson, 2002].
EIA estimates energy costs (in 2002 cents) of 18 cents per gallon in 2004 and 16 cents
per gallon in 2005 and 2006 [Energy Information Administration, Annual Energy
Outlook 2004]. A new biodiesel plant is estimated to cost $1.04 per annual gallon of
capacity. EIA assumes that the plant is financed by equity with an annualized return of 10
percent over 15 years. Treating the hypothetical income stream as an annuity over the 15
years, the estimated capital cost is $1.36 million per year, or 13.6 cents per gallon (2002
cents) at full output.

The National Biodiesel Board claims that dedicated biodiesel plants with a total
capacity of 60 to 80 million gallons per year (3,414 to 5,219 barrels per day) have already
been built. In addition, 200 million gallons (13,046 barrels per day) of capacity are
available from oleochemical producers, such as Proctor and Gamble [National Biodiesel
Board, “U.S. Biodiesel Production Capacity,” ]. Biodiesel producers will produce up to
80 million gallons per year at a price just high enough to cover variable costs. The
capacity in the oleochemical industry will not come on-stream unless the price of
biodiesel is sufficiently high to draw methyl esters out of other uses. A comparison of
total production costs of diesel fuel by type of feedstock is provided in Table 3.

There is currently excess production capacity in the biodiesel industry. Petroleum

refiners, on the other hand, use more than 90 percent of their capacity, and additional
capital investments are needed to keep up with increasing demand and tightening product
specifications, such as the transition in 2006 from a highway diesel sulphur limit of 500
parts per million to 15 parts per million. Soybean oil biodiesel has essentially no sulphur.
Because soybean biodiesel producers have overcapacity and a product that more than
meets the upcoming highway diesel sulphur limit, they need make no additional capital
investments to produce output up to 80 million gallons in 2006 and beyond. The cost
comparison in Table 3 is therefore between the cost of biodiesel, excluding capital, and
the cost of petroleum diesel, including capital.

8.5 Conclusion

Biodiesel from yellow grease is closer to being cost-competitive with petroleum

diesel than is biodiesel from soybean oil, but the available supply of yellow grease will
probably limit its use for biodiesel production to 100 million gallons per year (6,523
barrels per day) or less. Unless soybean oil prices decline dramatically, it does not appear
that biodiesel can be produced in large quantities at a cost that is competitive with
petroleum diesel. The largest market for biodiesel probably will be as a fuel additive,
because EPACT requirements are unlikely to increase significantly over the next 20 years.
The ultra-low-sulfur diesel program will offer an opportunity for biodiesel as a lubricity
additive and perhaps as a cetane booster as well. Biodiesel may also be marketed for
applications in which reducing emissions of particulates and unburned hydrocarbons are
paramount, such as school and transit buses. Because additives that improve diesel fuel
properties can sell for a price above that of the diesel fuel, the cost disadvantage for
biodiesel would not be as great in the additive market.

9.0 P-series fuel

9.1 Overview

In mid-1999, the DOE determined that Pure Energy Corporation's P-series fuel is
"substantially non-petroleum," and added P-Series fuels to the definition of "alternative
fuel" under its Alternative Fuel Transportation Program regulations [Federal Register,
1999]. P-series fuels are blends of ethanol, methyltetrahydrofuran (MTHF), and pentanes
plus, with butane added for blends that would be used in severe cold-weather conditions
to meet cold start requirements. The ethanol and MTHF are derived from renewable
domestic feedstocks, such as corn stalks, paper-mill sludge, oat hulls, wood waste from
construction, and other wastes [Federal Register, 1998]. Emissions from P-series fuels are
well below Federal emissions standards [U.S. Department of Energy, "What's An
Alternative Fuel?” 1998]

P-series fuels are designed to operate in vehicles with flexible-fueled engine

technology that can operate on E85 or gasoline, or any blend of the two. Although Ford
and Chrysler are mass producing flexible-fueled vehicles, such as the Chrysler minivan
and Ford Ranger pickup, the two OEMs do not warrant the operation of their vehicles on
P-series fuels because of the fuels' current lack of demand. If the demand for P-Series
increases, the OEMs may decide to revise their warranting position.

P-Series is currently only available in limited quantities. To help produce P-

Series, funding ($500,000) has been approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee.
Using this funding, the University of Louisville will conduct research and design a full-
scale, economically viable refinery that will manufacture P-Series for commercial sale.
The first commercial facility is planned for construction in 2000 [Butane-Propane News,
Vol. 31, 1999]

In July 1999, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, began a year-long trial using P-Series in

two flexible-fueled sedans. The city will test the fuel while operating the cars for
administrative purposes, primarily in the northern portion of the city, where the P-Series
fuel tank will be located. Drivers will test the FFVs on P-Series as well as gasoline, for
comparison, and will then analyze the results [National Association of Fleet
Administrators, FleetFocus]. The Department of Energy estimates that P-series fuels have
the potential to displace approximately one billion gallons (almost 1 percent) of gasoline
annually by 2005 [. U.S. Department of Energy, "DOE Designates New Alternative
Fuel?” 1999]

9.1 Economy Aspects of P-series fuel

As of May, 2003, the projected retail (pump) price for P-Series (89 mid-grade)
incl. all taxes is $1.49 per gallon (based on NJ state taxes). This about $.13 /gallon less
than mid-grade gasoline, but the lower price reflects the lower energy content of the
ethanol. On a BTU basis, P-Series is more efficient than gasoline, but on a gallon basis,
the fuel mileage is about 10% less than gasoline. The upshot is that the operating cost --
in $/mile -- is about the same as mid-grade gasoline. Fortunately, the scale of production
to reach this price point is very modest, only 10 MBD (150 million gallons per year), or
about 5% of the production volume of even a small oil refinery. Economies are met even
at such a small scale because revenue is obtained for accepting the waste as well as
producing the fuel. Because of the small size and scale, multiple plants can be distributed
geographically so that no one neighbourhood need become the trash importer for the
region.

9.2 Performance Aspects of P-series fuel

Much like gasoline, P-Series fuels range from 89-93 octane (mid-grade to
premium) and can be formulated specifically for winter or summer use. Refuelling with
P-Series is as quick and familiar as with gasoline. But P-Series is not gasoline and cannot
be used in a regular gasoline car. The basic capability for utilizing P-Series in vehicles
has already been incorporated into methanol/ethanol flexible-fuel vehicles (FFV's). FFV's
are designed to operate on alcohol, on gasoline, or on any mixture of the two. Nearly
three million FFV's have been manufactured since 1996. It's almost impossible to see the
difference between a regular car and an FFV, so check the owner's manual.

9.3 Environment Aspects of P-series fuel

Ethanol and MTHF, the main components of P-Series fuel are produced first
through an integrated process. Pure Energy Corporation expects to utilize commercially
proven concentrated acid hydrolysis processing as its base technology for this integrated
production process. MTHF is currently produced in limited quantities from furfural
(derived from both biomass and petroleum feedstock) for use as a specialty chemical in
consumer end products and in process industries. Pure Energy Corporation has developed
a thermo- chemical technology to produce MTHF from cellulosic feedstock through a
levulinic acid pathway, integrating it with an ethanol production system to achieve
technical and economic efficiencies. In this process, the lignocellulosic feedstock is
converted into both five- and six-carbon sugars, which are then bifurcated into
fermentation and thermo-chemical pathways to produce ethanol and MTHF respectively.

Emissions from P-Series fuels are substantially lower than that of conventional
fuels. A comparative emission test result with P-Series (32% Pentanes Plus+50%
Ethanol+18% MTHF) is given in Table-9.1.

Table-9.1: Comparative Emissions from P-Series Fuel

Pollutants (g/mile) UTG-96 RFG-II COMS E-85 P-Series

NMHC 0.14 0.11 0.14 0.12 0.07

NMOG 0.15 0.13 0.16 0.21 0.08

CO 1.40 1.20 1.40 1.20 1.00

CO2 422 417 422 379 407

Ozone Potential 0.48 0.46 0.52 0.48 0.30

Miles/Gallon 21 20 21 15 19
Source: Test performed on Ford Taurus at Automotive Testing Lab.
Ohio, 1998.
10.0 Conclusions

Table 10.1: Comparison table

Emissions (at 3000 rpm)

Fuel LHV (kJ/kg) RON Price (per liter) CO (%) NOx (ppm) UHC (ppm)

Gasoline 43,000 95 RM 1.80 0.41 364 47

diesel 42,500 - RM 1.70 0.02 800 15

natural gas 49,770 120 RM 0.68 0.12 194 29

hydrogen 120,000 130 RM 3.30 0 10 0

propane* 46,400 112 RM 0.81 0.27 291 32

ethanol* 26,900 107 RM 1.62 0.22 220 24

Bio-diesel* 37,000 - RM 2.66 0.01 202 12

P-series* 19,900 - RM 2.37 0.02 294 39

* price based on average price of fuel in USA

It can be justified that there are an abundant of alternative fuels that are here
already to fit in the ever subsiding fossil fuel for the internal combustion engine that is
powering our cars and automobiles. Ethanol for instance, is a very flexible and has a high
octane rating which will reduce emissions; a much cleaner combustion compared to
gasoline. Ethanol is a renewable source and the fuelling infrastructure is very much
convertible which requires no special training. Methanol has all the positives of ethanol
but with the advantage of extra performance due to Air Fuel ratio. In the case of P-series ,
which is renewable and is octane premium similar to gasoline. Despite being comparable
to gasoline, P-series fuel emits lower NOx, a cleaner emission in short. The P-Series are
currently being used in t M-85 FFV vehicles in the US without modifications. It can also
be adapted to E-85 vehicles. CNG or compressed natural gas gives the option to ICE
vehicles extended service intervals due to clean burning characteristics. CNG has a high
octane rating, 120+ and is one of the cleanest burning alternative fuels. Propane is one of
the least expensive alternative fuels. Most of the upfront costs can be offset by the lower
operating and maintenance costs of the vehicle. Propane has a high octane rating, 104
range giving a higher MPG compared to other alternative fuels. Biodiesel is becoming
more common nowadays as a lot of research has and is currently being done for this fuel
type. Biodiesel has a high cetane rating which is similar to the premium diesel. It comes
also with increased lubricity and gives out a cleaner burning less tail pipe emission. The
engine doesn’t not require any modification as biodiesel can run on normal diesel engine
efficiently.

11.0 References

“Hydrogen as an alternative Automotive Fuel,” Automotive Engineering, 1994, SAE International.

A computational study of free-piston diesel engine combustion R. Mikalsen, A.P. Roskilly *

Afgan Naim H, Darwish Al Gobaisi, Carvalho Maria G, Maurizio Cumo. Sustainable energy
development. Renew Sustain Energy Rev 1998;2:235–86.

Akansu SO, Dulger Z, Kahraman N, Veziroglu TN, Internal combustion engines fueled by natural gas–
hydrogen mixtures. International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2004

Bates, G., Germano, S., 1994. Vehicle tail pipe emissions – a comparison of natural gas and petrol
injection, SAE 942042. In: SAE Fuels & Lubricants Meeting & Exposition, Baltimore, Maryland,
USA, Oct. 1994.

Bio-diesel as an alternative fuel for diesel engines—A review A. Murugesan, C. Umarani, R.

Subramanian, N. Nedunchezhian. Mechanical Engineering, K.S. Rangasamy College of Technology,
Tamilnadu, India Chemistry, K.S. Rangasamy College of Technology, Tamilnadu, India. Automobile
Engineering, Institute of Road and Transport Technology, Tamilnadu, India, Received 13 September
2007; accepted 9 October 2007

BMW’s Hydrogen Message, Automotive Engineering International, 2002, SAE International.

Borges LH, Hollnagel C, Muraro W. Development of a Mercedes-Benz natural gas engine M366LAG
with a lean-burn combustion system. SAE Paper 962378, 1996.

Bysveen M, Engine characteristics of emissions and performance using mixtures of natural gas and
hydrogen. Journal of Energy 2007

C. Sopena a, P.M. Die´guez a, D. Sa´inz a, J.C. Urroz a, E. Guelbenzu b, L.M. Gandı´a a,*a Escuela
Te´cnica Superior de Ingenieros Industriales y de Telecomunicacio´n, Universidad Pu´ blica de
Navarra, Campus de Arrosadı´a, E-31006 Pamplona, Spai, b Acciona Biocombustibles S.A., Avenida
Ciudad de la Innovacio´n no 5, E-31621 Sarriguren, Navarra, Spain. Accepted 12 November 2009

Chengal, Y. A. and M. A. Boles. 1998. Thermodynamics an Engineering Approach. 3rd ed. McGraw-
Hill Inc. 85. 940.

De Witt MP, Faaij APC. Impact of hydrogen onboard storage technologies on the performance of
hydrogen fuelled vehicles: a techno-economic well-to-wheel assessment. International Journal of
Hydrogen Energy 2007

Diggins, D. D. 1998. CNG Fuel Cylinder Storage Efficiency and Economy in Fast Fill Operations.
SAE Technical Paper 981398.
Einewall P, Tunesta˚l P, Johansson B. Lean burn natural gas operation vs. stoichiometric operation
with EGR and a three way catalyst. SAE Paper 2005-01-0250, 2005.

EPA Approves Clean Diesel Measure, Automotive Engineering International, vol. 109, no.2, p.240,
2001, SAE International.

Ferguson, C.R., Internal Combustion Engines. New York: Wiley, 1986.

Frailey M, Norton P, Clark NN, Lyons DW. An evaluation of natural gas versus Diesel in medium-
duty buses. SAE Paper 2000-01-2822, 2000.

Haeng Muk Cho a, Bang-Quan He b,*a Division of Mechanical Engineering and Automotive
Engineering, Kongju National Univeristy, 276, Budae-Dong, Cheonan-City, Chungnam 330-717,
Korea b State Key Laboratory of Engines, Tianjin University, 92, Weijin Road, Nankai District,
Tianjin 300072, PR China Received 25 November 2005; accepted 30 May 2006 Available online 22
August 2006

Hari Ganesh R, Subramanian V, Balasubramanian V, Mallikarjuna JM, Ramesh A, SharmaRP.

Hydrogen fueled spark ignition engine with electronically controlled manifold injection: an
experimental study. Journal of Renewable Energy 2008

Heywood JB. Internal combustion engine fundamentals. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1988.

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2003

Kalam, M. A., H. H. Masjuki, M. A. Maleque, M. A. Amalina, H. Abdessalem, and T. M. I. Mahlia.

2004. Air-Fuel Ratio Calculation for a Natural Gas-Fuelled Spark Ignition Engine. SAE Technical
Paper 2004-01-0640.

Kato T, Saeki K, Nishide H, Yamada T. Development of CNG fueled engine with lean burn for small
size commercial van. JSAE Rev 2001;22:365–8.

Kett, P. W. 1982. Motor Vehicle Science Part 2. California: Chapman and Hall Ltd.

Kimura S, Aoki O, Ogawa H, Muranaka S, Enomoto Y. New combustion concept for ultra-clean and
high-efficiency small DI diesel engines. SAE paper 1999- 01-3681, 1999.

King SR. The impact of natural gas composition on fuel metering and engine operational
characteristics. SAE Paper 920593, 1992.

M.A. Escalante Soberanis*, A.M. Fernandez Universidad Nacional Auto´noma de Me´xico, Centro de
Investigacio´n en Energı´a, Privada Xochicalco S/N, Temixco, Morelos, C.P. 62580, Mexico.
September 2009

Magdalena Momirlan, T.N.Veziroglu, Institute of Physical Chemistry, “I.G. Murgulescu”, Romanian

Academy, Spl. Independentei 202, Bucharest 77208, Romania Clean Energy Research Institute,
University of Miami, Coral Gables, FL 33124, USA, December 2004

Martı´nez-Martı´nez S, Sa´nchez-Cruz FA, Riesco-A´ vila JM, Gallegos-Mun˜ oz A, Aceves SM,

Liquid penetration length in direct diesel fuel injection. Applied Thermal Engineering 2008
Masood M, Mehdi SN, Ram Reddy P, Experimental investigations on a hydrogen–diesel dual fuel
engine at different compression ratios; ASME Journal of Engineering for Gas Turbines and Power
2007

Mohammadi A; Performance and combustion characteristics of a direct injection SI hydrogen engine;

International Journal of Hydrogen Energy 2007

MS 1024. 1986. Specification for Wheel Nuts for Passenger Vehicles. Department of Standards
Malaysia.

MS 1096. 1997. Code of Practice for the Use of CNG in Internal Combustion Engines. Department of
Standards Malaysia.

Mtui PL, Hill PG. Ignition delay and combustion duration with natural gas fueling of Diesel engines.
SAE Paper 961933, 1996.

NFPA 52-1984. 1984. Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Vehicular Fuel Systems. National Fire
Protection Association.

Obert, E.F., Internal Combustion Engines and Air Pollution. New York: Harper and Row, 1973.

Ogink R, Golovitchev V. Gasoline HCCI modelling: computer program combining detailed chemistry
and gas exchange process. SAE 2001-01-3614, 2001.

Paola Helena Barros Za´ rante , Jose´ Ricardo Sodre´ *Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Pontifical Catholic University of Minas Gerais, Av. Dom Jose´ Gaspar, 500, 30535-610 Belo
Horizonte, MG, Brazil Accepted 11 November 2009

Perry, R. H. and D. W. Green 1997. Perry’s Chemical Engineers’ Handbook. 7th ed. USA: McGraw-
Hill Inc. 2-195.

Reynolds CCO, Evans RL, Andreassi L, Cordiner S, Mulone V. The effect of varying the injected
charge stoichiometry in a partially stratified charge natural gas engine. SAE Paper 2005-01-0247, 2005

SAE J1616. 1994. Recommended Practice for Compressed Natural Gas Vehicle Fuel.

SAE J1829. 2002. Stoichiometric Air-Fuel Ratios of Automotive Fuels.

Saravanan N, An experimental investigation on DI diesel engine with hydrogen fuel. Journal of

Renewable Energy 2008

Sir Joseph Swan Institute for Energy Research, Newcastle University, Devonshire Building, Newcastle
upon Tyne, NE1 7RU, United Kingdom. Accepted 15 August 2008. Available online 7 October 2008

Smith, J. M., H. C. Van Ness, and M. M. Abbott. 1996. Introduction to Chemical Engineering
Thermodynamics. 5th ed. USA: McGraw-Hill Inc. 85-93.

Sobiesiak A, Zhang S. The first and second law analysis of spark ignition engine fuelled with
compressed natural gas. SAE Paper 2003-01-3091, 2003.

SørensenB, Hydrogen and fuel cells: emerging technologies and applications. Amsterdam, Holand:
Elsevier Academic; 2005
Table B4, Appendix B, Transportation Energy Data Book from the Center for Transportation Analysis
of the Oak Ridge National Laboratory

Tang X, Kabat DM, Natkin RJ, Stockhausen WF. Ford P2000 hydrogen engine dynamometer
development. SAE paper 2002; 2002-01-0242.

Tilagone R, Monnier G, Chaouche A, Baguelin Y, De Chauveron S. Development of a high efficiency,

low emission SI-CNG bus engine. SAE Paper 961080, 1996

Topinka JA, Gerty MD, Heywood JB, Keck JC. Knock behavior of a lean-burn, H2 and CO enhanced,
SI gasoline engine concept. SAE paper 2004; 2004-01-0975.

Varde KS, Asar GMM. Burn rates in natural-gas-fueled, singlecylinder spark ignition engine. SAE
Paper 2001-28-0023, 2001.

Varde KS, Patro N, Drouillard K. Lean burn natural gas fueled SI engine and exhaust emissions. SAE
Paper 952499, 1995.

V. Ganesan, Internal Combustion Engines, 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill Inc., 2004

Wiederkehr, P. 1995. Motor Vehicle Pollution: Reduction Strategies Beyond 2010. Paris: Organisation
for Economic Co-operation and Development.

Zhao H, Peng Z, Ladommatos N. Understanding of controlled autoignition combustion in four-stroke

gasoline engine. Proc Inst Mech Eng 2001; 215(Part D):1297–310.

Federal Register. Vol. 64, No. 94 (May 17, 1999), pp. 26822 and 26826.

Federal Register. Vol. 63, No. 144 (July 28, 1998), pp. 40202-40208.

U.S. Department of Energy, "What's An Alternative Fuel?" Press Release (July 28, 1998)

Butane-Propane News, Vol. 31, No. 7 (Arcadia, CA: Butane-Propane News, Inc., July 1999), pp. 10-
11.

National Association of Fleet Administrators, FleetFocus, Vol. 2, No. 12 (Iselin, NJ: National
Association of Fleet Administrators, Inc., June 9, 1999), p. 1.

U.S. Department of Energy, "DOE Designates New Alternative Fuel?" Press Release (May 17, 1999)

Deutsches Museum, web site www.deutsches-museum.de/ausstell/meister/e_diesel.htm.

Optecon, web site www.sh015a7585.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/diesel.htm.

Deutsches Museum, web site www.deutsches-museum.de/ausstell/meister/e_diesel.htm.

Western Biofuels, web site www.westernbiofuels.com/history.html.

National Biodiesel Board, cited in G.G. Pearl, “Biodiesel Production in the U.S.,” Render Magazine
(August 2001), web site www. rendermagazine.com/August2001/TechTopics.html.

Energy Policy Act of 2003, Conference Version, Section 1314.

A cetane number is determined by an engine test using two reference fuel blends with known cetane
numbers. A cetane index is a calculated value, derived from fuel density and volatility, that gives a
reasonable approximation of the cetane number.

M.S. Graboski and R.L. McCormick, “Combustion of Fat and Vegetable Oil Derived Fuels in Diesel
Engines,” Progress in Energy and Combustion Science, Vol. 24, No. 2 (1998), pp. 131-132.

National Biodiesel Board, “Lubricity Benefits,” web site www.biodiesel.org/pdf_files/Lubricity.PDF.

Graboski and McCormick, pp. 135-137.

National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Biodiesel—Clean, Green Diesel Fuel, DOE/GO-102001-1449

(Golden, CO, September 2001), web site www.afdc.doe.gov/pdfs/Bio_CleanGreen.pdf.

National Biodiesel Board, “Biodiesel Usage Checklist,” web site

www.biodiesel.org/pdf_files/bdusage.PDF.

National Renewable Energy Laboratory, Biodiesel—Clean, Green Diesel Fuel.

Biodiesel exhaust is said to smell like french fries. Petroleum diesel exhaust has an unpleasant sour
odor.

The Fischer-Tropsch process uses natural gas as its raw material and yields diesel fuel with a very high
cetane number, no aromatics, and no sulfur.

R.L. McCormick, J.R. Alvarez, and M.S. Graboski, NOx Solutions for Biodiesel, NREL/SR-510-
31465 (Golden, CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory, February 2003).

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, A Comprehensive Analysis of Biodiesel Impacts on Exhaust

Emissions: Draft Technical Report, EPA420-P-02-001 (Washington, DC, October 2002), pp. 75-84,
web site www.epa.gov/otaq/models/analysis/biodsl/p02001.pdf.

J. Sheehan, V. Camobreco, J. Duffield, M. Graboski, and H. Shapouri, Life Cycle Inventory of

Biodiesel and Petroleum Diesel for Use in an Urban Bus: Final Report, NREL/SR-580-24089 (Golden,
CO: National Renewable Energy Laboratory, May 1998), p. v, web site www.
nrel.gov/docs/legosti/fy98/24089.pdf.

National Biodiesel Board, “Biodiesel Production and Quality,” web site

www.biodiesel.org/pdf_files/prod_quality.pdf.

Graboski and McCormick, p. 127.

G.G. Pearl, “Biodiesel Production in the U.S.,” Render Magazine (August 2001), web site
www.rendermagazine.com/August2001/ TechTopics.html.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Effects on the Farm Economy of a Renewable Fuels Standard for
Motor Vehicle Fuel” (report attached to a letter from Keith Collins, Chief Economist, to Senator Tom
Harkin, dated August 1, 2002), web site http://harkin.senate.gov/ specials/20020826-usda-letter.pdf.

U.S. Department of Agriculture, USDA Agricultural Baseline Projections to 2012, Staff Report
WAOB-2003-1 (Washington, DC, February 2003), web site
www.ers.usda.gov/publications/waob031/waob20031.pdf.
 R. Teall, Study to Evaluate the Feasibility of Biodiesel Production Facilities in Nevada & California
Utilizing Grease Trap & Waste Cooking Oils as Feedstocks (Las Vegas, NV: Biodiesel Industries,
March 19, 2002), Appendix #3—Feasibility Study, pp. 38-42, web site www.westbioenergy.
org/reports/55034/55034fin.pdf.

View publication stats