The Experts below are selected from a list of 158829 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
Wojciech Tutak - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effects of injection timing of diesel Fuel on performance and emission of dual Fuel diesel engine powered by diesel E85 Fuels
Transport, 2018Co-Authors: Wojciech Tutak, Arkadiusz Jamrozik, Akos Bereczky, Kristof LukacsAbstract:The paper presents the results of the investigation of Dual Fuel (DF) diesel engines powered by high bioethanol contain Fuel – E85. The object of the investigation is a three-cylinder Compression Ignition (CI) Internal Combustion Engine (ICE) powered by diesel oil and bioethanol Fuel E85 injected into the intake port as a DF engine. With the increase in the share of E85 Fuel the highest intensification of the combustion process takes place in the main stage of the combustion and the ignition delay increases as well. The researchers are conducted using Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) method; the results of the investigation are successfully verified based on the indicator diagrams, heat performance rate and emissions. Based on CFD results the cross sections investigation of the combustion chamber it can be seen that in case of the DF engine, the flame front propagates with a higher speed. The initial phase of the combustion starts in a different location of the combustion chamber than in the classic CI engine. Replacement of diesel Fuel by E85 in 20% resulted in the shortening of the combustion duration more than 2-times. With the increase of energetic share in E85 the soot emission is decreased at all ranges of the analysed operations of the engine. The oppositerelationship was observed in case of NO emission. With the increase of E85 in the Fuel, the emission of NO increased.
-
bioethanol E85 as a Fuel for dual Fuel diesel engine
Energy Conversion and Management, 2014Co-Authors: Wojciech TutakAbstract:This study investigates the potential of E85 Fuelling in a diesel engine. Researches were performed using a three-cylinder a direct injection diesel engine. A dual-Fuelling technology is implemented such that E85 is introduced into the intake manifold using a port-Fuel injector while diesel is injected directly into the cylinder. The primary aim of the study was to determine the operating parameters of the engine powered on E85 bioethanol Fuel in dual Fuel system. The parameters that were taken into account are: engine efficiency, indicated mean effective pressure, heat release rate, combustion duration and ignition delay, combustion phasing and exhaust toxicity. With E85 Fuel participation, NOx and soot emissions were reduced, whereas CO and HC emissions increased considerably. It was found that E85 participation in a combustible mixture reduced the excess air factor for the engine and this led to increased emissions of CO and HC, but decreased emissions of nitrogen oxides and soot.
Bruce E Dale - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
ethanol Fuels e10 or E85 life cycle perspectives 5 pp
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2006Co-Authors: Seungdo Kim, Bruce E DaleAbstract:The environmental performance of two ethanol Fuel applications (E10 and E85) is compared (E10 Fuel: a mixture of 10% ethanol and 90% gasoline by volume, and E85 Fuel: a mixture of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline by volume). Two types of functional units are considered here: An ethanol production-oriented perspective and a traveling distance-oriented perspective. The ethanol production-oriented functional unit perspective reflects the fact that the ethanol Fuel supply (arable land or quantity of biomass used in ethanol Fuel) is constrained, while the traveling distance-oriented functional unit implies that the ethanol Fuel supply is unlimited. In the ethanol production-oriented functional unit perspective, the E10 Fuel application offers better environmental performance than the E85 Fuel application in terms of natural resources used, nonrenewable energy and global warming. However, in the calculations based on the traveling distance perspective, the E85 Fuel application provides less environmental impacts in crude oil consumption, nonrenewable energy and global warming than the E10 Fuel application. The choice of functional units significantly affects the final results. Thus the functional unit in a descriptive LCA should reflect as nearly as possible the actual situation associated with a product system. Considering the current situation of constrained ethanol Fuel supply, the E10 Fuel application offers better environmental performance in natural resources used, nonrenewable energy and global warming unless the Fuel economy of an E85 Fueled vehicle is close to that of an E10 Fueled vehicle.
-
global potential bioethanol production from wasted crops and crop residues
Biomass & Bioenergy, 2004Co-Authors: Bruce E DaleAbstract:Abstract The global annual potential bioethanol production from the major crops, corn, barley, oat, rice, wheat, sorghum, and sugar cane, is estimated. To avoid conflicts between human food use and industrial use of crops, only the wasted crop, which is defined as crop lost in distribution, is considered as feedstock. Lignocellulosic biomass such as crop residues and sugar cane bagasse are included in feedstock for producing bioethanol as well. There are about 73.9 Tg of dry wasted crops in the world that could potentially produce 49.1 GL year −1 of bioethanol. About 1.5 Pg year −1 of dry lignocellulosic biomass from these seven crops is also available for conversion to bioethanol. Lignocellulosic biomass could produce up to 442 GL year −1 of bioethanol. Thus, the total potential bioethanol production from crop residues and wasted crops is 491 GL year −1 , about 16 times higher than the current world ethanol production. The potential bioethanol production could replace 353 GL of gasoline (32% of the global gasoline consumption) when bioethanol is used in E85 Fuel for a midsize passenger vehicle. Furthermore, lignin-rich fermentation residue, which is the coproduct of bioethanol made from crop residues and sugar cane bagasse, can potentially generate both 458 TWh of electricity (about 3.6% of world electricity production) and 2.6 EJ of steam. Asia is the largest potential producer of bioethanol from crop residues and wasted crops, and could produce up to 291 GL year −1 of bioethanol. Rice straw, wheat straw, and corn stover are the most favorable bioethanol feedstocks in Asia. The next highest potential region is Europe ( 69.2 GL of bioethanol), in which most bioethanol comes from wheat straw. Corn stover is the main feedstock in North America, from which about 38.4 GL year −1 of bioethanol can potentially be produced. Globally rice straw can produce 205 GL of bioethanol, which is the largest amount from single biomass feedstock. The next highest potential feedstock is wheat straw, which can produce 104 GL of bioethanol. This paper is intended to give some perspective on the size of the bioethanol feedstock resource, globally and by region, and to summarize relevant data that we believe others will find useful, for example, those who are interested in producing biobased products such as lactic acid, rather than ethanol, from crops and wastes. The paper does not attempt to indicate how much, if any, of this waste material could actually be converted to bioethanol.
Seungdo Kim - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
ethanol Fuels e10 or E85 life cycle perspectives 5 pp
International Journal of Life Cycle Assessment, 2006Co-Authors: Seungdo Kim, Bruce E DaleAbstract:The environmental performance of two ethanol Fuel applications (E10 and E85) is compared (E10 Fuel: a mixture of 10% ethanol and 90% gasoline by volume, and E85 Fuel: a mixture of 85% ethanol and 15% gasoline by volume). Two types of functional units are considered here: An ethanol production-oriented perspective and a traveling distance-oriented perspective. The ethanol production-oriented functional unit perspective reflects the fact that the ethanol Fuel supply (arable land or quantity of biomass used in ethanol Fuel) is constrained, while the traveling distance-oriented functional unit implies that the ethanol Fuel supply is unlimited. In the ethanol production-oriented functional unit perspective, the E10 Fuel application offers better environmental performance than the E85 Fuel application in terms of natural resources used, nonrenewable energy and global warming. However, in the calculations based on the traveling distance perspective, the E85 Fuel application provides less environmental impacts in crude oil consumption, nonrenewable energy and global warming than the E10 Fuel application. The choice of functional units significantly affects the final results. Thus the functional unit in a descriptive LCA should reflect as nearly as possible the actual situation associated with a product system. Considering the current situation of constrained ethanol Fuel supply, the E10 Fuel application offers better environmental performance in natural resources used, nonrenewable energy and global warming unless the Fuel economy of an E85 Fueled vehicle is close to that of an E10 Fueled vehicle.
-
environmental aspects of ethanol derived from no tilled corn grain nonrenewable energy consumption and greenhouse gas emissions
Biomass & Bioenergy, 2005Co-Authors: Seungdo KimAbstract:Abstract Nonrenewable energy consumption and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions associated with ethanol (a liquid Fuel) derived from corn grain produced in selected counties in Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin are presented. Corn is cultivated under no-tillage practice (without plowing). The system boundaries include corn production, ethanol production, and the end use of ethanol as a Fuel in a midsize passenger car. The environmental burdens in multi-output biorefinery processes (e.g., corn dry milling and wet milling) are allocated to the ethanol product and its various coproducts by the system expansion allocation approach. The nonrenewable energy requirement for producing 1 kg of ethanol is approximately 13.4–21.5 MJ (based on lower heating value), depending on corn milling technologies employed. Thus, the net energy value of ethanol is positive; the energy consumed in ethanol production is less than the energy content of the ethanol (26.8 MJ kg −1 ). In the GHG emissions analysis, nitrous oxide (N 2 O) emissions from soil and soil organic carbon levels under corn cultivation in each county are estimated by the DAYCENT model. Carbon sequestration rates range from 377 to 681 kg C ha −1 year −1 and N 2 O emissions from soil are 0.5–2.8 kg N ha −1 year −1 under no-till conditions. The GHG emissions assigned to 1 kg of ethanol are 260–922 g CO 2 eq. under no-tillage. Using ethanol (E85) Fuel in a midsize passenger vehicle can reduce GHG emissions by 41–61% km −1 driven, compared to gasoline-Fueled vehicles. Using ethanol as a vehicle Fuel, therefore, has the potential to reduce nonrenewable energy consumption and GHG emissions.
J Hromadko - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
effect of E85 Fuel on harmful emissions skoda fabia 1 2 htp
Agronomy research, 2014Co-Authors: J Cedik, Martin Pexa, M Kotek, J HromadkoAbstract:This article deals with harmful emissions production by a spark ignition engine Skoda Fabia 1.2 HTP operating on E85 Fuel. The measurement was performed on a test bench using a test cycle that simulates real traffic conditions. Three variants were chosen for burning E85 Fuel and the first one was the usage of the E85 Fuel without modifications of the engine control unit (variant 1 - E85), the second one was the usage of the E85 Fuel with prolonged time of the injection by 28% (variant 2 - E85+) and the last third variant was reference Fuel petrol Natural BA95 (variant 3 - N95) for comparison. The results of the measurement have shown that for the variant 1 - E85 there was a significant decrease in the emissions of CO and HC while increasing emissions of NO X especially at high load. For the variant 2 - E85+ there was a significant increase of the emissions of CO and HC, again especially at high load. Emissions of NO X have shown a decrease for this variant. CO 2 emissions were approximately on the same level for both variants (E85, E85+) in comparison with the variant 3 - N95.
-
effect of E85 Fuel on performance parameters Fuel consumption and engine efficiency skoda fabia 1 2 htp
Agronomy research, 2014Co-Authors: J Cedik, Martin Pexa, M Kotek, J HromadkoAbstract:This article deals with the effect of the E85 Fuel on the performance parameters, specific Fuel consumption and engine effic iency of a spark ignition engine Skoda Fabia 1.2 HTP and it is related to the article Effect of E85 Fuel on Harmful Emissions - Skoda Fabia 1.2 HTP. The measurement was performed on a test bench using a test cycle that simulates real traffic conditions and simultaneously the external rotation speed characteristics were measured. Three variants were chosen for burning E85 Fuel. The first one was the usage of the E85 Fuel without modifications on the engine control unit (variant 1 - E85), the second one was the usage of the E85 Fuel with prolonged time of the injection by 28% (variant 2 - E85+) and the last third variant was the reference Fuel petrol Natural BA95 (variant 3 - N95) for comparison. The results of the measurement showed a non-negligible decrease of the engine torque and power for both variants using E85 Fuel. Further, there was a considerable increase of the specific Fuel consumption for variants 1 and 2 (E85, E85+). Engine efficiency for the driving cycle increased for variants 1 and 2 (E85, E85+) approximately by one percent. For the external rotation speed characteristics the engine efficiency increased approximately by 5% for variant 1 - E85 and approximately by 2% for variant 2 - E85+.
Nicholas M Josefik - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
hydrogen production from E85 Fuel with ceria based catalysts
Journal of Power Sources, 2009Co-Authors: Scott L Swartz, Paul H Matter, Gene Arkenberg, Franklin H Holcomb, Nicholas M JosefikAbstract:Abstract The use of renewable (crop-derived) Fuels to produce hydrogen has considerable environmental advantages with respect to reducing net emissions of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Ethanol is an example of a renewable Fuel from which hydrogen can be derived, and E85 is a commercially available ethanol-based Fuel of increasing importance. The distributed production of hydrogen from E85 Fuel is one potential way of assuring availability of hydrogen as PEM Fuel cells are introduced into service. NexTech Materials is collaborating with the U.S. Army Construction Engineering Laboratory (CERL) on the development of a hydrogen reformation process for E85 Fuel. This paper describes the technical status of E85 Fuel reforming process development work using Rh/ceria catalysts. Reforming results are compared for steam reforming and oxidative steam reforming of ethanol (the primary constituent of E85 Fuel), isooctane, ethanol/iso-octane Fuel mixtures (as a surrogate to E85), and commercially available E85 Fuel. Stable reforming of E85 at 800 °C and a space velocity of 58,000 scm 3 g cat −1 h −1 over a 200-h period is reported.
