Potential of Alternative Fuels to Replace Fossil Fuels in Road Transport
1. 0
An Investigation into the Potential
of Alternative Fuels to Replace
Fossil fuels in Road Transport
Lawrence Wright
BEng (Hon) Civil Engineering
40094914
Undergraduate Honours Project
CTR10114
Submission Date: 21st
March 2014
Supervisor: Professor Wafaa Saleh
2. 1
ABSTRACT
This honours project focuses on the investigation of future fuels expected to be developed
for road transport. The aim of the research is to evaluate the potential of alternative fuels to
replace fossil fuels by comparing them with each other in terms of cost, sustainability and
viability.
Three alternative fuels have been identified as the most environmentally friendly and realistic
options. These fuel types, biofuels, electric vehicles and fuel cell electric vehicles, are
researched in full to understand their properties, environmental impact and overall benefits.
Biofuels, in the form of bioethanol and biodiesel, are currently used as substitutes for petrol
and diesel. For this project laboratory tests were conducted to study the effects of mixing
ethanol with petrol in terms of performance and emissions. While these results are
favourable many other issues need to be taken into account. Examples include the fuel
versus food debate and overall sustainability.
Electric vehicles are presently widely available and the necessary infrastructure is in place.
However there are many drawbacks which result in a lack of public interest in purchasing
them. These include the price of the vehicle and the limitations of the batteries.
Fuel cell electric vehicles appear to be the most promising alternative. Unfortunately they are
currently the most underdeveloped of the alternative fuels considered. They have the
potential to eliminate emissions from road transport, however that depends on production
methods of the hydrogen used to fuel the vehicles. The cost of developing the infrastructure
and time necessary for their introduction is considerable.
While undertaking this project the future of fuels in road transport was always considered in
terms of the results. The results show that while electric vehicles and first generation biofuels
are adequate to reduce emissions in the short term, they may not be best suited for long
term use.
Overall fuel cell electric vehicles, in theory are the most feasible to completely replace fossil
fuels. However this will not be possible for decades.
3. 2
Table of Contents
Abstract 1
Table of Contents 2
List of Tables: 4
List of Figures: 4
Acknowledgements 5
Abbreviations ` 6
1 Introduction 7
2 Biofuels 9
2.1 Bioethanol 9
2.2 Biodiesel 10
2.2.1 Biodiesel Emission Results 11
2.3 Law 11
2.3.1 The Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) 12
2.3.2 EU Directives 12
2.4 Life cycle Environmental Analysis 13
2.5 Second generation biofuel 13
2.6 Biofuel Summary 14
3 Laboratory Report 15
3.1 Apparatus 15
3.2 Safety Precautions 17
3.3 Procedure 17
3.4 Calculations 18
3.5 Results 19
3.5.1 Fuel Consumption 19
4. 3
3.5.2 Emissions Produced 20
3.6 Laboratory Tests Conclusion 29
4 Electric Vehicles (EV) 30
4.1 Infrastructure 30
4.2 Cost 32
4.3 Range 32
4.4 Battery Packs 33
4.5 Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV) 33
4.6 Nissan Leaf 34
4.7 Electric Vehicles Summary 35
5 Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles (FCEV) 36
5.1 The California Example 37
5.2 Hydrogen Fuel Cell 37
5.3 Production of Hydrogen 38
5.4 Honda FCX Clarity 39
5.4.1 Home Energy Station 40
5.5 Timeframe 40
5.6 Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles Summary 41
6 Conclusions and Recommendations 42
References 43
Appendix A 46
5. 4
List of tables:
Table 2.1 Engine Emission Results from the University of Idaho 11
Table 3.1 Fuel Consumption 19
List of figures:
Figure 3.1. Honda CBF600 fixed on the Dyna Pro Dynamometer 15
Figure 3.2. Fuel measurement container connected to the motorbike and front monitor. 16
Figure 3.3. Omniscan Gas Analyser 16
Figure 3.4. Exhaust Extractor Fan and Cooling Fan 17
Figure 3.5. 30mph Run – AFR 20
Figure 3.6. 45mph Run – AFR 20
Figure 3.7. 60mph Run – AFR 21
Figure 3.8. 30mph run – CO2 21
Figure 3.9. 45mph run – CO2 22
Figure 3.10. 60mph run – CO2 22
Figure 3.11. 30mph run – CO 23
Figure 3.12. 45mph run – CO 23
Figure 3.13. 60mph run – CO 24
Figure 3.14. 30mph run – HC 24
Figure 3.15. 45mph run – HC 25
Figure 3.16. 60mph run – HC 25
Figure 3.17. 30mph run – NOX 26
Figure 3.18. 45mph run – NOX 26
Figure 3.19. 60mph run – NOX 27
Figure 3.20. 30mph run – O2 27
Figure 3.21. 45mph run – O2 28
Figure 3.22. 60mph run – O2 28
Figure 4.1. Charging Point at Edinburgh Napier University Merchiston Campus 31
Figure 4.2. Nissan Leaf 34
Figure 5.1. Components of a FCEV 36
Figure 5.2. Honda FCX Clarity 39
Figure 5.3. Fuel Nozzle 39
6. 5
Acknowledgements
The completion of this Honours Project would not have been achieved without the kind
assistance of a few people. I would like to express my sincere appreciation firstly to my
project supervisor, Professor Wafaa Saleh. Throughout the process of producing this
dissertation her continued guidance and advice made the entire period, from start to finish
much easier and stress free. Anytime I needed assistance or feedback, Professor Saleh
kindly made herself available.
I would like to express my gratitude to the Engines Laboratory Technician Callum Wilson.
Over the two week period of conducting the laboratory tests he kindly donated his time to
teach me how to use the equipment and ensured the laboratory was open for me as often as
the schedule allowed. Furthermore he ensured the equipment was in proper working order at
all times. Without his generosity and patience the laboratory tests undertaken for the project
would not have been possible.
I would also like to thank Dr. Ravindra Kumar for his assistance and advice with regard to
the laboratory tests. His help was very valuable and his constructive observations were very
encouraging.
I must similarly direct my thanks to Shell UK customer care. Their response to my queries
were very helpful and they kindly provided me with more information than I had requested.
Finally I would like to thank the honours project leader Jonathon Cowie, library staff and
other university members of staff for helping me find material and making themselves
available to answer any questions.
7. 6
Abbreviations
United Kingdom - UK
European Union - EU
Nitrogen Oxides - NOX
Carbon Monoxide - CO
British Petroleum - BP
Greenhouse Gas - GHG
Hydrocarbons - HC
Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation - RTFO
Renewable Fuel Agency - RFA
European Commission - EC
Miles per Hour - mph
Millilitre - ml
Air to Fuel Ratio - AFR
Carbon Dioxide - CO2
Parts per Million - ppm
Oxygen - O2
Electric Vehicle - EV
Internal Combustion Engine - ICE
Ultra Low Emissions Discount - ULED
Lithium Ion - Li-ion
Hybrid Electric Vehicle - HEV
Kilowatt - kW
Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles - FCEV
California Hydrogen Highway Network - CaH2Net
California Fuel Cell Partnership - CaFCP
Water - H2O
Hydrogen - H2
8. 7
1 Introduction
The aim of this research project is to evaluate the potential of alternate fuels used in road
transport to replace fossil fuels. This is to be completed by investigating suitable alternative
fuels, analysing their properties and comparing them with fossil fuels. Issues to be
researched include price, environmental impact, energy output and infrastructure. It is hoped
that this project can be used to provide education on how best to introduce suitable
alternative fuels into the transport market.
According to the European Commission, “Alternative fuels are urgently needed to break the
over-dependence of European transport on oil. Transport in Europe is 94 % dependent on
oil” (EC, 2013).
There are a number of reasons why it is now considered urgent. These include;
The need to reduce carbon emissions. Fossil fuels are burned sending high levels of carbon
emissions into the atmosphere. This is damaging to health and increases global warming.
Alternative fuels are the best hope to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases being
released from road transport. It is even possible that the right alternative will eventually
eliminate carbon emissions completely.
The shortage in long term availability of oil has made it necessary to explore other options.
At the moment it is envisaged that oil will begin to run out after about another 50 years
(Chapman, 2007). This will affect all aspects of life and suitable alternatives need to be
developed now to prevent the transport sector from shutting down should its supply come to
an end.
This has also contributed to the rapid price rise of fuels. Increasing taxes combined with
higher costs to oil companies supplying fuel has seen the price for consumers multiply in
recent years. As a result ordinary people have had to spend more and more on transport
costs. It is hoped that suitable alternatives will reduce fuel prices in the long term.
In this project three viable alternative are being investigated and analysed in detail. These
are, biofuels, electric vehicles and fuel cell electric vehicles.
Biofuels are fuels that are produced from renewable energy sources, such as sugarcane or
other similar crops. The main biofuels are bioethanol and biodiesel. These are currently
mixed at low levels in the fuel in almost all vehicles today. Biofuels are a relatively new
prospect which has a big potential to improve and expand its use in road transport. Because
it is so new it has many issues which it has yet to overcome. In this honours project biofuels
are investigated fully to discover their impact and viability. This includes laboratory tests
which were conducting in the Engines Laboratory in order to understand biofuels better.
9. 8
Electric vehicles are currently the most common and most developed alternative to fossil
fuels on the road. While they don’t produce tailpipe emissions there are major drawbacks
which reduce their desirability to most people. Some problems include the price of the cars,
the limited range and the long-term energy levels of the battery packs, among others. All
these issues are investigated in this report with what can be expected in the future.
Constantly improving technology can help expand the use of electric vehicles. A profile is to
be conducted of the most popular electric car at the moment which is the Nissan Leaf.
The introduction of fuel cell technology is an exciting prospect. Fuelled by hydrogen, it has
the potential of producing zero carbon emissions. However this is currently the least
developed of the alternatives. As it stands it may not be until the middle of this century
before hydrogen fuelled vehicles may begin to take a foothold in the transport sector. The
main issue effecting the long term commercialisation of these vehicles is the cost and lack of
infrastructure, along with methods of producing hydrogen.
Although the three alternative options investigated in this project are very different, they each
provide a great deal of promise with regards to replacing fossil fuels as the most common
road transport fuel in the long term. They are each renewable energy sources which is very
important. Continued research and improvements are vital in the search to replace oil. While
today it is still early in the quest to achieve this goal, it is hoped that this research project can
have a small role to play.
10. 9
2 Biofuels
Biofuels are fuels which are created from renewable energy sources. They are produced
from organic matter, with most coming from crops. The two main types of biofuels are
biodiesel and bioethanol. Biofuels currently play an important role in reducing carbon
emissions and preserving the dwindling supply of oil.
Because they are liquid fuels like petrol or diesel, they are seen as a suitable substitute for
combustion engines. While biofuels could be used as a fuel in their own right they are
generally mixed with petrol or diesel at moderately low levels. At high levels modifications
may be needed to the engines to prevent damage. Under the current law in the UK and the
EU Directives every fuel supplier has to comply with legislation which has been introduced to
promote biofuels and increase renewable energy use in the transport sector.
Currently there appears to be a basic lack of knowledge among the general public about the
overall effects of using biofuels, whether beneficial or damaging. They may have the
potential to be a good long term alternative to oil however biofuels are a reasonably new
commercial concept. Concerns exist about the carbon balance of biofuels when all aspects
of their use and production are taken into account. At the moment all biofuels being
produced are in the first generation of this fuel range and so have many issues to overcome
before they can develop.
Some of these concerns include compatibility with car engines, overall environmental
benefits and the excessive amount of land needed to produce these fuels. There is also
believed to be less energy created or power discharged from biofuels than petrol and diesel,
this results in a higher fuel consumption per distance travelled.
2.1 Bioethanol
Ethanol is an alcohol made by the fermentation of carbohydrates in feedstock. These
typically are sugar in crops such as maize or sugarcane and starch in wheat or barley. It can
also be used as a fuel in its pure form but is generally mixed with petrol.
While ethanol has been around with over a century, it only started to become a viable
alternative fuel in the 1970s due to an oil crisis (Solomon et al, 2007). Since then its
popularity has grown worldwide. However there has been limited improvements in its
composition.
The main issue restricting mixing ethanol with petrol at higher percentages is its high
corrosive level. Car engines older than ten years old are in danger of being damaged from
high percentage mixes of ethanol in petrol.
11. 10
Bioethanol also produces only two thirds the energy of petrol. This can be attributed to the
presence of a high level of oxygen. However this also improves combustion and is
responsible for lower levels of nitrogen oxides (NOX) and carbon monoxide (CO) among
other carbon emissions (Balat et al, 2008). This is evident in the laboratory tests which were
undertaken for this honours project. The laboratory report is included in the next chapter.
Brazil is the major producer of bioethanol from sugarcane, the United States is the major
producer of bioethanol from corn. Together they produce more than half of the world’s
bioethanol (Wheals et al, 1999) which is where most bioethanol in the UK is imported from.
Most ethanol produced in Europe is made from wheat or sugar beet.
The policy changes of many governments worldwide over the last decade has made
investing in biofuels an attractive prospect for most large oil companies. Modern fuel often
has to have a certain percentage of biofuel or a cap on the amount of emissions allowable. A
joint venture between shell and Brazilian firm Cosan produces more than 2 billion litres of
ethanol a year from sugar cane in Brazil (Shell Global, 2013). BP has also invested in
producing biofuels from sugar cane in Brazil with the view of increasing the quantity rapidly
over the next few decades.
2.2 Biodiesel
Biodiesel is made from vegetable oils and animal fats. It is produced through a process of
refining. It can be used as a fuel for vehicles in pure form but is usually mixed with diesel.
When originally designing the diesel combustion engine, Rudolf Diesel used vegetable oil as
fuel. Eventually as crude oil became more accessible, the diesel engine evolved to be fuelled
by petroleum diesel, only reverting back to biodiesel during times of shortage, such as during
the Second World War (Ma et Hanna, 1999).
Recently along with the renewed attention on bioethanol, there has been a big increase in
the production of biodiesel from vegetable oil and animal fats. The most popular vegetable
oils used to make biodiesel include sunflower oil or rapeseed oil. These are much more
commonly used than animal fats as they are much more widely available and easier to
produce.
In Europe biodiesel is by far the most popular biofuel, where it is produced most by
Germany. Here the fuel is commonly used without mixing with diesel. This is because it has
better properties. It doesn’t corrode combustion engines like ethanol and it even provides
better lubrication (Bozbas, 2008). In cold weather it may not work effectively, however
additives can be easily used to improve its structure.
12. 11
2.2.1 Biodiesel Emission Results
Current biodiesel made from vegetable oils produce very favourable results. Most studies
show there is very little or even no reduction in the output of energy from biodiesel than
petroleum diesel. However a lower heating value means it sometimes generates slightly less
power. This is minimal. Overall it is believed to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by
a total of about 41% (Hill et al, 2006). This is much better than ethanol.
Table 2.1 Engine Emission Results from the University of Idaho (Bozbas, 2008)
Emission
100% Ester fuel (B100)
(%)
20/80 Mix (B20)
(%)
Hydrocarbons -52.4 -19.0
Carbon monoxide -47.6 -26.1
Nitrous oxides -10.0 -3.7
Carbon dioxide 0.9 0.7
Particulates 9.9 -2.8
Unfortunately it was not possible to conduct emission tests in the Engines Laboratory for this
project as the motorbike only runs on petrol and the equipment can only measure emissions
from petrol motors. However table 2.1 shows the results of such tests conducted by the
University of Idaho in the United States.
It can be seen in the table hydrocarbons (HC) and carbon monoxide (CO) show a sharp
decrease. This can be attributed to high oxygen content in the biofuels which provides a
more economical combustion. Similarly nitrous oxides (NOX) emissions also show a
reduction. Unfortunately carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions show a minor increase. This is a
setback for biodiesel. CO2 is the most important emission which needs to be reduced.
Overall the results show there is much less emissions produced from biodiesel than diesel.
2.3 Law
As the popularity of biofuels has grown, legislation in the UK and the EU has been
introduced. This is to ensure that the quality of biofuels is properly controlled and their use is
promoted. It has also been recognised as a way to reach international goals set out to
reduce carbon emissions, such as those from the Kyoto protocol.
The Kyoto protocol is a United Nations agreement which set international binding emission
reducing targets. It was adopted in 1997 and came into effect in 2005. The protocol was
renewed in 2012. Current stipulations requires countries to reduce emissions by at least 18%
from 1990 levels. It is to be completed or renewed again by 2020.
13. 12
2.3.1 The Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO)
The Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO) is described by the government as “the
principle legislation for the regulation of biofuels used for transport in the UK” (Department
for Transport, 2012).
The RTFO means that fuel suppliers of at least 450,000 litres of fuel a year must ensure 5%
comes from renewable sources. This means that most fuels now contains 5% biofuel. If the
necessary amount of biofuel is not met the alternative is to buy out of the obligation. This is
controlled by the Renewable Fuel Agency (RFA) who as part of the RTFO were set up to
oversee its application (Department for Transport, 2012).The regulation is processed using a
certificate system.
In 2011 the RTFO was updated to ensure a minimum GHG saving can be achieved and
proper land use is controlled so as to reduce the production of carbon emissions when
growing and harvesting the biofuel.
There has been suggestion that the 5% level may in time be increased to 10% in line with
EU targets, but currently there are no plans to do this. The main reason for this is the
expected maintenance and performance issues with engines in cars more than ten years
old, should this be applied.
2.3.2 EU Directives
The first EU biofuels directive was published in May 2003, Directive 2003/30/EC. This
directive issued a target of replacing fossil fuels in transport with 5.75% biofuels by 2010.
Biofuels were firmly regarded as the most important type of alternative fuel in transport at the
time.
However environmental and social concerns meant it was subsequently replaced by
Directive 2009/28/EC, The Renewables Directive. The purpose of this directives was to
promote the use of all alternative fuels in transport such as electricity and hydrogen along
with biofuels. The 2009 directive set a new target requiring 10% renewable energy in
transport by 2020.
In the directive strict sustainability standards for biofuels are outlined in Article 17
“Sustainability Criteria for Biofuels and Bio liquids” (European Parliament, 2009).The aim in
this article is to ensure biofuels achieve a clear and significant GHG saving.
The Fuel Quality Directive, Directive 2009/30/EC, which replaced Directive 98/70/EC, is
responsible for setting standards for petrol and diesel. The directive also introduces Article
7a, enforcing reductions in GHG emissions in road transport on fuel suppliers. In regard to
biofuels the directive issues sustainability measures. This is to help apply article 7a and
ensure the process overproducing biofuels also minimises the level of emissions released
14. 13
into the atmosphere. Some measures include restrictions on land which can be used. To
help protect soil quality, forests and vulnerable species of plants are protected (European
Parliament, 2009).
2.4 Life cycle Environmental Analysis
One major drawback with the production of biofuels is the insufficient availability of land to
grow the feedstock. This has created a food versus fuel debate. With the world population
continually growing, more food needs to be produced. In the next 50 years demand for food
is expected to double while transport fuel demand will increase even faster. With the growing
demand for biofuels as a possible supply of fuel many of these crops are used as feedstock
to produce fuel instead. This will impact the price in food as it becomes more valuable. It will
also curtail the market percentage biofuels can gain in the transport sector (Hill et al, 2006).
There are further issues relating to the amount of carbon emissions produced while growing
the crops. When growing the feedstock, carbon dioxide is taken in and replaced with oxygen.
However this does not make it carbon neutral. Large machinery are needed to set, irrigate
and harvest the crops, producing carbon emissions. Fertilizers and pesticide further
contribute to the negative environmental impact. The effect this has on water resources has
also been scrutinised. Transport of the feedstock again produces GHG’s reducing the
environmental benefits of biofuels.
Overall though despite these negative effects, biofuels are shown to provide a significant
reduction in carbon emissions and fuel price.
2.5 Second generation biofuel
All biofuels currently being produced are regarded as the first generation of biofuels. The
potential accessibility problems with biofuels due to the restrictions of feedstock availability
raises question marks over it sustainability.
Over the next two decades it is expected that second generation biofuel will become
available. This is a liquid fuel produced from plant biomass known as lignocellulose material.
Lignocellulose matter is the most profoundly available and underutilized raw material which
is mostly wasted when producing current biofuels (Sims et al, 2010). This makes it very
cheap.
Second generation biofuel, which does not have to come from food crops, would convert all
the plant into fuel, ensuring minimum waste. Plant biomass, such as wood or straw is often
used as fuel by simply burning it. This creates heat or electricity. However it’s potential to
create liquid biofuel could make it an ideal source of alternative fuel in road transport.
15. 14
Currently the majority of biomass produced across the world is wasted. When it is harvested,
it is left to rot on the ground. The fact that it doesn’t create a competition with food production
is another added advantage.
Presently second generation biofuels are being tested with positive results. A lower carbon
emissions rate and better level of sustainability has the potential to make them carbon
neutral. The main reason why it is not yet commercial is the lack of infrastructure. Bio
refineries are needed to produce this advanced biofuel (Naik et al, 2010). A lot of work is
needed to create these bio refineries where the biomass is produced and converted to fuel.
2.6 Biofuel Summary
Current available biofuels on first sight do achieve their purpose of reducing carbon
emissions. However when all environmental aspects of their production are taken into
account, there is only a modest overall improvement. While it is also likely that it will reduce
the price of fuel and increase the availability of petrol or diesel. It is a benefit for today.
However in the long term it will not be enough, due to the limitations of its production
capacity.
The potential that second generation biofuels show is much more promising. It eliminates
many of the drawbacks of the first generation biofuel. However with it not becoming available
for the next two decades, first generation biofuels will have to suffice for the immediate
future. A significant effort will be needed to develop the infrastructure needed to proceed with
the commercialization of second generation biofuels.
16. 15
3 Laboratory Report
As part of this honours project laboratory tests were undertaken to investigate the impact of
mixing ethanol with petrol. The tests were completed over two weeks in the Engines
Laboratory. Ethanol was mixed with petrol at different percentages ranging from 5% to 20%,
it was then used in the motorbike and run at different speeds with the results being recorded.
The results measured fuel consumption per distance travelled and the range of emissions
produced through the exhaust. They were then analysed and compared together to see how
they changed. All results are included in this report with the conclusions stating the effects of
ethanol on reducing emissions and increasing fuel consumption.
3.1 Apparatus
The motorbike used in the engines laboratory is a 2004 Honda CBF 600. This was securely
placed upon a Dyna Pro Dynamometer. The back wheel of the motorbike was on the roller
which would record speed and distance travelled while the motorbike was running. These
were displayed on a computer screen in front of the motorbike. The dynamometer could only
record for a maximum run of 3 minutes and only when the motorbike was travelling over
5mph. As a result it was decided in these tests each run should be about 2 minutes and 30
seconds in length. Recording generally started at 7 or 8mph and ended when the motorbike
decelerated below 5mph.
Figure 3.1. Honda CBF600 fixed on the Dyna Pro Dynamometer
The fuel used was Shell Unleaded Petrol. This already contains 5% ethanol due to the
Renewable Transport Fuel Obligation (RTFO). This was stored in fuel cans.
17. 16
Different measuring containers were used to mix the fuel. A container was also used to
measure the fuel used. This was connected to the engine in the motorbike. This meant
instead of filling the fuel tank, this container could be filled with the fuel used recorded after
each run on the motorbike.
Figure 3.2. Fuel measurement container connected to the motorbike and front monitor.
An Omniscan Gas Analyser was used to measure the emissions from the motorbike. A
probe was connected to the inside of the exhaust pipe. This recorded the emissions being
released and saved them on the machine. These results could then be exported onto the
computer to be analysed.
Figure 3.3. Omniscan Gas Analyser
18. 17
3.2 Safety Precautions
All necessary safety precautions were adhered to while conducting the tests in the Engines
Laboratory.
Before starting the motorbike the fans had to be switched on. One fan was placed over the
exhaust pipe of the motorbike to extract the fumes. To supplement this, a fan blowing fresh
air into the room was turned on. Two fans were also placed in front of the dynamometer
which had to be turned on when the bike was running. The purpose of these were to blow air
at the bike to prevent it from overheating. When all the equipment was turned on ear
protectors had to be worn as it created a lot of noise.
Figure 3.4. Exhaust Extractor Fan and Cooling Fan
Further precautions meant no loose clothing could be worn while on the motorbike. Goggles
were worn while mixing the fuel to prevent it from splashing into the eyes. It was also
important to ensure the straps holding the motorbike in place were tightly secured before
each run.
3.3 Procedure
Tests were conducted for fuel mixtures containing 5%, 10%, 15% and 20% ethanol. For
each of these mixtures, runs were completed at 30mph, 45mph and 60mph.
Each run consisted of the first 45 seconds gradually accelerating to the target speed of either
30, 45 or 60mph. It would then stay at that speed for 1 minute, before gradually decelerating
for 45 seconds until it stopped. Each individual run was repeated 3 to 5 time to get the most
consistent results.
19. 18
In advance of conducting the tests, the fuel was mixed and prepared for use, the
dynamometer and gas analyser were turned on and prepared to record the results.
Before recording the results the bike had to be driven for 3 to 4 minutes to get it up to the
right temperature. At this stage everything was ready to start recording the results.
After each run the results were saved and exported to excel on the computer where they
were analysed and all the necessary graphs were produced and studied.
3.4 Calculations
As there was 5% ethanol in the petrol at the start, the amount of ethanol need to be added to
get 10%, 15% and 20% had to be calculated. The calculations are shown as follows;
10% Mixture
50ml ethanol +Xml ethanol / 1000ml + X = 0.10
50 + X = 100 + 0.1X
0.9X = 50
X = 55.56ml
56ml of ethanol should be added to every litre of petrol which already contains 5% ethanol to
make it 10%.
15% Mixture
50ml ethanol + Xml ethanol / 1000ml + X = 0.15
50 + X = 150 + 0.15X
0.85X = 100
X = 117.65ml
118ml of ethanol should be added to every litre of petrol which already contains 5% ethanol
to make it 15%.
20% Mixture
50ml ethanol + Xml ethanol / 1000ml + X = 0.20
50 + X = 150 + 0.2X
0.8X = 150
20. 19
X = 187.5ml
188ml of ethanol should be added to every litre of petrol which already contains 5% ethanol
to make it 20%.
After each run, the amount of litres consumed per mile was calculated.
For this the fuel used in litres was divided by the distance travelled in miles to get how much
fuel was used in a mile, - e.g. 0.102 litre / 1.3 miles = 0.078 litres per mile
3.5 Results
Results were recorded and analysed to show two outcomes of increasing the mixture of
ethanol in petrol. The first shows how the fuel consumption increased and the second
outcome shows in detail how much the production of emission decreased.
3.5.1 Fuel Consumption
Table 3.1. Fuel Consumption
Speed
Fuel Mix Distance
(Mile)
Fuel Used
(Litre) Litre/Mile
30mph
5% 0.67 0.068 0.101
10% 0.68 0.07 0.103
15% 0.67 0.071 0.106
20% 0.69 0.074 0.107
45mph
5% 0.92 0.081 0.088
10% 0.94 0.086 0.091
15% 0.94 0.087 0.093
20% 0.93 0.087 0.094
60mph
5% 1.3 0.102 0.078
10% 1.28 0.101 0.079
15% 1.27 0.103 0.081
20% 1.3 0.107 0.082
Table 3.1 shows the average distance travelled and amount of fuel used for each run. It can
be seen the higher percentage of ethanol in the fuel gradually increases the amount of fuel
needed per distance travelled. For each 5% increase of ethanol, there is an increased fuel
consumption of just over 1%. This is very low.
21. 20
It can also be seen that at higher speeds, less fuel is consumed per mile. This may be
different in real road transport situations with more accelerating and decelerating, using
much more fuel at higher speeds.
3.5.2 Emissions Produced
Air to Fuel Ratio (AFR)
Figure 3.5. 30mph Run - AFR
Figure 3.6. 45mph Run - AFR
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
AFR
Time (Seconds)
30mph Run - AFR
5% Ethanol 10% Ethanol 15% Ethanol 20% Ethanol speed
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
AFR
Time (Seconds)
45mph Run - AFR
AFR 5% AFR 10% AFR 15% AFR 20% speed
22. 21
Figure 3.7. 60mph Run - AFR
Figures 3.5, 3.6 and 3.7 show the results for the air to fuel ratio (AFR). In the combustion
process the fuel has a chemical reaction with the gases in the air. Higher levels of ethanol
effects this reaction. It can be seen in the graphs that the AFR increases. This is a positive
which results in less carbon gases being released from the exhaust. This happens because
of a better combustion, reducing carbon emissions and increasing the release of oxygen.
Carbon Dioxide (CO2)
Figure 3.8. 30mph run – CO2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
12
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30
32
34
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
AFR
Time (Seconds)
60mph Run - AFR
AFR 5% AFR 10% AFR 15% AFR 20% speed
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
CO2(%)
Time (Seconds)
30mph Run - CO2
CO2 5% CO2 10% CO2 15% CO2 20% speed
23. 22
Figure 3.9. 45mph run – CO2
Figure 3.10. 60mph run – CO2
Figures 3.8, 3.9 and 3.10 show the results for carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions. This is the
most well-known carbon gas and has had a big effect on global warming. It can be seen in
the results that high levels of it are being released. It is obvious that higher percentages of
ethanol significantly reduce the amount of the gas being released into the atmosphere. This
is important as it proves the benefits of increased levels of ethanol in petrol.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
CO2(%)
Time (Seconds)
45mph Run - CO2
CO2 5% CO2 10% CO2 15% CO2 20% speed
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
CO2(%)
Time (Seconds)
60mph Run - CO2
CO2 5% CO2 10% CO2 15% CO2 20% speed
25. 24
Figure 3.13. 60mph run – CO
Carbon monoxide (CO) is a very toxic and harmful gas. It is made up of carbon and oxygen.
In figures3.11, 3.12 and 3.13 it can be seen that it is released at much lower levels than CO2.
It can also be seen that ethanol has a huge effect in decreasing its levels. In figure 3.13 the
gas peaks at 1.4% in the 5% run while in the 20 % run the level at the same point is only
0.2%. Higher levels of ethanol changes the amount CO being released. When the speed is
constant, it goes from increasing in the 5% run to steadily decreasing in the 20% run.
Hydrocarbons (HC)
Figure 3.14. 30mph run – HC
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
CO(%)
Time (Seconds)
60mph Run - CO
CorrectedCO 5% CorrectedCO 10% CorrectedCO 15%
CorrectedCO 20% speed
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
-300
200
700
1200
1700
2200
2700
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
HC(ppm)
Time (Seconds
30mph Run - HC
HC 5% HC 10% HC 15% HC 20% speed
26. 25
Figure 3.15. 45mph run – HC
Figure 3.16. 60mph run – HC
Hydrocarbon (HC) are made up of hydrogen and carbon. The results show that at steady
speeds levels are very low, however during accelerating and especially decelerating very
high levels are released. This is because the unburnt gas is being released through the
exhaust when the gears are changed and the revs are higher. In these tests it appears that
the ethanol does not make much of a difference in reducing the levels. Instead the best way
to reduce it is through a more efficient driving style.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
-200
300
800
1300
1800
2300
2800
3300
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
HC(ppm)
Time (Seconds)
45mph Run - HC
HC 5% HC 10% HC15% HC 20% speed
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
HC(ppm)
Time (Seconds)
60mph Run - HC
HC 5% HC 10% HC 15% HC 20% speed
28. 27
Figure 3.19. 60mph run – NOX
Nitrous Oxides (NOX) describes nitric oxide (NO) and nitrogen dioxide (NO2), among other
mono nitrogen oxides. They are produced from nitrogen and oxygen reacting during
combustion. High levels of NOX can cause health problems (Biarnes, 2014). It damages the
lungs and causes breathing problems.
When released into the atmosphere it can cause damage to the ozone layer, increasing
global warming. In these tests high levels of NOX were released. It can be seen that in the
30mph and 45mph runs the levels at a 20% mixture are nearly half of levels in the 5%
mixture. In the 60mph the levels of NOX are much higher, yet there is still a big reduction in
levels from 5% mixtures to 20% mixtures. This is very significant.
Oxygen (O2)
Figure 3.20. 30mph run – O2
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
NOX(ppm)
Time (Seconds)
60mph Run - NOX
Nox 5% Nox 10% Nox 15% Nox 20% speed
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
O2(%)
Time (Seconds)
30mph Run - O2
O2 5% O2 10% O2 15% O2 20% speed
29. 28
Figure 3.21. 45mph run – O2
Figure 3.22. 60mph run – O2
The final gas analysed in these tests was oxygen (O2). The results clearly show higher
percentages of ethanol produce higher amounts of O2. This is a positive result. The reduced
amount of carbon gases exiting the exhaust is being replaced with oxygen. Much of this is
due to a more economical combustion. Where higher levels of oxygen are used when
burning the fuel, reducing the carbon emissions being produced.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
O2(%)
Time (Seconds)
45mph Run - O2
O2 5% O2 10% O2 15% O2 20% speed
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
O2(%)
Time (Seconds)
60mph Run - O2
O2 5% O2 10% O2 15% O2 20% speed
30. 29
3.6 Laboratory Tests Conclusion
Looking at the fuel consumption at can be seen that more fuel is needed for the distance
travelled with the higher levels of ethanol. This is not very significant, the change is steady
and at low levels.
In the emissions analysis the results clearly show that higher levels of ethanol mixed with
petrol significantly reduces the amount of harmful gases being released into the atmosphere.
Comparing these results together it appears the reduction of carbon gases is much greater
than the difference in fuel being used.
Overall ethanol has a positive effect on petrol which could be improved and increased in the
future. However other issues, identified in the previous chapter nullify much of these positive
results. The overall carbon emissions saving must take production methods of the fuel into
account, among other concerns.
31. 30
4 Electric Vehicles (EV)
Electric cars were first developed with the invention of the motor vehicle during the latter half
of the 19th century. The first two decades of the 20th century was the best period for electric
vehicles. At the time it was in competition with the steam engine, which up to that point had
been most popular and the petrol powered internal combustion engine (ICE). The increasing
availability of crude oil lead to the rapid rise in popularity of combustion engine as the
superior choice, with it ICE vehicles soon took over in the transport sector (Hoyer, 2008).
After this electric motors became a thing of the past, until their reappearance in recent times.
Similar to biofuels the need for alternative fuels has brought about the revival of EVs.
Currently electric cars are the most popular of the alternates and their impact on the market
appears promising. These cars don’t produce any tailpipe emissions. However it does create
a carbon footprint from emissions created during the manufacture of the car and the
production of the electricity used to run it. This depends on the method of creating the
electricity, whether it is from coal, gas or renewable sources.
They are also considered to be cheap to run, however the vehicles are very expensive to
purchase. The main drawback appears to be the range constraints a fully charged car can
achieve, with recharging extremely time consuming.
When choosing an EV there is two main options. The first is a fully electric powered car and
the second is a hybrid. A hybrid is a car which has both an electric motor and an ICE. These
engines complement each other by working together to power the car.
Electric cars can be more spacious. Without the fuel tank, boot space is much better. The
car is also very quiet. With only the sound of passing air at high speeds and the low whirr of
the electric motor.
4.1 Infrastructure
Many issues which held back electric cars a century ago are still of importance today. One of
these drawbacks was the infrastructure. In the early 20th century charging stations were
established. However these could not keep up with the construction of petrol stations and
soon disappeared.
In the last decade considerable effort to provide the necessary infrastructure for EVs has
been undertaken. Across the world, with the support of motor companies and governments,
public charging points have been set up. There are currently about 5300 public charging
points across the UK (Next Green Car, 2014). Slow charging points take in the range of six
to eight hours for a full charge, fast charging points take three to four hours to charge and
about two hundred rapid charging points can charge to eighty percent in about thirty minutes.
32. 31
In 2013 there were over thirty two thousand hybrid and plug in electric vehicles registered in
the UK. Unfortunately only about 4.5% of these were plug in EVs (SMMT, 2014).
While this is a large increase on previous years, it is still very disappointing showing that EVs
have so far failed to take off in Britain. Most charging points so far don’t get much use as
there are not enough EVs to use the charging points.
Figure 4.1. Charging Point at Edinburgh Napier University Merchiston Campus
In September 2012, Edinburgh Napier University launched three electric car charging points.
One each at the three main campuses, Craiglockhart, Sighthill and Merchiston.
Concerns have also been expressed on the strain EVs may place on power networks.
Currently power supply is able to keep up with supply, however with the increasing numbers
of EVs todays infrastructure may not be enough. Future power supply would have to be
designed with this in mind.
The future potential impact needs to be properly assessed by electricity networks. At the
moment it is estimated that the electricity grid is adequate for up to a 10% market
penetration of EVs. It is also not expected that EVs will exceed that level in the UK in the
near future. However with expected population growth over the next two decades, a
significant increase of electricity supply may be needed with EVs with concentration focused
on the impact of EVs.
33. 32
Charging an electric car during peak times could increase a single household’s electricity
use by 54% (Van Vliet et al, 2011). To prevent applying pressure on the supply to a
household, off peak charging would have to be promoted. This would also decrease
pressure on the national grid.
4.2 Cost
Electric cars are much more expensive to buy, even after government incentives which try to
promote them as a better choice of vehicle. This is hindering their progress in generating an
increased market share. The main reason why they are currently so expensive is the price of
the battery packs. With time it is hoped these battery packs will become cheaper as they
become more commercially available.
Running costs amount to almost nothing apart from the low price of charging. Fully electric
cars fall under tax band A meaning they don’t pay any road tax.
EVs are also exempt from the London congestion charge. This in in accordance with the
Ultra Low Emissions Discount (ULED) introduced in 2013 by London mayor Boris Johnson
(Transport for London, 2013). The scheme is open for vehicles that produce less than
75g/km of CO2. Fully electric vehicles produce zero CO2 ensuring travel into the capital is
free.
Upkeep of electric cars is also believed to be considerably cheaper. This is because ICE
vehicles have dozens moving parts, while EV engines have very few part, meaning there is
much less to be maintained.
4.3 Range
The major restriction with EVs as they are currently available is the limited range. At the
moment the best cars can travel at most about 125 miles before running out of power. The
average would only make 80 to 90 miles at best. Recharging would then take up to ten
hours. With ‘quick’ charges taking at least 30 minutes. This is a major drawback for people
who travel long distances daily. For example a return journey from Edinburgh to Glasgow is
approximately 94 miles by road. This means most EVs would need to find a charging point at
some point in the journey to return without running out of energy.
All extra features in EVs such as heating and the radio are generally designed to conserve
energy. These features each reduce the range of the vehicle.
The limited range means EVs are best suited for people in cities, where they travel short
journeys every day and know where to find suitable charging points. If someone is driving
34. 33
where they are not used to, find a charging point with range running out can be stressful.
This is not the case in petrol or diesel fuelled vehicles, where refuelling is easily assessable.
4.4 Battery Packs
Battery packs account for significant additional weight to vehicles and are very expensive to
replace. Efficiency of batteries may reduce significantly after a number of years, potentially
costing thousands of pounds to replace. In hybrids there is a much lower reduced efficiency
of batteries over time as they are used less.
In the past lead acid batteries were most popular when EV first became commercial in the
modern age. Lithium ion (li-ion) are currently the most common batteries for EVs. While they
are not as cheap, they have a better range, are lighter and have a longer lifespan. Li-ion also
needs to be mined, a process which creates carbon emissions, but is almost entirely
recyclable. It also does not contain any toxic metals either, meaning it is not hazardous if
discarded at landfill. Li-ion batteries currently are believed they have a life span of about five
years, with better technology slowly improving this over time (Van Vliet, et al, 2011).
4.5 Hybrid Electric Vehicle (HEV)
The aim of Hybrid cars is to reduce emissions by increasing fuel efficiency but also combat
the drawbacks of electric cars. At the start of the 20th century the idea of HEVs was tested,
but quickly found to be unsustainable for the time. It wasn’t until the Toyota Prius was
introduced in 1997 as the first mass produced hybrid vehicle. It continues to be the most
popular having sold more than 3 million models across the world (Prius Explore, 2014).
Hybrid cars contain both an electric engine and combustion engine, generally fuelled by
petrol. These engines work together to create the best fuel efficiency while increasing power.
With two engines working the ICE can be smaller and less powerful than would be needed in
conventional cars. For some models the vehicle needs to be plugged in to recharge the
battery, while for most the combustion engine is responsible for charging the batteries for the
electric motor.
Along with using the electric motor, modern technology helps the cars to further reduce
emissions. Regenerative braking is introduced. This is when energy created when braking
can be converted into electricity to charge the battery. This helps to increase the range and
further reduce fuel consumption. When the vehicle is stopped or driving very slow, the ICE
can be turned off. The amount of ethanol in petrol, as a result of the RTFO, will also reduce
emissions.
The heavy batteries along with there being two engines may lead to fuel efficiency being
affected by the extra weight. In some cases with certain models the vehicle has shown only
35. 34
minimal increases to the amount of miles to the gallon achieved (Dijk et Yarime, 2010).
Despite this HEVs are considerably more popular than plug in EVs. They are viewed as a
compromise between environmental impact and dependability.
4.6 Nissan Leaf
Figure 4.2 Nissan Leaf (Next Green Car, 2013)
The Nissan Leaf is currently the most popular EV on the market. Since 2010, more than
50000 Leafs have been bought around the world. It is a comfortable and almost completely
silent 5 door hatchback which contains an 80kW motor. The vehicle has an official range of
up to 124 miles which in reality may be considerably lower, depending on road conditions
and driving style. It also has regenerative braking.
Charging the car takes eight hours or a rapid charge to 80% can be achieved in 30 minutes.
However there are only 200 rapid chargers across the UK. This is similar to most EVs which
generally take eight to ten hours. Acceleration from zero to 60 mph takes 11.5 seconds and
the top speed is 87mph (Nissan, 2014). While this is adequate for road transport, it is rather
modest compared to conventional ICE vehicles.
The car contains a 95% recyclable Li-ion battery. Nissan offer a recently updated warranty of
five years or sixty thousand miles. If battery efficiency reduces significantly in that period the
battery can be replaced under the terms of the warranty.
The Nissan Leaf Tekna model is £25500. This price includes a 20% tax rate and the £5000
government incentive (Next Green Car, 2013). In comparison, the Nissan Micra, also a 5 door
hatchback would cost about half the price to buy.
36. 35
4.7 Electric Vehicles Summary
EVs are important in reducing carbon emissions worldwide and with continued growth and
improvement of technology, their beneficial impact will be increased. However there are too
many drawbacks associated with them which hinders their development.
There has been significant effort into developing infrastructure and promoting electric
vehicles. While they have become very popular in some countries, in Britain the figures are
disappointing. The infrastructure is now in place for EVs but there are too many downsides
which mean they have not established a significant market share.
Despite government incentives, EVs are too expensive and charging can be problematic in
comparison with ICE vehicles. These vehicles appear to be best suited to city living, ruling
out many people who travel longer distances.
While in the short term they are needed to reduce emissions and reach targets. In the long
term many issues will need to be overcome in order to improve the public perception of EVs
to help reduce the dependency on fossil fuels.
37. 36
5 Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles (FCEV)
The development of the FCEV offers an opportunity to overcome the limitations of the
electric car. These cars are basically EVs without the inconvenience of having to be plugged
in to recharge. They also don’t compromise energy output, range or take a long time to
charge. Instead they are refuelled with compressed hydrogen fuel, which would be as
convenient as refuelling a conventional vehicle. In the car the hydrogen is stored in a
compressed tank, this flows into the fuel cell and is converted into electricity. The electricity
charges the battery, which then runs the electric motor and propels the vehicle.
Figure 5.1. Components of a FCEV (Honda, 2014)
Hydrogen powered cars is a concept which many auto companies are currently developing.
As of yet they are not commercially available but hold enormous potential. Hydrogen is a
clean and sustainable fuel that does not produce any carbon emissions. The only tailpipe
emission being water vapour.
In order for hydrogen to become available as a transport fuel, the infrastructure needs to be
built first. In California where this is happening, it is proving to be slow and expensive. For
people to purchase FCEVs, they need to be able to refuel them. For this hydrogen fuelling
stations would have to be built first. These stations would then lose money until enough
people have bought the cars.
In 2004 President George W Bush announced an initiative to develop a national hydrogen
infrastructure in America. The aim of this is to replace fossil fuels by 2040. Since then over
$1.2 billion has been spent on developing hydrogen technology and infrastructure. This is
only a fraction compared to the overall projected long term costs. It is believed that for
hydrogen to fuel 40% of light duty vehicles, it will cost up to $500 billion (Squatriglia, 2008).
38. 37
5.1 The California Example
California is leading the way in developing the infrastructure necessary to make FCEVs
commercially viable.
In 2004 the governor of the state of California, Arnold Schwarzenegger signed executive
order S-7-04 as part of the state’s energy conservation program. The order introduced the
California Hydrogen Highway Network (CaH2Net). This announced the states intention to
build hydrogen energy and fuelling stations, work with car manufacturers in developing and
promoting FCEVs and improve the production of hydrogen (California Government, 2004).
The executive order would ensure the necessary infrastructure would be in place when
FCEVs are commercially available.
Significant funding has been provided by the California Energy Commission to improve
hydrogen technology as part of the CaH2Net blueprint. As a result of this Chevrolet, Honda
and Toyota, among others are expected to be ready to introduce FCEVs to the Californian
market between 2015 and 2017.
Long term benefits of this would include the health improvements due to lower levels of air
pollution, reduce the pressure on oil refineries to keep up with growing demand and help
reduce the effects of global warming (California Government, 2004). As the vehicles run with
electric motors, noise pollution would also reduce considerably.
The California Fuel Cell Partnership (CaFCP) is a collective group of business in connection
with FCEVs such as auto companies, energy providers and government agencies in
California. Some of their partners include Toyota, Honda, the United States Environmental
Protection Agency and the California Energy Commission (CaFCP, 2014). Their aim is to
work together to help promote the benefits of fuel cell technology.
The partnership are also trying to accelerate the commercial viability of hydrogen as a
transport fuel. The current projection is that FCEV’s will be available by 2015 which is when
Toyota plan to launch the Toyota FCV. By then there will be 68 completed hydrogen energy
stations, soon rising to 100. Currently the Honda FCX Clarity can be rented in limited
numbers, but will also be available to buy in 2015. California is the only place where the
infrastructure will be in place when these cars are released in the open market and so will be
the only place they will be available.
5.2 Hydrogen Fuel Cell
Hydrogen is the simplest of elements. An atom of hydrogen is made up of one electron and
one proton. The fuel cell works by forcing hydrogen into the cell from the fuel tank. There a
chemical reaction happens where the electron is striped from the proton. The electron is then
directed through a circuit to create electricity. This electricity can then be sent to a battery to
39. 38
power the electric motor. The proton passes through a membrane where it mixes with
oxygen from around the vehicle and makes water. This process also creates heat, meaning
the water generally leaves the exhaust as steam (Lampton, 2009).
5.3 Production of Hydrogen
Hydrogen is in plenty of supply all over the world. It is all around us, the problem is that
hydrogen is always bonded to another element. One of the easiest place to find it is in water
(H2O), which is made up of hydrogen (H2) and oxygen (O2). The issue is separating these
elements. New technologies are being explored to make this cost effective and more
environmentally friendly. If hydrogen can be produced without using fossil fuels, the whole
process will produce no carbon emissions.
There are many ways in which hydrogen can be produced. To do it, power is needed to
release the hydrogen. This power can be provided from sustainable methods but currently it
is generally created from non-sustainable methods, such as the burning of fossil fuels.
There are two main methods of separating hydrogen, thermal and chemical. A biological
method is in the process of being developed.
In America, approximately 95% of hydrogen is produced using a thermal method by the
combustion of natural gas. The steam methane reformation process first creates high
temperature steam from burning the natural gas. This restructures the gas, which contains
hydrogen. In the second step, the carbon monoxide produced from the first step is used to
create hydrogen and carbon dioxide using a water to gas shift reaction (FCHEA, 2013).
The best chemical method used to separate hydrogen is electrolysis. This is much less
popular as it is more expensive and dependant on the electric infrastructure. Electrolysis is
when electricity is passed through water in a device called an electrolyser. This has the
ability of separating the hydrogen and oxygen elements. This method produces no emissions
and depending on how the electricity is produced, could be completely environmentally
friendly. This would mean the only carbon footprint a hydrogen FCEV would create is during
the vehicle manufacture stage (FCHEA, 2013).
40. 39
5.4 Honda FCX Clarity
Figure 5.2. Honda FCX Clarity (Honda, 2014)
Since fuel cell technology has become feasible, Honda has been ahead of all competition.
The first FCEV concept car was unveiled in 1999. Since then each prototype has seen
exceptional progress to improve the car, before finally being ready to release to the public.
Billed by Honda as the car of the future, the Honda FCX Clarity FCEV is the only hydrogen
fuelled car on the road today. Since 2008 a limited number of about 200 cars have been
leased to the public in southern California. The reason for this is the limited number of
hydrogen fuel stations available in the selected areas. Honda is using this as a trial period to
improve the technology and efficiency of the vehicle before finally releasing it for general
sale in California in 2015 (Honda, 2014).
Figure 5.3. Fuel Nozzle (Honda, 2014)
41. 40
Taking into account manufacture of the car and hydrogen production methods, Honda have
estimated this car to be more than three times more efficient than comparable gasoline
fuelled vehicles. Considering this is a very early model, this efficiency is expected to increase
with better technology and the production of hydrogen coming from more renewable fuels.
In comparison with EVs, the advertised range on a full tank of hydrogen is 240 miles. This is
much better than any EV available today. While this range is dependent on driving style, it
still has at least twice the range of most EVs.
The electric motor used in the FCX Clarity is the same used for other Honda EVs (Honda,
2014). It has been modified to increase efficiency of the extra power generated from the fuel
cell. As a result the driving experience is quiet and comfortable
5.4.1 Home Energy Station
With the release of a quality FCEV, Honda have recognised the next major step is the need
to develop the infrastructure to supply hydrogen. With this in mind, Honda have begun to
develop the Home Energy Station. This experiment is designed to create hydrogen from
natural gas to fuel a FCEV, while providing heat and electricity for the home. The latest
prototype is believed to reduce a households CO2 emissions by up to 30% (Honda, 2014).
The Home Energy Station is still in the developmental stage, but has the potential to
increase the convenience of hydrogen availability.
5.5 Timeframe
While it may become commercial in California within the next couple of years. The reality is
that for the rest of the world this will probably not be the case until the middle of the century
(Ramesohl et Merten, 2006). This has been a very slow moving process in getting it this far
with it first being developed at the start of the 1990’s.
In Europe there has been no real drive to develop the necessary infrastructure for the
introduction of FCEV’s. Instead attention has been focused on biofuels and electricity. This is
a major drawback. Hydrogen powered car is a real opportunity to develop a carbon free
technology without the performance issue of typical electric cars.
42. 41
5.6 Fuel Cell Electric Vehicles Summary
The introduction of FCEVs has a great long term potential to significantly reduce emissions
or even stop their production. While the California example has had a great influence in their
introduction, the cost and speed of building the necessary infrastructure means it will be
decades before hydrogen fuel cell vehicles receive substantial market share. A great amount
depends on public reaction to their initial commercialisation in California over the next
decade.
In Europe investment should be made to begin the process of creating a hydrogen economy
which has been started by America. In the UK working groups could be established,
following the example set in California, with the long term goal of building the infrastructure
needed to introduce FCEV to London. This would speed up the projected timeframe.
FCEV are the best option for significant reduction of carbon emissions and dependence on
fossil fuels worldwide. However because of the timeframe involved in their availability,
biofuels and EVs will have to be promoted in the short term.
43. 42
6 Conclusion and Recommendations
Overall it can be perceived in the long term that there will be sufficient alternative fuels to
replace fossil fuels. However this will not happen for the next three or four decades, with
hydrogen expected to take the longest time to gain the necessary market share.
In most cases the technology is there to produce these fuels, unfortunately the infrastructure
is not. As a result first generation biofuels and electric cars have to suffice as the best
method of reducing carbon emissions and dependence on fossil fuels for the foreseeable
future.
It is recommended that significant effort should be undertaken to help speed up the
timeframe for the introduction of second generation biofuels and hydrogen to become
commercially available.
With regard to second generation biofuel, bio refineries need to be constructed. After this the
fuel is capable of replacing first generation biofuel. It would first have to be mixed with petrol
or diesel like biofuel is presently. However with it then becoming increasingly of a better
quality it may work as a fuel in its own accord. It is very important that it is more sustainable
than first generation biofuel, it does not compete with the food market and is more accessible
to use biomass. Its projected increased availability and better qualities creates a huge
opportunity to significantly reduce carbon emissions.
The electric engine as it is today, while helping achieve the goals of alternative fuels, has too
many drawbacks to appeal to a major market percentage. While in the long term battery
packs and technology may improve, the limited range and prolonged charging time will
reduce its ability to adapt to public requirements. Currently EVs have performed poorly in the
market and as other alternatives become a reality, the public reception to plug in vehicles is
unlikely to significantly improve. Especially when compared to the hydrogen fuel cell.
While hydrogen powered cars are still decades away from commercialism in Europe, it is
clearly the best long term option. By using an electric motor without the drawback of
batteries, with a significantly higher range, it would be much better than electric vehicles.
In the UK the Californian approach to hydrogen fuel cell technology could be applied to help
it introduction. By first setting up a working group similar to the California Fuel Cell
Partnership (CaFCP), which would comprise of government officials, car manufacturers and
fuel suppliers. This could begin the process of introducing FCEV. Eventually this would lead
to the construction of hydrogen stations, with the gradual introduction to the market of the
fuel. With the huge population in London, it is recommended to first focus on constructing the
infrastructure there, with the hope that it would gradually spread across Britain and further
afield as its availability grows.
44. 43
References
European Commission (EC), 2013. “Clean Power for Transport – Alternative fuels for
sustainable mobility in Europe.”
http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/urban/cpt/ [Accessed 22 November 2013].
Lee Chapman, 2007. “Transport and Climate Change: a Review”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0966692306001207 [Accessed 22
November 2013]
Barry D. Solomon, Justin R. Barnes, Kathleen E. Halvorsen. “Grain and Cellulosic Ethanol:
History, Economics, and Energy Policy”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0961953407000396 [Accessed 2 February
2014]
Mustafa Balat, Havva Balat, Cahide Oz, 2008. “Progress in Bioethanol Processing.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360128507000706 [Accessed 2 February
2014]
Alan E. Wheals, Luiz C Basso, Henrique V Amorim. “Fuel Ethanol after 25 Years.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0167779999013840 [Accessed 8 February
2014]
Shell Global, 2013. “Fuelling a Lower Carbon Future with Biofuels.”
http://www.shell.com/global/environment-society/environment/climate-change/biofuels-
alternative-energies-transport/biofuels/raizen/shell-and-cosan.html [Accessed 12 November
2013]
Fangrui Ma, Milford A Hanna, 1999. “Biodiesel Production: A Review.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960852499000255%20Viitattu%2017.8.20
12 [Accessed 12 February 2014]
Kahraman Bozbas, 2008. “Biodiesel as an Alternative Motor Fuel: Production and Policies in
the European Union.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032105000614 [Accessed 13
February 2014]
Jason Hill, Erik Nelson, David Tilman, Stephen Polasky, Douglas Tiffany, 2006.
“Environmental, Economic and Energetic Costs and Benefits of Biodiesel and Ethanol
Biofuels.” http://www.pnas.org/content/103/30/11206.full [Accesses 13 February 2014]
Magin Lapuerta, 2007. “Effect of Biodiesel Fuels on Diesel Engine Emissions.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360128507000421 [Accessed 14
February 2014]
45. 44
Department for Transport, 2012. “Renewable Transport Fuels Obligation.”
https://www.gov.uk/renewable-transport-fuels-obligation [Accessed 18 February 2014]
European Parliament, 2009. “Directive 2009/28/EC.”
Official Journal of the European Union. Article 17.
European Parliament, 2009. “Directive 2009/30/EC.”
Official Journal of the European Union. Article 7a.
Ralph E.H Sims, Warren Mabee, Jack N. Saddler, Michael Taylor, 2010. “An Overview of
Second Generation Biofuels Technologies.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0960852409015508 [Accessed 18
February 2014]
S.N. Naik, Vaibhav Goud, Prasant Rout, Ajay K. Dala, 2010. “Production of First and Second
Generation Biofuels: A Comprehensive Review.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1364032109002342 [Accessed 20
February 2014]
Michael Biarnes, 2014. “Combustion.”
http://www.e-inst.com/docs/Combustion-Booklet-2013.pdf [Accessed 22 February 2014]
Karl Georg Hoyer, 2008. “The History of Alternative Fuels in Transportation: The Case of
Electric and Hybrid Cars.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957178707 [Accessed 27 February 2014]
Next Green Car, 2014. “UK Charging Points.”
http://www.nextgreencar.com/electric-cars/charging-points.php [Accessed 27 February 2014]
SMMT, 2014. “2013 New Car Market Records Best Performance in Five Years.”
http://www.smmt.co.uk/2014/01/2013-new-car-market-records-best-performance-five-years/
[Accessed 1 March 2014]
Oscar Van Vliet, Anne Sjoerd Brouwer, Takeshi Kuramochi, Machteld Van Den Broek, Andre
Faaij, 2011. “Energy Use, Cost and CO2 Emissions of Electric Cars.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S037877531001726X [Accessed 1 March
2014]
Transport for London, 2013. “Ultra Low Emission Discount to make Congestion Charge
Scheme Greener.”
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/corporate/media/newscentre/archive/27798.aspx [Accessed 1 March
2014]
Prius Explore, 2014. “The World’s Favourite Hybrid.”
http://www.toyota.co.uk/new-cars/prius-explore [Accessed 3 March 2014]
46. 45
Marc Dijk, Masaru Yarime. “The Emergence of Hybrid-Electric Cars: Innovation Path
Creation through Co-Evolution of Supply and Demand.”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004016251000106X [Accessed 3 March
2014]
Next Green Car, 2013. “Nissan Leaf Tekna 2013 Review.”
http://www.nextgreencar.com/review/6430/Nissan-LEAF-Tekna-2013-review [Accessed 4
March 2014]
Nissan, 2014. “New Nissan Leaf.”
http://www.nissan.co.uk/GB/en/vehicle/electric-vehicles/leaf/discover/life-with-ev.html
[Accessed 4 March 2014]
Honda, 2014. “FCX Clarity.”
http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/ [Accessed 6 March 2014]
Chuck Squatriglia, 2008. “Hydrogen Cars are here. Now we just need a Fuelling
Infrastructure.” http://www.wired.com/autopia/2008/03/hydrogen-cars-a/ [Accessed 6 March
2014]
California Government, 2004. “Executive Order S-7-04.”
http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/energy/ExecOrderS-7-04.htm [Accessed 8 March 2014]
CaFCP, 2014. “Partners.”
http://cafcp.org/ [Accessed 8 March 2014]
Christopher Lampton, 2009. “How Hydrogen Cars Work.”
http://auto.howstuffworks.com/fuel-efficiency/hybrid-technology/hydrogen-cars4.htm
[Accessed 22 November 2013]
Fuel Cell & Hydrogen Energy Association, 2013. “Hydrogen Production Overview.”
http://www.fchea.org/core/import/PDFs/factsheets/Hydrogen%20Production%20Overview_N
EW.pdf [Accessed 9 March 2014]
Fuel Cell & Hydrogen Energy Association, 2013. “Renewable Hydrogen Production Using
Electrolysis.”
http://www.fchea.org/core/import/PDFs/factsheets/Renewable%20Hydrogen%20Production
%20Using%20Electrolysis_NEW.pdf [Accessed 10 March 2014]
Honda, 2014. “Home Energy Station.”
http://automobiles.honda.com/fcx-clarity/home-energy-station.aspx [Accessed 6 March 2014]
Stephan Ramesohl, Frank Merten, 2006. “Energy System Aspects of Hydrogen as an
Alternative Fuel in Transport”
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301421505003484 [Accessed 11 March
2014]
47. 46
Appendix A
Further Laboratory Tests Emissions Results
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
CO(%)
Time (seconds)
30 mph Run - CO
CO 5% CO 10% CO 15% CO 20% speed
0
10
20
30
40
50
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
CO(%)
Time (Seconds)
45mph Run - CO
CO 5% CO 10 % CO 15% CO 20% speed
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 110 120 130 140 150 160
Speed(mph)
CO(%)
Time (Seconds)
60mph Run - CO
CO 5% CO 10% CO15% CO 20% speed
