SEARCH · Search NASA
Search indexed NASA NTRS and DOE OSTI research on propulsion, heat transfer, battery materials and energy systems. Follow report and document links to the original sources.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
This report explores the compatibility of refueling station equipment with E15--a 15% ethanol and 85% gasoline blend intended for use in conventional gasoline light duty vehicles model year 2001 or newer. The report includes background information on E15, a literature review seeking to identify issues during the nationwide deployment of E10, a diagram of all station equipment and supporting data.
Ethanol has the achieved the greatest market share of all the alternative transportation fuels that have been researched, developed, and deployed in the US. There are multiple lessons to be learned from the history of ethanol adoption that can be applied to future fuels and products. Ethanol has replaced portions of gasoline in three main blend levels, with corresponding vehicles, equipment, benefits, and policies. The first is E10, which has replaced nearly all pure gasoline (E0) sold in the United States today (U.S. Energy Information Administration 2015). This was brought about through generations of policies that were motivated by multiple factors related to engine performance, energy security, health, air quality, and climate protection. Ethanol's high octane has been a consistent driver of the fuel because this enables higher performance engines. Early policies (1973-1979) were largely motivated by the desire to reduce dependence on petroleum sourced from members of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries, or OPEC. Fuel policy in the 1980s was largely in pursuit of promoting octane number enhancers that could replace lead. Criteria pollutant reduction was the overarching goal of actions taken from 1990 to 2005. From 2005 to the present, fuel policy has been largely motivated by energy security and climate protection goals. These policies were usually technology-agnostic and promoted multiple fuels and additives during each period. However, ethanol is the only fuel identified that is cost effective with qualities that enabled it to prosper in the policy environments of all four of these periods.The second market for ethanol is via 85% ethanol (E85). This fuel has the advantage of a greater concentration of ethanol but the disadvantage of not being compatible with regular gasoline vehicles. Instead, it can only be used in flexible-fuel vehicle (FFVs), which can use every blend level from E0 to E85. Therefore, much of the effort to increase E85 consumption has been aimed at incentivizing automakers to manufacture FFVs, drivers to purchase FFVs, and fueling stations to equip themselves to sell E85.The third, and newest, market through which ethanol is consumed is 15% ethanol (E15), which builds upon the E10 market to increase ethanol consumption by common gasoline vehicles. Efforts to create the E15 market consisted largely of testing vehicles and refueling equipment for compatibility, creating waivers to allow the use of E15, placing requirements on E15 retailers, and incentivizing retailers to equip themselves to purchase E15.
The objective of this study is to understand the impact of ethanol-blended fuel at various blending levels (10%, 15%, and 20% vol.) on "in-operation" vehicles built to differing emissions and manufacturing standards around the world. The study focuses on vehicles used in Canada, China, India, Indonesia, Japan, South Korea, and Mexico. Historical experience in the United States and Brazil informs the analysis. The primary study question is: Are vehicles in targeted countries physically and operationally compatible with ethanol blended fuel? For a fuel to be compatible with a vehicle, the fuel must perform its function as part of the integrated fuel-vehicle system, meaning: the car should start easily and drive normally, the fuel should not cause catastrophic fuel system leaks, the fuel should not cause corrosion or degradation of any engine or fuel system components (including emissions control components). The history of E10 use in the United States, beginning in 1978, was evaluated and shows no reliability or operability issues for cars dating back to pre-emissions-control times -- and likely included many cars manufactured in the 1960s. This strongly supports the contention that fuel chemistry and property differences between E0 and E10 are so small that any car made to international standards in the last 50 years will have a very high probability of being fully compatible with E10. This conclusion is supported by the experience in Brazil in the 1970s, where E10 was also introduced, and ethanol blending for conventional cars rapidly ramped up to even higher blend levels. A limited number of fuel system and component manufacturers supply the global market, including Bosch, Continental, Denso, Delphi, and Visteon. To reduce complexity, ethanol-compatible materials began to be integrated in fuel system designs globally. Fuel systems evolved over the following decades to incorporate ethanol-compatible materials with core subsystem families, such as in-tank fuel pumps used across several global vehicle original equipment manufacturers (OEMs). A similarly compelling case can be made that all cars at the Tier 1 (or equivalent) emissions-control technology level or higher are fully compatible with E15 blends, based on the data evaluated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Ricardo in 2010. For cars at this technology level, the minor differences in fuel chemistry and properties between E10 and E15 are not significant. For E20, studies are not as extensive but are still highly significant. A long-term durability study conducted on mileage accumulation dynamometers presents convincing evidence that Tier 2 technology level cars have materials of construction and engine control authority for compatibility with E20, although this conclusion is not as strong as those drawn for E10 and E15, which are also partly based on real-world experience.
In this work, we explore the role of biofuels in mitigating the negative impacts of oil supply shocks on fuel markets under a range of oil price trajectories and biofuel blending mandate levels. Using a partial equilibrium model of US biofuels production and petroleum fuels trade, we discuss the adjustments in light-duty vehicle fuel mix, fuel prices, and renewable identification number (RIN) prices following each shock as well as the distribution of shock costs across market participants. Ethanol is used as both a complement (blend component in E10) and a substitute (in E15 and E85 blends) to gasoline. Results show that, during oil supply shocks, the role of ethanol as a substitute dominates and allows some mitigation of the shock. As US petroleum imports decrease with growing US oil production, the net economic welfare effect of sudden oil price changes and the energy security role of biofuels becomes less clear than it has been in the past. Although fuel consumers lose when oil price increases due to an external shock, domestic fuel producers gain. In some cases, depending on import share and supply and demand elasticities, we show that the gain to producers could more than offset consumer losses. However, in most cases evaluated here, sudden oil-price increases remain costly.
The purpose of the Biofuels Information Center (BIC) task is to provide relevant data, information, reports, and web-based tools to all bioenergy stakeholders. The BIC task began in FY08 to meet the requirement under Title II, Sec. 229 of the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 (EISA) requires DOE to develop a "Biofuels and Biorefinery Information Center". The BIC task supports biofuels pages content on the EERE's most visited website - the Alternative Fuels Data Center (AFDC http://www.afdc.energy.gov) and the Bioenergy Atlas tools (currently archived) (previous address https://maps.nrel.gov). This task results in more than 1.7 million web pageviews (an instance of an internet user visiting a webpage) per year. In FY22, the task completed the final year of the 5 year USDA Biofuels Infrastructure Partnership (BIP). The USDA BIP expanded infrastructure for E15 and/or E85 to approximately 850 stations and NREL received and reviewed data for quality analyzed all infrastructure and sales data collected by USDA. Stations are privately held and previously it was difficult to ascertain infrastructure and sales data. This unique dataset allows insight into infrastructure data (number of pumps and tanks, costs to install new equipment) and sales data (price and volume for E10, E15, E85, and diesel by month). The 2021 USDA BIP National Summary Report is with DOE for review prior to publication. Future work will include the biannual Bioenergy Industry Status Report (4 previous versions have been published) . The task also supports the principal investigator's time to engage stakeholders on infrastructure and deployment of biofuels. This includes leading, membership, and participation in the following roles: member Board of Advisors at the Fuels Institute, voting member for multiple UL standards committees, Co-Chair of the Infrastructure team at Agriculture/Auto/Ethanol, Member of Coordination Research Council's ULSD Corrosion Committee. The Principal investigator routinely responds to industry inquires to assist in deployment of biofuels regularly.
This document provides information on ethanol fuel properties, standards, codes, best practices, and equipment information for those who blend, distribute, store, sell, or use E15 (gasoline blended with 10.5 percent - 15 percent ethanol), E85 (marketing term for ethanol-gasoline blends containing 51 percent - 83 percent ethanol, depending on geography and season), and other ethanol blends.
This document provides information on ethanol fuel properties, standards, codes, best practices, and equipment information for those who blend, distribute, store, sell, or use E15 (gasoline blended with 10.5 percent - 15 percent ethanol), E85 (marketing term for ethanol-gasoline blends containing 51 percent - 83 percent ethanol, depending on geography and season), and other ethanol blends.
This analysis estimates the cost of selected oil and biomass supply shocks for producers and consumers in the light-duty vehicle fuel market under various supply chain configurations using a mathematical programing model, BioTrans. The supply chain configurations differ by whether they include selected flexibility levers: multi-feedstock biorefineries; advanced biomass logistics; and the ability to adjust ethanol content of low-ethanol fuel blends, from E10 to E15 or E05. The simulated scenarios explore market responses to supply shocks including substitution between gasoline and ethanol, substitution between different sources of ethanol supply, biorefinery capacity additions or idling, and price adjustments. Welfare effects for the various market participants represented in BioTrans are summarized into a net shock cost measure. As oil accounts for a larger fraction of fuel by volume, its supply shocks are costlier than biomass supply shocks. Corn availability and the high cost of adding biorefinery capacity limit increases in ethanol use during gasoline price spikes. During shocks that imply sudden decreases in the price of gasoline, the renewable fuel standard (RFS) biofuel blending mandate limits the extent to which flexibility can be exercised to reduce ethanol use. The selected flexibility levers are most useful in response to cellulosic biomass supply shocks.
The Government of Jamaica asked the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL) to determine if the use of domestically produced ethanol motor fuel could help them achieve their goals to develop its economy and to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. The first step was to determine how much ethanol could be used by Jamaican vehicles in blends of 10% (E10 – current blend level), 15% (E15), or 25% (E25). All blend levels make for feasible automotive fuels and are being used or pursued in multiple countries. Building on gross domestic product (GDP)-related projections made by the Johnson et al. (2019) business as usual scenario, the quantity of ethanol to be used in future years and blend levels is shown in Table ES1. All blend levels are assumed to achieve the same volumetric fuel economy because of verified efficiency improvements enabled by increased octane levels.
We've put spark-ignition engine fuel standards in place in order to ensure acceptable hot and cold weather driveability (HWD and CWD). Vehicle manufacturers and fuel suppliers have developed systems that meet our driveability requirements so effectively that drivers overwhelmingly find that their vehicles reliably start up and operate smoothly and consistently throughout the year. For HWD, fuels that are too volatile perform more poorly than those that are less volatile. Vapor lock is the apparent cause of poor HWD, but there is conflicting evidence in the literature as to where in the fuel system it occurs. Most studies have found a correlation between degraded driveability and higher dry vapor pressure equivalent or lower TV/L = 20, and less consistently with a minimum T50. For CWD, fuels with inadequate volatility can cause difficulty in starting and rough operation during engine warmup. The Driveability Index (DI)-a function of T10, T50, and T90-is well correlated with CWD in hydrocarbon fuels. For ethanol-containing fuels, a correction factor to the DI equation improves the correlation with CWD, although the best value for that factor has still not been determined. Ethanol increases the heat of vaporization. But, this is likely insignificant for E15 and lower concentration fuels. The impact of ethanol on driveability is likely due to its direct effect on vapor pressure at cold temperatures. For E51-E83 or flex-fuel blends, ASTM sets a minimum vapor pressure; however, published data suggest that a correction for the amount of ethanol in the fuel is needed to accurately predict CWD, possibly because ethanol has a higher lower-flammability limit.
Learn how ethanol is used in transportation fuels and about the different ethanol blends you may find at fueling stations. This fact sheet from Energy Saver includes information on the history of ethanol in the United States, what fuel ethanol is, the three categories of ethanol blends, and flex-fuel vehicles.