Transportation of people and goods largely relies on the use of fossil hydrocarbons, contributing to global warming and problems with local air quality. There are a number of alternatives to fossil fuels that can avoid a net carbon emission and can also decrease pollutant emissions. However, many have significant difficulty in competing with fossil fuels due to either limited availability, limited energy density, high cost, or a combination of these. Methanol (CH 3 OH) is one of these alternatives, which was demonstrated in large fleet trials during the 1980s and 1990s, and is currently again being introduced in various places and applications. It can be produced from fossil fuels, but also from biomass and from renewable energy sources in carbon capture and utilization schemes. It can be used in pure form or as a blend component, in internal combustion engines (ICEs) or in direct methanol fuel cells (DMFCs). These features added to the fact it is a liquid fuel, making it an efficient way of storing and distributing energy, make it stand out as one of the most attractive scalable alternatives. This review focuses on the use of methanol as a pure fuel or blend component for ICEs. First, we introduce methanol historically, briefly introduce the various methods for its production, and summarize health and safety of using methanol as a fuel. Then, we focus on its use as a fuel for ICEs. The current data on the physical and chemical properties relevant for ICEs are reviewed, highlighting the differences with fuels such as ethanol and gasoline. These are then related to the research reported on the behaviour of methanol and methanol blends in spark ignition and compression ignition engines. Many of the properties of methanol that are significantly different from those of for example gasoline (such as its high heat of vaporization) lead to advantages as well as challenges. Both are extensively discussed. Methanol's performance, in terms of power output, peak and part load efficiency, and emissions formation is summarized, for so-called flex-fuel engines

-Removing the biomass limit is one of the great challenges to further enlarge the share of renewable ethanol as alternative for fossil fuels. One of the possible solutions for this constraint are the ternary GEM (Gasoline-Ethanol-Methanol) blends. The air-to-fuel ratio of these blends is hereby chosen at the value of an E85-blend (9.75 kg air/ kg fuel) while the ethanol is replaced by methanol/gasoline and therefore these blends are called 'isostoichiometric'. If the methanol is produced out of renewable sources, these blends can help extend the part of clean fuels on the market. The ternary blends show few differences in physical properties for the total range of possible blends and are considered as drop-in alternatives to the original E85-blend for a flex fuel engine. In this paper the performance and engine-out emissions of four of these GEM-blends were examined on a 4 cylinder 1.8 l PFI production engine. A single cylinder engine with high compression ratio was used for a preliminary study of the knock behavior of these blends. The measurement results are compared with those on neat gasoline, methanol and ethanol to demonstrate the potential of these ternary blends as a fossil fuel alternative. All the GEM fuels which were tested gave very similar results to E85 and can therefore indeed be used as 'drop-in' fuels for flex-fuel vehicles.

No abstract

No abstract

Experimental measurements of the laminar burning velocity are mostly limited in pressure and temperature and can be compromised by the effects of flame stretch and instabilities. Computationally, these effects can be avoided by calculating one-dimensional, planar adiabatic flames using chemical oxidation mechanisms. Chemical kinetic models are often large, complex and take a lot of computation time, and few models exist for multi-component fuels. The aim of the present study is to investigate if simple mixing rules are able to predict the laminar burning velocity of fuel blends with a good accuracy. An overview of different mixing rules to predict the laminar burning is given and these mixing rules are tested for blends of hydrocarbons and ethanol. Experimental data of ethanol/n-heptane and ethanol/n-heptane/iso-octane mixtures and modeling data of an ethanol/nheptane blend and blends of ethanol and a toluene reference fuel are used to test the different mixing rules. Effects of higher temperature and pressure on the performance of the mixing rules are investigated. It was found that simple mixing rules that consider only the change in composition are accurate enough to predict the laminar burning velocity of ethanol/hydrocarbon blends. For the blends used in this study, a Le Chatelier's rule based on energy fractions is preferable because of the similar accuracy in comparison to other mixing rules while being more simple to use.

Several studies have shown that the type-approval data is not representative for real-world usage. Consequently, the emissions and fuel consumption of the vehicles are underestimated.Aiming at a more dynamic and worldwide harmonised test cycle, the new Worldwide Lightduty Test Cycle is being developed. To analyse the new cycle, we have studied emission results of a test programme of 6 vehicles on the test cycles WLTC (Worldwide Light-duty Test Cycle), NEDC (New European Driving Cycle) and CADC (Common Artemis Driving Cycles). This paper presents the results of that analysis using two different approaches. The analysis shows that the new driving cycle needs to exhibit realistic warm-up procedures to demonstrate that aftertreatment systems will operate effectively in real service; the first trip of the test cycle could have an important contribution to the total emissions depending on the length of the trip; and that there are some areas in the acceleration vs. vehicle speed map of the new WLTC that are not completely filled, especially between 70 and 110 km/h. For certain vehicles, this has a significant effect on total emissions when comparing this to the CADC.

The use of hydrogen derived methanol in spark-ignition engines forms a promising approach to decarbonizing transport and securing domestic energy supply. Methanol can be renewably produced from hydrogen in combination 10 with biomass or CO 2 from the atmosphere and flue gases. From well to tank studies it appears that hydrogen derived methanol compares favourably with liquid or compressed hydrogen both in terms of production cost and energy efficiency. Since existing well to wheel studies are based on outdated technology, this paper tries to provide efficiency figures for state-of-the-art 15 hydrogen and methanol engines using published data and measurements on our own flex-fuel engine.Both fuels offer a great potential for efficiency improvements compared to gasoline engines thanks to a variety of favourable properties. However, there is a clear distinction between engines specifically designed for hydro-20 gen or methanol operation and flex-fuel engines, which should also run on gasoline. For dedicated engines, the literature indicates that peak brake thermal efficiencies up to 45% and 42% are possible on hydrogen and methanol respectively. The ability to employ qualitative load control instead of throttling enables relative efficiency improvements compared to gasoline between 25 10-20% due to reduced pumping losses in part load. On our flex fuel engine, operation on hydrogen using qualitative load control enabled the highest efficiencies, especially at low loads, where improvements up to 40% relative to gasoline were possible. At elevated loads, rising NO x emissions necessitated a switch to throttled stoichiometric operation, resulting in efficiencies compa- (5-10% relative to gasoline), but can be retained over the entire load range. These improvements are mostly due to reduced pumping losses, increased burning velocities and a slight decrease in cooling losses. Future well-to-wheel studies should take this considerable potential for ef- 35ficiency improvements into consideration and should also distinguish between dedicated and flex-fuel engines.

The paper evaluates the results of tests performed using mid-and high-level blends of the low-carbon alcohols, methanol and ethanol, in admixture with gasoline, conducted in a variety of test engines to investigate octane response, efficiency and exhaust emissions, including those for particulate matter. In addition, pure alcohols are tested in two of the engines, to show the maximum response that can be expected in terms of knock limit and efficiency as a result of the beneficial properties of the two alcohols investigated. All of the test work has been conducted with blending of the alcohols and gasoline taking place outside the combustion system, that is, the two components are mixed homogeneously before introduction to the fuel system, and so the results represent what would happen if the alcohols were introduced into the fuel pool through a conventional single-fuel-pump (dispenser) approach. While much has been written on the effect of blending the light alcohols with gasoline in this way, the results present significant new findings with regard to the effect of the enthalpy of vaporization of the alcohols in terms of particulate exhaust emissions. Also, in one of the tests, two mid-level blends are tested in a highly downsized prototype engine -these blends being matched for stoichiometry, enthalpy of vaporization and volumetric energy content. The consequences of this are discussed and the results show that this approach to blend formulation creates fuels which behave in the same manner in a given combustion system; the reasons for this are discussed. One set of tests using pure methanol alternately with cooled exhaust gas recirculation and with excess air shows a significant increase in thermal efficiency that can be expected as the blend level is increased. The effect on nitrous oxide emissions is shown to be similarly beneficial, this being primarily a result of the enthalpy of vaporization of the alcohol cooling the charge coupled with the lower adiabatic flame temperature of the alcohol. Whereas it is normally a beneficial characteristic in spark-ignition combustion systems, one disadvantage of a high value of enthalpy of vaporization is shown in another series of tests in that, in admixture with gasoline, it is a driver on flash boiling of the hydrocarbon component in the blend in direct injection combustion systems. In turn, this causes the particulate emissions of the engine to increase quite markedly over those of ethanol-gasoline blends at the same stoichiometry. The paper shows for the first time the dichotomy of the potential efficiency improvement with the challenge of particulate control. This effect poses a challenge for the future introduction and use of such high blend rate fuels in engines without particulate filters. Although it must be stated that the overall particulate emissions of the methanolgasoline blend are lower than for gasoline, the effect is only present at extremely low load, and that there is a likelihood that particulate filters will be adopted in production vehicle anyway...