Filed under: Hybrids/Alternative, Green, Tech
Hybrid fuel efficiency for one-fifth the cost, and no batteries?
MIT-based startup
Ethanol Boosting Systems has another use for fuel that goes way beyond E85 fuel in terms of reduced emissions and
increased fuel efficiency. Best of all, the added cost of the EBS solution is said to be less than $1,000.EBS uses as-needed direct injection of ethanol in a turbocharged gasoline-fueled engine to boost the overall fuel octane rating to more than 130. The high octane rating allows the engine to use massive levels of turbo boost without lowering the engine's compression. To make a long story short —lots of power and torque can be produced very efficiently by a small engine, with a 1.5-liter 4 cylinder EBS engine producing roughly the same performance as a 3.0-liter V6, using much less fuel.
A really interesting aspect of the EBS solution is the low quantity of ethanol needed to enable a car with the fuel efficiency of a hybrid - a two- to six-gallon auxiliary ethanol tank would last for two to four months of driving.
Much more info at the EBS site here.
[Thanks for the tip, Kevin!]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 2)
steve s 12:40PM (4/26/2006)
Didn't read the article yet but I'm guessing some hefty turbo-lag.
Reply
Fred D. 12:52PM (4/26/2006)
"The main items in the extra cost -- i.e., $500 to $1000 -- of equipping an engine with EBS technology are the turbocharger and the direct fuel injection system.
...
It is believed that the costs of upgrading the smaller engine for higher output levels would be offset by the reduction in engine size"
Reply
Slo-Mo-Shun 1:03PM (4/26/2006)
Who cares? I want that on my Lan-Evo!
Reply
Aero 1:04PM (4/26/2006)
SAAB needs to invest in this tech. They already have a history of getting huge hp and torque numbers from very small engines (example: 2.3 liter 4 cylinder engine with 260hp and 258 ft lbs of torque! in the 9-5). Imagine how much hp adding this technology would create with an already great engine.
Reply
Swat Lax 1:12PM (4/26/2006)
In theory, this sounds freaking awesome - But do they have a prototype? Is one on its way?
Any thoughts on why, if it worked reliably, this wouldn't be game-changing idea?
Reply
Jeff the Baptist 1:31PM (4/26/2006)
$500 to $1000 for a turbocharger and a direct injection system? Have they bothered to price turbo kits lately? Their cost estimates are extremely optimistic.
Reply
mickster 1:38PM (4/26/2006)
If the octane is running at 130, the car computer would have to be able to calibrate the engine to burn it for maximum efficiency or else it would be pointless; also to make it clean burning as well.
On top of it, it almost sounds like this much of a boost might damage the piston liners, piston rings, heads and head gaskets since it would be burning (albeit for short periods of time) at a much, much hotter temperature than normal-similar to nitrous-oxide-no?????
Reply
Chris H 1:41PM (4/26/2006)
Give me a nitrous kit, a WRX, a tank of ethanol, a stick of gum, two plastic forks, and a toothpick... We'll build it Macgyver style!
Reply
Felipe 1:54PM (4/26/2006)
I agree, it seems a little bit optimistic cost-wise. I still hope it will work. This idea and VTG could make a REALLY efficient car.
Reply
gnubbs 1:59PM (4/26/2006)
Alky injection is not a terribly uncommon thing to do in the Subaru WRX world. Basically for about $500 you can buy a kit that injects either alky or water into the air fuel mix prior to combustion (generally through an injector mounted in the intercooler). This both increases the effective octane of the charge, and acts to cool it further. These two things allow people running alky injection to run very high levels of boost without resorting to buying 101 or 105 octane fuel. However, thier goal generally isn't increased fuel efficiancy...
Reply
davidl340 2:11PM (4/26/2006)
Interesting, idea has been around a while, but I haven't seen it from this angle of efficiency nor this level of published research. I would like to see the direct injection setup. I know they are doing it in diesels and outboards, as well as some other rare examples.
Reply
Krishna Das 2:13PM (4/26/2006)
Go EBS!
Reply
Bryan 2:31PM (4/26/2006)
I don't know about you guys, but I'd keep an eye on the status of this company. Might be something to invest in......
But that's da angle I always look at things from.
Reply
spdracerut 2:40PM (4/26/2006)
It's a good idea, but gnubbs has already noted, alcohol injection is nothing new in the aftermarket industry.
IF the car started out designed with this system, I could see it working well. I basically had the same idea for a highly fuel efficient vehicle; small, car, small motor and lots of boost. The small displacement will give excellent fuel mileage while cruising (assuming proper gearing) and the turbo will give you the power when you need it.
But, most cars today are still port injection. Only some of the very new cars are direct injection. To convert a car to direct injection, add a turbo (and oil lines, water lines, new exhaust manifold and downpipe, intercooler, associated plumbing), and the engine management system to control everything.... Heck, $500 doesn't even buy you a good turbo! Also... where are you going to put those extra injectors for the ethanol for a direct setup?
Designed from the outset though.. it'd be pretty badass.
Reply
Dirk Dundenburg 4:14PM (4/26/2006)
No way a 6 gal ethanol tank would last 6 months, at least in my household. I'd probably end up drinking most of it...
Reply
Tom 4:21PM (4/26/2006)
"calculations".. this is quite theoretical.
Costs will go much higher once they build and test, and find out the gazillion more parts they need.
It will take quite a while longer to make it as a reliable engine.
Reply
Richard 5:07PM (4/26/2006)
The science looks good. Even if it costs double the estimate it is still better than hybrid. I think the cost numbers may be closer than some suggest since this is mass produced manufacturing cost. Also the chassis and suspension can be smaller / less expensive due to a lighter weight engine. And no intricate drivelines to maintain and no expensive batteries to replace. I could learn to love turbo lag.
Reply
Fabulo 5:21PM (4/26/2006)
I'm pretty sure they don't mean it as an aftermarket technology. You have to design the whole system to work together (added boost, heat, direct injection, ecu, emission ...) the $500-1000 is for production cost for manufacturer.
Reply
tekdemon 5:31PM (4/26/2006)
Most of the fuel efficiency would just be achieved from getting great cruising mileage with the turbo not spooling.
But I don't really see it saving a lot of gas when the turbo boost is running and you're accelerating hard from a dead stop...a hybrid would get much better mileage in that scenario since it'd just be running off of the electric motor.
Also, I'm not sure how reliable they're going to be able to get this...alcohol injection is fun and all but if they expect the alcohol to last 4-6 months I'm guessing they'd have to get it to be very precise in terms of how much it injects. So if the alcohol injection systems glitches up or whatever you'll end up detonating the heck out of your engine.
Basically, where's the safety net here if something goes wrong? Also where the heck are you supposed to be able to buy these ethanol refills?
Reply
VW-Guy 6:04PM (4/26/2006)
"Give me a nitrous kit, a WRX, a tank of ethanol, a stick of gum, two plastic forks, and a toothpick... We'll build it Macgyver style!"
Without some zip-ties this project isn't going anywhere!
Reply