Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management http://doi.org/10.5276/jswtm/iswmaw/503/2024.

630

Circularity of Biomass Feedstock to Produce Ethanol and

Feasibility of Ethanol-Gasoline Fuel Blends in Engine

Rachan Karmakar1,*, Nitin Kumar2, Vijay Tripathi3, Praddeep Kumar Sharma1,

Rajesh Kumar3, Dinesh Gahlot2, Suman Naithani1, Bhaskerpratap Chaudhury4,
Rachna Sharma5, Neeraj Kumar2, Amit Kumar6, Sanjoy Gorai7, Pavan Gangwar8,
Rishabh Singhal9, Avnish Chauhan1, Pratibha Naithani1
1Graphic Era (Deemed to be University), Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India
2Roorkee Institute of Technology, Roorkee, Uttarakhand, India
3S.S.J. University, Campus Almora, Uttarakhand, India
4Dev Bhoomi Uttarakhand University, Manduwala, Naugaon, Uttarakhand, India
5Tula’s Institute, Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India
6Quantum University, Roorkee, Uttarakhand, India
7IILM University, Greater Noida, Uttar Pradesh, India
8United College of Engineering and Research, Prayagraj, U.P, India
9COER University, Vardhmanpuram, Roorkee, India

Received on: August 16, 2024

Accepted on: October 08, 2024
Article submitted to the International conference is advances in Materials and
Energy Technologies, By, Graphic Era Deemed to be University, Dehradun, India

ABSTRACT

To address the growing gap between energy demand and availability, the need
for biofuels has become increasingly urgent. Biofuels offer a renewable energy
source while significantly reducing or even eliminating net greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions. Ethanol, commonly produced through biomass
fermentation, has emerged as a promising alternative to gasoline due to its
advantageous combustion properties, including a high octane rating and
inherent oxygen content. Despite its expanding use, a key research gap exists
in evaluating the compatibility of internal combustion engines with ethanol or
ethanol-gasoline blends, particularly regarding performance and emission
outcomes. This study seeks to bridge that gap by examining engine
performance and emissions using various ethanol-gasoline blends (E0, E5,
E10, E15, and E20), while adhering to circular economy principles by utilizing
food waste for bioethanol production. The research questions center on how
these different ethanol blends impact engine power, thermal efficiency, and
emissions. The goal is to identify the optimal ethanol blend that enhances
engine performance while reducing harmful emissions. The results
demonstrate that adding ethanol improves combustion efficiency, leading to
increased brake power and brake thermal efficiency. Peak performance was
recorded with a 15% ethanol blend (E15), after which a decline was observed.
Additionally, a notable decrease in carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrocarbon
(HC) emissions occurred with higher ethanol concentrations, attributed to more
complete combustion. This research offers novel insights by providing a
detailed performance and emission analysis of ethanol-gasoline blends,
contributing to the development of more environmentally sustainable fuel
options.

Keywords: Biofuel, Brake power, Brake thermal efficiency, Combustion

efficiency, GHG.

* Corresponding author: Rachan Karmakar, email: drkumarntl@gmail.com

Circularity of Biomass Feedstock to Produce Ethanol and Feasibility of Ethanol-Gasoline Fuel Blends in Engine Vol. 50 Issue 3 630
 Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management http://doi.org/10.5276/jswtm/iswmaw/503/2024.630

1. Introduction: biomass-based ethanol production reduces greenhouse

gas emissions, improves resource efficiency, and
With rapid industrialization and urbanization, demand promotes energy security, although challenges such as
for fuels has increased many folds (Roychowdhury et technology costs and feedstock availability remain.
al., 2011; Bankar et al., 2013; Jin et al., 2011). At the 1.2 Ethanol-Gasoline fuel blending
same time, global reservoir of fossil fuels are
decreasing rapidly for their extensive usage (Zhao et al., Ethanol-gasoline blending is a key approach for
2021; Guo et al., 2024). Renewable energies are reducing fossil fuel reliance and greenhouse gas
becoming popular with time as people awareness is emissions (Balat and balat, 2009). Ethanol, produced
increasing. Wind energy (Kudelin et al., 2021), solar from biomass sources such as corn and sugarcane, is
energy (Kumar and Gupta, 2022; Ahmadi, et al., 2019) renewable and often blended with gasoline in common
hydel energy (Vasudevan et al., 2021; Vyas, et al., ratios like E10 (10% ethanol) and E85 (85% ethanol).
2015) nuclear energy (Zhan et al., 2021; Danish et al., Ethanol’s high octane rating enhances engine
2020; Osička et al., 2021), bioenergy (Ragit et al., performance, reduces engine knock, and lowers
2013; Kumar et al., 2017; Pandey et al., 2013; Pandey emissions of carbon monoxide and hydrocarbons
et al., 2013) are getting attention of mankind as (Musiaroh et al., 2024). However, its lower energy
promising future energy resources. Research on density results in decreased fuel efficiency, particularly
bioenergy produced from non-edible sources like non- at higher blends. Ethanol-gasoline blends offer
edible algae, neem oil, cotton stock etc. (Karmakar et environmental benefits, such as carbon-neutral
al., 2018; Ragit et al., 2011; Karmakar et al., 2012; emissions when considering ethanol’s life cycle
Chisti, 2013; Kumar et al., 2016). It has also been found (Feinauer et al., 2021). Blending challenges include
that biofuel produced from photosynthetic plants and ethanol’s hygroscopic nature, which can lead to water
microbes do not harm the environment like fossil fuels absorption and corrosion, and concerns over first-
(Karmakar et al., 2018; Karmakar et al., 2020; generation bioethanol's competition with food
Karmakar et al., 2019; Karmakar et al., 2023). In spite production (Deng et al., 2023). Advances in second-
of all these investigations, it has been found that all and third-generation ethanol (using lignocellulosic
these fuels together cannot meet world energy biomass and algae) and flex-fuel vehicles (FFVs) show
requirement (Smith et al., 2010). Besides that conflict promise in addressing these limitations, improving the
of food vs energy (Pfromm et al., 2011) and hike in sustainability and scalability of ethanol-gasoline blends
feedstock price (Seo et al., 2014) has also caused the (Mosier, 2005).
decline in interest of researchers. Though, new
technologies like electric cars have started to prevail the 1.3 Feasibility analysis of using blends in Engine
market, they cannot fit in the existing systems and thus
replacement of CI and SI engines will be mandatory. If existing engines are kept in operation, either we need
to use some alternative fuels which can be used directly
1.1 Circularity of biomass for ethanol production or blends of fuel and fossil fuels can provide us some
solutions. While the former option is a permanent cure
The circularity of biomass feedstocks for ethanol for the existing problem, the latter can be described as
production emphasizes sustainable resource use and instant relief. But most of the fuels like bioethanol
waste minimization (Balat et al., 2008). Biomass (Yuan et al., 2021; Walia et al., 2013), biodiesel (Mata
feedstocks are categorized into first-generation (food et al., 2009) have been found to affect engines in macro
crops), second-generation (agricultural residues, or micro scale if they are used in their pure form and as
lignocellulosic materials), and third-generation (algal a result more intensive research is required for the same.
biomass). Circularity is achieved by repurposing So, for the existing system to remain operative, there
agricultural waste, such as corn stover and sugarcane must be some experimental research work on the
bagasse, and using non-food biomass, reducing effectiveness of alternative fuel- fossil fuel blends in the
pressure on food systems. Key technological processes IC engines (Vardaan and Kumar, 2023; Li et al., 2023).
like pretreatment, enzymatic hydrolysis, and This research aims to investigate the feasibility of using
fermentation convert these feedstocks into ethanol bioethanol, produced from food waste in a circular
(Samanta et al., 2024). By-products such as lignin and economy approach, as a fuel in existing engine systems.
distillers' grains can be utilized in energy production or
as animal feed, enhancing the overall efficiency of the Despite significant advancements in bioethanol
process (Ang et al., 2022). Additionally, nutrient production and ethanol-gasoline fuel blending, a
recycling from biomass residues supports soil health, research gap remains in understanding the circularity of
further contributing to a circular system. Circular biomass feedstock for ethanol production and its

Circularity of Biomass Feedstock to Produce Ethanol and Feasibility of Ethanol-Gasoline Fuel Blends in Engine Vol. 50 Issue 3 631
 Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management http://doi.org/10.5276/jswtm/iswmaw/503/2024.630

feasibility in existing engine systems. The sustainability internally operated batch reactor at 32°C for 48 hours at
of second- and third-generation feedstocks, particularly 10 bar pressure (Kazemi et al., 2022; Saha et al., 2019).
their impact on engine performance when blended with Bioethanol produced in this process clearly follows
gasoline, needs further exploration. Key research circular economy. Food wastes cause pollution and
questions include how biomass circularity can be solid waste engenderment. These, produced in road side
optimized for sustainable ethanol production, the restaurants, mostly remain untreated in waste vats.
effects of ethanol-gasoline blends on engine Utilization of the same for bioethanol production not
performance and emissions, and whether these blends only assures bioenergy production at local level along
can be used effectively in existing engines without with solid waste management but also generate a
significant modifications. The novelty of this study lies bioenergy industry and new job market.
in investigating bioethanol produced through circular
biomass systems and its application in internal 2.2 Utilization of bioethanol- gasoline fuel blends for
combustion engines, providing new insights into the engine and emission tests
environmental and technical outcomes of such blends.
This produced Ethanol, blended with gasoline, was
2. Methodology utilized in engine tests to evaluate performance and
emissions across various blend ratios and loads. A
2.1 Bioethanol production computerized 4-stroke gasoline engine was utilized for
the study, comprising four main components: a Honda
Vegetable wastes were collected from local dhabas and model GX200 4-stroke spark ignition engine, a rope
roadside restaurants on a daily basis. These wastes were brake dynamometer, a data acquisition system, and a
chopped into fine pieces using an automated vegetable gas analyzer. The schematic experimental setup is
chopping machine followed by cleaning with water depicted in Figure number 1. The data acquisition
(Walia et al., 2013). This food mass was boiled in water system facilitated the measurement of various engine
thereafter. The liquid was extracted and cooled down to parameters under different load conditions. Emissions
get mixed with Saccharomyces cerevisiae (Walia et al., such as CO, HC, and NOx were analyzed using a Testo-
2013). Ethanol derived from vegetable waste was made digital gas analyzer (Karmakar et al., 2018).
generated using Saccharomyces cerevisiae within an General specifications of the engine and gas analyzer
are provided in Table 1 and 2.

Figure 1: Set up of the experiment

Table 1: Specification of 4-stroke gasoline engine

Engine type 4-stroke gasoline engine (Air cooled)

Bore x Stroke 68 x 54 mm
Displacement 196 cm3
Compression ratio 8.5:1
Net power 4.1 kW @ 3600 rpm

Circularity of Biomass Feedstock to Produce Ethanol and Feasibility of Ethanol-Gasoline Fuel Blends in Engine Vol. 50 Issue 3 632
 Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management http://doi.org/10.5276/jswtm/iswmaw/503/2024.630

Max. net torque 12.3 Nm @ 2500 rpm

Ignition type Transistorised
Make Kirloskar
Year 1998

Table 2: Specification of exhaust gas analyzer

Parameters Range Accuracy Limit in India

CO2 0 to 10 % volume ±5% of reading 113 gm/ km

CO 0 to 10 % volume ±5% of reading 0.5%

-
HC 0 to 20000 ppm ±5% of reading
Make Kirloskar
Year 2001

2.3 Experimental procedure The quality of fuel significantly influences engine

performance and emission characteristics (Table 3).
The experimental work was carried out at different load Any degradation in fuel quality can lead to noticeable
(Karmakar et al., 2023) ranging from 0 to 8 kg (at the differences in engine combustion, performance, and
rate of increase in every 2 kg) at constant compression emissions. Table 3 presents some key properties of
ratio of 8.5:1. Five different blends of ethanol fuel with ethanol, gasoline, and their blends (Thakur et al., 2017;
gasoline name as E0 (0% ethanol and 100% gasoline), Masum et al., 2013)
E5 (5% ethanol and 95% gasoline), E10 (10% ethanol
and 90% gasoline), E15 (15% ethanol and 85% 1. Ethanol fuel generally achieves higher combustion
gasoline) and E20 (20% ethanol and 80% gasoline) efficiencies compared to gasoline. Therefore, a
were tested at each load. Before testing with each of the lower gasoline content in the blend tends to
blends, the engine was being calibrated. The parameters improve combustion efficiency.
of performance such as fuel consumption, engine 2. As heating value of ethanol is comparatively lower
torque, brake power etc. and emission (CO, HC) were than that of gasoline, a greater volume of ethanol
measured for each experiment (Koç et al., 2009). fuel is required compared to gasoline fuel to get the
equal power output.
3. Comparison of physicochemical properties 3. Ethanol possesses a high octane number which
reduces the likelihood of engine knocking.

Table 3: Physicochemical properties of ethanol fuel blend

Property Unit E0 (4,5,6) E5 E10 E15 E20

3
Density Kg/m 720-780 762 767 769 770
Viscosity at 40 °C mm2/s 0.4–0.8 0.87 0.91 0.94 1.01
Heating value (MJ/kg) 42.5 39.91 39.45 39.26 39.08

4. Results and Discussion

4.1 Engine Performance

4.1.1 Brake power

Circularity of Biomass Feedstock to Produce Ethanol and Feasibility of Ethanol-Gasoline Fuel Blends in Engine Vol. 50 Issue 3 633
 Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management http://doi.org/10.5276/jswtm/iswmaw/503/2024.630

E0
E5
1.2 E10
E15
E20
1.0

Brake Power (kW) 0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

2 4 6 8 10
Load (kg)

Figure 2: Change of brake power with load of engine

It was observed that ethanol blending in gasoline ethanol) was used (Palmer, 1986). Hsieh et al., 2002
slightly improved the brake power i.e. all blends E5, showed similar results with his blended fuels. Enhance
E10, E15 and E20 have greater brake power at different in brake power might have taken place due to presence
load condition as compared to gasoline fuel (Fig 2). of oxygen in ethanol as addition of ethanol lead to
Average increase in engine power of 14.73% was stoichiometric burning of fuel which can achieve better
observed when E15 blend (85% gasoline & 15% combustion (Hsieh et al., 2002; Stan et al., 2001).

4.1.2. Brake thermal efficiency

E0
E5
40
E10
E15
E20
35
Brake Thermal Efficiency (%)

30

25

20

15
2 4 6 8 10
Load (kg)

Figure 3: Change of brake thermal efficiency with load of engine

It was observed that the brake thermal efficiency for all the E15 blend, attributed to its higher fuel consumption
ethanol-gasoline blends exceeded that of pure gasoline and lower calorific value for generating nearly the same
under the specified load condition (Fig 3). The highest power. On average, there was a shoot up in BTE of
brake thermal efficiency (BTE) was recorded for the 7.71%, 16.99%, 20.51%, and 17.46% for the E5, E10,
E15 blend due to the superior combustion efficiency of E15, and E20 blends, respectively (Hsieh et al., 2002;
the blended fuel. However, the brake thermal efficiency Lin, 2010).
of the E20 blend was minutely lower than the BTE of
Circularity of Biomass Feedstock to Produce Ethanol and Feasibility of Ethanol-Gasoline Fuel Blends in Engine Vol. 50 Issue 3 634
 Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management http://doi.org/10.5276/jswtm/iswmaw/503/2024.630

4.1.3. Brake specific fuel consumption

E0
450 E5
E10

Brake Specific Fuel Consumption (gm/kW h)

E15
E20
400

350

300

250

200
2 4 6 8 10
Load (kg)

Figure 4: Change of brake specific fuel consumption with load of engine

Figure 4 presents the experimental findings of brake- gasoline results decrease in fuel consumption due to
specific fuel consumption (BSFC), which elucidates leaning effect of fuel that enhance the fuel combustion.
consumption rate of the fuel (in grams per hour) to The average fuel consumption observed were 346.39,
produce 1 kW of brake power for various blends used 337.74, 314.86, 308.28 and 317.91gm/kW h for E0, E5,
in the experiment. The figure illustrates a reduction in E10, E15 and E20 blended fuels respectively (Lin et al.,
BSFC across different load conditions for the different 2010; Hsieh et al., 2002).
ethanol-gasoline fuel blends. Addition of ethanol in

4.2 Emission

4.2.1 CO2 Emission

E0
6.5 E5
E10
E15
E20
6.0

5.5
CO2(%)

5.0

4.5

4.0

3.5

2 4 6 8 10
Load (kg)

Figure 5: Change of CO2 emission with load of engine

Circularity of Biomass Feedstock to Produce Ethanol and Feasibility of Ethanol-Gasoline Fuel Blends in Engine Vol. 50 Issue 3 635
 Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management http://doi.org/10.5276/jswtm/iswmaw/503/2024.630

As seen from Fig. 5, the concentration of CO2 in the improves the combustion efficiency which leads to
emission decreases with increase in proportion of higher concentration of CO2 emission (Koc et al., 2009,
ethanol in fuel blend. For E0 (base gasoline), higher Karmakar et al., 2018). At high load, the mean averages
CO2 concentration was observed while E20 has lower increase of CO2 concentrations are 1.5%, 9.3%, 18.7%
concentration of CO2 emission than that of E5, E10 and and 28.1% for E5, E10, E15 and E20 respectively.
E15 at each engine load (Lin et al., 2010). CO2 is Minimum CO2 concentration was observed for E20
produced more by the complete combustion of fuel as a blended fuel which might have caused because of more
result of adequate supply of air in the air-fuel mixture. complete combustion for the presence of inherent
The addition of ethanol containing oxygen to gasoline oxygen in the fuel.

4.2.2. CO Emission E0
E5
E10
6.0 E15
E20

5.5

5.0
CO(%)

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0
2 4 6 8 10
Load (kg)

Figure 6: Change of CO emission with load of engine

As seen from Fig. 6, the concentration of CO in the improves the combustion efficiency which leads to
emission decreases with increase in proportion of lower concentration of CO emission (Koc et al., 2009).
ethanol in fuel blend. For E0 (base gasoline), higher CO At high load, the mean averages reduction of CO
concentration was observed while E20 has lower concentrations are 19%, 23%, 24% and 24% for E5,
concentration of CO emission than that of E5, E10 and E10, E15 and E20 respectively. Minimum CO
E15 at each engine load (Lin et al., 2010). CO is concentration was observed for E20 blended fuel which
produced by incomplete combustion of fuel as a result might have caused because of more complete
of insufficient supply of air in the air-fuel mixture. The combustion for the presence of inherent oxygen in the
addition of oxygen containing ethanol in gasoline engine.

4.2.3. HC Emission
E0
160 E5
E10
150 E15
140 E20

130

120
HC (ppm)

110

100

90

80

70

60

50
2 4 6 8 10
Load (kg)

Figure 7: Change of HC emission with load of engine

Circularity of Biomass Feedstock to Produce Ethanol and Feasibility of Ethanol-Gasoline Fuel Blends in Engine Vol. 50 Issue 3 636
 Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management http://doi.org/10.5276/jswtm/iswmaw/503/2024.614

In Figure 7, the concentration of HC emissions is Avnish Chauhan, Pratibha Naithani, Suman Naithani:
depicted under various load conditions for all blended Plagiarism check and conclusion writing along with
fuels. HC emissions increased with load for both guiding other researchers.
gasoline and ethanol-blended fuels. Experimental
findings revealed that the increase in ethanol in gasoline References
showed a cut down in HC emission concentration
compared to pure gasoline. The average concentrations Ahmadi, M. H., Ghazvini, M., Sadeghzadeh, M.,
of HC emissions were 140.2, 120.8, 97.6, 79.2, and 73.4 Alhuyi Nazari, M., & Ghalandari, M. (2019). Utilization
for E0, E5, E10, E15, and E20 fuels, respectively. of hybrid nanofluids in solar energy applications: A
Significantly, E20 blended fuel notably led to lower HC review. Nano-Structures & Nano-Objects (Vol. 20,
emissions, showing a 47.6% reduction compared to p. 100386). Elsevier BV.
pure gasoline (Koc et al., 2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nanoso.2019.100386
Ang, T.-Z., Salem, M., Kamarol, M., Das, H. S.,
Conclusions Nazari, M. A., & Prabaharan, N. (2022). A comprehensive
study of renewable energy sources: Classifications,
In this experimental study, the impacts of E0 and its challenges and suggestions. Energy Strategy Reviews
(Vol. 43, p. 100939).
ethanol blends (E5 to E20) on engine performance and
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2022.100939
emissions were analyzed. Based on the results obtained,
Balat, M., Balat, H., Öz, C. (2008). Progress in
the following conclusions were drawn: a) Both brake bioethanol processing. Progress in Energy and
power as well as brake thermal efficiency demonstrated Combustion Science (Vol. 34, Issue 5, pp. 551–573).
an increase with higher ethanol percentages in the https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pecs.2007.11.001
blended fuels. Among the blends tested, E15 ethanol- Balat, M., & Balat, H. (2009). Recent trends in
gasoline blend exhibited optimized engine global production and utilization of bio-ethanol fuel.
performance, b) A cut down in brake specific fuel Applied Energy (Vol. 86, Issue 11, pp. 2273–2282).
consumption was procured due to the leaning effect https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apenergy.2009.03.015
caused by ethanol addition to the base gasoline, c) The Bankar, S. B., Survase, S. A., Ojamo, H., &
addition of ethanol to base gasoline resulted in a Granström, T. (2013). Biobutanol: the outlook of an
significant reduction in pollutant emissions. Both CO academic and industrialist. RSC Advances (Vol. 3, Issue
and HC emissions in the exhaust droped for all blended 47, p. 24734). Royal Society of Chemistry (RSC).
fuels owing to their leaning effect and the presence of https://doi.org/10.1039/c3ra43011a
inherent oxygen in ethanol. E20 blend yielded the most Chisti, Y. (2013). Constraints to commercialization
favorable exhaust emission results, and d) Upon of algal fuels. Journal of Biotechnology (Vol. 167, Issue
comparison of all blended fuels, E15 emerged as the 3, pp. 201–214). Elsevier BV.
most favorable blend for both engine performance and https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiotec.2013.07.020
exhaust emissions. Experimentally, it was observed that Danish, Ozcan, B., & Ulucak, R. (2021). An
a 25% ethanol blend (E25) could be directly used empirical investigation of nuclear energy consumption
without any engine modifications. Hence, in existing SI and carbon dioxide (CO2) emission in India: Bridging
engines, employing an E15 blend can optimize IPAT and EKC hypotheses. Nuclear Engineering and
performance without adversely affecting the Technology (Vol. 53, Issue 6, pp. 2056–2065). Elsevier
environment or the engine. BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.net.2020.12.008
Deng, W., Feng, Y., Fu, J., Guo, H., Guo, Y., Han,
Contributions of authors B., Jiang, Z., Kong, L., Li, C., Liu, H., Nguyen, P. T. T.,
Ren, P., Wang, F., Wang, S., Wang, Y., Wang, Y., Wong,
S. S., Yan, K., Yan, N. Zhou, H. (2023). Catalytic
Rachan Karmakar, Nitin Kumar: Conceptualization,
conversion of lignocellulosic biomass into chemicals and
experimentation of the research.
fuels. Green Energy & Environment (Vol. 8, Issue 1,
Vijay Tripathi, Praddeep Kumar Sharma: pp. 10–114). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gee.2022.07.003
Experimentation, manuscript writing. Feinauer, M., Ehrenberger, S., & Buchgeister, J.
Rajesh Kumar, Dinesh Gahlot, Bhaskerpratap (2021). Life cycle assessment of a farmed wood butanol-
Chaudhury, Rachna Sharma: Proof reading and gasoline blend as an alternative transport fuel for
correction. passenger cars. Fuel (Vol. 306, p. 121651).
Neeraj Kumar, Amit Kumar, Sanjoy Gorai: Preparation https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2021.121651
of diagrams and graphs Guo, M., Han, Y., Liu, W., Cao, Y., Lei, D., Zhou,
Pavan Gangwar, Rishabh Singhal: Preparation of tables W., & An, Z. (2024). Source appointment of δ13C in
sediments of a maar lake in southern China: Implications
of fossil fuel CO2 emissions. Applied Geochemistry (Vol.

Circularity of Biomass Feedstock to Produce Ethanol and Feasibility of Ethanol-Gasoline Fuel Blends in Engine Vol. 50 Issue 3 637
 Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management http://doi.org/10.5276/jswtm/iswmaw/503/2024.614

165, p. 105950). Elsevier BV. on engine performance and exhaust emissions in a spark-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apgeochem.2024.105950 ignition engine. Renewable Energy (Vol. 34, Issue 10, pp.
Hsieh, W.-D., Chen, R.-H., Wu, T.-L., & Lin, T.-H. 2101–2106). Elsevier BV.
(2002). Engine performance and pollutant emission of an https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2009.01.018
SI engine using ethanol–gasoline blended fuels. Kudelin, A., & Kutcherov, V. (2021). Wind
Atmospheric Environment (Vol. 36, Issue 3, pp. 403– ENERGY in Russia: The current state and development
410). Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1352- trends. Energy Strategy Reviews (Vol. 34, p. 100627).
2310(01)00508-8 Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2021.100627
Jin, C., Yao, M., Liu, H., Lee, C. F., & Ji, J. (2011). Kumar, N., & Gupta, S. K. (2021). Progress and
Progress in the production and application of n-butanol as application of phase change material in solar thermal
a biofuel. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews energy: An overview. Materials Today: Proceedings (Vol.
(Vol. 15, Issue 8, pp. 4080–4106). Elsevier BV. 44, pp. 271–281). Elsevier BV.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2011.06.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2020.09.465
Karmakar, R., Kumar, N., Rajor, A., Kundu, K., Kumar, N., Mohapatra, S. K., Ragit, S. S., Kundu,
Kumar, R., Gahlot, D., Chaudhury, B., Ragit, S. S., K., & Karmakar, R. (2017). Optimization of safflower oil
Kumar, A., Gorai, S., Gangwar, P., Singhal, R., transesterification using the Taguchi approach. Petroleum
Bhattacharya, S., Sharma, R., Savita, Singh, N., & Kumar, Science (Vol. 14, Issue 4, pp. 798–805). Elsevier BV.
N. (2023). Evaluation of Performance of a CI Engine https://doi.org/10.1007/s12182-017-0183-0
Fueled With Biodiesel Produced from Unused Algae. The Kumar, S, Saini, N, Mohapatra, S. K. (2016).
Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management Producer Gas Production From Cotton Stalk and
(Vol. 49, Issue 4, pp. 359–364). Journal of Solid Waste Sugarcane Bagasse in a Downdraft Gasifier: Composition
Technology and Management. and Higher Heating Value Investigation. Journal of Basic
https://doi.org/10.5276/jswtm/iswmaw/494/2023.359 and Applied Engineering Research, 3: 1034-1037.
Karmakar, R., Kundu, K., & Rajor, A. (2017). Fuel Li, L., Wei, J., Liu, H., Wang, H., & Yao, M.
properties and emission characteristics of biodiesel (2023). The exergy analysis of low carbon or carbon free
produced from unused algae grown in India. Petroleum fuels: Methane, methanol, and hydrogen under engine like
Science (Vol. 15, Issue 2, pp. 385–395). Elsevier BV. conditions. Fuel Processing Technology (Vol. 252, p.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s12182-017-0209-7 107975). Elsevier BV.
Karmakar, R., Rajor, A., & Kundu, K. (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuproc.2023.107975
Biodiesel Production from Unused Mixed Culture of Lin, W.-Y., Chang, Y.-Y., & Hsieh, Y.-R. (2010).
Algae. Waste Valorisation and Recycling (pp. 273–279). Effect of Ethanol-Gasoline Blends on Small Engine
Springer Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981- Generator Energy Efficiency and Exhaust Emission.
13-2784-1_26 Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association
Karmakar, R., Rajor, A., Kundu, K., & Kumar, N. (Vol. 60, Issue 2, pp. 142–148). Informa UK Limited.
(2017). Production of biodiesel from unused algal biomass https://doi.org/10.3155/1047-3289.60.2.142
in Punjab, India. Petroleum Science (Vol. 15, Issue 1, pp. Masum, B. M., Masjuki, H. H., Kalam, M. A.,
164–175). Elsevier BV. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12182- Rizwanul Fattah, I. M., Palash, S. M., & Abedin, M. J.
017-0203-0 (2013). Effect of ethanol–gasoline blend on NOx emission
Karmakar, R., Rajor, A., Kundu, K., & Kumar, N. in SI engine. Renewable and Sustainable Energy Reviews
(2020). A Comparative Study of the Fuel Characteristics (Vol. 24, pp. 209–222). Elsevier BV.
Between Algal Biodiesel and Petro-Diesel. Bioresource https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2013.03.046
Utilization and Bioprocess (pp. 49–55). Springer Mata, T. M., Martins, A. A., & Caetano, Nidia. S.
Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-1607- (2010). Microalgae for biodiesel production and other
8_5 applications: A review. Renewable and Sustainable
Karmakar, R., Roychowdhury, A., Kundu, K., Energy Reviews (Vol. 14, Issue 1, pp. 217–232). Elsevier
Chattopadhyay, A. (2012). Optimization of Growth BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2009.07.020
parameters for Indigenous Algae (for Production of Algal Mosier, N. (2005). Features of promising
biofuel). ternational Journal of Genetic Engineering and technologies for pretreatment of lignocellulosic biomass.
Biotechnology. Vol. 3, Issue 1, pp. 1-13. Bioresource Technology (Vol. 96, Issue 6, pp. 673–686).
Kazemi Shariat Panahi, H., Dehhaghi, M., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biortech.2004.06.025
Guillemin, G. J., Gupta, V. K., Lam, S. S., Aghbashlo, M., Musyaroh, Wijayanti, W., Nur Sasongko, M., &
& Tabatabaei, M. (2022). Bioethanol production from Winarto. (2024). The effects of limonene and eugenol
food wastes rich in carbohydrates. Current Opinion in additives in n-heptane and low-octane gasoline on the
Food Science (Vol. 43, pp. 71–81). emission characteristics and fuel consumption of single-
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cofs.2021.11.001 cylinder gasoline engine. Engineering Science and
Koç, M., Sekmen, Y., Topgül, T., & Yücesu, H. S. Technology, an International Journal (Vol. 51, p. 101648).
(2009). The effects of ethanol–unleaded gasoline blends https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jestch.2024.101648

Circularity of Biomass Feedstock to Produce Ethanol and Feasibility of Ethanol-Gasoline Fuel Blends in Engine Vol. 50 Issue 3 638
 Journal of Solid Waste Technology and Management http://doi.org/10.5276/jswtm/iswmaw/503/2024.614

Osička, J., Černoch, F., Zapletalová, V., & substrate of lipid producing yeast Cryptococcus curvatus.
Lehotský, L. (2021). Too good to be true: Sugarcoating Renewable Energy (Vol. 69, pp. 473–478). Elsevier BV.
nuclear energy in the Czech national energy strategy. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.renene.2014.03.062
Energy Research & Social Science (Vol. 72, p. Smith, V. H., Sturm, B. S. M., deNoyelles, F. J., &
101865). Elsevier BV. Billings, S. A. (2010). The ecology of algal biodiesel
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.erss.2020.101865 production. Trends in Ecology & Evolution (Vol. 25,
Palmer, F. H. (1986).Vehicle performance of Issue 5, pp. 301–309). Elsevier BV.
gasoline containing oxygenates. MI MechE;C319/86:33– https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tree.2009.11.007
46. Stan, C., Troeger, R., Guenther, S., Stanciu, A.,
Pandey, R. K., Kundu, K., Prakash, V., Bhaskar, H., Martorano, L., Tarantino, C., & Lensi, R. (2001). Internal
Karmakar, R., Dahake, V.R. (2013). Production of Mixture Formation and Combustion - fro m Gasoline to
Biodiesel from Mixed Algal Culture and its Fuel Ethanol. SAE Technical Paper Series. SAE 2001 World
Characterization. International Journal of Recent Congress. SAE International.
Scientific Research. Vol. 4, Issue 6, pp. 794- 797. https://doi.org/10.4271/2001-01-1207
Pandey, R. K., Rai, A., Kundu, K., Karmakar, R., Thakur, A. K., Kaviti, A. K., Mehra, R., & Mer, K.
Roy, P., RoyChowdhury, A., Dahake, V. R. (2013). Effect K. S. (2017). Progress in performance analysis of ethanol-
of Process Parameters for Standardization of gasoline blends on SI engine. Renewable and Sustainable
Esterification of Cottonseed Oil for Production of Energy Reviews (Vol. 69, pp. 324–340). Elsevier BV.
Biodiesel. International Journal of Current Science. Vol. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rser.2016.11.056
8, pp. 74-78. Vardaan, K., & Kumar, P. (2023). Tribological
Parman, B. J., Amanor-Boadu, V., Pfromm, P., & parameters analysis of cam and follower pair used in IC
Michalsky, R. (2011). Third Generation Biofuels and the engine using ANSYS. Materials Today: Proceedings.
Food versus Fuel Debate: A Systems Perspective. The Elsevier BV.
International Journal of Environmental, Cultural, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matpr.2023.05.525
Economic, and Social Sustainability: Annual Review Vasudevan, K. R., Ramachandaramurthy, V. K.,
(Vol. 7, Issue 2, pp. 287–300). Common Ground Research Venugopal, G., Ekanayake, J. B., & Tiong, S. K. (2021).
Networks. https://doi.org/10.18848/1832- Hierarchical frequency control framework for a remote
2077/cgp/v07i02/54905 microgrid with pico hydel energy storage and wind
Ragit, S. S., Mohapatra, S. K., Kundu, K., & Gill, turbine. International Journal of Electrical Power &
P. (2011). Optimization of neem methyl ester from Energy Systems (Vol. 127, p. 106666). Elsevier BV.
transesterification process and fuel characterization as a https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijepes.2020.106666
diesel substitute. Biomass and Bioenergy (Vol. 35, Issue Vyas, A., Gupta, N. K., Gupta, S. K., Gautam, P., &
3, pp. 1138–1144). Elsevier BV. Jethoo, A. S. (2015). Mini/Micro Hydel Power System
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biombioe.2010.12.004 Design and its Implementation in Rajasthan. Aquatic
Ragit, S. S., Mohapatra, S. K., Kundu, K., Procedia (Vol. 4, pp. 1537–1544). Elsevier BV.
Karmakar, R. (2013). Methanolysis and Ethanolysis of https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aqpro.2015.02.199
Raw Hemp Oil: Biodiesel Production and Fuel Walia, N. K., Bedi, S. S., Kundu, K., Karmakar, R.
Characterization. International Journal of Engineering (2013). Production of Bioethanol from Mango Peel.
Research & Technology. Vol. 2, Issue 3, pp. 1-10. International Journal of Engineering Research &
Roychowdhury, A., Karmakar, R., Kundu, K., Technology. Vol. 2, Issue 1, pp. 1-7.
Dahake, V. R. (2011). Algal Biodiesel: Future Prospects Yuan, H., Tan, L., Kida, K., Morimura, S., Sun, Z.-
and Problems. Water and Energy International. Vol. 68, Y., & Tang, Y.-Q. (2021). Potential for reduced water
Issue 11, pp. 44-51. consumption in biorefining of lignocellulosic biomass to
Saha, K., Maharana, A., Sikder, J., Chakraborty, S., bioethanol and biogas. Journal of Bioscience and
Curcio, S., & Drioli, E. (2019). Continuous production of Bioengineering (Vol. 131, Issue 5, pp. 461–468). Elsevier
bioethanol from sugarcane bagasse and downstream BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbiosc.2020.12.015
purification using membrane integrated bioreactor. Zhan, L., Bo, Y., Lin, T., & Fan, Z. (2021).
Catalysis Today (Vol. 331, pp. 68–77). Development and outlook of advanced nuclear energy
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cattod.2017.11.031 technology. Energy Strategy Reviews (Vol. 34, p.
Santana, M. B., Jr., Gama, F. Á., Pereira, I. O., 100630). Elsevier BV.
Tramontina, R., Squina, F. M., Ambrosi, A., Zielinski, A., https://doi.org/10.1016/j.esr.2021.100630
Poletto, P., & Ienczak, J. L. (2024). Harnessing tobacco Zhao, X., Al-Abdrabalnabi, R., Wu, Y.-S., & Zhou, X.
stem biomass for eco-friendly xylo-oligomers production (2021). Evaluations of the feasibility of oil storage in
via hydrothermal treatment and succinic acid via depleted petroleum reservoirs through experimental
fermentation. Journal of Cleaner Production (Vol. 456, p. modelling studies. Fuel (Vol. 294, p. 120316). Elsevier
142305). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142305 BV. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fuel.2021.120316
Seo, Y. hwan, Han, S., & Han, J.-I. (2014).
Economic biodiesel production using algal residue as
Circularity of Biomass Feedstock to Produce Ethanol and Feasibility of Ethanol-Gasoline Fuel Blends in Engine Vol. 50 Issue 3 639