Advances in Fossil-Free Motorsports Fuels

for Sustainable Transportation

A.Ferrari, D.Vrtiska, M.Popilka

R&D / Technology Department

P1 Performance Fuels GmbH
Salzufer 16, 10587 Berlin
[email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]

M.Schmidt, Prof. Dr techn. C.Beidl

Institute for Internal Combustion Engines and Powertrain Systems

Technical University of Darmstadt
Otto Berndt Straße 2, 64287 Darmstadt
[email protected], [email protected]

Abstract: The topic of sustainable transportation has acquired a

central position on the agenda of governments and industries
globally. However, the discourse around which pathway to take to
achieve sustainable mobility is sometimes incoherent, due to
differing views and opinions from diverse stakeholders. This paper
describes how it is technically possible to introduce drop-in carbon-
neutral fuels (CNF) in ICEV and PHEV for fleets of vehicles, and how
this immediately produces a reduction in well-to-wheel (WtW)
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions from the transportation sector. In
particular, Berlin-based fossil-free fuel specialist P1 Performance
Fuels GmbH has been developing various grades of sustainable fuel
since 2018. It began introducing these products into international
motorsport in 2020 and is currently transferring this technical
know-how into the development of CNF for passenger vehicles.
This paper describes the steps that allowed the introduction of CNF
into motorsport, and the reasons why the motorsport arena is ideal
for the development of sustainable fuel technologies.
1 Introduction

Global atmospheric concentration of greenhouse gases (GHG) such as carbon

dioxide, methane, and other manufactured gases has increased significantly since
the beginning of the industrial era. This is mainly due to human activities including
industrial processes, agriculture, and the use of fossil fuels [1]. In Europe, the
transportation sector contributes one-quarter of the region’s total GHG emissions
[2,7] and is one of the main causes of air pollution in cities. Since 1990 in Europe,
other energy-consuming sectors have achieved a reduction of up to 40% in their GHG
emissions, but this has not been matched by the transportation sector [3]. The
priorities of the European Community (EU) in their effort to contain this trend and to
achieve a reduction in emissions of 55% between 1990 and 2030 are:

• Increasing the efficiency of the transport system, including a larger

implementation of digital technologies, as well as the use of lower-emissions
transport modes, such as car sharing and bike sharing.

• Speeding up the deployment of low-emission alternative energy for

transport, such as advanced biofuels, green hydrogen, and renewable
synthetic fuels, and encouraging the electrification of transport.

• Moving towards ‘low-emission vehicles’ [3].

Since 2016 (Paris Agreement) — because of the penalties for the car manufacturers
related to TtW CO2 emissions, the car industry began seeking new strategies to
reduce global emissions and striving toward a goal of 100% electric vehicle (EV)
technology for passenger cars and light-weight transportation. This process is
supported by the European legislation introducing a ban of the ICE from 2035, and
public incentives for the consumers for the purchase of new EV.

While we all agree on the need to reduce transportation’s carbon footprint quickly,
the discussion around which is the best way of achieving this, is critical and
instrumental in defining our future, and thus a scientific and pragmatic approach is
required.

The reduction of transportation’s GHG footprint must be attained by improvements

in all processes, from vehicle manufacture to on-road use. In addition, the building
of the infrastructure required by a new technology, and the environmentally friendly
recycling of waste from that technology, need to be considered. E.g., vehicle
electrification might not be the best solution for a rapid reduction of GHG in remote
locations, regions with poor electrical infrastructure, and places where the only
source of energy is fossil fuels. To attain our climate goals, and to cater for the
different energetic, social, geographic, and economic characteristics of different
areas in the world, it is important to evaluate and develop multiple technologies
simultaneously to obtain a rapid reduction of GHG emissions. Reports like the FVV
Fuels Study IV published in 2021 [12] argues that it will not be possible to meet the
‘1.5 degrees Celsius pathway’ of the Paris Agreement without taking existing vehicles
into account, and reducing urgently their emissions.

A competing GHG-reduction technology with wide applicability and potentially zero

entry cost for end users is fossil-free synthetic fuels, also called carbon-neutral fuels
(CNF). These fuels can offer immediate GHG reduction with no need for roadside
infrastructure development, and their application can potentially be extended to air
and sea transportation.

Global GHG footprint reduction requires smart energy management and efficiency
optimization in all phases of vehicle life and use — we cannot focus only on the
energy source necessary to make the vehicle move, whether that is a battery or liquid
fuel. To attain this goal, a technology agnosticism is required, allowing for an efficient
mix of sustainable solutions applicable to the end users’ needs. Motorsport is based
on this same approach: the participants all compete under the same technical and
sporting rules within a defined timeframe, and the team with the highest-efficiency
mix of solutions wins the race, and in the long term, the championship. Starting in
2020, the Fédération Internationale de l´Automobile (FIA), the governing body of
international motorsport, incentivized the use of advanced sustainable fuels by the
FIA — and in 2022 published a new fuel technical regulation in the AppJ252.9,
imposing a minimum fossil-free-components content for the fuel formulation of
certain of its World Championships [4].

In 2021 and 2022, the cars of the FIA World Touring Car Championship (WTCR) ran
successfully on a RON98 EN228 gasoline with 15% fossil-free components developed
by P1 Fuels [5]. In 2021, P1 Fuels was appointed as sole fuel supplier to the FIA World
Rally Championship (WRC) [6] for the seasons 2022-2024, with a 100%-fossil-free
fuel formulation called FossilFree100 WRC. A few months after the announcement
of the introduction of fossil-free fuel to the WRC, the F1 World Championship
announced that it too will adopt these rules, from 2026.

The severe testing and racing conditions in motorsport challenge the development
of both fuels and engines, enhancing the performance of the whole vehicle package.
A fuel compliant with European EN228 automotive gasoline standards, developed by
P1 Fuels with technology and manufacturing experience transferred from
motorsport, is being tested and evaluated in cooperation with the Technical
University of Darmstadt, with particular focus on drivability, emissions, and drop-in
compatibility. The Institute for Internal Combustion Engines and Powertrain Systems
of TU Darmstadt, in cooperation with Deutscher Motor Sport Bund e.V. (DMSB), is
working intensively on the technical conditions, testing, and pilot introduction of
drop-in-capable synthetic fuels in amateur motorsports. A drop-in fuel must work in
an unmodified standard vehicle without any modification of the fuel system or
engine, matching material compatibility and engine functionality.

2 Sustainability is a global matter

Electric vehicles (EVs) have grown in appeal in recent years because of their high
energy conversion efficiency, and the fact that their CO2 and emissions at the tailpipe
are zero. However, this is only true because we are evaluating the tank-to-wheel
(TtW) emission footprint, based on the transformation of electric energy stored in
the batteries into kinetic energy used to move the vehicle. But, when we consider
the well-to-wheel (WtW) footprint, including the GHG footprint during each step of
the energy transformation into electric energy before reaching the batteries, the
result is quite different, and is strongly affected by the emissions of the primary
energy source (Figure 1). Moreover, the impact of mining the raw materials
necessary to build the EV batteries cannot be neglected in the calculation of the GHG
footprint, although this topic is not part of this paper. Of the 1.5 billion vehicles
circulating worldwide in 2022, only 20 million (1.3%) are light-duty plug-in vehicles,
and the sales of EV and plug-in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV) passenger cars together
achieved only a 9% market share of global new car sales in 2021 [10]. This growth is
too slow to reach the GHG reduction goals set for 2030 and 2050, therefore actions
to reduce the GHG of the existing fleet must be immediate [14]. Statistics and case
studies highlight that the growing electrification of light-duty vehicles, sustained by
large incentives from governments, might be the case in China and certain states in
the EU and USA, however the largest part of the world is not ready for sustainable
electrification [11]. In contrast, the introduction of carbon-neutral fuels (CNF), or
low-carbon fuels, can immediately contribute to reducing the global GHG emissions
from existing vehicles, aircraft and ships, and these fuels can be distributed using
existing infrastructure.
 Figure 1: TtW and WtW scheme for an ICEV and EV

2.1 CNF – Carbon-neutral fuels: the way to store energy (and CO2) in liquid
form

CNF are part of a large family of partly- or fully-fossil-free synthetic fuels, blended
from chemical components derived from either second-generation feedstock, (such
as bio-alcohols generated from agricultural and urban-waste biomass), or from the
industrial catalytic conversion of syngas (CO + H2), generally known as e-Fuels or
Power to Liquid (PtL) [9]. In both cases, every molecule of the blend has a non-fossil
origin, so no new CO2 is introduced into the atmosphere during its use, as shown in
Figure 2. The carbon atoms in these fuels are captured from CO2 already present in
the atmosphere. The process of carbon capture can be natural, through
photosynthesis of plants or algae, or artificial, for example, through direct air capture
(DAC).

When an internal combustion engine (ICE) running on a 100% CNF transforms the
energy stored in the fuel into mechanical work, it emits CO2 that was originally
captured from the atmosphere, and the resulting TtW footprint can be considered
zero (neutral balance), as is the case for an EV. Figure 2 shows the circular path of
CO2 and water, which are released into the environment as combustion by-products,
and become potential feedstock for reprocessing back into CNF, via either
biosynthetic or PtL paths.

While the well-to-tank (WtT) footprint depends on the technical processes used
(alcohol to gasoline, Fischer-Tropsch, Direct Air Capture for CO2, etc.), as well as the
energy mix adopted to produce the fuels, and the fuel transportation method, the
TtW efficiency is directly related to fuel consumption, which can be improved by
improving the fuel properties and the fuel/engine match.

Methanol (CH3OH), the simplest alcohol molecule, containing one carbon atom.
Because of its simple structure, producing methanol, synthetically or from biomass,
is more straightforward than producing other fuels, and it is the simplest liquid
energy carrier. Methanol can be used as a stand-alone fuel for certain applications
such as ships, or as feedstock to produce more complex molecules for blending (e.g.,
ethers, gasoline, e-kerosene and e-diesel blend) [15]. Some of the synthetic gasoline
manufacturing processes use alcohols as feedstock because the alcohol molecule
contains all the necessary atoms to create a hydrocarbon blend [9] (see Figure 2).
For these reasons, the authors believe that methanol (bio or synthetic) will have a
central role in the future clean energy economy, and in CNF technology.

In summary, the advantages of CNF in transportation are:

• Replace fossil fuels in current vehicle fleet and reduce their WtW emissions.

• Keeping the existing refueling infrastructure and transportation assets (barges,

storage depots, etc.).

• CNF can be used as drop-in fuels in vehicles (gasoline, diesel), aviation

(kerosine), and ships (methanol), with only minor modification of the
hardware.

• Endless availability of certain feedstocks, and circular economy.

• Feedstocks (including bio feedstocks) and renewable energy are potentially

available in every region of the globe. This can allow local energy independence
and a reduction of the environmental impact of long-haul fuel transport.
 Figure 2: P1 Fuels Scheme of WtW and TtW footprint of the CNF production

2.2 P1 Fuels: removing ‘fossil’ from fuels as a mission

Since its establishment, P1 Fuels has developed innovative products for motorsport,
which is traditionally a field requiring very rapid development of new solutions for
efficient mobility.

P1 has introduced sustainable racing fuel as early as 2016 and has been continuously
innovating to increase the drop-in compatibility of the fuels as well as fuel
performance. As part of the FIA working group P1 has collaborated on the definition
of the Advanced Sustainable Fuel regulation which has led to the introduction of
complete range of sustainable fuels with varying renewability contents.

Table 1 is an overview of the estimated footprints of P1 Fuels’ sustainable gasoline

formulations comparing different levels of fossil-free rates, with the standard fossil
gasoline. This evaluation is based on mass balance, where source data for fossil fuels
and for the fossil-free components are coming from literature and from P1 Fuels
internal calculations, based on GHG footprint of the raw materials adopted for the
calculation of WtT footprint. Although the engine emits CO2 at the tailpipe, in this
approach the fossil-free part of the fuels adopted (15%-75%-100%) is considered to
give a neutral contribution to the TtW footprint*. The resulting WtW CO2 reduction
range (right columns of Table 1) is based on the actual energy mix available in EU
(2022) for the fuel manufacturing and a future scenario, when the 100% renewable
energy mix will be available.
 Well-to-Tank Tank-to- Well-to- WtW CO2 WtW CO2
(WtT) Wheel (TtW) Wheel (WtW) reduction reduction
footprint footprint footprint 2022 future

[gCO2eq/MJ] [gCO2eq/MJ] [gCO2eq/MJ]

100%
21.5 72.5* 94.0 -
Fossil

15%
fossil- 21.8 60.8* 82.6 10% 14%
free

75%
fossil- 20.5 18.5* 39.0 58% 71%
free

100%
fossil- 27.9 0* 27.9 71% 92%
free

Table 1: P1 Fuels footprint evaluation for three different fossil-free gasoline

solutions. *see description above the table.

The WtT footprint of each fuel is calculated via a mass-balance, using the footprint
of each of the fuel’s fossil-free components. Independent entities such as ISCC or
REDcert, certify the origin of raw materials and give footprint values per energy
(CO2eq/MJ) for each fuel product’s entire production transformation chain. P1 Fuels
received REDcert certification in 2022, allowing it to issue proof-of-sustainability
documentation quantifying the CO2/MJ emissions of the fuels it produces. Based on
this approach, it is possible to estimate the WtW footprint of fuels with different
concentrations of fossil-free components, in gCO2eq/km (Figure 3). This is compared
to a standard fossil fuel and to BEV technology, considering the actual average
electricity grid mix, ca. 38% renewable, in European countries [22]. The reference EV
in this example is the ‘Vehicle A’, with both battery packs of 58 kWh and 77 kWh,
while the reference ICE vehicle is called ‘Vehicle B’, 2.0L DI Gasoline. Both vehicle
types have comparable mass and price, they are produced by the same car
manufacturer and are available in the European market. This data shows that the
introduction of 15% fossil-free fuels in gas stations could give a WtW CO2 footprint
reduction of ca. 10%–12%, corresponding in EU-27 to a reduction of 65.5 thousand
Tons CO2 yearly (data emissions in 2020) [13]. On the other hand, where a larger use
of fossil-free rate is possible, for example for fleets of company cars, public
administration, or service vehicles like police and ambulances, it is possible to reach
a WtW footprint comparable to that of EVs during utilization, with the additional
advantage of not producing new vehicles. According to this internal study, based on
publicly available data, as well as the data from the proof of sustainability of the
components adopted, with a 75% fossil-free gasoline it is possible to achieve a
reduction of the WtW footprint of ca. 58%. With a 100%-fossil-free fuel the values of
the gCO2eq/km are comparable to those of today’s EVs. In a future scenario where
largely-renewable energy (solar, wind, etc.) is available for PtL production, and with
an economy of scale in fuel logistics, a reduction in GHG emissions of up to 90%–92%
(Table 1, right column) compared to fossil fuels is possible [8,9,23].

Vehicle A Vehicle B
Powertrain type BEV ICEV
Power [kW] 150 150 180
Torque [Nm] 310 310 370
Weight [kg] 1813 1936 1450
Tank capacity [L] - - 50
Energy capacity [kWh] 58 77 475
Autonomy (WLTP) [km] 335 550 990
Price ca. 40k Euro ca. 50k Euro ca. 45k Euro

Figure 3: WtW emission evaluation for market-available EV and ICEV of same

categories – P1 Fuels study
2.3 The main constraints on fuel development

This paper focuses on CNF (gasoline) and its application to spark ignition (SI) engines.
However, similar considerations are also valid for diesel fuels. The development of
the formulation of a high-performance fuel is a complex process, in which the
chemico-physical properties have to satisfy specific requirements and meet the
following constraints:

• Fuel specifications: these can be either EN228 for standard European gasoline,
or the FIA AppJ Art.252.9 [4] for regulated motorsport competitions, or other
technical customer specifications. Within the given technical specification, the
optimization work aims to maximize the fuel performance, its knock resistance,
flame speed, energy content, and fossil-free content. Fuel consumption is
correlated to CO2 TtW emissions, and HC and CO emissions are indicators of
combustion efficiency, which is directly related to fuel characteristics.

• Engine characteristics: the engine design and its applications are important
parameters in the design of the fuel. E.g., 2-stroke or 4-stroke, turbocharged
or naturally aspirated, direct or port injection, engine target speed, etc. The
target of a drop-in fuel is to make it work in the engine with minor changes
(e.g., on engine calibration).

• Material compatibility: the fuel compatibility with the tank, filters, elastomers
of the fuel line, and injector seals. This is one of the most relevant topics for
the introduction of a new drop-in fuel.

• Sustainability content of the fuel formulation

• Product stability and reproducibility: in Motorsport, and in every application

where the fuel plays a role in reaching high performance, the reproducibility of
the production batches is fundamentally important. E.g., the high compression
ratios and intake pressures of up to 2.5 bar in the FIA WRC require stable and
reproducible fuel behavior, under all conditions. Quality control is fundamental
to securing the reproducibility of the fuel and can be ensured using gas
chromatography and infrared spectra comparison.

• Product price: offering a product that satisfies all mentioned constraints at an

affordable price. Moreover, existing manufacturing technology and volumes
still makes CNF more expensive than a comparable gasoline refined from crude
oil.
 About the last constraint, it must be said that in Europe, excise taxes are still as
high for CNF as for fossil fuels — although it is hoped that this will soon change as
an incentive to sustain scaling up, to be able to offer soon this innovation at an
affordable price per litre.

3 100% Fossil-free racing fuel in the FIA WRC 2022

In 2022 the FIA WRC became the first FIA World Championship to adopt a 100%-
sustainable gasoline called P1 FossilFree100 WRC (Figure 5). The inclusion of the
Advanced Sustainable Fuel Standard in the FIA AppJ 252.9 facilitated the rapid
introduction of racing fuels with a high renewable component content, either
biosynthetic or PtL. In particular, the increase of the maximum oxygen
concentration, from, for example, 3.7 % m/m as in the E10 EN228 spec., to 7.5% m/m
(Table 2), is a major change in the technical regulations, which allows today to reach
both a high level of renewability and good performance of the fuel.

According to the mass balance calculation as in Table 1, during the 2022 FIA WRC
season, the introduction of the 100% CNF of P1Fuels contributed to a reduction of
ca. 512 Tons of CO2

Beyond the constraints of the 100%-fossil-free composition, the fuel FossilFree100

WRC has been designed to reach a level of performance like its fossil-based
predecessor (called here WRC 2021, produced by a different fuel supplier), to be
suitable for use in motorsport and the existing rally engines. All constraints described
in chapter 2.3 were taken into account to supply the final product. During the
development at P1 several fuel formulations have been evaluated with use of an
internal ML (Machine Learning) development tool (it will be presented in future
publications), allowing an efficient selection and screening of the possible solutions
in short time, and limiting the number of physical laboratory measurements.
 P1 FossilFree100 FOSSIL WRC 2021 FIA AppJ 252.9 EN228 E10
WRC (2022) (different standard standard
supplier) (2022)

RON [-] 101.0 101.7 95.0 – 102.0 min. 95.0

MON [-] 88.5 88.4 85.0 – 90.0 min. 85.0

Density [kg/m3] 759.0 749.0 720 – 785 720 – 775

45.0 – 60.0 (s)

DVPE [kPa] 60 – 64 58.0 50 – 80
60.0 – 90.0 (w)

Final Boiling
ca. 206 < 140 < 210.0 < 210.0
Point (FBP) [°C]

Evaporation at
64.0 71.0 46.0 – 72.0 46.0 – 71.0
100°C [% v/v]

Evaporation at
80.0 > 90.0 min. 75.0 min. 75.0
150°C [% v/v]

oxygen
7.3 3.5 7.5 (max.) 3.7 (max.)
[% m/m]

Ethanol [% v/v] < 1.0 ca. 7.1 - max. 10

Stoich. A/F 13.4 13.9 - -

Net Heating
39.6 41.2 - -
Value [MJ/kg]

Table 2: Overview of the WRC fuel characteristics (2021 vs. 2022) and the technical
FIA AppJ 252.9, EN228 E10 specifications.

P1 FossilFree100 WRC Fuel has been available from September 2021 for testing in
rally engines of the Rally1, Rally2, and Rally3 cars in the WRC championship, for
Toyota Motorsport, Hyundai Motorsport, M-Sport (Ford), Skoda Motorsport, and
Stellantis, the major car manufacturers participating in the WRC events. Together
with the manufacturers and the technical department of the FIA, P1 Fuels is
investigating the fuel characteristics, and its interactions with the vehicle and engine
parts, to understand its limits and what room for improvement is available for the
next generation.
 Figure 5: P1 Fuels as official supplier at WRC 2022.

Motorsport is the ideal field for the development of automotive technologies:

historically, car manufacturers have invented and tested different applications,
materials, and solutions in racing, before transferring them into large-scale
application in consumer vehicles. This is happening today with CNF, as suppliers such
as P1 develop fossil-free fuels for car manufacturers involved in professional
motorsport, focusing on sustainability. P1 is transferring the know-how from
motorsport to the blending of standard fuels with similar characteristics to what is
available at commercial fuel stations, for example, DIN EN228 standard gasoline for
Europe or JIS for the Japanese market.

3.1 Learnings from motorsport

Engine/Fuel performance:
Although the P1 FossilFree100 WRC fuel has a similar stoichiometric A/F ratio to its
fossil predecessor, (it has a typical value of standard gasoline), which makes it a drop-
in fuel, the net heating value, and particularly the distillation curve of the P1
FossilFree100 WRC are different. Indeed, the fossil fuel of the previous year had a
much higher volatility at high temperatures, and a very low final boiling point (FBP)
in the distillation curve (Table 2), because of the lower concentration of high boiling
hydrocarbons, like aromatics.
 The engine dynamometer measurements at wide open throttle (WOT) from one of
the Rally1 car manufacturers involved in the WRC are shown in Figure 6 and Figure
7. (For confidentiality reasons, the values cannot be disclosed.) The engine is a 1.6
L, DI Turbocharged SI, with a maximum intake boost of 2.5 bar abs., a compression
ratio of 12.5 and a 36 mm air restrictor diameter [4]. The Rally1 ICE have a declared
power of ca. 280 kW, and the hybrid powertrain reaches a performance of more
than 365 kW and 500 Nm. The measurements presented here (courtesy of the
Toyota Gazoo Racing Team, TMG) were generated in September 2021, before the
start of the first season with the fossil-free fuel, and include cylinder-indicated
measurements, which give some insight into the combustion process.
The Rally engines in WOT operate under a rich air/fuel mixture to maximize the
combustion efficiency and reduce the knocking tendency (Lambda = 0.80–0.85). The
measurements show a relatively high knock sensitivity for the P1 FossilFree100 WRC
at lower engine speed under these demanding operating conditions, which forces a
reduction in ignition advance of ca. 1.0–1.5 °CA, depending on the engine speed.
Enrichment of the mixture over a certain limit becomes counterproductive, reducing
the indicated efficiency. On the other hand, in the restrictor area, the higher oxygen
content in the fuel produces a slight advantage. The lower heating value of the P1
FossilFree100 WRC results in a slightly higher fuel consumption (3%–4%). The more
recent performance development of the engine with this fuel cannot be reported in
this work for confidentiality reasons. However, the indications from the
dynamometer regarding the fuel development are quite clear. In direct comparison,
the P1 FossilFree100 WRC and the previous WRC 2021 fossil fuel introduce a similar
amount of energy into the combustion chamber (related to each stoichiometric A/F
ratio). In addition, the knocking resistance indicators (RON/MON) are quite similar;
however, the mixture formation and the fuel evaporation rate during injection are
fundamental for creating the ideal conditions for ignition and combustion
propagation. The latent heat of vaporization of the P1 FossilFree100 WRC is between
5% to 10% higher than the fossil fuel from 2021 — therefore a positive cooling effect
of the mixture can be expected. On the other hand, the slower evaporation rate of
the fossil-free fuel can produce a higher axial penetration of the spray, with a
possible higher risk of cylinder wall impingement and consequent higher oil dilution.
The results of the combustion test show a delay in the combustion start (ignition
delay), although the combustion duration (10%–90% of burned mass) is comparable
(See Figure 7). The ignition delay increases in the middle engine speed range and can
be compatible with a poorer air/fuel homogeneity at the spark plug or with the need
of a higher ignition energy. At this moment no more details are available.
Figure 6: (upper) Torque/power comparison of the P1 FossilFree100 WRC fuel vs.
the predecessor fossil-based fuel.
(lower) Ignition advance, fuel consumption comparison vs. engine speed (x-axis).
 Figure 7: Ignition delay comparison of the P1 FossilFree100 WRC fuel vs. the
predecessor fossil-based fuel (upper). Combustion duration comparison (lower).
Oil dilution:
Increased oil dilution has been observed when using fossil-free fuel, in particular in
direct injection spark ignition (DISI) engines, suggesting the need for further
investigation of cylinder wall impingement and spray penetration. These
experiments on spray injection have been conducted by P1 Fuels at the French
Institute of Petroleum and new energies (IFPen) in Paris, together with the FIA, and
the results are reported in Figure 8-9. Different tests have been conducted on a
multi-hole gasoline injector (8-holes Delphi solenoid injector) at different
temperatures and injection pressures to compare the axial penetration of the fossil-
free fuel with the fossil version of the previous year. The measurements have been
conducted into a 1.4 L cell at a pressure of 1 bar, the temperature of the fuel was of
90°C, while the air temperature in the cell was of 150°C. The fuel injection pressure
tested was of 100 and 200 bar (Figure 9). The results of the tests show that, due to
its higher volatility and lower FBP compared to the fossil-free fuel, WRC 2021 fossil
fuel builds a more homogeneous droplet distribution during injection. Because of its
faster evaporation (see lower FBP and heat of vaporization), the fossil fuel spray has
an easier dispersion and a reduced axial spray penetration. As consequence the wall
impingement and the oil dilution are lower.

It should be noted that the engine design of the intake ports, combustion chamber
and the injectors (homologated parts, which cannot be modified within three years),
in the Rally1 cars have been optimized for the use of the previous fuel, while for the
lower categories of Rally2 and Rally3, it is mandatory to use standard production
injectors [6]. Therefore, it is not possible to intervene in the engine hardware design
to improve the fuel injection and mixing process, and the solution must come
(almost) exclusively from fuel development, just like drop-in fuels in passenger cars
that are already on the roads.

Figure 8: Fuel Injection at 200 bar, 150°C testing cell temperature after 1,0 ms.
(Left) P1 FossilFree100 WRC fuel. (Right) WRC 2021 (fossil fuel).
 Figure 9: Fuel axial spray penetration comparison at different injection pressure:
P1 FossilFree100 WRC vs. WRC 2021 (fossil fuel)

The reduction of oil dilution by fossil-free fuel is one of P1 Fuel’s highest priorities,
as this is not only relevant to the loss of oil viscosity and consequently engine
mechanical reliability, but also impacts engine efficiency, as the energy of the fuel
impinged onto the cylinder walls cannot be released during combustion. Moreover,
under some circumstances, this might create undesirable soot formation and
facilitate knocking — however, this last aspect requires deeper investigation, beyond
the scope of this work.

4 From racing to standard gasoline

In motorsport, the introduction of new technical regulations has allowed for CNF
development, and this knowledge can be transferred towards developing drop-in
fuels for commercial applications, where a revision of the fuel road standards (e.g.,
EN228 in Europe) could facilitate this process.
Valuable experience in CNF development gained in motorsport has been transferred
without delay into the development of CNF for standard car applications. P1 Fuels
has developed EN228 (European gasoline standard) and JIS (Japanese fuel standard)
fuels with different levels of fossil-free components, from 15% up to 100%, based on
the same technologies and approach as for the racing fuels. The fuel compatibility
with passenger cars fuel line components like sealings and elastomers, as well as the
reduction of the oil dilution were the main constraints for the fuel design. In
collaboration with prominent car and engine manufacturers, P1 Fuels has developed
drop-in solutions which have been successfully implemented for multiple
applications, for example, in vintage engines (e.g., the demonstration with the 1922
Green Pea Aston Martin with Sebastian Vettel at the French F1 Grand Prix, or with
the 1992 F1 Williams car, as well driven by Sebastian Vettel at a demonstration drive
in Silverstone in 2022), in GT and touring car engine applications, motorbikes,
karting, etc.

At the moment the current legislative framework in Europe does not facilitate the
utilization of CNF, and incentives are dedicated only for the purchase of new EV. The
ban of ICE from 2035, limiting the necessary investments so scale up CNF. A
reduction of the excise taxes for CNF — e.g., correlated with WtT emissions — would
be a useful incentive to sustain the development of this market, and facilitate
investments by major energy companies and technology owners. Taking the example
of what has happened in motorsport, a good first step would be the introduction of
a mandatory, affordable minimum level (e.g., 10% - 15%) of fossil-free content in the
fuels, with a revision of the technical specification standards.

4.1 Testing the EN228 CNF in a passenger car

Despite conformity with existing fuel standards such as DIN EN 228, the chemical
formulation of a fuel has a decisive influence on its evaporation and combustion
properties. In order to ensure future use in existing and new production cars, engine
oil dilution in gasoline direct-injection engines and compliance with current
emissions legislation are important issues which must be managed in the
development of synthetic fuels. With this in mind, an advanced EN228 gasoline
based on 100%-fossil-free components, called P1 Eco100Pro, is analyzed in
comparison with conventional premium-grade gasoline, and evaluated under Real
Driving Emissions (RDE) boundary conditions. Tailpipe emissions, oil dilution, and
drivability tests are carried out at the Institute of Internal Combustion Engines and
Powertrain Systems at TU Darmstadt, using an existing fleet production car with a
gasoline direct injection engine.
4.2 Experimental setup

A representative C-segment passenger car with homogeneous direct injection and

Euro 6c emissions standard is used as the test vehicle. A detailed overview is
presented in Table 3.

Research vehicle

Euro car segment C

Engine type 3-Cylinder gasoline direct injection

Charging Exhaust gas turbocharging

Displacement 1000 cc

Max. power 88 kW (120 hp)

Transmission 6-speed manual

Exhaust aftertreatment system Controlled three-way catalyst

Emission standard Euro 6c

Table 3: Characteristics of the test vehicle
For the test series, P1 Eco100Pro, with 100% fossil-free components, is examined, in
comparison with conventional fuel station Super 95 gasoline. The main properties of
the P1 Eco100Pro are summarized in comparison to DIN EN228 in Table 4. [18]

P1 Eco100Pro technical characteristics Specification – EN 228

Parameter Unit Typical Value Min Max

Net heating value MJ/kg 41.0 – 41.4 - -

(NHV)

Density (at 15 °C) Kg/m³ 760.0 – 763.0 720.0 775.0

RON - 96.0 – 98.0 95.0 -

DVPE kPa 48.0 – 52.0 45.0 90.0

Final boiling °C ca. 205 - 210

point (FBP)
Table 4: Fuel properties

4.3 Test procedure

The testing procedure proposed in this work is based on the following key points:
• At the beginning of the respective measurement series with Super 95 or P1
Eco100Pro, the fuel filter, oil filter and engine oil (SAE 5W30) are replaced.

• The test series with both fuels are each divided into two different real driving
profiles.

• A total of eight cold starts are made in urban short trip operation (5.5 km each,
Figure 10), followed by a total of eight cold starts on one of the legally
compliant RDE routes developed by the Institute (77 km each, Figure 11).

• Before each start, the vehicle is conditioned to 23 °C.

• To determine the fuel content in the engine oil (DIN 51454 :2015) as well as
the viscosity curve (ASTM D7042 :2020) over the course of the measurements,
oil samples are taken after defined distances have been covered.

• The RDE trips are also used to evaluate the emissions behavior in an existing
fleet production car regarding the current Euro 6d legislation.
The cold-started urban short trip in the inner-city low-load range is used to
determine the fuel input into the engine oil before the engine is fully warmed up and
higher-boiling fuel components can evaporate. The maximum oil temperature after
the urban short trips reaches 78 °C. Oil samples are taken after the first (5.5 km total),
fifth (27.5 km total), and the last short distance trip (44 km total). The last one is also
the initial sample for the following measurements on the RDE route. The oil is not
changed in between the two different real driving profiles. The removed quantity is
directly replaced with fresh oil at each step. The urban short trip (5.5 km) through
the city of Darmstadt and an exemplary speed curve can be seen in Figure 10.

Figure 10: Urban short trip and exemplary speed profile (© TU Darmstadt)

The subsequent RDE route (77 km) meets the requirements of the EU Commission
regarding route characteristics in the RDE legislation and is composed of urban, rural
and motorway sections [17]. In addition to the environmental conditions and route
characteristics, the requirements of the RDE regulation regarding driving dynamics
are also met. It will be investigated how oil dilution evolves with higher engine oil
temperature compared to short-distance operation, due to a thermally more
demanding load profile. The maximum oil temperature after the RDE trips is up to
105 °C. Oil samples are taken after the first (121 km total), fifth (429 km total), and
last RDE trip (660 km total). In addition to determining the oil dilution, the RDE trips
are used to evaluate the emissions behavior in an existing fleet production car
regarding the current Euro 6d legislation. The measurement of the gaseous exhaust
gas components (CO2, CO, NOX), as well as the particle number (up to 23 nm), are
carried out via an AVL M.O.V.E GAS PEMS iS. When evaluating the gaseous exhaust
components as well as the particle number, it must be considered that, in the RDE
procedure, different boundary conditions are created for the operating state of the
engine as well as the exhaust aftertreatment system. This is caused by varying driver
characteristics, the influence of traffic, and different ambient conditions. The
ambient temperatures during the RDE runs vary from a minimum of 6 °C to a
maximum of 25 °C. In addition, production cars such as the Euro 6c test vehicle,
which were certified before 1 September 2017, were still tested in standardized test
cycles on the chassis dynamometer in a conditioned environment according to the
Worldwide Harmonized Light Vehicles Test Procedure (WLTP) [17]. The application
of the RDE legislation only applies to vehicles certified according to Euro 6d-Temp or
Euro 6d. The presented results are nevertheless compared to the current Euro 6d
RDE 4 legislation in order to assess the usability of the P1 Eco100Pro for existing fleet
and new production cars under real driving conditions.

The RDE route as well as an exemplary speed curve can be seen in Figure 11.

Figure 11: RDE route and exemplary speed profile (© TU Darmstadt)

4.4 Results

The dilution of engine oil with gasoline fuel has a decisive influence on its lubricating
properties and consequently on friction and wear of the engine components.
Furthermore, with increased oil dilution, lubricant oxidation also increases [19].
Figure 12 shows the change in the fuel content in the engine oil and the kinematic
viscosity (at 40 °C and 100 °C) over the mileage for the urban short-trip operation
and the subsequent RDE trips.
Figure 12: Gravimetric fuel content in engine oil (left) and kinematic viscosity (right)
for urban short-trip operation and RDE trips

Most of the oil dilution through fuel occurs in cold-start urban short-trip operation
(44 km in total). Especially during cold starts, the fuel condenses on the cold cylinder
walls and pistons and reaches the oil sump through the piston rings. Evaporation of
the higher-boiling components of the fuel only takes place when the engine is at
operating temperature. The low temperature of the cold start urban short-trip
operation leads to an increase in oil dilution. In the subsequent RDE runs, only a slight
increase is detected, which ends at a maximum of 2.0 % (m/m) for the P1 Eco100Pro
and 1.1 % (m/m) for Super 95 after 660 km in total. (The reasons for the higher oil
dilution measurable with the P1 Eco100Pro in comparison to the fossil fuel are
described in chapter 3.1, discussing spray measurements of the racing CNF.)

The measurements for P1 Eco100Pro show an evaporation of the fuel content in the
oil, which reduces the oil dilution from 2.5 % (m/m) after 429 km to 2.0 % (m/m)
after 660 km. For the RDE trips, the steady state point of oil dilution seems to have
already been reached at a relatively low dilution level, and no significant increase in
oil dilution is expected with continued operation in this load profile. The kinematic
viscosity curves at 40 °C for the cold-start relevant range, and at 100 °C for the engine
at operation temperature, behave analogously to the oil dilution rate. Similarly, a
reduction of the kinematic viscosity in short-distance operation can be seen here, as
well as convergence to the steady-state point in the RDE runs.
As investigated in [21], with a maximum fuel content of 2.0 % (m/m) in the oil, no
increased wear is to be expected using the P1 Eco100Pro compared to Super 95 in
an RDE load profile. Whether an increase in oil dilution occurs during exclusively
cold-start short-distance operation over a longer period must be observed in further
investigations.

The results of the emission tests on the RDE Route compared to the current Euro 6d
RDE4 legislation are presented below. Figure 13 shows the distance-related CO and
NOX tailpipe emissions for a total of eight valid RDE test runs for each fuel.

Figure 13: Distance-related CO and NOX emissions in RDE valid test runs

For both CO and NOX emissions, the P1 Eco100Pro shows comparable results to the
Super 95 after the three-way catalyst. As expected, the respective Euro 6d limits are
met by a wide margin. On average, there is even a slight reduction in the CO and NOX
results. This result is to be validated in further investigations on the 4x4 chassis
dynamometer of the TU Darmstadt, under defined laboratory test conditions in the
Worldwide Harmonized Light Vehicles Test Cycle (WLTC). In addition, the THC
emissions, which do not have to be measured in real driving according to the RDE
regulation [17], are to be evaluated on the chassis dynamometer in order to obtain
a more precise statement about the combustion behavior.

Figure 14 shows the distance-related tailpipe particle number (PN) for the legally
relevant detection limit up to 23 nm. On the left of the figure are the entire RDE runs
(77 km each), and on the right are the urban part, broken down individually (21 km
each). In addition, the Euro 6d limit is shown as well as the permitted limit in real
driving conditions, considering the conformity factor (CF). This includes
measurement tolerances (0.5), which explains why the permitted laboratory value
for PN may be exceeded by a factor of CF max = 1.5 [17]. It has to be considered that
the EU 6c certified test vehicle does not have a gasoline particulate filter (GPF), as is
already state-of-the-art for an EU 6d production car.

Figure 14: Distance-related particle number (PN 23) in RDE total and urban only

For the mean distance-related particle number considered over the total of eight
RDE trips (RDE total), the P1 Eco100Pro is at the same level as Super 95. Furthermore,
the limit values are complied with in all journeys, considering a CF max of 1.5. In the
RDE procedure, particulate emissions in the urban part are also assessed individually
(RDE urban). With the high proportion of cold starts in relation to the RDE total, the
Euro 6d limits are not met in the urban section only, even when applying the
conformity factor. As shown in [20], with a gasoline particulate filter (GPF), the Euro
6d limits for the particle number are expected to be met by both fuels within the RDE
boundary conditions.

A comparison of the distance-related fuel consumption and the distance-related

tank-to-wheel (TtW) CO2 emissions, over the total of eight RDE trips, are plotted in
Figure 15. Both mean fuel consumption and TtW CO2 emissions are, on average, at
the same level due to the comparable carbon content of the fuels. An accurate
determination of the fuel consumption without the influence of traffic and the
environment must be carried out under laboratory conditions on the chassis
dynamometer. As already described in chapter 2.1, the 100%-fossil-free raw material
basis of the P1 ECO100Pro produces a neutral TtW CO2 footprint compared to its
fossil counterpart.
Figure15: Distance-related fuel consumption and CO2 emissions in RDE valid test runs

The presented results show the potential for the application of an EN228 advanced
gasoline fuel based on 100% fossil-free components in existing and new series
production cars. The Euro 6d limits for CO and NOX in the RDE procedure are met by
a wide margin, and are slightly lower than for conventional gasoline-station fuel. In
addition, P1 Eco100Pro fuel tested in a Euro 6d vehicle with a GPF is also expected
to comply with RDE limits under all boundary conditions. In further investigations on
the chassis dynamometer and at the engine test bench, the fuel’s potential for
standard vehicle application is to be highlighted, and more in-depth investigations
are to be carried out regarding combustion and emission behavior, as well as
performance and efficiency.

5 Conclusions and Outlook

The transportation sector is required to make an extraordinary effort to reduce its

GHG emissions, and this pressure to achieve the EU government’s goals
paradoxically leads to significant incentives to use only one technology, the battery
EV (BEV) or plug-in hybrid technology (PHEV). However, the path towards
sustainable mobility has to take into account social, economic and geographic
factors, and we must choose multiple relevant technical solutions in order to
maximize the benefit. Fossil-free synthetic fuels can quickly contribute to significant
WtW emissions reductions for the majority of currently circulating vehicles
worldwide, since 99,5% of them have an internal combustion engine [10]. P1 Fuels
recently introduced the first carbon-neutral fuel (CNF) into international motorsport,
combining both biosynthetic and PtL solutions with the approach ‘now or never’, and
bringing existing technologies to the market at an affordable price. The FIA WTCR
and WRC are the first FIA World Championships in history to use CNF. The transfer
of know-how from motorsport to standard fuels like EN228 (European gasoline
standard) is underway. In this paper, the results of emissions and drivability tests,
conducted on 100%-fossil-free EN228 gasoline, show that the fuel is already a viable
drop-in fuel, with comparable performance to the fuel available from commercial
gas stations, in terms of emissions, material compatibility and consumption.

6 Acknowledgements

For the realization of this work, support from partners and colleagues outside P1
Fuels has been invaluable. P1 Fuels would particularly like to acknowledge the
contribution of TGR - Toyota Gazoo Racing Team, Toyota Motor Corporation, the
VKM Institute at the University of Darmstadt, and IFPEN for support with laboratory
and engine measurements. P1 Fuels expresses thanks to its partners PerkinElmer for
technical support in the development of this project; DMSB in Germany, who
selected the CNF proposed by P1 Fuels for their investigations into the potential of
this solution; and of course, to the WRC Promoter and the powertrain department
at the FIA for their support and inspiration to make fossil-free fuels a reality in
motorsport.

Reference List

[1] www.epa.gov/system/files/images/2022-07/ghg-
concentrations_download1_2022.png

[2]
https://www.un.org/sites/un2.un.org/files/media_gstc/FACT_SHEET_
Climate_Change.pdf

[3] https://ec.europa.eu/clima/eu-action/transport-emissions_en

[4] www.fia.com

[5] https://www.fiawtcr.com

[6] www.fiawrc.com
[7]
https://easac.eu/fileadmin/PDF_s/reports_statements/Decarbonisatio
n_of_Tansport/EASAC_Decarbonisation_of_Transport_FINAL_March_
2019.pdf

[8] Die CO2-Gesamtbilanz für Antriebstechnologien im Individualverkehr

Heute und in Zukunft - Frontier Economics 2022.

[9] Zukünftige Kraftstoffe - ATZ-MTZ Fachbuch, Springer Verlag. ISBN 978-3-

662-58006-6

[10] https://www.spglobal.com/marketintelligence/en/news-insights/latest-
news-headlines/global-electric-vehicle-sales-doubled-us-made-ev-
comeback-in-2021-70489884

[11] https://theicct.org/ International council of clean transportation

[12] FVV Study IV (Project Number 1378) Final Report 2021.

[13] https://www.eea.europa.eu/data-and-maps/data/data-
viewers/greenhouse-gases-viewer

[14] IAV – IHK, E-Fuels – Notwendigkeit, Chance und Herausforderungen –

2020

[15] S.K.Maity, K.Gayen, T.K.Bhowmick, Hydrocarbon Biorefinery - ISBN: 978-

0-12-823306-1

[16] Kraftstoffe für die Mobilität von Morgen - Tagungsband 30 (2022)

[17] European Commission: Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/1151 of 1 June

2017. Official Journal of the European Union, 2017

[18] DIN EN 228:2017-08, Kraftstoffe - Unverbleite Ottokraftstoffe -

Anforderungen und Prüfverfahren; Deutsche Fassung EN
228:2012+A1:2017.

[19] TRIEBSCH, P. Kraftstoffeintrag ins Motoröl von aufgeladenen,

direkteinspritzenden Ottomotoren. Dissertation. Aachen, 2016.
Fortschritte in der Maschinenkonstruktion. 2016, Band 2. ISBN
9783844043976
[20] ADAC E.V. TEST UND TECHNIK. Particulate matter emissions: Otto-cycle
engines have potential for improvement, 11. Jun. 2021. Verfügbar unter:
https://www.adac.de/verkehr/abgas-diesel-
fahrverbote/abgasnorm/partikelemissionen-euro7/

[21] GLAHN, C.J. Benzindirekteinspritzung. Robustheitsuntersuchung durch

Simulation der Großserienstreuung in einem Langzeit-Feldtest. Zugl.:
Duisburg-Essen, Univ., Diss., 2006. Göttingen: Cuvillier, 2006. ISBN 3-
86727-039-2.

[22] Energy-Charts.info – Fraunhofer ISE

[23] Concawe, Aramco. E-Fuels: A techno economic assessment of European

domestic Production and imports toward 2050. (2022)