Abstract:
Beta-carotene, chlorophyll and jojoba oil are used together as a fuel additive to enhance combustion characteristics of carbonaceous fuels. Among the observed beneficial characteristics are reductions in the level of common pollutants emitted during combustion. Ethoxylated castor oil is also used in conjunction with the beta-carotene, chlorophyll and jojoba oil to provide enhanced combustion characteristics and reductions in pollutant emissions.

Description:
This is a continuation-in-part of U.S. patent application Ser. No. 08/163,651, which was filed on Dec. 7, 1993 and is now abandoned. 
    
    
     BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION 
     1. Field of the Invention 
     The present invention relates generally to reducing the amounts of pollutants produced during the combustion of carbonaceous fuels such as gasoline, diesel fuel, fuel oil, and coal. More particularly, the present invention relates to materials that can be added to the fuel prior to combustion in order to reduce the level of pollutants emitted as a result of the combustion process. 
     2. Description of Related Art 
     The combustion of carbonaceous fuels is a major source of air pollution. The primary pollutants produced as a result of the combustion of such fuels include carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, unburned hydrocarbons, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds. 
     There is today considerable interest in developing processes for eliminating or substantially reducing the amounts of pollutants that are emitted into the atmosphere as a result of fuel combustion. One approach involves treating the fuel prior to combustion in order to remove pollutant precursors. For example, numerous desulfurization processes have been devised to remove sulfur from fuel oil, coal, and other fuels prior to combustion. Although it is desirable to use preprocessed fuels that are inherently clean-burning, such fuels are expensive to produce. 
     Another approach to reducing air pollution involves treating the combustion gases to remove pollutants. A wide variety of adsorbents, as well as catalytic materials, have successfully been used for the removal of pollutants from combustion gases, including carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur oxides. For example, catalytic mufflers have been successfully used in automobiles to reduce pollutant emissions. Other scrubber devices have also been employed with some success in the removal of pollutants from a variety of combustion flue gases. 
     In addition to the above pollution-control mechanisms, there has also been interest in developing fuel additives that can be mixed with the fuel prior to combustion. The fuel additive participates in the combustion process, and its components act as scavengers or otherwise react with pollutants to convert them into nonpolluting combustion products. An example of this type of fuel additive is disclosed in U.S. Pat. No. 4,274,835; and involves improving combustion efficiency and reducing sulfur combustion emissions from burning coal by the addition of small amounts of chlorophyll, squalane, squalene, carotenoids, or mixtures thereof. 
     Many other processes have been developed over the years that are also effective in controlling pollutant emissions. However, the importance of reducing the amounts of substances emitted into the air mandates that researchers continue to seek new and improved methods for limiting the pollutants produced as a result of the combustion of carbonaceous fuels. 
     SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION 
     The present invention provides a method for reducing the levels of carbon monoxide and oxides of nitrogen and sulfur that are produced during the combustion of carbonaceous fuels, including, but not limited to, natural gas, gasoline, no. 1 diesel fuel, and no. 2 diesel fuel; and higher residual fuels including, but not limited to, No. 4 fuel oil, no. 5 light and no. 5 heavy fuel oils, and No. 6 fuel oil (Bunker C). The invention is based upon the discovery that adding synthetic trans β-carotene in combination with jojoba oil and chlorophyll in a suitable solvent to the fuel prior to combustion results in the reduction of pollutant emissions that would otherwise occur. 
     As a feature of the present invention, polyethoxylated castor oil surfactants may also be included in the fuel additive to provide additional component solubilization. Moreover, the addition of alkyl nitrates (e.g., 2-ethylhexyl, mixed octyl, etc.) to the synthetic trans β-carotene/jojoba/chlorophyll mixture reduces pollutant emissions resulting from the combustion of no. 2 diesel fuels as well as higher residual fuels, including, but not limited to, no. 4 fuel oil, no. 5 light and no. 5 heavy fuel oils, and no. 6 fuel oil (Bunker C) by acting synergistically with the synthetic trans β-carotene/jojoba/chlorophyll mixture to elevate cetane number. 
     The present invention is applicable to the full range of combustible carbonaceous fuels, including, but not limited to, natural gas, gasoline, no. 1 diesel fuel, and no. 2 diesel fuel; as well as higher residual fuels including, but not limited to, no. 4 fuel oil, no. 5 light and no. 5 heavy fuel oils, no. 6 fuel oil (Bunker C), and coal. Thus, the fuel additive of the present invention is suitable for use in a wide variety of combustion processes wherein emission of pollutants such as carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, sulfur oxides, unburned hydrocarbons, particulate matter, and volatile organic compounds are a problem. The method is advantageous in addition in that it obviates the need for other pollution reduction strategies such as treatment of exhaust gases. Moreover, the fuel additive of the present invention has been found to increase the combustion efficiency and power output of a variety of fuels including, but not limited to, natural gas, gasoline, no. 1 diesel fuel, no. 2 diesel fuel; as well as higher residual fuels including, but not limited to, no. 4 fuel oil, no. 5 light and no. 5 heavy fuel oils, and no. 6 fuel oil (Bunker C). 
     The exact mechanisms by which the synthetic trans β-carotene/jojoba/chlorophyll mixture interacts with pollutants during combustion to lower emission levels is not understood. However, it is believed that the fuel additives give rise to an increase in dissolved oxygen and water in the fuel itself, which results in turn in reduction of pollutant emissions. The mechanism(s) by which polyethoxylated castor oil surfactants and alkyl nitrate cetane boosters facilitate the reduction of emissions in diesel and higher residual fuels is not understood. 
     The above-described and many other features and attendant advantages of the present invention will become better understood by reference to the following detailed description. 
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION 
     The fuel additive of the present invention in its basic form is composed of a concentrated solution of synthetic trans β-carotene admixed with jojoba oil and chlorophyll. The concentrated additive solution may be diluted with a suitable solvent, if desired. Suitable diluent solvents include various organic liquids such as gasoline, no. 1 diesel fuel, no. 2 diesel fuel, xylene, toluene, cyclic hydrocarbons, hydrocarbon liquids containing cyclic constituents, liquid hydrocarbon fuels, halogenated hydrocarbon solvents (e.g., chloroform, trichloroethylene, etc.), liquid aldehydes, alcohols, and ketones, and even small amounts of water. Any organic solvent may in fact be used provided that it does not adversely increase pollutant emission levels. If desired, cetane boosters (alkyl nitrates: e.g., 2-ethylhexyl nitrate, mixed octyl nitrates, etc.; 0.01-99% v/v) may also be added at this time, depending upon the fuel to be treated). The preferred level of alkyl nitrate cetane booster is from 0.05 to 5% v/v. Also, if desired, the various ingredients used to make up the fuel additive may be added separately to the fuel. 
     The relative amounts of synthetic trans β-carotene, chlorophyll and jojoba oil may be varied depending upon the particular fuel being treated and the particular combustion conditions. In general, the ratio of synthetic trans β-carotene to jojoba oil may be varied from 8:100 to 20:100 w/v. The ratio of chlorophyll to jojoba oil may be varied from 1:100 to 50:100 w/v. The ratio of chlorophyll to synthetic trans β-carotene may be varied from 1:20 to 5:1 w/w. 
     For diesel and gasoline fuels being combusted in appropriate engines at conventional temperatures and pressures, the amount of total additive used to treat the fuel is generally less than 10% v/v. Typical optimal additive levels for treating fuel range from about 0.1 to 3% v/v. 
     For diesel fuel combusted in a diesel engine at conventional temperatures and pressures in accordance with the present invention, the fuel additive may also include 20 to 60% v/v polyethoxylated castor oil surfactants in addition to the synthetic trans β-carotene/jojoba oil/chlorophyll. The amount of polyethoxylated castor oil in the fuel additive can range from 0 to 75% v/v depending on the particular fuel and combustion conditions. The amount of total fuel additive for diesel fuel should nevertheless still be kept below 10% v/v. Preferred additive levels for diesel fuel when polyethoxylated castor oil is included in the additive mixture are about 0.2 to 1.5% v/v. The amount of polyethoxylated castor oil in the fuel in general should range from 0.05 to 3% v/v. 
     The particular ratios of synthetic trans β-carotene, chlorophyll and jojoba oil for a given fuel additive and the amount of additive that should be added to the fuel in order to obtain optimum emission reductions may be determined by routine experimentation. The procedure involves treating the selected fuel with a series of synthetic trans β-carotene/jojoba oil/chlorophyll combinations at different additive levels to establish which amounts provide the optimal combination of combustion efficiency and emissions reduction. 
     Depending upon the type of fuel being treated, i.e., solid or liquid, the fuel additive may also be diluted in a solvent prior to application to form an additive concentrate. For example, when the fuel additive is applied to solid particulate fuels (e.g. coal), it is desirable to dissolve the synthetic trans β-carotene/jojoba oil/chlorophyll in a suitable solvent to facilitate spraying or other application of the additive onto the particulate material. In these instances, the amount of solvent carrier used in the fuel additive may range from as little as 0.1% up to approximately 99% v/v. When the additive is combined with liquid fuels, a solvent carrier is usually not required. The amount of synthetic trans β-carotene/jojoba oil/chlorophyll in the additive concentrate is preferably between 0.05% to 10% w/w. As previously mentioned, suitable diluent solvents include various organic liquids such as xylene, toluene, cyclic hydrocarbons, hydrocarbon liquids containing cyclic constituents, liquid hydrocarbon fuels, halogenated hydrocarbon solvents (e.g., chloroform, trichloroethylene, etc.), liquid aldehydes, alcohols, and ketones, and even small amounts of water. Any organic solvent may in fact be used provided that it does not adversely increase pollutant emission levels. 
     The jojoba oil, synthetic trans β-carotene, chlorophyll, polyethoxylated castor oil surfactants, and alkyl nitrate cetane boosters used in preparing the fuel additive can be obtained commercially from a wide variety of sources. Jojoba oil, synthetic trans β-carotene, chlorophyll, polyethoxylated castor oil surfactants, and alkyl nitrate cetane boosters are all well-known compounds that have been commercially available from numerous sources for many years. For example, synthetic trans β-carotene is available from BASF Corp., Parsippamy, N.Y. Synthetic trans β-carotene is preferred over trans β-carotene that has been extracted from plant or animal material. 
     The temperature and pressure at which combustion takes place affects the level of pollutants emitted during a particular combustion process. The effectiveness of the fuel additive in the present invention will also vary depending upon combustion conditions, for example, the fuel to oxygen ratio. As a routine matter of experimentation, one skilled in the art can determine what fuel additive level provides optimum pollutant emission reduction for a given fuel when burned under certain combustion conditions. Further, as mentioned previously, the amount of synthetic trans β-carotene, chlorophyll, jojoba oil, polyethoxylated castor oil, and alkyl nitrates, if any, included in the fuel additive can also be determined by routine experimentation to achieve optimum pollutant emission reduction. 
     The following typical examples are limited to exemplary embodiments involving reduction in pollutant emissions and increased fuel efficiency for liquid fuels such as diesel fuel and gasoline. It will be understood by those skilled in the art that the fuel additives in accordance with the present invention may also be used effectively to reduce pollutant emission levels in other combustible carbonaceous fuels mentioned earlier, as well as other combustible fuels, such as hydrogen. 
    
    
     Examples of practice are as follows: 
     EXAMPLES 
     Example 1--Demonstration of Emission Reduction during Combustion of No. 2 Diesel Fuel 
     The following example demonstrates the use of the fuel additive in accordance with the present invention to reduce emissions of pollutants during combustion of no. 2 diesel fuel in a diesel engine. 
     The diesel engine used for this example was a two-cycle, two-cylinder 33-horsepower Detroit diesel engine, model no. 253. The engine was coupled to an M&amp;W dynamometer, model no. P-400B. The fuel used for this example was a no. 2 diesel that was supplied by Paramount Petroleum (Costa Mesa, Calif.). The fuel specifications for the no. 2 diesel are provided in Table 1. 
     
                       TABLE 1______________________________________Specifications for Paramount No. 2 Diesel FuelParameter            Value______________________________________Gravity, API @ 60° F.                32.2Appearance           4BColor, ASTM          1.5Corrosion, 3 hr @ 212° F.                1-AFlash Point, PMMC, °F.                174Cloud Point, °F.                18Pour Point, °F.                0Viscosity, SUS, @ 100° F.                38.8Water &amp; Sediment, % v/v                0Acid Number, mg KOH/g                0.003Mercaptan Sulfur, ppm RSH                3Ash, % w/w           0.001Carbon Residue, 10% res, % w/w                0.14Cetane Index         47Sulfur, ppm          474Distillation, D-86, °F.Initial              34110%                  42990%                  632End Point            698Recovery, %          98.0Saturates, % v/v     54Olefins, % v/v       2.6Aromatics, % v/v     43.4______________________________________ 
    
     A typical fuel additive was prepared as follows. Four grams of synthetic trans β-carotene was dissolved in 100 mL of toluene with warming. The solution was then blended with approximately 1800 mL of no. 2 diesel fuel with constant stirring. Forty-eight milliliters of jojoba oil was added to the mixture with constant stirring. In a separate container, 20 g of chlorophyll was dissolved in 100 mL of no. 2 diesel fuel. Thirty milliliters of this solution was then added to the synthetic trans β-carotene/jojoba oil mixture. The synthetic trans β-carotene/jojoba/chlorophyll mixture was then diluted to 3785 mL with no. 2 diesel fuel. Eight to 100 mL of this concentrated solution was added to every gallon of fuel to be treated. 
     Neat diesel fuel and fuels containing various amounts of additive were kept in separate large-capacity reservoirs to ensure that negligible fuel temperature changes occurred during any given test run. All fuel weighings were taken by placing a fuel reservoir on the platform of a precision balanced-beam scale. The various formulations are listed in the tables. The amounts of concentrated additive solution in the fuels tested were identified by codes which are identified below: 
     E=8 ml concentrate per gallon of fuel; B-1=16 ml concentrate per gallon of fuel; B-2=8 ml concentrate per gallon of fuel and 1 ml ethoxylated castor oil per gallon of fuel; A=8 ml concentrate per gallon of fuel; D=8 ml per gallon of fuel--the no. 2 diesel fuel carrier used in the concentrate was aromatic free; EM-1=8 concentrate per gallon of fuel; EM-2=16 ml of concentrate per gallon of fuel; EM-3=24 ml of concentrate per gallon of fuel; and EM-4=32 ml of concentrate per gallon of fuel. A &#34;+&#34; sign after the formula designation means that 2 ml per gallon of mixed alkyl nitrates was also added. 
     Prior to every run, the engine oil level, radiator level, and dynamometer hydraulic oil were checked. The engine was then started, and allowed to idle for several minutes until the engine water temperature reached 150° F. At this point, the engine speed and dynamometer load were slowly increased to a predetermined maximum horsepower engine output, and allowed to stabilize. The temperature (hence, viscosity) of the dynamometer hydraulic oil was carefully controlled at 140° F. by adjusting the cooling water flow rate. Once the engine water temperature reached 170° F. and the dynamometer hydraulic oil was stable at 140° F., the dynamometer was set to 400 psi and the engine rpm set and locked at 1725. According to the M&amp;W dynamometer calculator, these values defined an engine loading of 33 hp. Prior to the acquisition of any data, approximately 15 minutes full-load run time was permitted to make fine-tuning adjustments to both the engine and dynamometer so as to ensure that the preselected hp loading remained constant. 
     At the start of each run, the following parameters were recorded: all ambient conditions, all engine and dynamometer conditions, the time, and the fuel weight. Then, throughout the run, the following data were taken: the pounds of fuel burned, the engine rpm and hp, the dynamometer hydraulic temperature, ambient temperature, the exhaust gas temperature immediately after combustion as well as at the end of the exhaust system, the barometric pressure, and the percent relative humidity. The data were taken every 15 minutes; the run time was 2 hours. 
     Emissions were monitored with two models of portable combustion analyzer, viz., an Enerac 2000 and a Quintox KM. In doing so, several additional procedures were incorporated into the test protocol. First, the combustion analyzer to be employed was precalibrated to manufacturer&#39;s specifications. A ridged mounting fixture was then attached to the end of the exhaust stack to receive the monitor probe. The position of this fixture was located in accordance with the manufacturer&#39;s recommendation, and was not altered during a test run. Prior to prompting an analyzer to print emission data, it was necessary for its self-monitoring circuitry to indicate that valid data could be printed. Once this condition was verified, the following were printed out: oxygen (O 2 ), %; carbon monoxide (CO), ppm; air, %; carbon dioxide (CO 2 ), ppm; nitric oxide (NO), ppm; nitrogen dioxide (NO 2 ), ppm; nitrogen oxides (NO x ), ppm; sulfur dioxide (SO 2 ), ppm; the net, exhaust, and ambient temperatures, °F.; and the date and time. Emissions data were recorded at 15-minute intervals. The analyzer probe was removed from the exhaust gas flow between measurements. 
     Fuel economy for the various fuel mixtures was measured first. The baseline fuel economy data obtained with untreated no. 2 diesel are provided in Table 2. The average specific fuel consumption (sfc) of the no. 2 diesel was 0.441 lb/hp-hr. 
     
                       TABLE 2______________________________________Series of Runs to Establish a Baseline forEfficiency of Paramount No. 2 Diesel FuelAve.Baro-metric Ave.     Ave.     Ave.Pres- Rel.     Ambient  Exhaust     Total Fuelsure, Humid-   Temper-  Temper-     Used over                                      SFC,In Hg ity, %   ature, °F.                   ature, °F.                          Time 2 hr,lb                                      lb/hp-hr______________________________________29.80 92       66       733    AM   29.00  0.43930.71 55       44       724    AM   28.75  0.43630.60 55       45       715    PM   28.75  0.43630.50 56       44       725    AM   29.00  0.43930.38 54       47       734    PM   29.25  0.44330.20 74       54       725    PM   28.75  0.43630.21 74       53       741    AM   30.00  0.455Baseline Average Specific Fuel Consumption .441______________________________________ 
    
     Table 3 shows the comparable data for the same fuel containing additive formulations A through EM-2. The best additive formulation that appeared to provide the greatest increase in fuel efficiency was E, which gave an sfc of 0.356 lb/hp-hr, an improvement of 19% over untreated fuel. 
     
                       TABLE 3______________________________________Series of Runs With Different Formulas ofAdditive to Establish Efficiencyfor Paramount No. 2 DieselAve.Baro-metric Ave.    Ave.     Ave.                FormulaPres- Rel.    Ambient  Exhaust                         Total Fuel   Desig-sure, Humid-  Temper-  Temper-                         Used over                                SFC,  na-In Hg ity, %  ature. °F.                  ature, °F.                         2hr,lb lb/hp-hr                                      tion______________________________________30.60 61      38       650    26.50  0.402 C30.46 55      45       681    27.00  0.409 B-130.30 67      51       691    27.50  0.417 B-230.36 78      54       712    27.75  0.417 A30.31 71      52       650    25.25  0.383 D30.38 79      50       632    23.50  0.356 E30.15 80      53       650    24.00  0.364 EM-130.08 69      59       617    26.75  0.405 EM-1+29.89 79      70       663    27.25  0.413 EM-2______________________________________ 
    
     Next, fuel emissions were determined for various fuel-additive mixtures. The baseline data obtained for untreated no. 2 diesel are given in Table 4. 
     
                       TABLE 4______________________________________Series of Runs to Establish Baseline EmissionsUsing Paramount No. 2 DieselAnalyzer   Ave. CO, ppm              Ave. NOx, ppm                          Ave. SO2, ppm______________________________________Enerac 2000   1260       1256        no measure-                          ment possibleEnerac 2000   1467       1326        no measure-                          ment possibleEnerac 2000   1359       1355        no measure-                          ment possibleEnerac 2000   1283       1045        no measure-                          ment possibleEnerac 2000   1282       1203        no measure-                          ment possibleAVERAGE 1330       1277Quintox KM   587        1524        142Quintox KM   587        1439        135Quintox KM   552        1321        172AVERAGE 670        1428        133______________________________________ 
    
     The results for the fuel containing additives A through EM-2 are then provided in Table 5. Fuel treated with additive B showed a 60% reduction of CO and an 11.1% reduction of NO x  according to the Enerac 2000. Formulation EM-2 gave a 25% reduction of CO and a 4% decrease of NO x , as measured with the Quintox monitor. 
     
                       TABLE 5______________________________________Series of Runs to Establish ReducedEmissions Using Paramount No. 2 Diesel Fuel    Ave.     Ave.     Ave.      FormulaAnalyzer CO, ppm  NOx, ppm SO2, ppm  Designation______________________________________Enerac 2000    439      1239     no measure-                                C                      ment possibleEnerac 2000    496      1171     no measure-                                B                      ment possibleEnerac 2000    572      1100     no measure-                                B                      ment possibleEnerac 2000    608      1137     no measure-                                A                      ment possibleQuintox KM    446      1496     149       EM-1Quintox KM    398      1473     149       EM-1+Quintox KM    506      1371     108       EM-2______________________________________ 
    
     Several concentrations of additive formulation were assessed, as were both hot and cold start engine modes. The concentrations ranged from 0.2 to 4% v/v, based upon total fuel volume. 
     For specific fuel consumption, the baseline data obtained with untreated no. 2 diesel are shown in Table 6, where the average sfc was 0.455 lb/hp-hr. The data obtained for a series of runs with additives EM-2 through EM-4 are then shown in Table 7. Formulas EM-3+ and EM-4+ each gave a 15.2% decrease in sfc, the overall average for all three runs with treated fuel being a decrease in consumption of 12.3%. 
     
                       TABLE 6______________________________________Run to Establish Baseline SFCfor Paramount No. 2 Diesel FuelAve.              Ave.     Ave.Barometric   Ave. Rel. Ambient  Exhaust                             Total FuelPressure,   Humid-    Temper-  Temper-                             Used over                                    SFC,In Hg   ity, %    ature. °F.                      ature. °F.                             2 hr,lb                                    lb/hp-hr______________________________________30.10   92        65       675    15.0   0.455______________________________________ 
    
     
                       TABLE 7______________________________________Series of Runs to Determine SFC ofParamount No. 2 Diesel Fuel withDifferent Additive FormulasAve.Baro-metric Ave.    Ave.     Ave.                FormulaPres- Rel.    Ambient  Exhaust                         Total Fuel   Desig-sure, Humid-  Temper-  Temper-                         Used over                                SFC,  na-In Hg ity, %  ature. °F.                  ature. °F.                         1 hr,lb                                lb/hp-hr                                      tion______________________________________30.21 36      58       600    12.75  0.386 EM-3+30.20 72      65       625    12.75  0.386 EM-4+30.18 68      68       669    14.00  0.424 EM-2+             Ave. 0.399______________________________________ 
    
     The exhaust gases produced by combustion of the various fuels were also analyzed. To accomplish this, a large stack extension was attached to the existing exhaust stack to act as a collection chamber. Engine emissions were run through the stack extension collection chamber, which contained a single sampling point. The exhaust stream was sampled continuously in accordance with EPA Methods 1-5 for particulate matter, which mandates the use of carbotrap tubes. Also, volatile organic compounds (VOCs) were sampled in accordance with EPA Method TO-1/TO-2, then analyzed by gas chromatography/mass spectrometry (GC/MS). In addition, specific fuel consumption was monitored as outlined previously. The results of a comparison of the emissions from the neat fuel with those from fuel containing 2.5% v/v additive are shown in Table 8. In general, the results showed a 25-30% reduction in aromatic VOCs for the treated fuels, with the exception of toluene. It is believed that toluene was formed as a byproduct during additive combustion. Alkane emissions were reduced by nearly 40%. In addition, a 90% reduction in 1,4-dioxane, a highly toxic poison, is significant insofar as this compound is a known byproduct of combustion. 
     
                       TABLE 8______________________________________Example Emission Test Results              Neat  Treated Change,              Fuel  Fuel    %______________________________________Particulates,                0.070 0.068 3lb/hrParticulates,                0.034 0.034 n.c.80/DSCFMoisture, %                  6.33  6.11  negl.VOCs, mg/m.sup.3 (ppb)            Benzene     370   280   -24            C.sub.9 Alkylbenzenes                        930   700   -25Aromatics        Ethylbenzene                        200   150   -25            Xylenes     930   650   -30            Toluene     340   1100  324C.sub.6 -C.sub.10 Alkanes    7400  4600  -381,4-Dioxane                  52    3     -94______________________________________ 
    
     Additional emission data obtained during test runs with the Quintox combustion analyzer for the neat fuel and fuel treated with 2.5% v/v additive are shown in Table 9. The results correspond to those found in previous test runs, thus verifying that the system was functioning identically to that employed in previous testing periods. 
     
                       TABLE 9______________________________________Additional Emission Test Results  Neat Fuel Treated Fuel                      Change, %______________________________________CO, ppm  216.00      195.75    -9.4NO.sub.x, ppm    617.50      598.75    -3.0SO.sub.2, ppm    45.75       32.50     -29.______________________________________ 
    
     The above examples demonstrate that the fuel additive of the present invention provides a substantial improvement in specific fuel consumption in no. 2 diesel fuel. In addition, appreciable decreases of a broad range of volatile organic compounds were observed. Further, carbon monoxide and, to a lesser extent, nitrogen and sulfur oxides, were also found to be reduced. Thus, the additive favorably impacts the combustion characteristics of no. 2 diesel fuel. 
     Example 2--Demonstration of Emission Reduction during Combustion of Gasoline 
     The following example demonstrates the use of the fuel additive in accordance with the present invention to reduce emissions of pollutants during combustion of gasoline in a gasoline engine. 
     The gasoline engine used for this example was a 1988 Isuzu Trooper II four-cycle, four-cylinder 120-hp 2.559-liter (153.55 cubic inches) engine, model no. 4ZE1, with a compression ratio of 8.3. The fuel used for this example was a commercial unleaded gasoline, octane number 87. 
     A typical gasoline additive was prepared as follows. Four to six grams of synthetic trans β-carotene was dissolved in 400 mL of toluene with warming. Forty-eight milliliters of jojoba oil was added to the mixture with constant stirring. In a separate container, 20 g of chlorophyll was dissolved in 1000 mL of no. 2 diesel fuel. Thirty milliliters of this solution was then added to the synthetic trans β-carotene/jojoba oil mixture. The synthetic trans β-carotene/jojoba oil/chlorophyll mixture was then diluted to 3785 mL with toluene. Eight to 16 mL of this concentrated solution was added to every gallon of fuel to be treated. 
     Prior to initiating testing, the engine fuel economy was determined over the course of a 5-year period to be 19.9 miles per gallon (mpg). A smog check was then carried out by a California-certified smog check facility, station no. RG079882. The results were obtained with the engine at idle speed (ca. 850 rpm) and at high speed (ca. 2500 rpm) are shown in Table 10. 
     
                       TABLE 10______________________________________Series of Runs to Establish Baseline EmissionsUsing Unleaded Gasoline at Idle and at High SpeedsParameter      Idle Speed                   High Speed______________________________________Hydrocarbons,  77       30ppmCarbon         0.44     0.59monoxide, %Carbon         14.6     14.6dioxide, %Oxygen, %      0.6      0.5______________________________________ 
    
     Next, in a series of runs, various amounts of additive concentrate per gallon fuel were added to the engine gasoline, and the vehicle was then run under normal conditions until requiring refueling. At that point a subsequent smog check was carried out at the aforementioned smog check facility. The averages of three such consecutive sets of measurements are provided in Tables 11 and 12. The data shown in Table 11 was obtained with the engine at idle speed (ca. 850 rpm), while the data shown in Table 12 was obtained at higher speed (ca. 2500 rpm). The various data obtained with the treated fuels are then shown in comparison with data obtained for neat fuel in Table 13. 
     
                       TABLE 11______________________________________Series of Runs to Establish Reduced EmissionsUsing Treated Unleaded Gasoline at Idle SpeedParameter   Run 1   Run 2     Run 3 Average______________________________________Hydrocarbons,       21      36        31    29ppmCarbon      0.02    0.22      0.08  0.11monoxide, %Carbon      15.9    15.6      15.7  15.7dioxide, %Oxygen, %   0.02    0         0     0______________________________________ 
    
     
                       TABLE 12______________________________________Series of Runs to Establish Reduced EmissionsUsing Treated Unleaded Gasoline at High SpeedParameter   Run 1   Run 2     Run 3 Average______________________________________Hydrocarbons,       16      20        21    19ppmCarbon      0.12    0.41      0.23  0.25monoxide, %Carbon      15.8    15.6      15.7  15.7dioxide, %Oxygen, %   0       0         0     0______________________________________ 
    
     
                       TABLE 13______________________________________Comparison of Emissions of Neatand Treated Unleaded Gasoline  Idle Speed    High Speed                    Change,           Change,Parameter    Neat    Treated %     Neat  Treated                                      %______________________________________Hydrocarbons,    77      29      -53   30    19    -37ppmCarbon   0.44    0.11    -75   0.59  0.25  -49monoxide, %Carbon   14.6    15.7    7.5   14.6  15.7  7.5dioxide, %Oxygen, %    0.6     0       -100  0.5   0     -100______________________________________ 
    
     The results provided in Tables 10-13 clearly show that the additive has a measurable effect on gasoline emissions. For example, at idle speed, the hydrocarbons emissions were reduced by more than half, while carbon monoxide was diminished by 75%. Similarly, at high speed, hydrocarbons were reduced by 37%, while carbon monoxide emissions were halved. 
     In separate studies of fuel consumption, three runs with fuel containing additive resulted in fuel economies of 21.2, 20.8 and 20.9 mpg (19.9 mpg for neat fuel), that is, an average increase in fuel efficiency of 5.4%. 
     The above examples demonstrate that the fuel additive of the present invention provides a substantial improvement in specific fuel consumption in no. 2 diesel fuel. In addition, appreciable decreases of a broad range of volatile organic compounds were observed. Further, carbon monoxide and, to a lesser extent, nitrogen and sulfur oxides, were also found to be reduced. Thus, the additive has the capability of favorably impacting the combustion characteristics of no. 2 diesel fuel. 
     Having thus described the exemplary embodiments of the present invention, it should be noted by those skilled in the art that the disclosures within are exemplary only, and that various other alternatives, adaptations, and modifications may be made within the scope of the present invention. Accordingly, the present invention is not limited to the specific embodiments as illustrated herein, but is only limited by the following claims.