ORNL VIBE open-architecture framework for improved EV battery design
Toshiba opens Hydrogen Energy Research & Development Center

Toyota’s second turbocharged gasoline engine now available in Auris in Japan; 36% thermal efficiency

Toyota Motor has introduced its second turbocharged engine (following the 2.0-liter in the Lexus NX 200t turbo last year, earlier post) from a series of new engines with improved thermal and fuel efficiency. (Earlier post.) The new 8NR-FTS 1.2-liter direct-injection turbo engine is now available as an option for the partially redesigned Auris, which went on sale in Japan today. Toyota announced the new engine in March at the Geneva Motor Show. (Earlier post.)

The new 1.2-liter engine in the new Auris 120T generates peak torque of 185 N·m (136 lb-ft) at a wide range of rpms between 1,500 rpm and 4,000 rpm; maximum power is 85 kw (112 hp) at 5,200-5,600 rpm. At 19.4 km/L (46 mpg US, 5.15 l/100 km), fuel efficiency exceeds the Japanese government’s 2015 fuel economy standards by at least 10%. The 120T grade is eligible for the Japanese government’s subsidies and tax incentives for eco-cars.

The engine pairs a single-scroll turbocharger with a cylinder head that uses an integrated water-cooled exhaust manifold to optimize exhaust temperature. This enables adaptive intake cooling that is not affected by the engine’s thermal load. The result is responsive acceleration and maximum torque across a wide rpm range.

Toyota engines
Toyota’s new turbo engines deliver fuel economy on a par with some of the most efficient non-hybrids available today. Source: Toyota. Click to enlarge.

Toyota has also improved combustion speed by creating a strong tumble flow (a vertically-rotating swirl) inside the cylinder. This, together with advanced D-4T (Direct-injection 4 stroke gasoline engine with Turbo) technology, creates an optimized air-fuel mixture.

Toyota combined improvements developed in a variety of powertrains to improve combustion in its turbos. Source: Toyota. Click to enlarge.

In addition, continuous variable valve timing on the intake (VVT-iW, Variable Valve Timing-intelligent Wide) allows the engine to use the Atkinson cycle by adjusting valve timing according to load. These improvements combine to produce maximum thermal efficiency of 36%, a leading level among mass-produced gasoline engines.

Toyote engines2
Toyota says that it is delivering leading thermal efficiency with its gasoline turbos. Source: Toyota. Click to enlarge.

Despite the success of its hybrids, Toyota is also aware that vehicles with conventional powertrains still represent the majority of vehicles sold. By constantly increasing environmental performance across its entire vehicle lineup, Toyota said that it aims to offer a portfolio of environment-friendly vehicles that meet the diverse needs of consumers.




Should sell very well in Europe: 109 gms/km + 0-60 in 10.1 should be enough for most people.

Nice to see such economy in a non-diesel car.
I just hope it will be affordable.

+ It would be nice to see diesel engines on that top chart.


Very important informations:

For Hybrids, fuel consumption is increased from 35 kpL to 20 kpL (or by +43%) when vehicle weight is increased from one to two tonnes.

For non-Hybrids, fuel consumption is increased from 25 kpL to 10 kpL (or by +60%) with the same weight increase.

Less weight may be one of the easiest way to reduce uel consumption?



For hybrids should read (by +75% instead of +43%)

For non-hybrids, should read (+150% instead of +60%)

Why non-hydrids do relatively much better than Hybrids?


Sure, lower weight and size will reduce fuel consumption, but people want a little comfort. You could make a case that nobody needs anything larger than a Ford Focus sized vehicle, but the market says otherwise.

+It is a pity they don't have a "performance" axis on that graph.
If you want to accelerate a move to smaller cars, just increase gas taxes closer to European levels.
Now is the time to do it- +50 cents/Gal would have an effect and would raise Billions for the Feds or the individual states. The could spend it on infrastructure repair.

Efficient cars are already available and gas prices are very low - there has never been a better time.



I fully agree with you that the time is right for a major gasoline tax increase, specially in USA and in many parts of Canada where fuel taxes are too low.

However, with Fed Election in Canada this fall and pro fossil fuel (PC) Conservative in power, no Fed fuel tax increases are in sight. Minor Provincial fuel taxes increases are a possibility.

The same applies to USA with next election campaing already on the way, no politician will consider a fuel tax increase.

Vehicle weight and not size matters. Look ast what Ford did with the F-150.

Thomas Pedersen


According to your figures, non-hybrids do worse, not better when doubling their weight.

The answer is most likely that hybrids are less sensitive to weight increase because they can recuperate some of the kinetic energy in the motor/generator.


TP is correct.

Non-hybrids seems to be more sensitive to weight chnages. If really so, Ford is on the right path with a lighter F-150?

Much lighter weight coupled with less drag and more efficient engines could lead to 60 mpg ICEVs in the not too distant future?


What happened with 38% efficiency from earlier Toyota article? Oh, yes that was 1.3 NA engine with 13.5:1 CR.

Real world downsized turbo competition (TSI, EcoBoost, TwinAir) shows that you either get Eco or you get Boost there is no way you can get both, this new Toyota engine will be no different. But in Eco department similar displacement NA engine still wins, but consumer doesn't want to buy underpowered engine. I like Mazada's new engine concept more, I expected Toyota to offer something similar.


Supercharged, intercooled and super-expanded is the basis of the Miller cycle, no?  Getting volumetric efficiency on demand by turbocharging and changing the intake valve timing and reducing compression back-work in cruise is a combination everyone's been talking about for as long as I can recall.  Is this the first to hit production?

The turbo would be nice to add to hybrids for NVH.  My one complaint about the Fusion Energi is engine buzz when climbing hills, and a turbo engine with the torque at lower speed would address that.


Any tax on energy is quite burdensome on the less fortunate. It will also be a heavily burden industry.

Cars sales generate a very significant amount of revenue in the states, nearly a quarter iirc.

Everything in our economy is so tied to petroleum it could be a very detrimental change if taxes went up by 20% on fuels.

If you had a business that relied on shipping things, 20% on to your fuel costs could mean the difference between growing and taking new risks or playing it safe or even downsizing.

Fuel prices affect nearly everything you buy. It could very well lead to a 20% increase of the price of everything.

There are better ways to reallocate funds. If you want to do so, start with the top down not the bottom up.

Use all that money we saved on entitlements through ObamaCare and direct it to alternative energy. Take our military and bring them home, and use the billions there to kick-start alternative energy, and provide incentives for advanced technologies like waste to fuel, Plug-in hybrid/electric vehicles larger than a subcompact, work to green up the trucking industry, and work to make rail accessible like it once was for shipping.


We have more waste streams in the US than we know what to do with.
If we take all of those carbon filled eye sores like tires, sewage, agricultural waste, food waste, plastic waste, anything that has carbon... and reform it into syn-diesel/syn-gasoline/syn-whatever we can easily reduce harmful emissions, reduce CO2, and have better engine performance as a result.

Waste has to go somewhere, we have to pay to treat it or move it... why not make treating it fuel our vehicles? We can probably stop refining petroleum completely if we simply converted our waste streams and existing waste to fuels.

There is so much untapped potential that we don't even need to grow things. Advanced Fischer Tropsch technology could easily displace our need for foreign oil, and as it continues to advance, it may even displace the need to refine gasoline or diesel from petroleum... Electric and H2 vehicles will start taking more and more market share from petro-fueled vehicles...


CE88, I'm going to put the same challenge to you that I've put to many others elsewhere:

QUANTIFY this untapped potential, and compare it to what we consume.  If you don't even have ballpark numbers, you are just handwaving.  (The numbers people are digging up elsewhere are in the neighborhood of 10% of our energy consumption, which does a reasonably neat job of explaining why we don't already get most of our energy from waste:  there just isn't that much to get.)


Are we talking waste streams? or all waste period?

10% of our total energy consumption? or 10% of transportations consumption? or like 10% of road going consumption?

Does your 10% include agriculture waste(like corn stover or other non-traditional waste)? Waste from industry? Sewage? Or existing acres and acres of landfills we have today?

You are also aware that syngas derivatives are almost pure forms of carbon-chains and have much better properties than those found from traditional Petroleum distillation?

Even if it only 10% of automobiles current energy demand, it could easily meet 15% of the need for them. It is a much better fuel, also much cleaner, and cleaner burning.

We need 5 million additional barrels of crude a day capacity to make the US a 'energy self-sufficient' nation.

We only need about 9,000,000 barrels of gasoline per day equivalent to completely get off of petroleum for gasoline.

I looked around and found 16% by 2030 (as quoted by the NNFCC) of all transportation fuels could be made from waste in the EU.

That is a pretty significant chunk of the market.

I'd wager the US could pull down higher levels in the Midwest or any other farming intense areas where there is livestock or grains.


CE88, in EU gas prices are almost 100% higher than base price, but somehow I can order a printer cartridge on Amazon from a warehouse 1000 km away and pay only 5.99 € for shipping, if I lived in Germany shipping would be free. And price of that cartridge is lower than anything I can find locally even with shipping.

I don't see much benefit in Atkinson or Miller cycle without higher CR or better say expansion ratio, but then you again sacrifice power and again consumer doesn't want that.


Biomass production is put here at 140 billion tons a year:

They give that as the energy equivalent of 50 billion tons of oil.

Oil production runs just over 4 billion tons a year:

Clearly not all the biomass will be used, and the efficiencies will typically give the overall numbers a big hit.

Equally clearly the potential is substantial relative to our use, as other resources such as solar will also take up a large part of the load.

For the most common simple sugar in plants, xylose:

'The team liberates the high-purity hydrogen under mild reaction conditions at 122 degrees and normal atmospheric pressure. The biocatalysts used to release the hydrogen are a group of enzymes artificially isolated from different microorganisms that thrive at extreme temperatures, some of which could grow at around the boiling point of water.

The researchers chose to use xylose, which comprises as much as 30 percent of plant cell walls. Despite its abundance, the use of xylose for releasing hydrogen has been limited. The natural or engineered microorganisms that most scientists use in their experiments cannot produce hydrogen in high yield because these microorganisms grow and reproduce instead of splitting water molecules to yield pure hydrogen.

To liberate the hydrogen, Virginia Tech scientists separated a number of enzymes from their native microorganisms to create a customized enzyme cocktail that does not occur in nature. The enzymes, when combined with xylose and a polyphosphate, liberate the unprecedentedly high volume of hydrogen from xylose, resulting in the production of about three times as much hydrogen as other hydrogen-producing microorganisms.

The energy stored in xylose splits water molecules, yielding high-purity hydrogen that can be directly utilized by proton-exchange membrane fuel cells. Even more appealing, this reaction occurs at low temperatures, generating hydrogen energy that is greater than the chemical energy stored in xylose and the polyphosphate. This results in an energy efficiency of more than 100 percent — a net energy gain. That means that low-temperature waste heat can be used to produce high-quality chemical energy hydrogen for the first time. Other processes that convert sugar into biofuels such as ethanol and butanol always have energy efficiencies of less than 100 percent, resulting in an energy penalty.

In his previous research, Zhang used enzymes to produce hydrogen from starch, but the reaction required a food source that made the process too costly for mass production.

The commercial market for hydrogen gas is now around $100 billion for hydrogen produced from natural gas, which is expensive to manufacture and generates a large amount of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide. Industry most often uses hydrogen to manufacture ammonia for fertilizers and to refine petrochemicals, but an inexpensive, plentiful green hydrogen source can rapidly change that market.

“It really doesn’t make sense to use non-renewable natural resources to produce hydrogen,” Zhang said. “We think this discovery is a game-changer in the world of alternative energy.”'


So while this might not be a total solution to all transport needs, it could potentially provide all the power needed for agriculture, in, for instance, the US Midwest, and in addition provide the hydrogen for the production of ammonia fertilizer.

For transport it would seem to have great potential to provide low carbon hydrogen for fuel cell vehicles, perhaps in a PHEV configuration, so that every day running around is done on electricity, perhaps from solar, and the cars only need a ~12kwh battery instead of a very large pack such as the Tesla's have, as longer runs are done on hydrogen.

A billion tons of oil equivalent here, and a billion there, can really add up!


The guys at Virginia tech are actually significantly more optimistic than the very conservative guesstimate I gave:

'The researchers used cellulosic materials isolated from wood chips, but crop waste or switchgrass could also be used. “If a small fraction – 2 or 3 percent – of yearly biomass production were used for sugar-to-hydrogen fuel cells for transportation, we could reach transportation fuel independence,” Zhang said. (He added that the 3 percent figure is for global transportation needs. The U.S. would actually need to convert about 10 percent of biomass – which would be 1.3 billion tons of usable biomass).'


Biomass production is put here at 140 billion tons a year

That number is unreferenced; if it's supposed to designate any kind of available quantity, color me extremely skeptical.  "The Billion-Ton Vision" only found 1.3 billion tons of potential surplus in the USA, of which about half is currently available.  A number 2 orders of magnitude beyond that is in the realm of fantasy.  It's many times greater than the total mass of CO2 emitted into the atmosphere by humans each year (about 30 billion tons).  This only makes sense if you are talking about the total Net Primary Productivity, which produces the annual downswing in the Keeling curve.

Humanity is already causing enough damage with the small fraction of NPP we divert to our own use.



The number would be net primary production.

Your own figures show plenty of waste practically available, however.

The big difference in this one is it enables use close to production, instead of transporting it far, which kills the economics.


"In truth, nature wastes almost everything, from solar energy to seeds, and its default condition is therefore red-fanged competition for scarce resources. The resources of ecosystems are thus already spoken for; there are no lands that are not used by something for some purpose, no caches of unexploited energy piled up in the margins that we can tap without depriving other organisms, human and non-human, of their sustenance."


Well said EP.

The 7.5 B humans living on the free energy from our sun can:

1. use the free solar energy to help nature to produce more food and feed stock.

2. use the free solar energy to progressively destroy nature and the human population.

Hope that 1.) will prevail.

Roger Pham

How about setting up solar PV panels on top of already occupied lands such as over rooftops and parking lots? Wind turbines placed on farm land or grazing land have no effect on farm's output.
These will have no effect on the environment, yet can satisfy all our energy needs.


Your PV panel is useless for serving demand peaks that occur near or after sundown.  Summer-peaking generation is totally out of sync with winter-peaking heating demands.  So is generation that goes AWOL during cold, clear, still winter nights.

If you think these things can serve all our energy needs, you appear to be a religious convert rather than a rational analyst.


The proper mix of Wind, Solar, regional Wastes and Biomass and proper size storage could probably supply most of the energy required on a 24/7 basis.

Electric heaters exist to store enough heat for an average size room for 24+ hours. Recharge can be made in about 3 hours when lower cost energy is available.

New homes can be built to use a lot less energy for HVAC, lights, hot water and cooking.

Existing homes can be upgraded.

The comments to this entry are closed.