Comparison

The most important players in the market for energy conversion systems are the Otto-engine, Diesel-engine, Hybrid-engine, Electric-engine, Stirling-engine and the Fuel-cell. In order to evaluate how the JRS-Engine performs in comparison with these technologies they were individually evaluated on the following criteria:

1. Overall energy efficiency;
2. WTW GHG-Emissions;
3. Specific output power;
4. Power density;
5. Specific costs;
6. Service life;
7. Comfort;
8. Maintenance;
9. Added value.

The graph above depicts the various values for the characteristics as a percentage of the “best in class”. The various values are taken from the literature and there is a significant spread for each characteristic (the average has been used). The Diesel-engine and the JRS-Engine use 2nd- and 4th-Generation BioFuel, the Electric-engine uses EU-Powermix.

In relation to all of these competing technologies the JRS-Engine delivers significant advantages in, amongst others, the fields of: energy efficiency, emissions; specific output power, specific costs and output power density.

When the JRS-Engine eventually uses the 4th-Generation BioFuel, and is then compared with an Electric-engine (with wind or sun as the energy source), then the CO₂-Balance of the Electric-engine is CO₂-Neutral at best. Conversely, that of the JRS-Engine will be CO₂-Negative.

If a comparison (of weight, volume and charging/filling-up) is made between the Electric-engine, Fuel-cell and the JRS-Engine and the concepts are used in a mobile application with a range of 500 km, the following picture emerges.

  Weight  

Considering the entire drive system, the weight of the Electric-engine (916 kg) and the Fuel-cell (457 kg) are approximately a factor of 5 and a factor of 2.5 respectively heavier than the JRS-Engine (182 kg).

  Volume  

Considering only the volume required for energy and its storage, it appears that the volume for the Electric-engine (670 l) and the Fuel-cell (260 l) are approximately a factor of 22 and a factor of 8.5 respectively greater than the JRS-Engine (30 l).

  Charging/filling-up  

Charging/filling-up an Electric-vehicle (60 - 360 min.) and Fuel-cell vehicle  (3 min.) takes a factor of approximately 30 - 180 and a factor of 1.5 respectively longer compared with filling a JRS-vehicle (2 min.).

If a comparison is made between the fuel cell, electric engine and JRS-Engine and the concepts are used in a mobile application then it appears that the advantages of the JRS-Engine in the fields of, amongst others, specific output power, specific costs and output power density only increase further.