MX2008004252A - Fuel compositions containing fuel additive - Google Patents

Abstract

A fuel composition consisting of at least 95%by weight of predominantly or entirely hydrocarbon liquid fuel and 0.001 to 5.0%by weight of fuel additive, wherein the additive consists of:a) 20 to 90%by weight of at least one alkoxylated alcohol corresponding to Formula (I) R2R1-O-(-CHCH2O-)x-H (I) wherein -R1is C6-C16, -R2is H or CH3, and -x is 1 - 7;(b) 40 to 10%by weight of at least one polyalkylene glycol ester corresponding to the following general Formula (II) O R4R3-C-0 -(-CHCH2O-)-y-R5(II) wherein -R3is C11-C19, -R4is H or CH3, -y is 1 - 20, -R5is H or COR3;and

Description

FUEL COMPOSITIONS CONTAINING FUEL ADDITIVE Description of the Invention With ever-increasing fuel costs, such as the costs of petroleum-based fuel, it has become even more important and commercially desirable to consider and improve fuel economy within combustion processes, particularly within the processes of automotive activation combustion. Gasoline and diesel are the fuels derived from petroleum distillates, more prominent, used for the driving force in vehicular transport. It is widely known that the fuel efficiency of a compression ignition machine is typically better than in a comparable spark ignition machine. It is also desirable to improve the efficiencies within the internal combustion engines but especially within the diesel compression ignition machines by reducing, minimizing or potentially preventing the accumulation of deposits in the fuel injector components. Diesel machines present a problem for the automotive and transportation industry because exhaust emissions typically include high levels of particulate matter (PM) along with nitrogen oxide Ref. : 191577 (N0X). Particulate emissions from diesel engines can be visible in the form of black smoke exhaust. Currently, particulate matter emissions from diesel engines can be controlled by the use of black smoke filters or catalytic converters. While these emission control devices can be effective in decreasing particulate matter emissions, they are not effective in reducing N0X emissions and can have an adverse effect on fuel economy. Compression ignition machines have been tested using multiple different fuels of varied raw materials based on petroleum. When selecting a fuel composition, the effects of this composition must be evaluated in several factors. Among these factors are the performance of the machine (which include efficiency and emissions), the cost of the final product, the necessary changes in the infrastructure to produce the components of the composition and the availability of the raw material to provide these components. In different parts of the world, incentives for cleaner combustion fuels are available to replace "classic" diesel. In Europe, diesel EN 590 specification is characterized by an initial boiling point of 170 ° C and a final boiling point of 590 ° C. The preferred sulfur content is less than 50 ppm. In the United States, there are essentially two different specifications. A diesel of EPO specification and a diesel of CARB specification with sulfur requirements of less than 500 ppm. The difference in the two specifications is the aromatic content and the intervals of the boiling points in distillation. During the next decade, it is expected that it would be desirable to further reduce the amount of sulfur in diesel fuel. However, decreases in the sulfur content of the fuel generally decrease the lubricity of the fuel leading to increased wear of the machine or engine and can adversely affect the fuel economy and / or the accumulation of deposits in the components of the fuel. fuel injectors. An alternative or possible supplement to ordinary diesel is biodiesel. Biodiesel is a non-toxic biodegradable replacement for petroleum diesel, made from vegetable oil, recycled cooking oil and tallow. Biodiesel corresponds to a family of fatty acids called methyl esters defined by linked chains of medium length Ci6-Ci8 fatty acids. These linked chains help to differentiate biodiesel from regular diesel derived from petroleum distillate. He Biodiesel has performance characteristics similar to conventional diesel based on petroleum but it can burn cleaner. Blends of biodiesel and petroleum-based diesel can reduce particulate, hydrocarbon and carbon monoxide emissions compared to conventional diesel. The direct benefits associated with the use of biodiesel in a 20% blend with conventional diesel derived from petroleum distillate as opposed to using conventional diesel, includes increased fuel cetane and lubricity for improved economy and improved machine life or engine and reduction of the fuel emission profile for CO, C02, PM and HC and / or reductions in the fuel injectors' tanks. However, biodiesel is expensive to manufacture and can not help reduce NOx emissions. Some biodiesel, in fact, exacerbates NOx emissions. It is a purpose of this invention to mitigate the above problems and to use predominantly hydrocarbon liquid fuel raw materials, currently available through existing refinery and distribution infrastructures, optionally blended with predominantly hydrocarbon, non-distillate, alternative, known fuels .

A further purpose of the invention is to provide a method for improving fuel efficiency and / or for reducing internal fouling deposits in machines operated at average ambient temperatures above 0 ° C. These and other purposes are achieved by designing fuel compositions using hydrocarbon fuel such as gasoline, diesel or kerosene, petroleum derivatives, which incorporate a mixture of additive of two or three key components, generally as set out in claim 1. at the moment. In some embodiments, the fuel composition may include a synthetic blend fraction derived from natural gas condensate. These useful fuel compositions can be high cetane fuel and high lubricity. However, it has been known that certain biodiesel blends create additional NOx emissions. Now, surprisingly, it has been found that fuel economy can be improved and / or the fouling of the injectors can be relieved by using fuel compositions containing no more than two or at most three fuel additive components within ranges. of selected relative proportions as defined within the text of for example claim 1. Some preferred embodiments of the additive mixtures of Fuel for particular fuel compositions will be found in Table 1, at the end of this description. With reference to the fuel additive in the ethoxylated alcohol component (a), it is preferred that R1 be from C9 to Ci0 and x be 2.5. The additive may contain, for example, 30 to 80% ethoxylated alcohol. In some embodiments, the additive includes from 40 to 60% ethoxylated alcohol component, and in other embodiments from 50% to 60% by weight of (a) as defined in claim 1. In some embodiments, it is preferred that the amount of (a) exceeds the sum of (b) and (c). This can be particularly the case of kerosene compositions (heating oil) and diesel fuel compositions. It may also be preferred within admixture mixtures for diesel fuel compositions, that component (c) of alkanolamide may be absent. In some embodiments, the fuel additive still consists then of (a) plus (b). In component (b) of polyethylene glycol ester, preferably R3 is Ci7 and R5 is COR3. Diesters of polyethylene glycol of oleic acid, such as polyethylene glycol ditallates, are preferred, although the corresponding mono-oleates can be used. The preferred component (b) of polyethylene glycol ester can include mixtures of different glycol esters of the same general formula. In some embodiments, the additive includes from about 40 to 15%, and in other embodiments from 35% to 25% of polyethylene glycol ester constituent, and in additional embodiments from 30% to 25% by weight of (b). In component (c) of alkanolamide, when present, R6 is preferably C17 and R7 is CH2CH2OH. Oleic acid diethanolamides are highly preferred. The ethanolamide component can be a mixture of different alkanolamides corresponding to general formula III. In some embodiments, the additive includes from 40% to about 15%, in other embodiments, 25% to 15% by weight of alkanolamide. As used throughout the specification and the claims, terms such as "between 6 and 16 carbon atoms", "C6" and "C6-i6" are used to designate chains of carbon atoms of varying lengths within of the range and may indicate that several conformations are acceptable that include branched, cyclic and linear conformations. The terms are further proposed to designate that various degrees of saturation are acceptable. Furthermore, it is readily understood by those skilled in the art that the designation of a component as including, for example, "Ci7" or "2.5 moles of ethoxylation" means that the component has a distribution with the major fraction in the range indicated and therefore, this designation does not exclude the possibility that other species exist within the distribution. Ethoxylated alcohols can be prepared by alkoxylation of straight or branched chain alcohols with commercially available alkylene oxides, such as ethylene oxide ("OD") or propylene oxide ("PO" or mixtures thereof.) Suitable ethoxylated alcohols for Use in the invention are available from Tomah Products, Inc. 337 Vincent Street, Milton, Wis. 53563, under the trademark of Tomadol ™ The preferred Tomadol ™ products include Tomadol 91-2.5 and Tomadol 1-3. a mixture of alcohols of C9, Ci0 and Cu with an average of 2.7 moles of ethylene oxide per mole of alcohol.The value of HLB (Hydrophilic / Lipophilic Balance) of "Tomadol® 91-2.5 is reported as 8.5. 3 is an alcohol of Cu (main proportion) ethoxylated with an average of 3 moles of ethylene oxide per mole of alcohol.The value of HLB is reported as 8.7 Other sources of ethoxylated alcohols include Huntsman Corp., SALT Lake City, UT, Condea Vista Company, Houston, TX and Rhodia, Inc., Cranbury, NJ. The monoester (b) can be prepared by alkoxylation of a fatty acid (such as oleic acid, linoleic acid, coconut fatty acid, etc.), with EO, PO or mixtures thereof. same. The diesters can be prepared by the reaction of a polyethylene glycol with two molar equivalents of a fatty acid. Preferred polyethylene glycol esters (b) are PEG 400 dioleate, which is available from Lambent Technologies Inc. of Skokie, IL, such as Lumulse 41-0 and PEG 600 dioleate, also available from Lambent as Lumulse 62-0. Another ester (b) of polyethylene glycol suitable for use in the invention includes the Mapeg 400-DOT and 600-DOT and / or Polyethyleneglycol 600 ditallate from BASF Corporation, Specialty Chemicals, Mt. Olive, NJ. Other suppliers of these chemicals are Stepan Co. , Lonza, Inc. and Goldschmidt, AG of Hopewell, VA. In general, the alkanolamides (c) can be prepared by reacting a mono- or di-ethanolamide with a fatty acid ester. A preferred alkanolamide is oleic diethanolamide. The alkanolamides suitable for use in the invention are available from Mclntyre Group, University Park, IL under the trade name Mackamide. An example is Mackamide MO, "Oleamide DEA". Henkel Canada is another commercial source of suitable alkanolamides such as Comperlan OD, "Oleamide DEA". Other commercial sources of alkanolamides are Rhodia, Inc. and Goldschmidt AG. The components of the fuel additive are They can be mixed in any order using conventional mixing devices. Ordinarily, mixing will be done at ambient temperatures from 0 ° C to 35 ° C. Normally, the fuel additive can be mixed by bubbling into the base fuel. Ideally, the fuel additive will be a homogeneous mixture of each of its components. Preferably, the fuel composition will comprise from about 0.001 to 5% by weight, preferably 0.001 to 3% or 0.01 to 3% of the fuel additive composition. The fuel compositions according to the invention exclude the presence of other fuel additive components, unspecified or undefined, within the present "closed" definition of the term "fuel additive". It is also within the scope of this invention to provide a method for increasing the fuel economy efficiency of predominantly petroleum distillate fuels. EXAMPLES The following examples are proposed to illustrate, but not to limit in any way, the invention. Several mixtures were made to compare the characteristics of the various fuel mixtures with performance and fuel efficiency (ie, miles per gallon or mpg). Reference is now made to the accompanying Figure 1 which is a graph showing the comparison of average miles per gallon between the base fuel (without additive) and the fuel with bus additive tested according to Example 3 below.

Example 1 Background: The test was carried out to investigate the effect that the DI Sample has on the fuel consumption of an indirect injection diesel machine under standard test conditions. The formation of deposits in the injection nozzles of the machine was also investigated.

Test Description: The test was performed under the standard conditions of the CEC test procedure F-23-A-01, Emission 11. The fuel consumption was measured by the mass flow rate and expressed in Kg / Hr. Injection nozzle incrustation results are expressed in terms of the percentage of air flow loss at various points of elevation of the injector needles. Airflow measurements were achieved with an airflow equipment that complies with ISO 4010.

Test Machine: The machine used for the test was a Peugeot XUD9AL unit supplied by PSA specifically for the Nozzle Coke Test, as originally specified by the CEC Working Group PF-23.

Machine part number 70100 Displacement: 1.9 liters Injection pump: Broken Diesel DCP R 84 43 B910A Injector body: Lucas LCR 67307 Injector nozzle: Lucas RDNO SDC 6850 (not flattened) Ignition order: 1,3,4, 2 (Number 1 at the end of the steering wheel Machine Constitution and Article Preparation: The nozzles of the injectors were cleaned and checked for air flow at an elevation of 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4 mm. The nozzles were discarded if the air flow was outside the range of 250 ml / min at 320 ml / min. The nozzles were mounted on the bodies of the injectors and the opening pressures were adjusted to 115 ± bar.

Fuel Test: The CEC reference fuel RF-06-03 was used throughout the study.

Additive formulation: Sample DI is a mixture consisting of: 50% ethoxylated alcohol (Tomadol 91-2.5) - (a) 25% polyethylene glycol diester (PEG 400 DOT) - (b) 25% diethanolamide (Mackamide MO) - (c) The fuel component was diesel fuel.

Initial Test Preparation: A slave set of injectors adapted to the machine. The previous test fuel was drained from the system. The machine or motor was then run for 25 minutes in order to rinse through the system. During this time, all the spilled fuel was discarded and it was not returned. The machine was then adjusted to the test speed and loaded and all the specified parameters were verified and adjusted to the test specification. The slave injectors were then replaced with the test units.

Heating of the machine: 5 minutes, idle speed without load. 10 minutes, 2000 revolutions / min, 34 nM of torque. 10 minutes, 3000 revolutions / min at 50 nM of torque.

Test Operation Conditions: Immediately after the warm-up, the following test cycle was run 134 times giving a total test time of 10 hours and 3 minutes Other Operation Parameters: Test Procedure: The CEC F-23 -A- 01 test was carried out through two test cycles; Test Cycle 1: Ref. IF-XUD9-001 This test cycle was carried out with the reference fuel without additives with Sample DI. The test was started with the clean nozzles of test injectors as per the standard test procedure. The fuel flow was recorded throughout the test cycle. At the end of the test cycle, the flow velocities of the nozzles of the injectors were measured and recorded.

Test Cycle 2: Ref. IF-XUD9-002 The test cycle was then carried out with the reference fuel with additives with Sample DI at a dose rate of 1 part of Sample DI: 600 parts of fuel, vol / vol. The test was started with clean nozzle nozzles as per the standard test procedure. The fuel flow was recorded throughout the test cycle. At the end of the test cycle, the flow velocities of the nozzles of the injectors were measured and recorded.

Test results: Test Number: IFT-XUD9 - Code RF-06-03 Fuel: Additive Code Sample E Proportion N / A Treatment: Test Number: IFT-XUD9-Fuel Code: RF-06-03 Additive Code: Sample E Summary of Test Results: Fuel Flow Test Results: Results of Injector Nozzle Scale Test:% of nozzle inlay after Test Cycle 1, IF-XUD9-001 88% Nozzle inlay after Cycle 2 of Test, IF-XUD9-002 89% Conclusions: 1) Fuel flow velocity results indicate that adding the DI Sample to the reference diesel at a dose of 1: 600 vol / vol to the reference fuel results in a reduction in fuel consumption over standard test conditions. The greatest improvement in fuel economy was seen in the adjustment of the lower rpm. The smallest improvement in the economy of fuel was seen in the setting of the highest rpm. 2) The results of the injection nozzle embedding test indicate that the addition of Sample DI at a dose ratio of 1: 600 vol / vol to the reference fuel does not result in increased deposits.

Example 2 Background: The test was carried out to investigate the effect that the DI Sample as used in Example 1 above has on the formation of nozzle deposits of an indirect injection diesel machine.

Test Description: The test was performed according to the CEC test procedure F-23-A-01, Edition 11. The results are expressed in terms of the percentage of loss of air flow at various points of elevation of the needles of the injectors . Airflow measurements were achieved with an airflow equipment that complies with ISO 4010.

Test Machine: The machine used for the test was a unit Peugeot XUD9AL supplied by PSA specifically for nozzle coking test, as specified originally by the CEC Working Group PF-23.

Machine part number: 70100 Displacement: 1.9 liters Injection pump: Broken Diesel DCP R 84 43 B910A Injector body: Lucas LCR 67307 Injector nozzle: Lucas RDNO SDC 6850 (not flattened) Ignition order: 1,3,4 , 2 (Number 1 at the end of the steering wheel Machine Constitution and Article Preparation: The nozzles of the injectors were cleaned and checked for air flow at elevation of 0.05, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4 mm. The nozzles were discarded if the air flow was outside the range of 250 ml / min at 320 ml / min. The nozzles were mounted on the bodies of the injectors and the opening pressures were adjusted to 115 ± bar.

Test Fuel The CEC reference fuel RF-93-T-095 was used throughout the study. It is noted that this reference fuel is mixed specifically to encourage the formation of deposits.

Preparation of Initial Test: A slave set of injectors was adapted to the machine. The previous test fuel was drained from the system. The machine was then run for 25 minutes in order to rinse through the system. During this time, all the spilled fuel was discharged and it was not returned. The machine was then adjusted to the test speed and loaded and all the specified parameters were verified and adjusted to the test specification. The slave injectors were then replaced with the test units.

Heating of the Machine: 5 minutes, idle speed at no load. 10 minutes, 2000 revolutions / min, 34 nM of torque. 10 minutes, 3000 revolutions / min at 50 nM of torque.

Test Operation Conditions: Immediately after the warm-up, the following test cycle was run 134 times giving a total test time of 10 hours and 3 minutes Other Operation Parameters: The CEC F-23-A-01 test was carried out through three test cycles, - Test Cycle 1: Ref. IF-XUD9-003 This test cycle was carried out with the reference fuel without additives with Sample DI. The test was started with a clean injector nozzle. At the end of the test cycle, the flow velocities of the nozzles of the injectors were measured and recorded.

Test Cycle 2: Ref. IF-XUD9-004 The machine prepared as per the procedure of test but the dirty nozzles of Cycle 1 injectors were returned to the machine without cleaning. The test cycle was then carried out with the reference fuel with additives with Sample DI at a dosing rate of 1 part of Sample DI: 600 parts of fuel, vol / vol. At the end of the test cycle, the flow velocities of the nozzles of the injectors were measured and recorded.

Test Cycle 3: Ref. IF-XUD9-005 Repeat the procedure of Cycle 2 test with the dirty nozzles of the injectors returned to the machine without cleaning after measurement in flow velocity at the end of Cycle 2. At the end of third Test cycle, the test results were analyzed for effects observed in the inlay of the nozzles of the injectors by the addition of the Sample DI to the reference fuel.

Test Number: IFT-XUD9-003 Fuel Code: RF93-T-095 Additive Code: No additive Treatment Ratio: N / A Test Number: IFT-XUD9-0 Fuel Code: RF93-T-095 Additive Code: Sample DI Treatment Ratio: 1 PART in Clean = flows at the beginning of the test IF-XUD9-003 Cleaned = flows at the end of the test IF-XUD9-004 Test Number: IFT-XUD9-00 Fuel Code: RF93-T-095 Additive Code: Sample DI Treatment Ratio: 1 PART in Clean = flows at the start of the test IF-XUD9-003 Cleaned = flows at the end of the test IF-XUD9-005 Summary of test results of Example 2:% of nozzle inlay after Test Cycle 1, IF-XUD9-003 90% nozzle inlay after Cycle 2 of Test, IF-XUD9-004 85% % of nozzle inlay after Cycle 3 of Test, IF-XUD9-005 86% Conclusions: 1) The addition of the DI Sample at a dose rate of 1: 600 vol / vol to the reference diesel fuel does not increase the propensity of the fuel for the deposit formation in the nozzles of the injectors. 2) The results indicated that the addition of Sample DI at a dose ratio of 1: 600 vol / vol to the reference fuel can cause a reduction in existing deposits. The reduction of the deposits seemed to stabilize after a test cycle with the use of Sample DI.

Example 3 I. Test Background During three months, 40 buses received an appropriate dose of the DI sample of IFT additive. For each bus, the daily mileage and filled gallons were used as the data to calculate the daily fuel economy. This was achieved by calculating the difference in miles driven when that number is divided by the gallons supplied. The data used in this test was taken directly from the fuel sheets recorded by the refueling. To establish a baseline fuel economy before the additive for each bus, the mileage and gallons supplied for three months before the addition of the additive were calculated. Once the additive was introduced on the buses, the same methods were used to collect the mileage and gallon data supplied for three months to establish a post-additive fuel economy.

II. Characteristics of the Population 40 buses participated in the trial. Each make and model of machine within the test population is listed below: 7 International machines 2 - 1994 machines 4 - 1995 machines 1 - 1996 machine 33 - Caterpillar machines O- 1994 machines 28 - 1995 machines 5 - 1996 machines. In addition, 4 AE trucks (all 1995 Chevy machines) participated in the trial and achieved an average of 7.75% improvement in fuel economy.

III. Fuel Replenishment Program The buses were refueled each day differently and put into two groups, changing day and night. To work within this fuel re-supply program, the fuels participating in the trial were categorized into the same four groups: Day 1, Night 1 and Day 2, Night 2. 4 buses participating in the program were buses Day 1; 7 buses were on Day 2. 24 buses participating in the program were buses from Night 1, 5 buses were buses from Night 2. These buses were selected at random. The goal was to make sure each bus received its additive doses before it received its diesel during the day. Once the additive has been added to the tank, the impact of the diesel that enters the tank through the top of the additive will cause the two to mix together by bubbling. Therefore, it was necessary to add additive to the buses every day to ensure that the buses on Day 1 and Night 1 received the additive on the appropriate re-supply day and the Day 2 and Night 2 buses received additive. on the appropriate day. The dose for each bus was determined using the ratio of 1 gallon (3.78 L) of additive to 575 gallons (2176.61 L) of diesel. Based on the averages calculated for each Three months before the addition of the additive, any bus that re-supplied an average of 20 gallons (75.70 L) or less, received 400 ml of additive. Any bus that, on average, replenished between 21 (79.49 L) and 30 (113.56 L) gallons, received 500 ml of additive. Any bus that, on average, replenished between 31 (117.34 L) and 40 (151.41 L) gallons, received 600 ml of additive. The additive was introduced in each bus in the same way. A plastic tube was inserted lightly into the fuel tank, the appropriate dose of additive was measured in a measuring cup of 2 standard cups (500 ml) and with the help of a funnel, the additive was poured into the tube and entered the tank.

IV. Data Interval The percent increase in fuel economy ranged from 27.78% (bus # 505202) to 0.45% (bus # 50680). The range of data can be explained by a number of factors that may have impacted the fuel economy of the bus, or the integrity of the data collection process. The factors listed below were beyond the control in this trial: Factors that can affect fuel economy: Change in Bus Route: (freight in addition to the daily route) - Change in the Number of Stops / Start-ups within the Route (traffic, construction, etc.) - Change of Bus Driver; - Change in Climate; - Change in Tire Pressure; - Frequency of Oil Change; - Problems of Maintenance and Repairs; - Buses Not Available for Addition of Additive. Factors that may affect data collection and create the appearance of a change in fuel economy: Lack of Data due to the bus re-filling at another location; Lack of Data due to the bus refilling outside the program; - Lack of data due to the fact that the fuel refueling failed to register the data; Change in fuel refueling, or refueling habits; - Data that record error made by the fuel refueling. For each bus, there was a certain number of outliers: the data points that seem to make no sense. These points were either extremely high or extremely low compared to the total set of data. In order to ensure that the data used in calculating the average fuel economy were statistically significant and not biased by the outliers, the "bell curve" method was applied. The bell curve is a fundamental principle of statistics that allows the use of data that falls within the normal distribution for each specific bus and filters the outliers that skew the data. For each bus, the average miles traveled were calculated. Because recording the miles traveled for each bus each day was a standard procedure and does not require the reseller to remember the additional step of readjusting the fuel gauge, it is perceived that this number is less likely to be recorded incorrectly. The miles traveled were also the variable least likely to be affected by the additive. Assuming that the additive is going to have some effect on fuel economy, the miles traveled would be the same since the driving route will not change. The number of gallons supplied however can be increased or decreased as a result of the additive. The standard deviation or measurement of how the data varies from the average was calculated based on the average miles traveled. The standard deviation for each bus was then added and subtracted from the miles average traveled to create a range of data points that fall within the normal distribution of each bus. It is the points within this range that have been used to calculate the average post-additive fuel economy. The only data points for fuel economy that were used for bus 50689 were those whose miles traveled ranged from 111 to 189.

Example of Bell Curve: Bus # 50689 Average Miles Recorded: 150 Standard Deviation: 39 Interval: 189 (150 + 39) to 111 (150 - 39). It should be noted here that the data has been presented in two ways: filtered and not filtered. The filtered data represents the statistically significant data that was filtered by taking the range of numbers within one standard deviation from the average. The unfiltered data represents the average taken from all the registered numbers, whether they were statistically significant or not.

V. Summary of Results The 40 buses that participated in this trial discerned on average, an increase of 10.13% in the fuel economy. The graph in Figure 1 illustrates this improvement in fuel economy, compared to miles per gallon of baseline. The interval in fuel economy improvements is surprising considering that all buses operate independently from each other and are independently subject to several factors that influence fuel economy. Thus, the fuel economy of one bus has no effect on the fuel economy of another bus. These factors have been listed above. However, it is important to note that, the duration of the trial ensured that any factor that would have affected fuel economy, could not affect fuel economy for three months consistently in order to be considered a significant variable. None of the factors listed above was a consistent variable during the three months and therefore did not significantly affect the trial.

Savings analysis Assumptions Scenario 1 Scenario 2 (7%) (10%) Number of buses 560 560 Weekly fuel consumption per bus 60 60 Number of weeks in operation 45 45 Annual Diesel Consumption (in gallons) 1,512,000 1,512,000 Cost of one gallon of diesel ($) 1.00 1.00 Annual Total Cost of Diesel ($) 1,512,000 1,512,000 Cost of Additive Dose: 1: 575 Cost per gallon ($) 0.02 0.02 Annual diesel consumption (in gallons) 1,512,000 1,512,000 Annual cost of additive ($) 30,240 30,240 Annual savings Improvement in fuel economy 7% 10% Current annual cost of diesel ($) 1,512,000 1,512,000 Annual cost reduction of diesel ($) -105,840 -151,200 New annual cost of diesel ($) 1,406,160 1,360,800 Annual cost of additive ($) 30,240 30,240 New total cost ($) 1,436,400 1,391,040 Annual cost savings 75,600 120, 960 Savings per gallon ($) 0.050 0.080 Average for all bus / van comparisons Miles / gallon Mi1las / gallon Change with additive Buses Total buses 4.9307 5.4300 10.13% City 4.9381 5.4409 10.18% Road 4.9258 5.4227 10.09 Wagons Wagons total 7.6231 8.2136 7.75 City 7.4916 8.1463 8.74 Highway 8.0176 8.4157 4.97 Example 4 Subject: Field Test of DI Sample in Railway Locomotives Preamble: The following study was carried out by measuring a performance of two processes, determining their stability with each other and inserting a controlled variable to each process and measuring the performance.

Scope: The scope of this example was to define the structure, limits and statistically evaluate the influence of the DI Sample additive on the performance and efficiency of locomotives of 2000 and 3000 horsepower in the field.

Background: A protocol was established to evaluate the additive using a set of 38 General Purpose machines and a set of 40 Special Work machines with the following statistics: Data GP38.- Division elei tromotriz of General Motors Horsepower: 2000 Number of Cylinders 16 Arrangement of Cylinders 45"V" Caliber and Cylinder Race 9 1/16"x 10" Total Displacement 10,320 in3 (169 liters) Operation Principle : 2 stroke cycles, blower aspiration, unit fuel injection, water cooled cylinders and sleeves, oil cooled pistons, synchronous speed governor Maximum Power 900 RPM Idle Speed 315 RPM Data from SD40-2, General Motors Electromotive Division Horses Force: 3000 Number of Cylinders 16 Cylinder Arrangement 45"V" Cylinder Diameter and Stroke 9 1/16"x 10" Total Displacement 10,320 in3 (169 liters) Principle of Operation: 2 stroke cycles, turbocharged aspirated by blower, unit fuel injection, water cooled cylinders and sleeves, oil cooled pistons, synchronous speed governor Maximum Power 904 RPM Idle Speed 318 RPM Rationale: In theory, locomotive machines can be electronically coupled such that both machines respond identically to control orders from either the control console of any machine. With two theoretically identical machines operating in tandem, there will be a platform base that can be subjected to comparison analysis.

Typical Machined Machines Protocol A and B Phase 0. - Fill both machines and mark the filling point on the transparent glass of the fuel tank of each machine. Monitor the fuel consumed by each machine for a sufficient length of time to have required a minimum of 3 replenishment events without exceptions to establish a baseline. Record and set the fuel percent (positive or negative) used by Machine A compared to Machine B, called AC. This is the baseline. Phase O should only come out when a stable baseline is established without exceptions. Phase 1.- Select the machine with the highest fuel consumption compared to its twin coupled and introduce the additive when adjusting a full tank of fuel to an additive fuel ratio of 600: 1. Continues to monitor the fuel consumed in the refueling when filling the marked measured point. Adjust the additive concentration in the selected machine according to the amount of fuel used to maintain the 600: 1 ratio. Record and set the fuel percent (positive or negative) used by Machine A compared to Machine B, (AC) starting with the first refueling after the introduction of the additive to the selected machine. Phase 1 should only leave after a minimum of 3 to 5 replenishments or a stable relationship in the CA is seen. The stability in this case is defined as less than a change of 1% in the CA from one replenishment to the next (see Analysis Section). Phase 2.- Introduce the second twin machine to the additive when adjusting a tank full of fuel to the ratio of 600: 1. Continue monitoring the fuel consumed in the same way as Phase 1. Record and set fuel percent (positive or negative) used by Machine A compared to Machine B, (?? which begins with the first refill after the introduction of the additive to the second machine.The same foundation is used in the output of Phase 2 as used in the Phase 1. Phase 3. - Remove the additive from the machine selected in Phase 1. Continue monitoring the fuel consumed in the same way as Phase 1 and 2. Record and set the fuel percent (positive or negative) used by Machine A compared to Machine B, (AC) that starts with the first refill after stopping the additive on the first machine selected in the Phase 1 machine. It will be necessary to calculate the residual dilute concentration in the tank at each replenishment after having removed the additive from the machine selected in Phase 1. The criteria for leaving Phase 3 is only after witnessing a gradual change in the relationships between the two machines and then a period of stability where they do not exhibit change any longer. This phase has the dual purpose of demonstrating that a change will occur when the additive is removed and to estimate how much residual benefit there is of the additive. Phase 4. - Remove the additive from the machine selected in Phase 2. Monitor the use of fuel in both machines with no machine that has the additive.

Record and set the fuel percent (positive or negative) used by Machine A compared to the Machine B, (AC) that starts with the first refill after the removal of the additive to the second machine. The completion of this phase and the conclusion of the test will be similar to phase 3. Protocol Test Results: Locomotive ID 43 and 44 Type of work Long-distance coal train up to 65-132 long ton wagons Replenishment number 29 Number of exceptions * (data n / a) 6 Phase 0 AC = 6.87% (44 using more fuel than 43) Phase 1 AC = -6.37% (Machine 44 selected for Phase 1 - an improvement of 13.24% in the performance of Machine 44 compared to Machine 43) Phase 2 AC = -1.54% (performance of machine 43 improved by 4.83% compared to Machine 44 that is also receiving the additive) Phase 3 AC = 0.02% (Machine 44 lost 1.56% in performance after the additive has been removed.) The residual benefit of the additive has not been determined.

Phase 4 AC = -4.28% (when the additive is removed from both machines, Machine 43 is now using more than Machine 44) Locomotive ID 179 and 180 Type of work Short distance miscellany of up to 40 long ton wagons and change in rail yard Replenishment number In progress Phase 0 AC = -0.94% (Machine 179 that uses more fuel than Machine 180) Phase 1 AC = 6.06% (Machine 179 selected for Phase 1 - an improvement of 7% in the performance of Machine 179 compared to Machine 180) Phase 2 AC = In progress Conclusions: - The addition of the sample additive DI to the locomotive machine number 44 of 3000 horsepower resulted in a 13% improvement in fuel efficiency compared to its twin number 43 machine. These two machines were working on an allocation of long distance coal cars. When introduction of the sample additive DI is made to the 179 horsepower machine 179 that works mainly on a change allocation inefficient, the result was a 7% improvement in fuel efficiency compared to its twin 180 machine. - As the additive of Sample DI was introduced to the machine 43 after being introduced to the machine 44, there was an improvement of 4.83% in the performance of the machine 43 compared to the machine 44. Keeping in mind that the numbers of comparison are derived from two machines now "clean", the change is not expected to be as pronounced as it was when one machine is "clean" and the other "dirty". Although not tested for performance herein, the following admixture mixtures blended in Table 1 were formulated and dissolved in the hydrocarbon fuel.

Table 1: Example 5 The machine used was a 14-liter NTA855R3 machine previously installed in a Class 159 diesel unit of South West trains. The machine has been removed from the vehicle several weeks before ending a full 500,000-mile (nominal) operating life in order to carry out the additional test work and Sulfur-Free Diesel (SFD). At the end of the tests, it was proposed to submit the machine to a complete service. They were used for the Class A2 diesel test of the BS 2869 standards. The fuel was transferred to the IBC units and dosed with the DI additive in a ratio of 1: 600 by volume. The lubricating oil used was Shell Fortisol Fleet SG / CF-4, 15W-40. The following test program was defined: Initial performance data and emissions with standard diesel fuel. - Conditioning run from 40 hours to 100% load of machine speed using fuel with additives. - Final performance data and emissions with fuel with additive. Both the initial and final performance data of the Full Load Power Curves (FLPC), with the data recorded at eight load conditions through the speed range of the machine. Two complete sets of data were taken for both the initial and final configurations, one before and one after the emissions reading. Gaseous and particulate emissions data were measured according to ISO 8178 Test Cycle F for rail traction, which applies a weighting factor to each of the three load conditions tested (speed / load of full rate, zero load at idle speed and an intermediate load at 50% of torque). The gaseous emissions included nitrogen oxide (NOx), carbon monoxide (CO), total hydrocarbons (THC), carbon dioxide (C02) and oxygen (02). To ensure repeatability, five sets of emission data were taken for both the "before", "after" tests, again with average values that are used for the subsequent analysis of data and the graphing. All previous test cycles were programmed into the test cell control system to allow automatic operation to ensure the repeatability of the measurement conditions. Immediately before the conditioning run, the machine was run out of the day tank of the test cell only in order to drain as much of the diesel standard as possible from the supply system. During the 40-hour run, machine performance data (excluding emissions) were recorded at 30-minute intervals to allow subsequent identification of any trends as a result of the additive effects. The conditioning run was operated continuously, with the exception of a brief stop for service verification after 17.75 hours. The fuel filter of the machine was renewed before the start of the initial FLPC tests, and again after the conditioning run and before the final FLPC tests. The lubrication oil of the machine was not renewed before the test, since this has been carried out approximately 20 hours previously. A sample of the lubricant oil was taken for analysis before the start of the initial FLPC tests, and again at the conclusion of the conditioning run. All data throughout the test were corrected to the relevant BS / ISO standards as follows: - Power and fuel consumption corrected to BS ISO 15550: 2002 and BS ISO 3046-1: 2002 for standard reference conditions for barometric pressure of 1000 kPa and ambient temperature of 298K. - Gaseous emissions corrected to BS EN ISO 8178-1 for mass flow corrections.

Nitrogen oxide emissions corrected in addition to BS EN ISO 8178-1 for relative humidity and air temperature. - Gaseous and particle-weighted emissions according to the requirements of BS EN ISO 8178-4. To ensure this attitude of measurements of gaseous emissions, all analyzers were calibrated at the beginning of each day, with "zero" and "interval" checks carried out at the end of each day to verify the drift of the analyzer. Figures 2 and 3 show the comparison of specific fuel consumption, valued on a basis in mass and volume, respectively. Both graphs show a comparable reduction in fuel consumption for a given speed / load setting. Figure 4 represents this as a percentage of reduction, based on volume flow measurements. A minimum reduction of almost 7% at high load is evident, further improving to 10.5% reduction at the lowest speeds. Figure 5 shows the current reduction in fuel consumption during the conditioning run. This shows that the improvement in fuel consumption seemed to be stabilizing towards the end of the run. Figure 6 shows particle emissions.

A significant 95% reduction in PM emissions is evident. The magnitude of the power reduction varied from 2-3% for the lower load settings, up to 4.5-5.5% to the higher load factors, see Figure 7. Figure 8 shows the reduction of current power during the conditioning run . This indicates that the power reduction can not be stabilized at the end of the run.

Effects on Fuel Consumption The comparison of the effects of fuel consumption both in terms of mass and volume produced comparable trends, indicating that there was no effect on fuel density. When assessing fuel consumption in specific terms, this showed a clear and significant improvement in combustion from the use of the steering on a "per kW" basis. Even in absolute terms, the magnitude of improvements in fuel consumption was greater than the effect of power reduction, also indicating an improvement in combustion conditions. This improvement in fuel consumption seemed to have been stabilized at the end of the conditioning run.

Effects on Emission Small improvements were achieved in THC, CO and C02, although these may have been due at least in part to the reduction in power. Given the improvement in the measured levels of exhaust smoke, an improvement in PM emissions was expected, but the magnitude of the reduction was a surprise. Although it does not make a particular difference to the scale of this reduction, it should be noted that due to the general deterioration of the machine referred to already from the installation in the test bed, the results of PM of untreated diesel were double the levels measured at the beginning of the original test program. Due to the calibration regime in place, there is no reason to doubt the accuracy of the measurements, particularly given the repeatability of the individual readings. However, the accuracy of the instrumentation was verified by Technology mi during its subsequent use in another assignment, without established defects.

Effects on Power The details and potential cause of the observed reduction in power are discussed below. Importantly, despite this reduction, the measured boost pressure remained largely unchanged, suggesting improved fuel / air mixing and combustion more efficient. There was no power reduction, it would be reasonable to have expected an increase in the reinforcement pressure accordingly. An initial power reduction of approximately 3% was noted in the first few hours of the conditioning run. The power reduction ratio was then alleviated, following a more gradual downward trend for the rest of the run, with the exception of a stable time point around the midpoint of the run. The reason for this change in trend is not clear, although it can be an effect of the temperature since it follows the verification of the service of the machine when it is turned off. After this service verification, the power reduction trend continued for the rest of the run, with no stabilizing effect evident in the conclusion. As selected, the magnitude of the power reduction was greater at higher loads. It is believed that this may indicate the reason for the effect. Other parameters (discussed later in this section) clearly indicate that the additive was having an effect on the combustion conditions inside the cylinder. A particular claim is that the additive clean the components of the combustion chamber. It was clear from the oil consumption of the machine and from the oil analysis results that the wear of the machine or motor is occurring, and it has actually worsened since the machine has been installed first in the test bed for the original test program. Since a certain level of ring wear / piston lining has occurred inside the machine (as indicated by the increase in iron levels in the oil), it is also likely that a level of ring groove and carbon deposit packing at the top of the piston would have occurred. While in general it is undesirable, these deposits may have formed an additional seal in the ring area against the blow of the combustion gas. It is feasible that the additive has begun to clean some of these deposits, exposing the full effects of ring wear increasing the puff. This effect would be more pronounced at maximum cylinder pressures of higher machine speeds. The increased oil consumption observed during the last stages of the load run is also likely to be, at least partially, attributable to this effect.

Summary: 1. A Cummins NTA855R3 machine due to reconditioning successfully completed a 40-hour load run using fuel dosed with the fuel DI additive in a ratio of 1: 600 by volume. Emissions and performance data have been measured before and after of this cargo run. 2. Significant improvements in specific fuel consumption were obtained across the load range, from a minimum of 6.9% at full load, increasing to 10.4% at lower loads, demonstrating a clear improvement in combustion on a "per kW" basis . 3. For gaseous emissions, there were improvements in hydrocarbons (4.3%) carbon monoxide (12.8%) and carbon dioxide (8.5%). 4. The exhaust smoke and particulate matter were both significantly reduced, by 95% and 24.6%, respectively. The magnitude of the particle reduction was unexpected. 5. The performance data after the load run showed reductions in the available power compared to the data of the pre-load run, also evident during the run itself. The reason for this power reduction is not known, but it is not considered to be due to the use of the additive. It is more likely that the increased gas blast occurred in a worn machine, as suggested by the lubricant oil sample results. 6. From the performance data at the end of the load run, the power reduction varied between 2-3% at the lower load settings, up to 4.5-5.5% at higher loads. 7. Despite the reduction in available power, the boost pressure at the conclusion of the test remained largely unchanged, indicating improved fuel / air mixing and subsequent more efficient combustion. 8. Overall, the fuel additive has had its most beneficial effect on the consumption of fuel and particulate matter, confirming an improvement in combustion, either directly and / or as a result of cleaning the combustion chamber . It is assumed that the observed power reduction may be characteristic of the machine tested and not therefore typical for other machines that use the additive.

Example 6 Long-range fuel consumption test The long-range fuel consumption test is based on SAE J1321 and provides a standardized test procedure for comparing the fuel consumption in service of a test vehicle operating under two different conditions. in relation to the consumption of a control vehicle. A route and test load are selected that are representative of the actual operations and are the same for both trucks; the route should be approximately 55 km long. The two vans used in the test need to be similar in specification to both as possible, except that one is modified with the technology that is going to be tested and one is not modified. During the test, each driver follows the same driving parameters to minimize the act of driver variation. For the purpose of the test, each truck was equipped with a temporary fuel tank that allows the use of fuel to be measured by weight. An initial long distance test is run before introducing the additive to the test van. In this test, the trucks are driven during the test route during several runs until it can be established statistically that the results are repeatable. The use of fuel is followed exactly based on the weight of the temporary fuel tanks before and after each run. This test acts as the baseline. The same vans are then run through the same test a second time, but the test van has the additive added to the fuel to determine the potential improvement in fuel efficiency. This final test is done after running the test van for several months using the additive to ensure that any purge period is met. As in the initial test, the test run is repeated until it can be established that the results are statistically repeatable. Then comparisons are made between the results of the initial test and the results of the modified test, as well as between the vans in the test to establish the impact technology has on fuel efficiency.

Cold start test Because most truck owners ask if fuel additives would have any impact on the truck's cold weather performance, a cold start test based on SAE J1635 was included. A numerical rating system is used to classify how the vehicle works under specific operating conditions. The purpose of the test is to evaluate how easy it is to start and drive a truck after it has been left under freezing conditions for at least 8 hours.

Test site and test vehicle COOP St-Felicien, QC: - 2004 Kenworth T800, driven by a CAT machine C-15 roundwood road and non-road tractor-trailer - Start using a DiesolIFT on September 5, 2005.

Test results Long-range fuel consumption test The baseline test and the final test have been completed. As a result, the valid base test and final control / truck (T / C) truck ratios have been determined. Based on these relationships, the calculated fuel economy is 5.2%. Even if a flotilla test was not included in the research plan, the flotilla data for the period before the start of the use of the additive and the data for the last two months of use have been analyzed. The T / C ratios for both periods have been determined and the fuel economy calculated using the flotilla data is 5.6 Cold start test The cold start test was performed on January 28, 2006. The Start-Idle-Handle (S-I-D) score was 9-8-9, meaning excellent start, very good idle and excellent maneuverability. The details of the test results are included.

Conclusions The expected fuel savings have been confirmed by the result of the test of long-distance fuel consumption, 5.2% of fuel economy, and also by the results of the calculations of the leaves of the fleet (5.6% of fuel savings). The vehicle that uses the additive has a very good behavior during the cold start test. Cold Start Test and START PROOF METHOD Handling in COLD AND MANEJABILITY Test No: 1 Date: January 28, 2006 STARTING RATE (S) 9 Idle idle (manual, uncoupled clutch) or IMPULSION (automatic Handling system (D) 9 FINAL REGIMEN: HOME, RALENTI AND MANEJABILIDAD (SID) Example 7 The objective of the test was to carry out fuel consumption tests on a heavy vehicle with and without a diesel additive in order to establish the fuel economy performance of the additive diesolIFT. The following tests were carried out: Fuel economy at constant speed at 60 km / h and 80 km / h maximum speed at higher speeds. The fuel consumption tests were carried out in a 100-liter truck. The vehicle was loaded with a simulated mass of 8 tons and was instrumented with calibrated Datron fuel and speed measurement equipment. The temperature of the fuel was measured and the results were calculated accordingly. The tests were carried out only when the wind speed was below 3 m / s. First, the test vehicle was run for 1 hour at maximum speed around a high speed oval track to heat the vehicle to operating conditions. The fuel consumption was then determined for the truck without any additive. The tank of the vehicle was filled to the maximum with diesel and the additive was mixed at a ratio of 1 to 600 in the tank. The vehicle was run for 120 km and the fuel consumption was finished again. The initial results did not show significant improvement and it was decided to continue with the vehicle that runs with the additive during another period in order to increase the exposure of the machine to the additive.

After another 500 km, fuel consumption was repeated and improvements in fuel consumption were not significant. The vehicle was driven by others at 257 km and the fuel consumption results then began to show an improvement of 3.9 I and 4.1 at 60 km / h and 80 km / h, respectively. After another 668 km, the improvement went up to 5% for each speed. The test was repeated again after another 1527 and the improvements were 5.5% and 8.0% at 60 km / h and 80 km / h, respectively. The fuel consumption at maximum speed did not vary significantly with or without the additive. The following conditions were applicable before any test was initiated to ensure repeatability: - Each test was started at the same time in the morning. - For all tests, the vehicle was run at operating temperatures before the records began. - The fuel temperature was measured for correction factors. - The wind speed is below 3 m / s for all tests. The same test driver was used at all times.

Table 1: Fuel consumption Table 2: Percent difference Fuel consumption without the additive was used as baseline Note: Negative value indicates better fuel consumption than baseline Positive value indicates but fuel consumption baseline Results Fuel consumption Fuel consumption without additive Table 3: Fuel consumption at 60 km / h stable for 2000 m Table 4: Fuel consumption at 80 km / h stable for 2000 m Consumption of fuel with additive after 120 km Table 6: Fuel consumption at 60 km / h stable during 2000m Table 7: Fuel consumption at 80 km / h stable for 2000m Table 8: Fuel consumption at maximum speed Note: Only two runs were carried out because there was no improvement Fuel consumption with additive after 620 km Table 9: Fuel consumption at 60 km / h stable for 2000 m Table 10: Fuel consumption at 80 km / h stable for 2000 m Fuel consumption with additive with 757 km Table 12: Fuel consumption at 60 km / h stable during 2000 m Table 14: Fuel consumption at maximum speed Fuel consumption with additive after 1425 km Table 15: Fuel consumption at 60 km / h stable for 2000 m Table 16: Fuel consumption at 80 km / h stable for 2000 m Fuel consumption with additive after 2952 km Table 18: Fuel consumption at 60 km / h stable during 2000 m Table 19: Fuel consumption at 80 km / h stable for 2000 m Table 20: Fuel consumption at maximum speed It is noted that in relation to this date, the best method known to the applicant to bring the present invention to practice is that which is clear from the present description of the invention.

Claims (30)

1. CLAIMS Having described the invention as above, property is claimed as contained in the following claims: 1. Fuel composition consisting of at least 95% by weight of predominantly or completely hydrocarbon liquid fuel and from 0.001 to 5.0% by weight of fuel additive, characterized in that the additive consists of: a) from 20 to 90% by weight of at least one alkoxylated alcohol corresponding to the Formula (I) R2 i R1-0 - (- CHCH20-) x-H (I) where -R2 is H or CH3, and -x is 1-7; (b) from 40 to 10% by weight of at least one polyalkylene glycol ester corresponding to the following general formula (II) O R4 R3-C-0 - (- CHCH20 -) - and -R6 (II) where -R3 is Cn-Cis, -R4 is H or CH3, -y is 1-20, -R5 is H or COR3; and (c) from 40 to 0% by weight of at least one alkanolamide corresponding to the following general Formula (III) O CH2CH2OH .1 / R6-C-N \ R7 (III) wherein -R6 is C12-C18, -R7 is H or CH2CH2OH with the proviso that the sum of (a), (b) and when present, (c), constitutes 100% by weight of the fuel additive present in the composition made out of fuel. Composition according to claim 1, characterized in that the alkoxylated alcohol (a) comprises from 20 to 70% by weight of the additive, preferably from 40 to 60% by weight, more preferably from 50 to 60% by weight. weight . 3. Composition according to any preceding claim, characterized in that R1 is C9-Cn and x is approximately 2.5. 4. Composition in accordance with any previous claim, characterized in that the polyalkylene glycol ester (b) comprises from 40 to 15% by weight of the additive, preferably from 35 to 25% by weight, more preferably from 30 to 25% by weight. 5. Composition according to any preceding claim, characterized in that R3 is Ci7 and R5 is COR3. Composition according to any preceding claim, characterized in that the alkanolamide (c) when present comprises from 40 to 15% by weight of the additive, preferably from 25 to 15% by weight. 7. Composition according to any preceding claim, characterized in that R6 is Ci7 and R7 is CH2CH2OH. Composition according to any preceding claim, characterized in that the liquid hydrocarbon fuel is petroleum distillate fuel, obtained naturally, or residual fuel oil such as diesel fuel, gasoline or kerosene, optionally mixed with another alternative fuel predominantly of hydrocarbon. Composition according to claim 8, characterized in that the fuel is gasoline optionally mixed with gas-to-liquid condensate and / or alkanol such as ethanol. 10. Composition according to claim 8, characterized in that the fuel is kerosene optionally mixed with any alternative thereto, optionally based predominantly on hydrocarbon. 11. Composition according to claim 8, characterized in that the fuel is diesel optionally mixed with biodiesel, condensates of gas-to-liquid diesel, and diesel / alkanol such as diesel / ethanol mixtures. Composition according to claim 8, characterized in that the fuel comprises heavy residual gas oil. 13. Fuel additive concentrate, characterized in that it consists essentially of about 80-20% by weight of a fuel additive consisting of (a) plus (b) optionally more (c) as defined in accordance with claim 1 and approximately 20 to 80% of fuel solvent. 14. Concentrate according to claim 13, characterized in that the fuel additive comprises approximately 70 to 30% by weight of the concentrate and the fuel solvent comprises approximately 30 to 70% by weight of the concentrate. 15. Concentrate according to claim 13, characterized in that the additive of The fuel comprises from about 60 to 40% by weight of the concentrate and the fuel solvent comprises from about 40 to 60% by weight of the concentrate. 16. Concentrate according to any of claims 13 to 15, characterized in that the solvent is a fuel selected from petroleum distillate fuel and / or alternative diesel, gasoline and kerosene fuels. 17. Fuel composition formulated to produce improved fuel economy when subjected to combustion, characterized in that it comprises: from about 95 to 99.9999% by weight of predominantly hydrocarbon liquid fuel; and from about 0.0001 to 5% by weight of fuel additive concentrate as defined according to any of claims 13 to 16. 18. Method for making a fuel additive suitable for use in a composition as claimed in accordance with any of claims 1 to 12, characterized in that it comprises the steps of mixing in any order a mixture consisting of the following components: a) from 20 to 90% by weight of at least one alkoxylated alcohol corresponding to the Formula ( I) R2 i R1-0 - (- CHCH20-) x-H (I) wherein -R1 is C3-C16, -R2 is H or CH3, and -x is 1-7; (b) from 40 to 10% by weight of at least one polyalkylene glycol ester corresponding to the following general formula (II) O R4 R3-C-0 - (- CHCH20 -) - and -R5 (II) where -R4 is H or CH3, -y is 1-20, -R5 is H or COR3; and optionally (c) from 40 to 0% by weight of at least one alkanolamide corresponding to the following general Formula (III) O CH2CH2OH .i / R6-C-N \ R7 (III) where -R7 is H or CH2CH2OH subjected to the condition that the sum of the amounts of the components (a), (b) and when present, (c), is equal to 100% by weight of the fuel additive. Method according to claim 18, characterized in that the step of preparing the mixture comprises mixing from about 20 to 70% by weight, preferably from 40 to 60%, more preferably from 50 to 60% of alkoxylated alcohol (to) . 20. Method according to claim 18 or 19, characterized in that R1 is C9- Cii and x is approximately 2.5. Method according to any of claims 18 to 20, characterized in that the step of preparing the mixture comprises mixing from 40 to 15%, preferably from 35 to 25%, more preferably from 30 to 25% by weight of ester (b) of polyalkylene glycol. 22. Method according to any of claims 18 to 21, characterized in that R3 is Civ and 5 is COR3. 23. Method according to any of claims 18 to 22, characterized in that the step of preparing the mixture comprises mixing 40 to 15% by weight, preferably 25 to 15% by weight of alkanolamide (c). 24. Method according to any of claims 18 to 23, characterized in that R6 is approximately C17 and R7 is -CH2CH2OH. 25. Method for making a fuel additive concentrate, characterized in that it comprises in any order, the steps of: preparing an additive mixture comprising the steps according to any of claims 18 to 24, in any order; - mixing about 80 to 20% by weight of the additive mixture with about 20 to 80% by weight of fuel solvent predominantly or completely hydrocarbon. 26. Method according to claim 25, characterized in that the solvent is a fuel selected from one or more of diesel, gasoline and petroleum distillate kerosene, optionally mixed with an alternative fuel not derived from petroleum distillate predominantly hydrocarbon. 27. Method according to claim 25 or 26, characterized in that the step of preparing the concentrate comprises the step of mixing approximately 70 to 30% by weight of the additive mixture with approximately 30 to 70% by weight of the solvent. 28. Method of compliance with claim 27, characterized in that the step of preparing the concentrate comprises the step of mixing about 60 to 40% by weight of the additive mixture with about 40 to 60% by weight of the solvent. 29. A method for making a fuel composition formulated to improve fuel economy when subjected to combustion, characterized in that it comprises the steps of: preparing a fuel additive concentrate according to a method as claimed in accordance with any of the Claims 25 to 28; - mixing approximately 95 to 99,999% by weight of predominantly hydrocarbon liquid fuel with 0.0001 to 5% by weight of the fuel additive concentrate. 30. Method of compliance with claim 29, characterized in that the solvent comprises fuel selected from diesel, gasoline and kerosene derived from petroleum distillate, optionally mixed with alternative fuel not derived from petroleum distillate, predominantly hydrocarbon.