Can Coal-Based Hydrogenated Oil Be Used in Vehicles?

[SanAbigail]

Coal-based hydrogenated oil can be used in vehicles. Below is an introduction to fuel consumption-related content: Fuel Consumption: Large-displacement vehicles consume as much fuel as household cars. Comparison: A fuel consumption of 6 liters per 100 kilometers, on the same route, a 1.6L car like the Octavia consumes 7 liters. Sports cars typically require much larger throttle inputs, consuming more fuel than street cars, resulting in higher fuel consumption. A liter-class sports car during aggressive acceleration or high-speed driving can have fuel consumption comparable to the combined fuel consumption of a 3.0L car. Fuel: Most cars use gasoline, so the energy content of the fuel is the same. The relatively higher fuel consumption of the Octavia comes from high aerodynamic drag, a compact structure that leaves no room for fuel-saving technologies to be implemented, and a design philosophy that emphasizes high RPM for power extraction.

[WestonAnn]

Recently studying coal-based hydrogenated oil, technically it is indeed suitable for automotive use. Coal-based hydrogenated oil is a synthetic fuel produced through coal liquefaction processes, similar to diesel, and can be directly used in gasoline or diesel engines. I've reviewed some projects in China, such as the demonstration by Shenhua Group, where vehicles ran without issues, showing strong compatibility. Of course, purity and additives matter—improper handling could lead to engine wear or non-compliant emissions. With rising environmental standards, this type of fuel requires advanced purification techniques, like hydrogenation to reduce impurities. Long-term, it can reduce dependence on petroleum, but I recommend regular vehicle owners ensure the fuel meets the standards specified in their vehicle manuals. Currently, many heavy-duty trucks and buses are piloting its use with good results, as long as maintenance is properly managed.

[SanMatthew]

Although coal-to-liquid fuel can be used to power vehicles, I wouldn't recommend it from an environmental perspective. While it can keep the engine running, the entire process generates significant emissions, including carbon dioxide and sulfur compounds, making it dirtier than petroleum-based fuels. I've read online studies suggesting it may accelerate vehicle exhaust pollution and cause greater harm to the environment. With the current push for low-carbon transportation, pure electric or hydrogen fuels are more eco-friendly alternatives. If you must use it, it's better limited to small-scale testing, such as emergency situations in remote areas when vehicles run out of conventional fuel. Personally, I believe switching directly to electric vehicles makes more sense than dealing with coal-based fuels. While technically feasible, one should think twice morally, as the health of our planet is ultimately more important.

[DelConnor]

Economically speaking, this fuel is theoretically cheaper. But in practical use, it's not as readily available as regular gasoline. It might work in your car, but the cost-effectiveness is questionable due to complex production processes and unstable supply. If you can't easily find it at gas stations and have to seek specialized suppliers, that's extra hassle. I've seen driver feedback mentioning increased engine carbon buildup after use, leading to higher maintenance costs. For average family cars, it's not worth the trouble to save a little money. Before purchasing, check if there are local policy subsidies—otherwise, sticking with standard fuel is more worry-free.