% IMPORTANT: The following is UTF-8 encoded.  This means that in the presence
% of non-ASCII characters, it will not work with BibTeX 0.99 or older.
% Instead, you should use an up-to-date BibTeX implementation like “bibtex8” or
% “biber”.

@ARTICLE{Linzenich:877456,
      author       = {Linzenich, Anika and Arning, Katrin and Bongartz, Dominik
                      and Mitsos, Alexander and Ziefle, Martina},
      title        = {{W}hat fuels the adoption of alternative fuels? {E}xamining
                      preferences of {G}erman car drivers for fuel innovations},
      journal      = {Applied energy},
      volume       = {249},
      issn         = {0306-2619},
      address      = {Amsterdam [u.a.]},
      publisher    = {Elsevier Science},
      reportid     = {FZJ-2020-02209},
      pages        = {222 - 236},
      year         = {2019},
      abstract     = {In the search for sustainable transport solutions, fuel
                      production from renewable resources has received significant
                      attention. Some proposed synthetic fuels have favorable
                      combustion properties compared to existing fuels, e.g.,
                      significant reductions in pollutant formation. However,
                      penetration of such fuels requires a favorable social
                      acceptance, as demonstrated by the consumer boycott of the
                      ethanol-blend fuel with $10\%$ ethanol and $90\%$ gasoline
                      (E10) in Germany. Therefore, the consumer perspective and
                      their preferences regarding alternative fuels should be
                      considered in the fuel design. We use conjoint methodology
                      to analyze the preferences of German car drivers for
                      alternative fuels. This aims at understanding which criteria
                      determine consumer preferences and usage decisions. Among
                      the five considered fuel attributes (fuel availability,
                      driving range, pollutant emissions, fuel costs, and usage
                      requirements to enable the use of alternative fuels), fuel
                      costs had the highest decision impact for alternative fuel
                      preferences, followed by fuel availability and usage
                      requirements. Pollutant emissions had the lowest impact on
                      alternative fuel choices. A market simulation of
                      conventional diesel and alternative fuels (dimethyl ether
                      (DME) and a blend of diesel with oxymethylene dimethyl
                      ethers (OME)) revealed that currently a large majority of
                      car drivers would prefer conventional fossil fuel options,
                      indicating a currently low consumer demand for alternative
                      fuels. Thus, the findings demonstrate the importance of
                      integrating social acceptance as an objective function in
                      the design of novel fuels and production processes.},
      cin          = {IEK-10},
      ddc          = {620},
      cid          = {I:(DE-Juel1)IEK-10-20170217},
      pnm          = {899 - ohne Topic (POF3-899)},
      pid          = {G:(DE-HGF)POF3-899},
      typ          = {PUB:(DE-HGF)16},
      UT           = {WOS:000472692200018},
      doi          = {10.1016/j.apenergy.2019.04.041},
      url          = {https://juser.fz-juelich.de/record/877456},
}