Kw or horsepower are already a unit of how much work is done in a time period, kw per second or horsepower per hour would be a measure of the rate of change.
Same as how meters per second 'per second' is a rate of accelleration rather than a measure of speed.
Engine power does not have a direct kw for kw correlation with heat.
The efficiency of an engine being 30% is the percentage of how well it can convert POTENTIAL chemical energy of the fuel into POTENTIAL kinetic energy at the crank.
pumping losses etc count against the potential kinetic energy produced.
Heat energy from the petrol is one of many types of losses against its potential chemical energy.
The fuel igniting and heating up the air in the cylinder means it has lost some chemical efficiency before it has even imparted any kinetic energy on to the piston.
not being able to acheive the exactly optimum air fuel ratio too for every fuel particle is a loss against its potential chemical energy.
Engines running on methanol run a lot cooler but dont double or triple in power/efficiency compared to petrol.
An engine running lean burns hotter but does not produce more chemical or kinetic energy.
An engine with increased chemical efficiency still has plenty of kinetic energy losses, rotating the valvetrain, pumping losses in cylinders etc ad well as alternator and what not.
Cant remember exactly how they worked but steam trains in their later years recycled the heat from one cyl into the next and then the next to gain efficiency, as producing and utilising expansion from heat is the only way they work. (Unlike internal combustion)