Pickens' natural gas idea picking up steam. Will cars be fueled by CNG? Yes, if ex-oil tycoon has any say in the matter
By Jennifer Alsever
msnbc.com contributor
updated 6:44 a.m. CT, Tues., Oct. 21, 2008
What will power your car a decade from now? Billionaire T. Boone Pickens is betting big that it will be compressed natural gas.
The former oil tycoon has put $58 million into touting his "Pickens Plan" in TV ads, YouTube videos, town hall meetings and media interviews to get people talking about boosting wind power for electricity and using the nation's natural gas supply for the next auto fuel.
The publicity is working. After years of a relatively low profile in the alternative fuel discussion, compressed natural gas or "CNG" vehicles are now at the forefront of a national debate.
No one would be talking about CNG in vehicles but for T. Boone Pickens’ ad campaign," said Tyson Slocum, director of the energy program for Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group.
Multiple congressional bills aim to expand the use of natural gas vehicles, proposing new research programs, tax incentives for automakers and changes in fueling station requirements.
In California, a fight is under way over Proposition 10, a November ballot initiative that would authorize the state to issue $5 billion in bonds to provide financial incentives to buy and develop such vehicles.
Critics charge that Pickens' own financial interests drive the push for CNG cars. He is the largest shareholder of Clean Energy Fuels, a Seal Beach, Calif., company that builds natural gas filling stations for buses and fleet vehicles. Clean Energy is also the author and co-financier of the California ballot proposal.
Pickens also has come under fire for misstating some facts in the debate. For example, he contends in media interviews and in ads that the United States spends $700 billion on foreign oil, but the figure is closer to $327.6 billion, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
And critics point out that natural gas is a finite resource, just like oil.
“Most environmentalists believe natural gas is not the future,” said Richard Holober, executive director of the Consumer Federation of California, which is opposed Prop 10. “This is an attempt to divert public money away from zero-emission vehicles to a dead-end technology that gets us nowhere.”
The group estimates the bond issue will cost state taxpayers $350 million a year.
Natural gas industry executives say CNG is a cleaner alternative to gasoline — producing 23 percent less greenhouse gas than diesel vehicles and 30 percent less than gasoline vehicles. And thanks to new drilling technology, they say, unprecedented amounts of natural gas can be obtained domestically and at far cheaper prices — about $1.50 a gallon.
“It is the most viable technology that you can do on a big scale,” says Jim Harger, a senior vice president of Clean Energy. “We have a glut of natural gas across the country. It’s right here in our backyard. We can do this now. It’s all ready to go.”
Harger said more than a dozen automakers, including Porsche, General Motors and Volkswagen, now make natural gas vehicles for the European, Argentinean and Brazilian markets. But the only domestically available natural gas car is the Civic GX from Honda.
Since Pickens began pushing his plan last summer, Honda has seen increased demand for the Civic GX, said Todd Mittleman, American Honda Motor Co.’s environmental specialist. But the number sold is still tiny — just 2,000 vehicles nationwide. Honda continues to heavily invest in research and development of battery electric and hybrid vehicles, but “as gas prices remain high, there will be growing demand for CNG vehicles,” Mittleman said.
One of the biggest challenges for CNG vehicles is a lack of fueling stations. There are only 1,200 natural gas stations in the nation, compared with more than 100,000 gas stations. So even if you buy a CNG car, you might not be able to get very far.
Pickens wants to change that. His Clean Energy Fuels is building 35 to 40 filling stations across the country and last month purchased a Toronto company called FuelMaker, which sells a home fueling device — called Phill — that lets people gas up at home via a natural gas line. The machine costs $3,500 and another $500 to $1,000 to install.
“It’s going to be an excellent bridge to move people away from gasoline to natural gas because they can fuel up at their house,” said Harger of Clean Energy. “People will be able to buy these and use them in their home and essentially never have to go to fueling station for a commuter car.”
Despite the CNG buzz, a number of energy experts argue that natural gas is the wrong direction for the nation, because it would simply replace one limited fossil fuel for another and require costly vehicle conversions and a new infrastructure.
“While CNG is somewhat cleaner than gasoline, moving to a new fossil fuel to power our cars is expensive and is a lower priority than increasing fuel economy and moving away from fossils altogether,” said Therese Langer, transportation director for the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy.
Plus, the price of natural gas is not guaranteed to stay low if millions of cars and trucks start relying on it, said Slocum of Public Citizen. “As we know, prices and markets change based on supply and demand, so you will see prices increase,” he said.
In the short term, carmakers should invest in fuel efficiency technologies like turbocharging, direct injection, lightweight materials and hybrids, said Langer. In the longer term, electric vehicles, powered by batteries or recharged through a plug, will be increasingly important, she said.
General Motors moved in that direction last month when it unveiled the Chevrolet Volt, an electric car powered by a 400-pound lithium-ion battery with enough power to go 40 miles on a single charge before switching to a gas engine. The gas engine then creates electricity on board to power the car for several hundred additional miles.
GM expects production of the Volt to begin in November 2010, but the company is continuing to develop the battery technology. Industry watchers expect the car to be sold for about $40,000.
msnbc.com contributor
updated 6:44 a.m. CT, Tues., Oct. 21, 2008
What will power your car a decade from now? Billionaire T. Boone Pickens is betting big that it will be compressed natural gas.
The former oil tycoon has put $58 million into touting his "Pickens Plan" in TV ads, YouTube videos, town hall meetings and media interviews to get people talking about boosting wind power for electricity and using the nation's natural gas supply for the next auto fuel.
The publicity is working. After years of a relatively low profile in the alternative fuel discussion, compressed natural gas or "CNG" vehicles are now at the forefront of a national debate.
No one would be talking about CNG in vehicles but for T. Boone Pickens’ ad campaign," said Tyson Slocum, director of the energy program for Public Citizen, a consumer advocacy group.
Multiple congressional bills aim to expand the use of natural gas vehicles, proposing new research programs, tax incentives for automakers and changes in fueling station requirements.
In California, a fight is under way over Proposition 10, a November ballot initiative that would authorize the state to issue $5 billion in bonds to provide financial incentives to buy and develop such vehicles.
Critics charge that Pickens' own financial interests drive the push for CNG cars. He is the largest shareholder of Clean Energy Fuels, a Seal Beach, Calif., company that builds natural gas filling stations for buses and fleet vehicles. Clean Energy is also the author and co-financier of the California ballot proposal.
Pickens also has come under fire for misstating some facts in the debate. For example, he contends in media interviews and in ads that the United States spends $700 billion on foreign oil, but the figure is closer to $327.6 billion, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
And critics point out that natural gas is a finite resource, just like oil.
“Most environmentalists believe natural gas is not the future,” said Richard Holober, executive director of the Consumer Federation of California, which is opposed Prop 10. “This is an attempt to divert public money away from zero-emission vehicles to a dead-end technology that gets us nowhere.”
The group estimates the bond issue will cost state taxpayers $350 million a year.
Natural gas industry executives say CNG is a cleaner alternative to gasoline — producing 23 percent less greenhouse gas than diesel vehicles and 30 percent less than gasoline vehicles. And thanks to new drilling technology, they say, unprecedented amounts of natural gas can be obtained domestically and at far cheaper prices — about $1.50 a gallon.
“It is the most viable technology that you can do on a big scale,” says Jim Harger, a senior vice president of Clean Energy. “We have a glut of natural gas across the country. It’s right here in our backyard. We can do this now. It’s all ready to go.”
Harger said more than a dozen automakers, including Porsche, General Motors and Volkswagen, now make natural gas vehicles for the European, Argentinean and Brazilian markets. But the only domestically available natural gas car is the Civic GX from Honda.
Since Pickens began pushing his plan last summer, Honda has seen increased demand for the Civic GX, said Todd Mittleman, American Honda Motor Co.’s environmental specialist. But the number sold is still tiny — just 2,000 vehicles nationwide. Honda continues to heavily invest in research and development of battery electric and hybrid vehicles, but “as gas prices remain high, there will be growing demand for CNG vehicles,” Mittleman said.
One of the biggest challenges for CNG vehicles is a lack of fueling stations. There are only 1,200 natural gas stations in the nation, compared with more than 100,000 gas stations. So even if you buy a CNG car, you might not be able to get very far.
Pickens wants to change that. His Clean Energy Fuels is building 35 to 40 filling stations across the country and last month purchased a Toronto company called FuelMaker, which sells a home fueling device — called Phill — that lets people gas up at home via a natural gas line. The machine costs $3,500 and another $500 to $1,000 to install.
“It’s going to be an excellent bridge to move people away from gasoline to natural gas because they can fuel up at their house,” said Harger of Clean Energy. “People will be able to buy these and use them in their home and essentially never have to go to fueling station for a commuter car.”
Despite the CNG buzz, a number of energy experts argue that natural gas is the wrong direction for the nation, because it would simply replace one limited fossil fuel for another and require costly vehicle conversions and a new infrastructure.
“While CNG is somewhat cleaner than gasoline, moving to a new fossil fuel to power our cars is expensive and is a lower priority than increasing fuel economy and moving away from fossils altogether,” said Therese Langer, transportation director for the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy.
Plus, the price of natural gas is not guaranteed to stay low if millions of cars and trucks start relying on it, said Slocum of Public Citizen. “As we know, prices and markets change based on supply and demand, so you will see prices increase,” he said.
In the short term, carmakers should invest in fuel efficiency technologies like turbocharging, direct injection, lightweight materials and hybrids, said Langer. In the longer term, electric vehicles, powered by batteries or recharged through a plug, will be increasingly important, she said.
General Motors moved in that direction last month when it unveiled the Chevrolet Volt, an electric car powered by a 400-pound lithium-ion battery with enough power to go 40 miles on a single charge before switching to a gas engine. The gas engine then creates electricity on board to power the car for several hundred additional miles.
GM expects production of the Volt to begin in November 2010, but the company is continuing to develop the battery technology. Industry watchers expect the car to be sold for about $40,000.
Views: 82
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by North LA on
-
“Most environmentalists believe natural gas is not the future,” said Richard Holober, executive director of the Consumer Federation of California, which is opposed Prop 10. “This is an attempt to divert public money away from zero-emission vehicles to a dead-end technology that gets us nowhere.”
“While CNG is somewhat cleaner than gasoline, moving to a new fossil fuel to power our cars is expensive and is a lower priority than increasing fuel economy and moving away from fossils altogether,” said Therese Langer, transportation director for the American Council for an Energy Efficient Economy.
These people live in a dream land. CNG is the only realistic alternative to gasoline because it's CHEAP and abundant. There is nothing else available. No solar/bacteria biomass/ethanol/hydrogen/etc. It's clear to see that some people won't be happy until we're all dressed in leaves, living out of caves, eathing butterbeans we grew in our front yard. The goal of CNG is energy independence in my opinion.
-
Permalink Reply by Anna Mauck-Member Services on
-
Here's what Chavez is doing with CNG. He's smarter ( in one sense) than our leaders to use what's in their "own backyard".... hmmmm... where else have we heard that?
Venezuela's Chavez provides citizens with free natural gas vehicles by Caroline Calais, Dallas Environmental Policy Examiner
Although a 12 cents a gallon price on gasoline may not persuade many Venezuelan’s of shifting to alternative fuel sources, saving petroleum and combating environmental pollution possibly will. In a program to exchange old gasoline consumer vehicles for free compressed natural gas (CNG) ones, president Chavez takes one step closer to making the Bolivarian revolution also an environmental one.
Venezuela, holding the eighth largest natural gas reserve, and being the world’s fifth largest oil exporter, is now requiring the automobile sector to dedicate 30 % of their production to natural gas vehicles, an amount that may rise to 40 % by 2010, and 50% by 2011.
And with a government decree stipulating that PDVSA, the state run Venezuelan oil company, will pay for the acquisition, installation and maintenance of the required gas cylinders, General Motors (GM) is now planning to start an annual production of 40,000 natural gas vehicles.
-
Permalink Reply by RAY on
-
Not only does Pickens have "personal" motives, so do we.
I wonder what percentage of his supporters are living on one of the many Shales..
would we be so interested if we were not sitting on 4th largest etc.....???? BTW I'm signing up.
-
Permalink Reply by The ShaleRider on
-
Please take note and don't lose faith!
One VERY BIG reason both McCain and Obama keep repeating "clean coal" is because Pennsylvania and is a MAJOR site of coal mines ...and the surrounding states (Ohio and Indiana) to a lesser extent. These states are among the "flip-flop" states and BOTH are trying to win these states votes for this election.
Louisiana, Texas, Oklahoma, Kansas (NG states) are already known to be pro-McCain so they are considered "in the bag."
Hopefully, we can get NG back in the lime light after the election is over and nobody is trying to win over votes.
McCain is very well aware of the advantages of NG...since his own state is a big producer too and has NG conversion of autos going on in his state right now!
Excuse my lapse in bloggin on this site now....I gotta go vote!
-
Permalink Reply by The_Baron on -
The savings in fuel costs by using nat gas over gasoline should offset the higher cost of the cng car. (The honda is about $7000 more than the standard model). My problem is yes I could fuel at home through the house line with a compressor, but what do I do when I go on a road trip? Haven't seen many cng fueling stations out there.
The government is going to have to step in and offer station owners an incentive to offer cng fueling. The logistics can't be to hard, a large compressor, storage tank, and pipline connection. Question is, and I don't know the answer, but can existiong distribution lines supply enough gas to supply a cng station?
-
Permalink Reply by The_Baron on
-
NOt to mention, If people had fueling options, the price of cng cars would drop to comparable prices with conventional models.
-
Permalink Reply by P.G. on
-
If they could at least consider getting the trucking industry using CNG, that would take a lot of pressure off petroleum.
Folks who chose to purchase CNG cars could get refueled at the truck stops if they went traveling away from home. Seems like that would make installing CNG refueling stations economical without too much government involvement. Commercial trucking would use a lot of fuel right off the bat compared to the corner convenience store which would defray the costs.
As more and more consumers started buying CNG autos, small stores would want to install refueling facilities to get in on the sales!
-
Permalink Reply by Grice on
-
To add to your comment; reformulating the commercial industry would reduce expense, resulting in a decline for consumer cost. Lower the cost to transport products to the retailer, would reduce the cost for the consumer to buy those products. The same could apply to the commercial airline industry, whereas travel expenses would be decreased to a factor of making air travel more appealing. And, we must not forget the military. The department of defense is the largest petroleum consumer in the US.
-
Permalink Reply by The_Baron on
-
Boone Pickens claims the long haul trucking companies could switch with a couple dozen refueling stations on the primary interstates. That might be good enough for me as I just want to be able to take a good road trip every once and while and rarely stray to far from an interstate highway.
-
Permalink Reply by The_Baron on
-
Boone also claims the cost savings to the trucks in cng over desiel could save the industry from the declining profits they have had in the past few years.
Maybe we need to convert the trains as well.
-
Permalink Reply by JHH on
-
SAN MATEO, Calif., Nov 05, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- The No on Proposition 10 campaign claims an early landslide victory as election night results from throughout California indicate a lopsided defeat of T Boone Pickens' ballot measure.
"California voters didn't fall for a Texas oil tycoon's $10 billion money grab, no matter how much he spent camouflaging it as green," stated Richard Holober, spokesman for the No on Prop 10 campaign, and Executive Director of the Consumer Federation of California. "Proposition 10 is the ultimate example of a wealthy special interest abusing the ballot initiative process to enrich itself. We built a coalition of major environmental, consumer, business, labor, taxpayer and civic organizations that triumphed over Prop 10's $23 million war chest. The defeat of Prop 10 sends a signal that California's ballot initiative process is not for sale to the highest bidder."
Mr. Pickens' Clean Energy Fuels Corporation contributed nearly $19 million to the Yes on Prop 10 campaign. Chesapeake Energy and its owner Aubrey McClendon donated $3.5 million to the Yes on 10 campaign. Clean Energy is the nation's largest operator of natural gas fueling stations, and Chesapeake is the largest independent producer of natural gas in the U.S. Both corporations would have made a fortune under Prop 10's multibillion dollar giveaway program to create a market for natural gas-fueled trucks.
The No on Prop 10 campaign raised about $170,000.
The defeat of Proposition 10 is the first test of voter support for the self-styled "Pickens Plan." News reports state that Mr. Pickens has spent $58 million on national television ads since July promoting his plan. One key component of his plan is the conversion of vehicles to run on natural gas. Pickens Plan ads do not spell out who pays for this conversion, and who benefits from it.
"Proposition 10 pulled back the veil from the Pickens Plan, and revealed that taxpayers would be hit hard with the cost of funding giveaways designed to put money in Mr. Pickens' pockets. The Pickens' Plan flunked the smell test with California voters," Holober stated.
Learn more at: www.stopprop10.org
SOURCE No on Proposition 10
http://www.stopprop10.org
-
Permalink Reply by P.G. on
-
Guess they showed Pickens, huh?
I mean the voters would rather hostile countries get our dollars, right?
Side note:
Don't folks realize that no matter what new energy we eventually will get will make someone a lot of money?
This "cut off my nose to spite my face" attitude that is sweeping across the country is unbelievable!
Support GoHaynesvilleShale.com
Top Content
Blog Posts
The Lithium Connection to Shale Drilling
Shale drilling and lithium extraction are seemingly distinct activities, but there is a growing connection between the two as the world moves towards cleaner energy solutions. While shale drilling primarily targets…
ContinuePosted by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on November 20, 2024 at 12:40
Not a member? Get our email.
Groups
-
San Augustine, TX
386 members
-
Miller County, Arkansas
27 members
-
Sabine Parish, LA
455 members
-
South Caddo Parish Group
440 members
-
Natchitoches Parish
400 members
-
Bienville Parish, LA
244 members
-
Fayetteville Shale
149 members
-
North Caddo Parish
358 members
-
Central Texas Gas
63 members
-
Cass County, TX
119 members
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
