AND 
GM VP of R&D Suggests Natural Gas Chevy Volt Range Extender
Larry Burns is GM’s VP of Research & Development. He has just written a post on GM’s corporate blog entitled Natural Gas: An Enticing Alternative .
He reiterated GMs position that there is no single solution to achieve petroleum displacement, and that a multifaceted approach is needed.
Natural gas is described as a good transportation fuel alternative because it is "abundant, affordable, and relatively clean."
He states that GM can in the mid-term "leverage natural gas to create electricity for the Volt and future variants".
For the near term he indicates natural gas could be used in combustion engines and hints at what may be imminent production plans; "we are exploring a dual-fuel approach with natural gas and gasoline for U.S. customers."
As well Burns states that GM believes the government will have to play a role to encourage adoption of and infrastructure development for natural gas through incentives.
Source (FastLane Blog )
170 Responses to “GM VP of R&D Suggests Natural Gas Chevy Volt Range Extender”
Leave a Reply
Recent Posts
- New York Times Report on the Chevy Volt Generator Mode Driving Experience
- CNBC Test Drive of the Chevy Volt in Charge Sustaining Mode
- Chevy Volt Will be Able to Hit 104 MPH
- Chevy Volt and Battery Program Update
- GM to Announce Initial Volt Markets at LA Auto Show
- Coalition of Industry Leaders Releases Roadmap to get 120 Million Electric Cars on US Roads by 2030
- Op-Ed: GM Reports a $1.2 Billion Loss, but Has the Cash To See Volt Well into Production and Beyond
- Three Chevy Volt Paint Color Finalists Announced
- What BMW Has Learned from the MINI E Program So Far: That They May Need to Build EREVs
- GM: EVs are Cool, but EREV’s are Really Cool
Recent GM-Volt Forum Posts
- Hacked e-mails reveal global-warming fraud? November 20, 2009This is how open minded liberals operate. "And, perhaps most reprehensibly," Delingpole writes, "a long series of communications discussing how best... […]BigCityCat
- Is the Volt Engine Direct Injected? November 20, 2009I recently read that the Cruze's engine will be DI. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chevy_Cruze#Chevrolet_Cruze Obviously the Cruze's engine will... […]omnimoeish
- First Reports of the Chevy Volt's Charge-Sustaining (Generator) Mode Operation November 20, 2009The first two journalists' reports of what it's like to drive the Chevy Volt while in generator mode operation have been published. 1) New York... […]admin
- Florida giving $5000 rebate to convert Prius to plug-in November 20, 2009- Probably Hymotion - $10,400 standard price - $5000 state rebate - $1000 additional federal incentives - $4,400 final cost. Hurry because their... […]Texas
- New York Times CSM story November 20, 2009Link to the New York Times story of November 19, 2009 about a test ride of the Volt in charge sustaining... […]srschrier
- New video: Volt drive in Detroit November 19, 2009November 19, 2009 Detroit Free Press story with video featuring a Volt drive with Andrew Farah in... […]srschrier
- New Video: Volt Corrosion Testing November 18, 2009From GM VoltAge, the Volt's corrosion... […]srschrier
GM-Volt.com is not affiliated with General Motors Company
All contents copyright 2007-2009 GM-Volt.com, LLC - All Rights Reserved
Home | Contact | Privacy Policy | About | Back to Top
August 1st, 2008 at 6:11 am
Fits in nicely with Picken’s plan , eh?
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:24 am
Fits with Picken’s plan. I think I recall hearing that Pickens has spoken with Detriot. I think Detroit said something to the effect of, “if you build the market, we will come with the product.” Up here in the midwest natural gas is the dominant heating fuel in winter. Prices have been very volatile the last few years. This idea only makes economic sense if we fully execute the Pickens plan and quit using natural gas for other things.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:31 am
OT
GM: $15.5 billion net loss in Q2
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/01/AR2008080100329.html
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:37 am
GM just focus on getting this car on the road !
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:40 am
GM stock below $8 today ????
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:54 am
#3 Jeff j
GM isn’t just one guy. They have to have someone looking at every alternative. This memo isn’t going to slow anyone down in the Volt development. I doubt that more then a few designers on the Volt project have even found the time to read it. I’ve heard they’re quite busy.
At this point in the project, they’ve made all of the design decisions and they aren’t going change anything major. Heck, if a train load of EESTOR capacitors showed up today and they did everything that they are claimed to do, GM wouldn’t put them in the first Volt.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:55 am
Larry Burns from GM says,
………….GM’s position that there is no single solution to achieve petroleum displacement, and that a multifaceted approach is needed.
I agree.
======================
He also says,
As well Burns states that GM believes the government will have to play a role to encourage adoption of and infrastructure development for natural gas through incentives.
And here lies the same problem as Hydrogen. No infrastructure.
We don’t need to build an infrastructure for electricity.
How about concentrating on electrical vehicles.
The multifaceted approach to petroleum displacement can happen on the electricity development front, not necessarily on the cars themselves.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:58 am
#2 Pete
“OT
GM: $15.5 billion net loss in Q2″
Hey! Thats my job! Hehe. I seen it off the wire too. (I usually sneak them into the middle of threads, lol).
But since you did it…
“General Motors posted a $15.5 billion quarterly loss Friday, as North American sales dropped by 20 percent and plunging prices for SUVs prompted deep charges for its auto finance business.”
9.1 BILLION-
.$3.3 billion relating to the 2008 GMNA hourly special attrition program
$2.8 billion adjustment to the Delphi reserve
$1.1 billion GMNA restructuring and capacity related costs
$1.3 billion impairment of GM’s equity interest in GMAC
$340 million Canadian Auto Workers contract-related accounting charges
$197 million related to settlement of the strike at American Axle
6.3 BILLION- volume declines and shifts in volume mix, strike at American Axle & Mfg. and large lease-related charges and just generally making cars no one wants and a price that even if they sell them, they can’t make money
Surprisingly, lol–>”In an interview on CNBC Friday morning, GM Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Rick Wagoner said he was “comfortable” with the company’s liquidity. “
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:05 am
Statik
“comfortable” with the company’s liquidity. “
I am sure he is as long as he gets his unfair share of it.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:06 am
6 Statik:
Going along with that…
Have you heard any rumblings from the Canadian dealers? Some of my former dealers are saying GM is going to remove dealer holdback and toss them to the wolves.
This would actually come very close to making every car GM sold profitable for them. Murderous for the dealers but good for GM.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:06 am
The whole point of the volt (aside from having a 40 mi electric car) is that you can swap out the gas motor and swap in a diesel, Fuel cell, and even now a nat gas engine as the Range extender. It’s cool to see that they are actually looking at these options and not just touting them as possibilities.
Hey GM execs if you do start worrying about liquidity, I’d be happy to buy one of those mules off you
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:11 am
Radom facts with release:
Revenue: 38B vs 46.7B
Auto Earnings: -4B vs 1B
Earnings per share:-$15.5 vs .80
Cash flow for quarter: -3.6 billion
Also, and for the first time GM is wording it’s cash pile as follows: “cash, marketable securities, and readily-available assets of the Voluntary Employees’ Beneficiary Association (VEBA) trust totaled $21.0 billion on June 30, 2008, down from $23.9 billion on March 31, 2008.”
The cash/market securities on the balance sheet (JAn1/08) went from 26.5Billion to 20.5Billion…off SIX BILLION DOLLARS. Total assets fell 12 billion, liability up 7 billion, netchange of equity position from -37 billion to -57 billion.
GM said is drawing 1 billion (the beginning) from credit facility in July. They are also going to try and raise 5 billion through ‘asset sales’ and capitla market activities.
“GM is confident that these initiatives, along with its current cash position and $4-5 billion of committed U.S. credit lines, will provide the company with ample liquidity to meet its operational needs through 2009.”
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:16 am
#8 Morgan
“6 Statik: Going along with that…Have you heard any rumblings from the Canadian dealers? Some of my former dealers are saying GM is going to remove dealer holdback and toss them to the wolves.
This would actually come very close to making every car GM sold profitable for them. Murderous for the dealers but good for GM.”
I’ve not heard anything specific. That is generally considered a ‘unspeakable,’ but given GM’s situation..anything is possible I guess. I really doubt that is on the table right now. The 1.5-3% a average dealer actually makes I don’t think would translate to GM’s bottom line.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:21 am
So Statik – when does GM hit the wall? Is it going to break up?
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:26 am
Doesn’t really matter if mine is gasoline powered because it will be rarely used. Won’t gas prices go down with demand once all these e-flex vehicles get on the road?
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:32 am
Will the range of the Natural Gas version be more than 400 miles?
How do you “gas” up? Swap out a “propane like tank” or have a technician make up and disconnect a threaded connection?
Will the already too small trunk space be used by the compressed gas tank?
All in all, this trial balloon does not pop for me.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:43 am
#12 Demetrius
If the auditor (Deloitte) issues a “going concern” notice you’ll know that the auditor doesn’t see how GM can keep going. Unlike us, the auditor has all the numbers, and multiple specialists to interpret their meaning. So far as I know, there’s been no such notice as of now.
In the meantime, each of us can look at the facts and make our own guesses about what the future holds.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:50 am
I think having a NG duel-fuel range extender is an excellent idea! First of all the tank could be of reasonable size because the battery would be used most of the time. You can also fill up at home with your home NG station. Since NG is piped all over America it would not be that difficult to create a usable infrastructure. NG is also cheaper, bio-methanol can be easily made, its very clean (even the fossil fuel), and the peak is farther away than oil’s peak. Combine that with local and friendly country production and it’s sounds like a winner. Additionally, NG is used in other countries so they can sell the plug-in hybrid with NG range extender to many markets. The development is not that expensive and would even give GM more green street cred.
However, as others have said, if it delays the current Volt then put the NG idea back on the shelf. I agree it’s a great fuel but I don’t want GM spreading themselves too thin. If they want to start a whole new alternative fuels project with more fresh blood then thumbs up!
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:54 am
Oops. Now I found it. It is in moderation with the other one.
I can’t figure this out. No W O W word. Nothing nasty at all,. Just a nice clean 100% accurate opinion ( yea, what does that mean?). Moderation.
I wonder if it is going to be one of those days.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:55 am
13 Frankie
There are approx. 250 million registered cars in the US alone. The US sells about 16 million new cars a year.
So, the problem is that it will be a LONG time before a significant number of cars are e-flex or other technology. Also, oil is used for much more than just cars. It is used in plastics, asphalt, cosmetics, and much more. Also, you have all the large transport fleet of semi’s, airplanes, ships…..
So, It will be a long time before any real impact of oil is felt with the coming of electrics.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:57 am
How about a compressed NG trailer?
The trailer would actually be an aerodynamic utility trailer for long trips or for hauling things. That would give plenty of room for the NG tanks. Remember folks, you can fill up with hundreds of miles worth of range at home! Drive 40 miles on all electric and switch over for 150 miles of clean NG. If you can’t find a plug or NG port anywhere you then have to pay for the gas. Last resort.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:01 am
BRILLIANT!
Now I can even fuel my range-extender at home!
(if I ever use it)
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:11 am
Yahoo Finance http://biz.yahoo.com/rb/080801/gm.html?.v=7 coverage of GM’s latest earnings disaster. Note:
- $3.6 billion negative cash flow
- $21 billion cash/marketable securities and $5 billion credit lines
- $1 billion credit drawdown in next 30 days
That GM is technically bankrupt is obvious. Net worth is now in excess of negative $40 Billion (with a B). It’s piecemeal approach to dealing with its bloated corporate structure and look-alike brands is a disaster. Time to shutter Buick, Pontiac, Saturn (and if some fool wants it, Hummer) and other non-essential businesses..
GM’s only survival strategy is to focus on Chevy, GMC and Cadillac. Otherwise, we’ll never see the Volt.
I can’t wait to read the GM Chairman’s next letter
)
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:18 am
They need to keep their eye on the ball…
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:20 am
Larry Burns is right. NG is an enticing direction. It could work especially well for those fleets where a corporate NG fueling station could be installed.
But for right now, I agree with Rashid Amul @7. Please give us the electric alternative, where we already have a workable infrastructure.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:27 am
Natural Gas is crap. When I had my 73 Valiant I investigated getting my car converted to dual fuel with Propane. A litre of propane gives you about 90% the same distance that gasoline does.
The bonus is that the infrastructure is ALREADY in place. Where I live there are hundreds of cabs that were converted for Propane or dual fuel with Propane. Plus! instead of pumping the propane you could simply remove the BBQ sized canister from under the hood!
In comparison NG will only give you about 40% the distance. Thus you will need enormous capacity to compete with ICE vehicles. So if you’re going to settle for inefficient technology that wastes a lot of energy just get yourself a stupid hydrogen fuel cell.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:38 am
I got an idea how GM could generate some cash. Sell me one of those SUV’s at MSRP that are gathering dust on the lots and guarantee that in 3 years they will take it back in trade on a new Volt at the full price I paid for it. They would still lose money but they could shift the loss to 3 years in the future.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:44 am
#14 Demetrius
“So Statik – when does GM hit the wall? Is it going to break up?”
GM is basically done with the cash pile gets to about 10 billion.
Margins are called, and more importantly credit is not extended. GM is also playing a game of keeping creditors as far behind as possible…borrowing more now to pay them later.
ie) Lets assume GM pays supplier X for product in 4-6 months after delivery. GM then uses the sale of those goods to repeat the process. If Supplier X sees that GM is blowing 3-5 billion per quarter, and have under 10 billion left, they realize their chances of getting paid in 6 months…are basically zero…end of credit, end of goods…end of GM
The tricky part of the equation is determining at what point GM has under 10 billion in liquidity. They have 19billion in cash, 4-5 billion in credit, a few assets lying around…and most importantly, they have VEBA hanging out there like a big carrot.
Evident by this quarter and every analyst being ‘off’ by 10 billion,(including myself, I knew it was going to be bad….but geesh), forecasting cash drain is…well, impossible.
What we can do now, is set numbers that we know GM will ‘at least’ lose and come up with a ‘best case’.
We know they will ‘average’ at least 4-5 billion in cash flow lost now per quarter. They can scrap together 26 billion now…which we could then assume gives them at least 3 quarters (remember that the first ‘10 billion’ is technically useless). The dark horse is whether or not VEBA comes into play, I’d say 80% chance it does, which would give them 3 quarters past that.
Best case is 6 quarters, without massive government bailout…otherwise it is on to Chapter 11.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:48 am
Texas #21
I agree with you and Tim #22. I can then drive without ever going to a gas station. Fill the range extender tank at home, the few days it’s necessary, get up in the morning with the tank full and 40 miles of all electric range! Never have to worry about gas spoiling and digging castor oil out of a frozen ICE generator.
RE EV’s are only step one in creating a sustainable economy. Although eliminating gas from passenger cars will go a long ways to getting off of foreign oil, buildings use 52% of US energy. However, using cars for shorter trips w/o gas should be great. Taking cars for longer trips is way less efficient than driving your EV to a bus or train station for long trips, making an NG trailer an expensive way to make your RE EV really inefficient in comparison.
Somewhat related : In California NG Honda Civics are sold for about 23K. There is a home filling unit available with big gov’t subsidies.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:52 am
If you so inclined, webcast is going on now, exciting stuff…well it is for me, lol.
http://www.gm.com/corporate/investor_information/earnings/index.jsp
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:59 am
Arrgh. The most enticing thing about the Volt is that you can be 100% green 364 days per year but tap into the gasoline infrastructure when you have to. You can’t take a road trip with a BEV, or a natural gas vehicle. If I need to go 100, or even 1000 miles with the Volt, I can and I can do it today. This is what makes the Volt so exciting. It isn’t a second car. It’s a first car. It has all the benefits of electric with none of limitations. Why are we talking about developing technologies that require new infrastructures to extend range? Battery technology will continue to improve greatly in the near future. It’s likely that we’ll have affordable EVs with 200 mile + ranges in the next 5-10 years, which is far less time than it would take to develop a new energy infrastructure of any sort.
Sure, we could consider filling up with NG at home, but if we’re already charging up, what would be the point? The only argument for NG (or Hydrogen, or Propane) would be if you could bypass the need for an “expensive” battery by not using one. The reason we’re using a gasoline range extender is because gasoline is readily available when you reach the limit of your EV range.
If we’re going to create a new infrastructure, we should be talking about fast-charging EVs.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:20 am
Van #16 – How do you fill up
Here’s a related link about a Honda Civic GX. The video with it shows a home pressure unit “Phill” that runs $4000 to fill up at home. I think it is an accident waiting to happen. Theyu don’t let you fill your own propane tanks.
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,394341,00.html
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:21 am
Fast charging would be great but no mentions by GM, and the final battery contract has not been let so we won’t know if it will even be possible in the future. Thats why GM is engineering the range extender. Dumping gas altogether and the ICE would be a cool option for a lot of us. Gas is not as readily available and convenient as NG at my house when I remember I have an early meeting tomorrow an empty gas tank and I’m sitting in my PJ’s and don’t want to go out to fill up or get up even earlier than I have to already to fill up.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:21 am
The volt with a gas or diesel ICE will work. The infrastructure already exists. 110 outlet in my garage + the corner gas station. NG has no distribution. This is a just a PR release.
The volt does make switching to alternative fuels easier. Since people will only have to fill up on longer trips, fewer fillup stations will be needed and these can focus along major highways. But electricity is the best long-term solution, it’s price will remain stable because it can be produced form dozens of different sources. If everyone switches to NG, what’s that going to do for the price?
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:26 am
Natural gas engines aren’t a bad idea. But natural gas seems best used for heating. Using it to “fill in” renewable energy isn’t a bad idea either.
The biggest problem with it is that it seems like a second best altrenative. By the time we’d have the infrastructure for natural gas we could have BEVs with 250 mile ranges and fast chargers. At the end of the day natural gas is still a finite resource. Wind and solar and biofuels are not.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:27 am
The “Gang of 10″ (5′Rs &5 Ds) have a compromise that SOUNDS good, but last night they said it gets implemented when they return.
Throwing lots of money at “alternate” fuels and battery R&D. Also mentioned funding “retooliing” of factories.
Lots of mouth noise, no action.
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:33 am
GM is taking a real beating! I don’t understand how they can make up ground. They have so much going bad at the same time, it seems inevitable that they will be pushing the bankruptcy button soon.
With today financial climate, who in their right mind would buy any of GM’s other brands. GM needs to lighten its load, but without taking a bath in losses.
I just do not see this happening.
I think the only ray of hope for GM (and the big 3) is that oil drops significantly in the next 6-12 months. I think people would get back in the gas guzzlers, if gas drops below $3/gal. and stays their for a few months (memories are so short…). Then they could at least stay afloat long enough to get some newer/efficient models into the showrooms. (But, will people buy them if gas is < $3/gal?????)
If your thinking of buying “cheap” GM stock, just wait a little longer, and you will probably get it for a LOT less!
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:35 am
Heck why NOT use natural gas as a range extender fuel? How Larry Burns would make the Volt use either gasoline or compressed natural gas I don’t know. A gasoline/E85 tank AND a natural gas tank? Is this economically viable?
CHOICE is good … no doubt about that. I love the idea of “homegrown fuels” … made in the USA. It sure beats making OPEC’s oil shieks even more disgustingly rich so they can buy more luxury goods and help fund those wahabi Islam hate schools that tend to create terrorist madmen.
A future Volt that could run on 3 types of range extender fuel? If GM uses an “omnivorous engine” like they are developing at Argonne Labs, a future Volt might be able to run on butanol, maybe methanol too.
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2008/07/argonnes-omnivo.html
That would be 5 types of fuel. Other companies like LS9 are developing “biogasoline” from homegrown feedstock using bacteria or something. We might end up with all sorts of choices of fuels for the range extender in the future.
Maybe Home Depot or Wal Mart will get into the fuel business and there will be “Fuel Depot” filling stations or a “Wal Mart Fuel Center” where you could buy whatever fuel is the cheapest or runs the best, etc. People who really want to help the environment could buy the best environmental fuel even if it is a bit more expensive. It’s their choice. People still driving diesel trucks or whatever could get some fuel there too. For environmental reasons, gasoline and diesel will probably have some sort of carbon tax though. All these fuels would compete against each other just like with laundry detergent at Wal Mart.
I hear butanol and methanol can be distributed through the existing gasoline pipelines better than ethanol because it doesn’t absorb much water or something. Butanol also has more energy density I hear. Lots of people might be using methanol fuel cells before long to keep mobile electronics like cameras and laptops running without having to find a plug and wait for a recharge. Methanol fuel cells could be BIG in a few years. They use methanol fuel cells for forklifts right now.
The future fueling centers could sell different fuels for different applications. You could either buy a small container of fuel for small applications like your laptop fuel cell or fill up a tank for large applications at a pump like we do now. Down the road, these fuel centers might add hydrogen to their offerings for people buying the 2018 fuel cell cars from Honda or GM … that is, if those kinds of cars ever get inexpensive enough.
Choice is good. I hear people started buying GM cars in the 1920s and 1930s because they wanted an alternative to Ford’s Model T. Henry Ford said “you can get a Model T in any color you want as long as it’s black”. People didn’t like that so they bought cars built by other companies. If they don’t come up with an “ultra battery” that eliminates the need for a range extender, it would be great to have at least 3 or 4 types of liquid or gas fuels competing against each other to get into our Volt’s tank. That way we don’t freak out if one type of fuel’s price goes way up because of some crap happening with a fuel pipeline in the Middle East or Nigeria or whatever. We wouldn’t care as much about “stuff” happening in oil producing countries. We would just switch to another type of fuel if one kind becomes less appealing for whatever reason.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:35 am
#7 Rashiid Amul
“And here lies the same problem as Hydrogen. No infrastructure.
We don’t need to build an infrastructure for electricity.
How about concentrating on electrical vehicles.
The multifaceted approach to petroleum displacement can happen on the electricity development front, not necessarily on the cars themselves.”
I have stated on other blog subjects the reason the automakers and the government wants to keep us using an ICE type of engine. Automakers have service departments. Those service departments live and die maintaining vehicles and supplying parts. The automakers make a lot of money on parts. The government’s taxing system is based on you going to a service station to “fill-up” with some type of measurable fuel that can be easily taxed. Our whole system is based on the ICE and it is going to be very hard to get the automakers and government to change.
Now, if anyone else can come up with another answer, please do so.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:37 am
GMVoltFan, you hit the nail dead center. All gas stations have electricity for general operations and could be retrofitted for quick charges when standards are adopted. Most stations have natural gas for heating. Many are being retrofitted for ethanol. If the Volt and it’s derivatives eliminate much current gasoline use, these options might look good as supplemental income for station owners dealing with an already low margin business. Cars are no longer sold in just black. Ultimately a range of drive train options would help to dampen (collapse?) foreign oil use. For now though, I like the Kiss method for initial Volt production.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:41 am
Here in Canada … we already have the setup for natural gas/propane. In my small town alone there are at least 3 stations that supply gas, desiel and propane.
Bring it on…
Just get me my Volt..
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:44 am
Offsetting Statik at #28, one has to keep in mind some positives for GM. Even though their outlook seems bleak, the stock price is low but not zero because of some positives.
1) Their truck business alone still is huge, still is essential for many customers. Many trucks have been sold even in this down year.
2) Their dealer network is extensive and well established.
3) They do have products that can be profitable in 2009 and 2010.
4) Their vehicles are doing well outside of NA.
GM has been hit by a series of huge but still one-time charges. They still sell 20% of the vehicles in the huge NA market. I do not minimize their very serious financial situation, but there are people buying the stock today, despite all their difficulties, because there is a possibility that things will turn around.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:45 am
This is all old technology…and wy didnt it take off?? Because it has major drawbacks..everthing from efficiency issues to emissions.
I think we should invest in oranges…just cut one in half, stick a penny in one side and a nickel in the other and drive your “VOLT”
away!
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:48 am
Natural gas range extenders is not a bad idea, yet there are two main problems for me…
1. Filling up a CNG tank takes time and is slightly inconvenient. If I were to own one, I would consider investing in a compressor so I can fill my Volt up at my own house.
2. Now this is superficial, but am I the only one who HATES the sound of a CNG engine?
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:53 am
THOM
Here in Orange County we don’t even grow those any more. Bring on the Volt. The sooner the better. 2010 starts a year and a half from now.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:57 am
There’s already considerable use of natural gas to make electricity (it’s used for peak power generation but use seems to be expanding constantly). NG in vehicle tanks will be almost as difficult to work with as H2 and will continue to add CO2 to the atmosphere.
If we see widespread adoption of NG in vehicles, it will just be more upward pressure on NG prices (which have already risen considerably) and it will boost electricity prices and raise the price of NG home heating considerably. Just like corn-to-ethanol has boosted food prices.
The NG chatter from GM’s VP seems to me to be a pathetic attempt to deflect attention from GM’s shocking $15 billion loss and back to GM’s future product potential.
I’m sure that Wagoner met with the inner circle earlier this week and had a conversation that went like this:
Wagoner: We’re announcing a shocking loss at the end of the week. What else can we talk about to draw attention away from it?
Burns: Ummm… we’ve had some discussion about how we could maybe fuel the eFlexes with Natural Gas, rather than gasoline.
Wagoner: OK. What are the real prospects?
Burns: Ummm… well… it won’t boost food prices like that ethanol business…
Wagoner: And?
Burns: Ummm… well… Natural Gas… well… it’s clean… by EPA standards…
Wagoner: And??
Burns: Ummm… well… It would be difficult to build a Natural Gas vehicle with significant range, a dual-fuel vehicle would be prohibitively expensive, Natural Gas prices have risen a lot, already, in the last few years, using Natural Gas in vehicles will tend to make it more expensive, of course, which will hurt home heating bills.
Wagoner: That’s not very promising, is it?
Burns: Ummm… No. But T. Boone Pickens talked it up, lately, so Natural Gas is already in the press this week.
Wagoner: OK. Anybody else?
Wagoner: OK, Burns… run it up the flagpole and see if anybody salutes. Next order of business… Executive bonuses. Good news on that front, cutting engineering and hourly staff frees up cash for us. Should be good. Anybody got time for a round of golf with the Board of Directors?
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:02 am
#46 dagwood55 With greatest respect, your comments are overly pessimistic. NG is a good fuel, and good to consider as an alternative. It is not the best choice for every owner for the reasons you point out, but EREV design gives flexibility, and NG may work extremely well for some customers.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:13 am
Cellulosic E-85 seems like the most cost effective way to go over the long term. I think it is useful in the largest portion of the USA. Natural gas may have the same pricing problems as gasoline. The need for Presidential leadership is key and all the current group wants to do is drill and drill. I don’t think we can drill our way out of this problem. Exxon makes 11billion and GM loses 15billion. Why can’t our government see that there is a problem strangling our economy. All very discouraging.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:17 am
Dagwood you hit the nail on the head so hard your hand should hurt! Why do these execs need million dollar bonuses when ‘normal’ people are being laid off and the company is losing money? I just hope they can sell the Volt soon and maybe turn things around…..
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:18 am
From Lyle’s base posting quoting Larry Burns: “…. to achieve petroleum displacement”
Wonderful, displace one non-renewable fossil fuel with another, both of which whose by product is carbon dioxide.
In addition increasing demand for natural gas can put more upward pressure on the commodity… so those who heat their home with it can expect skyrocketing heating costs… which may also funnel into higher electricity costs as well for parts of the country whose electricity comes from natural gas fired power plants (or worse, those plants are converted to coal fired).
Lastly we also need to keep in mind that the United States is already a net importer of natural gas, and the percentage (currently 18%) we are importing is increasing every year. This is how we started out with oil, starting out by being a net exporter, then importer, to being very dependent on imports.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:18 am
#42 RB
Yes, GM does have some aspects of it’s business that still are viable/decent.
Even though these are relatively speaking very small portions of GM. However, after they go through Chapter 11, GM will probably be only a third (at best) the size it is now, and therefore the smaller profitable segments will remain and make a good and larger percentage ‘core business’ to base the ‘new’ company on.
The fact they are still selling ’some’ trucks and they have a dealer network and some decent products in the pipeline I’m afraid are inconsequential to the ‘GM of today’
“…there are people buying the stock today, despite all their difficulties, because there is a possibility that things will turn around.” There really isn’t, other than a few individual dellusional people. What we have is some covering and some short term speculators hoping there is a takeover or short term ‘pop news’/bailout news to flip their money.
There is no scenario other than massive government bailout that enables GM to avoid Chapter 11.
They have diminishing returns on top of catastropic sales revenue losses, with accelerating payments on massive debt loads…coupled now with enormous potential year over year losses on those ‘trucks, SUVs’ they make all the margin on because of the loss of leasing (bulk of the 19% leased vehicles they sell are at the very high end…and potentially in much further jeopardy).
On top of all of that, there literally is no way for GM to make money right now, it’s impossible.
With all the cuts to production now (and planned), GM can not even physically produce enough vehicles to make the required profit to cover operating expenses.
As a example.
Lets say you knit custom sweaters in a small house that you’ve mortgaged. You bought it for 200K a few years ago, now its only worth 50K (dang market), and you make ‘interest only’ payments of $700/mth.
You try to sell your sweaters for $50, and the most you can knit in a month is now 10…you used to be able to knit 20, but your arthritis is bad (you are almost 100) and no one else will knit your sweaters, who knits sweaters anyway?
If you sell every sweater at full price, you make $500. After you make your ‘interest only’ payment of $700. You lose $200/month…but you still have $1,500 in the bank and have a Visa with $1,500 left open, so your not ‘officially’ dead…yet.
You are done, it’s just a matter of time.
That is GM today.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:21 am
jan@48
Are you really Nancy Pelosi? These are the Dem’s talking points. I’m still for “do everything”. Closer to the Gang of 10 (see earlier post)
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:25 am
Get The Volt Out already!!!
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:30 am
#23 Bernie Torbik
“GM’s only survival strategy is to focus on Chevy, GMC and Cadillac. Otherwise, we’ll never see the Volt.”
Sorry, Bernie, but I don’t fully agree. GM needs to focus on Chevrolet, Saturn and Cadillac. GMC is well represented by the Chevrolet brand of trucks. There is no “real” difference, regardless of the GMC commericals, except the badge they put on the truck.
Chevrolet, Saturn and Cadillac gives GM penetration into every corner of the auto market. I know some of you will say Buick and GMC owners will not buy the other brands, but I think you are wrong. Plus, some of the more popular models of Buick are available in Chevrolet. If not all options are available, that could be remedied very quickly. Quality and style is easily transferable from Buick to Chevrolet by using some of Buick’s designer and engineers. GM just needs to do some pruning. IMO.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:31 am
Statik you’re back,
When natural gas prices go through the roof knit sweaters will come back with a vengeance, but Hummers, probably not. Better sell your knitting business while you can.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:36 am
Rashiid (#7),
No infrastructure for distributing propane and natural gas?
I have an underground line that brings natural gas (provided by the power company) into my house. It fuels my furnace, water heater,and a stove. Seems like it could also re-fuel my car.
My Mom has a giant propane tank in her back yard which gets periodically refilled by her propane service. It fuels her furnace, space heater, water heater, and a stove. Seems like it could also re-fuel her car.
Seems like the distribution infrastructure is already in place. We would just need a standard, safe, easy-to-use interface to refuel an automobile with propane/NG.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:36 am
#8 Statik:
Not to worry, they’re mostly only “one time charges”. Prosperity is just around the corner.
#9 JEC:
Nice to get the old bank balance up before the old job disappears, what?
How about offering natural gas versions of other models – Groove, Trax, Cruze, Malibu? I would have bought an NGV Honda long since it had been a Chevrolet. It’s a perfect commuter car for LA.
They clearly aren’t going to build enough Volts to keep the ship afloat, so some other options would seem to be a good idea.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:37 am
CNG is nothing new, many commercial vehicles now run on it.
A company in Tucson Az markets a home refueling compressor that will refill your tank at home off your gas meter, or at a refueling station that most large cities already have. Who else is listening to T. Boone ? Yes it will work, I can see charging my Volt at home and refueling the tank of the range extender with natural gas using a compreressor, outside of course, away from water heater pilot lights.
No more trips to the gas station, what deal.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:37 am
#55 Jeffre
“Statik you’re back”
Why does everyone keep saying that? Hehe.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:39 am
Tag@#52 & 36
I have no use for Nancy and I don’t know what their(Dems) talking points are. I think the oil folks should drill, just not off the coast of Florida. We’re a tourist state not an industrial state. I really think E85 is the best way to go.
The US Congress can’t do much if the President doesn’t sign the legislation. Dismal, I know, but next year can’t come soon enough. BTW I hear the price of drilling has gone up more than the price of gasoline.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:41 am
#51 Statik
If you were to ask me what I think will happen, I think it will be Chapter something. But if you were to ask me if I was certain, then I would say no. That’s because sometimes the unexpected actually happens — big government bailout, huge drop in oil prices, or something else unexpected
GM still is alive. Their future in Chapter something is probable, but it is not automatic.
Taking the other side, I would not rule out Chapter something late 2008 or early 2009. If the goal is to go in and come out (e.g. Delta airlines), it may give a little more wiggle room.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:45 am
I expect gas prices to drop until the election. The oil companies need Bush II.
#46 dagwood55 – That is probably not far off.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:49 am
60 jan
“BTW I hear the price of drilling has gone up more than the price of gasoline.”
What do you mean? Are you saying it costs more to drill then they can sell the oil for? Or, the fact that it just cost more to drill and the price increase has exceeded the increase in gas (time frame?). This is nearly impossible to believe, since gas has increased by such a large percentage over the last couple years.
Also E85? Corn based or other? I think the corn based E85 is a political pig (pigs like corn
)
Maybe I am not understanding your comment?
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:52 am
#8 Static
“Surprisingly, lol–>”In an interview on CNBC Friday morning, GM Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Rick Wagoner said he was “comfortable” with the company’s liquidity. “
And what would you have said in his position, knowing that financial reporters, GM investors, including fund managers, and future investors and creditors are hanging on every word he says about liquidity?
That said, I hope GM didn’t under estimate the cash situation in their cuts. I used to work for a software company (Culinet) that had millions of $ coming in from required maintenance. They lost their leadership position and cut some jobs, etc. At the time I said it wasn’t enough, which is the easiest mystake to make. Google Culinet and you’ll see what happened to them.
I have no doubt that GM will make it.. And I certainly am counting on buying my Volt as soon as I can after Nov. 2010!
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:53 am
62 Len
I agree.
So now that Exxon has all that money (insert $$$$$), they can really afford to wine and dine those candidates.
Lobbying by big oil will overshadow almost everyone else. The auto industry will have little weight going into the election year, to push for much in the way of electrics and other gas choking technologies.
Big oil will eventually go down (when supply get REALLY tight), but not now. They just have way to much money (that’s our money BTW).
Don’t get me wrong. I have no issues with big oil, making big money. They are just doing well right now, and making money hand over foot. Good for them, that’s what they are in business for. Just like I do NOT expect the govt to bail them out when times get lean (save now, and be ready for the future, should be oils motto).
This is our economy and if you try “fix it” with govt help, then you just unbalance the game. Govt should stick to it’s business of keeping the infrastructure of the US intact and keep the bad guys from killing us. Thats it.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:04 am
Sorry, jan. It just sounded like Nancy to me. My bad. The new proposal allows ststes to decide if they want to have drilling at least 50 miles off their shores.
I;m no fan of “big oil” but even with their HUGE profits, they paid the govt almost twice their profits ( >$1 Trillion, yes, with a T).
Looks like the gang of 10 is just a sham to allow no vote until after the election. Wonder why?
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:10 am
Even though this is completely off the topic, I just had to post this when I saw this picture. I think it would be great if the Volt or some future E-Flex car by GM had a front end that looks like the new Lotus Evora.
http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2008/07/evora_gt5.jpg
I like how the headlights look and the grill. It reminds me of the face of an alien with its mouth open or something.
http://www.alienagendas.com/images/graymaster10.jpg
Computers made by Alienware are popular with the gamers. Notice their logo:
http://www.alienware.com/products/desktop-computers.aspx
I think having a good front end with cool looking headlights and a sleek, aerodynamic shape is crucial. Headlights are kind of like sunglasses to me. You can make them unique and different, but sometimes the best sunglasses are still the classic styles … those cat-eye type styles in my opinion. I think the Cadillac CTS might look better with a different style of headlights and grill. Everything else on the car looks pretty good.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:14 am
At least you apparently wouldn’t have to worrry about natural gas going sour while sitting in the gas tank.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:15 am
JEC@63
Can’t remember where I read that, this is closest I can find:
http://industry.bnet.com/energy/2008/05/08/cost-of-offshore-drilling-rising-as-fast-as-oil-prices/
I can live without eating corn or corn syrup. I use Stevia(an herb from South America) as a sweetner. Our government doesn’t like/support Stevia. What a great government we have.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:26 am
“The whole point of the volt (aside from having a 40 mi electric car) is that you can swap out the gas motor and swap in a diesel, Fuel cell, and even now a nat gas engine as the Range extender. It’s cool to see that they are actually looking at these options and not just touting them as possibilities.”
———————————————————————–
If the pic of the engine several threads ago was anything like the production engine, you won’t be able to do this any easier than you could on the car you own now.
The genset is not going to be a self contained unit that you’ll be able to quickly slide out on it’s quick disconnect rails and fittings. It is going to be bolted in just like any car engine currently on the market. Again, I’m making assumptions based on the picture of GM doing testing.
On another note, the only advantage to being fueled by CNG or LPG, IMHO, is they don’t go stale like gasoline does.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:27 am
#12 Statik:
-$15.5/share this quarter? Does that mean that they lost more than their entire market capitalization in one quarter? Doesn’t work for me.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:32 am
#60 Jan
“I think the oil folks should drill, just not off the coast of Florida. We’re a tourist state not an industrial state.”
If your state does not contribute to our fuel needs, then that state should be taxed heavily to offset the cost associated with drilling, distributing and loss of resources to the other states that provide crude oil through drilling. No state should get a free ride.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:41 am
The oil companies are not some evil group of people, and they are not the largest lobbyists. See the link below for a list of the top lobbying groups. Oil companies are just like any other business seeking to make profits. They’re making tons of money now, in the 1970’s it was GM, in the 1990’s it was Microsoft. The free market has a beautiful way of stabilizing these things. The solution is not to go punish high profits. High profits are a signal to other business to jump into the market.
To the discussion on why drilling prices are going up, stop and think about it. When oil is high, every oil company wants to pump more because they make more. So they’re drilling more which raises the price of drilling units which tells the manufacturer to make more units which all helps to increase supply and reduce the price. The free market is the best way to allocate resources. Not with capricious government taxes and subsidies.
http://web.archive.org/web/20021203202009/http://www.fortune.com/lists/power25/index.html
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:42 am
#32 Michael
Here’s a related link about a Honda Civic GX. The video with it shows a home pressure unit “Phill” that runs $4000 to fill up at home. I think it is an accident waiting to happen. Theyu don’t let you fill your own propane tanks.
=============================
They don’t let you fill propane tanks because of the pressure involved. NG pressure on the house side of the meter is measured in ounces.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:43 am
Paul-R #56.
So myself and all my neighbors in about a 5 mile radius will have to put tanks in their yards to hold the NG. All of these people already have electricity going to their houses. This was my point.
Electricity is way more ubiquitous than NG.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:43 am
N. Riley
Why is taxation always the answer?
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:46 am
N Riley #72
Good Day,
May I share some inside information on some 3-D that was completed off the coast of Florida and Alabama. I have no reason to disbelieve the engineering reports for this site. It has been said that this salt dome find is one of the largest in the world. This cannot be drilled because some of it is off the coast of Florida. If you will recall another find off the coast of Florida between Florida and Cuba was also found. We could not drill but Cuba has invited China to drill the sight from the Cuban side ( horizontal drilling) This will suck the oil right out from under us. No we cannot drill our way out but we still have to have oil and coupled with other energy sources we can become energy independent.
Tom
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:47 am
N Riley
What ever happened to a “free economy”? I thought the cost of gas included the cost of drilling, distributing and so on.
Some states get far more income from tourism than oil. It should be a market decision, not some government intervention.
According to two government agencies the offshore oil will not show up until 2030 and it will not change the cost of gas. (I posted the sources in an earlier thread)
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:58 am
#72
We can contribute ethanol, sugar cane grows well here. Nobody wants a free ride, just a sustainable future. I find it hard to believe that the people of Florida will allow off-shore drilling. Who pays for damages if a catastrophe occurs. You know the oil industry will argue who’s responsible for the damages for decades. A US Supreme will need to decide it all. Look at the Exxon Valdez and that was just a boat load. That was just recently settled. We have enough uncertainty with hurricanes w/o adding more. An E85 Volt is just fine with me, thank-you.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:01 pm
#64 George K
“I have no doubt that GM will make it.. And I certainly am counting on buying my Volt as soon as I can after Nov. 2010!”
I understand your situation and where you are coming from, I wish you the best.
“#8 Static
“Surprisingly, lol–>”In an interview on CNBC Friday morning, GM Chairman and Chief Executive Officer Rick Wagoner said he was “comfortable” with the company’s liquidity. “–And what would you have said in his position, knowing that financial reporters, GM investors, including fund managers, and future investors and creditors are hanging on every word he says about liquidity?
People love to spell my name wrong, hehe.
Honestly, I would make a terrible CEO.
I am always brutally honest, and I make a habit of never lying, even to my own detriment. If someone asked me ’seriously’ what I think, I will tell them, 100%…even if its not what they want to hear (my wife is a special woman, lol).
.
But ‘if’ I was CEO…
I would probably take all the money (every nickel) GM has, max out all the credit, sell every asset I could…and then spend it ALL on making the ‘mother of all’ small car/hybrid plants (one in NA, one in Europe, one in the third world), stock them to the 9s.
Then I’d default on all the money I just spent (and all my old bills), leaving a huge wake of bankrupt companies in my path (except of course for the ones I intended to use post-bankruptcy, I’d make sure they were on-board and healthy).
Then I’d fire 75% of the workers/management. Who would then bloat the unemployment line and destroy local factory towns across the country.
Then file for Chapter 11. Get some sweet, sweet gov’t cash to essentially hire back the same people I just fired…cheaper of course. Picture me smiling with new president ‘John-Barack McObama’ as we talk about the revitalization of the America auto industry as he hands me the cheque.
Then come out of bankruptcy with a unbelievable advantage to my peers (with no legacy costs and brand new infrastructure) that they of course would have no chance of competing with…essentially driving both Ford and Chrysler out of business.
Then pay myself a bonus of 50 million dollars, immediately quit, write a book about it and do guests spots on CNBC with Jack Welch for the next 20 years.
I told you I was honest.
Truth be told, this is to some degree exactly what GM is doing (except for the super massive plants–they scrapped the super-Euro already). If Wagoner wasn’t a GM ‘lifer’, and ‘very mildy a nice guy,’ he’d probably would have been more aggressive from the start…rather than attempting to ‘turn it around’ first….slowing frittering 70 billion in losses away since 2004.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:06 pm
My volt will come with a natural gas range extender and solar roof so when it is sitting in my driveway a 110 power cord a natural gas compressor line and the glorious power of our star will take me wherever i need to go without harming the environment and giving cartels and foreign bullys my hard earned dollar, Amen.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:08 pm
Natural Gas? I’m listening GM. Sure beats petro. Ahh. . .another reason to stick it to foreign oil.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:12 pm
#71 noel park
“#12 Statik:-$15.5/share this quarter? Does that mean that they lost more than their entire market capitalization in one quarter? Doesn’t work for me.”
Yes it does. Thats got to be a good sign right? Since 2004 they have lost today’s market cap..10 times.
SIDE NOTE: Kinda reminds me of inflation in Zimbabwe. (150,000% anyone?) Almost impossible to comprehend. Ten billion Zimbabwean dollars, yeah thats worth just under a US dollar.
Here is the new hundred billion dollar note: I have got to get me some of these for my wallet, hella cool:
http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/photos/2008/07/30/zimbabwemoney-cp-5213614.jpg
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:16 pm
#80
I like your response and mostly agree.
GM problems are really America’s problems.
The price of oil.
The environment.
Health care.
I think GM is standing tall, but I wouldn’t buy GM stock anytime soon, I’d like to buy an E85 Volt though. The New GM will be a fine company.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:22 pm
I’ve heard some talk about using DME in conjunction with a diesel engine. It can be made from a variety of carbon sources, like coal. DME requires some heat as an input for its production, but if the heat source were waste heat from nuclear, it could be quite cheap. Since it can be stored as a liquid under pressure, it has a high energy density too.
Here’s more:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyl_ether
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:24 pm
#66 Tagamet
I’m going to apologize in advance for the following rant, but this offshore oil fairy stuff makes my blood boil.
The problem with offshore drilling is that it suggests that drilling will do something when, in fact, everyone who knows anything understands it won’t. The basic problem is that there isn’t any oil offshore. In his Senate testimony T. Boone Pickens called the estimates of offshore oil resources by the MMS “ridiculous”. Actually what he said is that in deference to the Bush Administration he wouldn’t call them ridiculous, he’d just say that he “strongly disagreed” with them. IOW they are complete and utter baloney. (Historically the MMS estimates have always been overly optimistic, with realistic 50% probabilities equaling their 95% probabilities).
Second is that even if oil exists offshore it won’t even begin to offset the declines in domestic production. T. Boone, like most people experienced in the field, believes in peak oil, meaning that world oil production has peaked. Whether you believe this or not, it is a fact that US production peaked in 1970. We’re producing at levels not seen since 1946. Since no one thinks that will change, we need to get over the idea that we can produce more oil. We can’t. Even if there was an “offshore oil fairy” and an “ANWAR oil fairy” — which there isn’t — these fairies wouldn’t leave us enough oil under our pillows to matter.
I think you’re a psychologist, in which case you will undestand the concept of “projection.” I think this is what we’re seeing here. Calling anyone who isn’t delusional about the actual facts concerning offshore oil “Nany Pelosi” makes no sense in light of the fact that people like T. Boone Pickes, the architect of the Swift Boat attacks on John Kerry, are saying the same thing. Since you’re in effect propounding idioitic Republican talking points, the natural conclusion to be drawn is that you are projecting your partisian behavior onto others who are just being realistic rather than partisan. IOW being smart and informed and patriotic does not make one Nancy Pelosi, though on this particular issue she may be all three. (The Democrats have problems of their own with respect to energy, but with respect to offshore oil they happen to be on firm ground).
In this regard you don’t have to accept what I’m saying. Do some research on your own. Check out the facts. Then come back and tell us if you really think offshore drilling will make one whit of difference in the amount of oil we import.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:26 pm
First is the batteries, then the infrastructure, now the range extender engine 3 cyl tyrbo, diesel, 4 cylinder NA, natural gas.
Go into production in a few years?? Thats a joke…GM will still trying to figure out where to locate the power plug!
Show me some actual test data….data aquisition equipment is readily available. I am really getting sick of all the promises and this site cutting down competitors when all gM can do is talk.
All hype, no product!
Anyone intersted in a bet that this so call concept will never go into production??
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:41 pm
#52 Tagamet
#60 Jan
That was an interesting exchange between you two. Tag resonded to Jan’s #48 by saying, “Are you really Nancy Pelosi? These are the Dem’s talking points.” Jan responded, “I have no use for Nancy…”
It seems logical that, if Jan and Nancy Pelosi are espousing the same thing, then Jan should (to serve his own needs) have a use for Nancy Pelosi. Yet, just the name “Nancy Pelosi” causes Jan to fight his own cause. We need to remove partisanship from our primary considerations. If both the left and the right want the same thing, maybe they should work together.
I’m not trying to start a partisan flame war here. I’m not taking any particular side. I’m just pointing out a curious exchange.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:45 pm
ok GM, read this, http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/21155/ i hope this will convince “We the People” that the idea of another “needle in our arm” will always be sold to us consumers. Energy independence doesn’t just mean for this Country, but can also mean “Personal Independence” I don’t care if T.Boone or anybody else is selling another alternative fuel, i don’t want it. Solar panels on the home and throught out our communities will give us that independence. Every structure in America can become it’s own power company! MIT is on the right track. Extended battery technology is the way to go.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 12:53 pm
#87 ThombDbhomb
This is a glorius thread isn’t it? It’s like organzed chaos. All kinds of news and views funnelling down one channel.
In all seriousness, you’d be hard pressed to find a larger group of better educated people, versed on such wide-topics, and co-existing anywhere else on the net.
It’s amazing we can not only tolerate each other, but get along as well as we do, while getting our thoughts out.
There is a real feeling of community here. It is a credit to Lyle, and the of course the people posting here.
It’ll be a double-edge sword when the Volt does indeed hit the mainstream, as all the internet focus will come here as this is the ONLY portal for ‘Volt fandom’. On one hand, it will be good we will be closer to getting our cars, but I fear it will also shift the intelligence and tone of the postings. Hopefully I’m wrong about that.
Anywhoo, cheers fellas.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 1:04 pm
Natural Gas …great… I can drive right down my street to the cloest natural gas station and fill up…. The ICE should be designed to burn ANYTHING… Ethanol … salad oil … diesel …. gasoline .. or what ever … no one can predict what type of fuel will be available 10 years or more into the future ….. stuck with one type of fuel ? Not a sound decision.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Yes its off thread but I’ve got itch I need to scratch on oil.
1 – New drilling won’t show up until 2030 – Seriously. Do you think it’ll take that long for an oil company to get oil to the market when it’s selling at $130 a barrel. That only makes sense if the gov’t were doing the drilling. My grandma could get it to market before 2030.
2 – New supply won’t affect the price – Are you kidding? With a commodity, more supply will lower prices. How much is another question. But did you notice how oil had it’s single greatest price drop the day Bush repealed the executive order banning off shore drilling. Coincidence? I think not.
3 – Oil companies aren’t drilling on their existing leases. This is ridiculous. They are drilling there stone cold hearts out. It would be illogical of them not to drill when they can make so much money on it. Plus, they’re leasing the land (paying rent), so why would they just sit on it and not drill?
4 – There’s no oil offshore – OK lets say there isn’t. Then what’s the harm in repealing a ban? If there’s no oil, then it won’t matter anyway. If the oil companies are wrong, they’ll pay a lot for a lease and then discover they’ve been had.
If you don’t want to drill for environmental our tourism concerns, that’s a valid perspective. But these other excuses are just unfounded talking points.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 1:13 pm
#87
Well put. That’s why back when(1992), I voted for the Independent Ross Perot, hoping he would tear DC apart. Dems, Reps, lobbyists & special interests. Unfortunately I don’t see an end to the grid-lock. But I still have hope for an E85 Volt.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 1:18 pm
Statik
There’s a saying in NC “Even a blind pig finds a few acorns.” I agree with your post #89.
The group here is amazingly thoughtful, and very good writers as well. I learn a lot every day.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 1:26 pm
Brad G #74
I understand household pressure, but the “Phill” unit pumps it up to 3600 psi. That’s where I thought the average homeowner could have something go wrong and start a fire while they are sleeping with the unit pumping overnight or when disconnecting. I know they probably have plenty of safety features built in, but I’m a bit of a pessimist when it comes these type of systems. Sorry.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Natural gas… Hmmm… I think the only way this fits in usefully is if we adopt Picken’s plan. Currently in CA, we can’t produce enough CNG to meet the current energy demand. We pump the excess production in times of low demand into huge storage areas and pull that out to help produce power during peak times.
I like Picken’s plan for the most part (plus, it gets bonus points for actually being technically feasable with existing technology and pretty much being the only plan I’ve heard anybody expound). In any case, I’m 100% with the wind farms and electric infrastructure. Regardless of cost, at least it will definitely get used.
After that, though, is where things get less optimal. Picken’s idea is to take the natural gas no longer used for electrical generation and use it for cars. Not a perfect solution, but certainly feasable and probably the lowest cost of transistion given the technology of today.
But the devil is in the details… “Community” infrastructure (such as gas stations) don’t exist for CNG refueling. “Individual” infrastructure (such as fueling in your garage) doesn’t exist, either, but as with Phil for the Honda, can be purchased as part of the car.
So, let’s split “energizing” your car into two sources… Community and Individual.
Currently, we have Community infrastructure for Gasoline and Diesel. Basically, as is, this infrastructure only accomodates fuels liquid at standard pressure and temperature.
Then, we have Individual infrascture, electric and (for many people but not as many as electric) natural gas. There’s also water and sewer, but I’m going to dismiss those for energizing your car, despite what the ads on the borders say.
The point I’m going to make here (after all that setup) is that I think ideally, a car should at least have one Individual and one Community refueling method. So, I propose, you would not want to have a car that ran on electricity and CNG. You’d want either CNG and gasoline or electricity and diesel or some combination like that. This would be a nightmare for tax collectors but on the other hand, it would be great for drivers since commuting would use the very convenient Individual method and longer trips would use the also very convenient Community method.
My hope is to save us from having to implement an entirely new community infrastrure, which I suspect is not going to pay off. Synthesized liquid fuels at STP are assuredly coming, and possibly coming pretty soon. I can’t imagine it will pay off putting money into building community infrastructure for anything else at this time.
So, in that light, I’m suggesting energizing the \Volt from Electricty and CNG would not be a very good idea.
Building a car to run on CNG/Gasoline would be a good idea. Better yet, building a good, cheap conversion for a gasoline car to run on gas or CNG would be the sort of solution that would have a tremendous impact on our overall oil consumption.
After we build the wind farms, of course.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 1:42 pm
94 Michael
I have the same fear. Having this thing running in the garage w/o anyone to watch is scary. Having kids that think its cool to see if they can fill their bike tires to 3600 psi with Mr. Phill is even scarier.
I used to be one of those kids that did something, just to see if I could. Sometimes the results were “interesting”, usually they tended to get me in a load of trouble.
Having 3600 psi NG capability in home, just seems a little daring!
BTW: Does anyone know how much electricity (KWhr/tank) it takes to fillup an average tank with CNG? I would think it takes quite a bit to run a compressor at these pressure levels for hours at a time.
BTW2: What is the pressure used to fill a standard gas grill propane tank? Just curious.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 1:42 pm
91 – Cautious Fan
The two links that I mentioned earlier about no oil until 2030 and no change in price if and when it does show.
A report last year by the Energy Department’s Energy Information Administration said that “access to the Pacific, Atlantic, and eastern Gulf regions would not have a significant impact on domestic crude oil and natural gas production or prices before 2030. Leasing would begin no sooner than 2012, and production would not be expected to start before 2017.” It added, “Because oil prices are determined on the international market, however, any impact on average wellhead prices is expected to be insignificant.”
Although the overwhelming majority of safety valves did in fact work during the hurricanes, the Minerals Management Service of the Interior Department reported that there were five spills, each between 1,000 and 2,000 barrels. Altogether, 125 small spills totaled 16,302 barrels, almost a quarter as big as the Santa Barbara spill.
Exxon has spent 8.8 billion of its 11 billion profits in the first quarter on stock buy backs. Does that sound like building refineries or drilling? When it is pointed out that they are not drilling on the leases they have they say, the boats are all booked seven years in advance and it is hard to find qualified crews. So why repeal anything until they explore where they already have leases?
The oil companys are getting incentives (tax payers money) to build refineries and explore, things oil companys should do anyway, and when it is sugested that maybe we should save the money, the Republicans call it a tax increase. That is double speak if I ever heard it.
edit: Lyle must have something that strips links out of posts cause they are gone, but if anyone wants them, I will send to their email (just disguise it so the crawler don’t get it)
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 1:42 pm
DonC
Thanks for the rant warning. It saved me a lot of reading.
Statik,
Yes, indeed. We are a heterogenius group and as you say, remarkably civil.
I spent the last couple of days contacting people to try to get Lyle some face time on TV. It’s a total long-shot, but “If you don’t ask, youu don’t get”.
If Lyle goes national the site may well “explode” well before 2010. Maybe we’ll need a secret hand shake site for us Charter Members?
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 1:50 pm
I thought the prices started coming down when they went after some speculators that were manupulating the market.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 1:54 pm
#95 DaveP
Nice post. Building vehicles based on logical compatibilities and regional availablility.
CNG/gas and electric/diesel. I like these combinations…and I like wind farms too, lol.
Of course it will never happen as the mere thought of such varied fuel combinations in one car would surely cause half of the nation’s heads to implode.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 1:55 pm
Len@99
Just because two things happen at the same time, does not mean that one caused the other. In the first half of the 19th century, the price of rum went up at precisely the same rate as the salary for Methodist ministers.
“Temporal contiguity does not suggest cause and effect”
Just a thought,
Tag
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 2:00 pm
I just found out I am 17460 on waiting list (I thought I was signed up alot earlier, but obviously I was mistaken). Not that it matters much.
I would have been willing to fork out the cash and then eBay the car to the highest bidder though….so much for making the easy buck.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 2:01 pm
Would an NG Range Extender eliminate the stale fuel issue?
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 2:04 pm
I think there are additives that take care of the stale fuel issue. If I were never using any gas that really would not keep me awake at night. Hauling the unused ICE around might though.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Noel Park,
“Not to worry, they’re mostly only “one time charges”. Prosperity is just around the corner.”
Besides the fact that they seem to come up with billions of these “one time” charges every quarter, they actually still lost 6.3 billion without them. Just take a look at revenue: 46.7 Billion in 2Q 2007 and 38.1 Billion in 2Q 2008.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 2:26 pm
JEC #97
I just looked up the vapor pressure of LPG vs temperature. At normal outdoor temperatures it is about 120 psi above the liquid in the tank. So the pressure to fill it might be a little more. The fact that it liquifies easily is why you can have a lot in a reasonable size tank that doesn’t have to have overly thick walls. The only thing that is gas is the vapor over the liquid.
BTW You do have to be careful of frost bite when you refill these on industrial forklifts.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 2:42 pm
#103 JEC
“I just found out I am 17460 on waiting list (I thought I was signed up alot earlier, but obviously I was mistaken). Not that it matters much.
I would have been willing to fork out the cash and then eBay the car to the highest bidder though….so much for making the easy buck.”
…I just so happen to be able to get you a place much higher than that, only $999.99
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 2:43 pm
N Riley @ 72:
“If your state does not contribute to our fuel needs, then that state should be taxed heavily to offset the cost associated with drilling, distributing and loss of resources to the other states that provide crude oil through drilling. No state should get a free ride.”
Let’s just turn that around, shall we? If your state does not contribute to our [insert: recreation-textiles-fishing-winemaking-mining...] needs, then that state should be taxed heavily to offset the cost associated with [whatever], distributing and loss of resources to the other states that provide [whatever]. No state should get a free ride.
I hear Jersey is the up-and-coming state for winemaking!!!
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 2:59 pm
Random factoids today from sales reports this afternoon
Coming in at the top for sales year over year: Nissan +8.5%, Honda -1%. Toyota off 12%. Ford -15%, and GM pulling up the rear off 26.7%
GM did lead however in ‘average incentives offered’ at $4,214, lol. (Chrysler 2nd worst at $3,661 and Fordgets the bronze for worst at $3,127.
/quite a 1-2 punch for July.
SIDE NOTE: The quarterly report today said that GM “needs a minimum of $11 billion to $14 billion to run its global operations” from day to day (so not 10 billion minimum after all).
Credit default swaps costs jumped to a record of 45.5 percent the sum insured as an upfront payment, from 42 percent on Thursday, in addition to 500 basis point annual payments. This means it would cost $4.55 million to insure $10 million in debt for five years, plus an additional $500,000 each year.
A cost of 45 percent upfront implies a 90 percent default probability.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 3:06 pm
@#7
“nd here lies the same problem as Hydrogen. No infrastructure.
We don’t need to build an infrastructure for electricity.”
No infrastructure. I don’t know where you live but Natural Gas is available at every other gas station in the Toronto area. What do you think all those mid 90’s Cabbies and Cop cars used to run on?
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 3:11 pm
#106 GXT:
Yeah, well that was just a straight line for Statik, since he has reminded us that the “one time charges” never end so many times. I thought about putting LOL or LMAO, or ROTFLMAO after it, but I didn’t want to ruin his fun.
Anyway, since he didn’t make any use of it, I’m glad that you got to. It’s kind of like Abbott and Costello. Martin and Lewis? Laurel and Hardy? I dunno.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 3:19 pm
#111 DG:
Yeah, didn’t GM used to sell one or more CNG vehicles a few years ago? A Caprice Classic and maybe even some kind of a light truck or van?
Gereon Langlitz from Germany comments all the time on the Fastlane Blog about his Aveo which has a GM DEALER INSTALLED LPG conversion kit. It saves him about 50% on fuel in Germany, and he loves it. If you go to the post on the Fastlane blog referenced by Lyle above, you can see Mr. Langlitz’s most recent comment on this.
Come on GM. It ain’t rocket science. I have commented on the Fastlane blog about 10 times that I would buy one if they made it available here. I double dawg dare ya!
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 3:23 pm
#112 noel park
“Yeah, well that was just a straight line for Statik, since he has reminded us that the “one time charges” never end so many times. I thought about putting LOL or LMAO, or ROTFLMAO after it, but I didn’t want to ruin his fun.”
Thanks for thinking of me noel. (=
Also interesting today. GM bumped the ‘incentives’ up on Yukons/Tahoes, etc. etc. from $4,000 to $6,000…ok thats not interesting part. Same old right?
But I just read about, (and then checked GM’s site to verify this), they are offering the $6,000 off of the hybrid now as well. This is a first for them.
Linky to GM:
http://www.gm.com/vehicles/vehicle.jsp?xvxid=08_257
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 3:24 pm
108 Statik
Really? Is that in Canadian or US $?
I have been in Canada (Toronto) once in my life. I got scammed by a Taxi driver. I paid the guy in US $, when it was supposed to be in Canadian $ (I think the I paid him about 35% more than I should have). I was young and dumb at the time, and didn’t understand that Canadian $ was not the same as US $ (Also very arrogant).
Now I am no longer young, but unfortunately I cannot say the same for the dumb part.
If you could give me your bank acct info. I will be sure to promptly make a deposit.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 3:27 pm
89. Frank D.
If all goes well, I think that technology by the MIT guys with solar energy looks pretty darned interesting. Once they get the cheaper thin film solar panels on the market, things could get VERY disruptive in the energy business. We need LOTS of disruptive technology in the energy business … the more the better, as long as it is not TOO expensive.
The big question is … can the fuel cell engineers make more durable, reliable fuel cell cars that people can actually afford? The fuel cells need a much cheaper catalyst or something I hear. Once they get the price of the fuel cell car down to maybe $50,000 things would start to look a bit more realistic for hydrogen and fuel cell technology. They might be able to do hydrogen electrolysis (from water) using solar panels fairly inexpensive someday. Who knows, Nocera’s MIT solar technology might be just the thing that makes it happen.
http://www.technologyreview.com/Energy/21155/
There might be a future Volt with a small, lightweight, energy packed 60 mile all electric range battery and a fuel cell range extender. I see UPS and FedEx delivery trucks who might try this in their fleets someday. With Nocera’s technology you could fill up your Volt with electricity AND some hydrogen if you need to do a lot of driving that day … all from your garage. Hydrogen is good for keeping the weight down in electrified cars because of its energy density. For long trips on interstates there would still need to be some quick charging stations and/or hydrogen pumps though.
A car that gets its hydrogen from solar panels is THE best way to drive without affecting the environment since you know your electricity didn’t come from a coal plant. I bet you might see Hollywood stars that are environmentalists driving cars like this within 10 years … maybe sooner since they have the big bucks for these new technologies. If you really want to show everyone you have “green cred” you could get yourself a nice looking fuel cell ER-EV sports sedan or something. In California, they might could have a new green car designation called U-ZEV … an ULTRA zero emission vehicle. You’d be super green. If you had that sticker designation on your car, I bet you’d gets lots of attention from the chicks at Earth Day every year.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 3:56 pm
we need to reduce oil usage now. Need NG/gas conversion kits for the existing fleet. Then you can drive a poor man’s version of the Volt while waiting for the real thing! Conversion kit should cost less than $3,000 and Phyll for all cars owned under $3,000. BY is running about a third the cost of gas and 95 per cent from North America.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Flash! Bob Lutz lucky tie alert:
http://money.cnn.com/video/#/video/news/2008/07/25/news.boulden.eurowheels.cnnmoney
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:02 pm
oils be NG for last sentence
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:04 pm
More than 2400 get laid off at GM technical center, including those in fuel cell R&D, what the hell is going on? My friend called from there and cried!!!!
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:05 pm
#99 Tag,
I aim to please
#92 Cautious Fan
“1 – New drilling won’t show up until 2030 – Seriously. Do you think it’ll take that long for an oil company to get oil to the market when it’s selling at $130 a barrel. That only makes sense if the gov’t were doing the drilling. My grandma could get it to market before 2030.”
Most people working in the field would think 2030 was overly optimistic. And it doesn’t matter if oil is $130/barrel or $300/barrel. First there isn’t any oil. We’ve been looking for oil in the Gulf for 50 years and we haven’t found anything in the last ten years. Second, the leasing process is a long one, the exploration process even longer — all the exploration ships are booked 7 years out — and the production process even longer. 2030 is a wetdream. 2040 is more realistic.
“2 – New supply won’t affect the price – Are you kidding? With a commodity, more supply will lower prices. How much is another question.”
You’ve framed the question perfectly. The answer to how much price would be affected is “insignificant”, even when looked at through the rose colored glasses worn by MMS.
“But did you notice how oil had it’s single greatest price drop the day Bush repealed the executive order banning off shore drilling. Coincidence? I think not.”
Well I banged on my pots when the last eclipse showed up and, guess what, it went away. Seriously, what has driven the price down is the demand destruction in the US due to the higher prices, the economic slowdown in the US — which has implications for the economies and hence oil consumption in other countries — and the concommitant rising inventories in the US. The recission of the executive order was irrelevant although starting negotiations with Iran was not. If Bush starts pounding the table about Iran in a serious way you could see oil go to $200/bbl.
“3 – Oil companies aren’t drilling on their existing leases. This is ridiculous. They are drilling there stone cold hearts out. It would be illogical of them not to drill when they can make so much money on it.”
You’re absolutely right that they would be drilling if they thought there was any oil. But since they’re using 55% of their profits for stock buybacks and dividents and only 7% for drilling you can safely conclude that they don’t think there is any oil on the leases they have. Any financial analyst who follows the industry will tell you that. The bottom line is that not only are they not drilling their hearts out, they’re basically not drilling. Lack of production opportunities is why the oil stocks trade at such modest P/Es.
“Plus, they’re leasing the land (paying rent), so why would they just sit on it and not drill? ”
The lease is a one time payment up front. It’s not like renting an apartment where you pay by the month or the year. They don’t have to make any payments.
“4 – There’s no oil offshore – OK lets say there isn’t. Then what’s the harm in repealing a ban? If there’s no oil, then it won’t matter anyway. If the oil companies are wrong, they’ll pay a lot for a lease and then discover they’ve been had. ”
Acutally there is no harm in it and, in fact, to the extent the dollars aren’t sent overseas to Iran and Saudi Arabia and Russia it’s a plus. However, that plus is far outweighed by the fact that it feeds the fantasy that there is enough oil out there to matter, which allows people to not take the necessary action. It’s akin to the World Trade Centers telling people to stay calm and stay in their offices. Had people in the south tower evacuated when the north tower was hit they would have gotten out. Somtimes you need to m*o**v*e. Now is one of those times.
The distraction danger is both real and apparent. Obviously you (wrongly) think offshore oil is a possible solution, and if you think that it’s highly probable that other people do as well. That’s the harm you’re asking about.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:08 pm
118 Fahrvergnugen Fanboy
I love the “Expect to pay more for less” like those silly Europeans do. Bob says you pay 13-15k for a small car in US, but in UK, they give us $30k.
Now is that REALLY true? I think you need to wash those numbers and eliminate the huge tax Europeans pay, then do some currency conversions, and maybe a little hat dance at the end.
I think Bob is trying to get people in US and other countries that pay less, to be ready for sticker shock on the new small cars.
They need to gouge you with small cars, since you won’t buy anymore of those overpriced SUV’s.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:10 pm
#76 Tagamet
“N. Riley
Why is taxation always the answer?”
Well, it is not always. I just used the method best understood by most people. My preference would be that you could only receive the number of refined gasoline and diesel gallons per ratio of the crude oil pumped from your state’s territory. Of course, that might put some states at a very big disadvantage.
What I mean is that no state should sit on its natural resources when that natural resource is in need by all the other states to provide for the needs of the nation’s citizens. What would happen if Texas and the Gulf States of Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama were to decide to stop off-shore drilling. There would be a hue and cry even among those “tourist states” such as Florida and California. These states have the right to ban off-shore drilling the same as California and Florida. What makes it right for those states to use the natural resources of the other states without giving some back themselves.
I am using California and Florida as examples only.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Natural Gas for Range-Extender. Ok, R&D idea after VOLT ships for implementation for VOLT 2.0 or 3.0, but stay the course for the current model – electric with gas backup.
BTW GM, you lost alot of money lately by the look of the posts here today. Keep bonuses held back for unforseen costs down the road.
GO GM, GO VOLT for 2010!
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:29 pm
I agree with the guy who said we need to do whatever we can to get off foreign oil, and while NG has it’s issues, it can help. That said, the price of NG would skyrocket and from a cost standpoint we’d be no better off – as everyone’s NG heating bills would skyrocket.
E85 in it’s current incarnation is a super pig. In order to be cost competitive it requires massive subsidies, so you’re paying a lot more than you think you are. And, Jan, no offense intended, but you’re dead wrong to think E85 affects just corn syrup. E85 subsidies steal farmland from wheat, vegetables, grains of all kind, and force the cost of ALL food to go way up. For that and many other reasons Corn-based ethanol will always be a dog.
Algae farms however should provide 100X the E85 output of corn and is better for the environment, will drive costs way down, and can be engineered not just to produce E85, or diesel, or gasoline (yes there are different algae’s that can cover this whole gamut) but produce pure H2 too.
Sadly Willie Nelson’s favored government subsidies and backroom politics will prevent that from happening while propagating an E85 industry that is already bankrupting an economy that’s currently in a recession.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:32 pm
#72 Tom
Nothing would prevent Cuba from coming to the west coast of Florida and drilling in the area that is now not allowed for U.S. companies. Now that China is drilling on the southern coast of Florida, I don’t hear any one complaining about that. It seems to be ok for that to happen.
We need to drill now and drill everywhere. We should work at our utmost speed to develop wind and solar along with other alternative fuels. But we are foolish to believe we can not drill our way out of the mess we now find ourselves in. If we do not increase supply of crude oil domestically, international prices of crude will continue to rise as other developing nations increase their use of crude oil. We will see some supply increase due to conservation caused by higher gasoline and diesel prices causing Americans to drive less. That is good.
Just because I support drilling for more crude and natural gas, does not mean I do not support the advancement of alternative fuels. I do the same as most of the people who feel as I do. If you accept the proposition that we can not better ourselves then you have accepted defeat, no matter if we are talking about fuel supplies, economics, military or any other matter.
Do we accept that we can not increase our supply of crude and natural gas or do we do everything in our power to develop more of our own resources while researching and advancing alternate fuels. Alternate fuels are not here today sufficiently to take the place of gasoline and diesel. Do we turn to some other mode of transportation? Maybe we could put 120 million bicycles on the nation’s roads. That would be a good solution for 0.0000001% of the population that wants to see the automobile thrown onto the junk pile of history and not be replaced.
It sounds good for someone to say that we should not drill. Does that person accept reducing their usage of fossil fuels to off-set the reduced drilling or do they accept us sending more and more of our money overseas to the likes of people we are presently making filthy rich and accept the fact that a significant part of that money will be used against us? I don’t think the “don’t drill” people have really thought this thing out very well. They hear a slogan that sounds good coming from people who drive around in big SUV’s themselves while telling everyone else to walk or ride a bicycle. These “don’t drill” people take that slogan they hear to heart without really studying the situation. It sounds good, so let do it. How many times have we been mislead by things that sound good? How many lies must we endure before we find the truth?
I say we should do it all and to hell with the rest of the world. Especially those “friends’ of ours that have forgotten what we have done for them. We can resolve our situation by working hard at all the solutions. No one solution will solve the problem. But we can do it with the right solutions and if we stick together and stick to our “guns”.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:37 pm
I saw the Bob Lutz tie, heard him say to get ready to pay more for less, but right after that video, one played that said that Exxon made nearly 12 billion in profits for the second quarter. The top few oil companys made 44 billion in profit. Any bets on how much of that goes to exploration or building refineries…. can you say gouge.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:44 pm
Anyone interested in learning more about natural gas vehicles can look in the Civic GX & its associated Phil stations (garage based compressor for CNG). My beef with NG is the market has been manipulated as much as petroleum. There is limited distribution pipeline capacity that keeps prices & profits high. Even in states where it is regulated prices soar year round. Not long ago there was a lot of talk about LNG ports (liquified NG) but seems the NIMBY crowd shut them all down in Ca. I thought about buying a CNG car years ago but the volatility of the market mostly headed up, discouraged me. Engines designed to run exclusively on CNG are known to last longer & perform better than dual use engines. It also takes almost all night long to compress enough NG to fill your car with a garage based Phil station. If the market was not so controlled & manipulated it might be viable but it is only trading one barrel for another and they would still have you over it. I am sure T. Boone has a vested interest in NG or he would not be pushing it and the argument it would take 10 years to bring new oil wells to market is a crock! Do they honestly expect there to be no petroleum gas vehicles on the road in ten years? Require dual hulls & double pipelines but until we become energy independant, Congress is killing our economy by limiting the source & helping to drive up prices. Require all petroleum refined in US waters to be sold & used in the USA as a condition and require the building of refinery capacity to refine it as a condition to drilling. When US does not need oil any longer it can be sold back to China at a premium. I am tired of the free market being manipulated by political opportunity, Even Obama wanted to make/subsidize coal oil that polutes more per mile than refining the gas we use now, just to help his Ill. coal industry. No green energy there yet he wants to kill Nuclear Power in the US. There are no Statesmen left in this country.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:47 pm
N. Reilly@123
If those states passed legislation to prohibit drilling, I’m guessing that first there’s be a law suit and if unsuccessful the oil companies would just sell the oil to other countries. Pretty straightforward. Then again, the US might just pull a Hugo and Nationalize Big Oil.
Be well,
Tag
JMO,
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 4:57 pm
I’m tired off seeing so many defend oil. Our country has not experienced any pain whatsoever. We are spoiled to the point of wishing away any transitional time in order to better our overall economy and country. We have been marketed a crock of you know what in order for us the consumer to argue and complain. I will pay 10 dollars a gallon and figure out other ways to live my life if I can be sure our country is truly dedicated to kick our oil habit. How many oil spills, and all the other dirty reasons do we need to defend this crock.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 5:26 pm
Guys multi-fuel for the range extender is the way to go.
Here is the best possible example. Corn for heat. I spend most of my time at iburncorn.com and corn has gone from $2/bu to $6.50+/bu that means from $5/mbtus (cost of geothermal) to god knows what.
Anyway, some corn stoves burn JUST corn, those guys are taking it hard at the moment as $4/bu corn is par with NG or in the $10-15 mbtu area (I think).
Could be cheaper to heat with electric resistence heat, or oil or PP.
Many such stoves can at least burn wood pellets, which give the owner another choice.
Multiple fuel options would be great on Gen2 volts, especially for people who can get NG, and contrary to what others have posted, not ALL of the US can. NG and PP are nowhere near the same cost by the way (at least where I am, VT) as in no NG and PP cost more to heat with than oil or electric, that SHOULD translate it into being a more expensive trans fuel than gasoline I would bet, right? (hmm what about those taxes?)
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 5:38 pm
N Reilly -
The Chinese are not drilling off the coast of Florida. Just because George Will says it and the Vice President repeats it does not make it true.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 5:56 pm
I just ran across this video – reminds me of a certain wind and ng scheme. Jack N. from 1978
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjfONpsFvyM&eurl=http://www.treehugger.com/cars_transportation/
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:12 pm
California would then be burning natural gas to produce the electricity and providing you with natural gas to serve as the range extender. Doesn’t sound like a very smart plan for California.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Len #133
Good video. We had some answers 30 years ago to higher gas prices but had to wait until there was a crises to start doing something about it 30 years later. Could this kind of planning doom the economy ?
We need to explore some of these old ideas and see if they’re viable. I’m sure there’s other ideas out there but we’re suppressed by big oil and politicians from oil producing states. Just think where some of this technology would be now if it had been developed. It’s time to give big oil and many of the Congress a big boot.
So glad to see that crook from Alaska in big trouble.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:31 pm
Jan #79
“An E85 Volt is just fine with me, thank-you.”
*** *** ***
Jan,
I couldn’t agree more. E-85 is renewable and the plan for cellulosic ethanol will provide for many small refineries close to their servicing areas which should alleviate the LD transportation problem. This will also have a net benefit on the landfill problem wrt to waste cellulose. Until then we can make the best of corn ethanol.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:34 pm
I see Toyota are going to try and produce another 40000 Corollas a month, good on them, right product at the right time.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:34 pm
So why not a natural gus (methane, CH4) fuel cell option…it would fit so nicely into that electric drive train…and a much more efficient use of menthane to boot?
Nahh, it would make too much sense.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 6:56 pm
So if GM goes into bankruptcy in 2009 or early 2010, we any of us ever see a Volt? For that to happen will require a successor company to pick up the Volt project and keep it going. That sounds good as words, but doing anything that radically new (with the continuing investment it implies) will not be easy. Rather, the natural course will be to form a new company using components that already exist and are profitable. But even that will not be easy, as there will be years and years of wrangling to unwind the present corporation enough to do anything.
I’m not trying to be gloomy here, and I hope it doesn’t happen. But after today’s report, the chances of no GM after 2009 look pretty strong, so it’s good to think it through as best we can at this time.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:03 pm
I saw Rick Wagoner on a news blurb this evening. I wonder if this is the same interview already mention here as occurring this morning (Fri) and I just got it late. Anyway, I think he said the initial production of the Volt would be in the “tens of thousands” and ramped up thereafter. I wonder if that means GM is planning more than 10,000 for the initial release or if he was just sort of talking in generalities.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:29 pm
GM loses $15 billion.
Chrysler earned 1.1 billion !!
Chrysler has $11.7 billion in cash !!
Chrysler should buy GM now. Do It. Please.
http://www.detnews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080801/AUTO01/808010433/1001
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 7:35 pm
CNG will not work. It is only good for fleet vehicles, where they go short distances and return to base to refuel. Listen to me now, and believe me later. CNG has NO RANGE. You will find yourself living at the gas station.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:08 pm
#118 Fahrvergnugen Fanboy
“Flash! Bob Lutz lucky tie alert:”
Woot, nice find! We need a dedicated thread to that tie.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:12 pm
#108 Me
“…I just so happen to be able to get you a place much higher than that, only $999.99″
#115 JEC
“108 Statik: Really? Is that in Canadian or US $?”
Actually I’d like that in equivalent Zimbabwean dollars, so 9,990,000,000,000 (9.9 trillion)…and I want it in twenties.
None of these:
http://www.cbc.ca/gfx/images/news/photos/2008/07/30/zimbabwemoney-cp-5213614.jpg
(any excuse to repost the ‘coolest’ bill of all time)
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:29 pm
Of interest:
Just surfing around the web, I have counted 3 sites that have Wagoner resigning next week. Nothing confirmed, so take it with a grain of salt. On a personal level, I have heard nothing on it. I’ve always thought the board thought he could do no wrong…and he was completely made of Teflon ™.
The consensus is that the board has had enough, so it’s not really a resign…it’s more like a resign or be fired.
Hopefully he hasn’t spend all the 110-odd million he has ‘earned’ since he took over since June 2000.
GM under his reign? Got it at around $70/share when he was CEO. Then proceeded to lose over 70 billion since he got the nod as chairman in 2003.
I don’t see why they wouldn’t be happy with him. He never did have any plan at all…except for firing people and shutting down plants while continuing to make the exact same vehicles year after year…can’t believe that didn’t pan out.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:31 pm
#118 Fanboy
Nice to see the lucky tie again. Thanks.
As to the message, Lutz notwithstanding, I doubt we’ll have many US buyers paying $30K for a Cobalt anytime soon, no matter what people want to do in Europe.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 8:42 pm
145 Statik
Since Fritz was elevated to COO, the handwriting has been on the wall. Today’s report was so bad, it will not be surprising for someone to have to take the fall. However, I disagree with you on what he’s accomplished, especially since 2003. I think it’s been a lot. The change in oil prices has been disasterous for GM, but no one foresaw such a very large increase in such a very short period of time.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:06 pm
RB #47
I agree, and you also have to include GM’s UAW problems in the mix, which Wagoner essentially jettisoned in a hard fought battle. It took a lot of courage to take the long term approach that Wagoner instilled in GM. The problem is, they are still a publicly traded company and like all companies must make money. The path they were on pre-Wagoner might have left them in worse shape than they are today, and certainly would have left no future for the company. You still have to wonder though why any company based out of a country that imports 70% of it’s oil had almost all their eggs in one basket.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:08 pm
Len
“The Chinese are not drilling off the coast of Florida. Just because George Will says it and the Vice President repeats it does not make it true.”
Techincally accurate, they are just buying leases to our potential oil.
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:15 pm
FrankD
“I’m tired off seeing so many defend oil. Our country has not experienced any pain whatsoever. We are spoiled to the point of wishing away any transitional time in order to better our overall economy and country. We have been marketed a crock of you know what in order for us the consumer to argue and complain. I will pay 10 dollars a gallon and figure out other ways to live my life if I can be sure our country is truly dedicated to kick our oil habit. How many oil spills, and all the other dirty reasons do we need to defend this crock.”
Good for you!
Just don’t expect (or worse compell) others to do the same.
Be well,
Tag
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:26 pm
Time to invest?
What’s the saying..? Oh yeah…. “buy low, sell high”
Death to oil http://www.oiljihad.org
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Responding to the original topic of the article, Natural Gas:
It just so happens that compressed natural gas engines are extremely inefficient, even worse than fuel cells (a.k.a. Fool Sells).
For example, let’s say you use natural gas to make enough electricity to power the Volt’s batteries for 40 miles. Using the same amount of natural gas in a compressed natural gas engine would only go 14 miles. With this horrible inefficiency, compressed natural gas engines actually produce more carbon emissions that gas engine cars. See here (pages 3 & 4) for details:
http://www.stanford.edu/group/greendorm/participate/cee124/TeslaReading.pdf
I like T Boone Pickens plans for wind power, but using natural gas in cars is a bad call. Just about anything else would be better…
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:42 pm
Just skipped from #11 or 12, to the bottom, and got side-tracked.. Anyway, while GM is wanting to figure out how to make the volt, it really isn’t that hard. All the hard stuff was done years ago…
Point is, all electric has been figured out, the engine and genset are mated together. The problem lies with the radio, windshield wipers, and HVAC systems, oh and when the engine should start itself… Even those systems aren’t that hard to figure out… Even if the engine was a diesel, and fuel injecion/glow plug timing is handled easily..
The only reasonable excuses GM has bringing this car out is the batteries, and crash testing, but the feds always drag their heels.
Then talking about burning natural gas? Where I live, there is only 1 public place to purchase natural gas, and I agree with the post just above mine, it’s just a bad call. If were going to do that, might as well follow Honda, and purchase units to extract H2 from natural gas, and use a fuel cell…….. Which is almost pointless, why put more strain on natural gas supply, don’t we pay enough for it now?
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 10:59 pm
There is absolutley NO WAY the government should support natural gas as a fuel by offering incentives.
I’d veto, vote no or whatever it takes to prevent us from tansferring a dependence from one non-net-zero, carbon emmitting fossil fuel from one country to another (Middle east & Venezuela to Canada). Hell, I would not even support E85 from Brazil since it is a different country.
Government should ONLY support energy independence with tax payers dollars.
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:05 pm
CNG has been around for ever but I do not recall GM mentioning its as a E-Flex fuel until today.
Does that mean E-flex is just a public relations stunt, a sort of “anything you can do I can do better”?
If someone came up up with a coal fired option they would say, “yup we can do that too..”
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:08 pm
“If someone came up up with a coal fired option thay would say, “yup we can do that too..””
Yeah, and let’s do pedal power while we’re at it
(4 people pedalling = how many kW?
)
(Quote)
August 1st, 2008 at 11:37 pm
Well,
My complete dislike of strap on hybrids may have some vindication(to my complete amazement)
http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/gm-drops-277-percent-in-july/
These people claim GM hybrid sales for July of 1023 vehicles.
Please, no claims of battery shortages at these levels!
As part of the new reality if Wagoner moves aside, I think the hybrids should be given a merciful despatch.
(Quote)
August 2nd, 2008 at 12:33 am
I’m looking forward to the time when i can not only buy a volt. (i’m with statik 2012 best case scenario)
But also being able to choose the fuel source for my range extender.
Let see:
CNG
Gas/e85
Diesel
no extender just a 2nd battery in its place
choice is good, if we have learned anything from this oil crisis we have created it should be. In the future we need multiple fuels, no single commodity in the world short of water can replace the demand we have created.
(Quote)
August 2nd, 2008 at 1:07 am
Amen on energy diversity. Electricity is the ultimate flexible fuel. It can be created from wind, nuclear, geothermal, solar, coal, oil, gerbals running on treadmills, etc. This ensures the price will remain relatively stable even if more demand is added, unlike the fossil fuels. More coal supply can easily be added but I doubt that’ll occur with the pressure on CO2 emissions. Both presidential candidates support some form of CO2 regs.
Did everyone see that Obama is considering supporting offshore drilling. I guess he realized that American’s don’t buy the arguments against it. McCain agrees with him. Its tough to get both candidates to agree on an issue. Maybe they’ve got a point. Intrade.com still has the likelyhood of lifting the ban at 35% though so I’m not holding my breath. The dems had better be careful. This opposition could bite em.
(Quote)
August 2nd, 2008 at 2:05 am
#131, while I definitely agree with your point that ultimately years down the road the range extender should be flexible in terms of its fuel source, your best possible example makes me laugh.
……honestly, you were kidding right? There is already a serious food crisis that affects the WHOLE WORLD including us here in NA, and you want us to start burning corn for heat?!? I really hope you were joking. Taking corn to make ethanol does not make a great deal of sense but I can understand people talking about it as an option (though not a good one) while searching for the next alternative renewable source of energy. Burning corn for heat does not make sense; it’s not an efficient use of it AT ALL.
I’m better off eating a couple cobs of corn, then pedalling a bike to produce electricity; this way, I can eat, have my heat (from exercise), and get electricity to run the toaster (which will produce more heat)! =)
Anyway, I used to work as a gas jockey while studying in post-secondary institution. I’ve worked with many propane (LPG) vehicles.
I can tell you right now that it WON’T WORK. All the customers complained about their vehicles not having enough power. BUT THE WORST THING WAS THAT A LOT OF PROPANE PUMPS IN MY CITY WOULD BE SHUT DOWN. It’s not like there weren’t many pumps. There were pumps a plenty; just none of them were working within 10-15 mile radius. Either we didn’t have propane certified staff to service the said customers OR we RAN OUT OF PROPANE, since we were filling up BBQ tanks. Another thing is that it does not work for cold regions; northern half of USA, CANADA, we get too cold during the winter months for them to work properly; believe you me, you are hearing from someone who worked with the stuff. There just aren’t enough propane or NG certified staff unlike gasoline, ethanol, or diesel which we can fill up ourselves. I was propane certified, but man I hated filling up tanks or vehicles. The valves had to meet up just right, or else the pump would not start. There were leaks that gave some guys burns (and that’s with LPG; NG will be MUCH worse with its whole lot lower boiling point). I belive a lot of the problems I’ve stated for propane above will be same for NG, if we try to use if for transportation in a major way.
Also, the boiling point for NG is -259 F or -161 C, if you take the numbers for methane, which NG mostly is. Do you Pro-NG guys know just how much expensive it is to compress the darn thing and transport it? Pipelines are close to reaching full capacity in NA, so that’s not an option. Plus, even if a great number of vehicles DO BECOME NG VEHICLES, how will we meet the demand? The infrastructure is simply not there!! Plus think about it; it’s one thing for a gas tanker truck to explode in the middle of a highway, it’s COMPLETELY another thing for a LPG or NG tanker truck to explode. Plus, I don’t want extensinve pipelines of NG being built; do we really want to live close to time-bombs? or provide terrorists easy targets? (no need for making bombs, just have 10 guys come with some pick axe or an ice pick and a lighter each, they’ll blow the whole area to smithereens!). I’d rather have powerlines going through NA not NG pipelines.
Besides, I thought we, the Western Society, want to achieve energy independence! Do you guys know that the world’s two largest NG field is 1) Qatar’s offshore North Field, estimated to have 25 trillion cubic metres (9.0×1010 cu ft) of gas and that 2) second largest natural gas field is the South Pars Gas Field in Iranian waters in the Persian Gulf. Connected to Qatar’s North Field, it has estimated reserves of 8 to 14 trillion cubic metres (2.8×1010 to 5.0×1010 cu ft) of gas. BOTH ARE IN THE MIDDLE EAST, with 2nd one being in IRANIAN CONTROL! Sure we have some in NA, but it won’t last long enough for our energy needs, even if we don’t use it for heat and use it exclusively for transportation. We DON’T NEED to go down the same route as OIL; I don’t want a NG war in the future.
Lastly, NG is a gaseous FOSSIL FUEL. Really, it does burn cleaner, but I don’t want any more CARBON based source of energy in my car as much as I can help it. It’s NOT RENEWABLE; for pro-NG people who claim that BIOGAS or LANDFILL GAS can provide methane, well, I agree with you that they are a source, but not very feasible source. First, BIOGAS. Well, we’re not gonna stick a hose up every cow’s rear end. =) Seriously, using organic waste like left over parts of the plants, manure, etc. is a good practice, but I don’t think it will meet our energy needs to a great degree. Don’t get me wrong; I think it will be a great method in upcoming future of REUSING our organic wastes, but it’ll not be a primary energy supply. For LANDFILL GAS, first you need to remove the water vapor, then clean it up to NG standards before it can even be transported using pipelines. But it’s not economical to remove all the trace amounts of other chemicals (e.g. hydrogen sulfide), but makes more economical sense to burn it right at the landfill or near it.
Anyhow just wanted to state that NG does not make sense as there are safety issues in transporting it using either pipelines or tanker ships and trucks plus filling it up safely, there are energy dependency issue as two largest fields are in Persian Gulf, and that it’s not very feasible to depend on NG to meet a large portion of our transportation needs. It’s more environmentally friendly than other fossil fuels, but I just don’t see it becoming anything major. It’ll definitely be an important part of our energy equation, especially the biogas, but won’t be even in the top three in terms of importance.
Like a lot of people I see solar, wind, and hydro as the major players in future energy market. NG will be significant too, but not for transportation. I’d rather have NG for heat or power generation (if we can use NG power plants instead of coal ones, it’ll certainly be a lot cleaner). If NG is to be part of the VOLT in any realistic efficient way, it better be at the powerplant, producing electricity for the battery/ultracap combo, NOT as part of ICE.
Let me know what you think.
Have a good weekend people!
(Quote)
August 2nd, 2008 at 2:20 am
Off-topic, I just realized if GM can make $5000 profit on each VOLT that they sell, if 20,000 of us here don’t back out of the waiting list and get one, GM will make $100 Million profit from people on this site alone. Not bad at all for profits coming from one car alone, for first two years of production, if GM keeps its promise and mass produce these babes.
I know that with the battery costs, above scenario is HIGHLY unlikely, but still…may be by 2014 or 2015, GM will be laughing all the way to the bank. GM, don’t die on me now; make this happen so that I get my VOLT and you get back in some serious green!! =)
(Quote)
August 2nd, 2008 at 2:37 am
Interesting interview on the EESTOR blog. Apparently the initial press release didn’t convey that EESTOR is starting their produciton run and is raring to go:
http://bariumtitanate.blogspot.com/2008/07/richard-weir-says-permittivity-is.html
(Quote)
August 2nd, 2008 at 3:23 am
MIT is running on all cylinders. I don’t know how feasible it is to have hydrogen and oxygen gas in the home though.
http://www.edn.com/article/CA6583673.html?nid=3351&rid=1158564308
(Quote)
August 2nd, 2008 at 6:06 am
160 Sam
I agree with everything you wrote. Replacing one imported fuel for another makes no sense at all.
(Quote)
August 2nd, 2008 at 9:52 am
WHy not make it an option, as well as a bio-diesel range extender,
(Quote)
August 2nd, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Im buying the volt to save the environment. The usual petroleum backup idea sucks and I prefer clean burning natural gas as the backup!
Pickens has the right idea. Lets finally keep the oil companies out of our pockets at last.
This option will be the winner!
(Quote)
August 3rd, 2008 at 7:48 pm
For anyone interested… Picken’s is scheduled to appear on Larry King Live on CNN this Monday (Aug. 4th) airing live at 9pm ET (and rerun at least once later on the same night).
ps to amante… I hate to tell you this, but it’s the oil companies that also produce most of the natural gas… that’s why they are called oil & gas… natural gas comes from the same source as oil… but is formed instead of oil due to the tempatures/pressures, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petroleum#Formation
Those that think using natural gas for general transportation will be cheaper than using gasoline are in for a surprise. NG prices are already up significantly this century… increasing demand by using it for general transportation is going to cost us all more
(Quote)
August 4th, 2008 at 6:01 am
August 4th, 2008 at 9:40 pm
Sweet. Just one more way to plug it into my house. Solar pannels, grid electricity, and now I’ll just plumb a natural gas nipple to my garage. Peice o’ cake, sign me up for NEVER going to a gas station ever again! Bye bye middle men!
(Quote)
August 9th, 2008 at 3:50 am