Fuel Systems Solutions, Toyota and the Phill 26 comments
an article to
-
Font Size:
-
Print
- TweetThis
The deal is done! The dysfunctional relationship between Honda (HMC) and Fuelmaker is finally over. Fuel Systems Solutions (FSYS) has purchased Fuelmaker IP including the Phill home garage natural gas refueling system. Here is the press release:
And a very interesting article by Edwin Black:
My advice for FSYS is very simple: contact Toyota Motor (TM) and present a business plan for packaging the Phill together with the concept car
Toyota presented at last year’s LA auto show.
As I have written many times, this electric/nat gas hybrid Camry (think a Prius powered by US produced natural gas as opposed to gasoline from foreign oil) is the single best transportation solution to begin America’s effort to reduce foreign oil imports.
Assuming an average American drives 50 miles a day, each packaged sale of a Phill and this Camry hybrid would reduce gasoline consumption by approximately 800 gallons per year. Sell 500,000 of these units, and America reduces its gasoline consumption by over 1,000,000 gallons per day! From an environmental standpoint, this would be a savings of 3,800,000 lbs of CO2 every day.
The combination of a strategic alliance between FSYS and Toyota (TM) would immediately begin addressing the economic, environmental, and national security issues the US is facing from its over dependence on foreign oil. A marketing and advertising campaign centered on these problems would be a win-win not only for the business model, but in educating Americans on the issue so as to reinforce the economic and environment gains the country can make along the way.
At the same time, FSYS should engage with natural gas utility providers across the US in strategic partnerships allowing the utilities to sell, install, and service the Phill. This would help overcome any local regulatory or code restrictions and pave the way for the utility companies to solve these issues on a local or state-by-state basis.
If FSYS and Toyota would mass produce these products, and if the utility companies would line up to install the Phill, there is no doubt in my mind that the natural gas producers such as COP, CHK, BP and others will provide the natural gas to power these vehicles for decades to come. So, let’s get it done now!
FSYS is currently trading at $16.86, down $0.85 today, but up from $15.50 the day the deal was announced. Toyota is currently trading at $80.13, down $3.41 for the day and within its $106-$55 52-week band.
Disclosures: The author owns COP and is seriously considering FSYS on any pullback. The author would buy Toyota (TM) in a New York second if it would put the Camry electric/CNG hybrid into production. He would also be first in line to purchase a Phill/Hybrid package.
Related Articles
|
-
The Seeking Alpha 100
See allThe top 100 stock
market authors
selected for publication
Seeking Alpha 100 » -
Fastest Climbers
Authors with the largestSee all
increase in followers
in the last 7 days
Fastest Climbers » -
Top Commenters
Top commenters,See all
as ranked by their peers
Top Commenters » -
Top Instabloggers
The 100 most active
Instabloggers.-
1
David Fry
-
2
TraderMark
-
3
Don Dion
-
4
Cliff Wachtel
-
5
Joseph L. Sha...
Top Instabloggers » -
1
-
Top StockTalkers
TopSee all
StockTalkers.
Top StockTalkers »
Another issue is sufficient on board fuel storage. For CNG you must use fairly high pressure storage and that requires an efficient pressure vessel design. Note that the CNG buses use long thin cylinders mounted in their roof structure to solve this issue. These issues suggest that a good CNG car needs to be designed around these factors and filling up the trunk of a standard car with a heavy, too small capacity pressure tank is not the answer.
The fuel capacity problem is also why LNG fueled large long haul trucks work. They can carry enough fuel for very long ranges hence requiring many fewer refueling stations where they can be quickly refueled. Note what Peterbuilt and Kenworth are doing on this front using Westport engines. Another advantage is that cleaner burning NG extends engine life about 2X between overhauls, especially for diesel and NG designed engines.
www.westport.com/
seekingalpha.com/artic...
I don't like buying stocks that have jumped like this one has, but I may make an exception here.
--R
The Honda GX uses a fiber reinforced metal tank that pretty well takes all the trunk space to contain the equivalent of about 8 gals of gasoline. We need to do better for a usable design that would be acceptable to a wide range of users.
rip: you're right, the honda tank is spec'd for 3600 psi. wrt rectangular tank, i don't have the specifics, but someone in the industry sent me a personal email awhile back and said they were working on such a tank to free up trunk space. regardless, i don't think the tank is a big problem. the problem in my mind is idiotic US policy.
> jack
Excellent article! Your best!
Could someone 6' 2" such as the old man here fit in that hybrid Camry, Fitzy, or would I have to wear it?
If I were fat I could lose weight to fit in these tiny things the world has planned for us, but I can't chop off four inches or so to get in one.
What's your solution for that, Fitz?
a Phill-fueled NGV might be.
CNG engine ratings are based on 900 BTUs per cubic foot (LHV) at STP. Regular gasoline contains 115,000 BTU/gallon. Therefore, one gallon of gasoline is equivalent to 127.77 cubic feet of natural gas.
I currently pay $1.61 for 127.77 cubic feet of natural gas. That includes sales tax, which is proportional to usage, but excludes the fixed monthly customer service charge--I would assume that any prospective NGV buyer would have residential gas service for other purposes, anyway.
According to the FuelMaker web site, the Phill compresses the energy equivalent of about 1.7 gallons gasoline in 4 hours. It consumes 800W while running. Assuming $0.16 per kWh, that adds $0.30 per gasoline gallon equivalent produced. That makes the breakeven on fuel cost $1.91 / gallon equivalent.
Now, let's consider the fixed costs.
Let's say the Phill unit costs $4000 (FuelMaker actually sold them for quite a bit more than that). Installation costs range $1000-2000 for electrical (240V circuit), gas plumbing and ventilation (if installed inside a garage, it must be vented to the outside). The Civic-GX cost $8000-9000 more than the gasoline-fueled Civic, although the dealers are desperate to unload them, now, so you might be able
to eliminate that premium.
Now, let's take the cost of the compressor ($4,000), installation ($2,000) and the additional cost of the vehicle ($8,000), amortized over the useful life of the vehicle. Let's assume 10 years and 150,000 miles, to be _very_ generous--it would be difficult to drive any more distance than that, given the refueling time. If the vehicle averages 35 miles per gallon (or gallon equivalent), that would be 4,286 gallons. The additional fixed cost of the natural gas system would add $14,000/4286 = $3.26 per gallon. When added to the basic fuel cost and the cost to run the compressor, that brings the breakeven point for the Phill-fueled NGV to $5.17 per gallon of gasoline, compared to a conventionally-fueled car.
We might get there, but it could take quite a while. I don't think raising the federal gasoline tax by a factor of ten is going to be politically viable. The number of people who will spend an extra $1000 a year for the prestige of driving an NGV is too small to sustain a business. Then, considering the impractical refueling time using the Phill, the limited range of the vehicle, or the simple problem of fitting high-pressure cylinders into a small passenger vehicle, this looks like a non-starter.
From the standpoint of simple physics, propane makes a lot more sense as a transportation fuel, simply because you don't have to store it at high pressure. LP gas has its own set of problems, of course. It's a by-product of refining, so it's much less abundant than NG and the LPG distribution and retailing network (in the US) hasn't changed much since the '50s. Still, I have to wonder if there is an efficient way to polymerize methane up to propane on a large scale, to bring down the unit cost of LPG. That would be far more attractive than compressing methane at the residential level.
LPG (AutoGas) is a big part of FSYS's business, because it makes economic sense. I don't expect residential CNG compressors to be anything more than a curious sideline. If LPG were to take off in the US, however, FSYS could sell a lot BRC AutoGas hardware.
www.eia.doe.gov/kids/e...
i get 1 gallon of gasoline is equivalent to 124,000/1028=120.6 cu ft ng
you referenced LHV. we differ by only 5% of so. doesnt change much. according to CNGprices.com, your number is about right for CA, but utah is around $1 gallon equiv, and OK is about $1.11. folks with GX's in CA were have told me they were filling up for $2 GGE when gasoline was $4.50-$5 last year. not too bad. for your fixed costs, you neglected to factor in the rebates for the Phill ($2k most states), or for the Civic GX (up to $4k), so those are big factors in your breakeven numbers. as far as refueling time, i've been told the car easily refuels overnight. perhaps if you are bone dry, get in late and up early, maybe there is a problem. i havent heard that. range of 200mi is isn't a problem for over 90% of the average american's daily trips (under 40 mi). that said, as a primary car probably not a solution (yet), although i have been told many folks simply rent a car for long vacations where NG refueling may be an obstacle. it's interesting that the folks in UT, CA, and OK who are using NG transportation love it, but the folks who don't have it and dont experience it downplay it. also, brazil, italy, iran - these countries all use NG transportation and the people love it (read the recent comment to my article by the italian gent). wrt your comments on propane, one of the reasons nat gas makes so much sense is the 2.2 million miles pipeline grid already connecting 130,000,000 homes in every major US metropolitan area where 160,000,000 cars and trucks go home every night and could be refueled while their owners sleep. that is a huge strategic infrastructure advantage that no other country can come close to matching. not so with propane. natural gas is the only domestic fuel that can be scaled up over the next 5 years to cut 5-7 million barrels of foreign oil. futher, your cost analysis did not discuss the current hidden subsidy for oil which is driving the US bankrupt: a military force to secure oil transport and to fight oil wars as well as funding both sides of the "war on terror" by sending 65% of all money americans spend on oil (all 20,000,000 barrels a day) out of the country. so, we have trade deficit, currency, and inflation problems which will without a doubt come back with a vengence as the era of peak oil progresses. so, basically, what is the cost of relying on an economic foundation built (not built?) on foreign oil during the era of peak oil versus an reindustrialized US economic foundation built on US produced natural gas? when you factor these economic, environmental, and national security costs into your economic equation, how can the US afford not to make a switch to NG transporation? i can't come up with another solution...and i don't think LPG is it. all that said, thanks for your comment and analysis.
Your response raises a major point regarding the real costs of the fuels. It is clear to me that the fuel pricing model must the adjusted to reflect much of the real total costs in order to drive consumers to the "best" solution. That looks to me like the bigger problem since it is political. The technical problems are amenable to rational solutions. Political ones are more difficult due to vested interests.
On May 09 07:56 PM Michael Fitzsimmons wrote:
> RoadCyclist: awesome post! one of the most constructive comments
> i've seen. that said, i hope you don't mind if i make a few small
> points. first, using EIA data from the "kid's conversion calculator":
>
> www.eia.doe.gov/kids/e...
>
> i get 1 gallon of gasoline is equivalent to 124,000/1028=120.6 cu
> ft ng
> you referenced LHV. we differ by only 5% of so. doesnt change much.
> according to CNGprices.com, your number is about right for CA, but
> utah is around $1 gallon equiv, and OK is about $1.11. folks with
> GX's in CA were have told me they were filling up for $2 GGE when
> gasoline was $4.50-$5 last year. not too bad. for your fixed costs,
> you neglected to factor in the rebates for the Phill ($2k most states),
> or for the Civic GX (up to $4k), so those are big factors in your
> breakeven numbers. as far as refueling time, i've been told the car
> easily refuels overnight. perhaps if you are bone dry, get in late
> and up early, maybe there is a problem. i havent heard that. range
> of 200mi is isn't a problem for over 90% of the average american's
> daily trips (under 40 mi). that said, as a primary car probably not
> a solution (yet), although i have been told many folks simply rent
> a car for long vacations where NG refueling may be an obstacle. it's
> interesting that the folks in UT, CA, and OK who are using NG transportation
> love it, but the folks who don't have it and dont experience it downplay
> it. also, brazil, italy, iran - these countries all use NG transportation
> and the people love it (read the recent comment to my article by
> the italian gent). wrt your comments on propane, one of the reasons
> nat gas makes so much sense is the 2.2 million miles pipeline grid
> already connecting 130,000,000 homes in every major US metropolitan
> area where 160,000,000 cars and trucks go home every night and could
> be refueled while their owners sleep. that is a huge strategic infrastructure
> advantage that no other country can come close to matching. not so
> with propane. natural gas is the only domestic fuel that can be scaled
> up over the next 5 years to cut 5-7 million barrels of foreign oil.
> futher, your cost analysis did not discuss the current hidden subsidy
> for oil which is driving the US bankrupt: a military force to secure
> oil transport and to fight oil wars as well as funding both sides
> of the "war on terror" by sending 65% of all money americans spend
> on oil (all 20,000,000 barrels a day) out of the country. so, we
> have trade deficit, currency, and inflation problems which will without
> a doubt come back with a vengence as the era of peak oil progresses.
> so, basically, what is the cost of relying on an economic foundation
> built (not built?) on foreign oil during the era of peak oil versus
> an reindustrialized US economic foundation built on US produced natural
> gas? when you factor these economic, environmental, and national
> security costs into your economic equation, how can the US afford
> not to make a switch to NG transporation? i can't come up with another
> solution...and i don't think LPG is it. all that said, thanks for
> your comment and analysis.
1) specificaly designed NGVs are simply not available in the USA
2) CNG refueling stations arent available in most of the country
3) US governmental policy is biased against NGVs
4) americans aren't educated as to the dangers of peak oil and foreign oil dependency (this goes back to 3. above) and the very real threats they pose to our economy, environment, and national security.
so, those are exactly the issues i have been attempting to address in my articles. range, car size, tanks - all those issues are easily solvable in mass produced specifically designed NGVs. the honda diesel you mention still relies on foreign oil imports,,,,i mean, there are lots of "nice" autos out there (toyota prius for example) that get decent gasoline mileage, but they are still fueled by **gasoline**, and that is the problem the country faces. we have to *switch* from ****foreign oil derived gasoline**** to US produced natural gas! that is the key. any cost analysis simply based on an NGV versus a gasoline hybrid or diesel or prius or whatever simply misses the point: what is the cost of an S&P500 that is negative over the last 10 years? what is the cost of a foreign oil based trade deficit that grows every year and is bankrupting the country? what is the cost of the air we breath and the vistas we look at that are brownish red? what is the cost of national security being dependent on funding countries that aren't friendly toward us? what are the cost of oil wars? these are the real costs. worrying about gas tanks and other such minor inconveniences pale in comparison to the consequences of peak oil and continuing on our path of relying on gasoline for transportation and doing *nothing*. what we need is a leader in the white house who can clearly articulate these issues to the american public such that we can have broad support among all americans that says: u know what? we need to do this. and we can do this. and we will do this! all the other reasons not to do it will be easily solved and fall by the wayside and we will wonder what the hell took us so long to take *action*.
george marchetti: thank you for making me aware of the VRI and, in turn, michael seal. i see he is retiring, but i sent him an email and hope to begin a dialogue with him. i have received many emails about solutions "better" than the toyota camry concept car. although impressed with each individual solution my response is the same: how can it be a better solution than one that could be built by one of the largest and most respected automotive manufacturers in the world? although niche players and research are all well and good, and as an engineer myself i know the value in such activities, what we need here is a game changer that can be deployed in large volumes with high quality and done so quickly. i believe that the toyota electric/nat gas hybrid is such a vehicle. to borrow from lincoln, "i will maintain this opinion until someone can convince me otherwise." thanks for the post.
As you have pointed out we have a very powerful network of gas pipes distributed throughout our country (many at high pressure). The addition of a moderate number of fueling outlets connected to those existing pipes PLUS good range of a NG vehicle will greatly increase the practically of NG cars and lead to their wide acceptance.
www.cumminswestport.com/
If you want to follow up with the Vehicle Research Institute at Western Washington University, I'd suggest that you contact Professor Eric Leonhardt. Email:eric.leonhardt@w... I agree with ripski that, for personal transportation, the NGV simply cannot follow the old, inefficient liquid fuel model. A light-weight, aerodynamic NGV parallel or, even better, series hybrid will have to be the base model. Because natural gas is half the retail cost (or less in some places) of gasoline per BTU, the fuel cost associated with a 50 mpgge NGV would be the same as having a 100 mpg gasoline-fueled vehicle. Consumers should find that attractive, along with the adequate driving range that only an NGV hybrid can provide.
Thanks for the education that you have provided and for stimulating such thoughtful responses. Do you intend to discuss biomethane at some point?
George
On May 12 09:33 AM Michael Fitzsimmons wrote:
> ripski: yup, i agree completely that there as not been focus on designing
> consumer NGVs from scratch by toyota, honda, GM, ford, chyrsler etc.
> and that is exactly why we need presidential and governmental leadership
> to encourage these makers by letting them know the US federal gov
> supports their efforts. it reminds me of the natural gas utility
> exec i spoke to on the phone recently about becoming more involved
> in NG refueling stations and Phill distribution, installations, and
> service. he said nat gas execs are watching HR 1835 like a hawk because
> it is a litmus test for federal support for nat gas transportation.
> they don't want to get burned again as in the past. i think the automakers
> are in the same position, especially the foreign ones. they don't
> want to make automobiles that the US gov doesn't want them to make,
> and it is clear the oil lobby has put huge pressure on the presidents
> (past and present) and congress to keep NGVs out of the US market.
> just look at idiotic energy and EPA legislation. it is clear this
> is the biggest factor holding NGVs back. now, if you were toyota,
> would you want to make big investments in the camry electric/ng hybrid
> knowing the US gov doesn't want you to be succesfull? of course not.
> that is why at the LA auto show, toyota presented the long list of
> benefits of the car: to show america that hey, this is what you guys
> need! tell your government!! we can do this if you and your government
> will support us. that is exactly why the Phill and that camry elec/ng
> hybrid are a symbol of US freedom (to me). i would LOVE to get my
> hands on that combination for my own garage. then i wouldn't depend
> on foreign oil for my transportation needs and i would be protected
> from peak oil and it's economic and lifestyle changes that it will
> force upon every american dependent on gasoline. but, obama and chu
> sit on their duffs and do nothing. so, we might as well have bush
> in office because obama administration policy is NOT reducing foreign
> oil imports. wind and solar, while i support them, generate electricity,
> not gasoline. you'd think a nobel prize winning physicist would know
> this, and of course he does. but he is bought and paid for, and that's
> the sad state of US policymakers these days: it's all about money,
> and patriotic concerns not only take a back seat, they aren't even
> in the vehicle, and the vehicle certainly is not an NGV.