Michael Fitzsimmons

Plug-In Natural Gas Hybrid Vehicles: A Game Changer

sludgeman: thanks for providing the link. i should have mentioned this vehicle, but i am very discouraged with toyota of late. i have owned toyotas since the 1970's. my current truck (tacoma) has 90k miles and not one yet, just like all toyotas i have owned. that said, i really think toyota went off the mark when they started introducing the tundra and the bigger tacoma. they left their game plan, and recently posted their first yearly loss since 1950. i have been communicating with the company the last 3 years or so to voice my displeasure at their lack of a NGV and their policy of making yet bigger (and less fuel efficient trucks). when i contacted them about a nat gas conversion kit for my truck, they not only said they didn't plan to make the kit, or any nat gas vehicle in the US, but sternly warned me that any aftermarket kit installation would void my warranty. i can understand the warranty issue i suppose, but i can't understand their attitude toward NGV, especially the hybrid in the article you pointed us to. this vehicle is *exactly* what the US needs. note that the article explains all the rationale for such a vehicle - weaning the US off foreign oil, lower emissions, fueled by US produced nat gas, etc. etc. then toyota says they have no plans to produce and market the car in the US (!). why can't our do-nothing congressmen and obama get together with toyota and make a deal whereby if toyota will manufacture 1 million of these vehicles in US factories, they will build out the fueling infrastructure (via a "stimulus" plan) on the interstate highway system? it's a win win, not "busy work" jobs, and would start a revolution in personal transportation. and best of all, no more dollars to unfriendly oil producing nations that have us by the short hairs! thanks for the link.

Plug-In Natural Gas Hybrid Vehicles: A Game Changer

RoyM. - i heard the tax credit was being discussed some time back, but i did not know for sure that it got into the bill the house voted on. i will check. it's a step in the right direction. however, congress and obama had a great chance to beat the hell outta the auto execs for not making NGV available in the US (Ford and GM do sell them in other countries). anyhow, i hope you are right on the tax credit. it would also be great if the gov would create a natural gas refueling infrastructure initiative along the intersate highway system. those would be meaningful jobs that would pay dividends for decades...

Plug-In Natural Gas Hybrid Vehicles: A Game Changer

back for more...

seeking truth: i agree with your first statement, however i don't see how we get around building more nuclear plants if we make a big jump in electric cars. coal should be stopped in its tracks.

i DO live in the tennessee valley area, and don't get me started on the spill, or on Senator Corker who even though he is from Chattanooga, it apparently doesnt seem to bother him that the residue from the spill (mercury, arsenic, lead, beryllium, and cadmoum among other goodies) will simply go down the emory river, into the clinch river, and then dump into the tennessee river, and go right down the valey to bob corker's water spigot in chattanooga. no wonder the cancer levels in the tennessee valley area are so high. but i am sure senator bob will have his water imported from france. btw, the kingston coal plant was the biggest coal plant in the world when it was built over 50 years ago. the amount of toxic ash spilled was enough to cover 3,000 acres 1 foot deep, or, 48 times the volume of the exxon valdez oil spill. dump trucks were called in to "clean it up", but where were the dumptrucks taking the crap? we couldn't find out because of course the police had everything tied off. however, we did see the water in the lake glowing at night, that very weird green glow...scary as shit man. but yeah, the TVA says the water quality is fine, no problem, Corker was against Federal money to clean it up (but note at the same time he was pushing for the money to "bailout" all the banks, insurance, and financial institutions - but oh, that money just went for bonuses to millionaires who already have too much money). what a friggin country man.

oops, i did get started on it. i apologize. anyhow, thanks for your nice compliments truth seeker.

koolsool: yes, they are. honda, gm, and ford all make them. they have been in use for decades. it is a mature technology inspite of the misconceptions of americans. that said, the cars and trucks just aren't widely available in the US, nor are the refueling stations. thus, my call for federal action. yet, obama blew his big chance.

old wizard; agree with everything you said except i am not sure about the last line on corp tax rates. honestly, i think most corporations have loopholes to get around paying any taxes at all. but, that is just a gut feel, i have no data, and therefore should say no more. thx.

Plug-In Natural Gas Hybrid Vehicles: A Game Changer

thanks again folks for all the comments. i'll hop in here:

john s. - sounds like we need a sensor & alarm.

longoil: neither technology is new here. the prius has been shipping for many years now. nat gas cars and trucks have been used for decades.
wrt the weight, i think you are double counting. a prius already has a battery pack, so the only weight differential would be the difference in weight between a regular gasoline tank and a CNG tank. that delta is certainly way under the 800 lbs you quote, would u not agree?

finmah: yup, i understand the alt energy is not the biggest item in the list. at the same time, i am not sure Obama can turn a blind eye to the realities of the economy today, and the effect it is having on millions of middle class americans who have had no income increases over the past 10 years, have lost their savings in the market, and have lost their jobs due to no fault of their own, but to idiotic fiscal and economic policies by our recent "leaders". so, would i like more energy? u bet - especially nat gas centric. that is the real shame about the last 8 years: the country was not only bankrupt, we have nothing to show for it. and now, instead of fixing our energy problems, we are spending money on *alot* of other stuff that is broken and in the ditch. as far as your last comment on creating jobs and sustainability, i agree - and building out the nat gas infrastructure and transportation creates good jobs and will pay dividends for decades (not to mention stop sending our money to foreign energy producers). it's a win-win all around.

longoil: hell, it's obvious the saudis (and add bush & cheney...) want to keep us addicted to oil, and we are helping them! as far as the gov giving loan to business to ensure the success - that is what they are doing now: billions to GM and chrysler. at the same time, we have NO nat gas related strings attached. MISSED OPPORTUNITY.

bindlepete: why go through all those steps when the folks in utah, brazil, and asia are quite happy simply burning the nat gas in it's simplest form - straight out of existing nat gas distribution networks and in their garage?

long ball: exactly! i first investigated converting my toyota truck to nat gas. toyota tells me it will void all my warranties because they don't provide a conversion kit and dont support after market. so, i told them i would go buy a honda. i called honda - you cannot buy a honda civic GX in my state, *no exceptions*. the conspiracy would be comical if it wasnt so serious and detrimental to our country. anyhow, you are dead-on with your observation (and kudos for trying to nat gas your fleet!). it reminds me of the documentary "Who Killed the Electric Car". if you havent seen it, you should check it out:

www.sonyclassics.com/w.../

clearlead: ok, i have been getting alot of email (directly to my email account as opposed to on here) jumping my butt for this article and sticking to the 100% electric vision. here is my problem with that strategy:

1) pure electric cars are simply not available in quantity today.
2) even if they were, the US is not making the batteries, so we are trading foreign oil addiction to asian battery addiction
3) even if the cars and batteries were available, the public is slow to buy them
5) even if electric cars were available, and even if the public did buy them, if one looks at replacing a significant portion of the 390,000,000 gallons of gas with electric substitutes, the US currently doesn't have the electric generation to support this. for instance, say we substitute 20% of our gasoline usage with electric cars (78,000,000 gallons of gasoline). now, calculate the number of BTU's in that amount of gasoline and convert to electric MW and tell me, where is that power going to come from?
6) even if we DID have the electric cars available in quantity, and even if the public DID buy them, and even if we DID have the electrical generation capacity, we DON'T currently have the transmission grid capacity to distribute that power!.

now, i support project better place, i support electric cars, and i support wind and solar and nuclear electric generation. it's all in my energy policy:
thefitzman.blogspot.co...

*but* electric cars will take time to produce, nuclear will take years to build-out, wind and solar will take TIME and so will building out the grid. not to mention the funding is drying up in many areas right now. so, sticking with the "pure electric car" strategy is simply not realistic. compared to a nat gas/electric hybird (which could be built today), we are wasting time and:
1) continue to send 70% of our oil dollars to foreign producers (most unfriendly to the US)
2) continue to burn gasoline at 19lbs of CO2 per gallon
3) continue to neglect US produced nat gas here at home
4) continue to see our automotive companies sink deeper and deeper.

we need to be realistic about the timeframes for electric cars, wind and solar infrastructure, and building out the electric grid. it is very dangerous not to because all it does is keep us on the oil centric path we have been on and this is NOT WORKING in sooo many ways.

grampa jim: thanks!

isaac: hey man! hope you don't mind me including you in the article - i figured you'd be ok with it, but i suppose i should have contacted you first (didn't think about that til later). i have a saying for things that i really like. regarding your suggestion "good action!" and it is a separate bullet in my energy policy now.

jack kreg: sorry if i neglected to notice, and mention, that you had earlier recommended to me a nat gas, electric hybrid. i don't recall.

john peterson: thanks! i have read and enjoyed many of your articles and comments as well. as far as everyone waiting for the "perfect solution", i couldn't agree more (please see my comment above to clearlead which lists the reason why simply waiting for a 100% electric car is dangerous and keeps the status quo in place). as far as testing, i would *love* to see toyota make a plug-in prius with nat gas as a concept car and test the heck outta it. i would volunteer as a guinea pig :) thanks for the comment.

old wizard: oh yeah, municpal nat gas fleets are already widely available and this is in my energy policy as well. it's a no brainer isn't it? yet some folks still think nat gas powered transportation is "new" technology. it is decades all and very mature.

red raider: thanks for the comments bud, but with all due respect i have to say i would disagree with your conclusions on wind. it's economical today, and is making money in germany, texas, and many other locations. sure there is an infrastructure transimission issue, and tax incentives are needed short term, but wind is real, and it will keep progressing. if the strategy for charging plug-in electrics is coal, as you said, then we are all doomed. talk about pumping alot of CO2 and mercury into the air...wait til we depend on coal to replace the 390,000,000 gallons of gas we burn every day. that is *alot* of MW!!
anyhow, thanks for your compliments.

jack kreg: yup, nat gas vehicles and electric/nat gas hybrids are the way to go in the nearterm if we want to:
1) reduce foreign oil imports significantly in the next 3-5 years
2) we want to reduce CO2 emissions
3) we want to create jobs and an infrastructure that will pay dividends for decades
4) we want to renew the competitive advantage of our auto makers
thanks jack.

isaac: maria cantwell huh? wow, i have some cantwells in my family tree from the old irish settlements in western NY and northwestern PA. wonder if she's a cuz? anyhow, thanks for forwarding it on. maybe some senator, someday, will actually read it on the floor of the senate. wouldn't that be something? :) thanks again for your great feedback on the subject!