Please Note: Blog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors.

Michael Fitzsimmons, Magna Sum Cloudy (Draft)

The following links are to Articles by Michael Fitzsimmons. Different titles but the template is clear. Just use the same pictures and with same words and Paste. Then just fill before and after. Sure does save an author the time and effort of writing an Article.

https://seekingalpha.com/article/188258-natural-gas-transportation-why-not


https://seekingalpha.com/article/182623-asset-returns-show-the-obvious-problems

In the first article, Mr. Fitzsimmons essentialy says that anyone saying that CNG transportation is not safe and secure  doesn't know what they are talking about.
 
I took umbrage to that statement because he also said that there were no studies comparing the two and then used Ford and GM as his proof.

My statement was as follows:

You contradict yourself in the same paragraph:

"Yet there is not one credible study done by an independent source indicating that NGVs are statistically or significantly more dangerous than are gasoline powered vehicles."

There aren't any studies done Yet. But without studies, Pro or Con, Your Conclusion is "that it is Safe and Secure".

"The bottom line is this: NGVs are a safe and secure mode of transportation. Ford (F) and GM would not be manufacturing NGVs for sale if they felt they would be subject to safety liability lawsuits. Anyone who tells you NGVs are not a safe and secure method of transportation simply doesn’t know what they are talking about."

You don't have any studies to support your claim and you certainly don't appear to realize that Manufacturing Unsafe vehicles is a way of Life in the Auto industry. Ever hear about Jeeps rolling over decades ago, the years worth of faulty Toyota cars, Honda Civics blowing up when rear ended (again, years ago). Decades worth of Unsafe and Unsecure cars manufactured by the Auto Industry.

You simply don't know what You are talking about.

Feb 12 05:13 

The following is an exerpt from a study done on CNG buses Vs Diesel Buses. the link to the entire study follows, so much for CNG bus safety: 

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0oGk5TYxHdLIIQAQHVXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE0Y24zbGFiBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMTAEY29sbwNzazEEdnRpZANINTAwXzEzNg--/SIG=11r2f13k7/EXP=1266226776/**http%3a//www.enre.umd.edu/ctrs/report.pdf

"Comparing the estimated results for CNG buses with those of historical diesel school experience, one may conclude that CNG buses are on the average 2.5 times more prone to fire fatality risk than diesel buses. More alarming is the fire risk for passengers of such vehicles. That is, CNG bus passengers’ fatal fire risk is more than two orders of magnitude of the fire risk for diesel bus passengers worst case fire scenarios for CNG buses are expected to lead to higher fatalities as compared to worst case fire scenarios of diesel buses."

Or try this link:

http://rds.yahoo.com/_ylt=A0geu.h3y3dLYYcA49dXNyoA;_ylu=X3oDMTE0ZGJrdnNqBHNlYwNzcgRwb3MDMzEEY29sbwNhYzIEdnRpZANINTAwXzEzNg--/SIG=124103ado/EXP=1266228471/**http%3a//www.enre.umd.edu/ctrs/SAEPresentation.ppt

an attached headline: "CNG SCHOOL BUS OCCUPANT FIRE RISK IS 230 TIMES HIGHER THAN THAT OF DIESEL ... NATURAL GAS VEHICLE SAFETY SURVEY (1992) NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE."

On the other side of the coin, there are articles which gleefully push CNG Cars as being safer.

When I did a search on "Natural Gas vehicle safety studies, I got over 10,000,000 hits. I only looked at the first few pages.

If MF had researched prior to posting, he would have run into these first.

The one thing that really stands out is Diesel/gasoline produce fires, CNG produes Explosions which send out shrapnel. surrounding vehicles are at risk as well.

CNG may be harmless after it dissipates, it is not harmless when the tank is initially punctured, milliseconds from spark to explosion.

Enough of Reality, lets take a look at some of Michaels responses to my comments both specifically and not specifically addressed to him: