Glycerol a big boost for biodiesel?

Turn it into methanol

Every year the US incinerates about 350,000 tons of glycerol per year, much of it produced as a waste product from biodiesel. However, a new method developed by Oxford University can now turn this waste product into methanol according to CleanEdge.

Green car dealerships: A worthy investment?

Would you buy a car from a green dealership?

Green car dealerships are popping up across America, and at one time I was interested in such a venture. Yet, what cars do you sell? Electric cars, bio-diesels, used hybrids, electric bicycles? All of the above?

What about financing?

Still, some are finding success meeting the needs of green consumers. Can the trend last? Opinions vary.

For an interesting article on green car dealerships, check out this MSNBC article.

Biodiesel wonder weed for emerging markets?

Could Jatropha provide cheap biodiesel?

I'm not a big fan of biodiesel or ethanol - at least not yet. Most important, I don't believe that the plant materials being used to develop these fuels, such as corn or soybeans, are the right ones. Still, cellulosic biofuels offer incredible potential. Thus, biofuels do have a role in America's energy paradigm, and I do believe they should be pursued.

In other areas of the world, however, biofuels offer much more potential, particularly because most other countries aren't the energy hogs that is America and our gas-guzzling culture.

Thus, CNBC has been plugging Jatropha as the "wonder weed" for emerging markets, particularly India, China, Malaysia and the Philippines. Offering 10x the oil per acre as soybeans, the once annoying weed, jatropha, could be a major money-making weed for the biofuels industry.

Unfortunately, it's not easy to play Jatropha as an investment, and it must be played through corn and soybeans, which all trade together according to CNBC.

Does biodiesel make large SUVs O.K.?

Is there enough biodiesel to go around?

So you drive a large SUV, yet you have SUV guilt? What can you do? Convert it to a biodiesel.

"LoveCraft Bio-Fuels in Los Angeles has converted more than 1,400 vehicles to run on vegetable oil by installing a system of heaters, pumps and filters. Its most famous client was Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, who modified one of his Hummers," writes MSNBC.

“To take the vehicle that symbolizes one of the worst environmental violators and get it to run on vegetable oil was pretty cool,” LoveCraft co-founder Brian Friedman said.

That is cool, especially for old SUVs until they are retired. Still, is there enough biodiesel to replace oil? Not according to most experts - not even close. Even worse, such a move could drastically increase the price of many foods.

Still, its hard to argue against waste-driven biodiesel, but it must be accepted that this is just a niche. This is a great program for older vehicles, but it certainly isn't an excuse to buy new, large SUVs.

Forget the politicians when it comes to hybrids and biofuels?

Does it really matter which Party is in control?

If you ask me, competition works better than politicians. I'm not saying competition works perfectly, but it works better than a bunch of rich, special interest-funded partisan politicians.

Consequently, I've been very bothered that Congress has not extended Toyota's hybrid tax credits - something both Republicans and Democrats have ignored. Yet, in the last couple of years, both parties have talked considerably about energy dependence, especially foreign oil dependence and/or global warming. Yet, very little has been accomplished to alleviate these problems.

Obviously, the task is not simple. Still, it seems to me that the quickest way to make automakers deal with fuel efficiency is simple competition. Force them to act or risk losing customers.

Thus, the more success Toyota has selling hybrid vehicles, the more pressure there is.....Finish Hybrids and Biofuels: Forget the Politicians.

Politicians Blowing Bio-Fuels?

Better Biofuels killed by politicians?

"This startup adds genes to microbes so the bugs convert sugar into useful stuff—such as green fuels. "Lobbyists have a huge influence in American politicals. For example, Amyris figures it can make a diesel and a gasoline-like product that offer major advantages over ethanol and biodiesel, today's alternative-fuel darlings. "Why not look for better solutions?" says Melo. "There is a second generation of fuels coming that could be very helpful to the country." (more from BusinessWeek)

When politicians are funded by lobbyists and special interest groups, can voters really expect politicians to do the right thing?

Eat more meat, make more bio-diesel?

Natural-air cleaning rainforests being burned for cattle grazing

I'm sort of happy to hear that ConocoPhillips and Tyson Foods are forming a partnership to make diesel fuel from animal byproducts. Ultimately, eating meat causes massive global warming pollution, so anything that alleviates some of this pollution is a good thing, right?

At the same time, however, animal fuel is just a bit scary. One can almost imagine, 'Eat more meat. It's not just for supper, it's clean gas for tomorrow's commute' ads. 'Forget those veggies, go for the NY Strip!'

He's not an environmentalist - Why I can't trust Al Gore

The environmentalist?

I am an environmentalist, but not a hardcore environmentalist; however, I have known a lot of hardcore environmentalists. People whom never shower, hate to flush toilets, eat only natural foods, and drive bio-diesel cars with bio-diesel they made in the basement (but whom only drove if they absolutely have to drive) - people obsessively concerned not just with their carbon footprint, but their entire footprint upon the world.

Al Gore is not one of these people. Read the rest of Why I can't trust Al Gore

Europeans set to test bio-diesel hybrids

Scania is set to begin testing some new electric hybrid trucks in Sweden next year. These diesel electric hybrids will be powered by ethanol and regenerative breaking - via supercapacitor electricity storage.

Wow! Almost sounds like a scene from Back to the Future - flux capacitors! (Press Release)

Who cares about foreign oil dependency?

America hasn't learned anything from the 70's gas lines, the Iranian hostage crisis or even 9/11

Recently, President Bush suggested the idea of reducing gasoline dependence by 20 percent in the next decade. America's Big 3 automakers responded that ending foreign oil dependency just isn't profitable.

On the other hand, Honda welcomed the idea, and Toyota was far less opposed than American automakers. So, which automakers are better for America?

Yet, foreign oil dependency has already cost Americans more than a trillion dollars, and it is certain to cause even far more money and problems in the next few decades if we can't even reduce dependence by 20 percent. Ironically, however, such a sum could easily fund the technology to end foreign oil dependency using today's technology such as hybrid cars, clean diesels, lightweight composite materials and bio-fuels.

So why don't Americans take foreign oil dependency more seriously? (Read More)

Nissan to step up electric and hybrid vehicle plans

Nissan is going to develop its own line of lithium-ion batteries and use those batteries to produce electric cars available for sale in about 3 years. Since this report is coming out of Japan, it is hard to assess which markets Nissan is focused on for these new electric vehicles. In addition, to the electric vehicles, Nissan is also going to step up plans for hybrid vehicles, bio-diesel vehicles and diesel vehicles.

Bio-diesel the next big investment in Europe?

With Europe's high gas prices and heightened concerns over global warming, it is no surprise that bio-diesel usage is expected to increase significantly in the next few years.

"We believe biofuels are here to stay as they represent a road to a cleaner transport sector that currently lacks significant alternatives," Goldman Sach said.

Consequently, Europe's market for biodiesel is expected to double by just 2010.

(Source: Reuters)

Now that CAFE is dead, it's all about the tax incentives

High gasoline prices are only the most obvious, negative result of America's foreign oil dependency. The worldwide geopolitical crisis that America is facing in an effort to maintain its dependency on oil is the real, but less visible, problem.

Now that CAFE is essentially dead, or at least rendered useless, the only thing that can make a difference are tax incentives. Congress must give consumers strong tax incentives to buy hybrid cars or to use bio-diesel, for example.

If automakers don't want to develop such technologies - they don't have to - but let consumers reward those that can and will.

It is simply ridiculous that vehicles, such as the Hummer, can receive a $25,000 small business tax deduction - a tax incentive far greater than any hybrid receives. When the Hummer achieves 35 mpg, then it might deserve such a deduction.

It's time for Americans to make a stand and demand that we stop giving so many incentives to oil companies and the likes, and that we give those incentives to consumers that reduce their oil use, or that move beyond oil.

American automakers have thus far failed America, oil companies have failed America, and if Congress doesn't pass a strong set of tax incentives for consumers, not corporations, to buy clean technologies, they will continue their failure of America.

Let's not let it happen. (More)

CAFE and Congress: Much Ado About Nothing?

Not long ago I referenced a story that ridiculed Congress and its conservationist policies. On a day members of Congress went to a gas station about a block from their offices to speak about high gas prices, almost every member was driven, spoke as their vehicles idled, and then was driven back one block to their offices. Even worse, most members were in gas-guzzlers. As if that were not enough, most members regularly drive gas-guzzlers.

This is Congressional leadership? Reminds me of what my old football coach used to say, "Anybody can talk the talk, but only champions walk the walk.

Apparently, there aren't many champions in either Congress or the White House these days, maybe there hasn't been in a long time. In today's world LEADERS would be driving hybrid cars, bio-diesel cars, or maybe flex-fuel vehicles fueled with E85, not Tahoes, Escalades, and BMW 760's. Maybe a REAL leader would even - dare I say - walk!?

Today, Congress is focused on CAFE, something they didn't act on just a year ago, but it's good politics now that Americans are angry about high gas prices. It seems success in Congress is driven by doing little and blaming someone else for the problem.

While I am an advocate for increasing CAFE, the plan is really going nowhere. The boldest move that has reasonable support - although probably not enough support - is to raise CAFE by 10 mpg in 10 years. In 10 years, with millions more Americans driving longer commutes while in more congestion, 10 mpg will basically accomplish, well, nothing.

The best case scenario for this plan is that we'll only be importing as much oil in the future as today. Whooohooo!

Nothing short of an automotive revolution is going to change America's oil addiction, and 10 mpg is far from a revolution. Unfortunately, only dire catastrophe will wake Americans up to such a realization, and without REAL leadership coming from Congress and the White House, such a catastrophe appears inevitable.

Time to Declare War on Foreign Oil Dependency?

I think America is at War, a war that most Americans refuse to acknowledge, and the fight for independence from foreign oil dependency is shaping up to be the most important war America has ever fought.

Former CIA Director R. James Woolsey has become a huge advocate for ending America's foreign oil dependency, and he is very outspoken about the dangers of America's oil addiction.

"If you want to see who's paying for all that [extremism and terrorism], next time you pull in to fill up, turn the rearview mirror a little bit so you can look at yourself for a minute as you get out with your credit card," Woolsey said during a meeting with reporters and editors of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review.

Yet, Americans don't really think about that - to our direct connection to extremism and terrorism - instead we think about how expensive is $3.00 oil. Sadly, $3.00 oil is nothing compared to what could happen.

Aside from the problems in Iran, Nigeria, Venezuela, aside from hurricanes, aside from rapidly growing oil demand in China and India, an attack on Saudi oil refineries could have an even greater impact on gasoline prices.

How bad?

Today oil is at $70.00 per barrel, but if Saudi oil refineries were damaged - not destroyed - oil could easily climb to over $150.00 per barrel. Add intensified problems with Iran, or another major hurricane and who knows how high oil prices could climb.

What would a year of $7.00 gasoline do for the American economy? How high would $7.00 gas push the cost of groceries and other commodities? How would $7.00 gas help your commute?

What We Can Do

Fighting this war isn't a battle between ethanol versus biodiesel, or clean diesel cars versus hybrid cars. All of these technologies and alternative fuels MUST be utilized. Conservation MUST be utilized.

While politicians can blame one another, and citizens can blame politicians, automakers and the drivers of gas-guzzlers, blame will not win the war. While many in Congress blame other members, or the President, how many members regularly drive a hybrid car, fill up with ethanol or biodiesel, or maybe even walk a little more? Not very many according to recent reports. What about citizens?

Ultimately, little can be done in the short term to fix gas prices or to reduce foreign oil dependency. Today, average citizens must try to conserve, buy hybrid cars, use ethanol where available, or give bio-diesel a try. Moreover, we have to think about the future. We must make Congress and the President create more tax incentives for clean automobiles and clean fuels, not for Hummers and for oil companies.

Finally, we need to let automakers and politicians know that if they can't, or won't, help us fight this war, we'll find alternatives to them.

Join our campaign to make Congress Act.

Toyota is the Most Important Automaker in the World

I was reading an article this morning, Honda sees hybrid owners buying fuel cell cars, and it struck me how Toyota has become the most important automaker in the world.

It turns out Honda is looking to the drivers of its hybrid cars to drive Honda Fuel Cell Vehicles.

"Honda has a rough idea of who its first fuel-cell customers will be, people trading in their gasoline-electric hybrid cars," states this AP article.

"We already hear of people saying, 'gee I like my hybrid but what's next. I want to go beyond gasoline'," says Steve Ellis, manager of fuel-cell marketing for American Honda Motor Co.

Yet, Ellis also notes that, "fuel-cell cars will make up only a fraction of the auto market for two or more decades."

While it's great that Honda is looking beyond hybrid vehicles, is the status quo of the world's fleet of automobiles good enough for the next two or three decades?

What happens when millions and millions of new drivers from China and India demand more oil in the next decade? What happens if Iran cuts oil production to the West? What happens if 10 years of increased, severe hurricane activity batters oil refineries in the Gulf of Mexico? What happens if global warming is actually much more serious than believed?

Even worse, what happens if the 'hydrogen economy' is found to result in some unintended consequence that actually makes gasoline still a better a solution?

How Green is Green Enough?

Sure Honda is the greenest automaker in the world, but none of the world's automakers are green enough, and that's why Toyota is so important.

Toyota's aggressive push into hybrid cars has made the public realize that much better automobiles - in terms of fuel economy and pollution - are available now, not in decades.

Yet, the best thing about hybrids is that hybrid technology offers much more potential than is currently offered. For example, hybrid technology could be added to flex-fuel vehicles, to diesel vehicles, to bio-diesel vehicles, to hydrogen vehicles, etc. Moreover, more and more research will lead to significantly better hybrid batteries. Consequently, 100 mpg hybrid vehicles could easily be less than a decade away.

100 mpg vehicles aren't worth striving for along the way to fuel cell vehicles in today's world? The status quo is simply good enough for another few decades?

Inevitably, when America experiences sustained gas prices of more than $3.00 per gallon combined with the constant threat of gas spikes of more than $5.00 per gallon, automakers won't - at least those that want to survive - have any choice but to build as many hybrids as possible.

Thanks to Toyota, Americans and the world will know, automakers can do better, much better.

Peugeot-Citroen hybrid vehicles by 2010 twice as efficient as Prius

Peugeot hopes to sell the Peugeot 307 and Citroen C4 hybrids by 2010

Yesterday, I blogged that I was tired of reporters whom claim that clean diesel is an alternative to hybrid cars, especially since diesel vehicles can also be hybrid vehicles.

Case in Point

"Imagine a car that gets 82 miles a gallon -- doubling the average fuel efficiency of the green-automotive market leader Toyota Prius. French auto maker PSA Peugeot-Citroen believes it can deliver such a car by 2010 with hybrid diesel engines that will join two fuel-efficient technologies. "That's the future. It combines the best of both worlds," says Thomas Sedran, partner at Munich consultancy Roland Berger." (BusinessWeek)

Whether the fuel is diesel, gasoline, hydrogen, ethanol, bio-diesel, or electricity, hybrid technology makes each of these fuels, and the vehicles powered by them, cleaner and more fuel efficient.

Join the Hybrid Car Revolution!

2nd glance at the Land Rover e Concept hybrid

Last week I made a post about the Land Rover e Concept hybrid vehicle that I didn't give much attention. Since; however, I've read a feature that MSN published on this hybrid. MSN states, "The Land_e is one of the most unusual concept presentations in the show, but potentially one of the most significant."

Not only will the Land Rover hybrid offer 30 percent gains in fuel efficiency, it's innovative hybrid technology will enable this hybrid to function off-road with the same performance for which it is known. In fact the hybrid Land Rover might actually perform better than a conventional Land Rover in off-road conditions, as well as on the highway.

And to top it off, the Land Rover e Concept will be able to utilize bio-diesel.

Just another example of how the technology behind hybrid cars is just emerging and that there is far more potential to be tapped.

Want to try out bio-diesel?

Bio-Beetle Eco Rental Cars has opened a new store in Los Angeles. Previously, you would have had to live in Hawaii to rent a bio-diesel from Eco. So, if you want to give bio-diesel a try and you live in SoCal, give them a try. (more)

By 2020 hybrid cars will dominate auto sales

Hybrid cars will dominate new car sales by at least 2020.

When stories such as how the Greenland ice cap is melting twice as fast as was thought just a few years ago hit the press, those of us that worry about global warming get anxious and even angry. Still, I believe that in the next decade, the evidence of global will become so clear, that the majority of the world will demand action.

Such demand could justify the extra costs of hybrid vehicles, even if those costs can't be made up solely by saving money on fuel.

While hybrid critics might claim that such demand could benefit clean diesel instead of hybrid cars, those critics simply have no vision.

Why?

New research being done at Sandia National Laboratories, for example, demonstrates that a new generation of lithium-ion batteries will be ready to take over the hybrid battery market before 2010.

Once this transition takes place, lithium-ion batteries will be cheaper, lighter and far more efficient than the current NiMH batteries used in today's hybrids. This means cheaper hybrid vehicles that further reduce pollution while offering greater fuel efficiency and better performance than today's hybrid vehicles.

If this hybrid battery transition occurs by 2010, imagine the technological advances that will occur in this technology by 2020. If you are having problems with this visualization, think about the advancement of notebook computers from 1995 to 2005 and remember that software, computers, semiconductors and lithium batteries dominate the technology behind both hybrids and notebook computers.

By 2020, conventional vehicles simply won't be able to cost-effectively compete with hybrid cars.

Maybe, you say, but won't fuel cell vehicles be ready by then?

Maybe. Since the same batteries used by gasoline hybrid vehicles will probably be used by fuel cell vehicles, fuel cell vehicles could also gain from these advancements. Still, since Ford, GM, and Toyota, for example, believe that fuel cell vehicles will be fuel cell hybrid vehicles, hybrid vehicles will still dominate auto sales either way.

Today's hybrid cars won't save America, or the world, from global warming or oil dependency, but tomorrow's hybrids could. The more we invest in hybrids today, the sooner we'll have real tools to fight oil dependency and global warming, not just in America - the world's biggest global warming culprit - but in the entire world.

The potential of hybrids simply must be tapped. Sure, conservation, clean diesel, ethanol and bio-fuel can help, especially in the short term. Moreover, clean diesel, ethanol and bio-fuel can also be utilized by hybrid vehicles and should be used by hybrids.

Dare to dream that the world can end oil dependence and that the world can fight global warming because it can. Let's make it happen.

Dare to dream: Flex fuel plug-in hybrid vehicles

"Advocates for diesel -- a less refined fuel than gasoline that burns more completely in the engine, delivering more power -- say it can cut oil use, perhaps more quickly and cost effectively than alternatives such as hybrids and ethanol." (CNNMoney)

Wow, diesel can cut oil use. Holy cow, somebody call up the Nobel committee!! We're ready to end foreign oil dependence!!

O.K., maybe not. While clean diesel is an excellent technology, it will never go far enough.

Diesel advocate Dieter Zetsche, CEO of DaimlerChrysler, "estimated that if 30 per cent of the vehicle fleet were powered by diesels, the United States could reduce fuel consumption enough to cut oil imports by the equivalent of what it buys each year from Saudi Arabia." (MotorTrend)

But what about Iran, Nigeria, and Venezuela, etc.? Why are we so content with such insignificant results and small goals?

Additionally, I disagree with the fuel efficiency of diesels. Advocates claim that clean diesel is 30% more fuel efficient - on the highway at least.

Yet new studies claim, "The worst traffic in the U.S. is getting even worse. It pollutes as the vehicles idle. It wastes the time of trucks and passenger cars. The annual delay per driver is in excess of 47 hours per year. It creates delayed shipments. It wastes more than 2.3 billion gallons of fuel each year." (Fortune)

In reality, diesel gas is going to have little effect on reducing fuel consumption in these conditions. Since census data suggests that the far majority of Americans are going to live around just a few large cities in the future, shouldn't congestion be the new standard for testing fuel efficiency?

In congestion - or the driving conditions of the future - full hybrid technology, such as that powering Toyota and Ford hybrid cars, is the best.

Then there is the cost of diesel fuel, and even if those costs are eventually reduced, Americans will simply drive more and then we'll need that Saudi Arabian oil anyway. So, where is the gain?

Dare to Dream

Why are we so afraid to shoot for the moon? Why do we accept such complacency from governments, oil barons, and automotive corporations? Why don't we demand the best, most innovative fuel efficient technology available? Why don't we demand choice?

For example, instead of diesel, why not diesel hybrids? Even better, flex-fuel diesel plug-in hybrids or flex-fuel gasoline plug-in hybrids blow every competitor away.

The only technology that can compare to or surpass flex plug-in hybrid technology is fuel cell technology, but the costs are just to high at this time, and fuel cell vehicles will probably be hybrid vehicles anyway.. Flex-fuel plug-in hybrids, on the other hand, can already achieve well over 100 mpg, while offering numerous fuel choices, such bio-diesel, diesel, gasoline, ethanol, electricity, solar-electricity, wind-electricity, etc.

More important, as hybrid battery technology advances, the fuel efficiency of hybrid batteries will increase significantly while reducing costs - think notebook computers and their batteries.

Besides isn't capitalism supposed to be about competition? Where is the competition in today's energy paradigm?

Don't question the lack of competition because energy is cheap?

How many trillions will oil politics and oil-driven pollution end up costing the world? Has cheap oil really been such a bargain?

Obviously, cheap oil has been great for oil companies. Entire countries are driven by oil profits alone, and oil conglomerates set unbelievable records for profits, yet continually ask for tax incentives as if they have somehow lost money over the history of oil.

We the People

Ultimately, most American simply haven't demanded more. Instead we complain about high gas prices, about Bush's oil connections, about Haliburton, about Iraq, about Iran, and then we go buy a gas-guzzler.

Americans should Dare to Dream for energy independence just as we dared to dream for the moon. If America could become energy independent, then any country could become energy independent, and what would be so wrong with that? Bankrupt oil companies?

I say let's start judging our politicians, corporations, and other capitalists by their ability make our dreams reality, not by their ability to maintain the status quo.

Let's DARE TO DREAM!!!

Clean diesel and hybrid technology: Let's work together

DaimlerChrylser is nowhere to be seen in the segment of hybrid cars. Why? They say clean diesel is better (more)

So is hybrid technology less important than clean diesel technology?

An interesting place to find an answer to that question is Europe. Europe is all about diesel, and in France, diesel is seen as the short term answer, but diesel hybrid vehicles are seen as the next step before fuel cells. (more)

Why? Because diesel hybrids would still be 20 - 30 percent more fuel efficient than clean diesel engines, and that is just with today's technology.

What the critics of hybrids are missing - in a huge way - is that experimental hybrids already demonstrate that is quite possible to achieve more than 200 mpg. When lithium-ion batteries take over NiMH batteries for use in hybrid cars, everything will change.

To assume that won't happen would be like assuming computers wouldn't overtake calculators.

The fact is, hybrid technology is just emerging, and the potential of hybrid technology has barely been tapped.

In reality, in the next decade, a diesel hybrid that achieves more than 200 mpg is completely feasible and cost effective. Within this same period, a completely feasible fuel cell vehicle will still cost more than $100,000.00.

In a decade, the potential of clean diesel technology simply won't be in the same league as hybrid technology.

Still, even if clean diesel is 20 or 30 percent more efficient than standard gasoline engines, diesel still costs almost a $1.00 more per gallon in California.

How cost effective is that?

Related

Hybrid cars versus biodiesel

Europeans starting to buy into hybrids, but diesel hybrids

Recently PSA Peugeot Citroen announced it will begin developing hybrid cars in connection with a call to do so by French President Jacques Chirac (more). Yesterday, Puegeot announced that it has also made significant gains in its fuel cells, yet the company still believes that fuel cell vehicles are still a long way from commercial reality.

"SA Chairman Jean-Martin Folz told a news conference that the best way to save on fuel consumption of cars in the short term was by boosting the use of diesel and by adding bio-fuel to diesel."

"For the medium term, hybrid diesel engines would offer further reduction in consumption and greenhouse gas emissions, while fuel cells, which release energy from the reaction of hydrogen and oxygen with a catalyst, were for a later stage, he said." (more)

New York joins California in fighting greenhouse gas emissions from cars

According to Reuters New York is joining California to require that, "Cars sold or registered in New York state must cut carbon dioxide emissions beginning in 2009."

Of course the Alliance of Automakers is balking, as they did when California announced its legislation. "Automakers need a consistent national policy for fuel economy, and national fuel economy standards cannot be written by any single state or group of states," said Gloria Bergquist, spokeswoman in Washington for the Alliance of Automobile Manufactures, which filed suit in California to block regulation there.

I guess you can't blame the automakers for wanting to continue their complacency, but it is time, especially for American automakers, to move forward. Hybrid cars, bio-diesel vehicles, etc. prove that technology exists to change America now.

It's time to stop making excuses and time to start doing the right thing. Instead of spending 10's of millions on lawsuits and 100's of millions on marketing to prevent change, invest in real innovation.

Fuel cell hybrid vehicles: The next step for hybrids?

Already, Toyota is claiming that its hybrid cars will eventually become fuel cell cars. In essence, hybrid vehicles are providing the foundation for fuel cell automobiles. A recent article demonstrates that Ford is also starting to follow this path. "The FCV [Ford Fusion FCV] is a hybrid car that uses a fuel cell powertrain supplied by Ballard Power Systems Inc. as well as a nickel metal-hydride battery pack and a brake-by-wire electrohydraulic regenerative braking system."

If this is true, what is the foundation of most hybrid critics?

Hybrids, such as the Prius or the Escape hybrid, can achieve amazing fuel efficiency and clean emissions today, but the potential of such hybrids is barely being tapped. Better hybrid batteries, diesel hybrids or bio-diesel hybrids, demonstrate that we can change the world - in terms of foreign oil dependency and clean air - and we don't have to wait for fuel cells.

Nonetheless, as fuel cell breakthroughs do occur, we can convert hybrids into fuel cell hybrid vehicles.

Is it just because GM isn't leading the way that hybrids are so criticized? I know they have an amazingly huge marketing budget, but is that enough reason for critics to wear such blinders?

Corn-based diesel set for explosive gains?

According to my October issue of Popular Science Magazine, just 0.5 gallon "of an experimental corn-based diesel - now in the works at the University of Wisconsin - can produce as much energy as one gallon of ethanol."

Yet, flex fuel ethanol-gasoline engines seem to to be the rage in Congress, according to a recent Autoweek article. Why are we picking the most inefficient path? While I'm not opposed to ethanol-gasoline engines, ethanol-diesel engines seem to offer even more potential. AutoWeek even cites Brazil as a success, however, doesn't Brazil use ethanol-diesel flexible fuel engines (more)?

Once again it appears that American politicians are stuck in the status quo and completely unable to think outside-of-the-box.

Additionally, merging flexible fuel technology with hybrid vehicle technology could create vehicles that not only end foreign oil dependency, but hedge consumers against spikes in fuel prices. For example, in Brazil ethanol fuels are sometimes more expensive than diesel and the flexible fuel engine; therefore, provides choice to Brazilian consumers when drought raises the price of ethanol.

Flexible fuel diesel hybrids offers consumers a great range of fuel choices, including ethanol, diesel, bio-diesel, regenerative electric, or even solar. Why do we stop so short? All of the above technologies could be combined to achieve unbelievable levels of clean and fuel efficient performance, at a fraction of the cost of fuel cells. Some of these experimental hybrids have already been developed.

So what's the problem?

Religion, science and hybrid cars

I make this post with a little tongue-in-cheek. Nonetheless, I read an interesting article the other day called, Is US becoming hostile to science? Ultimately, the article focuses on creationism versus evolution and it asserts that a significant percentage of Americans don't believe in evolution, nor the big bang, and many have become quite hostile towards science.

Similarly, an interesting video on CNN Video titled, America's Negative Numbers, notes that the U.S. has dropped to 28th in math compared to other countries and 22nd in science.

Is it any wonder China and Russia are sending men into space as America watches?

While I don't want to get into the debate between creationism and evolution, I have to admit that I believe in the power of science, but I also believe in god. To me science is simply the reproducible understanding of nature, and reviewing just the last 100 years it is hard to argue against what science has accomplished.

Some creationists that I know not only dismiss evolution, but also global warming and the dangers of oil dependency. Since hybrid cars are utilized by many as a solution to both global warming and oil dependency, then hybrids are equally dismissed as unnecessary.

Many bright bloggers and writers might argue that the dismissal of hybrids isn't due to a dislike of science, but is about simple facts. They argue that clean diesel or bio-diesel is a more affordable solution.

While I agree that both clean diesel and bio-diesel are significantly better options than our current path, I do not agree that either, by themselves, go far enough nor match the potential of hybrid technology. Additionally, the hybrid powertrain can accommodate both clean diesel and bio-diesel engines. Moreover, experimental hybrid technology demonstrates that even conventional vehicles can be converted into hybrids that can achieve well over 100 mpg. Consequently, it becomes obvious that the potential of hybrids has barely been tapped.

Neither bio-diesel nor clean diesel have demonstrated anywhere near such potential. Thus, while bio-diesel and clean diesel are important technologies, hybrid bio-diesels and clean diesel hybrids are even far more important technologies.

Is it a realization gap, rather than religion?

Is the problem that science and technology, much like evolution, isn't always visible via huge steps, but rather small incremental steps? For example, I have been using laptops for more than 10 years. Year after year, the performance of memory, speed, and battery power increases. From year to year the gains don't seem terribly significant, but comparing today's laptops to the laptops of 10 years ago, demonstrates that we've made amazing strides.

In my opinion, especially based on available, experimental technology, hybrids offer that same kind of potential, at a cost that is significantly less than fuel cells. That doesn't mean fuel cells won't replace hybrids, it just means that hybrid technology is important enough for investment until the many obstacles surrounding fuel cell vehicles can be resolved. In actuality, it might just be hybrid technology that resolves many fuel cell problems.

Yet, if America neither embraces nor believes in science and technology, what is the future for hybrids, for fuel cells, and for America?

The American auto industry might be an example of the path that America is taking. Decades of materialistically driven engineering and marketing have left GM on the verge of bankruptcy, as Ford continually becomes less and less significant. Appearance and useless power, not technological innovation, have been the drivers of the American automarket.

Likewise, if you work in technology, then you know of the void that exists in America when it comes to filling technical jobs - we have to import our programmers, engineers, and scientists. In America too much attention has been put on law and entertainment. We'd rather sue, act or be a professional athlete, rather than a scientist, engineer, or astronaut.

This has to change. As the population of the world booms in the next hundred years only pandemics or science can keep us moving forward. The world's demand for resources is growing so rapidly that only the death of billions and billions of us will allow us to move forward, or we can use science.

Somehow, America and the world must resolve our religious and scientific differences. Both god and science can co-exist. Our religious beliefs and values shouldn't hold science back, rather they should be used to ensure that we use science to benefit humankind, rather than to just control and profit from humankind.

Still, America's scientific problems aren't just about religion, as there are plenty of godless Americans that do not value science.

Ultimately, however, I believe that it is the religious Americans that will be the difference. If god is the ultimate creator, than science is nothing but an expression of god, an expression that should be embraced for good, not denied out of fear.

In recent years I've noticed a number of bumper stickers on the backs of luxury vehicles and SUVs that say, "Jesus was a liberal." While that might be true, Jesus would today drive neither a luxury vehicle, nor a gas-guzzler, Jesus would drive a hybrid.

Hybrid vehicles by 2012

I was recently interviewed for an article regarding hybrid cars and the question posed to me was, "Will the hybrid powertrain be the dominant powertrain by 2012?"

While I said that it would not, I noted that analysts currently predicting total hybrid sales achieving just 5% of the market by 2012, were just as wrong in that prediction as they were when they predicted the complete failure of the Toyota Prius.

Just today the article, Forget hybrids, America; diesels will provide economy, performance argues that America should focus on diesel, not hybrids, especially because Ford is a leading player.

So now diesel is the answer to America's oil problems? Please!

According to Ken Miller, an oil industry analyst with Purvin & Gertz in Houston, "New environmental rules for diesel will go into effect on Jan. 1 that are expected to add a few more cents per gallon to the cost of diesel. The day when diesel was cheaper than gasoline is probably over." (AutoWeek) Yet, diesel is the answer?

Others might say that bio-diesel can make diesel vehicles cheaper to run, but I doubt this to be true if a significant percentage of Americans begin to drive bio-diesel. Where will the fuel come from? What if severe weather causes drought or storm that destroys fuel crops? Bio-diesel can absolutely help end foreign oil dependency, but it cannot do it alone.

I say build flex-fuel hybrids because doing so could save America as much as a trillion dollars (more).

There was a time when technology was the strength of America, yet today, the strength of America seems controlled by whether oil is cheap or not. Additionally, many automotive writers, probably the ones who refused to use a computer for as long as possible, continue to wear blinders.

How many more conflicts in the Middle East, how much more evidence of pollution and global warming, how much more evidence that America is continually losing its technological stronghold, will it take before America embraces the future - a future that will be dominated by technology, not cheap oil?

America has for too long chosen the easy path, a path that has been enforced by military power and executed with a complete disregard for the environment. Suddenly, however, the easy path is neither so easy, nor cost-effective.

While hybrid cars might not dominate the future, hybrid technology is just an emerging technology that can lead to 100 mpg fuel efficiency within 10 years if automakers create bio-diesel hybrids, plug-in hybrids, or even solar-powered plug-in hybrids - while also helping hydrogen, electric, and fuel cell vehicle development.

Can diesel achieve that in a decade?

The future of the world, especially the automotive world, will not be driven by cheap oil, but by technology and that technological advancement needs to begin now. Sure America can wait, but the longer it waits, the more technologically obsolete America will become.

Besides, isn't it time America invests in America, rather than in filthy rich oil companies?

Let's end foreign oil dependency. Flex fuel, Bio-Diesel, Or Hybrid Vehicles?

Originally posted on the Hybridcarblog.com

When the Iranian Revolution in 1979 caused massive gas lines in the United States, many Americans turned to small Japanese vehicles. Eventually, however, oil prices stabilized, gas prices dropped, and many Americans returned to gas-guzzling as SUVs became an expression of American freedom.

But the Iranian Revolution wasn't only felt in the U.S., and the problems of oil dependence, particularly foreign-oil dependence, pushed Brazil to do more than just buy a few small Japanese vehicles. By 1985 almost every vehicle produced in Brazil was designed for alcohol as fuel transportation and gasoline stations were updated to handle this new fuel.

So did Brazil kick the oil habit? Not exactly. According to an interesting article, Ethanol: Is it the answer?, a combination of cheap oil and droughts - which caused poor harvests and less ethanol - led Brazilians back to oil.

Today in Brazil, flex-fuel technology has changed everything. Able to run on both gasoline, ethanol, or a mixture of the two, flex fuel vehicles allow Brazilians to take advantage of which ever fuel they choose. Thus, drivers are hedged against either drought, or skyrocketing oil prices.

So should America just focus on flex-fuel vehicles as the solution to America's oil problems?

Absolutely not.

Flex-fuel vehicles definitely are part of the solution, but even Brazil hasn't been able to kick the oil habit. More important Brazil consumes SIGNIFICANTLY less fuel per year than the U.S.. Additionally, Brazil uses sugar to produce its ethanol fuel, the U.S. uses corn, which is far less efficient than sugar.

Of course new grains, etc., might offer better efficiency, but how long will it take to create enough fuel? Brazil produces only about 5 billion gallons of ethanol per year, U.S. demand is around 140 billion gallons per year. And what about drought, or another natural disaster?

The key to Brazil's struggles and successes boil down to one thing, flexibility. Flex-fuel vehicle technology should be the standard in America, but it shouldn't stop there. Hybrid technology, or even better, plug-in hybrid technology, offers even far more flexibility.

Hybrid cars, or better yet, flex-fuel hybrid cars, could significantly improve fuel efficiency, while opening up new fuel possibilities beyond oil. In reality; however, fuel competition alone won't be enough to handle the oil monster, and that's why hybrid technology is so important.

Plug-in flex-fuel advanced diesel hybrid vehicles could offer fuel efficiency of more than 100 mpg with today's technology - even for SUVs. Sure the technology is somewhat expensive today, but it is FAR less expensive than fuel cell technology. Additionally, a national fleet of 100 mpg vehicles would end the need for foreign oil in about 5 years, which I've argued could save America more than a TRILLION dollars (more).

Even better, plug-in power could lead to another revolution in the automotive world, the utilization of solar power. Already solar power is cost-effective to power a home - if you are going to live in that home for at least 15 years - but what if you could also help power your car with your home energy system, with totally clean energy? Even more interesting, garage mechanics have already created plug-in hybrids with solar panels and Mazda is now showing a solar hybrid concept vehicle that includes embedded solar panels in the roof of the vehicle.

Ultimately, the good old days of the U.S. auto industry are over. Constant innovation and the best technology are an absolute requirement, and the best technology requires fuel flexibility, as well as the best possible fuel economy. It isn't just about saving money at the fuel pump, or protecting the environment, it is about protecting the security and welfare of Americans and the American economy.

Neither ethanol, bio-diesel or hybrids alone are going to take the oil monkey off America's back quickly enough, but combined, these alternative choices could radically change America within a decade.

Instead of subsidizing the cost of a foreign-oil-dependency-ending fleet of vehicles, America is going to build more oil refineries, drill in Alaska, and give billions of tax payer dollars to filthy rich oil companies, as GM increases production on the Hummer.

Is that really an investment in the future? Isn't it time to start investing in real American freedom, instead of investing in companies that can profit as much as $23 billion in just one quarter?

I guess it is pretty clear who Congress represents, and it isn't the majority of Americans.

Hybrids and biodiesel: A powerful combination

Earlier this week I made a post that paired off hybrid cars and bio-diesel vehicles (Read the article). Every time I write something about bio-diesel, I seem to offend some bio-diesel proponents. Still, I'm glad there are so many fans of bio-diesel because I DO believe this fuel offers immense possibilities to reduce foreign oil dependency.

While I ultimately believe that hybrid technology is more important than bio-diesel, I also believe that a bio-diesel hybrid would make the best hybrid vehicle, except for a solar-plug-in-biodiesel hybrid vehicle.

Of course, today, there simply aren't enough hybrids to make much of a difference in fighting foreign oil dependency, which highlights why bio-diesel is so important right now.

Tomorrow; however, today's 30 or 40 mpg bio-diesel cars could be 100, 200, or even 500 mpg plug-in-bio-diesel hybrids, and that is why it is so important that we invest in hybrid technology.

The focus of alternative energy and fuels shouldn't be on hybrids OR bio-diesel, but hybrids AND bio-diesel, especially bio-diesel hybrid vehicles.

(Click here for more on experimental hybrid vehicles)