Archive for the ‘Flex fuel vehicles’ Category

How do you say farvegnugen in Swedish?

Friday, March 7th, 2008

The Methanol Institute reports Volvo and Lotus are showing gasoline-ethanol-methanol flex fuel vehicles (GEM FFVs):

Even President George Bush was impressed when he walked on to the exhibit floor of the Washington International Renewable Energy Conference and saw Volvo’s display of seven trucks powered by alternative fuels, including methanol/ethanol and DME. Volvo had showcased the carbon-dioxide-neutral trucks in Stockholm and Brussels last year. The Swedish automaker pointed to the production of methanol from the gasification of biomass as a carbonneutral pathway. According to Volvo Environmental Projects Manager Henrik Landälv, while one of the trucks is dedicated to run on either methanol or ethanol, these are pre-commercial prototypes that will require additional development. Based on a their evaluation, Volvo found methanol and DME to be superior to ethanol and biodiesel for climate impact, energy efficiency, land use efficiency, fuel potential, and fuel costs. Back across the pond, Lotus Engineering unveiled the Exige 270E Tri-fuel at the Geneva International Motor Show. Tri-fuel runs on any mixture of methanol, ethanol and gasoline, with a top speed of 158 mph, and jumping from 0-60 mph in 3.88 seconds. According to Geraint Castleton-White of Lotus, “For car companies and the motorist, the use of sustainable alcohols like synthetic methanol requires relatively fuel changes to the vehicle.”

Lotus Exige 270E Tri-Fuel

 Lotus Exige 270E Tri-Fuel: a gasoline-ethanol-methanol flexible vehicle. 

As Michael Ledeen would say: Faster please!

Stop funding the enemy

Thursday, March 6th, 2008

Dr. Jeffrey B. Zeiger writes in the Minnesota Daily:

“Let’s look back at the early 1970s when we as Americans had to deal with the Arab Oil Embargo. In those years, America’s economy was thrown into complete chaos and we produced 70 percent of the oil we used yearly. Today, America produces about 40 percent of our own fuel; not very promising. Can you imagine another oil embargo or $200 a barrel? [...]Let’s stop fighting over miles per gallon, farmers being subsidized, not enough land and food vs. fuel. These are not the issues at hand; the issues at hand are our own survival. Stop funding our enemies and demand that Congress mandate that all vehicles be flex-fueled vehicles”

Rick Santorum agrees it’s time to Set America Free

Thursday, January 31st, 2008

Senator Santorum writes in the Philadelphia Inquirer:

It’s been two years since President Bush admitted we are “addicted to oil.” This expensive addiction has taken a toll on our economy while funding major sponsors of the jihadis and other terrorists that seek to harm us.

We have been told the only way to break this addiction is to reduce consumption, as in the recently passed mandate to increase fuel efficiency. I am all for conservation and improving fuel economy, as with hybrid cars, but even if everyone drove a hybrid it would just slow the rate of growth in our consumption of oil. Those savings will be more than offset by our reduction in national oil production because we are unwilling to drill in Alaska and offshore. In other words, the Middle East, Russia and Venezuela have us over a barrel.

I suggest that in the short term, we dig our way out of this problem. The United States is the “Saudi Arabia of coal,” and Pennsylvania is sitting on hundreds of years of this affordable and accessible resource, which, with innovative technologies – spearheaded by Pennsylvanians – we can use cleanly and right away.

Pennsylvania coal already generates most of the electricity in this state. The industry is in the process of doing it more cleanly through clean-coal technologies, such as gasification of coal into methanol, a form of alcohol that can be burned in internal combustion engines directly or used to manufacture synthetic gasoline and chemicals. These technologies can lead to a whole host of new clean uses that can help us reduce oil imports.

Just two hours up the road from Philadelphia, the nation’s first coal-to-gas-to-diesel facility may soon be developed in Schuylkill County; word was expected today on a U.S. Department of Energy loan of $100 million to help enable construction. This fuel, which is currently being used in another coal-rich country, South Africa, can be used to power jets, heat your home, and run diesel engines.

Across Pennsylvania, farmers are also digging and planting corn and other crops that will be turned into ethanol that can replace gasoline in our cars. Most cars in America can’t run on ethanol, however, so who is going to install ethanol pumps at the gas station without the cars to run on it? At this point I would say to all of my hard-core conservative friends: Hold on to your hats.

What we need is a government mandate! We need to mandate that all cars sold in the United States, starting with the 2010 model year, be “flex-fuel vehicles” – that is, they should be able to run on a blend that is 85 percent ethanol and 15 percent gasoline (the so-called E85 blend), or even a coal-derived methanol/gas mixture. This mandate would cost a fraction of the new fuel economy standard with the added benefit of saving barrels more oil.

What would Chávez and company do in response? Jack up production to kill this industry off before it gets off the ground. So – hold on again, conservatives – let’s put a temporary tax trigger on imported oil if the price hits $50 per barrel. Anyone think it will go that low without this idea?

Finally, Congress should immediately repeal the protectionist $26 per barrel tax on imported ethanol. So while we may have a tax increase if oil prices drop, we offset that with an immediate tax cut on ethanol. That’s a net win for taxpayers and our energy security. Ethanol will begin to flow into this country from poor third-world countries that don’t have oil or much in the way of terrorists. U.S. popularity would soar in the third world and help the poor of those countries as well as ours.

Energetic economics

Wednesday, January 30th, 2008

Cliff May writes:

It’s become a ritual: The economy grows sluggish and politicians rush to “do something” about it. What they do almost never has a beneficial economic impact, as any reputable economist will tell you.

But what if lawmakers could guarantee that the price you pay to fill the tank of your car will go down, not up, in the years ahead? What if they could launch a new industry that creates more jobs for more Americans? What if this would produce environmental benefits, too? Would that not send a message to the markets? And would that not represent the kind of change so many politicians have been promising?

Here’s the deal: Everyone who is not an economic illiterate knows that competition leads to lower prices. But there is no competitive market in transportation fuels. In most parts of the country, you can buy gasoline or you can buy gasoline. And most cars can run on gasoline or gasoline.It doesn’t have to be that way. There are alternative fuels. And there are automobiles built to burn them. But there is a chicken-and-egg dilemma: Why buy a car that can use alternative fuels if those fuels are not readily available at a local service station? Why devote a pump at a local service station to alternative fuels if there are few customers asking for them?

Elected officials could solve this problem with the stroke of a pen. An “open standards” fuel law would require that all new cars sold in the United States be flexible-fuel vehicles — able to run not just on gasoline, but also on a variety of alcohol-based fuels.

A car that is flexible-fuel capable costs only about $100 more. But if you want to make this transition cost-neutral for the automobile companies, consider a tax break to reward them for making the transition as quickly as possible.

Zubrin’s plan to destroy OPEC

Sunday, January 27th, 2008

Robert Zubrin’s oped in the Rocky Mountains news is an excellent explanation of how opening up the transportation fuel market to competition would result in a reallocation of resources on a global scale, from petrotyranies to third world farmers. Through fuel competition and Congressional flex fuel mandate we can stop the bleeding of our economy and the enrichment of our enemies while helping the economies of the developing world –

“We could effectively take more than a trillion dollars a year that is now going to the oil cartel, and direct it toward the world agricultural sector instead. This would not only be of great benefit to farmers here, but an enormous boon to the Third World, which otherwise faces brutal looting through continued unconstrained OPEC price hikes.”

Setting the record straight

Friday, January 18th, 2008

Fred Thompson’s otherwise excellent comments re the president begging the Saudis for oil repeated a factual error many of the candidates are making. Thompson is quoted as saying: “It’s not in the United States’ long-term interest to go hat in hand begging people to do things that in the end we know they’re not going to do…What we need to concentrate on is diversifying our own energy sources here in this country and opening up what oil reserves that we have here … using nuclear more, using clean coal technology more and all the other things that we can do.”

Here’s the error: unlike in the 1970s, today the US hardly generates any electricity at all from oil. To be precise, a mere 2% of our electricity is generated from oil (and conversely only about 2% of our oil demand is due to electricity generation.) Therefore nuclear power, while a valuable technology, has nothing to do with reducing our oil demand; we’ve already diversified our power sector away from oil. The key source of oil demand, and the source of oil’s strategic value, is the transportation sector.

If we want to stop kowtowing to the Saudis and their ilk, our focus must be on stripping oil of its strategic value, making it just another commodity We can do this through fuel choice in the transportation sector – through flex fuel vehicles and plug in hybrids which provide a platform on which fuels can compete and open up the transportation fuel market to competition. Salt, after all, was once a strategic commodity too; with the advent of electricity and refrigeration salt lost its strategic value and power to determine world affairs.

This is more like it: cars we want to drive

Wednesday, January 16th, 2008

Two very sexy cars that may just have what it takes to captivate the American driver’s imagination and desire to own a next gen, fuel choice enabling vehicle:

1. Fisker Karma plug in hybrid electric vehicle (PHEV). Popular Mechanics has video. Bottom line: Fisker’s Four-Door Karma Hybrid Hits 50 Miles on Li-Ion—at 125 MPH. Have we mentioned we’d love to drive this car? (hat tip: Instapundit, whose been on a roll about new vehicle technology and especially about fuel choice.)

2. Ferrari 430 Spider Biofuel

Several other exciting announcements about plug in hybrids at the Detroit autoshow, indicating a race to market by automakers. Here’s a roundup:

Saturn’s PHEV Vue: “Version 2 comes late this year using the more common nickel-metal hydride type battery packs in combination with the General’s direct-injected 3.6L V-6 to give a reported 50% boost in fuel economy. Version 3 comes late 2009 at the earliest and swaps the nickel battery for a lithium-ion unit. Those batteries will come with a plug that allows the owner to get a full grid charge in about 4-5 hours.”

Interview with several GM execs about progress on getting a GM flex fuel plug in hybrid on the road. Their target date is November 2010.

Cars.com test drove a plug in hybrid Toyota Prius. Note that this PHEV was made by Toyota, not converted by others like the ones Set America Free and CalCars brought to Capitol Hill – this in and of itself is progress. Toyota intends “to offer plug-in hybrid vehicles by 2010 on a lease basis to fleet customers, such as government agencies and corporations.”

Meanwhile, leaping ahead of the pack, a Chinese automaker called BYD Auto, a newcomer to the exhibition unveiled its F6 Dual Model plug-in hybrid, announcing it intends to produce the car in the second half of this year. This announcement is a strong warning of shape up or ship out to the rest of the field, along the lines of Gal Luft’s Chinese Sputnik oped.

One reporter actually got to test drive BYD’s hybrid with its chairman on the floor of the convention center: “I’m now completely taken with my good luck at getting a real test drive from the Chairman, looking back at the BYD booth now 100 feet away. I was convinced that this was the end of the trip and the car would be backed up to the booth. And then the car sped up to about 10 mph, which is an uncomfortable speed in the middle of a convention center. There was only one obstacle in the way: a press conference. Little did the ALMS people know the Chinese were on their way The American Le Mans Series was holding a press conference to discuss the environmental innovations they were making in their racing (including the introduction of E85 ethanol to the racing series). It was fitting then that the chairman of the small chinese automaker, that sells annually in China what Honda sells in a month in the US, was pointing his answer to the environmental question right at them.
“…And how was the car? I have to admit, besides it’s “heavily borrowed” styling, the F6DM was quite smooth and with a level of fit and finish that was superior to many of the other full production cars on display from China. And that electric motor? Quiet as a mouse. And though we didn’t get the high-speed tour, the car drove smoothly and easily around the floor. Is this the future? I can’t be sure. But there’s no doubt that the company’s Chairman is dedicated to proving his car works. Conventions and convention center staff be damned.”

If you will be in the market for a car in the next few years, now is the time to let your auto dealer know that you are waiting for a flex fuel plug in hybrid — automakers need to hear from you that the demand is out there, and if they want to sell you a car, they need to offer you fuel choice. Let’s get these cars on the road! As Michael Ledeen would put it, Faster Please!

UPDATE: Thanks Instapundit!

The Glenn and Helen Show: Bob Zubrin on How to Break OPEC

Friday, January 11th, 2008

Listen to Glenn and Helen’s interview with Set America Free Coalition member Bob Zubrin, author of Energy Victory: Winning the War on Terror by Breaking Free of Oil .

Get flexible

Sunday, December 9th, 2007

The newest Set America Free Coalition member, Admiral James Lyons, writes in the Washington Times:

Terrorist training camps and insurgents in Iraq and elsewhere are funded by Saudi and Iranian petrodollars. So are bounties for families of suicide bombers. It is incredible: by buying Saudi-controlled OPEC oil we finance a war against ourselves.

But the Saudis are not alone. Iran has used its vast accumulation of petrodollars to support terrorism throughout the Middle East as well as providing funds for their drive to develop a nuclear weapon. Oil has also given Iran, Venezuela and — in the past — Libya the flexibility to ignore economic sanctions by finding amoral partners such as China, Russia and some of the European countries who are willing to trade with them. Petro revenue has provided Vladimir Putin the means to centralize his power, bully his neighbors and steer Russia on an independent course that has been unhelpful to U.S. interests.

For all these reasons, as well as for our long-term economic and security concerns, we must break our addiction to oil…

We have technology that will underpin an energy strategy that will break our petro-addiction and OPEC’s hegemony. That strategy lies in something already available: mixed-fuel technology; vehicles that use a mixture of ethanol, methanol and gasoline.

Ethanol is produced from a variety of agricultural sources, primarily sugarcane and corn, at as low as $1.50 a gallon. In 2006, methanol, which can be made from coal, natural gas and agricultural waste, was being sold without any subsidies for 80 cents per gallon.

The engineering difference for a flex fuel car requires an additional sensor and computer chip that controls the fuel-air mixture. It also should have a corrosion resistant fuel system. The overall increase in costs for a flex fuel car will average about $100 per vehicle.

This year Detroit has offered two dozen models with a flex fuel option. To accelerate this program, Congress needs to put politics aside and enact legislation to require that 50 percent of all vehicles produced by our auto manufacturers must be flex fuel by 2012. This will not be easy. However, this is a figure the Big Three auto makers proposed to President Bush when they met last year.

Georgia’s Biofuels Refinery to Make 9 Million Gallons of Cellulosic Methanol a Year

Friday, November 16th, 2007

The Methanol Institute(MI) reports:

On November 6th, the first commercial plant to turn trees and wood scraps into biofuels officially opened in Soperton, Georgia. According to the Department of Energy, the Range Fuels plant is expected to produce 40 million tons of cellulosic ethanol and 9 million tons of cellulosic methanol each year. The Department of Energy will fund more than $1.2 billion for this plant and five similar ones in the works. The groundbreaking ceremony was headlined by Energy Secretary Samuel Bodman, who focused his speech on praising ethanol: “These six sites differ in their location and in the feed stocks that they will use, but they will all help us move toward the day when biofuels made from cellulosic ethanol can be made in near every part of the country.” In response, MI’s John Lynn wrote a letter to Bodman saying “As Range Fuels’ project advances, we encourage you to include methanol in the discussion. The methanol industry is seeing increased interest in renewable methanol and we expect to see new plants opening around the country over the next several years. Through its many applications, methanol can and should be a significant part of the solution.”

Both methanol and ethanol are alcohol fuels that can power flexible fuel vehicles, cars that can run on any combination of alcohol and gasoline and cost an auto manufacturer less than $100 extra to make over the cost of a gasoline only car. There is no reason for the Department of Energy to pick one fuel as a winner and ignore others – let them all compete. For more on the potential of flexible fuel vehicles to break the stranglehold of oil producers, click here: The Alcohol Standard by Robert Zubrin. For an article by Ford Motor’s Roberta Nichols about gasoline-ethanol-methanol fuel flexibility, click here.

MI adds another bit of important news from China, which is moving aggressively towards fuel choice:
“At the 5th International Clean Vehicle Technology Exhibition in Beijing, Chang’an Automobile Company presented the Ben Ben methanol-fueled car, and Geely Automotive stated the Haifeng methanol vehicles have been put into large-scale production and might be launched at the end of this year.”