Comments on: Which road leads to energy independence?

Alternative fuels advocate Will Coleman says options are not pipedreams. But hard decisions must be made.

[Pixelslave]

Hybrid

The fact is, even the hybrids, which many people say they don't save much gas, really do use a lot less gasoline. I have a Highlander Hybrid, I pay around 35% to 40% less for gas this year than last year (with a regular Highlander.) My driving habbit is similar to last year, but I still use less gas. Yes, it may not worth the extra cost to buy a hybrid (but it does look like I can earn it back in about 4 years if gas price stays at an average of $3), it reduces oil consumption. Just imagine everyone in the country uses a hybrid, that's 35% reduction of gasoline used by cars in US!

[ottonomy]

Hybrid or Hyperid?

Owner reviews of the Highlander Hybrid do not seem to bear out
your experiences:

http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/
toyota_highlanderhybrid_2006/4356/model_user_reviews.html

Hybrids do, as a class, generally achieve higher EPA ratings than
their conventional counterparts, but this is in part do to the
outdated way that the EPA measures fuel economy with tail-pipe
emission analysis rather than genuine road tests.

Modern diesels and gasoline powered vehicles can meet and
sometimes exceed the efficiency of hybrids when given the full
treatment of computer controls and other technology which are
so lovingly bestowed upon hybrids. What they can not do is
score points with the greenies in Washington.

Environmentally friendly, hybrids are, when new, but the jury is
still out on long term reliability. My experience as an automobile
mechanic tells me that hybrids will be the first widely sold class
of truly disposable cars. Repair and replacement costs of many
of the high tech components of hybrids will make it cost
prohibitive to even consider them in the used car market (yes,
there are those of us who drive the cars which you discard after
a few short years of service). When you pay $3500 for a car, you
don't want to have to pay another $3500 for an axle/brake/
regenerator/sensor cluster the first time you hit a nasty pothole.

[ottonomy]

Hybrid or Hyperid?

Owner reviews of the Highlander Hybrid do not seem to bear out
your experiences:

http://autos.yahoo.com/newcars/
toyota_highlanderhybrid_2006/4356/model_user_reviews.html

Hybrids do, as a class, generally achieve higher EPA ratings than
their conventional counterparts, but this is in part do to the
outdated way that the EPA measures fuel economy with tail-pipe
emission analysis rather than genuine road tests.

Modern diesel powered vehicles (eg: VW TDI) can meet and
sometimes exceed the efficiency of hybrids when given the full
treatment of computer controls and other technology which are
so lovingly bestowed upon hybrids. What they can not do is
score points with the greenies in Washington and local air nazis.

Environmentally friendly, hybrids are, when new, but the jury is
still out on long term reliability. My experience as an automobile
mechanic tells me that hybrids will be the first widely sold class
of truly disposable cars. Repair and replacement costs of many
of the high tech components of hybrids will make it cost
prohibitive to even consider them in the used car market (yes,
there are those of us who drive the cars which you discard after
a few short years of service). When you pay $3500 for a car, you
don't want to have to pay another $3500 for an axle/brake/
regenerator/sensor cluster the first time you hit a nasty pothole.

[NewWorldDan]

Alt Fuels

1. Common ground on fuel standards would be a good thing. I'm leary of a federal standard, but states could work together to get the number of fuel standards reduced significantly. For example, California, due to its geography, needs very clean burning fuels. Other areas might only need lower standards. A one size fits all approach is a dangerous thing.

2. Ethanol is a terrible fuel. It gets terrible mileage. To be competitive, Ethanol needs to be priced at about two-thirds the cost of gasoline.

3. Biodiesel, on the other hand, is by nearly any measure superior to conventional diesel. The problem with biodiesel is that we just can't grow enough vegetable oil to produce enough of it. The gene splicers need to get into action and invent a really good fuel crop. The oil yield on soybeans is terrible. We use soybeans for oil becaues they're easy to grow and we don't know what else to do with them.

4. Hybrids are overrated. The mileage is good, but they have their own issues. As a consumer, my confidance in them is not that high. A diesel can get comparable mileage and diesels are known for their durability.

5. Flex fuel vehicles: see ethanol.

6. Plug in hybrids. These also have their issues. High quality batteries that can be recharged thousands of times aren't cheap. And don't forget the cost of generating electricity when computing that mileage.

Finally, don't over estimate the governments ability to bring about change. People drive the cars they do and use the fuels they do for their own reasons. About the only need for government intervention might be to provide funding for the development of fuel crops. And even that's debatable.

[don509]

Alt Fuel isn't just about $$$

You make some very good points. But, I'm looking at the issue from a different perspective. Ethanol is not a terrible fuel if it helps relieve our dependence on foreign oil. It may not have the same mileage numbers as straight gasoline, but on a global economic/political scale it can make a huge difference by helping to break OPEC's grip on us and its global significance.

You are breaking down and damning each of today's emerging techs as if they were mature industries, which they clearly are not. I'd prefer to think of our path to a greener future as a series of baby steps that lead to adult strides. We need to take these first tentative steps before we can run.
Don H.

[Gray K]

Look at the long term!

One. Fuel price should match enengy content:
Fuel type BTU/US gal Octane(RON) % to Gasol.
Diesel 147,000 25(*) +17.6
Gasoline 125,000 91?98 0.0
Gasohol (E10) 120,900 93/94 -3.3
(E85) 90,400 -28.0
LPG 95,475 115 -23.6
Ethanol (E100) 84,400 129 -32.5
Methanol(M100) 62,800 123 -49.8
Methanol (M85) 72,130 -48.0
Two. Only Power from Solar, Wind, Water & Nuclear will outlast fossil fuels and none of them can be easily used in an automobile. Much of the world's attention has been directed toward hydrogen because it can be made from water and can be stored and shipped. However, both of these are very difficult. In a vehicle it can be directly converted to electricity using fuel cells.
Three. (Reference the recent book of Dr. Prof. Olah, et al at UCLA) But hydrogen can be combined with carbon monoxide to get CH3OH, methanol, which is easy to store and to burn. (It's good enough for the Indy race cars.) It can also be used in it's own fuel cell. It is currently the cheapest to make (from natural gas) but also can be sythesized from hydrogen and CO2.

[Björn Lundahl]

People do not realize that gas, in a free market, does not suddenly run out

Gas does not suddenly, in a free market run out. Prices today reflect ?expectations? of the available supply and demand for goods and services ?today and tomorrow?. If, for instance, the expectation is that oil supply will decrease or will be less than demand in ten years time, it will influence oil prices today. Prices today will go up. People will have the incentive to conserve (demand will decrease) and to develop new alternatives. Actually, we are probably conserving too much, because of OPEC and Governments taxations are keeping prices higher than they otherwise would be. ?That oil soon runs out? is a political slogan that keeps coming up to keep politicians busy. This political slogan sounds true and will, therefore, ?in the political market? sell. Only true markets can handle this sort of complex things. Compared to markets, Governments are too simple minded and primitive, because of the fact; they lack the essential tools that are needed to solve these kind of ?problems?. They primitively, for example, regulate car manufacturers (and in the end consumers) to produce cars which improve gas mileage and impose upon people speed limits, without knowing if these actions are good or bad. Only markets can tell if conservations are good or bad, because market prices gives people the necessary signals of supply and demand, and people can therefore compare these prices to their own values if they are profitable or not to realize. The essential tools that are needed (which Governments are always lacking) are, as mentioned, ?market forces and the market price mechanism?. Without these mechanisms nothing can be done. For example, a scientist will not reach the truth in trying to calculate physical available quantities and compare that to what he expects physical demand will be. It is silly, it is static and mechanistic. Every individual and every business around the whole world, with all different knowledge, all the time, and in all possible situations, and which are directly influenced of higher prices, will conserve and try out alternatives. Even people and businesses that are not directly influenced of higher oil prices, also, have incentives to find out alternatives. These things happen all the time with all goods, services, capital and raw materials, and it run smoothly without us even noticing it. If Governments were going to replace the markets, we would probably end up with no available goods and services at all! In a sense, this would solve the ?conservation problem? (joke). To make an example of this lack of knowledge and the belief that you can ignore markets, look at the so called ?Club of Rome?, a group that made fools of themselves in the 70s with their book
?Limits to growth? (http://www.answers.com/the+club+of+rome?gwp=11&ver=2.0.0.453&method=3). If they were right, we would probably barely, even, live today!

Björn Lundahl
Göteborg Sweden

[m_albertson]

Cellulosic Ethanol Has No Enemies

Well, maybe cellulosic ethanol does have one enemy...the oil industry. However, lately even the oil industry is getting in on the frenzy. Chevron, BP and others have been doing their own cellulosic ethanol research. It reminds me of when National Cash Register (NCR) began to research a new technology called computers. Don't we all wish we would have invested in computer stocks when they first launched? I've been trying to find investment opportunities in the emerging cellulosic ethanol industry. So far, this web site has provided the best info: www.InvestInCellulosicEthanol.com . I was surprised to read that even Alan Greenspan is a supporter/believer in cellulosic ethanol.