Manage updates with the Download App
September 2, 2005 11:56 AM PDT
Powering a new generation of cars
- Related Stories
-
Hybrids rev up for annual auto affair
March 23, 2005 -
Infineon's fashion trend: Wearable chips
April 26, 2002
Toyota, General Motors and virtually every other major automobile manufacturer are tinkering with a technology called Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition (HCCI), which could boost fuel economy in cars by about 20 percent and generate fewer polluting hydrocarbons. Research projects are also under way at national labs and universities.
What's new:
Automobile industry researchers and observers gathered recently to discuss fuel efficiency and alternatives to the internal combustion gasoline engine. They didn't always agree on what the best alternatives might be, but all acknowledged that current gas prices are adding urgency to the debate.
Bottom line:
Diesel-powered cars and cars with gas-electric hybrid engines are likely to become much more common. Researchers also are exploring an internal combustion technology called Homogeneous Charge Compression Ignition, or HCCI, which could increase fuel efficiency by 20 percent and produce less pollution.
In HCCI, the combustion process occurs by moderating the pressure and temperature inside the cylinder. Igniting the fuel with a spark is not required, said John Pinson, group manager of diesel engine research at the General Motors Research and Development Center, said during a one-day symposium sponsored by Infineon Technologies. A similar, but slightly different and slightly less effective, combustion process takes place in diesel engines.
"It is more efficient and less far-fetched than it sounds," Pinson said of HCCI. "In this decade you are going to see incremental introduction of it."
Other near-term ideas include use of gasoline-electric hybrid engines and engines fueled by hydrogen, diesel and/or ethanol. All these options have their critics.
The appeal of these technologies, of course, derives from the climbing price of oil and concerns about global warming.
On one end of the spectrum, Karina Morley, director of powertrain control electronics at automotive-systems supplier Visteon, says that the gas burning engine's days are numbered.
"Within 10 years, you are going to see the transition to alternative fuel sources," she said. "Eventually internal combustion engines will die off, but it'll take 20 to 30 years."
Dave Hermance, executive engineer for advanced technology vehicles at Toyota USA, disagrees with that assessment. Internal combustion engines will probably still be going quite strong for 20 years, he said, and oil companies will still be producing petroleum products. Nonetheless, the rising cost of these products is going to make the alternatives attractive.
"The break-even point used to be $30 a barrel for alternative fuels. We're way past that," he said.
Diesel's advocates
For its part, GM is one of the primary backers of diesel fuel. Diesel provides about 12 percent more energy than standard gasoline, said Pinson. Improved engines will also likely make it possible for diesel cars to meet emission standards already laid out by the federal government in a cost-efficient way, he said.
Another advantage of diesel is that one of the basic elements of the fuel-supply infrastructure--gas stations--already exists. Diesel is already popular in Europe. While it's tougher to find diesel in the U.S., its popularity could grow. DaimlerChrysler's Mercedes has had excellent sales of its diesel cars, which it reintroduced to the U.S. market in 2004, said John McElroy, an automotive journalist who hosts the TV show American Driver. Audi also has committed to bringing diesel vehicles to the U.S.
Ultimately, GM would like to marry full-fledged HCCI to diesel for a higher level of fuel efficiency, according to Pinson. Some aspects of HCCI will come to cars sold in Europe in 2007, he said.
HCCI, with regular gas or diesel, will take quite a bit of work, Pinson acknowledged. The pressure and temperature inside the cylinder need to be minutely calibrated. Gas from different stations may differ slightly in composition and performance, and could turn a smooth-running HCCI engine into a pinging, coughing machine.
Since the quality of gas and other environmental factors can't be controlled, the solution is to control the pressure/temperature inside the cylinders with sensors that can send data to a microprocessor controlling the engine. To raise the temperature, for instance, the microprocessor can send signals to the engine that will cause it to retain some of the hot gases from previous combustions in the cylinder.
38 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment
readily prepare for a future without the use of fossil fuels. Our
pork-barrel energy policy which was just passed does very little
to move us toward hydrogen and alternative energy sources. It
seems that until we stop calling them 'alternative energy'
sources they'll always fill just a niche role in our overall energy
demand. It is true that establishing a network of hydrogen
stations would be an enormous undertaking; this would,
however, power our nation for the next century and beyond. We
are crystal-meth addicts to the oil and auto industry. Maybe the
Bush administration ought have it their way, energywise, just
drill until it's all gone. Then perhaps we can move onto to
something else more quickly (<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://" target="_newWindow">http://</a>
sammy90483.blogspot.com).
We need two technical breakthroughs:
1) Cheap hydrogen extraction (which can be used as fuel to create electricy)
2) Efficient electric batteries.
I beleive our transportation energy needs (cars, buses, trucks, farm equipment, ocean ships) will be powered by electric motors, but will likely contain some kind of electric generator onboard to charge the batteries. The generator itself could run on hydrogen perhaps (if cheap enough,) or ethanol, or deisel or some combination there of. That's my un-expert idea.
readily prepare for a future without the use of fossil fuels. Our
pork-barrel energy policy which was just passed does very little
to move us toward hydrogen and alternative energy sources. It
seems that until we stop calling them 'alternative energy'
sources they'll always fill just a niche role in our overall energy
demand. It is true that establishing a network of hydrogen
stations would be an enormous undertaking; this would,
however, power our nation for the next century and beyond. We
are crystal-meth addicts to the oil and auto industry. Maybe the
Bush administration ought have it their way, energywise, just
drill until it's all gone. Then perhaps we can move onto to
something else more quickly <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://sammy90483.blogspot.com" target="_newWindow">http://sammy90483.blogspot.com</a>.
owner of a Volkswagen Jetta TDI since 2001. I drive almost 100
miles per day back and forth to work and take a number of road
trips each year. As a result, I have logged more than 120,000
diesel powered miles in about 4 years.
I do not travel with a light foot - if you catch my drift - and my
commute includes a trip across Washington DC.
I average 47 miles per gallon. Nothing in the article indicates
there will be any improvement over that figure.
Why wait.
I would have ignored this story, had I not just got home from filling up (I found 91 octane at the third gas station I visited).
I didn't fill it up. I put in $50 and stopped.
Best, Dick
www.CorpFutRes.com
anerobic fermentation, but the quantities available through that
method are far smaller - on a total energy basis - than is
currently consumed in the form of petroleum. The difference is
several orders of magnitude in BTU/day.
Like many PhD, you seem to care about "who is doing the
research" without taking the time to do a simple search yourself.
Right now, natural gas trades for more than $12.00 per million
BTU in the US, which is not competitive with either gasoline or
diesel fuel even at our current elevated prices.
diesel......
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/gas_prices_suv.html" target="_newWindow">http://www.consumeraffairs.com/news04/2005/gas_prices_suv.html</a>
"Soaring Gas Prices Hurt SUV and Pickup Sales
March 10, 2005
The rising price of gasoline appears to be stifling sales of large U.S. SUVs and pickups. If the trend continues, automaker profits are certain to suffer. Full-sized SUV and large pickup sales were both down last month. The sale of fuel-efficient cars gained more than two percent.
Large SUVs and full-sized pickups account for close to 80 percent of North American automotive profits at Ford and General Motors.
The average price U.S. drivers pay for a gallon of regular gasoline barely exceeds $2, according to the AAA motor club. The price is expected to shoot to a record high of $2.15 a gallon this spring, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.
HCCI is like diesel anyway only made more complicated. I don't believe in solutions that complicates simple things. The truth is, this is just another "band-aid" to solve the issue.
The real solution is to explore the alternatives just to trigger the evolution and perhaps the revolution to using a specific cheaper and cleaner engine.
The commercial success of an alternative will identify the right solution.
:-)
has all the power needed to move large loads. Plus HP is cheap and plentiful and much improved milage over petro.
WE COULD HAVE HAD AN ALL ELECTRIC VEHICLE 20 YEARS AGO IMAGINE HOW ADVANCED IT WOULD BE TODAY. I ALSO LIKE THE HYDROGEN VEHICLE AGAIN WE COULD HAVE HAD THAT 15 YEARS AGO. ME THINKS THESE PEOPLE LIKE THE SMELL OF THE GASOLINE ENGINE OR THE NOISE OF THE ENGINE. THE STORY ABOUT THE BATTERIES IS A FARCE WITH THE NEW TECHNOLOGY IN COMPUTERS THEIR SMALLER, LIGHTER AND MORE DENSE AS FAR AS ENERGY GOES. THEY JUST PASS BY THE MOST OBVIOUS CHOICE. THERE IS AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE THAT GOES 0 - 60 IN 4 SECONDS AND LAST 300 MILES PER CHARGE, NO MENTION OF THAT. OIL REINS THE VEHICLES OF TODAY. I DIDN'T EVEN MENTION THE FUEL CELL POWERED VEHICLES.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/" target="_newWindow">http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/</a>
"The coming oil shocks won't be so short-lived. They represent the onset of a new, permanent condition. Once the decline gets under way, production will drop (conservatively) by 3% per year, every year.
That estimate comes from numerous sources, not the least of which is Vice President Dick Cheney himself. In a 1999 speech he gave while still CEO of Halliburton, Cheney stated:
By some estimates, there will be an average of two-percent annual growth in global oil demand over the years ahead, along with, conservatively, a three-percent natural decline in production from existing reserves. That means by 2010 we will need on the order of an additional 50 million barrels a
day.
Cheney's assesement is supported by the estimates of numerous non-political, retired, and now disinterested scientists, many of whom believe global oil production will peak and go into terminal decline within the next five years.
Some geologists expect 2005 to be the last year of the cheap-oil bonanza, while estimates coming out of the oil industry indicate "a seemingly unbridgeable supply-demand gap opening up after 2007," which will lead to major fuel shortages and increasingly severe blackouts beginning around 2008-2012."
n : the intoxicating agent in fermented and distilled liquors; used pure or denatured as a solvent or in medicines and colognes and cleaning solutions and rocket fuel; proposed as a renewable clean-burning additive to gasoline [syn: ethyl alcohol, fermentation alcohol, grain alcohol]
Don't talk to me about global warming, pollution, habitat destruction, terrorism, oil cartels, traffic jams, etc. until you are walking to work (or at least living so close that you _could_ walk). And you've got no business driving an SUV unless you've got 4+ kids AND your job requires you to drive through a foot of snow. And lastly, does each of your children REALLY need a huge bedroom all to himself?
It disgusts me to think of OPEC and oil companies making a killing (literally) off of $5/gallon or $10/gallon gasoline. However, in the long term, this will greatly improve the quality of life for our grandchildren. Only outrageous prices will bring about the monumental lifestyle changes necessary to save America.
Disclaimer: I do have an SUV (Explorer--averaging 18 mpg) with fewer than four kids, but it stays parked except on the rare occasions that I need to haul a bunch of stuff/tow a trailer or on the very rare occasions that my wife and I need to drive different directions at the same time. My other car is an older Mazda Protege in good working condition (averages about 34 mpg). It does about 95% of the transporting people/things in our family.
However, all that increasedd fuel-efficiency does is temporarily lower the price of fuel until either the supply is cut or until more demand somewhere else in the world picks up.
The real solution to our problem lies in doing two things:
1) creating our own fuel source (i.e. not relying on other countries for fuel),
and 2) finding a renewable fuel source that is both economic to produce and to sell
If you don't get 1), than you just end up with another product derived by reliance on other countries. If you don't get 2) then you end up with a lot of promising technologies that government, corporations, and general society can not support.
The problem today is that, in general, we suffer from basically both of these problems, so we don't even see temporary relief in the marketplace. Hopefully a good fuel source that provides these two objectives (and a host of others as well) will be produced in the next few years in order to make it to market as a genuinely accepted alternative in 30 to 40 years.