What Would You Comprimise For A Gas Alternative?
Posted by admin on October 29, 2008 under Auto News | 
Read the First Comment
It’s often said there is no silver bullet for replacing oil dependence in the United States. It is no wonder, because no petroleum alternatives have as much energy density as gasoline. To put it another way, the other choices contain less energy for a given space than petroleum.
This results in significant compromises for most alternative fuels. For instance, natural gas and hydrogen require large in-car storage tanks that can rob cargo space. A small tank equals a short cruising range between fill-ups. Batteries take even more space yet provide an even shorter range. To compound the problem, batteries take hours to recharge.
A frequently discussed alternative is E85 (85 percent ethanol). This renewable fuel can be created domestically and emits less smog-causing pollutants than gasoline, but it provides fewer miles per gallon and is hard to find outside the Midwest. (Learn more about the pros and cons of alternative fuels.)
Although it’s still made from petroleum-and emits many pollutants-diesel fuel stands out from the other mentioned fuels, as it is the one alternative that packs more energy density than gasoline. This is part of the reason diesel engines are more fuel efficient. Now if only diesel fuel was cheaper than gasoline…
So engineering vehicles to run on gasoline alternatives leads to inevitable compromises, such as price, range, and utility. The real question remains: What compromises would consumers accept?
Looming oil challenges
Oil production from non-OPEC countries has already reached its peak and begun to fall, according to Peter Wells, a longtime oil industry consultant and former British Petroleum exploration manager. Wells spoke at the Toyota Sustainable Mobility Seminar last week. Even new discoveries and drilling are unlikely to make up for the drop in production from existing wells, he says.
Increasing oil production from tar sands and oil shale requires enormous amounts of energy, meaning the return on extracting these resources will be relatively small. Producing them also takes vast supplies of water, while aquifers and rivers in the U.S. are already oversubscribed.
Some people are likely to accept different sacrifices, whether it’s range, cost, or driving less. Yet automakers continuously report that most customers aren’t willing to sacrifice anything their cars can currently do. This mirrors feedback collected from the Consumer Reports National Research Center. In our recent gas prices survey, nearly 80 percent of car shoppers reported wanting better fuel economy, yet 69 percent want a same-sized or larger vehicle.
So for the sake of discussion, here’s a question: If you had to cut your oil consumption in half next year, in the name of energy independence, staying out of the poor house, or another reason, what would you be willing to do or sacrifice?
Learn more about how others are reacting to today’s gas prices in our recent Auto Pulse survey.
