nycgps

iTrader: (1)

at close to 2800 lbs and only 155 hp and fwd, im not sure if i want to call the mazda3 a performance car, but i mean it could be possible if the SA engine can take abuse and never breaks like the civic back in the 90s ... Thats how civic got their "fans"

8 Maniac

iTrader: (1)

You think the oil companies don't have anything invested in natural gas? Big oil/energy companies are among the top dealing with LNG (liquified natural gas). Once the US is able to export LNG, there's a decent chance one of the big oil companies will be involved.

rotarygod

Not even a fan of hydrogen wants to run it in his own car. Wow.

zoom44

it wont work for me in my situation where i live.

if i lived in hawaii i would

usnidc

It makes sense that mazda sales and profits are down right now. they are retooling for SkyActiv and their car line up is old. As they roll out SA over the next 3-5 years we should see them get back to profitability. "IF" SA is reliable and they get the performance and economy numbers they are promising along with their promised increase in quality...

rotarygod

Perhaps if you and the other 2 of you on the planet who like it would take a stand and create the demand for it, they could be convinced to supply it to you!

zoom44

http://mauinow.com/2011/06/14/hawaii...uel-cell-race/

http://green.autoblog.com/2010/05/11...ucture-in-haw/

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

that is true BUT oil is selling well so why bother to invest new infrastructure to get LNG/CNG going ? they're making millions already. Don't think they cared if oil suck/not efficient/whatever.

8 Maniac

iTrader: (1)

Well, there's already work in progress. A lot of the facilities to get natural gas are already in existence. The thing that has been in the way in the past has been government regulations. I believe there are currently 2 facilities looking to get approval to export domestic gas, though one is looking like it will have a more difficult time to get approval. The one that should be getting all of its approvals soon is already capable of exporting gas, but it can only export gas that has been imported and stored.

Natural gas is already a huge market for energy. They'll already be working on the necessary infrastructure to make it happen, regardless of whether or not it becomes a common fuel for vehicles. Here's just one example:

http://www.shell.com/home/content/me..._20052011.html

If I remember correctly, they're spending something in the range of $3 billion for that project.

The US has an amazing natural gas infrastructure. It really wouldn't be hard to develop a market for using it as a fuel here. Basically all that needs to be done is setting up fueling stations. A lot of other nations would depend on having multiple ports with regas facilities but, like I said, a lot of that has been or is being developed for energy purposes anyways.

ASH8

We have been selling massive amounts of LNG to China, started around 2005, around $25 Billion every 5 years. Sent in huge ships with 3 or 4 large round pressure/storage tankers (one giant gas bottle).

http://www.gasfund.com.au/

zoom44

in your house

8 Maniac

iTrader: (1)

That's a good point... I didn't even consider the fact that a lot of residential areas have natural gas so it wouldn't be difficult to have in-home fueling. That would just end up being considered a luxury/convenience to the owner, so that would greatly reduce the need for infrastructure costs.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

building it might be easy, but will people use it is a whole different story. Just look at diesel, no matter how clean they are right now, its so freaking hard to get the america public to use it, even tho its almost everywhere. This really deter the oil companies to sell anything other than fossil fuel.

8 Maniac

iTrader: (1)

I don't think it's comparable. Diesel has been tarnished by it's previous views of being unclean due to the older technology. Natural gas doesn't have a history of being viewed as a "dirty" fuel.

You'll still face the issues of convincing people to buy a car that requires a different fuel, but natural gas definitely seems like one of the easier options to market. It's generally a cleaner burning fuel and, at least in the US, the infrastructure for distribution is already well developed. With proper marketing, it would be relatively easy to advertise it as the "clean fuel of the future."

I honestly can't say much in regard to specifics of it being used in vehicles though. I know it has been used for some public transportation systems with success, but I haven't really looked into specific emissions numbers, power output or requirements for running an engine off of it. I'm simply making the point that it's a fuel with a reasonable cost, high supply and plenty of infrastructure for domestic and international distribution.

Edit: Forgot to mention... gasoline, diesel and natural gas are all fossil fuel products. They can produce synthetic diesel and natural gas options, but they're still overwhelming from fossil fuels.

Poop

Ill-informed

HiFlite999

iTrader: (2)

The cheapest way, and therefore the most common way, to produce hydrogen these days is to crack natural gas (which releases CO2). Electrolysis is clean, but most electricity in the USA comes from coal. Makes not a lot of sense.

If you want a CNG car now, Honda will sell you one, as well as the compressor unit required to fuel at home.

http://automobiles.honda.com/civic-natural-gas/

The standard Civic has a range of ~450 miles, the CNG version 190 Miles. Assuming an RX-8 has an advertised range of ~320 miles, and applying the same proportion, a CNG RX-8 would go 135 miles max between fillups.

HiFlite999

iTrader: (2)

If one wished to get a bit silly, one could argue that all non-electric cars today are already hydrogen-fueled. The most burnable, energy releasing part comes from 2H + O = H2O. The carbon in fossil fuels in this sense serves to bind the hydrogen with carbon to store it in a convenient storage medium. The greeness factor going from coal to gasoline to CNG, represents progressively less carbon being used to bind an equal amount of hydrogen.

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

you forgot the "110 horsepower" part for the CNG

so RX-8 will get what? 120 ? lol

nycgps

iTrader: (1)

as far as I remember HK has been using it for over 10+ yrs

it's not the best thing but they don't have much choice. and their life depends on the quality of the CNG they put in. there was an incident about a year or 2 ago the one of the CNG brand wasn't as "purify" as it should be and it killed almost all Taxis and vans there and people was nuts. I wonder what will happen if that happens in the US ... probably gonna sue the companies till it drops. yea I know the gas we use is not as great as it used to be (just call it suck) but gasoline engines is a bit more forgiving than CNG engines ... I think.

ASH8

HUH...

LPG (Liquid Petroleum Gas) is not the same as LNG (Liquid Natural Gas), one is a by product of gasoline manufacturing the other is naturally out of the ground.

LPG is sold at every Gas Stations here and has been for the past 40+ years, GM and Ford at times offer factory LPG cars, conversions can be done to most banger engines ($3000)..LPG sells here for half the price of gasoline.

rotarygod

I don't think that's a good excuse. In the US, if you want a diesel you are either driving a pickup truck, a Jetta, or an expensive luxury car. We don't have many options for diesels here and only 1 for cars when it comes to a price that most people can afford. The new Jetta is far and away worse than that last one. They've cheapened it in every way and it looks horrible. However VW does sell all of their diesels that come here. I would personally buy a diesel vehicle before a hybrid and would ride a bike before driving a slow worthless, impossible to refuel, 17 hp hydrogen powered piece of crap. I wouldn't even test drive one! The most abundant fuel source in the universe is worthless if you don't have easy access to it. It won't be a mainstream fuel in the lifetime of anyone here, if ever.

rotarygod

All you've done if proven me correct. Hydrogen fuel cells are not the same as using hydrogen for a fuel. It is horrible as a fuel. It's worthless. A hydrogen fuel cell is using hydrogen more as a battery while the vehicle runs on an electric motor. That's what FCV's are. They are electric cars without batteries. That's the only way hydrogen can ever be viable. It can't be if you want to burn it in place of gasoline.

serothis

What's with the hate for hydrogen? Normal petroleum base fuel isn't going to last forever, and in all likelihood is only going to get more expensive. Alternative energy is going to be a necessity eventually. I think hydrogen is an interesting energy storage medium. No, it's not as potent as gas but it has a lot more advantages than a battery as a energy storage medium.

That's kind of nit picking don't you think? Whether the energy from hydrogen is converted to mechanical movement via a fuel cell or in an ICE. The point is, you drive your car; it runs low on hydrogen; you gas up; And drive some more.

adviceinst

We were once the largest producer of oil, tv's, automobiles and countless other things. Where has that gotten us. Now we are a country of comsumers.

We need to get off our asses as a country and start producing again. People need to get off their soap boxes that they deserve a job making a 100k a year and get their hands dirty working, designing and building again.

We should be leading the way in hybrid tech.

HiFlite999

iTrader: (2)

No, there's a huge difference between the two. Burning H2 in an ICE is still stuck with the limitations of the Otto Cycle plus all the other hardware needed to get power to the wheels. Fuel cell "burning" creates electricity directly and the electric drive is vastly more efficient. Probably a factor of 10 gain in net efficiency (and easily a factor of 100 more expensive).