What do you guys think about the possibility of converting cars to natural gas as petro heads to $5?
We have tons of it, but Washington doesn't like the idea that it's not as clean as it could be. The truth is that electric cars can only go to the grocery store and back, and it's impossible to run a semi-truck off a battery. This isn't the case though for natural gas. It's cheap, plentiful, and cleaner than petro and diesel. Companies like Westport Innovations (WPRT) have invested a lot into converting diesel to Nat Gas engines. What is stopping everyone from pulling the trigger on this? The government? The media? Oil giants?
Here is an article from FIVE years ago that seems to say the exact same thing we're saying today: http://www.usatoday.com/money/autos/2007-05-08-na…
It's an interesting question that I have been thinking about for a while now. Picken's Plan make sense, if you take out the whole windfarm idea. For personal driving purposes, I do not find the whole infrastructure argument to be insurmountable. Most people are not aware of the fact that any home that has a nat gas line can be converted into a filling station for a nominal cost.
I am not an energy mkts expert, but isnt natgas pricing already relatively low? And I dont see natgas replacing petrol 100%, but maybe 10%, or 25%? I dont know, I am just saying...
Coal/Nat Gas/Nuclear are indeed the primary means of generating electrical power. However, as you know the market is saturated in Nat Gas and is predicted to be for the foreseeable future. Henry Hub is bursting at the seams. It is definitely feasible to diversify away from oil especially if the DOE actually does it's fucking job for once. Shale gas has completely shifted the paradigm and changed all of the rules.
But nat gas prices have been so depressed since the US has something like 3x the nat gas supplies that Russia does and, more importantly, the technology now to tap it. Would nat gas price levels realistically approach that of oil if it took center stage? I'm not an expert in energy but would think someone on here would have a good idea of that.
This should have happened a long time ago. Even most cars in Pakistan run on natgas because its cheap and plentiful. You can also convert a petrol car to run on natgas pretty easily.
And can I also say that people in the US have been obsessed with the "new" green tech that will solve the problem of oil over-consumption and pollution. The real value is taking today's resources and stretching them to the max, rather than going the hydrogen route or something.
Have you driven a car that runs on natgas? its got absolutely no power...try going above 60-70 with 4 people in your car...it won't happen. Also natgas in pakistan isn't plentiful at all, they're having a real natgas crisis over there.
This, I have talked with people with nat gas powered cars and this is the main complain, and only because in that area there were many stations available with natgas. I am a little less optimistic on the oil side, the problem is the regulation in the US, but eventually you guys will catch up too. The future issue with oil is that most of it is devoted to produce petrol, this to fuel vehicles, but in a world of electric cars and efficient renewables demand for oil is not set to be equally high. Now, is this realistic? well, check the new leaf-like autos, further developments are being generated here in Germany in that direction (I saw some job offers from automovile/energy joint ventures a few months ago). The electric car is not only a game changer from a transportation and fuel perspective, but specially from the smart-grid and electricity storage perspective. And then come the synergies with the renewable energies, at one point it might make even more sense just to generate energy and to the grid. In an electric car economy, demand for oil is reduced, in a renewable energy powered economy, the electric car has many advantages, and in a world that overlooks poverty and embraces environmental causes, a push toward renewable energy is inevitable, specially if drawbacks are resolved.
In the end the problem is that natgas makes a weak auto, and at the same time has no good future prospects without being subsidized.
I dont know about pakistan, but there are a shitload of cars running on gas in eastern europe. Huge market there.
A production nat gas car on the other hand would be different.
I'd like to add that Cheniere Energy Partners will receive $2 billion in financing from The Blackstone Group to fund the construction of a natural gas export plant in Southern Louisiana. T. Boone Pickens of course has a huge stake in Chesapeake and other energy giants.
All of this, while Warren Buffet laments natural gas? Fuck him.
I've never been a fan of Buffett. He's killing it on Burlington Northern Santa Fe. He clearly sees value in moving oil by rail. The longer that Keystone XL stays on hold the better it is for him.
I've been watching LNG for a while now, it's up 12% on the BX news.
Is it just me or did Obama not approving the pipline from Canada look at a little fishy...
,
I agree, Short. Canada actually went on the offensive about this - they stated that due to the decision they will have to work harder in diversifying their energy exports, mainly through shipping to China. When the friendly Canuck's in our hat start getting mad, you know there's a problem.
I'm not saying that nat gas will replace sweet crude over night I am just saying that th demand for nat gas stems far beyond transportation like the primary market for sweet crude. The idea of nat gas cars is great just saying you have to replace the energy output that will be redirected.
We are doomed energy-wise.
Dec 2020 oil closed today at $87. That is the steal of the century. Will probably be at $300 by the time Dec 2020 rolls around.
It's a significant arbitrage opportunity as long as the price ratio is greater than 6 for (bbl of oil/mcf of gas).
Btw, monkeys, it's easy to make money with the ridiculousness that is the oil curve right now. Let's say you have $20K to invest. Just buy one contract of Dec 2020 oil. You'd be wiped out if the contract goes to ~$70, but that's the current break-even price of marginal production. You can't bring new oil online for less than $70, so that's your price floor. Now, let's say I'm right, and oil production declines, plus inflation, bring the price to $300 on the long-end. That's a gain of $213K. So you're $20K investment is up 10x. That's a roughly 30% IRR.
If you invest 100K, you'll have $1M in 9 years. That'll pad your retirement nest egg quite a bit.
I think it's hard to see oil at that price in the future outside of massive inflation (in which case many other asset classes would also rise).
Of course. If you put 20K in a Dec 2010 contract in 2002 you'd probably be rich as shit.
How would one "invest" in oil? Can you just buy these types of contracts hedging fuel for later? And assuming a cheap ass car comes along in 2015 that has a 300 mile range and is electric and the price of oil in the US plummets, then what?
Is there any liquidity that far out?
Focus on buses to begin with. The concept of cars is ages away.
The buses idea makes sense, heck no top research firm PIRA/CERA/Bentek/Woodmac/Barclays/GS I think does not have Buses ins 2015 on built into their model somewhere. Ofcourse America would need a real President and real energy plan to get really into gear.
Gas is too high here in California, if people switched to another fuel source, would the prices drop?
i'd rather just mount sails on cars and power it with the wind of WSO trolls
Purpose built natgas vehicles can be comparable to diesel/gasoline vehicles. Of course, they don't have ~100 years of automotive powertrain development, so the efficiencies will be weaker. That doesn't mean it won't be economically viable with the massive energy price differential between gasoline/natgas.
Natgas-using vehicles are basically converted from using petrol, so they will be less efficient, and then there is a focus on developing electric engines, not gas ones. I believe the important comparison is not between petrol and natgas but natgas to electricity, given that with large price differencials between the first two, it will come down to whether the nargas is cheaper than electricity, and given usually gas turbines are peak load, I doubt that is likely.
Actually the electric car has huge synergies with renewable energies and smart grids that are not available in hidrogen-powered cars. The main problem with electricity is that other than pump-storage, you are very limited in storage options, and there is where the electric car comes into play, every single car connected to the grid is an electricity storage device on its own, which means that once you park your car on the evening and start watching tv, the car can deliver electricity to the grid and charge late in the night, where prices are low. You cant do this with hydrogen, and it is rather inefficient to generate hydrogen with electricity. Also what you get from organisms you can better invest in biofuels, I dont know how much you are using your biogas potential for power generation in the US, but developing that can be far cheaper than getting a fleet of hydrogen using cars. Think of all the current power in the cars and stations out there that is just sitting there, same would happen with natgas/hydrogen, while with electricity you can do stuff with that reserve power. I know we all love to pollute, and before I started working with renewables I never though there was any money on those hippie things, but actual opportunities arises in these areas, oil/natgas is sexy, but not exactly the future (as coal is), and the game-changer in my opinion will be the electric car.
Given that I've never looked into it, I won't act like I know specifics, but you seem to know. In natural gas cars, what is the range, and what is the added weight from the compression tank? What is the power delivery? In what manner are they comparable? In what sense does methane supply similar amounts of power?
Of course, rising energy prices mean tradeoffs. NatGas @ $3/MCF vs. Gasolines @ $5/gal means you are getting ~90%+ discount on energy/$ when you choose NatGas.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline_gallon_equivalent
Not sure, I'm not an automotive powertrain engineer. But I'll take a guess so I can sound stupid.A combustion chamber within a piston engine is a pressurized mixture between air and fuel. As long as it stoichiometrically balances out, fuel masses are roughly the same, combustion sequence is roughly the same then the general power production of the piston will be the same.
CNG on a piston engine will certainly deliver power similarly to a piston engine (as opposed to a rotary or a turbine).
A pressurized tank holds natural gas and is then fed into the engine using some sort of pressure control and injectors purpose built for gas. Injectors/pressure are such that an appropriate amount of gas is fed into the combustion chamber for the amount of air. At least I think.This is my qualm with natural gas. Although it sounds like a good idea, once there is significant demand for natural gas as there is with oil, the price of natural gas will rise. It is simple economics: supply and demand. Once the world is as dependent on natural gas as they are with oil, it is inevitable to see the price shoot up. There is not an unlimited amount. Will the gas be cheap for decades? Probably. But a half century later, prices will rise as did oil.
Problem with electric cars: How do you produce the electricity to power the cars? (via coal plants, nuclear power plants.....). Also, there will be a need to replace the batteries. Rechargeable batteries do not last forever.
If you are looking for the future answer, we are on the cusp of some scientific discoveries that could provide zero emissions in the hydrogen car industry. Researchers have discovered viruses, green algae, biomass and other options that produce hydrogen. And while there are currently solar powered hydrogen generators that produce hydrogen from water, this may put a strain on the clean water supply in the world.
My proposal would be for hydrogen powered cars to produce a byproduct which could be reused as potential hydrogen fuel at an efficient level. For example, if hydrogen cars had a byproduct of water, this water could be continuously reused, never putting a strain on the demand of water in our economy. The water could be taken to a hydrogen fueling system to produce hydrogen again. In addition, any owner of a H car would own individual hydrogen fueling systems at home, powered by solar energy.
The home filling station itself is in the area of $3-5k. Also, filling at home could be a pain - an empty tank would take up to 20 hours to fill at home (public stations are more highly pressurized and take a few minutes).
Mass production can destroy that number. I fail to buy the argument that a gas compressor can't be made cheaper than 3-5k.
Exactly, an IBM 5100 computer cost $20k in 1975. I'm sure if the incentive was there, gas compressor costs would be nominal.
I'd like to hear what PetEng says also. PetEng is Petroleum Engineer, right?
You want to buy Nat Gas Car? http://automobiles.honda.com/civic-natural-gas/
This is a bit of a gamble guys. EPA is due this year for their big report on hydro-fracking, which pretty much drives the natural gas domestic production for the future. Its very feasible that the EPA's report will result in some stringent changes to the drilling codes for this stuff, not to mention the publication of all chemicals used in the process. Once the horrible shit that gets pumped into the ground to get natural gas is out for courts to see, environmental and civil litigation will be a huge cost increase for the natural gas market. Not saying it'll break the system but the prices certainly wont be as depressed.
Disagree about natgas cars being weak. In Bangladesh, all vehicles are converted. You'd have to be crazy not to, gas is about one third the price of petrol, though both are heavily subsidized. I drive one myself, and even with a drop in power from petrol, its not significant enough for me to switch back. Conversion costs about a 1,000 dollars, give or take and you can run it like a hybrid, gas or fuel by flicking a switch.
I have heard reports that oil could hit 200/bbl if Israel attacks Iran.
The US can let the world oil supply dry up so then we have to use nat gas and once again rule the world
You only asked really one specific question. Here is the answer.
The CNG tank weights for the equivalent of 10 gallons of gas is ~125lbs.
Repellat et totam natus eius. Maiores consequatur veritatis vel. Voluptates perferendis nesciunt sunt tempora est in.
Voluptatibus suscipit nam harum eaque et deleniti velit. Cumque nam sit optio reprehenderit commodi. Maxime ut hic ipsa quibusdam ut nam ullam eaque. Expedita et fuga distinctio qui.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Ut odit quia et harum recusandae. Ex voluptates maiores debitis culpa labore voluptas dolorum. Molestiae fuga necessitatibus assumenda est sunt rerum. Id fugiat voluptate possimus consequatur quia porro et. Accusamus animi enim totam. Neque placeat hic iusto quis dignissimos possimus.
Qui ut accusantium voluptatem voluptas nobis. Reiciendis inventore doloribus velit sunt hic ad possimus perspiciatis. Et quam sit expedita adipisci nemo eveniet cumque.
Eius suscipit deleniti nihil quis assumenda odio. Corporis laborum ipsa labore debitis non dolores. Ut dolorem explicabo et quia nulla et.