DOE's Chu: Natural Gas Is a 'No-Brainer'
Tudor Van Hampton
Energy Secretary Chu speaks at the Green Truck Summit, held at this year's Work Truck Show.
Tudor Van Hampton
Commercial fleets have adopted CNG and propane more than any other alternative fuel, according to NTEA.
Natural gas is "no longer a debate" for fueling commercial vehicle fleets, said U.S. Dept. of Energy Secretary Steven Chu at this year's Green Truck Summit, which opened March 5 in Indianapolis.
Chu likened America's fuel crisis to a beef-eater who can no longer afford to buy beef. With crude oil prices at well over $100 per barrel, producers are investing in riskier sources, Chu said. Arctic or deepwater oil wells cost as much as $5 billion each to start up, so producers want to get the highest price possible for the investment.
"That's why it's so important to diversify, to be able to use pork and chicken and pasta," Chu said.
Chu, who has served as a lightning rod of criticism for DOE's investments in cleantech companies like Solyndra, as well as his comments on gasoline prices, told work truck attendees that a menu of natural gas, electric and biofueled vehicles will reduce the strain of rising oil costs and imported oil while cleaning up the air.
"We want to diversify our source of transportation energy," he said. "Oil is the overwhelming, predominant supplier."
Most recently, retail gasoline prices in the U.S. have inched up to $3.72 per gallon, while diesel is tracking at $4.05 per gallon, according to the Energy Information Administration. Four large fleet owners—Best Buy, Johnson Controls Inc., Pacific Gas and Electric Co. and Veolia Environmental Services have joined DOE's National Clean Fleets Partnership, which includes Coca-Cola, FedEx, UPS and Verizon, Chu noted.
"The question is, going to the future, should we make plans—and should you make plans based on your next purchase of trucks—expecting $30 a barrel of oil? If you do, it's a plan hoping for the best," Chu said.
Commercial vehicles using natural gas outnumber all other alternatives such as hybrids and electrics, reports the National Truck Equipment Association, which hosted the Green Truck Summit and related Work Truck Show, held here March 5-8.
"Both natural gas and propane are expanding very nicely, and the projection is that for next year we are going to see an even greater increase," said Doyle Sumrall, NTEA's senior director of business development. "As fuel prices are going up, the technology is becoming more available, and the technology is getting better."
About 73,000 CNG and 68,000 propane commercial vehicles will be in operation this year, compared with just over 50,000 and 48,000, respectively, in 2009, NTEA forecasts. By comparison, electric hybrids, the next-largest category of alternative-fueled commercial vehicles that NTEA tracks, are expected to rise to just under 10,000 this year.
Mr. Chu should stick to chewing his food analogies and leave the fueling issues to those who know something about it.<br/>It is absolutely possible to convert diesel engines to natural ...
March 6, 2012
Mr. Chu should stick to chewing his food analogies and leave the fueling issues to those who know something about it.
It is absolutely possible to convert diesel engines to natural gas. Only problem is you cannot get the same power from them because the fuel has so much less energy in it.
So for the truckers to have an equally usable vehicle they would have to upsize the engine.
There is another way to increase power in diesel engines and clean the emissions at the same time. Just introduce about 10% propane or natural gas into the air intake and OMG does it make a difference. And the oil does not get black like it does from conventional diesels because the combustion is complete. This has been done for years for stationary Agricultural engines in the West.
Bottom line appears to be Mr. Chu is too devoted to the political science of his ideology to be effective in his job. His mind is closed.
It is absolutely possible to convert diesel engines to natural gas. Only problem is you cannot get the same power from them because the fuel has so much less energy in it.
So for the truckers to have an equally usable vehicle they would have to upsize the engine.
There is another way to increase power in diesel engines and clean the emissions at the same time. Just introduce about 10% propane or natural gas into the air intake and OMG does it make a difference. And the oil does not get black like it does from conventional diesels because the combustion is complete. This has been done for years for stationary Agricultural engines in the West.
Bottom line appears to be Mr. Chu is too devoted to the political science of his ideology to be effective in his job. His mind is closed.
First a simple non refutable observation:<br/>Far sighted engineers and scientists have been warning us they are oil resources are very finite<br/>for many many years. In fact this conc...
March 6, 2012
First a simple non refutable observation:
Far sighted engineers and scientists have been warning us they are oil resources are very finite
for many many years. In fact this concern even reached the general public many many years ago.
See for example the 1940 movie "Boomtown" The oil industry paid no heed to these warnings.
Second the cost of using any gas is very highly dependent on the cost and convenience of storage.
Hence innovative tank design as outlined in this article can lead to far cheaper gas use.
Third the comment that the introduction of 10% propane or natural gas into the air intake will be highly beneficial is interesting but one has to add what is the theory underlying this measure?
Unlike innovative research, yet developable research that reasonable promises cheaper less bulky
storage of gas, there is no theory justifying the introduction of gas into the air intake of diesel engines.Therefore whatever benefits accrue using this technique must be ascribed to other cause(s).
Professor Chu may not know all he should know for his job (who does?) but to demean a top notch
nobel scientisr especially when the oil industry has shown time and time again that it is incapable or unwilling to govern itself is an example of the pot calling the kettle black.
Understandably I don't want an industry warning me about walruses in the gulf of mexico telling me
what I should do.
Far sighted engineers and scientists have been warning us they are oil resources are very finite
for many many years. In fact this concern even reached the general public many many years ago.
See for example the 1940 movie "Boomtown" The oil industry paid no heed to these warnings.
Second the cost of using any gas is very highly dependent on the cost and convenience of storage.
Hence innovative tank design as outlined in this article can lead to far cheaper gas use.
Third the comment that the introduction of 10% propane or natural gas into the air intake will be highly beneficial is interesting but one has to add what is the theory underlying this measure?
Unlike innovative research, yet developable research that reasonable promises cheaper less bulky
storage of gas, there is no theory justifying the introduction of gas into the air intake of diesel engines.Therefore whatever benefits accrue using this technique must be ascribed to other cause(s).
Professor Chu may not know all he should know for his job (who does?) but to demean a top notch
nobel scientisr especially when the oil industry has shown time and time again that it is incapable or unwilling to govern itself is an example of the pot calling the kettle black.
Understandably I don't want an industry warning me about walruses in the gulf of mexico telling me
what I should do.
Converting a diesel engine to run on compressed natural gas likely means replacing the cylinder head with one adapted to spark ignition - not a cheap proposition. The large fuel tank ...
March 6, 2012
Converting a diesel engine to run on compressed natural gas likely means replacing the cylinder head with one adapted to spark ignition - not a cheap proposition. The large fuel tank is another major problem that an enviromentalist like Secretary Chu can be expected to gloss over. Safety issues for such a mobile bomb makes one shudder.
And why do we still refuse to use thermal depolymerization plants to domestically create the fuels we need and already use? Jeez.
March 6, 2012
And why do we still refuse to use thermal depolymerization plants to domestically create the fuels we need and already use? Jeez.
Based upon Bakken Oil, the Keystone XL pipeline and the potential for conversion of coal to diesel economically at far less than todays oil prices why do the foolish thing that Chu asks...
March 7, 2012
Based upon Bakken Oil, the Keystone XL pipeline and the potential for conversion of coal to diesel economically at far less than todays oil prices why do the foolish thing that Chu asks? Politics seems to be the only answer.
Response regarding 10% propane.<br/>The "theory underlying this measure" is field observations of working engines for 20-years. Although in this age of political science it is likely so...
March 8, 2012
Response regarding 10% propane.
The "theory underlying this measure" is field observations of working engines for 20-years. Although in this age of political science it is likely some would rather cling to theories and discount direct observations.
It is from the application of the scientific method. Try something and see how it works.
The "theory underlying this measure" is field observations of working engines for 20-years. Although in this age of political science it is likely some would rather cling to theories and discount direct observations.
It is from the application of the scientific method. Try something and see how it works.
I wrote the comment that I would like to see the theory behind the benefit of adding 10% propane or natural gas.<br/>Both theory and direct observation are needed. To dismiss theory is ...
March 8, 2012
I wrote the comment that I would like to see the theory behind the benefit of adding 10% propane or natural gas.
Both theory and direct observation are needed. To dismiss theory is to dismiss rationality.
Wasn't there any theory behind the 10% addition of propane or natural gas?
Both theory and direct observation are needed. To dismiss theory is to dismiss rationality.
Wasn't there any theory behind the 10% addition of propane or natural gas?
With apologies to anyone becoming bored with this discussion about adding a little propane or natural gas to the combustion air feeding a diesel engine. Does it make any sense that if t...
March 8, 2012
With apologies to anyone becoming bored with this discussion about adding a little propane or natural gas to the combustion air feeding a diesel engine. Does it make any sense that if the energy in the total "air"-fuel mixture going into an engine is higher the energy out will be higher? And does it make sense that if there is more complete combustion there will be less deposition of "soot" in the oil from blow-by and less particulates up the stack?
Regardless of whether one likes the "theory" or not the fact is: it works.
Really appreciate ENR for this forum.
Regardless of whether one likes the "theory" or not the fact is: it works.
Really appreciate ENR for this forum.
I still fail to see how adding 10% propane or natural gas in the air intake of a diesel engine necessarily results in more complete combustion. I believe all carbon atoms - those coming...
March 8, 2012
I still fail to see how adding 10% propane or natural gas in the air intake of a diesel engine necessarily results in more complete combustion. I believe all carbon atoms - those coming from the diesel's tank and those coming from the 10% surcharge - are created equal.
It would be great if we had someone in DOE that really knew something about energy - producing it and using it. This administration has only crooks from Chicago or other know-nothings i...
March 8, 2012
It would be great if we had someone in DOE that really knew something about energy - producing it and using it. This administration has only crooks from Chicago or other know-nothings in it. Perhaps in November we the responsible citizens can get the USA back on track. The 3-year experiment with the socialists has not worked!!
James Rose
Scottsdale, AZ
James Rose
Scottsdale, AZ
Visit <a href="http://www.cleanenergyfuels.com" rel='nofollow'>www.cleanenergyfuels.com</a> They are hard at work building a nationwide liquefied natural gas fueling station network for...
March 8, 2012
Visit www.cleanenergyfuels.com They are hard at work building a nationwide liquefied natural gas fueling station network for 18 wheelers. Watch their videos. Large truck engines designed to burn natural gas are already being built. Piston engines burning natural gas to generate electricity have been used for decades.They need to be larger displacement than diesel engines, but will last a LOT longer due to lower combustion chamber pressure, and much cleaner (and quieter!) combustion. Oil changes will be needed less often. MILLIONS of your fellow AMERICANS will be put to work HERE in well drilling, steel making, trucking, pipeline construction, truck driving, and many other domestic occupations. Billions of dollars will remain inside America, instead of going to Saudi Arabia and Venezuela to help fund the next terrorist attack.
Bill in Slidell, who owns NO stock in any company, but probably should .
Bill in Slidell, who owns NO stock in any company, but probably should .
A point of the article was that Dr. Chu advocated converting diesel engines to natural gas. It is a fact you cannot get the same power from identically sized engines with one fuel vs th...
March 9, 2012
A point of the article was that Dr. Chu advocated converting diesel engines to natural gas. It is a fact you cannot get the same power from identically sized engines with one fuel vs the other. And the conversion entails changing pistons and heads, modification of the intake system and additional electrical for spark ignition. Possible but expensive. And, again, at the end of the day, the trucker ends up with a vehicle with substantially less power.
The poor sole who cannot understand that if you put more energy in you get more energy out must have either failed to pass thermodynamics and chemistry or never thought about why they use niotro-methane in the dragsters - to get more power.
And while atoms may be created equal, molecules are not. Much more energy in liquid diesel per unit volume than in natural gas. If this concept is so hard to understand then one can only hope those who cannot understand it have no influence on the energy policies of our country. It's a bit like the old saying "Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes?" In this case the observation is the answer.
The poor sole who cannot understand that if you put more energy in you get more energy out must have either failed to pass thermodynamics and chemistry or never thought about why they use niotro-methane in the dragsters - to get more power.
And while atoms may be created equal, molecules are not. Much more energy in liquid diesel per unit volume than in natural gas. If this concept is so hard to understand then one can only hope those who cannot understand it have no influence on the energy policies of our country. It's a bit like the old saying "Who are you going to believe? Me or your lying eyes?" In this case the observation is the answer.
I'm installing sails on all my on highway vehicles. I burn zero fuel as long as its windy and I produce zero emissions. Where's my Nobel prize? After all, its theory and good intenti...
March 9, 2012
I'm installing sails on all my on highway vehicles. I burn zero fuel as long as its windy and I produce zero emissions. Where's my Nobel prize? After all, its theory and good intentions this administartion rewards, not results.
Since it is agreed that molecules are not created equal, why claim that irrespective of the different<br/>molecular structures of propane and "natural gas", performance will be equally ...
March 9, 2012
Since it is agreed that molecules are not created equal, why claim that irrespective of the different
molecular structures of propane and "natural gas", performance will be equally enhanced with a 10%
injection of either into the air intake of a diesel engine.?
It is welcome news that the value of theory is affirmed contrary to earlier assertions. But I
do believe in the conservation of energy as all but the most rabid fringe expert must.
Someone nicely illustrated the difference between the "engineer's method" and the "scientific method"
Engineer's Method Scientific Method
Do Until (Exhausted) Do until (Enlightened)
Tweak (Something) Make hypothesis
If (Better) than accept change Experiment
Revise hypothesis
molecular structures of propane and "natural gas", performance will be equally enhanced with a 10%
injection of either into the air intake of a diesel engine.?
It is welcome news that the value of theory is affirmed contrary to earlier assertions. But I
do believe in the conservation of energy as all but the most rabid fringe expert must.
Someone nicely illustrated the difference between the "engineer's method" and the "scientific method"
Engineer's Method Scientific Method
Do Until (Exhausted) Do until (Enlightened)
Tweak (Something) Make hypothesis
If (Better) than accept change Experiment
Revise hypothesis
The reason for denying a Nobel prize to the writer who self nominated himself, is that the award is given for original work. There is nothing original in this suggestion. Indeed the gre...
March 9, 2012
The reason for denying a Nobel prize to the writer who self nominated himself, is that the award is given for original work. There is nothing original in this suggestion. Indeed the great pioneer railroad
engineer, Brunel did just that when he outfitted a railroad car with sails.
Theory of course is an indispensable guide in the rational design of wind machines.
engineer, Brunel did just that when he outfitted a railroad car with sails.
Theory of course is an indispensable guide in the rational design of wind machines.
I like that last statement of "try and see if it works". There would be a more diverse transportation fuel market today if we had been experimenting with other fuel types a long time ag...
March 11, 2012
I like that last statement of "try and see if it works". There would be a more diverse transportation fuel market today if we had been experimenting with other fuel types a long time ago.
I worked for Chemlawn Corporation 30 years ago and a portion of the fleet of Chemlawn "Tank Trucks" were utilizing natural gas. When did this become "NEW" technology?
March 12, 2012
I worked for Chemlawn Corporation 30 years ago and a portion of the fleet of Chemlawn "Tank Trucks" were utilizing natural gas. When did this become "NEW" technology?
But Mr Chu and the Obama administration oppose to oil drilling. I repeat Newt Gingrich's question to them: And how was Natural gas discovered? Answer: Drilling for oil.<br/><br/>As some...
March 14, 2012
But Mr Chu and the Obama administration oppose to oil drilling. I repeat Newt Gingrich's question to them: And how was Natural gas discovered? Answer: Drilling for oil.
As someone already said: Using natural gas to fuel commercial heavy vehicles in nothing new, same with electric engines to move vehicles, this is old technology.
For some reason the more I read about the NEW technology called CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) the more I like it over electric or hybrid cars. True that now a CNT Honda Civic is about 6K more expensive than its Gasoline cousin but it is less expensive than a full electric and you have to invest around 3K in a CNG home fueling station as there are only 400 gas stations in the US that provide CNG; but the technology seems to have less obstacles to become competitive on its own without big goverment imposing on the consumer where the future goes through absurd incentives.
As someone already said: Using natural gas to fuel commercial heavy vehicles in nothing new, same with electric engines to move vehicles, this is old technology.
For some reason the more I read about the NEW technology called CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) the more I like it over electric or hybrid cars. True that now a CNT Honda Civic is about 6K more expensive than its Gasoline cousin but it is less expensive than a full electric and you have to invest around 3K in a CNG home fueling station as there are only 400 gas stations in the US that provide CNG; but the technology seems to have less obstacles to become competitive on its own without big goverment imposing on the consumer where the future goes through absurd incentives.
