Fracking cheapskate!

It seems to me that it is more efficient to burn natural gas in one's vehicle, than to burn natural gas to extract bitumen from the Alberta tarsands, then refine it into gasoline, then burn that...

Isnt the problem with natural gas that when highly compressed and rammed into another vehicle or obstruction, it explodes in a crazy fashion? And dont ANY compressed air systems tend to develop leaks on a regular basis?

Just remember, buying domestic sources of energy, that create american jobs, lower costs for american consumers and make businesses more competitive, keeps money in our economy, helps our environment, and increases our national security is UNAMERICAN.
Anything but supporting big oil is evil and any alternative to oil is hippie communist lefty thinking. Or so the GOP tells us. Constantly. How exactly does that work again?

cc_rider: Here's how a slimy, cheap f*ck like T Boone Pickens weasels out of a million-dollar promise:

Link (new window)

Rich people are the worst tippers and cheapest MF's you'll ever meet.

It was driving me crazy trying to remember where I knew his name from. That explains it.

Fark that disingenuous asshole.

Alonjar: Isnt the problem with natural gas that when highly compressed and rammed into another vehicle or obstruction, it explodes in a crazy fashion? And dont ANY compressed air systems tend to develop leaks on a regular basis?


Yes and yes.

markie_farkie: C'mon here.. Is there global farking amnesia or something?

When we lived in Austria in the early 80s, my dad almost bought a 1969 Mercedes 280 4.5 Sedan, which had both a gas tank, and in the trunk, a 150 lb. natural gas cylinder. Switching fuel sources was as complicated as flipping a switch to turn off the gasoline fuel pump, and turning a small pitcock under the dash to open the natural gas flow into the intake manifold.

It was seamless, and dirt-cheap to fill and run.

*snicker*

NewportBarGuy: Is it the guy who would make billions selling his natural gas?

*click*

Yup!

But, but, but... He'll create jobs!

Why do you hate job creation?

/so vote republican

cc_rider: Here's how a slimy, cheap f*ck like T Boone Pickens weasels out of a million-dollar promise:

Link (new window)

Rich people are the worst tippers and cheapest MF's you'll ever meet.

What, do you think they got rich by just giving money away??

DRILL BABY DRILL

Great idea, but how much did it cost to convert his car?

Oh yeah. That's just what we need with the way Americans drive. Vehicles with large, highly explosive tanks of CNG driving at high speeds.

Red the whole damn article and no information on what device he uses to do this. Fracking worthless.

Oh the guy who put a multi-billion dollar giveaway for his company on the ballot in California and tried to greenwash it. Californians are too smart for that...

*sigh*

funny, Warren Buffett is the same type of guy and people LOVE him.

mr lawson: funny, Warren Buffett is the same type of guy and people LOVE him.

I dont love Warren Buffet.

Well, I admire Warren Buffet, and respect his opinions, even the flawed ones about taxes.

But I dont LOVE him. but how can you NOT love a guy named TBOONE? its so colloquial.

/ as for owning wind farms, if YOU were a billionaire and thought you knew the answer to the worlds future problems, wouldnt YOU stock up on it? maybe he has a conflict because he believes what he says, not the other way around.

Drove five years in a CNG minivan from Opel. Operating costs: stupendously low. Major problem: range only 275 km on CNG plus a reserve tank with unleaded that added another 150km range.

Was a biatch to take on vacation in, say, France where they don't do CNG. Germany, Italy, and Holland have great networks. And no, they don't asplode in a big ball of fire when you wreck. At least not as often as liquid fueled vehicles do.

A lot of buses and government vehicles already run on natural gas. I don't see why we can't invest in the infrastructure to expand it to more vehicles in the general market. Especially if it's cheap, it's domestic and it's better for the environment. Sounds like a win all around.

Let's do the math:

There's not a solid, objective way to equate natural gas miles with gasoline, but we CAN compare energies, which is pretty fair.

Checking my natural gas bill:
$0.5327500 per 100 cubic foot of natural gas
1 cubic foot of natural gas = 1,031 Btu
100 cubic foot of natural gas = 103,100 Btu
$0.5327500/103,100 BTU= $5.167133e-6 per BTU

From Wikipedia:
Gasoline has 114,000 BTU/gal

Residential rate for uncompressed natural gas is $0.589073 per BTU equivalent of a gallon of gasoline

Holy crap, the fuel itself is CHEAPER than he mentions!

Of course compressing to 3000PSI-3500PSI takes a LOT of electrical work, that's probably where he gets to $1.

To be fair, gasoline DOES have a $0.24/gal road tax that we pay on top of the market value of refined gasoline. In theory this should be added to the cost of a gallon-equivalent of CNG.

Looking up the density figures, a lb of CNG is about 10% more energy than a lb of gasoline. But CNG requires 5x the tank volume to hold the BTU equivalent of 1 gal of gasoline. And there's difficulties in that being compressed to exceptionally high pressures, the tank MUST by cylindrical, not shaped to make use of any ol' volume you have available in the frame.

Ulterior motives aside, I'm intrigued. I just wonder what would happen to prices if it really did catch on and everyone was buying it. Since, you know, business is about charging whatever you want and can get away with, not giving the customer the best deal.

I think what might work out best is if CNG augmented petroleum rather than replaced it outright. That way you still have some competition. Since CNG apparently gives you a much shorter range, there's still a reason to pay for gas, while CNG being cheaper and cleaner would appeal to others. And let's face it, CNG would probably be more convenient to implement than electric cars (charge time vs refueling...)

But all I can do is speculate.

BronyMedic: Oh yeah. That's just what we need with the way Americans drive. Vehicles with large, highly explosive tanks of CNG driving at high speeds.

Uhhhh...

Switching gasoline for natural gas, eh?

Its like switching coke for meth.

Then when we go to tar sands/shales, it will be like switching meth for huffing starter fluid.

Enjoy racing to the bottom.

markie_farkie: C'mon here.. Is there global farking amnesia or something?

When we lived in Austria in the early 80s, my dad almost bought a 1969 Mercedes 280 4.5 Sedan, which had both a gas tank, and in the trunk, a 150 lb. natural gas cylinder. Switching fuel sources was as complicated as flipping a switch to turn off the gasoline fuel pump, and turning a small pitcock under the dash to open the natural gas flow into the intake manifold.

It was seamless, and dirt-cheap to fill and run.

Newer cars present more challenges, due to computer-controlled engine management, but I'm sure that a relatively simple "CNG" profile could be enabled and disabled at will.

Googling the issue- the EPA is the problem here. The require an official Certificate of Conformity from a kit mfg, or you can't legally drive it.

So there's two problems: One, you can't do the simple thing and DIY a conversion. The thing I'd like to stress is that DIY should not necessarily be interpreted as "hacked together by a redneck with no idea what they're doing". Today's DIY can be some EXCELLENT, cutting-edge stuff. In fact cutting-edge technology is often now LED by hackers doing better things that commercial tech offers, and at VASTLY more cost-effective prices. There's a Megasquirt EFI system on the DIY market that totally replaced your car's computer, and that doesn't require any special certification- it just needs to pass emissions (if applicable in your area). But this looks like there's no way to LEGALLY DIY a CNG conversion.

Two, the cost of kits with a Certificate of Conformity is absurdly high, and kit mfgs are actually DROPPING the CoC because it's just too costly, and selling kits as "For Off-Road Use Only", so no, your vehicle wouldn't be legal, officially speaking. I'm not sure how this bears on the real-world ability to get caught. The annual inspection in most areas requires the gas cap be checked, and if you don't have a dual-fuel system, there isn't one.

I'm not sure why the EPA sees this as necessary. I mean, in general, it's easier to burn natural gas cleanly. Sure, if done like crap, it MIGHT run with bad emissions- but the same would be true of any engine mods, most of which could be done legally.

Oznog: Let's do the math:

I was told that...

...actually I did that analysis when considering switching my house from heating oil to CNG. I haven't switched yet because the burner is still going strong and that $6k trhrows a wrench in the payback. Luckely it's been a warm winter.

If nothing else, a variety of these natural gas propelled vehicles should be brought back to market so commuters have more options (along with stations which make refueling feasible.) I'd think with all the tech we have with gas storage, designers would be able to make a tank that was less prone to explode on impact/puncture. Some sort of multi-chambered tank or built in safety asphyxiation device (killing oxygen around the tank should stave off ignition.)

Electric car batteries still need a jump in technology before they get more widely adopted ( storage capacity, longevity of charge, longevity of the battery, especially price etc etc. ) The Tesla articles recently were an extreme case, but part of the R&D process to actually getting electric vehicles more in step with their petrol using brethren.

Hydrogen fueling systems could use more lovin' too.
[NeverForget-Hindenburg.jpg]

cc_rider: mr lawson: funny, Warren Buffett is the same type of guy and people LOVE him.

Funny, I don't remember Warren Buffett supporting Jerome Corsi and the Swift Boaters For "Truth" scum. derp alert (new window)

actually what i was going for was the crony capitalism angle. T Boone Pickens stands to gain alot if CNG is implemented. Buffett gains a lot via his contracts with the government as well.
Both are crony capitalist. One is hated while one is admired.

We have plenty of supply, extensive delivery network and it is cheap. We could capture more from landills, farms and sewage treatment plants. Only problems are initial investement and refueling.

"All you need now is leadership," he said, lamenting that America "has no plan, we've gone 40 years with no energy plan. We're the largest user of oil in the world."

Correction - Our MILITARY is the largest user of oil in the world

His method: He has a device that fuels his Honda Civic GX with natural gas from the pipes that serve his home.

And of course, pay NO Road Use Tax in doing so . . .

NatGas is/was available in Syracuse at the Carrier or GM Circle right near Rt90. All the busses used it.

Natural gas is super super cheap and we're the Saudi Arabia of Natural Gas.

ArkAngel: He said he still favors wind energy, which was a key part of the "Pickens Plan" he put forth in 2008

And the fact that you own massive wind farms has nothing to do with that, right?

Who cares? Wind is good stuff.
Being a hypocrit, or even taking advantage of a situation that benefits him doesn't automatically make his suggestion a bad idea.


Dadoody: Natural gas is super super cheap and we're the Saudi Arabia of Natural Gas.

Natural gas is super cheap because we don't use it for fuel. Put a huge demand on it and watch the price skyrocket.
Besides, it is still a fossil resource. It is still a limited stop-gap at best. Not that it wouldn't be beneficial to take advantage of our resources, but it isn't a solution. We still need to develop renewables. Not only will it eventually make energy much cheaper and more plentiful, it will mean that we can sell more of our natural gas and make $$$ off it instead of burning it up. It's like tossing bills in the furnace.

Dadoody: Natural gas is super super cheap and we're the Saudi Arabia of Natural Gas.

Well then we should be using as much of Saudi Arabia's oil as possible. Any one who's played Age Of Empires knows you need to deplete foreign resources first so that at the end of the game there is still plenty of wood, stone and gold near your capital.

buckler: Great idea, but how much did it cost to convert his car?

Zero. Its a factory build.

Kits to get the gas from your house to your car go for about 3k.

TenJed_77: Ebbelwoi: Was a biatch to take on vacation in, say, France where they don't do CNG. Germany, Italy, and Holland have great n

When were you in Europe the 80's? Been living here since 1996 and they are everywhere. According the link, I'm posting there are 1707 LPG stations in France, 41 in my department(about like a county). You can click on the map and see the little signs, green being average price, yellow slightly above average, and red well above.
LPG=GPL in french
GPL

LPG (liquid) and CNG (gaseous) are two, entirely different fuels, with different dispensing stations.... so 1707 LPG stations don't help a CNG driver at all. FWIW I'm in France a couple dozen times a year as I live just next door. Nice fish though....and wine.... the cheese is good...... need to lose the squat toilets though.

Sure, and if and when this becomes something mainstream the cost per cubic of natural gas will shoot up. As long as there's rich old white dudes like Pickens around to exploit resources for large profits no fuel alternative is going to save you money once it becomes common.

To lighten our dependency on foriegn oil although it might be a worthy endevour.

buckler: Great idea, but how much did it cost to convert his car?

Nothing. Honda makes them that way .

There's only choices and compromises here, not one "perfect solution." He and others are pushing for CNG as a replacement for diesel in trucks, but according to the truckers it adds weight and cost, and just as for cars there's no CNG infrastructure. (Pops to *.pdf)

Like pure electric vehicles, right now, CNG to me seems more suited to commuter-style cars.

As with electric vehicles, you could refuel rapidly, but only if there's a "charge" station available. It's probably cheaper and safer to put in 480 volt charging stations than CNG compressors, but that's a complete guess, With CNG, if you need electricity to run the compressors, at least you could use the incoming gas to run a generator if grid power wasn't available (hmmm... maybe not a bad idea anyway, you could still fuel if the grid power were out, unlike with EV and gasoline).

Another issue with CNG might be a desire to use composites rather than steel for the cylinders to reduce weight; however, high-pressure composite cylinders for breathing air usually have a 15 year service life and then have to be decommissioned (somewhat analogous to the battery issue in electric vehicles). Your gasoline tank in your car is usually good for the life of the vehicle.

One slight advantage with CNG as a fuel as opposed to gasoline is if the tanks do rupture/leak, and you manage to avoid ignition, the NG is lighter than air and quickly rises and dissipates. That gasoline leak is pooling, running off into storm drains, and giving off flammable vapors until it is actually cleaned up. On the other hand, there's not several hundred PSI behind the gasoline coming out. A 2000 PSI stream out of a cylinder can amputate things.

Like I said, only choices and compromises...

Hey guys, is this the thread where we trash a decent idea because it was mentioned by someone who would stand to profit from its adoption?

Oh, I see that it is. Carry on.

/If only a penniless vagrant would put forth his plan, then we could finally achieve energy independence.
//Pickens invests in wind and CNG, so those are out.
///Gore invests in wind and solar... Out.
////Anyone investing in thorium or fusion? Probably. So those are out.
//Looks like we'll have to rely on my Unicorn Fart Centripitator, then. I've yet to secure investors and I'm willing to give it away for free, so it passes the prime requirement of "no one anywhere can make money off of it, especially if they already have money".
//slaaaaasssshhhiiiiEEEEEESSS!

Quasar: And he thinks there's a lesson there for America's energy woes.

And that lesson is to buy energy in whatever form T Boone Pickens happens to be investing in at the time.

ArkAngel: He said he still favors wind energy, which was a key part of the "Pickens Plan" he put forth in 2008

And the fact that you own massive wind farms has nothing to do with that, right?

Pickens would probably try to tell you he's a capitalist. He's a capitalist the way Soros is. He doesn't focus on the creation of wealth, he focuses on the manipulation of currencies and commodities. He is totally self-serving and self-aggrandizing. He showed his true colors in the 80s as a reprehensible corporate raider who got incredibly wealthy at the expense of the companies (small investors and working folks) that he raided. A leopard doesn't change his spots. Any scheme he suggests is just that: a scheme. And the purpose of that scheme will ALWAYS be to line the pockets of one T. Boone Pickens at the expense of everyone else who gets involved.