Gottcha. Why doesn't the government and the natural gas industry push CNG anymore? Up until 5 years ago, most of the car manufacturers had at least one model so equipped. U.S. reserves are good for hundreds of years. Infrastructure, though small currently, is nationwide. 3 years I had no problem driving from DC to Oklahoma in a dedicated CNG Impala. Cost is way less than gasoline or hydrogen. 69 cents a gallon in OK then when gasoline was $2.50.
Toyota announcement on its hydrogen SUV and pick-up
- Thread starter GON
- Start date
All "fossil fuels" are on the chopping block now. That has driven bans on new natural-gas hookups in some areas.
Has anyone bothered to explain to those officials banning it, all the pros of using CNG? Natural gas isn't the same as gasoline. Maybe the electric industry has them on the take. There is a reason gas ranges don't need any venting. CNG is almost as clean as electric.
There is no explaining to these people
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
If you are talking all electric homes - fill your boots - not me …
4WD
$50 site donor 2024
Apache uses CNG in company vehicles - well, they tout green - but more likely greenbacks - and that’s all good too …
Sunbridge launches CNG station to help reduce Permian emissions
Operators in Texas's Midland region of the Permian can access CNG for their support vehicles from August 31. [Image: Clean Energy]
gaspathways.com
As I opined to 4WD it's gas leaks within the distribution system from well-furnace and overall inefficiency when used for cooking. NatGas (aka methane) has as 100-yr global warming potential that is 27 times greater than CO2. I have nat gas in my house. My gas range wastes a ton of heat but because Natgas is a fuel source the wasted heat doesn't cost me a lot.
Last edited:
Guilty as charged - but I don't think the hydrogen-fueled ICE will actually be developed.
I wish air-source heat pumps were viable here. It was -34°C overnight.
Nobody mentions all the cows that leak methane gas. Are we going to eliminate the beef and dairy industry? Guess not since THEY have a much bigger lobby budget.
It has been known for decades, but IIRC it's low on the priority list in the US but not in some other countries.
Still releases long sequestered carbon into the air.
I read (and please correct me if I'm wrong) that the US has been one of the most successful countries in the world in reducing its greenhouse emissions.
This is mostly attributed to switching coal-fired generating stations over to natural gas.
It appears that natural gas is a relatively clean fuel, one that will, if allowed, play an important role in transitioning to a low-carbon future.
Cummins is working on a H2 engine but a combustion type. Looks like the same with Toyota.
Problem is, while PM/HC/CO emissions are nearly 0, NOx will be high. Which means our old friend EGR and SCR will be used to cut down on that.
Problem is, while PM/HC/CO emissions are nearly 0, NOx will be high. Which means our old friend EGR and SCR will be used to cut down on that.
Ya. Seems like a waste of R&D dollars.
Even if true, low carbon isn’t zero carbon.
Which is why it’s confusing that we prefer wind over nuke. Wind requires a fast acting plant (peaker?) that seems to (typically?) be gas fired, so as to, well, make power when the wind doesn’t blow.
Please... before anyone gets too excited please brush up on the most efficient ways we currently have to create hydrogen.
Currently the most efficient way is NATURAL GAS reformation. A process where steam is used to break CNG where hydrogen is one of the byproducts. A few things to note:
1) Why go through the trouble of reforming natural gas into hydrogen when you could just burn the CNG?
2) How do you think that steam is created? Natural Gas perhaps? Nuclear reactor? Why not use that steam to create electricity?
The 2nd most efficient way is through electrolysis:
1) so you're going to use that electricity created from steam to create hydrogen which eventually gets converted back to electricity? The more you convert energy sources the less efficient it is
the 3rd is renewable liquid reformation
1) so now your taking ethanol which already consumes more energy than it returns to change back to hydrogen with the help of STEAM!
There's no free lunch people, unless a major breakthrough happens hydrogen power will never be feasible. Fuel cells have been around since the 60's, and there's a darn good reason there isn't more of them.
Currently the most efficient way is NATURAL GAS reformation. A process where steam is used to break CNG where hydrogen is one of the byproducts. A few things to note:
1) Why go through the trouble of reforming natural gas into hydrogen when you could just burn the CNG?
2) How do you think that steam is created? Natural Gas perhaps? Nuclear reactor? Why not use that steam to create electricity?
The 2nd most efficient way is through electrolysis:
1) so you're going to use that electricity created from steam to create hydrogen which eventually gets converted back to electricity? The more you convert energy sources the less efficient it is
the 3rd is renewable liquid reformation
1) so now your taking ethanol which already consumes more energy than it returns to change back to hydrogen with the help of STEAM!
There's no free lunch people, unless a major breakthrough happens hydrogen power will never be feasible. Fuel cells have been around since the 60's, and there's a darn good reason there isn't more of them.
Similar threads
