We commend the President for recognizing the immediate benefit of using a clean, domestic fuel such as natural gas: “A great place to start is natural gas,” stated Obama.

Based on his remarks, the President plans to support tax incentives for companies to buy more natural gas vehicles, specifically mentioning city bus fleets and the federal fleet. He also mentioned job creation in the context of using a domestic fuel and building infrastructure (it is an election year). We can only hope this support turns into legislation!

So, we’re a little biased – since the biomethane (natural gas from renewable sources) FirmGreen produces is a “drop in” fuel for a natural gas infrastructure. Obama said his administration would continue to work with the private sector to develop five natural gas corridors along major highway routes.

Click here for the White House PR.

Visit FirmGreen’s website to find out how using biomethane recovered from wasted resources can benefit your community.

Want to watch the speech? It’s here on C-Span:

The Obama administration says that proposed higher fuel economy standards can be expected to increase vehicle prices about $2000 but that owners will save an average of $6,600 in fuel costs over the life of the vehicle.

In order to be as realistic as possible (see figure above), we made a slightly less rosy analysis:

• current purchase price of $25,000 for a vehicle with 19 MPG vs.
• future cost of $27,500 (adding $2500 rather than $2000) for comparable vehicle with 36 MPG
• fuel cost of $3.38 per gallon & 15,000 miles driven annually (we used the same assumptions as fueleconomy.gov)

Total 5 year fuel cost for the 19 MPG vehicle is: $13,342.10
Total 5 year fuel cost for the 36 MPG vehicle is: $ 7,041.65

So, our fuel cost savings result was $6,300.45 — very close to the government projections. After deducting the additional purchase cost for the more fuel efficient vehicle, you would save $3.800.45 over 5 years in the example above.

Some vehicle dealers are concerned that increases in vehicle costs put them out of reach for many consumers, and wonder whether there will be sufficient demand for highly fuel-efficient vehicles. (Unsurprisingly, truck dealers have expressed more concern on this issue than dealers whose current lineup primarily features more fuel efficient models.) Obviously, that depends heavily on the cost of fuel – it’s no secret that when fuels costs skyrocket, people are incentivized to replace a “gas guzzler” with a “fuel sipper”.

Automakers seem much more enthusiastic about fuel economy as they show off new fuel-efficient models at Detroit’s International Auto Show. See our previous posts for auto show highlights.
]]> http://www.buycng.com/wordpress/2012/01/future-fuel-economy-savings/feed/ 0 http://www.buycng.com/wordpress/2012/01/methane-reduction-delivers-climate-benefits-at-lower-cost/ http://www.buycng.com/wordpress/2012/01/methane-reduction-delivers-climate-benefits-at-lower-cost/#comments Fri, 13 Jan 2012 19:16:06 +0000 gCNG host http://www.buycng.com/wordpress/?p=695 A new scientific analysis published today in Science, urges a focus on methane and soot (black carbon) emission reduction to deliver the quickest and greatest range of benefits – ranging from improved human health to increased crop yields. Benefits could start being seen in just weeks or months, rather than decades, according to one scientist...Read more

A new scientific analysis published today in Science, urges a focus on methane and soot (black carbon) emission reduction to deliver the quickest and greatest range of benefits – ranging from improved human health to increased crop yields.

The major reason for focusing on reduction of these particular greenhouse gases (GHGs) is that methane and soot have a significantly stronger greenhouse effect than carbon dioxide (CO2), but remain in the atmosphere for a much shorter time period. Therefore a reduction today means a rapid effect in “….weeks or months, not decades or centuries,” according to atmospheric physicist Veerabhadran Ramanathan, of the Scripps Institution of Oceanography at University of California, San Diego.

Even better news: out of about 400 emission control measures studied, the team of researchers noted that just 14 of those steps generated 90% of the benefits. Third on the list is capturing methane — also known as biogas, from landfills in the U.S. and China. Other steps on the “top 14″ list involve capture of methane from other sources, such as coal mines or petroleum exploration. In addition, the study found that many of these measures provide more economic value in benefits than their cost.

The study doesn’t go into how much more GHG reduction and economic benefit could result from use of captured and cleaned methane to displace the use of dirtier fuels such as coal and diesel. That’s an obvious next step, and one that FirmGreen has been pursuing since 2002, with its strategy of displacing dirtier transportation fuels with cleaned methane (known as biomethane) from wasted resources such as landfills, waste water treatment plants, and livestock operations.

Find out more about how FirmGreen is using wasted biogas resources to generate economic value and benefit the environment: www.firmgreen.com

]]>

Obviously, market development is required for increased use of biomethane in the transport sector, and support in the U.S. currently lags well behind that in the EU. In an article available online, a UK Environmental Audit states that “biomethane is an almost perfect renewable transport fuel.” The audit concludes that wide adoption of CNG and biomethane for transport will deliver the greatest air quality benefits at the lowest cost, especially when compared to expensive battery powered hybrid electric vehicles.

NGV refueling stations are somewhat costly to install (though not significantly more costly than a new fossil fuel station) and are only commercially viable if they refuel a significant number of vehicles — such as a fleet. Therefore the market penetration of NGVs for personal vehicles suffers from a classic problem; fuel suppliers are reluctant to construct refueling stations until there are sufficient numbers of NGVs, and consumers are unwilling to purchase the vehicles until there are sufficient refueling stations.

How do we get past this longstanding issue? A 2011 European Commission (EC) report on smart gas grids concludes that NG fueling stations can be located near their existing natural gas grid, avoiding the need for a costly build out of new gas distribution infrastructure. A similar approach might significantly reduce the overall cost of NG fueling infrastructure development, even for geographically large countries such as the U.S. However, the U.S. would still have large NG fueling gaps in areas that are not along natural gas pipeline routes, so a focus on fueling for fleets continues to make sense economically. Locating fueling hubs near fuel feedstock supplies such as landfills and waste-water treatment facilities is likely to continue as a limiting factor for biomethane use, unless national energy policy supports NG as a transportation fuel on a long term basis.

The European Industrial Bioenergy Initiative (EIBI), is a related effort underway in the EU to accelerate commercialization of advanced sustainable bioenergy. The broadest objective of this organization is to bring sustainable energy and fuel products to market at costs competitive with fossil fuels. Biomethane is one of several paths being explored to bring cost effective renewable fuels to the market; developing coherent policy that promotes a willingness for industry to invest in alternative fuels and energy is a primary task.

Find clean fuel facts about biomethane and CNG at: firmgreen.com

Links to article sources:
UK Parliament Environmental Audit Summary (opens in new window or tab)

EC Report on Smart Gas Grids – biomethane references, pp15-16 (PDF opens in new window)

European Industrial Bioenergy Initiative (EIBI) (opens in new window or tab)

“Reliance on oil is the greatest immediate threat to U.S. economic and national security, and also contributes to the long-term threat of climate change,’’ the report states. (page IX of the Executive Summary) Fine so far: we agree!

In the transportation sector, the DOE intends to focus on technologies that “significantly reduce oil consumption and diversify fuel sources for on-road transportation.” Step one (see the chart above) involves continued increases in Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standards. Beyond improving fuel efficiency, the DOE seems to have concluded that electrification of fleets represents the next best step. What?

Considering that almost 20% of our electricity generation is still powered by coal, electrification of vehicles will do little to reduce carbon emissions. So a push toward EV’s prior to cleaning up our electrical generation seems odd. However, recent government efforts to support primarily one biofuel – ethanol – have come under heavy criticism and may partially explain the lack of enthusiasm for biofuels. It’s no secret that ethanol production from corn puts it in competition with food supplies, and may require more energy to produce than can be obtained from using the fuel. Current research in this area is focusing on use of waste crop products, such as corn stalks and husks, but researchers admit that such fuels are multiple generations away from market viability. Hydrogen and fuel cells aren’t anywhere near ready for prime time either. Hence, the DOE concludes a shift to EV’s is the best near-term opportunity to reduce reliance on petroleum for transportation.

The report mentions another hurdle for biofuels besides ethanol: alternative transportation technologies must compete with the established fueling infrastructure. That hurdle is real, but it is unlikely to be overcome if there is little will to do so. We think another fact stated in this same report (p.17) provides ample reason for a will to surmount this hurdle: oil imports at current prices contribute 70% of the United States’ trade deficit. Budgets are tight these days, but some funding of new fueling infrastructure would also create some jobs, ultimately increasing tax revenues.

The DOE mentions natural gas as a transportation fuel, and then seems to dismiss it as a solution: the report states that “recent expansion of domestic gas reserves has…raised the possibility of exports.” In other words, not only do we have enough for domestic use, but we could actually export to other nations. Strangely, the report then concludes that such a linkage to global markets could make the US economy vulnerable to price swings in that market. This is amazing: it’s a little like concluding that Saudi Arabia’s economy is vulnerable to swings in the global price of oil. Technically true of course, but historically economic vulnerability from oil price swings has been much greater for nations that import than for those that are net exporters.

Some disclosure is appropriate here: FirmGreen is in the business of recovering and cleaning wasted methane (natural gas) from sources such as landfills and waste water treatment plants to produce natural gas fuel equivalent to pipeline quality. Obviously, policies that support adoption of natural gas as a transportation fuel could benefit our company. However, we fail to see how transitioning from a fuel for which we must import almost 50% of what we use, to a fuel that we have in sufficient enough quantity to export makes the US more economically vulnerable.

In fairness to the report, another stated goal is to derive 80% of America’s electricity from clean-energy sources by 2035. A great idea, and one that will require continued innovation, especially in the area of energy storage (i.e., battery technology) and improving the grid to reliably deal with fluctuations in production inherent in renewables such as solar and wind. Domestic natural gas, including biomethane would have a supporting role to play here as well – that of clean backup power when the sun isn’t shining or the wind isn’t blowing. However, greater adoption of renewables for power generation could still be expected to free up domestic natural gas supplies for transportation use. That this is the essence of the Pickens Plan doesn’t mean it’s a bad idea. Until we shift to cleaner power generation, a shift to EV’s will do little to clear the air, though it may slightly reduce demand for imported petroleum.

In our view, improving fuel efficiency is good policy. But we believe a rapid shift toward alternatives such as domestically produced natural gas for transportation is more likely to deliver near-term as well as long-term benefits, both environmentally and economically, over a strategy of electrifying our fleets.

Read or download the full DOE report (PDF)

Neither political party stateside has put much emphasis on manufacturing policy in recent decades. But, as manufacturing has declined from about 28% of the US gross domestic product (GDP) during the 1950’s to less than 12% of the annual GDP today, the finance, insurance and real estate sectors have proven to be a less than adequate replacement.

Many experts on public policy believe that a larger manufacturing base would have helped jumpstart economic recovery: each new manufacturing job generates five more jobs. Speaking at a conference in March 2011, Susan Hockfield, the president of M.I.T., said: “Manufacturing is simply this huge engine of job creation.” Manufacturing also tends to go hand-in-hand with research & development activities – historically an American strength. Locating manufacturing abroad also tends to put research centers offshore as well, leading to an erosion of US leadership in these areas.

Companies tend to defend their choice to offshore, stating that a huge consumer market has developed in areas such as Asia, and manufacturing close to the end-use market is ideal. As we mentioned in an earlier FirmGreen Facebook post there are a couple of bright spots in this otherwise lackluster scenario: lighting and battery production for electric vehicles. In other words, green technology is currently creating new “green collar” jobs and helping businesses retain existing jobs, especially in manufacturing.

Last year President Obama called for a doubling of exports by 2015. However, the administration lacks an explicit plan for achieving these lofty goals for manufacturing. “The United States today is alone among industrial powers in not having a strategy or even a procedure for thinking through what must be done when it comes to manufacturing,” says Thomas A. Kochan, an industrial economist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Want to get involved? Find contact information for your elected officials and urge them to develop economically sound manufacturing policy:
Senate.gov
House.gov

The MV Egret has landed, and FirmGreen’s latest green technology shipment was being offloaded late into the evening Monday at the port of Rio de Janeiro.

The equipment will be installed at and operate the Novo Gramacho biogas cleaning facility, creating long-term jobs and clean energy. The resulting pipeline quality natural gas fuel will significantly benefit the environment by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and displacing the use of dirtier fuels.

Find out more about FirmGreen’s alternative energy and fuels at firmgreen.com

MV Industrial Egret is now slightly ahead of schedule as she nears Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. Her last port call at Ilhéus in Bahia, Brazil went swiftly and the Egret is now back in route toward Rio — approximately 444 NM (nautical miles) from her most recently reported position of 17.59 S / 038.17 W as of noon local time (UTC -3) today, August 26th.

FirmGreen’s 2nd green technology shipment is aboard; soon to be offloaded and transported to the Novo Gramacho Landfill near Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. The USA-made equipment will be assembled on site, providing jobs for Brazilian workers as well as US workers who will assist in plant startup. Once operational, the biogas facility will clean dirty landfill gas to a pipeline quality biogas —biomethane—similar to natural gas. The project will create 200 or more long-term jobs, and benefit the environment by reducing greenhouse gas emissions and displacing the use of dirtier fuels. Find out more about FirmGreen’s alternative energy and fuels at firmgreen.com

MV Industrial Egret has now turned slightly southwest, having “rounded the turn” of South America’s easternmost point. The vessel is now off the coast of Bahia, Brazil — about 323 NM from her next port call at Ilhéus.

MV Industrial Egret continues on a southeastward route as she nears the easternmost point of South America. The Egret’s route then turns slightly southwest toward her next port call at Ilhéus in Bahia, Brazil — 682 NM (nautical miles) from her most recently reported position of 04.57 S / 035.11 W as of noon local time (UTC -3) today, August 23rd.

MV Industrial Egret crossed the equator over the weekend and is now in the southern hemisphere, off the coast of Rio Grande do Norte, Brazil. Though Hurricane Irene is surging northward through the Caribbean, that storm is well north of the Egret’s position and will not affect the ship’s progress. MV Egret continues on a southeastward route — 994 NM (nautical miles) from her most recently reported position of 02.22 S / 039.42 W as of noon local time (UTC -3) today, August 22nd.