Auto Execs Rate Hybrids First, Biodiesel Last in Alt Fuels
Car makers put more stock in hybrid systems than biodiesel.
This post from CNET News says a survey conducted by KPMG asked 200 senior auto executives to rate the most important alternative fuel technologies to their industry over the next five years:
When asked to rate which were the most important alternative fuel technologies to the auto industry over the next five years, hybrid systems were ranked first followed by battery electric power, fuel cell electric power, and biodiesel, respectively.
“Automotive manufacturers are in the challenging position of being asked to compete on both technology and cost. With global consumers still feeling the pinch of the recession, those OEMs who can deliver on this equation will be in the driver’s seat,” Gary Silberg, national automotive industry leader for KPMG, said in a statement.
An interesting twist to the survey says that the execs believe that fuel efficiency and environmental friendliness are the top two biggest impacts on customers’ buying decisions … which are two of the biggest attributes of biodiesel. Go figure.
2 Comments »
brodifaabs
The problem with Biodiesel/ fuel is that it takes away fertile land to produce crops that will NOT be used for human consumption. (ie: sugar-cane, corn, etc). Ultimatelly; it may promote deforestation, as farmers will try to gain more territory/ area for those “fuel-friendly” crops, in the event the demand increases.
Hybrids and Eltrectic Cars could be powered by more clean sources such as wind and solar plants or other sources of clean electric power.
THIS TIME around… the executives seems to be pursuing the correct idea! The one with the lowest impact!
Todd Swagerty
Biodiesel gets a bad rap when it is linked in with Ethanol. It gets a much better energy balance, but neither has to be made from virgin crops, they can both be made from waste biomass.
Biodiesel can be made from waste oils from the rendering plant and from oils taken from crops that are not food grade. i.e. crops that were grown for food, but came out at such a bad quality that it is otherwise useless (the outside edges of fields never produce as well). I didn’t find a study that calculated the energy balance using waste biomass, and pressing that to create oil and converting that oil to biodiesel, but the following ratios below should help illustrate my point.
Fuel (study author, date) Fossil Energy
Ethanol (Shapouri, 2002) 1.34:1
Petroleum Diesel (NREL, 1998) .83:1
Rape (Canola) biodiesel (Richards, 2000) 1.78:1
Soydiesel (NREL, 1998) 3.2:1
WVO Biodiesel (Hoover, 2005) 7.8:1.
I used the “Fossil Energy” which includes all the energy inputs both from the production or extraction of the feedstock and the energy required to process the fuel. For more information, read this paper. http://www.biofuels.coop/education/energy-balance/
A more recent study by the USDA conducted in Sept. 2009 is even more favorable: http://www.usda.gov/oce/reports/energy/ELCAofSoybeanBiodiesel91409.pdf
Another point I would like to make is that it is very easy for auto manufacturers to ensure their design works with biodiesel. Most vehicles need absolutely no modification to run B100.
There have been recent models that have been using a scheme to replenish the exhaust particle filter where they inject extra fuel into the cylinder after the ignition. This is bad for biodiesel because the biodiesel will get into the crankcase and dilute the oil. This means the user has to change their oil more frequently. The manufacturers can put an injector into the exhaust manifold to alleviate the problem.
Thanks,
Todd Swagerty
Mechanical Engineer
Springboard Biodiesel, LLC.
530.894.1793
2282 Ivy Street, Chico, CA 95928
http://www.springboardbiodiesel.com
Comments RSS feed — TrackBack URI
Leave a Comment