Why not Natural Gas?
Why are we not using the advantages of Natural Gas? If a car company told me that I can have a car that gets 40+ miles to the gallon, and be able to fuel it up at my house for as little as $1.25 a gallon (equivalent) I think I would listen, or at least do some research on the subject. And find out its cleaner, cheaper, safer, and much more abundant then gasoline. Also now with the technology of LNG in vehicles, the range is also increased. So why do we put all our effort into making some super battery that just ends up as hazardous waste at the end of its life cycle anyway. This is a proven technology, with proven benefits to consumer, environment, and as a distributor. We're saving money, your making money, and less emissions then the best Hybrid out there!
By: Devin N.
Rate this idea
Score: 2
Total votes: 4
+3 / -1

Related Tags
fuel
natural gas
research
Technology

1 COMMENTS ON THIS IDEA
mike sheehan Rich, Now you need to fill up using $1.02 natural gas. my 16 mpg CNG f150 is cheaper to drive than your car.
2 year(s) ago via
John Leake My 2000 F-250 diesel rins on 30% CNG. It gets abt 27mpg total(alot better than the original 14mpg) and has an extra 40hp over factory, 80hp including the programmer . However any form of NG is just as expensive as gasoline and gasoline engines don't do as well on NG. LPG is the only thing they do well on and they drink it like water. Just do it yourself...
3 year(s) ago via
Joe Gammon Ford offers a CNG/LPG Engine Prep Package for their 2011 Transit Connect XL Van. 2.OL DOHC 14, 4 Speed Automatic Transmission for $315.00. On their web site http:media.ford.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=34177 says that Ford has worked with preferred upfitters who install tanks and hardware. In this article it also says that Propane has a high octane rating of 104, in between Compressed Natural Gas at 130 and unleaded gasoline at 87.Because it burns completely, there is less carbon buildup. Spark plugs, exhaust system and oil changes are needed less frequently. Honda Civic offers their CX Natural Gas Vehicle which runs on nothing but Natural Gas. Natural Gas.org has more infomation. America's Natural Gas Alliance states that converting just one trash truck from diesel to natural gas is the pollution reduction equivalent of taking 325 cars off the road. An article in the Wichita Eagle newspaper on 5/20/2011 stated that we imported 11.5 million barrels of oil every day at a cost of $42.5 billion for the month. Reports show that we have a 100 year supply of naturgas, containing more energy than all the oil reserves in Saudi Arabia. Naural gas is about 30% cleaner than petroleum and produces no particulate emissions. There is currently a bill in the US House of Representatives (House Bill 1380) known as the New Alternative Transportation to Give Americans Solutions, or NAT GAS,Act- provides tax credits of a five-year period to buy and manufacture natural gas vehicles and begin building an infrastructure for refuling them. This bill is corrently in committe. We have a better fuel than ethanol and gasoline. We have the means and the know-how. We are just not using it .
3 year(s) ago via
Ed Jackson While there may be hope for LNG powered vehicles sometime in the future, now is not the time. It isn't because there is a problem with LNG, per say, there isn't. But it has some of the same problems propane powered vehicles have. It doesn't produce the same amount of power gasoline does, gasoline has about 35% more BTUs per atomized engine cylinder than LNG, it actuall gets fewer MPG compared to gasoline, and it creates rapid engine cylinder wear, and compsumes more engine oil. Before I retired from my last employer, we had a fleet of mostly Ford Vehicles, mostly F-150s and Crown Viccies. The F-150 regular cabs and Crown Vics only used LNG, and the F-150 Super Cabs were duel fuel of gasoline and LNG (each burned seperately through a dashboard switch. All had the 5.4L Ford V-8, and all vehicles afdter market conversions while the vehicles were still new and not in service yet (none of the manufactures offered a factory installed LNG option at the time), the model years were 2001 through 2006. The LNG only powered vehicles would usually burn about 1 quart per tank full of LNG, because LNG does not have any lubercating properties to protect the piston rings, like gasoline does. These vehicles would last about 100,000 to 150,000 miles. The Bi-Fuel Super Cabs lasted much longer, some as long as 250,000 miles (and one to just under 300,000 miles). We would use the LNG and gasoline alternaetly, one tank of LNG, one of gasoline. In all the F-150 pick-ups, the LNG system and fuel tank took up about 25% of the cargo beds. All of them were ordered with the Ford 7700 lb capacity option from the factory. The regular cabs were dogs in the performance area, and could only tow about half the weight a gasoline version with the 7700 lb kit could. The other problem with LNG (and hydrogen, etc.) is there are very few refueling stations (we had to build our own), compared to a gas station on just about every courner in the US.
3 year(s) ago via
Rich Palmer My Fiesta gets 40+ mpg every day. I will agree, however, that paying $4 a gallon is ridiculous. At least I'm saving more than most people that share the same commuting miles (98 miles one way)!
3 year(s) ago via
This discussion is missing your voice.

Your comment has been received and will be reviewed.
Thought of something else? Add another comment.
Comments are moderated in accordance with the
Ford Story Rules of Conduct.
Box Tops
Box Tops
Share the Love.
Choose the badge that speaks to you and take the first step into the amazing world of Ford Social.
Learn More >
Check out the family of badges on your dashboard.
View your Dashboard
Most Popular
Related Ideas
Safe Driving Incentive

Promo Promo Promo
Register Now
SOCIAL NETWORKS
|
RSS
|
|
EVENTS
|
BLOGS
|
ABOUT