Battle of Civic: Natural gas versus hybrid
Why not add hybrid technology to the Civic CNG vehicle?
Why not a natural gas Honda Civic hybrid?
So, the Honda Civic that runs on natural gas is the Green Car of the Year. In the last few years the Chevy Volt and the Chevy Tahoe hybrid have also picked up this award. Yet, between the 3, total sales have only been in the thousands. Maybe this isn’t an award to be coveted?
Anyway, I like the idea behind the natural gas version of the Civic, but does it really make any sense compared to the regular Civic, or even the Civic hybrid?
A base Civic starts at just under $16,000, while the more fuel efficient HF starts around $19,500. The Honda Civic hybrid starts around $24,000 and the natural gas Civic at $26,000. Now a base Civic doesn’t offer the same options as a Civic hybrid, so the price difference isn’t as extreme as it seems, but I don’t want to focus on the difference between the conventional Civic and the Civic hybrid.
Instead, let’s focus on the Civic hybrid versus the natural gas Civic.
With a $2,000 price advantage and significantly better fuel economy, especially in the city, the Civic hybrid seems the better deal despite the fact that natural gas is significantly cheaper than gasoline — about $3.70 versus $2.00. And, according to the EPA, for instance, estimated yearly fuel costs are almost the same.
So, why the natural gas version?
Of course, the same math can be done on the hybrid versus the conventional Civic. The numbers are just hard to justify in terms of pure cost-effectiveness. But, would natural gas vehicles cost as much if automakers knew they could ramp up production based on committed government support?
I don’t have the answer to that question, but I’ve met with auto journalists from South American countries where mom and pop shops offer after-market gasoline to natural gas conversions.
This suggests that it’s simply scale and government regulations that make natural gas vehicles more expensive. Ultimately, it seems to me that South American consumers wouldn’t be converting to a natural gas option if it wasn’t cost-effective.
Thus, it seems plausible that natural gas vehicles have the potential to challenge conventional vehicles in terms of cost-effectiveness. Consequently, adding hybrid technology to such a natural gas vehicle could result in hybrids that are more cost-effective than today’s gasoline hybrids based upon today’s gasoline and natural gas prices.
Obviously, I’m making a lot of assumptions, but it seems that natural gas hybrids offer some very real potential as a way to use a domestic resource that is set to be exported out of the US because of growing supplies. It seems silly that the US would import foreign OPEC oil rather than use cleaner domestic natural gas, particularly if it could be coupled with hybrid technology to both increase efficiency and to keep R&D investments flowing into batteries.
No. Natural gas is not a home run, nor a perfect world solution, but it could be a great interim solution to more sustainable technologies, especially since the US will need interim solutions for decades. By 2025, for instance, the liberal and aggressive California Air Resources Board believes that achieving just 15 percent plug-in penetration would be a huge success — but it won’t happen without significant government intervention according to CARB.
The automotive world is just not on the verge of a quick transition to electricity or hydrogen, and conventional liquid fuels will be necessary for decades longer. Barring major and unexpected technological breakthroughs, that’s become an indisputable fact.
Maybe it’s time to take natural gas hybrids a little more seriously.
I totally agree Larry. Without a more competitive price, the story is almost over.
I’ve heard that in terms of nat. gas, there are lots of regulatory hurdles, but I don’t have concrete facts. Still, there are larger fleets of CNG vehicles in other countries. To date they’ve been limited by CNG supplies to some extent, but all these new shale plays growing throughout the world seem destined to change that, and I know Chrysler/Fiat’s Marchionne has made very bullish statements regarding the potential of nat gas in the passenger fleet.
Theoretically, I think that scale could make CNG vehicles more cost-effective than gasoline vehicles. If that were true, then that could also help absorb some of the hybrid premium.
I’d also like to see a similar approach towards biofuels. There are new non-food based biofuels that could reduce a nice chunk of oil demand. Plus, there are new engines that work with ethanol — which I’d support if cellulosic, non food-based — that run more efficiently using ethanol than gasoline engines. Again, add hybrid technology and you might be talking 50 percent reductions in oil consumption at pretty reasonable costs — along that lines of 2025 CAFE assumptions.
And that technology could be ready long before 2025.
the price premium for hybrid or natural gas is not justified in the eyes of the average person.
$5000 is a heck of a lot of money for these “extras”.
it would be interesting to learn more about why these costs are so high.
I would think that a couple of thousand dollars would be a reasonable figure to move up to a hybrid or a NG vehicle… but 5K is just too much.