Obama renews 'clean' coal and biofuels plan to reduce foreign oil

Nothing like a good old coal ash spill

President Obama and a bipartisan coalition of governors plan to use 'clean' coal - still an oxymoron today - and biofuels as key resources to ween America off foreign oil dependence according to a White House press release.

Ironically, however, cost-effective clean coal technologies simply do not exist. And, according to a recent Oxford Study, even next gen biofuels will be significantly constrained by land-use issues.

So, why not natural gas?

Even if CO2 can be cost-effectively captured and managed, is coal technology really so much better for the environment than natural gas, for instance? Furthermore, natural gas doesn't require any magical breakthrough today to clean itself up compared to coal. More important, both natural gas and 'clean' coal - if such a thing ever exits - should be seen ONLY as interim technologies.

Is not an interim technology that is cost-effective and clean today better than an interim technology that might one day be clean and cost-effective? Are we being pragmatic, or just playing politics?

Forget hybrids and EVs: Just make cars smaller and lighter?

Could it be this easy?

According to an Oxford Study the best path to decreasing emissions in autos, in the short term, requires a serious decrease in weight and size.

Over the medium term, however, the study finds that hybrid cars, such as the Toyota Prius, offer "significant savings" while helping electric drive trains evolve.

While EVs, plug-in hybrids and fuel cell vehicles offer interesting potential long term, all have serious issues to overcome in the short to medium term, such as raw material availability.

Finally, first generation biofuels offer some localized uses. Second generation biofuels show more promise, but will still probably be constrained by land availability. Algae shows some probability of overcoming the land availability issue, but massive innovations and breakthroughs are still required.

Where's the people's cut?

Bankruptcies, loans, grants, etc - Where's my cut?

Just finished a story about a Dow Chemical venture into a pilot-scale algae-based integrated biorefinery. Interesting piece. Algae still has hurdles, but the upside is HUGE.

Yet, Dow is seeking a Department of Energy grant to "demonstrate the technology at a level to sufficiently prove that it can be implemented on a commercial scale". Read: Profitable.

Fine. I can handle the fact that Dow, a company that has made billions in profit over the years, needs my help to investigate the next big green development. Still, why is it that whenever Dow hits the next big breakthrough - using my money - the politicians get rewarded, Dow stock holders get paid, but I don't?

What investor would ever agree to such an investment?

And it's not just Dow. It's many major companies. It's certainly GM, GMAC, Citi, Chrysler, AIG, etc, etc, etc. Aren't such companies forever indebted to the tax payers, to the people? Is it not we, the people, that are the real investors, not the government?

Why not? Methanol fuel cell plug-in hybrids

Better than hydrogen?

Fuel cell stacks are shrinking. Lithium-ion batteries are getting lighter and more powerful. This combination alone means the need for hydrogen to power fuel cell vehicles is shrinking. Of course, where are the hydrogen pumps?

Already, automakers, such as Ford, are exploring hydrogen infrastructure gaps with plug-in hybrid functionality by developing plug-in fuel cell hybrid prototypes. This enables such a vehicle to use both hydrogen and electricity for power. Yet, what if hydrogen could be replaced with a fuel like methanol that not only can utilize a fuel cell, but also work within the current refueling infrastructure of America?

While many, including this writer, have consistently questioned biofuels, particularly ethanol, methanol seems to have some distinct advantages over other biofuels. Off the bat a fuel cell could double the efficiency of methanol. Add hybrid technology and another 30 percent in efficiency is achieved. Add plug-in functionality and little methanol would ever be needed, except for long trips, day-time refueling or other periods of high electricity costs.

Automakers are going to pursue biofuels, fuel cells, hybrid vehicles and EVs regardless of whom becomes the next President. Shouldn't the synergies of these technologies also be pursued?

Do biohybrids justify ethanol?

More ethanol in the states?

Yesterday, GM CEO Rick Wagoner called on the government to advance ethanol in the US because the "stakes" in the oil "poker game are getting higher and higher." Coincidentally (yeah right), GM announced its new lithium hybrid powertrain via the Saab BioHybrid, a new lithium hybrid optimized for biofuel.

Now, if all the biofuel was coming from something like the Coskata Project in which GM is investing - rather than corn - I could buy Wagoner's argument. However, earlier this week, the EIA already announced that cellulosic biofuels are significantly failing to meet the production standards set by the Renewable Fuel Standard. That's means even more corn, a lot more corn. That's just not acceptable.

Get the corn out, Mr. Wagoner. Get the corn out.

Cheap biofuels to the rescue!

$4.00 gas starts to change consumer behavior

I just finished reading a story on how the Department of Energy is funding enzyme systems for cellulosic ethanol, a line of research I endorse. Still, this quest that US automakers, Congress and business are making to develop cheap biofuels seems flawed in its very essence.

Hasn't cheap gas already proven that cheap fuel leads to consumer retardation? Cheap fuel leads to increased consumption. So, why do we keep pouring billions and billions of dollars into ethanol and biofuel-related endeavors, but so little into automakers that achieve impressive fuel economy, into automakers that significantly reduce consumption?

Is consumption, not efficiency, the driving force of America? Yes, I know, that's a stupid question for anyone living in this consumer nation to ask.

Biofuel wakeup call?

Another reason for automakers to retool their technology?

GM claims that it will take decades for technologies, such as hybrid cars or electric vehicles, to have a significant impact on foreign oil dependency and global warming emissions. Thus, the automaker has continually pushed for a huge increase in US ethanol production, continually dismissing all criticisms of the fuel.

Yet, the evidence against ethanol keeps mounting, and it just seems biofuels are not going to be an easy way out for automakers.

"Almost all biofuels used today cause more greenhouse gas emissions than conventional fuels if the full emissions costs of producing these “green” fuels are taken into account, two studies being published Thursday have concluded," writes the NYTimes this morning.

Will greens ever accept a Hummer?

A small, biofueled Hummer

Compared to some of the large SUVs on the market today, the Biofueled Hummer Concept that GM displayed at NAIAS is relatively small. Add in its biofuel-capable V6 powertrain and some might dare to call it a green Hummer.

I'm not sure that I can go that far just yet. However, if it were a biofueled hybrid Hummer, I might give it a second chance.

Brazil testing E25 Prius hybrids

Will it be as efficient on E25

For the next couple of years, Brazil is going to test a few Toyota Prius hybrids in regular traffic to monitor their performance when filled with Brazilian gasoline. Gasoline in Brazil is 20 - 25 percent ethanol. However, if the results are successful, CENBIO and Petrobras might try to sell the idea of bio-fueled hybrids to other areas of the world as part of the BEST project, BioEthanol for Sustainable Transport project. (more)

Will Google partner on the Astrolab?

My dream car: A solar powered plug-in hybrid vehicle

O.K. The Venturi Astrolab solar powered plug-in hybrid is not exactly ready for primetime, but the fact that it is almost production-ready is extremely exciting.

Hybrid technology, plug-in technology, solar technology! Damn, had they just added biofuels and a small wind generator, it would be alternative energy perfection.

I was able to check out the Astrolab at Wired's NextFest, and if you live in California, you just might have seen the Astrolab on a freeway near your, as did the President of Google, according to Edmunds.

Google is now heavily invested in solar power and electric cars, and it has been pushing plug-in hybrid technology. Would't helping Venturi set up a factory in California to build Astrolabs be the perfect fit? The perfect convergence of technologies?

I hope so. Those guys at Google are money, baby.

Volvo hybrid concept: If only lithium were reality

Lithium powered hybrids rock, but they are not yet ready for primetime

Wow! Seriously, could the Frankfort Auto Show become any more focused on green issues, at least in terms of concepts? It's hybrid cars galore - in addition to clean diesel and biofueles. Unfortunately, so many of the concepts, such as the Volvo Recharge Hybrid, are dependent upon technologies that are just not ready for reality.

Imagine 62 mpg on electric power only. That's what the Recharge hybrid promises.

Starting to sound like GM's Chevy Volt?

InsideLine notes that the 4 electric motors in each wheel combined with 1.6 liter flex-fuel engine could achieve a whopping 120+ mpg for trips less than 90 miles. In trips over 100 mpg, the Volvo hybrid would eventually average out at 45 mpg.

Still, much like the Volt, the Volvo hybrid can meet most commuter's daily needs with just electric power. Unfortunately, just as with the Volt or other plug-in hybrids, the technology is completely dependent upon lithium-ion batteries.

Ultimately, it is isn't automakers which control the future, its energy storage/providers - whether lithium, ultracapacitors, or hydrogen.

Automakers: Fuel efficiency pretenders?

Green hotdoggin' at the Frankfurt AutoShow?

The hype around the Frankfurt Auto Show has almost exclusively been focused on green vehicles, such as hybrid cars, clean diesel vehicles, and bio-fueled vehicles. Obviously, it's great that automakers are focusing on green issues, but are they just posing?

With the EU possibly on the verge of very strict emissions requirements, automakers have to be prepared. Nonetheless, if the EU doesn't act, will automakers continue with their green efforts?

Transport and Environment, a Brussels-based environmental lobby group, is not impressed with Frankfurt-attending-automakers according to Reuters. Essentially, automakers are just throwing out a few token green cars, rather than making real changes, the group claims.

"It's not good enough to have one or two cars," said Transport and Environment spokesman Dudley Curtis. "What we need is emission reduction across the board."

Do automakers really care about the environment or energy security, or is profit all that matters?

Indian automakers chasing green

Tata Motors: Tomorrow's green leader?

"Indian vehicle makers are joining the global race to make less-polluting greener vehicles, teaming up with international firms and pouring money into research that could result in commercially viable technologies quickly," Reuters claims this morning.

Bio-fuels, hybrid cars, fuel cells and more. India's emerging automakers are thinking big, and they are thinking green.

American automakers, pay attention. Years of declining U.S. marketshare have been balanced by Europe, Asia and emerging markets. Even worse, the future for U.S. automakers seems pinned to China and India - markets where local automakers are fiercely trying to catch up to the big boys of the auto world.

Once, the Big 3 laughed off the challenge of Japanese automakers and compact cars. Will U.S. automakers make the same mistake again regarding hybrid cars and other fuel efficient and green technologies?

What is "technically feasible" fuel economy?

Aren't automakers duping consumers?

A 'technically feasible' approach to fuel economy has become the new buzzword among automakers, including Toyota, the king of hybrid cars. Yet, if a Toyota Prius can achieve almost 50 mpg and a Camry hybrid can achieve more than 40 mpg, then why are automakers fighting even 35 mpg as a new CAFE standard?

The new CAFE standards will not even go into effect until 2020. By then, Toyota, for example, will probably be on at least their 5th generation of hybrid technology. Even hybrid late-comers, such as GM and Ford, will have already moved through multiple generations of hybrid technology.

--> Finish: What is 'technically feasible' fuel economy?

No chance for a "meaningful energy policy" from Congress?

Wouldn't a gas tax be better than dead soldiers?

"The dance that is going on between automakers, Dingell and other members of Congress is disheartening to anyone looking for a meaningful energy policy that will make the U.S. less dependent on foreign energy sources and for the the U.S. to finally act like a world leader when it comes to energy consumption and pollution generation."

Great quote from an interesting article on the BusinessWeek Autobeat.

Here's another, "Without a sustained communications commitment, most Americans just won’t get the fact that we are already paying huge gas taxes to protect the source of Middle East oil. It’s being sucked out of our taxes already to pay for the War in Iraq and other foreign interventions. That is adding to the deficit, and costing thousands of American lives."

How can a gas tax to fund things like hybrid cars and biofuels be bad when were spending 100's of billions in Iraq and sacrificing 1000's of American lives for what - cheap oil to soothe our gas-guzzling egos?

Gas tax: Why America is doomed

Without real action will the American dream go up in flames?

So, you don't like taxes, which makes you hate the idea of a gas tax. Furthermore, for working class Americans, a gas tax could make life extremely difficult, and it just might push the consumer driven American economy into a recession.

Nonetheless, what happens if an oil crisis irreversibly doubles the price of gasoline and other petroleum-based fuels sometime in the next few years?

Recently, I heard a statistic that America will increase its fuel consumption by at least 50 percent in just the next 20 years. At the same time, the IEA is reporting that an oil supply crunch in the next couple of years is going to make the U.S. significantly more dependent upon OPEC.

Well, isn't that great news!

Iraq is a mess that America is literally on the verge of handing over to Iran and Al Qaeda, as Iran develops nuclear weapons. Nigeria continues to unravel towards full scale civil war and Venezuela wants to partner with Iran to destroy American imperialism.

Yet cheaper oil prices are just around the corner?

Yes a gas tax will hurt, but not as bad as an unexpected foreign oil dependent driven catastrophe. So, let's use gas tax money to help Detroit build revolutionary automobiles, to help consumers buy hybrid vehicles and other clean technologies - in addition to more sensible vehicles. Plus, since a gas tax would be based upon the percent of petroleum content, biofuels would also become more cost effective.

America can choose to be proactive or reactive, but the problems caused by the politics of foreign oil dependency are only going to get worse. Will it be too late before America finally acts?

Ford delivers E85 hybrid vehicles

A better approach to biofuels?

"On June 13, Ford Motor Company will hand over several Ford Escape Hybrid E85s -- the world's first full-electric hybrid vehicles capable of operating on an 85 percent ethanol blend -- to several D.C.-area organizations for real-world testing. Ethanol is made from either corn or sugar beets, thereby reducing greenhouse gas emissions."

"Ford has produced 20 demonstration Escape Hybrid E85s for placement in six different states as part of its testing process, and continuing commitment to sustainability."

(Source: PressRelease)

Rick Wagoner's biofuel credibility

Rick Wagoner and Bob Lutz shake hands at the Volt debut

So, Rick Wagoner wants to push the focus of Congress from fuel economy to biofuels? He his a master of such distractions - he helped make Congress believe in fuel cell vehicles, rather than hybrids, plug-in hybrids and electric vehicles for many years.

Kudos, Rick.

Nonetheless, many disagree with Rick's biofuel's assessment.

--> Finish: Rick Wagoner's biofuel credibility

Wagoner: Forget auto technology and fuel economy, biofuels instead?

Have biofuels become the new fuel cells?

For decades U.S. automakers told Congress to take it easy regarding fuel economy standards in the U.S.. Legacy costs limited R&D, Detroit told Congress, but fuel cells were just around the corner. Consequently, a push towards hybrid vehicles or electric vehicles would take too much money away from fuel cells.

Thus, Congress let Detroit slide for decades.

Not there is a new, stronger-than-ever push for fuel economy. This time around, however, Detroit isn't using fuel cells as an excuse for inaction. This time it's biofuels.

"For example, it has become increasingly clear that, of anything we can do over the next decade, biofuels have by far the greatest potential to actually reduce US oil consumption, reduce oil imports, and reduce carbon gas emissions," Wagoner told members of the Senate.

Let's hope biofuels aren't this decade's fuel cells.

Hybrids and Biofuels: Forget the Politicians?

Does it really matter which Party is in control?

If you ask me, competition works better than politicians. I'm not saying competition works perfectly, but it works better than a bunch of rich, special interest-funded partisan politicians.

Consequently, I've been very bothered that Congress has not extended Toyota's hybrid tax credits - something both Republicans and Democrats have ignored. Yet, in the last couple of years, both parties have talked considerably about energy dependence, especially foreign oil dependence and/or global warming. Yet, very little has been accomplished to alleviate these problems.

Obviously, the task is not simple. Still, it seems to me that the quickest way to make automakers deal with fuel efficiency is simple competition. Force them to act or risk losing customers.

Thus, the more success Toyota has selling hybrid vehicles, the more pressure there is.....Finish Hybrids and Biofuels: Forget the Politicians.

Bright future for alternative fuels and hybrids in Europe?

How will Europe deal with CO2 emissions?

According to press releases from Frost & Sullivan, the future seems very bright for hybrid cars and alternative fuels, at least in Europe.

"As a medium-term strategy over the next three to five years, OEMs are expected to introduce micro hybrids, mild hybrids, ethanol, biofuels and LPG into their fleets to reduce CO2 emissions," notes Frost & Sullivan (http://www.automotive.frost.com) Research Analyst Krishnasami Rajagopalan. "These technologies offer increased fuel efficiency and reduced emissions, which help OEMs reduce their fleet average CO2 emissions."

"Going forward, reducing emissions below 140 g/km of CO2 will be possible mainly with the help of alternative fuels and hybrids (micro, mild and full). While OEMs are aware of this fact, further development or market acceptance of these alternative fuels and hybrids is restrained by the distribution network, availability and high implementation costs."

Automotive News World Congress: Need National Energy Policy

It seems the need for a National Energy Policy was a hot topic at the Automotive News World Congress according to the DetroitNews. Unfortunately, what that energy policy should be was far from unanimous. Of course GM lobbied for biofuels, plus some help with batteries. Chrysler lobbied for hydrogen. Ford, well, Ford's reported comments surprised me the most. Nancy Gioia, director of sustainable mobility technologies and hybrid vehicle programs at Ford told the DetroitNews, "hydrogen is one of the most promising long-term solutions -- one that she said will require a national commitment comparable to the one required to put a man on the moon.

At the same time, Gioia pointed out that hydrogen is not a panacea. She said it takes a great deal of energy to extract hydrogen -- energy that might be better utilized by other technologies like plug-in hybrids."

Anyone catch Living with Ed last night?

I was hoping to learn a little more about the Phoenix electric car that made an appearance on Living with Ed last night, but I didn't. The Jay Leno segment was funny - thanks to Jay, but also interesting. Seeing Jay's Baker Electric Car or his old series hybrid is a reminder that things could have been different in the world. Perhaps, gasoline vehicles were the right path at the time, but it's hard to ignore these 100 year old electric vehicles and stories of how even Ford preferred biofuels over oil. Did the best technologies win via fair competition, or did the technology with the most money and political influence destroy all the competition?

Democrats ready to give more subsidies to biofuels

Already, ethanol is an incredibly subsidized product, as is the corn from which most ethanol is derived. Yet, the profit margins for ethanol producers are actually greater than oil profit margins. For many, this isn't a problem because of the belief than ethanol is more green than petroleum, or that ethanol helps reduce foreign oil dependency. Many Democrats in Congress also have the same belief and those Democrats are preparing to roll back tax subsidies for oil companies and use them for biofuels according to the Detroit News.

Still no word, however, on whether Congress is going to do anything to promote hybrid vehicles, including plug-in hybrid vehicles.

Are stars good for the environment?

Leo and this star drive hybrid cars. This star promotes electric cars. This one promotes biofuels. According to Green wave surges onto pop culture's shores, "Environmental causes championed by scientists and watchdog groups are reaching wider audiences as they gain prominence in popular mainstream media."

Is all this star attention good for environmental issues? Or does all this star treatment lead to a backlash? I know for certain that there has been much backlash against the Toyota Prius because of its connection to Hollywood. Still, is star endorsement good for the environment, bad for the environment, or does it simply make no difference?

Hybrids, Biofuels and the Coming Energy Crisis

Just finished watching Robert McFarland, exNational Security Advisor, and James Woolsey, exCIA Director, on Rob Insana's Street Signs on CNBC. The two are leaders of a group of 45 current and past National Security officials that have been lobbying the President to curtail U.S. consumption of oil.

Both men essentially claim that the U.S. is playing with fire if the United States doesn't take fuel efficiency seriously. They pointed out that last year alone, China increased its foreign oil dependency by 35% over the previous year, and that such increases are possible into the future.

More important they noted that in the Middle East, Al Queda has publicly stated that it will target Persian Gulf production. Such a disruption, they say, will easily push oil well over $100.00 per barrel, and both believe when, not if, is the only question.

One of the most important solutions? Tax credits for hybrid cars, clean diesel and other biofuels. Currently, both noted that the President is pushing for a $4000.00 tax credit, and both stated that the credit should be tied to fuel efficiency, not just technology. Thus, hybrid cars that achieve the highest fuel efficiency would receive the greatest tax advantage, those with the lowest fuel efficiency would still qualify, just for less.

They also noted that all vehicles should be made flexible fuel vehicles, which would significantly increase their ethanol capabilities. Thus, vehicles could fill up with gasoline that is 85% ethanol, and this ethanol doesn't have to be just corn. Prairie grass and even various waste products could also be recycled into ethanol.

So make America stronger, buy a hybrid vehicle!

For more information on how Brazil used flex fuel vehicles to end its foreign oil dependency, highlighting American Congressional incompetence, click here.