Ford, GM clash over best alternative fuel
Ethanol or liquid petroleum gas (LPG)? Battle lines for alternative fuels are being drawn between automakers General Motors and Ford Motor Co. with much of the differences based on nationality.
Saab, which is owned by General Motors, is backing ethanol as the fuel of the future. Ford Australia is backing LPG. Both marques point out that their vehicles simply cannot support the other's fuel either technologically or, in most cases, nationally. States spokeswoman Sinead McAlary of Ford, "Cars in Australia are not built to run on E85, and there isn't an E85 network here to allow people to fuel their vehicles. It would take a total shift of the [automotive] market and sizeable resources [for E85 to become viable here]. And it would take significant steps for the fuel to become well recognised by people in Australia."
Saab counters that its ethanol-powered vehicles are exempt from certain charges and fees like parking in the city of Stockholm. Also, most European automakers have discontinued investment in LPG technologies, focusing instead on ethanol. Finally, the Swedish automaker points out that its Biopower Saab turbo engines actually perform more effectively with ethanol instead of LPG and can even run on unleaded fuel.
[Source: Sydney Morning Herald]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Howard Lee Harkness 12:33PM (8/23/2006)
Question: Which is best, LPG or ethanol?
Answer: Neither.
Reply
cheezedog420 2:33PM (8/23/2006)
It's true neither is better, but of the two I rather see Ethanol succeed since it is atleast a renewable energy source. Furthermore, burning ethanol is not like burning gas, or LPG (in that your not burning something that was locked in the ground for millions of years, but instead burning something that has exsisted for a year at most,) your only burning a years worth of carbon products instead of millions of years worth of carbon stock. (Or atleast thats how I see it in my tiny little monkey mind.)
Reply
1985 Gripen 1:35AM (8/24/2006)
Also keep in mind that the SAAB ethanol hybrid convertable concept car pictured is a HYBRID (meaning less ethanol is consumed) as well as a PLUG-IN hybrid. It's not advertised and was actually covered-up by GM, for as of yet unknown reasons. The plug was located behind the SAAB badge on the trunk, but at the Stockholm Auto Show where this hybrid was debuted, GM swept-in at the last minute, told SAAB engineers to glue-shut the badge and remove any reference to the "plug-in" feature in press releases. Unfortunately for GM some of those press releases actually made it to the publishing stage and couldn't be retracted.
So if you ask me, neither LPG nor ethanol is ideal, but I'd go with the ethanol for the reason that it's renewable and doesn't require fossil fuel.
The best alternative fuel I've heard of yet is bio-butanol, hands-down though.
Reply
cheezedog420 9:03AM (8/24/2006)
"GM swept-in at the last minute, told SAAB engineers to glue-shut the badge and remove any reference to the "plug-in" feature in press releases."
Wow, thats strange, but I could see there being a legal factor requiring them to scramble.
Bio-butanol? Got a link on it?
Reply
Clive Anthony Ramsey 11:47AM (6/14/2007)
I have been quietly pressing, research people, Ethanol producers, motor manufacturers and LPG distributors queitly on a small scale for some days now.
Ethanol/LPG combo seems the obvious way forward to me. An agreed international common standard is needed though.
The Possible Advantages:
1) Use of a renewable resoutce.
2) An existing LPG distribution network.
(quick delivery to market)
3) No atmospheric water absorption into the etahnol bot in distribution and within the vehicle.
4) LPG vehicles that may already be engineered to a degree, such that adaptation to accept both fuels is not insurmountable.
5) Improved balance of payments within countries.
6) Production within countries - less distribution costs.
7) Less landfill problems - as a number of new initiatives using waste materilas for ethanol production are being developped.
8) Less likelihood of adversely affecting wildlife with damaged or sinking tankers leavin g oil along coastlines.
Possible Problems:
There will be some problems with differing calorific values and characteristics of teh two products. However LPG can comprise both propane and butane and it may be possible to balance this out so that existing vehicles are not too adversely affected.
On the slightly negative side it may be necessary to include some additives (hopefully not lead) but research could gradually improve this.
It will not solve problems like congestion, or settle the debate over road pricing. With continued car usage we will still have problems with land lost (even in Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty) to car parks and car based development. Vehicle noise will not go away. Many things we hate to see will continue to be a problem.
Too often enviromentally concerned people only look at the problems, it makes us appear "old miseries" (Grumpy Old Men in in the Jeremy Clarkson style) . There will be some problems in implementing this, but lets adopt a more positive approach and look for solutions. It may at least address matters for asthmatics and avoid lenghty pipelines or drilling in places like the Gulf of Mexico or Alaska.
Reply