Honda's FuelMaker finds a new home at Fuel Systems Solutions
FuelMaker, the Honda company that makes the Phill natural gas home refueling system, was forced into involuntary bankruptcy about a month ago. For a while, T. Boone Pickens' Clean Energy Fuels was maybe going to buy the company, but that didn't happen. Honda has found a buyer for FuelMaker, though, in Fuel Systems Solutions Inc. FSS announced yesterday that the $7 million transaction is expected to close in the second quarter of 2009. With the new acquisition, FSS adds another part to its natural gas puzzle. FSS also owns IMPCO Technologies and BRC S.r.l., companies that offer products to convert internal combustion engines so they can operate on gaseous fuels like propane and natural gas. Currently, FSS is big player in the European CNG vehicles market. Green Car Advisor says that Honda expects FSS to keep "manufacturing and selling home-based natural gas refueling systems such as the Phill." Press release after the jump.
Gallery: 2007 Honda Civic GX
[Source: Green Car Advisor, Fuel Systems Solutions, Inc.]
PRESS RELEASE:
Fuel Systems Solutions Agrees to Acquire Certain FuelMaker Assets and Purchase Orders
Transactions Expand Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) Refueling Product Line
SANTA ANA, Calif., May 1, 2009 (GlobeNewswire via COMTEX) -- Fuel Systems Solutions, Inc. announced that it has agreed to acquire selected assets and technology for compressed natural gas (CNG) refueling products manufactured by FuelMaker Corporation, including the home refueling appliance marketed under the Phill(tm) brand. The transaction is valued at $7.0 million and is expected to close in the second quarter of 2009.
"We believe FuelMaker's unique technology, patents and certifications fit well with our turn-key refueling equipment solutions," said Mariano Costamagna, chief executive officer of Fuel Systems Solutions. "The FuelMaker product line addresses both the consumer and commercial markets, which complements our existing refueling solutions for large fleets and gas stations."
"We believe we have significant opportunity to deploy this technology in existing and developing markets, such as the United States, where the natural gas refueling infrastructure is limited," said Matthew Beale, president of Fuel Systems Solutions. "We intend to leverage our global distribution network and original equipment manufacturer (OEM) relationships to further penetrate more established natural gas vehicle markets."
MTM S.r.L., the Italian operating subsidiary of Fuel Systems Solutions, Inc., has agreed to two separate but related purchase agreements to facilitate the transaction consisting of an agreement to acquire assets from the receiver for FuelMaker Corporation, which still needs court approval, and an executed agreement to acquire assets from American Honda Motor Co., Inc. As part of the purchase agreements, Fuel Systems Solutions has agreed to fulfill certain FuelMaker service obligations and has assumed certain outstanding purchase orders. In an additional agreement with American Honda, the company has made provisions to license technology back to American Honda under certain circumstances to support its natural gas vehicle activities. The closing of the related transactions is subject to closing conditions customary in this type of transaction.
FSYS is a leading designer, manufacturer and supplier of proven, cost-effective alternative fuel components and systems for use in transportation and industrial applications.
Fuel Systems' components and systems control the pressure and flow of gaseous alternative fuels, such as propane and natural gas, used in internal combustion engines. These components and systems feature the company's advanced fuel system technologies, which improve efficiency, enhance power output and reduce emissions by electronically sensing and regulating the proper proportion of fuel and air required by the internal combustion engine. In addition to the components and systems, the company provides engineering and systems integration services to address unique customer requirements for performance, durability and configuration.
The company is composed of two operating subsidiaries: IMPCO Technologies and BRC. IMPCO Technologies is a leader in the heavy duty, industrial, power generation and stationary engines sectors. BRC is a leader in the light duty and automobile alternative fuel sectors and has established alliances with several major automobile manufacturers for OEM projects.
Additional information is available at www.fuelsystemssolutions.com.
Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties, including, without limitation, expressed or implied statements concerning the Company's ability to successfully utilize the acquired technology, certifications and patents, penetrate new and developing markets and use the acquired assets to leverage existing business. Such statements only state our beliefs and opinions. The Company's actual results may differ materially. Factors that may cause the Company's results to differ include, but are not limited to, risks that we cannot integrate the acquired assets into our business promptly and efficiently, that the patents or certifications acquired are insufficient or not useable by us, that expected sales do not materialize, that changes in emissions regulations may not significantly increase demand for the Company's products, the global economic downturn may reduce customers' demand for new automobiles and/or our products, and that all closing conditions will be met. Readers also should consider the risk factors set forth in the Company's reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including, but not limited to, those contained in the "Risk Factors" section of the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K, for the year ended December 31, 2008. The Company does not undertake to update or revise any of its forward-looking statements even if experience or future changes show that the indicated results or events will not be realized.
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
jharlan 3:34PM (5/02/2009)
It looks to me like this is the last piece of the puzzle. We can now get a Honda configured for Nat Gas, Fill up at home, Cut our fuel costs significantly, cut our emissions significantly (and don't tell anyone, but I don't see how they are going to charge for road tax). Maybe someone can tell me why this isn't a great idea.
Reply
jake 3:43PM (5/02/2009)
It's not anywhere near as good a PR tool. No ones sees natural gas vehicles as advanced. However if you calculate the efficiency and emission number they probably are near or better than most fuel cell vehicles running under natural gas based hydrogen.
Bill 12:22PM (5/03/2009)
About $4000 installed for the Phill.
Which has a short service life before rebuild - less than 3 years.
On top of the premium you pay for CNG vehicles (Civic GX was more expensive than the Civic Hybrid)
CNG looks pretty dead in the light passenger vehicle market.
harlanx6 1:19PM (5/03/2009)
Thanks, Bill. I guess there is no free lunch.
Back in the 40s on the farm, my Dad converted a flathead Merc V-8 to run on natural gas to run our irrigation pump. There just wasn't that much to it. He also converted trucks, tractors and cars to run on either LPG or gasoline, just by flipping a switch during the WW2 gasoline rationing. It took propane tank in the truck bed or the car trunk, a pressure regulator, which all LPG users have and only cost a few bucks, a heat exchanger, and a special carburetor, and they were good to go. I had one. The mileage was poor, but the fuel was cheap.
Right now these manufacturers are getting an obscene premium for vehicles equipped for CH4 and the filling equipment. I can see both being a do it yourself project. Whether it would make economic sense would depend on the mileage driven. I'll bet we'll see it in commercial applications soon, in fact I think some are already doing it.
Herm 7:36AM (5/04/2009)
You also forgot the energy spent compressing the gas, and the durability of the high pressure tanks in the car.
Its almost as bad as the economics of hydrogen fuel cell cars, except you dont expend 1 mil for the fuel cells and natural gas is a lot cheaper than hydrogen. It may just be cheaper to make synthetic liquid fuels out of the natural gas, and that is expensive also.
It may be economical if they can reduce the tank pressure drastically. Right now the only way it makes sense is in fleet situations where you can amortize the cost of the compressor.
.......................................
#3 Bill says:
About $4000 installed for the Phill.
Which has a short service life before rebuild - less than 3 years.
On top of the premium you pay for CNG vehicles (Civic GX was more expensive than the Civic Hybrid)
CNG looks pretty dead in the light passenger vehicle market.
harlanx6 11:27AM (5/04/2009)
Good points, Herm, but I can assure you the tanks are very durable. The other points being considered, the fact that C4 is almost universally available and we have huge reserves in the US makes a pretty compelling argument when we could eventually stop the economic drain to and subsequent economic and political power being accumulated by our enemies in the middle east, which if unchecked will likely result in nuclear war. Which is cheaper in the long run? My point is C4 is possibly our best interim strategy since we are too stupid to have a "Manhattan Project" to build nuclear power plants for the sake of energy independence and climate change.
3PeaceSweet 6:14PM (5/02/2009)
Look out for cheap natural gas powered motorbikes, also natural gas likes high compression ratios and direct injection.
Adsorbed natural gas technology is also getting better, you can store more gas a lower pressure using porous carbon.
Biogas can make use of a huge variety of feedstocks, much better energy return than ethanol.
In places when it can't be put into the gas grid it can be used to run gas engines and provide electricity to the grid and heat for farming process. Biogas electricity generation is the dispatchable renewable electricity generator that no one talks about, it also completes the loop on nutrient recycling on the farms and its feedstock can be nitrogen fixing cover crops, agricultural wastes, human and animal manures, fast growing grasses, prickly pears or seaweed.
Not a complete solution, but its probably the least bad biofuel.
Reply
Tohe 10:51PM (5/02/2009)
Go T-Boone Pickens go! Do the happy dance and lets give it up for big ole Texas oil. Yay : )
Reply
joe wojcik 11:03AM (5/05/2009)
I have an FM4 fuelmaker at home and at current rates, including compressor depreciation, my fuel costs work out to $1.10 a gallon. Also in comparing vehicles you can pretty much double the engine life of a natural gas vehicle vs a gasoline vehicle, and 100% of the money you spend on fuel works its way back into the US economic system.
Electric vehicles (Obama mobiles) using current electric rates works out to about $10 a gallon. Of course you can use solar to power it than its about $20. Dont believe me?
You can figure it out yourself 746 watts in 1 Horsepower. This is why GMs CEO was fired, the Volt put the cart before the horse.
Also you cant haul freight with electric vehicles because the battery weight is prohibitive. The bigger the motor the bigger the batteries resulting in an even bigger motor etc.... Cummins is already building Diesel engines that operate on natural gas.
Sure it would be great to just keep using oil, only problem is that nagging fact that there is a limited supply, and not enough oil for everyone.
Natural gas is not a technoly of hope, it is here it is now and it is being done all over the earth.
Eventually it will run out, but until we can get cheap electricity, and the Hydrogen fuel cells to store it, itll keep us eating, working,playing and researching other technologies that will eventually solve these problems.
The economy is currently healing and with that the price of oil is once again rising. Our $2 gas is just a blip in the radar.
Reply
Billw 4:06PM (5/14/2009)
How does one locate a bi-fuel conversion company in Houston, Texas? I an't seem to locate one in the natural gas capital of the world.
Chris M 5:45PM (5/12/2009)
Joe, you may be right about the cost of driving on natural gas, but I think you're way off on the cost of driving electric.
Take a car like the Tesla Roadster, it takes just 59 Kilowatt-hours of electricity from the outlet to drive 244 miles, that works out to about 0.24 kilowatt-hours per mile, about 2.5 cents a mile at average electric rates. That means a Roadster owner could go over 400 miles for $10 worth of electricity.
Oh, maybe you're right and electricity is the equivalent of $10 a gallon - but does that really matter if the car gets the equivalent of 400 miles per gallon?
Rick 9:46PM (5/15/2009)
Billw, CNG-NGV Solutions,Houston,Tx. www.cng-ngv.com. I will be open mid-June
Reply