While many environmental, safety and legislative pundits are ready to demonize the automobile, just try to think of any aspect of our market that has adapted more quickly or comfortably to our needs. While factions may decry the threat of large vehicles or wail about excessive gasoline consumption or claim modest progress on emissions, remember that we, the buying public, are largely to blame. Blessed by a good economy and inexpensive gasoline, American buyers are asking for larger sport utilities, more fuel-consuming features and higher performance engines.
So far the manufacturers have borne the cost of relieving these social concerns largely by themselves, but now are working directly with the advocacy groups and the legislatures to bring order to the process. In addition, pressure is being brought to bear on oil companies to produce cleaner fuels. The next step will be to develop support from government and private sector to develop the infrastructure for methanol, natural gas or hydrogen-fueling systems needed to support the vehicles coming in the next decades.
In order to respond to California legislation, GM and Honda introduced purpose-built electric vehicles while GM, Toyota, Ford and Chrysler sold modified versions of current vehicles. All of these are remarkably efficient and are heavily subsidized by the companies to roughly equal the cost of their gasoline equivalents, but are afflicted by cruising ranges of between 75 and 125 miles. A few can be seen on the highways in affluent sections of Los Angeles and Arizona, but the consequences of running out of juice away from a charging station keep them limited to curiosity or industrial applications.
Our next few years will see the Toyota and Honda hybrid powerplant vehicles joined by others from GM, Ford and DaimlerChrysler. These will use small efficient gasoline engines to charge the small battery packs that actually power the vehicles, resulting in 60 plus mpg and minimal pollution for four-door mid-size family sedans. Within the next quarter century these are likely to be supplanted or replaced by fuel-cell-powered vehicles that will use fuels to create hydrogen to power the fuel cells that create electricity without polluting internal combustion.
Still there must be the support structure to provide and dispense these lower-polluting fuels.
In 1999, President Clinton announced newly proposed federal standards for sulfur levels in gasoline that call for 30 parts per million sulfur, down from the current average of 340 parts per million. The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) estimates that this sulfur reduction would be equivalent to removing 166 million cars from the road. The plan would be phased in between 2004 and 2006.
Refiners argue that the cost may add as much as 6 to 10 cents to a gallon of gasoline. Energy BioSystems believes their biocatalytic technology to desulfurize gasoline will only cost 1 to 2 cents per gallon of gasoline. In addition to the cost advantages, biodesulfurization technology offers the advantage of operating under mild conditions, while consuming less energy and emitting fewer greenhouse gases than existing technologies.
The EPA has also indicated that it will put forward a proposal for cleaner diesel fuel. Similar diesel sulfur standards will be more difficult to reach using conventional technology, while biodesulfurization offers the same advantages for diesel fuel as for gasoline.
While several companies offer alternate fuel or flexible fuel vehicles, Ford has by far the most expansive program, selling propane, natural gas and ethanol-powered vehicles. They range from the Ranger compact pickup through their sedans to the large pickups. Now they have announced a fuel coupon program to encourage the use of ethanol (E85) fuel in Chicago and the twin cities of Minneapolis and St. Paul.
"When Ford decided to offer FFVs nationwide, we understood we had a responsibility to promote the use of ethanol fuel," said Jim O'Connor, President of Ford Division. "We realize there are only certain areas of the country where ethanol is now available, and those are the places we'll be targeting."
Corn-based E85 emits up to 30 percent less greenhouse gas emissions than gasoline on a life-cycle basis. It is a renewable energy source produced in the U.S. Today, the number of stations is still very limited, but there has to be a 'chicken and egg' exercise. The same process will have to play out for other fuels as they are needed.
In order to move the process along, the manufacturers have determined to be part of the planning and timetable.
The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers has presented an alternative to the EPA proposed rule on clean vehicle emissions and clean fuel. The Alliance proposal would reduce tailpipe emissions of nitrogen oxides from passenger cars, sport utility vehicles, minivans and pick-up trucks, as well as reduce sulfur in gasoline to produce a cleaner burning fuel.
Josephine S. Cooper, President of the Alliance made five key points before the EPA panel:
Automakers are committed to implementing advancements in clean air technology while still offering vehicles that meet consumer demand for quality and functionality.
Fuels and autos operate as one system and must be addressed in unison. Near-zero sulfur fuels are needed to enable the introduction of technology required to meet the tough new standards.
Automakers need enough flexibility in the timeline to allow for the invention of the technologies necessary to make performance against new standards a reality.
EPA must conduct an evaluation study midway through the implementation period to ensure that the standards are still seen as attainable.
EPA needs to ensure that the final rule continues to foster the development of and ready access to advanced technology such as "lean burn" engines that greatly increase fuel efficiency.
According to a spokesperson, "In the last 25 years, the auto industry has done more than any other sector to improve the quality of our air. We look forward to continuing our work with EPA in the months ahead to find emissions solutions that best preserve the environment and consumer choice."
The Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers is a coalition of car and light truck manufacturers BMW, DaimlerChrysler, Fiat, Ford, General Motors, Mazda, Nissan, Toyota, Volkswagen and Volvo.
While these proposals are being enacted, there will be new advances and technologies appearing that will affect the outcome, to say nothing of the impact of a drastic change in oil supplies. Even after a century, concepts such as direct injection, electronic valves and variable compression show remarkable promise for the tried and true internal combustion powerplants. And intensive battery research is showing results.
Ovonic Battery Company used their nickel metal hydride ("NiMH") batteries to power several electric vehicles to victory at this year's Northeast American Tour de Sol competition and achieved a range of 217 miles. Ovonic NiMH-powered production category EVs won the competition that included acceleration, handling and consumer acceptability as well as range and energy efficiency.
General Motors, Ford and DaimlerChrysler are sponsors of design competitions that will produce the engineers who will continue to attack these problems. They join the Department of Energy (DoE) and the Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) in collegiate design competitions emphasizing maximum fuel economy, solar energy or alternative fuel usage. Teams from 110 universities in 36 states, 6 Canadian provinces, Mexico, Puerto Rico and the United Kingdom vied against each other. Among the results achieved were fuel economies over 800 mpg.
The future may not be certain, but it will be interesting. The auto companies are intent on being major players as well as good citizens.
