Hawaii
Energy Policy Forum > 2003
Articles
The Future of Fuel-Efficient Cars
Designers have built cars that can
run on everything from soybean oil to solar power. So why
aren't we driving them?
NEWSWEEK WEB EXCLUSIVE
April 5 - Since 1972, more than 30 fuel-efficient, experimental-and
often award-winning-vehicles have been designed and built
by the students and faculty at the Vehicle Research Institute
at Western Washington University in Bellingham, Wash. Funded
by $7 million in grants from the federal government, industry
and private individuals, the models range from a propane-fueled
minivan to a lightweight, streamlined gas-powered model able
to get a whopping 118 miles-per-gallon on the highway.
FOR AT LEAST A DECADE, the new models have run on alternative
fuels ranging from solar power to a thermophotovoltaic generator
(basically, an engine powered by burning methane to simulate
solar energy). NEWSWEEK's Jennifer Barrett spoke to VRI's
director Michael Seal about the feasibility of using alternative
fuels from soybean oil to solar power, and which-if any-is
most likely to replace gasoline in our cars in the future.
NEWSWEEK: Tell me about the latest car designed at the Vehicle
Research Institute? How is it powered?
Michael Seal: It's a hybrid vehicle, powered with natural
gas on the engine side and an electric drive on the other.
It's a little different than those currently on the market.
It is a four-wheel drive. The front wheels drive electrically
with 100-horsepower electric motor and the rear wheels drive
with a 100-horsepower natural-gas engine. But it's a full-sized,
four-door vehicle, and our goal is 50 miles per gallon in
the city or on the highway. It's the 32nd vehicle we have
built, and we are basing this on what we've learned from building
other vehicles in the past, so it is not just a pie-in-the-sky
dream. But we are still working on it. The engine comes from
Honda and it already meets super ULEV (ultra-low emission
vehicle) standards. Our vehicle is different in another way
as well. It rises to the height of a sports utility vehicle,
so it has the same ground clearance and the high driving position
that people seem to look for. But above 30 miles per hour
it drops to car height, so there is the increased stability
and general increased drivability. It lowers itself to normal
car height.
An SUV that drops to regular car height while you're driving?
Why?
You can drive at the low height at low speed, too, if you
wish, but you can't drive it up high over 30mph. There are
too many of these high vehicles rolling over, and I can't
think of any that have rolled over at less than 30mph. So
this is a way of forcing people to have a safer vehicle. Most
of the reasons for a sport utility vehicle is to drive it
in the snow or off-road. Most of the reasons for a sport utility
vehicle is to drive it in the snow or off-road. Most people
who drive in the snow or drive off-road at full speed, though,
are probably doing something foolish.
You've been designing hybrid cars powered by different types
of alternative fuels for at least a decade. What kind of interest
have you gotten from automakers?
On the current project, not much. They all have similar hybrid
projects they are doing themselves now. But the current high-performance
Subaru uses an engine that was designed here in our labs.
We developed the natural-gas systems that became widely used
in Canada. And we did do one a few years back that Daimler-Chrysler
was interested in. DaimlerChrysler has a hybrid vehicle in
the works now-it is just not out yet. Virtually every automaker
has a hybrid ready to spring on the market as soon as Toyota
and Honda prove there's a market, which they seem to be doing.
Unlike electric vehicles, people will buy hybrid vehicles.
Beyond better fuel efficiency, why buy a hybrid vehicle-especially
if it costs more?
There's no loss of range or loss of performance or loss of
utility and a bonus is that you get substantially increased
fuel economy. Of course, in today's America, fuel economy
is just about the last thing most people look at when they
buy a new car. However, when one looks at recent events in
the Middle East, that might be foolish. I also think that
most people, given the opportunity, will spend a couple thousand
extra on a new car if it is really doing something to clean
up the environment. I think the current national government
misreads the American public in its view that no American
gives a damn about the environment. I don't think that's true
at all. Most Americans do care about the environment, but
they are not willing to buy a car with very limited range
and a very high price just to do their bit. Except for a few
movie actors and scientists, no one bought the electric vehicles
that were available. But people are buying the hybrids because
they are not giving up anything-well, except a little more
money. But that's returned in fuel economy. Plus, it is buying
a little security against the next energy crunch.
So why aren't automakers putting more hybrid cars on the
market in the United States?
It entirely depends on our willingness to do something about
the refueling network. That is entirely the case. If we decided
to do it now, in a year or so we would be there.
Canada has a lot of natural-gas vehicles because they have
a refueling network. But it took the Canadian government buying
a fuel company, Petrocan, which sells natural gas at its outlets.
Otherwise, it wouldn't have happened there. Mexico could do
it quite easily since they have a nationally owned fuel company.
But we don't have such a thing in the United States. And it
would be unthinkable for the U.S. government to take over
any oil companies. We are not likely to do it given our political
views. I think in general Americans resist the idea of a nationally-owned
fuel chain, even if it is the right thing to do. There would
be a strong resistance of a government-owned company competing
with private industry even if it was doing something the private
industry refuses to do.
What about electric cars? The electric car makes no sense.
A typical electric vehicle has about the same amount of energy
in it when it is fully charged as a standard car does when
the gas gauge reads empty. On the other hand, electric cars
are much more efficient than gas cars so you do go further
on that energy. But in the middle of winter in Boston, an
electric car is likely to go about 20 miles before it needs
to be recharged. The same electric car in the middle of summer
can go about 100 miles. Now, if it was able to go 100 miles
all the time, people might accept that. But it also takes
overnight to charge, and there's the matter of providing a
place where you can charge your car. It is that inconvenience.
Once people realize what they are getting into, then they
lose interest pretty quickly. There are some places where
it would make sense: on a golf course or in a retirement community-any
place where people don't go more than 10 miles a day.
So what is the best alternative fuel for vehicles?
Natural gas is the clear winner when you are looking at alternative
fuels. All the other alternative fuels are in very short supply
or don't exist at all. Natural gas is cleaner and it's in
better supply worldwide-far better-than oil. And it is correspondingly
cheaper on a miles-per-dollar basis. It is much better than
gasoline. With the natural-gas Honda engine we have, we are
routinely getting 250 miles between fill-ups, so it is quite
adequate. We have a refueling station at the institute. There
are not many refueling stations in this country, but we're
22 miles from the Canadian border so we can just drive up
to Canada and refuel if we need to. A faculty member is using
it to commute from Seattle-that's 90 miles from here. And
he can do it pretty comfortably. This natural-gas car is purely
run on natural gas. It won't run on gasoline. But most natural-gas
cars will usually run on either fuel. But the dedicated fuel
engines run better. They are cleaner and get better efficiency
then those that have to run on both.
If it's that easy to convert, why have we been so slow in
adopting natural gas-powered cars in the United States?
We don't get any government support for either hybrid or
natural-gas-only vehicles. Essentially, our current government
has said that global warming isn't a problem, fuel economy
isn't a problem. They have voted down any participation in
the worldwide effort to reduce global warming and voted down
any increase in the fuel-economy standards. I suspect that
they think-and they may be right-that they are expressing
the will of the American people in these things. Then again,
they may be wrong. I hope they are wrong.
But Americans like big cars. I guess it's the mentality that
really goes for monster trucks and things of that nature.
Consumption of fuel still seems to be something to be admired.
What would it take to change that attitude?
A fuel shortage. That does it. That'll do it overnight. And
that's likely to happen again. It's happened in the past and
it'll likely happen in the future. The technology is not the
problem. It exists. We have been attempting to show that not
only does the technology exist, but you don't have to give
up anything you like to get it.
Have you ever used cooking oil to run one of your cars? How
does it work? It works. We are running a car now on biodiesel,
as it is called. But the supplies are not good, and I don't
know what the potential supplies are. I have a team of students
that is very interested in using these fuels. They have already
converted a pickup to run on it, and they now have a little
one-litre turbocharged diesel we're putting in our experimental
car to run in the American Tour de Sol. It's a hybrid. Cars
would even run on McDonald's grease. There's not enough to
run every car in America on McDonald's grease but there's
an awful lot of that grease and rather than doing what we
are doing now with it, it'd probably be better to run it through
diesel engines.
© 2002 Newsweek, Inc.
|
