Analysis: Thrifty truckers wary of pricey natural gas vehicles

Yahoo/Reuters ^ | 22 mar 2013 | Nichola Groom

[shove_it]

LOS ANGELES (Reuters) - Truckers considering natural gas as an alternative to high-priced diesel say the cost of vehicles that run on the cheap and cleaner-burning fuel is still too high for them to see a timely payback on their investment. A push to run more of the nation's truck fleet on cleaner, domestically produced natural gas is rapidly gaining momentum. [...] Natural gas trucks' greenhouse gas emissions are about 20 percent lower than those of diesel trucks. But truck companies must fork over an extra $40,000 to $80,000 per natural gas truck - a big markup considering a heavy-duty diesel truck starts at about $100,000...

[nascarnation]

Just like the fracking revolution happened while the fedgov was out pimping batteries, windmills, and solar, I think CNG will find it way into vehicles quite nicely.

Locomotives are a perfect application, and I suspect they will be a big user eventually. Plug in a gas tank car behind the engine and away you go.

[Triple]

Great point on Wash state and LNG availability. (The network is east - west at first, but being built quickly.)

Look at HDMI technology for cold weather. It is a high pressure system for heavy duty engines. Westport Innovations is the company that has that technology. I think it is available on many trucks. This technology produces more power than spark ignited nat gas engines, which are good for medium duty.

There are lots of advances in natgas infrastructure and technology.

I think there is a chance that the energy density is different from what you post. Are you sure you are quoting LNG and not CNG?

Regards,

[Triple]

I just checked LNG has a little more than half the energy density of diesel...

You are absolutely correct, that will impact range.

(unless more space is used for tanks)