My Bone To Pick With T. Boone PickensBillionaire oil tycoon T. Boone Pickens rocked the automotive and energy industries this week with a bold plan to drastically reduce America's dependence on imported oil. His plan, in case you missed it, is to build massive wind farms to produce electricity, and to stop making electricity from natural gas. Then he wants to divert that natural gas to be used in cars and trucks.
Doing so, Pickens argues, would allow the U.S. to reduce its use of imported oil by 30 percent. Natural gas proponents point out that it burns far cleaner than gasoline, that we have abundant domestic reserves, and that depending on where you live, it sells at the equivalent of $1.50 for a gallon of gasoline.
Mr. Pickens may know a lot about the oil and gas industry. But getting people to buy cars that can run on natural gas may not be as easy as he thinks.
Car companies have always known about the advantages of compressed natural gas (CNG). They fruitlessly tried for decades to persuade people to buy CNG cars and trucks because that would allow them to immediately meet the toughest emission standards on the books. These things can meet Tier 2 Bin 2!

Until a few years ago General Motors, Ford, Chrysler, Honda, Toyota and Volvo all offered cars, trucks or vans that could run on natural gas. But today, in the U.S., Honda is the only one left that sells a CNG car. Even at that, Honda only offers one model, the Civic GX. And it will only sell them to individuals in California and New York (though fleet customers might be able to buy them in other states if they ask pretty please).
Honda boasts that its Civic GX is selling very well and that it's sold out for 2008. But to put that in perspective, it will barely sell 1,000 GX's this year.
The reason that CNG cars never caught on was twofold. First, the high cost of converting a car to run on natural gas. Second, the relative difficulty in finding where to fill the tank. I say relative difficulty because even though all major cities have natural gas outlets, it's not like they're on every other street corner. And back when gas was cheap, most people couldn't be bothered to go out of their way to find a CNG station.
Maybe that will change with gasoline at $4 a gallon, but clearly, the conversion cost is the biggest road block. A Civic GX costs $6,800 more than a comparable model with a gasoline engine.Why so expensive? Much of the cost is in the tank, which in Honda's case is a carbon-fiber wound cylinder tucked in the trunk. It also uses special fuel injectors that are manufactured by Honda. And it uses forged pistons, because engineers boosted the compression ratio to 12.5:1, up from 10:1 on the gasoline version.
Of course, the cost can be offset by federal and state incentives. The feds offer a tax credit of $4,000, but be careful. Even Honda advises buyers that they better check with a tax accountant to make sure they qualify for the credit. The California Air Resources Board used to offer a $3,000 rebate for people who bought CNG vehicles. But that money has run out.
Honda will sell you a home refilling station, called Phil, which taps into the natural gas line in your home so you can fill the tank there. But with this method it takes 16 hours to fill an empty tank! And Phil will set you back another $5,500 including installation.
I love the fact that Mr. Pickens is coming out with a bold new plan to help this country slash its dependence on imported oil. And I truly hope that he can pull it off. I'm with him all the way. But people should be aware that when it comes to CNG cars, there's a hefty price tag that's part of the deal.












Reader Comments (Page 1 of 3)
AngeloD @ Jul 11th 2008 1:16PM
Don't forget to mention that T. Boone "flim flam" Pickens is very heavily invested in companies that produce wind turbines and solar panels.
Frickin con artist. I was suprised that he didn't mention the need for monorails in his ad.
Dinosaurus @ Jul 11th 2008 1:28PM
T. Boone Pickes is sooooo Lyle Lanley it's not even funny!
http://simpsons.wikia.com/wiki/Lyle_Lanley
Brent @ Jul 11th 2008 1:42PM
I would rather have our money stay in America. It is that simple.
axiom @ Jul 11th 2008 2:28PM
First off this article is badly written. CNG and LPG (propane) cars are very popular in Europe due to their high gas prices. You can get a conversion kit for around around $1200 to $2400 (including installation) for a fuel injection system...in the US. This article makes it appear as if it would cost $6,400 extra, definitely not true. Thats honda's markup. Buyers do qualify for some tax benefits in the range of $2,500 a year on up depending on the size of the vehicle...and this again is in the US. From this you would think I'm a fan of CNG/LPG cars. I am..but it would be BEYOND STUPID to use to switch to natural gas exclusively for cars while simultaneously electric capacity is being increased with windmill power.
Why not simply use windmills in addition to natural gas to produce electricity? The extra boost would lower energy costs while allowing for an easy transition to the age of the electric car. As more windmills and renewable energy comes online the cars would be powered by cleaner and more renewable sources. Why switch them to a limited resource like natural gas? Oh, because oil companies lease the land that has the natural gas fields. This guy "T. Bone" is a clown. T.Bone would stand to gain BOTH from the increased demand for natural gas and the investment in windpower (which is he significantly invested in).
T.Bone knows renewable energy is receiving a huge push, that could eventually weaken the demand (and price) of his natural gas holdings, and he knows oil will be in decline when the speculation bubble bursts - while higher milage/electric cars come online; so he's thought of a way to shore up natural gas while still keeping a stranglehold on the energy market - by transitioning it to the windmills he's invested in. His idea is a sham. Keep the windmills and the natural gas going into energy production, and switch car production to ELECTRIC.
baffledu2 @ Jul 11th 2008 3:45PM
Axiom ... and the electricity for the electric cars comes from???????
The need to offset LPG imports with wind and solar is real. The use of that electricity to power transportation is a baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad idea.
Frank @ Jul 11th 2008 1:21PM
I have a better idea: If you want to save natural gas for autos, then build nuclear plants to produce electricity like France has. One reactor would make the electricity of hundreds or even thousands of windmills. And you don't have to worry about the wind dying down.
I don't know if it's feasible to power cars on CNG, but if it is, then this would be the quickest way to get there.
pmiddle5 @ Jul 11th 2008 1:26PM
Nuclear isnt a replacement but should be used to substitute hydro, wing, solar, and geo thermal generated electricity if it is not enough.
azzo45 @ Jul 11th 2008 2:05PM
Yeah, build more nuke plants... Come On! Still have the same problem from the 70's...
... Where do you store the radioactive waste? Bury it in the ground in "leak proof" storage tunnels?? When the plants overheat... are we still gonna use a local lake to act as its cooling base (& have small amounts backing up into that water source over time)???
We have had no Energy Policy in this country since the last "energy crisis" (the mid 70's)... nukes or alt. energy
Yar @ Jul 11th 2008 2:14PM
"Where do you store the radioactive waste? Bury it in the ground in "leak proof" storage tunnels?? When the plants overheat... are we still gonna use a local lake to act as its cooling base (& have small amounts backing up into that water source over time)???"
Yes, and Yes.
azzo45 @ Jul 11th 2008 2:40PM
Yar... your kids & grandkids will LOVE your selfish a$$.
Yar @ Jul 11th 2008 5:06PM
My kids and grandkids will thank me for what I have provided them, a solution. Nuclear power is the lesser of two evils, and is a choice I'm ready to make. You, on the other hand, just complain. That solves nothing.
John @ Jul 12th 2008 1:31PM
Most people are ignorant of nuclear power the same way they are ignorant of diesel cars.
Because of problems 30 years ago, they blindly want to write off the technology. Hello? We have advanced rapidly in science the last thirty years and with today's 2008 technology and out of control energy prices, things like nuclear power make sense again.
Stop living in the past and in unfounded fear.
BlackbirdHighway @ Jul 11th 2008 1:24PM
Don't we already have to import NG? Running cars on it means we'll have to import more?
Displacement @ Jul 11th 2008 1:52PM
That's why he's advocating tapping the trillions of dollars worth of domestic natural gas that could be environmentally mined out of Appalachia region.
robert bell @ Jul 11th 2008 1:30PM
give T Boone credit, he is out front in pushing energy independence using the products he has invested in. A bona fide capaitalist.
However, at the least he is pushing something other than drill more, drill deeper; fact is, if we are really interested in "energy independence" we are going to have to move to something other than petroleum to power our vehicle fleet. Why? Because we don't have enough crude available to us within our borders or off our coasts to meet the need.
Options include natural gas, coal, oil shale, and nuclear. Adapting our vehicles (primarily by designing new propulsion systems so they are affordable vs. converting what we have now after the fact) to alternative fuels could move us significantly toward a reduction in buying crude from other but no one system is likely to be a total replacement.
So let T Boone and his buddies pursue the natural gas option while others explore hybrids and electric cars which could draw power from a expanded grid of sustainable nuclear powered plants; and let's also continue to pursue coal gasification and oil shale conversion. If we put enough balls into the air, we can develop a matirx of energy which could produce independence and a reduction in the 700 billion a year we are sending elsewhere.
Vintage @ Jul 11th 2008 1:40PM
So a fitting to the civic plus a pressure regulator costs $5500?
Wow. Somebody is making a lot of money. There is no reason a hookup at home for natural gas should cost that much. At all.
Dinosaurus @ Jul 11th 2008 1:44PM
It needs to be compressed.
Pacman @ Jul 11th 2008 1:44PM
What are you talking about?
EVan @ Jul 11th 2008 1:46PM
Importing natural gas isn't a bad thing necessarily.
Anyone who takes an introductory economics course will tell you that in free trade both importer and exporter win. One side is purchasing products at a lower cost than they can produce it for and the other side is selling products at a price greater than it costs them to produce it.
Therefore, even though the United States may have enough reserves of natural gas to be self sufficient, it would make sense to import from Canada or Mexico if their costs of production are lower.
Russia has by far the largest reserves of natural gas in the world, (something like 75%, don't quote me though). However, getting natural gas from Russia to the US cheaply is next to impossible, so we tend to import natural gas from countries that we are fortunate enough to be closely allied with.
I like this plan, but I agree with John that consumer adoption of natural gas cars is a most likely insurmountable roadblock. With battery electric vehicles, plug-ins and other savvy technology gaining traction the move to natural gas will look like a step back rather than a leap forward.
idave101 @ Jul 11th 2008 4:13PM
"Russia has by far the largest reserves of natural gas in the world" (EVan, http://www.autoblog.com/2008/07/11/autoline-on-autoblog-with-john-mcelroy)