Are there more electric or natural gas vehicles in the world?

(edited)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Ron Wagner said:

Unless the MSM have been making claims that there are more electric than CNG cars they are not so uniformed or deceiving us.

The interest in electric cars is that they potentially get you off the hydrocarbon hook and have zero emissions at the point of use.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference is the growth rate.

CNG cars are folllowing a linear growth and EV's are following an exponential growth.

  • Like 3
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi.  I'm Ron Wilson and I am a new member. 

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Guillaume Albasini said:

The difference is the growth rate.

CNG cars are folllowing a linear growth and EV's are following an exponential growth.

I don't know what you mean by that, but all small industries start out small and any growth is a much higher percentage than that of older industries. Natural gas and electric vehicles both came out over one hundred years ago so natural gas vehicles are far ahead.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, NickW said:

Unless the MSM have been making claims that there are more electric than CNG cars they are not so uniformed or deceiving us.

The interest in electric cars is that they potentially get you off the hydrocarbon hook and have zero emissions at the point of use.

It shows that they are very uninformed and have a hidden agenda. To me, that is either due to ignorance or motives. Electric vehicles will be using electricity primarily generated from natural gas turbines and the electricity will have line loss over many miles. 

The job of the media is to inform not selectively choose what they wish to promote. 

  • Like 2
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Ron Wagner said:

I don't know what you mean by that, but all small industries start out small and any growth is a much higher percentage than that of older industries. Natural gas and electric vehicles both came out over one hundred years ago so natural gas vehicles are far ahead.

A key difference though is the householder can run a cable out and charge his EV (slowly admittedly) without any special equipment. If that householder has solar panels there is the opportunity to at least part charge from what is produced on the roof. 

EV's are zero emission at the point of use - CNG are not. They have low particulate emissions but Nox is still 50-60% of what you get from a petrol. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The point of use has little to do with it IMHO. Natural gas is used for home cooking, heating, and I have an unvented natural gas heating stove in case of electrical problems or for an aesthetic flame. Natural gas vehicles can be fueled at home also. Go to cngchat.com for proof of that. Special compressors are needed but the government was funding efforts to build a $500 pump. They went silent, however. That was a few years ago. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

36 minutes ago, Ron Wagner said:

The point of use has little to do with it IMHO. Natural gas is used for home cooking, heating, and I have an unvented natural gas heating stove in case of electrical problems or for an aesthetic flame. Natural gas vehicles can be fueled at home also. Go to cngchat.com for proof of that. Special compressors are needed but the government was funding efforts to build a $500 pump. They went silent, however. That was a few years ago. 

I certainly would have like to have seen a major effort to convert heavy trucks to natural to CNG and light trucks that do deliveries in cities. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Ron Wagner said:

I don't know what you mean by that, but all small industries start out small and any growth is a much higher percentage than that of older industries. Natural gas and electric vehicles both came out over one hundred years ago so natural gas vehicles are far ahead.

 

I mean that the world fleet of natural gas vehicles is growing. But this growth is linear.adding 1.3 million cars each year. There are now 25 million cars in circulation.

image.png.129e910efe9c08b058f930112aedcdca.png

 

The world fleet of EV's is only at 3 millions now but the growth is accelerating. 300'000 EV's were added in 2014, 500'000 in 2015, 750'000 in 2016 and  1 million in 2017.  This trend shows that in 2018 the sales of EV's will probably outnumber the sales of gas vehicles for the first time. A 50% increase of the EV fleet each year means that the EV world fleet could outnumber the NGV  world fleet in 2023.

image.png.e920959b3f7baf28d6236a5c6d6657fc.png

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Being a practical and economical fellow I just can't see electric vehicles catching on until the range increases substantially. I do realize that price is no object for those who want to keep up with the guy next door. 

The electric car graph shows that sales have been way behind the projections. I expect that to continue. No matter, it will be interesting to watch the progress of both. I hope they are both very successful. I definitely think that natural gas makes the most sense for larger vehicles. 

Presently small gasoline cars are a more economical choice for most people. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, ronwagn said:

Presently small gasoline cars are a more economical choice for most people. 

^  This.  Important point, often overlooked by idealistic unicorn herders.

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, ronwagn said:

Being a practical and economical fellow I just can't see electric vehicles catching on until the range increases substantially. I do realize that price is no object for those who want to keep up with the guy next door. 

The electric car graph shows that sales have been way behind the projections. I expect that to continue. No matter, it will be interesting to watch the progress of both. I hope they are both very successful. I definitely think that natural gas makes the most sense for larger vehicles. 

Presently small gasoline cars are a more economical choice for most people. 

Please see https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/gm-electric-cars-mandate/

  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are a lot more gas cars but not near enough to improve air quality. If only they could become mandatory. (I'm still angry from having to walk along a few very busy streets yesterday and get an unwanted fill of exhaust gases.)

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Marina Schwarz said:

There are a lot more gas cars but not near enough to improve air quality. If only they could become mandatory. (I'm still angry from having to walk along a few very busy streets yesterday and get an unwanted fill of exhaust gases.)

It will reduce your exposure to particulates but you will still get a good lung full of NOX from CNG fuelled cars.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Natural gas will produce NOX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOx  but natural gas will be burned as the main fuel to produce electricity for electric cars anyway. As coal use decreases more natural gas will be used worldwide. Of course solar and wind will have a role too, but they are, as of now, much more costly and have their own problems. 

http://clean-carbonenergy.com/nox-emissions.html 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, ronwagn said:

Natural gas will produce NOX https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NOx  but natural gas will be burned as the main fuel to produce electricity for electric cars anyway. As coal use decreases more natural gas will be used worldwide. Of course solar and wind will have a role too, but they are, as of now, much more costly and have their own problems. 

http://clean-carbonenergy.com/nox-emissions.html 

The difference is the car exhaust is feet away from people breathing  the same air. In contrast a CCGT power station is normally located some distance from population centres. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(edited)

I realize that but I am not familiar with what wind patterns and the weight of the various gases do over the short and long term. I know that CNG itself rises quickly versus gasoline or diesel which are liquids. Of course, the temperature of the exhausts affects this too. I lived nearly half of my life in the greater Los Angeles area where the pollutants stack up against the mountains to the East. They recently had a very long term inversion layer that hung over the city. They use all CNG buses in Los Angeles but seem unable to translate that to encourage trucking to make the change. 

Here are the needed maps. https://www.eia.gov/state/maps.php 

To me, it seems that the solar and natural gas plants are mainly urban but that wind is more rural. You be the judge. Los Angeles is today very dense, but nothing like NYC or Asian cities. I prefer to see wind turbines in the flat areas than on beautiful hills and mountains.

Edited by ronwagn
addition

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ronwagn said:

I realize that but I am not familiar with what wind patterns and the weight of the various gases do over the short and long term. I know that CNG itself rises quickly versus gasoline or diesel which are liquids. Of course, the temperature of the exhausts affects this too. I lived nearly half of my life in the greater Los Angeles area where the pollutants stack up against the mountains to the East. They recently had a very long term inversion layer that hung over the city. They use all CNG buses in Los Angeles but seem unable to translate that to encourage trucking to make the change. 

Here are the needed maps. https://www.eia.gov/state/maps.php 

To me, it seems that the solar and natural gas plants are mainly urban but that wind is more rural. You be the judge. Los Angeles is today very dense, but nothing like NYC or Asian cities. I prefer to see wind turbines in the flat areas than on beautiful hills and mountains.

I'd agree that CNG is a marked improved over liquid fuels especially diesel which is why I would like to see CNG better promoted as an alternative to diesel in heavy trucks especially those working in urban areas. 

Nitrogen Dioxide has a relatively short life in that it either dissolves in water and forma a weak acid or forms secondary particulates such as Ammonium Nitrate (a salt). Its health effects are pretty much felt if people are close to the point of production hence the reason NOX out the back of a car / truck is much more of an issue than NOX from a CCGT. 

In London its estimated that about 38% of NOX emissions come from gas central heating boilers. 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, NickW said:

It will reduce your exposure to particulates but you will still get a good lung full of NOX from CNG fuelled cars.

Honestly, that's fine by me. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Marina Schwarz said:

Honestly, that's fine by me. 

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/411756/COMEAP_The_evidence_for_the_effects_of_nitrogen_dioxide.pdf

Page 5

The authors concluded that the magnitude of the effect of long-term exposure to NO2 on mortality is at least as important as that of PM2.5.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NOx emissions from CNG are less than 50% that of diesel. I'll take it.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 11/1/2018 at 8:15 AM, NickW said:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/411756/COMEAP_The_evidence_for_the_effects_of_nitrogen_dioxide.pdf

Page 5

The authors concluded that the magnitude of the effect of long-term exposure to NO2 on mortality is at least as important as that of PM2.5.

So if Natural gas has half the NOx and virtually no particulates that is 75% cleaner than diesel, right? Also less expensive. Time is coming for change, at least in heavily polluted cities and those who travel through them. There will be a larger demand for "clean diesel" as soon as European ship regulations take effect. Trucking will possibly end up paying a premium for it. Natual gas is cleaner and cheaper. Other nations are way ahead of the USA in adopting Natural gas vehicles. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On 10/30/2018 at 7:10 PM, ronwagn said:

Being a practical and economical fellow I just can't see electric vehicles catching on until the range increases substantially. I do realize that price is no object for those who want to keep up with the guy next door. 

The electric car graph shows that sales have been way behind the projections. I expect that to continue. No matter, it will be interesting to watch the progress of both. I hope they are both very successful. I definitely think that natural gas makes the most sense for larger vehicles. 

Presently small gasoline cars are a more economical choice for most people. 

 

On 10/30/2018 at 7:38 PM, Tom Kirkman said:

^  This.  Important point, often overlooked by idealistic unicorn herders.

It isn't entirely fair to compare # Nat Gas vehicles to # EVs as they're different technologies.  I'd argue that isn't even a useful question.  Instead, I'd ask, "What is the potential of each technology, and how can we expect them to affect markets?" 

NatGas is just an ICE with high-pressure fuel tanks and an expensive refueling station. There's nothing new & innovative about it; it just increases capital cost to decrease fuel costs.  Because of the capital costs, NG is unlikely to catch on in consumer markets. Hence, we've only seen them in a small fraction of countries.  That limits NG to specific, commercial use cases: municipal buses, businesses with fleets of local vehicles, specific parts of UPS/Fedex/USPS, trash trucks, etc.  Those specific, commercial use cases account for most of the increase in NGVs, and that increase is subject to the relative cost of NG & oil.  

EVs are an entirely different technology: no ICE -> much lower maintenance, lower fuel costs, fuel cost stability, longer vehicle life, etc.  At the right price, EVs are transformative for the vast majority of use cases.  This contrasts with NG, which will never be more than an incremental improvement.

The history of EV development took a weird turn, and I think that's thrown people off the trail of what EVs are truly useful for.  Before the commercial use cases - which make the most sense for EVs - could be tried, we had to demonstrate durable batteries.  No business owner will bet his profits on completely unproven tech.  This is the weird turn: Tesla realized that the high-end, luxury vehicle market would pay for virtue signaling and, in the process, pay to prove battery durability. Thus did we end up with luxury consumer vehicles as the first EV application. 

This is where people got confused. Musk talked about an affordable, consumer EV, the media reported on it, and people fixated on it.  Why?  Because it was the ostensibly logical next step.  So now we get reams of articles discussing whether Tesla will achieve it's $35k EV goal, whether other automakers will get there first, what that will do to oil markets, etc.  That's all fine and well, but it misses the point that all the commercial EV use cases will take off first.  It doesn't yet matter how many consumer EVs are on the road because:

1) There are commercial use cases that are economical today.
2) Those commercial use cases will destroy more oil demand per battery kWh than a consumer EV.
3) We don't yet have enough battery production to handle the commercial use cases

I would propose these questions instead: 

1) What are the EV use cases, ranked from most to least economical?
2) How fast are we increasing battery production? 
3) How fast are batteries improving (cost, size density, weight density), thus bringing new use cases into range?
4) Will there be a point when the pace of battery production outstrips the immediately economical use cases? 

Given the money being thrown at battery production and the incredible gains to be had from commercial EVs, my gut tells me we won't be able to produce batteries fast enough. 

 

 

On 10/31/2018 at 3:28 PM, NickW said:

The difference is the car exhaust is feet away from people breathing  the same air. In contrast a CCGT power station is normally located some distance from population centres. 

 

On 10/31/2018 at 3:41 PM, ronwagn said:

I realize that but I am not familiar with what wind patterns and the weight of the various gases do over the short and long term. I know that CNG itself rises quickly versus gasoline or diesel which are liquids. Of course, the temperature of the exhausts affects this too. I lived nearly half of my life in the greater Los Angeles area where the pollutants stack up against the mountains to the East. They recently had a very long term inversion layer that hung over the city. They use all CNG buses in Los Angeles but seem unable to translate that to encourage trucking to make the change. 

Here are the needed maps. https://www.eia.gov/state/maps.php 

To me, it seems that the solar and natural gas plants are mainly urban but that wind is more rural. You be the judge. Los Angeles is today very dense, but nothing like NYC or Asian cities. I prefer to see wind turbines in the flat areas than on beautiful hills and mountains.

Wind patterns are part of the issue.  The other factor is diffusion: assuming no wind, NOx will diffuse into the surrounding air, lowering its concentration.  If you stand right next to the tailpipe, you're getting the full concentration of NOx.  If you stand next to a power plant, the exhaust stack is pretty tall and points the hot exhaust straight up, ensuring significant diffusion happens before anyone breathes it.  If a modern power plant is outside city limits, its effect on you is nil. 

Or, as environmental engineers like to say, "Dilution is the solution to pollution".

 

On 11/3/2018 at 4:49 PM, NatGasDude said:

NOx emissions from CNG are less than 50% that of diesel. I'll take it.

Out of curiosity, which generation of CNG engines, and which generation of diesel engines? 

  • Like 1
  • Upvote 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites