|
|
 THE STAT 26Percentage of wireless customers who use their cell phones to take picturesMore Vitals
| |
SEPTEMBER 4, 2003
Why Wait for Hydrogen to Kick In? Detroit claims this promising fuel is the answer to greater efficiency. Meantime, other technologies could do the trick today "I want my SUV" is one of the great mantras of the 21st century. So it's no wonder that Congress continues to turn a blind eye to proposed legislation that would force auto makers to increase the fuel efficiency of their cars and trucks. "This is still America, isn't it? Don't make the American people drive this little runt of a car," Senator Trent Lott (R-Miss.) barked as he stood in front of a small, light, fuel-efficient vehicle in Washington. That was July 29, the same day the Senate, by a vote of 65 to 32, trash-canned an amendment to the yet-to-be-enacted energy bill that would have raised the Corporate Average Fuel Efficiency (CAFE) standard for carmakers to 40 miles per gallon by 2014, up from the 27.5 mpg that has been on the books since 1975. Instead of acting now, Congress, the Bush Administration, and U.S. auto makers want to wait and place their bets on hydrogen, one presumed fuel of the future. In January, President Bush announced the awkwardly named FreedomCAR and Fuel Initiative, which will provide $1.7 billion in federal funding over five years for hydrogen-powered fuel cells, hydrogen infrastructure and advanced automotive technologies. General Motors (GM ), one of the staunchest proponents of hydrogen-powered cars, already spends one-quarter of its advanced R&D budget -- an amount that it declines to reveal -- on hydrogen and fuel-cell technology. DISTANT DELIVERY. No doubt, converting to hydrogen is a worthy goal. The fuel cells it would power would use an estimated 40% to 65% of hydrogen's chemical energy, vs. the 15% to 20% of the energy in gasoline that internal combustion engines use. And whereas today's engines spew greenhouse gases, hydrogen burns clean: Its only emission is water that advocates claim is clean enough to drink. Hydrogen has a drawback, though: Its practical application remains quite distant. Even by GM's ambitious timetable, hydrogen-powered cars won't be ready for manufacture until 2010. And allowing for time to work out bugs, and for consumer habits to change, it could be a decade after that before Americans regularly fill 'er up at the local hydrogen station. Which raises the question: Why wait? Technology already exists that could raise conventional engines' fuel efficiency by 25% or more. It's simply a matter of making it a priority for auto makers to use it -- which in turn could help reduce pollution and the country's dependence on foreign oil. OLDIE BUT GOODIE. According to an analysis by the New York-based advocacy group Environmental Defense, if every new car on U.S. roads got 41 mpg vs. today's 24, by 2020 American oil consumption would fall from 11.8 million barrels a day to 7.8 million barrels, a 33% saving. Now, with the Blackout of 2003 putting the energy bill back on the front burner, Congress has another opportunity to do the right thing. Fuel-efficient technologies abound right now. Take variable valve timing, which allows an engine to burn fuel more efficiently. The technology, environmentalists and carmakers agree, could cut automotive fuel consumption by 7% to 11%. And VVT is hardly a cutting-edge concept. It was first used in 1989 on the Acura NSX, made by Honda (HMC ), to improve power and performance, though not fuel efficiency. Since then Honda has put it into several models including the Civic VX, which it produced from 1992-95. VVT and other technologies helped that vehicle achieve a 50% gain in fuel economy over earlier Civic models.
BW MALL
SPONSORED LINKS
Buy a link now! | | |
 Copyright 2003, Bloomberg L.P.Terms of Use | Privacy Policy |
Printer-Friendly Version