

With all this natural gas, who needs oil? - gruseom
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/2012/0422/With-all-this-natural-gas-who-needs-oil

======
pwg
Single page link for those who would prefer to read the article whole instead
of split up into seven parts:

[http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/print/content/view/print...](http://www.csmonitor.com/layout/set/print/content/view/print/495269)

------
pm90
In India, a lot of the bus/taxi fleets have already converted to using CNG
(Compressed Natural Gas). I was in New Delhi when this change occurred, and I
must say that it did significantly reduce the pollution in the area where I
lived. (However, these vehicles used to use Diesel which is a lot more
polluting than petrol, so that may not be a fair comparison)

------
Bud
With all this renewable electricity, who needs yet another polluting fossil
fuel energy source (the extraction of which, incidentally, will trash all of
our aquifers)?

~~~
baddox
One thing: transportation.

------
ams6110
Natural gas can be converted to a diesel-compatible liquid, which is much more
compatible with our existing auto fuel transport and retail infrastructure.
We'd just need to get the motoring public to be more accepting of diesel
engines.x

~~~
darklajid
Interesting enough my last car, a VW Golf GTD, doesn't seem to be offered in
the USA (if I don't fail to navigate their site).

That's a Diesel powered 'GTI' (no.. not really. But according to its onboard
computer it reaches 247km/h / 153.5 mi/h), with the comfort of a middle class
family vehicle. I won't even start listing even more expensive options (Audi
is a favorite brand of mine, but lots of Asian brands are interesting as
well). Why _not_ a Diesel? Environmental reasons (might be good/make sense) or
performance (stupid)?

~~~
prodigal_erik
For years Diesel vehicles looked and smelled much dirtier in the US due to the
high sulfur and particulate content of that fuel here. It's going to take some
time and effort to rehabilitate their image.

------
chc
AFAIK, by the time we'd be able to convert our whole auto infrastructure to be
based around natural gas, we'd only have a couple of decades left before it
was just as gone as the oil. I've heard proponents boast that there's enough
of the stuff to last us a hundred years at our current consumption — but isn't
the whole idea to radically increase our consumption? We easily have room to
double or triple it. If this catches on, it seems likely I will have been
alive to see both the beginning and the end of natural gas.

~~~
eru
Other countries might use the fracking process to produce more gas that you
can import.

------
larsbot
Natural gas is great, useful for generating electricity, heating, maybe
powering cars, making plastic, etc. So why are we (the US) exporting it? It
seems incredibly shortsighted. Once we've exhausted our domestic supply we'll
be right back in the same mess we are currently in with oil.

[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_natural_ga...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_natural_gas_proven_reserves)

~~~
eru
Why not export it? If I have something to sell, I don't care if the guy who
gives me the money lives across the street or across the border. Why would you
discriminate one human against the other here?

------
phamilton
A group of students at my school are working on a high efficiency vehicle.
They currently get 733 miles per gallon of gasoline. They are working towards
an upcoming competition, where the winner usually gets around 2000 miles per
gallon. These are vehicles which hold a driver. Alternatives just aren't
anywhere near that efficient yet, and so it's difficult to provide compelling
reasons to switch.

~~~
darklajid
Cool - reducing the amount of fuel needed is great.

That said - it seems Wolfram|Alpha is translating your buddies current result
to roundabout 3l/100km (per 100km is the mpg here) and.. We have that. In a
car that runs on public roads (VW Lupo in this case), today. Yes, we need to
push it further. But I'm not sure how you could call a bare-bone (I guess?)
research vehicle interesting and special if it just reaches the efficiency of
a street-legal car...

~~~
sgk284
You're off by a factor of ten. According to Google (<http://goo.gl/5fEVp>),
733 mpg is .32 L/100k.

------
politician
Regardless of whether we have a 90 or 100 year supply of natural gas, it's
just bloody foolish to waste it as an oil substitute for transportation. It
won't solve the ultimate energy problem, it's a 50 year band-aid at best, and
"Mr. Hydrogen economy" T. Boone Pickens is involved (so you ought to know
something isn't quite right).

CNG? You're betting on a loser.

~~~
rsanchez1
On the flip side, it gives renewable energy 100 more years to finally develop
a cost-effective solution.

~~~
politician
No, if I've seen anything about civilization it's that a crisis averted is
quickly forgotten. We'll have precisely the same 15 years to solve the
problem, but we won't have the benefit of fuel for heat.

------
bigphishy
They are drilling in my backyard right now for natural gas.

------
rsanchez1
It's a shame that the national debate on energy has turned into oil vs. solar
and wind. The President's idea of energy policy is to go after oil
speculators, as if they really control oil prices. They're no OPEC.
Conveniently, it distracts from the failures of so many "green" energy
companies, the biggest among them being Solyndra, and in an election year no
less.

