maybe someone will convert the H2 BMW 7 series to run on CNG...will be a lot better in relation to well to wheel CO2 emissions.....now that there is a national CNG infrastructure ion Germany, time to leave petrol behind.

John -

we Europeans get much our gas from Russia, which exposes us to a lot of political risk, much like importing oil from the Persian Gulf does. Running on natural or biogas is much smarter than running any vehicle on hydrogen, but try telling that to the folks at CARB, EPA or their German equivalent.

CNG already makes economic sense for certain vehicle categories, such as city buses, certain commercial vehicles and light duty commercial vehicles. These feature high annual mileage and their operators need to minimize total cost of ownership. In Germany, a commitment to low taxes on CNG through 2020 offsets the higher initial purchase price (which businesses can amortize anyhow). Lower harmful emissions than diesels are a valuable fringe benefit, though CO2 output is actually the same or worse. CNG also makes eminent sense for countries with substantial domestic gas supplies, e.g. Argentina, Italy, Pakistan and Iran.

So far, no government anywhere has permitted the integration of the pressure tanks into the vehicle structure due to concerns about crash and leak safety. Solving that would reduce enable reductions in vehicle mass and available space via novel frame architectures.

In addition, the fuel is usually injected into the intake ports, displacing air that would otherwise be drawn in. For a CNG variant to maintain rated power relative to base gasoline design required direct injection and/or boosting, e.g. via a turbocharger. Raising the compression ratio also helps, but renders emergency gasoline operation low on both power and efficiency (cp. Opel's monovalent-plus concept).

German news is very exciting....

see this website, see the Opel presentation and the one from Bernard Jeken:

http://www.ngva.co.uk/index/fuseaction/site.articleDetail/con_id/5349

We can save the planet!!!

Also, Europe will be awash with gas for next 10 years ....we need to do something with it. UK prices have fallen by 80% this year!!

Andrey -

have you heard of California's ZEV legislation? That didn't come from the DOE, which actually favors diesels. And where CARB goes, EPA and the rest of the world's regulators tend to eventually follow. While it's true that CARB does not actually finance much hydrogen research, it really does use its regulatory power to force everyone else to do so. Tail wagging dog.

SJC -

providing a CNG option is MUCH more involved than upgrading a few hoses, seals and filters in the fuel system to cope with the more aggressive E85 (alcohol is a solvent). For CNG, you need to find space for a special and quite heavy tank. If you care about maintaining rated power in a port fuel injection engine, you have to add a super- or turbocharger. Plus, you have to support backup operation on gasoline during the transition period of setting up a distribution network.

Unlike some other countries, the US doesn't have a whole lot of natural gas to spare for transportation. I would expect CNG vehicles there to remain niche players for specialty commercial applications.

Andrey -

the original intent of ZEV was to clean up California's air pollution problems by forcing companies to give 10+% of their entire new-car fleet sales all-electric propulsion. GM duly built the EV1 to prove to CARB that the technology was not ready for prime time in economic terms.

To "save" its ZEV mandate, CARB then came up with an elaborate system of credits for specified propulsion systems, including fuel cells, hybrids and CNG vehicles. Nevertheless, as of 2005, manufacturers shipping more than 60,000 vehicles a year are supposed to deliver at least 2% "Gold Standard" vehicles with zero tailpipe emissions. In parctice, that means BEVs or FCVs.

An alternative compliance option specifies a minimum number of hydrogen fuel cell vehicles (250 anually through 2008, 2500 in MY 2009-2011, 25000 in MY 2012-2014 and 30000 in MY 2015-2017). This option permits meeting the "Gold Standard" quota using AT PZEVs instead.

Given that CA, NY, MA, VT and ME, the states subject to CARB rules, together comprise about 1/3 of the US automotive market, I believe it is correct to state that CARB is indeed forcing the development and production of BEVs and FCVs irrespective of the economics involved.

Btw, Euro 5 will be all-but-impossible to meet without DPFs. Peugeot introduced the first mass-produced filters in 2003, too late for them to be included in the then-current generation of cars designed to meet Euro 4. Before then, the technology simply wasn'`t ready for prime time, as Mercedes had discovered to its cost when it tried to introduce a much earlier version of it to California as early as the 1980s.

With a lot of engineering effort, VW, Mercedes and others figured out how to meet Euro 4 even without a DPF, which costs more. However, consumers reacted by demanding DPFs anyhow to safeguard resale values, forcing these manufacturers to make them standard or available option today. In other words, the market is for once ahead of the regs, at least in some EU member states. Anyone offering a model without one gets dinged mercilessly in the German automotive press (I suspect the same is true in France and the UK).

Smart was pilloried because their filter is a 30% effective flow-through type that allowed the old Euro 3 diesel to barely meet Euro 4. The general public has been led to assume that all DPFs are wall-flow types with 98% effectiveness, so environmentalists have claimed DCX was engaged in false advertising.

If you took all the NG Canada is going to use processing tar sands and piped it to the U.S. you would have more than enough NG to run lots of CNG cars. You can also gasify 1B tons of agriculture biomass to 100B therms of SNG. That would eliminate lots of problems in the Canada and the U.S.

I had my beautiful Alfa Romeo 164 3.0 V6 converted in a bifuel methane CNG vehicle in Italy. If I had italian numberplates everything would have been ok. But I have german ones and for the conversion to be legal in Germany I would have to get my exaust gasses certified. But who would pay €/USD 1800 for an exam when the old but otherwise perfect car is worth (on the market) only half the money? So I have to convert it back to smelly monofuel and another opportunity is lost. Burocracy is stupid.