This might be the answer:
Exxon Mobil Corp.'s decision to leave its U.S. natural-gas output untouched despite low commodity prices may push some smaller producers out of the business, force consolidation in the industry and make the oil company an even more powerful force in the oilpatch.This will be fun to watch.
The biggest U.S. natural-gas producer puzzled some analysts and investors Tuesday when during its earnings report, it said it had no plans to curtail its output despite that a glut has driven the price of the commodity to its lowest level in more than a decade. Other companies including Chesapeake Energy Corp., the second-largest U.S. natural-gas producer, recently have announced drilling cutbacks as natural-gas production in some areas becomes a money-losing business.
The Irving, Texas, company argued although it is doing its best to switch drilling to oil-rich areas, it still needs to keep drilling for natural gas to meet previously agreed-to contractual terms that let it retain expensive land leases. Raising some market observers' eyebrows, it also said drilling for natural gas in some areas is still profitable even at current prices.
Meanwhile, Navistar (a truck company) is partnering with Boone Pickens (a natural gas guy):
Navistar International Corp. has struck a partnership with oil and gas magnate T. Boone Pickens Jr. as part of a broad strategy to speed the shift of big rigs to natural gas.One almost gets the feeling the "big guys" have been meeting and formulating a strategy. XOM, T. Boone, and Navistar, just for starters.
The Lisle-based truck maker, which has been under pressure by activist investor Carl Icahn, will adapt its existing line of medium- and heavy-duty trucks to burn liquid natural gas. It will work with Clean Energy Fuels Corp., which will provide a national system of fueling stations for them. Mr. Pickens is founder, chairman and the largest shareholder of Seal Beach, Calif.-based Clean Energy.
“Natural gas has clearly emerged as the most realistic alternative fuel option for the trucking industry,” Navistar Chairman and CEO Dan Ustian said in a statement.
Clean Energy plans to have 150 stations, many of them located in Pilot-Flying J Travel centers, with 70 stations open by the end of the year.
Navistar makes the announcement as the Environmental Protection Agency prepares to fine it $1,900 per engine later this month for failing to meet federal emissions regulations. The company has been using credits to comply with the standards but could run out by the end of the month, according to a report in Transport Topics.
HMM! Liquefied natural gas (LNG) powered over the road trucks. Most of my focus has been on compressed natural gas (CNG). Turning natural gas into a liquid reduces the volume by a factor of 600.
ReplyDeleteBasically, CNG is passive. If you compress natural gas to 3500 PSI it can stay in the tank almost forever.
By comparison, LNG has to maintain a temperature almost -200F to remain a liquid. In an LNG truck gets stranded in a blizzard, falls into water off a bridge (or whatever) the LNG will eventually start to "boil" and increase pressure in the tank. You would need to vent out the gas and hopefully flare it. The amount flared at one time should be small so the muffler should be able to handle this.
The fuel injectors would be "hydralic" when the natural gas is a liquid but the liquid would be sprayed in cylinders at nearly -200F.
Liquid gas systems have long been used with oxygen, nitrogen and more recently, carbon dioxide (and even helium). The safety record is good but these gases are not flammable. I've seen a few liquid CO2 systems fast food places (to carbonate the pop) so the technology is relatively mature.
The liquid-to-liquid refueling should be fast for LNG versus CNG where compression causes heat. The LNG system would need constant monitoring even when it is stopped for driver rest. There are satellite based monitoring systems currently in use that could be easily adapted.
No insurmountable problems but this is best used on the interstate corridors. For more urban use compressed natural gas is probably a better choice. BTW: There is a federal road tax on vehicle natural gas that seems to be based on BTU equivalent. If states don't have it yet they will.
And those problems are the reason it will be a real challenge for natural gas in either form --- the logical answer remains interstate corridors servicing long-haul truck fleets. Once established, the independent truckers along those corridors will follow, and maybe by that time, a "tipping point" will have been reached.
ReplyDeleteAs to the "big guys" formulating a strategy, perhaps we should include Jeff Immelt. I wonder if he may have played a key role in getting Obama to embrace natural gas. Interesting that GE recently introduced their Micro LNG Plant.
ReplyDeleteYou know, you could be correct. At some point, one would think that there would be enough folks talking to Obama telling him he's betting on the wrong horse (wind, solar) if he wants to get re-elected. Wind/solar are niche resources, but certainly not going to change the world in less than four years.
DeleteHere is a plant operating almost a year in Tasmania. It is designed to liquefy natural gas for a fleet of 120 very large trucks. Let the slide show play to
ReplyDeleteto see the scale of the facility. http://www.glp.com.au/glp-plant/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=49&Itemid=53
For the past decade we were spending billions on wind, solar, nuclear, and natural gas was under our feet and noses all this time. There is some irony in all this.
Delete