Can natural gas ignite the economy?

New technology is unlocking vast amounts of natural gas in the United States, enough to have a huge economic impact.  Yes, it involves “fracking,” the controversial practice of pumping chemical-laced water into shale deposits, but improvements in that technique are starting to satisfy all but the most zealous environmentalists.  I’m glad to see companies from my native Oklahoma are leading the way.  Businessweek has a big story on the topic with the deck below the headline, “Unlocking vast reserves of shale gas could solve the energy crisis, the jobs crisis, and the deficit.”

“The United States,” [energy company CEO Aubrey] McClendon boasts, “has the capacity to become the Saudi Arabia of natural gas.”

A tall man who wears his wavy silver hair long by CEO standards, McClendon, 52, exudes the confidence of someone who’s certain he’s seen the future. Exploitation of newly accessible supplies of gas embedded in layers of what’s known as shale rock, he predicts, will help revive domestic manufacturing and change the terms of debate about global warming. “It’s a new industrial renaissance,” he says. . . .

Encouraged by the availability of inexpensive and cleaner domestic gas, some electric utilities are replacing their coal-burning capacity with gas-fired units. Energy-intensive manufacturers of chemicals, plastics, and steel are beginning to bring home operations that they exported years ago. “We believe natural gas must be part of any discussion on strengthening our country’s long-term economic health,” Mulva said in Detroit. “It should also be part of any discussion on improving energy security, protecting the environment, and, yes, creating jobs.”

On the economic potential of the nascent shale revolution, even some career environmentalists sound impressed, if cautious. “This thing is a potential game-changer,” says Fred Krupp, president of the New York-based Environmental Defense Fund (EDF). Shale production in the U.S. has increased from practically nothing in 2000 to more than 13 billion cubic feet per day, or about 30 percent of the country’s natural gas supply. That proportion is heading toward 50 percent in coming years. The U.S. passed Russia in 2009 to become the world’s largest producer of natural gas. An Energy Dept. advisory panel on which Krupp sits estimated in August that more than 200,000 jobs, both direct and indirect, “have been created over the last several years by the development of domestic production of shale gas.” At a moment of 9.1 percent unemployment nationally, additional decently paid work is just one potential benefit. “Natural gas burns cleaner than coal, emits less in the way of greenhouse gases, and avoids mercury and other pollutants from coal,” Krupp points out. “So this could be win-win, if—and this is a big ‘if’—we do it the right way.”

via Could Shale Gas Reignite the U.S. Economy? – Businessweek.

If you embrace nature, embrace natural law
A top doctor discusses transgenderism
The euro and the fall of Greece
Defaulting Puerto Rico is "America's Greece"
About Gene Veith

Professor of Literature at Patrick Henry College, the Director of the Cranach Institute at Concordia Theological Seminary, a columnist for World Magazine and TableTalk, and the author of 18 books on different facets of Christianity & Culture.

  • fws

    Here in brasil there are actually alot of cars that run on natural gas. you start the engine with gas or alchohol and then switch over to natural gas.

    the kit costs about 900 dollars to install. The downsides is that the gas tank takes over the trunk, the amount of energy provided by natural gas is less than alcohol or gasoline so u need to fill up more often, and since natural gas does not lubricate, the engine will probably not last as long.

    almost all the taxis run on natural gas as do the busses down here. a good 40 percent of personal cars also. they run very very cleanly. we have lots of busses and none of that soot. and the passenger cars that dont run on natural gas are all “flex”, they run on either gasoline or alchohol.

    the alcohol down here is the result of breeding sugar cane since the 70s to produce a high energy yielding sugar cane. it is actually an efficient source of energy whereas corn is not and using corn distorts the food chain as well. Sugar cane used as alcohol does not.

    We mostly use sugar cane to produce the national booze called cachaca, which is a stronger version of white rum, and it is still cheap…

  • fws

    Here in brasil there are actually alot of cars that run on natural gas. you start the engine with gas or alchohol and then switch over to natural gas.

    the kit costs about 900 dollars to install. The downsides is that the gas tank takes over the trunk, the amount of energy provided by natural gas is less than alcohol or gasoline so u need to fill up more often, and since natural gas does not lubricate, the engine will probably not last as long.

    almost all the taxis run on natural gas as do the busses down here. a good 40 percent of personal cars also. they run very very cleanly. we have lots of busses and none of that soot. and the passenger cars that dont run on natural gas are all “flex”, they run on either gasoline or alchohol.

    the alcohol down here is the result of breeding sugar cane since the 70s to produce a high energy yielding sugar cane. it is actually an efficient source of energy whereas corn is not and using corn distorts the food chain as well. Sugar cane used as alcohol does not.

    We mostly use sugar cane to produce the national booze called cachaca, which is a stronger version of white rum, and it is still cheap…

  • fws

    ah and now Brasil has discovered a huge deep water reserve of oil just off the coast of Rio De Janeiro. It will make Brasil’s Oil production dwarf that of Venezuela. So it seems that energy production is now shifting back to the western hemisphere. Brasil has been a net exporter of energy for the last 3 years.

    This probably bodes well for geopolitics and a diminishing of the importance of muslim states.

  • fws

    ah and now Brasil has discovered a huge deep water reserve of oil just off the coast of Rio De Janeiro. It will make Brasil’s Oil production dwarf that of Venezuela. So it seems that energy production is now shifting back to the western hemisphere. Brasil has been a net exporter of energy for the last 3 years.

    This probably bodes well for geopolitics and a diminishing of the importance of muslim states.

  • Joe

    Natural gas is a great idea as an energy source but it has a lot of drawbacks when used in vehicles. Most of not all of those drawbacks do not exist if you use propane instead of natural. I can’t itemize them all right now – but propane is something we should look at.

    One of the biggest reasons to favor propane is infrastructure. You can fill a propane tank on a car the same way you fill the one on your grill. You just pump it from a larger tank to a smaller tank. Many gas stations already have this capacity because they already fill tanks for grills, RV’s, 100# cylinders used to heat the hunting shack, etc. Also you can convert your standard gasoline engine to propane for a under $200 bucks.

  • Joe

    Natural gas is a great idea as an energy source but it has a lot of drawbacks when used in vehicles. Most of not all of those drawbacks do not exist if you use propane instead of natural. I can’t itemize them all right now – but propane is something we should look at.

    One of the biggest reasons to favor propane is infrastructure. You can fill a propane tank on a car the same way you fill the one on your grill. You just pump it from a larger tank to a smaller tank. Many gas stations already have this capacity because they already fill tanks for grills, RV’s, 100# cylinders used to heat the hunting shack, etc. Also you can convert your standard gasoline engine to propane for a under $200 bucks.

  • fws

    joe what is the difference between propane and natural gas? maybe it is propane that they are using here in brasil to fuel cars…

  • fws

    joe what is the difference between propane and natural gas? maybe it is propane that they are using here in brasil to fuel cars…

  • Cincinnatus

    In addition, natural gas can be used to produce the hydrogen employed in hydrogen fuel cells (look up the Honda FCX Clarity for an example). The wave of the future, I say.

  • Cincinnatus

    In addition, natural gas can be used to produce the hydrogen employed in hydrogen fuel cells (look up the Honda FCX Clarity for an example). The wave of the future, I say.

  • Tom Hering

    What’s the relation to the commodities bubble? How high will prices go in spite of increased production? What happens when the bubble pops? Will natural gas producers be “too big to fail” and receive a taxpayer bail out?

  • Tom Hering

    What’s the relation to the commodities bubble? How high will prices go in spite of increased production? What happens when the bubble pops? Will natural gas producers be “too big to fail” and receive a taxpayer bail out?

  • kerner

    Sounds great, but the mind set of the current administration will never permit the development of natural gas. If you believe in man caused global warming, natural gas as a fuel is not substantially better than other foscil fuels. Methane is itself a “greenhouse gas” as is the CO2 emitted when it is burned.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_gas#CO2_emissions

    If you want to revitalize the economy through the mining of natural gas, you’ll have to vote out President Obama.

  • kerner

    Sounds great, but the mind set of the current administration will never permit the development of natural gas. If you believe in man caused global warming, natural gas as a fuel is not substantially better than other foscil fuels. Methane is itself a “greenhouse gas” as is the CO2 emitted when it is burned.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Natural_gas#CO2_emissions

    If you want to revitalize the economy through the mining of natural gas, you’ll have to vote out President Obama.

  • SKPeterson

    Natural gas? Come on, the wave of the future is wind-powered vehicles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind-powered_vehicle

    Bummer about extra passengers or cargo space and the occasional overpass obstructions, but it is eco-friendly!

  • SKPeterson

    Natural gas? Come on, the wave of the future is wind-powered vehicles. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind-powered_vehicle

    Bummer about extra passengers or cargo space and the occasional overpass obstructions, but it is eco-friendly!

  • Tom Hering

    “New technology is unlocking vast amounts of natural gas in the United States, enough to have a huge economic impact.”

    Any positive economic impact will be enjoyed by the few. By the many – not so much (though certainly a little). That’s the way America works now.

  • Tom Hering

    “New technology is unlocking vast amounts of natural gas in the United States, enough to have a huge economic impact.”

    Any positive economic impact will be enjoyed by the few. By the many – not so much (though certainly a little). That’s the way America works now.

  • Cincinnatus

    Tom@9: Trying to derail the conversation? Yes, as in the oil booms of the twentieth century, a few lucky speculators and investors will be rewarded for their risks with tremendous wealth. But that’s not the end of the financial benefits in store if natural gas pans out. For instance, I put some of my very modest investment funds into commodities. I hope natural gas will make these funds slightly less modest (and no, I am not wealthy nor “one of the few”).

    More to the point, domestic fuel supplies are good for everyone. They will, analysts hope, provide more price stability in the energy costs of the “average” American–in all sectors: natural gas and its products can be and are used to fuel homes, cars, factories, etc. It also constitutes a cleaner alternative energy than petroleum or coal. Finally, any step toward energy independence and self-sufficiency is, in general, a good step. In short, the typical progressive should be in love with the prospects of natural gas. This is something both conservatives and progressives may find in common.

    Or not. I’m skeptical myself. But I suppose it’s better than fueling our country from foreign petroleum reserves, which demands that we support any number of tinpot dictatorships and engage in countless skirmishes in distant deserts and jungles.

    And kerner, what are you talking about? Much of the explosive growth in domestic natural gas production has occurred in the past couple of years–under Obama. Not because of Obama, mind you, but I don’t think he’s an especially prominent obstacle.

  • Cincinnatus

    Tom@9: Trying to derail the conversation? Yes, as in the oil booms of the twentieth century, a few lucky speculators and investors will be rewarded for their risks with tremendous wealth. But that’s not the end of the financial benefits in store if natural gas pans out. For instance, I put some of my very modest investment funds into commodities. I hope natural gas will make these funds slightly less modest (and no, I am not wealthy nor “one of the few”).

    More to the point, domestic fuel supplies are good for everyone. They will, analysts hope, provide more price stability in the energy costs of the “average” American–in all sectors: natural gas and its products can be and are used to fuel homes, cars, factories, etc. It also constitutes a cleaner alternative energy than petroleum or coal. Finally, any step toward energy independence and self-sufficiency is, in general, a good step. In short, the typical progressive should be in love with the prospects of natural gas. This is something both conservatives and progressives may find in common.

    Or not. I’m skeptical myself. But I suppose it’s better than fueling our country from foreign petroleum reserves, which demands that we support any number of tinpot dictatorships and engage in countless skirmishes in distant deserts and jungles.

    And kerner, what are you talking about? Much of the explosive growth in domestic natural gas production has occurred in the past couple of years–under Obama. Not because of Obama, mind you, but I don’t think he’s an especially prominent obstacle.

  • Cincinnatus

    Also, Tom, you’re comment is even sillier: natural gas literally has created hundreds of thousands of domestic jobs that are skilled and well-payed. Just ask North Dakota and, now, northwestern Pennsylvania.

  • Cincinnatus

    Also, Tom, you’re comment is even sillier: natural gas literally has created hundreds of thousands of domestic jobs that are skilled and well-payed. Just ask North Dakota and, now, northwestern Pennsylvania.

  • Cincinnatus

    YOUR* comment

  • Cincinnatus

    YOUR* comment

  • http://geochristian.wordpress.com/ Kevin N

    Overall, the upcoming development of our natural gas resources will be a good thing — good for the economy, good (or at least better) for the environment, good for national security. This is a win-win-win situation, not just a win-win situation.

    But we should not forget that natural gas, just like petroleum, coal, and even uranium, is a limited natural resource. It may get us through the 21st century, but we also need to press on with longer-term energy solutions for the sake of our children’s children.

  • http://geochristian.wordpress.com/ Kevin N

    Overall, the upcoming development of our natural gas resources will be a good thing — good for the economy, good (or at least better) for the environment, good for national security. This is a win-win-win situation, not just a win-win situation.

    But we should not forget that natural gas, just like petroleum, coal, and even uranium, is a limited natural resource. It may get us through the 21st century, but we also need to press on with longer-term energy solutions for the sake of our children’s children.

  • kerner

    Cinnsinatus @10:

    I’m talking about this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Greenhouse_Gases_Under_the_Clean_Air_Act

    Natural gas has always been considered “clean” because of its lack of particulate emissions and because it can be refined to the product we actually burn: methane, and the emissions from methane are basically CO2 and H2O, both of which were previously considered harmless.

    However, now that the EPA has declared greenhouse gasses to be a public health hazard, any fuel that emits CO2 in large quantities will be regulated and its use restricted, at least under this administration. It may take awhile before this regulatory system clamps down on the growing use of natural gas, but it is only a matter of time until gas is treated no differently than coal or oil.

    This is why the so-called “clean coal” plants are still being curtailed. All the filtering in the world can’t change the fact that you get CO2 when you burn coal. The same is true of methane. So its use will be subject to regulation and restriction as well as long as this administration, or like minded administrations, control the EPA.

  • kerner

    Cinnsinatus @10:

    I’m talking about this:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regulation_of_Greenhouse_Gases_Under_the_Clean_Air_Act

    Natural gas has always been considered “clean” because of its lack of particulate emissions and because it can be refined to the product we actually burn: methane, and the emissions from methane are basically CO2 and H2O, both of which were previously considered harmless.

    However, now that the EPA has declared greenhouse gasses to be a public health hazard, any fuel that emits CO2 in large quantities will be regulated and its use restricted, at least under this administration. It may take awhile before this regulatory system clamps down on the growing use of natural gas, but it is only a matter of time until gas is treated no differently than coal or oil.

    This is why the so-called “clean coal” plants are still being curtailed. All the filtering in the world can’t change the fact that you get CO2 when you burn coal. The same is true of methane. So its use will be subject to regulation and restriction as well as long as this administration, or like minded administrations, control the EPA.

  • Joe

    Frank – chemically they are brothers or cousins. Often time people lump them together. My father is in the propane business and I used to be in the propane business. Guys like Pikins promote natural but nothing else, while natural may have some advantages in some area vehicles is not one of them. Some additional advantages to propane are:

    Refueling time for natural is much, much longer. The last version of a natural pump I saw took a couple hours to fill the tank for a work truck. And this was done with very high PSI pushing the gas, which adds some danger.

    Also tank size for natural is huge, the city of Milwaukee has a dump truck on Na’t the tank is behind the cab and is a wide and tall as the cab and about 2 feet deep (so about 6′x5′x2′) they have to refuel it every night. With propane, to get the same about of mileage/usage the tank would be about ¼ that size and could be lighter construction (i.e. add less weight to the vehicle). Nat’l needs to be stored at about 4 times higher PSI than propane.

    Cost of refueling stations for propane are more advantageous. Could put in very nice one for under $13,000.00 (1,000 gallon storage tank). Na’t gas refueling station would be over $150,000.00 (this is due to all kinds of issues related to PSI, the only current delivery system for natural is pipeline, etc.)

  • Joe

    Frank – chemically they are brothers or cousins. Often time people lump them together. My father is in the propane business and I used to be in the propane business. Guys like Pikins promote natural but nothing else, while natural may have some advantages in some area vehicles is not one of them. Some additional advantages to propane are:

    Refueling time for natural is much, much longer. The last version of a natural pump I saw took a couple hours to fill the tank for a work truck. And this was done with very high PSI pushing the gas, which adds some danger.

    Also tank size for natural is huge, the city of Milwaukee has a dump truck on Na’t the tank is behind the cab and is a wide and tall as the cab and about 2 feet deep (so about 6′x5′x2′) they have to refuel it every night. With propane, to get the same about of mileage/usage the tank would be about ¼ that size and could be lighter construction (i.e. add less weight to the vehicle). Nat’l needs to be stored at about 4 times higher PSI than propane.

    Cost of refueling stations for propane are more advantageous. Could put in very nice one for under $13,000.00 (1,000 gallon storage tank). Na’t gas refueling station would be over $150,000.00 (this is due to all kinds of issues related to PSI, the only current delivery system for natural is pipeline, etc.)

  • http://geochristian.wordpress.com/ Kevin N

    Geologically, methane (natural gas) is much more abundant than propane, which is usually produced as a byproduct of methane extraction or petroleum cracking.

  • http://geochristian.wordpress.com/ Kevin N

    Geologically, methane (natural gas) is much more abundant than propane, which is usually produced as a byproduct of methane extraction or petroleum cracking.

  • fws

    joe and kevin

    so can propane be made from natural gas? if so would that process require lots of energy? I am hearing that the units of energy yielded is far far lower on a large scale for natural gas than for propane.

    is there really a choice between propane and natural gas I am asking. what kevin says suggests that they come from two very different sources…

    joe do you know what it is they are pumping into cars down here in brasil? is it propane or natural gas?

  • fws

    joe and kevin

    so can propane be made from natural gas? if so would that process require lots of energy? I am hearing that the units of energy yielded is far far lower on a large scale for natural gas than for propane.

    is there really a choice between propane and natural gas I am asking. what kevin says suggests that they come from two very different sources…

    joe do you know what it is they are pumping into cars down here in brasil? is it propane or natural gas?

  • http://geochristian.wordpress.com/ Kevin N

    fws:

    The propane produced from the ground is separated from the methane, and that is fairly easy. Propane produced from cracking is only available if you are actually doing petroleum refining, and so it does take energy to produce it. Propane will probably always be quite a bit less available than methane. That does not mean it shouldn’t have a role in our energy policies (e.g. transportation).

  • http://geochristian.wordpress.com/ Kevin N

    fws:

    The propane produced from the ground is separated from the methane, and that is fairly easy. Propane produced from cracking is only available if you are actually doing petroleum refining, and so it does take energy to produce it. Propane will probably always be quite a bit less available than methane. That does not mean it shouldn’t have a role in our energy policies (e.g. transportation).

  • Joe

    Frank – propane is “stripped” not made out of natural gas. Once you take the propane out you still have usable natural gas left. This is standard procedure for all natural gas wells except during periods of extreme demand when there is not time to do the stripping.

    I like both propane and natural gas as fuel sources because they are abundant and we have lots of it right here in the USA. I know about propane’s benefits and drawbacks because propane feed me, clothed me and put me through college. My dad is in the industry and I worked in the industry for a while. When it comes to cars – propane is clearly the better choice. When it comes to over all energy needs, they both can be very useful.

  • Joe

    Frank – propane is “stripped” not made out of natural gas. Once you take the propane out you still have usable natural gas left. This is standard procedure for all natural gas wells except during periods of extreme demand when there is not time to do the stripping.

    I like both propane and natural gas as fuel sources because they are abundant and we have lots of it right here in the USA. I know about propane’s benefits and drawbacks because propane feed me, clothed me and put me through college. My dad is in the industry and I worked in the industry for a while. When it comes to cars – propane is clearly the better choice. When it comes to over all energy needs, they both can be very useful.

  • Joe

    Frank – I am not sure what is used in Brazil but my guess is that it is natural gas. natural gas has always enjoyed a preferred status among governments because large utilities sell it. Propane is largely distributed by small companies that until recently failed to speak with one united voice. Propane people are just not very good a lobbying. I found this out when my dad was elected as the head of the Wisconsin Propane Gas Association. I was appalled at their inability to articulate the truth benefits of their product. They have gotten on track lately and lots of Wisconsin municipalities have changed their fleet requirements to allow for natural OR propane vehicles to meet their alt. energy requirements (many if not all cities have to have a certain percentage of their fleet run on alt fuels).

  • Joe

    Frank – I am not sure what is used in Brazil but my guess is that it is natural gas. natural gas has always enjoyed a preferred status among governments because large utilities sell it. Propane is largely distributed by small companies that until recently failed to speak with one united voice. Propane people are just not very good a lobbying. I found this out when my dad was elected as the head of the Wisconsin Propane Gas Association. I was appalled at their inability to articulate the truth benefits of their product. They have gotten on track lately and lots of Wisconsin municipalities have changed their fleet requirements to allow for natural OR propane vehicles to meet their alt. energy requirements (many if not all cities have to have a certain percentage of their fleet run on alt fuels).

  • fws

    i do know that what they pump into vehicles IS pressurized. would that be the case if it were natural gas being used?

  • fws

    i do know that what they pump into vehicles IS pressurized. would that be the case if it were natural gas being used?

  • fws

    joe. they use CNG and they seem to be moving to LNG. I am not sure why that is.

  • fws

    joe. they use CNG and they seem to be moving to LNG. I am not sure why that is.

  • Joe

    LNG = liquid natural gas
    CNG = compressed natural gas

    CNG is (and must be to remain compressed) stored at very PSI’s. The move to LNG is to try to take some of the pressurization requirements out of the equation. To keep the NG liquid they will replace pressure with cold (think in the neighborhood of -260 f or 160 c). If they can keep it cold enough they can store it at normal atmospheric pressure. The problem is that if the cooling unit fails the gas will vaporize and expand and if you don’t have a strong enough storage tank … well you get the picture. So, you still have to deal with the extra heavy tanks or hope like heck that the cooling unit doesn’t fail.

    Propane on the other hand stays liquid in either at pressurized or cold state. No need to pick and choose.

  • Joe

    LNG = liquid natural gas
    CNG = compressed natural gas

    CNG is (and must be to remain compressed) stored at very PSI’s. The move to LNG is to try to take some of the pressurization requirements out of the equation. To keep the NG liquid they will replace pressure with cold (think in the neighborhood of -260 f or 160 c). If they can keep it cold enough they can store it at normal atmospheric pressure. The problem is that if the cooling unit fails the gas will vaporize and expand and if you don’t have a strong enough storage tank … well you get the picture. So, you still have to deal with the extra heavy tanks or hope like heck that the cooling unit doesn’t fail.

    Propane on the other hand stays liquid in either at pressurized or cold state. No need to pick and choose.

  • kerner

    Joe:

    They both sound useful, but help me out here. Never mind the wikipedia information I have found. Do you think the CO2 emissions from using gas as fuel will attract the attention of the EPA under its greenhouse gas regs?

  • kerner

    Joe:

    They both sound useful, but help me out here. Never mind the wikipedia information I have found. Do you think the CO2 emissions from using gas as fuel will attract the attention of the EPA under its greenhouse gas regs?

  • kerner

    One other thing. When I was much younger, and I had a variety of industrial jobs, I remember that a lot of forklifts and front end loaders ran on propane engines. I never analysed why industrial vehicles used propane while passenger vehicles didn’t, but I never saw any reason why passenger vehicles couldn’t be designed to run on propane engines. From what I’m reading, it sounds like it could be done.

    Does anyone know the pros and cons?

  • kerner

    One other thing. When I was much younger, and I had a variety of industrial jobs, I remember that a lot of forklifts and front end loaders ran on propane engines. I never analysed why industrial vehicles used propane while passenger vehicles didn’t, but I never saw any reason why passenger vehicles couldn’t be designed to run on propane engines. From what I’m reading, it sounds like it could be done.

    Does anyone know the pros and cons?

  • SKPeterson

    kerner @24 – do you think anything would actually stop the EPA from being “concerned” about anything under greenhouse emissions regulations. They get to look at everything. The Securities and Exchange Commission will get to look at everything as well. And the BLM and the rest of Interior, and the Department of Energy, and Commerce, and HHS will probably look into it as well. Not to mention PHMSA. Treasury will pile on for fun and Justice will seek some type of investigation in tandem with state’s attorneys general. Why are you so concerned?

  • SKPeterson

    kerner @24 – do you think anything would actually stop the EPA from being “concerned” about anything under greenhouse emissions regulations. They get to look at everything. The Securities and Exchange Commission will get to look at everything as well. And the BLM and the rest of Interior, and the Department of Energy, and Commerce, and HHS will probably look into it as well. Not to mention PHMSA. Treasury will pile on for fun and Justice will seek some type of investigation in tandem with state’s attorneys general. Why are you so concerned?

  • Joe

    Kerner – at this point if your car is powered by anything other than rainbows and unicorns the EPA will have something to say about it.

    And, yes both propane and natural are very useful and both should be used more. My comments are focused only their relative merits in automobiles.

  • Joe

    Kerner – at this point if your car is powered by anything other than rainbows and unicorns the EPA will have something to say about it.

    And, yes both propane and natural are very useful and both should be used more. My comments are focused only their relative merits in automobiles.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X