Story first appeared in The Wall Street Journal.
Hyundai Motor Co. said Tuesday the paint shop of its No. 1 plant in China was on fire earlier in the day and the company is looking into the fire's cause and how much damage occurred. It is noted that the number of Workers Compensation Insurance Quotes skyrocketed after this event.
Hyundai will use the paint shop in No. 3 plant for the vehicles produced in plant No. 1 for now. According to a spokesman, the No. 1 plant has a one-month inventory of vehicles, so this disaster will not impact sales in China.
There were no casualties from the fire, however workers are concerned and are looking into Workers Compensation Insurance.
The No. 1 plant currently produces 1,300 units a day of the Accent subcompact, the Tucson sport-utility vehicle, the Elantra compact and the Sonata midsize sedan.
On top of No. 1 and No. 2 plants that have an annual capacity of 300,000 units respectively, Hyundai Motor plans to put the No. 3 plant into a full operation from July. The No. 3 plant's initial capacity is 300,000 units a year but it is scheduled to expand to 400,000 units to meet a rising local demand.
Separately, the company said it will begin commercial production at a new Brazil factory in November. Hyundai is building a factory with annual capacity of 150,000 vehicles in hopes of overtaking Ford Motor Co. as Brazil's fourth-largest car seller.
Test production will begin in September, Hyundai's press office said, with commercial production starting in November.
The Financial Times reported earlier Tuesday that production at the plant, located in Piracicaba, about 200 kilometers north of Sao Paulo, would start in September.
When plant construction began early last year, executives at the company said they expected Hyundai market share to jump to 10% of sales by the end of next year, up from about 3% currently.
Brazil last year raised taxes on foreign-made cars as part of an effort to combat a flood of imports. A strong Brazilian real, on top of already high labor and material costs, have eroded the competitiveness of Brazil's auto industry, while growing salaries led consumers to buy more elaborate and powerful cars than the basic models produced en masse in the country.
While the tax hike was questioned by companies that planned on building factories here--claiming that the high local-content requirements would be impossible to meet during the first few years of a new factory's operation—the government has made allowances in recent months for new factories.
For more national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical
blog.
For law related news, visit the Nation
of Law blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the Commercial and
Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.
Showing posts with label vehicles. Show all posts
Showing posts with label vehicles. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 8, 2012
Thursday, May 3, 2012
Compressed Natural Gas Vehicles and Kits
Story first appeared in ExxonMobil Perspectives.
With U.S. natural gas production booming, and the price of natural gas right now lower than the price of gasoline or diesel fuel, some are asking: Why don’t more of our cars run on natural gas?
Compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles – the most common type of natural gas vehicle – have been around for decades. Today, natural gas accounts for about 2 percent of U.S. demand for transportation fuel, with most of that demand coming from fleet vehicles like buses and taxis.
Looking forward, we do see opportunities for natural gas to make an increasingly important contribution to U.S. transportation when it comes to certain fleet uses. But for average consumers, there are a number of challenges that limit the widespread adoption of natural gas vehicles. These include:
Vehicle cost. CNG vehicles are nearly 25 percent more expensive than conventional gasoline or diesel vehicles and nearly 10 percent more expensive than hybrids, based on equivalent models. For example, a CNG-powered passenger car available in the United States costs about $5,600 more than a similarly equipped conventional model, and a CNG-powered 18- wheeler costs an additional $60,000. Even with today’s low natural gas prices, it would take years for motorists to recoup these extra costs.
Infrastructure cost. For American motorists to fuel up on CNG as easily as they do today on gasoline and diesel, the U.S. would need to build an entirely new network of pipelines and service stations to accommodate high-pressure fueling. In a 2010 study, IHS-CERA estimated it would cost between $8 and $12 billion to have CNG facilities installed in just 10 percent of existing U.S. fueling stations. A single CNG station costs anywhere from $300,000 to $3 million more than a regular gas station.
Obviously, these two challenges are economic, and you’ve likely heard some supporters of CNG vehicles advocate for taxpayer subsidies and government support to overcome them. But other challenges to CNG as at transportation fuel are performance-related. For example:
Energy density. Just as foods like nuts and granola bars are popular with hikers because they pack a lot of calories into a small, light package, gasoline and diesel are popular with drivers because they are the fuels with the highest energy density. CNG has relatively low energy density; it contains nearly 70 percent less energy per gallon equivalent than gasoline or diesel. As a result, CNG vehicles pack less horsepower.
Frequency and duration of fill-ups. The lower energy density of CNG also means that drivers will have to fill their tanks more frequently to go the same distance. For example, you would have to fill a CNG-fueled passenger car about 1.7 times to go the same distance as its gasoline-powered equivalent. Refueling a CNG vehicle also takes longer – about twice as long as a standard passenger vehicle.
Cargo space. Because of CNG’s lower energy density – and its need to be kept under very high pressure – CNG vehicles are equipped with large, heavy fuel tanks (200 pounds versus 10 pounds for gasoline). These tanks reduce a car’s fuel economy and its cargo capacity. CNG-powered passenger vehicles currently have about half the cargo space of their conventional equivalents.
Given all these factors, where might natural gas-powered vehicles play a role? One important application for CNG vehicles is for commercial and municipal fleets with limited driving distances. For these vehicles, CNG can make economic sense because they can benefit from shared refueling locations and infrastructure costs. According to the Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition, buses account for more than 60 percent of all natural gas vehicles in the world.
We also are beginning to see expanded interest in the use of liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a vehicle fuel for commercial trucks in the United States. LNG, which is natural gas super-cooled to its liquid form, has a much higher energy density than CNG.
Demand for fuel for trucks, buses and other heavy-duty vehicles exerts a strong influence on U.S. transportation trends. Today, these vehicles — which are generally tied to commercial activity — account for about 20 percent of total U.S. demand for transportation fuels; by 2040, they will account for about 30 percent.
ExxonMobil supports the market-driven use of natural gas as a vehicle fuel. But a government push to subsidize or mandate the expanded use of natural gas in the transportation sector is a wrong turn.
National energy goals in the transportation sector – such as reducing Americans’ transportation costs and strengthening U.S. energy security – are better (and more economically) met through other methods, such as the expanded use of hybrid vehicles or improved fuel efficiency in conventional vehicles. This is, in fact, what we expect to happen. ExxonMobil’s Outlook for Energy projects that the average new car on U.S. roads in 2040 in will get 45 miles per gallon, compared to 22 MPG today, with hybrids and efficiency accounting for most of that improvement.
Like any fuel or technology, natural gas should compete with other transportation fuels on a level playing field – not one distorted by governments trying to pick which fuels and technologies will ultimately be the most successful. In this way, the nation’s energy needs are met at the lowest possible cost to consumers and taxpayers.
For more national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical blog.
For law related news, visit the Nation of Law blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.
With U.S. natural gas production booming, and the price of natural gas right now lower than the price of gasoline or diesel fuel, some are asking: Why don’t more of our cars run on natural gas?
Compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles – the most common type of natural gas vehicle – have been around for decades. Today, natural gas accounts for about 2 percent of U.S. demand for transportation fuel, with most of that demand coming from fleet vehicles like buses and taxis.
Looking forward, we do see opportunities for natural gas to make an increasingly important contribution to U.S. transportation when it comes to certain fleet uses. But for average consumers, there are a number of challenges that limit the widespread adoption of natural gas vehicles. These include:
Vehicle cost. CNG vehicles are nearly 25 percent more expensive than conventional gasoline or diesel vehicles and nearly 10 percent more expensive than hybrids, based on equivalent models. For example, a CNG-powered passenger car available in the United States costs about $5,600 more than a similarly equipped conventional model, and a CNG-powered 18- wheeler costs an additional $60,000. Even with today’s low natural gas prices, it would take years for motorists to recoup these extra costs.
Infrastructure cost. For American motorists to fuel up on CNG as easily as they do today on gasoline and diesel, the U.S. would need to build an entirely new network of pipelines and service stations to accommodate high-pressure fueling. In a 2010 study, IHS-CERA estimated it would cost between $8 and $12 billion to have CNG facilities installed in just 10 percent of existing U.S. fueling stations. A single CNG station costs anywhere from $300,000 to $3 million more than a regular gas station.
Obviously, these two challenges are economic, and you’ve likely heard some supporters of CNG vehicles advocate for taxpayer subsidies and government support to overcome them. But other challenges to CNG as at transportation fuel are performance-related. For example:
Energy density. Just as foods like nuts and granola bars are popular with hikers because they pack a lot of calories into a small, light package, gasoline and diesel are popular with drivers because they are the fuels with the highest energy density. CNG has relatively low energy density; it contains nearly 70 percent less energy per gallon equivalent than gasoline or diesel. As a result, CNG vehicles pack less horsepower.
Frequency and duration of fill-ups. The lower energy density of CNG also means that drivers will have to fill their tanks more frequently to go the same distance. For example, you would have to fill a CNG-fueled passenger car about 1.7 times to go the same distance as its gasoline-powered equivalent. Refueling a CNG vehicle also takes longer – about twice as long as a standard passenger vehicle.
Cargo space. Because of CNG’s lower energy density – and its need to be kept under very high pressure – CNG vehicles are equipped with large, heavy fuel tanks (200 pounds versus 10 pounds for gasoline). These tanks reduce a car’s fuel economy and its cargo capacity. CNG-powered passenger vehicles currently have about half the cargo space of their conventional equivalents.
Given all these factors, where might natural gas-powered vehicles play a role? One important application for CNG vehicles is for commercial and municipal fleets with limited driving distances. For these vehicles, CNG can make economic sense because they can benefit from shared refueling locations and infrastructure costs. According to the Natural Gas Vehicle Coalition, buses account for more than 60 percent of all natural gas vehicles in the world.
We also are beginning to see expanded interest in the use of liquefied natural gas (LNG) as a vehicle fuel for commercial trucks in the United States. LNG, which is natural gas super-cooled to its liquid form, has a much higher energy density than CNG.
Demand for fuel for trucks, buses and other heavy-duty vehicles exerts a strong influence on U.S. transportation trends. Today, these vehicles — which are generally tied to commercial activity — account for about 20 percent of total U.S. demand for transportation fuels; by 2040, they will account for about 30 percent.
ExxonMobil supports the market-driven use of natural gas as a vehicle fuel. But a government push to subsidize or mandate the expanded use of natural gas in the transportation sector is a wrong turn.
National energy goals in the transportation sector – such as reducing Americans’ transportation costs and strengthening U.S. energy security – are better (and more economically) met through other methods, such as the expanded use of hybrid vehicles or improved fuel efficiency in conventional vehicles. This is, in fact, what we expect to happen. ExxonMobil’s Outlook for Energy projects that the average new car on U.S. roads in 2040 in will get 45 miles per gallon, compared to 22 MPG today, with hybrids and efficiency accounting for most of that improvement.
Like any fuel or technology, natural gas should compete with other transportation fuels on a level playing field – not one distorted by governments trying to pick which fuels and technologies will ultimately be the most successful. In this way, the nation’s energy needs are met at the lowest possible cost to consumers and taxpayers.
For more national and worldwide related business news, visit the Peak News Room blog.
For local and Michigan business related news, visit the Michigan Business News blog.
For healthcare and medical related news, visit the Healthcare and Medical blog.
For law related news, visit the Nation of Law blog.
For real estate and home related news, visit the Commercial and Residential Real Estate blog.
For technology and electronics related news, visit the Electronics America blog.
For organic SEO and web optimization related news, visit the SEO Done Right blog.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)