New posts from Gas 2.0!

MIT Students Develop Liquid Fuel for Electric Cars

Posted: 08 Jun 2011 09:18 AM PDT

One (of many) complaints against electric cars is that they take too long to "fill up" with electrons. But a group of MIT students seems to have developed a semi-solid electron-laden "fuel" that could completely how we power EV's.

Forgoing the traditional route of storing electrons in either nickel or lithium-ion, the MIT students have figured out a way to store electricity in semi-solid flow cells. Called “Cambridge Crude,” the charged particles are stored in an electrolyte gel that can be removed and refilled when drained, not unlike how we currently fill our cars with gasoline. The gel would move between a charging area, and dispensing area, sending electrons straight to the drivetrain. Perhaps even more importantly though, this technology can (supposedly) store 10x more electricity, at half the price of current conventional battery technology.

Talk about a game changer. If this technology pans out, it could single-handedly eliminate all the barriers facing EV's right now, including infrastructure, charging, battery capacity and cost. The gel supposedly can also be charged normally, via a plug-in system, adding in even more versatility. Of course, I write about great ideas and technology every day, but relatively few ideas actually pan out. But this is a unique idea seems like there is so, so much potential.

Does this electrolyte-laden gel have what it takes to go mainstream? Or is it just another great idea that will remain only a great idea? We’ll find out in 18 months, as the research team will work to build a working prototype by the end of 2012…just in time for the end of the world.

Source: The Atlantic Wire | Image: Nicole Werner

Chris DeMorro is a writer and gearhead who loves all things automotive, from hybrids to HEMIs. You can read about his slow descent into madness at Sublime Burnout or follow his non-nonsensical ramblings on Twitter @harshcougar.

GM CEO Wants Gas Tax Raised to $1 A Gallon

Posted: 08 Jun 2011 07:20 AM PDT

I know it. The government knows it. And so does General Motors CEO Dan Akerson, who joins proponents seeking a higher gas tax. Akerson thinks the tax should be at least $1 a gallon. What do you think?

This isn't the first time a GM executive has called for a higher gas tax, and Akerson's reasoning is that a higher gas tax will push more consumers into more fuel efficient cars. Whereas three years ago, when most automakers were still riding the SUV party train, a higher gas tax was completely out of the question, the Detroit Three have completely revamped their lineups to offer more fuel efficient vehicles (well except for Chrysler, which still has a ways to go.)

Given the choice between higher government mandated MPG ratings or a higher gas tax, Akerson and many auto executives would prefer the higher gas tax. I'm not sure consumers feel the same way, though the reality is we are going to end up paying more to get around either way. If government mandated MPG ratings go up to 62 MPG, it will add anywhere from $800 to $10,000 to the cost of a car. Or you bump the federal gas tax, currently at 18.2 cents per gallon (as it has been for the last 20 years) immediately up to 50-cents per gallon, and from there creep it up to $1 per gallon for gasoline. At least that is what Akerson would like to see, and I wouldn't mind it either, even though the "breaking point" for many Americans is closer to $7 a gallon.

Of course, convincing consumers and politicians that a higher gas tax is what this country needs right now, as we trudge through a "double-dip" recession, is an uphill battle to be sure, and it is unlikely to happen unless President Obama wins reelection, and not one second before then. And even then, such a tax is likely to push many small businesses to the brink of insolvency.

Then again, our much-neglected infrastructure system could really use the money, as could American automakers, who are now offering world-class small cars that are getting better and better fuel efficiency. And as counter-intuitive as it sounds, a higher gas tax means lower economic vulnerability to fluctuations in crude oil prices. Like Akerson, I believe that was as a country really need to weigh the costs versus the benefits of our cheap gas prices. Of course, this requires having a “grown up” conversation in Washington D.C., and I don’t see that happening until after the next election.

So let me ask you readers, how high do you think the gas tax should be? Is $1 a gallon too much, not enough, or just right?

Source: Detroit News