So You Want to Buy a Natural Gas Pickup Truck
Robert Menard, Certified Purchasing Professional, Certified Professional Purchasing Consultant, Certified Green Purchasing Professional
Is it fair to say that most of us want to be careful stewards of the Earth and environment? As education and awareness improves, vast sectors of the population is much more compliant and wants to do its part to preserving and conserving resources and having the best quality natural environment .
Those who have translated their good intentions into buying electric powered vehicles have probably learned lessons that they should have already known before they made such an expensive and poor quality investment. The batteries on these vehicles are made in countries with very low environmental standards. Electric cars are very expensive and the payback is spread over 15-20 years – and that is only if the costly battery doesn’t fail and require replacement. The fact that electric vehicles have not progressed in more than 100 years to anything but golf carts and kiddy kars is proof that anyone who is willing can see. Add to this calamity the fact that most cars are charged with electricity generated by coal and electric cars are the poster child for good sustainability intentions gone drastically wrong.
So what about Compressed Natural Gas (CNG) vehicles, are they sustainable? Let’s look at a real world example. Chrysler makes a 2500 Heavy Duty CNG Ram pickup truck for 2012 to compete with the 2013 Chevrolet Silverado and GMC Sierra 2500 HD trucks with a natural-gas option. According to Edmunds, Chrysler states that there are about 1,500 CNG fueling stations in the U.S, “half of which are accessible to the public” and warns that the lack of filling stations is a considerable obstacle.
This Chrysler truck is actually a dual fuel vehicle powered by gasoline and CNG engines. The first issue to evaluate is if the dual fuel engine adds weight and inefficiency to the truck. While that calculation takes some advanced science, there is absolutely no doubt, and Chrysler concedes, that cargo space is reduced because at least one third of the 8 foot long bed is consumed with a fuel housing for the 13 liter CNG and 18.2 gallons of gasoline fuels, more if the larger fuel tank option is chosen. This means that cargo space and weight are displaced making the net payload far more expensive to transport. Worse yet, according to Edmunds, the base price is $47,500 but popular options, including a larger gas tank, easily add $10,000 to the final purchase price.
The question of sustainability of this vehicle needs close scrutiny. The CNG price is low but the fuel is hard to find. The net payload is reduced by the dual fuel tanks and the weight of the vehicle reduces fuel efficiency. Chrysler is not bragging about the mileage. In fact, this spec sheet on its site is silent on the issue. Users report about 8-12 mpg for the V-8 motor but there is confusion about how to convert therms per gallon to miles per gallon.
What do you think?