OKPOLICY.ORG
Derek Wietelman is an OK Policy summer intern. He is an Oklahoma State University student pursuing a double major in statistics and political science, with minors in economics and environmental economics, politics, and policy.
Over the past few years, a top priority of Governor Fallin’s administration has been to encourage the use of compressed natural gas (CNG) vehicles in municipal fleets as well as to increase the number of CNG fueling stations in Oklahoma. CNG is a form of natural gas that can be stored and used as a fuel source for compatible motor vehicles.
Oklahoma is not alone in its efforts to promote CNG. Governor Fallin has been joined by Colorado Governor John Hickenlooper in leading a bipartisan 22-state initiative to convert state and municipal fleets to CNG vehicles. They have also lobbied the auto industry to produce more CNG vehicles for the average consumer and hosted representatives from foreign governments in Oklahoma to discuss the advantages of increasing CNG usage.
Given Oklahoma’s prominence as a natural gas producer and that CNG is cleaner-burning than standard petroleum, converting state and local government fleets to CNG could be a win-win situation for both government budgets and the environment. However, the relative lack of CNG fueling stations nationwide, concerns about the relationship between natural gas and climate change, and the feasibility of electric car options should give consumers pause before they commit to a CNG vehicle.
Arguments for shifting to CNG vehicles
A common argument in favor of CNG expansion is that it is a cleaner-burning fuel source than standard petroleum gasoline. Studies published by the Argonne National Laboratory and the California Energy Commission have both shown that CNG emits on average 6 percent to 11 percent less greenhouse gases than standard gasoline over the life of the fuel cycle, while getting the same amount of mileage. In an age where the threat of climate change grows larger each day and greenhouse gas emissions from human activity have been proven to be a contributing factor to climate change, the potential of CNG as a cleaner-burning fuel source cannot be ignored.
Another reason why the state is pushing for CNG development is the vast reserves of natural gas in Oklahoma and in the United States. Oklahoma is fourth in the nation in natural gas production. Our abundance of natural gas reserves allow CNG to be competitively priced when compared to standard gasoline prices. The national average price for gasoline in April 2015 was $2.42/gallon, while an equivalent amount of CNG only cost consumers $2.09.
Oklahoma State University is already saving money with CNG vehicles. The university began adding CNG vehicles to its fleet in 2009 and is set to have all daily buses running on CNG this summer. The University expects to save about $100,000 dollars per year in fuel costs from this change. OSU has even opened up the CNG fueling station created for its fleet to the general public.
A bill approved this year in the Legislature, SB 656, allows counties to receive no interest loans from the state for the purpose of converting their fleets to CNG vehicles. Cleveland County, which includes Southern Oklahoma City, Moore, and Norman, has begun to transition to CNG vehicles and plans to take advantage of the new program. Given these success stories and the advantages outlined above, it seems to make perfect sense for Oklahoma to continue to convert to CNG-powered vehicles.
But wait…
Despite the arguments in favor of CNG expansion in Oklahoma, there are several reasons why committing fully to CNG conversion is not the best option for the state. One is the lack of availability of reliable natural gas infrastructure, including limited natural gas vehicle options for the average consumer and relatively few CNG fueling stations.
While CNG use in transportation and municipal fleets has been growing, the average consumer will have a tough time finding a CNG vehicle for everyday use. Only one auto model that runs entirely on CNG — the Honda Civic Natural Gas — has ever been produced for market. However, citing a lack of demand, Honda announced in June that they would no longer continue production of the vehicle past 2015, a decision that could potentially have negative ramifications in Oklahoma given that from 2010-2015 Oklahoma had the highest demand for the car of any state in the nation.
Additionally, CNG fueling stations remain scarce across the United States and even in Oklahoma. Currently only 86 CNG fueling stations are open to the public in Oklahoma, and about a quarter of them were located in Oklahoma City or Tulsa. Even with this relatively small number of stations, Oklahoma ranks 2nd out of all 50 states in our number of CNG fueling stations, trailing only California. Texas has 71 CNG stations over a much larger area, and none of Oklahoma’s other border states have more than 17. Outside of municipal and other government fleets that can build out their own infrastructure within a limited area, most ordinary auto buyers cannot switch to a CNG vehicle without risking being stranded with no fueling station for hundreds of miles.
Another factor that should give state officials pause is the concerns around natural gas’s contributions to climate change. While natural gas is proven to be cleaner burning than both coal and oil, the fact remains that it is a still a fossil fuel that contributes to climate change. The primary component of natural gas, methane, is a greenhouse gas that is 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide when it is released into the atmosphere without being burned. Failure to capture methane properly throughout the life-cycle of natural gives it the potential to be an even dirtier fuel source than oil.
Is there a better option?
If CNG is not a feasible long-term option, then what is? Many signs are pointing to electric-powered vehicles. A study conducted in 2010 by MIT found that 1,000 cubic feet of natural gas used to produce electricity for an electric car would allow that car to drive 457 miles, while that amount of natural gas in a CNG vehicle would only yield about 224 miles. Electric cars also require much less maintenance than a standard engine or CNG vehicle, saving money over time. While there are drawbacks to electric cars as well (including range concerns), they are much more accessible to the general public than CNG vehicles, with several models from the Nissan Leaf to the Tesla Model S available for purchase.
The bottom line
There are proven benefits for Oklahoma governments and other large, centralized entities to switch their fleets to CNG. However, these vehicles have not yet proven themselves to be a viable option for the general public. Our close relationship to the natural gas industry has helped consumer CNG vehicles become more popular in Oklahoma than in any other state, but it’s not clear that centering our national transportation infrastructure around this fuel makes sense over the long-term.
Falin should have acted on this years ago!
It is entertaining that the author raises the issue about natural gas and its contribution to climate change but then proceeds to endorses electric cars adoption. Sure electric cars drive “cleaner” but the entire process to make & power an e-vehicle creates a more significant environmental impact than natural gas does.
Additionally, class 5-8 electric vehicles are way to expensive for consideration and CNG is a cheaper & cleaner alternative to expensive and dirty diesel.
This piece appears to be more shoot from the hip writing than a well thought out & reasoned article.
A study conducted in 2010 by MIT found that 1,000 cubic feet of natural gas used to produce electricity for an electric car would allow that car to drive 457 miles, while that amount of natural gas in a CNG vehicle would only yield about 224 miles.
The fuel mileage is better.
The primary component of natural gas, methane, is a greenhouse gas that is 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide when it is released into the atmosphere without being burned. Failure to capture methane properly throughout the life-cycle of natural gives it the potential to be an even dirtier fuel source than oil.
The pollution is increased when the fuel is released to the atmosphere. Most likely to happen when connecting hundreds of thousands of cars from fuel pumps and not from a power plant with solid piping to carry and deliver fuel.