Electric cars/hybrids - a dead end?
Discussion
this seems a bit more plausible, for 100% elecy cars.
http://euanmearns.com/how-much-more-electricity-do...
http://euanmearns.com/how-much-more-electricity-do...
The Spruce goose said:
this seems a bit more plausible, for 100% elecy cars.
http://euanmearns.com/how-much-more-electricity-do...
Except he's ignored the existing overnight spare capacity.http://euanmearns.com/how-much-more-electricity-do...
A quick google suggests some of those estimates are quite out.
1) No of cars - Estimated in 2016 at 31.7m cars
2) Average mileage - Estimated in 2014 at 7,900 / car but falling year-on-year
3) Total km driven = 31,700,000 x 7,900 x 1.6 = 400,688,000,000 or 401 billion km (This is 28% lower than used in the table).
4) 22kWh/100km seems ok => 88.2bn kWh required or 88.2m MWh or 88,200GWh
I'm going to set this out differently from here.
88,200GWh is 10.1GW of capacity running permanently. Allowing for downtime/maintenance, it's probably fair to gross this up by 30% meaning we need 13.1GW of capacity to cover this.
I think we have a base installation of about 75GW at the moment and the peak load is about 60GW (for very short periods - it always used to be when the commercials came on during Coronation Street, but do people still watch that now we have so many more channels?). At night the load is more like 30GWh. If "night" is 11pm-7am then there is enough system capacity to cover this charging requirement. Which is sort of what Flooble said at the start.
We're going to need to build in some extra capacity, but we're not going to 100% EV penetration over night. A combination of more renewables, some new gas and localized battery storage, together with further housing efficiency gains (and the almost inevitable continued run down of heavy industry post-Brexit) will mean that these problems will be dealt with over the 10+ year transition period (that's the life cycle of the existing vehicle fleet and assumes almost 100% penetration of new cars into EV - the reality is the transition period is going to be 20+ years). That's before we get to Hinckley Point.
I'm inclined to think that the rising price of Lithium is probably more of a threat than the energy supply to eventual EV domination. But there may be better battery tech out there in the next 5 years anyway ...
Jez
1) No of cars - Estimated in 2016 at 31.7m cars
2) Average mileage - Estimated in 2014 at 7,900 / car but falling year-on-year
3) Total km driven = 31,700,000 x 7,900 x 1.6 = 400,688,000,000 or 401 billion km (This is 28% lower than used in the table).
4) 22kWh/100km seems ok => 88.2bn kWh required or 88.2m MWh or 88,200GWh
I'm going to set this out differently from here.
88,200GWh is 10.1GW of capacity running permanently. Allowing for downtime/maintenance, it's probably fair to gross this up by 30% meaning we need 13.1GW of capacity to cover this.
I think we have a base installation of about 75GW at the moment and the peak load is about 60GW (for very short periods - it always used to be when the commercials came on during Coronation Street, but do people still watch that now we have so many more channels?). At night the load is more like 30GWh. If "night" is 11pm-7am then there is enough system capacity to cover this charging requirement. Which is sort of what Flooble said at the start.
We're going to need to build in some extra capacity, but we're not going to 100% EV penetration over night. A combination of more renewables, some new gas and localized battery storage, together with further housing efficiency gains (and the almost inevitable continued run down of heavy industry post-Brexit) will mean that these problems will be dealt with over the 10+ year transition period (that's the life cycle of the existing vehicle fleet and assumes almost 100% penetration of new cars into EV - the reality is the transition period is going to be 20+ years). That's before we get to Hinckley Point.
I'm inclined to think that the rising price of Lithium is probably more of a threat than the energy supply to eventual EV domination. But there may be better battery tech out there in the next 5 years anyway ...
Jez
Edited by Z3MCJez on Wednesday 15th February 21:20
herewego said:
The Spruce goose said:
this seems a bit more plausible, for 100% elecy cars.
http://euanmearns.com/how-much-more-electricity-do...
Except he's ignored the existing overnight spare capacity.http://euanmearns.com/how-much-more-electricity-do...
The Spruce goose said:
this seems a bit more plausible, for 100% elecy cars.
http://euanmearns.com/how-much-more-electricity-do...
It's a load of bhttp://euanmearns.com/how-much-more-electricity-do...
ks... Here's what my independent research finds:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
Avg Annual Mileage * Avg Power Use (based on 4 Miles/KWh ~ fairly typical for a Nissan Leaf)
7383m * 250wh/m = 1.846MWh per car per year.
As for Power Supply Capacity:
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
The 20GW Difference between Weekday(50GW) and Nighttime(30GW) (where Economy7 times apply) gives us:
20GW * 7hours * 365days = 51.1TWh per year.
Dividing Available Overnight Capacity by car consumption gives:
51,100,000,000,000 / 1,846,000 = 27.6 Million Cars
So I don't find any additional strain on the system at all for a very long time...
(as an aside 1.846MWh = 1846 units at economy 7 rate of 8p = £148 per year Average Fuel Bill)
I'm enjoying this thread on the whole, and find I side with the 'there isn't an issue with infrastructure to support EV' camp.
There ARE going to be changes for sure. There are lots of ideas rattling about but only time will tell which turn out to be prophetic and which pathetic.
Car to grid is an interesting one, I can see that helping to level out demand quite well but it'll take some serious management to make it work well.
Personally, I've just bought one of the maligned PHEVs. For me, it works well. I do mostly short trips, almost entirely within its admittedly pretty crap EV range. It's not the Tesla I really wanted, but it is a nice car and for me, it had to be a nice car. I have no axe to grind but personally, would not want any of the EV only offerings currently available other than the Tesla S. To help it make a bit more sense, I've just signed up to have solarPV installed, along with a battery. Its the only way I can afford to get a Tesla in the drive, although this particular one will be bolted to the wall.
There ARE going to be changes for sure. There are lots of ideas rattling about but only time will tell which turn out to be prophetic and which pathetic.
Car to grid is an interesting one, I can see that helping to level out demand quite well but it'll take some serious management to make it work well.
Personally, I've just bought one of the maligned PHEVs. For me, it works well. I do mostly short trips, almost entirely within its admittedly pretty crap EV range. It's not the Tesla I really wanted, but it is a nice car and for me, it had to be a nice car. I have no axe to grind but personally, would not want any of the EV only offerings currently available other than the Tesla S. To help it make a bit more sense, I've just signed up to have solarPV installed, along with a battery. Its the only way I can afford to get a Tesla in the drive, although this particular one will be bolted to the wall.
Parax said:
It's a load of bks...
7383m * 250wh/m = 1.846MWh per car per year.
you know it was for 100% vehicles (including light vehicles) not just cars.ks... 7383m * 250wh/m = 1.846MWh per car per year.
'Demand for electricity in 2014 was 34.42GW on average[3] (301.7TWh over the year) coming from a total electricity generation of 335.0TWh.[4]'
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
so spare capacity could be 34 TWh, but the figures are not clear on transmission loss thru lines, which is about 10%. (around 34twh)
''In June 2013, the industry regulator Ofgem warned that the UK's energy sector faces "unprecedented challenges" and that "spare electricity power production capacity could fall to 2% by 2015, increasing the risk of blackouts". Proposed solutions "could include negotiating with major power users for them to reduce demand during peak times in return for payment".[43]''
''Retiring nuclear power stations and a planned coal phase-out could leave the UK facing a huge electricity supply gap by 2025, says the Institution of Mechanical Engineers ''
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-the-uks-loomi...
the biggest problem is matching demand to supply.
Edited by The Spruce goose on Friday 17th February 13:36
The Spruce goose said:
you know it was for 100% vesicles (including light vehicles) not just cars.
'Demand for electricity in 2014 was 34.42GW on average[3] (301.7TWh over the year) coming from a total electricity generation of 335.0TWh.[4]'
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
so spare capacity could be 34 TWh, but the figures are not clear on transmission loss thru lines, which is about 10%. (around 34twh)
''In June 2013, the industry regulator Ofgem warned that the UK's energy sector faces "unprecedented challenges" and that "spare electricity power production capacity could fall to 2% by 2015, increasing the risk of blackouts". Proposed solutions "could include negotiating with major power users for them to reduce demand during peak times in return for payment".[43]''
''Retiring nuclear power stations and a planned coal phase-out could leave the UK facing a huge electricity supply gap by 2025, says the Institution of Mechanical Engineers ''
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-the-uks-loomi...
the biggest problem is matching demand to supply.
This is I think where the solar energy critical mass of Tesla's unified approach comes in, it we are producing power based on solar energy at pretty much all points along the supply chain then the demand 20 years from now will be catered for.'Demand for electricity in 2014 was 34.42GW on average[3] (301.7TWh over the year) coming from a total electricity generation of 335.0TWh.[4]'
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
so spare capacity could be 34 TWh, but the figures are not clear on transmission loss thru lines, which is about 10%. (around 34twh)
''In June 2013, the industry regulator Ofgem warned that the UK's energy sector faces "unprecedented challenges" and that "spare electricity power production capacity could fall to 2% by 2015, increasing the risk of blackouts". Proposed solutions "could include negotiating with major power users for them to reduce demand during peak times in return for payment".[43]''
''Retiring nuclear power stations and a planned coal phase-out could leave the UK facing a huge electricity supply gap by 2025, says the Institution of Mechanical Engineers ''
https://www.carbonbrief.org/analysis-the-uks-loomi...
the biggest problem is matching demand to supply.
Edited by The Spruce goose on Thursday 16th February 18:01
The definitive maths on generation infrastructure can be made pretty simple.
Cars in the UK do 244 billion miles a year. Source:https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/514912/road-use-statistics.pdf
An EV typically uses about 0.31 kWH to move a mile (source - forums, insert you own figure here, but seems typical.)
Therefore, regardless of charging patterns, the UK needs to find 75.6 billion kWH of capacity a year for total replacement. Or 207 gW/H a day. That's quite a lot of grunt.
If we assume even charging over a 24 hour period, then you need to find 8.6 gW of capacity. If you assume that everyone charges overnight, then you need to put all that demand between 20:00 and 08:00 which is 17 gW of capacity. The truth is somewhere in the middle.
The good news is that between 22:00 and 07:00, the UK does have a spare 10 gW - so, 90 gW of the 207 can be neatly packed in overnight. There isn't much spare capacity during the day, especially in the winter.
Overall, we'd need to pack in about 10 gW of new capacity if everyone charged constantly during the 24 hour day. We'd need about 15 gW to avoid rationing - i.e. if everyone want to use power at 18:00 on a winter's evening, some people won't get their cars charged.
Sizewell C = 1.6 gW. So we probably need 5 or 6 of them, not 20.
Where people may be getting confused is trying to model "zero carbon" power. The makeup of the grid is here, along with current utilisation:
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
What is very clear, is that most of our power comes from burning gas. As I write this (windy Feb morning), we have:
Low carbon:
Nuclear - 8 gW - flat out
Wind - 5 gW
Solar - chuff all
The rest is all fossil fuels
Gas - 12.9 gW - spare capacity at the moment.
Coal - 4 gW - spare capacity at the moment.
If you want EVs to be "low carbon", then you need to build a LOT of nukes. This is where the "20" figure comes from I'd guess. On a winter's evening, all of the additional capacity comes from gas and coal.
At the moment, all EVs are running on gas and coal. Nuclear doesn't even cover the overnight base load. Now CCGT ("gas") is much more efficient than a car engine, but its not "zero carbon".
Note this is just for private cars - lorries over 3.5 tonnes add another 44 billion miles a year and probably use quite a bit more power to do so.
Cars in the UK do 244 billion miles a year. Source:https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/514912/road-use-statistics.pdf
An EV typically uses about 0.31 kWH to move a mile (source - forums, insert you own figure here, but seems typical.)
Therefore, regardless of charging patterns, the UK needs to find 75.6 billion kWH of capacity a year for total replacement. Or 207 gW/H a day. That's quite a lot of grunt.
If we assume even charging over a 24 hour period, then you need to find 8.6 gW of capacity. If you assume that everyone charges overnight, then you need to put all that demand between 20:00 and 08:00 which is 17 gW of capacity. The truth is somewhere in the middle.
The good news is that between 22:00 and 07:00, the UK does have a spare 10 gW - so, 90 gW of the 207 can be neatly packed in overnight. There isn't much spare capacity during the day, especially in the winter.
Overall, we'd need to pack in about 10 gW of new capacity if everyone charged constantly during the 24 hour day. We'd need about 15 gW to avoid rationing - i.e. if everyone want to use power at 18:00 on a winter's evening, some people won't get their cars charged.
Sizewell C = 1.6 gW. So we probably need 5 or 6 of them, not 20.
Where people may be getting confused is trying to model "zero carbon" power. The makeup of the grid is here, along with current utilisation:
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
What is very clear, is that most of our power comes from burning gas. As I write this (windy Feb morning), we have:
Low carbon:
Nuclear - 8 gW - flat out
Wind - 5 gW
Solar - chuff all
The rest is all fossil fuels
Gas - 12.9 gW - spare capacity at the moment.
Coal - 4 gW - spare capacity at the moment.
If you want EVs to be "low carbon", then you need to build a LOT of nukes. This is where the "20" figure comes from I'd guess. On a winter's evening, all of the additional capacity comes from gas and coal.
At the moment, all EVs are running on gas and coal. Nuclear doesn't even cover the overnight base load. Now CCGT ("gas") is much more efficient than a car engine, but its not "zero carbon".
Note this is just for private cars - lorries over 3.5 tonnes add another 44 billion miles a year and probably use quite a bit more power to do so.
Edited by rxe on Thursday 23 February 10:24
RBH58 said:
Hydrogen Fuel Cells are going nowhere. All car manufacturers will give up on them within the next year or two. They make no sense. This is why...
...it's simply a terribly inefficient method to "deliver electricity"...that also requires a completely new delivery infrastructure to be built at a cost of trillions of dollars.
Not quite. ...it's simply a terribly inefficient method to "deliver electricity"...that also requires a completely new delivery infrastructure to be built at a cost of trillions of dollars.
Edited by RBH58 on Monday 13th February 11:49
I read an article yesterday about the first hydrogen refuelling station on the M25 in a shell garage the hydrogen is created on site in a mini power station behind the shell garage so the billion quid infrastructure isn't required if they do it like this they just need a s
t load of electricity and water. Oh the article went on to spout something about generating the hydrogen from the windmills, at night when there is excess supply and therefore saving polar bears (is switched off by then).
The thing is the figures never match and people Dont understand power and demand.
Gas turbine plants that are the most used are generally peaky plants used for peak power production.
The existing infrastructure might not be able to supply the extra demand which looks to be surplus, is why they always talk about extra plants needed and they due not run at 100% everyday just peak time.
They are also the most expensive to run so the cost of supply would skyrocket if they could provide all the elecy
Nuclear plants work 24 a day and would suit an EV world.
Gas turbine plants that are the most used are generally peaky plants used for peak power production.
The existing infrastructure might not be able to supply the extra demand which looks to be surplus, is why they always talk about extra plants needed and they due not run at 100% everyday just peak time.
They are also the most expensive to run so the cost of supply would skyrocket if they could provide all the elecy
Nuclear plants work 24 a day and would suit an EV world.
rxe said:
The definitive maths on generation infrastructure can be made pretty simple.
Cars in the UK do 244 billion miles a year. Source:https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/514912/road-use-statistics.pdf
An EV typically uses about 0.31 kWH to move a mile (source - forums, insert you own figure here, but seems typical.)
Therefore, regardless of charging patterns, the UK needs to find 75.6 billion kWH of capacity a year for total replacement. Or 207 gW/H a day. That's quite a lot of grunt.
If we assume even charging over a 24 hour period, then you need to find 8.6 gW of capacity. If you assume that everyone charges overnight, then you need to put all that demand between 20:00 and 08:00 which is 17 gW of capacity. The truth is somewhere in the middle.
The good news is that between 22:00 and 07:00, the UK does have a spare 10 gW - so, 90 gW of the 207 can be neatly packed in overnight. There isn't much spare capacity during the day, especially in the winter.
Overall, we'd need to pack in about 10 gW of new capacity if everyone charged constantly during the 24 hour day. We'd need about 15 gW to avoid rationing - i.e. if everyone want to use power at 18:00 on a winter's evening, some people won't get their cars charged.
Sizewell C = 1.6 gW. So we probably need 5 or 6 of them, not 20.
Where people may be getting confused is trying to model "zero carbon" power. The makeup of the grid is here, along with current utilisation:
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
What is very clear, is that most of our power comes from burning gas. As I write this (windy Feb morning), we have:
Low carbon:
Nuclear - 8 gW - flat out
Wind - 5 gW
Solar - chuff all
The rest is all fossil fuels
Gas - 12.9 gW - spare capacity at the moment.
Coal - 4 gW - spare capacity at the moment.
If you want EVs to be "low carbon", then you need to build a LOT of nukes. This is where the "20" figure comes from I'd guess. On a winter's evening, all of the additional capacity comes from gas and coal.
At the moment, all EVs are running on gas and coal. Nuclear doesn't even cover the overnight base load. Now CCGT ("gas") is much more efficient than a car engine, but its not "zero carbon".
Note this is just for private cars - lorries over 3.5 tonnes add another 44 billion miles a year and probably use quite a bit more power to do so.
There are various reports that it takes something like 6kwh to refine 1 gallon of fuel. I think its probably a bit biased, there are bi-products in the refining process but something like 75% of a refined barrel of oil is automotive fuel. I think the articles also refer to a US gallon which is smaller. Lets be conservative and say 3 kwh is required in the refining process or rather can be saved by not refining allowing for some refinement to occur anyway for other purposes. Cars in the UK do 244 billion miles a year. Source:https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/514912/road-use-statistics.pdf
An EV typically uses about 0.31 kWH to move a mile (source - forums, insert you own figure here, but seems typical.)
Therefore, regardless of charging patterns, the UK needs to find 75.6 billion kWH of capacity a year for total replacement. Or 207 gW/H a day. That's quite a lot of grunt.
If we assume even charging over a 24 hour period, then you need to find 8.6 gW of capacity. If you assume that everyone charges overnight, then you need to put all that demand between 20:00 and 08:00 which is 17 gW of capacity. The truth is somewhere in the middle.
The good news is that between 22:00 and 07:00, the UK does have a spare 10 gW - so, 90 gW of the 207 can be neatly packed in overnight. There isn't much spare capacity during the day, especially in the winter.
Overall, we'd need to pack in about 10 gW of new capacity if everyone charged constantly during the 24 hour day. We'd need about 15 gW to avoid rationing - i.e. if everyone want to use power at 18:00 on a winter's evening, some people won't get their cars charged.
Sizewell C = 1.6 gW. So we probably need 5 or 6 of them, not 20.
Where people may be getting confused is trying to model "zero carbon" power. The makeup of the grid is here, along with current utilisation:
http://www.gridwatch.templar.co.uk/
What is very clear, is that most of our power comes from burning gas. As I write this (windy Feb morning), we have:
Low carbon:
Nuclear - 8 gW - flat out
Wind - 5 gW
Solar - chuff all
The rest is all fossil fuels
Gas - 12.9 gW - spare capacity at the moment.
Coal - 4 gW - spare capacity at the moment.
If you want EVs to be "low carbon", then you need to build a LOT of nukes. This is where the "20" figure comes from I'd guess. On a winter's evening, all of the additional capacity comes from gas and coal.
At the moment, all EVs are running on gas and coal. Nuclear doesn't even cover the overnight base load. Now CCGT ("gas") is much more efficient than a car engine, but its not "zero carbon".
Note this is just for private cars - lorries over 3.5 tonnes add another 44 billion miles a year and probably use quite a bit more power to do so.
Edited by rxe on Thursday 23 February 10:24
244 billion miles, say 35 mpg on average, that's 7 billion gallons of fuel, or 21 billion kwh or electricity saved. Thats 57 million kwh per day which is 57 gwh - total needed by your maths is 207 gwh, so about 25% of the demand would come purely from the freed up capacity in not needing to refine petrol and diesel, and thats based on some serious rounding down of the savings.
It's important to remember when looking at what needs to be built to match demand that even in 10 years time I doubt there will be 25% EV on the road without some drastic tax increase or out right ban. It's obviously something to consider as an issue facing the mass adoption of EV but I don't think it will ever be a real issue personally.
JonV8V said:
There are various reports that it takes something like 6kwh to refine 1 gallon of fuel. I think its probably a bit biased, there are bi-products in the refining process but something like 75% of a refined barrel of oil is automotive fuel. I think the articles also refer to a US gallon which is smaller. Lets be conservative and say 3 kwh is required in the refining process or rather can be saved by not refining allowing for some refinement to occur anyway for other purposes.
244 billion miles, say 35 mpg on average, that's 7 billion gallons of fuel, or 21 billion kwh or electricity saved. Thats 57 million kwh per day which is 57 gwh - total needed by your maths is 207 gwh, so about 25% of the demand would come purely from the freed up capacity in not needing to refine petrol and diesel, and thats based on some serious rounding down of the savings.
Sure, but gWh of petrol and electricity are not fungible. No one runs refineries on electricity - generally refineries are net exporters of electricity because there is an abundance of process heat.244 billion miles, say 35 mpg on average, that's 7 billion gallons of fuel, or 21 billion kwh or electricity saved. Thats 57 million kwh per day which is 57 gwh - total needed by your maths is 207 gwh, so about 25% of the demand would come purely from the freed up capacity in not needing to refine petrol and diesel, and thats based on some serious rounding down of the savings.
The way a refinery works is roughly:
100 barrels of oil go in.
You consume some fraction of the 100 barrels powering the refinery. Waste process heat (crackers run very hot....) is used to raise steam for compression or electricity.
The remaining purified product goes out.
In most cases, if you shut down a refinery, you've just lost a net grid exporter.
BoRED S2upid said:
Not quite.
I read an article yesterday about the first hydrogen refuelling station on the M25 in a shell garage the hydrogen is created on site in a mini power station behind the shell garage so the billion quid infrastructure isn't required if they do it like this they just need a st load of electricity and water.
Oh the article went on to spout something about generating the hydrogen from the windmills, at night when there is excess supply and therefore saving polar bears (is switched off by then).
Yeah, they keep publishing that article about that station and spinning the same old line about "on site generation". Read deeper and you will find that they claim fifteen cars per day in the PR (which is pathetic in itself) but in the planning only said they'd do three cars per day - which is hilarious. I read an article yesterday about the first hydrogen refuelling station on the M25 in a shell garage the hydrogen is created on site in a mini power station behind the shell garage so the billion quid infrastructure isn't required if they do it like this they just need a s
t load of electricity and water. Oh the article went on to spout something about generating the hydrogen from the windmills, at night when there is excess supply and therefore saving polar bears (is switched off by then).
You need a shed-load of "three cars per day" filling stations - in fact, I did all the maths higher up this thread. Including showing how the amount of electricity needed to generate all that hydrogen on site would require electric cables the size of the channel tunnel to each filling station. Not a little windmill on site.
Can't be bothered to cut and paste all the arithmetic again.
RBH58 said:
Hydrogen Fuel Cells are going nowhere. All car manufacturers will give up on them within the next year or two. They make no sense. This is why...
...it's simply a terribly inefficient method to "deliver electricity"...that also requires a completely new delivery infrastructure to be built at a cost of trillions of dollars.
As soon as fast charging batteries can be done (as battery that fills to capacity in the same time it takes to fill a petrol tank), Hydrogen looses it's only advantage over straight Battery EV's. And this will happen in the next 5-10 years. When it does, it's not only goodbye hydrogen, it's goodbye IC engines too.
HFC's are Betamax in a world going VHS (for those that remember)
This, and I am sure I read a lot of the current H comes from hydrocarbon fuels anyway...its basically a fossil fuel!...it's simply a terribly inefficient method to "deliver electricity"...that also requires a completely new delivery infrastructure to be built at a cost of trillions of dollars.
As soon as fast charging batteries can be done (as battery that fills to capacity in the same time it takes to fill a petrol tank), Hydrogen looses it's only advantage over straight Battery EV's. And this will happen in the next 5-10 years. When it does, it's not only goodbye hydrogen, it's goodbye IC engines too.
HFC's are Betamax in a world going VHS (for those that remember)
Edited by RBH58 on Monday 13th February 11:49
Gassing Station | EV and Alternative Fuels | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff