Mercedes wants to eliminate petroleum by 2015

[tinrobot]

By the middle of the next decade Mercedes-Benz wants its entire lineup to be able to operate entirely free of petroleum. The German giant is working on a variety of technologies that will help provide crude oil free transport such as battery electrics, fuel cells and highly efficient internal combustion engines that can operate on biofuels. Mercedes has recently been letting European journalists sample some of these new powertrains at a test facility in Spain.

The F700 concept that debuted last fall in Frankfurt is powered by a turbocharged DiesOtto engine. The DiesOtto is Mercedes' branding for a combined HCCI and spark ignition engine that provides nearly the same efficiency as a diesel without the need for the expensive after-treatment systems. This and conventional diesel engines can run on biofuels and Mercedes hopes to launch the DiesOtto in production by 2010. Mercedes is also currently field testing electrically-driven vehicles with both batteries alone and fuel cells each of which they also plan to launch at the beginning of the decade. While it may well be that all Mercedes models in 2015 will be capable of running petroleum free, the reality is that many - if not most - will still be using fossil fuels much of the time. That may come in the form of coal for electricity, natural gas reformed into hydrogen, or petroleum fuels blended with biofuels. But you have to start somewhere.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2008/06/21/mercedes-wants-to-eliminate-petroleum-from-its-lineup-by-2015/

[NYC_SKP]

1. Meanwhile, GM introduces the hybrid Escalade....

Which is like lipstick on a pig.

[Donnachaidh]

2. Same with the Tahoe -- that was a USELESS conversion

it went from 8 miles to a gallon (approximately) to 20 mpg -- total BFD. :eyes:

[NYC_SKP]

4. I'm with you, but I don't think it's MPG improvement was that great.

http://www.greencar.com/features/2008greencar/

And it was greencar of the year....20 mpg is better than the old mileage, but my Pruis gets that while accelerating up hills!

[TreasonousBastard]

6. Can your Prius tow a 28' boat or...

a horse trailer?

Up a hill?

[NYC_SKP]

8. No sir. For tasks like that...

I would use my 84 El Camino, not that I own a horse.

Such specialty applications need specialty vehicles. Driving the kids to school or going to the mall do not a require a Tahoe.

The sad thing I see around here are the numbers of SUV and truck owners who never need to tow a boat or horse trailer, but have the big guzzler anyway.

[TreasonousBastard]

15. That's my point-- I get much better mileage on my...

bicycle than you get on your Prius, but the comparison is moot.

No question too many people buy far more car or truck than they need, but for the people that need the big iron, increasing mileage there is far more efficient than increasing mileage on smaller cars.

We're getting to diminishing returns on small car mileage, even with hybrids, and the huge gains will bwe from both new technologies and increasing mileage on the real gas hogs.

[NYC_SKP]

16. I'm hoping that the hybrid Tahoe will be followed by a full spectrum of cars

...large and small, sporty and utilitarian. It's been claimed that getting everyone into hybrids would eliminate petroleum imports. I believe the statement was made by Cameron Diaz in a short educational film called "Power Shift".

I don't know if what she said is true, but energy independence is a worthy goal.

:thumbsup:

[TreasonousBastard]

17. That's silly-- hybrids still use gas,and big ones...

use a lot of gas. Just less than other big ones.

But, yeah, all the car companies are working overtime to come up with somethijg that at least uses a lot less gas-- they've known for a long time that we'll run out of crude oil at some point, but it's tough to keep the stock price up while investing for 30 years down the road.

Even Toyota makes no bones about its hybrids being transitional until something better comes along, and everyone is working on that something better. The buzz is all about new batteries for the next major transition.

On the job I often go up to 150 miles a day. Just to get to my doctors is 120 miles round trip, so I'm one of those people who needs lots of range and a quick fillup when low. An electric car, as they are now, just won't cut it.

[Heywood J]

25. My Intrigue can, and it gets 33MPG...

Does your Tahoe or Suburban?

[diane in sf]

5. That's 2.5 times better mileage--imagine that applied to the entire US fleet--

we would probably be freed from importing oil. I would prefer a plug-in hybrid vehicle myself where one didn't even require fuel for the first 40-150 miles. But some people need/insist on driving large SUVs. Hopefully we can go to lightweight, injection molded carbon fiber vehicles that will do much better than 20mpg on whatever power sources soon.

[NYC_SKP]

10. It's not 2.5 times better. It's better by "up to 30%".

Per this article: http://www.greencar.com/features/2008greencar

Also, remember that EPA mileage estimates are always off, sometimes by 50%.

Still, that's a significant improvement, but unless a heavy truck is needed for towing, it's still just a fuel guzzler at 20 mpg.

And for those who own them but only tow a boat 5 or 10 or 20 times a year but this is their main vehicle, well, it's wasteful and stupid.

Now, it's costly.

I spoke with an old coworker last Wednesday. He drives a 1/2 ton truck, gets 14mpg, drives about 40 miles to work each day. He asked me about my Prius. He and I did the math and determined that for what he'd save on gas costs (about &400/month) he could be making the payments on a new Prius.

I asked if he really needed a truck. He said he has to trailer his boat whenever he uses it on the occasional holiday.

I said that he's got one expensive boat!

[sabbat hunter]

26. For city dwellers

plug in hybrids are a non-starter as most do not have driveways/garages and are forced to rely on street parking. I use mass transit for work each day, but have a car for being able to get out of the city for various things.

[NYC_SKP]

28. Good point. But...they're still hybrids and better than average vehicles.

But public transportation or cycling will always be better.

Also, some folks might be able to charge it up at work.

And you can still drive it as a Hybrid, using gasoline.

PHEV's don't add limitations to the Hybrid model, they expand the possibilities.

[TreasonousBastard]

7. Is it? Double the mileage is BFD?

10,000 miles a year at 8mpg= 1,250 gallons
at 20mpg= 50 gallons
a saving of 750 gallons

Now, for extra credit, calculate your fuel savings if you traded in a 25mpg sedan for a Prius at 40 mpg. Even 50mpg Not so hot, it it?

Basic physics sez you can't possibly get the mileage in a large, and heavy, truck that you can in a smaller, lighter, more aerodynamic vehicle. Being as how there a re some people who actually need to haul things like equipment around, a huge percentage increase in truck mileage should be celebrated, not scoffed at.

[Duke Newcombe]

9. Er...that IS a "big deal"...

For families like mine that NEED SUV-type people hauling capacity--that's LEAGUES better than the alternative. I'll take that hybrid brick over the fuel-binging non-hybrid, thank you very much.

Take your conservation where you can find it.


Duke

[NYC_SKP]

11. Nobody NEEDs an SUV

It's a purely American invention and automakers have successfully marketed them to make people see them as necessities.

We used to have station wagons in this country.

I had a Camry wagon that seated 7.

Of course, certain families suffering from obesity, another largely American phenomenon, might not fit.

Anyone who has been abroad, for example to Europe, knows that SUVs are peculiarly American and not by any means a necessity.

[medeak]

18. need 4 wheel drive!

but have Subaru that gets 30 mpg but unfortunately have to drive 300 miles to have it serviced. Your comment is too general..some of us live in tundra desolate places

[NYC_SKP]

21. Subaru's are great.

They are the economical alternative to full size trucks and SUVs, and come in the increasingly rare station wagon (low profile, high mileage, lots of passenger versions of sedans).

A hybrid Subaru all wheel drive Outback would be fantastic!

[GreenPartyVoter]

27. We have a Forester and love it. It's a great little family car

[Duke Newcombe]

22. Correction: YOU didn't "need" an SUV

Unless you know better how to run my life and my family.

Duke

[kristopher]

12. I think you're missing the point of the criticism

You use the word "need" to describe the basis of our decision. That is a subjectively defined word that is all too often substituted for 'prefer".

For example, if gasoline were $25/gal, I suspect your 'needs' might be subject to a revised evaluation. That being the case, the same revised evaluation could occur at $4 a gallon + concern over the external costs of using fossil fuels.

For the record: I drive a 1/2T pickup that gets 17mpg because I "need" it to occasionally haul things. I'm not casting stones. My only saving grace is that I've had it for 10 years and it has less than 80K, so I don't drive it much. This year, so far, I've put less than 1500 miles on it.

[Duke Newcombe]

20. True. But not in this case.

The "need" for an SUV is hauling 7 people AND groceries, and stuff for events and kid's obligations.


The ever increasing price of fossil fuels may modify our USE of the vehicle, perhaps even our task and event planning (it already has), but not obviate the NEED to have it.

Just sayin'

Duke

[tinrobot]

23. Large families didn't have SUV's up until the 1980's.

They seemed to get around just fine.

A lot of people confuse "needs" with habits. In the past two decades, we've become used to having SUV's, and now think they're a necessity. They're no more a necessity than a cigarette.

The problem with these SUV's isn't necessarily the size, it's the weight. An Escalade weighs almost 6000 pounds. A modern station wagon weighs half that. A station wagon from the 1970s weighs a third of the Escalade, yet can carry the same amount of stuff.

[Duke Newcombe]

24. I think we're talking past one another on this one.

To be entirely pedantic about it, we don't "need" Priuses, either.

Horses and buggies sufficed for families of 7 at the turn of the century, so we don't need internal combustion automobiles.

Bottom line, it is a need/preference/habit that we'll maintain until it no longer suits my family. And we get to be the "deciders" on this point.

Duke

[tom_paine]

3. A fine idea and goal. Good luck to them.

:toast:

[NYC_SKP]

13. Such a contrast to our country under Bush. (Must read for SUV owners)

Here's an exchange from a press conference that speaks volumes about Bush's attitude toward energy and American consumerism.
Sadly, it also seems to represent how some Americans feel.
Particularly SUV and truck owners, many of whom have become convinced that they NEED to own such vehicles.
In their defense, many automakers stopped offering station wagons to the American market, leaving only SUVs and minivans as options for large families.

Q: Is one of the problems with this, and the entire energy field, American lifestyles? Does the President believe that, given the amount of energy Americans consume per capita, how much it exceeds any other citizen in any other country in the world, does the President believe we need to correct our lifestyles to address the energy problem?

MR. FLEISCHER: That’s a big no. The President believes that it’s an American way of life, and that it should be the goal of policy makers to protect the American way of life. The American way of life is a blessed one. And we have a bounty of resources in this country. What we need to do is make certain that we’re able to get those resources in an efficient way, in a way that also emphasizes protecting the environment and conservation, into the hands of consumers so they can make the choices that they want to make as they live their lives day to day.

[medeak]

14. German engineering YAY! n/t

[samsingh]

19. sell Gm and ford stock