No Fuel Like A New Fuel

By Thomas McCarroll.

With its sleek, windswept contours, General Motors' two-seat Impact looks like any number of trendy sports cars. But the Impact is like no other vehicle on the road. It doesn't have a gas tank. It uses little oil. And it gets 120 miles with each fill-up. Miles ahead of its time, the Impact is an electric car that runs on 32 10-volt batteries. Since it burns no fuel, no tail pipes emit noxious fumes into the atmosphere. Though the car is experimental, GM last week announced it would produce it in a plant that can turn out 25,000 autos a year, signaling the company's most ambitious venture yet in electric vehicles.

With the Persian Gulf crisis as a fresh reminder that oil supplies are uncertain, interest in alternative fuels for vehicles is suddenly stronger than it has been in years. From automakers to energy companies, the race to develop a clean and dependable substitute for gasoline is in full gear. Chrysler recently unveiled a battery-powered prototype of its popular minivan. GM is experimenting with automobiles that run on methanol, a form of alcohol that comes from such sources as coal and wood. United Parcel Service recently tested delivery trucks that burn propane rather than gasoline. Mercedes-Benz has developed a prototype car that runs on hydrogen.

Perhaps the most promising alternative is compressed natural gas, or CNG. Although it yields lower mileage than gasoline, CNG is 20% cheaper overall because it burns cleaner and causes less wear on engine parts. The U.S. is virtually self-sufficient in the fuel, supplying nearly 95% of its needs. Modifying cars to run on CNG is much easier than adapting them to electric power: through replacement of the carburetor and fuel system, existing autos can be converted to burn CNG at a cost of about $2,000. Carmakers can build CNG-fueled vehicles from scratch without major retooling. GM plans to manufacture about 1,000 pickup trucks that run on natural gas this spring, its first such vehicles.

Energy companies have been reluctant to invest in CNG fueling facilities because there were no vehicles to use them. Carmakers haven't built the vehicles because consumers wouldn't buy a car they couldn't refuel. Only about 250 U.S. service stations sell CNG (110,000 sell gasoline), but that could change, believes John Watson of Mitchell Energy in Houston. Says he: "The potential is great, but the people who will invest to build the infrastructure have to be convinced it's a winner. GM will be an impetus."

The history of alternative fuels is spotty at best. After the 1970s oil shocks, many auto and oil companies started ambitious programs to develop domestic alternatives to gasoline, but most of the projects withered as crude prices declined. The driving force this time around -- new passion for the environment -- may be more durable.

Before CNG, electricity or hydrogen can be considered a serious alternative to gasoline, the driving public must be won over. That job may seem tough, says Wall Street energy analyst Charles Earle. But take heart. Back when cars were powered by coal-fired steam boilers, he points out, people "once thought it wasn't possible for cars to run on gasoline either."

With reporting by Joe Szczesny/Detroit and Richard Woodbury/Houston