@texases
I can only tell you that in all my conversations with my relatives in the auto business over the past twenty years, that companies like Toyota have worked with energy companies to get long range estimates on prices and availability of fuels and the additives they use to help design their power plants. One of the big reasons that Toyota has for years balked at producing diesel motors for example in the US, is the projected cost of diesel relative to the amount they would have to charge for that option. Even the govt. Has been consulted by them. Maybe that’s why they are successful ? These availability and cost estimates are all part of long range consultations with energy companies. The idea that any car company would build automobiles without involving a close relationship with the energy companies that produce the fuels for their products, is pretty far fetched. Your question should be " isn’t it obvious ? "
As a 30-year petroleum engineer, I GUARANTEE that nobody has any inside knowledge on long term energy cost and availability trends. A number of years ago the then-president of Exxon testified before Congress that the US would never see increases in natural gas supplies. OOPS! I’m sure Toyota asks around, but that’s far different than some close cooperation, and is of VERY limited long-term value.
Not to change the subject from socialized car manufacturing back to Tesla, but in the paper today a Wisconsin Doctor won his suit against Tesla. He was awarded $127,000 because the car was in the shop too long for too many different problems. I’m thinking something is not quite right at Tesla. The award covered the car cost, taxes, and lawyer’s fees. I assume they get the car back and will probably end up on Ebay.
And as far as I’m concerned, until we can get our government budget on track, no subsidies for experimental cars. I don’t need my tax contribution going to people buying $100,000 Teslas under the guise of saving the earth.
ah, now I get it…
He was awarded $127,000 because the car was in the shop too long for too many different problems. I'm thinking something is not quite right at Tesla.
If your using ONE car to gauge how well Tesla is doing…then Ford/GM and Chryco should have gone under decades ago.
@texases
You actually believe that Toyota does not consult with energy companies on the availability of fuels, additives in the gas and price structure…that all they do is just “ask around” Good grief, what do you think good business practices are ? You don’t think that additives have an effect onanauto manufacturers ability to comfort to pollution standards.
My neighbor, a successful business man wanted to add pumps to one of his businesses, a local grocery store. He consulted the state on local traffic patterns including heavy trucks and the local fuel distribution while sale distribution agent. He sat down with a rep with the traffic flow patterns and got an estimate on realized profits depending upon the selection of different gas blends on the pumps. Between them, like many others in a similar situation, he installed pumps with only 87 octane and diesel. Sure, he could have just asked around but just a local business men do such things on a small.
You should know that fuels aren’t just made up and the auto industry fends for itself. There is cooperation in these and other areas. Both companies have vested interest in the stability of one another. Logic doesn’t seem to be part of your description of the situation. And yes, who better to help determine a long range plan whether to made diesel powered trucks then involving the diesel fuel supplier.
“You actually believe that Toyota does not consult with energy companies on the availability of fuels, additives in the gas and price structure…that all they do is just “ask around” Good grief, what do you think good business practices are ? You don’t think that additives have an effect on an auto manufacturers ability to comfort to pollution standards.”
Exactly. Fuel standards are fixed, not open to negotiation. What, exactly, are you talking about?
Do you want to know where the oil industry goes for price forecasts? To the financial markets. Here is the link to one of the companies dealing in the futures market.
When I make an economic evaluation of an oil or natural gas project, I typically obtain the ‘futures strip’ for oil or gas, which is the price for each year that the commodities market is willing to buy and sell at. It’s not some magic forecast, or some secret set of numbers.
I’m not saying Toyota doesn’t research this information, but it is PUBLICALLY available, and is likely massaged by their internal economists using whatever judgment they think is appropriate.
Oil industry ‘experts’ complete a survey every year, part of which includes their expectations for future years. In retrospect, one thing is certain with EVERY ONE of these forecasts. They’ve been WRONG.
Here’s a better link, it shows prices out to 2022:
“companies like Toyota have worked with energy companies to get long range estimates on prices and availability of fuels and the additives they use to help design their power plants”
That is absolutely true, dagosa!
A friend of mine worked for Exxon for many years, working in the area of advanced fuel development.
For at least 4 years (until he left for greener pastures) he served as Exxon’s liaison with Toyota, in order for the two companies to work in conjunction with each other on fuel formulations for the future. On a regular basis, he traveled to Japan and to Belgium for this long-term project.
There are lots of industry work on fuel characteristics. Lots of work on what might improve fuels, often reported on in the technical literature.
Most of what I understood @dagosa to be talking about was discussion of supplies and prices. That’s not something that’s subject to more than random conjecture.
Once the octane and detergent level is specified, most of the remaining issues center on pollution, vapor pressure in particular, and are subject to lots of EPA regs.
The ‘Top Tier’ designation is a good example of what a consortium of refiners and auto makers can do, focused on detergent specifications.
This smacks of desperation:
There are plenty of individual topics to discuss when debating exactly where auto companies and energy companies cooperate to the mutual benefit of both. We can go round and round on the specifics but my assertions are true. There is no “general asking of questions” when a company makes a product that is motivated by a fuel developed by another. It is specific and relevant. You may in vision daily meetings of officials when in reality it’s on the level of technical data regularly exchanged, necessary for each to conduct business at their optimal levels. And yes, product availability and prices are always important as far into the future as either can foresee.
Everything from the points I made to the political side of conducting business is done for their mutual benefit. Regardless of whether you are conservative or liberal, where a D or an R on your shirt and feel energy corporations are in one side and automotive workers are on the other, consider this ONE situation.
When the plan for bailing out GM and Chrysler was being discussed as a possibility and the petroleum industry lobby I am sure was definitely in that discussion, what side do you think they came down on and flexed what ever political influence they had ?
These two entities mutually benefit when each is a strong and vital industry producing competitive products. It does not help the oil industry when factions of the auto industry are on the verge of collapse or the oil supplies are interrupted and prices soar does it help auto sales. We know from past history how that went. And, @texases, you want me to believe they give each other a passing nod in the night and a general…“hey, how you doing ?” ;))))
Please describe specifically the information you think they ‘trade in the night’. Future prices? Nope, nobody knows them, the oil industry uses the markets’ estimate of future prices. Future oil and natural gas production estimates? Those are available to the public, and are often wrong.
So I do not understand what you think is going on.
The oil industry has been pretty accurate in predicting many things. Like the stock market, there are long term trends that are important for auto industry to know and there are short term disruptions that no one can foresee. There is a n exchange on both levels which makers need for product development and there is a technical exchange of information that is on going as cars and their ability to use fuel efficiently in compliance with regulations and performance goals. How can you doubt the intrinsic link between these two industries. My cousin, a service manager for a half dozen different auto makes had frequently mentioned the importance of the cooperative nature of product development and fuel supplies availability and make up. That you continually deny these companies are mutually benefit by a cooperative effort that is firm, ongoing and beneficial to each is bewildering.
Btw, when the govt. boards which set fuel standards convene , they are made up of members from the petroleum industry and the auto industry amount others . Decisions on standards are done as a result of a cooperative effort from reps in all the industries involved. The govt. Does not make demands from an industry that representatives in general do not feel they can comply with. From that point on, there is a cooperative effort between the auto industry and others to that end.
As I said, they work on formulation. But you seem to think there’s something more going on. It’s not price, it’s not production. So what is it? Specifically?
I dunno, after 14 pages, I remain unconvinced; 1) That Tesla has a business model that will provide for continued success, 2) That Tesla doesn’t have some quality issues right now, 3) That there is a need and a public interest in borrowing more tax money to subsidize a product with a current limited market, 4) That the current grid can handle a major increase in electric use, and 5) That oil companies and car companies are in cahoots to limit electric cars so that they can continue to sell their engines, oil, and parts. Even if that is true, we sure would need to do some economic impact analysis of the jobs lost and regional economic impact before the government should step in and pay people to convert to electric.
So, Toyota is not concerned with gas formulation,not concerned with long term supplies and price projections by oil companies in their decisions not to bring diesels on to the US market, have no ongoing exchange from one year to another on gas formulation. What’s your question ? You deny there is an ongoing exchange of information that helps car companies decide on product development. Sounds like someone is looking for a technicality to hang their hat on. 
dagosa, while your at it can you please dig up those missing e-mails?
Hey felllas and howdy,lot of good info going around here-first I want to say that a citicar sure looked like a “Johnny Cab” to me.
And second,how much research or to put it another way has there been much research put into a maybe different ,better liquid fuel(if it costs a little more so be it)
Third what Dag(I believe it was) was saying about the types of fuel to vend,I agree(if I ever owned a filling station that would be my strategy)
Fourth there is a process to convert coal to high quality diesel fuel for less then a dollar a gallon,why for Petes sake arent we doing that?
Fifth,if I was president I would take a very serious look and act on certain things(such as why aren’t we doing No. four and trying to do away with Triple A batteries{just kidding} but believe you me I would try to bring the Middle class back and give them a true Folkswagen.
Anyrate you Guys are making me lust after an electric auto,where can I get a Spark?Keep the discussion going,I for one am learning a great deal(Now I know why I stuck with this Forum,there is such a high percentage of people here I would love to have as next door neighbors)-Kevin
If petroleum companys are involved with the design of engines then mistakes like this shouldn’t occur.
MANUFACTURER: Toyota Motor North America, Inc.
MFR’S REPORT DATE: January 16, 2009
NHTSA CAMPAIGN ID NUMBER: 09V020000
NHTSA ACTION NUMBER: N/A
COMPONENT: Engine and Engine Cooling
POTENTIAL NUMBER OF UNITS AFFECTED: 214570
SUMMARY:
Toyota is recalling 214,570 M/Y 2006-2008 Lexus IS, M/Y 2006-2007 GS and M/Y 2007-2008 LS passenger vehicles equipped with aluminum fuel delivery pipes (fuel rails). Ethanol fuels with a low moisture content will corrode the internal surface of the fuel rails. As this condition progresses, the engine malfunction indicator light may illuminate.
CONSEQUENCE:
Over time, the corrosion may create a pinhole resulting in fuel leakage. Fuel leakage, in the presence of an ignition source, could result in a fire.