Fuelmaker, the maker of Phill, goes bankrupt

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Lee K. Shuster on April 6, 2009 at 2:37pm

This article sheds some light:

http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com/index.php?article=11236&pagei...

T Boone's Clean Energy wanted to buy it but American Honda squashed the deal.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Oscar on April 6, 2009 at 5:21pm

I don't beleive Honda will just pull the plug and walk away. CNG is too big worldwide. Honda has too much interest in CNG to walk.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Lee K. Shuster on April 7, 2009 at 10:39am

Don't bet on it. Sadly, I think the upper management at American Honda is beginning to realize that CNG is seen as a "been there, tried that technology," by the present administration, at least for this vehicle class segment.

Everyone seems to be jumping on the PHEV and pure EV bandwagon, with the misconception that we already have a suitable infrastructure for recharging these vehicles.

With the current Honda Civic platform nearing end-of-life, I doubt that American Honda will have a GX replacement in the next-gen Civiv platform. I'm not even sure California has the clout to prevent the death of America's last remaining production NGV. American Honda will follow the money and our present administration is not providing a level playing field for all AFV's.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Walter Killeen on April 7, 2009 at 11:40am

You seem to be absolutely right in the assessment that Honda HAS just pulled the plug and IS walking away... The infrastructure (natural gas distribution) is already here... Our product, the XQF-50 is stuck in red tape re its storage tanks. Such a STUPID reason for preventing production... We already have propane tanks stored in residences... We already have scuba tanks there. Gas (natural) is abundant and cheap. It is safer than gasoline.

We need to get this technology NOW... Most Americans are willing to PAY for convenience. Having a re-fueling technology at HOME that re-fuels at gasoline station speeds, is something that they will pay for.. I am willing to step forward but government seems to think that the status quo needs to be kept no matter what..

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Oscar on April 8, 2009 at 5:49am

The preliminary word is Fuel Maker is in negotiations with a buyer. No word on who though.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Lee K. Shuster on April 8, 2009 at 9:07am

Here's one reason why the Administration "doesn't get it," when it comes to using Natural Gas as a viable alternative transportation fuel:

http://blogs.wsj.com/environmentalcapital/2009/04/07/energy-secreta...

Exerpt from WSJ article:

By Keith Johnson
Stephen Power reports:

Don’t count Energy Secretary Steven Chu among the pols cheerleading for oilman T. Boone Pickens’ plan for overhauling U.S. energy policy.

Asked by journalists on the sidelines of an energy conference Tuesday morning what he thought of proposals to expand the use of natural gas as a transport fuel, Mr. Chu paused a beat, said “I’m agnostic,” then explained why he prefer biofuels and vehicle fuel-efficiency standards. He also listed some of the drawbacks associated with encouraging a shift to natural gas-powered vehicles. The full exchange:

QUESTION: “What do you think of proposals to expand natural gas as a transportation fuel?”

STEVEN CHU: “It’s a possibility. It’s something that I think T. Boone Pickens has popularized. I think, you know, I’m agnostic, really, about it . . . My first impression is, let’s decrease the use of personal transportation, our use, by going to more fuel efficient cars and other mechanisms . . The other path forward is to develop the biofuels . . . using agricultural lumber wastes and plants specifically designed for growing energy and making our transportation fuel that way, to offset the oil imports. I don’t know which one will win. I think we could look at both. But remember, if we significantly shift our use of transportation to use natural gas. that will put a strain on natural gas use for industrial uses, for heating and other things . . . it’s a complicated issue.”

Mr. Chu’s seeming dismissal of natural gas as a transportation fuel contrasts with his support for clean coal, despite plenty of public misgivings about coal in the country’s energy mix.

And of course, Mr. Chu’s support of biofuels harkens back to his own days as head of the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, where he helped spearhead research into advanced biofuels, an energy source he also championed in his own confirmation hearing."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

We all need to step up the Virtual Army, letter-writing campaign. Send a message today using the tools on this website. One of the people it will be sent to is Secretary Steven Chu.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by William Engwer on May 9, 2009 at 1:22pm

I hate to sound like another whacko with conspiracy theories, but my personal belief is that the decline in interest in using CNG as a vehicle fuel roughly coincided with the electricity-producing utilities scrambling to build natural-gas fired plants, as they were the cheapest, cleanest and quickest way to increase load-following generating capacity. That's when the price per therm really began climbing, and since gas-providers could sell MASSIVE amounts of the stuff to utilities, why bother with pushing marketing, or even cooperating with marketing, to the individual end users with NGVs? After that, natural gas was nowhere near as cheap (vs. gasoline), so the economic incentive to use it evaporated.

I have no idea why Honda, with the cleanest car on the planet AND the refueling device for it thought FuelMaker should be dropped. Probably the executive in charge of the program was more concerned with playing CYA and building short term profits. That's what usually happens in business. If I were running Honda, I'd keep it around as the "green" flagship of the line. Honda certainly has the engineering ability to develop the "home-refueling appliance" into an affordable, fiscally desirable unit, and overcome the high price and performance issues of the FuelMaker Phill that have been cited.

One thing I do know for a fact is that still, the great majority of the American public has NO IDEA WHATSOEVER that you can run your car on the same gas you cook and heat with, or that it's potentially as easy to refuel as it would be to recharge a "plug-in" electric. Part of the problem is that for the most part, all the vehicles that have been put forward as being CNG powered have been boring. Nobody pays attention to city buses, utility trucks, or fleet vehicles in general. Even Jay Leno said as much in an interview a while back. See my group "CNG as Sexy" for more information. William Engwer

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Oscar on May 15, 2009 at 6:24pm

Honda Motors the company that owned Fuel Maker Forced receivership. Since then FSS Fuel Systems Solutions has been in the process of purchasing the assets. FSS owns Impco and BRC. Both companies manufacture parts for CNG conversion of vehicles.

It is too early to tell what track FSS will take going forward as there are still negotiations of minor contacts ongoing.

I have heard that certain obligations related to fulfilling orders, warranty, service, and parts supply apparently have been resolved to the positive.

We are all anxiously waiting to be informed of our future direction. It seems like a great thing at this point in time and the CFO seems to convey exitement in his communications.

As the grey cloud dissipates to clear sky, we all pray for a stronger oragnization to appear soon.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by LeRoy Young on November 1, 2009 at 2:30pm

I am opening Green Garage in Encinitas, CA and need your support.

▶ Reply to This