But does it have to be this way? Isn’t this the result of (or lack of) govt policy? In other parts of the world the situation is totally different. In Brazil, the number of vehicles running on “flex-fuel” passed the 2 million mark within the past year – that’s 77% of all vehicles on Brazilian roads. See BBC report - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/5263384.stm
Brazil has some significant differences compared to the US market. Liquid fuel consumption in much lower per capita, fuel is heavily taxed with gasoline coming in at $4.69 per gallon and pure ethanol at about $3.59 per gallon due to a lower tax, mainly. It has replaced about 50 percent of Brazilian motor fuel.
Ethanol is cheaper to produce in Brazil however, but for the following reasons:
1. An improved feedstock, sugarcane, that is not particularly viable in the US.
2. Abundant, cheap labor that is being exploited in ways that bring up accusations of human rights abuse -- both in country and abroad.
3. Ethanol is now virtually a monocrop -- the only crop produced -- which leads to long term food-to-fuel, price and general economic concerns.
4. Crude oil is still expensive. Any notable shift in crude demand/price will be a serious issue for Brazil's economy.
5. A decade or more of serious economic subsidies to get the infrastructure off the ground -- with no long term guarantee of ROI even today.
There are also some serious environmental issues in Brazil related to land misuse and straight air and water pollution, plus the concern that rainforest areas may be impacted.
Brazil has basically worked to turn itself into one huge ethanol producing machine, which is not that practical in the US.
On the other hand, while it is still a fossil fuel, Canadian oil sands also become viable with crude prices above $40/bbl. Even there though, there is not enough certainty in the industry that oil will stay above those levels to make investment in these areas comfortable.
The biggest issues with biofuels are land requirements and production costs. So far, demand FAR FAR FAR outstrips these limiters. Cellulosic ethanol, or miracle feedstocks like algae for biodiesel hold promise, but there is no clear indication of any immediate breakthroughs (though one could potentially happen any time). Any global warming concerns aside (real or imagined) petroleum is still the only viable fuel source to meet world energy demand (short of Nuclear for power).
To change that would involve a total reorganization of developed society and infrastructure in numerous areas and at an expense that would likely rival the cost of WW2 by the time it was complete with similar social impacts (not the death, but the change and sacrifice at the home front). Triple or quadruple public transportation. punitive gasoline taxes. Force an end to, and then a reversal of, urban sprawl. Mandate electric cars for urban residents (can rent a diesel for road trips) etc. charged by nuclear power plants. Auto mileage standards twice as demanding as they are now for liquid fuel cars. Manhattan Project or Apollo level funded fuel cell research..
We could do relatively minor adjustments to notably drop gasoline price, but to make big changes in fossil fuel consumption require big changes. There is no magic bullet anymore for the US, though the geography of Europe can help over there. Asia could do it "right" since it is largely just starting to develop, but will it?
Charon
