Can flex-fuel cars put US on the road to low oil p

nhboy

Ubi bene ibi patria
Link to original article.

"Barack Obama is in the market for creative ways of combating climate change, and Eyal Aronoff thinks he has one – involving the US's beloved motor car."

"Eyal Aronoff identifies himself on his business card as an "oil addiction therapist". He's got an unconventional detox method, claiming he can get Americans off oil by making it cheaper to fill up their cars.

The software entrepreneur is a co-founder of the Fuel Freedom Foundation, a new organisation trying to make the case for cutting America's oil consumption – both foreign and domestic.

He argues – along with backers including James Woolsey, director of the CIA under Bill Clinton – that if America cuts its use of oil in half over the next 10 years, prices on the global market would drop below $50 a barrel because of reduced demand. Americans would pay about $2 a gallon to fuel up – or about half as much as they pay now.

The foundation proposes to reduce America's use of oil by widespread adoption of other liquid fuels, allowing motorists to fill up their cars interchangeably with petrol, ethanol, natural gas or methanol, at prices well below those prevailing today. The foundation also rejects the idea of subsidising cleaner fuels.

The idea, which applies only to transport not electricity generation, basically turns conventional environmental thinking on its head.

And it will be interesting to see how much traction Aronoff and fellow tech millionaire and co-founder Yossie Hollander get for their free-market environmental solutions.

With Barack Obama announcing he is on the look-out for new, bipartisan approaches to climate change, Aronoff visited Washington DC last month with Woolsey to try to find support in the White House and Congress for rethinking the ban on using methanol in cars.

Aronoff argues that current environmental politics are self-defeating. The failure to find an immediate and competitively price replacement for liquid fuels was limiting support for environmental powers.

Outside of a handful of big cities, public transport does not exist in America. People rely on their cars to get to work, and if the price of petrol goes up they suffer.

It also allows the oil lobby to try and cast all environmental regulations as expensive job killers. "The American Petroleum Institute and the oil lobby, they keep blaming environmental regulations for high prices. As the price rises the base of the environmental movement becomes readier to buy the story that the price is rising because of environmental regulations," he said.

Instead, Aronoff argues that driving down the price of oil would make it less viable to mine non-conventional oils from the Alberta tar sands or in the deep-water drill sites in the Gulf of Mexico, and the pristine waters of the Arctic."
 

dontknowwhy

New Member
did he find the support he was looking for?

or did the President have a closed door meeting with him with no cameras so he could honestly tell him...

hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!......NO!!
 

Gilligan

#*! boat!
PREMO Member
I was wondering what kind of magic was going to make this happen...

The foundation proposes to reduce America's use of oil by widespread adoption of other liquid fuels, allowing motorists to fill up their cars interchangeably with petrol, ethanol, natural gas or methanol, at prices well below those prevailing today.
 

bcp

In My Opinion
The way I see it, if you cut the demand in half, those producing oil are not going to keep pumping at the rate they do today, they will cut production in half, and when they do, the balance between reserves, use and supply are going to stay close enough to the same that fuel will also stay about the same.

If by some chance fuel were to drop to half the price, and half the sales, then the government would also see a reduction in revenue, so you can bet that there would be at least a dollar per gallon tax on it.

Prices will not come down, this is just yet another puff of smoke up our collective asses.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
The way I see it, if you cut the demand in half, those producing oil are not going to keep pumping at the rate they do today, they will cut production in half, and when they do, the balance between reserves, use and supply are going to stay close enough to the same that fuel will also stay about the same.

If by some chance fuel were to drop to half the price, and half the sales, then the government would also see a reduction in revenue, so you can bet that there would be at least a dollar per gallon tax on it.

Prices will not come down, this is just yet another puff of smoke up our collective asses.

This is exactly right and is exactly why we need national energy policy predicted on the price that is in the national interest of the United States of America.
 

aps45819

24/7 Single Dad
The foundation proposes to reduce America's use of oil by widespread adoption of other liquid fuels, allowing motorists to fill up their cars interchangeably with petrol, ethanol, natural gas or methanol, at prices well below those prevailing today...
"allowing"? If the booze in the gas wasn't subsidized, prices would jump a couple bucks a gallon
The way I see it, if you cut the demand in half, those producing oil are not going to keep pumping at the rate they do today, they will cut production in half, and when they do, the balance between reserves, use and supply are going to stay close enough to the same that fuel will also stay about the same.

They can only decrease demand in the U.S.
Other countries will just use more and use it without the pollution controls in place here
 

bcp

In My Opinion
"allowing"? If the booze in the gas wasn't subsidized, prices would jump a couple bucks a gallon


They can only decrease demand in the U.S.
Other countries will just use more and use it without the pollution controls in place here

not only that but the also need to balance production and supply between the two types of fuel.
how many people are going to run out and get rid of a 3 year old car that burns regular gas and is paid for, just to trade it in at a very reduced price for a car that burns flex-fuel but has a steep payment attatched to it?
I can see maybe when that 3 year old car is suddenly 10 years old and now they NEED a new car anyway.
This thinking is just another symptom of the government thinking that the average citizen has thousands of dollars extra to spend each month.
Its why they think the tax increases are not going to affect the ecomony in a crippling way.
 
Top