As much as anyone, I wish there was an effective and available solution for foreign oil. Our "quick fix" cultural mentality fueled by the media is bewildering to me. I am also struck by a large number of people who aren't aware of facts on both the optimistic and pessimistic side.
This opinion piece provided a good context I wish was more widely understood.
First, one gallon of ethanol doesn't elminate one gallon of gasoline. It is more like 1/5 to 1/3 of a gallon. Secondly, ethanol is subsidized and with current technology using corn, is an expenseive replacement ($120 barrel).
All of this can change. There is a lot of focus and attention being paid. This is good and has the potential of replacing 10-20% of our fuel with new methods and alternative celluose sources.
It is not THE solution, but a good option.
Quote from today's WSJ Opinion Column...
President Bush has made the welcome point that the U.S. needs "to move beyond a petroleum-based economy," and has lent his support to the need to develop energy from biomass, which refers to all bulk plant material. This is popular with the public and also enjoys significant support in Congress. Unfortunately, congressional subsidies for biomass are driven by farm-state politics rather than by a technology-development effort that might offer a practical liquid fuel alternative to oil. Meanwhile, major oil and chemical companies are evaluating biomass and investors are chasing biomass investment opportunities. But how much of this is practicable?
In same catagory is the media's insistence that the oil companies "give back" the excess profits. Here, everyone deserves an "F" for economic literacy. See this column. Oil and gasonline pricing is a highly evolved market mechanism. I think this is very difficult to "manipulate".
