[jeffkrol]

or at least a valid idea..........

But sometimes a different approach is what works. Sometimes when the government is doing things, it is doing them inefficiently and the private sector can do better. But sometimes it goes the other way. Sometimes when the private sector is doing things, it is doing them inefficiently and the government can do better. And sometimes, sometimes its a good idea for things to be done worse, and in a way that only the government can.

I'll give you an example. I've noted a few times that you can stroll into most car dealerships in Brazil today and buy a tri-flex car. That is, the same car can run on any mix of gasoline, ethanol and natural gas. (There are two fuel tanks - one for ethanol and/or gasoline and one for natural gas.) You can then drive that vehicle into any number of fueling stations and fill up with whatever fuel is going to get you the most miles (er, kilometers) for your dollar (er, real). The technology to run cars on a number of different fuels, which you won't see in the US for a very long time, is marketed under such exotic brand names as GM, Ford, Toyota, Honda, Volkswagen and Fiat to name a few. (Look 'em up if you haven't heard of 'em.)

I've posted on how it came to be that Brazilians have choices that Americans do not, namely to buy a tri-flex vehicle. The Brazilian government wanted to reduce the country's dependence on gasoline, but it realized that nobody would buy a car that ran on a fuel other than gasoline if there was no place to buy that fuel, and hence no manufacturer would make such cars. The government also realized that Shell and Esso and Texaco (remember them?) weren't going to start selling other types of fuel because there weren't enough cars on the road that could use those fuels. But the Brazilian government owned an oil company that had a chain of gas stations. One fine day, that chain of gas stations started selling ethanol even though there was no market for it. It wasn't profitable. It was insane. No private company would have done something that stupid. But the result, a few decades later, is that about 80% of cars sold in Brazil in 2010 were flex-fuel. Guess what percentage of cars sold in the US in 2010 were tri-flex?

Rothbard would never approve of what the Brazilian government did. Neither would Goldberg. Personally, I like having choices. I wish I could pick among three different fuels for my car and go with whichever is cheapest. I suspect that in a few decades, when that technology finally arrives in the US, Goldberg might like having those choices too.

Angry Bear - Financial and Economic Commentary

[shooz]

One gets the impression that Brazil has actual energy policy.
What a novel idea.

[kenafein]

I read once it was something like $100 extra in parts to make cars flex-fuel. Not tri-flex like in Brazil, but we could be running 85% ethanol in our cars with no problems. All new cars should be required to be flex-fuel, at the very least. Car manufacturers are just going to pass the cost to the consumer anyways. Let's get our money back out of these corn subsidies.

[shooz]

So figure $200 per car with labor.
How much more do they charge for them?

It wouldn't take too much more to make them tri-flex either.

When the private sector refuses to truly innovate, who will?

Ask Brazil.

[redrockcoulee]

A few comments: Brazilain ethanol is made in a much more economical and environmentally friendly manner than is done in North America hence it makes more sense all the way round, secondly from what I have read the cost to make our cars better for the environment would cost less than either the upgrade to the stereo system or the leather interior but given the choice most would choose what they can see as a benefit than what is acutally more beneifical (give a person a choice between a holiday or cleaner air and watch them pack their bags) that is one reason that governments do set policies for our own good, some are very structural such as stop signs at intersections and others are the FDA or EPA in the US which I know that some do not like but clean air and water and relatively safe drugs seem to be a good idea.

If you do not like your government setting policies that affect your means of transportation than do not use the Interstate highway system or any of the side effects such as less public transportation or more freeways. Remember the government even doing nothing is in effect assisting one segment of transportation or energy over another. As an environmentalist and if I lived in the US I would oppose the current ethanol system as it is inefficient in both production and economics and it seems to be set up as a contiunance of agricultural subsidies that are not often necessary and in this case definelty not.

We should all take note of what Brazil did and follow in the spirit of that with what works in our own areas.

[luizpaulo]

Just one thing, most of the time it's not worth it to fuel the car with ethanol because of the government's crappy policy. I have a flex fuel car and it's been many months (over an year actually) since I fueled it with ethanol because it hasn't been worth it price wise. As for tri-fuel using natural gas, that was another idea that failed since our government simply accept while the government of Bolivia nationalized a brazilian company that was over there and extracted the natural gas. Prices went up, and the company lost billions of investment. Industries and cars pretty much stopped using natural gas since then. This was on 2008 I think. Please don't use Brazil's politics as a model for anything...

[BillM]

Had a look at methane conversion kit for jeep XJ I had.Tanks and all,came to
about $2k.Would of done install myself. Inherited something else,gave XJ to nephew.
Something in infancy here are landfills that draw off methane gas(vapor) and sell.
Easy to liquify and run.

[kenafein]

How does Brazil create their ethanol, and is it cheaper to produce than gas?

[shooz]

I believe methane to be the answer to many of our current fuel problems.
Let's face facts.
Our society runs mainly on internal combustion
The installed base of these engines is immense.
Most that run on liquid fuel could be converted to running gas of one form or another.

[JohnInIndy]

So figure $200 per car with labor.
How much more do they charge for them?

It wouldn't take too much more to make them tri-flex either.

When the private sector refuses to truly innovate, who will?

Ask Brazil.

All while we subsidize their oil exploration and help them create jobs.



In Brazil. We can't create any here though.

[shooz]

How does Brazil create their ethanol, and is it cheaper to produce than gas?

Brazil uses sugar cane.
They have lots of it.
It's high in sugar and distills readily.

[kenafein]

It looks like there are too many interesting (and efficient) processes in development to list, but in the short term, beets are an even better source for creating ethanol than sugar cane. I will gladly give up my share of beets for the betterment of society; besides sugar cane juice is too delicious to waste on fuel.

[JohnInIndy]

Wonder how bad the ramifications are in growing it though. Look at what sugar cane production has done to the Everglades.

The sugar industry
In addition to directly destroying the Everglades through drainage and interference with Everglades hydrology, the government also harms the Everglades through its trade policy.
The U.S. sugar industry is one of the most heavily subsidized sectors of the U.S. economy. Sugarcane growers are protected from international competition by quotas and aided domestically by nonrecourse loans. In 1994, it was estimated that the top 10 sugar producers in Florida received approximately $174 million in federal benefits.
Most people would be surprised to learn that, south of Orlando, a large portion of the country’s sugar is grown below Lake Okeechobee. The sugar industry is largely responsible for the deterioration of the Everglades, and, in all likelihood, would be only a fraction of its current size if the government did not protect it.

And corn is worse than sugar cane.

[shooz]

Sugar beet farmers are our friends.
They obviously need a more powerful lobby.
Is Monsanto working on it yet?
Or did they put all their money in corn?

[boriscleto]

Sugar beet farmers are our friends.
They obviously need a more powerful lobby.
Is Monsanto working on it yet?
Or did they put all their money in corn?

Monsanto ~ Roundup Ready Sugarbeets

Monsanto ~ Monsanto to Appeal District Court Ruling on Roundup Ready® Sugar Beets 2012 Seed Production

Monsanto | U.S. OKs planting of Monsanto's modified sugar beets despite court ban - Los Angeles Times

Appeals Court Vetoes Monsanto Sugar Beets - Production

GM sugar beets have had a major effect on migrant workers the last few years. The beets are harvested mechanically now but weeding still had to be done by hand. With the RR beets there was no need for migrant workers anymore.

On a side note, NY tried to get farmers into sugar beet production in the early 70's. It failed largely because of the introduction of HFCS and the Ford administration gutting the subsidies. SUNY ESF has been pushing cellulosic ethanol using shrub willows for years. One of the advantages of shrub willows is that they can grow on marginal land that isn't useful for agriculture.

Ethanol Production From Willow Trees | eHow.com

Willowpedia : FAQ