The Flex Fuel Solution

TAP talks to energy security advocate Gal Luft about the economics of alternative fuels and why natural gas isn't the solution to our energy problems.

Rachel Stern | July 31, 2008


Drive smaller cars. Drill for more oil. Many such solutions have been proposed to wean the United States off of our dependence on foreign oil, but -- at least according to Dr. Gal Luft, the executive director of The Institute for the Analysis of Global Security -- flex-fuel vehicles are the only plan of action that will yield lasting results. According to Luft, the U.S. government needs to mandate the manufacture of cars that will run on not only a combination of gas and ethanol but also other alternative fuels such as methanol and butanol.
Luft has gained widespread recognition for his advocacy. Newsweek deemed him a "tireless and independent advocate of energy security," and Esquire included him in its 2007 list of "America's Best and Brightest." Last week, Luft launched Citizens for Energy Freedom, a coalition to introduce competition to the fuel market, making the widespread use of alternative fuels more than a pipe dream.

Rachel Stern: You have been a fervent supporter of "flex-fuel vehicles" as a way to reduce foreign-oil dependence and bolster national security. Can you explain just what these vehicles are and how far-reaching of an effect they may have?

Gal Luft: Flex fuel allows drivers to use any combination of gasoline and alcohol. Now, alcohol fuel is ethanol, methanol, butanol, and many other various alcohols out there. All of these alcohols can be met at various rations based on your discretion to power the car without any compromise. The reason why we think that this is a very important part of the solution to our oil dependency is because today, petroleum is the only source of energy in the transportation sector. So it's basically a monopoly. We're trying to use fuel choice to break the monopoly by introducing competition.

RS: You say that it costs an extra $100 per vehicle to convert it to flex fuel. How would this eventually affect the auto industry economically?

GL: If you look at the cars that GM and Ford are making in Brazil, for example, almost all the cars are flex-fuel. American automakers have already said that they'd be willing to make 50 percent of vehicles flex-fuel by 2012. Which is good. We want to make this into a law. We want this to be codified. I think that no industry likes to be told what to do, but considering that the cost is pretty low, and considering that the technology is mature, I think that this is something they can live with.

RS: Considering that our economy is not doing so well right now, do you think there will be any reluctance on the part of the government to mandate this extra fee?

GL: Yeah, but it's only $100. Think about it this way: Let's say the car is $100 more expensive, which is not significant. Methanol today sells for about $2 dollars a gallon. So right there, you're saving almost 50 percent on your fuel expenses. You're going to be able to recoup this charge pretty quickly. It's not like a hybrid car that costs you an extra three or four thousand dollars. Here, we're talking about basically a tweak. Not anything major. The important thing is once you have the flex-fuel mandate, you basically incentivize the entire supply chain, because within three years there will be 50 million new cars on the road that are flex-fuel cars. At that point, it makes sense for gas station owners to retrofit their pumps. And then the supply chain will begin to follow. So it's sort of like you gotta deliver the chicken in order for it to lay an egg. Otherwise, you're going to be waiting for the egg forever.

http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_flex_fuel_solution

I love it

Using Corn or other food stocks for fuel only causes problem for the food industry and we already have enough starvation in the world.