[quote]vroom wrote:
There is a monopoly of sorts in place right now. It’s the same as some utility company trying to run 240v wires in North America. There’s no market for it. However, you’d be foolish to say there is no market for electricity.[/quote]
-
Check your oven and dryer outlets.
-
Hybrid cars are available. Diesel cars are available. Ethanol mix is available at some pumps.
The only “barrier to entry” currently in place is that gas is cheap. Most of what you pay at the pump is taxes; gas itself is about the cheapest liquid on the market. It costs less than milk, less than bottled water, less than soft drinks.
Your “oil monopoly” doesn’t control the entire car industry. If electric cars became practical and cheaper than gas, any car manufacturer could build them and sell them. They could install “recharging” stations on their franchises lots if the oil companies didn’t want to have them at their gas stations. They could sell concessions to convenience stores, etc. Costco sells gas cheaper than everyone else around here; I’m sure they’d be along if there was demand and possibility of profit.
The problem with government backing is that if the idea turns out to be a dud, or less viable than a new technology that comes around in 5 or 10 years, then all the grants and subsidies already in place are very difficult to get rid of, as it always looks bad when a govt. backs out of a deal.
As much as you might think that the oil industry wants to prevent any alternative fuel from being made available on the market, the car industry has something to say about it. It takes only one maker to make a successful alternative car (something akin to “the electric Beetle” that sells millions for examples) for other makers to be forced to enter the market.
Having the government back ethanol by mandating that it be offered at every station or by giving research grants to it pretty much guarantees that research into other alternatives will dwindle. Hopefully, even if Canada was to do that, other countries might not be so myopic and we might eventually profit from their foresight.
And again, I do get your point. I’ve been getting it since the first time. I still think you’re wrong.
And you other points about “fueling the hostilities in the Middle East” and “environmental concerns” are even crappier. Any slack in demand from the West will simply be gobbled up by China and other poorer countries who can’t buy all the oil they want because they currently can’t afford it. The environmental impact would also be made worse, as most of those countries have much less stringent emission controls in place.
Your arguments might get you a good grade on a high school paper; but for real life, they don’t hold up.