Key issues and barriers that must be overcome for the successful introduction of alternative-fuel vehicles are summarized. A host of market and institutional barriers faced by vehicle purchasers, vehicle manufacturers, fuel suppliers, and the vehicle service industry are broadly described. Although specific estimates of the costs of overcoming these barriers are highly uncertain, an initial estimate of the general magnitude of these transition costs is presented. This is done by analyzing the transition to a specific alternative-fuel vehicle market penetration for the year 2010. Transition costs are shown to be substantial.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Assessment of Costs and Benefits of Flexible and Alternative Fuel Use in the U.S. Transportation Sector. Technical Report 14: Market Potential and Impacts of Alternative Fuel Use in Light Duty Vehicles: A 2000/2010 Analysis.U.S. Department of Energy, Jan. 1996.
2.
KuraniK.S., TurrentineT., and SperlingD.Electric Vehicle Owners: Tests of Assumptions and Lessons on Future Behavior from 100 Electric Vehicle Owners in California. Presented at the 73rd Annual Meeting of the TRB, Washington, D.C., 1994.
Assessment of Costs and Benefits of Alternative Fuel Use in the U.S. Transportation Sector, Technical Report 4: Vehicle and Fuel Distribution Requirements. Report DOE/PE-0095P. U.S. Department of Energy, 1990.
5.
GusheeD.E., and LazzariS.Disparate Impacts of Federal and State Highway Taxes on Alternative Motor Fuels. Report for Congress 93-330 E. Congressional Research Service, Washington, D.C., 1993.
6.
CALFUELS Plan. Draft Report 500-94-002. California Energy Commission, June 1994.
7.
Tulsa World. As reported in Alternative Energy Network Online Today, Environmental Information Networks, Inc., July 15, 1994.
8.
CannonJ.S.Paving the Way to Natural Gas Vehicles.Inform, Inc., New York, 1993.
9.
BuysR.A Fire Marshal's Experience with Alternative Fuels. Presented at International Alternative Fuels and Clean Cities Conference, Milwaukee, Wis., June 1994.
10.
Investigation Regarding Federal Policy Actions for Encouraging Use of CNG as a Motor Vehicle Fuel.R.F. Webb, Inc., Washington, D.C., 1992.
11.
Annual Energy Outlook 1994. Report DOE/EIA-0383(94). Energy Information Administration, Washington, D.C., 1994.
12.
GreeneD., and RathiA.Alternative Motor Fuel Use Model: Model Theory and Design and User's Guide. Report ORNL/TM-11448. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tenn., 1990.
13.
LeibyP.N.A Methodology for Assessing the Market Benefits of Alternative Motor Fuels. Report ORNL-6771. Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tenn., 1993.
14.
Memorandum to DOE on Alternative Fuel Retail Markups.Energy and Environmental Analysis, Inc., Arlington, Va., March 1994.
15.
Light-Duty Vehicle Queuing Analysis for Alternative Fuel/Gasoline and Conventional Gasoline Refueling Stations.EA-Engineering Science and Technology, Silver Spring, Md., 1993.
