Quote from southamerica:
.
Fearless9: Brazil has the joy or deciding to export oil and/or ethanol and can change this ratio at anytime. There is a difference between these two fuels and that difference being that oil can remain underground for the next generation but a harvest of ethanol with held is a harvest lost.
*******
SouthAmerica: In the summary version I have not posted the part of my article that I mentioned ethanol. I am going to post below the Ethanol portion of the article.
You said: âI do not disagree with your concept but it seems to me that in order to mop-up the balance of potential earnings gov. is required to absorb the entire responsibility and we know from history that very very few govs. can achieve this with any degree of efficiency.â
Again the model that I am using is Saudi Arabia and Aramco.
Obrigado SA
Nothing there that I disagree with and I did notice your reference to taxation ... a very powerful and so simple tool.
I do think that the Saudi/Aramco model needs to be viewed very carefully simply because the social background to the governance of Saudi is very very different to that of Brazil and it can/will create a major distortion in the way in which Brazil might manage Petrobras should it chose this route.
That is why the idea of control via retention at pump and border should not be caste aside lightly imo.
Brazil has such diverse opportunities available to it whilst Saudi is oil, dates and sand essentially. I know that they have expressed a desire to head for hi-tech pastures but firstly they will need to address their internal social restrictions all the time keeping watch on the outcome of US struggle to give away it's employment base to the east.
How much hi tech can the next generation absorb?
The issue of growing organic fuel at the expense of food production is an interesting one.
What are your thoughts on an OPEC for major food exporting countries of which there are currently very few.
regards
f9