On 22 April the Economist reviewed "The Oil Industry". This review, like many current political and PR pronouncements, was conspicuously deficient in its failure to mention the potential for the direct use of natural gas as a transport fuel.  It is useful for us to think about why this mindset is so prevalent.

Firstly there are more natural gas reserves in the ground than oil reserves. Natural gas is also increasingly becoming available as a renewable fuel, both from waste and agricultural sources. 

Secondly, there are five million natural gas vehicles (NGVs) on the road around the world and this number is growing by about 20% per year. These are technically and commercially proven even though in many cases the country programs do rely on favourable government policies. These policies are justified however, given the economic, environmental and health benefits that natural gas vehicles deliver. Because of these policies, vehicle owners typically save 50% or more on their fuel costs, which helps to realise these community benefits.

Thirdly, the emissions from NGVs are less than the truly comparable conventionally fuelled vehicle.  Ask the citizens of Delhi how much their local air quality has improved since diesel buses were all switched to natural gas.

Fourthly, NGVs inherently have lower carbon dioxide emissions because of the chemical composition of natural gas. 

Fifthly, in most countries, natural gas is widely distributed through underground pipe networks making it logistically easy and safe to optimally site refuelling stations. Even without underground distribution, it is still possible to set up refuelling infrastructure using mother/daughter compressed natural gas (CNG) or liquefied natural gas (LNG) infrastructure. The underground netword even allows car owners to refuel at home using recently perfected technology.
 
Why then is natural gas ignored as an alternative transport fuel?  Why are politicians and journalists so fixated on oil and liquid fuels that they are unwilling or unable to comprehend a technology which has the above advantages?  Or have the oil companies and the fuel technologists mesmerised consumers on the absolute necessity of having a liquid fuel of inferior quality to run vehicles, rather than natural gas?
 
The solution to the finite oil issue is not likely to be singular.  It is an extraordinarily difficult issue.  NGVs are one part of the solution, a comparatively easy one at that, and they have the potential to be a large part of the solution.  How about 50 million NGVs by 2020?