Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

$200 Oil or Bust?

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby marmico » Thu 31 Aug 2017, 19:41:13

Seba from August 2010 stated that there will be "mass migration" from ICE to EV vehicles between 2016-2020.

https://tonyseba.com/why-oil-will-be-obsolete-by-2030/

2016 world new EV sales were <1% of light vehicle sales and are estimated at 1.2% in 2017. That is a trickle not mass migration.

Image

http://electriccarsreport.com/2017/02/g ... ales-2016/
marmico
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 626
Joined: Mon 28 Jul 2014, 13:46:35

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby Cliffhanger1983 » Thu 31 Aug 2017, 20:23:01

Repetitive post deleted.

Under the COC all members agree to follow when posting on this website,

3.0 The following post content is subject to edit/deletion with or without notification to the poster by the Staff member moderating that post:


3.1.6 Repetitive messages: This includes cross-posting, flooding, and spamming
Dennis Meadows "There's Nothing We Can Do"
http://churchandstate.org.uk/2013/04/dennis-meadows-there-is-nothing-that-we-can-do/
Cliffhanger1983
permanently banned
 
Posts: 141
Joined: Mon 18 Nov 2013, 15:25:53

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby asg70 » Thu 31 Aug 2017, 22:04:05

marmico wrote:Seba from August 2010 stated that there will be "mass migration" from ICE to EV vehicles between 2016-2020.


It's still 2017, not even half-way through his timeline and you're already declaring his prediction a failure?

marmico wrote: 2016 world new EV sales were <1% of light vehicle sales and are estimated at 1.2% in 2017. That is a trickle not mass migration.


That statistic by itself means nothing. What matters is the WHY. Why is it so low?

It's because the "killer app" has not arrived.

People will not just buy EVs because they are out there. They have to hit a magic threshold of features and price-point. It hasn't happened yet. We're going through the transitional stage still in the low-end market. You could say the Bolt still hasn't hit that threshold because it's ultimately a spam-can with a slow-charge rate and no fast-charge network. There are a LOT of planets that need to align first before the S curve goes up. But it would be foolish to assume that just because those planets haven't aligned that they never will. What happens when the Model 3 is in mass production? Even if it fails, it could be because it's not a hatch-back and has no dashboard. Consumers will NOT move en masse to EVs just for the novelty-factor of EVs. It must tick every box.

I lived through a period in the 70s and early 80s when there were many different approaches to the personal computer (then known more as "home" computers). During that time you had to be a geek to use them. They weren't that user-friendly and even after the Mac came out they were extremely expensive. The real threshold for PCs came in the late 90s with eMachines, the "Sub $1,000 PC". People forget about eMachines but only the one-two punch of that class of cheap PC in conjunction with the internet taking off made PCs break through the geek barrier into the masses. That was a good 20 or so year run from the mid 70s to the mid 90s when it would have been fair to assume that computers would always be limited to the propeller-hat contingent at the individual level---or as a corporate purchase to replace mainframes in the workplace. To the average person they didn't offer enough value for the money when they were still averaging $2,000 and above.

That's just one case-study of the sort that Tony Seba explains in the video. This sort of market analysis requires that you go much deeper than simply looking back to last quarter's sales figures.
Hubbert's curve, meet S-curve: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
asg70
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1266
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby kublikhan » Fri 01 Sep 2017, 08:46:48

asg70 wrote:I lived through a period in the 70s and early 80s when there were many different approaches to the personal computer (then known more as "home" computers). During that time you had to be a geek to use them. They weren't that user-friendly and even after the Mac came out they were extremely expensive. The real threshold for PCs came in the late 90s with eMachines, the "Sub $1,000 PC". People forget about eMachines but only the one-two punch of that class of cheap PC in conjunction with the internet taking off made PCs break through the geek barrier into the masses. That was a good 20 or so year run from the mid 70s to the mid 90s when it would have been fair to assume that computers would always be limited to the propeller-hat contingent at the individual level---or as a corporate purchase to replace mainframes in the workplace. To the average person they didn't offer enough value for the money when they were still averaging $2,000 and above.
Did you forget about the commodore 64? The computer that to this day still holds the record for the best selling personal computer of all time? It was a sub $1000 PC for the masses that blew away the competition. In fact I think the C64 would have made a good case study for Seba on how Commodore brought everything together to be a disruptive force in the market: vertical integration to lower costs, advanced sound and graphics, triple the memory at half the cost, more software titles than anyone else, functioned equally well as a computer or game console, etc. Not to mention the wave of bankruptcies that followed those who had the misfortune of competing against the C64.
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4038
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Illinois

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby asg70 » Fri 01 Sep 2017, 11:25:00

kublikhan wrote:Did you forget about the commodore 64?


There were some important milestones in the early days, but adoption was still limited to Generation X, and even within there, the geek wing. Think of Wargames where the parents were mystified by what their kids were doing with those newfangled gadgets in their bedrooms. And you know how Ally Sheedy was mystified by what David was doing? That's how it was. Only a certain segment of Generation X were into computers, and everyone else were either ridiculing them or wondering what all the fuss was about. Since I was part of that segment, my perspective of things seeming to explode is exaggerated.

Wargames was the era of 300 baud modems and private networks. People rushed to computers as a means to an end to access the internet which brought in all age groups. Computers became like telephones up until the point where telephones themselves became computers. There is no longer the sense that you have to be tech-savvy to use technology. Computers and internet access is ubiquitous. We carry it around wherever we go and wonder how we ever got by without it.

My elderly parents now use computers, but they didn't "get" it back when I was a teenager, that's for sure.

If you want to draw parallels, I guess fast-charge networks are like the internet. They are a support network that eliminates range-anxiety and unlocks greater utility. But the internet is itself an enabler for EVs, via downloading maps and over-the-air updates. When people point to the failure of things like the EV1, the world is so much different now, everything from the batteries on up. A lot of this sort of thing is covered in Seba's video. An EV is not just batteries and an electric motor anymore. It is a combination of technologies which have all been progressing in parallel. When these things get combined together it has a multiplier-effect, just as it did with the iPhone/iPad.
Hubbert's curve, meet S-curve: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
asg70
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1266
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby kublikhan » Fri 01 Sep 2017, 12:23:11

In Seba terms, the S curve for home computers started taking off earlier than you are making it out to be. The market started around 1977. By 1981 sales had grown to around 1.5 million. By 1988 sales had increased to 15 million units. By 1998 sales had grown to the 100 million mark. Geeks were the early adopters. But then computers destroyed the game console market in 1983 and took over that market segment as well(at least for awhile). Commodore & others started selling it's machines at a price that was competitive with game consoles. Parents were asking themselves: "Why spend $200-$300 on a game console when I can buy a personal computer for the same price that can play games and do so much more?"
The oil barrel is half-full.
User avatar
kublikhan
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4038
Joined: Tue 06 Nov 2007, 03:00:00
Location: Illinois

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby asg70 » Fri 01 Sep 2017, 13:33:48

kublikhan wrote:Parents were asking themselves: "Why spend $200-$300 on a game console when I can buy a personal computer for the same price that can play games and do so much more?"


But that's just it. They weren't the ones using them. They were buying them for their kids. Sure, there were lots of kids, enough to drive impressive sales figures, but it was still dominated by that one demographic.

Another factor is the shift from 8- to 16/32-bit computing. That shift incurred a large price-premium. By the early 80s, 8-bit CPUs and enough ram for 64K had been fully commoditized, but Motorola 68K and Intel x86 chips were still new. They also required more and more storage. Early hard drives were very expensive. Consequently, 8-bit computers that ran on carts and floppies (like the C=64) hung on in the mid 80s while the IBM PC started to colonize corporate America. By and large nerds did NOT go for the early PCs because they were simultaneously more expensive and had crappy graphics and sound. Early macs were grayscale and really oriented around desktop publishing. Macs and Amigas were really beyond the reach of most computer nerds in price. The Atari ST was an also-ran.

When we get to eMachines, we have largely done away with ISA (remember interrupts?) in favor of plug-n-play and we have Windows 95/98 which was on par with MacOS and 24-bit graphics cards. The time was right for the PC to trickle down into the mainstream. You also had the translucent iMacs around that time that were very popular because they were appliance-like.

If you were to make an analogy to EVs, think of the shift from lead to nickel and from nickel to lithium. Things take a dip during these transitions.

So the simple S-curve is an oversimplification in some cases.

With EVs you also have a format war of sorts (similar to VHS vs. Beta) with charging networks that causes market-confusion. Commoditization really cries out for standardization and we don't have it yet. Also, each car company is inventing its own autonomy suite. They're all reinventing the wheel. Think of the early days of PC graphics cards. Today there are only two R&D firms left, nVidia and ATI. If there's only a certain maximum amount of R&D to spend, dividing that thinly across many companies seems wasteful. It's OK during the formative stages as it fosters experimentation, but it has to eventually shake itself out. You see this in so many areas. eCommerce before Amazon rose to the top or social networks with MySpace and then Facebook or search with Yahoo and then Google.

When there isn't enough competition, companies make mistakes and push out products that don't really serve the market well enough. This yields mixed signals about that class of good if they don't buy into it. For instance, the shitty appearance of the Leaf. Nissan can have all of the motivation in the world to sell EVs but if they can't design their way out of a paper bag then analysts who look at their sales figures may just say "nobody wants EVs". No. Nobody wants Nissan's EVs. The whole idea of a capitalist system is to foster healthy competition. Build a better mousetrap and you may see what seemed to be a failed market explode overnight. Smart businesspeople move into a market when conventional wisdom falsely-assumes there's no potential because they realize it it's been just poorly served by the incumbents.

Anyway, I am not expecting doomers here to be well versed in entreneurialism. It's all about spinning collapse scenarios while the world just ignores them and goes its own way.
Hubbert's curve, meet S-curve: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
asg70
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1266
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby GHung » Fri 01 Sep 2017, 13:44:21

Anyway, I am not expecting doomers here to be well versed in entreneurialism. It's all about spinning collapse scenarios while the world just ignores them and goes its own way.


It doesn't take a doomer or a nerd to understand diminishing returns. Humans haven't evolved like their technology has. Can't fix stupid with a faster computer.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1866
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby AdamB » Fri 01 Sep 2017, 18:48:28

marmico wrote:Seba from August 2010 stated that there will be "mass migration" from ICE to EV vehicles between 2016-2020.

https://tonyseba.com/why-oil-will-be-obsolete-by-2030/


Well, my wife is part of that "mass" then I guess. I wonder if he predicted that peak oil would result in low prices and glut though? Certainly if prices had stayed high, things would be different. Sort of the peak oil angle where hydraulic fracturing "delayed" the onset, in this case, peak oil caused low prices, which "delayed" the onslaught of EVs?

marmico wrote: 2016 world new EV sales were <1% of light vehicle sales and are estimated at 1.2% in 2017. That is a trickle not mass migration.


Seba covers that pretty well with the market saturation curve. This isn't about a linear effect. The difference between what Seba is arguing and the peakers? He appears to base his conclusions on evidence and empirical changes that have happened in history. Peakers just want the world to end. Soon. And peak oil was convenient, for a time, as a trigger for that.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3326
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby AdamB » Fri 01 Sep 2017, 18:56:53

Cliffhanger1983 wrote:
The Oil Age may come to an end for a shortage of oil -Saudi Oil Minister Sheikh Yamani


Wow. You don't know ANYTHING about peak oil, do you? Not even simple quotes.

http://www.economist.com/node/2155717

Perhaps a frontal lobotomy, and starting over on your "learning" on this topic?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3326
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby AdamB » Fri 01 Sep 2017, 19:09:53

GHung wrote:
Anyway, I am not expecting doomers here to be well versed in entreneurialism. It's all about spinning collapse scenarios while the world just ignores them and goes its own way.


It doesn't take a doomer or a nerd to understand diminishing returns.


True. But it does take a doomer to ONLY see them. Seba sees both, diminishing returns in the form of peak oil circa 2020 or so, AND he sees what people like my wife are experiencing. Three months of driving around, commuting to work, for groceries, eating out, AND NO GASOLINE USED. Now that is diminishing returns on a scale doomers can't understand. But my wife can.

GHung wrote: Humans haven't evolved like their technology has. Can't fix stupid with a faster computer.


But you can replace cars running on liquid fuels with those that don't.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3326
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby asg70 » Fri 01 Sep 2017, 22:50:45

GHung wrote:Can't fix stupid with a faster computer.


Sure you can, by engineering our replacement with robots.

Image
Hubbert's curve, meet S-curve: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
asg70
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1266
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Sat 02 Sep 2017, 12:09:12

marmico wrote:Seba from August 2010 stated that there will be "mass migration" from ICE to EV vehicles between 2016-2020.

https://tonyseba.com/why-oil-will-be-obsolete-by-2030/

1). I don't see where he did this. His general meme has been that the mass migration process would BEGIN to take off in the 2016 to 2020 timeframe. Which as ASG pointed out, we're less than halfway through. The forecast date where he says EV's will dominate is 2030 (which assumes cheap plentiful fully autonomous cars in 2021, which I think is very aggressive -- so I think he's correct on the trend, but early on the 2030 date).

This is via his recent forecast, given here in this June, 2017 Youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0

2). Why can't a 2010 forecast be off by a bit? The fast crash doom pundits on this site have been constantly wrong and played the reset game for over a decade, and yet they keep claiming they'll be right, real soon now. :roll:
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 4152
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: $200 Oil or Bust?

Unread postby asg70 » Sat 02 Sep 2017, 12:32:46

Outcast_Searcher wrote:2). Why can't a 2010 forecast be off by a bit? The fast crash doom pundits on this site have been constantly wrong and played the reset game for over a decade, and yet they keep claiming they'll be right, real soon now. :roll:


Yep. Doomers can give it but they can't take it.
Hubbert's curve, meet S-curve: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
asg70
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1266
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Previous

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests