hironegro wrote:I think he's apart of generation that uses macro-economic principles to guide his world-view. You know the type. They believe politics started in 1947 and believe people make decision/trade-offs based on personal interest not because of religion, ethnicity, and or culture.
Aaron wrote:That's really gotta hurt.
It's a sea-change between older & younger generations, and how we view information.
People are paying Yergin for his terrible advice, while this websites correct advice is free.
A certain kind of symmetry there.
mos6507 wrote:hironegro wrote:I think he's apart of generation that uses macro-economic principles to guide his world-view. You know the type. They believe politics started in 1947 and believe people make decision/trade-offs based on personal interest not because of religion, ethnicity, and or culture.
Is this another veiled anti-baby-boomer rant?
mos6507 wrote:hironegro wrote:I think he's apart of generation that uses macro-economic principles to guide his world-view. You know the type. They believe politics started in 1947 and believe people make decision/trade-offs based on personal interest not because of religion, ethnicity, and or culture.
Is this another veiled anti-baby-boomer rant?
AUGUST 30, 2009, 7:21 P.M. ET.Why Oil Still Has a Future
Demand in the developing world trumps new technology.
By DANIEL YERGIN
Why this debate about the single most important source of energy—and a very convenient one—that provides 40% of the world's total energy? There are the traditional concerns—energy security, diversification, political risk, and the potential for conflict among nations over resources. The huge shifts in global income flows raise anxieties about the possible impact on the global balance of power. Some worry that physical supply will run out, although examination of the world's resource base—including a new analysis of over 800 oil fields—shows ample physical resources below ground. The politics above ground is a separate question.
But two new factors are now fueling the debate. One is the way in which oil has taken on a second identity. It is no longer only a physical commodity. It has also become a financial asset, along with stocks, bonds, currencies and the rest of the world's financial portfolio. The resulting price volatility—from less than $40 in 2004, to as high as $147.27 in July 2008, back down to $32.40 in December 2008, and now back over $70—has enormous consequences, and not only at the gas station and in terms of public anger. It makes it much more difficult to plan future energy investments, whether in oil and gas or in renewable and alternative fuels. And it can have enormous economic impact; Detroit was sent reeling by what happened at the gas pump in 2007 and 2008 even before the credit crisis. Such volatility can fuel future recessions and inflation.
What will those alternatives be? Batteries and plug-ins and other electric cars—today's favorite? Advanced biofuels? Natural-gas vehicles? The evolving smart grid, which can integrate plug-ins with greener electric generation? Or advances in the internal combustion engine, increasing fuel efficiency two or three times over?
In truth, we don't know, and we won't know for some time. For now, however, it is clear that the much higher levels of support for innovation—and large government incentives and subsidies—will inevitably drive technological change.
For oil, the focus is on transportation. After all, only 2% of America's electricity is generated by oil. Until recently, it appeared that the race between the electric car and the gasoline-powered car had been decided a century ago, with a decisive win by the gasoline-powered car on the basis of cost and performance. But the race is clearly on again.
Yet, whatever the breakthroughs, the actual impact on fuel use for the next 20 years will be incremental due to the time it takes to get large-scale mass production up and running and the massive scale of the global auto industry. My firm, IHS CERA, projects that with aggressive sales volumes and no major bumps in the road (unusual for new technologies), plug-in hybrids and pure electric vehicles could constitute 25% of new car sales by 2030. But because of the slow turn-over of the overall fleet, gasoline consumption would be reduced only modestly below what it would otherwise be. Thereafter, of course, the impact could grow, perhaps very substantially.
But, in the U.S., at least for the next two decades, greater efficiency in the internal combustion engine, advanced diesels, and regular hybrids, combined with second-generation biofuels and new lighter materials, would have a bigger impact sooner. There is, however, a global twist. If small, low-cost electric vehicles really catch on in the auto growth markets in Asia, that would certainly lower the global growth curve for future oil demand.
As to the next 150 years of petroleum, we can hardly even begin to guess. For the next 20 years at least, the unfolding economic saga in emerging markets will continue to make oil a global growth business.
DantesPeak wrote:For the next 20 years at least, the unfolding economic saga in emerging markets will continue to make oil a global growth business.
Return to Open Topic Discussion
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 32 guests