Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby asg70 » Mon 30 Apr 2018, 10:31:06

Here is some supporting information to the above post:

China's command-and-control economy means it is far more agile at shifting gears than the rest of the world, as you can see here.

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/2018 ... pollution/

EVs fate does not rest solely on Tesla's shoulders:

The government’s war on air pollution fits neatly with another goal: domination of the global electric-vehicle industry. Elon Musk’s Tesla Inc. might be the best-known name, but China has been the global leader in EV sales since 2015, and is aiming for 7 million annual sales by 2025.


Wouldn't you say 7 million EVs a year might start to displace oil? And the oil supply equation doesn't care if these cars are POSs that don't meet crash-test standards and only have compliance-car ranges. As long as people use them for their daily drive-cycle instead of gas cars, it's a win.

And below is where the coal-powered-EV or the "grid can't handle it" memes goes to die:

The trend towards clean energy is poised to keep gathering steam worldwide. BNEF projects global investment in new power generation capacity will exceed $10 trillion between 2017 and 2040. Of this, about 72 percent is projected to go toward renewable energy, roughly evenly split between wind and solar.
[space to store bad short-term prediction currently vacant]
asg70
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1840
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Mon 30 Apr 2018, 10:38:17

asg70 wrote:
That's my sense of things, at least. I know a small number of peakers are just hoping and praying for depletion to come roaring back to life suddenly, the whole shark-fin scenario. I don't think that's likely.

I don't pray for anything and I don't hope for a sharp "shark fin " decline in oil supplies once the final peak of production is reached but as a practical matter I think the decline will be much steeper and faster then the up side of the curve has been. Reason being that we found oil supplies much faster then the population and it's demand for oil was rising. Countries like KSA did not produce oil as fast as they could saving a lot of it "For future generations" .
But now the population in those countries is pushing for maximum production effort to pay the bills and consuming nations also with large populations such as China and India will happily buy any oil brought to market at today's prices. Willing buyer meets willing seller.
Just how long the supplies in the Middle East and Russia can meet this demand is the big unknown but when we reach the point where they can no longer do so the decline in world oil supply probably will be faster then the five to ten percent decline rate of mature oil fields. I don't think it will be as high as twenty percent a year but fifteen seems likely.
Then the question becomes can we adapt to this new reality as fast as it is thrust upon us? I think we can as far as food on the table is concerned and a comfortable house for the table to be in as well but flying off to an island for vacation will be a thing only for the very richest among us.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 8890
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Mon 30 Apr 2018, 15:35:12

Yonnipun wrote:
Armageddon wrote:I just dont see Joe Six Pack and soccer mom Mary ever converting to EV’s. I think the masses using EV’s is a pipe dream. We will be using oil until the HUGE oil shock hits, then we’ll experience an economic crash of epic proportion.


This. I see peak oil as a bottle of beer. The last gulp might be the biggest and after that it is over. Until then everything is fine and dandy.

Because you have no knowledge of how economics works. Epic fail, but thanks for playing. Hint: look at the past 45 years and notice how the global economy didn't collapse when the price of oil skyrocketed. Hint 2: recession isn't collapse.

Also, increasingly, green energy is offering a viable alternative. If things turn down, with oil prices sharply higher, it's delusional to think people won't flock to EV's as fast as makers will build them at middle class prices.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 5585
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby Armageddon » Mon 30 Apr 2018, 16:46:08

Outcast_Searcher wrote:
Yonnipun wrote:
Armageddon wrote:I just dont see Joe Six Pack and soccer mom Mary ever converting to EV’s. I think the masses using EV’s is a pipe dream. We will be using oil until the HUGE oil shock hits, then we’ll experience an economic crash of epic proportion.


This. I see peak oil as a bottle of beer. The last gulp might be the biggest and after that it is over. Until then everything is fine and dandy.

Because you have no knowledge of how economics works. Epic fail, but thanks for playing. Hint: look at the past 45 years and notice how the global economy didn't collapse when the price of oil skyrocketed. Hint 2: recession isn't collapse.

Also, increasingly, green energy is offering a viable alternative. If things turn down, with oil prices sharply higher, it's delusional to think people won't flock to EV's as fast as makers will build them at middle class prices.




Have we ever witnessed supply not meeting demand? I’ll hold judgement until we see that for a sustained time
User avatar
Armageddon
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: St.Louis, Mo

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby Yonnipun » Mon 30 Apr 2018, 17:30:10

Because you have no knowledge of how economics works. Epic fail, but thanks for playing. Hint: look at the past 45 years and notice how the global economy didn't collapse when the price of oil skyrocketed. Hint 2: recession isn't collapse.


I do not care about economics. It is a pseudoscience that will go down the toilet when the oil is gone. I always amaze how stupidly inefficient the capitalism is - 5 supermarkets in the circle for the customer to save a penny from the carton of eggs. 4 of them go bankruptcy eventually and the buildings will be demolished and a new cycle starts again. That mindlessness is apparently good for the economy.
Yonnipun
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat 07 Apr 2018, 03:29:19

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Mon 30 Apr 2018, 18:29:44

Yonnipun wrote:
Because you have no knowledge of how economics works. Epic fail, but thanks for playing. Hint: look at the past 45 years and notice how the global economy didn't collapse when the price of oil skyrocketed. Hint 2: recession isn't collapse.


I do not care about economics. It is a pseudoscience that will go down the toilet when the oil is gone. I always amaze how stupidly inefficient the capitalism is - 5 supermarkets in the circle for the customer to save a penny from the carton of eggs. 4 of them go bankruptcy eventually and the buildings will be demolished and a new cycle starts again. That mindlessness is apparently good for the economy.

Try learning some grammar and to write a coherent sentence. Try forming some cogent arguments.

Then, maybe, you talking about "mindlessness" won't be quite so ironic.

Meanwhile, despite your lack of knowledge about it, economics is becoming a more firmly established science over time, whether you care about it or not. Behavioral economics, with lots of experimental data to back it up in recent decades is the prime example.

Science doesn't have to be "perfect" for it to be science. Your denial sounds a lot like the nonsense the AGW deniers throw around about climate science not being valid. Is that you with that snowball there, Senator Inhofe?

(There's this thing called "Google" which lets you look things up if you want to check on any of this.)
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 5585
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby StarvingLion » Mon 30 Apr 2018, 19:58:47

America cannot keep the power on, Ev's are a fantasy. No Industry, No EV's.

How many Energy Storage Facilities have the unstoppable Greatest Geniuses on Earth at Google built so far?

Answer: 0

What is the combined industrial relevance of the "enterprises" of Amazon, Musk Enterprises, and Facebook?

Answer: Nothing

What will the history books read of the Tesla Model 3?

Answer: Its the Steve Jobs NeXT Cube Computer of Electric Cars. Industrially irrelevant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT_Computer

Why does the following article say about America?

Answer: Bankrupt

Gizmodo: Trump May Seek Wartime Authority to Boost Coal and Nuclear Plants

https://gizmodo.com/report-trump-may-se ... 1825442838

The White House is considering two ways to boost the coal industry after being thwarted several times at end-runs around the regulatory process. The first is by directing the Department of Energy to invoke Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act, which would allow the Trump administration to order coal and nuclear generators to remain online with guaranteed profits despite their financial issues—something essentially akin to an emergency bailout. The second avenue being explored is a little more dramatic: According to Bloomberg, the president could invoke wartime powers under the Korean War-era Defense Production Act. This route is more akin to nationalization and would classify energy as a “strategic and critical material”.

Will "Cheap" Solar and Wind enable a transition to Ev's?

Answer: No, they will cause rapid industrial failure.

Forbes: If Solar And Wind Are So Cheap, Why Are They Making Electricity So Expensive?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshe ... bb031a1dc6

Over the last year, the media have published story after story after story about the declining price of solar panels and wind turbines.

People who read these stories are understandably left with the impression that the more solar and wind energy we produce, the lower electricity prices will become. And yet that’s not what’s happening. In fact, it’s the opposite. Between 2009 and 2017, the price of solar panels per watt declined by 75 percent while the price of wind turbines per watt declined by 50 percent. And yet — during the same period — the price of electricity in places that deployed significant quantities of renewables increased dramatically. What gives? If solar panels and wind turbines became so much cheaper, why did the price of electricity rise instead of decline?
There is no escaping The Oil Apocalypse and there will be no survivors.
StarvingLion
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby Armageddon » Mon 30 Apr 2018, 20:20:05

StarvingLion wrote:America cannot keep the power on, Ev's are a fantasy. No Industry, No EV's.

How many Energy Storage Facilities have the unstoppable Greatest Geniuses on Earth at Google built so far?

Answer: 0

What is the combined industrial relevance of the "enterprises" of Amazon, Musk Enterprises, and Facebook?

Answer: Nothing

What will the history books read of the Tesla Model 3?

Answer: Its the Steve Jobs NeXT Cube Computer of Electric Cars. Industrially irrelevant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NeXT_Computer

Why does the following article say about America?

Answer: Bankrupt

Gizmodo: Trump May Seek Wartime Authority to Boost Coal and Nuclear Plants

https://gizmodo.com/report-trump-may-se ... 1825442838

The White House is considering two ways to boost the coal industry after being thwarted several times at end-runs around the regulatory process. The first is by directing the Department of Energy to invoke Section 202(c) of the Federal Power Act, which would allow the Trump administration to order coal and nuclear generators to remain online with guaranteed profits despite their financial issues—something essentially akin to an emergency bailout. The second avenue being explored is a little more dramatic: According to Bloomberg, the president could invoke wartime powers under the Korean War-era Defense Production Act. This route is more akin to nationalization and would classify energy as a “strategic and critical material”.

Will "Cheap" Solar and Wind enable a transition to Ev's?

Answer: No, they will cause rapid industrial failure.

Forbes: If Solar And Wind Are So Cheap, Why Are They Making Electricity So Expensive?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshe ... bb031a1dc6

Over the last year, the media have published story after story after story about the declining price of solar panels and wind turbines.

People who read these stories are understandably left with the impression that the more solar and wind energy we produce, the lower electricity prices will become. And yet that’s not what’s happening. In fact, it’s the opposite. Between 2009 and 2017, the price of solar panels per watt declined by 75 percent while the price of wind turbines per watt declined by 50 percent. And yet — during the same period — the price of electricity in places that deployed significant quantities of renewables increased dramatically. What gives? If solar panels and wind turbines became so much cheaper, why did the price of electricity rise instead of decline?




Ouch
User avatar
Armageddon
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 4284
Joined: Wed 13 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: St.Louis, Mo

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Mon 30 Apr 2018, 22:15:37

This is foolishness. We are running out of cheap and easy to get petroleum fuels. We have at most a decade of gasoline under $5/g. Then another decade perhaps of gasoline under $15/g. Then effectively, petroleum fuels are unaffordable.

It is already the case that the cost per mile for EVs vs. ICE has tilted extremely towards the EVs. I told you that I spend $3.30/g on the corner, and $50 for a tank that takes me 200 miles. If I owned a $100K Tesla instead of my $0, already-paid-for 2003 Jeep, then I'd be plugging in for an overnight charge in my garage, and I'd be spending $6 to travel the same 200 miles. Fuel cost per mile is 8X greater with ICE, TODAY.

Tesla will make it or not, based upon Musk's ability to actually make and sell a longer range EV for less than $40K. So far, that's a screw-up. The only thing he has is a head start on the other auto makers. They have the production expertise, but not the EV designs.

I did the research on Tesla's offerings yesterday. When I move to Wisconsin, I could use a 4WD Tesla Model X SUV, configured for 6 or 7 seats. If I do the online Tesla new car configuration, the retail price is $181K for that, and a wait of several months.

Then I checked the used Tesla marketplace. A 2-year old Tesla Model X, fairly close to what I wanted, was on the market for an asking price of $69K, and had been in used inventory for 3+ months with no takers. This was a 2016 model, 7 seats, with 21,300 miles on the odometer, and a clean record with no collisions. The sticker price in 2016 was $131,000 - which means that it was depreciating at $30K per year.

I concluded that I can't afford the Tesla I want. The annual depreciation alone was more than I paid for my Jeep in 2003, a vehicle that is still perfectly serviceable 15 years after I purchased it.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5196
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby Yonnipun » Tue 01 May 2018, 02:10:03

Meanwhile, despite your lack of knowledge about it, economics is becoming a more firmly established science over time, whether you care about it or not. Behavioral economics, with lots of experimental data to back it up in recent decades is the prime example.


Behavioral economics summed up in three word - greed, fear and stupidity. People like you also get very arrogant after they get some gains from another bubble.
Yonnipun
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 67
Joined: Sat 07 Apr 2018, 03:29:19

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby asg70 » Tue 01 May 2018, 06:08:06

StarvingLion wrote:Forbes: If Solar And Wind Are So Cheap, Why Are They Making Electricity So Expensive?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/michaelshe ... bb031a1dc6


I read through his articles and they appeared to be hit-pieces, which seemed strange, until I worked back to figure out why the axe to grind:

http://environmentalprogress.org/founder-president/

Michael is a leading pro-nuclear environmentalist.


He's kind of a James Lovelock sort of guy who is focused solely on nukes as a panacea, which isn't exactly a popular advocacy position after Fukushima.

He's not really a journalist. He's a pro-nukes lobbyist group, which requires that he bash renewables.
[space to store bad short-term prediction currently vacant]
asg70
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1840
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Tue 01 May 2018, 10:17:23

KJ - And thus the obvious problem: someone that can afford a $181,000 vehicle can also afford very high fuel prices. In fact, based on your depreciation numbers, very high fuel price would be much more economical then a $181,000 vehicle. Perhaps even true for that used vehicle at $69,000. That's still about $45,000 more then I paid for my NEW very dependable Kia Sorrento. $45,000 pays for a lot of expensive fuel...and I never have t buy an expensive replacement battery pack.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 11065
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby StarvingLion » Tue 01 May 2018, 11:29:39

KaiserJeep wrote:This is foolishness. We are running out of cheap and easy to get petroleum fuels. We have at most a decade of gasoline under $5/g. Then another decade perhaps of gasoline under $15/g. Then effectively, petroleum fuels are unaffordable.

It is already the case that the cost per mile for EVs vs. ICE has tilted extremely towards the EVs. I told you that I spend $3.30/g on the corner, and $50 for a tank that takes me 200 miles. If I owned a $100K Tesla instead of my $0, already-paid-for 2003 Jeep, then I'd be plugging in for an overnight charge in my garage, and I'd be spending $6 to travel the same 200 miles. Fuel cost per mile is 8X greater with ICE, TODAY.

Tesla will make it or not, based upon Musk's ability to actually make and sell a longer range EV for less than $40K. So far, that's a screw-up. The only thing he has is a head start on the other auto makers. They have the production expertise, but not the EV designs.

I did the research on Tesla's offerings yesterday. When I move to Wisconsin, I could use a 4WD Tesla Model X SUV, configured for 6 or 7 seats. If I do the online Tesla new car configuration, the retail price is $181K for that, and a wait of several months.

Then I checked the used Tesla marketplace. A 2-year old Tesla Model X, fairly close to what I wanted, was on the market for an asking price of $69K, and had been in used inventory for 3+ months with no takers. This was a 2016 model, 7 seats, with 21,300 miles on the odometer, and a clean record with no collisions. The sticker price in 2016 was $131,000 - which means that it was depreciating at $30K per year.

I concluded that I can't afford the Tesla I want. The annual depreciation alone was more than I paid for my Jeep in 2003, a vehicle that is still perfectly serviceable 15 years after I purchased it.


Give it up, KaiserJeep. Ev's are freeloading on top of reliable electricity generators. Googles Energy Storage Pipedream, Project Malta, is based on Nobel Physicist Robert B. Laughlin's paper linked below. In that paper, Laughlin states "But without storage, it[renewables based energy future] is also impossible". Energy storage instantly triples the cost of "renewables". Read Laughlins paper. Its hilarious. His design requires exotic steel because the storage device is actually a huge bomb waiting to go off. It also requires tanks full of deadly gases that will drift through the neighborhood killing everyone after the explosion penetrates the tanks. How this is safer than that other hopeless pipedream called nuclear is beyond me. Like Power2Gas, his design has terrible round trip efficiency, etc etc...hopeless. Google will never build any such contraptions because their scam stock will instantly collapse.

Anyways your entire mass renewables (or nuclear) electrification "its cheaper, its cheaper, it really is" ideology is based on nobody will allow the power to go off so you can pass on your insolvency to some other sucker. That other sucker ultimately is the currency itself (eg. order coal and nuclear generators to remain online with guaranteed profits despite their financial issues—something essentially akin to an emergency bailout).

https://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0ahUKEwiUwfzz9eTaAhUJ_4MKHUahC68QFggwMAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.w2agz.com%2FLibrary%2FStorage%2Frbl-storage-05feb16%2520(2).pdf&usg=AOvVaw1gS8KV53tWCyHxkkrerUXd
There is no escaping The Oil Apocalypse and there will be no survivors.
StarvingLion
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Tue 01 May 2018, 11:37:10

Yonnipun wrote:
Meanwhile, despite your lack of knowledge about it, economics is becoming a more firmly established science over time, whether you care about it or not. Behavioral economics, with lots of experimental data to back it up in recent decades is the prime example.


Behavioral economics summed up in three word - greed, fear and stupidity. People like you also get very arrogant after they get some gains from another bubble.

Yes, citing facts and meaningful sources and posting links to those sources instead of babbling nonsense constantly is SO arrogant.

You haven't said anything of substance (as usual) about behavioral economics. Not even enough to make me believe you know what it even is really about. As usual, you haven't backed up your empty claim at all.

So go ahead, tell us. Greed, fear, and stupidity are how people often explain the behavior of participants in financial markets. How does this apply to behavioral economics overall? What are your citations to credible sources? Can you provide any good examples?
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 5585
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby StarvingLion » Tue 01 May 2018, 11:44:05

Why doesn't the USA EV Freak just admit that borrowing from the future means the EV has to have expandable storage modules. The range of the EV must always increase because storage at the utility level is never going to happen. And the EV can never be a toss away consumer appliance because most buyers cannot afford to do so, the resale value of the EV is 0, and EV's have huge environmental impact.

Germany is never going to unveil its P2G Scam in 2024. And Google Malta is never going to happen. Its all can kicking to THE TOTAL COLLAPSE.

Just admit already that the Telsa Model 3 is a souped up GM EV-1. INDUSTRIALLY IRRELEVANT. The moment it is delivered to the customer its value is $0. In fact, all of Musk Enterprises product offerings are industrially irrelevant including its junk rockets

Renewables based industrial processes is impossible. Replacing the dialable heat of fossil fuels means lower temperature processes that requires gobs and gobs of high pressure hydrogen. So "Renewables" is really The Hydrogen Economy with its fatal flaws: mainly that hydrogen production is extremely expensive and that the problem cannot be technically solved.

Those Energiewende cons go into back alleys and whisper "Pssst, know of any cheap heat source".

You're all going to die when 2024 comes when the legacy giant oil fields decline rate increases massively. At that instant, 5 billion people on earth are no longer fundable (useless eaters). Guess what, those 5 billion people are going to grab ak-47's and RPG's in the huge caches and pay you a visit.
There is no escaping The Oil Apocalypse and there will be no survivors.
StarvingLion
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1184
Joined: Sat 03 Aug 2013, 17:59:17

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Tue 01 May 2018, 12:09:49

StarvingLion wrote:You're all going to die when 2024 comes when the legacy giant oil fields decline rate increases massively. At that instant, 5 billion people on earth are no longer fundable (useless eaters).

So, a big pile of nonsense, your usual uncited pack of lies or delusions about green energy and EV's. Crowned by the oft-cited, you're all going to die soon empty claim.

Yawn. I won't even bother to refute point by point, since it never penetrates your behavior.

What you really seem to need is some good mental health care.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 5585
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Tue 01 May 2018, 12:37:47

SL, you apparently do not know the basic facts of peak oil. I will give you the briefest of overviews, based on my observation of the content of your posts, which indicates that you simply want to ridicule other forum members, with zero reasoning to back up your wild assertions. This is Hubbert's original Peak Oil curve:
Image
...which he based more or less on the technology of the 1950's era petroleum industry. No accounting for oil shales, oil sands, or fracking. This is the actual oil production that happened:
Image
....this particular set of figures shows an oil peak occurred around 2010. There are many sets of figures available to choose from. The earliest worldwide oil peak generally accepted at this forum is about 2005, my personal favorite set of figures says 2Q of 2008, some few claim that the oil peak is still in the future. Whatever, the exact date does not matter a whole lot.

The area underneath the curves before and after the actual peak are approximately equal, and represent the amounts of oil produced. The peak represents the mid-point of the age of oil, which started around 1860 and will last until approximately 2100, at which time there will be no remaining supplies of oil that can be economically recovered. IOW, it will take more energy to recover/refine/distribute the oil than it is worth. Immediately prior to that end date, all of the sites where all of the various types of oil are found have all dropped off as they became uneconomical, based on the future value of petroleum fuels. Because we don't know those future fuel prices, we don't have a firm grasp of when that date is.

Irregardless of your (or anybody else's) pressing need to know those dates, there are simply too many factors to make even a wild-assed guess. We don't know the demand, because we don't know what the population will be, because we are uncertain if there will be resource wars over energy. We do know the peak, give or take a decade or so, was about 2008. Demand for oil remains high, and supplies are tightening, we are unlikely to see another 160 years, the peak oil curve is not symmetrical, in spite of Hubbert's calculation, which he based on "conventional" oil wells. Perhaps the end of the age of oil will occur in just 60 years. I don't personally think it will be that soon, but it's possible.

One thing is certain, and that it that NONE OF US having this debate, even if we were still teenagers, will live long enough to see the end of the Age of Oil. So every time you open your silly mouth and tell people they are going to die, you are confirming your own lack of knowledge and judgement.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5196
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby jedrider » Tue 01 May 2018, 16:16:52

Ha! I don't even see the incompatibility between these two arguments:

StarvingLion wrote:You're all going to die when 2024 comes when the legacy giant oil fields decline rate increases massively. At that instant, 5 billion people on earth are no longer fundable (useless eaters). Guess what, those 5 billion people are going to grab ak-47's and RPG's in the huge caches and pay you a visit.


KaiserJeep wrote:One thing is certain, and that it that NONE OF US having this debate, even if we were still teenagers, will live long enough to see the end of the Age of Oil. So every time you open your silly mouth and tell people they are going to die, you are confirming your own lack of knowledge and judgement.


Well, except for the last sentence of each paragraph, which could be debatable. Seems like a Mad Max ending is in the offing.
User avatar
jedrider
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1071
Joined: Thu 28 May 2009, 09:10:44

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby Outcast_Searcher » Tue 01 May 2018, 17:10:00

jedrider wrote:Well, except for the last sentence of each paragraph, which could be debatable. Seems like a Mad Max ending is in the offing.

If there were no alternatives, that might make sense. But there are, and at least the EV, wind, and solar alternative will be growing.

If oil were suddenly go from plentiful (supply rising every year along with demand, when the global economy grows) to tight overnight, that might also make sense.

But short of some full scale nuclear war or something along that line, it will take decades for oil to go from plentiful to truly scarce. And as that happens, market pricing will do more to help conserve what is left than a giant pile of political programs.

And of course, if the price of oil rises a lot, guess what happens to the demand to own, and the profit motive to produce EV's?

So, I don't see CREDIBLE Mad Max scenarios in all but the most rare and unpredictable circumstances. For me, common sense and frugality as "preps" makes at least a hundred times more sense than wrapping my life around the fear of or hope for a "Mad Max" scenario.
Given the track record of the perma-doomer blogs, I wouldn't bet a fast crash doomer's money on their predictions.
User avatar
Outcast_Searcher
COB
COB
 
Posts: 5585
Joined: Sat 27 Jun 2009, 20:26:42

Re: THE Electric Vehicle (EV) Thread pt 8

Unread postby KaiserJeep » Tue 01 May 2018, 18:30:32

I think a lot of the Doomies here are in fact HOPING for Doom. That would mean that they have an excuse to not get out of bed, pull their pants on, and go to work.
KaiserJeep 2.0, Neural Subnode 0010 0000 0001 0110 - 1001 0011 0011, Tertiary Adjunct to Unimatrix 0000 0000 0001

Resistance is Futile, YOU will be Assimilated.

Warning: Messages timestamped before April 1, 2016, 06:00 PST were posted by the unmodified human KaiserJeep 1.0
KaiserJeep
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 5196
Joined: Tue 06 Aug 2013, 16:16:32
Location: California's Silly Valley

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests