Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

When oil is no longer in demand

economist.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 175 posts

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#31

Post by edblarney »

graeme wrote: post #28
edblarney wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

'Tax breaks' are offered to all sorts of industries. Almost all entertainment in Canada for example, is done nearly tax free. Pharma, energy, small business etc. etc..

It's particularly perverse, however, to give tax breaks for an industry that has immense negative externalities.

Oil companies don't emit a whole lot of CO2.

You emit the CO2 when you use your car (almost 50% of CO2 emissions are from autos).

And a bunch of other industries are responsible for most of the rest of CO2 emissions.

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#32

Post by JulianMorrison »

shanemhansen wrote: post #4

I live in Utah and I can tell you exactly what happens when oil is no longer in demand. They offer numerous tax breaks per well to encourage exploration and increase production. I believe the term is "corporate welfare". One of the tax breaks has a stated goal of providing tax relief when oil prices are low. https://oilgas.ogm.utah.gov/pub/Publications/Lists/tax_incen... This is the same government attempting to roll…

That only goes so far.

If people literally don't want the oil, at some point those tax breaks are going to look vulnerable.

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#33

Post by labster »

msandford wrote: post #30
coredog64 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can't make fertilizer or plastic out of solar energy.

> Can't make fertilizer or plastic out of solar energy. No, but if you're willing to spend a lot of energy you can pull CO2 out of the air and use it as a feedstock to make various fuels or plastics. Right now I think you'd have to burn 10 gallons of oil to make a single gallon so that's not efficient at all. But if you literally had more solar than you knew what to do with (like Germany does on occasion) you could u…

In California and other deserts, excess solar can be directed to desalination plants. Our water and energy shortages are essentially the same issue; solving one goes a long way to solving the other.

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#34

Post by maxerickson »

coredog64 wrote: post #27
toomuchtodo wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

12-16 years till solar is the dominant form of power generation at its current growth rate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Growth_of_photovoltaics There isn't anything to indicate that growth curve will slow; the manufacturing capacity is already in place, and more continues to be added. There are power purchase agreements at 2 cents/kWh, and I would not be surprised if you see prices below 1 cent/kwh in the next five…

Can't make fertilizer or plastic out of solar energy.

There's a process for fixing nitrogen using electricity as the primary input:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Birkeland%E2%80%93Eyde_process

You can also plant nitrogen fixing plants and till them into the soil at the end of the season.

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#35

Post by toomuchtodo »

labster wrote: post #33
msandford wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Can't make fertilizer or plastic out of solar energy. No, but if you're willing to spend a lot of energy you can pull CO2 out of the air and use it as a feedstock to make various fuels or plastics. Right now I think you'd have to burn 10 gallons of oil to make a single gallon so that's not efficient at all. But if you literally had more solar than you knew what to do with (like Germany does on occasion) you could u…

In California and other deserts, excess solar can be directed to desalination plants. Our water and energy shortages are essentially the same issue; solving one goes a long way to solving the other.

All resource problems are energy problems. With enough clean energy, you can make fuel, water, fertilizer, anything.

We're going to need a lot of surplus energy to sequester all of the CO2 we've pumped into the atmosphere over the last 100+ years.

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#36

Post by monknomo »

edblarney wrote: post #31
graeme wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's particularly perverse, however, to give tax breaks for an industry that has immense negative externalities.

Oil companies don't emit a whole lot of CO2. You emit the CO2 when you use your car (almost 50% of CO2 emissions are from autos). And a bunch of other industries are responsible for most of the rest of CO2 emissions.

I think you're missing the negative externalities inherent in oil extraction, like groundwater pollution, earthquakes, above ground pipelines, etc.

Not to mention it's a little like saying Pablo Escobar doesn't OD on drugs or steal your TV very often, it's the crackheads that do that...

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#37

Post by [deleted] »

edblarney wrote: post #31
graeme wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's particularly perverse, however, to give tax breaks for an industry that has immense negative externalities.

Oil companies don't emit a whole lot of CO2. You emit the CO2 when you use your car (almost 50% of CO2 emissions are from autos). And a bunch of other industries are responsible for most of the rest of CO2 emissions.

[deleted]

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#38

Post by rm_-rf_slash »

coredog64 wrote: post #29
mjevans wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Probably temporarily. It'll likely cross a point where more synthetic production methods reach economic viability. The field requires such a great energy density that I suspect only a remarkable breakthrough in energy density for weight would allow a fully electric solution. Hydrogen is also likely out as the storage cells would be under unimaginable stresses. In the long term it might actually incentivize the creati…

Unless someone figures out how to bulldoze the Rocky mountain range, high speed rail as a replacement for coast to coast air travel is a non starter.

The real transit corridors are Boston-Atlanta and New York-Chicago, as well as Seattle-San Diego on the west coast. Coast to coast would be nice but even just those would be an enormous boost to our transport infrastructure and potentially a huge emissions cut (depending on where the power comes from).

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#39

Post by thatcat »

edblarney wrote: post #31
graeme wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's particularly perverse, however, to give tax breaks for an industry that has immense negative externalities.

Oil companies don't emit a whole lot of CO2. You emit the CO2 when you use your car (almost 50% of CO2 emissions are from autos). And a bunch of other industries are responsible for most of the rest of CO2 emissions.

Even if they don't use much, they tend to spill a lot which is worse than burning it.

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#40

Post by ghouse »

Resource extraction companies (oil, mining, etc..) usually are required to post security for reclamation. However, large companies are permitted to not post cash or bond, but on their word (credit). Which works while commodity prices are high. But when prices crash, so do the companies and society (the tax payer) is left holding the bag for cleanup.
Post reply on HN