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

141–150 of 175 posts

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#141

Post by edblarney »

Reason077 wrote: post #94
edblarney wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Oil companies don't emit a whole lot of CO2. Not true. Refining crude oil into gasoline or diesel is itself very energy-intensive. It takes around 4.5kWh to refine each gallon of gasoline from crude. In many cases that energy is supplied by fossil-fuel burning power plants. Volts for oil: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BQpX-9OyEr4

You proved my point.

4.5 kWh is not a lot of energy.

It's the amount of energy needed to light a 1K lightbulb for 4 hours.

It's a pittance compared to what you burn in you car.

4.5Kw/h won't get you around the block :)

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#142

Post by jabl »

dsfyu404ed wrote: post #96
hx87 wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

87UL and 93UL aren't much more expensive than automotive gas, since it's pretty much the same thing. It's 100+ octane leaded gas that's expensive, and it'll stay that way until general aviation gets out of its carburetor & fixed timing rut and join the modern world of direct fuel injection and FADEC.

Which will not happen quickly because FAA certification makes re-powering small aircraft expensive and strict maintenance requirements keeps half century old planes running

The're working on an unleaded 100 octane avgas: http://www.eaa.org/en/airventure/eaa-airventure-news-and-mul...

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#143

Post by jmknoll »

alivelore wrote: post #108
EGreg wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And if they didn't, we might have built a sustainable society faster and invested in sustainable energy sooner. It could have been done in the 80s. I know it's scary to imagine Americans driving on smaller cars and bicycles and public transport like Europeans... but we would survive it :)

Average commute time in the us is lower than almost all of europe ( https://goo.gl/r8DJqz ) and public transport not only needs billions in investment to be built but there are very few places where it doesn't run on subsidies. So yeah you're asking americans to a) take longer to get to work b) constantly subsidise a system that will keep on losing money. Based on the political makeup of the country i'd say you can k…

Commute times can be misleading. It takes me about an hour to get from my house in downtown Shanghai to my office on the other side of the city. However, this is about 15 minutes of walking and 45 five minutes on the metro. Even though its longer than the US average of 25 minutes, I much prefer this option.

Commuting by car is dead time. When I'm on the subway, I can read, send emails, catch up on work. Its also much better for the environment and costs a grand total of $200/year.

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#144

Post by zrail »

edblarney wrote: post #141
Reason077 wrote: post #94

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oil companies don't emit a whole lot of CO2. Not true. Refining crude oil into gasoline or diesel is itself very energy-intensive. It takes around 4.5kWh to refine each gallon of gasoline from crude. In many cases that energy is supplied by fossil-fuel burning power plants. Volts for oil: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=BQpX-9OyEr4

You proved my point. 4.5 kWh is not a lot of energy. It's the amount of energy needed to light a 1K lightbulb for 4 hours. It's a pittance compared to what you burn in you car. 4.5Kw/h won't get you around the block :)

A 1kW lightbulb is rather bright and not used in homes, more so in studios. A better comparison might be 10 100W bulbs or maybe an average chandelier.

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#145

Post by vonmoltke »

JulianMorrison wrote: post #41
coredog64 wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

See http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=oil_use Total petroleum products: 19.531 (million barrels/day) Of which, deleting fuels, Asphalt and road oil 0.343 Petrochemical feedstocks 0.331 Lubricant 0.138 Miscellaneous products and others 0.089 Waxes 0.006 which sum to 0.907 If the oil industry existed solely for non-fuel uses, it would be extremely tiny, and probably entirely domestic. It would not be la…

You deleted far more than just fuels. "Hydrocarbon gas liquids", "Still gas", "Special napthas", and "Kerosene" include significant non-fuel uses. Those bring the total as high as 3.390, though it is impossible to determine from that chart how much is fuel use.

Also, keep in mind that some fuel uses, such as welding/soldering gasses, don't have an effective replacement at this time. Cutting fuel use to 0 at this juncture is effectively impossible.

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#146

Post by mikeash »

hx87 wrote: post #80
mikeash wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can see this at work already with gasoline for small planes, which commands a huge premium over automotive gasoline now. Around here, the cost is 2x higher or more. The premium used to be smaller, but when gas prices came down from their $4 high, avgas didn't really follow.

87UL and 93UL aren't much more expensive than automotive gas, since it's pretty much the same thing. It's 100+ octane leaded gas that's expensive, and it'll stay that way until general aviation gets out of its carburetor & fixed timing rut and join the modern world of direct fuel injection and FADEC.

I didn't realize there was 87/93 avgas. What's the difference between that and what goes in cars?

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#147

Post by kerbalspacepro »

nateburke wrote: post #139

As long as we have ground wars, we'll have demand for oil (i.e. gasoline). As an energy source, stored gasoline is far more modular and transportable than anything requiring the electric grid. Consequently, it is easier to defend and remains the ideal energy solution for supply lines in battle. As long as we have air wars, we'll also have demand for oil. The logistics of moving an airforce around the world require fl…

George Friedman describes a ~2030/2040 military that uses batteries in power armor that are recharged by solar power satellites.

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#148

Post by mulletbum »

codecamper wrote: post #131
btilly wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that this is a stupid policy, but there is some attempt at logic behind it. Oil production has the problem that increasing in oil production requires spending money that will only pay off if the price of oil remains high for several years. Cheap producers like Saudi Arabia know this, and so try to make the price fluctuate with enough lows to wipe out expensive oil producers, and enough highs to get rich thems…

Or politicians could catch a glimmer of the future & put some tax dollars towards: * battery factories * electric car incentives * open source car sharing / planning services. (get rid of the 30% uber tax meanwhile steering people towards shared services) * carbon taxes it's been said a million times, but may as well keep saying it. it'll fix the problem for good. no more wars. less environmental destruction. Cars wo…

"car pretty much lasts forever, just swap out the battery pack now & then."

Not in Michigan. You will have far more problems from a car than just battery maintenance.

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#149

Post by JulianMorrison »

vonmoltke wrote: post #145
JulianMorrison wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

See http://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/index.cfm?page=oil_use Total petroleum products: 19.531 (million barrels/day) Of which, deleting fuels, Asphalt and road oil 0.343 Petrochemical feedstocks 0.331 Lubricant 0.138 Miscellaneous products and others 0.089 Waxes 0.006 which sum to 0.907 If the oil industry existed solely for non-fuel uses, it would be extremely tiny, and probably entirely domestic. It would not be la…

You deleted far more than just fuels. "Hydrocarbon gas liquids", "Still gas", "Special napthas", and "Kerosene" include significant non-fuel uses. Those bring the total as high as 3.390, though it is impossible to determine from that chart how much is fuel use. Also, keep in mind that some fuel uses, such as welding/soldering gasses, don't have an effective replacement at this time. Cutting fuel use to 0 at this junc…

One way or the other the conclusion is the same, though. The oil industry would have to radically shrink, even if it would probably not go away.

Re: When oil is no longer in demand

#150

Post by solarsavior »

dx034 wrote: post #117
solarsavior wrote: post #67

I was wondering about this lately as I live in Houston in an area greatly dependent upon oil and gas. What happens when so many vehicles are charged by solar panels on rooftops (Tesla Energy)? What about oil and gas? Well, it turns out that tons of things are made from oil and gas and once we stop burning it to make vehicles go down the street, we can start using it for other things. I'm unable to find the origin of…

As pointed out in another comment, the use of oil for plastics, streets, etc is less than 5% of overall oil consumption in the US. You could get that kind of output with a tiny domestic industry. With modern refineries, you can get a good control over the output mix and only produce what is needed.I think Houston would be hugely affected by a decline in the oil industry. Even if they can create jobs in the production…

Fair enough, a "potential decline in oil consumption of 90%". I get that. I accept that. It is a potential though; based upon existing technology. The oil and gas industry will be impacted (perhaps severely), but will it be a 90% impact? I doubt it. Few people have ever been able to predict the future. (Xerox failed, IBM failed, Yahoo failed, etc. - AT&T did a good job with "You Will" - Think it was a research firm that did it for AT&T.) Don't fall into the trap of thinking one knows how it will all play out. Odds are it will not play out like one thinks it will. The same technological advances that are removing industries are creating other industries. I just think the oil can be used for much more interesting things. 3D printing is really in its infancy right now. https://all3dp.com/biggest-3d-printers-world/ Imagine being able to print out whatever you want, including buildings and having them perfect. (not some nailed together wood done in a rush that has tons of joints where problems may arise) Raw material (oil) will be needed to do that. (unless of course there is other material to use, but it will have to be refined and oil & gas companies know all about that)

Now the employment of people is the other thing. Technology should make things cheaper and better. (cheaper either in initial price and/or the cost of maintenance) Fewer people will need to work and/or work fewer hours because things are cheaper and better. There was a time before there were two-income households. We could cut back to that without a huge disruption. An equilibrium will likely develop. If there is no income, there will be no consumers. Basic income may also be needed.

On a more funny note, those convenience stores had better well have some damn good restrooms like they have at Buc-ee's. Otherwise, why stop? The car is doing the driving. You're free to eat whatever you brought or simply sleep through the trip.

Post reply on HN