Live data from Hacker News

The U.S. is now energy independent

axios.com

91–100 of 135 posts

Re: The U.S. is now energy independent

#91
Sigh.

1. A barrel of oil isn't just gas.. About half is for bunker oil, diesel and kerosene that runs boats, trucks and jets. That need isn't going away no matter how many batteries you make. The rest (40-50%) of the barrel is a waste stream that can be used as light gasoline, plastics and chemicals.

We will always have the second half because we always need the first half.

2. As others have mentioned, all oil is not equal. Shale and tar sands (tight oil) are not producing the heavy cuts/blends that we require for bunker oil, diesel and aircraft. US will need to balance export of shale based (or nat gas) energy with import of heavier grades of oil. Probably always. This isn't "independence"..it's codependence at best, and it will require the world burning gas for cars. How's your CO2?

3. Peak oil (conventional) was 2005, and then the shale oil financial stunt (thanks negative interest rates!!) took us to Nov 2018 when -- *Before covid* peak oil, and energy happened.

We're on the downslope of production without massive "demand destruction".

4. The energy price predicament is that below $80/barrel, shale and tight producers can't make money (and there will be no further investment) and above $80 and the rest of the economy gets killed.

None of these ideas are mine. All are easily goog'd.

Re: The U.S. is now energy independent

#92
post #44
post #34

Can someone explain why during the start of Covid lockdowns, gasoline prices didn’t drop to $1.00/gallon? There was no demand, and plenty of supply. The simple supply/demand curve of my high school economics memory, seems to imply prices should have taken a dive to virtually zero. Sure they went down, but nowhere near what the models I’d learned would predict. Just a rant that lit up inside my brain every time I fill…

Actually many places with real competition, near production and very little regulation in the U.S. did have $1.00 or so gallon gas, i.e. much of the south and near energy producing areas in LA for example. I wouldn't be surprised to find out that gas retailers in California would continue to price their gas at ~$5.00 a gallon when they don't actually have any to sell (or conversely, aren't selling any at all) because…

>everyone in CA that I know is ready to be done with gas

If you ever needed evidence that you live inside your own little comfortable echo chamber...

Re: The U.S. is now energy independent

#94

> The impact on geopolitics extends to a potential Russian invasion of Ukraine. Disruptions to European energy supplies would have a less direct effect on the U.S. than they might have in an earlier era. Put another way, the USA now has less incentive to "keep the peace." Putin's drama and posturing, plus the USA being untethered...that's not a good combination.

The drama-and-posturing could potentially come to an end if Nato would be willing to negotiate. The US arming Ukraine—or even putting boots on the ground—is not the only solution.

Re: The U.S. is now energy independent

#95
post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's the other way around. Russia is agitating because they can't support their regime with oil anymore. The US has no obligations in Ukraine but have working overtime to prevent escalation.

> The US has no obligations in Ukraine It depends on defining 'obligation'. The US doesn't have a treaty obligation to defend Ukraine but does have that obligation to NATO members, and a Russian attack on Ukraine threatens NATO members. Also, the US has a different kind of 'obligation' to democracy, peace, prosperity - all of which are not only essential in themselves, but essential to the peace and prosperity of Ame…

Negotiations are one thing, but Nato countries can’t just ship out military to the vicinity because an attack on one country would then mean that Russia is closer to Nato member countries. Who gets to be a member of Nato is a delicate balance, and there’s a reason why countries like Finland and Sweden are not. Russia apparently wants a buffer between itself and Nato (there are some exceptions like Norway). Sending a lot of Nato troops to Ukraine would signal that Ukraine is a de facto Nato border.

> Also, the US has a different kind of 'obligation' to democracy, peace, prosperity

To find someone that still believes that line feels like finding a time capsule.

Re: The U.S. is now energy independent

#96

> The impact on geopolitics extends to a potential Russian invasion of Ukraine. Disruptions to European energy supplies would have a less direct effect on the U.S. than they might have in an earlier era. Put another way, the USA now has less incentive to "keep the peace." Putin's drama and posturing, plus the USA being untethered...that's not a good combination.

I don't actually expect any conflict there, but I also remember the old saw: "gas is up, polls are down? start a war!" I hope that joke doesn't apply. As Sting said, "Russians love their children too"

[deleted]

Re: The U.S. is now energy independent

#97
post #48
post #17

Producing more oil than you consume does not, as the article claims, make you truly energy independent. The US will always have to import oil from other countries to meet its needs, because not all oil is the same, and the type of oil that the US produces is not the type that it needs. For a better understanding: https://www.api.org/news-policy-and-issues/blog/2018/06/14/w...

The better reason to import oil is to avoid using the strategic reserves. Even if the US us technically energy independent it should still import oil.

No post body was provided.

Re: The U.S. is now energy independent

#98
post #91

Sigh. 1. A barrel of oil isn't just gas.. About half is for bunker oil, diesel and kerosene that runs boats, trucks and jets. That need isn't going away no matter how many batteries you make. The rest (40-50%) of the barrel is a waste stream that can be used as light gasoline, plastics and chemicals. We will always have the second half because we always need the first half. 2. As others have mentioned, all oil is not…

Regarding bunker oil, there are ships under construction that will use hydrogen instead of bunker oil. Also interesting is that while large ships burn bunker oil, they do so to power a generator that powers an electrical engine. This is true for modern oil tankers and large container ships.

So, it's not that inevitable that ships will continue to use bunker oil forever. Also, there is a company in the US already selling synthetic fuels to airline companies. I think there was a plane that recently flew with one engine burning that stuff. And finally, battery electric trucks of basically all sizes are now being produced and are shipping in small volumes. Diesel demand is on a slow decline. There is of course some debate on whether hydrogen will play a role in that. IMHO, the early signs are that it is basically not going to be a big role for at least trucking. It works, but has bout 4x the energy cost. Which is not a great value proposition when batteries basically get the job done already.

The challenge with oil is not so much the price but the fact that it keeps changing wildly unpredictably and that these swings seem to be getting more common. Those wilds swings are very damaging to industries that depend on those prices either being high (like shale oil) or low (any company that buys oil or gas in large quantities). Prices can be abnormally high or low for months/years on end if e.g. the Saudis or the Russians decide to flood the market with oil or decide to limit supply when that suits them. The US is only energy independent when prices are very high. And as you note, even then it needs to import oil because not all oil is alike.

High prices are very damaging to economies since you get things like inflation getting out of control when people suddenly have to pay a premium to heat their houses, drive their cars, or have stuff trucked around. I'm including natural gas here as it seems the prices for both oil and gas seem to be suffering from this. And of course it is an important thing that shale oil drilling produces in large quantities as well. And we are seeing quite a bit of inflation lately because of the high prices.

These price swings will drive demand destruction over time and far more rapidly than some people in the industry seem to hope/think. People will want to isolate themselves from supply and pricing issues. That's already happening. People put solar and batteries in their home because they can and to shield themselves from extortion level pricing and blackouts. The higher the prices, the more you will see people try to work around that.

The transport section will largely not be dependent on oil or gas by mid this century. Road traffic probably by the end of next decade. With about half new cars being electric by the end of this decade. That's just extrapolating from growth plans of various manufacturers. At this pace, they'll hit 50% of the market in about 8-10 years. A 50% drop in demand is going to be tough if you have investments in companies that 1) rely on high oil prices and 2) depend on things like gasoline and diesel sales to continue to be a thing that economies spend a lot of money on. Most investors are already voting with their feet because they know this is happening.

Re: The U.S. is now energy independent

#99
post #91

Sigh. 1. A barrel of oil isn't just gas.. About half is for bunker oil, diesel and kerosene that runs boats, trucks and jets. That need isn't going away no matter how many batteries you make. The rest (40-50%) of the barrel is a waste stream that can be used as light gasoline, plastics and chemicals. We will always have the second half because we always need the first half. 2. As others have mentioned, all oil is not…

Regarding bunker oil, there are ships under construction that will use hydrogen instead of bunker oil. Also interesting is that while large ships burn bunker oil, they do so to power a generator that powers an electrical engine. This is true for modern oil tankers and large container ships. So, it's not that inevitable that ships will continue to use bunker oil forever. Also, there is a company in the US already sell…

> The challenge with oil is not so much the price but the fact that it keeps changing wildly unpredictably and that these swings seem to be getting more common. Those wilds swings are very damaging to industries that depend on those prices either being high (like shale oil) or low (any company that buys oil or gas in large quantities).

Isn't that the point of futures contracts - to smooth variable prices?

Re: The U.S. is now energy independent

#100
post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Regarding bunker oil, there are ships under construction that will use hydrogen instead of bunker oil. Also interesting is that while large ships burn bunker oil, they do so to power a generator that powers an electrical engine. This is true for modern oil tankers and large container ships. So, it's not that inevitable that ships will continue to use bunker oil forever. Also, there is a company in the US already sell…

> The challenge with oil is not so much the price but the fact that it keeps changing wildly unpredictably and that these swings seem to be getting more common. Those wilds swings are very damaging to industries that depend on those prices either being high (like shale oil) or low (any company that buys oil or gas in large quantities). Isn't that the point of futures contracts - to smooth variable prices?

Doesn't seem to be working that well lately.
Post reply on HN