Cratering motor fuel sales in Norway show that we CAN end oil

[Think. Again.]

Jameson Dow | Oct 20 2023 - 3:18 pm PT
Full Article: https://electrek.co/2023/10/20/cratering-motor-fuel-sales-in-norway-show-the-death-spiral-that-can-end-oil/

-snip-

Lately, oil prices have been quite high around the world, nearing the historic highs of the 2010s and late 70s. This spike has largely been driven by pandemic-related supply (and demand) disruptions, the Russian invasion of Ukraine, and, as always, the decisions of Saudi Arabia (in this case, their decision to cut supply to buoy oil prices).

But looking back to the last peak, we can see another interesting thing: a giant drop in oil prices in the mid-2010s, which was driven by a “supply glut.” This supply glut was at least partially related to increased usage of hybrid and electric cars, which led to a relatively small decrease in oil demand. However, that small decrease meant that more oil was being pumped than used, which led prices to drop by about two-thirds in a matter of months.

The effect of oil prices on consumer demand is that as oil prices go up, usage (often) goes down, and interest in electric cars goes up. This stands to reason, as people start thinking about more efficient vehicles when the cost of fueling their vehicle becomes too much.

But the effect on supply is less popularly examined. In this case, low oil prices can actually be environmentally advantageous because it means that oil companies are less incentivized to explore new methods of extraction and that more expensive methods (such as tar sands extraction, which is also much more environmentally costly) become uneconomical.

-snip-

Full Article: https://electrek.co/2023/10/20/cratering-motor-fuel-sales-in-norway-show-the-death-spiral-that-can-end-oil/

[Farmer-Rick]

1. Capitalism as an economic system is too slow, stagnant

And inefficient to respond to major modern day problems.

The filthy-rich get entrenched and refuse to change even if more efficient, practical and cleaner ways of doing business are available. But since the filthy-rich have a large majority of all the capital and the power, they prevent others from using improved technology. They actively work against the most obvious solution in order to keep making profits in ways they are use to.

Until the majority of the world gets a more efficient economic system, we will be stuck with the primitive burning of fossil fuels for energy. It's like getting stuck with the horse and buggy because the buggy makers and horse traders have too much capital and use it to prevent the development of the car.

Take a look at how feudalism ended. It was stagnant, inefficient and slow. It prevented rapid economic development. The German based royals of England embraced capitalism and were able to survive the transition. Will they be able to survive this next economic transition?

Humans will either transition out of capitalism or be killed off when we lose most of our human habitat from burning fossil fuels for energy.

[mopinko]

2. imma put in my plug here for home pv.

just dollars and cents, the best investment i ever made. i intend to die in my home, and for $20k after incentives, i will never get an elec bill for more that the service charge of being hooked up to the grid.
from $200/mo to $20. i’m only sorry that i kneejerk replaced my gas boiler w gas instead of elec about the time my array went up. no elec bill is nice, no heat bill cd b a gamechanger for a lot of ppl.

such a good investment that i just converted a 2flat rental to heat pump run by solar. the premium for heat/air included in my area is about $500/mo. i invested $40k out of pocket, and i get $1000/mo return. we’ll see how it shakes out, but if i’m generating more than i need, i may cut my tenants in. they pay for their own lights, etc. i think their bills are about $60-70/mo. i think they’d both rather give me another $50.

i think a lot of ppl r ignoring the personal financial benefits of renewables. and ppl who think cuz solar isnt putting out 24/7 it’s worthless, when in fact, it’s the part where it peaks when demand peaks that makes it valuable. it shd power ac anywhere and everywhere.
like i said, my system just went up, but besides the fact that i’ll likely make more than i use, what i take from the grid is off peak. it’s cheaper and cleaner.

all in all, the whole thing appeals to the pinko in me. distributed, personal benefit, supported by the state, to meet ppl’s basic needs.
marx wd love it.

[CoopersDad]

5. I wish I'd have encouraged my wife to install more solar and not do a gas water heater

The water heater decision was the worst but she's an independent thinker.

She can add more solar, and she can trim some trees, her first annual true-up just came in and she's under-generating and quite shy of covering her annual usage with her solar.

Proud of you for being net-zero, especially in your part of the country!

[Think. Again.]

8. I have to disagree...

..We're not in a "Capitalism OR Clean Energy" situation at all.

Your Horse and Buggy analogy is perfect to illustrate how it was capitalism that did actually bring about the change that Henry Ford (and other early investors) were hoping for, on a grand scale!

There's more at play here than just the return on investment of fossil fuels. There's a multitude of new technologies and other investment opportunities that the large investment firms, venture capitalists, and fund managers are buying up now and getting in on the ground floor of. And we're only in the first few years, it's only going to grow (hugely) from here.

[MichMan]

3. If we want to follow Norway's lead on EV implementation, we could if we had the will.

Like Norway, tax all ICE vehicles at approx. 100% of purchase price. A SUV with a sticker price of $50k would have a federal tax imposed of an additional $50k, making the total cost $100k. EV would not be taxed.

Do we have the political will to do so ? I don't believe so.

[Otto_Harper]

4. I think it goes beyond political will to manufacturing capability

As a retired engineer, I have been a spectator to the development and implementation of disruptive technologies. As such, I have tried to stay current on the EV roll-out. The issue for the US is that we currently have a fleet of cars in this country which numbers about 250 million (+/-). In the current car market, we replace about 16 million (+/-) per year. That is the baseline manufacturing capacity that we start with. We cannot just double, triple or quadruple this manufacturing capacity instantly, regardless of political or economic will. The issue is not just factory capacity, but also raw materials. Replacing the entire US vehicle fleet will require more Lithium than the current proven world reserves of the material.
Yes, there is much more lithium to be found and developed, and more capacity can be built, but, this takes time. And, the current electrical infrastructure can not yet handle the charging load of a fleet this size, especially if we move to renewables, which is how the whole EV revolution will save us.
And so, all of the political will and haste will be of marginal value unless we approach this issue as the war for survival that it actually is. I don't see a whole lot of that outside of forums like this one.

[Farmer-Rick]

6. But with solar the charge is free

Yeah, our current electrical grid couldn't take it, but set up solar panels direct to your charger. You don't need to be on the grid.

Yeah, batteries are going to be the issue. I use regular deep cycle marine acid batteries on my fences and other outside electrical needs. The biggest problem is the controller that really doesn't like bad weather.

But aside from that, you just described why capitalism is stagnate and unresponsive. Why shouldn't we expect our economic system be able to gear up to this? Yeah, it's not going to happen overnight, but capitalism has done practically nothing to gear up for the inevitable change in energy source. That's what happened with feudalism and a lot of totalitarian countries have the same problem. They are clumsy and unresponsive economic systems.

So many resources, capital, wealth, whatever you want to call it, are tied up rewarding the most powerful, the oligarchs, the kings, the Lords, the dictators and other rulers.

Resources are wasted on uselessness. The castles built while the majority are starving. The yachts and hundred million dollar mansions while homelessness is ever on the rise. Just Look at the waste of Putin's gold palace and the Kotch brothers numerous estates.

We could gear up to dealing with the end of burning of fossil fuels if so many resources were not wasted on the filthy-rich and dictators for their lavish life styles. The Palace of Versailles is a perfect example. It was built and renovated at a time when the poor couldn't afford to buy bread or flour.

Look at any of the filthy-rich's hundred million dollar homes and you see why we are not gearing up for a transition away from fossil fuels.

[Otto_Harper]

7. I don't wish to belabor the point, but again

Just saying "hookup solar panels to charge your car".
A current technology EV carries about 70KWH of battery capacity. To charge something like that in a single very sunny day will require enough solar panels to run an entire house. Again, such systems would require massive installation at the single home level, or, again, upgrade of the complete power grid at a scale nnot currently even feasible.
We will not achieve the results we need to by just pointing at the problem and muttering impractical solutions. I think the actual solution has already been here and bypassed.
If we think of the current EV as an EXTERNAL combustion engine (i.e.) its motive power still comes substantially from fossil fuel combustion, just at power plants instead of within the car, then the real issue is optimizing how we achieve the greatest reductions of carbon emission and speed the transition to fullindependence from petroleum and coal. I think this was exemplified by the Chevy Volt. In this car, a sufficient battery was carried to allow normal daily around-the-town missions without needing to use the ICE engine. But, when extreme range was needed, or the ability to operate without charging facilities, the ICE engine was available. This reduced by a substantial the weight of the battery which the car needed to haul around, increasing miles-per-energy efficiency.
By using such an architecture as a transitional step while manufacturing and engiineering catches up to the current needs, it reduces the needs for immediate Grid upgrades, immediate massive Lithium development and immediate buildout of charging stations and the grid needed to support them.

[Think. Again.]

9. Would anyone really need...

...to fully charge 70kwh everyday?

I think the average range for EVs is around 300 miles on a full charge (about the same as a full tank in an ICE car), and that's at the early stage of energy storage tech we're at.

I believe that the vast majority of people would never need to fully charge a car every day.

[Farmer-Rick]

10. I found you can charge an EV for 40 miles with 5 solar panels

Last edited Sun Oct 22, 2023, 09:21 PM - Edit history (1)

"Let’s say you get 2 kWh per day, per panel. You’d need just five panels to make enough energy to charge a Tesla Model 3 battery and get 40 miles of range. That’s not very many! Of course, the number of panels increases if you need more than a 40-mile range.

Using the same math, you can determine that every EV on our list above needs just 5 to 7 solar panels to charge it every day. On the high side, you’d need 10 panels to make enough energy to drive 40 miles in a Ford F-150 LIghtning. Clearly, that is a truck that doesn’t sip the sun juice."

https://www.solarreviews.com/blog/how-much-solar-do-i-need-to-charge-my-electric-car#:~:text=Based%20on%20the%20table%20above,for%2040%20miles%20of%20range.

I like this site, it breaks down the math for you.

I use 5 solar panels through out my farm for fencing, heating, gates and barn lighting. They really don't take much room and would fit easily on a quarter of my garage roof.

I got a quote for solar energy to run my house. It was about 20 panels that would take up about half maybe less of my house roof. I do have a lot of roof space though.

We wouldn't need all that upgrading to make significant in roads to reducing burning fossil fuels. We could start charging EVs from home with very little effort.

Then we could focus on the major polluters - corporate transportation. Those container ships are allowed to burn very dirty fuel and pollute massively.

[Think. Again.]

12. Yep....

....and that's all if a person is completely off-grid.

With a solar, wind, hydro, or nuke -based grid (or any mix of any non-CO2 emitting energy sources), a person wouldn't need any panels at panels at all to keep an EV charging up every night and always have a full battery every morning, and use no fossil fuelsat all to get it.

[Caribbeans]

11. Norway doesn't intend to "end oil" - it's how they subsidize their battery cars & healthcare

Norway is a large energy producer, and one of the world's largest exporters of oil. Most of the electricity in the country is produced by hydroelectricity. Norway is one of the leading countries in the electrification of its transport sector, with the largest fleet of electric vehicles per capita in the world (see plug-in electric vehicles in Norway and electric car use by country).

Since the discovery of North Sea oil in Norwegian waters during the late 1960s, exports of oil and gas have become very important elements of the economy of Norway. With North Sea oil production having peaked, disagreements over exploration for oil in the Barents Sea, the prospect of exploration in the Arctic, as well as growing international concern over global warming, energy in Norway is currently receiving close attention.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_in_Norway

[Think. Again.]

13. It IS ironic...

....that by following Norway's own example of a fossil fuel-free society, we could stop them (and every other fossil seller) from selling fossil fuels by making them economically obsolete.