Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 53

Thread: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

  1. #1
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    (snip)"It seems the panic time for both green enthusiasts and peak oil pundits.

    According to a new paper by two researchers at the University of California – Davis, it would take 131 years for replacement of gasoline and diesel given the current pace of research and development; however, world's oil could run dry almost a century before that.

    The research was published on Nov. 8 at Environmental Science & Technology, which is based on the theory that market expectations are good predictors reflected in prices of publicly traded securities.

    By incorporating market expectations into the model, the authors, Nataliya Malyshkina and Deb Niemeier, indicated that based on their calculation, the peak of oil production could occur between 2010 and 2030, before renewable replacement technologies become viable at around 2140.

    The estimates not only delayed the alternative energy timeline, but also pushed up the peak oil deadline. The researchers suggest some previous estimates that pegged year 2040 as the time frame when alternatives would start to replace oil, could be “overly optimistic".

    As I pointed out before, despite the excitement and hype surrounding a future of clean energy, a majority of the current technology simply does not make economic sense for regular consumers and lack the infrastructure for a mass deployment….even with government subsidies, tax breaks, and outright mandates.

    In addition, the supply chain of renewable technologies is not as green as people might think. Most alternative technologies rely on rare earths for efficiency. However, the radioactive waste produced by rare earths mining process makes oil sands look like a green energy. This overlooked (or ignored) fact just now received some attention due to the sudden shortage caused by China’s embargo and export quotas on rare earths.

    Another case in point – In China, the city of Jiuquan in Gansu province needs to build 9.2 gigawatts of new coal-fired generating capacity as backup power of the 12.7 gigawatts wind turbines due to be installed by 2015. More wind farms would need more coal-fired power plants, with little or possibly no carbon reduction.

    Capitalism means investment naturally flows to the more profitable proposition....and vice versa. With more data and information becoming available, not much could go unnoticed by the markets, particularly in a relatively new sector such as renewable energy. And this harsh reality is clearly reflected in this new study.

    Now, in its latest long term outlook, the International Energy Agency (IEA) predicts that oil demand, prices and dependence on OPEC all set to continue rising through 2035, and that global oil supplies would be near their peak in 2035 as China, India and other emerging economies keep on trucking.

    So the world needs to come to a common understanding that

    1.The alternative energy is not mature enough to completely repalce fossil sources any time soon.

    2.Energy security means a diversified and balanced portfolio inclusive of every bit of resource, fossil as well as renewables, just to meet the projected demand.

    3.Real "green" energy is easier said than done.

    Furthermore, the increased rare earths dependency, and the latest food vs. fuel debate when the food industry slapped a law suit against the EPA over E15 ethanol, underline some of the unintended (we hope), yet nasty consequences that often come with ill-informed and poorly-planned policies. (In the case of E15, the EPA is an easy mark considering one in eight Americans is on food stamps.)

    All this requires a balanced and unbiased government policy to guide exploration and development of technologies to unlock the new fossil fuel reserves, expanding the R&Ds of emerging technologies, while effectively practicing and promoting energy efficiency and conservation.

    Otherwise, we may literally witness $300 a barrel oil before the electric vehicle could even make one percent market penetration. Unfortunately, there's no easy fix, and the clock is seriously ticking. "(snip)

    from

  2. #2
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    ^^^Almost every prediction on oil and energy ever made has been incorrect. This is because studies like the one you cite suffer from stagnant technological analysis. There is no way they can predict the innovations and improvements that will be made in 3-5-10 years and more. 30 years ago they said there was 20 years of oil left- then we figured how do drill deeper, go deep water and get better mileage. Same on both sides of the coin here. No matter how much big oil spends on politicians or studies to dismiss it "green" technology is the wave of the future.

    There are thousands of firms worldwide working on innovation and in the near and far future there will be an explosion of new products and technologies that will make "economic" sense as well as the other benefits to the environment etc. If we allow narrow thinking and special interests surpress or slow down the U.S.'s activity in this field it will be strictly to our own detrement.

    Your argument is the equivelant of someone in 1912 saying that it's better to have a horse because there aren't enough gas stations around to fill up the new cars that had recently arrived. They were right at the time, but those gas stations were sure on their way. Same with the green stuff. No need to slack off oil, explore, innovate all you can- but don't hold back on the green one bit.

  3. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jimboe7373 For This Useful Post:


  4. #3
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    ^^^Some cases in point about the rapid changes in technology and the research taking place:

    http://news.discovery.com/tech/cars-...e-battery.html Car's Body Could Work As A Battery

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/40139203...ure_of_energy/ Recharge that electric car wirelessly

  5. #4
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    ^^^ unfortunately, both of these options untimately rely on the availability of rare earth metals to produce the electric cars ... which also means dealing with mountains of radioactive waste byproducts of heavy metals mining. At present, US rare earth mines have shut down entirely due to the costs / complexities of dealing with the radioactive byproducts, and we are content to let Chinese rare earth processors expose miners to radioactivity and expose Chinese residents to growing radioactive slag heaps.

    However, China's recent announcement of an embargo against rare earth metal exports to Japan, plus imposing quotas on rare earth metal exports to other countries, pretty much guarantees that unless something fundamental changes in the way that US mines can be operated re worker safety and environmental compliance, or unless gov't mandates allow the already uneconomical US price levels of electric cars to double or triple ( like for example by tripling US gasoline and diesel prices ), virtually all future electric car components are going to be sourced from China.

    Be that as it may, it actually has very little to do with the central issue of this thread ... which is that in the medium term at least that worldwide demand for oil / gasoline / diesel will continue to increase, and with it oil prices will continue to increase. From an investor's standpoint, that makes oil majors and particularly XOM worth a 'look-see' ( since XOM has the most bbls of easy to pump at low production cost oil under contract ).

    From a wider economic view, this means that US gasoline / diesel / heating oil prices will continue to rise ... which in turn will drain an increased amount of US middle-class 'discretionary' spending dollars away from things like restaurant meals and lap dances in order to pay for the higher priced gasoline and heating oil necessary to keep living a middle-class lifestyle.

    The linkage that was established between food prices and gasoline prices by the Ethanol mandate, even if it isn't exacerbated by new EPA mandates increasing the 10% ethanol content of gasoline to 15%, will still insure that food prices climb right along with oil prices because modern agricultural production is heavily dependent on energy cost components of fertilizer, pesticides, and mechanized farm equipment operations. However, it is difficult to translate this into relative investment intel on agriculture corporations, since so much of their present profit margins actually depends on tax credits and other agricultural gov't subsidy payments. It is, however, fairly safe to assume that agricultural commodities themselves will continue to increase in price, as will fertilizers and pesticides. As such, fertilizer producers are also worth an investor 'look-see'.

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 11-13-2010 at 02:03 PM.

  6. #5
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    ^^^It's nowhere as dire as you let on. There are plenty of rare-earths in the U.S. and Brazil and almost everywhere else- they are pretty common. China cornerned the market by increasing mining and selling at a very low price and other countries including the U.S. curtailed production because China's was so cheap. Now with that situation changed they are taking steps to increase production on U.S. soil including a large supply in Mountain Pass, Calif. that will be at peak performance in 4 years or so. There are effective ways of dealing with the environmental dangers. This will create several industries including; mining, manufacturing, marketing and regulating environmental safety etc. http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503543_1...77-503543.html

    Brazil is also jumping into the foray and will have major production of the rare earths before we do. And once again technology isn't stagnant, if the rare earth components are too costly or dangerous etc., creative people and companies will invent synthetic or replacement components that solve those problems.

  7. #6
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    ^^^ the 'cheerleading' and 'wishful thinking' are easy to say ... but as Molycorp investors are finding out the 'doing' is far more risky in more ways than one ...

    (snip)"The chasm, in Mountain Pass, Calif., used to be the world’s main mine for rare earth elements — minerals crucial to military hardware and the latest wind turbines and hybrid gasoline-electric cars. Molycorp Minerals, which owns the mine, announced on Monday that it had registered with the Securities and Exchange Commission for an initial public offering to help raise the nearly $500 million needed to reopen and expand the mine.

    Molycorp is making a big bet that its mine — once the world leader in production of rare earth elements, but now a rusting relic — can be made competitive again. Global demand is surging for the minerals. And customers, particularly the American military, are seeking alternatives to China, which now mines 97 percent of the world’s rare earth elements.

    As part of reopening the mine, Molycorp plans to increase its capacity to mine and refine neodymium for rare earth magnets, which are extremely lightweight and are used in many high-tech applications. It will also resume bulk production of lower-value rare earth elements like cerium, used in industrial processes like polishing glass and water filtration.

    But Molycorp, like other foundation stones of American industrial pre-eminence that have cracked or eroded under foreign competition, faces challenges that may prevent its bet from paying off.

    Even riskier are efforts by nearly six dozen other companies in the United States, Canada, South Africa and elsewhere to open new rare earth mines in response to the surging demand.

    Worldwide sales of freshly mined rare earth oxides, although growing more than 10 percent a year, were still only worth about $1.4 billion last year, limiting the potential sales of new mines. Molycorp and the other companies face a challenge to match China’s low costs, a result of low wages and China’s willingness to tolerate heavy environmental damage from rare earth element mines, which have turned some areas into moonscapes. "(snip)

    from


    In other words, the most potentially successful venture re a known resource i.e. the Mountain Pass mine, involves Molycorp raising 1/2 a BILLION dollars worth of private investor money in order to reactivate the existing mine with less environmentally dangerous processing. This economic 'bet' relies on A. the Chinese gov't being serious about export quotas ( which will raise rare earth prices by 400% and thus provide Molycorp a payback on their investment - but will also make the neodymium electric car motors / wind generator magnets 4 times as expensive ), and B. the US and California EPA 'bending' existing rules for the sake of securing a strategic US source of rare earth elements for the US military.

    Indeed Molycorp's stock price has run up nicely as a direct result of the Chinese rare earth export quotas. But at this point, there is little remaining upside potential in Molycorp stock, and now a waiting game begins to see if the politics of electric car promotion and military 'strategic mineral' requirements supersedes the politics of California strip mine regulation and UMW pay scales / work rules to ever allow Molycorp to operate the California mine profitably !

    As to wishful thinking about totally new rare earth mines in Brazil or elsewhere, these essentially involve all of the same risks as gold and silver mine development, plus radioactive slag heaps ! This isn't to say that a country like Brazil might turn a blind eye ... but even so there's no guarantee that any new mine is going to wind up being profitable because of unknown ore grades etc.


    if the rare earth components are too costly or dangerous etc., creative people and companies will invent synthetic or replacement components that solve those problems
    undoubtedly this will happen ! Of course the two essential questions are #1 how long will this take and #2 how much extra will the substitutes cost / how much worse will the substitutes perform i.e. are the substitutes economically viable. In this case, even the 'original' neodymium motors and generators, and even with neodymium produced via 'slave labor' Chinese wage rates and non-existant Chinese environmental compliance costs, are still an order of magnitude away from being competitive with fossil fuels ( in the absence of massive gov't subsidies anyhow ). Thus from the standpoint of a potential investor, virtually every 'green energy' investment is hugely dependent on the continuation of existing US gov't policy re taxpayer funded subsidies to avoid incurring losses.

    Obviously this isn't to say that early investors in 'green energy' related companies from Tesla Motors to Solyndra solar cells to Molycorp to Pacific Ethanol didn't earn a short term profit if the investors jumped on the bandwagon early enough in the cycle. However, any investment profit was earned not from actual profitability of these companies business operations, but via the generosity of the US taxpayer in one form or another. Personally, I have 'conscience' problems making these sort of 'rape the taxpayer' investments, but there are obviously many others who do not. However, in general, if those other investors choose to hold onto their 'green energy' investments to the point where the true economics of the company are eventually scoped out and made public, they usually wind up saddled with significant investment losses ( see other Dollar Den threads re Tesla Motors and Solyndra for details ).

    Again I'll attempt to circle back to the central issue ... that oil isn't going to lose demand for the next decade at least, that oil prices will rise, that rising oil prices will divert 'discretionary' dollars toward necessary expenditures for gasoline / heating oil, that businesses that rely on 'discretionary' spending i.e. businesses that provide non-essential goods and services to the middle class will see a significant decline, etc.

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 11-13-2010 at 08:38 PM.

  8. #7
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    ^^^ the 'cheerleading' and 'wishful thinking' are easy to say
    Not cheerleading and wishful thinking, the track-record of human ingenuity and progress. Exactly how many technological challenges have we not conquered in the last 10,000 years?.

    There are currently plants underway to open in Canada, Brazil and Vietnam.

    Besides that the Japanese have developed an electric car that doesn't use rare earths: http://www.eetimes.com/electronics-n...e-earth-metals

    Posted by Melonie
    Again I'll attempt to circle back to the central issue ... that oil isn't going to lose demand for the next decade at least, that oil prices will rise, that rising oil prices will divert 'discretionary' dollars toward necessary expenditures for gasoline / heating oil, that businesses that rely on 'discretionary' spending i.e. businesses that provide non-essential goods and services to the middle class will see a significant decline, etc.
    And I will circle back to my central point- long term predictions on oil and energy are wrong about 90% of the time.

  9. #8
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    ^^^ actually the Japanese ( and Tesla for that matter ) are using AC motors that do not require a permanent magnet field, neodymium or otherwise. However, they do instead require lots of steel / aluminum / copper for the AC motors plus a large, heavy and complex AC electronics package to power the AC motor that hurts overall power to weight ratio and also adds to intial purchase and ongoing vehicle maintenance costs ( i.e. the AC electronics package in the Tesla is so complicated that only trained Tesla dealers are able to work on it). And guess where the AC electronics package is manufactured in order to keep the cost anywhere near 'reasonable' ... China !


    There are currently plants underway to open in Canada, Brazil and Vietnam.
    So says the investor prospectus, no doubt. From a personal standpoint, there's WAY too much investor risk involved. Keep in mind that where mining operations are concerned, and particularly mining operations in 3rd world countries, there are literally hundreds of gold and silver development mines that have yet to show a profit despite record high gold and silver prices. And gold / silver mining doesn't have to worry about mine workers glowing in the dark !

  10. #9
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    ^^You seem to keep arguing about "right now", I'm not disputing anything about what you say that is current. What I am proposing is that technology is not stagnant and that there are tens of thousands of people out there who are very smart and very creative and have a financial incentive to invent things that will alter the way things are "right now" and make them feasable and profitable in even the short term.

    In the past, as much of this type of innovation took place within the U.S. it was easy for various special interests groups to supress it for their greedy purposes- with the world becoming more "flat" it is not now so easy and for that reason we'll see more of this innovation coming to market and much quicker.
    Last edited by jimboe7373; 11-17-2010 at 08:37 PM.

  11. #10
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    ^^^ this is true re creative people and the pioneering of new technology. My point is that, now and in the future, when that new technology leaves the R&D stage and actually starts producing products for use in the 'real world' ( and jobs and profits ) it is almost guaranteed this will NOT happen in America.

  12. #11
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    this is true re creative people and the pioneering of new technology. My point is that, now and in the future, when that new technology leaves the R&D stage and actually starts producing products for use in the 'real world' ( and jobs and profits ) it is almost guaranteed this will NOT happen in America.
    http://money.cnn.com/2010/11/15/auto...year/index.htm

  13. #12
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    ^^^You seem to be switching topics. You never mentioned anything in your O.P. about whether or not this technology would be implented in the U.S.

    Either way, it's ludicrous to propose that it won't. Probabaly 50% of the firms working on the new technologies are based in the U.S.

  14. #13
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    ^^^ true, but as is admittedly the case with the Chevy Volt, the majority of actual component production ( in terms of value added ) is being performed by subcontractors and company divisions located outside the USA !!! This means that a large piece of the taxpayer subsidy money that Chevy Volts will receive is actually subsidizing Chinese battery and component manufacturers, Korean rare earth electric motor manufacturers etc. Even so GM personnel have admitted that the Chevy Volt is being sold at a loss despite it's high price tag ( with a portion of those losses being made good by revenues from gasoline engine GM vehicles i.e. warrantee cost shifting ). This all relates to the OP article's author's point that implementing green energy is easier said than done ... and particularly so when true costs versus subsidized costs are calculated for both the green energy technology and the unintended consequences. Or put another way, while US companies may be 'working on' green technologies, US taxpayers may be paying for most of that work and non-R&D related US workers may be getting nothing out of it now or in the future.

    PS giving the Motor Trend award to the Chevy Volt at such an early stage shares much in common with President Obama being awarded the Nobel Prize ... i. .e. political correctness purely based on expectations versus acknowledgement of actual real world results !

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 11-18-2010 at 12:34 PM.

  15. #14
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    ^^^You're changing topics again.......

    This was not about components or anything else, but the availibility of those products in the U.S. See:
    when that new technology leaves the R&D stage and actually starts producing products for use in the 'real world' ( and jobs and profits ) it is almost guaranteed this will NOT happen in America.
    Volt will be sold here, U.S. dealerships, salespeople, autoworkers, repair people, service people will all be be part of it.

    As for your other point about true costs etc. If you are going to look at the big picture than let's look at the big picture. There is currently a subsidy of a $7,500 tax credit for getting the Volt. Besides the mamby-pamby factors of less carbon in the air etc, one report showed that it cost the equivalent of about $1.75 per gallon to run the car (this will vary depending on local electric rates). Therefore it could save consumers a lot of money in fuel costs. In addition, how worth it is that $7,500 tax credit if we can someday reduce our reliance on oil from the middle east?- how many billions of dollars will we save if we don't need our military to engage in costly actions to secure our fuel supply?. This technology is in it's infancy and there will without any doubt be all kinds of improvements that will increase it's capacity and lower it's costs in the very near future.

    In fact, here is new quantum improvement right here, a solar powered filling station. It also illustrates a great case in point with the technology getting more affordable.

    "The conventional wisdom likely to raise objections against solar electricity charging stations is that solar energy is just too expensive. Yet photovoltaic (PV) technology prices have been falling since 2008 at extraordinary rates, with module prices dropping by 37.8%, wafer prices by 50% and polysilicon prices by 80%."

    http://www.solarfeeds.com/climate-pr...an-inside-look-

    As for your final comment regarding polical correctness etc. There are many groups and organizations that are politcally connected or motivated etc- Motor Trend is about as far away from that as you can get.

  16. #15
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    Volt will be sold here, U.S. dealerships, salespeople, autoworkers, repair people, service people will all be be part of it.
    yes, through EXISTING US dealerships, salespeople, repair people, service people. As to auto workers, that is the point I was trying to make i.e. that the job of US auto workers re the Volt will be to assemble imported Chinese / Korean sub-assemblies.

    As to dropping solar prices, in point of fact the reason that solar panel prices dropped so much is that the market is now dominated by US assemblers of solar cells imported from China. As discussed in the Solyndra thread, top to bottom US solar manufacturers are no longer economically competitive. So as is also the case with solar and wind devices produced offshore but assembled in America, US taxpayer funded gov't hybrid / electric vehicle subsidies might flow 5% to the US dealerships, 20% to the US assemblers, 65% to the Chinese / Korean subcontractors, and 10% to company stockholders ( who may or may not have a significant US ownership percentage - Arab Oil Shieks just bought 17% of the recent GM IPO ).

  17. #16
    God/dess Zofia's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2002
    Location
    Durham, North Carolina
    Posts
    2,417
    Thanks
    2,964
    Thanked 2,370 Times in 934 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    The rules of physics are set in stone. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. What that means is to move a vehicle of a fixed weight, you need a certain amount of energy. The amount of energy needed does not change no matter what the source. All sources have positives and negatives. Weigh them out before making any claims but one cannot be much more efficient than the other.

  18. #17
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    ^^^ thank you for the concise point. Indeed, plug-in electric vehicles are being touted as the end-all and be-all of 'green' technology. But in point of fact, they are trading off vehicle exhaust pipe emissions for power plant smokestack emissions. This appears to be a good thing in California ( which has very few coal and oil fired power plants ), but is not necessarily a good thing in many other states ( with ~50% of America's electricity still being generated by coal ). In fact, where coal fired power is concerned, the total stack emissions involved may be greater than exhaust pipe emissions from internal combustion engine technology. Thus in point of fact, some applications of US taxpayer funded 'green energy' tax credits are actually INCREASING the total amount of US emissions. And of course this doesn't even address the lack of 'green-ness' re offshore battery manufacture, offshore rare earth metals mining and refining, offshore rare earth magnet motor production etc. that are implicit in plug-in electric car technology i.e. total global emissions are being VASTLY increased ( while California is 'cleaner', locally speaking only - and while midwest states are about break-even on trading exhaust pipe emissions for coal fired power plant stack emissions ).

    The economic kicker of course is that the approximate 33% energy cost advantage enjoyed by plug-in electric vehicles may no longer be present if the US EPA forces coal fired power plants to shut down or forces the owners to spend billions of dollars to further reduce stack emissions. The 33% energy cost advantage will also be significantly reduced if the fuel based road taxes leveed on gasoline and diesel fuel purchases are collected from electric vehicle owners via an alternate method ( Oregon is already experimenting with GPS tracking of vehicle mileage for road tax collection, New York is considering leveeing road tax on electric vehicles based on miles driven reports from annual vehicle inspections etc .) The state gov'ts all realize that the 'stealth' subsidy being provided to hybrid / electric vehicle owners via a ( partial ) exemption from road tax cannot work once the percentage of hybrid / electric vehicles versus internal combustion engine vehicles becomes a significant fraction of total vehicles driving on the state's highways.

  19. #18
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Melonie View Post
    yes, through EXISTING US dealerships, salespeople, repair people, service people.
    The dealerships may have ceased to EXIST without the introduction of the new product, so my point remains very revelent. A new dealership opening has the same net impact as a current dealership not closing. Same is true in regards to the jobs. Once again, back to the original premise about this technology benefiting Americans- if it keeps dealerships that would have closed open and keeps workers that would have been laid off working it benefits Americans. Also, all sales taxes, payroll taxes etc. from sales of these products directly benefit the U.S.

    As to dropping solar prices, in point of fact the reason that solar panel prices dropped so much is that the market is now dominated by US assemblers of solar cells imported from China
    Same point as above, if it is creating jobs, even just as assemblers- it is jobs related to the new technology and sales tax, payroll taxes are being stimulated as those end products are sold in the U.S. In addition you have all the related economic activity- trucking companies delivering the products to and from the factory, accounting firms, rent on the warehouse and office space, advertising, even the places where the employees get lunch from.

  20. #19
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Zofia View Post
    The rules of physics are set in stone. For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction. What that means is to move a vehicle of a fixed weight, you need a certain amount of energy. The amount of energy needed does not change no matter what the source. All sources have positives and negatives. Weigh them out before making any claims but one cannot be much more efficient than the other.
    While this is theoretically true, it fails to take into account the impact of technological improvement. 10 years ago fuel efficiency was about 20 mpg, today we can move roughly the same size/weight care at the same speeds at up to 50 mpg. As to our current discussion, if the technology becomes available to have the solar chargers listed in a previous thread, the cost per mile as well as pollution and other factors will be revised by a very large margin, all because of technological innovation.

  21. #20
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    The Volt is making the Edsel look like a smashing automotive success story.

  22. #21
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    The Volt is making the Edsel look like a smashing automotive success story.
    I guess General Electric didn't get your memo on that:

    "General Electric lights up Chevy's Volt sales
    Firm to add 25K electric cars, starting with 12K from GM"

    http://www.detnews.com/article/20101...99s-Volt-sales

  23. #22
    Banned Eric Stoner's Avatar
    Joined
    Oct 2006
    Location
    NYC
    Posts
    5,150
    Thanks
    1,261
    Thanked 1,430 Times in 888 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    Quote Originally Posted by jimboe7373 View Post
    I guess General Electric didn't get your memo on that:

    "General Electric lights up Chevy's Volt sales
    Firm to add 25K electric cars, starting with 12K from GM"

    http://www.detnews.com/article/20101...99s-Volt-sales
    This is actually mixed news. Nothing about GE's order contradicts anything I posted. Including the sluggish rate of production. I trust you actually READ your own link.

    Moreover, this can be seen as an act of corporate incest by GE as it is heavily invested in so called "green tech" and more importantly stands to profit substantially the more intrusive and oppressive government energy policies become. GE under the idiot Immeldt has tied its future into things like Obama's Cap and Tax policy. Obama has looked very kindly on GE ( thanks in part to getting his political dick sucked by Matthews, Olberman and even Rachel Madcow) and GE in turn has gotten a number of very favorable contracts from the Obama Administration. By helping to prop up GM and by buying a notorious lemon of a car, GE is acting like a toady to the Auto Engineer in Chief.

    From a purely practical point of view, GE's shareholders have a right to be up in arms by this blatant wasteful spending. They are paying $41,000 a car that can't go further than 33 miles on one charge, can't carry more than 4 people WITHOUT luggage and operates on gasoline anyway, on the highway.

  24. #23
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    This is actually mixed news. Nothing about GE's order contradicts anything I posted. Including the sluggish rate of production. I trust you actually READ your own link.
    It's emerging technology and an emerging industry- what do you want massive, instant gauranteed success and if not that don't do anything. Yes, I read my own link- Do you believe in the credence of your own sig?
    "The credit belongs to the man who is actually in the arena... who, at the best, knows in the end the triumph of high achievement, and who, at the worst, if he fails, at least fails while daring greatly, so that his place shall never be with those timid souls who know neither."


    They are paying $41,000 a car that can't go further than 33 miles on one charge, can't carry more than 4 people WITHOUT luggage and operates on gasoline anyway, on the highway
    It goes about 40 miles on the charge only and can go up to 300 with a gas/battery mix if people need. For the many people who have a short daily commute, they can go on only battery- gas and emission free for about $1.50 a day. 75% of the commuters drive less than 30 miles to work and most people spend most of their time in the car alone. People buy a car based on their needs, for people who want to save on fuel costs, protect the environment, have a strong engine and the ability to go far when needed it will be a good fit- many of those people also won't have a need to carry more than four people and luggage.

    In addition, they are also planning on having it available for lease at $350 per month with $2,500 due at signing. For a lot of people the savings on gas purchases coupled with the lease rate will make a lot of economic sense.
    Last edited by jimboe7373; 11-19-2010 at 06:54 PM.

  25. #24
    Veteran Member
    Joined
    Oct 2009
    Posts
    493
    Thanks
    32
    Thanked 211 Times in 137 Posts

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    Quote Originally Posted by Eric Stoner View Post
    Obama has looked very kindly on GE ( thanks in part to getting his political dick sucked by Matthews, Olberman and even Rachel Madcow) and GE in turn has gotten a number of very favorable contracts from the Obama Administration. By helping to prop up GM and by buying a notorious lemon of a car, GE is acting like a toady to the Auto Engineer in Chief.
    Why can't we just limit the discussion to issues like the value, technology and potential demand etc. of the car. When you make insulting, rude and immature remarks about Obama it automatically triggers the response to compare him to Bush. Like in this case where I'll state how I'd much prefer my President to be focusing on and putting money and energy into encouraging new technology and industries that are designed to create jobs and lesson our need for foriegn oil as opposed to a President who is going to invade a country on fraudulent evidence, waste $1 Trillion and cause a few hundred thousand people to die.

  26. #25
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: weekend commentary - future oil prices versus 'green energy'

    Same is true in regards to the jobs. Once again, back to the original premise about this technology benefiting Americans- if it keeps dealerships that would have closed open and keeps workers that would have been laid off working it benefits Americans. Also, all sales taxes, payroll taxes etc. from sales of these products directly benefit the U.S.
    OK staying completely on topic ...

    How do you figure that the Volt will keep laid off workers on the job when 2/3rds of the jobs supporting the Volt will be based in China, South Korea etc. Also, zero US payroll taxes are collected from those Chinese and South Korean subcontract workers. Yes sales tax will be collected on the sale of Volts, offset by a net tax revenue 'loss' of the $7,500 federal tax credit plus whatever state tax credit is available. Thus the Volt serves a secondary 'stealth' function i.e. redistributing federal tax dollars to high tax rate ( blue ) states !!!

    It will be extremely interesting to see how the new votes on the GM board of directors ... i.e. those backed by the 17% stock ownership by Arab Oil Shieks, plus those backed by the 18% stock ownership by the Chinese gov't ... steer the future of the Volt.

    And last but not least, in the final analysis every purchase of a new Chevy Volt probably displaces the purchase of a new gas engine vehicle ... thus the dealership / repair / service argument will net out to zero additional income tax revenues, zero additional jobs etc.

    people who want to save on fuel costs
    The volt only appears to save on fuel costs by avoiding the payment of appropriate road tax and by the de-facto substitution from high priced gasoline to lower priced coal ( at the power plants being used to charge them ). If coal fired power plants are carbon limited, electricity prices based on natgas generation will quickly rise.

    protect the environment
    The Volt only appears to protect the environment in the immediate area where it is driven. However, the environmental damage done in China in order to produce batteries and rare earth magnet motors for the Volt is truly horrible. And don't forget those increased coal fired power plant stack emissions located one state away !

    they are also planning on having it available for lease at $350 per month with $2,500 due at signing. For a lot of people the savings on gas purchases coupled with the lease rate will make a lot of economic sense
    If this is actually true it is grossly mis-priced. Unlike a 3-4 year old leased gas engine vehicle, a 3-4 year old leased Volt is going to suffer hugely in resale value because at the 5 year mark it is going to need a $10,000 battery replacement. The ONLY way that ALLY bank can be making money on this lease arrangement is by 'cost shifting' the warrantee replacement battery costs to gas engine GM vehicle buyers in the form of higher than necessary prices.

    There are so many 'stealth' subsidies involved in electric vehicles, and so many real world negative factors that are ignored and/or discounted, yet electric vehicles still aren't close to being price competitive with high efficiency gasoline engine and especially high efficiency diesel engine vehicles. My personal position is that if certain people want to own an electric vehicle for whatever reason, go for it ! However, don't expect US taxpayers to subsidize 20% of your purchase price ( via tax credits ) plus 20% of your 'fuel' cost ( via road tax avoidance ) plus 50% or your maintenance costs ( via pooling vehicle warrantee costs to spread the cost of warrantee battery replacement to buyers of ALL types of GM vehicles ).

    ~
    Last edited by Melonie; 11-19-2010 at 07:52 PM.

Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. weekend commentary - oil prices are going higher
    By Melonie in forum Dollar Den
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-23-2010, 01:41 AM
  2. Replies: 5
    Last Post: 04-10-2010, 01:11 PM
  3. Replies: 15
    Last Post: 07-29-2008, 03:19 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-22-2008, 04:00 PM
  5. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 05-06-2006, 07:03 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •