SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Transportation accounts for a huge portion of US carbon emissions. As recently as 2014, it was behind the electricity sector — 26 percent of US emissions to electricity's 30 percent. But as the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) just confirmed, as of 2016, they have crossed paths. "Electric power sector CO2 emissions," EIA writes, "are now regularly below transportation sector CO2 emissions for the first time since the late 1970s."
This is happening because power sector "carbon intensity" — carbon emissions per unit of energy produced — is falling, as coal is replaced with natural gas, renewables, and efficiency.
The only realistic prospect for reducing transportation sector emissions rapidly and substantially is electrification. How much market share EVs take from oil (gasoline is by far the most common use for oil in the US) will matter a great deal.
[...] Today saw the release of a new study from the Grantham Institute for Imperial College London and the Carbon Tracker Initiative. It argues that solar photovoltaics (PV) and EVs together will kick fossil fuel's ass, quickly.
"Falling costs of electric vehicle and solar technology," they conclude, "could halt growth in global demand for oil and coal from 2020." That would be a pretty big deal.
The "business as usual" (BAU) scenarios that typically dominate these discussions are outdated, the researchers argue. New baseline scenarios should take into account updated information on PV, EV, and battery costs. (The EIA doesn't expect inflation-adjusted prices of EVs to fall to $30,000 until 2030, even as multiple automakers say they'll hit that within a few years.)
[...] If these forecasts play out, fossil fuels could lose 10 percent market share to PV and EVs within a decade. A 10 percent loss in market share was enough to send the US coal industry spiraling, enough to cause Europe's utilities to hemorrhage money. It could seriously disrupt life for the oil majors. "Growth in EVs alone could lead to 2 million barrels of oil per day being displaced by 2025," the study says, "the same volume that caused the oil price collapse in 2014-15."
Source: http://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2017/2/2/14467748/electric-vehicles-oil-market
(Score: 2) by Sulla on Saturday February 04 2017, @05:52PM
Currently I drive a truck because I do woodworking as a hobby and I'm not going to deal with strapping wood to the top of a hybrid every weekend. My wife has a minivan because of kids. When it comes down to it even if around town my wife's van will get better gas mileage, it is a shitty ride, dangerous, and has assloads of problems (2012 dodge caravan with 50k miles).
Trucks have been improving greatly in the mpg area. My 13 got 15 city and 19 highway (f150 single cab longbed v8) and my 16 gets 15 city and 20/25 highway (f150 supercab longbed v8). I imagine I will get another in a few years when they go hybrid.
Electric cars will susceed as they match the users way of life, not because users are forced to change their way of life. Some concessions are acceptable, but I am not going to bottom out my vehicle when I go shooting, or strap wood on the top, or tow with a caravan.
Ceterum censeo Sinae esse delendam
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 04 2017, @10:57PM
http://www.viamotors.com/vehicles/electric-truck/ [viamotors.com]
"The eREV powertrain by VIA enables larger vehicles, including vans and light trucks, to drive the first 40 miles in all-electric mode with near zero emissions, and a full range of 400 miles on a single fill-up. For most drivers, this means up to 100 mpg in typical local daily driving. It’s exciting to drive — with more low-end torque. The electric truck performs as well as or better than the comparable gas version."
See also a blocky electric van outrace a Ferrari:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VQn9DLOQWZg [youtube.com]
And:
http://www.alternative-energy-news.info/nissan-e-nv200-electric-minivan/ [alternative-energy-news.info]
So, even if these may not be good enough for everyone, they are good enough for more and more people.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday February 04 2017, @11:12PM
So, even if these may not be good enough for everyone, they are good enough for more and more people.
That is the key. You don't have to replace all sales to push the market off a fiscal cliff. As the article says, even just a 10% drop in demand can cause major disruption. So far, projections for "green tech" over the last decade have woefully under predicted the reality. Betting against that trend wouldn't be smart.