SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the instead-of-batteries-just-use-a-very-long-extension-cord dept.
The future is not looking bright for oil, according to a new report that claims the commodity would have to be priced at $10-$20 a barrel to remain competitive as a transport fuel.
The new research, from BNP Paribas, says that the economics of renewable energy make it impossible for oil to compete at current prices. The author of the report, global head of sustainability Mark Lewis, says that "renewable electricity has a short-run marginal cost of zero, is cleaner environmentally, much easier to transport and could readily replace up to 40% of global oil demand".
[...] The report, Wells, Wires, And Wheels... Eroci And The Tough Road Ahead For Oil, introduces the concept of the Energy Return on Capital Invested (EROCI), focusing on the energy return on a $100bn outlay on oil and renewables where the energy is being used to power cars and other light-duty vehicles (LDVs).
"For a given capital outlay on oil and renewables, how much useful energy at the wheel do we get? Our analysis indicates that for the same capital outlay today, new wind and solar-energy projects in tandem with battery electric vehicles will produce six to seven times more useful energy at the wheels than will oil at $60 per barrel for gasoline powered light-duty vehicles, and three to four times more than will oil at $60 per barrel for light-duty vehicles running on diesel," says Lewis.
As fossil fuels phase out, will battery technology improve quickly enough to support the transition to renewables?
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Thursday September 05 2019, @03:06AM (2 children)
Not if they're maintained.
http://www.imsdredge.com/reservoir-dredging/ [imsdredge.com]
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.
(Score: 2) by legont on Friday September 06 2019, @02:00AM (1 child)
The book https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cadillac_Desert [wikipedia.org] covers it as well - too expensive. Californians will all leave well before they collect enough taxes for the task. As per the federal government paying for this, well... fly over people might not appreciate it this time aground. They may say that the water is better spent upstream and fuck them liberals from California.
"Wealth is the relentless enemy of understanding" - John Kenneth Galbraith.
(Score: 2) by Reziac on Friday September 06 2019, @04:07AM
When I backtrack this guy's connections, I conclude he was part of the circular lobbying that 'environmental' groups are so good at, with the real goal being to suck money from the public teat. Basically they get themselves hired to produce a study that shows how their activities are necessary, so they can get funding for their activities. At best it's dishonest; at worst it's downright fraudulent.
And as one of those folks from flyover country (but who did 28 years in SoCal) I'm all for making California solve their own damn problems, which are entirely of their own making. If we that's upstream wouldn't sell 'em the water, maybe they'd figure out how to effectively use their own, which they are not actually short of, if politics got out of the way. Which won't happen so long as the current cabal runs the state.
And there is no Alkibiades to come back and save us from ourselves.