SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
The price of oil is now under $70 a barrel after OPEC decided it would not cut back production significantly in the months ahead and the latest OPEC move suggests that it isn’t going to reverse course anytime soon.. Now Neil Irwin reports in the NYT that the falling price of oil looks likely to be one of the dominant forces shaping the global economy in 2015. So who wins and who loses? Winner: Global consumers as anybody who drives a car or flies on airplanes gets lower prices for gasoline and jet fuel. Loser: American oil producers - One of the big open questions is just how many of the small, independent producers in the American heartland will still be viable with oil prices in the $60s rather than the $100s. Many have relied on borrowed money, and bankruptcies are possible. Loser: Vladimir Putin - Russia’s economy is already facing its sharpest challenges in years, as Western sanctions imposed after Russian aggression toward Ukraine crimp the nation’s ability to be integrated in the global economy. Russia is a major energy producer, and the falling price of oil compounds the challenge facing its president, Vladimir Putin.
Potential Loser: The environment. As a general rule, the cheaper fossil fuels become, the more challenging it will be for cleaner forms of energy like solar and wind power to be competitive on price. But solar and wind power are sources for electricity, whereas fluctuations in oil prices most directly affect the price of transportation fuels like gasoline and jet fuel. Unless or until more Americans use electric cars, they are largely separate markets, so there’s no reason that cheaper oil should cause a major reduction in investment in renewables. The average pump price of a gallon of regular gasoline in the United States was $3.12 this week, down from $3.80 in October 2012 and down from $3.70 just four months ago. In the past, cheaper gasoline has two environmentally problematic effects: It leads people to drive thirstier cars and trucks and to drive them more miles. This time may be different. The number of miles Americans drive per capita has declined for nine straight years dropping from roughly 10,100 miles in 2004 to about 9,400 miles in 2013. A change that significant suggests a change in lifestyle—one that would be hard to upend. In addition, the average fuel economy of new cars and trucks sold in the United States has increased markedly over the past decade—in contrast to the 1990s, when new-vehicle fuel economy essentially flat-lined. Today, the average new car sold in this country goes 36 miles on a gallon of gasoline, up from 29.5 mpg in 2004. "Times have changed since the dawn of the last era of cheap oil," says Jeffrey Ball. "Even assuming low oil prices are the new normal, a cleaner energy system probably is too."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Hairyfeet on Monday December 01 2014, @08:30AM
When you figure in the cost of everything from mining the lithium to the recycling? They just don't work. Also to affect real change you have to have used cars as well as new and because of how quickly the electric batteries shit themselves they will never be a serious contender in the used market where most of your poor (who drive the most gas guzzlers because that is all they can afford) get their cars. What we REALLY need is a "people's car/truck/crossover" where the requirements are 1.- Under 20K, 2.- Over 38 MPG, 3.- A big "cash for clunkers" style program to give your working poor the capital to get the gas hogs off the road. Frankly this wouldn't be hard to do, you could take a good 4 cyl diesel and wed it to a basic small truck chassis and use that as the base for all 3. Sadly you can't get enough Solyndra style kickbacks for such a practical thing to ever take off.
As for the mileage? Thank congress for blocking Internet taxation as online shopping seriously cuts down the driving. I went from a Ford ranger to a big ass GMC Yukon (have an autistic son I have to drive around and married a woman with grandkids, what can ya do?) yet my gas spending has gone down, thanks to online shopping. this is not only better for me but better for the environment as I sat down and figured how much driving I'd need to do to get my ecig supplies, parts for the shop, pretty much everything that isn't groceries and I'd be looking at a good couple hundred miles and that is if I planned ahead and didn't have any curveballs. Compare this to my shopping online where I went a grand total of 8 miles to pick up some packages that wouldn't fit in the box. That's a pretty big difference and I'm not doing a ton of shopping guys, I bet there is a lot of folks using a hell of a lot less gas by just shopping online.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 2, Informative) by Gravis on Monday December 01 2014, @12:00PM
When you figure in the cost of everything from mining the lithium to the recycling? They just don't work.
wow! now that is shortsighted! the gigafactory being built is expected to reduce the cost of the batteries by a minimum of 30%.
Sadly you can't get enough Solyndra style kickbacks for such a practical thing to ever take off.
it's hilarious you mention that because oil is subsidized. i say we shift those subsidies to electric cars batteries and solar panels since they "dont work".
(Score: 2) by Daiv on Monday December 01 2014, @01:57PM
We are effectively in the first generation of practical electric vehicles. I welcome the evolutionary changes likely to come out of the electric vehicle market that may overflow to other areas. Even if some of the technology gets adapted into hybrids that eventually take up a small percentage of the market, it's worth it.
Electric cars may not work in your self-defined parameters, but they do work. They work for making progress.
(Score: 2) by nitehawk214 on Monday December 01 2014, @04:38PM
Nobody is trying to take your gas guzzler away. Or more realistically, nobody is going to give you a free car to your exact specifications. You want people to subsidize your gas use by cancelling all electric vehicle programs? Well it isn't going to happen. Gas is already highly subsidized in the USA, it always has been, probably more than electric is considering all the lobbyist dollars.
The car you ask for already exists [fueleconomy.gov]. In fact a lot of light cars are close to 40mpg today. Hell, Hybrids are nearly down to $20k at this point. That they can't haul around all the stuff you need is your problem, not ours. You want an SUV that runs on normal gas that gets 40mpg. At no price point will this ever be possible unless it is a hybrid.
As much as I would like to have an electric; the specifications for my next vehicle require it to run on gas. (All wheel drive, carry camping gear and a 11" telescope, range of at least 400 miles including refueling.) At least there are hybrid crossovers that do what I need and save gas while doing so. Yes, I will be paying more, and because of my requirements, I am totally fine with this.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2) by LoRdTAW on Tuesday December 02 2014, @01:07PM
Define gas guzzling. Where I live they mostly drive around in pretty efficient cars, mostly older 90's Japanese cars such as Hondas and Toyotas. And not all of them are younger kids in wanna be ricers. Up until recently I ran around in a 95 Civic and sold it to a kid for $500 who was ecstatic to get a black 2 door civic with a stick.
(Score: 2) by Hairyfeet on Thursday December 04 2014, @06:07AM
I was going by the DOT numbers which stated last I looked that the average car used by those making less than $25k a year (your working poor) has an average MPG of just 23mpg, lower than pretty much anywhere on the planet. Next time you are driving by a used car lot, the type that brags "got a job get a car" see what kind of vehicles you see, yours is the exception NOT the rule I'm afraid.
And again this frankly could be fixed in less than 5 years, a single small diesel truck chassis could be the base for a "peoples vehicle" that would easily get 35+ MPG, probably over 40MPG if you choose the right engine AND you could cover a good 80% of the use cases, from your poor mom with 4 kids to the guy hauling trash, you just wouldn't get Solyndra style kickbacks from it. BTW just FYI might want to look and see how much the big donors got from the POTUS for their "green initiatives", biggest payout since Nixon. Sadly the more things change...
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.