Peak Oil

[orr]

Hey guy's ...
One important thing to keep in mind with regard Fleet turn over. Although ICE vehicals have become more fuel efficent the comparitive cost advantage of EV is in the realms of one third when compared to an ICE vehical.
Take these generics:-(tax issues and maintenace can be discussed elswehere/or not)
Average fuel (similar to that of a large passanger car) consumption of all Aust vehicals is ...13lt/100km.
13lts @ $1.30/lt circa........$16/100km...
A Tesla3(standard size passanger car) consumption 16kw/h per 100km
16kwh @ $0.35/kwh circa..$5.60/100km

For business as rapid a change as possible to EV will be an imperative which hasn't been the case with 'like for like'... And the bigger component oil based fuel is to a business, the BIGGER that imperative.

 

[Smurf1976]

For business use EV's would solve a lot of problems.

I've worked in places with shared "pool" cars and without exception it always comes to the same point. Management finds it necessary to issue a formal direction that no car shall be returned less than a quarter full of fuel. Give it a year and the same direction is issued again following another incident.

Because getting staff to actually put fuel in a shared car seems to always be a problem.

Enforcing an "always plugged in when parked" EV policy would be far easier.

 

[Value Collector]

Agreed.

I'm just always cautious on this issue since I've had the discussion many times with people who for whatever reason miss the difference between "new car sales" and "fleet composition". It comes up quite a bit that one, failing to account for the time to turnover the fleet.

I'm referring to people in general there, not specifically on this forum.

Reminds me of a saying “If you find your self stuck in a hole, the first step to freeing yourself is you stop digging out the bottom of the hole”

the actual date in the future that we find ourselves with a 100% zero emission fleet is not overly important, what is important is first stopping the growth of carbon emissions, and then eventually reducing carbon emissions.

 

[qldfrog]

For business use EV's would solve a lot of problems.

I've worked in places with shared "pool" cars and without exception it always comes to the same point. Management finds it necessary to issue a formal direction that no car shall be returned less than a quarter full of fuel. Give it a year and the same direction is issued again following another incident.

Because getting staff to actually put fuel in a shared car seems to always be a problem.

Enforcing an "always plugged in when parked" EV policy would be far easier.

Except that it remain easier to top up a petrol car, even if with nearly empty tank than jumping on a shared car, plugged in but with still warm seat from previous user, and with a 5% charged battery and 20km range....

 

[moXJO]

Except that it remain easier to top up a petrol car, even if with nearly empty tank than jumping on a shared car, plugged in but with still warm seat from previous user, and with a 5% charged battery and 20km range....

I had problems on jobsites with the EV EWP.
Some bastard would use ours over night and leave it flat.
The diesel ones was easier to get going. But then the trade off of fumes for convenience.

 

[sptrawler]

For business use EV's would solve a lot of problems.

I've worked in places with shared "pool" cars and without exception it always comes to the same point. Management finds it necessary to issue a formal direction that no car shall be returned less than a quarter full of fuel. Give it a year and the same direction is issued again following another incident.

Because getting staff to actually put fuel in a shared car seems to always be a problem.

Enforcing an "always plugged in when parked" EV policy would be far easier.

I think that will be a big issue with emergency service vehicles, if they have two currently, my guess is they will have two + standby when they go BEV.

 

[qldfrog]

Peak oil?
“It's more than all the oil ever extracted from Earth” ― Russia finds a mega-field... in this country https://share.google/yFaZa6M7t3FcHdFW4

 

[Dona Ferentes]

Peak oil?
“It's more than all the oil ever extracted from Earth” ― Russia finds a mega-field... in this country https://share.google/yFaZa6M7t3FcHdFW4

Guyana and Suriname are joinng the 1M bbl a day club.

 

[Smurf1976]

Peak oil?
“It's more than all the oil ever extracted from Earth” ― Russia finds a mega-field... in this country

The first red flag is the claim that 511 billion barrels is more oil than ever extracted from earth.

In truth that's a bit less than has been used since 2010. As with anything, once one blatantly false claim is spotted, that raises doubts as to the accuracy of the rest.

Key questions:

Is that recoverable oil? Or is it simply oil in place?

Next question is the economic feasibility of recovering it?

Is it actual oil? Or is it "barrels of oil equivalent" including gas?

And finally, is Russia claiming ownership of it? Or does Britain own it?

I'm not saying it's crap, but given the overstated claim about it being more oil than has ever been extracted, I'm questioning the rest.

 

[Sdajii]

The first red flag is the claim that 511 billion barrels is more oil than ever extracted from earth.

In truth that's a bit less than has been used since 2010. As with anything, once one blatantly false claim is spotted, that raises doubts as to the accuracy of the rest.

Key questions:

Is that recoverable oil? Or is it simply oil in place?

Next question is the economic feasibility of recovering it?

Is it actual oil? Or is it "barrels of oil equivalent" including gas?

And finally, is Russia claiming ownership of it? Or does Britain own it?

I'm not saying it's crap, but given the overstated claim about it being more oil than has ever been extracted, I'm questioning the rest.

This particular claim is whatever it is which may be anything between huge and nothing, but it's safe to say that the peak oil scares of not so many years ago were based on the incorrect assumption that global reserves were far lower than they actually are.

 

[qldfrog]

The first red flag is the claim that 511 billion barrels is more oil than ever extracted from earth.

In truth that's a bit less than has been used since 2010. As with anything, once one blatantly false claim is spotted, that raises doubts as to the accuracy of the rest.

Key questions:

Is that recoverable oil? Or is it simply oil in place?

Next question is the economic feasibility of recovering it?

Is it actual oil? Or is it "barrels of oil equivalent" including gas?

And finally, is Russia claiming ownership of it? Or does Britain own it?

I'm not saying it's crap, but given the overstated claim about it being more oil than has ever been extracted, I'm questioning the rest.

Well the link is not from the safest source, but was second similar related "news" so worth a post.
but lets say if we start looking in virgin territory, it is quite reasonable to expect some findings.
No, peak oil is not now, it will happen, oil might get dearer but we are not there yet.

 

[Smurf1976]

it's safe to say that the peak oil scares of not so many years ago were based on the incorrect assumption that global reserves were far lower than they actually are.

Agreed - although the geopolitical and environmental issues with oil are still very relevant.

Bearing in mind the environmental issues are more than just the impact of burning it. In the case of Antarctica, any spill would be pretty hard to clean up for example (versus spilling a solid material would be much easier to clean up).

 

[qldfrog]

Agreed - although the geopolitical and environmental issues with oil are still very relevant.

Bearing in mind the environmental issues are more than just the impact of burning it. In the case of Antarctica, any spill would be pretty hard to clean up for example (versus spilling a solid material would be much easier to clean up).

Neither is it in 50c desert but there, people do not care.
Funny how we care more about a "pristine" frozen dead world than the equivalent overheated one.
But i digress and yes frozen oil spill will take a while to be "digested"

 

[Sdajii]

Agreed - although the geopolitical and environmental issues with oil are still very relevant.

Bearing in mind the environmental issues are more than just the impact of burning it. In the case of Antarctica, any spill would be pretty hard to clean up for example (versus spilling a solid material would be much easier to clean up).

Those are two issues separate from each other and the topic of peak oil. The point is that whether or not the new find is significant, real reserves are far larger than what was assumed not too long ago when people thought peak oil was looming or had already happened. Antarctica probably has a tremendous amount of oil, and the Middle East presumably still has more than it supposedly had 20 years ago.

 

[Smurf1976]

Those are two issues separate from each other and the topic of peak oil.

Agreed with the environment.

For geopolitics though, pretty much all professional discussion of the subject of oil and gas supply has focused very heavily on geopolitics and the question of on what terms, or even if, that oil will be available to the West. Typical wording being along the lines of "....may not be available at all, or at least not at prices affordable for electricity generation or industrial use".

Acknowledged that is perhaps not the mainstream public version, but within the energy industry (not limited to the oil industry itself but including electricity utilities etc) the political dimension has always loomed large.

Acknowledged that's different to the mainstream definition of "peak oil" however.

 

[Smurf1976]

To clarify what I'm saying, it's not my intent to be negative about the discovery in Antarctica, say it can't work and so on an my previous posts may have, unintentionally on my part, conveyed that impression.

Rather what I'm intending to say is to be cautious, because there's a lot that's uncertain or subject to physical or political risk. It's by no means certain we'll be seeing oil from that source on the market anytime soon.

 

[Sdajii]

Agreed with the environment.

For geopolitics though, pretty much all professional discussion of the subject of oil and gas supply has focused very heavily on geopolitics and the question of on what terms, or even if, that oil will be available to the West. Typical wording being along the lines of "....may not be available at all, or at least not at prices affordable for electricity generation or industrial use".

Acknowledged that is perhaps not the mainstream public version, but within the energy industry (not limited to the oil industry itself but including electricity utilities etc) the political dimension has always loomed large.

Acknowledged that's different to the mainstream definition of "peak oil" however.

It's something of a moot point about this find by Russia, considering no one has ever produced oil in Antarctica, and there is an international agreement very likely to be respected which prohibits all mining in Antarctica until 2048.

But either way, in the sense of our ability to produce oil above the rate we have actually done so far, we haven't seen the peak yet, even if you completely exclude Antarctica from the picture. By all accounts, even excluding Antarctica, supply looks very comfortably able to satisfy demand for decades to come, with global proven reserves at their highest levels ever (partly due to new discoveries and partly due to imoroved extraction technology) still growing, not declining. With that being the case, regardless of how much or little is in Antarctica, we're unlikely to see anyone making any active attempt to extract it in our lifetimes, if ever.

 

[Knobby22]

Peak Oil was a real thing but then fracking was invented.