Tell me more...

That's just a number you pulled out of your ass.

They don't have to completely replace gas cars to have a huge impact on the demand for gas. What happens when half of vehicles on the road are evs?


There was a prolonged spike from 75-85, and then from 05-15. At pretty much every other point in history it's been below $50/barrel.

There're tons of examples where resources/stocks/currencies have fluctuated wildly and then settled in at significantly lower/higher prices.

If it takes 5-10 years for EVs to cross 50% of passenger vehicles sales, that probably means within 20 they'll be half the cars on the road and passenger vehicles account for almost half of oil consumption. And do you really think that if it becomes cost effective for passenger vehicles that NONE of the industrial vehicles will go electric? It's hard to imagine oil consumption dropping any less than 20% within 20 years purely based on the economics of passenger vehicles.

And what percentage of electricity is generated by burning of oil? half of a percent? The reason is because it's not cost effective.

Industrial vehicles won't go electric because electric has diminishing torque, and they probably won't ever make an efficient battery operated semi-truck or heavy machine. Electric works for quick passenger vehicles but I doubt it can work for hauling.

Oil itself way more than 1/2%. Almost all marine uses heavy oil for example. Gasoline and aero-fuel is rendered from crude. Many power plants burn oil or light oil. Burning hydrocarbons is like 95%. It all comes out of the wells the same...mixed together. The burning of hydrocarbons in one form of another is required to generate the vast majority of the worlds electricity. So even this theory that electric cars will somehow save the world from pollution is nonsense. Electric cars coupled with nuclear might, but the footprint from battery factories and charging stations will offset most of the pollution saved from cars going to electric.

Source?

Last I read Suncor who is the biggest player in the Canadian oilsands has costs down to ~24$ a barrel.

Nowhere near that low on average. Suncor is the biggest company in Alberta, but it's not the only one, and I believe they just started with new technology that brings their costs even lower.

~$50 for SAGD, $70 for standalone mine:

http://www.oilsandsmagazine.com/news...ine-since-2015

Syncrude $57

http://ca.reuters.com/article/busine...0QO25I20150819

I work at a SAG-D facility, we are definitely below 50$, last I heard it was ~30$ with plenty of cost cutting and projects to become more efficient (http://www.cenovus.com/technology/esp.html).

Suncor owns Syncrude:

https://www.google.ca/amp/s/seekinga...all-transcript

No. The ratio of car:truck:jet is 24:8:3. The 24 and the 8 are going to be completely electric because at a certain energy density - about a decade away - battery models become very superior in every way, such that producing ICE no longer makes sense. Which leaves the planes. The only new items which run on oil will be planes and remote equipment and ultra heavy machinery like boats. Apart from planes, the rest are close to meaningless in global oil usage.

Global oil usage a percentage of all transportation, in newly produced items, will be <10% once it's all done.

Oil as more than a tiny minority transportation fuel has a limited lifespan. The exact dates of when the mass transfer begins and gasoline/diesel usage starts falling off a cliff, is hard to estimate for a number of reasons. But it's something between 7 and 20 years from now. Electric vehicle sales are already closing in on a million/year and growing exponentially. And they've yet to reach cost parity. Once they do, it'll be an explosion.

total number of cars on the road are projected to double until 2040, most of it from china, india and other developing countries. in most of them (read: except chinese cities) there is little to no infrastructure for EVs, nor do i expect the governments to care (most of them don't even have stable electricity for everyone). so even if you get to 50% EVs by 2040 (which, i think, sounds like a high number, higher in western countries, a lot lower in the developing world) the number of ICEs on the road will be about the same as today (which is around the breakeven timeframe I projected). from there we might be flat on oil demand for a few years before it turns down.

/tbh i think 50% worldwide EV share by 2040 is pretty optimistic if i think about it. people are slow to adapt and a car is a significant investment for most (esp. in 3rd world countries). i just have to think about the amount of 20y old cars i see today.

I don't know why you'd think it would never happen and i have no background in engineering to take a strong position to the contrary, but if hybrid technology reduces large companies fuel consumption costs by even a little bit they'll be on board even faster than the average american driver.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electr..._United_States

suggests that oil is .7%.

[/quote]

It can't be much more than 5% of cars on the road (that get normal mileage) that're over 20 years, and if costs continue to drop, these misers will be the same ones who buy a used electric 10 years down the road to save on fuel costs. This is true for poor people in the developing world too. They won't be buying new, but there is a decent chance they'll switch over before 2040.

And I don't think many people are so scared of change that they'd overlook EVs if/when they're noticeably cheaper - it all depends on how fast costs go down.

Yes, but a lot of natural gasoline is refined from crude, so that should be included in the number for 'oil' as well. Also that's just the electricity generation, it doesn't speak to marine craft, aircraft, or heavy machinery, all of which also use fuel refined from crude. Fuel cost isn't a particular problem for anyone right now. Electric motors produce instantaneous torque, but it diminishes with rpm, and it diminishes with motor size as well due to friction, windage and copper losses etc. Electric motors haven't changed much in the past 50 years, it's all in the wiring. I don't think they will ever replace fuel in cases where a lot of constant power, or power over a long time is needed (which is one of the drawbacks of battery).

I readily admit they will take a certain share of the car market, but to think some parts of even the car market won't continue to use gas is just silly.

TS simultaneously thinks battery powered vehicle will be superior in every way within a decade and the leader in EV has no chance of meeting even 10% of its projections.

Yes. There is zero inconsistency in those positions. Because an EV is just a battery and electric motor slapped on the entire rest of the car. The battery pack and electric motor are the easiest things to make and will be essentially commodities soon.

Tesla = the only one willing to lose billions of dollars putting not-ready batteries in sports car. Other car makers will enter rapidly and at scale soon as batteries become viable for mass market consumption.

Tesla = utterly crushed in the entire rest of the car

Why is this difficult to grasp?

Tesla is crushing in at least one rather significant way: its name is synonymous with fast EVs.

Not as far off as you think:
"Volvo Cars on Wednesday became the first mainstream automaker to sound the death knell of the internal combustion engine, saying that all the models it introduces starting in 2019 will be either hybrids or powered solely by batteries."

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/05/b...ctric-car.html

The bottleneck is the batteries and always has been which is why he's building that superfactory in nevada.

Battery availability is not a bottleneck, in any way. Battery energy density is, but "superfactory" (aka just a factory) won't improve that at all. It's all nonsense.

Why is he building the biggest battery factory in the world then? Elon Musk himself has said it's because there isn't a big enough supply of batteries.

Because he's a moron and megalomaniac who wants to vertically integrate everything. He's building his own car seats too - is that because there isn't a big enough supply of car seats?

Ignore everything Elon Musk says, the guy is as self-interested and prone to lying as Trump. He likes to put himself at the center of everything and be viewed as indispensable visionary, but the truth is he's irrelevant to what will happen with EVs.

Battery factories worth billions are popping all over Asia like mushrooms to fill this market. There's no supply problem at all. Once energy density is sufficient to be competitive with ICE, you'll see an explosion of growth here.

It's not hard to build a battery factory. Short lead time, no great complexities. Far far easier than say a chip factory or an OLED factory.

You sure like to argue...

How's long oil going? Brutal few days, although I guess that's good if you want to get long.

Have you changed your view on anything with what the experts in the thread have said about production costs?

Here we go, a personal attack. You're now blocked for being a generally dislikeable cretin.

I may be dislikable but I'm certainly not a cretin.

Also, not a personal attack at all. Read what I wrote again, there is nothing personal in that whatsoever. I was changing the topic to bring it back to the thread. "Cretin" however is certainly a personal attack.

That you took it as an insult shows you must be really wedded to your theses. That's a horrible quality in an investor. Got to burn that out of yourself. Being rational is all that matters, and that involves changing your mind.

Not the best day for Tesla either..

Yeah never known TS to be a cretin