Oil majors dumping capital expenditures...
Yes, saying that Greek economic troubles (who are "white", by the way) ultimately trace their origin to a culture that is socialist, broken and corrupt and hence economically inferior to Northern European cultures, is racism. Are you high or something? WTF is wrong with you? Cultures define nations and economies and have nothing to do with race.
Nice red herring though. You must be feeling the shame of your OP in your bones.[
Nice red herring though. You must be feeling the shame of your OP in your bones.[
Don't weasel out of it, own it.
Good job ignoring the fact that the industry, as a whole, is not maintaining sufficient cash flow, and desperately needed investment opportunities are drying up.
Yeah, no. It's clear you still don't actually understand what peak oil refers to, and continue to confuse short-term production gain with longer-term production promise.
It's not how much you can ramp up and produce in a given month or year when Wall St. gives you an open line of credit. It's about how much you can prove you can produce going forward. No one expects your heroes in the tight oil industry to expand much further. That band has stretched as far as it can go.
Because as we've covered dozens of times, your "no problem" argument needs every last drop of new production coming in. Lop off 1/3 of producers in 18 months, watch CAPEX nosedive for the survivors (already is), then you've got serious problems on the near horizon. The "market" you worship so fervently doesn't just fix that scenario, seamlessly and quickly. It's a complete dislocation of all markets, as we'll see soon enough.
We're not talking about copper here. We're talking about oil, the lifeblood of all industrial society. The health of the oil industry is what maintains "business as usual" for the global economy, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
Any way you want to slice it, we are LONG past the point of the oil industry maintaining positive cash flow. That is absolutely because of depletion, and we're delaying the inevitable with this short, uneconomic wave of tight oil production. If we took away the subsidy and the baseless loans (to frackers) and the demand-slowing austerity, I think we can all agree that oil price would be much, much higher right now.
That's what my post referred to two years ago, troll.
It's not how much you can ramp up and produce in a given month or year when Wall St. gives you an open line of credit. It's about how much you can prove you can produce going forward. No one expects your heroes in the tight oil industry to expand much further. That band has stretched as far as it can go.
We're not talking about copper here. We're talking about oil, the lifeblood of all industrial society. The health of the oil industry is what maintains "business as usual" for the global economy, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
Any way you want to slice it, we are LONG past the point of the oil industry maintaining positive cash flow. That is absolutely because of depletion, and we're delaying the inevitable with this short, uneconomic wave of tight oil production. If we took away the subsidy and the baseless loans (to frackers) and the demand-slowing austerity, I think we can all agree that oil price would be much, much higher right now.
That's what my post referred to two years ago, troll.
And thank you for the below, this is wonderful, old school Jiggs
We're not talking about copper here. We're talking about oil, the lifeblood of all industrial society. The health of the oil industry is what maintains "business as usual" for the global economy, whether you want to acknowledge it or not.
Any way you want to slice it, we are LONG past the point of the oil industry maintaining positive cash flow. That is absolutely because of depletion, and we're delaying the inevitable with this short, uneconomic wave of tight oil production.
The mental acrobatics required to reconcile those contradictory positions has given us much pleasure. I'm glad you're back and kicking.
Yeah, electricity isn't an energy source, genius. And renewables don't provide the energy density needed to maintain a fleet of 800 million vehicles. Sorry. EVs are still powered by fossil fuels, largely.
Also, "offshore oil" isn't cheap, nor is it "unlimited" in any economical sense.
If your post were accurate and we were successfully phasing it out, global oil consumption wouldn't still be going up with each passing year.
It's funny that you mention anyone else somehow "not understanding" oil markets.
Also, "offshore oil" isn't cheap, nor is it "unlimited" in any economical sense.
If your post were accurate and we were successfully phasing it out, global oil consumption wouldn't still be going up with each passing year.
It's funny that you mention anyone else somehow "not understanding" oil markets.
Offshore oil is not only very cheap on a relative basis (you're looking at breakeven crude points from the 30s to the 60s for most projects, which is why they've stopped doing them with oil this low), but is also incredibly plentiful. We have barely scratched the surface of offshore oil, and technology continues to give us access to ever deeper fields at reduced costs. But again, with oil so cheap and oversupplied, there is just idle offshore machinery sprinkled all over the world.
I did not say oil was being phased out, I said this will likely happen in the future as gas pumps are supplanted by sockets. The high density applications (jet fuel) will take much, much longer to replace and plastic applications may never be replaced, but these are fractional pieces of oil demand.
So just to reiterate again: oil is very oversupplied right now, there is cheap oil all across the world not being drilled now because oil is so cheap and oversupplied, and oil may be PERMANENTLY oversupplied because demand may start plummeting within the next 10-15 years due to a permanent move away from oil-fueled transportation and towards electricity-fueled transportation.
I mean kinda ironically you've stumbled onto something that could happen soon. Not because any of the idiocy you're spouting about peak oil, but oil oversupply could lead to (or create the conditions for) a civil war in Venezuela, Brazil, or even KSA/other middle eastern countries.
Yeah, electricity isn't an energy source, genius. And renewables don't provide the energy density needed to maintain a fleet of 800 million vehicles. Sorry. EVs are still powered by fossil fuels, largely.
Also, "offshore oil" isn't cheap, nor is it "unlimited" in any economical sense.
If your post were accurate and we were successfully phasing it out, global oil consumption wouldn't still be going up with each passing year.
It's funny that you mention anyone else somehow "not understanding" oil markets.
Also, "offshore oil" isn't cheap, nor is it "unlimited" in any economical sense.
If your post were accurate and we were successfully phasing it out, global oil consumption wouldn't still be going up with each passing year.
It's funny that you mention anyone else somehow "not understanding" oil markets.
Peak oil supply being thoroughly disproven, we need to start talking about the problem of peak oil demand, which is a certainty thanks to the coming electrification. That will impact some industries pretty heavily. I predict peak oil demand will occur roughly in 2024, after which time demand will fall further and further under supply.
Mother of god Jiggs... You still believe in peak oil? How? Oil, as a technology, is at the 'approaching obsolescence' stage while oil extraction technology has improved drastically allowing for reserves that effectively did not exist when people dreamed up peak oil to be tapped.
High oil prices always depended on the richest nation in the world needing vast quantities of imported oil. Now we don't. The market has reacted accordingly.
You really can't see that the game has changed completely can you?
High oil prices always depended on the richest nation in the world needing vast quantities of imported oil. Now we don't. The market has reacted accordingly.
You really can't see that the game has changed completely can you?
Mother of god Jiggs... You still believe in peak oil? How? Oil, as a technology, is at the 'approaching obsolescence' stage while oil extraction technology has improved drastically allowing for reserves that effectively did not exist when people dreamed up peak oil to be tapped.
High oil prices always depended on the richest nation in the world needing vast quantities of imported oil. Now we don't. The market has reacted accordingly.
You really can't see that the game has changed completely can you?
High oil prices always depended on the richest nation in the world needing vast quantities of imported oil. Now we don't. The market has reacted accordingly.
You really can't see that the game has changed completely can you?
No one disputes technology for tight oil plays has improved, and production cost for each individual fracking well has fallen a little. You still have to move your well-head every 2-3 years with this crap, and production cost hasn't come down nearly as far as you cornucopians insist. The industry as a whole still isn't making money enough to maintain future exploration and infrastructure expansion.
You're all crowing about "over-supply," when all this is is lack of storage amid a short-term burst in production enabled entirely by unsustainable levels of credit. This has been shown dozens of times in links "no problem" trolls never read.
There is ZERO indication of long-term supply stasis when factoring in the industry is literally shrinking (see OP).
Peak oil supply being thoroughly disproven, we need to start talking about the problem of peak oil demand, which is a certainty thanks to the coming electrification. That will impact some industries pretty heavily. I predict peak oil demand will occur roughly in 2024, after which time demand will fall further and further under supply.
you don't know what you're talking about. Demand is only inelastic up to certain barriers. Demand for the most efficient energy source we've ever harnessed is relentless, and not going away any time soon until the price spikes again into the economy-killing triple digits it was for 5 years.
The Global Oil Demand Driver That Is Being Ignored
the conversation often overlooks the role that heavy trucks and freight play in driving demand. The International Energy Agency just published a report arguing that the world needs to get a handle on fuel efficiency for freight, or else oil demand will continue to rise, regardless of how many Tesla’s are on the road.EVs don't move freight, as we've covered. Not in any mass commercial scale, despite decades of trying. Now, I'm sure you'll frantically pour over "teh Googlez" and hammer out some screed with a link to some test-phase innovator showing their new EV 18-wheeler struggling up a hill, but they're really no closer to making that happen than they were 40 years ago.
Peak demand is painfully LOL, as the Douglas & Westwood presenter in the OP fleshed out rather clearly.
If your "peak demand" argument had any merit, your hero wouldn't be bending over so that his Russian idol could tap the final frontier: the polar ice caps.
the conversation often overlooks the role that heavy trucks and freight play in driving demand. The International Energy Agency just published a report arguing that the world needs to get a handle on fuel efficiency for freight, or else oil demand will continue to rise, regardless of how many Tesla’s are on the road.EVs don't move freight, as we've covered.
Not in any mass commercial scale, despite decades of trying.
Are you unaware that energy density has been improving constantly and rapidly for 40+ years? And that it's finally reaching the point of cost parity with ICE vehicles?
Hammer this into your brain:
1. There is a point which batteries are sufficiently cheap and energy dense that they're cheaper and offer a better experience than gasoline.
2. That point is less than a decade away for cars and less than 15 years for semi trailer trucks.
These two points aren't in contention, by the way.
Now, I'm sure you'll frantically pour over "teh Googlez" and hammer out some screed with a link to some test-phase innovator showing their new EV 18-wheeler struggling up a hill, but they're really no closer to making that happen than they were 40 years ago.
If your "peak demand" argument had any merit, your hero wouldn't be bending over so that his Russian idol could tap the final frontier: the polar ice caps.
Anyway, I love you Jiggs. A deep abiding man-love. The level of pure defiance of reality amidst the dismal failure of your own predictions is legendary
No we haven't covered that at all. EVs can and will move the majority of freight, in 15 years. As for use of oil in freight, I posted the numbers above. Did you even read them? Trucks are irrelevant when cars electrify. They're less than 1/4 of all oil demand, cars are roughly half.
Argonne: EVs may be almost as energy-dense as gasoline vehicles by 2045
An analysis by a team at Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) has found that by 2045, some configurations of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) could become almost as energy-dense as legacy vehicles, if the efficiency of the powertrain as a whole is considered."Some configuations..." "could become..."almost as" ... "if the" ...
Holy crap, that's a lot of qualifications! And this is a pro-EV article!!!
Clown.
Tell us more about how "lazy cultures" are ruining Europe from the south on up.
Are you unaware that energy density has been improving constantly and rapidly for 40+ years? And that it's finally reaching the point of cost parity with ICE vehicles?
Argonne: EVs may be almost as energy-dense as gasoline vehicles by 2045
An analysis by a team at Argonne National Laboratory (ANL) has found that by 2045, some configurations of battery electric vehicles (BEVs) could become almost as energy-dense as legacy vehicles, if the efficiency of the powertrain as a whole is considered."Some configuations..." "could become..."almost as" ... "if the" ...
Holy crap, that's a lot of qualifications! And this is a pro-EV article!!!
Clown.
Do yourself a favor and read 10 or 20 articles on EVs, maybe a scholarly paper or two, then get back to me.
I'll just quote myself again. These statements are not controversial in any way. You can learn them, or continue being ignorant:
Hammer this into your brain:
1. There is a point which batteries are sufficiently cheap and energy dense that they're cheaper and offer a better experience than gasoline.
2. That point is less than a decade away for cars and less than 15 years for semi trailer trucks.
These two points aren't in contention, by the way.
Oh this is beautiful man. You really are that ill-read that you don't even understand what's being said in your own link, or how it relates to question of EVs being at superior cost (and everything else) to ICE in the near future (experts peg that date at around 2022). I won't correct you, I will just leave others to laugh at the stupid.
And you sure as hell don't actually understand energy density.
Link your claim that they are "15 years away," or admit you're just pretending it's true because you want it to be true.
- Has an electric motor + baterry pack that costs less to car manufacturers than an ICE + supporting components
- Has enough range to drive all day
It reaches cost parity and becomes superior to an ICE car. It also has much lower running costs (already). Given that batteries are far from done improving in energy density and cost, it gets more and superior every year after parity, such that ICE are quickly wiped from the mainstream market.
The link above you mercilessly beclowned yourself with (really, these own goals are getting embarrassing) is talking about the point at which a battery system weight-for-weight has as much usable power (including efficiencies efficiencies) as gas does.
What does that have to do with cost parity? Absolutely zero. You're so silly you don't understand that. I thought maybe you were somewhat intelligent and just had some kind of schizotypical fixed delusions around oil/energy, but you can't even understand simple concepts.
Link your claim that they are "15 years away," or admit you're just pretending it's true because you want it to be true.
Again, I repeat, what I stated is not controversial. It's up to you to get your head around reality.
This is the trend in battery pack pricing:
It's predicted to halve by 2020 and halve again by 2023. And that's a conservative estimate. 100 kWh is an all day charge (all-week for even long range city commuting) with ICE-superior performance. And the battery pack will cost $5000, another 2-3000 for the motors and charging system. Against that, cars lose:
- ICE engine
- Muffler, gearbox, heavy drive components, engine mounting
- Radiator, hoses, sump, oil system
- Starting battery
- Catalytic converters, other expensive pollution systems
- Fuel injection system, overall hundreds of complex components.
- The cost of assembling, designing, servicing, warrantying, JITing this ultra complex system.
- For the end user, the large cost of gasoline and maintenance.
Do you see why cost parity will be reached? Do you see why they'll be vastly superior? Three years later, the cost of the battery pack will be halved again, to $2500. Do you see why ICE cars are going to be wiped off the map?
It's predicted to halve by 2020 and halve again by 2023. And that's a conservative estimate. 100 kWh is an all day charge (all-week for even long range city commuting) with ICE-superior performance. And the battery pack will cost $5000, another 2-3000 for the motors and charging system. Against that, cars lose:
- ICE engine
- Muffler, gearbox, heavy drive components, engine mounting
- Radiator, hoses, sump, oil system
- Starting battery
- Catalytic converters, other expensive pollution systems
- Fuel injection system, overall hundreds of complex components.
- The cost of assembling, designing, servicing, warrantying, JITing this ultra complex system.
- For the end user, the large cost of gasoline and maintenance.
Do you see why cost parity will be reached? Do you see why they'll be vastly superior? Three years later, the cost of the battery pack will be halved again, to $2500. Do you see why ICE cars are going to be wiped off the map?
Citation on "lower running costs already," please. Make sure you're comparing all the same factors for both. Thanks.
The link above you mercilessly beclowned yourself with (really, these own goals are getting embarrassing) is talking about the point at which a battery system weight-for-weight has as much usable power (including efficiencies efficiencies) as gas does.
What does that have to do with cost parity? Absolutely zero. You're so silly you don't understand that. I thought maybe you were somewhat intelligent and just had some kind of schizotypical fixed delusions around oil/energy, but you can't even understand simple concepts.
What does that have to do with cost parity? Absolutely zero. You're so silly you don't understand that. I thought maybe you were somewhat intelligent and just had some kind of schizotypical fixed delusions around oil/energy, but you can't even understand simple concepts.
It's not that I don't understand your obligatory goal post shift. It's that, as a matter of basic physics, EV batteries don't provide the same energy density that liquid hydrocarbons do, and won't. That supercedes your "cost parity" analysis for reasons you obviously don't understand. Moving mass over large distance (at a speed faster than a horse) is a process that, ultimately, isn't concerned with "cost parity." It either can be done, or it can't. You either have enough of the energy source in order to ramp up production, or you don't. Throwing money at it won't magically make more lithium, etc. But to people like you, "no problem! Technology is always improving, and we'll just figure out how to do power it better with even LESS of the source!" ... FAIL
Your limited brain seems to believe the sky is the limit on the power source required to make these batteries. But where is the lithium going to come from? The cobalt? Tesla already "sh*t the bed" on their promised Model 3s batteries this year, and refused to answer when asked if there was a resource limitation. There absolutely was.
What DID Tesla have to say after the resulting 15% share loss?
“The technology challenge grows exponentially with energy density. Until early June, production averaged about 40% below demand.”Wait, what? What does "energy density" have to do with anything? Tooth says "keep at it," so you should be fine.
Anyway, troll... You continue to come at this predicament of net energy decline from a position of economics and finance, just like every Adam Smith cultist before you in this forum. Showing a trend-line from a graph of cost (which you still didn't link to), and making assumptions as if it's going to continue at that trajectory without question? That's a real blind spot for you. I'm not sure you actually understand why.
We appear to have a communication breakdown 100% because you 1) don't provide links backing up your laughable claims, and 2) don't actually read the links you are provided.
Hydrocarbon liquids for fuel are king for a reason. Always have been. Unfortunately, we're not finding them like we used to, while demand is higher than ever. That's a problem. And "batteries" are not going to save the day.
Nice bump. This is the ultimate beclowning. Do one of the battery guys want to set this guy straight? I don't have the interest, it's too easy.
Jiggs, are we going to get a "Battery majors dumping capital expenditures" post any time soon? Peak battery density? Peak lithium? When do we get peak peak?
Jiggs, are we going to get a "Battery majors dumping capital expenditures" post any time soon? Peak battery density? Peak lithium? When do we get peak peak?
Jiggs,
I've been reading and posting on internet forums for a long time, and you are, by a fairly wide margin, the best troll I've ever come across.
The way that you made a prediction which (almost) literally could not have turned out to be any more wrong, then after you were proven wrong, you came back and, with a straight face, argued that you would be proven correct regardless of whether the oil market goes up or down, and regardless of when the market went up or down, is truly impressive.
Heck, I know for sure that you're a troll, yet you still got me to respond to you.
JiggsCasey = GOAT troll, period.
I've been reading and posting on internet forums for a long time, and you are, by a fairly wide margin, the best troll I've ever come across.
The way that you made a prediction which (almost) literally could not have turned out to be any more wrong, then after you were proven wrong, you came back and, with a straight face, argued that you would be proven correct regardless of whether the oil market goes up or down, and regardless of when the market went up or down, is truly impressive.
Heck, I know for sure that you're a troll, yet you still got me to respond to you.
JiggsCasey = GOAT troll, period.
Peak oil supply being thoroughly disproven, we need to start talking about the problem of peak oil demand, which is a certainty thanks to the coming electrification. That will impact some industries pretty heavily. I predict peak oil demand will occur roughly in 2024, after which time demand will fall further and further under supply.
Sounds like a man who 1) does not understand natural limits and 2) instead insists trends can continue indefinitely, and 3) has no honest appreciation for how an EV is built and maintained. Though, that was clear years ago about you.
2) Literally no one is insisting that trends continue forever.
3) Damn near every one of us built a toy one as a kid. Electric motors aren't complex and we all know what a battery is. Most of us haven't built a toy ICEV.
Citation on "lower running costs already," please. Make sure you're comparing all the same factors for both. Thanks.
Those are the entire totality of running costs that would differ between ICEVs and EVs. There really isn't anything else that matters until you get close to 100k miles where you are comparing the total ongoing costs of engine/transmission/exhaust repairs to battery replacement.
...
Sorry for not addressing the rest, but I am at risk of becoming bored so am moving onto activities that don't have as much of a risk of that. I've heard from trusted others that boredom is something to be avoided. Maybe I will address the rest at a later date.
While i agree with peak oil demand, i think 2024 is rather opportunistic. Could be a case for western oil demand peaking around that time but non-western will be increasingly use oil for a long time. Also building the infrastructure in non-dense regions particularly will take time. I'd estimate that by 2025 the 'first mover' countries and cities/hubs will go green (think Norway, Randstad area in the netherlands, London, Paris, some smog Chinese cities). World wide peak demand c. 2040
Total cost of ownership parity - car cost + maintenance + fuel - is being reached next year. By 2022 total cost of ownership will be many thousands of dollars cheaper.
The main reason for 2024 is that we're probably going to get another recession which will drop demand for a few years. This is what happened to oil in the 2008 recession (complete with hilarious Jiggs-y predictions post 2009):
Yeah I think we'll see a lot of second world growth in oil usage. Still. The tipping point happens when new cars with internal combustion engines go into permanent decline rather than growing every year. That will happen sooner than people think. Once price parity is reached, no later than 2025 IMO, it's gg ICE cars in much of the world, from industrialized Asia to Europe and the US. They'll go into rapid decline. EV cars are superior on so many levels, performance, ride smoothness, acceleration, low maintenance, lower running cost, no noise/vibration, space, more reliable, zero emissions.
Total cost of ownership parity - car cost + maintenance + fuel - is being reached next year. By 2022 total cost of ownership will be many thousands of dollars cheaper.
The main reason for 2024 is that we're probably going to get another recession which will drop demand for a few years. This is what happened to oil in the 2008 recession (complete with hilarious Jiggs-y predictions post 2009):
Total cost of ownership parity - car cost + maintenance + fuel - is being reached next year. By 2022 total cost of ownership will be many thousands of dollars cheaper.
The main reason for 2024 is that we're probably going to get another recession which will drop demand for a few years. This is what happened to oil in the 2008 recession (complete with hilarious Jiggs-y predictions post 2009):
And just to put these numbers into perspective, here are global car sales:
You'll notice they're growing about 1.7 million/year. However, EVs are growing exponentially, and this year will hit 1 million/year for the first time. We're about a year away from the start of terminal decline in non-electric cars.
In four years (2021) we'll be producing 3 million EVs/year, which will start eating rapidly into the total number of ICE cars on the road. By 2024, 20 million ICE cars will be off the road - 2% of the total - and another 1%/year, growing exponentially, will leave the road. Given that cars make up just over 50% of oil demand:
This means that oil enters terminal demand decline around 2024 - the greatest source of its growth (growth in the number of new ICE cars) will disappear in 2019, after which time the existing demand starts decreasing exponentially. The oil price will eventually be at the cost of the light sweet crude wells, about $10-$30 depending on inflation.
It's a pretty clear trajectory, and nothing is going to stand in its way.
You'll notice they're growing about 1.7 million/year. However, EVs are growing exponentially, and this year will hit 1 million/year for the first time. We're about a year away from the start of terminal decline in non-electric cars.
In four years (2021) we'll be producing 3 million EVs/year, which will start eating rapidly into the total number of ICE cars on the road. By 2024, 20 million ICE cars will be off the road - 2% of the total - and another 1%/year, growing exponentially, will leave the road. Given that cars make up just over 50% of oil demand:
This means that oil enters terminal demand decline around 2024 - the greatest source of its growth (growth in the number of new ICE cars) will disappear in 2019, after which time the existing demand starts decreasing exponentially. The oil price will eventually be at the cost of the light sweet crude wells, about $10-$30 depending on inflation.
It's a pretty clear trajectory, and nothing is going to stand in its way.
There are 1.2 billion cars, and China will probably grow at 5% the next decade. India at 7%. Some predictions say 2 billion automobiles in the world by the 2030's.
vehicle production (about 70m in passenger cars):
So the number of cars will grow. Average age of automobiles is quite high currently, like 11-12 years I think. Plus a lot of Chinese don't use their car a whole lot, which will change.
So if EV production is 5-6 million by 2024, that means the number of ICE vehicles is still growing, and probably will be until the 2030's.
Then there is problem of infrastructure. Since charging time is probably at least 15-20 min, you are going to need a lot more super chargers. Especially developing countries won't have those.
Plus there is still the other 50% of oil usage which will grow. Airplanes, trucks, bunker oil, plastic, fertilizers etc.
On top of that I don't think EV production will double each year. It takes enormous capex and raw materials to ramp up production to say 20-30m EV's a year. The cheapest most efficient batteries currently use a ton of cobalt, and most of the world's cobalt is in the congo. I don't think a lot of CEO's will be happy to depend on that, if they splurge 2-3x their annual profits on capex to expand production. And suddenly the price of cobalt goes up 10x due to some civil war.
If you really think it will be exponential, then you should bet on copper and aluminum producers imo. They will do really well. Especially copper, since there isn't a whole lot of spare supply (without significant capex spend), and it has been trading below marginal cost of production for a while.
I guess this is why Berkshire owns so much GM.
My guess is 85 million automobiles and light trucks by the time we reach 2030, and maybe 15-20m of those will be EV. So that still means 65-70m ICE vehicles being produced. If 50-60m vehicles are being scrapped each year (number is about 10m on 240m vehicles in the US), then that means ICE vehicle production will keep growing for probably another 15 years.
vehicle production (about 70m in passenger cars):
So the number of cars will grow. Average age of automobiles is quite high currently, like 11-12 years I think. Plus a lot of Chinese don't use their car a whole lot, which will change.
So if EV production is 5-6 million by 2024, that means the number of ICE vehicles is still growing, and probably will be until the 2030's.
Then there is problem of infrastructure. Since charging time is probably at least 15-20 min, you are going to need a lot more super chargers. Especially developing countries won't have those.
Plus there is still the other 50% of oil usage which will grow. Airplanes, trucks, bunker oil, plastic, fertilizers etc.
On top of that I don't think EV production will double each year. It takes enormous capex and raw materials to ramp up production to say 20-30m EV's a year. The cheapest most efficient batteries currently use a ton of cobalt, and most of the world's cobalt is in the congo. I don't think a lot of CEO's will be happy to depend on that, if they splurge 2-3x their annual profits on capex to expand production. And suddenly the price of cobalt goes up 10x due to some civil war.
If you really think it will be exponential, then you should bet on copper and aluminum producers imo. They will do really well. Especially copper, since there isn't a whole lot of spare supply (without significant capex spend), and it has been trading below marginal cost of production for a while.
I guess this is why Berkshire owns so much GM.
My guess is 85 million automobiles and light trucks by the time we reach 2030, and maybe 15-20m of those will be EV. So that still means 65-70m ICE vehicles being produced. If 50-60m vehicles are being scrapped each year (number is about 10m on 240m vehicles in the US), then that means ICE vehicle production will keep growing for probably another 15 years.
Feedback is used for internal purposes. LEARN MORE