Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on June 7, 2016
Diesel is finite. Trucks are the bedrock of civilization. So where are the battery electric trucks?
Introduction to battery electric trucks
Heavy-duty diesel-engine trucks (agricultural, cargo, mining, logging, construction, garbage, cement, 18-wheelers) are the main engines of civilization. Without them, no goods would be delivered, no food planted or harvested, no garbage picked up, no minerals mined, no concrete made, or oil and gas drilled to keep them all rolling. If trucks stopped running, gas stations, grocery stores, factories, pharmacies, and manufacturers would shut down within a week.
Since oil, coal, and natural gas are finite, and biomass doesn’t scale up, clearly someday trucks will need to run on wind, solar, hydro, and geothermal generated electricity. Yet even batteries for autos aren’t yet cheap, long-lasting, light-weight, or powerful enough for most Americans to replace their current gas-guzzlers with. And given the distribution of wealth, few Americans may ever be able to afford an electric car, since two-thirds of Americans would have trouble finding even $1,000 for an emergency.
Trucks that matter — that haul 30 tons of goods, pour cement, haul mining ore, and so on can weigh 40 times more than an average car. So scaling batteries up for heavy-duty trucks (NRC 2014) is impossible now given the state of battery technology. For example, a truck capable of going 621 miles hauling 59,525 pounds, the maximum allowable cargo weight, would need a battery weighing 55,116 pounds, and could only carry about 4,400 pounds of cargo (den Boer et al. 2013). And because a heavy-duty truck battery is so heavy and large, charging takes too long — typically 12 hours or more.
And car battery development is hitting the brick-walls of the laws of physics and thermodynamics, yet truck batteries need to be even more powerful, durable, and long-lasting.
Electric trucks do exist, mostly medium-duty hybrid that stop and start a lot to recharge the battery. This limits their application to delivery and garbage trucks (and buses). These trucks are heavily subsidized at state and federal levels since on average they cost 3 times as much as a diesel truck equivalent.
The Port of Los Angeles thought about using heavy-duty all-electric drayage trucks to improve air quality. Drayage trucks drive at least 200 miles a day back and forth between the port and inland warehouses. But it remained a thought experiment because electric drayage trucks cost too much, $307,890. The 350 kWh battery alone is $110,880 dollars. That’s three times as much as an equivalent diesel truck $104,360, and 100 times more than a used $3,000 drayage truck. And cost wasn’t the only problem (Calstart 2013a):
The range is too short because of the battery weight and size. Drayage trucks need to go at least 200 miles a day, but at best an electric truck could go 100 miles before having to be recharged, which would take too long, and require expensive infrastructure to charge each truck several times a day.
The batteries/battery pack cost too much.
Overcoming the long time to recharge by using fast-charging may shorten battery life which would result in the unacceptable expense of a new battery pack before the lifetime of the truck ended
Although electricity is available almost everywhere, the quantities required for a fleet of Battery Electric Vehicle (BEV) drayage trucks are very high and could require significant infrastructure. Multiple costly high-power and/or fast-charging stations would be required
Roadway power infrastructure is complicated and expensive, and may be appropriate only in certain areas or applications. The impact on the grid and whether enough power could be supplied is unknown for the roughly 10,000 drayage trucks in the I-710 region
Large battery pack life-cycle and maintenance costs are unknown
Swapping stations are impractical and would require “industry standardization and ‘ruggedization’ of battery packs, as well as standardized software and communication protocols for batteries and system integration, plus many locations, and the storage space and operating space for multiple large trucks and hundreds of large battery packs.
Currently electric trucks cost 3 times more, on average, than a diesel truck:
Maker Model Battery-kWh Year GVWR $-Electric truck $-Conv truck $-Diff Times-more-cost
AMP trucks walk-in Van 100 2013 19,500 $133,000 $ 58,000 $ 75,000 2.3
BYD Motors K9M Bus 2014 39,683 $850,000 $422,000 $428,000 2.0
BYD Motors T5 2016 16,100 $165,000 $ 47,888 $117,112 3.4
BYD Motors T7 2016 23,600 $195,000 $ 84,995 $110,005 2.3
BYD Motors T9 2016 120,000 $300,000 $117,500 $182,500 2.6
BYD Motors Package Truck 2016 23,500 $175,000 $ 83,343 $ 91,657 2.1
Motiv Power FE4 80 2014 14,500 $181,000 $ 29,605 $151,395 6.1
Motiv Power FE4 100 2014 14,500 $195,000 $ 29,605 $165,395 6.6
Motiv Power FE4 120 2014 14,500 $212,000 $ 29,605 $182,395 7.2
New Flyer XE40 100-300 2015 44,312 $750,000-$920,000 $465,000 $285,000-$455,000 1.6-2.0
New Flyer XE 35 100-200 2015 44,312 $735,000 – $825,000 $450,000 $285,000-$375,000 1.6 -1.8
New Flyer XE60 100-300 2015 69,000 $1,075,000-$1,210,000 $745,000 $330,000-$465,000 1.4-1.6
Proterra Inc BE40 Bus 2014 39,500 $825,000 $635,000 $190,000 1.3
Trans Tech Bus SSTe 2015 14,500 $180,000 $ 60,000 $120,000 3.0
Zenith Motors Cargo Van 136? 52 2015 10,050 $ 92,900 $ 32,500 $ 60,400 2.9
Zenith Motors Shuttle Van 52 2015 10,050 $ 92,900 $ 33,595 $ 59,305 2.8
Zenith Motors Cargo Van 136? 62 2015 10,050 $ 97,900 $ 35,595 $ 62,305 2.8
Zenith Motors Shuttle Van 52 2016 10,050 $109,000 $ 37,204 $ 71,796 2.9
Zenith Motors Cargo Van “159” 52 2016 10,050 $ 99,000 $ 37,364 $ 61,636 2.6
Zenith Motors Cargo Van “136” 52 2016 10,050 $ 99,000 $ 32,419 $ 66,581 3.1
Table 1. Cost of electric trucks versus diesel equivalents (ICEV). Source: 2016 New York State Electric Vehicle – Voucher Incentive Fund VEHICLE ELIGIBILITY LIST. https://truck-vip.ny.gov/NYSEV-VIF-vehicle-list.php
Electric trucks are also not commercial yet because they have too many performance issues, such as poor performance in cold weather, swift acceleration, and going up steep hills, too short a range and battery life, the miles per day declines over time as the battery degrades which makes planning routes difficult and inefficient, it takes too long to recharge batteries, and more that’s covered in the 2 articles below..
It is also much harder to develop batteries for trucks than cars because trucks are expected to last 15 years (versus 10 for cars) or go for 1 million miles. Trucks also have to endure more extreme conditions of temperature, vibrations, and corrosive agents (NRC 2015), and it is hard to make battery packs durable enough for this rougher ride.
Calstart interviewed many businesses about their reluctance to buy hybrid or all electric trucks, and found their greatest concerns were the purchase cost, lack of confidence in the technology, lack of industry and truck manufacturer support, lack of infrastructure, and the heavy weight (Calstart 2012).
But if the devil is in the details, then read more below which are mainly excerpts from 2 papers, augmented with additional research.
Alice Friedemann www.energyskeptic.com author of “When Trucks Stop Running: Energy and the Future of Transportation, 2015, Springer
Catenary trucks (that use overhead wires), will be covered in another post.
Also see: All Electric Trucks. Probably not going to happen. Ever. Why not?
This post continues with details from 2 papers at http://energyskeptic.com/2016/diesel-finite-where-are-electric-trucks/
47 Comments on "Diesel is finite. Trucks are the bedrock of civilization. So where are the battery electric trucks?"
Go Speed Racer on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 2:30 pm
Put a windmill on the front of the truck. When it’s going down the freeway, at speeds above 50 mph the wind is strong enough to power an electric drive to propel the truck emissions-free
Some solar panels on the cab roof, about a square yard, will give enough energy for when climbing a grade.
PracticalMaina on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 2:59 pm
Right here, they are hybrid though, and can run diesel or natgas threw the turbine.
We could go back to the old bedrock, rail…Diesel electric is most common for them, but straight electric freight trains are also hard at work all over the world.
https://nikolamotor.com/one
HARM on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 4:50 pm
For a long time, this was the “sustainable” alternative to FFs. Too bad it won’t scale to the needs of 7.4 billion people and industrial-scale consumption and waste.
http://www.sydsplods.co.uk/perch/resources/longitch12-14a-1-w600.jpg
dave thompson on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 5:09 pm
As long as there is food in the stores, gas at the stations,water from the taps, the people do not give a fuck. Talk about any of the issues of depletion in any sensible manner with the average person and you will be met with rolled eyes and who is going to be the next president or winner of the latest sporting event.
GregT on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 5:16 pm
“Put a windmill on the front of the truck. When it’s going down the freeway, at speeds above 50 mph the wind is strong enough to power an electric drive to propel the truck emissions-free”
Always remember to park uphill……..
Go Speed Racer on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 5:28 pm
Greg, there are some hamsters on exercise wheels, like if the truck is stopped.
The biggest problem
Is the windmill blades going around and around in front of the driver. Might be distracting.
Stuifzand on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 5:43 pm
Kunstler has repeatedly advocated the return of rail for goods and person transport. No need for batteries, a catenary suffices.
The Dutch Railways NS has set itself the task that by 2018 all trains will for 100% run on wind energy:
http://www.ns.nl/over-ns/energie/groene-stroom.html
The energy is going to be provided by energy company Eneco. 50% will be generated in the Netherlands, the rest bought on the European green energy market.
Add:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sl3xGrl7kZU
Davy on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 5:56 pm
Speeder, it would just take a little tweaking to turn the truck with windmills and hamsters into an Osprey style truck/helicopter once enough power was generated like a rotary copter. You could then take advantage of the lift to maneuver over traffic jams. You could deliver freight on top of buildings in Manhattan. Trixy could fly it. Pops surely could maintain it.
Davy on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 5:57 pm
The key to rail is a return to slow and cheap not fast and complex.
HARM on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 5:58 pm
@dave thompson
amen to that.
@Stuifzand,
Good for the Dutch. It’s still a lost cause, but at least their leaders are making a stab at (part of) the problem vs. fighting over table scraps and denying reality like everyone else.
Stuifzand on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 6:13 pm
“It’s still a lost cause”
???
The plan originates from 2014. Meanwhile in 2016 75% of the targets have already been met.
Total energy: 1,4 TWh (1% total Dutch electricity consumption). Every kwh will come from NEW wind parks.
makati1 on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 6:23 pm
Boy! The ‘alternate energy’ nuts are out in full today!
All of the systems require BACKUP energy sources for the times that they do not work. No wind, cloudy days, etc. That backup is usually oil/coal/NG fired power plants somewhere.
And they are still only electric energy. Hydrocarbons power the things that make the ‘alternate’ sources possible. And ‘alternates’ are not sources, they are carriers, dependent on Mother Nature to supply the fuel. (Wind, sun, etc.)
But dream on guys if it make you feel good.
Stuifzand on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 6:39 pm
“All of the systems require BACKUP energy sources for the times that they do not work.”
In Siberia life comes to a complete standstill for 6 months in the winter. If for some mysterious reason engineers would not be able to develop forms of storage of renewable energy in the coming decades, one simply can’t travel if the wind doesn’t blow. So what.
Come to think of it, the national grids in the EU are all interconnected. The larger that interconnected area is, the lower the chance that nothing works. The wind is always blowing somewhere.
The most logical form of storage is pumped hydro, with Norway playing a key role. The potential and intention is there. Sub-sea cables from Britain, Holland and Germany connecting Norway are already in place.
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/norway-wants-to-offer-hydroelectric-resources-to-europe-a-835037.html
“Boy! The ‘alternate energy’ nuts are out in full today!”
Come on Makati, admit it: you are not really interested in a solution. You have decided a long time ago that the world will go under (except China) and broad-casted that message to everybody who would care to listen and now you are so heavily committed to that view that there is no way back and you are resisting tooth and nail against anything that could threaten your dark world view.
Davy on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 7:25 pm
Stu, there is the inconvenient situation of systematic minimum operating levels for places like Europe. Life as it is now in Europe can’t come to a standstill. The other problem is attitudes and lifestyles. Modern man is used to on-demand wants and discretionary travel as needed when desired. All this will have to greatly adjust if the energy grid becomes highly variable. Interconnectedness is actually a systematic risk. It would be far better to localize and decentralize. I am behind your thinking 100% but it does not add up for me in scale of size, time, and workable complexity. Too many moving parts and too many things yet to be produced and proven.
Go Speed Racer on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 7:34 pm
Pops can build anything. He will get started right away! Trixie already has a helicopter.
makati1 on Tue, 7th Jun 2016 9:06 pm
Stuifzand, selective understanding again? I never said China will not suffer. No country is immune to the extinction event coming in our future. I do say that there may be some real surprises coming out of China in the near future that will take down the Us economy.
As for the desperate desire of most here to want some form of BAU for the rest of their lives, that is correct. I don’t dream that dream. I see reality. You seem to see what you want to see.
There is no way our current lifestyle can continue for much longer. No magic energy source is going to happen. No ‘alternate’ is ever going to keep any part of BAU alive. The system is breaking down faster and faster. You just don’t want to see it. Too bad.
kanon on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 12:13 am
This piece is a phony argument. The problem is not that we lack huge enough batteries for huge trucks, the problem is that we believe we need the huge trucks. A few might be nice, but for most the necessities for which they are so essential can be found in abundance at the local landfill.
Ralph on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 4:54 am
You can buy hybrid trucks today.
Here’s an alternative hybrid design – electric truck, battery range 100 miles, combined with a national network over overhead electric lines and trolly bus overhead electric feed to the trucks. A back of the envelope estimate is that it would cost $400B to electrify the entire interstate network. There are about 6M trucks in the US, so about $60,000 infrastructure investment per truck.
Trucks run and recharge batteries mostly on the overhead electric lines and switch to batteries for the last 50 miles away from the interstate. The electric wires do not need to be continuous because the batteries cut in real time, so no need to electrify under bridges and through difficult junctions, keeping costs down.
The truck does not need an engine, so would be less expensive than a gas/electric hybrid. Running costs very low.
Worth the investment?
Kenz300 on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 5:06 am
New Documents Show Oil Industry Even More Evil Than We Thought
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oil-cover-up-climate_us_570e98bbe4b0ffa5937df6ce
Climate Change is real….. we will all be impacted by it.
Oil Giants Spend $115 Million A Year To Oppose Climate Policy
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/oil-companies-climate-policy_us_570bb841e4b0142232496d97
The Kochs Are Plotting A Multimillion-Dollar Assault On Electric Vehicles
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/koch-electric-vehicles_us_56c4d63ce4b0b40245c8cbf6
Inside the Koch Brothers’ Toxic Empire | Rolling Stone
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/inside-the-koch-brothers-toxic-empire-20140924?page=2
Dredd on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 5:44 am
Seaports are the bedrock of international civilization, trucks are bedrock from the seaport to the local stores where consumers purchase international goods (90-95% of trade volume).
The seaports will go down first (The Extinction of Robust Sea Ports, 2, 3, 4, 5).
Methanol can replace diesel in the trucks (A Methanol Economy Way Out Of Here, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6).
Robust “local economies” must emerge.
makati1 on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 6:08 am
Ralph, not going to happen.
“There are about 6M trucks in the US, so about $60,000 infrastructure investment per truck.”
Too many reasons to go into here. But time and $$$$ are the main ones. Not enough of either to make a difference. We are locked into oily fuels, until they disappear, because the conversion of everything costs too much for a world economy deep in a depression that will never end.
It took 100 years and trillions of dollars to build the gasoline/diesel system we have today. We have, maybe 5-10 years of that system left, IF we are lucky. Nothing is going to replace it except muscle, human or animal.
Davy on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 6:48 am
A national network of overhead electric lines at $400B? It cost $400M alone to build the St Louis Metro Link that I am familiar with. It is these attitudes of national and complete transition to and from the current that represent the problem we have today with people. It is our attitudes that we can do these things or should is the problem. These attitudes are why little will be done and what is done will be a mistake. These grandiose ideas will be sunk and stranded investments when the reality of collapse sets in. Thinking too big or with the wrong ideas represents one of the classic cases of a civilization coming failure. It is the grandiosity of the scale in modern thinking that is a failure. It is the disregards to physics and basic economics. Finally it is our failure to see that we are broke systematically and in a macro sense globally. We don’t just have failed states here and there we have a failing global system.
We should consider electrification of rail and street car networks in cities. We should try to power this with solar and wind. We should do these things on a small scale and where there are sweet spots. Electrifying rail is many more times practical than even considering trucks but it is possible to electrify some truck routes with overhead lines. Rail is by far more economic so why consider electrifying trucks. Trucks with batteries are a failure and will never materialize because of where we are at and the distance we need to go in physical scale, economies of scale, and economics of transition to reconfigure trucks. We have essentially no electrified trucks now. We have a huge built out fossil fuel infrastructure in place. The cost of transitioning to a full blown electrified system would be in the trillions. If you are going to do trucks you will have to do cars so add more trillions?
We need to be downsizing our expectations in acceptance of a collapse process either slow or fast and preparing for both hoping for the former. We need to be thinking localization in any type of major investments at all levels from national down to local. We need to be thinking low cost and low tech with robust designs to last in a period of decline and collapse. We need things that are overbuilt like things used to be without all the bells and whistles everyone wants today.
Fast rail is the worst thing we could have today in regards to rail. It is a stupid out of Europe and Japan. It was built to satisfy consumer wants and compete with planes. It was built without any regards for decline and decay of modern man. Fast rail is a failure in regards to a collapsing future. Fast rail is a stranded asset in collapse for lack of support in a collapsing world. Slow rail built into a solar/wind grid would have been a far smarter investment.
These important investments are not being done or even talked about because of the grandiose thinking of those who do not accept a collapse of modern man is coming. There is not even any talk of going backwards instead it is ball to the wall forward with faster, more complex, and with it higher price tags. We talk about hyper loops and supersonic planes that are rubbish. We as a people deserve to crash and burn because of this. Elon musk is a criminal because of this.
Our transition to less does not happen because of these grandiose attitudes and lifestyles that are impervious to change. We as a people that want more, better, and faster. We are a people that do not accept that we are failing at a systematic level. This denial is at all levels and at all education levels. You would think our brightest minds would consider it but no it is all about technology and big scales. We are incapable of going in reverse. We must scale down and sacrifice not scale up with new and better.
We have a very short time to change the hardware and software of our civilization. We must change attitudes and lifestyles immediately and get to work on the hardware. If we can’t even honestly make changes for climate change how are we going to change for a general collapse? We will change but it will be in crisis and probably too late to make smart changes with important consequences. We have a huge powerful global system still functioning that could do so many things before it fizzles out. Now is the time for action so when we go into crisis we have the tools to better negotiate the pain, suffering, and decay that will come with collapse.
Stuifzand on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 7:35 am
“Heavy-duty diesel-engine trucks (agricultural, cargo, mining, logging, construction, garbage, cement, 18-wheelers) are the main engines of civilization.”
Mwaoh, they rather enable very-long distance transportation. When I was a kid in the early sixties we still had a “melkboer” (milkman, who only rang once), with a horse and carriage, selling warm milk, directly from a cow near us. First delivered from a big “melkbus” (milk churn)…
http://www.geheugenvannederland.nl/?/nl/items/NFA08:DOH-NN610
… later from unlabeled bottles, which were expected to be returned clean at the next visit:
http://www.hvoderen.nl/beeldbank/large/0224.jpg
Nowhere were trucks involved in this process.
These days you can buy fancy yogurts, in plastic containers, with all sorts of fruit and sugar additions, produced all over the EU. While travelling in these diesel trucks, the stuff needs to be cooled, handled, stored.
The milk in the old days tasted just as good.
“main engines of civilization” my foot.
Ralph on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 8:07 am
Milk was delivered to my door (reused glass bottles) by electric milk float until the early 70s.
Ralph on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 8:26 am
Found it.
https://www.flickr.com/photos/gwoodward/8759305468/in/album-72157633530834957/
ghung on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 8:53 am
This article assumes a lot, such as that the Port of Los Angeles will continue to have the volume of cargo it has today. Thinking systemically, all forms of transportation will necessarily go into contraction and be forced to adapt, barring some sort of swift collapse. Even then, goods and services, likely more local, will be produced and moved to markets, albeit, at much lower levels.
Articles like this, that attempt to posit that we’ll maintain near status quo levels of global commerce, are flawed by concept. Fact is, a powered-down world will be producing and moving much less of everything.
Fact is, there will be demand destruction on a massive scale, and it won’t matter how many electric trucks they plan to build. Everything that is essentially relies on everything else there is. What is coming will be an entirely different paradigm; unthinkable for those stuck in industrial age thought. Having their cake while eating it won’t be an option.
Consequences (big ones),,, baked in.
frankthetank on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 1:46 pm
Technology will save us. Trust me. Technology…just keep repeating that.
frankthetank on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 1:49 pm
I could see a period (very hypothetical) that we see personal transport outlawed (maybe electric only) and all business related trucking/military/gov is allowed to use fuel (diesel/gas/ethanol/coal/wood/old mattresses///whatever that will burn). Long term..we’re so fucked.
Tom S on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 2:37 pm
Stuifzand,
It’s worth pointing out here that the rail network in the USA was about 3x longer back in 1910 than it is today. There was no freeway system back then, so the rail network was much more extensive. Every tiny little town had its own rail connection. Warehouses were located near railroad stops.
With an electrified rail system (using overhead wires, which are common in many parts of the world, as you know) as extensive as that of 1910, the electric trucks would need to have a range of only a few miles, from the railroad depot to a warehouse, or from a warehouse to a home.
With regard to timing, we have more than a century remaining to accomplish the transition to the aforementioned system, assuming oil peaks today and starts declining. The rail system from 1910 was built in far less time than that, and with far fewer resources than we have today.
Finally, the remaining applications which really require a liquid combustible fuel (such as tractors) could use synthetic fuels. The technology to make synthetic fuels has existed for more than 60 years, and is straightforward. Synthetic fuels can be made using renewable electricity (even intermittent) and common substances such as seawater and air. Synthetic fuel is expensive, but would suffice for the few percent of our energy needs (such as tractors) which really require a liquid fuel.
-Tom S
Davy on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 2:45 pm
Get out of town TomS! A century to make a transition to aforementioned. What a crock of shyt. Get real man. We need to revive slow cheap rail everywhere but not you fantasyland kind.
Tom S on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 2:45 pm
Stuifzand,
I’ll also point out, that the long-distance transportation network in 1910 did not use oil. Ships and trains used COAL as fuel, of which we have 1,000 years of supply at current usage rates. Usage rates of coal are DECLINING in industrialized countries because of renewables.
Not only was the rail network far more extensive than it is today, coming within a few miles of almost everyone, but it used no oil.
-Tom S
Tom S on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 2:48 pm
Davy,
It would take only a few decades to revive an extended rail network. Building that much rail, that quickly, was accomplished in the late 19th century with a small fraction of today’s manufacturing capability.
Oil is not depleting anywhere near that quickly.
-Tom S
Davy on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 4:34 pm
Wow, TomS, smacks another home run “1000 years supply of coal at current usage rates”. That sure sounds reassuring TomS.
GregT on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 5:13 pm
“the rail network in the USA was about 3x longer back in 1910 than it is today. ”
With less than a third as many people, with dramatically lower standards of living.
JuanP on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 6:16 pm
Stui “When I was a kid in the early sixties …” You mean when the global population was less than half what it is today? And when we still had all the resources that we have consumed in the intervening 50 years? And of course it didn’t hurt none that back then we had a relatively stable climate and predictable weather patterns. I wish we had what we had in the sixties, more than anything else I wish we had the time we had back then. Now it is TOO LATE!
Carpe diem! Seize the day!
makati1 on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 7:25 pm
Juan, the dreamers just don’t want to, or cannot, face reality. It seems to be common disease in the 1st world of pampered lives. They ignore the hockey-stick graphs showing the future decline.
I too remember the 60s fondly. I was in my early 20s and lived in the the best years of America. (50s & 60s) The 70s was the beginning of the end of America. Vietnam and Nixon ending the gold tie to the dollar. We have been going downhill ever since and the slope is getting steeper.
Railroads are not coming back. The right-of-ways have been paved over or built on or otherwise destroyed. The existing tracks are not maintained. All of the recent oily accidents prove that. The Us has not one mile of high speed rail. That should say it all.
Tom S on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 8:39 pm
Davy:
“1000 years supply of coal at current usage rates. That sure sounds reassuring TomS.”
I derived this figure from the EIA website of how much coal could ultimately be recovered using currently available technologies. The resultant figure was approximately 4.5 trillion tons of coal worldwide that could be recovered. Since we extract 9 billion tons of coal worldwide per year at present (according to the same source), we have more than 500 years of coal at present rates of consumption. I was also assuming that there would be some improvement in the amount of coal we could ultimately recover from coal seams, during those years. Even the 500 years’ worth is a small fraction of the coal in place, in the ground. I guesstimated that we could develop technologies like in situ gasification which would approximately double the amount of coal (or gas from it) that could ultimately be extracted. That is a rough estimate. That is where I got the figure of 1,000 years.
If you think the EIA figures are too high, or that there will be no tecnological improvement in extraction over the next few hundred years, then fine.
However, the EIA’s estimate of how much fossil fuel can be extracted using currently available technology has been continually revised UPWARDS every year for decades, which would make the 500 year figure a fairly conservative estimate unless you think there’s some severe error in the EIA’s methods.
-Tom S
Tom S on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 8:51 pm
GregT:
” ‘the rail network in the USA was about 3x longer back in 1910 than it is today.’ With less than a third as many people, with dramatically lower standards of living.”
That’s true. The USA was able to build a rail network 3x longer than that of today, with a GDP less than 5% of today (in real terms), and a population less than 1/3rd of today. Even if there were a big decline in standard of living and drastic declines in oil production, it would still be very feasible to retain long-distance transport.
-Tom S
makati1 on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 9:04 pm
TomS, How? If it were up to the government, railroads would not exist in the Us today. They have underfunded them for decades. And they no longer serve all of America, just certain corridors. In the 70s there were steel mills in the Us that specialized in rail and frogs (where two tracks cross). I worked in two of them. Now? Imported from China?
No, rail is not going to grow or even be maintained. That is not the goal of the elite or we would have high speed rail from coast to coast by now. Localization is the future. Easier to control the masses if they are on foot. “Papers please”. lol
GregT on Wed, 8th Jun 2016 9:41 pm
Tom S,
Long distant transport is going to be of the least of our concerns, in the not so distant future. You’re grasping at straws.
peakyeast on Thu, 9th Jun 2016 4:02 am
@stufi: I wonder how many countries that can buy 50% of their energy from outside the country. All of them?
makati1 on Thu, 9th Jun 2016 4:53 am
The Ps imports about 40% of it’s energy in the form of coal and a bit of NG. All other energy sources are hydro, geothermal, wind and solar. No nuclear.
Stuifzand on Thu, 9th Jun 2016 5:06 am
The Ps are blessed by their location in that their central heating system, i.e. the sun, comes for free.
@peakyeast – not entirely sure what the points is you are trying to make.
makati1 on Thu, 9th Jun 2016 5:17 am
Stu, yes, they don’t have to worry about freezing to death, or heating bills. Only the city dwellers are dependent on electric. Many of those inhabitants are from a foreign country and will return there when the SHTF, or they are people with family lands in the provinces to go to.
Many of Philippine crops can be planted year round. Since rice can be stored for 4-5 years without losing it’s nutrients, they have a better chance of getting thru the bottle neck than most.
I am anxious to get out of the city and into nature again. Clean air, warm breezes, green, and yes, monkey bands raiding the crops and cobras to watch out for. lol
Davy on Thu, 9th Jun 2016 6:15 am
“Many of Philippine crops can be planted year round. Since rice can be stored for 4-5 years without losing it’s nutrients, they have a better chance of getting thru the bottle neck than most.”
The P’s rank number #3 in the dangers to natural disasters. Climate change will likely increase that risk dramatically besides heating the already hot place up.
http://www.worldriskreport.org/
energyskeptic on Thu, 9th Jun 2016 12:15 pm
Electric rail. U.S. diesel-electric locomotives are ALREADY ELECTRIC (the diesel generator IS the power plant) and more efficient than all-electric trains.
http://energyskeptic.com/2014/electrification-of-freight-rail/
There are only 95,000 miles of tracks but 4 million miles of roads. RR track can only be put on 1 to 2% grades, many right-of-ways are gone now. 80% of towns depend on trucks ONLY.
You can’t put catenary over millions of square miles of farmland for tractors and harvesters, or millions of miles of transmission lines, cover all mining and logging operations, and other essential off-road uses. For reasons explained in “When trucks stop running”, overhead wires on roads won’t work either, nor is it likely an 80 to 100% renewable grid is possible. We’d need to build thousands of fossil and nuclear power plants to electrify trucks.
Obviously I don’t believe that cargo will keep moving at the volumes that do today. Yet we’ve rearranged our lifestyle as if this will continue forever, and America will fall faster and harder than any other nation because of this. In the Great Depression, 25% of the population still lived on farms. And there were 230 million fewer people. And 80% of them didn’t live within 200 miles of the coast like now, yet 80% of food is grown in the interior of the country. Without trucks, how will that food be moved to where people live?
Biofuels: Peak soil: Why biofuels destroy ecosystems and civilizations
http://energyskeptic.com/2015/peaksoil/
http://energyskeptic.com/2015/biofuels-do-not-scale-up-enough-to-power-society/
http://energyskeptic.com/2016/are-biofuels-sustainable-and-viable-energy-strategy/
Methanol: diesel engines can’t burn methanol.
http://energyskeptic.com/2015/methanol/
Hydropower (there’s almost nowhere to put new dams for (pumped)hydropower
http://energyskeptic.com/2015/hydropower-has-a-very-low-energy-density/
http://energyskeptic.com/2011/hydropower/
National grid
Wind’s dirty secret: it goes on vacation in the summer and year-round in the South East
http://energyskeptic.com/2015/winds-dirty-secret-stops-working-across-continental-usa/
Building a national super grid in America
http://energyskeptic.com/2015/building-a-national-grid-in-america/
Wind and Solar diurnal and seasonal variations require energy storage
http://energyskeptic.com/2015/wind-and-solar-diurnal-and-seasonal-variations-require-energy-storage/
Energy storage
Compressed Air energy storage CAES
http://energyskeptic.com/2015/caes-in-aquifers/
CSP with thermal energy storage is seasonal, so it can not balance variable wind and solar power or contribute much power for half the year
http://energyskeptic.com/2015/csp-energy-storage-seasonal-not-much-use-on-national-grid-either/
CSP barriers and obstacles
http://energyskeptic.com/2015/csp-barriers-and-obstacles/
Zion on Fri, 6th Nov 2020 10:30 am
There is also https://www.kombo.co/ which allows you to compare all the tickets and above all allows you to create combinations that can save you a lot!
We do not necessarily realize but very often, a trip that we usually do by train can also be done by bus. And often, although the bus is a little longer, it is better to add 30 minutes to your trip to save tens of money, right?