Peak Oil is You
Donate Bitcoins ;-) or Paypal :-)
Page added on November 26, 2018
Hubbert’s Peak by Kenneth Deffeyes
This is the first of three books that the late geologist Kenneth S. Deffeyes, who passed away a year ago this week, wrote about the coming global oil crisis. The goal of these books is to provide readers a rudimentary understanding of oil, where it came from and what’s involved in finding and producing it, in order to raise awareness about the peril we face as oil depletes. All three books deftly achieve this aim courtesy of Deffeyes’ expertise, his gift for communicating science information and his great wit.
Part of what makes the books so accessible is that they’re almost as much autobiographies as textbooks, allowing us to get to know their author personally. Chapter one of Hubbert’s Peak tells of how Deffeyes’ career began at the prestigious Shell Oil research lab in Houston, Texas, in 1958. An oilman through and through, he felt at home in the field; but while at Shell, he met someone whose research persuaded him that the U.S. oil industry didn’t have long to live. The person in question was Marion King Hubbert, a preeminent geoscientist who today is best known for his theory of peak oil. In 1956 Hubbert accurately predicted that U.S. conventional oil production would peak between 1965 and 1970, then begin an irreversible decline. Based on Hubbert’s numbers, Deffeyes concluded that the U.S. oil industry would shrink drastically in coming decades.
So, in the late 1960s, he decided to leave the oil business and become a geology professor at Princeton University. In 1997, after teaching there for 30 years, he retired, became an emeritus professor and commenced writing his books about oil. By that time, Hubbert, who had become a close friend of Deffeyes’, had long since passed away. Drawing on Hubbert’s notes and equations, in 2001 Deffeyes predicted that oil production for the entire world would soon peak and begin a permanent decline. At the outset of Hubbert’s Peak, he posits a date range of 2004 to 2008 and argues that once the global peak is reached, our civilization will become mired in a crisis such as it has never before seen.
The first thing to be said about this book is that the prediction made in its opening pages turned out to be wrong in a big way. While global conventional oil production did indeed peak around 2005, the oil shortage has yet to materialize, thanks to an unexpected boom in U.S. unconventional oil that began 10 years ago. Even so, the gist of our predicament remains the same: Oil is a finite substance created by rare geologic circumstances, and all other energy sources now available to humankind fall far short of it in terms of energy density, transportability, versatility and storability. Moreover, Hubbert’s Peak is still remarkably up-to-date when it comes to a number of other topics it covers, including our understanding of oil’s origin, the myriad uses to which our society puts it and the shortcomings of its putative replacements.
True to his goal of reaching a wide audience, Deffeyes takes pains not to make this book too technical. He delves a bit into organic chemistry, but wisely refrains from including any chemical formulas in the text, instead relying on figures and brief accompanying captions. He also details the mathematics underpinning Hubbert’s ideas, but rightly opts to relegate the equations to endnotes.
The parts of Hubbert’s Peak that deal with finding and developing oil resources offer, among other things, a fascinating glimpse into a day in the life of a petroleum geologist. Ninety-five percent of that day, says Deffeyes, is devoted to searching for petroleum traps. These are subsurface rock formations that block the movement of oil and gas, allowing these fluids to accumulate in reservoirs from which they can be recovered. Detecting a trap requires knowledge of the types of rock present and the temperature history of any potential oil source rock (i.e., rock with the ability to generate oil). But even with our current knowledge of such things, petroleum geologists have a tough go of it. “There is a spectrum of things that can go wrong,” writes Deffeyes, “from big conceptual errors to small detailed mistakes. All of them are fatal.”
Understanding how petroleum geologists determine whether a potential oil source rock contains oil requires knowing some basics about organic chemistry and the chemical reaction that cracks source rock into oil. To this end, Deffeyes describes the molecular cracking process and provides a sort of condensed field guide to the types of molecules found in crude oil. He keeps this chapter brief and, as noted earlier, doesn’t dive too deeply into the chemistry. Another way he lightens the material is by injecting his trademark droll humor. At one point he likens the catalysts used in oil refineries to divorce lawyers, since their molecules manage to remain intact even as they enable innumerable oil molecules around them to split apart. He drops another funny line while remarking on pollen’s ability to stay preserved in sedimentary rock over millions of years: “My congratulations to the plants; hay fever is forever.”
For those who enjoy learning how things work, the chapters on technologies and methods used to discover and produce oil are a riveting read. Topics covered include subsurface geology mapping, reflection seismology, drilling rig equipment, drill bit types, oil well completion, hydrofracking and horizontal drilling. The material on these latter two is admittedly dated. Deffeyes treats hydrofracking and horizontal drilling as mere asides and makes clear that he doesn’t see them holding much promise. Yet in the years since this book’s release, these technologies have been instrumental in bringing about the recent surge in unconventional fuels production (predominantly in the form of fracked oil from U.S. shale formations) that has staved off the global oil shortage. Still, it’s hard to fault Deffeyes for this oversight, since the shale oil revolution has truly been one of the great surprise developments of recent history.
In addition to presenting hard science, Deffeyes also goes into the soft science of economics. He explains how geologists and economists approach the challenge of oil discovery from fundamentally different perspectives. Economists insist that the amount of money invested dictates one’s success in finding oil, whereas geologists maintain that no amount of money can grow the supply of a finite substance. Deffeyes is critical of both viewpoints, stating that each is only partly right. He says economists are correct insofar as investing zero money yields no new oil. On the other hand, geologists know that while hurriedly investing large sums of money might get more holes drilled, many of these will be dry holes. Deffeyes goes on to show how Hubbert’s numerical methods can be used to estimate future oil supplies “independent of an economic or a geologic bias.”
The book’s assessment of alternative energy sources remains right on the mark. The energy sources that Deffeyes considers—geothermal, hydroelectric, solar, wind and nuclear—continue to be plagued by the problems identified in this book. The chief limitation for geothermal is the dearth of high-grade heat sources capable of producing power economically. The problem with hydroelectric is that most of the favorable sites have already been tapped. Solar and wind are hampered by issues of intermittency and poor energy density. Nuclear energy is the one alternative that Deffeyes sees having significant potential to help mitigate the depletion of oil, though he acknowledges that the threats of radioactive contamination and nuclear proliferation are troubling downsides.
It’s a bit curious that Deffeyes’ analysis omits biofuels and biomass, whose dismal energy returns would serve to strengthen his argument that alternatives lack the energy concentration needed to replace oil. Ethanol, biodiesel, biogas and solid biofuel were all part of the alternative energy picture back in 2001 (even if they weren’t yet the craze they would later become), and as such should have received at least a mention here.
Deffeyes says he keeps an open mind about new proposed alternatives. “It takes real judgment to sort the sheep from the goats,” he writes. “It is all too easy to say, ‘It won’t work.’” Instead of pre-judging each new proposal, Deffeyes contends that we need to encourage open competition in order to generate detailed ideas on project implementation and identify potential design flaws. However, he cautions that we should be wary of anyone who claims to have a single solution to all of America’s energy needs. The reality is that different energy sources are suited to filling different parts of the puzzle. And he warns that we should be equally suspicious of those who offer a dizzying array of alternatives, since these individuals would have us believe that the vast number of energy sources available to us means there’s nothing to worry about.
While energy efficiency is important, Deffeyes counsels the need to be on guard for false efficiencies. For example, great gains have been made in automobile fuel efficiency, but when these require additional energy to be burned at refineries in order to meet new specifications for gasoline and diesel fuel, they can become self-defeating. “We need to look at the whole system,” writes Deffeyes, “including the refinery and the car manufacturer, when we ‘improve’ the system.”
The disclaimer at the beginning of Hubbert’s Peak couldn’t be more prescient. “Although the author has made a good faith effort to evaluate the likely future course of the industry,” it reads, “circumstances may change and the author may have overlooked something that will turn out to be important later.” Of course, Deffeyes, like most everyone else, did miss something significant in his analysis that caused his prediction on the exact timing of the oil crisis to be incorrect. Still, I give him credit for acknowledging in advance that he might not be right about all the details of the picture he was painting. He was certainly right about the basic dimensions.
56 Comments on "Hubbert’s Peak by Kenneth Deffeyes"
Anonymous on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 4:33 am
A very pleasant, sympathetic review. While Deffeyes was an enjoyable listen/read, his peak oil view was dramatically wrong. A better perspective is really to look at the history of peak oil warnings and at the behavior of the peak oilists. Campbell had made a previous 1989 peak call. Hubbert had actually said in the 30s that US would peak in 1950.
There is a sort of pattern to these guys. When you keep being so wrong, time after time, and don’t learn from it, than I don’t trust your analysis. It would be one thing if the peakists were some too early and some too late. But everyone who is really a part of the peak oil crowd (ASPO, TOD, book writers…the kind that are revered here) ends up predicting too early. This shows a bias. It’s like always undercounting the change, never overcounting. Those aren’t just errors, they are systematic bias.
Books from Heinberg, Deffeyes, Simmons are already becoming historical curiosities. Passed by (except for diehards) in a similar manner as TOD and ASPO which have shut their doors.
spike on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 4:36 am
Kind of like Campbell’s The Next Oil Crisis, this book is more about oil than peak oil. His method to predict the peak is actually mathematically invalid. M Lynch
Anonymous on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 5:53 am
One of the side benefits of the whole Peak Oil fad would be that people learned about oil extraction itself and then were able to do analysis of the industry regardless of if supply were declining or increasing. But in fact, I see very poor knowledge from commenters who have been reading popular articles for decades (e.g. not knowing the properties and names of natural gas liquids). So the educational benefit really seems limited.
In addition, one would think that people who embraced the peak oil analysis fad (Staniford, Hamilton, etc.) would continue to do analysis even when peak oil proved overblown. Still lots of interesting things happening, lots good to analyze. But instead, they seem to have run off and lost interest in the topic when the story did not work out how the expected or desired. This seems to be a lack of intellectual curiosity and show there was some political bias at play in the peak oil movement (essentially wishcasting of environmentalists and anti growth types).
Anonymous on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 5:55 am
Of course this isn’t the first time we’ve seen this movie for anyone who remembers the massive change in outlook from the 70s to the 80s.
Davy on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 6:10 am
Anyone who declares peak oil dead is narrow minded. There is the whole economic dynamics behind the oil’s relationship to civilization. Oil today requires a huge investment to maintain growing production. Shale is covered with debt and not catching on elsewhere in the world. New discoveries brought to market are declining rapidly and unconventionals proving way too expensive to fill the gap of declining conventional fields. We got lucky over the past 10 years but you cornucopians are pretending this luck will continue. As time goes on your luck will run out. You guys will have your tail between your legs again before long. You cornucopians are very dishonest in this respect. In respect to the peaker argument of a few years ago kudos to you guys. You won the argument but only to eventually lose the war that is coming.
Antius on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 6:19 am
“The first thing to be said about this book is that the prediction made in its opening pages turned out to be wrong in a big way. While global conventional oil production did indeed peak around 2005, the oil shortage has yet to materialize, thanks to an unexpected boom in U.S. unconventional oil that began 10 years ago.”
Ever since 2008, we have been living in a zombie economy. Ultralow interest rates have made investment cash very easy to obtain and quantitative easing has ballooned the paper value of stocks. In the energy field, many marginal resources that were never really viable before, such as tight oil, wind and solar, are suddenly profitable thanks to the bubble. Many companies that would be long bankrupt in any normal state of affairs have hung on. This has gone on for long enough, that many people have fooled themselves into thinking that it is the new normal.
Amongst other things, it postponed peak oil. Deffeyes failed to predict this, along with just about everyone else, for the simple reason that it was unprecedented. When people predict the future, they usually do so under the assumption that broad financial conditions will not be markedly different to what they were in the previous fifty years. Global elites chose to kick the can down the road for another decade, hoping that some miracle would come to their rescue.
Unfortunately, the scale of monetary adventurism carried out in all major economies pretty much ensures that the next crisis will result in currency crisis. Global debt levels are 125% higher now than they were in 2000; but global GDP is only 76% higher. Most of the recorded “growth” in the years since 2000 has been nothing more than the simple spending of borrowed money. Comparing 2017 with 2007, supposed “growth” of $29.7tn equates to an increase of only $7.7tn in clean GDP. The remaining $22tn – accounting for 74% of claimed “growth” over the period – was the effect of pouring almost $100tn of additional debt into the system. Thus, though world debt stood at a reported 215% of GDP at the start of this year, it equated to 301% of the smaller, credit-adjusted measure of clean GDP.
https://surplusenergyeconomics.wordpress.com/2018/11/20/138-inflexion-point/#comments
In other words, there are no additional financial resources remaining to head off the next crisis. The world has never been so indebted. The UK pound may turn out to be the first canary to die in the coal mine. But others (the dollar, yuan and euro) have similar structural problems. Oil is likely to fall in price as the economy deflates and demand collapses. How this will end I do not know. But I sense that the day of reckoning is not far off.
Davy on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 6:24 am
“WTO Warns Global Trade Slowdown To Accelerate In Q4”
https://tinyurl.com/y83oueue
“And now, the WTO’s forward-looking indicator is showing a similar conclusion. According to an update released on Thursday, the WTO’s World Trade Outlook Indicator shows that trade is slowing again in Q4 for the second straight quarter.”
Antius on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 6:35 am
Dr Tim Morgan puts it thus:
‘Having spent much of my City career as an energy analyst, I’m often tempted to post an article here about the outlook for oil supply, prices and so on. For now, though, just a few thoughts.
1. I have never believed that we would “run out of” oil. Rather, we’re likely to reach a point where the oil that remains can only be produced at costs that are prohibitive for consumers. Whether we call this ‘peak oil supply’ or ‘peak oil demand’ is purely semantics – it describes the same situation, where the industry can no longer supply oil in the quantity and at the price that consumers require. In other words, it’s not a quantity issue, it’s a cost issue (ECoE).
2. Conventional oil supply has peaked, and – depending on how tight is your definition of “conventional” – did so between 2005 and about 2012. Since then, we’ve been relying on unconventionals, most obviously shales, to (a) replace declining conventional supply, and (b) meet growth in demand. This is a matter of “scraping the barrel”. We wouldn’t be using shales etc if there was abundant conventional oil.
3. Most shale production is loss-making, meaning that its cash flow isn’t enough to fund capital costs. Shale wells are characterised by ultra-rapid declines in production after start-up. The stimulation sequence used in conventional production is not applicable to shales – they cannot move from primary to secondary, tertiary and EOR because they start at the end of that sequence. Rapid decline rates mean that constant drilling is required to maintain or increase output. Cash flow from production cannot finance this “drilling treadmill”.
4. Why, then, is so much shale liquids produced? It is subsidised by investors. Some bought into the hype but, more importantly, this cash-burn sector has been sustained by cheap money. It’s not too much of a stretch to see higher interest rates killing the shale sector.
5. Demand for oil continues to grow, not least because oil powers 97% of all transport, with electric rail the only significant exception. Optimists believe that demand for oil will be reduced by the switch to EV, but do not have a convincing explanation for where the power for this is supposed to come from. ECoE interpretation suggests to me that, if a switch to EV does happen, the primary sources of supply will be coal and gas.
6. Market forces operate imperfectly in oil, because responses to price are very slow. If prices rise, for example, consumers do not immediately use much less, and neither can suppliers rapidly increase production. This slow response process creates both shortages and gluts, over a cycle anywhere between 7 and 13 years in duration. Both shortages and gluts can be protracted. We’re in a glut now, mainly because (a) cheap money has fueled the shale boom, and (b) economic deterioration is impairing demand.
7. To understand the demand process, we need to see real economic trends behind credit-inflated activity. We do this here, but most observers ignore the credit/consumption equation, and thus are over-optimistic about economic “growth”.
8. So right now we have a glut, but that’s unlikely to persist more than, say, two more years unless the economy really slumps. That’s actually pretty likely.’
Davy on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 6:53 am
The important point about global debt is its systematic dangers. It is diffused throughout the global economy now more than ever and represents malinvestment if ever rates and monetary easing would normalize. Bad debt is lurking everywhere. The Fed has tried just a sliver of normalization and the whole global economy is trembling. Just a small amount of global trade is being disrupted by the US/China trade battle and the world economy gyrates wildly by the day. It is unclear if normalization can ever happen. If global trade becomes more about walls than bridges then “Katy bar the door”. Central bank management seems to be an open and shut door of a new experimental economic paradigm of adapted capitalism. It is now uncontrolled “controlled capitalism”.
The future of debt economics is in question when so much debt has been realized. We then have to acknowledge that net energy is in decline, climate is destabilizing, and social tensions of wealth transfer intensifying. Renewable transformation is occurring and helpful but nowhere near enough to counteract these new existential instability. It is easy to disassociate these other problems but they cost GDP and if GDP is declining then these problems magnify quickly. If GDP is declining then the renewable transformation will likely die.
Debt is not something that represents an organic like growth it is more a trade-off. The balance sheet is the same just who owns what changes. What is fraudulent is the “notional” of affluence. The fact that people, businesses and countries think they have wealth they don’t. In this respect then debt does take on a life of its own. This fraudulent belief in affluence represents a very dangerous financial narrative. It has become a myth and a false god.
We are living as if this status quo has no end. It is beyond control and it is metastasizing into all aspects of modern life. The real danger is when a tipping point is reached and we find ourselves in catastrophic change. Maybe the change won’t be catastrophic but it will surely be destructive change that is not growth related like in the past when new technologies change the world and destroyed old ways. This will be destructive with economic abandonment dysfunctional networks, and irrational policy IOW chaos.
It is the degree and duration of this decline that is the most important to our survival. This destructive change will surely be location based where the worst extremes are and time based because it is a process. It is happening now but we still have a robust economy so the growth/decline battle is an undulating plateau. At some point decline will represent the real paradigm that cannot be disputed. Once this occurs the all-important driver of global economics that is human confidence will change from liquid to illiquid. Trade will decline because of fear. Nations will not cooperate because of fear. Fear will be the new force. Risk off the new financial reality. Deflation and stagflation the basics not economic growth, productivity increases, and consumer wealth.
dissident on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 9:31 am
The moronic GDP accounting is why debt has accumulated to the extent it has. Any debt growth is considered a positive contribution to GDP. This includes foreign borrowing and domestic “investment”. Clearly, this sort of accounting is idiotic. The annual debt stimulus has to be counted after subtracting the annual debt costs. But I guess this is too complex.
We have seen western economic “growth” consist of debt growth. When the debt is approaching the scale of the GDP (as in most of the OECD) then a 2-3% GDP growth is really just annual debt growth.
Antius on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 12:18 pm
Some low hanging fruit for our oil predicament. There is a tendency to focus on revolutionary solutions, like electric vehicles, rather than technically easier solutions. Here are a few examples:
1. Absorbed natural gas – A simple yet impressive technology. At any given pressure, a tank filled with porous activated carbon desiccant will absorb about 3 times more methane than an empty tank.
https://www.angpinc.com/ang-technology
Car fuel tanks are typically 60-100 litres. A normal steel tank operating at a pressure of 30bar, with volume 0.1m3 would contain ~2kg of methane at 21C. Tanks in this pressure range can be made from carbon steel.
The heat of combustion of methane is 50MJ/kg. A car with fuel economy of 70mpg (113km/litre) will consume 1.8MJ of fuel energy per km. So an ordinary tank charged with natural gas to 30bar will take a car some 56km. However, with desiccant added, range increases to 167km – 100 miles. We could perhaps double tank volume by including pressurised segments within the chassis of the vehicle. That would increase range to 200 miles. Alternatively, the natural gas could be used in combination with diesel in say a 50/50 combination, with no real change to engine technology, other than valve and ignition timings.
2. From what I recall, hydrogen displays similar absorption characteristics. Hydrogen has poor energy density as a fuel, because of its very low density. However, by adding 10% hydrogen to the natural gas, vehicle energy consumption is reduced by about 7.5%, because the hydrogen boosts flame speed within the engine. Hence, the hydrogen almost pays for itself.
3. I have already mentioned the hydraulic hybrid. This recovers a vehicles braking energy within a hydraulic cylinder which can then be used to accelerate the vehicle. This improves fuel economy by 30-70% depending upon the vehicle type and driving conditions. Let us assume a 50% improvement (i.e. one-third reduction in fuel use) for a standard car.
Adding these improvements together. Assume a car that burns 50% diesel, 40% natural gas and 10% hydrogen, with hydraulic energy recovery. Total diesel consumption would be:
0.5 x 0.925 x 0.667 = 0.308
With technologically easy solutions, we can build vehicles that reduce oil use by 70%. Ultimately, we could replace a portion of natural gas with biogas and replace some of the diesel with wood tars derived from biomass pyrolysis.
Uri Nutz on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 6:07 pm
Peak or no peak, much of what’s left needs to stay in the ground if we want our kids’ kids to have a chance at a life beyond mere existence (or at all in the worse case). That we continue to squander oil by allowing rampant consumerism to continue is truely a crime against nature, of which humanity is a part.
Free Speech Forum on Tue, 27th Nov 2018 7:16 pm
If the elites and the 99% all support wars, debt, and tyranny, then who is the real enemy?
The government is destroying the US and Americans scream for more chains.
Absolute insanity.
Wild Bourg Man on Wed, 28th Nov 2018 8:00 am
As alluded to by others predicting peak conventional oil production seems to have been accomplished. What wasn’t accomplished was the understanding of the what other things could happen to mask the effects of Peak Oil. There will always be a multiple punches and counter punches, actions and reactions to the availability of resources regardless of the species using those resources. There always has been and there always will be even after we are gone.
Sissyfuss on Wed, 28th Nov 2018 9:08 am
Oil is a drug. We started injecting it in mass quantities in the early 1900s and have maintained our buzz ever since. But drugs are a trap, and we keep chasing the high that no longer exists. The world needs to go cold turkey but that’s not going to happen. Our high is turning into a bad trip that ends in madness. Look around, it is everywhere.
Cloggie on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 1:12 pm
Secret Dutch government document leaked:
https://nos.nl/artikel/2261387-iedereen-aan-de-elektrische-auto-6000-euro-subsidie-in-2021.html
Core measure: 6000,- euro subsidy on purchase e-vehicle. By 2030 1/3 Dutch car fleet needs to be electric.
1.8 million charging poles to be installed by 2030.
Who is going to pay this?
The idiots who don’t get the message and continue to drive in SUVs fueled by gasoline or diesel.lol Fossil fuel will be taxed additionally and road tax for gasoline cars is going to be increased.
Peak oil demand is coming in Holland.
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 1:33 pm
Cloggie
UC Davis Peer Reviewed Study: It Will Take 131 Years to Replace Oil with Alternatives
(Malyshkina, 2010)
http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/es100730q
University of Chicago Peer Reviewed Study: predicts world economy unlikely to stop relying on fossil fuels (Covert, 2016)
https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.30.1.117
IEA Sees No Peak Oil Demand ‘Any Time Soon’
https://www.wsj.com/articles/iea-sees-no-peak-oil-demand-any-time-soon-1488816002
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 1:43 pm
Clogg
You remind me of my cell phone?
Why?
Because you are about to die..
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 1:45 pm
Clogg
Unfavourability rating of Vladimir Putin in European countries (2017)
https://i.redd.it/vn9sqznb99121.png
Source:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_image_of_Vladimir_Putin#Ratings_and_polls
Nobody but scuff fuck nazi’s like Putin..
Cloggie on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 1:49 pm
“UC Davis Peer Reviewed Study: It Will Take 131 Years to Replace Oil with Alternatives”
This maybe true for countries like the US and Nigeria…
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 1:57 pm
Clogg
Its actually for the world..Duh duh duh duh..
It Will Take 131 Years To Replace Oil, And We’ve Only Got 10
http://www.businessinsider.com/131-years-to-replace-oil-2010-11
Make that 2 years sine that article is from 2010..
Cloggie on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 1:57 pm
“Unfavourability rating of Vladimir Putin in European countries (2017)”
Hahaha… Gallup.lol
https://derstandard.at/2000086073678/Warum-ist-Putin-im-Westen-populaer
“Why Putin is so popular in the West”
(with right-wingers and conservatives)
Antius on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 2:02 pm
“Secret Dutch government document leaked”
OK. This assumes that electric cars are the right solution. By 2030, prosperity in the Netherlands will be substantially down compared to today. It may be better to think in terms of lower cost or more collect forms of transport. Bikes and buses perhaps?
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 2:11 pm
Clogg
Gallup is one of the best polls in the world..That is why its trusted by Wiki..Unlike the Daily mail or bretbart..
And who cares what stupid and ignorant low IQ conservatives in America think?
Cloggie on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 2:13 pm
“Because you are about to die..”
And why would that be, you impotent loser?
I’d have you deloused before you can say “Hitler”.
http://www.renegadetribune.com/advertising-in-the-third-reich-and-beyond/
Cloggie on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 2:18 pm
“It may be better to think in terms of lower cost or more collect forms of transport.”
Shared autonomous cars and electricity don’t exclude each other.
https://deepresource.wordpress.com/2017/05/16/by-2030-you-wont-own-a-car/
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 2:25 pm
Clogg
Shared autonomous cars? HAHA!
Consumers Don’t Really Want Self-Driving Cars, MIT Study Finds
http://agelab.mit.edu/news/consumers-dont-really-want-self-driving-cars-mit-study-finds
Tesla: Autopilot was on during deadly Mountain View crash
https://www.mercurynews.com/2018/03/30/tesla-autopilot-was-on-during-deadly-mountain-view-crash/
Tesla and GM self-drive cars involved in road collisions
http://www.bbc.com/news/technology-42801772
Self-driving Uber kills Arizona woman in first fatal crash involving pedestrian
https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2018/mar/19/uber-self-driving-car-kills-woman-arizona-tempe
Cloggie on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 3:01 pm
Largest Dutch bank sees shared autonomous car as a certainty:
https://economie.rabobank.com/publicaties/2017/juli/autonoom-rijden-gaat-niet-vanzelf/
Cloggie on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 3:10 pm
Dedicated fleet of 7 autonomous cars have taken up tests on Dutch public roads. They not only communicate with static road infrastructure but also with each other. They mix with regular traffic.
https://www.zelfrijdendvervoer.nl/autopilot/2018/09/10/succesvol-experiment-met-cooperatief-automatisch-rijden-op-n205/
Antius on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 3:48 pm
“Consumers Don’t Really Want Self-Driving Cars, MIT Study Finds”
Think about how expensive it is to own a car. The cost of learning to drive; buying the car, maintaining it, fuelling it, insuring it, road tax, etc. And then there is the dead time spent driving.
In a time of declining prosperity, an invention that cuts those costs by half or more, will inevitably be adopted. It is irrespective of whether people like the idea or not. It will happen because it is cheaper and easier. And people will invariably do what is cheaper and easier for them.
Cloggie on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 3:57 pm
British consultancy Rethinkx calculated that the per mile cost of shared autonomous driving will be brought down ba factor 4-10 as compared to private car ownership.
People will love it, especially in times of a receding economy.
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 4:14 pm
Antius
You are a moron who said the Cons would hold congress via zerohedge..
You will never be able to park a self driving car..And a self driving car won’t be able to see the lines on the road when its raining or there is snow on the road..So the self driving car is always going to be an oxymoron..
And if self driving car gets into a wreck the auto manufacturer would be liable..
Its just PR BS to get stupid investors to invest in their car companies..
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 4:16 pm
Clogg
People will love being decapitated!
And how are people going to afford new self driving cars when the global economy collapses?
Too many “if’s”..
Antius on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 4:26 pm
“You are a moron who said the Cons would hold congress via zerohedge..”
Never said that specifically. Don’t take too much notice of the boney freak. I was surprised they made any progress at all. But politics is very much a tribal thing and with the demographic situation in the US being what it is, I suppose I shouldn’t have been surprised that the heathen freaks didnt completely bomb.
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 4:52 pm
Trumps tax attorney’s office in Chicago got raided today..We know he is a tax cheat already..
Mueller was just waiting till the mid terms to bring the hammer down..
Liberals will be dancing in the streets when they send the feds to arrest Trump!
LMFAO!
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 4:54 pm
Antius
Fuck off! You said it..You are as dumb as the muzzies..
Now go bow down to your invisible dear leader..You freak..And dont forget to drop your kids off with the pastor for play time..
LMFAO!
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 5:08 pm
Zerohedge spreading fake news scaremongering about global cooling..
https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2018-11-29/martin-armstrong-global-cooling-not-warming-what-we-should-fear-most
20 of the last 22 years have been the warmest on record..And the last four years have been the warmest ever..
https://www.cnbc.com/2018/11/29/last-four-years-were-the-hottest-on-record-un-agency-says.html?__source=twitter%7Cmain&fbclid=IwAR2g41S1qXRjik9JQUAPl8oPeqj5ODM4DO94i8WTW6Y6iBttaq6gp3p8UyM
Davy on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 5:37 pm
GM wants to focus on electric and autonomous vehicles if Trump will let them. This is part of the reason for their plant closures.
I am of the opinion that EV’s and autonomous EV’s will find a niche. Maybe in Holland more than a niche but I don’t see significant market penetration everywhere. Too expensive and too complex for widespread use. Remember these technologies need to be maintained. Lots of pricy infrastructure is needed. All this will be happening with the backdrop of a potential economic decline that could stop this process in its tracks.
makati1 on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 5:45 pm
Antius, “And people will invariably do what is cheaper and easier for them.” In the Ps it’s called a bus or a jeepney or a trike. I can go 100 miles on an air-conditioned bus for less than $5. A car would cost $60+ and that is using the US government’s tax deductible mileage rate, not the real one. Not to mention the stress of driving for several hours. The US has no bus service, forcing the serfs to own cars or live in the cities.
makati1 on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 5:50 pm
MOB’s intelligent rebuttals”
“You remind me of my cell phone? Why? Because you are about to die..”
“You are a moron …”
“Fuck off!…You are as dumb as the muzzies..
Now go bow down to your invisible dear leader..You freak..And dont forget to drop your kids off with the pastor for play time..”
Are you frustrated MOB? Hating your miserable life? Aww! Too bad! NOT!!! LMAO!
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 6:06 pm
Davy
How are people going to afford autonomous cars when the oil shortage hit and the global economy collapses?
You tell me..Because you are really smart..
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 6:10 pm
Look at the Proud Boys! LOL sounds like a name a bunch of faggots would come up with..LOL
https://i.redd.it/5w7cxqyg6c121.png
I am sure the Antifa are really scared of those preppy fat ass white boys!
LMFAO!
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 6:12 pm
That proud boys member is literally made up of butter..
Macaulay Culkin put on some weight.
Davy on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 6:15 pm
“You tell me..Because you are really smart..”
If you try again with a smart question I may answer it.
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 6:28 pm
The decline in U.S. life expectancy is unlike anything we’ve seen in a century
https://www.popsci.com/life-expectancy-declining?src=SOC&dom=tw
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 6:51 pm
That map to me reads that this is a culling of dumb people in the south. To me this is the opposite of collapse. An opportunity if you will.
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 6:59 pm
Federal agents raid Chicago office of lawyer who previously did tax work for Trump
https://thehill.com/homenews/administration/418928-federal-agents-raid-office-of-tax-firm-that-previously-worked-for
All I want for Christmas..
https://imgur.com/a/IMcx1vX
Cloggie on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 9:06 pm
A nation that is being destroyed from within:
http://www.spiegel.de/gesundheit/diagnose/usa-lebenserwartung-sinkt-durch-drogen-und-suizide-a-1240993.html
…by mobs tribe. Pushed into the third world. White despair wherever you look in America. The only country in the world where life-expectancy is receding. Drugs are now the main cause of death below 50. Wait for the revolt. For mob this is going to be worse than the thirties, after all, Americans have guns, Germans didn’t.
It is almost certain that Merz is going to succeed Merkel. Merz, that is the guy who tested the waters last week by suggesting that asylum needs to be abolished completely. After a storm of media protest he retracted, but everybody got the message.
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/annegret-kramp-karrenbauer-frau-von-gestern-kolumne-a-1241038.html
We’re going to win this fight.
Merkel meanwhile won’t make it in time to the G20. Her plane needed to make an emergency landing. Details now coming out suggest that communications complete broke down above the Netherlands:
http://www.spiegel.de/politik/deutschland/angela-merkel-verpasst-g20-start-flugabbruch-wegen-komplett-ausfall-des-funksystems-a-1241166.html
A crew member had a private satellite phone and this is how they landed, by improvising.
Meanwhile the planet is dying, says the UN and the world is looking away:
http://www.spiegel.de/wissenschaft/natur/uno-weltnaturschutzkonferenz-die-natur-stirbt-und-die-welt-schaut-weg-a-1241099.html
I AM THE MOB on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 9:20 pm
Clogg
Low IQ & Conservative Beliefs Linked to Prejudice
https://www.livescience.com/18132-intelligence-social-conservatism-racism.html
Cloggie on Thu, 29th Nov 2018 9:25 pm
…murdered from within, by mobs tribe:
https://youtu.be/q90kmUbEv7c
https://documents1940.wordpress.com/2017/09/27/paul-krugman-white-americans-are-losing-their-country/
Annie, get me my gun.
https://documents1940.wordpress.com/2018/06/11/cw2-brewing/