Rising Oil/Gasoline prices

[some_dude]

Be wary of people who talk about the "changed nature... of energy investing" or "it's a new era." That is what technology investors thought five years ago, too.

As Warren Buffett wrote (I'm quoting from memory, so cut me some slack): "Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when others are fearful." There is a lot of greed in the energy markets right now.

 

[Corona]

Still a lot of difficulties making them into a practical automotive power supply - see this month's Scientific American for an article on the subject. It depressed me a bit. They're still a ways from figuring out how to store enough hydrogen to power a car that has the same performance and range as contemporary cars.

There was an episode of Scientific American on PBS a while back where they looked at possible storage technology for hydrogen fuel cells. I think they are closing in on some solutions.

I agree the current technology of fuel cells is depressing. But, look where automobiles were a century ago...slow, noisy and very expensive. For a while, even, it was not even clear which would be more practical; electric or gasoline cars. That changed pretty quickly.

Honda is running fuel-cell cars in a couple municipal fleets in the Southwest (gotta keep those cells warm, or they don't work!), and they have been popular.

I also keep hoping someone will make a technology breakthrough on fusion power. The estimate is still 40-50 years away for a commercial reactor. When/if those become a reality, I expect that will create a societal change on par with the Industrial Revolution.

C

 

[JonJohn82]

It seems like since oil is finite and the United States is becoming more heavily dependent on foreign oil, we should spend some time developing alternative sources of energy.

 

[mzaharis]

There was an episode of Scientific American on PBS a while back where they looked at possible storage technology for hydrogen fuel cells. I think they are closing in on some solutions.

I agree the current technology of fuel cells is depressing. But, look where automobiles were a century ago...slow, noisy and very expensive. For a while, even, it was not even clear which would be more practical; electric or gasoline cars. That changed pretty quickly.

Honda is running fuel-cell cars in a couple municipal fleets in the Southwest (gotta keep those cells warm, or they don't work!), and they have been popular.

I also keep hoping someone will make a technology breakthrough on fusion power. The estimate is still 40-50 years away for a commercial reactor. When/if those become a reality, I expect that will create a societal change on par with the Industrial Revolution.

C

[curmudgeon]
You forgot steam - I think that steam-powered cars (don't know what they burnt to make the steam - wood?)

Yeah, researchers are considering metal hydrides, but these still take maybe 660 pounds of metal to hold an amount of H2 equivalent to a regular car's tank of gasoline (6-8 pounds of hydrogen). The neatest idea is to store the hydrogen in the interstitial spaces between water molecules in ice (250 pounds for one tank of fuel equivalent), but that one is in very early stages. Current processes require pressures of 36,000 psi (not a typo), although there is a process that could possibly require only 1450 PSI. I don't know how long it takes to refuel.

This is why California's horrendous mandated targets for percentage of zero-emissions cars that companies must sell have failed miserably - it's really hard to build a car that weighs the same as a current car, that goes as far on a tank of fuel, is as temperature-insensitive, and costs the same, without the manufacturers losing their shirts on each one, using alternative power sources. Who wants to buy an electric car that goes 70 miles (if you leave the AC off), and takes 8 hours to recharge? Gasoline is a simple solution that is hard to beat from a performance-per-pound perspective. And, as you aluded, it has a 120 year head start in technology development. Although it may (and my opinion, must) eventually happen, I think it will be a while (~20 years, my mostly uninformed guess) before we see people other than Ed Begley and the Sierra Club, and short-range commercial fleets with central refuelling points, buying fuel cell cars.

I remember that there was some effort to create a fuel cell car that runs on gasoline (I know - doesn't sound right, does it?). The fuel undergoes some sort of a catalytic breakdown which frees the hydrogen, which is then used in a fuel cell. The only problem is that the remaining component of Gasoline is mostly carbon, which is vented as CO2, although, being more efficient at extracting energy, the car still released less CO2 (according to the SciAm article, gasoline cars only use 33% of their chemical energy). The main advantages were that fuel storage is easier, and you can use existing distribution infrastructure (another big stumbling block for fuel cell acceptance). Don't know whatever came of it.

What's the old saw about fusion? "It's the energy source of the future - always was, and always will be." It's funny - about 40 years ago, the estimate was that fusion was only 20 years away. Now, it's 45-50 years away. Hopefully, that trend will reverse. ;-) Agreed, though, that it will have a fundamental impact on society if/when it happens, assuming the commercial hurdles are surmountable (in the late '40s, people said that nuclear fission was going to supply electricity that was "too cheap to be worth metering").

[/curmudgeon]

 

[B-J-J Fighter]

Very good thread. I started reading about peak oil about 1yr ago when gas prices really started to climb. I just hope rising prices don't slow down current growth. I just got a job flying again and I don't want a recession to bring it to a halt.

 

[sqwkvfr]

"What is the frequency Ken?" Bip...ooooops upside ya head! "The frequency Ken? What's the frequency?" Bip!

I think that considering that 80-90% of your posts make me laugh out loud, I'd have to say that your talents are wasted on aviation.

(hey, I'm bringing a 172R up your way from PHX next week and I'm debating whether to land it on a grass runway...is that a big no-no during the winter??)

 

[FracCapt]

I used to be a big believer in BioDiesel and Ethanol until someone on this board pointed out that when you factor the amount of energy required to manufacture these two, the benefit came to zero.

I use biodiesel in my truck(usually only B20, rarely is B100 available in my area - though, there is a new supplier that is supplying ONLY B100 for 20cents less than Diesel #2) whenever I can, and it makes it run better than #2. It lubes the injectors better than #2. When ULSD(Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel) becomes the standard, we will have to either run additives to lubricate the injectors, or a biodiesel mix to do the same, or comdemn our engines to much shorter lives. ULSD is not only more expensive, but it's much more damaging to engines when run without any additives. Unfortunately, there are no plans to place any kind of additives/lubricant in ULSD because the government feels it would defeat the purpose of ULSD. I guess I'll continue to run biodiesel, and I'm now investigating WVO.

I don't know why the government is dead set on this ULSD thing when biodiesel is so much better for the environment(the reason they claim ULSD is necessary) AND it can be produced domestically. Of course, we can't produce enough biodiesel to supply the entire country with B100....but we may be able to do B20 or even B50 for the whole country in 5-10 years, which GREATLY reduces emissions.

 

[atpcliff]

Hi!

I just read that GM will have production hydrogen fuel cell cars by 2010, and you will be able to buy a hydrogen fuel-cell car off a Chevrolet lot by 2015.

Another article I read was about what I have been worried about. The American car companies have lagged far behind the Japanese since about 1975, and it continues.

As you probably know, Detroit is far behind Toyota/Honda with hybrids. Note: If you didn't know, the new Ford Escape Hybrid is using 3 year old Toyota drivetrain technology, under license.

GM's response was to put max resources into a hydrogen fuel cell car. They are planning to be #1 again in world auto production, and they think they will do it by being first with mass hydrogen fuel cell auto production.

Unfortunately, I think Detroit has fallen by the wayside again!

The 5 companies with the most hydrogen fuel cell patents in recent years are ALL Japanese, starting with Honda and then Toyota!

I would really prefer to buy a Detroit car, but I won't if I can get a better quality car from someone else.

Cliff
YIP

PS-To any auto industry people reading this (I know there may be none), we won't be buying any new cars unless the worst-case mileage (city or highway) is a MINIMUM of 45 mpg. I'm not paying $3+/gallon for gas to put into a $35K+ auto that gets crappy mileage.

 

[Sphincter Boy]

Actually, I do both. I have every where I've lived; Orlando, FL and Fairbanks, AK and quite a few places in between. If more Americans left their SUVs at home and walked or rode bikes, they might find their seats fitting better when they airline to a vacation.

Do you walk or ride your bike to work? I'm tired of people bashing SUV owners when they themselves don't take their own advice. I guess we should all go back to the horse and buggy,

 

[AcroChik]

A Touch Of Market Pragmatism

Oil will never go below "what" price again?

Such statements are fundamentally unsound about any commodity (which is what oil is), or market.

A little history:

In January of 1968 the price of gold, per ounce, was fixed at just under $40.00. In January, 2002, an ounce of gold hovered around $300.00.

During the wild ride gold prices took in a speculators' bubble between 1978 - 82, the price broke through $600.00, twice.

We'll never see prices below $550.00 again, the pundits screamed. Then $500.00, then $450.00. Then $400.00. Etc. Etc. Etc. Many people got burned when that bubble burst. There's never a shortage of irrational exuberance.

The only thing financial pundits know for sure is how to cash their checks today and that you won't remember their names when they turn out to be wrong tomorrow.

Oil and gold seem to be closely related, in investment terms. Increasing oil prices apparently drive cash out of the equities markets and into gold..., usually but not always.

A recent upward spike in oil prices "seemed" to coincide with a sharp drop in the equities markets, which have since recovered those particular losses.

Proving causality in market events is a very tricky business. Reliably predicting the future? Impossible.

Here's a link to historical gold prices for anyone interested: http://www.kitco.com/charts/historicalgold.html