Today read a report saying, that world oil production / consumption will increase by 30% by 2030. This is slightly higher than during previous 17 years. Do you believe such a projection is right / wrong?
This by same people who predicted EU and US would grow by 3-4% in 2009? A lot can happen. Consumption could explode, the economy could implode,.. Depends on which side of an economic bubble we will be then.
There are just too many possible trajectories, so one can only believe they could be right and somewhat likely. Anyone saying more than that is clueless or intentionally misleading due to an agenda :)
Lets hope the oil consumption drops on top of a prospering economy, based on renewables, with oil companies stepping behind renewables, without shocks to anyone. That would be warm and fuzzy :)
As Car t man points out the future world oil consumption can only be described by a Probability Distribution Function (PDF). Normally people only quote the 50% probability. So half the time it will consume less.. the other half more.
Of course his prediction is based on his assumptions, which are never published. This makes it difficult to evaluate the estimate.
Such projections presume a straight line and no disruptions or new technologies. Ask RIM/Blackberry how well that worked out for them...
I remember reading a report when i was younger stating that the middle east had enough oil to meet world demand until about 2030, at which times supply would run out.
This was about 20-24 years ago.
Guess they were wrong.....but its surprising given just how much more oil is consumed worldwide today as compared to then.
It's tough to make predictions, especially about the future. Yogi Berra
Oddly, I don't hear people talking about "peak oil" any more...
If you're in luck, technology progresses and you have no severe disruptions. I think most here probably hate oil to the point of being an ideology but oil is going to stay around since there are very few products in daily life actually free of oil as a raw material. From rubber, plastics and all sorts of packaging... Oil, in terms of low hanging fruit, is getting scarce in many large exploited locations (new ones are popping up like the one in Brazil now), so it is getting more expensive to reach (deeper and deeper drilling). Currently new tech made deeper drilling more affordable and offset some of that.
And some food for thought. At some point in the future, we may find that global warming might turn to cooling or whatever twists and may end up needing larger CO2 emissions as a mechanism to try to "steer" climate change in direction suitable to us. Scientists don't fully understand the climate yet so I would actually like to see some preparations going into being ready if it goes either way. Needing to inhibit CO2 or to produce loads of it.
So to not just be able to lower the climatic "interest rate" but to raise it, if ever necessary. We need more tools. Best to cover all the bases in coming decades. Get a handle on global economy and climate. The first would make the second affordable...
They weren't exactly wrong. Those calculations are always based on existing technologies. No technology will allow fully extract oil from the oil well, but as technology develops more is extracted and less remains in the ground. This buys some time, but fundamentals are the same. And new oil is much more expensive.
I was more interested on demand side though. In the last 17 years oil consumption grew at about 30%. Within that growth however, developed countries except for US actually reduced their consumption. US consumption grew, but just about 5%. And Chinese consumption more than tripled to represent now world's 13%.
By projecting the same growth for the next 17 years, they are pretty much expecting China to keep developing at a current rate, or better even emerging of another China. While consumption in the developed world will keep growing. None of this can be correct. 17 years is quite a lot.
While no prediction is right, if they use trending and population numbers and correct for international consumption models and so forth, sure 30% increase by 2030 is surely possible.
Think about the growing middle-class in India and Asia. The USA only makes up 4% of the world population. Add in Canada and it's still below 5% of the world population. We have very little "command" of future energy demand that will be growing.
Buying 10,000 EVs a month in the USA is a drop in the proverbial bucket of oil production and consumption.
In the end - oil will stop flowing when it runs out. THen we have a huge problem on our hands. Seriously, and I believe this, that it will only become an issue when our world leaders step up and issue a world moratorium on production and guidance on how to slow the demand for it. Oil, to me, should be a transitional energy source. We should strive as hard as we can to get off of its use. But people are a herd species. Very few will go EVs until they are forced to by the world leaders or until EVs are cheaper than ICE vehicles with the same level of fueling options available to them. People don't change easily and thus this is a long up-hill battle to get electric transportion supplementing ICE.
I think Tesla should re-think its desire to create a $35K car and make it a $20K car for a mass-appeal auto. $35K is just not cheap enough to reach deep enough into the populace to make a big enough dent in oil usage and to help lower-income people stop paying hundreds per month for gasoline.
I mentioned the $20K car. It also means 5000-10000 rapid fueling stations sprinkled throughout the country. Thousands of these are needed - whether "gas-station" style or at high-wait points like hotels, commuter train stations, parking garages, shopping malls and similar.
In the short run, only economic collapses make instant dents in oil consumption. As far as consumer level growth is concerned, factors like small affordable cars for masses like Tata Nano in India, etc mean possible stark increases in consumption on that level, growth in vehicle sales also mean growth in consumption of oil as a raw material for plastic, tires, etc.. Such vehicles, if going mainstream will mean severe growth in use and pollution. Most of the world'd population does not have cars yet but want them.
China is decided to go electric but in the short run, they will still grow on gas but also might make a very quick subsequent transition to electricity but most of theirs comes from coil for now.
Shell thinks solar will win out completely within decades. In general, what you want is for big oil to step behind solar, wind, etc also. Many already did that but then also existed since short term economics failed them. BP, Shell,.. all had solar panel factories, but sold them off since they kept dropping in price. They should mainly stay on the solar plant side, not manufacturing.
What you want is for the very people who would currently oppose renewables, actually adopt them and then protect them as they currently do their current business models. There would be noone on this planet that would protect renewables more vigorously than an ultra conservative, if migrated to renewables successfully. Some of the very folks against them currently. Give Tesla the UPS (uninterrupted power supply) function, so it can also be used as a source of 110v or 220v electricity for you home in need, solar panels as source of government free energy source and way to duct Middle east dependency.. for a year an they would protect it as vigorously as guns.
And while at solar panels, transitioning to them is a very very en ergy consuming process. It takes A LOT of energy to produce them and extract their raw materials, which feeds into the short term consumption of oil and coal also, but more and more of that energy need is now being met by solar panels themselves also. It is also an investment and a transition which over time actually settles the problem of unsustainability, as opposed to prolonging it.
And for the conservative customers, an incentive should be remarketed as the car being free of excessive governmental taxation..
X Deutschland Site Besuchen