Oil spill a clean energy game changer?

[bit_pattern]

Is the following likely to end up being empty rhetoric, or will this disaster stimulate a move to a genuine clean energy? And what immediate technologies can America roll out and what would it take to roll out such technologies?

http://www.theage.com.au/environmen...spill-for-years-says-obama-20100616-yeg5.html

Pledging to do “whatever's necessary” to return the Gulf to its natural state, Mr Obama also urged the world's biggest consumer of fossil fuels to respond to the disaster by accelerating its transformation to renewable clean energy.

“We cannot consign our children to [an oil-dependent] future,” Mr Obama said. “The tragedy unfolding on our coast is the most painful and powerful reminder yet that the time to embrace a clean energy future is now.

“Now is the moment for this generation to embark on a national mission to unleash American innovation and seize control of our own destiny.”

 

[PixyMisa]

I don't know whether it will end up being empty rhetoric, but it's certainly starting out as empty rhetoric.

 

[theprestige]

It depends: Does this spill suddenly, magically, make "clean energy" more productive?

 

[McHrozni]

It depends: Does this spill suddenly, magically, make "clean energy" more productive?

It could make oil more expensive, and therefore alternatives more likely to turn a profit.

High oil price is practically the only way of making alternatives to oil economically viable. This is slowly making an impact, which is a good thing.

McHrozni

 

[EHocking]

It could make oil more expensive, and therefore alternatives more likely to turn a profit.

High oil price is practically the only way of making alternatives to oil economically viable. This is slowly making an impact, which is a good thing.

The price of oil at the moment is around $77.

In July 2008 it peaked at $145.

Funnily enough, back in 2008 the last PotUS said exactly what the current one is saying now.

The United States Is Reducing Dependence On Oil By Diversifying Energy Supply, Increasing Energy Efficiency.

 

[McHrozni]

The price of oil at the moment is around $77.

In July 2008 it peaked at $145.

Funnily enough, back in 2008 the last PotUS said exactly what the current one is saying now.

The United States Is Reducing Dependence On Oil By Diversifying Energy Supply, Increasing Energy Efficiency.

I seriously didn't expect Obama to be the 3rd Bush term, but hey, stranger things have happened.

The number I heard cited on TV back in 2008 was that the break-even point between oil and alternatives was $70/barrel of oil. If the price is above that level, alternatives are competitive with oil. If the number is accurate, the oil price is about perfect right now: just high enough to justify investing in alternatives, and still not so high as to severely impact economy.

McHrozni

 

[a3sigma]

$100 a barrel oil is the only thing that will make any difference. Higher price will make more of a difference sooner. IMHO

 

[EHocking]

$100 a barrel oil is the only thing that will make any difference. Higher price will make more of a difference sooner. IMHO

Conversely, it will make marginal return oil and gas fields profitable and prospects that might have been ignored in the past would then be revisited.

It will certainly help sustain the higher costing deepwater drilling.

 

[McHrozni]

$100 a barrel oil is the only thing that will make any difference. Higher price will make more of a difference sooner. IMHO

That I can't say. I'm just quoting what I heard on TV almost two years ago

The principle is quite certainly accurate: at a certain price level, oil is no longer the second cheapest energy source available (coal being the cheapest), and investments into alternative sources will occur because they're profitable, not just because we believe they will be necessary at some point in the future. Just where is that level I don't know, but I heard the number of $70/barrel

McHrozni

 

[a3sigma]

Conversely, it will make marginal return oil and gas fields profitable and prospects that might have been ignored in the past would then be revisited.

It will certainly help sustain the higher costing deepwater drilling.

Good points. My thought was mainly that we are unlikely to get serious about conserving gasoline until it hits $4 plus per gallon.

 

[23_Tauri]

The price of oil at the moment is around $77.
In July 2008 it peaked at $145.

Average price of petrol at the pump in the UK in July 2008: £1.19/litre

Average price of petrol at the pump in the UK in May 2010: £1.21/litre

Hmmm....

http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/fuel/aa-fuel-price-review-2008.html

http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/fuel/index.html

 

[EHocking]

Average price of petrol at the pump in the UK in July 2008: £1.19/litre

Average price of petrol at the pump in the UK in May 2010: £1.21/litre

Hmmm....

http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/fuel/aa-fuel-price-review-2008.html

http://www.theaa.com/motoring_advice/fuel/index.html

Average price of petrol at the pump in the US in May 2010: £0.39/litre ($2.70/gal)

http://www.eia.doe.gov/dnav/pet/pet_pri_gnd_dcus_nus_w.htm

 

[MortFurd]

Good points. My thought was mainly that we are unlikely to get serious about conserving gasoline until it hits $4 plus per gallon.

Unlikely. Gasoline in Germany is at that level (1.40Euro per liter.) Joe Average here doesn't call for better mileage or slow down from 200KMH on the autobahn, he bitches about how high the gas prices are and hits the boss up for a raise.

Gasoline prices here are high because of taxes - some 70 cents for each liter goes for taxes. The taxes are so high on gasoline that they actually give commuters a tax break per kilometer so that people can afford to go to work.

A sudden jump in the gas price will cause a short term interest in saving gas, but a long term increase doesn't really do much. As the price climbs, people acclimate to the higher prices, and they have time for to push for pay raises. Long term, people still use the amount of gasoline they would have used anyway and the economy gets bled. In Germany, the gasoline taxes are supposed to pay for the highways but they've gotten used for so many other things that they've had to start charging shipping companies tolls on the highways. That worked so well the truckers stopped using the main highways where they have to pay tolls and started using smaller roads and causing pollution and traffic problems in places that were never intended to have heavy traffic - and mucking up the roads besides, as they weren't built for the loads.

 

[Dragonrock]

It won't have a lasting change. Everyone is having an emotional response right now, but once it's not front page news everyone will go back to being how they've always been.

Since 2008 I see many more scooters and such rather than cars. I would be interested to know if the fuel consumption trend has changed since then.

 

[rwguinn]

It won't have a lasting change. Everyone is having an emotional response right now, but once it's not front page news everyone will go back to being how they've always been.

Since 2008 I see many more scooters and such rather than cars. I would be interested to know if the fuel consumption trend has changed since then.

I agree. One guy in the Ft Worth Star telegram pointed out that we don't use oil so much for electricity as we use it for transportation.
We have windmill farms all over this state, as well as several other states where there is lots of wind and room. Nuclear power generates electricity. We are big users of electricity, but if I need to visit a client, it takes petroleum products.
Unless we make use of more telecomuting (pretty useless if your job is making airplanes/selling groceries/operating a sewing machine/etc), or go to a "company town" sort of environment, or centralize everything, including living space, eliminate vacations to places other than where we live, and all that sort of thing (A complete society make-over), oil is going to be very important to us.

 

[BenBurch]

Well, if you have enough electricity, you can make liquid fuels from cheap feedstock.

 

[TraneWreck]

After Obama's speech last night it appears the answer is a resounding, no.

Unbelievable.

It's possible my disdain for the political process itself renders me incapable of understanding the motivations of our leaders, but I just can't imagine spending my whole life working towards a goal, achieving it, then contenting myself with doing a half-assed job. "Climate Change" doesn't poll well, ergo we won't do **** about it.

 

[a3sigma]

Unlikely. Gasoline in Germany is at that level (1.40Euro per liter.) Joe Average here doesn't call for better mileage or slow down from 200KMH on the autobahn, he bitches about how high the gas prices are and hits the boss up for a raise.

I'm not disputing what you say. But according to International Energy Agency:

http://earthtrends.wri.org/searchable_db/results.php?years=2005-2005&variable_ID=292&theme=6&cID=190&ccID=2

per capita consumption of gasoline is more than 6 times higher in the U.S. than in Europe. How to account for this other than cost?

 

[dudalb]

After Obama's speech last night it appears the answer is a resounding, no.

Unbelievable.

It's possible my disdain for the political process itself renders me incapable of understanding the motivations of our leaders, but I just can't imagine spending my whole life working towards a goal, achieving it, then contenting myself with doing a half-assed job. "Climate Change" doesn't poll well, ergo we won't do **** about it.

In a Democracy,you really can't make radical changes without a majority of the public behind you.
Sorry, but you sound like one of those Liberals who , for all their talk of the glories of democracies, have a deep contempt for 90% of the population.
And who, deep down really beleive in benevolent dictatorship with a small elite calling the shots.

 

[JoeTheJuggler]

It depends: Does this spill suddenly, magically, make "clean energy" more productive?

The spill changes nothing in this regard but our perceptions. It forces us to reassess the costs of (at least) deep water off shore drilling. If the cost of oil is substantially higher, then it would make clean energy sources more attractive from a cost/benefit point of view.

If we realize that oil extraction costs more than we thought because of Deepwater Horizon disaster, it doesn't mean that that disaster changed the cost. It means that our previous assessment of the costs of oil extraction were too low.