149 comments on The 2012 Oil Crunch vs. Cash for Clunkers
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
149 comments on The 2012 Oil Crunch vs. Cash for Clunkers
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Search The Oil Drum with Google
Support The Oil Drum
Recently on TOD:World
TOD:Campfire
TOD:Europe
- Peak Gold, Easier to Model than Peak Oil? - Part I
- Carbon Capture and Storage
- Oilwatch Monthly November 2009
TOD:Canada
- In this house, we obey the laws of thermodynamics!
- The Round-Up: October 24, 2008
- Compressed Air Energy Storage - How viable is it?
TOD:Australia/NZ
- International Energy Agency calls 'Peak' on OECD Oil Demand
- Australian Senate: Peak Oil motion defeated 31:6
- The Bullroarer - Friday 20th November 2009
TOD:Net Energy
Blogroll
Energy Sites
- The Coming Global Oil Crisis
- Die Off
- Dry Dipstick
- Energy Bulletin
- From the Wilderness
- Life After the Oil Crash
- Peak Oil Crisis
- Peak Oil News and Message Boards
- Powerswitch
- Rigzone
- Matthew Simmons
- Wolf at the Door
Environment & Sustainability Sites
- The Daily Green
- EcoGeek
- Eco Street
- Green Car Congress
- Green Options
- green.alltop.com
- Gristmill
- RealClimate
- Sustainablog
- Treehugger
- WorldChanging
Blogs
- Casaubon's Book
- Cleantech Blog
- Clusterf
k Nation (Jim Kunstler) - The Cost of Energy
- David Strahan
- Early Warning
- The Energy Blog
- European Tribune
- GraphOilology
- Health After Oil
- jeffvail.net
- Mobjectivist
- Peak Energy (Australia)
- Peak Energy (USA)
- R-Squared
- Resource Insights
Finance & Economics Blogs
- The Big Picture
- Calculated Risk
- The Crash Course
- Ecological Economics
- Econbrowser
- Environmental Economics
- Infectious Greed
- The Mess That Greenspan Made
- Mish's Global Economic Trend Analysis
Organizations
Peak Oil Primers
Beware email scams!
Beware email scams claiming to be from this site. We do not have any job openings. If anyone contacts you about a job at The Oil Drum, do not reply to them, and definitely do not give them any personal information or send them money. Read more here.
“Most people spend more time and energy going around problems than in trying to solve them.”
—Henry Ford
User login
Contact
- Content: editors at theoildrum dot com
- Tech support: support at theoildrum dot com
Personnel
- Editors: Nate Hagens, Gail the Actuary, Prof. Goose
- DrumBeat Editor: Leanan
- Contributors: ace, Engineer-Poet, Heading Out, jeffvail, JoulesBurn, Sam Foucher, Robert Rapier
- TOD:Campfire: Glenn, Jason Bradford
- TOD:Europe: Chris Vernon, Euan Mearns, Francois Cellier, Jerome a Paris, Luís de Sousa, Rembrandt, Rune Likvern, Ugo Bardi
- TOD:Canada: benk, Libelle
- TOD:ANZ: Big Gav, Phil Hart, aeldric
- Emeritus: Stuart Staniford
- Technician: Super G
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.










GAIA Host Collective
Compressed Natural Gas.
Most cars can be retrofitted to run dual-fuel petrol and CNG for modest cost ( a few thousand $) and a loss of some luggage space for the gas cylinders. Power output is similar, range is reduced on CNG only, or extended if petrol is carried as well. Price of CNG in UK is less than that of petrol. Carbon emissions are modestly lower.
The US currently has a glut of natural gas. The price is very low compared with oil. The recent developments in unconventional NG supplies suggest substantial increase in production could be possible for prices no higher than oil is today.
A national infrastructure would be needed to supply the CNG. This could be rolled out over time, since the cars will be duel fuel and run on petrol when/where CNG is unavailable. The infrastructure costs will be no higher than building the existing petrol distribution plant were. The is no fancy high tech. The technology is available worldwide today.
The national gas pipeline network would need to be upgraded. This would take time.
A massive nationwide investment to convert as much of the existing fleet over the next ten years would cut most US oil imports, generate millions of jobs, and would provide real benefits from day one. It could probably offset the oil supply crunch worldwide for five years just by reduced US demand alone.
A Manhattan scale project would be the saving of the US from economic collapse and would be completed just about in time for the global peak on NG supplies, which would be followed by an even steeper energy depletion curve.
Buy a bicycle :)
Ralph
I agree with the natural gas approach. I am surprised it has not got wider attention.
I'd say hybrid NG electric is better than NG gasoline, but either will do
- ample supply
- low price
- domestic supply reduces trade imbalance and foreign debt
- less pollution
- national distribution network is in place via the Phil spigot in your house
- relatively low cost to convert existing fleet
- known technology, so no new technology required
- fleet conversion program would create jobs
... whats not to like?
so my prediction is, when high oil prices start to bite in 2010, and the oil/NG ratio goes to an even wider extreme, this will suddenly be discovered by the MSM. so what are the companies that stand to benefit when the herd stampedes in this direction? who makes the conversion kits?
A couple of points:
I'm not sure about 'ample' supply. Unconventional gas is more expensive to drill than conventional, and it is not clear how much supply could be ramped up before the price goes exponential. As documented on TOD, the current glut has led to half the NG drilling rigs being idled. That alone could cause a sudden shortage in a year or two if we have a cold winter or hot summer. Large scale investment would be needed.
I would run a mile from anyone trying to fill their CNG tanks from a domestic spigot. The supply needs to be compressed, the compressor is not on the vehicle. Domestic gas line pressure would very quickly fall to dangerously low levels if every house in a street pulled that trick.
You need to spend money on the infrastructure.
I think it is actively suppressed by the car/oil companies. It is given a 'third world' and 'unsafe and unreliable' image.
It will not be a cheap option, but a lot cheaper than all the others.
Electric cars, natural gas burned in an electrical generator can be captured.
d
Has anyone paid any attention to the hydrogen car developed in Britain that is about to hit the streets soon? BBC World has a story released today at:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8103106.stm
That appears to be the Pickens plan, pretty much. I'm not sure what's left of it, after the maker of the Phill went bankrupt.
I still think it is a huge mistake to subsidize vehicles with lousy fuel economy, whether they're topers or huffers. Natural gas is only cheap at the moment, due in part to the collapse in US industrial demand and the sunk costs of a large amount of LNG infrastructure in places like Qatar. Producing new shale gas in the USA needs prices around $8 per million BTU. This is cheap compared to gasoline, but expensive compared to the historical prices of home-heating and industrial fuel. Shifting enough demand to NG will push prices up to that level and keep them there. Instead of trading food for road miles, it's the economy being traded for road miles. Then there's the question of what happens when there are NG shortages and vehicle usage is cut off to keep houses warm and the lights on. All the dual-fuel vehicles switch back to petroleum, running up prices there and perhaps creating secondary shortages (though less severe than without fuel-switching).
If we were talking about vehicles like the Honda Civic GX, this wouldn't be such a big issue. However, the incentives to replace these "clunkers" go to monsters only a bit less thirsty than my neighbor's 14-MPG Durango. More flexibility may help, but failing to promote economy is just piling new problems upon the old ones.
Hence the final line in my original comment :)
There are any number of solutions to our energy problems that would work if we expend a huge amount of capital on them.
One of the problems we have is that oil price spikes will cause recurring recessions (or worse) that will destroy capital. This past recession has been rough on renewable energy because a good deal of the capital they had drawn on dried up.
How will we afford these solutions that are so enormously expensive?
Something I've been wondering is what the net effect on the grid would be of millions of compressors running simultaneously.
Just like another hot humid summer day in South Florida when all the AC units kick in at full load.
[url=http://anz.theoildrum.com/node/3388]The Oil Drum: Australia/New Zealand | The Air Car - A Breath Of Fresh Air Or A Waste Of Breath ?[/url] has more than a few answers of course. Coal powered compressors would be no better than petrol according to one source; would compressing NG which has been diverted from electricity generation be any improvement aside from having an ostensibly large supply?
I can't see NG being any sort of long-term solution. My estiamte puts US resources of N gas at about 1,000 bcf (includes tight, not hydrates). At 23 bcf / yr present consumption, that's only about 40 years so we shouldn't be doing ANYTHING to increase N Gas consumption, especially not using it to support purchases of new guzzler autos.
Small PHEV and EV's is the way to go, with maximum support for generating electricity renewably. Better yet is the new light personal urban transport systems on rails. Since the vehicles and tracks are so light we could easily afford to cover cities with track grids at 1/2 mile intervals, meaning everyone and every place would be within 400 yards of a station.