A tail of two futures:

[longview]

In the most likely future (IMO),
The price of oil continues to rise as the glut from fracking leads to reservoir depletion.
New wells will not be fracked for oil, as the companies that did so, did not see a good return on their investment.
As oil gets closer and closer to $90 a barrel, we will start to hear more news that the oil companies want to play a
roll in saving us from climate change.
Exxon CEO says advancing U.S. carbon capture project with rivals, government
At about $90 a barrel, several technology breakthroughs will be announced about man made fuels,
and the oil companies will begin offering carbon neutral fuels.
Whoever has the best process will license it to the others if the efficiency improvement justifies the price of the license.
The refineries will still use oil, but for secondary uses like plastics and fertilizers.
The supply of fuels made from oil will supplemented by fuels made from scratch, at a higher profit, all over the world.
Carbon neutral fuels for jets, ships, cars, ect, will drop Global CO2 emissions by about 30 to 40%.
When Human CO2 emissions hit about 5 GtC, the environment will hit a balance where the uptake equals the emissions,
and CO2 levels will stop climbing.
What is far more important than CO2, is that people everywhere can use the technology to make fuel from solar panels,
as a way to store energy for applications not well suited for solar panels.
All humanity will have access to the energy they need and the global economy will expand.


The other future path is one where fear and haste rushes us into emissions cutting plans,
that barely scrap the surface of the emission problem, (but everyone feels better), and
as demand for oil pushes up the price, millions starve because the cost of fuel, exceeds what they can pay.

 

[Checkerboard Strangler]

There is no question that the major petroleum companies will be first in line to adapt to carbon neutral "drop-in" type replacement fuels.
There never WAS any question about his except for costs.
The major oil companies began talking about drop-in fuels many years ago and they all arrived at the same conclusion back then:
Oil is still more profitable at this time.

The only thing that's been changing is the cost of getting it out of the ground and the ERoEI of petroleum.
And that's what's going to drive the push to adapt to drop-in replacement fuels, so called "e-fuels".

 

[calamity]

In the most likely future (IMO),
.....

It's actually simpler than all that. Like coal power in days gone by, the internal combustion engines choke cities. Therefore, more and more countries are backing EV production. Soon, only a few dinosaurs here and there will need gas. So...oil is not likely to hold $90 a barrel....I peg it at $50 for the foreseeable future, once the EV takes over the city streets.

 

[longview]

It's actually simpler than all that. Like coal power in days gone by, the internal combustion engines choke cities. Therefore, more and more countries are backing EV production. Soon, only a few dinosaurs here and there will need gas. So...oil is not likely to hold $90 a barrel....I peg it at $50 for the foreseeable future, once the EV takes over the city streets.

And the jets, and ships?

 

[Integrityrespec]

It's actually simpler than all that. Like coal power in days gone by, the internal combustion engines choke cities. Therefore, more and more countries are backing EV production. Soon, only a few dinosaurs here and there will need gas. So...oil is not likely to hold $90 a barrel....I peg it at $50 for the foreseeable future, once the EV takes over the city streets.

Solar and Wind Alone Can’t Do It | LPPFusion

lppfusion.com

 

[KevinKohler]

What about, like...plastics, heating oil. Etc?

 

[Mycroft]

In the most likely future (IMO),
The price of oil continues to rise as the glut from fracking leads to reservoir depletion.
New wells will not be fracked for oil, as the companies that did so, did not see a good return on their investment.
As oil gets closer and closer to $90 a barrel, we will start to hear more news that the oil companies want to play a
roll in saving us from climate change.
Exxon CEO says advancing U.S. carbon capture project with rivals, government
At about $90 a barrel, several technology breakthroughs will be announced about man made fuels,
and the oil companies will begin offering carbon neutral fuels.
Whoever has the best process will license it to the others if the efficiency improvement justifies the price of the license.
The refineries will still use oil, but for secondary uses like plastics and fertilizers.
The supply of fuels made from oil will supplemented by fuels made from scratch, at a higher profit, all over the world.
Carbon neutral fuels for jets, ships, cars, ect, will drop Global CO2 emissions by about 30 to 40%.
When Human CO2 emissions hit about 5 GtC, the environment will hit a balance where the uptake equals the emissions,
and CO2 levels will stop climbing.
What is far more important than CO2, is that people everywhere can use the technology to make fuel from solar panels,
as a way to store energy for applications not well suited for solar panels.
All humanity will have access to the energy they need and the global economy will expand.


The other future path is one where fear and haste rushes us into emissions cutting plans,
that barely scrap the surface of the emission problem, (but everyone feels better), and
as demand for oil pushes up the price, millions starve because the cost of fuel, exceeds what they can pay.

The moral of your story is this: Let the market work. When government puts their thumb on the supply/demand/price equation, bad things happen.

 

[lwf]

Solar and Wind Alone Can’t Do It | LPPFusion

lppfusion.com

Wind and solar CAN replace fossil fuels. Just not quite yet with the technology as it stands today. The problems with solar and wind are why they haven't totally replaced fossil fuels. But those problems have solutions, most of them right on the horizon. When those solutions are implemented at scale, fossil fuels can and will be completely replaced with renewable energy sources. And working toward dropping non-renewable resources from our power needs is the only intelligent path forward.

 

[Integrityrespec]

Wind and solar CAN replace fossil fuels. Just not quite yet with the technology as it stands today. The problems with solar and wind are why they haven't totally replaced fossil fuels. But those problems have solutions, most of them right on the horizon. When those solutions are implemented at scale, fossil fuels can and will be completely replaced with renewable energy sources. And working toward dropping non-renewable resources from our power needs is the only intelligent path forward.

Even John Kerry admitted a short time back that the technology to go totally wind/solar doesn't exist and we will need innovations we don't even dream of at this point.

 

[Threegoofs]

In the most likely future (IMO),
The price of oil continues to rise as the glut from fracking leads to reservoir depletion.
New wells will not be fracked for oil, as the companies that did so, did not see a good return on their investment.
As oil gets closer and closer to $90 a barrel, we will start to hear more news that the oil companies want to play a
roll in saving us from climate change.
Exxon CEO says advancing U.S. carbon capture project with rivals, government
At about $90 a barrel, several technology breakthroughs will be announced about man made fuels,
and the oil companies will begin offering carbon neutral fuels.
Whoever has the best process will license it to the others if the efficiency improvement justifies the price of the license.
The refineries will still use oil, but for secondary uses like plastics and fertilizers.
The supply of fuels made from oil will supplemented by fuels made from scratch, at a higher profit, all over the world.
Carbon neutral fuels for jets, ships, cars, ect, will drop Global CO2 emissions by about 30 to 40%.
When Human CO2 emissions hit about 5 GtC, the environment will hit a balance where the uptake equals the emissions,
and CO2 levels will stop climbing.
What is far more important than CO2, is that people everywhere can use the technology to make fuel from solar panels,
as a way to store energy for applications not well suited for solar panels.
All humanity will have access to the energy they need and the global economy will expand.


The other future path is one where fear and haste rushes us into emissions cutting plans,
that barely scrap the surface of the emission problem, (but everyone feels better), and
as demand for oil pushes up the price, millions starve because the cost of fuel, exceeds what they can pay.

The magic $90/bbl oil.

So impressive that you can tell the future, with specifics.

 

[Mycroft]

When it comes to energy...like everything else, the prime factor is cost.

In other words, even if we COULD replace current energy means with alternative energy if it's not cost effective it won't happen.

Unless, of course, the government steps in. Then consumer costs for EVERYTHING will artificially rise. That, in turn, will affect supply and demand.

Let the market work and alternative energy will take it's place when the time is right.

 

[longview]

What about, like...plastics, heating oil. Etc?

Heating oil can be made just like any other hydrocarbon fuel, as can the feedstock for plastics,
I suspect that plastics will be the last to go, but there is no reason that everything we get from oil,
cannot be made from Air, water, electricity, and a few other elements.
Hydrogen, Carbon, nitrogen, alone cover a lot of the things we get from oil.

 

[longview]

Wind and solar CAN replace fossil fuels. Just not quite yet with the technology as it stands today. The problems with solar and wind are why they haven't totally replaced fossil fuels. But those problems have solutions, most of them right on the horizon. When those solutions are implemented at scale, fossil fuels can and will be completely replaced with renewable energy sources. And working toward dropping non-renewable resources from our power needs is the only intelligent path forward.

In Science many time a solution to a problem can be found in nature, it has after evolved the most efficient solutions.
Nature mostly stores energy as hydrocarbons, There is no reason that the storage component needed to make wind and solar viable
cannot be hydrocarbon fuels. The fuel when made from air and water, is 100% carbon neutral, so no new CO2 emissions.

 

[longview]

The magic $90/bbl oil.

So impressive that you can tell the future, with specifics.

The math if fairly straight forward, when costing the replacement of a feedstock.
We know what the current feedstock costs, and we know how much it will cost to make the replacement feedstock,
with the current level of technology.
What we do not know is if Sunfire can really hit their predicted 80% efficiency, of if Shell or Exxon do not
already have something better, but are simply waiting for economic viability, of for their low cost supplies of oil to run down.

 

[longview]

When it comes to energy...like everBut the ything else, the prime factor is cost.

In other words, even if we COULD replace current energy means with alternative energy if it's not cost effective it won't happen.

Unless, of course, the government steps in. Then consumer costs for EVERYTHING will artificially rise. That, in turn, will affect supply and demand.

Let the market work and alternative energy will take it's place when the time is right.

People think the energy from oil is free, because we pull it from the ground, but oil has a very real costs,
and when the cost of making the feedstock we currently get from oil, is less than buying the oil,
that is where the companies selling finished fuel products will go.

 

[Deuce]

When it comes to energy...like everything else, the prime factor is cost.

In other words, even if we COULD replace current energy means with alternative energy if it's not cost effective it won't happen.

Unless, of course, the government steps in. Then consumer costs for EVERYTHING will artificially rise. That, in turn, will affect supply and demand.

Let the market work and alternative energy will take it's place when the time is right.

Sure, but to make it a real free market, I'm sure you'd agree that the price tag on those fossil fuels has to include all of the costs of fossil fuels, right?

 

[Mycroft]

Sure, but to make it a real free market, I'm sure you'd agree that the price tag on those fossil fuels has to include all of the costs of fossil fuels, right?

Of course...and it is. That's how the free market works.

(When government isn't putting their thumb on the scales.)

 

[lwf]

Even John Kerry admitted a short time back that the technology to go totally wind/solar doesn't exist and we will need innovations we don't even dream of at this point.

That the technology currently doesn't exist doesn't mean that it won't. It's not an all or nothing deal. Just because we can't transition to 100% solar and wind doesn't mean that we shouldn't transition to solar and wind as much as possible within current technological limitations, and it doesn't mean that we shouldn't be working to reduce those limitations. It is beneficial to the environment to use as much renewable energy as possible, and to constantly and aggressively decrease the percentage of fossil fuels used to power our society.

 

[Antiwar]

In the most likely future (IMO),
The price of oil continues to rise as the glut from fracking leads to reservoir depletion.
New wells will not be fracked for oil, as the companies that did so, did not see a good return on their investment.
As oil gets closer and closer to $90 a barrel, we will start to hear more news that the oil companies want to play a
roll in saving us from climate change.
Exxon CEO says advancing U.S. carbon capture project with rivals, government
At about $90 a barrel, several technology breakthroughs will be announced about man made fuels,
and the oil companies will begin offering carbon neutral fuels.
Whoever has the best process will license it to the others if the efficiency improvement justifies the price of the license.
The refineries will still use oil, but for secondary uses like plastics and fertilizers.
The supply of fuels made from oil will supplemented by fuels made from scratch, at a higher profit, all over the world.
Carbon neutral fuels for jets, ships, cars, ect, will drop Global CO2 emissions by about 30 to 40%.
When Human CO2 emissions hit about 5 GtC, the environment will hit a balance where the uptake equals the emissions,
and CO2 levels will stop climbing.
What is far more important than CO2, is that people everywhere can use the technology to make fuel from solar panels,
as a way to store energy for applications not well suited for solar panels.
All humanity will have access to the energy they need and the global economy will expand.


The other future path is one where fear and haste rushes us into emissions cutting plans,
that barely scrap the surface of the emission problem, (but everyone feels better), and
as demand for oil pushes up the price, millions starve because the cost of fuel, exceeds what they can pay.

Why do you post comments about CO2 when you also post comments where you claim that CO2 is NOT an issue?

 

[longview]

Why do you post comments about CO2 when you also post comments where you claim that CO2 is NOT an issue?

We have to understand what effects of CO2 are real vs theorized only if a number of conditions are met!
If CO2 is an issue or not comes back to it’s climate sensitivity, and our emissions level.
if both are not high, then many of the predictions fall away!
We also have to understand the uncertainty surrounding CO2’s climate sensitivity!

 

[Lord of Planar]

We have to understand what effects of CO2 are real vs theorized only if a number of conditions are met!
If CO2 is an issue or not comes back to it’s climate sensitivity, and our emissions level.
if both are not high, then many of the predictions fall away!
We also have to understand the uncertainty surrounding CO2’s climate sensitivity!

Regardless of climate sensitivity, I would start to question how much CO2 we can tolerate if it gets past around 750 ppm. That's when I would start to question if we are affecting nature too much. As I have said before, I think around 600 ppm would be optimum for this planet.

 

[longview]

Regardless of climate sensitivity, I would start to question how much CO2 we can tolerate if it gets past around 750 ppm. That's when I would start to question if we are affecting nature too much. As I have said before, I think around 600 ppm would be optimum for this planet.

Looking at the amount of greening happening, I would if globally, if CO2 uptake is increasing.

 

[Lord Tammerlain]

Heating oil can be made just like any other hydrocarbon fuel, as can the feedstock for plastics,
I suspect that plastics will be the last to go, but there is no reason that everything we get from oil,
cannot be made from Air, water, electricity, and a few other elements.
Hydrogen, Carbon, nitrogen, alone cover a lot of the things we get from oil.

Plastics can be made from plant oils like soybeans. The types might change but it can be done. Most

 

[longview]

Plastics can be made from plant oils like soybeans. The types might change but it can be done. Most

You are right, we tend to forget the sources of the old names of man made plastics.
linoleum flooring was made from linseed oil.
We call plastic wrap, cellophane , because it was made from cellulose.