Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Locked thread
Morbus
May 18, 2004

Pimpmust posted:

...
It's not super complicated math, yet we have these guys coming out and flagging ~50 dollar oil for a decade? Do they know something about a civil war and collapse of China/India/Europe/The USA that we don't? :ohdear:

I'm really not knowledgeable about this stuff, but doesn't a lot of it hinge on what your forecast for demand is?

Oil consumption (not natural gas, just oil) has been flat in the US / North America for going on ~15 years now and has been declining in Europe. Since 2000, globral oil consumption has increased only 15-20%, and like half of that has come from China. The lions share of the remaining increase is somewhat equally split between India, Saudi Arabia, Russia, and Brazil.

On a 10 year+ timeframe, for China, lets say we have some reasons to be pessimistic that it will be able to keep up its accustomed rate of growth. Brazil isn't doing so great, seems perpetually locked in a middle income trap, and doesn't account for that much total oil consumption anyway. Russia and Saudi Arabia are headed straight for the shitter no matter how you look at it, and, again, will account for only a small portion of global consumption even if their consumption continues to grow.

So unless you imagine India uplifting a shitzillion people out of absolute poverty in the next 10 years, or some other miracle in the developing economies, it seems at least plausible that even very modestly increasing production will be able to more than keep up with global demand. And by an admittedly simplistic argument, that makes it at least plausible that prices may remain low unless supply is restricted. Since states like Saudi Arabia and Russia basically need to pump oil as fast as they can get it, regardless of the market price, just to keep their states from collapsing, I'm not sure I see that happening. And if it does happen, at this point even a modest supply restriction by e.g. Saudi Arabia would open a floodgate of blueballed North American oil from producers desperate to sell at even just moderately higher prices.

Bearing in mind that both the current pants-making GBS threads drop in price (along with large increases in price over the last 10 years) have been driven by relatively modest changes in supply or demand, it seams reasonable that we may stay sufficiently in oversupply for the next 10 years to prices to stay low. Am I missing something huge here?

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Morbus
May 18, 2004

Paul MaudDib posted:

It's really, really easy to underestimate just how energy-dense that hydrocarbon fuels are. Batteries and solar panels are piss-ant poo poo compared to a big tank of JP1 powering a turbine. Almost all large-scale electrical balancing systems use something like pumped hydro, compressed air, or molten salt because trying to store that much electicity in a battery is loving stupid.

I was on the very bleeding edge of powering model aircraft with electric, and it only really became workable about 15 years ago even at small scale (high-quality name-brand NiMH cells for high-discharge applications, LiPo for higher capacity but reduced discharge). Nowadays the tech is real solid for model-scale airplanes (barring the really big 50cc type stuff) but even still you can't beat the endurance and power of nitro aircraft. You need a more and more energy-dense powertrain the larger the plane gets.

Sanyo 1950mah 4/5A FAUP cells, rated at up to 45A on the sticker and would tolerate being discharged at up to 70A in practice (i.e. 23-36C discharge). And the Mega 16/15/3 would eat up whatever you could feed it :getin:

People also don't really appreciate how powerful large aircraft are. Takeoff power of a large passenger jet is on the order of 100-200 megawatts with a "M". That's like the entire power output of a (nuclear reactor powered) aircraft carrier, in a few packages small enough to tuck under the wing. The power to weight ratio of gas turbine engines is outstanding

  • Locked thread