for those of you who think going all electric will be Just Fine...

HomerJSmith

I just saw a NOVA episode on tv about climate change. It was compelling. There may be something to it. However...These Macro systems, I think are beyond mans ability to control and to think that man can, is hubris to the extreme. Good luck in trying to predict a 'Three Body Problem' such as the weather.

There was a time in this country when you wanted to go somewhere, you went by horse and buggy or walked. Along came the automobile. Nobody especially government had to legislate (force) that the horse and buggy needed to be phased out for the new technology. People gravitated to it because it was better. It conserved time. Time that could be directed to other activities. It freed man from a mundane existence.

There is such a thing as the 'conservation of energy'. EVs have to prove itself to be economical without government subsidies. Practicalities of EVs rest on production costs, operational costs, and availability to the public. In other words, you get more out of it than you put into it in terms of energy. That is yet to be proved. The EV has not proved itself to be a 'better mouse trap'. Look to see who profits from this and who pays.

NOVA had a graph showing rising global temperatures coinciding with the Industrial Age and suggested that it was causal. Looking back over eons of global climate variations one can rightly conclude that the relationship is coincidental and not causal, after all the Industrial Age is only about 150 yrs old.

Solar variations probably have more to do with climate changes than the automobile. EVs? You're being Conned. Buy a Tesla, than you can feel superior to us 'useless eaters'.

ethicalpaul

Hot_water_fan said:

If you're slow charging you only need a 15A 240v circuit for many cars no?

Yeah at 3-5 miles per kwh, covering the average daily mileage isn’t a huge feat. My dryer is significantly more of a burden than charging would be for me. 

I just got a new Leaf and so far I'm only using a 120v 15A plug for it (called Level 1). Eventually I will probably install a 30A 240v plug for it but right now the normal extension cord is doing fine. It puts in about 5 miles of range per hour that it's plugged in.

If gas and oil disappeared overnight there would be chaos. It won't be overnight. It will be fine.

NOVA had a graph showing rising global temperatures coinciding with the Industrial Age and suggested that it was causal. Looking back over eons of global climate variations one can conclude that the relationship is coincidental and not causal.

I don't have kids so this comment doesn't phase me very much. Good luck with that.

Hot_water_fan

 EVs have to prove itself to be economical without government subsidies.

If I recall correctly, Teslas receive zero federal tax credits (they were phased out) and are selling like hotcakes. 

hot_rod

HomerJSmith said:

I just saw a NOVA episode on tv about climate change. It was compelling. There may be something to it. However...These Macro systems, I think are beyond mans ability to control and to think that man can, is hubris to the extreme. Good luck in trying to predict a 'Three Body Problem' such as the weather.

There was a time in this country when you wanted to go somewhere, you went by horse and buggy or walked. Along came the automobile. Nobody especially government had to legislate (force) that the horse and buggy needed to be phased out for the new technology. People gravitated to it because it was better. It conserved time. Time that could be directed to other activities. It freed man from a mundane existence.

There is such a thing as the 'conservation of energy'. EVs have to prove itself to be economical without government subsidies. Practicalities of EVs rest on production costs, operational costs, and availability to the public. In other words, you get more out of it than you put into it in terms of energy. That is yet to be proved. The EV has not proved itself to be a 'better mouse trap'. Look to see who profits from this and who pays.

NOVA had a graph showing rising global temperatures coinciding with the Industrial Age and suggested that it was causal. Looking back over eons of global climate variations one can rightly conclude that the relationship is coincidental and not causal, after all the Industrial Age is on about 150 yrs old.

EV have to prove themself to be economical without govt subsidies??

Yet 18.5 billion Fed subsidies go to gas and diesel, and additional 3B from states. And us taxpayers have bailed out the internal combustion automakers how many times?

Meanwhile the top 5 oil companies tripled their profits in Q1 2022 35 billion in profits. 28 CEOs took in nearly 400M in compensation.

I wonder how much of those profits are being directed at ways of lowering fuel costs to us plebs?

Texas and Florida are #2 &3 in EV sales. Maybe those wealthy oil CEO's retiring there and going EV.

ethicalpaul

That is correct, Tesla is out of credits. GM has phased out also. My Nissan was still the full federal credit but soon they will start to phase down as well.

Oil and gas subsidies just keep going

HomerJSmith

Subsidies are more than car production, it's all the research, buying incentives, and infrastructure, too. Subsidies always come into play when the cost of producing a product is greater than the sale price for that product.

ethicalpaul

I agree Homer, all those subsidies should be considered for all vehicle types.

SlamDunk

While on vacation on the outer banks, the two chargers I saw in a shopping center had gas powered cars parked in front of them preventing EV's from getting charged. A new kind of battle for the ages. Gas drivers giving ev drivers the finger for trying to take two valuable parking spots. They aren't handicap spots. No laws to prevent this. Can't be a comfortable feeling for an EV driver to not have access to juice.

I plan on getting an EV in 2025 but it will be my daily commuter and we will have one gas car for long hauls.

SlamDunk

ethicalpaul said:

That is correct, Tesla is out of credits. GM has phased out also. My Nissan was still the full federal credit but soon they will start to phase down as well.

Oil and gas subsidies just keep going

I think I read that chevrolet dropped the price of their Bolt to 28k because of the subsidy loss.

ChrisJ

ron said:

Larry Weingarten said:

Hi @ChrisJ ... the topic of energy is a big problem that needs brainstorming and creative troubleshooting. Let's throw all ideas, seemingly silly or otherwise into the pot and consider them. We can be pretty sure that thinking and acting along the same lines that got us here isn't going to solve the problem...

I just vote democrat across the board, those in power like AOC, Pelosi, various democrat state governors... have the answers or so says there commercials. I mean, just think of all that #2 fuel oil burning military equipment that we are no longer using after evacuating, that should make you feel pretty good energy-wise.

This thread was actually going really good for two pages even and you had to make a political post?

Why?

Who did that benefit?

DJD775

ChrisJ said:

Who did that benefit?

Himself

jumper

Over a thirty year time frame is $5 gasoline far out of line with other stuff like house prices?
How about federal, state, county, or municipal spending on per capita basis?

hot_rod

The cost of any energy or resource should reflect all the $$ to get and maintain it. Same with running your own business, the cost to the customer is what all your necessary expenses are. Plus a reasonable profit.

One way or another we the consumer pay for all the cost whether at the pump or via taxes.

The huge salaries and bonuses the CEOs get are a burr under my saddle. The get paid for good, bad, even illegal practices and performance.

ethicalpaul

When I worked for a manufacturer, their voluntary deal they made with the electric company was that in exchange for a lower rate, they could have some of their power turned off when the power company needed to do it.

I think such arrangements are extremely common.

I can even take part in such a plan if I want to...I can get an electric vehicle charger that will only work during non-peak times in exchange for a better rate.

Is that OK?

I find your comment about cities and section 8 housing to be racist. Have a look inside yourself and ask why you said that.

Jamie Hall

@ron , your comment was the first that was overtly political. Just don't do it. There is quite a wide range of political and other philosophies on The Wall, and somehow we manage very well by not bringing that in.

On your question on load shedding and what is it. It is, simply, controlled shutting off of various loads in order to maintain frequency and voltage stability on the grid. It is closely related to rolling blackouts, except that as a general rule it involves dropping individual controlled loads rather than sections of the grid. These are usually industrial loads of one kind or another. It is very likely that load shedding can -- and will -- be extended to smaller individual loads, including residences, by means of "smart" meters; ideally this would mean that those residences or uses would have certain non-essential, but large, loads switched remotely as needed. This would include such things as air conditioners, heat pumps, electric vehicle chargers (level 2 and 3), and probably hot water and other forms of resistance heating.

Don't think it won't happen. It will have to, as reductions in base load capacity continue. At the moment the only real alternative is rolling blackouts, which have real disadvantages -- or destabilising the grid, as we have seen in Texas not long ago, which can result in much longer blackouts.

ChrisJ

10kw is $1.20 for me. I just looked at the bill and used the final rate after all of the fees etc.


For me, that would be $24 per 5 days vs my current $45 per 5 days using gasoline in a car that gets 44 MPG. So, the cost for fuel is almost half in my case assuming $5 per gallon.

I'm betting most aren't getting the same gas mileage I am......

SlamDunk

My present employer had the same deal with NG company. When we got that rare 2-3 week period in the teens, and oil was 4.80/gl, they asked us to roll to oil. And we did. We burned 4-6000 gallons of oil per day. We have a 10000 gallon tank. Oil truck made two daily deliveries. Whatever we saved the previous ten years -evaporated. We no longer have that deal with gas company.

My employer is in a "net zero" mind frame. We have solar panels everywhere. Fields, roof tops, top of parking decks and in one building, the outer walls. We have over 80 free level 2 chargers here alone and we need to buy more. If more employers think like that in areas like mine, EV will be a no brainer. I know to a lot of people this sounds like a pipe dream but the average person drives just 40 miles per day. Just like cell phone antennas, we can hang solar in a lot of places. even on cell phone towers.

Hot_water_fan

It will have to, as reductions in base load capacity continue

Jamie, I would argue that "baseload capacity" is used in place of "reliable, cheap" capacity, which is more descriptive. Baseload capacity seems less like an engineering requirement and more like an accounting term, where you have a large capital expenditure that needs to run nearly non-stop to be economic. Historically coal and nuclear generators have been inflexible and costly to stop and start but with low fuel costs, so this role has fit them well. However, a grid can function just fine with 0% coal and 0% nuclear, and it's not a given that adding these types of assets either increases reliability or decrease costs. The goal should be a reliable and economic grid: if that involves the constant output assets like coal and nuclear then great! if not, then also great.

JakeCK

Someone said EV's need to prove themselves to be a better mouse trap...

As far as I'm concerned they already have. I personally want one, but supply and demand is preventing me from buying one, at least with out a considerable mark up. Let that sink in for a second. 

And the concerns that the grid can't handle it? Hog wash. What percentage of american homes have an electric water heater? Imagine if they all switched to HPWH's when they bought an EV? There is the difference. Most electric water heaters use a 4500 watt or 5500 heating element if I'm not mistaken. And on average runs about four hours a day. That is 20kwh's right there. Your average American drives about 40miles a day for a total of about 14k miles a year. And your average EV uses in the ball park of .3kwh per mile or 12kwh per day. Switching to a HPWH and buying a single EV still nets you a daily savings of energy right there. Of course ymmv depending on how many people in the house and how far you drive but on average there it is. Now what about the electric dryer? Another massive opportunity to save. Perhaps enough to buy a second EV? What about all the central air systems out there that are oversized and don't use an inverter compressor? Improving building envelope? So many opportunities for improvement, yet so many rather just buy the latest and greatest shiney new I whatever distraction.

And maybe it's time to really start holding accountable all of the bad HVAC techs and construction contractors. How many installers lick their finger and go yup that's the right size ac. What's the old rule of thumb? Most slap something like a 2.5 ton ac in a 1500 SQ ft house right? I can tell you from personal experience that is horribly oversized. I still have yet to insulate my walls, only have 6" of blown fiberglass in the attic, and old wood windows with failing aluminum storms. I use a single 14k btu window shaker in the dinning room, and an 8k in the master bedroom. It keeps the house comfortable(68 in some rooms, 78 or so in others) even when its 96f outside and does one helluva job controlling the humidity when it's that hot. That's less then 2 tons that can cool an almost 100 year old 1470sq ft house when it's almost 10 degrees above design temperature. If it was ducted so all rooms got a share of the ac it would be amazing.

And all that noise about solar panels and net metering being subsidized by the other rate payers? Also hog wash. Just look at my usage graphs. It wasn't until 6pm that my solar panels were no longer offsetting my usage, and a good chunk of the day I was powering a couple of my neighbors houses too.

All of the angry people with a grudge against ev's and solar really are just are motivated by misinformation and fear. Change is always scary when you don't understand what is happening.
But that is the nature of life. Change with it or be consumed by it.

JakeCK

Here is my house by the numbers when it comes to energy usage, production, and climate. Don't mind the outside temperature reading that thing, while shaded it's self gets blasted by all heat rolling off my concrete porch and the hallway temperature is thrown off a little bit by the fact it's mounted to the ceiling and is less than 8" from the attic which is probably 120f atm. 

Jamie Hall

It is quite true that base load -- which is a technical term in electric power generation and distribution -- can be provided in ways other than spinning reserve; massive batteries are one possibility which may become available at some point. At one time hydroelectric power was held in that regard, but in some parts of the country it is proving to be otherwise.

As to the argument -- both here and in political circles -- that we should all just put up photovoltaics and buy electric cars. I sincerely wish that you could all walk my parish and listen to my parish. I would say that today about half the parish is wondering how to feed their family next week and how to heat the house this winter and how to buy enough gas to get their 15 plus year old car to work. Day to day, week to week. What savings they had evaporated when they were locked out of their job during Covid. And you ask them to spring for many tens of thousands for a shiny car? More tens of thousands for a heating system? Neither of which will last ten years? You've just lost them. Perhaps worse, your shiny concepts -- and you -- become ignored. Thanks be to God we have a few parishioners who are not essentially broke, and they do as much as they can for out food bank so at least folks have access to mac and cheese. You say you want to get buy in for electric cars? Wonderful -- then offer something which they can afford not dreams for the rich and famous. Don't raise the tax on their fuel to encourage them to switch. Don't raise the electric rates so the McMansions can have photovoltaics on the roof.

OK. I'll kick the soap box back in the corner.

JakeCK

My little Sears Craftsman is far from a McMansion. I hate McMansions. Many politicians are talking about suspending fuel taxes in a vain attempt to lower fuel costs. And my solar panels are not raising the electric costs for anyone else. The idea is antithetical to the concept of supply and demand. My panels are reducing the demand and strain on the grid right when it is needed most. The maintenance and production short comings of the grid are the result of poor business decisions made by greedy executives over decades, not a bunch of solar panels.

And as I've said before in the past, we don't need everyone to switch over. Just the bulk of people. That would reduce the demand on the available supply and reduce the costs for those who are unable to change over for whatever reason. I do not support outright bans on NG, internal combustion engines, and mandates forcing people to change over. But generous financial incentives to help the common person switch over to these newer technologies is all that is needed. Just for a minute imagine instead of a 300$ rebate for all "efficient" water heaters there was a rebate for HPWHs that was pegged to the cost difference between a standard gas water heater and a new HPWH. Now even those in poverty who could just barely afford the cheapest energy pig of a gas water heater when it blows up unexpectedly can perhaps afford the shiney new efficient model and maybe perhaps have some extra cash in their pocket every month for the life of that tank 

Hot_water_fan

@Jamie Hall Ha I don’t think comparing a new EV to a 15+ year old car (of any fuel) is a fair comparison. No one is advocating for forcing people out of old cars into brand new EVs. Ditto for solar panels and new heating system- these are apples to potato comparisons. The comparison that’s fair is saying: when the time comes, we’ll replace one for the other. Yes, a new EV is expensive. Just like new gas vehicles.  

Still unclear on what importance baseload has. Is there a technical explanation for why baseload capacity (understood by me to be: constant output generation which has long run times because it outputs less than or equal to the minimum load over a long duration) is needed vs. a portfolio of variable assets (gas, wind, solar, storage, etc) which together supply the same? I get why it might be desirable, but is it needed?

SlamDunk

@Jamie Hall, this isn't for everyone. We all have to master the basics like food, water, and shelter before thinking about luxury items like airconditioning and EV's.

I would buy a Bolt or a Leaf before I buy a Tesla, simply because Teslas are not economical for me. A Vietnamese company, Vinfast, is building an ev manufacturing plant capable of 150,000 EV's /yr here,so maybe I'll buy a Vinfast.

In the next town, Toyota is building an EV battery plant.

The costs will come down. There are areas of the country where this is very feasible.

Jamie Hall

If there are incentives (paid for by whom? Somebody has to cough up the cash) that's one thing. If there are mandates -- California, I'm looking at you -- that's quite another. For better or worse, that's what people are hearing.

Base load. It's not so much that the generating stations providing base load are putting out full capacity -- or anywhere near it -- all the time. What they do do, however, is they can respond within less than a cycle -- in fact, less than half a cycle -- to a change in phase or frequency and thus hold the voltage and, more important, the frequency very steady -- rock solid (frequency variation of much less than a tenth of a hertz maximum, phase on the order of a degree or two, and immediately corrected). Very small deviations in frequency or phase between a generator and the grid will, unless the generator can overcome them, cause huge currents to flow and various safety devices to trip (this is one of major reasons for the problems in Texas). This is one reason why, for instance, a really big battery -- capable of let's say on the order a gigawatt or two of instantaneous output and keep it up for a few hours-- which had crystal controlled inverters could serve as a base load facility. The inverters on distributed solar panels -- such as someone's roof -- are controlled by the grid; they are not themselves stable enough to control frequency and phase to the required degree. Some consideration has been given to controlling frequency and phase using GPS signals, This has been rejected, as while GPS is very stable when it is running, it is much too vulnerable to be used for an essential service -- not to mention the complication of variations in phase at the point of use due to switching high tension lines.

It's a very interesting problem overall -- but not amenable to simple solutions, never mind wishful thinking.

jumper

ChrisJ said:

10kw is $1.20 for me. I just looked at the bill and used the final rate after all of the fees etc.


For me, that would be $24 per 5 days vs my current $45 per 5 days using gasoline in a car that gets 44 MPG. So, the cost for fuel is almost half in my case assuming $5 per gallon.

I'm betting most aren't getting the same gas mileage I am......

Well in California a kwhr costs 40 cents delivered. California also has plenty of PV & sunshine plus lots of windmills. Many Tesla s are on the road. Are the drivers saving $$?

My understanding is that baseload is power an electric system needs to deal with fluctuations like your A/C cycling. Probably worse if you have PV. Batteries can help smooth fluctuations on a DC system like Titanic had.

Erin Holohan Haskell

Thank you for steering this conversation away from politics so that we can continue learning from one another without arguing.

Jamie Hall

I might add to the base load comment: there is one instance in which it is necessary that the base load facility be able to go from essentially idling to near full power in less than a quarter cycle -- if a large generating facility somewhere else drops out or is taken out, the base load facility has to pick that up -- RIGHT NOW. That is a fascinating problem in mechanical engineering! Made much simpler, however, by almost all base load facilities presently in use have very very large rotating masses in the generator and turbines, giving a little time for the throttle to respond.

Dave Carpentier

There were already many people struggling with food/water/shelter, and now of course it's heading quickly into Worseland.

So, Im on a smartmeter. Do they all feature the capability of opening the circuit remotely, for load shedding? Someone mentioned that above. I use a Cpap for breathing while I sleep. Our hydro provider does have a process where they can note electrically driven medical devices at your location, and this is supposed to prioritize service restoration. I never sent in the doctor's form to announce myself as such.. but maybe I should.

JakeCK

Jamie Hall said:

If there are incentives (paid for by whom? Somebody has to cough up the cash) that's one thing. If there are mandates -- California, I'm looking at you -- that's quite another. For better or worse, that's what people are hearing. 

Maybe the executives that are making the financial decisions to no longer invest in expanding refining capacity should cough up the cash. They are the ones making these decisions to maximize profits and ROI on already built infrastructure. 

And maximizing profits they are. 

PC7060

Over 30 years ago I lived in Maryland and had a smart meter system with time of day based charges. It was also configured with a cut out that would disable the HVAC as part of voluntary load shedding program. If you agreed to it, you received a payment of around 15 bucks a month during the AC months. They would shut off your AC for up to 20 minutes no more than three times a week. When I moved to Virginia they had no program and only just recently went to smart meters.

Jamie Hall

Dave Carpentier said:

There were already many people struggling with food/water/shelter, and now of course it's heading quickly into Worseland.

So, Im on a smartmeter. Do they all feature the capability of opening the circuit remotely, for load shedding? Someone mentioned that above. I use a Cpap for breathing while I sleep. Our hydro provider does have a process where they can note electrically driven medical devices at your location, and this is supposed to prioritize service restoration. I never sent in the doctor's form to announce myself as such.. but maybe I should.

Your meter probably does not support load shedding -- but I do think (personal opinion) that you should send in that form to inform the.

JakeCK said:

Jamie Hall said:

If there are incentives (paid for by whom? Somebody has to cough up the cash) that's one thing. If there are mandates -- California, I'm looking at you -- that's quite another. For better or worse, that's what people are hearing. 

Maybe the executives that are making the financial decisions to no longer invest in expanding refining capacity should cough up the cash. They are the ones making these decisions to maximize profits and ROI on already built infrastructure. 

And maximizing profits they are. 




That is their job. The idea is that people -- such as it might be you or I -- buy some shares in the company. We expect a decent rate of return on the money we invest. The objective of management is to run the company to provide that rate of return. Economics 101.

In the current regulatory and political environment, if I were one of the executives, I'd not make any investments in new fossil fuel infrastructure. Not one dime. It's way too uncertain. Better off going to Vegas and playing the tables.

STEAM DOCTOR

99% of this discussion has been over my head. Maybe I can try to summarize in layman's terms. There is potential for long-term or short-term financial hardship to those who are forced to convert to electric. That is either in cost of new equipment, more frequent replacement of old equipment, and higher utility bills etc etc etc. I have no idea what's what in these regards but one thing is absolutely certain. Those making these decisions had better have these numbers 150% worked out, long before they force everyone to convert. Secondly, there is uncertainty whether the grid can handle new demands. Personally, I have absolutely no idea or thoughts. But one thing is sure. Those who are forcing people to convert, had better make sure to upgrade the grid before forcing people to convert. You cannot force people to convert, see how it works out, and then make potentially necessary upgrades after the fact. Build the grid first and then take the next steps. Put the saddle on the horse before he leaves the stable. Do not let the horse run wild and then try to figure out how to tame the uncontrollable beast.

Hot_water_fan

@STEAM DOCTOR some of the anxiety comes from the “forcing” part. But is that real? How many people are being forced into using just electricity? Anyone besides new buildings in Berkeley? 

Jamie Hall

Hot_water_fan said:

@STEAM DOCTOR some of the anxiety comes from the “forcing” part. But is that real? How many people are being forced into using just electricity? Anyone besides new buildings in Berkeley? 

I know LA, and possibly the whole state by, I believe, 2035. New and existing.

STEAM DOCTOR

NYC. New construction. Plus, Con Edison isn't forcing but "convincing" New Yorkers (through rebate programs) to decomission boilers and install mini splits for heating. There are thousands of homes in Brooklyn/Queens that have switched.  Can't tell you how many of them called me crying, this past winter. Bills through the roof and cold( especially on frigid days).

SlamDunk

Nobody "forced" farmers to give up the mules and plows for tractors. No one forces anyone else to buy any kind of car. We can walk or hitch hike. Everyones choices are guided by economics, risk tolerance and whim. Some people are anxious simply because the times they are a-changin.

ChrisJ

jumper said:

10kw is $1.20 for me. I just looked at the bill and used the final rate after all of the fees etc. For me, that would be $24 per 5 days vs my current $45 per 5 days using gasoline in a car that gets 44 MPG. So, the cost for fuel is almost half in my case assuming $5 per gallon. I'm betting most aren't getting the same gas mileage I am......

Well in California a kwhr costs 40 cents delivered. California also has plenty of PV & sunshine plus lots of windmills. Many Tesla s are on the road. Are the drivers saving $$? My understanding is that baseload is power an electric system needs to deal with fluctuations like your A/C cycling. Probably worse if you have PV. Batteries can help smooth fluctuations on a DC system like Titanic had.

I don't know.
I don't live in California.  Ive heard rumor that gasoline costs far more there as well.   NJ is around $5 a gallon.

DC isn't very good with transformers or power transmission.

JakeCK

Jamie Hall said:

There were already many people struggling with food/water/shelter, and now of course it's heading quickly into Worseland. So, Im on a smartmeter. Do they all feature the capability of opening the circuit remotely, for load shedding? Someone mentioned that above. I use a Cpap for breathing while I sleep. Our hydro provider does have a process where they can note electrically driven medical devices at your location, and this is supposed to prioritize service restoration. I never sent in the doctor's form to announce myself as such.. but maybe I should.

Your meter probably does not support load shedding -- but I do think (personal opinion) that you should send in that form to inform the.

Jamie Hall said:

If there are incentives (paid for by whom? Somebody has to cough up the cash) that's one thing. If there are mandates -- California, I'm looking at you -- that's quite another. For better or worse, that's what people are hearing. 

Maybe the executives that are making the financial decisions to no longer invest in expanding refining capacity should cough up the cash. They are the ones making these decisions to maximize profits and ROI on already built infrastructure. 

And maximizing profits they are. 

That is their job. The idea is that people -- such as it might be you or I -- buy some shares in the company. We expect a decent rate of return on the money we invest. The objective of management is to run the company to provide that rate of return. Economics 101. In the current regulatory and political environment, if I were one of the executives, I'd not make any investments in new fossil fuel infrastructure. Not one dime. It's way too uncertain. Better off going to Vegas and playing the tables.

Of course you're right. These are pages right out of Harvard business school. 

But here is a thought, something so many forget, we are all, every single one of us, invested in this little blue and green space rock we call earth, and our society. Sure I have investments in Microsoft, alphabet, Facebook, and a dozen other tech stocks. But their long term potential is predicated on the continuation of our society and ecosystem. Now if I was just a day trader trying to make a quick buck sure I wouldn't care what happens to these companies a year down the road let alone 5, 10, 15, 20, etc. But those kind of people... have a special place at the gates of hell IMHO. And there in lies the problem. Most executives only care about maximizing profits and growth in the short term. They want everything to look great to get their payday then they bail and years down the road shtf. Perfect example is Eddie Lampert and Sears. That sob should be in jail. 

I guess you could call this "external costs" but really are they?

Now bringing it back to the original issue of refining capacity. Of course, why would they spend billions on new refineries when there is a sunset on carbon fuels. There would be no ROI. But maybe, just maybe, if these petrochemical companies hadn't spent the better part of the past century burying the evidence and pulling the wool over everyone's eyes and had instead invested in alternative fuels decades ago we wouldn't be having this conversation. At this point there is no way forward with out pain and loss. So no I haven't a single iota of sympathy for big oil, and am of the opinion that they need to pay for the crimes against humanity and the planet that they have committed. I only wish we could prosecute the actual executives themselves. But hey if society fails and it becomes a madmax dystopia, the rule of law will no longer be valid and if I was one of them that'd keep me up at night.

And those thinking they kind buy a bunker and hide in a hole in the ground... Lol 

JakeCK

I also want to add it's almost like our whole society is going though the stages of grief with climate change and the reality of what that entails. Right now it seems we're still somewhere between denial and anger. :S