-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
-
On today's TMC Podcast, we ask the question "What is the Tesla Cybercab?". Join us on YouTube live at 1PM and participate in the chat.
THE GAME IS ON - OPEC thinks BEVs is a pipe dream
- Thread starter vgrinshpun
- Start date
-
- Tags
- TSLA
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Very nice. Touché!
(The worst part is Kodak probably had some type of similiar internal projection graph, otherwise they wouldn't have made the business decisions they made)
I don't think it's a price war. I think the US and Saudi Arabia have worked out a deal hold prices down for a while, in order to:
#1 Teach Putin a lesson about who runs the world, and encourage him to pull back out of Ukraine
#2 Solidify the US recovery.
#3 Knock out some of the marginal oil suppliers - allowing Saudi Arabia to maintain market share and power.
dhrivnak
Active Member
I think Kodak did; as someone who worked for them. The resolution of film (over 40 million pixels) was far above digital camera's of the day at 1 megapixel. Since the cameras were expensive as were quality printouts. They really thought they had at LEAST 10 years. They forgot for most pictures they only needed to be good enough not better than film. I really predict the same will happen with ICE cars. Suddenly they will wake up and it will be hard to then catch up.
I don't think we've seen the game run long enough to make that call. There is a lot of opportunity for oil prices to drop further. And it would only help most western economies if it did.
Putin has made it clear that he will only back down when he must. The US (and other western countries) are clearly working toward that end. First rule - hit where it hurts. And nothing will hurt Putin like driving down the price of oil.
Last edited:
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
Kind of like how most people don't want or need to drive for 7 hours straight, refill for 10 minutes, then drive another 7 hours straight for a total of 2000 km in a day (like you can in a modern Diesel but not in an EV).
Bang-on. Bring the price down a bit more and people will really quickly start to realize that EVs are great second vehicles - as long you can keep another ICE car. I'd bet that most Teslas (mine included) are second cars. For them to become a primary vehicle the infrastructure and range still has to improve a fair bit.
There is a recent thread about how many people have a Model S as a primary car and only own EVs. I am one of them. Tesla has solved the range issue and have solved the infrastructure issue in many areas of the U.S. and Europe. In less than two years Tesla will have Superchargers available to meet the needs of almost everyone in the U.S., Canada, Europe, Japan, eastern China, and who knows where else.
All that remains is for Tesla to meet its announced goal of mass producing a 200 mile range, US$35,000 high quality EV. Once that is accomplished, the car market will rapidly shift to EVs and the ICE will be history in the developed world. It will take quite a bit longer to change the car market in less developed countries because of their inadequate and unreliable electrical infrastructure.
When considering why people buy BEV's, I think we aren't giving enough credit to geopolitical issues. One of the big reasons I support BEV is for domestic energy independance and to reduce dependence on foreign oil. MOST people will give this some value in their purchasing decisions. MOST people understand we keep going to war in the Middle East for reasons that are never far from oil supply/prices. Your typical Red State buyer knows this as well as a Blue state tree-hugger. My parents are raging Red-Staters and drive a leaf.
There are a lot of high cost oil producers of tight oil and oil sands in the U.S. and Canada. If the Saudis keep prices low I think we'll see cut backs in project development and production in North America.
- - - Updated - - -
Brilliant!
I imagine you're right. And that's probably not a bad thing for a while. The oil patch here has a had a really long, solid run, and it's driven the currency up to points where a lot of our manufacturing industry has collapsed. A more reasonable oil price, and and a less overheated environment in Alberta would probably do the country good in the long run.
jhm
Well-Known Member
A reduction in oil should reduce the cost of air travel. It seems this could be an advantage for EVs. Why worry about driving long distance when it's affordable to fly?
Johan
Ex got M3 in the divorce, waiting for EU Model Y!
The Saudis are obviosuly undercutting other producers by selling at close to, or at, a loss and by flooding the market. The main reasons for this is:
1) to bancrupt Iran or at least put substantial pressure on Iran's already challenged economy. The holy grail with regards to Iran is to get them to drop their nuclear weapons program once and for all and/or to spur a revolution from within (my wife is from Iran and for many years unrest has been growing domestically, while wages have gone up only a little prices for groceries and gas have trippeled. Unemployment is very high. Young people are living decadent lives with little hopes for the future. Well educated people are not working or if they are working are many times not getting paid. People are close to what they can take. There's a fire burning within Iran, news of this is not getting out much but those of us who know ordinary people living their ordinary lives there know this).
2) to in a similar fashion put severe pressure on Russia, who in a similar way as Iran is extremely dependent on their selling of oil and gas to sustain their economy including heavy military spending in recent years. Importantly, Russia is a firm supporter of Al-Assad in Syria, who is much hated by the Saudis. Remeber the basics of the Sunni-Shia conflict? The Wahhadities of Saudi Arabia are strong Sunni muslims, the Iranians are Shia and Al-Assad is a spin-off of Shia (Alawiti). The Saudi's want Al-Assad gone, they want to be the controlling power of the muslim world and they want the Shias gone.
The Saudis and the US are deeply allied, as they have been all the way back since king Saud the old came to power in Rhyad in the 30's. The intrests of the US and the Saudis have become som intertwined over the years that whatever happens you can be sure that they have made a deal behind closed doors before it happens.
The ideological battle between the sunni Saudis and the Shia of Syria, Iran and partly also Iraq connects to the fact that a lot of the untapped oil and especially gas rescources remaining in the Middle East are controlled largly but the shia countires mentioned above. In 2011, before the start of the war in Syria, the goverments of Iran, Syria and Iraq signed a deal to build a historically grand pipeline funnelling natural gas from the Iranian controlled Pars gas field (the world's third largest known NG reserve after Russia and mainland Iran) through Iraq in to Syria. It would be natural to assume that if Syria had not been thrown in to civil war this pipeline would have been built and Syria would have extended it to the mediterranean ports of Lebanon to open up trade with the huge EU market. Saudia arabia would not have this happen.
To me it's super clear that the Saudis conspired with the US to spark the civil war in Syria in 2011. In the same way it's clear that the price drop in oil is part of the same ongoing conflict but with oil price as a weapon, instead of jihadi warriors, bombs and terror.
And don't even get me started on how some US hawks have an extended view on this as a way for the US to indirectly undermine Chinas inevitable (IMO) climb towards being the global economical superpower of the 21 st century.
Please read this post before it gets moved to the political quarantine thread
(but can you really ever talk about oil without getting political?)
1) to bancrupt Iran or at least put substantial pressure on Iran's already challenged economy. The holy grail with regards to Iran is to get them to drop their nuclear weapons program once and for all and/or to spur a revolution from within (my wife is from Iran and for many years unrest has been growing domestically, while wages have gone up only a little prices for groceries and gas have trippeled. Unemployment is very high. Young people are living decadent lives with little hopes for the future. Well educated people are not working or if they are working are many times not getting paid. People are close to what they can take. There's a fire burning within Iran, news of this is not getting out much but those of us who know ordinary people living their ordinary lives there know this).
2) to in a similar fashion put severe pressure on Russia, who in a similar way as Iran is extremely dependent on their selling of oil and gas to sustain their economy including heavy military spending in recent years. Importantly, Russia is a firm supporter of Al-Assad in Syria, who is much hated by the Saudis. Remeber the basics of the Sunni-Shia conflict? The Wahhadities of Saudi Arabia are strong Sunni muslims, the Iranians are Shia and Al-Assad is a spin-off of Shia (Alawiti). The Saudi's want Al-Assad gone, they want to be the controlling power of the muslim world and they want the Shias gone.
The Saudis and the US are deeply allied, as they have been all the way back since king Saud the old came to power in Rhyad in the 30's. The intrests of the US and the Saudis have become som intertwined over the years that whatever happens you can be sure that they have made a deal behind closed doors before it happens.
The ideological battle between the sunni Saudis and the Shia of Syria, Iran and partly also Iraq connects to the fact that a lot of the untapped oil and especially gas rescources remaining in the Middle East are controlled largly but the shia countires mentioned above. In 2011, before the start of the war in Syria, the goverments of Iran, Syria and Iraq signed a deal to build a historically grand pipeline funnelling natural gas from the Iranian controlled Pars gas field (the world's third largest known NG reserve after Russia and mainland Iran) through Iraq in to Syria. It would be natural to assume that if Syria had not been thrown in to civil war this pipeline would have been built and Syria would have extended it to the mediterranean ports of Lebanon to open up trade with the huge EU market. Saudia arabia would not have this happen.
To me it's super clear that the Saudis conspired with the US to spark the civil war in Syria in 2011. In the same way it's clear that the price drop in oil is part of the same ongoing conflict but with oil price as a weapon, instead of jihadi warriors, bombs and terror.
And don't even get me started on how some US hawks have an extended view on this as a way for the US to indirectly undermine Chinas inevitable (IMO) climb towards being the global economical superpower of the 21 st century.
Please read this post before it gets moved to the political quarantine thread
(but can you really ever talk about oil without getting political?)
Last edited:
The question I wonder about is if, as BEV gains market share, do they put downward pressure on oil prices? This would make the financial case for each next EV less and less compelling.
Or, if demand gets too low does price actually rise as the market could only support a small number of refineries and discourage exploration and investment.
I feel both scenarios are feasible and give very different results in terms of BEVs.
Or, if demand gets too low does price actually rise as the market could only support a small number of refineries and discourage exploration and investment.
I feel both scenarios are feasible and give very different results in terms of BEVs.
Similar threads
