4 ms·

I want fewer fossil fuels as much as the next guy, and while the core argument about ICEs is beyond my expertise, the data the author presents seems to support

by chao- 9y ago

I want fewer fossil fuels as much as the next guy, and while the core argument about ICEs is beyond my expertise, the data the author presents seems to support it so that's pretty neat. However, I take issue with the article's casual conflating of oil with all fossil fuels, and fossil fuels used for transportation with all uses of fossil fuels. It signals a lack of awareness when the author writes things such as: >The pipeline was built at a cost of about $7 billion ... Keystone XL will go down as the world’s last great fossil fuels infrastructure project. Without even straining my memory, I recall that Cheniere Energy's Sabine Pass Terminal opened in the last year. It cost about as much to build as the $7 billion quoted here, and they are planning another now at a higher projected cost [0]. Overall I agree with the author's proposed trajectory and order of events involving self-driving cars, fewer used car sales, and so on, but differ on the time scale. I figure things will progress at one-half to three-quarters that speed, at fastest. I don't think the "simple" argument of "people will select the cheaper option" is as simple when it comes to automobiles. A combination of inertia, identity and utility are going to make it slow going. Not only am I "not a car guy", I actively dislike the task of driving. So it took a long time for me to really get why people identify with their vehicles, but now that I do, I can see how limited my eco-progressive perspective of "Everyone would prefer to live a car free life just like me!" was. I still arrogantly think everyone else will come around, but it's going to take longer than the author, or younger me, thought it would. Definitely the generation born after the self-driving car is widespread will be the ones to complete the job. I don't think that timeline plays as cleanly into the oil (or fossil fuel) narrative that this article sets up, though. [0] http://wgno.com/2016/12/21/8-5-billion-natural-gas-plant-and-terminal-planned-for-plaquemines-parish/ http://wgno.com/2016/12/21/8-5-billion-natural-gas-plant-and...

bmelton 9y ago
And of course there's people like myself -- I love cars, but I actively hate commuting. Not because I mind the driving, or the traffic, but because it's time I'm getting nothing done. If I lived in or near a bigger city, some of that would be offset by mass transit, but even mass transit comes with a lot of wasted time -- walking to the platform, waiting for the train, driving/walking to the station, what have you. But a self-driving car, or a car I can call on-demand solves all of that. I can walk out of my house, get into a car, and read, catch up on email, or get work done during my commute. I'll probably still have a car for leisure. I currently have a Jeep that I use for wilderness / beach / outdoor trips, and I can't see that changing any time soon even though I have a gas-electric hybrid for commuting, but if my daily transit needs can be met by a self-driving, plug-in electric, it's a massive ecological benefit while actively increasing my daily productivity and quality of life. I agree with you that the 100% coverage the author imagines is a LONG, long way off, and I imagine that even of people who feel more like you do, the idea that they're going to start replacing perfectly good cars with expensive replacements is unlikely outside of the top 10-20% of earners, but if enough people like me switch over a significant portion of our driving patterns to those described in the article, it'll be a huge win.
mark-r 9y ago
As demand drops, the producers who have the lowest cost will win out over the more expensive options and the market share of those expensive suppliers will drop to zero. I believe that's the basis for predicting the failure of the pipeline.

by chao- 9y ago

bmelton 9y ago

And of course there's people like myself -- I love cars, but I actively hate commuting. Not because I mind the driving, or the traffic, but because it's time I'm getting nothing done. If I lived in or near a bigger city, some of that would be offset by mass transit, but even mass transit comes with a lot of wasted time -- walking to the platform, waiting for the train, driving/walking to the station, what have you. But a self-driving car, or a car I can call on-demand solves all of that. I can walk out of my house, get into a car, and read, catch up on email, or get work done during my commute. I'll probably still have a car for leisure. I currently have a Jeep that I use for wilderness / beach / outdoor trips, and I can't see that changing any time soon even though I have a gas-electric hybrid for commuting, but if my daily transit needs can be met by a self-driving, plug-in electric, it's a massive ecological benefit while actively increasing my daily productivity and quality of life. I agree with you that the 100% coverage the author imagines is a LONG, long way off, and I imagine that even of people who feel more like you do, the idea that they're going to start replacing perfectly good cars with expensive replacements is unlikely outside of the top 10-20% of earners, but if enough people like me switch over a significant portion of our driving patterns to those described in the article, it'll be a huge win.

mark-r 9y ago

As demand drops, the producers who have the lowest cost will win out over the more expensive options and the market share of those expensive suppliers will drop to zero. I believe that's the basis for predicting the failure of the pipeline.