5 ms·

Wind has had a hard time competing with cheap heavy fuel oil—the toxic sludge that refineries have no other use for. What will happen to that fuel if they stop

by hbossy 4y ago

Wind has had a hard time competing with cheap heavy fuel oil—the toxic sludge that refineries have no other use for. What will happen to that fuel if they stop buying it?

WJW 4y ago
Probably they'll find a way to burn it that stays within regulations. It's not impossible, just more expensive than sending it to the shipping industry. The other scenario is interesting too btw: given that demand for combustion cars will be going down dramatically over the coming decades as countries regulate against them, the demand for petrol and diesel will also fall. Eventually, some refineries will shut down as there is no longer sufficient demand. That will also reduce the availability of these byproducts of refining and might eventually force shipping onto cleaner fuels as a side effect.
- nroets 4y ago
  I'm pretty sure petrol and diesel consumption will not fall significantly: As the price falls, people will drive more with larger cars in countries with less stringent environmental regulation. Open cycle gas turbines will increasingly being use to generate electricity because it can quickly come online when solar and wind power is insufficient. They burn diesel in many parts of the world. The real loser is coal.
kristopolous 4y ago
The point of the exercise is to sunset the industry, not keep it afloat. Phasing out oil as rapidly as possible is considered a victory
- nradov 4y ago
  The petrochemical industry will not be sunsetted in our lifetimes. That is not a reasonable thing to expect or want. At most we can somewhat reduce the use of fossil fuels for power, heating, and transportation. Use of fossil fuels as chemical feedstocks will increase.
  - kristopolous 4y ago
    > The petrochemical industry will not be sunsetted in our lifetimes Not with that attitude it won't! Dramatic change can happen faster than you think! The 3 social examples I use are smoking, fur coats, and social acceptance of LGBT people. Fur coats went from consensus glamorous to shameful in about 10 years. Support for gay rights and marriage flipped like a startup hockey stick graph over about 5 years, and smoking went from everywhere to nowhere in about maybe 15 years. These all happened almost as if by magic after decades of effort and for people working on the causes, the goals achieved still seemed like a lifetime away before they happened. I understand we're talking global infrastructure, but I'm not going to discount the idea of a rapid transition happening. For technology, look at the CRT -> flat screen transition. Now any CRT display is so rare that it will fetch a price immediately. Look at landline -> smartphone. Incandescent -> LED. Look at the disappearance of newspapers. In the sci-fi movies of the 20th century, not even fantastic fantasies of far off futures imagined a world without newspapers and now they are actually notable if you see one; you stop and briefly look as if it's some monarch butterfly fluttering by. All these technological transitions happened in about a decade, from "only speculative people predicting it" to the previous dominant form being considered vintage These changes, both social and technological are frequent and fairly common. I'm not foolish enough to put a date on energy transition but I'm not pessimistic enough to claim it won't happen in this decade. Energy is bigger then everything I listed, no kidding. I'm arguing that train has already started and greenhouse emitting energy will become as rare as a landline, newspaper, fur coat, CRT, incandescent, or after dinner smoker within some number of not so many years. It's okay if you don't feel like it will. If everyone could predict the future, we'd all be billionaires. I acknowledge I might be wrong and my opinion is fairly unique, but this is how I see things. No disrespect to you over our differences
    - nradov 4y ago
      So what? You haven't proposed a viable alternative. None of those examples are relevant.
      - kristopolous 4y ago
yardie 4y ago
Plastics, asphalt, fertilizer, sealants, complex hydrocarbon chemicals. I think everyone kind of underestimates how much of our lives is based on oil. Transport is the largest user, ~50% of each barrel. But the green revolution wouldn't be possible without it. If we stop using oil for fuel it will simply be refined into something else.
- chris222 4y ago
  At least for those other use cases the emissions are much less.
- 0wis 4y ago
  Yes, oil is used everywhere. And one reason why is because it is dirt-cheap compared to other materials. However, price does not account for the environmental price paid. That's why even the article is telling that sail cargo ship projects are betting on regulation. If the adopted regulation is a cargo tax, we will use less and less oil. Of course, today we still need it and oil will be used to create new green solution. Even with a very high carbon tax, I assume there will still be use cases for oil because it is a really incredible material and energy source. "The most versatile substance on the planet and they used it to make a frisbee. Typical of humans." Helen Cho - not very scientific but so truly mind-blowing. Edit : layout for readability
nine_k 4y ago
Long hydrocarbon chains can be cut to shorter fragments [1]. The resulting substances can be used to produce all kinds of further chemical products, plastics, etc. I suspect the last cracking reactors will be powered by abundant solar energy. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracking_(chemistry) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracking_(chemistry)

by hbossy 4y ago

Wind has had a hard time competing with cheap heavy fuel oil—the toxic sludge that refineries have no other use for. What will happen to that fuel if they stop buying it?

WJW 4y ago

Probably they'll find a way to burn it that stays within regulations. It's not impossible, just more expensive than sending it to the shipping industry. The other scenario is interesting too btw: given that demand for combustion cars will be going down dramatically over the coming decades as countries regulate against them, the demand for petrol and diesel will also fall. Eventually, some refineries will shut down as there is no longer sufficient demand. That will also reduce the availability of these byproducts of refining and might eventually force shipping onto cleaner fuels as a side effect.

nroets 4y ago
I'm pretty sure petrol and diesel consumption will not fall significantly: As the price falls, people will drive more with larger cars in countries with less stringent environmental regulation. Open cycle gas turbines will increasingly being use to generate electricity because it can quickly come online when solar and wind power is insufficient. They burn diesel in many parts of the world. The real loser is coal.

kristopolous 4y ago

The point of the exercise is to sunset the industry, not keep it afloat. Phasing out oil as rapidly as possible is considered a victory

nradov 4y ago
The petrochemical industry will not be sunsetted in our lifetimes. That is not a reasonable thing to expect or want. At most we can somewhat reduce the use of fossil fuels for power, heating, and transportation. Use of fossil fuels as chemical feedstocks will increase.
- kristopolous 4y ago
  > The petrochemical industry will not be sunsetted in our lifetimes Not with that attitude it won't! Dramatic change can happen faster than you think! The 3 social examples I use are smoking, fur coats, and social acceptance of LGBT people. Fur coats went from consensus glamorous to shameful in about 10 years. Support for gay rights and marriage flipped like a startup hockey stick graph over about 5 years, and smoking went from everywhere to nowhere in about maybe 15 years. These all happened almost as if by magic after decades of effort and for people working on the causes, the goals achieved still seemed like a lifetime away before they happened. I understand we're talking global infrastructure, but I'm not going to discount the idea of a rapid transition happening. For technology, look at the CRT -> flat screen transition. Now any CRT display is so rare that it will fetch a price immediately. Look at landline -> smartphone. Incandescent -> LED. Look at the disappearance of newspapers. In the sci-fi movies of the 20th century, not even fantastic fantasies of far off futures imagined a world without newspapers and now they are actually notable if you see one; you stop and briefly look as if it's some monarch butterfly fluttering by. All these technological transitions happened in about a decade, from "only speculative people predicting it" to the previous dominant form being considered vintage These changes, both social and technological are frequent and fairly common. I'm not foolish enough to put a date on energy transition but I'm not pessimistic enough to claim it won't happen in this decade. Energy is bigger then everything I listed, no kidding. I'm arguing that train has already started and greenhouse emitting energy will become as rare as a landline, newspaper, fur coat, CRT, incandescent, or after dinner smoker within some number of not so many years. It's okay if you don't feel like it will. If everyone could predict the future, we'd all be billionaires. I acknowledge I might be wrong and my opinion is fairly unique, but this is how I see things. No disrespect to you over our differences
  - nradov 4y ago
    So what? You haven't proposed a viable alternative. None of those examples are relevant.
    - kristopolous 4y ago

yardie 4y ago

Plastics, asphalt, fertilizer, sealants, complex hydrocarbon chemicals. I think everyone kind of underestimates how much of our lives is based on oil. Transport is the largest user, ~50% of each barrel. But the green revolution wouldn't be possible without it. If we stop using oil for fuel it will simply be refined into something else.

chris222 4y ago
At least for those other use cases the emissions are much less.
0wis 4y ago
Yes, oil is used everywhere. And one reason why is because it is dirt-cheap compared to other materials. However, price does not account for the environmental price paid. That's why even the article is telling that sail cargo ship projects are betting on regulation. If the adopted regulation is a cargo tax, we will use less and less oil. Of course, today we still need it and oil will be used to create new green solution. Even with a very high carbon tax, I assume there will still be use cases for oil because it is a really incredible material and energy source. "The most versatile substance on the planet and they used it to make a frisbee. Typical of humans." Helen Cho - not very scientific but so truly mind-blowing. Edit : layout for readability

nine_k 4y ago

Long hydrocarbon chains can be cut to shorter fragments [1]. The resulting substances can be used to produce all kinds of further chemical products, plastics, etc. I suspect the last cracking reactors will be powered by abundant solar energy. [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracking_(chemistry) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cracking_(chemistry)