tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13900197.post1091889381405966620..comments2023-10-15T05:20:00.675-06:00Comments on Entropy Production: Carbon Trading, Bubble HysteriaRobert McLeodhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/05270962906437456350noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13900197.post-73064322067873673742008-11-17T06:58:00.000-07:002008-11-17T06:58:00.000-07:00I've been thinking about it some more, and hav...I've been thinking about it some more, and have to agree that the carbon tax would be better overall. Feasibility is a different issue though.<BR/><BR/>Have you considered recycling the carbon tax revenue back into the economy via income tax rebates?<BR/><BR/>That way, the money gathered from the carbon tax could be mostly returned to those that suffer most from it, allowing them to buy more expensive but efficient stuff. While simultaneously improving macro economical equity and cost-effectiveness, and providing a favorable and stable, no-bubble&bust investment climate for alternative energy and efficiency in general.<BR/><BR/>The only disadvantage would be that carbon intensive industries could lose out a bit. But overall, a huge improvement in economic efficiency, mitigation of GhG emissions and peak oil, improvements in local and regional air quality and human health, and macro-economical equity. Perhaps a small tax reduction based on best-performance allocation could amend the burden for carbon intensive industries.Cyril Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17667288494374310919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13900197.post-18587097226001667442008-07-09T08:06:00.000-06:002008-07-09T08:06:00.000-06:00Valid points, Robert, but even you have to admit t...Valid points, Robert, but even you have to admit that carbon trading is better than doing nothing to price GhG emissions!<BR/><BR/>How about carbon trading AND a vanilla no loophole carbon tax on top of that? With carbon trading made more scarce over the years, and the carbon tax increased over time as well.<BR/> <BR/>Lots of bureaucracy, but that comes with the menu.Cyril Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17667288494374310919noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13900197.post-57493882883373308712008-04-11T10:03:00.000-06:002008-04-11T10:03:00.000-06:00"I personally wouldn't consider drag losses, tire ..."I personally wouldn't consider drag losses, tire losses, transmission losses, etc. as a part of oil's efficiency. "<BR/><BR/>That's why I compared electric vehicles to ICE vehicles: those losses are the same in both.<BR/><BR/>"I simply was comparing the amount of work you get out of a given quanta of energy."<BR/><BR/>So was I. The point is, small ICE's are very inefficient.<BR/><BR/> "The appropriate comparison to make is a stationary diesel or gasoline generator."<BR/><BR/>The correct comparison is the actual power production efficiency in vehicles. If you electrify vehicles you reduce BTU consumption by 80% compared to the actual US fleet in use today.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13900197.post-68598479068509562442008-04-02T11:27:00.000-06:002008-04-02T11:27:00.000-06:00I personally wouldn't consider drag losses, tire l...I personally wouldn't consider drag losses, tire losses, transmission losses, etc. as a part of oil's efficiency. I simply was comparing the amount of work you get out of a given quanta of energy. <BR/><BR/>The appropriate comparison to make is a stationary diesel or gasoline generator.Robert McLeodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05270962906437456350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13900197.post-5642463901968866272008-04-01T23:26:00.000-06:002008-04-01T23:26:00.000-06:00Yes..25KWH/mile for a small sedan, .35 for standar...Yes.<BR/><BR/>.25KWH/mile for a small sedan, .35 for standard, .45 for a light truck (SUV/pickup).<BR/><BR/>.35 for the current US fleet weight and size distribution.<BR/><BR/>35 KWH/gallon divided by 21 MPG gives about 1.67KWH/mile, so 21%.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13900197.post-10497353362657106722008-03-31T18:47:00.000-06:002008-03-31T18:47:00.000-06:00Nick, this is interesting... are those comparable ...Nick, this is interesting... are those comparable size vehicles?Krassen Dimitrovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06462795325843234990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13900197.post-22615157707298389502008-03-30T12:27:00.000-06:002008-03-30T12:27:00.000-06:00Good post. One quibble: the 35% efficiency factor...Good post. One quibble: the 35% efficiency factor for oil appears high, especially for the US, where the average vehicle gets about 21 MPG, equal to about 1.5 KWh per mile, vs an EV which might get .35 KWH per mile (for the current fleet's weight & size distribution).<BR/><BR/>That suggests about 20% efficiency to me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13900197.post-60033161116330280002008-03-27T19:20:00.000-06:002008-03-27T19:20:00.000-06:00...Which is why we need a tax policy that helps ke......Which is why we need a tax policy that helps keep the price of oil high enough to reflect some degree of it's true high cost.<BR/><BR/>Robert--love your blog. Drop me a line at mark@socialmediatoday.com if you would. I'd like to talk about getting you to lend a feed to http://www.theenergycollective.com.<BR/><BR/>thx.Mark Lazenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03082881097173406049noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13900197.post-26405941130299828452008-03-25T20:12:00.000-06:002008-03-25T20:12:00.000-06:00Oh, I see now what you mean by speculation. What ...Oh, I see now what you mean by speculation. What I meant to say was that the big players: nationals indeed, and pseudo-nationas (think Russia) are not eager to add capacity and are happy to hoard reserves and see prices go up.<BR/>Will there be a "dump"? You bet! Oil production costs are still a very small fraction of the price. Any sign of renewables starting to make a dent and you'll see capacity added in a hurry, to bring the prices down and to suppress the renewables. When production costs are in the single digit percentages, nobody would let a costlier competition steal market share. We are around the peak, for sure, however there will be fluctuations. We'll see $70 before we see $200.<BR/>Cheers,Krassen Dimitrovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06462795325843234990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13900197.post-5352127020016399102008-03-21T14:03:00.000-06:002008-03-21T14:03:00.000-06:00Krassen:Thanks for the comments.On 1., 84 million ...Krassen:<BR/><BR/>Thanks for the comments.<BR/><BR/>On 1., 84 million bbl/day, each bbl is 0.159 m^3, which works out to a cube 240 m on each side. So yeah, you're right. <BR/><BR/>The point I was trying to make however, is that only the nationals can really withdraw capacity from the market. A hedge fund simply doesn't have the infrastructure. <BR/><BR/>I'm not convinced anyone is actually withdrawing capacity from the market, a la the 1970s, however. Certainly there's a labour shortage in the oil industry, and that's slowing the development of new projects. <BR/><BR/>On 2., ok, let's call them "willfully blind." Scientists have families to feed too. I still maintain that you can learn a lot about an R&D company by looking at their books.Robert McLeodhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05270962906437456350noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13900197.post-59848996964259160412008-03-20T05:11:00.000-06:002008-03-20T05:11:00.000-06:00Robert, very nice rant. A few comments:1. I think ...Robert, very nice rant. A few comments:<BR/><BR/>1. I think the 300m cube is actually twice the daily oil output... However, the more important point is that you don't need to store oil to drive prices up, it is already stored underground, you just pump less of it. There is no question that the world oil producers are not pumping all-out at this point. Whether it is to drive the price up, or just to hoard up reserves is pretty much a matter of semantics...<BR/><BR/>2. You should not dismiss all entrepreneurs and inventors of unworkable technologies as fraudsters. Sometimes they themselves are blind to the pitfalls of their invention and are the first victims of their own "scam".<BR/>Ultimately, if institutional money is being invested, it is up to the money managers to put them to work wisely. However, the way they do business is not very different from what you describe on Wall Street: absence of risk to manager leads to lack of responsibility on their part. If they fail, it is their LP's money that is lost (usually pension funds and college endowments), they still get their management fees.<BR/><BR/>3. I hate to stereotype, but you are probably right about hiring MBAs... I have hired not one but in my lifetime, and it easily turned out to be the biggest mistake I have ever made.<BR/><BR/>Keep up the good posts!Krassen Dimitrovhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06462795325843234990noreply@blogger.com