Doug wrote:
>Furthermore, because of concerns about climate change and unrest in >the middle east, a prediction that batteries and cheap electric cars >are going to be in great demand over the next several decades is a >good bet. I have no arguement against the concept that cheap batteries and cheap electric cars would be in great demand. That has beent true since 1973, when the oil boycott woke us up to the dependance of the world on Mid-East oil. Since then, I've been seeing promises of competative electric cars. When gas prices were at $4.50/gallon, the premium for hybrids was within $1000 of being a wash. But, now that prices are back close to $1.50 (around here at least....but when we were up near $4.50, I'd guess you were higher too) hybrid sales are falling like a rock. So, we've made real progress since '73. In another 35 years, we may very well have competative battery powered cars that are flexible enough to be competative in the US and European markets. We also may have biofuels that are sensible because bioengineering has progressed to the point where we have 20%+ efficiency in converting sunlight to complex, burnable, hydrocarbons. But, until that happens, China will pick the cheapest option. Even when oil recovers to reasonable, sustainable prices (say $60-$80/barrel), hybrids will not make sense until the premium is, roughly, cut in half. Compact electric cars are roughly 40k, compared to about 13k for compact gas cars, and have a range < 100 miles/charge. So, these cars are only for the rich....and the well off Chinese who can afford to move up from a bike to a car are not rich by US standards. Further, oil usage in a country that is just starting to introduce automobiles their oil usage is not for private >So a move to all electric strengthens government control >by alleviating dependence on foreign oil and automobiles and expands the >economy not only internally but globally. But, the Chinese do make autos, > 7 million in 2006. They import oil, but they are also a producer, about 60% of their oil is internally produced. Coal is their favorite and cheapest option, so that is a plus for electricity (although a minus for the environment). So, while they would have an even better foreign trade balance than they do without importing oil, they are in a far different position than the US. For some reason, I keep on getting the feel that those who think that we can decrease worldwide CO2 output in the next 10 years feel that if nations only had the will, then they could quickly produce cheap alternative energy. It's not like the moon race, where price was no object, its more like space factories, where price is a critical factor. And so far, prices for alternative energy are not falling rapidly. That's why I think we need a disruptive innovation for things to change. > For example, several years ago, there were pollution regulations passed. > They have all been ignored, with no real consequences. The only exception > to this was during the Olympics, when some industries had to shut down and > most people had to stop driving so Beijing looked as good as possible. >Well, you can only crap upstream for so long before you figure out that it's >a pretty stupid habit. IIRC, we know that's been going on in India for 3000 years. :-) >Perhaps the Olympics has been a wake up call for the Chinese. I haven't seen any data that indicates that the Chinese will be willing to sacrifice ecconomic growth for pollution control. That is a tradeoff that the West agreed to because we were rich enough to have that on the agenda. But, it wasn't until the '60s that we did. If history is a guide, China is a good ways away from having the per capita GDP at which countries start spending it on pollution control. Perhaps they will do it faster than average, but since they are a factor of ~9 less than the US in 2007(5.4k vs 45k on Wikipedia), it would be unrealistic to expect them to accept lower incomes to attack pollution for at least a decade. I would guess that global warming would be an issue for them later than that. I think the only possible way to change this pattern is to change the relative expense of batteries, biofuels, large capacity energy storage, etc. Without that, China will keep on adding 1% to its CO2 output for 1% growth in income (it's been faster than that lateley, but I think it will fall to that over the next 10 years or so) for at least a decade. At that point, it should have twice the CO2 output of the US and EU combined. We can wish this won't happen, but history indicates it will. Dan M. -------------------------------------------------------------------- mail2web.com – Enhanced email for the mobile individual based on Microsoft® Exchange - http://link.mail2web.com/Personal/EnhancedEmail _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
