« prev   random   next »

2
2

Fuel economy

By Heraclitusstudent following x   2018 Aug 3, 5:15pm 5,875 views   41 comments   watch   nsfw   quote     share    


President Trump’s proposed this week to weaken fuel-efficiency standards for cars and light trucks
This begs a few questions:
Does he like to pay a lot for oil to Arab countries?
Does he like trade deficits?
And why does he like pollution so much?

I think he's suffering a lingering case of "Obama Derangement Syndrome".

« First    « Previous    Comments 2 - 41 of 41    Last »

2   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 3, 5:42pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Hassan_Rouhani says
U.S. Net Petroleum Imports Plunging Toward Zero

But is still a deficit and is a function of how much we consume.
If we consume more oil, oil imports will start contributing more to the deficit.
Oil will likely be more expensive too.
3   Tenpoundbass   ignore (14)   2018 Aug 3, 6:25pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
This begs a few questions:


It's sickening a starting car, starts at $35,000 Car loans have become long term mortgages, and the insurance companies squeeze the consumer for the same rate the day they drive it off the lot until the day pay off the last $25.00.

For every penny the gas consumption saves them, the auto industry, insurance racket, and the bank gets ten fold. It wasn't that long ago, there were cars for under $10,000.

Over half of the car cost is because of Socialist Bastards putting unnecessary burdens on the cost of the car with their Liberal bullshit. And car companies were even faking it for years like VW, and it took a Whistle Blower to uncover it because they know it's all bullshit junk Science and they are taking us all for a ride.

Besides my Modular Car industry dream to return Ameircan's manufacturing pride could never be realized with those Stupid unnecessary burdens.
4   Iranian_Oil_Burse   ignore (5)   2018 Aug 3, 9:02pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
oil imports will start contributing more to the deficit.
Oil will likely be more expensive too.


All this based solely on repealing the overoptimistic CAFE standards? Seriously doubt it.
5   HEYYOU   ignore (31)   2018 Aug 3, 9:14pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

TPB,
What does Mueller know?
6   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 3, 9:19pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
President Trump’s proposed this week to weaken fuel-efficiency standards for cars and light trucks
This begs a few questions:
Does he like to pay a lot for oil to Arab countries?

Nope.

Heraclitusstudent says
Does he like trade deficits?

Nope.

Heraclitusstudent says
And why does he like pollution so much?

Trump does not know what pollution is. He is an idiot.

Heraclitusstudent says
I think he's suffering a lingering case of "Obama Derangement Syndrome".

He is suffering because he is an idiot who thinks there is such a thing as "clean beautiful coal"
7   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 3, 9:23pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
Hassan_Rouhani says
U.S. Net Petroleum Imports Plunging Toward Zero

But is still a deficit and is a function of how much we consume.
If we consume more oil, oil imports will start contributing more to the deficit.
Oil will likely be more expensive too.


Trump does not realize how stupid it is to promote crude oil that benefits the Saudis when we have free fuel from the sun that can destroy the Saudis.
Sadly, Trump has his weak points.
8   Iranian_Oil_Burse   ignore (5)   2018 Aug 3, 9:34pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
Trump does not realize how stupid it is to promote crude oil that benefits the Saudis


Again: Trump or no Trump we are practically on the verge of becoming net exporters of that stuff. What "Saudis" are we talking about here?
9   MrMagic   ignore (11)   2018 Aug 3, 9:44pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
Trump does not realize how stupid it is to promote crude oil that benefits the Saudis when we have free fuel from the sun that can destroy the Saudis.


How does free sun work in place of oil for making plastics, tires, asphalt, propane, and tons of household products?
10   Patrick   ignore (1)   2018 Aug 3, 9:53pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The sun can create hydrocarbons from the air itself.

That's where they came from in the first place.

It's only a question of cost and efficiency, and the trend is very good for solar.
11   Heraclitusstudent   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 3, 10:14pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Hassan_Rouhani says
Again: Trump or no Trump we are practically on the verge of becoming net exporters of that stuff. What "Saudis" are we talking about here?


We don't efficiency. i.e. we want to spend more resources than we need to to drill oil out of the ground, polluting more in the process.

But we don't have resources to offer maternity leaves, or decent retirements, or healthcare for the poor, or infrastructures.

The allocation function is stuck at stupid.
12   Patrick   ignore (1)   2018 Aug 3, 10:26pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
But we don't have resources to offer maternity leaves, or decent retirements, or healthcare for the poor, or infrastructures.


That is the fault of the Democrats for utterly abandoning their mission to represent the working class.

Instead, Democrats now represent nothing but 24/7 race-baiting and tranny bathrooms. Nothing good.

Trump is a far better representative of the working class than any Democrat. He proves it every day by bringing back jobs and fighting lousy trade deals.
13   HonkpilledMaster   ignore (5)   2018 Aug 3, 10:41pm   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Patrick says
Instead, Democrats now represent nothing but 24/7 race-baiting and tranny bathrooms. Nothing good.


It's even worse than that. Every Democrat Verified Blue Check Twitter Reporter/Editor/Journalist is not only okay with Sarah Joeng, they're literally using orthodox post-Marxist Post-Modernist Critical Race Theory to justify it.

Literally. That's not an exaggeration.
14   Iranian_Oil_Burse   ignore (5)   2018 Aug 3, 11:19pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
We don't efficiency. i.e. we want to spend more resources than we need to to drill oil out of the ground, polluting more in the process.


Not everything mandated by the government automatically means efficiency. For example, my Toyota truck has an emission subsystem with sole purpose of injecting outside air into exhaust pipe right before the cat converters for 30 seconds once a day. It is supposed to help cats reach their operating temperature couple of minutes earlier when the truck is started first time after sitting overnight. It literally works once per fucking day for 30 fucking seconds. The cost of the fucking thing? $3.5K. How the fuck is this "efficient"?

To put things in perspective: replacing two stolen cats at dealer set me back almost the same amount - $4K. But these things work the whole time the engine is running, not fucking 30 seconds per one fucking day.

I do understand and support the cat mandate. The 30-second pump thingie? Not so much.
15   komputodo   ignore (1)   2018 Aug 4, 12:02am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
President Trump’s proposed this week to weaken fuel-efficiency standards for cars and light trucks
This begs a few questions:
Does he like to pay a lot for oil to Arab countries?
Does he like trade deficits?
And why does he like pollution so much?


This begs a few more questions: If automakers decide to produce some less fuel efficient cars, does that mean the people have to buy that model?
Why would you think that TRUMP buys oil? Oil companies buy oil. Better question would be "why do americans like polluting so much?
"Supposedly the USA is the #2 polluter in the world...This didn't happen over the last 16 months. And as far as trade deficits go, the USA has been running those since 1976...So basically what I'm saying is that your questions are nonsensical.
16   clambo   ignore (4)   2018 Aug 4, 6:57am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Obama, Pelosi and their ilk are all ignorant of the laws of physics so they just legislated that fuel economy is improved although it's impossible to make anything heavy move around without expending energy.

F=MA. Force=Mass X Acceleration. To move a vehicle, the energy used is related to the mass of the car or truck. This part of the equation can't be legislated to a zero.

The energy in gasoline is located in the C-H bonds in it. The gallon of gasoline contains a limited number of these chemical bonds. Legislation cannot increase the energy in a gallon of gasoline.

Turbocharging and other engine changes can improve the energy efficiency somewhat but the problem is still the mass of the vehicle can't be legislated down without making the vehicle more expensive.

Someday we will drive cars made of carbon fiber reinforced resin, like the $1 million + Bugatti Veryon.
17   Quigley   ignore (0)   2018 Aug 4, 7:24am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Mandating a fuel economy standard that’s currently impossible is the problem. It’s a great thing to make efficient cars. I own one,- Camry hybrid, and I like it. When I’m driving like a granny, I get 35mpg in the city which is great. But sometimes I wanna go fast. I step on it hard and get maybe 15mpg.

People want choice.
You shouldn’t outlaw choice.
Has the drug war taught you Lefties nothing?
19   MrMagic   ignore (11)   2018 Aug 4, 8:00am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Aphroman says
If Americans were allowed to grow Hemp, it would allow opportunities for so many new jobs


Why does EVERY thread fall into the abyss of pot references?

I'm sure that workforce would be the most productive of all time.

20   BlueSardine   ignore (3)   2018 Aug 4, 8:03am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Pot and work are not synonomous.
hence, libbies and government handouts...

MrMagic says
Why does EVERY thread fall into the abyss of pot references?

I'm sure that workforce would be the most productive of all time.
21   Tenpoundbass   ignore (14)   2018 Aug 4, 8:25am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Aphroman says
You asked a question about oil and plastics. Hemp is your answer

There are thousands of different plastics. But for the most part biodegradble plant based plastics.
Aren't up to snuff to be used as parts, long term vapor barriers, or on durable goods. It's pretty much limited to food safety and disposable needs.
22   komputodo   ignore (1)   2018 Aug 4, 9:52am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
He is suffering because he is an idiot who thinks there is such a thing as "clean beautiful coal"


In his 2010 State of the Union address, President Barack Obama told Americans that our energy future depends on safe, clean affordable energy and called for continued investments in clean coal technologies. Also, in 2008, then-Senator Obama championed clean coal technologies. As President, however, Obama gave coal the silent treatment while his EPA waged a war against our most affordable and abundant energy resource. As the 2012 campaign heats up, the president suddenly remembers the 1.5 million Americans employed in coal and coal-related industries.
23   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 4, 11:45am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Hassan_Rouhani says
Again: Trump or no Trump we are practically on the verge of becoming net exporters of that stuff. What "Saudis" are we talking about here?

I'm glad we are producing so much oil right now. Eventually, the world won't need any oil. The Saudis, who can't produce anything that takes hard work or brains will be in deep camel shit.

MrMagic says
How does free sun work in place of oil for making plastics, tires, asphalt, propane, and tons of household products?

We don't need a 100 million barrels of crude a day to produce all that stuff. Besides, biodegradable plastics will soon be here. We won't need propane when everything is electrified.
Clean energy that costs 3 cents a mile today and falling, will never compete with a polluting fossil fuel that costs 10 cents a mile.
24   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 4, 11:49am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
We don't efficiency. i.e. we want to spend more resources than we need to to drill oil out of the ground, polluting more in the process.

But we don't have resources to offer maternity leaves, or decent retirements, or healthcare for the poor, or infrastructures.

The allocation function is stuck at stupid.


When the cost of clean fuel gets close to Zero, the wealth effect from the energy savings will give a major boost to the standard of living in the next generation.
25   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 4, 11:57am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Hassan_Rouhani says
Not everything mandated by the government automatically means efficiency. For example, my Toyota truck has an emission subsystem with sole purpose of injecting outside air into exhaust pipe right before the cat converters for 30 seconds once a day. It is supposed to help cats reach their operating temperature couple of minutes earlier when the truck is started first time after sitting overnight. It literally works once per fucking day for 30 fucking seconds. The cost of the fucking thing? $3.5K. How the fuck is this "efficient"?


No such issues with an electric car. 20 moving parts vs 2,000. Manufacturing cost when the volume of e cars kicks in will be much much lower than a car with an engine. No oil change, no tune ups, no major device costs. No catalytic converter, no exhaust pipe. Less things that can go wrong and cost a fortune to repair.
Sorry aspiring auto mechanics. Take a different career path.
26   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 4, 12:01pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Quigley says
Mandating a fuel economy standard that’s currently impossible is the problem. It’s a great thing to make efficient cars. I own one,- Camry hybrid, and I like it. When I’m driving like a granny, I get 35mpg in the city which is great. But sometimes I wanna go fast. I step on it hard and get maybe 15mpg.


My daughter just got a Camry Hybrid SE--47mpg. The LE model gives 50mpg. It's a beautiful car.
27   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 4, 12:11pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

komputodo says
Strategist says
He is suffering because he is an idiot who thinks there is such a thing as "clean beautiful coal"


In his 2010 State of the Union address, President Barack Obama told Americans that our energy future depends on safe, clean affordable energy and called for continued investments in clean coal technologies. Also, in 2008, then-Senator Obama championed clean coal technologies. As President, however, Obama gave coal the silent treatment while his EPA waged a war against our most affordable and abundant energy resource. As the 2012 campaign heats up, the president suddenly remembers the 1.5 million Americans employed in coal and coal-related industries.


At this point no matter what one does to help the coal industry, it cannot survive. Go ahead and give a heart transplant to a 90 year old dying of cancer. He will still die.
Economics dictates the fuel to go extinct is.....
A. Heavily polluting fuel. More expensive.
B. Zero polluting fuel. Much cheaper, getting even more cheaper.
28   TrumpingTits   ignore (1)   2018 Aug 4, 1:23pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Heraclitusstudent says
Does he like to pay a lot for oil to Arab countries?
Does he like trade deficits?
And why does he like pollution so much?


Questions that only one who is completely ignorant of trade, oil and where it is produced/sold etc.

Heraclitusstudent says
Does he like to pay a lot for oil to Arab countries?


That's a question you should ask the libtard dumbasses running California. Because California (along with maybe Hawaii) buys so much oil from the Mideast. Most of the rest of the country gets it domestically, and before that -- for 4 decades now -- from Nigeria, formerly from Venezuela and other non-Mideast countries.

Heraclitusstudent says
Does he like trade deficits?


Trade deficits have been slashed dramatically ever since the shale revolution has all but eliminated the need for oil imports. In fact, soon we will be an net oil exporter.

And if Trump didn't like trade deficits, then why is he forcing a renegotiation of the world trade order to greatly reduce such deficits? Don't believe that? Ask the Chinese.

Heraclitusstudent says
And why does he like pollution so much?


Given the great embarrassment fueled by total ignorance as you displayed in the first two questions, I will give you a break and just smirk at this one but otherwise let it go. :)
29   TrumpingTits   ignore (1)   2018 Aug 4, 1:26pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Patrick says
That is the fault of the Democrats for utterly abandoning their mission to represent the working class.

Instead, Democrats now represent nothing but 24/7 race-baiting and tranny bathrooms. Nothing good.

Trump is a far better representative of the working class than any Democrat. He proves it every day by bringing back jobs and fighting lousy trade deals.


Oh yeah. He's outmaneuvered the Libtarded Dems completely and -- better yet -- the Globalist Establishment RINOs as well. I'd like to see more progress on the second group of people myself. But as they say, it is an imperfect world.
30   Quigley   ignore (0)   2018 Aug 4, 1:53pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
My daughter just got a Camry Hybrid SE--47mpg. The LE model gives 50mpg. It's a beautiful car.


Ok great maybe highway. Also the difference between LE and SE is just options which are weight. Should we also debate the difference in mpg with gas tank full vs on a quarter? Gas is weight too, at 7 pounds per gallon. Quarter tank is 4 gallons which saves 9 gallons or 63 pounds (which btw is probably the weight difference between my large ass and your daughter).

So my question is this: what did they strip out to get the better fuel economy? Hope it wasn’t safety equipment or steel framing, cuz our daughters are precious.

That’s the problem with mandated fuel economy. You can only do so much before you have to sacrifice safety or room or options. Not everyone wants to drive a sub compact!
31   HeadSet   ignore (1)   2018 Aug 4, 2:39pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

So my question is this: what did they strip out to get the better fuel economy?

Interesting. Strip out enough and it can be pedal powered.
32   Iranian_Oil_Burse   ignore (5)   2018 Aug 4, 2:58pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Strategist says
Hassan_Rouhani says
Not everything mandated by the government automatically means efficiency. For example, my Toyota truck has an emission subsystem with sole purpose of injecting outside air into exhaust pipe right before the cat converters for 30 seconds once a day. It is supposed to help cats reach their operating temperature couple of minutes earlier when the truck is started first time after sitting overnight. It literally works once per fucking day for 30 fucking seconds. The cost of the fucking thing? $3.5K. How the fuck is this "efficient"?


No such issues with an electric car.


There won't be "such issues" with the ICE-powered cars either if government knew when to stop instead of trying to defy the law of diminishing results by fiat. Mine doesn't have the issue anymore because I've bypassed the fucking thing instead of plopping $3.5K into fixing it. I value clean air but I simply don't see the difference injecting some air into cat converter for 30 seconds once per day would make as significant or even notable.

BTW, since we are on topic of EC superiority and/or readiness to replace gas-powered jalopies, which electric car would you recommend as a replacement for Toyota Sequoia? Keep in mind I use it to carry 5-7 passengers, a big dog and/or two 18ft kayaks on the roof. I also tow a travel trailer to places like Lake Tahoe, Death Valley or Yellowstone. And, of course, I drive it off-road and in Tahoe snow. I do not commute in the thing - have other cars for that duty.
33   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 4, 4:09pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Quigley says
Strategist says
My daughter just got a Camry Hybrid SE--47mpg. The LE model gives 50mpg. It's a beautiful car.


Ok great maybe highway. Also the difference between LE and SE is just options which are weight. Should we also debate the difference in mpg with gas tank full vs on a quarter? Gas is weight too, at 7 pounds per gallon. Quarter tank is 4 gallons which saves 9 gallons or 63 pounds (which btw is probably the weight difference between my large ass and your daughter).

So my question is this: what did they strip out to get the better fuel economy? Hope it wasn’t safety equipment or steel framing, cuz our daughters are precious.

That’s the problem with mandated fuel economy. You can only do so much before you have to sacrifice safety or room or options. Not everyone wants to drive a sub compact!


The 47mpg and the 50mpg is the average, not the highway. The SE gives less because of better power. It also costs more because of extra features and safety compared to the LE.
The better mileage of the 2018 models compared to the older models is due to better technology. Even the new Prius gives much better mileage compared to the older models. The first Prius that came out around 20 years ago gave 40mpg or less. The new one is well into the 50's. It's just advances in hybrid technology that give better mileage.
34   HeadSet   ignore (1)   2018 Aug 4, 4:18pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

recommend as a replacement for Toyota Sequoia? Keep in mind I use it to carry 5-7 passengers, a big dog and/or two 18ft kayaks on the roof.

Something by Sikorsky Aircraft?

Seriously, in time a scaled down version of the electric drive in the Thor/Tesla semis will take on the role of a current Sequoia/Suburban/Armada.
35   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 4, 4:20pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Hassan_Rouhani says
BTW, since we are on topic of EC superiority and/or readiness to replace gas-powered jalopies, which electric car would you recommend as a replacement for Toyota Sequoia? Keep in mind I use it to carry 5-7 passengers, a big dog and/or two 18ft kayaks on the roof. I also tow a travel trailer to places like Lake Tahoe, Death Valley or Yellowstone. And, of course, I drive it off-road and in Tahoe snow. I do not commute in the thing - have other cars for that duty.


My answer is simple. Stick with the Tahoe until an EV equivalent comes along. Here is a list of 60 EV models coming out in the next year or two. Pick one.
By the way, why don't you use electric cars for daily commutes. Lots of choices and more to come. Do your own homework and see for yourself how economical they really are.
http://evadoption.com/future-evs/

http://ev-vin.blogspot.com
36   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 4, 4:33pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

My two electric cars today:
1. 2015 Mercedes 100% electric.
2. 2017Chevy Volt. 53 miles on electric and then flips to gas.

My two electric cars by the end of the year:
1. Tesla Model 3 100% electric.
2. Nissan Leaf 100% electric.

I'm only switching because of the shortcomings that older e cars have, that newer ones do not.
Range and charging speed when on the road.
This site gives the best available deals for leases, which the car dealers really hate. I they hate it, I love it. You get state rebates in the form of a check. Federal rebates are built into the leases. When you see the bottom lines, minus the fuel savings, it's a no brainer.
http://ev-vin.blogspot.com
37   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 4, 4:36pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

When you do check out the true cost of an e car lease, I know you will get one. Please don't forget to thank me, and ask the dealer to donate $200 referral to Patnet.
38   HeadSet   ignore (1)   2018 Aug 4, 4:44pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

My two electric cars today:
1. 2015 Mercedes 100% electric.
2. 2017Chevy Volt. 53 miles on electric and then flips to gas.


How is the heater and A/C in the electric cars?
39   Strategist   ignore (2)   2018 Aug 4, 5:03pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

HeadSet says
How is the heater and A/C in the electric cars?


Perfect. Go test drive any electric car. Much more powerful, smooth, quiet etc.
40   anonymous   ignore (null)   2019 Mar 4, 2:03am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

The biggest change in global fuel regulations since leaded gas went away could cause price shocks

•On Jan. 1, 2020, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) will enforce new emissions standards designed to significantly curb pollution produced by the world's ships.

•Under a new international shipping rule, the big ships that travel the world's oceans must switch from high sulfur sludge-like fuels to lower sulfur fuel or find a technological solution by Jan. 1.

•That means ships, burning an estimated 3 million barrels a day, need to move to a different fuel type, putting them in direct competition for fuel with truckers, owners of heavy equipment, railroads and airlines.

•Analysts say it's unclear how high prices could go and how long the disruption could last as the industry adjusts to the changes and refineries alter their output.

Tens of thousands of ships sailing the world's oceans currently burn more than 3 million barrels a day of a high sulfur, sludge-like fuel, but starting next year the shipping industry will have to comply with rules to dramatically reduce sulfur emissions.

The change, mandated by the United Nations International Maritime Organization (IMO), is significant. The industry now burns fuels with a sulfur content of as high as 3.5 percent and will have to cut back to 0.5 percent.

For the world transportation market, the change is profound because shipping fuel is literally from the bottom of the oil barrel, like asphalt. The new fuel, however, will be much more refined and more like the lower sulfur diesel used by truckers and in jet fuel.

While huge investments have already been made, the change on Jan. 1 could send ripples through the transportation industry, causing estimated price spikes of 20 percent or more for fuel of all sorts.

As a result, cargo prices, airline tickets and the cost of sending a package could rise. Some analyst say there could even be temporary fuel shortages, as refiners and transport companies scramble to meet the needs of the shipping industry.

Ships can get avoid using the new fuel, which will be more expensive, by equipping themselves with multi-million dollar scrubbers to limit sulfur emissions from the current fuel. But a limited amount of ships can make those changes because it is costly and it may not be worthwhile on an older vessel.

The new regulations are the result of a recommendation that came from a subcommittee at the United Nations more than a decade ago and was adopted in 2016 by the UN's IMO, which sets rules for shipping safety, security and pollution.

More than 170 countries including the U.S. have signed on to the fuel change. Starting in 2020, ships found in violation of the new laws risk being impounded, and ports in cooperating countries are expected to police visiting vessels.

"This is the biggest change in fuel specifications since lead was taken out of gasoline, and it's global," said Tom Kloza, head of global energy analysis at Oil Price Information Service. The phaseout of lead additives in fuels first began in 1970s but was mostly eliminated in the 1980s, and the final additives were banned in the 1990s.

The shipping industry will have to make its switch over to the new fuel on a hard deadline.

Some companies have added new ships that run on liquified natural gas, but that is limited. Fleets are expected to increasingly add LNG fueled ships but the transition could take a number of years. The shipping industry now uses more than 5 million barrels of fuel a day, including the high sulfur fuel, lighter marine fuel and a tiny amount of LNG, according to Citigroup.

"The fuel now used in shipping is the bottom of the barrel. It's a very heavy black diesel oil that shippers use because it's cheap. It also is one of the most polluting fuels. So it's understandable people would want to regulate it. The whole purpose of this regulation change is to protect human health. That's why it was proposed in 2007," said Rick Joswick, head of oil pricing and trade flow analytics at S&P Global Platts.

Fuel costs will rise

While big shortages of marine fuel are not anticipated, the price of diesel, used in trucking, could temporarily jump and become more volatile starting in the fourth quarter as ships begin to fuel up for long journeys, energy analysts say. The actual impact is difficult to measure, because it will also be driven by oil prices, and it could affect other fuels too.

"We've been heavily involved in tracking this for the past year. It's going to increase the cost of fuel," said Glen Kedzie, vice president and energy and environmental counsel for the American Trucking Association, which represents more than 800 trucking fleets. "You will not come across any study that says this will make fuel prices cheaper. The fact is we're kind of shifting the dynamics of who is competing for the middle blend of distillates. You're kind of pushing another industry into that sector that includes heating oil, jet fuel and transportation fuel."

By extension, that means that businesses that use these fuels — from airlines to container shippers to farmers and trucking firms — will pay higher prices and could potentially pass along any price hikes to consumers. It's also conceivable that refineries could replace some of their gasoline production with marine fuel, if prices go high enough, analysts say.

"There's enough of the new fuel. It's never been a question of the refineries' ability to supply the fuel. It's really a matter of what price ships are going to have to pay for essentially diesel fuel. It's a switch from high sulfur, low value fuel which was also sold for less," said Kurt Barrow, IHS Vice President of Oil Markets, Midstream and Downstream. "The refiners have always been willing to provide diesel. It's just a matter of the cost associated with that, particularly when you have a 3 million barrel overnight change. We're going to increase crude runs. We're going to utilize the global refinery system."

Kloza said the price of truck fuel diesel at the pump could rise above $4 per gallon, from the current national average of about $2.95 per gallon. "Higher prices for diesel and for freight, for shipping by trucks, they work their way through the system and they're passed along as inflation. When you have higher prices for diesel for a sustained amount of time, it's not something that resonates through the population like with gasoline, but it's something that can resonate through inflation and raise the price of goods a little bit."

While the price of all fuels could rise, Goldman Sachs commodity strategists in a recent report said they do not expect a big impact on distillate prices or supply because of anticipated weaker demand for diesel from truckers and lower oil prices. They also expect more ships to add scrubbers.

Eric Lee, Citigroup energy analyst, however, said it's likely fuel costs will rise, starting at the end of the year, and refiners' margins on diesel will also rise. In one scenario, if Brent crude reaches $70 in the fourth quarter, he said diesel fuel could rise to as much as $3.35 per gallon. He said gasoline prices could also rise.

Joswick said the wholesale price of diesel could rise by 20 percent to 25 percent as the shipping industry changes over. "This will hit the market probably in the third quarter. Right now, it's totally under the radar with respect to prices ... and it's understandable. Bunker fuel is just something that makes people's eyes glaze over," he said.

"Things like diesel fuel and jet fuel would go up. It's not the 3 million barrel a day market. It's the much larger diesel and jet fuel market," said Joswick. "The diesel market is about 30 million barrels a day. The jet market is about 8 million barrels a day. This 3 million swing in bunker fuel will affect the 38 million and the 3 million barrels of diesel fuel it uses."

Splitting the barrel

Each barrel of oil that enters a refinery contains the makings for a range of fuels, the prominent one being gasoline. A certain amount is refined as high sulfur fuel and also asphalt, at the bottom of the barrel. There is the middle of the barrel, which provides the lower sulfur distillates — diesel, jet fuel and heating oil. Gasoline and lighter fuels are at the top. Kedzie said the marine fuel is from that middle tier, and could also be made by blending a higher sulfur fuel with diesel.

"There's a school of thought that thinks the new shipping rules will trigger a Y2K, and there's a school of thought that thinks it will cause the next Apocalypse. I'm leaning toward quite a bit of disruption and impact on prices. It's really going to have an impact on the vessels and what they have to use," said Kloza.

"For diesel, I think it's going to mean that diesel prices on the coasts of the United States are going to be significantly higher than they are on the interior."



Sulfur emissions from ships are currently very high, and Kloza said one study showed the annual emissions from one large container ship was comparable to the emissions from 10 to 15 million cars running on diesel fuel.

"On the diesel side, I think it's clear it's got to prop up diesel prices so there's the potential possibility of a spike in diesel prices next winter, and heating oil," said Kloza. "You're talking about rolling out a new marine fuel right in the winter of the northern hemisphere." He added, "If that market for marine fuel is high enough, the stuff that normally gets turned into gasoline and on road diesel is going to go to the vessel market."

But Citigroup's Lee and other analysts said there could be a response from President Donald Trump if diesel or other fuels rise very much. The president has periodically lambasted OPEC for high oil prices, including in a tweet on Monday that knocked the price of crude down by three percent.

"If you have this combination of a pick up in diesel prices, gasoline prices and shipping costs are higher, freight costs are higher and that filters through to other commodities. It's the kind of thing the White House might be inclined to delay or push back on," said Lee. "There will be some headline risk out of the White House, there could be other tweets that push us back late this year, early next year, as it's an election year."

While Trump could allow lax enforcement of the new regulations, ships traveling the world would still have to be in compliance if they wish to stop in other ports outside of the U.S. that are enforcing the new regulations. Analysts expect about 15 percent of the ships on the high seas to be non-compliant.

Refining industry can help

If fuel prices rise too much, the refining industry could be self-policing, and move quickly to provide more fuel. "My thing is the refining industry has a good track record of averting disaster. While it is concerning, I wouldn't panic over it. There's no greater incentive to race more production than if prices skyrocket," said John Kilduff, partner with Again Capital.

The concern is that the rule change is global, and the U.S. is far from the largest user of high sulfur fuel with Singapore and Rotterdam being major bunker ports. "You're going to have a lot of folks competing for a fixed asset, and it's a global market," said American Trucking Association official Kedzie. "Just because it might be refined here doesn't mean it has to be used here. There's no law that says any crude that's pumped in this country or any product that's refined in a U.S. refinery has to stay in the United States."

The Coalition for American Energy Security said it believes the rule change provides a big opportunity for U.S. refined product exports and that recent analyses show the U.S. industry is on track to meet demand.

"IMO 2020 presents an enormous economic opportunity for the U.S. energy industry and its workers to supply low-sulfur fuels to the global market. These standards give the U.S. a significant advantage over foreign oil producers whose nations haven't made necessary infrastructure investments," a spokesman said.

Ultimately, the markets should calm down, but it's difficult to tell just how much volatility there will be and how high prices could go, with the price of crude a major mitigating factor. Joswick said the heavy sulfur fuel is from about 3 percent of the world's oil output.

IHS Markit's Barrow estimates that perhaps 600,000 barrels a day of the higher sulfur fuel will continued to be used by ships with scrubbers. "Ships can either buy this new fuel which is more expensive or they could spend a few million dollars of capital to install a scrubber. We've seen a significant increase in orders and installation of scrubbers starting in 2018," he said.

"Another 400,000 or 500,000 [barrels of bunker fuel] could be in noncompliance....Our analysis says some of the ships coming out of the ship yards will be designed with more efficient engines that use the new fuel," he said. "Some in certain kinds of trade, particularly container vessels, those are in the future going to use LNG. Some cruise ships have put on scrubbers."

Carnival, for one, said it already has scrubbers on most of its ships, and it has plans to add 11 LNG ships to its fleet over the next five years. "The Advanced Air Quality Systems (generically known as exhaust gas cleaning systems, or scrubbers) are installed on 71 of the company's more than 100 ships and, through extensive independent testing, the systems have proven capable of outperforming low-sulfur fuel alternatives such as marine gasoil (MGO) in terms of cleaner air emissions with essentially no negative environmental impact to oceans and seas," a spokesman said in an email.

Randal Mullett, transportation industry consultant with Mullett Strategies, said shippers will find ways to save on fuel costs.

"They've indicated they're anticipating huge increases in their costs, and perhaps there are some other implications, like they revert to slow steaming to save fuel. That has big implications on supply chain," he said, noting cargoes could arrive days later than normal if ships slow their travel speed.

Some analysts say the cost to shippers could rise by a third or more if they have to switch from high sulfur fuel to low sulfur fuel.

Joswick said he expects U.S. refiners to easily handle the increase in marine fuel.

"Refineries have a certain amount of flexibility and they respond to price. They all run their models to simulate how they can get the best margins," he said. "U.S. refiners are very well positioned to do this. Refineries in Europe will be more challenged. The effect of this is price has to move [higher] for this to happen."

Lee said the complex refiners along the Gulf Coast will benefit from the fuel change and they can easily respond to the demand. "The U.S. is very well positioned," he said.

He said the adjustment period for the transportation industry could last a few years.

"By 2022, into 2023, prices will have normalized and there's a new mix of fuel use in the shipping sector. On day one, diesel demand jumps and high sulfur fuel demand drops significantly," Lee said. "Scrubbers are being installed and refiners are building more capacity. They aren't doing it all on day one. It's more a slow progression."

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/03/01/biggest-change-in-fuel-since-leaded-gas-went-away-could-raise-prices.html

Short version of the above - get ready to pay more for everything including cruises, airfare - you name it.

This will be next year's big story about the surprising and unexpected rise in fuel costs translating to higher prices for everything.
41   HeadSet   ignore (1)   2019 Mar 4, 12:49pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)   quote   flag        

Patrick says
The sun can create hydrocarbons from the air itself.

That's where they came from in the first place.



Yes, plants originally took carbon dioxide from the air to make themselves, and eventually oil and coal. But since CO2 is only a trace element today, not enough CO2 in the air to extract the carbon from to make all that plastic and lube.

« First    « Previous    Comments 2 - 41 of 41    Last »


about   best comments   contact   one year ago   suggestions