Lower "forever" oil prices?

[freebeard]

Originally Posted by sendler

What other way do you propose that we get people to be responsible to the future generations and quit buying huge SUV's? And transition to a lower carbon footprint? If not through a carbon tax.

Universal Basic Income

...and do a lot of quoting Chief Seattle

A few more hours, a few more winters, and none of the children of the great tribes that once lived on this earth, or that roamed in small bands in the woods, will be left to mourn the graves of a people once as powerful and hopeful as yours.

The whites, too, shall pass - perhaps sooner than other tribes. Continue to contaminate your own bed, and you will suffocate in your own waste.

When the buffalo are all slaughtered, the wild horses all tamed, the secret corners of the forest heavy with the scent of many men, and the view of the ripe hills blotted by talking wires, where is the thicket? Gone. Where is the eagle? Gone.

And what is it to say farewell to the swift and the hunt, to the end of living and the beginning of survival? We might understand if we knew what it was that the white man dreams, what he describes to his children on the long winter nights, what visions he burns into their minds, so they will wish for tomorrow. But we are savages. The white man's dreams are hidden from us.

Chief Seattle - Suqwamish & Duwamish

[RedDevil]

Paying about €0.16/kWh right now. Mostly tax and transportation fee, of course.

And that's what is keeping the giant solar panel farms away - yet.
As the real cost of electricity is closer to €0.05/kWh it does not get profitable to fill wastelands over here with solar panels commercially - yet.
A solar array on your house is profitable, as it competes with the 16 cent rate.
But don't produce an overage as you'll get just 5 cents per kWh for it - at best...

But we have a new offshore wind park under construction where the subsidies cover only a fraction of costs. And a new offshore wind park construction agreement is open to bidders, and it will be unsubsidized.
Due to its scale and previous experiences it is expected to be taken on anyway. Commercial unsubsidized wind power now is a competitive option on the energy market. it is here and it will never go away, only get bigger.

Windmills have dried out our marshes and lakes, cut our timber wood and ground our flour for centuries and will go on to charge our iPhones and power our data centers.

Solar is coming though. Panels and inverters get cheaper and will at some point tip the commercial scales. It already nearly does.
I'm watching the needle move to the right...

[redpoint5]

Originally Posted by sendler

51.97/497=$0.105 per kWh
.
This is what you paid for your electricity.
.
My bill is itemized also. So from now on I will just quote the cost of generation and throw out all of the line fees, taxes, and service fees to report $0.03783. So I can feel happier about it. And mislead the discussion. Instead of the actual .1360 that I am really paying at the bottom of the bill.
.
$58.26/ 428 kWh = $0.1360

I see you're sticking to your incorrect accounting methods.

My marginal cost is $0.08/kWh. If I consume no electricity at all, my fixed cost is $12. What is $12 / 0 kWh? Try it on your calculator. You'll get an error because even the calculator knows this is nonsensical.

Accountants don't use fixed cost to calculate marginal cost, which is what we're talking about.

My sewer bill is $75 every 2 months. It isn't $1 per poop, 50 cents per shower, or 25 cents per clothes wash. It's a fixed cost that is unaffected by use.

The only way to accurately include my fixed cost in the marginal cost of my electricity is to assume an infinite energy use.

[jakobnev]

But just look at the car. If you doubled or tripled the price of a gallon of gas with tax you double or triple the hit to the budget for gas.

This assumes, (incorrectly) that the poor will continue to choose the same fuel-inefficient cars, and cannot learn to use their car more efficiently.

(Ironically, this very forum is proof of how much fuel can be saved when people are actually trying.)

And increased tax revenue from fuel can be used to offset taxes on the bare necessities of life.

[JockoT]

Originally Posted by jakobnev

This assumes, (incorrectly) that the poor will continue to choose the same fuel-inefficient cars, and cannot learn to use their car more efficiently..

But what about the likes of me. I run a small (much smaller than I'd like), fuel efficient car and I practise economy driving to the best of my ability. If the UK government was to double or triple the tax on petrol it would cripple me entirely. I could not afford to run a car. As a pensioner, I have a fixed income and though not "poor", I have no cash left over for other than essentials.

[jakobnev]

JockoT:

UK gas prices are already ~3x US gas prices.

I was talking about increasing US gas prices.

[Hersbird]

Originally Posted by jakobnev

This assumes, (incorrectly) that the poor will continue to choose the same fuel-inefficient cars, and cannot learn to use their car more efficiently.

(Ironically, this very forum is proof of how much fuel can be saved when people are actually trying.)

And increased tax revenue from fuel can be used to offset taxes on the bare necessities of life.

I thought the increased taxes went to support more carbon neutral energy. Now we have to use the money to offset increases elsewhere? I'm sure most of it won't get lose in government waste, no danger in that right? So everybody changes their habits to offset. Now millions of those lower end jobs those lower income people had disappear. So you pay them not to work and just stay home. At least VR will be in wide use by then. Just seems like the start of a good sci-fi movie

[JockoT]

Originally Posted by jakobnev

JockoT:

UK gas prices are already ~3x US gas prices.

I was talking about increasing US gas prices.

I know that, but there are people in the US, in my situation, driving small fuel efficient cars, who would be stretched beyond breaking point if fuel prices were doubled or tripled. It wouldn't just be owners of gas guzzlers who would suffer.

[JockoT]

Originally Posted by Hersbird

I thought the increased taxes went to support more carbon neutral energy.

Not here in the UK it doesn't. Our petrol duty goes to replace Trident, and build two carriers we don't even have planes for, and give foreign aid to countries like India (in fact India gets £279,000,000/year), who can afford nuclear weapons and space exploration .

[Ecky]

Not a direct response to anyone here, but for the last 3 years I've been paying my father's rent and car insurance and registration. He's on food stamps and heating assistance, and most of what he makes (which doesn't involve driving) goes toward beer, cigarettes and gasoline. I've been offering for over a year to pay for him to move closer to civilization where he's more likely to find a job his pride will accept, but he "prefers" to live in a rural area. This month I've declined to renew his insurance and registration, and offered to give him an electric bicycle instead. I love him to death, but he's a good example of someone working well below their capacity, and living well above his means. If anything, I expect losing his truck will do him a lot of good.

I tend to lean very politically left, but where I grew up, most of the poorest people had a trucks and SUVs, and it was very much a choice.