Re:When oil is no longer in demand
by throwaway5752 on Wednesday November 30, 2016 @08:29PM
(#13076332)
"Petrochemical feedstocks" means plastic and Haber process nitrogenous fertilizers. Lubricants is probably substantially motor oils, but even Teslas have gearboxes and sealed parts (stearing, suspension, etc) that require lubricant. Same for general industry (regardless of input energy source).
You deleted far more than just fuels. "Hydrocarbon gas liquids", "Still gas", "Special napthas", and "Kerosene" include significant non-fuel uses. Those bring the total as high as 3.390, though it is impossible to determine from that chart how much is fuel use.
Also, keep in mind that some fuel uses, such as welding/soldering gasses, don't have an effective replacement at this time. Cutting fuel use to 0 at this juncture is effectively impossible.
Re:When oil is no longer in demand
by JulianMorrison on Thursday December 01, 2016 @09:19AM
(#13079439)
One way or the other the conclusion is the same, though. The oil industry would have to radically shrink, even if it would probably not go away.
That chart seems odd. From what I'm aware of, not all parts of "oil" are used for the same thing. E.g. before the internal combustion engine, gasoline was an unwanted byproduct of creating kerosene, and was usually dumped into the environment by refiners.
Re:When oil is no longer in demand
by maxerickson on Wednesday November 30, 2016 @08:31PM
(#13076341)
Modern refineries work a lot harder to shift their output towards the most valuable markets.
Look at all the steps with some output to gasoline on the right:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oil_refinery#Flow_diagram_of_t...
If the oil industry existed solely for non-fuel uses, it would be extremely tiny, and probably entirely domestic. It would not be large enough to fund any new deep or complex drilling, and nor would it be large enough to fund even the fixed costs of existing wells.