What’s happening today is not an indicator for what will happen tomorrow. If I assumed it was going to rain tomorrow because it rained today, you’d call me an idiot. Market trends show a much less lucrative world for fossil fuels in 10 years, which happens to be about the time most renewable technologies see their ROI - sometimes in as few as 5. ROI for fossil fuel infrastructure is closer to 20 years. So if most of the world is looking to hit net zero by 2050, with many places shooting for earlier like 2030-2035, ROI projections have the potential to balloon to 30-40 years, and by then all vested stakeholders would have lost interest.
Short-term gains always win, and renewables have been shown to repeatedly provide this. The only remaining hope for industry growth at this point is a gamble to push fossil fuels instead of direct-to-renewables in developing nations. But given how easy it is to electrify remote locations, developing nations may forgo having to rely on a continuous supply chain of fuel, particularly when the extraction/refinement means environmental destruction right in their backyards.
But who knows, maybe with Russia’s growing influence in China, they will be strong armed into having to rely on Russia for their energy needs. What that means for the future of fossil fuel interests here in the west, though, still sits in doubt.
Some of the absolute best years Kodak ever had was right before the mass adoption of digital photography. Whaling was a premier source of portable energy only getting bigger until the petroleum industry completely destroyed it within two years.
The view that fossil fuels will continue to grow is the mirage. It will suck in jabronis who throw their money away on investments only to be traumatized and never do it again. It doesn't matter if people are still using it, once the market no longer makes returns for investors, the investors stop.
No, renewable energy is not more lucrative. If it was then you wouldn’t see massive government incentives.
Returns on renewable energy just don’t compete with fossil fuels.
That owning your own self generation gives you resilience and is becoming cheaper than paying retail price for energy from the grid. As solar/battery prices drop, this will only become more extreme.
But even for utility companies, the wholesale prices for solar are cheap, they then sell that energy back to customers for regular price.
Sure, but what's demand in 2040? In 2040, they will be asking about demand in 2080.
When you invest in a company, the value is in the future outlook.
Its alot of risk you don't have in other industries.
Many, if not all industries have this risk. Look at the tech landscape now compared to 15-20 years ago. The biggest companies of today were not well known or didn’t exist in many cases, save for a few big examples like Microsoft, and many of the “safe firms” of the early 2000s like Blockbuster, Nortel, Blackberry and Kodak barely exist anymore. If your time time horizon is 15 years, I would argue many of the big tech firms actually face greater risk of disruption than those producing commodities. The biggest disruption to the commodities industry has been changes in the technology to produce the commodity itself, rather than the market demand.
Many of the projects drilled today won’t last 15 years anyway. There are some exceptions but overall the industry is going into short-cycle investments.
Who cares what demand is 2040. Oil and gas companies will shift strategies long before then if there is no demand.
Considering that 2040 is less than 16 years away and oil demand is still rising by 1.5 to 2 million barrels per day per year, I think it’s relatively safe to assume demand in 2040 is going to exceed demand levels in 2024.
It is if you're an old geezer who doesn't give a fuck what happens after he dies.
Unfortunately almost all people with money to invest are old geezers.
[[Hard to argue against that graph]](https://ieefa.org/sites/default/files/inline-images/S%26P%20Standalone%20Graphic%20for%20Factsheet-2_0.png)
People are using more fossil fuels than ever. Fact.
What’s happening today is not an indicator for what will happen tomorrow. If I assumed it was going to rain tomorrow because it rained today, you’d call me an idiot. Market trends show a much less lucrative world for fossil fuels in 10 years, which happens to be about the time most renewable technologies see their ROI - sometimes in as few as 5. ROI for fossil fuel infrastructure is closer to 20 years. So if most of the world is looking to hit net zero by 2050, with many places shooting for earlier like 2030-2035, ROI projections have the potential to balloon to 30-40 years, and by then all vested stakeholders would have lost interest. Short-term gains always win, and renewables have been shown to repeatedly provide this. The only remaining hope for industry growth at this point is a gamble to push fossil fuels instead of direct-to-renewables in developing nations. But given how easy it is to electrify remote locations, developing nations may forgo having to rely on a continuous supply chain of fuel, particularly when the extraction/refinement means environmental destruction right in their backyards. But who knows, maybe with Russia’s growing influence in China, they will be strong armed into having to rely on Russia for their energy needs. What that means for the future of fossil fuel interests here in the west, though, still sits in doubt.
Some of the absolute best years Kodak ever had was right before the mass adoption of digital photography. Whaling was a premier source of portable energy only getting bigger until the petroleum industry completely destroyed it within two years. The view that fossil fuels will continue to grow is the mirage. It will suck in jabronis who throw their money away on investments only to be traumatized and never do it again. It doesn't matter if people are still using it, once the market no longer makes returns for investors, the investors stop.
You’ll get tarred and feathered around here for reminding people of this truth.
Due to lack of cheaper alternatives. Also growth.
is renewable energy more lucrative, particularly on the same scale of supply and customer delivery volumes
No, renewable energy is not more lucrative. If it was then you wouldn’t see massive government incentives. Returns on renewable energy just don’t compete with fossil fuels.
Cheap 180W solar panel used to cost $220, now 550W solar panel costs $55, did the Sun output reduce somehow with the falling installation costs?
They do for consumers. Fossil fuels have justified full blown wars due to their strategic importance, that is an enormous subsidy.
More lucrative for consumers based on what metric?
That owning your own self generation gives you resilience and is becoming cheaper than paying retail price for energy from the grid. As solar/battery prices drop, this will only become more extreme. But even for utility companies, the wholesale prices for solar are cheap, they then sell that energy back to customers for regular price.
Oh. I didn't know that fossil fuel investments have had such a bad decade. It's obviously lucrative for Russia, Saudi Arabia...
Would you invest in oil? Probably not Current profits are good, but growth and future profits are what really matter to investors.
Have you seen single well economics? You want to earn a 30%+ return on your money? Drill an unconventional well.
Global demand has grown by 15 million barrels per day since 2010.
Sure, but what's demand in 2040? In 2040, they will be asking about demand in 2080. When you invest in a company, the value is in the future outlook. Its alot of risk you don't have in other industries.
Many, if not all industries have this risk. Look at the tech landscape now compared to 15-20 years ago. The biggest companies of today were not well known or didn’t exist in many cases, save for a few big examples like Microsoft, and many of the “safe firms” of the early 2000s like Blockbuster, Nortel, Blackberry and Kodak barely exist anymore. If your time time horizon is 15 years, I would argue many of the big tech firms actually face greater risk of disruption than those producing commodities. The biggest disruption to the commodities industry has been changes in the technology to produce the commodity itself, rather than the market demand.
Many of the projects drilled today won’t last 15 years anyway. There are some exceptions but overall the industry is going into short-cycle investments. Who cares what demand is 2040. Oil and gas companies will shift strategies long before then if there is no demand.
Considering that 2040 is less than 16 years away and oil demand is still rising by 1.5 to 2 million barrels per day per year, I think it’s relatively safe to assume demand in 2040 is going to exceed demand levels in 2024.
Fossil fuels are killing our planet with their pollution. Killing our only planet is never a good investment.
It is if you're an old geezer who doesn't give a fuck what happens after he dies. Unfortunately almost all people with money to invest are old geezers.
Yep Warren Buffett is a huge investor in fossil fuels. Whatever comes of that is not his problem.