Print 32 comment(s) - last by Lord 666.. on Mar 13 at 6:55 PM

These are just a couple of figures in ExxonMobil's insight through 2040

ExxonMobil said it plans to invest $185 billion in energy projects over the next five years, and has given its insight on what the future of energy looks like through 2040.

ExxonMobil has released its report, "The Outlook for Energy: A View to 2040," which takes a look at some energy challenges and predictions for the coming decades.

The report sees the global population increasing from 7 billion people today to about 9 billion in 2040. With this population bump, energy demand will grow 35 percent worldwide (65 percent in developing nations alone compared to 2010).

The report said automotive technology like hybrid cars are expected to keep global personal transportation energy demands steady for the most part. By 2025, it sees full hybrid prices coming down and these types of vehicles accounting for 40 percent of the global vehicle fleet by 2040. However, plug-in hybrids and electrics will likely only make up five percent of the market by 2040.

Vehicles will move away from gasoline as the No. 1 transportation choice thanks to tech like light-duty engine efficiency, and see an increase in diesel fuel instead. In fact, diesel will make up 70 percent of fuel demand growth through 2040.

CO2 emissions in OECD countries will be 20 percent lower in 2040 than 2010.

Also due to the population increase, electricity generation will be in great demand over the decades. In fact, ExxonMobil says it will account for more than half of the increase in global energy demand (electricity demand alone will grow 85 percent from 2010 to 2040). Electricity and natural gas will account for more than 60 percent of the world's residential/commercial energy demand by 2040 as cleaner fuels are used.

Oil will remain the No. 1 global fuel while natural gas steals coal's spot for second place. The report said coal will peak, and then decline as nuclear power and renewable energy grows. Oil and gas will supply about 60 percent of the global energy demand in 2040 (a 55 percent increase from 2010).

At 2040, North America will likely go from net importer to net exporter of oil. With growing demand and an evolving energy landscape, more global trade opportunities will arise.

A couple of other highlights include a 50 percent increase in energy demand for chemical production, and nuclear/natural gas generation in non OECD countries will increase by 150 percent.

Source: ExxonMobil

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Well, duh!
By Reclaimer77 on 3/12/2013 4:28:33 PM , Rating: 1
All of the diesel owners on this forum have said this for years

Yes and they've been mostly European. Unfortunately diesel just doesn't work in America that well currently. EPA mandates make it impossible to produce diesel engines at a competitive cost. The diesel fuel taxes are outrageous, pushing diesel to nearly $1 more per gallon. The cars themselves are thousands of dollars more on top of all this.

Because of these factors, Exxon's report is wildly optimistic. Unless major policy changes happen in our Government, do not expect diesel passenger vehicles to outpace gasoline ones.

RE: Well, duh!
By kleinma on 3/12/2013 4:47:29 PM , Rating: 3
I don't think the exxon report is being optimistic. It is just how they are showing the numbers:

In fact, diesel will make up 70 percent of fuel demand growth through 2040.

the key word there is growth. It isn't saying that 70 percent of fuel demand will be for diesel, it is saying that from now until 2040, 70% of the ADDITIONAL fuel needed versus what is currently being produced will be diesel. We would need to see gas vs diesel figures for today to see how level that 70% of growth demand makes the playing field. If currently they are refining 3 to 4 times the amount of gas as they are diesel right now, then gas would still be number one in overall consumption.

RE: Well, duh!
By maugrimtr on 3/13/2013 10:15:12 AM , Rating: 2
The numbers are not US based. The diesel growth may well occur in the rest of the world where the efficiencies have not been taxed out of existence.

RE: Well, duh!
By Mint on 3/12/13, Rating: -1
RE: Well, duh!
By Reclaimer77 on 3/12/2013 7:21:43 PM , Rating: 2
Why don't you rage more kid?

Until we implement a tamper-proof system of tracking big rig mileage, diesel damn well should be taxed far more than gasoline.

Where did I say it shouldn't be? I was simply pointing out the, obvious, barriers to mass diesel adoption for passenger vehicles.

You need to turn off your attack radar, chill out, and stop looking to take everything out of context.

RE: Well, duh!
By freedom4556 on 3/13/2013 6:03:53 PM , Rating: 1
Another factor is that gasoline is now watered down 10% with free (i.e., subsidized) ethanol, which drives down the price at least that much compared to diesel. That's worth 35¢ or 40¢ extra at the moment right there.

RE: Well, duh!
By Lord 666 on 3/13/2013 6:55:13 PM , Rating: 2
While reducing petrol fuel economy by about 20%. Its not free, taxes pay for it.

RE: Well, duh!
By Lord 666 on 3/12/2013 9:58:35 PM , Rating: 2
Policy change has nothing to do with what Americans purchase. In fact and to keep things easy, look through all of the diesel articles of DT in the past 12 months. Ford just stated if there was a demand, they would start producing diesel passenger vehicles. The new Cherokee (2014) and Ram come in diesel, but why skip over the minivan, who knows why.

Over 50% of all Volkswagens sold in the US are diesel. This lead to only the sixth time ever yearly sales have surpassed 300,000. They even just showcased their diesel hybrid three row SUV and sports car concept.

Anyway, my point is most Americans just have misconceptions stuck in their head from when diesels where dirty and slow while unable to see long term concepts.

RE: Well, duh!
By Reclaimer77 on 3/12/13, Rating: 0
RE: Well, duh!
By Reclaimer77 on 3/12/2013 10:25:04 PM , Rating: 1
And why the hell would I buy a VW, and suffer their horrible reliability and maintenance costs, when I could just buy a Mazda 3 for example?

Is the extra 3 MPG from the Jetta TDI worth the extra cost and horrible reliability ratings? I don't think so personally.

Seriously look up VW if you think I'm exaggerating. Pretty much every reputable source has them ranked at or near the bottom in quality and reliability.

I'm sorry but you've gotta get over this stigma that diesel fuel is the Holy Grail of the automotive world. I have nothing against the fuel, but if it's not in my best interests to go diesel, I'm not. In Europe the Government has structured the taxes so that it IS in your best interest to buy diesel. But here that's not the case. The cars have to compete on their own merits, which to be honest, haven't been that great so far.

RE: Well, duh!
By Lord 666 on 3/12/2013 11:13:28 PM , Rating: 2
I'm in NJ, born there too, but with foreign business travel including DoD. Huge proponent of the second amendment and eagle scout. Not bashing the United States, not even close actually. However, the average citizen cannot think past the next episode on the tube let alone ROI.

Agreed, diesel cars cost more to purchase and fuel. In NJ, its about 30 cents more per gallon and my oil change this past Sunday was $90 on the TDI for car whose sticker was 31,000 in 2006. As you said, any decent car nowadays should last at least 100,000. Agreed, mine has 150,000 on it and plan to run it until it completely dies, but even then the parts are worth something. I broke even around year four and we are on year seven. Business people would call that investment.

In fact, my CFO hates whenever I drive for business somewhere at 0.56 a mile since he knows it only costs me $57 to fill it once for a 500 mile round trip drive. Even factoring in 0.15 per mile ownership cost (its really less, but whatever), still works out to be $150 profit. Do that several times a year and its real money. In my case, its about $1000 unrealized extra revenue per year over the past seven years.

Almost all of the Jetta's I see on the interstate are TDIs with most of the Passats as well for good reason... diesels are highly efficient at constant RPM interstate driving. This Passat did 1600 miles on a single tank -

Sure, say whatever you want about VW. Fair enough, but right now they are the only cost conscious diesel option and more than half of their business is from diesel so they are doing something right. Chrysler is bringing on more diesels, all Audis will be soon enough, and MB always has a fair share. Honda missed the boat and plus you mentioned Mazda, still waiting for them as it would be interesting to see. Whatever happened to Nissan's plans? Ford too is missing the boat while they are getting laughed at for the miserable claimed economy. Hyundai should make a diesel, especially since they were also caught making false mileage claims.

RE: Well, duh!
By keith524 on 3/13/2013 9:55:42 AM , Rating: 2
Just pulling the MSRP off the VW website a base Jetta is $20,845 then you add in TDI and it's $26,225. That's 22mpg standard versus 31mpg for the TDI variant. Then using the national average diesel is $0.377 higher than gas. That means you break even at around 145,000 miles. If you put 15k per year on your car that's 9 years to break even. That's a piss poor ROI for most people. In fact most people would never break even. If you drive a lot then it might work for you but the vast majority of people the TDI is a bad deal.

Just for comparison I looked at the Ford Fusion Hybrid and it's base price is $27,200 and 47mpg. That means you break even at 75k miles which is much more achievable.

RE: Well, duh!
By Lord 666 on 3/13/2013 5:46:23 PM , Rating: 2
As you noted, it all depends on the use case. Road warriors with high percentages of interstate driving have a faster return than around-town usage.

Not sure about your numbers though. The VW site has the price of a stripped Jetta TDI for 24,155 while the Ford Fusion Hybrid starts at 27,200. Sure, its not an apples to apples comparision due to the options difference, but the ROI definitely changes. I am a definite fan of the new Fusion looks, but based on Ford's recent mileage claims and proven real-world mpg performance of VW diesels, its also not a fair armchair hypermiler comparsion. On paper vs reality, the numbers are different.

For my use case and at 25,000 miles per year, the best car would be a plug-in diesel hybrid followed by a pure diesel.

"Let's face it, we're not changing the world. We're building a product that helps people buy more crap - and watch porn." -- Seagate CEO Bill Watkins

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki