Feed on

How come when folks read headlines like this, “An electric eGallon costs three times less than real gasoline!” that they (correctly) don’t worry about all of the jobs that will be destroyed in the oil and gas sector?

We’ll dig into their calculation later to check for its accuracy.

UPDATE: Link updated. Those of you who looked earlier now know where I am headed next week!

5 Responses to “Creative Destruction Only When It Suits My Biases”

  1. Speedmaster says:

    >> “An electric eGallon costs three times less than real gasoline!”

    Do they mean it is 1/3 the price? I always find statements like “three times less” to be very awkward.

  2. coyoteblog says:

    I love the photos but your link is wrong

  3. coyoteblog says:

    Two possible things going on here
    1. They have their thermodynamics wrong, e.g. http://www.forbes.com/sites/warrenmeyer/2010/11/24/the-epas-electric-vehicle-mileage-fraud/
    2. With the right fuel, energy via hydrocarbon combustion in power plants can be cheaper than energy via gasoline engine combustion. The reason is that gasoline is really expensive vs. other hydrocarbons. To get gasoline they start with the sort of filet mignon cut of the barrel of oil and do a ton of refining, plus it has to meet expensive state and local blending requirements (e.g. by buying overpriced ethanol) AND it is taxed more per btu than other fossil fuels. Per BTU, methane/natural gas is less than half the cost of gasoline right now, I believe.

    • RIT_Rich says:

      Right. A modern power plant, regardless of the fuel, is going to have higher efficiency than an internal combustion engine. So by default, they would use less “fossil fuel”, and their fossil fuel is much cheaper than gasoline to begin with. But, it is probably not 1/3.

      Ironically, modern coal power plants would offer the most efficient and cheapest means of producing electricity. I wonder if this is an advertisement by the DoE for coal power 😉

      PS: An electric car is a good idea by itself. Electricity is a more efficient way of extracting and transporting energy than the current system. Unfortunately, it’s been turned into something quite different by politics.

  4. Harry says:

    Great posts all.

    Even though the term creative destruction is appealing to me and other capitalists, every time I encounter the phrase I cannot help think about the destruction part, which is the expense part of the income statement. Be creative, just do not destroy me.

    Freedom does keep us on our toes to make sure revenue exceeds expenses. Here, I write about my own money, in contrast to the political class talking about how they use other people’s money, a big difference.

    Laissez faire, et laissez les bon temps roulez, et vive Bastiat. Screw the French socialists.

Leave a Reply