Disqus - Latest Comments for gregordotus

Re: China’s Passenger Electric Vehicle Sales Jumped To 91,000 In January, Suggesting 2 Million Total Sales In 2019 — CleanTechnica Report

gregor.us — Wed, 20 Feb 2019 16:53:51 -0000

Interestingly, both IEA and EIA and other forecasters are still over-focused on the imminent decline of oil demand in the OECD the next two decades, while still anchored to the idea that Non-OECD oil demand will keep growing. I have a contrarian view, here. I think oil consumption decline will be gentle from current levels in the OECD and the decline could get very rapid in the Non-OECD because, as you can see, China the leader is literally conducting a revolution in transport.

And finally just to answer Max's question: yes, I already had 2 million total EV sales (EV+PHEV in both passenger and commercial market) for this year. And yes again, it appears we are already on track for total EV to grow again by nearly 60% YOY. But now we come to the big number: the market share of total EV to ICE. I am again in agreement, we are ready to seriously lift-off here. I already have 7.5% in my spreadsheet.

Meanwhile, the oil market, after correcting once will probably have correct again.

All best,

www.gregor.us

Re: Fossil Vehicle Sales Are Officially Now Decreasing In China, Europe, & US

gregor.us — Sun, 17 Feb 2019 12:29:23 -0000

A very good round up and it comes in the background of many analysts, including the IEA, having claimed for years now that the arrival of EV would have no effect on gasoline demand, because the initial EV wave is too small. That's not true, of course. Road fuel (gasoline + gasoil and diesel oil) fell last year in China and gasoline consumption fell in the US. Not by much. But, small declines nevertheless.

My twitter thread goes over much of this interplay between the peak of ICE and the inevitability that EV are about to control marginal growth:
https://twitter.com/GregorM...

Re: PredictIt | Will Brett Kavanaugh be the next confirmed Supreme Court justice?

gregor.us — Fri, 28 Sep 2018 17:55:04 -0000

Yup, good point. The only way to get volatility is to get market participants who are true believers. As Keynes would say, you want to play the other players.

Re: PredictIt | Will Brett Kavanaugh be the next confirmed Supreme Court justice?

gregor.us — Fri, 28 Sep 2018 17:29:40 -0000

Obviously don't know where this contract will close, but there's a very good risk-reward proposition that *before* it closes it's going to get beaten up some, if not a lot. For those of you who've watched prediction markets over the years, the contracts tend to get very volatile as you approach key dates, and given this fresh week that lays ahead, you have to believe uncertainty will weigh down on the contract. Look at it this way: this contract has plenty of time now to rally to a new high, and doesn't have to make that decision for a while. So it would make sense to play the downside. But even if you don't agree with this analysis, you probably agree that volatility is going to increase with the daily news flow for at least 5 days now. In other words, this is a good contract for traders to play in both directions. Bonus: notice my post offered no political opinions.

Re: Much to Do about (Vacant) Lots

gregor.us — Mon, 10 Sep 2018 10:57:26 -0000

This is a great story. Bravo to the writer, and the editor. All best, G

Re: Trek’s 2019 520 Disc Touring Bike

gregor.us — Wed, 22 Aug 2018 11:42:43 -0000

Looks as heavy as a palette of bricks.

Re: Planning for the Other Detroit

gregor.us — Wed, 30 May 2018 12:23:41 -0000

Thanks for the question, and also the information that the US Census Bureau has just released the 2017 udpate.

The reason it is statistically accurate to describe Detroit's population as having stabilized, is that the rate of its population loss has decelerated dramatically from prior periods, having fallen just a half a percent in 2016 v. 2015 (0.51%), and now, having fallen just a third of a percent in 2017 v 2016. (0.35%). If the city's population rose by equal amounts, one would still generally use the stabilization term of description. Such changes, at those levels, are not statistically significant. Put another way, they aren't far outside the margin of error, and are likely subject to revision.

By contrast, in early periods, Detroit lost population at much higher rates from year to year.

Thanks for reading.

Re: Planning for the Other Detroit

gregor.us — Thu, 24 May 2018 12:43:09 -0000

Thanks very much for this, India. I have located what appears to be a working email for you, and have sent you a detailed response, with related thoughts, to that address. If that does not come through, please feel free to email me at gregor (at) gregor.us for follow up. Best, G

Re: Planning for the Other Detroit

gregor.us — Tue, 22 May 2018 12:35:54 -0000

Yes, that's right. My city, Portland, also has a comparable amount of square miles--almost exactly: 145 Portland vs 139 Detroit. And the populations of the two cities are also comparable: 638.9 thousand in Portland vs the latest Detroit figure of 672.8 thousand. The current difference is that large swaths of Portland are covered in forested hillside, and one of the largest city parks in the US. Moreover, where there are single family homes on larger lots as you fan out from the city center, those lots increase in size. As a result, the more thickly settled land of Portland outside of the forest(s), river, and downtown is roughly 65% of the total land area. And even Portland can at times feel like it has a lack of density.

In my most recent trip to Detroit, just last week, I did have a thought: the Woodward spine from Campus Martius up to New Center and the Fisher Building is starting to fill in--albeit from very, very low levels of density. This is a good start, and I would conjecture the areas around New Center/Fisher have further recovery phases to enjoy, binded as they are now via the Q Line to the waterfront. Of course, should such an outcome occur, there will still be vast tracts of the city remaining. Something akin to a great park may eventually be the solution.

Thanks for reading.

Re: Inside / Out at White Industries in Petaluma, California

gregor.us — Sat, 21 Apr 2018 21:08:42 -0000

Just upgraded the wheelset on my 2014 All City MM Disc, with a fresh pair of White Industries CLD hubs and some H Plus Son Hydra rims. Too wonderful for words.

Re: Demand growth now the focus for oil market

gregor.us — Mon, 12 Feb 2018 13:29:02 -0000

The four year recovery in US oil demand growth has now ended. Gasoline demand was down somewhere between 0.3% and 0.8% in 2017, and total petroleum may have produced a small increase. We await the final revised data over the next 8 weeks. More broadly, we are now in the 18th year of the new mlilenium, with 45 million new people added to the US population, but oil demand in 2017 remained below the level recorded in the year 2000. https://www.eia.gov/totalen...
Also notable, total fossil fuel demand in the US is now back to 1997 levels. Oh, and one more: total consumption of energy from all sources has never made it back to the highs of last decade.

It appears the global oil industry has got itself into position to overproduce right into the face of a secular slowdown (again) in oil demand growth. The growth slowdown need not be dramatic, sudden, or steep. It only needs to be gentle to have broad effects because, after all, these are the commodity markets and commodity markets are wildly sensitive at the margin.

There is no question that the decade long problem of oil demand growth in the OECD has been nicely papered over by the robust growth in the Non-OECD. It appears the oil industry has told itself a story, that this counterbalance will continue indefinitely, or at least long enough for the industry to prepare.

I actually think the oil industry could enjoy another 2-4 years before having to face an painful reckoning, as long as the 5 billion people in the Non-OECD continue to take up small per capita increases in oil consumption. After all, 5 billion is a big number. In a way, however, it would be better for the industry to have to face its looming demand problem sooner, before it has a chance to increase investment even further.

Watch California.

All best, G

Re: Not the Road Ahead

gregor.us — Tue, 26 Dec 2017 18:31:37 -0000

"Your Uber Car Creates Congestion. Should You Pay a Fee to Ride?"
https://www.nytimes.com/201...

Re: PredictIt | Who will win the 2017 U.S. Senate special election in Alabama?

gregor.us — Tue, 12 Dec 2017 23:16:39 -0000

Roy Moore at two cents. Even that's greater than his moral worth.

Re: PredictIt | Who will win the 2017 U.S. Senate special election in Alabama?

gregor.us — Tue, 12 Dec 2017 21:41:17 -0000

Boom.

Re: Planned Community On Boston South Shore Will Be Laboratory For Sustainable Cities

gregor.us — Sun, 12 Nov 2017 11:47:37 -0000

Nothing new here. Looks like a parking lot, interrupted by buildings.

Re: Can oil's rally last?

gregor.us — Fri, 10 Nov 2017 11:52:33 -0000

As a demand bear, even I've been surprised by failure of US summer demand to eclipse 2016's summer demand, thus putting 2017 US demand for both petroleum more broadly, and gasoline more narrowly, on a flat YOY path. This surprising outcome has now been reflected in EIA's demand revisions to STEO, in which each of the two quarters composing 2H 2017 have been revised downward. We were not exactly working with a large demand growth forecast anyway, coming into 2017--maybe 1% at best. So, the EIA's downward revisions, in the 10ths of percentage points, are actually meaningful.
https://www.eia.gov/outlook...

The result; 2017 gasoline demand growth will at least be flat--and based on the weeklies through the first 44 weeks, may even be down.

We know a couple of things. EIA had already projected that US demand for petroleum was on course to reach a second, lower peak in 2019. We also know that EIA projects that even in a moderate global EV adoption case, 2018 will see a peak in petrol demand for Light Duty Vehicles. Finally, we've got the sub markets of California, and now as you point out, the UK and France showing signs of a sudden leap ahead from some of these broader projections. Policy levers are kicking in in California right now against ICE vehicles, even as EV sales in the major markets of CA are already achieving rates above 5%.

My current view is that just as that OECD oil demand stabilization thesis was starting to come together, it's about to break down again. I think it's happening right now, and will become more clear over the next 3 quarters.

Re: The Last Oil Cycle is Now Behind Us

gregor.us — Mon, 02 Oct 2017 13:14:59 -0000

Typically, the way large systems are transformed is not through direct substitution but through a new branching of industry, as the system moves forward through time. Ergo, it's difficult to quantify replacement--and also difficult to define replacement. Rather, it's the long process of turning over a global fleet of ICE vehicles through the accumulation of each, individual purchasing decision of a new unit, on a micro level.

More broadly, it's useful to remember that without forward growth and development in the economy, it becomes exceedingly difficult to turn fleets of any kind of infrastructure over. That said, retirements of existing fleets of infrastructure certainly can allow for turnover even in systems that aren't growing. The US powergrid is a good example of this particular pathway: the coal fleet really did reach the terminus of its lifecycle just as wind and solar power costs came down into the economic/affordable window. Accordingly, even though electricity demand in the US has been flat for a decade at 4000 TWh per year, coal's inevitable decline has made way for new wind, new solar, and new natural gas.

For everyone following this current transition in the auto sector specifically, I recommend watching the most basic metric: the slowing and then the flattening or even decline of new ICE vehicle sales, as EV sales growth bolts higher. As I've pointed out, we are already there in the US: ICE sales growth has peaked and EV sales growth is very strong.

Re: Wind turbines are neither clean nor green and they provide zero global energy

gregor.us — Mon, 25 Sep 2017 19:28:21 -0000

I feel bad for Matt. Not only did he get all the wind data figures wrong, but he's so confused about energy that he used TWh as the unit of account to describe the total growth of energy from all sources, 2013-2014. This article does not reflect well on Matt's honesty, or competency: https://twitter.com/GregorM...

The Spectator should print a full correction that covers the correct market share of wind in primary energy (1.2% in 2014, and 1.4% in 2015) and also cites the very wrong use of TWh (what was needed there was Mtoe). It gets worse, however. Because even if you accepted the very non-standard translation of Mtoe to TWh to describe total primary energy from all sources, Matt's use of "2000 TWh" doesn't get the marginal increase correct either. It's impossible to understand how he builds a case, therefore, on top of this obviously wrong 2000 TWh base. Indeed, it's impossible to understand from where he is producing this annual growth figure of 2000 TWh.

The entire article is shambolic. Telling: the comments are almost entirely about beliefs and opinions. Few even bothered with the underlying facts.

Re: Developers target historic Detroit district for $6 million housing development | Crain's Detroit Business

gregor.us — Sat, 23 Sep 2017 20:34:37 -0000

Design priorities are all wrong here. Solar should be an integral part of the structure, and better, these should be passive-houses. The tip-off is the two car garage: like, it's 2017 not 1977. The aesthetics look great. But again, if one is going to invest in Detroit--a city recovering from the zero bound--why not choose the leading edge?

Re: US Fossil Fuel Consumption Has Peaked, and Will Never Return

gregor.us — Tue, 08 Aug 2017 15:08:11 -0000

Texas is amazing. Here is the percentage of Texas electricity use that was provided by combined wind and solar, in the first five months of this year:

20.83% May
26.25% April
25.60% March
22.08% February
19.02% January

Of course, the majority of that share is Wind power.

Re: Foreign Investors Are Snapping Up US Farms

gregor.us — Fri, 04 Aug 2017 15:38:07 -0000

There are a number of problems with this story, but of course, as always, (most of) the comments are worse.

1. The growth of foreign investment in US farmland has slowed, not sped up, in recent years. Significantly. The story links to a 2011 USDA Report on foreign ownership of US farmland and claims "this is the most recent data" but actually a 2014 report is the latest USDA report. It shows that foreign ownership grew by only 3.8% between 2011 and 2014, from 25.7 to 26.7 million acres. At least the story did highlight one relevant stat: out of approximately 950 million acres, foreign ownership accounts for, at best, 3% of all US farmland.
https://www.fsa.usda.gov/As...

2. The story failed to mention that the search for foreign farmland is a global phenomenon, and starts back in the late 1990's, and accelerated 2000-2010 during China's industrialization. Inward investment in US farmland is very small compared to the capital going into Africa from both Asian and Middle East countries. The latter have water and arable land problems, and will continue to do so.

3. The story should have mentioned that farmland values have started to flatten, over the past three years. US farmland prices experienced two upwaves--the first was huge, coming off the lows of 2000, and crested around 2008 with farm values nearly doubling. The second wave was smaller, and leveled out about 3 years ago, with farmland values seeing roughly another 50% gain. Irony: low farmland values are associated with extremely tough conditions for farmers. Values rising has been a blessing, not a curse. See page 5 of this USDA PDF
http://usda.mannlib.cornell...

Finally, who exactly is nervous about the incredibly small level of inward investment in US farmland? Very few. Except of course, if you are driven by feelings and paranoia, rather than the facts.

The rising value of farmland in the US has had nothing to do with the tiny amount of inward foreign investment. It's had everything to do with the first wave of China industrialization, and, (if you understand markets) that US farmland was in a bear market for nearly 15 years, 1985-2000.

Prediction: if US farmland values start rising in a third wave, guess what, new farmland will be put into use. Yes that's right, the US has spare capacity in farmland. One example was the conversion of many grass-seed operations into farmland after the housing bust.

Conclusion: foreign investors tend to care about their investments, and often undertake improvements. That they represent a tiny 3% of the market has in no way impeded the explosion of young people going into farming, or the flowering of new, small food and beverage companies in the US.

It's all good, Mother Jones!

Re: Building Blocks to a World of Flat Emissions

gregor.us — Tue, 21 Mar 2017 17:43:24 -0000

You may be right. Just stepping back a bit, there is still a long tail of oil-based heating apparatus, primarily in the US Northeast–though, these systems have been steadily replaced–especially in municipal and institutional buildings. But looking ahead, what would make heat pumps more competitive and would help them to scale would be a transformation of building materials especially in the domestic market, such that insulation standards were prodded to higher levels.

Re: Oroville Dam and the Infrastructure Policy Swirl

gregor.us — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 23:12:55 -0000

Yes, you could make a new argument that Oroville is not attractive for P3 because of its vulnerability to California rainfall. But, if California emerges from its drought period--as it has in the past--then that argument loses its explanatory usefulness. The reason I thought Oroville was a good candidate to talk about infrastructure is that in my canvass of infra professionals over the past year, I concluded that these two classes of infra are important to think about. In other words, the infrastructure issue is fairly complicated, even after one sets aside the competing fiscal philosophies that often drive policy making. In a way, you could read me as predicting, generally, that any infra plan from the current administration will generally come down on one side: away from many needed projects, and will focus on the cash flow.

Re: How to Add a Bitcoin Donate Button to Your WordPress Site

gregor.us — Tue, 14 Feb 2017 16:39:01 -0000

BitPay absolutely positively will NOT allow you to accept donations on your website unless you clear a regulatory hurdle to classify your operation as a Non-Profit. The contents of this article are now quite wrong. Hope this helps.

Re: Peak Coal, They Said: Questions Persist about Fossil Fuel Scarcity, and the Economics of Natural Resource Extraction

gregor.us — Sat, 03 Sep 2016 10:58:32 -0000

Test.