Saudi Energy Minister Describes EV Market As “Hype”

NOV 12 2018 BY EVANNEX 86


Could electric vehicles disrupt the reign of Big Oil? Apparently not. According to Arab NewsSaudi Energy Minister Khalid Al-Falih publicly downplayed, “what he described as the ‘hype’ of the electric vehicle market.” And he emphasized that “miscalculations around the pace of [vehicle] electrification could create ‘serious’ risks around global energy security.”

*This article comes to us courtesy of EVANNEX (which also makes aftermarket Tesla accessories). Authored by Matt Pressman. The opinions expressed in these articles are not necessarily our own at InsideEVs.

Above: Saudi Energy Minister Khalid Al-Falih (Image: Arab News)

At CERAWeek’s energy gathering in New Delhi, Al-Falih said, “Conventional vehicles today, despite all the hype, represent 99.8 percent of the global vehicle fleet. That means electric vehicles with 0.2 percent of the fleet, only substitute about 30,000 barrels per day of oil equivalent of a total global oil demand of about 100 million barrels. Even if those numbers increase by a factor of 100 over the next couple of decades, they would still remain negligible in the global energy mix.”

Taking another swipe at electric vehicles, the Saudi Energy Minister employs a well-worn soundbite from Big Oil’s misleading (and thoroughly debunked) FUD rhetoric. Instead of acknowledging a grid that gets increasingly cleaner every year, he deflects — pointing his finger at coal.

To that end, Al-Falih makes a sweeping claim that, “in many parts of the world, roughly three fourths of the electricity, which would also power electric vehicles, is currently generated by coal, including here in India. So you could think of any electric vehicle running in the streets of Delhi as essentially being a coal-powered automobile.”

Above: Recall that Fitch credit ratings agency forecasted Big Oil’s looming “investor death spiral” in connection with electric cars (Source: Financial Times)

Then, ignoring all breakthrough battery storage projects by Tesla and others, the Saudi Energy Minister declares, “When it comes to renewables, the fundamental challenge of battery storage remains unresolved — a factor that is essential to the intermittency issue impacting wind and solar power.”

Is the Saudi Energy Minister saying, in essence, long live fossil fuels? Apparently so.

When it comes to the energy sector’s timeline of going green, Al-Falih is betting on “gradual” growth — defying a trajectory that’s evolving in an increasingly rapid manner. He says, “that electric vehicles and renewables will continue to make technological and economic progress and achieve greater market penetration — but at a relatively gradual rate and as a result, conventional energy will be with us for a long, long time to come.” MaybeOr, maybe not.

*Editor’s Note: EVANNEX, which also sells aftermarket gear for Teslas, has kindly allowed us to share some of its content with our readers, free of charge. Our thanks go out to EVANNEX. Check out the site here.

Categories: General

Tags: ,

Leave a Reply

86 Comments on "Saudi Energy Minister Describes EV Market As “Hype”"

newest oldest most voted

I am so glad that Tesla didn’t take themselves private on Saudi money. When those wells run dry, what have they got, a lot of sand? Let’s reduce our combustion demand.

Indeed. The book “Burn Out: The Endgame for Fossil Fuels” by Dieter Helm is a great read on this topic. One key point is once EVs reach the point where people realize they will have a big impact on petroleum demand petroleum producers will have a big incentive to dump their supplies on the market to avoid being stuck with stranded assets. That point could come well before the actual impact on petroleum demand becomes significant.

If that were to happen gasoline prices would dive and many more drivers will stick to gas guzzlers. We need a carbon tax now.

Sadly you are correct that EV adoption could induce a bit of a negative feedback cycle and encourage people to stick with ICE vehicles longer. But, countering that would be companies and banks would be less willing to invest in petroleum extraction if/when they see the “endgame” is near.

You love Donald trUMP so much that you want to give him even more money? We do not need more tax increase, carbon or otherwise. We need more incentives (tax cuts) for EV that fund directly, not extra taxes that will be hijacked by politicians for other stuff (ie, backdoor subsidy to fossil fuel).

BoltEV, I both disagree and agree. We need both incentives and a carbon tax. Tax law can be written that requires carbon taxes to be used for EV and green tech incentives. The fossil fuel industries owe the world big time for hiding and obfuscating the damage their product have done to our environment for decades, both the atmosphere and the oceans. The carbon tax money could go towards cleaning up the mess too. It will take a lot of political will to do this and we have to keep pushing our representatives. I definitely agree that tax money is spent in ridiculous ways, no doubt, but a carbon tax doesn’t have to be that way.

“But a carbon tax doesn’t have to be that way.” Sounds like wishful thinking. BoltEV (was SparkEV) is 100% correct, the last thing we need to do is give the politicians (the Ds or the Rs) any more of our hard earned money. Tax incentives can accomplish the same goals as a carbon tax with the added benefit of removing power from WDC and putting it back in the hands of the people (those of us who pay the taxes) where it belongs. If liberals want to accomplish their environmental goals, they should do so thru tax incentives not new taxes as that will get some conservatives on board.

A carbon tax would place a ton of load on poor people like me who can’t afford a EV now.

If someone can spent $50,000 dollars on a Tesla I’m sure a carbon tax won’t affect them.

I personally think the EV’s are spreading well on their own I also don’t think we will see dollar a gallon gas anytime soon.

By the time any law would get passed, EVs will be perfectly affordable to anyone who can afford a car at all.

I know this is an American site, but the knee-jerk reaction to any tax proposal still confounds me. Taxes allow a society to do things that individuals cannot do. They can, of course, be stolen or misdirected. They also build roads, schools, hospitals, universities and sewers. And taxes on certain products shape demand. They are a market incentive to do certain things and not others. A carbon tax can be written so its revenue goes into funding green infrastructure. There can and should be rebates for low earners. The transition to clean energy cannot be accomplished by individuals. It’s a change of direction for a society and requires social and political action.

You must live in fantasyland where every politician you elect do good. In the real world every politician is crooked. They will twist the tax law for nefarious purposes and/or give to their buddies. Only the simple minded would trust guys like Donald trUMP and want to give him even more money.

Problem is especially severe in US where bulk of our tax money is used to kill people abroad. US keeps more foreign bases now than during the cold war, that should tell you something about obvious corruption. High taxes literally kill people.

Absolutely right, clearcut! I’m born and raised here, and I have never understood the staggering selfishness and ignorance that continues to run rampant here.

The problem is that, the same people who vote Republican, and therefore hate taxes on principle, elect Republicans to office, and they are the absolute epitome of gov’t waste and fraud! These are politicians who don’t believe in gov’t. When you keep electing people like that, then the gov’t is going to get worse and worse! It’s no surprise to me that cities like Flint, Michigan, had terrible water that nobody did anything about – their state-level gov’t has been majority Republican for a long time, busy cutting taxes, and thus cutting services, sabotaging EPA efforts and state-level environmental efforts, so it’s no surprise that the Republicans have poisoned their constituents. And, they don’t care – Flint still has no clean water. Now that that evil governor of theirs is gone, and a Democrat is in office, things have a chance of changing for the better up there.

You underestimate the market. The most likely outcome is that the petroleum will be used for other things like jet fuel, pharmaceuticals, and polymers. Because these have high value, I would expect the price of oil to increase

Yeah the royal family will have to move out of there palaces and back into tents. Trade in there exotic cars for camels. The whole Mideast region spends billions on weapons. Saudi Arabia spent 112 billion alone on weapons from the US the past 10 years. The good news when EV’s replace ICE. The middle east will become environmentally friendly living in tents and riding camels again.

I thought camel farts were bad for the environment? 🙂

Tesla has the hottest crustacean band, to be sure

When those wells run dry they have thousands of square km of empty, sunbeaten land to fill with solar panels. Actually they have the best country for the old and new economy.

Saudis have investments in more sectors you can imagine. When the end of petrol era arrives, they keep earning money with banks, trade, finantial services, chemical, manufacturing, luxury….

This guy won’t be saying this 10 years from now.

Go EVs !

He has a point EV market share is pitiful. I have been driving a leaf since 9/2012 and not one of my friends or family members have switched to EV. Not one. It is sad we need carbon tax.

We need more EVs from more manufacturers on the market.

WE also need a carbon tax to make it more expensive to damage the environment.

Sure – if you believe that the motives of reps who institute the tax will be to serve the common good. If you believe the funds will be more honestly invested by American politicians than by american businessmen. If you believe the US or state governments will invest the funds wisely, and with proper due diligence. If you believe that the technologies and industries to benefit will necessarily be those that will provide the most optimum solution to the problem, and that equal or better solutions won’t be disadvantaged in how the taxes are applied…. Look, how about instead of( or at least instead of only relying on ) taxes & incentives, the government instead focused on sharing expertise, facilities and resources with energy companies to defray the cost of pathfinding r&d and initial roll-out on eco-friendly alternatives that the industry could could not only absorb, but even gain revenue from – emerging alternatives such as drop-in replacement bio-fuels( sustainable once the cost of using ‘wet’ feedstock reaches parity with conventional sources) and enhanced geothermal? Meanwhile we could also focus on less controversial but still effective measures against excessive warming and CO2 such as restoring plankton levels in the ocean… Read more »

Incidentally, to clarify, I’m not implying that businessmen would be more( or less) prone to invest funds honestly than politicians. The point is that both logic and history show that both are incentivised to look to their own interests, which often align with neither moral nor the public good.

People paid 90% tax on the amount over $200,000 in 1950. Today we just want to kick the can down the road to our kids and grandkids. 2019 will get close to a trillion dollar fiscal year debt. Tax plan was yet another give away to the rich and corpoations. Interest on the debt is $350 billion this fiscal year and it will be higher because interest rates will rise. Whatever increase in wages will be eated up with higher mortgage payments. Borrow and spend is the GOP way.

Sorry Ron M, but you are wrong when you say “borrow and spend is the GOP way.” Do some members of the GOP favor that? Yes. Do many members of the Democrat party favor it as well? Absolutely. The only members of Congress I am aware of who have vocally opposed more borrowing belong to the GOP. If I’m wrong and there are Dems who are on record against more borrowing please enlighten me. The main point you miss however is that increasing taxes is not the only solution. You brought up the highest tax rate from 1950, well what was our federal budget in 1950? I’m not going to bother looking it up, but I know it was well south of 1 Trillion and it was likely below 100 Billion, vs today’s federal budget of over 4 Trillion dollars. Yes I understand inflation and those are nominal not real dollars, but still, 4 Trillion dollars man!!! We do not have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem, and that goes for the vast majority of both parties! The biggest problem is entitlements (SS, Medicare, Medicaid) which represent nearly 50% of our total annual spending and continue to get… Read more »

You think the biggest problem is entitlements SS, Medicare and Medicaid. So what you want is an America like GOP Hoover had where Americans waited in long lines for food had tent cities on the Washington Mall. Of course spending increased we have highways, AC in schools, GPS in cars, All I’m saying is the rich need to pay more and many of the rich agree. It’s just not Trump, Ryan, Koch Brothers, Adelson or the rest of the GOP congressman that work for the rich. GOP works for the rich and GOP middle class still haven’t figured that out.
I’m not saying that the rich need to be taxes at 90% like in 1950 but if we couldn’t balance the budget with the amount we were collecting we didn’t need to cut taxes on the rich and corpoations.
Also Bill Clinton had budget surpluses the last few years he was in office. Bush left office with a billion dollar deficit. So which party is fiscal conservative.

Never said I want a Hoover America Ron, please stop putting words in my mouth and let’s focus on facts. The rich already pay the vast majority of taxes in this country, that’s a fact. If some rich people think they should pay more there is no law preventing them from doing so, in fact the IRS has already setup a way for people to voluntarily pay more in taxes if they choose. I’m sure Buffet and Soros and all the Hollywood leftist elites regularly contribute large parts of their fortune to that fund. (Snark fully intended) Yes Bill Clinton had budget surpluses the last few years of his term. Do you remember who controlled Congress at that time? You know, Congress, that entity that actually creates the budget and decides how much to spend? The GOP, that’s who. Newt Gingrich, an actual conservative, led the House and was able to accomplish a lot. In the years that followed the GOP become more and more centrist and spent more and more money, until finally it was difficult for people to tell the difference between the GOP and the Democrat party, thus the GOP lost Congress in the Bush years. No… Read more »

The GOP passed the Trump Tax plan. When Obama became President he inherited a trillion dollar deficit, two wars and the great recession. VP Cheney said deficits don’t matter. When Obama left office the fiscal deficit was reduced in half.
Under GOP and Trump next year we will be close to a trillion dollar deficit again.
Oh as far as having a 4 trillion solar spending bill which is so much more than in 1950.You do understand that the population is much larger and there’s this thing called inflation.The rich pay and corpoations have never paid less as a percentage of earnings.

Newt was cheating on his wife while waving the holier than thou flag. Newt started the divide in American politics and lost all the debates with Clinton.

I just noticed a mistake it should read Bush left office with a Trillion dollar deficit .

Okay, so we had tighter control of the Federal budget back when we had a 91% top income tax rate. So we drop the top rate to 38% or 35% or whatever Trump reduced it to, yet government spending explodes. It sounds as though what we have is not a tax problem or a spending problem, per se. We have an entire populace that is incapable of doing what it used to be able to do; make hard decisions about who sacrifices what to get what.

By the way, the real military budget should include all the off-budget ongoing war scams, the nuclear programs hidden under the DoE, and veterans’ expenses. Which would push us close to $1 trillion.

We have a spending problem, period. If you don’t think our imperial federal government spending 4 Trillion dollars a year is too much, then I don’t know how to help you. Government spending did not “explode” under Trump. Here are the numbers from Bush thru Trump, my source is downsizinggovernment dot org if you care to look. Bush took over in 2001 with a $1.9 Trillion dollar budget, and by the time he left in 2008 it was up to $3.0 Trillion. Obama started in 2009 with $3.5 Trillion (big jump b/c of the so-called stimulus) and ended in 2016 at $3.9 Trillion. Trump was $4.0 Trillion last year and $4.2 Trillion this year. I would love to know your source for claiming the “real military budget” is close to $1 Trillion. Supposing for a moment you are right about that, it would be just under 25% of current federal spending. As I already pointed out, entitlement programs make up almost 50% of federal spending, so even with your unverified number Defense is no where near our biggest spending problem. Still, as a fiscal conservative, I support reductions in ALL FEDERAL SPENDING PROGRAMS including Defense. We either get our spending… Read more »

Of course were spending more on Social Security and Medicare we have an aging population. We stop collecting Social Security and Medicare after an individual reaches a certain i come threshold so raise the threshold. Why would you want to cut benefits for people who earned these benefits and depend in then. I never heard Paul Ryan calling his $150,000 pension and medical insurance plan called an entitlement. You never hear congress talking about reducing there pay or benefits. Hell some of them sleep in there office or a lobbyist home for free or almost free. Do you think workers at McDonald’s can sleep at McDonald’s because they can’t afford an apartment. Paul Ryan’s wife is a lawyer. The cheap ass is complaining about someone on welfare.

You fool – the Republicans have been “starving the beast” since Reagan. That was one of their big mottos in the 1980s: starve the beast. They knew that they could not dismantle the gov’t by stopping spending on things that helped people. Instead, they cut the taxes, tripling the deficit.

The Republicans continue to do so. Their rhetoric has been so strong that Democrats can’t raise taxes, even though they want to. It’s political suicide. Democrats fully believe in raising taxes to pay for new programs, but they can’t. So, they put the new spending into place, anyway, and let the Republicans hang for their ignorance.

That is one big reason why the midterms went for Dems. People are waking up and tired of the BS from the Reps. The trump tax cuts must absolutely go! And then, taxes need to go up more. The poor and middle class won’t see a tax increase – it would be reversing the decades of pilfering that the Reps have done to the Federal Income Tax.

I don’t know you, I love your spirit, but my guess is that you are either surrounded by truck-ophiles, you are outside of a metro, or nobody in your circles can afford a new car (and don’t know what a steal a used Nissan Leaf is). Maybe you live in a coal mining town in West Virginia. or near the Baker Oil Reserve. Is there an EV club in your town? Do you know a single other EV owner? If so, you could start one. Show up to auto shows and the state fair and do what you can for visibility. Maybe nobody in your circles will buy something today, but I think with the knowledge you are gaining by being a regular reader of InsideEVs (really, is there much else worth reading in the news?), you can certainly speak to the benefits. I think how you are will reach some people, but not everyone. Making a compelling, thoughtful argument for the person you are speaking with requires a whole lot of listening and thinking, it’s not like reciting a script. It’s selling, and not everyone has the skill naturally. If it makes you feel any better, I’m not as… Read more »

I’m a Silicon Valley brat, but my family all moved away to either suburbs of Sacramento or rural Central Valley. Convincing them to go EV is like pulling teeth. My dad thinks only PHEVs have a chance, but he (retired) doesn’t have any money to buy one. The rest drive huge SUVs and write me off like I’m a tree hugger.

And yet, at one point yesterday while coming home on the grapevine (I-5) there were three of us in Model 3’s driving alongside each other….. The wave has begun.

If you show people Leaf, they’ll laugh at EV. I’m not surprised none have switched.

Solution is not to give more money to Donald trUMP administration. Whether you call it carbon tax or not, you can be sure a-hole like him will use it for a-hole purpose. There will be more a-holes elected to office in the future to divert the tax money for evil purpose.

Mister G,

Maybe the reason that none of your friends or family members have switched over to EVs is that you’ve turned them off to EVs by yelling the same thing over and over at them, and they think you’re a bit off:



Same here, I got a Leaf last year and a Model 3 this year. Most of my smart engineer friends/families are very good at their work but when it comes to global warming which is an existential threat, they still have their thumbs up their backsides.

These guys will not be alive in 10 years. As the income from oil dries out they will be face revolutions like Gaddafi.

And this would be….good, from a standpoint of general pain and suffering? Or better than, say, a gradual economic diversification and evolution towards a model more like the UAE, with gradually increasing purchasing power and freedoms for it’s citizens? I’m not so sure.

It is too late for a gradual process. They should have started 30 or 40 years ago. They are now expelling immigrants at a record rate and trying to get locals to work and they are not liking that idea.

The UAE is backing the Saudi tyranny all the way in its aggression against Yemen and Qatar and Bahrain. Which means it will follow it into the great scheme those other acts were preparations for: a war across the Middle East to liquidate Iran and all the Shiite populations. That could make a whole lot of bad things happen in a hurry.

5 Years.

In a word…exponential

“Exponential”. Someone needs to inform Khalid al Falih of the practical implications of that concept.

Yemen has lots of oil in the ground.

“Global energy secured”

Yemen is still a KSA “work in progress.

Good NYT article today on the Saudi business of hiring assassins for Iranian problems.

Yemen … Ya Man !. ….Lotsa 0iL That in10yrs. Will Hopefully Be Of Little Use …. 🙂

If everything they say is True .. , Why are they so worried about t Electric Cars ..

Yes, and why are the Saudis investing a boatload of money in renewable tech? They speak out of both sides of their mouths.

Oil was discovered barely 100 years ago in the Middle East. New money, the oil countries in the Middle East think they’re the smartest folks in the room, simply because of their geological location. Middle East, enjoy your temporary time with your new wealth, because money is an illusion. Better look beyond The Now, as money can go away just as it comes.

And people wanted them to take Tesla private. Terrorist and journalist killing regime

Meaningless babble. Go for a drive in CA and tell me evs aren’t taking over. Oil demand is falling especially in the U.S. Many cities and even countries are planning to ban ice from their roads. Currently we have just emerged from a long glut of oil that the Saudi’s have been trying to draw down for years, now after just a few months of returning production to normal levels we are back into a glut, with oil prices falling worldwide. U.S. production is at its highest point ever, The Bakken, Permian, are producing tons of the gooey stuff, the Canadians can hardly move their “Tar Sands” sludge, because no one wants it at prices that makes it affordable to mine. A few months ago traders were hollering about $100 a barrel oil. Well, now it’s below $60 in the hottest economy seen in decades, at least in the U.S., but still oil is falling. Iraq is producing it like there’s no tomorrow, Even with problems, like in Venezuela, production is half of what it used to be, but their missing oil is easily compensated for. There’s plenty, it’s cheap, and it will last for years, Especially with falling demand… Read more »

“Oil demand is falling especially in the U.S.”

US oil demand has risen every year since 2012. Demand did fall from 2005-12. We are still below the 2005 peak.

They can go back to riding camels.

Camels are very Fuel Efficient Got no AC & They Fart a lot….lol…… 🙁

Oil is their economy. And, Saudi’s aren’t the brightest people.

A perfect example of how stupid the Saudis are that there didn’t realize the the Turkish Embassy would have listening devices all over the Embassy.
Trump called it the worst cover up ever, but he didn’t realize that Russia would have listening devices in the hotel room in Moscow that he allegedly brought prostitutes in to pee on the bed the the Obama’s slept in. I don’t know why he’s even dening it. It’s clear as day how much he’s hated Obama with everything he says and does.

There is a lot of hype involved, but the EV market is for real, even with these horrible batteries. When solid-state arrives, you’ll see demand for EV’s with solid-state batteries exceed supply for a long time to come. So, stick to camels, you oil-soaked desert dwellers, and leave the technological advances to Western society.

“It’s hype!! Understand!!” says Saudi Energy Minister “Or do we have to cut you up into small pieces!!”

This is the one time I’m glad to hear someone doesn’t believe in EVs. Let the Saudi’s sit in their oil land and dream of the world being reliant on them. They’ll wake up in a few years and realize it’s too late for them to do anything but let their oil fields rot unused.

Funny thing is that one of his predecessors, Ahmed Zaki Yamani, is generally credited with saying that the stone age didn’t end because the world ran out of stones, and the oil age won’t end because of a lack of oil…

(He wasn’t actually the first one to use that quote — but surely the most prominent use.)

Enjoy the coming 120-140 degree days and nights in the Middle East in coming decades, Khalid. No doubt it will happen, it’s too late to stop. All we can do is mitigate the damage, and fools like Khalid don’t think we even need to slow down at all. Keep peddling the same, tired arguments against renewables and EV’s, Khalid. The facts of reality will not care.

Watch out. They are taking the names of those who disagree. And will send death squads to respective countries.

Electric cars are not going to make oil go away. Even when there’s only EVs. Oil is required for many stuff, and oil necessity will probably grow elsewhere.
Having said that, EVs are the future, somewhere around 2030s I believe EVs sold will surpass other types of vehicles and it’s not going to stop there.

I think electricity is not sourced from oil in significant amount, but I’m not sure, would have to check.

Around 85% of the oil is used as fuel (45% transport, 40% energy&heating). 4% is used for plastic, 4% for chemicals and the rest has other uses (like asphalt). EVs will not make oil dissapear but they can hit it hard at the same time renewables do their part.

Strange, that’s very different from the numbers I saw a while back… (Don’t remember exact values — but petrochemicals were well into the double digits.)

I took the numbers from the website of the British Plastic Federation; the numbers they published are for global oil consumption.

I still think electricity doesn’t come from oil. Take the US – around 1% just. Coal and gas are basically all the non clean sources.
During the crisis of 2007/8/9 a small decrease in oil consumption had a huge impact on price, so I agree with you, if EVs can eliminate 10% (didn’t think much about this number) of oil demand that can make the oil prices go down like a rock.

There’s going to be more tons of plastic in the ocean than fish. Guess what you get when fish eat the small plastic that breaks down. Plastic packaging inside your salmon fillet.
We should be reycling and eliminating plastic as much as possible.

I think we are at the point were EV’s are common a example is I think we are at a point were you will see multiple EV’s on the road a day.

better buy up lithium and cobalt mines, a-holes!

What percentage of the Indian electricity production is based on coal?

Around 75%. In the US around 30%, Europe 25%. There are still countries like Poland or South Africa where almost all electricity comes from coal.

This guy sounds like how Blockbuster Video did when they dismissed Netflix and its “DVD by mail” and “internet streaming” as fads that would soon fade away because people enjoy going to a brick & mortar store to browse a limited selection of movies.

He isn’t entirely wrong. But let’s see what happens in the next 5-10 years as more EV’s show up on the market. Especially if oil prices start going back up.

He can say whatever he likes – but when they have used their oil, they’re in trouble. They (Saudis, and the other oil producers in the Middle East) don’t really work that much, as they get money from the state. They have imported a lot of workers from India, Bangladesh, Pakistan and so on, that works for peanuts. They are the once that do almost all the manual labor. They are the once that hawl the trash, They also have a liftestyle, that does not reflect their ability to produce goods they buy, or grow their own food. They should be desperate to start some kind of industrial production, get a control of the land, and make it furtile. Should probably invest hundreds of billions in solar panels, and desalination facilities. They should also super size the sahara forest project: See if they can bing cost down, and increase products they can grow (and export). There are lessons to learn from the forest grown in Egypt too. All vegetation is good, and will make the climate cooler, and the air less dry. They can also create proper soil this way: They have the funds to do this, and… Read more »

Coal powered cars are way better than gasoline powered cars. He makes it sound like running an EV on coal is a bad thing. It’s not. COAL POWERED EVs ARE AWESOME.

US should be funding EVs instead of solar and wind. Money spent building solar panels instead of EVs delays the transition to EVs. The U.S. has enough excess power generating capacity to run our entire transportation industry on electricity. We don’t need to build any solar or wind. It doesn’t matter that wind and solar are now economical. Building something you don’t need is always uneconomical. Besides, coal powered EVs will reduce pollution faster and more cheaply than building wind and solar. Once our transportation is mostly electric, we can turn our attention back to renewables.

These are dynamic processes, and both wind and solar have come down in price.

IN fact, Wind has become a Low-Cost-Provider of electricity – and Wind and Solar combined is the reason why you dont see many new Nuclear Facilities being proposed in the states, other than the 2 Westinghouse – Toshiba AP1000’s currently undergoing construction.

(There are currently only 2 reactors being constructed in the USA, since the 2 VC Summer Ap1000’s project was cancelled on July, 2017 due to lack of need for the electricity, and unexpected cost overruns).

Nuclear plants in the states are being retired at a far faster rate than they are being replaced – mostly due to the cheap wind and solar, and also because electric usage has decreased 2% even though GDP is up.

It would be nice if EV’s sold enough just to keep electric usage overall Steady. But even that benchmark is in the future.

I wonder if the reduction in electricity demand has anything to do with LED lighting and/or LED TVs? There are probably very few CRTs left in homes throughout the US, and the plasma TVs faded into history fast once the LCD (first CCFLs, now LEDs) came down in costs.

I also wonder if it has to do with people preferring laptops and tablets compared to desktop computers? Or the proliferation of Energy Star standards?

Maybe all the above?

It’s almost like he’s being paid to do exactly that.

Those shameless, murderous, petroleum whores will suck it soon enough.

My response to the energy minister of Saudi Arabia: I DON’T CARE!