PART ONE
many claims are made , even here on ATS that " free energy " devices are [ if released onto the market ] going to cause the sudden collapse of the
" big oil " ,
but would it ? IMHO it would not , and here is why :
1a REDUNDANCY
there are 100s of millions of engines and powerplants running on various petroleum fuels – are all of them going to be instantly retired ?
just building sufficient “ zpe “ devices would take years
1b CAPITAL COST
this is an issue that " zpe proponents " rarely address - the capital cost of replacing existing petroleum engines with " zpe " devices
a “ ZPE powerpant “ of whatever size is going to have a capital outlay
assuming that the “ zpe device “ could be made as a “ unit replacement “ for conventional power plants
as opposed to the requirement to buy an entire new vehicle
a typical car engine costs [ new] from 1500 to 4000 pounds
a typical commercial vehicle engine [ capable of the HP and torque required ] costs 3 to 10k
marine diesel engines [ of the type illustrated below ] cost millions / unit
the cost of one piston and cylinder liner is £50k , yes fifty THOUSAND
assuming that “ zpe devices “ have comparable cost / HP Kw/h output
that is 100s of millions of ponds of “ suddenly redundant “ plant that has to be retired – and then REPLACED with the new “ zpe “
equivalents
are you going to scrap your perfectly good car engine – and spend 2k + on a replacement ??
2 AVIATION
the aviation industry would have very little use for ZPE , in any form
ZPE cannot replace a jet engine - so all applications currently using jet engines or rockets would still require petroleum fuels
could "ZPE" replace turbo props / turbo fans / piston engines ?
I personally doubt it - firstly - because conventional electric motors cannot deliver the SHP [ shaft horse power ] or torque required to operate an
aircraft prop
So the aviation industry will continue to rely on petroleum – that sector alone would continue to provide “ big oil “ with a revenue stream
And as I opine below – as they would
stay dependant – the oil companies would be free to adjust prices upwards to maintain profit levels
3 PETRO CHEMICALS
a - lubricants , mineral oils and greases , none of these can be replaced – our “ dependence “ on mineral oil lubricants will remain
b - plastics / composites and hydro carbons , we use , or are dependant on the use of
almost all are sourced from petroleum – ZPE cannot replace the hundreds of kilograms of plastic products in your home
see also the argument in part two [ relating to pricing ]
many people are shockingly ignorant of just how vast the range of products that are
chemically dependant on petroleum derivatives
almost every thing in our homes uses some none energy petrochemical in its production
even things that do not appear to have any link [ paper , textiles , metal , wood ] are secretly dependant at the manufacturing stage
the textiles , paper and lumber industries still use large quantities of petrochemical products [ b] not energy – which ZPE cannot replace
4 SCALABILITY
to a degree this has already been addressed – but an important issue is is its scalability – a ICE [ internal combustion engine ] engine can be
scaled from this :
a model aircraft engine weighing just 400 grams
to this :
Or larger – a marine diesel of 20ooo SHP output – weighing 2000 tons and above
Can “ zpe “ motors deliver such flexibility ? even if they can – at what cost ? see the arguments for redundancy and capital cost .
I realise it goes in a circle – but that is real life , Something ZPE proponents blissfully ignore
PART TWO
what would " big oil " do in reaction to a " rival " zpe device hitting the market
while I am loathe to project , it is my view that it would make little difference
the hundreds of millions of application currently using [ dependant on ] petroleum would still need fuel – and by economic / practical necessity ,
still be used
during the “ transition phase “ as petrochemical dependant applications were retired
they would adjust their pricing structure and marketing , the price of fuel oils would IMHO fall slightly – simply to encourage uses to keep ICE
engines in service
the theory is simple , if you already have a working ICE engine – bought and paid for – in order to justify the premature retirement of that unit
then the procurement cost – and running cost of a zpe replacement must be lower than the running cost alone of the ICE plant – at least for the
next phase of its service life
now if fuel cost dropped – the incentive to retain the ICE plant in service would be increased
thus – ICE power plants dependant on fuel oils would remain in many applications
also – using the principle of supply / demand – “ big oil “ would be at liberty to simply hike the cost of petrochemical derivatives which we
cannot survive without
thus what ever “ savings “ we make by freeing ourselves from petroleum fuels – would be lost to the increased prices of plastics
infact we would be doubly screwed – as we would not only be paying the capital outlay of conversion to ZPE , we would also be paying the price hikes
of petroleum derivatives
so – you could argue that it would be profitable for “ big oil “ to actually market ZPE devices – lol
PS – if you disagree with my contention that “` we cannot survive without “ none energy petrochemical products
Please start by telling us why we still use petro chemical energy ?
END
This is just a few off the cuff views / thoughts – ideas , corrections and counterpoints welcome .