Another detailed and informative article. However, as I continue to research (for my upcoming second book), it appears that batteries alone will not lead to a successful transition away from oil in the transport sector. In reality, if every passenger vehicle globally were battery-electric, this would only reduce oil demand by 25%.
The answer is hydrogen; not just for the transport sector, but for other oil use cases also. Within the transport sector for example, the US freight association have stated unequivocally that hydrogen will be the only possible zero emissions technology that will make commercial sense. For aviation, the answer is the same, and most manufacturers are already testing hydrogen engines for regional and long haul flights. For farming, mining and construction vehicles that need to be available 24/7, hydrogen is also the only option.
Following transport, there is then seasonal energy storage, heavy industry (the largest emitter globally), gas turbines, chemicals, home heating etc.
Really, hydrogen should be a priority to replace oil to start with, however very few refuelling stations are yet being built in the EU or the US. This should change as new laws come into effect (and if promised subsidies are paid out), but the oil industry is very protectionist as they understand very well that batteries do not present a structural threat. Essentially, lobbying is the greatest barrier as the data and narrative (even for example as provided by the IEA and others) remains firmly fixed on 'renewables + batteries', which on their own will not bring about an effective transition.
This may change however: China are building 1,200 hydrogen refuelling stations by 2025, and prices are comparable or lower than petrol or most diesel applications today - potentially a lot lower in the future as the grid decarbonises.
If governments had better data reflecting this, there might be more motivation to start building these refuelling stations. And realistically, if/when this shift occurs, there should not be that much actual risk to the economy (or pension/insurance funds) - for the main reason that only 17% on average of most investment portfolios are invested in fossil fuels; and as you correctly identify, oil has not historically been a strong performer.
So there should be less worry about a shift to hydrogen, and really less wishful thinking about the potential for batteries by planning agencies. Of course, the climate issue is the main problem, and will start becoming incredibly destructive for both the finance industry and the broader economy as inflation rises, and losses start to increase.
The new tax credit subsidy for hydrogen in the US is likely to initiate this shift, and 7 main US hydrogen hubs are built. But if lobbyists and policy groups sidline the industry, oil use could remain resilient for decades.
https://www.hydrogeninsight.com/transport/hydrogen-will-be-the-only-viable-economic-choice-for-zero-emission-long-haul-trucking-us-freight-body/2-1-1431470
