Hacker News Reader

Comment by avrionov | Hacker News Reader

Some negative comments below, but this is good news. This is the sign that the electric cars on the streets have a critical mass big enough for Shell to invest. The second positive outcome is that if they are directly involved in the electric cars business, they will be one less company trying to stop the greener technologies.

With more and more electric cars on the roads, the demand for the gas stations will decrease and some of them will close. Finding a gas station will become more difficult. It seems that most of the other owners are not thinking long term what will be the effect on their business.

View on HN

I don't disagree entirely but...

We will see a lot from shat Shell does next. If they invest and expand the network, they can be the dominant player. That will show they're transitioning to the new era etc.

If they do nothing and let the network stagnate, that will delay Electric car introduction in the UK a lot.

Kodak famously developed the digital camera but couldn't bring themselves to cannibalise their own market. Will Shell now have the balls to do that or will they take the safer option and delay?

I think this is very different from the Kodak situation. They are responding to market forces - the electric cars. The charging stations will provide a new revenue stream for them and it help them to transition.

We'll see I guess. Personally, I think it would be brave of shell to trade petrochemicals for the electric hookup market. They'd be a middle man, in a competitive market, with no "moat" protecting them. Kodak could at least have sat on their patents for a while.

I honestly do hope I'm wrong.

I think there will be greater interest from Shell here because for a while now the margins from operating gas stations largely comes from the associated convenience stores. With the longer charging times (relative to filling up a tank of petrol) customers will spend more at this convenience stores.

It would be interesting to see what they can make of the market. 30min of charging time is a lot more opportunity to sell food, drinks, entertainment, etc. I wondered about a Michelin Star equivilent model: places you could stop for 30-60min, get food, be entertained. I could even see a model like a gym: pay a monthly membership stop off 2-3 times a week, charge, get fit.

It's like the opposite of fast food: I don't want to be in and out. I want to be here for at least 30min. I want comfort. I want entertainment.

Wow, really enlightening comment. I only ride a motorcycle myself so have never even thought about that.

One thing that could be driving this is the rise of Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) investing in the UK, and across the EU, due to regulatory changes.

I wouldn't be surprised if Shell's management are aware of ESG pressure from institutional investors.

That's true and I hadn't thought of that angle at all. If it saves them from investor divestment for another 6 months it's a steal!

/cynicism

I agree. Political opposition by fossil-fuel companies to renewable energy and everything climate change is a problem. But aligning their interests in this way is a positive step that may reduce or eliminate that opposition. Incentive alignment matters.

They of course could have just bought the network only to squash it.

Very unlikely. All oil companies see the writing on the wall for gasoline powered daily consumer vehicles especially in urbanized areas and that electric vehicles sometime over next 5 to 10 years will tip over as significantly more economically viable. So everyone is trying something or the other to get ahead of the trend. Eg middle east and norway, are trying to funnel their oil money into diversified holdings. Makes sense Shell will too

I'm less of an optimist, I'm betting theyre taking over to slow its growth while keeping the back door open for when they need to start focusing on it.

I think Shell has decided that it is in the energy business, no matter the source of that energy. Surely its executives can remember seemingly invincible incumbents in other industries that failed to cannibalize their products. That or they are taking the EU directive to phase out new petrol/diesel car engines in 2030 (ish) seriously.

Pretty much Shell is an European energy company, and due to that they are looking at climate change, and wanting to lead the transition. Mostly because they see that is the way the world is going to go, and they want to be in front and are being pretty open about it. They have been partnering with environmental organisations to increase environmental regulations in the US, and having made early investments, will likely come out ahead of Exxon and others if / when regulations get tightened.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com