BS: Oil will run out

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Ed T
Date: 19 May 10 - 07:29 PM

Heeeeere's China:http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12501039/

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Ed T
Date: 19 May 10 - 07:25 PM

What does China not actually own behind the scenes, including in the USA, since they hold a good portion of their huge debt?

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: gnu
Date: 19 May 10 - 06:48 PM

Canada's? You mean China's oil supply in Canada, right? Because they are gonna own it soon enough.

And Pierre is spinning in his grave.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Ed T
Date: 19 May 10 - 05:39 PM

"Despite environmental and economic challenges, Canada's oilsands could account for more than one-third of U.S. oil supply within two decades, says a new report from U.S.-based Cambridge Energy Research Associates"

Read more: http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Oilsands+could+supply+third+within+years+report/3046507/story.html#ixzz0oPitS8N8



http://www.vancouversun.com/business/Oilsands+could+supply+third+within+years+report/3046507/story.html

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Amos
Date: 15 Jul 08 - 06:07 PM

Subject: exporting oil

http://www.cnbc.com/id/25518912

As Oil Firms Seek Drilling Access, Exports Set Record

By Reuters | 03 Jul 2008 | 03:23 PM ET
Font size:

While the U.S. oil industry wants access to more federal lands to help
reduce reliance on foreign suppliers, U.S.-based companies are shipping
record amounts of gasoline and diesel fuel to other countries.

(Emphasis added)


A

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Q (Frank Staplin)
Date: 23 Mar 08 - 12:03 AM

So that's where the dinosaurs went.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Barry Finn
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 11:16 PM

They also WMD's aimed at US, let's attack, now!

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,peak oil is a fraud
Date: 22 Mar 08 - 10:09 PM

"That said, data from the Cassini probe orbiting Saturn has shown that the ringed planet's moon has "hundreds of times more liquid hydrocarbons than all the known oil and natural gas reserves on Earth," according to research reported in the Geophysical Research Letters. The stuff is literally falling from the sky...."

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2008/02/titans-organic.html

So, if oil is fossil fuel, this PROVES that dinosaurs existed on Titan.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: pdq
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 10:04 PM

Oil ain't renewable on a **human** timescale.

Consider that point granted. However, there is at least 100X as much oil as has been estimated by fossil fuel believers. Maybe 400X as much.

Coal is a fossil fuel. I used to have a piece that had fossilized ferns in it. Coal is almost 100% carbon and is not of the same origin as crude oil.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 09:42 PM

Oops, GUEST at Date: 21 Mar 07 - 02:40 PM was me, saying that previous GUEST is full of a renewable animal byproduct.

Made it quite confusing.

Oil ain't renewable on a **human** timescale.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: The Fooles Troupe
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 08:00 PM

"not "decayed fossil fuel" at all; it's renewable"

Ah - well this abiotic stuff is supposed to come from large chunks of carbonaceous goop thrown out by stars decaying, that got caught up in the crust as the earth formed and is being slowly converted - the problem is that this IS a fixed amount - so it is NOT infinite... :-) Trying to claim so IS Bullshit!

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: pdq
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 06:11 PM

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Peak oil is a fraud - PM
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 01:40 PM

Peak oil is a fraud.

Over a hundred years ago a group of wealthy individuals and businesses began forcing the world economy onto oil and the internal combustion engine. Simple formula: control all oil reserves, limit the building of refineries, control oil exploration, and suppress rival technologies.

The first technology to be done away with was steam. The world should be running on water today, but it's not because of the efforts of the oil cartel. Other energy sources are suppressed just as ruthlessly.

The primary players in the oil market are the British and Dutch royal families (owners of British Petroleum and Shell), and a few conglomerate companies controlled by lesser families and banks.

                         {edited to size}

__________________________________________________________________________________________

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 02:40 PM

Yup, Teribus, you are correct. And this is bullshit too:

"The world is swimming in newly-discovered oil, but it's not being publicized. Improved technologies are showing there's lots more oil than was ever suspected. **And it's being constantly replenished by forces within the earth (not "decayed fossil fuel" at all; it's renewable).**"

Emphasis mine.

__________________________________________________________________________________________

I copied GUEST's statements in case they get deleted. It looks kinda dumb responding to a post that no longer exists.

Actually, GUEST may be close to correct on all counts. The British royal family certainly has a large financial interest in British Petroleum.

Here is a statement (=quote) about Royal Dutch Shell and the royal family of the Netherlands:

"As Queen, Beatrix wields more power than most of Europe's reigning monarchs. In domestic matters, she has little political say; however, in international relations, the Queen has much more latitude. It was once reported that she threatened to dismiss a cabinet minister if he turned down her request to open a Dutch embassy in Jordan.

According to a 2005 Forbes Web Site report, the Queen's personal wealth is estimated at $4.7 billion. If this estimate is indeed accurate, it makes her one of the richest people in the world. It is also believed, however, that the Queen's assets are tied up in stakes in Royal Dutch Petroleum (now 60% of Royal Dutch Shell), among other companies.

She has been a long-time member of the Club of Rome and the Bilderberg group."          ~ Wiki


About the source production of oil, put "abiotic oil" into your search engine and check some of the results. It ain't just one man's opinion.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bill D
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 03:53 PM

"... it's being constantly replenished by forces within the earth (not "decayed fossil fuel" at all; it's renewable)."


This is a *theory* developed and pushed by ONE MAN. I heard about it a couple years ago. As far as I know, NO serious geologists support his claim, and he has done almost nothing to prove it.....do you know something new? It certainly is not at a level to be made a flat statement.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 02:40 PM

Yup, Teribus, you are correct. And this is bullshit too:

"The world is swimming in newly-discovered oil, but it's not being publicized. Improved technologies are showing there's lots more oil than was ever suspected. **And it's being constantly replenished by forces within the earth (not "decayed fossil fuel" at all; it's renewable).**"

Emphasis mine.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Teribus
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 02:35 PM

The primary players in the oil market are the British and Dutch royal families (owners of British Petroleum and Shell), now that's pure Bullshit.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Peak oil is a fraud
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 01:40 PM

Peak oil is a fraud.

Over a hundred years ago a group of wealthy individuals and businesses began forcing the world economy onto oil and the internal combustion engine. Simple formula: control all oil reserves, limit the building of refineries, control oil exploration, and suppress rival technologies.

The first technology to be done away with was steam. The world should be running on water today, but it's not because of the efforts of the oil cartel. Other energy sources are suppressed just as ruthlessly.

The primary players in the oil market are the British and Dutch royal families (owners of British Petroleum and Shell), and a few conglomerate companies controlled by lesser families and banks.

The world is swimming in newly-discovered oil, but it's not being publicized. Improved technologies are showing there's lots more oil than was ever suspected. And it's being constantly replenished by forces within the earth (not "decayed fossil fuel" at all; it's renewable).

In the 60's and 70's the oil monopoly realized it would need a myth firmly implanted in peoples' minds to get them to go along with increasing gas prices, so the "peak oil" scam was unveiled. Essentially, on a graph of available oil, the roller coaster is now going downhill.

Pure bullshit. Peak oil doesn't exist except in the media and government-subsidized universities. If newly discovered fields were tapped and an adequate supply-and-demand number of refineries were built, you'd be paying a dime a gallon for gasoline.

Or governments could promote steam power, which makes more sense.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: dianavan
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 01:02 PM

Thats an excellent article, Saul. I hope people will read it and realize that they must start preparing for these changes in their lives.

Better public transportation in the cities is a start but I do wonder how people that live in rural areas will cope without public transport. Many are dependent on trucks and, in fact, trucks are an essential tool for many. I think living outside urban areas(unless you're a farmer) will be considered a luxury. Actually, I already think that way.

Its the people in the suburbs who will find themselves in big trouble without a car. Thats why developers are now thinking in terms of building up rather that creating more suburban sprawl. High density housing is the wave of the future. Any land that is still remaining, will have to be used for agriculture.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: saulgoldie
Date: 21 Mar 07 - 12:28 PM

This'll make you think...

http://ww.alternet.org/envirohealth/47705/

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Teribus
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 12:11 PM

Very old news freda.

Saddam Hussein signed PSA agreements with Russian and French companies in exchange for weapons prior to Desert Storm and between 1991 and 2003 . As to who has what in Iraq at present please refer to the following:

Oil Exploration and Development Contracts with the former Iraqi Regime and Foreign Companies (source: World Markets Research Centre):
West Qurna Phase 2 (Lukoil - Russian);
Majnoon (Total - French);
Bin Umar (Zarubezhneft - Russian);
Nasiriya (Eni - Italian, Repsol - Spanish);
Halfaya (BHP - Australian, South Korean consortium, CNPC - Chinese, Agip - Italian);
Ratawi (Shell - Netherlands);
Tuba (ONGC - Indian, Sonatrach - BVI);
Suba-Luhais (Slavneft - Russian); Gharaf (TPAO - Turkish, Japex - Japan);
Al-Ahdab (CNPC - Chinese);
Amara (PetroVietnam);
Western Desert (ONGC - Indian, Pertamina - Indonesia, Stroitransgaz - Russian, Tatneft - Russian)

Only one PSA has been signed since March 2003 and that was for a small developement (Tawke Field) in the Kurdish North of the country the agreement having been signed between the Kurdish regional government and a small independent Norwegian company, DNO ASA.   The company, which is the operator of the block and has a 40 pct stake, the production sharing agreement was signed with the Kurdish authorities in June 2004.

From your article freda:
"oil majors such as BP and Shell in Britain, and Exxon and Chevron in the US, would be able to sign deals of up to 30 years to extract Iraq's oil."

Shell is the only named "major" of the "evil" USA/UK alliance that appears to be named. Unfortunately the Shell in this case is Dutch (Shell always has been a Dutch Company) But no BP, No Exxon, No Chevron. What you do have are previous agreements made with the Ba'athist Government being honoured with predominantly Russian, French and Chinese oil companies. This should not be all that surprising as they represent the countries who supplied Saddam Hussein with most of his weapons (93.4%):

Russia - supplied 68.9% of all weapons and military equipment between the years 1973 and 1990
France - supplied 12.7% over the same period
China - supplied 11.8% over the same period

But no doubt the same old chestnut will be trotted out regarding this "War for Oil" Myth. Here are the figures illustrating where the USA imports its oil from, in reading these please try and remember there are some here who want you to believe that the US and UK invaded Iraq to steal their oil:

October 2006 Import Highlights: Released on December 27, 2006
Monthly data on the origins of crude oil imports in October 2006 has been released and it shows that two countries have each exported more than 1.4 million barrels per day to the United States. Including those countries, a total of five countries exported over 1.0 million barrels per day of crude oil to the United States (see table below).

The top five exporting countries accounted for 66 percent of United States crude oil imports in October while the top ten sources accounted for approximately 86 percent of all U.S. crude oil imports.

The top sources of US crude oil imports for October were:
Canada (1.704 million barrels per day),
Mexico (1.481 million barrels per day),
Saudi Arabia (1.322 million barrels per day),
Venezuela (1.125 million barrels per day),
Nigeria (1.049 million barrels per day),
Angola (0.506 million barrels per day),
Iraq (0.505 million barrels per day),
Algeria (0.449 million barrels per day),
Ecuador (0.315 million barrels per day),
Kuwait (0.234 million barrels per day).

Total crude oil imports averaged 10.132 million barrels per day in October, which is a decrease of 0.571 million barrels per day from September 2006.

Canada remained the largest exporter of total petroleum products in October, exporting 2.144 million barrels per day to the United States. The second largest exporter of total petroleum products was Mexico once again (1.646 million barrels per day) which was a slight increase from last month of 0.077 million barrels per day.

Now, I may be a simple sailor, but if they need 10.13 million barrels of oil a day, and they decided to invade a country to "steal" it's oil, I would have thought that they would have selected a country that would be able to supply them with more than 500,000 barrels per day, don't you? Oh, and of course they are not "stealing" it they are paying for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: freda underhill
Date: 08 Jan 07 - 09:14 AM

The Spoils of War - How the West will profit from Iraq's most precious commodity

So was this what the Iraq war was fought for, after all? As the number of US soldiers killed since the invasion rises past the 3,000 mark, and President George Bush gambles on sending in up to 30,000 more troops, The Independent on Sunday has learnt that the Iraqi government is about to push through a law giving Western oil companies the right to exploit the country's massive oil reserves.

And Iraq's oil reserves, the third largest in the world, with an estimated 115 billion barrels waiting to be extracted, are a prize worth having. As Vice-President Dick Cheney noted in 1999, when he was still running Halliburton, an oil services company, the Middle East is the key to preventing the world running out of oil.

Now, unnoticed by most amid the furore over civil war in Iraq and the hanging of Saddam Hussein, the new oil law has quietly been going through several drafts, and is now on the point of being presented to the cabinet and then the parliament in Baghdad. Its provisions are a radical departure from the norm for developing countries: under a system known as "production-sharing agreements", or PSAs, oil majors such as BP and Shell in Britain, and Exxon and Chevron in the US, would be able to sign deals of up to 30 years to extract Iraq's oil.

Critics fear that given Iraq's weak bargaining position, it could get locked in now to deals on bad terms for decades to come. "Iraq would end up with the worst possible outcome," said Greg Muttitt of Platform, a human rights and environmental group that monitors the oil industry. He said the new legislation was drafted with the assistance of BearingPoint, an American consultancy firm hired by the US government, which had a representative working in the American embassy in Baghdad for several months.

Britain and the US have always hotly denied that the war was fought for oil. On 18 March 2003, with the invasion imminent, Tony Blair proposed the House of Commons motion to back the war. "The oil revenues, which people falsely claim that we want to seize, should be put in a trust fund for the Iraqi people administered through the UN," he said.

.. the often-stated aim of the US and Britain was that Iraq's oil money would be used to pay for reconstruction. In July 2003, for example, Colin Powell, then Secretary of State, insisted: "We have not taken one drop of Iraqi oil for US purposes, or for coalition purposes. Quite the contrary... It cost a great deal of money to prosecute this war. But the oil of the Iraqi people belongs to the Iraqi people; it is their wealth, it will be used for their benefit. So we did not do it for oil."

Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Defense Secretary at the time of the war and now head of the World Bank, told Congress: "We're dealing with a country that can really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon."

The perception that Iraq's wealth is being carved up among foreigners can only add further fuel to the flames of the insurgency, defeating the purpose of sending more American troops to a country already described in a US intelligence report as a cause célèbre for terrorism.

Despite US and British denials that oil was a war aim, American troops were detailed to secure oil facilities as they fought their way to Baghdad in 2003. And while former defence secretary Donald Rumsfeld shrugged off the orgy of looting after the fall of Saddam's statue in Baghdad, the Oil Ministry - alone of all the seats of power in the Iraqi capital - was under American guard.

The largest beneficiary of reconstruction work in Iraq has been KBR (Kellogg, Brown & Root), a division of US giant Halliburton, which to date has secured contracts in Iraq worth $13bn (£7bn), including an uncontested $7bn contract to rebuild Iraq's oil infrastructure. Other companies benefiting from Iraq contracts include Bechtel, the giant US conglomerate, BearingPoint, the consultant group that advised on the drawing up of Iraq's new oil legislation, and General Electric. According to the US-based Centre for Public Integrity, 150-plus US companies have won contracts in Iraq worth over $50bn.


WHAT THEY SAID

"Oil revenues, which people falsely claim that we want to seize, should be put in a trust fund for the Iraqi people"

Tony Blair; Moving motion for war with Iraq, 18 March 2003

"Oil belongs to the Iraqi people; the government has... to be good stewards of that valuable asset "

George Bush; Press conference, 14 June 2006

"The oil of the Iraqi people... is their wealth. We did not [invade Iraq] for oil "

Colin Powell; Press briefing, 10 July 2003

"Oil revenues of Iraq could bring between $50bn and $100bn in two or three years... [Iraq] can finance its reconstruction"

Paul Wolfowitz; Deputy Defense Secretary, March 2003

"By 2010 we will need [a further] 50 million barrels a day. The Middle East, with two-thirds of the oil and the lowest cost, is still where the prize lies"

Dick Cheney; US Vice-President, 1999

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: saulgoldie
Date: 08 May 06 - 05:30 PM

I fergit the source, but hasn't it been suggested that oil discovery peaked in 1965, and that we are on the downside of the graph now with even more demands on a dwindling supply?

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bill D
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 05:56 PM

I can visualize electric cars charged with wind turbines, and cars fueled with bio-diesel for 'some' purposes..etc...but aircraft? Do they have a way to fly not based on petroleum?

Right now, the high cost of oil is just telling Canada that it is profitable to dig up half of Alberta and process oil sands....and Western US has Oil SHALE......they just won't give up till the last cup of oil is refined...

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 04:05 PM

I believe that energy will be the next growth area,
Ideally nuclear fusion would provide cheap unlimited energy,
we know it works because thats the way the Sun works.
Cheap energy would really solve a lot of other problems as well.

fusion is a long way away is still a long way away.
I expect there will be a number of alternative energy sources
wind, tidal, biofuels solar etc. that will come online when
oil really does become expensive. Right now the average Canadian
spends $1300 a year on gasoline, which is not a lot compared to the cost of a vehicle (it still not economical to purchase a hybrid for the savings in gas) although environmentaly with the total costs calculated in, probably makes more sense.

some problems are being solved such as storing of wind power.
Spanish wind farms are installing systems that will store excess energy ...sorry for the cut & paste - linking didnt seem to work

Hydrogenics Awarded Contract by Gas Natural to Deliver Hydrogen Station to Spanish Wind Farm
Tuesday January 31, 7:30 am ET
Leading European Utility Using Hydrogen to Capture Excess Wind Power

MISSISSAUGA, Ontario--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 31, 2006--Hydrogenics Corporation (TSX:HYG - News; NASDAQ:HYGS - News), a designer and manufacturer of hydrogen and fuel cell systems, announced today that the company has been awarded a contract for over EUR 500,000 to deliver a hydrogen station to Gas Natural SDG, a Spanish-based energy services multinational with approximately ten million customers in Spain, Latin America, Italy and France (www.gasnatural.com).

ADVERTISEMENT
Gas Natural will use a Hydrogenics' HySTAT(TM)-A Hydrogen Station at the Sotavento Galicia wind farm to produce up to 60 Nm3/hr of hydrogen. The hydrogen will be used to fuel an internal combustion engine generator, which in turn will supply electricity to the electric grid.

Presently, the Sotavento Galicia wind farm produces more electricity than can be delivered to the grid and the excess "green" electricity cannot be stored or delivered to the electrical grid, resulting in lost revenue. By powering the HySTAT Hydrogen Station with the excess wind energy, Gas Natural will now provide the means to capture high value electricity that otherwise would have been lost and utilize it to make more electricity for the grid than was achievable in the past.

"This project demonstrates the role that hydrogen can play as an energy carrier," said Pierre Rivard, Hydrogenics President and Chief Executive Officer. "One of the biggest challenges with wind power is that unused energy can not be stored for later use when the wind isn't blowing. Hydrogen solves this problem. As we will prove at this location, excess electricity from wind can produce hydrogen to fuel an internal combustion engine, essentially turning that excess wind power back into electricity that people can use."

The project at the Sotavento Galicia wind farm is completely green and is the sixth project that Hydrogenics has announced with various worldwide customers where hydrogen stations are powered by wind or solar energy. This latest hydrogen station, complete with outdoor housing and auxiliary equipment, will be installed and commissioned by September, 2006.

ts due to numerous factors, including changes in the competitive e arise after the date of this release. The forward-looking statements contained in this release are expressly qualified by this.

Hydrogenics Corporation (TSX:HYG - News; NASDAQ:HYGS - News)

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: robomatic
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 02:15 PM

That's a reasonable start, Amos. I presume when you derived the gasoline equivalent of a home's use of electricity you were using the theoretical absolute energy content of the gasoline, which a heat-engine (of which internal combustion is an example) can only reach 50% as a MAXIMUM and in practice only reaches maybe 20-30% in efficiency (of turning the gasoline into mileage). I remember a Scientific American article comparing high efficiency of transport. First came railroads, then came bicycles.

The other problem is the distinction between energy consumable as fuel and energy dispensed over the grid. Nuclear energy primarilly goes into the grid along with hydro as big sources of energy which don't produce carbon dioxide as a waste product. Transportation via the grid as I have mentioned above can be done efficiently as Europe and Japan have been doing by a great investment in electrification of the rail system.

Aviation is vulnerable to high fuel costs, but there has been a lot of research into 'beaming' energy at aircraft, which would promote high efficiency in air transport.

We can also hope that the fusion energy problem gets licked, so that we can derive vast amounts of energy through this process.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Amos
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 12:47 PM

The average home uses about 30 KWHs a day (not including transportation).

This is the equivalent in joules to about the total energy in a single gallon of gasoline (about 120.6 megajoules). For a year, this rounds up to 44,019 megajoules for the home.

If an average car drives 15-20,000 miles a year and in doing so (for the sake of estimation) uses 1,000 gallons of gasoline, it will consume about 115,000,000 BTUs of energy, the equivalent of 33,500 KWHrs or 120,600 megajoules of energy.

So what is needed is a method of independently providing a home+car with about 165,000 megajoules per year of energy for house and one car. For a two car family, make it 285,000 megajoules.

This estimate is distorted to the high side because of the inefficiency of a car's mechanism which loses large proportionate amounts of its energy in unnecessary drains such as wind-resistance, heat-loss, and so on.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: autolycus
Date: 10 Feb 06 - 12:21 PM

CarolC - I think guest's point is that we could and could have saved a lot of time, and helped ourselves, if we don't wait until Our Glorious Leaders speak the truths. They usually arrive very late to the party, when we're that much nearer the brink. Tho' James Lovelock, of Gaia fame is one who thinks it's too late anyway.

Auto.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 01:53 PM

Well done, Sweden!


Now Bush is repeating it and people suddenly want to listen.

That's ok, Guest,09 Feb 06 - 12:41 PM, as long as he says it and people listen, that's what matters. We don't help bring about the needed changes if we criticize people for changing.

If Bush is able to bring our energy economy in line with what the world (and the environment) needs, and if he follows Sweden's lead by doing it without increasing our use of nuclear energy, I will be grateful to him for it.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 12:41 PM

>>While we continue to throw away plastics when we've finished with them we are discarding a valauable resource as well as damaging our fragile eco-system. If we re-cycle more plastics now, we could at least partially reduce the impact of future oil shortage on our industry and our lifes.<<

Jimmy Carter proposed doing things like that back in the 70s and was called a liberal pantywaist. Now Bush is repeating it and people suddenly want to listen.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 12:23 PM

I agree with Wolfgang that before oil runs out it will get too expensive to burn it.   The problem is that there will be wars, starvation and death fighting for the oil as it gets more scarce.

New wind power is getting very competitive with new coal or new gas plants.   The problem is that it can't compete with existing coal plants and that the people managing our energy purchases (I am not talking about Washington) are only looking at short term costs.

It is a very scary proposition.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Wolfgang
Date: 09 Feb 06 - 11:55 AM

Sweden plans to be world's first oil-free economy

Good idea. As oil gets more expensive (and less reliable) any market economy will soon develop alternatives. Oil will never run out, it will only get too expensive to burn it.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Paco Rabanne
Date: 15 Apr 05 - 12:01 PM

Well played Leadhead! I have been out most of the day and so couldn't do battle with you. But, we'll meet again!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Leadfingers
Date: 15 Apr 05 - 05:46 AM

Wheres Ted ?? thats a 200 !!!

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Leadfingers
Date: 15 Apr 05 - 05:45 AM

You undo the sump plug , and YES ! The oil will run out !

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petrt
Date: 14 Apr 05 - 08:37 PM

the calculation in hubbertspeak.com thats interesting is that if you
were to calculate all the energy in the estimated oil reserves in the world - that is the oil already used up and the oil still in reserves -
it would equal the 24hours of the suns energy that strikes the earth.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 14 Apr 05 - 04:39 PM

I was at the Federal Reserve Bank Energy Seminar a month ago.   Stephanie Balltels from the EIA division of the Department of Energy gave one of the presentations.   An interensting tidbit:

In 1971 the oil reserves for the world were estimated at 200 billion barrels.   Since that time we have pumped 400 billion barrels and the oil reserve is estimated today at 209 billion barrels- more than in 1971.   That is because of costs and technology we have discovered new sources and reserves such as the Gulf of Mexico.

I am a big fan of renewable energy but have grave concerns.   About 20 states in the country have mandated standards.   According to Global energy Solutions in California, but 2020 we will have a shortfall of 52,729 MW with an investment of $53.4 billion dollars just to meet the mandated standards.   76% of this is supposed to come from wind energy.   I just don't see how that is going to happen.
That doesn't even account for voluntary programs or new mandates.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Apr 05 - 04:33 PM

Indead bacteria has been found a mile down. As far as the surface bios[here goes, it is predominantly insectoid.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,mg
Date: 13 Apr 05 - 03:39 PM

True...Iworry about its shock absorption properties in the earth's crust.plate tectonics and all. But the good news is that kudzu will never run out; sewage will never run out. Food packing waste will never run out. We aren't using what is at hand like we should be. But I am positive that they have patents and engines just waiting to run on whatever. That doesn't mean we wouldn't have a world-wide depression or war waiting for them to be built...but I am sure they are up and running somewhere.. mg

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Wolfgang
Date: 13 Apr 05 - 01:20 PM

I did wonder where Donuel did get that from and I've found a site about a man and an idea that might appeal to Donuel's fondness for the fanciful:

Fuel's Paradise

Judge for yourselves:
The belief that oil would run out, and that those with a source could always increase the price, caused the early-'70s oil crisis. That, to my mind, is a completely stupid attitude

I don't believe he's right except perhaps in some minor details, but not in the large picture.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Donuel
Date: 13 Apr 05 - 12:46 PM

To the complete surprise of many oil geologists - some abandonned and depleted oil wells in the Gulf of Mexico have begun to refill.
Not much is known about this phenomenon in other oil reserves around the world but it is well worth watching.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 13 Apr 05 - 12:33 PM

well PHEV vehicles are becoming very popular and intriguing --
(in Business Week article) these are hybrid vehicles such as the prius
which are modified with a larger battery pack is added and are recharged.
The car is plugged in overnight and can typically travel 50km before switching over to gas.. Since most daily commutes are 30kms? or the number of times one needs to gas up is very low. Also the power used is offpeak electricity. Of course theres still a way to go, modifying a vehicle will void its warranty, and Toyota still has no plans in making a Plug in Hybrid Vehicle but possible consumers may make the choice themselves given ever higher gas prices..

OF course if everyone switches over then there would be more demand for electricity..

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: saulgoldie
Date: 12 Apr 05 - 09:52 PM

But wait, there's more:
http://www.truthout.org/issues_05/041205EB.shtml
We are truly doomed.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: saulgoldie
Date: 04 Apr 05 - 09:21 AM

Here it is:

http://www.alternet.org/envirohealth/21588/

See that? Just over the horizon...NUKES! I mean, what else is there? We haven't supported research and incentives for alternatives since about the last "oil crisis," and "President Oil" is not likely to any time soon. Enjoy your SUV while you have it.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 03:10 PM

What? You clicked on a perfectly smooth and symmetrical Gaussian curve with no axes and expected science ? ! ? ! ?

I never clicked on it before. Now I see what you mean.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Wolfgang
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 01:08 PM

I see what you mean, but it hasn't worked with me: I first have seen their attention-grabber logo, have then seen that the logo is clickable, have clicked on it hoping to get more information and they wanted to sell me T-shirts.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 12:47 PM

Don't mean to be argumentative, but the graph without axes and a "we are here" warning is the attention-getter at the top of the page - surely intended more as a banner or logo than as the "meat" of the site. In fact, from there, you are one click away from graphs with axes, and tables with actual data (and links to both pro- and con-Hubbert analyses). So, I guess the specific graph that you label as propaganda is, in fact, propaganda... but in the same way that any logo or banner is propaganda. With little effort, it is quite easy to get to the actual information below the logo.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Wolfgang
Date: 17 Feb 05 - 05:49 AM

TIA,

I do not consider Deffeyes 'propaganda', only the site in your second link. The way they draw a beautiful bell-shaped curve with no axes given and state confidently 'we are here' including the perfect prediction where we go from now is hubris. They use a result which I consider serious in the way of propaganda.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 04:40 PM

Wolfgang:

Perhaps I misunderstand you...I'm not sure why the opinion of the geologist I cite (Deffeyes of Princeton, author of a book favorably reviewed in Scientific American) is "propaganda", and the opinion of the one you cite (Laherrere of unspecified affiliation, author of a proposed - and not yet reviewed? - submission to the Canadian Oil and Gas Journal) is "more than propaganda". Not saying yours is wrong - he or she makes good points - just puzzled about your criteria for "propaganda".

And, yes, that there will be a peak in oil production is "trivial" in the mathematical sense of the word, but it is not "obvious" to the uninformed (namely politicians) and it is far from "inconsequential".

The exact time is quite open to debate, but I (and many geologists) believe that "soon" is a fair characterization.

Like you, I welcome the end of oil, but I also fear it at the same time. If our leaders would acknowledge that the end of oil is coming, and foster a smooth transition to alternative energy, the world would benefit greatly. However, if, as they appear to be doing now, they ignore the inevitable, and grasp and claw and invade and kill for the last drops of oil, the world will greatly suffer.

I am afraid that it is no accident that the current US administration - composed largely of oil people, and awash in oil money - has done nothing to promote alternative energy. Instead they invaded oil-rich Iraq for reasons that better suit oil-less North Korea.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Wolfgang
Date: 16 Feb 05 - 09:54 AM

TIA,

the 'we are here' on your second link made me smile. Someone is taking a model prediction with all inaccuracies at face value. But I think it is thought as propaganda and as such it is good. Who wants to read more than propaganda, could have a look at:

THE HUBBERT CURVE : ITS STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES

That there will be a peak in oil production, eventually, is trivial. The exact time when this will be is open to debate. I hope it will be soon for that will mean one of two things and I'll be glad about each of it:
(1) oil is getting more expensive so that alternative sources of energy production are economically competitive.
(2) alternative sources of energy production are getting cheaper by themselves with the same result.

I predict that this will be a smooth transition driven by the price of energy.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 11 Feb 05 - 05:37 PM

The US past its Hubberts Peak in the 1970's. I.e., US oil production is in decline. It has not completely run out, but it is the late afternoon or evening for US oil.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 11 Feb 05 - 02:28 PM

In 1914, the US Bureau of Mines estimated that oil would last for another ten years.
In 1939, the US Department of the Interior was a bit more optimistic: 13 years.

Were they talking about oil from locations in the US? My understanding is that with the exception of a few areas such as the north slope in Alaska and things like oil shale, the oil did run out in the US some time in the last few decades (sometime in the '60s or '70s?).

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 11 Feb 05 - 07:33 AM

Funny you should mention a Princeton Professor. Give a listen to what this one says (about the coming "Hubbert's Peak"
in global oil production...Hubbert was a famous geophysicist, yet to be proven wrong). We should all be very worried. This is not conspiracy theories and quackery. It's darn good Earth Science. I learned about Hubbert's Peak as an undergraduate in the 1970's. Back then it was untested, but it has proven true (so far). However, Hubbert's prediction is ignored or impugned because the economic and geopolitical implications are just too painful to face, and it's too late to do anything. (We could try !?! )

BTW, if you go to the Hubbert's Peak clicky, go down the summary page and check out the chart showing the "time to depletion" for oil-producing nations. Isn't it a strange *coincidence* that the USA is past it's peak, and Iraq (along with Abu Dhabi) has the longest predicted time to depletion?

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Wolfgang
Date: 11 Feb 05 - 07:06 AM

In 1914, the US Bureau of Mines estimated that oil would last for another ten years.
In 1939, the US Department of the Interior was a bit more optimistic: 13 years.
Quite consistently, the same Deparment stuck to its 13 years figure in 1951.
Prof. Frank Notestein (Princeton): "We've been running out of oil ever since I've been a boy"

Stanley Jevons (Britain): "It will appear that there is no reasonable prospect of any release from future want of the main agent of industry", and he gave a bleak outlook that the industrial revolution would soon come to a halt. We was writing about coal and the year was 1865.

A source of similar errors predicting a quick running out of resources in the past is:
Simon, Julian L.; Guenter Weinrauch & Stephen Moore, 1994. 'The Reserves of Extracted Resources: Historical Data' , Non-Renewable Resources 3: 325–34

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Kaleea
Date: 08 Feb 05 - 03:07 AM

A few years back, I visited an Mennonite family in a rural area. The Mr. was the baker in the community, and used propane to fuel his ovens, refrigerator, freezer. Even the display cases in the bakery in which he offered dairy & meat products from other members of the local community. He pulled the propane tanks where they were to be filled, with a horse drawn wagon. They had no electricity, and used oil burning lamps. I did notice, as we first drove up, an interesting little thing up on the roof of the bakery. My friend noticed it too, but when I gave an explanation, he informed me that I was totally incorrect because they didn't use such modern high tech things. I later asked the gentleman, and sure enough, he confirmed the solar collector on the roof. It powered some batteries he used. Along with a few lights, & other things, the one "modern" thing from the outside world he allowed himself, was to listen to his portable radio while he worked in the bakery all day.
   Isn't the space station run on solar power?

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 07 Feb 05 - 05:16 PM

Auggie, I assume youre being facetious there. The environment and the beaver managed to do quite well before the dept of Natural Resources and your state came into existence.
Beavers do actually enhance the environment by flooding forested areas
which gradually fill in and become open meadows and bring other wildlife in. Lakes do have a certain life cycle and rivers do change direction.

on the topic of streams and micro power generation - I happened to talk to a couple of engineer friends of mine on the weekend and their view was that in order to do any significant power generation you need a fairly large volume of water and at least a 10ft drop. (There is a formula - for power generation) Unless its a really large and fast stream though its unlikely you will get enough to power everything in a household (ie a stove or a dryer have a much larger load than your lights)

having said that though I still think its a great idea to have some auxiliary power generated by stream - and if leftover sell back to utilitity - I know they already do that in some European countries.

I think future power generation will likely be a combination of many different forms of energy be it, hydro, solar wind, tidal geothermal
nuclear -

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Auggie
Date: 05 Feb 05 - 09:55 PM

"oh and dams (at least small onces) arent necessarily all that bad, the beaver actually enhances the environment by building dams"

Whoa there Guest Petr. You sure don't work for the Department of Natural Resources in our state. One of their favorite pastimes is removing those little dams you're so fond of,whether man-made or beaver made. Their reasons for doing so are legion and include the dams causing alteration of natural flow patterns,fragmentation of habitat,blockage of migration corridors, degradation of water quality, alteration of temperatures and oxygen levels, fluctuation of water levels causing either stranding or flooding of fish and wildlife, and the list goes on and on.

Environmental enhancement? They sure don't think so.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 09:45 PM

Ironically, robomatic, I was not quoting you. I didn't have time to read the thread you posted the link to until just now.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 08:14 PM

Hey Im all for small scale power generations,

but regarding your point - its free money.. (only after youve paid your investment of a power generator)

and Id really like to know how many killowatts a small creek can generate.. if its enough for a household, and if you have some leftover to sell to the utilities.

but Id like to see tax breaks, (or carbon tax incentives) for geothermal heat pumps, wind, tides and solar roofing material - and slap the difference on the 'performance' guzzler vehicles.

(oh and dams (at least small onces) arent necessarily all that bad, the beaver actually enhances the environment by building dams- a flooded area eventually becomes a meadow and increases the variety of fauna)

and development of Anwar will also affect the Porcupine Herd.
(the Caribou that is along the porcupine river)

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: robomatic
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 06:48 PM

LOL Carol, thanks for quoting me! That is absolutely correct, so our society will have to make a determination as to whether that is a worthwhile tradeoff.

BTW, at the West end of the oilfields, Alpine, they constructed a facility without a road. They used ice roads for construction. They automate a great deal of it, keep a minimal staff and a short runway. It has proven to be very productive.

Have a great weekend!

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 03:43 PM

The roads, robomatic. Any time they put roads into pristine wilderness, it becomes something other than pristine wilderness.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: robomatic
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 02:24 PM

What negative impact?

Defense Bill and ANWAR Thread 2001

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 12:26 PM

Not really, DougR. It's just not a very large deposit, and it wouldn't last very long at all. Certainly not long enough to justify the negative impact it would have on the area.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: DougR
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 12:22 PM

Not to worry. There is still lots of oil in Alaska's wild life refuge.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: robomatic
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 11:21 AM

Good points, Larry. You sound like a guy with a website.

Presumably you are only talking about power generation for the grid. As mentioned in some of the posts above, distributed generation and cogeneration are increasing efficient use of fuels while reducing loads on the grid itself. These are methods of utililizing existing fuels more efficiently.

Windpower is a comer, but it suffers (as you are well aware) from variability by source, not load. If your power needs to not coincide with wind levels, you need something else to bring up the balance. That is why wind is always thought of as a partial, or fill source. There's a techncial term which I forget. Also wind has great environmental repercussions, over the land on which it is installed, on bird routes, and, as you start converting more and more of the available power to electricity, you are going to affect the weather, locally or globally depending on whether chaos effects come into play. (Yes, we're probably a few years ahead of ourselves, here).

Railroad trains are already the most efficient way to move materials on land. They have been modified in Europe and to an extent are still being modified in the US to run off the grid, except for the long distances out west.

We are still going to have to solve the issue of increasing cost for transportatioin fuels for cars and trucks. Manufacturing hydrogen at plants in off-peak hours is one way to pursue.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 11:02 AM

A couple of points.   Fuel cells are not ready for prime time yet.   That doesn't meet they won't be in the future.    The same arguments against hydrogen were also made about the automobile- too expensive, no infrastructure for roads or refueling stations, and people were too attached to their horses.

Incandescent lights last 1,000 hours.   compact florescents cost 1/4 as much to run and last 10,000 hours.   LED lights last 100,000 hours (white) and up to 300,000 hours for colors (red, green)   About same economics as compacts- LED lights last better in cold temps- compact work better in warmer temps

about 250,000 people in the USA have signed up for renewable energy programs from their utilities.   That is dismal.   Costs are as low as $.06 kwh premium or about $3 a month on an average bill.    7 of the 10 largest programs are in California, Oregon, and Wisconsin. The rest of the country talks green but won't pay extra for it.

Wind is getting very competitive in price (except in Michigan where I live)    I have seen prices as low as $30 MW.   This compares favorably with some utility cost of generation.   In Michigan new wind maps (created with satelites that previously were used to spy on the soviet union) have shown huge potential of wind- 16,000 MW of level 3 or better on land, and huge amounts of level 5 & 6 in Lake Michigan and Saginaw Bay.   There is enough wind at profitable levels to power the entire state of Michigan- 25,000 MW.   but right now we only have 2.4 MW of wind.   Disgusting.   And it is priced at $60 MW. (the wind developers are not real fond of me these days but then again, the builders in Michigan are also mad at me for supporting the new building codes going into effect on Feb 28)

Nuclear is the cheapest option today.    If you are for clean air you should love Nuclear.   Some environmentalists do- others hate if for disposing of the waste.    If you have ever walked through a nuclear plant (like I have) it might change you mind. Hell no, we won't glow.

Solar is still way too expensive.   Don't see much hope there.   but who knows about the future.   Large hydro is maxed out at capacity. Small hydro is not cost competitive.   Biomass is growing and making a huge impact.   Currently, biomass is largest renewable source in the country- almost 4% of total energy capcaity is in biomass.   Bio diesel is part of that mix. Also includes getting methane gas from landfills- very economic if planned for in advance.

A couple of comments on net metering. My utility purchases energy back from people with windmills or solar panels (that is called net metering) at the highest current day generation cost.    that is state law. Customers do not get screwed and the utility does not make money on net metering.   Right now according to EIA (check out there web site) only about 15 homes in Michigan are eligible for net metering.   Good idea- but very small.

Sorry for rambling- if you want to hear more of this rambling I wil l be a guest on a 50,000 watt radio station - WJR 760 am in Detroit on February 20 at 1:00 on the Murray Gula Home Improvement show.   It is probably streamed through the internet.   (busy time- I did a live WJR short interview two weeks ago, channel 7 tv last wednesday, WWJ News Radio on Friday, spoke to nattionally syndicated home improvment host Glenn Haege on sunday, and have the Gula show in coming up)

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: RichM
Date: 04 Feb 05 - 10:36 AM

"As much as a quarter of a trillion barrels of oil and gas are waiting to be found largely offshore, the government has said, a figure that would top the official reserves of Canada's oil sands and rival those of crude-soaked Saudi Arabia."

Full story

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 08:48 PM

Small turbines are good, it is true. And a good start on switching peoples mindset toward small scale, distributed generation, which should be done. Now all I need is somewhere with a stream, as Scotland certainly has the rain...

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 08:46 PM

all those deals that talk about selling power back to the utilities - they usually buy it back at much lower prices than they sell

So what? It's free money. If you're producing your own, you don't have to pay the electric company anything, and if you produce extra, there is no extra cost to you and you get money back. If enought people were to do this, economy of scale would render the technology cost effective (taking into consideration all of the hidden costs of other energy sources), and help address the problem of finding sustainable sources of energy.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 08:40 PM

The technology for small scale water turbines has become pretty sophisticated. A friend of mine some years back was going to install one in a small creek that meandered through his two and a half acres of land. The creek was only a couple of feet across, and there was a small waterfall, only two or three feet high. He was going to install a small scale turbine in that creek. The only thing that prevented him from doing that was a strike in Canada at the time that prevented the turbine from being shipped to the US. By the time the turbine could have been shipped, my friend had decided to sell that property and move to another location.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 07:49 PM

good point about the dams, I guess theres always tradeoffs..

here in BC (as well as other places Im sure, there is also a loss,
of Archaelogical sites, as many tend to be near water, along with the
forests that are flooded by the dams)

as well as a loss of water downstream, to the detriment of the coastal wetlands and marshy river deltas - which are often the richest areas of biomass on Earth.

regarding the small streams and micro-hydro generation.
a couple of years ago here in BC there was a minor 'rush' of people staking claims to creeks, small rivers all around the province - for micro- hydro production -. All of this was in anticipation of de-regulation of the hydro-electrical industry. of course this means
the cost of hydro will go up and these people will be able to generate power and sell it to the utitilites. Unfortunately, at current prices its not worth the investment. (all those deals that talk about selling power back to the utilities - they usually buy it back at much lower prices than they sell.)

Not just any stream will do either, you do need a certain volume of water flowing through.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 12:47 PM

You don't need big dams to get power from water. Small scale water turbines can be used on creeks, rivers, and with pond dams. Such turbines can produce energy for home consumption, and the surplus can be sold to the power companies, just as with solar and wind power. And the tidal action of ocean water can be used to generate power.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 03 Feb 05 - 12:25 PM

Nothing wrong with rain,you're right there.
Unfortunatly, to get storable power out of it, you need dams. Lots of them. You've just flooded alot of river valleys, and destroyed a vast area of habitat. Plus a few other little things, like shutting of the sediment supply to downstream., and preventing the fish from getting upstream to spawn.
Plus mountains tend to be the best place for them. Mountains have a strong tendancy to be seimically active. Lots of fun for downstream....

And as an addedbonus, do not build dams in tropical areas.They tend to create vast, shalllow lakes. Rotting vegitaition in the lakes puts out more CO2 than a dirty coal power plant of the same size.

A few dams are useful, but too many are not.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 02 Feb 05 - 05:21 PM

it is not necessary to manufacture fuel cells at the source of power..
(fuel cells are just a devices for converting hydrogen in to electricity
essentially the reverse of electrolysis) Hydrogen is the fuel..

the problem is we still need something the investment of the manhattan
project to have practical hydrogen economy..

and regarding the concept of biodiesel hybrid - low consumption car and what it would to for energy conservation. Great idea, except that having the same mileage requirements on SUVs that the automakers are required to have for cars would reduce around 3million barrels of oil per day (from the 20million the US uses daily). Simple regulations would do it, rather than technical innovation. Thats why they reduced the highway limit to 55mph in the 70s after opec oil embargo.

the problem is that energy conservation is not a high priority. US consumers want performance - and the automakers would be dumb to ignore that demand.

I think there are going to be many energy options in the future - hydrogen is just one method for storing the energy.

another method for storing electricity right now is simply water behind a dam- thats how BC was able to supply California with a large supply of electricity a few years ago. So rain isnt all that bad.

as far as the cost of compressing hydrogen, there is energy loss
all along the way- electrolysis, compressing hydrogen gas, even more to compress as a liquid along with the cost transport with tanker truck - its better to just build a powerline...and use the electricity.

one energy option I read in the early 80s - involved building solar platforms in space which would beam the energy down as a microwave beam.. I dont know why they dont consider that as an option say instead of powerlines. (aside from the fact that it might affect planes, or birds) Im sure there is a loss of power as well.

on the smaller scale one company is making boots with piezoelectric
soles in the heel that generate electricity (I guess similar to a pickup on an instrument) and this could be used to either recharge batteries or heat the boots etc. Energy generated by walking.

petr.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 01 Feb 05 - 10:18 PM

If Hydrogen is acquired from say electrolysis, this would be ideal but is quite expensive, where do you get the electricity ? IF its from the power grid - you may be better off just using an electric vehicle.
(the only issue is recharging time)

The recharging time is a significant issue. A few years ago, some people were playing around with the idea of using interchangable modules that could be exchanged at service stations as a way of addressing the recharge time issue. I don't know whatever happened with that idea, but I haven't heard anything about it recently. Getting it off the grid might be a very good idea if it was combined with more and more people producing their own energy with wind, solar, and hydro, and selling the surplus to the energy companies. If eveyone who had a good location for placing solar collectors, wind generators, or hydro generators were to sell surplus to the energy companies, it could make a huge difference for the environment. Add to that the idea for interchangable electrical battery modules, and combining that in the same car with bio-deisel hybrid technology, and it could have an enormous impact on energy consumption.

The sources of oil for the bio-deisel wouldn't necessarily require a whole lot of new acreage to be put into agricultural use. If the cooking oil from restaurants and fast food places were to be recycled, that would provide a lot of oil with no additional agricultural requirements. People now growing tobacco could be encouraged to put their land into use for production of plants for bio-deisel. Archer Daniels Midland could stop putting their corn products into every single kind of food item available in the US and start using that corn for bio-diesel instead. If car makers could combine all of these things in one vehicle (and I think they could quite easily do that), the demand and supply equations might be very different than what people are working with right now.

Ideally the electricity would be from a renewable source say a windfarm - but you need 3cents per kw wind - the only places that you get that is in isolated areas in central US.. Then how do you transport the electricity - either build powerlines (costly!) and some power is lost through resistance, or convert to hydrogen (electrolysis)and transport hydrogen. Pipeline isnt such a good idea
though as hydrogen is not dense and would need pipeline with a circumference of an airplane fuselage. THere is an energy cost for compressing it. Tanker trucks arent that great either - as the equivalent energy of one tanker of gasoline would require 9 tanker trucks of hydrogen. (3 for liquid hydrogen but there is a cost to compressing it)

How much of a cost is there with compressing hydrogen? How does that cost balance with the savings that would be realized with that kind of energy, in percentages? If the cost of compressing the hydrogen would be less than, for instance, a war to secure the oil supply in a foreign country, that would change the equation when determining the true costs of each fuel source. If, through technological advances, it became possible to make the fuel cells at the site of the power source and the hydrogen source (perhaps in a coastal area with a sunny desert climate, like Baja California for instance), and then ship them to the locations where they would be needed as a finished product for the same amount of money or less money than it costs to locate, secure, extract, ship, refine, and clean up after oil, then the fuel cells would be the more cost-effective way to go.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 01 Feb 05 - 08:56 PM

good point Wolfgang - Germany made oil from coal in WWII and we can certainly go back to it.

CarolC - I went back and re-read the Scientific American article and
it was quite exhaustive in its study of environmental impact of each potential fuel. (There were quite a few possibilities - Internal combusion gasoline engines, IC natural gas, IC hydrogen, ..
and FUel Cell hydrogen - electrolysis from grid, Fuel Cell Hydrogen- natural gas reforming, Ethanol Fuel Cell.

Ironically one of the worst in greenhouse gas increase- was HFCell using Hydrogen from natural gas reforming. Ethanol fuel cell had the least impact.

Trouble is where do you get the hydrogen - the easiest and least expensive is natural gas reforming, but then economically its much better to use that natural gas in high effiecient powerplants that burn natural gas.

If Hydrogen is acquired from say electrolysis, this would be ideal but is quite expensive, where do you get the electricity ? IF its from the power grid - you may be better off just using an electric vehicle.
(the only issue is recharging time)

Ideally the electricity would be from a renewable source say a windfarm - but you need 3cents per kw wind - the only places that you get that is in isolated areas in central US.. Then how do you transport the electricity - either build powerlines (costly!) and some power is lost through resistance, or convert to hydrogen (electrolysis)and transport hydrogen. Pipeline isnt such a good idea
though as hydrogen is not dense and would need pipeline with a circumference of an airplane fuselage. THere is an energy cost for compressing it. Tanker trucks arent that great either - as the equivalent energy of one tanker of gasoline would require 9 tanker trucks of hydrogen. (3 for liquid hydrogen but there is a cost to compressing it)

Also the trouble with fuelcells is not a question of economies of scale- there are still a number of factors that need to be solved
ie. where do you get the hydrogen (above), storing it (even Metal hydride storage has problems) - when it burns (and it burns at a much wider range of density than say other gases or gasoline) its invisible. The Nasa safety handbook suggests holding a broom to the source to see if the straw catches fire.
Basically, there are a few hurdles and a lot of research still has to be done to make HFCells practical . Whereas on the other hand, the gas/electric hybrid is already available now. (ANd in terms of environmental impact - ranks about the same as a hfcell vehicle- which will take years and a lot of investment to make)

Not to say that I dont like the idea of a hydrogen economy, but there actually may be better uses for fuel cells, and probably the market will ultimately help decide.

Or there may be other soluticons, Craig Venter of the human genome project is working on a microbe that would eat co2 and make hydrogen.
I dont know if thats good, or scary,

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 01 Feb 05 - 09:48 AM

IIRC, coal reserves are approx 600 years at current usage, and coal represents 40-45% of the fossil fuels used.
If oil and gas became hugely expensive in the next 10 years, coal could replace them for 100-200 years, depending on demand growth.

The coal to oil/gas process has been used in several places. Town gas in the UK, oil in Aparthid era SA etc...

Bunnahabhain.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Wolfgang
Date: 01 Feb 05 - 09:22 AM

It's a small point not worth arguing, IMO (the difference between 'oil will run out' and 'oil will become too expensive to get').

The problem is that we are not exploring other forms of energy at a rate fast enough... (Brucie)

I disagree. It is not a minor point but one of the main points in this discussion. What you wish for in your second paragraph will come exactly when the price for oil goes up. The renewables will win when they can compete economically. That's a scenario I hope for.

Of course, it is necessary to calculate all costs: for all energy production models. That will include birds killed by wind energy, species lost to clearing for biodiesel production and so on.

In the physical sense, oil will never run out. When the price goes up the oil stocks go up as well, for then new stocks can be exploited at a marketable price. When the price goes up even more shale oil will become marketable (vast stocks of that, measured in centuries and not decades). Coal has been transformed into oil in Germany during WWII. If you add all coal stocks to the oil....

I'll look for a quote from the early 19th century moaning that coal will be depleted all too soon.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: dianavan
Date: 29 Jan 05 - 11:10 PM

I think its going to take alot more than changing the kind of fuel we use. The changes will happen because they must happen or life on this planet will be over.

Alternate fuel sources are definitely in order for major transportation systems but for the everyday person, you might as well get used to the idea of walking, riding bikes or using public transport in all of the urban centers.

Those of you who live in the country might get to own a truck if you have a farm license.

The personal automobile will be history sooner than you think.

I wish I could live to see the day when all those electrical wires will be down and the cars will stop making all that noise and pollution. Every building will have its own source of energy and public transit will be the norm. The grid will become redundant. The streets and hiways will be reclaimed. What a great big, beautiful future!

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Jan 05 - 05:11 PM

To reiterate, fuel cells aren't a solution, they're a method. The hydrogen still has to come from somewhere, and the fuel cell doesn't care.

Yes, I am aware of this.

The technology required for the production (or extraction), and storage of hydrogen in a usable form is a marketable commodity. I think both you and Bunnahabhain are underestimating the potential that the alternative power sources really have. I think you are both placing limitations on these technologies are not necessarily valid on the long run. Kind of like saying in the early days of the 20th century, "we can't use gasoline powered automobiles as our main source of transportation... we don't have enough gas stations".

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bunnahabhain
Date: 29 Jan 05 - 10:41 AM

A gas tax in America? Great idea, but have you noticed hell freezing over recently?

It is one thing to change how we power our lifestyle. It is a far bigger challenge to change our lifestyles.
The first is an engineering challenge. Thes can be solved by throwing sufficient resources at them. Changing our lifestyles? Any of us not tried to stop smoking/drink less/lose weight/stop bohdram playing etc

Hydrogen is the only alternative to hydrocarbons in terms of power density. In simple terms, you fill up a tank of gas, you have far more energy available there than the same weight of wood, or other non-HC fuels.

Hydrogen doesn't care where it comes from. Yes, it can be reformed from natural gas, but that has no long term benifit. the CO2 still ends up in the air, and the source runs out.
The alternative is electrolysis. Which demands a huge amount of power.

The only forseeable way to produce enough, non polluting power is not with renewables. Most forms are unreliable, and would use a large area to produce a significant amount of power. There are certain exceptions, such as solar cells across the worlds desert regions. Anybody fancy relying on the Middle East and North Africa for our energy supply?
Biofuels? If you clear every wilderness left there might be enough cropland to grow them and feed the people as well.
Dams? I like river valleys, and so do the fish.
ETC
All renewable supplies have significant flaws in them.

In my ( somewhat educated in the subject ) opinion, only nuclear power has the potential to keep us going. Fusion needs serious money thrown at it. The research in it has been underfunded for decades. A power station that only needs a supply of water, and produces no hazardous waste would be rather useful.
And as for hydrogen? The only things an electrolysis plant needs is a supply of water and electricity. It does fit together rather neatly.

rant over.

Bunnahabhain.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: robomatic
Date: 29 Jan 05 - 05:59 AM

Carol:
To reiterate, fuel cells aren't a solution, they're a method. The hydrogen still has to come from somewhere, and the fuel cell doesn't care.

At present, the enviro-'friendly' methods are being researched and getting better, specifically windfarms and solar panels. But, they are small scale generators and suffer from a defect (I've forgotten the techie word) that they don't respond to demand, they respond to availability of wind and sun. Where these methods are being used, they contribute relatively small (though important) percentages of total power. None of these come without some cost to the environment, either in construction over large areas of ground, or visual, or flooding huge great areas (Part of the founding of Sierra Club was over the construction of Glen Canyon Dam (and Lake Powell). We are getting more 'efficient' all the time, LEDs are going to replace a lot of incandescent and fluorescent lights at a HUGE saving in lighting power, but everytime we make new more efficient stuff, we immediately realize we're using outdated stuff, and that get thrown away or recycled.

I know nothing about biodiesel, it sounds great, but I don't think it is available in anything like the quantities of diesel that are purchased.

Imagining the future is conjuring a moving target, my imagining a world with a lot less oil for energy goes a lot like:
We'll have a significant increase in coal and oil from shale development.
We'll have significantly more nuclear generation (which also does not introduce carbon products - but does produce a lot of heat)
We'll have small but significantly increased solar and wind generation.

The wonderful science fictiony idea that is being researched a lot these days is to have some kind of orbital light collector which converts sunlight to microwaves and beams them back to earth. You have the sexiness of space and huge capital investment, and the cachet of 'it's all solar'.

Back to earth, the buzzwords of the industry have been 'cogeneration' and 'distributed power' meaning that more generation plants will get built closer and more specific to their big power users. Cogeneration means that excess heat produced by the generators gets used to heat the facilities instead of going up the funnel. Distributed power means a lot more generating facilities of smaller sizes. This appears to go against the economies of scale but linked to the idea of using heat, and linked to the concept that it gives greater reliability because the user is less dependent on the electric grid, it is being popularized among the folk who make the decisions.

When it comes to this stuff, everything is a tradeoff. The first human to cut his thumb on a piece of flint, or burn his toe, or overcrisp his mammoth meat, learned that.

Have a great weekend

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 29 Jan 05 - 12:11 AM

Thanks petr.

It sounds like economy of scale wasn't used as a factor in the article you mention then. If that's so, fuel cells could eventually become much less expensive versus even natural gas (since exploration for and extraction of natural gas has a cost to the environment associated with it), and whoever finally takes the initiative and finds a way to market fuel cells to countries like China will find themselves in an enviable position.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Alaska Mike
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 10:24 PM

Don't worry, be happy!!! As the next iceage begins to freeze us all into popcicles, we will finally draw out the last of the oil from the earth. I'm pretty sure this oil helps the earth turn smoothly on its axis. So when the oil is finally removed, the friction will build up because of the lack of oil and the earth will warm up from the inside. So don't worry, be happy!!!

Mike

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 08:33 PM

another point is the improvement in batteries over the years
has made the electric car a lot more viable. The only difficulty is recharging time.

and we shouldnt be just looking at cars. A lot of the greenhouse gas problems is from buildings etc. It seems that fuel cells are a much better application for heating and powering houses and buildings
rather than just cars. For instance a utility building in Central Park NY is powered by a fuel cell - this avoided the problem of tearing up the ground to bring in powerlines.
And such distributed power grid also reduces the vulnerability of a power failure such as the summer of 03.

it also looks like the fuel cell is poised to compete in the battery market for laptops, cell phones and pda's. WHich might ultimately lead to a less expensive fuel cell for cars.

One big issue is that in the US, the big automakers manufacture for what they see the market wants. ANd Americans prefer performance (power & speed) etc rather than gas economy. It wont be until the price of oil becomes much more expensive that it will start to be an issue.

I think China is the wild card. Chinas growth and hunger for oil, will drive up costs for everyone, and even though pollution in CHina is a big problem (mainly because of heating with coal pellets)
it is being addressed, albeit slowly. Inefficient and polluting steel plants are forced to shut down. And when a billion people will want cars the big automakers will fall over each other to get into that market with a non-polluting vehicle.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 06:07 PM

Hi Carol, unfortunately I dont have the facts on the Scientific American
article, had to return it to the library. The article was from last spring or summer.

The analysis was fairly exhaustive, since the well to wheels model compares energy loss in every step of the process, but Im sure there are always costs, that are not factored in such as wars and pollution. Definitely hydrogen acquired by electrolysis is far more expensive that re-forming natural gas.

Electricity by windfarms is actually quite competitive except that
the problem - is transporting it from isolated areas to areas that need it.

The biodiesel idea is great, and last spring when I was in the Czech republic pretty much every available field I saw had rapeseed (canola) growing on it for bio-diesel. But there just isnt enough land to supply the required energy needs for biodiesel.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: mg
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 03:55 PM

Every single person should be taking steps in their own lives to reduce their dependency...for some that might mean hanging out clothes instead of using a dryer..others can buy the biodiesel cars, solar panels etc. We can right now use other fuels in cars. We can, if and when the time comes, tighten our belts quite a bit..a lot of energy consumption is just because we can do it cheaply. But we can and obviously must not just reduce oil consumption but totally find other options...an interim might be the soybean and canola oil we eat (I am not sure of the safety of either foodwise but don't know..)..manure (and people waste?) can be converted..there is lots that can be done right now and we the people can do a lot of it right at home.....mg

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 01:31 PM

robomatic, I agree with you about the gas tax.

On the subject of "real costs", there are a number of hidden costs that are frequently not factored into the overall equation. One such hidden cost is the cleanup costs and the overall negative impact on the enviornment of oil spills. Also, the impact on the environment of the products of internal combustion. And of course, the costs (both in terms of dollars as well as in terms of loss of human lives) of the wars that are needed in order to secure a steady oil supply. Right now, the most environmentally friendly as well as cost competetive fuel source would seem to be bio-deisel used in hybrid vehicles. But if a way to produce reliable energy is found using hydrogen fuel cells, taking into consideration the cost to the environment of combustion of any sort, the fuel cell technology might prove to be the better one in the long run.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: robomatic
Date: 28 Jan 05 - 12:15 PM

Petr and Carol:

Good point about hybrids having the ability to recover energy through braking. This is because there is a chargeable battery on board. A simple fuel cell vehicle does not have this capability unless it, too is 'hybridized' to allow charging of a battery or a capacitor. I have not seen this as a part of most proposed fuel cell vehicles, e.g. the 'skateboard' design promoted by GM.

Heat engines such as external combustion (steam) or internal combustion are theoretically only able ever to get to 50% efficiency in recovering the energy locked into their fuel's chemical bonds. However, the best IC engines to date hardly get to even HALF this figure. Gas engines have been getting more and more efficient by among other things:
1) Reducing weight of rotating masses within engine
2) Increasing compression ratio
3) Making fuel burn more complete
4) Hybrid vehicles turn engine on only when needed and attempt to use engine at its most efficient RPM setting, although the cars allow the engine to run directly with their electric engine for maximum on-demand acceleration.

The next 'big' step is to reduce the size of the engine, and its complexity, by leaving out the cam shaft and camgear linkages, using electrically driven solenoids controlled by the onboard computer. The technology already exists, but putting together an engine that won't be able to run without its computer has yet to be tested on the market (despite new airplanes that can't be controlled without their electrical drive units, there being no physical links between control yoke and control surfaces in several of them, including the Concorde since the 70's). In mechanical engineering terms, this stuff is 'way cool'.

As far as fuel cells go, I believe there is no theoretical 'ceiling' on their efficiency (beyond the obvious one of 100%). What needs to be considered is overall capital cost, the longevity of the components, and their efficiency in the various stages that takes us from fuel to motion.
Technically speaking, for an overall comparison of efficiency between IC and FC, you have to compare apples to apples, start with a fuel, look at miles per gallon, then take into account construction, maintenance, and recycling costs. When you start with a FC fuel, you have to extract the hydrogen from it (Reforming), Convert the hydrogen to DC electricity, 'invert' the electricity to AC, and run it through a motor. There are several different fuel cell technologies, and they are all 'moving targets' due to evolving R & D.

There is a separate issue as to storing raw hydrogen, which is a resourceful little molecular critter and tends to leak right through metal.

Right now the main source of hydrogen in quantity is from natural gas. In future it can come from electrolysis from electricity from any source. I don't know how many Kilowatt Hours it takes to produce a gallon of hydrogen, but I think it is a pretty solid figure, i.e., we're not going to find a way to suddenly improve on it, in other words, we're already at peak efficiency when it comes to electrolysis.

There is a publicly traded fuel cell company that is constantly advertizing how they are making progress in fuel cell vehicles. I don't remember their name, but I remember talking to a fuel cell 'guru' in Anchorage who was the brains behind our post office being powered by a trendsetting fuel cell installation. He said their system allowed a test vehicle to operate for a day and then they had to be pulled out and replaced. A fuel cell is a lot like a battery in that chemical energy is converted directly to electricity and fluids are interacting with solids. When the temperature is not at the best, when you're starting up, when you're at top acceleration, some of the molecular activity gets 'messy' and you get deposits built up on the solid parts, and all at once efficiency goes down and you're in a world of hurt as a vicious cycle ensues, the less efficienty you get the more chemical deposits you get and so on. Sometimes the effects are reversible, and sometimes not. And fuel cell parts like battery parts contain heavy metals and stuff that is tough to recycle.

Are we ready to hug an internal combustion engine yet? Pause and reflect how much fun we've had with them, how much horse manure we haven't had to shovel in the last hundred years.

You can already simply and efficiently and cleanly burn natural gas in an internal combustion engine without going the fuel cell route. You're back in the heat engine efficiency limit, but fuel cells haven't proven themselves as any better in the practical world.

What I'm getting at by the above windage is that fuel cells are real neat, but not yet ready for prime time, and in themselves they do not address an energy supply problem, they kind of 'stir the pot.'

Analogy Coming:
You know how there are all these diet plans out there, but the simple truth of losing weight is that if you expend more calories than you digest, you will lose, and if you take in more than you burn off, you will gain weight.

The ideal ways to utilize energy are to:
Build light, don't move more mass than you have to.
Don't build more horsepower in than you really need.
Don't drive when you can ride or walk.
When you leave a room, turn out the lights.

But you want a vehicle to last. You may save on a miles per gallon basis with a light vehicle, but the average person I know says: "What good does it do for me if I save money on the commute, but one night I hit a moose and it comes through my tin foil car and puts me in the hospital?

I've personally come to the conclusion that a lot of American cars look solid and durable, but in fact are not. The Hummer comes to mind. I just drove a Toyota Camry across country at all kinds of speeds, it was quiet, the music was great, and the MPGs were about the same as my motorcycle was in the 80's.

I reiterate that market forces will do the job of getting us from now to the future not perfectly, but a lot better than government, unless government simply concerns itself with encouraging R & D (which it should).

I think a gas tax would be a good start, and it should be indexed to our expenses in the mideast.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 27 Jan 05 - 05:29 PM

What were they using as the source of energy in their fuel cell model? I suspect that the real costs for fuel cell power would vary depending on the energy source used in the production of the cells. For instance, I'm guessing that the real costs (taking into consideration all of the hidden costs) of a fuel cell that is produced using solar power would be far different from a fuel cell that is produced using hydrocarbon or nuclear power.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 27 Jan 05 - 04:22 PM

well, according to a recent NewYorker article on oil,
one economist calculated that Americans actually pay an something like
10cents per gallon (in taxes), if you take in the military cost of interventions and having carriers in certain parts of the world etc.

Scientific American had an exhaustive analysis, of the well-to-wheels
energy costs -with gas, hybrid and fuel cell vehicles. That is, the costs of refining, and transporting all the way to the efficiency of the vehicle were considered. And ironically enough, even though gasoline powered infernal combustion engines were inefficient in energy use
(ie. something like 80% of the energy goes out the tailpipe as heat, instead of powering the vehicle) the energy costs were still one 10th
of hydrogen fuel cell based vehicle. (Hydrogen through electrolysis)

The Hybrids vehicles did have the advantage of conserving and recovering energy from braking and moving downhill etc.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: robomatic
Date: 27 Jan 05 - 12:09 PM

Wolfgang, Brucie - good posts.

Brucie, I was hoping the greenhouse effect of having burned all those hydrocarbons would've kept things from getting too cold in the future (:-) but apparently things don't work that way.

We don't know what will happen. We know things will change and we won't all like it. When the first army with iron crossed swords with one carrying bronze, someone went home unhappy.

I'd say that as oil gets more expensive, the first to suffer will be those who can't pay for it, the loss of their demand will make life a bit easier for those who still have some money.
I think there will also be 'step' changes as one type of energy utilization takes over for another.
Airlines will suffer while railroads will prosper.
More nuclear power plants will be built.

There are far reaching ramifications beyond energy production because petrochem is used for so much else in society, from most plastics to most commercial fertilizers and so many new structures.

I agree that we don't seem to be making plans for the change, but I also distrust governments being able to predict the proper changes to make. Remember Bush predicting the 'hydrogen' economy with no sign of actually understanding the ramifications? That simply means government money funding big projects which will have very little to show for themselves, like missile defense or Enron's energy investments in India.

Barring the odd meteorite impact, the future will reward the flexible and rich and punish the ignorant and poor, comme d'habitude.

What governments can do is give tax breaks for research investments, rewarding the ones that are most successful/ efficient. This has its own problems, but it sure beats trying to predict what will be successful. It also has a side benefit of allowing the public to claim patent rights over successful inventions and processes.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,brucie
Date: 27 Jan 05 - 11:14 AM

It's a small point not worth arguing, IMO (the difference between 'oil will run out' and 'oil will become too expensive to get').

The problem is that we are not exploring other forms of energy at a rate fast enough to dovetail with the depletion of oil stocks. She gonna get real cold out there when that happens. And real ugly, IMO.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Wolfgang
Date: 27 Jan 05 - 09:11 AM

Yes, it's a typo, a nice example how wrong information can originate, "8 Million"just doesn't sound big enough. Carl Sagan at that time was saying that the effects of the fires would be similar to the Tambora volcano explosion in 1815 which led to a year without summer in the Norther hemisphere in 1816. He was a bit off the mark.

Oil is not finite in the sense it is meant here. It only will become more and more expensive from some point in the future on. When it is expensive enough alternative forms of energy will become competitive and that will be the end of the oil age. The stone age also did not end for a lack of stones.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: robomatic
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 01:59 PM

Corli: You can do it yourself. Pick whatever it is that concerns you, find out how much it is valued, then divide by the current value of a barrel of oil. That ignores a whole bunch of stuff, but it should get you dialed in to a first order approximation. I've been hearing a figure of $300 Billion for the US involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq. I've heard that a barrel of crude is going for $45. Throw in another $5 for refining and distribution costs (and to make the math easier), then divide the second number into the first and you get 6 Billion barrels. Of course, $300 Billion isn't going purely for oil, but you can make an argument that oil is involved in every phase of the enterprise. Men and materials are being shipped overseas in ships that burn crude, or high performance ships and aircraft that burn kerosene.

In 1990 Saddam invaded another mideast country (Kuwait) and on his retreat he ordered that Kuwait's oil wells be put to the flame. The Iraqis also caused millions of barrels of oil to be dumped into the Persian Gulf. Check out:

Iraqi burning and dumping of Kuwaiti Oil

I think there is a typo in there. The report says that 8,000,000 million barrels of oil were dumped, I suspect they meant to say 8 million barrels of oil were dumped.

Robo, who wishes he were on the waiting list for a Toyota Prius.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,corli z
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 01:10 PM

We know oil is finite, and we know (well in advance) that each time America invades another mideast country that they will burn and blow up enough oil to pollute half of Asia. Kuwait, Iran, Iraq, etc.
    I wonder, too, how many billions of barrels of oil are wasted just on insane military maneuvers. Does anyone out there have the math ability to compute how much oil our wars in the mideast have wasted; how much environmental damage they have caused....Oh, and if we can compute the value of human life into barrels of oil, factor that in too.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Jim Tailor
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 01:08 PM

If we had been listening, Flip Wilson warned us about these dangers back in the early 70's.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,corli z
Date: 26 Jan 05 - 12:44 PM

We know oil is finite, and we know (well in advance) that each time America invades another mideast country that they will burn and blow up enough oil to pollute half of Asia. Kuwait, Iran, Iraq, etc.
    I wonder, too, how many billions of barrels of oil are wasted just on insane military maneuvers. Does anyone out there have the math ability to compute how much oil our wars in the mideast have wasted; how much environmental damage they have caused....Oh, and if we can compute the value of human life into barrels of oil, factor that in too.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out - ANWR
From: robomatic
Date: 20 Aug 04 - 01:55 AM

ANWR (Arctic National Wildlife Refuge) has a significant amount of oil which would be a valuable supplement to existing Alaskan reserves. Arguing that it will not solve the problem all by itself is akin to saying we shouldn't put up any wind electric generators because they will only give us a few percent of our electric needs at best.

The development of the reserves will alter the coastal portion of the reserve, a fraction of its total size, and endanger no species of wildlife.

The infrastructure for delivering the oil to market is already there, The Trans-Alaska Pipeline.

The preliminary exploration for determining just exactly how much oil is really in ANWR has yet to be done. The figures used by pros and cons are based more on geology and history and polemics than actual measurement.

There is an area to the west called NPRA which is expected to have additional recoverable reserves on a par with ANWR, but distributed over a greater area. This will be more expensive to develop, but is being explored now.

The oil companies for the time being are putting their money into less hard to explore and politically less hot areas, such as the Gulf of Mexico.

60 Minutes did a pretty even-handed article on ANWR about two years ago.


For the time being our society is petrochem dependent, and knowing how and where to get more of it should be tied to a national drive for conservation, governmental rewards for frugality.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Aug 04 - 09:58 PM

My understanding, Bill, is that China already has a "one child per couple" policy.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bill D
Date: 19 Aug 04 - 09:41 PM

"A precipitous natural drop in human fertility.." would have to be aided by political and community will...we are too far along to rely on natural tendencies now. Even a slightly slower growth will produce a scary number in 2050.

One answer is a universal lottery...contraceptive implants in all young women at puberty...with some of them being placebos. No one would be told if they were not having children because of chemicals or just luck. ...Yeah, I know....who'd approve such an intrusive plan to interfere with out God-given RIGHT to "be fruitful and multiply"? And how would we get China (or ANY country who didn't trust the infidels not to stack the deck against THEM!) to cooperate? And who'd pay for it? etc. etc...

I don't presume for a moment that anyone will try this....yet....ask me again in 30-40 years. People will NOT look at the long view...

.remember the trick of how to cook a frog?..put him in a pot and raise the temperature VERY slowly..until it's too late.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Aug 04 - 08:44 PM

Anwar doesn't have enough oil in it to justify the destruction that would be caused by extracting the oil from it. It only conatins enough to last a very, very short while.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: DougR
Date: 19 Aug 04 - 08:08 PM

There is always Anwar!

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: robomatic
Date: 19 Aug 04 - 03:21 PM

I remember in 1999 the price of oil was $9 per barrel and the airwave media claimed that experts were predicting it could stay that way for years. I knew that was a load of bull. I think our current situation is similar in that the oil price will come down once the Yukos situation resolves and we get some 'stability' in such places as Nigeria, Venezuela, and Iraq.

Other issues may influence gasoline prices which I already mentioned in previous posts. While the events are unpredictable, the type of events (pipeline problems, refinery problems) could lead to gasoline price spikes.

So short term I expect continued high sales of Hummers (the vehicles), yet also increasing sales of Prius's (Looks to me to be the ideal middle age crisis car for nerds).

We are not ON THE BRINK. We are getting there, and some people are claiming they can see it from there. But can they really?

I've really enjoyed reading the posts on this thread!

And as for Soylent Green, it has come true for cattle, and it's making us mad.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 19 Aug 04 - 03:10 PM

One minor correction from an above post.   Canada actually leads the world in energy consumption per person.    Part of that can be attributed to the cold weather.    The USA is second fairly close behind.   On the other hand, the USA accounts for 43% of the worlds GNP.   I would like to see a comparison of energy consumption vs GNP.   Than we could see if a country is really wasting energy or using it properly for goods and services.

A few facts on renewable energy.   Per Chartwell research- about 50% of the utilities in the USA are offering renewables with another 20% considering it.    The vast majority do about 1/2% to 1% of their total energy in renewable.    Only a few of them have more than 1%.   As the 7th largest electric utility in the country to commit to 5% in five years was a very bold step in my opinion. I am nervous as hell about it. As least it is a start.   

Ultimately the market will decide how much renewables are used.   If oil keeps going up, and renewables keep going down the laws of supply and demand will take place.   People talk green but won't spend extra money for it.

We have a division that does fuel cells and we are also involved in hydorgen technology.    I was assigned to a fule cell demonstration project a year or two ago, but the project was canecelled as the technology wasn't ready.    A huge amount of energy is lost transporting it from the plant to the home.   A fuel cell is more efficient in that regard, but still to expensive to be mass produced.   The market right now is third world countries where there is no grid in place.   There, a fuel cell makes sense.

Hydrogen is coming.   Our CEO made a speech where he outlined the major drawbacks to hydrogen were exactly the same arguments used against the automobile when it was first introduced.   (There are no road, no gas stations, and people love thier horses)   I don't know how much time we have-heck I can't even keep my kids from leaving the lights on when they leave the room.   All we can do is keep making progress.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 19 Aug 04 - 03:08 PM

This is a very timely discussion (about overpopulation). I saw Soylent Green on TV last night. This discussion bears a somewhat eerie resemblance to the kinds of issues that are touched upon in that film.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 05:37 PM

Oddly, I've seen articles on the "problem" of declining human fertility. Actually animal populations display this same "problem" when they are overcrowded, underfed, etc. Nature is amazing. A precipitous natural drop in human fertility would be the most humane solution to the coming inevitable catastrophe.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: The Stage Manager
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 05:35 PM

Robbo,   Everyone,

Thanks for your input. There's times when I read articles and gut instinct tells me this has to be wrong, but because of a particular mindset, and/or how busy I find myself at the time, I can find it difficult to explain to myself exactly why I feel something may be wrong.

I think you, and others, are right when you suggest that we are not going to run out of oil, as the price climbs we are simply going to get to the point when it is just not going to be worth getting it out of the ground, because no one can afford to buy the stuff.

I am probably with you too on the work ethic. There's always people who see every problem as a opportunity.   Discomfort and boredom are great motivators.

I have to agree with Bill D too.   I seem to remember doing endless equations in math, modelling populations
of strange animals; births, deaths, resources etc to find points of equilibrium.

I'm heartened by your post Larry K. However, you state "Our goal is to convert 5% of our total energy to renewables in 5 years".   We have goals like this in the UK, But to my mind the big question of the moment is whether we've got five years.    That we are going to have to find renewable resources, and develop alternative technologies, I do not think is in doubt.

I'd also agree the changeover period is looking distinctly uncomfortable, and I think its perhaps here that the doom merchants predict the end of the current economic system.   OK oil is the worlds most marketable commodity at the moment, who knows what it will be in thirty years time. I suspect gold or even wood may rapidly increase in value during the 'bridge' period.    There could well be some serious belt tightening all round.   Ultimately I believe most wars are fought over resources, and as everyone here points out, a serious political reality check all round is going to be required.

It's crystal ball time. How fast is the oil price, and hence commodity prices going to rise?   We have to start with what we know.   And what we appear to know is that no-one has a clue.

In March of this year the Royal Bank of Scotland published a consensus of the top world economists and analysts who confidently predicted that oil prices in 2004 would average $26 a barrel and in 2005, $22.8 a barrel. Today the Oil Price peaked at $47.03 a barrel, An increase of some 68% over two years, and a 44% rise since the start of the year.   

Similarly in the financial pages Platts, the energy market information provider, reports that forward prices for electricity are running at more than £29 per megawatt hour, from an average price of £15.50 in 2002/2003. Average gas prices over the period have nearly doubled from 16p a therm to almost 32p.   

On August 15 while the oil price was $44/bl the Independent quoting generator EDF reported that coal prices were 20% higher than in January. This was largely due to increased extraction and shipping costs.

Two years ago energy companies were fighting to ram 5 year contracts down customer's throats. Today many won't quote for more than two years.    Businesses can't sustain this sort of cost inflation for long.
The reasons for these increases appear multifarious, again the current consensus goes along the lines that current oil output is close to its limits and any even small disruption to supply has a significant impact on pricing. Many analysts point to burgeoning economic recovery as a reason for increased demand. Emerging economies are proving the most difficult to satisfy, with Chinese imports of crude oil jumping 40% in the first seven months of 2004 from a year earlier. Some analysts are predicting that oil prices will advance above $50, while governments and firms are already warning of the damage that higher raw material and fuel costs are likely to do to economies. Along with this, Oil companies are maintaining a smaller cushion of oil stocks, (in commercial terms this is seen as efficient). These combinations make energy prices hypersensitive to political uncertainty and terrorist action around the world.

Going back to the population model, and given that in any complex situation it may be advisable to 'get back to basics' to build a new scenario.   Can we all accept the view that developed economies can survive and prosper only according to the availability of suitably priced energy resources?   

Bill

Just read your post Petr. "Democratisation on energy" Now that's an interesting concept.....

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 04:51 PM

I read a book a few years ago which dealt with past historical predictions of what the actual maximum world population would be
funnily enough it didnt actually make a prediction, although the one interesting point was that the rate of population increase started to go down around 1968.

if you look at the industrialized countries - the population dropping
with the exception of the US (the growth is due to immigration)

Japan for instance is likely to drop 20% in the next generation.

It seems one of the problems with the current economic beliefs is that there always has to be growth. (trouble is, were on a finite planet)

its not just oil thats a limited resource, but the worlds fisheries which are declining, water (aquifers being overused, or polluted)
etc, and since the world is made up of competing states the tragedy of the commons is repeated.

on the hydrogen economy, one of the problems seems to be the chicken and egg - no one wants to build hydrogen fuel cell cars before there is an infrastructure of stations to supply hydrogen, and no one is going to build the stations unless there are cars to use it.

supposedly the fuel cell car is the 'killer app' to kickstart the hydrogen economy but more likely but heres an interesting discussion

(pardon me for posting the article as I dont believe its available online anymore)

The buzz about hydrogen and the "hydrogen economy" is growing.As evidenced by the Illinois Coalition's 2H2 initiative to create a"hydrogen highway" in Illinois, and similar initiatives in California,Michigan, New York, Colorado and Canada, what began as a quiet hum isnow emerging into a call to action that cannot be ignored. Theconvergence of a presidential election, record gasoline prices, thelong-term realities of petroleum dependence on the Persian Gulf andmounting concern over global warming has hastened the urgency withwhich we must address America's energy problems. To many, hydrogen isthe answer.But what, exactly, is the hydrogen economy? If one were toask five different pundits on the topic, then one would probablyreceive five different answers. One common answer is that thehydrogen economy consists of the large-scale replacement of America'sautomotive fleet with hydrogen's killer application-the zero-emissionfuel cell car. Furthermore, the hydrogen required to fuel these carswould come mostly from renewable sources of energy like solar and windpower. In this incarnation of the hydrogen economy, the United Stateswould eliminate its need for foreign oil and could supply its entiretransportation energy needs with "All-American" sources of power.Some, like Jeremy Rifkin (author of The Hydrogen Economy) andAmory Lovins (founder of the Rocky Mountain Institute, which fosterssustainable development) take this concept a step further. To Rifkinand Lovins, the fuel cell car becomes a type of mobile power plant,able to plug into homes and buildings to provide electricity andthermal energy (e.g., space heating and hot water). In theory, afleet of 20 million fuel cell cars plugged into decentralized electricgrids would be able to provide the entire electricity needs of theUnited States. The result would be a "hydrogen energy web" in whichclusters of self-sufficient energy villages would replace the highlycentralized and monolithic energy utilities of today. This concept ofthe "hydrogen village" is not unlike John Galt's hidden utopiancommunity in Atlas Shrugged.Others take a less sanguine view. They view hydrogen as aninevitability because of the finite and decreasing global supply offossil fuels (particularly petroleum), the world's increasing thirstfor them (particularly by China), and the accelerating concentrationof petroleum reserves in the Persian Gulf. However, the moredown-to-earth hydrogen pundits see a gradual transformation of theexisting infrastructure into one that accommodates hydrogen. Overtime, existing gas stations would be augmented to include hydrogenpumps. Natural gas rather than renewable energy would be the primarysource of producing hydrogen, at least in the early years; after all,natural gas is a cleaner, cheaper and more plentiful fossil fuel thanpetroleum, so why not use it while we have it? The existing utilitystructure of power plants and natural gas distribution companies(GDCs) would remain intact.The perspectives of the hydrogen utopians and down-to-earthpundits are divergent but contain a common flaw: their overarchingreliance on the fuel cell car to be the catalyst of transformation.Consider the following: the United States currently has a domesticautomotive fleet of about 220 million cars and light trucks. By 2015,the earliest year in which fuel cell cars might be commercially viable(i.e., cost-competitive and having solved all problems related tohydrogen storage, safety, fuel cell durability, and operatingcapability in a range of temperatures, not to mention a widespreadrefueling infrastructure), our domestic fleet is expected to be 250million vehicles. New car sales in the United States total about 20million vehicles per year. If the current sales of hybrid cars areany indication, purchasers of automobiles based on a radically newtechnology are likely to be few in the early years. Looking ahead 25years, the very best case scenario would have fuel cell carscomprising about 10% percent of a domestic fleet of 300 millionvehicles in 2030. At best, this by itself would result in a decreasein projected petroleum consumption of about 7% percent, as gasolineand diesel fuel in that year are expected to make up about 70% percentof total crude oil use. However, our thirst for oil is expected toincrease by a whopping 50% percent between now and 2030. Reliance onthe fuel cell car as the messiah of our energy salvation will makeonly a slight dent in daily consumption and will do little to end ourpetroleum vulnerability. The Immediate OpportunityThe hype about the fuel cell car has blinded us to a much moreprofound and nearer-term possibility for hydrogen. It is thathydrogen and the fuel cell are disruptive technologies capable ofrevolutionizing the production, distribution and consumption of energyin the United States (and probably the world). This disruption wouldcome in two forms. The first is that hydrogen and the fuel cellprovide the capability to transform our current proprietary energyparadigms into open systems. The second disruption, a naturalconsequence of the first, is that transformation to a hydrogen economywill mimic the evolution of the PC and the Internet. Just as the PCand Internet resulted in the democratization of information, hydrogenand the fuel cell will bring about the democratization of energy. To explain why hydrogen and the fuel cell have the disruptivecapability to transform proprietary energy systems into open ones, abrief technological digression is necessary. At the most rudimentarylevel, we have three primary sources of energy: electricity (which isthe product of a variety of fuels, including coal, uranium and windpower), natural gas, and gasoline. We also have three primary uses ofenergy: electric appliances, thermal devices (e.g., furnaces and hotwater heaters), and vehicular transportation. For the most part, thesources and uses of energy match up nicely and are independent. Wecannot use gasoline to power our computers. We cannot use coal ornuclear energy to power our SUVs unless the fuel is first convertedinto electricity and we drive an electric car. Generally, we do notuse electricity to power our furnaces or hot water heaters unlessnatural gas is not available. In today's energy paradigm,electricity, natural gas and gasoline are highly vertical, monolithicfiefdoms.Enter hydrogen and the fuel cell. Hydrogen is the greatunifier of energy sources, and the fuel cell is the same thing forenergy uses. Hydrogen is the common denominator of energy sourcesbecause electricity, natural gas and even gasoline can be used toproduce it. Electricity creates hydrogen by passing an electriccurrent through water, which splits the molecule in one hydrogenmolecule and one-half of an oxygen molecule. The required electriccurrent can come from any source, including coal, uranium, windturbines or solar panels. This process is called electrolysis and isabout 85% percent energy efficient. Likewise, natural gas can be usedto create hydrogen by mixing it with steam and passing an electriccurrent through it. This process, reformation, combines methane(CH4) with steam (2 x H2O) and results in 4 H2 molecules and one CO2molecule. Reformation is also about 85% energy efficient and has theadded advantage of not requiring the intermediate and relativelyinefficient step of producing electricity as its primary catalyst. Itis currently a cheaper means of creating hydrogen than electrolysis,although it does have the disadvantage of producing carbon dioxide(whereas the only "emission" from electrolysis is pure oxygen).Reformation using gasoline is a bit more complicated; suffice to saythat any fossil fuel containing an abundance of hydrogen molecules(including coal) can be a source of creating hydrogen. For now,natural gas reformation is the only process involving fossil fuelsthat makes economic and environmental sense.Conversely, the fuel cell is the unifier of energy usesbecause it combines hydrogen and oxygen to create electricity andsteam or hot water-the reverse process of electrolysis. Theelectricity the fuel cell produces can be used to power appliances orprovide locomotion for vehicles. The thermal energy the fuel cellproduces can be used for space heating, hot water, or the cogenerationof more electricity (but probably cannot be harnessed for locomotion).Currently, fuel cells are about 40% percent energy efficient inproducing electricity, and an additional 35%--40% percent efficientfor producing thermal energy. This equates to an overall energyefficiency that approaches 80% percent, which is comparable to theefficiency of combined-cycle cogeneration plants.What does this mean? As long as we have a supply of hydrogenhandy, a stationary fuel cell for our home or business, and a fuelcell vehicle, we have a single source of energy that can power ourPCs, provide heat and hot water, and fuel our car. This is the simplepart of the new equation. The more complicated and revolutionary partinvolves what goes into creating the hydrogen, and this is what trulymakes hydrogen an "open" technology. What this requires is theincorporation at a stationary site of both an electrolyzer and anatural gas reformer to create the hydrogen. The existing natural gaspipeline would feed the reformer. Electric current for theelectrolyzer, however, can come from a variety of sources. Hookinginto the electrolyzer would be a connection to the existing electricgrid as well as connections to on-site photovoltaic solar panels andmicro wind turbines. By providing this type of holistic, small-scaleenergy architecture, inclusive of conventional and renewable sources,the user has the ability to access the lowest-cost energy sourceavailable at any given time (or any combination of sources) to provideelectricity and thermal energy, create hydrogen to store for futureuse, or both. If the sun is shining at a particular time, then solarpanels can provide the heavy energy lifting. If one can buyelectricity from ComEd at the market rate of 3.9 cents per kilowatthour at 2 a.m., then the conventional electric grid is the cheapestavailable alternative. On a cloudy, hot summer day, natural gas mightbe the preferred option to provide the hydrogen.This holistic incorporation of multiple energy sources is notwhat is commonly referred to as micropower or distributed generation,as both of these typically rely on a single energy source (e.g.,natural gas or solar) for small-scale power production. Instead, itis intelligent generation--the capability to selectively arbitragefour sources of energy (grid electricity, natural gas, wind and solarpower) for use in the three primary applications.Of course, intelligent generation requires some intelligence,and this is where the analogy of the PC and Internet applies. Ourcurrent energy architecture is not at all unlike the informationtechnology paradigm of the early 1970s, which was based on large,centralized mainframes connected to myriads of dumb terminals. Allthe intelligence was concentrated within the mainframes or "glassroom"; none was distributed. The dumb terminal made a request, andthe mainframe processed the request, handled the data and sent theresponse. The same relationship is true today for energy. Our PCneeds electricity, and by booting it up we are essentially sending adumb terminal's request to ComEd, which responds by providing theelectricity. Our thermostat tells us it is time to fire up thefurnace, and the methane that People's Gas or Nicor has supplied us isreleased through the meter. From this perspective, our appliances,furnaces and hot water heaters are like millions of green-screen CRTsmaking energy requests to the mainframes-our gas and electricutilities. The current home or small business has no energy commandand control capability whatsoever.As we know, the PC revolutionized the mainframe/dumb terminalstatus quo by placing processing power and access to data in the handsof the end user. Similarly, intelligent generation provides thecommand and control of energy to the end user by taking into accountthree things:* First, energy sources and uses combine a variety of static anddynamic factors. Static factors include the utilities' price perkilowatt hour or therm at any given time, as well as the quantity ofhydrogen needed to refuel a fuel cell car. Dynamic factors includecurrent sunshine and wind speed as well as the instantaneous electricand thermal energy needs of the home or small business. * Second, a stationary fuel cell simultaneously produceselectricity and thermal energy, so the need for one is constrained bythe relative need for the other. If one's hot water heater or boileris currently full, but one still needs electricity from the fuel cell,then the thermal energy from the fuel cell will be wasted unless it isused to cogenerate electricity. This requires a measure ofstatistically-based capacity planning. * Third, there is an holistic relationship among sources anduses of energy, and intelligent generation must take this into accountwhen creating an energy user's profile. The sun shines during the dayand the summer has more hours of sunlight. Conversely, the wind blowsmore at night and during the non-summer months. Grid electricity ismore expensive during summer days, and natural gas is more expensiveduring the winter. Taking these three things into account, intelligent generation entailsthe optimization of holistic energy production and use. If thecomponents of intelligent generation-electrolyzers, reformers, solarpanels, micro wind turbines, and fuel cells-comprise the equivalent ofthe PC and its peripherals, then the fuel cell is analogous to the CPUand the optimizer is its operating system.The individual intelligent generation home or small businessthus becomes the building block for the democratization of energy. Asis true in any democracy, a single disenfranchised voter wields littlepower, but thousands of them voting in a bloc-or network--carryconsiderable clout. We know from our experience with the PC andInternet that anything with a CPU (and NIC) can be networked. Acluster of intelligent generation homes and small businesses in BurrRidge and Hinsdale might be connected to similar clusters inBarrington, Bloomington and the south side of Chicago. Although theseclusters would not have the physical capability to transfer hydrogen,electricity or thermal energy among them, they would as a pool havethe virtual capability to broker hydrogen, electricity and other itemsof value like emission credits to similar communities or otherpurchasers. Moreover, these pooled clusters could negotiate morefavorable rates with both gas and electric utilities as well asindependent power producers (IPPs). For the first time, electric andgas utilities (and potentially, oil companies) would be in theposition of competing against each other across energy lines tosatisfy the purchasing requirements of the decentralized hydrogenconsuming community. The combined effect of individual energyself-sufficiency and inter-energy source competition would be that thestill-extant feudal construct of the public utility would undergo aradical rethinking. New partnerships, markets and jobs would emergeas a result-as has always been true when nascent democracy is allowedto flourish.As remarkable as all this sounds, wouldn't we still be stuckwith the same oil dependence issue? Maybe not. Adopting the conceptsof energy open systems, intelligent generation and the democratizationof energy would drastically accelerate the arrival andcost-effectiveness of hydrogen cars. Consider the following: today's"paving the cowpaths" approach has us growing the hydrogeninfrastructure organically by gradually augmenting existing gasstations to include hydrogen pumps. This would only begin in earnestonce automakers came close to producing a commercially acceptable fuelcell car. What the organic approach produces is a classic"chicken-egg" enigma, i.e., which comes first-millions of fuel cellcars or the refueling infrastructure to support them?. Alternatively,the creation of tens of thousands of hydrogen refueling-readyintelligent generation homes and small businesses in the next 10-15years obliterates this roadblock. Once such a wave of intelligentgeneration building began in earnest, automakers would see that themarket for significant numbers of hydrogen car sales will occur soonerrather than later-and if Detroit does not see this, then Japan and theEU certainly will. (as the benefits of intelligent generation alsoapply to the EU, Japan and China.) The evolution of a decentralizedhydrogen-ready refueling infrastructure (not unlike what we arecurrently experiencing with HDTV) would attract venture capital,investment capital, engineering talent and government assistance intothe energy and automotive sectors in a way that would make the dot.comera pale by comparison. Realistically, the ambitious goal of hydrogencars comprising 10% percent of the domestic fleet by 2030 could beaccelerated by 8-10 years by this type of economic fury. As acomparison, keep in mind that the elapsed time between the Apple IIand the Google IPO was just over 25 years-a single generation.This is what the hydrogen economy is all about-the completere-engineering of our existing energy architecture into one that makesenergy sources and uses interchangeable and places power (literallyand figuratively) into the hands of the end user. One's firstquestion may be "Sounds good, but how can it be cost-justified?Doesn't the combined cost of a fuel cell, electrolyzer, reformer,solar panels, wind turbines and optimizer far outweigh the benefits?"The answer may surprise you. And that will be the topic of the nextcolumn.On deck: The economics of the hydrogen economyIn the hole: How Chicago can become the global capital of the hydrogeneconomy (and why it should do so) +++++++++++++++Disclaimer: The views expressed in this article are solely those of the author and should not be construed in any way to represent the views of Latham & Watkins LLP, its attorneys or affiliates..+++++++++++++++Jay Marhoefer has made a career of conceptualizing new businessparadigms and bringing them to fruition. At Andersen Consulting (nowAccenture) in the 1980s, Jay was one of the early leaders in thefirm's nascent Change Management Services practice. At the consultingdivision of Price Waterhouse (now part of IBM) in the early 1990s, Jaywas the architect of firm's re-engineering service line, leading itsgrowth from concept to billion-dollar revenue machine. In the internalconsulting group of CNA Insurance in the mid-1990s, Jay developed theconcept of "Newtechco" which resulted in the multi-billion dollarjoint venture between CNA and one of the world's largest outsourcingcompanies. In the late 1990s, Jay joined Parson Group (now ParsonConsulting) to head up the company's ERP practice as theprivately-held consulting firm grew to its #1 ranking on the Inc. 500list in 2000. During his years as a consultant, Jay worked mostprominently with clients from the public utility, telecommunicationsand energy industry sectors. During his career, Jay has presented onnew technology countless times at business school seminars, regionaltechnology forums and international events. He has done so on aglobal basis, including presentations in the United Kingdom, SouthAmerica, Australia and Hong Kong, not to mention numerous places inthe United States and Canada. Jay is also a multiple-day champion ofthe game show Jeopardy!In May 2003, Jay completed his law degree at the Chicago-Kent Collegeof Law and finished as valedictorian of his class. During hiscommencement speech, Jay inspired the audience of 4,000 to a standingovation and shared the speaker's role with an at-the-time little-knownstate senator named Barack Obama. Jay's interest in the hydrogeneconomy began while in law school and he is currently building anational reputation as "the hydrogen lawyer" as an attorney with themultinational legal powerhouse Latham & Watkins. He has presented histhoughts on hydrogen and the law to groups including members of theHouse of Representatives Energy Committee, and is actively assistingin the development of the hydrogen roadmap for the state of Illinois.Jay is nearing the completion of his first book on the hydrogeneconomy entitled "Re-Energizing America: Ten Crucial Ideas forPreventing the Approaching Fossil Fuel Apocalypse." He is activelyseeking an agent and publisher.Jay can be reached by e-mail at [e-mail] or by phone at [phone]

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Peace
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 02:39 PM

Well, not a third time anyway.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Cluin
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 01:24 PM

Oil will run out.


Especially if you leave the drain plug out of the oil pan. Don't wanna do that again.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bill D
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 01:12 PM

I know the statistics about energy/resources use..but it does little good to simply proclaim that the US uses "more than its share"...this situation developed gradually as the US created much of the technology to GET energy, and by the time it was a serious issue, it was obviously tricky to just re-distribute the pile.

The only real solution is a long-term plan to develop alternate technologies...wind, solar, water,...whatever...and make these technologies available to countries with problems....while reducing our own excessive habits. (does Las Vegas really NEED all those lights?)

All of that, of course, while reducing the population to a level that can be sustained and allow the remaining resources to be monitored...

How low? Well, you may laugh, but I suspect that the largest population that can be sustained indefinitely is between 2-3 billion...about what it was in 1950 or so. Scary, huh? I may be off...but we need to know. And we need world leaders who will address the issue, and quit avoiding it because it is a political hot potato!

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Peace
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 01:05 PM

grammar police

I'm with the spellnig ploice.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: saulgoldie
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 12:50 PM

Scuse me, it should have been " ...US resident is equal to as MANY as several thousand of some residents ..." Being a charter member of the grammer police, I must self-correct.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: saulgoldie
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 12:45 PM

The equation includes, yes, the population. But it also includes the appetite of the population. On that score, the US leads the list in consumption per capita, and has an obligation to the rest of the residents of this blue and green marble. I don't know what the actual equivalent is, but I would venture to say that on the scale of CPC, one average US resident is equal to as much as several thousand of some residents of subsistance level regions. It all comes down to sustainability. And for that, The US and, to a lesser degree, the other industrialized nations have to drastically cut resource consumption.

On the more general issue of population, per se, just look at the prissy every-sperm-cell-needs-a-name attitude of our current boob. Not only is it a domestic nightmare to not talk openly and responsibly about procreation and our obligation to the larger human family, but we must export it in the manner of refusing to fund world programs that try to adress overpopulation with genuine education, or withhold funding for same.

I am not hopeful. I am 51, and I figure that the confluence of oil running out, water being in short supply--we haven't discussed THAT one, have we?--deteriorating air quality, and the ravaging of just about every non-human species will conbime to turn the lives of the surviving humans within my lifetime, and maybe within the next decade.

President Bush is obviously not the answer; Kerry is only not as bad. I'll vote for him and cross my fingers that we might get another few years before the boom lowers.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 10:07 AM

We have alternative forms of energy but they are currently more expensive than oil.   While most people talk "green" few are willing to pay for it.    To immediately shut down "brown" energy and switch over to green energy would cause a world wide depression.    On the other hand, it is foolish to believe that the price of green energy will not come down and become more competitive in the future.

For my day job, I was on a team assigned to bring renewable energy into Michigan (USA).   I made a proposal to the public service commsision last week which was accepted.    We have gone out for quotes.   (You can look up our RFP at dteenergy.com than go to community and than environment)    Our goal is to convert 5% of our total energy to renewables in 5 years.   That would represent 2 million mega watts or enough energy for 300,000 homes.   Chances are likely (hope hope hope) that I will either manage the project or at least be on the team that is assigned the project.    A million things can go wrong before this happens.    The point is that we are in process of converting to renewable energy on a large scale.   Technology and cost improvements will determine the market.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 09:25 AM

A gold star for Bill D!

The history of life on earth is full of examples of species becoming wildly sucessful, exploding across a habitat, exploiting every resource until they deplete or poison their habitat, or until they themselves create a ripe habitat for another species (e.g. another predator, or more likely a microbe).

Although we are the first species to be aware of this history, we certainly can't seem to overcome our overwhelming self-interest long enought to learn from it. The human population crash IS coming. Only questions are how soon, how sudden, how complete. My answers: in my daughters' lifetimes (aaaahhhh!), very sudden via pandemic or (less likely) nuclear holocaust, and not complete (the cycle will repeat...please read "A Canticle for Leibowitz").

What a lovely train of thought to start the day...
But everyone should be thinking it.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Ellenpoly
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 04:00 AM

BillD, You've said what I would have said.


..xx..e

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Peace
Date: 18 Aug 04 - 12:09 AM

"they would soon see how careful they had to be not to breed so rapidly as to exceed the carrying capacity"

. . . or they would find ways to reduce the existing population.

Bill D: Good thinking, as always.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Aug 04 - 10:36 PM

yep, pdq.....we do. We have LOTS of problems, but population is the key....meaning that no matter how well we learn to fix (as in put band-aids on) the other problems, if we don't control...and eventually REDUCE... population, none of the other problems can be controlled for long.

If we put some people on a small island with limited resources, they would soon see how careful they had to be not to breed so rapidly as to exceed the carrying capacity....but no one seems to see that Earth is just a larger island, where the time scale for danger is longer.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: pdq
Date: 17 Aug 04 - 08:19 PM

...repeat...

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: pdq - PM
Date: 08 May 04 - 02:11 PM

Great points by several people here. Remember though, every new human born is a new drain on a finite amount of natural resources. We really don't have an energy crisis, we have an overpopulation crisis.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bill D
Date: 17 Aug 04 - 07:32 PM

just 15 minutes ago, I saw a report on CNN about the latest predictions of the Population Resource Bureau ...read it and weep.

No matter how much oil is discovered, or how we politicize the distribution process, or how we (meaning the WORLD) creates more efficient autos, etc....we will not have enough oil...or anything else...to satisfy 9 billion people in 2050!

This thread is 'mostly' about oil, but substitute water, land, fish, trees, rice, clean air, ...almost any natural resource or commodity you wish, and it WILL be in short supply if we allow 9 billion people to share it. There are wars and disputes over many of these things today....imagine doubling the demand with a 5% increase in supply (if that much).

I am 65 years old...I expect to live 20 or so more--long enough to say "I told you so", but there will be no joy in winning that sad bet.

There are very few options...none of them easy or pleasant. Even the sanest and most reasonable will mean severe economic upheaval for a several decades--but with the mindset of those who control the economic sector, it probably means that some of the LEAST reasonable and sane measures will be employed as the crisis becomes evident.

(You'll notice I don't list detailed predictions...they ought to be obvious, and they are not pleasant reading)

Maybe I will start a seperate thread...

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Peace
Date: 17 Aug 04 - 06:41 PM

That was excellent, Fionn.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Peter K (Fionn)
Date: 17 Aug 04 - 06:39 PM

In economic terms, the world treats oil as current-account stuff, whereas being finite it ought to be counted as capital. (Likewise the environment.) The US leads the world by miles on per capita oil consumption, and is surely going to pay a high price as the rest of the world tries to close the gap. Some 100-plus countries, notably China and India, are likely to consume more before they consume less.

Those who expect to see alternative energy sources come on line as the price of oil goes up may well be right, but unless the two trends are dovetailed to perfection, the world economy will be severely tested. If the world economy was in rude good health, that might be OK, but in fact it is sustained by US spending, and the US is running a huge deficit. The world economy is in fact a bubble.

Whatever happens, and whatever we do, no-one in his right mind could think that our present stewardship of the planet, driven as it is by short-term, "me, now" interests, is in the slightest degree responsible.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Peace
Date: 17 Aug 04 - 06:02 PM

Not that I can see.

Can it be done? Read about the Manhattan Project.

Money, brains and will. Pretty powerful trio.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,TIA
Date: 17 Aug 04 - 05:51 PM

Even my neocon relatives are now admitting that Iraq really is about oil. But, let's not restart that debate here. Let's just say for argument's sake that it is about protecting our oil supplies in the future. Could we (and this is a serious question) develop alternatives to oil using the same money spent for the war (~ 4 to 6 billion per month), the same person power (~ 150,000 people), and the same time-frame (~ 5 years or so)? Any downside to doing that?

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out (NOT)
From: robomatic
Date: 17 Aug 04 - 05:00 PM

Bill:

I really appreciate your post. I have a hard time buying most of it. The basic premise that we are burning oil faster than we are discovering it is well taken, and the above mention that one of the Oil Major's 'suddenly' discovered that its reserves weren't as great as thought also gives one pause.

But I don't see a change in the structure of the economy coming out of this. Our economy (supply and demand, capital investment, time value of money) existed prior to the petrochemical age and is much more fundamental than it.

Rather, as stated convincingly above, we are NOT going to run out of oil, we are going to run out of CHEAP oil. The very economy in which we exist is helping us to define our terms and guiding us as we proceed through new events. Marrying well entrenched economic concepts of value with technological developments of solar, wind, hydro, nuclear will give us a way to evaluate the risk/ reward associated with alternative power sources and fuels.

This is no rosy scenario, and I am not saying: "Have no fear, the capitalist system will save us." That would be nonsense. Anyone who lived through the Tulip Craze, the Great Depression, and the High Tch Bubble, is well aware that people in groups can behave much more stupidly than any one person. Many believe we are doing that now, by not having a national program to face this very issue.

But the lines in your post about the abondonment of the 'work ethic' make no sense. Someone is advancing some weird agenda there and the groundwork for it is not included. It reminds me of the kind of stuff Marxist theorists used to advance. Good for a master's degree and a radio spot. Utterly without meaning otherwise.

Getting back to the world we find ourselves in, one thing that occurs to me again and again is that a great deal of fuel is used by the airline industry. Should the cost of fuel go up, I think we'd see a lot less flying, and a lot more train usage. Trains are much more efficient (The most efficient way to move loads on the planet, according to a 70's era Scientific America - bicycles came second). So, as energy costs go up, I think we would see more railroad development, purchases of fewer and smaller cars, larger and slower ocean liners, more nuclear reactors.

My point is that far from apocalyptical predictions of the end of "the world as we know it" we are faced with the fact that once again we are living in the good old days. Some things are going to cost more, new things will arise. Fewer business trips and way more on-line conferencing (which the oil company I knew best was getting into, anyway). People moving less far from home and vacationing via rail and ship. Warfare by cheap expendable lightweight robots. Space exploration by same (sigh).

Some other points you raise speak to my fears. I approve of some of what W has done, but as I mention above, I question his leadership and whether he 'gets it' meaning the new orientation that the world is taking around us. I felt that Clinton 'got it'.

Once again, this is where a real leader can be a real help. Lead the country into a competition towards efficiency. Spearhead technological research such as getting sulfur out of dirty coal, then sell that technology abroad. And pay attention to the needs of the state and preserve old railroad rights of way, 'cause we're gonna need 'em again.

It is way too early to make value judgements on the proposed re-positioning of 70,000 US Troops. There just isn't enough information. I don't think it is related to world oil.

Get It?

Robo

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,The Stage Manager
Date: 17 Aug 04 - 01:25 PM

My apologies for the unseemly length of this posting, but I genuinely feel that this is probably the most critical discussion to be had today, and I am only slowly getting to grips with the enormity of it.

Further focus to my 'feeling' may well be provided by my ' Day Job' which involves negotiating energy contracts for UK companies. One of our larger clients is facing a 45% increase in energy costs since their last contract 2 years ago. This is going to wipe in excess of £1m straight off their profit line.

There is a growing sense around that the current increases are not just down "The Iraq Situation" but to more fundamental factors.   Maybe it is time to look again at Hubbert's prediction that the start of the decline of carbon fuel supply would also precipitate the end of our current financial and energy based systems.    This is a hard one to swallow.


This is a recent "Editors Comment"   from 'Oil and Gas Investor'

Has anyone pointed out to you recently (after proper adjustments for the true discovery date of reserves) that the world oil industry is now producing approximately three times the volume of crude it is finding each year? That the peak global oil discovery rate was in the mid-1960s and that we have been in an inexorable descent since then? That in the late 1980s, new discoveries fell below the level of current production, and are still falling, despite the application of many powerful technological tools in the 1990s? And that 70% of the oil you are consuming today was found 25 years ago or more?

These are points that oil companies (and governments) find awkward to discuss. One reason is that there are so many conflicting views of "experts." Who is one to believe? Another is that while the Hubbert Curve cannot be "proven" to work in any exact time sequence, widespread debate about it would certainly raise warning flags for some elements in society, and environmental passions in others. Should sleeping dogs be wakened in this case? Lastly, recognition of the effects of Hubbert's math could imply an end to volumetric growth for most oil companies in the intermediate term—not an eagerly awaited event.

However, we are at a point now where these issues need airing. Effective energy policies for the U.S. are part of an ongoing national debate, and investors are asking where the flow of funds into the energy sector should be concentrated to bring the best results. The shadow of Hubbert looms large over these discussions. Suddenly, we are troubled by issues on a world scale that he was dealing with on a national scale back in the 1950s. And the resolution of them is just as elusive today as it must have been back then, only now we have no new world of exploration to turn to as an alternative to our depletion of an old one.

Hubbert had his own theories on what "Having no new world of exploration to turn to as alternative could mean"   This is what lead him to his forecast the end of our current financial system. This forecast is taken up in more detail in the following article:

Article

We have to form our own opinions of Hubbert's work and writings: and I don't particularly agree with some of Hickerson's conclusions in the article, however the following of these conclusions, made five years ago look to be proving not far wide of the mark.   This has enormous implications for all of us.


1.        We will never again be able to get sufficient growth of the economy to eliminate or even markedly reduce unemployment.

2.        All attempts to reduce the deficit, balance the budget or pay off the national debt are futile. The deficit and the national debt represent the subsidy the government has paid in its attempt to keep growth and unemployment at the level of social tolerance.

3.        The steady state economy into which we are being inexorably forced implies an interest rate of zero.

4.        An interest rate of zero (as Hubbert explains) means the end of the money system. We are being forced to completely rethink our cultural ideas about how to organize our economy and distribute purchasing power.

I particularly note the last sentence.


In the artice, Hubbert is reported as saying:

``I was in New York in the 30's. I had a box seat at the depression, I can assure you it was a very educational experience. We shut the country down because of monetary reasons. We had manpower and abundant raw materials. Yet we shut the country down. We're doing the same kind of thing now but with a different material outlook. We are not in the position we were in 1929-30 with regard to the future. Then the physical system was ready to roll. This time it's not. We are in a crisis in the evolution of human society. It's unique to both human and geologic history. It has never happened before and it can't possibly happen again. You can only use oil once. You can only use metals once. Soon all the oil is going to be burned and all the metals mined and scattered.''

``We are not starting from zero,'' he emphasizes. ``We have an enormous amount of existing technical knowledge. It's just a matter of putting it all together. We still have great flexibility but our maneuverability will diminish with time.''


Hickerson comments:

That is obviously a scenario of catastrophe, a possibility Hubbert concedes. But it is not one he forecast. The man known to many as a pessimist is, in this case, quite hopeful. In fact, he could be the ultimate utopian. We have, he says, the necessary technology. All we have to do is completely overhaul our culture and find an alternative to money.   (Really that's all ? Well that's certainly going to be a doddle!)

A non-catastrophic solution is impossible, Hubbert feels, unless society is made stable. This means abandoning two axioms of our culture . . . the work ethic and the idea that growth is the normal state of affairs. Hubbert challenges the latter mathematically and concludes the exponential growth of the last two centuries is the opposite of the normal situation.


The implication of all this for me is that our current financial systems will begin to implode as the gap between oil production and oil demand increases. It looks to me that this gap is now opening up. We do not have to wait until the oil actually runs out. No wonder then that, Oil and Gas Investor feels that "These are points that oil companies (and governments) find awkward to discuss."   The further I look into this the more I come to the opinion that the crisis nearer than many would like to admit.


Footnote:

Another unrelated article on this subject recently suggested that the US would pull out of NATO in order to re-deploy troops to secure oil US supplies from around the world.    I dismissed this as being 'far fetched'…….Then Bush made his defence re-deployment announcement.    Another of Hickerson conclusions that I was inclined to reject is that "Increasingly desperate means will be used by those who think we can continue to have business as usual."

Other commentators (Common Dreams) note:
The map of the 'war against terrorism' corresponds with such uncanny accuracy to the geography of oil fields and proposed pipelines. From Kazakhstan to Ecuador, American combat boots are sticky with oil.
To cite two recent, almost random examples: First, the Malaysian foreign minister warned in late May that Washington was exaggerating the threat of terrorist piracy in the Straits of Malacca in order to justify the deployment of forces there -- right at the chokepoint of East Asia's oil supply.
Second, T. Christian Miller, reporting in the Los Angeles Times, revealed that U.S. Special Forces, as well as the CIA and private American security contractors, are integrally involved in an ongoing reign of terror in Columbia's Arauca province. The aim of "Operation Red Moon" is to annihilate the leftwing ELN guerrillas threatening the oilfields and pipelines operated by LA-based Occidental Petroleum. The result, Miller reports, has been a slow-motion massacre.

If this is true, then I feel very uneasy indeed.   


Today it was announced that one of the UK's major suppliers is putting up prices a further 10% from September 3. The third increase in six months.

It's about time people started asking more fundamental questions, and started kicking those sleeping dogs….hard.

Bill

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: robomatic
Date: 13 Aug 04 - 03:51 PM

Well, we are and we aren't (f**ked, that is). There is a great deal of oil out there, and a great deal of demand. This situation reminds me of a gread Dickens Quote from David Copperfield:

Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness. Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.

Incremental surplus would result in immediate price reductions, just as seemingly minor restrictions, or refinery closures will result in immediate shortages and price hikes and potential rationing.

I hold out hope that further price rises will lead to fewer Hummers on the road and more Priuses. (One moment while I dial up my broker and buy some Toyota stock).

And there IS all that coal up north.

So while ANWR reserves may not be sufficient to replace our dependancy on Saudi Arabia (and they aren't) they may still have great significance to U.S. self-control of its unbridled consumption. I'm repeating myself that I don't see any real leadership in our government on the issue. I think the Feds should institute a 'terror tax' on motor fuels and get the automakers to include trucks in their fleet averages.

There are significant wild cards up there. Chinese and other Asian economic expansion, the Russian government battle against Yukos, and there are many less obvious but quite potent looming uncertainties, such as the aging refinery and pipeline infrastructure in North America.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,The Stage Manager
Date: 13 Aug 04 - 09:23 AM

I may have missed it, but I feel Hubbert's Peak is essential to this discussion.

Hubbert

There are some good links from this site


If the Oil Men and academics in some of America's foremost universities are worried....

Be afraid, Be very afraid.   Basicially we're fucked, and very few, (if any) have the balls to admit it.

Bill

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Rt Revd Sir jOhn from Hull
Date: 13 Aug 04 - 12:01 AM

Hello, i'm not even bothered if oil does run out, as i don't use it, [fried food is bad for you],
i grill stuff, sausages, fish fingers bacon etc]

sometimnes i eat fried fish, but thats from the chip shop on newland ave, and they only use pure sunflower oil, and its not bad for you once a week.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bobert
Date: 12 Aug 04 - 11:54 PM

I'm thinkin' of New Zealand myself, saul...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: saulgoldie
Date: 12 Aug 04 - 04:01 PM

Josh, you are right about our vote and the future of the world's environment. However, please note for the record that this president was never elected in the first place. And we are not all that sure that our votes will be properly counted this time. Any suggestions?

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: el ted
Date: 12 Aug 04 - 10:18 AM

100. hello wilfried!

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: el ted
Date: 12 Aug 04 - 10:18 AM

99

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: el ted
Date: 12 Aug 04 - 10:04 AM

98

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: el ted
Date: 12 Aug 04 - 08:44 AM

97

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Aston University (Josh)
Date: 12 Aug 04 - 07:17 AM

It is ur democratic right to vote America. Please vote for a president who is not so ignorant to the future troubles your children will suffer. Please help get the Kyoto protocol through. You are the biggest consumer of Oil in the world. Blood will be on your hands as well as the rest of us. Time to act now, not later!!

Good discussion!

Josh

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: MarkS
Date: 13 May 04 - 02:57 PM

Let's find a way to use garbage instead.

Kim - If I am not mistaken, we do. I believe both Philadelphia and New York are already running "trash to steam" plants to generate electricity.

Cant say anything about how efficient it is, but it sure sounds like a good way to get rid of the trash and turn it into something useful instead,'

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 13 May 04 - 01:54 PM

I agree with partial solutions and using what we have now while at the same time working on better solutions.

We have compact florescent light bulbs.   They use only 1/4th the wattage of regular light bulbs and last 10 times as long.   They have come way down in price ($15 to $3)   They used to be hard to find and only 1% of the market.   Today they are 25% of the market and growing. (maybe more- my date is 1 year old)

Someone asked about LED lighting for the house.   I have just added LED night lights to my product line of indoor and outdoor lighting for my company.   I think I am one of the first promoting these.   The nightlights last 100,000 hours (between 10 and 20 years) only use 1/4 of a watt, and cost only 20 cents a year to operate.   I am working on prototypes for LED outdoor post lights for the yard.   I am hoping to have these on the market this year.

These are simple things we can use right now.    To answer the question about why Detroit is making Hummers.    That is simple.   Because people are buying them.    Silly thing about business people.   They tend to make what people want to buy.    When more people want to buy hybrids, they will make more hybrids.    Lets critisize car companies for giving customer what they want.   The good news is that Hummer sales are way down this year.   I am surprized you had a 6 month wait.    In Michigan you can get one right away.    They will probably even throw in a free tank of gas.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Kim C
Date: 13 May 04 - 01:42 PM

Let's find a way to use garbage instead.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bobert
Date: 13 May 04 - 01:06 PM

Yeah, where's Jimmy Carter when we need him the most.. Heck, we got Dick Cheney, an oilman, holing up with a bunch of other oilmen to come up with America's "eneregy policy" and guess what? Ain't too much in it, if anything, about "conservation"??? It all geared toward "consumption"!!! How utterly narcisitic and arrogance...

Robomatic,

Thanks for yer thoughtful and time consuming post. It was well written and definately woke up a few sleepy brain cells...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 13 May 04 - 12:09 PM

All right, It's time for me to sound off on one of my favorite topics.

Everybody's lookung for the big, dramatic solution. Partial solutiond can have a tremendous impact without major disruption of anything. F'rinstance, putting a water tank in the attic and using it to supply water to your heater can cut summertime water heating costs in half--you just have to install valving to drain and bypass this tank when the weather gets below freezing. Using today's automotive technology on smaller engines and lighter cars instead of SUVs could cut fuel consumption by half--I recall getting speeding tickets with a FIAT 600 featuring 28 hp, so I'm not sure that 250+hp is needed.
    Geothermal-sourced heat pumps/air conditioners make a great deal of sense for large portions of the country. Solar-powered air conditioning for SunBelt areas make a helluva lot more sense than solar heating for the North East.
    AND THERE'S ALWAYS CONSERVATION.

Subject: Oh the Humanity
From: robomatic
Date: 13 May 04 - 11:04 AM

petr:

What you say is true, and I would say that what we should have government taking the lead on is financing technological development, NOT commercial development. Government should be used to advance technology in ways that aide and protect the people. Our capitalist system is quite efficient at filtering out what actually works from what is not productive.

Case in point. A company out there is very self-promoting in claiming that it can provide transportation vehicles with fuel cells. What I've been told by people in the know is that in fact their fuel cell technology is inadequate, and the units need to be replaced after a very short time. Another point, as with bio-research, if patents are going to be awarded over vital matters of biology and technology, I would rather the people own them. That's why I think government cooperation with research can be a good thing.

The point I made about wind and solar power being a good source of investment by government is arguable either way. I don't suggest that governments invest in sure losses (although this happens again and again in reality) but that, say, a handy limited range postal delivery cab might be something worth government interest. Speed and range will be less of an issue, and it will give industry of scale a boost. Likewise with government buying solar power arrays for powering remote weather reporting systems. (There's a neat unit in mid-Alaska used to power a railroad crossing that uses wind, solar, and battery storage, but damned if I can find out who designed it or paid for it - It's a hundred miles from the grid).

THE GRID. The grid is a wonder of the modern world. I don't know if Europe or Asia has anything to compare with what holds North America together. It won't go away in a hurry. It allows power to be united from the great hydro stations of the west with the big coal burners of the middle and keep lights on in the east. It allows power to be shifted from the areas that don't need their lights on to those that do, and from the areas that don't need their air conditioners on to those that do. The alternative technologies we are talking about are in early stages of development, and have the problem I mentioned already of not meeting immediate demand.

HYDROGEN
Hydrogen has taken a bit of a bad press on being thought of as explosive, particularly when your average fox network news can so readily lay a hand to a film clip of the Hindenberg going down as the hydrogen goes up. Recent research indicates that the material used to dope the zeppelin's outer covering had the same formulation as modern solid rocket fuel.

One nice thing about hydrogen (if you're outdoors) is that if you have a major malfunction your problems go 'up' and don't go flowing all around vulnerable property.

Nevertheless, hydrogen as fuel faces significant technological development (Euphemism for not ready for prime time).

Storage of Hydrogen. Hydrogen is the lightest element, it's a sneaky little atom, when pressurizing a tank, it also goes through the metal of the tank, kind of like air will seap out of a balloon. You won't want to leave your car alone for a few days in a closed garage where welding is going on. There are claims that there is a solution to this called 'hydriding', a solid material soaks up the hydrogen like a sponge.

EFFICIENCY
The Toyota Prius uses a battery to augment an internal combustion engine which by itself is undersized for the size of the car. The car is powered by electric motor acting alone off a battery, the engine charging the battery for the electric motor, or the gasoline engine physically linked to the electric motor to obtain maximum power to the wheels. One other important thing: When braking, part of the braking action is obtained by driving the electric motor from the wheels, turning it into a generator, and recharging the battery. This works well enough so that the reported miles per gallon is higher in stop and go city traffic than in highway driving.

ENERGY
Unless a fuel cell car incorporates such a recovery process, it may not be as efficient as today's Prius.

Other things they don't necessarily tell you: A battery can only charge and discharge so fast because the chemical action that stores the energy is limited by the surface area to which the battery chemicals are exposed, and just as important is the temperature of the battery and its contents. This is also true of fuel cells, which act a great deal like batteries. A way to think of a fuel cell is that it is a battery you can re-charge with fuel. Well, a cold fuel cell is not a happy fuel cell. Some fuel cells have to be many hundreds of degrees up there to be happy.

Another item that has been tried is to use a capacitor in addition to a battery. A capacitor is kind of like a battery with no electrolyte. It can store a charge of electricity with no chemical action, i.e. almost instantly. A capacitor doesn't usually care about the temperature. Unfortunately if something goes wrong, it can discharge almost instantly, too!

What all this adds up to is that we are facing a lot of interesting challenges, and a lot of us are going to have a great deal of fun making things work and writing up why they didn't.

This is a great time to be an electrical engineer! I think it would also be fun to work for consumer reports or som outfit that's going to test-crash all this new stuff and see what happens.

As the song says, "The future's so bright, I gotta wear shades."

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: MarkS
Date: 13 May 04 - 10:22 AM

I am just concerned; that car fueled with hydrogen will become fire bombs ; in accidents.

They already are; when you drive you sit almost on top of a tank of highly explosive gasoline. If a car were fitted with enough hydrogen to go the same mileage as a tank of gasoline, your risk would probably be reduced, since hydrogen is lighter than air and would rise in the event the tank was breached. Also, figure on the fuel tanks being made of a material stronger than the fabric which contained the hydrogen in the Hindenburg.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Wolfgang
Date: 13 May 04 - 09:37 AM

If the hydrogen was produced the way described by you, Two Bears, the situation would be worse than it is now. The hydrogen technology only makes sense, economically and environmentally, if the hydrogen is produced by a cleaner and preferably cheap renewable source.

Why not use the renewable source directly? Well, wind doesn't blow all the time and sometimes the sun doesn't shine. Hydrogen is a good and transportable storage of energy which makes it attractive.

Whenever energy is stored there is danger (dams can burst etc.). I wouldn't like to sit in a car with a fluid hydrogen tank or a very big gas tank. Thankfully, there are safer methods to transport hydrogen.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Two_bears
Date: 13 May 04 - 07:30 AM

Ahhhh, excuse me but this hydrogen that everyone keeps talkin' 'bout uses up a lot of energy to create since electricity is needed to make it... Now me and the Wes Ginny Slide Rule ahve figured that if it takes an equivalent amount of coal or oil to produce the electricity neeed to free up the hyogen and the energy of the hydrgen is roughly equivalent to the amount of energy that would have been produced by just using the coal or oil, like why the big push for hydrogen?

Doesn't it concern anyone that hydrogen was the lighter than air gas that was used for the HINDENBURG?

Hydrogen is an excelent fuel because the Sun has been burning Hydrogen for roughly 4.5 billion years.

I am just concerned; that car fueled with hydrogen will become fire bombs ; in accidents.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bugface
Date: 13 May 04 - 07:30 AM

science should look into recycling the biproducts in smokers lungs, everyone would benefit from that. Plus it's a great way to scare children, don't put that cig in your mouth or I'll be putting your arse into my petrol tank for the next year!

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Two_bears
Date: 13 May 04 - 07:24 AM

Hey, answer me this one if you will... If it wasn't important to burn up this oil as fast as we can then how comes the Big Three auto makers are bilding so many 500 horsepower cars and SUV's? Yeah answer me that one and don't go bad mouthin'

The problems goes back to when the covernment destroyed the family car the station wagon. The Station wagons were heavier, and could not conform to the CAFE standards applied to cars.

After the Station Wagon was taken off the table; they needed larger cars to carry the family, sports equipment, etc; so Vans and SUVs became popular, These are built on truck frames, and they are not forced to meed the same CAFE standards for cars.

I would much rather have a family in a station wagon that gets 17 MPG than in an SUV that is lucky to get 12 MPG.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: dianavan
Date: 13 May 04 - 12:21 AM

Bobert - I wonder how much oil it takes to run a war?

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Blackcatter
Date: 12 May 04 - 11:30 PM

Bobert -

It's useful for vehicles because internal combusion engins are extremely wasteful and polluting compared to powerplants.

Imagine that you p-roduce all the electricity for your house from a generator at your house - yo'd probably be using 3 or 4 times the amount of fuel to do so and probably producing over 10 times the pollution at the powerpnat down the road does.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bobert
Date: 12 May 04 - 10:09 PM

Ahhhh, excuse me but this hydrogen that everyone keeps talkin' 'bout uses up a lot of energy to create since electricity is needed to make it... Now me and the Wes Ginny Slide Rule ahve figured that if it takes an equivalent amount of coal or oil to produce the electricity neeed to free up the hyogen and the energy of the hydrgen is roughly equivalent to the amount of energy that would have been produced by just using the coal or oil, like why the big push for hydrogen?

Hey, just askin?

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 12 May 04 - 09:38 PM

hey robomatic, good points there.

no matter how many other oil reserves there are, (the amount is questionable anyway since Shell just got into trouble for overestimating its reserves and a lot of other big oil is probably doing that as well) the easiest and cheapest to extract crude is in Saudi. there are also many diff. kinds of crude (venezuelan is different than Saudi crude)

Id say that CHina is indeed the wild card. It has over the last 20 years averaged 8% growth. Its no longer streets of bicycles either, and pollution has become a big problem. (A lot is due to people heating their homes with compressed coal cakes) The govt is trying to keep employment up, but has already forced many of the old polluting steel mills to close down or upgrade.

If it should decide to implement, car pollution controls (no matter how stringent, the fossil fuel based cars will still pollute) on the other hand fuel cell vehicles would not. And you can bet with a billion strong market the big automakers would fight each other to make it work.

sure right now the easiest way to extract hydrogen is reforming from natural gas, which still results in greenhouse gases.
Electrolysis for instance is quite expensive. But one of the advantages of larger fuels cells is they make clean water (a plus isolated villages or places where water is a problem)

also the whole idea of a distributed power generation system allows for less dependence on an old creaky electrical grid which can be an easy terrorist target. One tree fell over last summer and 50million people were without electricity in the worst blackout in history.

a lot of large corporations, banks etc are installing fuel cell back up power supplies right now. A chip manufacturer lost 30million$ in production with a 1 hour power failure.

plus I think quieter streets, cleaner air, and less dependence on fossil fuels from unstable parts of the world would be another plus.

petr

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bobert
Date: 12 May 04 - 08:50 PM

Well gol danged tree huggin' commies, far as I can see... Well, I went tdown to the Hummer dealer but they is back ordered 6 months so what I do? Well, I'll tell ya... Seein' as Dick Cheney thinks we need to consume more oil to keep America great I had to do my part so Iz taken to drivin' my 1976 M880 military truck everywhere I need to go and leaving the Toyota parked... Hey, this is America. Home of the brave an' land of the free and I gotta burn up a hundred gallons of oil a week then no pinko gay marriage supportin' commie gonna stand in my way unless they wanta get their bell bottomed, Red Book readin', flower child seffs driven over by my 7 mph M880. No sir! This is America, dang it...

Hey, answer me this one if you will... If it wasn't important to burn up this oil as fast as we can then how comes the Big Three auto makers are bilding so many 500 horsepower cars and SUV's? Yeah answer me that one and don't go bad mouthin' Henry Ford either 'cause he was a good American. Yep, answer me that one, will ya?

Stroker Ace Bobert (new and improved)

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST
Date: 12 May 04 - 08:42 PM

Oil will run out! That's why the power companies are pushing LNG down our throats in Casco Bay.

Peter

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 12 May 04 - 08:07 PM

I once stated in a magazine article, "Predicting future energy costs and availability requires balls--either crystal or brass" Sooner or later fossil fuel will become too expensive, and several alternatives will replace them--problem is that alternatives need government subsidies to compete at present.Consevation is, of course, the simplest and safest alternative. Birth control wouldn't hurt, either.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,robomatic
Date: 12 May 04 - 05:08 PM

I'm real impressed, there's been a lot more common sense than nonsense in this pile o'words. I've got two cents, or tuppence ha'penny:

Alaska. I've worked around the oil 'bidness' up here for a few years and while there is a great deal of oil left up here, the rate of oil flow has already maxed out. The question here is if the U.S. will take advantage of the fact that there is more oil available (both in ANWR and NPRA). It will not threaten any endangered species. It will turn some pristine coastal land into non-pristine coastal land. It will not take the place of existing oil imports, it will simply defray having to increase our dependancy even more than it is right now.

Hydrogen. As stated above, hydrogen comes from hydrocarbons in a process called 'reforming'. You feed natural gas into a reformer, you get out hydrogen which is your fuel and what do you know, you also get out hydrocarbon waste products. In theory you can reform any hydrocarbon fuel, but you have to deal with the waste products. Where fuel cells become efficient is when their heat output, which is usually extensive, can be utilized to keep living areas warm. (This procedure is also used with local diesel generators and sometimes called co-generation).

Wind & Solar. Other folks have already had plenty of information on these, they are wonderful local energy sources but they aren't 'friendly' in that when you need the power you can't count on the wind to be blowing enough or the clouds to be out of the way of the sun. Wind & Solar can be used to supplement a power grid, i.e. help take care of the base energy demands. You still need generators to keep up with the sudden demands. The other thing going on right now is that design and manufacturing of better generators and more efficient and cheaper solar arrays is happening at such a pace that whatever you buy, you can be sure something cheaper and better will be available next year. So a lot of people sit on the fence, manufacturers can't find buyers and development gets stalled.

And here is where we are facing lack of leadership on the part of our political leaders. How about some CONSERVATION? How about mandating that the automobile companies live up to their fleet averages and closing the loophole that lets them sell Ford Excursions and GM Hummers as 'trucks' and doesn't require them to be counted in the fleet averages?

Ultimately, the market will sort things out. You've probably seen LED flashlights hit the market, LED turn signals, and now LED traffic lights. Pretty soon we'll be able to light houses with LEDs, heavy loads like television sets and computer terminals should become a great deal more efficient, and other gains will get made. Oil will creep up in price but we won't need as much.

As for predictions, I think you'll find that real scientists are not making predictions, just some media gurus and they're probably using weasel words that the broadcasters edit out.

I remember in about 1999 when the price of oil went down to $9 a barrel and there were media 'experts' saying that could last for 5-10 years. So take predictions with a grain of salt.

Oil will not suddenly run out. And as it goes up in price, a whole lot more energy sources become available. The real danger is that at some point China could go to high sulfur coal in a big way, and we folks living downwind will suffer.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Amos
Date: 12 May 04 - 03:56 PM

Well, so does the supply chain from crude down to petroleum. WHat we need is a methodology that uses renewable resources (tide, wind, light, etc.) to produce something portable (fuel cells or charged superbatteries) which can then be used in transport.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: dick greenhaus
Date: 12 May 04 - 03:37 PM

What nobody seems to mention is that the reason we use oil is that it's CHEAPER than the alternatives, most of which have been around for decades. Large-scale plants for extracting hydrogen from water face the twin problems of a) it still takes a great deal of energy to split out the hydrogen and b) if you get a lot of hydrogen in one place, how do you get it to where it's needed.
Most of oil's current alternative require expensive equipment (which in turn uses energy to produce) and high maintenance.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 12 May 04 - 03:25 PM

Amos:

Sorry I am late getting back to you.    I was away and haven't had a chance to check this site.

A geothermal is a water source heat pump. (different than an air source heat pump)   They operate very similar to a refrigerator or a water cooler that produces hot and cold water.   It is listed as a renewable energy source.

The way it works is that the earth remains a constand temperature below the frost line (5 feet deep) of 50-55 degrees.    The geothermal system has loops buried under ground that uses this heat stored in the earth.    Through a refrigerant and compression it converts the 50-55 degrees to 70 degrees (or whatever the desired temperature in the house) Because you always start at 50-55 degrees it is very efficient.   About 350% -400% efficient on the heating side. (compared to 80-95% for a furnace) and a SEER rating of 14-22 on the cooling side (compared to 10-13 for an air conditioner)

A geothermal unit looks like a furnce and has a thermostat that operates like a furnace.   The only difference is that it has a reversing valve so it does both heating and cooling.   NO need for an outside air conditioner.    It also how no flame so it has no carbon monoxide.   It is more comfortable than a conventional system.   The only disadvantage is the initial cost for the loop in the ground.   This can range from $1,000 to $12,000 more than a conventional system depending on the property being used.   

Imagine the savings in energy bills, polution, and energy needed if millions of people would use geothermal.    And it would save them money in the long run.   I live in a 2700 square foot house with a 1200 square foot basement in Michigan.   (fairly cold weather)   My total gas and electric bills for the year run from $1400-$1500.

Let me know if you want more information.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Blackcatter
Date: 12 May 04 - 02:38 PM

While is still takes energy to creat the hydrogen, if it is done at large scale plants, the process is very efficient compared to millions of tiny internal combustion engines. A great deal less polluting too. Imagine our country using a similar system for elelctricity for homes and offices. Each of us having a generator in the back yard. Imagine how much more fuel and how much more pollution we'd need and have.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: dianavan
Date: 12 May 04 - 12:52 PM

two_bears - I'm way over my head, here. I got this information from a radio show the other night. I'll admit I was half listening but I was sure they were talking hydrogen. Maybe not. In fact, they were saying, GM has reconceptualized the car, stating that it was now a power plant at night and that the excess power could be sold.

My daughter tells me that the hydogen fuel cell is not the answer in as much as the parts required also produce a great deal of pollution.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 12 May 04 - 11:19 AM

In Germany they are doing some remarkable things with photo-voltaic cells and energy production. Here is something about it. They scoff at the little bit that Americans have done so far, and they're in a good position to hold that attitude.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Stilly River Sage
Date: 12 May 04 - 11:16 AM

Right now it takes a lot of energy to produce that hydrogen--you'd have to fire up the coal burners to make the energy to make the hydrogen, a no-win situation. I doubt there is a technology that is available and affordable for that "tidal energy" recovery. Solar and wind are closest to being viable.

SRS

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: MarkS
Date: 12 May 04 - 09:50 AM

How about using tidal energy to make electricity to separate seawater into hydrogen?
Seems you could put in a facility that would not be environmentally harmful, the primary energy source (tides) are completely renewable, the raw material (water) is right there with the tides, and the plant could produce enough power to store the product.
Just leave it alone and come by every few days to pick up the full containers and hook up the empties.
Mark

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Two_bears
Date: 12 May 04 - 02:55 AM

GM has predicted that by 2025 over 50% of the automobiles in North America will powered by fuel cells. Apparently by day they are transportation and at night they are little power plants. It is also said that if you get in on it early, you will pay less for the hydrogen and you will be able to sell back your extra energy to the grid. Meanwhile, those that come along later, will be
-----

Diana

Hydrogen is the most abundant substance in the Universe, and sny high school kit in a chemistra lab can extract hydrogen from plain water. Water is H2O 2 molucules of hydrogen bomded to one molecule of Oxygen.

Now to your second point. If you generate more energy that you need; you can sell the extra energy to the electric plant; but you will only be paid for the energy at the wholesale rate.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: dianavan
Date: 12 May 04 - 01:56 AM

GM has predicted that by 2025 over 50% of the automobiles in North America will powered by fuel cells. Apparently by day they are transportation and at night they are little power plants. It is also said that if you get in on it early, you will pay less for the hydrogen and you will be able to sell back your extra energy to the grid. Meanwhile, those that come along later, will be paying high prices for the energy you create. I'm not sure if I believe this but I am waiting to purchase a vehicle until they get these babies on the road at an affordable price.

Diana

P.S. I hope nobody tells the states that Canada has oil. We definitely do not want to be the object of any attention from Bush.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bobert
Date: 11 May 04 - 10:45 PM

Well, gol danged it, if we're gonna run ou6t of oil then lets at least do it during our watch so we can go down in history fir somethin'...

I'm going down to my local Hummer dealer and order one. 7 miles per gallon? Hey, don't get no better than that...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Blackcatter
Date: 11 May 04 - 10:34 PM

We won't have to worry about oil running out - the coming plagues will kill nearly all of us off. Imagine AIDS and SAR together with a mortality rate of 80%.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Two_bears
Date: 11 May 04 - 10:29 PM

Ebbie...the distribution of oil is world-wide and very carefully controlled. A barrel needed in Japan is going to go the shortest possible distance - it will actually come from Alaska, no matter who agreed to sell it to them on the open market. It will most likely be replaced by a barrel from Venezuela, which is refined in Florida, payed for by...around and around...
-----

PDC; you are absolutely correct.

Most of theredineries are on the East coast, and the Alaska oil is
on the west coast. It makes more sence to sell the Alaskan oil to
Japan, and other countries in the area instead of shipping the oil
15,000+ miles to go around South America, and bring the crude oil
up the East coast.

Oil is fungable. Sweet crude is sweet crude, and is sold at a set
price for that specific day. They sell the Alaska oil to Japan, and
other places, then they take that money and buy sweet crude on the
East coast without the cost of oil going sky high to transport the
oil down by North and South America, then Up the East coast.

The tankers and most Navy ships are too large to pass through the
Panama Canal.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Two_bears
Date: 11 May 04 - 10:20 PM

Two bears, I live in Alaska and I have NEVER heard any such prediction as the statements you are making as to the amount of recoverable oil in ANWAR (Alaska National Wildlife Refuge). As for whether or how much it would reduce American dependence on foreign oil, until comparatively recently a hefty share of the oil brought down by pipeline from the North Slope was exported by the US.
-----

   I NEVER said that the Anwar would replace ALL of America's oil
   needs for 30 years. I use the qualifier that it would replace all
   of the oil that we import from Saudi Arabia.

   There IS a difference.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: pdq
Date: 08 May 04 - 03:25 PM

Ebbie...the distribution of oil is world-wide and very carefully controlled. A barrel needed in Japan is going to go the shortest possible distance - it will actually come from Alaska, no matter who agreed to sell it to them on the open market. It will most likely be replaced by a barrel from Venezuela, which is refined in Florida, payed for by...around and around...

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 May 04 - 02:47 PM

Two bears, I live in Alaska and I have NEVER heard any such prediction as the statements you are making as to the amount of recoverable oil in ANWAR (Alaska National Wildlife Refuge). As for whether or how much it would reduce American dependence on foreign oil, until comparatively recently a hefty share of the oil brought down by pipeline from the North Slope was exported by the US.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: pdq
Date: 08 May 04 - 02:11 PM

Great points by several people here. Remember though, every new human born is a new drain on a finite amount of natural resources. We really don't have an energy crisis, we have an overpopulation crisis.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Two_bears
Date: 08 May 04 - 01:36 PM

if we carry on as we are... 2040 we wont have any oil
-----

If you want to believe that; be my guest.

There are THOUSANDS of oil wels that are already drilled and capped because it is not cost effective to pump the oil when oil gets as low as $20 a barrel.

The reason it is not cost efective pu pump the oil that is here is because the U.S. has a higher cost of living, and U.S. Workers are paid a lot more, and there are environmental restrictions that cost oil producing companies millions of dollars.

There is the Anwar reserve with BILLIONS of barrels or oil. It would replace all of the oil we buy from Saudi Arabia for the next 30 years.

Then there is enogh coal (by using a technology developed in the second World War to supply current oil requirements for the next 400+ years.

The probles is NOT an energy supply problem. It is the cost of U.S. workers, AND most importantly governmental regulations.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Amos
Date: 07 May 04 - 10:42 AM

Larry:

Could you describe your geothermal system for me?

A

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: pussycat
Date: 07 May 04 - 10:19 AM

thats actually quite a scary prospect, and yet the thought of going backwards in development terms actually has a sort of nostalgic quality...

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: s6k
Date: 07 May 04 - 10:13 AM

if we carry on as we are... 2040 we wont have any oil

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Larry K
Date: 07 May 04 - 09:01 AM

This is a really great discussion.   Lots of information with no name calling.   Oil will run out so pick your poison:
1.   Coal burning plants- huge initial investment.   Most polution
2.   Gas burning plants- huge price volatility
3.   Nuclear- very mixed signals.   Clean air people love it because it is the cleanest energy.   Others hate it because of storing waste.   Bad press and huge safety issues (terrorists and regulations)
make it hard to build more nuclear planats
4.   Wind- very economical but an eyesore, noisy, and issue with birds.   Amazing how many "environmentalists" are fighting them. THe best wind area in the country is from Minnesota to Texas
5.   Solar- great concept but so far very expensive.    In MIchigan where I live you can only get 40% of your energy needs from solar.
6.   Hydro- great if you live in those areas.   Very expensive anywhere else.
7.   Geothermal- I have a geothermal heating and cooling system in my house.   It has reduced our energy bills by $1,000 per year.   It is very efficient (4 times a normal furnace/2 times a normal air conditioner) The problem is that it is more expensive than a conventional system and most people won't spend the initial investment.   IN addition, the loop makes it harder to install so most builders want no part of it.   The DOE used to promote it, but dropped funding.   There may be about 1 million geothermal out there.   If there were 20-50 million out there it would have a huge impact on our energy needs.   Too bad- proven technology, highest comfort level, lower bills, no carbon monoxide, no outdoor unit.   

My guess is that we will not get into hydrogen or fuel cells until we have to.   That seems to be the way things work.   I hate to repeat myself, but this is my issue- so here goes.

WHY NOT ENFORCE EXISTING BUILDING CODE LAWS?   We have a national buidling code and 20 states don't meet it.   My state of Michigan adopted the national code in 1994 and than repealed it in 1995.   This has cost residents 900 million dollars in higher utility bills. (I am on the States energy committee) Our current building code is 60% lower than the national code.   The only penalty was that we had to write a letter to the DOE explaining what we did.    For political reasons we never even wrote the letter.   Houses use more energy than cars.   If we would just force the 20 states to adopt the national code (by reducing federal funds to states that don't) it could have a huge impact on our consumption of energy.   That logic makes me a radical, but I continue to promote it.   In addition to worrying about hydrogen cars, I say we need to insulate the basement.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Two_bears
Date: 07 May 04 - 07:14 AM

Sooner or later, the oil will run out
-----

Yes it will; but not in either of our lifetimes.

There are numerous oil wells that have been capped in the U.S. because it is not cost effective, or political reasons that keep it being pumped from the ground.

In the Anwar reserve (in Alaska) are billions of barrels of oil enough to replace ALL of the oil we buy from Saudi Arabia for the next 30 years.

In World War II; germany developed a way to transform coal into petroleum, and there is enough coal in the U.S. to supply ALL of the current energy requirements for the next 400 years!

Then there is the the renewable energy sources. In 1978-1884; I heated my home by burning wood.

Two Bears

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Wolfgang
Date: 07 May 04 - 06:20 AM

I think this is an interesting article to this theme:

An ill wind

It was supposed to be a green solution to the environmental crisis. But Britain's 'wind rush' - the world's fastest expansion of renewable energy - has split the green lobby and whipped up a storm of protest from a powerful coalition of countryside groups.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Pied Piper
Date: 11 Feb 04 - 11:22 AM

Hydrogen does not need to be stored as a comprest gas Metal hydrides can be formed that absorb the gas reversible.
Metal Hydride Storage

PP

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 10:04 PM

And there's nothing like a big old oil spill (or a little one, for that matter) for killing birds and other kinds of wildlife.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Chief Chaos
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 09:39 PM

Okay,
Professor Chaos takes the stage,

Alot of the drawbacks pointed out with other technologies are present in the production (drilling and extracting) and development (cracking and other methods) of petroleum resources.
On top of what is used "down hole" to lubricate the drill pipe and drill bit what comes back up is not always "good" for the environment or anything else for that matter. Low grade radioactives, know as normally occuring radioactive material or NORM comes up hole. Sour crude is loaded with nasty materials, of which Hydrogen Sulfide gas comes to mind. Smells like rotten eggs. You smell it and it seems to go away because it desensitizes your olfactory receivers. You can stand in a cloud of it thinking your perfectly fine, until you drop dead.
It's bad enough that the facilities storing and transporting crude and refined petroleum products have discharges all the time, but the oil platforms in and around the gulf area are always having small discharges as well.

It's the cautionary tales of the other processes that keep them from being researched and developed. It makes them sound worse than what is going on now. I can also tell you that there are lots of problems with the dangers of the platforms themselves, the offshore supply vessels that run back and forth to the different platforms and the helicopters that transport crews in and out. When it's all added together it's a wonder that petroleum is such a lucrative item. Its only because the oil comes out in thousands of barrels per day (by the way its 42 U.S. gallons to a barrel, not 55) that they make money on it.

P.S. When you control the supply you control the demand. All of the so called Oil Crises have been put ons by the petroleum industry. I have talked with tankerman who have told me that during the two previous oil crises that they sat offshore until the owner got the price he wanted for the oil in the tanker.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 05:03 PM

no offense taken, I just wanted to clarify some points.
and I really meant to put my name down

I still like the feel of reading a newyorker in bed, coffee in hand,
and wouldnt want to do it from a screen - I know that RR Donnelly (one of the largest printers - has a lot invested in e-paper but Im not convinced - I much prefer the feel of a book in my hand)
petr

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Grab
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 02:06 PM

The problem with oil alternatives is that petroleum is damn near the perfect fuel source for vehicles, energy-wise. There really isn't much else that stores the same amount of energy in the same amount of space under simple and safe storage conditions.

- Batteries can't do it, nor will they ever unless there's some radical new invention that's utterly different from any battery we know.

- The main problem with hydrogen (and LPG) is storing enough of the stuff to get the required energy density per storage volume - these gases have to be stored at immense pressures, which requires seriously strong pressure tanks to store them. And unlike a leaky petrol tank which can be patched with chewing gum in an emergency, I wouldn't like to be anywhere within a block of one of these things getting a crack in the tank, or to be in a hydrogen/LPG car that gets rear-ended (the word would be "shrapnel" when umpty-tum atmospheres of gas blows the tank to pieces, and then there's the flammable gas to deal with as well).

- And diesel is all very well, but the particulates from that aren't good news for the environment.

Of course, the prediction of a 75% increase in oil usage assumes that consumers will still use it at the same rate. Once OPEC start running dry, the price is going to go way high, and demand will crumble. US consumers will get the idea when their 4-litre SUV starts hitting them in the pocket, and SUVs will become as much of an anachronism as all the other gas-guzzling American cars to date.

On the subject of solar panels, I assume we're talking about solar panels heating water? Photovoltaic solar panels producing electricity are a losing proposition - a recent Which? article reckoned they won't pay back their cost for 20 years. They use some really nasty chemicals in their manufacture as well.

Graham.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Chief Chaos
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 01:20 PM

Didn't mean to offend, I wasn't aware of all the new technology being used. Sounds like you folk have got your act together! Congrats! Glad to know our northern cousins don't have their head up their ass like us!
I know alot of people would not like to read from an e-reader but then alot of people didn't want to ride in cars or airplanes when they were first introduced. I just see it as mass distribution without alot of overhead cost. No delivery vans (which in my day of delivering papers weren't very well kept. No hauling of raw materials to the printer, Not as much electricity needed to put out the product. No paper to be put in a landfill (not all American cities or for that matter not all countries recycle).

The idea of burning the paper put out for recycling that has never been used came from news shows that were lamenting the high price of recycling programs and showed out of business recycling centers with tons and tons of paper just sitting in the recycling yard. I did not mean it as a "clean" source of energy. But I would argue that it is probably cleaner than coal burning plants and much better than strip mining which the present administration seems to be close to allowing.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,chief chaos
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 12:59 PM

hey chief, you raised a number of points I (being a printer) would dispute. First of all we recycle our paper - that is paper that is 'misprinted', we use & reuse when setting up a job so that we dont waste the good paper. Any offcuts from trimming, diecutting and other waste gets picked up by the recycler every 2 weeks.
(plus we do have a blue box recycling program in Vancouver to keep paper out of the landfill - and cardboard is not allowed in the landfill at all) There is a de-inking paper recycling plant around here and its not likely there will be ever enough recycled paper for it to run to capacity.

But most of the paper that is available today has some recycled content, and there are a few that are 100% post consumer.

most of the inks used today are vegetable based and as far as bleaching paper - the paper mills have switched from chlorine bleaching to oxygen bleaching which is much more environmentally sound. Your proposal to burn paper pellets only adds to the greenhouse problem.

I personally do not want to read books or magazines from electronic
readers and Im sure a lot of people would agree with me. I dont read the daily paper (other than scanning it at the coffee shop) but I do like to read magazines nyorker etc.

Printing makes up a significant part of the manufacturing sector and has been affected by technological change, as well as the downturn in the economy but oddly enough paper mills are making more paper than ever - while certain specialty papers (coloured or different finishes) have been dropped much more copy paper and laser inkjet paper is being produced for the small computer printer market.

and web presses that print newprint, and supermarket flyers are busier than ever - as I see everytime I open up my local rag.
Btw - I dont get a regular paper anyway I just scan the copies at the local coffee shop.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 12:40 PM

This site has information about how an Illinois company is addressing the problems people have brought up in this thread associated with wind energy. I'm still looking for the info on the new kind of wind generator I heard about recently.

Illinois Wind Energy

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Wolfgang
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 12:11 PM

The hydrogen economy blasts off

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Pied Piper
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 11:14 AM

Buning hydrogen produces water vapour true.
Burning fossil fuels produces CO2 AND water vapour.

CH4+ 202 > CO2+2H20

The above reaction (Methane another greenhouse gas)) yields 50.5Kj/mole.

2H2+O2 > 2H2O yields 97.4Kj/mole, both produce the same amount of water but burning Hydrogen produces twice as much energy.

Of cause if the H2 is oxidised in a Fuel sell the water output is liquid.

QED
PP

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Teribus
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 10:48 AM

Some facts about the USA and Geothermal Power Plants and Electricity Production

Geothermal energy provides more than 2700 megawatts (MW) of electric power — comparable to 60 million barrels of oil per year, enough for 3.5 million homes. This is only a small fraction of the potential value of geothermal energy in the U.S.

Geothermal electricity is clean — no fossil fuels are burned. Geothermal electricity produced in the U.S. displaces the emission of 22 million tons of carbon dioxide a year.

Geothermal electricity is reliable — plants have average system availabilities of 95% or higher, compared to 60-70% for coal and nuclear plants.

Geothermal electricity is cost-effective — today's cost of geothermal electricity ranges from $0.05 to $0.08 per kilowatt-hour, and technology improvements are steadily lowering that range. Also, the average geothermal power plant requires only 400 square meters of land to produce a gigawatt of power over 30 years. Compare that with the enormous amount of land needed for coal and nuclear plants and all the open-pit and other mining required to fuel them.

Geothermal electricity is homegrown — it reduces the need to import oil, reduces the trade deficit, and adds jobs to the U.S. economy.

Three power plant technologies are being used to convert hydrothermal fluids to electricity. The type of conversion used depends on the state of the fluid (whether steam or water) and its temperature:

Dry Steam Power Plants:
Steam plants use hydrothermal fluids that are primarily steam. The steam goes directly to a turbine, which drives a generator that produces electricity. The steam eliminates the need to burn fossil fuels to run the turbine. (Also eliminating the need to transport and store fuels) The oldest type of geothermal power plant. It was first used at Lardarello in Italy in 1904, and is still very effective. Steam technology is used today at The Geysers in northern California, the world's largest single source of geothermal power. These plants emit only excess steam and very minor amounts of gases.

Flash Steam Power Plants:
Hydrothermal fluids above 400 degrees F (200 degrees C) can be used in flash plants to make electricity. Fluid is sprayed into a tank held at a much lower pressure than the fluid, causing some of the fluid to rapidly vaporize, or "flash," to steam. The steam then drives a turbine, which drives a generator. If any liquid remains in the tank, it can be flashed again in a second tank to extract even more energy. Only excess steam and trace gases are emitted.

Binary-Cycle Power Plants:
Most geothermal areas contain moderate-temperature water (below 400 degrees F). Energy is extracted from these fluids in binary-cycle power plants. Hot geothermal fluid and a secondary (hence, "binary") fluid with a much lower boiling point than water pass through a heat exchanger. Heat from the geothermal fluid causes the secondary fluid to flash to steam, which then drives the turbines. Because this is a closed-loop system, virtually nothing is emitted to the atmosphere. Moderate-temperature water is by far the more common geothermal resource, and most geothermal power plants in the future will be binary-cycle plants.

The Future of Geothermal Electricity

Steam and hot water reservoirs are just a small part of the geothermal resource. The Earth's magma and hot dry rock will provide cheap, clean, and almost unlimited energy as soon as the technology to use them is developed. In the meantime, because they're so abundant, moderate-temperature sites running binary-cycle power plants will be the most common electricity producers.

Before geothermal electricity can be considered a key element of the U.S. energy infrastructure, it must become cost-competitive with traditional forms of energy. The U.S. Department of Energy is working with the geothermal industry to achieve $0.03 per kilowatt-hour. It is believed that the result will be about 15,000 megawatts of new capacity within the next decade.

The U.S. Department of Energy sponsors millions of dollars in research and development at national laboratories and universities. Investigators are working on issues in exploration, geochemistry, drilling, resource usage, and equipment operation.

The hot dry rock system once perfected could be used anywhere in the world. The system would be a closed system with the water captured after passing through the turbine blades injected back down to the reservoir to be converted into superheated steam.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: saulgoldie
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 09:36 AM

Each new source of energy has its drawbacks and limitations. The underlying issue is sustainability. We are using up everything faster than it can be replenished. There are just plain too many people on the earth and we--not each of us, but all of us together--have too great an appetite for resources for our Mother to support us in harmonious perpetuity. Until we achieve aggressive negative population growth and dramatically reduce our appetites we are only postponing the inevitable by relying on alternative energy and material sources to "save" us.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,McCanick
Date: 10 Feb 04 - 06:42 AM

In my experience oil only runs out if there's a hole in the can.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Chief Chaos
Date: 09 Feb 04 - 04:18 PM

There are a couple of other sources for energy which are often overlooked. Recycled paper (not yet used) can be compressed and used as fuel in electric plants. I believe it is time to end the reliance on paper medium in most part anyway. How much of the evening/morning/weekend news do you actually read? I believe a high resolution notebook style reader would be better in the long run. They can be recharged with solar energy. No more need for huge printing presses or the energy they demand. No tons of misprint papers that can't be sold. No more inks needed, no more bleaching paper to make it white, etc. Get your news downloaded every day with a subscription. The only difference between that day and this is that they print the word instead of sending it digitally.

There are millions of tons of old used tires which can be shredded, and burned to create steam which turns the turbines and is also then used to clean the emissions. The burning process yields usable oil as well.

And what's with all the steam coming from the electrical plants anyway? I would think that you would spend a few bucks to condense it, run it back down through additional turbines and either back through the system or filtered for drinking water.

Down here in Louisiana they have burn-off stacks all over the place (they call them flares) that burn 24-7-365. I understand that these are undesiragle flammable gases but they couold be routed to boilers to make steam to power turbines. Instead they just burn away merrily.

Attic turbines that spin with the wind or from heat rising through the louvres could be outfitted with lightweight magnets and wire to be small generators (every watt counts!)

I could go on and on.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 09 Feb 04 - 12:53 PM

I'd hope that hydrogen from natural gas would be a temporary phenomenon - my impression is that the gas is quite likely to run out sooner than the oil anyway.

No doubt someone has done the sums on the water vapour issue, and clearly they should. My guess is that the figures would be fairly reassuring about the possible impact, but guesses like that aren't worth much.

Agreed, it's not a good idea to assume that any technical fix will make it possible to keep on racing ahead and using more and more energy. There are definitely limiting factors. And there are potential drawbacks to pretty well all alternative energy sources that need to be taken heed of.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Wolfgang
Date: 09 Feb 04 - 12:39 PM

The German ecological movement is quite split on wind power:

(1) The really economically competitive projects would be offshore in a very sensible area of the flat tidal ocean.
(2) Direct killings of birds is not seen as a urgent problem, but
(3) Many species of birds avoid breeding and feeding close to these rotors (imagine you get a big fright every other second from a big shadow)
(4) People living there complain about the low frequency noise and about the intermittent shadow (intermittent shadow can in principle trigger an epileptic fit). The complaint are about headache, sleeplessness etc. Those people of course could be ecochonders (you will guess what this new word means), but who can be sure?

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Wolfgang
Date: 09 Feb 04 - 12:07 PM

I can't see how the hydrogen based energy production would actually mean more water vapour in the atmosphere, provided the hydrogen came from water in the first place. (McGrath)

(1) the cheapest way to produce hydrogen at the moment is not from water (but also from a nonrenewable source, namely natural gas).
(2) Even if all hydrogen would come from water in the first place, turning water into water vapour in the end increases the amount of greenhouse gas. We have loads of CO2 in the world. None of them worries us, except that small amount acting as a greenhouse gas. Water isn't problematic here, but water vapour could be.
(3) What makes water vapour less problematic than CO2 is that it eventually (and usually rather quickly) comes down. We call it rain. Therefore a human decision to stop adding water vapour to our atmosphere would have success within weeks. A decision to reduce CO2 (or other gases) would have success with a lag of decades. Water vapour, which actually is the largest contributor to the greenhouse effect, is therefore seen as less problematic.
(4) However, a grand scale water vapour addition to our atmosphere could have locally drastic climatic effects and globally perhaps too, for the amount of water vapour at any given time will increase, even if it all comes down fairly quickly. My guess is that high flying hydrogene powered planes will be the worst problem here.
(5) My point is not that this would not be an improvement, I actually guess it will be. I only want to warn against those thinking that everything will be unproblematic if only the oil profiteers will be replaced by environment loving people. Any energy production is dangerous and has some disadvantages.

I could find some articles, but I think this should make clearer my previous post.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 07:30 PM

I'm pretty sure there is a new wind technology that has a much smaller impact on birdlife. I'm trying to remember where I read or heard about it. I'll post something if I find it.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: The Vulgar Boatman
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 04:24 PM

This may be old sombrero, but I seem to recall an organisation called the Club of Rome which back in the sixties produced a report called "The Limits to Growth". Ring any bells?

For the record : an economist is someone who believes he can reverse the laws of thermodynamics...

KYBTTS

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 01:19 PM

The answer could be re-rigging the wind turbines so they worked more like windmills, larger sails but moving more slowly. So far as I know there was never much trouble with traditional windmills and bird collisions. Or even if they coloured them in such as way as to make them show up better, and stuck some lights on for night fliers it might help.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Midchuck
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 12:41 PM

Even the common household cat, wind power industry advocates argue, is responsible for more bird deaths than turbines.

True on its face, but...large raptors? I suspect more house cats are killed by eagles than eagles are killed by house cats.

Peter.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Neighmond
Date: 06 Feb 04 - 12:59 AM

They will, because they can.

Chaz

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: mg
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 09:36 PM

any semi-educated person who builds a house or commercial building without some thought to solar etc. is to stupid to be even given a permit. Even 20 years ago the high school drafting classes in a Maine high school I worked at couldn't turn in a non-solar project....Anyone capable financially of some retrofitting who doesn't is just irresponsible, especially as they wail about the oil companies. The oil companies undoubtedly will ride this monster as long as they can, but of course they have plans for all kinds of alternative energies..ready to roll out at a moment's notice.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: dianavan
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 09:08 PM

I'm guessing that the most underdeveloped source of energy is created by the oceans' tides.

Lets face it, the reason alternatives haven't been developed is that the profits are not as good as they are with oil production. I can think of at least one oil-rich family that has probably done all they can to insure that their revenue is not hurt by alternate sources of energy.

...but no matter what alternate sources are developed, it must be coupled with an effort by individuals to curb consumption. As the biggest consumers, N. America must lead the way - otherwise we have no right to deny developing countries the right to squander and pollute.

d

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: BanjoRay
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 06:38 PM

All hydrogen creates is water, of which the world has a huge excess already, so no problem, unless the production of hydrogen, from sources other than solar, releases other gases like CO2. When my master plan is executed and the oil producing countries cover their deserts with solar cells, they will use the power to split the seawater they always have next to them. They will export the hydrogen and oxygen by sea, and thus maintain their incredible standard of living when the oil runs out - or much preferably before the oil runs out, so the oil can be used as raw material for manufacture. This hydrogen production will produce no global warming, or pollution of any sort.
Ther you are - problem solved. Just pay me lots of money, please.
Ray

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 04:15 PM

some interesting points - it is true that hydrogen is not an energy resource - rather a way of storing energy - there not many ways to store electricity- (one is batteries - which have their disadvantages - heavy, toxic materials etc, and water in hydro reservoirs)
but imagine if your car or roof is covered with cheap & efficient solar panels - your car could be storing energy sitting in a parking lot.
the other point about hydrogen - is that current production of hydrogen - from methanol? actually creates green house gases.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: pdq
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 02:44 PM

Here is another...it suggests that market manipulation by various levels of government were needed to make the wind farms in Altamont Pass a reality:




Wind Power May Receive a Breath of Fresh Air


BY Yuriko Nagano

Date: 07-31-98

The everyday miracle of electricity comes at a cost not always revealed by the monthly utility bill -- costs involving dammed rivers, smog, the risks of nuclear power. Wind power seems to offer a way to avoid these costs, but it has run into difficulties on its own. Now new technology may revive hopes for this "clean" energy source. PNS correspondent Yuriko Nagano is a Japanese journalist studying at U.C. Berkeley.

SAN FRANCISCO -- From a distance, the ridgeline of the grassy Altamont hills east of here looks as if it is studded with thousands of pinwheels.

A closer look reveals enormous windmills -- and an even closer look shows many of them are rusting and out of commission.

Altamont is the second largest wind power site in the world. It produces about a billion kilowatt-hours (kwh) of electricity each year, enough to power about a third of the homes in San Francisco.

It is also a monument to an ambitious idea -- producing electricity without burning fossil fuel, damming rivers, or turning to atomic energy -- that ran into trouble. Now that idea may take on new life under a plan to replace nearly 1,300 of the 5,400 working turbines with 200 larger units. Total energy output would not change as the new machines produce about seven times as much power as the existing ones.

The new machines look like the old ones, with a tubular tower and three blades, but represent "the latest technologies from Europe and Japan," according to Steven Buckley, a senior planner with Alameda County. Three different developers -- Green Ridge Power, MNR Energy and SeaWest -- propose to spend more than $100 million on the new equipment.

California's new rules, which let consumers choose where to buy their energy, do not affect the project, as the region's major utility, Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) has agreed to buy all the energy the developers produce for at least the next decade.

The developers do face a deadline -- a federal tax credit of 1.7 cents/kwh ends in June 1999. But the project cannot begin until the two counties affected finish an environmental study.

One major concern is the fact that the turbines now kill many birds, including an average of 49 golden eagles each year, according to the Golden Gate Audubon Society. Developers claim the new turbines, with more space between blades and turning at a much slower rate, will be safer for birds, and some have met with environmentalists to explain this.

"We'd like to see a clean energy source," says Arthur Feinstein, executive director of the Society. "But wind power is not clean if it's dripping in blood. We really hope that their new approach is successful."

Other environmental concerns include noise generated by the rotation of the blades and frequent grass fires caused by electric sparks from the cables on the machines.

Landowners -- many of whom lease their land for grazing -- are somewhat wary about the project. For example, Anthony Castello, 59, is a rancher with 500 wind turbines on his property. SeaWest owns 65 of these, and is proposing to replace them.

"SeaWest has been paying rent, " Castello says. "But I'm not collecting rent from the rest." He is referring to the more than 400 windmills on his land owned by the Arcadian Renewable Power Corp., which went bankrupt and abandoned the machines two years ago.

Investors were drawn to wind power in the early 1980s by generous federal tax credits. To ensure the new industry's survival, the State of California's Public Utilities Commission required PG&E to write 20-30 year contracts agreeing to pay above-market rates for electricity produced at Altamont, in some cases ten times market rates, for the first ten years.

"We were forced to buy that wind energy," PG&E spokesman Jon Tremayne says, "so California could have a diverse mix of energy in the future."

As various contracts pass the ten year mark, however, the amount PG&E pays for wind-power has dropped. Today, about half the producers receive 11 cents/kwh, the rest an average of 3.5 cents/kwh. PG&E claims a fair market price is 1-2 cents/kwh but the American Wind Energy Assn. says the cost of production is 3.5 to 5 cents/kwh, about 80% less than it was 20 years ago.

Abandoned windmills still share Castello's land with his 400 cows. A British company has asked permission to build 45 to 50 new turbines, but Castello says , "I'd like to know more about how good these (new) windmills are because I don't want any more bad machines."

If the new machines prove less troublesome than the old ones, the spirits of those involved with the Altamont project will surely revive.

"The Altamont was traditionally the largest wind farm in the United States and actually in the world," planner Buckley says. "It has shrunk a little bit, but the repowering is basically the means to keep on operating the large wind farm in the next 20 years or so. They are going to give the Altamont a new lease on life."

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: pdq
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 02:37 PM

Cobble...here is an article...I found several by Google search: "Wind Power, Altamont"



Bird deaths create turbulence for Californian wind farm

By Rone Tempest in Altamont Pass, California
December 20, 2003

When the giant Altamont wind farm sprouted 20 years ago, the main objections were aesthetic. Locals did not appreciate the forest of 7000 ungainly wind towers cluttering their view.

No one, apparently, thought about the birds.

Since the phalanx of giant windmills began churning the air above the Altamont Pass east of San Francisco Bay, an estimated tens of thousands of birds have died, including hundreds of golden eagles, red-tailed hawks, kestrels and other raptors, after flying into the spinning blades of the wind turbines.

Now, some environmental groups that routinely supported wind power as a clean source of electric power are opposing the renewal of permits for the wind farm, the largest in the world in number of turbines, until steps are taken to reduce bird deaths.

"Renewing these permits without addressing the cumulative impacts of wind energy on migratory birds, especially raptor species, will give a black eye to wind power," said Michael Boyd, president of Californians for Renewable Energy. Joining in the effort is the Centre for Biological Diversity, a national non-profit group known for its litigious approach to wildlife protection.
  
The two organisations have asked the Alameda County Board of Supervisors to reverse a recent decision by a local zoning board granting permit renewals to some of the wind power operators.

Quoting from recent research for the National Renewable Energy Laboratory and the California Energy Commission, they estimate that over the past 20 years 22,000 birds have died in the Altamont windmills, including 400 to 800 golden eagles.

The open country surrounding Altamont Pass is believed to contain one of the largest populations of breeding pairs of golden eagles in the world. The large raptors, as well as thousands of the more common red-tailed hawks, use the pass as a route to their winter homes in California's Central Valley.

There are 16 other big wind farms in the United States, but none comes close to Altamont in the number of bird kills. In part, this is because of the abundance of birds.

The wind power industry, which is anxious to expand, describes the Altamont situation as an anomaly that has provided valuable lessons for other wind farm.

For example, the new Foote Creek Rim wind farm near Arlington, Wyoming, is also in an area with heavy concentrations of golden eagles. Using data about eagle flight patterns collected from Altamont, planners there were able to space rows of turbines in a way that has avoided high numbers of deaths.

A 2001 report commissioned by the National Wind Co-ordinating Committee, an industry-funded advocacy group, says that the continued controversy over bird kills, particularly at Altamont, has "delayed and even significantly contributed to blocking the development of some wind plants in the US".

The report says many more birds are killed annually in collisions with vehicles (60 million), window panes (98 million) and communications towers (4 million) than die nationwide in wind turbines (10,000 to 40,000).

Even the common household cat, wind power industry advocates argue, is responsible for more bird deaths than turbines.

Los Angeles Times

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 12:26 PM

I can't see how the hydrogen based energy production would actually mean more water vapour in the atmosphere, provided the hydrogen came from water in the first place. That's not to dismiss the suggestion, but can Wolfgang point me to a scientific paper indicating this possibility?

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: mooman
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 12:08 PM

The latest generation of solar panels can already offer energy conversion to heat in the 40% area (rising) and conversion to electrical energy at a lower level (between 25% and 35% in the latest designs - and rising also).

The only problem here is a mindset one and convincing governments to change. The more change there is the lower the currently high unit cost will fall. The more investment there is in the technology, the higher the efficiency will rise.

From my perspective renewable sources such as solar, wind and wave derived energy are the sensible way forward.

Of course, there is always the lobby from the current energy giants to put the spanner in the works.

Peace

moo

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 11:22 AM

There is no energy without disadvantages. Even better insulation of houses has led to the first deaths and illnesses in Germany (less draft, therefore more germs and fungus).


And many "disadvantages" are really just a need to make adjustments. Superinsulated, and tight homes need air exchangers. And that solves that problem.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Cobble
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 11:09 AM

Nobody has mentioned what the disadvantages of wind power are please tell in more detail???

             Cobble

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Cruiser
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 11:05 AM

All sources and uses of energy are paradoxical, for every positive aspect there is a negative result. This is just one of the many great conundrums in our lives on this planet.

I use solar power because it is less polluting than other energy sources. The sun is going to supply free energy for another 5 billion years plus, since it is about in midlife (barring any midlife crisis).

Entrophy will win in the end.

Crusier

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Wolfgang
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 10:49 AM

Let me predict one thing:

When the hydrogen based energy production will be the dominant energy source on the earth, environmentalists will point out soon that water vapour is a stronger greenhouse gas than CO2.

And this now is not a prediction, but it is happening already: Our environmentalists start to oppose wind power (lot of grassroot activities against it) for the damage it does to nature. You can make a lot of money with wind power in Germany, and so we have many rotors already with all the well known disadvantages.

There is no energy without disadvantages. Even better insulation of houses has led to the first deaths and illnesses in Germany (less draft, therefore more germs and fungus).

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Wolfgang
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 10:34 AM

Instructive link, Amos.

When science mixes with political opinion, then science is bound to lose. What has always bothered me and still bothers me in scientists making these predictions is that they nearly never make a balanced argument but only bring arguments supporting one particular point of view.

When in the 70s the worlds was bound to cool down to a new ice age, one of the threats was that the amount of arable land goes down and therefore we'll die from hunger.

When in the 90s the world was bound to warm up one of the threats was/is that germs will be on the increase and we will suffer from more diseases in future.

I still wait to read an article (a book) from the 70s saying that one good thing in cooling is the lessend threat by germs, and one from the 90s telling that one good thing from warming is the increase in arable land.

Now, I don't know what will be true in future, but I know that I do not trust scientists who do not name and weigh the arguments, even if they are against their opinion, but selectively only present those for a certain case. They behave like advocates and not like scientists.

Wolfgang

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Teribus
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 10:13 AM

I am surprised that as an alternative and inexhaustable energy source nobody has mentioned geothermal power stations.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,Boab
Date: 05 Feb 04 - 01:06 AM

Barry Finn has spoken truly!

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,BreastMan
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 11:52 PM

Midchuck,

Good observation.

However, wouldn't that be silicone running out instead of oil?

I prefer the REAL natural ones.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Midchuck
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 11:19 PM

At one point this afternoon, on the Forum main page, this thread was listed directly underneath "Janet Jackson's Breast."

I couldn't help but think that that would solve all kinds of problems.

Peter.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Amos
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 09:19 PM

Please look over this interesting article in Reason about past scientific predictions and how they erred.

A

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 08:06 PM

Plastics is a non-issue. We can make plastic from soy beans or from hemp seed.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 08:00 PM

Hydrogen isn't an energy source, it's really a way of making electrically generated power more portable (you get the hydrogen by splitting water, into hydrogen and oxygen, then you get the power by recombining them so you end up with water vapour in the atmosphere).

And the electricity to split the water in the first place could come from anywhere, but preferably solar/wind/tide driven generators.

What with that and biomass there shouldn't be a real problem, in replacing the oil and other fossil fuels. If we didn't have oil money in the driving seat.

Nuclear fission is just crazy, because of the radioactive waste problem. Nuclear fusion we haven't got yet, outside of H-Bombs, and maybe we never will. Apart from that wonderful nuclear fusion facility we've got shining down on us every day, at a safe distance, our Sun.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,ozmacca
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 07:59 PM

Hmmmm. While there are (or at least may be) viable alternatives to oil as a major fuel source, what we tend to forget is that oil is also the principal source for the plastics we use. If you think we don't use or need that much plastic, take a look around the average home and look for all the synthetics that just plain wouldn't or couldn't be there without it. Then think about the entire infrastructure of our civilisation that has come to depend on plastic.

While most products first used plastics as cheaper or attractive alternatives to conventional materials (metals, fabrics, wood, rubber and glass) plastics have taken over entirely in many areas because it can make goods cheaper to buy, and a whole lot easier and more cost effective to make. There is also (perhaps somewhat paradoxically) arguably impact less on the environment than conventional materials. Think how many trees would have been cut down to make wooden alternatives to plastic items, or how much extra power would be needed for the whole process involved in making metal goods.

While we continue to throw away plastics when we've finished with them we are discarding a valauable resource as well as damaging our fragile eco-system. If we re-cycle more plastics now, we could at least partially reduce the impact of future oil shortage on our industry and our lifes.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Bill D
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 07:49 PM

prediction: There will a few years of panic and re-adjustment when the crisis hits, as those whose business is invested in oil will not 'get out' until the last moment...reducing both demand per capita and "capita" (world population) could ease the transition, but mark my words, put your money in communications technology, 'cause ease of travel in big countries in places like the US will get worse, and will not let you to fly to Grammaw's house every Xmas..

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Barry Finn
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 07:26 PM

The use of fossil fuels should have become & could've become obsolete
decades ago. The enegy producing companies would had to have killed their golden goose & that just ain't gonna happen until they can corner the alternative fuel sources. Hard to make a buck off of windpower & water power. Solar energy put to use in the construction industry (even passive) would amount to a huge reduction in fossil fuels. The glass & the mass of heat storing building materials & the proper use of solar panels & harnessing the wind on roof tops in a city full of high rises is no small savings. Getting the maximun benifits from insulation & ventilation systems piggy-backed with other alternative sources is only one of the many areas that would decrease dependence even more. Air, land, & water pollution, acid rain, global warming & destruction of wild life habits would all be
affected in a positive way. The less we use fossil fuels for an energy source the less we'll depend/need power plants which is a gaint source itself for pollution. The land could be put aside as protected areas for the growing of plant life which helps again. I'm far from knowing much about the energy industries & their choice of sources but I do know at our current rate the power brokers will not go for a safer & cheaper source & give up the huge profits their raking in as long as they can rape us over the barrel. Son of a bitches will demand a thank you, a pound of flesh & a bucket of blood from us for their troubles.

Bush has been giving lip service to this all the while giving away our natural resources & allowing the industries to possess the keys to
both the front & back doors.

Barry

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 07:20 PM

True, but unless we re-gear industry to other fuels, and produce electricity other ways, we're screwed.

Yes indeedy. Your guys are doing a lot to help speed up that process. Canada is way ahead of the US in that respect. As are several European countries.

Don't expect the US to do anything until it becomes clear to enough corporate executives here that they are going to get left behind in the new, non-fossil fuel economy if they don't get on board.

Steve Parkes, I don't think nuclear energy is going to be the answer. It's too expensive, and they still haven't found a way to dispose of the spent rods that doesn't involve bombing people with them.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Peace
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 07:06 PM

True, but unless we re-gear industry to other fuels, and produce electricity other ways, we're screwed.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: CarolC
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 06:52 PM

If you're worried, get yourself a diesel car. You can use recycled deep-fryer oil from fast food restaurants in a diesel car. There's lots of ways to heat a house without using petroleum products.

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: GUEST,petr
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 12:19 PM

actually Oil will never run out.

because at some point when it becomes prohibitively expensive
to extract, other technologies will come on the market - what those
other technologies are is not easy to predict, but probably fuel cells using hydrogen,

other options are hybrid cars (mix of electric, and gas powered)which
are being sold now, and consume maybe half the gasoline of regular cards.
plus a host of other options, eg. ethanol, or blends, (heck you can turn just about plant into alcohol, even garbage)

even cheaper, more efficient solar panels, Imagine making roofing shingles out of that and converting the extra energy into hydrogen which can be stored for future use. etc.

the fact is as far as energy is concerned the amount of solar energy that hits the earth something like 20% is reflected, a large part goes into warming the soil, and a large part goes into water evaporation - but the amount that sustains all life on earth is negligible, less than 1%. (and oil is solar energy from the past)

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Steve Parkes
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 11:09 AM

According to New Scientist magazine, production will peak in (i.e. will fall off after) around 2010-2015. What this means is the price of oil will start increasing and will never come down again. (OK: "increasing more".) So all you US-folks who marvel that we pay over 5 pounds a gallon for our juice over here will find your selves doing it. Then you'll know why we drive such small cars!

It doesn't help to realise that at least half the oil will never come out of the ground, because there's just no way to get it out. Thefirst little bit may come out under its own pressure, then they have to pump hot water down the bores to soften it and force it out; but eventually there comes a point where it just won't budge.

Well, that will be good for the environment. It looks like some green alternatives aren't so green: hydrogen may be bad for the atmosphere in large amounts, wave- and wind-powered generators may be bad for wildlife habitats ... it might be nuke or nothing! (Ifwe can find a way of powering all those trucks and diggers they use to mine uranium ...)

Wake me up when it's all over!
Steve

Subject: RE: BS: Oil will run out
From: Teribus
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 10:58 AM

"Sooner or later, the oil will run out"

Yes it will.

Subject: BS: Oil will run out
From: Peace
Date: 04 Feb 04 - 10:41 AM

This was sent to me by a good friend. What's new. Didn't have a link with it; sorry to print it all here. (What do you tell the bear when you have no more cookies?)

Sunday, February 1, 2004 The Halifax Herald Limited

Sooner or later, the oil will run out

By Richard Gwyn

IN SOME YEAR ahead - and by no means one necessarily that far ahead - we'll go through another bout of winter weather like this one, but with one critical distinction that will make all the difference, even though it will have nothing to do with the weather.
Assume that we experience the same prolonged, extreme cold and high winds and succession of snowstorms, right across the country.
But assume, as well, that in that year the fuel with which we heat our houses, offices, factories and stores, and by which we power our cars, trucks, airplanes, trains and buses, is having to be rationed.
Rationing doesn't here mean actual physical rationing, with householders and car drivers limited to so many litres a month.
It means, instead, rationing by price. As oil supplies dwindle, not in themselves (or not for a long time) but in relation to demand, so will the price at first escalate, and then soar.
That's bound to happen. It will happen because the demand for oil is bound to outstrip the supply of oil, and of natural gas and coal and of other hydrocarbons.
The U.S. Energy Department reckons that this "tilting point" won't happen until 2037. Its calculation is widely criticized, with its forecasts for increases in demand dismissed as far too conservative.
One well-known petroleum geologist, Colin Campbell, has put the tilting point at 2010, or little more than a half-decade away. Another, Kenneth Deffeys, forecasts that it will occur this year.
The basic facts are these: The entire world now both produces and consumes some 75 million barrels of oil a day.
By 2015, or a decade away, demand is expected to increase by more than two-thirds, or by another 60 million barrels a day.
This extra demand simply cannot be met. We would have to find and develop the equivalent of 10 new North Sea oilfields in just a decade. Even if Iraq's oilfields are fully developed, with almost unlimited new investment and new technology, it could only produce an extra six million barrels, or a mere one-tenth of the amount needed.
Certainly, new supplies are being found in places such as Siberia, the Central Asian Republics and West Africa. But these are not net additions to the total output. At the same time, production from all existing super-giant and giant fields is contracting by four to five per cent a year.

Additional supplies could be generated from tar sands and oil shale in Western Canada and in Venezuela's Orinoco belt.
But more than half as much energy is used extracting this oil as the energy value of the oil produced.

Other potential supplies, such as polar oil and liquid natural gas, are horrendously expensive.
The real problem isn't supply, though. It's demand. Last year, one element of the demand equation clicked into place. In 2003, China overtook Japan to become the world's second-largest consumer of oil. The International Energy Agency describes China as "the major driver of global demand growth."
The U.S. remains the world's gas guzzler. It consumes about one-seventh of global production. Canada, relatively, is as liberal and as wasteful in its consumption.
A bit surprisingly, President George W. Bush, himself an oil man, has actually expressed some concern about the issue. He's said, "It's becoming very clear that demand is outstripping supply."
In fact, a lot could be done. Tax loopholes could be closed, like the one that makes SUVs artificially attractive.
Regulations could mandate higher fuel-efficiency standards.
Tax incentives could motivate householders to improve their heating efficiency.
Other remedies could range from minimizing urban sprawl to developing alternatives to hydrocarbons, such as hydrogen cells.
Energy economist Philip Verleger reckons that the U.S.'s oil imports, of some 11 million barrels a day, could be cut by half.
Bush, though, has done nothing about the problem other than to mutter that it does exist, and no Democratic presidential candidate has dared to mention the subject.
The reason is obvious: The last politician to talk seriously about conservation, Jimmy Carter in 1977, was trounced in the next presidential election.
Nothing is going to happen until the crisis of oil demand outstripping oil supply is clear, unmistakable and urgent.
And by then it may be too late.

Too late, that is, to avoid what former British energy minister Michael Meacher forecasts will be "the sharpest and perhaps the most violent dislocation (of society) in recent history."

So enjoy today's weather.

Richard Gwyn is a columnist for The Toronto Star.