Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login

Posted: 3/16/2005 8:52:23 AM EST
We've got a problem with a couple things. Two few refineries online, that's for sure. Superhot competition from China is another one. There's only so much daily production to go around.

I'm guessing that as of November or so that demand exceeded supply by a bit. China's had rolling blackouts for quite some time now, and they want their juice. We're used to having it whenever and how ever much we want with basically no competition.

Now we've got competition.

What to do?

I think getting coal power plants with good scrubbers that will keep the environment from getting too fucked up is a good idea. Gotta replace our need for natural gas soon, as well as oil. Electric cars, good public light rail systems in the cities would reduce the need for liquid fuels in the rural areas, so that's a case of one hand washing the other.

What else?
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 8:54:56 AM EST
Coal? How about nuke power.
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 9:13:38 AM EST
The biggest problems with nuke power is that the plants are insanely expensive to build and the NIMBY crowd simply won't allow them to be built.

I think we should focus our efforts on extracting the oil from the tar sands we have here. I read an article describing the equivalent of 2 TRILLION barrels of oil in a massive tar sands deposit in the Southern Utah/Colorado area. That would certainly take care of supply problems for the next 200 years.
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 10:04:41 AM EST

Originally Posted By tax_monster:
The biggest problems with nuke power is that the plants are insanely expensive to build and the NIMBY crowd simply won't allow them to be built.

I think we should focus our efforts on extracting the oil from the tar sands we have here. I read an article describing the equivalent of 2 TRILLION barrels of oil in a massive tar sands deposit in the Southern Utah/Colorado area. That would certainly take care of supply problems for the next 200 years.



Suppose there are TWO TRILLION barrels of oil in the tar sands...

But what is the NET ENERGY gain? A barrel of oil doesn't do you a whole lot of good if it takes 3/4 of a barrel worth of energy to extract it.
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 10:10:21 AM EST
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 10:15:43 AM EST

Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1:
Nuke plants for electricity generation. As an added bonus they drive the Left absolutely bonkers.


If it's good enough for Homer Simpson, it's good enough for me.
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 10:18:29 AM EST
Drill Alaska, ethanol and bio diesel also.
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 10:26:29 AM EST

Originally Posted By catch223:

Originally Posted By tax_monster:
The biggest problems with nuke power is that the plants are insanely expensive to build and the NIMBY crowd simply won't allow them to be built.

I think we should focus our efforts on extracting the oil from the tar sands we have here. I read an article describing the equivalent of 2 TRILLION barrels of oil in a massive tar sands deposit in the Southern Utah/Colorado area. That would certainly take care of supply problems for the next 200 years.



Suppose there are TWO TRILLION barrels of oil in the tar sands...

But what is the NET ENERGY gain? A barrel of oil doesn't do you a whole lot of good if it takes 3/4 of a barrel worth of energy to extract it.



From what I read extraction is profitable at $30/barrel.
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 10:45:06 AM EST

Originally Posted By MrClean4Hire:
Drill Alaska, ethanol and bio diesel also.



We have the farmers and the land... put them to work!
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 11:03:49 AM EST

Originally Posted By tax_monster:

Originally Posted By catch223:

Originally Posted By tax_monster:
The biggest problems with nuke power is that the plants are insanely expensive to build and the NIMBY crowd simply won't allow them to be built.

I think we should focus our efforts on extracting the oil from the tar sands we have here. I read an article describing the equivalent of 2 TRILLION barrels of oil in a massive tar sands deposit in the Southern Utah/Colorado area. That would certainly take care of supply problems for the next 200 years.



Suppose there are TWO TRILLION barrels of oil in the tar sands...

But what is the NET ENERGY gain? A barrel of oil doesn't do you a whole lot of good if it takes 3/4 of a barrel worth of energy to extract it.



From what I read extraction is profitable at $30/barrel.



They are doing this in the Oil Sands in Alberta now. INSANELY profitable, and tons of oil there. Already this year I think I've sold 5 units worth, and I've got 7 more on order.
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 11:05:59 AM EST

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By MrClean4Hire:
Drill Alaska, ethanol and bio diesel also.



We have the farmers and the land... put them to work!



This is actually a pretty good idea - we can at least 'cut' the gasoline with ethanol.

Brazil uses Ethanol almost exclusively. We can't - since there are areas in the country where it would freeze. Brazil still has some gasoline vehicles for up in the mountains, but fuel is scary hard to find far from there.
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 11:29:12 AM EST

Originally Posted By ASUsax:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By MrClean4Hire:
Drill Alaska, ethanol and bio diesel also.



We have the farmers and the land... put them to work!hr


This is actually a pretty good idea - we can at least 'cut' the gasoline with ethanol.

Brazil uses Ethanol almost exclusively. We can't - since there are areas in the country where it would freeze. Brazil still has some gasoline vehicles for up in the mountains, but fuel is scary hard to find far from there.



Nope. Ethanol has a lower freezing point than gasoline. That’s why you should use it in the winter. I use gasoline that has 10% ethanol mixed in, and my wife’s car can run on E-85 which is 85% ethanol.

www.ethanol-crfa.ca/vehicle.htm

Ethanol also removes water from your gas tank which can freeze in the tank. I can’t say enough good things about ethanol. It is a viable energy source at least in the short term. It keeps American energy dollars in America. I don’t know what people, especially conservatives, have against it. To be against ethanol is to be against rich American farmers. Wouldn’t it be great if we could be the Saudi Arabia of the world?


Link Posted: 3/16/2005 11:30:44 AM EST

Originally Posted By bobby_miles:

Originally Posted By ASUsax:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By MrClean4Hire:
Drill Alaska, ethanol and bio diesel also.



We have the farmers and the land... put them to work!



This is actually a pretty good idea - we can at least 'cut' the gasoline with ethanol.

Brazil uses Ethanol almost exclusively. We can't - since there are areas in the country where it would freeze. Brazil still has some gasoline vehicles for up in the mountains, but fuel is scary hard to find far from there.



Nope. Ethanol has a lower freezing point than gasoline. That’s why you should use it in the winter. I use gasoline that has 10% ethanol mixed in, and my wife’s car can run on E-85 which is 85% ethanol.

www.ethanol-crfa.ca/vehicle.htm

Ethanol also removes water from your gas tank which can freeze in the tank. I can’t say enough good things about ethanol. It is a viable energy source at least in the short term. It keeps American energy dollars in America. I don’t know what people, especially conservatives, have against it. To be against ethanol is to be against rich American farmers. Wouldn’t it be great if we could be the Saudi Arabia of the world?






Or the other good part, the middle east would be broke and not starting shit.
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 11:31:49 AM EST
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 11:34:27 AM EST

Originally Posted By MrClean4Hire:
Or the other good part, the middle east would be broke and not starting shit.



Absolutely! How much of our own money the we send over there for oil is being used by terrorists to kill our soldiers???
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 11:51:56 AM EST
[Last Edit: 3/16/2005 11:52:44 AM EST by ASUsax]

Originally Posted By thebeekeeper1:

Originally Posted By bobby_miles:

Originally Posted By ASUsax:

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:

Originally Posted By MrClean4Hire:
Drill Alaska, ethanol and bio diesel also.



We have the farmers and the land... put them to work!



This is actually a pretty good idea - we can at least 'cut' the gasoline with ethanol.

Brazil uses Ethanol almost exclusively. We can't - since there are areas in the country where it would freeze. Brazil still has some gasoline vehicles for up in the mountains, but fuel is scary hard to find far from there.



Nope. Ethanol has a lower freezing point than gasoline. That’s why you should use it in the winter. I use gasoline that has 10% ethanol mixed in, and my wife’s car can run on E-85 which is 85% ethanol.

www.ethanol-crfa.ca/vehicle.htm

Ethanol also removes water from your gas tank which can freeze in the tank. I can’t say enough good things about ethanol. It is a viable energy source at least in the short term. It keeps American energy dollars in America. I don’t know what people, especially conservatives, have against it. To be against ethanol is to be against rich American farmers. Wouldn’t it be great if we could be the Saudi Arabia of the world?





A local race car driver who burns it in his stock cars told me a gasoline engine only needs very minor mods to burn straight ethanol--but won't start in the cold weather with it. He said you need a gallon or so of gasoline and a delivery system for a squirt at start-up, but then you can burn it just fine.



Checking my data, you are correct. Maybe TBK1's answer is more accurate. I know there's a reason they still use Gasoline in the mountains down in Brazil...

BTW, the Ethanol costs more (or at least it did when I was there in '99) than Gasoline. It's subsidized by the Government to keep the Sugar farmers employed.

ETA: I don't think most newer engines need more of a mod than a new chip in the computer. Older vehicles might be more of a problem.
Link Posted: 3/16/2005 11:31:16 PM EST
Doesn't ethanol burn hotter? I thought it was harder on the engine components than gasoline. Plus, I think ethanol would probably cost about $3-4/gallon if it weren't subsidized, right?
Top Top