Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 3/6/2006 8:26:55 PM EDT
In WW2, the Germans were unable to fuel their war machine with their domestic oil fields and the oil fields in Romania, so they developed a process called coal gassification.

The US has 273.7 billion short tons of coal, as of 2001.

It takes about 9 tons of coal to produce 5 barrels of oil using current technology, which means in oil terms, the US has 152 billion barrels of oil equivilent in coal reserves, if we used all of it to produce crude.

The US is burning about 7.4 billion barrels of oil per year. So, the US has about 20 years worth of proven reserves of coal at current consumption rates, if we completely ran out of oil.

Of course, the US has about 21 billion barrels* of proven oil reserves, with another 10.4 in ANWR that isn't counted in that number, and the uncounted billions of barrel offshore that are current off-limits to exploration because of a Clinton executive order.

* every estimate ever produced has been amazingly wrong. Production has always exceeded estimates, often by an order of magnitude or more.

Additionally, Canada has 178 billion barrels of oil in proven reserves (including tar sands, which are now profitable). That buys the US another 25 years or so.

Just proven reserves gives the world another 50 years at current consumption. Since energy consumption tends to rise, obviously it's not 50 years, but closer to 35 or 40 years, but the reality also is that new reserves are found every day. Not enough to replace the consumption, of course, but fast enough to where the clock gets pushed back a decade or so.

Energy depletion is a serious issue. But most of us won't have to deal with it in our lifetimes. The sky is not falling, and it's not time to head for the hills.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 8:29:26 PM EDT
But....but....the sky is falling.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 8:29:58 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 8:31:54 PM EDT
Right, What happens when we go poke our finger in the eyes of the Iranians
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 8:33:06 PM EDT
I read somewhere that we have the worlds largest oil deposits in the Wyoming Colorado area....shale oil.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 8:36:50 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 8:42:19 PM EDT
Oh good. So if we can extract every drop of oil, without of course putting any back into the system, we have another 50 years.
Excuse me while I jump for joy at your wonderful revelation of "best case" numbers.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 8:42:59 PM EDT
I prefer to live in a state of panic.

Its good exercise to run around in circles screaming at the top of your lungs.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 8:44:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By IchWarrior:
I prefer to live in a state of panic.

Its good exercise to run around in circles screaming at the top of your lungs.



+1 that’s my favorite too.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 8:44:29 PM EDT
YAY FOR OIL
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 8:53:47 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/6/2006 8:55:14 PM EDT by NavajoGunOwner]
WHAT, this college kid from CA was was passing on the wisdom of his burnt out, ex-hippie proffessors, regurgetated, anti-capitalism carp about the we are at peak oil now and the end is in site......or.. we maybe near the peak oil production in a few years.......or blah, blah, blah.....

So I can quit digging the hole in the back year?

So I don't run for the hills and start a hippie commuity? Living off the land ? waiting to diiiieeee!



If we could just get the environuts and their regs out of the way we would could poke out their eyes and let them become camel loving dirt jockies just like we found them 100 years ago!!

For instance: If you poured concrete in buildingan Alaska oil well and had a little left over you would have to dispose of it properly....what that meant was shipping it to a EPA approved plant in OK. Yes you read that write a left over yard of concrete, normal everyday concrete, it would be shipped to OK for disposal. So with rules like this gas would have to cost $5.00 a gallon before it would make sense to drill on our own land...





ETA:
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 8:59:55 PM EDT
9 tons of coal to produce 5 barrels of crude? Damn near a waste of time.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:04:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By fike:
9 tons of coal to produce 5 barrels of crude? Damn near a waste of time.



Not really. 1 barrel of oil weighs about a metric ton. Oil is more energy dense than coal and some energy is lost in the conversion.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:09:24 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Specop_007:
Oh good. So if we can extract every drop of oil, without of course putting any back into the system, we have another 50 years.
Excuse me while I jump for joy at your wonderful revelation of "best case" numbers.



These aren't best case Specop, these are just extrapolations from current reserves. We've only found about half of the world's oil, so reality is we have probably closer to 100 years...at current consumption rates. Consumption will follow a curve, however, so we'll go alot longer than 100 years, and we'll have 50 GOOD years left before it gets dicey.

50 years is a long time. 50 years ago, the world's first nuclear power plant was 2 years old. A lot can change in 50 years. 50 years is long enough to where we could fully convert our electrical generation to nuclear power. We could completely rebuild our national transportation grid so it predominately used grid power instead of gasoline. We could put solar power satellites up in space and beam the power down. We could use the power to crack water into hydrogen.

I'm all for planning for the worst, but short of a bunch of nuclear strikes taking out the major oil fields, oil depletion isn't something we have to worry about right now...but it something we need to plan for in the future.

My original post was in response to Peak_Oil's assertion that the industrial economies of the world are going to collapse within 15 years. Ain't gonna happen. Not even close.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:12:27 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:13:34 PM EDT
thsi is just like that ammo availability chart..... we are not to "OH TEH NOES!!!1!" yet. there is still supply left that exceeds the demand. the problem is that not all the supply is held by some of our enemies.

as for using coal or other source to MAKE a oil alternative- you need to take the cost/benefit into consideration. if we figure the economy will collapse at sustained $3.50/gal for gas and the cost of a coal created gas is $4/gal, that solution doesnt work.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:14:14 PM EDT
WTF has this message board become?
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:15:13 PM EDT
I hope this site is still around in ten years so I can dig this shit out from the archives and make fun of someone. Hopefully, I'll be laughing at Peak_Oil...
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:15:41 PM EDT

Originally Posted By SPECTRE:
But....but....the sky is falling.


Heheheh. No kidding. Chicken Littles running around all the time crying wolf....
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:18:04 PM EDT

Originally Posted By otto-nyc:
WTF has this message board become?



AR15's are made of oil. It's relevant.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:18:48 PM EDT
this is GD. this is where we are supposed to talk about stuff OTHER than AR's. if you want to talk about AR's, go to the AR discussion section
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:20:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By BlammO:

Originally Posted By otto-nyc:
WTF has this message board become?



AR15's are made of oil. It's relevant.



Plus gas costs to go shooting, and the gas that the UPS trucks burn delivering ammo.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:31:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By PromptCritical:
I hope this site is still around in ten years so I can dig this shit out from the archives and make fun of someone. Hopefully, I'll be laughing at Peak_Oil...



I hope so too.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:42:50 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Peak_Oil:

Originally Posted By PromptCritical:
I hope this site is still around in ten years so I can dig this shit out from the archives and make fun of someone. Hopefully, I'll be laughing at Peak_Oil...



I hope so too.



Why not start early and make fun of someone now!
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:54:07 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 3/6/2006 10:04:44 PM EDT by imposter]
The US has at least 3,340,000,000,000 tons of oil shale. That is well over a trilion barrels of oil. It may not be economical now, but if we ran out of crude oil this recource could be exploited. Petroleum would be more expensive, but not unavailable.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 9:57:31 PM EDT
we're never NEVER NEVER NOT EVER going to run out of oil. there will NEVER be a day when someone walks into the last pumping station on earth and pumps out the last drop of oil out of the ground.

the reason we will stop using oil is that it will become more expensive to produce it than we gain from it's use.

the same thing happened with coal. we dont use it as the primary source for energy anymore because there is a cheaper alternative (oil). when a cheaper alternative becomes available (or oil becomes more expensive than something else) oil will go the way of coal.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 10:04:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Drakich:

Originally Posted By Specop_007:
Oh good. So if we can extract every drop of oil, without of course putting any back into the system, we have another 50 years.
Excuse me while I jump for joy at your wonderful revelation of "best case" numbers.



These aren't best case Specop, these are just extrapolations from current reserves. We've only found about half of the world's oil, so reality is we have probably closer to 100 years...at current consumption rates. Consumption will follow a curve, however, so we'll go alot longer than 100 years, and we'll have 50 GOOD years left before it gets dicey.

50 years is a long time. 50 years ago, the world's first nuclear power plant was 2 years old. A lot can change in 50 years. 50 years is long enough to where we could fully convert our electrical generation to nuclear power. We could completely rebuild our national transportation grid so it predominately used grid power instead of gasoline. We could put solar power satellites up in space and beam the power down. We could use the power to crack water into hydrogen.

I'm all for planning for the worst, but short of a bunch of nuclear strikes taking out the major oil fields, oil depletion isn't something we have to worry about right now...but it something we need to plan for in the future.

My original post was in response to Peak_Oil's assertion that the industrial economies of the world are going to collapse within 15 years. Ain't gonna happen. Not even close.



Extrapolations. Good, so those numbers are nothing more then guesses. As for finding half of the known reserves...If we havent found it, how do you know its there? Meaning we might have found 1%, 10% or 90% of known reserves. Hence, KNOWN reserves.

As for reserves now in coal and shale, how much is truly recoverable? At what price point? How much goes back into the system? While shale is an oil bearing rock, it takes a good amount of processing and energy to get it out. If you tell me theres 1 million barrels of oil and I tell you it takes 1 barrel into the system to get 2 out...How much do we REALLY have? Additionally, can production of these sources ramp up to meet increasing demand as well as declining output from existing sources? Sure, there might be enough oil in them thar rocks for 600 years but if we just cant squeeze it out any faster then a million barrels a year it does us very little good.

As for converting, we should already be converted! We learned NOTHING from the gas shortage of the 70's. We just kept using more and more. Do you think thats going to change until its too late? Nope. Because people, as a whole, do not want to do anything they dont have to until they have to do it. And by that time, it will be too late.


I dont know whats going to happen, but I do know alot of this fantastic gee whiz save us stuff people like to point out isnt really all that hot when you get down and dirty and look at it. Most importantly is ramp up times to production. Lets assume we hit honest to God Peak Oil on current production fields. Do you think these other sources could be ramped up in time not only to offset the decline of existing fieldws but ALSO to meet increasing demand?
I seriously doubt it.

Lastly, none of this takes into account the damages to the environment. I'm not one to preach about living in villages and wearing robes, but we do have to be aware of the damage we do to the planet.

One thing is for certain. Time will tell. And I surely do hope your right.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 10:07:51 PM EDT

Originally Posted By brouhaha:

Originally Posted By Drakich:

Originally Posted By fike:
9 tons of coal to produce 5 barrels of crude? Damn near a waste of time.



Not really. 1 barrel of oil weighs about a metric ton. Oil is more energy dense than coal and some energy is lost in the conversion.



Where did you make that up?

There are between 6 and 9 barrels of oil per metric ton, depending on the grade of oil.



Agggh. You are correct, of course, I need to rebase my numbers.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 10:19:36 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Specop_007:

Originally Posted By Drakich:

Originally Posted By Specop_007:
Oh good. So if we can extract every drop of oil, without of course putting any back into the system, we have another 50 years.
Excuse me while I jump for joy at your wonderful revelation of "best case" numbers.



These aren't best case Specop, these are just extrapolations from current reserves. We've only found about half of the world's oil, so reality is we have probably closer to 100 years...at current consumption rates. Consumption will follow a curve, however, so we'll go alot longer than 100 years, and we'll have 50 GOOD years left before it gets dicey.

If you check with Kenneth Deffeyes (who admittedly is a doomer so bring a grain of salt) we've found more like 90% of the oil. Deffeyes is working with the same model that M. K. Hubbert used to predict the peak of oil production in the US, and Hubbert was right. I wouldn't count on him being wrong.

50 years is a long time. 50 years ago, the world's first nuclear power plant was 2 years old. A lot can change in 50 years. 50 years is long enough to where we could fully convert our electrical generation to nuclear power. We could completely rebuild our national transportation grid so it predominately used grid power instead of gasoline. We could put solar power satellites up in space and beam the power down. We could use the power to crack water into hydrogen.

I'm all for planning for the worst, but short of a bunch of nuclear strikes taking out the major oil fields, oil depletion isn't something we have to worry about right now...but it something we need to plan for in the future.

You do know that the US is in decline in oil production and has been for over 30 years, right? Or that most oil producing nations are in decline today. This is as real as it gets my little frien'.

My original post was in response to Peak_Oil's assertion that the industrial economies of the world are going to collapse within 15 years. Ain't gonna happen. Not even close.



Extrapolations. Good, so those numbers are nothing more then guesses. As for finding half of the known reserves...If we havent found it, how do you know its there? Meaning we might have found 1%, 10% or 90% of known reserves. Hence, KNOWN reserves.

As for reserves now in coal and shale, how much is truly recoverable? At what price point? How much goes back into the system? While shale is an oil bearing rock, it takes a good amount of processing and energy to get it out. If you tell me theres 1 million barrels of oil and I tell you it takes 1 barrel into the system to get 2 out...How much do we REALLY have? Additionally, can production of these sources ramp up to meet increasing demand as well as declining output from existing sources? Sure, there might be enough oil in them thar rocks for 600 years but if we just cant squeeze it out any faster then a million barrels a year it does us very little good.

I did a little quick math of my own to see what the story was with regards to the shale situation. We'd use about half a percent of the known coal reserves in the US to extract ALL the kerogen out of the shale rocks. It's not that energy-expensive. Frankly, it looks like a pretty good deal to me and I raise my cup to the ones that will get busy on this particular piece of the puzzle. It's enough oil to replace 100% of our current extraction from everywhere in the entire world for 60some years, assuming we can ramp production up to 20 million barrels a day and keep it steady for the entire time. You never know.

As for converting, we should already be converted! We learned NOTHING from the gas shortage of the 70's. We just kept using more and more. Do you think thats going to change until its too late? Nope. Because people, as a whole, do not want to do anything they dont have to until they have to do it. And by that time, it will be too late.


I dont know whats going to happen, but I do know alot of this fantastic gee whiz save us stuff people like to point out isnt really all that hot when you get down and dirty and look at it. Most importantly is ramp up times to production. Lets assume we hit honest to God Peak Oil on current production fields. Do you think these other sources could be ramped up in time not only to offset the decline of existing fieldws but ALSO to meet increasing demand?
I seriously doubt it.

That's the rub, isn't it. It has to actually be built and operated and used in order to go from the "theoretical" column to the "they're actually in production right now" column.

Lastly, none of this takes into account the damages to the environment. I'm not one to preach about living in villages and wearing robes, but we do have to be aware of the damage we do to the planet.

I've recently heard that European nations have some great coal plants that don't pollute, I'm going to have to follow that lead and see what I come up with.

One thing is for certain. Time will tell. And I surely do hope your right.



I don't wish this on anyone, and I hope we get busy on a solution. Nevertheless, I remain pessimistic. Just look at the people on this thread. They'd rather do anything other than prepare. How many have food stored, or water stored, or even have their gas tanks full tonight? Guns are fun so that's easy to do. But how about having an extra set of keys made or duplicates of important documents at the safety deposit box, or a backup of their important data on their computers? Preparations like that aren't sexy and nobody brags about how many times they back up their files, you know.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 10:20:59 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Specop_007:
Extrapolations. Good, so those numbers are nothing more then guesses. As for finding half of the known reserves...If we havent found it, how do you know its there? Meaning we might have found 1%, 10% or 90% of known reserves. Hence, KNOWN reserves.



The historical record for guesses about the eminent collapse of the oil supplies have been going on since before Spindletop. Eventually the doomsayers will be right simply from a probability function. What they aren't right about is the peak oil / 10 years / death of industrialized world / 3.5 billion deaths from famine gloom and doom right around the corner scenario.

Again, absent the use of about 250 nuclear weapons against the primary oil producing regions and world refineries, it isn't going to happen (US Gov did a study in 1979 of an 80 warhead attack against the primary refineries in the US which would've caused enough damage to make the next year's agriculture harvest and distribution dicey). 250 warheads on the world's infrastructre would probably be enough to produce that global famine.


As for reserves now in coal and shale, how much is truly recoverable?


Proven reserve numbers are generally those reserves which are presently economically recoverable using current technology. Actual reserves will go up with technology improvements.


Additionally, can production of these sources ramp up to meet increasing demand as well as declining output from existing sources?


Not if they are taken off the table by political edict, thats for sure.


As for converting, we should already be converted! We learned NOTHING from the gas shortage of the 70's. We just kept using more and more. Do you think thats going to change until its too late? Nope. Because people, as a whole, do not want to do anything they dont have to until they have to do it. And by that time, it will be too late.


We've stuck our collective heads in the sand for the last 30 years. The main reason was oil was just too damn cheap not to. The secondary reason was irrational fear of nuclear power, NIMBY syndrome (which applies to all electrical generation plants including wind, fuel oil, natural gas, and coal plants), and lawsuits.


I dont know whats going to happen, but I do know alot of this fantastic gee whiz save us stuff people like to point out isnt really all that hot when you get down and dirty and look at it. Most importantly is ramp up times to production. Lets assume we hit honest to God Peak Oil on current production fields. Do you think these other sources could be ramped up in time not only to offset the decline of existing fieldws but ALSO to meet increasing demand?


I do. Look 50 years is far enough away that it means we don't have to head for the hills right now, but soon enough to where we need to start planning and building infrastructure now. And that means breeder reactors. With breeder reactors, we won't have to worry about running out of energy for a couple of billion years, and considering the sun will bake the earth in 900 million years or so, that's good enough for me.


Lastly, none of this takes into account the damages to the environment. I'm not one to preach about living in villages and wearing robes, but we do have to be aware of the damage we do to the planet.


Given the choice of starving to death, or killing the spotted owl, the spotted owl is going into the stewpot.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 10:22:05 PM EDT
Dude...
He just wants to justify his survivalist stance, he doesn't actually believe the shit he's spouting..... right?

Link Posted: 3/6/2006 10:22:58 PM EDT
So even if they do ramp up production, whats to keep the companies from selling the oil on the open market? Crude is a worldwide commodity. We (the USA) dont own it. The companies paid royalties to mine it, they can sell it to who they see fit.

unless of course suddenly capitalism isnt such a good idea........

Lets be honest, what do you think Texaco would do if China came and said We'll give you 1.5 times the market price for all your production?
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 10:24:03 PM EDT
Napoleon is right. We are not and will not run out of oil. World oil reserves are the largest they've ever been and getting larger. Oil is NOT a fossil fuel. It is a by product of methane. The Russians have known this since the 1950s and written thousands of scientific papers on it. There has recently been at least one major book about it, and it was featured in a program on the Science Channel last summer. One of the reasons gas in particular keeps getting more costly in the States is there have been no new refineries built in years and years and there aren't enough refineries now to keep up with demand.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 10:39:39 PM EDT

Originally Posted By IndianaDean:
Napoleon is right. We are not and will not run out of oil. World oil reserves are the largest they've ever been and getting larger. Oil is NOT a fossil fuel. It is a by product of methane. The Russians have known this since the 1950s and written thousands of scientific papers on it. There has recently been at least one major book about it, and it was featured in a program on the Science Channel last summer. One of the reasons gas in particular keeps getting more costly in the States is there have been no new refineries built in years and years and there aren't enough refineries now to keep up with demand.



Three things caused the current spike in oil:
- the war in Iraq took about 2 million barrels a day of production offline.
- When the East Asian economies went into a tailspin in 1999, they took about 2 million barrels a day of demand off the table. These economies basically finished their recovery around the time we invaded Iraq.

So, we got the double whammy of increased demand with lowered production. This was magnified by pretty rampant speculation in the markets. From a production standpoint, the world is current operating at near peak capacity. Easiest places to increase capacity would be Canada, Venezuela, and Iraq (minus the whole pipeline bombing thing).
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 10:47:32 PM EDT

Originally Posted By IndianaDean:
Napoleon is right. We are not and will not run out of oil. World oil reserves are the largest they've ever been and getting larger. Oil is NOT a fossil fuel. It is a by product of methane. The Russians have known this since the 1950s and written thousands of scientific papers on it. There has recently been at least one major book about it, and it was featured in a program on the Science Channel last summer. One of the reasons gas in particular keeps getting more costly in the States is there have been no new refineries built in years and years and there aren't enough refineries now to keep up with demand.



I've heard a couple of people go after this angle. Let's just say that you're right. Oil is created abiogenically. So what? The reservoirs are not filling back up. The US peaked in production in the early 70's at 10.5MBD, and we're down to 5. And no, it's not the crazy liberals that are causing this to happen, it's because we're running out. I could care less whether oil is created by rotting algae or by rocks grinding against each other.

There is a timetable to this thing. Unless oil is being created at a rate of 80 million barrels a day by whatever process you have in mind, then oil production will most certainly peak at some point.

I would suggest you research the opinions of messrs. Kenneth Deffeyes and Matthew Simmons. They have volumes of material on the subject and are much more dignified than am I.
Link Posted: 3/6/2006 10:48:21 PM EDT
We just found some in Utah, and I invested in it.
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 11:11:40 AM EDT
As brouhaha indicated, my numbers were off. So, here are some correct numbers with sources.

From:
http://gcep.stanford.edu/pdfs/RxsY3908kaqwVPacX9DLcQ/malhotra_coal_mar05.pdf

Yield of coal liquefaction is about 3 barrels of oil per ton of coal for bituminous coals, less for subbituminous and lignite varieties. . I'm assuming metric tons here.

From http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/infosheets/coalreserves.htm, bituminous coal makes up 53% of the coal reserves in the US.

US has 273.7 billion short tons of total coal, or 248.3 billion metric tons. 53% of that is bituminous, so that gives us 131.6 billion metric tons of bituminous coal.

Conversion is 3 barrels per oil per ton of bituminous coal, giving 394.8 billion barrels of oil of conversion capacity from the bituminous coal alone. At current oil consumption rates (7.4 billion barrels per year), that gives us 53 years worth of bituminous coal reserves.

From http://www.eia.doe.gov/oiaf/ieo/world.html, annual energy consumption for mature market economies is expected to grow at 1.1% until 2025. I went ahead and carried this number forward. Using that estimate, if the US shifted from oil to coal for transportation tomorrow, we'd run out of bituminous coal in around 41 years.

The US, however, also uses 965 million tons of coal per year for electricity generation, but the 41 years above is using only half the coal reserves.

Of course, this doesn't count the US oil reserves, which are proven out at 22 billion barrels, not counting the 10 billion estimated barrels in ANWR, and not counting injecting carbon dioxide gas into depleted wells, which according to the DOE (link: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060304/sc_nm/energy_crude_injection_dc) could liberate another 89 billion barrels from existing wells.

Again, the point of all this is to provide numbers to counter the current peak oil thesis that the industrial economies are going to collapse in 10-15 years.



Link Posted: 3/7/2006 11:57:53 AM EDT
Die you human bastards and let the planet go back to it's natural state! Maybe then the dinosaurs will come back and that God-awful man-made gully we call the "Grand Canyon' will heal up. Where's that fucking Uni-bomber when we really need him?
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 12:23:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 10mmFan:
Die you human bastards and let the planet go back to it's natural state! Maybe then the dinosaurs will come back and that God-awful man-made gully we call the "Grand Canyon' will heal up. Where's that fucking Uni-bomber when we really need him?



You first, then I will go..........honest


Trust me, go ahead.....we are waiting...
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 12:24:44 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Peak_Oil:
... The US peaked in production in the early 70's at 10.5MBD, and we're down to 5. ...



So what does that prove?

Nothing-nada-zip-zero other than it's cheaper to get oil from countries that have cheaper labor and far less EPA / Greenie-Weenie issues.

We could easily produce more if we wanted to.
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 12:27:39 PM EDT
It's not running out, it's how expensive it gets.

Cheap energy has allowed for a lot of extravagances and the energy might not be so cheap in the future.
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 12:34:58 PM EDT

Originally Posted By IAMLEGEND:
It's not running out, it's how expensive it gets.

Cheap energy has allowed for a lot of extravagances and the energy might not be so cheap in the future.



IAMLEGEND should change his name to IAMUNDERSTANDING.

It is not how much oil there is, it is how much it costs. We have an infrastructure dedicated to obtaining and refining crude oil. Any changes to that paradigm will require new expensive infrastructure.

Whether it is coal or shale, the expense of gas will be much more than $2.50 per gallon.
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 12:35:00 PM EDT

Originally Posted By IAMLEGEND:
It's not running out, it's how expensive it gets.

Cheap energy has allowed for a lot of extravagances and the energy might not be so cheap in the future.



+1

The Peak Oil Advocates NEVER said we were going to "run out" one day. We'll probably never run out completley. The problem is how much energy does it take ot extract and process oil from peaked oil fields and shale? A lot... which means higher prices...FOR EVERYTHING! Can you say "Depression"?


Speed
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 12:37:30 PM EDT
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 12:38:08 PM EDT
tag
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 12:42:34 PM EDT

Originally Posted By IAMLEGEND:
It's not running out, it's how expensive it gets.

Cheap energy has allowed for a lot of extravagances and the energy might not be so cheap in the future.



Yep.

Look at all the energy wasted just on lighting.

I've changed all the lights in my home to CFL bulbs.
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 12:49:09 PM EDT

Originally Posted By speedracer422:

Originally Posted By IAMLEGEND:
It's not running out, it's how expensive it gets.

Cheap energy has allowed for a lot of extravagances and the energy might not be so cheap in the future.



+1

The Peak Oil Advocates NEVER said we were going to "run out" one day. We'll probably never run out completley. The problem is how much energy does it take ot extract and process oil from peaked oil fields and shale? A lot... which means higher prices...FOR EVERYTHING! Can you say "Depression"?


Speed



Yeah, that's pretty much the deal.

Also, do the math on the depletion numbers. If you figure 8% lower production year after year, then it's a nine-year halving time. So. Nine years after production begins to drop at 8% per year, we'll have half the amount coming out of the ground in a day. Nine years after that, you're down to 25%. Nine years later, 12.5%, and nine years after that a little over 6%. If you figure you're going to live 36 years after the peak, then you're going to have to figure out how to run your life on 6% of the oil that you use today.

What a wonderful retirement to look forward to. If you have children, then their lives are going to be so very much different from the lives we lead today.

I don't think that having 6% of the production we have today is going to be all that different than having 0% of the production we have today. Unless you are in the top 6% of the wealthiest people on the planet, you probably won't be driving an internal combustion engine car.

But hey, maybe you will be.
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 1:03:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By DoubleFeed:
Simply stated: It is a problem of technology, and technology will emerge to address the problem.
No, not magically.



Not even that. We know how to solve the problems - it's the cost of the solutions that stops the use of alternative sources.
Simply put, oil is too cheap and easy right now. Why wouls anyone in their right mind pay $5/gallon for gas made from coal when you can go buy it made from oil for only $2.50?

But your point is well taken. The higher the price of oil, the more technology will emerge to replace it.
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 1:41:21 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Peak_Oil:

I don't think that having 6% of the production we have today is going to be all that different than having 0% of the production we have today. Unless you are in the top 6% of the wealthiest people on the planet, you probably won't be driving an internal combustion engine car.

But hey, maybe you will be.



We are in the top 6% or so of the wealthiest people in the world. Heck, I think that even our people on food stamps rank among the wealthiest in the world.
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 2:37:25 PM EDT
Yes it's true we're running out of oil at an alarming rate..................
Meanwhile- Oil companies post record profits
You think maybe the oil co's have an interest in keeping this alarmism going?
Link Posted: 3/7/2006 2:50:19 PM EDT

Originally Posted By gwitness:
I read somewhere that we have the worlds largest oil deposits in the Wyoming Colorado area....shale oil.



There are a number of areas in the West with oil. There's supposedly an interesting anticline in Nevada, near a producing field. More advanced drilling and extraction technology will get that out. Many old fields, previously shut down because old technology couldn't extract the rest of the oil. Newer techniques will pull it out.

In some ways I support the "we're running out" publicity. Get the impetus on research and development of new technologies. Certainly, at current usage levels we will run out; it doesn't matter whether it is 35 or 70 years. I would like to see new propulsion technology developed which would make oil and its derivatives more of a nuisance than even an expense issue.
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top