Dems have lost the ANWR battle

Status
Not open for further replies.
Gasoline derived from coal is doable, but it doesn't make economic sense yet. Gas is too cheap. I think I rember hearing that it would take $5-$9 a gallon to do it profitably.

Of course, the technology to do so will improve as gas prices rise, and I'm sure it will ultimately be fairly cheap to do so.

Then of course we have oil shale which is in sort of the same status.

We will have plenty of gas for your great grandchildren, but it may cost a little more than we pay now.
 
From Lord Rees-Mogg, quoted in today's "The Daily Reckoning":

"Economic growth normally stimulates technological advance, both by providing the need to develop new technologies and by providing the capital. 18th-century Britain, 19th-century Germany, and the 20th-century United States all had both rapid growth and new technology. Asia is now the area of fastest economic growth and of new technologies.

However, we should not simply concentrate on the rise of Asian scientific capacity. The energy issue is just as important. In physical terms, oil is the real limit to the growth of the world economy. The growth of world demand, particularly the rate of growth of China's economy, has pushed the oil price up to its current $43* a barrel. Despite a temporary relapse, demand for oil still seems to be greater than potential supply.

If one supposes that $40-60 a barrel is now the normal range of the oil price, all sorts of things become necessary or possible. Hydrogen fuel for cars, a new generation of nuclear power stations, and conversion of shale oil and tar sands all begin to look economic. Indeed, they all are economic at anything over $40 a barrel.

Yet they all take time. Perhaps in 2025 we shall all be riding around in hydrogen-fueled cars, going home to houses lit by pebble bed nuclear power, and relying on oil won from tar sands. But 2025 is a generation away. I have an uneasy feeling that there will be serious energy shortages in the period before these new technologies all come on stream. Oil at $100 a barrel would not be good for world trades."

* Obviously written a while back, before oil rose to $55/bbl.

Waitone, would you expand a bit on "We are running out of recoverable oil due to artificial political supply constraints placed on the marketplace."?

I don't quite follow your "artificial political supply constraints".

Art
 
OTOH, I've heard that hydrogen is not really efficient, because it takes an amount of oil equal to what would have been consumed in the first place, to extract/process the corresponding hydrogen. Nonetheless, Schwarzenegger is planning a 'Hydrogen Highway', along U.S. 101, I believe, running the entire length of this state.
 
This looks interesting, IF the science pans out as true AND is commercially viable. http://www.blacklightpower.com/

BlackLight Power Technology- A New Clean Energy Source with the Potential for Direct Conversion to Electricity

BlackLight Power (the "Company") cells generate energy through a chemical process ("BlackLight Process") which the Company believes causes the electrons of hydrogen atoms to drop to lower orbits, thus releasing energy in excess of the energy required to start the process. The lower-energy atomic hydrogen product of the BlackLight Process reacts with an electron to form a hydride ion, which further reacts with elements other than hydrogen to form novel compounds called hydrino hydride compounds ("HHCs") which are proprietary to the Company. The Company is developing the vast class of proprietary chemical compounds formed via the BlackLight Process. Its technology has far-reaching applications in many industries.

The power may be in the form of a plasma, a hot ionized glowing gas. The plasma may be converted directly to electricity with high efficiency using a direct converter such as a plasmahydrodynamic converter (PDC), thus avoiding a heat engine. The Company is working on direct plasma to electricity conversion. The energy balance permits the use of electrolysis of water as the source of hydrogen fuel using a small fraction of the output electricity. The device is linearly scaleable from the size of hand held units to large units which could replace large turbines. The Company's process may start with water as the hydrogen source and convert it to HHCs; whereas, fuel cells typically require a hydrocarbon fuel and an expensive reformer to convert hydrocarbons to hydrogen and carbon dioxide.

The Company's plasma to electric conversion technology with no reformer, no fuel cost, creation of a valuable chemical by-product rather than pollutants such as carbon dioxide, and anticipated significantly lower capital costs and operating and maintenance (O&M) costs will result in household units that are competitive with central power and significantly superior to competing microdistributed power technology such as fuel cells. The projected cost of the BLP cell and converter is less than five percent that of a fuel cell while providing a significant relative fuel savings. In addition, an energy consumer may also derive revenue by selling power back onto the distribution system when the full capacity of the system is not required by such consumer. With a focus on large scale production of microdevices, the Company anticipates rapid penetration of the electricity energy market. In this case, the Company plans to form strategic alliances with service companies in a franchise structure to provide power for consumers.
Note, not all technically doable cutting edge science pans out, as these folks demonstrated. :D
 
I googled up some numbers and they are incomplete but something like 70 million automobiles were produced in 2002 and 2003 combined world wide.

Pretty amazing!

Me thinks there are powerful economic inducements to keep making your share of the 30+ million per year if you are a corporation building cars.... and if that means providing super fuel efficient models and models that use alterate energy sources it'll happen. I hope designers are already considering the issue and feel sure they are.

I just moved from a 20 mpg model to one that does 33 or so. [Better on long I-state hauls.]

I expect the replacement for the current model will do even better, still be safe to drive and have AC. That's all I care about. Mass transit is not an option for me but if it met my sometimes on-demand need to travel schedule I'd sure do it some of the time.

I wonder if the airline industry can survive this however.

S-
 
We need to find more efficient ways of generating energy for the long term viability of our country.

However, real significant reductions in our need for fossil fuels is decades away.

In the short run we are likely going to see increases in oil proces. Some of that is due to current oil supplies not being able to meet demand. Another problems is that we have let environmentalists block exploration for new sources of oil based on lies about potential environmental damage.

We need to continue to explore for oil. We need to be cautious not to damage the environment in the process, but we need to make decisions based on sound science, not hype.

We need to continue to research better ways of generating energy.

Rising oil prices will make new options more economically viable. It will also make some sources of oil more economically viable to extract.

We also need to increase our refinery capacity, which is going to be another tough fight against the environmental lobby.
 
The True Bottleneck

is lack of refining capacity. There has not been a new refinery built in the US in approx. 20+ years. Imagine trying to build one now.....NIMBY's, Greenpeace, The Sierra Club, EPA, etc.
 
The deisel engine was designed to run on hemp seed oil and some people have converted their cars to run on the old cooking oil from fast food resturaunts.


mull that one over.


"you smell that"?

"what"

"Smells like burgers"

"oh, im just letting my car warm up" :D
 
Making your own bio-diesel is becoming a focus of a lot of people. Done right you can run for .70 a gallon. I've got a link around somewhere I picked up from the Derry Brownfield show a while back...
 
The last time I knew the oil industry bid for the rights to explore, drill, and produce oil. Won't they bid for the rights to the parcle or parcles of ANWR that are opened up?
 
Yeah, Bruce, and they often bid on faith and hope and guesswork.

Back around 1975, Exxon bid some $75 million to the feds for the right to drill on the Destin Dome, off the west coast of Florida. It wasn't exactly a dry hole, but they only found a small amount of natural gas in uneconomic quantity.

For decades, the standard royalty to a landowner was one-eighth of the value of the oil sold. Since the late 1970s, this has been as high as 25% on some leases. I've no idea of the existing deal on the present Prudhoe project, but it's no freebie for Arco...

Art
 
I always thought blind faith bidding was silly. The oil companies may have an idea on what is underground but nothing is for certain. The major point is companies will bid for the ANWR rights and there will be no federal money spent. I wish them luck but dry holes really ruin the bottom line.
 
Hey Art, don'tget me wrong, I think drilling in Alaska is probably a good idea. I guess I'm just frustrated with both sides' hyperbolic arguments for and against.

"If you drill in ANWR, all the wildlife will suffer!"

Is about equal in BS value to

"If only we could drill in ANWR, we might acutally be able to afford to drive these durn SUV's cross-country!"

:)
 
I am no expert on the matter, but I concur with other posters in that the problem is one of increased demand and our ability/inclination to extract it, not supply of oil residing in the earth.
 
On the brighter side, if the technology Sindawe posted about (or something similar) proves workable we could all be flying around in our air cars with plasma pistols on our hips.

:D
 
"...the problem is one of increased demand and our ability/inclination to extract it, not supply of oil residing in the earth."

What evidence exists to prove that the problem is "not supply of oil residing in the earth."?

Ore bodies are finite. Iron, bauxite, manganese, etc. Some of these are larger bodies than the world's demand has completely depleted, sure. But, the Mesabi iron ore body is no longer of value...

"Grease company" geologists have been doodle-bugging all over the world for the last 60 and more years. The type of geologic structures which might have oil are almost all mapped, even if not explored. And those guys have proven themselves pretty good at telling the relative size of potential reserve-pools to be found.

But stipulate that fields in Kazakhstan and other such locations can be brought on line: What's known to date is that they are smaller than in Saudi Arabia, Iran, Kuwait or Iraq. Saudi Arabia, the world's largest pool, is maxed out. It will begin an unending decline in production in a few more years. What's gonna take up the slack?

Again: The rate of new discoveries added to known supplies is less than the rate of consumption. The rate of consumption is increasing. That means trouble.

Hey, don't believe me. It matters not. All I can say is love and cherish whatever car or truck you have, but also, wish in one hand and poop in the other and see which fills up first. IMO, the idea of "Peak Oil is BS" is the wishing...

Art
 
We can back away from oil if we turn to wood burning cars like the Germans did in WW II. That way we can slash and burn the rainforest to keep our cars going. :p
 
Here's a tin-foil hat idea I came across someplace on line recently. The rise in oil price is intentional by out .gov as a means to getting OPEC all wound up and even more dependent on the money we give them for the oil they produce. Then, when the time is right, the .gov rolls out the SUPRISE! of the cheap/clean power generators the've been reverse engineering from the captured UFOs they have stashed at Groom Lake (aka Area 51). Oil become of little value, the corrupt regimes fall like a house of cards, then Peace & Freedom reigns in the former OPEC nations.

Well, I DID say it was a tin-foil hat idea. :D

Rebar: Even if the oil is not a fossil fuel, but one continually produced by the planet, I still think there will come a point then the demand outstrips the production rate. And the idea that oil is not a limited resource can keep our civilization from developing alternatives until it turns into a race for access to the best fields, AKA wars. That would further distract us from getting the petrochemical monkey off our backs.
 
Then, when the time is right, the .gov rolls out the SUPRISE! of the cheap/clean power generators the've been reverse engineering from the captured UFOs they have stashed at Groom Lake (aka Area 51). Oil become of little value, the corrupt regimes fall like a house of cards, then Peace & Freedom reigns in the former OPEC nations.
You clearly have minimal knowledge of the subject. Anyone with even passing knowledge knows the generators are stashed on the China / India border. ;)
 
Waitone, would you expand a bit on "We are running out of recoverable oil due to artificial political supply constraints placed on the marketplace."?
We politically make the decision of put specific areas of drilling off limits for reasons not associated with supply and demand. Typically they are environmental in nature but occasionally other reasons arise. Any number of oil fields are off limits due to environmental "needs." That is the source problem.

Further down the distribution chain we have the same kind of problems. Its been what 25+ years since we in the US have built a refinery. We've upgraded what we have but the simple fact of the matter is we are maxed out on refining capacity. Why no refineries? Same reasons as above. Environmental plus NIMBY, etc.

Does that mean we have a definite fixed number of refineries satisfying US demand? Well not exactly. A commodity market dellivers product at a rock bottom price to the consumer for two primary reasons: product homoginization and interchangeability. No real differece exists among products within a commodity category. All 87 octane gas is the same. Product similarity allows interchangeability to take place. Run out of one brand and another can take its place. Not so because of artificial political supply constraints. Without the constraints if Boston ran short of 87 octane, market players would simply whistle up inventory out of Chicago or NY or Canada. Can't do it. The EPA mandated boutique blends of gas formulated for specifc pollution problems with a specific geography. So now market player can not shift inventory to deal with shortages. Inventory has to be of the specific blend in demand. Marketing types will tell you boutique blends are called market segmentation and are designed to do one thing: keep the price high by keeping the consumer from substituting one commodity product from another commodity product.

My assessment? Its a freakin' miracle we have any gas at all. The government has so screwed up the production and distribution systems its a wonder it hasn't collapsed. What we have is formidable but creaky. The loss of a refinery will be verrwy, verrwy wuggie. Why? Because the tinplated gods of the Potomic think they know more about commodities than the market does. I am of the opinion the laws of economics are just as iron-clad as the laws of gravity. The speed of correction for violation of said laws is much greater with gravity than with economics.
 
Just found this.

http://www.wired.com/news/technology/0,1282,66925,00.html?tw=wn_tophead_4

More energy is trapped under the sea as frozen natural gas than is stored in all the world's oil reserves -- and researchers this week took a step toward tapping it.

Vast reserves of methane hydrates -- a form of natural gas -- could power the world for decades to come. But mining the deep, frozen deposits presents an enormous technical challenge.

An estimated 200,000 trillion cubic feet of methane hydrates exists under the sea, and the Department of Energy has a major research program under way that could result in commercial production starting by 2015.

This week, researchers announced completion of a table-top research apparatus that re-creates the high-pressure, low-temperature conditions found on the sea floor, allowing scientists to study ways of bringing the volatile frozen gas to the surface.

For millions of years, microbes have munched away on organic matter in ocean sediments, releasing methane as a byproduct. In cold, high-pressure environments at depths of 1,000 feet and more, individual methane molecules get trapped in ice-like cages of frozen water -- methane hydrates.

When they are brought up from the sea floor, the ice cages fizzle and decompose, releasing the trapped methane. Put a match to the decomposing ice and voilà: Ice that literally burns.

Devinder Mahajan (.pdf), a chemist at Brookhaven National Laboratory, has been able to "cook up" hydrates in the new apparatus with this simple recipe: "You fill the vessel with water and sediment, put in methane gas, and cool it down under high pressure (1,500 pounds per square inch). After a few hours, the hydrates form. They are stable at 4 degrees Celsius," he said.

Such data about hydrate formation in natural sediment samples is scarce. By studying different samples and learning what combinations of pressure and temperature keep the methane locked up, practical ways may be found to bring hydrates to the surface with minimal loss of methane.

The Brookhaven simulator is just a first step. Before any major extraction efforts can go forward, more-reliable means of identifying the location and composition of methane hydrates are needed.

Seismic probes that find oil and gas deposits don't work well with hydrates, Mahajan said -- they're prone to too many false signals.

Mahajan and others involved in the Department of Energy's National Methane Hydrate Program are trying to fine-tune seismic probes to eliminate the false signals. They'd also like to find out whether methane hydrate deposits vary in composition, concentration and behavior with depth.

The voyage of the Uncle John later this month may provide some of the answers. A semi-submersible drilling vessel, the Uncle John will spend 35 days in the Gulf of Mexico collecting the first-ever sediment samples from methane hydrate deposits at 4,300 feet beneath the gulf's surface.

"We're going to pull up 3-1/2-inch diameter cylinders of sediments and keep them under same conditions they were at the bottom," said Ray Boswell, a technology manager for methane hydrates at the DOE's National Energy Technology Laboratory in Morgantown, West Virginia.

The expedition is just one part of a $23 million, four-year effort funded by the DOE and ChevronTexaco to get samples from the ocean and analyze them. Mahajan and others will study the samples to determine the nature of the methane hydrate in the sea floor and develop methods to estimate reserves.

"In the labs we can raise and lower the temperatures in test chambers to find out what it will take to get the methane to flow," said Boswell.

<snip>
 
Sorry to interrupt, but us Alaskans already eradicated those pesky penguins (mentioned early on in the thread). We only have a few hundred thousand species to go and the tundra will be clear for condos and oil tanks.
 
Lord, lord. I just tried to go over and check out that Democrat sight, and I literally felt the need to vomit after about 10 minutes of reading. It saddens me to the core, to see people trash the Bill of Rights so violently and ignorantly, as they were doing in a discussion about which one was more important, the 1st or 2nd Ammendment. It's just, ...sad. :(
 
There is also oil shale. But the ecos will freak and the production will be messy. It will become a NIMBY (not i my back yard). Everyone wants cheap fuel. No one wants to do anything meaningful.

Ethanol and mixes would seem to be a good idea. Alcohol can be made from any surplus ag crop. We can pay our farmers, keep our dollars at home, and tell the people of the sand region to starve. When wheat prices go up maybe they'll bring those oil prices down a bit.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top