what do you think the world will be like when the oil fields are dry?

[tabs]

WW3 was fought from 1948 till 1990.....it was called the Cold War..

WW4 I think maybe upon us....the Islamic Fundlementalists are trying to creat CHAOS....

U know something I knew as a kid from reading history of Islam and the expansion of the religion form 600 till the the 1600's that it was an unstable religion...that if the Muslims get a wild hair up their a$$es they go crazy and Jihad...but I never really paid much more attention to them and what is/was going on...

About Oil...there more oil left in the USA than ever pumped out...it is just a function of COST to pump....all those oil Crickets that have been dormant for nearly 50 years may now start pumping again...

Nuclear...yep, Solar...required on new housing construction ..yep....Hybrid cars of one form or another...yep...I have said before that by 2020 or so the infenal combusiton engine will be passe...sure there will still be alot of 2005 model cars on the road and early Poraches to....but the new ones will be....

[M.D. Holloway]

Originally posted by tabs
What do ya mean Lubby...I gotta cut out the Buffets.....

Not before Sept 25 - I'll be in LV 25 & 26 and the Belchlagio is calling our names!

[Superman]

John Kennedy challenged America to put a man on the moon and safely return him to Earth by the end of the decade. Similarly, I would like to see a US President challenge America to be 80% engergy independent by the year XXXX. Of course, that would not be THIS "president."

Fusion is it. It will take some time for us to figure out how to handle the tremendous heat generated, but they're working on it. And it will deliver all our power needs. In the meantime, I'm actually for fission power. It can be done safely. And we've got other sources as well....solar, wind, etc. Hydrogen, maybe. Battery technology is coming forward quickly. And no, those cars will not need to be turtles. 50 electric horsepower is quite a bit. I mean, electric motored cars can be made to beat the pants off gas powered ones.

The only reason we're sticking with dino fuel is because so many people and corporations are making so much money from it. One guy comes to mind, who lives in a big White House in Washington DC.

[Moses]

Originally posted by Superman
I'm actually for fission power. It can be done safely.

Supe, you have deviated from the party line. I feel compelled to report you to the liberal constabulary for heresy, or maybe the crime of independant thinking.

[bryanthompson]

moses, he made up for it with:
The only reason we're sticking with dino fuel is because so many people and corporations are making so much money from it. One guy comes to mind, who lives in a big White House in Washington DC.


There's still hope... never give up hope.

[tcar]

Originally posted by IROC
I think you meant "fusion" technology? I agree. If we can solve the technical hurdles associated with fusion, it will change the world.

Mike

Actually he has it right. The French generate something like 90% of their electricity from Fission - nuclear reactors. Three mile island stopped it dead in it's tracks here and Chernobyl after that was no small issue either.

I still think fission is a good idea. Clean, cheap, and we've gotta have better safeguards...

Fusion is probably way out there, even if they can do it in a lab in 20 years...

[M.D. Holloway]

maybe closer than you think - even as soon as 2007, thing is it will take a bunch of energy to kick it off.

[IROC]

Originally posted by tcar
Actually he has it right. The French generate something like 90% of their electricity from Fission - nuclear reactors. Three mile island stopped it dead in it's tracks here and Chernobyl after that was no small issue either.

I still think fission is a good idea. Clean, cheap, and we've gotta have better safeguards...

Fusion is probably way out there, even if they can do it in a lab in 20 years...

Fission is good, but fusion offers energy potentials that blow fission out of the water. I think it's about time to start cranking out some more nuclear plants myself, though. The safeguards are already in place. If they can solve the spent fuel issues, that would help.

We learned alot from TMI and the whole Chernobyl thing shouldn't even be a factor in the US public's mind. Whole different ball game, that was.

Mike

[IROC]

Originally posted by LubeMaster77
maybe closer than you think - even as soon as 2007, thing is it will take a bunch of energy to kick it off.

If you're speaking of fusion, I think we're a lot farther away than that. I work with some folks "who work with some folks" that are currently trying to figure this out at Los Alamos and from what they told me a couple of months ago, we're not much closer to an operating fusion reactor than we were years ago.

Mike

[Aurel]

For transportation, biofuel such as ethanol makes the greatest sense in the world: it burns clean, requires minor or no modification on combustions engines, it helps the farmers use their corn production in the midwest, the solid by products can feed poultry, and it would cut the US dependancy on midwest oil. It is not more widespread only because the major oil companies are busy gouging the consumer, by raising the prices just enough that it is still beareable, and not yet worth the effort changing driving habits, let alone investing in biofuel.

Aurel

[Superman]

Thank you, Moses. From my perspective, it has been independent thinking that has gotten me to my conclusions. The labels are just an added amusement. Liberalism is not party thinking. In fact, historically the Democratic party's bigest liability is its diversity. The Republican party on the other hand, is monochromatic.

And yeah, I think it's interesting that:

1. The President of the United States of America is an oil baron.
2. Gasoline prices are the highest in history and....
3. At the same time, oil companies are making more profits than any corporations evern have in the entire history of American commerce.

Coincidence? Perhaps, if you're not very smart.
Conspiracy? Naw, humans don't play games for personal gain, do they?
Naivete'? If you choose to deny both of the above.

Alternative energy solutions are being pushed. But by the wrong people. They are being pushed by folks who care, and folks who understand the technologies. The pushback is coming from those who are making money from the current system, and the puppets they place into power.

[ChrisBennet]

Originally posted by Aurel
For transportation, biofuel such as ethanol makes the greatest sense in the world: it burns clean, requires minor or no modification on combustions engines, it helps the farmers use their corn production in the midwest, the solid by products can feed poultry, and it would cut the US dependancy on midwest oil. It is not more widespread only because the major oil companies are busy gouging the consumer, by raising the prices just enough that it is still beareable, and not yet worth the effort changing driving habits, let alone investing in biofuel.

Aurel

I was under the impression that ethenol took more energy to produce than you got out of it.
-Chris

EDIT: Here's a link UC scientist says ethanol uses more energy than it makes

[yellowline]

Originally posted by Superman
[B]
2. Gasoline prices are the highest in history and....

No, not when adjusted for inflation.

[1967 R50/2]

Well, when the world runs out of gas, I believe the LORD HUMONGOUS will have a few things to say

Humongous: I'm greatly disappointed. Again, you have made me unleash my dogs of war. Look at what remains of your gallant scouts. Why? Because you're selfish. You horde your gasoline. You will not listen to reason. Now my prisoners say you plan to take your gasoline out of the wasteland. You sent them out this morning to find a vehicle - a rig big enough to haul that FAT tank of gas. What a puny plan! Look around you. This...is the valley of death. Humongous will not be defied. ...

Humongous: There has been too much violence, too much pain. None here are without sin, but I have an honorable compromise. Just walk away. Give me your pump, the oil, the gasoline, and the whole compound, and I will spare you lives. Just walk away. I will give you safe passage in the wasteland. Just walk away. And there will be an end to the horror. I await your answer. You have one full day to decide.

Then, of course those weenie do gooders will trick Max into hauling a tanker full of sand, while they escape with the juice.

Full speech on: http://people.thirteen.net/~ned/

[Aurel]

Originally posted by ChrisBennet
I was under the impression that ethenol took more energy to produce than you got out of it.
-Chris

EDIT: Here's a link UC scientist says ethanol uses more energy than it makes

I guess, it depends who pays for the study...

Hosein Shapouri, an economist at the U.S. Department of Agriculture, has also cracked down on Patzek's energy calculations.

"It's true that the original ethanol plants in the 1970s went bankrupt. But Patzek doesn't consider the impact new, more efficient production technologies have had on the ethanol industry," he said.

Shapouri's most recent analysis, which the USDA published in 2004, comes to the exact opposite conclusion of Patzek's: Ethanol, he said, has a positive energy balance, containing 67 percent more energy than is used to manufacture it.

At any rate, ethanol looks more practical on a shorter term than hydrogen. I say, put solar panels on houses, ethanol in cars, and the money of the Iraq war in fusion research, and we`d be in good shape. Now, if there was also a way to use all the calories contained on fat people...we would get far ahead

Aurel

[Aurel]

Wow, I did some research and I am amazed:

1 lb of gasoline contains 5166 calories
1 lb of body fat contains 3500 calories

So, assuming you have a car that does 20 miles/gallon, that is 1550 calories/mile, you could run your car 3500/1550 = 2.25 miles wih one pound of your own fat.

Or, you would have lost 100 lbs after only 225 miles. Cool, huh ?

Aurel

[mikester]

Originally posted by ChrisBennet
I was under the impression that ethenol took more energy to produce than you got out of it.
-Chris

EDIT: Here's a link UC scientist says ethanol uses more energy than it makes

Wouldn't that likely change when we start creating it in the volumes we create oil based products?

Volume is the key...

[M.D. Holloway]

Aurel, how many calories in diesel? I was under the impression that it produces 10X the energy of gasoline.

As far as ethanol goes, five years ago my Father-in-laws farm produced soybeans and corn for animal feed. Now, 50% goes to ConAgra for ethanol production. He thinks that in 2 to 4 years his entire crop will be for ethanol. He doen't mind much, he says that the prices are very fair and if it releives our dependency on overseas oil he is all for it - as am I.

Biodiesel is another story, 75% comes from animal renderings and really doesn't make ecomonic sense yet. The giv still juices it with tons of subsidies.

[Aurel]

Per google, 1 gallon of diesel is 139,000 BTU, versus 124,000 BTU for 1 gallon of gasoline. Whatever a BTU is (and I don`t really care to know, since it is another stupid british unit), I conclude that 1 gallon of diesel is 139x5166/124= 5791 calories.

Aurel

[Aurel]

Actually, riding a bike is much more energy efficient than driving a car. Someone calculated here that his bike was doing 900 miles per gallon of vegetable oil.

Aurel