The end of the world is nigh (well our world)
- Thread starter Markie C
- Start date
The problem isnt oil is going to run out, oil will Never run out. Its the problem that cheap oil will run out. This isnt the $ cost of a barrel.
What I am talking about is the energy pay off you get from a barrel of oil. When oil was first discovered as a fuel source it was found just under the surface of the earth in places like Texas. Here all you had to do was sink a pump and out comes loads of oil! So in cost terms:
Very little energy in = large energy out
Eg. 1 barrels in = 30 barrels out
Now lets take it to the next step... getting oil out of the North sea, where you need an oil rig, helicopters and supply ships to get your oil
Medium energy in = large energy out
eg 3 barrels in = 30 barrels out
Now there is talk of oil under the polar ice caps... To get this we need ice breaker ships travelling large distances through ICE which all uses high levels of fuel. We need to setup expensive drilling equipment in a harsh environment
medium to Large energy in = large energy out
eg 15 barrels in = 30 barrels out
At some point it becomes a waste of time to extract oil as it comes to a ratio of 1 barrel in = 1 barrel out. At this point (and likely before) oil ceases to be an energy source.
At the moment (I think) we are sitting at the energy trade off of 1 barrel in = ~5 barrels out.
The majority of our infrastructure and energy requirements are based on oil. It is, and will remain for the next few years, the best value energy source available to us. Nuclear, wind, wave, solar all have input to output values of about 1: between 1.2 and 3ish. If we are to use these solutions we must input cheap energy into these NOW while we still have cheap (in energy terms) oil available to us.
Some of the alternatives actually take more energy to make then they give to us! For example ethanol from corn - You need to fertilise the corn which takes ammonia which is fixed in the haber process. The haber process is incredibly energy hungry and accounts for ~1% of human kinds energy product.
Then you need to harvest it...
Then you need to convert it into ethanol... it works out at an energy ratio of about 0.8:1.
If you interested in this topic i suggest you pick up a copy: Party's Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies by Richard Heinberg.
Thats where i read the above stuff.
What I am talking about is the energy pay off you get from a barrel of oil. When oil was first discovered as a fuel source it was found just under the surface of the earth in places like Texas. Here all you had to do was sink a pump and out comes loads of oil! So in cost terms:
Very little energy in = large energy out
Eg. 1 barrels in = 30 barrels out
Now lets take it to the next step... getting oil out of the North sea, where you need an oil rig, helicopters and supply ships to get your oil
Medium energy in = large energy out
eg 3 barrels in = 30 barrels out
Now there is talk of oil under the polar ice caps... To get this we need ice breaker ships travelling large distances through ICE which all uses high levels of fuel. We need to setup expensive drilling equipment in a harsh environment
medium to Large energy in = large energy out
eg 15 barrels in = 30 barrels out
At some point it becomes a waste of time to extract oil as it comes to a ratio of 1 barrel in = 1 barrel out. At this point (and likely before) oil ceases to be an energy source.
At the moment (I think) we are sitting at the energy trade off of 1 barrel in = ~5 barrels out.
The majority of our infrastructure and energy requirements are based on oil. It is, and will remain for the next few years, the best value energy source available to us. Nuclear, wind, wave, solar all have input to output values of about 1: between 1.2 and 3ish. If we are to use these solutions we must input cheap energy into these NOW while we still have cheap (in energy terms) oil available to us.
Some of the alternatives actually take more energy to make then they give to us! For example ethanol from corn - You need to fertilise the corn which takes ammonia which is fixed in the haber process. The haber process is incredibly energy hungry and accounts for ~1% of human kinds energy product.
Then you need to harvest it...
Then you need to convert it into ethanol... it works out at an energy ratio of about 0.8:1.
If you interested in this topic i suggest you pick up a copy: Party's Over: Oil, War and the Fate of Industrial Societies by Richard Heinberg.
Thats where i read the above stuff.
And then, only if you don't have a few pounds of "Composition B", some Axle Grease and a supply of socks and rudimentary fuses.Moral of the story, you should only start worrying when you see tanks rolling down the highstreet...
And the balls to use it...
I understand what you are saying. Its like in Canada, in Alberta thay have oil sands (or something similar) and up until fairly recently they didnt have the technology to extract it, and make a profit. They do now, and extract it and make a great profit. Apparently (and dont quote me on this) in Alberta they don't charge tax's as the province has an excess of money.
Europe are undertaking 2 major projects to make nuclear fusion work.. energy can be made from Sea Water so with the rising sea levels, we'll be laughing.
The problems so far have been the high temperatures that are required, but they have been looking in super steels and magnetic fields and laser fusion.
look at the ITER and HIPER projects if you want more info.
The problems so far have been the high temperatures that are required, but they have been looking in super steels and magnetic fields and laser fusion.
look at the ITER and HIPER projects if you want more info.
Nuclear Fusion will be the way forword once they learn how to control the energy. That ice caps thing is crap because that destroys the ice. Making the sea levels rise even more.
But it is ture we wont run out of oil we will just need to search further and further below the surface...
But neclear energy is the cleanest energy you can get (Mass amounts) unlike wind, etc.. The only thing dirty about it is the waste product left after. No polution is made unlike burning coal or oil or gas. Co2 amounts will decrease if we used Neclear more but the toxic waste would go higher.
Like said above my conclusion is Nuclear Fusion.. But thats what i think anyways
But it is ture we wont run out of oil we will just need to search further and further below the surface...
But neclear energy is the cleanest energy you can get (Mass amounts) unlike wind, etc.. The only thing dirty about it is the waste product left after. No polution is made unlike burning coal or oil or gas. Co2 amounts will decrease if we used Neclear more but the toxic waste would go higher.
Like said above my conclusion is Nuclear Fusion.. But thats what i think anyways
I did a bit of research about large scale solar energy farms. They provide a means to export energy from deserts which would otherwise go unused. The project I researched was called TREK, if anyone wants to read more.
http://www.impactlab.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/brightsource-solar-mojave2.jpg
http://www.impactlab.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/08/brightsource-solar-mojave2.jpg
for feul they just need to find suffient ways of making huydrogen once we can make hydrogen withought using oil then the car thing should be sorted.
The first diesel engine ran on peanut oil just grow more peanuts. Its just the car and oil companies that refuse to use alternitive oils. They have their own agender. Cough ££££££££££