Freeing ourselves from the gas crisis?
- Thread starter MeekAndMild
- Start date
nobody_special
New member
Tuttle8, you highlighted the wrong section. Instead, see these:
A coastal nation has control of all economic resources within its exclusive economic zone, including fishing, mining, oil exploration, and any pollution of those resources.
and this:
The coastal nation has control of all resources on or under its continental shelf, living or not, but no control over any living organisms above the shelf that are beyond its exclusive economic zone.
A nation can't prohibit passage in those waters, but they do have control over the mineral resources, including oil.
A coastal nation has control of all economic resources within its exclusive economic zone, including fishing, mining, oil exploration, and any pollution of those resources.
and this:
The coastal nation has control of all resources on or under its continental shelf, living or not, but no control over any living organisms above the shelf that are beyond its exclusive economic zone.
A nation can't prohibit passage in those waters, but they do have control over the mineral resources, including oil.
And what’s really cool is that this trend seems most pronounced among liberals. Result, a generation of conservatives.
It would appear that liberalism is a self correcting condition.
http://www.danieldrezner.com/archives/002631.html
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2006/2/index.html
The world is such a totally cool place.
It would appear that liberalism is a self correcting condition.
http://www.danieldrezner.com/archives/002631.html
http://www.usnews.com/blogs/barone/2006/2/index.html
The world is such a totally cool place.
toybox99615
New member
oil facts
US daily consumption 20 million barrels of oil per day.
US daily production 7 million barrels a day: or 1/3 of our demand
While there are some potential sites undrilled the issue is can those sites triple US daily production. ANWR is always thrown out as a solution. However the ANWR potential has various and assorted problems. Among the problems is that drilling alone does not get the oil to market. At present the Trans Alaska pipe line moves 73,000 barrels of oil per day (4% of the US demand.) It would require a pipeline with 20 times the capacity of the Trans Alaska pipe line to deliver the oil in ANWR (if it could be produced at that rate) to eliminate foreign oil.
The best guess estimates say it would be five years before oil from ANWR could be at the market should all restrictions be removed and drilling started immediately. In any event the dependency on foreign oil is going to be with us for a lot longer than most folks realize.
Believing the US is going to simply triple production from 7 million B/D to 20 million B/D is a wild shot at best. I doubt we can actually accomplish that goal when the predictions are the total undrilled resources do not exist.
I support drilling in Alaska becasue it part of the solution and I'll gain financially as the State of Alaska will not be looking to institute an income tax while the oil flows. Yet I do realize ANWR is a small step in the move to lower foreign oil dependency.
US daily consumption 20 million barrels of oil per day.
US daily production 7 million barrels a day: or 1/3 of our demand
While there are some potential sites undrilled the issue is can those sites triple US daily production. ANWR is always thrown out as a solution. However the ANWR potential has various and assorted problems. Among the problems is that drilling alone does not get the oil to market. At present the Trans Alaska pipe line moves 73,000 barrels of oil per day (4% of the US demand.) It would require a pipeline with 20 times the capacity of the Trans Alaska pipe line to deliver the oil in ANWR (if it could be produced at that rate) to eliminate foreign oil.
The best guess estimates say it would be five years before oil from ANWR could be at the market should all restrictions be removed and drilling started immediately. In any event the dependency on foreign oil is going to be with us for a lot longer than most folks realize.
Believing the US is going to simply triple production from 7 million B/D to 20 million B/D is a wild shot at best. I doubt we can actually accomplish that goal when the predictions are the total undrilled resources do not exist.
I support drilling in Alaska becasue it part of the solution and I'll gain financially as the State of Alaska will not be looking to institute an income tax while the oil flows. Yet I do realize ANWR is a small step in the move to lower foreign oil dependency.
MeekAndMild
New member
Dems been saying that since the mid 80's. Lessee...1985 + 5 = 1990...
Drill everywhere we can. Raise production as much as possible as a stopgap while we finally build modern nuclear infrastructure and move to an all-electric or almost-all-electric power base. We are just starting to pass the tipping point on natural gas usage where we'll soon have to start importing a significant portion. Things are going to start to go critical very quickly. I'm sure you all will like the ration cards that Barack has planned to meet this crisis.
The reality is that demand is outstripping supply. There are several reasons for this. First, many of the largest oil fields are old and their production is naturally going down. Second, political instability in many nations is reducing their output of oil (e.g., Iraq, Nigeria, Sudan). Third, 80% of the worlds oil reserves are controlled by national oil companies. Many of these national oil companies are poorly managed and underinvested (e.g., National Oil Company of Iran, Petróleos Mexicanos, Petróleos de Venezuela, etc.).
The major oil companies that we think of like Exxon, BP, etc., actually produce a very small percentage of the world's oil.
At the same time that supply is severely constrained, demand is increasing dramatically. China, India, and Russia suddenly have an emerging middle class that can finally afford to buy cars, which they are doing in great numbers.
Add into this mix speculators who are betting that the cost of oil will go up, and you have the runaway cost of oil.
Finally, the dollar is weak. With the value of the dollar going down, the price of imported oil is going up.
The reality is that there are no quick solutions to this. We do need to facilitate more nuclear power plants. But that requires that we finally solve the storage of waste. Whether or not you agree that Yucca Mountain is the place to do it, the waste has to be stored in someone's backyard, and no politician has the backbone to get it done.
Corn-based ethanol is not the answer, but cellulosic ethanol may be part of the answer. Drilling in ANWR would help, but it isn't going to solve the problem -- oil is a fungible commodity and ANWR is not such a huge reserve that it would significantly impact the global price of oil.
The US market does not control the world price of oil. We are a passenger in the market, not the driver.
The major oil companies that we think of like Exxon, BP, etc., actually produce a very small percentage of the world's oil.
At the same time that supply is severely constrained, demand is increasing dramatically. China, India, and Russia suddenly have an emerging middle class that can finally afford to buy cars, which they are doing in great numbers.
Add into this mix speculators who are betting that the cost of oil will go up, and you have the runaway cost of oil.
Finally, the dollar is weak. With the value of the dollar going down, the price of imported oil is going up.
The reality is that there are no quick solutions to this. We do need to facilitate more nuclear power plants. But that requires that we finally solve the storage of waste. Whether or not you agree that Yucca Mountain is the place to do it, the waste has to be stored in someone's backyard, and no politician has the backbone to get it done.
Corn-based ethanol is not the answer, but cellulosic ethanol may be part of the answer. Drilling in ANWR would help, but it isn't going to solve the problem -- oil is a fungible commodity and ANWR is not such a huge reserve that it would significantly impact the global price of oil.
The US market does not control the world price of oil. We are a passenger in the market, not the driver.
toybox99615
New member
you can prove other wise
"Dems been saying that since the mid 80's. Lessee...1985 + 5 = 1990... "MeekAndMild
It took two years to construct the Trans-Alaska pipeline. Construction began after a three year stockpiling of pipe, equipment and related materials. Unless you know of a way to simply snap your fingers and have everything build in zero time it will take five or more years. The Trans Alaska pipeline was considered one of the largest project of modern times. It was built in record time. So while you might attempt to fault the dems for their claim there is no evidence to indicate it can be done quicker.
Right now drilling companies spend a year or two getting materials or equipment staged for existing wells and platforms. Any new fields will require similar staging and fabrication time lines. Anyone who believes it will happen overnight is simply full of manure. At this point in time there is nothing staged for possable drilling in ANWR. It will be a start from scratch when it comes to materials and equipment.
"Dems been saying that since the mid 80's. Lessee...1985 + 5 = 1990... "MeekAndMild
It took two years to construct the Trans-Alaska pipeline. Construction began after a three year stockpiling of pipe, equipment and related materials. Unless you know of a way to simply snap your fingers and have everything build in zero time it will take five or more years. The Trans Alaska pipeline was considered one of the largest project of modern times. It was built in record time. So while you might attempt to fault the dems for their claim there is no evidence to indicate it can be done quicker.
Right now drilling companies spend a year or two getting materials or equipment staged for existing wells and platforms. Any new fields will require similar staging and fabrication time lines. Anyone who believes it will happen overnight is simply full of manure. At this point in time there is nothing staged for possable drilling in ANWR. It will be a start from scratch when it comes to materials and equipment.
(Playing devil's advocate here) But it would have an immediate affect on the oil *futures* market, which is more important than the spot market anyway. Drilling in ANWR would increase our near-term oil reserves.
But it all we do is increase our production without reducing demand, we are burning up our long-term reserves that our children might need someday.
Unlikely to have any significant effect. Most of the oil futures that are traded mature in less than a year. The possible impact of an oil field that won't come on line for 3+ years isn't going to effect the cost of a future for delivery in September.
Furthermore, the amount of oil in ANWR is not that great. If it was really, really, really huge, it would add 5% to the world's oil production. Big frickin' deal. Not enough to materially change the market.
Late estimates peg the number of illegal immigrants in the US at 13 million. At the US average per-capita gasoline consumption of 464 gallons per year, this puts them at 6 billion gallons of gasoline per year.
Think that might have a little bitty effect on the market for gasoline?
Still think you're getting a bargain on lettuce?
toybox99615
New member
another great use of logic.
"Late estimates peg the number of illegal immigrants in the US at 13 million. At the US average per-capita gasoline consumption of 464 gallons per year, this puts them at 6 billion gallons of gasoline per year"
So now the illegals are responsible for the price of gas. Such a logical connection for us to follow. :barf:
"Late estimates peg the number of illegal immigrants in the US at 13 million. At the US average per-capita gasoline consumption of 464 gallons per year, this puts them at 6 billion gallons of gasoline per year"
So now the illegals are responsible for the price of gas. Such a logical connection for us to follow. :barf:
The point is that a nation can't expect to conserve its way out of an energy crisis when the population is increasing by a million people a year, legally or illegally.
Replacing an incandescent with a compact fluorescent might cut your lighting bill by 2/3, but when four more people move in and fire up their own lights, you end up further behind than where you started. California learned that the hard way under Governor Grey-out Davis, but apparently the lesson that NEW energy supplies are required AS WELL AS conservation, hasn't sunk in either there or anywhere else.
So instead of lifting bans on expansion of domestic energy supplies, be they oil, nuclear, coal, or natural gas, Pelosi wants to sue OPEC.
Replacing an incandescent with a compact fluorescent might cut your lighting bill by 2/3, but when four more people move in and fire up their own lights, you end up further behind than where you started. California learned that the hard way under Governor Grey-out Davis, but apparently the lesson that NEW energy supplies are required AS WELL AS conservation, hasn't sunk in either there or anywhere else.
So instead of lifting bans on expansion of domestic energy supplies, be they oil, nuclear, coal, or natural gas, Pelosi wants to sue OPEC.
bushidomosquito
New member
If I had the money I'd put it in nanotech. Not the tiny robots but companies that specialize in building things on a molecular level. The stuff is viable and is producing usefull materials every day. Some day we're going to kick ourselves for burning up all the oil that we could have used for superplastics that perform specific funtions like cells in the body do. I wouldn't be surprised if I lived to see landfills getting strip mined for the precious plastic molecules. Remember that refineries used to burn off gasoline because there was no use for it. The batteries and super efficent solar cells that will eventually solve the energy problems will all be nano built. You can do some pretty amazing things when you can control where every single atom goes. You could paint your car with 85% efficent microscopic solar cells feeding into a battery that is actually formed into various parts of the car. Do you think that the capacity of a $20 cell phone battery was predicted 30 years ago? Who ever looked at a b&w cathode ray tube 50 years back and said, "That's cool but I want it paper thin and in 5 million colors"? We are in the 1950s of nanotechnology and all the stuff we can imagine it doing is only the begining.
Revelation76
New member
Who Killed The Electric Car?
A good film to see.
Copied from Wikipedia---
*******
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car?
Who Killed the Electric Car? is a 2006 documentary film that explores the birth, limited commercialization, and subsequent death of the battery electric vehicle in the United States, specifically the General Motors EV1 of the 1990s. The film explores the roles of automobile manufacturers, the oil industry, the US government, batteries, hydrogen vehicles, and consumers in limiting the development and adoption of this technology.
It was released on DVD to the home video market on November 14, 2006 by Sony Pictures Home Entertainment.
*******
Electricity will be NEEDED for our homes, why not concentrate on ELECTRICITY, and run our vehicles on it as well. OF COURSE IT'S THE $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ It always goes back to Money/Power, and what men/women do when they have it.
* Interesting fact- The electric car predates the internal combustion engine.
A good film to see.
Copied from Wikipedia---
*******
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Who_Killed_the_Electric_Car?
Who Killed the Electric Car? is a 2006 documentary film that explores the birth, limited commercialization, and subsequent death of the battery electric vehicle in the United States, specifically the General Motors EV1 of the 1990s. The film explores the roles of automobile manufacturers, the oil industry, the US government, batteries, hydrogen vehicles, and consumers in limiting the development and adoption of this technology.
It was released on DVD to the home video market on November 14, 2006 by Sony Pictures Home Entertainment.
*******
Electricity will be NEEDED for our homes, why not concentrate on ELECTRICITY, and run our vehicles on it as well.
OF COURSE IT'S THE $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ It always goes back to Money/Power, and what men/women do when they have it. * Interesting fact- The electric car predates the internal combustion engine.
That film is COMPLETE AND UTTER BULL!
Think about the reality of the GM EV1: It cost over $40,000, back when other cars cost much less. In the best conditions, in CA, its range was 100 miles. When you ran out of juice, you had to plug it in and wait for 8 hours for it to recharge. It was a 2-seater with very little room. And this was back when gas cost $1/gallon or so. And remember that you had to spend a thousand dollars or so to have an electrician install a charging station in your garage (a simple 110volt outlet would not work).
The battery technology in those days was simply not good enough. It isn't clear that battery technology is good enough today either -- GM has a huge challenge in getting the Chevy Volt to market in 2010 at a reasonable cost.
Think about the reality of the GM EV1: It cost over $40,000, back when other cars cost much less. In the best conditions, in CA, its range was 100 miles. When you ran out of juice, you had to plug it in and wait for 8 hours for it to recharge. It was a 2-seater with very little room. And this was back when gas cost $1/gallon or so. And remember that you had to spend a thousand dollars or so to have an electrician install a charging station in your garage (a simple 110volt outlet would not work).
The battery technology in those days was simply not good enough. It isn't clear that battery technology is good enough today either -- GM has a huge challenge in getting the Chevy Volt to market in 2010 at a reasonable cost.
MeekAndMild
New member
Another link
This is another link which more precisely describes one of the wood to oil processes which is build-able using off the shelf technology: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/wood_to_oil.html
This is another link which more precisely describes one of the wood to oil processes which is build-able using off the shelf technology: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel_library/wood_to_oil.html
Revelation76
New member
Whatever one might think of the film, think of where we could be now if we had a genuine interest in advancing electric car technology. Money and power, and protecting that money and power is ALWAYS a factor. Science will not advance without the needed money and minds, no matter what the topic.
So this car wasn't right for you. Other people really wanted it, and put up money that was not accepted.
Last edited: