Why Don't Some People Get It?

[Aharami]

Originally posted by: Random Variable
Spending more money on developing alternatives is a good thing, but it's BS that we're running out of oil.

so you know for a fact that new oil is being created somewhere as we speak? oil is a non-renewable resource. Everyday we're running out of it. The more we use, the less we have

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: rocadelpunk
What exactly would you have against drilling our own oil (putting jobs here) and not having to rely on foreign sources? Sounds like a great idea to me, especially since as far as I know there is just a shitttttton of oil in the U.S. (I'd have to ask my friend where/how much for specifics). Also, I don't know if the country could stand another *oil line debacle*. I wasn't alive during that time, but from what I've heard...morale was quite low, people felt like a second rate country and things were just...bad. If we got to that point, I'm sure nobody would care what environmentalists thought.

Would you want oil wells pumping outside your bedroom window 24/7? What kind of quality of life does that give? You don't care so long as you can fill up your SUV that gets 15mpg for under $50?

This guy doesn't seem to mind

Indiana man drilling for oil - in his backyard

2 days ago

SELMA, Ind. ? An Indiana man is capitalizing on high crude oil prices with his own oil well - in his back yard.

Greg Losh tells WISH-T-V in Indianapolis the well that produces three barrels of oil a day is "a money-maker."

He says it comes from the Trenton oil field that fuelled growth in east-central Indiana more than a century ago.

He says it costs about $100,000 to drill an oil well, but that at today's prices, it's worth it.

Losh expects to drill four more wells on his property in the town of Selma, about 90 kilometres northeast of Indianapolis.

Losh says the oil is stored in a tank and transported to Ohio for sale.

The well also produces natural gas to heat his home and several others.

http://canadianpress.google.co...N-WslQIEIrRXPoh1DdFc8g

What if you didn't own the land but just lived there? Not everyone owns land and even if you do the government can come in and take away your property rights. Have you ever seen an oil well? They are ugly, dirty, and noisy devices. I wouldn't want one in my backyard.

Another thing is refineries. We have a refinery in Torrance, it's huge, and everytime I drive past it I put my windows up and close the vents in my car because it smells so bad around there. There is also a fine mist of oil that hangs in the air and accumulates on everything, on your car (kind of ironic huh?), on the trees, in the ground (which contaminates the soil and ground water). Not to mention the disasters that are possible if something goes wrong at one of these plants.

No thanks, I wouldn't want to live next to one. No way.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Xavier434
Are treehuggers really to blame for our lack of participation when it comes to drilling for oil in areas like Alaska, Antarctica, and various other places? How does this all work out economically? Is it too expensive to drill the oil in most of these locations?

I do blame treehuggers when it comes to Nuclear power though. I would like to see us use Nuclear energy a lot more. I'm not green enough to care about the waste considering our current methods to dispose of it. Those methods are good enough for me.

we already drill for oil in alaska. the big wild life refuge is what is off limits, and the tree huggers are to blame.

except in the gulf of mexico (and not even all of it), no new drilling for oil is allowed off US coasts. that's a combination of environmentalists and beachside land owners who don't want their view spoiled.

antarctica is covered by international treaty that basically says no one exploits it for resources.

 

[Jugernot]

Originally posted by: eits
i was at a bar yesterday and a couple of guys were talking amongst themselves next to me and i couldn't help but overhear their conversation.

they were talking about the price of gas and how what "they need to do is drill in alaska and california and antarctica or something... fuck those tree huggers and start drilling."

i thought, why? what good is that going to do? it'll slow down the drive for alternative fueling and the huge push we're seeing for clean energy and less dependence on the middle east. the less dependent we are on the middle east, the less terrorism we'll have to worry about and the less likely we are to involve ourselves in another war out there.

running out of oil is easily one of the best things going for the world.

That's great and all.... but the average American family is barely able to cover their costs for heating their homes, pay their electric bills (because of fuel costs), or drive their cars back and forth to work.

Alternative energy sources are great in principal, but unless they can develop them quick enough to keep up with average Joes, they are a failure in my eyes.

I say all of this, but in reality, a major drilling source such as ANWR (Alaska) will take years to develop and actually bring new oil to the market. But hey, it's sooner than hydrogen fuel cells or a viable "cheap enough" solar cell car will make it to the market.

Plugin hybrids have a real chances, but even that is starting not to make sense. Here in Alaska, our electric bills have jumped 50% in the last few years because of "Fuel surcharges".

Jugs

 

[moshquerade]

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: moshquerade

Originally posted by: JulesMaximus

Originally posted by: rocadelpunk
What exactly would you have against drilling our own oil (putting jobs here) and not having to rely on foreign sources? Sounds like a great idea to me, especially since as far as I know there is just a shitttttton of oil in the U.S. (I'd have to ask my friend where/how much for specifics). Also, I don't know if the country could stand another *oil line debacle*. I wasn't alive during that time, but from what I've heard...morale was quite low, people felt like a second rate country and things were just...bad. If we got to that point, I'm sure nobody would care what environmentalists thought.

Would you want oil wells pumping outside your bedroom window 24/7? What kind of quality of life does that give? You don't care so long as you can fill up your SUV that gets 15mpg for under $50?

This guy doesn't seem to mind

Indiana man drilling for oil - in his backyard

2 days ago

SELMA, Ind. ? An Indiana man is capitalizing on high crude oil prices with his own oil well - in his back yard.

Greg Losh tells WISH-T-V in Indianapolis the well that produces three barrels of oil a day is "a money-maker."

He says it comes from the Trenton oil field that fuelled growth in east-central Indiana more than a century ago.

He says it costs about $100,000 to drill an oil well, but that at today's prices, it's worth it.

Losh expects to drill four more wells on his property in the town of Selma, about 90 kilometres northeast of Indianapolis.

Losh says the oil is stored in a tank and transported to Ohio for sale.

The well also produces natural gas to heat his home and several others.

http://canadianpress.google.co...N-WslQIEIrRXPoh1DdFc8g

What if you didn't own the land but just lived there? Not everyone owns land and even if you do the government can come in and take away your property rights. Have you ever seen an oil well? They are ugly, dirty, and noisy devices. I wouldn't want one in my backyard.

Another thing is refineries. We have a refinery in Torrance, it's huge, and everytime I drive past it I put my windows up and close the vents in my car because it smells so bad around there. There is also a fine mist of oil that hangs in the air and accumulates on everything, on your car (kind of ironic huh?), on the trees, in the ground (which contaminates the soil and ground water). Not to mention the disasters that are possible if something goes wrong at one of these plants.

No thanks, I wouldn't want to live next to one. No way.

i have windmills in my backyard.

the Nimbys don't like them either.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: moshquerade
i have windmills in my backyard.

the Nimbys don't like them either.

We have huge windmill farms out near Palm Springs lining the 10 freeway. They aren't pretty but they are not nearly as damaging to the environment as an oil refinery is.

 

[alkemyst]

Originally posted by: Aharami

Originally posted by: Random Variable
Spending more money on developing alternatives is a good thing, but it's BS that we're running out of oil.

so you know for a fact that new oil is being created somewhere as we speak? oil is a non-renewable resource. Everyday we're running out of it. The more we use, the less we have

I don't think it was a stretch to realize he meant we aren't running out of oil in the sense that in the current generation or next it's going to run dry.

Yes it's non-renewable in theory, but there are plenty of places with it that are untapped.

I don't agree reliance on oil is the right thing, but it's so intertwined in the global economy that unless everyone works together to move it to another form of energy and manufacturering it's not going to go away until those that profit off it, stop profiting.

 

[buck]

Originally posted by: AccruedExpenditure

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: AccruedExpenditure
Gas will be under 3 dollars a gallon and oil under 60 dollars a barrel by 2011
/thread

...and if it isn't?

It will be, i've got a number of running bets with friends that it will be, if it isn't, i'll be down a couple grand.

I certainly hope you win the bet.....

 

[jonks]

Originally posted by: eits
running out of oil is easily one of the best things going for the world.

and if we run out before alternative fuels mature and we turn into mad max or waterworld roaming the earth for "go-juice"? thanks, but id rather kill the polar bears until we find a solution, and i know colbert is with me.

 

[JulesMaximus]

Originally posted by: sirjonk

Originally posted by: eits
running out of oil is easily one of the best things going for the world.

and if we run out before alternative fuels mature and we turn into mad max or waterworld roaming the earth for "go-juice"? thanks, but id rather kill the polar bears until we find a solution, and i know colbert is with me.

NM, I got it. :laugh:

 

[Cogman]

Originally posted by: Eeezee

What you know about solar power was true 20 years ago. Times have changed.

Solar power does NOT require photovoltaic cells for generation. This is but one option. A more efficient (cost-effective) method is to essentially use mirrors to boil water, which runs a turbine. No rare materials are required (unless you consider mirrors to be particularly rare). Allow the steam chamber to be a nanotube coated surfaces (environmentally friendly) for maximum efficiency.

Solar power does NOT require batteries for supplying energy at night. In the regions most ripe for solar power, cloudy days are rare, so there's an automatic plus. These regions also happen to be home to some of the largest abandoned mine shafts in the world. Using molten salt (ie filling the unused shafts) as an energy storage medium is a well-understood cost-effective process.

HVDC transmission lines are an effective, nearly lossless (less lossy than standard AC lines) method for transferring the power from place to place, and the AC converters are actually a lot cheaper than you'd think.

I suggest you actually read up on modern solar power. Newscientist and Scientific American each did a series of very informative articles regarding the latest advancements in the last 5-10 years. In 50 years the US could be running on over 90% solar power for its electricity if we start laying down the infrastructure and investment NOW. The initial cost is high, but over a long time it will be cheaper to run on solar power than coal (which has been seeing a price spike in recent years).

Today, solar is just slightly more expensive per kW/hr than nuclear, which is only slightly more expensive than coal (factors of two). Coal is going up in price. Nuclear is a PR nightmare despite being safe and cost-effective, but its price is pretty much Solar is going DOWN in price every year as more research is conducted.

Boil water to run a turbine, are you joking me? Lets see, turbine efficiency, ~ 30% (Tops) photo electric, ~ 20%. So unless you are getting 100% or near 100% efficiency of converting photons into heat, you will only be getting 30% back at the most. Yeah, that sounds promising. How would coating the chamber with nanotubes make it more efficient? As far as I've read, (carbon) nanotubes are good conductors of heat so coating the steam chamber with them would only serve to take the energy out of the steam and transfer it too the surrounding wall faster, not the effect you would be going for.

Ill give you, though, that using a turbine rather then a photoelectric cell would reduce costs as you don't have to convert from DC to AC. While a DC transmission line may be efficient (don't know, haven't read up on it to be honest) the current infrastructure is based on AC power. It is simply impossible to change all the power stations to solar overnight. The materials required are still going to be far more then those of a regular power plant.

I still think there are much better solutions then solar available out there (nuclear), but I guess we are in agreement that the current state of relying on fossil fuels is not a good one. The only reason we do it now is because it is cheap to do, and we are already setup for it.

I have never heard of the molten salt stuff before, Ill have to go look it up now.

 

[PepePeru]

Its not like they can just start drilling and all of a sudden the price of gas drops.

i hope the price of oil stays insanely high so we look for alternatives.

fuck the turkeynecks.

 

[JDub02]

More oil on the market = lower prices for oil. What's so hard to understand? The US should absolutely go drill for oil on US soil. Not controlling our energy supply is a serious national security weakness.

Alternative energy is a wonderful DREAM. It's not here. It won't be here for a while. And when it does arrive and becomes economically viable, it will replace oil. Until then, see the first sentence above .. more oil on the market = lower prices. Lower energy costs are good for the economy.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: G Wizard
Its not like they can just start drilling and all of a sudden the price of gas drops.

i hope the price of oil stays insanely high so we look for alternatives.

fuck the turkeynecks.

So, you like paying more for everything that has to be transported anywhere? You think that's somehow good for the country?

 

[BoomerD]

Originally posted by: JDub02
More oil on the market = lower prices for oil. What's so hard to understand? The US should absolutely go drill for oil on US soil. Not controlling our energy supply is a serious national security weakness.

Alternative energy is a wonderful DREAM. It's not here. It won't be here for a while. And when it does arrive and becomes economically viable, it will replace oil. Until then, see the first sentence above .. more oil on the market = lower prices. Lower energy costs are good for the economy.

Why does that mean lower prices for oil? Keep in mind that we're already drilling for oil here in the US, but we STILL get raped at the pump. Exxon/Chevron/Shell, BillyBob's oil company all sell the oil to the refineries at market prices. Increasing the amount of US oil only reduces the cost to the seller, and increases their profit margin...and does NOTHING to reduce the price at the pump. It's not like the Saudi's would have to cut production if we did this...they'd just sell more to other countries. PLUS, if we start increasing our production, what's to stop the oil companies from selling US oil to the highest bidder?

 

[LegendKiller]

How about we tackle the problem in a realistic way that'll drop prices ASAP.

Derivatives.

 

[Xavier434]

Originally posted by: G Wizard
Its not like they can just start drilling and all of a sudden the price of gas drops.

i hope the price of oil stays insanely high so we look for alternatives.

fuck the turkeynecks.

Yes...we should support this idea. Hell, it worked for Europe right? :roll:

Reality check. No alternatives will be heavily used until the security and profit in the oil and gas industry starts to become negatively effected due to the lack of oil available. At this time, those same industries will start funding a ton of research in order to obtain and control the next alternative to oil so that they can stay in business and still make billions. In the mean time, they are just going to milk us for as long as they can or until the government steps in.

 

[hanoverphist]

Originally posted by: Baked
Maybe you should ask congress why they're paying farmers to burn their crops and pretend like we're making progress on alternative fuel. Oh wait, we're not. I wish people drive steam powered automobiles. Clean and cheap!

it would drive the price of water up...

 

[JS80]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
How about we tackle the problem in a realistic way that'll drop prices ASAP.

Derivatives.

The problem with your statement is that about 1 person understands what you're talking about.

I've been saying place a special tax of 80%+ on speculative commodity futures trading. That should blow up a few hedge funds and prices should come back to normal.

 

[hanoverphist]

Originally posted by: Eeezee

Originally posted by: Cogman

Originally posted by: eits

Originally posted by: Mo0o
Unless we dont come up with good alternative fuel systems by the time it runs out

the technology is all already there... i believe that this administration has been dragging it's feet on alternative fueling ever since 2001 when high horsepower hydrogen-powered cars by bmw were showcased in the u.s. because it was put in power by the big oil companies.

Tell us, oh mighty one, what is the alternative? solar? Wind? Ocean? Ethanol? Hydro? Hydrogen?

Let us dive into some alternatives.

Solar, expensive, dirty, and requires rare minerals, in some instances it doesn't produce more energy then the cost to manufacture. A long standing public myth deems this fuel source as "Clean" because it has low operating costs. This myth fails to take into account disposal and manufacturing which more then destroys this as being a "Clean" source. Lets not forget that it only operates during the day, in which case expensive batteries and converters (DC to AC) would be needed to supply the world with power at night.

What you know about solar power was true 20 years ago. Times have changed.

Solar power does NOT require photovoltaic cells for generation. This is but one option. A more efficient (cost-effective) method is to essentially use mirrors to boil water, which runs a turbine. No rare materials are required (unless you consider mirrors to be particularly rare). Allow the steam chamber to be a nanotube coated surfaces (environmentally friendly) for maximum efficiency.

Solar power does NOT require batteries for supplying energy at night. In the regions most ripe for solar power, cloudy days are rare, so there's an automatic plus. These regions also happen to be home to some of the largest abandoned mine shafts in the world. Using molten salt (ie filling the unused shafts) as an energy storage medium is a well-understood cost-effective process.

HVDC transmission lines are an effective, nearly lossless (less lossy than standard AC lines) method for transferring the power from place to place, and the AC converters are actually a lot cheaper than you'd think.

I suggest you actually read up on modern solar power. Newscientist and Scientific American each did a series of very informative articles regarding the latest advancements in the last 5-10 years. In 50 years the US could be running on over 90% solar power for its electricity if we start laying down the infrastructure and investment NOW. The initial cost is high, but over a long time it will be cheaper to run on solar power than coal (which has been seeing a price spike in recent years).

Today, solar is just slightly more expensive per kW/hr than nuclear, which is only slightly more expensive than coal (factors of two). Coal is going up in price. Nuclear is a PR nightmare despite being safe and cost-effective, but its price is pretty much Solar is going DOWN in price every year as more research is conducted.

this man speaks truth...

http://www.solargenix.com/

ive worked on one of their solar fields, but they were experimenting with mineral oil instead of water. water i think was dissipating too quickly and they are testing other ways to generate quick, stable super heat. i know the mineral oil was heated just under 600 degrees for the one i worked on.

 

[PepePeru]

Originally posted by: nakedfrog

Originally posted by: G Wizard
Its not like they can just start drilling and all of a sudden the price of gas drops.

i hope the price of oil stays insanely high so we look for alternatives.

fuck the turkeynecks.

So, you like paying more for everything that has to be transported anywhere? You think that's somehow good for the country?

well, it can certainly be argued that .90 gallon gas is not good for the country either.

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511
For all those claiming we should drill for more oil - couple of things, if refineries are currently working at full capacity, we would need more built to increase the supply of gasoline. And beyond that, we would probably have to wait 10 years before a sizable amount of oil is flowing from those wells, so there would be no immediate relief at all.

Even if the oil supply was immediate, it would only delay the inevitable switch to other energy sources to the absolute last minute

 

[JDub02]

Originally posted by: BoomerD

Originally posted by: JDub02
More oil on the market = lower prices for oil. What's so hard to understand? The US should absolutely go drill for oil on US soil. Not controlling our energy supply is a serious national security weakness.

Alternative energy is a wonderful DREAM. It's not here. It won't be here for a while. And when it does arrive and becomes economically viable, it will replace oil. Until then, see the first sentence above .. more oil on the market = lower prices. Lower energy costs are good for the economy.

Why does that mean lower prices for oil? Keep in mind that we're already drilling for oil here in the US, but we STILL get raped at the pump. Exxon/Chevron/Shell, BillyBob's oil company all sell the oil to the refineries at market prices. Increasing the amount of US oil only reduces the cost to the seller, and increases their profit margin...and does NOTHING to reduce the price at the pump. It's not like the Saudi's would have to cut production if we did this...they'd just sell more to other countries. PLUS, if we start increasing our production, what's to stop the oil companies from selling US oil to the highest bidder?

Supply and demand. More supply on the market means lower prices. If that's not the case, why does everyone want the Saudi's/OPEC to pump more oil? I'm talking about the global market, not just the US market.

Here's what we need to do to drive down gas prices:

1. Lower taxes on gas/fuel = immediate relief
2. Go get our own oil = more supply will lower global oil prices and that trickles down to our gas prices
3. Build more/newer refineries and get rid of specialty gas blends = higher supply of gas across the US market
4. Look into synthetic oil production = Coal to synthetic oil can be produced right now for about $55/barrel. We have LOTS of coal in the US. It's a fairly mature technology. The Germans were doing it as far back as WW2.

On top of that, we need to reduce our restrictions on very efficient engines such as the turbo-diesels that are all over Europe that get 60mpg but will not pass "California" standards, so they won't be sold here.

 

[Jeff7]

Eeezee and hanoverphist, thanks for that information about solar technology. I didn't know that such methods existed for storing solar-derived energy.

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: Brainonska511
For all those claiming we should drill for more oil - couple of things, if refineries are currently working at full capacity, we would need more built to increase the supply of gasoline. And beyond that, we would probably have to wait 10 years before a sizable amount of oil is flowing from those wells, so there would be no immediate relief at all.

Even if the oil supply was immediate, it would only delay the inevitable switch to other energy sources to the absolute last minute

And as was hinted at earlier in the thread, it would just make it that much more difficult to transition to alternatives, as research on them would slow down with lower fuel prices.

Just wait until gas prices get to $10/gallon. People will all be screaming at the government and scientists for not doing anything about finding alternatives.
These people will be the same ones who once whined about "treehuggers and hippies" talking about the problems of oil dependence. These will also be the same people who will also say, "I was always in favor of alternative fuels. I knew that oil would run out one day, but no one listened to me!"

 

[Drekce]

Originally posted by: Baked
Maybe you should ask congress why they're paying farmers to burn their crops and pretend like we're making progress on alternative fuel. Oh wait, we're not. I wish people drive steam powered automobiles. Clean and cheap!

What is used to create the steam? Think of those old steam trains; they burned tons of coal to create the steam that propelled them.