Solving the oil crisis

[Tom P]

We? ... who is we?

By "We" do you mean the good old US of A? ....

I know.......

let's play a game called "Take the World View"...

I appreciate that it's hard for you, but please, try.

Graham, I'm an American, the capital U, capital S, is the United States. What did you not understand about.............
"We have more oil reserves in the US than all of the arab countries combined, why not use it and let the arabs drift back to the stone age?"

 

[(C)arlos]

Tom,


the best soldiers in the world are those fighting because of hunger ........Watch the INTERNATIONAL news...and interpolate this to the whole arabic world....

Cheers
(C)arlos

 

[Roark_John]

A little off topic, but:

Bring the troops back from Iraq and Afganahstan, station them along the Mexican border with orders to shoot to kill. Tell the oil Shieks to fxxx-off, and start drilling here! Watch the per-barrel prices plummet!

Take your best shot!

Molleur...unfortunately it's not that simplistic to do. The oil...sorry, "energy" companies are in it to make a profit. If we isolated ourselves to our own energy sources, they would simply raise the price on domestics and we'd be no further off by having seperate prices based on regions.

Maybe this is a pipe dream, but I actually believe we are going to see new technologies begin to come on-line in the next 5-7 that make a difference. The new solar leasing companies are promising as are the the new solar technologies that are increase efficiencies by 3x (read this in Popular Mechanics).

I believe that we need to continue to support multiple technologies to lower our usage of oil to a more reasonable level.

Unfortunately the technologies such as the one above are cool but rarely come to fruition in a way that makes an impact. Remember the one technology where radio waves enabled salt water to burn? I hope this technology is still under development but I doubt it will work. Rarely have I seen these "all problems solved" energy solutions work in scaled up environment. Just my experience

Kevin

Kevin...our usage of oil IS at a reasonable level. Otherwise prices at the pump and elsewhere would be MUCH higher and you wouldn't see so many cars, trucks, SUVs and semi's on the road.

Try to remember that all companies exist to turn a profit...and a company that doesn't have to produce anything in order to get your money is in a better position than those that do. All those companies are selling is an idea.

They have a few demonstrator locations that are producing (only during the day when the sun is shining), but they have secured favorable rates with the utilities to log-on to the grid and are using government grants (transferred tax dollars) in addition to private investor funds to stay operational.

Rates for solar energy will fluctuate wildly if/when the producer plants go online, because of the sporadic output (the regular coal/gas/nuclear plants will have to pick up the slack).

When I read this I thought you were going to say -Render them down and extract oil from them

Ian

Ian...Not the troops, but definitely the illegals :thumbsup:

I've done a reasonable amount of reading on this subject. There are many ways to skin the cat so to speak, but the most obvious one to me is solar power.

Very large solar arrays using sterling engines are a very important route forward. I have read (in many places) that if we cover just 1 % of the deserts with these arrays, we can produce enough electricity for the whole worlds needs. Scientists have now almost cracked the problem of retaining the energy taken so that it can be stored during the day and delivered at night. giving 24/7 availability using large saline tanks that are capable of storing the heat. Just think about that....

The difficult issue is how to deliver the electricity to different parts of the world.

There is also the upside that these solar arrays will produce huge amounts of condensation during the night, which can be used to irrigate these areas...

Altruistic maybe, but if Bill Gates chucked a few billion at the project, I believe it could work...

Gravy...repeat after me...Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only converted (with attendant losses). That means that your stored energy is only as useful as long as the density surpasses the ability to convert & transport it.

I think FCs make more sense for homes or factories than in vehicles.

- Wind Mills - you can purchase/lease small windmills here in the UK and with a govenment grant can actually make some savings. The initial set up (if you can get planning permission) is around Sterling 20K. An old boss has gone into this business and is located in the Norwich area. Anyone interested from there, let me know, and I can probably you in touch with him.
- Solar energy - RAI from Italy did a program a few years back saying that if a 20x20Km square solar panel could be built in the Libyan desert, then all of Europe's electricity could be provided. As we have recently seen, some protective measures would have to be put in place as well as storage and distribution. But that could be overcome.

Domtoni...I don't think FC's are a bad idea and you are probably correct about their proper implementation. Unfortunately, without the mass-production that vehicles bring with them, the costs for small, stationary units will still be exorbitant.

Windmills...you said with a government grant the user/purchaser can achieve some savings. You realize grants come from tax monies? So in essence your neighbor is paying for the privilege of you having a windmill to produce a small portion of your energy needs. Guess that about sums it up...it's not about everyone, it's about what someone can get out of the deal.

Solar power in the Middle East...why yes, of course, makes perfect sense. After all, those Arabs aren't doing anything with that land, why not co-opt it to produce power for Europe? Because after all the clap-trap about the sovereignty of various cultures & nations, none of it matters so long as the "big picture" is minded...forgetting as a matter of course that more than 60% of the world lives in undeveloped areas, so naturally the developed countries energy needs are more important than their right to deny you access to it. And you guys say that Americans have a centric-view of the world!

"As we have recently seen, some protective measures would have to be put in place as well as storage and distribution. But that could be overcome." You say this so cavalierly, as if the right to shoot Arabs intent on sabotaging power-stations built on THEIR land, is evident...but not their right to cut-off your access to the energy it provides. Once again...Europe is more important than the areas of the world that they would like to exploit. Makes me warm & fuzzy when I can catch one of you socialist buggers admitting to the sins you are so quick to point out in us!

 

[Cliff Beer]

We mistakenly assume that solving the world's energy problems is a technological challenge. It's not. It is a political and economic challenge. What does that mean? It means that there are powerful petrochemical lobbys at work behind the scenes working hard to ensure that nothing changes from the status quo (dependence on oil) as that would be bad for business...

 

[John Milmont]

We mistakenly assume that solving the world's energy problems is a technological challenge. It's not. It is a political and economic challenge. What does that mean? It means that there are powerful petrochemical lobbys at work behind the scenes working hard to ensure that nothing changes from the status quo (dependence on oil) as that would be bad for business...

Yes. Most people are so oblivious of this. And it goes farther than just oil companies lobbing - foreign governments also 'lobby' and/or are in bed with our politicians. Buying oil can also be used as a diplomatic tool...

Nothing is going to change until there is no more oil... so lets use it up as fast as we can!

 

[Doug S.]

A little off topic, but:

Bring the troops back from Iraq and Afganahstan, station them along the Mexican border with orders to shoot to kill. Tell the oil Shieks to fxxx-off, and start drilling here! Watch the per-barrel prices plummet!

Take your best shot!

AGREED, Jack! I've been preaching the first part for a couple of years now, quit sending our money and our young men to the Middle East/Northern Africa and put them to use here at home. We already pay their salaries, so it costs us no more to do it here than overseas.

I think the solution to a lot of our oil problems is natural gas. We have so much of it and we could use it to power our cars and such, but we are not allowed to touch it and it has a lot of political resistance. I guess we dont want to upset our middle eastern freinds.

I agree. I foresee the time when hybrid cars will be combination of electric and compressed natural gas. The CNG technology already exists, the compressors are about the size of a mid-sized piece of luggage and hang on the walls of the "garage". At night one would plug their car into a 220V outlet and also connect the hose from the natural gas compressor to the inlet valve on the car, in the morning you would have a full charge and a full tank of CNG. No need to ever again visit a "gas station" as we now know it! The issue of electrical outages (such as during a hurricane) would not be a deal killer, as the natural gas continues to flow during these environmental disasters. Anyone who has tried to fill up with gasoline at a service station/convenience store during an electrical outage knows it is an exercise in frustration, all that gas in those tanks under the concrete and no electricity to pump it into the car's tank :furious: !

I've heard the U.S. has enough natural gas under our soil to last for hundreds of years, the natural gas industry MUST have political clout, so why don't we see more movement toward consumer use of CNG (there is quite a bit of movement toward fitting industrial vehicles for CNG usage).

Cheers from Doug!!

 

[John Milmont]

I've heard the U.S. has enough natural gas under our soil to last for hundreds of years, the natural gas industry MUST have political clout, so why don't we see more movement toward consumer use of CNG (there is quite a bit of movement toward fitting industrial vehicles for CNG usage).

Cheers from Doug!!

From what i hear, the natural gas lobby is very small and pretty much nothing when compared to big oil. The coal lobby and unions are also another enemy of natural gas and lobbies against it. If you want to see how powerful those lobbies are, you should look up the "film" Gasland. This film uses Michael Moore scare tactics and unscientific biased reports to demonize 'Facking'; a processed used to recover natural gas from rock...

 

[Graham]

Gravy...repeat after me...Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, only converted (with attendant losses). That means that your stored energy is only as useful as long as the density surpasses the ability to convert & transport it.

John, I'm not sure what you're getting at here?

Energy from the sun is free and abundant. HVDC can transfer electricity over great distances before conversion to AC. There's no need to quote the laws of thermodynamics to me really. If the energy that we receive from the sun is free, then we are already ahead of the game in terms of conversion costs (in energy terms). The issue of storage is moot in that any energy required to manage the storage can be taken from this free source.

Check this out:-
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Power station harnesses Sun's rays

Simplistic - yes, but undeniably functional.

 

[Graham]

Furthermore - regarding High Voltage DC lines....

Not Such a Madcap Idea Afterall
Like Copernicus, Buckminster Fuller was ridiculed by some for his expansive vision. However technological development now moves power further and cheaper than it did 30 years ago, just as he envisioned it would. When Buckminster Fuller first espoused his vision, electric power could only be efficiently transmitted a few hundred kilometers. Breakthroughs in materials science extended this transmission distance to 2500 kilometers, and Direct Current (DC) lines are now able to reach over 7000 km. This allows utilities to interconnect across time zones and compensate for variations in seasonal demand. Today about 2% of all electricity is transmitted along HVDC lines, in more than 90 projects around the world, linking large energy projects to centres of high energy demand.
Most networks are historically predicated on Alternating Current systems (AC), which were chosen over 100 years ago because it was easier then to transform AC supply than DC supply. Now, with the development of high-voltage valves, it has become possible to transmit DC power at higher voltages and over longer distances with lower transmission losses.
Research by the IEA, as set out in it’s newly published report Energy Technology Perspectives 2008- Scenarios and Strategies to 2050, supports the use of DC transmission systems. With losses typically around 3% per 1000 km, it makes economic sense for long-distance and sub-sea transportation. In the case of wind electricity, the IEA estimates that transportation over 2000 km would add USD 0.02 to USD 0.03 per kWh. To connect across the Mediterranean basin would require only 400 – 600 km depending on where the links were positioned. In theory an HVDC line could be laid from Morocco to London, a distance of 2700 km, with losses of less than 8%.

 

[Graham]

And some more... This can only be good news, surely?

… New Impetus
Interconnection into Europe was deemed an audacious idea even six months ago. Now the foundations of such links are to be built under the newly formed Union for the Mediterranean, which has been backed by amongst others, France, Germany and the UK. For the past 5 years TREC (Trans Mediterranean Renewable Energy Co-operation), an initiative of the Club of Rome, has promoted the DESERTEC concept of building Concentrating Solar Power (CSP) plants out in the Sahara desert to provide clean renewable electricity. TREC have successfully advanced the concept of a renewable energy transmission network combining CSP with wind farms and other renewables to transmit power to Europe from the Middle East and North Africa, via high voltage direct current (HVDC) cables across the Mediterranean.
Now the Union for the Mediterranean is planning the construction of a €45 billion high voltage direct current (DC) grid to transfer electricity produced by Saharan and North African solar installations to consumers thousands of kilometres away. The Project Proposal is called the Mediterranean Solar Plan.
Med Solar Plan
Key objectives of the Med Solar Plan are the expansion of integration of energy markets and the promotion of sustainable development through the creation and development of a solar market. It is proposed that key skills will be shared and market players from the EU will help facilitate such a development, with the long-term aim of importing solar electricity into the EU.
The Med Solar Plan, they say, will ensure a multilateral mobilisation of the political authorities, institutions and financial sectors. Recognising that energy policy in developing nations is still piecemeal at best, it proposes that the European Commission will promote the framework for the necessary dialogue on the energy policies and sectoral strategies that require to be implemented by the various countries. It will build on the established work of existing initiatives such as the Euro-Mediterranean Energy Market Integration Project. This will include the build of HVDC grid connections across the Mediterranean basin.
The Med Solar Plan aims to have in place 20,000 megawatts of CSP in North Africa by 2020. Estela Solar, the CSP industry Association, estimate that a further 36,000 megawatts of CSP will be online in Southern Europe by 2020.
If the projected annual growth rate of CSP through 2012 is maintained to 2020, say the Earth Policy Institute, global installed CSP capacity will exceed 200,000 megawatts—equivalent to 135 coal-fired power plants. With billions of dollars beginning to flow into the CSP industry and restrictions on carbon emissions imminent, CSP is primed to reach such capacity.

 

[Kevin L]

Kevin...our usage of oil IS at a reasonable level. Otherwise prices at the pump and elsewhere would be MUCH higher and you wouldn't see so many cars, trucks, SUVs and semi's on the road.

Fair point. I should have said our usage of foreign oil... Even then, I do believe we should always be looking forward, innovation is a good thing.

Try to remember that all companies exist to turn a profit...and a company that doesn't have to produce anything in order to get your money is in a better position than those that do. All those companies are selling is an idea.

Thanks for the lesson in Capitalism. I often forget companies exist to turn a profit, I often think they they exist only to pay taxes and provide social services.

Therefore while I remember that, maybe you could remember that innovation takes time and only starts with an idea. It took a bit of time for eBay to be profitable but they sure are today. They only started with an idea.

They have a few demonstrator locations that are producing (only during the day when the sun is shining), but they have secured favorable rates with the utilities to log-on to the grid and are using government grants (transferred tax dollars) in addition to private investor funds to stay operational.

I agree with your assessment. I believe subsidies and favorable rates are an important part of the process. I hate to say it but often ideas need to be funded early through private investors and government grants before they can turn a profit. An unfortunate result is that often times these technologies do not turn out favorable and it appears that money is wasted, I believe that sometimes we need to lose some to win some.

Rates for solar energy will fluctuate wildly if/when the producer plants go online, because of the sporadic output (the regular coal/gas/nuclear plants will have to pick up the slack).

Again, I agree but that is what I believe the cocktail of solutions will look like. I don't think that any one thing is right but rather a healthy mix. I know that OC_ thinks many of these ideas will not make it, I am going to hold out some hope. There was a long time nobody believed man could fly or make it to the moon.

Just my thoughts, considering they are free please place the same value on them.

 

[Doug S.]

I think the only way that consumer solar electrical production will become viable is if the government REQUIRES all PoCo's to allow back-metering. Storage of solar generated electricity is quite expensive and will remain so.....but if the government required the PoCo's to buy the energy from you through back-metering, it might just be enough to make the break-even point come quickly enough to attract more development.

From what i hear, the natural gas lobby is very small and pretty much nothing when compared to big oil. The coal lobby and unions are also another enemy of natural gas and lobbies against it.

CNG technology is here NOW and the technology is low-emissions. I'm amazed there isn't more development by the natural gas companies....their product is used by a HUGE number of homes in the U.S., so they must have the capital to develop lower volume distribution (especially since the infrastructure is already in place!!).

Cheers from Doug!!

 

[domtoni]

Its my understanding that natural gas and oil go together. I am not sure why oil doesn't promote natural gas? Anyone know?

And John, please don't call me a socialist. I think everyone here knows that I represent the free market, guns, and the ability to be the best one can.

 

[Ian K]

I agree with your assessment. I believe subsidies and favorable rates are an important part of the process. I hate to say it but often ideas need to be funded early through private investors and government grants before they can turn a profit. An unfortunate result is that often times these technologies do not turn out favorable and it appears that money is wasted, I believe that sometimes we need to lose some to win some.

Um, yeah - let's not forget that at one point there were subsidies and favorable rates on just about everything we use today for power generation. The Hoover Dam cost US taxpayers almost $50 million in the 1930's.

Those subsidies, favorable rates, and other sources of government funding do serve a purpose.

Ian

 

[Jim Craik]

It seems to me that just like everything else, when gasoline prices raise to the point where the switch to natural gas (and the huge infrastructure change) becomes economically feasable. It will happen.

We are not there yet, but we are getting close.

 

[tom pritchett]

I just want the MR. FUSION unit on the Delorean on Back to the Future.

 

[Ian K]

One point of interest - now that NASCAR is seriously looking into Fuel Injection and Ethanol, maybe we'll see some renewed interest in newer, cleaner, and less oil dependent tech in the automotive world.

Ian

 

[John Milmont]

I just want the MR. FUSION unit on the Delorean on Back to the Future.

But remember, the car only went to 88mph

 

[John Milmont]

Its my understanding that natural gas and oil go together. I am not sure why oil doesn't promote natural gas? Anyone know?

This is a good question.

It is true that oil companies also produce natural gas. I think the reason why you don't see them say anything about it is because its not their focus and they don't have the infrastructure setup to handle it. Further more, since they have oil reserves in foreign countries, their is really no need for them to switch to natural gas. Hey, they have a good thing going as it is.

Qatar was setting up infrastructure to export their natural gas to the USA. But since we dont want it, and since china has adopted natural gas as a fuel, they will be shipping it to China.

The problem with natural gas in this country is that its locked away in porous rock and has to be extracted with the use of hydraulic fracturing. This is where the problem apparently lies. Even though 'fracking' has been around for a while, it seems like it only recently came under fire when they started saying that natural gas is a good oil alternative.

I don't want to sound like a big conspiracy theoriest, but it sure does seem like someones does not want us converting to natural gas.

Another good question is this: Why was Honda not able to meet the demand for their natural gas powered Civic?

 

[Dalton Veitch]

Switching back to solar energy for a moment, while it seems attractively free it isn't by the time you do something useful with it (beyond a sun tan). Storage of this energy is expensive, but so is simply converting it. Solar cells are improving and have been developed a lot, yet rigorous all of life-cycle costing shows (I believe) that a solar cell hardly pays for itself, using up a lot of resources and energy in its manufacture and disposal. Worth pursuing though, as it is safe from the potential disasters that can occur with nuclear power, and the source is unlimited in our lifetimes plus. Probably, as has been said above, a mixture of alternative solutions will pave the way forward.