Posted on 11/26/2004 8:52:56 AM PST by tvn
It's just another myth the stupid use to scare the gullible.
Others are: Global warming, Global cooling, over population, water shortages, global famine, rain forest destruction, ozone depletion, etc. etc.
Thread pay dirt has been hit!
I've no doubt that you have a conglomeration of statistical data to support that statement. /s
Yea, I "figgered" as much.
It's a long-standing practice on FR that, when one makes a questionable claim, he backs it up with some facts. It doesn't matter how sure you are that it's correct, it's up to you to provide the substantiating information or links to it.
Oil didn't come from dinosaurs contrary to convential wisdom. Oil came from unicellular microbes. We've always had plenty of those...
:P
The world has more oil not less
The Origin of Methane (and Oil) in the Crust of the Earth
Thomas Gold
U.S.G.S. Professional Paper 1570, The Future of Energy Gases, 1993
PETROLEUM RESERVES EVALUATED WITH MODERN PETROLEUM SCIENCE
Another Washington Post article here
|
|
||||||
| Oil Fields' Free Refill - More oil than we thought (maybe) | ||||||
|
Oil from Coal....Boon, Bane, or Boondoggle? Geothermal- Promising Power, or dead-end dillema?
|
||||||
Call it an oil sump.. maybe a even finer form of crude could be obtained.. or even genetically enhanced organisms could even make gasoline.. or light or sweet crude and become a renewal resource.. Like brewing.. except they poop out oil and natural gas.. What is alcohol(ethanol) and carbon dioxide in beer ..but yeast poop.. A fact that I once explained to a couple of grand daugthers when they asked what BEER WAS.. (in a weak moment)... they said Ewwwweee.
LOL! I was just reading a book today, written in 1982, where the author was saying "We all know now for certain that we're running out of oil."
I LAUGHED!
A liberal I know (who earns $100k) vehemently said that "scientific studies show we'll run out of oil in 2006." She's prepared for the ensuing financial meltdown, however, and will "rely on the community" for her needs. "Relying on the community" is PC code for communism, as you know. They plan to join hands and sing kumbayaa at gatherings in Hawaii and other places they'll jet off to when the spirit moves them. On planes fueled by what?
However, I do agree that oil prices will rise. Extracting oil from sand and shale is expensive for sure.
The technology works, turning any carbon based waste stream into oil. The Con Agro plant is a success in that respect.
As to is it economically viable...
the feed stock for such a plant is a 0 cost at a minimum or a profit - there will always be someone willing to get rid of their particular kind of waste at 0 cost and there will always be some who will pay to get rid of their waste.
The process itself is about 85% energy efficient - meaning you get out about 85% of the energy you put into the process. In the specific case of ConAgro's test plant that's 200 barrels of oil a day.
Additionally, you get 2 important byproducts from the process. Again, particular to the ConAgro test plant, you get 25 tons of what ammounts to a very good fertilizer and about 125 tons of water that meets all EPA guidelines for direct release into rivers. To be honest, it acceeds to water quality of a number of cities.
The 200 barrels a day of oil - oil that is readily used in diesel engines or oil fired furnaces - ammounts to about 1.6 million at $40 a barrel assuming a 200 day per year operating schedule. In reality the day/year operating schedule is closer to 275 but I like conservative estimates.
the 200 barrels of oil equates to 1.8 million gallons of diesel/fuel oil - that equates to about 2 million dollars at today's wholesale prices paid by local dealers.
The plant cost about 27 million to construct and fine tune.
In terms of cash flow, rather than operating expense, it's a very profitable endeavour.
But there are other benifits.
Partial insulation from energy price spikes, elimination of disposal fees, elimination of water treament expenses, reduction in workforce, sale or lack of cost for quality fertilizer....
Is it economically viable in terms of a profit - marginally plus. You won't lose money on the deal but it is not a money maker either. The savings for a company like ConAgro comes from the elimination of other expenses and/or sale of byproducts of the process. Amazingly, there is still room for efficiency improvements in the process through blending with other technologies.
So long as the feed stock for the process is free the endeavour is a break even on the plus side proposition to the bottomline but a net plus to the cash flow. If a profit can be made off of receiving the feedstock, it's a profitable business model.
I understand that the energy return for the turkey feedstock is much lower than the energy return for say tires. So again, more profit can be made with a different source of feed stock. BTW, the primary byproduct of tires as a feed stock is activated carbon - of the variaty that is used in common water filtration units.
Why the environuts aren't all over this process is beyond me. It's a net plus to the environment for none petroleum based feed stocks at little or no overall cost and a zero sum game for petroleum based feed stocks.
Take a look at the Wankel Engines being developed by UC Berkeley. Penny Sized Wankel?
I'm getting tired of this whole petrol thing.
A new technology would mean an end to the ME BS plus it would spark a worldwide economic boom that would last decades.
Yeah! I really liked "Jurrasic Park"!
wow,
it's fairly obvious by your posts that you haven't delved too deeply into the subject. we're not "almost" out of oil, we're nearing the halfway mark, and that's what's important. the world only has about a million or so barrels/day wiggle room now before demand will "peak" with supply. the good ol' us of a is all about growth. when that peak is reached we will no longer be able to sustain a growing economy. don't forget china, with a two million man standing army is growing faster than us now and will be competing for that oil. obviously we're not going to change our ways in time to head off trouble so "bad" things are likely to occur. the religous zealots will use this as the sign of the apocalypse and love every minute of it, when really it's not god behind it, just the earth saying that's enough and us not adjusting properly. to put it another way, it's like most folks in the middle ages thinking a solar eclipse was some sort of nasty magic..BOOGA-BOOGA. I challenge you to thoroughly read lifeaftertheoilcrash.net and then refute it. before even doing that, tell me why all the oil companies are consolidating and buying their own stock back? if there's so much oil in the world why did shell overestimate their known reserves by almost 1/3 and then get fined 100 million by the sec for false reporting to the markets? geologist hubbert correctly predicted that the u.s.'s oil fields would would peak in the early 70's, if it's continually being made in the earth why have we had to rely on arab oil and other producers for the last 30 odd years? get back to me and let me know. oh and one last thing, it's not a rep/dem issue, it's the world at stake. you're here, so you must be somewhat interested unless, again, you think it's a political issue. if that's the case just go read about what britney spears is putting on her warts and don't give this thread a second thought..........
exactly my point,
go to lifeaftertheoilcrash.net and read through it and then show me evidence that will prove the peak oil theory wrong. i don't want to believe it but 99% of the evidence i've been reading points to big problems within the next few years.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.