Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Can We Do Without Saudi Oil?
The Weekly Standard ^ | 11/19/2001 | Irwin M. Stelzer

Posted on 11/10/2001 4:44:11 PM PST by Pokey78

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-226 next last
To: timestax
Yes, indeed:

Alaskans Hopeful Democrats Permit ANWR Vote

201 posted on 12/15/2001 2:20:49 PM PST by backhoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 189 | View Replies]

To: backhoe
I posted this earlier under "questions/opinions but it seems to have sunk without trace,so I thought maybe you might have come across this outfit at some time.

During an unrelated search I came across these two websites with identical content/layout etc.

Statedepartment.com
and
Sauduction.com

Both start off with this quote:
"I summon my blue-eyed slaves anytime it pleases me. I command the Americans to send me their bravest soldiers to die for me. Anytime I clap my hands a stupid genie called the American ambassador appears to do my bidding. When the Americans die in my service their bodies are frozen in metal boxes by the US Embassy and American airplanes carry them away, as if they never existed. Truly, America is my favorite slave." King Fahd Bin Abdul-Aziz, Jeddeh 1993

Then they show links to their newsletter which contains some disturbing stuff(if true)and some apparently tin foil hat material.

The website has a lot of information and before I invest the time in reading it I'd like to know if anyone at FR knows anything about this newsletter.

202 posted on 12/15/2001 2:25:58 PM PST by damnlimey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 201 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog
Yo Hog, Fusion has been working under lab conditions since the late 60's. Damn tricky business! But lets talk oil:

Any fool who has ever lived in LA Knows the reason there aren't basements in some neighborhoods is that they would soon fill with oil! In fact, there's an old LA Oil Company (Kelly) whose only source is pumping the basements of large office buildings! (hey, it's a living.) Beverly Hills is loaded with oil wells, including one under, the bleeping playing field where Monica Lewinsky once jiggled. Many a Hollywood loudmouth collects royalties from Beverly Hills oil! Check it out!

There is a giant totally natural oil seep right off the beaches of Santa Barbara, etc. ad nauseam. Yet the enviro-wackos insist that there be no more drilling.One more dumb factoid: The steam cleaning and detergents used on the beaches of Alaska after the Exxon Valdez struck were more environmentally harmful than the oil.

Like wow, dude, oil is like organic? Detergents are not? And like live steam at 1200F could kill tiny living things dead? Oh wow?

But speaking nuclear, one big mistake we made is not standardizing nuclear plant design. In NJ alone, there were four different types of reactor planned. The big local utility (PSE&G)and their boring management, belt-and-suspenders-Babcock-and-Wilcox-Coal-Fired-Steam-Generating Old-Time-Engineers, who knew nothin' about nucular, and were proud of it, made another huge error. Instead of hiring someone off Jimmy Carter's submarine, they went to great trouble and expense to find a mystical atomic/swami/wallah from a land which shall remain nameless, to be the chief nuclear engineer. He hired about a thousand more similar fellows, whose previous technical job experience had apparently been as tiger bait, to help out, and 14 years later they still had no nukes on line! I still have their memos: priceless. The company, once the richest utility in the land, went stony broke! .

Hey, we have learned a lot since then. Time to do it right and get those nukes fired up again! Good model? France, (believe it or not) where, since every plant has the same controls, trained crews are available who can go into any setup and straighten it out in case of emergency. Right now they are getting about half their electricity from nukes. They also pioneered molding the waste products into glass blocks and lowering them into salt mines 13,000 feet underground.

Also what people don't get is that all the nuclear waste from powerplants in the country for a year occupys the same cubic footage as a small house. It ain't a whole lot of tonnage, probably less than the BS emitted by environmentalists in a month!

203 posted on 12/15/2001 7:15:00 PM PST by Francohio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 197 | View Replies]

To: Francohio
"Yo Hog, Fusion has been working under lab conditions since the late 60's. Damn tricky business!"

Yup! But the scaling laws seem to be intractable about not letting it work on a large enuff scale to produce the amount of power needed to replace oil.

I agree with all your points about California oil and fission power plants (both construction and waste disposal)--they are right on.

204 posted on 12/16/2001 2:47:59 AM PST by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 203 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
My solution, if you'd like to know:

1) All electricity would be run off of hydroelectic and nuclear generation.

2) The refining aspect would be expanded. The wells in the southeast are opened up to pumping with the usual profit margin.

3) ANWR is opened for new drilling!

4) Natural gas would be marketed for personal home, industrial, and any other use that would fit the market.

5) All governmental price caps and taxes are done away with so that a free market can take effect.

6) Government would give funds for alternative energy ideas. But, only under the guide of REAL science. It would also be monitored, and rewarded by it actual accomplishments, not some paper written on a principle, but pure scientific logic and a working prototype.

7) Off shore drilling contracts are re-opened without taxes and fees.

8) Gasoline and fuel taxes are reduced by three quarters, across the board. Never to be increased again.

In other words, let a free, and open market take effect. Let people get rich, they deserve it if they pump their life savings into it. They take the risk, they get the profit.

We need refineries, and we need them now! The environmentalists have used the legal system, and the legislative process to stiffle the production of petrochemical processing. This has nothing to do with the environmant (considering the modern day refining process), but it does have everything to do with the social control aspect of the far left.

They are trying to control our food, it is their next project in it's infancy, but it is coming. If they control our energy use, then our food comes next. These people will stop at nothing to totally control the way that you live. They hate freedom, they hate liberty, and they hate these here United States of America, and it's Constitution.

Here is the problem that the socialists have; we have been free, we will be free, and we have a God given right to all of the above. Their power comes from America not looking. We are looking now, and by the God eternal we'll be looking always. America is awake, it is no longer the sleeping tool of the socialist left. All we have to do now is to change the Washington crowd. Make them accountable to "The People". In a short explaintion, it's time to take back the God given power given to us by blood and courage. It's time for the majority to take the high ground and liberate this land for freedom, and life, and the light of all mankind.

The second American revolution is coming. It is being pushed by a vocal minority, the socialist left, and the "do nothing for America" crowd in the legislative branch of this country's government. The time will come for the Poeple to take back this glorious land, and we will. It is our Consitutional right, and our responsibility..

I'll die on my feet before I'll live on my knees!

205 posted on 12/16/2001 4:15:29 AM PST by timydnuc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
"Most of which require more energy than they produce, especially photovoltaics."

Turns out you were wrong. See the following reference for an exhaustive comparison of many different energy systems:

Energy Analysis of Power Systems

206 posted on 12/16/2001 7:57:53 AM PST by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]

To: Wonder Warthog;snopercod
I would have to see the critical assumptions (such as weather) before I would buy that one study. I doubt that it included dust on the cell for example and SURELY didn't include the strorage requirements for night operation or the real estate costs for larger systems or the cost of the manufacturing apparatus (high-vacuum pumps for CVD processes don't come cheap). They might not look so good to you if you considered how much mining there would have to be to build adequate battery reserves. I wrote a rather long piece and posted it last night, but for some reason the system dumped it and it didn't show up. I noted for example, that broadband (for trip reduction) and passive heating are seldom part of the discussion. I'm not going to bother for now, because I don't live this stuff. I'm flaging snopercod because he deals with these issues more often than I.

PVs are fine in remote locations for low-current applications such as lighting. They just don't compete with other technologies as a primary source of energy. Even your citation states that. IMO solar is most appropriate for water and space heating, but even then carries a heavy environmental penalty for mining. Any conversion of our transportation economy from chemical to electric energy (other than nuclear) will require copper mining and the impact of demand pull upon raw material cost is seldom part of the analyses, especially in the case of rare earth minerals (magnets) and precious metals (catylists).

Now (for the real test of your understanding of the situation and how we got here), guess who is the biggest source of funds for RICOnut environmentalists?

The private foundations of stockholders in oil companies.

207 posted on 12/16/2001 8:25:55 AM PST by Carry_Okie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 206 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
bump for USA oil!!
208 posted on 12/16/2001 9:46:56 AM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: timydnuc
If they control our energy use, then our food comes next.

They're already working on that: Bioterror Food Bill Altered

It won't be long before you have to have a permit to have a backyard vegetable garden.

209 posted on 12/16/2001 11:21:12 AM PST by snopercod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 205 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
I'm not an expert by any means, but I used to do "energy calculations" for homebuilders in California so I have a pretty good feel for where heat comes in and goes out of a typical home. Also, I have built two energy and money-efficient homes.

These homes my wife and I built were not the kind you see splashed across the covers of Popular science, with the PV cells on the roof and all. They simply took advantage of science and nature both, where that was practical.

The first one, near the California coast, was passive solar, but not glaringly so. It had properly constructed South-facing windows, and a South-facing clerestory to let the winter sun heat the rooms which were normally occupied during the day. In the summer, these windows were shaded so the house didn't overheat. An inconnel fireplace was our only heat until we sold the place. Then we had to put in central heat so the buyers could get a mortgage.

I experimented with solar hot water on that one, too. I fabricated some copper panels an built them into a properly-sloped [lattitude plus ten degrees] South-facing porch. The storage tank was a fiberglass horse-trough in the attic with a floating, insulated lid. Even in foggy Los Osos, the system made enough hot water to do our laundry. (We had a faucet right over the washing machine where we could drain the horse-trough right into the machine.)

But "normal" homeowners simply won't [and don't] put up with all the little inconveniences in this type of home: Being a little too cold on some nights, or having to wait for a sunny day to do laundry, etc.

I have a good engineer friend in Los Osos who installed a commercial solar hot water system in 1979. He laughing claims that he is just now achieving break-even. It's probably the only system in California that ever has (if you subtract out all the tax credits).

I highly recommend a book called Your Engineered House by Rex Roberts to get you in the proper frame of mind for building such a house. You'll have to find it at a used book store, no doubt.

BTW, my latest home has 8" thick log walls, double insulated ceilings, .26 U-value windows (and very few of them), and is heated with a Rumford fireplace. No solar features in this one at all, since we're smack in the middle of a forest.

But by golly I will be using an electric heat-pump next summer when it's 90 degrees and 95% humidity outside!

210 posted on 12/16/2001 11:47:31 AM PST by snopercod
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: Carry_Okie
For more articles, try a Google search with terms (energy analysis solar cell production). The link I posted was simply one of the more thorough synopses I found quickly. I found NO article saying that solar cells cost more energy to produce than their life-cycle power generation---as I suspected, that is just an "anti-PV" urban legend.

Of course, if you actually HAVE an article that says that, post the link--as I said before, I'd like to see it.

As to your other suppositions and comments--I've heard all of those arguments before, and have yet to see any real data supporting any of them.

As I've said on other threads , my ideal system is 5-10 sites in the western desert states combining nuclear fission (both burner and breeder reactors) AND photovoltaic, with storage and transmission done via hydrogen and pipeline. A good part of the transmission infrastructure is already in place with the natural gas distribution pipeline network (and PLEASE, folks, don't bring up the old conundrum about "pipelines won't work because of hydrogen embrittlement" thing). Let the feds do as they did for the railroads and donate the land from their current massive holdings.

211 posted on 12/16/2001 1:31:43 PM PST by Wonder Warthog
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 207 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine
bump
212 posted on 12/17/2001 1:04:11 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: doomtrooper99
bttt
213 posted on 12/17/2001 1:44:07 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: BigBobber
bump
214 posted on 12/27/2001 4:09:45 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: monkeyshine
bttt
215 posted on 12/30/2001 8:19:23 AM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: RadicalRik
Rad, I think you broke the code. I believe Bush is covering his bets by working with Putin to increase dramatically the portion of off-shore oil we get from Russia. It's the only option we have to bring pressure on the Saudi's and other Muslim/Oil countries to fight terrorism effectively. Right now, we can't go in there and dig them out ourselves - the middle-east would be in even more danger of exploding if we did.

Russia is just as worried about Muslim fundamentalism as we are. They desperately need hard currency foreign exchange. They have stuff we need. The whole senario makes too much sense for Bush and his policy team to ignore.

It will take a year or more to get meaningful amounts flowing out of Russia - so I think that Bush is keeping it under his hat right now.

The above is speculation on my part - I would love to hear comments from anyone who has solid information as to what may be going on!

216 posted on 12/30/2001 8:54:21 AM PST by HardStarboard
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: HardStarboard
Well, Russia did cut production by 35,000 barrels - a negligible token - under pressure from Opec. I had heard that because of the methods used to get Russian oil, they really couldn't cut production until after the Winter for fear of freezing the pipes entirely, which would mean that if they needed to resume pumping in February for national emergency they wouldn't be able to. Could just be a bluff though.
217 posted on 12/30/2001 9:13:22 AM PST by monkeyshine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

Comment #218 Removed by Moderator

To: HardStarboard
I read this article by Larry Kudlow back in October which gave me the ideas that inspired me to reply as I did. The article talks about more than just oil with regards to Russia and Putin.
We also witnessed some of that when Putin visited Bush at his ranch and we could see how well the two got along.
I may be dreaming, but it appears that the Russians likes being more like us than they like being the way they used to be.

Oil Czar & Ally
Putin and Russia are showing the way

219 posted on 12/31/2001 6:40:44 AM PST by RadicalRik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 216 | View Replies]

To: Pokey78
bttt
220 posted on 01/21/2002 7:57:35 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 161-180181-200201-220221-226 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson