Topic Closed: July 05, 2005 - September 19, 2005
Not a member? Register Now. * Required
Plug-in hybrid Cars
posted by johnyb on 9/19/2005 - This comment was recommended 2 times
One important way to make oil last longer is to promote hybrid electric-petrol and electric-diesel vehicles that plug into the electricity grid. These would use battery power for the first 50 miles or so, then oil-based fuels only on long journeys. These would also help to balance the electricity grid, by charging at night and only when electricity is plentiful.
view all 2 replies
Hybrids
posted by andyprius on 9/19/2005 - Be the first to recommend this
Good solution: Owning a Prius, the ultimate solution is a Hybrid, Bio-Diesel, Plug-in with perhaps a Turbo also for added efficiency and power. This should/must be initiated NOW, at any costs. Costs will eventually smooth out to competitive levels and we can say goodbye to all the Oil Cartels. Oil will still be needed however for other, more vital functions. In the meantime, on an individual basis, buy oil stocks. The total leadership of this country is sitting on thier hands and trying to twiddle thier fingers at the same time.
Electric plugs aren't natural resources.
posted by Jenab on 9/19/2005 - Be the first to recommend this
Electric plugs aren't natural resources. The electrial energy that comes through them was transmitted over wires (thermal and E/M losses) from generator plants that burn fossil fuels at modest efficiency to create the current with magnetic fields. It is actually more efficient to burn the gasoline directly in your car.
Fully Integrated Solution
posted by pivot_enabled on 9/19/2005 - This comment was recommended 1 time
The only way to offset near term shortages is with a fully integrated solution. This will not replace oil but will supplement oil as its availability diminishes.$br$ $br$ The solution must include nearly all of the ideas which have been expressed here; Solar, Bio-Diesel, Nuclear Power, Rationing, Public transportation. With all of these methods offsetting diminishing oil supplies we can continue to grow economically albeit more slowly.$br$ $br$ Building some of these systems such as nation wide (world wide?) public transportation will require programs on the order of the New Deal.$br$ $br$ Meanwhile ongoing research projects to develop new energy sources will require the intensity, focus, and financing of the Manhatten project. When these programs are succesful we will, hopefully, be able to resume our high growth profligate ways.$br$ $br$ All of this will require the one energy source which we truly have the least of and which appears to have peaked long ago: Political Leadership. $br$ $br$ So ultimately it is up to us. Will we vote for those politicians in 2006 and 2008 who propose the above solutions and are also brave enough to point out that this will be painful? That in the short term this is likely to take money out of our pocket? I doubt it. (To be fair a bare majority of us did vote for that politician in 2000.)
Nueclear Reactors
posted by Jack Bayless on 9/19/2005 - Be the first to recommend this
Why can't breeder reactors use ordinary water as a coolent like other reactors? That would eliminate some of the problems with breeder reactors.$br$ $br$ Fusion of heavy hydrogen would be the ideal if it could be done at a useful temperature. Electrolysis of heavy water will not get the job done since the temperature is too low to be useful-so don't waste time and money on that variztion. Do the eperiments at high pressure and higher temperature, say 1500 degrees and 1000 psi. Try that Chevron???????? You have the dough-so its in your ballpark.
view 1 reply
Breeder Reactors
posted by pivot_enabled on 9/19/2005 - Be the first to recommend this
That is a very good question. I imagine the answer has something to do with the operating temperature of a fast breeder, but one would think that some other less volatile substance than sodium would work. Breeders seem like a necessary element in the solution.
Making Oil Last?
posted by CoolDrink on 9/19/2005 - Be the first to recommend this
We can't afford to spend time and resources on making oil last longer. Every day oil and/or coal are used, people die, climate is affected, and the air becomes more polluted. $br$ $br$ We must spend time and resources on alternate energy sources now. Solar, geothermal, wind, tidal and other sources have proven themselves time and again. If we can find a way to produce hydrogen using less energy than we do to produce oil and gas, that can be added to the list.$br$ $br$ There are simply too many ways to produce energy than oil, so we need to stop kidding ourselves and everyone else.
We MUST make oil last longer
None of the alternative energy source even come close to replacing oil. We have no choice. We need an integrated solution which emphasizes solar, bio-diesel, and nuclear. But the total mix will include oil for a very long time. The key is to not have to go cold turkey!
Methane?
posted by Andrew on 9/19/2005 - Be the first to recommend this
What, if anything, is being done with methane? I recall reading a while back that naturally occurring methane from everything from landfills to swampgas to cattle (or human) manure could be used as a power source.
US CONGRESS 1838 Post Road Mandate for Railroads
posted by tahoevalleylines on 9/19/2005 - Be the first to recommend this
The ability of Government to anticipate a paradigm shift, build consensus, and act, is wanting. The climate change is upon us; call it cyclical, or what you will- we have to act in a timely way to maintain SOCIETAL & COMMERCIAL COHESION to forestall starvation as well as make oil & gas supplies last longer. If Peaking Oil is not 100% accepted, then satisfy yourself that natural forces like weather and manmade pressures - unfettered demand growth and the exigencies of war/terrorism will have the same effect of hampering growth and human well-being! $br$ $br$ The USA has on record, in archival sites, and actual physical corridor, a railway network footprint that can be built upon to assure the requisite "Second Dimension Surface Transport Logistics Platform" so vital to maintain an adequate level of health & safety while our civilization passes thru the oil Interregnum. You have the necessary Capital (Oil Companies); will you please think strategically, as suggested by Sun Tzu, and develop, locale by locale, the rail distribution and warehousing/truck interface as was proven successful prior to the Freeway era? We can forward information upon request. Tahoe Valley Lines, CA 96158-2289
Solar and Wind Power
posted by johnyb on 9/19/2005 - Be the first to recommend this
Firstly, solar and wind power use have each been increasing at over 30% compound per year over the last three decades or so(International Energy Agency Data). So although they are still very small sources, if the trend continues, they are due to exceed all other sources of energy by about 2030. But is this fast enough to avert economic breakdown due to energy scarcity, or run-away greenhouse effect?
www.iea.org/dbtw-wpd/textbase/papers/2002/leaflet.pdf
Here is the solution but will big oil back it?
posted by Losonoco on 9/19/2005 - Be the first to recommend this
I run a company that builds biorefineries that turn urban waste and agricultural waste into ethanol. In Brasil and Sweden many cars burn a mix of 85% ethanol/15% gasoline. The manufacturing process saves 90% of greenhouse gasses compared to oil refining, and ethanol has 50% lower emissions in use compared to gasoline. By using waste we are avoiding its decomposition which produces methane, which has a 23x greater global warming effect than carbon dioxide. By using waste instead of maize or wheat we are not taking land out of food production.$br$ $br$ This solution allows us to continue to eat, to continue to produce waste, to continue to drive our cars but without polluting the planet. $br$ $br$ Hey, and at todays prices big oil can make twice the refining margin on ethanol than it can on gasoline.$br$ $br$ So, come on Chevron - put your money where your mouth is. The cost to you to help my company roll out this technology is about 20 seconds of your profits. You will make more money and do something that actually makes a difference instead of talking about it.$br$ $br$
Importing hydrocarbons from Titan won't work
The minimum arrival speed of a cargo vessel from Saturn is 15.5 km/sec, relative to Earth, of which 5.4 km/sec is the result of acceleration by Earth's gravity. A rendezvous in LEO isn't cost effective because it would require the vessel to use rockets to slow down to 7.8 km/sec. That maneuver alone would require slightly more than twice the amount of energy that could be recovered by burning all the oil in the cargo vessel.$br$ $br$ This assumes that the average density of the loaded cargo vessel was 900 kg/m3 and that there are 3.85E+10 Joules of chemical energy in a cubic meter of Titan hydrocarbons. It also assumes that the minimum energy Saturn to Earth transfer orbit is used. It further assumes that the unspent portion of the rocket fuel is massless until it enters the reaction chamber.$br$ $br$ The cargo vessel can perhaps be sent through Earth's atmosphere for aerobreaking - twice, since it can't be slowed by aerobreaking enough on one pass for capture. In between passes, the cargo vessel loops around the sun, aimed so that it encounters Earth again maybe 18 months later. But aerobreaking requires a heatshield. Where does the heatshield get put on? Saturn? What's the energy cost of accelerating its mass? Does it get installed in transit? What's the energy cost of the intercept rocket?$br$ $br$ No, it won't work. Titan's hydrocarbons are dandy for a colony in the Saturn system, but we don't have one, and now we can't make one because it's too late energywise.
making fuel last
posted by Tony Mac on 9/19/2005 - Be the first to recommend this
I note that many people are talking of removing the co2 from the exhaust gasses of coal burning power stations and storing it underground or etc. Please refer to the research which has been carried out on human colonies on Mars etc. That is Mars Direct. If one has a plentyfull supply of carbondioxide then why not use it as a feedstuff to make new fuel rather than putting it away underground? ie. create a recycled fuel cycle. Using the Sabatier reaction to produce methane from carbondioxide and hydrogen produces a gas (methane) which is much easier to handle than hydrogen. But there is an even better reaction to add, if we feed together hydrogen and carbondioxide in the ratio of 3 to 1 to get 2H20 + 2CO + 4H2 and then react the 2CO with the 4H2 in the presence of an iron based catalyst we get ethylene which is a great fuel. It has a boiling point of -104 degrees c so the handling is much easier than hydrogen and its energy storage density is also much improved. It is also a starting material for the petrochemical and plastics industries. In other words we should be basing our post-carbon world on a carbon based fuel not on hydrogen. The hydrogen required for the production of the ethylene can be produced using for instance: wind power, solar energy etc as per the hydrogen economy model but carry the process further and react the resultant hydrogen with the stored co2 as above to produce a much better fuel than hydrogen.$br$ Please refer to the research carried out for NASA by Martin Marietta - In-situ Propellant Production Plant and "The Case for Mars" by Robert Zubrin. It would be ironic indeed if research carried out for living on Mars held the key to sustainable energy production on Earth!
rapoleum.com