Posted on 11/16/2005 1:46:45 PM PST by dangerdoc
I am disgusted as I read the news. We buy oil from petty tyrants. South American thugs bad-talk us and threaten to shut off the tap. Middle-East royalty, two generations from living in mud huts fund jihadists who want to cut off our heads. We compete with communist slave-workers for oil driving up the prices. We may or may not be running out of the stuff creating the real possibility that we are going have to find a replacement anyway.
Honestly, our oil economy is going to hurt us at some point. I don’t know if it will be now in the form of sending our wealth out to people who want to harm us or from having to go off the stuff cold turkey at some point in the future. I personally believe it will be the former. I am concerned about oil funded nuclear technology going to oil funded terrorists brought into our country because of our lack of foresight.
Last century a petrochemical economy made sense. This century things are changing and we need to stay ahead of the curve.
If we need to replace oil what should we replace it with?
Hydrogen? Don’t believe what you hear. The best source of hydrogen is petrochemicals. It is not economical to produce, transport or store. Hydrogen fuel cells are not very efficient when you figure in the inefficiency in getting to the vehicle and trying to store enough in the car to get anywhere.
Ethanol? Corn farmers love it but it is too inefficient to produce and we would need to actually give up food production to provide enough.
Biomass? I have spent a few weeks google searching biomass, synthesis gas and associated chemistry. It seems like a reasonable approach. Synthetic gasoline and diesel should be fairly easy to produce on a commercial scale. It would be no more obtrusive than an oil refinery and would use fairly similar technology. It has not been commercially pursued because of the cost. Although synthetic fuels could probably be produced for less than $2 a gallon, the concern is that OPEC would respond by flooding the market with oil and bankrupt any company that invested in this type of technology. I’ve seen some conspiracy theories that the oil companies are trying to suppress biomass but I don’t think that makes sense. The oil companies’ expertise would lead them to dominate the field. Almost every step in conversion exists in modern petrochemical cracking plants. As an added bonus, it would divert money from overseas and back to the farm economy.
I’ve read that Saudi Arabia can deliver oil at less than $10 a barrel and would deplete their reserves as quickly as possible if a reasonable oil replacement were ever seen on the horizon. This is not a conspiracy, just simple economics. They have a limited supply and will work to get as much for it as possible. If a their product will be made useless, they will try to sell all they can while they can. All of this prevents companies from investing in alternative fuel technology even though the prices keep going up.
I really don’t like the government getting involved in economics and I know that the free market will solve the problem eventually but I am very concerned about where our oil dollars are going. I see this as a security issue. Can we begin development of a replacement strategy in a step-wisemannor. Do we need some sort of a price support structure to encourage the development. Do we need to summon the resolve and stop or ban the import of oil. I see real problems with almost any strategy that involves the government.
I am curious about people’s thoughts. I have numbers showing biomass is reasonable from an economic standpoint based on current oil prices.
Specifically I am curious if there are any petrochemical engineers, economists or even politicians out there with an opinion. I can share specifics but there are literally hundreds of pages and everything I have is available on the internet.
Bio diesel will never be more than peripheral.
That is why I am against drilling in Alaska presently. Use that as last resort.
Boy, that pretty well sums up the entire controversy, doesn't it?
But how does that create "... the real possibility that we are going have to find a replacement anyway."???
------------
"I have spent a few weeks google searching biomass, synthesis gas and associated chemistry. It seems like a reasonable approach."
Wow, that much time??
Some people spend their entire lives studying these subjects and yet aren't willing to make a conclusion like that!
Not when the new emission regs kick in.
You are right about diesel. the enviros will oppose it strongly because it is more efficient and would "delay" the day of reckoning.
What's the real difference between biomass and ethanol?
The best (partial) answer is Nuclear.
fwiw, you can convert a Dodge Cummings diesel-engined pick-up to burn WASTE VEGATABLE OIL (WVO) for less than 400.oo.
MOST diesels run BETTER/quieter/much longer on WVO!
free dixie,sw
The envirokooks are trying to outlaw diesel engines, because of their higher NOx emissions. There are solutions, but they are going to be somewhat costly.
But, you're right...the way to go is with compression-ignition (diesel) engines.
as soon as i can find a Dodge Ram diesel PU ,that i can afford, i'll take myself off the commercial fuel line.
free dixie,sw
Me, too. What's the sense of pumping oil down into the Strategic Oil Reserve at the same time as pumping it UP from arctic Alaska?
I'm so glad that others are saying it - I've felt like a voice in the wilderness saying the medium term solution to the problem is to encourage the use of diesel. That will reduce fuel consumption dramatically.
Regards, Ivan
That is what has been said about tar sands and shale oil. The tar sands in Alberta are bit by bit coming on line and will put a ceiling on the price of oil somewhere above the $30-40 range. Once Alberta's sand andUtah's shale are fully online, Arabia as a source for our oil will dwindle. It will not be this year or next but it is inevitible. The continuing increase in production from Alberta may well be having an effect on oil futures now.
Biodiesel from algae seems promising, but there's a big up-front investment required, and a lot of land needed, which the envirokooks will oppose.
I drive a diesel, so yes, I agree. We are wasting a lot of fuel unnecessarily, due to public perception of diesels in the U.S. (and due to unfair emissions regulations, which are modeled around gasoline emissions).
The EURO5 thing looks like it will put the kibosh on small diesels, though. That will unquestionably result in higher CO2 emissions.
"For example, lets say you do manage to move our huge demand for oil towards alternative sources our demand for oil would drop dramatically making oil dirt cheap for the rest of the world that competes with us."
The problem of manufactured scarcity, with wide and disruptive variations in price, would be greatly diminished or even eliminated. The geostrategic risk associated with importing so much of our fuel for domestic energy needs, from such an unstable part of the world would also be greatly diminished.
So, demand might eventually fall worldwide, and the price would follow. I don't see the problem there, for the US or any other country, excepting the OPEC nations.
OPEC, by limiting production is bringing forth supply that has before not been counted.
Actually the oil price is not so far out of line as it would seem. Gold is almost double what it was in the late nineties and the price of oil relative to gold is not so onerous. The price of gold is an accurate measure of inflation. We don't see the inflation now because we subtract the price of oil and of housing from the CPI and start talking abourt Core CPI which is the CPI without the things that are going up.The inflation is here and it is manifest in oil and housing. That's where all the extra dollars are going. If/when oil and housing decline then the prices of most everything else will rise.
BTW, in my neck of the woods, one can get soy-based biodiesel locally. When petroleum-based diesel fuel was running close to the same price, I was using it (B99). Made my old oil burner run a little smoother, but the fuel economy went down a little. Now, though, petrodiesel is quite a bit cheaper ($2.55/gal vs. $3.20/gal).
Do you have biodiesel available over there?
Not bye bye to oil but hello to domestic production of maybe all we need from Alberta and Utah and coal.
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.