|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/18/2010 : 09:43:08 [Permalink]
|
I think it's important to note the dirty little secret. Oil drilling off our shores does nothing to give us oil independence because it's not ours. These are multi national companies and oil is a commodity that, once extracted, enters the same market as oil from all of those evil countries that we want to be independent from. Drilling to have our own oil is bullshit because it isn't ours!
The only way to decrease our dependence on that market is to decrease our dependence on oil. Let me say it again. We allow companies like BP to drill here and to foul our waters, and it does nothing at all to bring us oil independence. It's an illusion. It's a bate and switch...
We are being had!!! |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
 |
|
|
Elmo the Clown
New Member
31 Posts |
Posted - 06/18/2010 : 10:58:01 [Permalink]
|
Companies colluding with the government to lead a misinformation campaign while selling the illusion of security and lining their pockets with the proceeds? Who would have thought.
But what does it really matter. Folks will sit and whine and complain and do little else but vote their ticket because their guy is slightly less of a bullshit scumbag than the other? Or they believe the bullshit that is spewed.
But hey.... If they really want to set an example, there is the ancient Athens requirement for a failed proposal: Suicide. I can't find it on the web. I'll try to hunt it up in Durant's Life of Greece. |
Support a clown, buy a luury cruise from www.ChicLuxuryCruises.com (or any cruise...) |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
 Posted - 06/18/2010 : 11:21:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
I think it's important to note the dirty little secret. Oil drilling off our shores does nothing to give us oil independence because it's not ours. |
It's also a small percentage of all the oil we use. Even if it were all "ours," we'd still be importing most of our oil from overseas. In 2009, the US imported about 4.28 billion barrels per year (bby), while US mainland and offshore production was about 1.38 bby and 0.56 bby, respectively (with an extra 0.10 bby from state-run offshore production).
So with thousands of oil rigs in the Gulf of Mexico already, our offshore production amounts to 32% of total national production and to a mere 15% of the crude oil that we import.
Total US proven crude oil reserves in 2008 were 19.12 billion barrels. Our proven Federal offshore reserves were only 3.90 bbl, 3.39 bbl of which is offshore Louisiana. In other words, we could suck our offshore reserves dry in six years at current production rates. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 06/18/2010 : 12:26:20 [Permalink]
|
| Yeah, Kil, you reminded me of an interview I heard on NPR once. The guy made an analogy that any and all oil found is "poured" into a "pool" and that all countries purchase their oil from this "pool". Not long ago, there was one of those emails going around that we shouldn't get our gas at places like Lukoil because they get their oil from "terrorist" countries. Instead, according to the email, we need to get our oil from countries like Venezuela. I checked it out on Snopes and found the same facts (that all oil goes into one pool). |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
Posted - 06/18/2010 : 12:40:13 [Permalink]
|
Right! There is only one way to become energy independent. And that's to cut back on our use of oil and move toward local energy production methods that are not tied to oil extraction, production and use. Home grown alternatives.
And I'm not just blaming Republicans for the way things are now. Obama and the Dems were in the process of approving more off shore drilling before BP had its blowout. Now everyone in DC is calling for safer drilling practices. And that may be good, but it will not release of from our lack of energy independence. Not at all. And just so it's understood, drilling on land is no different. Safer, but the oil still goes to an international market that takes oil produced here out of our country and sells it back to us at the going rate. (Even if the pool is on paper, it's still the same. It just doesn't travel as far.) It doesn't matter who's oil we are actually using.
There is only one way out. Two if you count nationalizing the industry, which is like impossible to do.
Reduce our dependence is it. Bite the bullet and do what it takes to minimize our need for oil...
|
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 06/18/2010 : 13:18:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
With a concerted, nation-wide effort we could be powering just about everything in this country via renewables by 2030. |
I agree. I don't see a way off of oil without investing in nuclear power today and that does not seem to be part of the Presidents plan. Solar, wind, ocean currents, thermal etc. cannot supply enough energy that the US currently needs.
Originally posted by Dave W.
Unfortunately, too many people will whine about their taxes going up and instead choose the status quo in which their fuel bills will keep going up.
|
I agree, but it has to be affordable to all. Paying more for energy is going to happen if we get off oil but there is a threshhold where that increase will ruin our economy and peoples lives. |
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Fripp
SFN Regular
USA
727 Posts |
Posted - 06/18/2010 : 13:28:21 [Permalink]
|
| I wonder if natural gas is the same way. Perhaps natural gas, as a short-term stop-gap measure, could help wean us off. I firmly believe that nuke plants is one way to get us off coal for electricity generation. Problem is that it takes DECADES to get a new one built. I read a book years ago called Green Delusions, written by an environmentalist who was skeptical about back-to-nature environmentalists. He stated that, for less than 1 percent of the available desert land, solar panels put in the desert could supply our electricity. Whether it was completely supply or a sizable percentage, I can't remember. In my opinion, even it was 10 percent of the desert, it's still worth it. There's a whole lot of dirt, non-scenic dirt, between Salt Lake City and Las Vegas. Nevada alone has so much area that panels would never be seen. |
"What the hell is an Aluminum Falcon?"
"Oh, I'm sorry. I thought my Dark Lord of the Sith could protect a small thermal exhaust port that's only 2-meters wide! That thing wasn't even fully paid off yet! You have any idea what this is going to do to my credit?!?!"
"What? Oh, oh, 'just rebuild it'? Oh, real [bleep]ing original. And who's gonna give me a loan, jackhole? You? You got an ATM on that torso LiteBrite?" |
|
|
|
Badger
Skeptic Friend
Canada
257 Posts |
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/18/2010 : 14:23:44 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Robb
I agree. I don't see a way off of oil without investing in nuclear power today and that does not seem to be part of the Presidents plan. |
Nuclear isn't a renewable resource, and approval and built-out takes so long that it's unlikely that there'd be a large increase in energy production from nuclear sources in just 20 years. Other than that, I've got no problems with nukes.| Solar, wind, ocean currents, thermal etc. cannot supply enough energy that the US currently needs. |
I've read the exact opposite (in Scientific American last year). We could exceed US energy needs by 2030 with just those methods and renewable (zero net carbon) biomass fuels.| I agree, but it has to be affordable to all. Paying more for energy is going to happen if we get off oil but there is a threshold where that increase will ruin our economy and peoples lives. |
Paying more for energy is going to happen no matter what. The question is whether we take it on the chin now, or leave the bill for our grandchildren and the environmental clean-up for our great-grandkids.
The US hit peak oil production in 1970, and optimistic predictions for world peak oil are only ten years from now (pessimistic outlooks say we passed peak oil a few years ago). Afterward, inflating oil prices could easily cause a global depression if we haven't switched to other sources of fuel before the oil supply becomes strained.
The economic pressures only get worse the longer we wait. Working now towards sustainable and affordable energy for all in 2030 allows us to best mitigate the costs and avoid panic buying of renewable technologies and equipment. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
Posted - 06/18/2010 : 14:33:17 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Fripp
I wonder if natural gas is the same way. Perhaps natural gas, as a short-term stop-gap measure, could help wean us off. |
Peak gas may have already occurred in the U.S., and we may hit peak coal in the 2030s. Worldwide, estimates for peak gas and peak coal aren't very tight.
But since there's plenty of oil now, we may as well use the situation to our advantage, and go straight from it to renewables. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
Elmo the Clown
New Member
31 Posts |
Posted - 06/18/2010 : 14:49:14 [Permalink]
|
Wow... The government was in bed with the oil industry and created an environmental disaster... and the answer contains "nuclear"?
Maybe those new-fangled pocket reactors will pan out. At least (to my understanding) they are underground.
|
Support a clown, buy a luury cruise from www.ChicLuxuryCruises.com (or any cruise...) |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13477 Posts |
 Posted - 06/18/2010 : 15:21:55 [Permalink]
|
I have no words... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
Dude
SFN Die Hard
USA
6891 Posts |
Posted - 06/19/2010 : 10:27:02 [Permalink]
|
Robb said:
Solar, wind, ocean currents, thermal etc. cannot supply enough energy that the US currently needs.
|
There is enough wind to satisfy the energy needs of the US, at our current growth rates, for the next century or more. And that is with existing technology. The capacity just needs to be installed.
If you add solar, enzymatic ethanol, tidal, and other renewable sources into that mix we have the resources to become more than energy independent for the foreseeable future, without considering nuclear power and with zero use of any fossil fuel.
For what we have spent on our bullshit war in Iraq we could have put in those windfarms and upgraded the entire domestic power grid.
But hey, chasing invisible WMD and killing our once-upon-a-time friend Saddam were totally worth a trillion bucks, I guess.
|
Ignorance is preferable to error; and he is less remote from the truth who believes nothing, than he who believes what is wrong.
-- Thomas Jefferson
"god :: the last refuge of a man with no answers and no argument." - G. Carlin
Hope, n.
The handmaiden of desperation; the opiate of despair; the illegible signpost on the road to perdition. ~~ da filth |
|
|
|
|
Robb
SFN Regular
USA
1223 Posts |
Posted - 06/21/2010 : 09:32:18 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dude
Robb said:
Solar, wind, ocean currents, thermal etc. cannot supply enough energy that the US currently needs.
|
There is enough wind to satisfy the energy needs of the US, at our current growth rates, for the next century or more. And that is with existing technology. The capacity just needs to be installed.
If you add solar, enzymatic ethanol, tidal, and other renewable sources into that mix we have the resources to become more than energy independent for the foreseeable future, without considering nuclear power and with zero use of any fossil fuel.
|
You may be right. This is a quick analysis but let me know if you agree.
174,930,000,000 Gallons of gasoline were used in 2006 (1)
If the energy content of the gasoline is 120,900 Btu/Gallon (2) then there is a total energy in that gasoline of 21,149,037,000,000,000 Btu’s/year That is 6,198,171 GWH/year that would have to be generated per year to convert all cars to electric.
In 2008 the US annual electrical consumption is 4,119,388 GWH (3) add the auto energy and that makes an estimated 10,317,559 GWH per year in 2008. If we estimate a growth rate of 0.015% then in 2030 the estimated electrical consumption would be 14,316,270 GWH/year.
Wind potential for the US is estimated at 10,777,000 GWH (4) maximum and Solar Potential is estimated at 19,012,944 GWH (5) maximum. Assuming we cannot overlap solar and wind energy in the same space we can assume that half of this capacity would actually be feasible for a total of 14,894,972 GWH/yearwhich could supply our need in 2030 with a lot of assumptions.
This is a rough estimate and let me know it can be improved. Does anyone know of payback periods for large scale wind and solar projects or how much land is available for wind and solar energy?
References:
1 http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0004727.html
2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gasoline#Energy_content_.28High_and_Low_heating_value.29
3 http://www.eia.doe.gov/cneaf/electricity/epa/epaxlfilees1.pdf
4 http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2010/02/better-wind-resource-maps/
5 http://www.nrcm.org/documents/publiclandownership.pdf
|
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. - George Washington |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26022 Posts |
|
 |
|
|
|
Gulf Oil Spill
