World's Energy Crisis Postponed?

by leavingwt 58 Replies latest social current

• 

  Farkel

  shamus,

  :The problem is not the fuel, but the FUEL STATIONS. And all the assosiated nonsense that would happen inbetween.

  :Ten years I'd say if they fast-tracked it, and that's not going to happen anytime soon.

  Everyone agrees it would be absurd, if not impossible to assume such a conversion happens as fast as someone could flip on a light switch. Of course, the new fuel would have to be phased in, just as cars being converted would have to be phased in. The supply (meaning the pumps) could be phased in to meet the demand (meaning the converted vehicles). The conversion would be slow and incremental. Lots of tax breaks for the companies involved would create incentives to get the job done.

  Even if it took ten years, we would have gotten rid of our dependence upon jihad terrorists, or mostly so, and that's a good thing. We've been talking about alternative energy sources for at least 40 years, and 10 more years of still "talking" about the problem, rather than switching fuels is a far better alternative than paying $200 per barrel for oil in ten years and having China and India buy most of it, anyway.

  Farkel
• 

  BurnTheShips

  Exctraction costs for this nonconventional fuel are much higher than for regular gas. It's only profitable over a certain price point. Also, it requires massive amounts of water as well as the use of toxic chemicals to extract. Yes, it is done below the water table, but there can be accidents.

  BTS
• 

  shamus100

  All gas production must include the use of toxic chemicals.

  And the price point of where it becomes profitable? I know of some fields that pay off the wells after one and a half months at $3.00 gas. Now that's reeediculous!
• 

  wozza

  Natural gas has been used extensively on the Metro buses in South Australia for years , Australia sells lots of natural gas oversees , but as long as LPG is available and there are few Natural gas compressing plants big business will continue to sell it overseas to countries like China with little infra structure and the cosy entailed. So much for governments caring about pollution etc.
• 

  Farkel

  The new 2010 Honda Civic GX, a $25,000 car, runs on natural gas and omits very, very low emissions. According to what else I've read, natural gas produces a 50% less carbon footprint than other fossil fuels. It gets up to 39 MPG.

  If you use natural gas in your home, it is not difficult or unduly expensive to tap into that gas line to fill up a gas powered car, so if that technology can be mass produced and meet government standards for safety, it would mean less gas "pumps" would need to be installed in service stations, although they would still be necessary for road trips or for those who don't have natural gas at home.

  Natural gas-powered vehicles is an old and mature industry. It is not something that requires "breakthroughs" to make workable. Honda has already proven that with a genuine production vehicle.

  In Utah, the price for natural gas for an amount equivalent to a gallon of gas is 63 cents, but the price is all over the board throughout the rest of United States. I've never seen a price higher than the current price of gasolene, though.

  Natural gas is abundant and new fields of it are being discovered every day. Already half of the homes in the USA use natural gas as an energy source. Make it an energy source for cars seems to me to be the next natural step, or at least one to seriously consider, given all the alternatives.

  If you type in "natural gas automobiles" in Google, you can find lots of information on this subject. Farkel
• 

  metatron

  Anyone of you armchair theorists wanna put your money where your mouth is?

  Check out CLNE and WPRT. They are hoping to build nat gas vehicles/filling stations big time.

  If the liars, liberals and crooks in Washington get their act together, we can defund terrorism, plunge the trade deficit and kick the economy into high gear. Drill Marcellus shale. Develop the almost unbelievable Bakken formation. Convert cars and trucks to nat gas. Use nat gas as a bridge fuel until we get good electric cars and geothermal generation and solar thermal.

  Anybody see the controversy about the BBC asking "Where's Global Warming?" - that world temperatures have been stable for 11 years and now, the oceans are cooling? That the cap n' trade religionists are having a stroke about it?

  metatron
• 

  Farkel

  :Anyone of you armchair theorists wanna put your money where your mouth is?

  If I had any money I would, met. The problem with natural gas as a solution is the same problem government has with any similar solution: it works, it's the easiest and least expensive. You can look through 100,000,000 pages of government documents and never see the expression "Occam's Razor." The concept is beyond their grasp.

  :If the liars, liberals and crooks in Washington get their act together,

  Please don't be so redundant.

  Farkel
• 

  avishai

  Folks, they've had LPG/propane vehicles for decades. It's nothing new, I almost bought a 1970's muscle car that had been converted a loooong time ago a year or so back, can't remember the model.
• 

  villabolo

  metatron: "Anybody see the controversy about the BBC asking "Where's Global Warming?" - that world temperatures have been stable for 11 years and now, the oceans are cooling? That the cap n' trade religionists are having a stroke about it?"

  Metatron, world temperatures have been inching up and glaciers have been melting. There's a temporary pause this year because of diminished solar activity which occurs from time to time. Furthermore, far from stabilizing, the thinning and shrinkage of the North Polar ice cap has been accelerating. Even the temporary pause this year with its cooler winter has not returned the North Polar ice capts to the level it was decades ago. All of this has been documented by satellite observations.

  Cap and Trade is not considered a solution by many environmentalists and those that do are the moderates amongst them not the "religionists", as you call them. The radicals are far different in their opinions.

  www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/earthandsun/climate_change.html

  www.worldviewofglobalwarming.org

  On the first site, second image as you scroll down, you will get time lapse photography of the ice caps shrinking. On the second site you will get an overall global picture of climate changing from glaciers shrinking all the way back to 1859.

  villabolo
• 

  Farkel

  villabolo,

  : On the second site you will get an overall global picture of climate changing from glaciers shrinking all the way back to 1859.

  Tell us please about the technology used to measure glacial climate change in Czarist Russia in 1859. After all, Russia has 11 time zones and all of the United States would fit into one small corner of it. Moreoever, its latitude is much, much lower than it is in the USA. Siberia is HUGE. So, in all fairness, since global warming "since 1859" is, well, "global", then tell us how much we can depend upon the sensors the Russian Czar installed in the gigantic country of Russia in 1859 to measure it. I'm sure in 1859 the Russian Czar was very concerned about the problem and invested tons of money putting up glacier sensors all over Siberia. Next, we'll discuss the sensor in they installed in China in 1859, another country who I'm sure was very concerned about the problem then.

  Of course, the glaciers in Antarctic are growing by trillions of cubic feet per year as we speak, but that's not important since Antarctica only has 90% of the ice in the world. We really need to concentrate on the Arctic which less than 10% of the remaining ice to get a "balanced" viewpoint of "global" warming.

  You need to read more on the subject, and not read just the stuff you want to hear. I have.

  Farkel