#40001 - 05/05/05 10:42 PM
Re: A future without oil
|
Enthusiast
Registered: 03/12/04
Posts: 316
Loc: Beaumont, TX USA
|
People should eat less meat: it requires SEVEN times more energy to get the steak than that it provides. If the land was used to grow crops instead of raise cattle than there would be less starvation. False...There is enough food produced, NOW, for everyone to get very fat...We have distribution problems, now production problems.....Many of them politicle...
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#40002 - 05/07/05 03:56 PM
Re: A future without oil
|
Registered: 11/14/03
Posts: 1224
Loc: Milwaukee, WI USA
|
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#40003 - 05/16/05 06:39 PM
Re: A future without oil
|
Member
Registered: 05/03/05
Posts: 133
Loc: Central Mississippi
|
Just today, I decided to take look at the "around the Campfire" forum and found this topic. So, allow me to hop up on my soap box and ramble a bit...
The recent spike in oli proces has reawakened the spector that we are running out of (mineral) oil. This price spike was driven by pure speculation. Even the Saudi's admit this. While the demand for petroleum is up, production is able to keep pace, and it will for the near, forseeable future. Does this mean that we're in the clear? No. It does mean that the sky is not falling.
This brings us to the $64,000 question - where do we go from here? There many in the "green" community who would apparently like to see humanity fade away, leaving only intriguing traces for some future ET explorer to ponder. I agree with the late William Faulkner when he said"... I refuse to accept the end of man. ... I believe that man will not merely endure: he will prevail." (http://http://www.rjgeib.com/thoughts/faulkner/faulkner.html). We need to apply the principals that we have learned to use when we find ourselves in "undesirable situations". S T O P. Stop Think. Observe. Plan.
In My Humble Opinion,
In the short term, non-petroleum fuels will not be practible for non-terrastrial (road, railroad, river and canal) transporation. Petroleum based fuels will continue to be used in high-seas shipping in the short-term and by aviation through the long-term.
The transition from petroleum fueled, internal combustion powerplants for terrastial transportation systems to the desired hydrogen fuel cell will take time and go through many intermediate steps as technology and infrastructure mature.
Wide-spread implementation of so-called "renewable energe sources" to meet base load requirements are unlikely, due to their general inability to produce constant power levels. Nuclear fission, despite its drawbacks, remains the only currently available power source able to meet the deamand. The issues of safety and waste can be effectively delt with (see below). (I would really prefer fusion and hey, I'd like to loose 100 pounds, too. Unfortunately, I don't think either will happen any time soon.)
<< There is nothing we can't do, if we really want to. >>
Climbing down off my soap box,
JimJr
Nuclear Power: Some have are not in favor nuclear power. Issues of safety and waste are legimately brought up. World-wide, commercial, light-water reactor power plants have have excellent safety records.1 Not perfect, no - but better than that of other types of power generating plants. There are other reactor designs, like the helium cooled pebble bed reactor, that promise to be even safer. The issue of waste is always problematic, but problematic because we refuse to deal with it. Not on technical reasons but emotional and political ones. Of "spent" commercial nuclear fuel, just over 5% of the fissionable material has actually been split, recycling (reprocessing) spent fuel would reduce the waste stream more than 94%. The 5% or so of waste left is really nasty stuff, but it can be effectivetly delt with using a process known as nuclear transmutation.
1. The Chernobyl plant was a "dry" graphite moderated reactor with no containment vessel used in the west. At the time of the accident, the reactor had been subjected to untested modifications, was being operated at high power on political orders and was being operated by technicians who were not fully qualified to do so. The Three Mile Island facility, a commercial light-water plant, while possesing a surprising number of "you gotta be s****ing me" control design, training and operational flaws, managed to contained the core, releasing only a small amount of radioactive hydrogen gas.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#40004 - 05/17/05 02:08 AM
Re: A future without oil
|
Veteran
Registered: 07/28/04
Posts: 1468
Loc: Texas
|
Cold fusion sure would be nice.... oh and so would time travel. <img src="/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />
_________________________
Learn to improvise everything.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#40005 - 05/24/05 03:20 PM
Re: A future without oil
|
Old Hand
Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 723
Loc: Pttsbg SWestern Pa USA N-Amer....
|
I am currently reading this Work. I think that it is quite a Warning, and quite a Read. It joins the great tradition of Alven Toffler and other Futurists.
As such, It is certainly something to get Prepared for! Individually and as a Society / Nation, -I think it Behooves us to Get Crackin!, -while there is still yet some time to do such in. As Squirrells in gathering their nuts for the Upcoming Winter, -It may be Late August for us now, -but let's not wait till November or December! [color:"black"] [/color] [email]martinfocazio[/email]
_________________________
"No Substitute for Victory!"and"You Can't be a Beacon if your Light Don't Shine!"-Gen. Douglass MacArthur and Donna Fargo.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#40006 - 05/24/05 04:28 PM
Re: A future without oil
|
Old Hand
Registered: 01/07/04
Posts: 723
Loc: Pttsbg SWestern Pa USA N-Amer....
|
As to the Nuclear Waste concerns raised in this thread, -we're gonna ultimately do things like send it down into Undersea Subduction Zones, into High Earth or Solar Orbit, or even into the "Solar Nuclear Facility" itself. These are of course well down the road, -and not just around the corner.
More Ultimately, -Long Range Answers are in Space, Sci-Tech, and in the Subatomic and Nano Worlds. This includes eventual and economic Breakthrus in things like Nuclear *Fusion*, and Desalinization.
We've got to Get Cracking on all of these! And as Frank says, -"Not in a Shy Way!" (to the extent it's at any time Economically and otherwise Feasable).
For now and for some time to come, -Nuclear is very much a part of the Answer. Despite it's wastes problem and other Risks.
Until the day that we through our All Out, Determined, and Non Shy Efforts, -cause us to once again Arrive upon such Sunny Energy and Resources Horizons, -We'll just have to Intelligently and Prudently, -"Suck some Things In"!, -concerning such Golden Nuclear Oppurtunity or Goose! As we have right at hand now! [color:"black"] [/color] [email]ScottRezaLogan[/email]
_________________________
"No Substitute for Victory!"and"You Can't be a Beacon if your Light Don't Shine!"-Gen. Douglass MacArthur and Donna Fargo.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
0 registered (),
321
Guests and
129
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|