Petroleum and the future of civilization

  • Thread starter Thread starter Doug50
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’m big on science and technology but I don’t put faith in the miracle of science to solve all problems. Science is not my religion. Science has made great headways into health care, for example, but even after all these years a lot of diseases have not been cured despite the efforts made.

When someone shows me the techno fixes for a substitute to petroleum I’ll become an optimist. There are no magic bullets.
There is no miracle or religion needed to build a better mouse trap. People that gloom and doom over oil being used up are the same people that gloom and doom over anything else. Do you honestly think we’ll wake up one morning and the radio news man will say, “Well folks, that’s it. The last drop of oil has been consumed. We are now all officially buggered.”? I don’t.
 
i work in the oil industry on the government side. i can tell you first hand that in the gulf of mexico, companies are forced to drill deeper and further offshore. the blocks available for leasing have been picked over by oil companies time and time again. they drill smaller and more subtle traps now. in alaska, the environmentalists have viturally stopped offshore leasing and exploration activities.

the bottom line is there will always be more oil and gas to drill, but at more of a cost. that is why oil prices are $70 a barrel. the oil industry is forced to either go back to old fields and produce by-passed pay, or go to more remote, deeper, locations to find oil. the age of cheap oil is over because all of the easy to produce mega fields have been drilled.

we are overly globalized and are living an unsustainable lifestyle here in the us. if every developing country were to consume at our level, there would not be enough resources available on our planet.

don’t you think we would be more humble and more God fearing if we would return to a more agrarian sustainable lifestyle? places like houston texas are the antithesis of sustainability–where ozone alerts are frequent and an ever expanding suburban sprawl destroy our quality of life. we are setting ourselves up for disaster. between a taxing illegal alien population, growing debt, constant wars, aging population, pollution, negative savings rate, and increasing oil prices, we will probably enter depression in 10 years time.

we are stewards of the earth, not consumers.
Exacty One of the biggist problems, I believe, is evident in this thread’s replies, “Don’t worry be happy. The free market, and the miracles of science will take care of the future.” Will it? How can Houston’s economic means and way of life be sustained without the ability to fill the tank anytime you’d need to? It’s the market that’s driving cities’ like Houston’s low density urban sprawl. For the free market to work effieciently the information going into the system must be reliable. No one in the broder media or government is giving much thought to a future oil crunch. So not much research or funds are being focused on it. “Eveything will work out” is the attitude. In Texas the govener is planing super highways called the Texas Trans Coridor. These highways will be a quater mile wide with trucking lanes, auto lanes, and railroad lines. And through it all not a word has been asked as to wheater the future fuel supplies will be availabe to support such an investment. It’s just assumed that it’ll be available. Personally, I don’t see going back to a more simple life as doom and gloom. I do worry, though, that cities like Houston will become future concrete scab lands. Government and industry can’t solve a problem unless they first acknowledge its existence.
 
i work in the oil industry on the government side. i can tell you first hand that in the gulf of mexico, companies are forced to drill deeper and further offshore. the blocks available for leasing have been picked over by oil companies time and time again. they drill smaller and more subtle traps now. in alaska, the environmentalists have viturally stopped offshore leasing and exploration activities.
Here’s a picture of the oil platform density in the Gulf
woodshole.er.usgs.gov/pubs/of2005-1071/data/background/mms/platforms.gif

Not many more places to drill
 
Seems to me that those who are complaining are ignoring the alternatives that are already in place. Profits is job one. The new proven technologies already exist, but they won’t be phased in until every last penny is squeezed out of oil and gas.

Do you think the urban planners are willing to strand their families and relatives and time shares, and lose their investments? I think not. For themselves alone, and for those who work the land, any talk of gloom and doom is illusory. It’s not that any magic bullet is needed. Coal gasification is an old technology. Germany was producing synthetic fuel during World War II.

Why are HUMMERS and SUVs crowding the roads? Why aren’t all vehicles mandated for a minimum fuel economy? Profits. Profits.

God bless,
Ed
 
Ed, you speak of profits as if they were something bad. I own a small business (albeit not in the energy industry). Profits are what enable to me to pay the payroll, which gives 2 other people jobs. Profits are what I get for the hours and hours of work I do. Am I supposed to work for free while everyone else gets a paycheck? How fair is that? Profits are not evil.

If profits are demonized, then all work for pay should be demonized. I seriously doubt most people would characterize their paycheck as evil, would you? If not, then to characterize profits as some sort of evil is hypocrisy.

As for the energy producers, like nearly the entire human race, they will choose to do something less expensive and easy over something more expensive and/or more difficult. To say that it’s all about profits is, at the very least, too simplistic.
 
I’ve run a business, so I understand that point. My point is, automakers are making SUVs for more profit since they can classify them as trucks.

ENRON is an excellent example of what I’m talking about. The philosophy I’m talking about is “there’s no such thing as too much money.” Greed is a sin.

Building more refinery capacity would cut into oil company profits. Google “obscene profits” for additional examples.

The United States is not addicted to oil. I remember when I first found out that the street rail line tracks were torn out so GM could sell more buses to Detroit. Mass transit? Where’s the profit in that?

In the early part of the 20th Century, electric cars were outselling gasoline powered cars (a google search will confirm that). But the oil companies needed to make money. Windmills were torn down in northern Europe early in the last century because gas was so cheap, now, improved windmills are going back up again.

Greed is the issue, not fair trade or fair profits.

God bless,
Ed
 
Seems to me that those who are complaining are ignoring the alternatives that are already in place. Profits is job one. The new proven technologies already exist, but they won’t be phased in until every last penny is squeezed out of oil and gas.

Do you think the urban planners are willing to strand their families and relatives and time shares, and lose their investments? I think not. For themselves alone, and for those who work the land, any talk of gloom and doom is illusory. It’s not that any magic bullet is needed. Coal gasification is an old technology. Germany was producing synthetic fuel during World War II.

Why are HUMMERS and SUVs crowding the roads? Why aren’t all vehicles mandated for a minimum fuel economy? Profits. Profits.

God bless,
Ed
As I said earlier, just because something can be done in the lab or in test doesn’t mean it will translate to the whole of the economy. All of the alternatives to oil are poor energy substitutes and more expensive. If you could buy all the gasoline you needed to drive from the suburbs to your job but the cost of that fuel was at least 50% of your families annual budget would you still be able to aford living there? As the age of cheap oil ends the relative cost of fuel to maintain living these way could cause a collaps in the housing market.

You bet, it is possible to make oil from coal so why aren’t we doing it? Because it’s expensive to do and would increase the cost at the pump. However, increasing coal demand for driving cars puts greater pressure to mine the supply that much faster. A 2% annual increase in the mining and usage of our coal reserves would us it up in 80 years.

The Hirsch Repot
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hirsch_report
acus.org/docs/051007-Hirsch_World_Oil_Production.pdf
 
Something is happening right now in California:

nytimes.com/2007/07/25/business/25solar.html?ex=1343016000&en=1cd1b9d76d98846a&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

And Nellis Air Force Base:

nellis.af.mil/

God bless,
Ed
Like said, those thinks can work on a limited/smaller scale but they will not scale up to meet anywhere near the global demand for energy that now exists. I’ve leased my land to a company that’s going to install 400 feet tall wind generators. These generators are the most effecient form of renewable energy and it’s proponents claim the mid-west has enough wind to supply the US with electricity. It’s detractors claim it couldn’t and the number of turbines it’d take would severly mar the landscape. Even then this energy in not going to do for autos/trucks what gasoline/deseal does.
 
OIL FUTURES: Nymex Crude Down $3; Stock-Led Selloff Quickens
NEW YORK (Dow Jones)–Crude oil futures headed lower toward $70 a barrel Thursday as a sell-off accelerated amid concerns credit market turmoil will cut demand and as storms looked less likely to affect U.S. Gulf of Mexico production. The front-month September light, sweet crude contract on the New York Mercantile Exchange was down $3.09, or 4.2%, at $70.24 a barrel. Prices are now down more than 10% from their intraday record $78.77 reached Aug. 1. Brent crude on the ICE futures exchange fell $2.69 to $68.95 a barrel.

cattlenetwork.com/content.asp?contentid=152993
 
OIL FUTURES: Nymex Crude Down $3; Stock-Led Selloff Quickens
NEW YORK (Dow Jones)–Crude oil futures headed lower toward $70 a barrel Thursday as a sell-off accelerated amid concerns credit market turmoil will cut demand and as storms looked less likely to affect U.S. Gulf of Mexico production. The front-month September light, sweet crude contract on the New York Mercantile Exchange was down $3.09, or 4.2%, at $70.24 a barrel. Prices are now down more than 10% from their intraday record $78.77 reached Aug. 1. Brent crude on the ICE futures exchange fell $2.69 to $68.95 a barrel.

cattlenetwork.com/content.asp?contentid=152993
I’m in the oil business. I make my living by drilling and selling the stuff. These short term swings help/hurt our interest checks from mont to month but what counts is the year over year trends. And the trend is up. All energy experts in this debate (even though they differe on when production will finally peak) are in agreement about one thing, the era of cheap oil is over.
 
Between wind and solar, a lot of energy will be generated. Period. Mar the landscape? If everybody wants light and energy for their electronic toys, mar the landscape it is.

I know big money interests are against solar because, well, you can’t put a meter on the sun and it’s going to be around for a long time.

God bless,
Ed
 
the end of cheap oil
sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/309/5731/101

magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0406/feature5/index.html?fs=www7.nationalgeographic.com

magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/0406/feature5/fulltext.html

members.forbes.com/forbes/1998/0615/6112084a.html

Cheap oil: enjoy it while it lasts
Howard Banks, 06/15/1998

NOT THIS YEAR, nor the next, but maybe as soon as five years hence, oil prices will start to rise, says Franco Bernab, chief executive of the Italian oil company ENISpA. Well before 2010, he believes, the world will be vulnerable to 1970s-style oil shocks.

Speaking to FORBES in London in early May, he says, “There is a great deal of complacency among politicians and economists that the oil problem is over. But despite today’s low prices, in the long term we will be back to a high-price scenario in the oil sector.”

It sounds unlikely, at a time when crude prices have sagged below $15 a barrel. In real inflation-adjusted terms, that’s not much above the price level just before OPECsandbagged the world with $30 oil in the mid-1970s. In short, on balance, the price of oil has gone nowhere in a quarter of a century. However, Bernab – who is a former economics professor and in the 1970s was a senior economist at the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation & Development – puts forward a well- argued case that oil will be a lot dearer in the 21st century than it is in the 20th.
 
Between wind and solar, a lot of energy will be generated. Period. Mar the landscape? If everybody wants light and energy for their electronic toys, mar the landscape it is.

I know big money interests are against solar because, well, you can’t put a meter on the sun and it’s going to be around for a long time.

God bless,
Ed
Enviromentalists are fighting wind energy, not big business.
 
I wonder how top executives all over the world are going to feed themselves, much less their families, should things go in the direction you claim (and others, I did read the articles). But, wind and solar are practical, and as far as infrastructure, it’s going to be based on what the people with the money decide.

Enough sunlight hits the planet every day to supply global energy needs. Fully electric cars are in development. I don’t buy any gloom and doom scenarios.

God bless,
Ed
 
40.png
Doug50:
Enviromentalists are fighting wind energy
Is this a great pun or what?
 
Is this a great pun or what?
No. It’s the truth. They don’t like them marring the views and they believe they kill too many birds even though more birds are kill by cats, flying into plate glass buildings, or by autos. Them and NIMBYs (not in my back yarders).
 
But you were still able to lease your land to build those wind generators?
God bless,
Ed
That’s right. As the saying goes you sue for anything but that doesn’t mean you’ll win the case…or even have a case.

Other people I know who have leased are being sued. We have yet to recieve lease money so we aren’t named. The people suing, though, can’t beging to win here in Texas. Problem is we have rich city people buying land up in our rural area who are use to have zoning codes. There are no zoning code in rural Texas. Also in this state we have what’s known as a two-tiered ownership of private property. One person may own the surface estate and other the mineral estate (or one person may own both). If you own both you can sell the surface estate and keep the mineral estate. But what most people don’t realize who are buying rurual surface estates is that the mineral estate is legally the dominate estate. Meaning what? The surface estate owner may not want his surface marred with oil and gas wells, oil tanks, powerlines, and roads to get these equipment but there is nothing he can do to stop an oil field from coming in on his surface’s shared property owned. If he can’t stop an oilfield from coming on property he has ownership title of, how could he stop any strutcher from marring his view on property he has no title rights to? You’ve heard of ambulance chasing lawyers? In Texas, we now have windmill chasing lawyers taking money from people who somehow believe they are entitle to the scenic views of another’s property.
 
I wonder how top executives all over the world are going to feed themselves, much less their families, should things go in the direction you claim (and others, I did read the articles). But, wind and solar are practical, and as far as infrastructure, it’s going to be based on what the people with the money decide.

Enough sunlight hits the planet every day to supply global energy needs. Fully electric cars are in development. I don’t buy any gloom and doom scenarios.
God bless,
Ed
But what you keep mistaking is that oil is only about energy. First off, it’s about liquid energy/fuel. Wind turbines, solar, coal, or nuclear will not drive your car. On average 60% of a barrel of oil is used for transportation fuel. The other 40% goes to products, everything from the asphalt roads you drive to the cups and stawing you pickup at the window from McDonald’s, to the elastic in your underware, to the carpet in you home. As I said earlier, at the current use of 86.1 million barrels per day that volume of oil would fill a swimming pool 82 feet by 6.5 feet by 63,488 miles long every year, or 5,600 olmypic pools per day. I don’t know how or what the global economy will use to replace this volume. There isn’t enough land to grow crops capable of replacing this volume.

In the past we went from wood to coal and then to oil (nuclear only came along in the 20th century). Each one was progressively more efficient. The Babylonians used oil for light. We’ve always know of oil’s existence. The problem the next generations face is that all the alternatives to oil are no where as energy efficient or practicle as oil has been. Cheap and abundent petroleum to fuel the economic growth is what made possible the disposable income of the 20th century. Without it the drivable cities and urban sprawl would not be possible. The amount of food was made possible by petroleum (oil and gas). The green revolution isn’t actually green, it was black. Pesticides and fertizers come from petroleum and natural gas. Solar, wind, or nuclear will not replace this need.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top