Anti SUV site

What's in a name? Fossil fuels are, to oversimplify, dinosaur bones. Now, since we seem to have rather a shortage of dinosaurs at the moment, I'd have to say that we're talking about a resource that will be very scarce in the near future. :)

Since I just heard this on the radio today...

It's estimated that Iraq has untapped oil reserves of about 600 billion barrels. They remove, at the moment, about 2 million a day... but if their infrastructure were repaired it's thought that number would be more like 7 million.

Doing a little math, 600 billion barrels / 7 million a day, in 2025, Iraq won't have oil any more.

Iraq has the second largest store of oil in the world, after Saudi Arabia.
Demand for fossil fuels is only increasing.

Would our world's supply of oil really hold out another 23 years?
 
jtr1962,
A 0-60 time is just unacceptable if you're trying to merge onto a heavily trafficked highway with no entrance lane like just about all highways in North Jersey.

Mercutio,
Just because Iraq could increase their production to 7 million barrels a day, the world's consumption is likely to stay at the same rate (with the rate of increase). This means that production would be reduced elsewhere by about just under 5 million barrels a day, making their supply last longer.

Also there is a huge supply of oil that isn't drilled for today simply because it is too expensive. Once the easy to get at oil starts to run out, the price will rise, making it viable to drill for the "expensive" oil. It'll also help ease the transition to alternatives, as they'll seem more attractive to now more expensive oil. This expensive oil should last about a decade or two (I have no real data to back it up, it's just a guess), added to the time left we have for the cheap oil should be enough time to switch to much better alternatives.

Steve

P.S. Most of the expensive oil is outside of the Middle East, meaning they will likely be rendered irrelevant to the rest of the world at that time unless they develop a real economy outside of oil.
 
SteveC said:
jtr1962,
A 0-60 time is just unacceptable if you're trying to merge onto a heavily trafficked highway with no entrance lane like just about all highways in North Jersey.
Click to expand...

You mean you have to be able to go to 60 in a nanosecond? Fire up the warp drive, Scotty, I'll need warp 9 in two minutes! Seriously, I think you forgot to add how many seconds you considered unacceptable. I know all about New Jersey's highways. They're awfully designed outside of the Turnpike, and it's a shame the Turnpike is only limited to 55 or 65, since you could safely go over a hundred on it(fuel consumption not withstanding). Given that buses take upwards of a minute to reach 60 and have no problems merging, I just don't see how it is necessary to have cars do it in anything less than 20. If they can by using stored energy instead of a large engine, fine, but I just don't see that it's necessary. The problem you speak of is a combination of very poorly designed roads and impolite drivers who don't let people in(not just in New Jersey, they're worse over here). Also, if I remember correctly, the maximum acceleration that most people find comfortable is about 0.2g, which corresponds to 0 to 60 in 13.6 seconds. You should really get after your politicians to fix your roads, not get a more powerful car than you need to compensate for it. That 20 second figure I quoted is widely used by transportation engineers since it probably corresponds to the median performance of all vehicles-about half do it faster and half do it slower. A very small percentage of vehicles, mainly older trucks and buses, can't even reach 60 at all. When my aunt drove a VW bug about 30 years ago, I think she said it maxed out at around 70. Don't even ask about 0 to 60 times. :(
 
Cliptin said:
I guess one question is: should we care if we run out of dino-fuel.? We could just switch to something else. LPG is not as plentiful as oil but it is available.
Click to expand...

LPG is just another fossil fuel. Given the figures Mercutio quoted, it's doubtful the oil reserves in the Middle East will last even 25 years. Once China and India become more industrialized, oil prices will rapidly skyrocket as demand increases by tenfold. This will happen within two decades, and hopefully the free markets will dictate that we finally search for alternatives. Even factoring in the hard to drill areas, which may be off-limits anyway thanks to environmentalists, I doubt we'll have any oil worth mentioning in 30 years due to the huge new demands from currently undeveloped countries. I'm 100% against drilling in these pristine areas. By doing so, we destroy a unique natural habitat just to delay the inevitable by maybe five to ten years, or in colloquial terms we sell the family jewels for a night on the town.

I think public policy planners should think in terms of eliminating fossil fuel use by 2010, 2015 at the latest. By then the supply will likely start to become scarce and expensive anyway, and we'll have alternative ready just in time. If not, what happens when China and India suddenly are in the market for huge amounts of fossil fuel just when it's becoming harder to find? Well, look for $20/gallon gas prices, and people freezing to death in their homes in the winter because they can't afford heating oil. To say it would be a catastrophe is an understatement, yet it would be one of our own making. We've known this was coming for 30 years and haven't done a thing about it so far.

P.S. Even if we find enough fossil fuel to satisfy all this new demand, what kind of shape will the planet be in once we're spewing ten times the amount of crap in the air as we are now. Suddenly Mars is starting to look good.
 
So how is this supposed to work? Saudi Arabia continues to suck their life’s blood out of the earth until they hear that sucking sound when you reach the end of a coke.

The following day, I go back to riding my bicycle to work, and the Saudis revert to sheep herding bedouins?

Obviously, this is nonsense. Known oil reserves are carefully tracked. Further, there are significant fields that are untapped, because the extraction of their oil is considered too expensive. As the reserve levels drop, the price of oil will go up. It will then be economical to pursue these untapped fields.

The rising price will encourage the market to make use of other fossil fuels, and eventually, renewable resources.

When will this happen? I have no idea.

Just ask our own(penn) state geologist. In the late 1800s he said the oil would be gone in four years. We are still waiting.

Besides, if oil is so terrible, the last thing I should do is leave it for my children.
 
cas said:
Obviously, this is nonsense. Known oil reserves are carefully tracked. Further, there are significant fields that are untapped, because the extraction of their oil is considered too expensive. As the reserve levels drop, the price of oil will go up. It will then be economical to pursue these untapped fields.

The rising price will encourage the market to make use of other fossil fuels, and eventually, renewable resources.
Click to expand...

It is not be a lack of supply that will cause the sudden rise in prices, it will be a fairly quick spike in demand that occurs just at a time when oil is harder to find. India and China combined have over 2 billion people now, probably another billion in twenty years. They are rapidly becoming industrialized. Unless we tell them they can't have the same lifestyle as we have have(and force them not to by military intervention), then in twenty years time you will have a demand for oil that is ten times what it is today. Furthermore, this rise demand will occur in a fairly short amount of time as power plants and roads suddenly come on line. Even assuming both countries are wise enough not to make our mistake of depending on the automobile, and instead rely mainly on mass transit, there will still be a huge demand for power, not all of which can be met with hydroelectricity. Sure, it can be generated by nuclear means, but building hundreds of reactors in densely populated countries will be politically unpalatable, even though those reactors are the safest way to make power. Just look at all the nimbyism that stopped new reactors in the US. Yes, China can build reactors now because of their system of government but in 20 years time it may be impossible.

Barring the invention of fusion, I would say we have two choices-keep most of the world's population from industrializing by force, or let them industrialize and finish destroying the planet in the process. Nuclear reactors represent a palatable(barely) third choice, but given the panicky nature of the general population and those with an agenda who take advantage of it, I don't see any large scale reactor construction at any time in the near future. Geothermal is an interesting fourth possibility if it can be made to work cost effectively since all you are basically doing is making a very deep hole and using the heat. Current research to improve thermoelectric modules(the same kind that power those portable coolers) may actually make geothermal electricity feasible since they can take advantage of a lower temperature heat source than a conventional steam turbine. If you can make electricity with a 300° F heat source instead of a 1500° F one, then this means a much less deep and less costly hole to drill.

Besides, if oil is so terrible, the last thing I should do is leave it for my children.
Click to expand...

The oil is best left where it is, in the ground, especially if we need to destroy pristine environments to get at it. I don't know precisely what the effects will be of all that carbon released into the atmosphere that was never there before, but Venus gives us a pretty good idea.
 
jtr1962 said:
Given that buses take upwards of a minute to reach 60 and have no problems merging,...
Click to expand...

You are going to pretend you don't know why buses have no problem merging under any circumstances. Hint: It's the same reason dump trucks don't have a problem.

I'm 100% against drilling in these pristine areas.
Click to expand...
I'm against destroying natural areas too. In some (many?) areas the oil can be extracted without having equipment above ground in these sensitive areas.
 
jtr1962 said:
SteveC said:
jtr1962,
A 0-60 time is just unacceptable if you're trying to merge onto a heavily trafficked highway with no entrance lane like just about all highways in North Jersey.
Click to expand...

You mean you have to be able to go to 60 in a nanosecond? Fire up the warp drive, Scotty, I'll need warp 9 in two minutes! Seriously, I think you forgot to add how many seconds you considered unacceptable.
Click to expand...

Oops. I hate when I do that. I meant to say that 0-60 in 20 seconds is unacceptable. The buses and trucks get away with it because they're so big and the cars have to get out of their way. It's very dangerous though when they pull out in front of you and you either have to slam on the brakes or change lanes.

jtr1962 said:
The problem you speak of is a combination of very poorly designed roads and impolite drivers who don't let people in(not just in New Jersey, they're worse over here). Also, if I remember correctly, the maximum acceleration that most people find comfortable is about 0.2g, which corresponds to 0 to 60 in 13.6 seconds. You should really get after your politicians to fix your roads, not get a more powerful car than you need to compensate for it.
Click to expand...

Yes, the highways are horribly designed. When my parents moved out here in 1970, Route 3 was a two-lane road. Then the Meadowlands was built and people fled the city during the crime wave of the 80's. Now it's a major 6-lane highway with no room to expand to add entrance and exit lanes. Some other highways are even worse, with exits just after entrances. It's not realistic to think that these road are going to be fixed (we're talking about hundreds or thousands of entrances and exits that have to be completely redesigned), as it would take tens of billions of dollars and countless years.

Steve
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top