![[dr. bob]](/dr-bob-sm.gif)
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.orgShown: posts 1 to 5 of 5. This is the beginning of the thread.
Posted by AuntieMel on December 2, 2004, at 14:25:49
Oil futures are down 22% from October's prices. There will be cheering in the media and on the streets.
Everyone will be happy until the next crisis. Will anyone ever learn?
When the folks my age retire from this industry there will be no-one left to do the work. Oh, well.
Mel (chicken little)
Posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2004, at 0:14:51
In reply to Price of oil futures down, posted by AuntieMel on December 2, 2004, at 14:25:49
The technology is there for water powered cars, and also hybrid cars which use both and apparantly have a bit of grunt as well.
If governments really cared about the environment they would subsidise the price of these cars and / or provide incentives for people to buy them with the goal of phasing out the other.
But then America wouldn't get as rich off all the oil...
Posted by AuntieMel on December 3, 2004, at 14:15:49
In reply to Re: Price of oil futures down, posted by alexandra_k on December 3, 2004, at 0:14:51
I truly hope you are right that other technology can take it's place.
If current trends continue, in fifteen years or less only a few people (in America, anyway) will qualified to find more than a quart of Pennzoil at the local quicky-mart.
But currently bottled water costs more per gallon than gasoline (if you subtract off the taxes.) So does milk. And good clean water is scarcer than oil in most places.
Actually, adjusted for inflation, gasoline is still dirt cheap compared to when it was selling for .29 a gallon.
As for America getting rich. I don't see that one. US oil production is at 50 year lows. We import more than half of our consumption, (55% in '02, it was 37% in '80 and 42% in '90.)
Over 1,000,000 jobs in the US oil industry were lost between '86 and '92. Any demand in the job market is difficult to fill as university enrollment in these fields is at near all time lows. Who wants to study geology or geophyisics with such volitile employment?
The good times for geologists/geophysicists were over a while back, but those of us left are still a bit shell shocked and each time there is a layoff we are left reeling.
See:
Posted by 64bowtie on December 3, 2004, at 15:55:59
In reply to Re: other alternatives » alexandra_k, posted by AuntieMel on December 3, 2004, at 14:15:49
Thanks, Mel, for going down this road...
The surface of the earth creates about 80,000 miles of coastline. Up to four miles out into the oceans is a field rich in hydrate shale. No matter how hard you squease the shale, no oil drips out. Oddly, there is a cleaner burning fuel locked into the shale. It is methane gas, that same stuff we cook with.
These 80,000 miles of coastline, and four miles out, makes up a field of potential fuel of over 300,000 square miles. Any country whose coastline creates at least 100 square miles, can produce the equivalent of all the power they are now using. The problem is how do you harvest the gas and contain it, when to date it is being liberated to atmosphere un-harnessed?
What is really happenning to the ozone layer? Hydrate shales are liberating methane which eats the ozone layer. If we harvest this methane safely, the full ozone layer can return.
Guess what? The cost of the actual harvesting would be nominal because it's already happening without mankind stimulating the process. I have a scheme that would cost initially far less than the billions being spent today prospecting for oil. Maintenance would be simple and the gas would actually pump itself to the surface.
It has been estimated that we might have 50 to 100 years of oil left. This potential methane supply today is the equivalent to an energy source a 100 times what oil has been used, is being used, or ever will be used. Left undisturbed for as little as 25 years, the harvested undersea field replenishes itself.
Endless power... And no corn or soybeans for fuel, except for our bodies!!! More tofu! Yum!
Rod
Posted by AuntieMel on December 3, 2004, at 16:57:42
In reply to Throwing my hat in about alternatives » AuntieMel, posted by 64bowtie on December 3, 2004, at 15:55:59
Actually, the price of oil doesn't affect the industry employment in the US near as much as natural gas.
I'm curious what your idea is, though I've been in the biz long enough to be wary of anyone saying "I have a scheme." It's usually some <supposedly> third world national promising to give you a cut if you provide him a bank account to helo him smuggle out his millions. <grin>
And I don't know how long they've been predicting we'll run out of oil soon. The technology to find it and retrieve it just keeps improving so much that it hasn't really been a danger yet. <all bets are off when us "old-timers" retire>
Anyway - natural gas. Cleaner to use, won't stick to the wildlife or make tarballs on the beaches - all around a better choice until solar or hydrogen methods become cost effective. Think of how much it would help if just the heating oil furnaces converted to gas.
And, selfishly, it would certainly help me and my bank account. Folks like me are becomming hard to get and an increase in gas demand would sure be a boost. So far there isn't a practical way to import it - there is some LNG import, but it's not common yet.
There was a bumper sticker around here after the '86 bust. "Please, God, give me just one more boom. I promise not to <mess> it up this time"
Interesting thing I saw this morning.
http://www.hgs.org/en/cev/?293
<<and this type of thing is what I had in mind when I wanted this board...>>
This is the end of the thread.
Psycho-Babble Politics | Extras | FAQ
Dr. Bob is Robert Hsiung, MD,
bob@dr-bob.org
Script revised: February 4, 2008
URL: http://www.dr-bob.org/cgi-bin/pb/mget.pl
Copyright 2006-17 Robert Hsiung.
Owned and operated by Dr. Bob LLC and not the University of Chicago.