[SI] SHOOT-IN - Tie-In

"Alan Browne" wrote in message
...
Mark Thomas wrote:

I, presumably mistakenly, used to think that the US had a lot of oil
reserves itself, and that the price would be kept at reasonable levels
over time because of that. Then again, maybe these *are* reasonable
levels... sigh..

Well, the US remains its own largest supplier at about 5 or 6 M bbl per
day, but with a consumption of 20 - 21 M bbl / day, it has to import
thrice as much oil as it produces.

The US hit its "peak oil" back in the late 60's.

They have not yet exploited ANWR, some of the Mexican Gulf and there is
probably oil off of the East Coast as well.

You would think that the 70's were warning enough.

Sometime ago I read somewhere that the US has adapted a policy of keeping a
lot of crude in reserve and using up as much foreign oil as possible so we
would not be in a bad position should there be a foreign war and we were to
run out of oil before it's over. (similar to the position that Adolf Hitler
was in at the end of WW-II) I don't know if this is true or not, but I do
know that my father, who was a traffic manager at Exxon, told me when he
retired (in 1953) that there was enough oil that he knew about, "in the
ground" to last us, "another 100 years". My father was not a stupid person,
so I believe him, and that puts us at 2050 before we run out of crude oil. I
told people about this during the gas crisis of the 70's, and they didn't
believe me then, but obviously, we weren't running out then, and I don't
believe we are anywhere close to running out now. I won't live until 2050,
so if I am wrong you are welcome to come and spit on my grave....:^) (But
you will have to ride a bicycle here to do it)

Alan Browne wrote:

Mark Thomas wrote:

I, presumably mistakenly, used to think that the US had a lot of oil
reserves itself, and that the price would be kept at reasonable levels
over time because of that. Then again, maybe these *are* reasonable
levels... sigh..

Well, the US remains its own largest supplier at about 5 or 6 M bbl per
day, but with a consumption of 20 - 21 M bbl / day, it has to import
thrice as much oil as it produces.

The US hit its "peak oil" back in the late 60's.

They have not yet exploited ANWR, some of the Mexican Gulf and there is
probably oil off of the East Coast as well.

You would think that the 70's were warning enough.

There maybe (is) oil in ANWR but the price we could pay for
that oil may be a footnote in history to the most destructive
attack on ecology.

The arctic is unique in it lack of ability to heal itself. I hiked out to
an 1100 year old inuit campsite a few years ago, the whale bone
ribs used as a frame for the shelter were still there. Most telling
of all was the garbage was intact in its pit.

The kind of natural organisms that are useful repairing spills
just don't exist. ANWR is one of the few pristine places left.
I will hang up my SUV and walk before I would want to
tell future generations that we destroyed that beauty for
another tank of gas.

Energy use and transformations from one form to another
should and will likely change. The US thinks that $4.00
gas is expensive. The innovation has already started in other
countries and is having an impact. Brazil's fermentors,
French hydrogen technology, Italy's small high performance
diesel engines. We are seeing big increases in wind power.
The Bruce Peninsula where I live in Ontario is a net exporter
of electricity due to wind generation.


(rant off, its coffee time)

w..

"Walter Banks" wrote in message
...


Alan Browne wrote:

Mark Thomas wrote:

I, presumably mistakenly, used to think that the US had a lot of oil
reserves itself, and that the price would be kept at reasonable levels
over time because of that. Then again, maybe these *are* reasonable
levels... sigh..

Well, the US remains its own largest supplier at about 5 or 6 M bbl per
day, but with a consumption of 20 - 21 M bbl / day, it has to import
thrice as much oil as it produces.

The US hit its "peak oil" back in the late 60's.

They have not yet exploited ANWR, some of the Mexican Gulf and there is
probably oil off of the East Coast as well.

You would think that the 70's were warning enough.

There maybe (is) oil in ANWR but the price we could pay for
that oil may be a footnote in history to the most destructive
attack on ecology.

The arctic is unique in it lack of ability to heal itself. I hiked out to
an 1100 year old inuit campsite a few years ago, the whale bone
ribs used as a frame for the shelter were still there. Most telling
of all was the garbage was intact in its pit.

The kind of natural organisms that are useful repairing spills
just don't exist. ANWR is one of the few pristine places left.
I will hang up my SUV and walk before I would want to
tell future generations that we destroyed that beauty for
another tank of gas.

Energy use and transformations from one form to another
should and will likely change. The US thinks that $4.00
gas is expensive. The innovation has already started in other
countries and is having an impact. Brazil's fermentors,
French hydrogen technology, Italy's small high performance
diesel engines. We are seeing big increases in wind power.
The Bruce Peninsula where I live in Ontario is a net exporter
of electricity due to wind generation.


(rant off, its coffee time)

w..


So all that global warming will be of some use after all. :-) Damn the
polar bears, I want microbial activity!

I do, however, dread what it will really take to get the US to use
alternative forms of energy for the morning commute. And the time it will
take. :-(

-Jim

jimkramer wrote:

So all that global warming will be of some use after all. :-) Damn the
polar bears, I want microbial activity!

It does have some advantages. In 1967 (boy was that a long time ago)
I was cut up pretty bad in a fall while mountain climbing in the eastern arctic
the surprise was we kept washing out the cuts in a stream and we were
then weathered in for several days, by the time we could have got me
out to medical help it was clear that I was better off where we were.
There was no sign of infection in any of the cuts.

I do, however, dread what it will really take to get the US to use
alternative forms of energy for the morning commute. And the time it will
take. :-(

A 150 mile / charge electric vehicle possibly one with a battery cartridge
for quick exchange would change a lot. The problem seems to be some
compact light form of energy storage.

Many countries have vehicles licensed for commuter use (non freeway)
as a separate category.

There are some serious new automotive companies emerging like Tata
in India that are likely to have innovative personal transportation products.
Even lead acid batteries are being improved significantly in the amount
of stored energy.

The biggest problem in the US is restarting fundamental innovation
to focus on quality of life issues.

w..

"Walter Banks" wrote in message
...


jimkramer wrote:

So all that global warming will be of some use after all. :-) Damn the
polar bears, I want microbial activity!

It does have some advantages. In 1967 (boy was that a long time ago)
I was cut up pretty bad in a fall while mountain climbing in the eastern
arctic
the surprise was we kept washing out the cuts in a stream and we were
then weathered in for several days, by the time we could have got me
out to medical help it was clear that I was better off where we were.
There was no sign of infection in any of the cuts.

I do, however, dread what it will really take to get the US to use
alternative forms of energy for the morning commute. And the time it will
take. :-(

A 150 mile / charge electric vehicle possibly one with a battery cartridge
for quick exchange would change a lot. The problem seems to be some
compact light form of energy storage.

Many countries have vehicles licensed for commuter use (non freeway)
as a separate category.

There are some serious new automotive companies emerging like Tata
in India that are likely to have innovative personal transportation
products.
Even lead acid batteries are being improved significantly in the amount
of stored energy.

The biggest problem in the US is restarting fundamental innovation
to focus on quality of life issues.

w..

Battery technology has come a long way during the last 10 years or so.
(Since the development of the digital camera and many cell phones and
laptops) I think the car of the future will be a battery driven electric,
and hopefully, most of the electricity will be generated with nuclear power
by then, instead of burning coal, as it is today.

Walter Banks wrote:

Alan Browne wrote:


They have not yet exploited ANWR, some of the Mexican Gulf and there is
probably oil off of the East Coast as well.

There maybe (is) oil in ANWR but the price we could pay for
that oil may be a footnote in history to the most destructive
attack on ecology.

I'm not promoting the idea. But you can be sure it will be tapped one
day. With projected production in a band of 400,000 - 800,000 bbl per
day (high likelihood) it is inevitable. (low likelihood estimates go as
high as 1.2 M bbl / day).

And since there is a pipeline in place to move that oil (Prudhoe Bay to
Valdez) it would be reasonably cost effective to do so as production at
Prudhoe Bay is declining. (Just need a pipeline from ANWR towards the
existing pipeline).

Fact is the US uses about 25% of the worlds oil day and day out.

It would be nice if the US showed positive leadership in curtailing the
need for oil. Fat chance.

Today the US Senate voted down a "windfall" tax for the oil co's. Guess
which party led the defeat of the bill? (Rhetorical). The bill also
contained extensions of tax breaks for renewable energy.

"" They (Republicans) said the nation should combat high prices by
increasing the domestic oil supply, including by permitting drilling in
the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, which Democrats oppose. ""
-- Wash. Post, 2008.06.10

It's long past due to stop trying to solve this with supply side
attacks. Certainly keep finding and developing, but also find ways to
reduce consumption through much faster CAFE requirements (current take
12 years to get anywhere... and that somewhere is not all that
ambitious), and more development of renewable energy.

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.