Panic warning as oil supplies run low - Page 2

madmelon · 18-11-2009, 02:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irlewy86

Yesterday's technology today. Other more efficent, cheaper and long term sustainable technologies are either in the pipeline or not far away. So why widdle billions of dollars away on an industry that just like coal spends more on lobby groups than technological advancement.

In the pipeline and not far away? That's what was said about electric cars 20 years ago! We still have virtually nothing which can replace a petrol powered car...

Same deal with baseline energy development- Nuclear might be "old tech" but it's not nearly as old tech as coal and is far more reliable and more available than wind, wave, solar, etc at the moment.

irlewy86 · 18-11-2009, 04:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by madmelon

In the pipeline and not far away? That's what was said about electric cars 20 years ago! We still have virtually nothing which can replace a petrol powered car...

Same deal with baseline energy development- Nuclear might be "old tech" but it's not nearly as old tech as coal and is far more reliable and more available than wind, wave, solar, etc at the moment.

By pipeline I mean under construction, not under consideration.

Solar is just a nano-technology boom away from being the energy of choice. So spending a billions of dollars on old hat nuclear is short sighted, poorly planned and pointless (something this country is famous for).

madmelon · 18-11-2009, 05:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by irlewy86

By pipeline I mean under construction, not under consideration.

Solar is just a nano-technology boom away from being the energy of choice. So spending a billions of dollars on old hat nuclear is short sighted, poorly planned and pointless (something this country is famous for).

Many things are only a nano-technology boom away. Problem is, nobody knows when that will happen.

Deep down, I think solar and wave are the two energy sources of the future but I also think they're a reasonably long way off.

When you consider that a fast breeder reactor makes about 600MW, that's a massive amount of wind,solar, wave or hydro energy. In Australia, the average energy recieved by the sun is about 250W/m^2 for 600MW, that would need 2.4 million square metres of area converting 100% of that energy into electrical power. That works out at 1.55km x 1.55km which sounds pretty reasonable, except that's at 100% efficiency. Photovoltaics generally operate at about 8% efficiency (extremely LOW) so that means divide that area by 0.08 and that gives 30 million square metres or about 5.5 km x 5.5km of solid solar panels. That would take a VERY long time to build.

Then consider that Australia's total electrical capacity as of 2004 was approximately 48.6GW (48,600MW) and that's been growing at something like 2% per year that kinda puts things into perspective...

It would be much, much faster to build a nuclear power base in this country than a solar or wave energy one and considering the ENORMOUS energy required to make solar panels, it would for many years be more environmentally friendly in terms of carbon output.

Interceptor · 18-11-2009, 07:09 PM

i cant believe ANYBODY is still stupid enough to fall for this crap

madmelon · 18-11-2009, 07:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Interceptor

i cant believe ANYBODY is still stupid enough to fall for this crap

Which crap are you talking about? The original topic or the tangent we've taken it to?

xy500 · 18-11-2009, 07:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by madmelon

Which crap are you talking about? The original topic or the tangent we've taken it to?

my guess is this emergency oil shortage crap

madmelon · 18-11-2009, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xy500

my guess is this emergency oil shortage crap

Your avatar sums things up nicely I think

Spanrz · 18-11-2009, 10:41 PM

There is enough coal in the latrobe valley area for a thousand years.
The seam heads out to sea towards Wonthaggi way.

Even though it's brown coal, and it pollutes, it's fuel!

Bossxr8 · 23-11-2009, 08:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by XCPWSF

True but storing it in a way that it won't bloody explode in an accident if the fuel tank is punctured is a bit of a problem.

F Hydrogen, lets have Nuclear powered cars, we got heaps of uranium haha.

BMW have already solved that problem with their Hydrogen powered 7 series. They shot at it, set fire to it, dropped it from a crane etc and it still didn't puncture. Its not a problem.

The problem with hydrogen is soley the lack of infastructure to sell it to the public, ie. next to no filling stations. There are some in Japan and in California.

xy500 · 23-11-2009, 08:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

BMW have already solved that problem with their Hydrogen powered 7 series. They shot at it, set fire to it, dropped it from a crane etc and it still didn't puncture. Its not a problem.

The problem with hydrogen is soley the lack of infastructure to sell it to the public, ie. next to no filling stations. There are some in Japan and in California.

thats still not the major problem, the major problem is the amount of energy (electricity) it takes to produce hydrogen.

joolz · 23-11-2009, 08:30 PM

Its just a reason to crank up the price of oil. Or is it just me but there hasnt been any excuses in well over a year like a sneeze in the ocean to raise the price of oil.

Bossxr8 · 23-11-2009, 08:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Riksta

Because there's too many uninformed stupid hippies out there who would crack it and protest and complain and whinge about how we're going to be the next Chernobyl.

I say bugger the nuke plant, lets get a plant to burn the hippies to make energy and then once that's all done, build the nuke plant.

Chernobyl was one of the most over dramatised events in human history. Less than 50 people died, and they were the ones who worked in the plant who copped massive doses of radiation or died in the fire. Birth abnormalities and cancer rates of people in the surrounding areas was no higher than anywhere else either. All the studies showed that unless you were next to the reactor when it blew you really had nothing to worry about. The guy who was in charge of the plant who was to blame for the whole meltdown copped radiation levels 10 times higher than what was considered at the time leathal and he lived for another decade or so with few effects.

Reports of the time believed more than 100,000 people would die because of it. Couldn't have been more wrong.

madmelon · 23-11-2009, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

Chernobyl was one of the most over dramatised events in human history. Less than 50 people died, and they were the ones who worked in the plant who copped massive doses of radiation or died in the fire. Birth abnormalities and cancer rates of people in the surrounding areas was no higher than anywhere else either. All the studies showed that unless you were next to the reactor when it blew you really had nothing to worry about. The guy who was in charge of the plant who was to blame for the whole meltdown copped radiation levels 10 times higher than what was considered at the time leathal and he lived for another decade or so with few effects.

Reports of the time believed more than 100,000 people would die because of it. Couldn't have been more wrong.

Oh that means there's no explanation for the weirdness of my bro

:

needaXYGT · 23-11-2009, 10:06 PM

Quote:

The world is much closer to running out of oil than official estimates admit

I think i heard that last year.....and the year before.....and the year before that!

SilentDave · 23-11-2009, 10:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by needaXYGT

I think i heard that last year.....and the year before.....and the year before that!

Every year we get closer to running out..... when that is i will tell you when it happens but i plan on being long gone before that happens so wont be my problem ......

ChemicalHorizon · 23-11-2009, 11:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MercurySilver

Hydrogen
more power than fossil crap will ever have

More potential.

Gathering useful power is difficult, as has been covered here plenty of times.

ChemicalHorizon · 23-11-2009, 11:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Spanrz

There is enough coal in the latrobe valley area for a thousand years.
The seam heads out to sea towards Wonthaggi way.

Even though it's brown coal, and it pollutes, it's fuel!

Actually current estimates there is not.

If Australias population continues to grow, and exports continue to grow, the reserves are much much less. Think maybe 150 years...at absolute max. Realistic id say around half of that.

Remember that brown coal rubbish takes 25% of the energy just to evaporate the water and crap thats inside it. Really is rubbish stuff.

ILLaViTaR · 24-11-2009, 02:19 AM

This article is propaganda, all it is is a business scheme which will allow an excuse for the to jack the prices up again.

There is NO oil shortage.

madmelon · 24-11-2009, 10:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILLaViTaR

This article is propaganda, all it is is a business scheme which will allow an excuse for the to jack the prices up again.

There is NO oil shortage.

...and as soon as the media starts sending THIS message, the sooner prices will come down again...

chevypower · 24-11-2009, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by joolz

Its just a reason to crank up the price of oil. Or is it just me but there hasnt been any excuses in well over a year like a sneeze in the ocean to raise the price of oil.

oil prices don't get "cranked up," but OPEC does make decisions on output targets (supply), and the supplying countries do base their targets on what price per barrel they want to see. When they are threatened by alternative fuels (competition), they do seem to act like the market isn't going to just pay whatever they are asking. 12 months ago was good proof of that when the oil market crashed from being too restricted, and crude at $150/brl. They say they want to adjust the supply to stabilize the price, but the only time we hear them say that is when the price is falling. It fell to $30-40/brl? The less they supply, the higher $ per barrel. Some people mistakingly think of oil supply as a big fuel tank in the ground, and picture a gauge that says how much we have left. Like it can just be pumped out pretty easily. There is plenty of oil left I am sure, but I am also sure it gets harder to find, and more expensive to extract.
Also, "shortage" doesn't necessarily have to reflect how much oil is left, but how hard it is to supply to the current world demands at the time. Which can legitimately push prices up.

Paxton · 24-11-2009, 05:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ILLaViTaR

There is NO oil shortage.

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

and...

We have always been at war with Eurasia.

Like anything, oil is not a limitless resource. We will eventually run out of oil. Not today, not tomorrow, but we will, in the future, run out of oil.

GASWAGON · 24-11-2009, 09:25 PM

Just another exuse to make money......

xy500 · 24-11-2009, 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Paxton

War is Peace
Freedom is Slavery
Ignorance is Strength

and...

We have always been at war with Eurasia.

Like anything, oil is not a limitless resource. We will eventually run out of oil. Not today, not tomorrow, but we will, in the future, run out of oil.

you may come to learn, that nothing is certain.