Energy Descent

[Roger Smelly]

Google this name if you want free energy in fact the earth is 70% free energy

 

the name is "Stan Meyer"

 

There is plenty of other fuels that can be used its not until the oil has gone that these will come out.

 

in fact oil is quite a crude way of producing power.

[Chinahand]

I think you must be confusing economics with home economics. Demand has numerous factors, price is just one of them, and I'm not going to print a textbook to explain that with each of my posts. An example of price on demand - was all of us getting ripped off with high prices over the last couple of winters - but generally we still had to pay it or freeze. Even though it was a relatively mild winter only something like a 10% reduction in supply occured.

 

Most of the world's economy is based on oil - if you think that will really change significantly in less than 30 years - then, sorry, but you have another think coming (e.g. the UK has only just hit the 2GWatts milestone on wind-generation - and it took decades to get even there - and that doesn't even match the population growth over the same period etc. etc.).

 

 

This is an over long, but interesting reprint of a New York Times article concerning the bet ecologist Paul R. Ehrlich had with economist Julian L. Simon over how the prices of 5 rare metals.

 

Simon offered to let anyone pick any natural resource—grain, oil, coal, timber, metals—and any future date. If the resource really were to become scarcer as the world's population grew, then its price should rise. Simon wanted to bet that the price would instead decline by the appointed date. Ehrlich derisively announced that he would "accept Simon's astonishing offer before other greedy people jump in." He then formed a consortium with John Harte and John P. Holdren, colleagues at the University of California at Berkeley specializing in energy and resource questions.

 

In October 1980 the Ehrlich group bet $1,000 on five metals—chrome, copper, nickel, tin and tungsten—in quantities that each cost $200 in the current market. A futures contract was drawn up obligating Simon to sell Ehrlich, Harte and Holdren these same quantities of the metals 10 years later, but at 1980 prices. If the 1990 combined prices turned out to be higher than $1,000, Simon would pay them the difference in cash. If prices fell, they would pay him. The contract was signed, and Ehrlich and Simon went on attacking each other throughout the 1980's. During that decade the world's population grew by more than 800 million, the greatest increase in history, and the store of metals buried in the earth's crust did not get any larger.

 

The end result - the ecologist lost - all five metals went down in price in real terms over the 10 year time period.

 

Hybrid cars, fuel cells, all altenative energy supplies are being introduced with ZERO price pressure from the oil price. I do not doubt for a second that fossil fuels will go up in real terms very steeply as supplies contract - and this will produce an even stronger impetus to move away from them which will counterveil this price rise.

 

I simply don't believe that we will carry on until oil "suddenly" runs out, or that it is "unlikely" that demand will not curtain as supply decreases and prices rise [Albert's direct quotes].

 

Price rises will be painful, and will happen because alternatives don't come on stream fast enough, I suppose that is Albert's point, but alternatives there are by the Megawatt load, and alot of them can be exploited without huge infrastructure changes - tar sands and methyl hydrates - in medium time frames - 30 years, Albert, I'd take that bet, just as Julian L. Simon did in 1980.

[Slim]

Google this name if you want free energy in fact the earth is 70% free energy

the name is "Stan Meyer"

 

A man convicted of defrauding investors with a false claim of a water fuel cell? What's your point?

[Roger Smelly]

What i meant was if H2o can be split into its parts then you have a free fuel scource.

 

Meyer was not the only one to do this type of work others have taken on where he left off.

 

How much is some moon rock going to cost to bring back ?

 

The logistics alone would cost a fortune

 

The key thing with any fuel is price.

 

After all the diesel engine was designed to run on peanut oil not the petroleum diesel it does today.

 

Bio fuels are the future, a lot of farmers will go from normal agriculture in the next 10 years to bio fuels.

 

Nuclear is propbably the cleanest fuel.

[Slim]

What i meant was if H2o can be split into its parts then you have a free fuel scource.

 

You know, you really lack some very basic knowledge of physics. If you're so interested on these subjects, why dont you actually spend some time reading up on them from reputable stuidies instead of reading tin hat bollocks conspiracy websites.

 

H2O can, of course be split, you can make hydrogen from water simply by adding energy. Did you never do the experiment in school to make oxygen and hydrogen from a cup of water using a 9v battery? The problem is to split it requires energy, so it's useless as a fuel. Otherwise what you're talking about is perpetual motion, which is bollocks.

 

Meyer was not the only one to do this type of work others have taken on where he left off.

 

Bollocks.

 

How much is some moon rock going to cost to bring back ?

 

That's part of what Chinahands talking about. Oil is finite, but it isn't going to run out instantly. The price will start to change as demand outstrips supply. When that happens, other fuels may become more economically viable. Taking Helium from the moon is costly, but if the fusion can be made feasable for helium 3, then it becomes worth the effort to bring it back in terms of cost.

 

The logistics alone would cost a fortune

 

You seen the market price of uranium?

[BenFairfax]

Oil is finite, but it isn't going to run out instantly. The price will start to change as demand outstrips supply. When that happens, other fuels may become more economically viable.

 

I agree, peak oil is a question of "when" not "if". In terms of the depletion rates Hubbert's distribution is the standard model. Historically this model predicted the peaking US oil production in 1970, and it depletion rates; the UK North Sea peak in 1999, and this depletion is also following a similar path (down over 1/3 since 1999). The source data links I collected on my blog at:

“Oil Supply and Free Market Dynamics” Supplement, which is a supplement for an article which is due to appear in next weeks Examiner.

 

The problem at present is that other oil replacement fuels, is that they are so much more expensive than oil. In Saudi Arabia it cost as little as $3 to pump oil from underground reserves onto tankers (guess why the Saudis have no tax). In comparison bio fuel cost (at present prices) about $120 to produce.

 

You seen the market price of uranium?

 

Sure, here's the price chart, over the last 6 months:

 

 

from: Ux Consulting

 

Also, note that around 1/2 the production of the world uranium comes from decommissioned nuclear warheads. Surely, the natural question must be what happen when the run out of warheads. In short, Uranium is not a renewable energy source.

[Albert Tatlock]

Also, note that around 1/2 the production of the world uranium comes from decommissioned nuclear warheads. Surely, the nature question must be what happen when the run out of warheads. In short, Uranium is not a renewable energy source.

Switch supplier from Russia to Iran I guess.