Maker Pro
Maker Pro

Peak oil/oil crash

A

Andy Hunt

Jan 1, 1970
0
Actually, it only shows that they had a limited track record of being close
to correct for a very limited area. The fact is that only a tiny part of
the world has been seriously explored for oil, and the more we look, the
more we find. It may cost a bit more, but history says if we keep looking
we will find more.

Aaahh . . . the quest for the bottomless pit. Maybe the Earth is hollow, and
full of oil!

Andrew
 
B

Bob Peterson

Jan 1, 1970
0
Andy Hunt said:
Aaahh . . . the quest for the bottomless pit. Maybe the Earth is hollow, and
full of oil!

could well be.
 
M

Meteorite Debris

Jan 1, 1970
0
Actually, it only shows that they had a limited track record of being close
to correct for a very limited area. The fact is that only a tiny part of
the world has been seriously explored for oil, and the more we look, the
more we find. It may cost a bit more, but history says if we keep looking
we will find more.

This is not the opinion of geologists like Colin Campbell and Jean
Laherrère. The fact is that creaming curves tell us that the more we
look for oil the less we find. History tells us that we found more oil
in the past. Those who make claims for a "magic pudding" earth have
never addressed the picture that emerges from creaming curves.

A creaming curve plots wild cat strikes against volume of discovery.
Like this one <http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/misc/cream.gif>.
Another graph by Campbell tells us that increased drilling does has
not resulted in increased discovery
<http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/misc/GrowingGap.gif>. Both
graphs come from a presentation by Campbell at
<http://www.mbendi.com/indy/oilg/p0070.htm>.




--
To reply remove *THE_ANTI-SPAM_SHIELD*
apatriot #1, atheist #1417,
Chief EAC prophet -
Evil Atheist Conspiracy
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/

Shhh. Be very quiet, I'm hunting automorons. Heh heh.

"Properly read, the Bible is the most potent force for atheism ever
conceived." - Isaac Asimov

Fingerprint for PGP Keys at key server or go to
http://members.optusnet.com.au/~pk1956/
RSA - 71 BA 7C 45 B5 4A 5F EA 72 DB EC 7F 7F A8 70 99
DSS - 9217 21A9 9C3F EB0B E302 AD0E 69C5 0F06 402E 0943
 
B

Bob Peterson

Jan 1, 1970
0
Meteorite Debris said:
This is not the opinion of geologists like Colin Campbell and Jean
Laherrère. The fact is that creaming curves tell us that the more we
look for oil the less we find. History tells us that we found more oil
in the past. Those who make claims for a "magic pudding" earth have
never addressed the picture that emerges from creaming curves.

But since so little of the earth has been explored, and estimates of
reserves have truned out to be wildly inaccurate, I see no reason to beleive
these guys theories either. just cause you come up with a theory that fits
some numbers, does not make a theory correct.

besides, its entirely possible that we might be able to find some other
energy source that might displace the need for some of the oil we currently
use, extending the supply far into the future.

no one knows how much oil could be found in the arctic, the antarctic,
siberia, china, viet nam, and other places where virtually no exploration
has occurred. and no one has even started to tap the depths of the oceans.
the amount of oil could well be unlimited for any practical purpose. of
course in reality it is finite, but even 100 years supply is really infinite
for any practical purpose, seeing as we have only been using it for
approximately that period of time anyway.
 
N

News

Jan 1, 1970
0
But since so little of the earth has been explored, and estimates of
reserves have truned out to be wildly inaccurate, I see no reason to beleive
these guys theories either. just cause you come up with a theory that fits
some numbers, does not make a theory correct.

besides, its entirely possible that we might be able to find some other
energy source that might displace the need for some of the oil we currently
use, extending the supply far into the future.

Nuclear is the only real alternative at present. Only if they are located
near disused deep mines to store and concrete in the waste. Unfortunately
the publics acceptance of nuclear is near zero.

But there is some light at he end of the tunnel. The waste material which
is difficult to store can be transmuted into short lived radioactive
materials. This is rendered safe within a few days. A physicist, Carlo
Rubbia analysed this approach in great detail assisted by a group of top
physicists. It is supposed to be highly feasible.

The driving factor was getting rid of the plutonium, and eliminate the
possibility of it getting into the hands of naughty people.

So if the waste is rendered neutral quickly, then safe reactors and ultra
strict procedures in build and running are all that need to be done.

Then we can eliminate the petrol IC engine and use electric vehicles which
are now getting 300 miles on one charge of a Lithium Iron battery.
no one knows how much oil could be found in the arctic, the antarctic,
siberia, china, viet nam, and other places where virtually no exploration
has occurred. and no one has even started to tap the depths of the
oceans.

There are substantial amounts in the Atlantic where it meets the North Sea.
Drilling slowly moved up the North Sea, until the cost of extraction was
deemed excessive. When cheap Middle east oil dries up then the Extreme
north above Scotland will be drilled. There is lots of oil around the
world, but at this time it is not economical to drill and extract. Best
leave it where it is and find other methods.
 
G

Gordon Richmond

Jan 1, 1970
0
I agree that deep burial is a sensible way to dispose of nuclear
waste, but I'd suggest an abandoned mine is not necessarily a good
choice.

First reason can be summed up by "when looking for elephants, look in
elephant country". Many new mineral deposits are found in close
proximity to former producing mines. In other cases, a mine may be
shut down when the grade of the ore being produced falls below the
break-even point. Changes in technology or commodity prices can shift
the break-even point, and make a moribund mine viable again.

Secondly, metal mines are often situated on faults or other zones of
permeability in the rock, as a "plumbing system" is a necessary
prerequisite for the formation of a mineral deposit. We really don't
want to be dumping nuclear waste into a potentially leaky hole.

Abandoned salt or potash mines would be potentially good sites, since
the crystallized mineral is virtually impermeable to water, and if
there were any substantial ground water circulation in the vicinity,
the deposit would not exist, having long since been dissolved away.

A purpose-built excavation in tight, dry rock in an ancient, stable
formation is going to be the best site. The location should be picked
well-distant from any formations that are prospective for known types
of mineral deposits.

Just my .02 worth,

Gordon Richmond
 
A

Arnold Walker

Jan 1, 1970
0
News said:
wrong

Nuclear is the only real alternative at present. Only if they are located
near disused deep mines to store and concrete in the waste. Unfortunately
the publics acceptance of nuclear is near zero.

But there is some light at he end of the tunnel. The waste material which
is difficult to store can be transmuted into short lived radioactive
materials. This is rendered safe within a few days. A physicist, Carlo
Rubbia analysed this approach in great detail assisted by a group of top
physicists. It is supposed to be highly feasible.
(stock ticker)NSOL gives regular update on that....a light company or
similar company would use transmutation.Especially in one case were they
used a
"particle beam" of some sort to excite the material with the resulting heat
used to
generate electricity.NSOL used two or three other methods as well,but it has
to do with
amount of power required and application. Since they are looking at nuclear
resonant batteries for space satelites in the minuture direct
as well as medium and large power appicables as well.
The driving factor was getting rid of the plutonium, and eliminate the
possibility of it getting into the hands of naughty people.

So if the waste is rendered neutral quickly, then safe reactors and ultra
strict procedures in build and running are all that need to be done.

Then we can eliminate the petrol IC engine and use electric vehicles which
are now getting 300 miles on one charge of a Lithium Iron battery.
Or scale down the transmutation device and have a steam car...running off
hospital radation waste.
Might even have a new medical service automotive refueling.....
 
Top