Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Who needs the oil?
A scenario, (bear with me, It came to me whilst walking the dog:)
By the end of the year a group of american scientists release a paper that they say will change the world.
They have discovered/invented a new energy source which is not only cleaner, more efficient and safer but it is also cheaper than oil.
They state that North america will not need a single drop of oil within ten years and the rest of the western world will be unreliant in twenty years; the world in forty.
Is it fantasy or does the technology already exist. If not would governments and big buisness suppress the technology? What effect would it have on the global economy or the politics of the middle east and gulf states? It will run out some day so what are the consequences?
By the end of the year a group of american scientists release a paper that they say will change the world.
They have discovered/invented a new energy source which is not only cleaner, more efficient and safer but it is also cheaper than oil.
They state that North america will not need a single drop of oil within ten years and the rest of the western world will be unreliant in twenty years; the world in forty.
Is it fantasy or does the technology already exist. If not would governments and big buisness suppress the technology? What effect would it have on the global economy or the politics of the middle east and gulf states? It will run out some day so what are the consequences?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by doctordb. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Yep, oil permeates our lives. Or rather the molecules of carbon and hydrogen. If there is an alternative, it would be probably be hydrogen based and one central issue would be solving the storage conundrum. Hydrogen is such a small molecule that it can easily escape - for example if you imagine it in a wine glass with a glass lid on, it will still escape.
Having said that, as others have said, there would still be the need for hydrocarbon chemicals in all their various forms, from gases to ethylenes, compounds like ethanol, acetic acids and their derivatives and all the joyous complexities of organic chemistry - as well as lubricants and bitumens.
The other point is that there is loads of crude still out there - this argument that we are running out in twenty years has been around since I started in the energy business - not only are vast new fields being discovered (wit Brazil, which is becoming the new Saudi) but also within existing fields. Schlumberger are developing down-well microwave extraction - shaking the crude molecules to pop out of their little sponge cell homes. Now take your average field, no more than 30 to 32 per cent can be currently extracted by conventional techniques (primary, secondary or tertiary recovery). Imagine if we can go to 35 to 40% - that's an awful lot of incremental hydrocarbon from existing fields, starting with the large ones first.
Having said that, as others have said, there would still be the need for hydrocarbon chemicals in all their various forms, from gases to ethylenes, compounds like ethanol, acetic acids and their derivatives and all the joyous complexities of organic chemistry - as well as lubricants and bitumens.
The other point is that there is loads of crude still out there - this argument that we are running out in twenty years has been around since I started in the energy business - not only are vast new fields being discovered (wit Brazil, which is becoming the new Saudi) but also within existing fields. Schlumberger are developing down-well microwave extraction - shaking the crude molecules to pop out of their little sponge cell homes. Now take your average field, no more than 30 to 32 per cent can be currently extracted by conventional techniques (primary, secondary or tertiary recovery). Imagine if we can go to 35 to 40% - that's an awful lot of incremental hydrocarbon from existing fields, starting with the large ones first.
Not that I am advocating complacency or not striving to find alternative forms of energy. I take the attitude that there may be something out there - after all our ancestors experienced static and could see lightning and St Elmo's fire but didn't know what electricity was, so, IMHO, it is naive to say there is nothing else
No it is fantasy and a very common conspiracy theory.
Big business does not make money by suppressing such technologies - they make money by getting into new technologies faster than their competition and grabbing a monopoly or near monopoly as soon as they can.
That's why you'll see BP and Shell and the like don't describe them selves as Oil Companies any more they describe themselves as Energy Companies.
They are investing Billions in alternative energy research in the hope of getting a toe ahead of each other - do you really think they'd find such a thing all sit around a table and agree to supress it?
Well they might but they'd then run back and try and bring it to the market as fast as thet could.
You don't get to run an oil - er sorry - Energy company by being daft!
Big business does not make money by suppressing such technologies - they make money by getting into new technologies faster than their competition and grabbing a monopoly or near monopoly as soon as they can.
That's why you'll see BP and Shell and the like don't describe them selves as Oil Companies any more they describe themselves as Energy Companies.
They are investing Billions in alternative energy research in the hope of getting a toe ahead of each other - do you really think they'd find such a thing all sit around a table and agree to supress it?
Well they might but they'd then run back and try and bring it to the market as fast as thet could.
You don't get to run an oil - er sorry - Energy company by being daft!
Oh bring on the petrol from water stories and all the rest of the conspiracy theories.
Unbelievable and how daft.....how could such stories be repressed in a free world and, if true, what would be the reaction if they got out? That is a degree of naivety beyond the natural wit of man, or woman. Makes my blood bubble.....
Now back to something more credible.....
Unbelievable and how daft.....how could such stories be repressed in a free world and, if true, what would be the reaction if they got out? That is a degree of naivety beyond the natural wit of man, or woman. Makes my blood bubble.....
Now back to something more credible.....
OK so let's look at the second part of your question - the implication of such a technology.
Firstly it depends on the technology - Obviously energy needs to originate from somewhere and there are only 3 real contenders:
Solar
Nuclear
Geothermal
Why not wind and wave etc? because you can't whistle up a storm when you get a sudden surge, your source is unreliable.
Solar is unreliable in the UK too but a cheap high efficiency system might allow you to cover large areas of desserts with them. The problem then becomes transporting the energy - perhaps a technology that allows you to create petrol from Carbon dioxide in the air, water and electricity
Global warming solved as a bonus! People are working on such systems now but they're very inefficient.
Politically this would still leave a lot of oil producing countries with the fuel production - but some African countries might get great dividends too!
ctd...
Firstly it depends on the technology - Obviously energy needs to originate from somewhere and there are only 3 real contenders:
Solar
Nuclear
Geothermal
Why not wind and wave etc? because you can't whistle up a storm when you get a sudden surge, your source is unreliable.
Solar is unreliable in the UK too but a cheap high efficiency system might allow you to cover large areas of desserts with them. The problem then becomes transporting the energy - perhaps a technology that allows you to create petrol from Carbon dioxide in the air, water and electricity
Global warming solved as a bonus! People are working on such systems now but they're very inefficient.
Politically this would still leave a lot of oil producing countries with the fuel production - but some African countries might get great dividends too!
ctd...
You could always run your car on water:
http://
http://
If anyone can do it the name is Craig Venter. He was the first to decipher the human genome.
http://
The problem is he has tied up with Exxon the biggest oil handler in the world...so don't expect free energy just yet.
The problem
http://
The problem is he has tied up with Exxon the biggest oil handler in the world...so don't expect free energy just yet.
The problem
And seawater through waves and tidal, jake - obviously different solutions for different geographies - that almost sounds like a Blairism. Shell is also investing substantially in algae as well.....and ethanol from waste of crops (cellulosic ethanol): http://www.iogen.ca/
Geothermal is I think improbable - the technology to drill deep enough anywhere is way beyond us - I guess if the "making petrol" technology becomes practical Iceland and New Zealand might become net exporters but I can't see them producing enough to significantly have an impact on the world's problems.
That leaves Nuclear, probably Fusion - slow and steady progress has been made on this over the years, I worked on some of the experiments, I'm in my 40's now and if I don't go mad on cream cakes may just about see the first commercial power station.
There could in theory be a spectacular revolution - there was a lot of silly nonsense about "cold fusion" but the only way for that to work is catalysed with Muons or something similar which is more difficult than the energy problem in the first place!
But even if I cracked it, it would take 40 years to demonstrate the technology, get international agreement, meet safety requirements, create a commercial plant - and then I'M GOING TO WANT TO MAKE A LOT OF MONEY OUT OF IT.
This is the crux - no owner of such technology is going to go through all that and present it as a gift to the world.
It might reduce the reliance somewhat on the middle East for oil but theirs is running out anyway - it would probably only be used in developed countries that can afford it and so have limited environmental impact.
It'll come but it won't be a revolution unfortunately, it'll be slow steady steps
That leaves Nuclear, probably Fusion - slow and steady progress has been made on this over the years, I worked on some of the experiments, I'm in my 40's now and if I don't go mad on cream cakes may just about see the first commercial power station.
There could in theory be a spectacular revolution - there was a lot of silly nonsense about "cold fusion" but the only way for that to work is catalysed with Muons or something similar which is more difficult than the energy problem in the first place!
But even if I cracked it, it would take 40 years to demonstrate the technology, get international agreement, meet safety requirements, create a commercial plant - and then I'M GOING TO WANT TO MAKE A LOT OF MONEY OUT OF IT.
This is the crux - no owner of such technology is going to go through all that and present it as a gift to the world.
It might reduce the reliance somewhat on the middle East for oil but theirs is running out anyway - it would probably only be used in developed countries that can afford it and so have limited environmental impact.
It'll come but it won't be a revolution unfortunately, it'll be slow steady steps
Homany tides a day DT?
And look what happened when they tried the Severn barrage - Nimby central! and with limited places you can do it it's niche at best.
Yep I class Algae in with Solar - I think there would be a lot of issues with that - not least rights to harvest over oceans - the areas you'd be talking about mean that it'd have to be on a gigantic scale if you were doing it open water and that might be impractical - politically - so you're back to desert solar farms.
As for ethanol from crops - sorry but you have to do the maths
I calculate to meet the UK's BioDiesel needs you need the entire agricultural land mass of Poland
"Waste food" won't cut it.
Yes I agree that there will be a piecemeal approach but actually generating the enery s much less of a prolem than efficiently storing and transmitting it.
It you really want to change the world - find me a room temperature superconductor then sit back and watch it happen in front of your eyes!
And look what happened when they tried the Severn barrage - Nimby central! and with limited places you can do it it's niche at best.
Yep I class Algae in with Solar - I think there would be a lot of issues with that - not least rights to harvest over oceans - the areas you'd be talking about mean that it'd have to be on a gigantic scale if you were doing it open water and that might be impractical - politically - so you're back to desert solar farms.
As for ethanol from crops - sorry but you have to do the maths
I calculate to meet the UK's BioDiesel needs you need the entire agricultural land mass of Poland
"Waste food" won't cut it.
Yes I agree that there will be a piecemeal approach but actually generating the enery s much less of a prolem than efficiently storing and transmitting it.
It you really want to change the world - find me a room temperature superconductor then sit back and watch it happen in front of your eyes!
Latest Posts
Quizzes & Puzzles3 mins ago
ChatterBank4 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles4 mins ago
ChatterBank11 mins ago
Quizzes & Puzzles12 mins ago
