( search forums )
Oil Crisis?
Soldat Forums - Misc - The Lounge
Vijchtidoodah
August 19, 2005, 11:01 am
For anyone who remembers that old thread about how we're running out of oil.

I don't know about you guys, but that thread (to anyone concerned about living in the future) was scary. It opened my eyes to the fact that what we have isn't limitless and gave a thorough explanation of why oil prices are going up while production is going down.

Well, it turns out that a company is currently turning waste products and animal entrails into usable oil. Yum!

Life After Oil

mickle89
August 19, 2005, 12:35 pm
Those fuel cell cars sound good. Our chem teacher has a basic small model one. Looks quite neat.

lastpatriot
August 19, 2005, 1:06 pm
I always thought using waste for fuel could work. Good thing they started to research it.


karmazon
August 19, 2005, 2:47 pm
quote:Originally posted by lastpatriotI always thought using waste for fuel could work. Good thing they started to research it.





YA RIGHT IT WAS MY IDEA
yeah and since I was like 14 I was like "damn (Please refrain from swearing) (Please refrain from swearing) oil's gonna end"
but oh well, I don't need cars....or million other things that need oil

Leo Da Lunerfox
August 19, 2005, 4:22 pm
His system sounds legit...but...I don't think the oil companies are going to like that very much.

Deleted User
August 19, 2005, 4:33 pm
For those of us in the Bay Area, oil price highs are about $3.29. About the solution to create oil, It's plausable, but if it is indeed true, then I believe it would be very costly.

karmazon
August 19, 2005, 4:42 pm
quote:Originally posted by aznbl00dFor those of us in the Bay Area, oil price highs are about $3.29.


wtf you call that high ?
pfff those american standards

117
August 19, 2005, 4:43 pm
Yeah, but the effiency isnt all its cut out to be especially for hybrid cars. A hybrid ford escape gives out the power of a V6 3.0 Ford Escape engine, but the effiency is of a 2.3 escape engine. Point is, it's not effiecient enough. But hey, in a few years, there'll be cars that can rival ferraris. Its been developed by GMC, and completely runs on fuel cell. beat a lamborghini in a drag race, so it may mean that ppl will still be able to drive without oil.

yey to fuel cell

wormdundee
August 19, 2005, 4:59 pm
At this point in time however, fuel cells are not helping the environment at all. The toxins that would be created in your engine in a standard car are now being created in the process to extract hydrogen from other sources.

I hope they figure out a way around this at some point soon.

n00bface
August 19, 2005, 6:09 pm
On that car show thing on Spike tv, they had an episode where they taught you how to make gas out of used deep fry oil from fast food restaurants. it's cheaper cos the fast food restaurants will usually let you take the used barrels for free :o

Michal
August 19, 2005, 6:13 pm
Converting wastes into oil sounds great, but as good as this developement is it will not matter because big governments and oil companies will never go for it. They are all rich old farts and they don't give a crap about future generations of common people. They want quick, easy money now. These people would rather send their countrymen off to fight in oil wars (also paid for by their countrymen) rather than switch to converting wastes because this method of conversion is currently less profitable than natural oil production.

117
August 19, 2005, 6:39 pm
hmmm, catalytic converters need to be improved upon. But the fuel in malaysia is terrible, prices keep going up, mainly cos those selfish (Please refrain from swearing) modders tune their cars to chew up more fuel. Not only that, but their giant exhaust pipes create drag (wasting petrol) and also lets more fumes out.

Its hard to save petrol too. You can barely save any if you closed all you windows in your car and turned off all electronic items in your car (including air con). It saves petrol, because the open window causes drag, and the air-con requires petrol. But its still not decreasing fuel consumption enough.

@n00bface...now how do we transport it?

peemonkey
August 19, 2005, 7:25 pm
quote:Originally posted by aznbl00dFor those of us in the Bay Area, oil price highs are about $3.29. About the solution to create oil, It's plausable, but if it is indeed true, then I believe it would be very costly.

where in the bay? cause you're paying too (Please refrain from swearing)ing much if that's true.

Deleted User
August 19, 2005, 7:28 pm
In SF the highest is three something, but I'm East Bay.

Cookie.
August 19, 2005, 7:52 pm
This was taken in March 2005 so prices have most likely gone up a bit since then

[code]Nation City Price in USD Regular/Gallon
Netherlands Amsterdam $6.48
Norway Oslo $6.27
Italy Milan $5.96
Denmark Copenhagen $5.93
Belgium Brussels $5.91
Sweden Stockholm $5.80
United Kingdom London $5.79
Germany Frankfurt $5.57
France Paris $5.54
Portugal Lisbon $5.35
Hungary Budapest $4.94
Luxembourg $4.82
Croatia Zagreb $4.81
Ireland Dublin $4.78
Switzerland Geneva $4.74
Spain Madrid $4.55
Japan Tokyo $4.24
Czech Republic Prague $4.19
Romania Bucharest $4.09
Andorra $4.08
Estonia Tallinn $3.62
Bulgaria Sofia $3.52
Brazil Brasilia $3.12
Cuba Havana $3.03
Taiwan Taipei $2.84
Lebanon Beirut $2.63
South Africa Johannesburg $2.62
Nicaragua Managua $2.61
Panama Panama City $2.19
Russia Moscow $2.10
Puerto Rico San Juan $1.74
Saudi Arabia Riyadh $0.91
Kuwait Kuwait City $0.78
Egypt Cairo $0.65
Nigeria Lagos $0.38
Venezuela Caracas $0.12[/code]

Here in Canada where i live it costs about $3.63 for an American Gallon
Right now its been jumping around .90 a litre to 1.05 a litre

Its kinda sad that I can remember when it use to cost like .50 for a litre

Venezuela 12 cents a gallon thats amazing ;)

-=Edit
I miscalculated :O It is about $2.98 for an american gallon here in us dollars

lastpatriot
August 19, 2005, 8:09 pm
In New Jersey, it's around $2.80 per gallon.

Deleted User
August 19, 2005, 8:39 pm
Australia wasn't included in the list. :(

However, even though the price has risen a lot, it looks like we have it pretty good compared to the U.S. At its most expensive, it hasn't passed $1:.20 AU. But I remember when 70 cents AU was considered expensive.

Deleted User
August 19, 2005, 8:45 pm
DAMN .12 cents?

Cookie.
August 19, 2005, 8:47 pm
JWCK_x144 is that per gallon or litre?


Anyway lets discuss global warming in this thread as well!

Clearly the cause of global warming is an abundant lack of pirates!
[IMAGE]

Vijchtidoodah
August 19, 2005, 8:58 pm
@ Michal and Leo, it's quite the opposite, in fact. Oil companies are doing anything they can to stay in the business...they already own most solar power and wind power supply production subsidaries. It's only natural that with billions of dollars worth of budget - one of the biggest (if not the biggest) markets on earth - that they will stretch out into anything remotely tied to energy. And considering that oil production from waste may someday replace drilling for oil, there's no doubt that they have a vested interest in it.

peemonkey
August 19, 2005, 9:14 pm
north bay > east bay

Deleted User
August 19, 2005, 9:31 pm
Oh, wait. I made a massive mistake. Please forgive me. SO embarrassed. It reaches $1.30 Au per litre.


So so so sorry.

And just call me JwCk, which is my ingame name. I dunno why I put the x144 in.

And I disagree with you Cookie. Global warming is caused by millions of pimply teenagers(I'm one of them) sitting in front of their computers all day playing soldat. This uses up massive amounts of electricity which is producd by coal-burning power plants which produce massive amounts of pollution, thus causing global warming.

Solar and wind powered plants use up to much space and produce too litle power to be effective. However, hydroelectricty is a good alternative, but most of the spots for the neccesary dams are already used. I saw a program however, where they were trialing the use of hydroelectric plants using ocean tides, etc., etc., which means that a large amount of electricity could be produced using a renewable resource. Did I sound like a geek?

Vijchtidoodah
August 19, 2005, 10:02 pm
JWCK, solar and wind powered plants produce too little power now to be effective. However, there are already projects underway to tap the vast amounts of energy stored in wind flowing through the jetstream and sunlight hitting the moon. I could go into more detail of how they want to accomplish that, if you like.

By the way, geek is chic nowadays. Get used to it.

Cookie.
August 19, 2005, 10:10 pm
The millions of teenagers resulted from a decline in pirates! Had they chosen a career in piratry there would be less of them to use up the massive amounts of electricity causing massive amounts of pollution and more of them devoted to a life of crime on the high seas which uses very little power! As you can see a decline in pirates is resulting towards to global warming!

I also figured it was per litre which actually makes the cost per american gallon about $3.71 american

Also the tidal powerplants thing. There has been one in Nova Scotia for along time I beleive
http://www.annapolisbasin.com/sys-tmpl/tidalgeneratingstation/

"Annapolis Royal is home to the first and only modern tidal power plant in North america. The Annapolis Tidal Generating Station employs the largest straight-flow turbine in the world and is capable of producing more than 30 million kilowatt-hours per year, enough electricity to power 4,500 homes."


-=Edit
Vijch go into detail about how to capture the wind from the jetstream :P I'm wondering how it could be done since the jetstream is always moving around

-=Edit
The tidal power station in nova scotia has been around since 1984 lol ;)

-=Edit
"The largest plant is located in France, in the estuary of La Rance near St. Malo. With a capacity of 240 megawatts, it generates on the incoming and outgoing tide"

There are apparently only 3 tidal plants in the world, also I think that there are not many places where the geography allows this type of powerplant to be effective

Deleted User
August 19, 2005, 10:38 pm
But the point is, right NOW the plants aren't effective. And I just happen to alive NOW. But yeah, I know about the projects. I have a science magazine, that goes on and on about it. Is chic good? Or is it bad?

But playing soldat is more fun than being a pirate, cookie. Those plants aren't what I'm talking about. The backyard inventors are rising to power. The one I'm talking about is small and cheap to manufacture. Plus, you can drop it just about anywhere theres moving water.

BTW, anyone here watch Mythbusters?

Edit: I guess I don't have a right to alk about this, because I don't have a solar panel on my roof.

Cookie.
August 19, 2005, 10:43 pm
"30 million kilowatt-hours per year, enough electricity to power 4,500 homes."

How is that not effective ;) Especially if the one in france is 240 megawatts

Also I occasionally watch Mythbusters

Deleted User
August 19, 2005, 11:28 pm
I meant solar and wind plants aren't effective yet.

Deleted User
August 19, 2005, 11:30 pm
Any source of power that involves moving parts = doomed once oil dries up.

Nothing to lubricate the parts.

Deleted User
August 19, 2005, 11:56 pm
rofl

Aegis
August 20, 2005, 12:03 am
I dont consider hydrogen a fuel. Its more like a battery, since hydrogen itself is not naturally present in pure form. (If you dont know anything about chemistry, this is because hydrogen likes to link up with other elements and form compounds, such as helium.)
Despite the shortcomings, it seems that hydrogen "fuel" cells is what everyone is hopeful about as far as replacements for fossil fuel. They're even building an entire wing to our university campus that will be hydrogen powered. o.O

AerialAssault
August 20, 2005, 12:19 am
wouldnt it be great if we could get cold fusion to work?

Deleted User
August 20, 2005, 10:33 am
there have been many solutions to this problem. there was:
efficient electric cars(bought out by oil companies)
solar powerd cars(bought out by il companies)
a small moterbike which run on some gas in the air(inventor mysteriously died after turning down oil companies)
water powerd cars(bought out by oil companies)
itsa well known fact that oil companies have enough resources to fund a small war. until oil supplies completly run out the oil companies will make sure oil is used. and judging on a book i read about (....ok it was a fhm magazine) what would happen if you somehow survived long ebough to release a vehicle that matched current petrrol cars the worlds enconomy would collapse and anachy would brake loose. so its not entirely a bad thing that oil comapnies are in total control

Oliver Stannus
August 20, 2005, 4:09 pm
quote:Originally posted by Aegis (If you dont know anything about chemistry, this is because hydrogen likes to link up with other elements and form compounds, such as helium.)

I won't pretend I did anything more than barely scrape through Chemistry myself, but I think you'll find Helium is an element, not a compound, and is only made by Hydrogen at extreme conditions (such as the interior of a sun) in nuclear reactions, totally different to chemical reactions. Also, hydrogen does bond with other elements to form compounds, but can be found on its own in a covalent molecule form as H2.

As for oil companies and alternative energy sources, owning the patents to new technologies probably ensures not only that no-one else has the right to use the bought-out ideas, but that the public also thinks that they are being proactive in researching earth-saving alternatives.

Vijchtidoodah
August 20, 2005, 8:52 pm
Alright, Cookie. They plan on harvesting wind from the jet stream by means of giant floating windmills, in a sense. Imagine a platform with about four rotors along each side and a large tether to a winch on the ground. The rotors are given power via the tether to make them spin which lifts the device into the jet stream (remember that an electrical generator is also a motor). Once they are up there, the wind spins the rotors by itself; this not only gives the device lift, but also creates energy (which is then sent down the tether to a ground station). The devices can then be lifted up or pulled down by the winch to maximize output depending on where the stream is.

Link

As for the solar energy on the moon, all they have to do is stick a bunch of solar panels up there that give power to one main station. The station then sends the power back to earth through microwaves (simcity style, but no catastrophic accidents). Solar panels on the moon could harvest incredible amounts of energy because the moon has no atmosphere and thus the light reaching the moon is remarkably potent.

Link

papasurf31
August 21, 2005, 12:03 pm
Even if an alternate source of power were created, it would never take off because oil companies wouldn't allow it to take away profit from them. They have the resources to try to buy em out, run slanted scientific studies, do one of many possible things to abotage them from ever working. Unless something completely revolutionary such as portable, no-waste, cold fusion reactor were made, any small alternative power projects will eventually die off. It's a sad sad world we live in today...

aprilninety
August 23, 2005, 10:40 am
$3 a gallon in san francisco/oakland.

what the hell happened to the hydrogen-powered cars that were already invented?

Vijchtidoodah
August 23, 2005, 10:46 am
Hydrogen powered cars are currently very expensive (especially because so few are being made) and they use up more fuel.

Captain Ben
August 23, 2005, 11:08 am
I'm kind of hurt. Am I a lost cause?

Deleted User
August 24, 2005, 1:48 am
why cant we just figure out what chemicals make up oil and make oil? because they make synthetic oil to go in you engine. why can't we make synthetic gas. peronally i like the whole hydrogen car thing where they combine oxygen with h20 and the only product is water, that conserves the environment

Deleted User
August 24, 2005, 2:58 am
The same reason why combining two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom to create a water molecule is so tough.

Vijchtidoodah
August 24, 2005, 4:29 am
quote:Originally posted by Faulty Doorknobwhy cant we just figure out what chemicals make up oil and make oil?


Hydrocarbons and a few other trace elements. They probably don't make it for any number of reasons: it's difficult and time consuming, it uses more energy than it releases (or not enough to justify the process), or it's expensive...take your pick. Listen, although it sounds like a great idea on paper, it's just not practical to go around assuming that you can produce anything that you want synthetically.

quote:Originally posted by aznbl00dThe same reason why combining two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom to create a water molecule is so tough.


It's not tough. In fact, that's exactly how hydrogen fuel cells work. Take hydrogen, release the electrons from it, stick the electrons on oxygen, mix, and watch.

Or, if you want to get really technical about it, you're currently creating water all the time. It's a natural byproduct (and often the main catalyst) for millions of reactions in your body. However, you also destroy it all the time in processes such as hydrolysis (the splitting of molecules by adding water).

The Geologist
August 24, 2005, 4:41 am
It makes me sad to live in a place that pays more for milk than it does for gasoline. :(

UGK
August 24, 2005, 4:41 am
quote:Originally posted by Cookie.JWCK_x144 is that per gallon or litre?


Anyway lets discuss global warming in this thread as well!

Clearly the cause of global warming is an abundant lack of pirates!
[IMAGE]


lol just lol oh and doont worry about oil.......we can get some from asia and saudi arabia and places..of course people would riot..but oh well they can reach us =D attack the middle east NOW!bush im talking to you Get er' DONE!

The Geologist
August 24, 2005, 4:52 am
You're now officially a twit.

Deleted User
August 24, 2005, 5:50 am
quote:Originally posted by Vijchtidoodahquote:Originally posted by Faulty Doorknobwhy cant we just figure out what chemicals make up oil and make oil?


Hydrocarbons and a few other trace elements. They probably don't make it for any number of reasons: it's difficult and time consuming, it uses more energy than it releases (or not enough to justify the process), or it's expensive...take your pick. Listen, although it sounds like a great idea on paper, it's just not practical to go around assuming that you can produce anything that you want synthetically.

quote:Originally posted by aznbl00dThe same reason why combining two hydrogen atoms and one oxygen atom to create a water molecule is so tough.


It's not tough. In fact, that's exactly how hydrogen fuel cells work. Take hydrogen, release the electrons from it, stick the electrons on oxygen, mix, and watch.

Or, if you want to get really technical about it, you're currently creating water all the time. It's a natural byproduct (and often the main catalyst) for millions of reactions in your body. However, you also destroy it all the time in processes such as hydrolysis (the splitting of molecules by adding water).


Yeah, I knew some of what you posted, but my point was it won't work if you're just going to blast the atoms at each other like they do in the accelerator near where I live, but you probably know more, anyways.

Kazuki
August 24, 2005, 5:56 am
quote:Originally posted by aprilninety$3 a gallon in san francisco/oakland.


Yeah, it just broke $3 here in the Suburban Chicago area, too. Christ, I still remember when it was $1.29, since that wasn't long ago.

Deleted User
August 24, 2005, 5:58 am
$3.29, actually.

n00bface
August 24, 2005, 6:59 am
It's 1.42 here!! Hellz yeah.

UGK
August 25, 2005, 2:51 am
its 2.59 here screw u where ever u live noobface.....is that u on the avatar