Peak Oil My Ass

trianglelaguna wrote:

(youtube)

lordy lordy that is just he funniest thing I have seen this week :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

Thanks trianglelaguna
I needed a good laugh

SPARKY47 wrote:

Would that criteria suffice?

So you're a former Mining Engineer are you?
We may well have met, I was a member of the underground community too.Ever heard of Lea Hall?

If you take a moment to look at the website - and the petition, there is no requirement to prove you have the credentials. As I mentioned, Edward Teller signed it - and he is dead! So, no, that criteria will not suffice!

The sponsor - "OISM" also heavily relies on religeous quotes to support it's so-called "scientific" theories. I guess if you believe in creationism, it is the place to go - but they don't seem to have many students!

Marble is still a biologically derived materal - it has the same chemical composition as limestone and chalk and is derived from coral - it has simply been subjected to metamorphosis by heat and pressure. So where does the unlimited supply of marble come from?

I worked for the NCB for six years, then worked in exploration for five and in mining R&D for four. I designed, built and installed the first instrumentation system to measure dust in real-time on a longwall coal face. I worked for the South Midlands Region - mostly at Snibston and Donisthorpe Collieries.

SPARKY47 wrote:

...

For information:
my bad, actually 31,478 American Scientists.
www.petitionproject.org/

Make that 31,479 American Scientists, I just signed it and sent it in. BS: Soil and Water Conservation, 30 yrs as a Medical Research Biologist.

And since I'm gonna be called a liar by the Scientific no-nothings.
www.biomedexperts.com/Profile.bme/651354/Ronald_W_Jones
Sorry for replying to my own post but my edit button is missing.

Don't make a bit of difference who or how many signs it, even if you give the figures of how many oppose it. Which I'm thinking would be as impressive. Question is what if you are right. What are the consequences? Now..... What if you are wrong and what are the consequences. The way I see it is if you are wrong and we are causing damage to the climate the path gives us. Clean air, clean water and gets us off the cartel tit. Just might allow us to give our world to future generations in a livable state. But we'll just argue about it until IF we are responsible we may be beyond the tipping point and all argument will be moot. History is full of learned people who fail to heed important aspects. Civilizations have put their fate in the hands of religions, charlatans and those with afflictions of hubris and while some flourished some were wiped from the face of the earth. The important fact in these events are those civilizations were local and not global. This one fact alone makes this argument not like others. The numbers on both sides means only it is serious as only the ramifications of act or don't act should bear any weight.

edited: by author 16:22 ......:woohoo:

Let's get back to the OP, are we at or past Peak Oil and what do we do about it?

Some have said electric vehicles. That's fine but with our present technologies are only viable on a large scale with nuclear power generation for the needed recharge if the reduction of fossil fuel use is the goal. However, like everything else on this planet, fissile material is in limited supply so nuclear only keeps us going for so long. What's next, fusion? So far it seems to have proven elusive on a large scale. PR is really the biggest issue these two technologies have, but they are here and available now.

That may solve a large part of the personal transportation needs, but as noted, personal transportation pales in comparison to freight transportation. For trains, trucks, ships, and airplanes, no fuel that we have or know of contains the energy per cubic foot that we get from crude oil that is so easy to handle and relatively safe.

It has been noted that nuclear is used aboard the large naval vessels. But even those vessels are limited due to local laws around the world against nuclear ships in port. So if ships, which have yet to record a nuclear accident, are a PR nightmare, who is going to want trains or trucks with nuclear reactors rumbling through their neighborhoods and towns? Who wants an airplane powered by a nuclear reactor flying overhead?

Biofuels have been mentioned. There are many directions they can go and the earliest mass market example was ethanol. As a farmer it is probably heretical for me to admit this, but we can't grow enough crops to supply our energy requirements and feed a growing world population. One or the other, perhaps, but not both. Too much of our crop land depends on highly variable rains. The rest is irrigated by either ground water or reservoir sources and both of those methods bring their own set of problems. But then someone pipes up and says that we'll just use the plant matter left over after harvest to create biofuels. Well, one cannot do that for very long before the soil suffers greatly--perhaps once every five years or so which will hardly create any large amount of biofuel. Then there is our garbage, but when we wise up and stop throwing so much away, there will be less matter available as well.

At current electric rates wind and solar technologies have amortizations measured in years if not decades and that's if nothing breaks or needs to be replaced in the system. They are good technologies to augment one's home or for a remote location where the product of their work can be stored such as a livestock water tank. As a 24/7 power source, they're a non-starter.

So, what are we to do? We now have a global society that depends on electricity to support our lives. It's not a luxury, it is now a necessity. We depend on fast and reliable transportation to support our lives and livelihoods. Fossil fuels have made that possible and will require a huge paradigm shift to replace. Then there is the volume of oil required for lubrication which will be required regardless of the fuel source.

It's a tough nut to crack and some generation down the road faces a dark future unless someone smarter than me figures out oil's replacement.

here is some peak oil info...whacky...you decide????

(youtube)

There seem to be some smart folks on here. I've always wanted to bounce this off of someone smart, so here goes. What about algae? I've read a few articles about algeal oil and that alot of the oil we use is from dead things covered by algae. I've even heard of hanging the algae solution in "baggies" vertically so a huge lake isnt necessary. I'm told this is a few years off, but I would think it would be worth it. I know I dont really want to drive a hydrogen car, or worse yet....an EV. Any input?

there is somthing to this ,as far as i know it is used to scrub the air clean ,i think thats a simple break down.....there is a movement afoot in cali....i saw some hand flyers posted on telephone poles about the efforts so far and what folks can do to get invovled....you could find it by the google gods i bet.....i sure i hope i'm spellin g this right cause it is permanetedly poosssttteeed

KZ700A1 wrote:

There seem to be some smart folks on here. I've always wanted to bounce this off of someone smart, so here goes. What about algae? I've read a few articles about algeal oil and that alot of the oil we use is from dead things covered by algae. I've even heard of hanging the algae solution in "baggies" vertically so a huge lake isnt necessary. I'm told this is a few years off, but I would think it would be worth it. I know I dont really want to drive a hydrogen car, or worse yet....an EV. Any input?

Limey wrote:

SPARKY47 wrote:

Would that criteria suffice?

So you're a former Mining Engineer are you?
We may well have met, I was a member of the underground community too.Ever heard of Lea Hall?

If you take a moment to look at the website - and the petition, there is no requirement to prove you have the credentials. As I mentioned, Edward Teller signed it - and he is dead! So, no, that criteria will not suffice!

Nope, I'm no scientist, nor am I a miner, and I don't piss oil either but seems to me that these 700 actual (yes that's with confirmed credentials) scientists might know what they're talking about.

More Than 700 International Scientists Dissent Over Man-Made Global Warming Claims

The next big naurally occuring energy resource is going to be the extraction of gas clathrates (ice gas) from the ocean. The problem we face with this resource today is technology. Technology has not proved to solve the pbolem of disolution of this gas when producing it.

One day someone is going to invent a solar cell that can actually harness more of the suns radiation band and improve the solar cell technology greatly.

KR