Quake3World

We're going to have to come up with new technologies sooner or later to find other ways to get resources of what we use day to day. And the sooner the better.

we need a way to counteract global warming.

energy doesn't have to be a problem at all

i hope it's not bullshit.

if it's not - energy mongers will stop it, as it would crush their incom base.

read it: most interresting :icon14:

it is not the solution to everything though, as burning this oil still produces CO2. however it is better then burning todays oil as it takes away the CO2 emmited during decomposition of these wastes.

It's not a save-all, it's just a cleaner burning oil.

It still takes massive amounts of energy to create it - i.e. crude oil.

Maybe if, instead of burning crude in cars and everything else, they were to use the rest of it for projects like this, we could continue to have the kind of lifestyle we're used to.

But again, this still produces CO2, so it doesn't solve the environmental problems, even though it does decrease the damage done by quite a bit.

I know how to turn peanut oil and used cooking oil into diesel fuel you can run in your car. The problem is, it still takes electricity to do it.

edit: It is a good idea though, and it's good to see things like this being researched. There may be hope for an energy solution yet.

Alberta tar Sands:

~300 billion barrels accessable with today's technology

estimated 1.6-3 trillion barrels of oil in total, perhaps accessable with tomorrow's technology

oil extraction remains expensive though

High prices make it profitable now.
Better than the high price we pay to the Middle East.

Canidae wrote:High prices make it profitable now.
Better than the high price we pay to the Middle East.

Profit is not the only concern. When it takes more energy to extract and refine it, than you can get out of the product, then what's the point?

R00k wrote:

Canidae wrote:High prices make it profitable now.
Better than the high price we pay to the Middle East.

Profit is not the only concern. When it takes more energy to extract and refine it, than you can get out of the product, then what's the point?

Market pressures will force us to extract oil from Alberta.

The market will be willing to pay more to extract oil, combined with technological progress that makes oil extraction more affordable over time.

you're still talking about profit, and not the law of conservation of energy. :icon17:

edit: you should realize by now, of course, that i'm dragging this into a long-term discussion about how it can help blunt the impact of peak oil.

R00k wrote:you're still talking about profit, and not the law of conservation of energy. :icon17:

edit: you should realize by now, of course, that i'm dragging this into a long-term discussion about how it can help blunt the impact of peak oil.

Sorry I didn't read your post properly. I don't know if it takes more energy to extract and refine the oil then the energy it produces.

Although... R00K they are already extracting oil from there so I doubt they're doing it with an energy deficit (input to output).

Massive Quasars wrote:

R00k wrote:you're still talking about profit, and not the law of conservation of energy. :icon17:

edit: you should realize by now, of course, that i'm dragging this into a long-term discussion about how it can help blunt the impact of peak oil.

Sorry I didn't read your post properly. I don't know if it takes more energy to extract and refine the oil then the energy it produces.

It doesn't and it's not an issue here.
While its true that gas has a big advantage over other fuels in terms of energy density and make it more suitable for storage in a moving vehicle over things like hydrogen it doesn't mean we have to burn it the way we do and make the emissions we do.
At the market prices now it is profitable and efficient (more energy out than put in to refine) to exploit the Alberta fields. But I am AGAINST paying world prices to multinational owned companies exploiting it now and going into the coffers of the Albertans unless it is done in concert with us sustaining our needs with a policy that eliminates our buying of world oil with all its political baggage. We, as Canadians should only pay the world premium price for our own oil if the excess cost of it goes towards a crash course research program to come up with a cleaner renewable energy system.

BTW sometimes it doesn't always matter if the energy put in is more than what you get out and that is when the energy cost you nothing, except the collection infrastructure, and what I'm talking about is creating hydrogen based fuels from solar and hydro sources where the fuel is the for example put in a vehicle that can't have sufficient onboard solar collection (or a dam ) onboard for its needs

mb everybody should pour money into time travel and somebody could travel into the future and figure out wtf we are supposed to do...

I'm not fond of Albertans, it's a shame they have the resources that could enrich their economy.

What was the estimate for when we would run out of oil? 2030? 2035? I still think we're set for that date (+/- 7 years).

zeeko wrote:mb everybody should pour money into time travel and somebody could travel into the future and figure out wtf we are supposed to do...

More than likely they would find out what we did wrong.

Massive Quasars wrote:I'm not fond of Albertans, it's a shame they have the resources that could enrich their economy.

What was the estimate for when we would run out of oil? 2030? 2035? I still think we're set for that date (+/- 7 years).

2050-2080 as far as i remember.

this is because as the oil prices increase, other sources will become viable.

Pext wrote: 2050-2080 as far as i remember.

this is because as the oil prices increase, other sources will become viable.

That's a key assumption. The date I quoted was if the world did not transition to other energy sources before oil ran out.

hm - there is need for a definition of 'running out' as well.

is it the point when oil is to expensive for the industry to rely on? or is it the point, when everything is actually used up?

as increasing oil-; thus energy- prices make alternative sources more viable, these sectors will experience inverstements as well.

Pext wrote: is it the point when oil is to expensive for the industry to rely on? or is it the point, when everything is actually used up?

as increasing oil-; thus energy- prices make alternative sources more viable, these sectors will experience inverstements as well.

My point was for the actual oil running out.

I realize the market will shift to other energy sources, or at least try. I'm not sure exactly how they came to that more recent date for oil running out.

I think one of the Peak Oil people more recently said that he thought the world could shift to alternative energy before oil shortages led to the end of civilization (or some dooms-day prediction like that).

the first assumptions about oil's sustainability where made by the Club of Rome in the 1980's i belive. they predicted a range of 50 years (2030)... i think they siply took the known oil reserves and related them to economy prognosises. current estimates range from 2050 to 2150 i believe.

[edit]oh... yeah - this 'doomsday' stuff is crap.

I wonder if they take into account the current uplift of the Chinese economy which is accelerating consumption.
I doubt that they do sufficiently just as they don't take into account a decline in the event of a major upheaval in our civilization occurring.

The doomsday stuff is exaggerated. However I don't know how the world will react to oil supply problems when they become much worse. We will likely adapt and shift to other energy sources but during that economic adjustment will their be a global recession?

Massive Quasars wrote:I'm not fond of Albertans, it's a shame they have the resources that could enrich their economy.

What was the estimate for when we would run out of oil? 2030? 2035? I still think we're set for that date (+/- 7 years).

we're completely out of debt, our province is rich