[blackbud]

I think it's fair to say that it's time to say nite nite to peak oil.
It can be put ino the same box room as a yellowstone volcanic eruption, a meteor strike, aliens landing and planet X.
All are theoretically possible but very unlikely within the next 100 years.
Planet X has moved ahead of peak oil in the probability stakes and Peak oil stays just ahead of Y2K

Peak oil is the most unlikely as evidence now shows.

Demand is down worldwide as consumption is down.

The emerging economies are going for other things. The USA are beginning to 'conserve'

New technologies are indeed more likely now such as hydrino power,
(check www.blacklightpower.com - in fact invest now
also www.hydrino.org) and nanotechnology.
Not to mention the massive new interest in nuke power which will be on-line within 10 years.

Simmons, Heiberg and Kunstler and others now seem and sound like desperate men as they see future book sales waning.

Many wonder whether Simmons is a dupe for people like those on here who with his help have elevated prices to $60 plus with many, many thanks from the Oil industry who have been keeping billions of barrels under their stetsons.

I would hazard a guess that peak oil websites had been enjoying expotentially growing hits but I would assume that this to is waning now.

Peak Oil will not ever happen as the conciousness shift that was desired by many here has occured and things have changed. Some will argue that it's a non renewable resource so inevitably will peak, well of course, but nobody will notice or care if that day ever arrives.

Far too much was invested in Simmons who is now evidently and simply 'wrong'- mission accomplished
SA have plenty, or at least they have 20 o 30 years before their peak and by then all will be well,
but many thanks to the doom sayers here, you did wake us in the indudtry up to a potential problem that many thought was 60 years away but now realise was more like 30.

we now have time to prepare.


Heartbeat
www.blackbud.co.uk

[erl]

You're welcome, bud.

[FoxV]

edit---
screw it, yanking my original post.

instead, lets work through your optomism 'bud. Can you please do the caclulations and show us the numbers that everything is all right

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') suggest you read more news articles posted here and do more PO research.

[dukey]

i suggest you reduce your intake of drugs

[dunewalker]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('blackbud', 'I') think it's fair to say that it's time to say nite nite to peak oil.

Peak oil is the most unlikely as evidence now shows.

Demand is down worldwide as consumption is down.

[aahala]

blackbud, without fear of contradiction I can say your first post
and the links provided were really something.

I didn't even know the Hydrinos were still around. They were my
favorite group back in the 70s.

[blackbud]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') suggest you read more news articles posted here and do more PO research.

[rogerhb]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('blackbud', 'I')t can be put ino the same box room as a yellowstone volcanic eruption, a meteor strike, aliens landing and planet X.
All are theoretically possible but very unlikely within the next 100 years.

[OilsNotWell]

Don't feed the trolls.

[ashurbanipal]

I think it's fair to say that it's time to say nite nite to peak oil.

Great! I don't.

It can be put ino the same box room as a yellowstone volcanic eruption, a meteor strike, aliens landing and planet X.

All those things shouldn't be put in the same box to begin with. The eruption of yellowstone is at least somewhat likely over the next century, and a meteor strike is also somewhat likely over a longer period of time. Both have happened in the past, and we find compelling reason to believe that they will at some point happen again.

Alien landings may take place one day, but as far as we know they've not happened yet. There's not sufficient evidence that there are aliens. I don't even know what "planet x" refers to, but I assume it's another kooky theory that is based on no evidence. This is the key phrase, so let me repeat it: no evidence.

There is considerable evidence that oil will eventually peak. There is enough evidence to induce a reasonable person to conclude that oil is likely to peak in the coming few years.

All are theoretically possible but very unlikely within the next 100 years.

I disagree. I think the likelihood of a couple of them are relatively high (though a yellowstone eruption in the next century I would probably give 2 chances out of 10).

Planet X has moved ahead of peak oil in the probability stakes and Peak oil stays just ahead of Y2K

No. Incorrect.

Peak oil is the most unlikely as evidence now shows.

Demand is down worldwide as consumption is down.

Can you back this up?

The emerging economies are going for other things. The USA are beginning to 'conserve'

Again, let's see some backup.

New technologies are indeed more likely now such as hydrino power,
(check www.blacklightpower.com - in fact invest now
also www.hydrino.org) and nanotechnology.

See next post. You and everyone who agrees with you should invest every last penny you own in these guys. You should sell everything you own and go naked in the streets; you'll make millions, I assure you.

Not to mention the massive new interest in nuke power which will be on-line within 10 years.

Massive? Again, it would be nice to see some figures.

Simmons, Heiberg and Kunstler and others now seem and sound like desperate men as they see future book sales waning.

Much is often made of the "these guys are selling books" angle, so let me see if I can douse this fire: sales of these books doesn't make these men a whole lot of money. Among them, only Kuntsler has to depend on his book sales for income. Simmons already has plenty of money. He wouldn't be desperate if he never sold a single copy. Heinberg has another source of income, and again, doesn't really need to sell any books. Most books, especially in a specialty field such as oil and energy, make the authors only a few thousand dollars. So the notion that peak oilers are living in mortal fear that their book sales will drop is nonsense.

Many wonder whether Simmons is a dupe for people like those on here who with his help have elevated prices to $60 plus with many, many thanks from the Oil industry who have been keeping billions of barrels under their stetsons.

Again, backup?

I would hazard a guess that peak oil websites had been enjoying expotentially growing hits but I would assume that this to is waning now.

Backup? You state this is an assumption. Prove it.

Peak Oil will not ever happen as the conciousness shift that was desired by many here has occured and things have changed.

What the hell are you talking about? Consciousness shift? Do you have enough evidence that this has happened? Are we building a few hundred nuclear plants soon? Are we gearing up to refurbish the rail system? Are we investing in electric car development? Are we transitioning to more natural methods of agriculture? I don't see any evidence that any of those things are happening.

Some will argue that it's a non renewable resource so inevitably will peak, well of course, but nobody will notice or care if that day ever arrives.

"Some will argue"? I suppose this is technically correct. But it's very misleading.

Far too much was invested in Simmons who is now evidently and simply 'wrong'- mission accomplished

I was reading an article this morning that cast serious doubts on SA's statement of reserves. And so far, they haven't ramped up production. So what are you talking about?

SA have plenty, or at least they have 20 o 30 years before their peak and by then all will be well,
but many thanks to the doom sayers here, you did wake us in the indudtry up to a potential problem that many thought was 60 years away but now realise was more like 30.

Again, backup?

[ashurbanipal]

This is from the front page of the blacklight webiste the OP author posted. If this is the kind of backup we can expect for his many assertions, I'd say we shouldn't listen to him.


Having exactly solved the atom using physical laws for the first time, BlackLight is the primary mover in advancing applications of a new chemical process of releasing the latent energy of the hydrogen atom, the BlackLight Process.

Having "solved" the atom? For the first time? Using physical laws?

1) How do you solve the atom? Presumably, if this is the first time whatever they're referring to has been done, it must be extraordinary. I'd like an explanation first exactly what sort of "solving" of the atom needed to be done.

2) What physical laws are they referring to, anyway?

An ordinary hydrogen atom consists of an electron orbiting a proton.

The notion that an electron orbits a nucleus is a little outdated (by about 40 years). Electrons are usually seen as clouds that surround a nucleus, where position and velocity exist as probabilities.

The BlackLight Process allows the electron to move closer to the proton, to which it is attracted, below the prior-known ground state.

So the blacklight process, whatever that is, causes an alteration in the strength of the electro-weak force? Suppose I take that for granted; just how does this create more energy. I'm trying to see it, but so far, I don't.

This generates power as heat, light, and plasma (a hot, glowing, ionized gas)

Plasma is power? These guys have been watching too much Star Trek. Plasma may become a carrier of power, but is not itself energy.

with the formation of strong hydrogen products that are the basis of a vast class of new chemical compounds with broad commercial application.

As opposed to all those weak, wimpy hydrogen products out there that get helium kicked in their face when they go to the beach.

The energy released from this process is hundreds of times in excess of the energy required to start it.

I really doubt this. It's possible, I suppose. But if this were really the case, either some government would have purchased the technology, or a large private firm would have. They wouldn't have had to advertise for investors on the internet.

The primary fuel is hydrogen gas, which can be created inexpensively via electrolysis from water.

Actually, at this point, electrolysis takes more energy than the hydrogen released gives back. The EROEI is something like 3:1.

Energy is released as heat and may be converted to electricity using known methods. The process is scalable from small, hand-held units to large, fire-box replacements in large central power stations.

OK. So far I haven't seen anything to make me believe their other claims, all of which seem pretty outlandish. Why should I believe this one?

Rather than pollutants, the BlackLight Process releases heat, light, and valuable chemicals. The lower-energy atomic hydrogen products of the process can be used to form novel hydrino hydride compounds ("HHCs") which are proprietary to the company, and form a vast class of new chemistry.

I just love it when stuff like this happens. A vast class of "new chemistry"? I have a hard time believing that people who can't express themselves properly in English could create a new chemistry, or even a new power source. Anyway, what's wrong with the old chemistry?

Alternatively, the product can be a new inert form of hydrogen gas that may serve in revolutionary applications such as the medium for a new high-energy laser. Since this gas is lighter than air, it may also be safely vented and allowed to diffuse into space.

If it's inert (presumably at room temperature), how is it going to lase? Also, just because it's lighter than air at room temperature and average surface pressure doesn't mean it's lighter than the air in the stratosphere (or higher). It may hang around for a long time; and I am not comforted by the claim that it is inert.

Anyway, these guys sound like nutbags.

[MicroHydro]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('OilsNotWell', '[')smilie=XXpuke.gif]

Don't feed the trolls.

[ashurbanipal]

I disagree somewhat. Obviously, this guy doesn't know what he's talking about, but it would be a proverbial very bad thing if someone just finding out about Peak Oil happened on this thread and thought that the best the peak oil crowd had to offer in response were one liners.

[untothislast]

Let's not be too dismissive of Blackbud's contribution. After all, if everyone here saw everything from the same point of view, we'd never have our assumptions tested - which is necessary in a process of constant re-evaluation.
But why look for new sources of energy? If George W. and his cheery band of creationist religious advisors are right - the Earth being only about 12,000 years old - some nice, new, fresh oil reserves, should be getting laid down round about . . . now.

[blackbud]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('ashurbanipal', '
')The energy released from this process is hundreds of times in excess of the energy required to start it.

I really doubt this. It's possible, I suppose. But if this were really the case, either some government would have purchased the technology, or a large private firm would have. They wouldn't have had to advertise for investors on the internet.
.

[blackbud]

applications
http://www.blacklightpower.com/applications.shtml

http://www.blacklightpower.com/business.shtml

do check around the site.
this is not net cranks and Big Oil won't want you to - obviously

[bobcousins]

Every now and then, someone comes up with a really wacky new idea. Usually, these go nowhere, but sometimes they get as far as a startup company, and manage to persuade a few mugs to part with some cash. History is littered with 'spoof' companies conning investors, technology is no exception.

Blacklight are in the embarrassing situation of having their patents withdrawn by the USPTO - who normally grant anything.

Remember folks, if you are relying on people to behave sensibly in any of your post-PO scenarios, this is the quality of material we have to work with.

Harvard M.D.Challenges Big Bang Theory$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '
')
A Harvard-trained medical doctor is banking that his widely derided theory could supplant Big Bang theory, find the recipe for the cosmos' interstellar gases, and fuel cars without pollution.

Randell Mills, 42, blipped onto science debunkers' radar screens in 1991 when he claimed to unleash energy by "shrinking" the hydrogen atom's electron orbit to form what he calls a "hydrino."

Although mainstream physicists, including Nobel laureates, rankle at the mention of hydrinos, Mills has gathered $25 million dollars from investors for his startup, BlackLight Power Inc.

[clv101]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('blackbud', 'S')A have plenty, or at least they have 20 o 30 years before their peak...

[blackbud]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('bobcousins', '
')BTW, I think Blackbud is just engaging in a little 'guerilla marketing'. Or he is insane too.