[Aaron]

Why?

Because if any known energy sources compared favorably with convention oil, or even equalled oil's qualities as an energy source, we would see massive implementations of these technologies today.

It's what the cornucopians are always saying... the market is the most efficient way to bring new technology "online".

I agree completely.

If it's potentially profitable, business pursues it.

Legal or not... many businesses accept incredible barriers to entry as part of the normal operating cost of doing business in pursuit of profits. Even risking death in many cases.

If these alternatives were profitable, we would see aggressive, large-scale efforts from companies to enter these markets.

But we don't see this.

Investments in oil alternative technologies have risen dramatically as the price of oil has soared in recent years, but remain a tiny portion of total energy spending.

This demonstrates nicely that conventional oil will need to be more expensive before alternatives will become truly competitive... much more expensive.

Which is, of course, the whole point.

So we are again left with Occam's Razor.

What's more likely?

Some conspiracy of influence has artificially squashed oil alternative technologies & made them non-competitive?

or

None are actually competitive?

Arguments about advanced technical solutions always fail to understand the basic issue.

Name any oil alternative tech you can think of... then compare it Prima Facia with pokin a straw into the ground.

Pokin holes into a pressurized fuel-tank (Oil Well), is a safe, simple way to produce tons of useful, profitable energy.

How expensive does oil need to be for these alternatives to be as profitable as oil?

And more importantly, why would you consider that an "alternative'?

If you replace an energy source with a better one... that's progress.

If you replace an energy source with a worse one... that's desperation.

If you replace an energy source with one of equal quality... that's an alternative.

Even worse is the direct & indirect subsidy oil provides to all these alternatives, which skews the perception of how valuable a given alternative is.

Sorry techno-fixers...

No soup for you.

[NEOPO]

[PraiseDoom]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')
Sorry techno-fixers...

No soup for you.

[vision-master]

[coyote]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'W')hat's more likely?

Some conspiracy of influence has artificially squashed oil alternative technologies & made them non-competitive?

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('coyote', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'W')hat's more likely?

Some conspiracy of influence has artificially squashed oil alternative technologies & made them non-competitive?

[Ayame]

Such a simple argument and yet so poignant.

[Greg]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'I')t's what the cornucopians are always saying... the market is the most efficient way to bring new technology "online".

I agree completely.

[Pops]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Greg', ' ') An example is the construction of coal liquefaction plants in the United States in the late 1970's that never became operational when the OPEC embargo ended and oil prices collapsed.

[aflurry]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('coyote', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', 'W')hat's more likely?

Some conspiracy of influence has artificially squashed oil alternative technologies & made them non-competitive?

[JRP3]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')
This demonstrates nicely that conventional oil will need to be more expensive before alternatives will become truly competitive... much more expensive.

[NEOPO]

[Omnitir]

Oil Alternatives Aren't YET.
You seem to be assuming that all energy sources are at a fixed level of quality. But fossil fuels are quickly becoming poorer energy sources, and simultaneously certain alternatives, especially solar, are becoming better energy sources.

One day, alternatives will be of equal quality to oil. Very soon afterwards, they will be better then oil.

[cube]

I once had an argument with a greenie who said:

"Solar power is superior to oil because it's free energy."

I replied: "Yes but oil is also free energy."




















----------------------------------------------
anybody who hasn't figured it out yet
Oil companies do NOT produce oil...they poke a hole in the ground and extract it. That's what you're paying for, the cost of extraction. Mother nature "produced" oil.

[matt21811]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Aaron', '
')How expensive does oil need to be for these alternatives to be as profitable as oil?

[Roy]

Aaron -- great post. You really have a way with words.

Matt, I think he's trying to say that "alternatives" are not really an alternative at all, and will never compete with conventional oil obtained in a conventional manner (straw into pressurized tank).

That makes perfect sense. After all it the energy we get from conventional oil that makes the alternatives possible.

How many solar panels can you produce economically with electrical power from a windmill? IE without oil inputs in some form?

I'd say the number approaches 0 when you look at every phase of solar panel construction. Of course I could be wrong and we'll all be commuting in EVs in 30 years and have solar panels on every roof.

I don't believe it and have structured my life, like many people here, for a lower energy future. What about you?

[matt21811]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Roy', 'A')aron -- great post. You really have a way with words.

Matt, I think he's trying to say that "alternatives" are not really an alternative at all, and will never compete with conventional oil obtained in a conventional manner (straw into pressurized tank).

That makes perfect sense. After all it the energy we get from conventional oil that makes the alternatives possible.

How many solar panels can you produce economically with electrical power from a windmill? IE without oil inputs in some form?

I'd say the number approaches 0 when you look at every phase of solar panel construction. Of course I could be wrong and we'll all be commuting in EVs in 30 years and have solar panels on every roof.

I don't believe it and have structured my life, like many people here, for a lower energy future. What about you?

[Roy]

Thanks for responding.

CTL does have some use but I can't see it replacing the current volume of oil America uses. Its environmentally destructive and like other alternatives, the EROEI is closer to unity than crude oil which has fuel the majority of our growth.

In my best case scenario, we could ramp up every 'alternative' and will still be forced to accept the reality of much lower energy per capita, due to both increased cost for energy and less energy being available overall.

[matt21811]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Roy', 'T')hanks for responding.

CTL does have some use but I can't see it replacing the current volume of oil America uses. Its environmentally destructive and like other alternatives, the EROEI is closer to unity than crude oil which has fuel the majority of our growth.

In my best case scenario, we could ramp up every 'alternative' and will still be forced to accept the reality of much lower energy per capita, due to both increased cost for energy and less energy being available overall.

[Aaron]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('matt21811', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Roy', 'T')hanks for responding.

CTL does have some use but I can't see it replacing the current volume of oil America uses. Its environmentally destructive and like other alternatives, the EROEI is closer to unity than crude oil which has fuel the majority of our growth.

In my best case scenario, we could ramp up every 'alternative' and will still be forced to accept the reality of much lower energy per capita, due to both increased cost for energy and less energy being available overall.