[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'E')nergy (though that has grown as I've shown, and as the Japanese example has shown) is just one (or a few) of the resources that we use to keep the economic wheel turning and growing. So it's pointless showing graphs of one or two resource consumption curves.

[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tyler_JC', 'O')il shale with an EROEI of 3:1 could still be worth the effort if we need the chemicals.

[TonyPrep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'C')onsidering that population growth can't go on forever, I would think that a increase in world GDP per capita while energy use, more or less, flat lines per capita, indicates that GDP can go up while resource consumption stays the same. I'm not saying it can go on forever, just that it can happen contrary to what you stated earlier. On a worldwide scale, energy consumption reflects resource appropriation since we can't acquire or recycle resources w/o energy, this would imply that the resource acquisition is reflected in energy consumption. Not that this can go on forever, just that it can happen, which was my initial response to you statement that economic activity cannot increase with resources increasing.

[yesplease]

I think stating it can't go on infinitely is a bit trivial don't you? I might as well state I can't have an infinite number of tuna sandwiches.

That being said, I think my initial response to your statement was reasonable given the magnitude of waste present in our society, considering you or I never stated an interval wrt the statement.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'E')conomic growth requires increasing resources.

[TonyPrep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'I') think stating it can't go on infinitely is a bit trivial don't you? I might as well state I can't have an infinite number of tuna sandwiches.

[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'I') think stating it can't go on infinitely is a bit trivial don't you? I might as well state I can't have an infinite number of tuna sandwiches.

[TonyPrep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'I') think stating it can't go on infinitely is a bit trivial don't you? I might as well state I can't have an infinite number of tuna sandwiches.

[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'T')hat's fine, but you stated that I said infinitely, when I didn't. That would be absurd. Indefinitely certainly implies a very long time and certainly many generations.

[TonyPrep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'L')ike I said before, given the magnitude of inefficiency, I think we could grow the economy while maintaining or even reducing energy usage, it's just that there haven't been consistent incentives/conditions to do so.

[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'I') think that's possible, but I don't think the periods in which that would occur would be very long - and couldn't be described as indefinite

[TonyPrep]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('yesplease', 'T')hat being said, I see no reason why consumption can't go down and efficiency can go up over some time period with the proper conditions. I think this would be seen if the land export model came to be, since a lot of manufacturers have cars projected to come out that use very little oil right around when the land export model is projected to start destroying supply for countries that don't produce oil. Coincidence? Maybe...

[yesplease]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', 'I')t could happen but I doubt it would enable growth to continue, or not for very long. In the case of more efficient cars, it takes 15 years to turn around the car fleet. That's not to say efficiency gains won't be seen before that, but the turnaround time might be slowed by any recession at the time. If you can't afford to get a different car (or someone can't afford to buy yours) then you're stuck with what you have and will have to make do a best you can, as the supply dwindles.

[Tanada]

Question for ROCKMAN, Rockdoc123 and any other petroleum geologists who happen to be hanging around here. I have seen it said many times that the Green River Shale formation never matured into liquid oil and is still kerogen in a rocky matrix because it was never buried deep enough to cook all the way. A) Is that true? B) what about the deeper parts of the formation on the bottom? C) Does anyone produce liquid oil from the formation at all, or is it still a pipe dream? D) Back in the early 1980's it was predicted to be the Next Big Thing with 3 TRILLION barrels of OOIP, is it a forever dream?

[ROCKMAN]

From: http://canaryusa.com/oil-production-in- ... -fracking/

Fracking Isn’t the Answer in the Green River

While the recent boom in oil production across other states has been driven by the advanced technique of hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) – a method that involves blasting a mixture of water, sand, and chemicals at a high pressure to release trapped oil and gas from shale formations – engineers in Colorado are discovering that the nearly 2 trillion barrels of Green River oil can’t be recovered this way. The “simple” explanation for this is that these other plays, such as the Bakken in North Dakota and Eagle Ford in Texas, are not at all similar to the Green River formation and the oil shale rock in Colorado’s Western Slope.

The differences between oil extracted from shale formations (like the oil in Bakken and Eagle Ford) and oil shale (like the Green River Formation and Western Slope) are vast and have been a great source of confusion. The oil recovered in the Bakken and Eagle Ford is actual oil that doesn’t flow properly because it’s trapped in the shale formation. This “tight oil” can be released thanks to advances in fracking technology. On the other hand, oil shale is a much different prospect than this tight oil. Oil shale is an inorganic rock containing kerogen, a precursor in the production of petroleum. In order to produce oil, the oil shale and its kerogen need to be heated. When superheated to 5,000 degrees Fahrenheit, kerogen undergoes various chemical reactions, resulting in a vapor containing a mixture of hydrocarbons and other organic compounds. When this vapor condenses, it becomes oil that can be refined to produce liquid fuels and lubricants.

Producing oil from oil shale has been done in one of two ways: a.) The oil shale is brought to the surface and cooked; or b.) An electric heater is placed deep beneath the surface at the base of the rocks to heat the shale, convert it into liquid oil and gas, and then bring it to the surface. {Shell Oil shut down its one demonstration project a couple of years ago}

Unfortunately, neither method has proven economically viable to this point. In recent years, both Shell and Chevron have abandoned their respective oil shale efforts in Colorado, after investing tens of millions of dollars into finding profitable extraction methods. And so, for now, the alluring deposits of oil in this fine-grained sedimentary rock in the Green River – that could put an end to America’s dependence on foreign oil – remains out of reach.

[rockdoc123]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') have seen it said many times that the Green River Shale formation never matured into liquid oil and is still kerogen in a rocky matrix because it was never buried deep enough to cook all the way. A) Is that true? B) what about the deeper parts of the formation on the bottom? C) Does anyone produce liquid oil from the formation at all, or is it still a pipe dream? D) Back in the early 1980's it was predicted to be the Next Big Thing with 3 TRILLION barrels of OOIP, is it a forever dream?

[Tanada]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc123', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') have seen it said many times that the Green River Shale formation never matured into liquid oil and is still kerogen in a rocky matrix because it was never buried deep enough to cook all the way. A) Is that true? B) what about the deeper parts of the formation on the bottom? C) Does anyone produce liquid oil from the formation at all, or is it still a pipe dream? D) Back in the early 1980's it was predicted to be the Next Big Thing with 3 TRILLION barrels of OOIP, is it a forever dream?

[rockdoc123]

The main difference here is that when trying to extract heavy oil whether it be by THAI or SAGD what you are doing is trying to improve the viscosity of what is already oil. In the case of the "oil Shale" such as Green River you are actually having to create oil from the kerogen. The energy required is, as a consequence much higher. I suspect as long as you are able to replicate the temperature at which you drive off hydrocarbons from kerogen it doesn't matter what the source is. Doing so in-situ (i.e. without mining the shale first) would be problematic given you can't contain the heat in a given area (too many heat sinks). Note that this is a similar problem for SAGD or THAI and there you don't need anywhere near the level of heating. But I'm not an expert in this area, I did work on a number of heavy oil projects over the years but never investigated any of the kerogen shales.

[Subjectivist]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('rockdoc123', 'T')he main difference here is that when trying to extract heavy oil whether it be by THAI or SAGD what you are doing is trying to improve the viscosity of what is already oil. In the case of the "oil Shale" such as Green River you are actually having to create oil from the kerogen. The energy required is, as a consequence much higher. I suspect as long as you are able to replicate the temperature at which you drive off hydrocarbons from kerogen it doesn't matter what the source is. Doing so in-situ (i.e. without mining the shale first) would be problematic given you can't contain the heat in a given area (too many heat sinks). Note that this is a similar problem for SAGD or THAI and there you don't need anywhere near the level of heating. But I'm not an expert in this area, I did work on a number of heavy oil projects over the years but never investigated any of the kerogen shales.

[rockdoc123]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')ow long and how high of a degree of heating are we talking about? I mean, if the heating is like steam, but you hold it for days would that work? Or does it need to be 500 C for six hours?