by kdenninger » Sat 23 Aug 2008, 20:39:49
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'H')ow are you not a Peak Oil doomer?
Because there's no point in it, and its wrong.
How long will the "Greenies" have their scalps when gasoline is $10/gallon?
Will we all
die if that happens? No.
The oil isn't gone. Its just more expensive to get what's left. There's plenty of it, if we're willing to go get it and pay what it costs. And before you say "but the costs of extraction are higher than the returned energy when consumed", that's not relavent since that has
always been true - remember, the ultimate source of the energy is the Sun, which is "free".
All of the cost of extraction is, in essence, the premium paid for the convenience of having this many BTUs of energy in that small and easily-transported of a space. That premium can exceed the net energy output and the equation still works, since you don't need to spend oil to extract oil (e.g. you could get the energy necessary from a nuclear plant, for example)
All we're talking about here is the price and long before we get to "truly out" the Greenies will be BBQd and eaten, at which point a reasonable solution, such as the path I have outlined, can be taken.
Notice how fast people started talking about sticking straws in the ocean floor when gas went to $4? That's just one small example; there will be many more as the cost of extraction continues to rise.
Liquid hydrocarbons can be created from short-cycle processes; you don't need to use long-cycle (millions of years) ones. We know how to do a few of them (E.g. ethanol) and even though most of them are non-viable for production use (e.g. ethanol again) as a consequence of the thermodynamics and yield potential, this does not mean they ALL suffer from the same defect. They do not.
Closed-cycle blue-green algae cultivation, for example, can take place on non-arable land and the density issue does not exist there. If we remove rail from hydrocarbon use and build nukes, we can replace literally all of our OTR transport fuel with biodiesel. No, we can't do it tomorrow, but the math works, unlike with ethanol and most other (e.g. "switchgrass", etc) biofuel plans.
This leaves us with aircraft which can't run that fuel at present due to temperature concerns (its too cold at 30,000 feet and the fuel gels, although a turbine can be recalibrated to burn it without difficulty) but even that is likely addressible with some effort (e.g. diverting some of the heat from the engines to warm the fuel in the tank)