Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Gas-to-Liquids (GTL)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby copious.abundance » Thu 06 Aug 2009, 16:04:32

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'T')hat doesn't drive Mom and the Kids to the Mall.

This drives mom and the kids to the mall
Image

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'O')r deliver your Amazon toys. :razz:

>>> UPS Deploys 167 Compressed Natural Gas Trucks <<<
This delivers your Amazon toys
Image

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'T')his is the United States, not some third-world piker country that otherwise depends on jittney's, pedi-cabs, and the occasional natural-gas model T clunkers, this is the the world's capital of long-distance driving and hauling.

It appears you've never been to Argentina. Or Brazil for that matter. But since you never go out of your house anymore I wouldn't be surprised.

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'H')ow about this: why don't you dismissive, brainy, wise-cracking cuties show me numbers? Evidence for a significant upswing in natural gas vehicle sales in the United States? Anything to counter declining oil reserves and record high petroleum prices. Or is your natural gas revolution on paper only?

A personal challenge: How many of you happy techies have a natural gas auto, have seen one in your neighborhood, or have the ability to fill one up somewhere on your commute?

Come on now. Play nice. Rise to the challenge. Be real :P

Thought not.

Maddog was right, it wouldn't matter how much I showed, you would dismiss it.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('OilFinder2', '&')gt;>> Waste Management Grows Fleet of Natural Gas Garbage Trucks <<<
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')ationally, Waste Management already has 265 CNG and has 418 LNG (liquified natural gas) vehicles; and by the end of 2009, the company expects to have 500 LNG vehicles and 299 CNG vehicles in service.


>>> UPS Deploys 167 Compressed Natural Gas Trucks <<<
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')ore than 800 CNG vehicles are already in use by UPS in the Untied States. While previous CNG trucks were converted from gasoline and diesel vehicles in the 1980s to run on alternative fuels, these new vehicles are manufactured explicitly for alternative-fuel use. They're expected to reduce emissions by 20 percent, and improve fuel economy by 10 percent, compared with the cleanest diesel engines you can get today.


>>> The trash is greener: Hamilton trucks running on natural gas <<<
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'G')arbage collection has traditionally been carried out by diesel-fueled trucks, but as of today, Hamilton’s trash will begin being picked up by natural gas trucks, according to Frank Fiumefreddo Jr., the owner of Central Jersey Waste and Recycling.

The township last year awarded Fiumefreddo’s company a five-year contract to collect solid waste. Bencivengo wanted the township to adopt an environmentally friendly approach, so his administration required Central Jersey Waste and Recycling to eventually replace its diesel fuel trucks with trucks fueled by natural gas or 100 percent biodiesel.


>>> Ports get Daimler natural-gas trucks <<<
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'L')OS ANGELES -- Local civic and business leaders, executives from Daimler Trucks North America and members of the press gathered under tents here at the Ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles complex Monday to mark the delivery of 132 new natural gas (NG)-fueled tractors to drivers who contract with California Cartage Company, as well as 100 new NG trucks for the Ports’ Clean Truck Program. The event also marked the official debut of Daimler’s Set Back 113 NG truck.


>>> Seattle's garbage trucks to run on natural gas <<<
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'N')ow the city seeks to despoil less of the atmosphere by converting its garbage-truck fleet from diesel to compressed natural gas (CNG) under new hauling contracts starting March 30.

One contractor, Seattle-based CleanScapes, is buying 40 CNG trucks and building a fueling stop in Georgetown. The other, transcontinental giant Waste Management, is buying 106 trucks to be fueled in South Park.

[...]

Waste Management has more than 600 natural-gas trucks in California, and the Seattle program is part of its national environmental initiative, said Susan Robinson, regional director for public-sector services. "We have a goal of reducing emissions associated with our fleet by 15 percent," she said.
Here's another one: 8,000 CNG vehicles! 8O
>>> AT&T Begins Deployment of Domestic-Fuelled CNG Vehicles <<<
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'D')omestic US natural gas will fuel 600 Ford E-Series vans for AT&T Inc. before end of 2009. The first step toward AT&T’s declared goal of purchasing 8,000 CNG vehicles (15,000 new alternative fuel vehicles in total) is now underway, with natural gas vehicle upfits being carried out by Dallas-based BAF Technologies. AT&T’s investment (USD $565 million) represents the largest U.S. corporate commitment to CNG vehicles to date.
BTW, yes I do have a CNG filling station along my commute
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby Maddog78 » Thu 06 Aug 2009, 16:24:33

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'M')addog was right, it wouldn't matter how much I showed, you would dismiss it.


I can't even make a serious reply to his posts anymore.
The guy is such a flake it wouldn't matter what you show him.

However, in case there are others following this thread, check out this map.
There might already be a lot more CNG stations than you realised.

CNG stations

I even see that one by your house in Seattle. :)
User avatar
Maddog78
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1626
Joined: Mon 14 Jul 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby copious.abundance » Thu 06 Aug 2009, 16:42:14

The one I pass by everyday is the one in Everett.
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby Tanada » Thu 06 Aug 2009, 17:58:55

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Outcast_Searcher', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '[')What I am looking for is, if you used a liquid propane tank like the ones they use on Forklifts on your car and filled it half full of gasoline while it was at atmospheric pressure how much CH4 or C3H8 could you pump in under pressure? I am sure it is less than you could add if you didn't put the gasoline in first, but I am also aware that back in the 1900-1925 era gasoline often had Propane in its formula straight from the refinery.

I was thinking that if you didn't want to go with straight Natural Gas or Propane you could dissolve it on your gasoline and still get a benefit from it as a fuel extender.


That's an interesting idea, but what about safety concerns?

Today, it's actually very rare for ordinary passenger cars to catch fire after wrecks, given how sheltered the gas tanks are. And even if the gas trickles out of a tank leak, it isn't a disaster as long as open flame or sparks aren't introduced.

Also, I've seen a television documentary on alternative energy for cars where they demonstrated actually introducing flame to a contrived leak in a NG car. It burned - like a big candle - it didn't explode or even progress. The NG car expert being interviewed claimed this would be normal - nice and safe.

Now, introduce gasoline in a tank under high pressure saturated with Methane or another gaseous hydrocarbon? That sounds like a recipe for an explosion in a crash/rupture scenario. Even if not, spraying gasoline around isn't exactly appealing. Unless it produced AMAZING efficiency results, I'm betting the risk-averse lawyers would insist on taking a big pass.


I would say that all depends on where on the tank it is leaking. Very rarely is a vehicle with a full tank going to be involved in a crash where the tank is full, but even in that case it is just like shaking up a beer or a soda pop before you open it, there will be a spurt of liquid out but the vast majority will stay in the container unless the hole is on the very bottom. If the hole is anywhere else it will spurt out till the pressure is gone and then trickle out just like any other gasoline tank would, and it seems like a double hull tank should significantly reduce the risk of that happening, that is why oil tanker ships are required to have a double hull now.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Alfred Tennyson', 'W')e are not now that strength which in old days
Moved earth and heaven, that which we are, we are;
One equal temper of heroic hearts,
Made weak by time and fate, but strong in will
To strive, to seek, to find, and not to yield.
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 17094
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 03:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby MattS » Thu 06 Aug 2009, 20:06:06

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '
')A limited class of specialized short-haul mostly urban vehicles may be prototyped for natural gas. But so what? Who cares? That doesn't drive Mom and the Kids to the Mall. Or deliver your Amazon toys. :razz:


But what you miss over and over again in your leaps of cognitive dissonance is..they CAN. Someone simply has to decide it makes more financial sense to drive their CNG car to the mall rather than their gasoline powered one.

So we all sit and wait...figuring that PO will do the job for us, ratcheting up the price high enough that the alternatives aren't just reasonable, a point which has already arrived, all pstarr whining to the contrary, but make complete economic sense. Much like gasoline cars displaced the original idea, EV's.
User avatar
MattS
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat 21 Jun 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby MattS » Thu 06 Aug 2009, 20:07:52

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('OilFinder2', '
')BTW, yes I do have a CNG filling station along my commute


I like the idea of filling in the garage myself, but I haven't bought the Civic yet. The wife wants a Prius instead.
User avatar
MattS
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat 21 Jun 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby copious.abundance » Thu 06 Aug 2009, 21:08:03

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MattS', 'S')o we all sit and wait...figuring that PO will do the job for us, ratcheting up the price high enough that the alternatives aren't just reasonable, a point which has already arrived, all pstarr whining to the contrary, but make complete economic sense.

Ah yes, but in pstarr's world, the inconvenience of filling up your tank every 150 miles instead of every 300 miles would be so great, Americans would rather pay $10/gallon for their gasoline or even let their civilization come to a screeching halt rather than resort to such unbearable inconveniences.

:wink:
Last edited by copious.abundance on Thu 06 Aug 2009, 21:51:58, edited 1 time in total.
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby copious.abundance » Thu 06 Aug 2009, 21:29:50

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'T')his is the United States, not some third-world piker country that otherwise depends on jittney's, pedi-cabs, and the occasional natural-gas model T clunkers, this is the the world's capital of long-distance driving and hauling.

I suppose Sweden is some third-world piker country that otherwise depends on jitney's [sic], pedi-cabs, and the occasional natural-gas model T clunker.

>>> LINK <<<
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', '[')b]Sales of natural gas vehicles soar

An influx of new natural gas vehicles has sparked a sales surge in Sweden, where the monthly sales rate leapt from around 150 to more than 700 units according to NGVA Europe.

At the heart of the success is the new Volkswagen TSI Passat EcoFuel, which has been responsible for 60 per cent of sales in the country. It is followed by the Mercedes B 170 NGT, which makes up 24 per cent of sales in the country. The two market leaders are followed by the likes of the VW Touran, the VW Caddy, the Opel Zafira, the Mercedes E200 NGT, the Opel Combo and the Fiat Punto. In total, natural gas vehicles made up 2.9 per cent of all new passenger cars sold in Sweden in June.

In the van segment, the Volkswagen Caddy accounts for some 45 per cent of total sales with the likes of the Opel Combo, the VW Transporter, the Fiat Fiorino, the VW Pick-up, the Iveco Daily and the Fiat Doblo also contributing to sales.

According to NVGA Europe, the total sales are back to the high rates achieved in mid 2006 when Volvo Cars temporarily knocked back the natural gas vehicle market by announcing its intention to discontinue sales of its bi-fuel cars.

At the end of 2008, Sweden had just 17,000 natural gas vehicles - but the sales in June ran at an annual rate of 8,700 vehicles.
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby MattS » Thu 06 Aug 2009, 21:42:30

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('OilFinder2', '
')Ah yes, but in pstarr's world, the inconvenience of filling up your tank every 150 miles instead of every 300 miles would be so great, Americans would rather pay $10/gallon for their gasoline or even let their civilization come to a screeching halt rather than resort to such unbearable inconveniences.

:wink:


It appears that quite a large part of the doomer schema involves the impossibility of change in human behavior ( which is why they generally adhor basic economic theory). They expect people would rather give up their jobs, roll over and die of boredom rather than move closer to work to save commuting costs. They expect people would rather starve than eat less meat, thereby easily making more room for the next 2.5 billion people expected to arrive on the planet by the year 2050. It nearly always seems to come down to the argument, at its heart, that humans will refuse to change, and without $1/gal gasoline and 10# of steak/week/American, we will sit in the corner of a room and waste away, because we refuse to eat 8#/steak/week/person, or live closer to work, death being so much more appealing, or resource wars, or zombie suburbanite charge of the Light Brigade type scenarios, or whatever the disaster scenario dejour is nowadays.

I've been away, so maybe now that peak oil has happened everything has calmed down and we can all wait another couple decades before mitigation of all sizes and shapes completely replaces oil and then peak natural gas in 2189 will be the hot topic.
User avatar
MattS
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat 21 Jun 2008, 03:00:00
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby TonyPrep » Thu 06 Aug 2009, 22:57:16

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MattS', 'I')t appears that quite a large part of the doomer schema involves the impossibility of change in human behavior
No, you mischaracterise it. The scenario is that people will generally ignore limits and will try to pick up on tiny slivers of news that suggest BAU, rather than make real changes, until they can't avoid it. That way can lead to societal collapse because it might then be far too late to make changes that can support an ordered transition to a different state.

Look at how the apparent good news is picked up on in this thread and all the bad news is ignored, as well as all the explanations for how even the good news is not as good as it might first appear. The stock markets appear to be doing exactly that, also.

If things get back to "normal" just how long do you think it will be before the next recession?
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby Maddog78 » Thu 06 Aug 2009, 23:39:25

You really are a piece of work.
I can just imagine how my career would have gone if I thought like you.


"Hey Maddog, what do you think about bending the pipe when we're drilling, go along the production zone horizontally and later pump in some fluid under high pressure to crack open the formation to produce more?"

What are you crazy? We should never try anything new! Don't you understand the consequences?
What about the EROEI? We could all be doomed! I'm just going to stay in my house.


:lol:
User avatar
Maddog78
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 1626
Joined: Mon 14 Jul 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby copious.abundance » Fri 07 Aug 2009, 00:42:40

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('TonyPrep', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('MattS', 'I')t appears that quite a large part of the doomer schema involves the impossibility of change in human behavior
No, you mischaracterise it. The scenario is that people will generally ignore limits and will try to pick up on tiny slivers of news that suggest BAU, rather than make real changes, until they can't avoid it. That way can lead to societal collapse because it might then be far too late to make changes that can support an ordered transition to a different state.

Look at how the apparent good news is picked up on in this thread and all the bad news is ignored, as well as all the explanations for how even the good news is not as good as it might first appear. The stock markets appear to be doing exactly that, also.

If things get back to "normal" just how long do you think it will be before the next recession?

Tony, I'm afraid it is you who doesn't get it.

Let's say you and pstarr are right, and we have reached and passed the peak of oil production. Oil will get increasingly expensive over time. Nobody wants to pay a lot of money for oil, and many can't even afford to. There's a good reason why you've got nations like Pakistan using a lot of NG for their transportation rather than oil: Oil is too expensive for most people there to afford. So, they've been switching to natural gas, which they have large reserves of their own and is considerably cheaper.

Now, let's say the same thing starts to happen to Americans. Let's say you're right and, being past peak, oil will start to get more expensive. Even many Americans will not want to pay that much for it, and/or they can't afford to pay that much for it. What to do? Give up and die? Hardly. They will "transition to a different state" - one dominated by natural gas (and other alternatives). You can't tell me people will go about BAU while gasoline rises to $5, 7$ and then $10 a gallon. No fool would. Of course they'll do something.
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby copious.abundance » Fri 07 Aug 2009, 00:53:01

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'I')s that the best you can do? A plaintive little cry for help in the wilderness?

We have endured the greatest run-up in the petroleum prices, perhaps ever, and the slowest response in new petroleum production--perhaps ever. (could be peak? I'll let you cornies debate the date.) This has been THE golden opportunity for all petroleum alternatives transport systems, yet the natural-gas vehicle industry has failed to shine. The market has not responded with any significant uptick in installation, conversions, new technologies, or market share.

Either the free market is bust, or the consumer does not want the gadgets, or natural gas vehicles are not competitive in the US and never will be. Which one is it?

It's pretty sad you have to pretend you haven't read a single thing I've posted in order to support your twisted doomview. If I had posted information telling you 15% of the cars sold in the US last year were powered by natural gas, electricity or other alternatives, you would repeat the exact same you just told me above, and repeat your endless mantra that "alternatives will never pan out." If you had been standing alongside Colonel Drake in 1859 when he first discovered oil in Pennsylvania, and if he had exclaimed to you, "I've just discovered a wonderful new energy source!" you would have scoffed at him, telling him it isn't as good as coal, and it will never pan out.

You are a really pathetic creature.
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby copious.abundance » Fri 07 Aug 2009, 01:34:20

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', '.') . . the fisheries, topsoil, aquifers, etc. that support the six billions are also depleting at awful rates . . .

In other words, you don't want natural gas to replace declining petroleum reserves. Your worst scenario is to have natural gas making a perfectly good substitute for oil, with Honda Civics, cement trucks, Freightliners, UPS trucks and farm combines going about their business as usual - all powered by natural gas. In order to avoid this dreadful scenario you start threads like this trying to convince yourself it will never pan out, in spite of abundant evidence to the contrary that it is perfectly capable of panning out.

It would be nice if you would actually be honest about this, but you don't appear to enjoy being honest. You should have titled this thread, "I don't want natural gas to replace depleting petroleum reserves" rather than the title you actually gave it.
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby copious.abundance » Fri 07 Aug 2009, 01:37:05

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'Y')es. We agree for once. We are transitioning to a different state, perhaps one more similar to Pakistan.

So then, you agree it is possible for 56% of the cars in the US to be powered by natural gas.

I rest my case then. 8)
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby copious.abundance » Fri 07 Aug 2009, 01:41:33

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('pstarr', 'O')ily, you have no idea really. You are quite clueless.

How many solar panels do you have on your roof? How many alternative systems have you ever developed? Who is stuck in yesterday's make believe? It's idiots like you, followers, belongers all, that explain our predicament.

You are so late to the game

I'm not the one screaming that we're on the cusp of depleting our natural resources, so why should I be putting solar panels on my roof and doing other things as if we *were* on the cusp of depleting our resources?

If you think we're about to deplete our natural resources and decide to do things to prepare yourself for this imminent depletion, then no one is stopping you. But since I'm not crying "depletion is imminent!" why should I be acting as if it was?
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby Gerben » Fri 07 Aug 2009, 02:25:16

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Tanada', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Maddog78', 'W')hat I am looking for is, if you used a liquid propane tank like the ones they use on Forklifts on your car and filled it half full of gasoline while it was at atmospheric pressure how much CH4 or C3H8 could you pump in under pressure?

The energy content by volume of atmosferic methane is about 1/1.000th of gasoline. You would not be able to carry any significant amount. Mixing NG or LPG with gasoline isn't a problem. In modern bifuel NG/gasoline vehicles there is a short time when you go from 100% NG to 100% gasoline when the NG tank is empty. But you need high pressure NG to get enough power out of NG. Bifuel is the way to go when there are insufficient refueling stations.
User avatar
Gerben
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 629
Joined: Wed 07 Mar 2007, 04:00:00
Location: Holland, Belgica Foederata (Republic of the Seven United Netherlands)
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby TonyPrep » Fri 07 Aug 2009, 06:03:31

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('OilFinder2', 'T')ony, I'm afraid it is you who doesn't get it.

Let's say you and pstarr are right, and we have reached and passed the peak of oil production. Oil will get increasingly expensive over time. Nobody wants to pay a lot of money for oil, and many can't even afford to. There's a good reason why you've got nations like Pakistan using a lot of NG for their transportation rather than oil: Oil is too expensive for most people there to afford. So, they've been switching to natural gas, which they have large reserves of their own and is considerably cheaper.

Now, let's say the same thing starts to happen to Americans. Let's say you're right and, being past peak, oil will start to get more expensive. Even many Americans will not want to pay that much for it, and/or they can't afford to pay that much for it. What to do? Give up and die? Hardly. They will "transition to a different state" - one dominated by natural gas (and other alternatives). You can't tell me people will go about BAU while gasoline rises to $5, 7$ and then $10 a gallon. No fool would. Of course they'll do something.
When did I ever suggest that people wouldn't want to do something, or even try to do something? Of course I get it.

However, I don't just simply accept, as you do, that such a change will happen overnight. There will be a great reluctance to build another infrastructure alongside the oil one and, even if the attempt is made, it will take a long time to do. I also don't expect a serious attempt to do so, until oil is extremely expensive. When will that happen? Neither you nor I know. But here's a scenario.

No serious attempt to build a parallel infrastructure will be made until the economy recovers to something near pre-recession levels. What happens then? Oil will become increasingly expensive. What event will that cause? A recession, of course. Will a parallel infrastructure be attempted then? Probably not. It would likely take one or two more oil price induced recessions to get governments to sit up and take notice to provide incentives to build a parallel infrastructure. How long might that take? To make significant inroads into oil use, probably quite a few years.

So it's not unreasonable to not expect a parallel natural gas infrastructure for maybe a decade and a half. That's two infrastructures to maintain, because the oil one will take a lot longer to go away. And what would be the cost of building such an infrastructure? Especially if oil is very expensive, and possibly scarce, at the time? Would it ever get built?

All this assumes that natural gas can be produced and delivered at the required rate, which will slowly increase, many many years after oil has peaked and, quite possibly with a world wide natural gas peak looming within another decade (that is, a decade after the natural gas parallel infrastructure has been built) or so. It also assumes that all the major natural gas exporters will play nice.

So I think there is a major question mark over your optimism about natural gas and its ability to keep BAU going for a further decade or two. I realise, though, that your belief system will not allow you to consider alternatives to your rosy scenario. Hopefully, others might.
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby TonyPrep » Fri 07 Aug 2009, 08:11:18

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('OilFinder2', 'i')t is possible for 56% of the cars
Could you pass that calculation by us again? I can't find any statistics for the percentage of cars in Pakistan running on natural gas, only the total number of vehicles; about 2 million.
User avatar
TonyPrep
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2842
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 03:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand
Top

Re: Natural Gas can not replace depleting petroleum reserves.

Postby copious.abundance » Fri 07 Aug 2009, 11:13:43

Here you go Tony.
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('OilFinder2', 'I') can't believe I missed this thread until now.

And now that I've seen it, it has to be among the stupidest threads posted here in a while.

Perhaps all these natural gas discoveries are getting on pstarr's nerves and, true to his nature, he needs to go into denial about it and tell us how it will "never pan out."

Perhaps pstarr needs to be reminded that 15% of vehicles in Argentina run on natural gas. Then there's this little factoid which I posted in the now-merged Pakistan thread:
$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('OilFinder2', 'A')ccording to this there are 2 million vehicles (all of the 4-wheeled variety, I presume) in Pakistan which run on natural gas, as of December 2008.

According to this (PDF), there are about 8 million total vehicles on the road in Pakistan, as of 2008. 44% of those are 4-wheeled vehicles (motorcycles and scooters being really popular there). So we have about 3.52 million 4-wheeled vehicles on the road in Pakistan.

2 million is about 56% of 3.52 million. Even if we include all those scooters, 25% of all vehicles on the road in Pakistan run on natural gas.

Gosh golly - I thought there was no substitute for oil! 8O

:lol:

Or maybe pstarr just needs to join in on the natural gas vehicles thread.

Nice pic here: Filling up at the (natural gas) pump.
Stuff for doomers to contemplate:
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1190117.html#p1190117
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1193930.html#p1193930
http://peakoil.com/forums/post1206767.html#p1206767
User avatar
copious.abundance
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9589
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 03:00:00
Location: Cornucopia
Top

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest