Joined: Oct 15, 2004 Posts: 2196 Location: Arkansas
Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 12:27 pm Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
My lights are on here to in the U.S. However, I understand now, at least a little bit, just how complex the US grid is and how difficult it is to keep it up and running, let alone, increase its capacity to meet new demand. As about 500k British just found out, years of piss poor planning had led to blackouts. A week ago, most of those 500k Brits had probably never thought twice about flipping on their light switch. I bet now they do.
Unfortunately, most Americans, like the vast majority of those Brits a week ago, just automatically assume their lights will come on when the flip the switch They don't even have a cursory understanding of their electricity, where the energy comes from, how its generated, and how its delivered. They assume that somebody is taking care of it, usually assuming falsely that "the gov't" is on top of things.
The point of this thread is to remove the ignorance of the masses and wake them up that nothing can be taken forgranted, not even something as simple as flipping one's light switch. As Duncan points out, electricity defines modern civilization. Its importance cannot be underestimated and probably cannot be overestimated. Unfortunately, it has been ignored for decades now, and even the West is beginning to feel the repurcussions of ignoring the one thing that defines all civilization - electricity.
Though this is but one example, it reinforces just how vital electricity is at all levels:
Outcast, the problem I have with the message you send, that "all is okay" is that all is not okay. There are serious problems that need to be addressed, and telling them that all is okay in your part of China only reinforces and encourages people to remain ignorant and not get involved.
Joined: Oct 15, 2004 Posts: 2196 Location: Arkansas
Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 1:35 pm Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
KTH,
I do understand you just like to be a smart ass, but for others new to the thread, what KTH and Outcast have not mentioned is that China too has had some blackouts and capacity issues, most recently, they closed 32 coal plants (article previously linked on this thread).
Interestingly, another issue needs watching. Many have believed that LNG will help make up for declining US conventional gas production and declining Canadian exports of NG to the US.
However, this article shows there may be problems relying on LNG imports:
Quote:
Natural gas shipments to U.S. in pause mode
By Clifford Krauss Published: May 29, 2008
CAMERON PARISH, Louisiana: The cost of a gallon of gas gets all the headlines, but the natural gas that will heat many American homes next winter is going up in price as fast or faster.
That fact makes the scene in the languid, alligator-infested marshland here in coastal Louisiana all the more remarkable.
Only a month after Cheniere Energy inaugurated its $1.4 billion liquefied natural gas terminal here, an empty supertanker sat in its berth with no place to go while workers painted empty storage tanks.
The nearly idle terminal is a monument to a stalled experiment, one that was supposed to import so much LNG from around the world that homes would be heated and factories humming at bargain prices.
But now LNG shipments to the United States are slowing to a trickle, and Cheniere and other companies have dropped plans to build more terminals.
A longstanding assumption of American energy policy has been that natural gas would be plentiful abroad, and therefore readily available for importation, as production falls off in North America, where many fields are tapped out.
But some experts are starting to question that idea, saying natural gas could be subject to the same explosion in overseas demand that has made oil so expensive.
As it is, the supertankers that were supposed to deliver cargoes of gas from Africa and the Middle East to the United States are taking them to places like Spain and Japan instead, pushing up gas prices and depleting the nation's stockpiles as the hurricane season approaches.
"A few years ago people looked at LNG as a solution to North America's gas needs," said Nikos Tsafos, an analyst with PCF Energy, a consulting firm. "But today we see that there is less LNG around than people expected, and there is more competition for that LNG from markets that are willing to pay more than the United States."
Not long ago, Cheniere was a darling of Wall Street. It was widely praised for having the vision to plan four new liquefied gas terminals around the Gulf of Mexico to connect the country with supplies of natural gas from places like Nigeria and Egypt, gas once considered so worthless it was burned off.
Now the company's stock price has sunk from $40 to just over $5 since last fall.
"The question that people ask is if LNG doesn't come to the United States for another year or two or three, what is going to happen to Cheniere," acknowledged Charif Souki, the chief executive officer of the company.
While natural gas prices in the United States have spiked to over $11.80 per thousand cubic feet from $7.50 at the beginning of the year, the price that gas producers can draw in many other countries in the world is several dollars higher. All they need are terminals in producing countries that can chill natural gas to minus 260 degrees Fahrenheit for shipping across oceans and terminals in consuming countries that can regasify cargoes.
Just about the only place where demand for LNG seems not to be growing is the United States, an abrupt shift from expectations as little as one year ago.
The Sabine Pass terminal was part of an estimated $7 billion construction of eight new LNG receiving terminals being built around the Gulf of Mexico and the Atlantic Coast over the last five years to guarantee plentiful domestic supplies. With imports about 40 percent of the level of a year ago, and national receiving terminal capacity poised to double this year, the excess construction of import capacity has alarmed industry executives.
However the executives predict that it is only a matter of time before the white elephants begin to look like a more robust breed. They say American gas suppliers will eventually be willing to pay the higher world prices on the spot market, especially if a gas shortage ensues after a punishing hurricane season or frigid winter.
They also predict future American consumption of natural gas is poised to increase because of hardening opposition to building new coal-fired electricity generating plants and delays in new nuclear plants. "Over time, we will need to start importing more gas," said Darcel Hulse, president of Sempra LNGE, a division of Sempra Energy, which is building receiving terminals in Mexico and Louisiana. "We will not have enough."
That was the thinking that spurred the LNG expansion in the United States in the first place. At the beginning of the decade, government officials and energy experts predicted a decline in domestic natural gas production as conventional fields on-shore and in the Gulf of Mexico declined. Companies like Cheniere, Sempra Energy and Exxon Mobil began snapping up coastal land and requesting regulatory approval for scores of terminals. Several other terminals were taken out of mothballs and expanded.
Posted: Thu May 29, 2008 4:22 pm Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
Since a lot of electricity is generated burning coal, here's a good article discussing US coal production and various estimates of coal reserves etc. Its a article by Heinberg posted at the Oildrum.
Joined: Aug 14, 2004 Posts: 2066 Location: San Diego, Ca.
Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 2:01 am Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
Recent off-topic posts deleted _________________ "Peak oil isn't more than an interesting industry factoid and doesn't have anything to do with the hysterics speculated on ad nauseum around here!" ReserveGrowthRulz
Posted: Fri May 30, 2008 2:28 am Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
To: seahorse
Don't let Trolls get under your skin.
They exist only to annoy and not add anything meaningful to the debate.
*getting back to electricity*
It's been said many times already. A chain will break at it's weak link. The weak link is the 3rd world. That's where collapse will begin. Actually I think it's happening right now as we speak.
Not to sound like an A**hole but, I'll personally be immune to most of the negative effects of PO simply because I was fortunate enough to be born in a 1st world nation. By the time it hits here I'll be dead by then or close to it so it won't matter. Electricity is too important to do without. If it came down to choosing between (Starbucks coffee and DVD movies) or maintaining the grid then the money will go to the grid. In other words there's a lot of unnecessary "fat" that can be redirected to support the core infrastructure.
It won't be pretty because there's lots of people who are employed in "unnecessary" industries.
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 12:20 am Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
Seahorse,
Not to steal Mr. Duncan's thunder (he did have the conviction to publicly throw out his expectations) but many in the exploration biz around me had similar views of the future. Not a lot of specific dates but the general consensus "soon". It may sound odd but peak oil, though a critical factor for society, isn't much of a concern at the grass roots exploration base as far as doing our jobs. In the USA we long ago gave up dreams of finding super sized fields. The question really was more "can I get someone to drill my well, how much will I get and how profitable will it be?" I've drilled many wells that were successful and very profitable for the investors but the reserves I've found times 10,000 wouldn't be even a tiny blip compared to daily US consumption. High commodity prices did make it easier to sell ideas for a while but the ever increasing costs to drill is reducing profitabity (from new wells) significantly.
Electrical shortages is a whole different matter. In the US it's not so much a potential lack of fuel as it is the lack of generating capacity. California was having blackouts when fuels prices were much lower than now and supplies were abundant. I don't recall the author's name but at least 6 or 8 years ago I read a report warning of this shortfall in electrical generation. Ignoring the polltution aspects, we have enough coal to supply all electrical needs for at least 100 years. In fact, the great majority of increased electrical generation in the last 20 years has come from coal. Oddly enough, one of the biggest potential factors for future electrical shortages (besides lack of power plants) is a shortage of coal transportation.
Joined: Oct 15, 2004 Posts: 2196 Location: Arkansas
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 7:40 am Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
Hi Rockman,
I stumbled on peak oil and the "Gorge" theory quite by accident about 4 years ago (while trying to understand dollar valuation issues on the net). The "shock value" of both PO and "Gorge" did peak my interest and put me on a long path now to try to learn what I could.
As you know, the "Gorge" theory and Peak Oil are separate but somewhat related issues. Its been a long learning process for me, and I emphasize that learning is a process, sometimes slow, especially for something as complex as energy issues. The issues and problems posed by PO and the Gorge are still too complex for me to ever fully understand, and I know that I will never be a petroleum engineer etc., but I at least now have a general understanding of the macro issues and feel I have enough information as a citizen to understand the issues and how they play out in the political debate.
Unfortunately, most Americans are still very much energy ignorant as I was 4 years ago and simply believe that if their lights don't come on its because of some "stupid utility" or if the price of gas goes up its bc some oil company or Arab is gouging them. Its my opinion that this collective ignorance of most Americans will lead to wrong political reactions, which we see happening already with Congress wanting to sue Opec and openly talking about "nationalizing" our own oil companies.
My hope and belief is that websites like this will educate people to the issues, at least enough them enough to understand the big picture so that the collective political debate will offer real solutions and not knee jerk reactions. I do think the "shock value" of Duncan's theory and of the "peak oil pessimist" is necessary to get people like me reading about it.
As for Duncan's "gorge theory" it was a starting point for me and has not been an ending point. As I said earlier, learning is a process, sometimes slow. Do I ultimately believe he is right? No, but no one person ever is. As Williams Faulkner said, no one person has the truth, we all carry a piece of it. The piece of the truth that the Duncan theory gave to me was the realization that the hallmark of "civilization" really is defined by electricity, and the process of mining, drilling etc for the energy that generates electricity, and the grid that delivers it, is very complex. The more complex something is, the more subject it is to unforeseen failures.
I also understand that electrical issues are very much regional in nature, as the grids are not interconnected, so each country must address the issues on their own. As the British just learned, years of political neglect has left them struggling now with lack of capacity and blackouts. The same can and may be true for the U.S. After trying to follow this issue for some time, I've almost come to the conclusion that no political body, be it democratic or communist like China, is fully able to address the issues.
I do appreciate now how important electricity is and no longer just take it forgranted like most of America does collectively. I no longer assume that the lights will flip on simply bc I flip a switch. Our energy issues have long been ignored. The US has no energy policy. Our grid issues are very real and very complex but we do not have a collective will or plan to deal with them, which is most unfortunate.
Joined: Oct 15, 2004 Posts: 2196 Location: Arkansas
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 7:56 am Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
Rockman,
As you point out, the US does have a lot of coal, but a few posts ago, I posted an article detailing how no new coal plants are being built, at least through 2010, bc the Federal gov't will no longer back funding for them, due to two reasons, one of which is this ongoing credit crisis caused by the housing downturn. So, energy issues are complex and just as we need more plants, we, as a country, stop backing funding for new plants. This goes to my point on energy ignorance leads to no energy policy leads ultimately to failure to deliver power to someone.
Here's an article out of the UK again showing one of their nuclear plants is not profitable which brings into question whether they will get the investors needed for future nuclear plants. There is always this assumption that in rich western nations that funding will be there, when this article from the UK and the fact the US gov't will not back any new coal plants shows the assumption to be wrong.
Here is the UK article:
Quote:
Shutdowns and plunging profits cast doubt on nuclear futureIndustry on the defensive as report says it will always need subsidy
Mark Milner and Terry Macalister The Guardian, Thursday May 29 2008 Article historyBritish Energy, the nuclear power group, reported a sharp fall in profits yesterday - the same day a series of mishaps at its stations left more than 60% of its capacity out of action.
An unexpected shutdown at Hunterston on Scotland's west coast yesterday followed the closure of its Sizewell B station on Tuesday which left thousands of homes without power. The shutdown at the Ayrshire plant meant 10 of the company's 16 units were out of action.
The nuclear generator, which is to be sold off after the government announced plans for a new generation of nuclear stations, has been dogged by problems in the past year. It blamed other, ongoing problems at two power plants, Hartlepool and Heysham 1, for the fall in underlying profits from £1.22bn to £882m.
Bill Coley, chief executive, said the figures were disappointing but insisted the company was making progress on technical problems. "We have made good operational progress ... We are well positioned to manage our existing fleet to best advantage and look ahead to playing a pivotal role in the new build programme." Sizewell B was expected to be back in production in a few days, he said.
The problems come as a report today into the failings of the UK nuclear industry casts doubt on British Energy's prospects and is likely to alarm foreign power firms preparing to launch multibillion-pound bids for it. The study, published by Friends of the Earth and written by former Guardian journalist Paul Brown, claims the company could be forced to shut down some plants because the reprocessing facility at Sellafield is running out of storage space.
Although Coley said the company was not experiencing any problems with waste storage, the report claims the financial legacy of Sellafield and failures of British Energy make it too dangerous for the government to embark on a new generation of nuclear plants.
Many of the companies considering a bid, such as EDF of France, want to use the UK company's sites for constructing a new generation of plants. They insist they do not need financial help to do so. But Brown concludes: "The economics of new nuclear power stations for the UK do not add up. It is not possible to achieve what the government says it will do - build a new generation of nuclear power stations in England without public subsidy."
Ministers had made many promises over the past 50 years that nuclear would pay its own way, Brown says, only to see huge new liabilities develop. The government had underwritten all the debts of British Energy when it collapsed in 2001 so the company can never go bankrupt, a commitment that dwarfs that made to the nationalised bank Northern Rock.
"Employing more than 10,000 people, the Sellafield nuclear complex is in crisis. Its reprocessing works and plutonium fuel plant are all failing at a massive cost - annually already £100 each for every taxpayer in this country - and this is rising," he says.
John Large, a nuclear industry consultant, believes British Energy might solve its storage problems but agrees it will be impossible to sell off the company without "massaging" the finances and handing financial liabilities to the public purse.
The doubts were underlined yesterday by an admission from the Nuclear Decommissioning Authority that the cost of cleaning up Britain's nuclear legacy would increase from the current estimate of £73bn. Director Jim Morse told the BBC: "I think it's a high probability that in the short term it will undoubtedly go up." The £73bn figure, published in January ,was an increase of £12bn on a 2003 estimate
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 12:23 pm Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
Seahorse,
Thanks for the update on Eng electrical probs. I hadn't realized they were in so much trouble. I haven't gotten into the details of nuclear power plants but, like any new technology, the startup is always full of missteps and cost overruns regardless of the technology. Same for cell phones as power plants except the learning curve would obviously be much greater (and costly and SCARY) for nuclear power.
You mentioned the different electrical grids in the world. You may know that the US is broken into a western and eastern grid. But the vast majority of Americans don't know it. Even less well known is that Texas (where I abide) is not part of either. That decision was made way back in the 1930's I think. I don't know why but being a TBC (Texan By Choice) for 30 years I suspect it had to do with the independant nature of the local population.
Back to coal: In 2000 I driled some wells in Wyoming. Entertaing myself with the local news I learned about the coal transport perdicament. They could dig all the coal out of the ground in WY that was needed to fire the electrical plants back east but there wasn't enough rail capacity to get it there. The RR companies tried to lay new lines next to existing lines. But these new lines would run right thru all the towns that developed along the original lines. Needless to say these small towns didn't want a new line or two running thru town that would carry 100 new trains or more daily. And the railroads said it would cost too much to lay new tracks around the towns. I don't know if they ever found a compromise. I may do a search on coal transport later and see if this is still a bottle neck.
So far we haven't had any real backout probs in TX. And we do have a few costly nuclear plants. We also have a major wind turbine project going up in N TX. It will be interesting to see how those economics work out as PO becomes more a part of everyday life.
Joined: Dec 27, 2004 Posts: 12541 Location: zombie horde wonderland
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 3:54 pm Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
Texas is one of the biggest energy hogs in the world - we certainly should have some room for conservation. If folks would relearn that it is possible to live here without air conditioning! _________________ No original ideas are contained in this post.
Posted: Sun Jun 01, 2008 5:33 pm Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
Ludi wrote:
Texas is one of the biggest energy hogs in the world - we certainly should have some room for conservation. If folks would relearn that it is possible to live here without air conditioning!
isn't there a saying in Texas:
If a man could own Texas and hell, he'd live in hell and rent out Texas.
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 9:24 am Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
Seahorse et al,
Picking up on Seahorse's LNG post regarding decreased LNG imports to the US: acutually the LNG import thread touches a broad range of PO aspects.
As Seahorse mentioned, US LNG offload terminals are often idle at the moment due to the decrease in import levels resulting from the higher prices other's in the world are willing to pay. Last number I heard was a 60% decline y-to-y. Oddly some time ago state regulators in Miss and La declined permits for a few of the proposed LNG terminals - a dispute over design characteristics. I'm wondering now if those permit requester's are breathing a sigh of relief. Econmimics of such projects depend heavy on through put. Declining imports would be a real killer. But there are $trillion of natuaral sitting south of the US in the Caribean with virtually now local market.
What may confuse some is the fact that natural gas is selling for over $11/unit now compared to $7+/unit last Jan. Gas is usually high in the winter and drops during summer. But the gas market bumped up big time because the coal producers bumped their prices up. Many untilities can switch between gas and coal. Coal went up so many switched to gas. And that drove gas prices up.
What drove coal up? Besides the absolute dependecy on coal by the electric generaters, a big bottleneck was coal transport. The ever increasing demand for coal for electrical generation (much in the eastern US) can readily be met by the mining sector. But not the coal rail transport system. For at least the last 10 years the RR have been trying to expand but met resistance from many local communities that don't want 100 long coal trains rolling thru their towns daily. Hard to blame them since they receive any monetary benefit.
One big stumbling block for potential LNG importers is the current rush of drilling in natural gas "resource plays". These are lower porosity sandstone reservoirs and shales that have been long known for holding hugh reserves but were not economical under past pricing conditions. Now, with higher prices and improved technology, companies are leasing and drilling in these plays as fast as possible. Currently I'm involved in more than 25 such wells. But we're about to hit a couple of bottle necks: lack of steel pipe to drill and complete these wells in addition to a shortage of drilling rigs.
With high natural gas prices most would think the LNG importers, steel makers and drilling rig builders would be expanding like crazy. But they suffer from the same problem (a fear actually): what will be the demand/price for natural gas 6 to 8 years from now? That's the time frame for most projects to payout their initial investments. Back in the big boom in the late 70's companies spent big bucks anticipatiing an increasing demand that quickly withered away. I vivid recall driving by a drilling rig contruction yards for several years watching 5 giants rigs (probably a $60 mm investment, just sit there rusting. They never made it out the yard before the boom ended...never drilled a single well. Eventually the were cut up and sold as scrape metal.
The point of this long winded essay is to highlight one of the major (if not the key) problems with addressing PO as I see it: what will the price theater be in the next 5 to 10 years. Many here would think that would be an easy call. But many of the CEO's making these decisions were there in 1980 when folks were predicting oil to rise from $35/bbl to $100/bbl by the mid 80's...and then they watched oil drop to $10/bbl by 1986. I actually knew two folks that commited suicide over the bust as well as many other families that fell apart to different degrees. I can easily proclaim a continued rise in commodity prices as well as anyone else here...but then again I'm not putting any money down on the bet.
Peak oil is definately here IMHO, but that doesn't guarentee ever increasing prices over short (a couple of years) term. A big drop in consumption (worldwide recession) will drop oil prices down as it did in 1986. But in the long term I, as well as most here, know upward pressure on prices will return as we slide farther down the deliverability curve. In short, the big problem I see is that all investments decisions are made on short term outlook and not the long term. It's hard to envision that to change anytime soon. Wall Street doesn't care what your profit and growth wil be 10 years from now...they want to know what it will be next quarter.
Anyone with a sulution for that hurdle has my vote for President (or even King).
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 10:10 am Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
Rockman,
Campbell and others have also voiced their concern that PO will manifest itself in a series of constant "recessions" caused by oil supply and demand bumping up against each other.
As you point out, this creates a real fundamental problem which is, how can we ever justify the investment needed when future prices are so uncertain? On the private side, I don't think it can be done or may not be done bc of the inherent risk. Thus, a gov't energy policy, namely strong gov't direction is needed to support the investment so that the production will be there.
Will this ever happen? Unfortunately, I think it would take some seriously high prices to get people "mentally" ready to accept necessary gov't intervention. There is a movement now that we need to become "energy independent" caused by increasing energy prices and by this "war on terror" bc people don't like the idea that they are supporting terrorist countries by buying their oil. So, there is an opportunity for the President and Congress to institute a "Marshall" energy plan and rebuild our energy infrastructure and supporting industries at the same time.
What I'm unsure of is the relationship of "money" and "credit" to America's ability to institute an energy "Marshall" plan. It clearly takes a country with a lot of financial resources to institute such a plan as the US did after WWII. The problem is the US is virtually bankrupt with its entitlement programs, our trade and budget deficits, our loss of political goodwill abroad etc. We depend on foreigners to buy our bonds which in turn allow us to operate budget deficits. So, it seems we as a country have a limited window of opportunity available to take advantage of instituting such a plan. For example, all the new coal plants put on hold bc of the current credit crisis is not a good sign.
The US military is clearly trying to make the energy transition by attempting to move to CTL.
So, although all problems are solvable, problems have to be solved timely. There seems to be a point of "no return" when talking about solving these very complex, expensive energy issues which ultimately require a strong gov't role. The ability for a gov't to actively intervene and do something like a Marshall plan means it has to have the financial ability to do such a plan. I don't know how long America has, financially, to be able to get its act together politically (political will) to seriously address the numerous problems, like assisting RR getting new lines, building of Nuclear plants (permitting process, backing funding of plants to ease private financial risks), same with oil and gas exploration and development, and solar.
If America suddenly woke up and said, all green arguments aside, we need this energy policy let's get it done, will we have the financial resources to do so? The risk is, by the time the US gets the political will to act (too ignorant now to act) it may no longer have the financial ability to act. The foreigners that provide us financing to run budget deficits may not do so any longer and we are left to squander like a typical third world country.
Right now, foreigners invest in our bonds, dollars etc to support our out of control consumer economy. So, if the American consumer gets too broke to spend, which is increasingly likely, the foreigners may shift investment into their own or other developing countries and we, the US, are left to our own devices. I can easily see the risk of an Argentine or South American economic crisis hitting the shores of the US. In that case, foreigners may simply quit funding our deficits and resort to buying and exporting our natural resources for their own growth rather than funding us to rebuild (We already see this with China buying lots of US coal, trying to buy Unocal a few years ago). The developing economies may even go so far as to buy our natural resource companies, like they are in Canada, which would do Americans no good. I may be nuts, but unless Americans wake up, I can easily see us becoming a typical third world country, rich in natural resources that are exploited by other growing economies throughout the world. That is, unless we act quickly.
This is not a scenario I like to envision, bc I have three kids who will either reap the benefits or pay the consequences of the decisions being made over the next 5 years.
Posted: Mon Jun 02, 2008 11:03 am Post subject: Re: Review of the Olduvai Gorge
Seahorse,
Very interesting to see the gov having the Air Force push the coal to liquids process (Did you notice they want the first plant in Mont....that coal transport issue again).
On the one hand, I agree with you that only the gov can move such matters along due to all the various private financing probs. On the other hand, besides my libertarian leanings, I don't trust the gov to do it right. Take the $8 billion subsidy to the ethanol producers last year. The free market said ethanol wasn't a viable approach (finally starting to see some wider spread public reports re: the decrease fuel economy of ethanol blends).
On the third hand, Wall Street won't tolerate the risk of the inevitable cost over runs, inefficiencey and potetial lack of adequate pricing when production is finally ramped up. Private investors (the FUNDS) might throw money at it if enough hype is tossed about.
A Marshal plan only works if there's enough political and public support. I wish I didn't view the current state of affairs precluding that possibility.
And since Seahorse brought up the subject of the US military proding fuel conversion technology in order to supple their needs, I'll offer a possible new thread regarding a potential short term (and very short lived) option: the Stratigic Petroleum Reserves. I have my own opinion to which I would gladly likely to see someone refute. The question is: what "company" is the largest consumer of oil in the US? A hint: their initials are D.O.D. I'm not sure but I believe they are also the largest individual consumer in the world. I have no doubt that if there were a sudden and major loss or imported oil very little, if any, of the SPR would make it to the public sector. Despite the military long ago entering into the nuclear age, 99% of all the material and manpower movements by the US military is done with oil byproducts. I would guess that whatever events would lead to such a sudden loss of imports would also involve a significant military response and thus an increased demand for product.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
