Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

For discussions of events and conditions not necessarily related to Peak Oil.

Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby Bill55AZ » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 12:58:04

Here in the USA, we just had an election....and it didn't take long for me to get upset about hearing the same thing over and over and over.
Pick any candiate from President to corporation commisson, and they all equate oil issues to electric issues in their speeches..
McCain and Obama both would say something like, "we need to stop using foriegn oil (or middle east oil) so let's build lots of PV panels, windmills, and use clean coal or more nuclear.
Less than 2% of our electric generation is the result of burning oil, mostly at peaking plants, so the savings is small.
Do politicians in other countries get it so wrong?
or am I missing something? if so, I hope it isn't obvious...
Bill55AZ
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri 14 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby mos6507 » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 13:16:37

Yep, you are missing something. The bridge between electricity and oil is transport. A significant chunk of transport can be electrified, but we obviously need more capacity and greener production to make that happen. If your ONLY goal is to get off foreign oil, then by all means power your plugin hybrids with dirty coal-powered plants. But Obama actually gives a damn about global warming.
mos6507
 

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby Bill55AZ » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 13:27:41

mos6507 wrote:Yep, you are missing something. The bridge between electricity and oil is transport. A significant chunk of transport can be electrified, but we obviously need more capacity and greener production to make that happen.

I am aware that transport is the bridge, but it will take a long time to build that bridge, and it only applies to short commutes. Batteries are not an answer if you are looking for green transportation. The materials in them are some nasty stuff. And I have doubts that battery technology is going to advance as quickly as its supporters wish it to.
Funny, tho, that few politicians ever try to connect the dots as you did. I suppose doing so would have led to harder questions that they couldn't answer.
Detroit wants a bailout so they can retool. I wonder what they are aiming for in the retooling effort, smaller cars that burn less gas? or hybrids? or all electric?
Bill55AZ
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri 14 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby alochin » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 13:34:13

You got a good point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sour ... A_2006.png

Although we still have a lot of coal, if we use coal to replace oil (with liquefaction), then our coal supply will last about 50 years. Using renewables to generate electricity will make our coal resource last longer.

Coal is a major cause of climate change which will eventually be a much bigger problem than peak oil.

If we replace our gas guzzlers with electric vehicles, then our electric demand will increase, and that increase should be absorbed by renewable energy sources, so that we don't postpone our energy problems to the next generation.
User avatar
alochin
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Tue 26 Aug 2008, 03:00:00

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby Commanding_Heights » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 13:46:03

alochin wrote:You got a good point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sour ... A_2006.png

Although we still have a lot of coal, if we use coal to replace oil (with liquefaction), then our coal supply will last about 50 years. Using renewables to generate electricity will make our coal resource last longer.

Coal is a major cause of climate change which will eventually be a much bigger problem than peak oil.

If we replace our gas guzzlers with electric vehicles, then our electric demand will increase, and that increase should be absorbed by renewable energy sources, so that we don't postpone our energy problems to the next generation.


I'd love to know where you got that 50 year estimation from. Source please? Also how do you account for compounding growth, even at a 1% rate? I hate how these numbers are thrown around so willy-nilly.
User avatar
Commanding_Heights
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu 09 Nov 2006, 04:00:00

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby jamest » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 14:18:22

Last year we used the energy equivalent of approximately 3 million barrels of oil per day in the form of natural gas in order to generate electricity.

This natural gas could have been used for transportation, displacing oil consumption.
User avatar
jamest
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat 08 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby Commanding_Heights » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 14:24:43

jamest wrote:Last year we used the energy equivalent of approximately 3 million barrels of oil per day in the form of natural gas in order to generate electricity.

This natural gas could have been used for transportation, displacing oil consumption.


OK? So now what do you do for the electricity that you just eliminated the feed source from? Use more coal? Windmills? PV?

All of that takes energy to mine or build.
User avatar
Commanding_Heights
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu 09 Nov 2006, 04:00:00

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby Bill55AZ » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 15:01:43

jamest wrote:Last year we used the energy equivalent of approximately 3 million barrels of oil per day in the form of natural gas in order to generate electricity.

This natural gas could have been used for transportation, displacing oil consumption.

agree, as does T. Boone Pickens, but lets not overlook that a lot of our peaking plants are dual cycle gas turbine plants that use that natural gas. Coal, hydro, and Nuclear are best for base load, but when those are maxed out, we need the peaking plants to come on line. Oil fired turbines and diesel generators make up some peaking plants.
Base load plants are large, and slow to get started or restarted after an outage. Peaking plants can be rotated on and off grid as needed almost as easily as starting your car.
So we can't divert all that natural gas to transportaion.
Bill55AZ
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri 14 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby jamest » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 15:25:31

Commanding_Heights wrote:
jamest wrote:Last year we used the energy equivalent of approximately 3 million barrels of oil per day in the form of natural gas in order to generate electricity.

This natural gas could have been used for transportation, displacing oil consumption.


OK? So now what do you do for the electricity that you just eliminated the feed source from? Use more coal? Windmills? PV?

All of that takes energy to mine or build.


The post that you quoted was a response to the original question of how developing alternative means of electricity generation could displace oil consumption. The premise of the response was that such alternative means would exist.
User avatar
jamest
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat 08 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby jamest » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 15:26:43

Bill55AZ wrote:
jamest wrote:Last year we used the energy equivalent of approximately 3 million barrels of oil per day in the form of natural gas in order to generate electricity.

This natural gas could have been used for transportation, displacing oil consumption.

agree, as does T. Boone Pickens, but lets not overlook that a lot of our peaking plants are dual cycle gas turbine plants that use that natural gas. Coal, hydro, and Nuclear are best for base load, but when those are maxed out, we need the peaking plants to come on line. Oil fired turbines and diesel generators make up some peaking plants.
Base load plants are large, and slow to get started or restarted after an outage. Peaking plants can be rotated on and off grid as needed almost as easily as starting your car.
So we can't divert all that natural gas to transportaion.


Good point. Thank you.
User avatar
jamest
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 92
Joined: Sat 08 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby mos6507 » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 15:42:05

Bill55AZ wrote:but it will take a long time to build that bridge, and it only applies to short commutes.


So what? Let's get on with it.

Bill55AZ wrote:Batteries are not an answer if you are looking for green transportation. The materials in them are some nasty stuff.


Do we have to go through EV FUD again? I'm so tired of this crap. Lithium batteries are benign to the environment. All batteries should be recycled anyway. No batteries should ever wind up in a landfill.

Bill55AZ wrote:And I have doubts that battery technology is going to advance as quickly as its supporters wish it to.


We're going to have to settle on whatever we can come up with on short notice.

Bill55AZ wrote:Detroit wants a bailout so they can retool. I wonder what they are aiming for in the retooling effort, smaller cars that burn less gas? or hybrids? or all electric?


Probably all of the above.
mos6507
 

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby mos6507 » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 15:45:45

Commanding_Heights wrote:OK? So now what do you do for the electricity that you just eliminated the feed source from? Use more coal? Windmills? PV?

All of that takes energy to mine or build.


I understand the problem of receding horizons, but at some point we have to get beyond this FUD paralysis and try something. There is no rationalization for inaction.
mos6507
 

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby Commanding_Heights » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 17:27:13

mos6507 wrote:
Commanding_Heights wrote:OK? So now what do you do for the electricity that you just eliminated the feed source from? Use more coal? Windmills? PV?

All of that takes energy to mine or build.


I understand the problem of receding horizons, but at some point we have to get beyond this FUD paralysis and try something. There is no rationalization for inaction.


Mos, this is where you an I part ways. I honestly believe you're one of the most rational people on this site but this "we've got to do something" (I believe) is irrational. Here's why:

1. You have to reach and convince quite a few people that drill baby drill isn't going to solve the problem. Most people don't think past "what's for dinner?" As humans we evolved as hunter/gatherers. This accounts for our greed plus the here and now mentality.

2. Even if you do achieve the above you're just allowing us to continue an unsubstantiable lifestyle a bit longer. Allowing this is just allowing us to foul our enviroment even more.

3. I don't even think there's a word in the dictonary to properly describe the amount of bureaucracy involved in getting this type of mammoth project moving. At this point in time the only form of government that could even attempt to achieve this is a dictatorship. And by NO means am I advocating that. I just don't see the free market and democracy getting this off the ground due to greed.

4. I actually do have several rationalizations for inaction. Or inaction on a massive scale. I take actions on a local level daily. My rationalizations for inaction on a massive scale are William Catton and Herbert Spencer. I agree with Catton that we just have too many people and I believe Spencers "survival of the fittest" is going to be the only solution in the end, no matter how many speed bumps we throw at mother nature. It's gonna get fugly.

Two things motivate most people. Those are fear and greed. By the time people are scared enough to take action it's going to be too late. Discussing on this forum what needs to happen is preaching to the choir. Unfortunately the pews are empty.

It's one big shiteball rolling downhill and there ain't no way to stop it. You gotta just get outta the way the best you can.
User avatar
Commanding_Heights
Peat
Peat
 
Posts: 194
Joined: Thu 09 Nov 2006, 04:00:00

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby mos6507 » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 18:12:07

Commanding_Heights wrote:2. Even if you do achieve the above you're just allowing us to continue an unsubstantiable lifestyle a bit longer. Allowing this is just allowing us to foul our enviroment even more.


Everyone makes their predictions, but nobody really knows how the die off would go down and how deep it would have to be before Gaia is satisfied. Within that range of uncertainty we have to operate under the assumption that moving towards sustainability is going to save lives. Perhaps not everyone, but some, and so it is worth doing (unless you've become misanthropic about humanity like so many here have). The more that make it through the bottleneck in one piece, the greater the chance that you or I will be left standing. Individual preps only go so far. So there is some self interest there.

Commanding_Heights wrote:I just don't see the free market and democracy getting this off the ground due to greed.


Deep down I agree with you. But I want to stay hopeful until shown otherwise. I'm already seriously emotionally f*cked up over this as it is, having to put on a positive facade everywhere other than this forum. I need something happening at the macro level to give me some reason to think the blast radius of the collapse is shrinking.
mos6507
 

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby Bill55AZ » Fri 14 Nov 2008, 21:51:14

alochin wrote:You got a good point.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Sour ... A_2006.png

Although we still have a lot of coal, if we use coal to replace oil (with liquefaction), then our coal supply will last about 50 years. Using renewables to generate electricity will make our coal resource last longer.

Coal is a major cause of climate change which will eventually be a much bigger problem than peak oil.

If we replace our gas guzzlers with electric vehicles, then our electric demand will increase, and that increase should be absorbed by renewable energy sources, so that we don't postpone our energy problems to the next generation.

Obama is calling for a million all electric cars by 2015. Depends on where you look, I get numbers from 62 million cars on the road, to 250 million registered. One million battery powered cars isn't even a good start....
I would guess that we can save enough gasoline by conserving to be more effective than adding only one million electric cars...
Bill55AZ
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri 14 Nov 2008, 04:00:00

Re: Oil vs Electricity, apples and oranges

Unread postby mos6507 » Sat 15 Nov 2008, 00:59:53

Bill55AZ wrote:Obama is calling for a million all electric cars by 2015. Depends on where you look, I get numbers from 62 million cars on the road, to 250 million registered. One million battery powered cars isn't even a good start....
I would guess that we can save enough gasoline by conserving to be more effective than adding only one million electric cars...


Even if every new car sold was an EV or plugin hybrid, it would take longer than 2015 to have all passenger cars be electric.

I fully expect a factory fresh EV to become a true status symbol post peak when gas becomes too expensive or just plain unavailable. The rest of us will have to either DIY convert our existing cars or pursue other forms of transportation.

EVs should have been ramping up in mass production ever since NIMH came of age.
mos6507
 


Return to Geopolitics & Global Economics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests