Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Methane Hydrate Fuel (merged)

Discussions of conventional and alternative energy production technologies.

Re: U.S. Gulf gas hydrate find most promising yet - DOE

Unread postby copious.abundance » Fri 12 Jun 2009, 21:01:31

Ah yes, the classic "it isn't available RIGHT NOW so we are doomed" argument.

As if we need this particular source of methane RIGHT NOW. :razz:

Image
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: 9573
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Cornucopia

Re: U.S. Gulf gas hydrate find most promising yet - DOE

Unread postby shortonsense » Fri 12 Jun 2009, 21:34:21

pstarr wrote:Thanks to Oilfinder and his linked studies it has become clear that dispersed sediment/permafrost hydrates in sand substrates have never been exploited, that no technologies exist to do so, and that commercial production (however unlikely) is years away.


Thanks to Oilfinder and his linked studies it has become clear that people who only read titles don't understand that hydrates have been produced, aren't in deep water, that sublimation as a production technique is completely viable, ( contrary to those "experts" who confuse this with "scraping it off rocks" ) and now its resource implications on other planets within the solar system is being considered by actual scientists versus local "experts" who make all of the mistakes above but can't ever admit it for fear of their teaching college giving them a refund for having done such a bad job.

Pstarr wrote: Given the fact that peak oil production is current or imminent it is highly unlikely that hydrates could be a useful mitigation.


Says Mr "Scraping It Off The Rocks". Forgive us for looking elsewhere for viable scenarios about useful mitigation considering that the information we want isn't always contained in the titles.

Pstarr wrote:So as an interested observer I am not convinced to change my personal or business plans and will continue to prepare for a different social paradigm I already see unfolding before me.

I would suggest you do the same


You've never seen a recession before? Well, a snot nosed kid pretending to be someone from a teaching college would explain alot....
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Re: U.S. Gulf gas hydrate find most promising yet - DOE

Unread postby shortonsense » Fri 12 Jun 2009, 21:37:59

OilFinder2 wrote:Ah yes, the classic "it isn't available RIGHT NOW so we are doomed" argument.

As if we need this particular source of methane RIGHT NOW. :razz:

Image


HOW DARE YOU SHOW ONLY THE INCREASE IN PRODUCTION AFTER THE PEAK WAS ACCOMPLISHED DECADES AGO!!!!

Such factual information, and its related oil discovery cousin have not been deemed useful by TonyP, and by the peak community at large. Say 3 Hail Marys and continue, please.
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Re: U.S. Gulf gas hydrate find most promising yet - DOE

Unread postby copious.abundance » Fri 12 Jun 2009, 22:04:53

pstarr wrote:Oily, it should be clear to all objective, even minimally knowledgeable, viewers what you attempt to do. CLOUD THE ISSUE. This graph has nothing to do with U.S. Gulf gas hydrates.

God man, you are truly, utterly clueless.

You said:
pstarr wrote:Thanks to Oilfinder and his linked studies it has become clear that dispersed sediment/permafrost hydrates in sand substrates have never been exploited, that no technologies exist to do so, and that commercial production (however unlikely) is years away. Given the fact that peak oil production is current or imminent it is highly unlikely that hydrates could be a useful mitigation . . .

Now let's see . . .

OF2 posts articles and information on GOM methane hydrates.

pstarr says this will not mitigate peak oil because production is in the future (if at all), not NOW, and the technology is not developed.

Notice that pstarr did not say that methane gas, in and of itself, cannot mitigate peak oil, he qualifies his objection by citing the timing and technology of "methane hydrates" as being unable to mitigate peak oil.

Thus, he does not dismiss methane gas as a potential mitigant for peak oil, it is "methane hydrates" which would be insufficient. By default, he has then admitted that methane gas, in and of itself, could possibly mitigate peak oil.

Seeing through his not-so-clever argumentations, OF2 posts a chart demonstrating, beyond any reasonable doubt, that US production of methane gas has been going through the roof even without methane hydrate production. In other threads OF2 has posted a wealth of information demonstrating that said methane gas is abundant.

Now, out of nowhere, pstarr comes along and accuses me of clouding the issue. No, I am not clouding the issue, it is YOU who are (once again) dodging the point: Methane gas - which you have all but admitted can be a mitigant for peak oil - is seeing greatly increased production and is abundant. Even without gas hydrates being in production. This being the case, it does not matter if methane hydrates might be a decade or two away from production: It has already been proven that other sources of methane gas are more than sufficient to serve civilization until these hydrates can be developed commercially.

You are a classic point-dodger. The only way you can get out of the corner you've painted yourself in is to claim that methane gas (in any form) is unable to serve as a replacement for oil. But you know that is not true: It can, and in many nations it increasingly is.
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: 9573
Joined: Wed 26 Mar 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Cornucopia

Re: U.S. Gulf gas hydrate find most promising yet - DOE

Unread postby shortonsense » Fri 12 Jun 2009, 22:11:59

pstarr wrote:Oily, it should be clear to all objective, even minimally knowledgeable, viewers what you attempt to do. CLOUD THE ISSUE. This graph has nothing to do with U.S. Gulf gas hydrates.


Of course it does.

As long as there is plenty of regular natural gas around, no one needs to consider the trillions of cubic feet of the other stuff. On this planet or any other.

Is this really that hard to understand for an acolyte of energy such as yourself, or did him not providing a title throw you off? :o

pstarr wrote:
The chart is for all conventional gas production, with a recent surge resulting from a very expensive, environmentally questionable production of special tightly-bound shale gas.


That "recent surge" has been happening since 1985, and includes environmentally questionable production of special tightly-bound coalbed methane gas as well. But it certainly didn't stop us from using it, and it certainly won't matter when we transition into hydrates either. See how this is all related pstarr?

pstarr wrote:That you would intentionally confuse hydrates (a crystalline structure embedded in sand that has yet to be exploited) with free-flowing natural gas in well-defined pressurized fields is a cheap and confusing gimmick.



Sounds to me more like someone doesn't understand the hows and why's of "low hanging fruit", isn't that one of the common claims on the oil side?
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Re: U.S. Gulf gas hydrate find most promising yet - DOE

Unread postby shortonsense » Fri 12 Jun 2009, 22:17:40

OilFinder2 wrote:God man, you are truly, utterly clueless.



Next time put a catchy title on any references to graphs you make...1 or 2 syllables max, short words if possible, in bold.
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Re: U.S. Gulf gas hydrate find most promising yet - DOE

Unread postby shortonsense » Sat 13 Jun 2009, 00:50:48

pstarr wrote:I have no idea what your rants are about. But you guys sure can sputter and stutter. Is that methane emanating from the orifice?


I consider you knowing what methane is to be in doubt, considering that CH4 wasn't written in the title to the thread. :-D
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Arctic's 'fiery ice' is potential new energy source

Unread postby Graeme » Mon 15 Nov 2010, 20:47:52

Arctic's 'fiery ice' is potential new energy source

For the Japanese, drilling down through Arctic permafrost to get at "fiery ice" was much less daunting than boring into the deep sea.

They came up with $48 million -- with $3 million from Canada -- for an epic experiment in the Northwest Territories that has generated tantalizing evidence, to be detailed in Tokyo this week, that frozen gas hydrates may live up to their billing as a plentiful new energy source.

The Canadian and Japanese team will describe how they got the hydrates to release gas, like bubbles out of champagne. In a world first, the team got a production well to generate a steady flow of gas for six days, fuelling a flame in the Arctic darkness.

"The message is quite clear, you can produce gas hydrates using conventional techniques," says Scott Dallimore, a senior scientist at Natural Resources Canada, who co-led the project in the Mackenzie Delta. Over two winters the researchers drilled down more than a kilometre into a 150-metre-thick layer on the edge of the Beaufort Sea at Mallik -- the most concentrated known deposit of the frozen fuel in the world.


montrealgazette
Human history becomes more and more a race between education and catastrophe. H. G. Wells.
Fatih Birol's motto: leave oil before it leaves us.
User avatar
Graeme
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 13258
Joined: Fri 04 Mar 2005, 03:00:00
Location: New Zealand

Re: Arctic's 'fiery ice' is potential new energy source

Unread postby dinopello » Mon 15 Nov 2010, 21:24:15

Japanese will have their robots doing it before long maybe. Mining the ice to get at the methane just starts to sound a little desperate - to me anyway.
User avatar
dinopello
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 6089
Joined: Fri 13 May 2005, 02:00:00
Location: The Urban Village

Re: Arctic's 'fiery ice' is potential new energy source

Unread postby Plantagenet » Mon 15 Nov 2010, 21:28:43

Definitely a huge source of methane. [smilie=fart.gif]

Since global warming is melting the permafrost and releasing methane, causing more global warming, we might as well drill it and use it and get some good out of it.
Image
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 23011
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: Arctic's 'fiery ice' is potential new energy source

Unread postby the48thronin » Mon 15 Nov 2010, 21:57:42

48 million to produce 6 days of flame...HMMMM!
Malthusian Riders Member!

Courtesy and Courage Sincerity and Self-control Honor and Loyalty a Code to Live By!
What do the miners do when the canary dies? EVACUATE THE MINE not argue about the color of it's feathers or buy a parrot instead.

Where is my pitchfork and torch? I need them for a visit to the castle!
User avatar
the48thronin
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 871
Joined: Fri 30 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: On the highway, or the water somewhere!

Re: Arctic's 'fiery ice' is potential new energy source

Unread postby Xenophobe » Mon 15 Nov 2010, 22:18:33

the48thronin wrote:48 million to produce 6 days of flame...HMMMM!


Took Drake most of the summer to drill down 69 feet. The well made so much oil he collected it in a bathtub.

From such small beginnings....
User avatar
Xenophobe
permanently banned
 
Posts: 1083
Joined: Fri 06 Aug 2010, 20:13:08

Re: Arctic's 'fiery ice' is potential new energy source

Unread postby Tanada » Tue 16 Nov 2010, 06:09:36

If they have a proven production technique they will be able to recover a lot of the resource, the problem is for the portion which has no geological cap there is always the risk of catastrophic release due to production.
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 15628
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

US DOE says test shows potential for natgas hydrates

Unread postby Rune » Wed 02 May 2012, 16:02:35

Reuters

May 2 (Reuters) - The U.S. Energy Department on Wednesday announced a breakthrough in research into tapping a possibly vast fuel resource that could eventually bolster already massive U.S. natural gas reserves.

By injecting a mixture of carbon dioxide and nitrogen into a methane hydrate formation on Alaska's North Slope, the department was able to produce a steady flow of natural gas in the first field test of this method. The test was done from mid-February to about mid-April this year

Gerald Holder, dean of the engineering program at University of Pittsburgh and who has worked with the DOE's National Energy Technology Laboratory on the hydrate issue, said before this announcement he had been skeptical about what researchers would be able to accomplish.

He said the main problem until now was finding a way to extract natural gas from solid hydrates without adding a whole lot of steps that made the process too expensive, so the success of this new test is significant.

"It makes the possibility of recovering methane from hydrates much more likely," Holder said. "It's a long way off, but this could have huge impact on availability of natural gas."


Innovation marches on.
User avatar
Rune
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 781
Joined: Tue 25 Mar 2008, 02:00:00

Re: US DOE says test shows potential for natgas hydrates

Unread postby Lore » Wed 02 May 2012, 16:53:46

I use to show potential too! What happened?

Wern't we suppose to be in the rapture of cellulosic ethanol at this point in time?

Shell trims cellulosic ethanol venture

Royal Dutch Shell PLC is withdrawing from plans to build a cellulosic ethanol plant in Canada through Iogen Energy, which it jointly owns with Iogen Corp. of Ottawa.

It said a “refocusing” of Iogen Energy’s strategy will result in a diminished development program and 150 layoffs.

“Shell continues to explore multiple pathways to find a commercial solution for the production of advanced biofuels on an industrial scale, but the company will not pursue the project it has had under development to build a larger scale cellulosic ethanol facility in southern Manitoba,” the oil company said.

Iogen Corp. plans to expand its services with “new technology for the production of advanced and cellulosic biofuels,” Shell said.

At one of its service stations in Ottawa, Shell briefly sold gasoline containing cellulosic ethanol made from wheat straw at an Iogen Energy demonstration plant in the same city (OGJ Online, June 10, 2009).

http://www.ogj.com/articles/2012/05/she ... nture.html
The things that will destroy America are prosperity-at-any-price, peace-at-any-price, safety-first instead of duty-first, the love of soft living, and the get-rich-quick theory of life.
... Theodore Roosevelt
User avatar
Lore
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 9021
Joined: Fri 26 Aug 2005, 02:00:00
Location: Fear Of A Blank Planet

Re: US DOE says test shows potential for natgas hydrates

Unread postby dbruning » Wed 02 May 2012, 17:27:35

While I bet the methane deposits hold a ton of energy, wouldn't mining this stuff and burning it have wicked environmental problems?

I mean, there have been a great deal of concern and discussion about these deposits being disturbed and causing a deadly planetary methane burp....and now we'll mine them? Of course methane is 30 times more potent than carbon dioxide, which is what gets released (along with water) if it's burned, so maybe if it is the big threat we're worried about, maybe burning it will lower the damage potential?

Anyone else have their heads swim from all the potential badness in the world these days? With so many different things to worry us, I'm betting the one that really takes a swing at us is totally missed.
User avatar
dbruning
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 486
Joined: Wed 13 Sep 2006, 02:00:00
Location: Vancouver Island

Re: US DOE says test shows potential for natgas hydrates

Unread postby Scottie » Wed 02 May 2012, 18:22:14

dbruning wrote:While I bet the methane deposits hold a ton of energy, wouldn't mining this stuff and burning it have wicked environmental problems?


Seems like if it is going to end up in the atmosphere anyway, might as well burn it and get some work out of it before it does?

http://science.slashdot.org/story/12/04 ... tic-region
User avatar
Scottie
Wood
Wood
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Wed 02 May 2012, 18:04:19

PreviousNext

Return to Energy Technology

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests