Pages: 1 2 3

 

2006-08-30 13:45:57
Cuttin_cut
Member
+7|7001
"Ethanol, also known as ethyl alcohol or grain alcohol, can be used either as an alternative fuel or as an octane-boosting, pollution-reducing additive to gasoline. The U.S. ethanol industry produced more than 3.4 billion gallons in 2004, up from 2.8 billion gallons in 2003 and 2.1 billion gallons in 2002. (Renewable Fuels Association and Renewable Fuels Association Ethanol Industry Outlook 2005). Although this number is small when compared with fossil fuel consumption for transportation, as individual states continue to ban the use of MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether) and with the possibility of a Federal ban, ethanol consumption is due for a significant boost. Because of the increased demand on ethanol as a gasoline additive, efforts to increase supplies are necessary in order to meet the increase in demand. As of the start of 2005, 81 ethanol plants in 20 states have the capacity to produce nearly 4.4 billion gallons annually and an additional 16 plants are under construction to add another 750 million gallons of capacity (RFA)." ....says the U.S. Department of Energy

So I do think we have enough land to produce ethanol....

Last edited by Cuttin_cut (2006-08-30 13:49:17)

2006-08-30 19:41:52
jonsimon
Member
+224|6758

Cuttin_cut wrote:

"Ethanol, also known as ethyl alcohol or grain alcohol, can be used either as an alternative fuel or as an octane-boosting, pollution-reducing additive to gasoline. The U.S. ethanol industry produced more than 3.4 billion gallons in 2004, up from 2.8 billion gallons in 2003 and 2.1 billion gallons in 2002. (Renewable Fuels Association and Renewable Fuels Association Ethanol Industry Outlook 2005). Although this number is small when compared with fossil fuel consumption for transportation, as individual states continue to ban the use of MTBE (Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether) and with the possibility of a Federal ban, ethanol consumption is due for a significant boost. Because of the increased demand on ethanol as a gasoline additive, efforts to increase supplies are necessary in order to meet the increase in demand. As of the start of 2005, 81 ethanol plants in 20 states have the capacity to produce nearly 4.4 billion gallons annually and an additional 16 plants are under construction to add another 750 million gallons of capacity (RFA)." ....says the U.S. Department of Energy

So I do think we have enough land to produce ethanol....
Thats talking about increasing production to meet demands for ADDITIVE ethanol. Imagine the increases needed to REPLACE gasoline with ethanol. Besides, that excerpt doesn't mention land, only refining plants.
2006-08-30 19:45:25
jonsimon
Member
+224|6758

Janysc wrote:

Navyholdi99 wrote:

Janysc wrote:

Hell, fusion reactors anyone? Clean safe energy without the nasty side-effects like radiation and toxic waste. Now, if we can figure out a way to heat up hydrogen into extreme temperatures and not burn off/melt everything around it...

That's why theoretical physics are fun. You come up with crazy ideas and pass them on to engineers and practical physicists to figure out.

But seriously. Fusion power is the future. Though "tree-hugging hippies" will probably object to the word "fusion"'s resemblence to "fission", the forementioned evil twin of fusion.

Sigh...
You don't believe all this cold fusion mumbo jumbo do you?
Why shouldn't I? I can imagine some hundred years ago, people were asking, "You don't believe all this heliocentrism mumbo jumbo do you?" As well as "nuclear power mumbo jumbo", "radiation mumbo jumbo" (the man behind the Periodic Table refused to believe it), "believe-in-nothing mumbo jumbo", and "genetic engineering mumbo jumbo" over the last years.

People have always said, "No way that's gonna work" until hey presto! science saves the day.
Fission isn't the answer anyway. It will merely serve as an even more cost effective nuclear power source. Using the electricity generated by fission won't help power your car without a better battery. What we need is a more effecient storage mechanism for energy, we can already create as much power as we want with nuclear energy, we just can't make it portable or variable output.
2006-08-30 19:46:59
leesupport
Member
+39|6945
i seriously dont think USA will be around in 20 years....eather china will take over or there will be a nuclear war and nobody will be around
2006-08-30 19:51:32
Flaming_Maniac
prince of insufficient light
+2,490|6969|67.222.138.85

CameronPoe wrote:

Which is exactly why supporting a resource-cripple like Israel, the arch-nemesis of practically all major oil-producing nations, is the WRONG move on the part of the US and could be their undoing.... China and Russia appear to have their strategic thinking caps on.
Excuse us for dealing with ideals as opposed to a becoming obsolete energy resource in an extremely unstable part of the world. Our bad.
2006-08-30 20:15:54
Navyholdi99
Member
+4|6747|Virginia Beach, VA

Janysc wrote:

Navyholdi99 wrote:

Janysc wrote:

Hell, fusion reactors anyone? Clean safe energy without the nasty side-effects like radiation and toxic waste. Now, if we can figure out a way to heat up hydrogen into extreme temperatures and not burn off/melt everything around it...

That's why theoretical physics are fun. You come up with crazy ideas and pass them on to engineers and practical physicists to figure out.

But seriously. Fusion power is the future. Though "tree-hugging hippies" will probably object to the word "fusion"'s resemblence to "fission", the forementioned evil twin of fusion.

Sigh...
You don't believe all this cold fusion mumbo jumbo do you?
Why shouldn't I? I can imagine some hundred years ago, people were asking, "You don't believe all this heliocentrism mumbo jumbo do you?" As well as "nuclear power mumbo jumbo", "radiation mumbo jumbo" (the man behind the Periodic Table refused to believe it), "believe-in-nothing mumbo jumbo", and "genetic engineering mumbo jumbo" over the last years.

People have always said, "No way that's gonna work" until hey presto! science saves the day.
Sorry...I wasn't putting your thought down...I was only quoting from the movie "The Saint."  It's one of my favs and I think Elizabeth Shue's best movie. 

Nuclear physics is waaay over my head!
2006-08-30 20:21:52
Superslim
BF2s Frat Brother
+211|6954|Calgary

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

JG1567JG wrote:

Did you know that we have over a hundred year oil supply stored in this country.  When ever you hear about the government tapping the oil reserves to help bring down prices, it is this 100+ year supply they are talking about.  If the oil in the ground ever runs out there will still be over a 100 year supply in the United States that will be ready on tap.
No we don't.  The strategic oil reserve holds about 570 million barrels of oil.  The US consumes ~20 million barrels of oil per day.
Need oil? Don't forget, you friends to the North, right here in Alberta, we have trillions of barrels.
2006-08-30 20:30:39
[KS]RECON
Member
+35|6824|E 2/351 Camp Anaconda

Superslim wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

JG1567JG wrote:

Did you know that we have over a hundred year oil supply stored in this country.  When ever you hear about the government tapping the oil reserves to help bring down prices, it is this 100+ year supply they are talking about.  If the oil in the ground ever runs out there will still be over a 100 year supply in the United States that will be ready on tap.
No we don't.  The strategic oil reserve holds about 570 million barrels of oil.  The US consumes ~20 million barrels of oil per day.
Need oil? Don't forget, you friends to the North, right here in Alberta, we have trillions of barrels.
Need supplies on my location ... please send ASAP, will karma you LOL
2006-08-30 20:48:56
iNeedUrFace4Soup
fuck it
+348|6808
Giant hamsters running on giant wheels are the wave of the future.
https://i.imgur.com/jM2Yp.gif
2006-08-30 21:07:34
D6717C
Anger is a gift
+174|6895|Sin City

In 40 years the U.S. will be over-run with liberals and illegal aliens anyway, so it probably won't matter much.
2006-08-30 21:11:12
Snipedya14
Dont tread on me
+77|6957|Mountains of West Virginia

D6717C wrote:

In 40 years the U.S. will be over-run with liberals and illegal aliens anyway, so it probably won't matter much.
Oh what an intelligent statement!
2006-08-30 21:17:45
DesmondLocke
Member
+1|6814

Flaming_Maniac wrote:

CameronPoe wrote:

Which is exactly why supporting a resource-cripple like Israel, the arch-nemesis of practically all major oil-producing nations, is the WRONG move on the part of the US and could be their undoing.... China and Russia appear to have their strategic thinking caps on.
Excuse us for dealing with ideals as opposed to a becoming obsolete energy resource in an extremely unstable part of the world. Our bad.
I never thought of Israel for it's energy or oil resources. (It has none.) But rather as, oh I don't know, maybe an example for near by countries? Religious, economic, political, and ideological freedoms. It's not about siding with the governments that control oil, but about changing their outlook. (Which will never happen, which is why we support Israel, but use force on the others, because all they know is force.)

Last edited by DesmondLocke (2006-08-30 21:20:07)

2006-08-30 21:19:40
johnsmokinblunts
pwner stoner
+12|6909|dont worry about it

TheMackumSlayer wrote:

All china would have to do is use j-10's LMAO
ahahahahahah
2006-08-30 21:25:46
11sog_raider
a gaurdian of life
+112|6721|behind my rifle

d3v1ldr1v3r13 wrote:

You know I coulda swore that modern tanks and shit ran off Nuclear reactors...(looks in Wikipedia)  Nope I was wrong, but is it really so far-fethced that these bastards can run off a nuclear reactor similar to our Subs?  What amazes me is the worlds thirst for drama, its almost like some/most of you guys are begging for a war to spark between the east and the west.  China wants a giant war almost as much as we want to kiss their ass for something.  I understand that we have pissed them off, and the ground is a little shaky, but you know that when China's leader came to visit before and apparently got pissed off because Bush's PR reps said he couldnt have a real American steak dinner, that wasnt the fault of the prez that was poor planning.  I have a feeling that all this talk about China attacking, invasion of the US, all that shit, is going to pass and most of you American hating douchebags are gonna be sorely disappointed that your favorite country you love to hate is going to be on top 20-40 years from now, but hey I been wrong before....
what he said +1 mate
2006-08-30 23:19:21
Spark
liquid fluoride thorium reactor
+874|6937|Canberra, AUS
Has ANYONE got any evidence to back up their view(s)?
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
2006-08-31 01:31:58
CameronPoe
Member
+2,925|6818

Spark wrote:

Has ANYONE got any evidence to back up their view(s)?
Yes.
2006-08-31 10:21:53
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,979|6894|949

Spark wrote:

Has ANYONE got any evidence to back up their view(s)?
Well, my post wasn't really a view so much more than an observation, and Agent_dung_bomb so eloquently expounded on that statement with some facts, so yes.  As far as the need for natural resources and nuclear power, I think that we are a long way from having a small nuclear reactor in our cars to power it.  Even if we found the space to contain it, I am not ready to have radioactive material in my car.  Yes, we (as a global community) need to come off the oil standard, but it takes effort.  What I don't understand is the stubbornness of Big Oil/Energy companies in researching and implementing new energy resources.  Then again, when you are bringing in record profits each quarter, why change?

Lastly, when are we going to develop a more efficient motor?  The combustion engine is SO 19th century.

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2006-08-31 10:34:09)

2006-08-31 10:41:55
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6812|Southeastern USA

Cuttin_cut wrote:

How about ethanol?....made from corn...thats a fuel we are starting to use more....
the abrams can already use it......

I like to think that human culture as a whole has evolved beyond the point of "let's take their corn fields over there" with the exception of a few pockets of political extremists like Kim or Hussein when he invaded kuwait. As aggressive as China has been in the past I find it hard to imagine them launching an offensive landgrab unprovoked, as that way of thinking is like soooo 19th century. However, I sometimes wonder if this is not the very reason why we (western nations and allies in general) are being so slow to develope our own proficient oil fields, let the extremist aggressive nations run their oil out and threaten us left and right with economic warfare and in the end we, from japan to east europe, will not only be the ones with fresh untapped oil fields but the infrastructure to utilize the alternatives to petroleum of which we are the worlds almost sole researchers.
2006-08-31 11:12:38
Cybargs
Moderated
+2,285|6979

leesupport wrote:

i seriously dont think USA will be around in 20 years....eather china will take over or there will be a nuclear war and nobody will be around
reasoning how china can take over usa... sure they have strong economy, but dont you think their people will be wanting democracy sooner or later?
https://cache.www.gametracker.com/server_info/203.46.105.23:21300/b_350_20_692108_381007_FFFFFF_000000.png
2006-08-31 11:15:13
kr@cker
Bringin' Sexy Back!
+581|6812|Southeastern USA
what he said, it seems as of late the chinese gov't is losing it's iron grip on it's people, how much longer are they going to put up with being told what they can/can't watch, what they can/can't listen to, what words they are allowed to use on the internet


edit: I'm all for a nation seeking to better it's economy on the world stage, it honestly wouldn't make any difference to me if china eventually outranked the US, aside from the possible business opportunities there, so long as the nation acheives it by bettering it's own economy as opposed to doing so by hamstringing it's neighbors, a cooperative world trade economy is to the benefit of everyone

Last edited by kr@cker (2006-08-31 11:17:59)

2006-08-31 11:30:13
Agent_Dung_Bomb
Member
+302|6998|Salt Lake City

Superslim wrote:

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

JG1567JG wrote:

Did you know that we have over a hundred year oil supply stored in this country.  When ever you hear about the government tapping the oil reserves to help bring down prices, it is this 100+ year supply they are talking about.  If the oil in the ground ever runs out there will still be over a 100 year supply in the United States that will be ready on tap.
No we don't.  The strategic oil reserve holds about 570 million barrels of oil.  The US consumes ~20 million barrels of oil per day.
Need oil? Don't forget, you friends to the North, right here in Alberta, we have trillions of barrels.
Yeah, I know.  I saw an article on it.  You have a major oil sand deposit about the size of the state of Florida.  I still would like to see alternatives to traditional fuels, but until then finding more efficient ways to extract oil from oil sand and oil shale would help.
2006-08-31 11:40:00
Tunacommy
Member
+56|6883|Massachusetts, USA

JG1567JG wrote:

Did you know that we have over a hundred year oil supply stored in this country.  When ever you hear about the government tapping the oil reserves to help bring down prices, it is this 100+ year supply they are talking about.  If the oil in the ground ever runs out there will still be over a 100 year supply in the United States that will be ready on tap.
WHAT?!?!  C'mon - you don't seriously believe that do you?  100 years of oil on tap?!?  I think that would take up the whole state of Rhode Island.

We have something like 3 months....and we use it strategically to level off prices if needed....and for defence...

As for China....depending on your definition of "#1 Super Power" 3-5 years max for them to take the pole position....but who cares?  What has being the "#1 Super Power in the World" ever done for the U.S. except raise expectations of us globally?  Means nothing.
2006-08-31 11:55:12
ShotYourSix
Boldly going nowhere...
+196|6982|Las Vegas

Agent_Dung_Bomb wrote:

Need oil? Don't forget, you friends to the North, right here in Alberta, we have trillions of barrels.
I'm not convinced we will need it.

We've got enough oil shale in the Green River Basin/Uinta Basin (Utah/Colorado/Wyoming) to cover our asses for a very long time.  We are talking about as much as 2 trillion barrels (thats nearly 4 times the estimated reserves of the entire middle east). 

https://img501.imageshack.us/img501/8258/20060405oil4fu0.gif

At a glance, these areas do not look all that significant on a geographical scale however when we look at this chart we can see how the "energy density" of the reserve compares to other reserves in North America.

https://img252.imageshack.us/img252/5397/shaleoilqj6.jpg

Currently there are 3 companies which have been granted government approval to test/prove their recovery methods (80% of this land is protected as wilderness area).  This oil has been known about since the 1930's but it has never been economically feasible to extract it.  Early methods in the 70's were so crude as to require strip mining the land and literally grinding it up to extract the shale oil.  Current methods involve high pressures and heat to force the oil to well heads.  Current estimates are that with recent technology, this oil can be extracted for 30-40 dollars/barrel.  One Utah company is claiming $10/barrel but I find this a bit hard to believe.

China is no doubt a force we will have to reckon with in coming years, but it will not be oil which fuels the conflict.

http://www.earthsearch.com/pdf/journalr … 0uintah%22

Last edited by ShotYourSix (2006-08-31 13:00:37)

2006-08-31 12:00:59
KEN-JENNINGS
I am all that is MOD!
+2,979|6894|949

kr@cker wrote:

edit: I'm all for a nation seeking to better it's economy on the world stage, it honestly wouldn't make any difference to me if china eventually outranked the US, aside from the possible business opportunities there, so long as the nation acheives it by bettering it's own economy as opposed to doing so by hamstringing it's neighbors, a cooperative world trade economy is to the benefit of everyone
Ha!  I knew it you hippy socialist trash!

Last edited by KEN-JENNINGS (2006-08-31 12:02:10)

2006-08-31 12:32:55
KnowMeByTrailOfDead
Jackass of all Trades
+62|6944|Dayton, Ohio
It was not more than a week or two ago that I was reading and article about how China's economy is headed down a path that could spell their doom.  That thier population and industrial growth was not supported by the economy and within the next 5 years or so it is likely to come crashing down.  If I can find the Artical I will post it.

http://articles.moneycentral.msn.com/In … ntrol.aspx

Last edited by KnowMeByTrailOfDead (2006-08-31 12:38:05)

 

Pages: 1 2 3

Board footer

Privacy Policy - © 2025 Jeff Minard