World Oil Production Passed its Peak?

[niky]

That "other resources" needed to produce hydrogen, can be nuclear power, in which America has. The key here is for America to eliminate dependence on oil. How can that be false?

As niky said, the materials needed for nuclear fission i.e. uranium and plutonium are already scarce enough as it is, more so than oil. Nuclear fusion will not be viable for at least the foreseeable future. Lugi lang ang US economy kasi mas malaki ang magagastos nila for nuclear energy, not to mention it being downright dangerous. It's not exactly a sustainable energy alternative.

Couldn't have said it better. But one point. Nuclear Energy is doable with minimal environmental impact if you actually recycle nuclear waste as new fuel. There are designs for new reactors that use no water as coolant, and eat their own wastes to produce power. The problem is, the ROI on nuclear fission reactors is very very veeeery long. And fission materials are still expensive to come by. You're right, fission materials are a non-renewable resource once you've used them up.

Also, Reactors made in the US are dangerous and expensive because they're all built to different design specifications and standards. The French have had no problems because they make their reactors to a standard design. This keeps development costs low, aids in maintenance, and safety and efficiency upgrades can be applied to all similar reactors at the same time.

But still, in many cases, producing power by Nuclear Fission is more expensive than by oil or coal... and there's no way it will get cheaper, as we slowly use up all the fissionables available to us.

how about cold fusion? myth ba yun o totoo

Myth ang cold fusion. But hot fusion should become commercially viable (hopefully!) within the next 50-100 years. (antagal!)

Biofuels would be a good stopgap measure, pero tama si uls, even in Brazil, where they were able to demonstrate a near 90% usage of biofuel before, the usage of biofuel was greatly dependent on crop abundance and harvest size. Biofuels will only supply some of our needs.

It won't be long before the whole world finally bows down to kiss our nuts!

I can't wait to see that!

Biowaste is one possible way to fill the gap. Flammable gases harvested from bacterial biodegrading factories could supply some energy, and there are ideas of using bacterial batteries in sewage treatment plants.

Organic Solar Cells are another. They produce much less power per square meter than silicone cells, but are non-hazardous to the environment, and potentially cheap to set-up... thus you could have huge arrays.

One other thing that's particularly exciting to me is the new wave-generator concept. Instead of having large rafts catching wave energy, you have hundreds of cheap, replaceable buoys anchored to the seabed off the coast. These have magnets inside them, and the up-and-down bobbing motion of the waves make the magnets move in relation to each other, generating current. Just five hundred of these could power half of Manila. And they'd help control erosion of the coastline, too. Best of all, they'd be cheap to make, and easy to replace.

[BlueBimmer]

i think we will be driving solar powered cars in the future, and no driving at night :D

[mazdamazda]

let me reiterate my earlier post and question regarding BIODIESEL:

i googled some facts - world oil consumption is ABOUT 80 MILLION BARRELS PER DAY. the philippines consumes 335,000 BARRELS PER DAY. how many coconut trees, soy fields or vegetable oil crops would you need to power everything using biofuels? how expensive is it to refine this stuff?

335,000 barrels = 14,070,000 gallons needed daily by the Philippines

300 gallons / 1 acre -> annual yield for coconut

46,900 acres needed to power the Philippines for one day

69,200 square kilometers to power the Philippines for one year (or about 23% of the total land area of the Philippines).

[BlueBimmer]

thats very much bigger than phils. itself hehe

[uls]

here's an article by michio kaku. Those who watch a lot of discovery channel programs probably know who he is. the article is kinda off-topic pero if u read thru it, it shows how primitive human civilization is right now when it comes to energy source.

http://www.mkaku.org/articles/physic...ien_civs.shtml

[empy]

335,000 barrels = 14,070,000 gallons needed daily by the Philippines

300 gallons / 1 acre -> annual yield for coconut

46,900 acres needed to power the Philippines for one day

69,200 square kilometers to power the Philippines for one year (or about 23% of the total land area of the Philippines).

ah, yun naman pala eh. so ibigay nyo na lang yung buong mindanao sa coconut farmers solb na kayo!

[RafRaf]

Coco-biodiesel is going to be sold in Petron stations starting March. Please support. Thanks!

[Karding]

ah, yun naman pala eh. so ibigay nyo na lang yung buong mindanao sa coconut farmers solb na kayo!

:evillaugh

ang tiyaga ni mazdamazda ah.

the US went into Iraq for its oil. Everyone knows its their agenda. They just used 9/11 as an excuse.

curious lang ako kapatid...bakit hanggang ngayon hindi pa din kumukuha ng ganung karaming oil sa Iraq ang US kung yoon ang agenda nila? bumaba pa nga ang import ng US from Iraq from 626,000 in Dec. 2004 to 390,000 in Dec. 2005. Sana nga oil talaga ang dahilan, para naman bumaba na ang presyo ng gas. Sa laki ng ginagastos ng US sa Iraq war, dapat pakinabangan dahil kaming mga tax payers ang nagdurusa.

RELEASED FEB. 14, 2006

OIL IMPORTS by the US as of Dec. 2005
(thousands of barrels per day)

CANADA 1,892
MEXICO 1,707
SAUDI ARABIA 1,438
VENEZUELA 1,183
NIGERIA 1,174
ANGOLA 425
IRAQ 390 ( back in Dec 2004 the US import was 626,000)
ECUADOR 340
KUWAIT 268
ALGERIA 212
BRAZIL 159
GABON 139
COLOMBIA 135
NORWAY 66
TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO 62

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/p...nt/import.html

curious din ako sa reaksyon ng mga kapatid nating nasa oil drilling industry. hindi ba threat din ito sa kanilang job security? Malamang hindi sila naniniwala that we are running out of oil. Or maybe we are running out of oil, but not in our lifetime kaya hindi pa yata worried ang mga oil drillers. Or maybe worried na din ang mga oil drillers, Im not sure kaya hintay na lang ako sa response nila.

[oldblue]

cocodiesel d ba delikado yan? like using water as fuel ... baka magkaron ng imbalance sa nature.

[oldblue]

the US went into Iraq for its oil. Everyone knows its their agenda. They just used 9/11 as an excuse

hindii, kaya nasa Iraq ang US, kasi na-trace na nila kung san talaga ang garden of eden, man's cradle


kidding aside, strategic ang iraq as base for a pre-emptive strike sa mga manggulo sa middle east. Look at the map. I think the oil is only secondary agenda.

[uls]

Saddam sabotaged Iraq's oil fields when it was clear the US was going into Iraq. Oil heads are destroyed and set ablaze. it takes a lot of time and work to put out an oil head fire. hundreds, maybe even thousands of oil heads were burning when the US entered Iraq.

now, oil pipelines are being destroyed by insurgents. the US could not secure Iraq's entire oil infrastructure. That's why production is limited.

Yes, the US indeed has a bigger agenda in the middle east... to spread democracy. The US wants American-friendly govts installed in every mideast country (like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, UAE, etc) so its oil supply will be ensured.

[mazdamazda]

I don't think that America would go to war just for oil.

Heck, with the cost of waging the said war you could have already invested that in the R&D of a new and alternative fuel source for the future instead of relying solely on oil.

[uls]

When the US went into Iraq, the planners thought it would be quick and easy... like when they drove Saddam out of Kuwait.

The plan was to depose Saddam and install a pro-US govt so the US will be ensured with a steady supply of oil (just like Saudi Arabia). The earnings from Iraq oil exports (controlled by a pro-US govt) will pay for the war and the rebuilding of Iraq.

That was the plan. Apparently, the planners didnt think stabilizing Iraq would be so difficult. So now they have a mess...

[niky]

exactly. It was all supposed to be easy money.

[mazdamazda]

When the US went into Iraq, the planners thought it would be quick and easy... like when they drove Saddam out of Kuwait.

The plan was to depose Saddam and install a pro-US govt so the US will be ensured with a steady supply of oil (just like Saudi Arabia). The earnings from Iraq oil exports (controlled by a pro-US govt) will pay for the war and the rebuilding of Iraq.

That was the plan. Apparently, the planners didnt think stabilizing Iraq would be so difficult. So now they have a mess...

just a question... did you talk with the "planners" or got hold of the "plan"?

[uls]

im Dick Cheney. Darth Vader of the Bush Admin.

Its just one of two things....

1. the US bombs the hell out of Bhagdad, depose Saddam and leave Iraq. Bahala na ang mga Iraqis sa buhay nila. Bahala na sila kung sino ang magiging next leader nila. RISK: the next leader could be worse than Saddam... even more anti-American than Saddam... and would control the 3rd largest oil supply in the world. So the invasion would be pointless right?

OR

2. the plan i mentioned in my previous post.

The reason why the US cant leave and wont leave Iraq right now is coz Iraq is still unstable. Islamic militants/extremists/insurgents (supported by Syria and Iran and whoever hates the US) can easily wipe out Iraq's barely established US-backed govt.

The bad guys will take over Iraq if the US troops leave now. Making the war, the lives lost and the money spent go to nothing.

There has to be a US-friendly govt in place and US-trained Iraqi police/defense forces in place before US troops withdraw. Thats the whole mission. Less than that, the war goes to nothing.

All that to secure Iraq's oil.

[niky]

Too bad, there's not enough political will left to produce the budget necessary to prosecute a successful anti-insurgency campaign.

I was against the war from the beginning, but I realize that for the US to pull out now would be a disaster to rival Vietnam.

Too bad the Republicans are showing their true colors... damn opportunists... they're calling for a pull-out right now to save face in the public opinion polls.

It's only guys like George W. Bush (I really dislike him, but I support him in this) and John McCain (opposition, but he uses his head and not his pollsters) who are brave enough to say what must be done.

Having a stable government in Iraq is to the benefit of both the US and Iraq's neighbors. Leaving it as it is, it becomes a melting pot for all the unstable elements and radicals that plague both the Western nations and its neighboring Arab states.

Anlayo na natin sa peak oil, no?

[uls]

hehe OT na tayo

[Karding]

Saddam sabotaged Iraq's oil fields when it was clear the US was going into Iraq. Oil heads are destroyed and set ablaze. it takes a lot of time and work to put out an oil head fire. hundreds, maybe even thousands of oil heads were burning when the US entered Iraq.

now, oil pipelines are being destroyed by insurgents. the US could not secure Iraq's entire oil infrastructure. That's why production is limited.

Yes, the US indeed has a bigger agenda in the middle east... to spread democracy. The US wants American-friendly govts installed in every mideast country (like Saudi Arabia, Jordan, UAE, etc) so its oil supply will be ensured.

ahhh ic. And why do you think the US did not 'invade' (democrats choice of word) Mexico and Canada or the top 5 countries that the US importing oil from?

Bigger agenda...to spread democracy. I thought the bigger agenda of the two is OIL? which is it?

Oo nga, OT na tayo. I'll ban myself from posting to this thread again, hahaha

[Karding]

NOTE ON IMPORTS FROM IRAQ: US oil imports from Iraq have fluctuated greatly over the past 15 years. In 1990, imports from Iraq accounted for about 6.4% of our imports. From 1991 to 1996, due to sanctions, Iraq provided NO exports to the US. In 1999 (average 6.7%), 2000 (5.4%), 2001 (6.7%), and 2002 (3.9% - yes, less than four percent), amounts varied a lot from month to month.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/aer/txt/ptb0504.html

The fluctuation started way before the pre-9/11 war in Iraq.