Another prophet of disaster

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

who says this ship is lost

[Jim]

The world will produce 118 million barrels of oil a day, up from its current 85 million barrels per day, just to satisfy projected demand by 2030, according to the Energy Information Agency.

 

"That's never going to happen," said Richard Heinberg, a research fellow at the Post Carbon Institute and author of three books on peak oil.

 

-----seems that coming up with that much new oil is unlikely. An interesting statistic I recently read - if the US adopted EU milage standards we could cut our oil imports to near zero. Now that seems like a good idea.

 

 

[JayB]

Euros tend to run way more diesel due to the higher energy content and the fact that diesel fuel enjoys tax breaks in Euroland that gasoline does not. The UCS makes a good point when comparing the total emissions from oil-well to tailpipe.

 

"DIESEL PERFORMANCE —

EXTRA POWER, HIGHER EFFICIENCY, BUT ...

 

If you or your parents owned a diesel car 20 years ago, you may have some bad memories of the experience. American drivers have steered clear of diesel since the early 1980s because many of the cars were unreliable, noisy, and polluting. Though today's diesel cars have overcome most of their past performance problems, they account for only a few percent of new automobile and truck sales in the US.

 

In Europe, on the other hand, about 40% of new cars sold are diesel, amounting to more than five million vehicles each year. The demand for diesel in Europe is fueled by the high cost of gasoline. (Unequal taxation of the two fuels results in diesel costing about one dollar less per gallon in most European countries.)

 

Over the past few years, diesel's popularity as an automotive fuel has grown significantly. Thanks to its higher energy content and its efficient combustion process, diesel performance enables cars to travel at least 30% farther on a gallon of fuel than comparable gasoline models.

 

The improved efficiency of diesel engines can also help reduce oil consumption. It should be noted, however, that it takes about 25% more oil to make a gallon of diesel fuel than a gallon of gasoline, so we should really look at how a vehicle does on fuel efficiency in terms of "oil equivalents." Thus, we need to adjust the mileage claims for diesel vehicles downward by about 20% when comparing them to gasoline-powered vehicles."

[KaskadskyjKozak]

The world will produce 118 million barrels of oil a day, up from its current 85 million barrels per day, just to satisfy projected demand by 2030, according to the Energy Information Agency.

 

"That's never going to happen," said Richard Heinberg, a research fellow at the Post Carbon Institute and author of three books on peak oil.

 

-----seems that coming up with that much new oil is unlikely. An interesting statistic I recently read - if the US adopted EU milage standards we could cut our oil imports to near zero. Now that seems like a good idea.

 

 

If the Euros told you to jump off a bridge, would you do it?

 

[tvashtarkatena]

The world will produce 118 million barrels of oil a day, up from its current 85 million barrels per day, just to satisfy projected demand by 2030, according to the Energy Information Agency.

 

"That's never going to happen," said Richard Heinberg, a research fellow at the Post Carbon Institute and author of three books on peak oil.

 

-----seems that coming up with that much new oil is unlikely. An interesting statistic I recently read - if the US adopted EU milage standards we could cut our oil imports to near zero. Now that seems like a good idea.

 

 

If the Euros told you to jump off a bridge, would you do it?

 

More accurately; if the Euros showed you a way to cross a bridge you absolutely needed to cross, would you do it?

[G-spotter]

The world will produce 118 million barrels of oil a day, up from its current 85 million barrels per day, just to satisfy projected demand by 2030, according to the Energy Information Agency.

 

"That's never going to happen," said Richard Heinberg, a research fellow at the Post Carbon Institute and author of three books on peak oil.

 

-----seems that coming up with that much new oil is unlikely. An interesting statistic I recently read - if the US adopted EU milage standards we could cut our oil imports to near zero. Now that seems like a good idea.

 

 

Since I wouldn't give much credibility to a guy's opinion on evolution if he was from the Discovery Institute and had written three books on creation science, why should I pay attention to an opinion from someone from the "Post Carbon Institute"?

[Jim]

Why not adopt a good idea that would get us away from relying on the middle east oil scene? It doesn't mean you have to eat foie gras or steak tartare.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Why not adopt a good idea that would get us away from relying on the middle east oil scene? It doesn't mean you have to eat foie gras or steak tartare.

 

this thread is not about reliance on middle east oil. it's about reliance on oil period and the prediction that it will dry up.

 

[dt_3pin]

mmmmm . . . foie gras ...

[tvashtarkatena]

Why not adopt a good idea that would get us away from relying on the middle east oil scene? It doesn't mean you have to eat foie gras or steak tartare.

 

this thread is not about reliance on middle east oil. it's about reliance on oil period and the prediction that it will dry up.

 

Um, Jim's comment is relevant either way, so your response has no point whatsoever.

[JayB]

Reducing CO2 emissions and limiting the extent to which we enrich unsavory regimes of various stripes by buying their oil are both worthy goals, but there are better and worse ways of doing so. One of the worst ideas - the entire corn-ethanol econo-enviro megacluster seems to have gained the most traction so far, so the importance of thinking carefully about the means used to achieve these ends seems worthwhile.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Reducing CO2 emissions and limiting the extent to which we enrich unsavory regimes of various stripes by buying their oil are both worthy goals, but there are better and worse ways of doing so. One of the worst ideas - the entire corn-ethanol econo-enviro megacluster seems to have gained the most traction so far, so the importance of thinking carefully[\b] about the means used to achieve these ends seems worthwhile.

 

Thinking carefully is the operative phrase. what Jim spewed out is just another knee-jerk liberal mantra. The euros do it, we must do it too, just like them!

 

If oil reserves are drying up, then we need to set goals that get us off of oil period - before we are forced to. that might involve higher CAFE standards, but those could be more or less than what the Euros do. And as you pointed out, the metrics may be apples-and-oranges as it is due to their higher use of diesel, which uses more crude to produce in the first place.

 

I never ceased to be amazed by the typical liberal response of a feel-good gesture which may more may not actually achieve a goal. These are the people who supposedly are "pro-science", and yet never do the real science and number crunching to determine if something actually needs to be done, and to what extent. The important thing is "feeling good" and doing "something".

 

[JayB]

Reducing CO2 emissions and limiting the extent to which we enrich unsavory regimes of various stripes by buying their oil are both worthy goals, but there are better and worse ways of doing so. One of the worst ideas - the entire corn-ethanol econo-enviro megacluster seems to have gained the most traction so far, so the importance of thinking carefully[\b] about the means used to achieve these ends seems worthwhile.

 

Thinking carefully is the operative phrase. what Jim spewed out is just another knee-jerk liberal mantra. The euros do it, we must do it too, just like them!

 

If oil reserves are drying up, then we need to set goals that get us off of oil period - before we are forced to. that might involve higher CAFE standards, but those could be more or less than what the Euros do. And as you pointed out, the metrics may be apples-and-oranges as it is due to their higher use of diesel, which uses more crude to produce in the first place.

 

I never ceased to be amazed by the typical liberal response of a feel-good gesture which may more may not actually achieve a goal. These are the people who supposedly are "pro-science", and yet never do the real science and number crunching to determine if something actually needs to be done, and to what extent. The important thing is "feeling good" and doing "something".

 

Exhibit A: Any discussion of nuclear power.

 

IMO higher fuel prices brought on by a genuine scarcity relative to demand would be the the most significant driver of reduced CO2 emissions per-unit output (conservation), adoption of alternative energy-sources, etc - and would dwarf the effects of any regulatory regime any legislature would dare impose.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

IMO higher fuel prices brought on by a genuine scarcity relative to demand would be the the most significant driver of reduced CO2 emissions per-unit output (conservation), adoption of alternative energy-sources, etc - and would dwarf the effects of any regulatory regime any legislature would dare impose.

 

There is a danger that it could occur too fast to react against in a timely manner. The doom-and-gloom scenario in the article explores this, and we have seen how easily prices can fluctuate, and their effects (recessions following Arab-oil crises).

[Jim]

If we can come up with ideas to limit our use of foreign fossil fuels now, instead of waiting for some passive market response at some future date, why not do it? The marketplace has us going backwards regarding fuel efficiency - and that means greater oil imports. The CAFE standards are way overdue for a major overhaul.

 

I'd have to agree with Jay about the ethanol thing - that's a big energy sink and is being pushed along by the corn-states. Another dead end.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

If we can come up with ideas to limit our use of foreign fossil fuels now, instead of waiting for some passive market response at some future date, why not do it? The marketplace has us going backwards regarding fuel efficiency - and that means greater oil imports. The CAFE standards are way overdue for a major overhaul.

 

Because you need to set a goal, and then do the number-crunching to see how/what needs to be accomplished to meet that goal, and then convince people that the goal is both desirable and achievable.

 

Arbitrarily changing CAFE standards just to do "something" doesn't cut it.

[JayB]

I don't personally think that a fleet-wide fuel economy standard is necessarily the best way to promote fuel efficiency, since automakers base their production on what they think that consumers want to buy, and if consumers don't want to buy fuel efficient vehicles, the auto manufacturers shouldn't be penalized for that. As fuel gets more expensive, consumer preferences will change accordingly - but progressively higher fuel costs aren't necessarily guaranteed, and hit the poor - especially the rural poor the hardest, not only at the pump, but via higher shipping costs, etc - all of which materialize in higher prices for the consumer staples, etc that they spend most of their money on. Not to mention the increased costs of heating their home, etc.

 

If I had to dream up a legislative method for promoting fuel efficiency that doesn't hose the poor - I'd favor fees that you paid at tab-time that used some kind of AGI ajdusted formula that multiplied either gross vehicle weight or EPA fuel-economy stats by miles driven per year. The AGI component could be used to lessen the impact on low-income people, and using this mechanism rather than a global tax on all fuels would prevent higher fuel costs from translating into higher prices for food, transport, etc, etc, etc, etc.

 

 

[Jim]

Consumption tax above some minimum?

[billcoe]

Old news. It explains why we're in Iraq and also why Bush Jr is committing 1.2 billion $ to Hydrogenated trans fat fuels.

 

It's time to step away the suburban and Tahoes boyz. Unless you want to have your kids killed for them.

 

I don't.

[KaskadskyjKozak]

Old news. It explains why we're in Iraq and also why Bush Jr is committing 1.2 billion $ to Hydrogenated trans fat fuels.

 

It's time to step away the suburban and Tahoes boyz. Unless you want to have your kids killed for them.

 

I don't.

 

eliminating all SUVs as passenger cars does NOT profoundly address an upcoming oil shortage.

[cj001f]

As fuel gets more expensive, consumer preferences will change accordingly - but progressively higher fuel costs aren't necessarily guaranteed, and hit the poor - especially the rural poor the hardest, not only at the pump, but via higher shipping costs, etc - all of which materialize in higher prices for the consumer staples, etc that they spend most of their money on. Not to mention the increased costs of heating their home, etc.

 

That's their fault for

a) Living in E. Bumfuck

b) Being poor

they could easily change both in America if they'd get off their lazy XXL sweatpants cut for a woman asses.

[JayB]

Quite a bit more to the energy-consumption/global-warming/CO2 emissions puzzle than petroleum consumption by passenger vehicles.

 

[cj001f]

I vote forced sterilizations for the vealpens of Tacoma

[KaskadskyjKozak]

 

That's their fault for

a) Living in E. Bumfuck

b) Being poor

they could easily change both in America if they'd get off their lazy XXL sweatpants cut for a woman asses.

 

Not everyone can be a smug, urbanite ass, now can they?

 

But, if we are serious about reducing our energy footprint, I vote for carbon footprint rations. You only get to buy so much fuel, use so much energy to heat your home. And yes, your ration includes fuel burnt on exotic destinations for skiing and climbing.

 

Those who want an SUV can have one, they just burn up their allowance quicker.

 

I'm sure all the SUV haters would quickly learn how much they burn themselves and how much it sucks to truly cut back.

[cj001f]

And yes, your ration includes fuel burnt on exotic destinations for skiing and climbing.

 

I'm hoping to sail for the next ski/surf trip

 

The only Co2 will come from my piehole!