Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Eagler on November 02, 2000, 11:44:00 AM
-
Hasn't there been more oil spills caused by tankers during transporting than an oil rig or pipeline leak? So where is the environmental damage when we drill our own oil? Seems they help the fishing, ever seen the fish around an offshore rig?
Eagler
-
I have heard many varying reports that the oil in the persian gulf part of the world will dry up during the next 50-100 years.
I think that the reason there is no push to drill for oil in the US or near-offshore (other than the tremendous costs involved), is that we are simply waiting for the persian gulf to dry up, leaving the US and Russia with the only oil supplies in the world.
Of course, that's just my opinion. I could be wrong. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
-
I think this might answer part of both questions and points made:
Partially right Mickey1992, that and the cost to get oil out is quite expensive in North America compared to from the middle east. Sea transport is still the cheapest way to get bulk stuff from point A to point B... especially in those quantities. Also, drilling on sand, or in solid ground, is easier than in the conditions of Alaska or offshore. Typical rig costs for drilling (based on rough numbers and experience in the industry) are $10K/day for good ground (flat, solid, mild conditions), $25K for bad conditions (more equipment and housing costs plus generally getting the equipment in is tougher), $100K/day for offshore (lots of costs and environmental levys).
When there is no more oil in these places like Iraq they aren't going to have a whole lot of economy left unless the price of sand increases on the world markets. Just wait and see how they destabilize when that happens. Scarey thought.
Soda
[This message has been edited by Soda (edited 11-02-2000).]
-
When the Persian supplies run out, there's always Antarctica. It has huge oil reserves just waiting to be drained once the international agreement on non-exploitation is broken.
Only a matter of time IMO.
-
yeah, unless some of those "almost ready for prime time" alternative energy sources take a 20-30 year development leap all of a sudden.
Either that or back to burning all the trees and coal we can find.
Neither is too likely, so pretty soon penguins will be wearing BP decals.
(http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
-
I think we're thinking about this the wrong way.
We say "let's find more oil, regardless of the cost to the environment" when we should say "let's focus on not needing as much".
What I liked about northern Sweden was that there was a lot of undisturbed nature there. Take a snowmobile, ride for an hour, and you're in Elk Land.
Hell, we already got 95% of the world to play with and abuse. Can't we just leave *some* unspoiled wilderness alone?
Our vehicles need gas, for sure. But it is certain that we can find more effective ways of yusing it than we do now. So I ain't saying "boohoo, give up yer cars" or anything like that. Merely "think fuel conservation".
As long as a non renewable source (oil) is cheaper or almost as cheap as a renewable one (milk), we really shouldn't be whining.
The US economy wouldn't come to a halt if gas prices were raised 100%. It'd affect the freedom of the individual in the sense that they'd have to think about when and how to use the cars though.
Which, IMHO, is not a bad idea (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
I agree StSanta - but I can't see the oil companies leaving antarctica alone for a second once supplies become really stretch. They'll find some way of breaking or 'bending' international law to turn a profit and supply us all with petrol.
-
Bad StSanta, baad!
What I liked about northern Sweden was that there was a lot of undisturbed nature there. Take a snowmobile, ride for an hour, and you're in Elk Land.
Hell, we already got 95% of the world to play with and abuse. Can't we just leave *some* unspoiled wilderness alone?
Our vehicles need gas, for sure. But it is certain that we can find more effective ways of yusing it than we do now. So I ain't saying "boohoo, give up yer cars" or anything like that. Merely "think fuel conservation".
Yeah - why don't you? Lazy bum (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)! What was wrong with skiing to that wilderness spot of yours? Gotta love them environmentalists on their snowmobiles (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif)!!!
But seriously - I live 7 miles from my work. I could be cycling to work on a nice day saving the fuel and blah-blah-blah... Why don't I? I'm not stupid to brave this narrow, windy road on a bike - it's just not worth the risk. What we need is not just "more roads" or "tax people out of their cars" but environmentally friendly alternatives - cycle paths etc.
------------------
lynx
13 Sqn RAF
-
lynx:
lol, yer right. I only took a snowmobile when I could borrow one (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
In DK, we have cycle paths everywhere. You're also right that in many cases, cars *are* needed and are essential. The question then is "how much fuel do I want my car to burn?"
American traditionally have been fans of huge gas guzzlers, and the trend to SUV sort of is indicative of it.
A Fiat Punto will get you from point A to point B just as quickly in a city (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif). The chicks won't be too impressed, but if thereason ya travel by car is for transport, that's not relevant (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
StSanta - ever tried a couple of hundred miles/day in a Punto? It's not fun. You need bigger car if you drive lots. What we need is a ban on huge Range-Rovers and such like delivering kids to schools for ~1/2 mile tops and creating absolute nighmare on the roads (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
------------------
lynx
13 Sqn RAF
-
I read a stat during the Gulf war that the USA gets 80% of it's oil from either Mexico or the Alasken Pipeline. Therefore only 20%could come from the middle east. Sounds like much of oil is somewhat domestic already.
Remember when the oil prices change they change globally. It is not just the OPEC countries that set oil prices. The oil companies would like you to believe that.
Later
F4UDOA
Remember I read that in 1991 in the USA today during the war. This is not a campain statistic.
-
Interestingly enough, a very large portion of oil/gas (as in natural gas) is used in heating, electricty generation, and industry. Cutting back on driving helps, but turning on your computer also uses these resources.
The costs of alternatives in relation to the cost of oil/gas has not made it economical, when that changes then you'll probably see a lot of advancement in a short period of time in alternative fuel sources.
North America could support it's own oil/gas needs, it's just more expensive. With the general direction of oil prices these days though it becomes more and more feasible.
Soda
-
You are right F4UDOA, the US gets a small percentage of its oil from the Middle East. You have to remember that not only Middle Eastern countries are in OPEC. I know Venezuela, and I think Mexico too are also in OPEC.
------------------
LJK_Raubvogel
LuftJägerKorps (http://www.luftjagerkorps.com)
-
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/opec.html (http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/opec.html)
These are the guys with all the cards, or at least the best hand.
http://www.opec.org/faqs.htm (http://www.opec.org/faqs.htm)
OPEC FAQS
Eagler
-
Lynx, yah I've been there, done that. 1200 km in one day in a Fiat Punto. It ain't that bad.
There are larger more comfortable vehicles that still are reasonable economic.
But, of course I was talking about the daily commute (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif).
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
AFAIR from my Economical Geographics school textbook (read it in 1989) - in 1980 US produced 2 times more oil then USSR (not Russia, Azerbaijan and Turkmenia included). You can call it "communist propaganda" if you wish (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
Also please note that US consumes more oil and energy resources then the rest of the world. So - that's who our children will blame for oil exaustion. (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/wink.gif)
StSanta, where in Europe did you find a 1200km route, and how many borders did you cross? ;-) Hehe, here we usually go to lake Seliger on weekends. It's quite near: 450km ride from Moscow. I know some guys that don't mind to go kajaking to Karelia on weekends, ~1500km one way (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/smile.gif)
------------------
With respect,
Pavel Pavlov,
Commissar 25th IAP WB VVS
-
Boroda, I used to live in northern Sweden. And had (and have) a brother in southern Sweden, so we travelled 1200 km when we wanted to visit.
Sweden is a relatively long country by European standards (http://bbs.hitechcreations.com/smf/Smileys/default/biggrin.gif).
------------------
StSanta
9./JG 54 "Grünherz"
(http://www.angelfire.com/nt/regoch/sig.gif)
-
Remember the gas price thread?
Go back and look at the figures in there. In most countries, the price of the GASOLINE is essentially the same.
The real difference in the "pump price" comes from the taxes the individual governments apply to the product.
All that "FREE education" and "FREE health care" and "FREE" this and "FREE" that always has SOMEBODY paying for it. (http://smilecwm.tripod.com/net6/jump3.gif)
I don't think it's possible to change the course of development now. Personal transportation devices are here to stay. People like the freedom. So, alternatives to oil WILL eventually be developed. The only thing that might be altered is the timeline.
-
I read an article about an oil field in the Gulf of Mexico. It was surveyed and found to be pretty big. The pumping started and, as expected, the production began tepering off after a matter of some time. After an even longer time, the production began to climb again until it actually surpassed the original numbers by a factor of 2. The area was re-assed and the oil field size had doubled in size.
I think scientists are having to re-evaluate just what the source of oil is. Some previous assumptions aren't applying every time they should. Basically, I wouldn't hold my breath for the oil to run out in the Middle east.
AKDejaVu
-
Oil field size is not the only factor, the most important is how easily the oil in the field can be collected. Some rock is much more porous than other and thus allow the oil in a field to flow more easily to the collection point. If the rock is less porous, you have to drill more wells in order to extract it. More wells = more costs. Doubling production probably involved drilling more production wells.
Anything off-shore is expensive, to have to drill lots of wells offshore is even more expensive. Drilling lots of wells on land is cheap(er). Problem is, the large majority of significant US oil and gas deposits are offshore or in Alaska. Both are fairly expensive areas.
Winter drilling season is upon us soon, I know the rigs in Canada are going to be working full tilt...
Soda
-
Instead of draining the world's oil reserve, why not make it a priority to come up with an alternate source of power to replace it?
Oil takes thousands of years to be created. Once we're out, thats it folks. Nevermind the ecological problems that will come up with oil reserves run dry. Oil has a natural purpose and it is not to power our needs.
-
Toad - some of us don't mind paying more taxes to have education and health care available for all. The problem with high fuel tax in this country is the fact that there is a budget surplus of $16 billion this year, so many people want some of this surplus to be used to cut petrol tax.
-
Dowding, many of us do object to the extortionate levels of indirect taxation. I don't object to fair and reasonable taxes on profits. I do object to taxes which prevent businesses making profits in the first place.
-
...IR35 is one of those...
------------------
lynx
13 Sqn RAF
-
my vette gulps fuel at the same rate StSanta and I can drink a bottle of tequila
and I am proud of it
because the more noise and smog you car can produce, the larger the size of your genitalia.
well at least thats how it works in America
by the way santa, when there is no more reefs and fish, we can always go ahead with our plan of diving hooped on LSD, our minds will make us see plenty of cooll stuff :-P
-
Originally posted by Dowding:
Toad - some of us don't mind paying more taxes to have education and health care available for all. The problem with high fuel tax in this country is the fact that there is a budget surplus of $16 billion this year, so many people want some of this surplus to be used to cut petrol tax.
Don't mind paying taxes but want taxes cut/refund? huh?
Don't give them (the government) the money in the first place and there wouldn't be a surplus. Everyone has to live within a budget but the government. They can do it with less, much less in my opinion. I'm not happy paying any taxes! Privatize it, I'll then support it if it is something I believe in, not some hair brain idea from some fat arse politician that probably hasn't held a real job his/her entire life.
Eagler
-
Canadians pay more taxes than most other nationalities. I happily pay my taxes because I know the money is being used properly. Our health care is free. If we break our leg, it is fixed up with no bill attached. If we need surgery of any sort. It is free. Our schooling systems are free as well. Our roads are in great shape, our cities are VERY clean and our crime rate is low.
Some European countries (I think Denmak and Norway) have VERY high taxes. But they also have free health care, free education, free university and many other benifets. I would much rather have that than HMOs and private schooling restricted to the rich.
------------------
Squadron Leader, Igloo.
C/O RCAF 411 Squadron - County of York (http://www.trueorigins.net/411rcaf)
"Problems cannot be solved with the same awareness that created them" - Albert Einstein[/i]
-
The U.K. is screwed tax wise. ugh.
IN regards to the fuel alternatives.
They could be on the road today if the demand was there.
If the U.S. and Canada put a deadline of 5 years on having every transportation road vehicle be ultra low or zero emission vehicles it would happen.
Check out these links:
General Info About Fuel Cells (http://www2.one.net.au/~dietrich/greenhouse/ballard.html)
2001 Honda Insight (70mpg) (http://www.honda2001.com/models/insight/index.html)
2002 Daimler-Chrysler Bus (http://http://www.hfcletter.com/letter/may00/)
Hyundai Fuel Cell SUV (http://http://www.hfcletter.com/letter/june00/)
[This message has been edited by Snoopi (edited 11-07-2000).]
-
Eagler - please read my post again. Hopefully you'll find that I was objecting to high fuel taxes when there is a huge budget surplus. There is a apparently no need for so much tax on petrol. According to government sources, a 10p petrol duty cut would cost the treasury about 5 billion pounds. It might sound a small cut, but the surplus more than covers it.
Unfortunately, its not as simple as 'I agree with paying taxes' or 'I hate paying taxes'.
qts - I agree with you. But I think the economy seems to be doing ok compared to the ludicrous situation created by the Tories in the early nineties. I think Brown has done a good job as Chancellor, overall.
[This message has been edited by Dowding (edited 11-07-2000).]