King Ethanol Will Abdicate?
April 25th, 2014 at 8:28:22 AM permalink | |
chickenman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 0 Posts: 368 | Not to conclude it is simple, and can't answer the energy recovery cost equation, but the usability, portability and storage of hydrogen is known. A thought experiment: imagine oil dried up tomorrow. Set aside for a moment the obvious ramifications far beyond transport but what would be available that already exists? Hydrogen and battery powered vehicles. Where does the energy for hydrogen and electricity to charge batteries come from now? Some oil for sure, so the other mechanisms must ramp up dramatically. Just trying to isolate here because the whole energy problem is immense for sure. He's everywhere, he's everywhere...! |
April 25th, 2014 at 8:47:17 AM permalink | |
AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 135 Posts: 18212 |
For discussion I will assume that all the uses for oil other than transport, which are most uses, would not matter. What would we have? Mostly coal, natural gas, and nuclear. We could convert vehicles to natural gas over time and it is a better store of power than batteries. It comes down to the fact that for vehicles you need the following for energy: 1. Must store a lot of energy 2. Must be easy to release but must be easy to stop release when needed 3. Must be easy to replenish (refuel) quickly and safely Hydrogen meets #1 and #2 but only half of #3. But we still have 1-2 trillion bbl of oil until the need really hits. The President is a fink. |
April 25th, 2014 at 8:59:57 AM permalink | |
chickenman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 0 Posts: 368 | That's one of the reasons it is hard to see a major shift toward hydrogen or battery power for transport in the foreseeable future. Maybe never. He's everywhere, he's everywhere...! |
April 25th, 2014 at 9:08:35 AM permalink | |
AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 135 Posts: 18212 |
I still say mankind only has 1,000 years left on earth and the lat 500 of that may be severe decline so it may not matter. The President is a fink. |
April 25th, 2014 at 9:13:13 AM permalink | |
chickenman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 0 Posts: 368 | I'm not optimistic enough to dispute that. He's everywhere, he's everywhere...! |
April 25th, 2014 at 9:41:08 AM permalink | |
odiousgambit Member since: Oct 28, 2012 Threads: 154 Posts: 5112 | If we can figure out how to harvest the methane ice in the oceans, oil will be a mute point. The Japanese are working on it like crazy. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methane_clathrate I'm Still Standing, Yeah, Yeah, Yeah [it's an old guy chant for me] |
April 25th, 2014 at 10:47:34 AM permalink | |
TheCesspit Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 23 Posts: 1929 | Electroysis of water is not energy efficient, but hydrogen is touted as one way of storing the energy from renewables so it can be taken elsewhere. The energy density of oil is huge, and that's why it's so damn useful. Thermopower is another useful source of electricity generation, I think, as is liquid salt solar. Problem both have (beyond the costs at present) is how do you then get it in a portable form. Current Hydrogen stores have as many problems as electric cells, but fuel cell technology has a long way to catch up. If we didn't need to move our energy around as much, most electrical sources are great... but we want to be able to drive and transport goods over long distances, fly, and all that good stuff. Oil is king there. And gas isn't too bad either, though if you ask me (and you weren't) there's many questions on fracking for gas that are unanswered and I don't believe it is the 'answer'... there's many potential unintended consequences to pumping water and toxic chemicals into the ground, to break the substrate to get at the gas. It is said that your life flashes before your eyes just before you die.... it's called Life |
April 25th, 2014 at 12:24:06 PM permalink | |
Face Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 61 Posts: 3941 |
One thing to remember, though, is while it make take X times less energy to procure it, it still took a ton more energy to produce it. All that decomposition and squeezing and smashing that took place naturally was a lot of energy to make what is hydrocarbon fuel. I don't reckon we'll ever find an energy, be it hydrogen from water or your "manufactured" petroleum, that will ever be different. This is way out of my element, but ain't it that whole conservation of energy thing? Any energy you use to create something is going to be leeched and bled off by friction, heat, whatever, leaving you with a product that has less energy than you started with. I dunno. Perhaps there are exceptions. Be bold and risk defeat, or be cautious and encourage it. |
April 25th, 2014 at 12:42:30 PM permalink | |
AZDuffman Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 135 Posts: 18212 |
Yes, oil took all that energy, but we did not expend that energy. Lots of crushing, but not the same as fermenting corn, etc. I have said it here and I did not take physics to understand it. Energy hates to be stored, it wants to spend itself immediately. Simplest way to understand this is compress a spring. It wants to release that energy right away. Same with most all energy, which is why it takes years to lock up solar energy in a tree and millions of years to lock it up in coal. The President is a fink. |
April 25th, 2014 at 12:57:20 PM permalink | |
Face Member since: Oct 24, 2012 Threads: 61 Posts: 3941 |
Oh, I know. I was just commenting on your comment about pumping hydrogen or whatever into the Earth as a way to sort of produce oil. It might be feasible someday, but I doubt it's the answer for those very reasons. I dunno, just commenting along, throwing little bits into a subject I'm not learned in. I'm not too passionate one way or the other, I just know electric sucks because batteries are the devil. God, I hate batteries. But as far as energy goes, I don't really care. Run out of oil and go back to horses? I sure wouldn't mind =) Be bold and risk defeat, or be cautious and encourage it. |