What's new
TerraForums Venus Flytrap, Nepenthes, Drosera and more talk

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

an answer to the oil shortage

  • #21
I know! I know! Ban the extra refridgerators (which will reduce power consumption by h*ll of a lot), and will also reduce the size of the people (and perhaps cars) by...oh I'd say half, maybe? That way, energy guzzling engines won't be needed to power massive cars with massive @sses inside! LOL!

smile_n_32.gif
 
  • #22
[b said:
Quote[/b] (zac @ July 26 2006,1:38)]Hydrogen....also a band-aid solution...

Hydrogen Fuel is and always will be an energy sink. It will always take more energy to make hydrogen than you will get out of the fuel. Hydrogen also requires energy from another source to be created, which is much different than oil. Oil can be used to extract more oil. Hydrogen can NOT be used to make more Hydrogen. Therefore if we begin using it as a major source of fuel for transportation we are really just going to be using electricity, used to make hydrogen, as an alternative. This will just put more strain on our already unstable energy situation.
Hydrogen can somewhat produce itself if you think about it. There is an inventor that converted a Volvo to run on HHO hydrogen. The HHO is stripped from water and stored for use all inside of the one car. So he fills up the tank with water, then the car converts the water to HHO useing (I think) a couple of alternaters, then it stores and uses the HHO. So in essence the car uses HHO to turn the engine and make enough power to convert water into more HHO.
 
  • #23
Huh? How would energy from hydrogen be able to produce enough energy to split water and to power the car as well? 2nd law of thermodynamics...where would the extra energy come from?
 
  • #24
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]We must prepare for the end of the automobile era.

aahh.. isnt' the internet already starting us doing that.... I don't need to see my clients any longer... i do need to ship things. with your vein of thought i bet only in time, pleasure driving will cease, and only to promote business will continue. having a car will be like the lottery...

But i have a horse, so i am happy... still can get up to 10 miles a day on her...on $2 worth of hay...:;):

Sorry to add to the mix, but govt. intervention on the agricultural side is getting to the point where they are slowly creating laws that take away these personal freedoms, too... NAIS is the beginning of the end....
 
  • #25
[b said:
Quote[/b] ]the problem with solar is with current technology it isnt terribly effective in some areas. however it sure would help at lowering the power needs of the country as a whole but it also takes money out of energy company pockets.at the moment i think it would cost me around $15,000 for a system that would give me enough electricity to run my house. however due to snow fall and severly overcast days in winter i would still need to be hooked up to the grid. after we get the house paid for i might just concider doing it the only problem is finding the materials since its solar energy companies arent terribly common in MT

Well, you are going to actually WANT to still be connected to the grid, for two reasons. One is that there will be days when you are going to need some extra juice.

The other is that on days when you produce MORE power than you need, you can sell it back INTO the grid - i.e. your meter will run backwards. I bet this would be more often than not. Now, between the savings on power, and the possible earnings on selling the extra, you MIGHT even be able to recoup the $15k.

As far as solar power companies in MT, I can't help ya there! Maybe you should start one....
 
  • #26
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Jason Wong @ July 26 2006,9:04)]Huh? How would energy from hydrogen be able to produce enough energy to split water and to power the car as well? 2nd law of thermodynamics...where would the extra energy come from?
I have no clue how he dose it. But it works and his car passes all fedreal regulations and he has a lot of patents on his technology. I just hope he can go big with it. I know for a fact that my RX7 will run on hydrogen just fine and if I can get a system like his, it would rock.
 
  • #27
I saw no mention of nuclear or fusion power in this discussion.  Would someone care to expound?
 
  • #28
From my knowledge....Fusion in theory would solve most of the world's energy problems. The issue is that Fusion needs to occur at a temperature of approx 1 000 000*C. In order to harness the energy the Nuclear plant must be able to withstand these incredibly high temperatures. The EU met on the idea of fusion last year and granted France a few million to design the plant. It's due to be constructed by the mid to late 2020's. Since it is also only a prtotype that would not provide a significant source of commercial energy it would take another 10-15 years following it's construction to build a commercial one. This is all dependant on whether the theory works out and we can build such a high tech reactor and control the fusion core. Cold fusion, which is the theory that a fusion reaction could take place at room temperature and at normal pressure is still under debate. A panel of 18 scientists met in 2004 to discuss it and two-thirds were not convinced that the theory would translate into a working reaction.

Nuclear in general is another viable source of energy but it is in no-way capable of filling the oil gap. Allow me to show you exhibit 1:

Historyofenergy-2.jpg


This Graph shows the history of american energy consumption. It was released by the Energy Information Administration in 2004.

In order to maintain growing energy demands we would have to be building a new nuclear plant every month for the next 20 years. Since it takes about 7 years to construct a nuclear plant and another 2-3 to certifie it and get it up and running you can count out this possibility. Even if this was achieved Nuclear is still non-renewable so we would just be buying ourselves a little time, rather than fixing the underlying problem within our culture.

Zac
 
  • #29
I think I'm still skeptical of the whole HHO technology. If it was as significant as the technology suggests (i.e. it broke the 2nd law of thermal dynamics!!!) then I think it would recieve a little more attention than it has.

Zac
 
  • #30
[b said:
Quote[/b] (jojo @ July 26 2006,9:35)]aahh.. isnt' the internet already starting us doing that.... I don't need to see my clients any longer...
Unfortunately not everyone can work from home, but this does help. Too bad that automobiles are used for more than just work. Leisure travel has become equivalent to a right in this country it is a very democratic situation. 95% of voters drive, that other 5% being the elderly, blind, and just people who don't care to. This means that laws pertaining to transportation are almost guarenteed to be passed seeing as they are beneficial to everyone. However with rising gas costs people are going to be turned away from this luxury. First the poor, then the middle class, and after awhile it will only be the upper class driving this would change the balance dramatically. You would now have 20% of voters being daily drivers and the other 80% finding alternatives. Prior to this point laws pertaining to the maintanence and advancement of the automobile will have become useless to most voters thus cutting off funding and ending the use of leisure automobile traffic. This will mark a great change in our culture. It just depends at which point the gas prices start to drive people away, in determining when this is going to happen. Of course a depression will ensue as this process takes place. The poor may revolt, the middle class may revolt, but the huge scale will force our economy to a grinding halt. Where things go from there I can only guess.

Zac

p.s. That horse concept bears more weight than you may think to give it. A horse is most likely the most efficient form of transportation. it's fuel can be picked up free almost everywhere and the only byproduct can be used to grow more of it's food.
 
  • #31
From what I understand, HHO is not new. Its been around forever but has never made it big because the people who invented ways to use it were sucked up by oil companys so they could keep us on oil instead.

It sounds like a conspiracy to me but I have seen the car and the technology and I would love to see more of it on a nationwide scale.
 
  • #32
All white House propaganda aside, this is what I read about Hydrogen being plentiful, albeit currently more expensive than gasoline:

Fact Sheet: Hydrogen Fuel: a Clean and Secure Energy Future




In his State of the Union address, President Bush announced a $1.2 billion hydrogen fuel initiative to reverse America's growing dependence on foreign oil by developing the technology for commercially viable hydrogen-powered fuel cells to power cars, trucks, homes and businesses with no pollution or greenhouse gases. The hydrogen fuel initiative will include $720 million in new funding over the next five years to develop the technologies and infrastructure to produce, store, and distribute hydrogen for use in fuel cell vehicles and electricity generation. Combined with the FreedomCAR (Cooperative Automotive Research) initiative, President Bush is proposing a total of $1.7 billion over the next five years to develop hydrogen-powered fuel cells, hydrogen infrastructure and advanced automotive technologies.

Under the President's hydrogen fuel initiative, the first car driven by a child born today could be powered by fuel cells. The hydrogen fuel initiative complements the President's existing FreedomCAR initiative, which is developing technologies needed for mass production of safe and affordable hydrogen-powered fuel cell vehicles. Through partnerships with the private sector, the hydrogen fuel initiative and FreedomCAR will make it practical and cost-effective for large numbers of Americans to choose to use clean, hydrogen fuel cell vehicles by 2020. This will dramatically improve America's energy security by significantly reducing the need for imported oil, as well as help clean our air and reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Background on Today's Presidential Action


Fuel Cells are a Proven Technology: America's astronauts have used fuel cells to generate electricity since the 1960s, but more work is needed to make them cost-effective for use in cars, trucks, homes or businesses. Additional research and development is needed to spur rapid commercialization of these technologies so they can provide clean, domestically produced energy for transportation and other uses.

The President's Initiatives Will Overcome Key Technical and Cost Barriers for Fuel Cells:

Lowering the cost of hydrogen: Hydrogen is four times as expensive to produce as gasoline (when produced from its most affordable source, natural gas). The hydrogen fuel initiative seeks to lower that cost enough to make fuel cell cars cost-competitive with conventional gasoline-powered vehicles by 2010; and to advance the methods of producing hydrogen from renewable resources, nuclear energy, and even coal.

Creating effective hydrogen storage: Hydrogen storage systems are now inadequate for use in the wide range of vehicles that consumers demand. New technology is needed.

Creating affordable hydrogen fuel cells: Fuel cells are now ten times more expensive than internal combustion engines. The FreedomCAR initiative is working to reduce that cost to affordable levels.

America's Energy Security is Threatened by Our Dependence on Foreign Oil:

America imports 55 percent of the oil it consumes; that is expected to grow to 68 percent by 2025.

Nearly all of our cars and trucks run on gasoline, and they are the main reason America imports so much oil. Two-thirds of the 20 million barrels of oil Americans use each day is used for transportation; fuel cell vehicles offer the best hope of dramatically reducing our dependence on foreign oil.

Hydrogen fuel Will Help Ensure America's Energy Independence:

Through the hydrogen fuel initiative and FreedomCAR, the federal government, automakers and energy companies will work together to overcome the technological and financial barriers to the successful development of commercially viable, emissions-free fuel cell vehicles that require no foreign oil.

Hydrogen is domestically available in abundant quantities as a component of natural gas, coal, biomass, and even water.

The Department of Energy estimates that the hydrogen fuel initiative and FreedomCAR initiatives may reduce our demand for petroleum by over 11 million barrels per day by 2040 - approximately the amount of oil America imports today.

Fuel Cells Will Improve Air Quality and Dramatically Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions:

Vehicles are a significant source of air pollution in America's cities and urban areas. Hydrogen fuel cells create electricity to power cars without any pollution.

The hydrogen fuel and FreedomCAR initiatives may reduce America's greenhouse gas emissions from transportation alone by more than 500 million metric tons of carbon equivalent each year by 2040. Additional emissions reductions could be achieved by using fuel cells in applications such as generating electricity for residential or commercial uses.

Hydrogen is the Key to a Clean Energy Future:

It has the highest energy content per unit of weight of any known fuel.

When burned in an engine, hydrogen produces effectively zero emissions; when powering a fuel cell, its only waste is water.

Hydrogen can be produced from abundant domestic resources including natural gas, coal, biomass, and even water.

Combined with other technologies such as carbon capture and storage, renewable energy and fusion energy, fuel cells could make an emissions-free energy future possible.

The Hydrogen Fuel Initiative Complements President Bush's FreedomCAR initiative:

In 2002, President Bush launched FreedomCAR, a partnership with automakers to advance high-technology research needed to produce practical, affordable hydrogen fuel cell vehicles that American consumers will want to buy and drive.

The hydrogen fuel initiative will develop technologies for hydrogen production and distribution infrastructure needed to power fuel cell vehicles and stationary fuel cell power sources.

President Bush's Budget Provides Strong Support for Hydrogen Fuel and FreedomCAR:

President Bush proposes $1.7 billion in funding for the hydrogen fuel initiative and FreedomCAR over the next five years, including $720 million in new funding for hydrogen fuel.

The President's FY 2004 budget request for hydrogen and fuel cell research and development and advanced automotive technologies through the hydrogen fuel and FreedomCAR programs is $273 million.
For more information on the President's initiatives, please visit www.whitehouse.gov
 
  • #33
[b said:
Quote[/b] (schloaty @ July 25 2006,3:55)]What kills me is solar energy.  Was just at the planetarium this weekend, and found out that the amount of energy that reaches the earth from the sun in one minutes is a little more than the US uses in a whole year.

Now, I understand that a) we cannot collect solar energy efficiently - maybe a 2% draw from the total energy.  Ok, so that makes it a hour to power the county for a year.

Then, we have less that the whole earth (because we aren't the only country, after all).  Say, we have 1% of the surface area to deal with.  

that means a few days to power the country for a year.

Still better than we're doing now!
The problem with solar is twofold at best. We don't have the means to collect sunlight effectively. Not only that, but even the most modern techniques for producing solar panels take more energy to produce a panel than that panel will ever collect before falling apart. Solar energy seems like a good choice to the consumer, but that's only because the true economic and environment costs of solar panel production are obscured by inflation and renewable energy subsidies.
[b said:
Quote[/b] (zac @ July 26 2006,10:16)]Cold fusion, which is the theory that a fusion reaction could take place at room temperature and at normal pressure is still under debate. A panel of 18 scientists met in 2004 to discuss it and two-thirds were not convinced that the theory would translate into a working reaction.
Cold fusion has recieved a lot of bad rep since the 80's when a group of researchers falsified lab reports to support their fusion method. However, there's a growing body of evidence to support that fusion is possible at room temperatures when certain alloys are used to exert enormous amounts of magnetic (or maybe weak nuclear) force on deuterium. I read a series of papers once documenting some sort of microbe (I think it was a fungus) that accumulated tritium - an isotope of hydrogen produced on Earth only by nuclear reactions - when grown in a closed environment, suggesting that the whatever-it-is performs fusion as a part of it's life process.
[b said:
Quote[/b] (CopcarFC @ July 26 2006,10:50)]From what I understand, HHO is not new.  Its been around forever but has never made it big because the people who invented ways to use it were sucked up by oil companys so they could keep us on oil instead.
This is precisely what's happening with cold fusion research as well. There's a lot of pressure to keep cold fusion under wraps; cold fusion reactors would allow anyone to have a safe, efficient power plant in their own home, running off of ordinary water. It would totally destroy the energy economy as it presently exists, as well as a number of other businesses that have sprung up around our methods of energy production (mining, emissions cleanup, etc.) Thus, big surprise, big oil and other energy concerns spend a lot of time and money lobbying against cold fusion research.
[b said:
Quote[/b] (jimscott @ July 27 2006,3:51)]Hydrogen can be produced from abundant domestic resources including natural gas, coal, biomass, and even water.

Combined with other technologies such as carbon capture and storage, renewable energy and fusion energy, fuel cells could make an emissions-free energy future possible.
Note the sources they list for hydrogen. Natural gas and coal? Still burning things, still relying on resources that are spectacularly slow to renew. Biomass is a little more reasonable, but the water part is complete and utter non-scientific hogwash. The next paragraph is a nice little scientifically accurate disclaimer; although it seems innocuous enough, what they're basically saying is that you need additional power to use hydrogen as a fuel source, IE we don't actually have any energy to gain by using it. They say, 'Combined with... renewable energy...' but hydrogen power is supposed to be that renewable energy. We're not solving the problem, just convoluting it. Circular logic anyone?
~Joe
 
  • #34
Maybe we should just go with lightening, a bell tower, and a flux capacitor. It's been around since 1955 and capable of generatiing 121 Jiggawatts of power.
 
  • #35
[b said:
Quote[/b] (Lauderdale @ July 26 2006,10:47)]I saw no mention of nuclear or fusion power in this discussion.  Would someone care to expound?
I wouldn't trust our species to use nuclear fuel for just energy production. There are far too many crazies out there and there have been accidents, in spite of safeguards. In my opinion, we will either be held hostage or destroyed - or both.
 
  • #36
Is E85 different than the ethinol top fuel dragsters use? because someone said that they produce lass hoursepower, but it has been my experience that alcahol drasters produce more hoursepower than the race fuel drasters. I could be wrong.

BMW made the first hydrogen/gas powered car, and because it needs to be tuned to use both fuel sources both MPG are down, but if it could be tuned to use strictly hydrogen than it get better gas miles. I am glad to see mazda getting in the mix of burning hydrogen.

It is my understanding that energy is neither created nor destroyed. So theroeticly when you burn gas the output is heat and the expolsion power used to turn the motor. We loose alot of that convertion into heat. Thats why its not efficient as converting one thing to another.

Now, this is a theory I have. Call me a loon, but don't bash me. Its just a theory. Keep in mind I do nto know how the earth goes about producing oil. I know its a fosil fuel, but other than that I don't know. Everyone firmiliar with the tar sands in Canada? Have you ever noticed that it seems like oil is found in areas of high sand content? Atleast to my knowledge anyways. Remember I'm just thinking outloud. I know that it has been said that trees and plants clean the air and help remove polution. Although no where in a plants respriation does it use the polutants from the air. Atleast thats not what I learned in Bio. So now I ask myself if plants don't realy filter out the bad stuff in the air then what does? I know polution has been on the increase, but some has to be removed or we would have overwhelmed ourselves already. All the forest fires and other things burning since the begining of time should have accumulated over time and we should have been overwhelmed by now. So not to get to my theory and point of this ramble. What if all those byproducts of oil some how accumulate in the sandy area of the world and over time pool into the pockets of oil we are now collecting. What if they somehow convert from the gass byproducts back into the oil they were once? I duno it could be far fetched, but I was just thinking outside the box. If atoms never get destroyed but they just recombine, unless we split an atom, but then don;t those components recombine after the reaction?

I know just enough to eb dangerous, but not enough to know really what I am talking about.
smile_n_32.gif


What about if someone built a hybred that when the engine was running it had 2 or 3 alternators running on the exuast lines generating more elestricity while the engine was running. It might help the engine run less to recharge the batteries. Just a thought.

Here is another, and I planned on building it, but EVERYONE says it will not work. You know the whole idea of can't get energy for free. What I have thought about doing was having an enetric motor funning a large pully or maybe a planitary gear or something where for every rotation of the motor pully you get Many rotations of the output gear. That ourput gear would then turn 2 or 3 alternators that are pretty free spinning. Now the motor would be running off 3 to 12 batteries in parrallel (parrallel would keep it a 12 volt system right?), and then the alternators would be recharging those batteries. I would think that the one motor running the 2 or 3 alternators would use less energy than the alternators were producing therefore, having a surplus of energy to be used to power something. I also thought about using a 6 volt motor to power the system, and charge the 12 volt batteries. Just had to find a 6 volt motor strong enough to run the system without sucking to much energy. Now I don't have the funds to impliment such an idea, and everyone I share this with tells me that it wouldn't work. The energy needed t oturn the alternators would accualy be more than the alternators would produce this that and the other. I just think that that is not the case if a high efficency motor was used and high output alternators were used. You know tha 190 amp big boys. Or even bigger if they make them, but they would have to be free spinning to reduce drag on the electric motor. I know the laws of physics says it will not work, but my twisted thinking outside the box tells me it will work. If I ever get the funds to make it, and I am able to get the system to power my car stereo for an extended period of time, then I would consider it a success.
 
  • #37
Wow I didn't think the post was that long.
smile_n_32.gif
Sorry everyone!
 
  • #38
JB_OrchidGuy
Top fuel dragsters are supercharged, use Nitromethane, chemical formula CH3NO2, for fuel and produce in the neighborhood of 8000 hp from a 500+ cubic inch engine.  The last time I looked, the 1/4 mile record is under 4.5 seconds and over 330 mph.  They are the quickest accelerating man made vehicles on the planet.

Alcohol dragsters use methanol ($52 per gallon) not ethanol, for fuel.  While they are very quick, about 7+ second quarter mile times, they do not even come close to the horsepower per cubic inch capability of the top fuel cars.
 
  • #39
JB, oil isnt commonly found in sand, its normally found fairly deep underground between hard layers of rock that keep it trapped in place. in a few areas due to earth quakes and just normal continental drift these pockets get broken and the oil will make its way to the surface into areas such as the tar sands in Canada or the Labrea Tar pits in LA
 
  • #40
Just another point to add.

Oil is currently an efficient source of fuel for extraction, but it is getting less efficient despite our increases in technology. In the 1950's they could extract 5-10 barrels of oil/for every barrel used to run the machines. Today the return ratio is 2-3 barrels/barrel. Mostly because the new oil sites are the tar sands/pits or they are extremly deep underground and require much more energy to extract. Oil sites become inefficient when 1 barrel only extracts another 1 barrel. These sites are then deserted even though they still contain more oil, it's just out of "efficient" reach. The tar sand/pit sites usually become unefficient fairly fast. Small increases in our current technology set back the 1/1 ratio by a few months at a time, but as the technology slows down and demand increases they too will become inefficient.

Zac
 
Back
Top