You can discuss this all you want, but the solution is right in front of you, you just don't want to see it.
You can discuss this all you want, but the solution is right in front of you, you just don't want to see it.
And that is?Originally Posted by robwhit
"You're a loser Bobby!"
That there will be no solution until you simply don't guzzle it down. Just live a life where your happiness is not dependent on how much oil you get. Then it won't matter. Like before energy powered the worlds infrastructure, things worked just fine. But people are too lazy to see that way of life now.
I don't think about "how much oil I get", I think about what I need to lead my life. If you want to live in horse and buggy times and never leave the state where you live, there's always Amish Country.
BTW, what's powering the computer you're using to post messages? And all the computers and switches in between that power the internet?
I never said anything about horse and buggy. I don't know where you got that.
And I doubt my energy-efficient laptop with its lcd screen is causing a global oil shortage.
Probably coal, and theres plenty of that in America.BTW, what's powering the computer you're using to post messages? And all the computers and switches in between that power the internet?
There seems to be this attitude that it can be either all or nothing. Either you use all you want and need and use it whenever you think you can and it would benefit you, or you go cold turkey and don't use any and live in a hole in the ground walking everywhere and not turning on the radio.
I don't know where you got this attitude. It seems kind of knee-jerk to me.
Many things are good when used in moderation. Pretty much everything is not good when used too much. If you don't have the supply, or if using your supply causes harmful effects, then perhaps it's not /really/ that cheap. Kind of like addicting drugs. But not quite.
Sure, there would be sizeable changes to facilitate such an alteration in lifestyle. But once it happens, it wouldn't seem so bad. And I don't think I'm thinking of the changes you're thinking of.
Economies grow. We need energy. Frankly, I don't care what kind it is as long as the US is producing their own. We are far too dependent on other countries for such a vital commodity. Countries that don't like us too much, to boot.
Maybe one day you'll understand that there's more to life than getting bigger.
edit: I guess I'm being a little cryptic. Sorry about that. Let's just say that I don't think that being well off and how much energy you get to your home/car/whatever are really that linked.
Last edited by robwhit; 07-30-2008 at 11:05 PM.
I doubt that.
As a little proof, let's look at some statistics from wikipedia:
According to this, USA produces 8.481.000 barrels of crude oil per day (yes, crude oil.. so the amount of usable fuel is less than that)
And according to this, the US consume 20.588.000 barrel/day.
Unless the statistics are wrong, the US can't meet it's own demands for one single day. I guess I don't have to explain what the effects would be.
Btw, this page states that the US have oil reserves of approx. 21.000.000.000 barrel of crude oil.
Dividing this by the per-day-consumption and then by 365, we get the result:
If you could actually use crude oil without refining, the US oil fields could supply the USA for the incredibly vast period of 2.79 years!
Your approximation was just a tiny bit out
> If you could actually use crude oil without refining, the US oil fields could supply the USA for the incredibly vast period of 2.79 years!
Are you saying that's some sort of solution?
If transportation used a completely different resource, such as water, the landscape of US oil consumption would be quite different I am sure, as any one county's would. Americans could also start using trains and buses more for long distance transportation, but suburbia isn't doing that. And since I really don't want to drive, I've noticed a lot of undue skepticism and negativity towards the system and the people who use it.
Oil is essentially a social problem -- we've developed engines that ran on different things before and we're already using some renewable sources. Wind power generated enough kWh for 1.6 million homes in 2005, for example (source). It's no silver bullet, but power can't run on hopes and dreams. The real trouble is that whenever something new comes up, some group of people seem to get ........ed off and try to squash development. I feel as if we are waiting for the "new oil" to save us all and my outlook is bleak.
Does no one mind that we've gotten off the topic?
no, I was saying that the USA using their own oil is nonsense. With increasing demand for cars this might actually be 2 years or less.
I totally agree that, on the long run, oil is not a reliable source for energy because its supply is somewhat limited and its emmisions of Co/Co2 (among others) are unacceptable. But that goes for all combustible energy sources.
The only power source that does not pollute the environment with carbon-oxides is nuclear power, though uranium is also a limited ressource. Plus, nuclear power also bears a lot of danger for the environment (no, I'm not talking about power plant security).
I hope fusion reactors will be the answer.
This report says that there may be enough in the Arctic alone for 12 years...
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...d=aqEDMhrCvp28
...and that of course doesn't include the vast off shore area where we can't drill or the approximately 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil in the Green River Formation in parts of Utah, Colorado, and Wyoming.
http://www.americansolutions.com/Gen...d-330aea987841
There's oil in them thar hills.
