[outcast]

There's no evidence coal or natural gas is peaking.

[Concerned]

There's no evidence coal or natural gas is peaking.

High grade coal is being substituted with lignite (brown damp coals)

Natural gas in the US has had a lift with coal bed methane. Lets hope this can last for a meaningful transition. Unfortunately at around $3 per unit (tcfl or however the spot price is measured) we are essentially flaring it off. Oh well *shrug*

[Cloud9]

Can you imagine the cost of transitioning ten percent of the gas burning vehicles to natural gas. This is going to be a long difficult slog and is what makes this depression different from the last several recessions. This is more than just the end of a business cycle.

[Maddog78]

Yeah, I can imagine it.
It would be a lot less than TARP.

There is n. gas for 100 + years and maybe even 100's of years.
See the n. gas threads on this site if you want more info.

[vision-master]

Forbes-The End Of Fossil Fuel The Capitalist Tool has become a Doomer's handmaiden.

You will never see cheap gasoline again. You will probably never see cheap energy again. Oil, natural gas and coal are set to peak and go into decline within the next decade, and no technology can change that.

No sugar coating this puppy. You'll have to swallow it furballs and all

How this will affect the global economy, and our lifestyles, cannot be overstated. Former chief economist for Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce World Markets, Jeff Rubin, and oil investment banker Matthew Simmons have concluded that it means no less than the end of globalization.

You corie deniers may not want to listen to Simmons et. al. but they have Steve Forbes ears.

What are the youngens gonna do?

[outcast]

Can you imagine the cost of transitioning ten percent of the gas burning vehicles to natural gas. This is going to be a long difficult slog and is what makes this depression different from the last several recessions. This is more than just the end of a business cycle.

If we can shell out $700+ BILLION to prop up failed banks, spend $1 TRILLION on our military (that includes all military related spending that's not on the "official" DoD budget such as Iraq and Vet benefits) per year and seemingly get away with it, why can't we do that?

[TheDude]

10% NG conversion of US vehicle fleet would be around $175 billion. Seemingly a pittance; while we're at it we could twice over electrify and massive expand the rail system, with LR/CR/Interurban systems that would cut oil consumption at least 10% and likely more. Alan Drake detailed all this extra-exhaustively in his article Multiple Birds – One Silver BB. Can't do that! (either option) We have OTC derivative counterparties to prop up, and that's who pays for political campaigns.

The figure I give for NGVs is for the 250 million vehicles we have here, more than half of which are redundant, plus economies of scale would quickly bring the price down, which as it stands is ca. $7k for a conversion or new car. I'm more sanguine about E85 and FFVs, if consumers are going to do the deed en maase - that's about 10% as expensive. We'll likely not produce enough ethanol ourselves, but if tarrifs were lowered imports could perhaps be increased; plus Chu's nuts for lignin. 3rd world laborers striving to produce cheap sugar cane so we can dump it in our SUV's tanks and tool across town to see the new Adam Sandler flick is a pretty nauseating spectacle to contemplate, but this at least seems semi-possible, until GW makes all that tropical cropland non-arable that is.

[shortonsense]

There's no evidence coal or natural gas is peaking.

And if they did, wait awhile, and it will reverse direction and peak again another 20 years down the road. repeat ad absurdium.

[shortonsense]

Forbes-The End Of Fossil Fuel The Capitalist Tool has become a Doomer's handmaiden.

You will never see cheap gasoline again. You will probably never see cheap energy again. Oil, natural gas and coal are set to peak and go into decline within the next decade, and no technology can change that.

No sugar coating this puppy. You'll have to swallow it furballs and all

How this will affect the global economy, and our lifestyles, cannot be overstated. Former chief economist for Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce World Markets, Jeff Rubin, and oil investment banker Matthew Simmons have concluded that it means no less than the end of globalization.

You corie deniers may not want to listen to Simmons et. al. but they have Steve Forbes ears.

What are the youngens gonna do?

Read a Forbes article which makes more sense?

http://www.forbes.com/2009/07/24/energy ... d=rss_news

[Carlhole]

Forbes: "Don't Bet On $800-A-Barrel Oil

A tsunami of fuel innovation will be unleashed well before gasoline costs $20 a gallon.

It's a good bet that oil will never reach the stratospheric level of $800 a barrel. At the same time, it is a fair bet that oil prices will rise again and surpass the previous peak of $150. And next time, absent a global economic collapse (most recently triggered by the financial sector, not by oil prices), it is likely that prices will stay high for some time. The sustained impact of oil staying beyond $100 a barrel will unleash a tsunami of innovation and production.

We'll see plenty of liquid fuels for a long time before people give up the convenience of getting to Tuscany by jet instead of ship, or from Chicago to San Francisco by air in three hours, instead of by rail in 50 hours. (In the latter case, having traveled that route on Amtrak's Zephyr I'll confess that it is very pleasant if you have the time.)

The future of Boeing Dreamliners and dastardly Chevy Suburbans are secure, along with everything they imply. The increasingly tech-centric world will become wealthier, and higher-priced gasoline will be accommodated because it permits so much of what people cherish both in the developed and in the developing world: comfort, convenience and quality of life.

Physicist Mark Mills is co-founding partner of Digital Power Capital, an energy tech venture fund. He also writes the Energy Intelligence column for Forbes, and is co-author of The Bottomless Well, Basic Books (2005).

[JJ]

email today from my mudlogger friend, currently in Louisiana:

Glad it went ok, and your headache is better as well.

Mine is still here .... Eat Sleep Work Repeat .....

Hopefully I'll keep getting paid ..... if I can just keep my sanity.

Had some Suits from Shell on location today .... The word is:

Push Natural Gas as a source of Motor Fuel because we have
a lot of it, and it will help us keep our jobs.
Alternate Translation: Oil is going away fast, but we can hang
on a little longer if we switch to Methane.

There was some talk about building large Power Plant sized
Fuel Cells near the Gas Fields, The idea is to use the gas
in place, and ship the electric power. Since the fuel cells
are relatively pollution free it may be an alternative to Nuclear.
Yeah, but what about all of that Water Vapor? No Free Lunch.

[Carlhole]

Cornies vs. Doomers.

Cornies have nanotechnology and quantum computing on their side, technologies that don't rely on energy, except a little what you'd expect to find in an expensive tightly-held Bakken methane formation that declines precipitously after the first year. And some hydrates.

Doomers have a finite planet and thermodynamics on theirs.

Cornies have the Sun on their side too.

I take peak oil seriously though; don't get the wrong idea. But we ain't going back to tribes or living like Amish.

Whatever turmoil takes place will be in search of a new equilibrium where the human spirit can reach full blossom. And when something blossoms on Planet Earth, it usually means a new "something on planet earth" is on the way. Life is like that. It constantly seeks advantage and every once in a while it gets immensely lucky.

The "civilisation collapses and survivors live in Olduvai Gorge tribes" meme is a tired fantasy. The paradoxical clash of Singularity vs Peak Oil is much more interesting discussion format, and it is one that has been explored in interesting episodes of the C-Realm Podcast with KMO.

You have to admit. there is a really strong stench of science-hatred on this site. Christ! People here are more open to numerology that they are to science. No wonder all the brainy types ran off to the TheOilDrum and stayed. It's been a real hassle trying to talk about an interesting engineering project such as Algae Fuels on PeakOil.com in the past because their is always some dimwit doom jerk-off spreading scat all the over the thread and arguing against even any further discussion of it.

Well, now we see Exxon and Dow and Airlines funding algae fuels and spending beaucoup bucks in further development. The article about Exxon, I think, claimed that 12% of America's liquid fuel requirement could be supplied by algae fuels.

Seems like all the doomers ever do is argue stupidly about why various ideas won't work. It's boring.

[Carlhole]

You don't have the faintest idea what you are talking about. You do not understand the nature or limits of biofuels. I can explain them if you are interested?

Tell it to Exxon, Dow and the Airlines. They're the ones making $600 million investments in algae fuels. All that money is hiring the best expertise around (like Craig Ventner's Synthetic Genomics).

Maybe if you called up Ventner and all the PhDs working for him and you educated them about algae fuels, they would thank you for setting them straight about this technological pitfall.

I'm interested in following the story because I think it's an interesting engineering problem that will very likely have some place in the energy mix.

[Carlhole]

They do not know what they are talking about. Or rather (and this is conspiratorial, and right up there with the bioengineered algae) they would prefer to have you, the oil-purchasinig consumer, believe Business-As-Usual will continue forever so you don't CONSERVE.

Couldn't have that Oh know. Mustn' t let Precious think something is wrong.

If your credentials and knowledge of the real potential of genetically engineered algae surpass those of Exxon and Dow's venture capital people, Craig Ventner and the team of PhD's at Synthetic Genomics, by all means, go and argue your case with them.

I would love to see the debate and the details of the science involved.

What? They won't talk to you because your an anonymous ignormus clotting up a public discussion board with a lot of your own useless prejudice?

Oh...

Well, maybe someone with knowledge, credentials and experience will step right up and inform Ventner him/herself?

Oops. That's not happening either.

Go shove your dumbass opinions.

[shortonsense]

Tell it to Exxon, Dow and the Airlines. They're the ones making $600 million investments in algae fuels. All that money is hiring the best expertise around (like Craig Ventner's Synthetic Genomics).

Maybe if you called up Ventner and all the PhDs working for him and you educated them about algae fuels, they would thank you for setting them straight about this technological pitfall.

do you know what an appeal to authority is?

Its the kind of people you hire who have enough actual science knowledge to know what sublimation is without it having to be explained to them?

An Appeal to Authority is a fallacy with the following form:

1. Person A is (claimed to be) an authority on subject S.
2. Person A makes claim C about subject S.
3. Therefore, C is true. They do not know what they are talking about. Or rather (and this is conspiratorial, and right up there with the bioengineered algae) they would prefer to have you, the oil-purchasinig consumer, believe Business-As-Usual will continue forever so you don't CONSERVE.

Sounds like Pstarr doesn't like his internet forum expert being overridden by actual experts there Carlhole. Probably isn't happy that actual experts in this game aren't trained at teacher colleges either.