Oil Storm...

[strredwolf]

FX Network's docudrama "Oil Storm" posed a question to the viewers, saying "What would happen if the flow of oil to the USA was temporarily severed?"  To spoil folks, their answer was "A year of hell, a nessisary shift in energy strategy, and a damaged economy."

The better question would be "What would happen if the flow of oil from everywhere to everywhere was peramently severed?"

I would think total anarchy would be highly probable at this current stage of the game.  Alternate fuel cars (aka natural gas, hydrogen, and their hybrid eletric forms) would need to be quickly refined and produced.  Lighter materials would provide for added efficency.  I doubt the world could wait that long.

But this exersize has some relivance on Canmeph 2.  The world is older, as is the species.  Many wars have come, and a healthy amount of paranoia has set in as well as the need for a certian level of redundancy in everything.  With energy, this was paramount.  So, in addition to oil, other fuels were being developed on the fastest pace possible.  Solar energy was refined to near-100% levels.  Battery technology improved massively, squeezing every electron possible out yet keeping it viable for a new charge.  Hydrogen, coal, oil (crude and natural-grown), nuclear, you name it.

There wasn't much of crisis, as the mindset was now on "be as efficent as possible, with leeway for comfort, so everyone can stay afloat."  There aren't many personal automobiles, as mostly it's mass transit and your own two feet.  Of course, you'll need one for groceries and such.

And then, the invention of the Artificial Singularity Cell, the ultimate matter-to-energy converter.  The ASC's principle is simple:  exploit a black hole's tendency to "leak" various types of matter and energy as it degrades over time.  How it does isn't for discussion here (but I will describe it later).  Needless to say all that useless junk you want gone peramently can be used to power your car.  Of course, the ASC's are (what I'll nicely term) "volitile" by nature.  If not handled correctly, it could suck you in and recycle you as electrons.  Thus, they're used more often than not in major energy plants.

There is one other side-effect of the ASC's, though.  While they spew out electrons, they may also spew out various atomic matter, including the odd gasoline molecule.  Given how many ASC's are in place around the world (and the tight security!) you may say that the older energy plants are still active, and Canmephia is now a major player in the intergalatic energy market.

And that's not counting Canmeph 3, Babylon Alpha, or any other station using ASC's.

---
In doing some prelim research, I came across a report by the Department of Energy.  According to them, using current technology, the world will run out of crude oil in roughly 30 years.  We have that amount of time to find new energy sources, refine more efficent technology, and impliment it in the consumer markets.  30 years...

Comments

[griffinwolf.livejournal.com]

Are you talking fossil fuels period?

If that's the case, Coal plants would be shut down, too. There's about 40% of our production of electricity down (especially in the East Coast and South). Though the west coast wouldn't be 'as' effected, ironically. Las Vegas would still be booming.

As for Solar energy, only about 20% of solar radiation that radiates solar cells are actually converted.

Right now, cars are made of far lighter material than back in the 70's and 80's (thank you plastics, which, by the way, is a byproduct that accounts for 3-6 percent or less of actual crude oil). However, much of the weight nowadays are protective safeguards. My big beef is that the US (car) manufacturers don't seem to be doing anything to cut down on consumption, opting to remain at the status quo, but with a new, sleeker look.

If the world suddenly had fossil fuels cut off, instead of developing really new technology, cars would probably be converted to Bio-diesel almost overnight, here.

As it is, with powerplants that use steam turbines, they really try to squeeze every ounce of energy that they have, from thermal re-heaters, to multiple turbines that run at different pressures. However, a lot of heat that is latent in the 'waste-water' could possibly be used to heat domestic hot-water supplies, or even heat homes. Of course, that means it'd have to be pumped to/from the powerplant to accomplish this.

Another big energy saver, HEAT PUMPS! It's basically a vapor-compression cycle that sucks heat from one source, and then expels it into another. The brilliant thing is, if you do it right, you can turn the valve one way to cool your house, and another to heat it. The amount of actual electrical work is negligable. As opposed to resistance heaters (which are just awful, yes you're getting the same amount of work energy put in as heat, but then, you're spending a LOT of energy to get that heat in the first place).

[griffinwolf.livejournal.com]

Oh, PS, I heard rumor that Toyota is actually going to RAISE the prices for their cars sold in the US, to make the American Car market more 'competitive.'

That's bullshit. Trying to appease an economic ally despite the reason why people are buying Toyotas (or, I suppose, Hondas, which are the only two car companies to develope and impliment power-recovery systems) is because they offer better milage, and better reliability. My dad said the guy in the dealer almost never sees corrolas again after they sell 'em because they don't break down.

America needs to start to get with the program, stop building so much SUV's (which only give a sense of comfort to the soccer moms who buy 'em and don't use them for their actual purpose, UTILITY), and start coming up with ways for their cars to use their gas better....

And also not fall apart.

[strredwolf.livejournal.com]

I also hear through Slashdot that Toyota's Prius (their hybrid) gets about 48 mpg in real world data (http://science.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/05/10/0117207), and that modifications to plug the car in (http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=05/04/02/1958251) allow it to get 60 to 100 mpg. Further modifications to the battery get it to 180.

Honda's getting 30 in R/W data.

[kesarra.livejournal.com]

GM is cutting jobs because it has fallen into junk bond status. And the US gov't is still propping them up with corporate welfare checks. The airlines have been under that sort of treatment for many years now. They've been losing money no matter what they do. What we really need to do is get our infrastructure back to rail. There's too much suburbia and diesel truck based living that will collapse catastrophically as oil dwindles.

Last I heard the newest H3 model still doesn't have a published milepergallon. Which means it's probably 12ish.

[kesarra.livejournal.com]

It's 50% coal right now. And there's only enough coal to supply for 250 more years. But that doesn't include what the release of mercury is doing to life on this planet. That's a hairy topic right there.

Solar is a bit under 20% in the field. It's 25ish at the most in the laboratory.

[strredwolf.livejournal.com]

Okay, we're now up to 2255, although from some research (previously done by my father) gives some points:

1. Dad argues that there's at least 250 more years of coal, and says the number is between 300 and 500.

2. Coal can become deisel, kerosene, and gasoline through a process, so the crude oil can be supplimented.... and crude's 30 years gets extended.

3. If "Oil Storm" really happened, all we would really need to do is redirect all supplies from Alaska to the US (they're being sent to China and Japan), and the price of gas at the pump may only just double. (I don't see it getting below $2/gallon)

[kesarra.livejournal.com]

Quite a bit of calculation has already been done by many scientists. Their conculsions are usually close to each other. I know one of them. I've done the calculation for the lifetime of oil. It's 250 for coal. And there's only 3 years of usable fuel if we switched completely to nuclear plants.

And under current regulations and practices for extracting coal we would fill up every river valley on the east side of the continent. Anything not filled would be unusable from the slag. You can see the valley fill from space, if that gets you a good idea of what coal mining is all about. And right next to it is an open pit that used to be a mountain. Trust me on this one, you do not want to play with coal or oil. Just get off that teat right now. We don't have enough oil in Alaska. There's less than 1 year of oil left in all of Alaska if you ran the country entirely on that supply. North American oil peaked 30 years ago.

[griffinwolf.livejournal.com]

The problem with Domestic reserves are that they are really, really low grade crude. LOTS of sulfur in the crude oil on this side of the world. Usually, what oil we do pump up, we ship off anyway.

[kazriko.livejournal.com]

I thought that the Saudi Arabia oil was high sulfur compared to our oil. Why then do we get most of our oil from Mexico, Canada, and Venezuela then? They're right in the same general vicinity of us and should have similar oil grades to us.

[kazriko.livejournal.com]

You're forgetting all the side effects of supply and demand here. We're already seeing this from the cost of a barrel of oil going up to $50. Saudi and other oil producing countries have generally low costs and spend less than $5 per barrel of oil producing it. The US on the other hand has a variety of oil sources that cost between $18 and $40 (top end = Wild arse guess) to exploit. With the price of oil at $20 for all these years, most of our oil resources were not being used. We've already seen an explosion of oil production in this country because of the higher price. By the law of supply, higher prices mean more people are willing to try for the higher hanging fruit and will produce more oil. With the gas prices at $50ish, they've restarted interesting projects like Oil Shale recovery and other expensive processes.

Similarly, the law of Demand says that the demand for oil will drop as the price goes up. I've already seen this happening. SUVs sales are declining and I've seen many people trying to sell their gas guzzlers. People will drive less or choose to drive a more efficient car when they realize how much they are spending on fuel. (Or they'll bitch and complain while continuing to drive their junker suv's and spend a huge portion of their income on said worthless beasts.)

In the case of a big oil shock like you're describing, supply would be decreased by about 50%. This would cause somewhat of a price jump which would give you both an increase in domestic production and a decrease in domestic consumption. We also have the Strategic Oil Reserve. It would simultaneously hurt and help the economy. Right now we're throwing billions out of the country on oil. Those billions would now be used to fund our own oil companies, our own drilling rigs, own drilling technicians, etc. It would be a huge boost for the economy of certain areas of the country. If some of our friendlier neighbours continued to sell us oil at raised rates then that would also help keep the price to a reasonable level. The 6 top countries we import oil from include 5 countries that are not in the middle east. Canada is our top supplier, followed by Mexico.

http://www.eia.doe.gov/pub/oil_gas/petroleum/data_publications/petroleum_supply_monthly/current/pdf/table37.pdf

Coal is really bad for us though. We really need to move to Nuclear power with an alternate rechargeable portable fuel source. Because of the energy density of liquid fuels, it will probably be some sort of high energy potential liquid. There was one form of chemical that released Hydrogen that could be burned and could have hydrogen reintroduced into it I heard of that sounds promising. Some form of TDP could work as well even without the supposed efficiency of the new TDP plants that are being toyed with. Remember, you're just trying to turn the output from your stationary nuclear, solar, wind, and geothermal plants into something that mobile vehicles can use. With the greatly increased cost of traditional fuel it may take it high enough that alternative fuels are competitive just like the current increases have made Oil Shale competitive again. Right now they're only used by fanatic environmentalists and are too expensive in comparison to traditional fuels for anyone else.

[kesarra.livejournal.com]

Ford's first cars ran on ethanol. Any diesel engine, with gaskets replaced, can run on ethanol. Simple, neh?

[kazriko.livejournal.com]

Yes, that is one liquid fuel source that can be used. I'm afraid almost every fuel source you find out there isn't quite enough to handle all of the energy needs alone though.

I suspect that what Redwolf is suggesting simply cannot happen. We're not going to have any instant "all fossil fuels gone" moment. It's going to be a gradual thing of one country after another slowly running out of easy low-lying fruits on the energy tree. The cost of producing the same amount of gasoline will slowly increase shifting the balance point of the gasoline supply and demand chart. As this happens, one after another, alternate fuels like Ethanol will have a lower price balance point than gasoline.

It won't be cost or ease of conversion alone that will determine the next major fuel source, but a combination of many such factors. I'm sure the auto industry will have a say in it, as will the various energy companies. They'll be able to influence the choice of fuels by making one car cheaper, or one fuel more efficient, or just by plain old marketing (lying) to the public to instill some sort of idea of superiority of one type over another. It'll be like BluRay vs. HD-DVD or Betamax vs VHS, only on a larger scale.

TDP, coincidentally, also would permit use with very mildly modified engines. Like I said before, it doesn't matter if it has the magical "more output than input energy" that they claim with the new plants. Breaking even or perhaps 70-80% efficiency in transferring electrical energy to gasoline would still accomplish the goal of having a portable energy source from longer lasting sources. There's also Biodiesel and any number of other alternate fuel sources already being used in small quantities.

[kesarra.livejournal.com]

That 30 years is based on current consumption rates. With the rise in population, it will be cut on a perpetually steeper curve.

News flash: Exxon has only recently recognized that the supply of oil in the world is dwindling and WILL run out. /facepalm

[strredwolf.livejournal.com]

There are reports that China's oil usage is leveling off. They don't know how, but it is.

[kisai.livejournal.com]

Liquid coal for cars
return to nuclear technologies
Biodiesel for cars/trucks
forcing people to switch to heat pumps and get rid of their gas/electric baseboard heaters and central forced air systems

There is a LOT of stuff that can be done, just the market doesn't want to change. What the government needs to do is tax the most inefficient systems so people don't use them.

A heat pump system initial investment is expensive, but the heat is essentially free once installed. Problem is that it can only be installed in single family houses, not apartments.

[kazriko.livejournal.com]

"But I can't afford to buy a new heating system! I can barely afford to pay the taxes and heat bills I have now, how can I save money up for one?"

Adding one more tax on top of the already high expense of the inefficient system won't help. The democrats would throw a fit about the inequality of such a tax and how the rich can afford new heating systems but the poor can't. Of course, the government could come up with a heat pump payment program in which they would pay less than the taxes they would pay otherwise. I'm sure people would call that extortion though.

Liquid coal for cars. Bleh. I don't want to live next to a coal powerplant, and I certainly don't want them in front of me at a stop light. Can't we find some other solution that could be charged off a nuclear plant? The only way I'd go for more Coal plants of any sort is if they were based off a Circulated Fluidized Bed design that could trap some of the crap that those things spew out.

[kazriko.livejournal.com]

I've done a bit more research on Heat pumps, and found another problem with requiring them or you get taxed. They aren't the greatest things in the world if you live in an extremely cold climate. There are some really bulky, expensive heat pumps that work in cold climates, but the majority of them just can't extract enough heat to work in them.

Secondly, I don't know why but nobody has exploited the similar but mirrored arrangements of Heat pump hot water heaters and refrigerators. With a couple extra coils for excess energy or insufficient energy, that waste heat from the refrigerator could be directly transferred to the hot water for the house.

One flaw in reversible heat pumps is the positioning of the elements in the house. For air conditioners they seem more effective up higher (at the level the heat rises up to, so that the heat energy can be absorbed by the cooling element), while for heating you would want them to be lower. This could be counteracted with a reversible ceiling fan to circulate the warm or cold air to where it is needed, but that adds to your energy consumption.

Also, I found information demonstrating multizoned apartment units that can handle 4 units each. The Apartment owners would have to be the ones installing them however.

I'm still waiting for them to make a grid of superconducting cables around the planet for use with heat exchangers.

[xaviusarchangel.livejournal.com]

I once seen a small presentation on The Discovery Channel about a man in California who was once paying $800 a month for electricity bills, so he invested $10,000 to install solar panels on his roof.

Now during the days, unless he is using a high-consumption device (like the oven or clothes dryer) he is actually producing more energy then he is using. His electric meter will actually run backwards, selling electricicty back to the electric company for others to use.

His average electric bill is now less than $100, and his investment should pay itself off in 3 years.

Now, imagine if a large number of houses had solar panels like that in cities? Less demand for energy means less fuels being expended to produce it, ergo, less pollution.

What irks me most about all these energy and pollution debates is that as it is now, we do have the means and technologies to drastically cut both if society really tried to change.

But society doesn't want to change. *sigh* Society will only want to change when it's already too late.

[kesarra.livejournal.com]

That math doesn't seem to add up. I've taken a class on residential photovoltaic and all the options available. Guess I should ask: What state?