Advocacy & Safety - Twilight Of The Oil Age

The Chicago Tribune has recently published a very good article on the end of the oil age. It's sobering and informative.

It's also long.

Here's the link
http://www.chicagotribune.com/media/acrobat/2006-08/24312763.pdf

Ah, Mayonnaise! Good to see ya.

When will you write a lil' somethin' of yours?

:D

Great article this month in Harpers too, though no online version.

Imagine There's No Oil
Scenes from a liberal apocalypse
Bryant Urstadt

It's as if all the liberal prof.s became survivalist nutjobs.

the Mayonnaise?

Ah, Mayonnaise! Good to see ya.

When will you write a lil' somethin' of yours?

:D


kinda stopped with all that fixed gear surly swagger. painted myself into a corner if you know what I mean.

i've been racing a lot, maybe some writing will come out of that.

God i hate reading pdfs so i likely missed something. He says he tracked the gas back to its source (non us non ca). My question is what source of information did he use to track it back to its "source"?

The big oil companies really can not be trusted. See the further away they claim the oil comes from the more they can charge for it. If a company pump oil down from ca but tells the public that its coming from (just a example dont kill me heh) china they can charge more and people wont question them or dig for the truth.

Now with that said you can find out where a given company gets their oil from just not very easy to do. Its pretty well buried as deep as the law allows for.

Auto manufactures are quickly moving towards the so called green tech using renewable sources like that e85 (i think is the name). Then of corse they all for the most part have hybrids. Also have bio disel etc. From what i understand to use bio disel requires a very small change to the engine to be used (quite cheap).

In the end big oil will be screwed likely long before the reserves are all dried up and no new oil is being drawn. I have no pity for the price gouging sobs and they will get whats coming to them soon enough i think.

The writer of the article has done extensive research on finding the source of much of the oil that comes to this country.

He clearly shows his sources. He's clearly done his homework.

I haven't yet finished the article, but was amazed to discover America imports more oil from Africa than Saudi Arabia.

God i hate reading pdfs so i likely missed something. He says he tracked the gas back to its source (non us non ca). My question is what source of information did he use to track it back to its "source"?

The big oil companies really can not be trusted. See the further away they claim the oil comes from the more they can charge for it. If a company pump oil down from ca but tells the public that its coming from (just a example dont kill me heh) china they can charge more and people wont question them or dig for the truth.

Now with that said you can find out where a given company gets their oil from just not very easy to do. Its pretty well buried as deep as the law allows for.

Auto manufactures are quickly moving towards the so called green tech using renewable sources like that e85 (i think is the name). Then of corse they all for the most part have hybrids. Also have bio disel etc. From what i understand to use bio disel requires a very small change to the engine to be used (quite cheap).

In the end big oil will be screwed likely long before the reserves are all dried up and no new oil is being drawn. I have no pity for the price gouging sobs and they will get whats coming to them soon enough i think.

Nova,

I don't mean to be condescending, but it might help you to better understand the economics of the issue if you were to print up the article and read it. It's really well researched and written. There is a lot of information on oil production that doesn't come from oil companies and I'm sure this journalist used a variety of sources.

I don't know where you are doing your research, but any look at Car and Driver will show you that auto manufacturers are not at all moving away from petro powered cars. The 2007 model lineups are filled with heavier and higher powered cars. This is no condemnation of the car companies that's just what people buy.

Also, I think where oil is transported from has very little to do with the current pricing. It may be a small factor, but the bigger issue is that you have high demand for a limited resource and the companies will charge whatever the market will bear. So it is hard to see how, "...big oil will be screwed likely long before the reserves are all dried up..." companies usually don't have problems when there is an unquenchable demand for their product. Peak oil doesn't predict that oil is drying up, just that the production will taper off and the remaining reserves will become more expensive to retrieve. But don't kid yourself that there won't be buyers for $10/gallon gasoline or that you'll be able to buy a GM electric car anytime soon.

Nova,

The 2007 model lineups are filled with heavier and higher powered cars. This is no condemnation of the car companies that's just what people buy.



It looks as if those heavier higher powered cars will be left on the lot. The latest figures released yesterday by the auto makers show Toyota with double digit increases in sales and Ford, Damler, and GM with sales slumps ranging from 20 to 35 percent.



Also, I think where oil is transported from has very little to do with the current pricing. It may be a small factor, but the bigger issue is that you have high demand for a limited resource and the companies will charge whatever the market will bear. So it is hard to see how, "...big oil will be screwed likely long before the reserves are all dried up..." companies usually don't have problems when there is an unquenchable demand for their product. Peak oil doesn't predict that oil is drying up, just that the production will taper off and the remaining reserves will become more expensive to retrieve. But don't kid yourself that there won't be buyers for $10/gallon gasoline or that you'll be able to buy a GM electric car anytime soon

When the major oil companies show profits in the tens of billions, I suspect graft and payoffs. If some local gas station anywhere in the country tries to "scalp" customers, regardless of the demand, by increasing prices like the big wigs do, he would be in court in a heartbeat.

The oil companies will enjoy carte blanche as long as oil men run the country. It is very much past the time to make wholesale changes in our federal government. In all three branches.

I'm sorry Capejohn, but I think your synopsis is very naive. How were oil companies profits limited under any other previous administration? And further how are the billions in profits raked in by the oil companies any different from the profits raked in by other corporations such as defense and drug companies?

GM's slipping sales has little to do with oil prices and more to do with the fact that they charge too much for cruddy cars. Hummer sales are actually up this year compared to last. Regardless, that car sales are down has no bearing on my point that none of the current auto companies are marketing any serious alternative fuel cars. In fact the rumour is that Euro diesels will no longer be able to meet emission standards with the dirty U.S. diesel and that VW voids their warranty with the use of biodiesel. And finally, the last time I checked Toyota still powered all of their cars with petroleum despite their feel good hybrids.

Everyone wants to take the Oil companies to task over gas prices and they forget that our whole economy is based on petroleum, from agriculture, to construction, to medicine and even clothing. We've only known that oil was going to run out for a few decades and now we want to blame someone else for not making changes like we should have thirty years ago during the OPEC crisis. So go ahead throw the book at all of the CEO's for price gouging. Even with all of them rotting in prison it does not change the amount of oil in the ground or the rate at which the world consumes it. The fact is we are a country that always wants to have someone to blame, but never wants to make the changes ahead of time to ward off the well publicized disaster. Some examples that come to mind are Katrina, border and port security, Iraqi insurgency, etc. We'd rather hold trials and inquests, and witch hunts.

But hey nobody is stopping you from buying an electric car, moving to a farm, growing your own biodiesel and food, putting up a windmill and some solar panels and riding your bike to work. It's just easier for everyone to blame those Oil companies as they drive to work.

My wife asked if we can spare 80 grand for this electric car. Its very quick, and well Ahhhnold says to buy it. While electric would not save the world from pollution, since some plants burn coal, etc. In our case, this car would be a beneift. We do short trips around our neighborhood, we work by where we live. I'd like to see a solar roof to charge while it sits. I keep our car batteries topped off via a VW solar panel. I don't drive far enough to keep the battery charged with euro lighting (gotta be able to see) and the radio up (gotta have tunes in a car). It could be a free powered car for us. Now I just need 80 grand.

http://www.blogsmithmedia.com/www.autobloggreen.com/media/2006/07/img_6891.jpg

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2006/07/20/tesla-roadster-unveiled-in-santa-monica/
http://www.teslamotors.com/index.php?js_enabled=1

I encourage everybody to read that article. It's extremely well-written. His writing is excellent. The imagery is beautiful. It's almost like a movie the way he writes, the way one scene fades into the next with a graphic match. Wonderful read.

The appendix shows how he got the information on the percentages of oil coming from which region. It's very interesting. The way they push the oil through the pipes means you can actually determine where it comes from if you have enough information, which he was able to get.

My wife asked if we can spare 80 grand for this electric car. Its very quick, and well Ahhhnold says to buy it. ...

Arnold could buy one for all of us. (cynical comment)

I like that they chose to honor one of the greatest electrical engineers of all time by naming the car after him. (that is what they did, isn't it?)

Battery technology continues to improve, so who knows? If this proves to be a success, maybe they'll use the techology to produce a lower-priced car for consumers. Then again, maybe not.

Arnold could buy one for all of us. (cynical comment)

I like that they chose to honor one of the greatest electrical engineers of all time by naming the car after him. (that is what they did, isn't it?)

Battery technology continues to improve, so who knows? If this proves to be a success, maybe they'll use the techology to produce a lower-priced car for consumers. Then again, maybe not.

If only folks got hot for this technology like they do for carbon fiber in the road forums then eventually this technology would trickle down to the rest of us for a reasonable price. It's my understanding that you can still buy a decent electric car for a lot less than $80k. I'll have to do some googling. It's all about choices. No one is forcing anyone to buy an Escalade.

You can build an electric car for less, but the 0-60 times on this show people that an electric car doesn't have to be slow. This is good to get attention of the lead foots that there is an alternative.

If you can, go see the movie Who killed the electric car. It's really good.

My wife asked if we can spare 80 grand for this electric car. Its very quick, and well Ahhhnold says to buy it. While electric would not save the world from pollution, since some plants burn coal, etc. In our case, this car would be a beneift. We do short trips around our neighborhood, we work by where we live. I'd like to see a solar roof to charge while it sits. I keep our car batteries topped off via a VW solar panel. I don't drive far enough to keep the battery charged with euro lighting (gotta be able to see) and the radio up (gotta have tunes in a car). It could be a free powered car for us. Now I just need 80 grand.

Please don't hang me for asking this simple question, but if all of your trips are so short, why not use a bike and save the $80k?

To foo with you!

Please don't hang me for asking this simple question, but if all of your trips are so short, why not use a bike and save the $80k?

I could have just died right there. Hang on while I go get a rag to clean up all the juice I just spit all over the monitor.

I use the bike for most trips, food, Blockbuster, etc. But most trips involve more than one of us, and packages involved.

It's as if all the liberal prof.s became survivalist nutjobs.
Hey, it's not just for liberals (http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2005/12/26/8364646/) anymore! ;)

I use the bike for most trips, food, Blockbuster, etc. But most trips involve more than one of us, and packages involved.

If most of this is short range city driving, then your best bet would be to pick up an older 240sx to convert to a direct drive EV. I'm thinking you could do the conversion for under ~$8k, and have something with a ~100mile@45mph range. EVs are more efficient as you slow down, so if you can keep your foot out of it, you'll be fine. If you're one of those "I have to go 75mph on the freeway" types, instead of cruising at 50-55mph, you'll probably get stranded in an EV and hate 'em. You'll also pay ~1/10th of what you would if the 240sx were still gas. PM me if you want more info.

These high fuel prices gave me a funny and evil idea.
Ride my bike up to a hill/knoll that overlooks a good length of a lonely road and spy it with binoculars.
Scope out any vehicles that break down and/or just stop, then ride over to them.
Along with the bike is a B.O.B. trailer that has a ten gallon fuel tank attached.
Go up to these people and ask if they ran out of fuel and need a little more to get them to the next filling station. If they need a little booster fuel, tell them to give me the money for the fuel they need, plus $10 or $20 for bike wear'n'tear(yeah, right:rolleyes: ).
If they begin to object, I'll just start taunting them about waiting in the heat or cold for the next five hours. Essentially, they'll cave and give in to their insatiable thirst.
But, anywho, if I do this five or six times a day, it would be perfect side income for non-work days.

If you taunt them they may just shoot you and take the gas... :p

It's just easier for everyone to blame those Oil companies as they drive to work.

On one of the main roads that motorists use to commute into our downtown business district from the southern suburbs, there's building with a yellow ribbon painted around it and the words "There is no freedom without responsibility."

I don't use this street as it's a hostile environment for bicyclists. Still, I think about that phrase often when I hear proposals that promise to win our freedom from dependence on foreign oil. Letters to the editor of my local paper are full of ideas: Building nuclear plants. Allowing more domestic drilling. Initiating new military adventures. Punishing the evil oil companies. Even building more roads. What these "solutions" all have in common is that they require us to take absolutely no responsibility for our own petroleum use.

What these "solutions" all have in common is that they require us to take absolutely no responsibility for our own petroleum use.

Did you read the article?
One of the folks in the story is a Hummer Driving biatch who spends $2000 per month to heat her goddamn swimming pool.

How can you make such idiots responsible?

We will become responsible when we start feeling the pain. The politicians have done everything they can to insulate us from the pain so as to keep the money flowing. Right now, the only ones feeling any pain are our soldiers and their families, and their sacrifice is crusted over with notions of patriotism and nationalism so that any force that might spur anybody to make a change is blunted.

Did you read the article?

Not yet. But I'm about to start. :) I was commenting not on the article, but about Treespeed's post.

Chocula,

That was my point. All of the solutions are always about someone else doing something. The worst solution now being that we are sending our soldiers to die so that folks can heat their swimming pools.
Am I the only one who finds this ludicrous? As Bill Maher pointed out in a book right after 9/11 we are constantly reminded that we are in the middle of a war, but what sacrifices are we being asked to make at home in support of this war? During WWII we had rationing of all sorts, but apparently the only ones who have to make any sacrifices now are the soldiers laying down their lives.

As Chocula points out, folks pay so much lip service to getting off foreign oil, but they don't want to actually make any changes themselves. These small government Republicans want the government or corporations to create domestic energy out of thin air so that they can continue their life of ease and entitlement. All of the conservation gains and warnings of the seventies have been squandered and wasted and it isn't this generation that will suffer, but our children's. So much for Family Values. I just wonder where we would be if 30 years ago we had actually made a real effort to heed the warnings, conserve, and make the changes to get off oil then instead of now. The arguments then were that it would be too expensive, though when has infrastructure ever been cheaper the more you procrastinate?

I can't build a farm in downtown Los Angeles, but I can make sure I live close enough to ride to work, invest in better insulation, good windows that open to make use of natural cooling, maybe put up some solar panels and even a windmill to make myself a little more immune to the rising prices. I don't mean to be at all self righteous, but it's just too funny when you have upper middle class folks saying that they can't afford to make these changes. Though I do feel for the real workers who will be hit the hardest by the across the board increases in prices that rising oil prices cause. When you are living paycheck to paycheck even a 10% rise in food and energy prices can easily put you under.

We are in complete agreement, treespeed.

We are in complete agreement, treespeed.
Amen.

Amen.

It's funny how civil some of the political discussions can be outside of the P&R forum.

Here's the article (http://www.chicagotribune.com/chi-oil-email,1,3687917.story?page=1)in non-PDF format.
Just in case you're like me, and hate PDF's, and curse Adobe.

Excelent article.

Going back to the Tesla car - why don't they make it as an urban compact (2 or 4 seater) rather than a sports car (I mean 2nd gear is for performance above 130 mph)!

If they did - maybe they could get their prices down.

Or could they do conversions of existing cages to change them into EV's????

Just wondering

Going back to the Tesla car - why don't they make it as an urban compact (2 or 4 seater) rather than a sports car (I mean 2nd gear is for performance above 130 mph)!

If they did - maybe they could get their prices down.

Or could they do conversions of existing cages to change them into EV's????

Just wondering

To raise venture capital. Once they sell enough of the big buck cars, they will likely develop a less expensive family oriented one. Or at least that is the story I read.:p It takes big, big money to get a project like this off the ground. The stand to make their money back quicker on a fast high dollar sports car than a mundane grocery getter.

Aaron:)

How about one of these?
http://greenspeed.us/santa_barbara_electric_bicycle.htm

If you taunt them they may just shoot you and take the gas... :p

I won't have the gas on me at the time.
I'll just have the tank in view and tell them that for the fee +pump costs, I'll be back in 20 minutes.
And I'm no anti-gun freak, I love guns, just can't afford one.
But, why must everyone assume that everyone packs?
In that case, I'll just scope out the sappiest person and also invest in kevlar when funds become available.

As for the peak-oil situation itself, I've heard enough about it that it's now a permanent fixture in the front of my skull.
I just don't see things going too far brutally-backwards.

All of the conservation gains and warnings of the seventies have been squandered and wasted and it isn't this generation that will suffer, but our children's. So much for Family Values. I just wonder where we would be if 30 years ago we had actually made a real effort to heed the warnings, conserve, and make the changes to get off oil then instead of now. The arguments then were that it would be too expensive, though when has infrastructure ever been cheaper the more you procrastinate?

Good rantage, Treespeed. And thank you Mayonnaise for posting the article here... I started to read it on screen but decided it's too good to be just quickly glanced over. I'm looking forward to reading it later tonight.

--J

Going back to the Tesla car - why don't they make it as an urban compact (2 or 4 seater) rather than a sports car (I mean 2nd gear is for performance above 130 mph)!

If they did - maybe they could get their prices down.

Or could they do conversions of existing cages to change them into EV's????

Just wondering

Here's someone in Los Angeles doing conversions.

NBC 4
More




Gas Guzzlers Go Green At Culver City Shop

POSTED: 6:14 pm PDT August 3, 2006
UPDATED: 6:58 pm PDT August 3, 2006

LOS ANGELES -- The owner of Culver City's Left Coast Conversions wants to give motorists the green light to go green.

Video | Images | LeftCoastConversions.com

Gadget, also known as Greg Abbott, can give a car a green makeover in about three to seven business days. The gas tank is exchanged for an electrical power plant.

"I feel like we should make as small of a footprint on the planet as possible," Gadget said.

He converted his Triumph Spitfire GT6 into a 170-bhp clean machine. He also is working on a 1962 Sunbeam Alpine and 1946 Olds.

The cars produce zero emissions.

Conversions range from $17,000 to $30,000. Gadget said the money saved makes up for the cost in about five years.

"You don't need tune-ups anymore, you don't need oil changes, and you're not buying gas," Gadget said.

Gadget said he is having a tough time keeping up with demand. He said he is out of parts, but attempting to determine how to buy out his supplies and provide kits for other auto shops.

Copyright 2006 by NBC4.tv. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

What is the point of electric cars? Almost all of the electricity in the US is converted from fossil fuels. Electric cars still pollute, only the pollution is centralized to a power plant, and sent up a smokestack to fall on somebody else hundreds of miles away. Also, we are stretching the power grid to capacity with our air conditioning. We can't generate more currently (pun intended), and it would realistically take decades to develop significantly more capacity.

What is the point of electric cars? Almost all of the electricity in the US is converted from fossil fuels. Electric cars still pollute, only the pollution is centralized to a power plant, and sent up a smokestack to fall on somebody else hundreds of miles away. Also, we are stretching the power grid to capacity with our air conditioning. We can't generate more currently (pun intended), and it would realistically take decades to develop significantly more capacity.

Good point, but it is easier to control the emissions from a central power plant than from thousands of cars. Also, most cars charge at night when demand is low.
While alternative power makes up a small part of the grid, it is realistic to add more windfarms and solar plants, but not realistic to create more oil or hydrogen for that matter. Since most commutes are relatively short and within the range of most electric cars it makes sense to use the existing electric infrastructure instead of holding out for the pipe dream of hydrogen cars which currently (no pun intended) use electricity to create the hydrogen anyways.

I should mention that compared to large, grid scale power plants, internal combustion engines found on cars are very, very inefficient. Mostly because the engine needs to have a fairly wide speed range and a very large horsepower overhead to provide acceleration.

What is the point of electric cars? Almost all of the electricity in the US is converted from fossil fuels. Electric cars still pollute, only the pollution is centralized to a power plant, and sent up a smokestack to fall on somebody else hundreds of miles away. Also, we are stretching the power grid to capacity with our air conditioning. We can't generate more currently (pun intended), and it would realistically take decades to develop significantly more capacity.

Grid problems probably have more to do with deregulation than lack of transmission capacity (source (http://www.aip.org/tip/INPHFA/vol-9/iss-5/p8.html)). The difference between EV and gasoline pollution is significant because it allows for central production that minimizes pollution and maximizes energy efficiency. The average gasoline combustion engine only operates at ~25% efficiency and has ~90% transmission efficiency. An electric motor runs at ~90% efficiency and has ~90% transmission efficiency, the efficiency of the electricty produced depends on the sources. From an economic POV the efficiency of nuclear, wind, hydro, and solar power are considered to be ~100% because those sources do not produce significant amounts of pollution and do not suffer from fuel limitations, whereas coal and NG have a locally (in our lifetime) finite fuel supply. So to compute electricity efficiency we need the relative proportion of production.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/northamerica/fig14.jpg
Generally speaking coal efficiency is around 37% and NG is ~50% (source (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fossil_fuel_power_plant)). So starting with nuclear power we have 18+15+2+5(.36)+14(.5)+46(.36)=60.36, so ~60% efficiency. Transmission losses are ~7%, so an EV is roughly .6(.93).9(.9)=45% compared to .25(.9)=23% for the equivalent gasoline powered vehicle. Large scale energy generation also allows for better pollution controls. When looking at utilitarian vehicles, designed (http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/gw/vw1litre.htm) for the majority of use (one or two people, minimal cargo), we can see (calcs on request) that replacing our fossil fuel powered fleet *use with these would only require an approximate doubling of nuclear capacity. When comparing the cost of the occupation in Iraq (~$300 billion), to the cost of the requisite nuclear power plant (~$2 billion per unit) (source (http://www.power-technology.com/projects/civaux/)) we can see that enough baseload generation to supply a nation of small EVs, and about four million small EV cars (~$25,000 each) could've been aquired for the same cost. This would significantly reduced pollution and all but wipe out any immediate problems with oil supply.
Otoh, we could continue using oil for transportation and watch as prices rise. Given that investment in oil/gas allows for a large ROI in markets such as gasoline (~$250 billion per year in sales) compared to nuclear power/EVs that require a large capital investment, minimal sales per year (~$25 billion), and most importantly, a fuel supply that will not suffer from depletion any time in the near future, or even influence the price of their product very much, which do you think a company will invest in? Economics is all about making maximal profit, and if demand can outpace supply without significant increases in extraction costs, and no viable large-scale alternatives are in sight, then the groups that control the supply of that product will make bank. This is why we are in Iraq, when we could've rid ourselves of oil for transportation permanently with the same cost... It's more profitable to secure, extract, and sell the oil in Iraq.

*We could still keep large FF powered vehicles for their limited use.

I have another idea: Just get rid of the damn cars.

I have another idea: Just get rid of the damn cars.

I have a feeling you don't have a long distance commute...
Am I right? ;)

biodiesel is becoming very popular here. Some people are making it in their garage.
Does anyone you know do that? I am thinking of doing it as two of our cars are diesel.
It is less polluting than diesel, runs well, and is much lest costly. It uses used cooking oil to make
diesel. I believe the cost to make it is about USD1 per gallon from the people I have spoke to.

biodiesel is becoming very popular here. Some people are making it in their garage.
Does anyone you know do that?

http://www.veggiepower.org.uk/

http://www.dancingrabbit.org/biodiesel/makeit.php

http://journeytoforever.org/biodiesel_make.html

I have a feeling you don't have a long distance commute...
Am I right? ;)

Some of us do have pretty short commutes due to the sheer luck of our jobs being as close as they are.
Any further just means we'll eventually adapt after the breaking in period.
Those that can't do that will be in for a hurting should the peakoil scenario become more devastating than we wan it to be.

I have a feeling you don't have a long distance commute...
Am I right? ;)

I wish...my commute ranges from walking from the kitchen to the office end of the house, 46 miles one way, to several hundred miles one way:eek: I work as a field project manager for a national specialty contractor. Our company is well aware of peak oil and rising costs. I haven't seen the contingency plans, but I know we can't continue to operate on our current model with the fuel costs escalating as they are. I personally think we are going to start seeing a major economic downturn in the next 5 years. I have hedged my bets, everything I own is free and clear. I live on acreage and have already layed out the plans for additional fruit and nut trees as well as truck type gardens. So I have a second career under way:p

Aaron:)