...especially after listening to much of the hub-bub over the BP oil spill,

is all those rigs/wells sitting idle in the Gulf of Mexico and along the US eastern seaboard (and other places), that,

according to The Industry (Big Oil),

aren't being used (milked dry ASAP) because the demand isn't there.

 

Funny.

Because in the past few weeks, I've seen it go up a good $0.30/gal or better in some areas.

And I won't get started on home heating oil costs...

 

Seems rather questionable that we'll bed-up with the troublesome arab world over oil, yet chose to ignore more local sources, all in the name of the capitalist status quo (gotta keep those modern day aristocracy (yes, the proverbial moneychangers that we can find in biblical reference), retaining their financial influence and power over the rest of us).

 

What disgusts me just as much is all these semi-eco-hippies who say, "get us away from arab oil dependence!",

yet cry afoul when someone even mentions windfarms or coal/liquid/gasification plants in their neighborhoods.

 

They (governments worldwide) need to make it a criminal offense for companies/corporations/special interest groups who buy up oil at one price from the fields, then let it sit offshore in tankers until the price becomes more favorable (larger profit margin).

 

 

Do you honestly believe that OPEC would happily keep the price of oil low?  Do you actually believe that Wall Street drives the price of oil? Is that tin foil hat a fitted job or does it have a plastic adjuster on the back?

Let's see how the Arabs like that situation.

They certainly don't like it, but they have means to make EPA to rule the process environmentally unfriendly.

 

We are not out of the woods.  I think a lot of folks have gone about the oil issues in a distracted manner.  First of all, since 2008 or so, the combined industrializing countries have imported more oil than the US, and the former are likely to demand even more.  But the days of dirt-cheap oil is long gone; energy-hungry states like China and India are actually fueling much of their energy needs fro coal, even though they are just as hungry for oil.  The question is:  Will new oil fields and improved extraction technology keep pace with demand?  Also, due to the global economic slump, the oil price is not as high as it could have been, which means when the global economy finally turns around, we could be in for some surprises.

 

As for America, much of our transportation infrastructures have been built during the era of dirt-cheap oil.  In other words, by design, we are heavily dependent on oil.  In addition, food prices are very sensitive to oil price as agricultural production requires a lot of oil.  Like China and India, the US will see rise in coal consumption as coal is still the cheapest source of energy per unit.  (Actually this is debatable; nuclear power costs just about as much as coal, except for the fact that the nukes are capital-intensive at the front-end, while coal makes up for its share of expenses towards the rear-end.)  'Energy independence' will require something more than new technology:  We have to reconsider issues like zoning and city planning.  A taste of follies of our love for suburban sprowls:  In the last decade, the poverty rate rose the fastest in suburban areas, not inner cities (there was an urban study conducted by Brookings a while back).  Because suburban residents are more dependent on cars than inner city residents, the former is more exposed to fluctuations in oil price.

 

Hemp produces viable biodiesel, study finds

October 6, 2010 By Christine Buckley

 

The plant?s ability to grow in infertile soils also reduces the need to grow it on primary croplands, which can then be reserved for growing food, says Richard Parnas, a professor of chemical, materials, and biomolecular engineering who led the study.

 

=====================================================

 

All looks good, but you can't have it.

Photon, did you even read the article that was linked? We're talking $35 a barrel oil from coal. We have a truly incredible amount of coal resources in this country. I mean, it's enough for centuries. By then we will likely have invented a better energy source.

 

Look, we've been hearing the same B.S. doom and gloom for environmentalists (even before they were called environmentalists) for decades now. They predicted we'd be out of oil decades ago. Why exactly am I supposed to be any more convinced by what you are proffering? 

Because you can use it in cars and not have to import oil and gasoline for that purpose. Electric cars are a silly fluke.

 

In theory we could start setting up nuke plants so the coal could be used for the conversion into petroleum and you just use nuke electricity for day to day power. 

 

Forcing people to live in ways they don't want to isn't the best way of trying to get elected in a democracy. Urban planning has been a consistent disaster. 

 

As for the electric cars -- I do not see it as anything more than a stop-gap.  (I was not thinking of generating electricity primarily to fuel electric cars.)  Instead, electrified mass transportation would be better, but this is where we hit a major snag:  This requires denser urban zones where commercial and residential buildings are more intermixed while restraining the growth of suburban sprowls.  As for cars:  Might as well expand the SNAP (food stamp) to cover more working class suburbanites.  They are the ones most sensitive to gas price.  By covering their food expenses, they can better deal with auto expenses.  In turn, they will help subsidizing auto and road industries.

 

Coal-to-liquid does have its uses, especially for the military and major commercial sectors like the airlines.