Energy!

[sheatheman]

Can you hear the highway?

 

I work in Texas for an Oil and Gas consulting firm. It gives me a first hand look at how it works, plus lots of time and motive to ruminate on energy prospecting and consumption as a concept.

 

Global society's titan momentum means that the global entity must seek energy above all else. You've seen the movie about what happens when we don't find enough.

 

Discussion here can range from scandal to discovery, philosophy to hypothesis. Also interesting is escape strategy from globalism and self reliance. How will new energy change the future, and what obstacles are in the way?

 

You can even ask me about fracking, since I know all the chemicals in hydraulic fracturing fluid (!)

[luke viia]

I have a couple questions...

 

With what sort of certainty can we say that fracked natural gas reserves won't leach hydraulic fracturing fluids into the Ogallalla Aquifer?

 

What happens when oil and natural gas reserves begin to run out? If a lack of energy - which is eventually a guarantee when it comes to fossil fuels - spells the doom of technological society, in what sense is it a good idea to continue to promote the use of fossil fuels?

[sheatheman]

Fracking is necessary because Daniel Plainview already got all of the easy stuff. There are still millions of barrels to be had, but it's trapped in formation. There is no longer an ocean of oil beneath our feet. I'm stating things broadly here as my degree is in English.

 

I can only speak for Texas, as Oil and Gas well completion is regulated at the state level, but there are very strict regulations in place that protect groundwater. Texas has the GAU (Groundwater Advisory Unit), and the most time consuming step in drilling a well is getting the GAU form approved. Their geologists determine the depth of the area's Usable-Quality groundwater, and therefore at what intervals casing and cementing must be fortified.

 

The danger is not so much in the fracking fluid leeching into the reservoir, as it contains over 90% water with a few percents of several types of acid and lubricants. The real danger, and the reason the regulations are in place, is to prevent the gas/oil from the formation from intermingling with the groundwater. That is what causes all of the problems related with fracking. It's a new science that has not been quite honed. Hopefully it will not have to stay around for long, in the wake of new energy, but for now it is absolutely necessary.

 

A place that wants to ban fracking right now basically wants to ban commerce, i.e. where will the trucks get the fuel to deliver the Mountain Dew for your bi monthly Gaslands viewing party?

 

At the same time, big oil isn't so much big oil as it is a gigantic network of small Operators spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on wells that often do not break even. But it's the ones that do that keep people trying. With oil at $100 a barrel, and some of the small-time operators I monitor producing over a thousand barrels a month per well, you can see why it is a viable industry. It has stock now not so much because big oil is lobbying for it, but because the thousands and thousands of operators and even more so their crews are still looking for oil and not buying shares in 3D printing. Things are trending that way, though, and once the media-fanned flame of public outcry and the rising governmental fees reach a certain point, I'm sure we will see a change.

 

For my livelihood at this moment, it is a good idea to continue to promote the use of fossil fuels, but from an economically vigilant standpoint, we all should be thinking very hard every time we fill up at the pump. I love driving more than a lot of things, but did you know that 1 gallon of gasoline does the work that it would take a human 5 weeks to do? I mean, $4 seems like an amazing deal. That says a lot about how unexamined our lives have been over the past seventy years or so. The sun produces an unfathomable amount of energy every second, but the amount we successfully capture industrially is pretty sad. We have to look at fossil fuels as necessary alongside of our pursuit of new energy.

 

Think about the energy and resources that lie in the galaxy sized armada of vehicles currently on this planet. We need to figure out ways to harvest while hydrogen or whatever happens. BMW had the hydrogen combustion 7 series. That was probably suppressed by the government more than any oil lobbyist. The government wants to control these types of paradigm shifts you know. They don't want the chaos that comes with a mad dash. With the NSA monitoring like it is, the guy who invents a low-cost superconductor hyper-refrigerant is likely to meet a couple of G-men in his doorway on the way to the patent office.

 

 

[sheatheman]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aGg0ATfoBgo

 

Even though the energy to create the radio waves is more than the energy gained from heat, this should be way more famous than it is. Burning water? Come on.

[goDel]

Thanks for the lay out.

 

If gas and oil reserves get smaller, the price will be higher. (:D) The result will be that other energy resources will be more viable economically. So there will be some sort of transition towards more wind and solar energy (which is already going on). For the products that are made with oil, I hope Craig Venter will develop his oil pooping bacteria in a hurry.

[Friendly Foil]

No I can't hear the highway. Just checked and it's completely quiet outside.

[luke viia]

Fracking is necessary because Daniel Plainview already got all of the easy stuff. There are still millions of barrels to be had, but it's trapped in formation. There is no longer an ocean of oil beneath our feet. I'm stating things broadly here as my degree is in English.

 

I can only speak for Texas, as Oil and Gas well completion is regulated at the state level, but there are very strict regulations in place that protect groundwater. Texas has the GAU (Groundwater Advisory Unit), and the most time consuming step in drilling a well is getting the GAU form approved. Their geologists determine the depth of the area's Usable-Quality groundwater, and therefore at what intervals casing and cementing must be fortified.

 

The danger is not so much in the fracking fluid leeching into the reservoir, as it contains over 90% water with a few percents of several types of acid and lubricants. The real danger, and the reason the regulations are in place, is to prevent the gas/oil from the formation from intermingling with the groundwater. That is what causes all of the problems related with fracking. It's a new science that has not been quite honed. Hopefully it will not have to stay around for long, in the wake of new energy, but for now it is absolutely necessary.

 

A place that wants to ban fracking right now basically wants to ban commerce, i.e. where will the trucks get the fuel to deliver the Mountain Dew for your bi monthly Gaslands viewing party?

 

At the same time, big oil isn't so much big oil as it is a gigantic network of small Operators spending hundreds of thousands of dollars on wells that often do not break even. But it's the ones that do that keep people trying. With oil at $100 a barrel, and some of the small-time operators I monitor producing over a thousand barrels a month per well, you can see why it is a viable industry. It has stock now not so much because big oil is lobbying for it, but because the thousands and thousands of operators and even more so their crews are still looking for oil and not buying shares in 3D printing. Things are trending that way, though, and once the media-fanned flame of public outcry and the rising governmental fees reach a certain point, I'm sure we will see a change.

 

For my livelihood at this moment, it is a good idea to continue to promote the use of fossil fuels, but from an economically vigilant standpoint, we all should be thinking very hard every time we fill up at the pump. I love driving more than a lot of things, but did you know that 1 gallon of gasoline does the work that it would take a human 5 weeks to do? I mean, $4 seems like an amazing deal. That says a lot about how unexamined our lives have been over the past seventy years or so. The sun produces an unfathomable amount of energy every second, but the amount we successfully capture industrially is pretty sad. We have to look at fossil fuels as necessary alongside of our pursuit of new energy.

 

Think about the energy and resources that lie in the galaxy sized armada of vehicles currently on this planet. We need to figure out ways to harvest while hydrogen or whatever happens. BMW had the hydrogen combustion 7 series. That was probably suppressed by the government more than any oil lobbyist. The government wants to control these types of paradigm shifts you know. They don't want the chaos that comes with a mad dash. With the NSA monitoring like it is, the guy who invents a low-cost superconductor hyper-refrigerant is likely to meet a couple of G-men in his doorway on the way to the patent office.

 

 

 

 

"Very strict regulations"?? Fracking is literally exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the term "pollutant" was redefined in that document to specifically -not- mean fracturing liquids.

 

As for the idea that "fracking liquid is 90% water so it's not so bad" -- that sounds OK when you think of percentages, but even if fracturing chemicals only amount to a single percent of the total volume, well, let me quote ProPublica's excellent article about fracking liquid that remains underground:

 

For more than a decade the energy industry has steadfastly argued before courts, Congress and the public that the federal law protecting drinking water should not be applied to hydraulic fracturing, the industrial process that is essential to extracting the nation's vast natural gas reserves. In 2005 Congress, persuaded, passed a law prohibiting such regulation.

Now an important part of that argument -- that most of the millions of gallons of toxic chemicals that drillers inject underground are removed for safe disposal, and are not permanently discarded inside the earth -- does not apply to drilling in many of the nation's booming new gas fields.

 

Three company spokesmen and a regulatory official said in separate interviews with ProPublica that as much as 85 percent of the fluids used during hydraulic fracturing is being left underground after wells are drilled in the Marcellus Shale, the massive gas deposit that stretches from New York to Tennessee.

 

That means that for each modern gas well drilled in the Marcellus and places like it, more than 3 million gallons of chemically tainted wastewater could be left in the ground forever. Drilling companies say that chemicals make up less than 1 percent of that fluid. But by volume, those chemicals alone still amount to 34,000 gallons in a typical well.

 

"90% water" starts to sound less reassuring.

 

Your argument about how energetically dense petroleum is ("can do 5 weeks of human work for $4") raises a great point though: we seriously, profoundly, dangerously undervalue petroleum products. Not only do we not have an infinite supply, but the supply we have cannot and should not grow larger, because it is a major detriment to the health of the planet and we are already drastically altering the climate in ways that will take thousands of years to fully respond to the changes we're forcing on the atmosphere.

 

...Can we answer my question about groundwater leaching now? I think you said "the danger isn't in groundwater contamination" which is, of course, a pretty nice way of skirting the question of likelihood... Or maybe the one about what happens when we run out, and why it's a good idea to keep building up a technological empire built on oil? One with "unlimiited economic growth" as its mantra nonetheless. :P

[goDel]

Good luck, Shea. May pope Fransiscus be with you.

[sheatheman]

 

"90% water" starts to sound less reassuring.

 

Your argument about how energetically dense petroleum is ("can do 5 weeks of human work for $4") raises a great point though: we seriously, profoundly, dangerously undervalue petroleum products. Not only do we not have an infinite supply, but the supply we have cannot and should not grow larger, because it is a major detriment to the health of the planet and we are already drastically altering the climate in ways that will take thousands of years to fully respond to the changes we're forcing on the atmosphere.

 

...Can we answer my question about groundwater leaching now? I think you said "the danger isn't in groundwater contamination" which is, of course, a pretty nice way of skirting the question of likelihood... Or maybe the one about what happens when we run out, and why it's a good idea to keep building up a technological empire built on oil? One with "unlimiited economic growth" as its mantra nonetheless. :P

 

 

Yes, very strict regulations, by the Ground Water Advisory unit, which is the entity all operators must go through before hiring a drilling contractor in the state of Texas where I work full time for an Oil and Gas consulting firm. I personally fill out these forms every week. Here is the pdf: http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/forms/forms/og/pdf/Form-0051P.pdf

 

These forms usually take a few weeks to process. Then the GAU sends a letter with instructions on how to case and cement the well, which we give to our client. There are 2-3 sets of long string casing inserted into the well as it is drilled, each one cemented until cement flows to the surface before drilling further. Most wells I see range from 1,000' (a shallow well) to 8000'. The interval that is then cemented and perforated is typically a 10 foot interval. The fracking fluid then forces its way into the formation. The amount of acids and lubricants that actually leave the casing of the well is far less than 34,000 gallons, as I hope you can understand now.

 

Even with these precautions in place, precautions that represent much of the operating cost of drilling a well, it is possible that a portion of "fracking fluid" does leech into groundwater occasionally. My point was that's like worrying about a mosquito bite when you consider the possibility of an entire oil reservoir contaminating a water supply. That is by far where you have to aim your precautions. A little bit of acid, even 34,000 gallons, is negligible (less than one part per million) in comparison to the hundreds of thousands of acre-feet of water in many aquifers. And to be sure, that fracking fluid is not leeching into the water supply at even .001% of those quantities.But natural gas and oil in the water supply is what made Gaslands famous. That's how the guy was setting his water on fire. That is much more of a concern, and that is what the regulations are in place to prevent. There are currently no regulations on fracking fluid that I have to deal with in my work.

 

Also, I know that a lot of it ends up in the Earth. One of the most profitable businesses is Salt Water Disposal, where dry wells are fully cemented and used to dispose of used fracking fluid, which really is mostly salt water. If you own a lease with a single well fit for salt water disposal, you can live off of the profit. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but we're talking six figures.

 

TLDR answer to question 1: Certain is a black and white qualifier that cannot be modified by how, so Not Certain.

---

 

I feel like I addressed the second question well enough. I don't think it's a good idea to build an empire on oil, that's why I started this thread. If anything, I'm saying we need oil to power our research, and that it is hilariously ironic to watch HELICOPTER FOOTAGE of fracking sites in anti fracking videos. The fallacy is so deep. We are all supporting fracking every time we pay our internet bill, every time we brush our teeth with a plastic toothbrush. It's at the core of everything, so if anything anti fracking campaigning is just confused anti globalism. The only way to ween ourselves off of oil is to extricate ourselves from the global economy.

 

Why are you asking me what happens when we run out? I thought I outlined that in my OP. Many people die for starters.

[eugene]

thanks for existing on watmm, sheatheman. i'm so tired of this discourse of "i read some stuff on realnaturlanewsforfreedom.org, watched some RT, participated in OWS and voted jill stein therefore i can talk about every single topic in existence with utmost confidence" that seeps into every hole in the contemporary internet.

[sheatheman]

thanks for existing on watmm, sheatheman. i'm so tired of this discourse of "i read some stuff on realnaturlanewsforfreedom.org, watched some RT, participated in OWS and voted jill stein therefore i can talk about every single topic in existence with utmost confidence" that seeps into every hole in the contemporary internet.

 

Haha.

 

*Find fracking articles on salon, search page for "toxic," get quotes, tweet, become revered by friends as expert*

 

---

 

Here is an energy idea I had: What if in big cities, there were magnetic turn stalls or some other mechanism to generate electricity that pedestrians could operate while waiting to cross the street. There could be some type of reward, maybe a variant of cryptocurrency that would be added to the account of whoever is operating the mechanism based on how many watt hours they add to the battery, which would have to be really stable.

 

Sure one person is only enough to power a lightbulb, but what if the energy could be efficiently stored, and millions of people did it every day?

[luke viia]

I worked in the green tech industry for years, that's how I got interested in this. Nice to know you both think I'm just pulling this out of my ass though. The reason I asked about the Ogallalla aquifer in particular is because I was born in Texas and raised in Nebraska, so that's the water I've been drinking most of my life. It interests me. I don't read RT, and like eugene, I find it extremely irritating to butt up against a legion of uncritical news-readers, primarily techno-optimists who do not understand the technologies they believe will fix the world's problems.

 

 

 

 

"90% water" starts to sound less reassuring.

 

Your argument about how energetically dense petroleum is ("can do 5 weeks of human work for $4") raises a great point though: we seriously, profoundly, dangerously undervalue petroleum products. Not only do we not have an infinite supply, but the supply we have cannot and should not grow larger, because it is a major detriment to the health of the planet and we are already drastically altering the climate in ways that will take thousands of years to fully respond to the changes we're forcing on the atmosphere.

 

...Can we answer my question about groundwater leaching now? I think you said "the danger isn't in groundwater contamination" which is, of course, a pretty nice way of skirting the question of likelihood... Or maybe the one about what happens when we run out, and why it's a good idea to keep building up a technological empire built on oil? One with "unlimiited economic growth" as its mantra nonetheless. :P

 

 

Yes, very strict regulations, by the Ground Water Advisory unit, which is the entity all operators must go through before hiring a drilling contractor in the state of Texas where I work full time for an Oil and Gas consulting firm. I personally fill out these forms every week. Here is the pdf: http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/forms/forms/og/pdf/Form-0051P.pdf

 

These forms usually take a few weeks to process. Then the GAU sends a letter with instructions on how to case and cement the well, which we give to our client. There are 2-3 sets of long string casing inserted into the well as it is drilled, each one cemented until cement flows to the surface before drilling further. Most wells I see range from 1,000' (a shallow well) to 8000'. The interval that is then cemented and perforated is typically a 10 foot interval. The fracking fluid then forces its way into the formation. The amount of acids and lubricants that actually leave the casing of the well is far less than 34,000 gallons, as I hope you can understand now.

 

Even with these precautions in place, precautions that represent much of the operating cost of drilling a well, it is possible that a portion of "fracking fluid" does leech into groundwater occasionally. My point was that's like worrying about a mosquito bite when you consider the possibility of an entire oil reservoir contaminating a water supply. That is by far where you have to aim your precautions. A little bit of acid, even 34,000 gallons, is negligible (less than one part per million) in comparison to the hundreds of thousands of acre-feet of water in many aquifers. And to be sure, that fracking fluid is not leeching into the water supply at even .001% of those quantities.But natural gas and oil in the water supply is what made Gaslands famous. That's how the guy was setting his water on fire. That is much more of a concern, and that is what the regulations are in place to prevent. There are currently no regulations on fracking fluid that I have to deal with in my work.

 

Also, I know that a lot of it ends up in the Earth. One of the most profitable businesses is Salt Water Disposal, where dry wells are fully cemented and used to dispose of used fracking fluid, which really is mostly salt water. If you own a lease with a single well fit for salt water disposal, you can live off of the profit. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but we're talking six figures.

 

TLDR answer to question 1: Certain is a black and white qualifier that cannot be modified by how, so Not Certain.

---

 

I feel like I addressed the second question well enough. I don't think it's a good idea to build an empire on oil, that's why I started this thread. If anything, I'm saying we need oil to power our research, and that it is hilariously ironic to watch HELICOPTER FOOTAGE of fracking sites in anti fracking videos. The fallacy is so deep. We are all supporting fracking every time we pay our internet bill, every time we brush our teeth with a plastic toothbrush. It's at the core of everything, so if anything anti fracking campaigning is just confused anti globalism. The only way to ween ourselves off of oil is to extricate ourselves from the global economy.

 

Why are you asking me what happens when we run out? I thought I outlined that in my OP. Many people die for starters.

 

 

That form literally says you can pay an extra $75 to have your claim expedited to 1-4 days. I had to fill out 10 pages more than that just to get $1000 for financial aid this year. BTW, how many gallons of water are pumped into a single fracture well over the 3-10 days it takes to pump? I've only read figures in the millions of gallons (usually 3-4 million quoted as an average, and a depth of about 7000 ft (that's Chesapeake Oil's data)). So... 1% of 3 million gallons is, of course, 30,000 gallons. Do you have any data about how much water goes into the wells you approve?

 

I've never seen Gaslands, but I have heard the stories of people's contaminated drinking water. It is unfortunate and very irresponsible that we subsidize and encourage something like fracking without long term environmental toxicology reports being done in smaller environments. (Horizontal fracturing is new enough that we cannot know the long-term repercussions yet.) It's even worse that there's a change of hands between researchers, industry members, and officials in government agencies like the FDA and EPA. Literally the only thing stopped the Dust Bowl from returning is the Ogallala aquifer and we are acting like short term profits (~100 years) are the goal.

 

At any rate, I don't know why I try to be an environmentalist on an intelligent dance music forum. I butt heads with almost everyone here, lol. Probably time for me to ship off.

 

This, btw:

 

"Also, I know that a lot of it ends up in the Earth. One of the most profitable businesses is Salt Water Disposal, where dry wells are fully cemented and used to dispose of used fracking fluid, which really is mostly salt water. If you own a lease with a single well fit for salt water disposal, you can live off of the profit. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but we're talking six figures."

 

Is fucking awful. Pumping the earth full of chemical-laden salt water? For profit? Seriously? As if nature adheres to our property lines.

[luke viia]

FWIW, I would like to stop being so argumentative in threads like this and try to find some common ground. I really don't want to attack good ideas, and fracking probably has its place as a technology. The lack of environmental regard is all that upsets me, it is literally a tragedy of the commons and that fucking sucks. Especially when the oil and gas companies are federally subsidized (that's that $4/gallon gasoline) meaning that we, the taxpayers, put up the fucking funds for this, and then we pay the environmental price later, when the businesses have died.

 

I do think that drastic improvements in battery technology, and energy storage in particular, is the clearest way out of the mess.

[sheatheman]

I worked in the green tech industry for years, that's how I got interested in this. Nice to know you both think I'm just pulling this out of my ass though. The reason I asked about the Ogallalla aquifer in particular is because I was born in Texas and raised in Nebraska, so that's the water I've been drinking most of my life. It interests me. I don't read RT, and like eugene, I find it extremely irritating to butt up against a legion of uncritical news-readers, primarily techno-optimists who do not understand the technologies they believe will fix the world's problems.

 

I don't think you are, I was just applying the stereotype Eugene presented to fracking. You said you work in nanotechnology and therefore I expect you to be well-read and have more than a novel interest in what we are discussing. You seem like a real +140 IQ type.

 

That form literally says you can pay an extra $75 to have your claim expedited to 1-4 days. I had to fill out 10 pages more than that just to get $1000 for financial aid this year. BTW, how many gallons of water are pumped into a single fracture well over the 3-10 days it takes to pump? I've only read figures in the millions of gallons (usually 3-4 million quoted as an average, and a depth of about 7000 ft (that's Chesapeake Oil's data)). So... 1% of 3 million gallons is, of course, 30,000 gallons. Do you have any data about how much water goes into the wells you approve?

 

I should have clarified that even though the form says expedited processing takes 1-4 days, trust me, it takes up to a month even with an expedited form. That's not the only form btw, just the one that typically takes the longest. It's because of the frenzy of activity. Things are completely out of hand. There is non-stop truck traffic and residents complain all the time. The roads are in horrible condition from all the salt water trucks going in and out at all hours. I'll see if I run into any forms with water usage data today. One thing you have to realize about the 30,000 gallons of acid and lubricants spent in the pumping process is that the fluid is a solution. It isn't as like all of the sudden an acid truck pulls up and empties itself in one go. It's a steady flow of solution. But yes, it is in the millions of gallons. Also, I do not approve wells. I'm just an intermediary. The Rail Road Commission issues drilling permits. Here is a list of all RRC forms that may be required in the drilling process: http://www.rrc.state.tx.us/forms/forms/og/alpha.php

 

I've never seen Gaslands, but I have heard the stories of people's contaminated drinking water. It is unfortunate and very irresponsible that we subsidize and encourage something like fracking without long term environmental toxicology reports being done in smaller environments. (Horizontal fracturing is new enough that we cannot know the long-term repercussions yet.) It's even worse that there's a change of hands between researchers, industry members, and officials in government agencies like the FDA and EPA. Literally the only thing stopped the Dust Bowl from returning is the Ogallala aquifer and we are acting like short term profits (~100 years) are the goal.

 

It is very unfortunate indeed. No one knows, not even the top petroleum engineers at Halliburton, what the effects will be, but again, the reason there is no time is that demand is so high. The science has not caught up to the demand, much less the infrastructure. Most problems due to fracking are caused by irresponsible operators cutting corners and lacking expertise. The RRC does what it can to regulate, but you know how big Texas is. It's not possible without multiplying the government's work force, and that would also create problems. Once the equipment is on site, it's all dependent on the money behind the crew. Fracking a well correctly has benefits, but the exorbitant costs of equipment rental cause operators to work as quickly as possible.

 

At any rate, I don't know why I try to be an environmentalist on an intelligent dance music forum. I butt heads with almost everyone here, lol. Probably time for me to ship off.

 

I would consider myself an environmentalist as well. I worked at a recycling plant for 3 years, am a vegetarian, and use Reusable Grocery Bags!!

 

This, btw:

 

"Also, I know that a lot of it ends up in the Earth. One of the most profitable businesses is Salt Water Disposal, where dry wells are fully cemented and used to dispose of used fracking fluid, which really is mostly salt water. If you own a lease with a single well fit for salt water disposal, you can live off of the profit. I don't have the numbers in front of me, but we're talking six figures."

 

Is fucking awful. Pumping the earth full of chemical-laden salt water? For profit? Seriously? As if nature adheres to our property lines.

 

I think it's awful too. Water is the most in-demand of all resources, and we really do not value it. I'm just telling you that it is a huge industry. The profit is in charging operators to use your well for disposal, which by law must be cemented and sealed off. I can really get into this if you want to know more. My dad has worked in plugging oil wells, the greenest act of the oil industry, for 30 years in the field and as a consultant. Putting it in a sealed well is one of the best options though. It's not like they are just digging a hole and pouring it in. What alternatives are there when you are talking about millions of gallons per well? The costs of treating it are astronomical and methods only so effective.

 

If you want to get an idea of how many wells we are talking about, here is the GIS viewer that I use every day. Well location and data is a matter of public record. It's really interesting stuff actually: http://gis2.rrc.state.tx.us/public/startit.htm

 

[sheatheman]

SWD may have been the cause of recent earthquakes in Ohio, as the pressure from salt water injection may have caused ancient fault lines to shift ... something like that. So there is an effect of fracking for you. Some of my friends who live there felt it.

[sheatheman]

FWIW, I would like to stop being so argumentative in threads like this and try to find some common ground. I really don't want to attack good ideas, and fracking probably has its place as a technology. The lack of environmental regard is all that upsets me, it is literally a tragedy of the commons and that fucking sucks. Especially when the oil and gas companies are federally subsidized (that's that $4/gallon gasoline) meaning that we, the taxpayers, put up the fucking funds for this, and then we pay the environmental price later, when the businesses have died.

 

I do think that drastic improvements in battery technology, and energy storage in particular, is the clearest way out of the mess.

 

I'm common! Let's be common!

 

The lack of environmental regard comes from a combination of the despondency of the individual and the greed/momentum of big government/corporations. Many are to blame. It all comes back to individual responsibility. Each person should probably be working much longer per day for the direct sustenance of his family and community. We should start pulling away from contributing one highly specialized product to the maelstrom of the global economy and getting paid in worthless currency and more time interfacing with things of actual value.

[chassis]

Fuck it, I dont care.

[sheatheman]

 

Can you hear the highway?

 

I work in Texas for an Oil and Gas consulting firm. It gives me a first hand look at how it works, plus lots of time and motive to ruminate on energy prospecting and consumption as a concept.

 

Global society's titan momentum means that the global entity must seek energy above all else. You've seen the movie about what happens when we don't find enough.

 

Discussion here can range from scandal to discovery, philosophy to hypothesis. Also interesting is escape strategy from globalism and self reliance. How will new energy change the future, and what obstacles are in the way?

 

You can even ask me about fracking, since I know all the chemicals in hydraulic fracturing fluid (!)

 

Im considering a career in oil and gas, would you recommend? Have you been in any other industries?

 

 

I have not been in any other industries. There are so many niches to be filled in this market if you are a good autodidact. What aspect of oil and gas?

[may be rude]

a japanese firm has a plan to put solar panels around the moon's equator and beam energy to earth with microwave and laser beams. they say they could start construction in 2035 and need funding. something like this seems like a good idea to me. i hope the laser and microwave beams wouldn't work out to be just as bad for global warming, though.

 

if it's feasible and happens then that could be it. this particular project claims to be able to provide over 1 terawatts, a million times that of a nuclear plant. it seems like after years of improving the gear the moon's solar power could be all the planet needs. the main problem could be the climatic one.

 

i've also read that the energy stored in an atom could power a city, if it could be unlocked. that brings up the problem of The Dark Knight Rises plot, though. g-men might show up, like you said, and sit you down in front of a projector and show you how that kind of power undeniably can not be made public because the risk of misuse is too great.

 

like i was saying in the livestock thread, the challenges facing us are psychological, idealogical, and sociological, not technological. how much more quickly and efficiently could we get a moon solar plant or some kind of alternative energy up and running if society weren't so... you know. i think the main problem is people asserting ideas that they don't know the basis of. so much discourse is nonsense.

[luke viia]

Sheatheman -- thanks for the kind response, I'm glad it seems like we see eye to eye on a lot of the details. I largely agree with you regarding individual responsibility, however, I would place greater emphasis on the responsibility of those who wield greater environmental/policy influence, does that make sense?

 

VH -- Putting aside the financial (and practical) barriers to something like Shibizu's project, are we sure we want a single country "owning" the energy output of the moon?

[may be rude]

countries going to war over moon property is not unimaginable. to avoid that situation the un would hopefully establish a framework for developing the moon at the outset. given that the moon circles the planet, the moon stations would probably service multiple countries and it would be an international project.

[luke viia]

definitely imaginable. i guess the question i have is, why develop the moon when we can't even seem to get the technology to work well at home yet? seems like an energy industry jumping the shark tbh. might work but as shibizu has absolutely no financial plan for their proposal idk if it's actually that serious... on the plus side, they claim it would actually generate 13,000 TW, not just one! that's pretty impressive but it's important to think of the embedded energy in a plan like that. it would be fantastically irresponsible to abandon a project like that if it didn't work out (the moon... has no atmosphere to speak of as we do, so the panels would quickly be smashed and break down from tiny collisions and ultimately, of course, litter the moon). idk. glad people are being inventive anyway haha

[may be rude]

they plan to build it with robots, so i imagine having repair robots is part of the plan

[goDel]

But who will fix the robots?

 

;D

[lumpenprol]

my wife's hometown is pretty cool, her family lives in a small valley in rural china and they get all their energy needs from hydro. Sure the mini-dam may have altered things a bit but the river still flows and it doesn't seem to have done a huge amount of damage (still some fish in the river). anyway I've seen hydro projects before of course but never knowingly seen a seemingly self-sustaining little valley. Apart from the generators which I suppose can break down and need parts, it's kind of perfect.

 

If we can stabilize and even decrease our population, I could see a lot of small communities thriving like this, on natural waterways. It really doesn't seem to take much effort, just harnessing "nature's bounty".

 

Of course that doesn't solve the fossil fuel prob, but it makes the prospect of the entire world economy grinding to a halt seem much less frightening when you've got as much electricity as you can use, as much rice as you can eat, pigs, chickens and ducks, fruit growing on trees, etc.