2

8/24/2005 7:10:59 PM

Isn't it some 75% of energy wasted in the combustion of gasoline. Come on, that is truley laughable compared to such alternitives like hydrogen fuel cell. If you dont think thats enough to get serious about then you obviously dont care about new technology or the advancement of this country.

8/24/2005 7:51:00 PM

^ Think of the energy it takes to produce pure hydrogen.

The reason ethanol fuels are less efficient when compared to gasoline in the exact same engine, is that the engine is designed to operate on gasoline. Ethanol can make just as much, if not more power and economy as gasoline if the engine is built with a higher compression ratio. The stored energy isn't as high as gasoline, but it can be overcome. I didn't get a chance to read all of DirtyGreek's link, but I'll try to do that her in a little bit. The Pimentel guy was quoted in the thread on another message board that I referenced earlier. There was a concept mustang a few years ago that made more horsepower running E85 than it did running straight gasoline. Ethanol is a viable alternative, but until engines are built with ethanol in mind, it won't be popular.

8/24/2005 11:23:05 PM

Quote :

"If everyone in the world sits on their asses, the market doesn't keep going. It depends on actions by individuals."

So go do something already! You recognize that something needs to be done, hence you recognize that by doing what needs to be done you will become fabulously rich, hence you should begin acting, as an individual!

Regretfully, as far as I can tell, I think you are going to lose your shirt if you begin doing any of the crap you are suggesting. The future price of oil is already factored into any oil wells you will buy, so by sitting on it and selling it later you will most likely just break even. As for alternative fuels, far more people than just you have this idea, so whenever you begin production you are going to have lots of competition battering down your profit margins to nill. If the problem is mere distribution of the new renewable fuels, then invest in new pipelines to carry the stuff and stations to sell the stuff and mechanics to modify people's engines to use the stuff.

As I said, you think these oportunities are being under-sought by the marketplace and so you should do something. I, on the other hand, think you are going to place that bet and lose big, so I'm not going to throw my financial future away on it.

Maybe you're right, I wish you all the luck and hope to see you on the cover of Forbes Magazine. But if you are wrong, my money will safely be elsewhere.

[Edited on August 24, 2005 at 11:49 PM. Reason : .]

8/24/2005 11:46:03 PM

Quote :

"Think of the energy it takes to produce pure hydrogen."

I am thinking about this. I'm just not a hydrolysis expert/chemist/mechanical engineer. It hasn't been perfected for large scale production but they are working on it. If they could get this down tacked then maybe one day you'll see people with they're own fuel producing tanks that use only water and a electricity to make hydrogen, in their own garages! This is not unfeasable. Only more reason to pursue this instead of relying on fossil fuels.

[Edited on August 25, 2005 at 12:10 AM. Reason : /ethanol and other inefficient fuels]

8/25/2005 12:07:06 AM

Quote :

"use only water and a electricity to make hydrogen, in their own garages"

Thats what they're really scared of. By they I mean petro sellers.

8/25/2005 12:26:30 AM

http://www.evworld.com

(Just a fun site to look at.)

8/25/2005 12:44:41 AM

hydrogen also seems quite dangerous to transport and I'd be scared of someone making it in their garage. One mistake and an errant spark, and no more house. Alcohol and vegetable oil are here, now. Nothing needs to be researched, created or otherwise explored to make it work; it already works.

8/25/2005 7:05:49 AM

Yeah the more flammable hydrogen would need to be handled carefully by users but with the hard standardized tanks it would help take care of that problem to a certain extent. Safety practices and government approved equipment would be the norm like at today’s gas station. I'm not saying I want this to happen tomorrow and some nut end up blowing up his whole neighborhood, just pointing out the obvious reason its better than all other fuels. Self privatization.

[Edited on August 25, 2005 at 7:17 AM. Reason : better than all fuels we know of]

8/25/2005 7:15:34 AM

Quote :

"use only water and a electricity to make hydrogen, in their own garages"

Well, you complain oil is inefficient, let me utilize my engineering prowess to analyze the efficiency of hydrogen.

Our electricity generation system operates using 19th century technology, namely one big-ass steam engine using heat from whatever fuel you wish to use, lets say coal, to boil water and drive a turbine. The latest in steam-based technology will give you at most 50% efficiency, most plants are far less.

The electricity distribution system operates, generously, around 80% efficiency depending on distance from the source.

Electrolysis is another big killer, offering about 65% efficiency.

Your fuel cells, while gutting the hell out of my gasoline V6, will only garner you about 65% efficiency.

Multiply this all together, and your ultra-efficiency fuel cell using garage hydrogen is not so impressive:
50% x 80% x 65% x 65% = 16.9%
And this is with optimal conditions. Most older power plants garner merely 25% energy-efficiency, and the further away from the plant you go the more loss you suffer to the power grid, etc. etc.

8/25/2005 9:48:09 AM

If you look at this on a macroeconomic level, the R&D being put into alternative fuels such as hydrogen IS evidence of the market taking care of itself... IOW, the substitution effect.

Once there is greater incentive to use alternative fuels than fossil fuels, consumers will make the change.

8/25/2005 10:18:50 AM

8/25/2005 12:18:57 PM

Who is this clown, and what oil companies' pants is he in?

8/25/2005 12:24:42 PM

That doesn't make any sense. If he was in the pants of some oil company, wouldn't he be predicting $200 oil? Company profits, and thus their stock price, falls when the price of oil falls.

Taking this obvious fact into consideration, I suspect he is in the pants of General Motors, as they are one of the few manufacturers without a viable hybrid.

8/25/2005 2:20:10 PM

8/26/2005 5:56:46 PM

Quote :

"If you look at this on a macroeconomic level, the R&D being put into alternative fuels such as hydrogen IS evidence of the market taking care of itself... IOW, the substitution effect. Once there is greater incentive to use alternative fuels than fossil fuels, consumers will make the change."

This is very well-said. Additionally, the rise in hybrid development (as well as sales) is directly attributable to the rise in oil costs. If crude prices double, hybrid sales and R&D will likely quadruple at the very least. No need to raise mpg requirements for new cars, limits in oil supply will force automakers to improve efficiency or lose market share.


BUT OMFG TEH GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO FIND A MAGIK NEW ENERGY SOURCE!!!1

Quote :

"If they could get this down tacked then maybe one day you'll see people with they're own fuel producing tanks that use only water and a electricity to make hydrogen, in their own garages! This is not unfeasable. Only more reason to pursue this instead of relying on fossil fuels. "

Hydrolysis requires a lot of electricity. Generating that much electricity requires a lot of fossil fuels and creates a lot of pollution. We would need to increase our renewable energy production by a factor of several thousand in order to wean ourselves off of fossil fuels under the current hydrogen fuel-cell model. That is "unfeasable".



[Edited on August 26, 2005 at 6:22 PM. Reason : !]

8/26/2005 6:09:03 PM

They said that when the first steam engine came out.

8/26/2005 8:14:25 PM

Quote :

"BUT OMFG TEH GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO FIND A MAGIK NEW ENERGY SOURCE!!!1 "

I don't recall saying the government needed to do this... that's primarily because I don't really see the government as being the catalyst for this change. They're too bogged down by oil, nuclear, and other "old" energy businesses to really invest in renewable and green energy.

No, we'll have to do this on our own.

Also, Information from OPEC's August monthly report (http://www.opec.org/home/Monthly%20Oil%20Market%20Reports/2005/MR082005.htm) indicates that world wide production of light sweet crude, the most sought after kind because it can be easily refined and because it is low in sulfer, is now in decline. Although overall production of oil is still rising, the shift to heavier grades is helping cause bottlenecks that are driving up gas prices because there is limited refinery capacity for these heavier grades of crude.

Quote :

"The key point is that non-OPEC light sweet crude went from 41% of 66 mb/d to 34% of 70 mb/d from 2000 to 2004, a drop of 3.26 mb/d. OPEC added 1 mb/d of light sweet crude over the same period resulting in a global reduction of light sweet crude of over 2mb/d showing that global light sweet crude has peaked and is now in decline."

8/26/2005 11:02:47 PM

DirtyGreek:

Quote :

"...indicates that world wide production of light sweet crude...is now in decline."

DirtyGreek's Quote, from the same post:

Quote :

"The key point is that non-OPEC light sweet crude went from 41% of 66 mb/d to 34% of 70 mb/d from 2000 to 2004"

You need to work on your reading comprehension. This sentence clearly states that world-wide oil production of light sweet crude went from 66 million-barrels per day to 70 million-barrels per day between 2000 and 2004. This is not a real decline, but a source shift away from non-OPEC towards OPEC suppliers.

Quote :

"No, we'll have to do this on our own."

What, exactly, do you see us doing about this? I've told you, neither of us knows anything the average WallStreet trader hasn't heard a million times, so what are you suggesting we should do that they aren't already doing?

[Edited on August 27, 2005 at 12:47 AM. Reason : .]

8/27/2005 12:45:55 AM

Quote :

"You need to work on your reading comprehension."

Did you read beyond the first sentence of the quote?

8/27/2005 8:16:35 AM

of course he didn't. Because if he did, he wouldn't have had to put some salt on his foot and eat it with a nice baguette.

Quote :

"Although overall production of oil is still rising, the shift to heavier grades is helping cause bottlenecks that are driving up gas prices because there is limited refinery capacity for these heavier grades of crude."

8/27/2005 9:46:53 AM

So what? How does a refining shortage equate to Peak Oil? I recognize that heavier grades are more difficult to refine, but obviously possible as the bulk of US oil consumption is heavier crudes. Until now, the light-sweet market was being used as a peaking station is used in a nations power grid. What we need are more base stations, or heavy crude refining capacity. Which, BTW, is underway as most refineries are in the process of expanding for the first time in years and, at the same time, the first new refinery construction permits are being requested in decades.

Quote :

""No, we'll have to do this on our own.""

What, exactly, do you see us doing about this? I've told you, neither of us knows anything the average WallStreet trader hasn't heard a million times, so what are you suggesting we should do that they aren't already doing?

[Edited on August 27, 2005 at 10:32 AM. Reason : .]

8/27/2005 10:30:23 AM