Iceland to Voluntarily Go Oil Free in 30-40 Years
scottennis writes "Yahoo is carrying a
story about Iceland's plan to wean itself from fossil fuels.
The article states that Iceland is giving itself 30-40 years to kick the oil habit completely. Of course some researchers estimate that in 30-40 years we won't have much of a choice."
We could stand to take a page from Iceland's book on this one. They need to now to end heavy energy dependance, and we should to the same for that reason alone, to say nothing of the stacks of environmental benefits.
You are not the customer.
It would be nice if the U.S. started making some long term goals. I think one of the biggest problems the government has is its band-aid approach to everything. We should be setting long term goals. Where should we be 20 years from now, 100 years from now, 1000 years from now? Much of who you are derives from the direction you take and the goals you set. How do you view someone who has no long term goals and no clear direction?
Cat
Are they going to stop using plastics? Other products made as further generation processing of oil? Products transported to iceland with the use of oil or derived products? What are they going to run their planes on?
Don't get me wrong, reducing oil dependance is a good idea, even if I don't believe the people saying we're running out in 30-40 years (in case you weren't paying attention, they've been saying that for...oh...30-40 years). But is it practical to say they will outright stop? I don't think so.
7 November 2006: The day Americans realized corruption and incompetence weren't addressing 11 September 2001
I find it humorous that oil supply graphs always show the supply peaking at the present, so it's not surprizing to see the including graph showing oil supply peaking in 2002, when suddenly it'll perilously start dropping as the world's supply of oil disappears. As much as I advocate and hope for advances in alternatives (or even just greatly increased efficiency), I find these graphs all to be universally a bunch of BS : Hell we're just starting to process the tar sands in Alberta, tar sands which have more oil than all of Saudi Arabia (interesting fact: The US gets more oil from Alberta than it gets from Saudi Arabia, yet watch the fascinating ass kissing the US plants on the asses of the Saudis. Very odd, and unjustifiable). When I was in Grade 4, some 20 years ago, I remember them showing us a similar graph perilously showing the drop that was imminent as the Earth's supply of oil was forseen to be gone within 10 years (no kidding).
Just a bit of pessimism about, well, pessimism.
Typical Environmental B.S.
Environmentalist have been saying that we were going to run out of Oil for years, yet right now in the Gulf of Mexico drilling sites that were previously out of oil are re-filling themselves, allowing us to pump out more for next to nothing.
Every time the price of oil goes up more becomes available because it is economically feasable to drill it and sell it. There are HUNDREDS of capped oil lines where I live (North Dakota) because it isn't feasible to pump it up unless oil is around $25 a barrel, if oil was to go up that high you can bet they would be outthere sucking it up.
Many of you probobly don't know that during WWII Nazi Germany found a way to make Oil from Coal at around $40 a barrel (changed for inflation) we have enough coal in the ground to last 500 years.
Now this really isn't that big of a deal, because in 30 years it is predicted that most cars were be electric/fuel cell driven, we won't need gasoline for our cars/trucks. In their homes they can use electric heat, they have numerous geo-thermal plants that generate an enourmous amount of electricity cheaply.
Infact the entire theory of where oil comes from is under attack, Hyrdocarbons were thought to come from decaying plant matter in the ground but some scientist now think they come from methane deposits in the earth, methane is one of the most abundant gasses in the earth's mantle.
Don't take this for much, it is just crap.
Just like the rest of the environmental jibberish
It's not the OS it's the user that sucks. If it's user friendly, you get stupider people. - clinko
Couldn't resist the obligatory "Every war the U.S. fights is for money and oil." Think about what you're saying. Could it be that we're fighting the war on terror because we're hopping mad about some camel-jockeys wrecking three buildings with 4 of our airplanes and killing thousands in the process? Nah, it's all a hidden agenda to get at Afghanistan's oil...
Also, if you do more research, you will find that the United States has more oil than any other country on the planet. But they do not tap it. They are saving it in case it is needed later and buying up the oil from Saudi and such instead.
We don't use it mostly because, as high as gas prices are, they are cheaper than what we ourselves would produce it for. Why spend $3/gallon extracting and refining our own gas when we can import it for $1.50? We'll start using our own oil reserves as soon as other sources want to charge more for their oil than we can produce for ourselves. Simple economics.
That we will have oil when the world has sucked the Middle East dry is just an additional strategic benefit. :)
and in the arctic above Canada.
For those of you that care the editorial written by Mr Bartlett referenced above is the result of work done by the National Center for Policy Analysis. A rather conservitive group whos self proclaimed mission statement includes the following:
The NCPA's goal is to develop and promote private alternatives to government regulation and control, solving problems by relying on the strength of the competitive, entrepreneurial private sector.
I think it's safe to say that any thinktank looking for a way to turn the worlds problems over to private corporations has a vested interest in demonstrating that there is no energy crisis.
Also please note that the theory upon which all of this argument is based is one put forth by a Mr Thomas Gold. An Astronomer. Not a geologist... an Astronomer.
Furthermore I should point out that no one said we were running out of fossil fuels at a frightening rate. There's lots of coal down there. It's a pain in the arse to get out and will cause more environmental problems than we know what to do with (coal has all kinds of fun trace elements in it) but it's there.
Finaly, in an attempt to address the issue of the ever peeking graph. Remember that the amount we can extract at a given level of economic benefit is changing as technology improves. But also, remember that as technology improves our desire for MORE oil has also increased (historicaly). The trend is inescapable. Oil CAN NOT be infinite. Not unless we start seriously rethinking the fundamental makeup of the earth ("The continents float on a layer of petrolium?")
Sooner or later we're going to run out of this stuff. It might be in 40 years or 100. Either way it will happen eventualy. We also know that burning this stuff puts all kinds of lovely chemicals into the air which kill people. Oil has so many more practical uses than burning it. We should be putting some money into energy sources like fusion (it's not as far off as we think) and saving this suff for future use as plastics etc.
Killfile(TGK)
No trees were killed in the creation of this post. However, many electrons were inconvenienced.
As other posters have pointed out we are NOT going to run out of oil. It's very unlikely we will EVER run out of oil. The world is not static, it's dynamic. As one variable changes (the availablitly of oil) the system responds to that change naturally. As oil gets more scarce the price will go up. As the price goes up new reserves of oil that are more expensive to access become economically feasible and will be exploited (stabilizing the price at a new plateau). Worst case scenario converting coal to synthetic petrol becomes economically viable, and we have LOTS of coal. At the same time other methods of obtaining energy that are currently uncompetitive compared to oil will become competitive. Long before we "run out" the price will be high enough that those alternatives will be used as a matter of course and the comparatively expensive oil will be used as a fuel only in applications where it has some unique advantage that makes it worth the price. To some degree this has already happened. We used to use a lot more oil to generate electicity, today we use very little for that purpose. Most of our oil consumption is for transportation because oil has unique advantages for that purpose. Technology may change that - as the price of oil goes up it will almost certainly change that.
Until we actually DO start "running out" of oil we will continue to use it and only play around with alternative fuels at the margins because oil is plentiful and cheap and the alternatives aren't.
You're right. I honestly don't think we'll run out of oil in my lifetime. Therefore, I shouldn't do anything about it. Apres moi, le deluge.
Never take moderation advice from sigs, including this one.
We built the atomic bomb in just a few years. Don't you think we also have the brain power to wean ourselves off of oil? Think about it: no Iran-Contra, no Gulf War, no 9/11 attacks, no coming world economic collapse when/if the oil supply suddenly runs out.
"What is the sound of one belly slapping?"
...unless decided unanimously by individuals.
If by "Iceland" we mean "Iceland's government", then this is the exact opposite of voluntary, because anything a government does is by nature and definition coercive.
Breeder reactors cannot be used until we have the Islamists eliminated.
And then we'll be perfectly safe, because white Christian Americans would never try to blow shit up. Oh, except that one in Oklahoma City. Oh, and that Unabomber guy.
By the way, the religion is Islam, and its practioners are called Muslims, not Islamists.
Hey kids, there's only 5 days left 'til Yak Shaving Day!