Slashdot Mirror
Practical Method for Getting Oil from Oil Shale?
ConfigurationManager writes "An article in the Rocky Mountain News describes how Shell has demonstrated a practical way to extract oil from the shale deposits in Colorado. Since it describes those deposits as "the largest fossil fuel deposits in the world," that could be a very good thing for those of us who are currently paying anywhere from $3 on up for a gallon of regular unleaded."
To make re-useable energy sources more and more attractive, we find a way to just heat this planet just a bit more.
Just place solar energy/wind energy systems on these shale places instead. It will yield more than oil in the long run (Break even point wind power: 6 years at current US energy prices).
My wife's sketchblog Blob[p]: Gastrono-me
The USA is doubtlessly the source of this abysmal misuse of 4x4 vehicles, but it's certainly spreading to the UK where mothers drive huge 4x4s to drop off their single child to the school a 5 minute walk down the road.
Just make the minimum required fuel efficiency far lower than it is currently. It's possible to build a 4x4 around an efficient engine, why not make it compulsory and if you feel the need to pay 150% for the fact your car is 3' taller and makes you feel 'safer' on the road then more fool you.
Alternatively, just make SMART cars compulsory.
How many people can read hex if only you and dead people can read hex?
I am car-less, and have lived, pretty much, car-less all my adult life.. its not difficult to have a lifestyle which promotes simpler forms of transportation, and i am proud to say that i was able to hone this skill in even a car-hungry metropolis as Los Angeles ..
.. but i could never, ever, see myself driving an SUV to work on a daily basis, and find the whole idea to be a preposterous example of the excesses of modern living. decadence defined.
i walk to work every day right now, and have a bicycle when i need it. i don't accept involvement in any business or company (workplace) which requires heavy commuting; i eschew all forms of long-distance car-only commuting; if i can't take the train somewhere, or walk somewhere, i don't get there. simple enough, and i would say my quality of life is superlative as a result.
every day i see people arriving at work in that 'just wasted an hour of my life on the freeway' zombie mode, for which they have all sorts of quick fixes and snake-oil remedies, like 4cups of coffee, bitchin' out their co-workers, etc. i say to them, walk to work; enjoy your health, fight your own personal laziness at all fronts. it really does improve ones life, to abandon cars altogether.
that said, if i want to go on a trip somewhere inaccessible, i do use cars. my vacations in the australian desert wouldn't be nearly as fun if it weren't for the (proper) use of a 4WD/SUV to get to certain long-distance places
; -- the corruption of government starts with its secrets. a truly free people keep no secrets. --
Fischer-Tropsch is the future of energy in the U.S. It produces oil from coal and generated $20/barrel oil in plants in South Africa that they used during their period of economic isolation. It is a simple process that converts coal to H2+CO and then into any kind of oil you want. It can also be used to produce fertilizer and plastics. It scales, it's simple and the U.S has the largest coal reserves in the world. This is really our ace in the hole in the upcoming global energy crisis. Expect their to be a coal to oil gold rush in the next 5 years. Apparently some people are catching on. Unfortunately for the environmentalists this is not what you wanted to happen when we started running out of oil but this is by far the most practical realistic solution that will work to give us time to find alternatives.
I agree with almost all of this. I've driven across the USA three times, so I'm more than aware of its size -- and indeed there are plenty of places you just couldn't get to without a car.
... and how very American of you to equate "Success" exclusively with GDP ;)
My only major obejection is that a lot of rural Americans making those routine 30 mile drives you refer to, choose to do them in absolutely enormous pickups, or other massively overpowered cars.
My own car, perfectly capable of carrying two people and their luggage in comfort for all-day drives, has a 1.2 litre engine. Yes, it strains a little with passengers in the rear, but the 1.4 model would not.
Whereas, our standard midsize rental in the US was a 3 litre V6, and nobody considers this to be a powerful car. Perhaps the answer to rising fuel prices is to start driving more economical cars.
(Other minor points: Amercicans can underestimate the size of Europe too, imagining the whole continent to be crammed full of dense cities. Although we don't have anything quite like Iowa or Nebraska, we do have some areas of emptiness.
)
Out here in California, prices surged as people bet the price would sky rocket and bought gas no matter what the price. The local 7/11 had people topping off their tanks because their price, usually the highest around, was 10 cents lower than in town. Most of the people buying gas didn't need it but figured the price was going higher so they bought while it was "low" at $2.90.
If the price stays high for the next few years, people will get out of their SUVs and move into more efficient vehicles. The oil markets will respond, just as it did in the 80's, and prices will drop in real terms. Eventually, people will forget and they'll buy gas hogs again. People do that - they forget.
Those of you who are certain that we're running out of oil forget as well. In 1970, it was common knowledge that we'd be out of oil by 1985. Paul Erlich at Stanford made a fortune pitching his dystopian view of the future and we bought it. The futurists who got it right were the economist who argued that the real price of commodities fall over time as producers and consumers become more efficient.
It's worth noting that the shift to SUVs wasn't due to just the cheap price of gas. Congress played a major role as well. Business used to be able to depreciate the price of cars it purchased at an accelerated rate. Small business owners used that to their advantage by buying nicer cars which angered folks who didn't own businesses and hence, couldn't get the same tax write off. Congress responded by eliminating the write off for business-owned cars. The accelerated depreciation schedule remained for trucks which GM and Ford exploited by gussing up what used to be utility trucks for hauling workers around into SUVs. I saw a lot of new SUVs in my neighborhood after my accountant sent out a flyer advising his clients of the tax advantage which was considerable. A very smart friend of mine grumbled that the "I want my children to be safe and so I have to have the biggest car available" crowd just got a tax boost and the only way to retaliate was to drive a Peterbilt to work.
In theory it is a good way to decrease pollution. But in practice it can cause weird anti-environmental policies, e.g. a reluctance in Finland by the government to support alternative fuels and hybrid cars because it would decrease incomes from fuel tax.