Topic Closed: March 15, 2006 - May 10, 2006
Not a member? Register Now. * Required
global warming
posted by wademoore on 5/10/2006 - This comment was recommended 2 times
why cant we harness the energy from active volcanoes and places like yellowstone to do away with fossil fuels to prevent the impending global warming issue? am i the only one with this idea?
Alternative energy sources - Hybrids
posted by gman91478 on 5/6/2006 - This comment was recommended 1 time
There is a lot of talk regarding alternative energy. The biggest concern is cost efficiency. Will the average American be able to afford alternative energy? Today's hybrid vehicles are great for saving gas. However, their cost differs by at least $3,500 more than gasoline-powered vehicles. (The Toyota Highlander Hybrid has a starting price tag $8,500 higher than its gasoline-powered twin.) Hybrids are a great way to conserve gasoline for those who can afford to purchase a hybrid vehicle. The same will be true for hydrogen, natural gas, and any other alternative fuel run automobile. Before finding alternative energy sources for vehicles, the focus for research should be on lowering the cost of our current conservation solutions: hybrid vehicles and natural gas vehicles (although rare, natural gas vehicles are out there). Financially, gasoline-powered cars are more efficient. The average loan for an automobile is 60 months (5 years). Taking the high average of 30,000 driven miles per year, that equals 150,000 miles over 5 years. Looking at the Honda Civic, the price tag difference between a Civic Hybrid and a comparably equipped gasoline-powered Civic is $3,690. The gasoline-powered Civic gets an average of 35 MPG, while the Hybrid gets an average of 50 MPG. With the Hybrid, you would need 3,000 gallons of gas ($9,000 at $3 per gallon), with the gas-powered, 4,286 gallons ($12,858 at $3 per gallon). The difference in the cost of gas is $3,858. It will not be until your fifth year of ownership that you finally receive a savings of gasoline versus purchase price of a Civic Hybrid. Wait, I forgot to include interest on the loan. With a tiny 3.9% interest and no down payment on either vehicle, the Hybrid will rake up about $2,237 in interest while the gas-powered Civic will total about $1,865 in interest. The final total cost of the vehicles, including price tag, interest, and gasoline comes to $33,387 for the Civic Hybrid while the gas-powered Civic totals $33,183. By staying with a gasoline-powered Civic, you would save $204 over your five years of ownership. Grant it, you would make out with the Hybrid if you plan to keep it for a few years after paying it off. For a financial nerd like myslef, car companies will need to lower the price tag on their hybrids before I consider purchasing one. The savings just do not add up.
view all 7 replies
Hybrid Cost Debated
posted by nightscope on 5/7/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
No offense, but, one would bet when oil as a major fuel source changed the world with industrialization during the late 1800's, it was expensive. As critical mass took hold it found some level of dollar acceptance. Hybrid is likely no different today. Not only just the point of being as yet more expensive is the factor of extending fossil fuel inventory, and, it is about reducing air pollution et al. One then has to determine how much that weighs into the cost factor. Being able to breath better must have some dollar value. U think?
www.wasteplastictechnology.blogspot.com
Think long-term, not short-term
posted by Payne on 5/8/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
I totally disagree with this post by gman 91478. Although I have to admit that gasoline-powered vehicles are cheaper than hybrids and natural gas vehicles when they are bought, think of the long-term fuel savings. A hybrid car such as the model made by the Toyota car company can use up to 40% less fuel than that of a standard 1.8 litre car. $br$$br$In fact, Americans do not even use 1.8 litre cars but probably about 2.0 or 2.2 litre cars. Therefore, this hybrid car will save even more fuel in the long-term. This extra amount of money spent by the user of the car when buying it will eventually be covered by the amount of money saved from the less fuel that it uses. Please think long-term solutions and not short-term.
www.geocities.com/rescuetheworld22/HomePage
Math doesn't lie
posted by gman91478 on 5/8/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
How can one argue with math? It is the one true topic that does not lie. Mathematically, hybrids are more expensive. Do not get me wrong, I would buy a hybrid if I could afford one (and see the long-term financial benefit). In our capitalistic society, money talks. Reread my post and check my numbers. Hybrids help the environment, but, in the end, they really do not help their owner's wallet. The real argument is financially related. You are an environmentalist. I am a realist. I do believe there is a need for alternate fuels. However, they need to be affordable to the general public (mid-to-lower class Americans). Currently, few alternative sources are affordable.
Long / ShortTerm- Hybrid - CNG - Diesel or Std. Gas
posted by bill f. on 5/8/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
(1.) It is already prooven that CNG has had some problems with breaking down.$br$ (2.) Hybrids are basically a gasoline fed vehicle with batteries and a big alternator; However they do not have a long enough track record to be prooven trouble free.$br$ (3.) My daughter has a 2003 M---a with 75K and has paid over $1,000 a couple times for A 30K check, brakes and other items not under warranty. HOW MUCH MONEY DO YOU HAVE TO PUT INTO REPAIRS ON YOUR HYBRIDS AND CNG VEHICLES? None of the comparrisons have had that info.$br$ (4.) diesel cars, some trucks and the new huge commercial van get better mileage than their gas counter parts; plus they almost last forever. I know that diesel service is expensive; but how do they (ALL) compare, per mile, on a level playing field or does anybody know yet?$br$ $br$ Right now the automakers are really messed up, thanks to $3.00+ gasoline, SUVs for safety, Wagons to replace VANS & SUVs, Hybrids for economy, HOT ROD toys and now higher energy prices again.$br$ $br$ The automakers seem to be in a holding pattern,Jacking up the super milers/hybrids prices, offering rebates on dead inventory and waiting for the fog to clear. $br$ $br$ That sounds like a plan to me.
Middle and higher class Americans
posted by Payne on 5/9/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
I am commenting on the sentence on making cars affordable to the general public, which is actually excluding the higher class Americans.$br$$br$Fact is that the richer someone is, the higher his electricity consumption and the higher his environmental damage level is. Just look at the USA. It is the world's most developed country but yet it has the most carbon dioxide emissions in the world.$br$$br$Therefore, the first job that this hybird cars are to do is to cater to the higher class Americans, who at the moment, are polluting the environment like nobody's business. These hybrid cars, or any form of less-pollutive cars such as CNG cars, are meant to reduce emmissions.$br$$br$Although I do not have the actual facts, I can make an estimation. An average middle-class American, half as rich as a high-class American, uses half his amount of fossil fuels. Therefore, for every amount of fossil fuels a high-class American uses, that amount can serve 2 middle-class Americans. Therefore, hybird cars and CNG cars are still something which should be promoted.
ALWAYS INCLUDING THE CURRENT TOPIC
posted by bill f. on 5/9/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
To answer altenergy's question, from my point of view, the other writers punch my buttons and that along with " the current topic and current interests, on this site, is what I write about".$br$$br$Nobody can or will answer my posting on the actual costs of repairs and maintence of alternate energy vehicles over time.$br$$br$Give Texas a bull's eye, yesterdays paper said that we are now bringing in thirty five natural gas wells a week; now, how is that for some good news altenergy?
Hybrids, Gasoline & Natural Gas
posted by Payne on 5/10/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
Hybrid and gasoline cars do have someting to do with "making natural gas more available bearing in mind cost, environmental and local concerns". It's how you look at it.$br$$br$Natural gas is a fossil fuel and also a fuel for vehicles, although it is still not reached its mass production stage yet. Hybrid and gasoline cars are also related to fossil fuel problems and therefore have a strong relation to natural gas availibility.$br$$br$For example, making natural gas more available also means building more pump stations etc. This also relates to hybrid and gasoline cars, which also have a relation with natural gas as they are all fossil fuels.
Why $3.00+ gas prices are good?
posted by adave24 on 5/8/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
High gas prices are painful but they force governments and energy companies to use new kinds of energy like enthanol and hydrogen to replace expensive fossil fuels. Rising gas prices mean that alternative energy sources become cheaper to produce than oil and therefore more econmically feasible. Not only does this help with environmental problems it also helps to end US ties to volatile oil countries that can lead to disasterous political problems for the US. Democrats have always wanted to artifically raise the price of gas by heavily taxing it and using the tax money to promote the use of alternative energy sources like enthanol. The problem is that Americans hate taxes especially on gas and would never go for that. Market forces and Iran/Iraq have pushed gas prices higher "naturally" and have acted just like a heavy gas tax which have lead the US gov't. and energy companies to begin to use enviromentally friendly energy sources. High gas prices will:$br$$br$-Help to protect the environment.$br$-Prevent wars over oil.$br$-Make American farmers rich & will give America energy independence without drilling a single new oil well.$br$-Make alternative energy sources less expensive than oil meaning cheaper prices at the pump for all Americans.
view all 3 replies
Why $3.00+ Gases are Good! ARE YOU KIDDING ME!
posted by probmxer1 on 5/9/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
I read your post and if I am reading it correctly you have totally missed the Boat. Higher gas prices ARE NOT going to translate into alternate sources of fuel being developed or the U.S. breaking away from foreign oil. All this translates into is that foreign governments can put the oil squeeze on developed nations and we will pay the higher prices, gladly handed down by our domestic oil companies. Interesting how we are in a supposed oil crunch/lack of production/natural disaster rebuilding/whatever you want to tag it, but Exxon/Mobil posted the highest quarterly profits or ANY American company for the 2nd time. $br$We as Americans and oil consumers, need to pressure our elected officials to put pressure on the oil Industry to develope alternative non-oil based fuels. I bet if American produced a non fossil based fuel, lets say made of corn oil and the cost to the end user paid $1.50 per gallon. The oil companies would still be very profitable and Americans would see foreign oil prices drop to well below $35.00 per barrel. This new American produced oil would create a whole new job industry. So current oil workers could transition to the new product (NO WORKER DOWNTIME). Our country could lessen our dependances on foreign oil to less than 10%, the middle east countries would either get in line or be put back in the DARKER ages, since a large part of their revenue was gone. $br$To me this is a simplistic view of a much larger issue. However, it really gives one room for thought. How changing one fossil source for a man made source would create new jobs, opportunities and minimize our dependance on foreign fuel.
I disagree with part of your logic on high energy prices:
The owners of our current energy sources will also own some of the alternative energy sources because that is their business, they have the money and have expressed no intentions in quitting business.$br$$br$Their share holders have mandated that they want to get dividends and that means higher prices to get more profit for dividends.$br$$br$My point is: get use to higher prices they are here to stay and I mean more than just energy.$br$$br$The first new truck I bought cost under $2200. and the last one stickered out at about 10 / 15 times that cost and I thought nothing about it. $br$$br$Allow energy to evolve 40 years and you will be considered old if you ever bought fuel at $3.00 per gallon.$br$$br$That is why I firmly believe that the only thing that will bring prices down and supplies up is strong competition in the energy field.$br$$br$Higher prices on all energy products will attract competition just like a dying fish attracts sharks.
High Gas Prices
I have read your comment and disagree and at the same time, agree with it. $br$$br$It is true that higher gas prices will indeed attract more competition. However, this intense competition between companies will force the smaller of the companies to pull out of this competition and enter a new market. Although I have to agree with you that they have the money to do anything they want, but these companies only have money in their eyes. Making an annual profit of $20 billion is not enough for them. They want more. And this intense competition will definitely decrease their profits by maybe $2 billion. Even this $2 billion is good enough to send them into serious discussion in the meeting room. No company wants to have decrease in profits. This would sooner or later force the company out of the industry.$br$$br$Higher gas prices will also mean higher electricity costs. Higher electricity costs means less electricity used. Less electricity used means less gas burned, and less gas burned means less demand for it. Again, this would reduce the company's profits by an even greater amount. This would give the gas company extra reason to pull out of the gas market and perhaps research into alternative energy sources.$br$$br$Therefore, I firmly believe that higher gas prices is a good way to solve our current energy problems
Natural Gas Solutions
Although I have to agree that natural gas is a cleaner solution to our energy problems, I still have to continue to stress that it is not a long-term solution.$br$$br$Natural gas is a fossil fuel, and it does release carbon dioxide into the atmosphere when burnt. Though it is definitely cleaner than oil and coal, scientists and environmentalists have continued to say that if we want to stop the warming of our planet we have to reduce our carbon dioxide emissions drastically. Natural gas cannot help these drastic reductions. $br$$br$Therefore, I still think that natural gas is not a long-term solution to our current energy problems.
more good news from Texas on natural gas
How we use our energy can often lower the volume of product used and make the overall operation more cost effective. Lower industrial operating costs may translate into lower cost of what is sold.$br$$br$I asked my CO-OP about selling us natural gas and got a no answer, asked about vehicle fuel for members and got the same answer.$br$$br$Then after changing the subject I found out that we have a break thru in producing electricity by burning natural gas.$br$$br$One of our groups uses a modified natural gas fired, turbine engine with a drive shaft to produce electricity and at the same time use the scoarching hot exhaust to make dry steam to power a steam turbine.$br$$br$Call that the old one--two punch and both systems get up to speed a lot faster.$br$$br$Now that is the kind of thinking, obviously from our britest and best, that makes me proud to be an American and gives me the patience to wait for the next great idea.
I will stick to the topic--Nat Gas Availability
posted by UHCarl on 5/9/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
I am no expert but it seems to me natural gas is produced in many areas but then piped or transported by some means to but a few hubs. Natural Gas should be made available closer to its source, which would help save costs for many. We are talking about a simple business concept; the concept of profit margins. The energy business is a business, isn't it? I believe the costs of energy are swelled by the number of suppliers, shippers, transporters, refiners, regulatory commissions, etc. I feel it is the "middle-man" who is costing us the most money. We therefore need to become more efficient with getting the original raw product into the hands of the end-user. Don't regulate the middle-men--get rid of them, altogether.
Natural Gas delivery by air/ use as aircraft fuel
posted by Jesse, BlennTEC on 4/29/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
As an airship design consultant I did a design study to deliver gas to areas of Bolivia not served by pipeline. A 150 meter airship would deliver 35,000 cu m of gaseous NG at 100 kph, using 3% of the payload as fuel for the 1000 km round trip. A fill of 40% helium lifts the weight of the airship structure, the lift of the gaseous NG carries additional cargo (in this case very useful Diesel fuel) and all gases are in changeable internal gasbags. $br$ $br$ This is an economically feasible means of transport for NG and also NG is a practical fuel for cargo and passenger airships. What will the jets do when jet A is $10 per gallon??? Airships in larger sizes use a small fraction of the fuel per ton/km or passenger/km of jets - 1/4 to 1/6 the fuel in 50 to 100 ton sizes that could replace commercial jets. As there is a longer-duration supply of NG and it is so much cleaner burning, this route should NOT be ignored as it is now.
view all 6 replies
safety
posted by superadamhsu on 4/30/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
I am concerned about its safety standard. Is it safe to transfer so much flammable gas using the gas itself? I think standards,technologies and regulations which are similar to those that are applied to oil-transfering flatcars(trains) must be executed.
Airship movement of flamable gases
posted by LtDan on 5/4/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
Years ago, working as a lawyer for USS, I reviewed plans for the shipment of iron ore directly from Minnesota mines to Pittsburgh blast furnace sites using ninety hydrogen-filled airships, each about a quarter mile long. The proposal made sense, but was ultimately ignored, and the promoter, who was a retired aeronautical engineer, took his idea to the Soviet Union. Does anyone know anything further about this idea? Using the lift of natural gas to transport that natural gas seems like a brilliant idea.
Airship transport of natural gas, just strange enough to work!
posted by we-must-move-fast on 5/6/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
When I first read your post, I admit it, I laughed and dismissed it as a lark...but then....I began thinking about the huge volumes of natural gas that are "stranded" and in areas where pipeline construction would be difficult....I am thinking of my home state of Kentucky, where in the Eastern hills there are vast amounts of natural gas, but due to the rugged terrein and ecological beauty and sensitivity of the area, cutting pipelines does not make economic sense...even though the distances needed to get the stranded gas to pipelines are sometimes reasonably short....hmmm, now you got me thinking, the first original idea I have seen in a long time! :-)
balloon/airship transport of natural gas
posted by LtDan on 5/6/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
Just how buoyant IS natural gas? The project I worked on would have used hydrogen for lift, but iron ore in detachable gondolas was to be the cargo, and substantial lift was going to be needed. But when the lifting gas itself is the cargo, and lightweight container balloons made of Kevlar or some other modern plastic could be used to contain the gas, I expect no supplemental lift would be needed. Just inflate your balloon, hook it up to towing craft, and haul the balloon to where the gas can be removed and compressed for market. $br$$br$On a much larger scale, say in the Libyan Sahara where vast amounts of gas are flared, really huge balloons could be inflated and sent aloft to move with the prevailing winds until they are recovered. Such free-floating gas would remain the property of the producer, but could be recovered and paid for by any enterprise licensed by treaty to make such recoveries. GPS tracking of such free-floating gas reservoirs would be quite simple, and a regime of treaties would govern the system.
Hate to burst your bubble!
posted by malakai62 on 5/8/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
While the proposed idea is original, there are two main issues that prohibit this creative idea from becoming a reality. First, the molecular weight of nat gas, which can vary widely depending on content (methane, ethane, butane), is usually marginally less than air. This means that while nat gas is lighter than air, the lift capability is far less than that of hydrogen (or helium, for that matter).$br$$br$Additionally, the safety concerns over having a potentially highly flammable balloon in the skies would stiffle any idea of further investigation. Nat gas can explode violently when mixed with air at the correcct ratio (5 - 15% nat gas).$br$$br$
balloon transport of natural gas
posted by LtDan on 5/9/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
I rather figured that natural gas would not be buoyant enough to use as the lifting gas in conventional airships, but if it is lighter than air, and if we can enclose it in very lightweight balloons, then we will be able to contain it and let it loose to float away to other places. Diffusion through the membrane of the balloon would be a technical problem we would have to deal with, but I would bet it can be solved.$br$$br$As Boss Kettering used to say, "There's a way to do it better. Find it!" (The way we seem to bumble about today, it might be more appropriate to say, "There's a way to do it. Better find it!")$br$$br$As far as flamability and safety are concerned, big balloons full of flamable gas floating about in the heavens would certainly explode now and then, but would that be very dangerous? We might be more concerned with their being hazards to air navigaton, especially the really huge, free-floating ones. But with advances in avionics and GPS technology, that problem could be minimized.
Hydrogen, how to get it off the ground...
posted by JoeLounsbury2004 on 5/9/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
Well here is my solution. Have the auto industry develop flex fuel vehicles that can run on hydrogen or gasoline. Yes an internal combustion engine that can be easily converted over to hydrogen. Maybe just change out the fuel tank and fuel injectors, or something simple like that. A 500-1000 dollar conversion, but design the engine to be able to run on either fuel. $br$ $br$ Also while the oil companies still have lots of money, and while we still have enough cheap oil to actually build a back up plan, start converting all gas stations to use hydrogen now.$br$ $br$ How hydrogen should be made: Using natural gas while its still cheap and abundant as a start, then as Natural gas prices climb, start popping up wind mills everywhere. Think of the windmills as modern day oil fields. Instead of fields of oil pumps, fields of wind mills. The wind mills will make electricity, which in turn will be used to make the hydrogen to power the cars. Wind is already cheap, 5 cents per killowat hour, already the cheapest non fossil fuel around. Build enough wind mills and you'll have enough hydrogen production to power a lot of cars.$br$ $br$ Gasoline will always be here, as the more hydrogen cars are built the more the demand of gasoline drops, and in turn an equilibrium in price of energy will be set. AS supply decreases for gasoline and prices increase, consumers will by hydrogen, hydrogen will get ever so cheaper over time as production will always be able to increase since wind is abundant and renewable.$br$ $br$ Oil companies will own the wind farms, and in turn will stay profitable. The oil companies should build hydrogen refineries to produce hydrogen from electricity. As electrical demand increases in summer months, stored up hydrogen could be converted into electricity to sell as electricity (to profit). So the energy companies could also store up hydrogen to sell as car fuel when vehicle fuel demands increase and electricity prices fall, or if electricity prices go up, the hydrogen could be converted into electricity via fuel cells to power the power grid.$br$ $br$ Imagine all that energy on the power grid that just flows to no one since there is no storage system on the electricit power grid. All this electricity could be converted to hydrogen.$br$ $br$ $br$ How hydrogen should be stored: Using NaBH4, sodium borohyride. A company called millenium cell in NJ makes a storage and production process. Basicly its a chemical that holds hydrogen just like water, the catch is the hydrogen can be released with a platinum catylst. This means a cheap, reliable, and safe storage method for hydrogen.$br$ $br$
Hybrid & Natural gas-powered cars
Recently there has been a lot of discussion on this website about hybrid and natural gas-powered cars and also about its financial rewards.$br$$br$However, I cannot help but realise that it is virutally impossible to solve environmental concerns and yet take into account the financial rewards and incentives. When our fossil fuels such as oil run out, the world would be drowned in debate, trying to find an alternative. Look at the situation now. Oil prices are just a mere $70 a barrel and all the countries are complaining, in some countries even riots break out.$br$$br$This recent increase in oil prices highlights the modern generation's dependence on barrels of oil. In about 50 years time, there will be even more trouble as oil prices would increase dramatically. $br$$br$Therefore, although now we still can afford to think both financial and environmental, but when the real thing comes, when the last barrel of oil is sold, financial and environmental issues cannot belong to the same mind. We had better start thinking only environmental if we are to learn to solve the real thing when it comes.$br$$br$
how can we make natural gas more available bearing in most cost,enironmental, and local concerns
posted by Chima Dozie Nwajagu on 5/6/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
As it is now, the oil industry has created a bad name for itself worldwide. with jumbo profits and the ever increasing crisis in oil producing communities especially in Nigeria, the quest for more product is becoming ever so difficult.$br$ $br$ The fact still remains that it is still very cost effective to transport Gas through pipelines over long distances to terminal ports. The backdrop is obviously the environment. This I believe is highly sustainable and can be done.$br$ $br$ The crux of the problem is the double rule concept being adopted by the oil companies. in the 3rd world countries, where they operate in conjunction with the Government in power to "neglect" the environment and communities.$br$ $br$ In Nigeria, the problem is critical.$br$ $br$ The answer to this every increasing crisis is, for the oil company to develop a blue prints to carry the Locals along and also conserve the environment as it is done in western countries.$br$
view 1 reply
MOTIVATING THE OIL COMPANIES THAT ARE ABROAD
posted by bill f. on 5/6/2006 - Be the first to recommend this
In the USA all business exist to make as much profit as is legally possible, within our laws.$br$$br$If you have natural gas and good pipelines to ship the products, do your best. If your government needs to be changed to benefit your people: run for a government office and help promote good changes, that is all we can do.$br$$br$If you also have heavy crude oil ask the people in control for help in building refineries (close to the well farms) to make gasoline and special products. Some of our resins sell for over $500.00 per 55 gallon drum.$br$$br$The more opportunities and jobs you can bring to Nigeria, the more the local workers will benefit. 80% of what a people consumes, cars, food clothes, natural gas and etc. should be made or processed by those same people.