Peak Oil and World Population

[Billy T]

{Venezuela is in OPEC}
Hugo will soon be sending the oil the US gets from Venezuela to China as repayment for China huge investment (approaching 100billion dollars) in development of the their word's largest shale oil deposit and the two heavy crude refineries China is building to process this oil.

Brazil surely has much more "pre-salt oil", not yet "proven." When this corrections is done, Only the US and Mexico of the majors are with huge use compared to reserves.

 

[Me-Ki-Gal]

LOts of speculation , Oil companies drill test wells and then cap em . Then they hide the results and stamp em Confidential. The Greathouse family trust has many many acres of mineral rights that the oil companies lease . Do they drill ? No . Why do they renew the leases if there is no oil . That would be stupid ! You all figure that one out with your speculations.

Do we know what oil companies are up to , I think maybe " Not really " It is confidential. O.K. some day natural oil will have to run out , Who knows when ? I don't

 

[ElectricFetus]

Peak oil is real and has already happened, but its affects are exaggerated. Peak oil is not the end of oil, its the end of CHEAP oil, are present day circumstances are the result. With high oil prices though previously uneconomical oil reservoirs become economical, like tar sands and oil shale, which we have over a trillion barrels in "viable" reserves world wide, so oil will not run out, its just all the sweet easy stuff is long since gone and we are going to have to be paying out the ass to literally squeeze blood from rocks. Civilization will not crumble, and the world we keep going though in a highly unstable and flaccid state as it is presently, until the day we have a cheaper more available energy source than good oil light crude was.

 

[Me-Ki-Gal]

Peak oil is real and has already happened, but its affects are exaggerated. Peak oil is not the end of oil, its the end of CHEAP oil, are present day circumstances are the result. With high oil prices though previously uneconomical oil reservoirs become economical, like tar sands and oil shale, which we have over a trillion barrels in "viable" reserves world wide, so oil will not run out, its just all the sweet easy stuff is long since gone and we are going to have to be paying out the ass to literally squeeze blood from rocks. Civilization will not crumble, and the world we keep going though in a highly unstable and flaccid state as it is presently, until the day we have a cheaper more available energy source than good oil light crude was.

I heard that , Yeah . What I heard from an ex oil executive that peak oil happened in 1999 or about then . Don't know for sure ? One guy from the industry spouting don't make it so . It is possible. Still speculation and not real science . We got synthetic oil and I believe that will get cheaper in comparison to other goods as time goes on . So I believe in reality the weaning off oil is a long way out cause when the crude runs out we have man made oil for as long as we need oil .

 

[ElectricFetus]

I heard that , Yeah . What I heard from an ex oil executive that peak oil happened in 1999 or about then . Don't know for sure ? One guy from the industry spouting don't make it so . It is possible. Still speculation and not real science . We got synthetic oil and I believe that will get cheaper in comparison to other goods as time goes on . So I believe in reality the weaning off oil is a long way out cause when the crude runs out we have man made oil for as long as we need oil .

The plots of oil production to a plateau in 2008.

The nothing new about synthetic oil, pyrolysis and FT synthesis have been around for decades, the problem is that it cost a lot. Man made oil from tar sands or even coal is certianly going to cost a lot more. Making gasoline from it is unlikely be less then $4 a gallon. In energy return economics making oil from organicsoften gives 1:2 energy returns or for every one unit of energy we put in 2 come out. Compare this to sweet crude from shallow self pressurized wells back in the 1950's (which are virtually all extinct and depleted today) has an energy return of 1:50! Even today's oil from forced pressurized deep and deep sea wells gives returns of 1:5-1:8, so we are going to have to expect price increases to reflect the reduced energy return.

The high price will make other sources more competitive, such as biofuels and electrics. Ultimately we are still going to need oil for this like jet-fuel to plastics, but the source of that oil may be biological instead of geological. If/when its the former it will be far cleaner as biological sources are carbon neutral (adds no carbon to the atmosphere that they don't suck up) or even carbon negatives if we take biomass and convert it into plastics, we create a carbon sink. Thus it is possible for us to being sucking carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and making useful products out of it.

 

[esbo]

I heard that , Yeah . What I heard from an ex oil executive that peak oil happened in 1999 or about then . Don't know for sure ? One guy from the industry spouting don't make it so . It is possible. Still speculation and not real science . We got synthetic oil and I believe that will get cheaper in comparison to other goods as time goes on . So I believe in reality the weaning off oil is a long way out cause when the crude runs out we have man made oil for as long as we need oil .

What you going to make the man made oil from?

 

[Me-Ki-Gal]

What you going to make the man made oil from?

People , Green oil is people ! Just joking . Well Me buddies at Blue Marble say they can make it out of anything . Spent hops and grain from making beer is one of the things they use . Any kind of biomass will do !

 

[Trippy]

People , Green oil is people ! Just joking . Well Me buddies at Blue Marble say they can make it out of anything . Spent hops and grain from making beer is one of the things they use . Any kind of biomass will do !

I've alluded to it before, but there is a process by which complex hydrocarbons, and substituted hydrocarbons can be broken down into simpler Alkanes. It has the advantage of being able to accept any kind of feed-stock, not just biomass, IIRC the highest yields come from running plastics through the process (the ultimate in recycling - recycling plastics back into light crude), although the feedstock does affect the ratios of the various molecular weights of the alkanes you get out of it - IE some will produce more Methane and less C8 Alkanes than others).

It's essentially an accelerated (non biological) adaptation of the process nature uses.

There have been test facilities, including one in the US that accepted waste from a butterball turkey plant, that have met with varying degrees of success, however it hasn't been implemented widely because the application of the technology and processes is still rather newish, and while some variations consume less energy than is contained in a barrel of the crude they produce, others do not.

 

[ElectricFetus]

Newish? The Nazis did FT synthesis in the 40's to make oil from coal when access was cut off. It is an expensive process but it has the benefit of turning even short chain carbon molecules into longer chain alkanes. Of course what your speaking of is hydrogenated pyrolysis, it has promise but like all pyrolysis mechanisms it has the limitation of only being able to breakdown large carbon molecules into smaller alkanes.

 

[Me-Ki-Gal]

Newish? The Nazis did FT synthesis in the 40's to make oil from coal when access was cut off. It is an expensive process but it has the benefit of turning even short chain carbon molecules into longer chain alkanes. Of course what your speaking of is hydrogenated pyrolysis, it has promise but like all pyrolysis mechanisms it has the limitation of only being able to breakdown large carbon molecules into smaller alkanes.

No this sounds a lot like the way the blue marble guys were talking . Except they got a grant from the state of Montana and seem to have something going . Funny they had a press release the day after I met with them . Planning on having 80 employees by next year . It is 2 guys right now , Maybe 5 guys I don't know for sure but publicly it is 2 guys . I like em , Nice guys . They seem to know what they are talking about .

 

[Trippy]

Newish? The Nazis did FT synthesis in the 40's to make oil from coal when access was cut off. It is an expensive process but it has the benefit of turning even short chain carbon molecules into longer chain alkanes. Of course what your speaking of is hydrogenated pyrolysis, it has promise but like all pyrolysis mechanisms it has the limitation of only being able to breakdown large carbon molecules into smaller alkanes.

Yes, I'm talking Pyrolysis as opposed to Fischer Tropsch.

 

[Me-Ki-Gal]

Yes, I'm talking Pyrolysis as opposed to Fischer Tropsch.

Pyrolysis, Pyrolysis , Pyrolysis, Pyrolysis I got type that so I don't forget Pyrolysis . You guys are greatest , Pyrolysis

 

[esbo]

People , Green oil is people ! Just joking . Well Me buddies at Blue Marble say they can make it out of anything . Spent hops and grain from making beer is one of the things they use . Any kind of biomass will do !

All the bio-mass in the world will only supply a fraction of the world fuel needs.

Then you have the tricky problem of having no food to eat.

Also where are you going to get your fertiliser from when there is no fossil fuel to make it from?

 

[esbo]

I've alluded to it before, but there is a process by which complex hydrocarbons, and substituted hydrocarbons can be broken down into simpler Alkanes. It has the advantage of being able to accept any kind of feed-stock, not just biomass, IIRC the highest yields come from running plastics through the process (the ultimate in recycling - recycling plastics back into light crude), although the feedstock does affect the ratios of the various molecular weights of the alkanes you get out of it - IE some will produce more Methane and less C8 Alkanes than others).

It's essentially an accelerated (non biological) adaptation of the process nature uses.

There have been test facilities, including one in the US that accepted waste from a butterball turkey plant, that have met with varying degrees of success, however it hasn't been implemented widely because the application of the technology and processes is still rather newish, and while some variations consume less energy than is contained in a barrel of the crude they produce, others do not.

Recycling plastics into fuel is something you can only do once.
What will you do the second year?

 

[ElectricFetus]

Pyrolysis, Pyrolysis , Pyrolysis, Pyrolysis I got type that so I don't forget Pyrolysis . You guys are greatest , Pyrolysis

It does roll of the tongue nicely doesn't it? Even so its still an energy intensive process involving high temperatures and/or extreme pressures depending on the specific class of pyrolysis being used, The one used in the pilot plant ot turn turkey meat byproducts into petroleum products involves heat, exterme pressure and water, and is termed "Thermal depolymerization"

 

[Trippy]

Recycling plastics into fuel is something you can only do once.
What will you do the second year?

This isn't even worth responding to.

 

[ElectricFetus]

This isn't even worth responding to.

Why not, point out that carbon is carbon is carbon.

 

[Billy T]

What the world has is a surplus of people and a lack of cheap liquid fuel.

People have this habit of dying, but are postponing this obligation as long as they can in most cases; none the less each will eventually provide a dead body. Just burning them is a waste and increasing the CO2, but better than polluting the ground with formaldehyde, etc. The obvious, rational solution may be the "Thermal depolymerization" ElectricFetus mentioned or some modification of Pyrolysis.

What would be best (yield the most valuable products) I will leave to the chemists here, but wonder what the net cost would be? Perhaps one can lower it with mass processing as then the surface to lose heat of the processing chamber is less per body processed. Of course I am not the first to suggest this and my suggestion is less efficient recycling than the earlier one which produced “Soylent Green” but having cars “eat” the production rather than people may be easier to “sell” to the public, and certainly both cheaper than typical US disposal of bodies and less polluting of the environment.

Anyone willing to estimate the chemical and economic yield per 100 kg of body?

 

[Trippy]

Why not, point out that carbon is carbon is carbon.

Quite, or even point out that in my original post I said that multiple feedstocks were available.

 

[Me-Ki-Gal]

Quite, or even point out that in my original post I said that multiple feedstocks were available.

See this is like Me talking about found resources . Old Dairy cows , Did you say that already . Have you ever tried to eat an old Dairy cow . Can't do it my self . To Nasty . MacDonald s won't even use em . To Nasty , no one would buy Burgers. So The Dairy I build has a Methane generator running the facility. I don't know much about , but Me old electrician does as he wired the thing . I imagine it is based on the old digestive concept . Manure is the product that makes it go . It is regulator code for dump sites to burn off Methane before it is released in the atmospheric. Makes sense right ?

But this other process. The chemical alteration is what Blue Marble is doing . How much heat and pressure are we talking about and what should the Facility look like in your expert opinion ? I mean does it take big fancy equipment? Big Stainless steel Silos and what have you ? Maybe there facility is research . Probably . Testing for viability of implementation? Don't know , Formulating question yes indeed