Biofuels are not the answer.

[Tezkat]

hey what if we take those super capacitors and hook like 10 of them up to the lightning rod on the empire state building... it alone gets zapped more than 300 times a year so shouldn't it produce enough electricity to power it and a few buildings around it? and if it works then we could just put that in every sky scraper from here to Tokyo.

Lightning bolts are very energy dense, but it's not easy to capture such massive power surges, and there isn't that much energy in the end because they only last a fraction of a second. A typical lightning bolt contains only a few hundred kWh of energy. 300 zaps a year wouldn't even power a single floor of the Empire State Building, let alone all the surrounding structures.

Lightning could certainly be a viable (and relatively cheap) supplemental energy source in some areas, however.

that or search into plasma reactors it's really easy to make plasma you do it practically every time you put metal in a microwave.

Being easy to make doesn't necessarily make it a good power source. Remember: Entropy. No matter what you do, you will lose energy forever at every stage of processing. Thus, when you're investing energy in power generation, you want it to do one of two things for you: 1) Tap into otherwise "free" sources of energy (e.g. solar, geothermal, weather phenomena, energy stored over millions of years in fossil fuels...) for net positive energy production, or 2) Transport energy (at a loss) to a location that wouldn't ordinarily have it. Plasma does not accomplish the former (at least not until nuclear fusion technologies become viable), and it's far from the best option for the latter in most cases.

Which isn't to say that plasma doesn't have other neat applications. Because it can get so hot, its perfomance in high temperature applications (e.g. smelting, waste disposal) can exceed that of fossil fuels. And it's relatively emissions free, which is a bonus. I expect we'll see a lot more industrial plasma use in the near future.

What we need to start off with is someone raid all the documents oil companies keep secret and release them to the public.  If no answers are found there...  YA MULE!!!  YA!!!  Back to good ol' horses once the oil runs out.

Answers to what?

We know that oil is running out. Oil companies know that oil is running out. Most are already investing heavily in alternate energy sources, which should tell you something.

Oil companies do like screwing taxpayers and such, but then that's hardly a secret, now is it?

[gh0st]

isn't the law of entropy come to everything will degrade and eventually die unless an outside force, aka humans, acts upon it?

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

No.

Everything will decay and degrade DESPITE anything done to it. You cannot beat the third law.

[Tezkat]

The entropy of a closed system will always increase.

Humans can intervene by expending energy to put things back together into a more ordered state, but that process won't be 100% efficient. So there's a net loss of usable energy in the process.

That's basically the big issue in energy economics. As I wrote above, energy sources need to provide us with a net positive output relative to our costs and/or a convenient way to transport said energy. Oil provides both. Millions of years worth of geological activity compressed dead plants and animals into nice, energy dense compounds for us to burn. The energy cost to make it was essentially "free"--paid by the planet millions of years before we were born. Something like hydrogen fuel cells provide only the latter, because hydrogen isn't "free" in this part of the universe. Thus, they can only replace half of what oil does for us. We still need energy to make the energy we store in the fuel cells (or batteries, or whatever will run our cars once oil goes away).

[superluser]

Quick way to remember the laws of thermodynamics:

Laws of Thermodynamics:
1. You cannot win.
2. You cannot break even.
3. You cannot stop playing the game.

[Kuari]

Answers to what?

We know that oil is running out. Oil companies know that oil is running out. Most are already investing heavily in alternate energy sources, which should tell you something.

Oil companies do like screwing taxpayers and such, but then that's hardly a secret, now is it?

I'm actually of the firm belief that oil companies already have something...  they just want to wait until the panic begins, but before everything crashes into the ground.  That way no one would have any choice but to update to their new fuel source, thus HUGE profits.

[RobbieThe1st]

Quick way to remember the laws of thermodynamics:

Laws of Thermodynamics:
1. You cannot win.
2. You cannot break even.
3. You cannot stop playing the game.

Well then, I guess we will just have to find a way of breaking the Laws of Thermodynamics.

That, or open a wormhole to another universe, and steal their energy to power our own!


-RobbieThe1st

[Tezkat]

I'm actually of the firm belief that oil companies already have something...  they just want to wait until the panic begins, but before everything crashes into the ground.  That way no one would have any choice but to update to their new fuel source, thus HUGE profits.

Ya know... I somehow doubt that would be in their best interests. The value of a network grows with its size. Conversely, even a super wonderful technology won't sell if the infrastructure to support it isn't available. If oil companies do indeed have access to some unknown Next Big Thing in energy resources, wouldn't they want to start hyping it up early so that there's awareness, demand, and a support network ready for them when they finally deploy it  on a wide scale?

[Kuari]

I'm actually of the firm belief that oil companies already have something...  they just want to wait until the panic begins, but before everything crashes into the ground.  That way no one would have any choice but to update to their new fuel source, thus HUGE profits.

Ya know... I somehow doubt that would be in their best interests. The value of a network grows with its size. Conversely, even a super wonderful technology won't sell if the infrastructure to support it isn't available. If oil companies do indeed have access to some unknown Next Big Thing in energy resources, wouldn't they want to start hyping it up early so that there's awareness, demand, and a support network ready for them when they finally deploy it  on a wide scale?

In most cases, yes....  but in this case, think about it.  A majority of people rely on their cars.  If they brought it out before the oil is gone, people would move into it a little at a time...

However, if they released it right as it was absolutely needed, they could charge ridiculous prices and get away with it.  People would HAVE to find a way to buy it if they wanted to survive.

You'd be right for any other product, but for something that has become such a necessity, they have pretty much the ultimate control over the economy.

[Alondro]

There is nothing.  I've studied fuel alternatives for a long time.  Nothing right now works better.  We're already seeing the problems with ethanol, you need too much crop production, sugar cane and palm oil production in the tropic are stripping the fagile soil at a completely unsustainable rate, and it drives food prices up so the poor can afford even less.

Hydrogen takes too much energy to produce.  Natural gas has the same problem of global warming fear as oil... plus it asplodes alot.   Wouldn't want to be in a bad car wreck with a tank of methane. 

Electric cars have problems with battery life, car performance, charging time, and then the excess energy required to produce the electricity.

Once more... getting rid of 3 billion people is the answer.  There is no way to avoid that as the most efficient solution.  Think of all the resources it would save... all the extra room for endangered species... just take out everyone on the lower half of the IQ curve... we don't need all those excess people... they're all going to die eventually, what's the real harm when it accomplishes so much?  It's logical, flawlessly logical...

*steeps in evil*   

[Kuari]

I personally think that if you took a hybrid car and added solar panels, it'd do quite a bit to conserve fuel.  When there is no sun, there's always the other options.

Though one thing I've gotta wonder about the electric option:  Subway trains and some of the faster monorail trains...  how much electricity do they take I wonder.

And Aldondro, unless you're a scientist who has been studying, there is very little reason to believe that there isn't the possibility that there might be something that isn't being thought about too closely.

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

And Aldondro, unless you're a scientist who has been studying, there is very little reason to believe that there isn't the possibility that there might be something that isn't being thought about too closely.

... he is.

A biologist, but still a scientist. (unless I'm incorrect in my memory of what Alondro does for a living...)

[Alondro]

Yes, I'm a biologist.  And I've been trying for so long to come up with a viable renewable alternative energy source so I can get rich.

Unfortunely, I haven't come up with anything but a long shot with kudzu gassification.

So far no oil companies have been trying to buy me out.   

[llearch n'n'daCorna]

You should probably stop eating the kudzu, then.

It's probably an inferior method of gassification, anyway... ;-]

[Reese Tora]

I'm actually of the firm belief that oil companies already have something...  they just want to wait until the panic begins, but before everything crashes into the ground.  That way no one would have any choice but to update to their new fuel source, thus HUGE profits.

Ya know... I somehow doubt that would be in their best interests. The value of a network grows with its size. Conversely, even a super wonderful technology won't sell if the infrastructure to support it isn't available. If oil companies do indeed have access to some unknown Next Big Thing in energy resources, wouldn't they want to start hyping it up early so that there's awareness, demand, and a support network ready for them when they finally deploy it  on a wide scale?

In most cases, yes....  but in this case, think about it.  A majority of people rely on their cars.  If they brought it out before the oil is gone, people would move into it a little at a time...

However, if they released it right as it was absolutely needed, they could charge ridiculous prices and get away with it.  People would HAVE to find a way to buy it if they wanted to survive.

You'd be right for any other product, but for something that has become such a necessity, they have pretty much the ultimate control over the economy.

This doesn't really work from a logistics point of view, though.

Whatever new technology is invented will ahve to go through a government approval process to be allowed to legally drive on the roads, which can take time.

The companies will have to design the cars that use the power source, whatever it may be, and car design is a long process, two or three years atleast.  The cars in the dealership lot today were in the design process four or five years ago.  The process of designing a production car (as opposed to concept car) needs to be long for various types of testing.

Once you ahve the car designed and ready fro production, you need to go through a retooling process, or build a new factory to handle the construction.  You need to make or order the parts for assembly, and you need to re-train the factory operators. (especially with a new power source in play!)

Once you've reached this point, you also still need to spend the time building the cars, shipping them, advertising, and so on.

And before any of this can take place, the oil companies would have to sell thier assumed new power technology to the car companies, and an infrastructure to support them would need to be put in place.

This is a process involving hundreds, thousands, maybe tens of thousands of people, through it's various stages.  You would need to keep all of these people in the dark or silent for half a decade.

I'm going to borrow this from Arthur C Clarke regarding moon landing conspiracy myths:

Remembering how quickly Watergate unraveled, how could any sane person imagine that a conspiracy involving hundreds of thousands of people over more than a decade would not have done the same? Ben Franklin put it well: "A secret known to three people can be kept — as long as two of them are dead.

(full text from which I quite can be found here: http://www.randi.org/jr/07-20-01.html )

[Kuari]

Yeeeah...  thing is, if they did it that way, I could see things being rushed in a mass panic and such.  I mean I seriously doubt anyone could win a law suit against oil companies...  unfortunately...  otherwise they'd have been gotten for price gouging by now..

As for that last line there...  yeeeeeah, not completely accurate.  I mean, how else would top secret files be kept...  well..  top secret.  They quite often are for at least quite a long while.  Hell, last I heard, the Abram tank's armor is still classified.  I somehow doubt you'll find too much info about it publicly.

[Reese Tora]

This is true.

However, much of what is classified is:
1) public knowledge in it's general form, and
2) known only to a few in it's specific form.

You are talking about a small number of military personel and NDA restricted contractors keeping specifics of a system secret vs a huge number of people who may only be tangentially involved keeping the existence of an entire technology secret.

You would especially have problems keeping the infrastructure people silent: whatever this wonder technology's equivalent of gas station owners and attendants ends up being, and the service and support personel who will be maning the service stations and repair shops dealing with these vehicles.

Also, don't forget that the delivery of cars itself depends on vehicles ultimately dependant on oil: tractor trailers burning diesel fuel.  (yay for the tools that make the tools!)

In any case, there's not going to be any sudden cut off in oil supply that would allow this sort of thing; oil is a scarce resource, but the supply will peter out over the course ofa  number of years as the various sources dry up at different times and oil reserves begin to be tapped.

I suspect that a LOT of people are going to take up bike riding before the scenario you suggest comes to pass.

[Kuari]

I'm not saying there'd be a cut off of oil supplies, I'm saying it'd come at the last possible minute

In any case, contracts can solve that quite a bit...  violating them would cause a person hell..

[Reese Tora]

Oh, contracts could help a lot, certainly, but the chance of a secret getting out is directly proportional to the number of people involved.  Considering how large company secrets get leaked all the time, on purpose or other wise, it would be only a matter of time before someone let the cat out of the bag.

In any case, there's something that will require the info to get out well in advance:

The oil companies don't run, nor do they want to run, gas stations. 

Whatever the equivalent is, they'll want to sell franchises, not buy land and build places.  building thier own infrastructure would mean billions in property purchases and taxes, billions in construction costs, and billions in hiring and training, and no certain return on investment any time in the near future.  Selling franchises means taking money from those that buy them, and those guys risk their own money on buying, building and training expenses.  decentralized management from franchises also is more cost effectve becasue there's no need for a structure to administer stations.

In order to do this, they'll need to advertise, find someone willing to buy the franchise, and get those places built.  Since any person buying a franchise will have to build the facility from the ground up, it'll take at least a year to get it built, and that's assuming everything goes smoothly with permits, architects, and contractors.  Have you ever had your house remodeled?

You will also need to sell your new tech to consumers.  I don't mean selling individual units, either.  You would need to convince people that they want to use your technology, and you will be competing against over a hundred years of entrenched gasoline-centric motorism. (yay, I made a word up! ) They very well might need the time leading up to your supposed last minute to convince people to use thier technology.

With all and everything the way it is, it just doesn't make sense for someone to sit on some sort of advanced gas replacement technology.

(This completely beside the point, a thought occured to me.  As gasoline powered vehicles become more rare, gas may actually go UP in price, becasue those who stick with older vehicles that use it will be willing to pay more than those that move to the new tech.  A similar phenomena has been seen to occur in other fields.)

[gh0st]

there's a few problems first: you can't have a monopoly no matter how many politicians you bribe someone will always find out and someone will always ruin you take microsoft for example remember when they were dominating the market and was sued by the government because it was turning into a monopoly, microsoft ended up paying more than 750 million dollars...

second even if scientists do come out with a safe cheap fuel it will destroy the economy as we know it take for instance say we economically slice an atom and get energy lots of it and the best thing is it's next to free... everyone wants it they sell all their stock in the oil companies which ultimately lowers the value of the next person overs stock and this continues until all this money is lost and not enough money is flowing... worst case another depression starts. second worst case the government changes to a socialist state and once again the country fails... finally if not anything else millions of people and banks are going to be either unfathomably rich or poorer than (insert witty noun) they actually made a movie of this but anyways it's a bad idea.

the point is you can't dump raw energy into the market. it makes an economic nightmare not to mention this energy source is most likely held by a single company that decides to become extortionate.

[Kuari]

See thing is though, we all know the oil is running out...  do you think they'd want their business to die?  No, they'd want to make sure they have something else ready.  Here's the biggest reason why it's possible they have something and might not have brought it out because of something that the two previous posters mentioned..

Profits..

It's possible the new source isn't quite as profitable, so they want to get every little scrap of cash they can from oil.

And gh0st...  oil companies might as well have a monopoly.  Ever notice how the Middle East seems to control the oil prices for the entire world?  Either way, they have too much power...  if gas prices go up, so does everything else.  I think something like this is actually detrimental to the economy.  The economy depends on cash flow...  sure they may be spending more money on things, but the more money you spend, the more important it is to save up money for unforeseen events, thus less products sold, less profits for the companies selling those products, thus they either shrink the package or raise the price.

Kind of a vicious cycle....  take out the oil companies, it may hurt for a while, but new job markets will open, and all will be well after a bit.

[Reese Tora]

See thing is though, we all know the oil is running out...  do you think they'd want their business to die?  No, they'd want to make sure they have something else ready.  Here's the biggest reason why it's possible they have something and might not have brought it out because of something that the two previous posters mentioned..

Profits..

It's possible the new source isn't quite as profitable, so they want to get every little scrap of cash they can from oil.

And gh0st...  oil companies might as well have a monopoly.  Ever notice how the Middle East seems to control the oil prices for the entire world?  Either way, they have too much power...  if gas prices go up, so does everything else.  I think something like this is actually detrimental to the economy.  The economy depends on cash flow...  sure they may be spending more money on things, but the more money you spend, the more important it is to save up money for unforeseen events, thus less products sold, less profits for the companies selling those products, thus they either shrink the package or raise the price.

Kind of a vicious cycle....  take out the oil companies, it may hurt for a while, but new job markets will open, and all will be well after a bit.

Never mind the US gets the majority of its oil from sources outside the middle east.

Anyway, to the point at hand: there's as much profit, and less waste, in laying all the cards on the table, as it were.  Rushing to get everything done in a shorter time frame would negate any extra profit to be had by holding out now.

Much as it's nice to think so, no company has a fully developed magic bullet to combat the coming energy crisis, and it's a damaging false hope to believe they do.  There are a number of alternative power sources in the works; hydrogen fuel cells, batteries, ethanol, even compressed air and solar panels, and the big companies are investing time and money in to researching these possible solutions, but there's nothing yet developed to the point where it's a viable replacement.  To think otherwise, to be complacent in the hope that a technology will be unveiled and save us all, is to invite disaster through inaction, as in Aesop's tale of the ant and the grasshopper.  The any, who worked hard and made sure he had what he needed survives, and the grasshopper, who was complacent and believed that everything would work out for him, starved in the cold.

[Kuari]

Never mind the US gets the majority of its oil from sources outside the middle east.

Yes, I know that, and that's exactly the thing.  The Middle East still basically controls those prices.  Messed up, ain't it?

Anyway, to the point at hand: there's as much profit, and less waste, in laying all the cards on the table, as it were.  Rushing to get everything done in a shorter time frame would negate any extra profit to be had by holding out now.

Much as it's nice to think so, no company has a fully developed magic bullet to combat the coming energy crisis, and it's a damaging false hope to believe they do.  There are a number of alternative power sources in the works; hydrogen fuel cells, batteries, ethanol, even compressed air and solar panels, and the big companies are investing time and money in to researching these possible solutions, but there's nothing yet developed to the point where it's a viable replacement.  To think otherwise, to be complacent in the hope that a technology will be unveiled and save us all, is to invite disaster through inaction, as in Aesop's tale of the ant and the grasshopper.  The any, who worked hard and made sure he had what he needed survives, and the grasshopper, who was complacent and believed that everything would work out for him, starved in the cold.

I believe they actually do have something, there is no real proof they haven't.  It is possible they haven't I suppose too...  but the idea that they do have something seems to be as widespread as knowledge of Area 51.  I actually think they could do quite a bit with electric.  Might have to lighten up vehicles quite a bit for it...  or maybe not.

Probably should check sometime how much electricity those large monorails take.  While I imagine it's quite a bit, they are also quite heavy if you think about the really big ones

Either way, I won't deny the possibility I'm wrong, but I still think it's very possible that I'm right