Which alternate fuel/technology is the most realistic for the future?

[j cAT]

Originally Posted by KiwiBacon

Such a setup works excellently for stationary heat and power. Being used to heat local swimming-pools, shopping malls, run water pumps etc.
It's hard to compress natural gases enough to get a decent energy density for road transport.

with oil 125.oo/barrel soon to be 200.oo /barrel landfills will soon be gone, as everything will be recycled or converted to power generation....only old land fills will still be used as methane gases are created from refuse..


in my area landfills are banned..has been for several years now...


i think that our love affair with the automobile is gonna end soon.....

[KiwiBacon]

Originally Posted by j cAT

with oil 125.oo/barrel soon to be 200.oo /barrel

How soon are you expecting that, the $US is devaluing fast, but not that fast.

[j cAT]

Originally Posted by KiwiBacon

How soon are you expecting that, the $US is devaluing fast, but not that fast.

i wish this were my own projected price rise to 200.oo/barrel ,as it would not be correct...this is the projected price in 2years by people in the business of oil.....rising demand world wide and the dollars fall is the main cause.....

if the there were a world wide resession/depression then this would probably not occur with in 2 years...


very soon only people that have alot of money, and businesses will have gas guzzling vehicles ...


gas stations will begin to close as the profit margin will drop as the gallons sold and drive in traffic to buy other products falls..not a good future...

[KiwiBacon]

Originally Posted by j cAT

gas stations will begin to close as the profit margin will drop as the gallons sold and drive in traffic to buy other products falls..not a good future...

This is what I truely dislike about the current situation. The oil companies are making truely obscene profits but they're screwing the local people who own the fuel stations.
Here it seems the margin the fuel stations make hasn't changed (in cents/litre), despite the fuel price roughly doubling in the last 5 years. Effectively their cut has halved.

[Moppie]

Originally Posted by KiwiBacon

Here it seems the margin the fuel stations make hasn't changed (in cents/litre), despite the fuel price roughly doubling in the last 5 years. Effectively their cut has halved.

Don't believe that for a second.
There has never been a lot of margin in fuel, profits in service stations in NZ have always come from shop sales, not the fuel sales.


Your right about the oil companies declaring billions in profits while still claiming they have to keep putting the price up.
It is all part of our wonderful capitalist idea called share holder responsibility, and the growing short term demands of share holders.

"I want it all!
I want it all!
And I want it now!!!!!!"

[KiwiBacon]

Originally Posted by Moppie

Don't believe that for a second.
There has never been a lot of margin in fuel, profits in service stations in NZ have always come from shop sales, not the fuel sales.

Outside of the main centres, small fuel stations keep disappearing.

The upside of massive oil company profits is a massive tax take for some countries. But it's the citizens who always end up paying.

[j cAT]

Originally Posted by KiwiBacon

This is what I truely dislike about the current situation. The oil companies are making truely obscene profits but they're screwing the local people who own the fuel stations.
Here it seems the margin the fuel stations make hasn't changed (in cents/litre), despite the fuel price roughly doubling in the last 5 years. Effectively their cut has halved.

i believe that the price of gasoline has trippled in 5 years...

price of oil closing in on 130.oo/barrel...

do i eat tonight or put gas in vehicle so i can go to work....

[KiwiBacon]

Originally Posted by j cAT

do i eat tonight or put gas in vehicle so i can go to work....

You sleep in your car outside work so it needs no fuel.

[j cAT]

Originally Posted by KiwiBacon

You sleep in your car outside work so it needs no fuel.

then put your dinner on the exhaust manifold for heating/cooking..

[curtis73]

Originally Posted by KiwiBacon

This is what I truely dislike about the current situation. The oil companies are making truely obscene profits but they're screwing the local people who own the fuel stations.
Here it seems the margin the fuel stations make hasn't changed (in cents/litre), despite the fuel price roughly doubling in the last 5 years. Effectively their cut has halved.

There is a congressional investigation currently happening concerning your first statement. ExxonMobil's profits in 2006 were $13.5 million. In 2007 they were $41 million.

Don't let the cents/liter debate sway you. Here in the states I was listening to the radio where they reported that crude had topped $131/barrel. As I was driving to work, I saw four fuel stations changing their prices on the board. At lunch I heard it topped $133/barrel and I saw them changing it again. Makes sense to the public, right? The problem is, from the time an oil company buy the crude at that price, ships it to a refinery, refines it, stores it, ships it, distributes it, and gets their money back from the consumer for it, it can be anywhere from 3 months to 3 years depending on the product. Gasoline, propane, diesel, and other fuels move pretty quickly, but parafin, greases, and other byproducts move slowly. The fact that gas stations are out there raising prices 2 minutes after the stock market reports is nothing less than price gouging. The prices of barrels of crude don't affect the gas station for at least 3 months.

Back during the gulf war the same thing happened. Gas prices climbed to well over $1 a gallon. There was one station who had the right idea. They sold gas at 86 cents per gallon. People flocked from miles around and waited in line for hours to get gas there. I drove nearly a half hour to get fuel there because it was still cheaper despite the drive.

Actual fuel cost at the gas station won't be affected for months. The fact that they are raising prices now is just a reflection of consumer stupidity. Diesel here is as high as 5.67 a gallon and gas is approaching 4.25 a gallon. Yet there hasn't been one pathetic dent in the amount of traffic or fuel consumption on the road at all. People still drive their huge SUVs to work with one person inside.

[curtis73]

The other thing that shocks me about this survey is that 53% at this point have voted for electric vehicles. Do people not realize that over 60% of our electricity on this planet comes from burning fossil fuels? Then consider that of that energy in fossil fuels only a pathetically tiny fraction makes it to your house. Seriously, the amount of energy you get from gasoline in a car is very similar to the amount of electricity you get from burning the same amount of fossil fuels at a power plant. Then consider the insane loss of energy that takes place as it is constantly converted, transferred hundreds of miles, and then used in your house. The loss is staggering. I haven't done the math, but I would wager that driving 40 muscle cars would use less energy than driving ONE rechargable EV.

[KiwiBacon]

Originally Posted by curtis73

The other thing that shocks me about this survey is that 53% at this point have voted for electric vehicles. Do people not realize that over 60% of our electricity on this planet comes from burning fossil fuels? Then consider that of that energy in fossil fuels only a pathetically tiny fraction makes it to your house. Seriously, the amount of energy you get from gasoline in a car is very similar to the amount of electricity you get from burning the same amount of fossil fuels at a power plant. Then consider the insane loss of energy that takes place as it is constantly converted, transferred hundreds of miles, and then used in your house. The loss is staggering. I haven't done the math, but I would wager that driving 40 muscle cars would use less energy than driving ONE rechargable EV.

I believe the "pollution relocation" is something that appeals to many.

[curtis73]

Originally Posted by KiwiBacon

I believe the "pollution relocation" is something that appeals to many.

Amen... landfills are another great example of that. "Let's haul our trash 10 miles away and put some dirt on it."

I also found some research that might be helpful. These are all from reputable sites, not just someone's blog or wiki. Sites like the EPA, DOE, and other government resources provided this info:

Originally Posted by http://leahy.senate.gov

Fossil fuel-fired electric power plants constitute the largest source of air pollution in the U.S. Based on real data from DOE sources, here are some striking facts about power plant pollution.

• The U.S. uses fossil fuels to generate more than 2/3 of its electricity. 51% is generated with coal, 15% is generated with natural gas, and 3% is generated with petroleum.
• In 1999, electric power plants produced approximately 2.2 billion tons of carbon dioxide, 12 million tons of sulfur dioxide, and 7 million tons of nitrogen oxides.
• The average coal-fired power plant is only 1/3 efficient, meaning 2/3 of the energy in the fuel is wasted.
• The average fossil fuel-fired power plant was built in 1964, long before the Clean Air Act began requiring pollution controls.
• Of the largest 1000 fossil fuel-fired power plants in the U.S., 77% are not subject to pollution controls under the Clean Air Act's New Source Review requirements.

Originally Posted by World Outlook, Paris, ISBN 92-64-1081-73.

The world's power demands are expected to rise 60% by 2030.With the world-wide total of active coal plants over 50,000 and rising, the IEA estimates that fossil fuels will still account for 85% of the energy market by 2030

This also doesn't take into consideration the rather monumental need for fossil fuel consumption just GETTING the fuel to the plants, nor does it take into consideration the fossil fuels burned getting that fuel out of the ground.

I also get a kick out of these new diesels with their exhaust scrubbers that remove particulate emissions. They are still being produced, just caught in a filter so they postpone their impact on the environment for a while until the car is junked. You can filter it, hide it, move it, and cover it with dirt, but the fact still remains that we dug it up from way below the biosphere and introduced it up here where we live.

[KiwiBacon]

I wonder what level of technology the chinese are using in their new coal fired power plants?
Mind you they've got some seriously impressive hydro power going on too. Three gorges dam etc.

Originally Posted by curtis73

I also get a kick out of these new diesels with their exhaust scrubbers that remove particulate emissions. They are still being produced, just caught in a filter so they postpone their impact on the environment for a while until the car is junked. You can filter it, hide it, move it, and cover it with dirt, but the fact still remains that we dug it up from way below the biosphere and introduced it up here where we live.

I do a lot of work with underground mines (but not with the machinery itself), they use water scrubbers on the exhaust of their diesel machinery (petrol isn't allowed underground). The systems are total loss and they go through more water than fuel.
Interestingly the rates of lung cancer in underground miners isn't supposed to be any different to the normal population. Given most of the miners smoke that may put a dent in the UCSUSA and such-likes view on cancer-causing diesel particulate.

Articles like this one: EPA article on Dieselnet are very interesting as they show the difference between measured particulates and visible smoke.