World Without Oil

http://business.financialpost.com/2...ds-west-oil-sands-pick-up-canadas-tech-slack/

Great, dude. Anything past peak oil, involving beating sequestered CO2 media to death isn't as interesting as ALGAE or any other biomass media, suppressed, since the 20th Century.

How canucks squeeze every last tar-ball out of the ground is only interesting, if you can't get over to Bowerbird's OP, about the pongamia tree or to my algae posts.

 

The US wages war better than anyone else in the history of the world, which is certainly better than whatever you might mean by "gang" war. And our carbon footprint has been quite a bit better as of late, all those Malthusian morons who thought we were running out of natural gas, almost as ignorant as peak oilers!

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/08/1...0-year-low-some-experts-optimistic-on-global/

 

Innovation is indeed a wonderful thing, but in the energy field you gotta get permits to build commercial-sized stuff. Bureaucrats are incapable of understanding innovation so they sit on the permits.

 

It's possible to kill Green Energy in its tracks by refusing to work with leftists. All we have to do is so no and refuse to compromise. Green Energy dies in America. How does that work for you folks on the left. Nothing you can do about it.

 

Oil is still viable because it still has a lots of advantages over "green" techs. For example, oil or natural gas work anywhere, under most conditions. You cannot do that with wind. If the wind stops, so does the power plant, which means lights off for the entire city that doesn't have any alternate. Same with solar -- no sunlight, no power. You can't run anything in a city with repeated brownouts, let alone blackouts. And it's very difficult to run cars on solar or wind. So we're back to ... horses. Give an alternative with 100% uptime that can be used in cars and generators. I haven't seen one.

 

Oil isn't viable, and neither are your other sequestered CO2 fossil fuel media, since every time CO2 rose not nearly this rapidly, a mass extinction event resulted. The US passed peak oil, in 1970. Catch up to facts.

Catch up to posts. The other people who post at this thread and others like it are off into biomass, and ALGAE has its own thread, which is pretty good.

We're not seeing a search or a link, in your posts. Got any?

 

Sure they sit...for awhile. Then they approve them, or disapprove them, and the system trundles on.

 

Of course oil is viable, I said oil is "obsolete". There is a difference. And yes, it does have some quite nice advantages, which is why we've enjoyed it all this time. But there are hard pressing issues beyond doing what is just convenient nowadays.

I have solar panels on the roof, and I buy my electricity off a grid which has plenty of wind power.

http://money.cnn.com/2012/08/06/news/economy/wind-power-Colorado/index.htm

and yes, I charge my car off of both of them. Like I said, oil is obsolete. It, and you, will get around to figuring it out in time. I just like being ahead of the game.

 

"Oil is obsolete . . ." Of course, since you are only trying to bait and argue, instead of discuss, you are mincing words, to evade issues.

1. Of course, oil is viable for you, who depends on corruption, for his social leverage. Oil peaked in the US, in 1970. Do you remember 1970? Were YOU an American soccer mom, back then? How'd you introduce "Jiggs" and "soccer mom," without baiting?

2. Since you are deflecting, from ALL biofuels and ALL biomass media and from the basic, deadly, warming problem, with greenhouse gasses, with an insulting, fake apology, you are basically trying to make a discussion, into an argument.

 

Yeah, you lost me there Bob. I work for a living, never even shook down freshman in high school for lunch money, sorry. I recommend you try something other than clairvoyance as a means obtaining information about other posters.

Of course I remember 1970. I also remember global peak oil in about 1979, I remember Jimmy Carter telling us we wouldn't have any oil left by the end of the 80's, I remember when prices crashed because there was so much oil around in 1986, hell, I remember the natural gas cliff in America in 2005 was supposed to cause shortages of the stuff! And instead we got cheap and plentiful abundance! Amazing how those Malthusians keep screwing it up, maybe they are all potheads?

Yeah, you lost me again there Jiggs...I mean Bob. I use ethanol every time I put fuel in my Volts tank, I also have a flex fuel truck and tried out E85 once, some of these biofuels aren't bad at all. Can you tell me were I can try out this hempoil, or is weed more valuable when smoked and thats why we can't find any weedoil being sold at the gas stations?

 

In one sentence, weed dealers and fossil fuel purveyors and prison cartels and courts of fraud have a good thing going, so NOBODY got to have hemp seed oil, in quantity, since 1938.

NOBODY got to have all 25,000 products, made from hemp, since the hemp corticator was introduced, since that would have made hemp commercially dominant. Oil, coal, timber, roaming neo-cons, and cops couldn't have THAT.

 

Lost me again Bob, what is a prison cartel? And why are weed dealers themselves committing fraud, and what is a court of fraud? And how does any of this have to do with why I can't buy weedoil to burn in my tank if it such a great thing? Someone, somewhere, thought ethanol was a great thing to use as a fuel and presto! I can go buy some and put it in my tank. Seems like if weedoil was as great as you want to make it out to be, I could do the same.

What do cops have to do with what oil I put in my tank? If this is such a great deal, fine, go get yourself a nice weedoil refinery fired up, I'll come buy some, if it works in a car, and is economically competitive with ethanol and crude based fuels. Just let me know when. Until then, lay off the product, it appears to be affecting your coherence.

 

/\ /\ Your problem is not WEED, but you can't READ.

Hemp seed oil is the best food oil, so it frees up other vegetable oils, on the market.

So if you have a nutritional deficiency, which makes it tough for you to READ, you need a supp.

Hemp also yields about 24,999 other products. You can't READ, or you'd know what I was repeatedly referring to, by a "Schedule I Controlled Substance." You can't have hemp seed oil, unless you are up in Canada, where industrial hemp has been legal, since 1998.

If you have diagnosed ADHD, you might be prescribed Adderall, a Schedule II CS. Your refusal to READ probably means something.

 

Ever talked to bureaucrats? Dumb as a box of rocks.

Their universal default is NO!

Algal biodiesel is going nowhere as long as 40 CFR 52.21 is in force. It gives mental midgets an opportunity to say NO! and get away with it.

 

Jiggsy used to claim the same stuff, and always when he couldn't make his point because...well....he did often post as though he was stoned.

So your point is weed is great, for something other than smoking, but because people smoke so much of it, the government won't let you save the world by making oil out of it? Well THAT is obvious why, because no one is trying to save the world from oil because we have so much of it, and any legalization of weed is always because the people who want to smoke it don't like going to jail for being potheads. NOT because they want to power their cars with it.

 

Actually, I speak with them regularly, say, at least once a year. The USGS scientists I bump into at national conferences are not dumb as a box of rocks. Do you consider scientists to be bureaucrats just because they work for the government? I also know some economic modelers in Washington DC who are quite smart as well, smarter than anything I've ever bumped into on web forums anyway.

The USGS doesn't deliver binary answers, so obviously they can't say NO as a default any more than they can YES. Just because you don't like one decision made by the federal government under pertinent federal regulations (is 40 CFR 52.21 federal?) doesn't make all government bureaucrats dumb.

 

Thousands of decisions under 40 CFR 52.21 (it was promulgated in 1977) have stopped the economy in its tracks.

The EPA can say NO! anytime they like and it takes an Act of Congress (non-vetoed) to get them to change it. EPA "scientists" can barley make change for a fin.

 

1. You post as though you can't READ. We can see pot isn't part of your meds.

2. Since you can't READ, you rant about oil, which makes a lot of the 24,999 other products, besides buds, for smoking. Go ahead and ponder how cellulosic alcohol gets made, after you get done with your blah-blah, la-la, "jail, potheads, power their cars," OK, done? What do all the dyslexic people want? Do they want you, to find a link or learn to read? Who can say? Did you ask "Jiggs?" He isn't your friend, is he.

 

You implied all bureaucrats are stupid. You should have said all EPA bureaucrats instead, I don't know any of them to be able to venture an opinion. My experience with government regulatory agencies (versus scientific ones) is that they tend to be pretty rule bound. That could be mistaken for stupid, under the scenario you are outlining.

 

Thank you. While it is easy to determine when someone is both mentally challenged and stoned (Jiggsy being the primary local example), it is nice when someone recognizes that I certainly don't suffer from either condition.

 

Somewhere some bureaucrat made those rules that make the rest of them look stupid.

 

A reasonable assumption.

 

Has anyone named the obvious answer yet? A world without humans? Sorted.

 

I do believe a world without people is the viable option. The planet will merrily continue on if'n we have been wiped off. Why is this option not considered? It is the greenest solution there is.

 

Are you volunteering to go first? Well, go ahead then, dude, and set the example.