The unsustainability of "green" energy

[hauke]

yes gasoline and electricity are equal

 

[westwall]

yes gasoline and electricity are equal

Not really. The primary source of electricity are fixed point generators that produce enormous amounts of energy for a comparatively small amount of pollution.

 

[mamooth]

And as people talk, discovery of new oil keeps declining, not even coming close to keeping pace with oil consumption.

https://aspoireland.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/newsletter100_200904.pdf

For the logically-challenged, let me explain what that means. The oil eventually runs out. Non-conventional oil and natgas take up some slack, but they're finite as well, and it's not possible for any finite resource to last infinitely. It doesn't run out all at once, but petroleum products will gradually get scarcer and more expensive. In ten years, we'll be paying $10/gallon for gasoline, and people will be screaming bloody murder about the lack of alternatives.

Hate "green energy" all you want, but there's no other choice. It's either a green and nuclear combo, or it's life without electricity. And being vehicles can't run on nuclear, it's either electric vehicles or no vehicles. We environmentalists like electricity, so we would rather have alternate sources in place before the crisis occurs. That's a philosophy that the green energy haters don't seem to share.

 

[westwall]

And as people talk, discovery of new oil keeps declining, not even coming close to keeping pace with oil consumption.

https://aspoireland.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/newsletter100_200904.pdf

For the logically-challenged, let me explain what that means. The oil eventually runs out. Non-conventional oil and natgas take up some slack, but they're finite as well, and it's not possible for any finite resource to last infinitely. It doesn't run out all at once, but petroleum products will gradually get scarcer and more expensive. In ten years, we'll be paying $10/gallon for gasoline, and people will be screaming bloody murder about the lack of alternatives.

Hate "green energy" all you want, but there's no other choice. It's either a green and nuclear combo, or it's life without electricity. And being vehicles can't run on nuclear, it's either electric vehicles or no vehicles. We environmentalists like electricity, so we would rather have alternate sources in place before the crisis occurs. That's a philosophy that the green energy haters don't seem to share.

Oh goody! Yet another "peak oiler" rears his silly head! So...how many times have you all claimed that we're going to be running out of oil........."REAL SOON!"

 

[mamooth]

I never said so. And anyone with common sense understands peak oil is real. It's not possible to make a finite resource last infinitely. Do you disagree with that statement?

Oh wait. Weren't you a believer in the abiotic oil fantasy? I suppose invoking wacky pseudoscience is one way to get around basic logic. Just wave your hands around, and pretend resources are infinite.

 

[P@triot]

I never said so. And anyone with common sense understands peak oil is real. It's not possible to make a finite resource last infinitely. Do you disagree with that statement?

Oh wait. Weren't you a believer in the abiotic oil fantasy? I suppose invoking wacky pseudoscience is one way to get around basic logic. Just wave your hands around, and pretend resources are infinite.

Do you think oil was placed here by aliens and it's about to run out?

The earth makes oil, genius. Just like it makes diamonds, natural gas, etc.

In fact - not mining these resources puts the earth in very grave danger. Earthquakes release massive amounts of oil (especially under the ocean floor and into the ocean) and natural gas explodes if it reaches a heat source (say....a volcano). We desperately need to mine these resources and use them all up as the earth continues to produce them.

But...since I'm talking to a progressive....all of this will fall on deaf ears as it doesn't fall in line with the left-wing propaganda.

 

[mamooth]

In fact - not mining these resources puts the earth in very grave danger. Earthquakes release massive amounts of oil (especially under the ocean floor and into the ocean) and natural gas explodes if it reaches a heat source (say....a volcano). We desperately need to mine these resources and use them all up as the earth continues to produce them.

I'm pretty certain that will be the single dumbest thing I read on the internet today.

I do hand it to you. That was impressive in the sheer magnitude of its wrongness.The part about natural gas exploding when it reached a volcano was an original bit of stupidity that I hadn't seen before. So, at least you get points for creativity.

Now, if you need some help understanding the dumbess of your paragraph, let me give you some starting ponts.

Learn about the rate of formation of fossil fuels. Yes, earth is "creating" them, but on a scale of millions of years. Hence, it's dumb to declare earth keeps creating vast new quantities of htem right now.

Also learn where fossil fuels are found. The answer is "sedimentary formations". That is, not near volcanoes.

 

[westwall]

In fact - not mining these resources puts the earth in very grave danger. Earthquakes release massive amounts of oil (especially under the ocean floor and into the ocean) and natural gas explodes if it reaches a heat source (say....a volcano). We desperately need to mine these resources and use them all up as the earth continues to produce them.

I'm pretty certain that will be the single dumbest thing I read on the internet today.

I do hand it to you. That was impressive in the sheer magnitude of its wrongness.The part about natural gas exploding when it reached a volcano was an original bit of stupidity that I hadn't seen before. So, at least you get points for creativity.

Now, if you need some help understanding the dumbess of your paragraph, let me give you some starting ponts.

Learn about the rate of formation of fossil fuels. Yes, earth is "creating" them, but on a scale of millions of years. Hence, it's dumb to declare earth keeps creating vast new quantities of htem right now.

Also learn where fossil fuels are found. The answer is "sedimentary formations". That is, not near volcanoes.

What about the oil that Gold found in the middle of the continental craton?

 

[mamooth]

You mean the tiny trace of oil?

Abiotic oil exists, just not in any significant quantities.

 

[westwall]

You mean the tiny trace of oil?

Abiotic oil exists, just not in any significant quantities.

According to every theory out there abiotic oil can't exist. The fact that it WAS found has profound implications for the worlds energy systems, and other non energy related uses for oil. And how do you know it doesn't exist in any meaningful quantities? Seems like a pretty strong assertion based on zero evidence.

 

[mamooth]

According to every theory out there abiotic oil can't exist.

I was unaware of any such theories. Can you point us to such a theory?

The fact that it WAS found has profound implications for the worlds energy systems, and other non energy related uses for oil.

No, it doesn't, because all the theories agreed it would be there in trace quantities.

And how do you know it doesn't exist in any meaningful quantities? Seems like a pretty strong assertion based on zero evidence.

That's not how science works. When someone makes a paradigm-shattering claim, it's up to them to prove it, as opposed to being up to anyone else to disprove it. I mean, just how could someone disprove it? If they dug a hole and found no significant abiotic oil, as has happened millions of times, abiotic oil theory backers would just claim they need to dig somewhere else.

 

[Old Rocks]

This is how insanely stupid progressives are - they want to rid the world of the CO2 plants require to thrive, in order to "save" plant life. You just can't make this stuff up...

What cannot be made up is how fucking stupid you are. Please post a link to where the scientists want to rid the world of CO2? You dumb bastard, if you researched anything at all about what scientists have to say about CO2, you would find that they state that CO2 is essential in the atmosphere not only for plant life, but as a GHG, to keep the oceans from freezing clear down to the equator. In fact, if you would like to lessen your vast ignorance a little, you might look up snowball earth.

Really? Please provide a link to them making such a statement.

yes gasoline and electricity are equal

Not really. The primary source of electricity are fixed point generators that produce enormous amounts of energy for a comparatively small amount of pollution.

Comparatively as compared to what? That 'little' is changing the climate and surface temperature of the Earth. Deny it all you want, but the vast majority of scientists state that is the case.

 

[westwall]

This is how insanely stupid progressives are - they want to rid the world of the CO2 plants require to thrive, in order to "save" plant life. You just can't make this stuff up...

What cannot be made up is how fucking stupid you are. Please post a link to where the scientists want to rid the world of CO2? You dumb bastard, if you researched anything at all about what scientists have to say about CO2, you would find that they state that CO2 is essential in the atmosphere not only for plant life, but as a GHG, to keep the oceans from freezing clear down to the equator. In fact, if you would like to lessen your vast ignorance a little, you might look up snowball earth.

Really? Please provide a link to them making such a statement.

yes gasoline and electricity are equal

Not really. The primary source of electricity are fixed point generators that produce enormous amounts of energy for a comparatively small amount of pollution.

Comparatively as compared to what? That 'little' is changing the climate and surface temperature of the Earth. Deny it all you want, but the vast majority of scientists state that is the case.

Sooo. When NOAA said that the global temp in 1998 was 62 degrees. And now they tell us that it is 58 and a new record....what does that mean to you?

 

[Old Rocks]

In fact - not mining these resources puts the earth in very grave danger. Earthquakes release massive amounts of oil (especially under the ocean floor and into the ocean) and natural gas explodes if it reaches a heat source (say....a volcano). We desperately need to mine these resources and use them all up as the earth continues to produce them.

I'm pretty certain that will be the single dumbest thing I read on the internet today.

I do hand it to you. That was impressive in the sheer magnitude of its wrongness.The part about natural gas exploding when it reached a volcano was an original bit of stupidity that I hadn't seen before. So, at least you get points for creativity.

Now, if you need some help understanding the dumbess of your paragraph, let me give you some starting ponts.

Learn about the rate of formation of fossil fuels. Yes, earth is "creating" them, but on a scale of millions of years. Hence, it's dumb to declare earth keeps creating vast new quantities of htem right now.

Also learn where fossil fuels are found. The answer is "sedimentary formations". That is, not near volcanoes.

What about the oil that Gold found in the middle of the continental craton?

How many barrels is that oil field producing? Yes, there may be some abiotic oil being created, but it is very little, and very slow.

 

[Old Rocks]

You mean the tiny trace of oil?

Abiotic oil exists, just not in any significant quantities.

According to every theory out there abiotic oil can't exist. The fact that it WAS found has profound implications for the worlds energy systems, and other non energy related uses for oil. And how do you know it doesn't exist in any meaningful quantities? Seems like a pretty strong assertion based on zero evidence.

Once again, a flat statement with no link to back it up. I have seen articles with explanations of how abiotic oil may be produced. And all of them that were written by credible scientists stated at the end of the article that abiotic oil would only be produced in very small quantities, not enough to even count in the inventory of possible oil reserves.

 

[westwall]

You mean the tiny trace of oil?

Abiotic oil exists, just not in any significant quantities.

According to every theory out there abiotic oil can't exist. The fact that it WAS found has profound implications for the worlds energy systems, and other non energy related uses for oil. And how do you know it doesn't exist in any meaningful quantities? Seems like a pretty strong assertion based on zero evidence.

Once again, a flat statement with no link to back it up. I have seen articles with explanations of how abiotic oil may be produced. And all of them that were written by credible scientists stated at the end of the article that abiotic oil would only be produced in very small quantities, not enough to even count in the inventory of possible oil reserves.

Please post a link to one of those please.

 

[Old Rocks]

This is how insanely stupid progressives are - they want to rid the world of the CO2 plants require to thrive, in order to "save" plant life. You just can't make this stuff up...

What cannot be made up is how fucking stupid you are. Please post a link to where the scientists want to rid the world of CO2? You dumb bastard, if you researched anything at all about what scientists have to say about CO2, you would find that they state that CO2 is essential in the atmosphere not only for plant life, but as a GHG, to keep the oceans from freezing clear down to the equator. In fact, if you would like to lessen your vast ignorance a little, you might look up snowball earth.

Really? Please provide a link to them making such a statement.

yes gasoline and electricity are equal

Not really. The primary source of electricity are fixed point generators that produce enormous amounts of energy for a comparatively small amount of pollution.

Comparatively as compared to what? That 'little' is changing the climate and surface temperature of the Earth. Deny it all you want, but the vast majority of scientists state that is the case.

Sooo. When NOAA said that the global temp in 1998 was 62 degrees. And now they tell us that it is 58 and a new record....what does that mean to you?

Mostly that you continue to be a liar.

La Niña fizzles, making record warm global temperatures more likely

 

[Wyatt earp]

And as people talk, discovery of new oil keeps declining, not even coming close to keeping pace with oil consumption.

https://aspoireland.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/newsletter100_200904.pdf

For the logically-challenged, let me explain what that means. The oil eventually runs out. Non-conventional oil and natgas take up some slack, but they're finite as well, and it's not possible for any finite resource to last infinitely. It doesn't run out all at once, but petroleum products will gradually get scarcer and more expensive. In ten years, we'll be paying $10/gallon for gasoline, and people will be screaming bloody murder about the lack of alternatives.

Hate "green energy" all you want, but there's no other choice. It's either a green and nuclear combo, or it's life without electricity. And being vehicles can't run on nuclear, it's either electric vehicles or no vehicles. We environmentalists like electricity, so we would rather have alternate sources in place before the crisis occurs. That's a philosophy that the green energy haters don't seem to share.

It will never ever run out logic and common sense will tell you that, it will just be more rare and expensive by that time hundreds of years from now we will have a good alternative energy source.

But to jump in it with both fleets just makes it harsh on the middle class and poor people.

But your ilk don't give a Damn about poor people or the middle class which is obvious.

 

[Old Rocks]

Initial indications of abiotic formation of hydrocarbons in the Rainbow ultramafic hydrothermal system, Mid-Atlantic Ridge

• Nils G. Holma, , ,
• Jean Luc Charloub

Abstract
In the presence of water, olivine of ultramafic rock is oxidized during the process referred to as ‘serpentinization’. Water in contact with the olivine is reduced to molecular hydrogen (H2) with the concomitant oxidation of Fe(II). The molecular hydrogen formed may be used as an energy source by lithotrophic bacteria, but may, at high temperature, also be combined with CO2 for the abiotic formation of organic compounds such as hydrocarbons and fatty acids through Fischer–Tropsch type (FTT) synthesis. Our analyses of fluids from the peridotite-hosted Rainbow hydrothermal field on the Mid-Atlantic Ridge indicate de novo synthesis of linear saturated hydrocarbons. The chain length of the hydrocarbons is between 16 and 29 carbon atoms. The discovery of FTT reactions in ultramafic hydrothermal systems on Earth provides an alternative pathway for the formation of early membranes and the origin of life.

Now that didn't take long. Many others available.

 

[mamooth]

Sooo. When NOAA said that the global temp in 1998 was 62 degrees. And now they tell us that it is 58 and a new record....what does that mean to you?

It means you're stooping to a favorite type of denier dishonesty, baseline fraud.

If you want to claim you're not deliberately peddling a fraud, you should explain why you're pretending that measurements from two different baselines are using the same baseline.