| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
James C
Major Poster
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 1046
|
 Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:23 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Mark Gobell wrote: | My view is that Britain lives without it's own coal because Thatcher wanted to smash the NUM.
Once the pits were closed we imported cheaper dirtier coal from Poland and Hungary.
We didn't stop using coal, the Tories just didn't want an orgainsed political workforce extracting it anymore.
No arguments were made then about it's scarcity, it was a savage political decision.
Our coal is still in the ground. |
I agree. But coal is not the full answer.
Although you can turn coal into oil and gas and use it in many manufacturing processes, it doesn't have the same calorific value and exraction rates are lower than oil. (I think you should look up EROEI). This is what peak oil is all about - total energy will be lower tomorrow than today. Less energy = poorer economy and will lead to social unrest. This doesn't mean the end of human beings or the earth or so on. But it means that there is no substitute for oil that will ensure business as usual. In other words, we'll have to endure a period of mega change as we adapt to using other energy means such as coal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
karlos
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| James C wrote: |
Because of shareholders |
James if oil prices rise oil company shareholders dividends will increase.
So ramping up the oil price is good for shareholders. and guess what, you too can become a shareholder too and join the party.
in a free market if you think oil is becoming scarce and the price will go up them
go and buy some
it really is that easy
the peak oil waffle is propaganda to justify them invading iran and then sudan and somalia
ps: coal
yes thatcher destroyed the num but my point was switching from coal to oil, from oil to gas, from gas to LNG, LNG to lignite, coppice willow, and many other fossi fuels out there. Marsh gas - methane is a bigger and more common greenhouse gas than co2. And it is available too.
So the world is perfectly capable of living without oil.
Cars can be driven with vegetable oil, with sugar based ethanol, water - hydrogen generator,
are you not ready to accept the only reason we use oil is to make george bush's dad rich?
Ask Brazil if they are worried about your peak oil fantasy.
_________________
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 8:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| James C wrote: | | 300 years of coal? Where do you get that figure from? |
http://www.coal.gov.uk/news/newsnov2001houseoflordssummarypaper.cfm
| Quote: | | The strategic importance of coal is further underlined by the fact that there are over 200 years of established coal reserves at present production rates compared with only 50 or so years for oil and gas. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James C
Major Poster
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| blackcat wrote: | | James C wrote: | | 300 years of coal? Where do you get that figure from? |
http://www.coal.gov.uk/news/newsnov2001houseoflordssummarypaper.cfm
| Quote: | | The strategic importance of coal is further underlined by the fact that there are over 200 years of established coal reserves at present production rates compared with only 50 or so years for oil and gas. |
|
So 300 years is actually 200 years at consumption rates applicable to 2001. Remove oil and consumption rates will rise exponentially. Suddenly we'll have 50, 40, maybe only a decades worth of coal to maintain our standard of living and keep the global economy afloat. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James C
Major Poster
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 10:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stelios wrote: | So the world is perfectly capable of living without oil.
Cars can be driven with vegetable oil, with sugar based ethanol, water - hydrogen generator,
are you not ready to accept the only reason we use oil is to make george bush's dad rich? |
I agree with you entirely. I am not a spokesperson for the oil industry nor do I support GW, Haliburton, Schlumberger or anyone else. I'd love a world without oil. But let's face facts; any substitute wil not give the world (sorry, the West) the same level of prosperity as it now has. Perhaps you should check out the story of Cuba after Russia collapsed and see what happened to that country when it lost its oil supply overnight. Sure, it has ultimately prospered and for the better but not before many people died and there was major social problems. This is the issue behind peak oil; how do we make the transistion from a high energy economy to a low energy one (which will be difficult for the US)? But that doesn't mean the end of man or the earth. Peak oil explains why 9/11 happened, why we occupy Iraq and Afgahnistan and are willing to attack Iran. GW et al really don't want to lose their empire and are desperate to capture as many resources as possible before matters worsen. It will also give them a military advantage over Russia and China as well as ensuring the dollar reamains alive. Blaming the world's ills on NWO and alien invasions is pure speculation and without any substance.
As for Brazil, it is becoming a model for post peak oil living. It can be done. The problem is, will people in this country and the US give up their cars, X-boxes, LCD TV's and cheap food, and watch their living standards fall without a fight? Probably not. Do you remember the riots under Thatcher and that was just about unemployment. Multiply the problems rising oil costs will bring and the social situation is set to turn sour. Why do you think the government is so keen to implement measures such as detention without trial, ID cards and so on?
As for ethonol and hydrogen as alternatives. Well you cannot make hydrogen without using energy which requires coal or another source. Suddenly, our coal reserves are shrinking rapidly just to make hydorgen. Dosen't make sense does it. Make one fuel by using another? Our coal reserves won't last long to justify that. And ethanol, how do you grow that on a scale that can compete with oil consumption? The answer is, you can't. You'd need to cover the whole world in plants to make all the ethanol and plastics we need. Then again, they won't grow very well anyway because we'll have no fertilisers and pesticides, and where's the land for growing crops going to be squeezed in? Suddenly, your romantic model looks a bit unsavoury.
Last edited by James C on Sat Jun 16, 2007 12:38 pm; edited 5 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 10:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Peak oil explains why 9/11 happened, why we occupy Iraq and Afgahnistan and are willing to attack Iran. |
It might explain it to you but I have a very different view as to why 9/11 happened. Oil companies may well be taking advantage but 9/11 was blatantly a Zionist plot to get America to fight and emasculate Israel's enemies and to cover up the theft of $2.3 trillion from the Pentagon. It was a nice little earner for a few Zionists as well, getting rid of those liabilities the twin towers and claiming billions in insurance. No wonder they were seen dancing at the time.
| Quote: | | Do you remember the riots under Thatcher and that was just about unemployment. |
I remember most people didn't give a rat's arse about the unemployed and only the miners got a little agitated. The riots were over the Poll tax. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James C
Major Poster
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 11:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
| blackcat wrote: | | The riots were over the Poll tax. |
Exactly! People do not like paying for things unfairly or feel that they are losing out due to government policy. Only rising oil prices will cause the government to act in ways that will make the poll tax seem like a fairytale. More riots I think.
Actually you are wrong. Remember Toxteth in 1981? It wasn't just about being black? What about The Specials singing Ghost Town?
Zionist NWO - give me a break! So 9/11 was just insurance fraud! I wonder if the insurance ombudsmen in the US are on our side?
Last edited by James C on Sat Jun 16, 2007 2:40 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 1:30 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| blackcat wrote: | | Quote: | | Think an elite group are ever going to be altruistic - a trait counter to nature? |
You state that as if it was a fact. There are multitudes of examples of altruism being a common feature of human behaviour. In my home town eight men lost their lives trying to save the lives of total strangers, doing a job for which they received no pay. The lifeboat service is just one example, there are many more. |
I have discussed this before. Apparent altruism can be re-stated as self interest every time. Richard Dawkins 'Selfish Gene' is the seminal work on this. I am not saying that people cannot be extremely good, or help others etc. But altruism implies that what they do is in direct contradiction to the best interests of their genes. That would be a recipe for extinction.
Blood is thicker than water and DNA is what we really mean when talking about blood-lines.
About Coal
It occurs to me if peak oil was coming then locking our coal underground until the price has tripled might have been a shrewd move. Let continental Europe run out first...
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 6:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | So 9/11 was just insurance fraud! |
Find the person who said that and take it up with them. 9/11 was part of an ongoing plot which included the taking control of the media in the west, and control of the financial establishments and military. A plot that led to the establishment of the state of Israel. Just how powerful and influential does an organisation have to be to create a completely new state and wipe another off the map in so doing? Rigging elections to get their stooge in the White House now sets the stage for the expansion of Israel to its biblical boundaries. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rodin
Validated Poster
Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 7:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
911 insurance fraud was just a bit on the side. Kept Nethenyahu's bosom buddy Silverstein sweet.
_________________
Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dr Doom
Minor Poster
Joined: 20 Jun 2006
Posts: 74
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 10:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I read Crossing the Rubicon in early 2005 and it makes for very grim reading, I didn't actually begin to seriously question the motives behind "peak oil theory" until a year after I read it. I even poo pooed the idea that it might be a huge scam.
Interestingly Mike Ruppert talks about financial elites that have decided the worlds population needs to be reduced to 2 billion, yet he doesn't name names, and by and large he is pointing his finger at the bad "american empire". Then talks about how WW3 is inevitable, and the elites will probably use bioweapons to depopulate the earth when the time comes.
He makes the claim that oil & natural gas are critical for maintaining food production sufficient for 6 billion people. Yet doesn't entertain the possibility that people could eat less, or eat less meat & more vegetables, vegetables are more energy efficient to produce than meat.
The conclusion I've come to is that whether oil is running short or not is really irrelevant. Even if this peak oil disaster is real, the ruling elites are wholly responsible for not doing enough to mitigate it, that's even giving them the benefit of the doubt that they haven't created it deliberately.
And by that I'm not necessarily saying they are hiding oil, I'm saying that they have either suppressed real alternatives, or at least failed to use their enormous resources to develop real alternative resources.
The real reason that this whole peak oil thing stinks is that the central banking interests are all basically merged with the huge oil concerns, Rockefeller Oil & The Federal Reserve, Queen of England & BP, Queen Beatrix and Shell Oil.
It also fits with the NWOs policy of creating artificial scarcity in all areas of economies. Artificial scarcity in land, debt-free money, diamonds, etc.
Scarcity = dependence = control.
It just doesn't fit that they artificially restrict all these other things, but then with oil they say, oh let's be honest with this, let's not create artificial scarcity.
Just imagine a world where energy wasn't limited. It would create such abundance that most of the population wouldn't even need to work. The ruling elite need to keep us working so that we don't have sufficient time or energy to oppose them. And also it gives them thrills. If everyone was able to not work like they don't, it would devalue their position as elites I guess. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Sat Jun 16, 2007 11:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | I even poo pooed the idea |
NEVER poo poo anything. That's how flim flammery and namby pambering start. Pretty soon you'll be hoity toity then the heeby jeebies will set in. Be careful!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karlos
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 6:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| James C wrote: |
As for Brazil, it is becoming a model for post peak oil living. It can be done. The problem is, will people in this country and the US give up their cars, X-boxes, LCD TV's and cheap food, and watch their living standards fall without a fight? |
Who says you cant watch LCD tv using hydro electric power?
Cheap food?
Where do you get cheap food from tell me please.
You seem to think we live in utopia. Today everything is bloody expensive for no aparant need. New cars are expensive, playstation 3, a single steak costs £4 before you even cook it, a small piece of fish is £3.
| James C wrote: |
As for ethonol and hydrogen as alternatives. Well you cannot make hydrogen without using energy which requires coal or another source.
|
james do you know that refining crude oil takes alot of energy?
| James C wrote: |
And ethanol, how do you grow that on a scale that can compete with oil consumption? The answer is, you can't. You'd need to cover the whole world in plants to make all the ethanol and plastics we need. Then again, they won't grow very well anyway because we'll have no fertilisers and pesticides, and where's the land for growing crops going to be squeezed in? Suddenly, your romantic model looks a bit unsavoury. |
by growing sugar cane and sweetcorn we remove carbon from the air. So the more we plant the more it cleans the atmosphere.
Ethanol is a good fuel. It burns clean no smoke very little pollution and removes carbon in it's production.
It is a WIN DOUBLE
Dont forget you can make alcohol from any sugar or starch producing crop. You can produce diesal from any oil producing crop as well as animal fats.
Please get over this point.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James C
Major Poster
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 9:34 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stelios wrote: | | Who says you cant watch LCD tv using hydro electric power? |
How many hydro-electric power stations do we have in this country? Is there one near you? Not a single one near me.
| stelios wrote: | Cheap food?
Where do you get cheap food from tell me please.
You seem to think we live in utopia. Today everything is bloody expensive for no aparant need. New cars are expensive, playstation 3, a single steak costs £4 before you even cook it, a small piece of fish is £3. |
As oil prices rise, so will the price of food. The price of pesticides, fertilzers, diesel costs (for farm use), transporation costs (from farm to manufacturing to supermarket), packaging costs (plastics). It's very simple. Why do you continue to ignore this. For a trader/former trader, your understanding of economics is very poor.
| stelios wrote: | | james do you know that refining crude oil takes alot of energy? |
Did you know that making hydrogen, ethanol, and bio-diesel costs even more in terms of energy and money? I suggest you look up the meaning of EROEI.
| stelios wrote: | by growing sugar cane and sweetcorn we remove carbon from the air. So the more we plant the more it cleans the atmosphere.
Ethanol is a good fuel. It burns clean no smoke very little pollution and removes carbon in it's production.
It is a WIN DOUBLE
Dont forget you can make alcohol from any sugar or starch producing crop. You can produce diesal from any oil producing crop as well as animal fats. |
You still fail to understand the basic law here. Oil has been created by nature over millions of years. It's been made for free and costs us little to extract it and refine it. It also has the highest calorific value of any fuel. To make the equivalent in other man-made fuels requires massive energy and monetary input and will cost us more to buy and use. All of a sudden, the economy will suffer as it attempts to grow and yet pay extra for the energy it requires to do so. Again, this is a simple rule of economics. It will also face problems with achieving the same levels of supply since output of other types of energy will be much reduced. So regardless of whether we can use alternate energy sources and all the benefits this will bring, if the overal energy supply is lower than we could achieve with oil then the economy will suffer. Now I don't have a problem with that but many people will, especially, as I said before, those who suddenly find they can't afford to commute to work, go on cheap holidays, buy reasonably priced food or are made redundant because their employer reduces its workforce to offset rising energy costs. Poorer communities will be hit the hardest and that will cause social unrest.
I absolutely agree with everything you are saying. I'd love a world without oil. All that greed and power spread amongst so few, but then again, the same people will only come to monopolize the hydrogen, ethanol and bio-fuel industies in years to come. Look at BP, they are the largest manufacturer of solar PV panels in the world with BP Solar (do they know something we don't?). But we have to be realistic and accept that as oil supplies dwindle, the economy will suffer as we make the transistion to a low energy society (which it will become). And during that transistion, there will be much social change to deal with. Did you read about Cuba after Russia collapsed? If you did then you'll understand that everything you talk about can been achieved. Cuba is a success story, but not without having gone through a period of major change. However, Cubans are not the same as Brits or Americans and yet they faced massive change even though they already had a relatively low energy economy. Makes you wonder how we'll cope. Ironically, Cuba is now doing deals with Chavez for more oil as well as finding a small amount of its own. Just shows you that an oil economy is preferential to a low energy one. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karlos
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london
|
| Posted: Sun Jun 17, 2007 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| James C wrote: |
It also has the highest calorific value of any fuel. |
you are refering to crude oil, but crude oil needs to be refined and processed first. So it is not a like for like or accurate thing for you to say.
Yes Ethanol only has 68% of the calorific value of petrol, but petrol is a manufactured product.
You did not compare Bio-Diesal with crude oil diesal.
Ethanol burns clean, is a renewable energy source one which can be made alot of in the UK.
Have you not considered security of supply in your arguments?
We can make our own ethanol and bio-diesal.
Without killing a million arabs to get our grubby hands on it.
Wont you accept a slightly lower calorific value and not have to murder a million people?
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James C
Major Poster
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 7:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stelios wrote: | | James C wrote: |
It also has the highest calorific value of any fuel. |
you are refering to crude oil, but crude oil needs to be refined and processed first. So it is not a like for like or accurate thing for you to say.
Yes Ethanol only has 68% of the calorific value of petrol, but petrol is a manufactured product.
You did not compare Bio-Diesal with crude oil diesal.
Ethanol burns clean, is a renewable energy source one which can be made alot of in the UK.
Have you not considered security of supply in your arguments?
We can make our own ethanol and bio-diesal.
Without killing a million arabs to get our grubby hands on it.
Wont you accept a slightly lower calorific value and not have to murder a million people? |
Petrol, like diesel, like kerosine, like tar are products of the refining process. Petrol is not highly calorific because energy is added, only a few chemicals are added to enhance engine performance and prevent corrosion. The energy in petrol comes from the crude oil already.
Sure we can make our own alternate energy supplies but the issue is the scale of supply. It is extremely unlikely that ethanol and bio-diesel can be made in quantities that will satisfy even a fraction of our needs. This will have a detrimental affect on the economy and unfortunately, that's what counts.
It is exactly because I don't want to see the invasion of the Middle East continue that I promote peak oil theory to all and sundry. I believe, like many others, that the governments of the world should be honest and sit down to discuss this matter - peacefully. But alas, greed has taken over as usual and we and the US have chosen the last man standing option by attempting to secure supplies first. We have a right to be told about how our future will be affected by dwindling oil supplies and be allowed to work the situation out for ourselves, not watch the deaths of millions of Arabs or witness the loss of our own liberties. To deny that there is a problem when the writing is on the wall will only delay the problem further and make the transition to a low energy society even harder. It's going to be tough enough as it is.
Last edited by James C on Mon Jun 18, 2007 1:17 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xmasdale
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 25 Jul 2005
Posts: 1959
Location: South London
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 12:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
What I would like to see is evidence of alternative forms of energy being suppressed. I keep hearing stories about abundant sources of energy being just around the corner in terms of anti-gravity, zero-point energy and nuclear fusion. At school in the 1950s I was even told by a physics teacher that soon the energy crisis would be solved by fusion. 50 years on, despite reports some years ago of encouraging cold-fusion experiments, I see no evidence of any of these technologies. I suppose you could argue that if the oil companies don't want it, no funds will be made available for R & D in those areas. Therefore there's no news.
Or is it all just fantasy?
It's interesting that we often don't know what's just round the corner. Even seers like Jules Verne, HG Wells, Aldous Huxley & George Orwell did not predict either nuclear power or computers. Perhaps the true seers are a younger generation: Iaac Azimov, Arthur C Clarke and other sci-fi writers.
I live in hope. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brian
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2005
Posts: 611
Location: Scotland
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 18, 2007 2:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ethanol kills people. It restricts staple diet foods to the poor to feed the richs' desire for gas guzzlers.
An oversimplification of the market perhaps but ethanol itself is not an answer to peak oil - only a temporary MORE EXPENSIVE quick fix.
Spurred by the increasing use of corn for ethanol, tortilla prices in Mexico have skyrocketed by more that 50 percent in many regions. -
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?ItemID=12030 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
brian
Validated Poster
Joined: 18 Aug 2005
Posts: 611
Location: Scotland
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karlos
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
the peak oil guru was spinning his story on the george galloway show
he said we have not reached peak oil yet
and china and the us are making a grab for the worlds oil
as i stated before oil is last century's fuel
ethanol and bio diesal are the future
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Disco_Destroyer
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 6342
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 11:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| stelios wrote: | as i stated before oil is last century's fuel
ethanol and bio diesal are the future |
Better start clearing the Cities and Forests for all the extra crops we'll need!
Driving will be a passtime for the rich and rich only! Unless WW3 wipes half the population off the Earth 
_________________
'Come and see the violence inherent in the system.
Help, help, I'm being repressed!'
“The more you tighten your grip, the more Star Systems will slip through your fingers.”
www.myspace.com/disco_destroyer |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ian neal
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3140
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| xmasdale wrote: | What I would like to see is evidence of alternative forms of energy being suppressed. I keep hearing stories about abundant sources of energy being just around the corner in terms of anti-gravity, zero-point energy and nuclear fusion. At school in the 1950s I was even told by a physics teacher that soon the energy crisis would be solved by fusion. 50 years on, despite reports some years ago of encouraging cold-fusion experiments, I see no evidence of any of these technologies. I suppose you could argue that if the oil companies don't want it, no funds will be made available for R & D in those areas. Therefore there's no news.
Or is it all just fantasy?
|
Have you really looked Noel?
The evidence of suppression and reports and films of working prototypes for new energy technologies are easy enough to find, so I'm surprised at your failure to see any evidence.
http://www.wanttoknow.info/newenergyinformation
Ethanol and bio-diesel are not sustainable alternatives in my opinion.
If we are looking for viable alternatives beyond the new energy technologies, then this report is a good summary of their relative merits (IMHO)
http://www.i-sis.org.uk/PLOIER.php |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Disco_Destroyer
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter
Joined: 05 Sep 2006
Posts: 6342
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James C
Major Poster
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 7:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ian neal wrote: | | xmasdale wrote: | What I would like to see is evidence of alternative forms of energy being suppressed. I keep hearing stories about abundant sources of energy being just around the corner in terms of anti-gravity, zero-point energy and nuclear fusion. At school in the 1950s I was even told by a physics teacher that soon the energy crisis would be solved by fusion. 50 years on, despite reports some years ago of encouraging cold-fusion experiments, I see no evidence of any of these technologies. I suppose you could argue that if the oil companies don't want it, no funds will be made available for R & D in those areas. Therefore there's no news.
Or is it all just fantasy?
|
Have you really looked Noel?
The evidence of suppression and reports and films of working prototypes for new energy technologies are easy enough to find, so I'm surprised at your failure to see any evidence.
http://www.wanttoknow.info/newenergyinformation
|
Hi Ian,
Can you honestly state that the website you've posted is proof that new energy technologies exist and in working order? The stuff about Zero Point theory appears to be just that, a theory. I'm pretty sure that it was you who spoke about this on the Powerswitch website a couple of years ago and was swiftly rebuffed by the guys on there who know a thing or two about quantum physics. As for cars running on soybeans and having efficiencies several times more than standard, then sure this is possible but these don't really help the situation. For a start, the manufacture of cars requires oil for the wheels, interior and exterior, and the engine. How can car production increase whilst remaining affordable if the price of oil is rising and its availability is reducing? Therefore, it doesn't matter whether a car can be run using hydrogen or some other technology, if the component parts of that car are made from a declining resource then the problem remains. Zero point energy certainly won't help with this issue even if there is some truth in it. Which brings us back to using plant based materials (plastics, bio-fuels etc) as an alternative which has been discussed on this thread already. The simple truth is that we cannot produce these on the scale necessary to maintain automobile economics and therefore business as usual for the economy at large. Even the CEO for Shell has made this abundantly clear this week in this article
Just in case you're wondering, I really couldn't give a stuff about car production and increasing the global economy, then again, I'm not a stockmarket investor (except indirectly through my mortgage). But the bottom line is, we sadly live in a world (Western world) which does require a growing economy for the money system to work and a declining economy will cause monetary breakdown leading to mass unemployment, repossesion of homes and stagflation. This is why peak oil is such an issue regardles of the fact that there are alternative fuels to use. No alternative has the power, flexibility and availability (as of now) of oil. Could Zero Point energy be used as a fertliser and pesticide for food production? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ian neal
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3140
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| James C wrote: | Hi Ian,
Can you honestly state that the website you've posted is proof that new energy technologies exist and in working order? The stuff about Zero Point theory appears to be just that, a theory. I'm pretty sure that it was you who spoke about this on the Powerswitch website a couple of years ago and was swiftly rebuffed by the guys on there who know a thing or two about quantum physics............
Could Zero Point energy be used as a fertliser and pesticide for food production? |
Hi James
I think I did post on powerswitch once or twice so you might be right. Not being a quantum physicist I wouldn't enter any detailed discussion with one. But I've read enough about quantum physics and new sciences to know that at the quantum level there is a definite lack of concensus on the science and much of the science is necessarily theoretical.
I wasn't claiming to have proof. I was claiming there is plenty of evidence and yes IMO the wanttoknow page is a good introduction. As I ask here, what would count as proof anyway. Scientific proof is normally accepted when it reaches a point of concensus within the scientific community. However many of the things we now take to be proven were at the time when they were first proposed considered heretical nonsense. So just because something is currently unproven does not mean that it is impossible. The whole of sciencitic advancement relies on people challenging assumptions and asking the question 'what if?'
And as the links I post here demonstrate there are plenty of claims (some of them apparently very credible) for working prototypes of this type of energy. Some of them claim to be over-unity thus violate the second law of thermodynamics and some are just incredibly efficient.
As for our dependence on oil for fertilisers and pesticides, more evidence of the folly of industrialised agriculture IMO. The dream farm model I linked to points us in the direction of a more efficient, productive and sustainable form of farming based on working with nature rather than battling against it. Nothing new there. It is what permaculturists have been advocating for years.
Last edited by ian neal on Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:12 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James C
Major Poster
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ian neal wrote: | As for our dependence on oil for fertilisers and pesticides, more evidence of the folly of industrialised agriculture IMO. The dream farm model I linked to (http://www.i-sis.org.uk/PLOIER.php) points in the direction of a more efficient, productive and sustainable form of farming based on working with nature rather than battling against it. Nothing new there. It is what permaculturists have been advocates for years.
|
Absolutely, but ask any permaculturalist and they'll tell you that the world's population cannot be sustained at current levels by natural means alone. I happen to be a Permaculturist myself and have read on many an occasion how, for the global food supply to stand even a small chance, everyone will have to grow their own food and stop eating meat (since meat is too intensive and land consuming). I cannot imagine your average ASDA shopper standing for that. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ian neal
Angel - now passed away
Joined: 26 Jul 2005
Posts: 3140
Location: UK
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Well that in a nut shell is our challenge. The biggest lie we are ever told is that there is not enough to go round. And this belief fuels our crazed, dog-eat-dog, competitive society.
I'm sure you're aware that 60% of the world's population get by on just 6% of the global income. So it also stands to reason that just 3 years worth of growth (at today's average growth rates) if redirected solely towards the poorest 60% of world's people would double their income. In short we could if 'we' (or more accurately the PTB) so chose to end world poverty in a matter of years. Meanwhile we spend over a $1trillion a year on war and $2trillion a year on tourism
As the old saying goes there is more than enough for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
James C
Major Poster
Joined: 26 Jan 2006
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 9:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ian neal wrote: | Well that in a nut shell is our challenge. The biggest lie we are ever told is that there is not enough to go round. And this belief fuels our crazed, dog-eat-dog, competitive society.
I'm sure you're aware that 60% of the world's population get by on just 6% of the global income. So it also stands to reason that just 3 years worth of growth (at today's average growth rates) if redirected solely towards the poorest 60% of world's people would double their income. In short we could if 'we' (or more accurately the PTB) so chose to end world poverty in a matter of years. Meanwhile we spend over a $1trillion a year on war and $2trillion a year on tourism
As the old saying goes there is more than enough for everyone's need but not for everyone's greed |
And if our economy fails due to peak oil, then how do we end poverty in other countries and can you see the population of the UK and US living the same life as witnessed in third world countries without some sort of social revolt? This is the crux of the matter. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
karlos
Validated Poster
Joined: 26 Feb 2007
Posts: 2516
Location: london
|
| Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 10:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A toyota Prius uses half the fuel that an average petrol car uses.
If the EXISTING hybrid technology is combined with EXISTING bio diesel and or ethanol then you have a very fuel efficient and sustainable and non petrol car.
Hydrogen generators have been on the market for a while now and ARE being surpressed. They put the guy in a court case who was selling the kits by mail order.
How a hydrogen generato works is when you are driving along using your normal petrol or diesel engine it uses the dynamo energy to pwer a simple low pressure hydrogen generator which is simply running an electric current through a water source, this gives off hydrogen gas which is feed under low pressure through the air intake valve and then basically combusts along with your normal fuel.
On average it produces fuel savings of ove 33% and is cost free to run and is 100% safe and clean.
A kintic energy generator is a device which as the car brakes uses this kintic energy to charge up a device which in laymans terms is like a coiled clock mechanism and very much existing technology. When you move forward the device provides forward thrust causing the vehicle to move forward without the use of any fuel.
Now if you combined a hybrid with alternative fuels with a hydrogen generator and a kinetic energy generator then you have a very low cost non petrol very low carbon vehicle running at say 200 mpg.
So i would say sustainable motoring is available today but is surpressed.
Look asda announced it was using chicken fat to run all it's lorries and actually started to do so but Ken Livingstone banned them.
Many companies started to produce bio-diesel but the chancellor Gordon Brown imposed maximum taxes on them so that killed to industry.
In Germany coincidentally bio-diesel is taxed much lowere and used by 2,000,000 motorists.
Count on your hands how many governement or government or public authorithy controlled vehicles run on alternative fuels.
Very very few will be running on LPG and that is very very few indeed.
So yes the powers that be are surpressing the switch from oil.
In Britain we have had electric vehicles for over 50 years running reliably every day delivering our milk, used in central london town clearing cheques and by certain postal services.
Fork Lift trucks are electric vehicles.
While i dont necessarily think an electric car is clean because you have to generate the electric first the fact remains they are used dail and have been for a long time.
Dont forget since CARLYLE GROUP owned by the BUSH family and the BIN LADIN family moved into Britain. They bought refineries from BP and then after that you had the Buncefield depot bombing.
You also had the petrol scare where cars using tesco petrol which was 5% ethanol caused engine damge.
You see letting Carlyle group into the UK oil industry and you start getting less alternative fuels and higher taxes and more criminal acts of SABOTAGE>
Anyone who thinks Buncefield was not bombed listen to news footage of the day
Why is aviation fuel subsidised so much?
In the 1900s-1930s airships which used very little fuel and carried huge payloads were used. Thye were unsafe because they were made using hydrogen.
Today the same technology can be used for carrying freight using HELIUM.
That would cut down on the use of aviation fuel.
Using our canal system to carry freight as opposed to lorries on our overcrowded roads
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
blackcat
Validated Poster
Joined: 07 May 2006
Posts: 2376
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 6:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/02/17/eveningnews/main1329941.shtm l
This article is over a year old but it makes interesting reading anyway.
| Quote: | Kids Build Soybean-Fueled Car
(CBS) The star at last week's Philadelphia Auto Show wasn't a sports car or an economy car. It was a sports-economy car — one that combines performance and practicality under one hood.
But as CBS News correspondent Steve Hartman reports in this week's Assignment America, the car that buyers have been waiting decades comes from an unexpected source and runs on soybean bio-diesel fuel to boot.
A car that can go from zero to 60 in four seconds and get more than 50 miles to the gallon would be enough to pique any driver's interest. So who do we have to thank for it. Ford? GM? Toyota? No — just Victor, David, Cheeseborough, Bruce, and Kosi, five kids from the auto shop program at West Philadelphia High School
The five kids, along with a handful of schoolmates, built the soybean-fueled car as an after-school project. It took them more than a year — rummaging for parts, configuring wires and learning as they went. As teacher Simon Hauger notes, these kids weren't exactly the cream of the academic crop.
"We have a number of high school dropouts," he says. "We have a number that have been removed for disciplinary reasons and they end up with us."
One of the Fab Five, Kosi Harmon, was in a gang at his old school — and he was a terrible student. The car project has changed all that.
"I was just getting by with the skin of my teeth, C's and D's," he says. "I came here, and now I'm a straight-A student."
To Hauger, the soybean-powered car shows what kids — any kids — can do when they get the chance.
"If you give kids that have been stereotyped as not being able to do anything an opportunity to do something great, they'll step up," he says.
Stepping up is something the big automakers have yet to do. They're still in the early stages of marketing hybrid cars while playing catch-up to the Bad News Bears of auto shop.
"We made this work," says Hauger. "We're not geniuses. So why aren't they doing it?"
Kosi thinks he knows why. The answer, he says, is the big oil companies.
"They're making billions upon billions of dollars," he says. "And when this car sells, that'll go down — to low billions upon billions."
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Chat
Usergroups
Calendar
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
