Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

What will we do when the oil runs out?

Options
13»

Comments

  • Options
    #62
    donegaLroad
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,379 ✭✭✭donegaLroad


    LordSutch wrote: »
    Rapeseed oil.

    How about farmers turning to fields of rape seed oil?

    Like on a massive worldwide scale, as a harvested fuel with government backing & multinational incentives to grow the stuff?

    There is company up here that makes it.. it retails at a fiver a 750ml bottle


  • Options
    #63
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    smacl wrote: »
    Its a bit more complex than that though. The principal issue involving intermittent renewables, whether wind, solar or wave is storage. Not so much of an issue for solar panels in a desert perhaps, but anywhere else you have to consider weather and seasonal variation in terms of consistent supply. Next big problem is transmission, which for electricity over long distances is both lossy and expensive to maintain. Third is time to construction, in that we'd be long past peak cheap oil before a project of this scale would be completed, but cheap oil could actually be required for construction. Even on a more local and considerably more modest level, if you look at Hinkley Point C for example, it got the go ahead in 2008 but won't be supplying power to the grid until 2025 earliest. My feeling is that in this country at least, the bulk of our renewable energy will continue to come from wind, possibly with pumped hydro as storage.

    Thats an argument about the technology and the economics not the science. The guy I was replying to clearly though that there isn't enough solar irradiation on the earth to replace oil. There is. Of course in Ireland we would have to rely on other renewables given the weather ( that said we do have very long days in the summer).


  • Options
    #64
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    smacl wrote: »
    Its a bit more complex than that though. The principal issue involving intermittent renewables, whether wind, solar or wave is storage. Not so much of an issue for solar panels in a desert perhaps, but anywhere else you have to consider weather and seasonal variation in terms of consistent supply. Next big problem is transmission, which for electricity over long distances is both lossy and expensive to maintain. Third is time to construction, in that we'd be long past peak cheap oil before a project of this scale would be completed, but cheap oil could actually be required for construction. Even on a more local and considerably more modest level, if you look at Hinkley Point C for example, it got the go ahead in 2008 but won't be supplying power to the grid until 2025 earliest. My feeling is that in this country at least, the bulk of our renewable energy will continue to come from wind, possibly with pumped hydro as storage.

    Once battery technology gets better ( and there is a huge investment in battery life across industry and universities on that) the way to solve storage problems is to have batteries in peoples houses. With the proper economic sticks and carrots, this could spread faster than you think.

    One thing we could do is charge the carbon charge on non-renewables only, so for instance if your house consumed 50% renewable energy and 50% non renewable, the renewables are not taxed. Year over year the tax increases.

    Your house will have local software that fills the battery when it knows that the grid is producing > 50% renewables (or higher if you want to set it), and your system switches to battery power if the grid is below that threshold. Only when the battery is exhausted will it draw energy directly from the grid if the renewable threshold isnt reached.


  • Options
    #65
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    LOL I don't really consider Nuclear to be low carbon , when you consider the front loading, decommissioning and displacement of real renewables. Wind can be carbon neutral after a few months, a lot of nuclear plants won't ever be.

    I didn't say anything about nuclear. The report from the guardian didn't either. Here it is, critique that.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/17/green-energy-surge-fuels-anxiety-uk-power-grid

    Oh yeah all those announcements about companies making only electric cars. Mostly they are hybrids, as in ordinary cars except that when you brake some of the energy gets stored in a battery.

    Don't think I mentioned electric cars either, however if Hybrid cars reduce consumption is that not good? The energy from the braking is saving energy that would other wise have been taken from oil consumption ( which isnt something you can guarantee with EVs as the electricity might be from any source, renewable or non-renewable.)


  • Options
    #66
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 90,827 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    server down wrote: »
    I didn't say anything about nuclear. The report from the guardian didn't either. Here it is, critique that.

    https://www.theguardian.com/business/2017/jun/17/green-energy-surge-fuels-anxiety-uk-power-grid
    The graph says that 33.2% was from Nuclear which is close to half of the 70%.

    It's a public forum so not all of the post was a reply :)

    I see nuclear as part of the problem.

    It costs too much, and takes far too long to install. As it's got slow response it's base load only and so has an absolute requirement for a roughly equal amount of gas or storage to load balance, which could be used instead to balance with cheaper renewables. Also as nuclear reactors are much larger they cause most of the costs for spinning reserve.

    Nuclear uses a LOT of fossil fuel.
    Hinkley C will use Three million tonnes of concrete and 230,000 tonnes of steel reinforcement And then there's the mining and refining energy inputs too. And these will increase now that most of the nukes have been burnt up and more uranium reserves are in harder granite rocks.

    Anyway here there's been a lot more investment in roads than public transport.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #67
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    Capt'n Midnight wrote: »
    The graph says that 33.2% was from Nuclear which is close to half of the 70%.

    It's a public forum so not all of the post was a reply :)

    I see nuclear as part of the problem.

    It costs too much, and takes far too long to install. As it's got slow response it's base load only and so has an absolute requirement for a roughly equal amount of gas or storage to load balance, which could be used instead to balance with cheaper renewables. Also as nuclear reactors are much larger they cause most of the costs for spinning reserve.

    Nuclear uses a LOT of fossil fuel.
    Hinkley C will use Three million tonnes of concrete and 230,000 tonnes of steel reinforcement And then there's the mining and refining energy inputs too. And these will increase now that most of the nukes have been burnt up and more uranium reserves are in harder granite rocks.

    Anyway here there's been a lot more investment in roads than public transport.

    Well, I agree that nonnuclear would be better. I don't doubt that the carbon costs of nuclear construction are important but lots of those costs are quite literally sunk. The plants that have already been built have already cost their cost of construction, in money and carbon costs. So that 70% was in fact non-carbon on that day. Wind was as much as nuclear, and that can only increase.

    In the future non-nuclear renewables would be better.


  • Options
    #68
    Infini
    Registered Users Posts: 4,573 ✭✭✭Infini


    Energy production will have shifted long before oil runs out. Most likely fusion power will become viable within the next 30 years and other diversification like solar and wind will become prevalent. Tech changes along with the times so its not the end of the world.


  • Options
    #69
    c_man
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,436 ✭✭✭c_man


    What will we do when the oil runs out?

    I don't know. But as someone who attended college in the early 2000s, I was assured that oil would be most definitely on the downward spiral by now, if not facing outright oil loss. Peak oil was always in 2003 2004 2005 current_year


  • Options
    #70
    Markcheese
    Registered Users Posts: 8,431 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    c_man wrote:
    I don't know. But as someone who attended college in the early 2000s, I was assured that oil would be most definitely on the downward spiral by now, if not facing outright oil loss. Peak oil was always in 2003 2004 2005 current_year

    Everything I remember from the early 2000s said we'd only really be able to say when peak oil hit a long time after the fact... And nó oil was a fallacy... Also there would be corresponding peaks and troughs in oil and renewables as the price of oil soars, money would be pumped into new oil projects, renewables and energy efficiency... This helps flood energy markets, reducing prices, drying up money supply to new projects.. Which will bounce the price up again...
    Oh and recessions have a big effect on oil demands... As oil prices has a big effect on recessions..

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Options
    #71
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,722 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    server down wrote: »
    Once battery technology gets better ( and there is a huge investment in battery life across industry and universities on that) the way to solve storage problems is to have batteries in peoples houses. With the proper economic sticks and carrots, this could spread faster than you think.

    As per this article, I think that we'll need pumped hydro as well as battery technology. Comments section is quite interesting wrt total lithium resources required, and whether they will be sufficient to meet a massive demand.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #72
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    smacl wrote: »
    As per this article, I think that we'll need pumped hydro as well as battery technology. Comments section is quite interesting wrt total lithium resources required, and whether they will be sufficient to meet a massive demand.

    There are other technologies that will probably supersede lithium, and would have to be there in fact, for distributed storage.

    Bill Joy is looking at alkaline batteries, the issues is number of cycles.


    https://www.wired.com/story/bill-joy-finds-the-jesus-battery/


  • Options
    #73
    server down
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,613 ✭✭✭server down


    Markcheese wrote: »
    Everything I remember from the early 2000s said we'd only really be able to say when peak oil hit a long time after the fact... And nó oil was a fallacy... Also there would be corresponding peaks and troughs in oil and renewables as the price of oil soars, money would be pumped into new oil projects, renewables and energy efficiency... This helps flood energy markets, reducing prices, drying up money supply to new projects.. Which will bounce the price up again...
    Oh and recessions have a big effect on oil demands... As oil prices has a big effect on recessions..

    What is a fallacy? Theres a strange symbol there.


  • Options
    #74
    smacl
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 15,722 Mod ✭✭✭✭smacl


    server down wrote: »
    There are other technologies that will probably supersede lithium, and would have to be there in fact, for distributed storage.

    Bill Joy is looking at alkaline batteries, the issues is number of cycles.


    https://www.wired.com/story/bill-joy-finds-the-jesus-battery/

    It is an interesting area for sure, one issue with batteries is they are currently looking more like a long life consumable than renewable.


  • Options
    #75
    Markcheese
    Registered Users Posts: 8,431 ✭✭✭Markcheese


    server down wrote:
    What is a fallacy? Theres a strange symbol there.


    Sorry, it was supposed to say 'no oil" is a fallacy.. As in there'll always be some oil... It could just be very expensive to pump out of the ground...

    Slava ukraini 🇺🇦



  • Options
    #76
    Sam Kade
    Registered Users Posts: 12,313 ✭✭✭✭Sam Kade


    c_man wrote: »
    I don't know. But as someone who attended college in the early 2000s, I was assured that oil would be most definitely on the downward spiral by now, if not facing outright oil loss. Peak oil was always in 2003 2004 2005 current_year

    We were told that in the mid 70's, there's a lot of it burned since.


  • Options
    #77
    BoatMad
    Registered Users Posts: 13,702 ✭✭✭✭BoatMad


    when I was in college in the late 70s, we're were told, ( over and over)

    No oil by 2000, were all screwed .


    how'd that work out

    and here we are nearly 40 years later , awash with the stuff !, and its still cheaper then bottled water or milk !!!!


  • Options
    #78
    Dr Brown
    Registered Users Posts: 1,283 ✭✭✭Dr Brown


    There is also the Abiogenic oil theory that says oil will never run out.

    This theory gained alot of traction in the USSR.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abiogenic_petroleum_origin


  • Options
    #79
    storker
    Registered Users Posts: 5,645 ✭✭✭storker


    mini_Sapphire wrote: »
    What will we do when the oil runs out?

    I'm sure we'll find something else to rub in.


Advertisement