HUGE breaktrough for unlimited supply of energy

[Bunty]

There are many energy problems that I hope the new GE energy research center will be working in collaboration with OU to find solutions for.

When the boom of oil and NG is over we should do everything we can to have fall back positions in place for our state’s economy. Some would be partly based on new and improved methods of production and energy use. But let’s use this current oil boom to partly fund our states efforts.

We already have one of the best energy saving manufactures in our state. ClimateMaster produces state of the art water- source and Geothermal Systems that are probably the very best in the world right now. I own one………OSU has done good research in this area…


Though research and manufacturing Oklahoma can become a world leader in high tech energy.
We can transform our state’s economy making our self’s more prosperous with sensible state investments in our university’s and with incentives for the right corporations.

Then the Republicans should quite cutting state income taxes, so more money will be available for education into the future.

[Plutonic Panda]

then the republicans should quite cutting state income taxes, so more money will be available for education into the future.

this

[venture]

Then the Republicans should quite cutting state income taxes, so more money will be available for education into the future.

But but but...they gotta get re-elected! Who cares if they dig us into a deeper down the road when they are out of office. They already collected all the kickbacks from special interest and are well retired by then.

I think we are still a couple generations away from changing the mindset of Oil/Gas being the holy grail. I also wouldn't put it past some areas to increase investment in new energy technologies, like fusion, to help speed the process along as safely as possible. The best thing that can help for the nation's economy will be a quick departure from fossil fuels. Special interests in Oklahoma, Texas, and other oil rich areas are going to fight it as long as they can.

While I agree the translation to the automobile is going to be tough, I don't think we need to look at cold fusion as the savior there. That is where improve battery technology is going to come into play that allows for fast charge ups and the improvement of distance and performance. If we can get the travel distance range on batteries up to 500 miles, it would be huge. Couple this with the developments towards build in wireless recharging and you remove the need for a lot of gas powered vehicles. Of course the cost deployment becomes an issue, which is why the work needs to go into extend the range of battery powered vehicles first. Then utilize the wireless charging tech on interstates initially - especially in stretches between cities where there isn't much.

This would probably translate into most interstates becoming toll roads, but you are essentially just shifting the revenue stream from gasoline taxes to tolls to pay for electricity being used. So at the end of the day we are transitioned to a system of where you are paying for what you use. Of course this means that local streets and non-powered highways would need a different source of funding. Though I'm sure something could be worked out that makes sense.

[ou48A]

Then the Republicans should quite cutting state income taxes, so more money will be available for education into the future.

That’s the wrong way too look at it. We should grow our incomes so we can pay more taxes.

But to do that we would need to do things like reform workers comp, root out wasteful state spending and there is still a lot of that and provide greater incentives for high end jobs.

[ou48A]

But but but...they gotta get re-elected! Who cares if they dig us into a deeper down the road when they are out of office. They already collected all the kickbacks from special interest and are well retired by then.

For many decades this state was dominated by democrats. Our state resedents were tired of being poor, it was time for a change so the state finally passed term limits mostly because of years of DEM corruption and lack of self-policing. Even most normal democrats were discussed by the Gean Stipes of our state.
I’m sure it’s not perfect but our states government is less corrupt now than it’s ever been in the States modern history.

[venture]

For many decades this state was dominated by democrats. Our state resedents were tired of being poor, it was time for a change so the state finally passed term limits mostly because of years of DEM corruption and lack of self-policing. Even most normal democrats were discussed by the Gean Stipes of our state.
I’m sure it’s not perfect but our states government is less corrupt now than it’s ever been in the States modern history.

I'm glad you completely disregarded the rest of the post and focused on the tongue-in-cheek remark at the start. Let's get away from the politics and discuss the energy alternatives.

[ou48A]

I'm glad you completely disregarded the rest of the post and focused on the tongue-in-cheek remark at the start. Let's get away from the politics and discuss the energy alternatives.

Then tell that to bunty too!

[venture]

Then tell that to bunty too!

He hasn't spent nearly as much time as you have so far in this thread. Agreed, Bunty should have stayed on topic too. Yet his was one post, one line...you've gone above and beyond that. Anyways. You are normally on top of any energy discussion, especially if it impacts your beloved Oil and Gas friends, so would really like to see your thoughts on the recent posts.

[ou48A]

. You are normally on top of any energy discussion, especially if it impacts your beloved Oil and Gas friends, so would really like to see your thoughts on the recent posts.

I have long known that high oil prices cause serious economic problems. Unless you want bad thing for our nation high energy prices doesn’t make any economic common sense what so ever.…. Since high energy prices lowers our standards of living anyone wanting high energy prices is extremely stupid, particularly since we still import much of our transportation fuel adding to our national trade deficit.



Please consider and then remember what this economist says.

“This is University of California, San Diego, economist James Hamilton noted in a recent study that 10 out of 11 post-World War II recessions in the United States were preceded by a sharp increase in the price of crude petroleum. The only exception was the mild recession of 1960-61 for which there was no preceding rise in oil prices”


Oil Price Shocks and the Recession of 2011? - Reason.com.

The price of oil and to a lesser extent other energy’s controls the world’s economic well-being. We must know that and remember that in making our decisions. But we also must remember that for now nothing can replace crude oil and NG based on affordability and scale.

If and when some cheap abundant energy source comes along that can be used to fuel vehicles I’m all for it, even if it displaces oil products and NG liquids. Why ,because just like other energy advancements of the past it will advance the health and well-being of man…. That’s called prosperity in my book.

This is where I hope the new GE center working with OU can make a real deference. We have a huge opportunity before us and unlike anything we have ever seen in our state before.

I will invest accordingly regardless of how it impacts my Oil & NG friend. But sleep well, I’m sure many of them will too since they are in the business of energy.

[venture]

I have long known that high oil prices cause serious economic problems. Unless you want bad thing for our nation high energy prices doesn’t make any economic common sense what so ever.…. Since high energy prices lowers our standards of living anyone wanting high energy prices is extremely stupid, particularly since we still import much of our transportation fuel adding to our national trade deficit.



Please consider and then remember what this economist says.

“This is University of California, San Diego, economist James Hamilton noted in a recent study that 10 out of 11 post-World War II recessions in the United States were preceded by a sharp increase in the price of crude petroleum. The only exception was the mild recession of 1960-61 for which there was no preceding rise in oil prices”


Oil Price Shocks and the Recession of 2011? - Reason.com.

The price of oil and to a lesser extent other energy’s controls the world’s economic well-being. We must know that and remember that in making our decisions. But we also must remember that for now nothing can replace crude oil and NG based on affordability and scale.

If and when some cheap abundant energy source comes along that can be used to fuel vehicles I’m all for it, even if it displaces oil products and NG liquids. Why ,because just like other energy advancements of the past it will advance the health and well-being of man…. That’s called prosperity in my book.

This is where I hope the new GE center working with OU can make a real deference. We have a huge opportunity before us and unlike anything we have ever seen in our state before.

I will invest accordingly regardless of how it impacts my Oil & NG friend. But sleep well, I’m sure many of them will too since they are in the business of energy.

But wasn't NG suppose the new vast, cheap energy source that we suddenly had tons of? Then when the prices started dropping too low, due to too much production, the companies scaled back to get prices to go back up. So I don't really get the defense of the Oil and Gas industry when they are more than capable of brings prices down, but they choose not to. I don't even want to touch on energy independence, but that come into play here as well. We could be that way today if we really wanted to, but we export so much that it's not going to happen.

Of course the Oil and Gas folks will sleep well tonight - record profits tend to do that.

Now how about commenting on the possibilities of fusion and better battery technology, like I had mentioned, as a way to get costs back down. That would be a good thing wouldn't it? Eliminate a lot of the smaller cars and trucks, at least, from using CNG or Oil products and that would raise the supply available and logically lower prices for the larger vehicles (trains, trucks, etc). So shouldn't we be full steam ahead to eliminate the use of gasoline in vehicles to reduce the demand on that portion of the energy sector?

[ou48A]

But wasn't NG suppose the new vast, cheap energy source that we suddenly had tons of? Then when the prices started dropping too low, due to too much production, the companies scaled back to get prices to go back up. So I don't really get the defense of the Oil and Gas industry when they are more than capable of brings prices down, but they choose not to. I don't even want to touch on energy independence, but that come into play here as well. We could be that way today if we really wanted to, but we export so much that it's not going to happen.

Of course the Oil and Gas folks will sleep well tonight - record profits tend to do that.

Now how about commenting on the possibilities of fusion and better battery technology, like I had mentioned, as a way to get costs back down. That would be a good thing wouldn't it? Eliminate a lot of the smaller cars and trucks, at least, from using CNG or Oil products and that would raise the supply available and logically lower prices for the larger vehicles (trains, trucks, etc). So shouldn't we be full steam ahead to eliminate the use of gasoline in vehicles to reduce the demand on that portion of the energy sector?

They didn’t directly scale back to get prices back up, they scaled back because they were losing money. Wouldn’t you stop doing something if you were loosing your rear end on it….?

If you or anyone else thinks that all the oil and gas companies have record profits then you simply don’t know very much about the industry. Besides it’s about profit margin anyway. Even in their best years most of the big major integrated oil & NG Co. don’t have profit margins that are out of line with other industries. There are other large companies who have higher profit margins.

NG is still cheap and we have lot of it that we could use for transportation… If this White House and congress could ever work together on this issue NG could start making a bigger difference in transportation... but NG was never going to be a full replacement for gasoline, but it can still help.

In the big picture the price of cude oil still controlled by OPEC and there production quota system and not the oil corporations. Saudi Arabia is the only country with significant spare capacity. The USA has huge oil & NG reserves that our government has put off limits. So if you want energy independence and lower than other wise prices, there it is.

In the next few months there will huge amounts of new oil production becoming available on the world markets. In addition the USA will grow its production by much smaller amounts.

But we don’t export any crude oil except for Alaskan crude due to cost considerations.

[Snowman]

“This is University of California, San Diego, economist James Hamilton noted in a recent study that 10 out of 11 post-World War II recessions in the United States were preceded by a sharp increase in the price of crude petroleum. The only exception was the mild recession of 1960-61 for which there was no preceding rise in oil prices”

One issues have with this statement is that the housing bubble had far more to do with the packaging of toxic assets into what had been previously been though to be safe loans, I do not doubt that oil prices were leading it's crash. Was the dot com bubble included in this as well?

It is one thing to say there are links but correlation does not equal causation, especially in something that has a general trend up due to demand and spikes by things like wars or other items.

[zookeeper]

They didn’t directly scale back to get prices back up, they scaled back because they were losing money. Wouldn’t you stop doing something if you were loosing your rear end on it….?

If you or anyone else thinks that all the oil and gas companies have record profits then you simply don’t know very much about the industry. Besides it’s about profit margin anyway. Even in their best years most of the big major integrated oil & NG Co. don’t have profit margins that are out of line with other industries. There are other large companies who have higher profit margins.

NG is still cheap and we have lot of it that we could use for transportation… If this White House and congress could ever work together on this issue NG could start making a bigger difference in transportation... but NG was never going to be a full replacement for gasoline, but it can still help.

In the big picture the price of cude oil still controlled by OPEC and there production quota system and not the oil corporations. Saudi Arabia is the only country with significant spare capacity. The USA has huge oil & NG reserves that our government has put off limits. So if you want energy independence and lower than other wise prices, there it is.

In the next few months there will huge amounts of new oil production becoming available on the world markets. In addition the USA will grow its production by much smaller amounts.

But we don’t export any crude oil except for Alaskan crude due to cost considerations.

Damn right. And for good reasons too, some people actually care about our one and only planet.

[ou48A]

Damn right. And for good reasons too, some people actually care about our one and only planet.

It’s ridiculously stupid and short sighted to be poorer than you need to be!

Poor people in poor societies have always cared less about how and what they pollute.
Poor societies don’t solve problems, like our energy problem.

The actions of our Government have made people poorer and the USA has the largest energy reserves of energy of any nation on earth. We will probably be the very last to run out.

[ou48A]

One issues have with this statement is that the housing bubble had far more to do with the packaging of toxic assets into what had been previously been though to be safe loans, I do not doubt that oil prices were leading it's crash. Was the dot com bubble included in this as well?

It is one thing to say there are links but correlation does not equal causation, especially in something that has a general trend up due to demand and spikes by things like wars or other items.

In 1999 the average crude oil price was $16.56
In 2000 the average crude oil price was $27.39
This represents a tremendous percentage crude increase in one years’ time.
The dot com bubble popped in part because consumers had less disposable income due to higher gasoline / energy prices.


I was on a live by inventation only conference call last week where the chief analyzed said that for every 10 cent decline in the price of gasoline that it directly puts one billion dollars into the hands of consumers every 2 weeks. Think what a dollar does in either direction in a years’ time.


In 2007 the average price for crude oil was $64.20
In 2008 the average price for crude oil was $91.48.
This is also a very big percentage increase that caused consumers to have a lower ability to pay back loans. Granted there were other problems with the economy but most of the crude oil price increases happened well before the housing bubble popped.

In 2009 the average price for Crude oil was $53.48
So far in 2013 (Partial) the average price for crude oil has been $87.13.
It should not be surprising that we are seeing signs of a slowing world and national economy.

I have seen this work pretty much like clockwork too many times. There are variables involved but it can clearly and easily be seen that rising oil prices causes harm to the economy and that anything that causes crude to go higher doesn’t help the national or world economy.
Responsible policies can make a pretty big difference in the real price of crude.


Historical Oil Prices: InflationData.com

[ou48A]

What exactly makes us poor right now? We have the cheapest oil in the world.

That’s not even remotely true…. Unfortunately.

[ou48A]

Comparatively. If you look at the nations with lower oil and gasoline, you can't really make the comparison.

I guess I taking a look at how big of nation we are, more developed, regulations, etc. I've been to Kuwait. You can walk across that country in an afternoon. It hardly costs much to get oil out of the ground and put in the pump compared to what we have to do here. When you factor all of that, we're doing just fine IMHO.

The notion that we should quickly drill everything we've got to lower prices makes very little sense to me. Remember when Oklahoma was completely covered in wells? A few people did really well but how exactly did the rest of the state benefit beyond a couple generations? It was a flash in the pan.

No, responsible energy policy is exactly what we need. Keep drilling enough to keep things from getting silly expensive, but keep pressure on finding and building alternatives. If we do that, people from 100 years from now will benefit far far more than if we did the alternative.

If we continue to drill our domestic reserves at current rates it’s still going to take 20, 30, 40, 50 years with current methods to infill just the known locations. Then there are the areas that are currently off limits because of government controls that the American public will eventually demand be produced. Then we still have gigantic deposit of oil shale that are currently unprofitable but are the largest reserves of oil in the world. This shouldn’t be look at as a flash in the pan, but prices will make it look that way at times when they decline by large amounts.

The cheapest oil that I know of in large amounts is in Saudi Arabia where the last I knew cost about $6 a barrel to produce. Much of our new oil production cost in the $ 60 range to produce. They are actually using a lot more oil in parts of the Middle East to manufacture value added products.

It would be nice if the industry is able to” keep drilling enough to keep things from getting silly expensive” but just as in the past future prices will determine drilling rates.

I’m all for the building of alternatives, just as long as they are cost competitive. But thus far except for NG with its limits, we really haven’t seen a practical alternative to gasoline in the US market.

[venture]

I’m all for the building of alternatives, just as long as they are cost competitive. But thus far except for NG with its limits, we really haven’t seen a practical alternative to gasoline in the US market.

That's what continued research, like fusion, need to continue at full steam with max amount of funding and intellectual power. Solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear fission also need to keep getting investments to further their development. Oil is really just the band-aid at this point getting us by until we can cut the cord. NG has promises of being a good replacement for oil when it comes to vehicle fuel, but we really haven't see a major push to get mass amounts of cars converted over. The technology is there, CNG is cheaper, why aren't we mass converting (or just outright having all new builds as CNG instead of gas/diesel) today? Yes there is a lot of infrastructure that would need to be built out, but we have the ability to go independent from middle east oil today if we really wanted.

The AFFORDABLE oil will eventually be gone. Granted most (if not all) of the people who are the biggest supporters of Oil will be long dead by the time it becomes an issue. I'll just chalk this up to another example of kicking the can down the road and let the next couple generations worry about it.

[BoulderSooner]

we have enough oil to last for well more than 100 years ..

[ou48A]

If you pretend that no one in the world will have kids.

Even with kids, BoulderSooner is very correct and then some.
The world will run out of food before it runs out of crude oil.

[venture]

we have enough oil to last for well more than 100 years ..

Even with kids, BoulderSooner is very correct and then some.
The world will run out of food before it runs out of crude oil.

Perfect example of "we'll be dead, who cares?"

[ou48A]

That's what continued research, like fusion, need to continue at full steam with max amount of funding and intellectual power. Solar, wind, hydro, and nuclear fission also need to keep getting investments to further their development. Oil is really just the band-aid at this point getting us by until we can cut the cord. NG has promises of being a good replacement for oil when it comes to vehicle fuel, but we really haven't see a major push to get mass amounts of cars converted over. The technology is there, CNG is cheaper, why aren't we mass converting (or just outright having all new builds as CNG instead of gas/diesel) today? Yes there is a lot of infrastructure that would need to be built out, but we have the ability to go independent from middle east oil today if we really wanted.

The AFFORDABLE oil will eventually be gone. Granted most (if not all) of the people who are the biggest supporters of Oil will be long dead by the time it becomes an issue. I'll just chalk this up to another example of kicking the can down the road and let the next couple generations worry about it.

Research needs to continue but we shouldn’t be wasting money on alternatives just for the sake of spending money like we did with the solar companies. Virtually all of the current alternatives cost more per unit of energy than do fossil fuels.
Oil is a “Band-Aid” that has served mankind well for over 100 years and will continue to be the band aid for a very long time in our future.
It should be noted that even in the 1910’s there were predictions that man was going to run out of oil by the late 1920’s. We have heard this repeated over and over.
These dire predictions rarely take into account new discoverers and new methods of production that with research are sure to come.
Hydrocarbon research has already bought us plenty of time to find the right alternatives.

[BoulderSooner]

If you pretend that no one in the world will have kids.

the reality is we likely have enough fossil fuels for a 1000+ years ..

[ou48A]

Perfect example of "we'll be dead, who cares?"

That’s not true.
Its 2 examples of people who are educated enough about the topic to not fall for the fear that some sell.

[BrettM2]

the reality is we likely have enough fossil fuels for a 1000+ years ..

What kind of data do you have that supports this statement? You make a lot of one-or-two line statements and very rarely provide anything to support it. I'd just like to see what you have that backs up the kind of claim I've never seen before.