Jump to content


Photo

Peak Oil~Rising Gas Prices~The Future of The World


  • Please log in to reply
32 replies to this topic

#31 dictatormax84

dictatormax84

    I can't get BoA off my mind!

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 815 posts

Posted 23 November 2005 - 02:28 AM

^ solar power is no doubt clean, but, a solar panel field can only be made at places where sun is suppose to shine throughout the day,i.e. without much cloud cover. thus, very few places in the world could actually built these giant solar panel fields( unlike traditional/nuclear generators where location is not as big as a problem ). another reason , they are just too expensive. this reduce the number of potential user nations, thus rendering it as a back up source of energy instead of becoming the next primary energy source.

#32 legendsofaranna

legendsofaranna

    Wowow! BoA is awesome!

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 462 posts

Posted 23 November 2005 - 01:46 PM

firstly, crops can be grown using organic fertilizers like manure and compost


For large-scale production, crops cannot be grown fast enough using organic fertilizers. Organic farming requires further irrigation and fertile soil. We don't have both because of lack of water and fertile soil/arable land. Although it produces less carbon dioxide compared to fossil fuels, it produces more carbon dioxide compared to other alternatives like wind power. Also, modern agriculture depends totally on fossil fuels. Organic farming belongs to history. Lol, crop rotation. Lastly, composting takes a long time. Decomposition for composting also needs oxygen. Some areas lack oxygen especially in areas where fertilizer run-off produce immense amount of algae which decreases oxygen. But, I still like the idea of composting.

secondly, these biomass are not suppose to come from any present forest.


But the fact is that companies are using present forests. Here is a recent article on newscientist magazine:

Forests paying the price for biofuels

http://www.newscient...=mg18825265.400

It's clear that people ARE using present forests. Furthermore, we lack arable land if you didn't know that already.

thirdly, wood ash will be returned to these planting grounds as fertilizers


True but during the decomposition of wood ash, carbon dioxide gets released to the atmosphere.

irrigation systems should be used whenever possible.


But global amounts of fresh water is already on the decrease.

" Irrigation of farm land also increases the sodium, calcium, and magnesium in the soil. This process steadily concentrates salt in the ground, decreasing productivity for crops that are not salt-tolerant."

http://www.answers.c...pic/arable-land

it provides heat for a variety of industrial processes such as water desalination


Heat produced from uranium is little. Heat energy is only 10% escaped from nuclear energy according to the second law of thermodynamics. Plus, uranium is in limited supply so it won't last forever.

even better fast grown trees are created in the future


And what are those trees called? What method is used to grow trees faster? You said fertilizers won't be used. My guess is you're talking about the genetically modified trees. They have allergies when eaten by other organisms and have hidden environmental effects.

There was very little uranium exploration between 1985 and 2005, so a significant increase in exploration effort could readily double the known economic resources


Why are you so sure there is still more uranium left? Even if more uranium gets discovered, Exploration requires energy and time. Time is what we are short of. We only have a decade left before oil peaks.

if more and more countries in the near future adopt nuclear as thier primary source of energy, the peak of oil production will be pushed further into the future


Actually, that might not be the case. First, it takes more than a decade for develop nuclear energy. Second, more nuclear energy doesn't mean less people will use oil. More nuclear energy will only give consumers more available energy. More available energy means consumers will be more dependent on energy. Rather, the opposite of that should likely happen. More nuclear energy will make peak oil production a little bit earlier. Why? It takes energy to create nuclear energy. The energy needed to mine uranium will most likely come from fossil fuels since it makes up about 90% of all energy production. Oil is more likely to be used since it has the most energy density and most easily transportable. Because more oil is used, peak of oil production will be earlier. You have to understand that technology needs energy. U.S.A. developed the nuclear bomb during World War 2 because they had more oil to develop the weapon. During WW2, U.S.A. was the biggest producer and exporter of oil. Germany and Japan both lacked supplies of oil. Third, nuclear fission technology in other countries can be used to develop nuclear bomb for the preparation of the inevitable World War 3. A resource war. That resource is oil. The team that has the most oil will most likely win. China will have a big role in this war. Nuclear bombs will be used but it might not be used more than 5 times. Consistent use of nuclear bombs will create a nuclear winter. Also, there will be many looting and riots. In case you didn't know, some police joined the looting during the devastation of New Orleans. Information founded in "The Economist" magazine. Fourth, let's not forget I told you uranium will deplete faster than fossil fuels. Fifth, uranium cannot produce fertilizers, pesticides and plasics. 3 things that are produced from oil that we need in our modern society. Sixth, Nuclear fission reactors costs 3 to 5 billion dollars!!! The cost will surely increase once oil peaks.

Projected capacities for nuclear electricity generation is expected to decrease.

http://www.infopleas...a/A0778278.html

Our knowledge of geology is such that we can be confident that identified resources of metal minerals are a small fraction of what is there


First, it is true that we always estimate less resources than what the earth actually contains. Second, it is true that government are overestimating their resources like oil reserves. Third, as we extract more resources, it will be harder to extract more because resources are too deep to extract. Thus, only fossil fuels can provide energy to extract more. Thus, even though there might be more resources, it doesn't mean we can extract all of it.

coal mining technology in near future might just do the trick


Coal produces more carbon dioxide than oil and natural gas. Global warming will surely speed up if large-scale production of coal is to occur.

Second, coal is not as transportable as oil. Coal is 50% to 200% heavier than oil. Oil can be transported through pipelines. Coal cannot. Coal converted into oil requires energy. Energy is what we need to conserve. The machinery used to extract coal is run on oil. Coal will also peak in 25 years if used in large-scale production.

***********

Alternatives are no solution to this. All alternatives makes the peak oil day earlier. If you talk to physicists and engineers, all of them will agree with me. The world currently has more than 700 million internal combustion engines. Honestly, the government wants the peak oil day earlier because the larger the population, the harder the crisis will hit. The government knows that alternatives won't solve the problem or else they would have spent massive amounts of money developing it right now. To save yourself, you may want relocalize but rural areas might not be as safe as urban areas. During the collapse of Rome, rural areas suffered the most. Just to give you an example. To survive, you need 5 things. Positive attitude,health, intelligence, muscles and finally, other humans. Combine those 5 things together and you are more likely to be able to provide your own basic needs thus, you will have a higher chance of survival.

World War 3 has started. It's happening in the Middle East. Soon, it will affect the whole world. A google search on World War 3 will prove my claim. And consider this. You may be drafted to the army to fight for oil. If you're born after 1980, you're more likely to be drafted.

About U.S.A.'s space plan:

Do you know why U.S.A. tried to go to space especially the moon? Earth barely has helium 3 but the moon has lots of it. Helium 3 is used for nuclear fusion. Whoever gets access to helium 3 on the moon gets access to nuclear fusion. Often times, I call nuclear fusion as "free energy" once deployed and successful because the output energy can be used again for more output energy resulting in free energy. Energy is crucial to win the war. That's why the government is spending lots of money on space technology. China wants to go to the moon too. That's why you recently hear China sending those 2 people to space.

And also, they are about to deploy space weapons for World War 3.

About someone mentioning solar-panels:

Virtually all solar panels today are made of silver paste. Silver is what we lack.

One thing I should mention:

Silver is the best conductor of electricity. Copper is the second best conductor. Copper is used only because we lack silver. Of course, most remaining amount of silver and copper is in places highly unstable and unfriendly such as the Soviet Union.

Here is a good picture.

Posted Image

Now you know why there was a "War on Terror".

Anyways, I trust WOCAP more than ASPO so I think peak oil is next year:

http://www.energybulletin.net/147.html


The end of oil is closer than you think

http://www.guardian....1464050,00.html

FINAL EDIT: Everything the thread creater says is true espcially the part that says "Development of alternative energies require fossil fuels.".


Ok. I'm out of here.

Edited by legendsofaranna, 04 December 2005 - 09:12 AM.


#33 justforboa

justforboa

    mmm... BoA's cute

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 65 posts

Posted 12 December 2009 - 02:48 PM

Posted Image
Iwo Jima of the 21st century




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users