The Altera Centauri collection has been brought up to date by Darsnan. It comprises every decent scenario he's been able to find anywhere on the web, going back over 20 years.
25 themes/skins/styles are now available to members. Check the select drop-down at the bottom-left of each page.
Call To Power 2 Cradle 3+ mod in progress: https://apolyton.net/forum/other-games/call-to-power-2/ctp2-creation/9437883-making-cradle-3-fully-compatible-with-the-apolyton-edition
'Peak Oil' is only 5-15 years away according to Oil industry analysts or their critics. Either way, the Peak is inevitable. So what happens when we hit the downward slope?
Well, alternative sources of oil such as coal liquification become economic at $40. Since there i plenty of coal this means that 1) we wont run out of oil 2) an oil price above $40, such as the current $70, is unmaintainable in the long run.
However, if the oil price stays at $40 or above then other forms of power such as solar, wind, coal or nuclear may replace oil in some cases.
Is this process similar to the old manufacture gas progess (which created gas for lamps and such, not gasoline)? IIRC, that was extremely dirty. Not that refineries are eco paradises, mind you, but still. And I'm skeptical about the $40/gallon price tag. If that were so, I would expect there would be much more hubub about it.
I don't understand the derision over the Hubbert Peak theory. We know that oil production is declining in I believe almost all non-mideastern oil reserves. And we don't know that it is not in the mideast, with most of the OPEC countries there refusing to let us verify, and telling us to trust them. And the fact is, we know oil is expendable. So my question is, why doesn't it make sense to prepare for something that we inevitably happen at some point?
"Remember, there's good stuff in American culture, too. It's just that by "good stuff" we mean "attacking the French," and Germany's been doing that for ages now, so, well, where does that leave us?" - Elok
Re: What will we do when the oil starts to run out?
Originally posted by MOBIUS
'Peak Oil' is only 5-15 years away according to Oil industry analysts or their critics. Either way, the Peak is inevitable. So what happens when we hit the downward slope?
WE adapt as we did when we switched from coal. But the changes and adaptation don't come when we hit some magical downward slope of oil. Its a constant process of evolution and experiementation.
The price of oil went up this past year. This made a whole bunch of other oil economic to produce that had not been economic previously ( IF your longer term price assumptions go up as well). It also meant that other energy sources that compete with oil could attract higher prices. So nuclear, hydro-electric, tidal, windpower and yes even coal are being looked at more seriously once again.
We will never "run out " of oil. There will always be some oil that is so hideously expensive to produce that it is never worthwhile. What will happen is that as energy demands on this PLanet continue to increase, other sources must be found/developed/implemented.
Its already happening. Exploration activity is up across the oil patch and all sorts of alternatives are being developed. Higher gasoline prices has made hybrids a hot commodity ( while ironically some of the oil millionaires can now afford their desired SUV or hummer )
So -- peak oil bla bla bla bla
You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo
I wonder if, hundreds of years ago, in Britain someone was saying "what'll we cook with when all the forests are burnt down?"
Jon Miller: MikeH speaks the truth
Jon Miller: MikeH is a shockingly revolting dolt and a masturbatory urine-reeking sideshow freak whose word is as valuable as an aging cow paddy. We've got both kinds
Re: Re: What will we do when the oil starts to run out?
Originally posted by Flubber
WE adapt as we did when we switched from coal. But the changes and adaptation don't come when we hit some magical downward slope of oil. Its a constant process of evolution and experiementation.
The price of oil went up this past year. This made a whole bunch of other oil economic to produce that had not been economic previously ( IF your longer term price assumptions go up as well). It also meant that other energy sources that compete with oil could attract higher prices. So nuclear, hydro-electric, tidal, windpower and yes even coal are being looked at more seriously once again.
We will never "run out " of oil. There will always be some oil that is so hideously expensive to produce that it is never worthwhile. What will happen is that as energy demands on this PLanet continue to increase, other sources must be found/developed/implemented.
Its already happening. Exploration activity is up across the oil patch and all sorts of alternatives are being developed. Higher gasoline prices has made hybrids a hot commodity ( while ironically some of the oil millionaires can now afford their desired SUV or hummer )
So -- peak oil bla bla bla bla
Well said indeed .
I was just reading an article this week in... Time Magazine, perhaps (I'm not sure), where they were discussing how Chinese and Indian companies are doing some oil exploration off the coast of West Africa. The problem, usually, with West Africa is political instability, which, naturally drives the cost up.
If the price of oil goes up, those methods of extraction become less costly, relatively. That's just one example. The BIG motherload is the one presently under the permafrost of Siberia. Russia has probably just as much oil as the entire Middle East. However it is unattainable because it is so expensive to drill through the ice. If oil prices stay high (or rise) and with improvements in technology, that oil will be drilled.
Another example of advancing technology and higher oil prices making a different form of oil extraction economical are the oil shales of Alberta. You CAN squeeze oil from rocks. It is just a bit more expensive than pumping out crude.
And, of course, if oil prices stay high, then other technology will come to the forefront to take over. It's how it is happened throughout history. I always like to point out to the "Peak Oil catastrophe" people (as opposed to those who simply because there will be peak oil, which may cause some discomfort, but nothing serious) that we used to have a "Peak Coal catastrophe" hypothesis floating around.
“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
- John 13:34-35 (NRSV)
Shell's ingenious approach to oil shale is pretty slick
Linda Seebach
When oil prices last touched record highs - actually, after adjusting for inflation we're not there yet, but given the effects of Hurricane Katrina, we probably will be soon - politicians' response was more hype than hope. Oil shale in Colorado! Tar sands in Alberta! OPEC be damned!
Remember the Carter-era Synfuels Corp. debacle? It was a response to the '70s energy shortages, closed down in 1985 after accomplishing essentially nothing at great expense, which is pretty much a description of what usually happens when the government tries to take over something that the private sector can do better. Private actors are, after all, spending their own money.
Since 1981, Shell researchers at the company's division of "unconventional resources" have been spending their own money trying to figure out how to get usable energy out of oil shale. Judging by the presentation the Rocky Mountain News heard this week, they think they've got it.
Shell's method, which it calls "in situ conversion," is simplicity itself in concept but exquisitely ingenious in execution. Terry O'Connor, a vice president for external and regulatory affairs at Shell Exploration and Production, explained how it's done (and they have done it, in several test projects):
Drill shafts into the oil-bearing rock. Drop heaters down the shaft. Cook the rock until the hydrocarbons boil off, the lightest and most desirable first. Collect them.
Please note, you don't have to go looking for oil fields when you're brewing your own.
On one small test plot about 20 feet by 35 feet, on land Shell owns, they started heating the rock in early 2004. "Product" - about one-third natural gas, two-thirds light crude - began to appear in September 2004. They turned the heaters off about a month ago, after harvesting about 1,500 barrels of oil.
While we were trying to do the math, O'Connor told us the answers. Upwards of a million barrels an acre, a billion barrels a square mile. And the oil shale formation in the Green River Basin, most of which is in Colorado, covers more than a thousand square miles - the largest fossil fuel deposits in the world.
Wow.
They don't need subsidies; the process should be commercially feasible with world oil prices at $30 a barrel. The energy balance is favorable; under a conservative life-cycle analysis, it should yield 3.5 units of energy for every 1 unit used in production. The process recovers about 10 times as much oil as mining the rock and crushing and cooking it at the surface, and it's a more desirable grade. Reclamation is easier because the only thing that comes to the surface is the oil you want.
And we've hardly gotten to the really ingenious part yet. While the rock is cooking, at about 650 or 750 degrees Fahrenheit, how do you keep the hydrocarbons from contaminating ground water? Why, you build an ice wall around the whole thing. As O'Connor said, it's counterintuitive.
But ice is impermeable to water. So around the perimeter of the productive site, you drill lots more shafts, only 8 to 12 feet apart, put in piping, and pump refrigerants through it. The water in the ground around the shafts freezes, and eventually forms a 20- to 30-foot ice barrier around the site.
Next you take the water out of the ground inside the ice wall, turn up the heat, and then sit back and harvest the oil until it stops coming in useful quantities. When production drops, it falls off rather quickly.
That's an advantage over ordinary wells, which very gradually get less productive as they age.
Then you pump the water back in. (Well, not necessarily the same water, which has moved on to other uses.) It's hot down there so the water flashes into steam, picking up loose chemicals in the process. Collect the steam, strip the gunk out of it, repeat until the water comes out clean. Then you can turn off the heaters and the chillers and move on to the next plot (even saving one or two of the sides of the ice wall, if you want to be thrifty about it).
Most of the best territory for this astonishing process is on land under the control of the Bureau of Land Management. Shell has applied for a research and development lease on 160 acres of BLM land, which could be approved by February. That project would be on a large enough scale so design of a commercial facility could begin.
The 2005 energy bill altered some provisions of the 1920 Minerals Leasing Act that were a deterrent to large-scale development, and also laid out a 30-month timetable for establishing federal regulations governing commercial leasing.
Shell has been deliberately low-key about their R&D, wanting to avoid the hype, and the disappointment, that surrounded the last oil-shale boom. But O'Connor said the results have been sufficiently encouraging they are gradually getting more open. Starting next week, they will be holding public hearings in northwest Colorado.
“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
- John 13:34-35 (NRSV)
Originally posted by Admiral
. So my question is, why doesn't it make sense to prepare for something that we inevitably happen at some point?
OH we do have to prepare . . . but the fact is that we are preparing. Many believe that OPEC intentionally kept the price of oil moderately low for a number of years because they wanted to avoid the push for alternatives. NOw it appears that OPEC is no longer able to meet all the demands out there and the inevitable price push is fuelling serious looks at many alternative sources of energy.
Yes it is obvious that oil reserves are finite but do you realize how many areas of the world are unexplored or underexplored. Even areas just offshore Canada and the US have large prospective basins where nothing/very little has been done.
So my view is that predicting some crises for 10 years from now is foolish. The stuff we know about can maintain us for that long and there are massive oilsands projects coming onstream so its not that far off to talk about an additional million barrels a day.
Actually, thinking about the day we run out is foolish. Instead what would happen is that over time as oil became scarcer and scarcer, other sources of energy would be utilized more and more.
Today we assume probably at least $30 oil. That triggers a certain number of alternative energy projects and even some conservation. At an assumed $40 price a whole bunch more comes on line and if we start assuming $80-$90 oil, it is probably the case that the windpower or tidal or whatever folks can heat our homes far far far more cheaply (even factoring in conversion costs).
Lets think about $90 oil for a second. Does anyone for a second think that , longer term, there are not other viable energy sources that could be used for home heating and many industrial energy needs? At that price, oil's use as an energy source would be greatly reduced but it may be necessary as part of many plastics, petrochemicals, lubricants etc.
I don't see a crisis at some given point. Instead I see scenarios where the oil gets pricier as less expensive sources get depleted. This triggers a move from oil (in Alberta most folks seem to use natural gas). Sooner or later the price assumptions get to the point where some massive hydro-electric projects get done etc etc and oil may maintain relatively stable prices (at much higher levels than current ones) for years and years.
There are many uses for which oil is currently the easiest and cheapest. There are very few for which there is no possible alternative once oil is much more expensive. And if there are uses where its worthwhile to use oil even if it costs $10,000 a barrel, there may come a time when oil hits that price
* Technical point-- a conventional oil reservoir is never COMPLETELY depletedby conventional wells. Every abandoned Texas oilfield still has some oil down there ( but this stuff is never considered part of reserves), in most cases the remaining oil is more than what was produced. Its just that the cost for additional production is prohibitive and the additional production is marginal. In reality, the only way to produce all the oil might be to did a mine and bring the sandstones to the surface.
You don't get to 300 losses without being a pretty exceptional goaltender.-- Ben Kenobi speaking of Roberto Luongo
Comment