From: ems@Apple.COM (Mike Smith)
Newsgroups: sci.environment,sci.energy
Subject: Re: Running out of oil.
Date: 30 Jul 92 10:39:12 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer Inc., Cupertino, CA

In article <15573@ucdavis.ucdavis.edu> altarrib@eecs.ucdavis.edu (Michael Altarriba) writes:
>In article <1992Jul28.023431.16111@michael.apple.com>, ems@michael.apple.com (E. Michael Smith) writes:
 
>|> We are no closer to any realistic plan because
>|> oil is so cheap that it makes absolutely no sense to do anything other
>|> than burn it, and when it is gone (at no significant increase in costs)
>|> we can use the next cheapest VAST energy source.  (coal or nuke, most
>|> likely, depending on the outcome of global warming, acid rain, and long
>|> term rad waste disposal fights.)
>
>Ah, hold on there. Aren't you ignoring some factors here? For instance:
>
>1) The 'cost' of getting the oil from some reservoir -> gasoline, fuel oil,
>   whatever. Cheap now, but what happens when the oil you want is off the 
>   Florida coast or in the Alaskan wildlife preserve. Can you say "Exxon"?

Why the quotes on cost.  Do you mean non-dollar cost?  I'm just using
dollar cost, since that is what drives markets.

The cost of getting the oil out of the ground and converted to fuel
is included in the cost of the end fuel product.  It doesn't matter to
the cost where it came from, only how much it cost to get it out.

As the cost goes up, due to such things as going to harder to pump
sources, it becomes profitable to use alternative sources of energy.

Coal, nuclear, even ethanol plants have the ability to produce liquid
motor fuel at costs in the $1.50-$4 per gallon of gasoline equivalent
(VERY conservatively stated.  Methanol from coal/natural gas via 
nuclear process heat should come in at about $1/gallon of gasoline equiv!)

This means that when it costs $2/gallon for real gasoline, we will 
start seeing natural gas derived methanol entering the market at 
about $1.50/gallon of gasoline equivalent for use in 'flex fuel' cars.
i.e. the $2/gallon gasoline from expensive oil wells will be non-competitive.

And guess what?  That is what we are seeing. Today.  There are at least
two Methanol fueling stations with signs on local freeways.  The State
of Calif. has a massive methanol fuel program underway (if it ever gets
a budget...) for state vehicles.  VW was scheduled to sell 200 flex
fuel vehicles in California this year.  FORD, GM, Chrysler; they all
have flex fuel vehicles either in testing or development with sales 
to be in the next couple of years (maybe sooner).

So oil that is exceptionally costly will most likely be left in the
ground.  Now if by 'cost' (as opposed to cost) you meant environmental
damage, that is up to the people to comunicate to the government for 
protection of scenic areas.  Raise the cost of those areas and the 'cost'
will take care of itself...

>2) The 'cost' of burning the oil, i.e. air pollution. Surely not negligible.

Havn't said it was negligible.  Many times I've said we will run out
of air before we will run out of oil.  This, BTW, is one of the strong
arguments FOR nukes.  John DeArmond loves to make this one... but
he tends to restrict himself to coal/electric generation.  Why is 
beyond me, since nuclear derived motor fuel is a feasable technology
(both via electric cars and via process heat for alcohol production).

I'd love to see an exposition on clean nuclear motor fuel from John ...
even though I prefer solar/wind/biomass approaches.  My only guess
is that it would require speculation and John doesn't seem to like
speculating about his field of work...

>3) Once the oil "is gone", one has to mine the coal or uranium. More air 
>   pollution, OR nuclear waste. What a great choice. You did mention this
>   above, but (IMVHO) you made it sound like some sort of legislative 
>   detail you'd hire a lawyer to fix.

Sorry for the impression.  I tend to stay money focused and to look
at things in terms of how they really will be handled (rather than
how I WISH they would be handled....).  I've played with some coal.
It is nasty nasty stuff.  Unfortunately, it all comes down to just
money as far as business is concerned.  It is SO cheap that it WILL
be used.  

While it saddens me greatly, the economics of things TODAY
say that the battle for the next energy source will be between coal
and nuclear.  My personal favorites are solar/wind/biomass for 
exactly the environmental reasons you cite.  That doesn't change
the dictates of money, and it is undeniable that coal and nuclear
are DIRT CHEAP sources of energy.  Even if coal is the most dirty
and nuclear the most controversial (justified or not...).

I do think it WILL be treated as 'some sort of legislative detail' a
lawyer will be hired to fix, but not because I want it that way ...

>Granted, technological solutions can be found to ameliorate the negative
>effects of using these resources. But when? How expensive are they? 
>(Rhetorical questions: I'm not looking to start more threads :)

Just remember that there are a host of 'green' technologies that 
become cost effective at the $40-$50/bbl of oil equivalent price...

Euphorbia Lathrysis (sp?) can be farmed on 'waste land' to make
synthetic crude at about $40/bbl.

Biomass conversion to alcohols comes in about that range (less for
some approaches, more for others).

Solar is cost competitive for many more (heating and electrical) uses.

Soyabean oil is about $2.50/gallon (less in bulk) and can be used
directly in diesel engines (I've done it!).

The list goes on.

The only question is:  Can oil prices be stable at above $40/bbl given
how cheap natural gas, coal, and nuclear sources are?

If the answer is no (because one of them is cheaper) the 'green'
solutions stay on the shelf.

IFF the answer is yes will the 'green' solutions enter the market
in any other than specialized or token uses.

Notice that this is about a doubling of crude oil prices.  This implies
that gasoline prices (unless forced up by taxes or other outside forces)
cannot be expected to stay above $2-$3/gallon.  Period.

>|> I AM comfortable & happy, though...  ;-)

>I'm happy for you, but just what percentage of the inhabitants of the 
>planet can say that? 

Not many.  But study ZEN and you can be happy with the IRS too ... ;-)

In reality, I'd guess that about 10% of the worlds population are both
comfortable & happy.  But that belongs in talk.religion or some such.

>To what lengths are you willing to go to support
>your lifestyle? 

To $40/bbl oil.  To a Eucalyptus farm in No. Calif, with a small 
soybean patch and some Euphorbia fields.  Windmill in the back...

The injustices in the world are not the result of overconsumption
of oil in America.  They are mostly the result of the policies of
the governments of the aflicted peoples.  I can't stop the wars
in Africa (mostly between tribes) or Asia (such as in Cambodia)
by taking a vow of poverty, but by building a better way to do 
things I MIGHT help keep some parts of the world afloat...

Fix what you can, leave lay what you can't, and know the difference.
I can't fix Africa, I can try to fix my own life...

>I DO NOT wish to flame, just to point out that each of
>us has an effect on our environment. 

That is why I live in a 1000 sq.ft. house, drive a 12 year old Honda,
save old cloths for Goodwill, etc.  (That and the IRS 8-(  )

>While I can envision a technology
>which could provide for our desires without doing permanent damage to
>our environment, we ain't got it now. Extinct species don't come back, 
>damaged habitats are less able to support life. Some of that life is
>us! Which isn't to say that the rest is unimportant, of course.

Would but that the Almighty Dollar recognized that ... but I'm fairly
certain we will get coal derived methanol before we get Euphorbia juice...

>*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*
>*  Mike Altarriba                                           /(o\            *
>*  Solid State Circuits Research Laboratory                 \o)/            *
>*  University of California, Davis               altarrib@eecs.ucdavis.edu  *
>*---------------------------------------------------------------------------*

Say Hello to Davis for me, I'm an Alumnus ...

-- 

E. Michael Smith  ...!sun!apple!ems

'If you can dream it, you can do it'  Walt Disney

This is the obligatory disclaimer of everything. (Including but
not limited to: typos, spelling, diction, logic, and nuclear war)
Xref: sparky sci.environment:10159 sci.electronics:13438 rec.autos.tech:10238