Fossil Fuels and a bleak outlook

[Cleef]

Is the DR already feeling the crunch?

Probably more related to other factors on the island, but this is an interesting read—with many supporting facts/research.

[CyaBye3015]

Is the sky also falling?

[Keith R]

Originally Posted by CyaBye3015

Is the sky also falling?

Cya, if you disagree, why not say why? Offer a real critique, criticism, or counterargument. This is issue is wide open to multiple interpretation and debate. But this type of response is childish.

The Moderator

[CyaBye3015]

Originally Posted by Keith R

Cya, if you disagree, why not say why? Offer a real critique, criticism, or counterargument. This is issue is wide open to multiple interpretation and debate. But this type of response is childish.

The Moderator

Keith, I resent the "childish" comment! Perhaps it was sarcastic, but I made that comment as I felt that the post was made from a 'doomsayer' perspective.

I do not for one moment believe that article was balanced or objective! I do however believe that some there are serious issues relative to the depletion of fossil fuels. I also believe that as pressure rises, we as a society will find appropriate solutions.

Joe

[Keith R]

Originally Posted by CyaBye3015

Keith, I resent the "childish" comment! Perhaps it was sarcastic, but I made that comment as I felt that the post was made from a 'doomsayer' perspective.

I do not for one moment believe that article was balanced or objective! I do however believe that some there are serious issues relative to the depletion of fossil fuels. I also believe that as pressure rises, we as a society will find appropriate solutions.

Joe

Joe, you can characterize it as "sarcastic" if you wish. Point is, your first post offerred little to the thread's discussion/debate, your second adds at least something.

What parts of the article do you find misleading or wrong? [I'm not defending the article by any means -- I'll leave that to Cleef, who is quite able to handle himself.] What sort of "appropriate solutions" do you see? Or are you simply hoping "technology" and the "market" will figure something out eventually?

Last, but not least, does a country so totally dependent on imported oil like the DR have the luxury of waiting for such solutions to show up? And at what cost to the Dominican economy [both the wait and the price of switching to the solution(s)]?

Regards,
Keith

[CyaBye3015]

Originally Posted by Keith R

Joe, you can characterize it as "sarcastic" if you wish. Point is, your first post offerred little to the thread's discussion/debate, your second adds at least something.

What parts of the article do you find misleading or wrong? [I'm not defending the article by any means -- I'll leave that to Cleef, who is quite able to handle himself.] What sort of "appropriate solutions" do you see? Or are you simply hoping "technology" and the "market" will figure something out eventually?

Last, but not least, does a country so totally dependent on imported oil like the DR have the luxury of waiting for such solutions to show up? And at what cost to the Dominican economy [both the wait and the price of switching to the solution(s)]?

Regards,
Keith

Keith, I also disagree with your comment that my "first post offered little to the thread's discussion/debate." When I made the reference to "Chicken Little," it was meant to paint a picture in the readers minds! And as we all know, sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words.

As for what parts of the article I find misleading or wrong, I'd be happy to elaborate on that too, I can't do it now as I have other plans, but be assured I'll share my perspective with all.

[Keith R]

Joe, I certainly hope so! It would be nice to spend less time being defensive, and more time being substantive.

[Chris]

Well, if anyone read all the material thoroughly, this quote will be familiar. "I would rather discover a single fact, even a small one, than debate the great issues at length without discovering anything at all." -- Galileo Galilei, c. 1640

I think the single fact is that we all know we're running out of oil. Personally, I don't think we're in for a 'post-industrial stone age'. What has fascinated me in the past number of years, is the level of rank fear and doomsday predicitions in the ranks of scientists in the field, and then the level of suppression of governments, of the real facts.

So, yes, I think as mankind, we could find solutions if we seek out the facts. That is if we stop shooting one another and focus on alternative energy solutions for the future. If we keep shooting one another for the little oil that is left, we won't find solutions. For ourselves personally, we're slowly building up our personal solar capacity. I think we should also buy a horse farm

I should add that for the DR with their dependency on imported fuels, it really could be a catalyst into a different world if they decided to embrace this issue. Imagine, a country starting to change over from fossils fuels to non-fossil means of providing energy.. One can but dream.

[Mirador]

I think we should also buy a horse farm

Actually, this is not as farfetched as it sounds, and may I suggest also donkeys and mules. Up in the foothills of Azua, most campesinos are having a very difficult time fueling their 'motores'. I bet in the near future I'll be seeing many of them returning to their previous means of transportation.

[NotLurking]

Overall the article is one sided. It is far from being objective and I doubt that the author is not playing on people's fears to sell books. In a few occasions the facts are misrepresented. When predicting the fall of the world economy, the author neglects obvious pertinent information.

Fossil fuel will absolutely be depleted (it's a finite resource) but world 'experts' have not reached a consensus of exactly how many years of fossil fuel are left. Certainly there is no agreement that world reserves have reached their peak. For petroleum, (crude oil) '40 years' seem to be the most accepted estimate before reserve are depleted at current rate of consumption (plus about 2% growth in demand??).

The doomsday outlook of the article fails to address other viable fossil alternatives. When crude oil reaches US$100 a barrel, coal liquefaction becomes quite attractive. The coal liquefaction process (pryolisis) will cost about US$75 per barrel to produce and would substitute crude on the existing infrastructure.

In fact today as I type this response, China is not sitting around waiting for the inevitable oil market debacle! The Chinese government will soon have in operation a Coal liquefying plant. The technology is quite robust and is the product of about 20 years of research from the Chinese. The US and other countries have also developed similar coal liquefaction processes but have not yet been implemented.

Why harp on coal so much? Coal is the world's most abundant fossil fuel and most of the world reserves are in USA, Russian and China. Coal will be here after oil reserves have been exhausted and in the places that most use energy.

The article underestimates resources such as Natural Gas but by far the power of the sun has been down played by that website. It is true that harvesting the power of the sun has been nothing more than a curiosity for many but that is really a byproduct of economics. When crude hits US$100 per barrel, 'mining' the sun wont be an oddity but a necessity.

The Dominican Republic is well situated geographically to take full advantage of the sun's power. The DR has about 290-310 sunny days per year. At an average of about 5.5 hours per day of full sun radiation and ~48,000 Km square, the DR receives about 264000 MW per day (5.5h). Using just 1% of that is more than our install electrical capacity. Gearing up to use, say, 5% of that capacity will isolate us from the petroleum downfall.

Many countries are actively searching for a new and cheap ways to take advantage of nature's forces. In Australia, for example, a 200MW Solar chimney (using solar thermal property) might be operational by 2008. In California (USA ) Parabolic Trough solar technology has proven reliable and efficient. I'm sure more capacity will be installed in the USA if oil continues to raise.

New discoveries in solar-electric, solar-thermal and wind power is ongoing. Companies such as Pyron Solar with its new solar cell capable of producing 800 times more power than regular solar cells and Sky WindPower Corp. with their 'flying' wind generators are just two innovative alternatives to fossil fuel.

Why the focus on electricity production from the sun? Well, it surely isn't 'free' as in a free lunch but it sure is free of CO2 emissions! The only cost incurred both in dollars and environment wise is minimal compared to fossil fuel. The zero environmental cost and almost negligible operating cost of solar or wind power generation makes those technologies highly desirable. The 'clean' electricity produced can by used for hydrogen production via electrolysis of water a resource in abundance in DR.

Many advancements have been made in fuel cell technology. There even is a fuel cell that can use hydrogen to supply electricity or separate water into hydrogen and oxygen if operated in reverse - you supply it with electricity. Hydrogen technology still has a way to go but it is getting there an will eventually replace fossil fuel in combustion engines. The only real setback of using hydrogen today is lack of infrastructure and liquefaction of it for transport and storage but these problems should be resolved 'if'/when oil becomes scarce.

The DR is in a very good position to start tackling its fossil fuel dependency today! The current fossil fuel infrastructure is not so entrenched as it is in other more developed nations. The DR sure has an edge it just needs to get with the program and start abandoning/replacing its electricity generation infrastructure for a more environment friendly, less crude oil dependant infrastructure.

NotLurking