Bush's Energy Comment

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » February 21, 2006, 6:22 am

"Our nation is on the threshold of new energy technology that I think will startle the American people," Bush said. "We're on the edge of some amazing breakthroughs - breakthroughs all aimed at enhancing our national security and our economic security and the quality of life of the folks who live here in the United States."

What does Bush know that we don't? It's very possible that a defense department contractor has discovered something that hasn't been revealed. It's easier to keep secrets than you think. They did a great job early on with Stealth Technology.

On the other hand, he might be full of shit.

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » February 21, 2006, 8:34 am

Have they discovered a way to harvest bureaucratic bullshit and make cars run on it?

Now there's something that the world will never run out of.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » February 21, 2006, 10:34 am

Now they've finally realised oil won't last forever they're gonna unwrap the alternate energy solutions that Big Oil has suppressed for the last 30 years.

Obvious really.

cadalano · Post by **cadalano** » February 21, 2006, 10:55 am

There's a crapload of energy technologies in the works. I dont think he has an ace up his sleeve though or we wouldnt be paying for so much development into alternative energy programs. I personally think theres three that will actually make a significant entrance onto the scene.. Hydrogen, ethanol, and biodiesel. Honestly though, these technologies will help, but there isnt an option available yet that will be able to replace petroleum based fuels. Hydrogen doesnt really make any sense to me. The cars cost hundreds of thousands of dollars to make right now and you are basically moving from a foreign limited resource to a local one; natural gas. But it is still the favorite alternative in development. Ethanol is already mixed in small quantities on the consumer market, but we'll see engines that can accept mixtures of gasoline composed mostly of ethanol. Biodiesel makes the most sense to me in terms of production, which uses organic oils as its base. The problem with Ethanol and Biodiesel is that we will never be able to grow enough crops to completely satisfy our needs unless the technology is developed to be much more efficient. The nice thing about Ethanol and Biodiesel is that we can introduce them as mixtures of petroleum and organic fuels and they are truly renewable and clean resources.

Whatever happens, it will be very gradual.

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » February 21, 2006, 11:22 am

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10776681/

Mind you it's shameless Honda Hype

Animale · Post by **Animale** » February 21, 2006, 11:33 am

As a scientist in the field... he is full of bullshit. The leading solar energy folks say "we hope fusion solves it first, because we're so far away." The leading fusion folks say "we hope solar solves it first, because we're so far away." As for ethanol, biofuel, hydrogen, etc... those are unfortunately only short term fixes.

We need to be able to directly turn solar energy into a usable fuel and not only electricity and/or we need to be able to use fusion with net power gain under reasonable conditions. The only way to get to either of these goals is to get a large number of scientists thinking about the problem.

We'll see if the money comes to do this now, or when it becomes a big enough problem environmentally that even the most jaded of people can see that we need to work it out.

Animale

cadalano · Post by **cadalano** » February 21, 2006, 11:46 am

What about nuclear power? Is it underutilized? Seems that improved electricity production would be a good solution, as we already have an infrastructure in place. Any idea?

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » February 21, 2006, 11:47 am

Bush talking about a mysterious, secret solution to a resource crisis gives me a bad case of the jibblies in a Soylent Green sort of way.

Sendarie · Post by **Sendarie** » February 21, 2006, 12:02 pm

I thought Hydrogen was still a non-option?

Something about it taking a lot more coal to produce the hydrogen than the coal itself was worth in terms of energy.

Like X volume of coal produced Y amount of hydrogen. But the X amount of coal was worth 6-7 times as much energy as the Y amount of hydrogen.

Hydrogen is cleaner by itself but it causes much more pollution and expenditure of natural resources to refine and collect into a useable source.

Hell at least the big man is publicly talking about it. That if nothing else puts it in the spotlight and maybe we'll get somewhere. It wont be enough...it never is but its better than nothing.

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » February 21, 2006, 12:33 pm

just wait for the oil companies and the president's staff to issue PR statements discounting this latest comment like they did about his energy comments from the State of the Union.

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » February 21, 2006, 12:37 pm

Sendarie wrote:I thought Hydrogen was still a non-option?

Something about it taking a lot more coal to produce the hydrogen than the coal itself was worth in terms of energy.

Like X volume of coal produced Y amount of hydrogen. But the X amount of coal was worth 6-7 times as much energy as the Y amount of hydrogen.

Hydrogen is cleaner by itself but it causes much more pollution and expenditure of natural resources to refine and collect into a useable source.

Hell at least the big man is publicly talking about it. That if nothing else puts it in the spotlight and maybe we'll get somewhere. It wont be enough...it never is but its better than nothing.

You can get hydrogen from natural gas

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » February 21, 2006, 1:00 pm

they are probably waiting to unveil a new type of refined oil that burns faster and costs more.

51% of all americans will embrace this new fuel.

cadalano · Post by **cadalano** » February 21, 2006, 1:02 pm

You can get hydrogen from natural gas

And it takes energy to do that, which we primarily get from burning coal.

Hydrogen power is a FORM of energy, not a source. Take this home generator thing for instance.. yeah it can power a home. But what powers the generator? Either electricity that was probably created by burning a fossil fuel, or by burning the natural gas itself at the generator to create power that collects hydrogen from the gas as well. Its a lateral move

A lot of the hype from hydrogen power is because people want to look at the chicken instead of the egg. To move into a hydrogen economy we would really need to look at how we generate the nation's power. Not what ends up in our gas tanks.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » February 21, 2006, 1:16 pm

Generating hydrogen from seawater using nuclear power was one option I'd seen. It's not renewable but is very long lasting.

Supposedly it takes more non-renewable energy to build a nuke plant than you'd save using one. That's from anti-nuke groups, no clue if it's in any way realistic.

Making hydrogen from any petro-chemical would dumb from many aspects.

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » February 21, 2006, 1:21 pm

Bush talking about a mysterious, secret solution to a resource crisis gives me a bad case of the jibblies in a Soylent Green sort of way

They're going to harness the power of prayer!

Not really.

Anyway the comments reminded me more of Hitler's April 1945 speeches about how his "secret weapons" were about to be unveiled and win the war.

Yes I'm invoking Godwin's.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » February 21, 2006, 1:41 pm

Niffoni wrote:Bush talking about a mysterious, secret solution to a resource crisis gives me a bad case of the jibblies in a Soylent Green sort of way.

Haha Niffoni

I guess this is just the sort of overly dramatic type of remark Bush usually makes whilst trying to come across as some sort of true visionary when in reality we all know pretty much everything he's about to promise has been being developed publicly for the last 50 years whilst, as Tanc rightfully points out, being stifled by the Oil companies.

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » February 21, 2006, 2:31 pm

Bush said he looked ahead to the day when solar panels are built into roofing materials, providing protection from the elements as well as electricity, and houses can send to the electrical grid the power they create but do not use.

"We want solar power to be competitive by 2015," Bush said.

Hrmmmmm, sounds like what we have been hoping for since the 70's energy crisis?...

Perhaps W has been receiving more intelligence from his WMD sources about scientific "breakthroughs?"....And those silly journals like Science have just totally missed the obvious...

This idiot is still trying to blow sunshine up our collective asses...Sorry W my sphincter is closed...

cadalano · Post by **cadalano** » February 21, 2006, 2:55 pm

Well thats actually done in many places now, not sure if you were saying that its impossible to do that.. or just impractical. I'm saying it is possible, no clue if its practical or not.

Solar Panels are usually used for heating up water or some shit in residences since its too expensive to store power in your house. Some solar panels these days can hook into a power grid and actually allow you to 'sell' your power back to the company, which is required by the state to 'purchase' it. It basically rolls back your power meter.

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » February 21, 2006, 3:15 pm

cadalano wrote:Well thats actually done in many places now, not sure if you were saying that its impossible to do that.. or just impractical. I'm saying it is possible, no clue if its practical or not.

Solar Panels are usually used for heating up water or some shit in residences since its too expensive to store power in your house. Some solar panels these days can hook into a power grid and actually allow you to 'sell' your power back to the company, which is required by the state to 'purchase' it. It basically rolls back your power meter.

Yes, it has been done since the 70's, hell they did that on a "This Old House" episode...Bush is looking forward to it still...So W's science advisors are some 30 years behind Bob Villa's...

Reckon there is a reason we aren't all doing it?

Midnyte_Ragebringer · February 21, 2006, 3:33 pm

kyoukan wrote:they are probably waiting to unveil a new type of refined oil that burns faster and costs more.

51% of all americans will embrace this new fuel.

lol....good one

Truant · Post by **Truant** » February 21, 2006, 3:38 pm

The equipment itself and installation on your house is very expensive.
My parents actually looked into when they built their new house...but the cost was just too much.

I remember seeing a story or a report just in the last month or so about the unveiling of a new type of panel. It was cheaper to produce, but slightly less effecient. However, much more flexible with regards to where it could be applied. Things like, in place of window glass and whatnot.

edit, i forgot to quote and/or address my post. Sorry Misters Arb and Box

cadalano · Post by **cadalano** » February 21, 2006, 4:10 pm

here's that window tint crap:

http://www.veeshanvault.org/forums/view ... hp?t=16910

its been a pretty popular stock too

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » February 21, 2006, 4:21 pm

Truant wrote:The equipment itself and installation on your house is very expensive.
My parents actually looked into when they built their new house...but the cost was just too much.

I remember seeing a story or a report just in the last month or so about the unveiling of a new type of panel. It was cheaper to produce, but slightly less effecient. However, much more flexible with regards to where it could be applied. Things like, in place of window glass and whatnot.

edit, i forgot to quote and/or address my post. Sorry Misters Arb and Box

Yup yup I'm not saying that no progress has been made...but that's evolutionary change (the sort that science can be relied upon to produce). Science cannot be relied upon to produce revolutionary change on demand...Science is incremental we see "revolutions" on the order of once a generation...

And by the way those new cheaper more versatile solar cells are sandwiched in guess what?...an oil based polymer... +1/-1 at best...

Our real dependence on oil has very little to do with energy production...It is about materials...Look at all the nice little plastic products in polyethylene packages next time you hit a walmart...Ask yourself where those end up by and large...

Sendarie · Post by **Sendarie** » February 21, 2006, 4:34 pm

kyoukan wrote:they are probably waiting to unveil a new type of refined oil that burns faster and costs more.

51% of all americans will embrace this new fuel.

Says the country that produces more barrels per day of oil than:
Kuwait
United Arab Emirates
Iraq
Qatar

Gotta pay for all those lovely health care perks somehow huh?

Thats what? 90k barrels per day per person vs the US 20k per day per person.

Hell kooky that plan sounds like the golden goose for Canada.
Nice suggestion.

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » February 21, 2006, 4:54 pm

You...

wait..

No. You're not seriously...

Hold on, I think maybe this might help.

Kuwait: 17,818 km²
Canada: 9,984,670 km²

Alright, so that's wiki, so i guess it COULD be off, theoretically by a few million, but...

I know it's Kyou, and reason and perspecive aren't exactly paramount in such discussions, but holy tapdancing hell...

And before anyone accuses me of just jumping to defend Canada, I'd like to remind everyone that as of a few years ago, Canada uses more oil (per capita, at least) than the U.S., primarily due to winter heating. This may have changed recently, but even so, Canada has no business invoking the "you evil gas-guzzlers!" bull. But for heaven's sake, have a little perspective.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » February 21, 2006, 4:58 pm

Truant wrote:The equipment itself and installation on your house is very expensive.
My parents actually looked into when they built their new house...but the cost was just too much.

I priced solar a couple years ago, the break even point for me was at 8-10 years assuming nothing major broke and we had "normal" weather. That was with enough capacity to feed back during most of the day and draw off the grid at night. With repairs, maintenance and such it just wasn't worth the bother, over the course of time you pretty much just hope to break even.

Cutting off from the grid entirely drove the price through the roof.

Truant · Post by **Truant** » February 21, 2006, 5:01 pm

Ahh, I see now what you are saying. And I'll even agree. Advancement has been a slow going process in that area.

They either have to improve the manufacturing of what's presently available to make it practical, or come up with something new that is more efficient than what is presently available to be more practical!
(I had to put it in dummy terms so i could understand)
Neither have really happened, and as you said...the technology has been available for quite some time.

Anyways, back semi on topic...I would be interested to see the statistics as to how we use our oil. How much of it is actually 'wasted' on packaging and throw away consumer goods that could be eliminated, etc.

cadalano · Post by **cadalano** » February 21, 2006, 6:17 pm

Bush has unveiled today that the US has unlocked the secrets of MICROWAVE POWER. Here's how it works

Solar Rays are collected from the 'Earth Freedom Liberty Nucular I' satellite and beamed down to earth into a massive dish pictured here:

The new technology is not without its drawbacks, government scientists have predicted that an 'accidental misfire' could potentially level political centers that oppose the Bush administration. Here is an artists rendition of one such leveling:

At a press release earlier this afternoon, President Bush had this to say about the groundbreaking new technology, "Mu... MUWHAH... MUUWWHAHAHAAHAHAHAA"

Truant · Post by **Truant** » February 21, 2006, 6:25 pm

lol I love the sim series

Voronwë · Post by **Voronwë** » February 21, 2006, 8:06 pm

seriously, dont build your house next to that thing

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » February 21, 2006, 9:49 pm

Sendarie wrote:Says the country that produces more barrels per day of oil than:
Kuwait
United Arab Emirates
Iraq
Qatar

Gotta pay for all those lovely health care perks somehow huh?

Do you think I live in Saudi Arabia?

Metanis · Post by **Metanis** » February 21, 2006, 9:58 pm

kyoukan wrote:
Sendarie wrote:Says the country that produces more barrels per day of oil than:
Kuwait
United Arab Emirates
Iraq
Qatar

Gotta pay for all those lovely health care perks somehow huh?
Do you think I live in Saudi Arabia?

I think he was was commenting on the potential economic windfall to Canada should your sarcastic comment be taken seriously.

But that's just my opinion. (Yes, we know all about opionions... and you're the lady of thousands of them.)

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » February 22, 2006, 4:59 am

Everyone is overlooking an excellent source of fuel that's been around since the 80's: Energon Cubes.

miir · Post by **miir** » February 22, 2006, 1:01 pm

The second result in a Google Image Search for Energon Cubes was this disturbing photo.

[hide]

[/hide]

Better?

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » February 22, 2006, 1:05 pm

Damn Miir....some employers (like mine) don't differentiate between a topless man or woman when it comes to what NOT to have on your screen at work.

Jice Virago · Post by **Jice Virago** » February 22, 2006, 2:24 pm

The kicker is that the real issue with running out of oil is not going to be the energy issue, but the plastics issue. We can find other sources of energy, but so many industries are dependant on plastics that when oil peaks out its going to affect every single corner of the market. Even if the greedy fucking oil companies had not supressed fuel efficient technologies, we would still be having issues with our enourmous use of plastic materials derived from oil.

Chmee · Post by **Chmee** » February 22, 2006, 3:03 pm

The idea that the oil companies have successfully suppressed alternative energy or fuel efficient technology to a degree that is actually of any significance regarding the overall technological base of the planet is more irrational than the whole "the government blew up the two towers" thread in the general forum.

Tangurena · Post by **Tangurena** » February 23, 2006, 1:54 am

You can get hydrogen from natural gas

Most natural gas is vented and burned at the wellhead (flared off). If Canada piped natural gas down to the US, it would help. Canada is looking at piping that natural gas down to the tar sands to cook the shale to release oil, which could then be used in refineries that were designed and built for "sour" oil. "Sour" crude has high sulphur content, and can corrode piping that isn't designed for it. "Sweet" crude has very low sulphur content. Refineries processing sour crude stink stink stink.

The idea that the oil companies have successfully suppressed alternative energy or fuel efficient technology to a degree that is actually of any significance regarding the overall technological base of the planet is more irrational than...

Hey, they bought up all the solar power panel companies and let them rot, or liquidated them during the oil bust in the 80s. Arco was the last US oil company owning solar panel manufacturing in the US, and they sold their solar cell division to BP.

Hydrogen is wildly impractical. Imagine a fuel that leaks out of your tank. So if you filled up the tank, parked the car, came back in 3 weeks and saw that it was totally empty: the fuel molecules leaked out between the molecules of the tank. What? You say that can't be? Have you never got a helium balloon, and watched it slowly deflate over the period of several days? Liar!

Skogen · Post by **Skogen** » March 3, 2006, 5:12 pm

Jice Virago wrote:The kicker is that the real issue with running out of oil is not going to be the energy issue, but the plastics issue. We can find other sources of energy, but so many industries are dependant on plastics that when oil peaks out its going to affect every single corner of the market. Even if the greedy fucking oil companies had not supressed fuel efficient technologies, we would still be having issues with our enourmous use of plastic materials derived from oil.

Yep...oil is too valuable to burn. One day in the future, your kids will be telling there grandkids about how we used to burn oil, and they will be dumbfounded.
Plastics are in pretty much everything. If the costs of plastics skyrockets, guess what happens to everything they are used in?

Aslanna · Post by **Aslanna** » March 3, 2006, 5:25 pm

Chmee wrote:The idea that the oil companies have successfully suppressed alternative energy or fuel efficient technology to a degree that is actually of any significance regarding the overall technological base of the planet is more irrational than the whole "the government blew up the two towers" thread in the general forum.

Yeah but that thread rocked the house.

Niffoni · Post by **Niffoni** » March 3, 2006, 6:23 pm

Aslanna wrote: Yeah but that thread rocked the house.

I thought it rocked the boat?

OMG, did you say house?? I thought it was a boat!! WHICH IS IT ASLANNA? What are you hiding from the American people?? Could it be... A HOUSEBOAT??

Wulfran · Post by **Wulfran** » March 3, 2006, 8:23 pm

Tangurena wrote:Most natural gas is vented and burned at the wellhead (flared off). If Canada piped natural gas down to the US, it would help. Canada is looking at piping that natural gas down to the tar sands to cook the shale to release oil, which could then be used in refineries that were designed and built for "sour" oil. "Sour" crude has high sulphur content, and can corrode piping that isn't designed for it. "Sweet" crude has very low sulphur content. Refineries processing sour crude stink stink stink.

Did you get this out of a 1940s paper on oil and gas production because its not even close to accurate...

Most natural gas is NOT flared off in Canada. As a matter of fact that practice is prohibited by regulatory agencies except in extraordinary conditions for a couple reasons:
- the price of natural gas has outpaced oil in price increases in the past 10 years and is a lucrative market
- natural gas production associated with oil production is often re-injected into the producing formation to maintain the reservoir pressure and ultimately lead to a higher recovery rate of oil in place
- in recent years countries have frowned on the C02 and other emissions released in flaring

I have heard that some of the large offshore platforms in the middle east/Africa flare it, simply because they don't have the facilities (or inclination) to re-inject it and no where to ship it to but that is not true in North America.