Please don't believe what my view is of "Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil" just read reviews on the book at least both pro's and con's you'll find this book is very reliable based on it's recorded evidence. You'll be looking at statistics by a man who for the time being is the Godfather of 9/11 research.
funniest thing i ever heard on the news, a defendant of the oils companies when the gas prices started to rise tried to explain how they werent actually making any more money (while the reports were 10Billion a quarter). her argument was the cost was going up to make it. and when the costs go up the profits go up naturally without raising the prices ridiculously to make more money. hmmm wish that happened when my bills got higher
Liberals lie about the war. They claim the military budget is a subsidy for oil. They say you have to roll in the cost of war into the "true cost of oil". Thats BS. We dont pay for war at the pump. We pay for it in TAXES. They are not the same. Oil alternatives will put soldiers out of work and make them feel their efforts were for nothing. Lets not bend over for alternatives. Lets TAKE OVER for oil.
Arguments here stemming from just this video and fuzzy memory and the little ALL OF YOU HERE know which may seem like so much or enough is just a fraction of all that's not being considered by anyone on this page but to help all who read this so as to avoid "SOPHIST" arguments and reach a conclusion with more soundness please read >> Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil
Liberals lie about "efficiency" and "alternatives". We should outlaw fuel economy laws to help the economy and show support for our troops. They fight so we can drive big SUVs and not stupid hybrids. We need to take over the world because they wont give it to us willingly. Plug in hybrids will hurt jobs. Solar funds the liberal agenda.
First of all, fuel cells and hydrogen are NOT an energy source, they are an energy transferring mechanism (with enormous potential, lest you forget). Second, a compressed tank of hydrogen isn't really any more dangerous than gasoline. Third, you left out wind and solar power from your stunning alternative fuel analysis.
I just hope this video is filled with irony, especially about the positive aspects of political instability in the Middle East. Considering the way you seem to think about all the other things you talk about, I find it hard to believe that you actually believe it.
What I like is that the middle east theory you told is indeed happening. Lebanon is at war against palestinians extremist groups. Turkey is bombing Iraq. And Israel is at war with everyone.
If we could invade canada then we could spread the bible to those heathenous liberals and make them take down theyre art and solar panels and make them see the word of God for what it is and no more homosex and womens rights crap. God made man to take over not bend over.
Well that aint gonn happen, so we will continue to have offensive art and to not "see the word of god" and to allow gays to marry and even force churches to preform the cerimonies. If you wanna run your country your way fine then, and we will run things our way. peace out
Electric is the wave of the future. You hear about that female scientist who made a battery out of viruses? It works better than lithium ion batteries. Not sure about costs of ownership, but it's completely emission-free. No NO2 or CO2 or anything.
Its funny how rich canada is and low a profile we try to keep .. bragging like yanks is no fun !!! but quietly having EASILY THE BEST STANDARD OF LIFE ON EARTH IS F*CKING PRICELESS...
So should we invade Canada? I would support its annexation. Survival of the fittest and all that. There is nothing Europe or Canada could do to stop us. Heck the NYPD could probably take over Canada by themselves.
like seriously, are you guys that pro war that your answer for every problem is invade, bomb, kill innocent ppl.Ithought americans are suppose to be good people.If this is really how you people think, then your no better than the terrorists or nazis
You tried in 1775 and it was a humiliating defeat. You tried in 1812 ("The invasion of Canada is a mere matter of marching": Thomas Jefferson.) and your country went nearly bankrupt, New England almost seceded and Washington was burned to the ground.
the canadian oil sands won't make us energy independent. the process of extracting the oil from the sands consumes enourmous amounts of fresh water and natural gas. why even have a society that is car based? why not have a society where everything is within walking distance
I would normally not respond to something as juvenile as this but it does a great disservice to people who are looking for a more meaningful understanding of energy issues. Your analysis of "tar sands" is completely inaccurate and it is irresponsible of you, as you take on the roll of public informer to present information you clearly havn't researched.
Exactly and this retarded half-wit is trying to defend invading countries for oil in light-hearted "I make sense" type of manner. This guy is a shill, every video I see of his he is either lying or very ignorant. By his logic of subsidies are "evil", what is the Iraq war for oil but a subsidy for big oil corporations? And then he advocates taht they can make all the profit they want at our expense! Not to mention we are talking about the death of thousands of Americans and far more Iraqis.
So your in favour of killing over one hundred thousand Iraqis and 3000 Americans just to fuel your SUV. Your a small minded pathetic scumbag. And we subsidize the war w/ our tax dollars. Remember that you worthless piece of shit. Maybe the "ragheads" will get thier hands on you and do some beheading. Fuckin useless loser.
If I had my way, the oil war would be ended. So long as we keep killing people for oil, they will keep attacking us.
Our government would rather sacrifice our constitutional rights to make themselves feel secure from the terrorists they created, than to end the conflicts with the middle east, and end their highly profitable oil wars, outright. Iraq War violates Article VI Clause II of the U.S. Constitution.
Those within our government have committed treason.
You are so very wrong. Canada does not have nearly what you claim and it is oilsands which to refine uses a ton of energy itself. Look into the new GM car which produce no emmissions. Hydrogen is stabilized fool, this is 1930's Hindenburg. GM is planning mass production for 2010. And this will be very good for the economy. And guess what by invading Iraq and spending over $100 billion a year there, we are SUBSIDIZING the oil companies. GM check it out.
If a fuel cell were mass produced, the costs of the fuel cell stack would be over $300 per peak horsepower. This doesn't include the motor, inverter, batteries, or chassis. A mass produced fuel cell car with about 80 horsepower for 0-60 mph in 15 seconds would end up costing $50,000+. Making hydrogen requires electricity. A fuel cell car is essentially a less efficient, more expensive, reduced range, reduced performance electric car.
Fuel cells are a shell game. FreedomCAR is government pork.
No, GM has just pioneered a new efficient and cheaper technology that operates on par with gas fueled cars. I just watched a news report on it. Right now it is expensive but by 2010 they will be mass producing, especially in China where new infrastructure can be built around it. The only difficulty is the fueling stations taht need to be built. In the long run though it would save massive amounts of money and help GM to rebound. Check it out, go to GM website.
Right on killer, we up in Canada are using our irreplaceable natural gas to make the heat required to process the tar sands. Enough to provide for a city of 3 million. Even optimistic assessments of its expansion talk about 5 million barrels a day, which would be only one fifth of America's daily needs, oh, sorry, desires. As our American liberal friends point out, all other counties on the planet without oil tax the hell out of it and don't allow people to drive SUVs.
I guess your cute little college isn't up to speed on the peak oil issue, or maybe it's because the government doesn't want you to know the economy will be failing soon since once the average dumbass knows this it will set off the collapse.
There's an estimated 300 billion recoverable barrels of oil in the sands. America alone goes through 85 million barrels daily. If America could have all that oil for itself we're talking about an estimated 10 year supply. It's an estimated 3 year supply for the world economy. Why don't you be like Mr. Pregnant and make a fool of yourself without spreading ignorance about important issues?
before americans sit back and complain about how much they pay for gas in the USA, they need to compare prices to othe rplaces around the world. i live in germany which in the ranking is the 7th highest priced gas country in the world (With Amsterdam being in spot #1) and here they pay 75% of one litre's price , not gallon but litre to tax. I think americans don't look outside the box enough to know how lucky they are.
I hate you liberals. Europe pays so much for gas because most of it is TAXES you idiot! If we did that everybody would be driving dangerous hybrids and dangerous public transportation! Trains KILL people you idiot! Bicicles KILL people you retard! Cars are safe and keep you in a safety cage dumb ass! Bigger is better! Ask any woman that moron!
Ever hear of "externalities", and how they are dealt with by subsidization and taxation? Your simplistic laissez-faire description of market forces shows you never progressed beyond high school "supply and demand curves" and studied at Naive-Limbaugh-U.
And last but not least - I hear all the hoopla about this being a war for oil and money. I heard a phrase once that sums up my thoughts on this ideology - "Where the fuck is the money? And where the fuck is the oil?". Honestly, our standard of living is extremely high. Irregardless of what companis bring in money based due to the events in Iraq, all that money goes back into our domestic economic infrastructure.
Second - I work for a telecommunications provider which is just now turning 6 years old. Exxon-Mobile posted earnings of 10B last quarter, but in that same quarter my employer posted earnings of 8.5B. WHat I am getting at is that a good portion of the reason oil is such a big topic is that the media has determined it should be so. And the public has swollowed it hook line and sinker. Ever see anyone debating about their cell phone bill on The O'Reilly Factor?
First - I lived over seas a fear years back. Even NOW gas prices per gallon here in the states are LESS than what I paid per litre while living abroad. And that was 8 years ago. Essentially, if you drive a V-8 and complain that your monthly gas expenditure is to high, get a part time job.
Thats for a barrel of crude, you need to factor in the cost of changing it into gas, as well as transportation and so on. ALL of this needs to come out of the gas-buyers pocket.
Another thing - Europeans are already paying top dollar for gas.. 6-8 dollars a gallon for them... And Americans complain when we have to pay 3 XD.
I have to comment on this as a person who lives in Alberta. Nice shout out by the way :)
I'm a free-market loving, conservative who agrees with most of what you said, except I have to point out that oil in the Alberta oilsands is already very economically feasible. It costs roughly 14-17 dollars to get a barrel out of the ground, while the price of oil sits far higher than that.
To the person who said that oil in Alberta will become prohibitively expensive, they are quite simply wrong, unless oil dips below around 14-17 dollars a barrel. Not gonna happen.
Not to mention we're getting raped up the ass in Alberta because our royalty structure is insanely low. In fact, the lowest in the world. We could double, triple, quadruple, hell, even increase our royalty rates by 10 times and oil companies wouldn't leave.
It might also be worth adding that with todays technology only about 10-15% of the oil sands is even extractable (yes yes, I know that will change but your comment about the oil sands talked about todays ability)
That aint even close to a thousand years. And that's assuming we can get 100% of the oil in place. Currently 'good' recovery rates from conventional oil sources is 40-60% of the total oil in the ground.
The problem with the oil supply doesnt lie with how much is in the ground, it has to do with how fast we can get it out of the ground.
Err, the oil sands will last us a thousand years? That's news to me.
The oil in place in the athabasca oil sands is around 1,700-2,500 billion barrels(wikipedia). Heck, that's a lot right? Well, we(the world) consume 30 billion barrels per year 2,500/30 = 83 years if I did that math right.
Only there's no way we would be able to consume it that fast. Tar sand/shale oil would last us 1,000 years because if we extract it as fast as we can, it will not replace more than about 5% of current oil use. We will completely destroy the environment if we extract tar sand/shale oil to its geological limit.
Dead on. It is a completely innefficient, ridiculously expensive and very dirty fuel to refine. To me it makes no sense to rely so heavily on it. We have to look at what Arnold Schwarzenegger is doing in Cali and in a bipartisan manner. I would vote for him for president without a doubt. Efficiency is the first step. If we develope energy resources it would mean massive economic growth in the long run too.
As far as the oil sands in Alberta...soon they'll realize cleaning those sands are too cost inefficient. His company has already taken measures to prepare for this by directing their services in other related areas (i.e. drilling for fresh water). My husband and I wish there was 1000 years of oil left...the money's good but he's already starting to look for another job! So everyone get their bikes out of that garage!
Hey dude, my husband saw this video and said you are wrong. He is a field engineer for a major oil drilling company and he's responsible for overseeing the drilling procedures to hydrocarbon reservoirs. He says that we'll run out of sweet sweet texas tea in less than 1000 years. Almost all reservoirs in the Gulf have been tapped and are estimated to only produce for another 25 years. The rest of the world is still open for drilling but the Gulf is one of the main comtributers.
You are wrong on oil pricing. Oil is a commodity and we should not be paying a higher price becuase of speculation. Not only that, as you point out it is the best way for us to operate. We are a road driven vehicle dependent country. Either we raise the minimum wage or stop the price gouging. Why not both?
I can think of one aiternative fuel and it won't blow your car up or caues it to run like crap in the morning, fry grease, I'm sure that you're aware that it can be used to power cars in much the same way as gas would, without the smell from the rear of your car that is.
The only reason that's a viable alternative *right now* is because you can take the stuff off the hands of fast-food restaurants for cheap or free. They're giving it away. The second they realize that there's money to be made... poof. It's no longer cheap.
Further, the U.S. disposes about 3 billion gallons of used fryer oil per year. The amount of diesel consumed in the U.S. for transportation is about 40 billion gallons a year!
Fryer oil can make a dent, but it won't be a huge amount and it certainly won't be able to allow everyone with a diesel automobile to end their oil use.
True Mr. Terrorist, and right now most people who use fryer oil in their diesel vehicles are getting it for free. As the guys on mythbusters said if there were actual competition for it the people who now freely dispose of it would start to think about making a buck from it.
Also, I like the alternative fuel sources because of the cleaner emissions they produce. I live near Chicago so the air quality index is 1 here (1 being the worst in a 1 to 100), so it would be nice to have nice clean air like in the country to breath. I have noticed a difference.
High pressure tanks, when pierced, tend to just go flying like a rocket and not exploding. Also, I am of the belief that these will just hold water (from the last thing I read about it) which will then be introduced to platinum which will blow the particle in half and thus you get your hydrogen. Meh, what do I know, I just felt like posting.
ive decided that your my favorite you tube user....omg i just looked up and saw this
blfriesen said this:
"uhhhhh...yeah...i'll believe your opinion about peak oil. what are your credentials again?"
'i put in the global warming video that it seems like all liberals say this. this quote says that im right. but anyway u are now my favorite youtube user. the things u say spark questions in my mind
He really has that much faith in libertarianism? WOw. He is naive. Lets risk a little bit of insecurity in the Middle East. noooo , that won't stur up any resentment that will eventually bite us in the ass. Any forget about morality altogether..
What happened to it? Auto industry, oil industry, and federal government pooled their resources to make sure you didn't have it as an affordable option. Electric motors have no maintenance and last over 500,000 miles with no repairs; gas cars require thousands of dollars in maintenance and last ~150,000 miles. Electrics don't use oil derived fuels; 40% of America's oil use is for auto fuel. Electric car drivers don't pay gas taxes either. 200-300 miles range at highway speeds is doable today.
And 92.345% of all statistics are made up. I don't mean any personal insult by this, but have you ever used anything with an electric motor? Think... a run/walk treadmill. The things break down all the time. And electricity doesn't come from nothing. It's generated using... oil/gas/nuclear... and to a VERY small degree in the US... other energy sources.
Have I used anything with an electric motor? Indeed yes. Often. I'm a few months away from an electrical engineering degree and am also in the process of building my own electric car for both commute and racing. I personally know individuals with electric cars that have been using the same electric motor in their car for decades, without ever having made repairs on it yet and have made about 2 or 3 brush changes(Takes about 10 minutes and $15, needed every 150,000 miles).
Only 3% of electricity in the U.S. comes from oil. ~50% from cheap, plentiful, domestic coal, ~20% from domestic, plentiful nuclear, ~16% from domestic natural gas. Even from dirty sources of electricity like coal, an electric car still has an environmental benefit over a gas car.
Of note, even with battery replacement, an electric car has a major economic advantage over a gas one due to cheap electricity and no need for powertrain maintenance.
electric cars require energy... which is generated using... coal, gas, nuclear and to a very very very small degree in the US solar/wind/geothermal/tidal power.
However, an electric car well to wheels uses less than half the energy per mile than a comparable gasoline car, and even if it gets its electricity from coal, the pollution produced per mile from an electric car is greatly reduced over a gas car.
Coal, natual gas, nuclear are all domestic sources of energy, many of them plentiful. Best of all, electric cars can be run on renewables.
What is the total efficiency of gasoline powered cars to electric powered? That is the joules used to travel a mile. Considering the mining/pumping/distribution/engine or electric generators.
What about the infrastructure to distribute the electricity if it were to replace gasoline. As a first order guess we would have to generate and distribute more electricity equivalent to the energy of the gasoline we now use. This is one of the problems hydrogen power is facing.
Oil refining/distribution is ~80% efficient. In typical use, Otto Cycle internal combustion engine for a car ~12% efficient; approaches 25% eff @ full load & low RPM. .8*.12 = 9.6% eff well to wheels for gas car. Coal plant ~40% eff, transmission lines 92% eff, charger/battery combined ~75% eff, electric drive ~85% efficient. 25% eff well to wheels for electric car. Electric uses 1/3 energy of gas one. Doesn't factor oil wars, exploration, drilling, cleanup of environment(eg. Exxon Valdez spill)
We generate enough electricity to power tens of millions of electric cars in the US today. According to CIA World Fact Book, US consumes 3.7*10^12 kWh/year. Ford Crown Victoria-size electric car or RAV4-size small SUV with no special attention to aerodynamics will use .4 kWh/mile from outlet. Typical car sees 12,000 mi/year; 220 million cars in US. Switch all cars to electric is ~29% more electricity consumption. Off peak hours, where most charging will be done, > 40% of capacity is unused.
I think it's great that people like you are really looking into what actual benefit these alternative fuels might provide, if any, to try to sort out what would actually work to improve our energy situation.
I don't think that's the issue, though. The real problem we face is finding something that IS actually cleaner and IS actually feasable on a large scale, not bickering about currently existing alternatives that really are just a load of crap anyway.
pretty much...driving faster consumes more oil, which in turn raises the price of oil, which in turn prices it out of the market... or at least on par with other forms of energy which were previously too expensive. The free-market is a wonderful thing.
i was of course pulling a metaphor,one that fitted more than i intended;)
going over it agin i see that the free market doesn't solve problems for anything but itself.....expensive oil makes alternatives more attractive,but it doesent solve the problem that life becomes more expensive/less comfy if enrgy is more expensive or the numerous technical problems(limited farmland,extraction ect.) of the alternatives.follwing the money means waste and low sustainability,esp. if it's an basic resource.
;o) i know. I was being a little facetious. lol. I do think that it's a basic resource... but if it's too expensive then people will use less of it. granted this may do bad things for the economy... but if transportation and the like are NEEDED then other methods will be found.
I recognized that information was, in many respects, like a public good, and it was this insight that made it clear to me that it was unlikely that the private market would provide efficient resource allocations whenever information was endogenous.
~ Joseph E. Stiglitz
Progress lies not in enhancing what is, but in advancing toward what will be.
It is not because the truth is too difficult to see that we make mistakes... we make mistakes because the easiest and most comfortable course for us is to seek insight where it accords with our emotions - especially selfish ones.
~ Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Ages when custom is unsettled are necessarily ages of prophecy. The moralist cannot teach what is revealed; he must reveal what can be taught. He has to seek insight rather than to preach.
open your mind to reality, quit thinking you've got more insight than the rest of the world. you remind me of how a friend of mine thought back when he was 13. it's not an admirable quality.
A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight and understanding.
I didn't say that I was for the war... or against it. I just said that those whole idea that a 'war for oil' is a 'bad thing' is just silly. A war that is truly for oil (not necessarily this one) is a spectacularly valid war. It's just as necessary for our survival as a nation as clean water and food.
A war for oil is a very bad thing when 120,000 civilians have died for it, our constitution has been violated for it(See Article VI, Clause II, then the Uniting for Peace Charter the U.S. agreed to adhere to post WWII), our budget has been overspent for it, 2,600 men and women in uniform have so far died for it. Worse yet, we have alternatives that work but have been fought by this very government to keep our money flowing to it and the businesses that bought it. There's a word for that: treason
Biodiesel is not that frikkin' hard to make, people. A hick in my state (Oklahoma), who is also a high school student, makes it in his garage for his truck. Wise up.
inuyasha, hemp is a lovely source for biodiesel. EROEI > 2, needs no pesticide inputs and very little fertilizer inputs, yields ~300 gallons/hectare per harvest, biodiesel can be made from hemp oil for the equivalent of $.60/gal.
But our overbloated government refuses to let it be grown. You can thank lobbyists for the oil, petrochemical, wood paper, steel, and other industries for that from back in the 1920s.
I didn't really pay attention to you, because I'am drinking, and you talked wayyyyyyy tooooo fast to hold my attention spam right now in my life, but you are cute, so you got 5 stars!!
I agree a bit with you, paying for some shit it dumb compared to gas... its the profits from companies, not the source... but we wouldnt wanna pay alot to muslims... I also understand you other fuel analysis... and now I am starting to get to the catch of the video, and missed it if it was there... companies have ways for infinite energy for cheap... they bought others out long ago, and wont release it anytime soon
oil shmoil! just use KY, it's a lot easier to clean out of your butt. jeez, why are we even debating this? oil is the worst lubricant i can think of. other than cement with broken glass and acid in it... actually... i'll be right back.
if you think theyre reinvesting it all in exploration, you probably still beileve in santa and the tooth fairy too; because that's how naive you would have to be.
do you know who Troy Hurtubise is?, and why he was silenced & his family received death threats & visits from varios middle east interests?
oil co.s are FAR from potato farmers. most american farms (which werent destroyed by factory farming) barely break even. exxon-mobil makes more $ in 10 seconds than the avg american family makes ALL YEAR.
Has anyone hear including utnow consulted a peer-reviewed (not a bought) scientist who develop their work around greenhouse gas emissions? Sure, make your case about oil regarding money. Perhaps you should think beyond economics...
The problem is that Exxon has used unethical tactics in the past to become a monopoly. There was an oil company out of texas that was trying to compete with exxon. But exxon kept bringing them to court for one reason or another. As a result, the company went bankrupt. A real free market would allow a competitor to sprout up against exxon, without the worry of frivolous lawsuits.
I have read that we can make coal from oil for about $20-$25 a barrel that sure as hell is a lot cheaper than what we are getting now. The only bad thing is it puts out 2x as much co2 but global warming is bullshit anyways so who cares. The co2 can be collected and shot down oil shaft to push more oil out in oil wales so you can do other things than let co2 out into the enviroment.
Willyswear, forget making oil from coal and running cars off of gas made by oil. Better to just make electricity with it to charge a battery car. You'll get much more miles out of a lump of coal with an electric car.
Why don't we make our fuel out of coal. Montana has more coal energy than Saudi Arabia has oil. The technology is from the 1920's the nazis got all there fuel from the Fischer-Tropsch method of making fuel from coal. The South Africans made their fuel from coal during apartheid when the world was boycotting them.
I do agree with you for the most part. The thing is though, that there isn't enough competition in terms of oil prices, as a result of all the major companies and their whole collusion shtick. People are still more than willing to buy at the higher prices though, albeit with more complaints, because we like, need it ye know.
i'll agree... kinda... with the lack of competition. There still is ALOT of competition at the pump, yet the stations are working on very low margins because their input is priced so high. Even still, all it takes are two suppliers to provide competition. As far as the price... it's worth what it's worth. If we'll pay for it, then it's priced fairly. :D
First off, I believe water is a regulated resource. If oil is a resource on the same plane as water, then shouldn't it also be regulated? It would be outrageous to think if by your understanding of the "free market" economy, that companies can charge whatever price they want for water... then I suppose only the rich will survive because they can afford it. The truth is, (and you're right on this point), EVERYONE needs oil.
But companies CAN charge whatever price they want for water! If they charge too much, folks will go to another supplier that charges less, but makes more money because they're selling more water. That's the way it works! The only reason many municipal water suppliers are regulated is because they're owned by the GOVERNMENT! It's GOVERNMENT that needs regulation, not the free market!
And also... you didn't address the pooling issue. In a COMPLETELY free market economy, then I suppose companies can also collaborate and raise prices at a standard (same as opec). FORUNTATELY, we do have government regulations so our prices stay down, otherwise there would be a whole lot of Opecs in the United States. This of course can only apply to essential goods like oil/water. Nonesstentials don't count because they're luxuries.
No! In a true free-market economy, collusion is ILLEGAL! That's why we have government -- to protect individuals against those (including large corporations) who would try to use force against us. Collusion is a form of force, and is thus illegal. Doesn't matter if the companies are fixing the prices of "essential" or "non-essential" goods -- collusion is always illegal in a true free-market economy. That's not regulation, it's simply law-enforcement.
how would you enforce and control such a thing?they won't be stupid enough to wirte this suff down(anymore).potato farmer 1 meets off road with potato farmer 2:"hey,i have to sell my potatoes at xx$ to make some profit,don't sell yours cheaper,even if you could, and we can both make more winnings"handshake,a suitcase of candy and gone....oil is a NEEDED resurce,wich means you can't just stop buying it if you don't like the price.we're addicts;)
Are you then implying regulation is simply a government standard imposed on companies, such as the filtering of our water or the refinement of oil? And that we have no need for such standards? I live in a place where we only have one water company. If the company feels it has no obligations to the people, I guess we're all pretty much screwed. (either live with the high prices and dirty water, or die.)
However, people don't have such a large degree of choices for oil like they do for water, LMacNeill. Oil choices are in the same few companies. Much of their profit margins are lined by subsidies courtesy of Joe Taxpayer. The oil industry never has to pay for the personal and property damage caused by the pollution it puts out. That's no free market, that's a rigged market. A real free market would keep consumers, employees, and those affected by business decisions in the decision making process
oh well, its human nature to complain on things and especially if your not on top of the food web.. thats just normal to civilized educated smart people.. what i do not understand is why we invest much in arguements like this instead to focusing our energy to the more simple and basic yet most important thing, like for me, love for self, others and God. i guess these dilemmas are inherent to human evolution/ commercialization.
Oh, my fucking god! I did not think it was possible that there existed another person on the planet who is sane. Energy and capitalism rock, and you have made my day!
Not sarcasm. Attempt for just one moment to imagine your life without either energy [beyond stick fires] or capitalism [beyond trading pebbles for fish]. Is it paradise? If so, I suggest you move to the bush-man paradise.
instability in the middle east wont cause exporting costs to rise a whole lot. and saying war in the middle east is good for america so it's a good thing is pretty selfish :/. also american oil dependancy polutes and causes global warming, wether or not it will run out or not is pretty irrelevant as we would have to resort to alternative fuels long before it eventually would run out.
Well for one i'd have to say the as of right now the alt fuel cars cost more, and are less efficient because it's a new technology. Over time they can become a cheaper/efficient.
With that said, how do you think we get corn into fuel? It talks a large ammount of energy. And if you've never been to one of those plants they smell like burnt ass. Anyway it takes power to cause the reaction takes corn(or sugar) into a fuel. That produces a by product into the air.
It doesn't take power, it takes yeast. Living, breathing, single-celled organisms that convert the sugars in the corn into ethanol. Folks have been using yeast for MILLENIA to do that very thing, then drinking the results. No extra power required. And the chief by-product that's released into the air? CARBON DIOXIDE! You won't hear the enviro-weenies complain about that, though, because it's a "good" source of CO2. (And how would you know what burnt ass smells like, anyway? <GRIN>)
well,you need power to grow(seed,water) and harvest the stuff,maybe even transport it.depending on the tempeatures at the production site you need to cool or heat your mash to keep it in uesful conditions,then you need to (vacuum)distill the max 25% ethanol out of the fermentation product.CO2 by fermentation would be CO2-neutral,but there is the possibility of CFC like substances occuring by rapid fermentation.so there is quite some energy need in this process.
gaunt006, electric cars would be cost competitive with gas ones if mass produced. Electric cars use about 1/2 the energy of gas cars on a well to wheels basis, so 1000 btus of coal will take an electric car twice as far as 1000 btus of oil will take a comparable gas car. Electrics can do 200-300 miles range and go fast today.
Corn ethanol isn't efficient at all, but sugarcane ethanol is. But lobbyists support corn ethanol while sugarcane is tariffed.
Get a haircut or do something to not have it in your face all the time. I like arguing out loud with a computer screen of your comments. It's fun. This video was particularly interesting. Keep up the controversy.
Cop-out guilt-trip argument. If you think the war is such a bad idea why don't you totally abstain from using oil and quit killing soldiers. I'd wager that you couldn't do it if you wanted to.
Look man, I don't owe you any justifications for what I do, and don't dare accuse me of killing anybody. It's low lives like you that get soldiers killed by manipulating them into thinking that this is the righteous path to a better country. When you put your own ass out there for the sake of the oil that you claim is so vital then you won't hear a peep out of me when you say this war is just.
And I'll return your cop-out guilt-trip response for a straight answer when you're ready.
lol. so you accuse me of getting soldiers killed... while using electricity to do so and giving them a reason to keep going out there so you can wage your battles online. 'grats.
340th comment!
sleffawoge 4 years ago
Please don't believe what my view is of "Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil" just read reviews on the book at least both pro's and con's you'll find this book is very reliable based on it's recorded evidence. You'll be looking at statistics by a man who for the time being is the Godfather of 9/11 research.
monolithsapphire 4 years ago
funniest thing i ever heard on the news, a defendant of the oils companies when the gas prices started to rise tried to explain how they werent actually making any more money (while the reports were 10Billion a quarter). her argument was the cost was going up to make it. and when the costs go up the profits go up naturally without raising the prices ridiculously to make more money. hmmm wish that happened when my bills got higher
bustin75 4 years ago
Liberals lie about the war. They claim the military budget is a subsidy for oil. They say you have to roll in the cost of war into the "true cost of oil". Thats BS. We dont pay for war at the pump. We pay for it in TAXES. They are not the same. Oil alternatives will put soldiers out of work and make them feel their efforts were for nothing. Lets not bend over for alternatives. Lets TAKE OVER for oil.
LatteLiberal 4 years ago
Arguments here stemming from just this video and fuzzy memory and the little ALL OF YOU HERE know which may seem like so much or enough is just a fraction of all that's not being considered by anyone on this page but to help all who read this so as to avoid "SOPHIST" arguments and reach a conclusion with more soundness please read >> Crossing the Rubicon: The Decline of the American Empire at the End of the Age of Oil
monolithsapphire 4 years ago
Liberals lie about "efficiency" and "alternatives". We should outlaw fuel economy laws to help the economy and show support for our troops. They fight so we can drive big SUVs and not stupid hybrids. We need to take over the world because they wont give it to us willingly. Plug in hybrids will hurt jobs. Solar funds the liberal agenda.
LatteLiberal 4 years ago
First of all, fuel cells and hydrogen are NOT an energy source, they are an energy transferring mechanism (with enormous potential, lest you forget). Second, a compressed tank of hydrogen isn't really any more dangerous than gasoline. Third, you left out wind and solar power from your stunning alternative fuel analysis.
Worsthoofd 4 years ago
The war in Iraq is the solution????
?????
How about getting used to living like our ancestors did for generations is the solution?
Spoken like a true addict.
postpeakman 4 years ago
I just hope this video is filled with irony, especially about the positive aspects of political instability in the Middle East. Considering the way you seem to think about all the other things you talk about, I find it hard to believe that you actually believe it.
manudosde 4 years ago
Studies show biodiesel is using more energy to be produced than it will give back
philippe1985 4 years ago
Albertan oil sands are a pipe dream. Simply put, it takes 2 barrels of oil energy to extract 3.
retrop75 4 years ago
I pick option #3.
Drive electric.
greyfalcon. net/ tesla
greyfalcon. net/ truck3
Costs about 70 cents a gallon.
greyfalcon. net/ volt
If the electricity comes from Coal, it's ironically just as green as driving a hybrid.
greyfalcon. net/ plugins3
greyfalcon. net/ plugins4
greyflcn 4 years ago
What I like is that the middle east theory you told is indeed happening. Lebanon is at war against palestinians extremist groups. Turkey is bombing Iraq. And Israel is at war with everyone.
philippe1985 4 years ago
If we could invade canada then we could spread the bible to those heathenous liberals and make them take down theyre art and solar panels and make them see the word of God for what it is and no more homosex and womens rights crap. God made man to take over not bend over.
LatteLiberal 4 years ago
Well that aint gonn happen, so we will continue to have offensive art and to not "see the word of god" and to allow gays to marry and even force churches to preform the cerimonies. If you wanna run your country your way fine then, and we will run things our way. peace out
KingMucktoad 4 years ago
Electric is the wave of the future. You hear about that female scientist who made a battery out of viruses? It works better than lithium ion batteries. Not sure about costs of ownership, but it's completely emission-free. No NO2 or CO2 or anything.
Raisinjeff 4 years ago
Its funny how rich canada is and low a profile we try to keep .. bragging like yanks is no fun !!! but quietly having EASILY THE BEST STANDARD OF LIFE ON EARTH IS F*CKING PRICELESS...
megadirt 5 years ago
So should we invade Canada? I would support its annexation. Survival of the fittest and all that. There is nothing Europe or Canada could do to stop us. Heck the NYPD could probably take over Canada by themselves.
rleaf16 5 years ago
like seriously, are you guys that pro war that your answer for every problem is invade, bomb, kill innocent ppl.Ithought americans are suppose to be good people.If this is really how you people think, then your no better than the terrorists or nazis
JBomber22 4 years ago
You tried in 1775 and it was a humiliating defeat. You tried in 1812 ("The invasion of Canada is a mere matter of marching": Thomas Jefferson.) and your country went nearly bankrupt, New England almost seceded and Washington was burned to the ground.
doctormodesto 4 years ago
the canadian oil sands won't make us energy independent. the process of extracting the oil from the sands consumes enourmous amounts of fresh water and natural gas. why even have a society that is car based? why not have a society where everything is within walking distance
DaveEngland187 5 years ago
Yes...; we need oil. We also need food, water, and clothing but.... that doesn't give us the right to steal them.
thearmin 5 years ago
I would normally not respond to something as juvenile as this but it does a great disservice to people who are looking for a more meaningful understanding of energy issues. Your analysis of "tar sands" is completely inaccurate and it is irresponsible of you, as you take on the roll of public informer to present information you clearly havn't researched.
buzzjustice 5 years ago
Exactly and this retarded half-wit is trying to defend invading countries for oil in light-hearted "I make sense" type of manner. This guy is a shill, every video I see of his he is either lying or very ignorant. By his logic of subsidies are "evil", what is the Iraq war for oil but a subsidy for big oil corporations? And then he advocates taht they can make all the profit they want at our expense! Not to mention we are talking about the death of thousands of Americans and far more Iraqis.
killerkel555 5 years ago
So your in favour of killing over one hundred thousand Iraqis and 3000 Americans just to fuel your SUV. Your a small minded pathetic scumbag. And we subsidize the war w/ our tax dollars. Remember that you worthless piece of shit. Maybe the "ragheads" will get thier hands on you and do some beheading. Fuckin useless loser.
killerkel555 5 years ago
If I had my way, the oil war would be ended. So long as we keep killing people for oil, they will keep attacking us.
Our government would rather sacrifice our constitutional rights to make themselves feel secure from the terrorists they created, than to end the conflicts with the middle east, and end their highly profitable oil wars, outright. Iraq War violates Article VI Clause II of the U.S. Constitution.
Those within our government have committed treason.
terrorist420x 5 years ago
You are so very wrong. Canada does not have nearly what you claim and it is oilsands which to refine uses a ton of energy itself. Look into the new GM car which produce no emmissions. Hydrogen is stabilized fool, this is 1930's Hindenburg. GM is planning mass production for 2010. And this will be very good for the economy. And guess what by invading Iraq and spending over $100 billion a year there, we are SUBSIDIZING the oil companies. GM check it out.
killerkel555 5 years ago
If a fuel cell were mass produced, the costs of the fuel cell stack would be over $300 per peak horsepower. This doesn't include the motor, inverter, batteries, or chassis. A mass produced fuel cell car with about 80 horsepower for 0-60 mph in 15 seconds would end up costing $50,000+. Making hydrogen requires electricity. A fuel cell car is essentially a less efficient, more expensive, reduced range, reduced performance electric car.
Fuel cells are a shell game. FreedomCAR is government pork.
terrorist420x 5 years ago
No, GM has just pioneered a new efficient and cheaper technology that operates on par with gas fueled cars. I just watched a news report on it. Right now it is expensive but by 2010 they will be mass producing, especially in China where new infrastructure can be built around it. The only difficulty is the fueling stations taht need to be built. In the long run though it would save massive amounts of money and help GM to rebound. Check it out, go to GM website.
killerkel555 5 years ago
Right on killer, we up in Canada are using our irreplaceable natural gas to make the heat required to process the tar sands. Enough to provide for a city of 3 million. Even optimistic assessments of its expansion talk about 5 million barrels a day, which would be only one fifth of America's daily needs, oh, sorry, desires. As our American liberal friends point out, all other counties on the planet without oil tax the hell out of it and don't allow people to drive SUVs.
doctormodesto 4 years ago
It's a shame we can't use bullshit as an alternative source of energy.
99fusion 5 years ago
I guess your cute little college isn't up to speed on the peak oil issue, or maybe it's because the government doesn't want you to know the economy will be failing soon since once the average dumbass knows this it will set off the collapse.
99fusion 5 years ago
There's an estimated 300 billion recoverable barrels of oil in the sands. America alone goes through 85 million barrels daily. If America could have all that oil for itself we're talking about an estimated 10 year supply. It's an estimated 3 year supply for the world economy. Why don't you be like Mr. Pregnant and make a fool of yourself without spreading ignorance about important issues?
99fusion 5 years ago
before americans sit back and complain about how much they pay for gas in the USA, they need to compare prices to othe rplaces around the world. i live in germany which in the ranking is the 7th highest priced gas country in the world (With Amsterdam being in spot #1) and here they pay 75% of one litre's price , not gallon but litre to tax. I think americans don't look outside the box enough to know how lucky they are.
magichaze69 5 years ago
I hate you liberals. Europe pays so much for gas because most of it is TAXES you idiot! If we did that everybody would be driving dangerous hybrids and dangerous public transportation! Trains KILL people you idiot! Bicicles KILL people you retard! Cars are safe and keep you in a safety cage dumb ass! Bigger is better! Ask any woman that moron!
LatteLiberal 4 years ago
ok, now think about the people on the receiving end of a car collision dumbass
lolz9464 4 years ago
Ever hear of "externalities", and how they are dealt with by subsidization and taxation? Your simplistic laissez-faire description of market forces shows you never progressed beyond high school "supply and demand curves" and studied at Naive-Limbaugh-U.
American94704 5 years ago
South Park fan much?
unemagnetique 5 years ago
And last but not least - I hear all the hoopla about this being a war for oil and money. I heard a phrase once that sums up my thoughts on this ideology - "Where the fuck is the money? And where the fuck is the oil?". Honestly, our standard of living is extremely high. Irregardless of what companis bring in money based due to the events in Iraq, all that money goes back into our domestic economic infrastructure.
JesstersDead 5 years ago
Second - I work for a telecommunications provider which is just now turning 6 years old. Exxon-Mobile posted earnings of 10B last quarter, but in that same quarter my employer posted earnings of 8.5B. WHat I am getting at is that a good portion of the reason oil is such a big topic is that the media has determined it should be so. And the public has swollowed it hook line and sinker. Ever see anyone debating about their cell phone bill on The O'Reilly Factor?
JesstersDead 5 years ago
First - I lived over seas a fear years back. Even NOW gas prices per gallon here in the states are LESS than what I paid per litre while living abroad. And that was 8 years ago. Essentially, if you drive a V-8 and complain that your monthly gas expenditure is to high, get a part time job.
JesstersDead 5 years ago
Nate - 14-17 canadian or US$?
BTW, thats not entirely accurate.
Thats for a barrel of crude, you need to factor in the cost of changing it into gas, as well as transportation and so on. ALL of this needs to come out of the gas-buyers pocket.
Another thing - Europeans are already paying top dollar for gas.. 6-8 dollars a gallon for them... And Americans complain when we have to pay 3 XD.
B00rduck 5 years ago
I have to comment on this as a person who lives in Alberta. Nice shout out by the way :)
I'm a free-market loving, conservative who agrees with most of what you said, except I have to point out that oil in the Alberta oilsands is already very economically feasible. It costs roughly 14-17 dollars to get a barrel out of the ground, while the price of oil sits far higher than that.
NateTheOkay 5 years ago
To the person who said that oil in Alberta will become prohibitively expensive, they are quite simply wrong, unless oil dips below around 14-17 dollars a barrel. Not gonna happen.
Not to mention we're getting raped up the ass in Alberta because our royalty structure is insanely low. In fact, the lowest in the world. We could double, triple, quadruple, hell, even increase our royalty rates by 10 times and oil companies wouldn't leave.
NateTheOkay 5 years ago
It might also be worth adding that with todays technology only about 10-15% of the oil sands is even extractable (yes yes, I know that will change but your comment about the oil sands talked about todays ability)
mihoda 5 years ago
That aint even close to a thousand years. And that's assuming we can get 100% of the oil in place. Currently 'good' recovery rates from conventional oil sources is 40-60% of the total oil in the ground.
The problem with the oil supply doesnt lie with how much is in the ground, it has to do with how fast we can get it out of the ground.
mihoda 5 years ago
Err, the oil sands will last us a thousand years? That's news to me.
The oil in place in the athabasca oil sands is around 1,700-2,500 billion barrels(wikipedia). Heck, that's a lot right? Well, we(the world) consume 30 billion barrels per year 2,500/30 = 83 years if I did that math right.
mihoda 5 years ago
Only there's no way we would be able to consume it that fast. Tar sand/shale oil would last us 1,000 years because if we extract it as fast as we can, it will not replace more than about 5% of current oil use. We will completely destroy the environment if we extract tar sand/shale oil to its geological limit.
terrorist420x 5 years ago
Dead on. It is a completely innefficient, ridiculously expensive and very dirty fuel to refine. To me it makes no sense to rely so heavily on it. We have to look at what Arnold Schwarzenegger is doing in Cali and in a bipartisan manner. I would vote for him for president without a doubt. Efficiency is the first step. If we develope energy resources it would mean massive economic growth in the long run too.
killerkel555 5 years ago
Nevertheless, I enjoy your videos... it keeps everyone on their toes!
rudeskaddess 5 years ago
As far as the oil sands in Alberta...soon they'll realize cleaning those sands are too cost inefficient. His company has already taken measures to prepare for this by directing their services in other related areas (i.e. drilling for fresh water). My husband and I wish there was 1000 years of oil left...the money's good but he's already starting to look for another job! So everyone get their bikes out of that garage!
rudeskaddess 5 years ago
Hey dude, my husband saw this video and said you are wrong. He is a field engineer for a major oil drilling company and he's responsible for overseeing the drilling procedures to hydrocarbon reservoirs. He says that we'll run out of sweet sweet texas tea in less than 1000 years. Almost all reservoirs in the Gulf have been tapped and are estimated to only produce for another 25 years. The rest of the world is still open for drilling but the Gulf is one of the main comtributers.
rudeskaddess 5 years ago
This guy is not very smart, and really doesn't know what he's talking about.
mikeoksbigg 5 years ago
You are wrong on oil pricing. Oil is a commodity and we should not be paying a higher price becuase of speculation. Not only that, as you point out it is the best way for us to operate. We are a road driven vehicle dependent country. Either we raise the minimum wage or stop the price gouging. Why not both?
sullivan28210 5 years ago
I know, than we need another alternative after that.
leonkubik 5 years ago
I can think of one aiternative fuel and it won't blow your car up or caues it to run like crap in the morning, fry grease, I'm sure that you're aware that it can be used to power cars in much the same way as gas would, without the smell from the rear of your car that is.
Tell me what you think!
leonkubik 5 years ago
The only reason that's a viable alternative *right now* is because you can take the stuff off the hands of fast-food restaurants for cheap or free. They're giving it away. The second they realize that there's money to be made... poof. It's no longer cheap.
utnow 5 years ago
Further, the U.S. disposes about 3 billion gallons of used fryer oil per year. The amount of diesel consumed in the U.S. for transportation is about 40 billion gallons a year!
Fryer oil can make a dent, but it won't be a huge amount and it certainly won't be able to allow everyone with a diesel automobile to end their oil use.
terrorist420x 5 years ago
True Mr. Terrorist, and right now most people who use fryer oil in their diesel vehicles are getting it for free. As the guys on mythbusters said if there were actual competition for it the people who now freely dispose of it would start to think about making a buck from it.
doctormodesto 4 years ago
Also, I like the alternative fuel sources because of the cleaner emissions they produce. I live near Chicago so the air quality index is 1 here (1 being the worst in a 1 to 100), so it would be nice to have nice clean air like in the country to breath. I have noticed a difference.
eurohim 5 years ago
High pressure tanks, when pierced, tend to just go flying like a rocket and not exploding. Also, I am of the belief that these will just hold water (from the last thing I read about it) which will then be introduced to platinum which will blow the particle in half and thus you get your hydrogen. Meh, what do I know, I just felt like posting.
eurohim 5 years ago
Im glad you have deleted my comment you pompous asshole
hikerinbc 5 years ago
Ya for some one who knows so much he sure don't like the trueth... little rich kid I bet!
gizmophile 5 years ago
*cough* I can hear you whispering over there.
utnow 5 years ago
LOL! that is funny and true.
His daddy told him so it must be true! lol
Oil gets harder and slower to pump as the fields get deeper and dry up.
All consumption goes up, hence our nice modern prices.
I dont think he understand the land needed for bio-diesel! or the knock on affect of food!
Pull those belts hard America, make an extra notch infact.
ShadowWorks 5 years ago
ive decided that your my favorite you tube user....omg i just looked up and saw this
blfriesen said this:
"uhhhhh...yeah...i'll believe your opinion about peak oil. what are your credentials again?"
'i put in the global warming video that it seems like all liberals say this. this quote says that im right. but anyway u are now my favorite youtube user. the things u say spark questions in my mind
moebob24 5 years ago
There will always be oil. Even if it's four donkeys turning a pump for axle grease.
So he's right.
Weaseldog2001 5 years ago
He really has that much faith in libertarianism? WOw. He is naive. Lets risk a little bit of insecurity in the Middle East. noooo , that won't stur up any resentment that will eventually bite us in the ass. Any forget about morality altogether..
aGua421 5 years ago
haha... did I once say that I thought it was done on purpose? I'm simply proposing what I think will be the eventual result.
utnow 5 years ago
uhhhhh...yeah...i'll believe your opinion about peak oil. what are your credentials again?
blfriesen 5 years ago
I'm a google scientist like the rest of us. Don't trust me. Look it up yourself. If you discover something new, then do tell. ;)
utnow 5 years ago
what ever happened to the electric car?
consciousdreamy 5 years ago
What happened to it? Auto industry, oil industry, and federal government pooled their resources to make sure you didn't have it as an affordable option. Electric motors have no maintenance and last over 500,000 miles with no repairs; gas cars require thousands of dollars in maintenance and last ~150,000 miles. Electrics don't use oil derived fuels; 40% of America's oil use is for auto fuel. Electric car drivers don't pay gas taxes either. 200-300 miles range at highway speeds is doable today.
terrorist420x 5 years ago
And 92.345% of all statistics are made up. I don't mean any personal insult by this, but have you ever used anything with an electric motor? Think... a run/walk treadmill. The things break down all the time. And electricity doesn't come from nothing. It's generated using... oil/gas/nuclear... and to a VERY small degree in the US... other energy sources.
utnow 5 years ago
Have I used anything with an electric motor? Indeed yes. Often. I'm a few months away from an electrical engineering degree and am also in the process of building my own electric car for both commute and racing. I personally know individuals with electric cars that have been using the same electric motor in their car for decades, without ever having made repairs on it yet and have made about 2 or 3 brush changes(Takes about 10 minutes and $15, needed every 150,000 miles).
terrorist420x 5 years ago
Only 3% of electricity in the U.S. comes from oil. ~50% from cheap, plentiful, domestic coal, ~20% from domestic, plentiful nuclear, ~16% from domestic natural gas. Even from dirty sources of electricity like coal, an electric car still has an environmental benefit over a gas car.
Of note, even with battery replacement, an electric car has a major economic advantage over a gas one due to cheap electricity and no need for powertrain maintenance.
terrorist420x 5 years ago
electric cars require energy... which is generated using... coal, gas, nuclear and to a very very very small degree in the US solar/wind/geothermal/tidal power.
utnow 5 years ago
However, an electric car well to wheels uses less than half the energy per mile than a comparable gasoline car, and even if it gets its electricity from coal, the pollution produced per mile from an electric car is greatly reduced over a gas car.
Coal, natual gas, nuclear are all domestic sources of energy, many of them plentiful. Best of all, electric cars can be run on renewables.
terrorist420x 5 years ago
What is the total efficiency of gasoline powered cars to electric powered? That is the joules used to travel a mile. Considering the mining/pumping/distribution/engine or electric generators.
What about the infrastructure to distribute the electricity if it were to replace gasoline. As a first order guess we would have to generate and distribute more electricity equivalent to the energy of the gasoline we now use. This is one of the problems hydrogen power is facing.
gski 5 years ago
Oil refining/distribution is ~80% efficient. In typical use, Otto Cycle internal combustion engine for a car ~12% efficient; approaches 25% eff @ full load & low RPM. .8*.12 = 9.6% eff well to wheels for gas car. Coal plant ~40% eff, transmission lines 92% eff, charger/battery combined ~75% eff, electric drive ~85% efficient. 25% eff well to wheels for electric car. Electric uses 1/3 energy of gas one. Doesn't factor oil wars, exploration, drilling, cleanup of environment(eg. Exxon Valdez spill)
terrorist420x 5 years ago
We generate enough electricity to power tens of millions of electric cars in the US today. According to CIA World Fact Book, US consumes 3.7*10^12 kWh/year. Ford Crown Victoria-size electric car or RAV4-size small SUV with no special attention to aerodynamics will use .4 kWh/mile from outlet. Typical car sees 12,000 mi/year; 220 million cars in US. Switch all cars to electric is ~29% more electricity consumption. Off peak hours, where most charging will be done, > 40% of capacity is unused.
terrorist420x 5 years ago
p.s. The formation of crude oil hydrocarbons does not take thousands of years, more like tens of millions.
jeffy8 5 years ago
One of my favorite songs of all time...
(If only I could get Kristen Kreuk to dance with me like that!)
shont2006 5 years ago
You're brilliant again. And I love the opening song.
alicat 5 years ago
stop moving about - you're freaking me out!
Chrispy7 5 years ago
I think it's great that people like you are really looking into what actual benefit these alternative fuels might provide, if any, to try to sort out what would actually work to improve our energy situation.
I don't think that's the issue, though. The real problem we face is finding something that IS actually cleaner and IS actually feasable on a large scale, not bickering about currently existing alternatives that really are just a load of crap anyway.
neonova03 5 years ago
great video utnow!
vvunshorty 5 years ago
The free market solves problems for itself eventually.
FreeTalkLive 5 years ago
exactly.the wall will move aside if we just drive fast enough.
farbot 5 years ago
pretty much...driving faster consumes more oil, which in turn raises the price of oil, which in turn prices it out of the market... or at least on par with other forms of energy which were previously too expensive. The free-market is a wonderful thing.
utnow 5 years ago
i was of course pulling a metaphor,one that fitted more than i intended;)
going over it agin i see that the free market doesn't solve problems for anything but itself.....expensive oil makes alternatives more attractive,but it doesent solve the problem that life becomes more expensive/less comfy if enrgy is more expensive or the numerous technical problems(limited farmland,extraction ect.) of the alternatives.follwing the money means waste and low sustainability,esp. if it's an basic resource.
farbot 5 years ago
;o) i know. I was being a little facetious. lol. I do think that it's a basic resource... but if it's too expensive then people will use less of it. granted this may do bad things for the economy... but if transportation and the like are NEEDED then other methods will be found.
utnow 5 years ago
I recognized that information was, in many respects, like a public good, and it was this insight that made it clear to me that it was unlikely that the private market would provide efficient resource allocations whenever information was endogenous.
~ Joseph E. Stiglitz
Progress lies not in enhancing what is, but in advancing toward what will be.
Hefeweizen 5 years ago
It is not because the truth is too difficult to see that we make mistakes... we make mistakes because the easiest and most comfortable course for us is to seek insight where it accords with our emotions - especially selfish ones.
~ Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
Ages when custom is unsettled are necessarily ages of prophecy. The moralist cannot teach what is revealed; he must reveal what can be taught. He has to seek insight rather than to preach.
~ Walter Lippmann
Hefeweizen 5 years ago
have you read hubbert's peak yet?
open your mind to reality, quit thinking you've got more insight than the rest of the world. you remind me of how a friend of mine thought back when he was 13. it's not an admirable quality.
A point of view can be a dangerous luxury when substituted for insight and understanding.
~ Marshall McLuhan
Hefeweizen 5 years ago
Like french fries are made out of potatoes...
TachyonMale 5 years ago
lol. maybe not from mcdonalds... ;)
utnow 5 years ago
You forgot to mention the cost of the Iraq war, Only about 750 billion. And where does that money come from? You and me.
morrisonak 5 years ago
I didn't say that I was for the war... or against it. I just said that those whole idea that a 'war for oil' is a 'bad thing' is just silly. A war that is truly for oil (not necessarily this one) is a spectacularly valid war. It's just as necessary for our survival as a nation as clean water and food.
utnow 5 years ago
A war for oil is a very bad thing when 120,000 civilians have died for it, our constitution has been violated for it(See Article VI, Clause II, then the Uniting for Peace Charter the U.S. agreed to adhere to post WWII), our budget has been overspent for it, 2,600 men and women in uniform have so far died for it. Worse yet, we have alternatives that work but have been fought by this very government to keep our money flowing to it and the businesses that bought it. There's a word for that: treason
terrorist420x 5 years ago
Biodiesel is not that frikkin' hard to make, people. A hick in my state (Oklahoma), who is also a high school student, makes it in his garage for his truck. Wise up.
inuyashaxx 5 years ago
inuyasha, hemp is a lovely source for biodiesel. EROEI > 2, needs no pesticide inputs and very little fertilizer inputs, yields ~300 gallons/hectare per harvest, biodiesel can be made from hemp oil for the equivalent of $.60/gal.
But our overbloated government refuses to let it be grown. You can thank lobbyists for the oil, petrochemical, wood paper, steel, and other industries for that from back in the 1920s.
terrorist420x 5 years ago
I didn't really pay attention to you, because I'am drinking, and you talked wayyyyyyy tooooo fast to hold my attention spam right now in my life, but you are cute, so you got 5 stars!!
wickedandwierd 5 years ago
this video makes my penis go
ploop ploop ploop DING!
ploop ploop ploop HEE HAW!
2ndcomingofuddercrap 5 years ago
yes nice video, it deserve a "group puke"
7Adrenaline90 5 years ago
let's have a race to see how many times we can blow boh3m3 in 1 hour. ready...... GO!
2ndcomingofuddercrap 5 years ago
your eyes are doped
NeWarg 5 years ago
I agree a bit with you, paying for some shit it dumb compared to gas... its the profits from companies, not the source... but we wouldnt wanna pay alot to muslims... I also understand you other fuel analysis... and now I am starting to get to the catch of the video, and missed it if it was there... companies have ways for infinite energy for cheap... they bought others out long ago, and wont release it anytime soon
paindrain 5 years ago
lol. not really. this is more urban myth than anything.
utnow 5 years ago
LOVE THIS VID! They should play your vids on TV!! There are some really dumb/annoying people that need to hear this stuff.
DuckyKissz 5 years ago
Wtf?
Creeptacular, man.
tlasz24 5 years ago
oil shmoil! just use KY, it's a lot easier to clean out of your butt. jeez, why are we even debating this? oil is the worst lubricant i can think of. other than cement with broken glass and acid in it... actually... i'll be right back.
OW! yeah cement sucks.
2ndcomingofuddercrap 5 years ago
if you think theyre reinvesting it all in exploration, you probably still beileve in santa and the tooth fairy too; because that's how naive you would have to be.
Hefeweizen 5 years ago
do you know who Troy Hurtubise is?, and why he was silenced & his family received death threats & visits from varios middle east interests?
oil co.s are FAR from potato farmers. most american farms (which werent destroyed by factory farming) barely break even. exxon-mobil makes more $ in 10 seconds than the avg american family makes ALL YEAR.
Hefeweizen 5 years ago
have you even taken a macro or micro econ class?
look up the royalty relief act
learn about tax shelters
ask youself why refineries are shut down when demand goes up.
Hefeweizen 5 years ago
Has anyone hear including utnow consulted a peer-reviewed (not a bought) scientist who develop their work around greenhouse gas emissions? Sure, make your case about oil regarding money. Perhaps you should think beyond economics...
pelagicdivision 5 years ago
You forgot plastic... Plastic is made from oil.
The problem is that Exxon has used unethical tactics in the past to become a monopoly. There was an oil company out of texas that was trying to compete with exxon. But exxon kept bringing them to court for one reason or another. As a result, the company went bankrupt. A real free market would allow a competitor to sprout up against exxon, without the worry of frivolous lawsuits.
nanciesweb 5 years ago
sup scott. I was having a horrible dayand your vicdeo made me feel better. } : <3
iwolfy 5 years ago
I can totally spell video bythe way } :
iwolfy 5 years ago
You're not very smart are you?
SuperNoob634 5 years ago
I have read that we can make coal from oil for about $20-$25 a barrel that sure as hell is a lot cheaper than what we are getting now. The only bad thing is it puts out 2x as much co2 but global warming is bullshit anyways so who cares. The co2 can be collected and shot down oil shaft to push more oil out in oil wales so you can do other things than let co2 out into the enviroment.
willyswear 5 years ago
Willyswear, forget making oil from coal and running cars off of gas made by oil. Better to just make electricity with it to charge a battery car. You'll get much more miles out of a lump of coal with an electric car.
terrorist420x 5 years ago
Why don't we make our fuel out of coal. Montana has more coal energy than Saudi Arabia has oil. The technology is from the 1920's the nazis got all there fuel from the Fischer-Tropsch method of making fuel from coal. The South Africans made their fuel from coal during apartheid when the world was boycotting them.
willyswear 5 years ago
Does Scott really look 30?? haha
Nice video. Nice ending, it was nice.
Ummmm, thumbs up.
If I called, you would have a rambling white woman saying "umm" a lot, so no.
.....Okay, so I'll think about it.
cravingcrimsoncries 5 years ago
Changing perspective during your video.....not original. Everyone is doing it and it's fucking annoying.
tafkase7en 5 years ago
Then close your eyes.
utnow 5 years ago
Then come up with original ideas..
tafkase7en 5 years ago
How come you never smile? SMILE... please
MrsJohnnyDepp22 5 years ago
lmfao, ur such a bullshitting lamo. and ur for war on IRAQ, wtf is wrong with u... u need to grow up.
roderick123 5 years ago
spoken like a true 16yr old ;)
utnow 5 years ago
I do agree with you for the most part. The thing is though, that there isn't enough competition in terms of oil prices, as a result of all the major companies and their whole collusion shtick. People are still more than willing to buy at the higher prices though, albeit with more complaints, because we like, need it ye know.
hermangill 5 years ago
i'll agree... kinda... with the lack of competition. There still is ALOT of competition at the pump, yet the stations are working on very low margins because their input is priced so high. Even still, all it takes are two suppliers to provide competition. As far as the price... it's worth what it's worth. If we'll pay for it, then it's priced fairly. :D
utnow 5 years ago
you believe this for real? i... you... thats just lame.
consensusSapientium 5 years ago
Wow, great video. Finally someone bringing up common sense as opposed to hysteric environmentalist alarmism.
raiden55 5 years ago
god your hair is so bothersome. i just wanted to cut it throughout the whole video. wear a headband next time.
drv8888 5 years ago
what panda said
polarbears92 5 years ago
First off, I believe water is a regulated resource. If oil is a resource on the same plane as water, then shouldn't it also be regulated? It would be outrageous to think if by your understanding of the "free market" economy, that companies can charge whatever price they want for water... then I suppose only the rich will survive because they can afford it. The truth is, (and you're right on this point), EVERYONE needs oil.
Tommyz0r 5 years ago
But companies CAN charge whatever price they want for water! If they charge too much, folks will go to another supplier that charges less, but makes more money because they're selling more water. That's the way it works! The only reason many municipal water suppliers are regulated is because they're owned by the GOVERNMENT! It's GOVERNMENT that needs regulation, not the free market!
LMacNeill 5 years ago
where I come from (upstate NY), we only have one water company. You have to buy from them if you want water.
Tommyz0r 5 years ago
Also, I'm pretty sure Unitedwater (unitedwater.com) isn't owned by the government.
Tommyz0r 5 years ago
And also... you didn't address the pooling issue. In a COMPLETELY free market economy, then I suppose companies can also collaborate and raise prices at a standard (same as opec). FORUNTATELY, we do have government regulations so our prices stay down, otherwise there would be a whole lot of Opecs in the United States. This of course can only apply to essential goods like oil/water. Nonesstentials don't count because they're luxuries.
Tommyz0r 5 years ago
No! In a true free-market economy, collusion is ILLEGAL! That's why we have government -- to protect individuals against those (including large corporations) who would try to use force against us. Collusion is a form of force, and is thus illegal. Doesn't matter if the companies are fixing the prices of "essential" or "non-essential" goods -- collusion is always illegal in a true free-market economy. That's not regulation, it's simply law-enforcement.
LMacNeill 5 years ago
how would you enforce and control such a thing?they won't be stupid enough to wirte this suff down(anymore).potato farmer 1 meets off road with potato farmer 2:"hey,i have to sell my potatoes at xx$ to make some profit,don't sell yours cheaper,even if you could, and we can both make more winnings"handshake,a suitcase of candy and gone....oil is a NEEDED resurce,wich means you can't just stop buying it if you don't like the price.we're addicts;)
farbot 5 years ago
Are you then implying regulation is simply a government standard imposed on companies, such as the filtering of our water or the refinement of oil? And that we have no need for such standards? I live in a place where we only have one water company. If the company feels it has no obligations to the people, I guess we're all pretty much screwed. (either live with the high prices and dirty water, or die.)
Tommyz0r 5 years ago
However, people don't have such a large degree of choices for oil like they do for water, LMacNeill. Oil choices are in the same few companies. Much of their profit margins are lined by subsidies courtesy of Joe Taxpayer. The oil industry never has to pay for the personal and property damage caused by the pollution it puts out. That's no free market, that's a rigged market. A real free market would keep consumers, employees, and those affected by business decisions in the decision making process
terrorist420x 5 years ago
Lmac ..........you are like really annoying its a great vid by the way ;D
polarbears92 5 years ago
God knows I try... Thanks for the feedback. (And I agree with you that Scott's vid is awesome!)
LMacNeill 5 years ago
oh well, its human nature to complain on things and especially if your not on top of the food web.. thats just normal to civilized educated smart people.. what i do not understand is why we invest much in arguements like this instead to focusing our energy to the more simple and basic yet most important thing, like for me, love for self, others and God. i guess these dilemmas are inherent to human evolution/ commercialization.
maerky 5 years ago
Oh, my fucking god! I did not think it was possible that there existed another person on the planet who is sane. Energy and capitalism rock, and you have made my day!
Aurelia1985 5 years ago
Right! Because what else to do we live for except energy and capitalism! I think your a little too enthusiastic there buddy.
aGua421 5 years ago
/sarcasm?... god i hope so
surGeonGG 5 years ago
Not sarcasm. Attempt for just one moment to imagine your life without either energy [beyond stick fires] or capitalism [beyond trading pebbles for fish]. Is it paradise? If so, I suggest you move to the bush-man paradise.
Aurelia1985 5 years ago
instability in the middle east wont cause exporting costs to rise a whole lot. and saying war in the middle east is good for america so it's a good thing is pretty selfish :/. also american oil dependancy polutes and causes global warming, wether or not it will run out or not is pretty irrelevant as we would have to resort to alternative fuels long before it eventually would run out.
surGeonGG 5 years ago
What's up with that hair?
mikeabundo 5 years ago
it grows... and apparently I'm a hippie. ;) It'll never look right at 'in between' stages.
utnow 5 years ago
Well for one i'd have to say the as of right now the alt fuel cars cost more, and are less efficient because it's a new technology. Over time they can become a cheaper/efficient.
With that said, how do you think we get corn into fuel? It talks a large ammount of energy. And if you've never been to one of those plants they smell like burnt ass. Anyway it takes power to cause the reaction takes corn(or sugar) into a fuel. That produces a by product into the air.
gaunt006 5 years ago
It doesn't take power, it takes yeast. Living, breathing, single-celled organisms that convert the sugars in the corn into ethanol. Folks have been using yeast for MILLENIA to do that very thing, then drinking the results. No extra power required. And the chief by-product that's released into the air? CARBON DIOXIDE! You won't hear the enviro-weenies complain about that, though, because it's a "good" source of CO2. (And how would you know what burnt ass smells like, anyway? <GRIN>)
LMacNeill 5 years ago
well,you need power to grow(seed,water) and harvest the stuff,maybe even transport it.depending on the tempeatures at the production site you need to cool or heat your mash to keep it in uesful conditions,then you need to (vacuum)distill the max 25% ethanol out of the fermentation product.CO2 by fermentation would be CO2-neutral,but there is the possibility of CFC like substances occuring by rapid fermentation.so there is quite some energy need in this process.
farbot 5 years ago
gaunt006, electric cars would be cost competitive with gas ones if mass produced. Electric cars use about 1/2 the energy of gas cars on a well to wheels basis, so 1000 btus of coal will take an electric car twice as far as 1000 btus of oil will take a comparable gas car. Electrics can do 200-300 miles range and go fast today.
Corn ethanol isn't efficient at all, but sugarcane ethanol is. But lobbyists support corn ethanol while sugarcane is tariffed.
terrorist420x 5 years ago
You look like my science teacher ,and sound like him, but you speak more sence then he does.
blackkeiron 5 years ago
dude you're on point
w0rldpeace 5 years ago
Get a haircut or do something to not have it in your face all the time. I like arguing out loud with a computer screen of your comments. It's fun. This video was particularly interesting. Keep up the controversy.
candycanefaery 5 years ago
you look like my uncle^_~
kuzureenaimyheart 5 years ago
If the war in Iraq is such a grande idea, maybe you
should enlist. You look like a healty young man just good as anybody else. Why not fight alongside your fellow American's for what you
think will reap positive results for the country?
Nice hair by the way.
okiquit 5 years ago
Cop-out guilt-trip argument. If you think the war is such a bad idea why don't you totally abstain from using oil and quit killing soldiers. I'd wager that you couldn't do it if you wanted to.
utnow 5 years ago
But Scott, this war has nothing to do with oil. Isn't that the official story? ;)
plob218 5 years ago
Look man, I don't owe you any justifications for what I do, and don't dare accuse me of killing anybody. It's low lives like you that get soldiers killed by manipulating them into thinking that this is the righteous path to a better country. When you put your own ass out there for the sake of the oil that you claim is so vital then you won't hear a peep out of me when you say this war is just.
And I'll return your cop-out guilt-trip response for a straight answer when you're ready.
okiquit 5 years ago
lol. so you accuse me of getting soldiers killed... while using electricity to do so and giving them a reason to keep going out there so you can wage your battles online. 'grats.
utnow 5 years ago