Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Energy Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    I like natural gas, and used to be an employee of an excellent gas company (and wish I had purchased a significant amount of stock when I was there in the late 90s...grrr!). It burns very clean and can be extremely efficient in a gas turbine (approaching/exceeding 90% yield).

    We have a good 300 years worth of proven, harvestable resources at current usage and using current techniques. If other areas open up (including offshore) and technology improves, this cutoff date will certainly extend. However it is not an inexhaustible resource. It is a highly efficient and clean source of heating (as well as being very important in the plastics, chemical, and fertilizer industries as well), and in some ways should be kept for these uses.

    Alternative sources are mandatory to move into the future. Oil is the only (currently practicable) energy source for air travel, period. Oil is exceptionally important, and practically irreplaceable, as a feedstock for plastics. No oil, no plastics, and by definition no composites will be possible (epoxy is a 'plastic' and typically makes up over half the mass of a composite structure).

    Windmills will not be able to run indefinitely. The composite structures will degrade through exposure to UV and the elements, and through normal usage. Should they (the blades anyhow) last a decade or so each, how economicaly feasible are they without government support? They are good for augmenting peak demand only, and should never be considered for base load. It is somewhat ironic that the smaller, faster spinning windmils are undesirable because they kill the raptors and migrating birds, while the bigger slower turning windmills are undesirable because their enormous pressure deltas across the blade disc kills the bats. Can't win either way, and the environment can tolerate neither the loss of raptors nor of bats. Luckily bats breed like rodents...

    Comment


    • #17
      A lot of our carbon reduction has come from switching from coal to natural gas. We haven't really been reducing use.

      I was tickled to find that the State of West Virginia's Alternative Portfolio Standards includes the use of natural gas. Yup--offshore winds, bio fuels, fuel cells, solar, and... natural gas. Not even Pennsylvania is that shameless. I guess when your state is almost entirely coal, natural gas is seen as a radical alternative.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Katy Lied View Post
        A lot of our carbon reduction has come from switching from coal to natural gas. We haven't really been reducing use.

        I was tickled to find that the State of West Virginia's Alternative Portfolio Standards includes the use of natural gas. Yup--offshore winds, bio fuels, fuel cells, solar, and... natural gas. Not even Pennsylvania is that shameless. I guess when your state is almost entirely coal, natural gas is seen as a radical alternative.
        It also helps that their state sits atop of trillions of cubic feet of gas.

        I actually spoke with a member of Congress about my crack-brained energy plan and the hoser (a Texas representative, mind you) "had no idea" we had so much natural gas. I asked him what Congress was doing to promote the use of natural gas, and he said, "Nothing." Ugh....
        Jesus wants me for a sunbeam.

        "Cog dis is a bitch." -James Patterson

        Comment


        • #19
          KL, have you seen the doc Gasland? It starts with this young pup who is offered big bucks to lease a portion of his land to site a gas well. The incredulous kid starts to investigate the gas company's claims that the chemicals used for fracking, the process that releases trapped gas by slamming fracking fluid into the well with so much pressure that it breaks up the rock formations and releases the gas, are harmless. As he crosses the country to talk to other land owners who have leased their property to gas companies he meets one family after another with contaminated wells. Some of the dramatic footage from the doc was featured in an episode of 60 Minutes where some of these families are able to literally light on fire the gas that streams out of their water supply from their well.

          Very interesting doc. Gas might be a big part of our energy future, but it seems to have some serious drawbacks.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by RedSox View Post
            It also helps that their state sits atop of trillions of cubic feet of gas.

            I actually spoke with a member of Congress about my crack-brained energy plan and the hoser (a Texas representative, mind you) "had no idea" we had so much natural gas. I asked him what Congress was doing to promote the use of natural gas, and he said, "Nothing." Ugh....
            He is ignorant. Watch Gasland. It shows a Congress that has exempted fracking chemicals and processes from EPA clean water and air regulations.

            Comment


            • #21
              That's interesting, Robin.

              Also, Geothermal Energy also uses fracking. I think they use it even more than natural gas. They might even use fracking in exploration, because it is difficult to locate "deep hot rocks" which is essentially what geothermal wells are.

              Dr. Joe Moore just came and delivered a lecture on geothermal energy. He's with EGI over at the U of Utah. Chevron is the largest geothermal producer in the world. The largest state producers are CA, NV, UT, HI, ID, then AK, in that order.

              Right in the middle of my lecture notes, I have this statement:

              "There are more than 500,000 pigs in Milford."

              The conversation must have switched over to methane.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Katy Lied View Post

                Right in the middle of my lecture notes, I have this statement:

                "There are more than 500,000 pigs in Milford."

                The conversation must have switched over to methane.
                Yes.

                One of the issues at Milford is dealing with the pig manure. The plant produces more sewage than the rest of the state combined. When fully built out, it will produce more sewage than LA County. Ponder that for a moment.

                This produces two problems. The first is the smell. Ever driven by a pig farm? The stench is unbelievable. Supposedly, workers at Milford occasionally pass out due to the overwhelming stench. The bigger issue is simply managing and treating that much sewage. It requires massive infrastructure. They used to put the sewage in open ponds awaiting treatment, but the ponds would often overtop and spill. Ugh...

                Funny story: Years ago I was doing some groundwater work and got my name in some of the local papers due to a press release. A few days later I got a call from a farmer in the Milford area asking for my help. He said that his family was getting sick and they got their water tested and it was full of E. Coli (water from a well on his property). He lived not too far from the pig farms and was furious that the groundwater had been contaminated from massive amounts of pig sewage on the farm. He was contemplating a large lawsuit, publicity campaign, etc. We discussed a few things he could do and then a few weeks later he called me back and said that the Utah DEQ tested his water and the E. Coli was bovine. Turns out there was a depression around his well and there was a gap near the well riser. The sewage was draining into the well from his own farm. Oops.
                "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by RobinFinderson View Post
                  He is ignorant. Watch Gasland. It shows a Congress that has exempted fracking chemicals and processes from EPA clean water and air regulations.
                  That's old news, though. The question was what are they currently doing.
                  Jesus wants me for a sunbeam.

                  "Cog dis is a bitch." -James Patterson

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by RobinFinderson View Post
                    KL, have you seen the doc Gasland? It starts with this young pup who is offered big bucks to lease a portion of his land to site a gas well. The incredulous kid starts to investigate the gas company's claims that the chemicals used for fracking, the process that releases trapped gas by slamming fracking fluid into the well with so much pressure that it breaks up the rock formations and releases the gas, are harmless. As he crosses the country to talk to other land owners who have leased their property to gas companies he meets one family after another with contaminated wells. Some of the dramatic footage from the doc was featured in an episode of 60 Minutes where some of these families are able to literally light on fire the gas that streams out of their water supply from their well.

                    Very interesting doc. Gas might be a big part of our energy future, but it seems to have some serious drawbacks.
                    Like most things, there's certainly a trade-off. Millions of gallons of freshwater gets contaminated with sand and the chemicals used to frack (it's 99% water, however), and there needs to be a way to reuse the water that comes back out of the wellbore after fracking is done, but all in all, I think the net gain from fracking technology far exceeds the environmental drawbacks. I"m probably biased since my livelihood depends on the vitality of the energy industry, but all in all, a strong NG policy is, IMO, the overall best way to meet our energy needs while also improving carbon emissions.


                    I think you've been slightly misled, RF. I have a co-worker who has numerous publications on the process of fracking (he also has a PhD in petroleum seismology), and he claims that the lighting of the watertap is complete crap.

                    Although I don't completely buy into the whole "it's harmless" claims from E&P companies, I also don't believe that these people had their well water contaminated by the gas released via fracking.
                    Last edited by Green Monstah; 05-11-2011, 11:04 AM.
                    Jesus wants me for a sunbeam.

                    "Cog dis is a bitch." -James Patterson

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by RedSox View Post
                      I think you've been slightly misled, RF. I have a co-worker who has numerous publications on the process of fracking (he also has a PhD in petroleum seismology), and he claims that the lighting of the watertap is complete crap.

                      Although I don't completely buy into the whole "it's harmless" claims from E&P companies, I also don't believe that these people had their well water contaminated by the gas released via fracking.
                      Complete crap in terms of "the fracking did not cause the gas to enter the water well" or "I don't believe they really had gas coming out the tap"?

                      I assume you are arguing the former and not the latter, because natural gas coming out of taps is well documented.
                      "There is no creature more arrogant than a self-righteous libertarian on the web, am I right? Those folks are just intolerable."
                      "It's no secret that the great American pastime is no longer baseball. Now it's sanctimony." -- Guy Periwinkle, The Nix.
                      "Juilliardk N I ibuprofen Hyu I U unhurt u" - creekster

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by RobinFinderson View Post
                        He is ignorant. Watch Gasland. It shows a Congress that has exempted fracking chemicals and processes from EPA clean water and air regulations.
                        That's true. A 1 hr documentary is an unimpeachable source.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Pardon the politics at the end of the vid. I just picked the first one that came up in a search. Also pardon the gratuitous blasphemy:

                          [YOUTUBE]PRZ4LQSonXA[/YOUTUBE]

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                            Complete crap in terms of "the fracking did not cause the gas to enter the water well" or "I don't believe they really had gas coming out the tap"?

                            I assume you are arguing the former and not the latter, because natural gas coming out of taps is well documented.
                            I have a first-person view of fracing (usually spelled without the k, although practice still varies) and I am vey skeptical that it has anything to do with tap water contamination given the huge difference in depth between the two strata (among other things). At least as it is common in the major gas plays here in the US. More I don't think I care to say publicly.
                            Awesomeness now has a name. Let me introduce myself.

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Jeff Lebowski View Post
                              Complete crap in terms of "the fracking did not cause the gas to enter the water well" or "I don't believe they really had gas coming out the tap"?

                              I assume you are arguing the former and not the latter, because natural gas coming out of taps is well documented.
                              That fracking caused the gas to enter the water well. Some people (they may be Oil and Gas puppets) that I respect claim that this can't happen due to fracking and is the result of naturally occurring methane. I could be totally misinformed, I'm just passing on the words of a couple of scientists that I respect (but who also depend on the oil and gas industry for their livelihood).
                              Jesus wants me for a sunbeam.

                              "Cog dis is a bitch." -James Patterson

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by nikuman View Post
                                I have a first-person view of fracing (usually spelled without the k, although practice still varies) and I am vey skeptical that it has anything to do with tap water contamination given the huge difference in depth between the two strata (among other things). At least as it is common in the major gas plays here in the US. More I don't think I care to say publicly.
                                I like the "k" because it doesn't look like (Frase-ing).
                                Jesus wants me for a sunbeam.

                                "Cog dis is a bitch." -James Patterson

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X