<Peak Energy Oz: Peak Oil and the Philosopher's Stone The Oil Drum Listening to the cacophony and trying to make some sense>

35 comments on Rigzone: 'Peak Oil' Argument Does Not Account for Nontraditional Sources

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version

mikegordon on December 7, 2005 - 10:23pm Permalink | Subthread | Comments top
"from so-called nontraditional petroleum sources that will become more common over time"

What he means by this statement, which is good in a way, is that Alternative sources will come on line that will replace traditional petroleum sources. Now hopefully these new sources will include Biomass and other organic and renewable sources instead of digging, mining, or pumping a non-renewable and environmentally destructive resource out of our planet.

One way to look at it is what if next year someone discovered that we could generate 200% more energy globally each year by draining the blood from 1 million people a year, would the world signup for that? Probably. What if that number was 10 million or 100 million? That might be pushing it.

Now, what if there was a Natural, Organic, and Renewable Energy resource that could be produced in any amount required to generate practically Unlimited and Clean Energy that wasn't made of human blood? Would you sign up for it?

Just about everyone would except for the greedy bastards running the corporations and this country, it would impact their bottom lines. Funny how it all comes down to money.

There is a solution that solves all our energy problems and their associated environmental issues as well. It can also solve the economic crisis in this country by replacing all petroleum based products and their associated environmental restrictions that have forced numerous industries to foreign countries that have no EPA or Environmental Laws. In other words, they can destroy the environment with those countries governmental blessings.

What is the answer? Cannabis, Hemp, Marijuana.

End of story.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Nate Hagens on December 7, 2005 - 10:42pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
I researched hemp and asked some forestry professors about it - clearly it should be legalized and we could benefit from the fiber, seed-oil, etc. While it is true one can get magnitudes of biomass per acre more than traditional tree farming, what marijuana proponents forget is that if the plant is removed (for use) that the soil rapidly depletes and requires (fossil fuel based) fertilizer. It ranks closely with canola and rapeseed as an energy source but way below algae, palm oil and some others.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Rajiv on December 7, 2005 - 11:33pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
You should look at George Monbiot's article in the Guardian The most destructive crop on earth is no solution to the energy crisis

Quote:

Over the past two years I have made an uncomfortable discovery. Like most environmentalists, I have been as blind to the constraints affecting our energy supply as my opponents have been to climate change. I now realise that I have entertained a belief in magic.

In 2003, the biologist Jeffrey Dukes calculated that the fossil fuels we burn in one year were made from organic matter "containing 44 x 1018 grams of carbon, which is more than 400 times the net primary productivity of the planet's current biota". In plain English, this means that every year we use four centuries' worth of plants and animals.

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
mikegordon on December 8, 2005 - 9:31am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
There is no doubt that using ANY resource that is grown in the ground can cause more serious issues than mining or digging out of the ground, but Hemp is the ONLY natural resource than can be produced indoors in controlled environments. Indoor production would negate the negative effects that this crop would have on the farm land and it could be scaled to any level needed. Therefore, the negative issues concerning Biomass fuels are eradicated.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Biologyfool on December 8, 2005 - 12:41pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
"...but Hemp is the ONLY natural resource than can be produced indoors in controlled environments......Therefore, the negative issues concerning Biomass fuels are eradicated."

You're joking right?  If you grow the plants indoors, that doesn't mean they no longet need N, P, and K.  Now you've got to mine for the P and K and use natural gas to create the Nitrogen.  You've just shifted the "negative issues" to someplace other than where the plants are grown.
-BiologyFool (who thinks MJ should be legalized for other reasons)

Comments can no longer be added to this story.
tom deplume on December 8, 2005 - 1:38pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top
There is (or was) an hydroelectric facility in northern Canada whose primary customer was an ammonia plant. The electricity was used to electrolyze water for hydrogen and to cryogenically extract nitrogen from the atmosphere. Using the Haber-Bosch process they manufactured NH3(anhydrous ammonia). No fossil fuels needed.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.

35 comments on Rigzone: 'Peak Oil' Argument Does Not Account for Nontraditional Sources

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

| Show without comments | PDF version