I've wondered if the Oil industry isn't just trying to stall other forms of energy until the inventory of Oil is used up. This is also a race against mankind's interests in reducing greenhouse gasses. This is a rough estimate, but there are only about 40 years left of oil. Here are the calculations;
Total world oil reservers is ~1,35 Trillion Barrels. Average daily oil consumption is estimated at ~85.6 million barrels/day. 1350GB / 0.0856GB/day = 15771 days of oil left. 15771 / 356 days/year = 44 years of oil left. +/- a couple of years. In addition, this is the approximate CO2 produced by that oil to be added on to the 400ppm we already have; 3.15 barrels produces 1.0 tonne of CO2. So in 44 years, we will have dumped 1350GB/3.15 TCo2/B = 428,571,428,571 TonsCO2 (429 GTons CO2). Every 15 GT CO2 will rise CO2 by 1.0ppm. 50ppm will rise global temps by 1C. 429/15=28.6ppm or ~0.6C gain from now until oil is used up in 40 years or so. Similar calculations on coal will yield a 1.30C change in the same time period, and combined with oil it give 1.58C global average temp change in 40 years. Coal us in the developing countries has increased exponentially so this really could be an underestimate. If there is a 2C rise in global average temperatures occurs by 2050, (in line with these estimates), 4C by 2100 is very likely and if coal use is accelerating, a 6C change is really likely. Sadly for mankind, the corporate world is more than happy to do the waiting game and continue to gather huge profits from stone age polluting technologies for years to come. . On Sun, Aug 24, 2014 at 1:14 PM, Jones Beene <jone...@pacbell.net> wrote: > *From:* Terry Blanton > > > > But, have you considered how much cheaper it will be to pump oil from the > ground using a LENR source? :-) > > > > Actually that is not sarcasm. It is likely that a prime early use of LENR > will to extend the productive life of oilfields by a large factor. The USA > has a sunk-cost infrastructure of 150,000,000 working vehicles, and the > supply system for fuel delivery, so the economics of using LENR to leverage > multi-trillion dollar legacy is a no-brainer. That is accomplished by > bringing up deeper oil, and is actually a stronger incentive, economically > - than using LENR as an alternative to the ICE… EVEN when the new > technology lowers the value of the deeper oil! …at least for most consumers > in the near term. Green activists do not want to believe this, but it is > obvious to realists and most economists – nothing is more compelling > economically than extending the lifetime of a sunk cost. > > > > In terms of geology, it appears now that most if not all of the mega oil > fields are sitting on top of deeper shale which was in fact - the original > source of the now depleted lighter oils. That is the real lesson of the > Bakken and fracking. > > > > This is why Texas has and will continued to lead in oil production – even > after most of the shallow wells are depleted. There could 10 times more oil > than realized if and when it can be pumped up from 2 miles. This will > leverage the energy of LENR in a non-green way, but follow the buck… it > will happen and politics will not likely change that. > > > > Look for Texas oil money to try to put their man in the White House next > go around… even if he is a Canuck J > > > > > > >
