college prep work

Sunday, May 07, 2006

article thoughts

The first article takes the side the peak oil is a possibility, but if it is it will not happen soon. They argue that the growth in production is able to grow by 15 million barrels a day. And that there is “no geological reason why this wave of supply will not become available.” They were arguing that there is 3 trillion barrels on oil in the ground. And that since 1 trillion barrels have already been used that leaves 2 trillion barrels in the ground. It is different from what we have read because they do not really address the issue of the difficulty with which it takes to harness all of that oil. They say they can use tar pits and shale oil to draw out even more oil. All the other readings our class has read address the idea of the left over oil, although most have said that there is 1 trillion barrels left not 2. The difference between this site and the others in that they make it seem as easy as harnessing\.
They also seem to quote different researchers than we had before. While in the past we have heard from private geologists. They seem to not really have any alternative motives than finding out the truth. They have not been associated with any large corporations. This site quotes the United States Geological Survey (USGS). The USGS would do well with saying that the peak is a long way off because as the U.S. economy relies on oil, it would not look good for our government if they announced that oil is shortly going to peak and the economy will decline.
The economist also does not seem to have any worry with environmental issues oil Is having on the planet, in fact they seem to encourage them in order to get more oil! “In the Arctic (which, as global warming melts the polar ice cap, will perversely become the next great prize in oil).” The Economist directly admits that global warming is happening, which is cased from gasses from oil, and they see it as a positive because it will make it easier to acquire more oil.
The economist does mention the growing need. And says that there is an ability to produce 15 million barrels of oil more every day. They never truly announce, how they will come up with more oil to bring more out of the earth. They come up with weak plans to continue with however much they are extracting currently, but none of the plans say how they will deal with a larger demand. They argue that there is much more land to be found and that because of that the peak will not be a sharp drop. Well other sources we have read do seem to favor that when oil recedes it will be drastic. I agree with the latter idea. Although there seems to be more land available to search for oil there has not been significant evidence of any kind that they will begin to start finding 100 million barrel oil fields again. The largest have been around 20 million and those to are becoming to be further between. They even argue that there will not be a peak at all. Just a plateau. I feel that will not happen for two reasons. One is that there has been very little government-funded research on a scale that could really draw up any new ideas. The hydro, solar, and wind power that is often used as an example for power sources growing that are not related to oil. One they do not even take up 1% of the energy that is being used by oil. As well as the space to generate small amounts of energy is very inefficient. A 100 acre field filled with 60 foot windmills may generate enough energy for a house and small farm, but there is not enough space to give that to every family, or money for that matter. They also say that gas is continuing to stay cheap. Although it was written only two weeks ago it says that there is large amount of gas still for under $60 a barrel. Well currently gas is going for over that in the United States and I know its much more expensive than that in other parts of the world including the majority of Europe.


Post a Comment

<< Home