how do you feel about running your jk on ethonol that obama supports?
06-16-2011, 06:40 PM
#31
06-16-2011, 07:15 PM
#32
I'd take a 15% hit in fuel economy for 50% less fuel cost. As long as the math works out to benefit me I'm down. (As long as the vehicle is equipped to run it properly.. like a Koenigsegg CCXR that has 1000hp on ethanol)
On that note, I'm not ok with the prices being lower because of government subsidies that I'll have to pay for indirectly anyway.
On that note, I'm not ok with the prices being lower because of government subsidies that I'll have to pay for indirectly anyway.
06-16-2011, 08:22 PM
#33
JK Junkie
Obama is about to cut the 6 billion ethanol subsidies. That is 45 cents per gallon paid toward every gallon people bought plus a 55 cent per gallon tariff charge on Brazilian ethanol imports.
Yeah. The end of a pathetic product. Now you can buy Brazilian ethanol.
Yeah. The end of a pathetic product. Now you can buy Brazilian ethanol.
06-16-2011, 09:13 PM
#34
JK Newbie
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Lexington, KY
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Random thoughts:
There are many who think that speculators on Wall Street are responsible for as much as $0.70 of each gallon of gasoline purchased in the United States. The Saudis themselves have reported their cost to produce each barrel of crude - somewhere along the normal production chain the normal rules of supply-and-demand are being subverted.
There are lots of costs associated with that non-ethanol gasoline some love so much. How much of your tax dollars go into our defense budget so that we can maintain a military presence in the Middle East? What's the cost in bloodshed of our military servicemembers? What's the price to our national credibility?
Natural gas scares the crap out of me until we know more about this "frakking" process. I'd like to live long enough to enjoy my Jeep, and drinking contaminated groundwater won't help that goal.
There are many who think that speculators on Wall Street are responsible for as much as $0.70 of each gallon of gasoline purchased in the United States. The Saudis themselves have reported their cost to produce each barrel of crude - somewhere along the normal production chain the normal rules of supply-and-demand are being subverted.
There are lots of costs associated with that non-ethanol gasoline some love so much. How much of your tax dollars go into our defense budget so that we can maintain a military presence in the Middle East? What's the cost in bloodshed of our military servicemembers? What's the price to our national credibility?
Natural gas scares the crap out of me until we know more about this "frakking" process. I'd like to live long enough to enjoy my Jeep, and drinking contaminated groundwater won't help that goal.
06-21-2011, 02:13 AM
#35
JK Freak
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Arvada, CO
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Those guys talking about diesel and biodiesel, I absolutely agree, that is why I looked into swapping a small turbodiesel into my JK many times. I really wish more people would drive a modern diesel vehicle to see how great they are (awesome low-end torque coupled with 30% better fuel economy is great!) so we could get some momentum behind diesel technology.
I also agree that corn is absolutely not the answer, that was why I posted the link about the baterial enzyme discovery that breaks down cellulose. I am just curious, if it was cellulosic ethanol rather than corn ethanol, would you support it?
As for the "new discoveries to come" the reason I say that there are no more new discoveries is that we are no longer (like we were in the 70s) limited to how deep we can drill by technology. I doubt this is common knowledge so I will post it so everyone can realize just how far we are pushing our limits.
Current new oil wells being drilled in modern times are generally at 3 MILES (15000 feet) of depth below the earths surface (where the earth's natural geothermal gradient puts the temperature at 160 - 200 degrees C, or 320 - 400 degrees F). In the Gulf of Mexico those wells are at 15,000 feet of depth below 8,000 feet of water, so a total of 23,000 feet of drill, how crazy is that?! People wondered why an accident happened a year ago...this is why. Drilling to an oil reservoir that is almost 5 miles below the surface of the water is no walk in the park! Also considering that there are hundreds of such wells, there had to be an accident eventually (put enough cars on a highway and no matter how careful everyone is, something unexpected will happen eventually unfortunately).
The reason I can say for certainty that there are no more "big finds" is because oil and gas cannot exist at temperatures any higher than the current oil reservoirs that we are drilling, it is physically impossible. Even if there is organic material in deeper reservoirs, it has been converted to rock rather than oil/gas during the geologic processes.
I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news but someone has to put the facts out there that aren't common knowledge so that people can make up their minds for themselves. I'm trying not to tell you what to believe in this post, but just to get the facts about current technology and reservoirs out there so people can read and make up their own logical minds to believe what they want. I just want to put a few key facts out there to get you on your way to figuring out the limits on why oil is limited to what we are producing now. We aren't going to run out of petroleum overnight but it is pretty much unanimous in the petroleum industry that there are no more "big finds" left in the world.
I also agree that corn is absolutely not the answer, that was why I posted the link about the baterial enzyme discovery that breaks down cellulose. I am just curious, if it was cellulosic ethanol rather than corn ethanol, would you support it?
As for the "new discoveries to come" the reason I say that there are no more new discoveries is that we are no longer (like we were in the 70s) limited to how deep we can drill by technology. I doubt this is common knowledge so I will post it so everyone can realize just how far we are pushing our limits.
Current new oil wells being drilled in modern times are generally at 3 MILES (15000 feet) of depth below the earths surface (where the earth's natural geothermal gradient puts the temperature at 160 - 200 degrees C, or 320 - 400 degrees F). In the Gulf of Mexico those wells are at 15,000 feet of depth below 8,000 feet of water, so a total of 23,000 feet of drill, how crazy is that?! People wondered why an accident happened a year ago...this is why. Drilling to an oil reservoir that is almost 5 miles below the surface of the water is no walk in the park! Also considering that there are hundreds of such wells, there had to be an accident eventually (put enough cars on a highway and no matter how careful everyone is, something unexpected will happen eventually unfortunately).
The reason I can say for certainty that there are no more "big finds" is because oil and gas cannot exist at temperatures any higher than the current oil reservoirs that we are drilling, it is physically impossible. Even if there is organic material in deeper reservoirs, it has been converted to rock rather than oil/gas during the geologic processes.
I'm sorry to be the bearer of bad news but someone has to put the facts out there that aren't common knowledge so that people can make up their minds for themselves. I'm trying not to tell you what to believe in this post, but just to get the facts about current technology and reservoirs out there so people can read and make up their own logical minds to believe what they want. I just want to put a few key facts out there to get you on your way to figuring out the limits on why oil is limited to what we are producing now. We aren't going to run out of petroleum overnight but it is pretty much unanimous in the petroleum industry that there are no more "big finds" left in the world.
As for big traditional plays you are (probably) correct. The real issue is "unrecoverable reserves". Tight sands gas, which are now a major play, were "unrecoverable" in your lifetime. You know this.
The oil shale in Colorado (unrecoverable) is still under money heavy exploration. If and/or when, this becomes economically recoverable (around 100/barrel steady) this has the potential to provide more oil than Saudi Arabia. Mine and process didn't work, but my former company was working with other much larger companies and has proven profitable extraction at IIRC around $80 or so/barrel. Are you taking this into consideration? The Colorado oil shale? I don't know how much more I can really go into it, even though I don't think at this point it is really secret.
While this is not a new discovery or find, it is a massive reserve of "unrecoverable" oil.
06-21-2011, 02:14 AM
#36
JK Freak
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Arvada, CO
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06-21-2011, 02:20 AM
#37
JK Freak
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Arvada, CO
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Random thoughts:
There are many who think that speculators on Wall Street are responsible for as much as $0.70 of each gallon of gasoline purchased in the United States. The Saudis themselves have reported their cost to produce each barrel of crude - somewhere along the normal production chain the normal rules of supply-and-demand are being subverted.
There are lots of costs associated with that non-ethanol gasoline some love so much. How much of your tax dollars go into our defense budget so that we can maintain a military presence in the Middle East? What's the cost in bloodshed of our military servicemembers? What's the price to our national credibility?
Natural gas scares the crap out of me until we know more about this "frakking" process. I'd like to live long enough to enjoy my Jeep, and drinking contaminated groundwater won't help that goal.
There are many who think that speculators on Wall Street are responsible for as much as $0.70 of each gallon of gasoline purchased in the United States. The Saudis themselves have reported their cost to produce each barrel of crude - somewhere along the normal production chain the normal rules of supply-and-demand are being subverted.
There are lots of costs associated with that non-ethanol gasoline some love so much. How much of your tax dollars go into our defense budget so that we can maintain a military presence in the Middle East? What's the cost in bloodshed of our military servicemembers? What's the price to our national credibility?
Natural gas scares the crap out of me until we know more about this "frakking" process. I'd like to live long enough to enjoy my Jeep, and drinking contaminated groundwater won't help that goal.
There is no question trades build up the oil price. While this was a "secret" and a "conspiracy theory" during the first round, there are now federal lawsuits addressing the past issues. Not the present though.
Fracking is a non issue. People think it affects drinking water, and sometimes it inevitably will, shoot sometimes your wheel will fall off while driving. Subsurface casing usually goes to around 150'. Surface casing on the wells I ran were to between 1,100 and 3,600' - well below ground water. The fracking was around 5-7000' feet at the absolute minimum on shallow wells. This is far, far below any aquifers. The fear being created has less to do with the process and more to do with just creating fear because of a general hate of the industry.
06-21-2011, 02:54 AM
#38
JK Freak
Sigh. Such bad info available.
There is no question trades build up the oil price. While this was a "secret" and a "conspiracy theory" during the first round, there are now federal lawsuits addressing the past issues. Not the present though.
Fracking is a non issue. People think it affects drinking water, and sometimes it inevitably will, shoot sometimes your wheel will fall off while driving. Subsurface casing usually goes to around 150'. Surface casing on the wells I ran were to between 1,100 and 3,600' - well below ground water. The fracking was around 5-7000' feet at the absolute minimum on shallow wells. This is far, far below any aquifers. The fear being created has less to do with the process and more to do with just creating fear because of a general hate of the industry.
There is no question trades build up the oil price. While this was a "secret" and a "conspiracy theory" during the first round, there are now federal lawsuits addressing the past issues. Not the present though.
Fracking is a non issue. People think it affects drinking water, and sometimes it inevitably will, shoot sometimes your wheel will fall off while driving. Subsurface casing usually goes to around 150'. Surface casing on the wells I ran were to between 1,100 and 3,600' - well below ground water. The fracking was around 5-7000' feet at the absolute minimum on shallow wells. This is far, far below any aquifers. The fear being created has less to do with the process and more to do with just creating fear because of a general hate of the industry.
I will say though that there are a few (read this as very few, as in less than a few percent of cases) there is genuine evidence that isolated aquifers have been compromised by the fracking process. This is the reason why as we develop these resources we need to continue doing research on them (as most companies are doing) to minimize such occurrences. Even though the casing and cement may isolate the wellbore from the aquifer, most of the problems come from the fractures extending vertically from the horizontal well, penetrating the caprock (because the strata are not always as robust as they hope), and the fracture acts to conduct fluids vertically to the aquifer in addition to into the wellbore (for extraction as natural gas). However, again I repeat that there are -very- few occurrences of this so if I had a farm and had a water well on my property I would absolutely allow them to drill.
Also for the oil shale in CO I will look into it more deeply but I am fairly certain that the Alberta tar sands will be produced first as they strike me as much easier to produce. They require about $4 per gallon gasoline (equates to ~$150 per barrel oil) to make a profit on producing the tar sands. The oil shale, while a source of petroleum, I am pretty sure we are going to be paying $5 - $6 per gallon for gasoline before that becomes economically viable unfortunately...
Last edited by tpm152; 06-21-2011 at 02:58 AM.
06-22-2011, 01:44 AM
#39
JK Freak
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Arvada, CO
Posts: 747
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is very true that 99% of the hype over fracking is just that, hype. Most of the people that show that they can light their tapwater on fire due to dissolved methane in their water could infact do so before they drilled for natural gas (because there are much shallower small natural gas pockets that naturally occur make the aquifer in the region high in dissolved methane) but these people saw a way to become famous so they took advantage of the situation.
I will say though that there are a few (read this as very few, as in less than a few percent of cases) there is genuine evidence that isolated aquifers have been compromised by the fracking process. This is the reason why as we develop these resources we need to continue doing research on them (as most companies are doing) to minimize such occurrences. Even though the casing and cement may isolate the wellbore from the aquifer, most of the problems come from the fractures extending vertically from the horizontal well, penetrating the caprock (because the strata are not always as robust as they hope), and the fracture acts to conduct fluids vertically to the aquifer in addition to into the wellbore (for extraction as natural gas). However, again I repeat that there are -very- few occurrences of this so if I had a farm and had a water well on my property I would absolutely allow them to drill.
I will say though that there are a few (read this as very few, as in less than a few percent of cases) there is genuine evidence that isolated aquifers have been compromised by the fracking process. This is the reason why as we develop these resources we need to continue doing research on them (as most companies are doing) to minimize such occurrences. Even though the casing and cement may isolate the wellbore from the aquifer, most of the problems come from the fractures extending vertically from the horizontal well, penetrating the caprock (because the strata are not always as robust as they hope), and the fracture acts to conduct fluids vertically to the aquifer in addition to into the wellbore (for extraction as natural gas). However, again I repeat that there are -very- few occurrences of this so if I had a farm and had a water well on my property I would absolutely allow them to drill.
Also for the oil shale in CO I will look into it more deeply but I am fairly certain that the Alberta tar sands will be produced first as they strike me as much easier to produce. They require about $4 per gallon gasoline (equates to ~$150 per barrel oil) to make a profit on producing the tar sands. The oil shale, while a source of petroleum, I am pretty sure we are going to be paying $5 - $6 per gallon for gasoline before that becomes economically viable unfortunately...