• Please be sure to read the rules and adhere to them. Some banned members have complained that they are not spammers. But they spammed us. Some even tried to redirect our members to other forums. Duh. Be smart. Read the rules and adhere to them and we will all get along just fine. Cheers. :beer: Link to the rules: https://www.forumsforums.com/threads/forum-rules-info.2974/

Washington state joins CA in the war on gasoline powered cars

CrakHoBarbie

Active member

waybomb

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
We were supposed to run out by now, and the world was supposed to be 10 degrees warmer, and NYC under a foot of water.
 

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
Peak Oil is an old theory. Shale Oil, Fracking and other technologies have extended the abilities of extraction, at some point we will run out. But as for now, extraction of oil and gas is still economical and plentiful.

Natural Gas is also very clean.
 

300 H and H

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter
I see it as both economics and unfortunately political, and I hate that....
But also economics is the real driver.
Picture a lithium battery the size of a sedan floor pan 6" thick. Now beside it picture a jug of 2 gallons of gasoline.
What is it your looking at? Energy equivalence. In other words the heat energy in BTU's is the same.
Now how far can you dive on 2 gallons of gas in the most economical car there is.... 80 miles tops?
That Tesla car can go nearly 400 miles in mild weather... 300 in the winter.
 

CrakHoBarbie

Active member
Peak Oil is an old theory. Shale Oil, Fracking and other technologies have extended the abilities of extraction, at some point we will run out. But as for now, extraction of oil and gas is still economical and plentiful.

Natural Gas is also very clean.
According to the British Petroleum’s 2019 Statistical Review of World Energy, the total known and proven reserves of the planet’s oil at that time was 1,733.9 billion barrels. Yearly global consumption in 2019 was about 35.9 billion barrels. A basic calculation reveals that if proved reserves didn’t grow, and if consumption remained constant at 2019 levels, it would take only about 48 years — meaning some time in 2067 — to exhaust those reserves. Of course, technology could very well step up again and find new ways of squeezing the planet for every last drop. But the ugly reality is still.... The oil supply is not infinite. So, maybe it's not such an outlandish idea to start looking ahead to alternatives.
 

Melensdad

Jerk in a Hawaiian Shirt & SNOWCAT Moderator
Staff member
GOLD Site Supporter
According to the . . . The oil supply is not infinite. So, maybe it's not such an outlandish idea to start looking ahead to alternatives.
Yes, I'm familiar with the projections. Every few years they come out with projections. Funny thing is that they have historically been wrong every time. Largely because new technologies have found new ways of extracting, economically, oil that was previously considered unreachable.

But that said, there are also alternatives, some of which include bio-diesel and synthetic fuels. We should also not forget natural gas, that is also being used to power city buses and over-the-road tractor trailers.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
According to the British Petroleum’s 2019 Statistical Review of World Energy, the total known and proven reserves of the planet’s oil at that time was 1,733.9 billion barrels. Yearly global consumption in 2019 was about 35.9 billion barrels. A basic calculation reveals that if proved reserves didn’t grow, and if consumption remained constant at 2019 levels, it would take only about 48 years — meaning some time in 2067 — to exhaust those reserves. Of course, technology could very well step up again and find new ways of squeezing the planet for every last drop. But the ugly reality is still.... The oil supply is not infinite. So, maybe it's not such an outlandish idea to start looking ahead to alternatives.
Known reserves and what may well be available are not the same thing. 40 decades ago we were told oil reserves would not last twenty years.

For all the science we still don't know from where petroleum comes. Like natural gas, it is a product of the planet and may not be a finite supply at all. But to be honest, that is not the issue.

The issue is the function of burning oil fuels and its effect on the planet. With electric cars we are still burning fuel somewhere to generate it. ANd no, wind isn't the answer. Can you say Texas power commission?
We no longer use coal to fire steam engines chugging across the nation 50 miles at a fill up. It simple wasn't economical competition to diesel engines. The government is trying to force similar innovations by political fiat. As fools method when the best most fecund method of fathering innovation is capitalism.
And we have it right here in America. On life support yes but it is available if unleashed.

Do I need to remind you of the costly success of the Obama/Biden "Cash for Kluckers" program.

It did not produce one electric car innovation.
 

CrakHoBarbie

Active member
Known reserves and what may well be available are not the same thing. 40 decades ago we were told oil reserves would not last twenty years.

For all the science we still don't know from where petroleum comes. Like natural gas, it is a product of the planet and may not be a finite supply at all. But to be honest, that is not the issue.

The issue is the function of burning oil fuels and its effect on the planet. With electric cars we are still burning fuel somewhere to generate it. ANd no, wind isn't the answer. Can you say Texas power commission?
We no longer use coal to fire steam engines chugging across the nation 50 miles at a fill up. It simple wasn't economical competition to diesel engines. The government is trying to force similar innovations by political fiat. As fools method when the best most fecund method of fathering innovation is capitalism.
And we have it right here in America. On life support yes but it is available if unleashed.

Do I need to remind you of the costly success of the Obama/Biden "Cash for Kluckers" program.

It did not produce one electric car innovation.
"40 decades ago" nobody used gasoline. Kerosene wasn't even invented till the 1840's. But I digress. The main issue is replacing fossil fuels, for all the reasons already mentioned. Personally, I was hoping for advancements in hydrogen generators, or "browns gas" generators. But since that technology hadn't advanced enough to be viable, we still need a viable option. There are a lot of promising technologies. But i am done trying to guess which one will come out on top. We will just have to wait and see. Either which way... Getting away from fossil fuels is imperative. And that's regardless if how much the idea pisses Republicans off.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
"40 decades ago" nobody used gasoline. Kerosene wasn't even invented till the 1840's. But I digress. The main issue is replacing fossil fuels, for all the reasons already mentioned. Personally, I was hoping for advancements in hydrogen generators, or "browns gas" generators. But since that technology hadn't advanced enough to be viable, we still need a viable option. There are a lot of promising technologies. But i am done trying to guess which one will come out on top. We will just have to wait and see. Either which way... Getting away from fossil fuels is imperative. And that's regardless if how much the idea pisses Republicans off.
It was a typo, I meant 10 decades ago. I don't have my glasses so sometimes I cannot see what I type. Sorry.

Gasoline was available in1840 but nobody new what to do with the stuff it was so volatile. So they burned it off to get kerosene. BTW since your being picky....kerosene wasn't invented. It was discovered. And it replaced whale oil lamps. Non government intervention BTW,,,; an Innovation from the private sector.

However we could have consumption exceed available supply quantities. Like aquafers in western Kansas New Mexico and around the world. I know we refer to them as "fossil fuels." That is a misnomer. They have nothing to do with dinosaurs. Therefore they are not a finite quantity.

Your say you are "not done trying to guess" yet our government leaders are. Guessing that is. And if the past patterns are repeated, it will be a costly failure.
 

300 H and H

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter
University of Stockholm in Sweden many moons ago proved crude oil requires no fossil organic matter for formation.
No plants or animals involved. It also explains nicely why we find crude at such great depths.
We will never run out of oil. Not going to happen....
 

CrakHoBarbie

Active member
It was a typo, I meant 10 decades ago. I don't have my glasses so sometimes I cannot see what I type. Sorry.

Gasoline was available in1840 but nobody new what to do with the stuff it was so volatile. So they burned it off to get kerosene. BTW since your being picky....kerosene wasn't invented. It was discovered. And it replaced whale oil lamps. Non government intervention BTW,,,; an Innovation from the private sector.

However we could have consumption exceed available supply quantities. Like aquafers in western Kansas New Mexico and around the world. I know we refer to them as "fossil fuels." That is a misnomer. They have nothing to do with dinosaurs. Therefore they are not a finite quantity.

Your say you are "not done trying to guess" yet our government leaders are. Guessing that is. And if the past patterns are repeated, it will be a costly failure.
Yes. I knew it was a typo but I had to exploit it. My bad. I simply cannot agree with you about the Earth's remaining oil supply. Logically, once oil is burned, its gone. Our oil supply is definitely finite. It's a known, undenyable fact. Also, I said I "am" done trying to guess, because frankly, I have no idea which technology is going to replace fossil fuels. But replaced they must be, because our supply is not infinite. If the wheels of commerce grind to a halt....... It's over for us. So we need to start now and keep pushing till we've found a viable replacement. That's it.
 

CrakHoBarbie

Active member
University of Stockholm in Sweden many moons ago proved crude oil requires no fossil organic matter for formation.
No plants or animals involved. It also explains nicely why we find crude at such great depths.
We will never run out of oil. Not going to happen....
Literally the entire scientific community around the globe disagrees. It all comes down to who you put your faith in. Do you believe some oil industry lobbyists, who's job it is to deceive you? Or, do you put your faith in the entire global scientific community? Think carefully before you spout another radical alt-right zealot conspiracy theory.....
 

Roofgardener

Active member
This is just virtue signaling. The bill only sets 2030 as a 'target', and it is not fixed. It does NOT mean that Washington state will ban the sale of gasoline powered cars in 2030.
 

waybomb

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
If you believe that dinosaur degradation is the source of hydro-carbons,, ya, we should have run out of oil eons ago.
The way I figure, I've got about 20 years to burn all the fuel I can. And a I believe I have about 113 or so cylinders to burn it up with. You greenies crack me up.
 

jimbo

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter
Yes. I knew it was a typo but I had to exploit it. My bad. I simply cannot agree with you about the Earth's remaining oil supply. Logically, once oil is burned, its gone. Our oil supply is definitely finite. It's a known, undenyable fact. Also, I said I "am" done trying to guess, because frankly, I have no idea which technology is going to replace fossil fuels. But replaced they must be, because our supply is not infinite. If the wheels of commerce grind to a halt....... It's over for us. So we need to start now and keep pushing till we've found a viable replacement. That's it.
No, once oil is burned, it's not gone. It's converted into something else. Gets in the air, then plants suck it up and convert it back into carbon, and the cycle begins anew. Not one drop disappears.
 

CrakHoBarbie

Active member
No, once oil is burned, it's not gone. It's converted into something else. Gets in the air, then plants suck it up and convert it back into carbon, and the cycle begins anew. Not one drop disappears.
What I meant was it's not recycled like water. But yes.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
Yes. I knew it was a typo but I had to exploit it. My bad. I simply cannot agree with you about the Earth's remaining oil supply. Logically, once oil is burned, its gone. Our oil supply is definitely finite. It's a known, undenyable fact. Also, I said I "am" done trying to guess, because frankly, I have no idea which technology is going to replace fossil fuels. But replaced they must be, because our supply is not infinite. If the wheels of commerce grind to a halt....... It's over for us. So we need to start now and keep pushing till we've found a viable replacement. That's it.
Wrong again. Oil reserves are a quantity we know. It is not the same as quantity available. So we don't know how much is ultimately available.
Crude oil is a complex hydrocarbon. And the molecular structure changes from all the different sources.

What we also don't know is from where Crude actual originates. Is it like natural gas a complex of methane and other elements that the earth creates? Or is there just so much coming out of the ground and it is gone?

I remember a tower of flame coming out of the ground near Seattle/Tacoma back in the early fifties. When my wife and I went to see it back in the late 1990's it was but a flicker. However, today it continues to be supplied fuel from the earth.

Most of the surface life on our planet is carbon based. As Jimbo explained, carbon is the key element of crude and it is recycled through that surface life. It does not go away. Carbon dioxide is the building block of most plant life. Greenhouse operators literally burn natural gas and exhaust it into their buildings to promote plant growth. Using solar energy as an energy source, plants combine CO2 and hydrogen to create complex sugars and structures. The amount of carbon does not change. Only it's state of existence.

The wheels of commerce will not stop because we run out of oil. It is far more likely they might stop because the government shuts down it's production and use. If supplies of economically available crude begin to dwindle, other sources will become attractive. And Industry/Commerce will adapt.

And 40 decades from now those new resources will be the fear mongered choice of politicians wanting to control every aspect of the live of their subjects.

Last time I was in New England, I was amazed at the acreage of productive farmland converted to solar panels. How many farmers no longer getup in the morning to feed livestock and grow carbon sucking crops? Instead the walk to the mailbox to get a check from the utility company .

Or the Gubmit.


Meanwhile, energy sucking pumps drain the aquifers out west to grow food on mechanical farms in the cheap land of former deserts. All because of government incentives. Elon Musk is a billionaire because our Gubmint gave him $40,000 of taxpayer money for each car he produced. And each one only uses 60% of the original coal and natural gas fuel energy to run down the highway past fields of solar panels and windmills where, once, food was grown.
 
Last edited:

CrakHoBarbie

Active member
It's recycled precisely like water.
No. It's not. Water evaporates from the surface of the earth, rises into the atmosphere, cools and condenses into rain or snow in clouds, and falls again to the surface as precipitation. Is it your moronic contention that oil gets burned, rises into the atmosphere and then falls to the Earth's surface as fresh clean oil? Oh my goodness....
 

jimbo

Bronze Member
GOLD Site Supporter
No. It's not. Water evaporates from the surface of the earth, rises into the atmosphere, cools and condenses into rain or snow in clouds, and falls again to the surface as precipitation. Is it your moronic contention that oil gets burned, rises into the atmosphere and then falls to the Earth's surface as fresh clean oil? Oh my goodness....
You're jousting at windmills. And the windmills are winning.
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
No. It's not. Water evaporates from the surface of the earth, rises into the atmosphere, cools and condenses into rain or snow in clouds, and falls again to the surface as precipitation. Is it your moronic contention that oil gets burned, rises into the atmosphere and then falls to the Earth's surface as fresh clean oil? Oh my goodness....
I don't believe anybody said that. Jimbo referred to "CARBON" as did I.

Carbon is a very common element on earth. It is constantly used in natural processes including rain which forms from snowflake crystals. They must have a bit of dust, often carbon, on which to congeal. Water, carbon and sunlight make plants grow and we consume them for energy. We can also make fuel for our cars from this process. So, our dependence on a our purported finite supply of crude, and therefore we must eliminate the internal combustion engine, is a fearmongering lie.
 
Last edited:

CrakHoBarbie

Active member
I don't believe anybody said that. Jimbo referred to "CARBON" as did I.

Carbon is a very common element on earth. It is constantly used in natural processes including rain which forms from snowflake crystals. They must have a bit of dust, often carbon, on which to congeal. Water, carbon and sunlight make plants grow and we consume them for energy. We can also make fuel for our cars from this process, So our dependence on a our ported finite supply of crude, and therefore we must eliminate the internal combustion engine, is a fearmongering lie.
Please cite your reference material which shows how that carbon, from burnt fossil fuels, is converted into gasoline and oil at a viable price point. ..... I'll wait here....?
 

FrancSevin

Proudly Deplorable
GOLD Site Supporter
Please cite your reference material which shows how that carbon, from burnt fossil fuels, is converted into gasoline and oil at a viable price point. ..... I'll wait here....?
I never said that either.

As some other members have cited,,; You seem to have a problem with comprehension. I would suggest it may well be based, in part, on your perspectives.
 

CrakHoBarbie

Active member
I never said that either.

As some other members have cited,,; You seem to have a problem with comprehension. I would suggest it may well be based, in part, on your perspectives.
Cite the reference material that proves that there's a process that can viably take over, producing the volume of petroleum we need at the price point we need, when the known oil reserves Peter out. You cannot cite said reference material because it doesn't exist. And your to stubborn to admit it. Now, that's not to say that the technology might become viable in the future. But that ain't now.
 
Last edited:

waybomb

Well-known member
GOLD Site Supporter
What's the difference if we run out? All you greenies will by peddling your recycled bicycles and wont need fuel. Everything will be "sustainable".

As for reference material, please cite the actual experiments where animal flesh was converted into petroleum. And how many pounds of said flesh is needed to make 1 barrel of oil.
 

CrakHoBarbie

Active member
What's the difference if we run out? All you greenies will by peddling your recycled bicycles and wont need fuel. Everything will be "sustainable".

As for reference material, please cite the actual experiments where animal flesh was converted into petroleum. And how many pounds of said flesh is needed to make 1 barrel of oil.
The difference is that life as we know it will end. All us "greenies" riding our bikes won't be able to take the place of all the18 wheelers who's life blood will grind to a halt sans fossil fuel. So, if you'd like life as you know it to continue, we'd best find an alternative to fossil fuel, pronto. ..... Oh.....that is, unless your planning on putting fish in your tank?...
 
Top