Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    If public transport wasn't so expensive and overcrowded, I suppose more people would be using it Beekeeper. I really don't understand where the government is going by increasing train fares and trying to get people off their cars by raising fuel duty etc. Other european countries have managed to have cheap public transport all over their country, so why not us?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fivebyfive)
    Me and my friend were having a chat about how much petrol has gone up of late. She made me aware that we only have 20 years left in reserves. Is this true?
    Obviously a little bit more will be found before then but doesn't it worry anyone else that are whole economy is based on oil and the west seems to be doing little to tackle the problem (what with the USA and its petrol guzzling 4by4s).
    Do you think the governments are actually going to do anything on a large scale to solve the problem? so far they just seem to be burying their heads in the sand.
    There's enough oil in venezuela alone to power the world for the next fifty years. Total reserves will last for at least 3 centuries. The middleeast has about 685 thousand million in proven reserves (yes, that's the real number). I wouldn't worry about it. People just say things like that as propoganda to push forth their over the top and unnecessary environmental agenda. Of course we need to reduce emissions and protect our planet, but they shouldn't lie. I'm all for wind, nuclear and solar power.

    Also i read something about fusion reactors? They're still a pipe dream. One has been started in france but the first useable one won't be useable for 50 years, and that's if it works. Don't expect fusion in this lifetime.

    The process used to make hydrogen fuel for fuel cells creates as much pollution as using gas.

    Oil is the cheapest easiest to use fuel and it will be a long while till it's gone.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by fivebyfive)
    Me and my friend were having a chat about how much petrol has gone up of late. She made me aware that we only have 20 years left in reserves. Is this true?
    Oddly enough they were saying that 20 years ago. :rolleyes:
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    Well every text book at school has said that theres 50 years left, but they are about 10-20yrs old themselves.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Dude)
    Well every text book at school has said that theres 50 years left, but they are about 10-20yrs old themselves.
    Nobody knows how much is left. We only know what we have so far discovered "known reserves" and project a date for it running out based on our current "burn rate"

    This is actually a fairly meaningless exercise and draws us towards alarmist conclusions.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Right, first of all, the most recent discoveries in the field of oil (sorry for the pun) are that we have more than enough oil for many years to come. secondly, a recent discovery in the states is that a well that was tapped and run dry 10 - 15 years ago and recently been re-assesed. Guess what, it is refilling, but not with the same oil as was in it before and in the surrounding fields, but is infact re-filling with a new grade of oil.

    The issue with oil is not wether it will run out, but more to the point the fact we need to stop evolving CO2 into the atmosphere that has not been there for millions of years. Yes, hydrogen in the immediate term will help stop the co2 comming out of your exhaust pipe, but you must remember that hydrogen is evolved from sea water through electrolysis, which requires electricity. With even the most modern fossil fuel stations running at only 15% thermal efficiency, at massive losses through the power transmission systems, the actual pollution produced by hydrogen powered car is no different to that of petrol.

    The best option open to reduce transport generated co2 is to switch to bio-diesel. This can take 2 forms, 'chip-shop' diesel, which is a blend of waste cooking oil blended with fermented alcohol (no use of crude oil). this however does tend to make the car smell a little. the second is 'grown' diesel, which is a blend of rapeseed oil, and alcohol fermented from the pulp used in step 1. both these fuels are actually carbon negative, as the co2 taken in by the growing plant, is less than is evolved from the resulting fuel. whats more, in the grown process, the final pulp can be used as animal feed.

    For power generation, fossil fuels simply cannot be used, they are just too inefficient and too polluting. so what do we replace them with? 'renewable' is OKish, the major problem is that for the initial power outlay, they have very little return. Take for instance wind farms. For each windmill, it will take in excess of 15 years to the turbine to generate the power used to make it in the first place. so in reality, they are simply pretty towers on the landscape. thier impact on our energy need is negligable. If we all of a sudden decided to power our national grid with them, we would see the lack of impact they have.

    Nuclear has a massive return on the initial outlay, and with modern building techniques, they will last much longer than the current reactors, with are 1950's technology. The problem is that all the research since 1975ish has had no use in the outside world, and the public has seen a very negatic image, as the advances have just been shunned by the like of greenpiss. The fact of the matter is, for the sort of scale needed by the UK, Nuclear is the only source of power that does not release massive amounts of co2. Its is the only way to prevent the run-away train that is , god i hate saying this, 'Global warming'!

    The issue of lack of clay for bricks is also a major issue. Yes, we can revert to concrete, but the process of making cement, also releases massive amounts of co2, second only to cattle farming and power stations!
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bikerx23)
    Its also the case that shell have recently employed 1000 new oil prospectors, so they are going on a big hunt for new reserves.
    There are known reserves in the arctic, but an agreement has been signed not to exploit these (even by the americans!)
    Part of the price rise is also OPEC messing about and decreasing production.etc.
    I do agree with AT82's prophecy...only the flashy classic cars will need oil for the future.
    I haven't read the whole thread but you seem to be right about new reserves. What is almost finished are the reserves in the North Sea near Scotland that the UK and Norway have been exploiting. They're almost finished.
    In the Middle East there are certain reserves that can be exploited for another 100 years. What happens is that as the reserves diminish, petrol becomes rarer and rarer and the price of the barell goes up. When the price will be high enough they will start to exploit certain reserves which are not at the moment. Some people predict that Canada will be a rich oil country in about half a century to a centiry.
    Plus oil companies are not stupid: they're continuously looking at new forms of energy. The current fad are natural gases, which at the moment have very local markets: unlike the petrol which has its prices listed at NY and London.

    A friend of mine works for the petrolium section of Peugeot. He could go on about petrol for hours...
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    does this 20 years include reserves that are yet to be extracted? like around the falkland isles...
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    I think this thread was started due to a misconception: it's the reserves in the North Sea which have very little time to go. Some people even estimate it to only 10 years.

    No way is there only enough petrol for the next 20 years. THat's totally wrong. No estimation would give numbers like that, even if you predict some crazy increase in petrol usage.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SamTheMan)
    I think this thread was started due to a misconception: it's the reserves in the North Sea which have very little time to go. Some people even estimate it to only 10 years.

    No way is there only enough petrol for the next 20 years. THat's totally wrong. No estimation would give numbers like that, even if you predict some crazy increase in petrol usage.
    To be perfectly honest, even if we have 100 years left that's still amazingly worrying.

    I suggest we all breed butch dogs to take over.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Hmm. So we can't agree on facts, consequences or solutions and all-in-all this thread has got nowhere. Maybe we should work for the UN.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mdm708)
    Hmm. So we can't agree on facts, consequences or solutions and all-in-all this thread has got nowhere. Maybe we should work for the UN.
    :toofunny:
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Do these 20/50/100/200/300 year estimates (!) of how much oil we have left take untill account the increases in oil consumption. Because like someone said, china/india etc are using huge amounts and will continue to expand their oil use.

    I read somewhere (think it was a chevon advert) that it took us 120 years to use our first trillion barrels of oil. the next trillion will take 35 years.
 
 
 
Turn on thread page Beta
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: August 17, 2005
Poll
Black Friday: Yay or Nay?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.