| home |
|
| news |
|
| discussions |
|
| content |
|
| site |
|
|
| technical support | Need Help? Lodge a support ticket!
Note: This is for technical support only. General questions about railways should be posted to the Forums.donation 
Please Donate!photo comp Have YOU voted yet on Photo of the Month?
Click Here!
Voting Closes 30/11search |
| |
| Author |
Message |
Myrtone
Chief Train Controller
Joined: Feb 13, 2007
Last Visited: Nov 23, 2008
Location: North Carlton, Melbourne, Victoria
contact
|
post
|
|
Posted: Wed May 14, 2008 11:20 pm
|
| Draffa wrote: | | MD wrote: | | I simply dont understand why people keep thinking that Australia is going to run out of oil. |
Because it's a finite resource.
Strictly speaking, we're not going to 'run out'. What's going to happen is that field decline will mean there's less available each year, and what is available will cost more. At some point, it won't be economic anywhere.
There'll always be Oil in the ground, it's just that nobody will want it because it's too expensive. |
What does field decline mean?
| Quote: | | Victoria was making its own oil from brown coal back in 1982. |
At a horrible environmental cost.
CTL also requires a lot of water.
What exactly is the eviromental cost. As for CTL, whatever that stands for, is any sulfur extracted in the porcess? Sulfur in fossil fuels it produces sufur dioxide when combusted, very corrosive. Without sulfur, and especially with a higher oxygen content, combustion of hydrocarbons such as coal, could in theory produce no more than carbon dioxide (breated in by vegetation) and water vapour, which means more water in this world.
| Quote: | | Quote: | | Australia has enuf black coal to make oil from for the next 4000 years. |
Your figure is way off, but lets assume it's correct.
That 4000 years would be for us only. But what makes you think other countries won't want a piece of the action? We wouldn't be making it just for ourselves. And since that will be the case, we're back to the 250-year figure that's usually bandied about (which itself assumes we can get all of the Coal out of the ground, which has never happened.
Then you have to worry about Peak Coal, currently assumed to hit somewhere around 2015 (notice how all of these Peaks seems to be around the same time?). IIRC, the US has already passed Peak Coal Energy, since they have used most of the better quality reserves.
| Quote: | | South Africa incidentally, has been making its own oil from coal for the past 22 years. |
The SASOL plant in South Africa only produces about a third of SA's daily needs, and is the largest point-source of pollution in the whole of Africa.
Converting Coal to Liquids is not efficient, and requires a huge supply/distribution chain. We'd be better off just burning the Coal in a power Plant and using the electricity directly. |
Too much Sulfur dioxide, and radioactive material (more than a well designed properly functiony Nuclear power station) released into the air.
Last edited by Myrtone on Thu May 15, 2008 2:35 pm; edited 1 time in total
|
|
 |
Golconda
Locomotive Driver
Joined: May 09, 2006
Last Visited: Jul 17, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 7:28 am
|
"What does field decline mean?"
There is lots you can do to keep an oil field producing, injecting seawater into the strata beeing a common one, problem being that these cost money.
Day one, you spend a dollar and get a litre out, day two you spend 1.10 and get 0.9 of a litre out - etc etc till you are paying 10 bucks to get 0.1.
We are not there yet, one of the most amazing facts in the peak oil/biofuel debate is that the common feedstock for industrial alcholol is - mineral oil!
|
|
|
cootanee
Train Controller
Joined: Apr 28, 2006
Last Visited: Nov 20, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
|
Draffa
Chief Train Controller
Joined: Apr 11, 2005
Last Visited: Nov 23, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 3:43 pm
|
| Myrtone wrote: | | What does field decline mean? |
It's when you can poke as many holes in a formation as you like, but you can't get as much out as you did the day before.
One way to look at it to pretend the oil field is like one of those garden pump-up sprayers. You start with a bottle full of water/pesticide/fertiliser/whatever. You pump it a few times and the pressure increases. This is the default state of an Oil or Gas field.
Now, release the trigger and start spraying. This is the same as drilling a well and starting extraction.
You'll notice that as you use the fluid, you have to pump the sprayer more and more to acheive the same pressure. In an Oil or Gas field, keeping the pressure up is achieved by pumping another gas or liquid back into the field through another well (letting the pressure drop too far means you 'blow down' a gas cap and any remaining Oil becomes unattainable).
Since you have to pump more and more into the sprayer/field, your costs go up. Energy Return on Energy Input (EROEI) declines. Eventually, the pressure is dropping so rapidly the producer simply can't pump replacement liquids/gasses in fast enough. In an oil field, you also experience things like Water Incursions as the flood front moves unpredictably through the field (a particular problem for highly fractured fields) and causes wells to 'water out' (Stripper Wells in the USA are watered out, and produce about 99L of water for every L of Oil, but they've got so many of them, they actually extract quite a significant volume).
| Quote: | | What exactly is the eviromental cost. As for CTL, whatever that stands for, |
CTL = Coal-To-Liquids.
| Quote: | | is any sulfur extracted in the porcess? |
Ideally.
| Quote: | | Without sulfur, and especially with a higher oxygen content, combustion of hydrocarbons such as coal, could in theory produce no more than carbon dioxide (breated in by vegetation) and water vapour, which means more water in this world. |
You need energy to make the converstion. That energy comes from (in overwhelming abundance) Fossil Fuels. You'll be burning one Fossil Fuel so you can have the energy to turn more Fossil Fuels into even more Fossil Fuels. There's a loss of efficiency at every step. Entropy cannot be avoided.
CTL is not efficient. Burn the Coal in a Power Plant and use the electricity genreated directly, instead of using it to convert more Coal into Oil.
|
|
|
MD
Assistant Commissioner
Joined: Dec 10, 2003
Last Visited: Nov 16, 2008
Location: Canbera
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 4:49 pm
|
Oil is neede for 2 reasons and it doesnt matter how its made.
The worlds aviation industry has no alternative to oil, no electric airplanes.
The worlds shipping industry has no realistic alternative.
Whilst you could make Nuclear powered ships, I cant see the UN security council going along with civilian nuclear ships.
And without ships , Australia starves to death as we are currently an importer of food.
The pollution from coal liquefaction is irrelevant when one compares the
pollution thats going to come from the 500 1GW coal fired power plants China is building.
If oil actually does run out, then goodbye Australias economy.
Think about how many industries in this country that need oil, and the farming and mineral extraction business is just a start.
|
|
|
simonl
Assistant Commissioner
Joined: Jan 05, 2006
Last Visited: Nov 16, 2008
Location: Brisbane
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 6:04 pm
|
| MD wrote: | | Whilst you could make Nuclear powered ships, I cant see the UN security council going along with civilian nuclear ships. |
It's been tried. The Savannah was a civil nuclear powered ship, but it was a commercial flop.
| Quote: | And without ships , Australia starves to death as we are currently an importer of food.
|
What are you smoking? We might import some food, but we're a net exporter last I checked.
|
|
|
FieldShunt74
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Nov 06, 2004
Last Visited: Nov 23, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 6:47 pm
|
| MD wrote: | Oil is neede for 2 reasons and it doesnt matter how its made.
The worlds aviation industry has no alternative to oil, no electric airplanes.
The worlds shipping industry has no realistic alternative.
Whilst you could make Nuclear powered ships, I cant see the UN security council going along with civilian nuclear ships.
And without ships , Australia starves to death as we are currently an importer of food. |
Yes, aviation need liquid petroleum based fuels. They need an energy dense fuel that is easy to contain and burn. Shipping though, is one of the easiest sectors to use non oil based fuels. On a ship, weight and size of the power source isn't much of an issue. You could run ships on just about anything; coal, gas, wood, you name it. Ships can have sails or solar panels to supplement whatever power you use.
We're a huge net exporter of food. We need oil or a suitable substitute to run farm machinery though. We could use CNG or some other gas.
We need oil (or maybe coal) to make plastics. How stuffed would be be without those?
Electric trains are the most mature non oil dependant transport technology and if we want to save oil, that should be the first place we start.
|
|
|
FieldShunt74
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Nov 06, 2004
Last Visited: Nov 23, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 7:36 pm
|
| simonl wrote: | | FieldShunt74 wrote: | | Electric trains are the most mature non oil dependant transport technology and if we want to save oil, that should be the first place we start. |
That's true, but the question how to get the freight on those electric trains. |
OR how to have any sort of an economy or manufacturing sector that will require transport in the first place.
|
|
|
Draffa
Chief Train Controller
Joined: Apr 11, 2005
Last Visited: Nov 23, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Fri May 16, 2008 1:56 am
|
| MD wrote: | | Oil is neede for 2 reasons and it doesnt matter how its made. |
More than two, actually. We need Oil and Gas to make all our fertilizer and pesticides, many of our medicines, roads (the loss of six-lane highways is not something I'm going to be crying about), plastic, computers, DVDs, and a thousand other uses.
| Quote: | | The worlds aviation industry has no alternative to oil, no electric airplanes. |
Air travel will be the first thing to go. If I had the money, I'd be making a CFD (Contract for Difference) in the negative direction on Airlines in general. Budget airlines in Europe and North America are already bleeding to death.
| Quote: | | The worlds shipping industry has no realistic alternative. |
Sails.
| Quote: | | The pollution from coal liquefaction is irrelevant when one compares the pollution thats going to come from the 500 1GW coal fired power plants China is building. |
China is also removing old, less efficient CPPs from service as new plants come online, and is running into problems getting enough Coal to power existing capacity. It's also the worlds largest implementer of Solar and Wind.
Remember, of course, that CCS (Carbon Capture and Sequestration) is a complete non-starter at this point in time.
|
|
|
BDA
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Oct 17, 2003
Last Visited: Nov 23, 2008
Location: Sydney
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 12:41 pm
|
|
In the short term don't hold your breath .
|
|
|
fabricator
Deputy Commissioner
Joined: Jun 12, 2007
Last Visited: Nov 23, 2008
Location: Gawler
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sun May 18, 2008 4:13 pm
|
| Draffa wrote: | | MD wrote: |
The worlds aviation industry has no alternative to oil, no electric airplanes. |
Air travel will be the first thing to go. If I had the money, I'd be making a CFD (Contract for Difference) in the negative direction on Airlines in general. Budget airlines in Europe and North America are already bleeding to death.
|
Exactly, in the long term there is no competition from Airlines. When its $99 for a 8 hour train ride and $299* for a 6 hour plane trip, which would you choose ?
* Assumes 3 fold increase in fuel costs, like say from 80cents to $2.50 for petrol.
One problem is how to get off this rock, rail tunnel from Cape York to PNG and then island hop via Indonesia perhaps ? Take a steam powered ship instead ?
|
|
|
awsgc24
Minister for Railways
Joined: Feb 18, 2003
Last Visited: Nov 23, 2008
Location: Sydney, NSW
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 06, 2008 4:45 pm
|
|
What about some electro-diesels so that you only have to electrify the steep bits needed more power. NZ are proposing something like that for a new Wellington - Auckland train that can use the 25kV that only goes part of the way.
|
|
|
Riccardo
Minister for Railways
Joined: Aug 20, 2003
Last Visited: Nov 23, 2008
Location: Elsewhere
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 07, 2008 2:21 pm
|
| fabricator wrote: | | Draffa wrote: | | MD wrote: |
The worlds aviation industry has no alternative to oil, no electric airplanes. |
Air travel will be the first thing to go. If I had the money, I'd be making a CFD (Contract for Difference) in the negative direction on Airlines in general. Budget airlines in Europe and North America are already bleeding to death.
|
Exactly, in the long term there is no competition from Airlines. When its $99 for a 8 hour train ride and $299* for a 6 hour plane trip, which would you choose ?
* Assumes 3 fold increase in fuel costs, like say from 80cents to $2.50 for petrol.
One problem is how to get off this rock, rail tunnel from Cape York to PNG and then island hop via Indonesia perhaps ? Take a steam powered ship instead ? |
6 hour plane trip to where? 8 hour train trip to where? How can the two said to be competing? A train in 8 hours might get to Yass, in 6 hours a plane can be over the Arafura Sea and nearly in Indonesia.
You asking me to go to Yass when I had intended to go to Indonesia.
So tell me, how good is the tahu goreng in Yass? Where can I pick up a good rendang and satay for dinner in Yass? And how's the surf in Yass today? Choppy I suspect.
I think I'll pay the extra.
If you need to get in touch, drop a comment at the Transport Textbook or on my blog.
|
|
|
BDA
Chief Commissioner
Joined: Oct 17, 2003
Last Visited: Nov 23, 2008
Location: Sydney
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 2:42 pm
|
Just about everything revolves around the almighty dollar (or whatever currency) .
For those in the cities or near major roads have a look around , see any drop in car or truck traffic ? Nup so fuel can't be that expensive that neither industry or the public can afford it .
That's not to say that I like what I pay for mine but crying about it isn't going to change things this week .
The southern railway (Syd Melb) is going along the predictable lines of more reliable perway but nothing in the way of logical realignments .
Personally I think electrifying the current alignment would be sheer lunacy , hopefully one day the powers that be will wake up and shout Eureka ! lets have a better alignment that will mean less energy required to get people and goods from Sydney to Melbourne regardless of where the traction energy comes from .
BTW have you been reading about the downturn in sales of those gargantuan SUV's in the States , one can only hope that the trend follows suit here . I wonder how long the soon to be on sale 7Litre Vomit Door's are going to sit around HSV's dealerships .
I can see more being spent to make cars and trucks use less juice but really its a fantasy to let yourselves believe it helps whilever the worlds population keeps growing .
I think its an eternal tug of war between business interests who farm us consumers , can't have too many can they , and more rational thinkers who realise that there is a finite amount of resources planet earth can provide .
Its simple mathematics , more people - greater energy requirements - limited resources . If nothing else changes the wealthy will get wealthier and the vast majority will suffer varying degrees of lower living standards .
Have a nice week end .
|
|
|
Draffa
Chief Train Controller
Joined: Apr 11, 2005
Last Visited: Nov 23, 2008
contact
|
post
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 09, 2008 5:47 pm
|
| BDA wrote: | | BTW have you been reading about the downturn in sales of those gargantuan SUV's in the States , |
Yes, the sales drops are huge! GM is now planning on closing four manufacturing plants by 2010!
However, it seems that the drop in sales is due less to petrol prices than it is to the Housing Bubble. With the enoumous number of people involved in house construction, marketing, sales, supply, whathaveyou now out or work, they're not buying new Urban Assault Vehicles.
In either case, the less UAV's on the road, the better imo. 
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT + 10 Hours
|
You cannot post new threads in this forum
You cannot reply to threads in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB 2.0.6 © 2001 phpBB Group
Theme images and concept © 2004 by Michael Greenhill and Railpage, All Rights Reserved.
Version 2.0.6 of PHP-Nuke Port by Tom Nitzschner © 2002 www.toms-home.com
|
|
