If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
"Cheneyburton" flees the country
Halliburton, probably guilty of embezzlement of BILLIONS of taxpayer
dollars in the Iraq "war for oil" disaster that is now imploding, announced Friday that it has decided to move to...where else...Dubai, that Texan-friendly, Republican-friendly emirate in the Middle East. Remember, it was Dubai that tried to take control of US port operations last year and Democratic hopefuls exposed the deal, sending the Bushies running for cover. Reason for the move? To try to protect our "vice" president, Dickhead Cheney, from nosey committee hearings and possible prosecution. Also, regarding hiding offsho Why has Bush Bird bought a huge ranch in Paraguay? Anyone look at the fact that Paraguay has NO extradition treaty with the US? The Republican reign of terror is collapsing, and the rats are running for safe harbor around the world. |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"Cheneyburton" flees the country
On Mar 12, 11:49 am, DeserTBoB wrote:
Halliburton, probably guilty of embezzlement of BILLIONS of taxpayer dollars in the Iraq "war for oil" disaster that is now imploding, announced Friday that it has decided to move to...where else...Dubai, that Texan-friendly, Republican-friendly emirate in the Middle East. Remember, it was Dubai that tried to take control of US port operations last year and Democratic hopefuls exposed the deal, sending the Bushies running for cover. Reason for the move? To try to protect our "vice" president, Dickhead Cheney, from nosey committee hearings and possible prosecution. Also, regarding hiding offsho Why has Bush Bird bought a huge ranch in Paraguay? Anyone look at the fact that Paraguay has NO extradition treaty with the US? The Republican reign of terror is collapsing, and the rats are running for safe harbor around the world. The recent price spike in gas, is due to refineries being down for refit/modernization. And Feb. was the month from hell for heating costs. Otherwise, hopefully they will bring back all this oil, if this really is a "war for oil" as you say. It would drive the price down, by increasing the supply. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
"Cheneyburton" flees the country
On 12 Mar 2007 16:12:44 -0700, "duty-honor-country"
wrote: Otherwise, hopefully they will bring back all this oil, if this really is a "war for oil" as you say. It would drive the price down, by increasing the supply. snip No such fantasy exists, stunod. The major papers today are predicting $4/gal gasoline this summer. We'll never see $2/gal again. It's over for gasoline-powered/mechanical drive cars. It's over for GM, too, since other smaller, more nimble companies are developing the lithium ion and "megacapacitor" energy storage systems, while GM sat on their fat asses, trying to yet again kill electric drive vehicles. They're as big a bunch of stunods as you, Noodles! |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
"Cheneyburton" flees the country
On Mar 12, 8:34 pm, DeserTBoB wrote:
On 12 Mar 2007 16:12:44 -0700, "duty-honor-country" wrote: Otherwise, hopefully they will bring back all this oil, if this really is a "war for oil" as you say. It would drive the price down, by increasing the supply. snip No such fantasy exists, stunod. The major papers today are predicting $4/gal gasoline this summer. We'll never see $2/gal again. It's over for gasoline-powered/mechanical drive cars. It's over for GM, too, since other smaller, more nimble companies are developing the lithium ion and "megacapacitor" energy storage systems, while GM sat on their fat asses, trying to yet again kill electric drive vehicles. They're as big a bunch of stunods as you, Noodles! no one wants an electric car with less power, that costs more- you think the Elcaset was a flop, the electric car makes Elcaset look successful ! put your money where your mouth is- are you going to buy a Prius for $24 grand ? do you realize how much the replacement batteries cost ? take one on a trip- do you realize how LONG the recharge time is ? "honey, let's pull over for the night- we have to recharge the batteries"... yeh, that's gonna sell.. coal synth is our ace in the hole- 3 billion barrels a year indefinitely ! that's not counting the 100 year supply that BP is sitting on in South America... |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Cheneyburton" flees the country
On Mar 12, 8:34 pm, DeserTBoB wrote:
On 12 Mar 2007 16:12:44 -0700, "duty-honor-country" wrote: Otherwise, hopefully they will bring back all this oil, if this really is a "war for oil" as you say. It would drive the price down, by increasing the supply. snip No such fantasy exists, stunod. The major papers today are predicting $4/gal gasoline this summer. We'll never see $2/gal again. It's over for gasoline-powered/mechanical drive cars. It's over for GM, too, since other smaller, more nimble companies are developing the lithium ion and "megacapacitor" energy storage systems, while GM sat on their fat asses, trying to yet again kill electric drive vehicles. They're as big a bunch of stunods as you, Noodles! what a piece of **** ! http://www.toyota.com/prius/ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Cheneyburton" flees the country
I'll be driving my V-8 American musclecars for my lifetime, and so
will my descendants- and unfortunately, you will be stuck with your rotted, aging Honda, for the rest of your life. And you have no descendants to pass that rotted Honda on to- lucky for them ! http://www.usatoday.com/tech/science...rnatives_x.htm Before the oil runs out: The search for alternatives By John Dillin, The Christian Science Monitor WASHINGTON - When Adolf Hitler sparked World War II, the German war machine faced a daunting challenge: It had almost no petroleum. Despite the shortage - which some considered fatal - a powerful Nazi blitzkrieg quickly rolled back the armies of Poland, France, the Low Countries, and Britain, and it thrust far into the Soviet Union. Hundreds of German bombers pounded Britain, and swarms of German fighter planes fought off Allied attackers. How did Hitler do it? With coal. Operating 25 synthetic fuel plants, Germans converted their country's brown coal into high-quality diesel fuel and gasoline. Coal provided over 92% of Germany's aviation fuel and half of all its petroleum needs. What worked in wartime Germany could hold lessons for the United States. With only 2% of the world's proven oil reserves all but teeming with coal, the U.S. could turn its carbon bounty into synthetic fuels. If they're cheap enough, synfuels could power America's autos, trucks, trains, tractors, and aircraft far into the future and cut the nation's reliance on Middle East oil. The U.S. already relies on coal, natural gas, hydropower, and even windmills to heat and provide electricity for homes, offices, and factories. But for transportation - a linchpin of modern economies and national security - synfuels from coal, tar sands, and other ancient fossil deposits represent one of the few alternatives to oil. "Only fossil fuels provide energy on a large enough scale and with sufficient versatility to meet the world's growing demand for energy," concluded a recent study by ExxonMobil. Oil and Gas Journal seems to concur. Even as conventional oil supplies begin to play out in the U.S., the North Sea, and some other major production areas like Venezuela, the Journal says that the most "realistic" replacements would be other "hydrocarbon resources [such as] oil shale, tar sand, extra heavy oil, and possibly coal liquids." Only hydrocarbon sources like tar sands and coal liquids are in great enough supply to supplement regular oil, the Journal says. Until now, energy companies have by and large bypassed hydrocarbon alternatives to conventional oil because of cost. Producing oil from something like Canada's vast tar-sand deposits was just too expensive at $30 or $40 a barrel when Saudi Arabia could pump and deliver conventional oil for about $4 a barrel. Current tight markets and rising prices for oil have changed that equation. Today, there are already a few places with limited but growing production of synfuels. South Africa, for example, has two firms that together produce 200,000 barrels a day of synfuel, mostly from coal, but more recently from natural gas. Even more ambitious projects are underway in Canada, where private firms such as Royal Dutch Shell are mining and refining tar sands into synfuel that competes directly with conventional oil. Shell plans to more than triple its output from Canadian tar sands to 500,000 barrels a day by 2015, Malcolm Brinded, the company's executive director for exploration and production, said this month. This is only one of Shell's several efforts to expand oil output from unconventional sources. Mr. Brinded says the company also recently set up a joint venture with a Chinese partner "to explore the possibilities for developing oil-shale resources in Jilin Province." Among the top candidates to replace conventional oil a ·Tar sands. The world's largest deposits of this bitumen are in Canada. After billions of dollars of investment by private oil companies, output from the Alberta tar sands has reached 1 million barrels of synthetic oil a day. That should rise to 2 million barrels a day by 2010, and 3 million by 2020. A recent report indicates that costs of producing the oil have declined to $18 a barrel - making tar- sands oil comfortably profitable in today's market. ·Oil shale. Extensive deposits - perhaps 2 trillion barrels of hydrocarbons - lie in America's Rocky Mountain West, mostly in Wyoming, Colorado, and Utah. Difficulties in extracting and refining the hydrocarbon have frustrated earlier efforts. But if oil prices remain at recent levels, oil-shale deposits will become more attractive as conventional deposits in North America play out. Already, the U.S. government has begun to get "expressions of interest" from oil companies about oil-shale deposits on public lands, according to congressional testimony in April by Tom Lonnie, an official with the U.S. Department of the Interior. ·Extra heavy oil. Located in deposits around the world, extra heavy oil, like tar sands, is costly to process, but it could eventually become an important resource. There are hundreds of billions of barrels that could be produced. ·Coal. East and West, the U.S. has plentiful supplies of coal that meet about 20% of US energy needs, primarily to generate electricity. Coal is rich in carbon, which provides lots of energy, but it gives off a greenhouse gas, carbon dioxide, that many researchers argue is causing global warming. All these alternatives to conventional petroleum have serious problems. The hydrocarbons in extra heavy oil and tar sands have been compared to what is left of crude oil after the valuable elements like gasoline and diesel fuel are removed. Heavy oils and tar sands are thought to have once been conventional oils from which the lighter, more valuable elements either evaporated or were washed away by water. Heavy hydrocarbons are thick, black, and full of contaminants. To make them usable as transportation fuels, they must be cleaned (by removing sulfur, heavy metals, and carbon) and enriched with inputs of hydrogen from another source, such as natural gas. Yet after processing, they make a quality product. All these alternative hydrocarbons also have a problem with excessive carbon content. Considerable federal research is underway to keep the carbon, which becomes CO2 after it is burned, from reaching the atmosphere. One way is to inject it into the ground, either into oil wells, which increases output of petroleum, or into huge underground formations where it can be stored indefinitely and not damage the environment. Skeptics abound, especially in places like Parachute, Colo., which saw the 1970s boom in alternative fuels go bust during the 1980s. The small community lost 2,500 jobs after Exxon closed its oil-shale project there in 1982. Today's energy boom is "organized chaos," the town's mayor, John Loschke, told the Associated Press. But "we're better prepared. It's 25 years later and we've got infrastructure." Environmentalists and conservationists are also wary, because they would prefer greater efforts on renewable sources of energy. But the best-known alternatives, such as wind energy and solar power, are difficult to incorporate into a car or plane and still be commercially feasible. Nevertheless, inventors and some companies are hard at work on everything from plug-in hybrid cars to engines that run on hydrogen or saw grass. It's not clear which of these technologies, if any, will win out. What looks clear, experts say, is that the continuing growth of demand for gasoline will not come from the West but from developing nations, especially China and India. In fact, oil demand in the U.S. and Europe should begin to decline well before 2030, according to the ExxonMobil study, even while global demand continues to rise about 1.5% a year during the same period. This suggests that developed nations, which inaugurated the oil era 150 years ago and kept it going with imported oil, will pioneer the alternatives as oil begins to run out. "We have in the pipeline, in 10 to 15 years, a portfolio of [coal] technologies with near-zero emissions," says Scott Klara, deputy director of coal-based projects for the U.S. Department of Energy. "We don't know when oil [output] will peak, but it will peak, and when that time comes, more people than ever will be looking at coal." |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
"Cheneyburton" flees the country
we're way ahead of you Boob- you're going to be driving an aging Honda
for a long, long time...they are using nuclear to cook down the coal to oil. I love technology, and so does my American V-8 ! http://www.americanenergyindependence.com/letter.html The United States spends more money protecting Middle East oil and fighting terrorism than it would cost to develop new energy technology that would obsolete oil as a source of energy. The connection between terrorism and Middle East oil wealth can no longer be ignored. It is time for America to lead the development of new energy technology that would end the need for oil as a source of energy. Freeing America, and all other industrial countries, from the need to use fossil oil as a source of energy will cut-off the flow of oil money to the Middle East and put an end to the financial support of militant Islam. With the help of new technology, America's energy needs can be obtained from sources other than fossil oil. American technology has put a man on the moon, mapped the human genome, and successfully landed robotic exploration vehicles on Mars. It seems reasonable to believe that American scientists and engineers could also develop environmentally safe alternative energy technology to free America from dependence on fossil oil. The United States has over 270 billion tons of proven coal reserves, having the energy equivalent of four times the oil reserves of Saudi Arabia and equal to all of the proven oil reserves in the world. If the United States could use its coal reserves without destroying the environment, foreign oil would not be needed. Nuclear energy can produce the hydrogen and provide the intense heat needed to make synthetic oil from coal. Nuclear power is a proven emission-free energy source that can replace gas and coal fired base-load electric power generation plants, and enable the USA to develop a replacement for our oil based transportation fuel. The replacement of coal power plants with nuclear power plants would reduce America's atmospheric CO2 emissions by 30%. The USA does not need to wait for a hydrogen economy; nuclear power can begin to give America energy independence now, by providing the process heat and hydrogen needed for the manufacture of synthetic oil from coal. If nuclear heat and nuclear hydrogen are used in the manufacture of synthetic oil from coal, then the yield of oil from coal would be much higher than if coal was used to provide the needed hydrogen and process heat. Using synthetic gasoline and diesel made from coal, to provide transportation fuel, would not reduce CO2 produced by cars and trucks on the nation's highways, nor would it increase atmospheric CO2 because it would merely replace existing consumption of gasoline and diesel. However, it is possible to have zero emission gasoline/diesel cars and trucks. If technology is used to remove the CO2 tailpipe emissions directly from the atmosphere after the CO2 is released from the tailpipe. In other words, allow cars and trucks to release CO2 and then clean the atmosphere using technology designed to remove CO2 from the air. The collected CO2 can either be recycled or sequestered. If coal power plants were replaced by nuclear power plants, for base- load electricity, and coal is used to make synthetic gasoline and diesel, then Americans who are dependent on the coal mining industry for their incomes would support nuclear energy. Modern Coal-to-oil technology can free America from dependence on Middle East oil. One billion tons of coal per year, at 3 barrels of oil per ton, would replace 65% of USA imported oil, and provide jobs for people who depend on the coal industry. At 12 million imported barrels per day, 65% is 7,800,000 barrels per day. Just over 20% of oil imported into the USA today comes from Persian Gulf Nations, which are also members of OPEC. Less than 45% of oil imported into the USA today comes from OPEC. Drilling for new petroleum might help in the short term, but in the long term natural petroleum is not sustainable - we cannot depend upon crude oil for our energy future. However, the development of technology for the production of synthetic petroleum will create a sustainable energy future. Synthetic hydrocarbon fuels such as synthetic diesel and synthetic gasoline can be made from many different sources of raw material, including renewable biomass. America has an abundance of natural raw materials that can be used to make synthetic petroleum. A large-scale public investment in Gas-To-Liquids (GTL) technology would bring the cost of the technology down so that the manufacture of synthetic petroleum would be competitive with fossil oil production. The current interest in Gas-To-Liquids technology is focused on monetizing otherwise worthless remote natural gas deposits. However, variations on the same technology can be used to make synthetic petroleum from synthesis gas derived from coal, oil sands, oil shale, biomass, or even recycled CO2 in combination with hydrogen extracted from water. Synthetic gasoline and synthetic diesel made from synthetic petroleum can power existing cars and trucks without needing to modify the engines or national fuel distribution infrastructure. Details and links to more information about new energy technologies can be found on the American Energy Independence web site. www.AmericanEnergyIndependence.com Congress needs to fund advanced research and development of new energy technology. The United States needs to move forward with the development of sustainable sources of energy, and do so with the urgency of a national security mandate. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
"Cheneyburton" flees the country
On Mar 12, 8:34 pm, DeserTBoB wrote:
On 12 Mar 2007 16:12:44 -0700, "duty-honor-country" No such fantasy exists, stunod. oh, it exists...and it's awesome to behold- an entire industry springing up, just to make gas for my 455 Firebird to guzzle... just remember, many a dinosaur died, just so I can get 10 MPG...and people like myself, will continue to enjoy powerful American V-8 engines, for at least the next 100 years on the coal supply alone- or perhaps we'll bolt on an alcohol carburetor, and enjoy the added octane benefit... (laughter...) knarly, isn't it...I love this country ! http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synthetic_fuel Synthetic fuel or synfuel is any liquid fuel obtained from coal, natural gas, or biomass. It can sometimes refer to fuels derived from other solids such as oil shale, tar sand, waste plastics, or from the fermentation of biomatter. It can also (less often) refer to gaseous fuels produced in a similar way. The process of producing synfuels is often referred to as Coal-To- Liquids (CTL), Gas-To-Liquids (GTL) or Biomass-To-Liquids (BTL), depending on the initial feedstock. The best known synthesis process is the Fischer-Tropsch synthesis which was used on a large scale in Germany during World War II. Other processes include the Bergius process, the Mobil process and the Karrick process. An intermediate step in the production of synthetic fuel is often syngas, a stoichiometric mixture of carbon monoxide and hydrogen, which is sometimes directly used as an industrial fuel. The leading company in the commercialization of synthetic fuel is Sasol, a company based in South Africa. Sasol currently operates the world's only commercial coal-to-liquids facility at Secunda, with a capacity of 150,000 barrels a day [1]. Other companies that have developed coal- or gas-to-liquids processes (at the pilot plant or commercial stage) include Shell, Exxon, Statoil, Rentech, and Syntroleum [2]. Worldwide commercial gas-to-liquids plant capacity is 60,000 barrels per day [3], including plants in South Africa (Mossgas), Malaysia (Shell Bintulu) and New Zealand (Motor-fuel production at the New Zealand Synfuel site has been shut down since the mid nineties, although production of methanol for export continues [4]. This site ran on the Mobil process converting gas to methanol and methanol to gasoline). Numerous US companies (TECO, Progress Energy, DTE, Marriott) have also taken advantage of coal-based synfuel tax credits established in the 1970s, however many of the products qualifying for the subsidy (for example slurries or briquettes) are not true synthetic fuels since they are not the portable, convenient, end-user liquids that the credit was established for. The coal industry currently uses the credit to increase profits on coal-burning powerplants by introducing a 'pre-treatment' process that satisfies the technical requirements, then burns the result the same as it would burn coal. Sometimes the amount gained in the tax credit is a major factor in the economic operation of the plant. The synfuel tax credit has been used primarily in this manner since the cheap gas prices of the 1980's killed any major efforts to create a transportation fuel with the credit, and its continuation is seen as a major 'pork project' win for coal industry lobbyists, to the tune of $9 billion per annum.[1]The total production of such synfuels in the US was an estimated 73 million tons in 2002. The United States Department of Energy projects that domestic consumption of synthetic fuel made from coal and natural gas will rise to 3.7 million barrels per day in 2030 based on a price of $57 per barrel of high sulfur crude (Annual Energy Outlook 2006, Table 14, pg52). Synthetic fuels require a relatively high price of crude oil in order to be competitive with petroleum-based fuels without subsidies. However, they offer the potential to supplement or replace petroleum- based fuels if oil prices continue to rise. Several factors make synthetic fuels attractive relative to competing technologies such as biofuels, ethanol/methanol or hydrogen: The raw material (coal) is available in quantities sufficient to meet current demand for centuries It can produce gasoline, diesel or kerosene directly without the need for additional steps such as reforming or cracking There is no need to convert vehicle engines to use a different fuel There is no need to build a new distribution network While at present synthetic fuels are primarily produced because of subsidies, they are a proven technology that offers the potential to solve the energy crisis due to the depletion of oil (Hubbert peak), at least for the next hundred years. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
"Cheneyburton" flees the country
On 13 Mar 2007 04:37:36 -0700, "duty-honor-country"
wrote: what a piece of **** ! http://i18.tinypic.com/2eycs5z.jpg |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
"Cheneyburton" flees the country
On 13 Mar 2007 05:01:41 -0700, "duty-honor-country"
wrote: I'll be driving my V-8 American musclecars for my lifetime, and so will my descendants- and unfortunately, you will be stuck with your rotted, aging Honda, for the rest of your life. And you have no descendants to pass that rotted Honda on to- lucky for them ! snip My Honda has no "rot". It's never been to northeastern Pennsylvania, where everything (including steel bridges) rusts to uselessness. Another Cholly Noodlez da Stugot fantasy down in flames. Doesn't it get irritation to be made to look like a bacciagaloup all the time....Noodles? |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
FS: 1992 Collect-A-Card "ACM Country Classic" Series 1 (Factory) Set | [email protected] | Cards:- non-sport | 0 | June 23rd 06 10:02 AM |
FS: 1993 Sterling "Country Gold" 99-Card Plus Foils Factory-Set | J.R. Sinclair | Cards:- non-sport | 0 | March 16th 06 11:10 AM |
FS: 1996 "Country Music Christmas" Hardcover 1st Edition Book | J.R. Sinclair | General | 0 | November 29th 05 10:41 AM |