Here I am

US Energy Independance is a Myth !!!

Attention: TDR Forum Junkies
To the point: Click this link and check out the Front Page News story(ies) where we are tracking the introduction of the 2025 Ram HD trucks.

Thanks, TDR Staff

Spanked a ricer yesterday

So how does Pacific Pride work?

Well, according to head of Exxon it is:



Exxon Head: Energy Independence Is a Myth



Associated Press/AP Online





WASHINGTON - The idea of American energy independence is a myth and the United States must maintain "constructive relationships" with oil-producing countries for its own prosperity, the head of petroleum giant Exxon Mobil Corp. said Monday night.



"We do not have the resource base to be energy independent," Exxon Mobil chairman Lee R. Raymond said in a speech in which he outlined some of what he called the "hard truths" about global energy markets.



Raymond, who runs the world's largest publicly traded oil company, said that while other countries, including Russia, will play a growing role in supplying oil to the world, the Middle East will remain the center of supply because it holds as much as half of the world's oil reserves.



"We simply cannot avoid significant reliance on oil and gas from the Middle East because the world's supply pool (of oil) is highly dependent upon the Middle East," Raymond said in a speech at the Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars.



The fact that the United States and the rest of the world will have to depend increasingly for its oil and also for natural gas from Middle East, "is not a matter of ideology or politics," he said. "It is simply inevitable. "



Raymond scoffed at suggestions - heard commonly among politicians in Washington - of energy independence.



"We periodically hear calls for U. S. energy independence as if this were a real option," he said. "The fact is, the United States is a part of the world energy market and we must participate and compete in that market. "



At a time when relations with some major oil producers such as Saudi Arabia and Venezuela are strained, Raymond said the United States must work to "maintain appropriate and constructive relationships with oil-rich countries in the future. They will be very important for our prosperity and our security. "



Responding to a question from the audience about the recent terrorist attacks that killed oil workers in Saudi Arabia, Raymond said they "obviously give us a lot of pause" because Exxon Mobil has workers and investments in petrochemical plants and refineries in the country.



`We're going through a difficult patch right now ... and may for some time," he said.



Exxon Mobil earned a record $21. 5 billion last year, nearly double the previous year, and also reported record earnings during the first quarter of this year as crude oil and gasoline prices soared.



Raymond predicted that fossil fuels - coal, oil and natural gas - will continue to provide most of the energy for many decades, even if there are improvement in conservation and efficiency and expansion of other energy sources.



As for global warming, Raymond expressed -as he often has - his skepticism about the science and predicted that in the decades ahead "carbon dioxide emissions from greater fossil fuel use will climb. "



Carbon dioxide is the leading "greenhouse gas" that many scientists believe eventually will cause a warming of the earth if allowed to continue to grow.



"We simply do not yet have the economic solutions or technologies that would permit us to meet future energy demands without carbon emissions growth," Raymond said.
 
"Bio desiel is getting better every year. "



QUALITY is not the issue, QUANTITY is!



Folks have no real comprehension of the sheer VOLUME of combustible fuels consumed in this country - or the vast acreages needed to provide even a significant percentage of that volume... Add in ever increasing population, and at some point a choice must be made between planting to feed an engine, or to feed a family...
 
There will be a day when black oil is too prohibitive to use in our vehicles as a source of fuel. Renewable resources will have to pressed into use.



I may not live to see the end of black oil fuels, but my children will.
 
Is it that the US doesn't have enough crude in its control or that 'we' won't allow drilling in our backyard?



IMO, every new house built should be roofed in solar panels and have a wind turbine sticking out the roof.....



Brian
 
NVR FNSH, you are right on!!

We have mega-million dollar satellites orbiting the earth, all with solar panels to feed a tiny but very efficient battery system, which in turn powers all the functions of these birds. And they last for decades! So in a world where profit wasn't always king, wouldn't there be solar panels on every building, everywhere? And spinning windmill blades to capture even more free energy? So why isn't that happening? Profit IS king! After the solar panels are installed and the windmills are turning small generators to charge what would hopefully be inexpensive and very efficient batteries, and the new technology was developed to give us home appliances, central A/C and heating systems, etc. , with lower power requirements than we now think possible, well guys, after all the theoretical progress had been made, the power companies can't SELL US ANYTHING ELSE!!! And there goes the profit margin that all the stockholders demand from their investment. So it is a logical next step in this thought process that money, in the form of ever increasing profits is, sadly again, the real bottom line. Did anybody miss the paragraph in the post reprinted above, wherein it was stated that Exxon-Mobil had recently declared RECORD PROFITS!?
The energy industry is going to ride this horse until it drops dead, and the mechanized world will be the loser. And nobody that can or will do anything about it seems to give a s*&#! The US CAN be energy independent, but not with the current attitude and profit generating influence of the energy industry. They don't care about running out of fossil fuel, they care about being among the wealthiest people on the planet.
"Here endeth the lesson. "
 
The community I live in has quite a few homes with a full solar array on their roofs. I think they are in the area of 2500 watts. Interesting and simple no-battery setup. The solar panels generate DC power, which is turned into 115 VAC by an inverter, which is tied to the power grid. When you are producing more than you are using, the local power company buys the power from you at the same rate they sell it to you when you use it. Maintanance free, no batteries, no moving parts, no noise, and no polution. Because we get so much sun here, and need the power when the sun is out, it works very well. Only down side is the price of about $15,000.
 
Take a few years for the system to pay back. But, the real goal is the testing and future of creature comforts for us.



I love solar, but my 3 amp, 13. 6 volt system is going to have to do for a while.



Up in Albuquerque, I had a home with an 80 gallon solar pre-heat tank. Average daytime temp was about 128* and overnight still holding 114*.



A 5 gallon bottle of propane on the "real water heater" lasted me a couple years.
 
Sounds like Exxon is generating propaganda... . Nothing prevents them from farming and mixing their own B2. Was it BP and Amoco partnership that is currently doing a lot of Solar stuff now...



I guess they forgot when we had tariffs against the Saudi's... .
 
Originally posted by klenger

When you are producing more than you are using, the local power company buys the power from you at the same rate they sell it to you when you use it.
Is that specific to Arizona? Back around 82', I put up wind generators until the tax credits ended killing my friends business. Same setup, generate DC, invert to AC and backfeed the grid. The payback was less than the utilities cost per kwh by a couple of cents. I have not kept up with the money aspect so I don't know how it is these days.
 
I think getting "credits" is pretty standard. Unless you are a commercial alternative energy generator. I would love to get a small diesel engine (vw comes to mind) run it on waste vegetable oil and crank up some energy credits here :)
 
The 100% buyback is with the Tucson Electric Power (TEP) company. I don't know if other utilities offer this or not. Tucson Electric Power seems to be very progressive with energy conservation. We have a TEP gurantee home, and our heating and cooling costs are guranteed not to exceed $1. 00 per day average throughout the year. Ours has actually been less. Not bad for airconditioning in 100+ temps for over 3 months / year.
 
As far as generating your own power with solar panels, the technology isn't quite ready yet. Yes, satellites use solar panels for power, but it's at a very minute quantity--you just can't get that much power out of them (some satellites are powered by the heat generated by the decay of radioisotopes, and a few have actual nuclear reactors (like the Soviet RORSATS, I believe)).



Anyway, solar panels just aren't that efficient--I know it's less than 10%, and I'm thinking it might be less than 5%. The sun puts an enormous amount of energy into the top of your house, but the technology just isn't there to harness it yet.



Back in school, one of the EE courses required us to do a project to convert our house completely into solar power, with a suitable amount of storage (battery bank) for nighttime or inclement weather. The solar panels were the most expensive part (the best I found, oddly, were manufactured by BP, as I recall), and they're only good for 20 years. Then you need sun trackers, batteries, charge controllers, inverters, and convert all your lighting and appliances to DC, if you can, so you don't loose so much through the inverter.



My solution was one of the cheaper ones, and it was in the five-digit range. And you can't really run a washer/dryer, refrigerator, or HVAC system on it--the energy required is just too great. The guys that tried to run everything straight off of inverted power got up above a million dollars in equipment, IIRC.



Talking with one of the consulting firms, they told us that Arizona is the only place it makes any kind of sense at all, and that only in the long run. It is nice to be able to sell some back to the utility, but running completely off the grid is not economically feasible at this point. Tax credits could make it better, but we need better solar panels.



And you're going to have to replace them all in 20 years, so the cost is recurring...



Personally, I like the idea of miniaturized nuclear reactors. If we could get over the stigma that Three Mile Island brought to nuclear power in this country, we'd all be a lot better off. I'll not go into specifics, but the pebble bed reactor is quite small (8MW is pretty low output for a reactor--I believe someone put one in a truck trailer for a remote Canadian installation of some kind), and very, very safe--you can read more about it if interested.



Put a PBR in every neighborhood (it would give you less radiation dose in a year than flying from DC to LA once), and we can really cut back on the monstrosity that our power grid is becoming.



--Ty

Disclaimer: I'm just an aerospace engineer, not a petroleum engineer or nukee; all my knowledge on this stuff comes from professional curiosity.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally posted by Gary - KJ6Q

"Bio desiel is getting better every year. "



QUALITY is not the issue, QUANTITY is!



Working here in the middle east, I see nearly 9 million barrels being pump daily, the oil company say they can do 10 million barrels a day. 12 and 15 in the future. that's not much reserve, unless there a serious build up in the intrastructure and plant capacity here. I say we looking at 3-5 years before there an increase in production. Looking forward to summer leave in 3 weeks.
 
Anyone that thinks that solar is the answer- Don't tell us- Put the 40,000 dollar system on your house. Disconnect from the grid. If you are selling it back to the grid you are depending on the system and not really affecting peak load. So it is a subsidy to sell it back at retail. Do the justification at selling it back wholesale- The wires, meters, peaking power and billling all have to be maintained- who is paying for that- The non solar user. Why am I being "taxed" by a private corperation for not useing the most "politically correct" power? Here in the northeast (NY) a base loaded plant on a long term contract gets 4. 2 cents per KW/HR during the summer. The people that read the meters and distribute the power maintain the power lines and buy the peaking power sell the product for 15 to 17Cents/ KW-hr.



As far a building solar- No one is preventing you from doing this. All you need is a checkbook. Being that it takes more electricity for a solar cell to be manufactured than it will produce in its lifetime, and the drums of heavy metal waste created in thier manufacture are of no consequece to the end user- but that use is still there. It must be politcally incorrect to look past the end use appearance and look at the "well to wheels" cycle efficiency. Solar does not cut the mustard. Not for a homeowner, definitely not for an industrial concern. Why does the government need to give breaks not given to other energy suppliers? This is corporate welfare for the manufacurers of a politically correct appliance. If/when solar becomes and efficient alternative to being on the grid, people will buy the systems.

Lets look at the 15,000$ system that will last 20 years. Capital cost 750$/year plus interest- 20 Year note say 120$/month. Retail electriciy . 15 cents per KW/hr. 2500 watts in the peak sun. 12 HRs per day( no rain ever) reduction for sun angle ( generous ) 0. 7 = 21 kw-HR/DAY 630 kW-HR/MONTH. or 94. 5$ per month in electricity produced RETAIL. And the hidden costs of maintaining the system.

It cannot even compete with the highest cost electricty. But it does give the opportunity for those who feel strongly to support the solar cell manufacturers, and feel good about thier "Magic" power from the sun. All in all if I had 15,000$ to waste -I would not give it to thoose making drums of toxic waste, using grid power to sell it back to you in a different form. I would follow the algae diesel idea. That looks promising. Using low tech to harvest the sun- not high tech. But big algae ponds in the desert, big refineries-this is not as "sexy" a technology as the magic solar panel that produces electricity for nothing other than stacks of 100$ bills and the sun.



But this was all just my opinion.
 
Exxon is full of it. They sell oil thus it would stand to reason they'd be the first in line yelling IMPOSSIBLE!! But its just BS. Excursions that get 8 mpg... while other countries make diesel cars that get 60 mpg. VW even has diesel cars that get 200 mpg. Yes... they are not Lincoln Town Cars... but they are fuel efficient. US Government is always trying to place laws into effect that "increase" MPG by the year 2030 by 3 MPG for SUV's and garbage like that. Ya... meantime they'll produce 1 million more of them than the year before so what good did that do?



If the US wants to do something... until high tech gets off its hind end... just make 50 mpg minimum acceptable in cars. Bet diesel will become favorable then. I dont feel guilty driving the Dodge. I'm getting over 20 in a 6000 LB truck while neighbor X and neighbor Y get 10 in 454 Suburbans and V10 F350's. Aren't we the only country who produces vehicles with V10's? What is this... the 1930's. Internal combusion engines should have been made obsolete long ago. Yet we keep adding more cylinders to them?



There are always those who claim impossibilities. In 1980 many engineers said the Space Shuttle was simply impossible with the technology they had. And 20 some years later getting 50 mpg is still impossible? VW kinda proves that wrong.
 
Last edited:
Peter,

My comment about roofing houses in solar panels was not totally serious. I haven't looked into the cradle-grave costs of solar so I'll take your word about panels consuming more electricity to manufacture then they'll make in their lifetime.



I do believe new houses should be using as much alternative energy sources as possible - provided it is environmentally beneficial.



And, no - I don't have $15K to drop on solaring my house. I'm unemployed.....



Brian
 
One day they will be able to produce solar cells more energy efficiently, and cheaper. They are still great for places expensive to pull a wire to, and low enough power requirements. What does have promise is the diesel from salt water algae. There was a link here a while ago on a paper written about it. If 10 % of the sonoma desert in california was used for an algae pond, with the right farm waste feedstock, fermentaion vessels and refineries it would be able to produce all us transportation fuels. Assuming everyone was using diesels. That is a here-now we know how to do it technology. No fuel cells, no new distribution network. all the "weird and new" stuff is ia a large plce in a desert. Building anything this big would get a lot of people upset over the "destruction" of the desert. The environmental impact statements alone would keeps lawyers in business for many years. Maybe more on lawyers than the fabricators and constuctors of the facility. It will have to happen in a country short of oil that does not sue people who come up with a good idea. - NOT the US
 
Back
Top