Extend a Hand
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-07-08 01:02 AM
Original message |
I talked to a rocket scientist tonight |
|
a physicist working on the airforce "assured fuel" program, developing additives for synthetic jet fuel. He said that the airforce is trying to find manufacturers that will build refineries to provide fuel to their specifications. Every thirty years power-plants are required by PUCO to basically rebuild to take advantage of newer technologies and the AF is wanting coal powered generators that currently use high-quality coal to instead include in their remodels, small refineries to synthesis fuel from low-quality high sulfer coal that could then be used to power the plant, supply synfuel to the airforce, and sell captured sulfer to the fertilizer industry. I asked him if the AF was worried about peak oil and he not to his knowledge, that the purpose of the program was to eliminate dependence on unfriendly foriegn suppliers. I ask him what he personally thought of claims that Ghawar was in decline and he said he didn't know anyone that really believed the Saudi estimates and that no one knows what's in the ground over there.
The integrated refinery-power generator idea was interesting-- I hadn't heard that one before.
|
RaleighNCDUer
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-07-08 03:29 AM
Response to Original message |
1. One thing to remember when talking to scientists -- |
|
they may be very knowledgeable and focused on their own field, but are often, shall I say, less than well informed outside it.
IOW, you can't expect a rocket scientist to be able to speak knowlegeably about geology, and the current state of foreign (or domestic) oil fields.
If you want accurate assessments of Saudi oil fields, speak to a geologist.
|
unhappycamper
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-07-08 03:39 AM
Response to Original message |
2. The military guzzles 340,000 barrels of oil a day. |
Dead_Parrot
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-07-08 05:47 AM
Response to Original message |
3. "synthesis fuel from low-quality high sulfer coal" |
hunter
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-07-08 11:06 AM
Response to Original message |
4. Or we could just get rid of the Air Force. |
|
Solves the problem, doesn't require coal, and you don't have to be a rocket scientist to accomplish it.
The military-industrial complex knows it's days are numbered because they are utterly dependent on oil. The people of the United States must be vigilant that our self-serving military machine does not resort to increasingly desperate and draconian measures to prolong its existence. As the beast starves it will become increasingly dangerous to our civil liberties and the earth's environment.
|
phantom power
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
|
Thu Feb-07-08 11:08 AM
Response to Reply #4 |
5. You mean like invading other countries on trumped-up pretext? |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) |
Tue Apr 30th 2024, 09:00 PM
Response to Original message |