Take your photography to the next level and beyond...

  • NEWS
  • REVIEWS
  • INSPIRATION
  • COMMUNITY
  • COMPETITIONS

Why not join for free today?

Join for Free

Your total photography experience starts here


Forget electric cars - enough oil for 100 more years!


Carabosse e2
11 39.7k 269 England
15 Jul 2013 4:27PM
Phew! Thank goodness I won't have to buy one of those electric things! Wink

Article: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-23280894

Join ePHOTOzine for free and remove these adverts.

Dann
1 223
15 Jul 2013 4:36PM
I had a similar thought CB.

Petrol-heads can relax! Wink
keith selmes
11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
15 Jul 2013 4:58PM
Some of us have been mumbling in our beer for years about how there's plenty of oil, if people are willing to pay for it.
Get a new technique and a slight shift up in price, and suddenly there's heaps of reserves.
Nice to be right sometimes.

Climatologists won't be happy though.
brian1208 e2
11 10.6k 12 United Kingdom
15 Jul 2013 5:12PM
When I joined Shell 50+ years ago one of the questions I asked during an induction course was "what were Shell going to do when the oil ran out" as even then there were stories about there only being another 30 or so years worth of crude.

The clear and strong message was, "find some more" and even then the Exploration techies were convinced there was basically limitless oil supplies, restricted only by the economic cost of extraction and refining.

so far that appears to have been correct Grin

Mind you, it is time we stopped burning the damned stuff and made more effective use of it as chemical feed stocks, a much greener and more effective use in my opinion

(The "30 years supply" concern was in fact a misunderstanding by the media of the way in which the oilcos reported their reserves, ie: proven reserves for the next 30 years, I guess its much the same today? )
llareggub e2
4 758 United Kingdom
15 Jul 2013 5:56PM
To me it is not a case of if it runs out it is a case of when, how coal/oil is produced is a fact and it is also a fact that we are using coal/oil far quicker than it is being produced and therefore the reserves are reducing...

I agree that those reserves are not reducing at the rate that some of the alarmists claim, however those reserves are not infinite and at some point in time an alternative needs to be found! Putting politics aside what is wrong with investing now to find solutions for tomorrow?

As for the "there is enough oil for those willing to pay for it", all that does is reaffirm to me that all "we" are interested in is "ourselves"! What happens to those that cannot afford to pay for it yet possibly have a greater need for it?
keith selmes
11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
15 Jul 2013 6:36PM
When I type "if people are willing to pay for it" I'm primarily referring to governments and industry, and indirectly to their voters and customers, as well as individual private motorists.

On an Open University course, when the workings of oil reserves were explained to us, we were also told that oil was the most compact form of mobile energy known, and therefore the most suitable for vehicles. We were then asked, if there is a limited supply of oil, and eventually it will be more costly, should we allow it to be used for private transport ? Shouldn't it be reserved for essential public services ? We might extend that to tasks like food production and construction work, which are essential and don't have an alternative, but do any private individuals actually need oil ?

I've tried public transport, and after that I'm not giving up my car in a hurry, but it wouldn't kill me not to have it, whereas it might kill me not to have an ambulance. Makes me pause for thought. But we seem to be some way from having to make that choice.
thewilliam e2
6 4.9k
15 Jul 2013 6:37PM
Why shouldn't we use up all the oil? Why should we leave any natural resources for future generations?
brian1208 e2
11 10.6k 12 United Kingdom
15 Jul 2013 6:46PM

Quote:Putting politics aside what is wrong with investing now to find solutions for tomorrow?



Absolutely nothing and indeed many of the major oilcos are doing just that (I know from personal experience that Shell have been doing so since the '70s and certainly BP and Esso have been to)

We also need to be looking at better engine design to reduce consumption much further, look at local power generation from human and animal waste etc.

Its a multifaceted problem and needs to be addressed as such.

Getting rid of Nimbyism and red-tape would be a good start as a lot of the efforts to do this so far have been blocked at every turn

I remember chatting about this to a local councillor some years ago when there was a proposal for just such a local "waste to energy scheme" and he was tearing his hair out when the locals blocked it, meaning that we had to pay to dispose of the waste rather than profiting from the generation of energy. Its not as if it was near any habitation as it was on an industrial site round the back of our local airport but they "disagreed in principle" with the concept
keith selmes
11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
15 Jul 2013 6:48PM

Quote:Why should we leave any natural resources for future generations?
fair comment

Current generations should be able to develop failsafe nuclear power generation, that doesn't produce weapons grade material, and can use up the stocks of nuclear waste that we're already leaving for future generations - along with all the huge amounts of thorium we've barely touched.
We're slow getting on with it though, because we've still got plenty of gas and oil, and because lots of people like the concept of "green" power and are scared of the word "nuclear".
dcash29 e2
9 2.0k England
15 Jul 2013 6:50PM

Quote:We also need to be
looking at better engine design to reduce consumption much further, look at local power generation from human and animal waste etc.

Don't be fooled.

These companies already have the designs by paying out huge sums of money to buy the technology and sit on it.
llareggub e2
4 758 United Kingdom
15 Jul 2013 6:58PM

Quote:Putting politics aside what is wrong with investing now to find solutions for tomorrow?


Absolutely nothing and indeed many of the major oilcos are doing just that (I know from personal experience that Shell have been doing so since the '70s and certainly BP and Esso have been to)

We also need to be looking at better engine design to reduce consumption much further, look at local power generation from human and animal waste etc.

Its a multifaceted problem and needs to be addressed as such.

Getting rid of Nimbyism and red-tape would be a good start as a lot of the efforts to do this so far have been blocked at every turn

I remember chatting about this to a local councillor some years ago when there was a proposal for just such a local "waste to energy scheme" and he was tearing his hair out when the locals blocked it, meaning that we had to pay to dispose of the waste rather than profiting from the generation of energy. Its not as if it was near any habitation as it was on an industrial site round the back of our local airport but they "disagreed in principle" with the concept



I agree with you, nobody corporation operates out of altruism and the reason that oil companies have invested since the 70's is that they know more acutely than other folk that at some point in time an alternative solution needs to be found!

As for public transport... I love it, I am 40 next year and owned a car for 18 months of my life and hated it, I have a wee moped that I use for fun in the summer but for the rest of the time I am a bus/train man! And that is even after I moved to a village in Hungary with a population of 180 people and has a 5 buses a day, 3 of them before 7am Smile
brian1208 e2
11 10.6k 12 United Kingdom
15 Jul 2013 7:23PM

Quote:
Don't be fooled.

These companies already have the designs by paying out huge sums of money to buy the technology and sit on it.



I'd love to see your evidence for this, its the same as they were claiming that the Oilcos suppressed a "Water Burning Engine" back in the '70's

You may not be aware that in the '70's Toyota came up with Lean Burn technology that promised huge savings in consumption by increasing the air to fuel mix it was possible to burn in a petrol engine.

What stopped it was not the Oilcos etc (who worked with Toyota on this) but the invention of the catalytic convertor and the political take up of the idea which resulted in it becoming mandatory the world over.

To make a catalytic converter work it is necessary to run the engine very inefficiently so this scuppered that technology, depleting the reserves of rare earths used in their construction and needlessly burning excessive qualities of fuel in the process. (they are only just now getting catalytic converters sorted to work with lean burn engines and they are much more complex and expensive)

The obvious target isn't always the correct one Wink
keith selmes
11 7.1k 1 United Kingdom
15 Jul 2013 7:36PM
I find the bus very variable. Some of the seats are OK, but often it's uncomfortable or even painful.
My car is a relief with comfy seat and back support, quite therapeutic.
Sometimes I get off a bus feeling I need to call a taxi and go straight home.
Other times it's fine.
Can't get to a train with out using a bus first.
And very few buses go where I want to go.
If I move home, bus and rail routes will play a part in the choice, along with good broadband, which can reduce travel needs.

I thought I didn't like driving, but about a year ago my car was in for repairs for more than a week.
When I collected the car it was wonderful, I suddenly realised how much I enjoy driving - compared with using the bus, that is. If only the bus had proper seats.

Quote:a population of 180 people and has a 5 buses a day,

When I was very young in a Devon village we had less than 5 a week. You could go out on Wednesday or Saturday.
Population 500, but many lived on outlying farms.
llareggub e2
4 758 United Kingdom
15 Jul 2013 7:56PM
I was never bought up around cars not having them around is normal, I was bought up in a big city (Birmingham) though and public transport was all that I needed it to be and always chose where I lived by public transport, until my latest move Wink

There are 180 people that live in our village and probably less than 2 dozen cars, in fact there are more tractors which is cool Smile Hence the 5 buses a day, they run before 7 am to get people to one of the local towns 20km away that provides the only employment (a Goodmans factory and an abattoir) that is not on a farm, there is one at 3pm and then one at 6:45pm... Needless to say we don't leave the village very often in winter when it is too cold for mopeds Wink
Kako e2
8 143
16 Jul 2013 12:03AM
Apparently Australia is the new Oil Superpower in waiting as wells currently being explored are said to be as big as anything yet found anywhere with a possible value of $20 trillion at today's prices...a new oil rush is in progress with many new fortunes to be made in supporting industries.

Brian1208, rather convenient though wouldn't you say that a technology that was adopted worldwide just happened to scupper much lower fuel bills for motorists who would have been using significantly less fuel. Rather like what happened when lead was introduced to petrol...engines that had demonstrated unbelievable mpg were overnight rendered useless. Funny how these things always seem to benefit the oil companies and not the masses.

Sign In

You must be a member to leave a comment.

ePHOTOzine, the web's friendliest photography community.

Join For Free

Upload photos, chat with photographers, win prizes and much more.