# What to do if we run out of oil?



## ScienceRocks

What to do if we run out of oil? I understand that electricy doesn't really rely on it that much, but our trains certainly carry the coal(40 percent of energy) and food certainly does. Should we decrease our need of coal and oil by going over to nuclear, wind and solar??? For transport maybe we can make "electric" trains that run on the energy grid? 

I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.


----------



## whitehall

"We" won't run out of oil. In a hundred or two hundred years sometime in 20220 they might have to consider it but unless the fascists still run the government the private sector might have some solutions. Meanwhile we have to consider the way pop-culture seems to just adore the rich Saudi princes but condemn the hard working Americans who run oil companies.


----------



## Old Rocks

There are many things that can produce 'oil'. However, use these, you have to increase the price of the end product in order to cover costs. At a certain point, it becomes cheaper to use other forms of energy. And that is leaving out the environmental and climatic costs that the use of oil for fuel creates.


----------



## Moonglow

Matthew said:


> What to do if we run out of oil? I understand that electricy doesn't really rely on it that much, but our trains certainly carry the coal(40 percent of energy) and food certainly does. Should we decrease our need of coal and oil by going over to nuclear, wind and solar??? For transport maybe we can make "electric" trains that run on the energy grid?
> 
> I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.



use the fat from fat people


----------



## Mr. H.

Old Rocks said:


> There are many things that can produce 'oil'. However, use these, you have to increase the price of the end product in order to cover costs. At a certain point, it becomes cheaper to use other forms of energy. And that is leaving out the environmental and climatic costs that the use of oil for fuel creates.



Alternatives and renewables are not totally without such costs. And I would contend that hydrocarbons' benefits far outweigh such cost.


----------



## KissMy

I have been running my entire fleet on ethanol for over 12 years. Who needs oil?

Livestock gain weight 30% faster on 15% less Ethanol co-product DDG feed than they do on corn. Food & fuel are no problem.

New bio-genetic enzymes have just been developed to turn seaweed/kelp efficiently into ethanol. We may soon be farming the ocean, reducing dead zones & reducing carbon as we produce ethanol fuel.

Poet Ethanol is already producing cellulosic ethanol. They are about finished with construction on their second cellulosic ethanol plant that will come on-line producing cellulosic ethanol to capacity in 2013.


----------



## RGR

Matthew said:


> What to do if we run out of oil?



Are you kidding, or are you just trolling to see if there is any potential for peak oil religious converts in this particular forum? We once had one of those missionaries, but we threw him back as he wasn't fully grown. We never did get a replacement with functioning neurons.


----------



## KissMy

We will have 4 next-gen cellulosic ethanol plants operating next year.

DuPont breaks ground on $200M cellulosic ethanol plant

Poet, the largest ethanol maker in the U.S., has turned down a $105 million federal loan guarantee that would have financed it's cellulosic ethanol plants. Poet announced it has established a joint venture with life sciences company Royal DSM to commercially demonstrate and license its cellulosic ethanol made from corn cob and crop residue. The joint venture, called POET-DSM Advanced Biofuels LLC, is scheduled to start production in the second half of 2013.

Poet has been working towards commercial production of next-gen cellulosic ethanol for more than a decade. In 2006, it partnered with DuPont to find cost effective ways to bring corn stover-ethanol to market. Two years later, Poet built a pilot plant in Scotland, South Dakota, where it began testing its cellulosic ethanol production process. Poet plans to eventually scale up its production to 25 million gallons a year at Project Liberty, the company&#8217;s long-planned cellulosic plant in Emmetsburg, Iowa.


----------



## Mr. H.

KissMy said:


> I have been running my entire fleet on ethanol for over 12 years. Who needs oil?
> 
> Livestock gain weight 30% faster on 15% less Ethanol co-product DDG feed than they do on corn. Food & fuel are no problem.
> 
> New bio-genetic enzymes have just been developed to turn seaweed/kelp efficiently into ethanol. We may soon be farming the ocean, reducing dead zones & reducing carbon as we produce ethanol fuel.
> 
> Poet Ethanol is already producing cellulosic ethanol. They are about finished with construction on their second cellulosic ethanol plant that will come on-line producing cellulosic ethanol to capacity in 2013.



At what cut? 10%? 

The better question is, who needs corn? 40% of corn crops go to ethanol production. So much ethanol, that 20% is exported. 

Was this the initial intention of the ethanol program when introduced in the 80's?

No. 

There were 3 basic tennets: Reduce oil imports (not done), improve air quality (not done), improve crop prices to agriculture (DONE). 

Back to the question... who needs corn? The world is starving. We have starving kids in this country. If you argue that ETOH corn is not food-grade, then I'd argue that we should devote those acres to food-grade ag products. 

If not, the least we can do is plow under the worthless shit and plant trees.


----------



## whitehall

It's possible that the radicals can mange to raise taxes and punish American achievers while maintaining a phony loyalty to the muslem brotherhood and that's why they want to destroy information networks that might not go along with the program. I have seen offensive programs promoted by the "history channel and nat-geo" that tends to promote the extravagant lifestyle of mid East Saudies rich and famous.


----------



## Mad Scientist

How'd that work out turnin' food into fuel?


----------



## Mr. H.

Kimmy, you know I like ya but ethanol is an aberrant concept created by a self-serving industry with the sole purpose of getting that incremental bushel of grain to market. 

Agriculture was a main culprit behind getting methanol banned. There was no issue with methanol save for one- containment. It's the same issue with ethanol. There are containment concerns- train cars derailing, tanker trucks crashing, blended fuels leaking into the environment...

The purpose of the U.S. agriculture industry is not to "feed the world" but to fleece the world.

It's one giant marketing scam.


----------



## KissMy

Mad Scientist said:


> How'd that work out turnin' food into fuel?



It works great. 

I love watching amateurs discuss shit they know absolutely nothing about. Especially the ones who call themselves Mad Scientist. 

China Starts Probe of US Feed Dumping driving down DDG feed & corn prices in China far below the cost their farmers can produce them for.

Livestock gain weight 30% faster on 15% less DDG feed from ethanol plants than they do on corn. With ethanol production we have more food than without. Animal feeders can't even be competitive anymore without feeding their livestock Ethanol's DDG feed.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4wwRpznV00A"]Feeding Cattle DDGs[/ame]


----------



## KissMy

Kinder Morgan completes ethanol pipeline between New Jersey and New York

The directional drill pipeline includes full automation and a state-of-the-art leak detection system.


----------



## JiggsCasey

RGR said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> What to do if we run out of oil?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you kidding, or are you just trolling to see if there is any potential for peak oil religious converts in this particular forum? We once had one of those missionaries, but we threw him back as he wasn't fully grown. We never did get a replacement with functioning neurons.
Click to expand...


LOL... still renting time in your dumb head, I see.  

Actually, what you had was a poster who kicked your ass all over the subforum, got bored with your intellectual blockage regarding the fundamental aspects of global energy depletion, and moved on to fresher meat. You didn't "throw back" anything. Tool.

I still drop in from time to time only to witness you jacking yourself to the same dumb premises over and over again. How are those annual depletion rates holding on shale gas/oil plays since we last spoke? 25%? 35%? Talk about a nosedive. They don't tell America about that aspect of the fracking craze, do they? ...  Yeah, there's plenty down there, ...  if you're willing to build a new series of $90 million wells every few months. LOL.

Another fraud passed off by the fossil fuel industry, and the masses of dumb Americans willing to lap it up under the illusionary blanket of "energy independence!"



Matthew said:


> What to do if we run out of oil? I understand that electricy doesn't really rely on it that much, but our trains certainly carry the coal(40 percent of energy) and food certainly does. Should we decrease our need of coal and oil by going over to nuclear, wind and solar??? For transport maybe we can make "electric" trains that run on the energy grid?
> 
> I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.



No, it can't. Nuclear, wind and solar won't move freight. Won't make computer chips, won't provide plastics, asphalt, tires and the tens of thousands of other things oil is (afford-ably) used for - most especially nitrogen-based fertilizers and pesticides for our global food conveyor belt and its "just in time" delivery system.

We'll never "run out" of oil. It will (and already is) simply get more expensive than the middle-class consumer can afford, and will push the fragile world economy into systemic meltdown ... a process that is already well underway. ... and a concept our "nothing to see here" contingent of cornucopians continues to avoid like the plague, .... and with good reason, because the "how do we pay for it" question dumps their retarded overall argument on its ass. Every time.

It is called the petrol-dollar for a reason. Oil is indispensable to maintain the buoyancy of our fake, bubble economy.


----------



## Skull Pilot

Peak oil will be realized it's only a matter of time.

Nuclear is our best option for our power needs. Electricity can replace petroleum products for heating homes and electric cars will continue to improve.

Diesel engines can run on oil from renewable sources and of course waste cooking oil can be recycled.

Solar and wind, in my opinion, are supplemental sources not primary.


----------



## Politico

Yeah this thread ain't for real.


----------



## KissMy

World Oil Production is still rising in the face of the Peak Oil Nay Sayers!






This rise in oil production happened even as Iran has been embargoed forcing their enormous oil production to plummet.


----------



## Old Rocks

whitehall said:


> "We" won't run out of oil. In a hundred or two hundred years sometime in 20220 they might have to consider it but unless the fascists still run the government the private sector might have some solutions. Meanwhile we have to consider the way pop-culture seems to just adore the rich Saudi princes but condemn the hard working Americans who run oil companies.



No, we won't run out of oil In fact, we will continue using it in spite of the obvious affects of burning fossil fuel. However, a some point, it will become too spendy for most people to use as the motive power for their vehicles. You see, recoverable reserves go up as the price goes up. However, there is a point where the public will seek out alternatives as the price gets beyond their means.


----------



## S.J.

Since everything manufactured today takes oil, shouldn't we be using natural gas to power our cars and save the oil for everything else?


----------



## Old Rocks

Skull Pilot said:


> Peak oil will be realized it's only a matter of time.
> 
> Nuclear is our best option for our power needs. Electricity can replace petroleum products for heating homes and electric cars will continue to improve.
> 
> Diesel engines can run on oil from renewable sources and of course waste cooking oil can be recycled.
> 
> Solar and wind, in my opinion, are supplemental sources not primary.



The liquid metal batteries seem to offer a way to make the wind and solar easier to phase into the grid, and allow a much larger role for them in the energy formulay. However, the answer has always been 'all of the above'. Nuclear definately has a place in the future energy supply of this nation.


----------



## RGR

JiggsCasey said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> What to do if we run out of oil?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Are you kidding, or are you just trolling to see if there is any potential for peak oil religious converts in this particular forum? We once had one of those missionaries, but we threw him back as he wasn't fully grown. We never did get a replacement with functioning neurons.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> LOL... still renting time in your dumb head, I see.
Click to expand...


Jiggsy! You just get back from a long vacation in the pokey, or maybe you ran off to peak oil churchcamp to try and get a better handle on all the stuff you were ignorant about before? In either case, welcome back! Lets hope you brought a few more billion brain cells with you though, you were getting a bit long of tooth before.



			
				JiggsCasey said:
			
		

> I still drop in from time to time only to witness you jacking yourself to the same dumb premises over and over again.



yes...that is what people do when they know they can't participate anymore because they can only take so much looking incompetent. No fear, you are hardly the first!



			
				JiggsCasey said:
			
		

> How are those annual depletion rates holding on shale gas/oil plays since we last spoke? 25%? 35%?



Well, oil production in the United States in the past 15 years has had an aggregate depletion rate of...WAIT FOR IT....0 PERCENT! Thats right, 15 years of decline erased by the tight oil of the Bakken and Eagleford.

But don't you worry Jiggsy, peak oil is so bad lately that I've been driving the monster truck just because gasoline prices have dropped so much. I suppose the spring gouging will start soon, so I'll be back on the scooter or bicycle, but that's the breaks until we can get some more decent peak oil price increases back into crude.



			
				JiggsCasey said:
			
		

> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, it can't. Nuclear, wind and solar won't move freight.
Click to expand...


Good thing that most crude is used to move fat Americans around in SUVs then! So we just get them off into a decent EV and presto, all the oil they wasted can go to the things it should really be used for. And really, come to think of it, if I consider commuting "people freight", then certainly nuclear, wind and solar can all be used (individually or in combination) to move "commuting freight" as it were. I already use all three! Well, two anyway, no nukes in my neck of the woods. Lots of wind, reasonable amounts of solar though. And the explosion in natural gas production, no need to talk about that.

You need to catch up on things Jiggsy, that exponential growth in types of power generation hasn't been sleeping while you were finding a new rock to pop out from under.



			
				JiggsCasey said:
			
		

> We'll never "run out" of oil. It will (and already is) simply get more expensive than the middle-class consumer can afford, and will push the fragile world economy into systemic meltdown ... a process that is already well underway. ... and a concept our "nothing to see here" contingent of cornucopians continues to avoid like the plague, .... and with good reason, because the "how do we pay for it" question dumps their retarded overall argument on its ass. Every time.




Oh, lets give the old Jiggsey nonsense a break, try some NEW Jiggsey nonsense instead! Crude gets more expensive, and us consumers buy an EV and stop worrying about it. Admittedly mine still uses a little every now and then, but seriously, once you replace liquid fuels with electricity, it is tough to go back except for the fun factor, sportcars, motorcycles and the like. The pure rush of hydrocarbon powered transport does have an appeal, but so does the quiet "whoosh!" of the electric off to work.  Try one Jiggsey, you'll like it, and maybe then you'll stop bleating like a sheep.


----------



## RGR

Skull Pilot said:


> Peak oil will be realized it's only a matter of time.



Of course, no one even ARGUES about that. The problem is that people define peak oil different ways, and when an ignoramus like Jiggsy gets involved, he assumes when someone says "peak oil", they don't actually mean "maximum production rate followed by terminal decline" but TEOTWAEKI and all sorts of Rapture nonsense. 

Oil is already obsolete, it just doesn't know it yet. It will figure it out, and in the meantime I'll be spending my money on something other than shipping it off to other countries for something I don't need much of anymore. Once you go electric, you don't go back!



			
				SkullPilot said:
			
		

> Solar and wind, in my opinion, are supplemental sources not primary.



Maybe, but they work pretty darn good even in that configuration.


----------



## Mr. H.

RIGZONE - Total: Oil Production to Peak at 98M Barrels per Day

_Global oil production should plateau at that level for some time before dropping as reserves gradually deplete, de Margerie said during a meeting with the Anglo-American Press Association in Paris._


----------



## Snookie

Matthew said:


> What to do if we run out of oil? I understand that electricy doesn't really rely on it that much, but our trains certainly carry the coal(40 percent of energy) and food certainly does. Should we decrease our need of coal and oil by going over to nuclear, wind and solar??? For transport maybe we can make "electric" trains that run on the energy grid?
> 
> I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.


 

I am not worried about it.  The sooner we run out of it the better.

Mankind will survive.


----------



## whitehall

What's going to happen if, ummm an asteroid hits earth or the Mayans were right? We aren't running out of oil or coal and in the next two hundred years we might get a handle on alternate energy unless left wing  fascism turns the US into a 3rd world country.


----------



## Katzndogz

We won't run out of oil.  Oil is a renewable resource.


----------



## Snookie

Katzndogz said:


> We won't run out of oil. Oil is a renewable resource.


 
True!  You are smart.


----------



## Snookie

whitehall said:


> What's going to happen if, ummm an asteroid hits earth or the Mayans were right? We aren't running out of oil or coal and in the next two hundred years we might get a handle on alternate energy unless left wing fascism turns the US into a 3rd world country.


 
Why do all the threads turn into partisan hackery?


----------



## Underhill

KissMy said:


> World Oil Production is still rising in the face of the Peak Oil Nay Sayers!
> 
> This rise in oil production happened even as Iran has been embargoed forcing their enormous oil production to plummet.



Sure it is.   But nobody in the industry believes it can go on indefinitely.   There is plenty of oil out there for the next few hundred years.   But it's deeper in the Ocean, or less dense in the shale.    

What we are seeing right now is a increased production thanks to increased prices.    At $100+ a barrel oil is profitable that wasn't at $70 a barrel.   At $150 a barrel even more is available.   But eventually the cost will become prohibitive.   And we are just starting to see that escalation now (which is really what peak oil is all about).

I don't entirely disagree with you about ethanol.   But I do think corn ethanol isn't the way to go.   There are much more efficient methods of producing the stuff that has been developed.   Some of which won't require massive percentages of our food producing acreage.


----------



## Mr. H.

Peak Oil
Peak Oil

Whatcha gonna do when it comes for you...
Peak Oil


----------



## whitehall

Old Rocks said:


> whitehall said:
> 
> 
> 
> "We" won't run out of oil. In a hundred or two hundred years sometime in 20220 they might have to consider it but unless the fascists still run the government the private sector might have some solutions. Meanwhile we have to consider the way pop-culture seems to just adore the rich Saudi princes but condemn the hard working Americans who run oil companies.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> No, we won't run out of oil In fact, we will continue using it in spite of the obvious affects of burning fossil fuel. However, a some point, it will become too spendy for most people to use as the motive power for their vehicles. You see, recoverable reserves go up as the price goes up. However, there is a point where the public will seek out alternatives as the price gets beyond their means.
Click to expand...


It's "too spendy" right now. The price of oil is artificially kept high as a political lever. The private sector no doubt will come up with alternatives to fossil fuel in the future and the best thing the US can do for the economy right now is to become independent of foreign oil and make sure energy is cheap enough to keep the cost of living down and encourage industrial development. It's all a lesson in political hypocrisy. The Hussein administration used more energy in useless jaunts around the Country than all the SUV's use in a year.


----------



## Big Black Dog

I'm switching my truck over to run on coal.


----------



## KissMy

Underhill said:


> KissMy said:
> 
> 
> 
> World Oil Production is still rising in the face of the Peak Oil Nay Sayers!
> 
> This rise in oil production happened even as Iran has been embargoed forcing their enormous oil production to plummet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure it is. But nobody in the industry believes it can go on indefinitely. There is plenty of oil out there for the next few hundred years. But it's deeper in the Ocean, or less dense in the shale.
> 
> What we are seeing right now is a increased production thanks to increased prices. At $100+ a barrel oil is profitable that wasn't at $70 a barrel. At $150 a barrel even more is available. But eventually the cost will become prohibitive. And we are just starting to see that escalation now (which is really what peak oil is all about).
> 
> I don't entirely disagree with you about ethanol. But I do think corn ethanol isn't the way to go. There are much more efficient methods of producing the stuff that has been developed. Some of which won't require massive percentages of our food producing acreage.
Click to expand...


Oil production is controlled by the elite politics in every country in the world. They wield ultimate power over us citizens. J.D. Rockefeller of the Standard Oil monopoly bought congress & passed Prohibition of Alcohol to eliminate Alcohol/Ethanol from fueling automobiles & competing with oil. Now the oil companies funded the scientifically discredited Pimentel & Patzek studies claiming ethanol uses more energy than it creates & drives up food & gas prices. J.D. Rockefeller of the Standard Oil built Rockefeller Center to house the biggest media companies in the USA & has used that media centers power to blast the airwaves & news papers with their biased ethanol research propaganda. They have very effectively brainwashed most of the population.

You brainwashed idiots also fail to comprehend the facts. Corn Ethanol creates more food than without ethanol. 98% of all corn went to feed livestock who's digestive tract is designed for grass & leaves. Livestock do a poor job digesting corn causing digestive & health problems with the animals & huge methane gas emissions. But livestock grow 30% faster on 15% less (distillers dried grains)-DDG feed when the corn is broken down into easily digested  DDG feed at ethanol plants. The Corn Ethanol used to get emitted from the livestock as Methane Gas which is 15 times worse Greenhouse Gas than (Carbon Dioxide)-CO2. Now that potential corn methane is turned into ethanol before the DDG feed is fed to livestock.

Besides the fact that Corn Ethanol increased food production & eliminated the 15 times more damaging than CO2 Methane Emitions from corn fed livestock. Corn Ethanol also replaced the highly toxic MTBE additive in gasoline that was polluting our water supply. Corn ethanol has created so much food infact that China complained to the WTO & launched an investigation into how the US farmers wer dumping so much DDG feed & corn into their country at prices far below what their farmers could produce DDG feed & Corn.

Since you mindlessly parroted that corn ethanol is not efficient. Can you tell me what size tractor & equipment Pimentel or Patzek used in their study as an energy input to farming? What size field were they using in that study? Was that tractor & equipment 10 times to big for the field? Did that bias the energy input by showing far more fuel, rubber, steel, etc was consumed farming the corn used to make ethanol? The studies are packed with biased fiction, yet they are always used to rebut anyone who favors Ethanol to Oil.

These elite have been playing people like you for suckers forever. For over 130 years they have been telling you we were at Peak Oil to justify high prices & wars. They make fortunes off of you suckers who will go to your grave believing Ethanol is bad & paying high gas price is ok because of Peak Oil.


----------



## Reality91

We will not run out of oil, there will always be oil in the ground. Our ability to extract it will diminish over time.

The best thing we can do is to change the way we live our lives and how our societies are built.

New fuels and technologies will certainly have a grounding in the future, but the way we live now will be a luxury, as it already has become so for so many people.


----------



## Snookie

KissMy said:


> Underhill said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> KissMy said:
> 
> 
> 
> World Oil Production is still rising in the face of the Peak Oil Nay Sayers!
> 
> This rise in oil production happened even as Iran has been embargoed forcing their enormous oil production to plummet.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Sure it is. But nobody in the industry believes it can go on indefinitely. There is plenty of oil out there for the next few hundred years. But it's deeper in the Ocean, or less dense in the shale.
> 
> What we are seeing right now is a increased production thanks to increased prices. At $100+ a barrel oil is profitable that wasn't at $70 a barrel. At $150 a barrel even more is available. But eventually the cost will become prohibitive. And we are just starting to see that escalation now (which is really what peak oil is all about).
> 
> I don't entirely disagree with you about ethanol. But I do think corn ethanol isn't the way to go. There are much more efficient methods of producing the stuff that has been developed. Some of which won't require massive percentages of our food producing acreage.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Oil production is controlled by the elite politics in every country in the world. They wield ultimate power over us citizens. J.D. Rockefeller of the Standard Oil monopoly bought congress & passed Prohibition of Alcohol to eliminate Alcohol/Ethanol from fueling automobiles & competing with oil. Now the oil companies funded the scientifically discredited Pimentel & Patzek studies claiming ethanol uses more energy than it creates & drives up food & gas prices. J.D. Rockefeller of the Standard Oil built Rockefeller Center to house the biggest media companies in the USA & has used that media centers power to blast the airwaves & news papers with their biased ethanol research propaganda. They have very effectively brainwashed most of the population.
> 
> You brainwashed idiots also fail to comprehend the facts. Corn Ethanol creates more food than without ethanol. 98% of all corn went to feed livestock who's digestive tract is designed for grass & leaves. Livestock do a poor job digesting corn causing digestive & health problems with the animals & huge methane gas emissions. But livestock grow 30% faster on 15% less (distillers dried grains)-DDG feed when the corn is broken down into easily digested DDG feed at ethanol plants. The Corn Ethanol used to get emitted from the livestock as Methane Gas which is 15 times worse Greenhouse Gas than (Carbon Dioxide)-CO2. Now that potential corn methane is turned into ethanol before the DDG feed is fed to livestock.
> 
> Besides the fact that Corn Ethanol increased food production & eliminated the 15 times more damaging than CO2 Methane Emitions from corn fed livestock. Corn Ethanol also replaced the highly toxic MTBE additive in gasoline that was polluting our water supply. Corn ethanol has created so much food infact that China complained to the WTO & launched an investigation into how the US farmers wer dumping so much DDG feed & corn into their country at prices far below what their farmers could produce DDG feed & Corn.
> 
> Since you mindlessly parroted that corn ethanol is not efficient. Can you tell me what size tractor & equipment Pimentel or Patzek used in their study as an energy input to farming? What size field were they using in that study? Was that tractor & equipment 10 times to big for the field? Did that bias the energy input by showing far more fuel, rubber, steel, etc was consumed farming the corn used to make ethanol? The studies are packed with biased fiction, yet they are always used to rebut anyone who favors Ethanol to Oil.
> 
> These elite have been playing people like you for suckers forever. For over 130 years they have been telling you we were at Peak Oil to justify high prices & wars. They make fortunes off of you suckers who will go to your grave believing Ethanol is bad & paying high gas price is ok because of Peak Oil.
Click to expand...

 
I just saw a show on the history channel where Rockefeller tried to sabatoge electric lighting because it would ruin the sale of kerosene for oil lamps.

He was going against JP Morgan, Telsa, and Edison.

But then along came the internal combustion engine and it was happy days again for him.


----------



## RGR

Reality91 said:


> We will not run out of oil, there will always be oil in the ground. Our ability to extract it will diminish over time.



You are correct. However, this exact thing has been going on for more than a century now, so it is not a surprise that the same effect will continue forward.



			
				Reality91 said:
			
		

> The best thing we can do is to change the way we live our lives and how our societies are built.



Been doing that as well. Go get yourself one of these, and stop worrying about what the little numbers at the gas station say.


----------



## Snookie

RGR said:


> Reality91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will not run out of oil, there will always be oil in the ground. Our ability to extract it will diminish over time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are correct. However, this exact thing has been going on for more than a century now, so it is not a surprise that the same effect will continue forward.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reality91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The best thing we can do is to change the way we live our lives and how our societies are built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Been doing that as well. Go get yourself one of these, and stop worrying about what the little numbers at the gas station say.
Click to expand...

 
I'd love to.  Spare change?


----------



## KissMy

RGR said:


> Reality91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> We will not run out of oil, there will always be oil in the ground. Our ability to extract it will diminish over time.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You are correct. However, this exact thing has been going on for more than a century now, so it is not a surprise that the same effect will continue forward.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Reality91 said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> The best thing we can do is to change the way we live our lives and how our societies are built.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> 
> Been doing that as well. Go get yourself one of these, and stop worrying about what the little numbers at the gas station say.
Click to expand...


In this economy most can only afford one of these 150mpg bikes!


----------



## RGR

Snookie said:


> RGR said:
> 
> 
> 
> Been doing that as well. Go get yourself one of these, and stop worrying about what the little numbers at the gas station say.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I'd love to.  Spare change?
Click to expand...


No. With current tax breaks they are a few thousand more than the median car price in America, which just cracked $30G's I believe. So if you are worried about the oil you use, the next time you buy a car, buy one which doesn't require you to use much gasoline.


----------



## DeeDeeJack

We have enough natural gas to last several hundred years and vehicles can run on natural gas quite efficiently. It is also a good bridge fuel for power plants as it is much cleaner than coal. Nuclear is a clean fuel, but has a problem of where to store the spent fuel rods. We should re-look at reprocessing the rods. Also, minig uranium has its own issues. Many families near shuttered mines till suffer larger than normal occurences of cancer. Water will actually be our next big problem considering the last few years of drought in the SW and all those who rely on that water.


----------



## RGR

DeeDeeJack said:


> We have enough natural gas to last several hundred years and vehicles can run on natural gas quite efficiently.



True, we have plenty of natural gas, but at what price. And yes, natural gas is great for running internal combustion engines. But there is just something about the silent rush from the torque of an electric motor which can't be beat.


----------



## JiggsCasey

RGR said:


> Jiggsy! You just get back from a long vacation in the pokey, or maybe you ran off to peak oil churchcamp to try and get a better handle on all the stuff you were ignorant about before? In either case, welcome back! Lets hope you brought a few more billion brain cells with you though, you were getting a bit long of tooth before.



Cool story, bro'. Actually, I was reducing you to the babbling, goalpost-shifting, self-adulating fraud that you are. It got boring crushing you on the same fundamental points over and over again, so I stuck with theoildrum and resilience.org for a while, where people don't cling to faith-based ideology like you and "Kiss Me" do day after day here.



RGR said:


> yes...that is what people do when they know they can't participate anymore because they can only take so much looking incompetent.



What? Jack themselves over the same retarded premises like you do? Yeah, I know. ... Ah well, at least you're admitting it, finally.



RGR said:


> No fear, you are hardly the first!



The first to leave you cornered with no out besides personal insinuation? I'm hardly surprised, considering how much of a douche you are in your delivery, in addition to being so fundamentally wrong.



RGR said:


> Well, oil production in the United States in the past 15 years has had an aggregate depletion rate of...WAIT FOR IT....0 PERCENT! Thats right, 15 years of decline erased by the tight oil of the Bakken and Eagleford.



And because of that desperate detour to heavier crap, the cost is up some 500-600%, WAY ahead of normal inflation. You get how this equation works, do you not? We've been over it some 15 times, and you're still stuck on stupid.



RGR said:


> But don't you worry Jiggsy,



LOL. I'm not. Not even a little bit. The debate is long over, as confirmed by industry men much smarter and better paid than goofy you.



RGR said:


> peak oil is so bad lately that I've been driving the monster truck just because gasoline prices have dropped so much.



Ah yes. Your final rallying point, whereby you pretend it's not happening because well-off asshats like yourself don't feel it yet - as they have more discretionary spending than most. Replete with arrogant condescension, of course.



RGR said:


> I suppose the spring gouging will start soon, so I'll be back on the scooter or bicycle, but that's the breaks until we can get some more decent peak oil price increases back into crude.



Considering how much you've lied about the past two years, you'll forgive me for not believing for one second that you ride a bike to work nor market. Meanwhile, oil price is up some 10% since the last time we spoke? Meanwhile, less and less people can afford it (and everything it provides) with each passing month.



RGR said:


> Good thing that most crude is used to move fat Americans around in SUVs then! So we just get them off into a decent EV and presto, all the oil they wasted can go to the things it should really be used for. And really, come to think of it, if I consider commuting "people freight", then certainly nuclear, wind and solar can all be used (individually or in combination) to move "commuting freight" as it were. I already use all three! Well, two anyway, no nukes in my neck of the woods. Lots of wind, reasonable amounts of solar though.



So for all your blather, you finally admit that conversion and conservation are desperately needed components. Surrender accepted. We can agree on that much. I guess the difference being that you feel it will all be a seamless transition, and growth won't miss a beat. Ooops, nope. Growth will never be the same, because cheap energy from abundant light crude IS what allows for growth - a basic concept you can't seem to get your flat head around. 



RGR said:


> And the explosion in natural gas production, no need to talk about that.



And with good reason, considering you avoided the challenge put to you to acknowledge their painfully awkward annual ldepletion rates. Keep being you.



RGR said:


> You need to catch up on things Jiggsy,



No, apparently I need to keep reminding you of the same things you run from each time I return.



RGR said:


> that exponential growth in types of power generation hasn't been sleeping while you were finding a new rock to pop out from under.



Do you even know what the word "exponential" means? Because you appear to be using it wrong here.



RGR said:


> Oh, lets give the old Jiggsey nonsense a break, try some NEW Jiggsey nonsense instead!



If any of what I've said while engaging you was "nonsense," you'd have responded to any of the many challenges put to you. You haven't. Instead, you've changed your argument, ignored perspective, and generally acted like an 11-year-old while pretending to be an industry insider.



RGR said:


> Crude gets more expensive, and us consumers buy an EV and stop worrying about it.



By "us consumers" you must mean the out-of-touch, gated community drones like yourself? I'm sure you're not worried about it, as the global economy continues to come apart at the seams. That's just the kind of person you are.



RGR said:


> Admittedly mine still uses a little every now and then, but seriously, once you replace liquid fuels with electricity, it is tough to go back except for the fun factor, sportcars, motorcycles and the like. The pure rush of hydrocarbon powered transport does have an appeal, but so does the quiet "whoosh!" of the electric off to work.  Try one Jiggsey, you'll like it, and maybe then you'll stop bleating like a sheep.



Sounds good in your empty head, I'm sure. But the reality is that electricity made from magic, like the kind you curiously are attempting to convey here, doesn't move frieght in any  commercially productive capacity yet, despite decades of trying. It also doesn't pave roads, provide plastics nor fertilize crops.

Got any links to that huge factory pumping out e-cars and e-trucks using electricity made by non-fossil fuel sources? I'll wait. ... As for natural gas, why aren't the majors converting the world's fleet of vehicles to run on it? Because they know the (front-loaded) "fracking craze" you masturbate over isn't gonna last very long - what with their laughable depletion rates you can't dare to acknowledge.

In this equation, the only sheep is you. You'll eat up whatever tools like Yergin and David Frum offer. It's a faith-based religion for you zealots. Oh, the irony.

Run along now, little cornucopian.


----------



## RGR

JiggsCasey said:


> The first to leave you cornered with no out besides personal insinuation? I'm hardly surprised, considering how much of a douche you are in your delivery, in addition to being so fundamentally wrong.



Jiggsy! And here I figured you had found a more comfortable rock. How is your end of world religion coming along, what with the new highs in production and whatnot?



			
				JiggsCasey said:
			
		

> So for all your blather, you finally admit that conversion and conservation are desperately needed components.



Always have, you were just so busy making crap up you never actually stopped to read what I was writing. Why do you think I drive EV? So I can ignore those silly numbers jumping around at the gas station. You should get one, maybe then you wouldn't be so scared of the world.



			
				JiggsCasey said:
			
		

> Growth will never be the same, because cheap energy from abundant light crude IS what allows for growth - a basic concept you can't seem to get your flat head around.



Cheap energy shouldn't be confused with abundant light crude, and only a moron like you does it...continually. I recommend a library book on the topic, your religious education, as usual, is failing you terribly.



			
				JiggsCasey said:
			
		

> Do you even know what the word "exponential" means? Because you appear to be using it wrong here.



Oh please Jiggsy. Last time you calculated EROEI incorrectly you sort of gave away your mathematical (in)ability. Like I said, find a good library, do some reading, lay off the weed, etc etc.



			
				JiggsCasey said:
			
		

> If any of what I've said while engaging you was "nonsense," you'd have responded to any of the many challenges put to you. You haven't. Instead, you've changed your argument, ignored perspective, and generally acted like an 11-year-old while pretending to be an industry insider.



I have never pretended, because I am not in industry, something I've explained but, as usual, your reading comprehension didn't spot. Admittedly, I am also no longer a scientist, having moved on to another job just within the last 2 weeks. But it would require words with more than 2 syllables to explain what I do now, so you wouldn't understand.

But it is nice to see you tempting the light of day again, but I expect you'll be back under a rock pretty soon. It appears to be a habit of yours, and is undoubtedly more comfortable.


----------



## polarbear

Matthew said:


> What to do if we run out of oil? I understand that electricy doesn't really rely on it that much, but our trains certainly carry the coal(40 percent of energy) and food certainly does. Should we decrease our need of coal and oil by going over to nuclear, wind and solar??? For transport maybe we can make "electric" trains that run on the energy grid?
> 
> I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.



And what if we don`t run out? (...in the next 3 centuries)
According to alarmists we should have run out already. But then there were huge deposits discovered in Russia and Canada.






And if that runs out we do what we did in  Germany when we were cut off crude oil during WW2.
We made synthetic fuel,...as in project Blechhammer.
Heat Limestone + Coal excluding Oxygen===> Calcium Carbide. 
Calcium Carbide + H2O ===> Acetylene (C2H2) + Calcium Oxide (CaO)
Acetylene at 400 C over Copper wool  catalyst===> Benzene (C6H6)
which is a prime fuel for Diesel engines and can be cracked and reacted to almost every hydrocarbon that can be obtained from crude oil.
The calcium oxide is recycled and the only other input is electricity, coal and water.
When South Africa was under an embargo a lot of the old "Blechhammer" Nazi Chemists found gainful employment there, making a huge amount of synthetic fuel exactly like that. 
I know, *what comes after the Calcium Carbide* process is not in Wikipedia or mentioned in any other social media, so I must be making it up...Eeeh?


----------



## Mr. Peepers

> Back to the question... who needs corn? The world is starving. We have starving kids in this country. If you argue that ETOH corn is not food-grade, then I'd argue that we should devote those acres to food-grade ag products.



95% of corn grown here is not food-grade when harvested - it is only grown for its starch content.  It is heavily processed & goes into the makings of HFCS and other processed "food product" crap FOR BIIIIGGG profits - and also to feed cows, who are not meant to eat corn and thus bloat and get sick (which is why their "food" is laden with antibiotics) - but that's another thread!  It does not nourish starving people.  That's just the lie that Big Ag spreads around about "feeding the starving".

Sweet Corn Vs. Field Corn | Garden Guides


----------



## Mr. Peepers

> How'd that work out turnin' food into fuel?



Corn grown for ethanol is not edible.


----------



## tjvh

Old Rocks said:


> There are many things that can produce 'oil'. However, use these, you have to increase the price of the end product in order to cover costs. *At a certain point, it becomes cheaper to use other forms of energy.* And that is leaving out the environmental and climatic costs that the use of oil for fuel creates.



But the *reality is* we have *not* reached a point where alternatives are cheaper than Oil. And we are a long way from reaching that point. Destroying the Oil industry in the name of Environmentalism in the hopes that technology might *one day* alter our dependency on Oil is... *Absolute fucking lunacy.*


----------



## tjvh

Mr. Peepers said:


> How'd that work out turnin' food into fuel?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Corn grown for ethanol is not edible.
Click to expand...


The point is that it is farm land and resources which are being wasted in the name of Environmentalism, and it is a leading factor in driving our (and the World's) food prices to record highs, and it is starving people in poor nations.


----------



## Mr. Peepers

> The point is that it is farm land and resources which are being wasted in the name of Environmentalism, and it is a leading factor in driving our (and the World's) food prices to record highs, and it is starving people in poor nations.



Horse shit.  It is being wasted in the name of CORPORATE PROFITS.


----------



## RGR

tjvh said:


> But the *reality is* we have *not* reached a point where alternatives are cheaper than Oil.



Sure they are. You just need to calculate the actual cost of oil correctly. For example, a military capable of defending international shipping lanes and blow up foreigners who try and stop the flow of it on a regular basis, the lung cancer for those living near refineries, dirty air, etc etc. Right about then you realize that solar panels on the roof of the garage aren't a bad deal after all.



			
				tjvh said:
			
		

> And we are a long way from reaching that point. Destroying the Oil industry in the name of Environmentalism in the hopes that technology might *one day* alter our dependency on Oil is... *Absolute fucking lunacy.*



The oil industry isn't going to be destroyed anytime soon. Might be made pricey by regulation and whatnot, but there is so much of the stuff around, it isn't going away anytime soon.


----------



## RGR

Mr. Peepers said:


> The point is that it is farm land and resources which are being wasted in the name of Environmentalism, and it is a leading factor in driving our (and the World's) food prices to record highs, and it is starving people in poor nations.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Horse shit.  It is being wasted in the name of CORPORATE PROFITS.
Click to expand...


Corporate profits aren't waste. Buy some stock, participate in the profit.


----------



## realinvestment

Matthew said:


> What to do if we run out of oil?



Such a great question.  For the last few decades, the media has continually warned that we could run out of oil within a few years.

Now we are finding that thousands of years supplies exist, it's just that some of it is more expensive to get.

But to answer your question, the human mind would have to innovate and come up with an economical substitute.


----------



## RGR

realinvestment said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> What to do if we run out of oil?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> But to answer your question, the human mind would have to innovate and come up with an economical substitute.
Click to expand...


Oh and for transport, that is an EASY answer.


----------



## Katzndogz

Oil is a renewable resource.  We won't run out of oil.


----------



## Mr. Peepers

> Corporate profits aren't waste. Buy some stock, participate in the profit.



You were bitching about the land resources being "wasted" due to an environmental concern.  I called you on your lie and told you exactly what that land is being "wasted" on, which is corporate profit... but that's ok, right?  Of course, I know that reading comprehension is not exactly found in spades in RWers.  And by the way, those corporate profits are NOT feeding hungry people here nor starving people anywhere else, so yes, they are a waste for this country, according to your original post.

And I will not buy stock in anything containing GMO's nor their parent corporations, thank you very much.  I stand against big agra and with the farmers.  I vote at the ballot and with my fork.


----------



## Ernie S.

Moonglow said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> What to do if we run out of oil? I understand that electricy doesn't really rely on it that much, but our trains certainly carry the coal(40 percent of energy) and food certainly does. Should we decrease our need of coal and oil by going over to nuclear, wind and solar??? For transport maybe we can make "electric" trains that run on the energy grid?
> 
> I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> use the fat from fat people
Click to expand...


I was thinking environmentalists.


----------



## JakeStarkey

Matthew said:


> What to do if we run out of oil? I understand that electricy doesn't really rely on it that much, but our trains certainly carry the coal(40 percent of energy) and food certainly does. Should we decrease our need of coal and oil by going over to nuclear, wind and solar??? For transport maybe we can make "electric" trains that run on the energy grid?
> 
> I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.



 Run out of oil?

Invade Canada, Mexico, and Venezuela.  We can also tax our new citizens, take away their rights to collectively bargain, establish FEMA camps to re-educate our far lefties and reactionary righties, and create at least four new MLB franchises.


----------



## KissMy

Despite the 130 years of predictions to the contrary, we have not peaked in oil production. But we may have peaked in net oil energy. 100 years ago it only took 1 barrel of oil to produce 100 barrels of usable oil energy. That was an Energy Returned On Energy Invested (EROEI) rate of 100:1. Today the newer oil production being brought on-line like Canada's Tar Sands only has an EROEI of 3:1. Oil production is rising but useful oil energy may be declining. It won't be long before other sources of energy are cheaper than oil. Energy storage like Ambri battery, Isentropic Energy & Gravity Power LLC will be the key to energy & economic growth. No we will never run out of oil, but oil's useful energy will decline.


----------



## RGR

Mr. Peepers said:


> Corporate profits aren't waste. Buy some stock, participate in the profit.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> You were bitching about the land resources being "wasted" due to an environmental concern.
Click to expand...


Not me. I am agnostic about environmental concerns without a corresponding consideration for the benefit involved. For example, if we could obliterate the Sahara desert in its entirety in exchange for complete energy supplies for the entire world, people would say...sure! If however we obliterate the Sahara in exchange for $5, well, obliterating the Sahara isn't worth it.



			
				Mr.Peepers said:
			
		

> And by the way, those corporate profits are NOT feeding hungry people here nor starving people anywhere else, so yes, they are a waste for this country, according to your original post.



Corporate profits are not SUPPOSED to feed hungry people, they are supposed to be distributed among the shareholders. So you don't get to pretend that is what they are supposed to be doing.



			
				Mr.Peepers said:
			
		

> And I will not buy stock in anything containing GMO's nor their parent corporations, thank you very much.  I stand against big agra and with the farmers.  I vote at the ballot and with my fork.



Good for you. So do I. And so does most everyone in America. Which is why some corporations have profits, and others do not. Want to bet those creating GMO's have those profits because fewer people vote against with their fork, then for?


----------



## freedombecki

Matthew said:


> What to do if we run out of oil? I understand that electricy doesn't really rely on it that much, but our trains certainly carry the coal(40 percent of energy) and food certainly does. Should we decrease our need of coal and oil by going over to nuclear, wind and solar??? For transport maybe we can make "electric" trains that run on the energy grid?
> 
> I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.


I found a table of some plant sources of oil and yields per acre here, but it did not transfer well, however here's the link: Vegetable Oil Yields and characteristics


----------



## akelch

Where oil comes from....hint : not plants or animals.
http://po.st/hOU9v2


----------



## waltky

Drunk Russian snowplow driver kills Total Oil exec...

*Russian plane crash: snowplow driver was drunk*
_Oct 21,`14  -- The head of French oil giant Total SA was killed at a Moscow airport when his corporate jet collided with a snowplow whose driver was drunk, Russian investigators said Tuesday._


> Total confirmed "with deep regret and sadness" that Chairman and CEO Christophe de Margerie died in the crash at Moscow's Vnukovo airport.  The three other people on board, all of them French crew members, also died when the French-made Dassault Falcon 50 hit the snowplow on takeoff at 11:57 p.m. Monday. The plane crashed onto the runway and burst into flames, investigators said.  The driver, who was not hurt, was operating the snowplow under the influence of alcohol, Tatyana Morozova, an official with the Investigative Committee, Russia's main investigative agency, told reporters at the airport. She said investigators are questioning the driver and also air traffic controllers and witnesses to the crash.
> 
> De Margerie, 63, was a regular fixture at international economic gatherings and one of the French business community's most outspoken and recognizable figures, with his trademark silver moustache.  He was a vocal critic of sanctions against Russia, arguing that isolating Russia was bad for the global economy. He traveled regularly to Russia and recently dined in Paris with a Putin ally who is under EU sanctions.  On Monday, de Margerie took part in a meeting of Russia's Foreign Investment Advisory Council with members of Russia's government and other international business executives.  President Vladimir Putin extended his condolences in a telegram sent to French President Francois Hollande.  Putin said de Margerie "stood at the origins of the many major joint projects that have laid the basis for the fruitful cooperation between Russia and France in the energy sphere for many years," according to a text released by the Kremlin.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> French energy giant Total CEO, Christophe de Margerie, posing prior to a press conference held in Paris, France. The CEO of French oil giant Total SA was killed when his corporate jet collided with a snow removal machine Monday night at Moscow's Vnukovo Airport, the company said. Total "confirms with deep regret and sadness" that Chairman and CEO Christophe de Margerie died in a private plane crash at the Moscow airport, the company said in a press release dated Tuesday and posted on its website
> 
> Hollande expressed his "stupor and sadness" at the news. In a statement, he praised de Margerie for defending French industry on the global stage, and for his "independent character and original personality."  De Margerie had risen through the ranks at Total, serving in several positions in the finance department and exploration and production division before becoming president of Total Middle East in 1995. He became a member of Total's policy-making executive committee in 1999, became CEO in 2007, and added the post of chairman in 2010.
> 
> He was a central figure in Total's role in the United Nations oil-for-food program in Iraq in the 1990s. Total paid a fine in the U.S. in this case, though De Margerie was acquitted on corruption charges by a French court.  Paris-based Total is the fifth-largest publicly traded integrated international oil and gas company in the world, with exploration and production operations in more than 50 countries, according to a profile on the company's website.  Total shares opened lower Tuesday morning after the news, then climbed slightly to 42.95 euros in early Paris trading.
> 
> News from The Associated Press



See also:

*Oscar de la Renta, legendary designer, dead at 82*
_Oct 21,`14  -- At his Fashion Week runway show in September, Oscar de la Renta sat in his usual spot: in a chair right inside the wings, where he could carefully inspect each model just as she was about to emerge in one of his sumptuous, impeccably constructed designs._


> At the end of the show, the legendary designer himself emerged, supported by two of his models. He didn't walk on his own, and didn't go far, but he was beaming from ear to ear. He gave each model a peck on the cheek, and then returned to the wings, where models and staff could be heard cheering him enthusiastically.  De la Renta, who dressed first ladies, socialites and Hollywood stars for more than four decades, died Monday evening at his Connecticut home at age 82, only six weeks after that runway show. But not before another high-profile honor was bestowed on him: The most famous bride in the world, Amal Alamuddin, wore a custom, off-the-shoulder de la Renta gown to wed George Clooney in Venice. Photos of the smiling designer perched on a table at the dress fitting appeared in Vogue.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Designer Oscar de la Renta, right, and model Karlie Kloss backstage before the presentation of the Oscar de la Renta Spring 2013 collection sponsored by Revlon at Fashion Week in New York. The designer, a favorite of socialites and movie stars alike, has died. He was 82
> 
> De la Renta died surrounded by family, friends and "more than a few dogs," according to a handwritten statement signed by his stepdaughter Eliza Reed Bolen and her husband, Alex Bolen. The statement did not specify a cause of death, but de la Renta had spoken in the past of having cancer.  "While our hearts are broken by the idea of life without Oscar, he is still very much with us. Oscar's hard work, his intelligence and his love of life are at the heart of our company," the statement said. "All that we have done, and all that we will do, is informed by his values and his spirit."  The late `60s and early `70s were a defining moment in U.S. fashion as New York-based designers carved out a look of their own that was finally taken seriously by Europeans. De la Renta and his peers, including the late Bill Blass, Halston and Geoffrey Beene, defined American style - and their influence is still spotted today.
> 
> De la Renta's specialty was eveningwear, though he also was known for chic daytime suits favored by the women who would gather at the Four Seasons or Le Cirque at lunchtime. His signature looks were voluminous skirts, exquisite embroideries and rich colors.  Earlier this month, first lady Michelle Obama notably wore a de la Renta dress for the first time. De la Renta had criticized her several years earlier, for not wearing an American label to a state dinner in 2011.  Among Obama's predecessors favoring de la Renta were Laura Bush, who wore an icy blue gown by de la Renta to the 2005 inaugural ball, and Hillary Rodham Clinton, who wore a gold de la Renta in 1997.
> 
> MORE


----------



## Youch

Matthew said:


> What to do if we run out of oil? I understand that electricy doesn't really rely on it that much, but our trains certainly carry the coal(40 percent of energy) and food certainly does. Should we decrease our need of coal and oil by going over to nuclear, wind and solar??? For transport maybe we can make "electric" trains that run on the energy grid?
> 
> I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.



What to do if we run out of oil?

We won't, if we drill baby drill.  There is more oil under our American feet than anyone ever thought possible.  We have hundreds, if not more, years of petroleum usage available to us, yet the radical freaks desire us to suffer under under-developed technology instead.  Maroons. We could frack our way into the next century, awaiting the next best alternative, but noooooOOOOOooooo, the radical Left would rather cut of our nose to spite our face.

Liberalism really is a mental disorder.


----------



## Moonglow

Youch said:


> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> What to do if we run out of oil? I understand that electricy doesn't really rely on it that much, but our trains certainly carry the coal(40 percent of energy) and food certainly does. Should we decrease our need of coal and oil by going over to nuclear, wind and solar??? For transport maybe we can make "electric" trains that run on the energy grid?
> 
> I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What to do if we run out of oil?
> 
> We won't, if we drill baby drill.  There is more oil under our American feet than anyone ever thought possible.  We have hundreds, if not more, years of petroleum usage available to us, yet the radical freaks desire us to suffer under under-developed technology instead.  Maroons. We could frack our way into the next century, awaiting the next best alternative, but noooooOOOOOooooo, the radical Left would rather cut of our nose to spite our face.
> 
> Liberalism really is a mental disorder.
Click to expand...

Is that why when US oil production was on the decline in 2010 and now the US is one of the top oil producers?



> In 2010 oil production in the United States had been in a steady decline for close to three decades. But a mere four years later, in the spring of 2014, America officially became the #1 oil producer in the world.


This Little-Known Region Could Soon Be The World s 1 Offshore Oil Field - Yahoo Finance


----------



## Delta4Embassy

Matthew said:


> What to do if we run out of oil? I understand that electricy doesn't really rely on it that much, but our trains certainly carry the coal(40 percent of energy) and food certainly does. Should we decrease our need of coal and oil by going over to nuclear, wind and solar??? For transport maybe we can make "electric" trains that run on the energy grid?
> 
> I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.



Wont run out all at once like. Once it becomes apparent we're going to in however many years, we'll begin transitioning to whatever else we can use. Some things will be effected more than others though like military machines. A US aircraft carrier may be nuclear powered, but the aircraft use oil and a bloody lot of it.


----------



## Dogmaphobe

Matthew said:


> What to do if we run out of oil?.




I don't know.  Maybe, like, have some bar-b-que?


----------



## elektra

yes, what to do if we run out of oil, or why are we using more oil to produce more stuff that does not produce, like wind and solar?

increased consumption, millions of tons of copper electrical generators sitting idle with no wind, when those natural resources, once built into generators are better serving humanity by being used, 24 hours a day, hooked up to a nuclear power plant.

yes what to do, I know lets consume more and produce enough useless junk to cover our entire earth with solar panels.

increase consumption, who cares if we use all the oil, the liberals do not care, why should anyone else.


----------



## Youch

Moonglow said:


> Youch said:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Matthew said:
> 
> 
> 
> What to do if we run out of oil? I understand that electricy doesn't really rely on it that much, but our trains certainly carry the coal(40 percent of energy) and food certainly does. Should we decrease our need of coal and oil by going over to nuclear, wind and solar??? For transport maybe we can make "electric" trains that run on the energy grid?
> 
> I"M talking about building nuclear and other means that don't have to rely on it. Can it be done and continue having the civilization that we have today.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> What to do if we run out of oil?
> 
> We won't, if we drill baby drill.  There is more oil under our American feet than anyone ever thought possible.  We have hundreds, if not more, years of petroleum usage available to us, yet the radical freaks desire us to suffer under under-developed technology instead.  Maroons. We could frack our way into the next century, awaiting the next best alternative, but noooooOOOOOooooo, the radical Left would rather cut of our nose to spite our face.
> 
> Liberalism really is a mental disorder.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> Is that why when US oil production was on the decline in 2010 and now the US is one of the top oil producers?
> 
> 
> 
> 
> In 2010 oil production in the United States had been in a steady decline for close to three decades. But a mere four years later, in the spring of 2014, America officially became the #1 oil producer in the world.
> 
> Click to expand...
> 
> This Little-Known Region Could Soon Be The World s 1 Offshore Oil Field - Yahoo Finance
Click to expand...


No.  Perhaps follow the news a bit closer.  Domestic oil production is up, not because of federal restrictions, but on private lands despite federal restrictions.  Recall Barry Obama promised to put the coal and oil business out of business.....he's tried, but like with all else, failed.

Don't believe me (of course you don't) then look it up yourself.  I ain't your daddy.


----------



## Indofred

Matthew said:


> What to do if we run out of oil?



Well, you dash around like headless chickens, trying to invent and perfect alternative energy sources and uses.
Of course, you could do it now but no one will invest in the future.


----------

