- This topic has 245 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 5 months ago by
sd_bear.
-
AuthorPosts
-
May 29, 2008 at 2:54 PM #213776May 29, 2008 at 3:42 PM #213675
Anonymous
Guest“With no new power plants in this state in several decades, what do you think is going to happen if a few million people start plugging their cars into the power grid?”
In all honesty, not that much if you can set them to charge in the middle of the night. The power plants are running anyways at night with the electricity mostly going to waste. A hybrid that you could charge at night, would allow a lot of people to drive back and forth from work or do small errands without really increasing the demand for power, or pollution those plants emit.
I do appreciate that in your mention of hydrogen you focus on it being a way to store energy, and not an energy source. What the US needs more than anything is a new energy source not dependent on fossil fuels. I’m a big fan of nuclear power, but that isn’t currently politically feasible.
May 29, 2008 at 3:42 PM #213750Guest“With no new power plants in this state in several decades, what do you think is going to happen if a few million people start plugging their cars into the power grid?”
In all honesty, not that much if you can set them to charge in the middle of the night. The power plants are running anyways at night with the electricity mostly going to waste. A hybrid that you could charge at night, would allow a lot of people to drive back and forth from work or do small errands without really increasing the demand for power, or pollution those plants emit.
I do appreciate that in your mention of hydrogen you focus on it being a way to store energy, and not an energy source. What the US needs more than anything is a new energy source not dependent on fossil fuels. I’m a big fan of nuclear power, but that isn’t currently politically feasible.
May 29, 2008 at 3:42 PM #213777Guest“With no new power plants in this state in several decades, what do you think is going to happen if a few million people start plugging their cars into the power grid?”
In all honesty, not that much if you can set them to charge in the middle of the night. The power plants are running anyways at night with the electricity mostly going to waste. A hybrid that you could charge at night, would allow a lot of people to drive back and forth from work or do small errands without really increasing the demand for power, or pollution those plants emit.
I do appreciate that in your mention of hydrogen you focus on it being a way to store energy, and not an energy source. What the US needs more than anything is a new energy source not dependent on fossil fuels. I’m a big fan of nuclear power, but that isn’t currently politically feasible.
May 29, 2008 at 3:42 PM #213804Guest“With no new power plants in this state in several decades, what do you think is going to happen if a few million people start plugging their cars into the power grid?”
In all honesty, not that much if you can set them to charge in the middle of the night. The power plants are running anyways at night with the electricity mostly going to waste. A hybrid that you could charge at night, would allow a lot of people to drive back and forth from work or do small errands without really increasing the demand for power, or pollution those plants emit.
I do appreciate that in your mention of hydrogen you focus on it being a way to store energy, and not an energy source. What the US needs more than anything is a new energy source not dependent on fossil fuels. I’m a big fan of nuclear power, but that isn’t currently politically feasible.
May 29, 2008 at 3:42 PM #213833Guest“With no new power plants in this state in several decades, what do you think is going to happen if a few million people start plugging their cars into the power grid?”
In all honesty, not that much if you can set them to charge in the middle of the night. The power plants are running anyways at night with the electricity mostly going to waste. A hybrid that you could charge at night, would allow a lot of people to drive back and forth from work or do small errands without really increasing the demand for power, or pollution those plants emit.
I do appreciate that in your mention of hydrogen you focus on it being a way to store energy, and not an energy source. What the US needs more than anything is a new energy source not dependent on fossil fuels. I’m a big fan of nuclear power, but that isn’t currently politically feasible.
May 29, 2008 at 4:07 PM #213705Nor-LA-SD-guy
ParticipantWe just need to put up a few Hundred square miles of these things
May 29, 2008 at 4:07 PM #213781ParticipantWe just need to put up a few Hundred square miles of these things
May 29, 2008 at 4:07 PM #213807ParticipantWe just need to put up a few Hundred square miles of these things
May 29, 2008 at 4:07 PM #213834ParticipantWe just need to put up a few Hundred square miles of these things
May 29, 2008 at 4:07 PM #213862ParticipantWe just need to put up a few Hundred square miles of these things
May 29, 2008 at 4:23 PM #213730Arraya
ParticipantJust be glad we don’t have these yet….
http://cryptome.org/cn-fuel-low/cn-fuel-low.htm
The world’s top oil producers are proving unable to put more barrels on thirsty world markets despite sky-high prices, a shift that defies traditional market logic and looks set to continue.
Fresh data from the U.S. Department of Energy show the amount of petroleum products shipped by the world’s top oil exporters fell 2.5% last year, despite a 57% increase in prices, a trend that appears to be holding true this year as well.
There are several reasons behind the net-export decline. Soaring profits from high-price crude have fueled a boom in oil demand in Saudi Arabia and across the Middle East, leaving less oil for export. At the same time, aging fields and sluggish investments have caused exports to drop significantly in Mexico, Norway and, most recently, Russia. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries also cut production early last year and didn’t move to boost supplies again until last fall.
In all, according to the Energy Department figures, net exports by the world’s top 15 suppliers, which account for 45% of all production, fell by nearly a million barrels to 38.7 million barrels a day last year. The drop would have been steeper if not for heightened output in less-developed countries such as Angola and Libya, whose economies have yet to become big energy consumers.May 29, 2008 at 4:23 PM #213806ParticipantJust be glad we don’t have these yet….
http://cryptome.org/cn-fuel-low/cn-fuel-low.htm
The world’s top oil producers are proving unable to put more barrels on thirsty world markets despite sky-high prices, a shift that defies traditional market logic and looks set to continue.
Fresh data from the U.S. Department of Energy show the amount of petroleum products shipped by the world’s top oil exporters fell 2.5% last year, despite a 57% increase in prices, a trend that appears to be holding true this year as well.
There are several reasons behind the net-export decline. Soaring profits from high-price crude have fueled a boom in oil demand in Saudi Arabia and across the Middle East, leaving less oil for export. At the same time, aging fields and sluggish investments have caused exports to drop significantly in Mexico, Norway and, most recently, Russia. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries also cut production early last year and didn’t move to boost supplies again until last fall.
In all, according to the Energy Department figures, net exports by the world’s top 15 suppliers, which account for 45% of all production, fell by nearly a million barrels to 38.7 million barrels a day last year. The drop would have been steeper if not for heightened output in less-developed countries such as Angola and Libya, whose economies have yet to become big energy consumers.May 29, 2008 at 4:23 PM #213831ParticipantJust be glad we don’t have these yet….
http://cryptome.org/cn-fuel-low/cn-fuel-low.htm
The world’s top oil producers are proving unable to put more barrels on thirsty world markets despite sky-high prices, a shift that defies traditional market logic and looks set to continue.
Fresh data from the U.S. Department of Energy show the amount of petroleum products shipped by the world’s top oil exporters fell 2.5% last year, despite a 57% increase in prices, a trend that appears to be holding true this year as well.
There are several reasons behind the net-export decline. Soaring profits from high-price crude have fueled a boom in oil demand in Saudi Arabia and across the Middle East, leaving less oil for export. At the same time, aging fields and sluggish investments have caused exports to drop significantly in Mexico, Norway and, most recently, Russia. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries also cut production early last year and didn’t move to boost supplies again until last fall.
In all, according to the Energy Department figures, net exports by the world’s top 15 suppliers, which account for 45% of all production, fell by nearly a million barrels to 38.7 million barrels a day last year. The drop would have been steeper if not for heightened output in less-developed countries such as Angola and Libya, whose economies have yet to become big energy consumers.May 29, 2008 at 4:23 PM #213858ParticipantJust be glad we don’t have these yet….
http://cryptome.org/cn-fuel-low/cn-fuel-low.htm
The world’s top oil producers are proving unable to put more barrels on thirsty world markets despite sky-high prices, a shift that defies traditional market logic and looks set to continue.
Fresh data from the U.S. Department of Energy show the amount of petroleum products shipped by the world’s top oil exporters fell 2.5% last year, despite a 57% increase in prices, a trend that appears to be holding true this year as well.
There are several reasons behind the net-export decline. Soaring profits from high-price crude have fueled a boom in oil demand in Saudi Arabia and across the Middle East, leaving less oil for export. At the same time, aging fields and sluggish investments have caused exports to drop significantly in Mexico, Norway and, most recently, Russia. The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries also cut production early last year and didn’t move to boost supplies again until last fall.
In all, according to the Energy Department figures, net exports by the world’s top 15 suppliers, which account for 45% of all production, fell by nearly a million barrels to 38.7 million barrels a day last year. The drop would have been steeper if not for heightened output in less-developed countries such as Angola and Libya, whose economies have yet to become big energy consumers. -
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.