The Chrysler Minivan Fan Club Forums banner

41 - 60 of 66 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
Are you sure the station by you is selling 100% gas? I'm pretty sure WI switched a couple years ago and started putting a minimum of E10 in all grades. My inlaws live in Oshkosh and I used to like buying non-E10 gas but all stations now are E-10. I remember reading about it that WI switched.
There is real gas selling stations all over the place, mostly the deep south and midwest but even Commiefornia has some, less then five but they're still out there.
Check this out for any near you, http://pure-gas.org/
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,029 Posts
...One of the worst ideas that's floating around now is the idea of running our cars on natural gas, (methane)! You still have all the problems of greenhouse gas, (CO2), and all you'd do is drive up the price of heating your house as the supply of natural gas would be split among heating and running your car. I know we are supposed to have a lot of natural gas in this country, but much of it would be very expensive to get out of the ground, and it's not all that pure when it does come to the surface. It's usually got a lot of sulfur in it and it would cost a fair amount to clean it up enough to burn in your car cleanly. Some of it is clean, but to extend the amount we use for heating to cover burning in our cars, would require us to start tapping into some expensive and dirty sources. After all of this, you'd still have the same problems of storage and dispensing as you would with hydrogen. The natural gas that comes into your house does so at a pressure of only a small fraction of one psig. To store enough in your car to be useful would require pressurizing it to at least 2500-3000 psig, about the same as hydrogen...
Oh, but Natural Gas is indeed an alternative that should be explored.

Natural Gas is being harvested aggressively across southern New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia, from the Marcellus Shale. The Marcellus Shale has been called the Saudi Arabia of Natural Gas. It is not too expensive to get out of the ground, otherwise there would not be thousands of rigs being erected across Pennsylvania. Gas is abundant in this area, and could be used to power vehicles. The transportation, storage and dispensing issues with gasoline are well known, because we've lived with them for years and years. The transportation, storage and disposal issues with Natural Gas are different, but any time you are talking about a highly flammable substance, there are going to be issues. However, anyone who has gas heat in their home could have a fitting installed to "charge" their car overnight.

I would recommend reading as much as you can about the Marcellus Shale.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
Oh, but Natural Gas is indeed an alternative that should be explored.

Natural Gas is being harvested aggressively across southern New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio and West Virginia, from the Marcellus Shale. The Marcellus Shale has been called the Saudi Arabia of Natural Gas. It is not too expensive to get out of the ground, otherwise there would not be thousands of rigs being erected across Pennsylvania. Gas is abundant in this area, and could be used to power vehicles. The transportation, storage and dispensing issues with gasoline are well known, because we've lived with them for years and years. The transportation, storage and disposal issues with Natural Gas are different, but any time you are talking about a highly flammable substance, there are going to be issues. However, anyone who has gas heat in their home could have a fitting installed to "charge" their car overnight.

I would recommend reading as much as you can about the Marcellus Shale.
Ok...., remember this..., I work in the petroleum industry. I have for almost forty years. There are very few refineries around the entire world including ALL the countries in the Middle East, even Iran and Niceragua, that do not use at least some of our technology and we have reps at those refineries most days of the year. I know more about natural gas and it's chemistry and problems than you possibly could unless you work for a competitor of ours.

The push for natural gas is coming from a few companies that are trying to corner the market on it and then see the price skyrocket! Probably the biggest name is T. Boone Pickens. The reserves of the Marcellus Shale area MAY have some large amounts of natural gas, but getting it out is not going to be easy. There are environmental issues that haven't been addressed yet and the possibliity of contaminating the drinking water supply for much of the Northeastern part of the country with sulfur and radioactive substances is quite possible. Yes..., some wells have been drilled, and some have been producing for a number of years, but the cost will be prohibitive for many years to come even if the environmental issues can be overcome.

Anyway, many experts believe the amount of gas and it's quality in those areas is vastly overrated. There are also stories of vast amounts under Wyoming, Utah and surrounding states. Those too are likely vastly overrated and the difficulty of getting it out of the ground without a large government subsidy is next to impossible.

The technology to use the natural gas in your house to power your car is, indeed, existing..., but you wouldn't want to pay the bill and put up with the hassle. To get enough natural gas into your car, you are going to have to compress it to pressures exceeding 2500 psig. Now I don't know about you, but I wouldn't trust most of my neighbors to handle that kind of equipment. The electricity costs to power the compressor would wipe out any savings you think you might get. And...., as with any commodity, the minute the demand rises for something, the price will go up, meaning you'll pay more to heat your house and cook your food.

We're better off putting our money into nuclear power plants and making electricity and then using that power to heat our homes and perhaps produce hydrogen fuel for our cars. The use of natural gas adds many problems and will greatly increase the cost of a car, and you'll still have all the problems of greenhouse gases and global warming that goes with that. Don't get me wrong. It could be done, but don't be so easily fooled by someone who's just looking for another way to extract more money from you!
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,203 Posts
Discussion Starter #45
There is only so much natural gas fracking they are going to be able to do if they can't keep it from leaking into the water table.
I am not a fan of using a great heating fuel (that keeps tons of wood and coal smoke out of neighborhoods) for electricity production or for running our vehicles.
I prefer coal and nuclear for power production because they are cheap. Too bad our current dictator (in the US) has promised to bankrupt any company that builds a new coal plant no matter how clean the exhaust is. That and the increased use of wind has pushed the production of natural gas powered plants which while some are twice as efficient as a coal plant, the cost per MW is anywhere from 50% more to 500% more than coal. Coal is roughly 5 times the cost per MW of nuclear.
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
... However, anyone who has gas heat in their home could have a fitting installed to "charge" their car overnight.

...
This.
I have natural gas at home. If they would make a CNG/Gasoline Hybrid (well, they make conversion units, but not talking about that) I would buy one.
I could fill at my home 90% of the time, and for that last 10% for long trips and such, I can still use gasoline.

While I would love a Hydrogen powerd car, that is just not feasable at any time in the near future. CNG is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
This.
I have natural gas at home. If they would make a CNG/Gasoline Hybrid (well, they make conversion units, but not talking about that) I would buy one.
I could fill at my home 90% of the time, and for that last 10% for long trips and such, I can still use gasoline.

While I would love a Hydrogen powerd car, that is just not feasable at any time in the near future. CNG is.

it doesn't take merely a 'fitting' to fuel up a car with natural gas. The gas supply to your house isn't even 1 psig. It's a fraction of 1 psig. To carry enough to drive your car for any distance would require a tank about the size of a medium size tank truck.

To carry a useful amount of natural gas, (methane), you have to compress it up to about 2500 psig, and then contain it in your car and regulate the supply to the engine. You are talking about a substantial cost for the equipment to do this.

After all of that..., you still are burning a fossil fuel and pumping out a lot of CO2 into the air.

The only way to sustainably keep cars as we know them is to go for hydrogen as fuel, which requires a whole new infrastructure, or electricity, which is also going to take a lot of money and time to implement on a large scale.

To continue to use hydrocarbons for fuel for the foreseeable future, we should switch to small, turbo-charged Diesel engines as they are much more efficient than gas engines running the Otto cycle.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,203 Posts
Discussion Starter #49
My preference would definitely be diesels. Too bad they just don't seem to sell well here. I hope that is the direction that manufacturers go with the new CAFE regulations that they are going to.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
After all of that..., you still are burning a fossil fuel and pumping out a lot of CO2 into the air.

The only way to sustainably keep cars as we know them is to go for hydrogen as fuel, which requires a whole new infrastructure, or electricity, which is also going to take a lot of money and time to implement on a large scale.

To continue to use hydrocarbons for fuel for the foreseeable future, we should switch to small, turbo-charged Diesel engines as they are much more efficient than gas engines running the Otto cycle.
My preference would definitely be diesels. Too bad they just don't seem to sell well here. I hope that is the direction that manufacturers go with the new CAFE regulations that they are going to.
Much adu about nothing. Gimme straight gasoline (or diesel) and 'eff' the rest.
First, there is NO shortage of oil and no signs we'll run out any time soon. The high costs of fuel is due to the market conditions. Gasoline is hands down the most cost effective and economical means of powering our vehicles, in the past, the present and foreseeable future, NOTHING is even close.
Second, the amount of CO2 is a measley fraction of the total green houses gasses, a whooping 3.6%. Thats TOTAL! The percent of man made CO2 is 3.2%, remember thats only 3.2% of the 3.6% of a green house gas, that works out to roughly a WHOPPING .11% of CO2. If you include all man made green house gases such as methane, nitrous oxide, CFCs & misc, we, man only account for .28%!!! It's a joke to think anything we can ever do will effect the natural heating/cooling cycles the earth has been going through for hundreds of billions of years. Natural H2O, yes ...water (in vapor form obviously) makes up 95+% of the green house gases. Now to put all that in perspective, all greenhouse gasses account for about 1% (ONE percent) of out atmosphere.
Think about it, we all know of ice ages, what caused them to end....GLOBAL WARMING!!!! During most of the dinosaur periods most of the earth was tropical or semi-tropical rain forests, what ended that...GOLBAL COOLING. Long long long before any human walked the earth.
There have been many of these cycles, with in these cycles are mini warming or cooling cycles of about 2000 years, they are predicable.
All this conservation stuff is a joke. Only reason to do it (alternative fuels or more efficient gas/diesel engines) is an INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, not some mandated BS laws.
I'm not in the least worried about my carbon foot print, if my personal choices in vehicles or home appliances etc, cause it to be smaller so be it, bottom line for me is my pocket.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
4,203 Posts
Discussion Starter #51
It would help if the moratorium on drilling in the Gulf of Mexico was lifted.
FWIW, I don't drink the "Global Climate Change" Kool Aid either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
Much adu about nothing. Gimme straight gasoline (or diesel) and 'eff' the rest.
First, there is NO shortage of oil and no signs we'll run out any time soon. The high costs of fuel is due to the market conditions. Gasoline is hands down the most cost effective and economical means of powering our vehicles, in the past, the present and foreseeable future, NOTHING is even close.
Second, the amount of CO2 is a measley fraction of the total green houses gasses, a whooping 3.6%. Thats TOTAL! The percent of man made CO2 is 3.2%, remember thats only 3.2% of the 3.6% of a green house gas, that works out to roughly a WHOPPING .11% of CO2. If you include all man made green house gases such as methane, nitrous oxide, CFCs & misc, we, man only account for .28%!!! It's a joke to think anything we can ever do will effect the natural heating/cooling cycles the earth has been going through for hundreds of billions of years. Natural H2O, yes ...water (in vapor form obviously) makes up 95+% of the green house gases. Now to put all that in perspective, all greenhouse gasses account for about 1% (ONE percent) of out atmosphere.
Think about it, we all know of ice ages, what caused them to end....GLOBAL WARMING!!!! During most of the dinosaur periods most of the earth was tropical or semi-tropical rain forests, what ended that...GOLBAL COOLING. Long long long before any human walked the earth.
There have been many of these cycles, with in these cycles are mini warming or cooling cycles of about 2000 years, they are predicable.
All this conservation stuff is a joke. Only reason to do it (alternative fuels or more efficient gas/diesel engines) is an INDIVIDUAL CHOICE, not some mandated BS laws.
I'm not in the least worried about my carbon foot print, if my personal choices in vehicles or home appliances etc, cause it to be smaller so be it, bottom line for me is my pocket.
Uhhh...., sorry to throw a wet blanket on your wishes....., but if you want to believe all of what you wrote...., I think you drank a whole lot of somebodys Kool Aid!

I'm in the oil business. The supply is finite and we are approaching our peak production level...., or are close to it. I don't know where you got your figures on CO2 and other greenhouse gases..., but I'd stop buying whatever publication you read them in.

If we were to drop all restrictions on drilling anywhere and do an all out effort, by 2030 we might be producing another 500,000 barrels per day. The world uses 89 million barrels per day now. By 2030, it will be using approximately 100 million barrels per day. So after 20 years of work, we wind up adding another 0.5% to world production.

To add to that dismal outlook..., any increase from us would be met with a decrease in the amount from OPEC, cancelling out anything we add, to keep the price up.

Simple economics and science are all against you! Sorry!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
102 Posts
Well, some one is drinking kool-aid and it seems it being served by some ones company.
Now, hate to burst your bubble but real science is what I'm using. The real science info is out there, just have to weed through the political bias crap.
According to what your saying all current oil wells are at 100% capacity...really? Some one better tell OPEC, the reports from them don't say such. Look it up, I'm not going to for the sake of trivial arguments on a mini-van forum.....fed up and burnt out from politics several years ago.

"In the oil business", well, that says a lot. Gas station attendant? Independent dealer for Royal Purple, Amsoil, Red Line?????? I guess I was an oil man too....yeee haaaaa call me Tex!

Science is against me eh? Prove me wrong, solid real proof via reports from NON-biased scientists. Sorry, again but I was in this up to my neck for years (for political reasons mostly, until I got sick of it) and have seen reams and reams of reports, it's easy to weed out the garbage no matter how nice a package they sell it in. Everything from global warming to global cooling to oil production.
Hmmm, a "finite" supply eh? So I suppose after the dinosaurs all died off there was no animal or plant life on earth until man showed up?
The earth is constantly producing oil, prove it isn't. Sure one can argue we're pumping it faster then she's producing it, but there is no way of knowing that with current technology.
 

·
PT Driver
Joined
·
2,674 Posts
Science marches on..., but at the current state of the art, and given the political and economic realities of the moment, gasoline looks to be the main fuel for the foreseeable future. Hydrogen makes the most sense in the near term, and some form of stored electric power is really the answer in the long run.
Gasoline will stay around for a while no doubt, but Diesel, which I"m sure as you know is a cruder oil then gasoline, is what I'm sure soon enough we'll see more of in the future. Hydrogen, I see as a future fuel, a lot of people are scared about it being pretty much a bomb in your car, even though on a hot day your car with a 1/4 tank of gas, is pretty much carrying a bomb as well. (remember gas in liquid form isn't actually explosive, or even flammable, its the fumes).

Electric isn't the answer in the long run, because of the batteries, they aren't exactly good for the environment to manufacture, and they only last up to 10 years. Lets not forget, range anxiety, and unlike a conventional gasoline powered car, when its out, your stuck waiting hours to recharge. Electric cars only make sense if you have a small commute to work and back. But say going on a family vacation, not a good idea. Of course can't forget that over time those batteries also won't be able to hold quite as much charge. They also don't make sense because some places are making just enough electricity to say its 120v, now imagine everyone plugging in their electric car at night at such a place, especially in the summer time with everyone's a/c running in the house. I'm sure in places like California electric cars make a lot of sense, but in reality, not so much. As I see it even if we come up with a new form of storage for electricity, its still not a good idea to put it in cars.

I do agree though that CNG is not a viable path for powering our cars. Heating houses with natural gas is expensive as it is.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
Well, some one is drinking kool-aid and it seems it being served by some ones company.
Now, hate to burst your bubble but real science is what I'm using. The real science info is out there, just have to weed through the political bias crap.
According to what your saying all current oil wells are at 100% capacity...really? Some one better tell OPEC, the reports from them don't say such. Look it up, I'm not going to for the sake of trivial arguments on a mini-van forum.....fed up and burnt out from politics several years ago.

"In the oil business", well, that says a lot. Gas station attendant? Independent dealer for Royal Purple, Amsoil, Red Line?????? I guess I was an oil man too....yeee haaaaa call me Tex!

Science is against me eh? Prove me wrong, solid real proof via reports from NON-biased scientists. Sorry, again but I was in this up to my neck for years (for political reasons mostly, until I got sick of it) and have seen reams and reams of reports, it's easy to weed out the garbage no matter how nice a package they sell it in. Everything from global warming to global cooling to oil production.
Hmmm, a "finite" supply eh? So I suppose after the dinosaurs all died off there was no animal or plant life on earth until man showed up?
The earth is constantly producing oil, prove it isn't. Sure one can argue we're pumping it faster then she's producing it, but there is no way of knowing that with current technology.
I design and build experimental oil refinery technology. I've been doing it for almost forty years. My company has been one of the leaders in the petrochemical research and technology business since 1914. There's not a refinery in the world that doesn't use at least some of our technology or patents or catalyst. Our success depends on accurate information and forecasts of the supply and demand for oil based products. (I did work at a gas station for a couple of summers when I was in college back in the sixties.)

For every complicated problem in the world..., there is always a 'simple' solution...., that is invariably wrong!
 

·
Vendor
Joined
·
1,105 Posts
it doesn't take merely a 'fitting' to fuel up a car with natural gas. The gas supply to your house isn't even 1 psig. It's a fraction of 1 psig. To carry enough to drive your car for any distance would require a tank about the size of a medium size tank truck.

To carry a useful amount of natural gas, (methane), you have to compress it up to about 2500 psig, and then contain it in your car and regulate the supply to the engine. You are talking about a substantial cost for the equipment to do this.

After all of that..., you still are burning a fossil fuel and pumping out a lot of CO2 into the air.

The only way to sustainably keep cars as we know them is to go for hydrogen as fuel, which requires a whole new infrastructure, or electricity, which is also going to take a lot of money and time to implement on a large scale.

To continue to use hydrocarbons for fuel for the foreseeable future, we should switch to small, turbo-charged Diesel engines as they are much more efficient than gas engines running the Otto cycle.
I know it is not just hooking up to my home gas supply, they already sell units that compress the gas from the low pressure of NG to the CNG for vehicles. They run around $5000 installed, and their are rebates for some in some areas.

I like how you ridicule the "substantial cost for the equipment to do this" yet 2 sentences later praise hydrogen, which requires even more expense and infrastructure. Internal combustion engines can already run on CNG with minor modifications (my dad had a car in 1966 that ran on LPG and gasoline) and several makers offer CNG vehicles (although Honda is the only one offering to the public instead of a conversion).

Is CNG the end all answer, no. It is a very viable and immediate one though that will reduce emissions and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. It also allows the ability to continue to use our existing gasoline supply system (if you have a CNG/gasoline hybrid) until a CNG system is in place.

Oh, BTW, guess where most of the hydrogen comes from now?
Fossil Fuels (namely CNG (95%), coal and LPG). Yes their are other ways, but the cheapest right now is from CNG.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
I know it is not just hooking up to my home gas supply, they already sell units that compress the gas from the low pressure of NG to the CNG for vehicles. They run around $5000 installed, and their are rebates for some in some areas.

I like how you ridicule the "substantial cost for the equipment to do this" yet 2 sentences later praise hydrogen, which requires even more expense and infrastructure. Internal combustion engines can already run on CNG with minor modifications (my dad had a car in 1966 that ran on LPG and gasoline) and several makers offer CNG vehicles (although Honda is the only one offering to the public instead of a conversion).

Is CNG the end all answer, no. It is a very viable and immediate one though that will reduce emissions and reduce our dependence on foreign oil. It also allows the ability to continue to use our existing gasoline supply system (if you have a CNG/gasoline hybrid) until a CNG system is in place.

Oh, BTW, guess where most of the hydrogen comes from now?
Fossil Fuels (namely CNG (95%), coal and LPG). Yes their are other ways, but the cheapest right now is from CNG.
The reason that hydrogen is better than compressed natural gas is that it doesn't produce the greenhouse gases that natural gas, (methane), does. The equipment cost to compress them is about the same. It's the supply of hydrogen to your house that would be a problem. Building that infrastructure would be expensive and more prone to leaks than natural gas systems.

Burning hydrogen in your car would require almost the exact same modifications as burning natural gas, (or propane as a lot of industrial vehicles do). The exhaust would be just pure water and wouldn't contain any CO or CO2. The combustion temps with hydrogen would be lower to limit the possibility of producing oxides of nitrogen.

You don't need a supply of HCBN to get hydrogen, although you can do it that way, usually by a methane steam reformer unit. (In a refinery the hydrogen balance and it's distribution is carefully calculated and measured and there isn't that much to spare at the end of the line!) The best way to get hydrogen would be from water through hydrolysis, by splitting the hydrogen and oxygen atoms. At the present state of the technology, it would cost more in the use of electricity, probably produced by burning a fossil fuel, than you would save by burning the hydrogen.

The best plan to produce enough electricity is to engineer and build safe nuclear power plants, or to use wind generators or hydro power from waterfalls or subterranean steam. Possible the best idea I've heard is the use of a device similar in operation to a wind generator, but to place it under water in areas of tidal flow. They would be out of sight and quiet. It would be more expensive than wind generators, but as the technology improves, the cost could be brought down to a level that would make it feasible.

In the short term, it's gasoline! No doubt about that. In the slightly longer term, the efficiency of the Diesel cycle is probably what will bridge us over to something new. That something could be electric vehicles if they solve the problems with battery technology or, eventually, hydrogen, if we insist on sticking with the internal combustion engine.

By the way..., gasoline IS a flammable substance. It has to be or it wouldn't burn in your car when mixed in the proper proportion with air. It can and does produce an explosive mixture when the proportions of air to gasoline are within the explosive limits. In your gas tank, the mixture is usually too 'rich' to be explosive, but it might explode if you have a source of ignition which isn't usually present in your fuel tank. The Lower Explosive Limit, or LEL, for an average blend of gasoline is ~1.4 % by volume with the gas phase in the tank. The Upper Explosive Limit, or UEL is ~7.6 % by volume. Less than 1.4 % won't go off and above 7.6 % won't either.

One of the often forgotten problems with oxygenating gasoline with ethanol, is that one of the side reactions is the production of formaldehyde, CH2O. Pumping this out into the air we breathe isn't the smartest thing to be doing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
546 Posts
I know it's an old thread but I feel that I need to add my $0.02.
First off, CNG when used in place of gasoline, produces practically same or with an engine designed for it, produces more power and less emissions. It has much higher octane than gasoline, so an engine with higher compression/ turbo/ supercharger will benefit.
NG, is practically limitless as far as we know, it's there wherever a oil is being pumped from the earth, as a matter of fact it was treated as waste in the past and burned off.
You don't have to pump it, it comes out under pressure, so all you need to invest in is collection and storage. Yet the reason for it's high price is that in order to prevent us from switching from gasoline to CNG, it's price is artificially raised to make the switch uneconomical.
Many countries run almost all of their cars on CNG.
Also another point about Hydrogen that everyone one seems to forget. Water vapor ( the result of burning Hydrogen) is a much more powerful Greenhouse gas then CO2 or Methane, so it does nothing to prevent the so called "man-made global warming".

So end result, as a consumer we still lose.

Alex...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
289 Posts
I know it's an old thread but I feel that I need to add my $0.02.
First off, CNG when used in place of gasoline, produces practically same or with an engine designed for it, produces more power and less emissions. It has much higher octane than gasoline, so an engine with higher compression/ turbo/ supercharger will benefit.
NG, is practically limitless as far as we know, it's there wherever a oil is being pumped from the earth, as a matter of fact it was treated as waste in the past and burned off.
You don't have to pump it, it comes out under pressure, so all you need to invest in is collection and storage. Yet the reason for it's high price is that in order to prevent us from switching from gasoline to CNG, it's price is artificially raised to make the switch uneconomical.
Many countries run almost all of their cars on CNG.
Also another point about Hydrogen that everyone one seems to forget. Water vapor ( the result of burning Hydrogen) is a much more powerful Greenhouse gas then CO2 or Methane, so it does nothing to prevent the so called "man-made global warming".

So end result, as a consumer we still lose.

Alex...
Natural gas is not "practically limitless". I don't know where you got that idea, but it's not true. Some oil wells do have a relatively high pressure from LPG being dissolved in the oil. It's formed from the same process that made the oil, so it's not unusual for it to be there. However...., it isn't present in every well, or even the majority of them today, otherwise the vast number of 'Nodding Donkey' oil pumps you see all over Texas and California wouldn't be needed. Many wells today require the pumping of steam or a compressed gas into the well to get the oil to the surface. Much of the supply available in Canada today is in 'oil sands' that are dug out by essentially strip-mining an area and then the heavy, viscous oil has to be separated from the sand at a not inconsiderable expense. And..., no..., not all wells are pumping at 100% capacity. The market for oil is subject to what's called a very 'inelastic' supply and demand curve. You have to give people a huge break on prices to get them to use more of it and you have to raise the price substantially to get people to use less of it. Anything we do in this country to increase production, will be countered by OPEC cutting production to keep the price at a point where they have determined that they can extract the maximum amount of money from us. If we can produce more oil in this country, and we can...., at a price..., do you think the company that does it will charge any less than the maximum amount it can get for it? If you suddenly owned a bunch of oil wells here in the US, would you charge half of what OPEC does, just because you're a good American and you want to give the rest of us a break? No...., you'd do what anyone else would do. You'd charge as much as you can get for the oil. That's not just greed, it's simple economics and that's what you, or I for that matter, would do.

Compressed natural gas, (methane, actually), does have an octane rating of between 120-130 depending on how it's measured, and this can help the performance of a vehicle, but the equipment to store and supply the gas to the engine can take up much of the available space in the trunk or other storage areas of the cars. This limits the range of CNG vehicles and their appeal to many. It's also one of the reasons that most CNG vehicles are small, economy types anyway. There have been some efforts to convert large fleets of commercial vehicles to CNG, and it does work, but the same problem arises with CNG as with gasoline. You are burning a hydrocarbon. When you do that, you are making CO2. That's what happens when you oxidize carbon..., you make CO2. The number of hydrogen atoms compared to carbon atoms in the CNG is what gives you the lower level of CO2. Unfortunately, it also limits the amount of energy that you can release from a stoichiometric mixture of natural gas as opposed to gasoline.

Water as a product of combustion has no effect on the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere! The amount of water present in the atmosphere is totally Dependant on the barometric pressure and the temperature of the atmosphere. Too much water and it just drops out as rain. It's self regulating. The amount of water in our atmosphere wouldn't change by even the smallest measurable amount if all of our cars ran on pure hydrogen. The vast majority of water in the atmosphere comes from evaporation over the oceans, an activity that dwarfs anything we can do.

I make my living from building equipment to produce gasoline and other products derived from oil..., although now we have several projects under way to improve ways of making hydrocarbons from biomass material. I would actually lose my income from the complete elimination of oil derived products and their use, but we have to face the fact that global warming is not some liberal-left-wing conspiracy to wreck western economies. It's real and the vast majority of scientists adhere to that fact. Just covering your ears and only listening to the likes of the Faux News Network, (Fox News, if you don't get the joke), will not make it go away.

Right now, as always, the market will ultimately decide where we get our energy from, but that market will always be subject to the constraints of the needs of society to keep from committing suicide by pollution. Every day I spend most of my time at work trying to solve problems with refining oil and making useful products out of it. You just don't pump it out of the ground and put it in your car! Much of the crude oil that comes out of the ground is full of toxic and poisonous substances. It contains acids, poison gases, heavy metals and other minerals that make it useless without some pretty fancy chemistry done on it. Much of it is essentially solid at room temperature!

As I've said before...., for every complicated problem, there is inevitably a simple solution..., that is just as inevitably wrong!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
546 Posts
Natural gas is not "practically limitless". I don't know where you got that idea, but it's not true. Some oil wells do have a relatively high pressure from LPG being dissolved in the oil. It's formed from the same process that made the oil, so it's not unusual for it to be there. However...., it isn't present in every well, or even the majority of them today, otherwise the vast number of 'Nodding Donkey' oil pumps you see all over Texas and California wouldn't be needed. Many wells today require the pumping of steam or a compressed gas into the well to get the oil to the surface.
I grew up in an oil producing country in Russia's Middle East and practically every oil well had to have some kind of NG separating process because there was so much of it.
A lot of other oil producing countries have the same issue.
A fact not many outside of circles know is that when oil companies do exploratory drilling, a lot of time they hit NG but no oil or little oil. Those wells are plugged and they move on. Why? Much higher profit from oil.

Much of the supply available in Canada today is in 'oil sands' that are dug out by essentially strip-mining an area and then the heavy, viscous oil has to be separated from the sand at a not inconsiderable expense.
Not applicable to the subject.

And..., no..., not all wells are pumping at 100% capacity. The market for oil is subject to what's called a very 'inelastic' supply and demand curve. You have to give people a huge break on prices to get them to use more of it and you have to raise the price substantially to get people to use less of it. Anything we do in this country to increase production, will be countered by OPEC cutting production to keep the price at a point where they have determined that they can extract the maximum amount of money from us. If we can produce more oil in this country, and we can...., at a price..., do you think the company that does it will charge any less than the maximum amount it can get for it? If you suddenly owned a bunch of oil wells here in the US, would you charge half of what OPEC does, just because you're a good American and you want to give the rest of us a break? No...., you'd do what anyone else would do. You'd charge as much as you can get for the oil. That's not just greed, it's simple economics and that's what you, or I for that matter, would do.
That is so true and greed is a universal evil. But as you know, most of the oil and NG is extracted from Federally owned territories. If we produce and sell internally at a true rather than OPEC set price and tell OPEC to suck it, guess what will happen? When OPEC sees that one of their major buyers no longer buys at the price they sell, they will lower the price. And before you say that we don't produce enough, if we actually start using CNG or LNG as auto fuel, they we would be fully self-sufficient.
Iran, Pakistan, India, Brazil, Latin America have major natural gas resources and are actually utilizing them as auto fuel with great results as it completely eliminates the very expensive refining process that is necessary for production of gasoline. And if you've ever had an engine running on CNG or LPG, you'd know that those engines require a lot less maintenance then gasoline run engines.

Compressed natural gas, (methane, actually), does have an octane rating of between 120-130 depending on how it's measured, and this can help the performance of a vehicle, but the equipment to store and supply the gas to the engine can take up much of the available space in the trunk or other storage areas of the cars.
You mean as opposed to a gas tank?

This limits the range of CNG vehicles and their appeal to many. It's also one of the reasons that most CNG vehicles are small, economy types anyway. There have been some efforts to convert large fleets of commercial vehicles to CNG, and it does work, but the same problem arises with CNG as with gasoline. You are burning a hydrocarbon. When you do that, you are making CO2. That's what happens when you oxidize carbon..., you make CO2. The number of hydrogen atoms compared to carbon atoms in the CNG is what gives you the lower level of CO2. Unfortunately, it also limits the amount of energy that you can release from a stoichiometric mixture of natural gas as opposed to gasoline.
Give me an engine and I can make more power from it using CNG or LPG than pump gasoline. And it will produce less harmful emissions in the process.
Higher octane of CNG/LPG allows for optimization of efficiency of internal combastion, hence more power with less emissions.

Water as a product of combustion has no effect on the amount of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere! The amount of water present in the atmosphere is totally Dependant on the barometric pressure and the temperature of the atmosphere. Too much water and it just drops out as rain. It's self regulating. The amount of water in our atmosphere wouldn't change by even the smallest measurable amount if all of our cars ran on pure hydrogen. The vast majority of water in the atmosphere comes from evaporation over the oceans, an activity that dwarfs anything we can do.
Water vapor by definition is a greenhouse gas, don't even try to argue that it's not. As someone who I'm sure paid attention in science class you should also know that the higher the temperature, the higher the amount of water vapor can be supported in the atmosphere without precipitating and guess what happens during greenhouse? The more heat gets trapped the higher the temperatures get.
But we all know that mother nature is pretty good at finding balance.

I make my living from building equipment to produce gasoline and other products derived from oil..., although now we have several projects under way to improve ways of making hydrocarbons from biomass material. I would actually lose my income from the complete elimination of oil derived products and their use, but we have to face the fact that global warming is not some liberal-left-wing conspiracy to wreck western economies. It's real and the vast majority of scientists adhere to that fact. Just covering your ears and only listening to the likes of the Faux News Network, (Fox News, if you don't get the joke), will not make it go away.
I respect your experience and knowledge but I'm sure you agree that others have those qualities as well, so we can have discussions like this and learn from them.

Right now, as always, the market will ultimately decide where we get our energy from, but that market will always be subject to the constraints of the needs of society to keep from committing suicide by pollution. Every day I spend most of my time at work trying to solve problems with refining oil and making useful products out of it. You just don't pump it out of the ground and put it in your car! Much of the crude oil that comes out of the ground is full of toxic and poisonous substances. It contains acids, poison gases, heavy metals and other minerals that make it useless without some pretty fancy chemistry done on it. Much of it is essentially solid at room temperature!
Very true though the that list sentence is only true for North America which predominately has heavy crude while the Middle East is rich in light crude. As a matter of fact I remember a class trip back in the 80's to a well that had such light crude that it was possible to use it as gasoline as is. Crappy gas but you get the point.
As to your point about Fox News, I'll have to counter with this:
Stop watching CNN, BBC, MSNBC, CNBC and so on, massively left leaning, not even close to the center stations.
Guess what, about 10,000 years ago there was nearly a mile thick ice sheet right where Manhattan, NY is. Guess what happened to it? It melted due to global warming. Hmm, were cave men burning that much wood in their fires? And there have been many other global cooling and global warming events in history of Earth and there will be many more. With or without us. So let's get off this Al Gore BS wagon pretending that history starts 100 years ago and that the same scientist that cannot predict what the weather is going to be like next week, can predict to a 10th! of a degree what the temperature is going to be 100 years from now. Most real scientists do not agree and many of the ones that tried to speak against Al Gore's goons have lost their grans and or jobs. Pisses me off every time I watch Discovery Channel there's a Man-made Global Warming scare at the end of each special. These people truly do think that most of us are idiots that don't know anything about science and will believe anything if they say it enough times!

Alex...
 
41 - 60 of 66 Posts
Top