Biden to Release U.S. Oil Reserves in Challenge to OPEC+

[pecksniff]

^^^^^^^^
I fully agree that demand is on the increase. My point is some on the left insist on complete severance from fossil fuels based on the incomplete science of causes and effects of climate change . . .

The science is complete as to the causes. As to the effects . . . all we can be sure of at this point is, we won't like it.

 

[pecksniff]

Yes you can.

Well, it would have to be a new design, or at least an at present unusual one. Every car you see on the road, that is not electric, is designed to run on liquid fuel.

 

[JohnnySavage]

Natural gas powers more than 175,000 vehicles in the United States and roughly 23 million vehicles worldwide. Natural gas vehicles (NGVs) are good choices for high-mileage, centrally fueled fleets because they can provide similar fuel range support for applications not involved in long-haul routes where fuel stations can become sparse. For vehicles that travel long distances, liquefied natural gas (LNG) offers a greater energy density than CNG, meaning the fuel range is more comparable to conventional fuel. The advantages of natural gas as a transportation fuel include its domestic availability, widespread distribution infrastructure, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions over conventional gasoline and diesel fuels.


https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/natural_gas.html

Also - I deal with several industrial organizations. They all have forklifts and such powered by propane.

 

[JohnnySavage]

For the record though - I oppose fracking and worked hard to have it banned in Maryland.

I support an "all of the above" energy mix. Base power generation should be nuclear. Peak and surplus should be wind, solar and natural gas.

Transportation should be electric for cities and delivery vehicles and probably emergency vehicles. Anything that does daily routes and can be plugged in when not in use. Gasoline and Diesel will always be needed in rural areas.

Office buildings should have individual solar and wind power and the grid would only be a back-up

 

[bellisarius]

Natural gas powers more than 175,000 vehicles in the United States and roughly 23 million vehicles worldwide. Natural gas vehicles (NGVs) are good choices for high-mileage, centrally fueled fleets because they can provide similar fuel range support for applications not involved in long-haul routes where fuel stations can become sparse. For vehicles that travel long distances, liquefied natural gas (LNG) offers a greater energy density than CNG, meaning the fuel range is more comparable to conventional fuel. The advantages of natural gas as a transportation fuel include its domestic availability, widespread distribution infrastructure, and reduced greenhouse gas emissions over conventional gasoline and diesel fuels.


https://afdc.energy.gov/vehicles/natural_gas.html

Also - I deal with several industrial organizations. They all have forklifts and such powered by propane.

The same can be said for Hydrogen Fuel Cell powered vehicles. The HFC technology has matured quickly and is now a viable alternative. The problem is fuel source infrastructure now.

 

[LittleDixie]

For the record though - I oppose fracking and worked hard to have it banned in Maryland.

I support an "all of the above" energy mix. Base power generation should be nuclear. Peak and surplus should be wind, solar and natural gas.

Transportation should be electric for cities and delivery vehicles and probably emergency vehicles. Anything that does daily routes and can be plugged in when not in use. Gasoline and Diesel will always be needed in rural areas.

Office buildings should have individual solar and wind power and the grid would only be a back-up

I think a better way would be to just relax and retire regulations and let the market figure it out.

300 million people all making independent decisions and judgments will produce a superior outcome than a few biased people making judgments that they think will lead to the Jetsons world of tomorrow they want to live in.

 

[icanhelp1]

Ahhh yes, nuclear waste.

I need to talk to a couple of nuclear physicists (maybe a couple of Geophysicists would be better) I know of concerning that. What I never understood about the whole nuclear waste issue is why they just don't dump the shit in a subduction zone. It will just disappear into the bowels of the Earth never to be seen again.

Recycling spent fuel is doable, just takes the will to do it. There’s enough spent fuel that if recycled could provide grid size energy output for the next hundred years.

https://www.pnnl.gov/news-media/recycling-gives-new-purpose-spent-nuclear-fuel

 

[LupusDei]

Well, it would have to be a new design, or at least an at present unusual one. Every car you see on the road, that is not electric, is designed to run on liquid fuel.

Robust kit to convert diesel vehicles to Natural Gas and Biogas for extended life and reduced contaminants emissions

Yes, you can retrofit cars -- and diesel engines especially easily -- to run on natural gas instead, and could since forever (thirty years for sure). A garage shop conversions for consumer cars used to have a little performance hit (but now they claim it can actually increase performance) and the range on a tank is usually less, and the retrofit gas tank takes up space in the trunk (sometimes a lot of it), but in certain markets it could (and still can) more than halve fuel costs, paying back the conversion quickly, and although gas fueling stations are rarer, where I live (in Europe) they are widespread enough for that to be non-issue. Also the emissions are better, so there was "eco" reasoning for the switch (long before electric cars become viable), for those who feel it important.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

After crippling domestic petroleum production and transportation, Biden begged OPEC to boost production. When that didn’t work, the old coot joined other countries in releasing oil from the strategic reserves. And now WSJ reports that OPEC is considering pausing production to offset what gets released from reserves. Gee, nobody could have seen that coming! Lol.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

After crippling domestic petroleum production and transportation, Biden begged OPEC to boost production. When that didn’t work, the old coot joined other countries in releasing oil from the strategic reserves. And now WSJ reports that OPEC is considering pausing production to offset what gets released from reserves. Gee, nobody could have seen that coming! Lol.

OPEC knows we can only tap the SPR for so long, and they can wait us out and really jam it up our asses when we've depleted the only leverage we have (aside from actually producing it, that is). Biden and his idiot crew are only about the short-term political gain, that's all.

 

[icanhelp1]

Robust kit to convert diesel vehicles to Natural Gas and Biogas for extended life and reduced contaminants emissions

Yes, you can retrofit cars -- and diesel engines especially easily -- to run on natural gas instead, and could since forever (thirty years for sure). A garage shop conversions for consumer cars used to have a little performance hit (but now they claim it can actually increase performance) and the range on a tank is usually less, and the retrofit gas tank takes up space in the trunk (sometimes a lot of it), but in certain markets it could (and still can) more than halve fuel costs, paying back the conversion quickly, and although gas fueling stations are rarer, where I live (in Europe) they are widespread enough for that to be non-issue. Also the emissions are better, so there was "eco" reasoning for the switch (long before electric cars become viable), for those who feel it important.

Considering the fact that LNG emissions consists of CO2 and H2O the offset could be planting billions of trees. Still need to look at nuclear for grid size energy output. Going green is a comprehensive effort where strategic use of different types of energy sources are used to compliment each other. Geothermal, nuclear, solar, LNG, storage cells, batteries and wind along with planting green could wean us off fossil fuels in the not so distant future. I know you know that but some posters don’t.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

Considering the fact that LNG emissions consists of CO2 and H2O the offset could be planting billions of trees. Still need to look at nuclear for grid size energy output. Going green is a comprehensive effort where strategic use of different types of energy sources are used to compliment each other. Geothermal, nuclear, solar, LNG, storage cells, batteries and wind along with planting green could wean us off fossil fuels in the not so distant future. I know you know that but some posters don’t.

And keep in mind hydrogen is no solution, either. While burning it yields only water vapor, it's made using natural gas and stripping off the carbon atom, which then has to be dealt with.

 

[icanhelp1]

And keep in mind hydrogen is no solution, either. While burning it yields only water vapor, it's made using natural gas and stripping off the carbon atom, which then has to be dealt with.

I was considering electrolysis which at this time is above our technological capabilities, perhaps not good for vehicle use, could be used at large facilities where small hydro electric plants could be used to produce H2. Maybe pie in the sky. Considering the huge methane hydrates deposits on the ocean floor learning to scrub CO2 from the atmosphere in large enough quantities could make methane a feasible alternative to fossil fuel . Plant trees man!

 

[Bud_Spencer]

I was considering electrolysis which at this time is above our technological capabilities, perhaps not good for vehicle use, could be used at large facilities where small hydro electric plants could be used to produce H2. Maybe pie in the sky. Considering the huge methane hydrates deposits on the ocean floor learning to scrub CO2 from the atmosphere in large enough quantities could make methane a feasible alternative to fossil fuel . Plant trees man!

As you note, electrolysis require massive amounts of electricity to split water into its component parts. Where do we get that if not from non-carbon sources like hydro or nuclear?

 

[Lazaran]

.
LMMFAO at the usual idiots.

The PRIVATE SECTOR'S FAILURE to gauge demand and adjust production to meet that demand as the economy recovered under President Biden's leadership is what led to higher gas prices. The PRIVATE SECTOR also FAILED to take measures to address supply chain issues, requiring President Biden to step in to ease the bottlenecks at the ports.

President Biden's actions have reduced the number of ships waiting to be offloaded from well over two hundred to about 60. President Biden's coordinated release of oil from several countries strategic oil reserves will also eventually ease prices at the pump as America transitions away from fossil fuel powered vehicles.

/Lesson

 

[Bud_Spencer]

.
LMMFAO at the usual idiots.

The PRIVATE SECTOR'S FAILURE to gauge demand and adjust production to meet that demand as the economy recovered under President Biden's leadership is what led to higher gas prices. The PRIVATE SECTOR also FAILED to take measures to address supply chain issues, requiring President Biden to step in to ease the bottlenecks at the ports.

President Biden's actions have reduced the number of ships waiting to be offloaded from well over two hundred to about 60. President Biden's coordinated release of oil from several countries strategic oil reserves will also eventually ease prices at the pump as America transitions away from fossil fuel powered vehicles.

/Lesson

You give slavish toadies bad name, Laz.

 

[oggbashan]

The release4 of US oil fuel reserves and increased US production is good news for the whole world. It will minimise or reverse recent price increases.

The US is helping everyone. That is good - whoever is President.

Now we just need Venezuela to start producing again under a capitalist system (not that that will happen!).

 

[LupusDei]

Considering the fact that LNG emissions consists of CO2 and H2O the offset could be planting billions of trees.

And keep in mind hydrogen is no solution, either. While burning it yields only water vapor, it's made using natural gas and stripping off the carbon atom, which then has to be dealt with.

Indeed. And while LNG is clean, it's only marginally better from climate standpoint if greenhouse gas effects of leaking gas isn't considered, at least according to this:

Why are electric vehicles the only way to quickly and substantially decarbonize transport?

for the (sales weighted) average medium-size car registered in China, Europe, India, and the United States in 2021, we found that gasoline and diesel ICE vehicle technologies fueled on a fossil/biofuel mix emit approximately 245–253 g CO2 eq./km over their lifetime. These figures already include today’s share of gasoline hybrids in the four regions. When looking at hybrids separately, the GHG emissions are approximately 20% lower, about 200 g CO2 eq./km. Natural gas cars are at about 219 g CO2 eq./km. When taking into account the high short term, 20-year global warming potential (GWP) of upstream methane emissions, however, the climate impact of natural gas cars is just as high as for gasoline or diesel cars. Plug-in hybrids partly fueled by fossil/biofuel and electricity are roughly 30% lower than gasoline cars, about 184–191 g CO2 eq./km. Fuel cell electrics fueled by natural gas based hydrogen are about 169 g CO2 eq./km. When taking into account the 20-year GWP of upstream methane emissions, they are at 191 g CO2 eq./km. Battery electrics fueled on average grid electricity are 105–124 g CO2 eq./km.

https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/why-EVs-only-way-decarbonize-fig1-jul2021.png

the vast majority of biofuels on the market today don’t offer much, if any, life-cycle GHG improvements over fossil gasoline or diesel. The supply of genuinely low GHG biofuel such as advanced waste- and residues-based biofuels is highly constrained, and in the best case scenario could only displace a small fraction of road fuel in the next decade. By 2050, we estimate the maximum amount of low-GHG bioenergy that will be available would be approximately 28 million barrels per day. This might sound like a lot, but demand from the aviation, marine, and plastics sectors will be around 31 million barrels per day, and that will leave nothing substantial for road transport.

And what about e-fuels? Many people are touting e-fuels as the perfect solution. When produced with renewable energy, it’s a nearly carbon neutral fuel that can be dropped into the existing fleet of ICEs to achieve something on par with the performance of electric vehicles from a life-cycle GHG perspective. The primary reason we don’t view e-fuels as a solution is cost. Even the most optimistic projections we are aware of estimate that e-fuel cost parity with fossil fuel*would not come until 2050, and*our analysis*suggests this is a hyper-optimistic estimate and unrealistic. Also, 2050 is simply not workable considering the Paris Agreement timeline.*Especially when considering that battery electric vehicle*cost parity*with ICEs is already here today on a total cost of ownership basis, and upfront cost parity is probably only about 5–8 years away. In addition, the energy efficiency of battery electric vehicles is 4–7 times higher than for e-fuels, so using renewable energy to fuel these vehicles goes a lot farther than using it to produce e-fuels.

A global comparison of the life-cycle greenhouse gas emissions of combustion engine and electric passenger cars

https://theicct.org/sites/default/files/Global-LCA-passenger-cars-fig1-jul2021_0.png

(P.S. Ouch, sorry for the oversized pictures...)

 

[pecksniff]

The real problem with hydrogen as fuel is that it's too difficult to work with. It will bond with anything. It will corrode any machine it's used in. And it leaks too easily.

 

[pecksniff]

Trump issues stunningly false statement criticizing Biden for 'attack' on US oil reserves.

"For decades our Country's very important Strategic Oil Reserves were low or virtually empty in that no President wanted to pay the price of filling them up. I filled them up three years ago, right to the top, when oil prices were very low. Those reserves are meant to be used for serious emergencies, like war, and nothing else," Trump falsely claimed.

As The New York Times' Peter Baker notes, the Strategic Oil Reserves (technically the Strategic Petroleum Reserve,) were far from empty when Trump took office, but they were far less full when he left.