Reply With Quote
Really? Companies should not be able to export product?
If you're making that argument within the framework of nationalization of oil, I can understand that. But outside of nationalization, that makes zero economic sense.
Over one and a half million hydrogen powered vehicles could be on UK roads by 2030
http://www.altenergymag.com/emagazin...ered-cars/2040
Today, 95% of the hydrogen produced in the U.S. is made via natural gas reforming in large central plants. (The hydrogen produced is used predominantly for petroleum refining and ammonia production for fertilizer).
http://www1.eere.energy.gov/hydrogen...tural_gas.html
So the US oilcos exporting liquified NG means exporting a proven, current source of hydrogen. There Otta Be A Law
Last edited by boutons_deux; 02-20-2013 at 11:57 AM.
Really? Companies should not be able to export product?
If you're making that argument within the framework of nationalization of oil, I can understand that. But outside of nationalization, that makes zero economic sense.
Exporting a critical BUT KNOWN LIMITED energy resource is suicidal, esp when the 99% is getting ed by fracking industry not paying for externalities.
You right-wing kids like to about "boomers don't think of our kids' future" when pimping deficit reduction (by ing over the 99%), but don't GAF when UCA short-term profits trump the long-term future.
Additionally, why would you do that instead of, you know, just burning the nat gas in the engine? Hydrogen doesn't make sense unless we aren't using fossil fuels to make it
"we aren't using fossil fuels to make it"
wind/solar to produce energy to produce hydrogen
there is already a precedent where a community, in CA?, refused to let a BigNastyCorp like Nestle or Coke suck down their aquifer to make bottled water to ship out of their community, at a rate far exceeding the community's (sustainable) withdrawal rate. I think there have been several similar cases.
Right, so this has nothing to do with the NatGas that you spoke about in your OP. Thank you for destroying your own point. Only 5 posts in too!
sure it does, an extensive infrastructure exists for producing hydrogen from NG.
It would be great, MUCH BETTER, if wind/solar could be used to product hydrogen directly from water.
Right, and until we can, there is no reason that we should be using hydrogen to power our cars.
Ummm...so we would be the only nation to not export petroleum. yeah, I can see the economic benefits of this. Not.
The 99%, as I have demonstrated on multiple occasions, are reaping the benefits of increased production through techniques like fracking. Your, completely unsubstantiated, claim that fracking is ing the 99% is ludicrous. Are there cases where fracking is injurious? Of course there are. There are cases where virtually any completion activity is injurious. You left wing kids like to about "fracking" but cant quantify it's effects so instead, you preach fear thru innuendo. Sounds like you belong to the GOP to me.
I wouldn't worry about here too much. The Texas RR commission is up there ass about poor shielding on the wells allowing that to get int to the water stream or poor holding tanks. We will miss the brunt of the worst sideeffects hopefully although we should remain vigilant.
The ones that are going to get ed are going to be the latin americans. They do not have the environmental controls and I would not be the least bit surprisied if the BP and S 's of the world do what they did before and not use holding tanks or other safety precautions and leave a big pile left behind when they are done. Fracking is dirty business even when done well.
--LOVE THAT PUN--
"Texas RR commission"
yeah, we can be sure their huge oilco-corrupted, huge staff is feverishly inspecting fracking wells.
"only nation to not export petroleum"
they're all gonna have "sellers regret" when oil and gas run short.
"fracking is ing the 99% is ludicrous"
people with poisoned wells, destroyed property, destroyed QoL, etc, aka externalities, aren't being compensated even if NG consumers are getting a good deal for paying for NG without the cost of externalities. And when we have to drill deeper for "fossil" water, it'll be poisoned by fracking poisons.
Don't know bout now, but when I was in the biz you did not with the RRC.
And I'm really convinced that the RRC really s with frackers, just like TCEQ really s with the oilcos.
Yep.
Making hydrogen outside of using natural gas is just too expensive. May as well use the NG in vehicles instead.
The CNG model, at $26,925, is $5,650 more than a gasoline Civic EX,
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/money...ive/51159408/1
So how many miles to offset the $5600 premium of ng engine vs gasoline engine?
3. CNG cars are cheaper to run than conventional vehicles.
As petroleum prices erratically jump up and down and up again, it's tempting to look at compressed natural gas as an economic alternative. Buyer beware: the math is tricky.
Since CNG is normally sold as a gas rather than a liquid, it isn't measured in gallons, but can be converted on an energy basis that equals a gallon of gasoline. The term used for this conversation is GGE, or "gallon of gasoline equivalent."
When gasoline was about $2.25, the average price of CNG in the United States was $1.99 per GGE. While a 24 cent-per-gallon price advantage sounds attractive, CNG vehicles have lower fuel efficiency than hybrid vehicles. A Civic GX, for example, averages 32 mpg, while a Civic Hybrid is rated at 43 mpg. So while a GGE of CNG is cheaper, the Civic GX needs more fuel to operate, and therefore costs per mile are actually higher.
http://autos.yahoo.com/green_center-article_114/
Well, in the absence of any data (cite?), experiential data trumps.
Commission That Oversees Drilling Is Being Overhauled, Even in Name
Its old mainframe computer system will be upgraded with modern digital storage, clearing the way for a more user-friendly Web site. Decades-old regulations are getting updated to reflect the rapid spread of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
Its old mainframe computer system will be upgraded with modern digital storage, clearing the way for a more user-friendly Web site. Decades-old regulations are getting updated to reflect the rapid spread of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
The drilling boom, along with increased scrutiny from the public, the Legislature and federal regulators, has also forced the commissioners’ hand. Oil production in Texas rose by 18 percent between 2010 and 2011. That has strained the permitting and inspection capabilities of the commission, whose budget — $71.1 million this fiscal year, down from $74.7 million last year — has not kept up.
Another area of improvement is the drilling rules, most of which were written long before the spread of fracking. The commission is working on a rule that would tighten safety requirements for oil and gas wells. It is an important area, known as well integrity, that Texas regulators have essentially left alone for more than 30 years, according to Scott Anderson, an Austin-based senior policy adviser with the Environmental Defense Fund.
Another rule in the works would make it easier to recycle water from oil and gas wells — a much-discussed issue in the drought-ravaged state. The commission is also working on tightening oversight of “disposal” wells, where chemical-laced waste from fracking processes gets buried.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/25/us/railroad-commission-of-texas-is-getting-overhaul.html?_r=0
Doesn't sound like the business-friendly TRRC is a bad ass regulator with tough rules and stringent enforcment. This is ing oilco-owned Texas, after all.
keep up the improvement got
they just found a basin down here...worth $20trillion, but the hippies wont allow any drilling...lol fkn hippies
no, it doesn't. Texas govt is "business friendly", and especially VERY friendly to its owners, the oil industry.
For people like you, who do nothing but complain about the pollution, cost is not a factor and articles like that often lie. It's about being green...
WTF?
"3. CNG cars are cheaper to run than conventional vehicles." was a MYTH being debunked.
And I'm saying people like you don't care that they cost more.
You Lie.
I just passed on a new Camry Hybrid because there were no savings until about 140K miles, plus the battery was guaranteed to only 100K miles. Adding battery replacement cost to the hybrid purchase premium makes no sense.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
