Leafless Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 August1991 Concerning your message, " Leafless, would you not press on reply and copy all the previous post." I have no idea what your talking about. After reading your post I've come to the conclusion you are extremely naive concerning the remaining world oil supply, future population growth within the next 20-years and the associated huge demand. I don't understand how you possibly think or assume there is going to be total world order when oil and gas sky rockets to prices only a few will be able to afford. More powerful countries that need oil will TAKE what they can. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 August1991 I have no idea what you're talking about. He's referring to the new forum rule to edit what you're quoting. (See "Using the [ Quote ] Feature:" under Support and Questions) Your post on the previous page uses a screen and a half just to get through the already posted. Note how I cleverly just used the relevant line from your post. I was even able to clean it up a little to make it gramatically correct. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Anthony Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Anyone that owned oil would want to keep some for sale tomorrow or next year when the price rises further.or maybe use it as a practical commodity currency in the future like olive oil once was. The first Olympians competed not for gold or silver medals but for wreaths of olive branches and casks of extra-virgin olive oil. It was even used as currency in some cultures. Even today, at the annual Kirkpinar wrestling tournaments Turkish wrestlers put olive oil on their bodies to make themselves slippery, thus increasing their advantage over their opponents. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbg Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 August1991 Concerning your message, " Leafless, would you not press on reply and copy all the previous post." I have no idea what your talking about. After reading your post I've come to the conclusion you are extremely naive concerning the remaining world oil supply, future population growth within the next 20-years and the associated huge demand. I don't understand how you possibly think or assume there is going to be total world order when oil and gas sky rockets to prices only a few will be able to afford. More powerful countries that need oil will TAKE what they can. I happen to agree with August1991 on this one. Our experience during the 1970's and 1980's was that oil is responsive to the laws of supply and demand. What happens in the event of market scarcity is that other sources are found, or replacement technologies, i.e. nuclear power become politically and economically feasible. See my post above. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
August1991 Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 After reading your post I've come to the conclusion you are extremely naive concerning the remaining world oil supply, future population growth within the next 20-years and the associated huge demand.The world's oil supply is largely a question of price and extraction technology. When the price of oil rises to $100/barrel, many known fields become economically viable and there are strong incentives to develop new technology. At $100 per barrel, there are severe incentives on the demand side. If gasoline is $1.50 a litre, you'll see fewer SUVs on the road.I don't understand how you possibly think or assume there is going to be total world order when oil and gas sky rockets to prices only a few will be able to afford.Why would the price "skyrocket"? It will just increase (more or less) over time. Adjusted for inflation, oil was more expensive in 1980 than in 2004.More powerful countries that need oil will TAKE what they can.No, people around the world will buy oil. The rich will be available to afford to buy more. That's hardly an earth-shaking observation.---- The peak oil enthusiasts believe that the oil market will come to some catastrophic end. Apart from speculative bubbles or panics, markets don't behave that way. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Just keep buying gas, Albertas' economy is depending on you! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BubberMiley Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Why would the price "skyrocket"? It will just increase (more or less) over time. Adjusted for inflation, oil was more expensive in 1980 than in 2004. Hasn't it already sckyrocketed? WHen Bush took office, it was less than $20 a barrell. The peak oil enthusiasts believe that the oil market will come to some catastrophic end. Apart from speculative bubbles or panics, markets don't behave that way. No, they don't. You will find that many believe that oil will become more expensive at about the rate it's going right now (which is doubling in price every two years or so). It won't take long for even such (relatively) moderate increases will have a significant effect on our lifestyle. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 The thing to remember is that it will be getting more expensive to purchase fuel. That little fact should wake people up into realizing that the oil companies of the world are going to be making a lot more money. In other words invest in that stock folks....... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Any price manipulation is likely to backfire. It is better to seek alternative energy sources. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Best plan is to get citizens off the grid. Create our own power and be done with it. I am designing just such a home now actually. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Best plan is to get citizens off the grid. Create our own power and be done with it. I am designing just such a home now actually. How will you do that? I know a lot of people are concerting to thermal heat and cooling. Quite brilliant in it's simplicity but the inititial outlay is intimidating. I know that developers are considering whole sub-disvisions that use thermal heat. Cost savings from installing it from the beginiing are tremendous and people living in such an area can expect to save possibly tens of thousands. Personally, I'd put up a windmill if my neighbors could stand a structure standing hundreds of feet at the edge of my property. <heh> Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Anthony Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Personally, I'd put up a windmill if my neighbors could stand a structure standing hundreds of feet at the edge of my property. <heh>We could have a windmill attached to every single power line transmission tower. The towers are ugly to begin with anyway. Oh, but think of all of the jobs that would be lost if we converted to free electricity sources! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 The lowest cost heating system I have found is an outdoor coal fired boiler system. Cost outlay for this looks like a little over 14k. Not cheap but a good high effeciency furnace will run 3k and then you still need the tin bashers to come in and do their thing for about 4k. But the upside is that coal in Alberta runs about 28 to 30 bucks a ton and it takes about a ton a month to heat the place in the winter verses about $250.00 with natural gas. Coal will allow me to heat a greenhouse as well, and a sauna and a swimming pool at a fraction of the cost I am spending on gas now. On the electricity side I am alittle miffed at the feds, because of regulations that prevent me from using a steam engine for power generation. So I am stuck with wind power that is going to cost almost 25k with all of the inverters and stuff to work in conjuction with solar power. The entire power system will end up costing almost 45k. So far the cost to going off grid looks like about 50k give or take a few k here and there. The biggest concern overall is the design and construction of the home itself. You need to take advantage of southern exposures and have a little respect for thermal mass numbers. We have looked at foam blocks filled with concrete, regular concrete blocks, and regular stick frame construction, as well as timber frame and log designs as well. The method we have chosen is called stack wall construction. If you can mix mortar in a wheel barrow and are capable of lifting a piece of firewood, then you can build your own walls for practically nothing. The foundation and the roof will require professionals, but the walls can be done no problem. Cost projections are in the 125k range to lock up. Finishing is another story, we haven't delved into that little corner of design yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Personally, I'd put up a windmill if my neighbors could stand a structure standing hundreds of feet at the edge of my property. <heh>We could have a windmill attached to every single power line transmission tower. The towers are ugly to begin with anyway. Oh, but think of all of the jobs that would be lost if we converted to free electricity sources! I live out in the boonies so I can get away with my plan of attack. Unfortunately for the city dwellers they can't. A little town by the name of Spruce Grove just outlawed coal boilers within city limits. Windmills need space to work, at least 500 feet between towers, so Fred could have one but if Barney put one up next door, both would suffer production losses. Solar can be slapped on just about anything, roofs that have a southern exposure would work best. But these things cost money to buy and instal. Putting turbines on transmition towers is a great idea though. It will take advantage of the height and probably work really well. I don't thing we are in danger of losing any jobs in the industry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Personally, I'd put up a windmill if my neighbors could stand a structure standing hundreds of feet at the edge of my property. <heh>We could have a windmill attached to every single power line transmission tower. The towers are ugly to begin with anyway. Oh, but think of all of the jobs that would be lost if we converted to free electricity sources! Hydro companies across Canada are getting on board so they must believe in windmills. It means more power for export or to attract industry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Personally, I'd put up a windmill if my neighbors could stand a structure standing hundreds of feet at the edge of my property. <heh>We could have a windmill attached to every single power line transmission tower. The towers are ugly to begin with anyway. Oh, but think of all of the jobs that would be lost if we converted to free electricity sources! I live out in the boonies so I can get away with my plan of attack. Unfortunately for the city dwellers they can't. A little town by the name of Spruce Grove just outlawed coal boilers within city limits. Windmills need space to work, at least 500 feet between towers, so Fred could have one but if Barney put one up next door, both would suffer production losses. Solar can be slapped on just about anything, roofs that have a southern exposure would work best. But these things cost money to buy and instal. Putting turbines on transmition towers is a great idea though. It will take advantage of the height and probably work really well. I don't thing we are in danger of losing any jobs in the industry. I haven't heard of turbines on hydro towers. Are they anywhere in Canada now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Anthony Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 I haven't heard of turbines on hydro towers. Are they anywhere in Canada now?I do not know. It is an original idea a friend mentioned to counter the "ugly windmills destroying the aesthetics of the country-side" argument. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry J. Fortin Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Your friend should look at leasing the tower tops and buying some turbines! Its a good idea. Then again a little partnership to do this would not hurt any of us on this forum! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MightyAC Posted July 19, 2006 Report Share Posted July 19, 2006 Generate power on the structure designed to transport power? Brilliant! I doubt the existing transmission towers can withstand the additional weight and force load of a turbine but that is something that could easily be rectified. I'm also a huge proponent of thermal heating and cooling. A new subdivision near where I live has installed community thermal loops. The houses are a little more expensive but they will save an average of 60% on their heating and cooling costs. My local hydro company also offers 10 year financing plans on personal geo-thermal systems, but at a rate of 10%. Even with the ridiculous financing costs people with electrical heat will save money immediately. At current rates natural gas customers will pay a little more each month in the winter but save money in the summer. The loops can be installed in any size of residential lot. I think there is a golden opportunity for the provinces to offer low interest loans for people wanting to install geo-thermal systems. I would also like to see legislation making community loops mandatory in new construction. On the news last night there was a story about a massive geo-thermal cooling project taking place in Toronto. A tunnel is being dug 40 metres under downtown. Water from Lake Ontario is pumped in at 4 degrees circulated through buildings and then pumped back out at 9 or 10 degrees. It's nice to see that green projects are finally becoming more prominent. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Anthony Posted July 19, 2006 Report Share Posted July 19, 2006 It's nice to see that green projects are finally becoming more prominent.As a capitalist, it is nice to see that saving and making more of the Almighty Dollar is what motivates it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MightyAC Posted July 19, 2006 Report Share Posted July 19, 2006 That's what makes the world go round. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffrey Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 The lowest cost heating system I have found is an outdoor coal fired boiler system. Cost outlay for this looks like a little over 14k. Not cheap but a good high effeciency furnace will run 3k and then you still need the tin bashers to come in and do their thing for about 4k. But the upside is that coal in Alberta runs about 28 to 30 bucks a ton and it takes about a ton a month to heat the place in the winter verses about $250.00 with natural gas. Coal will allow me to heat a greenhouse as well, and a sauna and a swimming pool at a fraction of the cost I am spending on gas now. On the electricity side I am alittle miffed at the feds, because of regulations that prevent me from using a steam engine for power generation. So I am stuck with wind power that is going to cost almost 25k with all of the inverters and stuff to work in conjuction with solar power. The entire power system will end up costing almost 45k. So far the cost to going off grid looks like about 50k give or take a few k here and there. The biggest concern overall is the design and construction of the home itself. You need to take advantage of southern exposures and have a little respect for thermal mass numbers. We have looked at foam blocks filled with concrete, regular concrete blocks, and regular stick frame construction, as well as timber frame and log designs as well. The method we have chosen is called stack wall construction. If you can mix mortar in a wheel barrow and are capable of lifting a piece of firewood, then you can build your own walls for practically nothing. The foundation and the roof will require professionals, but the walls can be done no problem. Cost projections are in the 125k range to lock up. Finishing is another story, we haven't delved into that little corner of design yet. I'd do coal, but I'd likely get sick of the raining soot after awhile. Clean coal is apparently much better though. What you need to do is get some mineral rights nearby, directional drill from your house, and have a small distillery. Sell the refined products and I'm sure you'd break even.... I haven't heard of turbines on hydro towers. Are they anywhere in Canada now?I do not know. It is an original idea a friend mentioned to counter the "ugly windmills destroying the aesthetics of the country-side" argument. Not that original, tower, add a turbine... Your friend should look at leasing the tower tops and buying some turbines! Its a good idea. Then again a little partnership to do this would not hurt any of us on this forum! I work in the industry, pay our right of way access and I'm sure we'd let you stick a windmill on the top of the tower. Then again, wind power only works large scale in very select locations... and more importantly... only when the wind is blowing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MightyAC Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 Then again, wind power only works large scale in very select locations... and more importantly... only when the wind is blowing. Aye, wind is not a great baseline power system but it is a superb supplemental one. Some places add their wind generated electricity to the grid when necessary and when it's not, they use the power to generate hydrogen. That seems like a good idea. In know we still use quite a bit of coal and natural gas. Would it be possible to lower the output of our fossil fuel powered plants while the green power facilities are producing significant amounts of power and increase the output when they're not? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charles Anthony Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 I work in the industry, pay our right of way access and I'm sure we'd let you stick a windmill on the top of the tower.Two things: 1) what "industry" is that specifically? does it generate power in competition to windpower? 2) why does the "industry" not do it themselves? whose jobs are at stake? Then again, wind power only works large scale in very select locations... and more importantly... only when the wind is blowing.We have a lot of space in Canada. We could put a lawn-garden pinwheel on every tower and the total power generated would add up. I wonder what competitors in the dirty-electrical-supply industry think about windpower. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MightyAC Posted July 20, 2006 Report Share Posted July 20, 2006 I work in the industry, pay our right of way access and I'm sure we'd let you stick a windmill on the top of the tower.Two things: 1) what "industry" is that specifically? does it generate power in competition to windpower? 2) why does the "industry" not do it themselves? whose jobs are at stake? Then again, wind power only works large scale in very select locations... and more importantly... only when the wind is blowing.We have a lot of space in Canada. We could put a lawn-garden pinwheel on every tower and the total power generated would add up. I wonder what competitors in the dirty-electrical-supply industry think about windpower. An acquaintance of mine is a member of the Power Workers' Union and he's dead set against the widespread use of wind power. His monthly newsletters have told him to be very pro nuclear and coal. If I were a betting man…actually I am a betting man. Five bucks says that both nuclear and coal plants require a lot of employees to operate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.