Natural gas becomes the safe energy bet

Discussion in 'General Survival and Preparedness' started by Gator 45/70, Mar 25, 2011.


  1. Gator 45/70

    Gator 45/70 Monkey+++

  2. UGRev

    UGRev Get on with it!

    Do people have any idea how fast natgas will go up in price and then "go away" if we used that as a supporting power output in lieu of other, vastly superior (nuclear) ways of generating power?. The reason natgas is so cheap is because it's MOSTLY being used for things like stoves and heating, not for generating power.
     
  3. BTPost

    BTPost Old Fart Snow Monkey Moderator

    Just goes to show that even supposed "smart guys" do not have a clue, when it comes to technology that they do not FULLY understand. I doubt this guy knows just how much Natural Gas, is required to run a NG Power Peaking Electrical Plant, and just how BIG the Pipeline feeding it would need to be. HOWEVER, any Yahoo, can write this kind of piece, in a NewsRag, and be called a "smart guy".... Does NOT make it so....
     
  4. Gator 45/70

    Gator 45/70 Monkey+++

    We in the U.S. for the most part have plenty of natural gas and in most case's close to you....
    Natural gas was used to generate power long before nuclear came along....
    and as demonstrated in Japan,You do not have to evacuate your home for the next hundred year's or so....
    But then again i work with natural gas..lol
    compressorMap. natural-gas-pipeline-map.
     
    Brokor likes this.
  5. BTPost

    BTPost Old Fart Snow Monkey Moderator

    Now if only we alaskans can get our NG piped down to sell it to you FlatLanders, for the BIG Bucks, things up here would be Go'in Good again.....
     
    Gator 45/70 likes this.
  6. Gator 45/70

    Gator 45/70 Monkey+++

    I suspect your new customer will be Japan....
    But then again if i could buy a nuclear power truck...I would look into it....lol
     
  7. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    Nuts to ya BT, we have all the gas we can use for the next 100 years right here in good ol' Pennsylvania, and the pipelines are (going to be) shorter.

    "Other than solar, wind and hydro (discounting climatological change) all the sources of power we currently have depend on non renewable resources. Coal, oil, and nat gas are finite, and the real (as vs. inflationary) cost to produce will do nothing but rise. I think short and mid term diversification is the way to fly, but I also admit to a very pro-nuke bias. It is my belief that nukes are good for a number of reasons, even tho' uranium is also a non renewable resource. The principal difference is that with nuclear power, we are not limited to using a finite resource since we can actually make more fuel than we burn in the cores. Nukes are the power source of the future with that concept. Diversity will come with more and smaller plants spread around instead of big central stations. Until the population becomes comfortable with that idea, the bridge fuel is nat gas."

    pagaslease.com if anyone is really interested.
    "

    Drill, baby, drill!!

    (And get the nuke permits fast tracked.)
     
    GreenTeaBlend likes this.
  8. Minuteman

    Minuteman Chaplain Moderator Founding Member

    Actually 20% of all electrical production comes from natural gas powered plants and it is the fastest growing sector of power generation. With all the new concerns about nuclear energy, natural gas will become the biggest rival to coal in the years to come. Which is good news for the drilling industry. The soaring demand for natural gas has been a large factor in the increase in drilling activity the last several years.
    I have been in gas drilling for over 6 years now. The saying goes "I used to hunt dinosaurs, now I pull dragons from the ground."

    The recent technology that allows NG to be liquefied and shipped in tankers the same as crude has been a big incentive in the recent rise in drilling activity. The ability to export NG without the need for expensive pipelines has opened up a whole range of new markets.

    Here are a few snippets from some searches.

    Another solution is to export the natural gas as a liquid - see Gas to liquids. Gas-to-liquid (GTL) is a developing technology that converts stranded natural gas into synthetic gasoline, diesel or jet fuel through the Fischer-Tropsch process developed in World War II Germany. Such fuel can be transported to users through conventional pipelines and tankers. Proponents claim GTL burns cleaner than comparable petroleum fuels. Most major international oil companies are in an advanced stage of GTL production, with a world-scale (140,000 barrels (22,000 m3) a day) GTL plant in Qatar scheduled to be in production before 2010.


    The world's largest proven gas reserves are located in Russia, with 4.757×1013 m³ (1.68×1015 cubic feet). With the Gazprom company, Russia is frequently the world's largest natural gas extractor. Major proven resources (in billion cubic meters) are world 175,400 (2006), Russia 47,570 (2006), Iran 26,370 (2006), Qatar 25,790 (2007), Saudi Arabia 6,568 (2006) and United Arab Emirates 5,823 (2006). It is estimated that there are also about 900 trillion cubic meters of "unconventional" gas such as shale gas, of which 180 trillion may be recoverable.[4]

    The world's largest gas field is Qatar's offshore North Field, estimated to have 25 trillion cubic meters[5] (9.0×1014cubic feet) of gas in place—enough to last more than 200 years[citation needed] at optimum extraction levels.


    Natural gas - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Proven Natural Gas Reserves as of Jan. 2010


    1 Russia 47,570,000,000,000 25.02%
    2 Iran 29,610,000,000,000 15.57%
    3 Qatar 25,470,000,000,000 13.39%
    4 Turkmenistan 7,504,000,000,000 3.95%
    5 Saudi Arabia 7,461,000,000,000 3.92%
    6 United States 6,928,000,000,000 3.64%
    7 UAE 6,071,000,000,000 3.19%
    8 Nigeria 5,246,000,000,000 2.76%
    9 Venezuela 4,983,000,000,000 2.62%
    10 Algeria 4,502,000,000,000 2.37%






    Today, nearly half of the electricity generated in the United States comes from coal.
    While coal is the nation's major fuel for electric power, natural gas is the fastest growing fuel. More than 90 percent of the power plants to be built in the next 20 years will likely be fueled by natural gas. Natural gas is also likely to be a primary fuel for distributed power generators - mini-power plants that would be sited close to where the electricity is needed.



    Natural gas-fired generation provides 20 percent of America’s electricity needs. But in some states, such as California and Texas, natural gas-fired power generation provides nearly 50 percent of the electricity consumed.
    Natural gas, clean burning and efficient, has become a popular fuel for the generation of electricity. In the 1970’s and 80’s, the choices for most electric utility generators were large coal or nuclear powered plants. But as environmental concerns and technological advances occurred, natural gas became the fuel of choice. In fact, in the last 10 years, over 90 percent of the new electric capacity built in the United States has been natural gas-fired generation.
    Natural gas electricity generation plants cost less to construct and are generally more acceptable to the public, making them easier to site and permit by regulators.


    In 2007, for the first time in history, the amount of natural gas used to generate electricity in the U.S. exceeded the amount of natural gas used by industry. That trend is expected to continue as utilities increasingly choose natural gas-fired electric generation to meet America’s clean air goals and cost efficient energy demands.

    http://www.ngsa.org/assets/Docs/Issues/NaturalGasIsVitalForElectricPowerGeneration.pdf




    The "Pickens Plan" that got a lot of coverage last year basically urges a transition to NG as much as possible to lessen our reliance on imported oil. I think converting all fleet vehicles to run on NG is a step in the right direction. The biggest obstacle for NG vehicles is retrofitting fueling stations to provide adequate coverage for motorists. Right now the only feasible means to do that is a central fueling area in large metropolitan areas. Such fleet vehicles such as buses, trash trucks, taxi cabs, etc could be converted to NG fairly easily.






     
    ghrit and Gator 45/70 like this.
  9. UGRev

    UGRev Get on with it!

    6 United States 6,928,000,000,000 3.64%

    Thanks.. do you want to take a guess on how fast 50% will jack the price of gas up? my point stands. Nat gas is not meant to replace Nuke power.
     
  10. Gator 45/70

    Gator 45/70 Monkey+++

  11. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    In that last statement, you are correct. Nuke is long term, and until other sources become relatively more expensive it won't get much more than lip service. NG is a bridge; as noted it is a finite resource, and even more finite than coal.

    FWIW, we have all the gas we can use, at least for now. Price is (relatively) low for that reason and storage is near full waiting on increased demand. In the short term, gas prices won't rise significantly, but it WILL go up as demand draws storage down, new users and new fields are brought on line. (Disclaimer: I want the price of NG to go up, I have a vested (very tiny) interest in the Marcellus shale play.)

    There is talk of building NG liquifaction plants here and there along the coasts for NG export in LNG tankers. Mostly, it is a NIMBY (like nukes) deal to get these things permitted and built. I don't know that we have any, but I think there are receiving (import) terminals with re-gasification facilities that are no more dangerous. Just like nukes, they will be demand driven and regulated to the nines. The demand isn't there. Yet.
     
  12. Minuteman

    Minuteman Chaplain Moderator Founding Member

    Interesting interactive map. I was playing around with it. In a 500 mile radius of Oklahoma City there were 3 places to fill up with LNG. 2 in Dallas and 1 in Houston. For Hydrogen there was only one in Missouri at the university and it was private access. There lies the problem. There are other fuels sources available but the cost to convert the infrastructure to support it is prohibitive.

    And BTW Rev I support Nuclear 100%, but unfortunately the public at large has a knee jerk, Pavlovian reflex when you mention the "N" word. Especially after this latest disaster in Japan. Natural gas generating plants don't have the stigma attached to them that nuclear does, so therefore they will be easier to get built and to get the public and congress to back. But, Natural Gas is a finite and non-renewable resource just like oil is. If we ramp up demand for it, sooner or later we end up with supply constrictions.

    So eventually we won't be able to afford to go anywhere and we will have to sit home in the dark. You ever feel like a hamster on a wheel?
     
  13. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    CNG maybe? Dewars or recompression gear on board vehicles is something I did NOT know about.
     
  14. Gator 45/70

    Gator 45/70 Monkey+++

    It's a idea i've been toying around with...Duel fuel an older model truck...1.without the computerized control's..compressing my on fuel at home...and using this for local run's close to home..thereby cutting my fuel cost in 1/2 or at least it's a theory..
    I do however have a Impco natural gas carb.and hardware for a 350 chevy...Which i should be able to adapt too a number of engine's...
     
  15. UGRev

    UGRev Get on with it!

    you are forgetting doubling time.. ;) when people say "...we have enough for 300 years".. that's 300 years from NOW with the current demographics, environmental factors and population size. I caution against thinking that this is even remotely viable as a bridging stage between oil and some other source that is more efficient.

    Bridging it dangerous and impractical because we need to move to something and stay there for a long period of time due to overhead in infrastructure and development. Unfortunately, this needs to be more of a "flip of the switch" move than a move through some source on a short term basis then another move to a source on a long term basis.

    Where's a Mr.Fusion when you need it :)
     
  16. ghrit

    ghrit Ambulatory anachronism Administrator Founding Member

    Out in the cold -- [boozingbuddies]
     
survivalmonkey SSL seal        survivalmonkey.com warrant canary
17282WuJHksJ9798f34razfKbPATqTq9E7