Oil Companies Discover 'Sustainability'

By Charles I. Burch, Prairie Writers Circle. Posted July 30, 2005.


The companies have yet to admit that no scheme for providing
sustainable energy can rely on petroleum.


Sustainability is big in corporate America today. The word, that is.
Once an arcane term used chiefly by foresters and agricultural
researchers, "sustainable" has become the label of choice that
executives use to describe their businesses.

Perhaps the most laughable of the newly "sustainable" corporations are
the oil companies. Pumping a finite resource like oil out of the
ground must be one of the least sustainable endeavors on the planet.
But this doesn't bother the oil industry, which knows a powerful
public relations word when it sees one.

The most recent ConocoPhillips annual report has a section titled
"Technology Achieving Long-term Sustainability," and the CEO writes of
the company's "sustainable growth plan." Annual reports from
ChevronTexaco and ExxonMobil speak of "sustainable development." And
BP and Shell issue reports on the sustainability of their operations.
There are even auditors willing, for a fee, to vouch for the
statements in these "sustainability" reports.

All this when Arthur R. Green, lecturer for the American Association
of Petroleum Geologists and former chief geoscientist of ExxonMobil,
says world oil production is nearing its peak.

The history of U.S. oil production is instructive.

Domestic oil output steadily rose until it peaked in 1970. Since then
production has declined despite the technological know-how of domestic
oil companies and the considerable incentive of high prices. Domestic
oil production in 2003 was less than 60 percent of its 1970 level.

To meet our demand we import foreign oil. More than 56 percent of what
we used in 2003 came from other countries, and the proportion
increases every year.

Increase, taper off, then decrease -- world oil production will follow
the same pattern. Some experts think world output is very near its
peak already, while others say the peak will arrive sometime between
now and 2050.

Five complications make this grim picture even bleaker.

First, the world's largest oil reserves tend to be in countries with
unstable governments. Unrest can disrupt supply.

Second, insiders have been suspicious for some time about oil reserve
figures claimed by certain Middle Eastern countries. In 1987 the
United Arab Emirates claimed reserves of 33 billion barrels; in 1988
they claimed 98 billion barrels, according to the U.S. Department of
Energy. Iraq and some other Middle Eastern countries also reported
similarly implausible sudden increases. These figures probably owe
more to politics than sound science.

Third, China, until 1993 a net oil exporter, now imports more than 40
percent of its oil and is the world's third largest importer, after
the United States and Japan. With 1.3 billion people, one-fifth of the
world's population, and an economy that has quadrupled since 1978,
China is developing a world-class thirst for oil. China and the rest
of Asia now consume about as much oil as the United States.

Fourth, as demand climbs past supply, already high oil prices will
rise even higher. The "energy crisis" of the 1970s showed how
sensitive overall inflation, interest rates and the stock market are
to increased oil prices. The oil squeeze will not just raise the cost
of energy. It will affect the entire economy.

Fifth, even as oil becomes more scarce, development of replacement
fuels remains on the back burner. Do not expect the oil companies to
do more than token research on other fuels. True, they do have
experience taking on large projects and have sophisticated ways of
analyzing risk. But their investment and expertise are in petroleum.

If an oil company makes a genuine sustainability breakthrough --
figuring out, for example, how to make hydrogen efficiently with solar
power -- you can be sure the company will publicize this rather than
promote the pleasant fiction that its current operations are
sustainable. The reality is that no scheme for providing energy
sustainably can rely on petroleum.

But do not expect to hear that from oil executives.

Charles Burch was a senior staff scientist at Conoco before retiring
in 2002. He wrote this essay for the Land Institute's Prairie Writers
Circle, Salina, Kan.

David:

Mostly true. However, there are no "hydrogen wells" or "hydrogen mines", most
all supplies of hydrogen come from oil (hydrocarbon-petroleum.) It is possible
to separate hydrogen from sea water with electricity or supertemperatures,
however, this requires an energy source to do so.

Hydrogen fuels, at least at this point, are a fairy tale to appease the
masses...

Cold fusion is still a possible resource, however, if it is developed to its
full extent, any one with a glass of water can probably develop a "super
weapon", I think they will drag their feet for a long time because of that...

John

"David" wrote in message
...
Oil Companies Discover 'Sustainability'

By Charles I. Burch, Prairie Writers Circle. Posted July 30, 2005.


The companies have yet to admit that no scheme for providing
sustainable energy can rely on petroleum.


Sustainability is big in corporate America today. The word, that is.
Once an arcane term used chiefly by foresters and agricultural
researchers, "sustainable" has become the label of choice that
executives use to describe their businesses.

Perhaps the most laughable of the newly "sustainable" corporations are
the oil companies. Pumping a finite resource like oil out of the
ground must be one of the least sustainable endeavors on the planet.
But this doesn't bother the oil industry, which knows a powerful
public relations word when it sees one.

The most recent ConocoPhillips annual report has a section titled
"Technology Achieving Long-term Sustainability," and the CEO writes of
the company's "sustainable growth plan." Annual reports from
ChevronTexaco and ExxonMobil speak of "sustainable development." And
BP and Shell issue reports on the sustainability of their operations.
There are even auditors willing, for a fee, to vouch for the
statements in these "sustainability" reports.

All this when Arthur R. Green, lecturer for the American Association
of Petroleum Geologists and former chief geoscientist of ExxonMobil,
says world oil production is nearing its peak.

The history of U.S. oil production is instructive.

Domestic oil output steadily rose until it peaked in 1970. Since then
production has declined despite the technological know-how of domestic
oil companies and the considerable incentive of high prices. Domestic
oil production in 2003 was less than 60 percent of its 1970 level.

To meet our demand we import foreign oil. More than 56 percent of what
we used in 2003 came from other countries, and the proportion
increases every year.

Increase, taper off, then decrease -- world oil production will follow
the same pattern. Some experts think world output is very near its
peak already, while others say the peak will arrive sometime between
now and 2050.

Five complications make this grim picture even bleaker.

First, the world's largest oil reserves tend to be in countries with
unstable governments. Unrest can disrupt supply.

Second, insiders have been suspicious for some time about oil reserve
figures claimed by certain Middle Eastern countries. In 1987 the
United Arab Emirates claimed reserves of 33 billion barrels; in 1988
they claimed 98 billion barrels, according to the U.S. Department of
Energy. Iraq and some other Middle Eastern countries also reported
similarly implausible sudden increases. These figures probably owe
more to politics than sound science.

Third, China, until 1993 a net oil exporter, now imports more than 40
percent of its oil and is the world's third largest importer, after
the United States and Japan. With 1.3 billion people, one-fifth of the
world's population, and an economy that has quadrupled since 1978,
China is developing a world-class thirst for oil. China and the rest
of Asia now consume about as much oil as the United States.

Fourth, as demand climbs past supply, already high oil prices will
rise even higher. The "energy crisis" of the 1970s showed how
sensitive overall inflation, interest rates and the stock market are
to increased oil prices. The oil squeeze will not just raise the cost
of energy. It will affect the entire economy.

Fifth, even as oil becomes more scarce, development of replacement
fuels remains on the back burner. Do not expect the oil companies to
do more than token research on other fuels. True, they do have
experience taking on large projects and have sophisticated ways of
analyzing risk. But their investment and expertise are in petroleum.

If an oil company makes a genuine sustainability breakthrough --
figuring out, for example, how to make hydrogen efficiently with solar
power -- you can be sure the company will publicize this rather than
promote the pleasant fiction that its current operations are
sustainable. The reality is that no scheme for providing energy
sustainably can rely on petroleum.

But do not expect to hear that from oil executives.

Charles Burch was a senior staff scientist at Conoco before retiring
in 2002. He wrote this essay for the Land Institute's Prairie Writers
Circle, Salina, Kan.

"John Smith" wrote in message

Hydrogen fuels, at least at this point, are a fairy tale to appease the
masses...

No there not fairy tale. The technology exists. It's just that we're so
locked into fossil fuels that nobody wants to make the investment.

B.H.

Brian:

How so, where is this "hydrogen" going to come from, for free?

I have never seen pools of the stuff lying about. In college labs I have
extracted it from sea water, strange, it takes about as much energy to recover
it from sea water as you get back when you burn (use) the hydrogen....

What am I missing?

John

"Brian Hill" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message

Hydrogen fuels, at least at this point, are a fairy tale to appease the
masses...

No there not fairy tale. The technology exists. It's just that we're so
locked into fossil fuels that nobody wants to make the investment.

B.H.

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Brian:

How so, where is this "hydrogen" going to come from, for free?

I have never seen pools of the stuff lying about. In college labs I have
extracted it from sea water, strange, it takes about as much energy to
recover it from sea water as you get back when you burn (use) the
hydrogen....

What am I missing?

John

Yea I've never seen pools of gas laying around either. It cost $s to turn
oil into gas, right? Yes it cost money using electricity to do the work of
extracting hydrogen, but there are other ways too that can work like
titanium dioxide & solar energy to offset the cost of more expensive ways
etc.. My point is if there was enough human energy and $s thrown at the
project, we would have it licked and the world would be a cleaner better
place. There are many scientist that claim they can do it with the right
resources and I believe them and as long as the big oil CO's are still
selling oil it's going to be hard stopping they're lobbyist.

B.H.

Brian:

Ways do exist of getting "virtually free energy."

Huge sheets of reflecting aluminum foil unfolded in space, to catch the sun
rays and focus them on a HUGE laser rod/tube, beaming the laser beam to a
steam-electric generator on the face of the earth.

Schemes also exist which would use microwaves in place of the laser beam...
THESE ARE DOABLE NOW, at this very moment!

I am not really a "nay sayer."

John

"Brian Hill" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Brian:

How so, where is this "hydrogen" going to come from, for free?

I have never seen pools of the stuff lying about. In college labs I have
extracted it from sea water, strange, it takes about as much energy to
recover it from sea water as you get back when you burn (use) the
hydrogen....

What am I missing?

John

Yea I've never seen pools of gas laying around either. It cost $s to turn oil
into gas, right? Yes it cost money using electricity to do the work of
extracting hydrogen, but there are other ways too that can work like titanium
dioxide & solar energy to offset the cost of more expensive ways etc.. My
point is if there was enough human energy and $s thrown at the project, we
would have it licked and the world would be a cleaner better place. There are
many scientist that claim they can do it with the right resources and I
believe them and as long as the big oil CO's are still selling oil it's going
to be hard stopping they're lobbyist.

B.H.

"Brian Hill" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Brian:

How so, where is this "hydrogen" going to come from, for free?

I have never seen pools of the stuff lying about. In college labs
I have
extracted it from sea water, strange, it takes about as much
energy to
recover it from sea water as you get back when you burn (use) the
hydrogen....

What am I missing?

John

Yea I've never seen pools of gas laying around either. It cost $s to
turn
oil into gas, right? Yes it cost money using electricity to do the
work of
extracting hydrogen, but there are other ways too that can work like
titanium dioxide & solar energy to offset the cost of more expensive
ways
etc.. My point is if there was enough human energy and $s thrown at
the
project, we would have it licked and the world would be a cleaner
better
place. There are many scientist that claim they can do it with the
right
resources and I believe them and as long as the big oil CO's are
still
selling oil it's going to be hard stopping they're lobbyist.

My thinking is that yes, it's preferable to what we have
now, but as I like to point out, there will be an impact
of some sort that we can't forsee. Remember, 100 years
ago, cars were a less polluting option to all the horses
that were around, and cars would have been seen as
a "cleaner" alternative to all the horse manure and flies
and other refuse around.

Hydrogen fuel cells would be a nicer alternative, but
what is the long term impact? We don't know. Nuclear
power is a nice alternative to coal and gas fired power
plants, but no one wants to put up with the risks of it
(or the spent fuel).

--Mike L.

John Smith wrote:
Brian:

How so, where is this "hydrogen" going to come from, for free?

I have never seen pools of the stuff lying about. In college labs I have
extracted it from sea water, strange, it takes about as much energy to recover
it from sea water as you get back when you burn (use) the hydrogen....

It take More energy than you can recover The Laws of Thermodynamics

You could use hydrogen as means of store energy

What am I missing?

John

"Brian Hill" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message

Hydrogen fuels, at least at this point, are a fairy tale to appease the
masses...

No there not fairy tale. The technology exists. It's just that we're so
locked into fossil fuels that nobody wants to make the investment.

B.H.

AOF:

Precisely why I used the word "about."

John

"an old friend" wrote in message
oups.com...

John Smith wrote:
Brian:

How so, where is this "hydrogen" going to come from, for free?

I have never seen pools of the stuff lying about. In college labs I have
extracted it from sea water, strange, it takes about as much energy to
recover
it from sea water as you get back when you burn (use) the hydrogen....

It take More energy than you can recover The Laws of Thermodynamics

You could use hydrogen as means of store energy

What am I missing?

John

"Brian Hill" wrote in message
...

"John Smith" wrote in message

Hydrogen fuels, at least at this point, are a fairy tale to appease the
masses...

No there not fairy tale. The technology exists. It's just that we're so
locked into fossil fuels that nobody wants to make the investment.

B.H.

Turn all of the poiticians into oil and we got it made,blow them out the
tailpipes of our vehicles.
cuhulin