Page 3 of 3

Re: Lockheed

Posted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 5:29 am
by KitemanSA
MSimon wrote:
Skipjack wrote:Sure and what after those 100 years are over? Then what? Oh does not matter what happens in a hundred years from now, right?
Also what will the price for a barrel of oil be? We need to invest into sustainable energy sources that are cheaper, much cheaper than oil and are not burning a valuable, limited resource.
Let us suppose there are 10K years worth of B11 on the planet. I propose we devote 1K years worth to making oil and gas. If necessary. Some where along the way we start looking for B11 asteroids. We don't have to figure it all out by tonight.
If there are only 10k years worth of B11, why bother? There are several millions to hundred million years of thorium. Just saying.

Re: Lockheed

Posted: Thu Sep 11, 2014 11:19 am
by paperburn1
Pollywell in theory can be lightweight for space travel. but thorium will be fine if we can get some up and running

Re: Lockheed

Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2014 1:25 am
by palladin9479
Whomever said "100 years" needs to carefully read the exact words used. It's a guesstimate by the alarmists that we have 100 years of usable left, and that's accounting for theoretical growth. In actuality we are constantly finding new deposits and constantly developing technology that enables economical extraction from older previously uneconomical deposits. Shale fracking is a prime example of this, we've known about those deposits for decades but were previously uneconomical and thus weren't counted in the total of "usable". The crust of this planet is thick and we've only begun exploring the topmost layer, there is guaranteed to be deposits at lower depths that are currently undiscovered or uneconomical but will later become discovered and / or economical.

Finally, hydrocarbons are essentially infinite as long as you have access to a supply of CO2, H2O and a f*ck ton of cheap energy. The navy has already developed a process to extract bicarbonate from ocean water and synthesize jet fuel while underway, requires quite a bit of electricity and the cost is higher then commercial process's but it lesson's the costs of logistics for them and thus can be cost savings in dangerous waters. It's easily possible to drop a Gen IV MSR near the Ocean, preferably in a place that doesn't' experience tidal waves, and then dedicate it to synthesizing hydrocarbon fuels from raw material. It would essentially be using hydrocarbons as a form of long term energy storage.

Re: Lockheed

Posted: Fri Sep 12, 2014 9:30 pm
by hanelyp
Finally, hydrocarbons are essentially infinite as long as you have access to a supply of CO2, H2O and a **** ton of cheap energy.
If land area isn't a problem, and biomass is acceptable as an intermediate, a lot of that energy can come from solar. Cheap conversion from biomass to oil needs a little engineering work, but thermodynamically it's solid.