There's an amazing collection of machinery from the early days of the oil and gas industry, including American and European gas and oil engines going back as far as 1885, at the Coolspring Power Museum (http://www.coolspringpowermuseum.org/), near Brookville, PA. Many of the engines are restored and operable, and at their June and October shows nearly everything in the museum is operating. The museum collection is housed in a complex of buildings, many recreated in turn-of-the century style, across several acres of land in a beautiful setting.

 

The next show is October 13 - 16. For anyone interested in early technology, especially internal combustion industrial power, this place is a must-see.

Thanks for the excellent column, Noozer. My suggestion goes a bit further, to increase the gas tax 10 cents per gallon per year over the next 20 years. It would be the federal government's signal that the era of oil is ending and that alternatives are needed.

 

Each cent of federal gas tax generates about $1 billion per year. With each 10-cent block of revenues, I would do the following:

 

> 2 cents for reconstructing existing highways

> 2 cents for intercity/passenger rail

> 2 cents for public transport

> 2 cents for urban brownfields remediation

> 2 cents for alternative energy research and development

 

The reason why I would increase the amount going to highways is because, even without any action by the federal government, revenues from existing gas taxes are flattening and may even decline. Higher energy prices are causing people to drive less and encouraging auto manufacturers to pursue making more efficient cars. Both will cause people to limit their gasoline purchases, and therefore limit growth in gas taxes. But they may still have use in providing for a post-oil transportation system and smarter land use that limits vehicle-miles traveled.

 

KJP

Now I know Peak Oil has become a mainstream issue. It used to be that the Peak Oilers were the conspiracy theorists. Now, the conspiracy theorists are going after Peak Oil....

 

KJP

__________________

 

http://www.infowars.com/articles/economy/peak_oil_globalist_scam.htm

 

Peak Oil is a Corrupt Globalist Scam

 

Infowars Network | October 04 2005

By Steve Watson, Alex Jones & Paul Watson

 

They make the profits on creating artificial scarcity.

 

"Peak oil" is pure military-industrial-complex propaganda.

 

Publicly available CFR and Club of Rome strategy manuals from 30 years ago say that a global government needs to control the world population through neo-feudalism by creating artificial scarcity. Now that the social architects have de-industrialized the United States, they are going to blame our economic disintegration on lack of energy supplies.

 

 

  Oh dear.

 

  Words such as "unlimited" and "plentiful" show that the author just doesn't get it.

 

 

 

Clearly they are geologically challenged (er, reality challenged).

 

KJP

From CNN.com 10/06/2005

 

 

Gasoline surge leads to pedal power

Group expects sale of 20 million bicycles this year, approaching record years set in early 1970s.

October 6, 2005: 6:32 AM EDT

 

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A spike in gasoline prices is fueling what could be the biggest year for U.S. bicycle sales since the Arab oil embargoes more than three decades ago, a leading bike association says.

 

"For bicycles, high gasoline prices are a good thing," said Tim Blumenthal, executive director of Bikes Belong, a national coalition of bicycle suppliers and retailers.

 

http://money.cnn.com/2005/10/06/news/funny/bicycles.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes

ahh yes, leave to the crew at the onion:

 

http://www.theonion.com/content/files/images/Stat-Shot-Leading-Ways.article.jpg

 

HAHAHAHA!!!!

That's awesome!

 

KJP

Oh! I'm so relieved! Now, I can go out and buy that Hummer after all :clap: ( :wtf:)

From the 10/15/05 Enquirer:

 

 

Coalition celebrates bio-diesel progress

By Dan Klepal

Enquirer staff writer

 

We're now working on our second billion.

 

The Clean Cities Coalition, a government-industry partnership created to push alternative fuels, celebrated a milestone Friday: It has saved 1 billion gallons of petroleum nationwide since it formed in 1994.

 

Created by the U.S. Department of Energy, the Clean Cities Coalition came to Greater Cincinnati and Northern Kentucky in 1997. About 4.25 million gallons of gasoline have been saved locally, by bio-diesel or ethanol, in that time. That number is based on how much alternative fuel has been sold.

 

http://news.enquirer.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20051015/NEWS01/510150363/1056

 

 

  "The American Petroleum Institute estimates that there are at least 100 billion barrels that are fairly easily recoverable in Alaska and offshore that oil companies are not permitted to exploit."

 

  Ok, this may be true. But, at today's consumption rate of 20 million barrels per day, this 100 billion barrels would last us only 5,000 days, or about 14 years. In the meantime, other sources are in decline. That's the point of peak oil: the easiest oil is extracted first.

 

    So, the author says that oil will not run out in our lifetime, then blames the government for not allowing the extraction of 14 years worth of oil.

 

    "A child born in 1970 will see 80% of the world's oil consumed within his lifetime." - M. King Hubbert

 

 

From the Akron Beacon Journal 10/19/2005

 

 

Windfalls in wake of hurricanes

 

Oil industry expected to reveal staggering third-quarter profits

By Steve Quinn

Associated Press

 

 

DALLAS - Offshore oil platforms were destroyed, refineries were flooded and gas stations were sporadically out of fuel.

 

Although Hurricanes Katrina and Rita created compounding headaches for energy companies late this summer, the storms ultimately benefited them because, as supplies tightened, prices for gasoline, diesel and jet-fuel soared. Exactly how much money was made will become clearer next week, when the industry begins to detail its third-quarter performance, though analysts are expecting huge profits.

 

http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/business/12939542.htm

From the Akron Beacon Journal 10/20/2005

 

 

Disasters aren't bad for Big Oil

By David Giffels

 

 

Well, apparently all those reports of raping and pillaging in the wake of the hurricanes were correct.

 

The major oil companies are about to tally up profits big enough to choke Fat Tuesday.

 

David Giffels' column appears Tuesday, Thursday and Sunday. He can be reached at 330-996-3572 or at [email protected].

http://www.ohio.com/mld/ohio/news/columnists/david_giffels/12949705.htm

The Fulbright scholars in Congress will probably argue for a oil profits windfall tax. They won't get it, considering who's in the White House. Even if something like that does pass, who believes the oil companies will eat the cost?

 

KJP

 

  In another speech Chavez said that Venezuela is pumping all the oil they can.

Here's another good one.  I heard that BP made $9 billion profit last quarter.  Shell was up around $7 billion, I believe. 

 

The profit gains for oil companies were up from between 75% and 90%.  Not too shabby!

Here's a photo I took in 1999 in Knoxville, TN, selling 86 cent gas:

 

<img src="http://www.cincinnati-transit.net/knoxvillegasstation.jpg">

Here's a photo I took in 1999 in Knoxville, TN, selling 86 cent gas:

 

<img src="http://www.cincinnati-transit.net/knoxvillegasstation.jpg">

 

 

Oh the memories. :cry:  I miss the days when I didn't have budget gasoline cost.

I found this article on the web.  It takes the other side on the peak oil argument.  Its hard who to believe on this issue because one side says supply will run out soon, the other side says we have plenty.  Supply is the variable that seems to change from argument to argument.  I don't know if anyone on this forum knows anyone in the gas business, but how are we supposed to know unless you have access to some pretty privledged info?

 

http://libertyunbound.com/archive/2005_12/otoole-oil.html

The Myth of Peak Oil

by Randal O'Toole

 

The world is running out of oil. Demand in China and other Asian nations is rising rapidly, yet total oil production will soon peak and then decline. As a result, today's high oil prices, driven by Katrina and Rita, are only a harbinger of even higher prices to come. Such high prices mean an end to life as we know it — life in the suburbs with automobiles, Wal-Marts, and other modern conveniences.

 

Randal O'Toole is senior economist with the Thoreau Institute and author of "Reforming the Forest Service." 

The problem with that article, which has been floating around for a while, is that all one has to do is look at rate of new oil discoveries and then match it against the changes in consumption. Oil discoveries peaked in the 1960s and are now down to near nothing today. Meanwhile consumption keeps rising. While we aren't going to run out of oil anytime soon (if ever, because the last drops will be so expensive, no one will be able to afford them), there is a law of nature here than even an economist can't overcome. That is, the geologic reality of dwindling supply will bring shortages and higher prices. Granted, those factors will force reduced consumption. And since there no alternatives available (or even under serious active research) to replace oil, a reduction in consumption portends difficult times ahead. It won't take much to dehydrate our oil-dependent economy -- as Katrina and Rita showed.

^ That is true, and I understand that at some point the resource will run out,  I don't think anyone really debates that point.  I think it’s basically the time table that people argue over.  I do think that consumption can be curbed with the advent of hybrid technology, but eventually something will have to replace gas.  I really have high hopes for fuel cell technology as well, considering that in Akron it was announced that there will be a new fuel cell research facility.  I realize fuel cells are a way off, but I think there will be a time when they become cost effective; being in the tech field I place a lot of faith on ingenuity.  I also think the article takes the side of rail only being an option if cars become too expensive, which I think incorrect.  I think both cars and rail can play a part in the future of transportation in the area.  Recently returning from Seattle, a city that desperately needs a good central rail system, using a car to get from one place to another was too costly and annoying.  I think connecting hub areas (Cleveland, Akron, Youngstown, Toledo, Columbus, Dayton, Cincinnati) is in the best interest of the state because I think overall to would reduce the cost of transportation in order to do business, etc.  I guess I'm one of those people that think that cars and rail can live happily together if they both do what they do best. 

There's a strong tendency to only look at the consumption and cost of energy in discussing contemporary development patterns and transportation habits. Often, people fail to consider the social justice implications.

 

Although Americans may have averaged ten percent of their income for transportation over the last fifty years, a local study several years ago showed that for Fort Wayne's working poor, the number is closer to 60%. These are people who manage to keep their families together and off the welfare roles by working at menial, minimum-wage jobs, sometimes two or three of those jobs. The jobs they can get are often outside the service area and hours of public transportation, and the cars they can buy aren't reliable, efficient hybrids, or even safe. They get stuck with the junker cast-offs, and often make monthly or weekly payments at high interest rates.

 

Environmental impact goes beyond tailpipe emissions, too. The production and consumption of electricity both release heat, and in the case of large generating plants, the amounts are prodigious. Where rivers and lakes are used for cooling, ecosystems are often changed over a substantial area and we still don't know everything about what the long-term effects of those changes may be. Spent nuclear fuel presents a major storage and disposal problem, and I've read some accounts that say it may cost more to decomission a worn-out nuclear power plant than it cost to build it.

 

The filling and paving of rural land to build shopping centers, office parks, parking lots and expressways disrupts natural drainage patterns and the natural soil percolation that should be filtering surface water to replenish aquifers, and the runoff from roads and parking lots is contaminated with oil, transmission fluid and antifreeze from automobiles that pollute our streams, rivers and lakes and interfere with the biological processes upon which sewage treatment facilities depend.

 

Millions of used tires, made from petroleum, accumulate every year, providing breeding places for disease-carrying mosquitoes and contributing to tire fires that foul the air, and fighting the fires releases toxic runoff.

 

Those are just a few of the consequences of our short-sighted, irresponsible car-dependent way of life. Our unwillingness to recognize a need for change carries with it an almost endless cascade of bad consequences.

 

Er ... am I being taken over by the persona of my avatar?

http://www.lightrailnow.org/ (with additional information and photos)

Electrification 101

Electrification of Transportation as a Response to Peaking of World Oil Production

 

 

Commentary by Alan S. Drake • November 2005

 

 

 

With this commentary, Light Rail Now initiates a series we're calling Electrification 101 – a discussion aimed at informing transportation professionals, decisionmakers, and the public at large of the value and advantages of electrifying transportation operations, and the electrification of public transport systems in particular. This commentary, the first article in our series, has been slightly adapted from a professional paper prepared by the author.

 

Alan S. Drake is an engineer, former accountant, and professional researcher based in New Orleans.

 

Light Rail Now! website

URL: http://www.lightrailnow.org/features/f_lrt_2005-02.htm

Updated 2005/11/20

 

The lightrailnow article is excellent. It's visionary, yet solidly realistic and fact-based.

 

A sidelight that may be interesting and known only to arcana-obsessed railfans (redundancy?) involves the electrification of Swiss railways. What brought it to mind was the article's mention of the long lifespan of capital equipment on the railroads.

 

The Swiss railway system is quite old, and prior to the buildup of German militarism leading to WWII, the Swiss were heavily dependent upon coal-fired steam locomotives for the brute power needed to muscle freight through the mountains. The coal came from Germany's Ruhr Valley, and when the Germans cut off coal exports and hoarded their supplies to fuel their war machine, the Swiss had a problem.

 

They already had significant hydropower resources, with potential sites for a lot more. They expanded their railway electrification and installed pantographs atop the steam locomotives and put huge electric resistance heating elements inside the boilers, effectively turning them into giant electric water heaters. It was terribly inefficient, but the power was comparatively cheap. Additional benefits were the elimination of the logistics and costs of handling the coal, the elimination of smoke, soot, and hazardous embers discharged along the track, and longer life of flues and other boiler components. This tactic is irrelevant now, but I think the Swiss certainly demonstrated "thinking outside the box."

Some Americans are having to think outside the box, with more in the near future facing choices they've never had to make before. Others are hopelessly addicted to the lifestyle that oil has fueled and may never realize how much healthier their lives might actually be if they weaned themselves from the black crack.

They already had significant hydropower resources, with potential sites for a lot more. They expanded their railway electrification and installed pantographs atop the steam locomotives and put huge electric resistance heating elements inside the boilers, effectively turning them into giant electric water heaters. It was terribly inefficient, but the power was comparatively cheap. Additional benefits were the elimination of the logistics and costs of handling the coal, the elimination of smoke, soot, and hazardous embers discharged along the track, and longer life of flues and other boiler components. This tactic is irrelevant now, but I think the Swiss certainly demonstrated "thinking outside the box."

 

Interesting, I heard recently from someone who works on engines for a living that the ubiquitous diesel-electric freight locomotive owes its existence to the inability to contruct a clutch strong enough to handle the kind of force needed to get fully loaded trains rolling.

 

On the topic of coal, we have all seen the huge piles of coal outside power plants, but they actually use incredibly small amounts daily, like 1-2 barges.  Many have a month's supply sitting there in case shipment is interrupted.  Those piles present a bit of an environmnental hazard since the sludge gets washed off in the rain into nearby waterways.  This problem is solved by storing the coal in a bath tub-type structure, which was never done until recent decades.  Also, the use of coal in the US is greener than elsewhere if only because so much of it is delivered by barge.  No other country has anywhere near the network of navicable inland waterways that the US has and a tow has the same sized crew as a train, with a single barge carrying twice the cargo of a fully loaded freight train.     

 

 

 

 

 

 

If I remember right, a barge carries more than double what a freight train carries. But that may be several barges hooked together.

Okay I looked it up at www.ingrambarge.com and I was way off.  I was going by what somebody said. 

 

A 15 barge tow is = to 225 rail cars (2.5 trains) or 887 semi trucks.  15 barge tows commonly operate on the Ohio and upper Mississippi, tows of up to 40 barges operate on the lower Mississippi. 4 and 6 barge tows run on the Intracoastal and smaller rivers like the Cumberland and Illinois.  There are no locks on the Mississippi below the Ohio.  Locking is a ridiculously slow and sweaty process, rail has a huge advantage here because barge coupling is dirty, physical, dangerous work.  Keep in mind too that American freight cars and trains are much bigger than their European counterparts.  I haven't seen operations on the Rhone or Rhein but the river traffic I've seen elsewhere in Europe was pathetically small-time.  They can only run one barge down the Seine through Paris, for example, but they still deliver gravel and other contruction materials to the center of Paris a lot more efficiently that way than by rail or truck.  In short we've got the coal in our own borders and can move it around easily compared to France, even though we import a lot from South America and elsewhere.       

 

 

 

 

    I remember from science class way back in 7th grade that we have 300 years worth of coal, at current rates of consumption.

 

    However, it is forecast that the rate of consumption will quadruple in the next 25 years. Thus, we have less than 300 years worth.

 

    This is the concept of peak production. It increases year by year, exponentially, until near the halfway point. Then it gradually peaks and then declines year by year, exponentially. It is a function of both economics and geology. There is nothing anyone can do to change it. Fuel efficiency or conservation are not issues.

 

    So, how much coal do we really have?

 

    The latest estimates are:

    Petroleum extraction will peak within 5 years ("Peak Oil").

    Natural Gas will peak within 25 years.

    Coal will peak within 100 years.

 

    Some place more weight on oil because it is the most versatile and 90% of our transportation system runs on oil. It may be possible to switch some transportation from oil to coal, such as battery-powered electric cars, electric trains, or even a return of coal powered steam locomotives. Ultimately, though, even those will be obsolete as we reach peak coal.

 

    And yes, Jake, I agree that our inland waterways are phenominal. I got a chance to the see New York State Canal System, formerly the Erie Canal, and it is a neat work of engineering. They generate enough electricity from hydropower to operate the locks and lift bridges, and then some. In fact, locks are a form of hydropower, as they use falling water to lift barges. In theory, the inland waterways will be able to operate after peak oil, provided that the system is maintained.

   

Locks don't use any electricity at all, other than the opening and closing of the doors.  There are no pumps.  Most of the dams on the Ohio have one 1200 and one 600 foot lock, things get backed up at the dams all the time.  A big problem is lock maintenance which shuts down the main lock and forces barge traffic through the small locks.  Relative to a lot of what our government spends money on expanding the dams to two 1200 and one 600 foot lock wouldn't be too much effort and would reduce the amount of barges and people required to move the same amount of material.  I don't believe the shipping companies pay anything at all to use the locks and I know if you bring a fishing boat down the river you use the locks for free. 

 

Some of our man-made waterways don't get much business at all, like the Tennessee-Tombigbee Canal and the Intracoastal.  Those have been a bit of a bust from a cost-benefit standpoint but things could turn around at any point and those waterways could become invaluable.  I used to live in Knoxville, where a big deal was made of making the Tennessee River navigable to that point.  There is a 300 foot lock a few miles below town and only like one business that still gets a barge delivered every few weeks. 

 

    As I understand it, the Mississippi, Ohio, and Illinois rivers are the busiest of the inland waterways. The Ohio River traffic at Pittsburgh is just a fraction of what it is at Cincinnati. Some of the western waterways get very little traffic.

 

    Recreational boaters, however, can be found anywhere on the system. Maintenance on some of the older locks on the lessor used areas have been delegated to state departments of natural resources. Examples of this include the Muskingum River and Kentucky River locks. There are a lot of recreational boaters on the Tenn-Tom canal who wish to bypass the heavy industrial traffic at New Orleans.

 

  The cheapest way to move heavy things, in terms of energy use, is by boat. It's even better if things can be moved downstream. I wouldn't close the book on the navigatable waterways yet.

  A big problem is lock maintenance which shuts down the main lock and forces barge traffic through the small locks. 

 

Having to run barge tows through locks that are too short is an arduous process. I've watched them on the Ohio and on the Mississipi, and they have to break the tow into two or more segments. The left-behind barges have to be tied off while the towboat locks through with one segment at a time and then ties off that segment on the other side of the locks. After everything is locked through, they have to reassemble the tow before going on. The process jams up everything, and nobody else gets through until they're finished. I've seen four barge tows queued up down the river waiting while one tow takes nearly an hour to get through.

 

It looked to me like taking apart and reassembling tows could be the most dangerous part of the workers' jobs, too.

http://321energy.com/editorials/maund/maund011606.html

 

The article and graphics at the above link are a fascinating look at trends in the oil market over the last three years, which have seen prices trending upward consistently, with seasonal variations occurring with almost clockwork regularity (the second chart is quite telling). The analysis suggests a $70/barrel oil price sometime during the regular spring peak (between April and June) and possibly $80 in the late-summer peak (August-September). Additional factors, such as the Iran situation and mother nature (how the rest of winter and this year's hurricane season plays out), could greatly affect actual prices -- of course!

 

But the second chart is something to behold....

 

^----- What do you make of it, KJP?

 

    Also, what price of gasoline corresponds with $70 or $80 a barrel? What can we expect next year?

 

 

 

 

The analysis suggests a $70/barrel oil price sometime during the regular spring peak (between April and June) and possibly $80 in the late-summer peak (August-September).

 

The suggestion from the analysis was mine. I think we're looking at $70 sometime between April and June, and $80 by late summer. And since changes in the per-barrel price of oil doesn't correspond evenly with changes in gas prices at the pump, it's hard to say what the retail price of gas will be.

 

Remember the day that Katrina hit the Gulf Coast, oil sold at $70. But a couple months after the price of oil fell, gasoline was still selling for around $3 per gallon because the refineries were off-line or damaged. Perhaps a better measurement is what was the case just prior to Katrina. Oil was selling at about $65-67 per barrel and gasoline at about $2.50-$2.75 per gallon. But, then, oil now is selling for $63-65 and gasoline for $2.20 to 2.30. So the correllation still doesn't work well. Suffice it to say, we're probably looking at a per-gallon price of gasoline of $2.50 to $2.75 by June and possibly back up to $3 by September.

 

If the UN puts sanctions on Iran, or we have another bad hurricane season, $3 will seem like the "good ol' days."

 

    Yeah, remember just after 9-11-2001 the price of gasoline dropped to $1.00 a gallon? All of those aircraft were grounded for about 3 days and the extra jet fuel flooded the market. On top of that, people were watching television instead of driving.

Today, Nymex Crude Future jumped some $2 in just one day to $66.74.

 

Geez, forget about June! Maybe we'll hit $70 before February...

 

    Is this a surprise? Like the table shows, the reserve numbers have been suspect for years. I think the experts have already taken this into account when forecasting the peak date.

 

    The actual peak date is just a mathematical curiosity, anyway. We probably won't know for sure that it happened until 10 years later. One expert is sticking to his estimate that oil production peaked in 2005.

 

    Still interesting, though.

If the experts are the Association for the Study of Peak Oil, then yes, they have been taking the overstatement of reserves into account in estimating the peak oil date as 2008. But if the experts are the US Geological Survey and US Dept. of Energy, they have not taken into it account and thus pegged the peak oil date as 2035.

 

I suspect that if more holes can be poked into the other OPEC nations' reserve data by industry insiders, the official government estimates will be adjusted to show we are at or near the crest. Hopefully that will motivate a dramatic change in energy policy, transport policy, land use policy, etc etc.

Many of you have commented that, while the all articles distributed about peak oil are interesting reading, what do we do about it and how do we communicate the issue to others who aren't familiar with it?

 

The answer has finally arrived, from of all places the City of Burnaby in British Columbia. It is a document that provides a primer on peak oil from a municipal context, and lists in the appendix various actions that municipalities might choose to take to become less energy (especially petroluem) intensive.

 

The information came from the following link, which I saved in a PDF document (if you'd like the PDF, send me your e-mail by personal message, as the one I have required a bit of reworking on my part to make things fit a bit better on proper pages). But you have the link (below) to the site from which the information was gathered in case you choose to develop your own community-specific primer.

 

http://burnaby.fileprosite.com/contentengine/document.asp?Print=yes&ID=9181

 

Best of luck

Ready for $262/barrel oil?

Two of the world's most successful investors say oil will be in short supply in the coming months.

By Nelson Schwartz, FORTUNE senior writer

January 27, 2006: 4:40 PM EST

 

 

DAVOS, Switzerland (FORTUNE) - Be afraid. Be very afraid.

 

That's the message from two of the world's most successful investors on the topic of high oil prices. One of them, Hermitage Capital's Bill Browder, has outlined six scenarios that could take oil up to a downright terrifying $262 a barrel.

 

The other, billionaire investor George Soros, wouldn't make any specific predictions about prices. But as a legendary commodities player, it's worth paying heed to the words of the man who once took on the Bank of England -- and won. "I'm very worried about the supply-demand balance, which is very tight," Soros says.

 

Find this article at:

http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/27/news/international/pluggedin_fortune/index.htm?cnn=yes 

 

 

If a barrel ever cost $262 a gallon.....all jobs would be lost.

Here's a little article...

 

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/feed/2006/02/are_you_an_oil.html

 

Spotting An Oil Addict: A Crude Guide

By Emil Steiner

 

In light of President Bush's declaration in the State of the Union address that "America is addicted to oil," here's a list of warning signs that a loved one may have a problem:

 

Keeps saying, "I can stop my SUV anytime I want."

Nice plug for rail near the end, and he makes the sound point that our nation's transportation system and land uses are designed for $20/barrel oil -- not $65+ oil. This is worth sharing with others.  KJP

______________

 

http://www.tidepool.org/original_content.cfm?articleid=184962

 

Tidepool Originals: VOICES

 

What Peak Oil Means to Every American

Declaring energy independence

by TOM UDALL | posted 02.02.06

 

In 1970, oil production within the United States peaked -- reached its maximum production rate -- at not much more than 10 million barrels of oil per day. That means since 1970, oil production in this country has been declining, and we now import 58 percent of the oil we use. The sheer scale of the American appetite for petroleum is difficult to grasp: Per capita, each of us consumes about 20 pounds of petroleum products each day.

 

With demand rising and production that we can control falling, our dependence on imported oil has become an economic, diplomatic and security nightmare. We now send $25 million an hour abroad to pay for foreign oil, and some of that money is diverted to the same jihadi terrorists we are spending additional billions to fight. For these and other reasons, Rep. Roscoe Bartlett (R-Md.) and I founded the Congressional Peak Oil Caucus in October 2005.

>As I understand it, the Mississippi, Ohio, and Illinois rivers are the busiest of the inland waterways. The Ohio River traffic at Pittsburgh is just a fraction of what it is at Cincinnati. Some of the western waterways get very little traffic.  Recreational boaters, however, can be found anywhere on the system. Maintenance on some of the older locks on the lessor used areas have been delegated to state departments of natural resources.

 

Yeah, this is correct, but it would be a mistake to abandon any of our minor locks because the market keeps shifting around.  For example the Tenn-Tom was very busy in the 80's but ground to a halt in the 90's when Alabama's high sulphur coal was banned.  But now that coal is being mixed with low sulphur coal from South America at the giant McDuphie coal terminal in Mobile.  This blend does comply with environmental regulations and freight traffic has returned somewhat to the Tombigbee River.  This blend is then shipped back up that river and throughout the gulf coast along the ICW.   

 

 

> Examples of this include the Muskingum River and Kentucky River locks. There are a lot of recreational boaters on the Tenn-Tom canal who wish to bypass the heavy industrial traffic at New Orleans.

 

That's true but it's important to point out that the lower Mississippi has no locks whereas the Tenn-Tom has 10 alone and takes a day to get through.  If your destination is Paducah, Ky and you're coming from the gulf it's definitely quicker to go up the Mississippi.  Another thing is some people on other sites have speculated that New Orleans will bounce back single-handedly because of all the shipping jobs.  This is incorrect.  It's true that the Mississippi is lined by operations of every description for 50 miles between there and Baton Rouge, but many of these businesses, despite their huge size, often employ relatively few people as compared to a shopping mall or office building of the same size.  Also, many who work in oil and in shipping down there are from remote swamp areas and commute ridiculous distances to their jobs.  I worked for a week down there on a 12 on 12 off deckhand job with guys driving over an hour to get there each way.  So these guys had to wake up at 3:30am to get in the car by 4 to make it to work by 5am, then not get home until 6pm.  This gives you like 2 hours at home before going to bed.  That said the money is pretty damn good down there for guys without college degrees but it's tough, tough work. 

 

>process jams up everything, and nobody else gets through until they're finished. I've seen four barge tows queued up down the river waiting while one tow takes nearly an hour to get through.

 

Tell me about it. 

 

>It looked to me like taking apart and reassembling tows could be the most dangerous part of the workers' jobs, too.

 

Working a deck job on the river is probably one of the most dangerous jobs in America.  The reason you don't hear about it more is because it is such a small industry (relative to its importance and the railroads, for example), there are probably well under 5,000 river deck hands in the country.  I haven't worked on the railroad but I'm sure the river is a lot more dangerous.  The first day in training they tell you "think of the water as fire" because if you fall over you have about a 1 in 5 chance of dying.  This is because the movement of the barges creates a suction current that drags you under and your life jacket forces you against the bottom of the barge.  If you fall over you actually want to jump (if you can) and for sure swim *away* from the barage and boat and to the shore. 

 

>The cheapest way to move heavy things, in terms of energy use, is by boat.

 

Those tugs do use up a ton of fuel, they all run on diesel and the big line tugs have two 16-cylinder engines and the fleet tugs usually have two 8-cylinders.  Those 16 cylinder engines have pistons the diameter of bowling balls, so they're gobbling thousands of gallons of fuel per day. 

 

Did we just crest the oil peak? Former oil industry geologist-turned-author Kenneth Deffeyes thinks so....

 

http://www.princeton.edu/hubbert/current-events.html

 

Join us as we watch the crisis unfolding

February 11, 2006

 

In the January 2004 Current Events on this web site, I predicted that world oil production would peak on Thanksgiving Day, November 24, 2005. In hindsight, that prediction was in error by three weeks. An update using the 2005 data shows that we passed the peak on December 16, 2005.

 

"A decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires" that I present an update on the data sources and the interpretation.

Coming to Terms With Our Obsessions

Time to ban car commercials?

- Bob Ecker

Monday, February 6, 2006

 

 

Social engineering is a concept many Americans naturally abhor, because it attacks our deeply held freedom, and we have always believed in doing virtually anything we want. Free-market capitalists feel this way, and most citizens usually go along for the ride.

 

But our country's obsessive consumption of oil to fill the tanks of our auto-centric culture may eventually kill off the world, and believe it or not, Mr. and Mrs. America, you and I will go down, too. Our love affair with cars has to change, sooner rather than later. The hubris of excess (see Hummer) has gotten our society into a pickle, and it's time to take a novel approach with this problem.

 

Let's tamp down the future demand side -- to put it another way, like a diet, we must somehow decrease our appetite. Cars are wonderful machines, I'll freely admit, and powerful tools that help us maintain our modern lives. But this obsession has gotten way out of control and threatens the very air we breathe, the earth beneath our feet, our overflowing landfills and even the worldwide political landscape. If every American drove less, kept the same car longer or thought about cars as a well-being issue, then perhaps we can yet avert catastrophe.

 

........

 

URL: http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/02/06/EDGU9GJCDM1.DTL

 

 

Oil tumbles below $60

Crude futures hit their lowest level since late December on healthy stockpiles; gasoline futures also sink.

February 14, 2006: 3:33 PM EST

 

NEW YORK (Reuters) - Oil sank back below $60 a barrel and gasoline futures tumbled Tuesday as traders focused on the recent buildup in inventories.

 

U.S. light crude for March delivery lost $1.67, or about 2.7 percent, to settle at $59.57 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange.

 

It was the first time since Dec. 30, 2005 the front-month crude futures contract fell below $60.

 

Find this article at:

http://money.cnn.com/2006/02/14/markets/oil.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes 

 

I love the Falls Church News-Press. For some reason, they're usually ahead of alot of other media on this issue....

 

http://www.fcnp.com/550/peakoil.htm

February 16 - 22, 2006 VOL. XV NO. 50

Serving the City of Falls Church and Northern Virginia               

 

The Peak Oil Crisis

Cantarell — An Omen?

By Tom Whipple

 

There are a lot of bad things out there waiting to bite as the world moves towards peak oil— Iran, Iraq, Nigeria, Venezuela, China, globalization, and hurricanes to name a few. Last week a new bogeyman arose — super fast oil depletion.

 

Our story begins 65 million years ago when the Chicxulub meteor (or perhaps comet) crashed into the sea near the Yucatan Peninsula . This was one big bang, for it not only wiped out all our dinosaurs, but also took out 75% of the species living on earth.

 

As our 10 km wide meteor was tooling along at 60,000 miles per hour when it hit, there was not much left of the meteor but vapor after the impact, but for a few seconds, there was a monster hole in the earth 100 miles in diameter. I won't go into all the terrible things that happened to our earth in the months after the blast, but few living things survived.