From one of the Simmons presentations the following data was shown.
B.O.E per capita
US - 64.3
Europe - 50.9
Japan - 32.8
China - 5.3
India - 2.5
Pakistan - 2.5
It is frightening to think of the impact on oil supply when these 3 coutries with 2.5 billion people start to consume energy like the US, Europe and Japan.
"What's more, it is very hard to transport."
Not true. While hydrogen in gas or liquid form is problematic, it can be safely stored in various substrates.
Carbon nanofibers in particular seem a promising candidate. There are still issues to be worked out with the economical manufacture of nanofibers, but their storage capacity is phenomenal (up to 65% by weight). These numbers promise HUGE distances possible between refuelling, with estimates ranging up to about 5000km, eliminating the need for a distributed hydrogen infrastructure. (How'd you like to fuel your car about as often as getting the oil changed?)
Still, Hydrogen utilization would require a cheap, clean, energy source, as the energy balance for hydrogen production via electrolyzation is only about 60%, and current fuel cell efficiency is only about 60%, yielding a net energy balance of about 36%.
We physicists continue working on a plethora of clean energy solutions: gravity engines, fusion technology, zero-point energy engines, matter/antimatter collisions, and photonic entrapment, to name a few. Still, the fact remains that there are no clearly incipent breakthroughs looming in these technologies.
Therefore it is likely that we will remain hydrocarbon-dependent for the near future. Hydrogen utilization merely allows for centralization of energy production, making viable such solutions as a coal-driven economy (or, of course, the politically-unacceptable alternative of fission).
Anyway, just some food for thought.
Thank you for the article.
It is amazing how people continue to focus only on this year's supply / demand issues. Next year will be much worse.
It is also interesting how the oil analysts who should have predicted this occurrence are steadfastly united in the view that their is enough oil and this is not a long-term issue.
It must make the Muslim extremist's absolutely crazy that they can't use their most powerful weapon "Oil" against the western infidels.
In the coal-to-fuel arena, SSL is reasonably cheap if you dont mind investing in AIDS-land.
Another unconventional oil project is canadian oil sands, but I dont like the valuation of either SU or COS_U.TO at this stage, maybe in the next years.
"Thats still fossil fuels. Efficient conversion of coal will buy us some time, but its still a limited resource."
It is a finite resource, but there is a
Yes, but you can get micro compact floursents 3 for $5. Also, I remember 10 years ago, cf bulbs were $20 each and were of poor quality. But, you all in cold canada, will probably miss the heat given out by the regular lightbulbs.
There was a study done in Solar Today magazine, that said converting oil to hydrogen to fuel cells will ever only be as efficent as burning oil directly in a hybrid car. So basically I can't see any purpose in this fuel cell waste, execept to control local pollution. Seems many buses are going hybrid due to stop and go.
In California for like $20K you would never have to pay an electric bill again by installing solar. But, as you said it will be decades before it makes a dent in oil. In fact the demand for oil is growing very fast due to China and India too.
formerly played the role now enjoyed by OPEC.
They suspended quotas on Texas production in the early 70's when it became clear production had peaked. Her is the link for production in Texas.hxxp://www.rrc.state.tx.us/divisions/og/information-data/stats/ogisopwc.html
Now OPEC talking about suspending quotas.
The harbinger of the future?
Did anyone here see Daniel Yergin in Krudlow and Cramer this past week tell how technology would come to the rescue?
I guess he failed to observe the effect of the "new" technology on the Texas fields.
Denial still in force;how much longer!
Meanwhile IMO PKZ needs to continue thumbing its nose at WS. Buy back more stock and pay those dividends.
Ballard power did a fuel cell prototype for all the major autos and energy. From what I read Ballard and the fuel cell were the next gen system. The hype was the fuel cells would be in homes, computers, cars and buses as alternate power. Recent reports claim this technology is not ready for prime time.
Similiar to CNG as an alternative fuel source. When all the tax incentives expired, the buses all switched back to diesel.
Still can't see solar as cost effective. Was willing to convert home to solar but the cost was prohibitive. The LED lights producing 100 lumens are 20-40 dollars per bulb and the panels run 200-800 dollars per. Tax incentive due to expire soon.
OTOH I could be wrong in time frame.
This is Vostok Nafta, traded in Stockholm. I would only recommand to buy them on transparent Stockholm Stock Exchange.
To read a bit more about the story try also
http://www.vostoknafta.com/eng/ and click around a bit.
About difference between expensive Gazprom ADR�s and "original local" Gazprom shares, pls. try also
Gazprom ADR�s are widely traded. In Europe there is a strong volume in London and a rather strong volume is in Frankfurt.
I guess, Gazprom ADR�s are also traded in New York. I myself only traded them in Europe.
Gazprom original local shares are traded on Sankt Petersburg stock exchange and also in a special section of the Russian Trading System (RTS). BTW: Petersburg is a diamond among the European capitals, it is a nice place to visit...
Gazprom is a great story, everybody should make his own work about it. Present bad mood in Moscow (because of the Putin /Yukos story) may be a good entrance point. Think, buy and think and buy more on weakness.
OK, all imho and its enough now about Gazprom. Let us keep this board mainly a PKZ board. PKZ is my clear favourite for the comming summer time.