Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 2 of 8      Prev   1   2   3   4   5   Next   »
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 9,543
Reply with quote  #31 
Quote:
Originally Posted by uwApoligist

spazsdad gets it.  Anyone know what the free sh it scene is like in Mexico?  Just asking, in case. 


The only thing free in Mexico is sh1t.  Literally - sh1t.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,000
Reply with quote  #32 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1janiedough



You cannot trust a single word a muslim says...ever.


Sad but true, the Quran teaches them to lie for their cause

__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
pabar61

Registered:
Posts: 9,543
Reply with quote  #33 
Quote:
Originally Posted by keepinitreal
Sad but true, the Quran teaches them to lie for their cause


Yep - and Antifa has learned that from them.  Watch any video of an Antifa confrontation and you will see their strategy of incitement followed by blatant lying.
TheNarrator

Registered:
Posts: 3,570
Reply with quote  #34 
Quote:
Originally Posted by woody
EG, we keep discovering previously unknown oil and gas reserves, and getting better at extracting oil. How far into the future do you estimate this "oil and gas crunch" will occur? At what point will Solar power be able to compete head to head with fossil fuel without government subsidies? How will heavy loads of goods be transported to local stores without fossil fuel? I can only assume some other fuel source other than solar, or nuclear will have to be developed to power heavy equipment.


I'm in a new group, call it #5.  Love the debate, but I think you are attempting to look at future problems through the technologies we have today.  Future generations will come up with a new way to fly planes and do other things.
EarlyGrayce

Registered:
Posts: 4,374
Reply with quote  #35 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNarrator


I'm in a new group, call it #5.  Love the debate, but I think you are attempting to look at future problems through the technologies we have today.  Future generations will come up with a new way to fly planes and do other things.


Thanks for the reply. I would argue that your post puts you squarely into group #1, the "Technology will save us" group. Thoughts?

__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
TheNarrator

Registered:
Posts: 3,570
Reply with quote  #36 
Probably, but more so in the "humans will find a way" camp.  Might not be through technology, but we are fearfully and wonderfully made by our Creator.

Image result for life will find a way meme
PDad

Registered:
Posts: 4,062
Reply with quote  #37 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheNarrator
I'm in a new group, call it #5.  Love the debate, but I think you are attempting to look at future problems through the technologies we have today.  Future generations will come up with a new way to fly planes and do other things.

Sounds like #1. What's the difference?

1-The 'technology will save us' group, where we can sustain growth, and scalable electricity, transportation, and agriculture, forever;
2-The 'religious/spiritual' group that believes it is all part of the plan, so they have no control over the future;
3-The 'F it we either will get nuked or Ebola'd or hit by a meteor or other disaster' group, so who cares.

FWIW, #3 thinks we're doomed regardless, so don't get preoccupied with this one threat.

The 3 groups represent different outlooks - 1 = optimistic, 2 = neutral and 3 = pessimistic.
TheNarrator

Registered:
Posts: 3,570
Reply with quote  #38 
You're right - my mistake
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 6,887
Reply with quote  #39 

There were 174 new oil discoveries last year. That is off from normal years of 400 to 500 discoveries. The reason that is off is that discovering oil is super expensive. It must compete with the expense of recovering technologies, like fracking. Right now recovering technologies are winning the investment battle. That appears to continue for some time.

It is just cheaper to push the latest ultra slick, small pore liquid into a whole known to hold billions of gallons of oil. Oil is the purest of money businesses.

The last few discoveries have been monsters. One is close enough to the Alaskan North Slope that they are just tacking it onto that already massive oil field. It is over 1.2 Billion barrels of recoverable light crud, the good stuff. The other was the Midland TX oil field, 20 Billion barrels recoverable oil and 1.6 Billion Barrels of Natural Gas. 

So while there have been fewer new discoveries, that is quite easily offset by the size of new discoveries and the new recovery technologies which allow us to economically get oil from those existing fields. 

Yes, Bakaan was found in the 1950's.  Yes Fracking was discovered in the 1940's.  1940's fracking was literally pump some of the salt water that came out of a well back in, oil in the cracks floats, you suck it off.  You could take a 100M barrel field and get 1M more out of it.  Fracking today is all about porosity of and finding the right liquids that are slick enough to get though those pores, but got enough grip to bring the oil with it.  Once you have the right liquid, you can extract massive amounts of oil from unusable fields of the past.  That fracking liquid technology is only getting started. 

Renewables are already 15% of our electrical generation.  And growing quite rapidly.   Oil consumption curves have fattened in US, Europe, Middle East, Asia.  There is still a bit of growth in India.  But largely  oil consumption is level or trending slight downward overall. 

We are really just a few years, like 10, from getting solar cells that are basically break even for the home consumer.  When that happens, you will see a huge shift in electrical generation.  Right now the efficiency exists in cells in the lab.  They are just too expensive to manufacture.  So this is now more of a manufacturing optimization problem. 

To me governmental debt has been the source of every major conflict for 300 years.  Oil caused a few flare ups recently, but the discoveries and technology development have largely removed oil as a source of conflict going forward.  


__________________
DC v Hellar - Landmark Supreme Court case established that "protects an individual right to keep and bear arms", that right was "premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad)." 
PDad

Registered:
Posts: 4,062
Reply with quote  #40 
Oil isn't used to generate electricity, so you need to fill in the gap between oil and renewables.

I suspect your "huge shift in electrical generation" is more about using renewables to dramatically increase generation of electricity to power electric vehicles that displace gas cars.
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 6,887
Reply with quote  #41 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDad
Oil isn't used to generate electricity, so you need to fill in the gap between oil and renewables.

I suspect your "huge shift in electrical generation" is more about using renewables to dramatically increase generation of electricity to power electric vehicles that displace gas cars.

Natural Gas is used extensively in generating electricity.    As we spin up renewables, we will free that NG for other uses.  Still going to take a lot of years, but not unreasonable to think 50% of our electrical gen comes from renewables in 10 years.  We will not be down nuclear, so that is definitely going to free up NG. 

I would advocate that we make an immediate shift to LNG.  Waste Management switched their entire fleet to LNG.  For fleet driven vehicles is totally makes sense.  I think that inner city busses should all be LNG.  The accident rates on fleet driven vehicles is very low.  LNG is more than safe.   As stations become available we start to look at cars on LNG as well. 

Longer term 20-30 years, we should be looking at moving to Hydrogen.  Some definite longer term research needed before Hydrogen is plausible.  But not unrealistic to think in 20-30 years.

__________________
DC v Hellar - Landmark Supreme Court case established that "protects an individual right to keep and bear arms", that right was "premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad)." 
rudymartinez

Registered:
Posts: 392
Reply with quote  #42 
It would be quite foolish for any bolillo  to come to Mexico looking for sh1t, free or otherwise. The Capo de la drogas don't  bother with a war of words on the message boards. But hey, stroll on down amigo. I'll leave the light on for you.
keepinitreal

Registered:
Posts: 23,000
Reply with quote  #43 
Who would want to go to that hellhole, free or otherwise?
__________________
"I like to establish the parameters of my own thoughts and don't think I need a director."

"This is not debate class. And this is not about politeness. We're talking about the damn future of our country"

"It is not just simply yelling out a name and yelling down dissenters........................... and I'll defend your right to even insult me" 
EarlyGrayce

Registered:
Posts: 4,374
Reply with quote  #44 
Quote:
Originally Posted by uwApoligist

There were 174 new oil discoveries last year. That is off from normal years of 400 to 500 discoveries. The reason that is off is that discovering oil is super expensive. It must compete with the expense of recovering technologies, like fracking. Right now recovering technologies are winning the investment battle. That appears to continue for some time.  I would offer that the reason for less 'discoveries' is because there is less to discover. I would also suspect that the quantity and quality of those 174 discoveries is less than good.

It is just cheaper to push the latest ultra slick, small pore liquid into a whole known to hold billions of gallons of oil. Oil is the purest of money businesses.

The last few discoveries have been monsters. One is close enough to the Alaskan North Slope that they are just tacking it onto that already massive oil field. It is over 1.2 Billion barrels of recoverable light crud, the good stuff. The other was the Midland TX oil field, 20 Billion barrels recoverable oil and 1.6 Billion Barrels of Natural Gas. "Monsters". 21.2 billion barrels combined, using your very optimistic estimate. We burn thru 7.2 billion barrels a year here in the US. Worldwide yearly burn is 35 billion barrels. We need one of these "monster" discoveries every three years, just for us? Do you see that as realistic?

So while there have been fewer new discoveries, that is quite easily offset by the size of new discoveries and the new recovery technologies which allow us to economically get oil from those existing fields. Disagree.

Yes, Bakaan was found in the 1950's.  Yes Fracking was discovered in the 1940's.  1940's fracking was literally pump some of the salt water that came out of a well back in, oil in the cracks floats, you suck it off.  You could take a 100M barrel field and get 1M more out of it.  Fracking today is all about porosity of and finding the right liquids that are slick enough to get though those pores, but got enough grip to bring the oil with it.  Once you have the right liquid, you can extract massive amounts of oil from unusable fields of the past.  That fracking liquid technology is only getting started. IMHO it is insane to frack. The environmental/water table damage will far outlast the fractional increase in our gluttonous run towards collapse. We are so shortsighted.

Renewables are already 15% of our electrical generation.  Link please. And growing quite rapidly.   Oil consumption curves have fattened in US, Europe, Middle East, Asia.  There is still a bit of growth in India.  But largely  oil consumption is level or trending slight downward overall. Link please.

We are really just a few years, like 10, from getting solar cells that are basically break even for the home consumer.  Oh my. For a numbers guy, you seem to be overlooking a lot of 'costs' in that 'breakeven' analysis. When that happens, you will see a huge shift in electrical generation.  Right now the efficiency exists in cells in the lab.  They are just too expensive to manufacture.  So this is now more of a manufacturing optimization problem. 

To me governmental debt has been the source of every major conflict for 300 years.  Agreed. Oil caused a few flare ups recently, but the discoveries and technology development have largely removed oil as a source of conflict going forward.  Disagree. And going forward, fossil fuels will be the primary conflict generator, however it is hidden within other claimed injustices. Again, we are shortsighted. Humans will be killing each other over every drop, because the one thing we absolutely will refuse to do is face reality. Probably that 'Manifest Destiny' insanity rearing its ugly head again.



Had time to look online for that '174 new oil discoveries in 2016'  figure. Ran across this April 2017 article from the International Energy Agency. Seems more in line with what I was thinking.


"Global oil discoveries fell to a record low in 2016 as companies continued to cut spending and conventional oil projects sanctioned were at the lowest level in more than 70 years, according to the International Energy Agency, which warned that both trends could continue this year.

Oil discoveries declined to 2.4 billion barrels in 2016, compared with an average of 9 billion barrels per year over the past 15 years. Meanwhile, the volume of conventional resources sanctioned for development last year fell to 4.7 billion barrels, 30% lower than the previous year as the number of projects that received a final investment decision dropped to the lowest level since the 1940s."


__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
woody

Registered:
Posts: 8,820
Reply with quote  #45 
Oil produces gasoline, and diesel. Natural gas, which seems unlimited at this point, produces electricity. Care to take a guess as to how much natural gas is remaining? I mean, they flare the stuff off of deep water rigs, because it's a nuisance, and a hazard. It's a market commodity, and it's very abundant. Care to match up a solar farm cost and delivery, as opposed to a natural gas turbine generator? Nope, don't think so..
__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
spazsdad

Registered:
Posts: 4,903
Reply with quote  #46 
Quote:
Originally Posted by keepinitreal
Who would want to go to that hellhole, free or otherwise?

No sh it amigo.
Haven't been to that hell hole since my early years and had to make a split second decision to deal with the federales or hope my motor started on the first kick and I could ride away. Luckily my steed was there for me and down the beach I went.

__________________
#SCOTUS
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 6,887
Reply with quote  #47 
Quote:
Originally Posted by EarlyGrayce


Had time to look online for that '174 new oil discoveries in 2016'  figure. Ran across this April 2017 article from the International Energy Agency. Seems more in line with what I was thinking.


"Global oil discoveries fell to a record low in 2016 as companies continued to cut spending and conventional oil projects sanctioned were at the lowest level in more than 70 years, according to the International Energy Agency, which warned that both trends could continue this year.

Oil discoveries declined to 2.4 billion barrels in 2016, compared with an average of 9 billion barrels per year over the past 15 years. Meanwhile, the volume of conventional resources sanctioned for development last year fell to 4.7 billion barrels, 30% lower than the previous year as the number of projects that received a final investment decision dropped to the lowest level since the 1940s."


Renewables are 15% of our electrical generation
https://www.eia.gov/tools/faqs/faq.php?id=427&t=3
Supply Demand curves: 
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/steo/report/global_oil.cfm


As woodrow properly points out.  We burn off 278,623M Cubic feet of Natural Gas a year.  Cause we can't consume it. 
https://www.eia.gov/dnav/ng/ng_prod_sum_a_EPG0_VGV_mmcf_a.htm

This shows supply/demand curves for the long term.  With good estimates out to 2050.
https://www.eia.gov/outlooks/aeo/pdf/0383(2017).pdf
I was going from memory.  These are actually flatter than I remember. 

All these numbers assume current regulatory environment.  The reality is that there are massive deposits off the West coast, and some in the Gulf Of Mexico, that we have not even explored enough to know their size.  In the 60's when they were found, environmentalist blocked their exploration as their was a very real possibility of all of LA looking out and seeing rigs everywhere.  Since that timeframe they have developed drill technology that would allow most of that oil to be developed from on shore rigs drilling horizontally.  One could reason that if came down to global war/famine/anarchy, the environmental concerns might start to lose out.

In addition to all of that energy there is over 300 US years worth of Methane Hydrate in the Gulf of Mexico alone.  Turns out that most Methane Hydrate can be produced using normal oil and gas production technologies.
http://www.ldeo.columbia.edu/news-events/gas-hydrate-deposits-gulf-mexico
http://www.mh21japan.gr.jp/english/mh21-1/4-2/

All of this is not to mention coal.  There has been significant discoveries of coal for going on 30 years.  Most of that was very underdeveloped.  The last 8 has basically seen coal development go to zero. 

As far as solar making the turn.  I look at the previously posted efficiency curves.  It used to be only truly exotic materials that were able to hit great efficiency numbers.  Like GaAs.  That stuff was always going to be to expensive to mass produced.  Worked great for space applications, where size and weight were paramount.  You look at those curves and you will now start to se silca based solar starting to get some great numbers.  These are very manufacturable technologies.  For instance one of the biggest efficiency wins is to lay a lens on top of existing silcon cell tecnology.  That lens allows that cell to remain way more productive at way lower light angles.  There is really nothing to mass producing these lens.  You can actually use the existing silicon chip manufacturing technologies. 

__________________
DC v Hellar - Landmark Supreme Court case established that "protects an individual right to keep and bear arms", that right was "premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad)." 
woody

Registered:
Posts: 8,820
Reply with quote  #48 
If somebody will give me free lithium battery banks, pick them up and install them, pick them up when they are at 60%, recycle them, and deliver me new ones for free, I will consider Solar as an alternative energy source. Until you can show me how solar can compete head to head with natural gas turbine electrical generation without subsidies, you cannot compete in a free market, nor convince me of that. If I choose to live off the grid, I will be responsible for that added cost. Don't expect me to subsidize your decision at my expense.
__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
EarlyGrayce

Registered:
Posts: 4,374
Reply with quote  #49 
Thanks to everybody who's been posting. Topic du jour:


The theory that certain patterns in US political and cultural history repeat over a period of eighty to ninety years-called The Turning Theory.

Put forth by a couple of guys and also called the Strauss-Howe theory (I think), and discussed in Steve Bannon's doc "Generation Zero".

Our historical hallmark 'events' that 'evidence' this:

American Revolution 1776
Civil War 1861
US enters WW2 1941

The idea is, our country historically repeats itself every 80-90 years, with that 80-90 year time period further broken down into roughly 20 year categories. These 4 cycle categories are labeled as:

HIGH-Post WW2 to the assassination of JFK
AWAKENING-Consciousness revolution of the 60's to the tax revolts of the '80s
UNRAVELING-mid 80's to 2004 Our American society begins to disintegrate
CRISIS-2005-2025? --- usually war

According to the theory, our current cycle has had corresponding, distinctly characteristic generations of individuals, and the theory says these 'generations' also repeat every 80-90 years, although of course have been called different things in previous cycles:

Baby Boomers  1943-1960
Generation X 1961-1981-
Millennials 1982-2004
Generation Z 2005-present

So, we are in the CRISIS point of the cycle. IMO this is one of those things that you could argue, anybody can use any period(s) of time to prove any theory they want to prove, so this is just random info put together to forward a position of Strauss-Howe. I dunno. I personally believe that humanity does cycle, in a lot of different areas.






__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 6,887
Reply with quote  #50 
On this we agree.  We tend to forget history, sanitize it, gloss over it, such as this tearing down statues.  



__________________
DC v Hellar - Landmark Supreme Court case established that "protects an individual right to keep and bear arms", that right was "premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad)." 
woody

Registered:
Posts: 8,820
Reply with quote  #51 
Somebody forgot that little spat in Europe called WWI. An estimated 60 million died. The treaty of Versailles is what lead to WWII. Repeat as necessary.
__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
PDad

Registered:
Posts: 4,062
Reply with quote  #52 
Quote:
Originally Posted by woody
Somebody forgot that little spat in Europe called WWI. An estimated 60 million died. The treaty of Versailles is what lead to WWII. Repeat as necessary.

The Marshall Plan after WWII certainly didn't repeat that mistake. Trump's repeated promotion of "to the victor goes the spoils" would lead to a repeat.
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 6,887
Reply with quote  #53 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDad

The Marshall Plan after WWII certainly didn't repeat that mistake. Trump's repeated promotion of "to the victor goes the spoils" would lead to a repeat.

a repeat?

__________________
DC v Hellar - Landmark Supreme Court case established that "protects an individual right to keep and bear arms", that right was "premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad)." 
EarlyGrayce

Registered:
Posts: 4,374
Reply with quote  #54 
Quote:
Originally Posted by woody
Somebody forgot that little spat in Europe called WWI. An estimated 60 million died. The treaty of Versailles is what lead to WWII. Repeat as necessary.


Not forgotten. That span of time is considered to have fallen within an 'unraveling' period. 

__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
PDad

Registered:
Posts: 4,062
Reply with quote  #55 
Quote:
Originally Posted by uwApoligist
a repeat?

A repeat of the Versailles treaty mistake.
uwApoligist

Registered:
Posts: 6,887
Reply with quote  #56 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PDad

A repeat of the Versailles treaty mistake.

Trump is going to start WWIII?

__________________
DC v Hellar - Landmark Supreme Court case established that "protects an individual right to keep and bear arms", that right was "premised on the private use of arms for activities such as hunting and self-defense, the latter being understood as resistance to either private lawlessness or the depredations of a tyrannical government (or a threat from abroad)." 
EarlyGrayce

Registered:
Posts: 4,374
Reply with quote  #57 
Always amusing that we call them 'world' wars. Yea, there will be a 3rd. Trying to pin the 'start' of it on any one person or group would be disingenuous or naive I think.
__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
EarlyGrayce

Registered:
Posts: 4,374
Reply with quote  #58 
How about this? I'm gonna have to Venn Diagram these people into a hybrid of my 2nd and 3rd groups.



"A Christian numerologist claims that the world will end next Saturday when a planet will, supposedly, collide with Earth.

According to Christian numerologist David Meade, verses in Luke 21:25 to 26 are the sign that recent events, such as the recent solar eclipse and Hurricane Harvey, are signs of the apocalypse. 

The verses read:

“25: There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea. People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken.'

"'26: Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after those things which are coming on the earth: for the powers of heaven shall be shaken.'

Sept. 23 is a date that was pinpointed using codes from the Bible, as well as a "date marker" in the pyramids of Giza in Egypt. 

Meade has built his theory on the so-called Planet X, which is also known as Nibiru, which he believes will pass Earth on Sept. 23, causing volcanic eruptions, tsunamis and earthquakes, according to British newspaper."


__________________
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
PDad

Registered:
Posts: 4,062
Reply with quote  #59 
Quote:
Originally Posted by uwApoligist
Trump is going to start WWIII?

It's possible, however I didn't suggest that. You're jumping to a conclusion. 

To clarify, I doubt the Versailles treaty mistake will be repeated by a Western democracy. If it is repeated, it will be due to stupid reasoning like Trump promotes.
woody

Registered:
Posts: 8,820
Reply with quote  #60 
I don't figure Russia, China, or the US being the countries that start a WW. Maybe Russia, but not likely. The Chinese are militarily unable to project naval power. Russia is looking to annex a few former Soviet States. The most likely scenario would be Iran going off the rails, and along with other unstable countries like Yemen attacking Israel. That would possibly be the only place I see nukes being used, and that would lead the US into reacting, and then Russia would defend Iran. I really don't see Fat Boy doing anything. He may be crazy, but he isn't stupid.
__________________
Anarcho Capitalism. Get some, and no you can't have any of my money to live off of you Socialist Democrat.

"IT'S GOOD TO BE DA KING"
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.