Topic: Is fossil fuels REALLY running out quickly, or do we still have time? - page 3. (Read 513 times)

i do have to laugh when the big institutional influencers of the world talk about 'single use plastics'

if the world in one day stopped creating single use products. the by-product 'sludge' of petroleum refinement wont have as much demand to take the by-product to then use the sludge to convert to plastic products.. so it would remain as sludge

the reason single use plastic products is so cheap is because the toxic sludge needs to be made into SOMETHING else they will have stockpiles of waste at the refinery..

yes the sludge should be made into long-life plastic products like window frames, guttering that serve a purpose to homes for decades instead of a day. [insert many examples of long life use plastic products]
but the demand per barrel of sludge to become plastic for long term products is not there. hence why they literally give away the sludge to then be made into the cheapest most useless single use plastic things.. to stop a stock pile of barrels of sludge from piling up

..
the solution the big institutional influencers came up with decades ago is to continue to make single use plastics(big business in doing so).. also they need it off their property to not be their problem... so they continue.
however they then ask/demand citizens/consumers to then recycle the single use plastics, thus making it consumers problem. shifting the blame away from the petroleum refineries

time to what mate?  electrical products work just as well if not even better than their counterparts

maybe you are just not used to electrical devices being used instead of the what we can call traditional ones but we have no choice because as of right now this is what we have as a solution if there are no more fossil fuels it will be extremely bad for the economy all around the world so we should not wait for that to happen before we start changing our ways

I don’t think that electric vehicles or devices will under perform. Though it is a new concept, but it works just as previous ones do. Tesla cars are electric, if you test the speed of the car, you’d see how fast and how it overshadows certain fuel-powered cars. Same as the electric stoves too, it works very well. The only concern should be the cost however, it’s a good thing to the world. If we can eradicate burning of fuel then hopefully the earth can be a better place and may exits longer.

Whether or not the government has some kind of hidden agenda behind this, I still think that we should really start thinking about using renewable energy. When are we going to switch to more environmental friendly products? When there is completely no fossil fuel and our climate is damaged to the point of no return?

I do not think that the issue has anything to do with a conspiracy theory. There is a real energy problem in the world, not only because of the depletion of fossil fuels from major reserve sources, but also because of conflicts and wars that lead to problems in fuel supply.

I see that there are political reasons, not just economic or environmental, because the main oil and gas producing regions in the world are the Middle East for oil and Russia for gas, and all of them have problems and conflicts, and this leads to disruption or delay in the arrival of these basic materials to Europe and also their use as political pressure cards on Europe does, as does Russia, so moving to renewable energy will have economic, environmental, and political advantages as well.

Humanity needed to intensively search for new alternative methods of energy production as soon as they began to use oil and gas for this. This was not done because their use was relatively simple and cost-effective. On the other hand, oil and gas corporations severely prevented the invention and use of other methods of obtaining cheap energy, even to the point of physically eliminating inventors and their inventions in order to maintain their excess profits.

Gas and oil fields are really drying up and we should think better about using their remains not as fuel, but as raw materials for other industries, including food. Their use has become one of the reasons for the increase in average temperature on the planet by one and a half degrees. which is already almost a critical point for people’s lives. Therefore, in any case, humanity needs to switch to other types of energy use.

Conspiracy theories about elite involvement and control may reflect a distrust of authority and institutions, but in fact, the transition to renewable energy is a collective effort and step to maintain the sustainability of the planet we live on.

A concern that arises due to the cost and performance of new equipment, this is a fairly common problem. Indeed, this transition often requires a fairly significant initial investment, as well as several other problems that must be resolved. Talking about the transition to renewable energy, this is not only a direction for the wider community, but also a response to the real challenges that are visible before our eyes related to climate change.

I think it has more to do with carbon emission, the government of your country wants to rapidly move to renewable source of energy, that is why maybe I feel they've instructed manufacturers to sort of produce some of the equipments that will use more of electricity instead of gasoline.

Don't be skeptical about the performance of the new electric materials, the manufacturers already know the standard and what to produce, so don't be skeptical about the usage, however you should be concerned about the amount of power these equipments might consume because I'm seeing your electric bill going up.

I don't see it as a conspiracy theory anywhere, I believe the government in your country is laying the needed environment for the new phase of our new reality that we are going to come into in the next 10 years or more. Forget about the mileage electric cars can go, with time production of electric cars that can go far distance will come onboard.

What does WEF even do? Most of them are so fat they don't even leave Davos.

WEF is full of lunatics but I feel that these kind of conspiracy theories involving them don't have any substance. There are much more practical reasons why people would think that electric versions of devices are (created) bad, like: Cost cutting on the part of factories, bribes (think Volkswagen emissions scandal), power failures, and maybe human stupidity as well.

there is enough surface area of planet so that the suns energy can be captured, there is enough water area/movement of rivers and seas that can be captured
the issue is the rare metals of the technology to do the capturing..... and now ill reveal the solution
nasa is not doing project artemis for science of knowledge of the universe.. its for rare element mining

there are more rare metals in a asteroid than in a plot of land on earth
(get 2 hard silica balls.. 1 you hang above your head like a Piñata. the other you throw on your backyard soil so it shatters, spreads like dust and mixes with the soil, then tell me which is easier to get large clumps of near-pure from.. answer: the Piñata(with the right technology))


the fresh unused nuclear rods are very radio active.. and in solid form
when depleted after use. less soo radio active.. hint: depleted
the water cooling fluid (waste you speak of) is less radio active than fresh mined nuclear solids(pre used)..
but still in liquid form, waste can be hazardous if it spilled in the open air to evaporate and contaminate the air... so carefully putting it in the ground in the place they found the highly radio active solids is the answer

the whole "but it will toxify the land if you put it in the land" silliness is silly because the solids came from the ground and were more radio active/toxic when originally in the land..
same goes for oil sludge by-product of refining oil. put it back into the empty holes the oil came from

the 'toxic threat' problems only exist/persist if left on the surface to contaminate the air and water and SURFACE-land we humans come into contact with

The problem of fossil dependency is multifaceted.
On the one hand, it is not quite right to talk about the "disappearance" of fossil fuels such as hydrocarbons. It is not entirely true. The truth is that these resources, which can be extracted technologically easily and at acceptable costs, are really scarce and their volume is shrinking. For the world economy, this clearly indicates that within 30-50 years (and this is the period that today's deposits are limited to), the cost of such a resource will have a very strong and negative impact on the economy.
Yes, there was also a problem "from the last century" - pollution of the environment by carbon dioxide emissions. I'm not ready to say how much it really has a strong and negative impact, as many statements turned out to be more populist than scientific.
Well and the third problem, which appeared after 2022 - for example, gas and oil have become a means of economic terrorization of the normal world by terrorist countries. Therefore, reducing the dependence of developed countries on such resources is a double benefit - freedom from the antics of inadequate regimes, the absence of forced sponsorship of terrorist regimes, diversification of the economy, and leaving resources that can be used for manipulation.

At the same time, I would like to note that normal countries that supply oil, for example, have been investing huge amounts of money in the development of alternative energy sources for many years, realizing that their wealth - oil - is not eternal. And only backward, savage regimes continue to mentally self-satisfy themselves by constantly repeating the song "oil will only get more expensive, without our gas everyone will freeze"

The thing they aren't telling us is how they're going to supply the needed electricity for all this demand. Considering how a major part of their arguments for this replacement is "environmental related". Many electricity production methods are not as clean as they're advertised. For example the nuclear power plants create a lot of pollution and create "nuclear garbage" that hurts the environment more than fossil fuels specially if they're used at large like what they're planning on doing (replacing everything with electrical versions).

As for fossil fuels, they are running out but not as fast as some reports say (like the usual 50 years). We still have a century or two of fossil fuels left. One of the main reasons why some countries (specially in the West) are desperately trying to abandon or reduce their need of fossil fuels is political since they are a net importer of it from the Eastern bloc!

I also would like to point out that fossil fuels like oil and gas are used in a lot more things that can be replaced. For example the tires used in an EV is still considered a petro product thing! So the need for fossil fuel is not going away in our lifetime.

Pressure on fossil fuels has increased dramatically since the Industrial Revolution. The world is also moving forward at a very fast speed and the population in the world is increasing day by day. Fossil fuels play an important role in fueling this growing population and development. Since fossil fuels are limited i.e. a fixed amount is stored underground, it is gradually depleting. Thus, a time will slowly come when fossil fuel will be completely exhausted, then the world will suffer from a fossil fuel crisis i.e. energy crisis. Many scientists and experts believe that we will run out of fossil fuels in the 21st century. So we should reduce the use of fossil fuels keeping in mind or thinking about our next generation and looking for alternative energy otherwise our future generation will face extreme threats.

Fossil fuels are formed from the dead leaves of trees and bodies that have been dead for about 650 million years. These fossil fuels are non-renewable and since they take billions of years to form, nature has limited reserves of them. Due to the growth of population and the development of civilization in the world, the use of such natural renewable energies is gradually increasing. According to scientists, by the end of the 21st century, all these natural energy sources will be exhausted so the world will fall into a big energy crisis.
So according to the information given by the scientists, we can say that fossil fuel is gradually running out. So we should think about our future generations and we should conserve fossil fuels and find and use renewable energy sources.

Although fossil fuels are limited resources, I don't believe that they're actually running out soon. There have always been statements about it, perhaps bordering on propaganda. I have already heard about it in my elementary school days. Only to find out decades later that the price of crude oil can actually go below $0. And production has to be lowered down a lot just for the price to rise.

There are certainly influential personalities and institutions that have selfish interests involved in the proliferation of this information. But they're not actually walking their talk. Especially when it comes to protecting the environment, there are so many hypocrites. And then the alternatives aren't actually better.

I would guess that it is not really about resources ending, but more about finite resources that hurt the environment versus infinite resource that's good for us. Even if you do not believe in climate change, let's assume that you do not care about that at all, we could just look at the economical approach to it.

The reality is that you can generate green energy forever, it will never end, just the winds and the sun is alone enough and every nation gets sunshine and/or winds which are enough for power generations, so it will be like that forever. However, when you are talking about fossil fuels, that's a finite resource that will eventually end, either it will end soon or it will end later on but it will end one day for sure. So, why not move to green energy instead.

fossil fuel isn't a renewable energy, even if there's still plenty of resources left it will depleted if our fossil fuel consumption keep climbing year by year, but whats more important than running out of fossil fuel is the carbon emission that it produced, good thing so many researches nowadays are finding alternative energy to it and one of them is electricity and white hydrogen fuel its definitely better to diversify the use of energy to fuel engine than just using one unified fossil fuel in the long term.
there's certainly nothing wrong with it and i think there's no conspiracy either, you are still free to use whatever energy you want to use well unless government decided to banned the use of fossil fuel.
I mean diesel are being banned everywhere due to producing too much pollution sometime its only allowed to be used for commercial purpose.
though i personally don't agree if we should all just suddenly switch over to electric vehicle, its better if we can wait until the infrastructure adequate first.

I think there's some kind of truth to what they're saying with fossil fuels. There's only a limited amount of them underground, and it's just natural that it will run out pretty soon unless you have a way to speed up the process of fossilization of animals and other organic matter. It's just that they're selling it at an exaggerated way that it forces people to not believe in it even though it's a reality.

Renewable energy is always the way to go, however our equipment and processes to harness it is still very primitive and not entirely efficient at the moment.

I don't get how we can be "controlled" by using more electric stuff and even be able to generate our own electricity. Remember, the whole world runs on money and that means if there is a way to make money then they will push us to that. I believe that if capitalism had their way, they would make electric stuff dangerous to use, like tesla would have been gone already, and everything else too, and would push us for fossil fuels, gas and such. However, with solar panels, and maybe even a small wind turbine (not the industrial giant ones) you can literally just build your own grid, and do not ever need to spend money on energy again, maybe redo them every few decades or so. That means you do not pay anyone at all, its yours, you pay significantly less on the capital compared to what you would pay each month on your bill. I can't really see the downside to this for an individual, sorry.

I was listening to one conference about "How to increase throughput of distillation of crude oil" and one professor made a statement that he is always amaze by how people talk about fossil fuels sometimes, some comments are so funny that he just assume people are too ignorant of what they don't know. He said that anytime people say crude oil is going to deplete and oil well will dry up, then that's a big fat lie. The oil and gas reservoirs are so enormous in large quantities that they are not going down even after his grand children becomes parent, theoretically is not possible.

I think your government are trying to promote free green house effects which is good. We are been warned about the global house warming, it's affecting our health and some are a very big disasters in some communities where crude oil are been drill. However, it's becoming difficult for some countries to readjust and that's because their main source of revenue is crude oil, we need to adapt to new tech for our own good, our own safety and good health.