Re: An oil industry leader's perspective on abundance, etc.

Al Koop wrote:

"One of the interesting things that I have noticed about the oil/gas
depletion discussion is that the oil/gas industry tends to paint a rosy
picture of the fossil fuel situation while environmentalists tend to
paint a rosy picture of alternative fuels. Neither group seems to be
much concerned about how much longer economical supplies of oil and gas
will be available."

Perceptive comment--but Glenn is an oil man, and he's painting no rosy pictures. However, the reasons they may not be concerned are probably that they haven't thought through the issues in sufficient depth and breadth.

"David Doty basically claims that he does not see a significant shift to
a hydrogen economy soon, if ever. He writes that although fuel cells
have been around for 40 years, their cost has not decreased as much as
would be expected if new technologies were successful. There is a
further question of the purity of the hydrogen gas (LH2)...."

Don Paul addressed some of these concerns and others before the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. See

http://energycommerce.house.gov/107/hearings/06062002Hearing582/Paul1007.htm

His testimony likewise doesn't give you a warm feeling that a hydrogen economy is just around the corner.

Doty's article is interesting, but I'm one of these guys that isn't yet convinced global warming is from human causes. Doty seems to take that as a given.

For one thing, huge changes in climate have gone on in the past when humans weren't around. For another, radiant energy output from the sun changes from time to time, and temperature variations on Earth appear to correlate. Furthermore, modeling capabilities do not seem sophisticated enough to establish whether or not CO2 is a true pollutant. This matter has become a political football driven partly by hysteria. (As an avid gardener I kind of like the idea of a little extra CO2!) (And some Russians clearly would welcome a little global warming.)

If global warming is real--and I believe it is, even though some data even challenge the basic assertion, then we've got to deal with it. Without really good evidence for causes we should not put limitations on various economies around the world to try to reverse the trend. Such constraints may not have any desirable effect; and to take major actions "just in case" that will definitely hurt people short-term is unwise. Still, I have mixed feelings, because I think natural limits are likely to slow us all down before too long....

Don

  ----- Original Message -----
  From: Al Koop
  To: asa@calvin.edu
  Sent: Saturday, December 06, 2003 9:05 AM
  Subject: Re: An oil industry leader's perspective on abundance, etc.

  DLP- ChevronTexaco has now become the only major company in the US with
  a serious effort to make hydrogen available [from methane] as a fuel.
  We bought this capability from Texaco. The US government and the
  military are already significant customers.

  DW- Environmentalists and some politicians claim that making hydrogen
  from methane only worsens "CO2 pollution," so we should be getting it by
  electrolysis from seawater instead.

  DLP- Well, as you know, that's definitely a losing proposition that uses
  more energy than it makes available. Now, Iceland has practically
  infinite reserves of geothermal energy, so it makes sense for them to
  get hydrogen from water. But not for the rest of us.

  DW- How about producing hydrogen in Iceland for the rest of the world?

  DLP- A big problem with hydrogen is that it's not cost-effective to
  transport it. To liquefy or even compress it requires a significant
  fraction of the energy it contains. Ultimately we'll probably go to
  some solid form.

  DW- You don't mean freezing it?!
   
  DLP- No! I mean chemically bonding it with solids, such as adsorption
  on carbon [?]. [I didn't understand what he said on this. But I added,
  "Something like gas hydrates?" And he replied, "Yes."]

  Hydrogen economy

  One of the interesting things that I have noticed about the oil/gas
  depletion discussion is that the oil/gas industry tends to paint a rosy
  picture of the fossil fuel situation while environmentalists tend to
  paint a rosy picture of alternative fuels. Neither group seems to be
  much concerned about how much longer economical supplies of oil and gas
  will be available. Politicians tend to take the best of both worlds and
  tell their constituents all is well,one way or the other-either oil and
  gas will be plentiful or alternative fuels will take over with little
  disruption. Whereas much of the hardcore scientific community has
  concerns about both the fossil fuel and alternative fuel situation,
  concluding that we are in for some tough times in the near future..

  Glenn has already responded to the oil and gas part of the discussion
  with your friend, the ChevronTexaco executive. He knows a lot more
  about that than I do, and what he says agrees with most of what I have
  read.

  Let me convey a bit of information I have come across about the hydrogen
  situation. There is a well crafted paper about the hydrogen economy at

  http://www.dotynmr.com/EnergyFuture1.pdf

  It is the most thorough and detailed report about hydrogen that I have
  read. It seems like a respectable paper to me.

  David Doty basically claims that he does not see a significant shift to
  a hydrogen economy soon, if ever. He writes that although fuel cells
  have been around for 40 years, their cost has not decreased as much as
  would be expected if new technologies were successful. There is a
  further question of the purity of the hydrogen gas (LH2) that will be
  required to have a fuel cell last long enough to be economical. Amory
  Lovins, a environmental advocate of the hydrogen economy, seems to
  think 98.5% pure hydrogen will suffice, but Doty thinks it may require
  99.999% purity--obviously affecting the price of the LH2 to the
  consumer. There is also a question of safety as well. How safe is a
  cannister of LH2 in an accident, what sort of containment is required
  and at what cost. Doty claims that we are nowhere near designing an
  economical container for an automobile that will meet accepatable safety
  standards. In addition we have no good economical source of hydrogen gas
  at present, especially methane does not seem a viable source thse days.

  Doty thinks that biodiesel is likely to be a more practical than
  hydrogen at any time in the near future.

  Al
   
   

   
Received on Mon Dec 8 03:32:42 2003