It is true right now because there are no other sources large sources in production.
Applied to the future the statement is not true. There are several possible replacements for oil including: several other types of fossil fuels including synthetic oil made from coal and natural gas, biofuels including: Ethanol made from corn, sugar beets or sugar cane, Ethanol made from cellulose, Butanol made from sugar or cellulose, and biodiesel made from vegetable oil, and finally Hydrogen made from natural gas or from electrolysis of water.
There are limits on how much of each of these types of fuels could be made. Also there are infrastructure issues posed by both hydrogen and natural gas because both are gasses the current fuel distribution system would have to be rebuilt.
Of these the one that could be made as a simple and direct replacement of in the same quantities we now use oil is synthetic oil made from coal. It would require many production facilities to be built and the process releases far more CO2 than even burning oil. The CO2 problem is so bad that synthetic oil is a very poor replacement for oil. Nevertheless it will probably be made in large quantities as we run low on oil as a transition fuel.
The biofuel sources have a lot to offer in that potentially they make no net contribution to CO2, and also the current fuel distribution infrastructure can be used, but there are limits to how many plants can be grown and therefore how much bio fuel it is possible to make. Current estimates are the bio fuel can only be made in quantities of about half as much as the oil we currently consume. This may be acceptable though if we introduce technologies that make more efficient use of fuel. Hybrid cars are a great example. Hybrids can be made to get about 10X better mileage than current passenger cars. Liquid fuels are best used for transportation and so if we limited non-transportation used of biofuels and employed hybrids we can make enough biofuel to power all of our transportation needs.
Natural gas may also be running out soon so any solution that relies on natural gas is questionable. Natural gas does reduce but not eliminate CO2 emissions.
Hydrogen is not currently a very good alternative because there are a number of technological problems that have not been solved yet including, storage of hydrogen, inexpensive fuel cells, and economical way to generate hydrogen.
The best alternative in my opinion is biofuel combined with hybrid technology. It could be implemented in about 20 year, by which time we could get about half our transportation fuel in this way. The great thing about bio fuels is that they can be blended with conventional gasoline or diesel fuel so the transition from fossil fuels to renewable fuels could be implemented gradually and seamlessly as production of bio fuels grows.
There are a number of companies that are in the process of building new biofuel production facilities, most of which will be initially based on corn ethanol because that is the best developed technology in the United States. Brazil is now making a large amount of sugar cane based ethanol and claim to be completely energy self sufficient now as a result.
2006-07-08 12:00:11
·
answer #1
·
answered by Engineer 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
The word "oil" is too vague - as a fuel it's days are certainly numbered, and eventually the amount that is burned throughout the world will be minimal. At some stage in the not so distant future the crude oil derivatives will be reserved for military use only for the purposes of national security. By then advancements in steam power, solar power, wind power and hydrogen engines will have replaced all petrol-driven public-use transport, and any lubricants that are needed for these will be vegetable-based - but I wouldn't worry too much - the chances of the world surviving that long without a major catastrophe are pretty slim, war, nuclear meltdown, pandemic disease, global warming, asteroid strike etc.- good times ahead, heh?
2006-07-08 17:51:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are alternatives to oil as a power source for personal transport - eg electric vehicles are far more efficient, and much more pleasent driving experience too.
The problems come from trying to meet current and increasing demand for all the other uses for oil from the current energy input to this planet, ie sunlight.
Oil, and other fossil fuel, is the stored sunlight energy from millions of years of plant growth. We have used most of the easily recoverable reserves in a few hundred years.
Trying to provide fuel, agrochemicals, plastics, paints and other coatings, pharmacuticals ...
and still have enough fertile land left to grow enough food, paper, fabric, timber - well I don't think the sums add up.
So there are alternatives to oil, but not ones that would support the current human population and its consumerist lifestyle
2006-07-09 11:42:48
·
answer #3
·
answered by fred 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
The only really accurate statement is that there really is no alternative to the sun. The sun is a nuclear reactor, by photosynthesis created coal and oil millions of years ago, by photosynthesis now helps consume CO2 and generate O2. Gives warmth, rain, the weather, etc, etc. Causes the winds and hence wind farms.
We only have the sun really. Think long and hard about it
2006-07-12 17:11:50
·
answer #4
·
answered by andyoptic 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well unless we all want to do without a lot of things it's true. people always think only of gasoline when they say we need an alternative to oil. But a lot of other things are made with oil and oil byproducts. Isn't plastic a byproduct of oil polymers or such. If it is what will they make the bumpers on your hybrid cars from. Hell most of your car is plastic. ANd what will you lubricate the bearings and motors with butter?
2006-07-10 03:46:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Helium-3 could be an alternative, which is a non-radioactive isotope of helium. Its very abundant on the Moon which is partly why China is looking to land on the moon by 2024 to start mining for it. In addition Nanotechnology if it shakes out, will provide near perfect super-conductors which will mean a massive reduction in wasted electricity in the "delivery" phase from the power station to your home and over massive distances, so you could have solar generators in the desert that could generate the power for Europe, US etc..
Finally there is a growing push in Europe to make it easier to install solar panels on your house and your own wind turbine, (changes to planning laws) which will give localised power and therefore less waste and less reliance on Oil.
Therefore yes, I think over the next 20yrs oil will become less important, but I dont think it will ever be 100% replaceable.
2006-07-11 07:19:31
·
answer #6
·
answered by Charles P 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
For the structure of the internal combustion engine, and the costs of producing fuel, then no, there's no clear alternative. However, there WILL be an alternative source of energy found eventually that will rival oil/gasoline in performance, ease of production and price.
2006-07-08 17:18:32
·
answer #7
·
answered by Eric C 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
At the moment, mostly true. It's possible to reduce oil consumption on an individual basis, but even as the president tells us about alternative fuels for powering the country, he's still hell bent on getting us to use as much oil as possible. It's one of those big lies that presidents tell.
2006-07-08 17:18:14
·
answer #8
·
answered by ratboy 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Everybody thinks of oil in terms of burning it. I've heard it said that petroleum is far too valuable to be burned. There are so many petrochemicals that are produced from oil for which there is currently no substitute that at least for now, there is no alternative for oil.
Has anyone seen a corn based substitute for asphalt, PVC, or benzene?
2006-07-08 17:48:06
·
answer #9
·
answered by rt11guru 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Not very true. At the moment there is no economical alternative. That does not mean that we can't change our economy over time to take care of this.
2006-07-08 18:10:12
·
answer #10
·
answered by bunja2 3
·
0⤊
0⤋