Is an oil free economy achievable?

Answer 1

No, nor would one be desirable.

It is theoretically possible to transition to an economy where oil was not used to generate energy, though some alternative form of energy would need to be perfected before this could happen. As petroleum products are currently some of the most energy-dense chemicals of which we are aware, this is difficult, if not downright unlikely. If you're going to be burning something as a source of energy, there is no more efficient fuel than petroleum products. There just isn't.

Alternative energy would have to involve getting energy without burning anything, but this has its drawbacks.

Hydro-energy is clean - as long as you don't count the construction of dams and flooding of valleys as environmental damage - but you can't take it with you and it costs a lot to get started.

Wind energy isn't that plentiful - air isn't particularly dense and thus can't transmit all that much energy - and the ramifications of setting up large-scale wind farms have yet to be determined. Birds certainly don't like 'em.

Nuclear energy has the potential to provide energy on a scale that we need, but the thought of producing a few million nuclear reactors to power personal transportation gives most people the heebie-jeebies. One accident could conceivably contaminate a city block for decades.

But more to the point, we don't *want* to be an oil free economy. Plastics are made from oil. Medicines are made from oil. We pave our streets with oil. It's everywhere. Granted, energy is the single largest use and constitutes most of the petroleum used every year, but even if we found a substitute energy source tomorrow, we'd still need large quantities of oil.

Answer 2

Yes, an alternative to consider is that we could switch to gatorade for energy but a gallon of gatorade is like $5 a gallon as opposed to $3 for gasoline. Seriously though, oil is a cheap source of energy all around. Most alternatives suchas ethanol or hydrogen are possible but simply not cost effective.

An oil free economy will some day be achievable but thats not the problem. Say for instance we could produce usable energy from gatorade it could still have potential to cause environmental harm that we are unaware of to date and who's to say it would be cheaper. These are the two complaints about oil it seems. The best thing to do if we want a new energy source other then oil is to allow the price to increase making it viable for alternatives to competitively be produced. As the price of oil increases this raises the incintive for alternative fuels. The problem really is that we all want cheaper and cleaner at the same time. Its a slow process.

I use the example of gatorade because, one, I find it slightly humorous, two, a gallon of gatorade is more expensive then gasoline but no one complains about it because they don't consume 20 gallons of gatorade a week. We continue to complain about the price of oil and gas but for its use it is relatively cheap.

Answer 3

Of course it is. Oil and the extensive use of oil are relatively recent in terms of Economic History. Besides, there are many more types of oil than crude oil which can be substituted.

It is just that we have come to rely on oil so much that we find it difficult to imagine life without oil.

Imagine a world where nobody at all had to travel to a place of work! That would reduce the amount of oil consumed enormously.

Also image a world where public transport was free for everybody in inner cities. That too would reduce oil consumption and increase the happiness factor for the average commuter.

Answer 4

Absolutely not! There is too much money tied into everything that we in do this world that virtually every giant global company will not play allow it to change. Case in point every car manufacture claims to be working on alternative fuels and systems but the truth is if they wanted to change it would happen already. The reason that they don't is because it it will cost way too much and affect their bottom line and they wont take any chances. Sure they have hybrid systems but that's all nothing but a small patch to a gigantic problem.Hydrogen is noting more that a fantasy to give people hope. To believe in anything that has nothing to do with global corporate business is like believing in Santa Clause. Don't believe the hype. Do you think any company or industry wants to loose a multi-trillion dollar business? Don't try to rebuttal by saying that they can still make money by finding other sources of fuel. Yea easy for any one to say they can do this and they can do that. They, they , they. They will not. You and I will never see the day.This is at such a huge scale that's it is far beyond the average person to truly understand there is NO WAY OUT. Don't shoot the the messenger.

Answer 5

Of course, but it will take adaptation and be relatively expensive unless the next great technological power advance comes along. Don't forget before the Pa. oil boom whale oil was thought to be the best way to keep the lamps burning, how much do you miss that now? Chances are that by the time we are getting less and less oil rather than still finding more as at present, nuclear fusion reaction could become sustainable and give us the power of the sun from a few gallons of Ocean water.

Answer 6

Maybe it's "achievable," but it is not desireable at the moment. Oil is a good and beneficial commodity - its positives far outweigh its negatives.

Anyway, If the USA stopped buying oil from the Middle East today, THEN you'd hear screaming from Arabs and see a rise in terrorism. The economies of the Middle East depend on oil, and they would collapse if we stopped buying their oil.

Personally, I think we should increase our domestic sources of oil (ANWR, more drilling off the coasts, drilling in the west). The Muslim fundamentalists claim to want to live in a society free of influence from the USA and the West. Fine, let's give them what they want - a 12th century society. They would have no need for oil then. They are hypocrites, though.

Answer 7

Perhaps we should ask the right question. What would happen if tomorrow we could no longer import oil from foreign countries? We would probably shift to coal. At least the power companies and other big users of energy would shift to coal. It is the cheapest form of enetgy we have, environmentalists be damned. Also, you can be assured that Canada and the US would agree to allow a pipeline from Alaska for natural gas. As the price of gasoline rose, people would drastically cut back on driving. Massive investments in mass transit would result. Use your imagination.

Answer 8

No. Putting the energy question aside, oil is used for so many other things in particularly lubricants and plastics. Every manufacturing plant in this country depends on oil for lubrication. No lubrication no product. Most plastic products used to be made from wood (paper). Get rid of plastic and we'll be back to chopping down trees. No trees no oxygen. Bottom line: pick your poison.

Answer 9

Dear Jack
What u said i can divide it in two catagories please don't mind.

Right:


Maybe it's "achievable," but it is not desireable at the moment. Oil is a good and beneficial commodity - its positives far outweigh its negatives.

Anyway, If the USA stopped buying oil from the Middle East today, THEN you'd hear screaming from Arabs and see a rise in terrorism. The economies of the Middle East depend on oil, and they would collapse if we stopped buying their oil.
Personally, I think we should increase our domestic sources of oil (ANWR, more drilling off the coasts, drilling in the west).

REASONS:

No doubt US is the largest buyer of oil from Arab world. If US stopped buying oil from them both parties will suffer. US economy will stop growing rapidly. and Arabs will suffer ecnomically . That why US invaded Iraq and Afghanistan. To meet their requirements for Oil. And Iran is one of the major exporter of oil. ofcouse poverty is the root cause of terrorism. if people die with hunger, and their rights are not given they try to snatch them from others that is the major reason which is USA and Western world is not considering. That is duty of people like us to present the true picture, try to understand the facts. please don't mind this.



Worng:-

The Muslim fundamentalists claim to want to live in a society free of influence from the USA and the West. Fine, let's give them what they want - a 12th century society. They would have no need for oil then. They are hypocrites, though.

REASONS:

Ofcourse no one has the right to interfere in the routines of other than why should USA and West tries to control the governments and resources of Muslim countries. And we don't want to be in 12 th century although it was the golden period for the Muslims and the area under Muslim rulers. Can u give any example of unjustice in the rulership of MUHAMMAD (PBUH), ABU BAKAR (1st Caliph), UMAR FAROOQ (2nd Caliph). Please read the history of Muslims first and then pass comments.

Thanks and Best Regards

Answer 10

Yes, but not cheaply. Power stations and heaters designed to burn oil will have to be converted to natural gas or coal or replaced. Share of electricity generated by nuclear power plants can be increased as well (with all additional risks it brings). Gasoline can be made from coal or natural gas as well, but at the present level of technology, it will cost north of $3 at the pump regardless of oil price (the bulk of the cost will be processing).

One area where oil will be very difficult to replace is rubber and plastics...