English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

i didnt knowe what to class this under

2006-09-07 07:20:40 · 34 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics Geography

34 answers

Probably better under "Earth Sciences and Geology", but it works here as well.

As to your question, even without the big discovery announced in the Gulf of Mexico, the world is in no danger of running out of oil.

As oil becomes more scarce, the price increases and that encourages companies and countries to look for oil in places that were too expensive before. That is what is happening in the Gulf of Mexico.

When oil was $30 per barrell it was not possible to justify the expense of drilling a 20,000' well in 7,000' of water, but with oil over $60 per barrell, this is possible. Unless a company can make money, they aren't going to do anything.

Speaking of how much oil costs (and how much we are paying for gasoline): People will pay $1-2 for a bottle of "spring" water which equates to about $8 per gallon, but complain about $2-3 per gallon of gasoline. A can of Coke or Pepsi product equates to about $6 per gallon. So what's the gripe? It's politically motivated and because the prices are posted where one can see the changes.

2006-09-07 16:57:47 · answer #1 · answered by idiot detector 6 · 0 0

How do we know that all the oil that will be discovered has been discovered?
We don’t know that all the oil that will be discovered has been discovered, and this is a somewhat controversial subject. But we do know that the peak in oil discovery occurred decades ago. The rate at which we’ve been discovering new oil has been declining for decades. That’s one of the arguments that the peak in oil supply must be coming soon because the supply curve follows the discovery curve by a few decades. The United States Geological Survey conducted an exhaustive study between 1995 and 2000 and gave out a statistical output in which they said that the amount of oil that we started with, we could be 95 percent certain, was at least 2 trillion barrels. But they also thought there was a 50 percent chance that there was 2.7 trillion barrels. The difference between those two is 700 billion barrels of oil—that’s the entire reserves of the Middle East. They were predicting discovering the Middle East all over again. That’s pretty implausible. But if you really did add 700 billion barrels to the world’s oil supply, it would delay the peak by about a decade. So we’re not talking about really something that does away with the problem

2006-09-07 07:46:40 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Well u want live long enough. The system that everybody wants to fix is doing exactly what it should.The burning of all materials creates large amounts of CO2, The environmentalist think it is terrible. Go and measure the CO2 what u get?? U will find that there is 1 to 2 parts per million CO2 which is nothing. Where did it all go?? the other half of the recycle system is the green plants. Now when the plants absorbed the CO2 out it produces oxygen for us. the plants on the other side grow more abundant and produce more fissile fuels. Consider that we are on a spacecraft and it has all kinds of recycle systems on it and have been recycling everything for millions of years,and u think u can do better.

2006-09-07 07:34:16 · answer #3 · answered by JOHNNIE B 7 · 0 0

Technology already exists to manufacture electric cars and to produce electricity with nuclear or renewable energy.

Oil is still being used because governments make shed loads of cash from it. Once the oil runs out, this technology will be used and we'll continue having electricity and cars. All that will happen is the oil giants will run out of money.

2006-09-07 07:46:57 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

We've never completely used up ANY natural resource...not one. It seems we ingenius humans always figure out something better long before that happens.

Who knew we were that smart and adapatable??Oh, oh, oh...I know!!! The cavepeople that survived the last ice age!

Get a grip people, the world changes all the time and humans adapt very well. Of course, given the large number of brainwashed and apparently helpless morons now in our midst, maybe we should be worried.

2006-09-07 13:58:57 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

That is A LONG time off. I doubt they have found some of the biggest oil fields of the world. And by then... there will be alternative and better sources of fuel

2006-09-07 09:15:59 · answer #6 · answered by j H 6 · 0 0

Well since I will be dead by that time I don't think I will be doing anything. As for people living on the Earth at that time, I like to believe they will have developed new energy sources by then. If not, then I guess they are going to do without electricity, plastic, and gas powered transportation.

2006-09-07 07:27:33 · answer #7 · answered by Bryan 7 · 0 0

Live on dubya's ranch in Crawford? LMAO

The US will be second class to China and India by then. We will follow their lead. I believe it will be a combination of nuclear and fuel-cell.

Solar & wind alternatives will be effective in some regions where the climate and terrain are conducive to such technologies.

But the majority will be need to be provided by stored energy based systems such as fuel-cell technologies or non-fossil fuel energy creation systems such as nuclear fusion and/or fission.

2006-09-07 07:28:58 · answer #8 · answered by IknowNothing 2 · 0 0

Try Science- other.
Initially as usual the lower classes will suffer.

2006-09-09 03:47:11 · answer #9 · answered by NEIL C 2 · 0 0

Horse power? Candle power? Eat food in season? Get dirty and eat more healthily? Stay fit because we have to dig our own patches? The possibilities are limitless and most of them seem attractive.

2006-09-09 05:24:58 · answer #10 · answered by cymry3jones 7 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers