Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations KootK on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

What will the price of crude bring next....shale oil? 2

Status
Not open for further replies.

jmw

Industrial
Jun 27, 2001
7,435
The EIS (Energy Information Service) advises (what we already know) that while it took a long time to break the $100 a barrel target, the £200 a barrel barrier won't be long following.

What I wonder is what new changes the rising price of crude will bring and what the critical values are.
For example, Shale oil: when does the price make it too attractive not to exploit on a major scale?

Back in 2006 when crude was $40 a barrel someone asked whether shale oil would ever be viable. ((
Shale oil is profitable in some processes at $30 a barrel. The USA has some of the largest deposits of shale oil in the Green River deposits. This means that it is increasingly attractive as a means to recover energy self-sufficiency.

The downside is environmental.

One thing I anticipate is that truth is going to take a further hit and there will be some shifts in the Environmental Propaganda war which already obscures the truth to a remarkable degree.

One might argue that there is a vested interest in energy self-sufficiency that means that the USA, for example, could find it expedient to exploit its Green River deposits.
To that end, the Anthropogenic Global Warming fanciers might find themselves a embarrassment, Al Gore could end up in Quantanamo Bay..... (I'll go along with that).

Of course, this also means putting a lot of support behind the ideas that temperatures have fallen and been falling for the last 10 years and disproving the claimed causal link between CO2 rises and a consequence temperature rise (Shale oil production releases a lot of CO2).

On the other hand, the environmental issues are a handy tool with which to attack the western economies which means that the environmentalist groups could become more obviously under the control of the anarchists.

The interesting question then isn't simply shale oil, but what are the critical price levels for other changes, innovations etc and what are those innovations or major changes we can expect?

JMW
 
Replies continue below

Recommended for you

The point you make about the forklifts just reinforces my question of why they aren't pushed more in places with polution problems.

I guess my point, and one I think Greg or someone has implicitly made before is that Natural Gas can be used in vehicles relatively easily. Not as easy as diesel or gasoline and the infrastructure for vehicle use isn't anywhere near as developed but from a basic technological point of view no giant leaps, unlike some of the work required to make electric vehicles or hydrogen vehicles work which seem to be the flavour of government etc.

Instead of using it for fixed power generation we could use it in vehicles. We could replace it in fixed power by wind, solar, wave, nuclear, coal... There are lots of potential options for fixed power but currently for vehicles the options are limited so why are we using the NG for fixed power?

I know a lot of it has to do with hitting certain polution targets for fixed power etc but if we were sensible about looking at where pollution is emitted V where it causes problems etc it would make more sense to me to use the NG in vehicles and just use cleaner technologies on coal power and the other fixed options.

Rant over.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
 
good point Kenat.

=====================================
Eng-tips forums: The best place on the web for engineering discussions.
 
The Oil & Gas company that I used to work for had a fleet of CNG (compressed natural gas) trucks in the early 90's. These gutless pig vehicles couldn't climb a hill on the highway without shifting the differential into low range. They couldn't climb a hill on a dirt road at all. Even at 3,000 psig there just wasn't enough specific energy in the fuel to allow the trucks to perform anywhere close to their design.

I'm sure that with some work on timing, valves, and fuel delivery the fuel could have been made to work, but after 1 million fleet miles (and twice that many complaints) in three years, the systems were pulled from the trucks.

A gathering company in this area tried a test with LNG at the same time. We were hearing that the fuel had many fewer performance issues, but after a couple of years those vehicles left the fleets as well. I never heard what that issue was.

So far natural gas hasn't made the cut to compete with liquid fuels for motor transport.

David
 
Looks like that idea is taking root a few places (but I haven't heard of it)

Suggested price only around $25,000 for that Honda.

It was mentioned in one of the links that it would be easy to install a fixture in your home to fuel up these vehicles (assuming you have natural gas piped to your home for heat). So this one is not dependent upon building an infrastructure for refueling (unless you want to travel far from home).

=====================================
Eng-tips forums: The best place on the web for engineering discussions.
 
Pressure at your home is a fraction of a psi. Pressure in a full CNG tank is 3,000 psig. At sea level you would need 200 compression ratios which is a 4 stage compressor. I just don't see the generic "Mom & Pop" successfully operating a 4 stage recip in their garage. After the first dozen blow up their house (or neighborhood), the government will probably take issue.

David
 
zdas, Honda were or are working on a home unit that you put in your garage that compresses a tanks worth of gas.


This is the one mentioned in Electric Petes Honda link.

I agree that the performance of vehicless/engines designed for conventional fuels and converted to NG or even LPG will generally not be favourable. However, an engine designed from the start to run on Compressed Natural Gas would I suspect be OK. Not sure how that linked Honda is.

I think I read somewhere that CNG may suit the diesel cycle as it favours high compression ratios but I can't remember the source.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
 
CNG is hard as franzh has explained in several posts over the years.

LPG is 'easy', in fact Ford of Australia makes LPG sedans on the production line which meet emissions and crash and so on.

Over here LPG sells for about 70 c per litre, as against 1.70 for gasoline (roughly). You use at most 30% more per km. You lose a bit on max power and torque.

Refuelling is a bit more technical than with a warm liquid fuel, but less smelly.

The suspicion is that the government will increase the tax on LPG when the user base is large enough.

You can also get aftermarket conversions, these probably would not pass emissions.


Cheers

Greg Locock

SIG:please see FAQ731-376 for tips on how to make the best use of Eng-Tips.
 
I don't doubt you on the tax Greg. The govt's gonna get their pound of flesh somewhere.

I can't help thinking of Corporal Jones truck on Dads Army, you know the episode where they're all in the back and stick their bayonets up through the roof, puncturing the gas bag above.

for those of you who have no idea what I'm on about.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
 
Greg,
that is exactly the attitude in the UK toward LPG (it is terrible thing not to be able to trust your government...) and I believe it is something the SMMT were moaning about at one time, that and why in the UK diesel was more expensive than petrol while in Europe it was the other way round, which is why they have substantially more diesel cars in Europe than the UK.

JMW
 
"There are lots of potential options for fixed power but currently for vehicles the options are limited so why are we using the NG for fixed power?"

You can have a multi-megawatt NG-fired gas turbine dropped on your lot (or just parked on its flatbed semi-trailer) in a week from today, and be generating the next day. Having a plant start generating income so quickly really makes investors salivate, and is not possible with any other fixed generation scheme. The longer it takes to get the plant generating, the more that plant has to produce (in the way of profit) to make the investment attractive...
 
Good point btrue, thanks, I hadn't really thought about that.

KENAT, probably the least qualified checker you'll ever meet...
 
Natural gas can be used for peaking, whereas many of the other types of electrical generation units are poor at load-following. That's another reason for their popularity.
 
Another factor for NG-fueled peaking units is that electrical peak normally occurs in the summer when NG demand is otherwise low. NG TOU rates generally reflect that.
 
The peak in the winter and valley in the summer for Natural Gas is really a thing of the past. With net reductions in storage every year for the last 25, people are buying gas for storage whenever price drops a nickle. The seasonality of the price/demand is pretty much gone these days.

David
 
This sound good, except what happens to everybody's AC when the wind quits in the summertime?


I guess we would develop massive storage facilities. I heard San Luis Reservoir is 90% efficient at storing energy. Anybody know anything about that?
 
Sometimes I think it's better to let people suffer with the problems they create.

Maybe if one of the state goverments builds a pumped hydro plant.
Oh wait that was proposed but deemed unfeasable because of the low cost of energy on the market.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor