How to replace the petroleum energy supply

Your video is fake and many people are working hard to solve the energy problem. I'm one of them and I work with a highly dedicated and brilliant team.

Nothing you've posted here is true. Not one word. You don't even know what amps and current are so you are in no position lecture others.

 

Just gotta say, I like you. Welcome to the board.

 

How many volts and amps are standard US neighborhood transmission lines?

I already know the answer, let's see if you do.

 

It depends on the area. But typically they run 13.8 KV at about 700 amps. The primary lines are usually 115 KV.

Now explain to me the role of the phase angle and AC transmission. Also, what is the radiated power and how is it minimized?

 

You're not from America, huh? No. That may have been your first Googled answer, but you didn't read far enough to realize that's in Europe.

 

Yes, I googled that answer. So did you. I could have walked outside and looked but it was dark.

What are the answer to my questions - real engineering questions. And put the answers into common language.

I'm quite sure you don't even understand the questions. So explain those first.

 

The question is, "How to replace the petroleum energy supply"...?

Here would be a great place for the Biden regime to start: STOP DRAINING OUR STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE AND SELLING ANY OF IT TO FOREIGN COUNTRIES!

To begin doing anything 'smart', first, you have to stop doing things that are STOOPID!






search recall marker

 

I don't understand what that has to do with the topic. It is just a political rant that isn't even correct.

 

Oh... so, replacing "the petroleum energy supply" in your mind is limited to developing other energy-producing technologies? I suppose I'm being too practical, even though like many, I'm interested in new technologies ranging from hydrogen fusion to spray-painted solar panels!

But first (FIRST) we must stop being stupid, short-sighted, and suicidal! We have to stop draining-off the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to create the election-year 'feel-good' narrative that the Biden regime has done a 'magic trick' to reduce gasoline prices 'at-the-pump', while at the same time this country is selling it off to foreign countries! In a Democrat's mind, if this gimmick helps to keep to them from losing their asses in November, it's all worth it!










search recall marker

 

Once some company buys this oil, they get to choose what to do with it, don't they?

The whole idea here was to put downward pressure on the price of oil in the US. Congress had already decided to sell oil from the "strategic reserve". Biden just increased the amount, implementing a plan that will replenish the "strategic reserve".

More than 2/3 of petroleum goes to transportation. Almost zero goes to electric generation.

That would seem to be a strong indication that the only real way to "replace the petroleum energy supply" would have to target transportation.

For example, there just isn't enough oil used in home heating to justify trying to encourage people to change the way they heat their homes.

 

Yeah, but the SPR specifically is supposed to be for real national emergencies, not for political 'grandstanding' in the months before national elections.

Companies buy and sell in petrochemical commodities markets all the time, and that's OK -- but the Strategic Petroleum Reserve should not get dragged into any of this unless there is a genuine emergency!









search recall marker

 

We're not living in an age when petroleum is going to be cut off from the USA by foreign intervention.

That time has passed.

Today, we export more oil than we import. While that doesn't answer the details of the various grades of oil and the amount of gas and other petroleum products we export, it does show that we are far from being in dire circumstances regarding access to petroleum.

If we're worried about oil, we could widen that gap by answering the question posed in the OP.

That would be a far strong step in defense than holding more petroleum in reserve.

Plus, the rising cost of gas IS a serious issue in America.

 

That, like the hockey stick, is completely inaccurate in the real world of insanity perpetrated in Sacramento.

 

(*Sigh!*) No, we aren't "living in an age when (oil) is going to be cut off from the USA by foreign intervention" -- primarily because when America WAS 'great', we drilled our own oil, refined it, stored it, and sold it for our overall mutual benefit! But "foreign intervention" is by no means all we should take into account, Will. There's events like earthquakes, hurricanes, other destructive storms, bizarre heat and cold weather spells, too, that can last a long time. And, now that our economy is do damnably intertwined with those of other countries, then when there's large conflicts going on, that, too, affects our national well-being.

And, in any event, barring some kind of real catastrophe that affects some or all of our nation, there is no excuse whatsoever for pillaging the Strategic Petroleum Reserve! And, IMHO, providing artificially-manipulated gasoline prices temporarily so that somebody can gas-up the family SUV to go get in a miles-long line to have free food loaded into it is not (NOT) a good reason to raid the SPR!

. "And remember to vote for Democrats in November!"






search recall marker

 

What kind of event are you talking about? Do you have an example that has happened within human history?

The use of a fraction of the reserve is on a temporary basis with the reserve then being replenished.

Do you believe this catastrophe you mention will happen during that time period?

The reserve currently has ~20 days of full oil supply for the USA.

It was created as a way to avoid the embargo that occurred in ~1975. But, at that time we depended on oil imports. Today, we are a net oil exporter. We also export gas and other fossil fuel products. So, an embargo against the USA would undoubtedly add expense due to general disruption, but it wouldn't be similar to the situation in 1975.

As in 1975, the reserve can't affect the availability of electricity, as almost zero oil or oil products are used to create or distribute electricity.

Again, I think you need to be more specific concerning what you fear could happen.

 

Besides, Biden needed to do something about rising gas prices, at least before the midterms.

 

The fact is that any production of renewable energy is limited by the power received from the sun per 1 square meter of surface. Hydro, wind, and tidal stations are powerful because they collect energy from many square kilometers. To make biodiesel through algae, you need to occupy huge territories for farms.

 

Wow - what a vacuous and snide remark.

Do you see ANY legitimate reason that ANY leader might do something to meet the needs of the people he governs?

Or, are you just hating the fact that we have a government?

 

Analysis of various methods can not be based on whether they scale to produce the total demand. Our system is always going to be a hybrid. Today, we have hydroelectric, oil, and nuclear plants that are low percentage contributors, but they are still profitable and worth while.

For example, technology is at a stage where solar is profitable. And, we do have a large amount of surface area of building structures that is unused for any other purpose. Obviously, that's not an endless supply, but we would be in better shape with homes creating all their own electricity and other buildings also contributing. This would reduce the load on the grid, too.

Let's remember that the after work 4:00pm bulge in electricity consumption in large regions of the USA is caused by home use - cooling, cooking, hot water, etc.

In CA there is a system where citizens can allocate a portion of their battery backup to the grid to reduce emergencies - getting paid at above standard rate for that contribution. That's a win for the public, as emergency power is always significantly more expensive.

Again, we need to do a better job of analysis than to write off sources on the grounds that they can't power America by themselves.

 

No. Specifically I can't stand that vapid mess Joe Biden and his inherent corruption.

 

But, you seem unable to identify what it is that you have to complain about.

 

Starting with the incredibly bungled Afghanistan pull out and moving forward- inflation, gas prices, inflation, war with Russia (anyone else see where the Nordstream pipelines appear to have been sabotaged- like Biden promised), inflation, the full on collapse of the real estate market, inflation- I mean, seriously, what has that senile idiot done right?

 

Claiming that inflation is Biden's fault is just plain flat out BS.

There are real reasons for the inflation we see, and they are being felt by other countries, too.

Plus, your comment on gas prices is equally nutty. Biden doesn't control gas prices. The reason for price increases has to do with the world market price for oil and the problems with petro industries in finding the products they need.

Your real estate claim is equally nutty, as Biden does not control real estate.

You need to think through your claims FAR better than that.

 

No I don't. Not when the opposition is you.

 

What is it that you don't do?