"Carl Alex Friis Nielsen" <cafn@get2net.dk> skrev i en meddelelse news:9uvvg.24$Xj6.10@news.get2net.dk...
> Nævn bare een ting man kan bruge olie eller gas til, som man ikke
> kan få ud af kul - bare een.
Jeg syntes at du misser pointen, det handler ikke om en erstatning for olie men prisen på den.
Canada har mere olie ind Saudi Arabien, men det er bundet til sand, og kræver
en masse energi og vand for at blive udnyttet. Nu da prisen er paseret 60$ tønden, så kan
det betale sig at starte produktionen op. Men flowet er peanuts i forhold til bare at pumpe det op
som Saudi.
Jeg går ud fra, at når prisen på en tønde oile stiger så meget at det kan betale sig at
producere oile fra kul, så vil vi se sådanne anlæg blive bygget. Men hvor høj skal prisen
på en tønde olie være før det sker ? og hvor meget kan de finansielle markeder holde til.
Men den nuværende stigning i kul forbruget på 2.8% så har USA kul nok til 80år.
Hvis kul så også skal til at erstatte olien, så går nok rigtigt stærkt.
Jan Rasmussen
http://www.globalpublicmedia.com/lectures/461
Well in the energy crisis about thirty years ago we saw ads such as this (shows slide) This is from the American Electric Power
Company, it's a bit reassuring, sort of saying, now don't worry to much because we're sitting on half of the worlds known supply of
coal enough for over 500 years. Where did that 500 year figure come from? It may have had its origin in this report to the committee
on Interior and Insular Affairs of the United States Senate, because in that report we find this sentence "at current levels of
output***** (27.23) these American coal reserves can be expected to last more than 500 years"
This is one of the most dangerous statements in the literature. It's dangerous because its true, it isn't the truth that makes it
dangerous, the danger lies in the fact that people take the sentence apart, they just say coal will last 500 years. They forget the
caveat with which the sentence started. Now what were those opening words, "at current levels", what does that mean? That means if,
and only if we maintain zero growth of coal production.
So let's look at a few numbers. We go to the annual energy review, published by the dept of energy (DOE). They give this as a coal
demonstrated reserve base in the United States, it has a footnote that says about half the demonstrated reserve base is estimated to
be recoverable. You can not recover and get out of the ground and use 100% of the coal that's there. So this number then, is ½ of
this number. We will come back again to those in just a moment. The report also tells us that in 1971 we were mining coal at this
rate, twenty years later its at this rate, put those numbers together and the average growth rate of coal production in that twenty
years is 2.86% per year. And so we have to ask, well, how long would a reserve last if you have steady growth in the rate of
consumption until the last bit of it is used.
I'll show you the equation here for the expiration time. I'll tell you it takes first year college calculus to derive that equation,
so it can't be very difficult. You know I have a feeling there must be dozens of people in this country who've had first year
college calculus, but let me suggest, I think that equation is probably the best kept scientific secret of the century!
Now let me show you why, if you used that equation to calculate the life expectancy of the reserve base, or the one half they think
is recoverable for different steady rates of growth, you'll find if the growth rate is zero, the small estimate would go about 240
years and the large one would go close to 500 years. So that report to the congress was correct. But look what we get if we plug in
steady growth. Back in the 1960's it was our national goal to achieve growth of coal production up around 8% per year. If you could
achieve that and continue it, coal would last between 37 - 46 years. President Carter cut that goal roughly in half, hoping to reach
4% per year if that could continue coal would last between 59-75 years. Here's that 2.86%, the average for the recent period of
twenty years, if that could continue coal would last between 72-94 years. That's within the life expectancy of children born today.
The only way you are going to get any where near this wild quote, this 500 year figure, is to be able to simultaneously do two
highly improbable things.
Number one, you got to figure out how to use 100% of the coal that is in the ground. Number two, you got to figure out how to have
500 years of zero growth of coal production. Look at those figures, those are facts.
Back in the 1970's there was great national concern about energy. But these concerns disappeared in the 80's, now the concerns about
energy in the 70's prompted experts, journalists, and scientist to assure the American people that there was no reason to be
concerned. So let's go back now and look at some of those assurances from the 70's so we can see what to expect now that the energy
crisis is returning.
Here is the director of the energy division of the Oakridge National laboratory telling us how expensive it is to import oil,
telling us we must have big increases and rapid growth in our use of coal. Under these conditions, he estimates America's coal
reserves were so huge they can last a minimum of three years, probably a maximum of a thousand years. You've just seen the facts,
now you see what an expert tells us and what can you conclude? There was a three hour television special on CBS on energy, the
reporter said; by the lowest estimate we have enough coal for 200 years, by the highest, enough for more than a thousand years.
You've just seen the facts now you can see what a journalist tells us after careful study, and what can you conclude?
In the journal of Chemical education, on the page for high school chemistry teachers in an article by the scientific staff of the
journal, they tell us our proven coal reserves are enormous and they give a figure. These can satisfy present US energy needs for
nearly a thousand years. Well, let's do long division. You take the coal they say is there and divide by what was then the current
rate of consumption, you get 180 years. Now they didn't say, current rate of consumption, they said present US energy needs. Coal
today supplies about one fifth, about 20% of the energy we use in this country, so if you'd like to calculate how long this quantity
of coal can satisfy present US energy needs, you have to multiply this denomination by five. When you do that you get thirty six
years. They said nearly a thousand years. Newsweek magazine, in a cover story on energy, said, at present rates of consumption we
have enough coal for 666.5 years, the point 5 means they think it will run out in July instead of January. (audience laughter)