Oil Theology

[SivartM]

Quote:

There is this black sticky substance that fuels our empire. That motivates us to go to war and have military bases all over the world. We feed off of it. We use this black sticky substance to supply our every need and desire. It energizes our greed and chokes out the life God made. This black sticky substance has even oozed into our religion and our theology; our thinking has become so black and sticky that we try and use the Bible to justify its use.

Our thinking has become so darkened that all we consider is ourselves. We have fallen into the hubris of pride and tell ourselves it is our God given duty. We believe that “God gave man the stewardship of the earth, to look after it and to use it for our enjoyment while living from its benefits. Plants, animals, fish, and fresh water. Minerals, such as coal, copper, gold, silver to make things and earn a living,” including that black sticky stuff.

http://www.jesusmanifesto.com/2010/06/oil-theology

[Bravus]

Well, if it's any consolation, at this point in time it's more like 'oil eschatology'.

[there buster]

Quote:

There is this black sticky substance that fuels our empire. That motivates us to go to war and have military bases all over the world. We feed off of it. We use this black sticky substance to supply our every need and desire. It energizes our greed and chokes out the life God made.

Obviously, we should go back to using whale oil as God intended.

[phkrause]

Obviously, we should go back to using whale oil as God intended.

LOL, you have to be, being sarcastic here.

If not, I want to see where you got that from!

pk

[bonnie]

Quote:

Obviously, we should go back to using whale oil as God intended.

Nope,that won't work either.Have to kill the whales first. That takes oil to power the whaling vessels,unless they use oars.

Windmills aren't a very good idea either.The noise they make has caused some people to leave their homes.Windmills kill thousands of birds every year.The oil slick only coats the birds and many with help can survive. After a bird is ground up there is little help available.

Solar is pretty ineffective,can't go nuclear.Obama promised to bankrupt the coal industry.

Wonder what they heat the White house with.

Not saying it can't be true but what was was fought over oil by the US.

To all those opposed to the sticky substance that is vital in so many area's have you lead the way in avoiding the use of it wherever possible?

A little research into that article and the author is interesting

[there buster]

Quote:

Quote:

There is this black sticky substance that fuels our empire. That motivates us to go to war and have military bases all over the world. We feed off of it. We use this black sticky substance to supply our every need and desire. It energizes our greed and chokes out the life God made.

LOL, you have to be, being sarcastic here.

If not, I want to see where you got that from!

The blog was typical of these fatuous rants. They never take into account what the realistic alternatives are. They dream of utopia, and whine that we have not created it.

Before petroleum, people used whale oil for such things as lighting. Kerosene replaced it, and thus saved many whales from extinction. It's marvelous to imagine a world with no trade-offs, but it doesn't exist. And clinging to such notions without being practical is childish.

No doubt we'll soon be treated to a sermon on 'idealism.' yawn.

[doug yowell]

Quote:

There is this black sticky substance that fuels our empire. That motivates us to go to war and have military bases all over the world. We feed off of it. We use this black sticky substance to supply our every need and desire. It energizes our greed and chokes out the life God made.

Motivates some of us to pack up our stuff and move to Beverly----------(Hills, that is)!

[Overaged]

Well, if it's any consolation, at this point in time it's more like 'oil eschatology'.

LOL, true.

[SivartM]

Yes, let's ignore the idea of inventing better options...

[bonnie]

Yes, let's ignore the idea of inventing better options...

What would you suggest? Who is being prevented from inventing better options?

Windmill energy is a joke. Solar has a very low percentage of providing much .Nuclear energy is not to be considered.Obama has threatened to bankrupt the coal industry.Electric cars are not very well received.Ethenol has backfired as most said it would.Hard on car engines,costly to produce,higher food costs as a result.

So what do you have in mind to replace oil?

[SivartM]

How are wind and solar energy jokes?

[karl]

Problems facing alternative energy sources

Solar:

Although silicon is the most abundant element in the Earth's crust after oxygen, it makes relatively inefficient cells. Efficient cells rely on much rarer materials than silicon.

Multiple-junction cells owe their performance to the rare metal indium, which is far from abundant. There are fewer than 10 indium-containing minerals, and none present in significant deposits – in total the metal accounts for a paltry 0.25 parts per million of the Earth's crust.

Most indium is used to manufacture LCD screens, an industry that has driven indium prices to $1000 per kilogram in recent years. Estimates that did NOT factor in an explosion in indium-containing solar panels reckon we have only a 10 year supply of it left.

If power from the Sun is to become a major source of electricity, solar panels would have to cover huge areas, making an alternative to indium essential.

Hydrogen:

The dream of the hydrogen economy faces similar challenges.

A cheap way to generate hydrogen has so far proved elusive. New approaches, such as using bacterial enzymes to "split" water, have a long way to go before they are commercially viable.

So far, fuel cells are still the most effective way to turn the gas into electricity. But these mostly rely on expensive platinum to catalyse the reaction.

The trouble is, platinum makes indium appear super-abundant. It is present in the Earth's crust at just 0.003 parts per billion and is priced in $ per gram, not per kilogram. Estimates say that, if the 500 million vehicles in use today were fitted with fuel cells, all the world's platinum would be exhausted within 15 years.

Unfortunately platinum-free fuel cells are still a long way from the test track. A nickel-catalysed fuel cell developed at Wuhan University, China, has a maximum output only around 10% of that a platinum catalyst can offer.

A new approach announced recently demonstrates that carbon nanotubes could be more effective, as well as cheaper, than platinum. But again it will be many years before platinum-free fuel cells become a commercial prospect.

Wind power:

Wind power promises a clean and "free" source of electricity that would reduce our dependence on imported fossil fuels. A little research, however, reveals that wind power does not in fact live up to the claims made by its advocates, that its impact on the environment and people's lives is far from benign, and that with such a poor record and prospect the money spent on it could be much more effectively directed elsewhere.

Wind power has never been an efficient source of electricity, and wind turbines would only be for hobbyists were it not for large government subsidies (which means that the wind power producer robs the rest of us in order to provide us with expensive power.)

Biofuels:

Fuels like ethanol fermented from maize, are the most infamous examples of the doubtful sustainability of supposedly renewable forms of energy. This time the non-renewable resource at risk is the world's arable land. In addition, once ethanol is produced, it is considered an inferior fuel by consumers and is hard to sell.

Production-wise there are potential solutions, but none that are ready for market. Biofuels from cellulose or even lignin can be derived from inedible plant material and wood rather than food crops. Algae, grown in outdoor tanks, continues to attract attention, and extracting biofuel from marine algae or seaweed could sidestep land use issues altogether.

Renewable energy technologies remain the great hope for the future, and are guaranteed research funds in the short term. But unless a second generation of sustainable energy ideas based on truly sustainable resources is established, the light at the end of the alternative energy tunnel is looking dimmer.

[bonnie]

How are wind and solar energy jokes?

Do a little research and you will see how inefficient and costly they actually are.Windmill farms are notoriously noisy.Some of those living close to one have ended up leaving their homes as they could not tolerate it.

Besides where is PETA and the greenies as thousansa of birds are slaughtered every year by wind mills. Maybe they don't count unless it is oil causing the damage

[Bravus]

Research has shown that, contrary to the myths, wind farms do *not* kill birds.

And each of those sources has its own issues, which is why none of them *alone* solves the problem. But all of them together, along with some nuclear and some on-going fossil fuel use too, can be.

[aldona]

Research has shown that, contrary to the myths, wind farms do *not* kill birds.

And each of those sources has its own issues, which is why none of them *alone* solves the problem. But all of them together, along with some nuclear and some on-going fossil fuel use too, can be.

My husband and I spent some time travelling in Western Australia a couple of years ago.

We saw the wind turbines lined up on the southern coast near Albany and went and had a look up close. There is a picnic ground and hiking trail right at the foot of the wind turbines, and people come from all over to have a look.

They were almost completely silent as they turned in the wind. It was actually quite an interesting and awe-inspiring sight. There was not one dead bird at the foot of any of the machines. (The number of dead birds by the side of the road as road-kill, however, is huge no matter where you drive on the interstate highways. I haven't heard of anybody wanting to get rid of cars or highways.)

There were also wind turbine farms dotting the hillsides on our drive north of Perth.

Wind power is becoming a more accepted form of generating energy and the usual objections about dead birds, the landscape being spoiled, etc. are being heard less and less frequently.

I can imagine that 500 years ago or whenever the windmills were introduced to the Netherlands, the people would have had similar objections. But time has passed and it is accepted as part of the landscape and part of the cultural heritage of the nation.

As for solar - when I drive around the neighborhood it seems like every time I look, more houses have solar panels on their roof. The government is now offering a $1000 (AU) incentive/rebate to anybody who installs a solar hot water system in their home, and many people are taking them up on the offer.

Australian Government Renewable Energy Rebate

So when I see folks say that alternative ways of generating energy are a "joke", I say that this is not the case everywhere!

AJ

[bonnie]

Research has shown that, contrary to the myths, wind farms do *not* kill birds.

And each of those sources has its own issues, which is why none of them *alone* solves the problem. But all of them together, along with some nuclear and some on-going fossil fuel use too, can be.

It may have been in Calif.Over 4500 birds killed per year. Another area had 2-3,000 bats killed,other area have lost bald eagles etc.Wind turbines take up an enormous amount of land.Most people don't want to live by them. Ask the Kennedy family,none were going where they lived.

Nuclear is out and fossil fuel is blamed for all the ills possible.

Cost effectiveness is not there

[olger]

[SivartM]

I wonder how many birds are killed by air pollution every year... or how many people?

It sounds like that argument against vegetarianism where, if you really cared about animals, you'd eat meat because farm machinery kills bunnies. Or something.

[GreatLakesGramma]

Our farm is leased to a Canadian power company for evaluation for wind farm development. According to the information they gave us, the actual ground space each wind generator takes is quite small, and the fields could be farmed around them. And for the amount of space each one takes up, the income is many times that of raising crops.

[SivartM]

I've seen big wind farms in Indiana. They look pretty cool. I don't think my area would be a very good place for them... too bad. :(

[Dr. Shane]

Wind is a viable source to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. Solar has a long way to go. However we will always need either nuclear of fossil fuels as a back up source.

Fossil fuels has contributed a lot to cleaner cities. Cities use to have cleaning crews to haul out the horse manure daily. Coal was a common home-heating fuel. Many old homes still have coal chutes into the basement. Natural gas furnaces are less polluting and cause less home fires.

I think the government does need to create incentives to use less fossil fuels. A usage tax on large engines would be a start. Cars with engines above 2.5 liters should pay an annual usage tax. The tax would increase as the size of the engine does. Those driving cars with a 2.5 liter engine or smaller would be exempt from the tax.

[karl]

Wind power is intermittent, unreliable and expensive (even with subsidies). Some modern turbines are 400 feet tall and carry 130-foot, 7-ton blades. They operate at only 20 to 30 percent of rated efficiency – compared to 85 percent for coal, gas and nuclear plants – and provide little power during summer daytime hours, when air-conditioning demand is highest, but winds are at low ebb.

Using wind to replace all gas-fired power plants would require over 300,000 1.5-megawatt turbines, covering Midwestern “wind belt” agricultural and wildlife acreage equivalent to South Carolina.

Building and installing these turbines requires 5 to 10 times more steel and concrete than is needed to build nuclear plants to generate the same electricity more reliably, says Berkeley engineer Per Peterson. Add in steel and cement needed to build transmission lines from distant wind farms to urban consumers, and the costs multiply.

Wind thus means more quarries, mines, cement plants and steel mills to supply those materials. But greens oppose such facilities.

Since adequate wind is available only three to eight hours a day, we would also need more gas-fired generating plants that mostly run at idle, kicking in whenever the wind dies down. That means still more money, cement, steel and gas –and still higher electricity prices.

[Overaged]

Cost effectiveness is not there

"Cost effectiveness" is not there for oil either. I am personally aquainted with many people who use solar power to stay off the grid. They are doing fine with powering their homes, and not causing any pollution.

[Overaged]

Our farm is leased to a Canadian power company for evaluation for wind farm development. According to the information they gave us, the actual ground space each wind generator takes is quite small, and the fields could be farmed around them. And for the amount of space each one takes up, the income is many times that of raising crops.

They do this in Alberta with great success. It's not a perfect energy system; but it does help a lot with the problem. Certainly; I would not call it "a joke."

[bonnie]

Originally Posted By: bonnie

Cost effectiveness is not there

"Cost effectiveness" is not there for oil either. I am personally aquainted with many people who use solar power to stay off the grid. They are doing fine with powering their homes, and not causing any pollution.

Oil is the cheapest fuel.The varied and staggering uses for one product is pretty hard to beat.Can't visulize a windmill on the back of my car.71% of fossil fuel goes for transportation.

A former neighbor of ours designed and built his own home. Solar power,not a power line to his property.He was very anti everything that had to do with government,power plants etc.

He has since moved to MT and heads a militia out there

He had closets in his home with solar batteries. I can't tell you how it all worked but it was quite the setup. Unbelievably expensive.Behind his house he had a huge gas generator.Solar alone did not give him the power he required for his home.Most of us could not afford to have the solar power energy he had.