British Expatriate Network

8) There seems to be a lot of talk about when the oil will be gone and what will replace it?

We do have a source for Electric and all talk seems to revolve about our cars, "what are they going to use"? .

I am not worried about cars. I am sure there is an answer out there for them, but what about aircraft ?? What are they going to run on. Seems to me that Designers are building aircraft, based on the convential wisdom that we will still have oil around. I think most aircraft have a life span of 20/25 yrs. I am sure they are saying it oil will be gone before that.

So why buy a Plane that will not be usable in years to come.

The logic would be to design and build aircraft that can use other fuel sources.

What would you do if there was no more flights and you had to face the fact that you could not go back home and see your family etc.

Do we have any aircraft designers on the Board lol.

I suspect that aircraft will continue to use conventional fuel for many years to come.

Some type of penalty seens to be in order for those that insist on driving large vehicles.

While some people do need larger vehicles either for work or those with large families. The average person doesn't need more that a compact car at the most.

Oil is too valuable for many other uses than burning it in private vehicles.

There is more to it than that. A lot of our electricity uses oil (or coal which is something else that the world is running out of) to produce it. Many plastics come from oil etc. etc. The list is endless.

When the oil does run out, we will lose our ability to replace a lot of things from washing machines to communications. We won't be able to heat or cool our homes in the way many of us are used to. We will even lose our clean water eventually. And how will hospitals run or medicines be produced.

Not being able to fly is the least of the problems of no oil!

Serves us right if it happens.

Not like there hasn't been any warning. I think some countries will deal with it ok but not this one.

Me and the lad were just discussing this.
Obviousely there's a limited amount of natural resources available like oil and coal. I remember in Britain when they mothballed all the coal mines and switched over to cheap imports. At that time there was something like 100 years worth of coal in the English mines still available. Maybe if the imported stuff drys up they'd have to think about re-opening the British ones.
As for oil I'm guessing they'll need to develop fuels from sustainable sources like vegetable oil. Sounds ridiculous but I remember watching a show where these college kids travelled accross the US in a VW van that ran on used vegetable oil that they picked up from diners along the way. Course as the lad just pointed out, it'd take a hell of a lot of vegetable oil.

8) I was watching TV the other day and they are using cooking oil of sortsin the US at the moment. There are about 100 gas stations supplying it and Willie Nelson is helping to push the stuff.

All his cars and tour bus runs on it.

Heating homes etc will not be a problem because they will just turn to Nuclear energy. I think most of Frances power comes this way. I am sure they have more Nuclear power stations than anyone else, but don't quote me on that lol

When I was at school (30 years ago), I remember being told that there was only 30 years worth of oil left. Nowadays, it seems we are guzzling more than ever.

Maybe there's always a 30 year projection...but as supply runs low, the price goes up and usage goes down. This stretches the reserves and gives technology and personal behaviour more time to get used to it.

And if you think that no oil is used in some way here too, then you are highly mistaken. Same with wind turbines etc., oil or an oil product of some sort is used in some way - either directly or indirectly. And there is no way that homes will be allowed to use this energy as we progress. It will be saved for hospitals and those who are able to afford to pay for their own supply.

And then, don't forget the food industry as well. We will all become farmers ;)

France is a fraction the size of USA. Currently, the US struggles to process the spent Uranium rods but you are talking about increasing the number of nuclear power stations by an additional 80 - 90%!

I think they would need to seriously expand Yucca Mountain in Nevada to accomodate the amount of spent nuclear waste that would accumulate using this fall-back.

Good point. The last UKAEA contract I worked on with GEC was to store the liquid waste in cementation planes right next to the actual reactor. Again, a big problem when it comes to the amount of space it takes up.

The trouble with Yucca Mountain revolves around some very dodgy paperwork. Apparently the science may not be as sound as y'all have been led to believe.

Check at http://www.lvrj.com for the latest goodness.

Don't get the point of your link, VRB. I can't see anything on there to do with Yucca mountain -?

And what do you mean that the science isn't as sound as we have been led to believe?

Sorry, did I give a bad link? :-?

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2...04008.html


Scientists on the Yucca Mountain nuclear waste project used "fudge factors" and made up dates to fabricate quality assurance of their work in modeling how water would move through the mountain under future climate conditions.

Their fabrications and tactics to cover up their shortcomings are told in a 90-page collection of redacted e-mails released Friday by Rep. Jon Porter, R-Nev., whose subcommittee will air the allegations at a hearing Tuesday.

Some e-mails from scientists at the U.S. Geological Survey, which also appear in Department of Energy files, instruct the reader to "delete this memo after you've read it."

One says flatly: "I've made up the dates and names. ... If they need more proof I will be happy to make up more stuff."

Another confirms that quality assurance for documenting data was sorely lacking in the models used to determine how much water will seep through the mountain, carrying off radioactive particles as the containers holding 77,000 tons of spent fuel corrode over time.

"Wait till they figure out that nothing I've provided them is QA (quality assurance). If they really want the stuff, they'll have to pay to do it right," says an Oct. 29, 1998, message that appeared in both sets of redacted e-mails from the Interior and Energy departments.

The e-mails portray a workplace where disgruntled employees felt pressured and rushed.

One e-mail indicates two sets of files were used, one to make quality assurance officials "happy" and one that was actually used in the models.

The words "fudge" or "fudge factor" appear in a couple of e-mails, including one that states: "Our infiltration model has virtually no infiltration in washes; what infiltration there is in washes is basically put there as a fudge factor. ... I could probably tear apart any of our models. Did somebody say seepage?"

The e-mails show how frustrated some scientists were with trying to meet deadlines.

"Yes the work is behind schedule but so is everything else because I'm the only one doing this work and I'll be damned if I drop everything else," an employee said in a March 26, 1999, message. "I'd be very happy to just hand the work over to somebody else at this point."

/threadjack over - more than happy to tell y'all how it really bloody is with Yucca Mountain.
//how do I make clickies smaller?

thanks VRB. Actually already knew this.

Also, nuclear waste, in this country, is dumped more on land that Native Americans live on or near than any other group of people. their water and food source (mainly fish) are horrifically contaminated.

Y'mean like this?

http://www.reviewjournal.com/lvrj_home/2...99957.html

Still no follow-up yet.