November 29, 2008

USGS: 85.4T cubic feet of undiscovered, recoverable natural gas in Alaska
— Purple Avenger

Cowbell anyone?

The USGS estimates that there are 85.4 trillion cubic feet of undiscovered, technically recoverable gas from natural gas hydrates on the Alaskan North Slope. This is the first-ever resource estimate of technically recoverable natural gas hydrates in the world...
More details here.

Podcast here.

Current gas reserves in North America are estimated to be in the 280T cubic feet range. Adding another 85T to that is a pretty big jump indeed.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at 07:09 PM | Comments (115)
Post contains 93 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Are the dems not allowing us to tap any of the gas in that land?  The 'Cuda should bring it up at the meeting Tuesday, just start raising some hell.  It's closed door, so the media won't be able to see it and you can just deny any anonymous leaks.

Posted by: Truth Meter at November 29, 2008 07:21 PM (plYMr)

2 Only a country full of homos wouldn't tap that.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at November 29, 2008 07:22 PM (MOdlB)

3 There's already a coalition of incredibly naive children being formed to oppose any production of any hydrocarbons in this area. WE SIMPLY CAN'T ALLOW THAT MUCH CARBON TO ESCAPE INTO MOTHER GAIA'S ATMOSPHERE!!!!!! I'm investing in rickshaws.

Posted by: pendejo grande at November 29, 2008 07:22 PM (iMnDJ)

4

I'm sure that the President-Elect Lightworker Chicago Jesus will find an endangered snail or fly up there that we must save, and tapping all that natural gas just won't do.

The Green Economy. Put your shoulders into it, you peons.

Posted by: Jones at November 29, 2008 07:26 PM (VkNlv)

5 We need a "Sarah with a Cowbell" pic.

Posted by: someone at November 29, 2008 07:33 PM (1wXl7)

6

2 Only a country full of homos wouldn't tap that.

THREAD WINNER

Good night

Best Regards

Posted by: ATNorth at November 29, 2008 07:35 PM (dBJw1)

7 and alaska isn't even the most plentiful, there are area's off the cost of florida, that have solide hydrates in the trillions based on volume.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 07:42 PM (ul7te)

8 Domestic energy!  YUCK!

Posted by: Moonbat_One at November 29, 2008 07:47 PM (RFDNy)

9 ok... let's play inform the moron... what is the "T" tons?

Posted by: Kaptain Amerika at November 29, 2008 07:48 PM (6vrhg)

10 "Slope" is a racist word. No drilling. Raaaaacccciiiissssssstttttt!!!

Posted by: 29Victor at November 29, 2008 07:50 PM (kJVzu)

11

As an Official Member of the Energy Department's First Allocation Program's Response to those who are part of the Public Works Programs, Ohio Public Utilities Commission as part of the Division of Public Assets. If you followed that, you're smarter than I am.

Posted by: ErikW at November 29, 2008 07:50 PM (6x3r4)

12 TCF = Trillion Cubic Feet. So T is for Trillion.  A word that seems to get thrown around quite casually these days.

Posted by: pendejo grande at November 29, 2008 07:51 PM (iMnDJ)

13 Hell, with the amount of hydrocarbons we're "accumulating" via discovery, we'll have enough potential energy to construct and fuel all the giant air conditioners needed to optimize our outdoors, too.*



*Yeah, yeah... ignoring thermodynamics of closed systems blahbity blah blah blah. Work with me here.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at November 29, 2008 07:53 PM (sI5Ho)

14 The difference, WP, is that the ones in Alaska are "technically recoverable", meaning they are recoverable using current technology.

The stuff off Fla are methane hydrates as I recall. That, and being underwater makes it a whole different level of difficulty.


Posted by: krakatoa at November 29, 2008 07:56 PM (YM1XM)

15
My, my....
That's allot of natural gas.
Nope not gonna touch it.

Posted by: democrats at November 29, 2008 07:58 PM (O55b1)

16 So put it into perspective. What does a trillion cubic feet look like? What does it do?

Posted by: ErikW at November 29, 2008 08:00 PM (6x3r4)

17 ErikW at November 30, 2008 01:00 AM (6x3r4)

The gas from Alaska's natural gas hydrates would be enough to heat more than 100 million average homes for 10 years.

US consumes 23TCF per year right now.

Posted by: lorien1973 at November 29, 2008 08:06 PM (ddGv/)

18 So put it into perspective. What does a trillion cubic feet look like? What does it do?

<zzzzziiip>

Posted by: D Cheney at November 29, 2008 08:08 PM (YM1XM)

19 ooooh!  Galaxy quest is on!  I LOVE THIS MOVIE!!!

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 08:09 PM (ul7te)

20 Did all the people that are against tapping and using these hydrocarbons skip science class. The earth is covered with carbon sequestering plants. That oddly enough sequester more when the levels rise.

My plan for making money since this is the set of idiots that will control the govt purse strings is to get into carbon sequestration. I will collect paper before it is recycled . Since the carbon from the atmosphere has been sequestered in the paper. I'll have to give my plan a stupid name to sell it but I will fool them with the big words since they have no clue as to how this shit works.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at November 29, 2008 08:10 PM (MOdlB)

21

thanks krak, I just didn't know the technicalities, I knew there was a reason other than green thought, but I didn't know.

I think they have to be drilled, and sampled, and then mixed with water, and then seperated with water or some shit like that.

The gulf hydrates are MAJOR!  and need to be perfected before gulf exploitation, but we knew they have existed for more than 20 years.

We can't pay dubai to maintain our ports, but we will give too much of our national product for their gas, when we have the largest coal and natural gas reservoirs within our own borders.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 08:13 PM (ul7te)

22 It would appear the gas exists in a "solid" state, trapped by a water shell at a molecular level and maintained in this form from pressure. The gas (hydrocarbon proper) can be recovered by depressurizing the solid state (clathrate). I wonder if this just means cracking the rock to provide pockets for expansion and subsequent escape of the gas via liquified or gaseous state?

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at November 29, 2008 08:14 PM (sI5Ho)

23 T. Boone Pickens just got a non-Viagra-assisted boner.

Posted by: spamhead at November 29, 2008 08:15 PM (u4f7N)

24 I agree buzz, I should buy land and plant "Martin luther kennedy clinton tree's" to "sequester" CO2.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 08:16 PM (ul7te)

25 feet isn't feet, it's CUBIC feet.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 08:17 PM (ul7te)

26 Interestingly enough, those methane hydrates may be responsible for many of the mysterious goings on in the "Bermuda Triangle".


Posted by: krakatoa at November 29, 2008 08:18 PM (YM1XM)

27

I don't know Anon, not that kinda fixer, but it's my understanding that gaseous hydrates are volatile while in the presence of water, so, you drill, and seal, and exchange solids and at sea level pressure, you add water, then seperate the methane and pump out the pure water. 

But that is just based on one docu I saw on TV.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 08:20 PM (ul7te)

28
24 Wikedpinto
You picked the right guys to name your trees, since they all had more wood than their wives could control.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at November 29, 2008 08:24 PM (MOdlB)

29

Yeah, I know about GW, I'm just waiting for sunspot data. Oh, nevermind that the poles are freezing over like no ones biz! Must be the warming temps that cause freezing. Ha!

Posted by: ErikW at November 29, 2008 08:31 PM (6x3r4)

30 TCF = Trillion Cubic Feet.

If you are looking for a comparison, that is the volume equivalent to a cube measuring 10,000 feet (just a smidge over 3 km) on an edge (or a largish mountain, say about 20,000 feet tall, because of the narrowing at the top). Your average home contains about 8-10,000 cubic feet.

It is the energy equivalent of 1.1 billion MWh (just over 1 quadrillion BTU).

Just to compare, check your own energy bills for the equivalent units being used, and see how many millions of households that much energy could provide for.

Posted by: Drumwaster at November 29, 2008 08:33 PM (Ymor3)

31 technically recoverable I don't know that anybody has been able to actually recover a commercially meaningful amount of natural gas from hydrates. On the brighter side, at least these hydrates are on land. Most of the other ones I hear about are buried beneath the ocean floor. I'm not saying these can't be exploited. It's just really hard compared to conventional natural gas sources.

Posted by: Arthur at November 29, 2008 08:37 PM (4MHbz)

32

drum,

to be fair, thats TCF at 1 atmosphere, not in it's compressed state.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 08:37 PM (ul7te)

33 Thx, Wickedpinto. I don't have a clue as to how it'll be extracted. I'm just glad smarter morons have it figured out.

Posted by: AnonymousDrivel at November 29, 2008 08:42 PM (sI5Ho)

34 Can any wisdom be recovered from Pelosi's  and Obama's brains?

Posted by: FloofyParisParamus at November 29, 2008 08:50 PM (rbLHc)

35

RAAAACCCIIISSSSSTTTT!!!!

(That's generally the appropriate response these days.)

Posted by: LC at November 29, 2008 08:51 PM (K37tB)

36 I am not a fan of the govt subsidizing things but the collection of oil and gas here in the US needs some help to keep us from being in the situation we were this last summer. Some of these areas in the US that have gas or oil are not as cheap to retrieve as in the ME. But we need to build the infrastructure for their pumping now so I never have to hear the argument "well that energy won't be available for 5 years".
Ours may end up at $3.00 or even $4.00 a gallon to make it profitable but that is better than the ME MFs having control.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at November 29, 2008 08:51 PM (MOdlB)

37 I'm not smarter, I just saw a documentary.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 08:52 PM (ul7te)

38

THATS THE BITCH OF IT!!!

The government doesn't need to subsidize exploitation, they just need to get the fuck out of the way!!!!

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 08:53 PM (ul7te)

39 HOLY SHIT! I'm buying a Pfill and moving to AK. Fuck The messiahObamaSorostron. I don't see AQ bombing the shit out of caribou.

Posted by: AGR at November 29, 2008 09:03 PM (r8a5Z)

40 I just don't a scenario where the Obama administration would allow this to go through. Why? This would make Alaska and their governor look good, regardless of how this would benefit the lower 48. Hell would freeze over.

Posted by: Sergei at November 29, 2008 09:03 PM (4f9V7)

41 I know some about this industry and yes there is allot of Us gas and oil that just needs less govt restriction to retrieve and be competitive.  But to get to where we are self sufficient we may need to subsidize. But you are right the govt just getting out of the way would be the best and easiest step.

Anyone that doesn't want that should have to get a special permit to buy gas. These buttheads make me get a permit to buy guns they should need a permit to buy gas.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at November 29, 2008 09:11 PM (MOdlB)

42 I like you buzz, you should joine the captives.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 09:14 PM (ul7te)

43 Who are the captives?

Posted by: Buzzsaw at November 29, 2008 09:17 PM (MOdlB)

44

Shazam~!

 

Posted by: Mr. Pissed at November 29, 2008 09:18 PM (X7Ey1)

45 "technically recoverable gas from natural gas hydrates"

No cowbell.  Hydrates are tricky (they're actually the reason that we need pigs in our gas lines) and incredibly unfriendly as natural gas products go.  As far as I know (and it's my field of interest), there is no good way to free hydrates of their water.  There are only 'ok' ways, all of which are much more complicated and magnitudes less efficient than simply sucking the non-hydrate gas out of the ground and removing the sulphur.

Don't get your hopes up on this one.  It's about as useful as coal mined in Texas (you know, the stuff that has about 10% of the energy in it that anthracite coal has).  There's some energy in both, but not too much.

Posted by: Kevin at November 29, 2008 09:20 PM (KO6dP)

46

I thought this was the reason that Sarah had signed the contract with that Canadian company to build a pipeline to the Midwest. This area IS recoverable and they plan on recovering it.

Posted by: Vic at November 29, 2008 09:21 PM (Qd7GC)

47

If the moonbats in DC block drilling that, I think Alaska's going to start thinking breakaway. They'd be richer than the Saudis until Vladmir Putin decides to reposess what the Czars sold...

Posted by: SGT Dan at November 29, 2008 09:22 PM (Q6BTe)

48

Buzz,

The "captives" are the commenters at the hostages.  You are only a hostage if you have access, everyone else is a detainee or a captive.

and "The Hostages" is my sorta kinda blog, even though I don't post often.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 09:25 PM (ul7te)

49

different field Vic.

Hydrates are different, not because of the energy added, but because of an uncontrollable reaction in exploitation.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 09:27 PM (ul7te)

50

to quote mila jovavich, vic, and mila is one of my and my brothers favorite all time hotties, "BADA BOOM!  BIG BADA BOOM!"

I'm not an engineer, but I think "BADA BOOM" at an energery exploitation site is not a good thing.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 09:28 PM (ul7te)

51 Wikedpinto  I clicked on your nick and now it makes sense.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at November 29, 2008 09:37 PM (MOdlB)

52 for some reason I don't have access to my own blog right now, wondering if one of the admins are playing with jackassery.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 09:38 PM (ul7te)

53 The news article about the pipeline said "the North Slope". Maybe different, maybe not.

Posted by: Vic at November 29, 2008 09:49 PM (Qd7GC)

54 Wickedpinto
The admins got a a dead thread going at the moment so they aren't doing jackassery with any competence.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at November 29, 2008 09:52 PM (MOdlB)

55

It's just that I can't access buzz.

It's kinda irritating.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 09:57 PM (ul7te)

56

and by "jackassery" I was wondering if one of them decided to play games by blocking my IP.  We kinda do that, if you didn't notice in the comments.  Basicaly the hostages is where you go to insult and be insulted.

Me, Mesa, PA,ND PJ Wiser and others to twist the game a touch

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 09:59 PM (ul7te)

57 It seems that hostage and hostagee has got a little twisted if you give the hostage the codes. They may have Fuckd with you but it appears they are all asleep now so if you are (or someone near you is) sober enough to drive go teach them a lesson. Sharpie markers come to mind as a legal punishment.

Posted by: Buzzsaw at November 29, 2008 10:09 PM (MOdlB)

58

Democrats: "Sorry, the mosquito population of the north slope must be protected."

 

Posted by: SamIam at November 29, 2008 10:23 PM (jl7C/)

59

heh buzz!

Yeah, you rate detainee or captive status.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 10:38 PM (ul7te)

60 It's about time they kicked wickedpinto out of the Hostages. He was ruining the place.

Posted by: XBradTC at November 29, 2008 11:11 PM (GIPhT)

61 I'm right here brad.

Posted by: Wickedpinto at November 29, 2008 11:20 PM (ul7te)

62

I'm sick and tired

Of your liberal views

What's politically correct

Come Judgment Day

I'll be tying a noose

And slippingg it 'round your neck.

Can I stand up an' say

There's some people 'round 'ere

Need blowing away

But for you,

There's just no 'ope

Get a rope,

Get a rope!

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at November 30, 2008 12:28 AM (RWmCt)

63

Is that more than 1.21 gigawatts?

Great Scott!

Posted by: Steve Skubinna at November 30, 2008 12:38 AM (Vcyz0)

64 @63: I'm sure plutonium is available at your corner drug store in 1985, but in 1955, it's a little hard to come by.

Posted by: Fa Cube Itches at November 30, 2008 12:41 AM (RWmCt)

65 You can ahh, recover that hydrocarbon rich natural gas, but uhh, it will bankrupt you because of ahh, err, umm, the carbon offsets needed to line our pockets, produce an equivalent amount of green energy.

Posted by: Barack Obama at November 30, 2008 02:00 AM (G3Wx0)

66 The fact of the matter is that right now the main obstacle in developing the North Slope is the Palin Administration. Just Google Point Thompson to see what I'm talking about.

Posted by: lowandslow at November 30, 2008 02:08 AM (thEW6)

67 So this is an "estimate" of "undiscovered", "technically recoverable" natural gas? I could say the same thing about unicorn farts. We should probably actually "discover" this gas before we start dancing like fucktards around the Energy Independence Maypole.

Posted by: Velociman at November 30, 2008 03:11 AM (XrP/E)

68 Unfortunately, unless federal jurisidiction of Alaska is moved to either the fourth or fifth federal circuit from the ninth circuit, the Boxer Feinstein judges on that court will continue to thumb their noses on energy production as they apallingly did just last week enjoining energy production off the coast of Alaska.

Posted by: eaglewingz08 at November 30, 2008 03:25 AM (tjEJG)

69

It is not clear that Point Thompson is the same area, and Palin is not the problem with the development of it.  Exxon-Mobile has been sitting on it since 1960 WITHOUT DEVELOPING IT which is costing the State money in lost revenues.

Posted by: Vic at November 30, 2008 03:27 AM (Qd7GC)

70 People, these are natural gas HYDRATES that they are talking about, not natural gas.  It's a solid, pain in the ass material.  Currently, no one at all, worldwide, attempts to recover them.  And there's a reason for it.  It's because they suck.  They don't flow, they seep.  Or worse, they just sit there, and have to be recovered mechanically.

Blaming Palin, or anyone else for their lack of use is silly.  We just don't have the technology to efficiently put them to use.

On the ephemeral side though, the stuff looks pretty cool.  It looks like ice, is room temp to the touch, and you can burn it for a few seconds.  Neat!  As an energy source, not so much.

Posted by: Kevin at November 30, 2008 04:04 AM (KO6dP)

71 "It is not clear that Point Thompson is the same area"

What are you talking about? Of course Point Thompson is in the North Slope

"and Palin is not the problem with the development of it.  Exxon-Mobile has been sitting on it since 1960 WITHOUT DEVELOPING IT which is costing the State money in lost revenues."

Boy that sounds familiar, who spouts this same rhetoric? Could it be Pelosi and her ilk? There's more to extracting the natural gas then meets the eye when it comes to the economics of it. Like it or not right now it's the Palin administration that's stopping Exxon from developing Point Thompson by rejecting their plans to develop it, by litigating the lease and by denying their request to build an ice road to begin developing it. And it didn't cost the state anything, the natural gas didn't go anywhere.

Posted by: lowandslow at November 30, 2008 04:05 AM (thEW6)

72 Posted by: Kevin at November 30, 2008 09:04 AM (KO6dP)

I guess I pulled it a little off topic from the Gas Hydrates.

Posted by: lowandslow at November 30, 2008 04:46 AM (thEW6)

73

71  People, these are natural gas HYDRATES that they are talking about, not natural gas. 

OK Kevin, than what does all this mean in terms of usable energy?

Posted by: 7HEAVENS at November 30, 2008 05:00 AM (oIvn7)

74

Don't get your hopes up on this one.  It's about as useful as coal mined in Texas (you know, the stuff that has about 10% of the energy in it that anthracite coal has).  There's some energy in both, but not too much.

So we should discount this as PR CYA for the USGS to keep their jobs? Bummer. After 25 years of study they finally announce nothing at all? 

On another note, I read yesterday that the great majority of our biofuel, (which was supposed to replace gasoline and has driven up the price of food around the world) has been exported to countries that pay more than we do.  And we subsidized it all lavishly.  Can we get a Cowbell?

Posted by: 7HEAVENS at November 30, 2008 05:22 AM (oIvn7)

75 Followed by Sierra Club and the World Wildlife Foundation announcing the find of a new lifeform that lives within the confines of natural gas, and, the "unannounced long term study of the area" where this lifeform was discoverd.

Methancaus Taurocanicus Cacaris was proposed name given of this new species, and the unusual nature of its existance.

Robert Dingleberry, spokesman for WWF, has called for further investigation, research, and the possible protection of this new find.

"We can't let our wanton needs threaten this new find," Dingleberry stated. "We're going to have to look at our usage of natural gas, and find a new source to use as fuel to warm our homes, heat our water, generate steam for electricity, and other uses. We've now found out our comfort threatens others, and, has been since the use of its habitat."

Dingleberry also called on the Alaskan governor, the state lesislature, and the Federal government to curtail further development, utilization, and production of natural gas, until the impact on the new species.

+++ +++ +++ +++

..... you just wait - its coming....

Posted by: fred zeppelin at November 30, 2008 05:33 AM (R4ffQ)

76

Boy that sounds familiar, who spouts this same rhetoric?

Yes, you sound just like a Moby. This shit started in 2005 long before Palin and they have had 40 fucking years to do something and have not.

At some point even the most patient have tothrow the bullshit flag. And no Nanny Nancy would be stopping ALL development. Palin want SOMEBODY to develope it and wants to reissue the lease.

And yes we know it is on the North slope but it is not the strata that this article is talking about.

Posted by: Vic at November 30, 2008 05:46 AM (Qd7GC)

77 Posted by: Vic at November 30, 2008 10:46 AM (Qd7GC)

And you sound like a Palin apologist that will defend her without regards to any facts. Who cares what happened in the past forty years, right now it's the Palin Administration that's stopping Exxon from developing Point Thompson, no one else.

Posted by: lowandslow at November 30, 2008 06:00 AM (thEW6)

78 But what about the cariboo that will be slaughtered to extract that oil?  And the pengins?  What about the poor pengins????

Posted by: Earth First!1! at November 30, 2008 06:26 AM (VFkb6)

79 "They'd be richer than the Saudis until Vladmir Putin decides to reposess what the Czars sold."

Watch: Putin is eventually going to restore the Russian monarchy under some powerless Romanov puppet in order to completely eliminate the presidency as another power base and increase his unaccountability as PM.  Then he probably WILL lay claim to Alaska, as well as everything that the Tsars ever ruled, i.e., Ukraine, Georgia, the Caucasus, the Balts, Finland, Poland.

Posted by: Dave J at November 30, 2008 06:33 AM (qsGH+)

80

WP @ 50:

There was a German language magazine about 10 years ago that had a several page layout of Mila.  Her breasts were the best I've seen.  The magazine was called MAX, I think.  Wished I'd kept my copy, b/c she's not as attractive anymore.

Posted by: Pigilito at November 30, 2008 07:15 AM (GR6JB)

81 Man these people just hate Palin.  They won't give her credit for anything.  During the campaign it was "Palin doesn't care about the environment, see she just loves burning oil and gas" and now it's "Palin doesn't care about energy, see she's standing in the way of developing natural gas."  Maybe the liberal Mobys here should just shut up; we understand that you just plain hate Palin and will blame her for anything no matter what.

Posted by: chemjeff at November 30, 2008 07:36 AM (VLxln)

82 This girl does to Islamic culture what Shannon did to Christoph. http://jadedhaven.wordpress.com/2008/11/29/scheherazade-needs-a-new-tale/

Posted by: locus ceruleus at November 30, 2008 07:39 AM (e2mBS)

83 But it'd take yeeeeaaaaaarrrrrs to access that natural gas.  Unlike wind-powered cars and hydro-fusion-powered homes which can be used right this minute!

Posted by: Whiny Leftists at November 30, 2008 07:45 AM (9Vu+H)

84

Speaking of nutcases and chemicals Jeff, my lesbian girlfriend forgot and took her methadone and anti-deppressants twice yesterday.  She perked up walking the dog, but nodded out later over the Valu-Rite.  She can be such a bore sometimes!  She's a dog behaviorist like Cesar Milan and teaches Submission. 

(Sura 2:131)

Posted by: 7HEAVENS at November 30, 2008 07:48 AM (oIvn7)

85 This is a feather in Palin's cap. God Bless.

Posted by: mossback at November 30, 2008 08:45 AM (in8Vs)

86 23 T. Boone Pickens just got a non-Viagra-assisted boner.

And all that made me think of is that this is some sort of T-Boone propaganda.

We've been T-Booned!

Posted by: Nyctalus Lasiopterus at November 30, 2008 08:57 AM (EPSru)

87 Just kinda wondering, were there any eskimos on Star Trek?

Posted by: Big Swede at November 30, 2008 09:15 AM (GhwKr)

88 Yeah, Sulu was an Eskimo.

Posted by: Ed at November 30, 2008 10:02 AM (VFkb6)

89 What does a trillion cubic feet look like?

It's like...about 500 cubic MILES of gas.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at November 30, 2008 10:49 AM (CwzFE)

90 It's like...about 500 cubic MILES of gas.

Come again? A cube just under 2 miles on a side somehow equals 500 cubic miles? 2 x 2 x 2 = 8, not 500. Even in metric terms, it's less than 30 cubic kilometers.

Posted by: Drumwaster at November 30, 2008 11:10 AM (Ymor3)

91 85 400 000 000 000 cubic foot = 580.171 115 43 cubic mile

Posted by: exception at November 30, 2008 11:26 AM (o5wq5)

92 5280^3 = 147,197,952,000 cubic feet = 1 cubic mile

84,000,000,000,000 / 147,197,952,000 = 570.66.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at November 30, 2008 11:31 AM (CwzFE)

93 But that would be the entire amount, not just a single TCF. Which, after all, was what the question (cited by PA (pbuh)) asked.

See comment #89. I admit that a trillion cubic feet is a shitload and a half (see # 30), even in terms of potential energy stored, but it is only what it is.

Posted by: Drumwaster at November 30, 2008 11:37 AM (Ymor3)

94 Regardless of how to get the fuel out of the ground, we must start producing our own energy, or the economy and the WOT will suffer. 

Wind and solar are cute, and conservation is important, but we have to produce enough to grow the economy and cut off the terrorist regimes.  I hope Obama gets that--but I doubt it.

Posted by: PJ at November 30, 2008 11:59 AM (GVdvM)

95 find of a new lifeform that lives within the confines of natural gas

BTDT. Woods Hole has already written about bacteria that metabolize gas and don't need any O2 to do it.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at November 30, 2008 12:02 PM (CwzFE)

96 To belabor a point, there is over a billion ounces of gold in the oceans!  Why aren't we mining them?

Answer: Much like natural gas hydrates, gold in the ocean costs more money to recover than it's worth.

What is so complicated about that?  You guys are making me embarrassed to be a conservative.

Posted by: Kevin at November 30, 2008 01:00 PM (KO6dP)

97 Uh, that would be Rosie O'Donnell, which is gaelic for 'that big bitch eats everything" and she doesn't need O2 but she does need mud to wallow in.
Just thought you'd like to know.

Posted by: enter sandman at November 30, 2008 01:28 PM (kRtdI)

98 To belabor a point...

So why is Conoco/Phillips doing a pilot hydrate extraction plant using CO2 injection up in Alaska then if this is a fools errand to even think about?

Posted by: Purple Avenger at November 30, 2008 02:04 PM (CwzFE)

99 To belabor a point, there is over a billion ounces of gold in the oceans!  Why aren't we mining them?

Because that works out to less than an ounce of gold per cubic kilometer of salt water. Are you seriously trying to claim that these hydrates only yield up an ounce per cubic kilometer?

You are asserting, in essence, that these new finds are not economically recoverable at today's prices. This ignores that prices go up and down. When prices go up, more can be recovered at that higher price.

And oh, look! We've just elected a President that thinks that higher energy prices are nothing more than a "signal" to consumers...

(One last thing. That should be "... there are over a billion ...". Plural, dontchaknow?)

Posted by: Drumwaster at November 30, 2008 02:18 PM (Ymor3)

100 #98, because at some point in time, it WILL be cost effective.  Right now though, it's not.  That's why they are doing a pilot plant run.  You don't hear about them piloting a new oil rig, do you?  Nope, because they already know oil rigs are a good way to drill. 

What they don't know, and probably won't for a few decades, is if hydrates can become a viable energy supply.  Oil from Rocky Mountain shale is already much more proven than hydrates (MUCH MORE), and there's a few hundred billion barrels of that stuff in Colorado alone.  It makes much more sense to work on extracting those until tech advances enough to allow cost effective capturing of CH4 from hydrates.

Drumwaster, I do not believe that hydrates yield an ounce of natural gas per cubic kilometer.  I am amazed that you have distorted my words to suggest that I did.  Let me re-iterate.  Hydrates (a composition of natural gas loosely bonded to water, making it look and act like ice) are incredibly low on the list when it comes to attainable energy.  I don't know how I can make this more clear.  It is common knowledge.  Hydrates are a pain in the ass in pipelines, and they are a pain in the ass in the ground.  They totally suck.  Even ethanol, if you can believe it, is a cheaper source of energy than hydrates at this point in time.

I'll shut up about it after this post, but I have to say once again that you're making conservatives look bad.  We're supposed to do our homework.  You're clearly not.  The hydrate/ocean gold analogy was quite appropriate, and until the price of CH4 goes up to $1,000/mcf or gold goes up to $50,000/oz, it will continue to be so.


Posted by: Kevin at November 30, 2008 02:56 PM (KO6dP)

101 Hydrates are a pain in the ass in pipelines

Why?  Pressure and temperature.   Those are variables. 

If we know how to pump wet concrete, which we do, then we know how to pump a slurry of this crap to a warmer place where it won't maintain its hydrate form.  It may be as simple as piping a slurry past a solar parabolic collector to warm it up.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at November 30, 2008 03:35 PM (CwzFE)

102 "Why?  Pressure and temperature.   Those are variables."

Eh.  I give up.  Yes, those simple properties, pressure and temperature, are the only thing stopping us from harvesting the greatest known energy source to all mankind... hydrated methane.  You totally caught me.

Sadly, I'm employed by the Let's Not Allow America To Use Hydrates As Fuel Even Though It's A Great Source Of Energy conglomerate.  I won't be receiving a check this week for sure.  Darnit.  If only you meddling kids didn't know that the secret to using methane trapped in hydrates was pressure and temperature!

This whole debate would be funny, except that the purple avenger is a hardcore conservative!  That makes it kind of personal.  It's your duty to understand science if you are going to be a conservative.  If I could make laws, that would be one of them.

Couldn't you do some research on this subject?  Saying the problem with hydrates boils down to 'temperature and pressure' is like saying 'the only trouble with room temp nuclear fusion is weak nuclear force'.

Look, I too hope that someday hydrates become a viable source of energy.  But that day isn't today.  You can't use current science to prove this fact away.  Hopefully in a few decades you'll be able to, but until then, let's get the energy locked up in the Rockies and give this hydrate crap a rest.  K?

Posted by: Kevin at November 30, 2008 04:21 PM (KO6dP)

103 Am I the only chemical engineer here?  Someone help!  They're not going to believe the truth if I'm the only one saying them.

Posted by: Kevin at November 30, 2008 04:56 PM (KO6dP)

104 Couldn't you do some research on this subject?  Saying the problem with hydrates boils down to 'temperature and pressure' is like saying 'the only trouble with room temp nuclear fusion is weak nuclear force'.

And the problem with flight is that pesky force of gravity.  Eventually when there's enough incentive to solve a problem like this, someone (not him specifically) will figure out a way to do it.  Shale oil isn't going to be available right away (particularly now that Reid and Pelosi have a mandate to stop it).  Windfarms, solar energy, biofuels, etc. may be technically possible at this point, but a lot of infrastructure has to be built before they matter.  In other words, all of these are down-the-road ideas.

Not that it matters.  The Greens and Pinkos have a common goal in ending economic activity in the US and much of the power they need to do it.

Posted by: Methos at November 30, 2008 05:08 PM (dRS5E)

105 I can't control weak nuclear forces (or at least I don't think I can yet).  Temp/pressure, I know how to do.

But that day isn't today.

I'd like a specific quoteback of where I ever claimed it was. 

Posted by: Purple Avenger at December 01, 2008 03:11 AM (CwzFE)

106 I also think you're seeing the problem too narrowly Kevin.  What you perceive as a chemical engineering problem becomes much simpler when viewed as a transportation problem.  All of the bad characteristics of this stuff disappear if you move it to a warmer place.

There's about ~3 cubic miles of solidish shit to be extracted if the whole of what USGS is claiming were pulled out.  Most of that will become ordinary water when the shit gets warmer and the crap releases its payload.

What you see as a problem, I see as a solution.  Where might there be people in a warm climate, that will warm the crap up for free, who could use a nice fresh water+energy package?  Southern California leaps to mind.

This is a logistics/transport problem, not a chemical problem.

Posted by: Purple Avenger at December 01, 2008 03:30 AM (CwzFE)

107

We need the strong nuclear forces to control the anti-Palin Mobies. I suggest a liberal application of the delta-m theory of binding energy to the areas frequented by the Mobies.

Posted by: Vic at December 01, 2008 04:53 AM (Qd7GC)

108 I'm sure there is a big 'ol eco-illuminati democrat movement to protect this little bit of land.  We need to protect our wallets before our trees.

Posted by: RJ at December 01, 2008 06:30 PM (7nbTg)

109 YouTube Mate - the most powerful YouTube assistant on the planet - is a professional FLV Converter software which can convert Flash Video FLV to AVI, FLV to MPEG, FLV to WMV, FLV to MP4, FLV to 3GP Converter, etc. It supports convert FLV to all popular video, like AVI, MPEG, WMV, DivX, Xvid, ASF, 3GP, MP4, iPod, PSP, Zune and convert FLV to MP3, WMA and WAV audio. The YouTube FLV converter suport download youtube videos unlimited simultaneous downloads.Youtube FLV to 3GP Converter, Youtube FLV to iPod Converter, Youtube FLV to MP3 Converter. Are you looking forFLV Cutter, FLV merger, how to cut FLV video? You're right here. Take a few minutes, you will end up the toil of searching.FLV Cutter is a professional FLV Video cutter which can cut or join multiple FLV format files and then output as other popular formats, like AVI, MPEG, WMV, RM, MP4, Divx, XviD, VCD, SVCD, DVD, etc.Free download the FLV Cutter from the following cue and follow the following guide to know how to cut FLV video files.MPG Converter for Mac is specially designed for Mac users to convert MPG to all popular video formats, just like: iPod, PSP, AVI, MOV, MP4, FLV, 3GP, M4V, DivX, XviD, MKV,etc. In addition, the Mac MPG Converter also can convert all common audio video files(eg: AAC, AC3, MP3, etc)Moreover,the MPG Converter for Mac provides powerful edit functions, like "setting resolution, bitrate, frame rate", "customizing the video effect",etc.So we can output the files with different audio and video effects.Have you been worried about your videos that can not playback on Mac? I strongly recommend WMV Converter for Mac. The WMV Converter for Mac is specially designed for those Mac users to convert WMV to all popular video formats, just like: iPod, PSP, AVI, MOV, MP4, FLV, 3GP, M4V, DivX, XviD, MKV,etc. In addition, the WMV Converter for Mac also can convert all popular audio files as well (AAC, AC3, MP3, etc)Moreover, the WMV Converter for Mac provides powerful edit functions, like "setting resolution, Bitrate, frame rate", "customizing the video effect",etc. So we can output the files with different audio and video effects.

Posted by: obama at December 17, 2008 04:10 PM (vV3tk)

110 Do you have your favorite DVD movies? Whether do you hope to play with your iPod but always in trouble? Here I'll recommend the DVD to iPod Converter Mac.DVD to iPod Converter for Mac is a powerful and professional DVD to iPod Mac OS X software to convert DVD to iPod for Mac with excelent quality and fast conversion speed. With the powerful Mac DVD to iPod Converter, you can freely enjoy your favorite DVD movies with your iPod everywhere.Transfer iPod to Computer is premium iPod transfer software for iPod music, video and photo transferring. It can transfer iPod to computer and backup iPod to computer quickly and smoothly. It's also a computer to iPod transfer tool which can transfer iPod music, videos and photos from computer to iPod.iPhone Converter for Mac is a powerful Mac iPhone converter which can convert all popular video formats to iPhone on Mac perfectly and quickly. The iPhone Converter for Mac can not only convert iPhone for Mac but also can convert avi, wmv, mpeg, mp4, mov, vob, divx, xvid to iPod, PSP, Zune or convert video formats between them.

Posted by: dadada at December 22, 2008 07:51 PM (6sWo1)

111

If you come, we will give you a great surprise!

Posted by: pw Gold at January 02, 2009 03:17 PM (fMiY/)

112 Festival Museum Nusantara Festival museum nusantara
Anti Wrinkle Cream Anti Wrinkle Cream
Iklan Baris Iklan Baris

Posted by: Nowgoogle.com adalah multiple search engine Popular at March 07, 2010 08:44 PM (eW1d9)

113 Thanks for sharing, I found this story while searching for rock lyrics Advertising signs, useful comments and great points made.thanks for great informations It’s a wonderful Writing Board! Great site. A lot of useful information here neon signs California. I’m sending it to some friends!I’ve recently started a blog Los Angeles neon signs, the information you provide on this site has helped me tremendously. Thank you for all of your time & work.

Posted by: Advertising signs at January 07, 2011 09:25 PM (JsxNx)

114 It is part of a broader Palestinian quest for greater international recognition in hopes of moving closer to statehood through channels other than simply negotiations with Israel. DTS Converter

Posted by: DTS Converter at November 04, 2011 01:45 AM (x5HsY)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.
134kb generated in CPU 0.14, elapsed 1.2282 seconds.
62 queries taking 1.1251 seconds, 350 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.