- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
2
Posted on 5/19/14 at 9:40 pm to AUbused
Would the O&G industry try to block this?
Posted on 5/19/14 at 9:40 pm to BOSCEAUX
Just and FYI.
Posted on 5/19/14 at 9:40 pm to baybeefeetz
quote:Not really. Still need petroleum for tons of products. Fertilizers, pesticides, plastics, asphault, medicines, paints, nylon, PTFE... the list is loooong. Plus, it lets then stretch out "inventory" (reserves) longer, greatly lowering their cost structure.
wouldn't the oil industry be the one who gets pissed?
The bigger question is what do we do with all fuel and diesel? Burn it? Bury it?
Posted on 5/19/14 at 9:44 pm to Asgard Device
quote:
Would the O&G industry try to block this?
The bigs would probably compete. They consider themselves energy companies before oil companies.
Posted on 5/19/14 at 9:46 pm to AUbused
Here's a different question. Let's say Lockheed Martin develops fusion technology, would the federal government allow them to control all fusion technology or would they be broken up a la Standard Oil?
Posted on 5/19/14 at 9:50 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Fusion energy will not be free. There will be a cost. The oil industry will have to simply adjust their prices or go out of business.
frick, Houston would turn into the next Detroit lol
Posted on 5/19/14 at 9:57 pm to AUbused
Sierra Club would be mad if you rode a bicycle to work. Its never good enough for those assholes.
Posted on 5/19/14 at 10:01 pm to CptBengal
How many years now has fusion been the wet dream of energy expansion? I will believe it when it comes online at an efficient rate and price..
Posted on 5/19/14 at 10:07 pm to geauxturbo
quote:
Sierra Club would be mad if you rode a bicycle to work.
Why don't you try it... to test out your conjecture? Let's see if they really get mad.
Posted on 5/19/14 at 10:09 pm to GumboPot
quote:
Here's a different question. Let's say Lockheed Martin develops fusion technology, would the federal government allow them to control all fusion technology or would they be broken up a la Standard Oil?
I think they would be eventually pressured into making contracts with other companies to resell the technology.I guess it would be like how Microsoft makes money off technology sold in every android device sold.
Posted on 5/19/14 at 10:13 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
Not really. Still need petroleum for tons of products. Fertilizers, pesticides, plastics, asphault, medicines, paints, nylon, PTFE... the list is loooong. Plus, it lets then stretch out "inventory" (reserves) longer, greatly lowering their cost structure.
So water off a duck's back? In the "don't much care" category?
Posted on 5/19/14 at 10:31 pm to baybeefeetz
Petroleum will still be very important for a long time. Fusion would hurt the coal and natural gas markets most because at first reactors would be too big to power vehicles. Strictly for electrical power generation.
Mr Fusion is quite a ways off.
Mr Fusion is quite a ways off.
Posted on 5/19/14 at 11:35 pm to antibarner
quote:
Petroleum will still be very important for a long time
Yes, but if natural gas stops being used to power the grid and if oil stops being used to power transportation then the price of oil will drop significantly and the cost to make plastics and other oil derivatives will increase.
You don't need Mr. Fusion. You just need an electric vehicle infrastructure. Right now people don't want it but when self-driving cars become the norm and the engineering/distance/cost improves they'll start getting on board and the adoption rate will grow exponentially.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:10 am to baybeefeetz
quote:Probably somewhere between "pissed" and "water off a duck's back"
So water off a duck's back? In the "don't much care" category?
Honestly, it would give the majors an unprecedented amount of cash to diversify with. Opens up a lot of possibilities (both green and traditional). All while retaining a significant part of their revenue streams.
The independents would likely go under. No cash, though. And the mom&pops with the 2BOPD well in the back yard would become irrelevant.
Wouldn't want to be a coal miner... almost no alternate uses...
This post was edited on 5/20/14 at 12:12 am
Posted on 5/20/14 at 12:18 am to upgrayedd
quote:
About as pissed as when unicorn hunter's are no longer allowed to use chupacabras to flush yetis out of the magical forest.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 1:07 am to GumboPot
quote:
Here's a different question. Let's say Lockheed Martin develops fusion technology, would the federal government allow them to control all fusion technology or would they be broken up a la Standard Oil?
If they can do it, someone else can. Even if they patent it, the Chinese would clone it with a quickness. It would be in Lockheed's interest to license the technology as soon and as widely as possible to forestall that.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 5:07 am to VOR
quote:
That's just not true, dude. There are plenty of people who lean left but who would welcome fusion. Hell, almost all of my liberal friends from college would wet themselves at the prospect of a viable fusion option.
This is me. I agree with the Green Party on a loooooot of issues, but we differ radically on our stance on nuclear power.
Posted on 5/20/14 at 7:35 am to CptBengal
I agree with those who opine that the advent of feasible commercial fusion will be fought tooth and nail by the Democrat Party and the Green Lobby.
If Democrats are able to do so, they will attempt to Federally regulate fusion out of existence.
The reasons for this have already been explained in this thread.
Of course, if fusion technology is not completely safe, then, there might be good cause to oppose its implementation. However, I believe that Leftists will oppose even completely safe fusion.
If Democrats are able to do so, they will attempt to Federally regulate fusion out of existence.
The reasons for this have already been explained in this thread.
Of course, if fusion technology is not completely safe, then, there might be good cause to oppose its implementation. However, I believe that Leftists will oppose even completely safe fusion.
This post was edited on 5/20/14 at 7:39 am
Posted on 5/20/14 at 8:00 am to Champagne
In response to the electric car post, people will not want those things until...you can drive one as far as you can an internal combustion engine. Not until you can fuel it as fast as a gas or diesel engine and not until you get the power.
You will sell some ,but you will not dominate the market. Maybe you can with the hydrogen fuel cell,that can possibly fit all those criteria right now,except for availability of fuel.
You will sell some ,but you will not dominate the market. Maybe you can with the hydrogen fuel cell,that can possibly fit all those criteria right now,except for availability of fuel.
This post was edited on 5/20/14 at 8:02 am
Page 3 of 5
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News