Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » Global warming
|
|
|
|
| Re: Global warming [message #222964 is a reply to message #222829] |
Wed, 27 September 2006 20:53   |
msgtpain
Messages: 663
Registered: March 2003
Location: Montana
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
| help-linux wrote on Wed, 27 September 2006 16:37 |
this means after this ace age is over people in the future will have a second chance, they will not have carbon-based fuels because it will all be burnt up at the rate we use it.
|
That is what a lot of eco-freaks would like you to believe, but the truth is, no one knows for sure how much oil and natural gas is really left in the earth today.
| Quote: |
A primary source for worldwide reserves estimates is the Oil & Gas Journal (OGJ).[1] OGJ estimates that at the beginning of 2004, worldwide reserves were 1.27 trillion barrels of oil and 6,100 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. These estimates are 53 billion barrels of oil and 575 trillion cubic feet of natural gas higher than the prior year, reflecting additional discoveries, improving technology, and changing economics.
At 2003 consumption levels [2], the remaining reserves represent 44.6 years of oil and 66.2 years of natural gas. Does this mean that the world will be out of fossil fuels in 50 years or so? That theory has been around since the 1970s. In fact, the figures for years of remaining reserves have remained relative constant over the past few decades as the industry has replaced consumption with newly discovered oil and gas deposits and has developed technologies to increase the amount of oil and gas that can be recovered from existing reservoirs.
|
| Quote: |
But EIA estimates that in 2025, countries around the globe will still have more than 900 billion barrels of oil remaining to be discovered. EIA estimates total world oil resources at more than 2.9 trillion barrels of oil.
|
http://www.spe.org/spe/jsp/basic/0,,1104_1008218_1109511,00. html
And, these are what they call currently "recoverable" deposits. They also admit that there are trillions of barrels of known deposits which aren't even being considered because they aren't economically logical to persue. If people are willing to pay for it, they'll find a way to refine it.
By my guesstimates, there will be no "oh shit we're out of oil, what now?" scenarios for at least 100 years. And I'm pretty sure they'll find the next-best-thing by then.
|
|
|
|
| Re: Global warming [message #223027 is a reply to message #222964] |
Thu, 28 September 2006 00:17 |
 |
jnz
Messages: 3396
Registered: July 2006
Location: 30th century
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) |
|
|
| msgtpain wrote on Thu, 28 September 2006 04:53 |
| help-linux wrote on Wed, 27 September 2006 16:37 |
this means after this ace age is over people in the future will have a second chance, they will not have carbon-based fuels because it will all be burnt up at the rate we use it.
|
That is what a lot of eco-freaks would like you to believe, but the truth is, no one knows for sure how much oil and natural gas is really left in the earth today.
| Quote: |
A primary source for worldwide reserves estimates is the Oil & Gas Journal (OGJ).[1] OGJ estimates that at the beginning of 2004, worldwide reserves were 1.27 trillion barrels of oil and 6,100 trillion cubic feet of natural gas. These estimates are 53 billion barrels of oil and 575 trillion cubic feet of natural gas higher than the prior year, reflecting additional discoveries, improving technology, and changing economics.
At 2003 consumption levels [2], the remaining reserves represent 44.6 years of oil and 66.2 years of natural gas. Does this mean that the world will be out of fossil fuels in 50 years or so? That theory has been around since the 1970s. In fact, the figures for years of remaining reserves have remained relative constant over the past few decades as the industry has replaced consumption with newly discovered oil and gas deposits and has developed technologies to increase the amount of oil and gas that can be recovered from existing reservoirs.
|
| Quote: |
But EIA estimates that in 2025, countries around the globe will still have more than 900 billion barrels of oil remaining to be discovered. EIA estimates total world oil resources at more than 2.9 trillion barrels of oil.
|
http://www.spe.org/spe/jsp/basic/0,,1104_1008218_1109511,00. html
And, these are what they call currently "recoverable" deposits. They also admit that there are trillions of barrels of known deposits which aren't even being considered because they aren't economically logical to persue. If people are willing to pay for it, they'll find a way to refine it.
By my guesstimates, there will be no "oh shit we're out of oil, what now?" scenarios for at least 100 years. And I'm pretty sure they'll find the next-best-thing by then.
|
when i ment the "fututre" i ment in about 100 years time.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Global warming [message #225338 is a reply to message #218605] |
Sat, 07 October 2006 11:07 |
appshot
Messages: 83
Registered: August 2006
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
|
controlling our population maybe more important than global warming . Global warming is going to happen and you can not stop it now. We wont really see the real effects until about 50-100 years from now.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Global warming [message #226307 is a reply to message #226286] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 12:08 |
 |
Broadus
Messages: 33
Registered: October 2006
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
| cheekay77 wrote on Thu, 12 October 2006 10:00 |
Edit, I think he meant this:
Now why would you want to stop the Earth from Destruction? Lets all ignore it and get drunk.
Spell checks your friend, remember that.
Btw, with that kinda logic, i can bet youll never sirmound to anything in life.
|
Did you really think any of that through, or did your fingers just start spouting crap on your keyboard? Obviously, global warming is real, and I realize it. My sarcastic sentence doesn't make that any different.
"destruction"
"Let's"
I don't know how I could fix all of the wrong in "Spell checks your friend, remember that" sentence. I don't spell checkS my friend(s).
"By the way"
"kinda'" or "kind of"
"I"
"you'll"
"surmount"
[Updated on: Thu, 12 October 2006 12:11] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Global warming [message #226407 is a reply to message #226307] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 21:32 |
 |
Renerage
Messages: 1223
Registered: May 2005
Location: Hamilton ON, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Broadus wrote on Thu, 12 October 2006 15:08 |
| cheekay77 wrote on Thu, 12 October 2006 10:00 |
Edit, I think he meant this:
Now why would you want to stop the Earth from Destruction? Lets all ignore it and get drunk.
Spell checks your friend, remember that.
Btw, with that kinda logic, i can bet youll never sirmound to anything in life.
|
Did you really think any of that through, or did your fingers just start spouting crap on your keyboard? Obviously, global warming is real, and I realize it. My sarcastic sentence doesn't make that any different.
"destruction"
"Let's"
I don't know how I could fix all of the wrong in "Spell checks your friend, remember that" sentence. I don't spell checkS my friend(s).
"By the way"
"kinda'" or "kind of"
"I"
"you'll"
"surmount"
|
Lol I had a feeling i spelt surmount wrong  Meh, doesnt surprise me that you would come back with a sarcastic remark. All i was stating that there was no need for a "sarcastic post"
Even when you think that theres time to look like an idiot, even if you not, there usually isn't
Once again, not calling you an idiot. Just dont post stupid/sarcastic posts. Speak what you mean, if you meant sarcasm, type it normally, then put sarcasm. Its not hard.
A pissed off noob Once said:
I DESLIKE YOU!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Global warming [message #226417 is a reply to message #226413] |
Thu, 12 October 2006 23:42 |
|
Renerage
Messages: 1223
Registered: May 2005
Location: Hamilton ON, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Broadus wrote on Fri, 13 October 2006 02:15 |
Why would I want to add to my sarcasm? ESPECIALLY with something serious? Or "lol". What would be the point in that? Is someone going to read it and be like, "WELL, I GUESS THE EARTH IS GETTING UNNATURALLY HOTTER! MAYBE I SHOULD DO SOMETHING!" No, more like they'd go, "Meh, I don't care. In fact, I'll type something annoying purely for the enjoyment of being against someone."
Nobody would pay attention to or think about my two cents, so what would be the point? I mean, what does talking about political issues in a Renegade forum do for anything?
|
1. Your a dumbass
2. If no one thinks about your two cents, maybe start putting in something worth thinking about. If people dont pay attention, get their attention.
3. And talking about political issues in the world expand our minds and give us new opinions on how the worlds done. Think of all the websites that people have posted about bush lying, the war on iraq useless,same with afghan. It goes to show, that without half of these people and their searching, that US would be made out to look like gods to the eyes of other countries.
Your saying youd rather not know NK has nukes then one day, your house is blown to ashes? Not saying it would happen, just saying stop being a retard and post something that people can relate to, then youll find that youll get more response, whether or not your right.
You can always fight your way out of a battle.
END OF DISCUSSION. I dont want to talk to you any longer. So dont even bother posting to this because i doubt youll have anything useful to say.
A pissed off noob Once said:
I DESLIKE YOU!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Re: Global warming [message #226437 is a reply to message #218605] |
Fri, 13 October 2006 00:50 |
|
Broadus
Messages: 33
Registered: October 2006
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
Whoa, what's this? I believe you said:
| Quote: |
END OF DISCUSSION. I dont want to talk to you any longer. So dont even bother posting to this because i doubt youll have anything useful to say.
|
Going back on your word? Talking to me, now? So dishonest of you. Obviously, I must've had something useful to say, since you came running back to sling some pitiful insults at me because you absolutely must get the last word in. If it so pleases you, I'll let you have the last word. But, yeah. I won. You know how I know? Because here you are, even after saying you wouldn't respond anymore. I'm just that irresistible!
[Updated on: Fri, 13 October 2006 00:50] Report message to a moderator |
|
|
|
| Re: Global warming [message #226438 is a reply to message #226437] |
Fri, 13 October 2006 00:51 |
|
Renerage
Messages: 1223
Registered: May 2005
Location: Hamilton ON, Canada
Karma: 0
|
General (1 Star) |
|
|
| Broadus wrote on Fri, 13 October 2006 03:50 |
Whoa, what's this? I believe you said:
| Quote: |
END OF DISCUSSION. I dont want to talk to you any longer. So dont even bother posting to this because i doubt youll have anything useful to say.
|
Going back on your word? Talking to me, now? So dishonest of you. Obviously, I must've had something useful to say, since you came running back to sling some pitiful insults at me because you absolutely must get the last word in. If it so pleases you, I'll let you have the last word. But, yeah. I won. You know how I know? Because here you are, even after saying you wouldn't respond anymore. I'm just that irresistible!
|
OT: I like ham and cheese bagels 
A pissed off noob Once said:
I DESLIKE YOU!
|
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Sat Nov 23 16:39:54 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01258 seconds
|
Search
Help
Members
Register
Login
Home
