Showing posts with label oil. Show all posts
Showing posts with label oil. Show all posts

Tuesday, September 17, 2024

Fracking, a report from 2124

A summary of a discussion with ChatGPT on fracking repercussions as viewed in the future...

In a future 100 years from now, the commentary on fracking would likely be a reflection on both its environmental and societal impact, viewed through the lens of hindsight and evolved energy technologies. 

Here’s a speculative outline:

  1. Environmental Damage and Regret: The environmental cost of fracking, including water contamination, methane emissions, and induced seismic activity, would likely be seen as a cautionary tale. Future commentators might describe it as an era of short-term gain at the expense of long-term sustainability. They may look back and say, "How did they allow this to happen despite the warnings?" much like how people today view certain harmful industrial practices of the 20th century.

  2. Transition Era: Fracking could be seen as part of the growing pains of transitioning from fossil fuels to cleaner energy sources. The commentary may focus on how the technology helped fuel global economies and energy demands during a critical time but ultimately was superseded by innovations like fusion, renewables, or entirely new energy forms.

  3. Social Critique: In a future more conscious of equity and sustainability, fracking might also be criticized for its social and economic impacts, particularly its disproportionate effects on marginalized communities. The health consequences and the degradation of land in rural or less affluent areas could be viewed as a systemic injustice emblematic of early 21st-century energy politics.

  4. Technological Myopia: Future thinkers might comment on the technological optimism and hubris of the era—how advancements in drilling and extraction took precedence over exploring alternative energy paths or addressing the climate crisis head-on. This could lead to discussions about how humanity was slow to react to climate tipping points, despite having access to data and warnings.

  5. Policy Failures and Legacy: There could be a critique of the political frameworks that allowed fracking to flourish—subsidies, lack of regulation, and lobbying efforts by energy corporations. This would highlight a disconnect between scientific knowledge about climate change and the political actions of the time, a recurring theme in historical environmental discourse.

In this speculative future, there might also be a sense of relief that humanity eventually moved beyond fracking but with a tinge of regret about the time and damage it cost.

If we fast-forward 100 years and assess the damage caused by fracking today, the long-term effects could be profound and multifaceted, influencing environmental, social, and economic spheres. 

Here’s how the impacts might be viewed in that future:

1. Environmental Scars:

  • Water Contamination: A century from now, regions affected by fracking may still be dealing with the consequences of polluted water tables and aquifers. Toxic chemicals used in fracking fluids may have left a legacy of contamination, rendering certain water sources unusable for generations. Future commentators might look back on this as a tragic disregard for a vital resource.
  • Methane Leaks and Climate Change: Methane, a potent greenhouse gas, leaks from fracking operations and is likely to be blamed for exacerbating the climate crisis of the 21st century. The 100-year perspective would probably highlight how this contributed to rising temperatures, extreme weather, and ecological shifts that future generations had to mitigate with urgent, costly efforts.
  • Ecosystem Destruction: Landscapes scarred by drilling, deforestation, and habitat loss may still bear visible marks. Natural ecosystems could take centuries to fully recover, if they recover at all, leading to a sense of loss for species driven closer to extinction and environments fundamentally altered.

2. Climate Change Tipping Points:

  • Accelerating Warming: Fracking’s contribution to fossil fuel consumption may be cited as one of the factors that worsened climate instability in the 21st century, pushing the world closer to critical climate tipping points. By the 22nd century, society might reflect on this period as the last major reliance on fossil fuels before more sustainable alternatives became mainstream, though at a cost that was likely too high.
  • Ocean Acidification and Sea Level Rise: The effects of continued fossil fuel extraction, including fracking, on carbon emissions might be linked to long-term ocean acidification and rising sea levels. Coastal communities that no longer exist or are under threat could be a powerful reminder of decisions made in the early 21st century.

3. Health and Human Impact:

  • Generational Health Problems: Communities near fracking sites may suffer from ongoing health problems due to air and water pollution, including respiratory diseases, cancers, and birth defects. This could lead to future scrutiny of corporate and governmental negligence. In 100 years, historians might discuss fracking’s health toll on populations as part of a broader critique of how industrial activities were prioritized over human well-being.
  • Displacement and Migration: As regions became less habitable due to environmental degradation, droughts, or water shortages exacerbated by fracking, mass migration may have occurred. The future might view this era as a time when entire communities were uprooted or their livelihoods permanently damaged.

4. Economic and Political Critique:

  • Stranded Assets: The fracking boom of today might be seen as part of a larger economic misstep when fossil fuel industries locked in investments in assets that became obsolete or devalued. In the future, much of this infrastructure may be abandoned or turned into "stranded assets," with the industry’s decline coming too late to prevent widespread damage but early enough to leave costly ruins behind.
  • Political Corruption and Influence: The powerful lobbying of the fossil fuel industry today might be remembered as one of the reasons why critical climate action was delayed. Future historians could see this period as one where political short-sightedness, under corporate influence, led to a missed opportunity for a quicker transition to cleaner energy sources.

5. Societal Reflection and Responsibility:

  • Moral Reckoning: Society in the future may wrestle with the ethical implications of the decisions made today. How did humanity, despite having evidence of environmental harm and knowledge of alternative energy solutions, continue down this path for decades? This period might be viewed as morally negligent, particularly if future generations face severe climate repercussions as a result.
  • Resilience and Adaptation: At the same time, there could be stories of resilience, where communities learned to adapt and recover from the damages left behind. Technological innovations, natural ecosystem recovery efforts, and policy changes would likely be part of the narrative that reflects a late but hopeful transition to a sustainable future.

In sum, the damage we are doing today might be seen as one of the major drivers of the challenges future generations face. While there could be some technological fixes and recovery, the scars—environmental, social, and ethical—may linger as a sobering reminder of the cost of prioritizing short-term energy needs over long-term planetary health.

But I'm sure it will be OK...

Right?

By the way...

As of recent data, around 60% to 65% of the petroleum consumed in the United States is produced domestically. This includes both crude oil and refined petroleum products. The remaining percentage is imported from other countries, with Canada being the largest foreign supplier of petroleum to the U.S. This balance allows for a high degree of energy independence, though the U.S. continues to rely on international sources to some extent.

Here’s a more detailed breakdown of U.S. petroleum production and imports:

  1. Domestic Production:

    • As of recent years, the U.S. produces roughly 11 to 12 million barrels per day (bpd) of crude oil. This accounts for about 60-65% of the total petroleum consumption. Most of this production comes from key areas like Texas, North Dakota (Bakken shale), New Mexico (Permian Basin), and offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico.
    • U.S. production has grown significantly since the shale oil boom began in the early 2000s, making the U.S. one of the world's top oil producers.
  2. Imports:

    • The U.S. imports around 7-8 million barrels per day, but a large portion of these imports come from Canada, which supplies over half of U.S. oil imports. Other key suppliers include Mexico, Saudi Arabia, and Iraq.
    • Despite being a net exporter of refined petroleum products (like gasoline and diesel), the U.S. still imports some types of crude oil, particularly heavier grades, which are used by specialized refineries.
  3. Energy Independence:

    • U.S. energy policies in recent years have focused on maximizing domestic production. However, the market continues to balance between domestic production and foreign imports based on refining needs, oil prices, and geopolitical factors.
  4. Strategic Reserves:

    • The U.S. also maintains the Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR), a stockpile designed to offset short-term disruptions in supply, but this reserve is used sparingly.

That's it. Just some things to consider...

Monday, June 4, 2018

Cannabis As A Legal Intoxicant

I'd like to clear something up about Cannabis, pot, weed, ganja, or whatever you like to call it.

I may come across as a die hard activist about it, but actually I don't think anyone should do drugs if they can avoid them. Meds, obviously are another issue. The concept of using medical pot for recreation has always been a bastardization of it, something our government should hang their heads in shame over the need for that to have come about. That has nothing to do with the actual need for medical pot. I'm talking only recreational use.

I just don't think people should be abused as we have, through prohibition (and alcohol in my view is as bad as cocaine and just or nearly, as dangerous). Unlike most of those against all this, I learned to have my opinion through research and experience, not just having a jaded opinion as many who are against it.

There has also been more interest by the public in drugs after our government has lied to use for so many decades about them. There are now doctors, scientists and journalists talking about drugs and the real information about them. Therefore there is also more interest in hallucinogens.

People like Michael Pollan with his book, How to Change your Mind - What the New Science of Psychedelics Teaches Us About Consciousness, Dying, Addiction, Depression, and Transcendence,.discusses this. At the writing of this here, I'm still waiting for the audiobook to hit retail.

I go in depth about this myself in my latest audiobook, On Psychology. It should be available any day now on Amazon, iTunes and Audible.com. See the addendum at the end of that article about the history and systems of psychology and study of synesthesia and schizophrenia. It's a fascinating article. Even if I do say so myself. And I explain in it what that is so and how I know that to be true.

I don't say this in my psychology article but I'll mention it here. I do mention drugs like LSD in the article and audiobook, however. Years ago I was in a job I couldn't quit, couldn't get away from and had it for several years. It was stressful and difficult to go back day after day until finally I had ran out my condition of employment. It allowed me to get my degree eventually in psychology from a university, so in the end, that was good. But it was a stressful few years.

I would use LSD over a weekend sometimes when I really needed to escape but couldn't. So that come that next Monday, I felt refreshed and recharged, like I had been on vacation for an entire week. I would also use it at times to kill off a bad habit, or one I wanted to change but kept failing to. I was drop (take) the acid (LSD) alone, concentrate on what I wanted through the experience and find that afterword, There is talk nowadays about microdosing LSD. Taking low doses on a daily basis. The word is out on that for now but they are beginning to research it.

And I Found that I had indeed changed that habit after a single acid trip. Now I'm not advocating this method for people, just saying that it worked for me. And I admit, I was unusual in my understanding of drugs and psychology, even before I got a degree in it. Yet, I didn't go crazy, didn't lose my job, didn't need medical attention, didn't harm anyone, not even myself, and it seemed to me to only be a benefit to me. And to be sure, in the 1950s it was actually used in therapeutic ways. But our government, out of fear and ignorance, as usual, had made it illegal because of the 1960s counterculture.

Weed in comparison to those other drugs is pretty harmless, in that it doesn't kill like the other drugs can that it's been inappropriately grouped with. Grouping pot with heroin and meth, is ridiculous and always has been. Cocaine and cannabis are not physically addictive. The issue there comes not in physical but emotional. They are not the same thing. But cocaine is vastly more dangerous that cannabis.

Yet there are dangers related to legalizing cannabis, now. And oddly enough, they have little to do with the substance itself.

The dangers come not in the substance but in big money as usual and through corporate mismanagement (also as usual), in trying to push a product on us more than is good for us. They will seek to sell us pot soda pop, pot everything, now. Anyway they can make a buck and addict us just as in tobacco.

Except, as stated above, weed isn't addictive in the same sense as heroin or alcohol.

But does that mean it should be illegal? No. We will go through a honeymoon period for a while and then slack off some as it becomes culturally normal and we acclimate to how to use and not abuse it. As we mature into it's national use as we did alcohol after prohibition, or as a human maturing into adulthood and make decisions of use or abuse.

Also, in over enhancing the weed itself to powerful medical levels, something that came from the underhanded way that decriminalizing it had to go, we have it more and more in a far more powerful than necessary form.

All because our government lied to us ever since the Nixon commission said it was safe and he  as president ignored that because of his own personal bias. Just as we're seeing now with Attorney General Jeff Sessions, whom even the man who appointed him as said, was a bad idea. This had led since Nixon to a war on (citizens, not) drugs (as it failed in waring on drugs), where we found ourselves eventually with a very powerful form of pot that never appeared in nature.

I would suggest to anyone wanting to use pot, to seek the weaker forms, to learn they don't need to consume as much now a days to get reasonably high, to imbibe with reason as you would (or should) alcohol.

The less often you use it, the less it can become normalized in your system. Use at little as possible to enhance life, to "take the edge off" and not make it a life in and of itself. In that form, it can be very useful as an adjunct to life and not an end all, be all. Rather than use it and do nothing, use it and do something, safely, and legally.

We simply need to act like responsible adults. The ability now to eat THC (or CBD) is healthier than smoking it. Using a bong or water pipe (even better as it doesn't burn the substance just as a vape does not), is healthier. Vaping the oil or other such substance is better too than smoking it due to the heated smoke, the particulates hitting the lung's alveoli.

Let's face it, drugs aren't for kids. But if my own pre adult kids (or as adults) were to use a drug, I'd far more prefer it be cannabis, than literally any of our other of the scarier prospects out there, including alcohol. Deaths to cannabis are nearly if not completely non existent. Death due to alcohol, domestic violence, drunk driving, weapons charges on booze, etc., are astounding. The more we can get people to replace alcohol use with cannabis, the better we'll all be.

And then, there is the tax situation. Robbing drug cartels of their mainstay, removing crime from cannabis use. This isn't rocket science and states with legal cannabis are proving this to extraordinary degree. Including my own state of Washington. Where we are also leading the way on serious drugs like heroin use in needle exchanges and safe injection and use locations.

This is America and I've always been stunned at how our government continues to try to make decisions for us, that we should be making ourselves...if America is such a great and free nation.

Let us see it. Let us decide. And stop abusing us for mere political gain.

Thursday, March 19, 2015

Nuclear Energy - Thorium as a 'future fuel'

This situation reminds me of the Beta vs VHS situation. One got held up until the other, not as good of a choice, simply took over. In the case of Beta, it was Sony's greed and as the court case dragged on VHS simply took over the entire market.

In the case of Thorium, the Government's penchant for words in how a technology was presented, and not understanding the technology, were perhaps what killed it during a period in our history when the sound of something could outweigh its viability. Kind of like now with a certain partisan cohort in the US Congress.

Full disclosure, I actually bought stock in Thorium energy companies a couple of years back. So I'm not pushing this now as something to make me money but to share what I thought was a good idea back then and still do.


I'm not going to argue or present much of anything here other than to present this video (see below). It is two hours long on YouTube, but it contains a lot of information worthy of hearing. The important thing to note is life as usual has got to stop. We need a change. This may very well be a possible, if even temporary solution, but one better than carbon based ones like coal which has really got to go ASAP as well as petrochemical.

I would suggest those petrochemical companies also need to go considering in some (many) cases their historical and ongoing crimes around the world against humanity.

One naysayer below the video in the comments section says Thorium only has supplies for forty years, four times that of carbon based fuels. And? Still sounds good to me. After all, don't we need that buffer to come up with even newer technologies? And we don't need to continue the insanity with the current ancient ones.

Here is the video, a little clunky, but worth sitting through: You be the judge.

Thorium backed as a 'future fuel' - BBC.com Published on Nov 19, 2014

"Some believe thorium is key to developing a new generation of cleaner, safer nuclear power.[2] According to an opinion piece (not peer-reviewed) by a group of scientists at the Georgia Institute of Technology, considering its overall potential, thorium-based power "can mean a 1000+ year solution or a quality low-carbon bridge to truly sustainable energy sources solving a huge portion of mankind’s negative environmental impact."[3]

"After studying the feasibility of using thorium, nuclear scientists Ralph W. Moir and Edward Teller suggested that thorium nuclear research should be restarted after a three-decade shutdown and that a small prototype plant should be built.[4][5][6] Research and development of thorium-based nuclear reactors, primarily the liquid fluoride thorium reactor, (LFTR), MSR design, has been or is now being done in India, China, Norway, U.S., Israel and Russia."

One of the points in this video is that China has already come over here for information and is already building one of these Thorium based nuclear power stations. Do we really need to buy our energy from China in the future via the technology to build these plants when we originally discovered and and foolishly disregarded it, actually killed it ourselves back in 1972 if not even sooner in many ways?

We need to start looking to the future (or perhaps in this case, the past)....