Energy!

  On 2/10/2014 at 6:02 AM, luke viia said:

so remind me why you don't believe in legislation?

if the government's power is the problem, how is creating more and more legislation (thereby making it more powerful) to fix itself effective.

"We realize our corporation is too big, therefore we are adding 20,000 employees by 2015 to regulate against the types of excess a big corporation would be guilty of."

I'm not sure where you're getting at with that argument. Rebuilding the total car market is an ongoing process which is already continually taking place. Just like people getting new mobile phones all the time. So those massive amounts of energy being burnt to change the car market is mostly a business as usual kind of thing which is inherent to the existing market.

Again, I'm not coming from reports, but what I see happening around here on the streets. Analists and their projections always tend to be conservative. They're bad at predicting disruptive changes. What were the projections for the new iphone in 2007? Or for the entire smartphone market around that time?

@shea: ?

the government's power isn't 'the problem' (there are many); in that regard, though, bad legislation allowing for environmental degradation is a big part of the problem. we currently have a lack of laws protecting the environment, not too many bogging it down.

  On 2/10/2014 at 6:14 AM, goDel said:

I'm not sure where you're getting at with that argument. Rebuilding the total car market is an ongoing process which is already continually taking place. Just like people getting new mobile phones all the time. So those massive amounts of energy being burnt to change the car market is mostly a business as usual kind of thing which is inherent to the existing market.

yes, and business as usual is harmful to the goals of environmental protection, not helpful. so i was getting at the idea that a market solution is not a solution at all.

  On 2/10/2014 at 6:17 AM, luke viia said:

yes, and business as usual is harmful to the goals of environmental protection, not helpful. so i was getting at the idea that a market solution is not a solution at all.

This is the same reason I don't think a government solution is a solution at all.

OK. I hope you understand I was not arguing that environmental issues will be solved. My only argument was at the amount of alternative kinds of energy being used, and the changes I see. Whether or not those will be enough to save the planet is beyond my scope.

On that point, this planet will outlive us anyways. No need for reading international reports on this point, I guess. ;D

most definitely the planet will outlive us but that isn't a legit reason to waive responsibility for our actions --- so hopefully it's been clear i'm just advocating more involvement with the political and market processes that have led us to these problems as individuals.

@shea: i see your point but i don't think it's fair to completely write off the only (governing) body that can effectively institute necessary changes. if i thought the private sector could solve this i'd be all about it, but the private sector works on the terms of the government, hence the problem.

I'm doing my share by having no car. The universe is safe in my hands.

/responsible nancy

edit: it's not a either/or between the private sector or the government. never was and never will be. they need each other, whether they openly admit it or not. don't be fooled by the private sector talking points. it's just a game where both keep each other responsible for each others faults. sort of checks and balances, so to speak. (although the situation in the us might be different....everything feels like being on steroids over there).

you know that's not what i'm saying.

nvrmnd.

A collapse would be horrible for society. Because instability is a breeding ground for tyranny, 9/11 is proof of this. Unpredictability could lead to things much worse than climate change. The right way is to make gradual change. That way you don't upset economic growth too much. Everyone can do things in their own lives that will help the situation globally. That is the cool thing about having a gigantic society. We all just have to do small things to create big change. A huge fault lies with the corporations. They are the ones who are responsible for what they produce. They are the ones making the decisions to negatively impact the planet in the name of profit. They could choose other avenues as some do and some make claims towards such action.

To be honest though. My feeling guilt about my job is really not necessary. There is as much positive to my working my job as there is negative. I merely acknowledge that it goes against my personal beliefs. To be fair everyone contributes to the bad and the good in various ways. There is bad and good that comes from the oil industry.

I really don't see someone who speaks about environmentalism having a smartphone as hypocrisy. It's all about minimization, and there lots of ways one can achieve this. It does require that everyone be more conscious of their lives and actions and put forth a genuine effort to do what they can when they can.

  On 2/10/2014 at 6:46 AM, luke viia said:

most definitely the planet will outlive us but that isn't a legit reason to waive responsibility for our actions --- so hopefully it's been clear i'm just advocating more involvement with the political and market processes that have led us to these problems as individuals.

 

@shea: i see your point but i don't think it's fair to completely write off the only (governing) body that can effectively institute necessary changes. if i thought the private sector could solve this i'd be all about it, but the private sector works on the terms of the government, hence the problem.

 

i don't think the private sector can either.

lol: "a collapse would be horrible for society"

indeed.

  On 2/10/2014 at 5:45 AM, sheatheman said:

 

  On 2/10/2014 at 3:11 AM, John Ehrlichman said:

 

  On 12/12/2013 at 8:10 AM, sheatheman said:

Fracking is necessary because Daniel Plainview already got all of the easy stuff.

don't you think that might not bode well for our future and current rate of energy consumption? Meaning the fact that we are taking such desperate measures to actually get energy sources out of the earth (fracking, tar sands extraction) and all the 'easy' stuff is gone seems to lend credence to the Peak oil theory or the more general 'peak energy' theory.

The only solution that I can see is for America and similar over-consuming nations to lower energy consumption. Is there a legitimate way out of this situation? Short of building a ton of new nuclear power reactors It's hard for me to see, and i'd argue that's a bad solution to maintain a network for the amount of energy being consumed

 

 

I know, it's crazy. Most of the world toils to feed the luxury of the west. China may cash in their chips in a few decades, but either way, it's insane that we have this crazy new science of fracking. it just bothers me when all of these people with all their plastic products and smartphones say "big oil is so evil fracking is the worst thing ever." We might as well complain about Foxconn through imessages. All are implicit unless you are homesteading.

 

I don't think there is legit way out. Globalism has too much momentum. We are all pushing towards the abyss, and it would take an equal or greater amount of pushing away from it to do any good. Even if we don't make it to the edge, the cliffside may crumble anyway.

 

very candid response from someone inside the industry, appreciated (unless you weren't being sarcastic were you? that response was insanely revealing and far more candid that I anticipated) (( sorry just jumped back in thread ))

damn! i came in here to think Mike Ruppert was going insane, but your posts actually have (frighteningly) further convinced me he's onto something. Jesus christ. Have you seen this film? If so how accurate do you think his energy assessment is?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rdO2Xh51Q-U

  On 2/10/2014 at 5:50 AM, sheatheman said:

The only thing that will snap the masses out of it is some form of collapse.

I have not seen the film, but judging by those hand signals in the still, he seems legit.

more rambling:

I'm interested in the idea of collapsitarianism. I'm also interested in the idea of an oilman being a collapsitarian.

fracking, the wells are only economically viable for less than a couple of years, after that the returns don't account for the inputs, it's not like an oil or traditional gas well. Methane seeps out of the ground around the well head and through fissures elsewhere on the site, methane is a nasty greenhouse gas, but as this gas isn't recorded as part of the output, it's an open secret that helps the industry to state that fracking is somehow better than oil production from a global warming standpoint. Fracking uses heaps of water, which is combined with toxic proprietary (as in here the queensland government doesn't even know exactly what is being pumped in underneath us all) blends that are injected deep into the rock strata to break it up. No one has modelled the long term effects of both smashing up the geology below huge swathes of your land and injected lethal chemicals into this leaky environment. Here it could be slowly moving through our giant aquifer for thousands of years. Popping up wherever we've a bore to water our cattle.

As for the collapse is good thing. I came to that conclusion long ago. People are still too connected to the current failed system even as it has taken away from the general masses most of what the previous generations fought for and expected for themselves. Once people have no basics, especially those with more intellectual capacity to know what the challenges are and how to look for solutions, those in the middle classes. Then we'll reboot. Of course total collapse and a politically naive population is not a very encouraging blend. You'll either get New Deal or fascism. bluh.

i should probably watch that video for a laugh.

Fracking and oil wells are not two different things. Fracked wells can produce oil and/or gas. Wells are not continually fracked. This happens a few times through their life. They are economically viable for much longer than 2 years. Methane is 1 of many gases that can be trapped in formation. Fracking isn't so much an alternative to traditional drilling as it is a necessary step.

But you're right about long term effects not being known. One thing we do know is that salt water disposal wells (which I covered earlier in this thread), caused an earthquake in Ohio, the concentration and pressure of the wells likely resulting in the shift/collapse of an underground fault line. As for water pollution, wells in Texas (my field) are rigorously cemented to protect the aquifer/groundwater. But as I said here earlier, it is not the chemicals we should be concerned about re: water pollution, but fossil fuels from formation and reservoir.

Yes, rigorously cemented. Step one towards self delusion. It's nice that you've found a well paying job and all (pun), i don't begrudge you that. But this industry is pretty shameful both in it's deceitful premise of a cleaner way to fossil fuels that will last for ages and the fact that wells will just be left abandoned for the government to fix up, once the money has been made (this has already been happening in the US, look it up).

of course you'll know better than those fucking brainwashed plebs working in the actual thing.

yes, cause they just went down there and subjected the complete substrata to a visual examination before they determined that there were no fissures left after pumping in the concrete (which btw probably created more cracks and helped to squeeze the junk further along to wherever it's going to end up, maybe your back garden). This is a new industry, most involved wouldn't know, beyond the limited literature and what the company hands down as scripture, what they are doing except for that there's money in it and then there's that regulation hasn't caught up. There have been parallels to this throughout the last 200 years of human progress. Just look the issue up, it's not as cut and dried as you'd like to think, and if they want to do it where you are, i'd hope that you'd be opposed. Especially if it's anywhere near your main aquifer, given it's importance to that area.

Of course, i'm just some hipster nut that helicopters into drilling rigs to pontificate to the poor gas men for the righteous boner it gives me. Or a misguided fixie rider that puts all his faith in every word that leaves the fingers of some dreadlocked vegetarian blogger whose advertising revenue jumps everytime she calls out the man.

  On 2/11/2014 at 8:57 AM, delet... said:

Yes, rigorously cemented. Step one towards self delusion. It's nice that you've found a well paying job and all (pun), i don't begrudge you that. But this industry is pretty shameful both in it's deceitful premise of a cleaner way to fossil fuels that will last for ages and the fact that wells will just be left abandoned for the government to fix up, once the money has been made (this has already been happening in the US, look it up).

Please don't tell me to look things up. I have first hand access to collectively over 100 years of oil field experience. My father "fixed up" oil wells for the Railroad Commission (aka the "government") for over twenty years of his life. My grandfather (not my father's father), has worked in the oil field over 50 years.

The groundwater surveying and cementing processes are what take up the most time. I would explain how it works but I think that would be wasted effort as you would probably say "that's just what they want you to think! I sort of half-saw this documentary that was on in the other room this once, and I skimmed like 3 different articles on it!! I'm passionate about this subject!"

Do you understand supply and demand? How do you think boomkat ships you vinyl? Do you understand the concept of reservoir oil being harder and harder to come by? Do you understand that people go to war over energy? Do you understand that fracking, as dystopically cool as it is, is a way to get at energy under our feet that was previously inaccessible?

I have never seen a single piece of "company literature." You're conflating cyberpunk corporate archetypes with RL. I know, you really want to live in a cool scifi world of pollution and oppression. Just keep buying that boomkat/bleep merch and you'll do your part.

Also, don't assume that I'm getting rich off of this. I work around 30 hours a week and make under $26k a year.

Your claim that "those involved wouldn't know" is, wow, what a doozy. "A gardener doesn't know what's really happening when he plants those Lantanas." You're right, there is an inverse relationship between knowledge of a subject and involvement with it! I can see how you know much more than I do now, since you have never seen a single completion report in your life, much less been to a well site. As eugene said, that I would dare come here and talk about fracking, like I know anything, is a Plebeian delusion!

shots fired

  On 2/11/2014 at 8:23 PM, sheatheman said:

you really want to live in a cool scifi world of pollution and oppression

  On 2/11/2014 at 6:44 AM, sheatheman said:

I have not seen the film, but judging by those hand signals in the still, he seems legit.

 

more rambling:

 

  Reveal hidden contents

 

Most of the people afraid of fracking don't know anything about it. Environmentalists of today are comprised of 90% kneejerk fixie riders. All of the stuff about unknown chemicals in "fracking fluid" is made up. FracFocus is a chemical disclosure registry, and I look at forms for every completion report I file that tell me exactly what each well is fracked with. A frequent main ingredient is SiO2 (silicon dioxide).

 

The problem with fracking is the opposite of what most "activists" are saying. Most activists are just that, in that they fly around in helicopters very actively reporting on new fracking developments. What they should be saying is "hydraulic fracturing sure is a beautiful thing, as it enables me and my crew to fly around in this thing." The problem with fracking isn't that Big Oil is so evil, they are just doing the dirty work. The problem is our desires have pushed the oil industry to the height at which it now sits. There is no way for the ugly underbelly to be done away with unless we do away with the ugliness of our excess. But everyone wants that gold iphone, so...

 

 

 

I'm interested in the idea of collapsitarianism. I'm also interested in the idea of an oilman being a collapsitarian.

I love how you make all these comments about fracking safety, but you don't make one comment concerning the government produced water quality reports that specifically state that oil related damage is in fact a reality. All you did was laugh at the introduction to my statement. In the words of Daniel Plainview whom you seem so much to admire, "You look like a fffffoool....don't you?" Have you been to fucking Pecos or Big Spring? This is not something that is hidden. I'm still recovering from health problems that only started after I lived in Pecos.

  On 2/11/2014 at 9:31 PM, Cryptowen said:

 

  On 2/11/2014 at 8:23 PM, sheatheman said:

you really want to live in a cool scifi world of pollution and oppression

third top reason to buy bitcoins, after "i might get rich off this" and "you can use them to buy drugs off the internet"

 

I know!

"Hey, isn't that a disruptor field assembly? Is that compatible with my Axom 3700?"

"Why yes sir, the Axom 3700 is the primary EnviroSuit model that the Lentec DFA was designed for."

"I'll take it!"

"Sir, I must inform you that you are out of credits."

  On 2/11/2014 at 8:23 PM, sheatheman said:

 

  On 2/11/2014 at 8:57 AM, delet... said:

Yes, rigorously cemented. Step one towards self delusion. It's nice that you've found a well paying job and all (pun), i don't begrudge you that. But this industry is pretty shameful both in it's deceitful premise of a cleaner way to fossil fuels that will last for ages and the fact that wells will just be left abandoned for the government to fix up, once the money has been made (this has already been happening in the US, look it up).

 

Please don't tell me to look things up. I have first hand access to collectively over 100 years of oil field experience. My father "fixed up" oil wells for the Railroad Commission (aka the "government") for over twenty years of his life. My grandfather (not my father's father), has worked in the oil field over 50 years.

 

The groundwater surveying and cementing processes are what take up the most time. I would explain how it works but I think that would be wasted effort as you would probably say "that's just what they want you to think! I sort of half-saw this documentary that was on in the other room this once, and I skimmed like 3 different articles on it!! I'm passionate about this subject!"

 

Do you understand supply and demand? How do you think boomkat ships you vinyl? Do you understand the concept of reservoir oil being harder and harder to come by? Do you understand that people go to war over energy? Do you understand that fracking, as dystopically cool as it is, is a way to get at energy under our feet that was previously inaccessible?

 

I have never seen a single piece of "company literature." You're conflating cyberpunk corporate archetypes with RL. I know, you really want to live in a cool scifi world of pollution and oppression. Just keep buying that boomkat/bleep merch and you'll do your part.

 

Also, don't assume that I'm getting rich off of this. I work around 30 hours a week and make under $26k a year.

 

Your claim that "those involved wouldn't know" is, wow, what a doozy. "A gardener doesn't know what's really happening when he plants those Lantanas." You're right, there is an inverse relationship between knowledge of a subject and involvement with it! I can see how you know much more than I do now, since you have never seen a single completion report in your life, much less been to a well site. As eugene said, that I would dare come here and talk about fracking, like I know anything, is a Plebeian delusion!

 

What we should be concerned with is not that if we consume that we are destroying. Because it is necessary for us to consume. It is why the powers that be are not making necessary the diminishing of the impact of our consumption. Why are we not making huge changes for the long term?

For instance, why are we not using bioplastics for everything already?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bioplastic

Also, if you only make 26k a year in oil & gas it means you are an admin. That means you get exposed to the echo chamber of your office. You aren't out in the field. You aren't traveling and seeing the wells. You just push paper. Of course, all the paper you see is going to say everything is fine and dandy.