yeah thats pretty much the TL;DR here. It’s complicated since oil is complicated and there isn’t really a “insert oil” oil to talk about, there are a lot of variations of it, and a lot of ways to refine it, and a lot of different resultant products from it as well.
The fact that the modern petro industry even works is kind of insane.
ah yes, wait until you find out about the qwerty keyboard. Or better yet, the fucking ABCDE layout for some godforsaken reason.
all freight traffic is a pretty significant dent, i think the net total for all of transport is something like 15-20% of total emissions, so.
actually, it’s already happening, why do you think LNG is such a massive export from the US right now?
yeah, free market economies baby, making everything more efficient!
the problem with tar sands is a fundamental energy conversion issue. It’s really hard to refine because you don’t get nearly as much energy out as you put in, compared to something like fracking.
It may become reasonable in the future with really cheap renewable energy and higher oil prices for example, but as of right now, it’s economically unviable.
bc local supplies would generally be sufficient for industrial, non-fuel uses
this is assuming that its not just cheaper to import that needed oil? This is always going to be a fundamental problem, though maybe we already happen to produce plastic with native oil idk.
there absolutely is? What if i can buy hydrogen at 1$ per ton, from the hydrogen production empire, meanwhile in the manufacturing empire hydrogen is produced at 2$ per ton. Economically, it would make sense to buy that hydrogen from the hydrogen production empire.
It’s not going to be as significant as a trade as something like coal and LNG obviously, but the market IS going to do this in some capacity. And it’s a beneficial thing for everybody.
arguably, compressing natural gas into LNG is fucking stupid, but apparently the market rates work out, so it’s economically viable. And here we are compressing a gas into a liquid just to ship it over the ocean lol.
market economies are just funny.
you really think this is going to stop the globalism aspect from happening? If you can ship something, and get better market rates on it, you’re going to do it. Economics follows the cheapest route, not the most efficient.
It also just makes sense if you think about it. Places like alaska are going to struggle to generate green energy compared to another place like, texas for example. If you can ship in green hydrogen much cheaper than you can locally produce energy, why wouldn’t you? It’s a reasonable solution to the problem of supply and demand scaling.
it’s also to do with prices. There is a certain amount of this that is true, but the primary reason is oil prices.
to be perfectly clear, this probably wouldn’t help much, since we would likely just move to shipping something like hydrogen across the ocean anyway…
well yeah, you can’t just try, you need to actually do it.
Stupid title, grammatically at least.
if you build a literal tower there are two primary issues: how do you get things up to the top, and 2, it will fall over because of gravity and or wind if you aren’t careful. (or just the ground being too soft to support it)
the pyramid solves basically all of these problems.
i would really appreciate it if a stats/math nerd would put together a short piece on how “statistically it only makes sense if the Egyptians built a pyramid, this is the most logical and likely outcome”
i feel like you could argue that statistically, shapes that are to be built by humans, will inevitably approach the shape of a pyramid.
oil and resource industries are pretty well known for being energy intensive no?
last i checked industry is the primary energy consumer. Sure there’s less people in alaska, but it was just an example i picked, and the market economics would still be applicable there. If it’s cheaper to buy hydrogen, than it is to produce locally sourced power, that’s going to be what happens.