Total posts: 
The United States....as fuel exporter?:
It's logic like this that decreed Ireland didn't deserve potatoes.
PHD in Thuganomics
Still OccupiedWait really? ....man, if the states can cut down and stop importing from Saudi Arabia and Alberta...righteous. As long as we're not repeating clusterfucks like BP's, of course.
I changed accounts.This is why I say we aggressively invest in green energy development: so we can make a killing on the oil market while the gettin's good.
I am now known as Flyboy.
Still OccupiedOne way or another sustainability is going to be the cornerstone of the future economy. We're gonna have to go green if we want to stay in the green. So it's quite encouraging to see that oil consumption is dropping; let's keep it up, and get off the coal too while we're at it.
Yeah, but you know policymakers are just going to keep us burdened with oil, then break out the alternative energy once people simply can't pay the inflated prices. That could take a decade.
PHD in Thuganomics
If you don't like a single Frank Ocean song, you have no soul.
This hat doesn't fit!Can we export the Ethanol while we're at it? Barely anybody's using the damn stuff. More seriously, how do we plan to get the oil to export? Unless I'm mistaken, we haven't found many new sources in the US after the 70's.
edited 5th Dec '11 8:42:56 PM by RocketDude
Transformers 4?!Good news for once!
Now crowned princessIsn't ethanol rather intensive and inefficient in its present state? I know Brazil can pull it off with sugarcane, but I'm not so sure about here at its present state.
Just some ordinary bloke looking for work... Also, for "vandalism", just send me a PM and I'll put it on my page. Thanks! :)
the article in OP is false http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2011/11/is-the-usreally-a-net-petroleum-exporter-no/249269/
What the numbers mean is that we have more refining capacity than we need to supply our domestic needs. So, we import the crude oil, refine it, use almost all of it, and sell a percentage of it to the rest of the world.http://www.slate.com/blogs/moneybox/2011/11/30/america_is_still_a_giant_oil_importer.html
The WSJ writes that "the U.S. sent abroad 753.4 million barrels of everything from gasoline to jet fuel in the first nine months of this year, while it imported 689.4 million barrels." But at the same time, we're importing about 9 million barrels of crude oil every single day.
edited 5th Dec '11 8:58:31 PM by PhilippeO
This hat doesn't fit!@Earl: Yeah, and we apparently have a bit of a stockpile of it. Lobbyists have been pushing the govt. to put more of it into the regular pump gas.
edited 5th Dec '11 9:09:02 PM by RocketDude
Where's that fuel that MIT was working on that was made from genetically engineered algae that only requires brackish water? Anyway, we can't export ethanol. 1) Ethanol doesn't transport well (which is why you only really see ethanol fueling stations in like the middle of Iowa) and 2) considering you get less MPG with ethanol and you only get 20% new energy when you make it, it's probably not even worth manufacturing at all.
I changed accounts.Er... considering that my parents' company competed for a contract to load tanker ships bound for Europe full to the brim with ethanol, I think we do export it...
I am now known as Flyboy.
I see the Awesomeness.
The U.S. is on track to be a net exporter of petroleum productsWeasel Words bolded for you.
It doesn't transport well — it has to do with the water solubility. Oil is comparatively easy to export. I have no idea why Europe wants it. Either way, if we're going to insist on ethanol, it might be better to distill it from something that's, you know, not a food source.
edited 5th Dec '11 9:24:14 PM by ohsointocats
This hat doesn't fit!@Oh So Into Cats: 1. There is algae fuel on the way, it's just that it has a couple of hurdles (reliability of the production or something, for starters) and there's not much news on it. 2. There is cellulose ethanol (made from the plant stalks or something, which won't cut into food prices), but it's not much better.
The plant material left behind is still used depending on the farming method, so while it wouldn't cut into the actual food supply it would cut into production costs. It probably wouldn't be as bad, though.
Still OccupiedAh. Disappointing. Thank you, Phillipe and Deboss.
Yeah, but you know policymakers are just going to keep us burdened with oil, then break out the alternative energy once people simply can't pay the inflated prices. That could take a decade.Of course. It would be nice to think we'll keep our atmospheric carbon ratio under 500 ppm, but I'm an optimist.
I see the Awesomeness.The refinery thing is one of the big parts. To put it simply, there are no new refineries. Nobody builds them, they just revamp old ones with new tech and replace broken down parts. So it's fairly cheap to send the stuff to the US for refining and cracking* and then ship it back out. It's similar to claiming that Japan is a car importer because it imports all the raw metals* .
The system doesn't know you right now, so no post button for you.
You need to Get Known to get one of those.
Total posts: 20
TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from firstname.lastname@example.org.