If Windmills and Nuclear Replaced the Grid We would still need Oil for Plastic Produc

Thread Starter

loosewire

Joined Apr 25, 2008
1,686
So that means we will never In a correct world,
not need oil. Any comments on this electronic
problem for the grid dependant on oil based
products. Can we print enough money to
solved this problem,we can go back to glass.
WE may use gold to solved some of the problems.
Glass would not be a good choice for cases for
electronic equipment.Any comments on oil base products
being eliminated,If money was not a factor.
 

massive

Joined May 7, 2010
20
Hi,
Today on DWTV , German tv ,there was coverage of a company "Tecnaro" producing biodegradable plastic from Tree Lignen ,they call it "Arboform".
They reakon they can substitute anything on the market now.
 

retched

Joined Dec 5, 2009
5,207
Well, lubricants made from non-crude sources are not up to snuff yet, so we would still need oil.

And THERE IS NO REASON TO NOT USE OIL!

Burning oil is bad. If you got VEHICLES off of oil, that would do something.

I would MUCH RATHER have BP oil spill than a Loosewire(TM) Nuclear Plant detonation.

Oil spills do horrible things. But compared to Chernobyl, It is like a kid drawing on a wall.

If you get a pelican covered in oil, you can clean it. IF you get a pelican covered in radiation, there is NO cleaning it up..or you.

I would like to see land based oil supplies be enough oil for our needs.

That would be great. Corn based plastics, plant based fibers. Even coconut oil based "diesel" fuel. For LARGE equipment would be nice.

There is a LOT of research to be done.

Remember that finding oil is what got us off of killing whales for blubber.

WE ARE HUMANS (most of us) ;) THIS IS THE WAY IT WORKS.
 

retched

Joined Dec 5, 2009
5,207
Hi,
Today on DWTV , German tv ,there was coverage of a company "Tecnaro" producing biodegradable plastic from Tree Lignen ,they call it "Arboform".
They reakon they can substitute anything on the market now.
http://www.tecnaro.de/english/arboform.htm

This is good for plastic, but BAD for trees.

If cars ran on water, BP will stop drilling oil and start cutting down forests.

Rich folk CAN NOT "not be rich"... scares 'em.
 

Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,429
I'm willing the bet there are magnitudes of difference in use, possibly millions of gallons for gas for every gallon for plastic. Plastic lasts, gas doesn't. Plastic can be recycled, gas is breathed after use.
 

Norfindel

Joined Mar 6, 2008
326
Chernobyl was a piece of crap nuclear reactor. There are much safer reactors, but the nuclear waste has nothing safe about it, however.

If we stop burning oil, that means more years for other uses. But i doubt that the people getting rich with it are very interested on selling less.
 

Potato Pudding

Joined Jun 11, 2010
688
Thermal Depolymerization is able to make real Light Oil from almost any type of waste.

<Conspiracy theory self censored.>

There are oil crops that are probably more suitable for making some plastics than oil - but if they aren't being planted already and oil is available at the current price then creating a plantation and reengineering and converting the chemical plants for the different polymerization process just won't happen. Jatropha for example has great potential as a source for making plastics, but even though it is being planted for making BioDiesel there is limited diversion of byproducts to the plastics industry. They have to be already refined as part of prepping the biodiesel and be exactly identical to the products available from oil refining.

And Tires can be made from oil - synthetic rubber or Butadiene was used during the war for example. Most tires are made from Latex harvested from Rubber trees. This is the best example of how plantation chemical cropping can outcompete oil. In fact there is too much scrap rubber left over from all of the used tires. Finding ways to recycle Tires is one of the biggest opportunities out there. Everything from turning the tires into an asphalt additive to increase the roads durability back to the Thermal depolymerization I mentioned before and turning the tires into fuel. There are mountains of tires and lots of options being tried.

The main holdup? If you paid an extra $1.50 environmental fee for each tire they could all be 100% recycled. There is a big fight against environmental fees because the list of items is so long that should have fees on them. Assume it would add up to about 2% on everything more or less. It it fixes thousands of problems and creates thousands of jobs is it really hurting anyone? Don't think so. Do you?
 

Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,429
Actually tires haven't been made from latex for almost a century. The transition was made around WWII, about the same time they started adding steel in tires I believe. Every tire can be converted into about 2 gallons of fuel oil or gas. Synthetic rubber is much better than it's natural counterpart for most uses.

I remember a tire dump that "accidentally" caught on fire a couple of decades ago, they had fuel oil running out of this huge field of tires. No problem, the guy who owned it just pumped it into a tanker and sold it as fuel oil and let it burn itself out. At the time I suspected it was too convenient to be true, still do.

My Dad spent time living in the country when he retired from the Air Force. We had a cow die on us, so we stacked brush and a couple of old tires on her and burned her up. Only a few bones were left, as tires burn hot.
 
Last edited:

massive

Joined May 7, 2010
20
Hi,
No offence but you people spell funny, Tires is spelled TYRES and it be Petrol not Gas

I read in ww2 they used alcohol to make Tyres ,how ? dont ask ,dont know.
Over in Aussie theres Shale oil , theres rock where they heat it and oil comes out , theyve been at it for ages.
These Nuclear stations are still just boiling water ,steam power is hardly a giant leap forward ,we used to have trains that did that.....until the Gov sold off the tracks for scrap . Now weve got bicycle tracks and Im not kidding.
 

Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,429
Only if you are from New Zealand or Britain. In the USA it is gas, short for gasoline, and tires is the word, just like color. Since we use more than you... Majority rules. :p
 

Potato Pudding

Joined Jun 11, 2010
688
My father worked at a Michelin Tire plant and they used mostly latex rubber.

When they bought out Uniroyal Goodrich and started pressing economy brand tires they started to use more of the synthetic rubber I think.
 

massive

Joined May 7, 2010
20
Hi,
That could be true but Gasoline sounds like Vasoline ,and that scares me.
By the way, its supposed to be the Queens English, is it not.
And theres a minority of her rule.
 

Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,429
He who makes the stuff names the stuff. Besides, the first thing the USA did was change our (note the personal) language to be separate from the King's English after the Revolutionary War. Back at you. :D

I will respectfully disagree with latex being used for tires. This doesn't mean I want to argue, it just means you aren't going to convince me. My Mom also made her share of the suckers, it was hot unpleasant work.

Back on topic, there are many other reactor concepts that are much safer than the current crop. Smaller too.

For example, look up "pebble reactors".

************************
OK, after a bit of research I'm wrong about natural rubber. Evidently it is used for winter tires especially, since they need to be a bit softer.
 
Last edited:

Potato Pudding

Joined Jun 11, 2010
688
I stand corrected.

I did some more research and over 60% of natural rubber is vulcanized and used to make tires, but natural rubber is still not as a big contributer as I thought.

Synthetic rubber production has been higher than natural rubber since 1960. About 40% of the worlds rubber - over 20 Million tons comes from rubber trees, but the other 60% is made out of oil.

I thought natural rubbers share was much higher and that the balance was in the other direction. I didn't mean to misinform anyone, and thanks for making me check my facts.
 
Last edited:

Wendy

Joined Mar 24, 2008
23,429
I think we'd make the trees extinct if we relied solely on them. The artificial version is superior, but not as soft. If oil disappeared tomorrow I suspect we'd be able to synthisize replacements, we gripe, but we'd get by.
 

Norfindel

Joined Mar 6, 2008
326
I think we'd make the trees extinct if we relied solely on them. The artificial version is superior, but not as soft. If oil disappeared tomorrow I suspect we'd be able to synthisize replacements, we gripe, but we'd get by.
Still, it would be a lot less painful if we do that with time. It can get pretty nasty if we aren't prepared when oil goes out.
 
Top