300 Years of Fossil Fuels in 300 Seconds

Submitted by: madest 6 years ago in Science

A quick rundown of the worlds energy history.
There are 44 comments:
Male 173
How many _hundreds_ of people have died from nuclear disasters? (not counting warfare).

How many _millions_ of people have died from air pollution partly from coal fueled power plants?

Someone please explain to me how nuclear power is more dangerous compared to coal plants?
0
Reply
Male 2,855
seems obvious, when trees and coal ran out everything got better, so i propose burning fossil fuels faster than ever
0
Reply
Male 39
did he say the atom bomb? how is that petroleum
0
Reply
Male 31
Thanks Mykunter. I had the beat in my head all night and it was driving me crazy. Good looking out.
0
Reply
Male 2,436
@Jamesthekidd: Walk on the wild side by Lou Reed.
0
Reply
Male 31
Does anyone know what the song is at the beginning of the video? It`s driving me crazy! Help, anyone, please!!!
0
Reply
Male 1,010
The biggest scam ever, was the idea that "global warming" is something you "believe" in or not.
0
Reply
Male 34
Exactly right. You don`t have to be a treehugging hippy to see that we need to change. Fossils fuels are going to run out.
0
Reply
Male 6
This is a bit over-zealous in what it says needs to be done and also makes some statement like they are facts rather than the creators opinions. Nevertheless it does have some good points. I don`t know what it doesn`t just say, well we COULD just put more investment into hydrogen fuel rather than oil and beef up solar and wind production through gov incentives. We don`t need oil or coal really it`s just the most economical resource at the moment. Eventually that will change. If population keeps growing we`ll just find new and better ways of managing it. We`re pretty awesome that way.

I don`t like the video just cos the guy sounds like a bit of a deuche is all.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
p.s, to lighten the tone, I`m such a f*cking fantastic nerd that I went through my entire receipt from a recent trip to the grocery store and converted every single liquid item to barrels of oil. Yes, I`m *THAT* sad. Or bored, which is why I`m here.

Most expensive sh*t you can buy, by volume?

3rd place: Hair Conditioner.
2nd place: Margerine.
1st place goes to: Haagen-Dazs Icecream.

And yep, under all scenarios, oil is the cheapest sh*t in the trolley.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
[email protected] Nice.

Just throwing this out there, let`s not forget that we`re quite happy to pay $1 for a liter of bottled water, while we rail against a global price $100 per barrel of oil, which fuels our entire world economy at present.

This is important, please note. When upscaled to barrels (just did the math myself, made a spreadsheet and everything), bottled water costs about $159 per barrel, while oil costs $100 per barrel. We are literally burning through a finite resource at a retarded rate.

I`m a bit embarassed to think of what children of the future will be taught in class about our generation, when there`s 20 billion people in the world with rumbling bellies. We`re living in golden times, guys. We don`t appreciate it, because we`re inside the bubble. But like credit card debt, we don`t have to worry about it as we live in Halcyon Days right now. It`s future generations that are going to have to pay the price.
0
Reply
Male 5,194
THEY RIPPED OFF RSA ANIMATE!!! I`m so pissed off I`m going to retaliate with a refrigerator bonfire.
0
Reply
Male 490
world war II did not have guided missiles
0
Reply
Male 758
Good points, but almost every single thing he mentioned about the environmental hysteria is bull.
0
Reply
Male 437
Leveling thousands of acres of real estate to make way for wind turbines and solar panels which absorb energy directly from the Earth`s weather patterns and sun energy... that totally doesn`t effect the environment.
0
Reply
Male 166
meh...
{scroll}
0
Reply
Male 221
The Oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico was only a big deal because the media blew it out of proportion. The Oil spill during the gulf war on January 19, 1991 was 156 million gallons larger... and probably on almost nobody knows/remembers it. Why? Because it didn`t affect us Americans.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
[quote] this doesnt deserve to be on such a bad website as i-a-b. remove it now [/quote]

I would agree with that if it wasn`t for myself not being able to otherwise see it.
0
Reply
Male 10,440
[quote]1) The nuclear waste is still harmful for years to come. And what we basically do is store in bunkers underground. Sounds like an accident waiting to happen, especially if we are to produce waste on a bigger scale.[/quote]

What sort of accident exactly? You have no idea how nuclear waste is buried. It`s safer than burying garbage.

2) Nuclear energy is not renewable. Like classic fossil energy, it depends on raw material (in this case, uranium or plutonium) and the human race is excellent in depleting materials, as we have proven with oil, gas, copper, phosphorus, helium, wildlife, etc.

That is true. Uranium is a finite resource, but we have so much of it it would last us more than long enough to develop better means.

Time to face facts. Nuclear power is the best option until we develop fusion - IF you can afford it.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
Always with the global warming :(
0
Reply
Male 625
@mandingo3519:
"this guy is presenting very good point (except for the first 30 seconds of theory of evolution)"

Theory of evolution? Where? Oh, you mean the Big Bang theory? Or geochronology?
Either way, all three of these theories/sciences are well funded, and -dare I say it- true*

*with a probability of 99.9999% (<always put this in so religious zealots can keep clutching at straws)
0
Reply
Male 192
this guy is presenting very good point (except for the first 30 seconds of theory of evolution) however it is too bad that the people who need to see this will not. so very good idea just "wasted" on those of us who while can do something about it, still wont make a big enough difference
0
Reply
Female 3,562
N-Vet, there`s just a line that HAS to be drawn. I`m sure you don`t care if millions of acres of wildlife were destroyed, but what if after that all that`s left is oil that`s under cities and peoples homes? Would you be willing to let them dig oil in your own backyard? Heck, it`s not like you`ll have a choice. They`ll just buy the land and send you packing. You`ll only care when it effects you immediately and directly, but the damage will be far worse by then.
0
Reply
Female 3,562
The problem eventually boils down to the fact that there`s 7 billion of us. I doubt we`ll adapt fast enough, millions or billions of us will die off and the population will become sustainable again. Problem solved.
0
Reply
Male 625
@chimmeychang & 5Cats:
True, there is no CO2 emission with nuclear energy. But there are two reasons we shouldn`t depend too heavily on it:
1) The nuclear waste is still harmful for years to come. And what we basically do is store in bunkers underground. Sounds like an accident waiting to happen, especially if we are to produce waste on a bigger scale.
2) Nuclear energy is not renewable. Like classic fossil energy, it depends on raw material (in this case, uranium or plutonium) and the human race is excellent in depleting materials, as we have proven with oil, gas, copper, phosphorus, helium, wildlife, etc. etc.

We should make the effort to change our complete system towards RENEWABLE energy (solar & wind) and start closing our production cycles, i.e. recycle EVERYTHING.
If you see the Earth as a big space vessel, with a certain fixed number of raw materials, it`s not hard to imagine that renewable & recycling is the ONLY way forward.
0
Reply
Male 13
You know we can just use hemp to run all of our land, and water vehicles on right? And hemp (weed) grows faster than any plant, or tree on Earth right?
0
Reply
Male 36
"we`ll have to re-design health care and more"... what does that have to do with anything?
0
Reply
Male 2,419
@5Cats/randomxnp
Except the food shortage isn`t as bad as you think it is, farmers in the US are paid to NOT farm because the excess of supply would drat up the market value. Lots of businesses get their profits from this kind of inefficiency.

That land could be used to grow crops just for making fuel. Since it never enters the food market it shouldn`t cause any deflation for food, just for fuel prices.
0
Reply
Male 684
5 cats is right, nuclear is the cleanest safest most efficient energy producer...but bad publicity(probably from competing coal companies) has turned it into Satan`s turd?
0
Reply
Male 105
Don`t forget about Natural Gas. The U.S. has the 6th largest proven reserve of Natural Gas with 6.9 TRILLION Cubic Meters. Now if we were only allowed to use it....

Also the "easy oil" isn`t all gone. regulations and ,as Jeremy Clarkson puts it, Eco-Mentalists limit or prevent drilling oil close to shore.
0
Reply
Male 40,764
Pretty good video, except it leaves out Nuclear Energy which is the greenest, safest available (Japan`s current problem included!)

@Gerry1 no, ethanol, and the USA is currently doing it, is TERRIBLE! If EVERY single food crop was converted to ethanol, it still would no replace gasoline. And there`d be zero food!
It`s supposed to be made from waste materials, in low-effeciency methods, not with top grade FOOD and huge subsidies.
0
Reply
Male 147
this doesnt deserve to be on such a bad website as i-a-b. remove it now
0
Reply
Male 114
Yes @randomxnp, I whole heartedly agree with you that it is indeed propaganda and that there will be slight increases (with increasingly higher supplies) in food production costs, etc. But, we are getting more aquainted with the higher costs of oil / barrel these days to point where it`ll be accepted and we`ll be in a situation where we`ll be astounded by the cost of oil at $200-300+ per barrel of oil and somehow $100 barrels are no longer an issue in the mainstream.

The point of the ethanol of course is to reduce the need for fossil fuels and upping the supply may be a jump in the beginning, but will be reasonable in time. That is also to say, that USA can produce most of its own fuel needs instead of relying on foreign countries that are always in contention with the US.

I guess, for either side, it`ll come down to the lesser of the two evils (so-to-say). I`m for the increase in ethanol production personally.

0
Reply
Male 1,293
redser99

"Today, it`d certainly make sense to get back into [ethanol] I`d hope"

You have listened to dangerous nonsense. The reason for the vast increases in the cost of food recently is largely in ethanol production. That is just for adding about 5% to car fuels. What would happen if 50% of car fuel was ethanol?

This video is pure propaganda.
0
Reply
Female 2,761
redser- I heard the same thing
0
Reply
Male 114
I remember reading years ago that back in 1980 there was a massive initiative in the US to move to ethanol but the Arabs severely dropped the price per barrel to $20 which undermined the cost to produce ethanol so the ethanol production industry was dropped (huge money pit for the USA).

Today, it`d certainly make sense to get back into it I`d hope.
0
Reply
Male 588
In that part, when the Earth just formed... There should be Pangaea.
0
Reply
Female 582
@Gerry

Ethanol is actually a crappy alternative source. When you factor in the amount of fossil fuels used to produce it and then transport it, biofuels actually use MORE energy than they produce. They could work if they didn`t need to be shipped everywhere.
0
Reply
Male 418
nobody will ever do any of this stuff unless its profitable. end of story
0
Reply
Male 39,929

Brazil switched over to ethanol.
It would be done, we have enough farmland in the U.S.
We just don`t want to get off our asses and do it.
0
Reply
Male 426
oh and all this is pointless. We drated up way to hard. So once 2012 comes around. aliens who created us will come down to earth and be like.

"we tried to make you a thriving civilization, but yall just keep screwing up" "no we will kill you"

"they will then scoop up whoever isn`t a complete d bag and the rest will be left behind while they destroy everything. rendering this planet useless."
0
Reply
Male 426
*end of the video comes*

Woah... that oil plant blew up? I thought it sprung a leak and we couldn`t plug it up...
0
Reply
Female 582
Totally true! People have made a lot of progress due to industrialization, but it won`t last forever. We need to start changing the way we live as a community and as individuals in order to ensure long-term stability.
0
Reply
Male 7,378
Link: 300 Years of Fossil Fuels in 300 Seconds [Rate Link] - A quick rundown of the worlds energy history.
0
Reply