VansAirForceForums  
Home > VansAirForceForums

- POSTING RULES
- Donate yearly (please).
- Advertise in here!

- Today's Posts | Insert Pics


Go Back   VAF Forums > Main > RV General Discussion/News
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Today's Posts

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #51  
Old 10-19-2007, 05:46 PM
teookie's Avatar
teookie teookie is offline
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Huntsville AL
Posts: 47
Default

You have to be careful when your "researching" this topic. If you are only getting information from popular sources (CNN, any broadcast news, the paper, or heaven forbid: hollywood) than you are working with some very diluted and poor info. As a general rule: if it's the popular notion, than it's probably been exaggerated and/or fabricated.

The media is notorious for sensationalizing everything and blowing even minor events out of proportion. I was on a commercial flight two weeks ago that had to shut down an engine and make a 'emergency' landing in Albany New York. Everyone on the plane (with the exception of one flight attendant who seemed a little nervous) was very calm and cool, no one panicked, and we would not of even known one engine on our 757 was shut down if the captain had not made an announcement. After our perfect landing, I almost laughed out loud when I saw the media already set up along the perimeter fence of the airport with cameras and reporters. Checking the net for news the next day, I found video clips with reporters showing video of our approach to land and claiming that the condensation coming off the wings and flaps was smoke from the shut-down engine. One reporter even said the passengers were "biting there nails", and that it was a "really rough landing" HA HA HA!!!!! Then she said, "Lets look at some video of that rough landing" and showed a video of a perfect one engine 757 landing. Honestly, these so called "reporters" don't do any research and just say what they think will sound good.

I'm concerned about the cost of gas, bust mostly because I think the publics perception of supply/pollution/etc. is so off, that suppliers get away with high prices more easily. Alternative energy sources are very appealing, but at the end of the day fossil fuels have a much denser energy content and are easier to use. We'll be relying on them until they are well and truly depleted.

When I was in college, I wrote a paper about the feasibility of using solar powered sterling engines to generate power on a residential scale. As much as I wanted my idea to work out, I could not get the numbers to come out as cost effective. At the end of the day, it is soooo much easier to extract energy from GAS.
Reply With Quote
  #52  
Old 10-19-2007, 07:24 PM
Paul Tuttle's Avatar
Paul Tuttle Paul Tuttle is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Lantz,Nova Scotia ,Canada
Posts: 556
Default

My kid got a job managing the local FBO. I'm hoping he remembers the old man for putting him through collage, and gives me the wholesale price on avgas.
__________________
Paul Tuttle
RV 8
C-FPVT
Flying.
Reply With Quote
  #53  
Old 10-19-2007, 09:52 PM
briand's Avatar
briand briand is offline
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Grand Rapids MI
Posts: 742
Default Very Little

Quote:
Originally Posted by johnp View Post
did you count the cost of disposal of the bulb when it finally fails? (it _does_ contain mercury, you know). tanstaafl
I think in ten years when mine start burning out, the problem of disposal should be solved. If its not I will just throw them in the garbage can. Billions of these bulbs will be sold over the next ten years and someone will figure out what to do with them. As the price of electric continues to rise in the coming years these bulbs will become more and more popular, especially if congress mandates electric utilities to obtain at least 15% from renewable energy sources.

I'm not telling anyone to run out and buy these. I just did the math and found them to be economical for me. If you don't like the idea of tossing them in the local dump these bulbs might not be for you. All the cleaners you or your wife use in the bathroom (that go down the drain) are probably way worse than a few micrograms of mercury.

I do NOT want to go into a discussion/flame war about haz. mats. but think a lot of builders would be able to save some bucks on their utils. if they put CF's in their RV factory and home. I love having LOTS of light when I'm building so I imgaine other builders do too. These bulbs will save you money. Money you can spend on avgas later.
Reply With Quote
  #54  
Old 10-20-2007, 02:34 PM
Skyhi Skyhi is offline
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 32
Default Oil Price rises ..... a good thing

Future generations will think we were mad to burn oil as a source of energy, as it has so many potential uses that are as yet to be realised.

I recently paid ?2 / $4 a litre in Holland for Avgas ( or about $12-14 US gallon). On the face of it, this is an incredible price, but in reality it makes me (and other users) very aware of the environmental impact of flying.

Hopefully these prices will soon reach the USA too, and influence the development of new engines that will be more economic and fuel efficient.

JadeAir in the UK are developing a new diesel three cylinder to replace the ubiquitous Rotax 912S, and within ten years I forsee that many of the existing Avgas powertrains for Vans aircraft will be completely defunct unless they can be modified.

The reality is hard to face, but fuel has been too cheap, for too long and only economic impact will force alternatives. Increased oil consumption in China and India are now the driving forces for this equation linked directly to the West's insatiable desire for cheap goods produced in the Far East.

Rgds, Nic






Quote:
Originally Posted by wrongway john View Post
Besides me. Seen today where crude prices are over $87 a barrel, and the sky still seems to be the limit. Some years back, a wise aviator told me not to be concerned about aviation fuel, it will be the least expense of your airplane budget. After I thought about that a bit, I figured he was right. Today, that old adage might not still hold up. Maybe it depends on how many hours one flies each month.

Will the prices now or perhaps in the future slow any of you down or will you keep flying about the same amount of hours?

wj
Reply With Quote
  #55  
Old 10-20-2007, 02:55 PM
L.Adamson's Avatar
L.Adamson L.Adamson is offline
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: KSLC
Posts: 4,021
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skyhi View Post
I recently paid ?2 / $4 a litre in Holland for Avgas ( or about $12-14 US gallon). On the face of it, this is an incredible price, but in reality it makes me (and other users) very aware of the environmental impact of flying.

Hopefully these prices will soon reach the USA too, and influence the development of new engines that will be more economic and fuel efficient.
Hopefully......???

Mind if I disagree?
Reply With Quote
  #56  
Old 10-20-2007, 04:09 PM
rph142's Avatar
rph142 rph142 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Walnut Creek CA
Posts: 513
Default

I currently work for ConocoPhillips or "Big Oil" and I can say that we are not going to totally run out of oil any time soon. At least not in the next 50 years. And in 50 years most of us wont be in any condition to fly. Sure all of the low hanging fruit has been picked, however that doesnt tell ust how tall the tree is. There are some interesting projects such as the canadian oil sands that are coming online as we speek. My refinery alone is investing 3.5 billion over the next 5-10 years in a huge expansion upgrade so we can handle the heavier crude. We must aslo consider the coal to oil potential. The us has an estimated 1 trillion barrels of oil in the form of coal. We burn 21 million barrels a day so do the math. There are also huge fields that are off limits at the moment, so when oil hits 150/bbl and the economy is imploding watch for those to tapped. Humans will always adapt so long as it makes economic sense. If you told a farmer on manhatten 150 years ago that 6 million people would some day live on that island he would say thats insane...there isnt enough room for their horses! Well technology changed and i think the same is true for the global energy problem.
__________________
Rob Holmes
www.myrv3.com
N59LG
The minimum number of planes one should own is one. The correct number is n+1, where n is the number of planes currently owned. This equation may also be re-written as s-1, where s is the number of planes owned that would result in separation from your partner.

- Veluminati
Reply With Quote
  #57  
Old 10-20-2007, 04:30 PM
sierradelta sierradelta is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Pisa, Italy
Posts: 25
Default

I disagree, the fact that companies are going to these measures to produce oil is a sure sign of whats to come.

Oil derived from oil sands is extremely financially and energetically intensive to extract. Whereas conventional oil has an amazing rate of "energy return on energy invested" (EROEI) of about 30 to 1, the oil sands rate of return hovers around 1.5 to 1. This means that we would have to expend 20 times as much energy to generate the same amount of oil from the oil sands as we do from conventional sources of oil.


The tree of oil discovery can be plenty tall and fruitful, but if it cost 2 dollars to pick an apple worth 2 cents no company is going to make that investment. People need to wake up and face facts.
__________________
Shane Davis
N914SJ (Pending Reserve Request)
Interested in -7A, -12 (Not Building YET!)
AGE Craftsman (USAF)
Pisa, Italy
Reply With Quote
  #58  
Old 10-20-2007, 04:35 PM
DSmith DSmith is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Panama City Beach, FL
Posts: 129
Default

We could force the price of auto fuel down in just a few weeks if people would just use a little common sense and not make some many unnecessary trips to the store, etc. Turn off unnecessary lights. It's really would not take much conservation on peoples part to have a big effect.

Why do we light up the interstate highways and intersections miles out in the country? The last time I looked all vehicles have lights on them. When you fly across this country it is lit up like a Christmas tree.

Congress is our biggest problem. They won't let us drill along the coasts or in Alaska. They pay the ethanol people to produce the **** just to please some of their fat cat farmers. If we don't use the oil we have in the ground what will we do with it - just leave it there while we produce all these inefficient alternative fuels? We should drill on every square foot of available oil producing land/sea we have in the USA and begin a real Manhattan type project to develop the energy of the future. Our oil would last more than long enough to get this done and we could then stay out of the Middle East's problems. If we don't do this we have no choice but to try to manage that mess over there.

My 2 cents worth!
Danny
Reply With Quote
  #59  
Old 10-20-2007, 04:58 PM
rph142's Avatar
rph142 rph142 is offline
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Walnut Creek CA
Posts: 513
Default

Youre absolutely right, it is a sign of whats to come...but few living people on the planet right now will see the effects because there is still alot of oil in the gound. The EROEI on oil sands isnt all that bad. When $/bbl > 30$ or so then its profitable to mine it. Coal to oil is similar. The crack spreads are actually higher for the thick nasty stuff. I just requires retooling of refineries...hence my companies 3.5 billion dallar project. You have to remember that oil prices only recently spiked. It takes 5-10 years to shift gears and retool the refineries to handle different crudes. The executives at the large oil companies wouldnt be investing tens of billions of dollars per year in expansion projects if they thought we were going to run out any time soon. I also read somewhere that there is something like 5 trillion bbl's equivalent of methane hydrate under the seabed. There are so many options...except enthanol...ethanol makes no sense!
__________________
Rob Holmes
www.myrv3.com
N59LG
The minimum number of planes one should own is one. The correct number is n+1, where n is the number of planes currently owned. This equation may also be re-written as s-1, where s is the number of planes owned that would result in separation from your partner.

- Veluminati
Reply With Quote
  #60  
Old 10-20-2007, 05:13 PM
sierradelta sierradelta is offline
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Pisa, Italy
Posts: 25
Default

I agree with you about ethanol....I read somewhere that to supply the U.S. with enough ethanol to run the countries infrastructure you would have to farm the entire continent of South America.

We should all realize though that most alternative sources of energy are just small tangents on our oil supply. We have to use oil based machinery to extract things like coal, hydrogen, methane...etc. Yes you can run coal machinery but once again nothing is easier to use than good ol oil.

On a side note, it seems that congress dragging its feet on Alaska might not be such a bad thing. It is a reserve. It will eventually be used, thats a promise. If the Russians have to come over here and take it after our economy crumbles it will be used. I think though that we are trying to get all we can from sources farther away and saving the closer stuff for later. It makes sense, if the gov needed it they would find ways to get it.
__________________
Shane Davis
N914SJ (Pending Reserve Request)
Interested in -7A, -12 (Not Building YET!)
AGE Craftsman (USAF)
Pisa, Italy
Reply With Quote
Reply



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:27 AM.


The VAFForums come to you courtesy Delta Romeo, LLC. By viewing and participating in them you agree to build your plane using standardized methods and practices and to fly it safely and in accordance with the laws governing the country you are located in.