Jump to content



Featured Articles

Check out the latest featured articles.

File Library

Check out the latest downloads available in the File Library.

New Article

Product Viscosity vs. Shear

Featured File

Vertical Tank Selection

New Blog Entry

Low Flow in Pipes- posted in Ankur's blog

'our Shock Absorbers'


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
6 replies to this topic
Share this topic:
| More

#1

  • guestGuests
  • 0 posts

Posted 26 August 2007 - 09:34 PM

on the thought, our 'oil and gas' deposits, have a mechnical function, of absorbing shock from a variety of earthly up-heavels, without talking about planetesimals or other space driven objects.
One would assume, by the exploitation, of these earthly absorbers of shock, we are undermining their capabilities, and reducing the ability of Our planet to recover from unforseen internal upheavels, or external impact. It appears we are all contributing to making life for our children harder, not easier. With this attitude of 'take until there is no more', and to hell with the consequences.
Now imagine if we were to tap our Oil & Gas deposits. And, instead of draining them, we use their hydrostatic recipricating pressure, which i'm sure would be immense. This would provide clean energy indefinitely. This gives our children options. But maybe, i have over looked something?
I would be interested in what you may think!

#2 djack77494

djack77494

    Gold Member

  • ChE Plus Subscriber
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 27 August 2007 - 09:35 AM

I don't see where you're getting useful energy. What do you mean by "hydrostatic reciprocating pressure", and how will you exploit it? Also, I view your discussion regarding the negative planetary impact of fossil fuel extractions to be speculative, and pretty wild at that. I know of no means of getting clean power indefinitely, except for solar power. Nuclear is almost as good if we could get our act together.
Doug

#3 Art Montemayor

Art Montemayor

    Gold Member

  • Admin
  • 5,721 posts

Posted 27 August 2007 - 08:29 PM


I couldn't help but spot what I clearly see as a totally unscientific, irrational, and hilarious claim. I have heard a lot of outlandish claims and "theories" on energy generation and its sources, but this has to be one of the most ridiculous. It is going to be very hard to stop laughing after reading this thread.

I don't know your credentials - and perhaps you are only a student who is trying to mean well - but you are coming across as a "junk" science professor who hasn't taken a physics course yet. I have no idea of where you could have developed the "theory" that our earthly oil and gas deposits "have a mechnical function, of absorbing shock from a variety of earthly up-heavels, without talking about planetesimals or other space driven objects".

I strongly believe that you are under the impression - like most persons who have never seen a core sample of a petroleum deposit - that we are walking around on top of "lakes" or "pools" of underground petroleum deposits and that the natural gas forms in large underground "caverns" and these deposits act much like a rubber bladder - or balloon - would. If you take the time and effort to read a book on petroleum geology - such as "Basic Petroleum Geology" by Peter K. Link, Oil & Gas Consultants International, Inc., Tulsa Oklahoma - then you will quickly find that that is certainly not the case. Some of the stratas and "pay" where the reserves are found are as hard and dense as concrete. So there goes your shock absorber theory - into the junk science trash bin.

After 47 years as an engineer I deeply resent anyone's attempt to accuse me of ruining his/her world simply because they don't understand physics nor chemistry. To state: "It appears we are all contributing to making life for our children harder, not easier" is to cast stones at engineers and scientists simply because you fail to understand what we know as scientific proof and record. I am not making life harder for anyone's childern. If anything, I am saving lives and improving others.

If you are a knowledgeable and educated individual, then at least have the courtesy to explain in great detail - with equations and illustrations - what you mean by the "hydrostatic recipricating pressure" which you claim you are "sure would be immense". If you want to be respected and heard by experienced engineers, then you've got to "put up or shut up". Show us how you will utilize your "recipricating(sic.) pressure" in detail.

I will await your enlightening disclosure on this unique energy solution to societies' needs.


#4 Adriaan

Adriaan

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 118 posts

Posted 08 November 2007 - 08:12 PM

A big downside to exploiting oil and gas deposits, not to mention coal (and all other mining) is that you get cave ins. Not just little ones either; there was a program on it on German tv recently that featured a French village that has subsided over eight METERS in recent years (most houses are unfit for habitation, flooding is a BIG worry).

The biggest worry is that in Germany there are underground pumps (BIG ones) running continuously in mines in use and in mines no longer in use; the worry is that in a few years those pumps will be switched off and the water flooding those abandoned mines will cause all sorts of problems, including - rather unexpectedly - earth RISING (sort of a sponge effect). It is a problem that is already causing damage there.

#5 JEBradley

JEBradley

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 126 posts

Posted 09 November 2007 - 08:37 AM

Well I thought Ariki was just expressing a musing and received a bit of an over-reaction from what I can only assume are two petroleum engineers.

I dont know anything at all about the subject - but the presence of the oil and has must have a stabilising effect. Art's argument of the resources being found 'as hard and dense as concrete' doesn't really seem strong to me because it would still absorb shock - I cant help but think of the absorbers they fit to oil rigs and how hard and dense they are. Mind you what would be left in the voidage after the oil and gas is removed? air? so perhaps the end result would be a substance equally adept at absorbing shock.

Must admit I thought gas permeated through strata and then collected when it hit a dense rock layer (Im not argueing here). But im not about to read books on petroleum geology - sticking pins in my eyes is more appealing.

My main problem is this - to have an opinion one does not have to produce mathematical evidence of its validity. Particulary on a web forum. You could extend this further to state that mathematical proof does not provide 'actual' proof.

Can I venture on what 'hydrostatic reciprocating pressure' might be.......Gas/oil reserves are held underground at great pressure. I think we are proposing this pressure is tapped as an energy source in itself.

#6 ashetty

ashetty

    Gold Member

  • Members
  • 98 posts

Posted 12 November 2007 - 01:23 AM

Hello all,

Exploiting oil & gas reserves is something which is inevitable in this day and age. As engineers we should concentrate our efforts on optimizing the recovery, and scientists can explore alternate sources of energy. I dont think people should go around blaming the energy sector for what is happening today.
As good citizens of this planet we could try and minimize using our SUVs and try to use public transport as far as possible. Try and conserve energy at home or whereever possible.

The enviornmentalists can do their part, by dissconnecting the power supply to their houses. They will be saving some reserves that way.


Anyhow I agree with JEBradley that Ariki meant well but was unfortunately taken to the cleaners by some of the members.

Thx.
ashetty

#7 djack77494

djack77494

    Gold Member

  • ChE Plus Subscriber
  • 1,282 posts

Posted 21 January 2008 - 01:37 PM

QUOTE (ashetty @ Nov 11 2007, 10:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>
Ariki meant well but was unfortunately taken to the cleaners by some of the members.

I certainly assume that Ariki meant well, and believe my response was direct and respectful. That was despite my opinion that the topic is rather incredible to ponder. I absolutely know that ground subsidence caused by mining is a real (and destructive) phenomenum. I do have doubts that oil and gas extractions taking place thousands or tens of thousands of feet below grade would introduce similar concerns, and I admit that my only O&G experience has involved very deep extractions. However, subsidence or no, the original topic seems more related to some sort of unspecified mysterious shock absorbing capability that is presumably being squandered.

The hazards mentioned in the original posting include "a variety of earthly up-heavels, without talking about planetesimals or other space driven objects". In lieu of extracting the fuels, it is suggested that we "use their hydrostatic recipricating pressure, which i'm sure would be immense". Though I like to think of myself as forward thinking and open minded, I do not see any serious scientific or engineering concepts that can be discussed in what was presented. I'd challenge anyone to describe how something that could be called hydrostatic recipricating pressure could be exploited to produce useful energy from oil and gas reservoirs. Instead of being unduly harsh with this topic, I think most of the responders were quite generous in trying to offer insights into what I believe is a fictious problem.




Similar Topics