Flower Power in the 21th century. Koenigsegg´s response to Al Gore.

Even the greenies at the Sierra Club can see through the

http://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/200701/decoder.asp

Also, Car and Driver reported that the regular CCX didn't feel like it had all that 800+hp (they say it was hot day) The regular version makes a lot of power out of a relatively small engine (reliability?)

Cool cars but I have yet to be 100% sold on one.

— chewy (View Profile)

Posted on 3/3/2007 3:34:03 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: -3   

I would like to hear Greeny Gore tell us why the Dust Bowl in the Mid West to Canada happened between 1931 and 1939?

There were very few cars at that time and atom bombs hadn't been invented.

Come on Mister Bore, enlighten us?

— EL34 (View Profile)

Posted on 3/3/2007 5:05:20 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Over use/farming of the land, and off course drought cycle came back during that time frame.

— Lexus (View Profile)

Posted on 3/3/2007 10:20:00 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

yes, peak oil theory says that we are at the pinnacle of consumption/production right now...production can only go down from here and i don't see consumption going down anytime soon. we need to be prepared for $10/gal gas.

— NARunner (View Profile)

Posted on 3/4/2007 10:07:42 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

junior, here's an article for you to read.

"From Ice Age to Global Warming in 30 years"

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=5543

— EL34 (View Profile)

Posted on 3/4/2007 1:34:24 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

[clears throat]...ifwyou would please pardon me for adding my two cents on this matter, but I am prety sure that I am the only person on here with a degree in Petroleum Engineering.

We are not running out of oil; we are running out of cheap oil, with compliments to Peter Terzakian. There is a massive difference. For example, there is more oil in western Colorado in the oil shales than there is in all of Saudi Arabia. There is even more in the Canadian Tar sands. The problem with this oil is that it is either bound to the shales, or bituminous [asphaltine] in nature.

As far as Hubbert's Theory [peak oil] that includes only convential rescources. I.E. light sweet crude, and it was successfully used to determine peak oil in the United States. Be that as it may the world situation is more complex. A lot of those who say that we are passing peak oil have actually said that befre and have revised their estimates. This theory does carry a primary assuption as well: that the annual production as a fraction of the total oil is linearly dependent with remaining oil. That is particularly probelmatic because it requires you to know the reserves.

As far as demand; it will go up. Even if every car were suddenly made independent of oil, there would still be a demand: there are an array of products which are made with petrochemicals.

— cdoke (View Profile)

Posted on 3/4/2007 11:15:05 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

CDCoke Is spot on, although I would love to hear his opinion on developing techniques and methods for harvesting this NA based oil. :)

Josh

— d1sinfo (View Profile)

Posted on 3/5/2007 11:34:35 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

p.s.
Koenigsegg CCXR = Hotness.

Lets power that car with nuclear power :)

— d1sinfo (View Profile)

Posted on 3/5/2007 11:35:41 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 2   

Flower Power is Garbage. Build a real car!!! Who cares about gas mileage!!! Think Power!!! The only thing the swiss are good for is watches!!

Some good articles for all of the Global Warming E-chondriacs. Yes it is a hoax!!

http://www.lse.co.uk/ShowStory.asp?story=CZ434669U&news_headline=global_warming_is_lies_claims_documentary
http://www.channel4.com/science/microsites/G/great_global_warming_swindle/index.html
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php?p=192

— jasongoudie (View Profile)

Posted on 3/5/2007 12:53:13 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

d1s,

Of course, it is very difficult to extract these heavy [low API] oils. In Canada at the moment they are lucky enough to be able to acutally mine it.

I attended the 26th annual Oil Shale Symposium hosted by CERI, and do know some of what is being done. Shell at the moment is using a procedure whereby they drill many multiple offset wells and then freeze them and the surrounding reservoir. The idea is to create an effective pressure boundary. As I recall they then inject water at high temperature and pressure. This decreases the viscosity thus promotes flow. It isn't quite that simple as I recall but that is the jist of it.

Exxon uses something they call "electrofrac". They fracture the formation by exceeding the mimimum horizontal stress through fluid pressure, and then pump metal beads as proppant. They then drill a well that intersects the end of the propped fracture. What they do is then run current though the metal laden fracture, which causes electrical resistance resulting in heat.

There is a possibility of using the research of one of my professors in this matter. Dr. Graves acquired from Boeing patents being used for laser drilling. She literally has a Star-Wars class laser [the same type they were going to use to shoot down nuclear weapons from space] which she can, through modifying the beam, either chip rock, melt rock or even vaporize rock. It she can melt it, she can heat it...we wouldn't want to melt the matrix itself, but instead to heat the matrix.

— cdoke (View Profile)

Posted on 3/5/2007 1:58:16 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Fears? Well, to produce these barrels of oil the price of oil must be rather high and habitually so. The potential payoffs are IMMENSE. It is estimated that there are 1.5 TRILLION barrels of oil the American oil shales. If brought to market at oh $50 per barrel [and the price will likely go up] that is $75,000,000,000,000.00 [75 trillion] in assets in the ground. Now usually we only get a percentage of what is in the ground. Be that as it may, you start to produce it and this accumulation is sufficient to drop the price to almost nothing. Things however do take time.

Because it is such a massive accumulation my primary concern with it regards rock compressibility and subsidence of the land. Which is something that really needs looked at since at times the rock matrix alone cannot support the overburden stresses without some incorporated fluid pressure.

I agree with the fact that oil needs brought to a more efficient market. In fact if we could get so oil is a smaller part of our energy mix. Where we to start producing from Western Colorado and Utah in sufficient amounts, we could sell the oil to China and India, who have GDP growth that is FAR more dependent upon oil. Any trade deficit we had with China would disappear almost overnight as if it had never existed.

I recommend to you the book “A Thousand Barrels a Second” it is by Peter Tertzakian [who I have seen speak here at my school] and it is excellent. He does not go into the oil shales and the like so much but it does discuss trends in energy usage through time.

Again say it with me,

$75,000,000,000,000.00 [hold pinky next to edge of mouth]

— cdoke (View Profile)

Posted on 3/5/2007 3:32:03 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

One quick thing: 1.5 trillion BBLS is about 5 times the reserves of Saudi Arabia. It is in fact more oil than there is in all of the Middle East.

— cdoke (View Profile)

Posted on 3/5/2007 3:39:16 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Oh great here we go again with the global warming debate and the flame wars. *sets up chair, eats popcorn*

As for this new CCX, nice! I like the CCx. It seems only fair that they improve on it.

— 2007Tahoe (View Profile)

Posted on 3/9/2007 12:33:27 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

Al Gore invented the internet. Don't forget that!

— 993Turbo (View Profile)

Posted on 3/9/2007 8:21:57 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1