Oil Boycott: Non oil based products?
Bill
these high oil prices. I think the manufacturers would like to get away from
oil based materials if possible. Maybe consumers can help them do this by
buying non-oil based products when available...
So the question: What products can I buy at the store which are not oil
based nor have oil based packaging? What do I look for?
I did find this on the internet...
http://www.greenhome.com
Rod Speed
> Seems to me both manufacturers of products and consumers are fed up with these high oil prices. I think the
> manufacturers would like to get away from oil based materials if possible.
Pity it aint possible for anything like the same price.
> Maybe consumers can help them do this by buying non-oil based products when available...
Only if they are actually stupid enough to pay a lot more for it.
> So the question: What products can I buy at the store which are not oil based
Fuck all apart from basic food and even that has had lots of oil used in its production.
> nor have oil based packaging?
There's still quite a bit of packaging that uses paper/cardboard, but a lot of oil was
used in its production too, and even more to move the packaged product around.
> What do I look for?
Some old hemp or cotton rope, hang yourself with it.
> I did find this on the internet...
> http://www.greenhome.com
Completely useless.
clams_casino
>Seems to me both manufacturers of products and consumers are fed up with
>these high oil prices. I think the manufacturers would like to get away from
>oil based materials if possible. Maybe consumers can help them do this by
>buying non-oil based products when available...
>
>So the question: What products can I buy at the store which are not oil
>based nor have oil based packaging? What do I look for?
>
>
>
Firstly, only about 5% of oil is used for petrochemicals (plastics,
detergents, pesticides, food preservatives, candle wax, pharmaceuticals,
etc).
Secondly, a lot of plastics as well as fertilizers are made from coal
and natural gas (especially those derived from ethylene, polypropylene,
etc).
Is your goal to avoid products derived from oil or all (man made) carbon
based products?
Acetate & rayon are primarily made from trees. Polyester (fabrics &
plastics) is primarily made using oil-based materials (paraxylene).
Silk & cotton are other natural products, but the dyes & chemicals used
to convert them into colorful fabrics / garments likely have many
oil-based components.
Bottom line - it's unlikely there is much you can do to avoid oil-based
chemicals/ products. It's much more effective to minimize using
oil-based fuels.
Jeff
> Seems to me both manufacturers of products and consumers are fed up with
> these high oil prices. I think the manufacturers would like to get away from
> oil based materials if possible. Maybe consumers can help them do this by
> buying non-oil based products when available...
I'm a little surprised at the shift to non petroleum sources. Goodyear
is using more natural rubber and other manufacturers are subbing oils
such as rapeseed. Trouble for them is those products are rising in cost
also.
2.6% of all petroleum is used for the production of all plastics
80% of all petroleum is used for gasoline, jet and diesel fuel and
home heating fuels
17.2% of all petroleum is used for the production of asphalt, road
oils and lubricants
http://www.polystyrene.org/news/PSPC_flyer.pdf
Where are the whales now that we need their oil?
Jeff
Rod Speed
> Bill wrote
>> Seems to me both manufacturers of products and consumers are fed up with these high oil prices. I think the
>> manufacturers would like to get away from oil based materials if possible. Maybe consumers can help them do this by
>> buying non-oil based products when available...
> I'm a little surprised at the shift to non petroleum sources.
> Goodyear is using more natural rubber and other manufacturers are
> subbing oils such as rapeseed. Trouble for them is those products are
> rising in cost also.
> 2.6% of all petroleum is used for the production of all plastics
> 80% of all petroleum is used for gasoline, jet and diesel fuel and home heating fuels
> 17.2% of all petroleum is used for the production of asphalt, road oils and lubricants
> http://www.polystyrene.org/news/PSPC_flyer.pdf
> Where are the whales now that we need their oil?
The Japs have eaten them.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Seems to me both manufacturers of products and consumers are fed
>>>> up with these high oil prices. I think the manufacturers would like to get
>>>> away from oil based materials if possible. Maybe consumers can help
>>>> them do this by buying non-oil based products when available...
>>> I'm a little surprised at the shift to non petroleum sources.
>>> Goodyear is using more natural rubber and other manufacturers are
>>> subbing oils such as rapeseed. Trouble for them is those products
>>> are rising in cost also.
>>> 2.6% of all petroleum is used for the production of all plastics
>>> 80% of all petroleum is used for gasoline, jet and diesel fuel and home heating fuels
>>> 17.2% of all petroleum is used for the production of asphalt, road oils and lubricants
>>> http://www.polystyrene.org/news/PSPC_flyer.pdf
>>> Where are the whales now that we need their oil?
>> The Japs have eaten them.
> That's unlikely, they seem to have lost their taste for them, so it's
> hardly going to be economic for any whaling ships to work at all.
They're so bloody minded about it that they'll keep killing them anyway.
> What's puzzling is why coal to oil production hasn't increased by a huge scale.
Thats because it isnt economic at the current price of oil.
What we have seen is a big increase in the use of coal stream gas.
> It also has the side benefit of outputting CO2, which of course will spur plant
> growth. The current price for oil certainly makes processing coal attractive now.
Not yet.
Jeff
> On Mon, 9 Jun 2008 12:11:23 +1000, "Rod Speed"
> <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote
>>> Bill wrote
>>>> Seems to me both manufacturers of products and consumers are fed up with these high oil prices. I think the
>>>> manufacturers would like to get away from oil based materials if possible. Maybe consumers can help them do this by
>>>> buying non-oil based products when available...
>>> I'm a little surprised at the shift to non petroleum sources.
>>> Goodyear is using more natural rubber and other manufacturers are
>>> subbing oils such as rapeseed. Trouble for them is those products are
>>> rising in cost also.
>>> 2.6% of all petroleum is used for the production of all plastics
>>> 80% of all petroleum is used for gasoline, jet and diesel fuel and home heating fuels
>>> 17.2% of all petroleum is used for the production of asphalt, road oils and lubricants
>>> http://www.polystyrene.org/news/PSPC_flyer.pdf
>>> Where are the whales now that we need their oil?
>> The Japs have eaten them.
>
> hardly going to be economic for any whaling ships to work at all.
>
> course will spur plant growth.
And what a lovely side benefit that is.
I suppose that there are three issues at work, the need for carbon
sequestration that you have mentioned, the relative shortage and rising
costs of coal and the huge capital costs of the plants. There's a lot
more coal that can be brought online, and the carbon sequestration is
easier to do for this (separating out is easier, storage remains an
issue), then for straight coal fired plants.
I believe congress has allocated $20B for syn fuel generation, but I
can't find a reference to it.
What does seem to be happening is the US Air Force has a strong
interest in this as you can make high quality synthetic aviation fuels.
B52's have recently been certified to fly on a 50 50 blend.
The only large scale plants now online are two in South Africa and
there appears to be one being built in China.
It seems to me that the best short term energy source is the SUV
gasification plan. There's a large supply of them and you can run two +
cars on the energy released from one SUV.
Jeff
> The current price for oil certainly makes processing coal attractive
> now.
>
>>>> So the question: What products can I buy at the store which are not
>>>> oil based nor have oil based packaging? What do I look for?
>>>> I did find this on the internet...
>>>> http://www.greenhome.com
>
> Jim
> www.inghamcam.info
Paul M. Eldridge
> [...]
>
> It seems to me that the best short term energy source is the SUV
>gasification plan. There's a large supply of them and you can run two +
>cars on the energy released from one SUV.
>
> Jeff
Hi Jeff,
Do we gas just the SUVs or the SUVs and their owners? =:-O
Cheers,
Paul
Jeff
Hmmm, the energy recovered from the owners has got to be huge!
It's time to take away tax breaks for building McMansions and driving
mega SUVs.
Jeff
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
Paul M. Eldridge
Hi Jeff,
Funny, I was asking myself earlier what the energy content of a 250-lb
SUV driver clutching a double glazzed Dunk'n Donut might be...
With respect to McMansions and SUVs....
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601072&refer=energy&sid=a4kOXcpI3dQg
To bring one comment up-to-date, crude oil is now trading between
$135.00 and $140.00 a barrel, and the Henry Hub and NYC gate spot
price for natural gas are $12.71 and $14.09 per MM BTU respectively.
Cheers,
Paul
Rod Speed
> Jimington wrote
There is no 'relative shortage' of coal.
> There's a lot more coal that can be brought online, and the carbon
> sequestration is easier to do for this (separating out is easier,
> storage remains an issue), then for straight coal fired plants.
> I believe congress has allocated $20B for syn fuel generation,
Nope.
> but I can't find a reference to it.
> What does seem to be happening is the US Air Force has a strong
> interest in this as you can make high quality synthetic aviation fuels.
You can make anything you like. What matters is what it cost to do that.
> B52's have recently been certified to fly on a 50 50 blend.
> The only large scale plants now online are two in South Africa
Which are only viable there because they have no oil at all.
> and there appears to be one being built in China.
> It seems to me that the best short term energy source is the SUV gasification plan. There's a large supply of them and
> you can run two + cars on the energy released from one SUV.
You can run 10 cars on each bloated american gasified.
Pity about the pollution produced in the process tho.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> Jimington <wvzu...@gfa.pp> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote
>>>>> Bill wrote
>>>>>> Seems to me both manufacturers of products and consumers are fed
>>>>>> up with these high oil prices. I think the manufacturers would like to
>>>>>> get away from oil based materials if possible. Maybe consumers can
>>>>>> help them do this by buying non-oil based products when available...
>>>>> I'm a little surprised at the shift to non petroleum sources.
>>>>> Goodyear is using more natural rubber and other manufacturers are
>>>>> subbing oils such as rapeseed. Trouble for them is those products
>>>>> are rising in cost also.
>>>>> 2.6% of all petroleum is used for the production of all plastics
>>>>> 80% of all petroleum is used for gasoline, jet and diesel fuel and home heating fuels
>>>>> 17.2% of all petroleum is used for the production of asphalt, road oils and lubricants
>>>>> http://www.polystyrene.org/news/PSPC_flyer.pdf
>>>>> Where are the whales now that we need their oil?
>>>> The Japs have eaten them.
>>> That's unlikely, they seem to have lost their taste for them, so it's
>>> hardly going to be economic for any whaling ships to work at all.
>> They're so bloody minded about it that they'll keep killing them anyway.
> Yeah but they're never going to have the effect on numbers
> that the occidental whalers did in centuries past. It's hardly
> even newsworthy except as a milking cow for greenpeace
> to drain the wallets of well intentioned animal lovers.
Sure, but since they kept claiming that its just scientific research
and not because they want to eat them, they have no choice but to
continue with the whaling even if no one wants to eat them anymore,
because if they stopped now, that would prove that they lied.
They've never had the balls to admit to what they got up to in china etc during the war.
>>> What's puzzling is why coal to oil production hasn't increased by a huge scale.
>> Thats because it isnt economic at the current price of oil.
> A bit of quick research leads me to believe the $80 per
> that antiquated barrel mark would make CTL viable.
Not for a new plant. Its viable for South Africa because they built the plants when
they had no choice due to sanctions and that coal isnt readily exportable now.
>> What we have seen is a big increase in the use of coal stream gas.
>>> It also has the side benefit of outputting CO2, which of course
>>> will spur plant growth. The current price for oil certainly makes
>>> processing coal attractive now.
>> Not yet.
> If not yet, it must be damned close to it, especially when we live in a region with abundant coal.
Nope, it makes a lot more sense to concentrate on coal stream gas instead,
and thats what we are doing and the yanks have done for a long time now.
> I don't see the CO2 thing as an issue
They do tho. Thats what matters.
> and even believe increasing it will lead to a lush green world.
Nope, you dont get that result in a desert with even doubling the CO2 level.
And we didnt get that effect in this country from the big increase
in the CO2 level seen since before the industrial revolution either.
Jeff
Hi Paul,
> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 12:28:08 -0400, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
>
>> Paul M. Eldridge wrote:
>>> On Mon, 09 Jun 2008 10:00:33 -0400, Jeff <jeff@spam_me_not.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> [...]
>>>>
>>>> It seems to me that the best short term energy source is the SUV
>>>> gasification plan. There's a large supply of them and you can run two +
>>>> cars on the energy released from one SUV.
>>>>
>>>> Jeff
>>> Hi Jeff,
>>>
>>> Do we gas just the SUVs or the SUVs and their owners? =:-O
>> Hmmm, the energy recovered from the owners has got to be huge!
>>
>> It's time to take away tax breaks for building McMansions and driving
>> mega SUVs.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
> Hi Jeff,
>
> Funny, I was asking myself earlier what the energy content of a 250-lb
> SUV driver clutching a double glazzed Dunk'n Donut might be...
I think it's worth doing the research!
>
> With respect to McMansions and SUVs....
>
> http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601072&refer=energy&sid=a4kOXcpI3dQg
Considering that's Bloomberg, it must be sobering to it's readers.
>
> To bring one comment up-to-date, crude oil is now trading between
> $135.00 and $140.00 a barrel, and the Henry Hub and NYC gate spot
> price for natural gas are $12.71 and $14.09 per MM BTU respectively.
It took a while for those numbers to sink in. And it's a staggering cost
to industry, and for the homeowner it bodes badly. I just checked per
therm fixed rate 1 year contracts here and they are running about
$1.70/therm, that doesn't include delivery charges, which could be
another buck. And those prices seem likely to soar if the spot is where
it is now.
Well, I feel pretty good about my solar investment and the fact that
the wood pile is stocked and the house is insulated. But most people
haven't done that.
Jeff
>
> Cheers,
> Paul
Rod Speed
>>>>>>> http://www.polystyrene.org/news/PSPC_flyer.pdf
> Good point. I wonder how long before industry decides to take
> a gamble on the oil price staying high enough to be viable.
I doubt they will with coal to oil any time soon.
It makes a lot more sense to do coal seam gas instead with the coal and use
shale oil as a source of oil when it looks like the price of crude oil will stay high
enough for long enough to justify that. Coal seam gas is already very viable.
> There's no guarantee oil will remain at current prices
Yep, its less than clear what the current prices will do to OPEC etc.
> even though they've conditioned us to expect it.
>>>> What we have seen is a big increase in the use of coal stream gas.
>>>>> It also has the side benefit of outputting CO2, which of course
>>>>> will spur plant growth. The current price for oil certainly makes
>>>>> processing coal attractive now.
>>>> Not yet.
>>> If not yet, it must be damned close to it, especially when we live in a region with abundant coal.
>> Nope, it makes a lot more sense to concentrate on coal seam gas instead,
>> and thats what we are doing and the yanks have done for a long time now.
>>> I don't see the CO2 thing as an issue
>> They do tho. Thats what matters.
>>> and even believe increasing it will lead to a lush green world.
>> Nope, you dont get that result in a desert with even doubling the CO2 level.
>> And we didnt get that effect in this country from the big increase
>> in the CO2 level seen since before the industrial revolution either.
> Pity that water is needed too and that something that isn't overly plentiful.
Its very plentiful in the north and didnt produce that effect there either.
Paul M. Eldridge
With respect to natural gas prices, the following article appeared in
yesterday's Atlanta Journal-Constitution:
http://www.ajc.com/business/content/business/stories/2008/06/09/natural_gas_prices.html
It would seem reducing your home's energy needs and installation of a
solar hot water system will pay off rather handsomely.
Cheers,
Paul