Newt Gingrich has three ideas to reduce the price of oil

[Galvatron]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UOpcPfAarjY

[CaptainZoidberg]

1. Release the Strategic Reserve

Is he a moron? Seriously, is he? Keeping a reserve of a scarce resource that is only going to get more scarce makes perfect sense.

Also, I don't get what his big deal is with speculators. If speculators are driving up the price of oil because they know it will cost more later, aren't they actually helping the nation by making the rise in prices more gradual?

Newt Gingrich's reasoning only makes sense if you think that there's an infinite amount of oil.

2. The US has more oil than Saudi Arabia

I wonder if he's including oil shale...

3. We can transition to nuclear power and fuel cells for cars

I actually agree with the third point. Transitioning to nuclear power would be a good idea.

[Patrick Degan]

Newt Gingrich's reasoning only makes sense if you think that there's an infinite amount of oil.

2. The US has more oil than Saudi Arabia

I wonder if he's including oil shale...

Oh yes he is. Gingrich touts the Rocky Mountain oil shale reserve as the next big strike and seems to think extracting the oil from it will be easy with New Technology™ —them evil Government Regulations™ being the thing in the way of full exploitation.

[CaptainZoidberg]

I think part of the problem is that he's thinking "Zomg we just need new technology", when in reality extracting crude oil from oil shale will require energy no matter how you slice it.

[bobalot]

1. Whats the point of a strategic reserve if you don't keep it for emergencies?
2a. Shale oil a shitty source of oil.
2b. Even if they could extract it, the production rates of oil wouldn't be large enough.
3. Nuclear power is very expensive, and a roll out on the scale he is talking about would require massive government support and funding, which as a small government conservative he would be against. Talk about being in a pickle there.

[MichaelFerrariF1]

3. We can transition to nuclear power and fuel cells for cars

I actually agree with the third point. Transitioning to nuclear power would be a good idea.

PBRs are the shit. You can generate electricity and crack hydrogen.

[bobalot]

Hydrogen Cars require Platinum as a catalyst for the process. There is only enough platinum in the world for 50 million cars, which doesn't even cover America.

[SirNitram]

Hydrogen Cars require Platinum as a catalyst for the process. There is only enough platinum in the world for 50 million cars, which doesn't even cover America.

Hydrogen fuel cells require platinum. One can simply burn hydrogen for power, it should be remembered.

[Mayabird]

Newt, go back to writing your alternate history Civil War novels. We all rather liked your leaving politics and finding a hobby.

[Sea Skimmer]

PBRs are the shit. You can generate electricity and crack hydrogen.

No they can’t. The point of a Pebble Bed Reactor is that it runs are a nice safe low temperature which makes a meltdown impossible. For the direct cracking of hydrogen you need a reactor which is designed for exceptionally high temperatures.

Hydrogen Cars require Platinum as a catalyst for the process. There is only enough platinum in the world for 50 million cars, which doesn't even cover America.

You can use several different catalysts actually (and in fact a low efficiency fuel cell doesn’t need one at all), including iron which has been converted into a very pure, very fine powder. I don’t think we’ll be running out of iron anytime soon. The real limitation on fuel cells is simply that they cost too much to be practical right now, and that’s not likely to change for some time to come.

[Admiral Valdemar]

You can also use engineered enzymes which offer various advantages also. Still, costs are way up again and we don't have the time to replace even a fraction of modern traffic with fuel-cell stack powered vehicles, which would really need to be in new models.

[MichaelFerrariF1]

No they can’t. The point of a Pebble Bed Reactor is that it runs are a nice safe low temperature which makes a meltdown impossible. For the direct cracking of hydrogen you need a reactor which is designed for exceptionally high temperatures.

It's doesn't directly crack hydrogen, but it makes electrolysis a lot more efficient.

PBRs use helium, which has high thermal conductivity and inertness (read: fireproof and noncorrosive) for cooling. This makes them more efficient at capturing heat energy from nuclear reactions than standard reactor designs. The ratio of electrical output to thermal output is about 50%.

The high-temperature gas design also has a silver lining – it can produce hydrogen. Think about that – fuel cell vehicles need expensive-to-produce hydrogen to run on – this reactor could make hydrogen as a byproduct.

Generation of hydrogen has been the biggest stumbling block to it adoption as a clean fuel. Hydrogen, found primarily in water, is expensive to extract as a gas. While the technical problems of handling, storage and use as fuel are largely solved, the high energy cost to produce hydrogen has made it an energy transport medium, not a source.

These new reactors run at high temperatures which are perfect for cracking abundant water or helium gas into hydrogen which can then be used as a green fuel – burning hydrogen just produces water vapor.

http://www.physorg.com/news8956.html

Starting next year, both China and South Africa intend to build full-scale prototype pebble beds based on a design developed in Germany in the 1960s. However, the concept being considered in Idaho will produce hotter gas. “The Chinese and South African reactors will be close to 1550 F,” says Weaver, who is coordinating the pebble-bed program in Idaho, “and we want 1650 to 1830 F. Those 100 degrees can make a huge difference.” The extra heat will run the electricity-generating turbines more efficiently, and--crucially--meet the threshold for efficiently generating hydrogen from water.

Hydrogen is currently produced from natural gas by a process called steam reformation, which releases 74 million tons of heat-trapping carbon dioxide into the atmosphere each year. As a cleaner alternative, researchers are trying to figure out the best way to split the H from H2O. A team at Idaho National Lab recently showed that electrolysis--using electricity to split the water molecule--is nearly twice as efficient at the high temperatures made possible by a pebble-bed reactor.

http://www.popularmechanics.com/science ... tml?page=4

[Surlethe]

You can use several different catalysts actually (and in fact a low efficiency fuel cell doesn’t need one at all), including iron which has been converted into a very pure, very fine powder. I don’t think we’ll be running out of iron anytime soon. The real limitation on fuel cells is simply that they cost too much to be practical right now, and that’s not likely to change for some time to come.

Do they carry a high cost because production has not been sufficiently expanded, or do they have a high per-unit cost regardless of the economy of scale?

[Sea Skimmer]

Do they carry a high cost because production has not been sufficiently expanded, or do they have a high per-unit cost regardless of the economy of scale?

They have no economy of scale at the moment, the largest scale single use as a far as I can tell has been a couple dozen cells for some German Type 212/214 submarines, but even with mass production they’ll never be as cheap as conventional piston engines are. Its like the costs and problems of a piston engine and a high end battery rolled together.

[SirNitram]

Honestly, I suspect we'll see solar cars becoming a viable consumer option before fuel cell ones. Advances in solar cell tech to make it scalable, less toxic, and higher efficiency are coming alot faster than the catalysts, and if you could ever work that 'solar ink' stuff into a car's paintjob, you'd not even need the things to look so silly.

[MichaelFerrariF1]

We'll need better battery tech to run through the rain/night, or else they'll be very weather dependent. A plug in plug-in solar car with regenerative braking could work, though.

[SirNitram]

We'll need better battery tech to run through the rain/night, or else they'll be very weather dependent. A plug in plug-in solar car with regenerative braking could work, though.

Nanosolar is making claims on gathering from even cloudy days, though night without ambient lightning is an issue. A high capacity battery that can be plugged in and other advances like regenerative breaking were assumed; they're now mass-producable.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Nanosolar also rely on gallium and indium, metals that will be exhausted before 2020 at present rates. The thin film solar fad is sucking up venture capital, but I see polysilicon PV cells being the mainstays with thermal combined systems like Helio Dynamics' systems.