what's the futur for gasoline van/RV/camper

[rruff]

I'll just toss out something else to think about. If we all did just a little bit to cut our gas usage, maybe we could get it down to just what we can pump and produce in this country. Then there would be no reason to be sending $$$ to unfriendly countries that now try to blackmail us with oil costs. I'm thinking about all the OPEC countries.I am old enough that I remember the OPEC oil embargo. For me, that would be a good enough reason by itself to work a lot harder developing better EV options for us. In the meantime, if we we could cut back on our gas usage it wouldn't hurt.

We already produce as much petroleum products as we use. And most of our imports come from Canada:
https://www.eia.gov/energyexplained/oil-and-petroleum-products/imports-and-exports.phphttps://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=55880

 

[RonDean]

We have the capacity to pump and produce all the oil this country needs.

Without getting into politics, the ability to pump and produce has been restricted to the point where we are more reliant on importing oil than we were not long ago.

You are right, it's hard to talk about anything these days without politics creeping in. But, I'll try.

I think we have 2 choices - pump more or use less. It saves me $$ when I just use less. Maybe if I were getting paid for pumping more it would be easier for me to see that as a solution, although I hope not. The less gas we use, the cleaner the air gets. That's either by changing our habits or by more people converting to EVs. And the moment I see an EV-RV I can afford, I'll buy it. Beyond today's air-related health issues, cleaner air also means fewer climate-related problems moving forward. Things like more severe weather, rising seas, etc. - which someone is going to have to deal with sooner or later.

I just can't see any advantage, for the vast majority of us, to be pumping more oil out of the ground. It really doesn't matter if it is from public or private land. But, my point about not wanting to buy more oil from other countries still stands. I remember the original Oil Embargo. It wasn't fun. It will happen again if we remain vulnerable to such coercion. And those of us that enjoy the nomadic lifestyle we talk about here are more vulnerable than the average bear.

 

[rruff]

I remember the original Oil Embargo. It wasn't fun. It will happen again if we remain vulnerable to such coercion.

We aren't vulnerable. Did you check the links I posted above?

 

[RonDean]

We aren't vulnerable. Did you check the links I posted above?

Yes, I did. If anything, it reinforced my opinion that American consumers need to use less oil/gas. Don't be fooled into thinking that just because some oil companies are based and operating in the US they have any sort of patriotic obligation to reduce cost to US consumers. They don't. As your article showed, they are now exporting oil. Given our current habits and our economic system, I think we (the US consumer) remains vulnerable. To be clear, WE would not be pumping more oil, it would be the oil companies, that have no allegiance to anyone other than their owners and investors, pumping it out of US soil and selling it to the highest global bidder.

EVs, as in electric (especially solar generated) vehicles would be an improvement. The sun shines on everyone. Once we invest in collection and generation of sufficient renewable power, the rest gets easy. Given the necessary technology, we might even free ourselves from using oil entirely. I don't see that as a bad thing. I certainly see it as better than pumping and burning more. In the meantime, I'll try to use less gas and do other things to lessen my impact on the earth (Happy Earth Day - BTW) and my wallet.

 

[rruff]

We are vulnerable to price increases (like with everything), but we aren't dependent on OPEC or shortages.

It's always good to use less...

 

[Happy Camper]

Six of one. Half dozen of the other in many ways due to tradeoffs.

 

[maki2]

By the time the gas engines become obsolete I will likely be in assisted living.

 

[LargeMarge]

....politics...

.
Geez... I went all day without anybody mentioning the 'p' word.
Then, you go and spoil that perfection.
Cripes.

 

[Gr8ful]

Personal vehicles only produce 1% of the worlds pollution & most of the electricity to charge them are made by natural gas or coal so we're just fooling ourselves about saving the planet. Also EVs are heavier, more expensive & cost a fortune to replace the batteries which are hazardous waste when removed. Stanley Meyer who worked for NASA & held 2000+ patents made 2 vehicles that ran on water but was murdered. He developed a simple way to split the 2 hydrogen atoms off the oxygen atom so it produced no pollution. This is the answer.

 

[RonDean]

Personal vehicles only produce 1% of the worlds pollution & most of the electricity to charge them are made by natural gas or coal so we're just fooling ourselves about saving the planet. Also EVs are heavier, more expensive & cost a fortune to replace the batteries which are hazardous waste when removed. Stanley Meyer who worked for NASA & held 2000+ patents made 2 vehicles that ran on water but was murdered. He developed a simple way to split the 2 hydrogen atoms off the oxygen atom so it produced no pollution. This is the answer.

I think I'll reserve my opinion of your opinion until I see some hard facts AND some at least somewhat unbiased counter arguments. IMO, the more unlikely the theory - the more solid the evidence must be. As yet, I have not seen any that stands up to critical thinking or might be accepted in a court. And that is strictly non-political.

 

[wayne49]

Energy Returned on Energy Invested (EROEI) is the critical function in energy production and profitability. How much energy is expended to extract energy resources.

In this case extracting energy from H atoms by cracking water molecules.

This water as fuel myth has been around at least since the 1950's (my lifetime, maybe it has been around since the Model T), featured in Popular Science and Popular Mechanics magazines. The "inventor" always dies suspiciously, thus never around to defend his claims.

 

[Gr8ful]

They also claim flying cars are a new idea but I saw a 1930s one fly at the antique airfield at Airventure at Oshkosh.
When we were teenagers my friend had a bad gas tank & put one in the trunk. We'd go to gas stations, ask if we could use the hose then put water in the orig tank then drop in an aspirin in plain site of the attendant then get in & drive off. Believe it or not!
Here's the Meyer you tube. There are many more on the subject also making diesel from waste plastic.

 

[quilting22]

Personal vehicles only produce 1% of the worlds pollution & most of the electricity to charge them are made by natural gas or coal so we're just fooling ourselves about saving the planet. Also EVs are heavier, more expensive & cost a fortune to replace the batteries which are hazardous waste when removed. Stanley Meyer who worked for NASA & held 2000+ patents made 2 vehicles that ran on water but was murdered. He developed a simple way to split the 2 hydrogen atoms off the oxygen atom so it produced no pollution. This is the answer.

Yes l knew this, it's true also an ordinary , intelligent house wife in late 50's developed how to run an automobile engine using water . She proved it to powers that beand wisely choose to go no further with it fearing for her and her familys life. Im 74 yrs old so l remember the house wife story being news.

 

[Gr8ful]

I was wrong saying he had 2000 patents but it was 200,000 patents. He was offered a huge amount of money for his invention so if he was a fraud he would have sold it. Here's more you tubes.

 

[rruff]

Yes l knew this, it's true also an ordinary , intelligent house wife in late 50's developed how to run an automobile engine using water . She proved it to powers that beand wisely choose to go no further with it fearing for her and her familys life. Im 74 yrs old so l remember the house wife story being news.

Stanley Meyer who worked for NASA & held 2000+ patents made 2 vehicles that ran on water but was murdered. He developed a simple way to split the 2 hydrogen atoms off the oxygen atom so it produced no pollution. This is the answer.

It takes more energy to split hydrogen from oxygen atoms than you could ever get from them later. There is no getting around that one... which means you have to use energy from somewhere to get a lesser amount back from the hydrogen. Meyer had ample to time to prove that his device worked, and he never did.

Auto companies shouldn't care, but big oil certainly wouldn't like it. Thing is, many countries import nearly all of their oil, and would have no qualms about putting their "oil industries" out of business. The competitive advantage that any country, industry, or group would have would be tremendous... nearly free energy! There is absolutely no way to keep something like this quiet, or keep it from being used.

Meyer's patents are freely available to anyone who'd like to give it a go.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

I was wrong saying he had 2000 patents but it was 200,000 patents. He was offered a huge amount of money for his invention so if he was a fraud he would have sold it.....

I count 32 patents authored by Stanley Meyer in the US patent database and Canadian patent data base.

The patent for extracting hydrogen from water is US5149407A (pdf available from US Patent Office). The patent expired 9/22/2009 so it is available for anyone to freely utilize (no cost).

As to the original question:
Unless governments do something stupid (no guarantee there) gas and diesel will be available until probably the end of the century. Just about everything we consume is transported by diesel.

 

[RonDean]

As to the original question:
Unless governments do something stupid (no guarantee there) gas and diesel will be available until probably the end of the century. Just about everything we consume is transported by diesel.

I can't argue with that. The question is --- should we? Especially when there are so many other solutions that are better for our health and the planet.

Just for grins, how about we pull all those diesel trucks off the road and replace then with Airships? See: https://www.cnn.com/travel/article/flying-whales-airships-hnk-spc-intl/index.html. Then we (RVers) would have the roads a lot clearer in front of us.

 

[Gr8ful]

They were developing cargo airships in Ohio 10+ years ago. I lost track track on how it worked out.

 

[khantroll]

Meyer's patents are freely available to anyone who'd like to give it a go.

A few years ago, someone did just that and found that it was a convoluted electrolysis design. Further then that, though, Meyer himself was sued in 1996 nd his car was inspected by independent experts...who found the exact same thing.

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

..... Just for grins, how about we pull all those diesel trucks off the road and replace then with Airships? .....

We wouldn't be saving any fuel; probably take more.

Airships need a lot of power to go anywhere but where the wind goes. One has to push a lot of air out of the way to go anywhere.
- Goodyear blimp has 3 X 200 HP motors = 600 HP
- Semi tractor has between 300 HP and 600 HP
Airships don't lift much for their size.
- Goodyear blimp: 300,000 cu. ft., 4000 lbs total usable lift.
- Semi tractor trailer: 20,000 lbs - 80,000 lbs (limited by road and bridge restrictions).