Somalia's Oil reserves

[Removed]

Useful yes.

Profitable? No

When you have nearly half a trillion barrels competing for a smaller market you can forget making the huge profits of today.

We could use the materials for our own economy but that's only if we have one to start with.

Most oil exporters don't even bother with that and will struggle when the time comes.

Fossil fuels will not stop being the main power source of the world until atleast 50 years from now. Fusion is the future and its a long way from becoming advanced enough to power us commercially.

Even if Fusion wasn’t incredibly hard, innovation in it is being stifled by the million and one regulations set on nuclear energy.

 

[abdullah233]

I truly believe galbeed will be richer than all somalis states because they have tons of oil and are getting atleast 50% for it. They also are in agreement with each other while we spend our time bickering and wasting valuable time.


They have tons of oil and gas reserves that the chinese company claims to have surveyed. I believe galbeed will be wealthy long before any somali region because they don't have security issues and are not divided on this matter. I hope they diversify their economy from the get go and invest in solar energy.

At least one somali region will be wealthy beyond belief. Trillions of income is no joke, only the dumb arabs wasted all that money because they have no business mindset. Somalis on the other hand will dominate in the business sector and hopefully our generation will plan ahead 10 yrs like china does. We could make deals with congo that is being looted by rwanda to provide them much needed electricity or other goods in return for coltan and kick start our own electronics industry or corner a market that other countries have yet to in africa.


If galbeed does better then i will take my business investments there. Reer NFD will stay dirt poor for the rest of their existence if they stay with the debt riddled corrupt kenya that is under pressure by the world bank and china hitherto.

Does SL have any oil reserves? i'm genuinely curious? I guess there is gold and rare earth minerals, perhaps the admin there can make use of wind and solar energy. I want somalis to be like Norwegians but even the diaspora behaves in a short sighted manner.

I feel like abiy has a deal for them to leave Ethiopia and be a sovereign state

 

[Yahya]

I feel like abiy has a deal for them to leave Ethiopia and be a sovereign state

Only once oromos have benefited. Trust me abiy is gonna milk them first.

 

[Gabay]

Somalia has no oil you must work hard you lazyies

 

[abdullah233]

In terms of Geography Puntaland would have the most in modern day Somalia

 

[Ras]

Oil isn't only used in cars. It used in pharmaceutical, plastics, textiles, power generation. The world is more dependent on oil than you think.

Oil is easy money for an economy. Norway seeks oil yet how many billions of barrel does the gulf and Russia produce.

Over 50% of it is used on transportation alone.

Diesel is currently one of the most expensive energy generation options.

Places like Somalia only use it because no one is willing to invest in a more larger efficient natural gas thermal power plant.

Batteries for cars and stabilizing solar & wind intermittency will get ridiculously cheaper.

The price of oil won't be able to hold up with the huge reduction in demand that's about to appear.

There's already a glut of production and you think losing half the market will let the industry stay profitable?

It won't be as simple as the price halving. I doubt OPEC will be around in a decade.

 

[Ras]

Fossil fuels will not stop being the main power source of the world until atleast 50 years from now. Fusion is the future and its a long way from becoming advanced enough to power us commercially.

Even if Fusion wasn’t incredibly hard, innovation in it is being stifled by the million and one regulations set on nuclear energy.

Fusion is something different altogether. Not waiting on that but would be cool to have.

However you forgetting the huge fusion ball in space?

Just 00000.1% of it's energy it releases as photons would be enough for us to live as kings in a post scarcity world.

Solar panels will get cheaper to the point it'll bankrupt the other energy production methods.

Even hydro plants will require to be subsidized to stay up.

The prices per kwh today are already feasible for even the poorest African villages but crappy batteries are preventing mass adoption.

Think that will get solved this decade since a trillion dollar industry is up for grabs.

 

[Zhang he]

Fusion is something different altogether. Not waiting on that but would be cool to have.

However you forgetting the huge fusion ball in space?

Just 00000.1% of it's energy it releases as photons would be enough for us to live as kings in a post scarcity world.

Solar panels will get cheaper to the point it'll bankrupt the other energy production methods.

Even hydro plants will require to be subsidized to stay up.

The prices per kwh today are already feasible for even the poorest African villages but crappy batteries are preventing mass adoption.

Think that will get solved this decade since a trillion dollar industry is up for grabs.

Lol at you for thinking that solar power will become the predominant energy source anytime soon. Solar power remains fossil fuel linked due to solar panels requiring coal for their production and oil for their transportation.

If you read Vaclav Smil's work, recommended by Bill Gates, you'll see that a solar energy transition is coming no time soon.

 

[Ras]

Lol at you for thinking that solar power will become the predominant energy source anytime soon. Solar power remains fossil fuel linked due to solar panels requiring coal for their production and oil for their transportation.

View attachment 128802
If you read Vaclav Smil's work, recommended by Bill Gates, you'll see that a solar energy transition is coming no time soon.

 

[Prime Minister]

I think he means electric cars energy source is cheap coal known as lignite in countries such as China, India and Indonesia where there is supposedly a green transportation drive. The coal negates any benefit to the environment by driving electric.

 

[Ras]

I think he means electric cars energy source is cheap coal known as lignite in countries such as China, India and Indonesia where there is supposedly a green transportation drive. The coal negates any benefit to the environment by driving electric.

Was confused with his initial point which disagreed with my prediction and then turns around and brings up the exact transition I was referring to...

Anyways no one claiming that fossil fuels don't have a major role today.

However my point was that the moment we're able to mass produce batteries that are economically no brainers then you should expect a quick transition.

 

[Zhang he]

My point was that there will be no quick transition.

This is because, when it comes to assessing renewables, there are two essential facets to whether they can surpass existing energy sources: their monetary cost and their energy yield (also known as EREOI or emergy yield). For energy sources like solar power to be viable, not only must they be cheap enough but the energy they produce must be greater than the energy required to produce them. This is not always remembered but vital. Solar power is net energy positive but it has still a smaller net energy yield than fossil fuels. This net energy yield is decreased further when batteries are factored in. This means that, in a world where energy demands are always increasing, it can never displace fossil fuels but only be added on top. Until solar power surpasses the net energy of oil, gas and coal, there will be no quick transition. To do so otherwise would reduce the total energy available and have severe economic effects.

 

[Ras]

My point was that there will be no quick transition.

This is because, when it comes to assessing renewables, there are two essential facets to whether they can surpass existing energy sources: their monetary cost and their energy yield (also known as EREOI or emergy yield). For energy sources like solar power to be viable, not only must they be cheap enough but the energy they produce must be greater than the energy required to produce them. This is not always remembered but vital. Solar power is net energy positive but it has still a smaller net energy yield than fossil fuels. This net energy yield is decreased further when batteries are factored in. This means that, in a world where energy demands are always increasing, it can never displace fossil fuels but only be added on top. Until solar power surpasses the net energy of oil, gas and coal, there will be no quick transition. To do so otherwise would reduce the total energy available and have severe economic effects.

You're stuck with a linear mindset.

Solar wasn't net energy positive just a short while ago and it's been exponentially improving.

The thing with old fossil fuels is that the price dynamics could only go so low.

However, all it takes for an order of magnitude improvement for Solar in price & efficiency is a material science or production breakthrough which I'm seeing more of now.

The speed of development is so fast that while you were writing your comment, Solar's EROI number already passed the minimum sustainability levels:

What's the EROI of Solar?

There's a graph making rounds lately showing the comparative EROIs of different electricity production methods. (EROI is Energy Return On Investment - how much energy we get back if we spend 1 unit of energy.

rameznaam.com

What would it take for your household to fully switch to solar panels? What if Solar offered 2-5 cents Kwh even with batteries?

We'll start seeing that sooner that you think.

 

[Zhang he]

You're stuck with a linear mindset.

Solar wasn't net energy positive just a short while ago and it's been exponentially improving.

The thing with old fossil fuels is that the price dynamics could only go so low.

However, all it takes for an order of magnitude improvement for Solar in price & efficiency is a material science or production breakthrough which I'm seeing more of now.

The speed of development is so fast that while you were writing your comment, Solar's EROI number already passed the minimum sustainability levels:

What's the EROI of Solar?

There's a graph making rounds lately showing the comparative EROIs of different electricity production methods. (EROI is Energy Return On Investment - how much energy we get back if we spend 1 unit of energy.

rameznaam.com

What would it take for your household to fully switch to solar panels? What if Solar offered 2-5 cents Kwh even with batteries?

We'll start seeing that sooner that you think.

I don't think you understand. The expansion of the net energy yields of a maturing energy generation technology always follows a sigmoid function due to the action of material restraints. Currently, solar tech is in its growth phase, then it will plateau. Solar panels can be used right now in homes but cannot yet be used significantly to drive an industrial society. The failure of the German Energiewende, Germany being much richer than Somalia, should show you that.

 

[Yahya]

You're stuck with a linear mindset.

Solar wasn't net energy positive just a short while ago and it's been exponentially improving.

The thing with old fossil fuels is that the price dynamics could only go so low.

However, all it takes for an order of magnitude improvement for Solar in price & efficiency is a material science or production breakthrough which I'm seeing more of now.

The speed of development is so fast that while you were writing your comment, Solar's EROI number already passed the minimum sustainability levels:

What's the EROI of Solar?

There's a graph making rounds lately showing the comparative EROIs of different electricity production methods. (EROI is Energy Return On Investment - how much energy we get back if we spend 1 unit of energy.

rameznaam.com

What would it take for your household to fully switch to solar panels? What if Solar offered 2-5 cents Kwh even with batteries?

We'll start seeing that sooner that you think.

Brother I agree with what you said. However it's not realistic to believe that every country is developing their green energy sector as efficiently as the US and other superpowers. There will still be many countries in need of fossil fuels. However I think that by 2050 even most of these countries will have moved on to efficient energy.

 

[Ras]

I don't think you understand. The expansion of the net energy yields of a maturing energy generation technology always follows a sigmoid function due to the action of material restraints. Currently, solar tech is in its growth phase, then it will plateau. Solar panels can be used right now in homes but cannot yet be used significantly to drive an industrial society. The failure of the German Energiewende, Germany being much richer than Somalia, should show you that.

Why do you believe that material science development in solar panels will start to slow down?

Some materials have already surpassed the Shockley Queissler limit and now with new 2d materials breakthroughs it won't be long until we'll be able to decrease the costs by an order of magnitude.

Today's limits are just that and it's actually the material restraints of the fossils fuels industry that will make it hard for them to compete.

 

[Ras]

Brother I agree with what you said. However it's not realistic to believe that every country is developing their green energy sector as efficiently as the US and other superpowers. There will still be many countries in need of fossil fuels. However I think that by 2050 even most of these countries will have moved on to efficient energy.

It's all about costs benefits not sustainability/green policies or any of that stuff.

Coal/diesel plants require huge investments and on top of that you need an expensive transmission line that needs to be maintained.

If solar starts becoming cheap enough that even poor African villagers could finance them then why would the governments need to spend hundreds of millions on these huge power plants?

They'd probably save money by subsidizing solar since they are already effectively doing that for electricity in some African countries.

These power plants take years to build while gigawatts of solar panels could be installed in months.

All that's preventing the mass adoption is the cost of batteries.