2300AD energy sources

Lemnoc

Mongoose
Although the sourcebook goes to lengths to note Earth has moved away from petroleum / coal as sources of energy, any new worlds with a combustive atmosphere and carbon-based life will likely have petroleum resources that are relatively easy to crack and yield fantastic amounts of cheap energy. Nothing else comes close to the energy < > cost comparison.

We like to imagine future-y things like fusion plants, etc., but for a setting as dedicated to "keepin' it real" as 2300AD we mustn't forget these young colonies will be burning coal and oil by the @#$% ton.

I don't see that in the description of worlds, but it could add even more grit to a gritty setting. Just sayin'. :mrgreen:
 
Two things to consider: the Core's focus on environmentalism and the lack of an industrial base on many colony worlds.

Petroluem's been out of style for 200 years in the Core, and for the companies making things like fuel cells & MHD turbines they might not want to make custom jobs for what to them is a small niche market. Plus, it's not enough that you have access to crude oil, you need refineries to make it usable, and those things are so damn expensive they haven't built new ones in the real world in about 30 years.

Plus, environmentalism is so strong in the Core that they have banned immigration by DNA-modified humans & have a paramilitary force tasked solely with protecting the planet from biological contamination. I'm sure there might be official suppression of petroleum refining, as well as laws preventing the sale of refining technology or hydrocarbon-burning fuel cells to the Colonies (the Core is obsessed with protecting people from themselves). Plus, I'm sure any colony that started burning fossil fuels would end up with the North American Research League all up in their face, and possibly sanctions from the home government.
 
Well, to each his own interpretation.

I'm not talking about the Core here, mind you.

But to my mind, petrol cracking is 19th century technology and easily accessed for BIG energy gains. Nothing remotely ultra-tech about it, and even crude diesel offers big thermal advantages. Even medieval societies were able to crack something usable out of raw oil. That is why it continues to dominate today's energy portfolios.

The investment to get some kind of cracking station up and running for a colony is pretty minor, basically a big tower with points on it whereupon you can draw off successively lighter and lighter products—gasoline, butane, etc.—and sure makes a lot more sense than using draft horses and whatnot. Coal you can just burn, no refinements required, although some forms burn better than others. Natural gas, same.

I would hazard to guess that if new refineries are not currently being built it is because the world is past peak capacity, and the explanation at that point becomes self-referential. This would not be true on a new world, where potentially oceans of oil could lie near the surface (as indeed they did here prior to the late 20th Century). I could certainly see the colonies having a pathway off the petroleum treadmill; I cannot imagine the colonies making their lives harder by ignoring volumes of cheap available energy.

Hard to imagine a setting so fiercely non-utopian as the 2300AD setting would not avail itself to the same expedient solutions as are currently available to humanity.

EDIT: Besides, it adds a nice retro steam punky flavor :)

EDIT: And some of these worlds could use a little global warming :lol:
 
Harsh reality interruption.

A colony is put on a world for a purpose, be it research, extraction of resources or just a new world for people to live.

The colony is a drain, a massive drain on money and materials until it becomes self sustaining. Once it becomes more or less self sustaining then the idiot rules can start to be applied but until them billions of Currency units are being thrown into a deep pit to sustain that colony.

Using FTL transports to ship foals or horse sized exo wombs out to a world that is then intended to develop using horse and carts is frankly insane unless the colony is deliberately going primitive.
Two horses pulling a cart can manage a few tons. 20 horses pulling ten carts with ten drivers can manage 2-30 tons. A single tractor with a single driver can do better. If you are moving those goods to a point 10 miles away the horses can do two trips a day, the tractor can do 5.

To developed a 23rd century colony, or even a 20th century one takes power and a lot of it, oil, gas or coal provide the highest energy density for the smallest effort in production.

If you are sitting on a world with lots of sun light solar is possible providing you have auxiliary storage for overnight and a lot of electric vehicles. Wind is unlikely to be any more use in the 23rd century than it is now unless you have settled on a hell hole with a permanent wind storm going past.

Cracking oil for petrochemicals provides oils, petrol, diesel, chemicals etc and can be done very simply. You can do it at home if you have the know-how and parts.

Now in the early 21st we are playing with technology to capture the emissions from Oils and coal burning, extrapolating forward and this should be routine and highly efficient plus for a colony the emissions can then be processed for other useful chemicals. The home world can be as anti oil as it likes due to cultural reasons but pragmatism will rear its head.

You can spend countless billions over the next 100 years while waiting for the horse and cart colony to expand far enough to start making money if you want to, in a democracy you will not make it past the next election.

Or you can ensure the colony uses every viable technology and send out the odd EPA inspection team to ensure you get minimal hassle from the tree huggers and ten years down the line you can proudly boast (during your latest re-election campaign) that the colony is now paying taxes to the home country all because of your leadership.
 
ALSO:

petrochemicals -> plastics
petrochemicals -> fertilizers & herbicides

etc.

---

I imagine flying into one of these colony worlds would look a lot like flying into Bladerunner's 2019 Los Angeles...
 
On many worlds, vehicles are powered by internal or external combustion engines burning fuel derived from local vegetation, typically alcohol and plant oils. Petrochemicals are used on some worlds, but refining usuable fractions from crude oil requires technical resources and infrastructure that most colonies do not have, and most governments are unwilling to provide. Initial investment in a colony is almost always about food self-sufficiency,a nd then development of resources of interest to the mother country. Many colonies were established to support these resource extraction operations, in fact.

On worlds where horses and draft animals are widely used, this was a conscious choice, often on the part of the sponsoring government. The first herds of these animals are developed as part of the initial pathfinder operations, so they are available when colonists arrive. Heavy machinery is almost always available as well, but more on a community basis, due in part to the high cost of shipping.

As colonies grow and develop, they almost always transition away from animal power to other means of transport.

Fuel cells and other high-tech power sources are less common on the Frontier, in part due to the difficulty in repair and maintenance. A big block diesel is a TL5 or TL6 item, while a compact fuel cell is TL10 or higher.
 
Colin said:
Petrochemicals are used on some worlds, but refining usuable fractions from crude oil requires technical resources and infrastructure that most colonies do not have, and most governments are unwilling to provide.

Medieval chemists understood basic distillation, and all you need to refine crude oil is a good heat source, a double boiler, and a vertical length of pipe with a few holes drilled in it at key condensation points. I can't imagine people left their brains and creativity on Earth when they colonized the stars, incapable of re-creating what would come easily to a Bronze Age level of technology. I mean, a length of pipe is infrastructure no one can afford?

Necessity is the mother of invention.

EDIT: Look, a little kid is doing it! :)

http://blog.modernmechanix.com/2006/09/03/table-top-oil-refinery-for-the-home-chemist/
 
Most colonial fuels are by-products of agriculture, the most important segment of most early colonies.

Refining of fuels may be a relatively simple task, drilling for oil can be easy as well, but these are pursuits that are not core to the primary goal of a new colony, food self-sufficiency. Alcohol and vegetable oil fuels are likewise very easy, and are a by-product of the core economic pursuit of most colonies, agriculture. On worlds with limited agriculture, or heavy mining, effort will be made to either exploit local petrochemical energy sources, or else continue to utilize high-tech power solutions, and accept the higher costs involved.

Another factor is the environmentalism mentioned earlier. Fossil-fuel burning is associated in the mind of Core citizens with a host of environmental issues and dangers, and is not something a Core government can be seen to endorse.
 
Colin said:
Refining of fuels may be a relatively simple task, drilling for oil can be easy as well, but these are pursuits that are not core to the primary goal of a new colony, food self-sufficiency. Alcohol and vegetable oil fuels are likewise very easy, and are a by-product of the core economic pursuit of most colonies, agriculture.

Well, I'm going to have to go along with Captain Jonah, it was expressed well: The quickest route to sufficiency is efficiency, and you cannot match the BTUs in petroleum. That is WHY it is so prominent in the modern day world's energy portfolio.

Tell you what: You run a tractor on grain alcohol or vegetable oil. I will run one on gasoline. We will compare our agricultural yields. We will compare our efficiency in getting our crops to market. We'll compare our profits. We'll report back to our sponsors.

Whatever a society is doing, its access to a cheap, useful energy supply is a core concern not a side concern. Probably all the more so if a world is sketchy in its resources.
 
That is all true enough. Yes, the energy density of petroleum distallates is far higher than alchohols or biodiesels. It's considerably higher than hydrogen, too, for that matter. Yet fuel cells are an integral part of the background.

Part of this, the different fuels, animal power, etc, is to install a different flavour in the colonies, not just from the Core, but from where we are now. There are many similarities, but some jarring differences. In 2300AD, in my interpretation, the burning of petroleum to power a car is considered a bad idea. Never mind the pollution, petroleum is more valuable as a feedstock for chemicals and synthetic materials (natural gas, too). Worlds that produce petroleum typically do so for the export chemical and synthetic material market.

However, if your game worlds are powered by gasoline and diesel, that is your call. It's your game.
 
There is also the question of the availability of the oil - if you have several thousand hectares producing crops for bio-fuels and a good growing season that give you multiple yields as opposed to a resource that needs expensive surveying, locating and specialist teams to come in and drill for it before you see a drop, which do you think will be the cheapest fuel? People will vote with their wallets, use bio-fuels for everyday transport - oil for other petrochemical uses.
 
Rick said:
There is also the question of the availability of the oil - if you have several thousand hectares producing crops for bio-fuels and a good growing season that give you multiple yields as opposed to a resource that needs expensive surveying, locating and specialist teams to come in and drill for it before you see a drop, which do you think will be the cheapest fuel? People will vote with their wallets, use bio-fuels for everyday transport - oil for other petrochemical uses.

Without wanting to be a tyrant on the topic, and having an open mind on multiple possibilities and no particular investment on any of them, it strikes me that any world with hydrocarbon lifeforms will have the residue of said hydrocarbons at the surface and below, In other words, there will be oil at surface and below surface. Some of the oil yield will be easy, some more difficult; some will have to be drilled, some might be drawn. Some might lie at surface like the La Brea Tar Pits.

My guess would be any world would do a cost / benefit analysis on its energy yield that would look a lot like the one we're undergoing in the real world modern era right now wrt oil and coal extraction. When it no longer becomes cheap and easy, when the environmental and health risks have risen significantly, when the socio-politics of it no longer pencil, hopefully these worlds will have matured to accommodate more expensive alternatives.

Let's wish them better luck, and more options, better thinking, on this issue than the Advanced World in the early 21st Century appears to be having.
 
Biofuels are a hideously inefficient way of producing usable fuel. If self-sufficiency in a colony, particularly in food, is the host governments number one concern, then using agriculture for biofuel is a non starter. I expect the the Core is far more worried about providing enough food on earth for its billions than whether an agricultural colony is using biofuel or petroleum to power its tractors.
Also there is an assumption here that the present mania for monitoring CO2 hasn't been proven to be completely stupid in 300 years. I must admit I see earth in 2300 as more Blade Runner than the Stepford Wives.
 
How people run their games is entirely up to them, if Colin wants to have his colonies using draft horses as power that is his choice as ref. :lol:

Without intending to upset anyone here who is environmentally active much of the save the environment campaign and current solutions are short term patches which in the long term are actually worse.

I’ll start with food.
You need the colony to feed itself not ship thousands of tons of food there. Allowing for the soil being able to support terrestrial crops you have hydroponic bays and field planting. Hydroponics are man power intensive but require little in the way of machines, field production is manpower light but machine intensive.

Probably the first thing put in would be the hydroponics as fast grow food stuffs can be up and running in a few months. Gene modified field crops can be up and harvestable in 6 months with good soil and fertilisers. The hydroponics bays have a small foot print but require much more care and monitoring, the fields take up vastly more room but a single person can look after many acres.
On a new colony where you need to feed everyone which food path you follow depends on the colony. If you have a lot of spare people and a lack of space then hydroponics. With less people but lots of space then fields are the way forward.

I don’t see the average colony lacking space or having lots of spare people so I suspect fields are going to be the most common.

The Horse drawn colony is going to have access to GM seed stock and may have a limited supply of fertilizer shipped in but without chemical/oil production on site is not going to be able to afford to ship large amounts of plant food. They will need to support and maintain the horses against disease, illness, injury, predators etc. Horse drawn ploughs will work the land, horse drawn harvesters will cut the crop, horse drawn machines or large numbers of people will gather the crop for processing.

The oil powered colony will have a multi use tractor much like a JCB with buckets, ploughs, cranes etc. This tractor can pull a plough, pull a harvester, collect the crop and tow it around in trailers. One person can plough hundreds of acres a day or harvest the same area. Larger fields, access to much higher volumes of fertilisers since the world has a developing petro chemical industrial base.

If you want your colony feeding itself fast you can use hydroponics and lots of people and horse drawn farm equipment or you can produce five to ten times the yield with tractors. Modern farm yields are vastly higher than Victorian and its not just because of better science and fertilizers.

Fuel and power
Colin mentioned Bio fuels. Not intending to upset or insult anyone but Bio fuels are about as stupid a solution to environmental problems as windmills. Here on 21st century earth they are much less viable, end up with a higher environmental impact and seem to have single handed driven up the world food index and increased hunger in the third world and you need to burn more of it since it has a lower energy density.

On a colony struggling to produce its own food why on earth (or any other planet) would it sacrifice growing capacity for bio fuels. Rapeseed produces five times the yield of corn or wheat so to get a decent bio fuel yield you are giving up a lot of food production. Consider also that with horse drawn farms your production and the area you can farm is much lower than with tractors, how much of that are you going to sacrifice for bio fuel.

Solar, tidal etc can produce electricity if you have a steady source of it to power the base structures but to be mobile you need to store and use it. By the 2300s batteries are likely to be far more effective but what does it take to make them. With a 3d printer/fabricator or even a skilled person with a good set of tools parts can be made to keep ICEs running for years and even to make new ones. On a starting colony with limited production capacity how many new electric drives and high capacity batteries can they make (also bear in mid limited plastics and chemicals due to no oil explotation)

If you only means of moving stuff is horse drawn you are looking at rural Victorian life. 20 miles away from the core colony becomes a day’s travel, everything needs to be close by because you cannot ship goods long distances. If the colony wants local wood or minerals it needs to be set up next to them. With horse drawn wagons having the good metals 100 miles away is a huge logistics problem, being able to mine large volumes of metals helps with rapid colony expansion. When it takes a week for a horse drawn cart to carry food out to the mine and bring the ore back that is a lot of people power and horse power tied up just to bring a few tons of ore to the colony. When a tractor can make the trip out and back in a day with a full load of ore your colony grows much faster.

Also when something goes wrong and you need a replacement part that has shut down production at the mine waiting a week for the next horse drawn cart means no production for a week or more, having the replacement part made and delivered the next day means a loss of two days production.

Colony expansion.
To expand the colony you need to feed it, provide it with power and shelter. The shelter bit requires materials for construction which must be local. You cannot ship in prefabs and corrugated sheeting past the initial creation point so you need to find, harvest, refine and use local materials.
Early colonies are going to be wood if the world has trees, it is the most versatile building material.

Now your colony should be using petrol powered chain saws (or maybe electric battery ones) to cut down the trees. Moving the trees to the place where it is being prepared is next, a horse can drap a good ton or two of tree, more if you have wagons or are using wheels and axels. The tractor on the other hand can drag a lot more wood and do so faster. Cutting the trees into boards could be done in the field or back at the colony, solar could power this or a generator so this will be about as efficient at either colony. Then you need to get the cut wood to the building site.

Again you are looking at multiple horses and wagons or a single tractor. One tractor/trailer should be able to carry enough cut timber for a basic building in one go, that’s one person driving. Half a dozen horse drawn wagons with horses and drivers take longer to move the same volume of good. Your construction team can be on site waiting for the timber to be delivered and put up the frame over a day of two then move on while the less physical work of cladding, fitting etc is done by another team. This presumes the materials are at hand.

If your wood is coming from further away than say 10 miles then its more than a day’s round trip by horse so you need to either double the number of horse drawn carts with more drivers or you slow down production of the buildings.
Now non wood building materials. Where are you getting the insulations, the plastics, even the nails from? It’s not going to be flown in apart from the set up runs, you need to source it locally.

Insulation could be compressed wheat stalks or grass rather than plastic fibres but you need to allow for the lower levels of corn/wheat crop yields with horse drawn tech, the material used for building is not being used for bio fuels and is not being burnt for power or used as natural fertilizer for the next crop.

What about metals, nails for the wood, hinges for the doors, cables, bars, bracings and reinforcement, replacing the tools being broken building the houses. Log cabins are acceptable for homes and buildings for an early colony but the sooner you can start building larger and more versatile buildings the faster your colony becomes self sustaining. Plentiful metals and plastics to go with the wood make building much easier, speaking for myself I like having windows even if they are locally made plastic rather than crystal clear glass.

You can build a colony with horse drawn power; the grand children of the founders may have a nice colony one day. Or you can build one using every technology available and the founders can sit on their porches in the evening watching their children growing up in a viable small town.

I’ll stop here because this is getting to be a long post.
 
Captain Jonah said:
Fuel and power
Colin mentioned Bio fuels. Not intending to upset or insult anyone but Bio fuels are about as stupid a solution to environmental problems as windmills. Here on 21st century earth they are much less viable, end up with a higher environmental impact and seem to have single handed driven up the world food index and increased hunger in the third world and you need to burn more of it since it has a lower energy density.

It is possible to produce bio fuel from waste product of the crops, not cutting into food product.
 
AndrewW said:
Captain Jonah said:
Fuel and power
Colin mentioned Bio fuels. Not intending to upset or insult anyone but Bio fuels are about as stupid a solution to environmental problems as windmills. Here on 21st century earth they are much less viable, end up with a higher environmental impact and seem to have single handed driven up the world food index and increased hunger in the third world and you need to burn more of it since it has a lower energy density.

It is possible to produce bio fuel from waste product of the crops, not cutting into food product.

Yes but unless the 2300s have reversed crop growing and selective breeding themes the current trend is for shorter stalks and larger heads. Modern wheat crops are half the height of older breeds and later generations are going to be shorter still.

This is to improve the yield since more of the plants energy goes on the useful head and not the waste stalk.

So 2300 wheat may well be lower than knee high with stalks under a foot high, that’s a lot less waste material and there are a number of demands on that waste. Straw for building, insulation, burning to generate heat and power, mulching down etc.

Rapeseed which cannot be eaten at all produces five times the bio oil per acre. Which is why so much third world production has switched to rapeseed so the rich idiots in the west can feel good about buing bio fuel while people go hungry because the rapeseed can be sold for hard western cash whereas the food crops are worth far less money. Sad really.

So in addition to using less effective farming methods which lead to smaller crops on smaller farms you are also looking at wasting some of your productive land on something that doesn't feed people at all.

The comparison with easy access oil, cracking tech that you can build in your garden and vastly higher energy density is stark. It comes down to a rapidly growing colony that can feed its people or a slow growing drag on resources that runs on the margins every day. I know which colony I would want to be on :lol:
 
aiglos63 said:
Also there is an assumption here that the present mania for monitoring CO2 hasn't been proven to be completely stupid in 300 years. I must admit I see earth in 2300 as more Blade Runner than the Stepford Wives.

Apart from it being unlikely being proven stupid it will be moot point in 300 years anyway. Even if humankind survives we'll be running out of oil far before 300 years has passed.

Mankind better invent up viable alternative for oil power. 'cause it will be running out scarily soon in the big picture.

Maybe colonists landing on new planets would like more long term solution? (not sure about 2300AD background as to alternatives.)
 
I don't believe we will be running out of oil in 300 years, but it will be scarce and very, very expensive. It will have passed the supply-&-demand curve as a useful source of energy for the Core, because that curve is fairly inelastic. You will not be running planeloads of middle class vacationers to the Bahamas on jet fuel, but you may see billionaire vintage NASCAR owners burning up gas at a race track while lighting each other's cigars with million credit notes. Just to show they can.

----

Look, I consider myself an environmentalist—with a number of friends in leadership positions in various environmental movements—but I have to say, I do not see the relevance here. Seems silly as applied in this thread/

You really have to work at it to get your average "tree hugger" of the Western world to care what is going on in Central Africa, specifically oil extraction, or Central China, in the burning of coal. That is because environmentalism is primarily a local effort wherever it is found. Whenever the enviro movement does mount an interest in remote places in the world, it is in recognition of a shared global climate or shared global airshed. This is not because enviros don't care; it is because environmental activism is hard.

Here we are talking about worlds many light years distant, which do not share an airshed or a climate with the central value-holders, stakeholders, and shareholders. And we are talking about worlds that, from the standpoint of human habitation and agricultural yield, could probably use a good burning of carbon and the CO2 that releases. Global warming may be a bad thing for a warm, crowded world; but from the standpoint of terrestrial life, global warming is a good thing for a cold, empty world.

In other words, you're not going to "sell" the advantages of an environmental ethos either to the colonists or to their observers in the Core.

Now, you might make a case that there are organizations and activists that object to the whole notion of cracking and exploiting virgin worlds and virgin ecosystems, supplanting the natural order through the moral hazard of colonialism. That is another matter and another issue. But once you move past that into the actual peopling of these worlds, then I think you're going to see the moral hazard swing the other way, and a great deal of sympathy directed toward the welfare of populations struggling on cold, infertile worlds.

So, in short, I just do not and cannot see this as a problem.
 
Lemnoc said:
In other words, you're not going to "sell" the advantages of an environmental ethos either to the colonists or to their observers in the Core.

No you but could be able to sell long term viability based on what's currently already happening. We are running out of gas. Unless somebody figures a way to artificially create oil we are going to be in shitload of trouble real soon, quite possibly within lifetime of many of the forum goers here. No oil and we are going to be in some serious problems in a) getting sufficient energy for current lifestyle b) maintaining sufficient food supply for the billions of humans. Logically speaking human population should be shrinking to ensure situation doesn't blow up in our face but instead it's increasing.

We are heading into one heck of a disaster here. Assuming humankind survives this(not quaranteed btw) they might actually be interested in more long-term solution.

But then again. Humans have never been that well known for their ability to learn from their mistakes :lol:. So yeah maybe it's not that unfeasible that they will get to the stars and get false sense of security and repeat the mistakes creating even bigger disaster down the road :)
 
tneva82 said:
No you but could be able to sell long term viability based on what's currently already happening. We are running out of gas. Unless somebody figures a way to artificially create oil we are going to be in shitload of trouble real soon, quite possibly within lifetime of many of the forum goers here.

I agree with this point, and one would hope these colonies have a pathway to use their wealth and creativity to develop the same energy supplies over time that are fueling the developed Core. At least they have examples of alternative energy technologies that we currently do not :? Easier to build a fusion plant when you have blueprints about how it is done.

But while the Age of Oil lasted barely a century on a world with multiple billions of people (and a couple of world wars and in a few places some really ugly consumption values), how long might similar quantities of oil last on worlds with populations of under one million? The pops of a lot of these colonies are barely larger than a small-to-mid-sized 20th Century city.

I would guess their oil consumption would stretch longer than did here on Earth. Might go two centuries or more before it got bad.
 
Back
Top