U. offers Master's in Petroleum Engineering

Return To Article
Add a comment
  • Wally West SLC, UT
    Aug. 2, 2013 4:05 p.m.

    to RS1701

    That is why I put *could*

    There is algae, Heavy water, & the most feasible now.... Natural Gas

    My concern is the infrastructure (Fueling stations, storage, etc...)

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Aug. 2, 2013 10:57 a.m.

    To "Wally West" hydrogen could be a viable alternative. The problem is where to get the hydrogen. Right now there is some research going into efficiently from water, but the best source for producing hydrogen comes from crude oil.

    Hydrogen could be a viable alternative, but it has a lot of issues right now.

  • Wally West SLC, UT
    Aug. 2, 2013 10:08 a.m.

    I'm going to go w/ Redshirt on this one.

    If we get it together and start now. Hydrogen *could* be a viable alternate.

    If memory serves, there is a small nuclear reactor in what was the Merrill Eng Bldg.

  • E & EE Ann arbor, MI
    Aug. 2, 2013 9:17 a.m.

    Thanks for your comments Redshirt. We've supposedly been running out of fossil fuels for decades now. Yet we keep on discovering more and more. Makes it hard to take the "when we run out" argument seriously.

    As for this professor, all I can say is I'm glad he's retired and no longer the dean. There's no need to hold back progress and innovation in the petroleum industry (which often includes cleaner ways of doing things) based on the religion of anthropogenic global warming.

  • Redshirt1701 Deep Space 9, Ut
    Aug. 2, 2013 7:55 a.m.

    To "Bebyebe" you wanted alternatives, I gave you alternatives. Just because you don't like the answer, you shouldn't complain.

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Aug. 1, 2013 6:16 p.m.

    anti-matter? Really?

    Redshirt you have to give up on Star Trek.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Aug. 1, 2013 4:26 p.m.

    To "LDS Liberal" can you name the current viable alternative to fossil fuel?

    We stopped using whale blubber and beeswax when we had viable alternatives. So tell us, what do we have right now that is a viable alternative to fossil fuels?

    Since we don't have any viable alternatives to fossil fuels, and you and the Professor want to cut off fossil fuels now, what do propose we do while waiting for the viable alternate?

    I am still waiting for you and your ilk to tell us what the viable alternate is to fossil fuels.

    If you want to go the gospel route, how do you know that God did not put sufficient oil in the ground for us to use until the end of the Millenium? According to D&C 107:17 "For the earth is full, and there is enough and to spare; yea, I prepared all things, and have given unto the children of men to be agents unto themselves." Sounds like if God wanted us to use fossil fuels, he probably gave us enough plus a bit more.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Aug. 1, 2013 3:30 p.m.

    We will move onto to something better.

    Tell me Red,
    Do you think God wanted us to keep using whale blubber and beeswax?
    He gave it to us - for the use of man...

    or do you think he gave us something better,
    and left it up to us to discover and use it?

    Same goes for fossil fuels.
    It's time to move on.
    We call it Progress.
    and it's all part of our eternal Progression.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Aug. 1, 2013 1:05 p.m.

    To "LDS Liberal" did you even read the letter. He said "Petroleum — and fossil fuel in general — is a 19th century energy source which must be fully retired if humanity is to survive." If fossil fuel is retired, that means it is gone, and is no longer in use. There is one example of somebody proposing "the total annilation of fossil fuels."

    The 400 mile range means that you only have to fill up once every 133 trips you make to church, the grocery store, or school. How often would you have to go to the gas station if you had a vehicle that had to refilled every 20 miles? That is an inconvienience. Why have a 20 cubic foot refrigerator when you only have 10 cubic feet of space used 90% of the time? Are you selfish and greedy wasting all of that electricity on a refrigerator that you don't use to its full capacity all the time?

    To "Bebyebe" some alternatives for fossil fuel, once they are all gone are anti-matter, cold fusion, self regenerating batteries, nuclear power, Mr. Fusion, and other technologies are all alternatives when fossil fuels are gone.

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Aug. 1, 2013 10:45 a.m.

    Redshirt, what's the alternative when fossil fuels are all gone?

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    Aug. 1, 2013 10:43 a.m.

    RedShirt --

    No one has EVER proposed the total annilation of fossil fuels.

    But seriously,
    Why should we burn coal and natural gas during the daylight hours when God gave us the sun and the wind during that time?

    Some vehicles will remain gasoline powered for many years to come,
    but please explain precisely why we need vehicles with a 400 mile range to go 1.5 miles to the grocery store, church, or schools?

    Selfishness and greed is the only answer I can come up with.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Aug. 1, 2013 8:56 a.m.

    To "Bebyebe" then please name the viable alternative.

  • Bebyebe UUU, UT
    Aug. 1, 2013 8:31 a.m.

    Redshirt, then we probably shouldn't be burning it up.

  • Baron Scarpia Logan, UT
    Aug. 1, 2013 8:25 a.m.

    Students will have to decide where to place their educations. Most universities have eliminated nuclear engineering programs because of the decline of nuclear power in America (with the exception of Obama stimulus subsidized plants now being built in Georgia, the nuclear renaissance never came, especially after Fukushima). Aside from lack of water and fear of nuclear disaster, nuclear's key obstacle is the lack of young people entering nuclear energy as a career choice. I read an analysis not long ago that noted that if nuclear were to expand in America, we'd need to look to China and Europe for engineers to run the plants.

    With regard to petroleum, the reality is we'll be using petroleum for at least another decade or two, perhaps longer if renewables come onboard to help diversify energy and keep fossil fuel prices from skyrocketing.

    Obama wants to eliminate subsidies for fossil fuels, but the GOP has blocked him (so much for GOP's belief in free market principles). Subsidies from taxpayers help keep gas prices very low for Americans, but if gas were to creep above $4 a gallon again (as expected), natural gas and electric cars will threaten petroleum's future.

  • RedShirt USS Enterprise, UT
    Aug. 1, 2013 7:52 a.m.

    To "Joe Andrade" I don't think you know what we use petroleum for. It is not just for fuel for our cars. If you were able to eliminate the petroleum industry, lets see what products you would lose, assuming that vehicles could be powered by something else:

    Many medicines
    Composite materials used for constructing wind turbines
    Plastics for everything
    Shoes with rubber soles and synthetic fabrics
    All synthetic fabrics and clothing
    Teflon coatings
    Rocket fuel, which means no new satelites for your TV or GPS
    Fuel for aircraft

    There are many things that you would lose if you killed petroleum. Now, since you were dean at the UofU for so long, surely you remember that the U also offers a nuclear engineering degree. You remember nuclear power, a great energy source that is renewable and does not pollute the environment.

  • LDS Liberal Farmington, UT
    July 31, 2013 9:02 p.m.

    U. offers Master's in Petroleum Engineering

    Funded and paid for by -- the Petroleum Industry.


    And who ever said the University of Utah was purely a LIBERAL school?

  • red state pride Cottonwood Heights, UT
    July 31, 2013 8:03 p.m.

    I find it hard to believe that someone who was the dean of a college at the U of U for 4-5 years would use an adjective such as "fragile" to describe the Earth. How long has the Earth been around? A pretty long time so evidently it's not especially fragile. Is humanity fragile? Based on the evidence I would say humanity is actually pretty stalwart and sturdy. Very odd letter indeed.

  • Mister J Salt Lake City, UT
    July 31, 2013 6:40 p.m.

    Maybe, just maybe? This program will emphasize Tar Sands & shale?

    This program will make a fine addition to the College of Mines & Earth Sciences.

    to procuradorfiscal

    But, we could always use more MBA's & lawyers, right!!???

  • marxist Salt Lake City, UT
    July 31, 2013 6:38 p.m.

    As a Marxist let me state that the most important consideration is employment. That which allows support of one's family is of paramount importance. Other considerations, though they be of some importance, fail in comparison to the need for workers to provide LABOR.

  • stuff Provo, UT
    July 31, 2013 3:22 p.m.

    The U. is teaching that?!!! Don't they have any standards there? That is sacrilege. Shame on them teaching science and job skills. (sarcasm) :)

  • Ernest T. Bass Bountiful, UT
    July 31, 2013 2:08 p.m.

    He brings up some good points and if the first two comments wish to be willfully ignorant of future problems, they can try to justify it to their own grandchildren who will faced with the problems.

  • atl134 Salt Lake City, UT
    July 31, 2013 2:03 p.m.

    "I suppose you prefer we all freeze to death."

    Considering today will finish out the warmest month in Salt Lake City history (narrowly beating July 2007) I'd be fine with slowing the warming trend...

  • ingslc salt lake city, UT
    July 31, 2013 1:46 p.m.

    This letter is spot on. Utah can continue trying to desperately squeeze every last dime out of 19th and 20th century technology, but ultimately the real winners will be those who have foreseen and shaped the energy economy of the future. It's foolish to imagine that progress will not happen. Those holding the future win, not those who master the past. Hopefully, at the very least, these petroleum engineers are figuring out ways to extract and burn fossil fuels more cleanly and sustainably, but I doubt it.

  • KDave Moab, UT
    July 31, 2013 8:49 a.m.

    I suppose you prefer we all freeze to death.

  • procuradorfiscal Tooele, UT
    July 31, 2013 5:15 a.m.

    Typical liberal hogwash!

    And, so typical of modern liberal "educators." The equivalent of stopping both ears and shouting "la, la, la" at the top of the Prof's lungs.

    The academic liberal arts community must certainly roaring approval to the his callow implication -- students should only major in psychology, English, medieval French poetry, and other such politically correct liberal endeavor.

    Yeah, that should fix higher education.