Paul,
I think you have inadvertently hit on the real threat to the future of 
stable isotope research (and most other kinds of research). Serious as 
the helium issue is, it is dwarfed by the oil and associated issues. 
This may seem off-topic, but it affects us all directly. There is 
virtually no excess capacity is the world oil supply system for the 
first time in history. The majority of informed observers of the 
industry who are free to speak without threat to career believe that 
world oil production has already peaked in late 2005 or early 2006 and 
will never increase significantly from current levels, due to high 
depletion rates and declining rates of discovery , while demand 
skyrockets. The world's three super-giant fields (Ghawar, Burghan and 
Cantarell) are all definitely or most probably in decline. Iraq is 
under-explored but of course has some slight problems for the near 
future. Deep-water is very slow and very expensive. The question is how 
long we can maintain the bumpy plateau we're on. Discoveries peaked 40 
years ago, and with the exception of the demand destruction of the 70's, 
we are on target to match M.K. Hubbert's predictions globally as we did 
in the continental US (peaked 1970). One major event disrupting the 
global supply line could instantly propel us into $150 a barrel oil 
right now. A price spike and recession would curb demand temporarily, 
but we will be in for a wild ride, because we've built ourselves into a 
situation where it's hard to cut back quickly and maintain a viable 
economy. Unconventional oil sources have a very poor EROI (energy return 
over input), so Coal-To-Liquids, the Alberta tar sands or the Orinoco 
Basin heavy oil are not equivalent in the least to light sweet Saudi 
crude. By the way, with a large C-T-L program, as the Chinese are 
currently ramping up, we will hit peak coal in just a couple decades. 
The CO2 issue will certainly force a changeover along with resource 
depletion, but I disagree that any hydrocarbon or alternative fuel 
supply or transportation infrastructure change likely to scale up in the 
next decade or two is going to deliver us from some wrenching 
difficulties. See the recent reports by the GAO and SAIC (Hirsch) as 
contracted to DOE, also discussions by geologists on the Oil Drum and 
similar peak oil sites. The thing to remember is that EVERYTHING runs on 
a platform of cheap oil, including the supply and maintenance of the 
power grid and the development of renewable energy systems. Sorry for 
the long-winded reply but this is going to hit everyone close to home, 
so we need to be prepared to adapt.
Jon


Paul Brooks wrote:
> Interesting as this discussion is, this reminds me of the talk about 
> when we re going to run out of oil. At a price of $10 per barrel we 
> are about to run out, at $100 a barrel oil substitutes can be made 
> from coal and the supply will be hundreds of years. In actual fact, 
> the need to curtail CO2 production will probably mean that hydrocarbon 
> energy use is curtailed before the price increases to $100 per barrel, 
> and we never run out of oil.
>
> I imagine similar thing will happen to He. If there is a shortage the 
> price will go up and He users will start to conserve and even capture 
> He that is now vented to into the atmosphere so that this waste He can 
> be re-processed.
>
> One striking feature is that at least compared to instrument 
> depreciation and labor cost, the cost of He to run our isotope 
> analysis is just not a very significant factor now. The price will 
> have to increase significantly before we are affected.
>
> Paul Brooks.
>
>
>
> At 01:41 PM 6/7/2007, you wrote:
>> Dear All,
>>
>> I just spoke with our gas supplier (email me off list so that I’m not 
>> “advertising”) and they currently are not being affected by the shortage.
>>
>> Just to put this into perspective, there is/was a short term supply 
>> shortage due to a maintenance issue at the facility in Cliffside, TX 
>> (as far as I understand, the only stockpile of already purified He on 
>> the planet) as well as maintenance/construction issues at other 
>> helium refinement facilities around the world. This is the dominant 
>> reason there have been supply issues for medical and scientific 
>> helium and the reason that many retailers of balloons have had their 
>> shipments decreased from their suppliers (in order for the suppliers 
>> to favor science and medical customers). In addition, the US 
>> strategic helium reserve has been in the process of being liquidated 
>> since 1996, with projections that it will run out around 2015. This 
>> raises a very serious mid term supply issue that can only be remedied 
>> through increased capture and refinement from natural gas/gaseous 
>> hydrocarbon sources. Ultimately though, the Earth is constantly 
>> losing helium to space, making it the ultimate non-renewable resource 
>> and raising the stakes in helium conservation.
>>
>> If anyone has more information on this subject, please include me in 
>> your future emails – I’m always looking for more accurate and up to 
>> date information.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Mike Kubo
>> NASA Ames Research Center
>> M/S 239-4
>> Moffett Field, CA 94035
>> (650) 604-6110
>> *From:* Stable Isotope Geochemistry [ mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
>> *On Behalf Of *Tom Brenna
>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 07, 2007 11:18 AM
>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>> *Subject:* Re: [ISOGEOCHEM] Helium shortage
>>
>> Steve,
>>
>> Some years ago we ran our MAT 252 with argon carrier gas in the 
>> context of early attempts at continuous flow HD measurements. At 
>> first, the machine worked nicely, but soon the high voltage leakage 
>> current began to rise. We found that the intensity of Ar+ emerging 
>> from the efficient IRMS ion source sputtered the metal from the 
>> conductors onto the ceramic insulators, thereby depositing a 
>> conducting sheet of surface metal. He+, with a mass of 4, does not 
>> have sufficient energy transfer capability to significantly sputter 
>> the metals at the fluxes of the IRMS. A few details of this 
>> experience are in print, Tobias et al, Anal Chem 67(14): 2486 (1995).
>>
>> Neon may be fine, but it costs a fortune. My guess is that He will 
>> rise to similar prices if it is distilled from air rather than mined 
>> (as I understand it is now obtained).
>>
>> I'd also be interested to hear if anyone has had better luck with Ar 
>> or other carrier gases.
>>
>> Tom Brenna
>> Cornell University
>> Ithaca, NY
>>
>>
>> At 08:15 PM 6/6/2007, you wrote:
>>
>> Dear Steve,
>>
>> The upcoming helium shortage is indeed real. This has been a concern 
>> in the industry since my college days (I recall a lecture given by 
>> one of my professors in 1997, warning of this), and even was 
>> addressed by the American Chemical Society in 2001. Sadly, this issue 
>> has gotten very little notoriety in the press. Despite all this, even 
>> now approximately 8% of the nations helium consumption is a result of 
>> party balloons.
>>
>> As for the possibilities of running IRMSs on another gas, I cant 
>> honestly answer this question as thoroughly as others on this list, 
>> Im sure.
>>
>> Mike Kubo
>> NASA Ames Research Center
>> M/S 239-4
>> Moffett Field, CA 94035
>> (650) 604-6110
>> *From:* Stable Isotope Geochemistry [ mailto:[log in to unmask]] 
>> *On Behalf Of *Steven R Silva
>> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 06, 2007 3:08 PM
>> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>> *Subject:* [ISOGEOCHEM] Helium shortage
>>
>>
>> Hello,
>>
>> I'm curious if other people are getting a message from their gas 
>> suppliers about wide spread helium shortages. Is this real? If so, 
>> what are the possibilities of running IRMSs on argon or something 
>> else? Thanks much. -- Steve
>>
>> Steven Silva
>> U.S. Geological Survey
>> 345 Middlefield Rd., Mailstop 434
>> Menlo Park, CA 94025
>> ph: (650) 329-4558
>> fax: (650) 329-5590
>> email: [log in to unmask] 
>
> Center for Stable Isotope Biogeochemistry
> Valley Life Science Building Room 3060
> Integrative Biology - MC3140
> Berkeley CA-94720
> Phone: (510)-643-1748
> Fax: (510)-643-1749
>


-- 
Jonathan D. Karr, Ph.D.
Technical Director, Duke EnVironmental stable Isotope Laboratory (DEVIL)
Duke University Dept.of Biology & Nicholas School of the Environment and Earth Sciences
Phytotron Bldg, 71 Science Drive 
Durham, NC 27708-0340

(919) 660-7418
Fax: (919) 660-7425
[log in to unmask]
laboratory website: http://www.biology.duke.edu/jackson/devil/




Adversity is an opportunity