How then, do we move backwards? How does a society, with most of the people having no clue of future events, move from being dependent on a vast and intertwined network of goods and services produced by the indigenous people of whereever, to a local resource and renewable energy based society, and do so in the timeframe available (20-30 years using the most liberal extimates, 10-20 with resonable estimates, 5-10 with worst case scenarios), all the while prices on everything increasing, world politics getting more militaristic, governments continuously reducing civil liberties, shortages of goods on the market and weather patterns resembling bad Hollywood movies?
Joined: Jun 13, 2007 Posts: 3262 Location: Minniesotuh
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 11:01 am Post subject: Re: Alberta
Fossil fuels are finite.
IMHO, in the long run (which is getting shorter all the time), it doesn't matter what wonderful new technologies are developed to get the oil out of the ground, the sea, the sand, or the shale.
The faster we get it out, the quicker it will run out. _________________ "RRrrruuuunnnn!!!" ~Apocalypto
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 11:30 am Post subject: Re: Alberta
BigTex wrote:
Did we ever figure out the net energy from the sludge?
I don't know the exact figures, but this Wikipedia article says the EROEI is approximately 5.4. It's still technically positive, but it's lower than the between 6 and 10 EROEI for the natural gas that runs the tar sands projects. That means you're still losing a lot of efficiency.
And of course none of this even remotely addresses the drain on the Athabasca River, or that huge tailings pond. _________________ The whole of human history is a refutation by experiment of the concept of "moral world order". - Friedrich Nietzsche
Joined: Apr 06, 2006 Posts: 2791 Location: 3 miles NW of Champoeg, Republic of Cascadia
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:01 pm Post subject: Re: Alberta
Dreamtwister wrote:
From the article:
Quote:
Until adopting a new name and mission last fall, Arctic Oil & Gas called itself Bulldog Financial Inc. Its declared specialty was taking over and collecting on "subprime" or high-interest loans made by vacuum cleaner dealers to risky or delinquent buyers of their machines on instalment plans.
For their Johns that must...really suck...
If you want to mull over tar sand EROEI TOD have had a series of articles by Charlie Hall on various types of energy; here is the TS one: Unconventional Oil: Tar Sands and Shale Oil - EROI on the Web, Part 3 of 5. Like corn ethanol, unless tar can feed itself long term it's not going to save the day. Also like corn it has a ceiling on the volume it can deliver, and is at the mercy of economic conditions being just right.
Seems these monster oil companies are incapable of change. Of going Beyond Petroleum, you know? Name the one horse drawn carriage manufacturer that evolved into an automaker. Answer: Studebaker.
CALGARY - Imperial Oil Ltd.'s $8-billion Kearl oilsands project in Alberta faces a major delay after a Federal Court judge on Wednesday turned down its request to have a key permit reinstated.
The permit, required to de-water the Kearl site, was pulled by the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans after an environmental-impact assessment by a federal-provincial panel was deemed to be incomplete, the result of a court challenge by a coalition of environmental organizations.
Imperial, 70 per cent owned by Exxon Mobil Corp., asked Justice Douglas Campbell last week to exercise his discretion and restore the permit, arguing it had no fault in the situation, which was due to a minor error of law made by the panel.
Kearn Ph. 1 was scheduled to come online in 2010, which is a quite lean year for megaprojects. _________________ Cogito, ergo non satis bibivi
Walter, there is an unspoken message here.
Joined: Aug 03, 2006 Posts: 4043 Location: Memphis
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:16 pm Post subject: Re: Alberta
Dreamtwister wrote:
BigTex wrote:
Did we ever figure out the net energy from the sludge?
I don't know the exact figures, but this Wikipedia article says the EROEI is approximately 5.4. It's still technically positive, but it's lower than the between 6 and 10 EROEI for the natural gas that runs the tar sands projects. That means you're still losing a lot of efficiency.
And of course none of this even remotely addresses the drain on the Athabasca River, or that huge tailings pond.
Well, at least fresh water is not a critical resource. _________________
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:49 pm Post subject: Re: Alberta
Dreamtwister wrote:
And if natural gas production is falling, tar sands production can not expand sinificantly without a massive reallocation from either exports, or home heating.
Joined: May 13, 2007 Posts: 592 Location: Athabasca, Alberta
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 12:51 pm Post subject: Re: Alberta
Oil Sands ER - (1.5 to 3) : EI - 1
Oil Sands (open pit mining) - ER (4) : EI (1)
Oil Sands (in situ) - ER(1.43) : EI (1) _________________ Appuis ait fabrum esse suae quemque fortunae.
Alias Redneck
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 4:09 pm Post subject: Re: Alberta
Dezakin wrote:
Dreamtwister wrote:
And if natural gas production is falling, tar sands production can not expand sinificantly without a massive reallocation from either exports, or home heating.
Or nuclear power, or in situ methods.
OK, go build some nuclear power plants. Because...you know...they're so cheap and they go online so fast. They might come in handy 10 years from now, when Canada's NG production has fallen by 60%. But until that happens, tar sands production is limited by NG production.
In situ? Do you even know what you are talking about? The only in situ method I know of that doesn't involve the direct application of heat is VAPEX, and it's not even out of the testing stage yet. _________________ The whole of human history is a refutation by experiment of the concept of "moral world order". - Friedrich Nietzsche
Joined: Aug 03, 2006 Posts: 4043 Location: Memphis
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 4:46 pm Post subject: Re: Alberta
Blacksmith wrote:
Oil Sands ER - (1.5 to 3) : EI - 1
Oil Sands (open pit mining) - ER (4) : EI (1)
Oil Sands (in situ) - ER(1.43) : EI (1)
Can you translate please?
When the projections are made regarding how much oil can be produced from this region, are the projections net or gross energy? I assume it is gross, but given how much energy is needed to produce this stuff, shouldn't there be a footnote or something?
What I am thinking is that the locals might say "yeah, for three million barrels a day we're okay with our comunity and local water supply being wrecked." If, however, they found out that the net energy was only 1.5 mbd, they might say "go look for oil somewhere else." _________________
Posted: Thu May 15, 2008 9:08 pm Post subject: Re: Alberta
KillTheHumans wrote:
Blacksmith wrote:
To put it in tiny tot terms:
If natural gas was the same price per BTU as oil there would be no bitumen nor oil sands production.
Night Children.
A good explanation for why using EROEI measures to determine the validity of an economic event is nonsense.
Nonsense? You're making another lame RGD joke, yes?
If the energy return on a remote or difficult product is negative than why use another fossil (or nuclear) fuel to extract it? Why not just use the primary fuel as a primary fool? Oh. I mean fuel. Oh excuse me
So if you use up 2 million btu's of nat. gas to convert 1 million btu's of tar sludge to low-grade crude then you have wasted 1 million btu's of nat. gas. Right? Oh wait! you say. "I have converted the natural gas into something much greater---OCTANE FOR MY dumb crap CAR I am genius"
But in all seriousness your comment displays a complete lack of sophistication and worldlyness. Sorry I can't argue with you any more _________________ ree rah rip ram. sunofabitch godamn. hidey didey christ almighty. rah rah crap
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
News
Discussions
Resources
Members
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Name the one horse drawn carriage manufacturer that evolved into an automaker. Answer: Studebaker.
ree rah rip ram. sunofabitch godamn. hidey didey christ almighty. rah rah crap 
