[IP] something to dream about -- nightmare more on Oil Independence?
Begin forwarded message:
From: MLowe_turbinetool <mlowe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: September 13, 2005 11:45:18 AM EDT
To: 'David Farber' <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>, 'Ip Ip' <ip@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: more on Oil Independence?
You won't get any CO2 if you use nukes for the power source for the
heaters.
The new technology nukes are plenty safe and will eventually get used
here,
with or without the consent of the hysterical, because it is the
right way.
-----Original Message-----
From: David Farber [mailto:dave@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Tuesday, September 13, 2005 05:56
To: Ip Ip
Subject: more on Oil Independence?
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Hawkins, Dave" <dhawkins@xxxxxxxx>
Date: September 12, 2005 8:48:47 PM EDT
To: dave@xxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: [IP] Oil Independence?
The other thing this process produces is more CO2 than conventional oil
production (those heaters need energy to run). This will exacerbate
global warming, which will lead to more intense hurricanes. There are
solutions; they involve getting serious about efficiency --we can build
fuel-efficient vehicle faster than we can build refineries--; doing more
with wind and solar; and capturing CO2 for geologic storage from the
fossil fuels we continue to use
-----Original Message-----
From: David Farber [mailto:dave@xxxxxxxxxx]
Sent: Monday, September 12, 2005 8:02 PM
To: Ip Ip
Subject: [IP] Oil Independence?
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Robert C. Atkinson" <rca53@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: September 12, 2005 6:40:44 PM EDT
To: David Farber <dave@xxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Oil Independence?
This is a promising development. Excerpts below, full link:
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/news_columnists/article/
0,1299,DRMN_86_4051709,00.html
What do IP skeptics say?
Shell's method, which it calls "in situ conversion," is simplicity
itself in concept but exquisitely ingenious in execution. Terry
O'Connor, a vice president for external and regulatory affairs at
Shell Exploration and Production, explained how it's done (and they
have done it, in several test projects):
Drill shafts into the oil-bearing rock. Drop heaters down the shaft.
Cook the rock until the hydrocarbons boil off, the lightest and most
desirable first. Collect them.
Please note, you don't have to go looking for oil fields when you're
brewing your own.
.
Upwards of a million barrels an acre, a billion barrels a square mile.
And the oil shale formation in the Green River Basin, most of which is
in Colorado, covers more than a thousand square miles - the largest
fossil fuel deposits in the world.
Wow.
They don't need subsidies; the process should be commercially feasible
with world oil prices at $30 a barrel. The energy balance is
favorable; under a conservative life-cycle analysis, it should yield
3.5 units of energy for every 1 unit used in production. The process
recovers about 10 times as much oil as mining the rock and crushing
and cooking it at the surface, and it's a more desirable grade.
Reclamation is easier because the only thing that comes to the surface
is the oil you want.
--
***************************************
Robert C. Atkinson
Director of Policy Research
Columbia Institute for Tele-Information (CITI) 1A Uris Hall, Columbia
Business School
3022 Broadway
New York, NY 10027-6902
212-854-7576
cell: 908-447-4201
***************************************
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as dhawkins@xxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at:
http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/
-------------------------------------
You are subscribed as roessler@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To manage your subscription, go to
http://v2.listbox.com/member/?listname=ip
Archives at: http://www.interesting-people.org/archives/interesting-people/