<!--quoteo(post=1600802:date=Jan 22 2007, 11:44 AM:name=Rapier7)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rapier7 @ Jan 22 2007, 11:44 AM) [snapback]1600802[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> Considering that the tar sands in Alberta has almost 3 times as much oil as Saudi Arabia's Ghawar field....I say that's a very good investment. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> tar sand is only profitable when the oil price is above $70 if i remembered, according to life after the peak oil. sorry i cant quote the source since the overseas connection is still terrible.
1) If we run out of liquid oil, Tar Sands will become profitable instantaneously, regardless of price 2) The whole point of research is to find a way to make the process cheaper. With a yet-unknown breakthrough in recovery methods for Tar Sands, who knows how far the price might fall?
I don't understand why some are so afraid of planning ahead. It seems like many of you are of the general mindset that 'the market will sort it out when it becomes a large enough problem'. But why wait? We know it will be a problem, why not spend more money researching it today so that we have better alternatives and more options when it happens?
It seems like you guys worship the free market too much. I'm not saying I don't like it, but it can't solve any problem instantly... and it seems to not be doing a very good job on the energy problem.
Oh no, planning ahead is fine and dandy and should definitely be done. It's the holding up signs saying "repent sinners" and "the end is nigh" I have a problem with. 'Cause it ain't. Even if we don't plan ahead, we'll merely suffer a setback. Possibly a very large setback, but a setback. Planning ahead is what is needed to make that setback as small as possible.
<!--quoteo(post=1600615:date=Jan 21 2007, 04:02 PM:name=Crisqo)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Crisqo @ Jan 21 2007, 04:02 PM) [snapback]1600615[/snapback]</div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec--> When oil starts going down the right side of the bell curve of "peak oil" and becomes less and less profitable, another form of energy will take its place.
Never doubt the free market, someone WILL step in with a replacement so they can make money. <!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> Subsidies don't exist in this fictional market though.
Not to mention full disclosure of supply information. Saudi's haven't let anyone inspect the validity of their supposed reserves for decades.
No, it costs around 40 dollars per barrel after all costs are considered. It's already profitable and economical. It's why Canada is the largest oil trading partner to the United States.
<a href="http://federaltimes.com/index.php?S=2491924" target="_blank">Interior Department charges oil companies $0 through 1998-1999 for drilling on federal land.</a> <a href="http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article2162862.ece" target="_blank">Steven Hawking compares climate change to Nuclear Holocaust.</a> <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/19/AR2007011900132.html" target="_blank">Major Energy Companies demand Federal Climate Change policy</a> <a href="http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1995348,00.html" target="_blank">Worldwide panel on Climate Change: Forecast looks even More Grim</a>
US Scientific information being outright <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/15/AR2007011501049.html" target="_blank">Slashed</a> , <a href="http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/300615_epalibraries22.html" target="_blank">Burned</a> , and <a href="http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=11847" target="_blank">Censored</a>.
How much longer can this flat-earth administration go wrong? (About 1 year)
"All we need for energy independance is MORE Oil All we need for war strategy is MORE Troops. Believe me, it will be different this time, you'll see!"
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. " Benjamin Franklin
Well, I'll be damned. So thats where this <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-low_sulfur_diesel" target="_blank">Ultra Low Sulfur PetroDiesel</a> comes from. <a href="http://www.insidegreentech.com/node/594" target="_blank">Gasified Coal.</a>
Maybe thats just the exception, and not the rule. *shrug*
While not a good long term solution, it is a good Transition Fuel over to BioDiesel. Which is also Ultra Low Sulfur. <a href="http://www.insidegreentech.com/node/290" target="_blank">http://www.insidegreentech.com/node/290</a>
2007 Dodge Ram in March will already have this anti-Smog/Smoke tech inside it. <a href="http://www.insidegreentech.com/node/645" target="_blank">http://www.insidegreentech.com/node/645</a>
Volkswagen, Dodge/Mercedes/Chrysler, Audi, and Honda are all looking into designing clean Diesel cars for 2007 and 2008 <a href="http://www.dieselforum.org/no_cache/newsarticle/article/683/" target="_blank">http://www.dieselforum.org/no_cache/newsarticle/article/683/</a>
Trick being the difference in Smog Reducing Tech. Odorless Ammonia Tanks (Trucks and BigRigs) versus Regenerating Filter Tech (Passenger Cars).
But yeah, Diesels always used to have Air Pollution issues to em. But they offered half the global warming effect, and 20%-40% more fuel effeciency over gasoline And 3-5x less maintanence on the engine.
It may be Coal, but this does a hell of a lot more good than Corn Ethanol.
Atleast this starts to explain what that Barrack Obama thing was about: <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/09/AR2007010901503.html" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7010901503.html</a>
_
That said, I may second guess this later, but it is intriguing.
Comments
Considering that the tar sands in Alberta has almost 3 times as much oil as Saudi Arabia's Ghawar field....I say that's a very good investment.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
tar sand is only profitable when the oil price is above $70 if i remembered, according to life after the peak oil. sorry i cant quote the source since the overseas connection is still terrible.
2) The whole point of research is to find a way to make the process cheaper. With a yet-unknown breakthrough in recovery methods for Tar Sands, who knows how far the price might fall?
It seems like you guys worship the free market too much. I'm not saying I don't like it, but it can't solve any problem instantly... and it seems to not be doing a very good job on the energy problem.
When oil starts going down the right side of the bell curve of "peak oil" and becomes less and less profitable, another form of energy will take its place.
Never doubt the free market, someone WILL step in with a replacement so they can make money.
<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Subsidies don't exist in this fictional market though.
Not to mention full disclosure of supply information.
Saudi's haven't let anyone inspect the validity of their supposed reserves for decades.
US uses 14 million barrels of oil a day.
That "major" find we have in the Gulf, it's 15,000 million barrels of oil.
All told, 3 years worth of oil.
_
Drilling in the world class salmon fishery?
14 days worth of oil.
However if you assume 70$ a barrel sale price, it's worth:
$14,000 million dollars
<a href="http://federaltimes.com/index.php?S=2491924" target="_blank">Interior Department charges oil companies $0 through 1998-1999 for drilling on federal land.</a>
<a href="http://news.independent.co.uk/environment/article2162862.ece" target="_blank">Steven Hawking compares climate change to Nuclear Holocaust.</a>
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/19/AR2007011900132.html" target="_blank">Major Energy Companies demand Federal Climate Change policy</a>
<a href="http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0,,1995348,00.html" target="_blank">Worldwide panel on Climate Change: Forecast looks even More Grim</a>
US Scientific information being outright <a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/15/AR2007011501049.html" target="_blank">Slashed</a> , <a href="http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/300615_epalibraries22.html" target="_blank">Burned</a> , and <a href="http://www.enn.com/today.html?id=11847" target="_blank">Censored</a>.
How much longer can this flat-earth administration go wrong? (About 1 year)
"All we need for energy independance is MORE Oil
All we need for war strategy is MORE Troops.
Believe me, it will be different this time, you'll see!"
"The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. "
Benjamin Franklin
<img src="style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/confused-fix.gif" style="vertical-align:middle" emoid="???" border="0" alt="confused-fix.gif" />
Lol
<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikXGYbqK-IU" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikXGYbqK-IU</a>
So thats where this <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultra-low_sulfur_diesel" target="_blank">Ultra Low Sulfur PetroDiesel</a> comes from.
<a href="http://www.insidegreentech.com/node/594" target="_blank">Gasified Coal.</a>
Maybe thats just the exception, and not the rule. *shrug*
While not a good long term solution, it is a good Transition Fuel over to BioDiesel.
Which is also Ultra Low Sulfur.
<a href="http://www.insidegreentech.com/node/290" target="_blank">http://www.insidegreentech.com/node/290</a>
2007 Dodge Ram in March will already have this anti-Smog/Smoke tech inside it.
<a href="http://www.insidegreentech.com/node/645" target="_blank">http://www.insidegreentech.com/node/645</a>
Volkswagen, Dodge/Mercedes/Chrysler, Audi, and Honda are all looking into designing clean Diesel cars for 2007 and 2008
<a href="http://www.dieselforum.org/no_cache/newsarticle/article/683/" target="_blank">http://www.dieselforum.org/no_cache/newsarticle/article/683/</a>
Trick being the difference in Smog Reducing Tech.
Odorless Ammonia Tanks (Trucks and BigRigs) versus Regenerating Filter Tech (Passenger Cars).
But yeah, Diesels always used to have Air Pollution issues to em.
But they offered half the global warming effect,
and 20%-40% more fuel effeciency over gasoline
And 3-5x less maintanence on the engine.
It may be Coal, but this does a hell of a lot more good than Corn Ethanol.
Atleast this starts to explain what that Barrack Obama thing was about:
<a href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/01/09/AR2007010901503.html" target="_blank">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/conte...7010901503.html</a>
_
That said, I may second guess this later, but it is intriguing.