Rethinking oil sands and pipelines

[NUMBERED]

You are trolling , and doing a lousy job at it too.

Physics, learn it please.

Heat dissapation , magma disposal, melting of all the machinery.....yeah, you have not thought of those problems have you?

Sure we do, but we on earth call them 'drilled wells'They deliver water . Realy cool things too.

Says the resident of infowars.

Ok, we melt it, but where do we put it and how do we transport it, how do we get the heat to dissapate?

Limestone is a soft sedimentary rock. Really easy to drill through.

Granite is a hard stone.

Climb out of the basement and ask mom if the counter top is limestone or granite and why ? Mommy should know , but then again.......fruit of the loins and all that.

So simple no one had designed , buitl , tested, mocked up, done drawings......simple!

Glassify? Oh man....insert facepalm here.

Dude you are the one trolling, as I explained Tungsten has amelting point more than twice that of stone, likewise heat is able to be reflected.

You are the one that needs to read up on physics.

No it has been made there are different designs as I said.

What are you doubting? Say it specifically, chances are if you read the links you would not be spouting nonsense.

Limestone is unstable and has pockets which makes it a bad substance for a large heavy drilling machine. Read up on the subject before posting back. The harder rocks are better, remember it isn't being cut it is being melted, there is a difference.

For drilling it is issues like cleave and hardness, with melting it is the thermal capacity and pressurization.

Put a heating element on a block of ice in a subzero room and see what happens, this is the same thing just at higher temperatures.

As far as transport, how do you transport anything, this is a stupid question.

Don't picture a large nuclear power plant the micro reactors are smaller than a house, the same sort of thing used in nuclear submarines - not the exact same thing, but there are massively small. The energy amount you are looking at is upwards of 7MW that isn't a lot today.

Research into this tech over the last 50 years has produced really small models, and the costs for much of it is much less than it was 10 or 20 years ago.

These are the commercially available units

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Micro_nuclear_reactor

Note this technology has faced governmental setbacks... but it exists and is possible.

In Canada a stumbling block could be

http://nuclearsafety.gc.ca/eng/

In the US designs are waiting for approval from the Nuclear Regulatory Commission - slated to be complete by 2013 (only 4 months away). Bear in mind it is not that it is not possible it is that civillian access to the technologies is underway, with various finacial backers.

Bear in mind having nuclear materials underground ain't nothing government isn't trying to do..

http://www.opg.com/power/nuclear/waste/dgr/index.asp

The stuff is being shut down and delayed for governmental reasons but it is moving forward. As soon as the reactors start to become more available the easier the implmentation for civillians streams becomes. Obviously if DUMBS are real... and we know there are some underground bunkers and tunnels if not to the level of DUMBS, any mining operations in the US will need to be closely watched. But tunnels are not new, moving reactors tend to only be used by the military and almost always in naval systems.

There are lots of people in high places that don't like the idea of moving reactors being in the hands of civillians even if they are the much less dangerous thorium type.

We are talking hundreds of tons, not thousands. Bearin mind even a big shovel loader at the tarsands picks up less than 100 tons of sand in a scoop.

The thing can be modularly aseembled on site in a factory bay designed for the purpose.

A road train can move these weights. How much can a big truck at athabasca carry?

A powertrain operates at only 350kw. 1mw of energy from the reactor would propel the thing with ease. well over 500t of hauling capacity.

Edited August 14, 2012 by NUMBERED

[WWWTT]

So if the green movement won the war tomorrow we would all starve!

Speak for yourself.I do not eat oil or oil products.

And not just that as far as I am concerned that pipeline should be coming east,not west.

WWWTT

[WWWTT]

The technology is 40 years old.

Oh yes sorry you are right.

What I should say is that effectively applying this technology into some kind of platform that can efficiently bore tunnels cheaper/better/faster is too far away.

WWWTT

[guyser]

Dude you are the one trolling, as I explained Tungsten has amelting point more than twice that of stone, likewise heat is able to be reflected.

You are the one that needs to read up on physics.

Been here years, pretty sure others would jump in and concur re the troll angle, but I doubt it.

What are you doubting? Say it specifically, chances are if you read the links you would not be spouting nonsense.

Simply?

All of it.

There is no NTBM, not a single one built made designed (drawings are not designs)nor feasible in your lifetime......well maybe your lifetime as you seem very very young (as in middle school young)and have that over me.

Put a heating element on a block of ice in a subzero room and see what happens, this is the same think just at higher temperatures.

Well lets see....

The ice will initially start melting and running off the block of ice.

Then will reform as ice on the rooms floor.

The steam presumably generated will coat the walls and build up.

The heating element will bore down creating a bowl however the water above the element will cool into ice once again thus sealing off the element.

Got it about right?

As far as transport, how do you transport anything, this is a stupid question.

Ever wondered why Hawaii doesnt just transport the lava that eats up homes, pasture land,cropland, towns and highways?

I mean...its sooo simple...right?

Don't picture a large nuclear power plant the micro reactors are smaller than a house,

Ok...small! Got ya! Now what? Small enough to be built .....yet have not.

the same sort of thing used in nuclear submarines - not the exact same thing, but there are massively small. The energy amount you are looking at is upwards of 7MW that isn't a lot today.

How about minutely huge ?

Research into this tech over the last 50 years has produced really small models, and the costs for much of it is much less than it was 10 or 20 years ago.

Oh ffs, show us one model built and operational and we will tuck tail between legs and run away.

If not, you and login do same and joing the single digit mensa league.

Edited August 14, 2012 by guyser

[Wild Bill]

Speak for yourself.I do not eat oil or oil products.

And not just that as far as I am concerned that pipeline should be coming east,not west.

WWWTT

It would work better if you would read my whole post and not just grab one point out of context.

Did I not say something about fertilizer? You do know how fertilizer works, don't you? You do have an idea of just how much is used to maintain the production levels of the food that fills our supermarkets?

You do understand that take the fertilizers away tomorrow and yields would immediately drop to a mere pittance?

Once again you are doing what Moonbox pointed out. I don't think you are trolling. I think you just don't know any better!

[WWWTT]

It would work better if you would read my whole post and not just grab one point out of context.

Did I not say something about fertilizer? You do know how fertilizer works, don't you? You do have an idea of just how much is used to maintain the production levels of the food that fills our supermarkets?

You do understand that take the fertilizers away tomorrow and yields would immediately drop to a mere pittance?

Once again you are doing what Moonbox pointed out. I don't think you are trolling. I think you just don't know any better!

You are the one who wrote the comment that I replied to!?!?!

It is you who made something big out of something little.

Not just that I believe fertilizer is not made from oil.

I am not sure but I believe there are laws against using non organic products in the production/use of edible produce(however I have heard of polymer coated fertilizer).Maybe someone can step in and help on this one?

The three largest in fertilizer is nitrogen,potassium and phosphorous.And numerous micro nutrients.

WWWTT

[waldo]

Some politicians are blessedly ignorant of the situation, as witness McGuinty paying people up to 80 cents per kilowatt for wind and solar generation against traditional sources at 5-6 cents per kw. If Ontario were to go fully alternative tomorrow the lights would go out across the province. Not because the grid would fail but simply because only a few rich folks could afford it!

context... reference... for your numbers/assertion? With respect to solar, as I understand the Ontario Green Energy program and tieing back into the grid, you could be paid $0.64/kWh for installing a ground mount system... or $0.71/kWh for a roof mount system - versus, for example, typical rates for importing from the U.S. or Quebec as high as between $1.00-to-$1.20/kWh.

yours is a most stereotypical and generalized slant on the "Green Movement"... you continue to utter unsubstantiated comments and paint the "Green Movement" as one monolithic entity. Most certainly, the "Green Movement", generalized, has demands/wants on an increase and a shift toward more sustainable energy sources. As you continue to spout off and make grandiose collective statements about the "Green Movement", you should expect to be called on them with increased frequency.

[Wild Bill]

You are the one who wrote the comment that I replied to!?!?!

It is you who made something big out of something little.

Not just that I believe fertilizer is not made from oil.

I am not sure but I believe there are laws against using non organic products in the production/use of edible produce(however I have heard of polymer coated fertilizer).Maybe someone can step in and help on this one?

The three largest in fertilizer is nitrogen,potassium and phosphorous.And numerous micro nutrients.

WWWTT

Why didn't you just do a quick google? There are all kinds of links!

Try this one for a start: http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/100303_eating_oil.html

"The Green Revolution

In the 1950s and 1960s, agriculture underwent a drastic transformation commonly referred to as the Green Revolution. The Green Revolution resulted in the industrialization of agriculture. Part of the advance resulted from new hybrid food plants, leading to more productive food crops. Between 1950 and 1984, as the Green Revolution transformed agriculture around the globe, world grain production increased by 250%.4 That is a tremendous increase in the amount of food energy available for human consumption. This additional energy did not come from an increase in incipient sunlight, nor did it result from introducing agriculture to new vistas of land. The energy for the Green Revolution was provided by fossil fuels in the form of fertilizers (natural gas), pesticides (oil), and hydrocarbon fueled irrigation.

The Green Revolution increased the energy flow to agriculture by an average of 50 times the energy input of traditional agriculture.5 In the most extreme cases, energy consumption by agriculture has increased 100 fold or more.6

In the United States, 400 gallons of oil equivalents are expended annually to feed each American (as of data provided in 1994).7 Agricultural energy consumption is broken down as follows:

· 31% for the manufacture of inorganic fertilizer

· 19% for the operation of field machinery

· 16% for transportation

· 13% for irrigation

· 08% for raising livestock (not including livestock feed)

· 05% for crop drying

· 05% for pesticide production

· 08% miscellaneous"

Man, what do they teach in schools these days?

[NUMBERED]

Oh yes sorry you are right.

What I should say is that effectively applying this technology into some kind of platform that can efficiently bore tunnels cheaper/better/faster is too far away.

WWWTT

Why is that, they build conventional borers just fine. (this is a simpler technology to deploy aside from regulatory issues) as the entrails don't exist.

Edited August 14, 2012 by NUMBERED

[NUMBERED]

Been here years, pretty sure others would jump in and concur re the troll angle, but I doubt it.

Simply?

All of it.

There is no NTBM, not a single one built made designed (drawings are not designs)nor feasible in your lifetime......well maybe your lifetime as you seem very very young (as in middle school young)and have that over me.

Well lets see....

The ice will initially start melting and running off the block of ice.

Then will reform as ice on the rooms floor.

The steam presumably generated will coat the walls and build up.

The heating element will bore down creating a bowl however the water above the element will cool into ice once again thus sealing off the element.

Got it about right?

Ever wondered why Hawaii doesnt just transport the lava that eats up homes, pasture land,cropland, towns and highways?

I mean...its sooo simple...right?

Ok...small! Got ya! Now what? Small enough to be built .....yet have not.

How about minutely huge ?

Oh ffs, show us one model built and operational and we will tuck tail between legs and run away.

If not, you and login do same and joing the single digit mensa league.

Read the links and come back with meaningful criticism right now all you offer is proof you havn't read the links.

You are wrong.

[guyser]

Read the links and come back with meaningful criticism right now all you offer is proof you havn't read the links.

You are wrong.

You show me a pic of a TBM from 1972 and I'm wrong ?

[NUMBERED]

You show me a pic of a TBM from 1972 and I'm wrong ?

yes you are wrong.

read the links first then post something that is sane.

[guyser]

yes you are wrong.

read the links first then post something that is sane.

Fail

[WWWTT]

Why didn't you just do a quick google? There are all kinds of links!

Yes I just did a search.

Haber-Bosch process it is called using natural gas to form the nitrogen in fertilizers.(the nitrogen still comes from air)

However oil is not natural gas is it now.

WWWTT

[Wild Bill]

Yes I just did a search.

Haber-Bosch process it is called using natural gas to form the nitrogen in fertilizers.(the nitrogen still comes from air)

However oil is not natural gas is it now.

WWWTT

Why do I bother?

Gas is also a byproduct of heating or burning oil. Oil is much more easily transportable to fertilizer plants than natural gas.

Did you actually read more than one link? Or did you just keep scanning for something that would make it look like you were right in the first place?

I give up! It's just not worth it. I'm going back to putting you on ignore.

[Tilter]

where are you getting the figures for nuclear tunnel boring machines tunneling speed from?

I think you are refering to other forms of boring tunnelers that don't use nuclear power and use inferior only mechanical technologies.

NTBM's such as powered by thorium microreactors cost less, make stronger tunnels and don't have waste to be removed as they glassify debris. Also the timeline was over 3x the total time requred giving an 8 hour work day. It could be done in 10 days working around the clock.

Yes---- Buck said that was the way they tunnelled right thru the center of planet XZ 42(Xyream Zoska star system)

Mr Rogers is quite pleased to see a renewal of the 1930's news sheet that everyone thot was a comic strip. :lol:

[WWWTT]

I give up! It's just not worth it. I'm going back to putting you on ignore.

Hallelujah!

WWWTT

[Newfoundlander]

Forgot the oil sands, here come the iron sands (hopefully)!

http://bit.ly/SEmbFm

[jacee]

Enbridge is attempting to begin work on reversing the flow of Line 9 through Ontario, though hearings have not yet been held and the reversal has not been approved. Activists are preventing Enbridge from breaking the law.

http://m.thestar.com/#!/business/redirect/aa070e134c7b5f507c84623f10b28688

This just in! Another Enbridge leak:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/business/synthetic-oil-leak-shuts-down-enbridge-pipeline-in-northern-alberta-1.1338011

And a bit of Enbridge history:

http://www.watershedsentinel.ca/content/enbridge-spills

Can't think of any reason why we should believe a word they say.

Edited June 24, 2013 by jacee

[G Huxley]

Oil sands is a propagandistic misnomer. It isn't oil there it is bitumen. Since Bitumen was originally called asphalt, tar sands is accurate.

[jacee]

The oil and pipeline companies are belatedly realizing that they've created a public relations disaster for themselves, and that they can't do business without public support.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2013/07/12/calgary-stampede-animals-marketing.html

For decades, pipes were sewn into the ground without any hesitation. Slowly, opposition grew because of spills and industry failed to counteract the uprising by getting into communities with facts and science.

Some argue the pipeline industry lost the public relations war.To hear industry leaders now, you know how regretful companies are they didn't act sooner. At a conference in Calgary in May, companies explained how trust has eroded.

"If we don't restore public confidence, we won't be able to keep our social licence to be able to continue to operate. And simply that means as companies, we're out of business," said TransCanada Corporation CEO Russ Girling.

Too bad they can't figure out that PR isn't their problem: SPILLS are their problem!

We don't need to hear "facts and science": They need to use "facts and science" to stop having SPILLS!

[jacee]

http://www.vancouversun.com/touch/story.html?id=8663022

Joe Oliver, the grumpy warrior who gamely repeated PMO-penned lines last winter equating pipeline opponents with eco-terrorists, ...

Oliver's inflammatory rhetoric made oil and gas pipeline construction a target for every environmentally minded activist ...

and many other people.

What were they thinking?

I guess I just want to make the point that the inflammatory rhetoric that contributed to bad PR and slowed pipeline expansion came from the PMO.

Not unnoticed at the same time, Harper voted himself a veto over the Environmental Review Board.

Despite the power of the oil industry and majority power in Ottawa, the rest of us can't be steamrolled.

Now there's room for real conversations.

Edited July 16, 2013 by jacee

[Guest Derek L]

So not to further derail the NDP related thread here:

http://www.mapleleafweb.com/forums/topic/22865-nova-scotia-earns-best-credit-rating-ever-thanks-to-ndp/#entry910471

I'd like to ask the NDP supporters on MLW what the current stance of the NDP (Federal and BC Provincial) is on both the Northern Gateway pipeline proposal, and the expansion of the Southern Kinder Morgan Trans Mountain pipeline. Clearly several months ago they came out against them both during the BC election campaign (which they lost).....I ask since a poster in another thread is claiming that the NDP has reversed their position on these two pipeline proposals for British Columbia and that they now support them.

So what is it?

[hitops]

It is much safer to transport oil by pipeline than by rail or any other method.

[jacee]

It is much safer to transport oil by pipeline than by rail or any other method.

Safe enough?