[narby]

What this report does not mention is the amount of hydro-carbons released into the atmosphere in the production of what sounds like a truly massive amount of energy to cook the rock.

The energy ratio is 3.5/1. We should use nuclear to provide the energy put into the rock. It's cleaner, abundant, and it can't fuel your car while gasoline can.

There's also plenty of wind energy up there too. I don't know if this process requires energy 24/7. But if it doesn't, power it from the wind on top of the shale via wind.

Wind energy is lousy at powering your house (because it quits), and you can't use it in your car either.

[fallujah-nuker]

"The energy ratio is 3.5/1. We should use nuclear to provide the energy put into the rock. It's cleaner, abundant, and it can't fuel your car while gasoline can."

Might be able to use the high temperature gas reactor to provide process heat, it could produce electricity as a byproduct.

[Redcloak]

You don't need a 24/7 energy source for the cooking process. Remember: several hundred feet of rock makes a dandy insulator. The heat you pour into the site will take months (or years!) to dissipate. While the flakey windmills take a break, the shale stays hot. Think of it as the world's biggest Dutch oven.