Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: E. Pluribus Unum
From your article:

Others are also expressing caution. "It takes a lot of natural gas to process oil sands, and much more will have to be allocated," says James Halloran, Wall Street analyst for National City Bank in Cleveland. Without the added natural gas, "technological improvements will have to be made to make up for the lack of it. At some point, the cost to the environment may limit production growth." Producers, meanwhile, are having trouble getting the needed resources to support increased development of oil sands.

If they have to import natural gas to get the oil out of the sand, that is a showstopper. As a general rule, an energy resource needs to use about 1/2 or less (preferably much less) of it's own energy to be viable. External energy inputs must be minimal.

78 posted on 05/17/2006 1:40:46 PM PDT by palmer (Money problems do not come from a lack of money, but from living an excessive, unrealistic lifestyle)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 57 | View Replies ]


To: palmer
One of the cruel, ridiculous twists of fate (or a delightful one, if you are a Canadian) is that western Canada is not only a source of abundant oil -- it's got a ton of coal under the ground, too.

At some point in the not-too-distant future, coal will replace natural gas as the primary source of energy for these oil sands projects.

112 posted on 05/17/2006 4:09:00 PM PDT by Alberta's Child (Can money pay for all the days I lived awake but half asleep?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson