Official (Alberta) Oil Discussion Thread

[karl262]

Originally Posted by Resolute 14

The problem with nuclear is the politics of it. Especially after Fukushima.

Agreed, which is kind of sad, considering politics is the only problem.

Fukushima could have been prevented from melting down if the technicians had proper training.

[CliffFletcher]

The lesson of Fukishima is to think twice about building reactors over active earthquake zones.

[karl262]

Even with the tsunami and earthquake the meltdown was preventable.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by karl262

Agreed, which is kind of sad, considering politics is the only problem.

Fukushima could have been prevented from melting down if the technicians had proper training.

That's not the only problem - you've got to do something with the waste at some point. Big deal in Ontario right now - http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nuclea...ject-1.3065407


They are also extremely capital intensive to build. They cost a ton of money and time to build and it takes a while to start earning revenue. When the electricity market monopolies were opened up - it became very tough to get any plants built. No new nuclear plants have been built in a liberalized electricity market - http://www.world-nuclear-news.org/V-...s-0420152.html

[FLAMESRULE]

Some of the new GenIV reactors will burn the waste of the old GenII + III reactors dramatically reducing the amount of waste and putting the timeline for disposal in the hundreds of years, not tens of thousands.

Also, the new Thorium reactors are absolutely amazing. Meltdown proof, 1/5 the cost, modular, way lower waste products, etc. Also there is apparently more energy in Thorium than oil, coal, gas, uranium combined...2500 years worth of energy. http://www.thoriumpowercanada.com/db...orium-reactor/

[Barnes]

Originally Posted by Tinordi

The Ford Model T got 25 MPG over one hundred years ago. The average MPG of all vehicles sold in the US in 2015 was 25 MPG.

Just sayin...

Just to come back to this and further illustrate how ridiculous this is;

The 1890 Morrison Electric. Range 100 miles.



The 2015 BMW i3 Range. 80 - 100 miles

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by karl262

Even with the tsunami and earthquake the meltdown was preventable.

A meltdown isn't when one thing goes wrong, it's when ten things go wrong at once.

[Fuzz]

I've been hearing about how awesome Thorium is for years. Anyone actually building one yet?

[Fuzz]

Jeebus that's an ugly BMW. Why are most electrics so butt ugly?

[Pipty]

Problem with nuclear is that it is inevitable that a meltdown will occur somewhere. And each time it happens it will probably be worse than the last one. Will probably see another one somewhere in your lifetime again for those in your 20s.

[karl262]

I think a meltdown in the case we're discussing is when the nuclear fuel lacks proper cooling, turn molten and melts through the containment vessel.

[FLAMESRULE]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

I've been hearing about how awesome Thorium is for years. Anyone actually building one yet?

The company in the link I posted is building two apparently, Chile and Indonesia. Pretty amazing potential with it.

[karl262]

Originally Posted by Pipty

Problem with nuclear is that it is inevitable that a meltdown will occur somewhere. And each time it happens it will probably be worse than the last one. Will probably see another one somewhere in your lifetime again for those in your 20s.

As bad as they seem on the news, very few people actually die in these incidents.

[Burninator]

Originally Posted by Barnes

Just to come back to this and further illustrate how ridiculous this is;

The 1890 Morrison Electric. Range 100 miles.

The 2015 BMW i3 Range. 80 - 100 miles

The BMW i3 does 0-60mph in 7 seconds. The TOP speed of the Model T was 45mph.

[FLAMESRULE]

Originally Posted by karl262

As bad as they seem on the news, very few people actually die in these incidents.

Exactly. Safest energy source around.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamescon.../#2131a99549d2

Energy Source Mortality Rate (deaths/trillionkWhr)
Coal – global average 170,000 (50% global electricity)
Coal – China 280,000 (75% China’s electricity)
Coal – U.S. 15,000 (44% U.S. electricity)
Oil 36,000 (36% of energy, 8% of electricity)
Natural Gas 4,000 (20% global electricity)
Biofuel/Biomass 24,000 (21% global energy)
Solar (rooftop) 440 (< 1% global electricity)
Wind 150 (~ 1% global electricity)
Hydro – global average 1,400 (15% global electricity)
Nuclear – global average 90 (17% global electricity w/Chern&Fukush)

[zamler]

Even if the thermal efficiency of a petrol engine is 100% it doesn't matter we are still burning a finite fuel. Now I want to be crystal clear I am not anti-oil in fact I think we should exploit our resource as much as possible, but at the same time use a % of oil revenue and properly invest in future energy tech. I'm a fan of solar I think long term it is the solution but if not I'm all for using whatever technology is viable.

Originally Posted by FLAMESRULE

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jamescon.../#2131a99549d2

Article is behind a pay wall.

[trew]

The traveling wave reactor that Bill Gate's company is building in China is also very exciting http://neutronbytes.com/2015/09/23/t...-fast-reactor/.

Like Thorium, it's cheaper, cleaner, and safer. It's also something that can be built within the next 10-15 years.

[FLAMESRULE]

Originally Posted by zamler

Article is behind a pay wall.

Think its just an ad-blocker wall...I don't pay for Forbes.

[zamler]

You're right I had to disable a bunch of stuff.

[Resolute 14]

I would recommend against disabling an adblocker for Forbes. They have served up malware-laden ads in the past.