Previous 21 - 30 Next
Cappmann, Many of these regulations could be met easily by a synfuel which would be at the same time - cleaner and more energy dense, about 20 percent more energy dense than current refined fuels. This is because you are building up a hydrocarbon rather than refining one out so what you get is more of the fuel and less of the pollutants. I agree that government restrictions on drilling are annoying, but I am also concerned that we are in a long term rising demand market. The rest of the world is powering up and asking for liquid fuels. We will need a LOT more fuel to keep the prices at a reasonable level. This is why I am advocating coal to synfuel using Nuclear heat.
Vic156 I live in an apartment and have for much of my life so your point is well taken that an EV for an apartment dweller is not easy. My only point is that it is feasible in the medium term. The Elio will be a good cheap option for inexpensive commutes if it is built. A vehicle can be converted to NG for as little as 50 dollars in equipment. It is the regulations that prevent us using it for cars today. I am not saying that drilling for oil is a non-starter. I am saying that if Nuclear power were allowed to even submit designs on a normal basis - say approval in 2 to 4 years for a design, that we don't need to drill for oil, we can produce it from coal for about 50 / barrel. I really want cheap oil, but drilling today is working because the prices are above 100 / barrel. In many places they are able to access the oil because of this high price. If the prices drop below 80 / barrel many wells would shut down - forcing a rise again. We need a better long term solution that is cheaper.
Agreed, almost totally, but the cost of reaching those reserves has risen. We need much less expensive energy and a lot of it. I like gasoline cars but the Electric cars are making progress and their are enough charging stations being built to make them practical on a long trip. Nuclear powered electricity can fill up a car quickly enough. have you seen Tesla's battery swap? http://www.teslamotors.com/batteryswap I totally disagree with the subsidies for electric cars but the economic case for them improves greatly if the cost of batteries goes below 100 / kWh
I agree that we need gasoline and diesel, but the cost of drilling has now reached the point where synfuel is cheaper if you use inexpensive heat to make it. We can turn coal directly into liquid fuel at a much lower cost than drilling today if we use Nuclear heat to convert that coal. All the technology needed to do this has been around since WWII when the Germans turned their coal into fuel to run their army after we shut down their ports.
No it would not take decades. Most of the infrastructure is in place now. But I have heard that it cost's a mechanic 600,000 dollars to get a license to convert ONE model. That is each different model he converts will be an additional 600,000. That is a go-away price.
The Arab countries are starting to build Nuclear Power plants to save their precious oil for sale on the open market. The only way to bring the cost of energy down is to make a bunch more of it. Commodities markets are very sensitive to supply and demand. But the problem with oil sands is that it costs a lot of money to access them. We can do the same thing with synfuel made from High Temperature Nuclear power plants for less money - about 50 / barrel. Also, those same plants can produce another greatly needed commodity - fresh water. Desalination could totally fix the water problems in California and Florida with power and heat from Nuclear.
Yes, the Navy manages to take fresh High School graduates, train them in a few months and then put them in charge of some of the best equipment for producing power in the world. These ships manage to keep Nuclear reactors safe while pitching and rolling far more than any earthquake and last reliably for 15 to 30 years without refueling. All this while cruising at very high speeds and powering all the needs of the sailors and equipment on board. Yes, Nuclear power is the greenest available. It needs less land than hydro, produces no dangerous emissions while in operation so that it can safely run for decades inside a submarine.
If we could move the NRC to a more reasonable time schedule for licensing we could increase the amount of energy available by vast amounts. For example, the NRC requires that a new design for a Small or Medium sized Reactor, the kind that are intrinsically safe, have a purchaser or buyer BEFORE the NRC will consider reviewing the design for certification. In other words the vender goes to a customer and says, "Hey I have this amazing design that will fit your needs!" The customer replies, "Has the NRC approved the design?" "Well no, but if you will buy one the NRC will start to review the design." How long will that take?" "About 15 years from start to finish." Laughter, more laughter, rolling on the floor. We need to reform this process.
Yes, this is possible and in Bangkok Thailand many of the heavy trucks now use CNG/LPG for fuel. They have about 8 tanks just behind the cab in a serial configuration.
Also, with a small commuter car we could use two cars - one for normal family stuff and one for those single commutes. Check out Elio motors.
Why drill? Why not build Nuclear? I like oil but the oil that can be drilled for less than 80 / barrel is gone. With Coal to Liquid using High Temperature Nuclear reactors (Molten Salt Reactors - MSR) you can produce gasoline or diesel at 50 / barrel. The best use for Natural Gas is transportation. Many countries in Asia are using it now and per mile driven it is MUCH cheaper. We don't need to use NG to generate electricity
Previous 21 - 30 Next