Anybody have an idea as to how much oil would be displaced if it were used mainly for transportation and not for heating which could be done by nuclear produced electricity? Nuclear could also power short range transportation since many people are convinced (rightly or wrongly, it doesn't matter) that electric cars are an answer, especially in cities.Cheers,Andy
From: cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.CIS.McMaster.CA [mailto:cdn-nucl-l-admin@mailman1.CIS.McMaster.CA] On Behalf Of Jerry Cuttler
Sent: 30 May 2010 9:37 PM
To: Canadian Nuclear Discussion List
Subject: [cdn-nucl-l] Nuclear power: key to ramping up oil sandsThis is nice ...----- Original Message -----From: Gene CramerSent: Sunday, May 30, 2010 8:58 PMSubject: [MbrExchange] Nuclear power: key to ramping up oil sands
Nuclear power should be key to ramping up oil sandshttp://www.timminspress.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=2600110
The Daily Press 29may2010
EDITORIAL By MICHAEL DEN TANDTCanadians have watched in horror as BP's Gulf of Mexico oil spill has mushroomed week by week into the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history.
The damage to the Gulf's ecosystem is unknown. Oceanographers report seeing massive columns of oil well below the surface. This is a phenomenon not seen before. Likewise, the chemical dispersants used so far may prove to be a "cure" that rivals the oil itself for toxicity.
Economically, the costs are already staggering. BP has spent nearly $1 billion on cleanup and appears to have barely made a dent. Fishing and ocean-side tourism anywhere in the Gulf states are crippled. Huge areas of precious wetland may have to be burnt.
Here in Canada we can draw some conclusions already about the consequences of this spill, which is now at least twice as serious as the Exxon Valdez disaster in 1989.
The most obvious is that the Alberta tar sands have become much more valuable. There was already great economic and political pressure to develop them to a much greater extent.
This will now become an unstoppable force.
U.S. offshore and deep-water oil production will be slowed or halted for months, perhaps years to come. Saudi and other Mideast production grows less secure by the year. As the Americans search for safe, reliable sources of crude, they will inevitably settle on Alberta as a solution.
Alberta's tars ands have been dogged by the high cost, in energy, of extracting oil from the sand. Industry has proposed building a series of nuclear reactors to offset energy production from gas-fired plants. This would greatly reduce the greenhouse-gas footprint of oil sands production.
The anti-nuclear lobby is, of course, dead against this. For them neither oil nor nuclear are viable options. Perhaps they'd prefer we all move into straw-bale houses powered by candlelight. It's hard to say.
It's time Canadians and the politicians who lead us faced facts: We need more modern, efficient, safe, nuclear power. This is the only way to meet our growing energy needs while not exacerbating global warming.
Let the building begin.
MbrExchange mailing list