Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If its profitable, then there should be no problem with it.
Fusion, on the other hand, isn't profitable, because it takes more energy to sustain a fusion reaction in a safe manner then you get out of the fusion reaction.
That gives it no profit.
Oil shale is profitable. Even if it takes more energy to make it then it does from getting out of it (which isn't true, read the link I posted), then its still profitable, and as such means its a viable source of energy.
Its not a matter of profit! The problem is the energy inputs required to produce shale are so vast it limits the degree to which production can be scaled up. I've no doubt oil shale will be produced - but only at low flow rates, a replacement for crude it is not. I shall say no more.
1) Its not this president, (or the former). Its about speculation. With all China's and India's thirst for oil, the only reason for such after Christmas increase is... speculation. Someone out there is making billions out of the misery of regular folks. Not only reach Arab Sheiks or companies like BP, but "investors" that gamble on future profits. They buy millions of barrels they don't need, to be sold at high prices.
2) Even with increased domestic drilling, there would be little change in oil prices. The oil that is currently pumped in Alaska flows to China and does not remain in the US. What the US can contribute to world oil supply is negligible.
1) Its not the president, this or the former. Its about speculation. With all China's and India's thirst for oil, the only reason for such after Christmas increase is... speculation. Someone out there is making billions out of misery of regular folks. Not only reach Arab Sheiks and companies like BP, but "investors" that gamble on future profits. They buy millions of barrels they don't need, to be sold in the future at high prices.
2) Even with increased domestic drilling, there would be little change in oil prices. The oil that is currently pumped in Alaska flows to China and does not remain in the US. What the US can contribute to the overall world oil supply is negligible.
False propaganda which has become an urban myth since the pipeline was first operational.
In denial much? Let me guess: you drive an F350 and live at least an hour commute from you work place.
Why would I be in denial? I'm not the one implying gas going up a buck is going to be the end of suburbia. Oh Noes!! I better buy a hybrid and move into a condo in the city!
Sorry to burst your bubble but I don't drive a pickup. Although I do have 5 cars with two of the sports cars getting about 6mpg. Gas can be $10 a gallon and I'll still be out enjoying them.
1) Its not this president, (or the former). Its about speculation. With all China's and India's thirst for oil, the only reason for such after Christmas increase is... speculation. Someone out there is making billions out of the misery of regular folks. Not only reach Arab Sheiks or companies like BP, but "investors" that gamble on future profits. They buy millions of barrels they don't need, to be sold at high prices.
2) Even with increased domestic drilling, there would be little change in oil prices. The oil that is currently pumped in Alaska flows to China and does not remain in the US. What the US can contribute to world oil supply is negligible.
This president said that under his plan energy prices would skyrocket. I think we should give him credit. It is rare a politician sees his policies come to a successful conclusion. He deserves his props.
Its not a matter of profit! The problem is the energy inputs required to produce shale are so vast it limits the degree to which production can be scaled up. I've no doubt oil shale will be produced - but only at low flow rates, a replacement for crude it is not. I shall say no more.
It requires higher amounts of energy to produce it. So when demand increases, then the things that are required to produce it increase.
What are those things?
Mining equipment, we're the worlds leader in it.
Electricity to heat it, we've got coal reserves that would dwarf Saudi Arabia if compared to oil.
And the EROEI has been dramatically lowered with newer technologies that would obviously be developed when production is ramped up.
This president said that under his plan energy prices would skyrocket.
Let's keep things honest here, that quote was in the context of Cap and Trade policy. If I remember correctly it was given a full year before the election. While there are certainly some policies like those implemented in the Gulf having some effect overall blaming the current cost on Obama is no better than those blaming Bush when he was in office or "Big Oil" .
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
