$5 Per Gallon!?!

[RandomGuy]

Given that you are against both additional refinery capacity and additional nuclear capacity, I gather your plan is to let energy prices continue to skyrocket in order to force conservation via economic recession.

I am not against refinery capacity per se.

I am against the pollution that these things put out.

Give me a refinery that meets some fairly strict environmental standards, and I would not mind.

I am more for renewables and efficiency, both of which offer very good cost to benefit relative to refineries and nukes.

[Guru of Nothing]

I am not against refinery capacity per se.

I am against the pollution that these things put out.

Give me a refinery that meets some fairly strict environmental standards, and I would not mind.

I am more for renewables and efficiency, both of which offer very good cost to benefit relative to refineries and nukes.

Mister RandomGuy, do you live inside Loop 410, or outside?

Followup question(s): Do you drive a car to work? Everyday? How far?

I ask only because I am curious.

[Yonivore]

It's all the stuff I've been saying on this forum for years, Yoni. I'm glad you are amused by industry jargon, btw. "Crack spread" gets its name from the chemical process of making refined products... you are literally "cracking" molecules to turn crude oil into gasoline and distillates. What are the refinery units that do this cracking? You guess it... crackers! (hydrocrackers, catalytic crackers, etc.)

Seriously, though; when will be able to start getting the 1.5 Trillion barrels of this crap out of the ground?

[boutons_]

When the costs, both $$$ and environmental restoration, of surface or in-situ retorting makes sense.

US shale oil and Canadian tar sands are huge sources of oil, but it's very difficult and expensive to recover.

If the shale oil and tar sands were good business, they the oilco's would be all over them by, and they would buy enough politicians to rape the environment doing it.

[scott]

If the shale oil and tar sands were good business, they the oilco's would be all over them by, and they would buy enough politicians to rape the environment doing it.

Tar sands already are good business, and the production profile has a very steep curve to it looking into the future. Shale, on the other hand... is a lot tougher. S recently s ed out (no pun intended) like $6B for a northern Alberta shale field, and they say at current prices they are looking at a project payback at 10-15 years out.