Bill, Agreed, that is a sick project. Cheapest energy gets used first. (Think wood --> coal --> oil --> nuclear ) More energy, more costs until it all falls down... Regards, Bob S.
On Jan 29, 2008 8:59 AM, William Robb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Bob Sullivan" > Subject: Re: Global warming: Icy lolipops > > > > Adam, > > Didn't say dirty isn't wasteful, just it's cheaper...less energy, heating, > > etc. > > It's only cheaper while you have an ample supply of cheap materials to > waste. With oil, this is something that will change over the next decade as > it gets scarcer in North America, and more difficult to extract from the > Muslim countries. > Add to that, North America's (I include Canada) short sighted policy's > towards the Arab world turning them even more against us, and China and > India becoming major consumers of oil, I expect the Arab producers will > prefer selling closer to home, leaving North America pretty much in the cold > with regard to oil imports from the Middle East. > The Athabasca tar sands project, while able to produce a pretty huge amount > of oil, is extremely dirty. Fully 1/3 of the carbon emmissions that Canada > produces is from this project, and it takes 1 barrel of natural gas to > produce 2 barrels of oil from the bitumen ore that is being mined. Add to > that, it is an environmental disaster, in that it will, eventually, make an > area of land the size of Florida completely unusable. > > William Robb > > > -- > PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List > [email protected] > http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net > to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow > the directions. > -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net to UNSUBSCRIBE from the PDML, please visit the link directly above and follow the directions.
