Jed Rothwell writes:
>
> Frederick Sparber writes:
>
> >Fission Nuclear Heat and Electricity for shale oil extraction and inter
> >basin water
> >transport from Lake Powell or The Great Salt Lake plus CO2 is viable if the
> >price is right.
>
> If you have fission heat and electricity already, why would you bother to convert them into oil? It seems like a losing proposition. The only purpose would be to supply liquid fuel for transpiration, and I expect you could do that cheaper by synthesizing hydrocarbons directly, and with plug in hybrids. We are talking about a multi billion dollar investment either way. Why not do it the easy way?
>
Horse Puckey.
You're not turning them into oil, Jed you need the fission reactor heat to drive the Kerogens out of the shale
(2 to 15 gallons/ton) mined by 21st century robotics. .
The ton of 1000 degree F rock will concurrently make high grade steam. If Southern Cal Edison can pump
coal-water slurry the 273 miles from eastern Arizona to Laughlin, Nevada it can be sent to
where the "oil" or coal is.
Atmospheric O2 for In-Situ Coal Gasification Synfuel production or electrical energy
as heat for undersea Methane Hydrate release can come from fission reactors.
The average household uses 500-720 KW-Hr/month.
Where is the Power Plant-Grid capacity-infrastructure in place to handle "Off-Peak"
and instant 50 KW-Hour Hybrid Recharge for ten or more cars at a time at the "gas station"?
Fred
>
> - Jed
>
>
