Re: $5 a litre fuel

On Sat, 18 Feb 2006 20:49:09 +0000 (UTC), nospam4me@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
wrote:

no.point@xxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

major reserves of shale oil ,

Not worth a ***. Takes more energy to get oil from the kerogen in shale
than you eventually get from the oil. That's why you need government
subsidies for any company to want to go near the stuff.

The total value depends on what it costs to get the black goo out of the
ground vs. the supply.

There is no black goo in shale, just kerogen.

Not to mention ... the value of oil is more than the number of BTUs/kCal
per weight and volume ... it's the fact that all commercial
transport from the smallest motor-bicycle to the largest aircraft and
ocean freighters use a liquid fuel derived from petroleum.

I think it would be cheaper to do Fischer-Tropsch, tar sands and oil shale
than to convert transport to coal and nuclear power :)

The first two, maybe. But "oil" shale is a different story - it is
really bad for converting into anything you might want to put into a
car.

Also keep in mind during World War 2 the Japanese were doing oil shale in
"Manchukuo" .

What is "economically feasible" in wartime when fighting for dominance
is quite different for what will be economic for running passenger cars
on. The Japanese public were not driving to the mall to get McDonald's
in cars powered by oil made from kerogen in shale.
.

Loading