In the 1950s, some genius working for a U.S. oil company had an idea for extracting oil from the tarsands in northern Alberta: Why not put nuclear bombs below ground, where those oil-soaked sands are, and detonate them? The heat would cause the oil to boil out and puddle up into nice pockets that could be pumped out.
Sounds crazy, right? But the idea was taken seriously, for a while at least. And it doesn't seem much crazier than pressurizing carbon dioxide so that it liquifies, and then putting it underground as a way of reducing the amount of CO2 released into the atmosphere. Which is basically what "carbon capture and storage" (CCS) is.
And Canadian governments (federal and provincial) have committed to spending billions of dollars on this latest mad science.
I thought of this as I read Frances Russell's column in the Winnipeg Free Press today. She quotes William Marsden (in whose book you can read more about that nuclear-bomb idea) as opining that CCS is "too expensive, is untested and it won't store enough carbon." Not to mention that it's dangerous.
I'm sure many experts would agree. Maybe not the industry-supplied "experts" Environment Minister Prentice is fond of consulting, but probably the environmentally minded experts he deems unworthy of his time. Perhaps the minister should pay attention to those people.
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
This and other Dr. Bizzaro ideas of generating more finite oil just goes to show to what lengths we will go. We have sold our hearts and souls to this black goo. We can now no longer live with it, or without it.
The quest to solve climate change, green tech, even bridge fuels are all lip service. Drill baby drill, and more nuke plants will be the call of the day. The planet is grasping for water and air. While the human species keeps polluting, and abusing its natural resources. We are committing Ecological genocide.
Oddly enough, I recall learning about the nuke idea in Grade 10 geography, as well as the only slightly less crazy GRAND Canal proposal.
I'm thinking (but not saying anything out loud) that I ought to be coming around here more often. Either Stimson is losing focus or I'm coming in, in the middle of a reasonable conversation.
Yea, they have been holding out dreams of developing the tar sands for decades. I remember all sorts of crazy tar sands extraction plans back in the 70s oil crisis when I was working in hydrocarbon technology.
I agree with RZ. . . this is just more dues to the devil.
Using nukes to pump oil. And I thought Jersey Shore was the worst idea ever. I stand corrected.
I remember when I was a kid in the 70's and commercials about this stuff and oil shale solving our energy problems. I'm comforted that they're still working on this stuff Stimpson. I hope they are getting some huge government subsidies to continue their painstaking research. God forbid they spend 40 years on this and just give up. That would be a waste of huge government subsidies.
RZ: Yes, these are symptoms of what desperate oil junkies our societies have become.
nitro: funny, I don't recall the GRAND Canal idea.
Vig: You could say unfocused. I prefer "eclectic"
SH: the methods now being used to extract oil from the tarsands strike me as at least close to crazy.
Oso: LOL!
Truth: I hadn't thought of the comfort to be gained in this case of some things staying the same for all these years. Thanks.
I tend not to knee-jerk every time a hot button is approached. I'm highly skeptical about the notion of confining CO2 geologically. However, since there is a pilot program to try it on a small scale, I'll wait and see what geologists with no connection to Big Energy have to say, rather than condemn the idea in advance of the evidence.
Read a National Geographic article and saw the pictures about how they were "mining" the oil from the tar sands. It was a nightmarish view of destruction all so SUV drivers could more easily fill their tanks.
I'm with Tomcat, CCS sounds to me like a pipedream, I'd rather go uber-crazy and just plant trees everywhere while controlling CO2 emissions.
What will they think of next? It seems that, no matter what we do, we end up polluting the planet or creating toxic waste. If there IS intelligent life out in space, they must certainly view us as a sort of spinning outhouse...
We are just so damn stupid. We have unlimited amounts of solar energy at our disposal, but so far have tapped only about one atom's worth. We have tremendous amounts of wind as a resource but have so far tapped only about one breath's worth. Instead, we keep seeking and using finite and impure resources. We need to develop some brains, and fast!
I'm with RZ on this one. I doubt that oil will be replaced by an alternate fuel anytime soon, at least not in the next 100 years. Then again, given the alarming rate at which the planet is warming there may not be a "next 100 years" for mankind.
Post a Comment