Opinion please.

[zbest1966 + 10]

I am not expert but I would like a opinion. For sometime US has gotten comfortable with cheap oil esp with shale. In effect this has left nuclear and coal behind, will USA regard its choice, if so when.  

[Tom Kirkman + 8,860]

4 hours ago, zbest1966 said:

For sometime US has gotten comfortable with cheap oil esp with shale.

In effect this has left nuclear and coal behind, will USA regard its choice, if so when.

I don't understand your question.  Perhaps you can re-phrase it.

[Cowpoke + 70]

47 minutes ago, Tom Kirkman said:

I don't understand your question.  Perhaps you can re-phrase it.

I think he means "regret" its choice.

 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

To put the question in perspective, I invite viewers to ponder the example of what happened in Canada.

The Canadians, although partly factionalized (fractionalized?) into provincial regions, had [relatively] cheap oil, out of their Western provinces, a unique nuclear industry based on their CANDU reactor designs using heavy water, and lots of cheap power from those reactors and from big river projects, specifically Niagara Falls and Beauharnois, and BC Hydro.  The outflow of this mix was the emergence of the industrial powerhouse of the Central East, Ontario, and specifically southwestern Ontario.  

Canadians never had it so good.  they had cheap power, cheap industrial power, and with the proximity to the vast US market, were able to develop a diverse industry base including lots of heavy industry, exploiting its abundant resources: including iron ore for Big Steel, and made for a prosperous country, with big spending on education of the citizens. 

Along come the politicians and various hysterical people, the latter coalescing into these political groups now known by the label "greenies."  For reasons that remain obscure, they latch onto "nuclear" as deeply evil, and onto oil and gas as "dirty."  And they convince the politicians to make massive investments in windmills, basically industrial wind propellers mounted on tall poles, and in solar panels, to directly convert the small amounts of sun falling on Canada into electricity, via photovoltaics. They also convince the politicians to place large taxes on oil products, and then a "carbon tax" on oil use, now headed for $40 a ton. 

Those taxpayer investments cost billions, destabilize the various electric grids, drive up consumer prices, and most alarmingly drive up the price of industrial electricity.  In the oil sector, the added charges drive up the price of trucking and air freight, big factors in the Canadian landscape. After Ontario spends itself into oblivion, now with some $323 Billion in provincial debt and an annual deficit of perhaps $16 billion  (nobody really knows as the Books have been massaged in Latin American style), its industry has largely either collapsed or fled, and, even worse, is not coming back.  The consumers are left to pick up the costs, so electric bills for minimal use are now approaching a thousand dollars a month - which is unpayable. 

Indeed, at this point everything is unpayable.  Ontario has no hope of ever being able to pay either the debts or the future unfunded liabilities, mostly government pensions. It has no hope of ever bringing back that wast manufacturing sector.  It has no hope of recovering those  lost jobs.  It has no hope of going back to cheap electricity. OK, Ontario is not quite Venezuela, but it has shared characteristics: a partly collapsed economy, and needing beggar's payments from elsewhere to stay afloat  (in Ontario's case, as the recipient of "equalization transfer payments," the governmental equivalent of welfare). 

In the oilfields, due to a combination of "greenie" ideas and politicians obstructing pipeline construction  (and a rail system clogged with grain shipments, affording no spare capacity for oil by rail), the big resource powerhouses of Alberta and Saskatchewan are hurting, as their oil is in danger of being shut-in. And there is the looming threat of the carbon tax, another unbelievably stupid idea being floated by the "greenies."  The net result is that people who have no idea what they are doing are hard at work wrecking one of the richest, greatest resource countries on the planet. 

Will they regret it all?  Yup, sure will.  Will the USA follow suit down that Canadian road?  Well, there can be no real debate that, under Clinton and Obama, it was headed that way.  Under Trump, unlikely, although the chaos in leadership in the White House does not inspire confidence. Unfortunately, Trump has no grounding in physics, or he would force a development of next-generation nuclear power, to feed the energy-hungry industries that produce so much real wealth. 

Americans still remain a can-do people.  they will regret the mistakes of the past, but if they can get free of the shackles of the political mistakes of the past (and present), they will come up with solutions.  Americans are real big on solutions.  They are a remarkably ingenious people. 

[Horton47 + 15]

No nukes.  Why not?  I'll give you 4 good reasons.

1. Chernobyl

2. Fukushima

3. China Syndrome risk

4. Waste management

[Rodent + 1,424]

5 minutes ago, Horton47 said:

No nukes.  Why not?  I'll give you 4 good reasons.

1. Chernobyl

2. Fukushima

3. China Syndrome risk

4. Waste management

5. palisades

https://oilprice.com/Alternative-Energy/Nuclear-Power/Controversial-Lake-Michigan-Nuclear-Power-Plant-T

"This leak was not an isolated incident—from 2012 to 2013, the Palisades was shut down at least six times to deal with leaks, and the Palisades has been plagued with troubles since shortly after construction in 1966, when Consumer’s—then owner—filed lawsuits against the five companies that built and designed the plant, citing everything from defective equipment to faulty design. The plant was shut for over a year starting in 1973 after a radioactive leak was discovered that sent large amounts of poisonous radiation into both the atmosphere and Lake Michigan, according to an Ann Arbor Sun article from 1974."

[zbest1966 + 10]

China is pouring billions in Nukes power followed by India. Nuclear does not leave a carbon footprint the only downside is cost to builded.

[Rodent + 1,424]

3 minutes ago, zbest1966 said:

China is pouring billions in Nukes power followed by India. Nuclear does not leave a carbon footprint the only downside is cost to builded.

and cost to safely shutter when done, as evidenced by that incredible article posted above. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 minutes ago, zbest1966 said:

China is pouring billions in Nukes power followed by India. Nuclear does not leave a carbon footprint the only downside is cost to builded.

The cost to build dramatically comes down when you build them all the same. 

Where the USA went wrong was to build each plant to a unique design.  You never get economies of scale doing that. 

New design thorium reactors can be built to as small as 40 MW, built on an assembly line, you truck them to the jobsite on a trailer, drop in place, and if you need maintenance or re-fuelling then the entire plant is picked up by a crane and truck and taken back to the factory, with a spare replacement dropped in at the time the original is taken out.

[Rodent + 1,424]

1 minute ago, Jan van Eck said:

The cost to build dramatically comes down when you build them all the same. 

Where the USA went wrong was to build each plant to a unique design.  You never get economies of scale doing that. 

New design thorium reactors can be built to as small as 40 MW, built on an assembly line, you truck them to the jobsite on a trailer, drop in place, and if you need maintenance or re-fuelling then the entire plant is picked up by a crane and truck and taken back to the factory, with a spare replacement dropped in at the time the original is taken out.

yeah I remember reading somewhere that we were looking at building smaller ones. But then oil prices fell and I think many alternative energy projects were benched. 

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

6 minutes ago, Rodent said:

yeah I remember reading somewhere that we were looking at building smaller ones. But then oil prices fell and I think many alternative energy projects were benched. 

Various groups are hard at work on thorium reactors.  You may expect the first prototype to be operational within a year.  Interestingly, quite a bit of design work is going on in both Ontario and Vermont.

Where the old-style (pressure water units) went wrong was in caving in to the hysterical, who insisted (and politicians obliged) on these massive containment domes, massive redundancy components, and massive on-site police forces and entire fire departments staffed 24/7  (and never used). all of which drives up the fixed costs to astronomical levels. Faced with those cost profiles, the owners of those proposed plants simply built them as large as possible, in an effort to "spread the overhead."  So small plants never got designed nor built.

It is entirely possible to build a small nuke that is able to be moved by truck semi-trailer, and can be parked right inside a factory, for dedicated industrial power.  It would be fuelled by the left-over waste now sitting in containment canisters lying about the country.  Literally, electricity too cheap to meter.  It is right at our fingertips, right now, needs a little more push to get it up and running. 

Edited September 8, 2018 by Jan van Eck
typing error

[Rodent + 1,424]

1 minute ago, Jan van Eck said:

 It is right at our fingertips, right now, needs a little more push to get it up and running. 

higher oil prices may be that push. 

[zbest1966 + 10]

Say about 2020 oil price should get extreme, actually no one know when things will get extreme  

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

1 minute ago, Rodent said:

higher oil prices may be that push. 

I suspect that the high cost of additional transmission lines, including acquisition costs and environmental reviews, will push thorium reactors to further development.  Gas power plants remain cheap to build, go up fast, and as long as there is sufficient pipeline capacity, will be easy enough to keep running - except in winter, where homes need gas heat and get first priority (at least, in New England area). 

Ultimately, new technology eventually makes it way into the market, it is in the nature of capitalism to reward pluck and innovation.  It is what the Americans are particularly good at. 

[Dan Warnick + 6,100]

2 minutes ago, Rodent said:

higher oil prices may be that push. 

With respect, why do we hold ourselves hostage to the rise and fall of oil prices?  Jan just outlined a virtually free source of energy.  If true, and I have no reason to doubt it is, it is a source of energy that takes into account the mistakes of the past and nearly eliminates the risks.  I imagine a time (I know, please excuse my imagination) when $30 oil will be considered expensive.  Will we be ready if/when that happens?  It would appear that it is certainly possible.  I don't worry about greenies too much, at least in the long term, because ultimately they will be flushed out for the extremists they are, costing humankind everything from jobs to education, creating new famine and ensuring that our hands are tied when we need them free the most.  Imagine a time, especially in Canada, when people are freezing to death in the cities in the winter because they can't fire up their furnace, and no doubt it will be blamed on America and climate change; anything but the green movement.

Alright, let me have it.  I think I can take it.

[ceo_energemsier + 1,818]

1 hour ago, Dan Warnick said:

With respect, why do we hold ourselves hostage to the rise and fall of oil prices?  Jan just outlined a virtually free source of energy.  If true, and I have no reason to doubt it is, it is a source of energy that takes into account the mistakes of the past and nearly eliminates the risks.  I imagine a time (I know, please excuse my imagination) when $30 oil will be considered expensive.  Will we be ready if/when that happens?  It would appear that it is certainly possible.  I don't worry about greenies too much, at least in the long term, because ultimately they will be flushed out for the extremists they are, costing humankind everything from jobs to education, creating new famine and ensuring that our hands are tied when we need them free the most.  Imagine a time, especially in Canada, when people are freezing to death in the cities in the winter because they can't fire up their furnace, and no doubt it will be blamed on America and climate change; anything but the green movement.

Alright, let me have it.  I think I can take it.

There was a time in the not too far past , that 30$/35$/40$/45$/50$/55$ /bbl oil was considered expensive..... at one time  a $.25/gal gas was considered expensive. Greenies have nothing better to do than be a hindrance... ask the greenies to give up their latest techs and gadgets and toys and go back to living in caves, mud huts, and hollowed out rotten tree trunks and let them dig for maggots, grubs and roots and pick berries..... they can hug each other to keep warm and burn wild herbivores droppings for fuel... use bow and arrow to hunt food? spear a fish? let them give up all modern amenities and comforts of life including good health, advanced medicine, higher living of standards , living longer, communications-iphones, netflix, emails, text. snapchat, insta and twitter etc .... lets  see how many will do that... live a life free of and devoid from anything and everything derived from fossil fuels

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

15 hours ago, Dan Warnick said:

With respect, why do we hold ourselves hostage to the rise and fall of oil prices?  Jan just outlined a virtually free source of energy.  If true, and I have no reason to doubt it is, it is a source of energy that takes into account the mistakes of the past and nearly eliminates the risks.  I imagine a time (I know, please excuse my imagination) when $30 oil will be considered expensive.  Will we be ready if/when that happens?  It would appear that it is certainly possible.  I don't worry about greenies too much, at least in the long term, because ultimately they will be flushed out for the extremists they are, costing humankind everything from jobs to education, creating new famine and ensuring that our hands are tied when we need them free the most.  Imagine a time, especially in Canada, when people are freezing to death in the cities in the winter because they can't fire up their furnace, and no doubt it will be blamed on America and climate change; anything but the green movement.

Alright, let me have it.  I think I can take it.

The Canadians will always blame the Americans for whatever befalls them.  It is the national obsession.  Canadians are particularly gifted at not looking at themselves for responsibility.  I view that as the logical outgrowth of an Administrative State, where the vast bureaucracy controls all.  Bureaucrats can never blame themselves; to do so invites being reassigned to the Polar Regions  (bureaucrats never get fired, so there is internal exile, a concept developed by Stalin and the area East of Urals.)

Edited September 8, 2018 by Jan van Eck

[Cowpoke + 70]

19 hours ago, ceo_energemsier said:

There was a time in the not too far past , that 30$/35$/40$/45$/50$/55$ /bbl oil was considered expensive..... at one time  a $.25/gal gas was considered expensive. Greenies have nothing better to do than be a hindrance... ask the greenies to give up their latest techs and gadgets and toys and go back to living in caves, mud huts, and hollowed out rotten tree trunks and let them dig for maggots, grubs and roots and pick berries..... they can hug each other to keep warm and burn wild herbivores droppings for fuel... use bow and arrow to hunt food? spear a fish? let them give up all modern amenities and comforts of life including good health, advanced medicine, higher living of standards , living longer, communications-iphones, netflix, emails, text. snapchat, insta and twitter etc .... lets  see how many will do that... live a life free of and devoid from anything and everything derived from fossil fuels

Now some of the more delusional are proposing an ecosexual relationship with the environment:

https://www.campusreform.org/?ID=11258