Yeah, this was taken in July.Edmonton was hit by some awesome electrical storms this year. Look in my flickr profile to check more local photos of storms.
Tar sands are not profitable at all! Canadians will believe anything.The Canadian tar sands are an extensive deposit of oil-rich bitumen (another word for tar) located in northern Alberta, Canada, with some extensions into adjacent Saskatchewan.The largest deposit in Alberta is called the Athabasca tar sands, and there are two other smaller bodies known as the Peace River and Cold Lake deposits. Together, these tar sand deposits cover about 140,000 square kilometers (about 54,000 square miles, or an area about the size of Florida).You have to, as the expression goes, “add energy” to make bitumen flow and to extract the product. Add energy? And a whole lot more.One of the most important characteristics of the above-described Athabasca deposit is that it is the only one shallow enough to be suitable for surface mining. That is, about 10% of the Athabasca sands are covered with less than 75 meters (about 250 feet) of overburden.Even under the best and most optimistic of scenarios, Canadian tar sands might yield about 3 million barrels per day (bpd) of product by 2025, or about 2.5% of forecast world demand of 120 million bpd by the International Energy Agency (IEA).Production of “oil” from the tar sands is a very energy-intensive process. Production estimates for 2025 are that the energy input will require between 1.6-2.3 billion cubic feet (bcf) of natural gas per day, approximately equal to the planned maximum capacity of the proposed Mackenzie Valley gas pipeline (1.9 bcf/d) out of northern Canada, or about one-fifth of anticipated daily Canadian gas production.Another limitation on tar sands expansion is that processing capacity is limited by water supply. Much water is already being recycled using current technology, but current production techniques require 1-2 barrels of “makeup” water per barrel of product.Assuming that there will be sufficient energy and water to utilize in tar sands operations, any expansion of bitumen export capacity from Alberta may be limited by projected shortfalls of what is called “diluent.”Begin with the fact that bitumen is thick, heavy, and viscous. It will not flow, and cannot be moved through a pipeline unless it is diluted with a lighter medium, or diluent. The best types of diluents are natural gas condensates, but these are becoming rapidly scarce due to depletion of gas reserves.As if the shortage of diluent were not enough, the existing pipeline system in the Alberta region is inadequate to support the anticipated exports of bitumen, let alone the possible imports of significant quantities of diluent. Thus, the region will require new pipeline capacity of about 1 million barrels per day. Petro-Canada, for example, has put its Fort Hills project on hold until 2008 due to cost estimates ballooning to the range of $19 billion, or over $130,000 per barrel per day of capacity. Shell Canada has also scaled back expansion plans due to cost estimates more than doubling.So in summary, critical issues for the development of the Canadian tar sands include large and growing capital costs, lengthy time to build, constraints on natural gas and water supplies, the need for large volumes of pipeline diluents, Canadian domestic and international politics, and environmental degradation coupled with growing NIMBYism in Canada toward becoming strip mine to the world.Public perception in many quarters is that the Canadian tar sands will be fueling the U.S. automobile fleet from I-5 to I-95 for centuries to come. I cannot explain that, but the perception simply does not match the reality of what is going on out in the field.
Alberta had a $8.7 Billion budget surplus in 2006, mostly due to energy cash.$4.2 Billion surplus reported for 2007 and it is estimated $1.2 Billion for 2008. We also get royalties from the oil companies. Seems profitable, or those oil companies wouldn't be working the sands right?
insearchoftruthOct 27, 2008
"SUBCREATURES! GOZER THE GOZERIAN, GOZER THE DESTRUCTOR, VOLGUUS ZILDROHAR, THE TRAVELLER HAS COME. CHOOSE AND PERISH..."
dredpir8robrtsOct 27, 2008
Your face is a s**thole.
atptOct 28, 2008
Thanks Man.This is my image, I took it from my balcony in July.Thanks again for making me popular :)
atptOct 28, 2008
Yes, that's the wall of the building.
atptOct 28, 2008
Yeah, this was taken in July.Edmonton was hit by some awesome electrical storms this year. Look in my flickr profile to check more local photos of storms.
Closed AccountOct 28, 2008
Tar sands are not profitable at all! Canadians will believe anything.The Canadian tar sands are an extensive deposit of oil-rich bitumen (another word for tar) located in northern Alberta, Canada, with some extensions into adjacent Saskatchewan.The largest deposit in Alberta is called the Athabasca tar sands, and there are two other smaller bodies known as the Peace River and Cold Lake deposits. Together, these tar sand deposits cover about 140,000 square kilometers (about 54,000 square miles, or an area about the size of Florida).You have to, as the expression goes, “add energy” to make bitumen flow and to extract the product. Add energy? And a whole lot more.One of the most important characteristics of the above-described Athabasca deposit is that it is the only one shallow enough to be suitable for surface mining. That is, about 10% of the Athabasca sands are covered with less than 75 meters (about 250 feet) of overburden.Even under the best and most optimistic of scenarios, Canadian tar sands might yield about 3 million barrels per day (bpd) of product by 2025, or about 2.5% of forecast world demand of 120 million bpd by the International Energy Agency (IEA).Production of “oil” from the tar sands is a very energy-intensive process. Production estimates for 2025 are that the energy input will require between 1.6-2.3 billion cubic feet (bcf) of natural gas per day, approximately equal to the planned maximum capacity of the proposed Mackenzie Valley gas pipeline (1.9 bcf/d) out of northern Canada, or about one-fifth of anticipated daily Canadian gas production.Another limitation on tar sands expansion is that processing capacity is limited by water supply. Much water is already being recycled using current technology, but current production techniques require 1-2 barrels of “makeup” water per barrel of product.Assuming that there will be sufficient energy and water to utilize in tar sands operations, any expansion of bitumen export capacity from Alberta may be limited by projected shortfalls of what is called “diluent.”Begin with the fact that bitumen is thick, heavy, and viscous. It will not flow, and cannot be moved through a pipeline unless it is diluted with a lighter medium, or diluent. The best types of diluents are natural gas condensates, but these are becoming rapidly scarce due to depletion of gas reserves.As if the shortage of diluent were not enough, the existing pipeline system in the Alberta region is inadequate to support the anticipated exports of bitumen, let alone the possible imports of significant quantities of diluent. Thus, the region will require new pipeline capacity of about 1 million barrels per day. Petro-Canada, for example, has put its Fort Hills project on hold until 2008 due to cost estimates ballooning to the range of $19 billion, or over $130,000 per barrel per day of capacity. Shell Canada has also scaled back expansion plans due to cost estimates more than doubling.So in summary, critical issues for the development of the Canadian tar sands include large and growing capital costs, lengthy time to build, constraints on natural gas and water supplies, the need for large volumes of pipeline diluents, Canadian domestic and international politics, and environmental degradation coupled with growing NIMBYism in Canada toward becoming strip mine to the world.Public perception in many quarters is that the Canadian tar sands will be fueling the U.S. automobile fleet from I-5 to I-95 for centuries to come. I cannot explain that, but the perception simply does not match the reality of what is going on out in the field.
banderwockyOct 29, 2008
Alberta had a $8.7 Billion budget surplus in 2006, mostly due to energy cash.$4.2 Billion surplus reported for 2007 and it is estimated $1.2 Billion for 2008. We also get royalties from the oil companies. Seems profitable, or those oil companies wouldn't be working the sands right?