HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #81  
Old Posted Jun 28, 2022, 2:04 PM
Truenorth00 Truenorth00 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2017
Posts: 24,430
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackslack View Post
Not talking fund managers. I’m talking about the Joe Biden’s, who puts thousands of his own people out of his work his very first day in office, only to beg the Saudi’s and Venezuela’s to pump more oil just months later because their economy is starving for more and more. Talk about a big fat egg on his face… Venezuela is a heavy oil blend, with higher GHGs per barrel, and Biden is drooling at their nipple for more. Why Venezuela over a secure, friendly source in Canada? ESG factor? Really?… probably helps support the message of the “ethical oil” ad in Times Square, to help inform people that the Venezuela’s and Saudi’s don’t have to be the option.
I'd say a billboard in Times Square is more likely to be aimed at bankers than politicians but sure ...

As to buying Saudi and Venezuelan oil, time frame matters. For an administration that wants to cut national oil consumption, they aren't likely to be want to tied to supply arrangements which need decades to pay off.

Lastly, the way the KXL folks handle indigenous protests, Standing Rock, etc should have been a clue that it's unlikely to be supported by a Democratic administration. Trying to force a fait accompli was a bad call.

On the broader point, again, Canadian producers can help themselves by going balls to the wall to cut emissions. I appreciate the nice dividends that I get. But I think they are morons for trying to sustain my dividend and fight back demands to cut emissions with PR. They better hope the next CPC government doesn't give them all they are lusting for, or their global reputation is going to end up on par with Newfoundlanders who club baby seals.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hackslack View Post
Nobody is discounting communities concerns. They have every right to ensure their way of life will not be negatively effected, in any way, whatsoever. There substantial negotiations and certainly massive cheques are cut, and guarantees. Guilting communities is not part of the playbook.
You can say this. But it's pretty hard to ignore the Quebec and Maritime bashing that keeps insinuating they are welfare bums. From where I sit that very much looks like an attempt to guilt them into acceptance. Either way, that pipeline will never have a business case again. It's time for oil sands producers to focus on Asia and the US and on taking concrete steps to make their product less emissions intensive instead of constantly bitching about the demand to do so.

Personally, I would actually support public investment from the feds to help the oil sands clean up and to help them diversify quickly into things like carbon fibre. But there needs to be an acceptance here to do some work.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #82  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2022, 1:40 PM
ericmacm's Avatar
ericmacm ericmacm is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: SW Ontario
Posts: 723
Pathways Alliance (oil sands operators CNRL, Cenovus, ConocoPhilips, Imperial Oil, MEG, and Suncor) are looking into building nuclear reactors to power and reduce emissions for oil sands operations. This is not a new idea - Bruce Power was attempting to build a full-scale nuclear power plant in partnership with the government of Alberta in Peace River back in 2008, until it was canned due to mass opposition. The difference this time is that there are plans to use SMRs (smaller, modular 300MW reactor units) instead of a traditional full-scale plant using the CANDU platform like in Bruce, Darlington, and Pickering. This way, it can likely be built closer to oil sands operations.

While they are still early on in the process (they are aiming for the early 2030s), the technology of choice will likely end up being the Hitachi-GE BWRX-300, the same reactor that is being pursued both by Ontario and Saskatchewan for their SMR plans. Currently, oil sands operations burn fossil fuels to generate the energy and heat necessary for extraction and processing. This approach will significantly reduce emissions during processing.

If Bruce Power Alberta ended up going ahead as planned, we would likely see it built by now. It was unfortunate that it got cancelled, but this approach will probably be better for cost than a full-scale non-modular plant. Fortunately, the public opinion has changed on nuclear energy significantly since then, due to its potential as a zero-emission energy source. Hopefully we don’t see a large amount of pushback on this.
__________________
Opinions expressed here are solely my own and do not represent those of my employer.

Come See My Work: Mississauga Future Skyline Model | Pan-Canadian Future Skylines Project - Kelowna, Saskatoon, Windsor, London, Hamilton, Niagara Falls, Barrie, Ottawa, Halifax​​​ | Astrophotography Thread
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #83  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2022, 3:43 PM
swimmer_spe swimmer_spe is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Posts: 10,738
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericmacm View Post
Pathways Alliance (oil sands operators CNRL, Cenovus, ConocoPhilips, Imperial Oil, MEG, and Suncor) are looking into building nuclear reactors to power and reduce emissions for oil sands operations. This is not a new idea - Bruce Power was attempting to build a full-scale nuclear power plant in partnership with the government of Alberta in Peace River back in 2008, until it was canned due to mass opposition. The difference this time is that there are plans to use SMRs (smaller, modular 300MW reactor units) instead of a traditional full-scale plant using the CANDU platform like in Bruce, Darlington, and Pickering. This way, it can likely be built closer to oil sands operations.

While they are still early on in the process (they are aiming for the early 2030s), the technology of choice will likely end up being the Hitachi-GE BWRX-300, the same reactor that is being pursued both by Ontario and Saskatchewan for their SMR plans. Currently, oil sands operations burn fossil fuels to generate the energy and heat necessary for extraction and processing. This approach will significantly reduce emissions during processing.

If Bruce Power Alberta ended up going ahead as planned, we would likely see it built by now. It was unfortunate that it got cancelled, but this approach will probably be better for cost than a full-scale non-modular plant. Fortunately, the public opinion has changed on nuclear energy significantly since then, due to its potential as a zero-emission energy source. Hopefully we don’t see a large amount of pushback on this.
You know we are nearing the end of our oil addiction when oil companies are building nuclear power plants.....
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #84  
Old Posted Jul 18, 2022, 5:03 PM
casper casper is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Victoria
Posts: 9,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by ericmacm View Post
Pathways Alliance (oil sands operators CNRL, Cenovus, ConocoPhilips, Imperial Oil, MEG, and Suncor) are looking into building nuclear reactors to power and reduce emissions for oil sands operations. This is not a new idea - Bruce Power was attempting to build a full-scale nuclear power plant in partnership with the government of Alberta in Peace River back in 2008, until it was canned due to mass opposition. The difference this time is that there are plans to use SMRs (smaller, modular 300MW reactor units) instead of a traditional full-scale plant using the CANDU platform like in Bruce, Darlington, and Pickering. This way, it can likely be built closer to oil sands operations.

While they are still early on in the process (they are aiming for the early 2030s), the technology of choice will likely end up being the Hitachi-GE BWRX-300, the same reactor that is being pursued both by Ontario and Saskatchewan for their SMR plans. Currently, oil sands operations burn fossil fuels to generate the energy and heat necessary for extraction and processing. This approach will significantly reduce emissions during processing.

If Bruce Power Alberta ended up going ahead as planned, we would likely see it built by now. It was unfortunate that it got cancelled, but this approach will probably be better for cost than a full-scale non-modular plant. Fortunately, the public opinion has changed on nuclear energy significantly since then, due to its potential as a zero-emission energy source. Hopefully we don’t see a large amount of pushback on this.
The CANDU 6 uses modular construction techniques. The last ones built by AECL were in Shanghai (and I was still working for AECL at the time). That is a long time ago. For an industrial project coming in under budget and on time was impressive. Not certain how much of that is to be credited to AECL and how much of it to being a project in China. That said, give how long it has been since AECL (now SNC Lavalin - CANDU) built one from the ground up, not certain its the best option today.

These new Hitachi reactors designs are significantly more modular. I have not looked to closely at the design. Hitachi has a long history with AECL, as balance of plant supplier for some of the reactors sold in Asia. Balance of plant is the non-nuclear power generating systems.

For the CANDU 6 (and likely for other reactors) the key advantage is thermal output is significantly higher than electrical output. There is significant waste heat that could be recovered and used for oil sand operations. I would expert the reactor pays for itself from the electrical sales and the waste heat for the oil sands operation is simply a bonus.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #85  
Old Posted Sep 18, 2022, 11:59 PM
Loco101's Avatar
Loco101 Loco101 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Location: Timmins, Northern Ontario
Posts: 7,705
I rarely post anything about oil but here is an article that's partly about Timmins ON and the bad roads here and it involved oil from the oil sands.

Climate change is worsening Canadian roads, but Alberta oil may be the answer

Bright future could see an oil industry that hasn’t been left for dead by electrification, but pivoted to a new calling: building roads


https://driving.ca/auto-news/local-c...Qisqu_jS9g1BG0
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:36 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.