Solution to looming US oil shortage

[Zeno]

At least one year ago (or was it two years ago?) in this very forum, I advocated the US take over Canada. This is old stuff, and as Andy pointed out a dusty American dream.

-Zeno

[Il_Mostro]

[ QUOTE ]
[Shale is] the fuel of the future. Always has been. Always will be.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, no, no, now you are taking about fusion [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[CORed]

Seriously, I don't think merging with Canada (with their consent) would be a horrible idea. We have a common language (except Quebec) and heritage. However, I don't get the feeling that most Canadians like the idea very much, so i don't see it happening any time soon.

[cadillac1234]

[ QUOTE ]
Because we have to bring the benefits of our system of government to Canada. Canada's evil parliamentary system, which eliminates the essential separation of powers between the executive and legislative branch, is a threat to all of civilization. We must invade, and convert them to the correct form of government, with an independant executive and bicameral legislature before they destroy civilization. This makes almost as much sense as Bush's justification for the war in Iraq.

[/ QUOTE ]

The Canadians have also amassed 90% of their population within 100 miles of the US border so we must strike soon to prevent a possible invasion.

Their warped ideas of socialized medicine are undesirable in the family-friendly neighborhood we've created here.

[CORed]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[Shale is] the fuel of the future. Always has been. Always will be.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, no, no, now you are taking about fusion [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

[/ QUOTE ]

I think fusion has a better chance than oil shale. We already have working fusion reactors (stars). The trouble is, nobody's found a good way to scale them down yet.

[PokerMatt]

Relying on shale oil and oil sands as a cheap, viable alternative to replace crude oil is a pipe dream. The return on investment with oil sands is about 1.5; in other words it costs 2 units of energy to extract 3 units of energy. Oil shale is worse. So far, all attempts to get this "oil" (it's not really crude oil but a solid organic material called Kerogen) have failed economically.

By comparison, Mideast crude's ROEI (return on energy invested) is about 30, or about 20 times better than oil sands. It will require fundamental leaps in technology to make either of these viable as a cheap alternative.