$300 oil, very soon?

[ASH]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

Thousands of nuclear plants can be built in the USA in under 5 years, no problem at all.

What are you basing that on?

[BiscayneSunrise]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

What are you basing that on?

Technologically it is possible with enough political will and urgency but given the current political and bureaucratic obstacles in the US, you'd be lucky to just get a permit it 5 years.

[ASH]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

Technologically it is possible with enough political will and urgency but given the current political and bureaucratic obstacles in the US, you'd be lucky to just get a permit it 5 years.

I'm not so sure that it is technologically or industrially possible. I think there is a manpower problem -- not enough trained nuclear engineers to oversee that many simultaneous projects, nor operate that many plants. I also wonder about the availability of key materials and how fast we could really ramp up the fuel chain. If nothing else, that type of rapid expansion would put you in a very uncomfortable place on the pricing curve for the required labor and specialty materials.

[GRG55]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

Replacement of oil as the primary energy source can take place anytime.

Thousands of nuclear plants can be built in the USA in under 5 years, no problem at all.

China builds entire cities in a few years.

Alternatives will be created the momement they are required to be created. It is very simple actually.

The current argument is more about if it is prudent to plan ahead and invest in alternatives to oil as a society or just wait until the last minute and then crash and burn.

I bet you'll have time after lunch to bring us eternal world peace...:rolleyes:

[Guest]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

I bet you'll have time after lunch to bring us eternal world peace...:rolleyes:

Anyone who can take on such a mammoth project without even breaking a sweat is an awesome achiever and your skepticism is taking the wind out of the sails here GRG55. What we evidently lack here GRG55, is merely the will to overcome this 1000 nuclear plant obstacle. The World Peace after Lunch bit may be asking a bit much, but thousands of nuclear power plants in the US in five years? That is merely a matter of vision. There are those that have the vision, and then those that don't have the vision. It's a vision thing, see? Why do you have to be so pedestrian? (jeez everybody better get long cement, pronto! :eek

Replacement of oil as the primary energy source can take place anytime. Thousands of nuclear plants can be built in the USA in under 5 years, no problem at all. Alternatives will be created the momement they are required to be created. It is very simple actually.

[LargoWinch]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

Thousands of nuclear plants can be built in the USA in under 5 years, no problem at all.

Uno, I suggest you reconsider this comment or provide solid evidence of this being possible.

Speaking from experience, the Darlington Nuclear plant in Canada (Ontario) has been extremely difficult to push through red tape.

http://news.google.ca/news/url?sa=t&...x%3Fid%3D24762

Nuclear energy is incredibly complex, incredibly regulated and insanely monitored by the media and the public.

[GRG55]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

Anyone who can take on such a mammoth project without even breaking a sweat is an awesome achiever and your skepticism is taking the wind out of the sails here GRG55. What we evidently lack here GRG55, is merely the will to overcome this 1000 nuclear plant obstacle. The World Peace after Lunch bit may be asking a bit much, but thousands of nuclear power plants in the US in five years? That is merely a matter of vision. There are those that have the vision, and then those that don't have the vision. It's a vision thing, see? Why do you have to be so pedestrian? (jeez everybody better get long cement, pronto! :eek

No sweat Lukester. They can probably put 5 or 6 of them in San Diego. After all, we have it on good authority the place sucks...

Only 995 more locations to go [maybe metalman will step up and take a couple for his neighbourhood]. Labour won't be a problem. All those out of work housing contractors, with years of experience stapling plywood onto 2x4's should do a great job assembling reactors.

Once we have all that cheap power all we need to do is replace the entire auto fleet [hey, there's a new strategy to bail out GM], and upgrade the transmission system to handle the load.

Yep, simple it be

[c1ue]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

More Obama-in-the-sky talk from the Unobomber.

It would take 5 years just to train up and certify the construction workers to build a half dozen plants.

The skills and work force from the 70s is long since dispersed and/or dead.

You can't take Joe Plumber to build a nuke plant, nor can you take semi-skilled illegal labor.

Even finding sites for 1000 nuclear power plants is non-trivial. Then there are the extensions necessary to hook up the sites with the water/isolation requirements with the existing power grid.

But maybe the Obamessiah can wave his magic wand and do a 'miracle of the loaves and fishes' with multi-billion dollar construction projects.

[flintlock]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

Then again, who could have imagined manufacturing output in WWII, from practically nothing to this in 5 years. And yes I know its not the same as building a nuke plant.


System Allies Axis
Tanks and SP guns 227,235 52,345
Artillery 914,682 180,141
Mortars 657,318 100,000+
Machineguns 4,744,484 1,058,863
Military trucks 3,060,354 594,859
Military aircraft total 633,072 278,795
Fighter aircraft 212,459 90,684
Attack aircraft 37,549 12,539
Bomber aircraft 153,615 35,415
Reconnaissance aircraft 7,885 13,033
Transport aircraft 43,045 5,657
Training aircraft 93,578 28,516
Aircraft carriers 155 16
Battleships 13 7
Cruisers 82 15
Destroyers 814 86
Convoy escorts 1,102 -
Submarines 422 1,336
Merchant shipping tonnage 33,993,230 5,000,000+
Pillboxes, bunkers (steel, concrete
- uk only - 72,128,141 tonnes
Estimate Concrete runways 10,000,000 tonnes

[BiscayneSunrise]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

You are correct. I was a bit facile when I said it would be 'easy'. it would require tremendous effort in terms of manpower, and strain on the industrial infrastructure something along the lines of a WW2. What I meant by easy was really to point out the difference between technical know how vs. political will.

[LargoWinch]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

Was it not partly due to the women giving a hand?

Unfortunately, they are now busy performing their civic duty i.e. shopping, while their husbands are busy setting up the home theater and buying new tire for the SUV...

Maybe China can build them for us? Now that is an idea!

[santafe2]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

History is on oil's side. Displacing it will take generations, regardless of how much money gets thrown at the alternatives.

This made me stop and think about how much of an off-set my 5 years in the solar business have contributed. It's not a direct off-set because very little electricity is produced with oil. But here's how I broke it down:

I've sold between 35,000 and 40,000 solar panels in 5 years and these averaged 190 watts each. I'm assuming all of these panels are still in operation. Given their average installation latitude of 37 degrees they are producing about 29 MWh a day of energy or a barrel of oil equivalent, (BOE), of 17.

Another way of looking at this is that one average solar panel off-sets the energy equivalent of 2.5 oz of crude every day it's in operation, (more in summer and less in winter). If we really do move to electric vehicles, it will begin to make a difference but your point is well taken, it will take a long time.

[Starving Steve]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

The fact that planning for and building atomic power plants would be very labour intensive is fine. We want jobs now. We don't want helicopter drops (of counterfeit money) from the Fed, but we DO want jobs.

Spending money on infrastructure that produces long-run economic benefit is not inflationary.

[Roughneck]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

Thousands of nuclear plants can be built in the USA in under 5 years, no problem at all.

No way. The lead time on a nuke plant is about ten years. There are only a few firms that have the resources and build nuclear plants. So even if you cut the regulatory time in half you would struggle to build 100 in ten years.

[Starving Steve]

Re: $300 oil, very soon?

In rough figures, ONE typical American nuclear power plant provides enough electricity each day to supply the needs of 740,000 homes, twenty-four hours per day. There are no cloudy days. There are no rainy days. There are no winter days. That is: 740,000 homes electrified regardless of season, weather, leaves, trees, fading, scratches, positioning, dust, snow, or whatever.

Every megawatt counts just as every penny counts at the bank, so I don't oppose any energy source. But there are powerful sources of energy, and there are weak sources of energy. Unfortunately, the sun is a very weak source of energy because the sun's energy is dispersed over the entire Earth. Solar power yields a maximum of just two calaries per square centimetre per minute.

For more info on atomic power, go to the Nuclear Energy Institute: www.nei.org or contact Dr. Bill Wattenburg at the University of California, Berkeley or thru Dr. Bill Wattenburg at KGO Radio in San Francisco. Or go to Dr. Bill's web site at www.pushback.com .

I am sick of starving, and maybe you are getting sick of starving too. Let's get organized and push-back.