BP's "giant oil discovery"

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: Trvlr500
They can't even build roads without oil.


they can build concrete pavements or unsealed roads
34.gif
 
Concrete isn't what I'd call an energy light product. Even crushing stone tends to foul that notion. It does give you more bang for the energy $$, imo. Asphalt is a fine waste product. You've got to do something with it.
 
Originally Posted By: PandaBear
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Quote:
You will never get 100% perfect efficiency in a market economy with spikes here and there.

You can't get 100% perfect efficiency under any circumstances.


Then why are you attack wastefulness due to spikes?

It's about minimizing those spikes. Shannow has admitted that moving his industry closer to free market principles has cut operating costs in half.
 
At 2% reduction in thermal efficiency (5% greater coal consumption).

Coal is still 80+ percent of the equation, and that didn't come down a cent.
 
As an engineer I'm sure you are familiar with the concept of diminishing returns?

Would it be possible to build a coal plant with say...75% efficiency? What would it cost?
 
Last edited:
tempest, that's with the existing plant.

Can and could build 50% efficient stuff, but the new plants are all either low 30s cheap and nasty, or efficient units run with low efficiency by cutting heaters, or running bypass.

Coal plant costs are around $2,000/Kw, and can save maybe 20% of that in capital costs by burning 30% more coal every day.

Then there's this gem, that was literally ready for the scrap heap, and picked up for a song (but they sold it with an attached, free coal mine, with fuel costs only being the extraction cost, rather than any market cost)

http://www.smh.com.au/business/hazelwood-powers-a-40-profit-surge-20100315-q9lw.html
 
Quote:
The profit comes shortly before the Senate is due to debate again the federal government's carbon pollution reduction scheme, having twice rejected the bill.

The owners of the most carbon-heavy power stations claim the proposed scheme will force write-downs in what are now highly profitable assets, threatening future investment.

Quote:
The federal government last year more than doubled help to power plant owners, but International Power said the support would cover only a third of the $10 billion loss to the generation sector. The company has proposed shutting down high-polluting stations such as Hazelwood in return for more generous compensation.

And you say that you have a free electrical market? There are HUGE distortions in that one article.
 
The greenhouse gas concessions aren't in yet, as the carbon trading is yet to be discussed again.

Whats referred to is the assistance that they'll get WHEN there's a trading scheme, not what they (don't) get now.
 
It's called uncertainty. They have no idea what the economic landscape will be after the regulators get done with it. This is a major distortion of the market, as is carbon trading.
 
So it was a distorting fact a few minutes ago, and uncertainty now distoring the market, at huge profitability for the worst first world polluter, who will only be getting back 1/3 of his (possible) costs in the future...

ROFL.
 
The rig that drilled this big find in 2009 is the same rig that had the blowout.

Deepwater Horizon.

I wonder if the previous big find is yet in production stage.

I have been following the Thunder Horse and its production has never really reached what was thought to be its potential.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top