[Vision2020] the energy cost of oil sands

[Ted Moffett]

Mark et. al.

The irony!

As some promote nuclear power to substitute for CO2 emitting fossil fuel
energy, we read this suggestion to use nuclear power to assist in fossil
fuel development and use, and thus facilitate increased CO2 emissions...

We hear the skeptics about human induced global warming talk about the
uncertainties of climate science, questioning the necessity of taking
dramatic action to reduce CO2 emissions.  Of course, if the Earth's climate
was being considered for an insurance policy against damages, and there was
a 50% chance of the estimates of damage from human induced global warming
predicted by the IPCC coming true, no insurance company would offer
protection, or the price would be astronomical.

This website below at first struck me as a extremist and unscientific
analysis of the threat of human induced global warming, but after careful
reading, it now seems like a warning from the point of view of a worst case,
though possible, scenario, backed mostly by credible climate science.  There
is a section on the damage to the insurance industry from severe climate
change:

http://www.planetextinction.com

------
Ted Moffett


On 5/4/07, Mark Solomon <msolomon at moscow.com> wrote:
>
>  Extracting the oil from the bitumen is so energy intensive that nuclear
> plants may be built to power the refineries.
>
> http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=24103fc4-5c
> c5-4161-894c-de070a035c77&k=98326
>
> m.
>
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20070506/d02ee87c/attachment.html