Re: Oil Shale?
- From: "bill" <ford_prefect42@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: 26 May 2006 13:12:01 -0700
Pooh Bear wrote:
dezakin@xxxxxxx wrote:
Alex Terrell wrote:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_Nimitz_(CVN-68)
The Nimitz, which makes the Titanic look like a dinghy, has 194MW of
nuclear propulsion.
For tar sands, some work has been done in using nulcear power and GWs
are needed for any descent amount.
I wonder if you could use cogeneration of heat and electricity to make
the economics come out rosier.
The 'waste' heat is quite low temperature. That's the problem there.
I think he meant the other way, use the primary heat for tar sand
extraction and the cogeneration to recover the waste heat from that
process.
.
- References:
- Oil Shale?
- From: BobG
- Re: Oil Shale?
- From: Pooh Bear
- Re: Oil Shale?
- From: BobG
- Re: Oil Shale?
- From: Pooh Bear
- Re: Oil Shale?
- From: Alex Terrell
- Re: Oil Shale?
- From: dezakin
- Re: Oil Shale?
- From: Pooh Bear
- Oil Shale?
- Prev by Date: Re: Gasoline grade BTUs per gallon?
- Next by Date: Re: Oil Shale?
- Previous by thread: Re: Oil Shale?
- Next by thread: Re: Oil Shale?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
