Does Russia and Canada have any incentive to stop global warming?

[tripp]

Jayman,

Do ye know what percentage of that 24% increase is attributable to Alberta Oil Sands production/development?

[jayman]

Trying to get a straight answer from Syncrude is all but impossible. It's estimated that Syncrude contributes 4% of Canada's total GHG emissions. Here is their official stuff

Syncrude Sustainable Development Annual Report 2003 - Air

An environmental watchdog group has ranked Syncrude for toxic emissions

Company Profile

The Carbon Disclosure Project didn't get too far with them

Carbon Disclosure Project: Online response

Various tar sands watchdog groups are far more concerned about Syncrude's consumption of natural gas, which will probably leave Canadians short. Under NAFTA, Canada really can't break out of it

I would be far more concerned about Syncrude toxic emissions, such as polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, sulfur (Sulfur dioxide), heavy metals, and naphthenic acid. Naphtha is used to enhance oil liberation from the ore, the wash cycle introduces naphthenic acid into the environment.

Currently, the "best practise" to deal with the sludge is to permanently store it in giant retention "ponds." They are not ponds, rather giant lakes, easily seen from orbit.

The various watchdog groups have brought all of this up before

Tar Sands Watch

Of course, the various tar sands proponents would have you believe that nothing but Wholesome Goodness (tm) results from synthetic crude extraction

[tripp]

Aye, the toxic nature of it is pretty heinous. It also consumes and immense amount of water, no?

Isn't Naptha also a primitive form of petrol? I seem to recall last year a tank of naptha exploding at an Oklahoma refinery.

[Zythryn]

Originally Posted by burritos

Okay. I saw this in the movie "The Day After". Is this the scientific consensus on what is going to happen?

Certainly not. The day after movie is just that, a movie.
If you add enough fresh water to the main ocean current that current can break down.
The current fluxuates from year to year. However, a complete breakdown is thought to be what caused the 'little ice age'.
There won't be any storms such as you saw in 'The day after' with extreme temperature changes. However, it is expected that, if the current fell apart, there would be dramatic changes in climate for the western part of North America and Europe (Britian especially).

Here is a link for some information on the topic: http://news.mongabay.com/2006/0105-scripps.html

[jayman]

Originally Posted by tripp

Aye, the toxic nature of it is pretty heinous.

The little birdies thought so

Hundreds of ducks dead or dying after landing on Syncrude tailings pond (Alta-Oilsands-Birds) | Oilweek Magazine

Syncrude issued an apology, great

Syncrude Canada Ltd. - News Room

Originally Posted by tripp

It also consumes and immense amount of water, no?

Yes

Oilsands activity threatens water supply: study | Energy Bulletin

Oil boom puts stress on water supply

They claim to be making progress

Syncrude Canada Ltd. - Research & Development Programs

Originally Posted by tripp

Isn't Naptha also a primitive form of petrol? I seem to recall last year a tank of naptha exploding at an Oklahoma refinery.

I'm pretty sure I covered this in my discussion of oil refineries. Naphtha is primarily derived from the upper stage aromatics in the Crude Distillation Unit.

You require a source of naphtha, either from a conventional crude refinery or from an upgrader plant in-situ, to get the naphtha. Another example of robbing Peter to pay Paul

Naphtha processing can be dangerous, due to the explosive nature of the vapors in hydrotreating and condensation. Actually most parts of an oil refinery have the potential to go kaboom, especially during a process upset

Hence the need for a flare gas header system. When a process upset happens, the theory is that the excess gases like naphtha and hydrogen can be quickly flared off.

[jayman]

Originally Posted by Zythryn

Certainly not. The day after movie is just that, a movie.

I remember they mentioned some ungodly low number as the freezing point of military jet fuel, JP-8, something like minus 100 something or another.

Actually, JP-8 has a rated freeze of -47 C. JP-8 is universally used by the military to replace many different grades of turbine fuel and diesel fuel, to aide logistics.

As an example, for cold weather operation they used to use a diesel fuel called DFA (Diesel Fuel - Arctic), now JP-8 is used

[tripp]

except generators. We used mogas in our generators on M577s. If you put JP-8 in you got yourself a nice smoke generator. Not so good if you don't want to be noticed, however. A 577 already has enough antennas on it, the last thing you need another attention getter.

[jayman]

Originally Posted by tripp

except generators. We used mogas in our generators on M577s.

I've never understood the M577 TOC. It has a Detroit Diesel to move the thing, but a mogas APU to run the electronics. IMHO that is a tactical and logistic boo-boo. Why not have a diesel APU and run everything off the same fuel tank??

[tripp]

that's the same thing we thought. Never liked the 577. Roomy, yes. But top heavy and gutless. The thing had a rated top speed of 45 km/h, I think, it could only do that falling down a mineshaft. You can run the electronics off of the main engine, but there are obvious draw backs to that. We did it all the time because mogas was often hard to come by in training.

It was a lot more comfortable than the M981 and the M3, which are the other two vehicles I had experience in.

[jayman]

Overall I'm not that crazy about tracked vehicles anyway. They have a purpose, but not my favorite ride