The shale extraction methods sure have changed from early proposals, I remember an old issue of National Geographic (February 1981, energy special) with an article on shale oil, complete with a artist's conception of a massive underground mine complete with man-made caverns where the ore would be pyrolysed to yield oil.
Most large oil sands operations in northern Alberta are strip mines using truck and shovel operation, with some of the largest haul trucks in the world. When Syncrude opened the first mine up there in the late 1970s they initially used draglines, bucket-wheel excavators and conveyor belts, but this system proved be a maintenance headache in the -40°C temperatures the area enjoys every winter. Plus any minor breakdown would disable a whole production train, wheras losing one truck or shovel does not make much difference.
More recently some projects have been built using a technology where steam is injected into the orebody to thin the oil underground:
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam-assisted_gravity_drainage
Production costs have consistently been dropping over the years, and even after the past few years of lower oil prices Teck Resources is continuing to move forward with their proposal for a new $20 billion mine northwest of Fort McMurray.
Greetings from Alberta
-an Articulate Malcontent
The tar sands are quite different from oil shale. The differences in extraction methods make the point. The petroleum in oil shale is extracted by hydraulic fracturing while the tar sands are extracted by methods similar to strip mining.
Are tar sands the same as shale oil? I remember a lot of buzz about Alberta shale oil in the 1970's with research trying to make extraction/refinement economically viable.
Was even a Great Lakes freighter that ran on fuel derived from it for a trip back then as a test for the US Navy, although I don't know if the fuel she burned actually originated from up north.
Ended up not economically viable back then.
Bitumen does indeed need to be diluted or heated to flow efficiently. The "dilbit" moved in pipelines is normally at least 30% diluent, while the "railbit" commonly found in tank cars requires around 17% diluent.
Raw bitumen (no diluent) can also be transported in tank cars but must be heated to be loaded or unloaded, much like molten sulphur. Tank cars in these services normally feature internal steam coils for heating the load.
Some studies have suggested that unit trains of raw bitumen are more cost effective than diluting the stuff and putting it in a pipeline, due to the costs of handling the diluent and shipping it back to the oilfield.
I have no idea how Canapux's costs compare to pipelines or tank cars so far.
Here is a link to information on the CN CanaPux technology:
https://www.cninnovation.ca/
Unknown to me. It is something I read about on the CN web site a few months back. I would expect they would be making those economic calculations on all those critical costs that you point out. It was my understanding that it would only make sense with oil coming from the tar sands because it was already such a thick consistency.
kgbw49 I also understand they are trying to develop a process that converts the Alberta tar sands oil to solid pucks for transportation in gondola cars similar to transporting coal. They won’t ignite in a derailment and if they spill into a waterway they actually float and so can be skimmed up. Interesting concept.
I also understand they are trying to develop a process that converts the Alberta tar sands oil to solid pucks for transportation in gondola cars similar to transporting coal. They won’t ignite in a derailment and if they spill into a waterway they actually float and so can be skimmed up. Interesting concept.
Well played, rdamon! Well played indeed!
:-D
If it is winter and the waterway is frozen, you can play hockey until Hulcher shows up ;)
Read an article stating CN signed a long term contract with oil producers so they can plan expansion of capacity between Winnepeg and ? . That will enable them to order locos, track work, hire additional crews etc.
CHICAGO — GE Transportation announced today that Canadian National has ordered 60 more locomotives, adding to an order of 200 placed in December 2017. The units will be built at GE Transportation’s Fort Worth, Texas, plant. They will meet...
http://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2018/09/05-cn-orders-60-locomotives-from-ge
Brian Schmidt, Editor, Classic Trains magazine
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.