• Please use real names.

    Greetings to all who have registered to OPF and those guests taking a look around. Please use real names. Registrations with fictitious names will not be processed. REAL NAMES ONLY will be processed

    Firstname Lastname

    Register

    We are a courteous and supportive community. No need to hide behind an alia. If you have a genuine need for privacy/secrecy then let me know!
  • Welcome to the new site. Here's a thread about the update where you can post your feedback, ask questions or spot those nasty bugs!

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Yes, James,

Tech Valley appears to be well above the polluting practices of other strip mines in Canada.

There are still a good number of massive Canadian mines that cause great angst for environmentalists for water contamination risks and closing down and dumping perpetual remediation costs on communities.

However, this company you show seems to have done well for Canada, except exporting the ore to China means we have to buy it back!

Asher
 

James Lemon

Well-known member
Yes, James,

Tech Valley appears to be well above the polluting practices of other strip mines in Canada.

There are still a good number of massive Canadian mines that cause great angst for environmentalists for water contamination risks and closing down and dumping perpetual remediation costs on communities.

However, this company you show seems to have done well for Canada, except exporting the ore to China means we have to buy it back!

Asher

Imagine what happens when one of those dams breaks ? I does happen and is an environmental catastrophe.
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Imagine what happens when one of those dams breaks ? I does happen and is an environmental catastrophe.
What the country needs to do is add the costs of safety and reclamation to the price of the ore to China. Their margins of profit are high at the expense of Canada!
 

James Lemon

Well-known member
What the country needs to do is add the costs of safety and reclamation to the price of the ore to China. Their margins of profit are high at the expense of Canada!
Depending on the price of HFO (heavy fuel oil) that is needed to schlep the raw materials across the ocean for a minimal cost savings on labor. We need shorter supply chains and more localized economies. We need to trade for things that we don't have such as cotton, coffee beans, kiwi fruit and other goods. The global economy can only function on cheap oil.
 
Last edited:

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
Depending on the price of HFO (heavy fuel oil) that is needed to schlep the raw materials across the ocean for a minimal cost savings on labor. We need shorter supply chains and more localized economies. We need to trade for things that we don't have such as cotton, coffee beans, kiwi fruit and other goods. The global economy can only function on cheap oil.
Is there a compelling reason why Canada and the USA can’t have efficient refining?

At present we send cheap raw materials to China and buy it back 6-13 months later in sheets, bars and pipes while we could be smarter and do it all here, using the shipping cost to offset higher labor in N America. But surely with modern technology, we could use 24/7 robots too!
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
[BTW, in the fields, the drone try of the pipes and pumps against the landscape, or silhouettes of workers would be treasures.

A book would sell!

Asher]
 

James Lemon

Well-known member
Is there a compelling reason why Canada and the USA can’t have efficient refining?

At present we send cheap raw materials to China and buy it back 6-13 months later in sheets, bars and pipes while we could be smarter and do it all here, using the shipping cost to offset higher labor in N America. But surely with modern technology, we could use 24/7 robots too!

Oh yes the world is changing rapidly as the stock markets and Central Bankers wake up and adjust to this new era that we are in. Samsung will be building a semi conductor plant in Texas over the next three years at a cost of 17 billion. Intel is building one in Ohio as well many projects on the horizon in this space. The U.S recently opened its first Silicon Carbide Chip plant in New York.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/intel-plans-new-chip-manufacturing-site-ohio-report-2022-01-21/

https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Te...-major-silicon-carbide-chip-plant-in-New-York

https://www.electronicdesign.com/te...-build-17-billion-chip-plant-in-texas-by-2024
 
Last edited:
The typical 1,000 megawatt coal or nuclear plant might sit on a few acres. To generate the same amount of electricity with renewables would require 60,000 acres for a utility-scale wind farm, or about 11,000 acres of photovoltaic cells capturing the sun's light. Digging up more earth to make more solar panels is not a good path. Coal provides half our electricity today. Wind and solar provide less than 1 percent. Where to you plan on getting the rest of your material from? The solar panel industry will sink under the weight of its own trash. Some governments may even regulate it as hazardous waist.
The coal mine and uranium mines to get fuel for those plants take up a bit of space, usually more than a few acres, however, yes they take up overall less area than solar would. That said, you can install solar on roofs, so dual using the roof. We have a LOT of roof space in the USA. And wind farms can be built within farm land that is still useable for farmland. Interestingly a couple of depleted coal mines are being converted into solar industrial arrays. And that is the important part, the coal depletes and once burned to make energy it is gone forever (well give or take several million years). If the fuel for solar goes out, we have more serious problems then worrying about electricity. And as mentioned at least for silicon panels, they are 95% plus recyclable back into solar panels at the end of their useful life, so not a lot of waste. And they are working on improving that towards 100% without ruining the efficiency. Silicone solar panels are mostly aluminum frame with glass covering a different form of silicon.

As an interesting side note, while we are basically at around 25% efficiency at the moment, in the labs they have panels that are the equivalent of over 100% efficient. Note the word equivalent, as they are multi-layer technology, each layer only does 15-25%, but with four or five layers they can combined come in over 100% of potential solar energy, namely because each is using a different part of the spectrum. Technically it is 100% plus of current solar technology.

Oh and currently wind makes up 9.2% of electricity and solar 2.8% of USA electricity and both 9.8% of global energy (as of Feb 2022 based on 2021 data)
 

Asher Kelman

OPF Owner/Editor-in-Chief
I don’t mind nuclear energy in the mix as long as it’s an interim solution for say 30 years until replaced by fusion.

It just needs to be self healing or sealing if there’s an earthquake or bomb with enough redundant safety measures.

Asher
 
Top