How I learned to Love Bitumen


Rebuttal to the Anti Tar Sand Frenzy


The Keystone XL Pipeline.
It is not a good idea as currently proposed


 Syncrude Bitumen is cracked in the world's largest fluidized bed cokers.

Bitumen is ~ C-1500. The cokers crack it down to C-1 to C-75

What goes down the pipeline is a blend of Light Gas Oil, Heavy Gas Oil and Naphtha

Syncrude Light Crude Oil Product Specs.

It looks like motor oil, not the bitumen being shown on TV news.


What we should really do with tar sand.

Tarsand Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons for LNERs


More info on the use of Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons can be found here:

New Energy Times


My comments on the Keystone XL Pipeline.
It is not a good idea as currently proposed.

If raw diluted bitumen is transported through the Keystone XL Pipeline it will likely be environmentally dirty and destructive.

I can see no justification for not stipulating that the oil sent through the pipeline be upgraded.

This is a serious concern as the upgrading technology to convert the bitumen into something similar to motor oil has been in existence for decades. In the case of Syncrude, what goes down the pipeline is a blend of Light Gas Oil, Heavy Gas Oil and Naphtha.

Using that blend significantly reduces toxicity during spills. Since the relaxation of environmental rules since the retirement of Premier Peter Lougheed, the tar sand regions have become a mess. Oil companies should not be allowed to ship anything across the border except products with the same quality as the product coming out of Syncrude.

As far as impacts on our climate, I would require as a part of any authorization of this project that alternate and potentially more productive uses of this resource such as
( )
and the development of ceramic engines operating at ~50% efficiency (Litus Company,) be funded and researched in perpetuity at a rate of 1/2 percent of the net on any material sent down this pipeline. Financial analysts and oil executives should re evaluate their findings with committed environmental advocates and advanced
technologists like myself. The study should be done under the auspices of the National Academies and the National Research Council. I do not believe that the existing findings of the financial and oil people should be accepted as the issue is so politically charged. The tar sands have significant quantities of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons which have the potential to revolutionize the production of energy.

I am familiar with tar sand and its processing as I commissioned Dragline #4, Bucket wheel #2, the tailings system and solved major conveyor and mining system problems at Syncrude while working for Bechtel Canada.

For the National Interest and the future of our country and our planet, I urge you to reject this pipeline as currently proposed and renegotiate this proposal using at the very least technology that was available in the late 70s and stipulating that the research, as outlined above, be part of the agreement.

The idea that the oil be refined in the United States instead of Canada is politically motivated to create jobs in the U.S.