Rhosty,

You have detailed these plans a few times now and I admit I am not qualified to judge the economic viability of these plans. Have you invested your own money into this idea? Is there a business/company investing in this, and if so are they making profit?

Not all that long ago, we knew as immutable scientific law the the sound barrier couldn't be broken! Now that barrier is routinely broken and not just by military aircraft.
We knew as immutable law that the speed of light was the ultimate barrier and one we would never ever be able to cross; until we found the melbar particles, which seem to do just that; albeit, confined to certain lines or magnetic stellar tracks?
Now, we know that the law of thermodynamics is another of those unbreakable immutable scientific laws. Even as US scientists seem to, through a patented process, be able to produce a net energy gain from electrolysis, via the agency of adding a catalyst to the water?
We know that we can produce hydrogen via electrolysis. We also know we can pipe hydrogen over very long distances, without any significant losses, as might be par for the course with electricity transmission, we also know that there are around 20% losses, when we convert the hydrogen back into electrical energy!
However, and as demonstrated by the patented process referred to, the addition of a cobalt catalyst to the water, reduces the required electrical energy input; by around 50%, for the same hydrogen production; as would be obtained by the current traditional method.
Meaning, when we burn the hydrogen in the same fell cell for the same current losses, we still are able to achieve around 30% more energy returned, than that now required for the initial decomposition process.
It seems that the immutable law of thermodynamics, is immutable no more?
I don't know what we are actually looking at here, but it could be the long longed for cold fusion process and almost costless endless power, or the scientific signpost leading to it; and or, a practical electrically powered ion drive; that finally opens up the stairway to the stars?

Steeza; there are working examples, but you might need to travel! We are just not bright enough to invest in alternatives, particularly those that don't make mega bucks for debt laden foreign speculators?
Conversely, still govt owned Tarong power in SEQ, is trialling algae production as a response to carbon emission. Algae absorb up to 2.5 times their own bodyweight in Co2 smokestack emission; and under optimised conditions; literally double that bodyweight every 24 hours!
Profit Steeza? I believe you have almost single-handedly underlined the very reason the world and or its human population is in such sorry shape today.
Every western economy rests on just two economic pillars; energy and capital! Privatising and profiteering, and thinking inside very limited circles of ideas, have white anted/crippled these two same dangerously leaning pillars.
Cheap publicly owned and operated energy production gave us our once vibrant manufacturing economy, and made us the third most prosperous nation on earth; and a creditor one at that.
Returning to that same energy production paradigm, will not only rebuild it, but create almost endless opportunities for innovative entrepreneurs; but particularly, if we finally understand the road to universal prosperity lies in investing govt money, in our own people and their better ideas.
All very doable if we but grasp the nettle and bring vast simplification and reform to our tax system; which would end forever the need to endlessly shell out or devote time to compliance or reconciliation, which currently rips out around 7% of the averaged bottom line.
The cheapest cleanest greenest energy on the planet coupled to the lowest tax take, in real terms, will be all we need do, to encourage a reverse exodus and or most of the energy dependant high tech manufacture to relocate here.
Don't give me all the myriad reasons that can't be done, because can't died in a cornfield over a hundred years ago! But rather focus your mind and considerable talents, on all the ways we might achieve far better outcomes, that actually bless us all, rather than a shrinking band of quite grossly overfed elites? Rhrosty.

What concerns me about uncoventional oil and gas are the high environmental costs. We have to look beyond the purely economic and determine what havoc will be wreaked on the biosphere from their production and use. There will, of course, be an economic cost to that but not one borne by the producer/extractor. For instance, pollutants from the production of oil from the Athabasca tar sands in Alberts, Canada, flow into north flowing rivers and will pollute the Arctic biota, not to mention the forgone greenhouse sink of the spruce forests that have to be destroyed to allow the open cut mining. Will a new Kyoto Protocol set a carbon price that makes this tar sand production uneconomic, not to mention Venezuelan heavy oil or US shale gas?

Popernish; the thing that will make both Canadian tar sands and the vast bulk of Russian oil production uneconomic, will be endlessly available cheaper cleaner and carbon neutral alternatives, like Farmed Algae.
Some algae are up to 60% oil and child's play to extract, utilising power station waste heat or solar thermal energy.
The only thing still successfully growing in the Murray/Darling at the height of the most recent drought, was algae. Our algae is apparently preferred by US alternative producers. Algae absorb up to 2.5 times their own bodyweight in Co2 emission; and double that bodyweight in as little as 24 hours, given optimised conditions. Waste effluent eminently suitable.
Green energy, Boston Massachusetts, have been trialling Algae in smoke stack emissions, with considerable success for at least a decade, and are talking about a green future, where all the diesel is green.
One producer in silicon valley has been running a couple of diesel powered mercs on the stuff for years.
Its proven technology not pie in the sky stuff, as continuously put about by apologists for the fossil fuel industry, which clearly has the most to lose, when we embrace much cheaper clean green alternatives.
Basically, all that prevents us from converting to the cleaner green alternatives, is greed and or, price gouging proponents, who likely would make a healthy profit from $10.00 a barrel, but want $100.00? $100.00 is okay, if it's for ready to use bio-diesel, but at $10.00 it would destroy most of the fossil fuel profit base; and that's why it's so hard to get the message through?
As noted by one Saudi oil/energy minister, the stone age didn't end because of a shortage of stone. And indeed, opined that hydrogen would likely replace oil as a portable energy source long before we/they actually ran out of oil. The fossil fuel industry is currently raking in over 4 trillion PA, and have the most to lose, as indeed does the drill rig industry, currently getting around a billion for each and every marine rig. Rhrosty.