Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 61

Thread: Like $3/gallon gas prices?? Thank a tree-hugging/bike riding enviromentalist lib...

  1. #1
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408

    Like $3/gallon gas prices?? Thank a tree-hugging/bike riding enviromentalist lib...

    U.S. Oil Shale Has Potential, Report Says
    WASHINGTON -- The United States has an oil reserve at least three times that of Saudi Arabia locked in oil shale deposits beneath federal land in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming, according to a study released this past week.

    But the researchers at the RAND think tank caution the federal government to go carefully, balancing the environmental and economic impacts with development pressure to prevent an oil shale bust later.

    "We've got more oil in this very compact area than the entire Middle East," said James Bartis, RAND senior policy researcher and the report's lead author. However, he added, "If we go faster, there's a good chance we're going to end up at a dead end. You could end up bogged down."

    For years, the industry and the government considered oil shale - - a rock that produces petroleum when heated -- too expensive to be a feasible source of oil.

    However, oil prices, which spiked above $70 a barrel last week, combined with advances in technology could soon make it possible to tap the estimated 500 billion to 1.1 trillion recoverable barrels, the report found.

    That could meet a quarter of the nation's current oil needs for the next 400 years.

    But the risks are high. It's unclear how new technologies will affect the land, air and the Colorado River, Bartis said.

    The study, sponsored in part by the U.S. Department of Energy, comes in the wake of Hurricane Katrina, which disrupted Gulf oil production and sent crude oil prices surging.

    It also comes about a month after the president signed a new energy policy, which dramatically reversed the nation's approach to oil shale, opening the door within a few years to companies that want to tap deposits on public lands.

    Bartis said he hopes lawmakers will take the study's recommendations into consideration as they make future decisions on oil shale.

    The U.S. has tried to develop oil shale in the West before. Sky- high oil prices in the 1970s led Congress under President Carter to create the Synthetic Fuels Corp., to find new, domestic sources of crude. Entire towns in Colorado were created and all-but abandoned after oil prices bottomed out in the 1980s.

    The RAND researchers estimate the federal, state and local governments would rake in about $10 billion a year from lease payments, royalties and taxes if the industry produced 3 million barrels a day.

    Production would also likely cause oil prices to fall by as much as 5 percent, saving American oil consumers up to $20 billion a year and creating hundreds of thousands of jobs.

    The report also says oil shale mining, above-ground processing and disposing of spent shale cause significant adverse environmental impacts. Shell Oil is working on a process that would heat the oil shale in place, which could have less effect on the environment.

    "We need to be focusing in on what are the implications," Bartis said. "I'm not saying this is a show-stopper, I'm saying it's important enough we have to have the answers."

    The study recommends the federal government take a few low-cost steps to move oil shale production forward, such as adding oil shale to the Energy Department's research and development profile and archiving information on oil shale resources, technologies and impacts of development.

    But it also urges the government not to make any major investments in oil shale development until private firms are willing to invest without major government subsidies.

    Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, a champion of oil shale development, said the report's statistics on the amount of available oil prove the United States must move as quickly as possible.

    "Our country runs on energy," he said. "We can't sit back and hope we're going to get all we need from world production."


    [url]http://www.rednova.com/news/display/?id=229800&source=r_science[/url]

    ---------------------------------------


    Seebach: Shell's ingenious approach to oil shale is pretty slick
    September 3, 2005

    When oil prices last touched record highs - actually, after adjusting for inflation we're not there yet, but given the effects of Hurricane Katrina, we probably will be soon - politicians' response was more hype than hope. Oil shale in Colorado! Tar sands in Alberta! OPEC be damned!

    Remember the Carter-era Synfuels Corp. debacle? It was a response to the '70s energy shortages, closed down in 1985 after accomplishing essentially nothing at great expense, which is pretty much a description of what usually happens when the government tries to take over something that the private sector can do better. Private actors are, after all, spending their own money.


    Advertisement


    Since 1981, Shell researchers at the company's division of "unconventional resources" have been spending their own money trying to figure out how to get usable energy out of oil shale. Judging by the presentation the Rocky Mountain News heard this week, they think they've got it.

    Shell's method, which it calls "in situ conversion," is simplicity itself in concept but exquisitely ingenious in execution. Terry O'Connor, a vice president for external and regulatory affairs at Shell Exploration and Production, explained how it's done (and they have done it, in several test projects):

    Drill shafts into the oil-bearing rock. Drop heaters down the shaft. Cook the rock until the hydrocarbons boil off, the lightest and most desirable first. Collect them.

    Please note, you don't have to go looking for oil fields when you're brewing your own.

    On one small test plot about 20 feet by 35 feet, on land Shell owns, they started heating the rock in early 2004. "Product" - about one-third natural gas, two-thirds light crude - began to appear in September 2004. They turned the heaters off about a month ago, after harvesting about 1,500 barrels of oil.

    While we were trying to do the math, O'Connor told us the answers. Upwards of a million barrels an acre, a billion barrels a square mile. And the oil shale formation in the Green River Basin, most of which is in Colorado, covers more than a thousand square miles - the largest fossil fuel deposits in the world.

    Wow.

    They don't need subsidies; the process should be commercially feasible with world oil prices at $30 a barrel. The energy balance is favorable; under a conservative life-cycle analysis, it should yield 3.5 units of energy for every 1 unit used in production. The process recovers about 10 times as much oil as mining the rock and crushing and cooking it at the surface, and it's a more desirable grade. Reclamation is easier because the only thing that comes to the surface is the oil you want.

    And we've hardly gotten to the really ingenious part yet. While the rock is cooking, at about 650 or 750 degrees Fahrenheit, how do you keep the hydrocarbons from contaminating ground water? Why, you build an ice wall around the whole thing. As O'Connor said, it's counterintuitive.

    But ice is impermeable to water. So around the perimeter of the productive site, you drill lots more shafts, only 8 to 12 feet apart, put in piping, and pump refrigerants through it. The water in the ground around the shafts freezes, and eventually forms a 20- to 30-foot ice barrier around the site.

    Next you take the water out of the ground inside the ice wall, turn up the heat, and then sit back and harvest the oil until it stops coming in useful quantities. When production drops, it falls off rather quickly.

    That's an advantage over ordinary wells, which very gradually get less productive as they age.

    Then you pump the water back in. (Well, not necessarily the same water, which has moved on to other uses.) It's hot down there so the water flashes into steam, picking up loose chemicals in the process. Collect the steam, strip the gunk out of it, repeat until the water comes out clean. Then you can turn off the heaters and the chillers and move on to the next plot (even saving one or two of the sides of the ice wall, if you want to be thrifty about it).

    Most of the best territory for this astonishing process is on land under the control of the Bureau of Land Management. Shell has applied for a research and development lease on 160 acres of BLM land, which could be approved by February. That project would be on a large enough scale so design of a commercial facility could begin.

    The 2005 energy bill altered some provisions of the 1920 Minerals Leasing Act that were a deterrent to large-scale development, and also laid out a 30-month timetable for establishing federal regulations governing commercial leasing.

    Shell has been deliberately low-key about their R&D, wanting to avoid the hype, and the disappointment, that surrounded the last oil-shale boom. But O'Connor said the results have been sufficiently encouraging they are gradually getting more open. Starting next week, they will be holding public hearings in northwest Colorado.

    I'll say it again. Wow.

    [url]http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/news_columnists/article/0,1299,DRMN_86_4051709,00.html[/url]

    ---------------------------------------------------
    So next time a lib bellows aloud about those evil oil corporations making huge profits make sure you let them know they've got no one to blame but themselves....
    Last edited by Come Back to NY; 09-07-2005 at 10:02 PM.

  2. #2
    I thought we agreed it is a refinery problem?

  3. #3
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=cr726]I thought we agreed it is a refinery problem?[/QUOTE]

    Refinery problem or not- you get more oil into the market the price per bbl will come down...

  4. #4
    The price pre barrel of oil didn't go crazy until the US invaded Iraq and then more recently when the US government failed to ensure the levee's were secure for a critical refinery area and port.

    As a person that lives in a Canadian province that is just raking in the cash because of the price of oil it's pretty evident that things started to climb dramatically with the Iraq invasion and then of course the hurricane.

  5. #5
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=Beerfish]The price pre barrel of oil didn't go crazy until the US invaded Iraq and then more recently when the US government failed to ensure the levee's were secure for a critical refinery area and port.

    As a person that lives in a Canadian province that is just raking in the cash because of the price of oil it's pretty evident that things started to climb dramatically with the Iraq invasion and then of course the hurricane.[/QUOTE]

    so we can pretty much put to rest the lib tom foolery that the war was for oil....

  6. #6
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]so we can pretty much put to rest the lib tom foolery that the war was for oil....[/QUOTE]

    No it reinforces the point.

  7. #7
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    Westchester Co.
    Posts
    38,490
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]so we can pretty much put to rest the lib tom foolery that the war was for oil....[/QUOTE]
    But then the libs will complain about the poor people of the Middle East if this oil shale reserve comes into play. We will never be able to abandon the ME because we finance the entire region.

  8. #8
    you guys claim to be free market economists??? You don't know what you are talking about.

    Yes there's oil in shale in Colorado

    Yes there's oil in sand in Canada.

    we've known about this for decades.

    but until the price of gas topped 3 dollars, extracting this energy was cost prohibitive - simple economics, the movement of the marketplace.

    Hence the title of this thread "3 dollar gas prices, thank an environmentalist" is dead friggin wrong.

    It wasn't until the gas prices rose that this even became an option for big oil. Environmentalists haven't protested it because it wasn't being pursued by energy corporations. It was a non-issue.

    Let's imagine that what Cheney said about the Iraqis greeting us as liberators was true - and let's imagine that when Bush said Mission Accomplished was true. When that iraqi crude comes online, the price drops below 2 dollars guess what happens?

    getting oil out of shale or sand becomes a sucker bet again.

    None of this has anything to do with environmentalism whatsoever. If there is money to be made people will make it, if there is no money to be made due to current market conditions that logically cannot the fault of tree huggers.

    The fact that such an article can be reprinted on this forum and so many people agree with it speaks volumes to the mindset of the average conservative poster. you guys rag on me for blaming people that don't deserve blame yet you are here blaming the fact we don't get oil from shale on Greenpeace?

    This is pot calling kettle, come in kettle.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    On some beach... somewhere...
    Posts
    3,735
    [QUOTE=bitonti]you guys claim to be free market economists??? You don't know what you are talking about.

    Yes there's oil in shale in Colorado

    Yes there's oil in sand in Canada.

    we've known about this for decades.

    but until the price of gas topped 3 dollars, extracting this energy was cost prohibitive - simple economics, the movement of the marketplace.

    Hence the title of this thread "3 dollar gas prices, thank an environmentalist" is dead friggin wrong.

    It wasn't until the gas prices rose that this even became an option for big oil. Environmentalists haven't protested it because it wasn't being pursued by energy corporations. It was a non-issue.

    Let's imagine that what Cheney said about the Iraqis greeting us as liberators was true - and let's imagine that when Bush said Mission Accomplished was true. When that iraqi crude comes online, the price drops below 2 dollars guess what happens?

    getting oil out of shale or sand becomes a sucker bet again.

    None of this has anything to do with environmentalism whatsoever. If there is money to be made people will make it, if there is no money to be made due to current market conditions that logically cannot the fault of tree huggers.

    The fact that such an article can be reprinted on this forum and so many people agree with it speaks volumes to the mindset of the average conservative poster. you guys rag on me for blaming people that don't deserve blame yet you are here blaming the fact we don't get oil from shale on Greenpeace?

    This is pot calling kettle, come in kettle.[/QUOTE]


    Good post.

  10. #10
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=Section109Row15]No it reinforces the point.[/QUOTE]

    of course it would for brainwashed liberals, that is besides the point....

  11. #11
    [QUOTE=bitonti]you guys claim to be free market economists??? You don't know what you are talking about.

    Yes there's oil in shale in Colorado

    Yes there's oil in sand in Canada.

    we've known about this for decades.

    but until the price of gas topped 3 dollars, extracting this energy was cost prohibitive - simple economics, the movement of the marketplace.

    Hence the title of this thread "3 dollar gas prices, thank an environmentalist" is dead friggin wrong.

    It wasn't until the gas prices rose that this even became an option for big oil. Environmentalists haven't protested it because it wasn't being pursued by energy corporations. It was a non-issue.

    Let's imagine that what Cheney said about the Iraqis greeting us as liberators was true - and let's imagine that when Bush said Mission Accomplished was true. When that iraqi crude comes online, the price drops below 2 dollars guess what happens?

    getting oil out of shale or sand becomes a sucker bet again.

    None of this has anything to do with environmentalism whatsoever. If there is money to be made people will make it, if there is no money to be made due to current market conditions that logically cannot the fault of tree huggers.

    The fact that such an article can be reprinted on this forum and so many people agree with it speaks volumes to the mindset of the average conservative poster. you guys rag on me for blaming people that don't deserve blame yet you are here blaming the fact we don't get oil from shale on Greenpeace?

    This is pot calling kettle, come in kettle.[/QUOTE]

    Well Bit, you're actually spot on on this one. While the Enviro-Lobby IS a thorn in the side of many things, they are not the prime reason for the Oil-Shale issue. Costs is. It is only in a market with $70+ Barrell prices that current-tech extraction costs become standable by the Oil Companies.

  12. #12
    Hall Of Fame
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Location
    L.I. NY (where the Jets used to be from)
    Posts
    13,472
    [QUOTE=bitonti]The fact that such an article can be reprinted on this forum and so many people agree with it speaks volumes to the mindset of the average conservative poster. you guys rag on me for blaming people that don't deserve blame yet you are here blaming the fact we don't get oil from shale on Greenpeace?

    This is pot calling kettle, come in kettle.[/QUOTE]

    So many people agree? You mean 2?

    That is so many?

    Comeback is as extreme as you are. With similar credibility.

  13. #13
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]of course it would for brainwashed liberals, that is besides the point....[/QUOTE]

    Whatever. Show me one instance where anyone has said that Bush wants to take over the Iraqi oil supply to lower the price of oil. The implication has always been that the US oil companies would benefit from the contracts to rebuild their oil infrastructure and most likely end-up owning the oil fields. The high prices for oil makes this even more lucrative, not that I am saying Bush had a plan to drive prices up. With the price of oil so high and the oil in Iraq so easy to extract, this is a goldmine for whoever controls it.

  14. #14
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=Section109Row15]Whatever. Show me one instance where anyone has said that Bush wants to take over the Iraqi oil supply to lower the price of oil. The implication has always been that the US oil companies would benefit from the contracts to rebuild their oil infrastructure and most likely end-up owning the oil fields. The high prices for oil makes this even more lucrative, not that I am saying Bush had a plan to drive prices up. With the price of oil so high and the oil in Iraq so easy to extract, this is a goldmine for whoever controls it.[/QUOTE]

    Of course you rely solely on "implications".....of course there is not a single shred of evidence...just like there is not a single shred of evidence of election cheating last November....just like there is not a single shred of evidence......but hey- don't let that stop you libs- it's worked so well for you up!

  15. #15
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]Of course you rely solely on "implications".....of course there is not a single shred of evidence...just like there is not a single shred of evidence of election cheating last November....just like there is not a single shred of evidence......but hey- don't let that stop you libs- it's worked so well for you up![/QUOTE]

    All other reasons for going to Iraq have been proven false.

  16. #16
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=Section109Row15]All other reasons for going to Iraq have been proven false.[/QUOTE]

    I see...so there has been no regime change in the nation and we are not fighting terrorists on their on soild...I defer back to my comment about brainwashed libs...and please- be intelligent and come back with facts not "implications".. :O

  17. #17
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY] we are not fighting terrorists on their on soild...[/QUOTE]

    CBNY if we kill 1 terrorist and create 3 bent on revenge, what sort of progress is that?

  18. #18
    All League
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Washington, D.C.
    Posts
    3,408
    [QUOTE=Come Back to NY]I see...so there has been no regime change in the nation and we are not fighting terrorists on their on soild...I defer back to my comment about brainwashed libs...and please- be intelligent and come back with facts not "implications".. :O[/QUOTE]

    Regime change? Atleast they had electricity under Saddamm and it looks as if their new government is going to be under Islamic law. (I know I know the rape rooms, the rape rooms, then why haven't we done jack $hit in Sudan?)

    We are not fighting terrorists in Iraq on their "soild", we are fighting people pissed off we invaded their country. Zarqawi(sp) didn't align with al Queda until after we invaded, they were rival factions. Terrorist attacks have increased. London.....Madrid.

  19. #19
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    Greenwich Village, NY
    Posts
    2,243
    [QUOTE=Section109Row15]Regime change? Atleast they had electricity under Saddamm and it looks as if their new government is going to be under Islamic law. (I know I know the rape rooms, the rape rooms, then why haven't we done jack $hit in Sudan?)

    We are not fighting terrorists in Iraq on their "soild", we are fighting people pissed off we invaded their country. Zarqawi(sp) didn't align with al Queda until after we invaded, they were rival factions. Terrorist attacks have increased. London.....Madrid.[/QUOTE]


    You realize the Sudan has a ton of oil?

  20. #20
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    31,408
    [QUOTE=Lawyers, Guns and Money]You realize the Sudan has a ton of oil?[/QUOTE]


    he has no clue...

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us