Posted on 04/21/2005 2:56:45 AM PDT by RWR8189
As a prominent advocate for encouraging unconventional energy sources, Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) was asked to testify today in front of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee on his efforts to develop fuel from a vast untapped domestic oil reserve in tar sandsand oil shale -- a large part of which sits in eastern Utah.
"Who would have guessed that in just Colorado and Utah, there is more recoverable oil than in the Middle East?" Hatch said. "We just don't count it among our nation's oil reserves because it is not yet being developed commercially. I find it disturbing that Utah imports oil from Canada tar sands, even though we have a larger tar sands resource within our own boundaries that remains undeveloped."
According to the U.S. Department of Energy, recoverable oil shale in the western United States -- located mainly in Utah, Colorado and Wyoming -- exceeds one trillion barrels and is the richest and most geographically concentrated oil shale and tar sands resource in the world. Hatch noted that Canada recognized the potential of the large tar sands deposits in the province of Alberta and developed a government policy to go promote their development -- increasing its oil reserves by more than a factor of 10.
Hatch is working with Senators Bennett (R-Utah), Allard (R-Colo.), and Salazar (D-Colo.) to develop a bill that would encourage development of commercially viable oil from oil shale and tar sands.
"I cannot sit by while gas prices are going through the roof, and while I hear from constituent after constituent about the disastrous effect gas prices are having on their livelihoods and their businesses," Hatch said. "Why has Canada moved forward in leaps and bounds, while the United States has yet to take even a baby step in this direction? I believe the difference has been the government policies of the respective countries. We need to change that."
The RD has already been done including horizontal drilling technology for solvent extraction.
Right now the oil sands are more like open pit mining operations. In the future the oil will be extracted without surface disruption.
Unfortunately, it takes more than drilling. Extracting oil from oil shale is more like strip mining than drilling, and actually getting the oil "out" of the rock requires a completely different (and as yet un-developed) processing infrastructure than for either coal or oil.
You will know that "peak oil" theory is real when the stock of companies starting up to extract oil shale or Canadian tar sands or focussing on tertiary oil recovery start to to through the roof. Until then, the "high" price of oil is caused by global political factors and NOT a lack of oil.
All that said, I think the Feds (i.e. Department of Energy") should begin R&D funding on ways and means to make it happen.
It's also highly radioactive. (This is the stuff they used to make the now banned "black boards" out of).
Think you are confusing slate (the original blackboard) with transite blackboards. The original Transite was asbestos reinforced cement board and was used in place of slate for a lot of applications such as blackboards, lab countertops, roofing tiles, etc. There were a lot of other applications for Transite (fire-proofing, electrical insulation...) Ended up on the poopy list because of asbestos. (Transite 1000 is a non-asbestos product.)
They didn't exactly glow green in the dark but they'd set off a geiger counter!
I hope it's nowhere near Arches or Bryce canyon or any of the other nat'l parks.
They didn't exactly glow green in the dark but they'd set off a geiger counter!
So does a brick!!!!
The article fails to mention that technology to extract that sort of oil makes its more expensive than oil from the middle east. Canada's shale oil is normally 10 dollars more expensive than the market value.
That is an interesting viewpoint, and one I have not yet considered.
Maybe in 100 years, the Middle East will be buying oil from us, and we will be able to charge them whatever we wish.
"The article fails to mention that technology to extract that sort of oil makes its more expensive than oil from the middle east. Canada's shale oil is normally 10 dollars more expensive than the market value."
Does that include the cost of shipping?
Apples and oranges. The Alberta oil sands costs around $13 to produce a barrel of synthetic crude oil whereas it will probably cost three times as much per barrel if using oil shale as the stock.
A better move would be to exponentially increase investment and development of the Alberta oil sands and just utilize or expand existing transcontinental pipelines into US hub markets.
"To develop similar resources in the US will probably take ten years with exploration and infrastructure costs factored in if you started today."
If it took Canada ten years to develop the resource, we should be able to do it in considerably less time, simply because we can learn from how they did it.
You may actually have an extremely good point. As the middle east's reserves start to dwindle, having large remaining reserves in the US may put us at a huge advantage economically in the future.
FWIW, I think we should deplete the oil reserves from the Middle East before we tap into our stash.
======
I agree completely. Tapping the shale oil now will do nothing but drop Saudi sweet crude to back to $30/barrel, making the shale oil/tar sands not economically viable.
If we don't buy the Saudi oil, China will at about a 40% discount, putting us at another economic disadvantage to them.
Not using Mideast oil just prolongs there staying power. The faster we use up their oil, the sooner the leaders in the region (Including the Mullahs in Iran) crumble.
Burn up there oil first.
Now that is Private U.S. Citizen wealth......keep the U.N. OUT.
That includes Canadians!
The word "shortage" doesn't appear anywhere in the Kingdom dictionary.
They will have little or no oil with chemical and nuke devices.
I agree, however, if the cost is going to be the same, I say use up their reserves first.............
Well, if we keep developing other energy sources, 10 years from now will probably be about the time we'll really need another source of oil.
The time to get started is now.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.