Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The politics of oil shale
Fortune ^ | June 6, 2008 | Jon Birger, senior writer

Posted on 06/07/2008 12:10:09 PM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan

NEW YORK (Fortune) -- You'd think this would be oil shale's moment.

You'd think with gas prices topping $4 and consumers crying uncle, Congress would be moving fast to spur development of a domestic oil resource so vast - 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil shale in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming alone - it could eventually rival the oil fields of Saudi Arabia.

You'd think politicians would be tripping over themselves to arrange photo-ops with Harold Vinegar (whom I profiled in Fortune last November), the brilliant, Brooklyn-born chief scientist at Royal Dutch Shell whose research cracked the code on how to efficiently and cleanly convert oil shale - a rock-like fossil fuel known to geologists as kerogen - into light crude oil.

You'd think all of this, but you'd be wrong.

(Excerpt) Read more at money.cnn.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Government; News/Current Events; US: Colorado; US: Utah; US: Wyoming
KEYWORDS: colorado; congress; energy; environment; oil; oilshale
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-116 next last
To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan

I am going to keep banging this drum but where are the RNC ads exposing this to the American people. These ads should be up and running right now.


21 posted on 06/07/2008 1:00:43 PM PDT by C19fan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

So you’re saying we can’t extract it fast enough for it to make a dent? Can’t we develop technology to help that process along?


22 posted on 06/07/2008 1:01:10 PM PDT by djsherin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan

DemocRATs are slow rolling this until they get the White House. The whole problem with an energy policy is who get to claim credit for it. DemocRATs (Johnson) got credit for Civil Rights (when it was Republicans who got it passed), and DemocRATs (Clinton) got credit for welfare reform (when it was Republicans who got it passed). Nothing changes.


23 posted on 06/07/2008 1:01:18 PM PDT by OrioleFan (Republicans believe every day is July 4th, but DemocRATs believe every day is April 15th. - Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan

Canada has been doing this for some time.

http://www.investincanada.gc.ca/en/explore-our-regions/western-canada/alberta.aspx?WT.srch=1&WT.mc_id=ga-en-sec-oilgas&gclid=CKydiYqQ45MCFR4sagodXlxjVg

Colorado School of Mines
Colorado Energy Research Institute
28th Oil Shale Symposium
October 13-17, 2008

http://www.mines.edu/outreach/cont_ed/oilshale/


24 posted on 06/07/2008 1:02:25 PM PDT by blackie (Be Well~Be Armed~Be Safe~Molon Labe!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: djsherin

It appears the meaningful rate of production would be so expensive to achieve that the oil would not be economic.


25 posted on 06/07/2008 1:03:09 PM PDT by RightWhale (We see the polygons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

You think the rate of production will be static?
Whatever we can get now from there and other areas will gut the high blackmail prices we are paying now.
Production will increase as more money is made by those drilling.


26 posted on 06/07/2008 1:03:49 PM PDT by smoketree (the insanity, the lunacy these days)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan

‘When the American people learn of this, the Democrat Nimrods in the senate will be toast. “

I wish that would be the case. But you have to have an effective PR machine on our side in order to make the case to the American Sheeple. Our side right now is a sick elephant.


27 posted on 06/07/2008 1:05:18 PM PDT by The South Texan (The Drive By Media is America's worst enemy and American people don't know it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

What is the current rate of production?
Is it static and not to change?


28 posted on 06/07/2008 1:05:56 PM PDT by smoketree (the insanity, the lunacy these days)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: smoketree

They won’t be drilling. It is a mining project. We used to take on such engineering projects as homework in engineering school. Engineering cost and return. What do you need? What will you produce? How long will it take?


29 posted on 06/07/2008 1:07:34 PM PDT by RightWhale (We see the polygons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: PugetSoundSoldier

And converting shale to fuel doesn’t leave third worlders’ starving.


30 posted on 06/07/2008 1:08:49 PM PDT by tbw2 ("Sirat: Through the Fires of Hell" by Tamara Wilhite - on amazon.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan

BTTT


31 posted on 06/07/2008 1:08:53 PM PDT by SE Mom (Proud mom of an Iraq war combat vet)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sherman Logan
If I’ve got my numbers right, we’re importing 5B barrels annually. 800B barrels would make quite a dent for some time.

I lived not far away when they were doing the subsidized oil shale stuff back in the 70s near Rifle. The environmentalists had kittens about the ecological damage and the waste of water. Then oil prices went back down and the whole thing was just dropped.

You're numbers are probably right. My numbers give 189 years of oil independence assuming consumption stays flat.

Shell has developed what is called a "in situ" recovery method. Meaning "at site recovery" with no environmental impact.

32 posted on 06/07/2008 1:10:51 PM PDT by Donald Rumsfeld Fan ("Sincerity is everything. If you can fake that, youÂ’ve got it made." Groucho Marx)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

So then according to you we should just sit on all that oil until some time in the future when something else happens and the economy is farther in the tank and gas is around ten dollars a gallon?
Sounds like a plan for self destruction.
Is that what you propose?


33 posted on 06/07/2008 1:11:28 PM PDT by smoketree (the insanity, the lunacy these days)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
It appears the meaningful rate of production would be so expensive to achieve that the oil would not be economic.

The oil companies do not agree with you and they are willing to make that investment.

It's quite ironic that some people are trying to limit the opportunities for the oil companies because it would be bad for them, while others want to impose windfall profit taxes on them because they're not investing fast enough, or whatever the socialist excuse of the day might be.

Either way, it's crap.

34 posted on 06/07/2008 1:12:21 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: Eagles6
People around here are still convinced that Bush and his oil buddies are still conspiring to screw the American public with high gas prices. If you lay the facts on them they look at you like you're from Mars. The Democrats and the MSM have told that lie loud and long enough they believe it. Some of them started to pay attention when the Democrats took control of congress and gas doubled but not near enough. You see they have to vote Democrat because their daddy voted Democrat and their grand daddy voted Democrat.
35 posted on 06/07/2008 1:12:47 PM PDT by kempo (c)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
They won’t be drilling. It is a mining project.

Wrong. Technology has changed since you were in school.

36 posted on 06/07/2008 1:13:52 PM PDT by Dog Gone
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale

Oh, it’s a mining project.
So then we shouldn’t do it.
Right!


37 posted on 06/07/2008 1:16:01 PM PDT by smoketree (the insanity, the lunacy these days)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Donald Rumsfeld Fan
The politics of oil shale

I've wondered about the politics of oil. If there were large amounts of oil in New York and the rest of New England would the liberals still hate big oil.

Is the hatred of big oil a symptom of the North still fighting against the South after all these years?

38 posted on 06/07/2008 1:17:13 PM PDT by RJL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: smoketree

I expect you to go out there and start digging instead of wasting time on this BBS.


39 posted on 06/07/2008 1:17:18 PM PDT by RightWhale (We see the polygons)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: RightWhale
It appears the meaningful rate of production would be so expensive to achieve that the oil would not be economic.

It would require significant investment. If companies had some assurance that their investments wouldn't be sabotaged by a "carbon tax" or other such nonsense, the payoff from the investment may be worthwhile.

In today's political climate, though, any method of extraction which was truly cost-effective would quickly get shut down. Democrats don't want prosperity and energy independence. Any project that would produce those things must be terminated with extreme prejudice.

40 posted on 06/07/2008 1:17:26 PM PDT by supercat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-116 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson