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

Skip to comments.

A Second Shale Revolution May Be Coming
businessinsider ^ | Jun. 27, 2014, 4:37 PM

Posted on 06/27/2014 9:39:29 PM PDT by ckilmer

The cliffs at Kimmeridge, on England's south coast, have on occasions been known to smoulder or even burst into flames in hot weather.

That is because, unlike the famous white chalk cliffs of Dover, they are made of oil shale, a soft rock that has hydrocarbons trapped in its pores. The world's oil-shale beds may contain the equivalent of up to nine times as much oil as all of its conventional wells.

(Excerpt) Read more at businessinsider.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy
KEYWORDS: energy; oil; oilshale; shale; whatwaspeakoil

1 posted on 06/27/2014 9:39:29 PM PDT by ckilmer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: ckilmer
 

 

enefit oil shale drill

Enefit

Enefit in Jordan.


Confusingly, oil shale has nothing to do with fracking, a technique for extracting oil and gas from a different sort of shale through horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing. America is blessed with prodigious quantities of both types of shale.

Its fracking pioneers have successfully exploited one type, transforming the country's energy supply. But hitherto, squeezing the energy out of oil shale has generally proved uneconomic, and even more environmentally unsound than other forms of fossil-fuel extraction.

However, a second shale revolution is in prospect, in which cleaner and more efficient ways are being found to squeeze the oil and gas out of the stone. The Jordanian government said on June 12th that it had reached agreement with Enefit, an Estonian company, and its partners on a $2.1 billion contract to build a 540MW shale-fuelled power station. Frustratingly for Jordan, as it eyes its rich, oil-drenched Gulf neighbours, the country sits on the world's fifth-largest oil-shale reserves but has to import 97% of its energy needs.

In Australia, Queensland Energy Resources, another oil-shale company, has just applied for permission to upgrade its demonstration plant to a commercial scale. Production is expected to start in 2018. Questerre Energy, a Canadian company, also said recently that it would start work on a commercial demonstration project, in Utah in the United States.

In all these projects, the shale is "cooked" cheaply, cleanly and productively in oxygen-free retorts to separate much of the oil and gas. In Enefit's process the remaining solid is burned to raise steam, which drives a generator. So the process produces electricity, natural gas (a big plus in Estonia, a country otherwise dependent on Russian supplies) and synthetic crude, which can be used to make diesel and aviation fuel. The leftover ash can be used to make cement. Enefit's chief executive, Sandor Liive, says his plants, the first of which started production in December 2012, should be profitable so long as oil prices stay above $75 a barrel (North Sea Brent oil was around $113 this week).

Although the new methods of exploiting the rock are cleaner than old ones, environmentalists still have plenty to worry about. Oil shale varies hugely in quality. Estonia's is clean, Jordan's has a high sulphur content, Utah's is laden with arsenic. Like opencast coal mining, digging up oil shale scars the landscape. Enefit has solved that in green-minded Estonia, by landscaping and replacing the topsoil. Other countries may be less choosy.

enefit in estonia shale oil

Enefit

Enefit plant in Estonia.

Some of the world's biggest energy firms have also experimented with mining and processing oil shale, only to give up, after finding that it took so much energy that the sums did not add up.

However, Shell says it is making progress with a new method it is trying, also in Jordan, in which the shale is heated underground with an electric current to extract the oil.

These rival technologies have yet to prove their reliability at large scale--and they are far from cheap. Mr Liive reckons it will cost $100m to get a pilot project going in Utah (where his firm has bought a disused oil-shale mine), and another $300m to reach a commercial scale. A fall in the oil price could doom the industry, as happened in the 1980s when a lot of shale mines went out of business.

But just as fracking has proved more economic and less environmentally damaging than sceptics expected, the new techniques for squeezing the hydrocarbons out of shale have the potential to disrupt the oil business once more. America this week loosened its ban on crude exports. If the second shale revolution succeeds, it will have a lot more oil to sell.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/a-second-shale-revolution-2014-6#ixzz35uCmRl3d

 

2 posted on 06/27/2014 9:40:41 PM PDT by ckilmer (q)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney; bestintxas; Kennard; nuke rocketeer; crusty old prospector; Smokin' Joe

I think the technology for extracting oil from oil shale is jinxed by bad timing. This technology may be ready for prime time in 10-15 years but by then the moment for oil shale will have passed.


3 posted on 06/27/2014 9:44:46 PM PDT by ckilmer (q)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

As long as it is just private capital being invested, I am fine with it.


4 posted on 06/27/2014 9:55:48 PM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Ping.


5 posted on 06/27/2014 10:11:09 PM PDT by Army Air Corps (Four Fried Chickens and a Coke)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

Even if its not a world-beater, perhaps it can fill some niches - like in the case of Jordan that they mention.

One thing that they did not mention, it that although it might be energy intensive to extract the goods from oil shale, you could use nuclear reactors to power it, like they do with Canadian tar sands. So improvements in nuclear generation, among other possible technical innovations, might make oil shale more competitive.


6 posted on 06/27/2014 10:25:54 PM PDT by BeauBo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: ckilmer

I don’t care what anyone says. There is still one hell of a lot of fossil fuel down there.


7 posted on 06/27/2014 10:34:38 PM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

God has been very generous to us, providing an unlimited amount of natural energy.

Environment wackos hate to see the word natural next to gas but it also applies to oil.

Much more natural than ethanol or solar


8 posted on 06/28/2014 6:02:52 AM PDT by bestintxas (Every time a RINO bites the dust a founding father gets his wings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: bestintxas

Just recover the torn up land to look like a garden and they’ll be happy. They do a lot of recovery in Canada. Clear cutting? Simply replant. What is so hard about that?


9 posted on 06/28/2014 8:28:28 AM PDT by huldah1776
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: huldah1776

its been done for hundreds of years.

problem for the wackos is they want nature to do it rather than man.

Bible says God gave man dominion over the things of this earth.

Nature works for man after all.


10 posted on 06/28/2014 3:08:11 PM PDT by bestintxas (Every time a RINO bites the dust a founding father gets his wings)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: onedoug
I don’t care what anyone says. There is still one hell of a lot of fossil fuel down there.

It's not fossil fuel. It is carbon based fuel.

11 posted on 06/28/2014 6:42:16 PM PDT by SeaHawkFan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan

Well, there are heck of a lot of near-surface microfossils in any given handful of crude. I think the standard explanation of how they got there is more satisfactory than to say they migrated to it.


12 posted on 06/29/2014 7:12:56 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: SeaHawkFan; onedoug
It's not fossil fuel. It is carbon based fuel

From wikipedia:

"Carbon-based fuel is any fuel whose energy derives principally from the oxidation or burning of carbon. Carbon-based fuels are of two main kinds, biofuels and fossil fuels."

Is the wiki wrong? Thanks in advance.

13 posted on 06/29/2014 7:50:45 AM PDT by Fightin Whitey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Fightin Whitey

Please excuse me if I thought you were going to make the “crude comes from the deep interior” argument.


14 posted on 06/29/2014 8:39:29 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: onedoug

I think you might have responded to me in error.

It was Seahawkfan’s comment that you responded to in terms of close-to-the-surface crude.

I posted the wiki definition of carbon fuels primarily to Seahawkfan, and copied you just ‘cause you were in on the conversation.

I think I essentially agree with you, though I am far from well-informed on the chemistry and prehistoric chronology of fossil fuels.


15 posted on 06/29/2014 9:37:37 AM PDT by Fightin Whitey
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: Fightin Whitey; SeaHawkFan

We’ll get it straight sooner or later.

BTW, is that the Sea Hawks team, or Errol Flynn’s privateer?

Not an NFL fan, but I can sure relate to Captain Thorpe’s love of country and freedom.


16 posted on 06/29/2014 10:00:34 AM PDT by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

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