SPEAKOUT: Let's keep the door open on oil shale
By Peggy Rector
Published June 20, 2008 at 12:05 a.m.
With oil prices near record highs and world supplies increasingly in the hands of countries that are hostile to our nation's interests, now is not the time to close the door on any domestic energy source.
We need more energy, both traditional and renewable, for our economy and for our nation's security.
If done right, the oil shale contained in the Green River Formation of Colorado, Utah and Wyoming could go a long way toward increased energy security and less reliance on foreign sources of energy.
The history of oil shale in northwestern Colorado has been controversial. None of us want a repeat of the bust of 25 years ago. The impacts to our communities were long-lasting. But our region contains an estimated 1.2 trillion to 1.8 trillion barrels of oil.
Even by conservative estimates, there are 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil from oil shale in the area. That is three times greater than the proven oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. Seventy percent of these reserves are under the control of the federal government.
The draft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement for Oil Shale and Tar Sands is an important public policy document now under public review that addresses a critical need we have in America today - increased energy independence and security.
Today, we have no regulatory process for oil shale on public lands. The draft PEIS is a critical first step that must be taken if we are ever to reach a point where economically viable and environmentally sound oil shale extraction can be considered.
The Bureau of Land Management is asking for public input to bolster the document. I have heard many reasonable individuals make sound arguments for areas in which it could be improved. However, the underlying need for more domestic energy is undeniable.
We need to be very clear: The draft PEIS doesn't mean that commercial oil shale leasing on public lands will begin tomorrow. We are not, in a recent Rocky letter writer's words, "putting the cart before the horse." In fact, not a single oil shale project will begin until well into the future and then after an exhaustive environmental assessment of the specific application. We must have cautious planning that will avoid the booms and busts of energy projects of the past.
Our region's economy relies on energy, agriculture and outdoor activities. I trust our local leaders and my neighbors to maintain this balance while growing our economy.
What does the PEIS really do? It signals the start of an important public conversation on how to possibly move forward on oil shale. This must include a careful consideration of the environmental, economic and social effects of any lease long before development begins. In releasing the draft PEIS, the BLM laid out three alternative plans for lands to be made available for commercial leasing of oil shale. And, it would continue to prohibit development on large tracts of land including wilderness areas.
We need more sources of domestic energy. Let's not close the door on one of our state's most important energy sources.
Peggy Rector is the chair of Environmentally Conscious Consumers for Oil Shale. She is a resident of Rangely.
Post your comment
Registration is required. Click here to create your free user account, or login below.
Comments are the sole responsibility of the person posting them. You agree not to post comments that are off topic, defamatory, obscene, abusive, threatening or an invasion of privacy. Violators may be banned. Click here for our full user agreement.
Featured
-
Rocky Multimedia
The news comes alive in our videos and slide shows. Catch up on what's happening today.
-
Holiday Lights
Is your house the jolliest on the block? Submit your holiday lights display.
-
Holiday Gift Guide
Looking to get a jump-start on the holiday shopping season?
-
Mount Crushmore
Which four Broncos greats should be immortalized on Mount Crushmore? Vote here.
-
Bronco Dean's rant
Listen to Bronco Dean's midweek rant on the Chiefs.
-
Broncos Video
Get the latest from Dove Valley as the Broncos prepare for Sunday's matchup.
-
Calendar wallpaper
Download this month's desktop wallpaper calendar
-
Sam Adams' Open Mic
Open Mic: Stirrin' the Soup with Matt Iseman
-
The Rocky @ 150 Years
Read the Rocky's coverage of Colorado's cannibal, Alfred Packer, in 1886.
June 20, 2008
12:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
usaproud writes:
Yes, Let's talk about Senator McCain, who MILLIONS OF US DEMOCRATS are now supporting. John MCCAIN is now our guy, especially after we have found out that Senator Obama seems to have alot of skeletons in his closet that the media isn't telling you about. OH HAVE WE LEARNED ALOT!!!! Go to the websites I am going to give you and you will be STUNNED at what mr. obama has planned and what he and the DNC have been doing behind closed doors. Afraid to go see...you should be afraid of what will happen if Obama gets elected. His key word should not be CHANGE, his key word should be CONTROL. Go see for yourself and then you will see why MILLIONS are leaving the Democratic party and joining with JOHN MCCAIN. Here are the web sites: www.hcsfjm.com....www.noquarterusa.net....www.dems4mccain...www.hillaryclintonforum.net...www.chicagoagainstobama.com....Be prepared to meet the REAL Barack Obama. BY THE WAY GO TO THIS SITE TO SIGN A PETITION TO DRILL....www.americansolutions.com..oh and by the way IT IS TRUE THAT OBAMA'S STEP FATHER WAS AN OIL EXECUTIVE?
June 20, 2008
7:50 a.m.
Suggest removal
FlyfishDude52 writes:
Froward - Are you sentient? Oil shale not viable? Ever hear of the Athabaska oil sands around Ft. McMurray, Canada. Seems viable to the Canadians, but then they've been using superglue instead of sutures for decades & we, finally, are using them in the US today.
Your warped perspective of "big oil" (I'm not terribly fond of them either) is just that; warped. Having the leases and exploiting them are two completely different issues. It requires so very much red tape to be cut, t's crossed & i's dotted(mostly put in place by bleeding heart liberals who would rather protect the trees and animals than the humans) to actually get permits to drill, even for exploration not necessarily production. By the way, would you like to have some of the leases you talk about? You can, there are a lot of leases available. Oh, I forgot, you have to buy them, and it's speculative. They don't all just magically produce like Jed Clampett's mythical rifle shot. You lose more often than you win, probably better odds than in las vegas where you know you can't win...
June 20, 2008
8:52 a.m.
Suggest removal
CL writes:
I always wonder about groups with names like "Environmentally Conscious Consumers for Oil Shale" - makes me wonder what they really are all about.
Rather than just taking Ms. Rector's spin on it, read the PEIS for yourself
http://ostseis.anl.gov/eis/guide/inde...
June 20, 2008
8:55 a.m.
Suggest removal
RJS07 writes:
Ken Salazar's latest idiotic reason for not going after oil shale is because by the time it's viable, we'll be using fuel cells anyway. And he knows this how? I'd say if someone wants to spend the money to do it, let them...meanwhile, I think Salazar has already spent way too much time around the Washington elite. We need to try use ALL avenues available to us--off shore, oil shale, alternatives, conservation, etc. And he needs replaced.
June 20, 2008
9:44 a.m.
Suggest removal
soccermom writes:
The process for extracting the bitumen from the oil sands in Canada is different from the experimental process of extracting organic marlstone from the Green River Formation in Colorado.
This is a brief description of the oil sands projects in Canada. Doesn't sound very environmentally friendly.
While conventional crude oil flows naturally or is pumped from the ground, oil sands must be mined or recovered in situ - meaning 'in place.' Oil sands recovery processes include extraction and separation systems to remove the bitumen from sand and water.
Alberta's oil sands comprise one of the world's two largest sources of bitumen; the other is in Venezuela.
Mineable bitumen deposits are located near the surface and can be recovered by open-pit mining techniques. For example, the Syncrude and Suncor oil sands operations near Fort McMurray, Alberta, use the world's largest trucks and shovels to recover bitumen.
About two tonnes of oil sands must be dug up, moved and processed to produce one barrel of oil. Roughly 75 per cent of the bitumen can be recovered from sand; processed sand has to be returned to the pit and the site reclaimed.
June 20, 2008
9:46 a.m.
Suggest removal
soccermom writes:
Also, enough already about environmentalists loving trees more than people. Take away the trees and clean water and you won't have any people.
June 20, 2008
9:56 a.m.
Suggest removal
oli writes:
If you republicans and turned democrats feel that keeping our dependence on oil and thus BIG government and BIG business is patriotic think again. Some have mentioned that Obama and the democrats want control? What about the republicans and the scare tactics with red, orange, yellow and green warning levels? What about the republicans scare tactics on spying on anyone and everyone? You support the all seeing all controlling republican parties version of BIG government? You should re-think what the republicans, BUSH and MCCAIN, have done to American. Not the same American as I have grown up in during the cold war and all the wars that followed.
June 20, 2008
10 a.m.
Suggest removal
oli writes:
don't forget that getting oil out of Oil shale the price of oil MUST be $130 or higher just to break even. To get oil out of the oil sands in Cananda Oil prices MUST be $75 or higher. If oil is at $50 bbs you would not see oil out of oil sands or oil out of oil shale. If you support $4.00 per gallon of gas then by all means support getting oil out of shale and see what it does to our economy.
June 20, 2008
10:57 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
We need to responsibly use every resource we have at our disposal. Oil shale and coal are abundant in this country.
McCain's policy: "Let's drill on our own continental shelf; utilize our own coal and oil-shale; build 45 new nuclear power plants."
Obama's policy: "Sweat in the dark, pay $10/gallon for gas and just get used to it you greedy Americans."
June 20, 2008
11:24 a.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
'SQUATCH writes: "DEMS/LIBS LOSE THEIR ENERGY BET. ZOGBY: 60% OF AMERICANS SAY DRILL:"
You got that right! Average Americans seem to understand how "supply and demand" works.
Either the millionaire-politicians can't figure it out, or they just don't care.
What's $10/gallon to Nancy Pelosi?
June 20, 2008
12:21 p.m.
Suggest removal
oli writes:
How can you repubs/conservs say the this oil crises we are in today is due to Nancy Pelosi or any other democrat in office when oil was less than $30 barrel and prices at the pump was less $2 BEFORE REPUBLICANS took over the government. You go what you wanted by support the REPUBLICAN party...HIGHER OIL and GAS prices. You can thank BUSH and TRICKYDICK for that!
June 20, 2008
12:26 p.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
SASQUATCH
They can get the barrel oil down to $35 but your big oil buddies that you cons worship and kneel down and pray to have their price where they want and will never lower it. Example the shortage in the 70's. When there was plenty of oil all of a sudden, it never came down. I have come to the conclusion that republicans like taking in the rear. And all they will say is: "THANK YOU SIR MAY I HAVE ANOTHER"!!!!!!!!!
June 20, 2008
1:01 p.m.
Suggest removal
Logical writes:
dill, oli,
None of our politicians are directly responsible for the current price of oil. It is due to the vast increase in demand worldwide. When a commodity is in high demand, and supply can't keep up, the price goes up. That's why the price didn't go down much after the initial surge in the 70s. That's what we have now, with India and China using more oil than in the past.
As for the long-term price, we can have an impact by increasing the supply of oil available to us by drilling our own reserves, and building more refineries. We need the refineries, as we currently import refined gas, since we can't make all we use.
The only way to impact the price of oil (which "Big Oil" doesn't control) is to produce more ourselves. But, you don't want "Big Oil" to drill (which would eat up those "obscene profits" you libs whine about). You can't have it both ways. Either pay the price for a high-demand commodity, or produce more of it.
June 20, 2008
1:04 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
I would love to see ALL politicians open their portfolios to the public and see just who has investments with "big, evil oil".
Somehow, I doubt it will all be Republicans.
June 20, 2008
1:28 p.m.
Suggest removal
FlyfishDude52 writes:
I guess I don't understand that oil companies make more $ on imorted than domestic oil. How is that? Their profit would be greater with domestic oil via verticle integration. i.e. then they have control of nearly the whole process not just shipping, refining and distribution...
June 20, 2008
1:40 p.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
If we cut them loose today and tell them they can drill any where the want, can someone tell me who will foot the bill to pay for all this drilling and all the refineries you want build. I got news for you pinheads we will at the pump. What do we save? They just get higher profits. When will you all realize it is time to get alternative power. Battery power,recycle our trash into ethanol like Holland does. Not corn that cost more.
June 20, 2008
2:08 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
dilligaf writes: "Battery power,recycle our trash into ethanol like Holland does."
We use the most because we do the most.
We go to the Moon, we go to Mars! Holland? They have their hands full just trying to keep the Jihadists at bay for another 10 years so anyone who is able can abandon the country before it is too late.
June 20, 2008
2:44 p.m.
Suggest removal
soccermom writes:
Affiliates of Environmentally Conscious Consumers for Oil Shale are:
Americans for American Energy
Applied Control Equipment
Develop Utah
EGL
EnShale
Jacobs Engineering Group
Partnership for America
Red Leaf Resources
Shell Exploration and Production Company
The Center for Unconventional Fuels
Western Business Roundtable
These are not your mom and pop consumers of Colorado.......Shell speaking for Shell as a consumer, that's interesting.....
June 20, 2008
2:50 p.m.
Suggest removal
dilligaf writes:
Cowboy63
What the hell does going to the moon and mars or jihadists have to do with making affordable ethanol? You some kind of idiot?
June 20, 2008
3:45 p.m.
Suggest removal
Cowboy63 writes:
dilligaf - Batteries? Maybe that's good enough to get you down to your local Boulder underground book store to whine about Big Oil, but the rest of us need Fuel.
American problems require American solutions. We have plenty of resources right here, right now and the means to extract it, refine it, and use it.
What we need is plenty more good old-fashioned American CRUDE!
June 20, 2008
6:29 p.m.
Suggest removal
glowrock writes:
So, does anyone here even comprehend the amount of water and energy it's going to take to extract that "oil" from the shale? Remember, we're dealing with bitumen, which is extremely immature oil, so to speak. Intense heat needs to be applied in order to extract it from the shale or marlstone. Intense heat takes a LOT of energy, and then immense amounts of water as well. And then of course, to keep the extracted oil relatively contained, the ground surrounding the wells needs to be essentially frozen solid!
We're not dealing with small potatoes here. It's going to be a very, very long process, which may or may not ultimately work. Not to mention, the environmental issues are simply mind boggling, between the waste materials generated, the water used, the energy used, etc... etc...
Oil shale isn't a panacea, folks. No matter what our resident hairy ape says!
June 20, 2008
10:30 p.m.
Suggest removal
nucpwr2006 writes:
We send our youth over to Iraq in harms way to protect the OIL Interests. In my opinion if it wasn't for the oil we would have nothing to do with the middle east.
Between our government & the environmentalist have allowed us to be pushed into this energy crisis at hand. This is the first of pending energy problems. Once we start buying and plugging in the electric cars will have brown, or black outs. Then what the environmentalist don't want coal fire power plants, or nuclear power plants.
They would rather litter the country side with wind turbines or solar panels.
Jimmy Carter actual had the vision that alternative fuels need to be funded. So UNCAL opened the Shale Oil Refinery in Parachute CO and a Coal Gasification plant was built in ND. Unfortunately Ronald Regan didn't have the same vision and pulled the money thus closing the UNCAL Refinery.
I back the need for a electric car 100% and think that for commuting in larger cities, it would greatly reduce the smog problem. After watching the DVD "Who Killed the Electric Car", I am at the point to believe that big oil companies bought off the car manufacturers as well as the CA government officials. The reason was to scrap the already manufactured vehicles and to stop the production of new vehicles, thus maintaining their domination over the fossil fuel burning automobile industry and their influence over the oil industry.
We need a government that will develop a comprehensive energy program. This program should fund alternative energy programs and DEVELOP the areas there is oil in our country.
Sorry environmentalist we must go after the oil off-shore, refine the oil shale in Colorado and build Nuclear Power Plants.
OUR economy in this country doesn't work off cheap labor but CHEAP energy. You want to se the oil prices go down, if our President was to announce tomorrow were drilling off-shore and opening up the oil-shale in Colorado oil would drop to $60 a barrel.