Go to the mobile version of this Web site.

Login | Contact Us | Site Map | Paid archives | Electronic edition | Subscription Questions | Extras

Home › Business › Energy

Guv to urge lease slowdown

Ritter invited to testify on oil shale development

Gargi Chakrabarty

Published May 14, 2008 at 8 p.m.

Text size  
Gov. Ritter looks at a piece of oil shale on a visit to an EnCana gas drilling operation in Parachute in 2006. Ritter, who will testify before Congress today, favors a cautious approach to leasing public lands for oil-shale development.

Photo by Linda Mcconnell / The Rocky/2006

Gov. Ritter looks at a piece of oil shale on a visit to an EnCana gas drilling operation in Parachute in 2006. Ritter, who will testify before Congress today, favors a cautious approach to leasing public lands for oil-shale development.

More Energy

More stories »

Gov. Bill Ritter will testify before a U.S. Senate committee today to urge a slowdown of plans to lease 2 million acres of public land for oil-shale development.

Ritter accepted the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee's invitation to speak about the future of oil-shale development in Colorado, spokesman Evan Dreyer said.

"He is supportive of continuing with the oil-shale R&D process, as there are many unanswered questions," Dreyer said, referring to ongoing research. "He does not see a need for the federal government to rush ahead at this time with the commercial development of oil shale."

Oil-shale development is expected to use enormous amounts of water and power, and large tracts of land will be torn up in the process, at least temporarily, observers say.

Ritter's testimony comes on the heels of a bill proposed by U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., to slow the process. The measure would provide another year for the development of a commercial leasing program after the federal government completes its environment analysis.

The agency has received more than 100,000 public comments since the 1,400-page draft plan was released Dec. 20.

The U.S. Bureau of Land Management, charged with leasing the lands under the Energy Act of 2005, says there are no imminent plans to lease because it has yet to complete environmental studies.

The studies likely won't be completed before the end of the year, BLM spokeswoman Heather Feeney said. "We are already one year behind, so it's hard to see how that can be characterized as rushing. What we are doing is following the law."

Colorado has 360,000 acres of public lands, mostly on the Western Slope, that contain 500 billion barrels of recoverable shale oil - more than double the proven reserves of Saudi Arabia.

Critics of the leasing plan, including local governments and water companies, say the BLM's decision to forge ahead is short- sighted, given that there are no feasible oil-shale extraction technologies.

Furthermore, the developing technologies use enormous amounts of electricity and water.

For instance, 1 million barrels of oil shale per day would use up to 300,000 acre-feet of water per year, according to an Argonne National Laboratory report.

It also would require 10 new power plants, estimated Randy Udall, an energy analyst.

But supporters say unlocking those vast oil-shale resources are important to ensure the nation's energy security and reduce its dependence on foreign oil.

"Gov. Ritter knows that at this stage of research and development, no company will be able to commit the billions of dollars needed to figure out how we can develop oil shale in a responsible manner without the promise of eventual commercialization," said Greg Schnacke, president and CEO of Americans For American Energy, a lobbying group.

"By saying good things about research and development, but opposing commercialization, the governor is following the duplicitous path laid out by those who oppose virtually and all American energy development."

chakrabartyg@RockyMountainNews.com or 303-954-2976

Ritter on oil shale

* March 21: In formal comments submitted to the U.S. Bureau of Land Management: Oil shale development, if done hastily, runs the risk of creating "tremendous adverse impacts on Colorado."

Also: "Colorado is committed to working with the federal government and industry on oil shale efforts going forward. But this requires a thoughtful approach - economically, environmentally and socially - rather than a rush to premature leasing and regulatory decisions."

* Dec. 10, 2007: If oil-shale extraction becomes commercially viable, it would be the "biggest industrial development in the history of the state of Colorado."

* Nov. 16, 2007: At the end of a trade mission to Canada, including a visit to the tar sands of northern Alberta: "One of the things that people are mindful of is what happens to the landscape with open-pit extraction. We experimented (in Colorado) - more than experimented - with that in the late 1970s, mining the shale and trying to separate it from rock and turn it into refinery-quality. It was a very inefficient process. . . .

"It'll be decades before that landscape is fully reclaimed (in Alberta). Suncor, one of the companies operating there, has a commitment to reclamation, but people understand it'll take decades. It's a massive project, massive scale. It's a sight to behold."

Comments

  • May 15, 2008

    7:13 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    An_Engineer writes:

    Ritter wants to delay developing shale oil...

    Ritter opposes drilling for gas and oil on the Roan Plateau...

    And yet Ritter expedites support, funding, and permitting for any "alternate" or "renewable" energy venture that is proposed.

    What is wrong with this picture???

    Ask yourself, who exactly is Ritter working for???
    It sure isn't any of us who have to pay for his decisions...

    Remember Ritter's actions when you pay for high priced gas at the pump, when you pay ever increasing prices for natural gas to heat your home, and every increasing prices for electricity to keep the lights on...

  • May 15, 2008

    8:54 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    greenleaf writes:

    We always try to take care of the supply side of the energy equation, while giving little attention to the demand side which is almost as important. Why continue wasting valuable resources such as oil and natural gas? Rather than racing to the "bottom of the barrel", we should use our energy resources far more wisely. We should embrace hybrid technology for cars and trucks. We should insulate our houses and install more efficient furnaces, air conditioners and other appliances. Simply replacing your incandescent bulbs with CFLs now rather than waiting can save hundreds of dollars and thousands of kilowatt hours of electrical energy( we do have many natural gas powered plants).

    I believe that Governor Ritter has the right idea: preserve our important places while permitting sensitive energy development. If we conserve but continue to develop our oil and gas resources, we can have energy for the necessities while giving alternatives time to emerge from research and development.

  • May 16, 2008

    8:13 a.m.

    Suggest removal

    JeremyBlack writes:

    We have a long way to go with renewable energy. The emissions footprint left behind by ethanol is 3 times that of gasoline yet we continue to invest heavily in this contaminate. Never mind the fact that farmers make more money growing fuel grade food than human grade food thus resulting in food riots from Haiti to Egypt.

    The smoking ban has impacted profits of our Colorado casino's and now oil and gas contracts for this state are diminishing. Why drill in Colorado and have to deal with Ritters backwards policies when you can go to the states north and both smoke and drill.

    Governor Ritter has a duty to protect the beauty of Colorado but really, has anyone been to the areas where the shale is found? It just seems that Ritter spends more money on useless programs than helping us gain our independence from OPEC, makes me wonder if he and the house of Saud are business partners.

    Ask yourself what kind of American hinders gas and oil exploration at a time when current oil and gas suppliers are this countries biggest threat.