Bush Administration Proposes ‘Fire Sale’ of Rocky Mountains for Oil Shale Development
On Tuesday, the Bush administration moved to accelerate oil-shale development across the Rocky Mountain West. Along with calls to lift the moratorium on offshore drilling, and open up the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil drilling, Tuesday’s release of proposed rules for shale exploration (pdf) by the Bureau of Land Management was merely another shot across the bow in the political blame game over $4-per-gallon gas.
According to Secretary of the Interior, Dirk Kempthorne, shale deposits in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming could provide 800 billion barrels of oil, enough to meet U.S. demand at current levels “for 110 years.”
But the Interior Department is limited in what it can do. Language inserted in a spending bill by Senator Ken Salazar (D-CO) bars the department from issuing final rules on oil-shale development. Though the moratorium is set to expire this October, Sen. Salazar said on a Denver radio station Wednesday that it would probably be extended for another year, so that the issue of oil shale development could be given a much closer look. Salazar said:
“The administration is trying to set the stage for a last-minute fire sale of commercial oil-shale leases in western Colorado, despite the fact that we are still years away from knowing if the technologies for developing oil shale on a commercial scale are even viable.”
Each barrel could require 1 to 3 barrels of water to produce
Tens of millions upon millions of people all over the southwest rely on water from the Colorado for everything from growing crops to meeting drinking water needs, making it one of the most heavily used and managed water systems in the United States.
One study done at the Los Alamos National Laboratory (Wilson et al.: 2006) projected that it would take 105 to 315 million gallons per day to produce 2.5 million barrels of oil per day from shale. The authors also projected that an industry that size also would result in a regional population growth of 433,000 people, requiring another 58 million gallons per day.
Shell not in a hurry to develop oil-shale
Shell Exploration & Production Co. is working an oil-shale project on three 160-acre parcels in Colorado but the company seems to recognize that the technology to squeeze billions of gallons of oil from the rocks of the Rockies is not high on the company’s list of priorities. According to the Denver Post:
“The company is two years into its 10-year research-and-development leases. Shell will make a decision on commercial leasing closer to the end of that decade, [Shell spokesperson Tracy] Boyd said…The company won’t be ready for commercial leasing until probably 2015, Boyd said.
So, what’s the rush to hand out these oil leases now? Even the BLM report states that “currently, there is no oil-shale industry and the oil-shale extractive technology is still in its rudimentary stages.”
The lack of a domestic oil-shale industry makes it purely a speculative endeavor to project the development of the technology necessary to extract oil-shale, the future demand for oil-shale leases, and the costs of developing those resources.
After another day of falling oil prices, the hurried rush to hand out oil shale leases for hundreds of thousands of acres of the Rocky Mountain West is merely another knee-jerk reaction from a Bush administration that is struggling to gain political favor in an election year. But that begs the question - who’s favor are Republicans trying to gain?
Despite what Republicans would have you believe, this election will be about much more than gas prices. And if Republican strategists think otherwise, they’re in for a big surprise in November.
Related Posts:
- “Bush Lifts Executive Ban on Offshore Drilling - Why it Matters and Why it Doesn’t”
- “McCain Calls for More Offshore Drilling - What Else Would he Say in Houston?”
- “Billions of Barrels Under the Bakken Shale”
- “Offshore Drilling Ban Opens Door for Other Domestic Oil Options”
Photo Credit: dsearls via flickr Under a Creative Commons License
Sources: Denver Post; Salt Lake Tribune
Sen. Salazar is right-on. I live in Colorado and let me tell you, it is ALL I can do not to spew obcenties at this idiocy right now. Bush is a short-sighted moron. That’s as clean as I can say it right now.
Bush Administration Proposes Fire Sale of Rocky Mountains | nerdd.net…
\r\nOn Tuesday, the Bush administration moved to accelerate Oil-Shale Development across the Rocky M…
This is off topic, but I’m trying to spread the word about a report from the US Energy Information Agency that says that at max production ANWR will reduce the price of a barrel of oil in 2027 by 75 cents. Please help spread the word that not only will it not effect gas prices now, but it will never have a real impact on gas prices.
Here is a link on digg to the EIA website where the report is available. Please digg it up!
http://digg.com/environment/Drilling_in_ANWR_will_NOT_change_the_price_of_domestic_oil
I love how it’s OK to invest millions of dollars into a new technology like wind power which meets next to none of our national energy needs, but if anyone wants to find a new way to get oil it’s suddenly a waste of time.
Oh, and the stats about how much water it takes to produce oil is very misleading, borderline intentionally misleading. You should compare the water usage to oil production USING THE SAME UNITS OF MEASUREMENT. Then your sentence would read, “105 to 315 million gallons per day to produce 77.5 million gallons of oil per day from shale.” 105 gallons of water for 77.5 gallons of oil is pretty good.
This would allow us to halt rising energy cost while transitioning to renewable sources like wind, solar, and bio. Imagine if we’d started this 10 years ago; we wouldn’t be talking about our dependence on foreign oil or 4.50 a gallon fill-ups.
Hmm… the water issue looks kind of alarming… maybe they can put in a pipeline from the ocean. LOL. Then you’d have a problem with saltwater… by the way, once they use all that water what happens to it? I imagine it must be a horrendous pollutant after its been blasted through shale, or whatever they do with it.
LOL, You gotta be kidding me. Dictator Bush just wont be happy until he COMPLETELY runs the country right into the ground. What a MORON.
JT
http://www.Ultimate-Anonymity.com
Posted by cchiovitti, “Bush is a short-sighted moron.”
At least they are making attempts to broaden the U.S. oil industry and possibly lower oil prices in the future. Everyone complains about the problem, and then you complain further when a possible solution is offered. Shale oil is a step in the right direction. Offshore drilling is a step in the right direction. Drilling in Alaska is also a step in the right direction.
Again, you want cheaper oil prices? The politicians are not to blame, you are. As the consumer you have the power to lessen your own demand for oil. Take a hint from Europe and buy a smaller car. Ride a bike. Use public transportation. Until you do, your complaints are meaningless because you, the consumer, are the idiot.
We need to add to the oil supply now while investing in new technologies to lighten our dependencies on it in the future. We can have more oil within the next decade, but alternative energy methods will not be adequate for our needs for decades.
Oil drilling in Colorado?! You’ve got to be insane. I live in Colorado and I can’t imagine this beautiful state having massive, filthy oil refineries. The impact on the environment would be intense. The oil companies are reporting record breaking profits. They don’t need to be charging what they are charging. I’m so glad Senator Salazar is taking a stand.
May be this idea will work and bear fruits.. who knows…
[...] open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge and the Outer Continental Shelf to drilling, and to allow new oil shale projects in the Rocky Mountain West, a majority (54%) of Americans do not see more drilling as a solution to [...]