Home › Forums › Other › Off Topic: “Department of Interior news release” Western Oil Shale Potential
- This topic has 20 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 16 years, 6 months ago by
Anonymous.
-
AuthorPosts
-
August 4, 2008 at 11:11 AM #13515August 4, 2008 at 3:41 PM #252236
Aecetia
ParticipantJohn,
You must know by now, they do not want us to be energy independent.August 4, 2008 at 3:41 PM #252480Aecetia
ParticipantJohn,
You must know by now, they do not want us to be energy independent.August 4, 2008 at 3:41 PM #252474Aecetia
ParticipantJohn,
You must know by now, they do not want us to be energy independent.August 4, 2008 at 3:41 PM #252416Aecetia
ParticipantJohn,
You must know by now, they do not want us to be energy independent.August 4, 2008 at 3:41 PM #252407Aecetia
ParticipantJohn,
You must know by now, they do not want us to be energy independent.August 4, 2008 at 4:41 PM #252457jficquette
Participant[quote=Aecetia]John,
You must know by now, they do not want us to be energy independent.[/quote]Ain’t that the truth!
John
August 4, 2008 at 4:41 PM #252466jficquette
Participant[quote=Aecetia]John,
You must know by now, they do not want us to be energy independent.[/quote]Ain’t that the truth!
John
August 4, 2008 at 4:41 PM #252285jficquette
Participant[quote=Aecetia]John,
You must know by now, they do not want us to be energy independent.[/quote]Ain’t that the truth!
John
August 4, 2008 at 4:41 PM #252524jficquette
Participant[quote=Aecetia]John,
You must know by now, they do not want us to be energy independent.[/quote]Ain’t that the truth!
John
August 4, 2008 at 4:41 PM #252530jficquette
Participant[quote=Aecetia]John,
You must know by now, they do not want us to be energy independent.[/quote]Ain’t that the truth!
John
August 4, 2008 at 9:20 PM #252408Arraya
ParticipantShale has approximately the energy density per ton as Captain Crunch. It’s all about the flow rate.
“Despite a century of trying, and $10 billion in investment, oil shale currently provides an infinitesimal .0001 of world energy, said Randy Udall, director of the Community Office for Resource Efficiency in Aspen. The (Shell) technology is incredible – incredible in an insane way, incredible in a fantastic way, maybe both.
Shell decided that previous efforts to exploit oil shale used too much energy, too much water and displaced too much land. Instead of taking rock out of the ground, heating it inside enormous retorts and releasing unstable hydrocarbons that must immediately be refined into oil, Shell plans to do something different, said Jill Davis, public relations director for the Shell Mahogany project.Imagine a football field, Udall said. Now, imagine that they freeze the perimeter of the field to about 2,000 feet deep. Then, they take the water out of the middle of the field. Once the water is removed, they will drill wells 30 to 40 feet apart, and insert long electric heaters. Shell then plans to heat the rock to about 700 degrees Fahrenheit, and keep it that hot for three years – completing the work that nature would have done if the oil shale had been buried deeper, Udall said.”
“But with today’s technology, the potential energy comes with a steep price, says Udall and others who are opposed to producing oil from shale. The energy required is a ‘gigabunch,’ Udall said. To produce 100,000 barrels a day, would require raising the temperature of 700 billion tons of shale by 700 degrees Fahrenheit. How much coal, how many power plants? One million barrels a day would require 10 new power plants, five new coal mines. Given the expenditure of energy just to get the kerogen out of the rock, oil shale is a poor contender to solve the nation’s energy problems, Udall said.”
You know the oil companies are desperate when it comes down to this. That’s a lot of environmental destruction for very little energy and they still don’t know where the coal or water will come from.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, what we are left with is a federal government fiscally unable to act in ways that respond effectively to the growing energy crisis (even if it now wanted to), a financial system under tremendous stress that is geared primarily to moving funds into investments that encourage further dependence on fossil fuels, and a public that collectively has enormous amounts of capital it cannot effectively move into areas that will reduce fossil fuel dependence or create an infrastructure that runs on renewable energy.
We have in essence a dysfunctional investment system, both public and private, that seems to be providing the equivalent of very expensive end-of-life care to the moribund fossil fuel economy without much consideration for what comes afterward.
August 4, 2008 at 9:20 PM #252573Arraya
ParticipantShale has approximately the energy density per ton as Captain Crunch. It’s all about the flow rate.
“Despite a century of trying, and $10 billion in investment, oil shale currently provides an infinitesimal .0001 of world energy, said Randy Udall, director of the Community Office for Resource Efficiency in Aspen. The (Shell) technology is incredible – incredible in an insane way, incredible in a fantastic way, maybe both.
Shell decided that previous efforts to exploit oil shale used too much energy, too much water and displaced too much land. Instead of taking rock out of the ground, heating it inside enormous retorts and releasing unstable hydrocarbons that must immediately be refined into oil, Shell plans to do something different, said Jill Davis, public relations director for the Shell Mahogany project.Imagine a football field, Udall said. Now, imagine that they freeze the perimeter of the field to about 2,000 feet deep. Then, they take the water out of the middle of the field. Once the water is removed, they will drill wells 30 to 40 feet apart, and insert long electric heaters. Shell then plans to heat the rock to about 700 degrees Fahrenheit, and keep it that hot for three years – completing the work that nature would have done if the oil shale had been buried deeper, Udall said.”
“But with today’s technology, the potential energy comes with a steep price, says Udall and others who are opposed to producing oil from shale. The energy required is a ‘gigabunch,’ Udall said. To produce 100,000 barrels a day, would require raising the temperature of 700 billion tons of shale by 700 degrees Fahrenheit. How much coal, how many power plants? One million barrels a day would require 10 new power plants, five new coal mines. Given the expenditure of energy just to get the kerogen out of the rock, oil shale is a poor contender to solve the nation’s energy problems, Udall said.”
You know the oil companies are desperate when it comes down to this. That’s a lot of environmental destruction for very little energy and they still don’t know where the coal or water will come from.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, what we are left with is a federal government fiscally unable to act in ways that respond effectively to the growing energy crisis (even if it now wanted to), a financial system under tremendous stress that is geared primarily to moving funds into investments that encourage further dependence on fossil fuels, and a public that collectively has enormous amounts of capital it cannot effectively move into areas that will reduce fossil fuel dependence or create an infrastructure that runs on renewable energy.
We have in essence a dysfunctional investment system, both public and private, that seems to be providing the equivalent of very expensive end-of-life care to the moribund fossil fuel economy without much consideration for what comes afterward.
August 4, 2008 at 9:20 PM #252582Arraya
ParticipantShale has approximately the energy density per ton as Captain Crunch. It’s all about the flow rate.
“Despite a century of trying, and $10 billion in investment, oil shale currently provides an infinitesimal .0001 of world energy, said Randy Udall, director of the Community Office for Resource Efficiency in Aspen. The (Shell) technology is incredible – incredible in an insane way, incredible in a fantastic way, maybe both.
Shell decided that previous efforts to exploit oil shale used too much energy, too much water and displaced too much land. Instead of taking rock out of the ground, heating it inside enormous retorts and releasing unstable hydrocarbons that must immediately be refined into oil, Shell plans to do something different, said Jill Davis, public relations director for the Shell Mahogany project.Imagine a football field, Udall said. Now, imagine that they freeze the perimeter of the field to about 2,000 feet deep. Then, they take the water out of the middle of the field. Once the water is removed, they will drill wells 30 to 40 feet apart, and insert long electric heaters. Shell then plans to heat the rock to about 700 degrees Fahrenheit, and keep it that hot for three years – completing the work that nature would have done if the oil shale had been buried deeper, Udall said.”
“But with today’s technology, the potential energy comes with a steep price, says Udall and others who are opposed to producing oil from shale. The energy required is a ‘gigabunch,’ Udall said. To produce 100,000 barrels a day, would require raising the temperature of 700 billion tons of shale by 700 degrees Fahrenheit. How much coal, how many power plants? One million barrels a day would require 10 new power plants, five new coal mines. Given the expenditure of energy just to get the kerogen out of the rock, oil shale is a poor contender to solve the nation’s energy problems, Udall said.”
You know the oil companies are desperate when it comes down to this. That’s a lot of environmental destruction for very little energy and they still don’t know where the coal or water will come from.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, what we are left with is a federal government fiscally unable to act in ways that respond effectively to the growing energy crisis (even if it now wanted to), a financial system under tremendous stress that is geared primarily to moving funds into investments that encourage further dependence on fossil fuels, and a public that collectively has enormous amounts of capital it cannot effectively move into areas that will reduce fossil fuel dependence or create an infrastructure that runs on renewable energy.
We have in essence a dysfunctional investment system, both public and private, that seems to be providing the equivalent of very expensive end-of-life care to the moribund fossil fuel economy without much consideration for what comes afterward.
August 4, 2008 at 9:20 PM #252640Arraya
ParticipantShale has approximately the energy density per ton as Captain Crunch. It’s all about the flow rate.
“Despite a century of trying, and $10 billion in investment, oil shale currently provides an infinitesimal .0001 of world energy, said Randy Udall, director of the Community Office for Resource Efficiency in Aspen. The (Shell) technology is incredible – incredible in an insane way, incredible in a fantastic way, maybe both.
Shell decided that previous efforts to exploit oil shale used too much energy, too much water and displaced too much land. Instead of taking rock out of the ground, heating it inside enormous retorts and releasing unstable hydrocarbons that must immediately be refined into oil, Shell plans to do something different, said Jill Davis, public relations director for the Shell Mahogany project.Imagine a football field, Udall said. Now, imagine that they freeze the perimeter of the field to about 2,000 feet deep. Then, they take the water out of the middle of the field. Once the water is removed, they will drill wells 30 to 40 feet apart, and insert long electric heaters. Shell then plans to heat the rock to about 700 degrees Fahrenheit, and keep it that hot for three years – completing the work that nature would have done if the oil shale had been buried deeper, Udall said.”
“But with today’s technology, the potential energy comes with a steep price, says Udall and others who are opposed to producing oil from shale. The energy required is a ‘gigabunch,’ Udall said. To produce 100,000 barrels a day, would require raising the temperature of 700 billion tons of shale by 700 degrees Fahrenheit. How much coal, how many power plants? One million barrels a day would require 10 new power plants, five new coal mines. Given the expenditure of energy just to get the kerogen out of the rock, oil shale is a poor contender to solve the nation’s energy problems, Udall said.”
You know the oil companies are desperate when it comes down to this. That’s a lot of environmental destruction for very little energy and they still don’t know where the coal or water will come from.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, what we are left with is a federal government fiscally unable to act in ways that respond effectively to the growing energy crisis (even if it now wanted to), a financial system under tremendous stress that is geared primarily to moving funds into investments that encourage further dependence on fossil fuels, and a public that collectively has enormous amounts of capital it cannot effectively move into areas that will reduce fossil fuel dependence or create an infrastructure that runs on renewable energy.
We have in essence a dysfunctional investment system, both public and private, that seems to be providing the equivalent of very expensive end-of-life care to the moribund fossil fuel economy without much consideration for what comes afterward.
-
AuthorPosts
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.