| Next: Big Three beg for aid as bailout bill stalls |
| Author |
Message |
tony7914
Joined: Dec 24, 2004
Posts: 4961
Location: Peru Indiana
|
 Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 11:52 am Post subject: 'Rules of the road' set for oil shale drilling |
|
|
| Quote: |
WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration gave energy companies steep discounts in the royalties they will be required to pay as it established the groundwork Monday for commercial oil shale development on federal land.
Interior Department officials said the 5 percent royalty rate during the first five years of production was needed to spur drilling while still giving taxpayers a fair return. But that rate is much lower than the 12.5 percent to 18.8 percent the government collects from companies harvesting conventional oil and gas on public lands.
"In the short run, the American economy will continue to rely on oil and that means we need to increase supplies particularly here at home," said Stephen Allred, Assistant Secretary of Land and Minerals Management, during a call with reporters. "Public lands have a significant role to play."
Up to 800 billion barrels of oil -- enough to displace oil imports for 100 years, according to the Interior Department -- is locked within fine-grained rock known as oil shale. The bulk of the resources are within a 16,000-square-mile area known as the Green River formation in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming.
Energy companies are looking into various ways of extracting the oil economically. Unlike traditional sources of oil, oil shale is costly to produce. Energy is needed to bake the rock and pump the molten oil to the surface. Shale oil can cost about $37.75 to $65.21 a barrel to produce, compared with $19.50 per barrel for conventional crude, according to Interior Department figures.
|
Source. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ejward
Joined: Jan 06, 2003
Posts: 7054
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 12:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
|
| I can remember hearing about how we have enough oil in shale to supply us for 100 years on the Merv Griffan show ...... That must have been at least 25 years ago. I'll beieve it when I see it.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tony7914
Joined: Dec 24, 2004
Posts: 4961
Location: Peru Indiana
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 1:53 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| ejward wrote: |
| I can remember hearing about how we have enough oil in shale to supply us for 100 years on the Merv Griffan show ...... That must have been at least 25 years ago. I'll beieve it when I see it. |
It's still there because they haven't touched it yet ej. When gas was at or below $1.00 a gallon it wasn't feasible to try and extract it but with prices they way they are now it is. Ending our foreign dependence on oil is a priority with our new administration and should have been done a long time ago, in the short run using what we have here is the best and cheapest way to go.
Here's an interesting read on oil shale. Link. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ejward
Joined: Jan 06, 2003
Posts: 7054
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 2:29 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| Now that the price of oil is back down, will they still do it? Will it be profitable at $1.90 /gal? I'm guessing no. With gas hovering around $2.00 /gal, I'd be willing to pay a few extra cents a gallon to help finance it. Just to get off foreign oil. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tony7914
Joined: Dec 24, 2004
Posts: 4961
Location: Peru Indiana
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 2:43 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| ejward wrote: |
| Now that the price of oil is back down, will they still do it? Will it be profitable at $1.90 /gal? I'm guessing no. With gas hovering around $2.00 /gal, I'd be willing to pay a few extra cents a gallon to help finance it. Just to get off foreign oil. |
Time will tell if they do it or not. You can bet the oil cartels and Venezuela will do what they can to get those prices up while they can. Did you know in Venezuela that Oil generates about 80 percent of the country’s total export revenue and contributes about half of the central government’s income? America is their biggest customer. How do you feel knowing your hard earned dollars are funding Hugo Chavez's social programs when they should be working here.
Let's see if our new president elect can keep his word. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ejward
Joined: Jan 06, 2003
Posts: 7054
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 3:52 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| I'm all for it. Shale away!! It's just not going to happen unless somebody can make some money from it. Even T. Boone Pickens is backing away from his energy ideas because the price of oil has gone down. This is where we need a manhattan project sized program. I'd much rather spend $700 billion on finding new energy than a bail-out of Wall street or the auto industry. I'd rather fund science for new energy than a war in Iraq. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kenmabmcc
Joined: Nov 20, 2003
Posts: 8172
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand.
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 5:02 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
There is no way any money can be made out of oil shale.
Environmental and very large water issues make this a non-starter,
despite all the glowing "new" technology fixes on various company's websites.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
tony7914
Joined: Dec 24, 2004
Posts: 4961
Location: Peru Indiana
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 5:17 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| kenmabmcc wrote: |
There is no way any money can be made out of oil shale.
Environmental and very large water issues make this a non-starter,
despite all the glowing "new" technology fixes on various company's websites.
|
Always the pessimist they used to say a man would never fly as well lol!
It can be mined like coal and processed above ground eliminating the water table concerns.
The time to make a choice is here, America can stay dependent and at the whim of foreign governments and cartels or we can start using what we have to cover the short term until something more reasonable and realistic can replace it. Our government can step in and make this happen.
People here won't tolerate high fuel costs and the trickle down (more like flood) effect that goes with them, the high cost of food, the lost jobs, and the increased cost of everything else. I think this last election helped prove that point.
We were promised change and one way or another there will be change either now or come the next election. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ejward
Joined: Jan 06, 2003
Posts: 7054
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 6:00 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| kenmabmcc wrote: |
There is no way any money can be made out of oil shale.
Environmental and very large water issues make this a non-starter,
despite all the glowing "new" technology fixes on various company's websites.
|
That's not true. If gas goes up to $5.00 / gal or higher, money could be made. At some point, it will be profitable. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kenmabmcc
Joined: Nov 20, 2003
Posts: 8172
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand.
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 8:27 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| tony7914 wrote: |
Always the pessimist they used to say a man would never fly as well lol!
It can be mined like coal and processed above ground eliminating the water table concerns.
|
True...
Processing needs lot of water and electricity,
where the shale is, the water and electricity is not...
The millions of tons of leftover processed shale rock is toxic,
just as is the gases given off by the process.
This process is worse for environment than coal burning power stations.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gezzer
Joined: Oct 19, 2008
Posts: 661
Location: Buckinghamshire England
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:12 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| i take it that not a thought is given to using anything energy saving then ? … |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xavierx
Joined: Nov 06, 2004
Posts: 5421
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:15 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| Why would you say that we're not trying to conserve energy? We are, and can point to specific instances if you want. The bottom line, though, is that we still need energy to run our computers, otherwise there'd be no Lockergnome! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kenmabmcc
Joined: Nov 20, 2003
Posts: 8172
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand.
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:18 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| Gezzer wrote: |
| i take it that not a thought is given to using anything energy saving then ? … |
The process for separating the oil from the shale is very energy intensive,
using large amounts of water.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gezzer
Joined: Oct 19, 2008
Posts: 661
Location: Buckinghamshire England
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:19 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| xavierx wrote: |
| Why would you say that we're not trying to conserve energy? We are, and can point to specific instances if you want. The bottom line, though, is that we still need energy to run our computers, otherwise there'd be no Lockergnome! |
my energy costs have gone up by over 100% in the last year
but the amount i pay has become less, why … |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gezzer
Joined: Oct 19, 2008
Posts: 661
Location: Buckinghamshire England
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:26 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| kenmabmcc wrote: |
| Gezzer wrote: |
| i take it that not a thought is given to using anything energy saving then ? … |
The process for separating the oil from the shale is very energy intensive,
using large amounts of water.
|
agreed
but they make no effort to husband there resources only ways to continue on the path they are treading … |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kenmabmcc
Joined: Nov 20, 2003
Posts: 8172
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand.
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:31 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| xavierx wrote: |
| Why would you say that we're not trying to conserve energy? We are, and can point to specific instances if you want. The bottom line, though, is that we still need energy to run our computers, otherwise there'd be no Lockergnome! |
We could run our computers from solar or wind power,
with suitable storage,[lead batteries]
but for large industrial processes solar and wind do not cut it,
as no suitably large and/or dense storage mediums are commercially available,
to cover the night/day, windy/calm, difference.
In NZ we can used hydro to cover these fluctulations
as we have a large proportion of hydro electricity generation.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
xavierx
Joined: Nov 06, 2004
Posts: 5421
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 9:36 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| Gezzer wrote: |
| xavierx wrote: |
| Why would you say that we're not trying to conserve energy? We are, and can point to specific instances if you want. The bottom line, though, is that we still need energy to run our computers, otherwise there'd be no Lockergnome! |
my energy costs have gone up by over 100% in the last year
but the amount i pay has become less, why … |
That's great. I wish I could say that I've saved more since my costs went up, but I can't - my house is new enough that it's already as energy efficient as it can get. The only thing I could do more is have more CFBs, but I refuse to have mercury-laden bulbs in a house with young children.
I also wouldn't support government enforced conservation as a general rule. While I think the government could (and should) encourage conservation, I don't want big brother deciding for me how hot I can have my house, or how far I can drive. I think what they do now, with tax incentives for hybrid cars and energy efficiency improvements to our houses, is the right kind of encouragement. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kenmabmcc
Joined: Nov 20, 2003
Posts: 8172
Location: Dunedin, New Zealand.
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:39 pm Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
| xavierx wrote: |
| That's great. I wish I could say that I've saved more since my costs went up, but I can't - my house is new enough that it's already as energy efficient as it can get. The only thing I could do more is have more CFBs, but I refuse to have mercury-laden bulbs in a house with young children. |
We all make our own choices but CFB's contain a very small amount of mercury.
http://www.popularmechanics.com/blogs/home_journal_news/4217864.html
| Quote: |
How much mercury is contained in a CFL?
Each bulb contains an average of 5 milligrams of mercury, “which is just enough to cover a ballpoint pen tip,” says Leslie, associate director of the Lighting Research Center at Rensselaer. “Though it’s nothing to laugh at, unless you wipe up mercury [without gloves] and then lick your hand, you’re probably going to be okay.” |
I have CFB's throughout the house and probably have more mercury in my fillings than in the bulbs.
To call them mercury-laden is a vast exaggeration.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gezzer
Joined: Oct 19, 2008
Posts: 661
Location: Buckinghamshire England
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 8:59 am Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
i have all low energy bulbs throughout the house the 2 lights that remain on at night have LED bulbs
the water tanks are heated overnight on the cheaper rate and are triple insulated there is an hour advance switch which can be used during the day if required
all CRT's have been replaced with LCD (3 TV's & 3 monitors)
all equipment has been replaced with 5 star energy saving equipment
my monthly cost a year ago was about £75 it is just about that a month now and that's after the increases. that's for both gas and electric (gas is only used for heating)
i am still looking at ways to save for the house as i don't like giving my money to the power companies needlessly
we also changed our car to a newer small 1200cc petrol one which gets about 45/50mpg from the 2000cc which was doing about 30/35mpg
as they say "every little helps" … |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ejward
Joined: Jan 06, 2003
Posts: 7054
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 19, 2008 10:29 am Post subject: [Login to view extended thread Info.] |
|
|
[quote="xavierx"]
| Gezzer wrote: |
| xavierx wrote: |
| Why would you say that we're not trying to conserve energy? We are, and can point to specific instances if you want. The bottom line, though, is that we still need energy to run our computers, otherwise there'd be no Lockergnome! |
I think what they do now, with tax incentives for hybrid cars and energy efficiency improvements to our houses, is the right kind of encouragement. |
When I was shopping for a car over the summer, I looked at hybrids. All of the tax incentives ended last year. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
General