The Oil & Gas Journal had an article regarding a BLM shale oil development program from which I have excerpted the more pertinent parts:
WASHINGTON, DC, Jan. 19 -- Five applicants submitted eight oil shale development and demonstration proposals that are eligible for further consideration, the US Bureau of Land Management said. The five companies are Chevron Shale Oil Co., EGL Resources Inc., ExxonMobil Corp., Oil-Tech Exploration LLC, and Shell Frontier Oil & Gas, which submitted three applications that BLM accepted. ....
The next step will be to complete an evaluation under the National Environmental Policy Act of the eight proposals, according to BLM.
"Each of these proposals shows potential for advancing knowledge of oil shale recovery technology, evidence of economic viability, and adequate means for managing the environmental impact of oil shale development," BLM Director Kathleen Clarke said.
"NEPA analysis will further ensure that oil shale development on federal lands is conducted with environmental and economic responsibility," she indicated. ....
BLM said that six of the proposals involve in-situ retorting, which does not permanently modify the land surface. It said that NEPA analysis will help the agency, which manages 261 million surface acres mostly in 12 western states, determine whether current technologies will result in less surface disturbance than earlier methods. ....
"Oil shale research and development is a critical component in the future of domestic oil production, and by increasing our domestic supply we ultimately decrease our dependence on foreign sources of oil," said Energy and Minerals Subcommittee Chairman Jim Gibbons (R-Nev.).
BLM said that the US holds significant oil shale resources underlying 16,000 sq miles and holding an estimated 800 billion bbl of recoverable oil. More than 70% of American oil shale is on federal land, primarily in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming, it said.
Six of the eight accepted proposals were from major oil companies, one from an engineering company and one from an exploration company. It seems that the major oil companies are more interested in this type of effort rather than expanding their efforts into renewable programs. (Shell does have two significant renewable interests with Iogen and Choren). Although BLM is claiming that these projects will not be awarded if they are not environmentally friendly, expect strong statements against this work from some environmental groups. The problem with in-situ methods is the danger of ground water contamination. I know Shell is trying to develop a system that alleviates this problem. The surface based retorts potentially have surface disturbances, that perhaps could be alleviated by an aggressive land remediation program. Although it is believed to be expensive, oil shale is a potential reserve that may have to be tapped until alternative means of fueling our transportation vehicles are found. If it is the only source of fuel, when oil is at $100-$200 a barrel, in 5 to 15 years, will we then think it is a suitable alternative? I think we should go ahead with this technology development so we have it available if we need it. Tar sands oil from Canada are unlikely to meet all our needs and counting on heavy oil from Venezuela is too much of a political uncertainty.
Technorati tags: oil, shale oil, energy, technology
Comments