Site search
sponsored by
News
Sports
Rifle, Colo. - Some area residents don’t think it’s yet time for the federal government to auction off
leases for oil shale development on federal land in Rifle’s back yard.
“These leases have no restrictions on how things get done,” said Bob Elderkin of Silt,
a retired range expert and wildlife biologist for the Bureau of Land Management.
Elderkin referred to the Bush Administration’s last-minute amendments to BLM
resource management plans, opening approximately 2 million acres of public land to
commercial oil shale leasing.
Elderkin said the administration acted in defiance of the National Environmental
Protection Act, the federal law that requires analysis of impacts on communities and
on the environment before such major projects can be approved.
The problem is such analysis can’t be done until it is known what techniques will be
used to extract the oil from the rock, Elderkin said. At least two technologies have
been discussed, but neither is proven.
“There aren’t any techniques specified,” Elderkin said, “and so the impact is
completely unknown.”
The impacts on towns such as Rifle and Parachute aren’t very well understood, either.
Elderkin said no economic analysis had been done - that he’s aware of - since 1971 or
1972.
“It’s really hard to say what the impacts are going to be,” he said.
One of the companies waiting to purchase leases, Shell Exploration and Production,
has proposed what it calls “freeze wall” technology for releasing the oil from the rock
without mining the rock. The process involves heating the rock until the kerosene is
liquefied and can be pumped to the surface. Large amounts of electrical energy would
be required.
Retired engineer Larry Soderberg of Parachute said other companies’ technologies
might involve mining the oil shale and heating it in an industrial vessel to a
temperature where the kerosene vaporizes from the rock and is then condensed into a
liquid by a cooling system.
“It was a very uneconomical operation,” Soderberg said.
He said he thinks oil shale shouldn’t be pursued because he doesn’t have much hope
that oil produced from the mineral will yield more energy than the amount required to
produce it.
“If the amount of energy that goes in is more than the amount that you get out, it just
doesn’t make any sense,” he said.
A Dec. 4 news release from the Western Colorado Congress, an umbrella group for
Western Slope interest groups, said the WCC had sent a letter asking Carol Browner,
the head of President-elect Barack Obama ’s Energy and Environment Policy Working
Group, to reverse the Bush administration’s policy on oil shale, and to withdraw a set
of rules for oil shale development put in place Nov. 18.
The release says rules made by the administration to govern oil shale leasing are
inadequate because they don’t take into account the vast amount of water oil shale
production is expected to require.
leases for oil shale development on federal land in Rifle’s back yard.
“These leases have no restrictions on how things get done,” said Bob Elderkin of Silt,
a retired range expert and wildlife biologist for the Bureau of Land Management.
Elderkin referred to the Bush Administration’s last-minute amendments to BLM
resource management plans, opening approximately 2 million acres of public land to
commercial oil shale leasing.
Elderkin said the administration acted in defiance of the National Environmental
Protection Act, the federal law that requires analysis of impacts on communities and
on the environment before such major projects can be approved.
The problem is such analysis can’t be done until it is known what techniques will be
used to extract the oil from the rock, Elderkin said. At least two technologies have
been discussed, but neither is proven.
“There aren’t any techniques specified,” Elderkin said, “and so the impact is
completely unknown.”
The impacts on towns such as Rifle and Parachute aren’t very well understood, either.
Elderkin said no economic analysis had been done - that he’s aware of - since 1971 or
1972.
“It’s really hard to say what the impacts are going to be,” he said.
One of the companies waiting to purchase leases, Shell Exploration and Production,
has proposed what it calls “freeze wall” technology for releasing the oil from the rock
without mining the rock. The process involves heating the rock until the kerosene is
liquefied and can be pumped to the surface. Large amounts of electrical energy would
be required.
Retired engineer Larry Soderberg of Parachute said other companies’ technologies
might involve mining the oil shale and heating it in an industrial vessel to a
temperature where the kerosene vaporizes from the rock and is then condensed into a
liquid by a cooling system.
“It was a very uneconomical operation,” Soderberg said.
He said he thinks oil shale shouldn’t be pursued because he doesn’t have much hope
that oil produced from the mineral will yield more energy than the amount required to
produce it.
“If the amount of energy that goes in is more than the amount that you get out, it just
doesn’t make any sense,” he said.
A Dec. 4 news release from the Western Colorado Congress, an umbrella group for
Western Slope interest groups, said the WCC had sent a letter asking Carol Browner,
the head of President-elect Barack Obama ’s Energy and Environment Policy Working
Group, to reverse the Bush administration’s policy on oil shale, and to withdraw a set
of rules for oil shale development put in place Nov. 18.
The release says rules made by the administration to govern oil shale leasing are
inadequate because they don’t take into account the vast amount of water oil shale
production is expected to require.
Oil shale’s effects on population
Associated Governments of Northwest Colorado released a study in April called “Northwest Colorado Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts.” One of the areas investigated was the economic impact of possible future oil shale development.
Under the scenario of the most rapid development of commercial production of oil from oil shale, the study group anticipated production to begin at a small scale in 2021, reaching 50,000 barrels per day (bpd) by 2025, and adding production of 50,000 bpd annually after that. All production would take place in Rio Blanco County. Predicted employment would be 2,000 people per 100,000 bpd, leveling off somewhat above 250,000 bpd. The report can be seen at agnc.org/reports.html. |
