The Bush administration proposed rules [PDF] for U.S. oil shale development Tuesday that include charging lower royalty rates for oil-shale production on public lands than it does for other oil and gas drilling. The lower royalties are meant to encourage oil-shale production since, as it turns out, the energy- and pollution-intensive process of cooking rocks before pumping out the resulting oil is still up to three times more expensive than extracting already-liquid oil. "It is basically recognition that in the beginning there has to be a lower royalty to recognize the pioneering nature of this business," said the executive director of the National Oil Shale Association. Interior Secretary Dirk Kempthorne had a different take on the economics of oil-shale development, saying the high costs of production are finally beginning to make sense. "For years, the cost of extracting oil from shale exceeded the benefit, but today that calculus is changing." (Thanks, high oil prices!)
source: Associated Press
see also, in Gristmill: Bush admin’s effort to spur oil shale production won’t do much for consumers in short run
see also, in Gristmill: It’s a 1980 flashback, as energy price spikes make oil shale economical once again
Cautious optimism for Copenhagen deal as Barcelona climate talks end
Another coal plant bites the dust
Barcelona outcome: White House strategy is plea for more time
Comments
View as Threaded
Wolverine Posted 2:29 am
23 Jul 2008
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 3:28 am
23 Jul 2008
That's a great deal for all of US. Vote McBush!
Permalink
Wolverine Posted 3:35 am
23 Jul 2008
Permalink
Gustavion Posted 8:29 am
23 Jul 2008
Permalink
Paleocon Posted 9:29 am
23 Jul 2008
I believe that if oil stays above $70 a barrel, at least coal conversion is profitable.
I wonder what we could do to mitigate environmental costs at $120 a barrel?
Again...as a stepping stone to a better ultimate solution.
Permalink
treestump Posted 9:45 am
23 Jul 2008
Permalink
mtvyfan Posted 12:23 am
24 Jul 2008
I'm sorry Mr. Bush, but your American turnip's are just about out of blood for you to squeeze, sir.
Permalink
amazingdrx Posted 12:43 am
24 Jul 2008
Why not skip these foul GHG multiplying air-fouling, aquifer destroying "stepping stone(s)" instead? Because the gas guzzling must continue?
No one is buying that anymore. except bribed legislators and lobbyists. And a very small minority of deluded supporters of supply side fuelishness.
Only demand reduction will stabilize fossil fuel prices, supply increase is a dead end. For the economy and the climate.
Over the next two decades diminish demand for liquid fuel, to a small fraction of present use. With renewable electric energy for transportation.
The technology exists right now, only a free and fair market, let loose from the monopoly control of status quo gas guzzling dependent industries, is necessary to get this effort going.
Permalink
Pathos Posted 9:07 pm
24 Jul 2008
Grats on finally gaining a real name; I understand that's useful for acquiring a driver's license or getting into clubs.
Every dime spent on oil shale extraction would be much better spent on efficiency, or developing electric cars, or at the very least, non-destructive alternative fuels. (These do exist; there's a very cool NYT article in the current--now yesterday's--"In Brief.")
And coal-to-liquid is the worst idea since... Well, solid coal. Is Obama still supporting coal-to-liquid, or has he had the good sense to back-peddle and pretend he never really liked it? Anyone know?
Permalink
Paleocon Posted 3:52 am
28 Jul 2008
As long as it includes a commitment to improving the standard of living of humans at the same time.
Permalink
Birdy100 Posted 10:34 pm
28 Jul 2008
As with the ethanol production, it takes five gallons of water to produce 1 gallon of ethanol. Corn is one of the most nutrient soil robbing plants in the farm world. The land used to produce this product is also taken out of food production. I am all for renewable sources of energy such as solar and wind. That Texas oilman (can't think of his name) has the right idea and it can be done a lot more quickly than any drilling on or offshore.
Permalink
mtvyfan Posted 2:41 am
31 Jul 2008
Permalink