Posted on 06/09/2008 6:03:48 AM PDT by K-oneTexas
No, it was $30. but the price will have risen some since it is energy intensive (3.5 units output for 1 unit input).
Seebach: Shell's ingenious approach to oil shale is pretty slick
http://www.rockymountainnews.com/drmn/news_columnists/article/0,1299,DRMN_86_4051709,00.html
Shell's method, which it calls "in situ conversion," is simplicity itself in concept but exquisitely ingenious in execution.
Drill shafts into the oil-bearing rock. Drop heaters down the shaft. Cook the rock until the hydrocarbons boil off, the lightest and most desirable first. Collect them.
They don't need subsidies; the process should be commercially feasible with world oil prices at $30 a barrel. The energy balance is favorable; under a conservative life-cycle analysis, it should yield 3.5 units of energy for every 1 unit used in production. The process recovers about 10 times as much oil as mining the rock and crushing and cooking it at the surface, and it's a more desirable grade. Reclamation is easier because the only thing that comes to the surface is the oil you want.
This was hyped on a thread yesterday.
Washington should not block them, but they should not subsidize it either, which is what the article suggests.
Mosley left out Reason 5, the real reason for not exploiting shale oil. It would be contrary to the wishes of one of the constituency groups of the democrat party.
Well? Tell me how oil companies recording billions of dollars in profits stops YOU from developing a hydrogen from seawater engine.
Shell has been studying oil shale for years, and was ready to bid on leases which were to have been made available next year. But, Colorado's illustruous junior DEMOCRAT senator, Salazar, made sure the leases will be unavailable for years.
GOT $ 5/ gallon gas ? Thank a Democrat !
No, in fact the government should be making a killing leasing the mineral rights.
Or we could just drill some of the oil deposits in Alaska, or off the coast of California, Washington, Texas, Florida, ...
Sorry for not following you down your rabbit trail...have fun though.
Shell, Unocal, and Chevron each have processes to extract kerogen from shale, and two of these processes are field-tested and known to produce in the $35-$45/bbl-equivalent range.
What is needed is a president who will declare domestic production to be a matter of national security (which of course it is, DUH!), and thereby sweep the NOPATs into the dustbin of history.
And folks are poised to vote for more Dems this Nov. 2+2 does not equal 4 for lots of people. Like I said a rough 10 years, maybe more.
What does that mean?
That you don’t have an answer to my question?
How is Joe sixpack getting scammed out of his money?
How are the oil companies having money keeping you from developing a hydrogen from seawater engine?
If you are going to throw accusatory, empty, asinine statements out you should atleast notice that you are unable to substantiate them in a serious question and debate.
No, it was your sophomoric attempt to paint me into your lil corner so you could heap all your sarcastic rhetoric down on my head.
RELAX fella! It's an opinion forum....you have yours and we all have ours.
If you don't like my opinion, find another, don't blow a gasket and risk a stroke.
The energy companies are a portion of the equation. They've done little to help forge a way through this.
All I see from the major oil companies is the blame game.
It's all a matter of public record. Huge salaries, perks, bonuses and HUGE RECORD PROFITS.
Sorry that hurts your feelings.
I’m having a good day, you didn’t hurt my feelings at all.
I have my facts and you have your opinions. I suspect that you may be like some others that I know that will not allow facts to interfere with what they WANT to believe.
Yes, the oil companies are part of the equation. The oil companies are the ones who would provide oil and gasoline at a reasonable price if only Congress would let them.
Now, please elaborate on how the oil companies are shamming Joe Sixpack out of money. (Any emotion you detect in my typed words are fabricated from your end)
You choose to turn a blind eye....that’s ok. Most who are affiliated with a particular industry tend to hold a self preservation mentality...thats ok too. It is however, embarrassing to witness oil company execs shifting around in their chairs attempting to dodge questions regarding their exorbitant compensation packages. Funny really. It was reported yesterday that it cost approximately two dollars a barrel to pump from the ground in Saudi. Do you dispute this? Who gets the other $137. dollars a barrel? http://www.consumersunion.org/profitscover.pdf Major oil companies have ♦ achieved more than $100 billion in excess profits from 2000 to 2005 as a result of anti-competitive practices; ♦ strategically underinvested in refinery capacity to tighten supplies and gain market power over gasoline prices; ♦ carried out a deceptive and misleading PR campaign telling a huge profit story to Wall Street and a small profit story on Main Street; ♦ sought to blame factors other than their own behavior for higher consumer gasoline prices. I submit that the major oil companies have in fact been an integral variable in the latest surge in prices at the pump. Do they shoulder ALL the blame? Certainly not, theirs enough blame to go around. Congress, consumers, foreign interest, market forces and players all play a part to be sure, but American owned oil needs to exhibit some level of loyalty to America and her economic health rather than playing the blame game all the while raking in billions in excess profit to the detriment of the American consumer. You have your opinion, I have my facts. boom!
U.S. domestic oil production has fallen 40% since 1985 because of environmental restrictions and areas of potential oil fields put “off limits” by Congress. Since 1985 U.S. oil consumption has risen 30%.
China and India have hundreds of millions of consumers with recently enhanced lifestyles, oil consumers. World demand for oil has risen dramtically.
Oil companies typically show a profit margin of 9% to 10%. Is this out of land with other industries? Oil companies would much rather expand their businesses and production and provide their product to the consumer at a more reasonable price. This would be much more profitable for them.
You have many empty speculative remarks that are meaningless. Not fact based. I try to stay with facts, when I project, as to what the outcome of the attack of the privately owned oil companies by the socialists might be, I’ll say it is projection.
My meager Mutual Funds may have energy in them, that would be my only affiliation.
Oil is the lifeblood of the American economy, the American economy is what funds the American military. The American military currently cannot be defeated, the economy can be harmed by limiting it’s lifeblood. I want the oil companies to succeed and be profitable. They are huge, that is why their earnings may seem overwhelming to you. Do you want them to be able to expand their oil exploration and be more profitable? I do. (That’s a real question I hope you answer for me.)
How much it costs to pump oil from the ground in Saudi Arabia should be meaningless to us because there are estimated to be 112 billion barrels of oil in areas that are now placed off limits domestically.
Blame the “environmentalists” and Democrats in Congress for this. I have environmentalists in quotes because I believe they do not care any more about the environment than anyone else they are merely using it to advanced their socialism.
What is my “blind eye” not seeing?
I am reading the consumers union thing you sent me.
I am at the point where it mentions that oil companies have refused to build refineries for 30 years.
WOW! I’m telling you, the motive behind propaganda like this is to nationalize the oil industry. What else could be the explanation?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.