Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

USA has Shale Oil 8 Times Saudi Arabia Oil [Energy Independence waiting political will]
Christian News Wire ^ | June 17, 2008 | Jonathon Moseley

Posted on 06/17/2008 6:17:58 AM PDT by Moseley

The United States has as much as 8 times as much oil in the form of "shale oil" as all of Saudi Arabia's oil. America could end all imports of foreign oil if these shale oil resources were developed.

The Wall Street Journal editorial page then picked up the theme of accessing America's shale oil resources, shortly after publication in the New Media Journal.

America's vast supplies of shale oil has not been tapped because it was too expensive when oil was trading at $19 per barrel. And no one has taken action now that oil has exceeded $137 per barrel out of inertia.

Environmentalists oppose all success in the economy and all use of energy. And about 80% of all shale oil is on land owned or controlled by the Federal Government. Therefore, Congressional action is needed to access the 1 to 2 trillion barrels of oil currently residing in the Mid-West.

Shale oil currently supplies about 90% of the electricity and 76% of the total energy for Estonia, in Eastern Europe, on the Baltic Sea. An oil shale demonstration plant in Queensland, Australia produced 700,000 barrels of oil between 2001 and 2003.

SEE --

http://www.NewMediaJournal.us/guest/j_moseley/2008/06092008.htm

New energy solutions will appear in the New Media Journal every Tuesday throughout the Summer.

http://www.NewMediaJournal.US

Jon Moseley studied physics at Hampshire College and the University of Amherst, with a Finance degree from the University of Florida. Moseley promoted the Strategic Defense Initiative at High Frontier and at the Center for Peace & Freedom at the Heritage Foundation.

(Excerpt) Read more at christiannewswire.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Foreign Affairs; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: economy; energy; energyprices; foreignoil; gasoline; gasprices; oil; oilprices; shaleoil; tinfoil

1 posted on 06/17/2008 6:22:03 AM PDT by Moseley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Moseley
The demoratats took away Social Security and gave it away and now what are they doing with oil? Why are they working so hard against US.
2 posted on 06/17/2008 6:27:14 AM PDT by mountainlion (Concerned Conservative.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Moseley

And John McCain in a move that will reassure some of us, is publically calling for an end to the federal moratorium on offshore oil and gas drilling (he apparently still thinks 200 square miles of Alaska are sacrosanct, though). Still it’s an improvement.


3 posted on 06/17/2008 6:28:35 AM PDT by cake_crumb (Terrorist organizations worldwide endorse Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Moseley

Most of this shale is in the Southwest. It takes alot of water to steam the rock to free the oil trapped there. Currently the Southwest is drier than a bond martini. So obviously things are not as cut and dried as they seem.


4 posted on 06/17/2008 6:30:22 AM PDT by steel_resolve (We are living in the post-rational world where being a moron is an asset)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Moseley

Can’t be right. Senator Nelson of Florida says there isn’t enough there to help and he can’t be wrong. /s


5 posted on 06/17/2008 6:33:54 AM PDT by driftdiver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mountainlion

The Dems say we can’t drill our way out of this oil crisis. YES WE CAN. If they would get out of the way, YES WE CAN. This issue will be the main issue for defeating the Dems this year. They have been found out. They are tools of the environmental crazies who want to make the US a third world nation and have us riding around on bicycles. This Pelosi administration must end NOW!


6 posted on 06/17/2008 6:36:01 AM PDT by rtbwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Moseley
Environmentalists oppose all success in the economy and all use of energy.

It is way past the time that we DEMAND the names of these so-called environmentalists.
They are unelected, unaccountable, supreme beings that rule the world.

Transparency now!
I want Name, occupation and all affiliations.
I want to know HOW MANY of these so-called enviromentalists there are.

7 posted on 06/17/2008 6:37:13 AM PDT by Just A Nobody (PISSANT for President '08 - NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steel_resolve

The largest one is in Colorado, I believe. Which still doesn’t solve the extraction problems. The biggest problem with the newer extraction techniques is the amount of electricity needed and the length of time it takes to get the oil heat up and perc out of the rock where it’s accessible. And of course, there are the environmental impact studies.


8 posted on 06/17/2008 6:38:02 AM PDT by cake_crumb (Terrorist organizations worldwide endorse Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Moseley
Oil shale has a great future . So long as there is no real shortage of crude oil , it will always have a great future . Government subsidies are no substitute for market forces . You can just about count on congress to guess wrong about which technology to support . Open market competition is the only proven model for sustainable development .
9 posted on 06/17/2008 6:40:14 AM PDT by kbennkc (For those who have fought for it , freedom has a flavor the protected will never know)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steel_resolve
It takes alot of water to steam the rock to free the oil trapped there.

That is not the only method.

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

RAYTHEON TECHNOLOGY MAY UNLOCK ENORMOUS OIL SHALE RESERVE
http://www.raytheon.com/newsroom/feature/oil_shale06/

10 posted on 06/17/2008 6:43:33 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Moseley
Ya know, I don't think you people get it.
The object here is not to be energy independent from foreign Countries.
The object here is to STICK IT to BIG OIL!
11 posted on 06/17/2008 6:45:05 AM PDT by Falcon4.0
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steel_resolve
There is so much water trapped in the rocks that getting rid of the excess is one of the problems.
The Unocal commercial demonstration plant project in the Colorado Piceance Creek Basin actually produced more water than it consumed, as former Paraho Corporation head Larry Lukens found from talking with Unocal’s engineers. Colorado oil shale contains, on average, 2-5% by weight of water. That water is liberated from the rock during the ‘retorting’ process. Unocal actually had to construct evaporation ponds to get rid of all the excess water generated.
http://www.newmediajournal.us/guest/j_moseley/2008/06092008.htm
12 posted on 06/17/2008 6:45:32 AM PDT by Straight Vermonter (Posting from deep behind the Maple Curtain)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kbennkc

Ping


13 posted on 06/17/2008 6:46:03 AM PDT by Normandy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: steel_resolve
I would hardly call Colorado and Wyoming "Southwest."

Shell has been developing the technology for "in situ" recovery for some time now. The technology is real, it is practical and at $130/bbl it is way past economically viable.

Seebach: Shell's ingenious approach to oil shale is pretty slick

The only thing missing is willingness on the part of our government.
14 posted on 06/17/2008 6:47:29 AM PDT by Sudetenland (Those diplomats serve best, who serve as cannon fodder to protect our troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Moseley

Why not use up the cheap oil in the middle east first, then leave the rest of the world with nothing?

The the USA would still be on top economically, militarily, socially, AND have all the important resources.

This is what the arab “street” always talks about -— they will have nothing in 25 years.


15 posted on 06/17/2008 6:52:15 AM PDT by Yitzchak (The arabs do not respect power; they worship it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All

It’s time to begin the destruction of the House of Saud, as well as release the stranglehold of the other dictators that are cuckolding us with energy dependance. Drill now and get serious about it!


16 posted on 06/17/2008 6:52:33 AM PDT by Maverick68 (w)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: steel_resolve

Using the water assumes it cannot be recaptured and recycled by any means, that the water, converted to steam, is merely allowed to blow away in the wind.

What are the sources of water available there? Some would be fossil water, or water of crystalization, that is already present in the immediate environment. Another would be recapture of the water vapor from the fuel used in the process of heating the steam needed for this extraction process.

A different approach may be to insert RF-generation units into the body of oil shale, in a pattern that focuses the microwaves inward to a certain point, and concentrating the energy there until the heat reaches the critical point.(which could easily exceed the 600º F. or so necessary to cause the kerogen to volatilize and separate from the strata in which it is embedded). Everybody has seen how a microwave works, same principle applied on a larger scale.

Up from the ground comes a’bubblin’ crude - oil, that is, black gold, Texas tea.

There will be some pretty hot rocks for a while, though. The soil will be THOROUGHLY sterilized. For remediation, it may be necessary to re-introduce the native flora and microbiota. But not until there is sufficient water also re-introduced to assure their regrowth. The fauna returns on its own.


17 posted on 06/17/2008 6:52:43 AM PDT by alloysteel (Carbon dioxide is plant food, no more of a "pollutant" than water or oxygen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Moseley

Sen. Salazar (D-CO) is blocking the development of shale oil.


18 posted on 06/17/2008 6:57:03 AM PDT by Brilliant
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Yitzchak

Why? Because the marginal supply is inadequate for our needs, at reasonable if not cheap prices, NOW. Not at some pie-in-the-sky date in future.


19 posted on 06/17/2008 6:58:49 AM PDT by SAJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Yitzchak

What cheap oil in the Middle East?


20 posted on 06/17/2008 7:00:29 AM PDT by cake_crumb (Terrorist organizations worldwide endorse Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant
Sen. Salazar (D-CO) is blocking the development of shale oil.

Sen. Salazar is a putz.

21 posted on 06/17/2008 7:01:58 AM PDT by ironwill (I want my daddy's records.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb

Oil may seem expensive, but that is only because it has been too cheap in the recent past.

For years and years Saudi Arabia and the OPEC have been dumping oil on the market at lower prices than production costs in an attempt to suppress competition from alternative energy supplies.

They reap the benefit during the period (now) when supply cannot meet demand.

Economically (and I speak as an outsider to the United States), the USA is in a very good long term strategic position.

When the economies of China and the developing nations come into fruition, the oil of the Middle East will have been used up.

The only developed countries (other than Norway) with ample energy reserves (coal, oil, nuclear) will be the United States and Canada.

In Israel, the arab papers have been filled for years-and-years with the theory that this result was a “grand conspiracy” by the evil Jooos that run America to leave the arabs with nothing.

The only arab country doing anything about this is Egypt and Quatar, both of which are trying to make sure they will have a developed non-oil-dependent economy in 25-50 years. (Egypt more out of necessity than Quatar -— Eqypt has some oil, but not like the other countries.)


22 posted on 06/17/2008 7:10:04 AM PDT by Yitzchak (The arabs do not respect power; they worship it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Moseley

The odd thing is that Canada, which is in many ways more to the left than the US, is moving full speed ahead to develop tar sands and shale oil and other natural resources. Some of it depends on the province. I believe Alberta is a bit of a problem. But Quebec is generally a safe place for mining companies to operate.

One company I’ve been watching is BQI, Oilsands Quest. In general the Canadians have been pretty active in this area, and in uranium. Canada is, I believe, one of our biggest energy suppliers. And Mexico would be as well, if they weren’t having the usual socialist problems with Pemex. But the US has been sitting on its hands, and the politicians have been blocking development, for the past 40 years.

Ironically, China is about to start drilling by invitation off Cuba, 50 miles from the Florida Keys. I’m sure they’ll be much more careful than American companies not to spill or pollute!


23 posted on 06/17/2008 7:13:18 AM PDT by Cicero (Marcus Tullius)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: steel_resolve
Most of this shale is in the Southwest. It takes alot of water to steam the rock to free the oil trapped there. Currently the Southwest is drier than a bond martini.

Actually, a bit more than half is in the North Dakota/Montana shale formation, which is hardly as dry as the Southwest (and Wyoming isn't, as another poster mentioned, in the Southwest).

Further, there are (again, as others mentioned above) other methods of extraction that don't use anywhere near as much water. Oh, and BTW, if fresh water is a problem, just build a damned pipeline from the Great Lakes to where the oil is. It can be built on the same land as the pipeline bringing oil to Chicago, Detroit, Pittsburgh, etc. (one pipe brings water one way, the pipe 10 feet away brings oil the other way). If a pipeline can be built across Alaska, so can one be built across the Great Plains, and a good deal more cheaply.

24 posted on 06/17/2008 7:15:31 AM PDT by Ancesthntr (An ex-citizen of the Frederation dedicated to stopping the Obomination from becoming President)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Sudetenland
Saturday, September 3, 2005

On one small test plot about 20 feet by 35 feet, on land Shell owns, they started heating the rock in early 2004. "Product" - about one-third natural gas, two-thirds light crude - began to appear in September 2004. They turned the heaters off about a month ago, after harvesting about 1,500 barrels of oil.

While we were trying to do the math, O'Connor told us the answers. Upwards of a million barrels an acre, a billion barrels a square mile. And the oil shale formation in the Green River Basin, most of which is in Colorado, covers more than a thousand square miles - the largest fossil fuel deposits in the world.

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.

That would be one trillion barrels of oil.

25 posted on 06/17/2008 7:16:06 AM PDT by TLI ( ITINERIS IMPENDEO VALHALLA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb

The mere threat of opening US federal lands to drilling will drop the international price of oil by $25 a barrel or more. The price of oil today is driven by 3 factors...
1) Speculation
2) Currency fluctuation
3) Supply & Demand

As soon as the Fed opens up govt owned land for drilling...watch the speculators run for the hills.
The price will drop without a single hole being drilled.


26 posted on 06/17/2008 7:16:11 AM PDT by ptlurking
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Moseley
USA has Shale Oil 8 Times Saudi Arabia Oil

The problem is recovering it. The Saudis just have to stick a drill in the ground and there it is.
27 posted on 06/17/2008 7:17:12 AM PDT by mysterio
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Brilliant

Git a rope!


28 posted on 06/17/2008 7:17:53 AM PDT by Don Carlos (No8Do)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Yitzchak

i made a post similar to your thoughts not long ago and was attacked as being crazy.....i had suggested that this was exactly what our gov’t may be thinking....not really absurd at all...


29 posted on 06/17/2008 7:18:57 AM PDT by tatsinfla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: tatsinfla

I don’t know if it is on purpose, or a blessing of God, or both.

People need to learn how to play chess again. Everyone is playing video games. There are many moves ahead.


30 posted on 06/17/2008 7:27:06 AM PDT by Yitzchak (The arabs do not respect power; they worship it.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Falcon4.0

And the way to be energy independent from arab oil is to drill our own oil in our country. Sticking it to big oil is just foolish. Big oil is keeping you on the road. If they were allowed to drill here, drill now, we would pay less. It’s very simple. More supply, means lower price. Oil profits are no higher as it relates to total revenues than any other corporate profit. They take in a lot but they have to pay a huge amount of federal taxes on their oil. The government is the biggest freeloader of all in the price of oil. How about having them give up their taxes they impose on oil revenues.


31 posted on 06/17/2008 7:33:34 AM PDT by rtbwood
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Yitzchak

Oh I know. You’re preaching to the choir there. I don’t see the point in putting off energy independence in order to further enrich the leaders of hostile nations.


32 posted on 06/17/2008 7:39:19 AM PDT by cake_crumb (Terrorist organizations worldwide endorse Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: ptlurking
"The mere threat of opening US federal lands to drilling will drop the international price of oil by $25 a barrel or more. "

Maybe. It'll drop, yes, but prices locked in via contracts by futures traders will also be a factor.

33 posted on 06/17/2008 7:41:59 AM PDT by cake_crumb (Terrorist organizations worldwide endorse Obama.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: cake_crumb

Eventually those futures contracts HAVE to be delivered, and meanwhile, the hedge funds are trading for cheaper and cheaper oil further up in the future.


34 posted on 06/17/2008 8:03:42 AM PDT by alloysteel (Carbon dioxide is plant food, no more of a "pollutant" than water or oxygen.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: tatsinfla

I too have thought along these lines for years. Our strategic military decision is to wait for the rest of the world to use their oil first, before we use ours.


35 posted on 06/17/2008 8:07:35 AM PDT by Codeflier (We just had 8 more years of a democrat president in office, we already know what happens!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: Moseley
America could end all imports of foreign oil if these shale oil resources were developed.

Not nearly possible. How many bpd can they produce?

36 posted on 06/17/2008 8:07:56 AM PDT by RightWhale (I will veto each and every beer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Just A Nobody

It’s time to start hanging them from lamp posts.


37 posted on 06/17/2008 8:14:49 AM PDT by Noumenon (Time for Atlas to shrug - and pick up a gun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: thackney
Great links

Where can I buy me one of them oil shale licenses?

So if I read this right most of this Oil Shale/Sand is on BLM land is which owned by this collective enterprise called the United States of America.

So the licenses go out to contractors (Big Oil-Small Oil- Mom and Pop Oil)who produce this oil and then the resulting royalty shows up every year as a check made out to John Q Public - like in Alaska now?

Or does the Congress get together and figure out how to steer this "taxpayer profit windfall" into their more deserving projects?

38 posted on 06/17/2008 8:29:27 AM PDT by ninonitti
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Falcon4.0

The object here is not to be energy independent from foreign Countries. The object here is to STICK IT to BIG OIL!

I think it is way beyond that.

In concert with anthropogenic global warming, the idea is to squeeze the United States, which is undeniably an energy and prosperity hog, into the same economic realm as the rest of the world.

The fact is that any other nation, society, or citizen, of the World, no matter how much of an "ally" they may declare to be, will not object to this strategy.

Thank the Council on Foreign Relations.

39 posted on 06/17/2008 8:33:47 AM PDT by jnsun (The LEFT: The need to manipulate others because of nothing productive to offer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: Noumenon
Could not agree with you more!

That is why I want a list of names provided to the public.

How many are there? 20...200...2000...2,000,000?
How many are controlling the world?

40 posted on 06/17/2008 8:45:08 AM PDT by Just A Nobody (PISSANT for President '08 - NEVER AGAIN...Support our Troops! Beware the ENEMEDIA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ninonitti
Where can I buy me one of them oil shale licenses?

The feds continue to keep it tied up. The process for the environmental impact statements were extended and are still in progress.

http://ostseis.anl.gov/

and then the resulting royalty shows up every year as a check made out to John Q Public - like in Alaska now?

No, the check would be like other federal property, it goes to the federal revenue, not as payment to citizens.

41 posted on 06/17/2008 8:58:12 AM PDT by thackney (life is fragile, handle with prayer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: steel_resolve
http://www-acerc.byu.edu/News/Conference/2008/Presentations/Carlos%20Adams.pdf Not a lot of water is used, click here
42 posted on 06/17/2008 9:13:11 AM PDT by cpdiii (roughneck, oilfield trash and proud of it, geologist, pilot, pharmacist, iconoclast.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Codeflier

exactly, then you have the control while they scramble...its just a shame that the citizens(us) have to suffer along the way....its not like we can vote ourselves a 3x payraise like the state of louisiana politicians were trying to do...such a shame they are settling to only double it....


43 posted on 06/17/2008 9:24:11 AM PDT by tatsinfla
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: rtbwood

I’m with you Bro.


44 posted on 06/17/2008 9:42:33 AM PDT by Falcon4.0
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Just A Nobody

Start with your local Green Peace, Sierra Club and ACLU offices. Those places are high on my list of Places to Go, Things to Do, and People to Meet when Atlas shrugs.


45 posted on 06/17/2008 10:00:22 AM PDT by Noumenon (Time for Atlas to shrug - and pick up a gun.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: ExTexasRedhead

Here you go.


46 posted on 06/17/2008 10:39:38 AM PDT by Arrowhead1952 (Typical white person, bitter, religious, gun owner, who will "Just say No to BO in Nov.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Arrowhead1952; freekitty; oswegodeee; ncfool; Free ThinkerNY; gonzo; Clintonfatigued

I worked for Shell and ARCO back in the 70’s and 80’s and they told us then that we had many many years of oil shale and to not worry about having jobs. Liberals and RINO’s have been lying to the American people for decades. IMO, it’s all about their power, greed, and egos. The human waste in DC don’t care one shred about the American people. It’s up to the American people to direct their anger at the corrupt, elitist US Congress who have screwed us over for the past 30+ years. A special thank you also goes to Jimmah Carter, the great American traitor!


47 posted on 06/17/2008 12:02:13 PM PDT by ExTexasRedhead
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: steel_resolve

It takes alot of water to steam the rock to free the oil trapped there.”

NE: No, actually, the rock contains water itself, 2-5% by weight. So when you heat the rock, you release water. The shale is actually a net source of water.


48 posted on 06/17/2008 9:06:54 PM PDT by Moseley (http://www.TheBidenQuiz.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Moseley
May not be that much...see this FR Thread:

U.S. Says 400-Billion Barrel Bakken Oil Field a 'Myth'

49 posted on 06/18/2008 10:21:25 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExTexasRedhead

Amen to what you say...and Obama will follow the Carter path....once in the White House!


50 posted on 06/18/2008 10:42:10 AM PDT by Ernest_at_the_Beach (No Burkas for my Grandaughters!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson