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

Skip to comments.

BLM proposes scaling back oil shale, tar sands development
Fuel Fix ^ | February 3, 2012 | Puneet Kollipara

Posted on 02/06/2012 5:31:48 AM PST by thackney

The Bureau of Land Management on Friday proposed scaling back a George W. Bush-era plan for development of oil shale and tar sands on Western lands, drawing the ire of Republicans and industry groups.

The plan would reduce the available acreage for oil-shale and tar-sands development by about three-fourths in Utah, Colorado and Wyoming in an attempt to protect environmentally sensitive areas. It also would pull back the Bush-era proposal to make oil-shale leases available for commercial development, instead continuing to lease them only for research-and-experimentation purposes.

BLM announced last year it would redo the Bush-era plan as part of a settlement in a lawsuit from environmental groups concerned about impacts of oil-shale development. The bureau said today it also considered concerns that the process of converting kerogen, the organic matter extracted from oil shale, into petroleum liquids hadn’t yet become commercially viable in the United States.

“Because there are still many unanswered questions about the technology, water use, and impacts of potential commercial-scale oil shale development, we are proposing a prudent and orderly approach that could facilitate significant improvements to technology needed for commercial-scale activity,” BLM Director Bob Abbey said in a statement. “If oil shale is to be viable on a commercial scale, we must take a common-sense approach that encourages research and development first.”

Republicans and industry groups said the plan would hold back development of a job-creating, energy-producing resource.

“The distinction between the pro-American job policies of House Republicans and the anti-American energy policies of the Obama Administration could not be clearer,” House Natural Resources Committee Chairman Doc Hastings, R-Wash., said in an emailed statement.

The proposal represents an affront to the “all-of-the-above” energy strategy President Barack Obama espoused in his State of the Union address, Reid Porter, spokesman for the American Petroleum Institute, an oil-and-gas lobbying group, said in an emailed statement.

“The administration is continuing actions that send negative signals to industry and capital markets at exactly the wrong time for the American public,” Porter said. “Consistent and stable regulations are needed to promote the commercial development of oil shale, an important and strategic national resource.”

Areas of the three states the lease plan covers are estimated to hold more than 1 trillion barrels of oil, though not all of it may be recoverable.

The BLM also said the U.S. Geological Survey would study how commercial oil-shale development would affect groundwater and surface water systems.

Some Democrats from Western states said they agreed with BLM’s decision to hold off on commercial leases for now.

Sen. Mark Udall, D-Colo., said “a number of unanswered questions” regarding oil shale should be answered before opening up lands to commercial development.

“Fully understanding the demands of oil-shale development on Colorado’s water and local communities is essential to ensuring responsible development,” Udall said in a statement.

The plan announced Friday would reduce the available oil-shale acreage from 2 million in the 2008 Bush administration plan to 462,000 acres, and reduce the tar-sands acreage from 431,000 to 91,000.

The GOP-controlled House Natural Resources Committee earlier this week passed a bill that would have required the Interior Department to issue five commercial oil-shale leases by 2016 and keep issuing research-and-experimentation leases.

They’re planning to tie that bill and two others that would expand oil-and-gas drilling to upcoming legislation to reauthorize surface transportation programs.


TOPICS: News/Current Events; US: Colorado; US: Utah; US: Wyoming
KEYWORDS: energy; oilsands; oilshale

1 posted on 02/06/2012 5:31:55 AM PST by thackney
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: thackney

Remove the BAST-RDS, the green COMMIE BAST-RDS!!


2 posted on 02/06/2012 5:35:26 AM PST by WellyP (REAL)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Gee, what a surprise the anti-Americans would close down more of our lifeblood production.

Pray for America


3 posted on 02/06/2012 5:35:44 AM PST by bray (More Batting Practice for the Bambino)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Republicans ought to unveil their plans for scaling back the BLM.


4 posted on 02/06/2012 5:39:43 AM PST by G Larry (I dream of a day when a man is judged by the content of his character)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney
So because shale isn't yet commercially viable - yet, we should move cautiously? Wind, solar, electric vehicles? Anyone?
5 posted on 02/06/2012 5:46:37 AM PST by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

No they shouldn’t unveil the plans. They should just implement them.


6 posted on 02/06/2012 5:48:41 AM PST by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: G Larry

No they shouldn’t unveil the plans. They should just implement them.


7 posted on 02/06/2012 5:48:58 AM PST by Sgt_Schultze (A half-truth is a complete lie)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: thackney
The plan would reduce the available acreage for oil-shale and tar-sands development by about three-fourths in Utah, Colorado and Wyoming in an attempt to protect environmentally sensitive areas.

LOL. This needs a slight re-write in order to be really accurate. Here is the edited version:

The plan would reduce the available acreage for oil-shale and tar-sands development by about three-fourths in Utah, Colorado and Wyoming in an attempt to protect environmentally sensitive campaign donations.

8 posted on 02/06/2012 5:54:05 AM PST by InterceptPoint (TIN)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

It is payback for the House Transportation Bill. That has the greenies in a tizzy.

Have a peek at http://www.environmentamerica.org/news/ame/house-transportation-bill-drives-us-deeper-oil-dependence for a prime example of frothing at the mouth Greens.

Just don’t eat first.


9 posted on 02/06/2012 6:08:57 AM PST by EnglishCon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: WellyP
Remove the BAST-RDS, the green COMMIE BAST-RDS!!

I'll buy an "A" Alex.


10 posted on 02/06/2012 6:12:01 AM PST by USS Alaska (Nuke The Terrorist Savages)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Udall again.


11 posted on 02/06/2012 6:21:59 AM PST by Eric in the Ozarks (Eh ?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: thackney

Obama making more jobs for Americans. /s


12 posted on 02/06/2012 9:09:56 AM PST by Vaduz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | 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