OIL SHALE, What is America waiting for?

Published on August 21, 2007 By Moderateman In Consumer Issues

The vast extent of U.S. oil shale resources, amounting to more than 2 trillion barrels, has been known for a century. In 1912, the President, by Executive Order, established the Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves. This office has overseen the U.S. strategic interests in oil shale since that time. The huge resource base has stimulated several prior commercial attempts to produce oil from oil shale, but these attempts have failed primarily because of the historically modest cost of petroleum with which it competed. With the expected future decline in petroleum production, historic market forces are poised to change and this change will improve the economic viability of oil shale.

Right now several companies have already started drilling in the shadow of the Rockies, they say that they can extract oil from the shale at about 10 dollars per barrel, we have more oil there than the combined total of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq and Venzuale put together, doubled, Why have we waited so long to take action on this? Why has our leadership allowed us to be bled dry by people that hate the very air we breath? Why are we still funding terrorism through the pumps of foreign gas stations?

http://emd.aapg.org/technical_areas/oil_shale.cfm

http://www.rand.org/pubs/monographs/2005/RAND_MG414.pdf

Comments (Page 2)

ThinkAloud

on Aug 22, 2007

First off wikipedia is a site that anyone can say anything for a definition for any word, not a good source, Period, for anyone.
Two: extracting the oil from shale was to expensive when they could buy it at 10 to 15 per barrel.

you see what i mean? now Wikipedia is no good? and that information there are fake? they just list fake laws passed by congress? what a spin ....!!!!!!

That corp was not to start the production ..... it was for research for God's sake.

If you want, as your article indicate, to start getting fuel from Coal or Shale you need the process and the equipment all established in design and proven in pilot plants. You know how long that takes?

You guys are really in a virtual-reality world.

That corp was working on projects to figure out the process and the equipment. Do you understand that?

If you did you wouldnt have answered the way you did.

ThinkAloud

on Aug 22, 2007

That democrats are lousy economists and do not understand the science? You just proved that

Of course. These things are privileges reserved only for you and the GOP.

Prove that Big oil is ine bed with republicans? No, you have not proved any such thing.

If the shoe fits ... wear it Doc. I didnt even say that ..... you said it.

Dr Guy

on Aug 23, 2007

Prove that Big oil is ine bed with republicans? No, you have not proved any such thing.

If the shoe fits ... wear it Doc. I didnt even say that ..... you said it.

Ummm....did you read what you quoted? Apparently not.

Of course. These things are privileges reserved only for you and the GOP.

No, they are reserved for sentient beings. Any sentient being may apply. Demogogues need not apply. Now if you can understand that, you are already smarter than your party leaders,.

Moderateman

on Aug 23, 2007

me thinks think aloud needs to think more and remain silent, better to be thought a fool than to confirm it.

MasonM

on Aug 23, 2007

now Wikipedia is no good?

That's hilarious! Wikipedia has never, ever been a reliable source of factual information. It can be edited by anyone who feels like it.

Gideon MacLeish

on Aug 23, 2007

That's hilarious! Wikipedia has never, ever been a reliable source of factual information. It can be edited by anyone who feels like it.

Wikipedia should ONLY be used as a starting point. Everything on there should be independently verified. There's a lot of good information there, but an awful lot of junk as well.

Moderateman

on Aug 23, 2007

Reply By: MasonMPosted: Thursday, August 23, 2007
now Wikipedia is no good?

That's hilarious! Wikipedia has never, ever been a reliable source of factual information. It can be edited by anyone who feels like it.

I keep trying to gently educate people but somehow what I say turns into me being an asshole or I am attacking Mr thinks aloud.

Moderateman

on Aug 23, 2007

Reply By: Gideon MacLeishPosted: Thursday, August 23, 2007
That's hilarious! Wikipedia has never, ever been a reliable source of factual information. It can be edited by anyone who feels like it.

Wikipedia should ONLY be used as a starting point. Everything on there should be independently verified. There's a lot of good information there, but an awful lot of junk as well

Maybe if he reads it from you gid he will understand what I was trying to say. I can go to wikipedia right now and edit America to appear as a country in Africa.

Ziggystyles

on Aug 24, 2007

I live in WY and I think that you are right in asking the question, why arent we digging up that shale now?

However, America isn't waiting for shale....as the oil companies don't want to invest in it. Some are; as I know a rubber manufacturor in my hometown has developed a lining for pipes that carry the shale, helping to extend their life...which is another thing...shale eats pipes rather quickly. I also think that getting oil from Shale is rather expensive and only when regular petroleum is on the higher end of the spectrum does it become worth it. But I figure that as long as the oil comps are making oodles of money from regular oil...they don't see a need yet to tap into the shale reserves. True, there is a bunch, but its too costly at the moment

ThinkAloud

on Aug 25, 2007

me thinks think aloud needs to think more and remain silent, better to be thought a fool than to confirm it.

None of you have challenged the information there. These were actions approved by congress and signed by US presidents. And none of you challenged the accuracy of that. They are historical records. And what you have left to say? Just insults and spin about the accuracy of the wikipedia? !!!!!

You asked for details and i provided it. prove it wrong if you can. Insults and name calling shows who is the fool here.

Twice the Dem started a program to develop methods to do what YOU ASKED FOR IN YOUR ARTICLE and twice the GOP ended that program. and instead of admitting the problem, what do you do? you just start name calling ....

You all are a great intellectual group and i am the fool who should remain silent so you can spread false information and spin the facts? keep dreaming ....

However, the truth usually comes out regardless. and it is now started to show whether i remain silent or not and you guys are all nervous and have nothing to say except name calling.

Ziggystyles

on Aug 25, 2007

i agree that Wikipedia isn't the best place for information, but they are doing a better job of getting information cited with sources. And if there isnt a citation, it will show such.

Just as one can easily go in there and edit info, away from the truth or whatever, one can just as easily go in there and change it back.

ThinkAloud

on Aug 27, 2007

they are doing a better job of getting information cited with sources.

The funny thing about the objection to Wikipedia In This Case is that they listed the history of specific actions by the US Congress and Presidents. we are not talking about opinions. These are records of official US GOV actions.

If this was an opinion of any kind, i would understand the objection, but i guess there is no limit at which spin stops.

Moderateman

on Aug 27, 2007

Reply By: ThinkAloudPosted: Monday, August 27, 2007
they are doing a better job of getting information cited with sources.

The funny thing about the objection to Wikipedia In This Case is that they listed the history of specific actions by the US Congress and Presidents. we are not talking about opinions. These are records of official US GOV actions.

If this was an opinion of any kind, i would understand the objection, but i guess there is no limit at which spin stops.

\there is no spin in my article none, not one word of what I wrote is untrue. We are just trying to tell you start with Wiki then find other sources to back up your claims, if the info you got was gov, sourced, you should have done a little more research and source it through the gov sites, not wiki. that is all. so spin, no name calling.

Moderateman

on Sep 01, 2007

Moderateman

on Sep 10, 2007

Reply By: Moderateman

Posted: Monday, August 27, 2007

I noticed just using a little kindness and common sense blew mr. thinksaloud away.

Welcome Guest! Please take the time to register with us.
There are many great features available to you once you register, including:

Richer content, access to many features that are disabled for guests like commenting on the forums.
Access to a great community, with a massive database of many, many areas of interest.
Access to contests & subscription offers like exclusive emails.
It's simple, and FREE!