Shell Oil develops oil shale (new method)

Meeker Morgan

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 10:56 PM
Original message

Shell Oil develops oil shale (new method)

http://ww2.scripps.com/cgi-bin/archives/denver.pl?DBLIST=rm05&DOCNUM=20000

When oil prices last touched record highs - actually, after adjusting for inflation we're not there yet, but given the effects of Hurricane Katrina, we probably will be soon - politicians' response was more hype than hope. Oil shale in Colorado! Tar sands in Alberta! OPEC be damned!

- snip -

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.

- snip -

And we've hardly gotten to the really ingenious part yet. While the rock is cooking, at about 650 or 750 degrees Fahrenheit, how do you keep the hydrocarbons from contaminating ground water? Why, you build an ice wall around the whole thing. As O'Connor said, it's counterintuitive.

But ice is impermeable to water. So around the perimeter of the productive site, you drill lots more shafts, only 8 to 12 feet apart, put in piping, and pump refrigerants through it. The water in the ground around the shafts freezes, and eventually forms a 20- to 30-foot ice barrier around the site.

- snip -

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

niyad

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 10:58 PM
Response to Original message

1. thanks, I missed that article this morning (not enough caffeine) will look

it up when I get home.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

derby378

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 10:58 PM
Response to Original message

2. One word: Biodiesel

Someone PLEASE tell me how to convert my Camry to this stuff!!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

marbuc

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:13 PM
Response to Reply #2

5. It is my understanding

that you cannot without buying a new engine that can process diesel fuel. You might as well buy a new car, or if your Camry is new enough, you might be able to use E-85.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Robb

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:17 PM
Response to Reply #5

7. Any diesel engine will work

The only modifications that need to be made are for altitude and cold, IIRC.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mr_Spock

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:23 PM
Response to Reply #7

14. Yep - sounds like good stuff from what I heard on Ed Shultz show

I don't think the guys Camry (above) is a diesel though...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

meow mix

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:01 PM
Response to Original message

3. gee i thought we had so much of the easy to get stuff..

why bother with all that? spooky.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

TheWraith

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #3

11. Price, price, price.

The old methods of tapping oil shale cost $18 per barrel of oil gotten out of the ground. In contrast, Saudi oil only cost $1 per barrel to get out of the ground. Add to those figures the cost of transportation, storage, distribution, etcetera. Thus, when the price of oil was only $19-$25 per barrel, it could never be cost-effective to go after oil shale. But now with prices close to $70 a barrel, oil shale is starting to look pretty good as a profitable alternate source of supply, so research is being done on how to extract it more efficiently.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Toots

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Sep-04-05 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #11

27. You don't think extraction costs are going to go up like everything else?

Back in the days that extraction costs were $18 a barrel gas cost about a dollar and a quarter a gallon. Now gas is over three dollars and not likely ever to return to under three dollars ever again. Because of this increase in gasoline prices virtually everything in america is costing more. I expect those extraction costs to be doubled at least but still almost viable but how about "alternative energy"? If we invested one fourth in alternative energy that we do in fossel fuels we would do wonders.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Poiuyt

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:01 PM
Response to Original message

4. Wasn't the governor of Montana touting an old method of getting oil from

coal? Supposedly, it wasn't economically feasible when oil was less than $30 per barrel. Now that we'll probably never see prices go back below $30, he thinks its time to re-evaluate that method.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

marbuc

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:18 PM
Response to Reply #4

8. The governor of Montana is one of many

that have promoted liquid coal fuel. This is cost effective when oil is 33-35 dollars a barrel, and as you mentioned, we will probably never see prices like that again. Look for Coal-to-liquid facilities to pop up in the next few years. There is one in Wyoming, and planned for Illinois, Pennsylvania, and possibly WV, and Kentucky.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Robb

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:17 PM
Response to Original message

6. A big part of the energy bill

...involved $$ for some oil shale demo projects.

Out here in Colorado we're pretty leery of oil shale, seeing as how at one time we had something of a bust.

However, if the new tech works out, it's likely to change the face of globalk petro-politics forever.

The potential is huuuuuuge. One set of numbers I read said the high side was oil production in the U.S. would be twice that of the rest of the world combined.

Can you imagine a more valuable technology? What would we do, if it worked, to keep it out of the hands of the competition?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

benburch

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:18 PM
Response to Original message

9. Wow... This sounds like the technology from "Atlas Shrugged"

Yes, I did read the whole thing 35 years ago...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

bemildred

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:19 PM
Response to Original message

10. How many calories in for each calorie out? That's the question. nt

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Texifornia

(399 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Sep-04-05 12:39 AM
Response to Reply #10

20. Sir Isaac will not be ignored

Newton's Second Law of Thermodynamics, that is.

Shale oil didn't work in the 70's because it took more energy input that could be delivered. In other words, energy return on energy invested (EROEI)was negative. Everything else is bullshit.

Even tar sands have only a 1.5:1 to a 3:1 EROEI as compared to about 30:1 for conventional land-based oil. So the usage actually accellerates as these "non-conventional" hydrocarbons become a bigger portion of consumer products like gasoline, heating oil and gas.

No majic here. Physics is physics.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Mr_Spock

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:21 PM
Response to Original message

12. I remember the shale technology discussions in the 70's energy crunch

It's good to see that this technology has progressed over the years - very interesting indeed...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Solon

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:21 PM
Response to Original message

13. So how much energy aka, hydrocarbons, will have to be burned...

to maintain this heat-exchange system again? Looks like just an antipollution measure for a dirty way to get even more pollutants. Find a way to make it more energy efficient, and I'll be impressed.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

joey93turbo

(36 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:26 PM
Response to Original message

15. I hope it works

I'm all for alternative fuel sources, I'm amazed we've progressed this slowly.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MeatLoafZero

(48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sat Sep-03-05 11:50 PM
Response to Reply #15

16. No matter what is proposed, someone complains.

Hydrogen? explosive

Hydroelectric? kills rivers

Nuclear? are you nuts?

Wind turbine? kills birds/views

Mass transit? Will they stop at McDonald's?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Extend a Hand

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Sep-04-05 12:08 AM
Response to Reply #16

17. hi

I crossposted a link to your post in the peak oil group forum
because there are a lot of people over there really knowledgeable about peak oil and I'm hoping they can discuss the merits of this technology.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

MeatLoafZero

(48 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Sep-04-05 12:26 AM
Response to Reply #17

18. Hello

I'm hoping they can discuss the merits of this technology.

and hopefully not the merits (or lack thereof) of my humor. ;)

Crosspost away.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

Extend a Hand

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Sep-04-05 12:37 AM
Response to Reply #18

19. tee hee

I meant to reply to the orignal poster -- but you post did give me a giggle

:hi:

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

mhr

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Sep-04-05 09:47 AM
Response to Reply #16

25. Peak Oil And EROEI Trumps All Meatloaf

Do your homework!

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

BeTheChange

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Sep-04-05 12:58 AM
Response to Reply #15

22. I dont, they will destroy our remaining natural areas..

open up state parks to log all the trees and fuck up all the landscape.

Dumbasses.

BIO - DIESEL.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

NNadir

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Sep-04-05 12:40 AM
Response to Original message

21. Oil is an environmental disaster; oil shale is worse.

We must go nuclear or die.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

CantGetFooledAgain

(635 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Sep-04-05 09:53 AM
Response to Reply #21

26. What about the waste? (nt)

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DS1

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Sep-04-05 12:59 AM
Response to Original message

23. sounds like there's as much energy going into the ground

as there is coming out

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

RevCheesehead

(1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore

Sun Sep-04-05 01:03 AM
Response to Original message

24. I think I'll wait for "Mr. Fusion"

You know - beer cans, banana peels, etc...

Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top

DU AdBot (1000+ posts)

Tue Apr 30th 2024, 07:20 PM
Response to Original message

Advertisements [?]

Top

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.