M
Monte_RCMS
Guest
Oil shale and shale oil are two totally different things.
Your Wiki article defines or explains oil shale development this way:
"According to a survey conducted by the RAND Corporation, the cost of producing a barrel of oil at a surface retorting complex in the United States (comprising a mine, retorting plant, upgrading plant, supporting utilities, and spent shale reclamation), would range between US$70–95 ($440–600/m3, adjusted to 2005 values). This estimate considers varying levels of kerogen quality and extraction efficiency. In order for the operation to be profitable, the price of crude oil would need to remain above these levels. The analysis also discusses the expectation that processing costs would drop after the complex was established. "
However that actually applies only to Canadian oil shale and a failed Colorado project … more like Canadian tar sands. And to certain shale that needs to be dug up and heated.
This article describes the difference between oil shale and shale oil.
But they are two totally absoutely different geologies and “processes”.
seekingalpha.com/article/175771-the-difference-between-oil-shale-and-shale-oil
That is NOT the way they extract shale oil in North Dakota or other stateside places.
The shale in North Dakota merely needs to be drilled and fractured to put paper thin cracks in the rock. And then the oil or natural gas just flows naturally.
money.cnn.com/2011/03/04/news/economy/oil_shale_bakken/index.htm
We don’t use retorts to heat sand or shale that they dig up, the way they do in Canada. The tar sands or oil shale oil is extremely messy and we don’t do that in the U.S.
So, the article should be retitled or been made clearer. … sort of as “tar sands” oil. Or something similar.
With tar sands and oil shale, they dig up the stuff and run it through a messy energy intensive process.
Not the same process as Bakken or other shale oil.
ANWR oil is basic Oil 101. Nothing risky at all. No more risky than developing oil at Prudhoe Bay and pumping it 800 miles to Valdez.
Sorry. But the link and the article are not applicable to this discussion.
Oil developed in the U.S. would likely stay in the U.S. the same way that natural gas in the U.S. would stay in the U.S. While the international price could affect the local price, the fact that so much energy is locally produced would be a bigger factor.
Natural gas is being sold within the United States at rock bottom prices and affects energy prices locally … and causes local prices for energy to drop to rock bottom prices.
And only a relative handful of natural gas wells in Pennsylvania is totally dominating natural gas markets in both the Eastern and Southwestern United States with super low cost energy.
IN ADDITION, natural gas/ methane can be converted to methanol … a liquid at room temperature … and burned in cars and trucks. And the free market cost is half of gasoline’s cost on an energy specific basis. Read www.energyvictory.net and also www.methanol.org All they would need is to have conventional automobiles and trucks be modified to burn the methanol. Very easy to do.
In order to compete locally, ALL energy would need to drop to meet the local natural gas price.
Vehicle fleets are already converting from diesel fuel to compressed natural gas.
That causes the localized price for diesel to drop somewhat. As more and more natural gas markets are developed, ALL local energy prices will be forced to drop and that will cause gasoline and diesel to drop.
The Federal government is working to prohibit use of natural gas for vehicles by requiring exorbitant certifications for conversion kits … for EACH AND EVERY SEPARATE APPLICATION.
