57 comments on Shhh is for oil shale
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
| Show without comments | PDF version
Dave Cohen on June 27, 2006 - 5:34pm
Ho, you've described an entirely different method here for processing the "oil shales". My simple question is this: Considering that Shell does not know yet whether their in situ method will scale up and be economical on large scales, why are they spending so much time, effort and money to develop this "new" method?
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Heading Out on June 27, 2006 - 6:12pm
Patience, and I will get there - to explain why we are "where we are" with oil shale I thought it best to start at the beginning and gradually explain why the process has evolved to the point where it is today. And it is way too long for a single post so there will probably be a short series of these as I go through some of the issues.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
TJ on June 27, 2006 - 7:43pm
At a guess, for the same reason in-situ coal gasification is being examined. Using a hole in the ground vs reactors saves a lot of investment.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
oilmanbob on June 27, 2006 - 11:07pm
Ther are several reasons for attempting to develop oil shale. First, there are research and development tax credits so the research is not costing them much. Second, the major oil companies are absolutely terrified of a punative "windfall profits" tax, and they see this as great public relations for developing alternative energy sources. Third, In Situ minining leaves the waste in place so there is comparitively little remediation and environmental flack. And Fourth-it just might work and be a very economic way to produce energy.
Comments can no longer be added to this story.




k Nation (Jim Kunstler)






GAIA Host Collective