On page 185 of the third edition of Resources of the Earth by James R. Craig et al., they quote the Green River shale as giving no more than "1 to 15 gallons of oil per metric tons... hence, their extraction for oil is not feasible for the foreseeable future."



Additionally, you misrepresented the intent of my comment. Here, I'll quote it for you again since you seem to have missed it:

The first is to surface mine it where on average you get about 1-30 gallons of oil per ton of waste rock. They do get as high as 100 gallons per ton of waste rock though.

I have no idea what the price of oil will be at one gallon oil per ton of waste rock, but it'll be too high to burn, that's for sure.

What I said was that 1 gallon per ton is too low "for sure". I'm not entirely certain about the higher values, so I didn't say anything, which you incorrectly assumed I did. According to the above reference, even 15 gallons per ton waste rock is too low.

Finally, I have serious doubts about the objectivity of your reference -- it's an oil and gas trade magazine. I'm not entirely sure it's wrong, that's why in my comment I said, "I don't think producing that oil shale is going to turn out to be a very good idea" instead of "I know that producing oil shale isn't going to turn out to be a very good idea."