End of Peak Oil: 200-Year Supply Of Oil In One Single Shale Formation

[John F Kennedy III]

I really hope they find a better method than fracking for one really important reason. Halliburton owns the patent on the process. Can you believe THAT shit? Returning to the drawing board.....

Yeah we need a new method ASAP.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Oil shale is one of the hardest and thus more expensive forms of oil to extract. It isn't the same as drilling down with an oil rig and pumping it to the surface. Fracking won't help you get to most of it either. The reason for this is that most of the oil is contained within rock. To extract that oil, you have to dig up the rocks, crush them, and then heat them to extract the oil from them. It takes a lot of energy- with current technology, an estimated energy equavelent of one barrel of oil for each two barrels you get in return so half of the energy is lost simply trying to get it and that does not include the energy to refine and transport it. Litterally tons of earth need to be dug up and the waste desposed of- another big problem. It also requires a lot of water and in the part of the country where the Green River Basin is found is pretty dry country. Some are experimenting with drilling a ton of holes and pumping something very hot into the ground and try to get it to flow to a point where it could be pumped out but again that takes a lot of energy to bring the rocks to the needed temperature. You would also have to control for any groundwater contamination.

http://ostseis.anl.gov/guide/oilshale/

The term oil shale generally refers to any sedimentary rock that contains solid bituminous materials (called kerogen) that are released as petroleum-like liquids when the rock is heated in the chemical process of pyrolysis. Oil shale was formed millions of years ago by deposition of silt and organic debris on lake beds and sea bottoms. Over long periods of time, heat and pressure transformed the materials into oil shale in a process similar to the process that forms oil; however, the heat and pressure were not as great. Oil shale generally contains enough oil that it will burn without any additional processing, and it is known as "the rock that burns".

Oil shale can be mined and processed to generate oil similar to oil pumped from conventional oil wells; however, extracting oil from oil shale is more complex than conventional oil recovery and currently is more expensive. The oil substances in oil shale are solid and cannot be pumped directly out of the ground. The oil shale must first be mined and then heated to a high temperature (a process called retorting); the resultant liquid must then be separated and collected. An alternative but currently experimental process referred to as in situ retorting involves heating the oil shale while it is still underground, and then pumping the resulting liquid to the surface.

Oil Shale Mining and Processing

Oil shale can be mined using one of two methods: underground mining using the room-and-pillar method or surface mining. After mining, the oil shale is transported to a facility for retorting, a heating process that separates the oil fractions of oil shale from the mineral fraction.. The vessel in which retorting takes place is known as a retort. After retorting, the oil must be upgraded by further processing before it can be sent to a refinery, and the spent shale must be disposed of. Spent shale may be disposed of in surface impoundments, or as fill in graded areas; it may also be disposed of in previously mined areas. Eventually, the mined land is reclaimed. Both mining and processing of oil shale involve a variety of environmental impacts, such as global warming and greenhouse gas emissions, disturbance of mined land, disposal of spent shale, use of water resources, and impacts on air and water quality. The development of a commercial oil shale industry in the United States would also have significant social and economic impacts on local communities. Other impediments to development of the oil shale industry in the United States include the relatively high cost of producing oil from oil shale (currently greater than $60 per barrel), and the lack of regulations to lease oil shale.

The Canadian Tar Sands (which provide our biggest source for oil in the US) needs the price of oil to be about $85 a barrel to break even. Oil shale is more expensive to produce than tar sands are.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

//////////////

 

[Indy Vidual]

If anyone cares, the old-school Russian dictators poured a lot of money into studying oil, and concluded long ago that:
1) fossil fuel is a myth
2) the world is not running out of oil.

I also agree we need cleaner alternatives.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Water requirements for oil shale- an estimated range from one to three to five barrels of water for each barrel of oil produced:
http://www.postindependent.com/article/20070915/VALLEYNEWS/109150056

High oil prices and a diminishing global supply have renewed interest in the oil shale industry, which went bust in the early 1980s. If the industry took off, full production could reach 2.5 million barrels per day. Each barrel could require 1 to 3 barrels of water to produce.

If full production occurred, that would require additional withdrawals of water from the Colorado and other rivers in western Colorado, said Cathy Wilson, who has studied the oil shale industry's water needs for Los Alamos National Laboratory.

Her study found that the White River in northwest Colorado might be able to support production of 500,000 barrels of oil per day, but only with creation of 16,000 acre feet of new water storage to provide backup during dry years.

She said it remains unclear how much water might be needed to do "in-situ" oil shale production. That process, which is under research by Shell, involves heating shale underground and pumping oil to the surface, rather than mining the shale and then heating it to produce oil.

Wilson's forecasts for water needs project that it would take 105 to 315 million gallons per day to produce 2.5 million barrels of oil per day from shale. However, an industry that size also would result in a regional population growth of 433,000 people, who would require another 58 million gallons per day.

Colorado, Utah and Wyoming used an annual average of 3.8 million acre feet of Colorado River water from 2001-2003. That's 70 percent of the water they're entitled to under an interstate compact governing use of the river by states including those in the dry Southwest.

Use by Colorado, Utah and Wyoming is projected to increase to 4.8 million acre feet, or 90 percent of that allocation, by 2020. A full-scale oil shale industry could increase that use by another 0.2 to 0.4 million acre feet.

Wilson added that the river's flows are likely to be impacted by drought and climate change.

 

[NewRightLibertarian]

Peak Oil has been promoted in the Mainstream media? Since when?

Peak Oil was tinfoil until about five years ago when it hit.

They push the negatives of oil dependence because they're desperate to enact carbon taxes and world government.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Costs for all sources of oil have been soaring. Cheap to produce oil is being used up. That is the basics of Peak Oil- not that we will have zero oil one day. It gets more difficult and more expensive to produce that additional barrel of oil so you do hit a point where production begins to decline- that is the "peak".

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/energy-futurist/the-cost-of-new-oil-supply/468

A few decades ago, we could produce conventional oil profitably in the U.S. for under $15 a barrel. But those days are long gone for the U.S., and for most of the world (except a few old fields in places like Saudi Arabia). As every major oil company has admitted in the past few years, the age of easy and cheap oil has ended.

As the cheap oil from old mature fields is depleted, and we replace it with expensive new oil from unconventional sources, it forces the overall price of oil up. This is because oil prices are set at the margin, as are the prices of most commodities. The most expensive new barrel essentially sets the price for the lot.

Research by veteran petroleum economist Chris Skrebowski, along with analysts Steven Kopits and Robert Hirsch, details the new costs: $40 - $80 a barrel for a new barrel of production capacity in some OPEC countries; $70 - $90 a barrel for the Canadian tar sands and heavy oil from Venezuela’s Orinoco belt; and $70 - $80 a barrel for deepwater oil. Various sources suggest that a price of at least $80 is needed to sustain U.S. tight oil production.

Those are just the production costs, however. In order to pacify its population during the Arab Spring and pay for significant new infrastructure projects, Saudi Arabia has made enormous financial commitments in the past several years. The kingdom really needs $90 - $100 a barrel now to balance its budget. Other major exporters like Venezuela and Russia have similar budget-driven incentives to keep prices high.

Globally, Skrebowki estimates that it costs $80 - $110 to bring a new barrel of production capacity online. Research from IEA and others shows that the more marginal liquids like Arctic oil, gas-to-liquids, coal-to-liquids, and biofuels are toward the top end of that range.

My own research suggests that $85 is really the comfortable global minimum. That’s the price now needed to break even in the Canadian tar sands, and it also seems to be roughly the level at which banks and major exploration companies are willing to commit the billions of dollars it takes to develop new projects.

 

[PaulConventionWV]

Sell the property. Oh and I guarantee there's a much better way to get the oil, so I'm sure you only have a problem with how the government does it.

What is the connection between fracking and the government? I thought the oil companies were private.

 

[John F Kennedy III]

What is the connection between fracking and the government? I thought the oil companies were private.

Apparently Halliburton owns the patent on the process. They're not exactly seperate from the government.

 

[BenIsForRon]

Fracking for oil reminds me of a crackhead searching through his couch for one last rock.

 

[paulbot24]

lol. That is hilarious. I like the quote in the above article: "As every major oil company has admitted in the past few years, the age of easy and cheap oil has ended." This until they magically have patents that seem to save the day every time.

 

[Krugerrand]

Costs for all sources of oil have been soaring. Cheap to produce oil is being used up. That is the basics of Peak Oil- not that we will have zero oil one day. It gets more difficult and more expensive to produce that additional barrel of oil so you do hit a point where production begins to decline- that is the "peak".

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/energy-futurist/the-cost-of-new-oil-supply/468

Is that graph adjusted to inflation?

 

[KingNothing]

Lol. Don't forget the other side of the coin; demand is...lower now than it was almost 30 years ago?!??!? That can't be right, can it?!

Without looking it up, I would say that there is absolutely no way this is true, globally.

 

[KingNothing]

The property owner is then only compensated for surface damages that occur, not for the pollution to the air, land and water table. Each oil well only destroys 2 or 3 acres of land so the property owner is usually only compensated, at the very most, $2,000 per well (number of acres x the average price of land). I feel so bad for the ranchers north of me, their land is being invaded and there is NOTHING they can do about it. Their cattle are getting sick and their well water is being contaminated to the point it can no longer be used.

You realize those things are cause for lawsuits, right? My guess is that you're exaggerating or speaking without all of the details. And for what it's worth, I believe that mining and drilling companies usually buy up land from property owners too, so that they can have easier access to the minerals. They can't just trespass on someone elses land to extract what is under it.

while at the same time we lose this once beautiful ecosystem of western North and South Dakota.

This is true, and it's why I'm not against leaving the mining of rare earths and other "dirty" minerals to the Chinese and those outside of our country.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Is that graph adjusted to inflation?

"Nominal" means in current dollars. "Real" is adjusted for inflation. The chart shows both.

 

[Zippyjuan]

Lol. Don't forget the other side of the coin; demand is...lower now than it was almost 30 years ago?!??!? That can't be right, can it?!

Oh but it is!

US Total Gasoline Retail Sales by Refiners have been falling hard since ~2003.

http://www.eia.gov/dnav/pet/hist/LeafHandler.ashx?n=PET&s=A103600001&f=M

The US oil consumption hit one peak back in the 1970's and the Arab Oil Embargo and resulting energy crisis led the country to examine what it was doing and significantly reduced their oil consumption- so much so that it took nearly 30 years before total (not even per capita which is still lower than then) oil consumption hit the same level (that is with more cars being driven, more businesses, more people using oil for all kinds of things, huge increase in plastics which are made from petroleum, etc). With a slowing economy, consumption again has been declining (not as dramatically as in the 1970's) since about 2003 but is still above that 1970's peak.

(Looking for the chart of US consumption- here is one on global consumption since 1970

http://www.economist.com/node/21519035

 

[Original_Intent]

Zippy is right in that for oil shale, fracking is NOT the method used to extract. It has to be mined and cooked per his post. And where tar sands need a price per barrel of about $85 to be feasible, I BELIEVE the last I heard on oil shale is more like $120 per barrel.

And I am no tree hugger, but I believe you are looking at essentially a strip mining operation. On the plus side, a lot of the locations where it would be mined doesn;t have a lot of "environment" that needs protecting.

I definitely hope for better alternatives, but it is good to know it is there in a pinch. Water would probably be the biggest issue, but I bet if push comes to shove we will find a way - we always do.

 

[puppetmaster]

It's the year 2012, we should be moving past oil.

corruption will not let that happen yet

 

[Mani]

We don't need shale, there are perfectly good spots for oil drilling just bubbling under the surface with more oil than saudi Arabia. Sitting under dead tundra land with no wildlife or trees in site in Alaska.

The non oil crisis. The area was banned because they saw a bird fly by and they didn't want to harm some alge native to that area. It has been sitting untouched for 30 years after it was discovered and we made a deal with the Saudis not to drill it.

 

[Zippyjuan]

We don't need shale, there are perfectly good spots for oil drilling just bubbling under the surface with more oil than saudi Arabia. Sitting under dead tundra land with no wildlife or trees in site in Alaska.

The non oil crisis. The area was banned because they saw a bird fly by and they didn't want to harm some alge native to that area. It has been sitting untouched for 30 years after it was discovered and we made a deal with the Saudis not to drill it.

You been listening to Lindsay Willliams? One of the places he says has more oil than Saudi Arabia in Alaska is Gull Island Island which is less than one mile in area-it sits within Prudhoe Bay. The largest field in Saudi Arabia is 200 miles long. Here is a picture of it:

Prudhoe Bay's (the largest oil field in the USA) estiimated oil reserves are about 25 million barrels and over half of that has already been pumped out. The area has been experiencing declining production since 1987. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prudhoe_Bay_Oil_Field

"Bubbling just under the surface", eh? I guess that is why companies like BP are spending $1 billion a hole to drill litterally miles below the Gulf of Mexico to try to get at some when they already have rigs and leases for Prudhoe Bay. If BP is a rational company and seeking to maximize profits, they are going to want to get the cheapest sources first before they go after the more expensive ones like deep water drilling in the Gulf. This is exactly why companies went to China looking for labor- because it offered the lowest costs for them to produce their goods.