 | | 
07-05-2008, 10:58 AM
|  | Administrator | | Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: The Republic of Texas
Posts: 22,069
Rep Power: 369 | | | Fueling America
__________________
“The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing” - Edmund Burke |
Login to remove all ads
07-05-2008, 11:38 AM
|  | Klaatu barada nikto | | Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,677
Rep Power: 150 | | Quote:
Originally Posted by GunnyL  | In the "solutions" section of the article, nothing was mentioned about oil shale and coal gasification. Why? Quote: The Politics of Oil Shale
By Jon Birger, senior writer
Complete article: The politics of oil shale - Jun. 6, 2008
NEW YORK (Fortune) -- You'd think this would be oil shale's moment.
You'd think with gas prices topping $4 and consumers crying uncle, Congress would be moving fast to spur development of a domestic oil resource so vast - 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil shale in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming alone - it could eventually rival the oil fields of Saudi Arabia. [Some estimates put total US oil Shale at 1.7 trillion barrels. Saudi Arabia and Russia combined amount to 260 billion barrels -1d].
You'd think politicians would be tripping over themselves to arrange photo-ops with Harold Vinegar (whom I profiled in Fortune last November), the brilliant, Brooklyn-born chief scientist at Royal Dutch Shell whose research cracked the code on how to efficiently and cleanly convert oil shale - a rock-like fossil fuel known to geologists as kerogen - into light crude oil.
You'd think all of this, but you'd be wrong.
Last month, the U.S. Senate's Appropriations Committee voted 15-14 to kill a bill that would have ended a one-year moratorium on enacting rules for oil shale development on federal lands (which is where the best oil shale is located). Most maddening of all - at least to someone like myself not steeped in the wacky ways of Washington - the swing vote on the appropriations committee, U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., voted with the majority even though she actually opposes the moratorium.
"Sen. Salazar asked me to vote no. I did so at his request," Landrieu told The Rocky Mountain News. A Landrieu staffer contacted by Fortune doesn't dispute this, but notes that Landrieu did propose a compromise which Republicans rejected.
Arghh!
She was speaking of U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., who has emerged as the Senate's leading oil shale opponent. Salazar inserted the aforementioned moratorium into an omnibus spending bill last December, and in May he proposed a new bill that would extend the moratorium another year.
Salazar's efforts have essentially pulled the rug out from under Shell (RDSA) and other oil companies which have invested many, many millions into oil shale research since the passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which established the original framework for commercial leasing of oil shale lands. (Last year, oil shale represented Shell's single biggest R&D expenditure.)
Salazar says he's simply trying to slow things down in order to ensure environmental considerations don't get trampled in the rush to turn western Colorado into a new Prudhoe Bay. But, ironically, his bid to extend the moratorium comes at a time when his fellow Senate Democrats have been blasting Big Oil for not reinvesting enough of their profits into developing new sources of energy.
I recently spoke with Republican U.S. Sens. Orrin Hatch of Utah and Wayne Allard of Colorado, the two lawmakers working hardest to end the oil shale moratorium. Here are some excerpts from the interviews:
Fortune: Why do you consider developing oil shale such a high priority?
Sen. Hatch: We have as much oil in oil shale in Utah, Wyoming and Colorado as the rest of the world's oil combined. Liberals and environmentalists can talk all they want about wind, solar and geothermal - all of which I'm for - but last time I checked, planes, trains, trucks, ships and cars don't run on electricity. 98% of transportation fuel right now is oil. Ethanol is the only real alternative, and we're seeing that ethanol has major limitations.
|  |
07-05-2008, 12:03 PM
|  | Bad Motherfucker | | Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 1,773
Rep Power: 98 | | Quote:
The Politics of Oil Shale
By Jon Birger, senior writer
Complete article: The politics of oil shale - Jun. 6, 2008
NEW YORK (Fortune) -- You'd think this would be oil shale's moment.
You'd think with gas prices topping $4 and consumers crying uncle, Congress would be moving fast to spur development of a domestic oil resource so vast - 800 billion barrels of recoverable oil shale in Colorado, Utah and Wyoming alone - it could eventually rival the oil fields of Saudi Arabia. [Some estimates put total US oil Shale at 1.7 trillion barrels. Saudi Arabia and Russia combined amount to 260 billion barrels -1d].
You'd think politicians would be tripping over themselves to arrange photo-ops with Harold Vinegar (whom I profiled in Fortune last November), the brilliant, Brooklyn-born chief scientist at Royal Dutch Shell whose research cracked the code on how to efficiently and cleanly convert oil shale - a rock-like fossil fuel known to geologists as kerogen - into light crude oil.
You'd think all of this, but you'd be wrong.
Last month, the U.S. Senate's Appropriations Committee voted 15-14 to kill a bill that would have ended a one-year moratorium on enacting rules for oil shale development on federal lands (which is where the best oil shale is located). Most maddening of all - at least to someone like myself not steeped in the wacky ways of Washington - the swing vote on the appropriations committee, U.S. Sen. Mary Landrieu, D-La., voted with the majority even though she actually opposes the moratorium.
"Sen. Salazar asked me to vote no. I did so at his request," Landrieu told The Rocky Mountain News. A Landrieu staffer contacted by Fortune doesn't dispute this, but notes that Landrieu did propose a compromise which Republicans rejected.
Arghh!
She was speaking of U.S. Sen. Ken Salazar, D-Colo., who has emerged as the Senate's leading oil shale opponent. Salazar inserted the aforementioned moratorium into an omnibus spending bill last December, and in May he proposed a new bill that would extend the moratorium another year.
Salazar's efforts have essentially pulled the rug out from under Shell (RDSA) and other oil companies which have invested many, many millions into oil shale research since the passage of the Energy Policy Act of 2005, which established the original framework for commercial leasing of oil shale lands. (Last year, oil shale represented Shell's single biggest R&D expenditure.)
Salazar says he's simply trying to slow things down in order to ensure environmental considerations don't get trampled in the rush to turn western Colorado into a new Prudhoe Bay. But, ironically, his bid to extend the moratorium comes at a time when his fellow Senate Democrats have been blasting Big Oil for not reinvesting enough of their profits into developing new sources of energy.
I recently spoke with Republican U.S. Sens. Orrin Hatch of Utah and Wayne Allard of Colorado, the two lawmakers working hardest to end the oil shale moratorium. Here are some excerpts from the interviews:
Fortune: Why do you consider developing oil shale such a high priority?
Sen. Hatch: We have as much oil in oil shale in Utah, Wyoming and Colorado as the rest of the world's oil combined. Liberals and environmentalists can talk all they want about wind, solar and geothermal - all of which I'm for - but last time I checked, planes, trains, trucks, ships and cars don't run on electricity. 98% of transportation fuel right now is oil. Ethanol is the only real alternative, and we're seeing that ethanol has major limitations.
| By Federal Lands are we talking National Parks? Funny how we entrust the government with preserving our lands and then they turn around and call us liberals and environmentalists when we don't want to exploit it for capital gain. I hardly believe Hatch and Allard are socialists, so it'd be opened up to big oil only. The quickest solution to the gas crisis right now is the mass production of cars with better fuel efficiency. A 6 month wait for hybrids...the demand is there.
__________________  |
07-05-2008, 12:51 PM
| | Klaatu barada nikto | | Join Date: Sep 2004
Posts: 2,677
Rep Power: 150 | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Dirt McGirt By Federal Lands are we talking National Parks? Funny how we entrust the government with preserving our lands and then they turn around and call us liberals and environmentalists when we don't want to exploit it for capital gain. I hardly believe Hatch and Allard are socialists, so it'd be opened up to big oil only. The quickest solution to the gas crisis right now is the mass production of cars with better fuel efficiency. A 6 month wait for hybrids...the demand is there. | No we are not referring to "Nationa Parks." See map below. Fuel efficient cars will be good, but that still leaves us dependent on foreign oil. We must develop what we have. We must reduce the foreign policy distortions that result from the West's energy dependency on the Middle East and Russia. So far in this thread, we have mentioned oil shale and the more than one trillion barrels of energy it offers. Included in the discussion should be coal gasification. As great is the energy potential of oil shale, coal offers even more potential. The short form is that we have the hydrocarbon energy we need right here in the lower 48. We know how to reclaim and sequester carbon. We do not need to go to Alaska or drill offshore. Do we want to pay Saudi Arabia, Iran, Chavez, and Putin $145 per barrel or $50 to $60 per barrel to the northern plains and mountain states?  http://geology.com/news/images/oil-shale-map-sm.jpg
For a map of US National Parks, go here: US National Parks Pictures: map |
07-08-2008, 12:29 PM
|  | wanasiasa wapumbava | | Join Date: May 2008 Location: PA
Posts: 1,490
Rep Power: 11 | | | i dont understand the politics behind energy. dems only want to use renewable energy, repubs only want to use oil. why not work equally hard on becoming self sustaining in both? it seems obvious that we cant rely solely on one or the other
__________________
sealybobo thinks im a racist right winger. RGS thinks im a braindead liberal. I wonder which one I am?
the best view is from the middle
“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.” Plato
“Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich by promising to protect each from the other” Oscar Ameringer
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. ... The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home." James Madison |
07-08-2008, 01:36 PM
|  | Registered User | | Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,803
Rep Power: 65 | | | The problem is that the dems are without exception opposed to any progress, period. They won't let us develop our own oil fields, they tax the crap out of it, they penalize people for producing oil...then they act all shocked and shaken when there's an energy crisis.
They insist that we conserve water...then hike the rates. They insist that we buy smaller, more economical cars...then impose toll taxes to make up the difference in $$ they would be receiving in fuel tax. They won't let us develop and make use of our own resources, then stamp their feet and insist that "somebody" provide the unemployed with jobs or income, and accuse others of hiking prices.
It's crazy.
Flipping idiots.
__________________
Poor Spot! He was tired of being thought of as stupid. "I'm gonna join Mensa," he said to myself, "and then I'll be legally permitted to wear the society's insignia--a tattoo of a little map pin pushed into my flesh--and then everyone'll know that I'm not dumb at all!"
Spot Joins Mensa
by James "Kibo" Parry |
07-08-2008, 01:45 PM
| | wanasiasa wapumbava | | Join Date: May 2008 Location: PA
Posts: 1,490
Rep Power: 11 | | Quote:
Originally Posted by AllieBaba The problem is that the dems are without exception opposed to any progress, period. They won't let us develop our own oil fields, they tax the crap out of it, they penalize people for producing oil...then they act all shocked and shaken when there's an energy crisis.
They insist that we conserve water...then hike the rates. They insist that we buy smaller, more economical cars...then impose toll taxes to make up the difference in $$ they would be receiving in fuel tax. They won't let us develop and make use of our own resources, then stamp their feet and insist that "somebody" provide the unemployed with jobs or income, and accuse others of hiking prices.
It's crazy.
Flipping idiots. | you cant say this is all the dems fault. you must realize fault lies on both sides
__________________
sealybobo thinks im a racist right winger. RGS thinks im a braindead liberal. I wonder which one I am?
the best view is from the middle
“Those who are too smart to engage in politics are punished by being governed by those who are dumber.” Plato
“Politics is the gentle art of getting votes from the poor and campaign funds from the rich by promising to protect each from the other” Oscar Ameringer
"I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations. ... The means of defense against foreign danger historically have become the instruments of tyranny at home." James Madison |
07-08-2008, 02:35 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,803
Rep Power: 65 | | Quote:
Originally Posted by busara you cant say this is all the dems fault. you must realize fault lies on both sides | Yes, I can and do say it's the dems fault. There aren't any GOP environmental activists to my knowledge, nor have the Republicans historically nixed anything that means progress, in terms of the harvesting of natural resources.
__________________
Poor Spot! He was tired of being thought of as stupid. "I'm gonna join Mensa," he said to myself, "and then I'll be legally permitted to wear the society's insignia--a tattoo of a little map pin pushed into my flesh--and then everyone'll know that I'm not dumb at all!"
Spot Joins Mensa
by James "Kibo" Parry |
07-08-2008, 02:36 PM
| | Registered User | | Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 8,803
Rep Power: 65 | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Kirk | I'm telling you. Messing with algae is a dangerous, baaaaadddd thing. It's weird stuff, and if it gets messed up, we're screwed.
__________________
Poor Spot! He was tired of being thought of as stupid. "I'm gonna join Mensa," he said to myself, "and then I'll be legally permitted to wear the society's insignia--a tattoo of a little map pin pushed into my flesh--and then everyone'll know that I'm not dumb at all!"
Spot Joins Mensa
by James "Kibo" Parry |
07-08-2008, 05:26 PM
|  | Registered User | | Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 36,997
Rep Power: 236 | | Quote:
Originally Posted by busara i dont understand the politics behind energy. dems only want to use renewable energy, repubs only want to use oil. why not work equally hard on becoming self sustaining in both? it seems obvious that we cant rely solely on one or the other | I disagree with your effort to make this 'simple.' The Dems by ideology and core group, (Greens) must be against drilling, oil shale, etc. They are left with arguing for new technologies and blaming our 'lifestyles.'
The Republicans on the other hand, find that their constituencies are demanding exploitation concurrent with incentives for inventing new technologies. Note that it was McCain that floated the idea of the government offering financial reward for the first to develop a new technology.
__________________
"We are fighting today for our life, for our liberty, for our all, we cannot go on being led as we are. Somehow or other, we must get into the Government men who can match our enemies in fighting spirit, in daring, in resolution and in thirst for victory."~Leo Amery 1940, while staring at Chamberlain |
07-08-2008, 08:02 PM
|  | I used to be cool | | Join Date: May 2007
Posts: 4,293
Rep Power: 106 | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Kathianne I disagree with your effort to make this 'simple.' The Dems by ideology and core group, (Greens) must be against drilling, oil shale, etc. They are left with arguing for new technologies and blaming our 'lifestyles.'
The Republicans on the other hand, find that their constituencies are demanding exploitation concurrent with incentives for inventing new technologies. Note that it was McCain that floated the idea of the government offering financial reward for the first to develop a new technology. | How can you NOT blame our lifestyles to at least some extent? We are the most wasteful society on Earth. God forbid we don't have AC to drive around with on full blast while gas prices are costing many people a rent payment.
And you have to be able to realize McCain is pandering with that proposition, because oil companies have eaten up the competition for decades now, in regards to new technologies. It's also extremely difficult to land a patent for so-called "new technology". All kinds of road blocks, and although I'm pro business and pro free market and all that, I am able to realize the faults of the oil companies. Their lobby will always make sure to snuff out the competition.
__________________
"If you analyze it I believe the very heart and soul of conservatism is libertarianism. The basis of conservatism is a desire for less government interference or less centralized authority or more individual freedom and this is a pretty general description also of what libertarianism is."
-Ronald Reagan
Last edited by Paulitics; 07-08-2008 at 08:04 PM.
|
07-10-2008, 07:35 PM
|  | Thus Always to Tyrants! | | Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Washington, DC area
Posts: 703
Rep Power: 4 | | | We have to get out of the "us vs. them" mentality in this country vis-a-vis the energy discussion. We have one side saying anything that isn't geo-thermal, solar or wind (and there are some on their side that aren't too sure about wind) is BAD.
The other side isn't perfect either.
But we need to have a little nationalistic fervor here and realize we need to get to a place where we are energy independent first. Then, migrate that energy independence to renewables.
Concerning new technologies, I wouldn't be so certain that the oil companies are totally in control of all of them. For example google a company called eestor out of Texas and their ultra capacitors. Or, look at A123 who will be providing the batteries for GM's Volt. |
07-10-2008, 10:19 PM
|  | Registered User | | Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Houston
Posts: 1,059
Rep Power: 23 | | | If the oil companies were all-powerful, we wouldn't have CAFE (Corporate Average Fuel Economy) laws.
If anyone is really holding the power, it's developers. If you want to get into national politics, you usually start out in state or local politics. And if you want to do that, sucking up to developers is probably a good idea. |
07-10-2008, 10:25 PM
|  | Registered User | | Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,517
Rep Power: 78 | | Quote:
Originally Posted by Paulitics How can you NOT blame our lifestyles to at least some extent? We are the most wasteful society on Earth. God forbid we don't have AC to drive around with on full blast while gas prices are costing many people a rent payment.
And you have to be able to realize McCain is pandering with that proposition, because oil companies have eaten up the competition for decades now, in regards to new technologies. It's also extremely difficult to land a patent for so-called "new technology". All kinds of road blocks, and although I'm pro business and pro free market and all that, I am able to realize the faults of the oil companies. Their lobby will always make sure to snuff out the competition. | You do realize, you use more gas driving with your window down than you do with your AC on.
__________________
Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for.
Will Rogers
Socialism is a philosophy of failure, the creed of ignorance, and the gospel or envy, its inherent virtue is the equal sharing of misery.
Winston Churchill
And so, my fellow Americans: ask not what your country can do for you—ask what you can do for your country.
JFK
No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session. -- Mark Twain | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes |  Linear Mode | 
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts
HTML code is Off | | | | |
|
