In recent days, some politicians have loudly demanded immediate leasing of massive oil shale reserves in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah as a way to swiftly lower gasoline prices.
The idea is ludicrous, and goes directly against the advice of the very energy companies that are actively researching how to tap the enormous but economically elusive oil shale reserves.
For nearly a century, oil shale has been the Big Rock Candy Mountain in Colorado, a promise of vast riches that always seems just over the next mountain.
As the late historian Carl Ubbel- ohde wrote, Colorado “went through a ‘madness’ in the late teens and early twenties, which included grandiose plans, stock speculation and projected prosperity for northwestern Colorado. The predictions did not materialize because of high costs, expectations which outran technical methods of mining, retorting, and refining, and the discovery of new oil fields that lowered the price per barrel.”
Industry attitudes turned bullish again by 1980, when Exxon predicted shale would be producing 8 million barrels of oil a day by 2010. A Denver Post editorial on June 29, 1980, reacted with a warning that is still valid: “A surging shale industry doesn’t have to do simply with oil. A surging shale industry involves roads and schools, law enforcement and medical services, domestic water supply and pollution control — a myriad of human concerns, all of which are Colorado’s concerns.”
That boom went bust also and in 1982, Exxon canceled its $5 billion Colony Shale Oil Project near Parachute. In the wake of the shutdown, Congress dealt another blow to oil shale’s hopes by ending the Synthetic Liquid Fuels Program.
Despite this record, the tub-thumping Americans for American Energy last week issued a news release assailing Colorado Sen. Ken Salazar in language that would have made Joe McCarthy blush. In one perfervid passage, Utah state Rep. Aaron Tilton said Salazar — who earlier this year helped extend a moratorium on federal oil shale leasing through 2009 — “is aiding and abetting the sworn enemies of our nation. Whose side is he on?”
Well, Salazar is on the side of the citizens who live in the West. He’s also on the side of such major players in oil shale research as Chevron and Shell, which oppose commercial leasing at this time.
There is plenty of oil shale land already in private hands to support existing research efforts.
As the Grand Junction Daily Sentinel editorialized on May 6, “The notion that the one-year moratorium on commercial leasing approved by Congress last year is somehow a barrier to commercial development is nonsense. The real barriers to commercial oil shale production are technological, environmental and financial.”
We believe commercial oil shale production in this region will come, and probably within 10 years. That’s why it’s so important to address the concerns The Post voiced 28 years ago about the impact of oil shale production on the environment and economy of the West, especially on our scarce water supplies.
“In-situ,” or in-the-ground, technology being developed by Shell and EGL Resources, along with a new approach by Chevron crafted by teaming with Los Alamos National Laboratories, may be able to solve those problems. But the companies doing that research say they aren’t yet ready for commercial development.
We commend these far-sighted and responsible energy companies for working with Western leaders like Salazar, Gov. Bill Ritter and Wyoming Gov. Dave Freudenthal to ensure that these vast reserves are developed wisely.
