This report was written by David M. Abelson, with invaluable guidance from Anita Schwartz, Joro Walker, Rob Dubuc, Karin P. Sheldon, Mike Chiropolos, Peter Roessmann, Nicole Theerasatiankul, Rob Harris, Bart Miller, Jason Bane, Barney White, and Jason Hanson. The project was funded by a grant from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation.
About Western Resource Advocates Western Resource Advocates is a nonprofit conservation organization dedicated to protecting the West’s land, air, and water.
Design: Jeremy Carlson
Western Resource Advocates 2260 Baseline Road, Suite 200 Boulder, CO 80302 Tel: (303) 444-1188 Fax: (720) 786-8054 www.westernresourceadvocates.org Introducing © Copyright March 2012 Professor Rock
Professor Rock will point out key educational features throughout this report. 5 1 F Introduction Introduction 6 4 3 2 7
C
orward: orward: Air- R What O What D Fueling Our Future Fueling Our Turning into Fuel Asphalt What About Money? the Matter Why Regulations Emissions High Gas Greenhouse #2: Challenge APoorSource #1: Energy Challenge How Water Is Used for Development? Shale Oil WaterPutting Competition Context: for in Shale Oil for Water Increasing Is How Much Water Would Needed? Be Development Shale Oil Technologies Liquid Fuel But Any Is No Economically Shortage Recoverable? of Rock, of Failed Shale History DevelopA Brief Attemptsto Oil Commercially A Poor E A Poor T E and Wildlife, People, West’s the About What ar S ar egulating O egulating onclusion own to the Last D Last the own to F ands: O ands: ouling, S ouling, Message from the President Message the from il S il nergy S nergy Isn’t It What …and Is hale
il S il il S il trip-Mining C trip-Mining hale’s Water-Intensive, High- Water-Intensive, hale’s Welfare Public the Protecting hale: ource with Huge C Huge with ource rop ousin
Impacts limate C arbon, arbon, conomics? conomics? 40 24 29 42 24 39 34 35 37 27 14 10 41 16 13 12 18 21 9 3 1
Table of Contents T producing liquidfuelfrom oil shale. over thewisdom andfeasibility of issues central totheongoing debate tool, concentrating onthesalient This report islargely aneducational United States. the in worldwide,1million including more cars than million company the had sold 2 2011, more than by April 2001; in models Prius ago. Toyotayears 30,000 sold fewer than worldwide introduced 10 was just vehicle, hybrid electric successful commercially Thereally Toyota first the Prius, sale-milestone-us/ (accessed November 18,2011). April 6,2011, http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/04/06/toyota-prius-hits-million- 1 depending on the results of current research and testing. testing. and research of current depending on results the a position to produce of quantities shale, from oil large might they in Shellpredict be Dutch Royal companies as roughly date It the such by which also is water demands. to states commonly project use that it abaseline is First, Why 2050? 2050. of year the perspective the from framed are report this in discussed of issues Many the shale. oil of producing feasibility and from wisdom liquidthe fuel to ongoing the central issues on salient debate the over educational an tool,concentrating largely is report This matters. explores these report This goals. and demands deposits; what and development would for mean energy our of impacts exploiting climate these and economic, social, environmental, the to advance; trying companies are deposits; state of the technologies of shale the oil the nature the on understanding focused has Advocates (WRA) United western Statesthe continues, Western Resource debate development the shale oil over potential As in won’tdecades developing consumers use? that even afuel several next the spending development:be we shale Will when it oil comes as such importance issue to an particular It aquestion is to of power use them. we’ll ofwhat fuel kind without considering years vehiclesmightour 40 in look like about We what consider can’twe think future. energy our but it’s to remember changes, alesson as would we wise be about technology howIt to quickly acliché may be talk United the in available were States. cars all-electric that year David Schepp, “Toyota PriusHits Million-SaleMilestone inU.S.,” DailyFinance , available when Ichose my Honda. mileage and fuel options weren’t that readily were to buy anewtoday, car Iwould consider DNAvehicular my as beloved old Peugeot. I If same the Accord, barely that acar shares into Todaydrove ground. the aHonda Idrive door Peugeot about Chevaux wejust that Deux everThe I bought car first a was two- blue, 1 At the end of 2011, we marked the first full full first the marked we end Atthe of 2011,
Forward Message from the President F
1 OIL SHALE 2050 2 Western Resource Advocates report, I think you’ll agree. Ithink report, this reading After pursuit. energy to awise it is conclude hard would make this that production shale oil of commercial reasonable any analysis found we research, our in As economies. communities and western our sustains the currently that one than environment different face afar likely will teenagers projections these hold climate and true, population growth, water demands, look environment today’s the like? teenagersIf approachAs age, retirement what will not exploring. yet are researchers that sources or energy or by biodiesel renewable powered mademight algae, from sources, cars include electric for might we on automobiles. fuels planes fossil and less be reliant 2050 By Alternatives demands. industrial municipal and to cover growing for used agriculture currently on water rely heavily projections Current conclude will we that by 2050. 5%from to 20% Coloradoanywhere projected water the is to in decrease change, of Basin climate River aresult As amount of the impact water available 2050. in directly will develop shale, oil today including about whether or Decisionsmake we not ahost of to concerns, change. be compounded only climate by will competitionand the fierce be for water 2050, By will much 83%. by as as to increase estimated are water demands Colorado in industrial alone, municipal and growth, of Because this population by 2050. anticipates nation, its the in state in increase a105% second-driest the Utah, years. The population of state 30 of the Colorado next over the by 57% projected is to swell population. arapidly from demand growing escalating with Coloradothe Basin, River less be water in hugepredict to West. the changes will Their there that modelsforecast of otherscientists avariety and climatologists, biologists, economists, 2050, year the By 2050?Why President, WesternPresident, Resource Advocates P.Karin Sheldon undermine these important goals. goals. important these undermine production would of likely shale oil Large-scale goals. similar advancing states are Other by 2050. by 80% emissions gas of goal reducing its greenhouse important Coloradoconventional oil. crude adopted has vitally the comparable of quantities than gases more greenhouse projected is to produce shale oil roughly to 25% 75% report, this in explained As on climate. impacts our potential the evaluate The debate likewise, shale oil must, development. ofassessment shale oil to an temporary. central be These are otherissues and many of whomof workers, likely would additional influx an support communities can whether these is addressed development.of energy to be One question needs that to bend strain under the Colorado beginning already are western in towns as at risk, also communities are Sustainable Angeles. Los than quality have air worse of Colorado, Wyoming and areas Utah, rural certain Already,development, breathe. we of because fuel fossil of air the quality the is at stake Also resource. dwindling for competing how needs and this states would balance water debate supplies the are in over shale oil At stake of source energy.potential The about debate not adiscussion is a just over shale oil development onenergy and and otherland initiatives. negative its on potential environment impacts the also but general, in source energy an have about as shale oil The more morewe the concerns delve we into shale, oil future renewablefuture energy economy. our and usual” as gap “business between strategic of uses fossil to fuels bridge the emerging technologies, while identifying energy solutions, including development of benefits. Thatis why we advocate for clean innovationthat yields positive economic on ahealthy environment. We believe also ideathe ahealthy that economy depends weabideResource Advocates by (WRA), our nation’s continued At Western focus. policy apressing —is issue thatwarrants policyEnergy to its —and economic nexus
Introduction I 3 OIL SHALE 2050 the Colorado River. Sunrise along
from the development of oil shale, including economic and national security impacts. development the from including economic of security national and shale, oil that mightbenefits potential result Corporation identifiedseveral RAND aside, History later, success. but years tocommercial yet it century, see 100 has 20th early shale has been touted as the beginning of a“new era” touted been beginning the has as shale oil hazardous; butdevelopment shale oil particularly amount of is risk, acertain with investment comes financial Any investoran couldbe significant. to returns financial potential the viable, to were prove shale oil commercially if that is The answer short shale. oil region have about this in pith the many of captures concerns questions and realized, WRA question, This shale. oil companies in would invest of shale’s oil drawbacks, all why, asked students shale, oil with When discussing water and issues. energy western about to learn staff Recently, at of University students the Colorado WRA met with shale? oil in invest Why by theRANDCorporation for theU.S. National Energy Technology Laboratory. 2 1 term best interest. This report draws out issues. those draws report This interest. best term long-development our incountry’s that be pursuing argue really would to difficult be companies to were develop viable economically technologies it for would still shale, oil if even development of pursuing costs outweigh the far that benefits. Furthermore, the not to it hard considered, conclude is is of on availableinformation the shale oil When all environment. impactwater,the as such on and of overall its resources, of in terms cost a significant development would of Large-scale come shale oil at report. throughout this discussed however,Those are numerous weighed that the mustbe possible impacts against gains, Pittsburgh Press, October 6,1916,seehttp://checksandbalancesproject.org/tag/oil-shale/. James T. Bartisetal.,OilShaleDevelopment intheUnited States: Prospects andPolicy Issues, 2005,report prepared 1 in oil production oil in at since the least 2
transportation fuel from oil shale. oil from fuel transportation obstacles to producing economic, environmental and acommercial technical, the Butto overcomeneed before of consider even will it production, kind Enefit can that 2025. dayper by of oil barrels be able really to Perhapsproduce50,000 will Enefit Energy andNatural Resources Committee onJune7, 2011, June29, 2011, pages11-12. 4 12, 2011). 3 of day. per oil barrels producing 50,000 be alone will in Utah it 2025 that by posits Oil “data.” American Enefit industry to new incorporate problemsA more trying same recentexample the shows with inadequate. problems otherpotential and proved woefully costs, trends, market to predict ability Exxon’sthat information shows thethat context of 1980, in justifiable technically were Even claims those public ofand if success. estimate alegitimate opinion than rather deployed may have been —and atool as clearlytowere suspect influence public policy claims people Those jobs lost overnight. their 1980 2,000 shut more and than was down later, years its Colony two than Project Shale Less of shale. oil dayfrom per oil barrels Colorado by 2010 it western that wouldin producing itbe which claimed in 10 million made apresentation Exxon ago: 1980 In years For 30 from claim consider example, this completeness, or accuracy.independent of its usefulness, vetting or context presentation without any time, in represents often frozen information considerednew mustbe amuch information in broader Data on aPowerPoint context. emerge can rapidly, claims New and data but of picture. the any presentingbe part may only industry gas and oil the at time point that any in knowing present data, Western Advocates how grappled to Resource with report, this preparing In at best. speculative development remains shale oil from of liquid fuels infancy, without workable and commercial technologies, their in not know. viable technologies Commercially remain do agencies government and still how much industry the doneFor it just remarkable is on of research shale, oil the all to kno deserves public the kno don’t agencies What government and industry Corporation undermined this claim in Congressional June in testimony in 2011: claim this Corporation undermined Enefit, “Development projects: EnefitAmerican Oil,” https://www.enefit.com/en/oil/projects/usa (accessed December James T. Bartis,RANDCorporation, documentsubmitted asanaddendumto testimony presented before theSenate emission of hazardous air pollutants. ofemission hazardous of underground the waters, underground and and waters, of pollution surface overexploitation overThese include subsidence underground mining areas, in Estonia consumed produced and indicatesshale severe haveoccurred. impacts Arecentof environmental oil assessment fuels. to produce transportation used Togeneration or plants. cogeneration in our oil knowledge, Estonia shale not is power. in power of all converted which used is amount is to Asmall aliquid fuel, for generation of asolid the fuel electric as used In primarily is Estonia, oil shale w , and w , and 3 But energy expert Jim Bartis of the RAND of RAND the Bartis Jim expert But energy 4
w hat is speculative at best. at speculative is shale oil from fuels of liquid development Commercial 5 OIL SHALE 2050 6 Western Resource Advocates climate. sources, and quality, energy water quality, air to water quantity, evaluate impacts be able toproperly The publicneedsto and community impacts of the following disclosures: following of the impacts community and able to be environmental, publicto properlyeconomic, the needs The evaluate oftechnologies oninformation on impacts these the abroad values. of range resource disclose it works to mustcandidly develop technologies, commercial industry as theyears, coming In subsidiesgovernment todata. provide independently verified seeking are who The officials elected and burden of proof should on industry be the conclusions. unbiased present believe we impartial, that sources information using in careful very was WRA — independently be cannot paid supporters verified made by companies and claims many because —and ofuncertainties Because these abs/10.1021/ef900678d. Greenhouse Emissions,” Gas Energy Fuels 23,no. 12(2009)6253–6258, doi:10.1021/ef900678d, http://pubs.acs.org/doi/ 5 Adam R.Brandt, “Converting Oil Shaleto LiquidFuels withtheAlbertaTaciuk Processor: Energy Inputsand 5 4 3 2 1 especially important in the arid West. arid the in important especially for development.much commercial water is would need This required be agencies independent governmental mustfund of assessments how program, leasing acommercial Before toneeded considering develop initiating shale. oil amountsCorporation, have concluded water of significant wouldbe that RAND the as such The private and contractors, government federal Water quantity. production, refinement. and mining, of impacts shale oil environmental and health adverse the assessing data agencies governmental independent mustput quality forth air measures, To development evaluate to and and adopt enforceable effective mitigation producers. to shale oil might challenge greatest the pose quality air Protecting quality. Air barrel of oil from oil shale than from conventional from fuel. than of shale oil from oil barrel development would produce per gases toutilized, 25% 75% more greenhouse have concludedIndependent depending on technology the that, analyses Climate. must specify how would mitigated. be impacts must specify agencies regulatory and shale’s contribution needed, is change to climate water groundwater and quality. impacts datathe of potential developmentprovideon quantifiable surface on to industry conditions for require stream (b) and aquatic life, of existing agenciesgovernmental must(a) independent assessments establish baseline development to and adopt implement and appropriate mitigation measures, groundwater Toand quality. properlyof commercial effects the evaluate developmentCommercial water huge poses to surface protecting challenges Water quality. independent ofon impacts assessments otherresources. such agencies the production, with funding of sources electricity the to identify need regulators environmental and industry progresses, research As impacts. and demands different has development,shale of each source and electricity to oil support necessary demand electricity to provideincreased used the might nuclear and energy be gas, natural production. Coal, to electricity tied directly are waterWater quality, along demands, with air and quality sources. Energy 5 More analysis of oil More analysis terminolog “Oil Shale”vs.“eOil “Oil shale,” “shale oil,” and “shale gas” are terms that are often often are that terms are gas” “shale and oil,” “shale shale,” “Oil oil Shale Shale Oil Shale GA entities. entities. incorrectly used in place of one another, but they are different different are they but another, of one place in used incorrectly S
Advances in horizontal drilling techniques and the use of of use the and techniques drilling horizontal in Advances is neither oil nor gas; in fact, it doesn’t contain oil at all. all. at oil contain doesn’t it fact, in gas; nor oil neither is the Borrowing formations. rock tight in trapped oil is is natural gas trapped in impervious shale formations. formations. shale impervious in trapped gas natural is Wyoming are shale oil fields. fields. oil shale are Wyoming economical to exploit. The Marcellus Formation in in Formation Marcellus The to exploit. economical and fundamentally different from shale oil and shale gas gas shale and oil shale from different fundamentally and It is kerogen, or fossilized algae, locked in shale rock. The The rock. shale in locked algae, fossilized or kerogen, is It Niobrara Formation in northeast Colorado and southeast southeast and Colorado northeast in Formation Niobrara the and Saskatchewan, and Dakota, North Montana, Pennsylvania, New York, Virginia, and West Virginia Virginia West and York, Virginia, New Pennsylvania, from shale gas extraction, shale oil has recently recently has oil shale extraction, gas shale from technologies. unproven are shale oil to develop necessary technologies is a shale gas formation. gas ashale is become a feasible resource. The Bakken Formation in in Formation Bakken The resource. afeasible become techniques “fracking” and drilling horizontal/directional hydraulic fracturing technology have made this resource resource this made have technology fracturing hydraulic ” vs.“ShaleGa y s” This is This the one we’re talking we’re about! 7 OIL SHALE 2050 8 Western Resource Advocates Mesa County, Colorado. Photo: U.S. GeologicalSurvey. Oil ShaleMiningCompany's first retort, 1923. — the syndicates, says eastern and filed on recently by Colorado munitions have been material, combustibleof unlimited and Colorado,western productive the richin in area oil shale ofThousands acres of land of the fields spring.this forunderway the development March 30, 1917. Christian Science Monitor, Times , and preparations are Monitor 1917, 30, editionScience of March the Thefrom Christian upplaying Consider shale’s excerpt oil promise. great this stories news and speculators, of alitany politicians, are it rich, of striking dreams fueling and cycles, amongst these Interspersed bust. by followed of hype period a recurring quite simply, is, shale of oil nor rosy history simple. so The not is so picture —the reinforce water and demands energy shale’s oil as —and shows of shale oil However, history the as to access public unfettered lands. industry give is to need we do all that —and needs energy solve growing our can rock this that is shale oil surrounding discourse political The sustains that vision United theoretical. States remains the producing level in onproduced, a commercial shale oil have been of quantities shale from oil small continues, and Although research shale. oil geologic unlock and process develop could technologies deploy they to nature’s shortcut to working have been speculators Since 1900s, early the org/tag/oil-shale/. 6 dubious. much more hype the proven making has elusive, thereby production shale oil history, commercial western mark development otherenergy that However, activities unlike to repeatedcount. times been too many That has view Christian Science Monitor , March 30, 1917, see http://checksandbalancesproject. fields this spring. this fields for development of the arethe underway preparations says Times the syndicates, Colorado eastern and on filed havebeen recently by material, munitions and western Colorado, productive of unlimited combustible area of in oil acres ofshale in rich land the Thousands shale quest forshale years. 100 more than oil it this into sustained aliquid has that fuel, kerogen to extract drive that upgrade and oil, theory,in yield oil naturally. It for drive that is heat kerogen the pressure, and would, shale in precursor Given to oil. of afew years million rock the contains kerogen,oil; instead, awaxy Despite does oil not its shale name, contain ofWhen picture arock. oil shale, you think : 6
, and , and
What Oil Shale Is … and What It Isn’t 1 9 OIL SHALE 2050 “Oil-bearing shale … in “Oil-bearing 10 Utah … contain about 300 A Persistent Myth April 22,1948 Colorado, Wyoming, and the green river area of Deseret News, billion barrels of shale oil.” C Unemployment skyrocketed. oil,” emergency domestic an “ensure and supply of to growth spur 1912, In them. from but not did oil butworked, flow not could The burn, for investors. rocks the oil in the rock.” the in oil of the “atsecret the companies had formed to 100 least unlock 1922, By reserves. shale oil separatenaval asidethree set in was land federal orders, through numerous executive years, 12 next the Over Reserves. Shale Oil A B 14 2009), http://www.centerwest.org/publications/oilshale/0home/index.php, page15. Guide to ShaleCountry (Boulder, CO: Center oftheAmericanWest, University ofColorado, June 13 to Club20, Grand Junction,Colorado, August 25,1980, page18. 12 go+history&hl=en (accessed November 13,2011). com/newspapers?id=6DQxAAAAIBAJ&sjid=9U0DAAAAIBAJ&pg=5975,3441307&dq=oil+shale+chica 11 10 2009), http://www.centerwest.org/publications/oilshale/0home/index.php, page8. Guide to ShaleCountry (Boulder, CO: Center oftheAmerican West, University ofColorado, June 9 Development, October 2010, GAO-11-35, http://www.gao.gov/assets/320/311896.pdf, page4. Understanding of Water Resources Could HelpMitigate theImpactsof Potential OilShale 8 September 2010, page8. 7 attempt an to in lure investment. rocks shale Chicago in lit and corners on stood street westerners 1900s, early the In Wyoming, and Utah…contain about 300 billion barrels of shale oil.” of shale barrels billion about 300 Wyoming, Utah…contain and of Colorado, area river green the shale…in “oil-bearing the that estimate Society’s Chemical touting American the story Press Associated an edition of Deseret News A 1948 production hopes shale the of alive. commercial-scale continued associations and (invisible) the to fan keeping industry flames, years, and $85 million in annual payroll contributions disappeared. contributions payroll disappeared. annual in million $85 and years, regionfollowing back operations or the companies scaled left in Other people out of Colorado’s work western and 2,000 economythan tatters. in Sunday,” Exxon’s Colony billion more leaving $5 collapsed, Project Shale per day.per of shale could from oil produce eightby 2010 barrels country our million Colorado, that western counties in announced representing 22 the Exxon presentation toagroup Club a1980 In 20, developed. commercially be can deposits to idea these the that gave which birth persists, myth that Still, developed long ago. would have been shale oil true, were that If oil. contain rocks the that — is about shale oil discussions transcends still that operative idea myth —the oil discoveries conspired to kill the boom.” the to conspired kill discoveries oil crude Greatthe Depression, when “afree-flowing flood of new lower-cost ommercially D Western Resource Advocates, Fossil Foolishness: Utah’s of Pursuit Tar SandsandOilShale , U.S. Government Accountability Office, Energy-Water Nexus: ABetter andCoordinated “Oil ShaleAmpleTo Over SupplyGas 150Years,” Deseret News, April22,1948,http://news.google. Exxon Corporation, “The Role of Synthetic Fuelsin theUnited State Energy Future,” presentation Jason L.HansonandPatty Limerick,What Every Westerner Should Know AboutOilShale:A Jason L.HansonandPatty Limerick,What Every Westerner ShouldKnow AboutOilShale:A Id. Id. 8 President Howard Taft established the Office of Naval and President Taft Office ofPetroleum the Howard Naval established rief H rief 12 Less than two years later, on May 2, 1982, a day known as “Black “Black as aday known later, 1982, years on May 2, two than Less istory F of 9 That interest in oil shale development That shale oil in interest continued until evelop O evelop 14
, one of Utah’s leading newspapers, carried , one of Utah’s carried leading newspapers, ailed A ailed il S il 10 Despite this bust, private bust, Despite this 7 ttempts to ttempts The scheme investment hale hale 11 13 The npr/NSURM_Documentation.pdf, page6. 2006, http://fossil.energy.gov/programs/reserves/ Strategic Unconventional Resource Model,April Petroleum andOilShaleReserves, National * U.S. DepartmentofEnergy, Office ofNaval rock. the always it’s and been over It’s years. the the rock past 100 — have oil challenged shale development that ones same the rather but land, to access not fundamentally, are, faces industry problems The development. stymieing is policy federal that argue tain policy debates, pro-oil shale voices cer- In matter? land private does Why The problem istherock. Access toland isnot theproblem. in Utah. land non-federal of acres than 45,000 more to access has Exploration Company) Shale Oil Oil The (formerly American Enefit Similarly, in land Utah. non-federal of acres 16,000 approximately to access has sources TOSCO. from Leaf Re- Red itacquired that Colorado in Basin Piceance the in lands shale private extensive has also ConocoPhillips Basin. Piceance rado’s acres 50,000 of oil shale lands in Colo- decades. than more owns for instance, for been Exxon, have and ship, owner- tribal or private, state, in are region three-state the in oil lands of shale acres million three than more that estimated has Reserves Shale Oil and Petroleum Naval of Office ergy’s of En- The Department Wyoming. and Utah, Colorado, across deposits shale oil non-federal, large, are there land, federal on focused has shale oil oping devel- to attention the of much While A Priv a te Aff air *
38°N 39°N 40°N 41°N 42°N 43°N 1 W ° 112 Roy Redmond Honeyville Aurora Corinne cpio Sc Eureka Garland 0 000 000 2 1 Spanish Fork American Richmond Antimony Downey Mona
91 UT
Scale ID
A Glenwood 15 Gunnison Logan Sigurd i ard Wil 1 W ° 112 Brigham City Brigham Perry Monument Peak Monument
Q Payson Springs Hot Lava Fork 89 South Ogden South North Ogden Ogden Layton Utah Koosharem mtfed Smithfie U Lake Idaho Falls Riverton Levan A Hyrum Ephraim Ammon Centerville Morgan 215 Lehi Bountiful rn in Frank Preston Moroni Bancroft R Iona City Lake Salt Santaquin IU afeld Mayf
S Pleasant Grove ereown George pigCty C Spring Loa 04 080 60 50 40 40 30 20 20 0 10 0 Mount Marvine Mount Salem Orem saante Esca Manti
P Provo
akCty C Park B Bicknell Springville L EA C Monument Peak Monument
Mapleton R
Fairview
A RIVE A
T R RAN R
Henefer G
Midway E Reservoir Blackfoot
E I Bridger Peak Bridger B
A O
W e Coalvil
U Lake Grays U
A Charles Saint Lake Bear
National Recreation Area Recreation National R S 30
Fruita A
Laketown Kamas Emery A
T C N Park National Reef Capitol G Fairview
H Peak Meade 189 P E L Randolph Ferron AT E AU 1°W 111° Glen Canyon Glen
F RAFAEL SAN
r
S U e M W 111° Castle Dale Castle
u Evanston
89
t ID
m d awatha H
r
d SWELL H o y a Etna
Huntington
E
C WY
I
n w
N
t r R Diamondville Afton
e b
N Smoot
WY UT Y
e e
Spring Glen Spring Helper
k r
M r
T T Monument National Fossil Butte y
Aspen N 89 elngton Well
S Jackson
D A
km 191 mi
i
r
t
S y Wyoming Peak Wyoming rdger Br
a D S C e
n v M
o i Fort Frontier Kemmerer l A J lo u r N 70
a Carbon East
a d O
o Sunnyside
n Peak Kings 6 R B 189
D OO
View Mountain
E A K U
C
L Peak op Double Lyman I F F el Dan MOUNTAINS F S S
A Granger E N E Barge La Green River Green
ainlMnmn Hovenweep Monument National NaturalBridges R L ABAJO
T
T Piney Big Uinta Basin Uinta Green River Green
1 W ° 110 1 W ° 110
G TAVAPUTS
Reservoir Fontenelle r
e Neola PLATEAU e A n Roosevelt 163 Reservoir Gannett Peak Gannett Basin EAST NationalPark Canyonlands I Flaming Green River ieae Pineda
N Gorge R
191 B O S Maeser
aia Mani B RANGE RIVER WIND O A Ouray i g O N S a
Park National Arches Moab
191 n K W
Vernal
d Peak River Wind
C h y
Map data iscurrently underreview by theBLM. i Eden
Map source: http://ostseis.anl.gov/guide/maps/
Blanding t C L e I Monument National Dinosaur L Monticello F LA SAL A lantic Peak lantic A
MTNS I F F 26
F Springs Rock La Sal La S Reliance Monument
Mount Peale Mount S
Bonanza National
PLATEAU UT 109°W
PLATEAU 666 CO AMPA YA ROAN 109°W
B lford M Monument Superior
O llion Pav Colorado aeway Ga National
O R
Fort Washakie Fort K Dove Creek Dove
O 6
Rangely
C
U A au ta Natur L
N
Fruita I
Uravan F
160 C N 80
F
O atha Hia Hudson S M
40
Junction Grand C Cortez P
Nucla
A Beque De
L Washakie Piceance Shoshoni 10 H Dolores
Riverton
Clifton I Creek G Basin
Basin
F Mancos
R Parachute
DIVIDE GREAT erde National d Park r Ve a s e M
BASIN E
Norwood H
F I
Mountain L
D P L
A Copper
S G N
L S 108°W
F
A
Meeker O
R
SHOSHONE
B R T Montrose
G T
A A Whiskey Peak Whiskey E
on ison Wi Mount T H
Wamsutter
R N eta De 108°W A
T BASIN
Rico
U A L I
WY
CO olbran Co Olathe
E T
N Rifle Monument Peak Monument Jeffrey City Jeffrey
Cedaredge M E D
E l ro Ba
New Castle M 550 N M Durango
Telluride T T
Ridgway E
M Craig N Hotchkiss S
Uncompahgre Peak Uncompahgre E S National Park the Gunnison BlackCanyon of Ouray A S Silverton
Crawford A Paonia Windom Peak Windom 287 Tar Sands Area Oil Shale Basin System Park National Forest National ELKHEAD 50 20 Somerset MTNS MOUNTAINS Garf e d Peak d e Garf SAN JUAN 30 Pagosa Springs Pagosa Oak Creek Oak
Springs Glenwood Hayden Lake City Lake 107°W icar Sincla Gypsum WEST MTNS Monument Peak Monument Yampa ELK onain Moun Gunnison Bridger Peak Bridger ElJebel Copper OSTS015 107°W 84
38°N 39°N 40°N 41°N 42°N 43°N 12 Western Resource Advocates orado and Utah. and orado Col- on focuses instead and Wyoming, in development shale oil de-emphasizes report this Accordingly, state. on the pressure or no development in little result could which rich, as not are deposits the Utah, and Colorado However,in face. unlike would Utah those approximate needs, and consumption climate would impacts roughly water impacts, water and air the Accordingly, Utah. in those mirror thus and Colorado in found those than er important in shallow- generally are Wyoming differ in deposits The ways. Wyoming facing challenges mining, the shale oil discussing when Utah and Colorado with in conjunction mentioned is often Wyoming While in Wyoming? Wha t AboutOilShale N http://pubs.usgs.gov/dds/dds-069/dds-069-dd/REPORTS/69_DD_CH_1.pdf, chapter 1. River Formation, Greater Green RiverWyoming, Basin, Colorado, andUtah,2011, 18 gao.gov/assets/320/311896.pdf, page1. Resources Could Help Mitigate theImpactsof Potential OilShaleDevelopment, October 2010, GAO-11-35, http://www. 17 publications/oilshale/0home/index.php, page20. Country (Boulder, CO: Center oftheAmericanWest, University ofColorado, June2009),http://www.centerwest.org/ 16 15 of Policy 2005. Act stoked Energy when again the Congress was passed shale United oil the and in interest States surged prices fought energy as wars, two 2005, In resiliency. amazing of shown developing has dream shale the oil bust, Despite after bust formation underlying western Colorado, eastern Utah, and southwestern Wyoming. southwestern and Colorado,formation Utah, western underlying eastern Formation, world deposits the River found in Green ageologic the most extensive are in The private and lands. tribal, state, of federal, deposits amixture sit shale underneath Oil Colorado,underway. in Wyoming and also were lands federal Utah, on non- efforts research Other others. three evaluating was and leases research six had issued Bureau of the Management Land (BLM) 2011, December By leasing program. research- to afederal initiate of Interior the (DOI) Department the instructing things, sought by, issues, shale ahostoil of to energy boost addressed which among other bill, F uel E uel o S U.S. Government Accountability Office, Energy-Water Nexus: ABetter andCoordinated Understanding of Water See Energy Policy Act of2005,Pub. L.109–58,Section369. U.S. GeologicalSurvey Oil Shale Assessment Team, Assessment of In-Place OilShaleResources intheEocene Green Jason L.HansonandPatty Limerick,What Every Westerner ShouldKnow AboutOilShale:AGuideto Shale hortage R of conomically R ock, B ock, ecoverable? ecoverable? barrels of oil from the formation. of the from oil barrels trillion produce to billion 1.4 approximately 800 could theoretically industry towere developed, be technologies enough the contains if that shale oil Formation River Green the that estimates The (USGS) United States Survey Geological land. The holdings. underlies federal rest substantial to recover the oil.” to the recover economic not an developed been yet method has there because recoverable,economically largely amount ofis made the that tooil estimate was Colorado, Wyoming,in and “no attempt Utah, deposits shale oil evaluating report a2011 in USGS’sthe Team Assessment Shale Oil stated As construct. of recoverable atheoretical is oil quantities vast are idea there the that that clear butimpressive upon numbers, it closer look, is corporations. private and by individuals owned are lands shale concluded approximately that of oil the 20% one vary, independentAlthough estimates study ut I s A ny L ny 16 State and tribal lands also contain contain also lands State tribal and iquid iquid 18
17 Those are 15 That T • by the RANDCorporation for theU.S. National Energy Technology Laboratory, pagex. 19 • viable: to commercially be neither proven been of has which pursued, being are that for methods developing shale oil primary There two are or comparable for substance transport. high naphtha (a viscosity, or with diluted hydrocarbon) aheated to in shipped be of containerhas because its Unless kerogen on upgraded is site, product the either refined. kerogenand upgraded mustbe then extracted, Once “retorting.” called aprocess in must heat rock the To companies rocks. shale the from precursor, do this, petroleum waxy a kerogen, extract to necessary it first is To fuel, produce and develop shale oil atransportation O echnologies echnologies il S il energy, of incredible and amounts time. of amounts water and varying require processes These to kerogen rock. separate the the from processes chemical or kerogen, utilizing the formation extracting shale then and the in gas natural of burning possibility the evaluating companies are Other kerogen. the free and of heaters underground using to heat shale the feasibility the researching company, short, in is, name oneto Oil, Shell refined. it and upgraded is where to surface, the substance pump waxy the kerogen then and underground would extract (or In-situ retorting. place) in In-situ retorting retorting. aboveground to use seeking are companies shallow, deposits the because are Utah, In retorting. aboveground Sunday was leading up use The to in Black technology to kerogen. separatethe furnace aboveground an in heatingrock and the it, crushing shale, the mining requires retorting surface and Mining and surface retorting. surface and Mining James T. Bartisetal.,OilShaleDevelopment intheUnited States: Prospects andPolicy Issues , 2005,report prepared hale D hale evelopment evelopment 19 Mining Mining — “ oil shale production facilities.” dollars infirst-of-a-kind commercial millions, andmore likely billions, of a decision toinvest hundreds of information adequate tosupport has gathered enough technical my knowledge, noneof these firms fuels from oil shale. However, to that economically produce liquid directed atdeveloping technologies making investments inresearch At present anumberof firmsare June 3,2011, page2. Commerce Committee, Subcommittee onEnergy andPower, Testimony presented before theHouseEnergy and RAND Corporation James T. Bartis, commercially viable. viable. commercially is shale oil developing for methods of these Neither
13 OIL SHALE 2050
14 Western Resource Advocates
Down to the Last Drop 2 the broader forthe demands of water. context stateregional and but not within evaluated simply basis, on amine-by-mine mustbe —and uses future and backdrop of current the Water against viewed mustbe thus, for shale, oil water resources. for dwindling same the not but onlycontribute would change, tocompete climate development shale Oil wouldto projected meet demands. ability water providers’ challenge further also will climate page 5(primarysources are found infootnote #16ofthereport). Water, 2010, http://www.westernresourceadvocates.org/water/lifeline/lifeline.pdf, the Lifeline of theWest: How Climate andCleanEnergy Policies Can Safeguard 21 final_comp.pdf, page5. Wyoming, 2009),http://www.uwyo.edu/enr/_files/docs/uofw-water_climate_ Ruckelshaus Institute ofEnvironment andNatural Resources, University of Resources: Adding Climate Changeto theEquation (Laramie, WY: William D. 20 by 5% to 20%. upper decrease Colorado will River the of globalrunoff modelsproject that of circulation 24 23 operations, shale oil commercial developing large-scale could be industry predicts BLM the that timeframe the average supply on facing page). (see chart 2050, Around 10-year the exceeded Colorado the has in Basin River average of consumptive use water 10-year the 2003, since Bureau of Reclamation, to U.S. According the Western Resource Advocates andEnvironmental Defense Fund,Protecting S. Gray andC.Andersen, Assessing theFuture of Wyoming’s Water population climate and change. growth face even greater will basin pressures from almost 40 million people. million 40 almost behome to will basin the that are estimates 2020, By states. sevenirrigated arid in land people acres million of two more and than which supplies Basin, River water million to 30 development would place take Colorado the in to recreational many activities. Most oil shale habitat for numerous central species, is and gives life to our crops provides livestock, and foundation of communities economies. and It Water lifeblood the is of West. the It the is 20 By 2050, the river the 2050, By 21 A drier Adrier flow volume (af in millions) 20.0 25.0 22.5 10.0 15.0 12.5 17.5 5.0 7.5 9313 1943 1933 1923 Colorado River Runoff &Demands supplies. Any reductions in water supplies will result in unmet demands. unmet in result will supplies water in reductions Any supplies. available exceed already demands water Basin, River Colorado the In 1953 calend 1963 ar ye 1973 formed by the GlenCanyon Damon theColorado River. A longnarrow butte inLake Powell, Utah.Lake Powell is basin water demand water basin average running 10-year supply water basin average running 10-year 9319 2003 1993 1983
16 Western Resource Advocates require 375,000acre-feetwater of AF/yr. 225,000 roughly of demands through people million 1.3 to water supplies ly current- Water Denver perspective, in amount this put To three households. to urban two of needs annual the ply about sup- contains can and water of gallons 325,900 acre-foot An deep. one-foot field, football a of size the ly approximate- land, of acre water one fill of can acre-foot One acre-feet. by is volumes water measure to way One Acre-Foot? Wha Quick Defnton: — that's 122 billion gallons! — that's 122billion Oil Shale development could development Shale Oil t Isan 1 fthigh 122 billion gallons, eachyear. gallons, billion 122 to equivalent acre-feet (AF), water —up to 375,000 project development huge would volumes require of Office(GAO). Accountability Government studies These the from 2010 October report the Corporation, and RAND BLM, the from analyses to rely on existing up, continue we developed scaled and technologies are United the technologies in Until States. commercial viable shale oil no commercially are there First, realities. fundamental two rooted in is uncertainty This understood. fully development of impacts shale oil many notthe is that operation. Water commercial a given one is demand of question of how much water to would needed sustain be pivot often critical the discussions around shale — oil ahigh would desert developed be in mountain shale of water oil because —and of importance Because the changes. how and would these communities would occur, address how, to changes and such where, what when, extent are leaders other and forcommunity officials elected for and The WyomingUtah, to questions alesser degree. that mightthat Western generated be in demand by energy it which consumptive uses evaluated in 2011 in a report issued water on issues, western expertise company with consultancy and project management, engineering, aleading noting. AMEC, worth is study Another but would water differ.)technologies, the needs in-situ and retort surface between not distinguish (AF/yr). acre-feet year per do studies (These 225,000 people of roughly through demands million to 1.3 Denver Water suppliesperspective, water currently industrial economies. industrial economies to Colorado western agricultural-based from development communities in transform would likely shale oil to shale, oil water agriculture from by shifting concluded BLM the that analysis, environmental 2008 a In concerns. serious raise others and BLM by the production, independent shale oil commercial analyses amount of the for water would needed be that regarding unknowns and uncertainties many are there While Would B H 23 pages 4-144 to 4-145. September 2008,available at http://ostseis.anl.gov/eis/guide/index.cfm, and Tar Sands Final Programmatic Environmental ImpactStatement (PEIS), 22 o U.S. DepartmentoftheInterior, Bureau ofLandManagement,OilShale An acre-foot isavolume ofwater equalto 325,851gallons. w M uch Wateruch e N eeded? eeded? 22 Similar changes are projected for are changes Similar 23 To amount in put this barrels/day) would require up to 120,000 (AF/yr),barrels/day) up to 120,000 would require production commercial (1,500,000 large-scale that 27 26 25 Final_Report.pdf. media/uploads/Energy_Development_Water_Needs_Assessment_Phase_II_ Roundtable andYampa/White Basin Roundtable, http://www.crwcd.org/ Final Report,February 2011, report prepared for theColorado River Basin 24 Colorado, including shale.” oil likely to exceed the[se] to exceed likely high water use demands.” productionis not electrical coal-fired in-basin minimal found resources on-site, gas with water natural and developed incrementally, industry, “an shale oil using noted that GAO and AMEC BLM the projections. than 350,000 AF annually. AF 350,000 development notes, For AMEC could require reason, that hugely is prove otherassumptions and uncertain. true Whether these concerns. due to quality numerous air it would Colorado not produced needed, be be western in electricity coal-fired should large-scale, that any assumes further AMEC needed. orneeded would minimally be kerogen before shippingstabilizing it) would not be production, (3) and (the upgrading that of process electricity,power used to wouldbe notand coal-fired plants, gas (2)diversions, combined-cycle natural that formations lieu of in shale oil surface the from technologies wouldwater able be produced to utilize (1) among otherthings, that assumes, report AMEC’s likely be realized. be likely would analysis their in BLM by the captured and report this in impactsand identified conflicts use the then statedgoal, industry’s is which high, are they If project. others and BLM the less than far be will water demands barrels/day), ornon-existent low is (~20,000 the then production if and remains to water needs, tie directly met? be barrels/day Production levels by 2050 1,550,000 barrels/day? Could BLM’s the projection of 100,000 barrels/day How about by 2050? to produce 10,000 it Is possible realistic. development truly are scenarios not does of to any know whatits extent industry that is shale oil regarding The second huge uncertainty of people. not if millions, of thousands, ofamounts water, enough of hundreds to needs the meet development shale oil massive that clear would require of prove numbers which more it is accurate, Regardless Id. at ES-4to ES-5. Id. at 8. AMEC, Energy Development Water Needs Assessment, PhaseII, Id. at ES-4. 27
24 The concluded report 26 25 less
“ itself.” Colorado andfor thestate consequences for allof northwest state’s history—withenormous industrial development inthe Oil shale would usherinthelargest May 15,2008. Oversight Hearing:OilShaleResources, on Energy andNatural Resources, Testimony before theSenate Committee — Governor ofColorado Bill Ritter, Jr. 17 OIL SHALE 2050 18 Western Resource Advocates P S tat P opulation 2050 2040 2030 2020 2010 U e of tah 5,989,089 5,171,391 4,387,831 3,652,547 2,927,643 C P 30 July 14,2003, http://www.water.utah.gov/M&I/Plan7-14-03.pdf, page4. 29 projections.html (accessed November 16,2011). Projections, 2008Baseline Projections,” January10, 2008,http://www.governor.state.ut.us/dea/ 28 some contain of the White and rivers, Green including the through Utah, The flow states. that Colorado its tributaries and downstream River and by upstream of because claims streams and water itsuse from rivers precipitation meager receives rightUtah annual to alimited has and Take United the Nevada. States’ second-most Utah, state after arid face by 2050. of context the projected states will water needs within water development any forviewed mustbe shale shale oil pursued, is developed oil and eventually viable technologies are commercially If development. AF/yr, but none account of plans for these shale oil potential to 1,550,000 energy study: energy 10-year state concluded the 2011 As its March in needs. energy with population of challenge balancing needs the The state of recognizes Utah increase. a115% AF/yr 2050, in to 1,951,000 AF/yr 1995, in 904,000 from increase would demand industrial municipal and statewide projected that Utah ro utting Waterutting O for ompetition for Water for ompetition I State ofUtah,Governor’s Office ofPlanningandBudget,“Demographic and Economic Utah DivisionofWater Resources, Utah’s M&IWater Conservation Plan:Investing intheFuture, Id. je the next decade, the possibility of increased drought, and with and drought, of increased possibility the decade, next the Utah’s projected growth and population growth over economic …Given development in infuture. for energy the use purchased be Water at other facilities or by currently used other water may users currently available will undoubtedly decline decade. over next the little be What may ground water in relatively quantities. small appropriations) for open are are primarily that still those and ground-waterand (especially appropriations consumptive new Most ofdevelopment. state the areas are to closed surface- new Limited of water quantities available be may for energy new ctions 29 With conservation, the state hopes to reduce the 2050 demand demand state hopes the to 2050 reduce the conservation, With 30
in 2010 to 5.9 million by 2050, million 2010 toin 5.9 million 2.9 from increase population will The state’s state the ofprojects Utah populations as increase. understood to need fully be water industries to these The viable. be consequences of allocating to basin river ofamounts water this from large would to need draw industries shale most sought-after country. Oil water the in a rapidly expanding region. In 2003, 2003, In region. a rapidly expanding in for set was inevitable water conflicts thestage shale, in interest oil of flurry Even beforepeople recent the by 2060.) add 900,000 another itprojects will state the 2050, (Beyond recession. the projectionsthose might slow due to il S il hale in C in hale s I ncreasing ontext: ontext: 28 although development come to fruition. how Colorado obligations shale oil would M&I meet should large-scale open question an for it remains decrees municipal use, to some existing Since water senior the priority rights forin prove are challenging. shale oil population increasing —will by an driven principally are that demands — demands these Meeting come addition demands. in to M&I statewide new electricity/energy and water as forwell existing production, would power water production, as any so for shale, oil or thermoelectric shale 6b03612a38e3, Table 3-3, “M&IForecast by River Basin,” page3-11. cwcbweblink.state.co.us/weblink/0/doc/144800/Electronic.aspx?searchid=c1469548-e589-49df-a54f- by Camp Dresser & Mckee, Inc. and Harvey Economics for Colorado Water Conservation Board, http:// 32 (emphasis added). Energy Plan,March 2,2011, http://www.utah.gov/governor/docs/10year-stragegic-energy.pdf, page25 31 to 83%) over 2008 baseline demand. baseline to 83%) over 2008 AF/yr (55% AF/yr 812,000 and 538,000 by somewhereincrease between will (M&I) demand industrial municipal and statewide conservation, into account taking after by 2050, projected that report Initiative TheColorado 2010 challenge. Statewide Water faces asimilar Supply water rights are senior to existing and planned future uses. future planned and to existing senior are rights water as many oil use, of shale these municipal and for agriculture Front used Range diversions of transbasin tailment cur- force could development shale oil for rights these Using rights. these in decreed water of volume the near anywhere not need does industry prove accurate, most projections or industry the BLM of whether Regardless use. Water’s annual Denver dwarf still would rights these of aportion year. Utilizing per water of AF in volumes context, Denver Water, uses 225,000 roughly of a which million, serves 1.3 approximately population own or have the right to use 10,689 cubic feet per second (cfs) second per feet cubic to 10,689 use right haveown or the River On and White the Colorado parties these River development. in commercial Colorado, for used be could that rights water substantial hold shale oil to develop seeking companies website, http://www.crwcd.org/page_98 (accessed November 16,2011). ** Cubicfeet persecond (cfs) istheunitofmeasurement for water that isinmotion.See“Water Measurement,” Colorado Water District org/land/wotrreport/. * Colorado, in rights water shale oil on report 2009 its WRA in As staggering. catalogued is rights these of extent The mid-1900s. and rights these 1800s late of the Many from are development. shale oil hold for used districts be water can that and rights water companies substantial Oil Colorado. in unfolding is dynamic interesting An “ State ofUtah,Governor’s Office, Energy Initiatives andImperatives: Utah’s 10-Year Strategic State of Colorado 2050Municipal&Industrial Water UseProjections, July2010, report prepared W Oil ShaleW Western Resource Advocates, Water ontheRocks:OilShaleWater RightsinColorado , 2009, http://www.westernresourceadvocates. should be considered. be should [sic] portfolio an energy state, an arid …As consideration. given be resources should careful limited water new of water resources energy available, consumption a ter ontheRocks: a ter Rights inC 31
that encourageslowwater-use technologies that 32 M&I does not does include M&I water for oil ol orado” ** and 1,553,310 AF of water. Again, to put these these to put water. of Again, AF 1,553,310 and * water districts and and districts water demands. increases inwater these statesface huge shale development, drop of water for oil usingone Without lShale Water Rights in Colorado O Water rocks on the
“ Conservancy Board ofDirectors, where hehasworked for three decades. Conservancy District. Heistheformer mayor ofAlpine, Utah,andformer memberoftheCentral UtahWater and OilShale,September 2010, page23.DonChristiansen isgeneral manageroftheCentral UtahWater Quote by DonChristiansen, inWestern Resource Advocates, Fossil Foolishness: Utah’s of Pursuit Tar Sands can’t go on.” may not bevery comfortable, butyou water cangoyou on.Without It willgo onwithout oil. Itmaynot go ontheway we like it,andwe The humanbodyjustwillnot go onwithout water. get along without water. resource for thisendangered speciesof humans.You justcan’t We’re going tohave tobeconcernedabout saving some of that that we would take thewater away from theagricultural industry. for my children andgrandchildren anddown theline, Well itscares mefor those whofollow me,
Autumn colors alongariverbed insouthernUtah. • • for O for 34 gao.gov/assets/320/311896.pdf, page15. Resources Could HelpMitigate theImpacts of Potential OilShaleDevelopment, October 2010, GAO-11-35, http://www. 33 • needed: amount aboutthe water of uncertainty level a different of each with Water development the points in at various process, would used be H of water for available Colorado, Wyoming. and curtailment Utah, (see a “Colorado in sidebar) resulting Compact” thereby River could exceeded, be Colorado under the limits Compact use that River risk the factors increase —these shale for demands huge reducedwater and oil in due change, to increases for climate M&I, demands supplies. together When —growing taken existing straining more,even further would reduce change water availability climate on page 28, Importantly, discussed as day) per becomes reality. barrels 500,000 greater than (i.e., production commercial large-scale if perhaps especially and untenabletradeoffs, difficult Water water which used. is in way the in for wouldchanges therefore shale oil require projectdevelopment, and significant states face water huge these in demands, increases one without using of show that drop is water for statistics What these shale oil • • o development would also require waterdevelopment to remove hydrocarbons. residual require would also In-situ surfaces. to and revegetate disturbed piles shale, of retorted Water waste shale the activities. to needed stabilize mining is Reclamation. process. according to retort the to toThe varies kerogenupgraded which be needs degree for processing. to arefinery transported be kerogen it that so can Upgrading. needed for on-site sanitary and potable and uses.” forneeded on-site sanitary preventing and fire. zones, also Water of retort the is situ fracturing in- of producing cooling equipment oil, steam, shale and extraction, for in-situ wells drilling ore, handling and mining dust, controlling facilities, constructing for roads, water used is building retorting, and extraction “During GAO the explained, As retorting. in-situ and retorting, surface and to mining develop ways shale: primary two are there chapter in 1, discussed As retorting. and Extraction and the businesses needed to support these employees to these needed support businesses development the and and activities. more water would to its require workers support industry shale oil Any Population. demands. to not of supply is scale enough newthere grid electricity the in this energy excess according to generationof water varies needed technologies.) cooling and Currently, of electricity. (Theamount deal agreat would require developed, was that technology depending on the alot —and, of energy requires Heating shale oil generation. Power unclear. by development, amount of the so likewise water is needed affected about companies to how plan areas revegetate the energy exists information U.S. Government Accountability Office, Energy-Water Nexus: ABetter andCoordinated Understanding of Water Id. w I s Water U il S il Upgrading is the process of stabilizing and purifying purifying and of process the stabilizing is Upgrading hale D hale Reclaiming a mine site component amine key is of Reclaiming evelopment? sed sed 33
34 “ Very little viable oil shale industry.” to sustainacommercially how muchwater isneeded shadow of uncertainty over develop thisresource casta the power necessary to choices inhow togenerate oil shale technologies and The unproven nature of assets/320/311896.pdf, page44. 2010, GAO-11-35, http://www.gao.gov/ of Potential Oil Shale Development, October Resources Could HelpMitigate theImpacts Coordinated Understanding of Water Energy-Water Nexus: ABetter and U.S. Government Accountability Office,
21 OIL SHALE 2050 22 Western Resource Advocates
Flaming Gorge Reservoir, Wyoming. “ GAO’s Word ofCaution and endangered fishes.” to provide additional water toprotect threatened under interstate water compacts, andtheneed from awarming climate,fulfillingobligations users, thepotential of reduced water supplies water demand from municipalandindustrial Water limitationsmayarise from increases in eventually belimitedby water availability. size of anindustryinColorado orUtahmay development of anoil shale industry, butthe Water islikely tobeavailable for theinitial www.gao.gov/assets/320/311896.pdf, page44. Impacts of Potential OilShaleDevelopment, October 2010, GAO-11-35, http:// Coordinated Understanding of Water Resources Could HelpMitigate the U.S. Government Accountability Office, Energy-Water Nexus: ABetter and creases associated with population growth. population with associated creases in- demand normal the of independent increase, will water for needs that and use be for available will water less there that likelihood the suggests basin the of parts large in temperatures warming of Evidence demands. meet to Basins Lower and Upper the in ity availabil- water physical expected of evaluation an is critical more but important, is depletions existing of estimate reliable more a Getting water. developable ing the assumptions underlying the state’s remaining examin- has the been state uses, of existing Colorado some of curtailment force will that basin the in ages short- water of possibility increasing the of Because users. future and current both to deliveries water of curtailment the in result could which “call,” it a would spark compact wide shortage, river- a to contributes water of overuse If River. rado Colo- the from water of share Utah’s and Colorado due to poses a climate change, risk of overdeveloping supplies decreased and uses industrial and municipal for demands mounting with coupled when shale, Oil are Utah Basin. Upper the of of part most and Wyoming, Colorado, Basin.” “Lower the and Basin” “Upper River the sections: two Colorado into the divides River,” the of Law “The as known compact, The tributaries. their and River, Green the River, Colorado the from water covers It Wyoming. and Utah, Mexico, New Nevada, Colorado, California, Arizona, states: seven among water river’s the up divided 1922 of Compact River Colorado The C ol orado RiverC ompa ct population growth. normal demand increases associated with water will increase, independent of the available for use andthatneedsfor Evidence suggests there willbeless water as seenfrom Emerald Pool trail, inZionNational Park, Utah. North Fork oftheVirgin River, atributaryoftheColorado,
24 Western Resource Advocates
A Poor Energy Source with Huge Climate Impacts 3 A P oseroi.php. Western Resource Advocates, http://www.westernresourceadvocates.org/land/ Return onInvestment (EROI) of OilShale,June2010, report prepared for 35 countedacost. as in energy when internal 2:1 and 1:1 between used, depending on technology the fall, EROI the for would most reliable shale the oil studies, atCleveland on Boston concluded University based that, of EROI the conducted of shale oil analysis by Dr. CutlerAn profitinvestmentthefrom energy of energy. no is there EROI means An of 1:1 process. by the delivered into amount aproduction of the energy versus process EROI goes of that amount acomparison of the is energy simple In produced. of of value terms, the energy analysis any underpins on (EROI) investment return Energy Ch below. discussed are challenges development These technology two as pursued. is evaluated carefully mustbe emissions gas greenhouse and of demands shale’s oil energy examination An close scrutiny. demands likewise, shale, Oil otherareas. in oninformation impacts its potential without enough and too perhaps quickly pursued was ethanol Corn-based fuel. developing in this makes country our tradeoffs the and source of fuel the of nature the to tied acloser examination directly is ethanol corn-based The opinion in skepticism concern. change about and great draws that to afuel of future the fuel the being went from ethanol one corn-based decade, less than In question whether its development is really worth the effort. the question whether its development worth really is of processing.) the The into part poor EROI calls of shale oil as used is that extraction co-produced gas during natural to operationproduction power that used then —e.g., is that during shale oil by the released includes energy energy the Cutler J. Cleveland andPeter O’Connor, AnAssessment of the Energy a oor E oor deposits. shouldour country pursue developing these question the ofdeposits whether turn, in and, missing from such debates of the quality the is could that fuel beproduced Often from shale. questionthe of of potential the liquid barrels Too often debates over hinge oil shale around llenge #1 llenge #1 nergy S nergy ource 35 (Internal (Internal eroi eroi 40 30 50 20 10 4 3 5 2 1 shale. oil for to refining prior product crude for or oil, crude conventional for head ( investment on return energy the of estimates of A comparison EROI atthe well head shale. oil from and oil crude conventional from produced fuel refined ( investment on return energy the of estimates of A comparison EROI: conventional crudeoilvs. oilshale Delucchi (1991) direct +indirect direct +indirect energy refind fromconventional crudoil Delucchi (1991) energy 43.4 4.5 Delucchi (2003) direct +indirect conventional crudoil energy 20.4 direct +indirect energy Delucchi (2003) direct energy 4.7 clevland (2005) 22.7 (2005) direct + indirect energy direct +indirect energy clevland brandt (2008): 18 in situ; 1.4 refind fromoilshal E E ROI) at the well well the at ROI) for ROI) brandt (2008): indirect energy in situ;direct + 1.7 direct +indirect energy oil shale brandt (2009): retort; direct plus brandt (2009): retort; indirect energy 1.5 2.1 25 OIL SHALE 2050
full fuel cycle emissions (gCO2 eq./mj rfd) 100 140 160 120 40 60 80 20 equivalent per megajoules of final fuel delivered (g CO2 equiv/MJ RFD). equiv/MJ CO2 (g delivered fuel final of megajoules per equivalent dioxide carbon of grams in measured production, oil conventional vs. cases (ATP) Taciuk Processor Alberta high and low from emissions gas Greenhouse Greenhouse Gas Emissions Comparison 10.1021/ef900678d, http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ef900678d. Energy InputsandGreenhouse Emissions,” Gas Energy Fuels 23,no. 12(2009)6253–6258, doi: Source: Adam R.Brandt, “Converting OilShaleto LiquidFuelswiththeAlbertaTaciuk Processor: ATP -Low ATP -High CONVENTIONAL OIL Upstream Misc. Energy Use Retorting - Mineral Decomp. Retorting - Upgrading &Refining Combustion H by several gigatons. by several them raising emissions, gas on greenhouse effects global would have profound fuels of shale use oil to atransition large-scale demonstrated that has research his and resource,” hydrocarbon a“low-quality shale oil calls Brandt dwindling supplies of water.dwindling water scarcity, greaterincreased con and of climate, the more in warming dioxide output, resulting would onlyaccelerate carbon our industry shale oil an (October 2007) 241–263. Consequences ofaTransition to Low-Quality andSynthetic Petroleum Resources,” Climatic Change84,nos.3–4 37 abs/10.1021/ef900678d. Greenhouse Emissions,” Gas Energy Fuels 23,no. 12(2009)6253–6258, doi:10.1021/ef900678d, http://pubs.acs.org/doi/ 36 feedstocks. oil conventional crude from liquid fuels than gases 75% more greenhouse would to emit 25% shale oil on used, process Depending the emissions. gas greenhouse high of dioxide wouldlevels other produce carbon and process, disproportionally of retorting the thermochemistry the combined with to shale, needed oil process energy quantities Thelarge of gases. greenhouse release of toclosely asignificant connected shale’s oil that low EROI determined at Brandt is has University Stanford Dr. Adam Ch conventional crude. than shale penalty, energy producinglarge a a much lowerEROI carries effort for oil extra This of equivalent conventional oil. crude to functional the to shale oil upgrade the required supply must the energy additional humans effect, it to In to convert liquid form. required othergeologic and conditions pressure, not to subject temperature, the been has that have alow Why shale EROI? oil does Thesolid is organicmaterial shale kerogen oil in —approximately shale oil 20:1. than surplus energy larger generates asignificantly conventional still oil crude pressure, artesian or fields, loss of deeper well and smaller as conditions, such Even under marginal stagesfuel of processing. at refined and the at wellhead the both conventional oil, crude EROI the Clevelandfound, considerably for EROI is the As shale oil of less than igh G igh Adam R.Brandt andAlexander E.Farrell, “Scraping theBottom oftheBarrel: Greenhouse Emission Gas Adam R.Brandt, “Converting OilShaleto LiquidFuelswiththeAlbertaTaciuk Processor: Energy Inputs and a llenge #2 llenge #2 reenhouse G reenhouse 37 What that means is that developing that is means What that as E as missions fl ict over 3 2 1 Triple Threa Oil Shale's It emits a lot of CO of alot emits It source. energy apoor It's water-intensive. It's and greenhouse gases. greenhouse and 36
2 t:
27 OIL SHALE 2050
• How Climate and Clean Energy Policies Can Safeguard Water: Safeguard Can Policies Energy Clean and Climate How report, 2010 our in discussed Fund Defense Environmental our ways. in lives As and is tangible and WRA our Climate affecting communities change already Clima ‡ Assessment Report,Synthesis Report,http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar4/syr/ar4_syr_spm.pdf, page3. † West’s ChangedClimate, March 2008,http://www.nrdc.org/globalwarming/west/west.pdf. ** Seegenerally Rocky MountainClimate Organization andNatural Resources Defense Council, Hotter andDrier:the lifeline/lifeline.pdf. and CleanEnergy Policies CanSafeguard Water, 2010, pagesi–ii,http://www.westernresourceadvocates.org/water/ * • • report, and 2008 Organization March Climate Council’s Defense Mountain Resources Rocky Natural The real. is West American the in change Climate Climate • • Intergovernmental Panel onClimate Change, “Summary for Policymakers,” inClimate Change2007: Fourth Id. Western Resource Advocates andEnvironmental Defense Fund,Protecting theLifeline of theWest: How Climate C wildlife. of to loss leading and seasons of timing natural the rupting dis- also is West the of warming The beetles. bark as such insects, damaging some of range could be at an increased risk of extinction if global warming continues unabated. continues warming ifglobal extinction of risk increased an at be could f bv-oml et n dogt Wrig eprtrs n ohr aiettos f a of the in West. manifestations opportunities hunting and other fishing diminishing and already are climate changing temperatures Warming drought. and heat above-normal of combination the from significantly suffered have ranchers and farmers western century, 21st In the few first of years the tourism. and recreation, business, affect temperatures Warmer T (IPCC) C documented. been have flows summer reduced and flows, winter peak increased events, rain winter more for the region’s scarce water supplies consequences serious T 1950. since bydecade toup days per four days hot increasing of extremely number with the waves, heat he West is getting hotter. hotter. getting is West he In the arid and semi-arid West, global warming is already having having already is warming global West, semi-arid and arid the In drier. getting is West he ers us- current impact directly will water available in reduction exceed further any basin; demands the in water Today,supplies … pressing. more be not could issues change climate River Colorado Basin, the In … challenge. supply water West’s the exacerbate greatly will changes in river runoff basins the mountainous across If region. climate change is future not addressed, spring earlier toward shifts and states coastal western in of snowpack trends downward term long- have Scientists measured water western is resources. impacting Climate change already limate change is affecting wildlife. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Change Climate on Panel Intergovernmental The ecosystems. disrupting is change limate , underscores the changes the West will face: will West the changes the , underscores — farmers, cities, and industry. and cities, farmers, † te ChangeinAction concluded that forests across the West are suffering. as warming has extended the the extended has warming as suffering. are West the across forests that concluded The American West has experienced more frequent and severe severe and frequent more experienced has West American The * The IPCC reports that 30% of animal and plant species species plant and of animal 30% that reports IPCC The ** Hotter and Drier: The West’s Changed Changed West’s The Drier: and Hotter Protecting the Lifeline of the West: West: the of Lifeline the Protecting — less snowfall, earlier snow melt, earlier less snowfall, ‡ adequately forecast the many impacts resulting from large- from resulting adequately impacts many the forecast to government development federal the and for industry economicthe socioeconomic and of impacts commercial about There simply unknowns are too challenge: many The development. shale oil by commercial undermined socioeconomic vital maybe and environment diversified, economy.local Asolid, opposite the Quite true: may be to save the development shale oil which necessary is not is one in ofareas socioeconomic these trajectory below, the explained of economies. As roots local the displaceand with conflict can landscape of natural the development Industrial ranches. and farms local undermine WaterAt risk: for development demands shale may Strategic Unconventional Fuels,September 2007. 38 temperament.” public and ecosystem fragile already onmore an pressure put will developmentof uses land energy changing and network “oil leasing on existing top shale 2007, in of this former Colorado As Jr. Ritter, Bill noted Governor retirees. of influx an and beauty,scenic towns, opensmall space, strongly rests on example, outdoor recreation opportunities, for collapse of 1980s, early energy the and shale oil the of Colorado’s find here. Therecovery they West Slopefrom of life of quality because the to area the drawn likewise, othernon-employmentand income. Y retirement, investment, West them the with bring and to drawn are Older workers retirees and opportunities. recreational and agriculture, tourism, increasing with development shale country. Oil overlaps shale oil in asset economic acritical is environments, natural and social the of quality quality, including the Environmental At stake: aquatic and species. of arange terrestrial support landscapes that how to ensure time, at same the and, (and diverse diversification support whereremain needed) economies western to competingensure uses land balance is how to officials facing western of challenge the Part Colorado Governor BillRitter, Jr., letter to membersoftheTask Force on dominant industry. economies on uses land and asingular, environmentaland diversity by focusing economic existing potentialthe to narrow itif were produced on alarge holds scale, indicator of ahealthy environment. shale, Oil diversity.is a critical Diversity likewise, is, A central foundation of strong any economy 38
ounger people are,
What About the West’s People, Wildlife, and Economics? 4 29 OIL SHALE 2050 30 Western Resource Advocates 3 2 for leasing. commercial lands to federal opening committing nation the region and the before operations would shale oil impact how industrial-scale regarding to need answered be questions that inextricable are there program, R&D deficit throughthe federal information attempt tothis address development.scale Despite BLM’s the Environmental ImpactStatement (DPEIS),December 2007. BLM, aboutU.S. DepartmentoftheInterior, Bureau of Land Management,OilShaleandTar SandsDraft Programmatic 43 6.1.2-4, page6-77. Environmental ImpactStatement (PEIS),September 2008,available at http://ostseis.anl.gov/eis/guide/index.cfm, Table 42 41 SiteCollectionDocuments/DOW/AboutDow/Revised2004DOWEconomicImpactReport.pdf. http://wildlife.state.co.us/About/Reports/EconomicImpacts/; report-specific web page:http://wildlife.state.co.us/ Report, revised September 18,2008, report prepared for Colorado DivisionofWildlife, page1.Mainreport web page: 40 (Tucson, AZ:The Sonoran Institute, 2004). 39 1 follo C 4 onsider the the onsider years.” of excess 50 in take will tofound that pre-disturbance similar systems to functional development sands reclamation tar proposed, being and is where shale oil environs arid habitat. the In would “completely wildlife as of value lands the those eliminate development shale oil Federation National by stated the Wildlife As 2008, in surface. of leased the 100% would projects disturb The shale most oil that presumes BLM development. fromshale habitat oil risk acres ofas identified at sage-grouse habitat, 501,503 and winter acres elk of winter 649,700 habitat,acres of deer mule identified 735,000 at least BLM 2008, In habitat, stunning. is some of what known is wildlife and on wildlife leasing of about impacts commercial potential the uncertainties great are there While Wyoming. and Utah only 3% of western counties could be classified as dependent extraction. countiesresource could classified ofon be only 3% western of impact the public states found on that economicwestern lands 11 in well-being examining study sector. A2004 professional the and service and industries, based knowledge- economies to recreation, moretourism, on based diversified industries extractive largely from economies have western shifted years, 30 past the Over were approximately $1.1 billion. approximatelywere $1.1 Coloradoalone in hunting fishing from and expenditures annual direct 2007 the that for prepared Colorado the report concluded Division ofA September Wildlife 2008 would be open for commercial development under the BLM’s 2008 oil shale plan. would open be forplan. development shale oil commercial BLM’s under the 2008 habitats Colorado, Wyoming in and that holdLands important and Utah, vast economic impact of $1.2 billion annually. billion economic of impact $1.2 additional total an yields Thefound study wildlife-watching billion. same $1.8 than for economic atotal of impact million, more to $767 be estimated are economy 2007 in Id. at 2. R. Rasker, B.Alexander, J. van denNoort,andR.Carter, Lands Public Conservation andEconomic Well-Being U.S. DepartmentoftheInterior, Bureau ofLandManagement,OilShaleandTar SandsFinalProgrammatic National Wildlife Federation, March 20, 2008comments, page6(citation in originalquote omitted), onfilewith the BBC Research &Consulting, The Economic Impactsof Hunting,FishingandWildlife Watching inColorado, Final 43 w
ing points: ing 42
40 Secondary impacts of the dollars re-spent within the the within re-spent of dollars impacts the Secondary 41 Wildlife plays a similarly important role in important plays asimilarly Wildlife A bullelkinamountainstream. 39
“ especially inthenorthwest quarterof Colorado.” socioeconomic impactsthatcould beparticularly severe, ecological impacts,andwould likely beaccompanied by scale, suchdevelopment would almost certainlyhave adverse economic mitigation measures, unprecedented inscope and from theircurrent uses. Intheabsence of environmental and development of oil shale willcause federal lands tobediverted the northeasternquarterof Utah.Inparticular, large-scale the residents inthenorthwestern quarterof Colorado and by thefederal government mayhave aprofound impacton within Utah.Thismeansthatoil shale leasing decisions made Basin andwithinasmallportionof thenearby Uintah Basin area (roughly 30by 35miles) withinColorado’s Piceance Most of thehighvalue resources liewithininavery small Committee, Subcommittee onEnergy andPower, June3,2011, page2. James T. Bartis,RANDCorporation, testimony presented before theHouseEnergy andCommerce energyandcapital.com/articles/oil-renewables-energy/410 (accessed November 13,2011). ** ChrisMiller, “Receding Horizons,” April 20, 2007, Energy andCapitalwebsite, http://www. robertrapier.wordpress.com/2007/04/09/) (bothaccessed November 13, 2011). articles/oil-renewables-energy/410), whoappropriated itfrom Robert Rapier(see http:// * away.” dollars abillion or mile another mirage economi- Like oil-slick an recedes. horizon longer The cal. no is it until balloon to costs project’s the causes oil of cost rising the before: irony we have observed a is “horrible there explains, Miller As development. to shale refining, oil central costs other and food, transportation, housing, energy, do so rise, oil producing of costs the as that for account to fail viable. be predictions would those shale What oil $120/barrel, or $100/barrel hits oil once that claim industry shale oil the in involved people hear wetoday, Even viable. nomically eco- become would shale oil then plateau, magical a hits oil that of price claimed the once have boosters shale oil generations, For matter? this does Why fuel. liquid producing of means ventional and other uncon- with associated oil coal-to-liquids, tar producing shale, sands, costs production the do so rises, oil of barrel a of cost the as explains, analyst, energy an Miller, Chris As economics. oil in and shale oil of history the both in future great a has shale “oil axiom The The Law ofRecedingHorzons WRA appropriated this phrase from ChrisMiller(see http://www.energyandcapital.com/
** — always has and always will” is rooted rooted is will” always and has always — clear makes Miller what and — always just out of reach, just just of out always reach, just
* — is is Photo: BerndNies, www.nies.ch
32 Western Resource Advocates pages 7–8. GAO-11-35, http://www.gao.gov/assets/320/311896.pdf, of Potential OilShaleDevelopment , October 2010, of Water Resources Could HelpMitigate theImpacts Water Nexus: ABetter andCoordinated Understanding u * impacted.” negatively be could viewing, life andwild- fishing, as such hunting, resources, natural on relies that tourism and landscape, the of development industrial the by placed re- be could uses rural Fur- traditional … thermore, schools. and systems, water mu- nicipal housing, roads, as such infrastructure local on stress additional put with families, their along who workers, of influx sizeable a bring can development shale “Oil cluded, con Office Accountability Government the In October 2010... .S. Government Accountability Office, Energy- - * 6 5 socioecomic/agnc_final_mail_report_4-07-08.pdf. Associated Governments of Northwest Colorado, http://agnc.org/reports/08- Report, April2008,report prepared by BBCResearch &Consulting for 45 cfm, pages4-144 to 4-145. (PEIS), September 2008,available at http://ostseis.anl.gov/eis/guide/index. Shale andTar Sands FinalProgrammatic Environmental ImpactStatement 44 recreation opportunities. habitat, and water, and for wildlife air needs clean economies growing by meeting rural western strengthen These lands becomes increasingly important. lands presence the of undeveloped grows, country entire the population the of As resources. of natural extraction the not and rely publiconlyon on that these sectors lands, economic and of industries importance increasing the consider locations.scenic Management mustalso plans to attracted businesses entrepreneurial and tourism, income, retirement recreation, including and investment ofcommunities, these systems economicthe social and for ofplans public to need account aspects lands for all management to alternatives, evolve. When evaluating public continue management land decisions mustalso for framework making the economies, their diversify communities continue to rural As region. three-state a thorough, comprehensive across the examination economy local the and given be area public the in lands protected relationship the between It imperativethat is wilderness designation Utah. in wilderness proposed development for shale oil areas and lands; of proposed downstream are that areas state wildlife most iconic Colorado landscapes; Desert’s of Red the Those include lands Adobe Town Wyoming, one in exceed energy revenues by $1.3 billion. revenues by $1.3 energy exceed could capital costs growth-related cities counties, and Moreover, accounting for made after payments to the to built. be capacity, needing new towns in resulting todevelopment reach towns would cause existing shale oil oil/gas concurrent that large-scale and Colorado of Northwest Governments concluded for prepared Associated the report A 2008 quality. air degrade development shale Oil further would likely Desert. of Wyoming’s Red Wyoming, parts and Pinedale, is ongoing from development. gas and oil quality too So air poor fromextremely Colorado, suffering are Rifle, around areas and Utah in The Basin Uintah for economic their important value. also are they values; forsimply environmental their important Northwest Colorado Socioeconomic Analysis and Forecasts, Final See U.S. DepartmentoftheInterior, Bureau ofLandManagement,Oil 44 These areas are not are These areas 45
December 2007. and Tar SandsDraft Programmatic Environmental ImpactStatement (DPEIS), about U.S. Department oftheInterior, Bureau ofLandManagement,OilShale * species. the of recovery to ensure velopment de- water limit likely would program recovery the Accordingly, explains: expert, sources re- water and scientist environmental leading a Luecke, Dan As habitat. species’ endangered these of ment also put Utah at the risk state’s for manage- lawsuits challenging could It efforts. recovery of potential future and successes past the undermine seriously could in the Utah, scale viable mercially com- a at tooccur it were Glen development, shale Oil of Dam. Canyon upstream well and Reservoir Gorge segments Flaming stream between includes area that Utah, In remains. still itat hab- where reaches, the upper its in in be will it Basin, River restored Colorado be to ever are fish native endangered these If species. these recover and to protect wise development water new any and today, continues species these of survival for Concern fish. of these existence continued the jeopardize water basin’s would razorback and of sucker. depletions that the had additional USFWS determined bonytail, chub, humpback pikeminnow, orado basin inthis only found of fish species of four survival continued the was issue At Act. Species Endangered the under Basin River Colorado upper the in development water ditional ad- to related actions federal proposed reviewing began (US- FWS) Service Wildlife and Fish U.S. the 1970s, the in Beginning C End ol Dan Luecke, April21,2008comments, pages 1–2,onfilewiththeBLM, store the native fish populations to self-sustaining levels to self-sustaining populations fish native the store re- to designed activities improvement related habitat and water of support for exchange in depletions water for age cover- Act] Species [Endangered ESA provides modation accom- This concerns. development water and ronmental envi- both accommodate to as way a such in it structured Up- to agreement the parties The the Compact. River Colorado per and Compact River Colorado the under entitled were they which to water developed Wyoming and Utah, Colorado, of states the time, same the at while, recovered be could fish native the that assumption working the ture fea- central its as established (RIP) Program plementation Im- Recovery Fish Endangered River Colorado Upper The — orado RiverBa angered Fishinte must satisfy substantial program requirements intended intended requirements program substantial satisfy must — hte fr i sae r other- or shale oil for whether sin — the Col- the . *
Regulating Oil Shale Protecting the Public Welfare 5 from commercial development. commercial from would sufficient be ecosystems toand regulations protect communities safety and environmental whether existing questions regarding important raises about technologies, the uncertainties approach, many the and of patchwork This gaps. full is states and development between varies commercial potential guiding framework regulatory the that regulations of applicable review legal our from state knows and federal WRA framework thus far fails to meet this basic to threshold. meetframework this fails thus far abovegroundboth in-situ and development. The regulatory economic and address social, environmental, the impacts of framework comprehensive both is adequately and tailored to positionindustry’s presumes applicable the that regulatory applicable view, that all agrees with but WRA regulations. commercialthat development would need to comply with quick is environment, tohealth the and point industry out prospectsthe of development oil shale public harming about others and have raised responseIn to concerns WRA Aerial detailoftailingpondsfor mineral waste inrural Utah. Corporation for theU.S. National Energy Technology Laboratory, pagex. States: Prospects and Policy Issues, 2005,report prepared by the RAND 47 ostseis.anl.gov/documents/docs/ostseisnoi04142011.pdf. Wyoming,” inFederal Register 76, no. 72 (April14,2011): 21003–21005, http:// Administered by theBureau ofLand ManagementinColorado, Utah,and Amendments for Allocation ofOilShaleandTar SandsResources onLands Environmental ImpactStatement (EIS)andPossible LandUsePlan of LandManagement,“Notice ofIntent To Prepare aProgrammatic 2–3, onfilewiththeBLM,about U.S. DepartmentoftheInterior, Bureau 46 development.of energy ill effects the significant at moment, the suffering is, aregion that public in environment the and health impact to potential further have the areas these in extraction of impacts energy cumulative the BLM, the Moreover, letter to aMay EPA 2011 the in as explained technologies. to account for oil-shale-specific structured be regulations that it important is progressing, research With of technology. impacts that environmental and health the as well as regulating, what are technologies they do not they know public if environment the and health agenciesFundamentally, protect cannot regulatory R Why development adverse may have significant, processes (EPA) concluded sands “oiltar and that shale Agency Protection Environmental U.S. the 2008, In • • • over abroad impacts region quality Air • • Some include: issues structure. regulatory issues, development policy shale anumberoil of critical raises Corporation noted potential that RAND the 2005, In environment. elements the consequences and adverse to health means Each of these emissions. gas greenhouse would increase shale Wequality. oil that have subsequently learned also water decrease and air, the in particulate increase constituents, of hazardous storage disposal and require of ofacres of thousands land, hundreds energy, disturb amounts development of significant would require shale oil large-scale BLM’s that conclusion 2008 in rapid population growth and due impacts Socioeconomic to significant spent from shale toxins and Water of leaching from salts impacts quality conventional oil crude fromthose higher than significantly would be that emissions gas Greenhouse activities surface-disrupting extensive from stemming impacts ecological and use Land See JamesT. Bartisetal.,OilShaleDevelopment intheUnited U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, May 16, 2011 comments, pages 47 many of acomprehensive overlap which many with egulations M egulations 46 This view aligns with the the with aligns view This atter water quality. particulate intheair, anddecrease of hazardous constituents, increase of land, require storage anddisposal disturb hundreds of thousands of acres require significant amounts of energy, scale oil shale development would The BLM concluded in2008thatlarge- development. shale of oil impacts potential of list Corporation's RAND The 35 OIL SHALE 2050 36 Western Resource Advocates to oil shale. is aregulatory framework structured at allsimilar. Whatisinsteadneeded by thetwo typesof development are not and surface disturbance implicated possible sources of contamination, model for oil shale, asthetechnology, Oil andgas does not provide agood of both ozoneof both PM and concentrations that development. have gas shown and Basin Monitors Uintah the in from ongoing quality oil air poor fromextremely suffering slate. Utah’s is Basin Uintah and by impairing visibility on a regional level.” on aregional visibility by impairing and of levels ozone by increasing deposition nitrogen and particular quality, in toimpacts air 4.1.1-1, 4.1.2-1, and4.1.3-1, andfootnote C. Environmental ImpactStatement (PEIS),September 2008,available at http://ostseis.anl.gov/eis/guide/index.cfm, Tables 50 (PM2.5) Designations: Frequent Questions,” http://www.epa.gov/pmdesignations/faq.htm (accessed November 13,2011). human hair),fineparticlescanlodge deeplyinto thelungs.” Source: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, “Fine Particle believed to posethegreatest health risks.Becauseoftheirsmallsize (approximately 1/30th theaverage widthofa respiratory system. Particles less than2.5micrometers indiameter (PM2.5)are referred to as“fine”particlesandare 10 micrometers indiameter (PM10)poseahealthconcern becausethey canbeinhaled into andaccumulate inthe react intheatmosphere to form PM.These solid andliquidparticlescome inawiderange ofsizes. Particles less than with anelectron microscope. Many manmade and natural sources emitPMdirectly oremitotherpollutantsthat large ordarkenoughto beseenassootorsmoke. Othersare sosmallthat individuallythey canonlybedetected soot, smoke, andliquiddroplets. Particles canbesuspendedintheairfor long periodsoftime. Someparticlesare 49 Impact Statement (DPEIS),December 2007. Department oftheInterior, Bureau ofLandManagement, OilShaleandTar SandsDraft Programmatic Environmental 48 eliminate all wildlife habitat. The regulatory framework mustaccount for framework impacts. habitat.such The regulatory wildlife all eliminate “the entire lease area will be disturbed.” be will area lease entire “the developed, of technology the activity. The regardless that projects BLM disturbing ground- would have significant retorting aboveground and Finally, in-situ both watergroundwaterand Adequate quality. impacts surface on adverse have significant EPA as of huge and, development land recognizes, in-situ and swaths would disturb retorting Aboveground important. critically likewise, is, water quality Protecting problems. similar Colorado regulations. could face quality air health-based to compliance achieve with suggest? data Even development, struggling What this shale does without is oil Utah standard. health federal the County, nearly reached twice Utah, ozone Uintah in levels 2010–2011, winter In standards. quality air current above the are U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, April 17, 2008comments, page2,on filewiththeBLM,about U.S. According to theEPA, “particulate matter (PM)istheterm for particlesfound intheair, includingdust, dirt, U.S. DepartmentoftheInterior, Bureau ofLandManagement, OilShaleandTar SandsFinalProgrammatic 2.5 , a fine particulate matter that can thatlodge can the matter deeply in lungs, particulate , afine is a regulatory framework structured to shale. oil structured framework aregulatory is needed instead What is development similar. not at are all of implicated types two by the disturbance surface and technology, the as possible of sources contamination, not does gas and provide agood model for shale, oil adequately. otheractivities to regulate fail and Oil Clean Water provisions under the certain from Act would which exempt activities some mining regulations, gas under and oil shale oil from impacts water quality However,quality. EPA the state and ofregulate Utah water groundwater and to surface protecting essential —is activities retorting aboveground and to mining —aproblem waste shale oil from particular discharges of point-sourceregulation non-point-source and 50 Development among other impacts, would, 48 Rural Utah is not starting with a clean aclean with not is starting Utah Rural 49
(accessed November 13,2011). Junction DailySentinel,August 21,2011, http://www.gjsentinel.com/opinion/articles/oil_shale_hearing_should_look 51 industry.” to accommodate the necessary infrastructure and services provide increased the intended of to dollars helpmillions removes communities effectively our provide, place administration in previous set by the rules as half, rate by more than royalty the Cutting extraction. with associated impacts the communities to local helpand with deal to states percent 49 state returning and entities federal with split between are “Royalties Grand Junction the Daily Sentinel in editorial 2011, 21, councilor, August an in stated Tom As Colorado Rifle, mayor Kenyon, Colorado, of Junction, Grand Lambert, Keith and needs. by (aslaw) revenues to taxpayer required and the to cover infrastructure return to encourage development concernedabout those afair necessary is against royalty alow The that pits debate who royalties those BLM. claim by the set over shale oil are For public selling resources. and development royalties for extracting lands, of federal return in companies —payments make royalties concerns issue regulatory key Another What A cripple local governments. cripple governments. local could payments inadequate royalty lows, municipal at budgetsand historic already state many With upgrades. infrastructure significant would require that towns to small Tom Kenyon andKeith Lambert,“OilShaleHearingShouldLook at ImpactsonAffected Communities,” Grand 51 Massive commercial oil shale development shale oil commercial Massive of could add residents thousands bout the M the bout oney? affected. adversely be could groundwater so, If contaminants. for atepathways cre- would that fissures create would technologies heating down-hole zone. and fracking these groundwater whether is the things, other among below unknown, is What shale develop to looking are AMSO, and Chevron as such Others, unclear. remains groundwater scale, of commercial a protective at mention to not viable, Whether is groundwater. technology protect is this to lease, wall freeze research a shale develop oil to federal working a holding companies the of Oil, one Shell problems. own its pose could development shale oil In-situ development. shale oil evenwithout issue, expensive an as looming available at http://ostseis.anl.gov/eis/guide/index.cfm, page 3-63. Sands Final Programmatic Environmental ImpactStatement (PEIS),September 2008, * issue. huge a is Basin River Colorado the in salinity recognizes, BLM the As supplies. ground- water and water surface into minerals other or metals, trace salts, hydrocarbons, remaining leach could which shale, spent of piles large leave would Utah, for proposed as those such operations, Mining gion. water in degrade quality that materials the organic can re- significantly and chemicals with filled be may water produced The adjacent into watercourses. released be can and “produced” is water that of some tity of water When these are resources resources.” and mined retorted, quan- and quality the on impacts significant have could development shale “oil report, shale oil 2010 October its in noted GAO con- the As critical cern. a is groundwater and water surface both of quality The W U.S. DepartmentoftheInterior, Bureau ofLandManagement, OilShaleandTar a ter Qu ality * Additionally, cleaning processed water processed is Additionally, cleaning already ,
Photo courtesy ofThe Story Group. Oil shaleresearch inColorado.
each community’s traditional Main Street economy.” Street Main traditional each community’s water sewer), and (d) and of alack workforce available services, to sustain social services, (schools, police fire and physical infrastructure and social on community’s the demands (c) housing and prices, retail in increases overwhelming dramatic (b) housing shortages, (a) Colorado, experiencing already northwestern development are we gas in activity natural increasing the development, shale oil “with noted, strong supporter of large-scale Colorado counties in western representing 22 organization the a and an Club 20, 2008, In 2007. of LandManagement,OilShaleandTar SandsDraft Programmatic Environmental Impact Statement (DPEIS),December 52 to review the regulations. A decision is due in late 2012. Adecision due is late in 2012. regulations. the to review agreed BLM the 2011, violated law. thus and the February In to taxpayer the return fair a rates not did these ensure that implementation arguing regulations, of shale oil the to sued block organizations otherconservation 12 and WRA to 18.8%. 12.5% between Compare set rates generally to those domestic are which production oil royalties, 12.5%. reached it until before year per 1% increasing years five at set 5% forwas first the The royalty leasing regulations. adopted BLM shale the oil commercial lateIn 2008, development shale oil place. takes large-scale get if worse Club 20, March 20, 2008comments, pages4–5,onfilewiththeBLM,about U.S. DepartmentoftheInterior, Bureau 52 These are all issues that will only will that issues These all are Volume_III_ResourceTechProfiles(Final).pdf. 2007, pageIII-54,http://www.unconventionalfuels.org/publications/reports/ Unconventional Fuels, Volume III–Resource andTechnology Profiles, September 53 of oil. barrels at billion 11 reserves USGS known estimates Thelandscape. arid the defines that desert rock red the in Tar United Utah, the in Statesfound eastern sands are in report. ofcontext this the within sands tar to discuss it important is nexus, that With impacts. climate exacerbate would sands tar shale, oil Like activity. mining significant require would and demands, water energy large and would carry develop to would difficult commercially, be as both both impacts,” minimize that practices using sound manner, should environmentally develop an deposits these “in DOI that mandate corresponding and view Despite this lands are also available for available development. also are lands for development. commercial stateprivate and Additional acres of public open for Utah in land application 431,224 designated BLM the 2008 in fuels, for transportation ToBLM-managed land. development spur ofdeposits these acres of approximately covering deposits, 656,000 sands toTar encompass Utah’s Areas Sands most promising tar Special 11 established Congress formally U.S. the 1981, in and late the development 1960s, in Utah sands in began Some into them tar of oil. goal cooking the with sands attempting Utah’s companies to are mine alure, as tar Alberta in industry sands tar Canadian Now, the with high it since concentrations contains road base, of bitumen. as to use material tarry this For companies mined years, Triangle regions. Tar and Sunnyside, Spring, P.R. Sands Ridge, Asphalt the Most of concentrated Utah’s four are deposits: in sands tar Task Force onStrategic Unconventional Fuels,America’s Strategic sources of foreign oil imports.” on politically economically and unstable dependence growing the of United the States resources should that bedeveloped to reduce “strategically are sands domestictar important PolicyEnergy and oil that shale declared Act at hip. the linked The are sands tar 2005 and unconventionalAs sources, oil fuel shale 53
Oil Shale’s Water-Intensive, High-Carbon, 6 Tar Sands Air -Fouling, Strip-Mining Cousin 39 OIL SHALE 2050 Photo: C.Campbell,The Pembina Institute Tar sandsdevelopment inAlberta. Photo: ChrisE Tar sandsdevelopment inAlberta. Tar sands development in Utah risks contaminating surface water and groundwater.
vans, The Pembina Institute them from areas being developed to process tar sands.” developed being to tar process areas from them displacing uses, these on effect could have adirect activities The amongconcluded BLM others. “development that grazing, production, livestock gas and and oil mining, hunting, for —recreation, used of being arange uses currently on lands development commercial would occur 2008, in discussed BLM the As lots into for aliquid fuel. parking and roads material development sands The facing tar how challenge is to turn disruption. surface large-scale and pollution, groundwater contamination, generateand monumental air problems toxic waste, with ofmultiple water to produce of barrels oil, asingle barrel energy, development use sands substantial would require tar shale, oil Like heating underground techniques. in-situ operations or mining strip either using vast processed and clay, of extracted be sand, can bitumen and that amixture oil, deposits of are not-quite- “oil as sands,” known Tar also sands, A Turning 2008, available at http://ostseis.anl.gov/eis/guide/index.cfm), page 5-12. Tar SandsFinalProgrammatic Environmental ImpactStatement (PEIS),September 54 alter natural drainages. drainages. alter natural might also disturbance surface while load, sediment increased projected to due degrade to also is water quality Surface level. designed at molecular to the bond to petrochemicals residual are chemicals the because used, when is chemical-laced steam problematic deposits especially is sands of tar bounds the the tendencyThis beyond to groundwater resources contaminate salts. and petrochemicals residual with aquifers deposits neighboring contaminate and sands groundwater tar compounds organic the mobilize from would likely pressure under intense steam residual of bitumen, the viscosity the increases steam the Because groundwater resources. challenges for neighboring significant poses layers sands tar into relatively porousof chemicals and high-pressure steam or high-pressure of acombinationprocess steam injecting the water groundwater. and For extraction, sands tar in-situ surface contaminating —risks processing retort and in-situ development sands More both — tar specifically,in Utah (and developed. shale) oil commercially be developmentof gas and oil would continue sands should tar aresult as The have begun that changes to area. the moving housing and for developed employeesbe to provide services would open and space lands agricultural existing BLM, the accommodate development.and commercial to According to support change Uses of likewise, neighboring would, lands U.S. DepartmentoftheInterior, Bureau ofLandManagement, OilShaleand sphalt into F uel 54
interest. long-termdevelopment best country’s our would in be shale oil that pursuing argue to difficult be would still it technologies, emerging and measures, conservation efficiency, anticipated in with increases and impacts, andexpected known the With outweigh benefits. the developmentconclude of pursuing costs the far that not to it hard considered, is is oninformation shale oil of available the Corporation’s when all analyses, RAND GAO, and BLM, by the supported as and report, this in discussed as Nevertheless, challenging. remains impacts economic and suite of the environmental quantifying and evaluating viable technologies, Without commercially development.commercial from sufficient ecosystems toand protect communities would be regulations safety and environmental existing whether questions regarding important raises technologies, about the patchwork uncertainties approach, many the and of This gaps. full is states and development between varies commercial potential guiding framework regulatory the of applicable review that legal state and regulations federal our from knows WRA structure. comprehensive regulatory level mustdevelop local and implement and state, a To agencies otherissues, at and federal, the these address on globalimpacts the climate. of context the development within evaluated mustbe shale oil else, nothing If of conventional oil. crude comparable quantities than gases 75% more greenhouse projected is to produce shale debate. Oil roughly to 25% at troubling forefront mustbe and the extremely of the likewise, The are, to projected climate impacts our have worse air quality than Los Angeles. than have quality worse air of Colorado, areas rural Wyoming and Utah, Because of fossil development, fuel certain aquestionableresources to extract one. we breathe at essential —damaging least two water suppliesdiminish pollute and air the would oilunderstand pursuing that shale competingbalance must they resource needs, protectand our air. statessteps take to As communities, how and our weuse water it adebate is of over western future the discussion about apotential source of energy; The debate over not is oil shale a just than Los Angeles. have worse airquality Utah, andWyoming rural areas of Colorado, development, certain Because of fossil fuel
conclusion 7 41 OIL SHALE 2050 42 Western Resource Advocates invest in clean technologies and to finally put oil shale in our rear-view mirror. rear-view in our putshale oil technologies to and clean finally in invest to again It time is past. the in times many harnessed been ingenuity has American poor not public it’s is onlyabad also investment, fuels new fossil policy. into unproven resources unhealthy Continuing and to for divert othergoals and 2050. That’s to shale. whatwater, needed oil our meet is climate, than impact environmental lower have afar that new sources exploring while recordof aproven success, track with sources energy sustainable and clean in investment states should prioritize and support theand questionable Congress to this effort, resources natural over vast turning and more ofmoney Instead pouring into shale oil needed. be technologies will energy clean in investments much dramatic more to significant, date are gains energy clean While made algae switchgrass. from those and as such biofuels, for new production R&D and driving are which renewable standards, have fuel passed Oregon and California States technologies. like fuel emerging cases, many in and to transition clean, the to looking speed also are United and Service Parcel Atlantic, Virgin Boeing, United companies like Airlines, looks to future, the Navy the While effort. development of dependence biofuelsour Reducing to this to poweron jets. central is oil including sources, Navy, energy Theclean for in issue. U.S. one,investing is security anational It not also is is simply issue. Clean energy economic an environmental and by 2050. emissions reduction carbon in to apath 80% achieve down starting while levels below 2005 20% region’s the from emissions gas greenhouse power sectorto decreasing supports WRA 2020, acountry. By as make decisions can economic we environmental and technologies one technologies is to energy of fuel best clean fossil the damaging of transition power productionAccelerating the conventional, from environmentally F ueling O ueling ur F ur uture of theColorado River. Autumn alongabend
Western Resource Advocates is a nonprofit conservation organization dedicated to protecting the West’s land, air, and water.