DOCSLIB.ORG

OIL SHALE 2050 2 Western Resource Advocates Report, I Think You’Ll Agree

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
OIL SHALE 2050 2 Western Resource Advocates Report, I Think You’Ll Agree 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. T S T EN T Forward: Message from the President 1 Introduction 3 1 What Oil Shale Is … and What It Isn’t 9 A Brief History of Failed Attempts to Commercially Develop Oil Shale 10 No Shortage of Rock, But Is Any Liquid Fuel Economically Recoverable? 12 Oil Shale Development Technologies 13 TABLE OF CON TABLE 2 Down to the Last Drop 14 How Much Water Would Be Needed? 16 Putting Water for Oil Shale in Context: Competition for Water Is Increasing 18 How Is Water Used for Oil Shale Development? 21 3 A Poor Energy Source with Huge Climate Impacts 24 Challenge #1: A Poor Energy Source 24 Challenge #2: High Greenhouse Gas Emissions 27 4 What About the West’s People, Wildlife, and Economics? 29 5 Regulating Oil Shale: Protecting the Public Welfare 34 Why Regulations Matter 35 What About the Money? 37 6 Tar Sands: Oil Shale’s Water-Intensive, High-Carbon, Air-Fouling, Strip-Mining Cousin 39 Turning Asphalt into Fuel 40 7 Conclusion 41 Fueling Our Future 42 This report is largely an educational tool, concentrating on the salient issues central to the ongoing debate over the wisdom and feasibility of producing liquid fuel from oil shale. F The first car I ever bought was a blue, two- door Peugeot Deux Chevaux that we just about drove into the ground. Today I drive a Honda Accord, a car that barely shares the same vehicular DNA as my beloved old Peugeot. If I were to buy a new car today, I would consider fuel and mileage options that weren’t readily available when I chose my Honda. The Toyota Prius, the first really commercially successful hybrid electric vehicle, was introduced worldwide just 10 years ago. Toyota sold fewer than 30,000 Prius models in 2001; by April 2011, the company had sold more than 2 million cars worldwide, including more than 1 million in the the President from Message United States.1 At the end of 2011, we marked the first full year that all-electric cars were available in the United States. It may be a cliché to talk about how quickly technology changes, but it’s a lesson we would be wise to remember as we consider our energy future. We can’t think about what our vehicles might look like in 40 years without considering what kind of fuel we’ll use to power them. It is a question of ORWARD particular importance when it comes to an issue such as oil F shale development: Will we be spending the next several decades developing a fuel that consumers won’t even use? As the debate over potential oil shale development in the western United States continues, Western Resource Advocates (WRA) has focused on understanding the nature of the oil shale deposits; the state of the technologies companies are trying to advance; the environmental, economic, social, and climate impacts of exploiting these deposits; and what development would mean for our energy demands and goals. This report explores these matters. This report is largely an educational tool, concentrating on the salient issues central to the ongoing debate over the wisdom and feasibility of producing liquid fuel from oil shale. Many of the issues discussed in this report are framed from the perspective of the year 2050. Why 2050? First, it is a baseline that states commonly use to project water demands. It is also roughly the date by which such companies as Royal Dutch Shell predict they might be in a position to produce large quantities of oil from shale, depending on the results of current research and testing. 1 David Schepp, “Toyota Prius Hits Million-Sale Milestone in U.S.,” Daily Finance, April 6, 2011, http://www.dailyfinance.com/2011/04/06/toyota-prius-hits-million- OIL SHALE 2050 sale-milestone-us/ (accessed November 18, 2011). 1 WHY 2050? By the year 2050, economists, biologists, climatologists, and a variety of other scientists predict huge changes to the West. Their models forecast that there will be less water in the Colorado River Basin, with escalating demand from a rapidly growing population. The population of the state of Colorado is projected to swell by 57% over the next 30 years. Utah, the second-driest state in the nation, anticipates a 105% increase in its population by 2050. Because of this growth, in Colorado alone, municipal and industrial water demands are estimated to increase by as much as 83%. By 2050, the competition for water will be fierce and will only be compounded by climate change. Decisions we make today about a host of concerns, including whether or not to develop oil shale, will directly impact the amount of available water in 2050. As a result of climate change, water in the Colorado River Basin is projected to decrease anywhere from 5% to 20% by 2050. Current projections conclude that we will rely heavily on water currently used for agriculture to cover growing municipal and industrial demands. By 2050 we might be less reliant on fossil fuels for planes and automobiles. Alternatives might include electric cars powered by renewable sources, or biodiesel made from algae, or energy sources that researchers are not yet exploring. As today’s teenagers approach retirement age, what will the environment look like? If water demands, population growth, and climate projections hold true, these teenagers will likely face a far different environment than the one that currently sustains our western communities and economies. As we found in our research, any reasonable analysis of commercial oil shale production would make it hard to conclude that this is a wise energy pursuit. After reading this report, I think you’ll agree. Karin P. Sheldon President, Western Resource Advocates S E ocat E ADV RC U SO N RE R E st WE 2 I Energy policy — and its nexus to economic policy — is a pressing issue that warrants ON our nation’s continued focus. At Western Resource Advocates (WRA), we abide by CTI the idea that a healthy economy depends on a healthy environment. We also believe that innovation yields positive economic benefits. That is why we advocate for clean RODU energy solutions, including development of T emerging technologies, while identifying IN strategic uses of fossil fuels to bridge the gap between “business as usual” and our future renewable energy economy. The more we delve into oil shale, the more concerns we have about oil shale as an energy source in general, but also its potential negative impacts on the environment and on other land and energy development initiatives. The debate over oil shale is not just a discussion about a potential source of energy. At stake in the debate over oil shale are water supplies and how states would balance competing needs for this dwindling resource. Also at stake is the quality of the air we breathe. Already, because of fossil fuel development, certain rural areas of Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming have worse air quality than Los Angeles. Sustainable communities are also at risk, as towns in western Colorado are already beginning to bend under the strain of energy development. One question that needs to be addressed is whether these communities can support an additional influx of workers, many of whom would likely be temporary. These and other issues are central to an assessment of oil shale development. The oil shale debate must, likewise, evaluate the potential impacts on our climate. As explained in this report, oil shale is projected to produce roughly 25% to 75% more greenhouse gases than comparable quantities of conventional crude oil. Colorado has adopted the vitally important goal of reducing its greenhouse gas emissions by 80% by 2050. Other states are advancing similar goals. Large-scale production of oil shale would likely undermine these important goals. OIL SHALE 2050 3 WHY INVEST IN OIL SHALE? Recently, students at the University of Colorado met with WRA staff to learn about western energy and water issues. When discussing oil shale, students asked why, with all of oil shale’s drawbacks, companies would invest in oil shale. This question, WRA realized, captures the pith of questions and concerns many in this region have about oil shale. The short answer is that if oil shale were to prove commercially viable, the potential financial returns to an investor could be significant. Any financial investment comes with a certain amount of risk, but oil shale development is particularly hazardous; oil shale has been touted as the beginning of a “new era” 1 in oil production since at least the early 20th century, but 100 years later, it has yet to see commercial success. History aside, RAND Corporation identified several potential benefits that might result from the development of oil shale, including economic and national security impacts.2 Those possible gains, however, must be weighed against the numerous impacts that are discussed throughout this report. Large-scale development of oil shale would come at a significant cost in terms of resources, such as water, and of its overall impact on the environment.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • EMD Oil Shale Committee
    EMD Oil Shale Committee 2017 EMD Oil Shale Committee Report Justin E. Birdwell (Chair), U.S. Geological Survey November 29, 2017 Vice-Chairs: • Gerald Daub (Vice-Chair: Industry), Daub & Associates, Inc. • Dr. Lauren Birgenheier (Vice-Chair: University), University of Utah • Michael D. Vanden Berg (Vice-Chair: Government), Utah Geological Survey Advisory Group: • Dr. Alan K. Burnham, Stanford University • Dr. Jeremy Boak, Oklahoma Geological Survey, University of Oklahoma • Mr. Ronald C. Johnson, U.S. Geological Survey Special Consultants to the Committee: • John Parsons, QER Pty Ltd • Gary Aho, Sage Geotech • Indrek Aarna, Eesti Energia • Rikki Hrenko-Browning, Enefit American Oil • Ryan Clerico, Enefit American Oil • Alex Bocock, Red Leaf Resources • Christopher Hopkins, Canshale Corp. • Steven Kerr, Millcreek Mining Group • Steven Odut, Thyssenkrupp • Pierre Allix, Total S.A. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Low oil prices continue to hamper oil shale development around the world. Although new production capacity in Estonia and China has come online recently, efforts in other places are on indefinite hiatus or are well behind schedule relative to what was anticipated just a few years ago. The current status remains in flux, and recent developments in conventional and unconventional crude oil plays in the United States and elsewhere indicate this will not change anytime soon. Oil shale continues to be mined processed in China and Brazil, but production updates for 2016 were not available as of the preparation of this report. In Estonia, Eesti Energia (Enefit) continued development of their co-generation Auvere power plant that is designed to utilize both oil shale and other fuel sources (wood chips, peat, gas).
    [Show full text]
  • HISTORY of WESTERN OIL SHALE HISTORY of WESTERN OIL SHALE
    / _... i';C4 - SHELF , Historyof Western Oil Shale Paul L. Russell . " The Center for Professional Advancement Paul Russell received his degree from the University of Arizona. After working for Industry for five years, he began his involvement with oil shale in 1948 when he joined the U.S. Bureau of Mines and was assigned to Rifle, Colorado, to work at Anvil Points. During the middle fifties, he was assigned to the Atomic Energy Com­ mission to study the extraction of ura­ nium from the Chattanooga Shales in Tennessee. He became Research Director of the U.S. Bureau ofMines in 1967 and served in this capacity until he retired in 1979. During these years his involvement with oil shale intensified. Currently, he is an engineering consultant. ISBN: 0-86563-000-3 ,._-------_._.. V.D.ALLRED 6016 SOUTH BANNOCK LI7TLETON. COLO. 80120 ....~ ...........~..... This compelling history spans 65 years of western oil shale development from its begin­ ning to the present day. These were the years in which most of the present-day retorting pro­ cesses were invented and devel­ oped,leading to present studies of in-situ retorting, and to the resumption of leasing of fed­ eral oil shale lands. The many excellent illustra­ tions and contemporary photo­ graphs in themselves provide a pictorial record of an era when the United States was "wild over oil"-an era when Gov­ ernment estimates of billions of barrels of oil in western oil shales were used to advan­ tage for questionable-if not fraudulent-stock promotions designed to raise capital for development, or to fatten the promoters' pockets.
    [Show full text]
  • Secure Fuels from Domestic Resources ______Profiles of Companies Engaged in Domestic Oil Shale and Tar Sands Resource and Technology Development
    5th Edition Secure Fuels from Domestic Resources ______________________________________________________________________________ Profiles of Companies Engaged in Domestic Oil Shale and Tar Sands Resource and Technology Development Prepared by INTEK, Inc. For the U.S. Department of Energy • Office of Petroleum Reserves Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves Fifth Edition: September 2011 Note to Readers Regarding the Revised Edition (September 2011) This report was originally prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy in June 2007. The report and its contents have since been revised and updated to reflect changes and progress that have occurred in the domestic oil shale and tar sands industries since the first release and to include profiles of additional companies engaged in oil shale and tar sands resource and technology development. Each of the companies profiled in the original report has been extended the opportunity to update its profile to reflect progress, current activities and future plans. Acknowledgements This report was prepared by INTEK, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Petroleum Reserves, Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves (DOE/NPOSR) as a part of the AOC Petroleum Support Services, LLC (AOC- PSS) Contract Number DE-FE0000175 (Task 30). Mr. Khosrow Biglarbigi of INTEK, Inc. served as the Project Manager. AOC-PSS and INTEK, Inc. wish to acknowledge the efforts of representatives of the companies that provided information, drafted revised or reviewed company profiles, or addressed technical issues associated with their companies, technologies, and project efforts. Special recognition is also due to those who directly performed the work on this report. Mr. Peter M. Crawford, Director at INTEK, Inc., served as the principal author of the report.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2012
    Annual Report 2012 Aastaaruanne 2012 Kaane kujundus alles tuleb Creating New Energy! We will release the Group’s consolidated interim reports for the financial year 2013 as follows: Corporate • 1st quarter – 30 April 2013 Social Responsibility 2012 • 2nd quarter – 31 July 2013 • 3rd quarter – 31 October 2013 The audited results for the financial year 2013 will be released on 28 February 2014 Click here to read the Corporate Social Responsibility Report www.energia.ee/en/investor Contents Address by the Chairman of the Management Board 5 In Brief 7 Strategy 11 Business Environment 15 Financial Results 22 Environment 45 Corporate Governance 49 Consolidated Financial Statements 71 Consolidated Financial Statements Consolidated Income Statement 71 23 Trade and Other Payables 131 24 Deferred Income 131 Consolidated Statement of Comprehensive Income 72 25 Provisions 132 26 Revenue 134 Consolidated Statement of Financial Position 73 27 Other Operating Income 134 Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows 74 28 Raw Materials and Consumables Used 135 29 Payroll Expenses 135 Consolidated Statement of Changes in Equity 75 30 Other Operating Expenses 136 31 Net Financial Income (-expense) 136 Notes to the Consolidated Financial statements 76 32 Corporate Income Tax 136 1 General Information 76 33 Cash Generated From Operations 137 2 Summary of Principal Accounting and Reporting Policies 76 34 Off-balance Sheet Assets, Contingent Liabilities and Commitments 137 3 Financial risk management 97 35 Assets and Liabilites of Disposal Group Classified as Held
    [Show full text]
  • The American Energy Initiative, Part 17: a Focus on the Future of Energy Tech- Nology with an Emphasis on Canadian Oil Sands
    THE AMERICAN ENERGY INITIATIVE, PART 17: A FOCUS ON THE FUTURE OF ENERGY TECH- NOLOGY WITH AN EMPHASIS ON CANADIAN OIL SANDS HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND POWER OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION MARCH 20, 2012 Serial No. 112–128 ( Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce energycommerce.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 77–480 PDF WASHINGTON : 2013 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Aug 31 2005 10:55 Jan 23, 2013 Jkt 037690 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 F:\114313~1\112-12~1 WAYNE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE FRED UPTON, Michigan Chairman JOE BARTON, Texas HENRY A. WAXMAN, California Chairman Emeritus Ranking Member CLIFF STEARNS, Florida JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky Chairman Emeritus JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York MARY BONO MACK, California FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey GREG WALDEN, Oregon BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois LEE TERRY, Nebraska ANNA G. ESHOO, California MIKE ROGERS, Michigan ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York SUE WILKINS MYRICK, North Carolina GENE GREEN, Texas Vice Chairman DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma LOIS CAPPS, California TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas BRIAN P.
    [Show full text]
  • A Preliminary Investigation of the Feasibility of Spent Oil Shale As Road Construction Material
    A PRELIMINARY INVESTIGATION OF THE FEASIBILITY OF SPENT OIL SHALE AS ROAD CONSTRUCTION MATERIAL Gerald J. Gromko, University of Colorado at Denver The use of spent oil shale material as aggregate for flexible pavement con­ struction was investigated, and its suitability for use both in base courses and in bituminous surface courses is discussed. To assess the aggregate and asphalt-aggregate characteristics of spent shale the following tests were performed: the Los Angeles abrasion test, the dry sieve analysis, the specific gravity test, the Atterberg limits test, and the Hveem method of mix design. The results of the testing showed that the spent shale aggregate was well-graded, flat, angular, highly absorbent, friable, and nonplastic, has a rough surface texture, and wears relatively easily. The aggregate mixes tested by the Hveem stabilometer yielded high strength values and were relatively lightweight. The asphalt-spent shale mixtures studied showed very high total resistance (combination of stability and cohesiometer values) values, i.e., more than adequate load-carrying capability. How­ ever, the asphalt contents necessary for these very high strengths were also high. Based on the results of the tests performed, it seems apparent that this particular type of spent shale material might perform very well in flexible pavement structures. Although the material showed more than ade­ quate strength and stability, it may not stand up as well to the abrasive action of traffic on high-capacity roads and may be expensive because of the seemingly large amountofasphalt needed. However, this mixture might perform very well as a surface course layer for lower capacity roads (e.g., secondary roads).
    [Show full text]
  • Comments – Enefit American Oil Utility Corridor Project DEIS
    June 14, 2016 Vernal Field Office, BLM Attn: Stephanie Howard 170 South 500 East Vernal, UT 84078 RE: Comments – Enefit American Oil Utility Corridor Project DEIS Reviewers: Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments on the Enefit American Oil (Enefit) Utility Corridor Project, DOI-BLM-UT-G010-2014-0007-EIS (Utility Corridor DEIS). We appreciate your time, and attention to this issue. We are submitting these comments on behalf of the Grand Canyon Trust, Living Rivers, Sierra Club, Southern Utah Wilderness Alliance, Western Resource Advocates, the WaterKeeper Alliance, American Rivers, the Natural Resource Defense Council, the Center for Biological Diversity, The Wilderness Society, Utah Physicians for a Healthy Environment, the Science and Environmental Health Network, Wildearth Guardians, and Earthjustice (on behalf of the Grand Canyon Trust). I. Introduction The purpose of the proposed rights-of-way is to promote an unprecedented and uniquely destructive project in the Upper Colorado River Basin. Enefit’s “South Project,” located in northeastern Utah near the White and Green Rivers, will attempt to take a pre-petroleum found within rock – oil shale – bake it at high temperatures, and turn it into a liquid synthetic crude oil. Enefit hopes to produce 50,000 barrels a day at the facility for 30 years. With the subsidy of rights-of-way over federal public land for power, fuel, water, and roads, Enefit plans to: - build a half-square mile industrial complex in the desert – the first commercial-scale oil shale operation in the United
    [Show full text]
  • Legislative Hearing Committee on Natural Resources U.S
    H.R.l: ‘‘AMERICAN-MADE ENERGY AND INFRASTRUCTURE JOBS ACT’’; H.R.l: ‘‘ALASKAN ENERGY FOR AMERICAN JOBS ACT’’; H.R.l: ‘‘PROTECTING INVESTMENT IN OIL SHALE: THE NEXT GENERATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL, ENERGY, AND RE- SOURCE SECURITY ACT’’ (PIONEERS ACT); AND H.R. l: COAL MINER EMPLOY- MENT AND DOMESTIC ENERGY INFRA- STRUCTURE PROTECTION ACT.’’ LEGISLATIVE HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES OF THE COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS FIRST SESSION Friday, November 18, 2011 Serial No. 112-85 Printed for the use of the Committee on Natural Resources ( Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.fdsys.gov or Committee address: http://naturalresources.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 71-539 PDF WASHINGTON : 2013 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Nov 24 2008 13:06 Mar 12, 2013 Jkt 000000 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 L:\DOCS\71539.TXT Hresour1 PsN: KATHY COMMITTEE ON NATURAL RESOURCES DOC HASTINGS, WA, Chairman EDWARD J. MARKEY, MA, Ranking Democratic Member Don Young, AK Dale E. Kildee, MI John J. Duncan, Jr., TN Peter A. DeFazio, OR Louie Gohmert, TX Eni F.H. Faleomavaega, AS Rob Bishop, UT Frank Pallone, Jr., NJ Doug Lamborn, CO Grace F. Napolitano, CA Robert J. Wittman, VA Rush D. Holt, NJ Paul C. Broun, GA Rau´ l M. Grijalva, AZ John Fleming, LA Madeleine Z.
    [Show full text]
  • Oil Shale Development in the United States: Prospects and Policy Issues
    INFRASTRUCTURE, SAFETY, AND ENVIRONMENT THE ARTS This PDF document was made available from www.rand.org as CHILD POLICY a public service of the RAND Corporation. CIVIL JUSTICE EDUCATION Jump down to document ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT 6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research NATIONAL SECURITY organization providing objective analysis and POPULATION AND AGING PUBLIC SAFETY effective solutions that address the challenges facing SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY the public and private sectors around the world. SUBSTANCE ABUSE TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY TRANSPORTATION AND Support RAND INFRASTRUCTURE Purchase this document WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Explore RAND Infrastructure, Safety, and Environment View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND monographs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. Oil Shale Development in the United States Prospects and Policy Issues James T. Bartis, Tom LaTourrette, Lloyd Dixon, D.J. Peterson, Gary Cecchine Prepared for the National Energy Technology Laboratory of the U.S. Department of Energy The research described in this report was conducted within RAND Infrastructure, Safety, and Environment (ISE), a division of the RAND Corporation, for the National Energy Technology Laboratory of the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 2: Operations and Environment
    Chapter Two Operations and Environment Abstract Expanded natural gas and oil resources have resulting variation in environmental impacts and dramatically improved the North American energy issues. The main focus of this chapter is to con- supply outlook. However, prudent production and sider ways in which industry and government can delivery of these resources presents operational improve environmental performance, reduce risk, and environmental challenges. Technological engage with stakeholders, and develop and com- advances have made shale gas, tight oil, deepwater municate important information on environmen- offshore, oil sands, and other resources economi- tal impacts. cally recoverable. If these resources are to be avail- able and economic for development, continuous The outline of the Operations and Environment attention to reducing risks is essential to ensure chapter is as follows: pollution prevention, public safety and health, and y Introduction and Summary environmental protection. These outcomes are important in their own right, but also in order to y Resource Play Variations and Associated Envi- enjoy access to the resources for extraction and ulti- ronmental Challenges mate satisfaction of consumers’ energy demand. y History of Innovation in Environmental Stew- Given the importance of these issues, they have ardship strongly influenced the study process. y History of Natural Gas and Oil Environmental This chapter examines the major environmental Laws and safety issues that must be addressed in order to safely produce and deliver North American natural y Sustainable Strategies and Systems for the Con- gas and oil resources; examines the historical con- tinued Prudent Development of North American text of environmentally responsible development Natural Gas and Oil and improvements in technology, regulation, and y Offshore Safety and Environmental Management environmental management; and describes the variation in natural gas and oil resources and the y Key Findings and Policy Recommendations.
    [Show full text]
  • Annual Report 2018
    Annual report 2018 We contribute to making the world a cleaner place 1 Large-scale energy production 35 Cash flows 94 Contents Network services 42 Investment 97 Development projects 46 Financing 100 Eesti Energia at a glance 3 We protect the environment 49 Outlook for 2019 104 80 years of innovative Eesti Energia 7 Our people 55 Chairman’s letter 11 We give back to society 59 Eesti Energia Highlights of 2018 15 Tax footprint 64 consolidated Operating environment 17 Corporate governance 67 financial Strategy 24 Risk management 79 statements 106 Customer services Financial results 27 83 Income statement 108 Statement of comprehensive income 109 Statement of financial position 110 Statement of cash flows 111 Renewable energy Statement of changes in equity 112 Notes to the financial statements 113 31 Revenue and EBITDA 84 Electricity 85 Independent auditor’s report 195 Distribution service 88 Profit allocation proposal 203 Shale oil 90 Glossary 205 Other products and services 92 Investor information 206 Eesti Energia 106 million euros: at a glance NET PROFIT for 2018 2.5 billion euros: INVESTMENTS 4 in the last BUSINESS LINES: 10 years customer services, renewable energy, large-scale energy production, network services 875 Established million euros: REVENUE in 1939 for 2018 5,763 6 employees* HOME MARKETS: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Finland, Sweden 3 100% owner: REPUBLIC OF ESTONIA * number of employees at 31 December 2018. 8 5 6 7 2 3 9 1 4 4 BUSINESS LINES LARGE-SCALE ENERGY PRODUCTION: 1. Oil shale mines I 2. Thermal power plants I 3. Oil plants NETWORK SERVICES: 8.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of New Applications of Oil Shale Ashes in Building Materials
    minerals Article Evaluation of New Applications of Oil Shale Ashes in Building Materials Mustafa Cem Usta 1,*, Can Rüstü Yörük 1, Tiina Hain 2, Peeter Paaver 3, Ruben Snellings 4, Eduard Rozov 5, Andre Gregor 1, Rein Kuusik 1, Andres Trikkel 1 and Mai Uibu 1 1 Department of Materials and Environmental Technology, Tallinn University of Technology, 19086 Tallinn, Estonia; [email protected] (C.R.Y.); [email protected] (A.G.); [email protected] (R.K.); [email protected] (A.T.); [email protected] (M.U.) 2 Department of Civil Engineering and Architecture, Tallinn University of Technology, 19086 Tallinn, Estonia; [email protected] 3 Department of Geology, University of Tartu, 50411 Tartu, Estonia; [email protected] 4 Sustainable Materials, VITO, 2400 Mol, Belgium; [email protected] 5 Wienerberger, 43401 Aseri, Lääne-Virumaa, Estonia; [email protected] * Correspondence: [email protected] Received: 3 July 2020; Accepted: 27 August 2020; Published: 29 August 2020 Abstract: Achieving sustainable zero-waste and carbon neutral solutions that contribute to a circular economy is critically important for the long-term prosperity and continuity of traditional carbon-based energy industries. The Estonian oil shale (OS) sector is an example where such solutions are more than welcome. The combustion of OS generates a continuous flow of ashes destined to landfills. In this study, the technical feasibility of producing monolith building materials incorporating different OS ashes from Estonia was evaluated. Three binder systems were studied: self-cementation of the ashes, ceramic sintering in clay brick production and accelerated carbonation of OS ash (OSA) compacts.
    [Show full text]