DOCSLIB.ORG

Investor Risks from Oil Shale Development *

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Investor Risks from Oil Shale Development * www.ceres.org InvESTOR RISkS from Oil Shale Development * The Department of the Interior’s Bureau of Formation oil shale Green River Formation Oil Shale Deposits Land Management (BLM) recently proposed resources lie beneath limiting federal leases for development of federal lands, primarily oil shale to Research, Development, and lands managed by BLM. 3 Demonstration (RD&D) leases instead of Unlike conventional crude commercial leases. Given the many risks oil, the kerogen in oil shale surrounding oil shale development, is not liquid in its natural including technological uncertainties, state and has to be heated regulatory risks, and water constraints, through a process called BLM’s proposed RD&D approach makes “retorting” to separate it sense. Investors should be similarly from the shale. There are cautious in evaluating future investment two basic ways of retorting: in this technology. surface methods involve Given the many risks surrounding mining and crushing the shale and heating it above- oil shale development, including ground in a manner technological uncertainties, similar to conventional regulatory risks, and water refining; in situ methods constraints, BLM’s proposed involve heating the shale RD&D approach makes sense. while it is still in the ground and pumping the resulting hydrocarbons to the surface. 4 Source: Dyni, USGS, 2006 Background Oil shale technology is still in the early stages of development, even projects are currently under environmental Oil shale is a sedimentary rock that contains though it has been recognized as a review from a second round of BLM solid hydrocarbons in the form of kerogen, potential U.S. energy resource since the RD&D lease solicitations in 2009. 6 which is essentially immature petroleum. mid-1800s. Sporadic attempts to Several other oil shale projects are under Due to its relatively shallow depth, the commercialize oil shale during periods of development on state and private lands. kerogen in the shale has not been subjected high oil prices or heightened concerns (See table on next page) to enough heat and pressure to fully convert about energy security repeatedly failed once it into petroleum hydrocarbons. 1 The largest In 2008, BLM issued a plan to lease larger oil prices fell again. 5 oil shale reserves in the U.S. are in the amounts of federal land—more than two Green River Formation beneath Colorado, As oil prices and energy security concerns million acres—for commercial oil shale Wyoming, and Utah (see map). Estimates have risen again over the past decade, development, which was legally challenged of the technologically recoverable oil there there has been renewed interest in oil by environmental organizations. As part of range from about 0.5 to 1.1 trillion barrels; shale. In 2005, BLM initiated an RD&D the ensuing settlement, BLM agreed to take to put that in context, the midpoint in that program for companies to test oil shale a fresh look at the plan in 2011. The recent range (800 billion barrels) is more than triple technologies and their impacts, resulting in draft Programmatic Environmental Impact the proved oil reserves of Saudi Arabia. 2 the issuance of six RD&D leases for oil shale Statement that BLM prepared as part of More than 70 percent of the Green River projects on federal lands. Three additional this process recommended leasing smaller 99 Chauncy Street • Boston MA 02111-1703 • Tel 617.247.0700 • Fax 617.267.5400 May 2012 INvESTOR RISkS FROM OIL ShALE DEvELOPMENT amounts of land—just under 462,000 UUU Core Technological Uncertainty UUU Regulatory Risks acres—only for RD&D “so as to obtain more information about the technological Oil shale technology is still in the early stages Current and future regulations may pose requirements for development of this of development, particularly in situ processes. serious risks to oil shale. Lifecycle carbon resource, as well as the environmental Surface retorting technology has not been emissions for fuels derived from oil shale are implications, before committing to broad- applied successfully in the U.S. at a likely to be 25 to 75 percent greater than for 7 scale commercial development.” Because commercially viable level, and though the conventional petroleum fuels, depending on there are still many unknowns about the technology has been in development for the process used. 15 Assuming the estimates technologies that may be used for several years, further development and of elevated CO 2 emissions for oil shale are commercial development of oil shale, the testing is required. 10 The uncertainties reaffirmed and verified, then development of RD&D approach to leasing is prudent. around continued testing and development these fuels could face risks from regulations Likewise, investors considering investment in of new technologies and processes for such as: producing oil from oil shale leave a great deal the development of oil shale should be sure d lifecycle emissions requirements (e.g., still unknown, including the amount of the to obtain a comprehensive understanding of Section 526 of the Energy Independence resource that is recoverable, the efficiencies the wide range of risks that these projects and Security Act of 2007, which prohibits and costs of various methods, the impacts on could present. federal agencies from procuring natural resources, and the effects of various “alternative or synthetic fuel” unless its technologies on the costs of final products Key Investor Risks from lifecycle greenhouse gas emissions are (and thus the competitiveness of oil shale). 11 Oil Shale Development less than or equal to conventional fuels); 16 It is primarily this uncertainty that led BLM d Investors face risks from oil shale exposure to recommend making acreage available clean fuel standards and low carbon fuel through their public equity investments in oil only for RD&D leases. 12 And this uncertainty standards that aim to regulate and companies and their holdings in related creates risk for investors. As the Task Force reduce the lifecycle carbon intensity of companies. They may also face risks on Strategic Unconventional Fuels transportation fuels (e.g., the LCFS through private equity and other forms of (comprised of federal, state, and local adopted by California in 2009, though it is development capital. Investor exposure can officials) put it, “[d]emonstration of first- currently being challenged in court); 17 and be difficult to assess, due to limited generation technologies will be required at d legislation that puts a price on carbon , disclosure from the companies involved. To a commercially-representative scale before which, while unlikely in the near term, get a sense of some of the figures in play, significant private investment will lead to remains a possibility in the longer term. Exxon spent $1 billion on failed oil shale 13 commercial production.” The Task Force Given its high carbon intensity, oil shale will development efforts in the 1970s and early further explained that “[t]echnology be very dependent on carbon capture & 1980s (Exxon pulled out in May 1982 when uncertainty is the largest single risk factor sequestration (CCS) if it is to survive and oil prices began to decline and newly associated with oil shale development. This thrive as carbon-reducing regulations take discovered less-costly reserves came uncertainty remains even after 50 years of hold. In addition to being very expensive, online), 8 and Shell’s recent agreement to government and industry research to develop CCS faces many uncertainties—including develop oil shale in Jordan is projected to 14 a commercially viable retorting technology.” with respect to its commercial viability, cost $20 billion or more over that project’s public opposition, enabling policies, carbon first two decades. 9 price levels, public financing needs, and Investors should be aware of the range of constraints on markets for captured CO 2. risks that oil shale development efforts face, Other federal and state environmental which could potentially lead to stranded Technology uncertainty is the regulations, including those related to air assets and reduced shareholder returns. largest single risk factor associated and water quality, may pose additional risks with oil shale development. to oil shale development. For instance, oil shale operations will produce a range of air pollutants (both criteria pollutants and air Some Oil Shale Projects & Leases in the United States toxics) covered by the Clean Air Act (CAA). Company State Lease Type The CAA’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations might American Shale Oil LLC (AMSO) CO BLM 1st Round constrain oil shale development in the Green Anadarko Petroleum Corp. WY Private River Formation and elsewhere, particularly AuraSource, Inc. UT Applied for BLM 2nd Round where oil shale resources are near or Red Leaf Resources, Inc. UT Private & State immediately upwind of “Class I” areas of EnShale, Inc. UT State natural or scenic value where incremental Exxon Mobil CO Private & Applied for BLM 2nd Round increases in air pollution are strictly limited. Great Western Energy, LLC UT State Furthermore, if the oil shale industry reaches Independent Energy Partners CO Private the stage of applying for PSD permits, and Millennium Synfuels, LLC UT State those permits are based on use of Best Available Control Technology (BACT), it is Natural Soda Inc. CO Applied for BLM 2nd Round possible that the first few facilities will Enefit American Oil (acquired OSEC in 2011) UT BLM 1st Round, Private, & State exhaust the total PSD increment allowed Shell Exploration and Production Co. CO Private & BLM 1st Round (3) for the region. 18 UUU Market Risks UUU Water Constraints UUU Risks from Public Opposition The economic competitiveness of oil shale Oil shale development may be constrained by CCS projects in places such as Ohio, new is contingent on several market factors, the technology’s need for large amounts of York, and Germany have faced strong public including high up-front expenditures and water.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Oil Shale in Jordan 1 2.1
    MINISTRY OF ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Mineral Status and Future Opportunity OIL SHALE Prepared By Dr Jamal Alali Geo. Abdelfattah Abu Salah Dr. Suha M. Yasin Geo. Wasfi Al Omari Edited By Geo. Julia Sahawneh Geo. Marwan Madanat 2014 Oil Shale Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, 2014 CONTENTS List of Contents I List of Figures II List of Tables II 1. Introduction 1 2. Geology of Oil Shale in Jordan 1 2.1. Origin and Definition 1 2.2. Mineralogy and Chemistry of Oil Shale 2 2.3. Uses and Industrial Applications of Oil Shale 3 3. Oil Shale Deposits 3 3.1. El-Lajjun Deposit 4 3.2. Sultani Oil Shale Deposit 6 3.3. Attarat Umm Ghudran Oil Shale Deposit 8 3.4. Wadi Maghar Oil Shale Deposit 9 3.5. Khan Az Zabib Deposit 10 3.6. Jurf Ed Darawish Deposit 11 3.7. Siwaqa Deposit 11 3.8. El Hasa Deposit 12 3.9. Eth Thamad/ Madaba Area 4. Summary of Previous Technical Activities 12 5. Mining Aspects 14 5.1. Overburden 14 5.2. Ore Body of the Oil Shale 14 5.3. Reserves 14 5.4. Mining Method 15 6. Oil shale Technologies and Exploitation Worldwide 17 6.1. Crude Oil Production 17 6.2. Power Generation 18 7. Investment Opportunities and Outlook 19 7.1. Crude Oil Production 20 7.2. Direct Combustion 20 8. References 23 I Oil Shale Ministry of Energy and Mineral Resources, 2014 List of Figures Figure (1): Location map of the major oil shale deposits. 5 Figure (2): Oil Shale outcrop in El-Lajjun deposit.
    [Show full text]
  • Oil Shale and Tar Sands
    Fundamentals of Materials for Energy and Environmental Sustainability Editors David S. Ginley and David Cahen Oil shale and tar sands James W. Bunger 11 JWBA, Inc., Energy Technology and Engineering, Salt Lake City, UT, USA 11.1 Focus 11.2 Synopsis Tar sands and oil shale are “uncon- Oil shale and tar sands occur in dozens of countries around the world. With in-place ventional” oil resources. Unconven- resources totaling at least 4 trillion barrels (bbl), they exceed the world's remaining tional oil resources are characterized petroleum reserves, which are probably less than 2 trillion bbl. As petroleum becomes by their solid, or near-solid, state harder to produce, oil shale and tar sands are finding economic and thermodynamic under reservoir conditions, which parity with petroleum. Thermodynamic parity, e.g., similarity in the energy cost requires new, and sometimes of producing energy, is a key indicator of economic competitiveness. unproven, technology for their Oil is being produced on a large commercial scale by Canada from tar sands, recovery. For tar sands the hydrocar- and to a lesser extent by Venezuela. The USA now imports well over 2 million barrels bon is a highly viscous bitumen; for of oil per day from Canada, the majority of which is produced from tar sands. oil shale, it is a solid hydrocarbon Production of oil from oil shale is occurring in Estonia, China, and Brazil albeit on called “kerogen.” Unconventional smaller scales. Importantly, the USA is the largest holder of oil-shale resources. oil resources are found in greater For that reason alone, and because of the growing need for imports in the USA, quantities than conventional petrol- oil shale will receive greater development attention as petroleum supplies dwindle.
    [Show full text]
  • 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]
  • Organic-Rich Shale of the United States and World Land Areas Organic-Rich Shale of the United States and World Land Areas
    GEOLOGICAL SURVEY CIRCULAR 523 Organic-Rich Shale of the United States and World Land Areas Organic-Rich Shale of the United States and World Land Areas By Donald C. Duncan and Vernon E. Swanson Geological Survey Circular 523 Washington 7965 United States Department of the Interior STEWART L. UDALL, Secretary Geological Survey William T. Pecora, Director REPRINTED 1966 Free on application to the U.S. Geological Survey, Washington, D.C. 20242 CONTENTS Page Page Abstract----- _ ____________ _ ____ 1 Shale oil resources Continued Introduction- ______________ _ _____ 1 North America Continued Acknowledgments __ ____________ _ 2 United States Continued Previous summaries______________ 2 Shale associated with coal ______ 14 Definitions _______________________ 2 Other shale deposits _ ______ 15 Organic -rich shale _____________ 2 Total shale oil resources.---- 16 Oil shale __ ____ __ ___ __ 3 Other areas in North America ____ 16 Other terms ___________________ 3 Africa-___--__-_-_----_--_----_--- 17 Types of deposits_________________ 4 Total shale oil resources of Potential energy, oil, or gas yield of Africa _______________________ 17 the organic matter in shale ______ 4 Asia _________ _ _____ ___ 19 Status of the shale industry ________ 5 China __________________ _ 19 World production _______________ 5 Israel, Jordan, and Syria _________ 19 Byproducts ____________________ 5 Siberia _________________________ 20 Activities in the United States ____ 5 Thailand and Burma-_____________ 20 Classification of resources ________ 5 Turkey ________ _____
    [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]
  • Analyzing of Formation Evaluation of the Unconventional Upper-Safa Formation, Western Desert, Egypt
    Petroleum & Petrochemical Engineering Journal ISSN: 2578-4846 Analyzing of Formation Evaluation of the Unconventional Upper-Safa Formation, Western Desert, Egypt Fathy Omran MA1,2,* and Hassane T2 Research Article 1Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Norway Volume 2 Issue 7 Received Date: September 14, 2018 2The British University in Egypt (BUE), Cairo, Egypt Published Date: November 05, 2018 *Corresponding author: Mohamed Ahmed Fathy Omran, Norwegian University of DOI: 10.23880/ppej-16000175 Science and Technology, Norway, Tel: +4746217833; Email: [email protected]. Abstract Unconventional reservoirs can add huge amounts of additional energy to our world resources bases like organic shale in terms of Shale gas, shale oil, tight gas and coal-bed methane. These reservoirs can transform the world global energy market through advances in reservoir characterization, drilling, and completion technologies. Reservoir characterization and properties have great influences on the exploration and development processes, it is not through a single discipline that can provide a fulfill description of the reservoir characteristics especially for unconventional reservoirs. Moreover, unconventional sources can be defined by their difference of intrinsic of their geological sittings, origins, and tapping mechanisms, thus having different methodologies for exploration, production, and development methods. Therefore, it is very important to well express and identify the necessary parameters for unconventional characterization of these reservoirs for defining reservoir rock and fluid properties in terms of total organic carbon content, gas adsorption, level of maturity, grains surface roughness, original fluids in place, and etc. Hence there are many developed correlations and methods to get these parameters that can define each one of them, but most of them are not correlated with each other.
    [Show full text]
  • U.S. Fossil Fuel Resources: Terminology, Reporting, and Summary
    U.S. Fossil Fuel Resources: Terminology, Reporting, and Summary Carl E. Behrens Specialist in Energy Policy Michael Ratner Specialist in Energy Policy Carol Glover Information Research Specialist December 28, 2011 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov R40872 CRS Report for Congress Prepared for Members and Committees of Congress U.S. Fossil Fuel Resources: Terminology, Reporting, and Summary Summary Discussions of U.S. and global energy supply refer to oil, natural gas, and coal using several terms that may be unfamiliar to some. The terms used to describe different types of fossil fuels have technically precise definitions, and misunderstanding or misuse of these terms may lead to errors and confusion in estimating energy available or making comparisons among fuels, regions, or nations. Fossil fuels are categorized, classified, and named using a number of variables. Naturally occurring deposits of any material, whether it is fossil fuels, gold, or timber, comprise a broad spectrum of concentration, quality, and accessibility (geologic, technical, and cultural). Terminology is adopted to reflect those characteristics. For oil and natural gas, a major distinction in measuring quantities of energy commodities is made between proved reserves and undiscovered resources. Proved reserves are those amounts of oil, natural gas, or coal that have been discovered and defined, typically by drilling wells or other exploratory measures, and which can be economically recovered. In the United States, proved reserves are typically measured by private companies, who report their findings to the Energy Information Administration, and also to the Securities and Exchange Commission because they are considered capital assets. In addition to the volumes of proved reserves are deposits of oil and gas that have not yet been discovered, which are called undiscovered resources.
    [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]