SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: i-node who wrote (392117)6/18/2008 8:13:22 PM
From: combjelly  Read Replies (3) of 1578465
 
"which is expensive to mine, but may well be economically feasible at this point."

It has only recently become viable. That requires about $100 a barrel. Before anyone is going to make the kind of investment required, they have to be pretty certain that oil remains about about $100 a barrel.

Now, Shell claims that they can produce at around $30 a barrel in Colorado using in situ methods. However, all in situ methods are experimental and it will take some time to bring them into production. in situ is desirable for a number of reasons. Primarily, it reduces the waste disposal problem. Mining and retorting on the surface has two problems. One, the waste created had greater volume than what was mined. Two, it consumes a lot of water. In Estonia, which has been exploiting their oil shales for a while, 91% of the water consumed in the country is for the oil shale industry.

The best bet seems to be to get in situ methods off the ground.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News