Reader comments
Would oil shale require coal-fired plants?
6 comments | Read story
Douglas | 7:35 a.m. Aug. 27, 2007
Sounds great if it didn't need so much water and would tear our countryside
apart, let alone what it would do to our air quality. I think it's sad
enough that I'm advised to not eat trout I catch in a stream. At what
point will we stop chasing oil?
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
Dave | 7:51 a.m. Aug. 27, 2007
So we are to believe there is plenty of water to grow and produce bio-fuels, but
none to develope oil-shale?
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
Coluber | 10:43 a.m. Aug. 27, 2007
Oil shale requires a large amount of energy to render it into a fuel. If you
spend a barrel's worth of energy to get a barrel and a quarter back (just
to pick some figures), some might say that's a good deal. But at what
price? Turning the Book Cliffs into the equivalent of a giant kitty-litter box?
Adding more CO2 and pollution into the air? Using the water that ranchers and
cities need? I think oil shale has many hidden costs that will make it
unacceptable to reasonable minds.
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
Cathy Kay | 11:31 a.m. Aug. 27, 2007
Corn and Sugar based bio-fuels are water guzzelers, therefore other energy
sources such as geo-thermal, solar and wind need to be looked at. Cellulosic
ethanol using switch grass and the likes would use less water and would have
better options for desert areas than corn, soya and sugar beet based ethanol
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
Keith | 8:59 p.m. Aug. 27, 2007
Re: oil -- just a thought about oil. Don't we want to be the LAST country
on earth to run out of oil, not the FIRST? Let's save what we have and
focus on nuclear energy. The Idaho National Engineering Lab (INEL; now just
INL) solved the nuclear waste problem about 12 years ago...oh, oops! I
wasn't supposed to share that because it isn't politically correct (in
the eyes of all the anti-nukes) for the general public to know a solution
exists. Sorry.
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
James Willie | 8:13 a.m. Aug. 28, 2007
If we are going to tap this resource we have to do it in a more energy/water
efficient way than tar sands are currently being exploited in Canada. A recent
Department of Energy report referenced several companies that have newer
technologies that may be able to efficiently process oil shale at less than $30
a barrell.. This is a resource we cannot ignore and just as we continue to make
solar and other alternative technologies more viable at market rates, we need to
continue to explore ways of efficiently unlocking this important resource.
Whether we like it or not, we will need liquid hydrocarbons for decades to come
even as we become a more energy efficient society.
Recommend
Recommendations: 0
Get today's headlines via email
Good morning edition
Deseret News Family Deals
In News
Across Site
- Colliding causes: Gay rights and...
- Woman charged in Rasmussen death...
- Photos: Salt Lake Main Library...
- Powells, Coxes put differences aside...
- Amendments to gutted sex education...
- Requests to alter online news...
- Salt Lake City celebrates 2002...
- 'Wicked' tickets on sale May 11
- Sweethearts in real life also share...
- Despite data, Lyme disease sufferers...
In News
Across Site
- Powells, Coxes put differences aside...
- Colliding causes: Gay rights and...
- View live stream of services for...
- Focus returns to Powell children today
- Battling misconceptions: Faced with...
- Father-in-law dragged deeper into...
- Josh Powell had 'incestuous' images...
- LDS bishop ordered to stand trial for...
- Committee will explore new '22...
- Romney's 'Horrible Tuesday' signals...
In News
Across Site
- Prop. 8 declared unconstitutional
181 - LDS Church, others respond to Prop 8
88 - Gay rights and religious liberty
57 - Families at odds over Powell's actions
54 - LDS bishop ordered to stand trial
41 - Utah House blocks Sandstrom bill
39 - Powell call:'I'm afraid for their lives'
33 - Photos: Year of the Dragon
26 - Bill would cut auto safety checks
24 - Should SLC bid again for Olympics?
23






