My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
WSPC01351
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
Backfile
>
13000-13999
>
WSPC01351
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/26/2010 11:11:16 AM
Creation date
10/9/2006 2:44:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
File Number
8200.760
Description
Colorado River - Colorado River Basin - Yampa General Publications/Correspondence/Reports
State
CO
Basin
Yampa/White
Water Division
6
Date
9/6/1972
Author
Helene C Monberg
Title
Lower Yampa Project - Western Resources Wrap-up, Series VIII, No. 36, Oil Shale-Lead Story
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Publication
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />hI <br /> <br />\00j095 <br /> <br />-3.<-WkW washn x x a- <br />day industry,. Dole stated. ~e environmental draft report indicates a <br />400,OOO-barrel-a-day_shale oil industry could be operating by 1981 and <br />a 1 rnillion-barrel.-a-day industry by 1985 "if all lights are go." as <br />Dole put it. <br />ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT <br />'!'he draft report indicated a 1 million barrel-a-day industry would <br />would disturb from 35,000-50,000 acres of land on which the shale mining- <br />crushing-retorting plants would. be built over a period of 50-70 years. <br />In addition, another 25,000-30,000 acres, of land would be taken up for <br />use for urban development and for utility rights-of-way, the report said. <br />All lessees on public land would be required to backfill spent: shale in <br />mined-out areas of underground mines and, as space became available, in <br />open-pit operations. And they also woUld be required to revegetate the <br />land areas as soon as they were no longer needed in mining operations. <br />As oil shale country is not regarded as prime scenic' land, and as it <br />covers a lot of territory in three states, relatively small amounts of <br />land would be involved. More controversiallf~71y~othe report's propos- <br />al to fill up canyons near 011 shale mines with spent shale, as it would <br />be i.nt>ossible to put it all back into the ground. Filling the canyons <br />would perrnanentralter the appearance of Cathedral Bluffs in the piceance <br />Creek country of Colorado and the Kinney Rim coun try in Southern Wyoming <br />Some air pollution would occur in retorting oil from shale. "Cumu_ <br />lative loading to the atmosphere from all sources'except automobiles of <br />the workers at shale oil plants "would increase gradually to a maximum <br />in the ranges of 230-340 tons per day of sulfur and 80-120 tons per day <br />of nitrogen dioxide. 'lhese l.evels would be maintained as long as the <br />industry output continues at the 1 million barrel-per-day level of pro- <br />duction," the report stated. It indicated these levels would meet both <br />federal and state air quality standards. "A potential 'scrubbing' com- <br />pound is the nahcolite produced with oil shale," and it might be used to <br />help "clean up. stack emissions, the report said. It indicated that <br />most of the gas produced in the retorting operations would be recovered <br />and used later as a plant fuel. Building shale oil processing plants on <br />(more-hem) <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.