Spoiler Alert- Oil Shale Development May Harm Rivers in the Colorado Basin
David Moryc, Senior Director, River Protection
November 27, 2012 | Most Endangered Rivers, Water Supply
Green River, UT | Scott Bosse
If you were to draw up a list of rivers where you wouldn’t want to extract oil shale in the United States, the Green, the White and the Upper Colorado would be in the list. (Similar to developing a massive copper and gold mine in the most productive salmon watershed on the planet, but I digress.)
Yet, due to a curse of geology that is unfortunately exactly where industrial-scale oil shale production of oil shale is proposed that could require as much as 123 billion gallons of water, according to a new report [PDF] authored by Melinda Kassen.
The Sportsmen for Responsible Development Coalition (I’m sure along with the sports women) are rightly concerned that industrial scale oil production could deplete stream flows, degrade habitat, cut off wildlife migration corridors along important rivers. All of this will of course affect hunting, fishing and the local economies that depend on more sustainable industries.
At the heart of the matter is the fact there are some places and rivers where development, including oil and gas, is simply not appropriate and this is one of them.
The rivers in the Colorado River Basin are under immense pressure from a myriad of development threats (See American Rivers’ listing of the Green River as one of America's Most Endangered Rivers) and along with our partners we will continue to fight for these special places.
Post a Comment
Comment Policy: Our goal is to provide a forum for sharing and interacting with others about issues that are affecting our rivers and our clean water. All comments offered in the spirit of civil conversation are welcome! Commercial spam, obscenity and other rude behavior are not, and will be removed.
Comments List
Submitted by Jessie Thomas Blate at: November 29, 2012
While the amount of water used in the development of shales may be less than other industries, such as agriculture, it is not insignificant. Water used for fracking or shale oil development is completely removed from the water cycle, unlike agriculture. Also it is critical to consider the placement of shale development in relation to rivers, especially in the West where water is so precious. The risk of contamination, even if it is small, should not be ignored when we are talking about a water supply that is strictly managed. In some places, drilling will never be appropriate. This is particularly the case in river corridors that are eligible for Wild and Scenic designation, or supply water to thousands of area residents.
Submitted by Bill Midcap at: November 28, 2012
Agriculture is the second largest industry in Colorado, and this is largely attritubeted to irrigated agriculture. For Mr. Boak to say our rivers are threatened by agriculture is in fact an insult to farmers and ranchers that use water from those rivers. The fact is farmers have used water for over 100 years and have proved the management of water as a tool to enhance the viability of agriculture. Where oil companies have been trying to harvest oil from a rock for 100 years that is just to immature and never been exposed to enough heat to generate enough income to sustain the oil shale industry. Why do folks like Mr. Boak assume big oil will do anything to protect our environment? Let's make big oil prove they have an economic model that is viable and show proof of the quanity of the water they will use and the quality when they return it to an ecosystem. Big oil cannot gamble with our water resources. I wonder Mr. Boak--Can you go longer without food than you can without the scarce amount of oil produced from oil shale?
Submitted by Jeremy Boak at: November 27, 2012
The rivers of Northwest Colorado are much more seriously threatened by agriculture, which uses 80-90% of Colorado's water than by oil shale development, which would use 1-2% of the water and produce 15% of Colorado's GDP. There is no evidence that holistic management of the water resources of the region cannot provide a place for multiple uses of the water without serious environmental impact. This would, however, require compromise. If oil shale development is inappropriate in Colorado, so is biofuel production, which uses 5-100 times more water. Development of the largest oil shale deposit in the world does not have to destroy these valuable resources, as the politicians would have you believe.