BLM proposes 90 percent cut in Colorado shale land availability

By Dennis Webb
Friday, February 3, 2012

The Bureau of Land Management is proposing cutting acreage available for potential oil shale leasing to a tenth of the current amount in Colorado.

The agency is proposing making 35,300 acres available, compared to about 360,000 acres under a plan issued during the Bush administration.

In total, it proposes reducing available acres by more than 1.5 million acres in three western states.

Under a 2008 decision during the Bush administration, the BLM allocated 2 million acres for possible oil shale development in Colorado, Wyoming and Utah. The Obama administration agreed to reconsider that allocation as part of a settlement of a lawsuit by environmental groups challenging the 2008 action.

The BLM is proposing reducing total acreage in the three states available for possible oil shale development to about 462,000 acres. In Utah, about 91,000 acres would be available for activities related to tar sands activities, down from about 431,000 acres in the 2008 plan.

Garfield County has been involved as a cooperating agency with the BLM on its revision. In November, Garfield Commissioner Tom Jankovsky had said the BLM was working on a recommendation to reduce available acreage by just 270,000 acres. He said what’s now being proposed “is a new alternative and it’s coming from the very top.”

Jankovsky, who hopes to see a commercial oil shale industry emerge, said he’s shocked by the proposal.

“There’s more oil in that ground than there is in Saudi Arabia, and they’re shutting it down. I don’t know what they’re thinking about national security,” he said.

Others, including the city of Rifle, have endorsed a go-slow approach that focuses on research and development projects rather than commercial development before it’s proven feasible.

In a news release, BLM director Bob Abbey said the proposal “continues our commitment to encouraging research, development, and demonstration projects so that companies can develop technologies that can lead to economic and commercial viability. Because there are still many unanswered questions about the technology, water use, and impacts of potential commercial-scale oil shale development, we are proposing a prudent and orderly approach that could facilitate significant improvements to technology needed for commercial-scale activity.  If oil shale is to be viable on a commercial scale, we must take a common-sense approach that encourages research and development first.”