OCR Text |
Show New oil shale plants decrease waterdemands (Special to the Vernal Express) By Helene C. Monberg Washington The new oil shale projects approved by the Department of Energy (DOE) on July 29 and Aug. 5 would use only 11,400 acre-feet of water annually, according to the study on syn-fuels syn-fuels development in the Colorado River Basin recently released by the Water Resources Council (WRC). The study indicated a 50,000 barrel-a-day oil shale conversion plant would use 5,700 acre feet of water a year from the Upper Colorado River Basin. Each of the plants approved in oil shale country, the Colony project of Tosco and Exxon, and the Parachute Creek Project of Union Oin Co. of California, would be 50,000-barrel-a-day plants, as both projects are now envisioned. Both are in Western Colorado. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Anne M. Gorsuch told this correspondent on Aug. 5 EPA is keeping an eye on these new syn-fuels plants thru a special office. It turns out EPA has an alternative fuels group here which has as its contact Frederick D. (Derry) Allen. Asked what EPA had been doing in the past and what it would be doing in the future to keep an eye on the water quality, air quality and solid waste disposal problems as they relate to the two Colorado plants and the new Great Plains coal gasification plant approved by DOE for North Dakota, Allen said, "These projects got their permits to operate some time ago. We are tracking these projects thru a coordinator coor-dinator in Denver John Philbrook in our Denver regional office. He is the one who will be keeping up to speed on these projects to see that they meet air and water quality standards." Allen ' wasn't sure what EPA was doing regarding the solid waste problems posed by these projects, but it will tract that too, he said. The WRC study released recently in draft form will be released in final form before the WRC goes out of existence on Sept. 30. One of the most interesting things about the study is that it indicates coal gasification will take considerably more water than oil shale conversion under projects now in the discussion stage. It shows that high BTU coal gasification projects which would produce 250 million cubic feet of synthetic syn-thetic gas daily would take 7,500 acre feet of water, and low BTU coal gasification plants of the same size could take up to 13,500-acre feet of water annually. The North Dakota project is only half the size of the proposals for coal gasification outlined in the Colorado River Basin study; it is a high BTU project which is expected to use 6,000 acre-feet of water a year out of Garrison Reservoir on the Missouri River in North Dakota. There were some interesting observations ob-servations in the study, whose contents have long been known: that the Upper Colorado River Basin would support a 3 million barrel-a-day syn-fuel industry, and that such an industry could consumptively con-sumptively use about 150,000 acre-feet of water per year for each million barrels of syn-fuels production, or its equivalent. It indicated an increase in runoff from weather modification is not likely to add to the water supply of the Upper Colorado River Basin. "Enhanced snowfall from weather modification would be advantageous to skiers, snowmobilers and supporting businesses" as well as syn-fuels industry. in-dustry. "However, increased snowfall raises costs for snow removal and avalance control, increases the snow damage to orchards, reduces grazing potential for livestock and wildlife in high pastures, and raises costs for mining and timber operations. Because of these and other institutional factors, major weather modification is not likely in the near future," the draft study on the upper Basin concluded. Events have overtaken the study in one regard. It indicated syn-fuels development might have an adverse effect on endangered species in the area, particularly the Colorado River squawfish and the humpback chub. The U.S. District Court in Denver on Aug. 3 ruled that the listing both of these fish as endangered species was invalid and void, as the Secretary of Interior had not followed the correct procedures public notice and public participation as required under the Administration Procedures Act-before Act-before so listing these fish as endangered. en-dangered. All of the proposals in the Council Upper Colorado study were potential at the time they were considered. Now both the Union proposal, approved on July 29, and the Tosco Colony proposal, approved on Aug. 5, will be subsidized by the government, so both are expected ex-pected to go forward as actual commercial-scale synthetic fuel projects to convert oil out of shale. Additionally, the Geokinetics Oil Shale Development and Production Office will be moved on Sept. 1 from Concord Calif., where the Geokinetics home office is based, to Salt Lake City, Geokinetics announced on Aug. 12. This appears that Geokinetics will materially expand its oil shale operations in the Vernal, Utah, area. |