Shale oil

by Harvey
(Deerfield Beach, FL)

“The technical groundwork may be in place for a fundamental shift in oil shale economics,” the Rand Corporation recently declared. “Advances in thermally conductive in-situ conversion may enable shale-derived oil to be competitive with crude oil at prices below $40 per barrel. If this becomes the case, oil shale development may soon occupy a very prominent position in the national energy agenda.

What is your opinion of the above quote, and what other huge deposits of shale are there, other than the Bakkan, in Utah, Colorado, Wyoming, and California?

Conventional oil is now $70 to $100 a barrel. Regardless of the expense, if the oil shortage, in the U.S, is truly a matter of national security, why doesn't the U.S. government subsidize the processing of shale oil? The government already owns 70% of all the land the shale is in.

How would a new U.S. source of oil, that is three times the amount of oil in Saudi Arabia, change the world?