Talk:Shell in situ conversion process

Energy Start‑class Mid‑importance

	Energy portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Energy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Energy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.EnergyWikipedia:WikiProject EnergyTemplate:WikiProject Energyenergy articles
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Chemical and Bio Engineering (inactive)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chemical and Bio Engineering, a project which is currently considered to be inactive.Chemical and Bio EngineeringWikipedia:WikiProject Chemical and Bio EngineeringTemplate:WikiProject Chemical and Bio EngineeringChemical and Bio Engineering articles

EROEI

The EROEI for ICP can also be calculated from first principles, based on an estimate of the specific heat of shale and the amount of shale heated in Shell's three Mahogany trials in 1981, 1996, and 2005. All three trials had poor levels of oil recovery compared with the mass of shale being heated. The 2005 trial was intended to show that the EROEI would be improved for a larger volume of shale with less heat dissipation, but was a failure in this respect. See SPE 121164, Oil Shale ICP (In-Situ Processing) Colorado Field Pilots, Fowler and Vinegar, 2009.Jdkag (talk) 22:34, 9 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EROEI and oil recovery are different things (although there is a link between them). Mentioning Vinegar raised a question if you have any direct or indirect relation to IEI or Genie Energy? Just curiosity. Beagel (talk) 04:50, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I included Vinegar simply because anyone reading of an ICP patent would be curious as to whether Vinegar had been involved (given his recent prominence with IEI).82.166.158.90 (talk) 07:04, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EROEI relationship to oil recovery: According to the SPE article, the shale richness in the Piceance Basin averages 25 GPT (p. 2). In Shell's 2005 trial 1860 bbl (78,000 gallons) was produced from about 3500 m3, or 7700 tons (p. 8). So the trial produced about 10 GPT. Oil recovery was therefore 40%, and the EROEI was therefore only 40% what it could have been with full recovery.82.166.158.90 (talk) 07:41, 10 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]