In the United States, on-site (in-situ) oil shale extraction methods are underutilized, leading to a potential loss of $20 billion per year in profit. On-site oil shale extraction methods are not considered when discussing large-scale oil shale extraction operations. Off-site (ex-situ) extraction remains the only commercialized method, but on-site extraction is showing considerable promise. The on-site methods allow for the exploitation of deeper oil shale prospects, which have the potential of producing up to 1.32 trillion barrels of oil.
Oil shale is an unconventional hydrocarbon resource that must be considered part of the overall energy solution. There are two general methods for extracting oil shale resources: off-site extraction and on-site extraction. The off-site method consists of surface mining and above ground heating. The on-site methods consist of well drilling, well completion, and underground heating. Due to their technical differences, a comparison of the methods is difficult.
This praxis seeks to inform the selection of oil shale extraction methods using a multi-attribute utility function as part of a decision tool. The tool consists of three components: the oil production model, the cost model, and the decision model. The practical application of the tool is to bring on-site extraction methods into the conversation. The Piceance Basin, located in western Colorado, is used to show the application of the tool in the field. With the ability to evaluate different extraction methods and process-heating options using the decision tool, the exploitation of more oil shale is possible.
Multi-criteria decision-making methods have seen increased use in process industries. Decision making in mining and offshore oil and gas exploration provides useful insights into how decisions are made and how decision analysis could be used for oil shale projects. When evaluating distinct oil shale extraction alternatives, a decision tool, built around multi-attribute utility theory, simulation, and regression analysis provides the best vehicle for systematic decision making.
|Commitee:||Fossaceca, John M., Etemadi, Amir|
|School:||The George Washington University|
|School Location:||United States -- District of Columbia|
|Source:||DAI-A 82/6(E), Dissertation Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Energy, Engineering, Management|
|Keywords:||Decision theory, Energy, Engineering management, Fossil Fuels, Multi-attribute utility theory, Oil shale|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be