New BLM Proposal Would Limit Shale Oil, Tar Sand Development In Utah

A new proposal floated Friday by the Bureau of Land Management has Utah's political leaders hopping mad.

The plan, which still awaits public input, would greatly reduce the amount of BLM land in Utah that could be used for potentially lucrative tar-sand and oil-shale development.

Energy companies have been eyeing vast swaths of land in eastern Utah for years now, hoping to unlock the estimated trillions of barrels of fossil fuels deposited in the soil there. The technology for extracting those fuels, however, has been slow to develop and proponents of clean air and water in Utah and across the country question the environmental impact such water hungry operations might have.

Under the new federal proposal a deal struck by the Bush Administration opening up more than two million acres of land for such energy development would be reduced to a little more than a half million acres. In Friday's proposal BLM Director Bob Abbey said the decision to reduce the amount of land was based on environmental concerns.

"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, Abbey said.

Utah's political leaders have been quick to condemn the plan.

Senator Orrin Hatch released a statement Friday blasting the Obama Administration for "limiting American oil production" and "killing jobs" that would come with it.

“Once again, the Obama Administration caved in to their liberal environmentalist allies and said no to creating jobs and lowering energy costs for Utahns,” Hatch said. “The Energy Department says there’s nearly a trillion barrels of recoverable oil in the three-state region from oil shale, and 90 percent of that is on federal lands. But this ruling says that instead of extracting this American energy and creating jobs right here in Utah, we’re going to continue to import foreign sources of oil and export jobs. It’s one more step backwards for this Administration and another sign they just don’t get it.”

First District Congressman Rob Bishop echoed Hatch's concerns.

"This week, both Democrats and Republicans on the House Natural Resources committee joined together to approve bipartisan legislation that would increase domestic energy production, including oil shale, create jobs and fund essential roads and bridges throughout the country," Bishop said. "Just as we take steps to improve energy production in this country, the Administration throws up yet another energy roadblock, destroying hopes of new jobs, more education funding for our children, and a chance to obtain true energy independence.”

But not everyone in Utah was disappointed in the news. Southern Utah Wildness Alliance spokesman, Steve Bloch, welcomed the BLM's decision, but said there were other BLM lands in Utah that also warranted protection.

In January, Bloch argued in favor of a lawsuit filed by SUWA in 10th District Court calling for a repeal of BLM decisions allowing energy development in southern Utah near The Canyonlands and the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. At the time, Block said the lawsuit was "critically important to protect some of the most breathtaking places in Utah from a parade of horrors that would come from tar sands or conventional oil and gas development. From onsite refining to new roads and power lines, to strip mining or underground “fire-floods” that proposed tar sands development would bring, these leases are the camel’s nose under the tent for the intensive industrialization of these wild places."

The public now has 90 days to respond to the BLM proposal.