Comments on: Opening the Book Cliffs

By: Doc Searls

Doc Searls — Wed, 30 Jul 2008 19:42:29 +0000

So help me out, Billy. In what ways am I still wrong? I’m glad to correct anything.

By: Billy Beck

Billy Beck — Tue, 29 Jul 2008 17:12:47 +0000

When I read and think about this post and the comments so far, I cannot help but reflect on a line from a later post here: “Being right is overrated.”

I beseech you: think that you might be wrong in both posts.

By: Christina

Christina — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 21:25:40 +0000

Great pic, Doc! Your posts & pics are always really good, but this one is particularly resonant. Unfortunately, oil isn’t the only problem–there are currently over 80,000 natural gas wells in Colorado alone, and New Mexico/Wyoming are doing just as badly if not worse. All of this is also subject to much less regulation than oil drilling because it’s more under the radar. Recently, it’s been discovered that the natural gas in the Marcellus Shale (which covers most of PA/WV and half of OH/NY) is actually recoverable, so we’re going to start to see a lot of environmental damage in Appalachia, too.

And the drilling for both oil & gas is damaging to much more than just the beautiful vista: it all too often destroys small towns with the accompanying boom & bust cycles and wreaks havoc on the health and safety of wildlife/people living in the area.

By: Doc Searls

Doc Searls — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 14:39:20 +0000

Thanks again, Ron. I got thrown off a series of times here, mostly by my haste.

I think this is the last time I’ll post something on geology while not having a) the time, b) books that help, and c) a good-enough connection to do the required research to get my facts straight.

Now that I’m back home, I’ll go look at my CO and UT geology texts and start straightening stuff out. When I have the time.

Meanwhile, I need a strategy for geo-coding my photos on the fly.

By: Ron Schott

Ron Schott — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 17:25:50 +0000

To clarify a bit further – you were absolutely correct to identify your photo as the Book Cliffs, Doc, and the Book Cliffs are Upper Cretaceous Mancos Shale capped by Mesa Verde Group sandstones. It’s just that these are not the Eocene Green River Formation oil shales that are the focus of oil development in the future. The Wired article was just as incorrect in using your photos of the Book Cliffs in place of the Eocene Green River Fm. oil shales.

By: Doc Searls

Doc Searls — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 10:28:39 +0000

Woops! Well Ron, you’re the guy I was hoping would come along and correct me if I’m wrong about any of this. I didn’t realize I’d be so spectacularly off-base this time. Going back and correcting the pix.

By: Ron Schott

Ron Schott — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 04:54:38 +0000

Sorry Doc, but I’ve gotta correct your geology. The Book Cliffs are Upper Cretaceous in age – your photo illustrates the photogenic Mancos Shale capped by sandstones of the Mesa Verde Group. The big oil shales, however, are upsection by a good ways; up in the Eocene Green River Formation, particularly a layer known as the Mahogany Ledge. No doubt strip mining this would tear up some spectacularly scenic country, but if we’re lucky technology advances will allow us to cook the oil shale in situ and pump the oil out in a less environmentally destructive way. No guarantees that’ll be technically feasible or cost effective any time soon, but it does offer the hope of deriving a valuable resource without necessarily despoiling a wonderful landscape.