This is an archived article that was published on sltrib.com in 2016, and information in the article may be outdated. It is provided only for personal research purposes and may not be reprinted.

"Bass-ackwards" and "hostile toward even the possible development of much-needed energy resources." That's Utah Gov. Gary Herbert in March 2012 describing the Bureau of Land Management's plan to protect federal land from speculative oil shale development.

Herbert made that comment when politicos and industry believed that despite 100 years of hype followed by bust, oil shale — essentially rock containing immature oil — would finally prove commercially viable. For the leader of a state that proudly supports nearly unbridled fossil fuel development, the governor was on stable political ground.

When the Bush administration announced in 2005 it would support commercial oil shale development, speculators and supporters claimed that Colorado, Utah and Wyoming oil shale deposits hold up to 1.5 trillion barrels of oil, six times the proven reserves of Saudi Arabia. Since that announcement, the shale remains in place, and the vision of commercial development remains an illusion.

Despite best efforts, government policies and investment income have yet to overcome the technical hurdles necessary to produce an economically viable product. The problem lies in the rock itself. The recent free fall in energy prices has compounded the many challenges, but is not the root cause.

Take Enefit, the Estonian company seeking to develop oil shale on non-federal lands in eastern Utah. To be profitable, Enefit, like its parent company Eesti Energia, must sell both liquid fuel and the electricity it co-produces. Given eastern Utah's remoteness, the inability to get electricity to market undermines the company's economic modeling.

As the Moab Sun News reported in December 2015, Eesti Energia's "CEO Hando Sutter told an Estonian broadcaster that Enefit has no business plan to continue its Utah operations, noting that the area is far from civilization and decent power grids. Moreover, he said, it would take the company a long time to transport the oil from the remote site to the nearest markets."

Until eastern Utah becomes a large population center, Enefit will struggle to produce a profit.

Red Leaf, another company seeking to develop oil shale in eastern Utah, is similarly challenged. Total, the French energy company, has capped its investment in Red Leaf and, as Red Leaf comes up against that cap and struggles to develop a commercially viable technology while reducing costs, the goal of turning a profit begins to evaporate. These challenges come despite Utah regulators actively facilitating the oil shale development.

These companies are not alone. Even with generous federal research leases in Colorado, Shell and Chevron admitted defeat. Ambre Energy abandoned its efforts, selling approximately 34,000 acres of state leases to Red Leaf for $4 million. TomCo, a Red Leaf licensee, is unable to more forward until Red Leaf proves its technology.

Over the next 12 to 15 months, Enefit and AMSO, another company pursuing research in Colorado, must either relinquish the federal research leases they received in 2007 or convince federal regulators that they are making progress towards commercial development. How Utah and Colorado politicians respond to any such requests for lease extensions will show how much they are willing to rearrange the chairs on the Titanic.

In July 2008, as the Salt Lake Tribune reported, then-Lt. Gov. Herbert said that developing Utah's oil shale deposits would "unleash the power of the private sector." "We can do it reasonably in an environmentally sensitive way," Herbert said, and anyone disputing that "is not thinking clearly."

As Einstein reminds us, "insanity" is defined as "doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." The question for politicians who stuck out their necks to support this nascent industry: how long are you willing to wait?

David M. Abelson is managing director of Abelson Partners in Boulder, Colo. Abelson Partners advises local governments and non-profits on national environmental and energy policy.