Board index » Word on the Street... » News & Debate




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 159 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 11:43 am 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
McParadigm wrote:
To give credit where it is currently due:

Where education discussions reign, LW has frequently asked questions in response to my posts that clearly imply a degree of doubt. But, at the same time, he has never used my station as a reason to refute my statements. There is a real value inherent to that approach that cannot be refuted, especially when doing something as non-consequential as using a message board to try and prove people wrong.

For the record.

how often do you start a post w/ "well from what the teachers in the teacher's caf tell me..."

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 1:07 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 17, 2004 3:07 pm
Posts: 12393
EllisEamos wrote:
McParadigm wrote:
To give credit where it is currently due:

Where education discussions reign, LW has frequently asked questions in response to my posts that clearly imply a degree of doubt. But, at the same time, he has never used my station as a reason to refute my statements. There is a real value inherent to that approach that cannot be refuted, especially when doing something as non-consequential as using a message board to try and prove people wrong.

For the record.

how often do you start a post w/ "well from what the teachers in the teacher's caf tell me..."


Once or twice, but it always ended with "...getting gonorrhea from a student is not included in our insurance plan."


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Thu Apr 21, 2011 2:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
McParadigm wrote:
EllisEamos wrote:
McParadigm wrote:
To give credit where it is currently due:

Where education discussions reign, LW has frequently asked questions in response to my posts that clearly imply a degree of doubt. But, at the same time, he has never used my station as a reason to refute my statements. There is a real value inherent to that approach that cannot be refuted, especially when doing something as non-consequential as using a message board to try and prove people wrong.

For the record.

how often do you start a post w/ "well from what the teachers in the teacher's caf tell me..."


Once or twice, but it always ended with "...getting gonorrhea from a student is not included in our insurance plan."

Ooo Baby I like IT RAAAWWW!!!

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 3:10 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 2:43 am
Posts: 10694
Sandler wrote:
LittleWing wrote:
would you then like to discuss it with people who actually work in the gas industry?


I think most people would like to know what exactly is in the fracking fluid. People are concerned, and if you're right that this is a relatively harmless process, there should be no need to keep this information from the public.

dkfan9 wrote:
If there is anything the last few years of economic meltdowns and oil spills have taught me, it's that you should fully trust those with a profit motive to tell you the truth, no matter the consequences.


:nice:


So this all comes full circle pretty nicely. McParadigm is in an industry where publication is prolific and open. Teachers and education theorists make their money by selling books and openly pushing ideas. So it's really easy for McParadigm to show studies and refer books to me on his area of expertise. That's not how Natural Gas or many other areas of the technological world work. We make our money selling product, and selling more product by advances in technology. My company has a bunch of trade secrets that we try to keep as close as we can to prevent reverse engineering. It helps us maintain our globally dominant position in the marketplace. We don't just publish everything we do, because the second we do, we give up our advantage. Fracking recipes are the same way. If you ran a corporation and invested tens of millions of dollars and years of time to develop your own technique for extracting a quarter of a million dollars worth of gas per day, per well head, would you take a position of, "Oh, well, this stuff is A-OK for the environment, so hey world, here's my recipe and here are my methods!" Of course not. That's very shallow thinking right there. Especially when you're talking about the kind of numbers you're looking at with some of this drilling outfits. They're going to keep everything they do regarding their fracking procedures close at hand and force their competitors to endure the same learning curve they did. Why would you invest all that time and money just to give it up to your competitors who could then use what you developed and reap pure profit?

Furthermore, I really wish some of you guys could walk around a wellhead, or go visit a petrochemical plant. I wish there was a way to quickly convey the complexity, in its most absolute terms, of the entire operation. When I go around to some of these places in the field and learn about the processes and the explicit dangers associated with everything that is done, I find myself even more and more astonished that shit like the BP oil rig doesn't happen more often. The moving parts, the pressures, the poisonous gases, the dynamics, the shear weight of the equipment and the facilities, it's all incredible to see up close and personal. How we don't have more devastating accidents is beyond me, and speaks volumes for the attention that is paid to safety in this industry. A simple vibration can quite literally blow up a whole fucking petrochemical plant.

_________________
Its a Wonderful Life


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 3:57 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Father Bitch
 Profile

Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:20 am
Posts: 5198
Location: Connecticut
Gender: Male
Isn't this why we have patents?

Sorry, LW, but most people aren't going to take the word of the people profiting from this procedure. Nor should they. Right now there is no risk to the environment and our drinking water simply because you (the industry) say so. That isn't enough. If some pharmaceutical rep you didn't know said "take this pill, it'll make you feel great," would you? I mean, he clearly knows more about medicine than you do, and this is some great recipe he's spent the last 10 years designing.

And to be clear, I'm not trying to argue against this industry. I'm not saying you're wrong. I know very little about all this. I just know that enough people have taken an interest in this, and believe there needs to be a little more transparency.

_________________
...


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 5:00 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Yeah Yeah Yeah
 Profile

Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 4:48 pm
Posts: 4320
Location: Philadelphia, PA
LittleWing wrote:
Furthermore, I really wish some of you guys could walk around a wellhead, or go visit a petrochemical plant. I wish there was a way to quickly convey the complexity, in its most absolute terms, of the entire operation. When I go around to some of these places in the field and learn about the processes and the explicit dangers associated with everything that is done, I find myself even more and more astonished that shit like the BP oil rig doesn't happen more often. The moving parts, the pressures, the poisonous gases, the dynamics, the shear weight of the equipment and the facilities, it's all incredible to see up close and personal. How we don't have more devastating accidents is beyond me, and speaks volumes for the attention that is paid to safety in this industry. A simple vibration can quite literally blow up a whole fucking petrochemical plant.

Have been to the new natural gas wells in the Marcellus Shale?


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 5:08 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
LittleWing wrote:
How we don't have more devastating accidents is beyond me, and speaks volumes for the attention that is paid to safety in this industry.

Feb. 23, 2011: http://www.wtae.com/r/26973100/detail.html
Apr. 3, 2011: http://www.vancouversun.com/news/Explos ... story.html
Apr. 20, 2011: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/ ... story.html

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 9:18 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 2:43 am
Posts: 10694
Sandler wrote:
Isn't this why we have patents?

Sorry, LW, but most people aren't going to take the word of the people profiting from this procedure. Nor should they. Right now there is no risk to the environment and our drinking water simply because you (the industry) say so. That isn't enough. If some pharmaceutical rep you didn't know said "take this pill, it'll make you feel great," would you? I mean, he clearly knows more about medicine than you do, and this is some great recipe he's spent the last 10 years designing.

And to be clear, I'm not trying to argue against this industry. I'm not saying you're wrong. I know very little about all this. I just know that enough people have taken an interest in this, and believe there needs to be a little more transparency.


That is why we have patents. But they're still violated constantly all over the technological plane and legal fights are prohibitively costly. And with something such as a mixture you're dumping into the ground it'd be really easy to manipulate the patent just outside its boundaries and utilize it if the mixtures become publicized. Anywhere shale drilling is taking place is strictly monitored by state environmental protection agencies and there are rigorous regulations regarding it. Your pharma question needs a lot of qualifiers. If it wasn't anything dire I'd look for the FDA approval, which I'm sure is what you're driving at. Well guess what, if the EPA and state level environmental agencies are allowing this to take place then I'm going to trust their judgment as opposed to some hyperbolic propaganda video circulating around Netflix.

@ SLH - Yes. In West Virginia. Equitable Energy wellheads.

@ Ellis - You clearly have no idea what I'm trying to convey here. But that really doesn't surprise me. My company has roughly 36,000 compressors out in the field right now. Some of them have been operating almost continuously for 30, sometimes 40 years. Our compressors run up to about 75 tons, with piston/piston rod assemblies that weigh 1500 pounds, going back and forth at 1000 RPM. The fact that we've never had a catastrophic failure or explosion is astonishing. The fact that offshore oil rigs can operate for decade without incidence is astonishing. When you examine the particulars of these locations, and consider that there are thousands upon thousands of wellheads, refineries, off shore rigs, thousands of miles of pipelines, underground reservoirs full of natural gas, it's astonishing that we don't see more enormous, devastating accidents, or environmental disasters that you cite.

_________________
Its a Wonderful Life


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 9:53 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
LittleWing wrote:
@ Ellis - You clearly have no idea what I'm trying to convey here. But that really doesn't surprise me. My company has roughly 36,000 compressors out in the field right now. Some of them have been operating almost continuously for 30, sometimes 40 years. Our compressors run up to about 75 tons, with piston/piston rod assemblies that weigh 1500 pounds, going back and forth at 1000 RPM. The fact that we've never had a catastrophic failure or explosion is astonishing. The fact that offshore oil rigs can operate for decade without incidence is astonishing. When you examine the particulars of these locations, and consider that there are thousands upon thousands of wellheads, refineries, off shore rigs, thousands of miles of pipelines, underground reservoirs full of natural gas, it's astonishing that we don't see more enormous, devastating accidents, or environmental disasters that you cite.

no i get it. i'm just saying it happens, and as you say yourself, its almost divine intervention that keeps these "reported" incidents from being even bigger disasters.

and i feel compelled to point out that i'm not against natural gas. i just take no comfort from your repeating what more experienced folks tell you about zero contamination. i'm merely hoping for this abundant and american resource to be as safe as possible... i.e. regulated.

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:05 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Reissued
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 20059
Gender: Male
LittleWing wrote:
Anywhere shale drilling is taking place is strictly monitored by state environmental protection agencies and there are rigorous regulations regarding it. Your pharma question needs a lot of qualifiers. If it wasn't anything dire I'd look for the FDA approval, which I'm sure is what you're driving at. Well guess what, if the EPA and state level environmental agencies are allowing this to take place then I'm going to trust their judgment as opposed to some hyperbolic propaganda video circulating around Netflix.

Don't these organizations operate in an inherently political climate? You write about them as if they rule objectively on issues of an objective nature--the extent of acceptable environmental hazard for a given level of output is an inherently political question. What these organizations deems is safe depends in part on what politicians say is safe. Whether or not this specific movie is accurate, documentaries, books, studies, these are at the core of the debate that shapes environmental policy (probably indirectly more than anything).

Basically, what I'm saying here is that even if the EPA or state regulatory agency is a neutral arbiter with perfect information, there is not some objective level of acceptable pollution they bow to--society, including documentaries and debates, determines what is acceptable (or, that's the ideal case: powerful actors like politicians do most of the actual determining but they might apporximate what society wants, and the chances of that are higher if there's a debate). There are negative externalities often not taken into account currently.

Of course, I doubt agencies are neutral arbiters, are effective, and even more that they have perfect info--your account of the complexities, as well as the BP spill, lend credence to this line of thought.

_________________
stop light plays its part, so I would say you've got a part


Last edited by dkfan9 on Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
dkfan9 wrote:
Of course, I doubt agencies are neutral arbiters, are effective, and even more that they have perfect info--your account of the complexities, as well as the BP spill, lend credence to this line of thought.

this is the biggest problem i have with the way things currently are... not just w/ nat gas, but throughout our society.

the epa (insert regulatory body here) is stripped of their powers (by different branches of the gov) and then the industry says, "the regulators says we're okay, so you should feel that way too."

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:16 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Reissued
 WWW  Profile

Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 3:38 pm
Posts: 20059
Gender: Male
EllisEamos wrote:
dkfan9 wrote:
Of course, I doubt agencies are neutral arbiters, are effective, and even more that they have perfect info--your account of the complexities, as well as the BP spill, lend credence to this line of thought.

this is the biggest problem i have with the way things currently are... not just w/ nat gas, but throughout our society.

the epa (insert regulatory body here) is stripped of their powers (by different branches of the gov) and then the industry says, "the regulators says we're okay, so you should feel that way too."

:nice:

_________________
stop light plays its part, so I would say you've got a part


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 10:20 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
dkfan9 wrote:
EllisEamos wrote:
dkfan9 wrote:
Of course, I doubt agencies are neutral arbiters, are effective, and even more that they have perfect info--your account of the complexities, as well as the BP spill, lend credence to this line of thought.

this is the biggest problem i have with the way things currently are... not just w/ nat gas, but throughout our society.

the epa (insert regulatory body here) is stripped of their powers (by different branches of the gov) and then the industry says, "the regulators says we're okay, so you should feel that way too."

:nice:

which is why i blame the republicans for messing up everything!!!

:arrow:

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Fri Apr 22, 2011 11:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 2:43 am
Posts: 10694
EllisEamos wrote:
dkfan9 wrote:
Of course, I doubt agencies are neutral arbiters, are effective, and even more that they have perfect info--your account of the complexities, as well as the BP spill, lend credence to this line of thought.

this is the biggest problem i have with the way things currently are... not just w/ nat gas, but throughout our society.

the epa (insert regulatory body here) is stripped of their powers (by different branches of the gov) and then the industry says, "the regulators says we're okay, so you should feel that way too."


Stripped of their powers? Again, how I wish I could bring you on site.

Also, it would seem that the position you and dk are taking ignores the external costs for the companies that operate these outfits. What do you think it costs them when someone dies on site? What do you think the lawsuits are like if there is a negligent cause to be found? BP is suing the owner of that oil rig for fucking 40 billion dollars. The owners of that property in Pennsylvania will undoubtedly sue.

Look at the wellheads we compress at. If our compressors go down it's typically costing that producer a quarter of a million dollars a day. What do you think the cost of a spill, or an explosion is, in regards to simple lost revenue? How much money do you think BP lost in revenue from not being able to tap that oil reserve in the Gulf from that accident? Our pipeline units can pump millions of dollars in gas a day, so what do you think it would be like to have an unsafe system set up that would lead to a gasline explosion?

Safety is in the equation from top to bottom. Distributors and end users look to purchase our compressors because they know they're safe, and they know they'll never break or cause a safety accident. They pay huge prices, sometimes two or three times greater than our competitors, to get that reliable product. The idea that these companies do not have safety as a number one prerogative is really pretty insulting.

_________________
Its a Wonderful Life


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2011 1:46 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
LittleWing wrote:
Stripped of their powers? Again, how I wish I could bring you on site.

the comment was based on this:
Quote:
September 7, 2003 (Houston Chronicle) -- Tucked inside an 800-page energy bill making its way through Congress is a short section that would exempt from federal regulation a lucrative gas-drilling process perfected by Houston-based Halliburton...


and this:
Quote:
On April 7, 2011, the Energy Tax Prevention Act of 2011, sponsored by Rep. Fred Upton (R-MI) passed the house 236-172. The bill seeks to, “amend the Clean Air Act to prohibit the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from promulgating any regulation concerning, taking action relating to, or taking into consideration the emission of a greenhouse gas to address climate change, and for other purposes.” Not a single Republican voted against it and 19 Democrats also voted for it. Supporters of the bill took on average over five times more [Money] in the last
election cycle than those that opposed it.


LittleWing wrote:
Also, it would seem that the position you and dk are taking ignores the external costs for the companies that operate these outfits. What do you think it costs them when someone dies on site? What do you think the lawsuits are like if there is a negligent cause to be found? BP is suing the owner of that oil rig for fucking 40 billion dollars. The owners of that property in Pennsylvania will undoubtedly sue.

Look at the wellheads we compress at. If our compressors go down it's typically costing that producer a quarter of a million dollars a day. What do you think the cost of a spill, or an explosion is, in regards to simple lost revenue? How much money do you think BP lost in revenue from not being able to tap that oil reserve in the Gulf from that accident? Our pipeline units can pump millions of dollars in gas a day, so what do you think it would be like to have an unsafe system set up that would lead to a gasline explosion?

BP wants $40B you say? interesting... its good to know they could deduct $12.8B from their taxes to mitigate there $40B loss over the spill... which includes the $20B the Gov. made them put asside.

as far as deaths on site, i would hope these companies insured themselves and their employees against such incidents. which would mean no cost.

lastly, you yourself are amazed that more doesn't go wrong, on a larger scale. you say that demonstrates how safe everything is, i'd say that demonstrates how lucky we all are. basically, its not a matter of "if" its a matter of "when," which is not comforting. not to mention, this was not, nor has it ever been, a discussion of whether people are safe on site. this is a discussion of whether or not people are safe downstream.

LittleWing wrote:
Safety is in the equation from top to bottom. Distributors and end users look to purchase our compressors because they know they're safe, and they know they'll never break or cause a safety accident. They pay huge prices, sometimes two or three times greater than our competitors, to get that reliable product. The idea that these companies do not have safety as a number one prerogative is really pretty insulting.

again, you're losing track of the conversation. we're talking about the pollution of this process, not whether a compressor "will never break." we all expect and demand safety as a "number one prerogative," which is why it seems odd that these companies need to game the system to get less eyes watching them do what they claim is so safe to do. also, if we want to talk about special formulas be proprietary, let's just let coca-cola & red bull put coke back in our "soft drinks."

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2011 5:13 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 2:43 am
Posts: 10694
Quote:
as far as deaths on site, i would hope these companies insured themselves and their employees against such incidents. which would mean no cost. - Ellis


Right. Because a reckless driver pays the same kind of monthly premiums on their insurance as I do. Just as an insurance company would be just as happy provide the same premiums to Chesapeake as they will an outfit that has been accident free. You're right. Insurance means that accidents and deaths cost nothing.

_________________
Its a Wonderful Life


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2011 6:25 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
LittleWing wrote:
Quote:
as far as deaths on site, i would hope these companies insured themselves and their employees against such incidents. which would mean no cost. - Ellis


Right. Because a reckless driver pays the same kind of monthly premiums on their insurance as I do. Just as an insurance company would be just as happy provide the same premiums to Chesapeake as they will an outfit that has been accident free. You're right. Insurance means that accidents and deaths cost nothing.

you know what i meant donkeywing. :roll: you and i are discussing ADDITIONAL costs, beyond basic operating costs.

but are you trying to tell me this IS a reckless endeavor that should be more closely watched/regulated?

i agree.

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Sat Apr 23, 2011 7:14 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
these are honest questions, so please refrain from taking your inherently defensive position that usually follows my posts. I'm asking you (LW) as someone in the industry, but i'd understand if you don't know the answers:

What is the procedure for getting the right to drill?

Do land owners still own the property, but relinquish the profits derived from the nat. gas. to the company that drilled by way of an upfront lump sum? Or is payment for use of the land based on the profits derived by the drilling company?

Does a county or state need to first permit a company to drill, then that single company can pursue buying land/permission-to-drill-someone-else's-land? Or is it a general permit and companies then divide up the land themselves?

Do multiple companies operate in the same area?

Does a home/land owner, after being contacted by one company, have the right/means to contact another company and look for a larger lump sum payment?

Do they have the right to investigate a company that contacts them and do a background check on their safety record? If so, wouldn't promoting a more bio-neutral fracking cocktail be good for business?

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 3:26 pm 
Offline
User avatar
Supersonic
 Profile

Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 2:43 am
Posts: 10694
1. Don't know, but I will have a week long session with drillers the first week of May and can find out then.

2. Gas companies will approach land owners and offer them a monthly check to drill on their land. Sometimes they will offer it on a per drilling rig basis, sometimes on a per acre basis. These are usually leases from the land owner, unless they land owner just ops to sell the land which I've never heard before. Typically people in these locations are leasing as long as the gas company wants to drill and making a bucket load doing it.

3. Operators have to be certified by a number of organizations before they can begin drilling. Local, state, and federal environmental agencies, OSHA, health department, etc. Once they are certified than can then begin looking for land. Near as I can tell the companies do not collude. They're pretty competitive. Now, there's very general information sharing within the industry, but when it comes to drilling gas, they're really not. They'll pursue land owners and make offers to receive permission to drill or survey.

4. That depends on what the size of the same area is.

5. I wouldn't think so. I can't tell you for sure but I'd almost gaurantee that there's an exclusive arrangement preventing that sort of thing.

6. Of course. Near as I can tell you'd be able to look up the safety record of any gas or oil drilling outfit.

_________________
Its a Wonderful Life


Top
 
 Post subject: Re: GASLAND
PostPosted: Sun Apr 24, 2011 5:43 pm 
Offline
User avatar
AnalLog
 Profile

Joined: Sun Feb 26, 2006 3:28 am
Posts: 28541
Location: PORTLAND, ME
LittleWing wrote:
1. Don't know, but I will have a week long session with drillers the first week of May and can find out then.

2. Gas companies will approach land owners and offer them a monthly check to drill on their land. Sometimes they will offer it on a per drilling rig basis, sometimes on a per acre basis. These are usually leases from the land owner, unless they land owner just ops to sell the land which I've never heard before. Typically people in these locations are leasing as long as the gas company wants to drill and making a bucket load doing it.

3. Operators have to be certified by a number of organizations before they can begin drilling. Local, state, and federal environmental agencies, OSHA, health department, etc. Once they are certified than can then begin looking for land. Near as I can tell the companies do not collude. They're pretty competitive. Now, there's very general information sharing within the industry, but when it comes to drilling gas, they're really not. They'll pursue land owners and make offers to receive permission to drill or survey.

4. That depends on what the size of the same area is.

5. I wouldn't think so. I can't tell you for sure but I'd almost gaurantee that there's an exclusive arrangement preventing that sort of thing.

6. Of course. Near as I can tell you'd be able to look up the safety record of any gas or oil drilling outfit.

thanks, i'll be interested in whatever you find out.

:thumbsup:

_________________
Winner, 2011 RM 'Stache Tournament


Top
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 159 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next

Board index » Word on the Street... » News & Debate


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 10:53 am