[Duke Castile]

I'm late to the party but I can tell you a little of what I know.

Each well has upwards of 20,000 gallons of FRAC water pumped into it. This water is highly toxic and so are thousands of gallons of other things that go into the drilling process.

I think the last estimation I heard from various oil companies is that 45% of the wells have integrity problems (in other words, are leaking all of this shit into the soil).

If this is what the oil companies are saying, then you can bet it's much worse.

North Dakota is going to be a wasteland in another 10-15 years.

Yes there are a lot of regulations that are followed to "minimize" damage to the environment but it's negligible.

I believe the costs of the damage are worth the benefit but the whole process is very poisonous. It amounts to injecting poison directly into the soil, water supply, and air.

[Flint]

(11-24-2014 12:55 AM)Matt Forney Wrote:  

The NYT and the leftist media have had it out for the Bakken since day one, because the jobs there enable men to pull down decent money without having to go to college, get indoctrinated by Marxist academics, and work for companies run by PC human resources flacks. Not only that, the jobs are strictly for men (though there are some women who work high-paid service jobs... and of course, strippers and prostitutes).

These SJWs hate anything that threatens the government-education complex, so they run attack pieces on the rising crime rate in Williston (still lower per capita than NYC, Chicago or any of the enlightened leftist metropolises they live in), the rising rape rate (ditto), the strained social services (what do you expect to happen in a boom town?) and more.

I call conspiracy theory on this one.

Feel free to criticize the NYT and other media for their liberal bias all you want, they often deserve it, but to think that they sent out a bunch of reporters to North Dakota and made this multimedia piece (trust me, especially this format + double checking the facts is A LOT of work), just with the intention to give male-dominated professions a bad rep is ludicrous, to say the least. Some of you seem to believe that every single piece you read in a publication like the NYT is committed to a vague "cultural Marxist" agenda and you don't notice that you abandon all your rational and critical faculties by making these broad and generalized statements.

The farmers around that area who now have to deal with contaminated soils and which are quoted in the article certainly don't read the NYT. I bet they are Rednecks, evangelical and vote GOP. If the mainstream media were really so liberal, it makes no sense why the article would take sides with these people and highlight their problems.

Where I'm from, environmental protection and eco-activism is nowadays an issue for conservatives.

[ElJefe]

(11-25-2014 03:46 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

I'm late to the party but I can tell you a little of what I know.

Each well has upwards of 20,000 gallons of FRAC water pumped into it. This water is highly toxic and so are thousands of gallons of other things that go into the drilling process.

I think the last estimation I heard from various oil companies is that 45% of the wells have integrity problems (in other words, are leaking all of this shit into the soil).

If this is what the oil companies are saying, then you can bet it's much worse.

North Dakota is going to be a wasteland in another 10-15 years.

Yes there are a lot of regulations that are followed to "minimize" damage to the environment but it's negligible.

I believe the costs of the damage are worth the benefit but the whole process is very poisonous. It amounts to injecting poison directly into the soil, water supply, and air.

Well, if they own the land, they can do what they want with it as long as externalities are internalized in the price of what they do - for instance if water supply in neighboring communities is damaged - then said companies should pony up.

I suppose since science doesn't know everything, stockholders of companies should be liable for damages from externalities for a number of years after the operation.

[Duke Castile]

(11-25-2014 05:38 PM)ElJefe Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 03:46 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

I'm late to the party but I can tell you a little of what I know.

Each well has upwards of 20,000 gallons of FRAC water pumped into it. This water is highly toxic and so are thousands of gallons of other things that go into the drilling process.

I think the last estimation I heard from various oil companies is that 45% of the wells have integrity problems (in other words, are leaking all of this shit into the soil).

If this is what the oil companies are saying, then you can bet it's much worse.

North Dakota is going to be a wasteland in another 10-15 years.

Yes there are a lot of regulations that are followed to "minimize" damage to the environment but it's negligible.

I believe the costs of the damage are worth the benefit but the whole process is very poisonous. It amounts to injecting poison directly into the soil, water supply, and air.

Well, if they own the land, they can do what they want with it as long as externalities are internalized in the price of what they do - for instance if water supply in neighboring communities is damaged - then said companies should pony up.

I suppose since science doesn't know everything, stockholders of companies should be liable for damages from externalities for a number of years after the operation.

I agree that if they own the land (mineral rights) etc then they should be able to do what they want.

I'm just saying North Dakota is going to be a wasteland.

It was a shit hole anyway so I couldn't care less.

[VolandoVengoVolandoVoy]

They did a part 2 on the politics of it all, and efforts at reigning some of the irresponsibility in. Pretty much what I would expect.
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2014/...itics.html

"Then, this year, North Dakotans learned of discovery after discovery of illegally dumped oil filter socks, the “used condoms” of the oil industry, which contain radiation dislodged from deep underground."


"And there he found what he believed to be an explanation for why the mega-unit “case of such complexity” had gotten simpler after Mr. Helms signed the Dec. 5 continuation order.
On Dec. 5, the Exxon Mobil Corporation PAC contributed $600 to Mr. Dalrymple’s campaign. On Dec. 12, Harold G. Hamm, chief executive of Continental, gave $20,000. On Dec. 17, the Marathon Oil PAC gave $5,000. On Dec. 21, the day after the mega-unit vote, for which he was present, Continental’s Bismarck-based lawyer gave $5,000. On Dec. 27, Denbury Resources contributed $5,000.""


"Six oil companies were charged with misdemeanor violations of the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Mr. Purdon said that within hours of the complaints being filed, he received a call from a friend with a message from top-ranking state officials: “If Tim thought he would be a federal judge someday, that’s done.”"


"Governors in top oil-producing states typically get industry contributions. In North Dakota, though, the governor’s relationship to those contributors’ interests is uniquely direct because he is chairman of the Industrial Commission."


"Edward T. Schafer, a Republican former governor, toured the state in an oil industry-sponsored “Fix the Tax” bus in 2011, arguing that oil taxes should be lowered to prevent the boom from going bust. The effort failed; afterward, Mr. Schafer was named to the board of Continental Resources, and awarded a compensation package, mostly stock, valued at $700,000 that year."

[Seth_Rose]

^^^ Why is that guy holding my used condom?

[TheSlayer]

(11-25-2014 05:38 PM)ElJefe Wrote:  

Well, if they own the land, they can do what they want with it as long as externalities are internalized in the price of what they do - for instance if water supply in neighboring communities is damaged - then said companies should pony up.

That never happens though since those companies fight tooth and nail to not pay any damages and it's impossible to make them pay without lengthy court cases/litigation. I agree in principle that they should be able to do what they want but as Fisto said, there is tons of waste that is leaking into the soil and that usually does contaminate the surrounding land/water (which they do not own).

[Cattle Rustler]

(11-25-2014 05:38 PM)ElJefe Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 03:46 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

I'm late to the party but I can tell you a little of what I know.

Each well has upwards of 20,000 gallons of FRAC water pumped into it. This water is highly toxic and so are thousands of gallons of other things that go into the drilling process.

I think the last estimation I heard from various oil companies is that 45% of the wells have integrity problems (in other words, are leaking all of this shit into the soil).

If this is what the oil companies are saying, then you can bet it's much worse.

North Dakota is going to be a wasteland in another 10-15 years.

Yes there are a lot of regulations that are followed to "minimize" damage to the environment but it's negligible.

I believe the costs of the damage are worth the benefit but the whole process is very poisonous. It amounts to injecting poison directly into the soil, water supply, and air.

Well, if they own the land, they can do what they want with it as long as externalities are internalized in the price of what they do - for instance if water supply in neighboring communities is damaged - then said companies should pony up.

I suppose since science doesn't know everything, stockholders of companies should be liable for damages from externalities for a number of years after the operation.

When have you seen a company say "okay, we fucked up. We'll start fixing it, how much do we owe?".

What they do instead of get an army of lawyers and lobbyists and try to fight tooth and nail in court and in congress. Even when one of their own employees die, they fight the OSHA fine and are reluctant to pay insurance. Actually, most OSHA fines get cut in half 99% of the time.

It's a race to the bottom game in terms of costs. Thinking companies will "do the right thing" is hamster.

[weambulance]

I don't know if things are different in oil, but in the mining industry most large companies go way out of their way to comply with MSHA and EPA regulations. The mine I worked at spent a shitload of money to avoid environmental problems, way above and beyond, mostly for PR reasons I imagine.

I'm sure there's a lot of fly-by-night shit going on in the oil fields though.

[ElBorrachoInfamoso]

Don't trust any expose in the MSM. If you bother to do a little bit of digging on your own, you'll usually find the reporter is misrepresenting the facts.

Back when I was still a consultant, a major paper did an expose on one of my clients - a hospital. I won't go too much into the details but they basically said my client was overcharging for certain medical procedures. I did some digging and found that reporters all over the country were doing essentially the same story on hospitals in their areas. All of them were written to make it seem like these evil hospital executives were fleecing the poor citizens of whatever fucking city the paper covered. I did my own research and found out the reason these medical procedures had gone up in price was because medicare had passed a rule saying they would pay more for the procedures. Private insurers were forced to go along in many cases but some were fighting it. Of course, these reporters couldn't point out that the evil villain in this case was really the government, particularly medicare. These unethical reporters have nothing but praise for shitty government pyramid schemes.

[Sp5]

(11-25-2014 10:39 PM)Cattle Rustler Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 05:38 PM)ElJefe Wrote:  

(11-25-2014 03:46 PM)Fisto Wrote:  

I'm late to the party but I can tell you a little of what I know.

Each well has upwards of 20,000 gallons of FRAC water pumped into it. This water is highly toxic and so are thousands of gallons of other things that go into the drilling process.

I think the last estimation I heard from various oil companies is that 45% of the wells have integrity problems (in other words, are leaking all of this shit into the soil).

If this is what the oil companies are saying, then you can bet it's much worse.

North Dakota is going to be a wasteland in another 10-15 years.

Yes there are a lot of regulations that are followed to "minimize" damage to the environment but it's negligible.

I believe the costs of the damage are worth the benefit but the whole process is very poisonous. It amounts to injecting poison directly into the soil, water supply, and air.

Well, if they own the land, they can do what they want with it as long as externalities are internalized in the price of what they do - for instance if water supply in neighboring communities is damaged - then said companies should pony up.

I suppose since science doesn't know everything, stockholders of companies should be liable for damages from externalities for a number of years after the operation.

When have you seen a company say "okay, we fucked up. We'll start fixing it, how much do we owe?".

What they do instead of get an army of lawyers and lobbyists and try to fight tooth and nail in court and in congress. Even when one of their own employees die, they fight the OSHA fine and are reluctant to pay insurance. Actually, most OSHA fines get cut in half 99% of the time.

It's a race to the bottom game in terms of costs. Thinking companies will "do the right thing" is hamster.

I would expect that many subsidiary companies for the operators, within trusts and other subsidiary companies have been formed as a shell game.

Finding out who the real beneficial and controlling interests are, establishing liability, and reaching and applying assets to a judgment would be a tough task for the best law firms.

That's just the way things are in America nowadays. Only poor and middle class human individuals are responsible for anything.

[VolandoVengoVolandoVoy]

(11-26-2014 05:26 AM)ElBorrachoInfamoso Wrote:  

Don't trust any expose in the MSM. If you bother to do a little bit of digging on your own, you'll usually find the reporter is misrepresenting the facts.

Back when I was still a consultant, a major paper did an expose on one of my clients - a hospital. I won't go too much into the details but they basically said my client was overcharging for certain medical procedures. I did some digging and found that reporters all over the country were doing essentially the same story on hospitals in their areas. All of them were written to make it seem like these evil hospital executives were fleecing the poor citizens of whatever fucking city the paper covered. I did my own research and found out the reason these medical procedures had gone up in price was because medicare had passed a rule saying they would pay more for the procedures. Private insurers were forced to go along in many cases but some were fighting it. Of course, these reporters couldn't point out that the evil villain in this case was really the government, particularly medicare. These unethical reporters have nothing but praise for shitty government pyramid schemes.

So, what's the real truth here?
Help us peel back the MSM lies.
Of course a significant risk when someone sets out to do their "own research" is that they will end up with conclusions that match their prejudices rather than any objective reality. The internet is full of "facts" to suit any belief on any subject.

[ElBorrachoInfamoso]

(11-26-2014 02:50 PM)VolandoVengoVolandoVoy Wrote:  

(11-26-2014 05:26 AM)ElBorrachoInfamoso Wrote:  

Don't trust any expose in the MSM. If you bother to do a little bit of digging on your own, you'll usually find the reporter is misrepresenting the facts.

Back when I was still a consultant, a major paper did an expose on one of my clients - a hospital. I won't go too much into the details but they basically said my client was overcharging for certain medical procedures. I did some digging and found that reporters all over the country were doing essentially the same story on hospitals in their areas. All of them were written to make it seem like these evil hospital executives were fleecing the poor citizens of whatever fucking city the paper covered. I did my own research and found out the reason these medical procedures had gone up in price was because medicare had passed a rule saying they would pay more for the procedures. Private insurers were forced to go along in many cases but some were fighting it. Of course, these reporters couldn't point out that the evil villain in this case was really the government, particularly medicare. These unethical reporters have nothing but praise for shitty government pyramid schemes.

So, what's the real truth here?
Help us peel back the MSM lies.
Of course a significant risk when someone sets out to do their "own research" is that they will end up with conclusions that match their prejudices rather than any objective reality. The internet is full of "facts" to suit any belief on any subject.

The truth is right here jelly nuts: http://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guida...dance.html

Also here, particularly Title 42: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/collecti...onCode=CFR

Whenever you encounter something really stupid about how healthcare providers charge for services, there is a good chance that you can figure out why within those regulations I just linked to.

If "journalists" really cared about exposing corruption, they would get to know the CFR really well.

[ElJefe]

(11-26-2014 02:35 PM)Sp5 Wrote:  

I would expect that many subsidiary companies for the operators, within trusts and other subsidiary companies have been formed as a shell game.

Finding out who the real beneficial and controlling interests are, establishing liability, and reaching and applying assets to a judgment would be a tough task for the best law firms.

That's just the way things are in America nowadays. Only poor and middle class human individuals are responsible for anything.

That's not good.

Why is it so opaque? And why shouldn't liability simply be proportionally assigned to stockholders? One could amend ltd. liability rules with statements like "ltd. liability does not apply to damages of the following nature... blablablah"

So if you, individual i, have 1% of stock in company A, which owns 10% of company B, which owns 50% of company C, and company C is making a big ass mess that destroys the property value and affects the health of neighboring communities, then the full cost of the property loss/health damages will be assigned, where company C has full liability, company B has 50% liability, company A has 50%x10% = 5% liability, and stockholder i has 5%x1% = 0.05% liability.

I would expect in this scenario, companies would have to accurately assess externalities when they purchase property for development, and in the process make a contract with neighboring communities where they pay those communities an amount that would equal the expected damages. This is what the Coase theorem is about. Companies could then still deceive, but then the problem would no longer be about the environment, it would be about deceptive practices, which should lead to jail and seizure of assets.

[Akula]

Note: I'm cross-posting some of this from the thread on North Dakota oil jobs in the Lifestyle section (where I'm asking if forum guys are seeing lots more layoffs and shutdowns up there - link: http://www.rooshvforum.network/thread-13...#pid907847). I am more active in the Everything Else forum so wanted to post something here too.

I guess the end of the energy boom in the US is exactly what the progressives and many elites want given some of the reasons already discussed in this thread. But hitting the brakes so hard sure ain't the best way to have it all go down. I'll admit that I'm pretty torn on fracking though, I like the job growth and "home grown" & energy independence angle, but with all the nasty stuff that leaks into the groundwater + the flaring it sure seems like it's way more dangerous than the corporations claim. And no way these companies try to do the right think in terms of environmentalism...the whole process itself is one big environmental mess.

Anyway, I've been reading that tons of people are getting laid off and the party is over due to the drop in oil, but wondering what the word on the street is up there in ND. Are things slowing down markedly with lots of shutdowns and layoffs or are they still riding the storm out?

I gotta say that the ramifications of low oil prices are going to be pretty serious in the coming months, and not all good despite making it cheaper to drive. A LOT of US job and capital growth over the past few years has been tied to the energy industry and since E&P and fracking companies are getting hit hard there will be lots of problems going forward. Lot of investment research people saying that up to 40% of these companies will be bankrupt by the end of 2015 if oil prices stay where they are. That means no job growth in the US in the sector, and lots of bad debt at the banks and funds. Also all the new equipment manufacturing is gone, along with all the fees and taxes paid on all this stuff. So a big loss to the economy across the board.

I gotta say from what I've been reading the past few days I'm pretty scared about another crisis coming due to all this, and that doesn't even factor in the Russia wild card. China is already hitting the wall, and the last thing we needed was for the bright shining star of US economic growth to go completely in the toilet, even if it's not completely environmentally friendly (to say the least).

[Slim Shady]

Bump.

This seems to have been getting a lot of press recently. I know people like Elizabeth Warren have been virtue signalling about his, but is there a legitimate wrong happening here with regard to the Native Americans/ Sioux tribe?

I don't trust anything I read anymore.

[Easy_C]

I do know the FAA put up a no-fly zone around the area.

If the government's going out of it's way to stop people from seeing something, then there's probably something to see.

[billbudsocket]

(10-31-2016 12:21 PM)Slim Shady Wrote:  

Bump.

This seems to have been getting a lot of press recently. I know people like Elizabeth Warren have been virtue signalling about his, but is there a legitimate wrong happening here with regard to the Native Americans/ Sioux tribe?

I don't trust anything I read anymore.

They're pissed because the pipelines aren't going over tribal lands, but they want their payout anyway