Reply With Quote
TB
just saying nuttin, as usual
Las Cruces is "across the border" from El Paso, closer to Arizona than the panhandle, and is in the middle of a ing desert.
Just sayin'
TB
just saying nuttin, as usual
just slapping you, as usual. lol panhandle.
panhandle up your ass
TB
I got slapped again!
Has anyone met this boutons guy in person?
More on BigCarbon stealing royalties from landowners
Unfair Share: How Oil and Gas Drillers Avoid Paying Royalties
Don Feusner ran dairy cattle on his 370-acre slice of northern Pennsylvania until he could no longer turn a profit by farming. Then, at age 60, he sold all but a few Angus and aimed for a comfortable retirement on money from drilling his land for natural gas instead.
It seemed promising. Two wells drilled on his lease hit as sweet a spot as the Marcellus shale could offer – tens of millions of cubic feet of natural gas gushed forth. Last December, he received a check for $8,506 for a month’s share of the gas.
Then one day in April, Feusner ripped open his royalty envelope to find that while his wells were still producing the same amount of gas, the gusher of cash had slowed. His eyes cascaded down the page to his monthly balance at the bottom: $1,690.
Chesapeake Energy, the company that drilled his wells, was withholding almost 90 percent of Feusner’s share of the income to cover unspecified “gathering” expenses and it wasn’t explaining why.
“They said you’re going to be a millionaire in a couple of years, but none of that has happened,” Feusner said. “I guess we’re expected to just take whatever they want to give us.”
Like every landowner who signs a lease agreement to allow a drilling company to take resources off his land, Feusner is owed a cut of what is produced, called a royalty.
In 1982, in a landmark effort to keep people from being fleeced by the oil industry, the federal government passed a law establishing that royalty payments to landowners would be no less than 12.5 percent of the oil and gas sales from their leases.
From Pennsylvania to North Dakota, a powerful argument for allowing extensive new drilling has been that royalty payments would enrich local landowners, lifting the economies of heartland and rural America. The boom was also supposed to fill the government’s coffers, since roughly 30 percent of the nation’s drilling takes place on federal land.
Over the last decade, an untold number of leases were signed, and hundreds of thousands of wells have been sunk into new energy deposits across the country.
But manipulation of costs and other data by oil companies is keeping billions of dollars in royalties out of the hands of private and government landholders, an investigation by ProPublica has found.
An analysis of lease agreements, government do ents and thousands of pages of court records shows that such underpayments are widespread. Thousands of landowners like Feusner are receiving far less than they expected based on the sales value of gas or oil produced on their property. In some cases, they are being paid virtually nothing at all.
In many cases, lawyers and auditors who specialize in production accounting tell ProPublica energy companies are using complex accounting and business arrangements to skim profits off the sale of resources and increase the expenses charged to landowners.
Deducting expenses is itself controversial and debated as unfair among landowners, but it is allowable under many leases, some of which were signed without landowners fully understanding their implications.
But some companies deduct expenses for transporting and processing natural gas, even when leases contain clauses explicitly prohibiting such deductions. In other cases, according to court files and do ents obtained by ProPublica, they withhold money without explanation for other, unauthorized expenses, and without telling landowners that the money is being withheld.
http://www.propublica.org/article/un...ying-royalties
probably a lot of these rural land owners are tea baggers wishing their hated BigBadGovt was around to help them get their contracted money.
Last edited by boutons_deux; 08-13-2013 at 12:15 PM.
Foreseeing Trouble in Exporting Natural Gas
As Dow Chemical’s chief executive, Andrew N. Liveris has made himself into something of an outcast among his fellow business leaders.
The reason? He is spearheading a public campaign against increased exports of natural gas, which he sees as a threat to a manufacturing renaissance in the United States, not to mention his own company’s bottom line. But many others say such exports would provide far more benefits to the country than drawbacks, all part of a transformation that promises to increase the nation’s weight in the global economy.
Now it seems that one cons uency where Mr. Liveris had gained a sympathetic ear, the federal government, may also have turned against him. Last week, the Energy Department approved another planned project to export natural gas, the second such proposal it has accepted since May.
But that windfall is at risk if the government permits natural gas exports to increase quickly, Mr. Liveris warns.
To nurture the nation’s good luck, he says, the government needs to plan an energy policy that carefully balances the interests of the oil and gas companies that want to freely export natural gas with those of industries like Dow Chemical that fear that an export boom could outpace domestic gas supplies and bring higher energy prices. ( b!ngo! higher prices in USA is exactly what BigCarbon is dreaming about and trying to hasten )
After ing in the last decade, natural gas prices in the United States have hovered between $3 and $4 per million B.T.U.’s this year. That is down from a high of $12 before the recession, and a fraction of what it costs in Asia and Europe.
That price differential is one reason exports are so appealing for domestic energy companies, who are willing to spend billions to build export facilities to ship liquefied natural gas in tankers in the hopes of selling it overseas.
On the other hand, cheap domestic supplies mean Dow — one of the biggest private consumers of natural gas in the country — and other chemical companies are now paying much less than their foreign compe ors for the raw material they turn into products like plastic, raising profit margins. It could also bring back jobs to the United States as manufacturers that use natural gas for energy benefit, Mr. Liveris says, although that renaissance is just in its infancy.
So far, the Obama administration has granted permits to three terminal projects, two in Louisiana and one in Texas, and it appears to be on a gradual path to approve a handful more over the next several years to avoid risking the natural gas price e Mr. Liveris fears.
In the United States, roughly 15 proposed gas projects await regulatory approval; if all were approved they could export the equivalent of more than a third of the domestically consumed natural gas. Along with an expected future increase in natural gas consumed by vehicles and industry, such an export boom would undoubtedly push prices up.
he remembers the impact of escalating domestic natural gas prices between 2001 and 2005, when the company was forced to cancel plans to build a $4 billion chemical plant in Texas.
“I’m protecting my shareholders,” he said, adding that $5 billion to $6 billion in new Dow Chemical investments were depending on the continuation of low gas prices “and not repeating the ’01-to-’05 movie.”
his native Australia, which he said exported 90 percent of its gas. That has caused, he sayid, “the collapse of the manufacturing sector — and, by the way, the retail sector’s paying through the nose. We’re paying Japanese electricity prices in Australia, yet Australia is gas-rich.”
Exporting natural gas is fine, he says, but not at the price of importing it back in the form of goods made with cheap gas elsewhere.
I’m not importing finished goods. I’m making them in the United States of America.”
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/08/16...?from=homepage
BigCarbon will Human-Americans by exporting LNG in large quan ies, make $Ts doing it, then gouge Human-Americans with $10+ domestic natural gas prices.
Boutons, what's your aim with these articles? To protect the environment or talk finance?
they're all related to fracking industry
what's your point in asking about my point?
If you were concerned with the financial aspect you would be happy with fracking. But you never post that stuff, leading to my point: you're ignorant. You're a naive, simple minded person.
what specific financial aspects are you mumbling about?
there PLENTY of financial angles in the stuff I post.
How about the contributions fracking brings to GDP and job creation in a time of economic challenges? Do I need to mention the huge impact it has with foreign oil?
Remember when oil companies used to pollute the rivers in Nigeria and rape the country and its people of a finite natural resources...now we get to have that here..
Yeahhh
Growth in GDP and national wealth is not being shared equally, no matter what the economic activity, but going to the top 5% or less.
BigCarbon is ing up the planet which in your calculation is acceptable as long as GDP and a few jobs are increased.
Natural Gas prices are way too low to be sustainable as far as from a production standpoint.
They went from the stupid highs in 2008 to even stupider lows here now for the last 3 years.
Allowing real exporting of Natural Gas would help push up the prices. The cost that I have paid for my natural gas from CPS hasnt really changed any in the last 5 years, and with the amount of supply we have in Texas alone (not even factoring in there other large handful of gas rich states), its highly stupid for us to not export it, if we arent going to actually change our vehicles to run on natural gas.
If we as a nation take that step, then I'm all for not allowing exportation. We wont, so it. Ship it out.
Boutons should be all for this anyway. Pollution from Natural Gas < Pollution from Crude Oil < Pollution from Coal
Unless Boutons thinks its actually economically sustainable to put electrical outlets at every rest stop in mass and to increase the capacity of electrial lines and produce said electricity from the sun, wind and water.
auto mfrs should get out of the fuel business. batteries should be generic, swap plugins.
"increase the capacity of electrial lines and produce said electricity from the sun, wind and water."
the national grid is a disaster waiting to happen, from the many articles I've, none of which have ever hinted the national grid is in wonderful conditon.
There are areas producing and/or could produce 100s of GWs of, eg, wind power electricity that is being dumped because the grid can't handle it, etc, etc, etc.
The country needs a national grid investment and grid management govt policy, but that would be blocked by right-wingers and the corps as socialism. One of their BIG LIES is that capitalism, the market always provides the optimum solution (but only for capitalists).
who exactly is going to fund this national grid investment?
question
how will funds be raised for said investment and what are the projected costs for this to occur? Are we just upgrading electric lines or what else is going to be upgraded along the way? Explain to me how you are going to get to a system where 100% of the electricity is garned by renewable sources and how long it will take for it to occur and how long it will take for this to happen.
Don't link me to any propaganda articles, facts and facts alone. Thanks.
some big picture items here:
As Worries Over the Power Grid Rise, a Drill Will Simulate a Knockout Blow
http://mobile.nytimes.com/2013/08/17...kout-blow.html
roll back at tax cuts on everybody and everything to 1980
add a 2% tax on all financial transactions.
cut $300B+ annually from MIC
increase federal tax on transport fuel.
Lots of way to increase federal revenue to INVEST in America's infrastructure and keep the country PROGRESSing as it did before the VRWC's policies got going in the 1970s, resulting in an impoverishing of the 99% and the country while concentrating national wealth in the 1%. The more the Corporate-Americans control America, the more Human-Americans suffer and are impoverished.
You right wingers always ing about how poor little America is so poor and can't do are ing shilling for the 1%.
Of course I don't get hard numbers. Just more hyperbole.
Oh and go yourself boutons. The last thing I am is a ing right winger. But bravo on the labeling game. Asshole
also,
no mortgage interest deduction for 2nd, etc and vacation homes
no mortgage interest deduction for mortgages 100% above the median house price for a city or region.
capital gains tax at least 25% if not higher
etc,etc, etc. Lots of ways to finance infrastructure construction, maintenance, repair (electrical, water/sewer, roads, railways, public transport).
numbers? you need steenkin numbers? GFY
the above strategy will raise $Ts.
its funny how you say that. In the field I've meet hundreds of people making $70k+ a year, half of them with just a high school education. You should ask them if they mind that their employee is raking in way more money.
Texas is Fracked: More than 30 Towns Will be Out of Water due to Fracking
More than 30 towns in West Texas will soon be out of water as a direct result of diverting their underground water supplies for use in hydraulic fracking. Largely unregulated fracking, it should be said.
Largely unregulated fracking that is definitely putting arsenic into the ground it happens to be drying out. Before you start acting horrified, though, consider: this is exactly what Texas’ mental-midget teabillies voted for.
http://gas2.org/2013/08/16/texas-is-...e-to-fracking/
Nav'i people getting ed by the SkyPeople
Imagine If There Were A Town In The USA Where You Couldn't Get Any Water. You Can Stop Imagining.
http://www.upworthy.com/imagine-if-t...more-10?c=upw9
Nav'i done lost and gonna stay lost
praying? yeah, that fixes everything. What if God loves fracking more than the Nav'i?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
