Results 1 to 11 of 11
  1. #1
    W4A1 143 43CK? Nbadan's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Post Count
    32,408
    give me some of that...

    Not for Kitty lovers or the extremely easily squeamish...


    Say, aren't Haliburton and other companies about to about to start gas fracking just south of here? Hmmm....

  2. #2
    I cannot grok its fullnes leemajors's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Post Count
    24,176
    Dunno about that but I think DeWitt county had 100+new millionaires this year just from natural gas. A buddy of my dad's first royalty check was 500k. I was immediately envious and occupied his front lawn.

  3. #3
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    yeah, people are getting real rich, real easy, so they can afford to move away from their defaced land and poisoned water.

    carbon energy is a Faustian deal for many landowners.

    fracking, oil, oil, uranium, gold, copper, all extremely destructive with the costs externalized by the extractor corps.

  4. #4
    The D.R.A. Drachen's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Post Count
    11,214
    yeah, people are getting real rich, real easy, so they can afford to move away from their defaced land and poisoned water.

    carbon energy is a Faustian deal for many landowners.

    fracking, oil, oil, uranium, gold, copper, all extremely destructive with the costs externalized by the extractor corps.
    well, a lot of people are getting screwed because about 20 years or so ago people started stripping the mineral rights from the land. Someone would buy land, strip the rights from the deed, then sell it. Someone could have bought the land years ago and yet someone else is getting the profit off of their land.

  5. #5
    Veteran Halberto's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    2,164


    continue to demonize us, we don't care.

  6. #6
    Veteran DarrinS's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Post Count
    42,561
    Imagine what it's doing to the polar bears.

  7. #7
    俺はまんこが大好きなんだよ baseline bum's Avatar
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    97,881
    It would be lunacy to not tap our great stores of natural gas. I can't believe we're not using it in our cars right now.

  8. #8
    Veteran Wild Cobra's Avatar
    My Team
    Portland Trailblazers
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Post Count
    43,117
    If this near a Bakken Formation, which naturally outggasses?

  9. #9
    Moss is Da Sauce! mouse's Avatar
    My Team
    Dallas Mavericks
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Post Count
    26,358
    Canada is looking better everyday.

  10. #10
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    Sometimes Things Are Not As They Seem

    Some scientists said using less Clean Coal and more natgas would increase global warming because the pathogenic particulates (they sicken and kill some people, and they fall to earth as methyl mercury, cadmium, radioactive , etc) of Clean Coal that linger in the atmosphere reflect solar energy, so fewer particulates would mean less reflected energy, more heating.

    Atmosphere and warming is very complex, ripe for Kock/API deniers lies.

  11. #11
    Veteran
    My Team
    San Antonio Spurs
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Post Count
    97,536
    ah yes, just trust UCA to be fair, honest, non-predatory, unregulated, etc, etc,

    Fracking: Anatomy of a Free Market Failure

    A review of more than 111,000 leases, addenda and related do ents byThe New York Times revealed:

    Fewer than half the leases require companies to compensate landowners for water contamination after drilling begins. And only about half the do ents have language that lawyers suggest should be included to require payment for damages to livestock or crops.

    Most leases grant gas companies broad rights to decide where they can cut down trees, store chemicals, build roads and drill. Companies are also permitted to operate generators and spotlights through the night near homes during drilling.

    In the leases, drilling companies rarely describe to landowners the potential environmental and other risks that federal laws require them to disclose in filings to investors.

    Most leases are for three or five years, but at least two-thirds of those reviewed byThe Times allow extensions without additional approval from landowners. If landowners have second thoughts about drilling on their land or want to negotiate for more money, they may be out of luck.

    If all this sounds reminiscent of ex post revelations about predatory lending in the housing market that contributed to our recent housing bubble and crash, it should. It is the classic tale of fast-talking salesmen working for well-heeled companies taking advantage of disadvantaged individuals who are less than fully informed about the options presented to them.

    The importance of knowledge and power asymmetries is illustrated by the fact that most of the communities in Pennsylvania attempting to ban fracking through local regulations are affluent. Affluent communities can afford the time and money to investigate the risks of fracking more thorougly to reduce knowledge asymmetry. Affluent communities are also not so desperate for additional income that they are willing to risk damaging their health and high property values.

    Externalities: But far and away the most important reason the free market solution to fracking yields undesirable outcomes is because there are significant external costs unaccounted for in the market for fracking leases:

    As a fossil fuel, natural gas contributes to global warming even if it is cleaner than burning coal. And if methane, which is a more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide, leaks from wells as new studies suggest, the effects on global warming may be even worse.

    Fracking has also been associated with earthquakes.

    The risk of contaminating well water is not confined to the land of the lease, but extends to neighbors’ wells and can potentially damage an entire aquifer. A major reason the NYSDEC report is delayed is concern over contaminating the water supply for New York City.

    http://www.truth-out.org/print/11532

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •