Posted 29 December 2008 - 06:06 PM
If you have 35 acres and I have 5 and I am anti-drilling, why after 142 years of oil production in the State of Texas should the RRC now decide that you have a right to my minerals? You should be able to get an exception or use the existing interpretation (and likely original intent) of that law to join a larger unit nearby (cause I guarantee my 5 acres doesn't go all the way 'round your 35, keeping you from joining another unit).
Posted 29 December 2008 - 06:10 PM
Well, I read the actual order and it says the force pooled owners have a 1/5 royalty and a 4/5 working interest. So, that sounds like a 20% royalty. I'm not sure what the working interest means.
The hearing officers that heard the case recommended denial and the Commissioners went the other way. Interesting.
Posted 30 December 2008 - 12:44 PM
'If you have a milkshake and I have a milkshake, and my straw reaches across the room ...'
Posted 01 January 2009 - 10:29 PM
Posted 06 May 2009 - 09:19 AM
Posted 07 May 2009 - 06:25 PM
But according to our mayor and council, our newspaper, and our uninformed citizens, that is fine in every zoned area of the city.
This was a nice city. Enjoy our demise.
Nice picture, by the way.
Posted 26 August 2009 - 02:33 PM
Posted 27 August 2009 - 05:10 AM
But given that it is a political statement I would like to know more about the details. It looks like the video might have been from more than one site.
Also, I thought that FLIR (Infrared) was heat based as far as images were concerned. I see little in the way of heat related (light flaring) here. Anyone know about this?
And the general terminology bothers me. Anyone that knows anything at all about drilling sites would tell you that the tanks and gear around it are not involved directly with natural gas. You can't store or control natural gas in containers like that. You have to have large pressure vessels. Natural gas is taken directly from the well head and possibly scrubbed in-line to removed certain contaminants and then put directly under pressure into a gathering network of pipelines.
It may well be that the tanks hold crude oil or something that may also have come up under pressure with the gas. This is common. And it may well be a problem. If so, it should be contained. But whatever it is that is causing the problem, I don't think it is natural gas itself.
The tone and the way this video was presented bothers me. I don't think we're getting all the facts and I think we're getting a very sharp slant that may not be justified.
The Fort Worth Gazette blog
The Lost Antique Maps of Fort Worth on CDROM
Website: Antique Maps of Texas
Large format reproductions of original antique and vintage Texas & southwestern maps
Posted 27 August 2009 - 08:13 AM
As for the lack of pressure vessel, I am also a little confused about the tank battery. I am unfamiliar with gas wells, but I always thought those tanks were related to oil wells, not gas. All I can guess is that tanks recover fluids from the gas well (perhaps leftover frac water or other fluids) and some of the gas gets into the tank in the separation process and that is what is venting from these non-pressurized tanks. It seems to me that the more crud/fluid you can separate out before you send it down the transmission line, the better. Of course since the fluid is a mix of chemicals and hydrocarbons, you have to store it in a tank for collection and disposal instead of draining it into the nearby creek.
Posted 23 October 2009 - 06:24 PM
The liquid (frac fluid) is so toxic the only means of disposal is to pump it 10,000 feet underground and hope for the best. The vapors that come off it and are vented? Probably fine to breathe, right?
Why is it so difficult to understand that the process dumps poison into our air in an unregulated fashion? I suppose we need to re-live the 20th Century because we obviously did not learn a thing the first time around.
Posted 01 September 2016 - 09:30 AM
New study highlights public health effects of sloppy techniques used in urban gas drilling:
Yes, the study in question was done by environmental groups, but the groups speaking out against it are drilling groups... surprised?
The chief pollutant the study focuses on is methane, inadvertently released from drilling and down-line transport operations; poor quality control and lack of responsible oversight to blame. In each of the rebuttals offered in the article the concern from drilling groups turns immediately away from the alleged public health consequences to dire warnings of adverse economic effect on the fossil fuel industry if they had to clean up their operations.
Adding the cost of these identified health issues to the effective condemnation of urban drilling sites, the costs of local, state and national governments (taxpayers) to remediate the thousands of wells abandoned to be abandoned by producers escaping responsibility through bankruptcy when no longer economically productive, the ability of drillers to simply dump (possibly, who knows?) heavily polluted drilling fluids deep into the earth, stimulating local tectonics in the process... The possibility exists that if the total costs of production were required to be factored into the price of raw gas other, less polluting, more sustainable, etc. would also be much more economically viable.
The article is not all serious; the author throws in a little humor by quoting the always joking Texas Railroad Commission (sic) who says that "public safety and health is the agency's priority by maintaining a strong regulatory framework". RIGHT!
Posted 05 September 2016 - 09:13 AM
5.6 magnitude quake on the edge of the OK oil/gas production region.
Several people I have talked to felt it in north Tarrant county. I am sure it has nothing to do with fracking wastewater injection wells.
- Volare likes this
Posted 20 June 2017 - 01:12 PM
Does anyone know why a drilling company is boring into the parking lot of the former Chase Bank building at Texas and Cherry streets?
Posted 21 June 2017 - 05:55 AM
Possibly. With oil and gas on my mind, I didn't think of that. If it is soil sampling, could that possibly be a prelude to site prep for some construction project? I sure hope so, I've always felt this property was ripe for purchase and rehab.
Posted 21 June 2017 - 08:26 AM
I didn't see the rig, so I can't say for sure what it was, but it was probably a soil sample rig. If a new building is planned for the site, this would be something that was done before anything was designed.
Posted 21 June 2017 - 08:49 AM
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users