Fingers crossed that it's the crack that brings the dam down. I cannot believe I'm thinking this, but bring on the personal injury law firms coast to coast!evnow wrote:Ok - now back on topic.
Is this verdict a one off or will it make frackers think twice ?
Many analysts and politicians say this resource is the next industrial revolution. Hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," has helped lead a boom in gas and oil production in the U.S. The new technology is unlocking oil and shale gas resources, spurring economic activity and giving industry a competitive edge with less expensive gas and electricity prices
It is certainly going to be a tough fight. I'm not sure how much faith I have in todays Americans to put their health and environment ahead of a few dollars.LTLFTcomposite wrote:Oh boy, Andy isn't going to like this... I'm not crazy about it either.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/4-reasons ... 53322.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Many analysts and politicians say this resource is the next industrial revolution. Hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," has helped lead a boom in gas and oil production in the U.S. The new technology is unlocking oil and shale gas resources, spurring economic activity and giving industry a competitive edge with less expensive gas and electricity prices
I neither like nor dislike this because it's a garbage piece written from an insane view of the world. This country is in decline, not recovery. Large businesses are booming but they're doing it by screwing over workers, land owners, and the environment for short-term profits. The fossil fuel industry is in a last-gasp push to generate as much cash flow as possible before they're forced to leave the oilfields behind.LTLFTcomposite wrote:Oh boy, Andy isn't going to like this... I'm not crazy about it either.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/4-reasons ... 53322.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Many analysts and politicians say this resource is the next industrial revolution. Hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," has helped lead a boom in gas and oil production in the U.S. The new technology is unlocking oil and shale gas resources, spurring economic activity and giving industry a competitive edge with less expensive gas and electricity prices
People being poisoned, losing safe water, losing their land, or being unable to finance land. Since fracked fields don't continue to produce the way traditional wells used to - production peaks and falls quickly. That forces a re-fracture - and requires multi-millions of gallons of water and new batches of chemicals. Note that many of the areas where this activity is booming are in severe drought...http://ecowatch.com/2013/11/13/fracking ... rty-value/As ExxonMobil’s CEO, it’s Rex Tillerson’s job to promote the hydraulic fracturing enabling the recent oil and gas boom, and fight regulatory oversight. The oil company is the biggest natural gas producer in the U.S., relying on the controversial drilling technology to extract it.
The exception is when Tillerson’s $5 million property value might be harmed. Tillerson has joined a lawsuit that cites fracking’s consequences in order to block the construction of a 160-foot water tower next to his and his wife’s Texas home.
nothing but a spin article with no real foundationLTLFTcomposite wrote:Oh boy, Andy isn't going to like this... I'm not crazy about it either.
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/4-reasons ... 53322.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Many analysts and politicians say this resource is the next industrial revolution. Hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," has helped lead a boom in gas and oil production in the U.S. The new technology is unlocking oil and shale gas resources, spurring economic activity and giving industry a competitive edge with less expensive gas and electricity prices
That or the only other reason I could think of is the value of the land as a potential site for another rig?LTLFTcomposite wrote:Why would a house (that doesn't use groundwater - directly) go up 11% by virtue of being in 1.25 mile proximity to fracking? To house the frackers?
After reading the piece and scanning the 'study', it appears they isolated a single factor - source of water - in order to directly compare property value changes. There's enough documentation now that drilling/fracturing does negatively affect local water. Down here, there doesn't seem to be a distinction, because it's hard to find rural or semi-rural property that doesn't rely on ground water - and that's where most of the wells are drilled.LTLFTcomposite wrote:Why would a house (that doesn't use groundwater - directly) go up 11% by virtue of being in 1.25 mile proximity to fracking? To house the frackers?
http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com ... uth-texas/In 2011, Texas used a greater number of barrels of water for oil and natural gas fracking (about 632 million) than the number of barrels of oil it produced (about 441 million), according to figures from the Texas Water Development Board and the Railroad Commission of Texas, the state’s oil and gas regulator.
edit...From January 2011 through May 2013, hydraulic fracturing producers in the Eagle Ford used about 19 billion gallons of water for 4,300-plus wells, the highest water use of any shale basin in the country...
http://www.nber.org/While shale gas development can result in rapid local economic development, negative externalities
associated with the process may adversely affect the prices of nearby homes. We utilize a triple-difference
estimator and exploit the public water service area boundary in Washington County, Pennsylvania
to identify the housing capitalization of groundwater risk, differentiating it from other externalities,
lease payments to homeowners, and local economic development. We find that proximity to wells
increases housing values, though risks to groundwater fully offset those gains. By itself, groundwater
risk reduces property values by up to 24 percent.