As Dallas Considers Fracking in Parkland and Floodplains, the Usual Suspects Speak Out

finkelman.jpg
Photo by Leslie Minora
Lois Finkelman, drilling task force chair, gives city council their recommendations.
It was Dallas city council member Tennell Atkins who, during yesterday's discussion of the city's still-far-off gas-drilling regulations, posed the million-dollar question. "Do you think that it's safe to drill in the city of Dallas?" he asked task force chair Lois Finkelman.

Finkelman was noncommittal. That left others to speak up for the money, and the same old characters to speak up on behalf of the environment.

The task force is charged with making recommendations for a new gas-drilling ordinance that balances environmental concerns with financial ones. The group's current recommendations include 1,000-foot setbacks, land use restrictions and notification requirements, and they require gas companies to obtain a zoning permit that's subject to council approval and a permit granted by city staff. But they leave a lot of leeway for council to make case-by-case decisions, including on a particularly controversial question: whether to allow drilling in floodplains and on parkland.

Parkland and floodplains came up several times -- not surprising, given that Trinity East's gas leases with the city fall on land classified as both. The city earned $34 million from land leased to Trinity East and XTO under the current ordinance. Trinity East manager Steve Fort said this week that his company's plans rest on its ability to get the permission it needed to drill in the floodplain, which he claimed city staff assured him wouldn't be a problem.

Anti-drilling activists and environmentalists are calling for tight restrictions guarding against drilling parks and floodplains. But the task force has recommended that the city allow drilling in parks and floodplains if a site meets a strict set of guidelines.

Councilwoman Angela Hunt, the official spokeswoman of green stuff, said drilling in either should be prohibited altogether. When Councilman Jerry Allen called the money that could come from fracking a "generational asset," Hunt responded by calling the city's greatest "generational asset" a "clean, healthy environment."

Joining her, Councilman Scott Griggs suggested his own plan: Any parkland that is deemed suitable by drilling should be first stripped of its label as "parkland," he said, because if they drilled parkland it's "never going to be part of the natural ecosystem again."

He also strongly warned against drilling in floodplains. "It's all going to wash down, first through southern Dallas, and then through cities farther south that do use the Trinity's water," he said.

But not everyone's so concerned about what's downriver from the frack. Councilman Sheffie Kadane looked to Finkelman for confirmation that all of the fracking materials would be contained, and she nodded yes. "I feel like we're pretty secure there if we did do that in the floodplains," he said.

Fracking's effect on the city's fragile water supply also resurfaced. Councilwoman Sandy Greyson requested more information from city staff about the volume of water used elsewhere for fracking, since the water used in gas-drilling is permanently removed from the water system.

Before everyone went home, Mayor Mike Rawlings set out the next steps in the process of developing a new ordinance, which will include more speakers and more lonely screaming into the wind by Griggs and Hunt. Then, he said, the city council will be briefed by city staff on legal issues.

With that, Councilwoman Caroline Davis summed it up.

"This is far from being over," she said. "We have still a lot of work ahead of us."


Sponsor Content

My Voice Nation Help
66 comments
King Neece
King Neece

  Easily remove radiation from any water source   Our University of Alabama patented solar desalination product uses no electricity, has no filters to replace, can be taken anywhere and extracts pure water from any contaminated water source. It removes radiation, fluoride, salt, pesticides, bacteria, dirt and other contaminants from any water. It aids people to be prepared for disasters. Made tough in the U.S.A.   Please visit us: http://freshwater.ecogreenenergies.com   These units can also be placed together in arrays of literally any number of panels, as needed, to accommodate a desert farm or any remote area that needs water.

pak152
pak152

somewhere down below Bill Marvel mentioned drilling earthquakes and Denver. now he provided no links or anything so I had to go do a little digging this a.m. (since Bill is a distinguished journalist and write I wasn't doubting what he wrote I just wanted to find out more since it appeared he was trying to connect it with the oil industry)So here is what I found yes drilling did take place near Denver in the early 1960s, but at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal land and it was a deep well designed to pump fluids into the ground for storage (difference with fracking is that the fluids are pumped in and once the fracking is finished the fluid is pumped out)yes this first link is to wikipedia, but I offer it as a starting point not as an authoritative sourcehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R... do take a look at this section Deep Injection Well http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...here are the sources for that section http://www.rma.army.mil/cleanu...http://earthquake.usgs.gov/ear...

my searching also turned up this articel from the journal of petroleum technology (probably not worthy in some folks' minds since it is connected to the petroleum industry )http://www.onepetro.org/mslib/...

now Mr. Marvel also mentioned Shell has having been involved at RMA but I couldn't find much if anything about what they did except for this mention in the above wikipedia articleManufacturing Operations http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R...

as I said this was a quick search to learn more about something that was mentioned in passing below as being (I think) supportive of the ban on drilling. (I'm sure Mr. Marvel will correct if I'm wrong).anyway if you would like to recreate the searches I did here are the search strings from google

1st search  - drilling earthquakes denver 2nd search - drilling earthquakes denver shell

have at it gain

disclosure no I am not a shill for the oil and gas industry and no i'm not a lawyer, and not i'm not what you think i am

have a good friday and may your weekend be a pleasant one

claytonauger
claytonauger

Dear Observer: this is the most important Quality of Life issue Dallas has faced in decades. It deserves better reporting from you. Someone who maybe understands city politics better, isn't ignorant about how government works and isn't so dismissive of residents. It's pretty clear that the DO is not the place to go to get a good understanding of this issue or how it's been playing out at City Hall.

trannyntraining
trannyntraining

All I want to say to the pro-frackers is, "that when/if you guys start fracking Mother Earth, will you at least lube her up nice before the fracking begins....it's the least y'all could do".

Scruffygeist
Scruffygeist

You don't have to be a scientist or expert to realize that putting holes in the ground in floodplains isn't such a good idea. FEMA won't let you build a house in one, but a well is okay?

pak152
pak152

"The University at Buffalo's Shale Resources and Society Institute today issued a report, "Environmental Impacts During Shale Gas Drilling: Causes, Impacts and Remedies," which offers the first quantitative data review of Pennsylvania's regulation of hydraulic fracturing of natural gas.""Announced by UB on April 5, the Shale Resources and Society Institute's goal is to provide accurate, research-based information on the development of shale gas and other unconventional energy sources. The institute conducts and disseminates peer-reviewed research that can help guide policymakers on issues relating to hydraulic fracturing."http://www.buffalo.edu/news/13...

cynical old bastard
cynical old bastard

Where does the City of Houston stand in regard to becoming involved in this situation? Doesn't Houston source 20% - 30% of their water from the Trinity River?  If drilling is allowed in the floodplain and the contaminated fluids/water are not contained that could cause a major problem from Dallas to the Gulf.  But, of course, Allen and Kadane don't care because there are no voters downstream.

T. Erickson
T. Erickson

Does "Parkland" refer to the hospital? Might be easier if you separated the words as "park land" when referring to land in parks.

JRinDallas
JRinDallas

If Dallas has only gas drilling moonscapes and tollways to offer generations that follow, the measly $34M in revenue pales in comparison to the looming losses in flight to the burbs and beyond.

And if Dallas has any generational assets left, they have all but completely been squandered.

Oak Cliff Townie
Oak Cliff Townie

Fake BOOBS Fake Hair .Fake Bridge ....

Can't we just buy a Fake oil rig and move it around the city 

Uncle_Scrappy
Uncle_Scrappy

Real Simple you Anti-Drilling people. Just give the 34 million dollars back with interest to the Gas companies that they paid. Then you wont have to worry about it. OH WAIT, you already spent that money & a whole lot more.

Once again, a bunch of enviro idiots that think you should be able to get something for nothing. Parks cost $$$. So does Police & Fire protection. And the city has already cut everything to the bone because of the economy. So this money is needed & there can be reasonable safety accomidations. But you enviro-nazis want it your way or not at all. SORRY, doesnt work that way.

Bill Marvel
Bill Marvel

clayton,In fact, the Observer has been the ONLY publication around here that's paid serious attention to this issue. (The Denton Record-Chronicle did a superb take-out on the subject last year.)

pak152
pak152

 once again an anti-fracking responds with a non-sensical retort. thanks for raising the intellectual level of the discussion

pak152
pak152

 depends really on the type of holes scuff. but check first with billm

pak152
pak152

 and yet houses are built in floodplains all the time

Marianagriggs
Marianagriggs

I really wish I knew your name. Anyway, I read your study, at least industry can begin to admit that accidents and spills do happen and they are not an ideal situation. The pro drilling speakers here in Dallas have repeatedly said its safe, but not for those involved in accidents. Let's compare apples to apples, not lies about how this stuff is so safe because "we have been doing it for a long time". That's not science, if the business is putting people at risk for money then at least show the true risks and costs.

Darrd2010
Darrd2010

The University at Buffalo's Shale Resources and Society Instituteand they are funded/endowed/gifted by who again?

pak152
pak152

i think BillMarvel would classify this as a snarly comment

phe_75034
phe_75034

"But you enviro-nazis want it your way or not at all."

And you don't? Throwing "nazi" in there doesn't really indicate a lot of willingness to compromise, Scraps.

biff
biff

We'll get right on that, just as soon as the oil companies give back the tax breaks and subsidies. Also, clean the aquifers they have ruined.

Bmarvel
Bmarvel

Scrappy,How close do you live to a drilling site or proposed drilling site?

Darrd2010
Darrd2010

 Poor soul, you really don't have any knowledge about what has transpired under the table since 2007, the long term effects of what could be, and what attempts are currently being made to 'cover up' some other interesting aspects to this story. Keep reading Dallas Observer as to what is going on because you will have troubles finding it anywhere else.

dfw75208
dfw75208

I agree we should give the money back.  And that every city employee from Suhm down who approved the entering into  of those agreements without understanding what was stake should be immediately terminated.   To think we have city staff that, without public input, would agree to drilling in our parks and the flood plain, is very scary.  Suhm herself announced yesterday that the budget is back on track due to rising sales tax revenue, so the "need" argument is not valid (it never was).  I would rather pay more taxes and have a clean and healthy environment for our children than sell out their health for city revenue.  I understand, however, that you feel differently.

Anon
Anon

the same people paying for the drilling leases are the ones lobbying that taxes can never, ever be raised under any circumstances. thereby making the city dependent on the money they dangle in front of them through drilling leases. that should be pretty obvious to anyone who is paying attention.

Mewkins
Mewkins

what about toll roads?

Scruffygeist
Scruffygeist

Depends on the floodplain. With lots of red tape and hassles.

Bill Marvel
Bill Marvel

Mariana,I think we had this conversation with Pak152 before.If I recall, he swears he has no connection with or financial interest whatsoever in the energy industry -- not employed or paid, not an investor or someone drawing royalties -- and he says we should take him at his word. He does seem to closely follow the issue, or at least the industry's side of the issue. But to quote Pak152 himself, "there’s a lot of good information to be gleaned from his posts, but caution should be exercised with regards to some of his conclusions."

pak152
pak152

 what does it matter what my name is Mariana? the oil industry has always admitted that spills happen. The key thing is that you firmly believe that the oil industry is out to do evil, that when they drill they purposefully harm the environment. this is evidenced by this ' not lies about how this stuff" in other words no matter what someone presents that is contrary to your beliefs you will call them lies. you need to work with an open mind not a closed one.i'll read what you and darrd post but I will always write a counterpost pointing to information that is different from yours. What I won't do is call you and others shills. Want to have a discussion? fine do it objectively without the emotion. there is no industry out there that is one hundred percent safe. Are you aware of the problems associated with wind and solar farms? I'm always surprised by the outrage exhibited against the oil industry and yet little if any outrage is exhibited by the massive destruction of birds and bats by wind farms.

pak152
pak152

 but you apparently missed his closing comment"In sum, there’s a lot of good information to be gleaned from the study, but caution should be exercised with regards to some of the conclusions."

pak152
pak152

 comments from the EDF reviewer can be found herehttp://blogs.edf.org/energyexc...

in closing he states "In sum, there’s a lot of good information to be gleaned from the study, but caution should be exercised with regards to some of the conclusions."

is he a shill? a co-opted individual who shouldn't be trusted? this is the second such report that the EDF has been involved in. the first came from the U of Texas

pak152
pak152

 type of comment I expected Darrd2010 i guess you didn't scar your eyeballs reviewing the report itself http://www.buffalo.edu/news/pd...if so you would have found that the Environmental Defense Fund did provide comments on the report. according to Forbes the research was funded by the university

"A team of researchers from UB, University of Wyoming and Penn State University examined violations at almost 4,000 natural gas wells in Pennsylvania between January 2008 and August 2011. The peer-reviewed study found approximately two-thirds of the 3,000 violations were administrative, 38 percent were environmental, and only 25 were deemed “major,” defined as site restoration failures, serious contamination of water supplies, major land spills, blowouts and venting and gas migration."http://www.forbes.com/sites/jo...

however I'm sure this report is more to your likinghttp://artvoice.com/issues/v11...

pak152
pak152

 biff can you point us to credible evidence that the oil companies have damaged aquifers?

Uncle_Scrappy
Uncle_Scrappy

Less than 1 mile to the closest drilling site. I have also collected over $10k in Signing Bonuses & am waiting on Royalty payments. I have seen no issues & have in fact attended many meetings with the Drilling companies. Also there are several other wells less than 3 miles from my home. Never had any issue with them other than Traffic Jams when they had to move a bunch of equipment. 1 or 2 days was all & then it was just for short periods of time. Overall this seems a lot like "CHICKEN LITTLE" to me.

Sometimes I wonder if the people complaining are people with no MINERAL RIGHTS and are just upset because they arent able to collect anything from these wells. I know there was a series of stories of farmers up north several states who were upset about Oil Drilling as they bought the property, but did not buy the Mineral Rights. They were complaining about people making millions for doing nothing but just having owned the land a long time ago. They felt they were ENTITLED to some of the riches. SORRY CHARLIE, doesnt work that way. Sometimes you get lucky & win big. Other times you dont.

pak152
pak152

 if you read the DO you get only one point of view and a  skewed point of view. DO is decidely on the side of the Anti-drilling crowd. wouldn't be surprised if the the anti-crowd is just feeding stuff the DO and it just eats it up without any checking.

and of course anyone who offers an opposing point of view is identified as a shill. or bought off

pak152
pak152

 thank you teacher for the smack down. yes I saw and understood the question mark indicated that you were asking a question and not making a comment. I used the wrong terminology and for that I beg your forgiveness and absolution.

next time don't ask a snarky question especially when my first comment was pretty clear as to where I stood with regards to the tollroad. I was  suprised though that with your superior intellect that you had to ask such a question. I thought you would have been able to answer it yourself.

of course it also depends upon where the drilling site is placed as to whether or not a tollroad would impact the drilling. having grown up in Dallas and studied its history I see no reason why someone would want to build a toll road inside the levees.

and next time don't opine from on high like the almighty. it doesn't reflect well on you. ;-)

as for your last question "or are you a lawyer?" dang now you've done it in the past I've been accused of being employed by the oil companies. but to answer your question, no i'm not. next question

Bill Marvel
Bill Marvel

Not a comment, Pak. Observe the question mark, which most people interpret as a...question. You answer, though packaged in sarcasm, actually helped clarify. It suggests that on the whole, natural gas interests would be opposed to a river bottom road project, at least in areas where they are likely to drill.Next time you're asked a question, why not just answer instead of interpret. Or are you a lawyer? 

pak152
pak152

 I'm not sure I understand your comment bmarvel. did I say I supported the tollroad in the river bottoms? I don't think so. I did ask a question "any current (as in existing) tollroads you know of constructed in a floodplain?"but to answer your question which is very simplistic and somewhat rhetorical. yes

Bill Marvel
Bill Marvel

Construction and operation of a toll road in the river bottoms would seriously impede gas drilling and fracking operations, would it not? 

pak152
pak152

 any current tollroads you know of constructed in a floodplain? and just to let you know I think the idea of a tollroad inside or on the Trinity levees is idiotic

pak152
pak152

 definitely depends upon the flood plain. saw it happen all the time in Houston where many areas where homes were built in the 100 yr floodplain got flooded out each year because so much of the area had been built up over the years reducing it from a 100 yr to a 10 yr flood plain. not a whole lot of red tape back then

pak152
pak152

 Bill I think one could classify this comment as snarly don't you think? are you doubting me when I say I have no connection with or financial interest with the energy industry? gee this is what I like about you Darrd and Marianna open mindedness

and some should exercise caution with regards to the conclusions put forth by you Darrd , TxSharon and Marianna ;-)

pak152
pak152

yes it is complicated and we will never know all the risks. Technology continues to improve and with each improvement there are risks. we can't learn unless we take risks. that is how engineers learn (see henry petroski). we should always be questioning  what someone does, but at the same time we shouldn't say no to everything. Not everything the environmental movement wants does good. Take a look at the prevention of forest fires out west. Turns out it is better to let small fires burn because the control the underbrush. stop the fires and let the underbrush grow and you can have catastrophic fires. or several years back the EPA issued a new regulation concerning arsenic in water. as a result many cities were out of compliance why? because the new technology was able to find smaller quantities. some towns in New Mexico had arsenic occurring naturally in their water and had for thousands of years. how were they to come into compliance?

as for the government who is watching them? absolute faith in the government is not good. Just look at the recent case of Mr. Armendariz. or the GSA party spending.

all we can do is be reasonably skeptical, keep our eyes and ears open on both industry and the government.

JRinDallas
JRinDallas

the point EDF is trying to make, and most any group that exhibits any sort of real, non-superficial interest in the issue...is that we basically don't know what we're doing because no data and no long term studies exists on the subject save for a smattering of studies with seriously flawed assumptions, conclusions, and data sets.

we say 'environmental risks' are low.  but low compared to what?  we don't know all the risks and we've never sought out to quantify what the risk and effects actually are.  mostly they're low because industry says they're low and because governments are years behind them (or too meek or compromised to push back) in actually looking at what they're doing.  just because we don't know isn't affirmative evidence that we need not look or care or declare energy independence and call it a day.

it's a complicated mess of an issue with no magic ordinance wording or technology to make it safe.

Darrd2010
Darrd2010

 Unfortunately, EDF takes money from industry as well. I don't take everything they say as 'gospel' because of that.

Bill Marvel
Bill Marvel

Your comment speaks volumes about yourself and your values, and about your assumptions regarding other people whom you -- wrongly -- assume share those values.I can well believe that if someone came to your door with a $5k check, you'd happily accept it and consign your children's health and the health of your neighbors, to whatever the wind and effluent from the drilling might also bring to your door.We don't know for certain or in detail, yet, what that wind or effluent will have in it. That, of course, is the problem. Until we have more knowledge -- and what knowledge we do have is already disturbing - to allow unchecked drilling and fracking is a gamble with very, very high stakes.      

Uncle_Scrappy
Uncle_Scrappy

Easy to say you would turn it down. But if someone offers you $5k or more for basiclly nothing, you would take it. Face it you would turn into a hypocrite like everyone else who didnt get in on the Big Bonuses or anything else.

I believe there is enough regulation & safeguards on the drilling. But it seems that those that didnt get anything have just turned into a bunch of CHICKEN LITTLES (The Sky os Falling etc)

You want to stop it because you are JEALOUS you didnt get a piece of the pie. Remember the simplest solution is usually the best. Same thing about the truth.

Bill Marvel
Bill Marvel

 You ask: "if you were approached to sign a lease would you sign it or turn it down?"At this point, without more reliable information about the effects of drilling and fracking, I'd turn it down.If you were approached, and you thought there was some possibility that drilling would endanger your health, your children's health and the health of your neighbors, would you sign? 

Uncle_Scrappy
Uncle_Scrappy

YES you will recieve royalties. If you are as you say a Citizen of Dallas. Then when the city recieves the monies, it helps them from raising taxes on you. So indirectly you are recieving royalities. Maybe not as much as me, but then that is your tough luck. So once again, SORRY CHARLIE or BILL (have to add that for the Idiot special need readers named bill). Also that saying comes from the old Star Kist Tuna commericals http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C... and here you go http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...

Trying to help enlighten the uninformed.

pak152
pak152

 er-uh Bill have you never used the term "Sorry Charlie" or something similar in a conversation? do you not remember where it came from?  a little thin-skinned?

pak152
pak152

boy talk about a snarly comment and you take me to task over mine. I guess one could say you are jealous of Scrappy. if you were approached to sign a lease would you sign it or turn it down?

Bill Marvel
Bill Marvel

Scrap,Figured you were making money out of this somehow. In the interest of full disclosure: I live within a mile of park land leased by the city to a drilling company. But you're right, I won't get a dime in royalties. What I will get is the noise and the environmental and health effects, which as yet have not been fully measured. So for me this isn't really about money.My best wishes to you and your family,  but if I were you I'd set apart a big share of those inflowing royalties to buy health insurance.By the way, my name isn't Charlie, in case you didn't bother to look. 

Bill Marvel
Bill Marvel

Scrappy,1. Apparently, then, "the sky is falling" around Oklahoma City, all over the Marcellus Shale in the east, and even in the Dallas Fort Worth area, all places where earthquakes were very rare until the commencement of drilling.  2. What you "understand" about casings and about actual industry practices -- and about lax inspection of industry practices -- is quite at odds with what I've heard from a reporter who covers the industry. At this point I want a definitive third opinion.3.On this point, you are not at all reassuring. The emissions I am concerned about are not those burned in some power plant but those that find their way to my and my children's lungs. They may be clean-burning, but are they clean-breathing?4. Your financial interest is precisely what makes your comments unreliable. Our only interest is the future of our health and our children's health. That trumps your $5k check any day.        

pak152
pak152

 what is commonly known as an outlier. did you know that Shell has a well in  the Gulf deeper than the BP Deep Horizon. Are you aware of hundreds of offshore rigs for which there are no problems? so could you come up with some more examples? oh! and by the way as a result of BP Deep Horizon engineers were able to design new equipment that can contain what caused the blowout.

no one ever said oil production is perfect.

Uncle_Scrappy
Uncle_Scrappy

Want examples of problems with OIL, just look to the BP Gulf Spill. Oil & Petrolium are needed as lubricants & other products like that. But if we can come up with a better FUEL source than Petrolium Spirits (Like Natural Gas, Hydrogen Fusion or wahtever) then we can greatly reduce our need & consumption of Oil. We will still need it for its lubricating properties.

Uncle_Scrappy
Uncle_Scrappy

Lets think about the issues with some common sense thoughts.

1. Earthquakes. I agree when you inject Pressured water underground you can affect the balance of tetonic plates & such. How much I dont know. I also would assume it would depend a lot on the geology underneath. Would think Calif with the San Andres fault would be a lot more risker than around here. Havent heard very much hard data from a Geoligist that specialize in this. Would listen & try to understand, So far just a bunch of "THE SKY IS FALLING"

2. Gas in Ground Water. I understand that drillers must use Cement Casing far below the water table. Not sure of the exact depth, but it is fairly deep & well below any Aquifer or Water table source. When there has been cases of Gas in Water, I believe they determined there was Faulty Casing. So wasnt the Drilling itself, just something that was faulty. But then I guess if you arent going to allow drilling because of possible faulty casing, then we shouldnt allow Automobiles. Look at all the recalls they have because of faulty parts, workmanship & design.

3. Emissions. Natural Gas & Propane are very clean burning energy sources. Only thing cleaner would be Hydrogen which is 2/3 the part of water H2O (2 parts Hydrogen, 1 part Oxygen) So until we can come up with Hydrogen Fusion technology & use pure water as a Fuel Source, natural gas is far preferred than OIL, COAL or any other carbon source.

So show some facts, expert testimony or such & I will listen. But all I have heard is CHICKEN LITTLE ("The Sky os Falling") and what I have seen is those crying this is those that have NO FINANCIAL interest in these Minerals, other than as a customer at the local Gas Station.

phe_75034
phe_75034

It's called "effective communication" - what you say is important, but so is how you say it. And I'm not pointing out "smugness and attitude" on the part of others because Bill's and Mariana's and Dard's smugness, if they're displaying any, is dwarfed by your overwhelming quantities of same.

This has already turned into a much bigger waste of time than I had anticipated. Why don't you just take it as constructive criticism and go about your business, as I am going to go about mine.

pak152
pak152

 thank you again for your insightful comments. I didn't realize that personality overrode good comments. interesting. as for smugness et al do you take others take task for their smugness and attitude or just those you disagree with?

phe_75034
phe_75034

Wow. You're a case, man.

You make some good points, but your bullying and smugness make your posts difficult to read. Why don't you try adjusting your attitude and see if you're not taken a little more seriously?

pak152
pak152

 thank you for the name calling it raises the level of the discussion to an even higher plain. I'll assume that your use of the term "d*ck" serves as an example of how not to be civil and respectful. if so I'll keep it in mind

have a good day

phe_75034
phe_75034

Dude, you're being a dick. Bill has responded to your posts and questions with real answers. You're defensive and snarky. Arguments which are civil and respectful are genearlly beneficial. Bill has been both. You have been neither.

pak152
pak152

 thank you mr. marvel you have put me in my place I will retire with my tail tucked firmly between my legs. never again shall I challenged the rapier keyboard of a professional journalist.

"You would like to post information and not have it called into question?? did I say anything about not challenging it? I don't think so (but i'm sure you'll find that maybe i did). sure challenge it after you read it, but how about reading it before challenging it. wouldn't that be better?  most of the challengers haven't even read what I post. not that I can tell.

 What planet do you come from? oh I'm sorry are you being surly or snarky here. anyway since you asked I'll answer er-uh this one?

Do you think any of us are free from challenge? no I don't but what I do expect is that if you challenge what I post that you at least take the time and effort to read what is posted before challenging it. and when it is challenged that you offer credible supporting citations which I will read before commenting on. making a  statement without supporting evidence means I have to take what you say on faith.

Do you even read any of these blogs?"yes I doam i a special project for you? Have I struck a nerve? do you point out to others that they are being snarly? or snarky?well it's off to bed if that is okay with out. TTFn

Bill Marvel
Bill Marvel

Pak,To take your points in order:1. "i guess you haven't been labeled as a shill..." I would think you would take pains to not appear to be a shill by answering "the normal point of view" in something closer to a courteous and restrained manner.2. I lived in Denver for decades and followed the investigation of the deep-well related earthquakes very closely. That finding has never been challenged, even by the company (Shell Oil, as I recall)  that managed the arsenal. Te deep-well earthquake connection is firmly -- not to make a joke --  established.3. You fall again into the trap set by your own mind. We who are uneasy about he effects of drilling and fracking are not, thereby, necessarily anti-drilling. We are, just as i said, uneasy. If you want to characterize your own position as pro-drilling, that's your business. It certainly gives us a reliable way to gauge the probable reliability of your posts.4. "what are the costs you are worried about?" Where to begin? Cancer and other environmentally caused diseases. Birth defects. General degradation of our neighborhoods by noise, light, traffic, pollution. Not that we know these will be the effects. We don't know. That is the problem. The industry hasn't done much to reassure us.5. You would like to post information and not have it called into question?? What planet do you come from? Do you think any of us are free from challenge? Do you even read any of these blogs? 6. If you insist upon adopting a surly tone, then you're not really interested in getting your point understood, much less accepted, are you? You're really interested only in doing battle, in knocking down those you imagine to be your opponents. As I said, if you were my employee, speaking on behalf of my drilling interests, you'd be out the door and looking for work.7. The rest of your reply is either self-evident or beside the point. If my pension is invested in drilling companies, I hope to hell they are addressing these issue in a sober and serious manner, because if they are not, they and my pension are in a world of trouble. 

  

pak152
pak152

 'Your surly and snarly comments might lead us to the suspicion that you couldn't care less about our concerns"

really bill i guess you haven't been labeled as a shill after posting information contrary to what is the normal point of view on this blog.

'It certainly did at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal near Denver" do you have a site that you can share? an objective one

"Your characterization of those who have legitimate worries as the "anti-drilling crowd" is not only unhelpful. It's belittling and insuting." and what term should one use? Protectors of the Environment? If I am pro-drilling then those who call me a shill must be anti-drilling? correct or is there a more politically correct term I should use.

"Most of us would love to burn cheap natural gas in our homes, our factories, even - perhaps -- our cars. But at what cost?' so tell me what are the costs you are worried about? whenever I've posted something that offers information it is called into question. just look at Darrd's comment about the University of Buffalo report. I doubt that he had even read the report. and yet we are asked to accept without question the information put forth by Darrd, Marriana. and TxSharon (who was apparently in tight with the former EPA regional director)

maybe I wouldn't be so 'surly' if one were attacked regularly as a shill.or whose information is called into question without it even being read. I'm as much concerned as the environment as you and others. I also recognize that the oil/gas companies are not inherently evil. many of those opposed to the drilling/fracking exhibit at attitude that these companies purposefully want to harm the environment.

let me ask you this. do you have an IRA? do you invest in mutual funds. do you (collectively) have a 401K plan or someother type of retirement plan? well if you do you are invested in these companies.

Bill Marvel
Bill Marvel

pak,There may be an anti-drilling crowd and a pro-drilling crowd. But most of us are in the middle. We certainly favor independence from Mideast oil and we know coal is dirty.What we don't know is how drilling and fracking will affect our lives, our children's lives, the value of our homes, our way of life. There are some disturbing questions hanging out there without clear answers. It does seem seems pretty clear that fracking will cause minor earthquakes. It certainly did at the Rocky Mountain Arsenal near Denver, and it likely has other places. Folks who live near drilling sites can turn on the water tap in their kitchen and light a flame. I can't do this -- yet -- at my sink. Will I when they start drilling nearby? The findings about various pollutants in the water and air around these sites are still, after so many reports and counter-reports, unclear. Nobody wants to gamble his family's health on best gueses or partisan shouting matches.Your characterization of those who have legitimate worries as the "anti-drilling crowd" is not only unhelpful. It's belittling and insuting. Most of us are not members of Sierra Club or any other environmental organization. Most of us would love to burn cheap natural gas in our homes, our factories, even - perhaps -- our cars. But at what cost?Your surly and snarly comments might lead us to the suspicion that you couldn't care less about our concerns, that you dsmiss us as a bunch of cranks. You're not doing your cause a bit of good. If you were a lobbyist or a p.r. rep for natural gas drilling, and I were a drillng company exec, I'd fire you in a minute. 

Now Trending

Dallas Concert Tickets

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...