After Dueling Presentations, City Council Still Isn't Quite Sure What To Do About Gas Drilling

Categories: City Hall

Thumbnail image for thrilla.jpg
Dallas Drilling
In hindsight: Not super thrilling.

We promised you a throwdown during yesterday afternoon's gas drilling hearing before the city council, the first step towards an updated ordinance on drilling within city limits. Dallas Drilling, meanwhile, guaranteed a "smackdown." It's possible in retrospect that those were slight overstatements, designed to interest you in an issue that's as crucially important as it is incredibly boring to sit through live.

The dueling presentations the council and the audience heard amounted to a grim, four-hour slog through the same arguments that plagued the council-appointed gas drilling task force for months. Should the council allow drilling in the city's parkland or floodplains? How many feet of setbacks should separate drilling operations from businesses and homes? Is fracking even safe? Who the hell knows?

In the end, the main takeaway from the briefing was a look at who on the council is for drilling and who's not: Scott Griggs, Angela Hunt and Sandy Greyson seem to fall pretty firmly in the "anti" camp, while Sheffie Kadane and Jerry Allen were fracking's most enthusiastic cheerleaders. Davis and Atkins still seemed somewhat undecided (though he's said previously he supports drilling), and most everyone else stayed mute. With a bit of caution, Mayor Mike Rawlings also appears to be on board.

As we mentioned yesterday, bickering broke out even before the two sides set foot in the council chambers but once they did, things were relatively tame.

Former gas drilling task force member and local attorney Terry Welch suggested a 1500-foot setback on any drilling operation, with a possibility to get a variance to 1,000 feet or so with a special permit from the council. He warned that most companies would probably request the variances, saying that's been true in "80 percent" of the drilling applications in Flower Mound. He said drilling operations there have negatively impacted property values, according to a study released in mid-March.

Welch also pointed out that there's no scientific consensus yet on whether fracking is actually a public health risk. Instead, both sides can point to studies with the conclusions they like best. (Fracking studies sort of resemble religion that way.)

"Scholars and scientists in this area of study have differing opinions," Welch said. "I don't know what the absolute truth is. No one does."

For that reason, he added, the council should err on the side of caution: don't allow drilling in floodplains, for example, which tend to, you know, flood. In fact, he said, he'd discourage any development in those areas. "We shouldn't build homes, schools, or hospitals" there, he said. "Quite frankly, I don't believe we should put an industrial activity like gas drilling in the floodplain either."

Parks also need to be dealt with carefully, he said. The task force agreed on six recommendations for drilling there, including making sure the park is not currently in use, that it's not an environmentally sensitive area, and that any would-be drillers will have to obtain special use permits (SUPs) that would require a "Yea" vote from three-quarters of the council.

"I would suggest to you that park land is valuable," he said. "It's a limited public commodity. If drilling is allowed in a public park, that area will be diminished, possibly for decades."

"We always have the ability to go back and amend our ordinances," Welch said. "But if we enact weaker provisions, it's just too late. There's nothing we can do when that pad site is there next to my home. It's there, and it's gonna be there for many years."

"A world-class city," he added, "Deserves a world-class ordinance." That brought a prolonged standing ovation from the audience.

But Kadane and Allen were skeptical, with Kadane suggesting that restrictions on drilling were depriving the drilling companies of their "constitutional rights." He said a 600-foot setback seemed more than adequate.

"Anything more than that to me tries to put a moratorium on drilling," he said. "Which I don't think we have the right to do because of property rights."

Allen suggested that drilling was far less dangerous than secondhand smoke, chemicals in the home, or the hazardous materials that go barreling down Dallas's freeways each day as they're shipped to other places. He'd Googled the safety record of gas pipelines as a comparison, he said.

"Two million miles of pipelines, and just 15 deaths," he said. "To me that was a small number."

"As long as you're not one of the 15," Welch replied dryly.

"The reality is we accepted $34.8 million," Allen said, from two drilling companies who bought leasing rights from the city back in 2007. "At the end of the day, there's 11 districts that are sit around this horseshoe whose entire residential property values do not equate to $34.8 million."

"In my heart of hearts," he added, referring to additional restrictions, "I truly believe this is nothing but a death sentence."

After a bit more discussion from the council, Ed Ireland gave the opposing presentation; he's the executive director of the Barnett Shale Energy Education Council, a gas-industry backed group. He disputed that there were any safety issues with drilling and called some of the task force's recommendations "overly restrictive."

Where Welch focused on health and safety risks, Ireland focused on revenue: he used Fort Worth as his example, where he said 110,000 jobs had been created from drilling, with $11 billion per year in "economic stimulus" and $730 million in revenues to the city government. At that point, a lady in the audience started silently waving a pink sign that read "People over Profit." She was gently marched up the aisle and out the door by a security guard, displaying the sign for the crowd as she went.

Unperturbed, Ireland said "private property rights must be respected" with regard to the landowners who would like to sell their mineral rights. He said imposing stricter setbacks would be "confiscatory," in that it would "confiscate the property rights of mineral owners."

The requirements aren't just onerous, he said. "They're unachievable."

"The data does not support extending setbacks greater than 600 feet from a wellhead," Ireland ultimately said. He pointed to a study from last year that found no serious air emissions from fracking, and said any damage to property values would only affect more expensive homes. As for drilling in the floodplains: "It's nothing new." Existing wells in plains near Fort Worth have showed "no impacts on water or floodways," he said.

Ireland also claimed that most drilling sites are unobtrusive, showing off some pictures of a pretty, tree-lined pad site, one that sits next door to a church, some shops, and a sports field. The facilities blend in so well, he said, that when he takes clients around on tours of Fort Worth, "I usually have to point out where these natural gas facilities are." Later, in response to questions from Sandy Greyson, he allowed that planting trees or putting up fences to hide the operations isn't required by law.

He also disputed a contention from Angela Hunt that drilling companies don't disclose the chemicals they use. Ireland pointed out correctly that a law passed in the last legislative session requires companies to disclose their chemical makeup (although they can still withhold the ingredients they consider "trade secrets," and critics have called the mandatory disclosure website nearly impossible to interpret.)

Hunt pressed him on whether he'd be comfortable with the city of Dallas requiring gas companies to disclose all of their chemicals, even the trade secret ones.

Of course, Ireland replied, with one exception: when the companies hire outside contractors, they might not know all the chemicals the contractors use. "So they can't disclose, because they don't know what it is," he explained.

A moment later, Griggs asked him whether he agreed that "the jury is still out" on the health effects of fracking chemicals.

"I think the studies that have been done and the data is clear," Ireland replied. "The process is safe." There's some disagreement, he allowed, "But the studies I've seen and look at the credibility of, and the track record of the gas industry and shale gas specifically, have shown that it's very safe."

Again, Allen and Kadane chimed in with their support for drilling. "Once it's set up and it's stationary, they camouflage it," Kadane said. "You don't hardly know it's there. It's not like a rock-crushing facility. It's not that bad."

Rawlings too had a few questions about safety and property values for Ireland. But he wasn't shy about making his views known: companies should disclose their chemicals because they "aren't that bad," and keeping them secret leads the public to assume otherwise.

"The industry is doing itself a disservice," he said.

In the end, Rawlings added, "I am pro-natural gas. We have to have cleaner air, and natural gas is one solution." But neighborhood and safety issues are important, too, he said, and "it's critical that we go through this process."

The council will meet again in close session August 15 to hear from the city attorney's office about the myriad legal issues they're facing with regard to drilling.


My Voice Nation Help
37 comments
Marc
Marc

"Allen suggested that drilling was far less dangerous than secondhand smoke, chemicals in the home, or the hazardous materials that go barreling down Dallas's freeways each day as they're shipped to other places. He'd Googled the safety record of gas pipelines as a comparison, he said.

 

"Two million miles of pipelines, and just 15 deaths," he said. "To me that was a small number."

 

Jerry Allen is either illiterate about this matter, or else he is a bald-faced liar. I collected data from the Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA) agency of the United States goverment and found that, since 2000 alone, there have been at least 45 deaths related to natural gas pipeline explosions. 8 of them happened in San Bruno, California on the evening of September 9, 2010.

 

See http://fracdallas.org/docs/pipelines.html for a list of the 45 deaths I found - there are probably more that I have not yet discovered. This number, just since 2000, is three times Allen's false claim. And, Allen cannot possibly claim ingorance of these facts because I personally sent that information to him several times.

 

Now, 15, or even 45, deaths may not be all that many, but if your loved one is among those killed it is a very significant matter indeed. I would be willing to bet that if the wives and children of Allen and Kadane were fatalities of those accidents they would be singing a different tune. But, since their families are not affected they really do not care if YOUR family is adversely affected by the death of a loved one, and that says all that needs to be said about their lack of humanity and character. It also says a lot about those who elected them to serve on the City Council.

Marc
Marc

"A moment later, Griggs asked him whether he agreed that "the jury is still out" on the health effects of fracking chemicals.

 

"I think the studies that have been done and the data is clear," Ireland replied. "The process is safe." There's some disagreement, he allowed, "But the studies I've seen and look at the credibility of, and the track record of the gas industry and shale gas specifically, have shown that it's very safe."

 

The "studies" Ed Ireland refers to are industry-funded or industry-conducted studies rather than objective research by independent researchers who have no vested interest. Dr. Charles Groat, lead author of the UT study, is currently being scrutinized by the regents at UT after disclosure that Groat received over $1.6 million in direct benefits from the oil and gas industry. That hardly constitutes an independent, objective study. It is little wonder the UT study found no evidence of contamination in groundwater.

 

Again, Ed Ireland intentionally lied in order to deceive the public and our elected officials in an open, recorded, public meeting for the purpose of benefitting his industry at the expense of the general public.

Marc
Marc

"The requirements aren't just onerous, he said. "They're unachievable."

 

"The data does not support extending setbacks greater than 600 feet from a wellhead," Ireland ultimately said. He pointed to a study from last year that found no serious air emissions from fracking, and said any damage to property values would only affect more expensive homes. As for drilling in the floodplains: "It's nothing new." Existing wells in plains near Fort Worth have showed "no impacts on water or floodways," he said."

 

The "study" to which Ireland points specifically stipulates that it is NOT a comprehensive study. Its authors stipulated that they only test a few (18?) sites briefly and over intermittent periods of time. They stated that comprehensive testing would have to be done steadily over a period of a year or more on many sites. They stipulated that testing would have to be downwind of pollution sources rather than upwind, as in the FW study. They stipulated that air monitoring would have to be done continuously during hot, summer months when the effects were the greatest rather than in spring, fall or winter months when there is less ozone hazard. And, they clearly stated that their study was NOT comprehensive, but rather just a snaphot of limited conditions at limited locations over a very limited period of time.

 

Ed Ireland, and those who defend him, are liars who doctor the facts to fit their arguments without regard for truth and fact.

Marc
Marc

"Ireland focused on revenue: he used Fort Worth as his example, where he said 110,000 jobs had been created from drilling, with $11 billion per year in "economic stimulus" and $730 million in revenues to the city government."

 

This is typical Ed Ireland lies and spin doctoring. In the first place, the industry counts every job on a new well site as a "new" job even though it is the same people doing the same job on each new well site as they did on the previous ones. Each "new" job lasts only 20-40 days, but they never mention that fact. There is absolutely no truth to the claim that 110,000 jobs have been created in Fort Worth. If that were true, then Fort Worth would have zero unemployment and would be importing labor to fill the other jobs.

 

I defy Ed Ireland to prove his claim of an $11 BILLION per year economic impact for Fort Worth. Those numbers are just staggering in their deception and fraud. They are created out of whole cloth without any factual basis by people who have no problem telling lies to sell their agenda.

 

And, exactly what is that "$730 million in revenues to the city government"? Is that the royalties received? Hell, NO! Is it the drilling permit fees? Hell, NO! Is it the land leases? Hell, NO! In fact, it would not be all three combined, or even anywhere close. Again, these are fictitious numbers constructed of whole cloth by a deceptive and dishonest industry that makes all sorts of false claims for its own benefit, and then leaves taxpaying citizens to cover the cost of their mistakes and accidents. We do, after all, have to prove they caused the damage in order to hold them accountable, and they work in ways that preclude finding that proof.

Marc
Marc

Quote - But Kadane and Allen were skeptical, with Kadane suggesting that restrictions on drilling were depriving the drilling companies of their "constitutional rights." He said a 600-foot setback seemed more than adequate.

 

"Anything more than that to me tries to put a moratorium on drilling," he said. "Which I don't think we have the right to do because of property rights."

 

Typical for the idiot Sheffie Kadane, he fails to realize that there are already hundreds or thousands of prohibitions to use of personal property in the City of Dallas, and none has ever been considered to be a "taking" under the law. You cannot build a strip club, adult video store or other SOB on your personal property if it lies within 1,000 feet of a home, school, church or other protected use area.

 

You cannot build a dragstrip on your personal property if it would impinge upon your neighbors' quality of life. You cannot build a service station on your property if it sits in the middle of a residential neighborhood, in a public park or in the Trinity River floodplain. We have numerous zoning ordinances that dictate what you can and cannot do with your personal property, and NONE has ever been considered a "taking" by any court - EVER!

 

The very purpose of zoning ordinances is to protect Dallas from becoming like Houston, which is about the very last thing we want to become. People who do not understand the process irrationally believe that a gas well site consists of a single well which is drilled in 20-40 days, and then just sits there quietly, out of sight and out of mind. That is bullshit! Every application seeks to drill 6-36 wells on each pad site, and that extends the heavy industrial activity out to several years rather than just 20-40 days.

 

Sheffie and Jerry would serve themselves and their constituents well to shut their mouth and open their ears and minds before making assinine comments like they both made during Wednesday's council briefing. Until they actually know and understand something about this issue they are wholly unqualified to comment.

NoGasDrilling
NoGasDrilling

How about NO GAS DRILLING IN DALLAS AT ALL.  Give back the $34.8m

WCGasette
WCGasette

Another great moment yesterday was when Ed Ireland, PhD, made it clear to the Dallas City Council that the waste disposal wells for Dallas will be in Johnson County.  So, Johnson County, the same county that is being bombarded by earthquakes in the past month, will receive Dallas'  shale gas drilling and fracking "waste."   And there you have the industry's ethics in a nutshell..."Don't you worry, Dallas, be happy.  We'll dump your drilling waste in another county."

darrd2010
darrd2010

Watching yesterday's presentation was interesting to see how both Sheffie and Jerry turned the whole affair into a Congressional Hearing treating Terry Welch as if he was an integral part of a banking scandal. Their comments, tone, and attitude towards him were pathetic, uneducated, accusatory, and embarrassing for everyone in Dallas. Then when Ed Ireland finished his lies and misinformation, you would have thought that Sheffie, Jerry, and Ed had just awakened with a 'love hangover' in Las Vegas. It was gross.

It's a shame that we have these two council members in office are shilling for an industry who has depoisited their money in a lot of pockets. But I do think that the capper to the day was Mike's declaration of being a 'gas supporter' and a 'resident supporter' at the same time. LOL, but for a New Yorker whose portfolio is stuffed with oil and gas revenue, I guess it did not come as a surprise.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

Unfortunately, you tree huggers rode in on the backs of the redistribution rank and file.  And as I have stated before, they are practical and mercenary.  Practical in that they know how the Golden Goose lays the egg. And mercenary in the sense that they are not hamstrung by irrational ideology.  They just want the damn money for their constituents.  The Council sees free revenue, and a lot of it from those “evile” capitalists who want to tap the big gas fields under city control.  So the Council WILL . . . hook up.

 

After all, the council now realizes we have a public hotel, a ditch and a bridge to support.

 

Well, you got yours and now they get theirs.  And there is only so many private sector oxen to suckle off of.  They see why the economic herd is so sluggish.  The parasites are draining too much blood.

 

Go get your own.

randi.trollop
randi.trollop

It's interesting that everyone inside the fracking companies know about the ingredients in fracking liquid (industry secret, not an individual company's trade secret) yet they don't want the public to know.

We know that the drilling industry has a spotless safety record and never as to do site cleanup, and when they do there is absolutely no trace of anything dangerous left at the site, right?

Another area I am curious about is how the residents in the Ft. Worth area feel about fracking in their neighborhoods now.  Anyone?

Making money is not a bad thing.  We all need to make money.  I have a problem with irreparable damage to water and land.  It is best to err on the side of caution.  Remember the atomic bomb testing?  Go read the article about the test subjects who were exposed to an air test.  The gov't told them it was safe, and used the test for propaganda.  Think that would fly today? 

claytonauger
claytonauger

Why not mention there were so many citizens there that they had to move the meeting to the Council chambers? Why not mention the incredible show of support from a packed house of citizens during a business day meeting in August? Their standing ovation for Welch was sustained and aimed directly at the Council. It was the first time citizens had gotten to express themselves that way in front of the entire council, and it's very clear that the vast majority of interested citizens support more protections. Never thought the Observer would see this kind of grassroots support the same way as the DMN - not worth mentioning.

 

For another point of view:

http://www.downwindersatrisk.org/2012/08/thank-you-it-was-a-watershed-moment-in-the-dallas-drilling-fight/

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

There are essentially two approaches to environmentalism:  The Abolitionist or the Utilitarian Approach.  The former is an irrational ideology which is opposed to scientific and industrial progress, and impedes economic and social development. 

 

The latter is a call for an anthropocentric assessment of the world's resources to hazardous substances used or created by technology. It targeted as irrational, by implication, if not explicitly, both a vision of a "Natural State" with intrinsic rights to impede the activities of man, and hysterical fears of environmental poisons, disproportionate to the threat and dismissive of their associated benefits.

 

This is where the City Council is advised to not be bamboozled - guard yourselves against decisions which are supported by pseudo-scientific arguments or false and non-relevant data. ... The greatest evils which stalk our Earth are ignorance and oppression, and not Science, Technology and Industry.

 

Shale gas can be our salvation, locally and nationally, and it is not going to our kill babies, incinerate daycare facilities, nor shake the Earth whereby we all sink in a lake of fire.

 

But you wouldn't know it by listening to the wild peculations and bizarre accusations that are being made by the abolitionists. 

 

So take a breath and lets drill baby drill, for the plant (and responsibly?).

AviAdelman
AviAdelman

Money quote - "But Kadane and Allen were skeptical, with Kadane suggesting that restrictions on drilling were depriving the drilling companies of their "constitutional rights." He said a 600-foot setback seemed more than adequate."

 

I grew up in Philadelphia. I have visited the Liberty Bell, Independence Mall, and Betsy Ross' house. I even visited Valley Forge. And for the life of me, I do not remember ever seeing an historic oil well, one that would have been in operation around the time of the American Revolution, let alone the Constitutional Convention. Did I miss something about the country's massive drilling program during that timeframe in American History 101?

Marc
Marc

 @NoGasDrilling We do not need, nor are we required, to give back the $34.7 million. That money was for land leases. There was NEVER a guarantee of a right to drill. The leases stipulated that before ANY drilling would EVER be allowed an SUP would have to be granted by the City Plan Commission and approved by the City Council, a drilling permit would have to be approved and issued by the City Council and any drilling plans would have to meet with the fire code and, where applicable, comply with federal laws under the jurisdiction of the US Army Corps of Engineers, for EACH well.

 

XTO and Trinity East paid the money and got their leases. Then, each got an additional 30 months lease extension at no additional cost. There is no court in the land which would rule the city liable for repayment, which is precisely why they would never sue us to recover that money. Industry would lose in court and a critical precedent would be established thus taking away their ability to use threats of law suits to coerce accommodations by city governments.

darrd2010
darrd2010

 @WCGasette Everything that came out of his mouth along with Sheffie and Jerry was a bag of shit. They must stink to high heaven with that stink on them, but I guess the money makes it all better for them.

WCGasette
WCGasette

 @darrd2010  Yes. Terry Welch certainly showed a lot of class throughout the entire afternoon.

Marc
Marc

 @holmantx You are an idiot! There is no money to be made. NG currently sells for about $3/mcf. Breakeven is about $8-9/mcf. Lease agreements stipulate that the city gets no money unless producers recover all production costs plus 15%, which means that NG market prices need to be at least $9.20-10.35/mcf before the city receives any revenue. Even Ed Ireland concedes that it will be years before NG sells for rates above breakeven (he estimates $5-6/mcf in 2-3 years.)

 

Apparently, you are as mathematically challenged as you are ignorant about the facts surrounding NG. And, by the way, there is strong opposition on the Council to allowing it in the first place, so don't get too giddy over three Council members supporting it. This is a LONG way from over, and every day brings more opposition.

 

But, your antipathy toward your fellow citizens and their health and safety are duly noted. Never let little things like facts get in the way of your personal bias.

WCGasette
WCGasette

 @holmantx  Interesting.  Your "essay," while attempting to be smart, misses so many marks.  Parasites?? Please.

 

Let's get real here about a few very "real" moments yesterday. 

 

Mr. Ed Ireland, PhD, made sure to correct Council members who spoke correctly of the "Heavy, Industrial Mining Activity" known as shale gas extraction and fracking. 

 

When he quickly corrected Council members,  they probably weren't expecting that and weren't able to react quickly enough.  Understandably so, since Ed Ireland has been doing this a lot longer and has lots of practice.  At one point he went into a personal story about "driving" down 183 near Euless/Bedford and how there is SO much construction activity there.  Indeed there is.  And how shale gas drilling activities are better described as "construction activity."  He drew the picture.  But, really?? Was that a correct picture??Herein lies the problem for the Dallas City Council.  Industry reps like Ed Ireland know how to make everybody "comfortable" with "heavy, industrial mining activity."  It's what they've been doing for many years. It's how they got it done in Fort Worth and municipalities in Tarrant County, the cities in Johnson County, Grand Prairie (partly in Tarrant County and mostly in Dallas County), Mansfield...it's the same Playbook.  Industry calms any and all fears about it.  They make light of the concerns when they can. And they certainly did that yesterday. 

 

If all of this is a debate, as it should be, then the Dallas City Council clearly needs more time to learn everything they can about it.  Some of the back and forth about drilling "one well and then they're done" was breathtakingly inaccurate.  And dear Mr. Ireland just let those statements hang out there without correcting them.  That was shameful.

 

This decision will impact Dallas, Texas and surrounding communities for generations to come. As a "Home Rule" city,  the law says that the City of Dallas must "protect" ALL citizens from harm.  Our state and our Texas Railroad Commission are extremely "hands off" when it comes to all of this.  They publicly demonize the EPA on a regular basis.  And contrary to what Mr. Ed Ireland said, it IS "heavy, industrial mining activity," no matter how many trees or masonry walls you erect. The "Lipstick on the Pig" is really what you get.  And those gas gathering pipeline "Pigs" do fly.

TXsharon
TXsharon

 @randi.trollop Regarding Fort Worth, there is much opposition but the mayor and council ignore what the people want. By the time they figured out what was happening, it was too late to save Fort Worth. Dallas has a change to make different choices. 

http://www.fwcando.org/

http://nctca.net/

Marc
Marc

 @holmantx And once again you prove yourself to be an idiot who knows nothing about this issue, but who only argues against it because you hate the environment and you irrationally think we can live with polluted water, air and soil.

Double-O-Joe
Double-O-Joe

 @holmantx When resources are exploited responsibly, with a view towards maintaining a balance between human use and preservation of the natural world, the result is success for all concerned.

 

When resources are exploited for profit, with no regulation of or responsibility on the part of the resource extractors, the result is severe environmental damage and threats to public health.

 

Where does the responsibility of the government lie?  Is it to the companies, to ensure that they are able to remain efficient and profitable? Or is it to the citizens, to ensure that they are protected from threats against which they cannot defend themselves?  When the threats are unclear or a matter of probability, shouldn't the government err on the side of the people?

 

Advocates of the industry maintain that the fracking process is safe.  Under ideal circumstances, I would assume that it is.  Unfortunately, we all know that nothing ever operates under ideal circumstances.  This is a human endeavor: there will be accidents, there will be spills, there will be errors.  There will be unforseen consequences.  There is no way to prevent this.  Therefore, it makes sense to limit our exposure to these incidents by more heavily regulating the extraction sites.  This isn't opposition to the process: it's a risk versus reward analysis.  It's what all sensible consideration of this process should come down to. 

 

Also worth noting is that analysis of potential problems that originates from the extraction companies should never be taken at face value.  Because their motive is profit, it's unfortunately highly likely that their statements about potential dangers are minimized.  We're seen it too often (cigarettes, leaded gas, etc.) to take these statements to heart without due consideration.  That said, I would also maintain that statements about its dangers from opponents can fall victim to the opposite problem: they can be inflated out of a desire to cause alarm.  What is needed is a thorough, long-term, and comprehensive analysis by an unaffiliated third party group.  Until that happens, though, my opinion is that we should err on the side of the public, not the companies.

claytonauger
claytonauger

 @holmantx The only bad science in use yesterday was by Ed Ireland, Shefie Kadane and Jerry Allen.  They're the absolutists and you're a paid industry hack.

RTGolden
RTGolden

 @AviAdelman You must have missed something in American History 101.  We've altered the Constitution 17 times since the end of the constitutional convention.  During the times you speak of, the Revolutionary Era, Blacks were considered 3/5 of a person, but didn't get to do 3/5 of the voting.  Women could not vote, the Constitution has been changed to correct those omissions (the law is there, the execution of it is not perfected yet).  Judicial Review has awarded rights to Corporations, taken them away from the fetus, and protected many of those inalienable, yet un-enumerated, rights we US citizens have.

 

I don't think municipal, state, or federal oversight of drilling in order to protect the greater good is a violation of anyone or anything's constitutional rights, however, your argument above does absolutely nothing to illuminate how.

Egdar
Egdar

 @Marc

 Marc : mental gymnastics :: Gabby Douglas : regular gymnastics.

Egdar
Egdar

 @Marc

 "Lease agreements stipulate that the city gets no money unless producers recover all production costs plus 15%"

 

What the hell are you talking about?  Did you just make that up?  I challenge you to find one lease in the Barnett Shale with a provision remotely similar to that.  You might be confusing a royalty interest with a working interest.  The city would get the royalty percentage stated in the lease of the proceeds of every mcf of gas that is produced and sold.

holmantx
holmantx topcommenter

 @Double-O-Joe sounds like you and I could cut a deal somewhere under the Utilitarian Approach

Edgar
Edgar

 @Marc

 In which dictionary do they use all caps like that?  You guys sure like to call people idiots.  The count is higher than usual under this post.  Keep it civil.  I know, I know, I'm asking you to be civil to the face of pure evil. 

Marc
Marc

 @Egdar Definitions:

 

Marc: having a brain with which to do mental gymnastics.

 

Edgar: anencephalic - born without a brain with which to do ANYTHING mental.

darrd
darrd

@Egdar= idiot

Marc
Marc

 @WCGasette Camaraderie, hell! It was a veritable circle jerk between Kadane, Allen and Ireland. It should have had an "X" rating and people under 17 should have been barred from witnessing it.

Edgar
Edgar

 @Marc

 I agree with the last statement.  That's fairly obvious.  If there's no flow, there's no production for the City to receive royalty on.

 

As for the other, please quote, in context, the language from the lease which you believe prevents the City from receiving royalty until the lessee recovers 115% of costs.

 

And the last part...devoid of honesty and integrity?  How is questioning what you claim dishonest?  How does it evidence a lack of integrity?  That's rich, judging by the way you've behaved yourself on this post.  Can you do anything besides call people idiots, usually in all-caps?

Marc
Marc

 @Egdar I made up nothing, and I was not referring to leases other than those signed by the City of Dallas, which is THE focus of this discussion. If you had bothered reading the leases, then you would understand what I said before shooting off your mouth and again proving yourself to be devoid of honesty and integrity.

 

Further, if no viable flow is produced, then the City of Dallas would get no revenue regardless of the terms of the lease.

Marc
Marc

 @Egdar I made up nothing, and I was not referring to leases other than those signed by the City of Dallas, which is THE focus of this discussion. If you had bothered reading the leases, then you would understand what I said before shooting off your mouth and again proving yourself to be devoid of honesty and integrity.

WCGasette
WCGasette

 @holmantx Seems you and Double-O should do that deal and live happily ever after.

Now Trending

Around The Web

From the Vault

 

General

Loading...