Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Yes I do. There have been news stories covering it. It was not throwing anything except something that's actually happened
It may come as a surprise to you that Koch Minerals (which is the entity that operates their oil and gas properties, to the extent they have any) apparently operates no oil/gas wells in Arkansas at all.
Now, for the $64,000 question: Exactly where is this Koch Minerals well where this alleged groundwater contamination supposedly located? (Leaving aside, of course, the ignorant, hair-on-fire canard about groundwater contamination from hydrofrac operations, which take place many thousands of feet below any groundwater sources.)
If this well exists, the Arkansas Oil & Gas Commission evidently doesn't know about it.
We should note that Koch Industries is mainly a midstream player, and less of an upstream concern. They don't do a lot of exploration and production anywhere. Clearly none in Arkansas.
Frankly...this whole Arkansas fracking contamination story sounds as if it were made up by some ignorant blowhard trying to advance some hare-brained political agenda.
I paid over $100k in taxes last 2 years......I think its a total rip off and I dont know what many consider rich but where I am at I completely understand I am better off than most and very fortunate but I still dont feel like I am financially secure with the amount of taxes I pay.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,615,202 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milton Miteybad
It may come as a surprise to you that Koch Minerals (which is the entity that operates their oil and gas properties, to the extent they have any) apparently operates no oil/gas wells in Arkansas at all.
Now, for the $64,000 question: Exactly where is this Koch Minerals well where this alleged groundwater contamination supposedly located? (Leaving aside, of course, the ignorant, hair-on-fire canard about groundwater contamination from hydrofrac operations, which take place many thousands of feet below any groundwater sources.)
If this well exists, the Arkansas Oil & Gas Commission evidently doesn't know about it.
We should note that Koch Industries is mainly a midstream player, and less of an upstream concern. They don't do a lot of exploration and production anywhere. Clearly none in Arkansas.
Frankly...this whole Arkansas fracking contamination story sounds as if it were made up by some ignorant blowhard trying to advance some hare-brained political agenda.
And with this, you have provided incontrovertible proof that some folks have trouble understanding what they're reading.
If you had bothered to read and understand the article, you would have properly concluded that this contamination did not occur because of hydrofrac operations, per se, but because of apparent improper handling of some kind of compound on the surface of the land, resulting in some quantity of that unspecified compound finding its way into a creek.
It's not clear that these barrels even contained frac fluid, which is usually transported by tanker truck, not in barrels. The article says that some of the barrels were marked "drilling fluid," which is not the same as frac fluid. (Drilling fluid, also, is usually transported by tanker truck and stored in tanks near the well pad.)
The explanation offered is that a flood washed some barrels containing some industrial chemical away from a wellsite, which is plausible enough, but it's still not clear what this compound was that ended up in the creek.
Having barrels of any chemical compound wash away from a work site is a bad thing, and it shouldn't happen. But it's actually a fairly rare occurrence. The fact that it happens so infrequently is exactly why this kind of event is newsworthy. Man bites dog, and all that.
But, for the benefit of all, allow me to highlight the three paramount points the reader should take away from your article:
1. Any contamination arising out of this 2011 incident was not related to normal fracing operations conducted in accordance with industry standards, but appears to be related to improper surface storage of some unspecified number of barrels of some unspecified compound.
2. It's unclear that this unspecified compound was actually toxic. Some formulations of water-based drilling fluids are fairly benign.
3. Nowhere in your article is Koch Industries or Koch Minerals even mentioned. Koch appears to have no connection to this event whatsoever.
Which brings us back to the original point: The Koch Brothers have probably done more for you just operating their businesses oin a day-to-day basis than a thousand Hillary Clintons could with a million different proposals to steal more money out of your pocket via increased taxation. And for that I know we are both duly thankful.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,615,202 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by Milton Miteybad
And with this, you have provided incontrovertible proof that some folks have trouble understanding what they're reading.
If you had bothered to read and understand the article, you would have properly concluded that this contamination did not occur because of hydrofrac operations, per se, but because of apparent improper handling of some kind of compound on the surface of the land, resulting in some quantity of that unspecified compound finding its way into a creek.
It's not clear that these barrels even contained frac fluid, which is usually transported by tanker truck, not in barrels. The article says that some of the barrels were marked "drilling fluid," which is not the same as frac fluid. (Drilling fluid, also, is usually transported by tanker truck and stored in tanks near the well pad.)
The explanation offered is that a flood washed some barrels containing some industrial chemical away from a wellsite, which is plausible enough, but it's still not clear what this compound was that ended up in the creek.
Having barrels of any chemical compound wash away from a work site is a bad thing, and it shouldn't happen. But it's actually a fairly rare occurrence. The fact that it happens so infrequently is exactly why this kind of event is newsworthy. Man bites dog, and all that.
But, for the benefit of all, allow me to highlight the three paramount points the reader should take away from your article:
1. Any contamination arising out of this 2011 incident was not related to normal fracing operations conducted in accordance with industry standards, but appears to be related to improper surface storage of some unspecified number of barrels of some unspecified compound.
2. It's unclear that this unspecified compound was actually toxic. Some formulations of water-based drilling fluids are fairly benign.
3. Nowhere in your article is Koch Industries or Koch Minerals even mentioned. Koch appears to have no connection to this event whatsoever.
Which brings us back to the original point: The Koch Brothers have probably done more for you just operating their businesses oin a day-to-day basis than a thousand Hillary Clintons could with a million different proposals to steal more money out of your pocket via increased taxation. And for that I know we are both duly thankful.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,615,202 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by British Sterling
They are absolutely correct. They pay twice their fair share (as a proportion of the income they earn as a group) and are in effect, fiscally-raped. The people who need to pony-up and start carrying their own weight are the ones at the other end of the economic scale who are, in any analysis, pure takers.
No, no they don't. I can tell you're going to end up on my ignore list
They are absolutely correct. They pay twice their fair share (as a proportion of the income they earn as a group) and are in effect, fiscally-raped. The people who need to pony-up and start carrying their own weight are the ones at the other end of the economic scale who are, in any analysis, pure takers.
correct
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
👎