Knowing how government intrusion really works if they were forced to sell the original gas without infrastructure then the well probably would not be drilled in the first place. How many starving infants and children would be out of luck then? Besides this is North Dakota I suspect there are not too many starving infants and children in the state, the people have too much character for that. Generally the "Judas" argument doesn't get much milage.
On Oct 1, 2:00 pm, elwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > great rufus, nd should allow flaring because nigeria does ? > > and nd should allow flaring because it produces less ghg than raw > methane ? > > majic wand ? how 'bout dont allow it. seems to work in other > states. > > 11,500 mcfd, that is the $$,$$$ equivalent of 920 bopd. surely some > freezing and starving orphans and widows in north dakota could use the > royalty off'n dat rufus. > > On Oct 1, 11:22 am, "Rufus O'Malley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Lipstick, Elwood? Let's go there..... > > Let's start here for fun ..http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gas_flare > > 'The largest flaring operations occur in the Niger Delta region of > > Nigeria. The leading contributors to gas flaring are (in declining > > order): Nigeria, Russia, Iran, Algeria, Mexico, Venezuela, Indonesia, > > and the United States.' > > > Next: http://www.eapirf.org/MenuItems/Resources/Papers/Energy/rsrc304.pdf > > Read the first 3 pages --- Notice the Chart of Flaring countries on > > page two: Where is the US? oh-oh Not there.... > > 'In contrast, gas UTILIZATION is much higher in such > > countries as Norway, the United States, and the > > United Kingdom, WHICH FLARE OR VENT LESS THAT 2 CUBIC METERES FOR > > EVERY BARREL OF OIL. > > Flaring and venting is an important safety > > measure at oil production facilities, safely disposing > > of gas during emergencies, power and equipment > > failures, or other upsets in oil production > > that might otherwise pose hazards to workers or > > nearby residents.' > > > Next: We stop at The World Bank.... (Roadtrip: this is such fun, don't > > you think?) > > 'More than 80 percent of global venting and flaring occurs in fewer > > than 15 countries (including Nigeria, Russia, Iran, Iraq, Angola, > > Qatar, Algeria, Venezuela, Equatorial Guinea, Indonesia, Brazil and > > Mexico).' > > "The GGFR partnership, managed and facilitated by a small team at the > > World Bank in Washington, DC, includes the following partners: Algeria > > (Sonatrach), Angola, Cameroon, Canada (CIDA), Chad, Ecuador, > > Equatorial Guinea, Indonesia, Kazakhstan, Khanty-Mansijsysk (Russia), > > Nigeria, Norway, Qatar, U.K. Foreign Commonwealth Office, United > > States; BP, Chevron, ENI, ExxonMobil, Marathon, NorskHydro, Shell, > > Statoil, Total; OPEC Secretariat, and the World Bank. The EU will > > become a partner in 2007." > > The US is already on the forefront of this issue and has been for some > > time.... > > Key Obstacles (to reducing flaring): 'But a key obstacle to reduce the > > amount of gas flared is the lack of infrastructure and available > > markets for the associated gas.' > > “Large amounts of oil are produced in remote areas and often it’s > > offshore far from any potential markets for the gas and infrastructure > > is the key to utilize this gas. So what we do is we work with the > > industry, with the governments to facilitate investments in this > > infrastructure,” Svensson says. > > The GGFR partnership aims to create a framework so investments can > > take place, as the Partnership itself does not have the funds to > > invest in infrastructure such as pipelines, but instead relies on the > > private companies to do the investments. But Svensson says there are > > several other obstacles. > > > “First of all there’s often contractual regulatory issues related to > > the utilization of this gas. In old petroleum contracts, it’s often > > not clear who owns the gas and therefore who can utilize it. > > > “Often these can be economically marginal projects so we are working > > with the industry and the governments to improve the economics of > > these projects. And the tools that we have been looking into include > > carbon credit financing in order to help these projects become more > > viable.” > > > In brief, the success and viability of gas flaring reduction projects > > depend on having the right conditions and incentives such as fiscal > > incentives, investments in infrastructure, markets availability, > > appropriate regulations that enable gas utilization, and political > > will.' > > Next:http://web.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/NEWS/0,,contentMDK:20966504~... > > > Next : (my personal > > favorite)http://siteresources.worldbank.org/NEWS/Resources/world-gasflare.pdf > > This is the first effort by the World Bank Global Gas Flaring > > Reduction Partnership project to actually see and measure the flaring > > globally to find the worst offenders... Notice: There is no satellite > > measureability of gas flaring in the US -- Elwood, Any high levels of > > flaring coming from North Dakota fields? > > > Next:http://www.portofentry.com/site/root/resources/industry_news/5023.html > > "While 22 countries have actually increased gas flaring, 16 have made > > progress in reducing it, and nine have maintained stable levels of > > flaring over a 12-year period, according to the study" > > My main point here is that their study is making PROGRESS over a 12- > > YEAR-SPAN. I admit there must be a better way to deal with the gas > > from the drilling -- but I bet that if you give ND 12 YEARS (instead > > of the 18-24 months since the boom started) that they, too, will make > > progress. They are already making progress, with new and expanded > > pipelines, new natural gas plant at South Heart, re-injection > > technique exploration and r & d, And that has been in the little time > > span, all the while dealing with the boom issues of highway and road > > infrastructure problems, legislative issues, population expansion, and > > everything else that comes with 'boom times' > > > Next:http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,504511,00.html > > (Germany-- alright!) > > > Yes, Elwood, YES. There IS an issue here. ND (and the WORLD) are > > working to solve it. When you look at the bigger picture vs looking > > at the microcosm of the North Dakota -Mountrail County Bakken, the > > percentage of flared gas is miniscule by comparison to the overall > > scheme of things. And when you look at the scientific data, flaring is > > better for the environment than venting, which is releasing the raw > > methane into the environment. > > There are global oil fields where gas is simply discharged straight > > into the atmosphere, which is even worse for the climate, because > > methane -- the main component in the hydrocarbon mixture known as > > "natural gas" -- has 20 times the greenhouse-gas or "warming" > > potential of CO2. > > The responsible method, until infrastructure solutions and legal and > > other issues are worked out, and the method that has been the primary > > safe technique since the beginning of oil discovery globally, has been > > flaring. Yes, ND does need to address this, and they are doing so. > > Just as fast as they are able - The Planet is also working on it - > > Legislators and Scientists and Benefactors and Corporations and > > Federations and Environmentalists are working on it. But, Elwood, > > seriously, if you do hold some magic answer in your pocket, I do wish > > you would share it with ND and the world. > > Watch out for that lipstick, it'll getcha every time. > > Rufus. > > > On Sep 30, 7:21 pm, elwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > 11.5 million cubic feet per day, rufus. how much lipstick are you > > > going to put on that pig ? > > > > On Sep 30, 4:40 pm, "Rufus O'Malley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I agree wholeheartedly with David, here. Theory only goes so far, and > > > > it is great on paper and in the boardroom. Where the real > > > > breakthroughs will be made is in the field --- and the driller needs > > > > the latitude (to a reasonable extent) to exercise judgment in matters > > > > in real-time. What happens in ND WILL change the industry and the > > > > industry practices whereever drilling is done. It will eventually be > > > > the gold-standard about horizontal drilling in shale (and sands such > > > > the TFS) environments. > > > > This is incredibly important to the future of energy ... Now, I cannot > > > > say with impunity that Elwood does not have the knowledge to be of > > > > critical value to the oil companies and their strategies, he well > > > > might -- but I do know that I do not have such a depth and breadth of > > > > knowledge as to 'guess' at better solutions to issues without even the > > > > benefit of having access to the same documentation the geologists/ > > > > petro engineers use to make such decisions. While I do have children > > > > with advanced degrees in Aerospace Engineering, Mechanics and Civil > > > > Engineering - I am only qualified genetically to pretend intelligence > > > > on such matters. As a royalty owner, I am assuming that same analogy > > > > hold true.... > > > > Say 'Cheese', Elwood! (that means 'smile' you know!) > > > > > On Sep 30, 4:05 pm, David <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > I see the Parshall/Sanish Mountrail and Dunn county Bakken fields as > > > > > simply a marvelous laboratory whereby every company can get to try > > > > > their most interesting and inventive oil drilling and recovery > > > > > technologies, and, with luck, get the majority of them to be > > > > > economically profitable. The entire drilling and oil recovery industry > > > > > benefits from these experiments, and they point the way for the future > > > > > of crude production not only in the US but around the world. What > > > > > better place in the world right now to run these tests and > > > > > experiments? What's happening in NW ND right now is important to the > > > > > future of energy generation for all of mankind. > > > > > > On Sep 30, 1:30 pm, "Rufus O'Malley" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > One can assume, Elwood, that they are attempting new technologies > > > > > > (i.e. Huff'n'Puff) to 'maintain' their initial production results vs > > > > > > just allowing 'depletion' to run its course -- that, in my mind, > > > > > > would > > > > > > be the real waste of resources. There is nothing 'same old same old' > > > > > > in the ND bakken fields right now --- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Bakken Shale Discussion" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/bakken-shale-discussion?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
