Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Gary Joseph Anselmo on May 16, 2015 at 1:11

As soon as the bald headed geek started kissing up CHK and claiming they do a good job communicating their brand's message, it became impossible to take the presentation seriously. The Oil Industry is slowly being killed by its practices and tainted reputation more than anything else. Soon the landowners/mineral owners will be in the same camp as the greenies, thanks to the industry itself.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on May 18, 2015 at 5:36

Bald-headed geek? Ouch, though James would probably agree with you, lol, he's a good guy and has success in his niche of communication within the industry.

I hear you re CHK, I think CHK did some good things technically speaking. They had/have solid people in the communication roles who did some things right and spent a lot of money doing it. But, in the end, your actions mean more than what you say. The wheels came off in so many ways, ways that will be in courts for some time.

Gary, in your mind, what are some things that are tainting the industry that companies are doing?

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gary Joseph Anselmo on May 18, 2015 at 7:50

Anyone having dealings with the industry as a landowner and/or mineral owner has had to run the gauntlet of blatant lies and misrepresentations by shills and contracted land leasing agents Anyone having their land drilled or subjected to easement dealings have had to fight for their land value tooth and nail, and along the way deal with the incredible specter of black robed shills, legislative shills, and sell out attorneys. To top it off, all one needs to do in this digital age of enlightenment is read the posts of any number of mineral owners on this site and read of their experiences. I have benefited from both and along the way I must say I have come to trust the industry as little as I do the government. As far as threat, in my case the industry has been more of a threat than the government.

Perhaps I am more fortunate than many who very much need to believe the hype and be grateful for their pottage of lentils while allowing themselves to be cursed for generations in stolen minerals and devalued land value. Perhaps I am too cynical to only see the obvious shilling and evasion on blogs that also help people. However, you asked. I must say it is very insulting to show CHK propaganda and not expect a significant minority or more to be repulsed. 

I care not to get in a flame war with any of many well known leasing agents and promoters. I have noticed since the hyped price has deflated they are less notable, could be they are exercising their gifts in another field. There must be a special place where they go during the downturns. Thank you for your interest, Keith. All have opinions and you have done an admirable job in keeping things afloat.      

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Bemis on May 17, 2015 at 4:21

Mr. Mauck,

Despite Mr. Hahn's comedic parody derived from a borrowed slide show, I find no "environmental part" of his show. Instead, I am treated to a poor history lesson about Hitler's  end-run around the Maginot Line during World War II --with an equally poor and unnecessary  attempt to explain the French pronunciation of "Maginot".  I also learn that we are all dumb frogs being boiled in our own oil, because the  "greenie" environmentalists have more "communications" smarts. A very weird mix.  

Please tell us that Mr. Hahn's  cut-and-paste podcast does not represent a change in your  own more even-handed  editorial stance in your daily  administering of this network, which I have long enjoyed as both an advocate of responsible environmental stewardship  and an owner of small mineral interests.

Mr. Hahn's pathetic attempt at strategic communications  thinking serves only to divide those of us who seek a well-reasoned solution to the extremely serious issues now facing the oil and gas industry and  owners of small  mineral interests.     I much prefer your website(s,) which  have long contributed to   helpful exchanges among those of us who have few other ways to share in dialog about these strong global concerns,  

I agree with Mr.Anselmo's post   and suggest that your readers also  take a  critical look at Mr. Hahn's previous laudatory podcasts that focus on Chesapeake's dubious role as a model communicator for the industry. 

Sincerely,

Jim Bemis, daily visitor to your websites and admirer of your family enterprise.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on May 18, 2015 at 5:43

The topic can't be covered in a 10 min podcast, at the same time, it's difficult to not conclude that the environmental movement is using favorable legislation or court ruling to shut down development (and not just oil and gas drilling). They'd be crazy not to! I like a discussion of these issues, that's why I occasionally post stuff like this.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Jim Bemis on May 19, 2015 at 14:40

Mr. Mauck,

We're agreed that "the topic" can't be covered in Mr. Hahn's 15 minute podcast. However, I guess we'll have to agree-to- disagree on your conclusion about the environmental movement's role in killing the oil and gas industry and shutting down development.

On the other hand, I am in complete agreement with Mr. Anselmos' post and  I also continue to think that you have done an admirable job with your network.

I will look forward to any future discussions that  reflect the collatoral damage that Chesapeake's "broken wheels" have inflicted  on the industry, on  owners of small mineral interests, and on the environment. In fact, I would urge you to make it  a discussion topic.

Thanks again for an opportunity to express my concerns,

Jim Bemis

 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher) on May 21, 2015 at 3:27

Jim, the the website's I publish have always been open to topics of concern including the good, bad and ugly. Each website has the ability to post photos and videos to provide a robust discussion. To date the network has had well over 2 million people visit them.

I have awaited evidence of widespread pollution and negligence and no doubt there have been instances, but I'm largely still waiting to see something other than a documentary that plays loose with facts. If there is widespread environmental damage occurring, I would be pleased to have the websites play an active role in applying pressure for correction.

On another issue, let's take royalty payments, the opposite has occurred. Perhaps thousands of posts and discussions have been dedicated to this topic. These complaints have given legs to these complaints and contributed heavily to action being taken.

These websites are an open canvas and the community dictates their direction.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Spring Branch,mineral owner on May 21, 2015 at 5:32

Since we are all entitled to our own opinion, let me just say that I am much more interested in reading about  "Can Refracs Bring New Life To The Haynesville", or "9 New Wells In San Augustine Co.", or "BHP Upbeat On U.S. Shale Prospects" than I am in reading the vitriolic diatribe about the US Oil & Gas Industry.  Just saying!

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve P on May 21, 2015 at 5:55

Best I can tell from my reading, the primary environmental risks related to the oil and gas industry is transporting the stuff to market.  Train derailments and pipeline ruptures seem to be occurring far more frequently than I can remember over my 6 decades.  But that's not the primary emphasis of this web site.  

I think SPMO says it pretty well: vitriolic diatribe.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Skip Peel - Mineral Consultant on May 21, 2015 at 6:22

Steve, I'll add to your list a lurking issue that is not being addressed properly and is a much more likely cause of ground water contamination than modern wells:  orphan (abandoned) wells.  Most of these unplugged or improperly plugged wells are old.  They are in varying states of deterioration.  And they pose a real risk. 

If the wells drilled in the Haynesville Shale were causing environmental problems, we would know it.  The thought that people in areas with high levels of development are ignoring problems in their backyard, or back forty, because they are receiving royalty payments flies in the face of reason. 

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Gary Joseph Anselmo on May 21, 2015 at 8:41

I think the number of hits speak better than glib straw man arguments and back slapping among shills. A good polemic is hardly vitriolic diatribe. Unless, of course, one wants it their way or the highway. Steamrolling dissent and settled damages with attached gag orders do not work well with train derailments and pipeline ruptures. Nothing mysterious here. Hence, they are news.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Steve P on May 20, 2015 at 8:00

I have read the posts on this thread for the past few days, but never actually took the time to watch the video.  I just finished it.  I am a bit mystified by the vitriol of some of the posts regarding this 15 minute podcast.  As a land and mineral owner in NW Louisiana, I have my own complaints with CHK and others.  They could all do a much better job in PERFORMING their job as operator on their respective units, and could do a far better job at communicating with their Lessors, especially when they are going to arbitrarily stop paying royalties for some reasonable or, frequently, unreasonable basis.  

This podcast isn't speaking to those issues.  It is addressing policy and regulatory issues, and the presentation is right on (okay, I would not have chosen to use the Maginot Line as my analogy).  They can't win a fight that directly challenges the use of fossil fuels for our cars and to heat and cool our homes.  The environmental community has a pretty focused, commonly shared goal:  To move the world, and especially the US, away from fossil fuels to renewables.  There are a number of tactics they are pursuing on this front.  (1) In Congress, they don't have the votes to pass new laws, so use what laws exist, maybe in creative ways, to start winding down both the production and utilization of fossil fuels.  Expansion of the Clean Air Act regulations on utilization is directly driving the coal industry out of existence.  We, as a nation, could have a discussion about whether that is a good or bad thing, but we aren't really having that discussion.  We elected a President, twice, who is focused on eliminating the coal industry, so that was a proxy for that discussion.  On the production side, a number of tools are available - Endangered Species, Clean Water Act, fracking regulations on federal land, etc.  For those of us who support the continued production and use of oil and NG, we should be a bit thankful that the current Administration has adopted the "all of the above" approach to energy sources (but they don't really include coal in the "all").  These tactics are the indirect attach on OUR use of oil and gas and OUR oil and gas jobs.  Hence, the "Maginot Line" analogy.

I can foresee future oil and gas exploration and production on federal lands in the West being curtailed through legal action by environmental groups using the indirect confrontation of the oil and gas industry.

Beyond the legal battles, which the industry does a good job of funding, there is the "hearts and minds" campaign that the industry, and frankly, most of us on this blog, should be supporting.  For most of the industry, once they get their leases in hand, get their drill sites and pipeline infrastructure, they "have what they want" and their presence in the community is diminished.  That is a mistake.  When that happens, then you have the St. Tammany or Denton, TX "uprisings" that are, in my view, a lack of reflection of trust by local communities with the industry.  Some are just your everyday NIMBY outbreaks, but the NIMBY response is fed by either lack of knowledge, or too much disinformation.

And just for some of the posters on this thread, other than being a land and mineral owner in DeSoto and Sabine Parishes, and a concerned citizen of the US, I don't have a dog in the fight.  I'm not sure what is meant by all of the concerns.  I've owned land in DeSoto for decades, and the value of that land (and mineral rights) are far higher today than they were in 2006, driven almost exclusively by the Haynesville Shale activities.  I'm thankful.

Although I do still have issues and annoyances, big ones, with some of the operators.

 

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page