Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Wednesday, July 23, 2014

North Dakota's biggest oil producers have picked a side and put money into an obscure election for the state's agriculture commissioner, hoping to ward off a rising Democratic challenger who could limit development of new wells and pipelines. At veterans halls and church suppers around the state, anecdotes abound of cattle escaping when energy workers forget to lock gates, of crops damaged by the saltwater waste byproduct from hydraulic fracturing and of contractors not repairing land after laying pipeline. Such stories are shared by residents who are proud North Dakota is helping the United States achieve greater energy independence, but wary of what comes next.

Advertisement

Liberal Blog Advertising Network

Menu

Advertisement

Subscriptions

Author Info

Whatsleft

 

Advertisement

MORE STORIES

 

Advertisement

More

How much will the oligarchs plug into this race to support their corporate, low-regulation candidate? ... Rather than simply using the money to make sure they're running a clean, safe industry.

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

So sue the oil companies for damages.... I see nothing wrong with that. One of my pet peeves about capitalism is when a mining company folds, it leaves behind a disaster. Someone should be held accountable.

#1 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-07-22 06:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

Like totally duh.

#2 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2014-07-22 07:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

Who cares what North Dakotan's want?

Corporations are People!

North Dakotan's are expendable and need to abide by the constitution!

#3 | Posted by ClownShack at 2014-07-22 07:09 PM | Reply | Flag:

So sue the oil companies for damages....

#1 | Posted by AndreaMackris

It needs to be handled by regulation because the people who've been damaged often don't have the resources to fight the oligarchs in court.

#4 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2014-07-22 07:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

"So sue the oil companies for damages."

So, who do YOU think will have the better lawyers?

#5 | Posted by Harry_Powell at 2014-07-22 07:29 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 3

So sue the oil companies for damages.... I see nothing wrong with that. One of my pet peeves about capitalism is when a mining company folds, it leaves behind a disaster. Someone should be held accountable.

#1 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-07-22 06:58 PM | Reply | Flag:

People barely have food in their pantries. Where are they going to find money for lawyers??

#6 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2014-07-22 07:31 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

"So sue the oil companies for damages...."

Yeah, let an ecological disaster happen and then pretend that monetary damages actually correct the ecological disaster.

#7 | Posted by danni at 2014-07-22 07:33 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 5

Sue?

If there are real damages what will happen is some law firm will file a class action suit. They will make hundreds of millions and their clients will receive $7.37 each.

#8 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-07-22 07:35 PM | Reply | Flag: | Funny: 1

If there are real damages what will happen is some law firm will file a class action suit. They will make hundreds of millions and their clients will receive $7.37 each.

Posted by JeffJ at 2014-07-22 07:35 PM | Reply

Yeah right the EXXON Valdez oil spill proves that wrong. Last time I checked they have yet to pat for damages.

#9 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2014-07-22 07:37 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 2

PAY^

#10 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2014-07-22 07:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

If there are real damages what will happen is some law firm will file a class action suit. They will make hundreds of millions and their clients will receive $7.37 each.

#8 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Little bit of hyperbole, also the action is supposed to make the companies at least care about what they are doing.

While I would like it to goto the person harmed, the system is the system.

More regulations won't help do you think they will? Did it prevent BP? Did it prevent Valdez?

The ability to sue while not perfect is the closest thing we have to keeping companies in line.

Average Total Amount Paid Per Claimant = $27,466.47 of the BP oil spill.

#11 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-07-22 08:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

Yeah, let an ecological disaster happen and then pretend that monetary damages actually correct the ecological disaster.

#7 | POSTED BY DANNI

I am not saying let it happen, but regulations don't stop environmental disasters from happening.

What prevents it from happening, or negligence, is the threat of a huge lawsuit, holding the company and is shareholders responsible.

#12 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2014-07-22 08:26 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Democratic challenger who could limit development of new wells and pipelines...."

All while promising 'innovative' and cheap energy, I'm sure.

#13 | Posted by Diablo at 2014-07-23 03:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

"Little bit of hyperbole, also the action is supposed to make the companies at least care about what they are doing.

While I would like it to goto the person harmed, the system is the system."

LOL. I can't believe someone wrote that and was serious.

#14 | Posted by sully at 2014-07-23 09:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

"of crops damaged by the saltwater waste byproduct from hydraulic fracturing"

Most likely salt is the least of their worries.

#15 | Posted by Sully at 2014-07-23 09:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

Speaking of ND and oil.

www.upi.com

#16 | Posted by Lohocla at 2014-07-23 12:30 PM | Reply | Flag:

"So sue the oil companies for damages...."
Yeah, let an ecological disaster happen and then pretend that monetary damages actually correct the ecological disaster.
#7 | Posted by danni at 2014-07-22 07:33 PM

Precisely the most important issue of all.

That said, it's too late for most states to do anything. They have been mined and fracked into serious disarray, their ecological diversity dwindled to a tiny fraction of it's original status - people are so readily led by their wallet into a wasted land.

No amount of money can repair that. Ever. Once a species is extinct, it's gone forever.

#17 | Posted by redlightrobot at 2014-07-23 01:41 PM | Reply | Flag:

I don't feel sorry for these greedy landowners. I feel sorry for their neighbors.

You dance with the devil you may get the horns.

#18 | Posted by Prolix247 at 2014-07-23 02:24 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

"Yeah, let an ecological disaster happen and then pretend that monetary damages actually correct the ecological disaster."

Exactly how much time have you spent in ND? seriosuly. How much? I spent eight years up there. You want to know what an ecological distaster looks like? It's -40 with -80 wind chill. Very little will survive that. If you have an oil spill, no problem. Simply go outside and pick it up. It will have the consistency of a jolly rancher.

The big problem with the growth of the oil sector is the increased wear and tear on the roads. That's what people in North Dakota care about. It's a little disingenuous getting the Whole Foods, organic wheat grass farmer and presenting him as the average Dakotan. Not even close.

#19 | Posted by madbomber at 2014-07-23 02:31 PM | Reply | Flag: | Newsworthy 1

It's kind of a scam.

They get the uniformed up there with talk of high pay and never warn people about the high prices of everything.

#20 | Posted by Tor at 2014-07-23 06:05 PM | Reply | Flag:

"If you have an oil spill, no problem. Simply go outside and pick it up. It will have the consistency of a jolly rancher."

How do they pump oil that is frozen solid?

#21 | Posted by sully at 2014-07-23 06:28 PM | Reply | Flag:

So, if you never use petrochemicals in your life like plastics, resins, fibers, elastomers, lubricants, gels, and gasoline to name a few, you have every right to complain how bad big oil is. Otherwise, lets talk about how they can be better controlled to protect the environment while still producing what they do for our benefit.

You can sue the pants off them, but that just comes back to the consumer that depends on the above products.

#22 | Posted by path at 2014-07-23 07:02 PM | Reply | Flag:

suing an oil company will take twenty years and cost you your marriage.

#23 | Posted by nutcase at 2014-07-23 09:15 PM | Reply | Flag:

How do they pump oil that is frozen solid?

#21 | POSTED BY SULLY

DESCRIPTION OF THE PRIOR ART U.S. Pat. No. 3,670,752, to Marsden and Rose, discloses a method for transporting crude oils via pipeline in the arctic in the form of a 40 to percent oil-inbrine emulsion. The brine contains enough salt to maintain the brine phase in the unfrozen condition even at relatively low, sub-freezing temperatures. The method has the disadvantage that energy is lost in pumping large quantities of the brine which, per se, has no economic value.

U.S. Pat. No. 3,730,201, to LeFever, also shows a method of pumping crude oil at cold temperatures, the

oil being admixed with liquefied natural gas. The mixture in the pipeline is maintained under pressures sufficiently high as to maintain the liquefied component in the liquefied state, thereby adding additional operating costs to the process.

US. Pat. No. 3,675,671, to Sweeney and Alexander; shows a process for improving the pipeline flow characteristics of waxy crude oils in which high and low pour point crudes, respectively high and low in'wax content, are blended together along with a polymeric pour point depressant. Also disclosed is a a relatively uneconomic prior art method in which somewhat the same effect is obtained by cutting waxy crudes with expensive lighter hydrocarbon fractions.

www.google.com

#24 | Posted by tontonmacoute at 2014-07-24 06:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

#24 | Posted by tontonmacoute at 2014-07-24 06:45 AM | Reply | Flag:

Good info.

If they are using a method that relies on mixing it with another substance that acts as antifreeze, whatever leaks isn't going to freeze solid.

2nd method sounds like leaks would freeze solid quickly. But any loss of pressure and you have much bigger issues.

#25 | Posted by Sully at 2014-07-24 09:18 AM | Reply | Flag:

Exactly how much time have you spent in ND? seriosuly. How much? I spent eight years up there. You want to know what an ecological distaster looks like? It's -40 with -80 wind chill.

#19 | Posted by madbomber

You obviously haven't spent eight years in North Dakota. They have summer as well.

classic.wunderground.com

#26 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2014-07-24 01:25 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You obviously haven't spent eight years in North Dakota. They have summer as well."

YOU obviously haven't spent a summer in ND, or you would know that summer basically drastically reduced (but not eliminated) chance of snow or freezing precip. But highs of less than 60 are pretty common throughout the summer months. My kids always regarded it as summer when temps were greater than 50 degrees and the snow had receeded to the point where they could ride their bikes.

#27 | Posted by madbomber at 2014-07-24 05:37 PM | Reply | Flag:

"You obviously haven't spent eight years in North Dakota. They have summer as well."
YOU obviously haven't spent a summer in ND, or you would know that summer basically drastically reduced (but not eliminated) chance of snow or freezing precip. But highs of less than 60 are pretty common throughout the summer months. My kids always regarded it as summer when temps were greater than 50 degrees and the snow had receeded to the point where they could ride their bikes.
#27 | POSTED BY MADBOMBER

Is it really that extreme in the summer?

I just got back from 10 days in Boyne City, Michigan (not quite as far north, but pretty close). Mid 70's the entire time which is a bit cooler than usual.

#28 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-07-24 05:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

But highs of less than 60 are pretty common throughout the summer months.

#27 | Posted by madbomber

Still a hell of a lot warmer than -40.

#29 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2014-07-24 07:18 PM | Reply | Flag:

Still a hell of a lot warmer than -40.

Posted by Whatsleft at 2014-07-24 07:18 PM | Reply

Give me 20 below any day.

#30 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2014-07-24 07:19 PM | Reply | Flag:

You're insane, Larry.

I endured a brutal winter here in Michigan this year. 20 below is horrible.

3 years ago I was in Vegas in June. It was 103. That temperature is WAY more tolerable and safe than 20 below.

I don't know what the seasonal weather is like in Kansas. Maybe your summers are oppressively hot. Trust me on this - they are far more bearable than this past Michigan winter.

#31 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-07-24 07:24 PM | Reply | Flag:

You're insane, Larry.

I endured a brutal winter here in Michigan this year. 20 below is horrible.

3 years ago I was in Vegas in June. It was 103. That temperature is WAY more tolerable and safe than 20 below.

I don't know what the seasonal weather is like in Kansas. Maybe your summers are oppressively hot. Trust me on this - they are far more bearable than this past Michigan winter.

Posted by JeffJ at 2014-07-24 07:24 PM | Reply

It's supposed to be 105 tomorrow. I betcha don't weigh 180 pounds soaking wet. See you can put on clothes to stay warm in Winter. When you're in your birthday suit in summer and still uncomfortable in summer. You're screwed.

#32 | Posted by LarryMohr at 2014-07-24 07:33 PM | Reply | Flag:

I understand, Larry.

But even with plenty of blubber, 20 below is still far more dangerous over prolonged periods of exposure, even when properly dressed for it, than 105 is in one's birthday suit.

PS - unfortunately, I weigh a lot more than 180.

#33 | Posted by JeffJ at 2014-07-24 07:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

"Is it really that extreme in the summer?"

No.

North Dakota mean highs for June/July/August average 80.6F and mean lows for the same period are 54.8F.

#34 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-07-24 07:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

.... "North Dakota Getting PO'ed at Big Oil"

**** This is really a message from North Dakota Politicians to BIG OIL saying "We're still waiting for that boost in our PAY OFFS...So better get with it!"

#35 | Posted by AntiCadillac at 2014-07-24 07:57 PM | Reply | Flag:

North Dakota mean highs for June/July/August average 80.6F and mean lows for the same period are 54.8F.

#34 | Posted by REDIAL at 2014-07-24 07:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

I think the point was, claiming that spills are a non-issue because whatever spills is going to freeze solid right away is premised on the ludicrous notion that the temp in ND is always below freezing.

#36 | Posted by Sully at 2014-07-25 10:26 AM | Reply | Flag:

Advertisement

Post a comment

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2014 World Readable

 

Advertisement

Drudge Retort