Jump to content
272 total votes
I wish we didn't have to always pit the economy versus the environment. It creates a zero sum game where it doesn't need to be. I wish there was an option "Yes, if done with proper environmental and visual controls".
I wonder how many of those 35% actually live by their espoused beliefs and don't use petroleum... probably about 1/10th of 1%... maybe less...
I wish the 35% would stop using my oil so the price would go down.
Exactly Mark! Drill drill drill!!! Let's get all of western routt to have rigs like North Dakota and bring in the drillers and crews like up there. What did I read a 1BD apt is almost $2000/month and the McDonalds starts at $15/hr. Forget ski seasons we could have year round business and make more money!!!
Ben Beall is right. Poll presents unrealistic false choices.
Paper should have known better because Shell Oil is happy to drill according to Routt County regulations while Quicksilver apparently is not.
And Mark's point is also a false choice because people willing to require things like groundwater testing when drilling would probably enjoy being able to only use oil or gas that was produced from wells that had groundwater testing. So Ben Beall could buy gas produced in a reasonable way and Mark Hartless would buy oil and gas from unscrupulous producers that have trashed the environment.
The stand against Oil and Gas is obtuse. There is NOTHING one touches or does that oil and gas doesn't pay a part in. Even the tires for your bike are petro based. If it is not in the product, it is what get the product to you. Farming, ranching, mining, your lights, the machines to get the water to you....everything. To me it is equally deficient as the argument of science and the world is still flat.
Let review what could have been done as a simple plan to avoid the BS that took place over the Oil and Gas Permit. First of all, less than one percent of water is EVER damaged durning drilling. Fracking has been done IN THIS COUNTY STARTING IN 1947.. so now its news? Now it's causing issues? Now there is gas in water wells? Really? Gas in water is can also be a natural occurring event as it was in Indian Valley where the pot holes could be lit by the Native Americans. Or, is it more like the chance to create fear, and push for control on something that most do not understand yet use? Rich people don't want to be around local working stiffs. Is it a fire that is being fed by the demand of the few to control the many? How hard would it have been to take a base line read of all the wells in question, and do so while drilling, and after drilling? It would have save allot of BS and cost to everyone. Use outside lab with out attachment to the outcome. Chances are the wells in question will be high in nitrates because of livestock and sepetic tanks. In other words... S*** in the water. Not oil, not gas.
ENERGY is the tax base of this county and North Western Colorado. In my attempts to find the percentage I see that it APPEARS everything is under what will benefit the mountain. No break out for energy. This is NOT true. Tourist will NEVER be able to support what energy can. When that is your only businss base these things take place. Higher and higher taxes, more sub-division of large pieces of land, high price places to live, and low paying seasonal jobs. The mountain doens't play nice with this ether. They have NEVER dropped the price of a lift ticket so more people can afford to ski (they have pushed the locals out of that market). They could drop the lift tickets once a week to 35.00, and then watch how things fill up. BUT THAT WONT HAPPEN. Why, because it would be ordinary working class people skiing, in their Carharts. Cant have that, that goes against the facade of what those in power want to present. In the end its total BS. Steamboat has become more and more of the land of the Rich and Removed. Energy development will make a level paying field for everyone. It always has, it has always been here....nothing new, just more of it, and long over due.
Michelle, how many lawsuits are settled with non-disclosure agreements so that the risks of poor operators are hidden. We need oil and yet those who drill need to ensure that ALL costs of operations are included in its production.
Your lift ticket price comparison is similar to gasoline. In the eighties a lift ticket cost a third of what it does today. Gas also cost a third of what it does today back then.
John, I think dealing with the what if's, and maybe's is a waste of time. Just as is the questions of I wonder.... I wonder how much S*** people are hiding in non-disclosure agreements. If thats the case, they must be OK with it. In truth less than one percent of any fracking ever damages water. That is after allot of looking and learning. Here is another clue. Fracking has been around as of 1947, thats allot of wells, and NOW its a problem? Another point, the depts of gas and oil are far below what is used as drinking water. Not only that but gas in water can be a natural event as it was in the "Pot Holes" in Indian Valley. The Native American could light the water, just as they used the "rocks that burned." (Coal and Oil Shale.) All technology has room to improve, and can be. That's how man got to the moon. Same for fracking. Not only that, people who live here and work here don't want to see damage to the land or the water. That is something that is not even talked about. I am sick of the loud voices being heard, while those with manors, wanting to live and work here are being ignored. The LANDOWNERS, have every right to have oil and gas on their land with out the BS that is being put in place.
People with good manors don't say "S***" in an opinion.Allot is not a properly spelled word and Phippsburg is how the town's name is spelled.Everyone has a right to a clean valley and that includes ALL of the people.
Posting comments requires a free account
Contents of this site are © Copyright 2016 Steamboat Pilot & Today. All rights reserved.
Tablet version |