It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

ND burns off natural gas due to lack of pipelines

page: 1
2

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 05:00 PM
link   

ND burns off natural gas due to lack of pipelines


hosted.ap.org

BISMARCK, N.D. (AP) -- Enough natural gas to heat every home in North Dakota through at least two brutal winters was burned off as an unmarketable byproduct in the state's oil patch in 2008, records obtained by The Associated Press show.
(visit the link for the full news article)



Related AboveTopSecret.com Discussion Threads:
Hedge Fund Bets Millions Natural Gas Price Will Rise, FT Says
US oil industry has crashed, Obama is paying Brazil to drill and sell us oil




posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 05:00 PM
link   
Listen people, there is very clear evidence that there is a grand scheme of energy resource manipulation going on as we speak. One minute we are being told there is not enough, the next we are being told there is a surplus.

The above article shows a wanton waste of what is supposed to be a non renewable resource. This now makes me ask the question of how non renewable is it if we can afford to waste it away for no reason?

Either the government does not care about the price manipulations or the fuel is acctually a renewable fuel and all of this time we have been being lied to.

The first thread listed below talks about a unamed hedge fund buying a place holder to purchase natural gas at over 3 times the value it is now. That shows an expectation of a huge increase in the cost, but yet there is such a surplus that we are wasting it. This makes no sense unless there is deliberate manipulation. My main problem is that the government doesn't care that they wasted this "fossil" fuel.

I am begining to think that it has all been a conspiracy to convince people that oil and natural gas are non renewable. I seriously wonder just how limited these two fuels really are. It is so much more profitable to make something of limited availability than it is to make it abundant.

hosted.ap.org
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 09:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by LeaderOfProgress

I am begining to think that it has all been a conspiracy to convince people that oil and natural gas are non renewable. I seriously wonder just how limited these two fuels really are. It is so much more profitable to make something of limited availability than it is to make it abundant.

hosted.ap.org
(visit the link for the full news article)


The conspiracy has not been to convince people that fossil fuels are non-renewable. That's science. It's a fact. Unless you consider millions of years a timeline any of us feel like waiting around for...

The conspiracy is being committed by the energy companies who don't want the grid to switch over to solar and wind power, because it IS abundant and always will be and therefore it's less profitable.

They are trying to squeeze every last cent out of the age of fossil fuels before we start to harness the truly inexhaustible resources we have.

Solar, wind, geothermal, and tidal power are all options that would be much more efficient, but that's not the name of the energy game unfortunately.

Not to mention the promise that fusion holds for the future.

It's like the movie Zeitgeist:Addendum states: The current system only works when resources are scarce. If we as a society chose to we could harness unlimited energy.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 10:27 PM
link   
DOes obama know about this? i mean, if W are expected to take on carbon tax, look at whiat big business and oil/gas companys are doing! whos gunna foot the bill on all that greenhouse gas after it wa burned!!! thier gunna walk away scott free. this makes me sick to my stomach. it jsut goes to show, they and governemnt, have NO deiisre to help ANY of us at all, were all on own america.
im pissed, sorry but enough heat too for people of ND for an entire year, simply waisted , up in smoke jsut like that! it sthings olike this, that make me re think about not recycling anymore. i was/still am for it, but tis all about money. the more we clean up things around us, the more in toruble legislature makes it for us, and simpky impliments recycled palstics into things like fake grass turff, new cars, huoses ect. thats its only purpose, ive self learned. their is NO save the planet agenda..its only KEEP the people cold and under our control agenda.

screw it..start using your fireplaces again.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 10:38 PM
link   
The real question is, why aren't there the pipelines that are needed to transport this energy to the consumer?

You can thank the tree-hugging green energy coalition for that. And that includes Obama.

Same goes for stifling the production of nuclear, shale oil, offshore drilling, drilling in ANWR, clean coal, and many other technologies that could make us energy independent until the pipe dreams of the greenies are made technically capable of powering much more than a small chicken farm.

But just wait - you'll be paying for these bad decisions very soon under Cap and Trade.

It has nothing to do with whether fossil fuels are renewable. That's just a diversion tactic.



posted on Aug, 20 2009 @ 11:01 PM
link   
i was in oil and gas exploration for a few years and this is nothing unusual.

gas producers routinely burn off excess gas and it's usually worthless garbage that the producer does not want to attempt to refine, or let the transport company "take."

the transport lines that criscross the nation are owned by a select few companies. those companies absolutely charge what they want (and alot of times, pay for what they want) and no one can do much about it.

these types are common in a oil and gas state like oklahoma (where i live).

a buddy of mine is a higher up in a company that produces natural gas. they developed a field (high production) and could not sell it for about 8 years because no one wanted to lay the lines...
sad but true.

cheers,
AA

[edit on 20-8-2009 by anonamousantichrist]



posted on Aug, 21 2009 @ 07:14 AM
link   
IMO if Obama really cared about making the US more energy independent and improving the economy then pipelines would be being constructed to help avoid situations like this . You couldn't get much more beneficial then increasing the supply of natural gas as well as job creation via the pipe lines construction . Another reason why a pipeline may not go ahead is that the natural gas company's would only want such a project to go ahead would be that it could deny them the ability to put the product in the market place . Put another way by not pumping the product directly to its destination the consumer cant be ripped off just like they are at the petrol pump .

[edit on 21-8-2009 by xpert11]



new topics

top topics



 
2

log in

join