DOCSLIB.ORG

The Exxonmobil-Xto Merger: Impact on U.S

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Exxonmobil-Xto Merger: Impact on U.S THE EXXONMOBIL-XTO MERGER: IMPACT ON U.S. ENERGY MARKETS HEARING BEFORE THE SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT OF THE COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS SECOND SESSION JANUARY 20, 2010 Serial No. 111–91 ( Printed for the use of the Committee on Energy and Commerce energycommerce.house.gov U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 76–003 WASHINGTON : 2012 For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800 Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001 VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:51 Nov 06, 2012 Jkt 076003 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 5011 Sfmt 5011 E:\HR\OC\A003.XXX A003 pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE HENRY A. WAXMAN, California, Chairman JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan JOE BARTON, Texas Chairman Emeritus Ranking Member EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts RALPH M. HALL, Texas RICK BOUCHER, Virginia FRED UPTON, Michigan FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey CLIFF STEARNS, Florida BART GORDON, Tennessee NATHAN DEAL, Georgia BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky ANNA G. ESHOO, California JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois BART STUPAK, Michigan JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona ELIOT L. ENGEL, New York ROY BLUNT, Missouri GENE GREEN, Texas STEVE BUYER, Indiana DIANA DEGETTE, Colorado GEORGE RADANOVICH, California Vice Chairman JOSEPH R. PITTS, Pennsylvania LOIS CAPPS, California MARY BONO MACK, California MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania GREG WALDEN, Oregon JANE HARMAN, California LEE TERRY, Nebraska TOM ALLEN, Maine MIKE ROGERS, Michigan JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois SUE WILKINS MYRICK, North Carolina CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma JAY INSLEE, Washington TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas MIKE ROSS, Arkansas MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York PHIL GINGREY, Georgia JIM MATHESON, Utah STEVE SCALISE, Louisiana G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana JOHN BARROW, Georgia BARON P. HILL, Indiana DORIS O. MATSUI, California DONNA M. CHRISTENSEN, Virgin Islands KATHY CASTOR, Florida JOHN P. SARBANES, Maryland CHRISTOPHER S. MURPHY, Connecticut ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio JERRY MCNERNEY, California BETTY SUTTON, Ohio BRUCE L. BRALEY, Iowa PETER WELCH, Vermont (II) VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:51 Nov 06, 2012 Jkt 076003 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\A003.XXX A003 pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT EDWARD J. MARKEY, Massachusetts, Chairman MICHAEL F. DOYLE, Pennsylvania RALPH M. HALL, Texas JAY INSLEE, Washington FRED UPTON, Michigan G.K. BUTTERFIELD, North Carolina ED WHITFIELD, Kentucky CHARLIE MELANCON, Louisiana JOHN SHIMKUS, Illinois BARON P. HILL, Indiana JOHN B. SHADEGG, Arizona DORIS O. MATSUI, California STEVE BUYER, Indiana JERRY MCNERNEY, California GREG WALDEN, Oregon PETER WELCH, Vermont SUE WILKINS MYRICK, North Carolina JOHN D. DINGELL, Michigan JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma RICK BOUCHER, Virginia MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas FRANK PALLONE, JR., New Jersey ELIOT ENGEL, New York GENE GREEN, Texas LOIS CAPPS, California JANE HARMAN, California CHARLES A. GONZALEZ, Texas TAMMY BALDWIN, Wisconsin MIKE ROSS, Arkansas JIM MATHESON, Utah JOHN BARROW, Georgia (III) VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:51 Nov 06, 2012 Jkt 076003 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\A003.XXX A003 pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:51 Nov 06, 2012 Jkt 076003 PO 00000 Frm 00004 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\A003.XXX A003 pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING C O N T E N T S Page Hon. Edward J. Markey, a Representative in Congress from the Common- wealth of Massachussetts, opening statement ................................................... 1 Hon. Fred Upton, a Representative in Congress from the State of Michigan, opening statement ................................................................................................ 3 Hon. Jay Inslee, a Representative in Congress from the State of Washington, opening statement ................................................................................................ 4 Hon. Joseph R. Pitts, a Representative in Congress from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, opening statement ................................................................... 5 Hon. Michael F. Doyle, a Representative in Congress from the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, opening statement ................................................................... 5 Hon. Joe Barton, a Representative in Congress from the State of Texas, opening statement ................................................................................................ 6 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 8 Hon. Lois Capps, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, opening statement ................................................................................................ 11 Hon. Michael C. Burgess, a Representative in Congress from the State of Texas, opening statement .................................................................................... 11 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 13 Hon. John Shimkus, a Representative in Congress from the State of Illinois, opening statement ................................................................................................ 16 Hon. Gene Green, a Representative in Congress from the State of Texas, opening statement ................................................................................................ 17 Hon. Greg Walden, a Representative in Congress from the State of Oregon, opening statement ................................................................................................ 18 Hon. G.K. Butterfield, a Representative in Congress from the State of North Carolina, opening statement ............................................................................... 18 Hon. John Sullivan, a Representative in Congress from the State of Okla- homa, opening statement .................................................................................... 19 Hon. Cliff Stearns, a Representative in Congress from the State of Florida, opening statement ................................................................................................ 20 Hon. Doris O. Matsui, a Representative in Congress from the State of Cali- fornia, opening statement .................................................................................... 21 Hon. Steve Scalise, a Representative in Congress from the State of Louisiana, opening statement ................................................................................................ 22 Hon. John B. Shadegg, a Representative in Congress from the State of Ari- zona, opening statement ...................................................................................... 23 Hon. Diana DeGette, a Representative in Congress from the State of Colo- rado, opening statement ...................................................................................... 24 WITNESSES Rex Tillerson, Chairman and CEO, ExxonMobil Corporation ............................. 25 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 27 Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 71 Bob R. Simpson, Chairman of the Board and Founder, XTO Energy, Inc ......... 31 Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 33 Answers to submitted questions ...................................................................... 78 SUBMITTED MATERIAL EPA report, June, 2004 ........................................................................................... 64 Letter of December 15, 2009, from Members of Congress to the EPA ................ 66 (V) VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:51 Nov 06, 2012 Jkt 076003 PO 00000 Frm 00005 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\A003.XXX A003 pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING VerDate Mar 15 2010 00:51 Nov 06, 2012 Jkt 076003 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 5904 Sfmt 5904 E:\HR\OC\A003.XXX A003 pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with HEARING THE EXXONMOBIL-XTO MERGER: IMPACT ON U.S. ENERGY MARKETS WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 20, 2010 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT, COMMITTEE ON ENERGY AND COMMERCE, Washington, DC. The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:35 a.m., in Room 2123, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Edward J. Markey [chairman of the subcommittee] presiding. Present: Representatives Markey, Doyle, Inslee, Butterfield, Mat- sui, McNerney, Welch, Green, Capps, Gonzalez, Matheson, Barrow, Upton, Hall, Stearns, Shimkus, Shadegg, Pitts, Walden, Sullivan, Burgess, Scalise, and Barton (ex officio). Also Present: Representative DeGette. Staff Present: Bruce Wolpe, Senior Advisor; John Jimison, Senior Counsel; Joel Beauvais, Counsel; Jackie Cohen, Counsel; Michael Goo, Counsel; Melissa Cheatham, Professional Staff Member; Caitlin Haberman, Special Assistant; David Kohn, Press Secretary; Lindsay Vidal, Special Assistant; Mitchell Smiley, Special Assist- ant; Matt Eisenberg, Staff Assistant; Andrew Spring, Minority Pro- fessional Staff; Aaron Cutler, Minority Counsel; Mary Neumayr, Minority Counsel; and Garrett Golding, Minority Legislative Ana- lyst. OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. EDWARD J. MARKEY, A REP-
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: a Primer
    U.S. Department of Energy • Office of Fossil Energy National Energy Technology Laboratory April 2009 DISCLAIMER This report was prepared as an account of work sponsored by an agency of the United States Government. Neither the United States Government nor any agency thereof, nor any of their employees, makes any warranty, expressed or implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility for the accuracy, completeness, or usefulness of any information, apparatus, product, or process disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe upon privately owned rights. Reference herein to any specific commercial product, process, or service by trade name, trademark, manufacturer, or otherwise does not necessarily constitute or imply its endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States Government or any agency thereof. The views and opinions of authors expressed herein do not necessarily state or reflect those of the United States Government or any agency thereof. Modern Shale Gas Development in the United States: A Primer Work Performed Under DE-FG26-04NT15455 Prepared for U.S. Department of Energy Office of Fossil Energy and National Energy Technology Laboratory Prepared by Ground Water Protection Council Oklahoma City, OK 73142 405-516-4972 www.gwpc.org and ALL Consulting Tulsa, OK 74119 918-382-7581 www.all-llc.com April 2009 MODERN SHALE GAS DEVELOPMENT IN THE UNITED STATES: A PRIMER ACKNOWLEDGMENTS This material is based upon work supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Fossil Energy, National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) under Award Number DE‐FG26‐ 04NT15455. Mr. Robert Vagnetti and Ms. Sandra McSurdy, NETL Project Managers, provided oversight and technical guidance.
    [Show full text]
  • Unconventional Gas and Hydraulic Fracturing Issue Briefing
    Unconventional gas and hydraulic fracturing Issue briefing bp.com/sustainability Unconventional gas and hydraulic fracturing Issue briefing 2 How we operate At BP, we recognize that we need to produce energy responsibly – minimizing impacts to people, communities and the environment. We operate in around 80 countries, and our systems of governance, management and operation are designed to help us conduct our business while respecting safety, environmental, social and financial considerations. Across all BP operations, established practices support the management of potential environmental and social impacts from the pre-appraisal stage through to the operational stage and beyond – reflecting BP’s values, responsibilities and local regulatory requirements. BP’s operating management system integrates BP requirements on health, safety, security, social, environment and operational reliability, as well as maintenance, contractor relations, compliance and organizational learning into a common system. BP participates in a number of joint venture operations, such as in Algeria and Indonesia, to extract unconventional gas. Some of these are under our direct operational control, while others not. When participating in a joint venture not under BP control, we encourage the operator of the joint venture, through dialogue and constructive engagement, to adopt our practices. For more information bp.com/aboutbp bp.com/oms Cover image BP’s gas well drilling site in, Wamsutter, Wyoming, US. The BP Annual Report and Form 20-F may be downloaded from bp.com/annualreport. No material in this document forms any part of those documents. No part of this document constitutes, or shall be taken to constitute, an invitation or inducement to invest in BP p.l.c.
    [Show full text]
  • Oil Shale and Tar Sands
    Fundamentals of Materials for Energy and Environmental Sustainability Editors David S. Ginley and David Cahen Oil shale and tar sands James W. Bunger 11 JWBA, Inc., Energy Technology and Engineering, Salt Lake City, UT, USA 11.1 Focus 11.2 Synopsis Tar sands and oil shale are “uncon- Oil shale and tar sands occur in dozens of countries around the world. With in-place ventional” oil resources. Unconven- resources totaling at least 4 trillion barrels (bbl), they exceed the world's remaining tional oil resources are characterized petroleum reserves, which are probably less than 2 trillion bbl. As petroleum becomes by their solid, or near-solid, state harder to produce, oil shale and tar sands are finding economic and thermodynamic under reservoir conditions, which parity with petroleum. Thermodynamic parity, e.g., similarity in the energy cost requires new, and sometimes of producing energy, is a key indicator of economic competitiveness. unproven, technology for their Oil is being produced on a large commercial scale by Canada from tar sands, recovery. For tar sands the hydrocar- and to a lesser extent by Venezuela. The USA now imports well over 2 million barrels bon is a highly viscous bitumen; for of oil per day from Canada, the majority of which is produced from tar sands. oil shale, it is a solid hydrocarbon Production of oil from oil shale is occurring in Estonia, China, and Brazil albeit on called “kerogen.” Unconventional smaller scales. Importantly, the USA is the largest holder of oil-shale resources. oil resources are found in greater For that reason alone, and because of the growing need for imports in the USA, quantities than conventional petrol- oil shale will receive greater development attention as petroleum supplies dwindle.
    [Show full text]
  • Unconventional Gas and Oil in North America Page 1 of 24
    Unconventional gas and oil in North America This publication aims to provide insight into the impacts of the North American 'shale revolution' on US energy markets and global energy flows. The main economic, environmental and climate impacts are highlighted. Although the North American experience can serve as a model for shale gas and tight oil development elsewhere, the document does not explicitly address the potential of other regions. Manuscript completed in June 2014. Disclaimer and copyright This publication does not necessarily represent the views of the author or the European Parliament. Reproduction and translation of this document for non-commercial purposes are authorised, provided the source is acknowledged and the publisher is given prior notice and sent a copy. © European Union, 2014. Photo credits: © Trueffelpix / Fotolia (cover page), © bilderzwerg / Fotolia (figure 2) [email protected] http://www.eprs.ep.parl.union.eu (intranet) http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank (internet) http://epthinktank.eu (blog) Unconventional gas and oil in North America Page 1 of 24 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The 'shale revolution' Over the past decade, the United States and Canada have experienced spectacular growth in the production of unconventional fossil fuels, notably shale gas and tight oil, thanks to technological innovations such as horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (fracking). Economic impacts This new supply of energy has led to falling gas prices and a reduction of energy imports. Low gas prices have benefitted households and industry, especially steel production, fertilisers, plastics and basic petrochemicals. The production of tight oil is costly, so that a high oil price is required to make it economically viable.
    [Show full text]
  • Hydraulic Fracturing in the Barnett Shale
    Hydraulic Fracturing in the Barnett Shale Samantha Fuchs GIS in Water Resources Dr. David Maidment University of Texas at Austin Fall 2015 Table of Contents I. Introduction ......................................................................................................................3 II. Barnett Shale i. Geologic and Geographic Information ..............................................................6 ii. Shale Gas Production.........................................................................................7 III. Water Resources i. Major Texas Aquifers ......................................................................................11 ii. Groundwater Wells ..........................................................................................13 IV. Population and Land Cover .........................................................................................14 V. Conclusion ....................................................................................................................16 VI. References....................................................................................................................17 2 I. Introduction Hydraulic Fracturing, or fracking, is a process by which natural gas is extracted from shale rock. It is a well-stimulation technique where fluid is injected into deep rock formations to fracture it. The fracking fluid contains a mixture of chemical components with different purposes. Proppants like sand are used in the fluid to hold fractures in the rock open once the hydraulic
    [Show full text]
  • Assessing Undiscovered Resources of the Barnett-Paleozoic Total Petroleum System, Bend Arch–Fort Worth Basin Province, Texas* by Richard M
    Assessing Undiscovered Resources of the Barnett-Paleozoic Total Petroleum System, Bend Arch–Fort Worth Basin Province, Texas* By Richard M. Pollastro1, Ronald J. Hill1, Daniel M. Jarvie2, and Mitchell E. Henry1 Search and Discovery Article #10034 (2003) *Online adaptation of presentation at AAPG Southwest Section Meeting, Fort Worth, TX, March, 2003 (www.southwestsection.org) 1U.S. Geological Survey, Denver, CO 2Humble Geochemical Services, Humble, TX ABSTRACT Organic-rich Barnett Shale (Mississippian-Pennsylvanian) is the primary source rock for oil and gas that is produced from Paleozoic reservoir rocks in the Bend Arch–Fort Worth Basin Province. Areal distribution and geochemical typing of hydrocarbons in this mature petroleum province indicates generation and expulsion from the Barnett at a depocenter coincident with a paleoaxis of the Fort Worth Basin. Barnett-sourced hydrocarbons migrated westward into reservoir rocks of the Bend Arch and Eastern shelf; however, some oil and gas was possibly sourced by a composite Woodford-Barnett total petroleum system of the Midland Basin from the west. Current U.S. Geological assessments of undiscovered oil and gas are performed using the total petroleum system (TPS) concept. The TPS is composed of mature source rock, known accumulations, and area(s) of undiscovered hydrocarbon potential. The TPS is subdivided into assessment units based on similar geologic characteristics, accumulation type (conventional or continuous), and hydrocarbon type (oil and (or) gas). Assessment of the Barnett-Paleozoic TPS focuses on the continuous (unconventional) Barnett accumulation where gas and some oil are produced from organic-rich siliceous shale in the northeast portion of the Fort Worth Basin. Assessment units are also identified for mature conventional plays in Paleozoic carbonate and clastic reservoir rocks, such as the Chappel Limestone pinnacle reefs and Bend Group conglomerate, respectively.
    [Show full text]
  • Exhibit 2.1 EXCHANGE AGREEMENT by and Among DENBURY
    Exhibit 2.1 EXCHANGE AGREEMENT by and among DENBURY ONSHORE, LLC, XTO ENERGY INC., and EXXON MOBIL CORPORATION dated as of September 19, 2012 TABLE OF CONTENTS ARTICLE I DEFINITIONS Section 1.1 Definitions 1 ARTICLE II EXCHANGE OF ASSETS Section 2.1 Agreement to Exchange Assets 1 Section 2.2 The Assets 1 Section 2.3 Excluded Assets 1 Section 2.4 Transfer as of the Effective Time 2 ARTICLE III CONSIDERATION Section 3.1 Exchange Consideration 2 Section 3.2 Payment of the Additional Consideration 4 Section 3.3 Pre-Closing Settlement Statement 4 Section 3.4 Exchange Consideration Allocation 4 ARTICLE IV TITLE AND ENVIRONMENTAL MATTERS AND CASUALTY LOSSES Section 4.1 Title Examination 5 Section 4.2 Defensible Title 5 Section 4.3 Permitted Encumbrances 6 Section 4.4 Notice of Title Defects 7 Section 4.5 Remedy for Title Defect 7 Section 4.6 Value of a Title Defect 8 Section 4.7 Title Benefits 9 Section 4.8 Title Defect and Title Benefit Deductibles 10 Section 4.9 Title Dispute Resolution 10 Section 4.10 Environmental Assessment 11 Section 4.11 Environmental Defect Notice 11 Section 4.12 Remedies for Environmental Defects 11 Section 4.13 Casualty Losses; Condemnation 13 Section 4.14 Condition of the Assets 13 Section 4.15 Contiguous Interests 14 Section 4.16 Assignment; Special Warranty of Title 14 i ARTICLE V REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF TRANSFERRING PARTY Section 5.1 Existence and Power 15 Section 5.2 Brokers 15 Section 5.3 Claims and Litigation 15 Section 5.4 Royalties 15 Section 5.5 Compliance 15 Section 5.6 Material Contracts 16 Section
    [Show full text]
  • THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2013 Grand Hyatt Hotel San Antonio, Texas
    THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 14, 2013 Grand Hyatt Hotel San Antonio, Texas THE PRIDE OF TEXAS BUSINESS WELCOME Mark M. Johnson Chairman, Texas Business Hall of Fame Edward E. Whitacre, Jr. Master of Ceremonies RECOGNITION OF TEXAS BUSINESS HALL OF FAME MEMBERS RECOGNITION OF 2013 INDUCTEES INVOCATION Reverend Trey H. Little DINNER RECOGNITION OF 2013 SCHOLARSHIP RECIPIENTS HALL OF FAME INDUCTION CEREMONY CLOSING REMARKS Mark M. Johnson Jordan Cowman Chairman, 2014, Texas Business Hall of Fame 2013 Inductees to the Texas Business Hall of Fame Charlie Amato Joseph M. “Jody” Grant Chairman/Co-Founder Chairman Emeritus and Texas Capital Bancshares, Inc. Gary Dudley Dallas President/Co-Founder SWBC H-E-B San Antonio Represented by Craig Boyan President, COO Tom Dobson San Antonio Chairman Whataburger Rex W. Tillerson San Antonio Chairman and CEO Exxon Mobil Corporation Paul Foster Irving Executive Chairman Western Refining, Inc. El Paso Charlie Amato & Gary Dudley Chairman/Co-Founder & President/Co-Founder SWBC | San Antonio Charlie Amato and Gary Dudley, Co-founders of SWBC, have had a long friendship. Through this friendship, they established SWBC, a company with more than three decades of dedication to not just great business and customer service, but also giving back to their community. Amato and Dudley met in grade school and were reunited in their college years. Both men graduated from Sam Houston State University with Bachelors of Business Administration degrees. After graduation they went their separate ways. Dudley became a coach and worked in the Houston school district for nine months before he was drafted into the armed forces. He spent six months on active duty with the US Marines (and six years as a reservist) before returning to coaching for another year.
    [Show full text]
  • The Context of Public Acceptance of Hydraulic Fracturing: Is Louisiana
    Louisiana State University LSU Digital Commons LSU Master's Theses Graduate School 2012 The context of public acceptance of hydraulic fracturing: is Louisiana unique? Crawford White Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses Part of the Environmental Sciences Commons Recommended Citation White, Crawford, "The onc text of public acceptance of hydraulic fracturing: is Louisiana unique?" (2012). LSU Master's Theses. 3956. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_theses/3956 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at LSU Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in LSU Master's Theses by an authorized graduate school editor of LSU Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE CONTEXT OF PUBLIC ACCEPTANCE OF HYDRAULIC FRACTURING: IS LOUISIANA UNIQUE? A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate Faculty of the Louisiana State University and Agricultural and Mechanical College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in The Department of Environmental Sciences by Crawford White B.S. Georgia Southern University, 2010 August 2012 Dedication This thesis is dedicated to the memory of three of the most important people in my life, all of whom passed on during my time here. Arthur Earl White 4.05.1919 – 5.28.2011 Berniece Baker White 4.19.1920 – 4.23.2011 and Richard Edward McClary 4.29.1982 – 9.13.2010 ii Acknowledgements I would like to thank my committee first of all: Dr. Margaret Reams, my advisor, for her unending and enthusiastic support for this project; Professor Mike Wascom, for his wit and legal expertise in hunting down various laws and regulations; and Maud Walsh for the perspective and clarity she brought this project.
    [Show full text]
  • Secure Fuels from Domestic Resources ______Profiles of Companies Engaged in Domestic Oil Shale and Tar Sands Resource and Technology Development
    5th Edition Secure Fuels from Domestic Resources ______________________________________________________________________________ Profiles of Companies Engaged in Domestic Oil Shale and Tar Sands Resource and Technology Development Prepared by INTEK, Inc. For the U.S. Department of Energy • Office of Petroleum Reserves Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves Fifth Edition: September 2011 Note to Readers Regarding the Revised Edition (September 2011) This report was originally prepared for the U.S. Department of Energy in June 2007. The report and its contents have since been revised and updated to reflect changes and progress that have occurred in the domestic oil shale and tar sands industries since the first release and to include profiles of additional companies engaged in oil shale and tar sands resource and technology development. Each of the companies profiled in the original report has been extended the opportunity to update its profile to reflect progress, current activities and future plans. Acknowledgements This report was prepared by INTEK, Inc. for the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Petroleum Reserves, Naval Petroleum and Oil Shale Reserves (DOE/NPOSR) as a part of the AOC Petroleum Support Services, LLC (AOC- PSS) Contract Number DE-FE0000175 (Task 30). Mr. Khosrow Biglarbigi of INTEK, Inc. served as the Project Manager. AOC-PSS and INTEK, Inc. wish to acknowledge the efforts of representatives of the companies that provided information, drafted revised or reviewed company profiles, or addressed technical issues associated with their companies, technologies, and project efforts. Special recognition is also due to those who directly performed the work on this report. Mr. Peter M. Crawford, Director at INTEK, Inc., served as the principal author of the report.
    [Show full text]
  • Untested Waters: the Rise of Hydraulic Fracturing in Oil and Gas Production and the Need to Revisit Regulation
    Fordham Environmental Law Review Volume 20, Number 1 2009 Article 3 Untested Waters: The Rise of Hydraulic Fracturing in Oil and Gas Production and the Need to Revisit Regulation Hannah Wiseman∗ ∗University of Texas School of Law Copyright c 2009 by the authors. Fordham Environmental Law Review is produced by The Berkeley Electronic Press (bepress). http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/elr UNTESTED WATERS: THE RISE OF HYDRAULIC FRACTURING IN OIL AND GAS PRODUCTION AND THE NEED TO REVISIT REGULATION Hannah Wiseman * I. INTRODUCTION As conventional sources of oil and gas become less productive and energy prices rise, production companies are developing creative extraction methods to tap sources like oil shales and tar sands that were previously not worth drilling. Companies are also using new technologies to wring more oil or gas from existing conventional wells. This article argues that as the hunt for these resources ramps up, more extraction is occurring closer to human populations - in north Texas' Barnett Shale and the Marcellus Shale in New York and Pennsylvania. And much of this extraction is occurring through a well-established and increasingly popular method of wringing re- sources from stubborn underground formations called hydraulic frac- turing, which is alternately described as hydrofracturing or "fracing," wherein fluids are pumped at high pressure underground to force out oil or natural gas. Coastal Oil and Gas Corp. v. Garza Energy Trust,1 a recent Texas case addressing disputes over fracing in Hidalgo County, Texas, ex- emplifies the human conflicts that are likely to accompany such creative extraction efforts. One conflict is trespass: whether extend- ing fractures onto adjacent property and sending fluids and agents into the fractures to keep them open constitutes a common law tres- pass.
    [Show full text]
  • Statoil-2015-Statutory-Report.Pdf
    2015 Statutory report in accordance with Norwegian authority requirements © Statoil 2016 STATOIL ASA BOX 8500 NO-4035 STAVANGER NORWAY TELEPHONE: +47 51 99 00 00 www.statoil.com Cover photo: Øyvind Hagen Statutory report 2015 Board of directors report ................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 3 The Statoil share ............................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................ 4 Our business ..................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 4 Group profit and loss analysis .................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................... 6 Cash flows ........................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]