According to the Recorder's office, Chesapeake's primary term (5 years) recently expired on about 500 acres in the NE corner of Trumbull and they "extended the option to renew" the lease for an additional 5 years. 

Views: 3853

Replies to This Discussion

Embargoes, tariffs, and treaties tend to be reactionary and simultaneously cause equal and opposite reactions from those to whom they are placed.  Smoot-Hawley comes to mind.  That was essentially the catalyst for the Great Depression.  OPEC has far too much power.  But then again it isn't up to the US--or anyone else--to tell OPEC how to use their own natural resources.  After all, Saudi Arabia may be a bunch of thugs and lunatics, but they are their own sovereign nation and any interference would just lead to more instability.  Our best chance is the one that we've always used to get through tough times: innovation by American entrepreneurs.  

With you on part of what you write Dexter - especially the part about keeping our nose out of OPEC business - and that would include not spending our military resources protecting their 'market share' / their energy supply to the world. In other words expand that philosophy.

Yeah, that's my favorite part.
How much was the original lease for per acre and royalty. If it was on the cheap then I would say they didn't have much to lose to tie it down for another 5 years and see what happens. If it was for quite a bit of money and % the first time then I would wonder what they know.

I hope they find the tech. To make the north viable. I believe the oil is there and they will figure out how to get the pressure up. The biggest hurdle is the oil price. As soon as it goes back up things will get better. Hang on guys. Most of us are pulling for u

There is definitely more to the local oil and gas story, and skepticism is the only defense. As for cynicism, read this article about Houston-based Halliburton(NYSE: HAL) and Houston-based Schlumberger Ltd. (NYSE: SLB).

Yea. Go American Energy Independence. Let's help Iran to compete directly with our development, and to get the money to, ----- to what?  We wouldn't help Iran to get the money to buy arms and shoot at our soldiers? We couldn't possibly do that to the brave people who protect us around the world each and every day. We wouldn't help Iran to get the money to further develop Nukes, they gave us their word they wouldn't, that should be good enough. Go lend a hand Texas based HAL&SLB. You know that money won't do America any harm.
You've got to look for the good in things to make it all worthwhile, but to not balance that with a skeptical eye is dangerous. I'm with you Joseph.

I think I'm reading your drift correctly and it appears to me we share common ground.

Good to know I'm not the only one with questions / viewing it all with serious skepticism.

Thanks for your reply Sage59.

Ya sage. They said they wouldn't build one. We will be allowed inspections with a 14 day notice...I think. Couldn't hide anything in that time. Even if they lied and build one anyway it is easy to deal with a country that has a bomb. They must be playing around when they recently chanted death to america and isreal. I remember when they said if they ever had a nuke they would wipe the Jews off the map. They don't acknowledge their right to live. That's all b.s. it's a weird show of love.


© 2021   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service