 |
| |
|
| |
|
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970
time: 00:35
|
|
Hmmm... That testimony has a lot wrapped up into it. On the question of running the slightly salty water down the well, the testimony indicates that the company on their property has a reinjection well and is using it. Indeed, the testimony complains of more than one company using it -- which is, of course, much more preferable than running the slightly salty water down the creek. But perhaps bringing water from another lease and reinjecting it on their lease technically violates the lease terms.
(The testimony indicates that they don't understand that a lease normally requires the surface landowner to accomodate roadbuilding and whatnot and the company doesn't have to negotiate yet another agreement with the surace landowner to build a road.)
The testimony regarding the company running the salty water down the creek indicates that the company may not have a reinjection well. But now that the water is to be considered a toxic substance by Wyoming, they could get their asses thrown in jail for doing that. I'm slightly surprised that it wasn't considered a toxic substance already, but as far as I can tell from the testimony, the wastewater in Wyoming isn't that salty.
My dad has several oil/gas wells that he uses for reinjection of brine (not this slightly salty water mentioned in the article). In Ohio, the driller is now required to have one reinjection well per lease, IIRC. He didn't like having to spend the money to test the wells for suitability for reinjection, but now that he's doing it, it works just fine.
Last edited by DanS on 18-03-2005 at 09:00
|
|
| |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:35.
Apolyton Time is 00:35. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|
18-03-2005 08:14
|
|