Lon,

Care to elaborate on that at all? I’m not much of a fan of modern architecture, but I do like Pier 1’s design. The site plan stinks, but the building itself is pretty nifty IMHO.

Thank you, Lon. I’ve always hated the P1 building, but every time I express that I catch some considerable flak. The tractor beam is annoying, supremely wasteful, and honestly always felt a little gimmicky/cheap to me (like the spotlights car dealerships and strip clubs rent to attract attention), the site plan is stupid, and it pretty much ruined a perfectly usable piece of riverfront property.

But at least it’s ugly. So it’s got that going for it, which is nice.

Yes, the site plan stinks. The building itself, though, I find to be lovely. As lovely as contemporary architecture can get, anyway. I find nothing bad about the proportions at all. If it wasn’t stuck on a suburban office park site layout, it’d be one of my favorite buildings.

Wow, what a blatant attempt by Chesapeake to offset the possible negative headlines coming from the task force meetings with a “positive” headline.

I wish I didn’t have work commitments tonight so I could attend the task force meeting. I hope the task force crowd is double the crowd that turns out for CHK’s ceremony.

Luke,

I tend to stay out of the gas drilling stuff, but I do have to say that I cannot accept that things are as rosy and feel-good and worry-free as the industry and several supporters who comment here say they are. Just as I’m not sure it’s as bad as the anti-drilling side always makes it out to be, I am not sure of the opposite. I tend to take a more middle-ground stance on the issue these days.

I think saying that people who are opposed to all the urban gas drilling going on are just jealous because they didn’t get rich off it is very unfair, though. There are many serious, legitimate safety issues that nobody in the industry wants to face, that have a real impact on our neighborhoods. I do not think that vigilance is unwarranted, frankly.

You’re right, Luke. The Barnett Shale has been such a blessing for so many of us! Like Mike Dean, who was nearly asphyxiated by carbon monoxide coming from a well near his house, or for Jerry Horton and Rebecca Brooks, both facing being essentially forced off of THEIR property by pipeline companies, or any of the other 26 people who stood up last night to voice their concerns to the Gas Drilling Task Force.

What a blessing! I’m so glad it’s happening here instead of somewhere else.

“There seems to be a real sense of jealousy by outsiders (particularly those who do not own minerals) with respect to the wealth created by the Barnett Shale. I encourage you all to check your ulterior motives at the door before slinging mud. Remember that to slander your elected officials is tantamount to degrading your friends and fellow citizens whose votes put those leaders in office.”

Is “jealousy by the have-nots” the latest talking point out of Chesapeake’s PR firm? How much are they paying you to astroturf for them? It’s amazing how many people come on here and tell us that we’re “just jealous.” (Which, BTW, it’s ENVY, not jealousy. You’re ENVIOUS of something someone else has, and jealous of something you have.) That logic doesn’t pass the sniff test, though, because supposedly drilling the shale benefits everyone (”Together We All Win!), so you’d think the “have-nots” would be clamoring for more drilling and fewer restrictions. Also, how the hell would you (or anyone else who claims that we’re “have-nots”) know whether any of us own our mineral rights or not and whether it would influence our words and actions?

None of the authors of this blog have ulterior motives. Our motives are out in the open and I think very clear. We think that urban gas drilling is doing and will continue to do more harm than good in Fort Worth over the long term, and we want it to stop.

If saying Carter Burdette is a bad councilman because he’s carried water for the gas companies is degrading my fellow citizens for voting him in to office, then I guess I’m guilty of degrading my fellow citizens. I think they made a bad choice, and I hope they think long and hard about their support for him the next time he’s up for election.

What information do you have access to that’s different from the rest of us, Luke? Care to share? Show us that it’s safe and that the drillers and pipeline companies really have put money, time, and effort into making exploitation of the Barnett Shale as safe as it possibly can be. Sadly, I suspect (unless you really ARE a paid shill) that you have no more information than the rest of us. You’ve just bought the propaganda or you live in the sort of neighborhood that won’t really be affected by drilling operations.

Lastly, none of us have read the Weekly since the smear job they did on Starr-Tincup a couple of months ago. Just because you’re seeing the same opinions over here doesn’t mean we didn’t come to them on our own.

One other thing…

Who exactly is getting wealthy from the Barnett Shale?

Steve-O, you signed a gas lease — where’s your gold-plated Bentley? Why do I have to buy you beers sometimes? Shouldn’t you be footing the bill now that you’re wealthy thanks to the Barnett Shale?

I’m bothered that Chesapeake and their cohorts think we’re all stupid enough to think that the mere fact that the Shale is being exploited will somehow make everyone wealthy. No, I’m bothered that some of us really ARE that stupid, if some of the gas company apologists are for real and not just paid shills.

Please don’t feed me any of that crap about all the jobs and ancillary services, etc. etc. The SECOND the Shale dries up, those jobs are OUTTA here. Gone. Poof! Wiped off our economy like that school in New London was wiped off the face of the Earth.

Actually, it’ll be sooner than that, since by my understanding the only part of the life-cycle of a well that requires a lot of workers is the initial drilling phase. After they’re drilled and frac’ed, it’s just a matter of maintenance (which doesn’t take many people) and the occasional re-fracturing, for which people can be sent in from anywhere temporarily.

Is that the kind of job boom we want in Fort Worth? Are we all really that greedy and shortsighted?

Chris -

“…anyone who doesn’t regularly rip on Chesapeake or thinks there might be some good effects from paid drilling are paid shills?” — No, but if you’re the 6th or 7th person that I’ve heard the EXACT SAME phraseology from (calling people jealous “have-nots,” etc.), then I have to wonder what your motivations are. Maybe they’re not a paid shill, but they certainly don’t seem to me to have put much independent thought into the topic.

I can’t argue that the guys working the rigs aren’t providing a benefit to the city by spending their paychecks here. It’s also obvious that the increased spending is only going to encourage job growth IN THE SHORT TERM.

I’m not saying that the jobs “…may one day go away,” I’m saying that they WILL go away, and that day will be a lot sooner than you think. If the drillers had their way, you can bet that all the proposed wells would be drilled and the pipelines run in less than 5 years. Granted, 5 years would rightly qualify as a “boom,” but booms are ALWAYS followed by BUSTS. I’m done asking the rhetorical question, so I’ll just answer it:

NO, these are NOT the kind of jobs we want created for our economy. We should be attracting clean energy jobs or high-tech jobs or encouraging local small businesses instead of giving away the store to companies who have flatly stated that they’re only here for the “Barnett Shale play,” at which point they’re pulling up stakes and leaving for the next spot. We’re clinging to the oil and gas industry no matter the cost to our environment, our economy, our health, and the health of our city, and we think it’s wrong.

Lastly, asking if Luke is a paid shill is not an ad hominem attack. CALLING him a paid shill would be.

Chris, we want oversight, regulation, and accountability of the companies that stand to reap massive financial gains at the expense of our quality of life. That’s it. What’s in place now is so heavily skewed to favor the private companies that it’s unacceptable. It provides no realistic protection to the private citizens who have to live with what’s left over when these companies move on to the next bubble of dino farts.

I don’t think that’s too much to ask, do you?

You mean articles from the paper that runs full-page ads from Chesapeake every day? I don’t think we can assume their coverage of the Barnett Shale is completely objective.

There are a couple of reporters on the S-T that have done a good job of reporting both good and bad aspects of the “Boom,” but by and large the paper as a whole has a very pro-drilling lean. As one would expect from a paper that was making a large amount of money leasing minerals under its own land.

Ben,

I never said there wouldn’t be ANY economic benefit from activity related to the Barnett Shale. To imply otherwise is just plain inaccurate.

What I said is that our economy may be benefiting NOW, but in the near future (5-10 years) that benefit will dry up and we’ll be left worse off in more ways than just economically. (Remember, the excitement we’ve been hearing about from the S-T is about all of the blue collar rig workers coming to town who disproportionately spend their money out “on the town” vs. the higher-paid white collar workers.)

The frenzy around the Shale is like a land grab where the early and big players win HUGE, the medium-sized guys get rich, and the poor stay poor. Except in this version of the story, the winners don’t stick around to enjoy the benefits of their labors; they leave town with their profits and leave a wake of pollution and environmental catastrophes in their wake.

Here’s why: modern corporations don’t earn their profits entirely by selling products for more than they cost to make — part of the profit calculation is to what degree they can externalize the negative impacts of the production and disposal of their products. Rare is the corporation that won’t buy the cheaper raw material for their widget, even if that cheaper raw material causes horrific environmental damage on both ends of the production/use cycle.

Chesapeake and their cohorts don’t have to worry one whit about the long-term effects their actions have on our environment, nor whether the injection wells they’re proposing will cause any harm at all, because by the time those chemicals seep back into our water supply, they’ll be long gone and they’ll leave the cleanup bill squarely on the backs of the taxpayers. They don’t have to care about the potential for catastrophic accidents around their wells and pipelines because they expect the people around those areas to carry insurance, which might cover their financial losses, but could never make up for any loss of life or injuries. If public infrastructure gets damaged in an “accident,” again, it’s the taxpayers of Fort Worth who are stuck cleaning up the mess.

You think I’m an anti-corporation socialist who is just railing against the evil faceless corporation? Take a look at the judgment in the case against Ford for the faulty gas tank in the Crown Victoria. During the discovery phase, it came out that Ford’s attorneys and accountants had done the math and figured out that paying x number of settlements of y dollars each for KILLING PEOPLE (mostly police officers — yay America!) was cheaper than the less than $1 it would cost to actually FIX the crappy design of their product. Killing police officers in the line of duty through faulty design was all in a day’s work for Ford, who as a CORPORATION, was unwilling to do the right thing because it “didn’t make financial sense.”

Clearly I think that Chesapeake and the others are no better than Ford, not because I think they’re especially evil, but because the point of a corporation is not to look out for anyone’s best interests but their shareholders in the form of profitability and increased market value. There’s not much room in that reason for existence for things like looking out for the little guy, is there?

I’m glad you trust that corporations have our best interests at heart, Ben, because history and the legal record demonstrate that they most certainly do not.

Dan, I doubt that Chesapeake is the saving grace of our economy that you make it out to be. Where will those 80,000 jobs you reference be in 5 years? Most likely not here, that’s for sure.

Again, I’ll ask you to keep your personal attacks to yourself and out of this forum. You’re welcome to discuss the issues, and we don’t mind sarcasm, but referring to people as “somebody’s bitch” will get you banned.

WRT your patriots line — there’s room in the definition of patriot for all of the examples you gave AND people like Don, who give of themselves to protect what they love. The fact that they disagree with you does not make them less of a patriot.

Dan,

I’ve given you license to give your opinion and present your ideas, just as we have Don and Sharon. The difference is that they don’t refer to other people participating in this discussion as “stupid,” despite no doubt holding that opinion. You’re free to spout whatever verbiage you want, just address people’s arguments, don’t attack the person making the statement.

Who cares if Chesapeake is the only player in the Shale? Chesapeake just happens to be the most egregious offender when it comes to PR mis-steps and outright hubris, so they get the bulk of our coverage. My point, which you clearly got, is that no matter who employs them, these “80,000 jobs” that you speak of will not be in Fort Worth for the long term, effectively making it as if they weren’t here at all.

I don’t and Don and Sharon don’t have to defend their actions, nor do they have to list their resumes for you. How many jobs have you created, Dan? How much money and time have you given to local charities?

If those are the only things needed in your eyes to make a company a “good corporate citizen,” then you’re pretty easily won over.

I’ve read your post about movements a few times, and I can’t figure out to whom you’re referring. Care to clarify?

Ben,

Let’s be specific when we talk about jobs related to the Barnett Shale. I have no doubt that SOME jobs will still be here once the drilling is done; perhaps a thousand or so, maybe more. I’m not privy to the drilling companies’ plans, so I have no way of knowing.

My estimates come from the reports I’ve read about the number of jobs created during the “boom” period and the number of people needed during the initial drilling and frac’ing process.

However, to throw around numbers like “80,000 jobs thanks to the Barnett Shale!” as we’ve seen in various media outlets is a perfect example of what I hate about modern journalism — it’s factually accurate, but lacks context.

Yes, it’s true: the Barnett Shale will create around 80,000 jobs at some point in the process. No one denies that. What I want to know is how many of those jobs are going to still be here in 5 or 10 years?

If we create a job here for only a year or two, isn’t that almost like the job had never existed in the first place? It certainly doesn’t do much of anything to improve the economic situation of Fort Worth in the long run. That’s the context that’s missing in all of the reports about the “Barnett Shale Job Boom.”

As Dan said, it’s clear that this issue brings out people’s passionate sides. It’s easy to get riled up about things when they’re happening in your own back (or front) yard and to lose sight of the fact that no matter which side of the debate we’re on, the thing that ties us together is our desire for the best living environment for ourselves and our kids, etc.

We may disagree on exactly what that is or how to get there, but at least we can agree on that.

Thank you for your apology, Dan. I know from too many experiences of my own just how hard it is to do that, particularly in an environment like this one where no one really knows you, and it wouldn’t really matter if you apologized or not. It takes a strong person to apologize and make things right even when they don’t have to. They taught us in the Marines that integrity was doing the right thing, even when no one is looking, and I think you’ve demonstrated that you’re a person of integrity with this comment.