Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

"Al Franken Brings The 'You Didn't Build That' To Fracking Boomers"

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • "Al Franken Brings The 'You Didn't Build That' To Fracking Boomers"

    Al Franken is a fracking moron...
    WASHINGTON -- With a bevy of fellow senators and natural gas industry experts angling to jack up profits by boosting gas exports, Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.) had a reminder for them in a Senate hearing Thursday: You didn't build that gas boom -- taxpayers did.

    Natural gas prices have plummeted since 2005, as firms across the nation have aggressively deployed hydraulic fracturing technologies to extract gas from shale formations deep underground.

    That boom started with the work of George Mitchell's Mitchell Energy and Development Corp., which proved in Texas in the 1990s that fracking could work.

    [...]

    "I want everyone here to understand who developed that technology, and who's responsible for that, and it's the taxpayers of the United States," Franken said in the Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing.

    "We're hearing senators talk about discoveries of reserves of natural gas in their states as if this is just a discovery that happened out of nowhere," Franken said. "This is because of the taxpayers doing investments in research into three-dimensional microseismic imaging, done in Sandia National Labs."

    [...]

    "This whole renaissance in natural gas is due to research done by the Department of Energy paid for by the United States taxpayers," Franken said.

    [...]

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/0..._hp_ref=energy

    Total bullschist!
    The Feds and Fracking: A Chicken or Egg Question
    FEDERAL OFFICIALS LIKE TO REMIND THE PUBLIC THAT THE INVENTION OF HYDRAULIC FRACTURING OWES A GREAT DEBT TO GOVERNMENT FUNDING AND SUPPORT. HOUSTON OILMAN GEORGE P. MITCHELL WOULD HAVE DISAGREED.

    by LOREN STEFFY
    TUE OCTOBER 29, 2013

    With his own “green jobs” initiative falling short and unemployment remaining stubbornly high, perhaps it wasn’t surprising that President Barack Obama touted the benefits of cheap natural gas in his 2012 State of the Union speech. He predicted that the boom unleashed by hydraulic fracturing would add 600,000 jobs by 2020, then added this aside: “by the way, it was public research dollars, over the course of thirty years, that helped develop the technologies to extract all this natural gas out of shale rock, reminding us that government support is critical in helping businesses get new energy ideas off the ground.”

    Listening to the speech from his home in The Woodlands, Dan Steward bristled. Recounting the story more than a year later, it’s still a sore subject for the former Mitchell Energy vice president who oversaw much of the company’s pioneering effort to develop fracking. In 2011, Steward granted an interview to the Breakthrough Institute, an environmental think tank. The post that grew from his comments declared that “Mitchell Energy’s first horizontal well was subsidized by the federal government.”

    That was the conclusion of the writer...

    [...]

    In all the hoopla, Steward’s point has gotten lost. He is quick to acknowledge that fracking’s success came through the hard work of people at Mitchell Energy, building on the advances of others. Fracking technology has existed for more than a century, and the first commercial fracking job was done in 1947. His comment that “the DOE started it” refers to the Eastern Gas Shales Project, a research effort in the Appalachia Basin from 1979 that proved shale rock was rich in natural gas. The DOE-supported project tested the use of nitrogen foam to fracture shale formations, and its analysis led to a deeper understanding of natural shale fractures.

    [...]

    Yet in the past few years, the government’s share of the credit has been amplified, Steward contends.

    [...]

    Yes, the government encouraged Mitchell’s efforts, but it was Mitchell who invested the capital, shouldered most of the risk, and stuck with the effort for almost two decades when many in the industry though he was wasting time and money.

    “George probably could have done it without the government,” Steward said. “The government would not have done it without George.”

    http://www.texasmonthly.com/story/fe...r-egg-question

    George Mitchell and his team identified several unrelated government science projects, which they combined along with Union Pacific Resources slickwater fracking technique to build the shale gas boom.
    Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

  • #2
    “George probably could have done it without the government,” Steward said. “The government would not have done it without George.”
    And, that's the bottom line. Investment capital helps but it doesn't do the thinking, the work, or get results.
    The Government in giving out money "didn't build that...PERIOD!"

    Obama the Ignorant and Al Frankenstein have it backwards. The government offered a bit of venture capital, that could have come from the private sector just as easily, and some entrepreneur with a good idea, hard work, and business sense ended up with a profitable idea and business. The government did nothing. Handing someone a wad of cash with an expectation of a positive ROI is no different than opening a savings account.
    With venture capital, it is more like buying a stock on the stock market. You hope the company succeeds but you are risking failure. However, your investment in that company is the limit of your involvement. You are not making decisions about what or how they will proceed or what products or services they will offer.
    So, the government "didn't invent that." The government "didn't build it" either.

    And, if government weren't so fracking huge there'd be more private venture capital and people wouldn't be so dependent on government to supply it.
    In fact, I'd say the government is generally a drag on innovation and creativity rather than a leader.

    Comment


    • #3
      Here's an analogy...

      Government trains 1 million chimps to type random paragraphs.

      Shakespeare is 70% done with a new play. Finds remaining 30% in government chimp storage shed. Capitalizes production. Play is huge success.

      Government takes credit for Hamlet.
      Watts Up With That? | The world's most viewed site on global warming and climate change.

      Comment


      • #4
        It's more like the example I gave.

        The government hands out funding to 1000 different companies.

        250 of the are doing just enough to get the funding and make their owners rich over time. They will produce nothing. They are scamming the government.

        250 more are run by idiots with lots of letters after their names, pieces of paper on the wall, etc. Their ideas are failures, and so are their companies.

        250 more have a decent idea but can't get it to work for one reason or another, they too fail.

        245 more manage to produce something marginal but it really never makes money. The company's owners move on to better ideas.

        5 actually have a brilliantly successful idea and succeed.

        The government takes credit for the five companies that succeed ignoring the failure of the other 995.

        Comment


        • #5
          You've got it.
          Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

          Comment


          • #6
            Every time Franken opens his mouth, he makes an ass out of himself. He should be ignored.

            Sincerely,
            M

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by Massena View Post
              Every time Franken opens his mouth, he makes an ass out of himself. He should be ignored.

              Sincerely,
              M
              He was a professional ******* before he became an elected professional *******...

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                He was a professional ******* before he became an elected professional *******...
                Excellent. Unfortunately, I can't rep you for this one yet.

                Sincerely,
                M

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Massena View Post
                  Excellent. Unfortunately, I can't rep you for this one yet.

                  Sincerely,
                  M
                  He really isn't even funny. His radio talk show was pathetic back when he was on Air America.

                  He "wrote" books like this one:



                  Supposedly funny but more like shrill and petty. In that one he scathingly berates Ann Coulter. For example, he complains she uses too many end notes in her books then includes a couple of pages in his book.
                  And, who writes a book with a "chapter" that isn't even a page long or uses Lexus Nexus as their almost sole source on things?

                  It showed me he was a typical liberal arts major (in "government" no less!) who does research that is an inch deep and a mile wide. That is he is an "expert" who knows nothing about everything (as opposed to academics who know everything about nothing).

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Massena View Post
                    Excellent. Unfortunately, I can't rep you for this one yet.

                    Sincerely,
                    M
                    But I can and just did!
                    Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Trung Si View Post
                      But I can and just did!
                      Thanks, both of you.

                      Comment

                      Latest Topics

                      Collapse

                      Working...
                      X