Continental Resources Business Practices

[PhiAlpha]

Everyone a few years out of college knows everything and has all the answers. That's part of "growing up" if you will. But you take this phenomenon to new heights. You don't have to have an answer for every negative post about the energy industry, Phi.

Some of us have decades (too many) of experience watching how the Oil & Gas moguls have an entitlement mind in this state, and how they usually get their way. This stuff with Harold Hamm just goes to show - again - that millionaires and billionaires expect their money to influence decisions they have no business being involved in. From Robert S. Kerr on we have seen this in Oklahoma. Hamm's comment that he's going to contact Mary Fallin about having OU stripped of its position as host of the OGS is typical tycoon tyranny.

And according to your posts it would seem that people a few years out of school don't know anything and that people your age know everything almost infallibly. What I lack in age, I more than make up for in exposure to the industry. I'm sorry but there is nothing that you can post or send me in 4 page long private messages that will make me believe you have any more knowledge of the industry than I do. Despite what you seem to think, I'm well aware of the history of the oil and gas industry both in this state and abroad...good and bad. You don't have to personally live through every minute of history to understand it. Again, your posts prove that you are just as biased against the industry as I am toward it.

That's great that you've seen corruption in the energy industry, I never said that it doesn't exist and certainly have not said that there has never been corruption in the industry, but that also doesn't mean the entire industry and everyone in it is unethical which was the blanket claim I took issue with in JC's post. I never defended Harold Hamm's actions or said that he hasn't made unethical decisions, but that doesn't make the entire industry unethical.

I certainly don't have an answer to every negative post about the energy industry, nor do I claim to, but I almost always have a valid argument against them (especially the more off-base posts) from the industry supportive perspective, whether you agree with that argument or not.

[jccouger]

I shouldn't speak in absolute terms, I apologize for that. I also can't back up my statements and opinions with facts that show the oil and natural gas industry is anymore corrupt than any other industry. Wherever there is money to be made, There will be people who take advantage of that through unethical ways. For some reason or another it just seems as if the oil and natural gas industry draws more of these personality types than other industries. I also believe in general there are waaaaay more good people than corrupt, and I'm certain this absolutely remains true in the fossil fuel industry as well.

[PhiAlpha]

I shouldn't speak in absolute terms, I apologize for that. I also can't back up my statements and opinions with facts that show the oil and natural gas industry is anymore corrupt than any other industry. Wherever there is money to be made, There will be people who take advantage of that through unethical ways. For some reason or another it just seems as if the oil and natural gas industry draws more of these personality types than other industries. I also believe in general there are waaaaay more good people than corrupt, and I'm certain this absolutely remains true in the fossil fuel industry as well.

I agree with you for the most part but I would argue that it only seems like there are more of that type of person in the energy industry for a few reasons:

1) it's the dominant industry in the state
2) it's viewed controversial by the general public for a multitude of issues among them environmental and gasoline pricing (the latter is one few understand)
3) It's viewed as controversial by the media and reported on from a negative prospective often, especially outside of the producing states. Generally you only hear about the energy industry when something bad happens or people are pissed about high gasoline prices.
4) It's one of the least understood major industries by the public, especially outside of the major historic producing states and ironically probably has the biggest effect on the general public of any industry.

[soonermike81]

I'm a little ignorant to the subject, but aren't there other industries that use wastewater disposal wells? If so, then how come earthquakes were never much of an issue before fracking, outside of along the normal fault line areas that we're used to?

[PhiAlpha]

I'm a little ignorant to the subject, but aren't there other industries that use wastewater disposal wells? If so, then how come earthquakes were never much of an issue before fracking, outside of along the normal fault line areas that we're used to?

Yes, other industries do use disposal wells and there have been a few isolated incidences of those wells causing minor earthquakes, one of which was in Colorado in the 1950s or 60s. I can't speak with too much knowledge as to the water volumes that other industries dispose of, but I would assume that instances of induced earthquakes occur more often around oil and gas operations because of the higher water volumes and frequency that the oil and gas industry has to use to use disposal wells. In Oklahoma, an oil well produces on average 10 barrels of water per barrel of oil, so oil companies often have to drill disposal wells to handle the produced water from one or more wells, especially in higher water content plays like the Mississippi Lime and the Hunton Lime. If you have a 100 bopd well, you get 1,000 bbls of water (a barrel = 42 gallons) so you can imagine how much water is produced by several wells. Hook several wells up to one disposal well, and that is a tone of water to dispose of and in some cases it is injected at very high pressures and apparently too deep (according to the reports from the OGS a few weeks ago).

Hydraulic fracturing has been around since the 1950s and disposal wells have been around at least that long, but horizontal drilling is relatively new. One of the theories as to why waste water disposal is causing earthquakes now when it didn't before (or didn't cause as many before), is that horizontal wells are producing more water than vertical wells had in the past and the increased water volume and increase in disposal wells being drilled is the culprit. I think we can also inject water at higher pressures now than previously and that may be part of it (not sure on that though). One of the issues with that theory is that operators were not required to keep injection volume records until the 1990s (after the previous major oil booms and before the latest one) which makes it difficult to prove.

[dankrutka]

It is water disposal, not hydraulic fracturing that is believed to be responsible for many of he earthquakes. They are completely different processes.

E&P companies have nothing to gain by admitting that their operations may have caused the earthquakes, especially before all of the research has concluded. There is just no benefit to that and it would be a borderline stupid business move to do so. Deciding who should be responsible is the corporation commission's job and that is starting to happen. Every company's operations are not causing them, and up until recently no one was completely sure who's operations were causing them and how/why they were causing them. As more and more of the results from the multitude of studies come to light, as they have over the last few months, you will start seeing more companies having to take responsibility for them (at least from an operational stand point). It is already happening now as companies like New Dominion and others are being forced to plug, plug back, or reduce disposal pressures on many of their disposal wells. For the most part operators are being cooperative in the research, but I wouldn't ever expect the companies themselves to openly admit that they're disposal wells played a roll in causing any of the earthquakes, it just opens them up to far too much legal risk. Could be wrong but I just don't see the upside to it.

Benefit? Upside? We're talking public safety. Your entire response is basically apologizing for an industry lacking ethics. An industry with ethics doesn't need a commission to tell them right or wrong. It should be proactive in protecting public safety.

Devon was involved in shady politics during Denton's fracking ban vote. Is there a major energy company that hasn't been implicated in unethical practices in the last 5 years?

[mimino]

Talking about this Corp Commission(er)? lol http://www.thelostogle.com/2015/05/0...try-to-rescue/

[zookeeper]

And according to your posts it would seem that people a few years out of school don't know anything and that people your age know everything almost infallibly. What I lack in age, I more than make up for in exposure to the industry. I'm sorry but there is nothing that you can post or send me in 4 page long private messages that will make me believe you have any more knowledge of the industry than I do. Despite what you seem to think, I'm well aware of the history of the oil and gas industry both in this state and abroad...good and bad. You don't have to personally live through every minute of history to understand it. Again, your posts prove that you are just as biased against the industry as I am toward it.

That's great that you've seen corruption in the energy industry, I never said that it doesn't exist and certainly have not said that there has never been corruption in the industry, but that also doesn't mean the entire industry and everyone in it is unethical which was the blanket claim I took issue with in JC's post. I never defended Harold Hamm's actions or said that he hasn't made unethical decisions, but that doesn't make the entire industry unethical.

I certainly don't have an answer to every negative post about the energy industry, nor do I claim to, but I almost always have a valid argument against them (especially the more off-base posts) from the industry supportive perspective, whether you agree with that argument or not.

Phi, Please. I sent you one private message about the selective attacks. It was one paragraph with a salutation and "have a good day."

I also disagree with you saying I am just as biased against the industry as you are for it. When good things happen, I am glad. (I've mentioned my own mineral rights checks!) I think age and experience in life does give one a certain latitudinal license to analyze things in our economy, culture, etc. that you couldn't possibly understand because you're right out of college.

For example, you claim this and that is "off base" all the time. Yet, they usually aren't off base at all - they are only a different opinion than one would hold who has hopes of climbing the rope up in the industry.

But telling me to "grow up" hit a nerve with me and that's why I went off-board and sent you a private message. You make it sound sinister.

Such irony here at times.

[zookeeper]

Benefit? Upside? We're talking public safety. Your entire response is basically apologizing for an industry lacking ethics. An industry with ethics doesn't need a commission to tell them right or wrong. It should be proactive in protecting public safety.

Devon was involved in shady politics during Denton's fracking ban vote. Is there a major energy company that hasn't been implicated in unethical practices in the last 5 years?

Thank you, Dan. Well said.

[PhiAlpha]

Phi, Please. I sent you one private message about the selective attacks. It was one paragraph with a salutation and "have a good day."

I also disagree with you saying I am just as biased against the industry as you are for it. When good things happen, I am glad. (I've mentioned my own mineral rights checks!) I think age and experience in life does give one a certain latitudinal license to analyze things in our economy, culture, etc. that you couldn't possibly understand because you're right out of college.

For example, you claim this and that is "off base" all the time. Yet, they usually aren't off base at all - they are only a different opinion than one would hold who has hopes of climbing the rope up in the industry.

But telling me to "grow up" hit a nerve with me and that's why I went off-board and sent you a private message. You make it sound sinister.

Such irony here at times.

And calling everyone that thinks differently than you do "brainwashed" hit a nerve with me so I told you to grow up...it goes both ways. Ok maybe your not as biased against the industry as I am for it, but you most certainly are as biased against corporate America in general as I am toward the energy industry.

Yes claiming the entire energy industry is unethical and that everyone that disagrees with you in this state has been brainwashed is offbase.

[PhiAlpha]

Benefit? Upside? We're talking public safety. Your entire response is basically apologizing for an industry lacking ethics. An industry with ethics doesn't need a commission to tell them right or wrong. It should be proactive in protecting public safety.

Devon was involved in shady politics during Denton's fracking ban vote. Is there a major energy company that hasn't been implicated in unethical practices in the last 5 years?

I said I don't think they will come out and claim responsibility until the research proves who is directly responsible becuase there is no legal upside to it. Also I said I'm not sure that the companies responsible will ever admit to causing them do to the lack of legal upside to it (I should have specified that I meant legal upside). Energy companies are cooperating with the research efforts and when the responsible parties are proven to be responsible, I'm sure they will do everything possible to stop causing he earthquakes and potentially help pay for property damages, but I just don't expect there to be a huge press conference where everyone claims responsibility. I could be wrong and don't take that for me apologizing for the industry...when the responsible parties are determined, I think they should admit responsibility, pay for property damages, and do everything possible to mitigate future risk, I just don't know what will happen...it's almost completely unprecedented. The corporation commission will inact regulations to mitigate future risk when they figure what needs to be done...which they appear to be getting closer to. They don't need a commission to tell them right or wrong, but they aren't going to admit to wrong doing with out proof that they are responsible.

I didnt follow the Denton fracking ban very closely, but from what I saw, Devon, XTO, other energy companies, and local mineral owners spent a ton of money funding the campaign against the fracking ban. Those against oil and gas development and/or fracking may consider that unethical, but I don't really understand why. If I remember correctly the campaign supporting the fracking ban was funded by several major environmental organizations...not sure how that is any different. At any rate, that ban will undoubtedly be overturned as it is not within the city's rights to ban oil and gas activity, those rights belong to the state and even then there are constitutionality issues involved when it comes to preventing mineral owners from developing their property. It will cost Denton a ton of money and they will be fighting the state of Texas, every energy company in the area, and the area mineral owners. It will go down like several of the cases in Colorado and New Mexico...it will cost the city a ton of money to fight a battle they have no chance of winning.

[zookeeper]

And calling everyone that thinks differently than you do "brainwashed" hit a nerve with me so I told you to grow up...it goes both ways. Ok maybe your not as biased against the industry as I am for it, but you most certainly are as biased against corporate America in general as I am toward the energy industry.

Yes claiming the entire energy industry is unethical and that everyone that disagrees with you in this state has been brainwashed is offbase.

You didn't mention that in my very next post I wrote, "You are right about the tone of that post. I should not have used the word, "brainwashed," as it is a bit incendiary."

Biased against Corporate America? I am an economic populist and believe in labor equality with capital. I believe in (and I am simplifying) the "greater good" before profits. I believe in ethics before profits. Just because something is legal doesn't make it ethical. I believe in actually revoking corporate charters if and when necessary. Ending corporate "personhood." I very much believe that the excessive CEO (actually top tier management) salaries that run 500-1 more than the average worker they are leading must be halted - and golden parachutes ended completely. I believe in SEC reform that embraces these principles. I believe in reform at the Fed that would actually make monetary policy for the good Main Street instead of being owned and operated by, and a revolving door with, Wall Street. So, if that makes me "biased" against Corporate America, then so be it.

We're very different, PhiAlpha. It doesn't make me "off base" or you a demon. We have different political and cultural values. Yet, there are probably many things we probably agree on. But I do not apologize for my economic views, because I think they are based on something that is more sustainable than greed, avarice, and the drive for more and more and more for the top brass, which leads to a concentration of wealth and an America our founders never imagined.

Call me whatever you like, but the above is what I'm about -- without apology.

[dankrutka]

I said I don't think they will come out and claim responsibility until the research proves who is directly responsible becuase there is no legal upside to it. Also I said I'm not sure that the companies responsible will ever admit to causing them do to the lack of legal upside to it (I should have specified that I meant legal upside). Energy companies are cooperating with the research efforts and when the responsible parties are proven to be responsible, I'm sure they will do everything possible to stop causing he earthquakes and potentially help pay for property damages, but I just don't expect there to be a huge press conference where everyone claims responsibility. I could be wrong and don't take that for me apologizing for the industry...when the responsible parties are determined, I think they should admit responsibility, pay for property damages, and do everything possible to mitigate future risk, I just don't know what will happen...it's almost completely unprecedented. The corporation commission will inact regulations to mitigate future risk when they figure what needs to be done...which they appear to be getting closer to. They don't need a commission to tell them right or wrong, but they aren't going to admit to wrong doing with out proof that they are responsible.

I didnt follow the Denton fracking ban very closely, but from what I saw, Devon, XTO, other energy companies, and local mineral owners spent a ton of money funding the campaign against the fracking ban. Those against oil and gas development and/or fracking may consider that unethical, but I don't really understand why. If I remember correctly the campaign supporting the fracking ban was funded by several major environmental organizations...not sure how that is any different. At any rate, that ban will undoubtedly be overturned as it is not within the city's rights to ban oil and gas activity, those rights belong to the state and even then there are constitutionality issues involved when it comes to preventing mineral owners from developing their property. It will cost Denton a ton of money and they will be fighting the state of Texas, every energy company in the area, and the area mineral owners. It will go down like several of the cases in Colorado and New Mexico...it will cost the city a ton of money to fight a battle they have no chance of winning.

First, there seems to be clear evidence that the energy companies have NOT cooperated with researchers, but repeatedly discounted the research or played dumb. With public safety, companies should always be on the safe side. Period. The energy companies have been unethical. They should have led the efforts to investigate it, not wait for proof on every individual case.

Second, the fracking ban was not organized or funded by environmental groups, but by local citizens who were being ignored by the energy companies. Numerous residents repeatedly pleaded with energy companies to quit drilling right next to their houses, which was causing physical and water damage that made the homes unlivable. After repeated attempts at compromise, a group of citizens started the fracking ban campaign. It was a clear example of the industry being unethical. Doesn't matter because the energy companies got the Texas state house to take away the rights of local citizens to enact their own laws, which is obviously hypocritical for supposed small government politicians... But money spoke louder than democracy.

I have no stakes in any if this, but the energy industry has clear systemic ethical problems. It's resulted in Oklahoma dealing with thousands of earthquakes and no one taking responsibility. It's really quite alarming.

[ljbab728]

Harold Hamm has released a statement denying his involvement in trying to influence some recently reported events.

Continental Resources CEO Harold Hamm says he didn?t seek ouster of OGS staff | NewsOK.com

Continental Resources CEO Harold Hamm on Tuesday denied reports claiming he asked for Oklahoma Geological Survey staff to be removed because of the way they addressed the state’s ongoing earthquake swarm.

[gopokes88]

You guys are 2 sides of the same coin.

No different then Harry Reid ranting and raving about the evils of super-pacs and how the Koch brothers are destroying America while simultaneously taking huge amounts of money from George Soros or tom Steyer.

Or republicans that slam big government but won't agree to even a penny in defense cuts.

And stop with the BS that O&G attracts unethical and blah blah blah. I've worked in finance, insurance, alcohol, O&G and construction. Guess what? Every single one is just dirty as the other. Life lives in the gray. Get off your moral high horse, cause if you don't someone will eventually make you.

[mimino]

You guys are 2 sides of the same coin.

No different then Harry Reid ranting and raving about the evils of super-pacs and how the Koch brothers are destroying America while simultaneously taking huge amounts of money from George Soros or tom Steyer.

Or republicans that slam big government but won't agree to even a penny in defense cuts.

And stop with the BS that O&G attracts unethical and blah blah blah. I've worked in finance, insurance, alcohol, O&G and construction. Guess what? Every single one is just dirty as the other. Life lives in the gray. Get off your moral high horse, cause if you don't someone will eventually make you.

So you're saying we should just let "morals" go out the door and let businesses do whatever they can "legally" do in the grey zone? I suppose that will support your point of various industries being just as dirty as the rest. At what point will means justify the ends, though?
Your first argument fails, because commenters here were not indulged in a hypocritical debates on other (ethical) issues, or have they? The second part is just an excuse for corporate profits. Amiright?
It seems like everyone can see so clearly thru all the BS, but nobody is doing anything about it. It's much easier to have these perpetual virtual debates instead.

[Just the facts]

Bill Clinton would be proud.

Continental Resources CEO Harold Hamm says he didn?t seek ouster of OGS staff | NewsOK.com

“Since, as you pointed out, the mission of the USGS is to provide for the development of the natural resources in Oklahoma, particularly oil and gas, I strongly feel that your search committee should include a representative from the oil and gas industry,” Hamm wrote in the email, apparently mistakenly referring to the U.S. Geological Survey rather than the Oklahoma Geological Survey. “I would be interested and willing to sit on your search committee.”

Hamm on Tuesday said he did not ask to be on the committee.

“I didn’t serve on any search committee,” he told The Oklahoman on Tuesday. “I didn’t ask to serve on any committee. I said I would be willing to if asked. I wasn’t.”

Umm, Mr. Hamm - that is the definition of asking (boarding on a demand).

https://www.google.com/search?q=ask+definition

[Pete]

We had discussed elsewhere that CLR runs a very lean ship and that don't even fully occupy their current HQ building (let alone be in the market to buy Chase Tower).

In a report just posted as part of their job creation incentive payments, the company reported 669 jobs in OKC.

That's down about 50 positions since their high in 2015.

The City has paid them a total of $7.2 million for job creation.

[Pete]

Harold Hamm is now the richest Oklahoman according to Forbes, worth $19.5 billion and ranked #29 (#43 in 2017_ on the Forbes 400 list:

https://www.forbes.com/profile/harol.../#27cbc6ea59b1


Other OKC people on that list:

#73 David Green - Hobby Lobby: $6.7B
#73 Tom & Judy Love - Love Stores $6.9B (the numbers show are real-time according to Forbes, so fluctuate over time)

[dankrutka]

Harold Hamm is now the richest Oklahoman according to Forbes, worth $19.5 billion and ranked #29 (#43 in 2017_ on the Forbes 400 list:

https://www.forbes.com/profile/harol.../#27cbc6ea59b1


Other OKC people on that list:

#73 David Green - Hobby Lobby: $6.7B
#73 Tom & Judy Love - Love Stores $6.9B (the numbers show are real-time according to Forbes, so fluctuate over time)

Just curious. What are the biggest philanthropy donations and areas of donation for these OKC billionaires? With so many Kaiser gifts in Tulsa, it's made me curious how they compare.

[Bellaboo]

Just curious. What are the biggest philanthropy donations and areas of donation for these OKC billionaires? With so many Kaiser gifts in Tulsa, it's made me curious how they compare.

I know Hamm has a building in the Health Science Center with his name on it - Not sure how much he donated though.

[OKCRT]

The rich get richer.

[Pete]

Just curious. What are the biggest philanthropy donations and areas of donation for these OKC billionaires? With so many Kaiser gifts in Tulsa, it's made me curious how they compare.

Harold Hamm has donated $30 million to start Harold Hamm Diabetes Center at the OUHSC.

[gopokes88]

Just curious. What are the biggest philanthropy donations and areas of donation for these OKC billionaires? With so many Kaiser gifts in Tulsa, it's made me curious how they compare.

Observationally it seems like a pretty big hole was left when McClendon died

[gopokes88]

https://oklahoman.com/article/563305...-stock-buyback

All of Hamms wealth is in CLR stock, he can’t really be to philanthropic without selling off stock (which he isn’t going to do), but now with CLR starting a $75,000,000 yearly dividend (that’ll grow over time), Hamm is going to have at least $50,000,000 in cash coming in every year. Let’s see if it changes something.