Page 1 of 2

North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 1st, 2013, 8:35 pm
by 4everfsu

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 1st, 2013, 10:18 pm
by Purple Haize
One of my liberal friends posted this from Nat Geo. it's amazing that they are trying to spin this as a bad thing. Not so much THAT they are but the points they're making saying WHY its bad. People have jobs! :shock: There isn't a lot of housing so they live in trailers :shock: Men leave their families to work the fields to support them :shock: there is traffic :shock:

http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/ ... hotography

Really cool pics though

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 2nd, 2013, 8:32 am
by ATrain
Great...though I'd wish they'd allow drilling off Virginia's coast.

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 2nd, 2013, 9:04 am
by Purple Haize
ATrain wrote:Great...though I'd wish they'd allow drilling off Virginia's coast.
Then you'd have more pictures and stories about how difficult working is. I've thought about getting my CDL to drive a truck and work out there. My schedule is very free at the moment

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 2nd, 2013, 9:13 am
by HenryGale
Just think...after you finish driving there you could head to Canada and be on Ice Road Truckers!

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 9th, 2013, 4:51 pm
by BJWilliams
a friend of my wife started this week in North Dakota delivering water to the oil rigs...theyll be making almost six figures over the course of their two year contract

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 9th, 2013, 7:26 pm
by adam42381
BJWilliams wrote:a friend of my wife started this week in North Dakota delivering water to the oil rigs...theyll be making almost six figures over the course of their two year contract
So, less than $50k per year? Doesn't sound like all that much for the area.

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 9th, 2013, 7:32 pm
by Purple Haize
adam42381 wrote:
BJWilliams wrote:a friend of my wife started this week in North Dakota delivering water to the oil rigs...theyll be making almost six figures over the course of their two year contract
So, less than $50k per year? Doesn't sound like all that much for the area.
I think he meant the driver will be close to making 6 figures, which is accurate with numbers I've heard. But COL is also skyrocketing.

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 10th, 2013, 7:27 am
by ATrain
Yet I'm sure the COL there is still going to be way cheaper than it is in Virginia Beach or NOVA. They're probably just now catching up to Lynchburg/Roanoke.

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 10th, 2013, 8:36 am
by Purple Haize
ATrain wrote:Yet I'm sure the COL there is still going to be way cheaper than it is in Virginia Beach or NOVA. They're probably just now catching up to Lynchburg/Roanoke.
True. But I'm thinking it may turn into a 'Company Town'' since a lot of them are buying/building places to live for their workers

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 10th, 2013, 10:01 am
by RubberMallet
50k to drive a water truck is really good.

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 10th, 2013, 12:23 pm
by adam42381
RubberMallet wrote:50k to drive a water truck is really good.
Agreed. I think I may have misread BJ's post. I assumed when he said "theyll be making almost six figures over the course of their two year contract" he meant 2 people would make less than 50k per year combined.

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 10th, 2013, 2:30 pm
by bballfan84
drill baby drill

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 13th, 2013, 12:33 pm
by BJWilliams
They both will be making around $90K/year so combined income around $180,000/year before taxes

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 13th, 2013, 1:41 pm
by Sly Fox
This drilling & construction phase is practically a license to print money in certain communities ... especially those in wet plays. It is not quite a dramatic but close to it in the Eagle Ford play in South Texas. Just keep in mind, once the drilling is done the majority of jobs move elsewhere. In the meantime, make some hay.

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 13th, 2013, 2:10 pm
by adam42381
BJWilliams wrote:They both will be making around $90K/year so combined income around $180,000/year before taxes
Ok, that's a lot better. Your original statement seemed to indicate something different. I may have misinterpreted it.
BJWilliams wrote:theyll be making almost six figures over the course of their two year contract

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 14th, 2013, 10:02 am
by ALUmnus
Sly Fox wrote:This drilling & construction phase is practically a license to print money in certain communities ... especially those in wet plays. It is not quite a dramatic but close to it in the Eagle Ford play in South Texas. Just keep in mind, once the drilling is done the majority of jobs move elsewhere. In the meantime, make some hay.
If you want drama, keep your eye on California. The Monterey Shale deposit is bigger than Eagle Ford and North Dakota combined....but we can't touch it right now.

The fiscal trainwreck of California has the answer to all its financial problems right under its feet, but ideology prevents them from taking advantage of it.

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 14th, 2013, 10:54 am
by Sly Fox
Easy, tiger. Just because there are resources down there doesn't mean the technology is in place today to reach it all. Anyone investing in Cali right now is doing it under ridiculously speculative circumstances. That's why the majors aren't all over lease purchases.

If you want to blame a state government for holding up massive production then you just need to look to New York. But because it is a more populated area next door to a massive production state then I wouldn't expect the crazy speculative jobs like in the Bakken even if the NY legislature finally buckles to allow hydraulic fracturing. And for the record, the Utica is a very wet play.

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: May 14th, 2013, 12:05 pm
by BJWilliams
adam42381 wrote:
BJWilliams wrote:They both will be making around $90K/year so combined income around $180,000/year before taxes
Ok, that's a lot better. Your original statement seemed to indicate something different. I may have misinterpreted it.
BJWilliams wrote:theyll be making almost six figures over the course of their two year contract
It was, but I guess I can fault myself for not being more clear with the initial wording

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: August 6th, 2013, 10:19 am
by 4everfsu

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: September 17th, 2013, 10:00 am
by 4everfsu

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: September 17th, 2013, 1:38 pm
by Purple Haize
This actually has a great tie in with the Syria discussion. We have the potential to quell some of the Isolationist zeal, strengthen our hand Internationally and make Russia King Nothing if we utilized what we have.

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: September 17th, 2013, 1:49 pm
by SumItUp
Purple Haize wrote:This actually has a great tie in with the Syria discussion. We have the potential to quell some of the Isolationist zeal, strengthen our hand Internationally and make Russia King Nothing if we utilized what we have.
Don't bring common sense into the discussion.

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: December 24th, 2013, 2:33 pm
by 4everfsu

Re: North Dakota has more oil then first thought

Posted: February 16th, 2014, 7:31 pm
by 4everfsu