Exxon Mobile CEO Sues To Stop Fracking Near His Texas Ranch

Hugh Pickens DOT Com writes "Exxon Mobile's CEO Rex Tillerson's day job is to do all he can to protect and nurture the process of hydraulic fracturing—aka 'fracking'—so that his company can continue to rake in billions via the production and sale of natural gas. 'This type of dysfunctional regulation is holding back the American economic recovery, growth, and global competitiveness,' said Tillerson in 2012 of attempts to increase oversight of drilling operations. But now Rick Unger reports at Forbes that Tillerson has joined a lawsuit seeking to shut down a fracking project near his Texas ranch. Why? Because the 160 foot water tower being built next to Tillerson's house that will supply the water to the near-by fracking site, means the arrival of loud trucks, an ugly tower next door, and the general unpleasantness that will interfere with the quality of his life and the real estate value of his sizeable ranch. The water tower is being built by Cross Timbers Water Supply Corp., a nonprofit utility that has supplied water to the region for half a century. Cross Timbers says that it is required by state law to build enough capacity to serve growing demand. In 2011, Bartonville denied Cross Timbers a permit to build the water tower, saying the location was reserved for residences. The water company sued, arguing that it is exempt from municipal zoning because of its status as a public utility. In May 2012, a state district court judge agreed with Cross Timbers and compelled the town to issue a permit. The utility resumed construction as the town appealed the decision. Later that year, the Tillersons and their co-plaintiffs sued Cross Timbers, saying that the company had promised them it wouldn't build a tower near their properties. An Exxon spokesman said Tillerson declined to comment. The company 'has no involvement in the legal matter' and its directors weren't told of Mr. Tillerson's participation, the spokesman said."

Comments

Rich, white hypocrites? Say it aint so!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is anyone surprised? This is like how Eric "Peeping Tom" Schmidt says people have no privacy and then complains about drones with cameras flying around his house. Don't you plebes know that the rich are our betters and deserve more rights? You're not a bunch of socialist retards are you?

Re:Rich, white hypocrites? Say it aint so!!!

[garyisabusyguy]

we are just flowers to be plucked to supply bouquets of posies, so that the gentry do not need to smell the foulness of our rotting bodies

So... does anybody directly remember the outrages of the 19th century? The work farms, then pauper prisons, the crowded workplaces where worker's only options to escape a fire were to launch themselves from multi-story buildings, or when the 'babysitter' was a bottle of laudanum to knock your baby out with opiates while you were working?

Probably not, but all of these abuses were well documented and they are the direct result for the Union movements (along with global socialism) that knocked the landed gentry and robber barons off of their roosts and allowed the growth of a new class, the educated middle class that American hold so dear

It is well past time that the middle class recognized that they are being pushed back into the 19th century and start pushing back

Re:Rich, white hypocrites? Say it aint so!!!

[TheGratefulNet]

we are just flowers to be plucked to supply bouquets of posies, so that the gentry do not need to smell the foulness of our rotting bodies

aka, "mongo only pawn in game of life."

Re:Rich, white hypocrites? Say it aint so!!!

[Nimey]

Which is precisely why you get Internet Libertarians smugly arguing against unions: their sheltered upbringing prevented them from learning about being downtrodden anything, except for maybe having to do household chores when they didn't want to.

Re:Rich, white hypocrites? Say it aint so!!!

[Newander]

I wouldn't have had to make my bed if only we had the gold standard! Fiat currency causes dirty dishes.

Re:Rich, white hypocrites? Say it aint so!!!

[Nimey]

So basically he's suing to stop the fracking, because without that water tower they can't frack on that land.

The tower is an excuse.

Re:Rich, white hypocrites? Say it aint so!!!

[Nimey]

Certainly unions are not perfect, and nobody will argue otherwise. The proper thing to do is reforming them so they'll actually represent the members' interests, not nihilistically destroying them so the rich and powerful can become more rich and powerful... which, not coincidentally, is what said smug Internet Libertarians want to do with government, because they're sheltered idiots who think they'd be the ones rising to the top.

Re:Rich, white hypocrites? Say it aint so!!!

[tomkost]

As a Libertarian, I can say that many of us are completely fine with Unions. People should be free to form groups to achieve common objectives. I do struggle somewhat with unions for public servant though. The reason being is that it's easier for them to be granted their wishes because their pensions and stuff are backed by the full faith and credit of the US or State government. If a company agrees to a certain pension, and then can't afford it later. It has options to either renegotiate the costs or go out of biz. That last option not being generally available or certainly much less desirable to government, means that future generation have to pay for poor choices of the past. The Unions btw, should be able to use their power and finances to influence elections, just as other large companies and groups are currently doing. None of this should be allowed. I'm much against Citizens United. The elections and the government are for the people. These larger groups can agree what they interested in promoting, but the actual funds should come from private citizens.

Re:Rich, white hypocrites? Say it aint so!!!

[whitroth]

Really? And on what basis do you assert this? What's the income of the union presidents?

Yep, unions are a waste of time... of course, you like working 60+ hour weeks with declining benifits (if you have any), and decreasing vacation days (or, since they've done the "modern" thing, and merged your sick time with your vacation time to be "paid time off", don't get sick).

And btw, I googled what "exempt salaried" meant in the US, legally... and found that there's a *special* exemption for computer people, meaning they can say "whatever it takes", and claim the benifits of having you salaried... and not paying you for, say, snow days, meaning you're really just hourly, with no chance of a union.

There are two kinds of Republicans and Libertarians: millionaires, and suckers.

                        mark

NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY!!!

[Anonymous Coward]

Yay.

Just like the rich ecofreaks suing to stop wind farms off Martha's Vinyard. OK, those folks did have a legit concern that a Kennedy might fly or drive into one, but still...

Re:NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY!!!

[i kan reed]

Yeah, but poor people worried about fracking are concerned with boring things like water-table pollution. This CEO and those people are worried about real life problems that actually matter, like property values.

Re:NIMBY NIMBY NIMBY!!!

[dywolf]

ya, all those woman who developed cancer, or had their implants burst inside their bodies, sending silicon into various random places or simply making their chests look like golf balls.....they were all faking it.

thought experiment: lets pump water and chemicals into the ground at high pressure specifically for the purpose of fracturing the rock to release entrapped natural gas. the water slurry even helps push it out by displacing it (ie: flowing into the cracks). the entire process rests on the principle of cracking rocks and having water (with chemicals) flow into said cracks.

so just where in hell do you think that water goes?

there's 2 possible answers, both of which are unsatisfactory:
1) into groundwater tables and acquifers (water bearing layers of rock)
2) who knows because at the depths and scales we're talking about, no one really knows with certainity how far the newly created fractures lead*, and whether it connects with a acquifer.

*we do know (regardless of industry claims otherwise) that the fractures are sufficient in size and depth to relieve stresses in the crust triggering earthquakes, so the idea they connect to acquifers is hardly far fetched.

short version: the only wacky person here is you.
and don't make fun of Meryl Streep, she's probably the world's greatest living actress.

Re:fracking should be done where it should be ....

[i kan reed]

They don't wonder. They pay shills to "wonder" and "just ask questions" about "all this class warfare". Wondering takes time away from the golf course.

"Mobile"...Really? C'mon guys...

[Anonymous Coward]

"Mobile"...Really? C'mon guys...

Exxon MOBIL

Not fracking, a water tower

[Sez Zero]

So there's a link, but it is a little disingenuous to say he's suing to stop fracking. His suit (linked from TFA) is about the water tower. He doesn't want a high-rise water tower across the street.
He's actually ok with a low-rise water tower that he can't really see from his ranch.
So, over-react much, headline writer?

Re:Not fracking, a water tower

[Rob the Bold]

So there's a link, but it is a little disingenuous to say he's suing to stop fracking. His suit (linked from TFA) is about the water tower. He doesn't want a high-rise water tower across the street. He's actually ok with a low-rise water tower that he can't really see from his ranch. So, over-react much, headline writer?

If there weren't fracking to be done then the water wouldn't be needed, then there wouldn't be a water tower or the extra truck traffic, so it's not unrelated to fracking. Perhaps not about groundwater or earthquakes or whatever, but still an issue.

And this actually brings up a less-often mentioned concern about gas extraction -- the conflict between water and energy resources. You need water to produce energy (and energy to "produce" water). IEEE Spectrum had a good feature on this.

misleading

[therealkevinkretz]

He's not suing about fracking specifically, or any would-be-hypocrisy-laden dangers or damages associated with it. He's suing over a water tower and the traffic associated with it. There's a considerable difference.

Re:misleading

[coldsalmon]

Here is a copy of the complaint: http://online.wsj.com/public/r...
It is a municipal zoning issue, which mentions fracking in passing in paragraph 6.04. As far as I can tell, the main objection is to the height of the water tower and the fact that it does not comply with zoning ordinances.

"To Stop Fracking"?

[Sigmon]

Seriously?... Forbes throws up a headline like that and if you RTFA it's all about a freaking municipal water tower... only a single throw-away line about the tower providing water to a nearby drilling operation. That's quite a stretch... What a troll!

Re:"To Stop Fracking"?

[Ex-MislTech]

Well this is in part due to the halliburton loophole allowing them to not list
8 very nasty and toxic chemicals they are leaking into the water table.

Watch the film "Gasland" and realize that some of the oil & gas lobby
has been hired to poo poo the film because it might hurt their business.

Keep in mind some ppl get royalty checks off oil and gas leases, etc etc
and they are biased by the money flowing in from it.

First person account

[140Mandak262Jamuna]

It was posted to dailykos, where the liberals congregate and dominate. But still, this is a first person account of an earlier town hall meeting: http://www.dailykos.com/story/...

NIMB

[sociocapitalist]

Someone should buy this cunt a pizza and coke and tell him to shut the fuck up and stop being such a hypocrite.