Continental Resources
---
See Hamm H TRUMP PAL DONOR
no relation conoco
---
AN 2 26
---
MS NOW co-anchor Jacqueline Alemany says House Democrats are so convinced they will stampede the chamber in November that they are already planning to investigate U.S. companies that paid President Donald Trump millions for political favors.
Trump may thump his chest over Democrat-led House investigations, but tech giants, oil companies, defense contractors and Fortune 500 CEOs still fear congressional subpoenas and congressional scrutiny.
“Now, as House Democrats plot a return to the majority, they are pledging to probe the deals, mergers, settlements and regulatory favors that flowed to corporations doing business with the Trump administration,” reports Alemany.
Democrats are currently in the minority and limited to issuing “strongly worded letters and … toothless investigative authority,” but Alemany said they are already “laying the groundwork for a sweeping expansion of oversight targeting the companies and CEOs who have done business with the Trump family, or sought favorable regulatory treatment, merger approval, or policy changes from the administration — from Paramount to Palantir.”
“Trump’s running the presidency like a mob boss and everyone who has agreed to bribe him is a target for an investigation,” said a senior congressional staffer, speaking anonymously to MS NOW. “And although there’s a spectrum of wrongdoing with Elon Musk at one end and not much more than small businesses trying to get by on the other, there are very wealthy CEOs who know better. And we’re taking names.”
Critics may consider this retaliation against Trump’s corporate enablers but Democrats say this is a strategy that could “reshape corporate America’s relationship with Trump,” by making CEOs “think twice before opening their wallets or bending to presidential pressure.”
Biden administration national security adviser Jake Sullivan met with senior Democratic officials in December and encouraged them to hold the private sector more accountable as Trump embraced a more blatantly “transactional and retributive [form of] governance,” according to three sources in the meeting.
The idea caught on as a result of backlash to members of the national security community who have been fired or blacklisted by companies fearful of retribution from Trump. But the conversation quickly expanded to how completely companies have folded under pressure from the administration, said Alemany.
Democrats on the House Oversight Committee are already sending inquiries to chief executives of at least four oil companies, including Chevron, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips and Continental Resources, demanding information to determine “who stands to privately or personally benefit from President Trump’s actions and whether corrupt motives were a driving force in U.S. foreign policy decision.”
---
9 25
ICYMI: Trump’s Big Oil Donors Are Cashing In | Climate Power
Washington, D.C. – Yesterday, the Wall Street Journal published a piece highlighting the Trump administration’s closeness with oil and gas executives — who donated tens of millions of dollars to re-elect the president — and the fulfillment of their wishlist. This comes after Republicans voted to kill clean energy jobs and raise utility rates for millions of Americans.
The administration is not only capitulating to the requests of the executives by opening wilderness land and federal waters to drilling and axing environmental protections, but also has installed at least a dozen former Big Oil executives and lobbyists across the administration. Industry CEOs now enjoy direct phone calls and personal access to the Oval Office, while American families are left with higher prices, dirtier air, and a future mortgaged to Big Oil’s profits.
The Wall Street Journal: Oil Tycoons Bet Big on Trump. It’s Paying Off.*
{“Oil billionaire Harold Hamm high-fivedDonald Trumpon election night as results trickled in at the Mar-a-Lago watch party.*}:
Hamm, founder of family-owned oil-and-gas company Continental Resources, had good reason to celebrate. He and other oilmen haddonated tens of millions of dollarsto help re-elect Trump, betting that his pro-fossil-fuel agenda would stave off a long-term shift away from fossil fuels and keep the country hooked on gasoline.
That wager is paying off. The Trump administration is opening swaths of wilderness land and federal waters to drilling, approving new terminals to export natural gas and proposing to ax environmental regulations, including an Obama-era rule used to curb emissions from power plants, tailpipes and oil-and-gas production. His One Big Beautiful Bill is expected tohobble renewable-energy projectsandstunt the adoption of electric vehicles.
Oil executives now enjoy extraordinary access to the White House. Trump has taken to phoning oil bosses whose TV appearances he enjoys, such asChevronCEO Mike Wirth, according to White House and industry officials.
“No doubt, this administration understands how important energy is,” said Toby Rice, CEO of natural-gas producerEQT. Rice andExxon MobilCEO Darren Woods sat at Trump’s table during a Julyenergy summit in Pittsburgh.
So far, however, the industry’s policy wins haven’t flowed through to the companies’ bottom lines. Trump’s shifting positions on trade, coupled with an increase in crude supplies globally, have depressed oil prices,cost energy firms billions of dollars in stock-market valueand contributed to layoffs across the industry. And new tariffs on steel and aluminum are making drilling more expensive.
U.S. oil prices are hovering near $62 a barrel—below the break-even point for many of the industry’s smaller players—down from about $76 the week Trump took office. Yet some oil bosses see the turbulence as a price worth paying to see the president implement their agenda.
White House spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt said the oil-and-gas industry is the backbone of the American economy and the source of “millions of good-paying jobs,” and that the president is delivering on his promise to “make America energy dominant again.”
Trump’s unabashed support for the industry has left environmentalists aghast. They contend the administration’s moves will translate into higher energy prices for consumers, fuel climate change and make the U.S. less competitive with other nations that are embracing renewable energy….. (Read the resthere)*”*
===
5 22 steamboat inst bryce BS
council for sec am
Blu Hulsey is the Senior Vice President of Government Relations and Regulatory Affairs at Continental Resources.
He is responsible for advising corporate leadership and implementing strategy to influence government and regulatory actions. Mr. Hulsey is a registered lobbyist in North Dakota, Montana and Oklahoma. Prior to joining Continental Resources, Mr. Hulsey served as the City Manager for the Cities of Bixby and Skiatook, Oklahoma. He also served as Council for the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee for Senator Inhofe in Washington, DCand as a field representative in the Senator’s Tulsa office.
NB DESMOG TRACKING IMPENDING BANKRUPTCY? KEPT AFLOAT BY BANKS?
aha ish // disaster cap'l, never waste a crisis to dustoff wishlist
Will an oil tycoon who donated $500,000 to support Trump’s re-election get bailed out by his administration?
https://www.alternet.org/2020/03/will-an-oil-tycoon-who-donated-500000-to-support-trumps-re-election-get-bailed-out-by-his-administration
no lnx
Will an oil tycoon who donated $500,000 to support Trump’s re-election get bailed out by his administration?
Written by Igor Derysh / Salon March 12, 2020
With oil prices plunging during the coronavirus outbreak, the Trump administration is weighing a federal bailout for oil and natural gas companies, according to a new report.
President Donald Trump has repeatedly touted a fracking boom under his administration, but oil and gas companies have seen profits drop amid an oil price war between Russia and Saudi Arabia.
“Alarmed” by the prospect that some of these companies, many of which are already in debt, [see desmog]could go out of business, White House officials have pushed for a federal bailout in the form of low-interest government loans, The Washington Post reported.
Among those pushing for the bailout is Harold Hamm, a billionaire Trump adviser who owns Continental Resources, an energy company which lost half of its market value Monday.
Hamm told The Post that although he had not made “direct” contact with the president, he advised the administration to consider “any action that the administration might take to protect and preserve American interests at this time from being unfairly disadvantaged.”
Hamm has given more than $500,000 to support Trump’s re-election effort since 2017, the government watchdog group Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington noted.
Some Trump advisers told The Post that the administration was eyeing “targeted assistance” for the companies. Though under consideration, another official warned that “political blowback over the idea may eventually lead campaign advisers and others in [the] administration to talk Trump out of it.”
Chris Rupkey, the chief economist at MUFG Union Bank, told the outlet that he expects significant political backlash.
“It’s difficult when governments selectively target individual industries,” he said. “And there’s going to be pushback on it, because it’s political and may be tied to the administration’s contacts and the people it knows.”
Cornell University professor Robert Hockett, who has advised Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., on economic policy, added that it was ridiculous to look out for big fracking companies while millions need relief.
“We are in the midst of a crisis where people are literally having to skip work and may miss paychecks or face medical debt,” he said. “The idea you would look to help out shale companies now is like something out of a satire or a bad movie. It’s absurd.”
Trump also said that he was looking at bailing out airlines, cruise lines and the hospitality industryTuesday, as they reel from the impact of COVID-19, the disease spread by the novel coronavirus. But the bailout proposals have received public pushback from Republicans.
“They can take care of themselves,” Sen. Mike Braun, R-Ind., told The Washington Examiner. “Why do you overreact just when there’s a little pain? That doesn’t make sense.”
Nick Loris, an economist at the right-wing Heritage Foundation, said such a bailout “would not sit well” with fiscal conservatives.
“Not only would it potentially put taxpayers on the hook for future potential losses and bankruptcies, it would distort the risk-taking process that is so critical in making these investments,” he told the outlet. “We’ve seen the resiliency in the industry before, and I believe we’ll see it again.”
However, Alex Doukas, the lead analyst for advocacy group Oil Change International, predicted that Trump’s big-money donors would heavily pressure the administration to ignore the criticism.
“With oil prices in free fall, expect oil companies to turn to their age-old tactic of bullying governments for even more subsidies on top of the hundreds of billions they benefit from annually,” Doukas said. “Instead of more handouts to polluters, governments should make big investments in high-quality green jobs that will put people to work and ultimately end our dependence on the volatile fossil fuels that create climate chaos.”
Journalist David Cay Johnson described the lobbying effort as “corporate socialists” seeking “welfare from the Trump administration.”
“Bailing out the oil industry won’t help the workers who have to choose between their health and their paychecks. It won’t help the people who could go into medical debt from COVID-19,” Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., tweeted. “We need paid family leave and Medicare expanded to every American.”
“The American people are worried about missing paychecks, affording coronavirus tests, & being able to afford healthcare period. But [Trump] wants to bail out the oil industry?” Rep. Mark Pocan, D-Wis., added. “Leave it to Trump to prioritize his friends over the American people.”
Igor Derysh is a staff writer at Salon. His work has also appeared in the Los Angeles Times, Chicago Tribune, Boston Herald and Baltimore Sun.
==
=-
World May Hit 2 Degrees of Warming in 10-15 Years Thanks to Fracking, Says Cornell Scientist
In 2011, a Cornell University research team first made the groundbreaking discovery that leaking methane from the shale gas fracking boom could make burning fracked gas worse for the climate than ...
https://www.ecowatch.com/wall-street-fracking-revolution-2566742237.html
How Wall Street Enabled the Fracking 'Revolution' That's Losing Billions
By Justin Mikulka
The U.S. shale oil industry hailed as a "revolution" has burned through a quarter trillion dollars more than it has brought in over the last decade. It has been a money-losing endeavor of epic proportions.
In September 2016, the financial ratings service Moody's released a report on U.S. oil companies, many of which were hurting from the massive drop in oil prices. Moody's found that "the financial toll from the oil bust can only be described as catastrophic," particularly for small companies that took on huge debt to finance fracking shale formations when oil prices were high.
And even though shale companies still aren't turning a profit, Wall Street continues to lend the industry more money while touting these companies as good investments. Why would investors do that?
David Einhorn, star hedge fund investor and the founder of Greenlight Capital, has referred to the shale industry as "a joke."
"A business that burns cash and doesn't grow isn't worth anything," said Einhorn, who often goes against the grain in the financial world.
Aren't investors supposed to be focused on putting money toward profitable companies? While, in theory, yes, the reality is quite different for industries like shale oil and housing.
If the U.S. financial crisis of 2008 has revealed anything, it is that Wall Street isn't concerned with making a "shitty deal" when it means profits and bonuses for its traders and executives, despite their roles in the crash.
Wall Street makes money by facilitating deals much like a Vegas bookie makes money by taking bets. As the saying about Las Vegas goes: "The house always wins." What's true about casinos and gambling also holds true for Wall Street.
Wall Street caused the 2008 financial crisis, with some of its architects personally benefiting. However, while a few executives profited, the result was a drop in employment of 8.8 million people, and according to Bloomberg News in 2010, "at one point last year [2009] the U.S. had lent, spent or guaranteed as much as $12.8 trillion to rescue the economy."
JP Morgan (along with much of Wall Street) required large sums of money in the form of bailouts to survive the fallout from all of the bad loans made, which brought about the housing crisis. Is JP Morgan steering clear of making loans to the shale industry? No. Quite the opposite.
As shown in this chart of which banks are loaning money to shale company EOGResources, while all of the big players in Wall Street are in on the action, JP Morgan has the biggest bet.
To understand whyJP Morgan and the rest of these banks would loan money to shale companies that continue to lose it, it's important to understand the gambling concept of "the vigorish" or the vig. Merriam-Webster defines vigorish as "a charge taken (as by a bookie or a gambling house) on bets."
Wall Street makes money by taking a cut of other people's money. To a gambling house, it doesn't matter if everyone else is making money or losing it, as long as the house gets its cut (the vig)—or as it's known in the financial world—fees.
Understanding this concept gives insight into why investors have lent a quarter trillion dollars to the shale industry, which has burned through it. If you take the vig on a quarter trillion dollars, you have a big pile of cash. And while those oil companies may all go bankrupt, Wall Street never gives back the vig.
Trent Stedman of the investment firm Columbia Pacific Advisors LLC explained to The Wall Street Journal at the end of 2017 why shale producers would keep drilling more oil even when the companies are bleeding money on every barrel produced:
"Some would say, 'We know it's bad economics, but it's what The Street wants.'"
And "The Street" generally gets what it wants, even when it is clear that loaning money to shale companies that have been losing money for a decade and are already deep in debt is "bad economics." But Wall Street bonuses are based on how many "fees" an employee can bring to the bank. More fees mean a bigger bonus. And loans—even ones that are clearly bad economics—mean a lot more fees.
Shale Oil Companies Are "Creatures of the Capital Markets"
In 2017 "legendary" hedge fund manager Jim Chanos referred to shale oil companies as "creatures of the capital markets," meaning that without Wall Street money, they would not exist. Chanos is also on record as shorting the stock of heavily leveraged shale oil giant Continental Resources because the company can't even make enough money to pay the interest on its loans.
And he has a point. In 2017 Continental spent $294.5 millionon interest expenses, which is approximately 155 percent of its 2017 adjusted net income generation. When you can't even pay the interest on your credit cards, you are broke.
And yet in 2017, investor capital was still flowing, with Continental Resources among those bellying up to the Wall Street trough for another billion in debt.
"In 2017, U.S. [exploration and production] firms raised more from bond sales than in any year since the price collapse started in 2014, with offerings coming in at around $60 billion — up nearly 30 percent from 2016, according to Dealogic. Large-cap players like Whiting Petroleum, Continental Resources, Southwestern, Noble, Concho and Endeavor Energy Resources each raised $1 billion or more in the second half of 2017."
How big of a problem is this business of loaning money to an industry burning through billions and burying itself in debt? So big that the CEO of shale company Anadarko Petroleum is blaming Wall Street and asking its companies to please stop loaning money to the shale oil industry. Yes, that's right.
In 2017, Anadarko CEO Al Walker told an investor conference that Wall Street investors were the problem:
"The biggest problem our industry faces today is you guys. You guys can help us help ourselves. It's kind of like going to AA. You know, we need a partner. We really need the investment community to show discipline."
The Wall Street Journal reported that Walker maintains: "Wall Street has become an enabler that pushes companies to grow production at any cost, while punishing those that try to live within their means."
Imagine begging banks to stop loaning you money. And being ignored.
Growing production at any cost is the story of the shale "revolution." The financial cost paid so far has been the more than $280 billion the industry has burned through—money that its companies have received from Wall Street and, despite the plea from Al Walker, continue to receive.
The Economist summarized the situation in 2017:
"It [the shale industry] has burned up cash whether the oil price was at $100, as in 2014, or at about $50, as it was during the past three months. The biggest 60 firms in aggregate have used up $9 billion per quarter on average for the past five years."
Higher oil prices are now being touted as the industry's savior but, as The Economist noted, the shale industry was losing money even when oil was $100 a barrel.
Still Wall Street keeps giving the shale industry money and the shale industry keeps losing it as it ramps up production. To be clear, this arrangement makes shale company CEOs and financial lenders very rich, which is why the trend is likely to continue. And why Continental Resources CEO Harold Hamm will continue to repeat the myth that his industry is making money, as he did at the end of 2017:
"For anybody to even put forth the suggestion we haven't had great expansion and wealth creation in this industry with horizontal drilling and all the technology that's come about the last 10 years, I mean, it's totally ridiculous."
No one will argue that Hamm and his partners on Wall Street are not extremely wealthy. That has happened despite Hamm's company and the rest of the fracking industry losing epic sums of money. The same year Hamm made that statement, his company couldn't even cover its interest expenses. To put that in perspective, Continental Resources couldn't even make the equivalent of the minimum payment on its credit card.
Watch What the Industry Does, Not What It Says
Higher oil prices are yielding more storiesabout how 2018 will be the year that the shale industry finally makes a profit. Harold Hamm refers to it as Continental Resources' "breakout year." Interesting how potentially not losing money for a year is considered a "breakout year" in the shale industry.
As reported on DeSmog, the industry certainly got a huge boost from the recenttax law,which will help its companies' short-term finances. Continental Resources alone took home $700 million in tax relief.
Recent reports in the financial press detail how the new approach in the shale industry will be to focus only on profitable oil production, not just producing more barrels at a loss. As The Wall Street Journal put it in a headline: Wall Street Tells Frackers to Stop Counting Barrels, Start Making Profits.
In that very article, Continental CEO Hamm assures that he is on board with this new approach, saying, "You are really preaching to the choir."
But has Continental actually embraced this new approach of fiscal responsibility and restraint?
Not so much.
The fracking firm appears to have done the opposite, increasing production to record levels along with the rest of the shale industry. Continental recently reported plans to drill 350 new wells at an estimated cost of $11.7 million per well, which adds up to over $4 billion in total costs on those wells. The company currently holds more than $6 billion in debt and less than $100 million cash.
How will Continental fund those new wells? Hamm has promised that going forward, there would be "absolutely no new debt." Perhaps Continental will fund it by selling assets because without more debt, Continental does not have the money to fund those new wells. However, if past is prelude, then Wall Street will happily lend Continental as much money as it wants.
Why would Hamm say one thing and do another? Well, he personally has accrued billions of dollars while his company has burned through billions.
Despite leading Continental to another money-losing year in 2017, Hamm took home a fat raise.
==
http://grist.org/news/oklahoma-scientists-pressured-to-downplay-link-between-earthquakes-and-fracking/
Oklahoma scientists pressured to downplay link between earthquakes and fracking
Oil company execs and university bigwigs leaned on the Oklahoma Geological Survey so it wouldn’t blame quakes on fracking techniques.
Oklahoma has been experiencing an earthquake boom in recent years. In 2014, the state had 585 quakes of at least magnitude 3. Up through 2008, it averaged only three quakes of that strength each year. Something odd is happening.
But scientists at the Oklahoma Geological Survey have downplayed a possible connection between increasing fracking in the state and the increasing number of tremors. Even as other states (Ohio, for example) quickly put two and two together and shut down some drilling operations that were to blame, OGS scientists said that more research was needed before their state took similar steps.
Now, though, emails obtained by EnergyWire reporter Mike Soraghan reveal that the University of Oklahoma and its oil industry funders were putting pressure on OGS scientists to downplay the connection between earthquakes and the injection of fracking wastewater underground. In 2013, a preliminary OGS report noted possible correlation between the two, and OGS signed on to a statement by the U.S. Geological Survey that also noted such linkages. Soon after, OGS’s seismologist, Austin Holland, was summoned to meetings with the president of the university, where OGS is housed, and with executives of oil company Continental Resources. Continental CEO Harold Hamm was a major university funder, while the university president David Boren serves on Continental’s board, for which he earned $272,700 in cash and stock in 2013. From EnergyWire:
“I have been asked to have ‘coffee’ with President Boren and Harold Hamm Wednesday,” [Holland] wrote in an Nov. 18, 2013, email to a co-worker.
The significance was not lost on his colleague, OGS Public Information Coordinator Connie Smith.
“Gosh,” Smith responded. “I guess that’s better than having Kool-Aid with them. I guess.”
A meeting with such powerful figures in the state would be intimidating for a state employee such as Holland, said state Rep. Jason Murphey of Guthrie.
“Wow. That’s a lot of pressure,” said Murphey, a Republican whose district has been rattled by numerous quakes. “That just sends chills up your spine if you’re from Oklahoma.”
Oklahoma geologist Bob Jackman, who has tried to get the word out about the connection between fracking and the quakes, recalls Holland saying last year that he couldn’t do the same. According to Jackman, Holland, when pressed, blurted out, “You don’t understand — Harold Hamm and others will not allow me to say certain things.”
Holland says Jackman misremembered the conversation. Holland publicly denies being pressured by the university or industry.
Other scientists at OGS weren’t happy to see the agency downplay the link between one oil and gas project, called the Hunton dewatering, and an earthquake swarm near Oklahoma City. One wrote to a family member, “I am dismayed at our seismic people about this issue and believe they couldn’t track a bunny through fresh snow!”
Even the USGS picked up on something fishy when Holland suggested alternative hypotheses to explain earthquakes instead of linking them to fracking processes. A science adviser with the federal agency wrote to Holland saying one alternative theory was “unlikely” and “could be very distracting from the larger issue of earthquake safety in Oklahoma … and the role that wastewater injection may be playing.”
In July 2014, Holland told Bloomberg that if a link between fracking and the quakes were to be discovered, he’d have to advise the state to shut some drilling operations down. “If my research takes me to the point where we determine the safest thing to do is to shut down injection — and consequently production — in large portions of the state, then that’s what we have to do,” he said. “That’s for the politicians and the regulators to work out.”
The research is there, even if UO President David Boren or Continental CEO Harold Hamm aren’t pleased about it. Let’s see what those politicians and regulators do next.
==
==
reuters By Cezary Podkul
NEW YORK, Dec 13 (Reuters) - Continental Resources, one of the companies that has committed to ship crude on TransCanada Corp's proposed Keystone XL pipeline, now says the controversial pipeline is no longer needed.
Continental has signed on to ship some 35,000 barrels of its own oil from the Bakken field of North Dakota on the 1,179-mile, $5.4-billion Keystone XL line. But construction of the pipeline has been delayed for years as TransCanada has sought regulatory approvals, and Continental has since turned to railroads to get its crude to oil refineries.
Harold Hamm, chief executive of the independent oil producer, told Reuters that his company and the U.S. oil industry in general are no longer counting on Keystone XL.
Oil companies have been strong advocates of Keystone in order to help alleviate oil supply bottlenecks, but Hamm's remarks raise the question of whether regulatory delays have eroded the industry's enthusiasm for the line, which has faced aggressive resistance from environmentalists.
When asked whether Keystone XL is still needed, Hamm said "not for our Bakken (crude). And is it needed for the industry? I don't think so ... not in the U.S."
"Rail has been a big factor and, you know, proven to be a very effective way" (of getting Continental's crude to market), he said on the sidelines of the Platts Global Energy Outlook Forum in New York on Thursday.
Continental now ships 90 percent of its crude oil by railcar, Hamm said. Rail transport can be more expensive, but it allows shippers more flexibility on where the crude is shipped.
"It may be several years yet, you know, before you find out if it (Keystone XL) is going to be built," Hamm said. "It's no way to run your business."
Keystone XL's developer, Canadian pipeline giant TransCanada, said the line has broad support, and there is a waiting list of customers interested in securing capacity on the line. Keystone XL should be operational two years after TransCanada receives a U.S. permit to complete it.
"Rail may be a flexible, short-term solution but pipelines and Keystone XL in particular are more efficient from a safety, environmental and economic perspective," said company spokesman Shawn Howard.
"It's also important to look at the whole U.S. energy picture, not just the production coming out of one field or from one company," he said.
Howard declined comment on TransCanada's contract with Continental, citing confidentiality.
TransCanada first applied for a U.S. permit for Keystone XL in 2008, but the line remains under review by the Obama administration.
If built, it would connect the Alberta oil sands in Canada with U.S. refiners and provide an alternative route for more crude to reach U.S. Midwest and Gulf Coast markets.
To be sure, Continental's view on Keystone may have little or no effect on the line's prospects. Most of the crude that would move on Keystone XL - whose capacity would be 830,000 barrels per day - would originate in Canada.
Continental is one of a handful of U.S. producers to sign up to use the line. Their commitments are small relative to Canadian oil sands shippers, who are counting on Keystone as a vital outlet for their crude. Canadian crude is now heavily discounted versus U.S. crudes due to scarce transportation options to get more of it to end-users.
The majority of the proposed pipeline route - some 850 miles - is in the United States, crossing Montana and South Dakota en route to Steele City in southern Nebraska, where connections are available to the Gulf Coast via Cushing, Oklahoma and to the Midwest.
A southern portion of TransCanada's Keystone network - known as the Gulf Coast Project, from Oklahoma to the Texas Gulf Coast - has already been built, and is expected to begin operating next month. Unlike the international Keystone XL, that line didn't require a U.S. State Department permit.
Environmental groups have opposed Keystone XL on grounds that it would allow higher production of carbon-intensive Canadian oil sands crude. Yet concerns have also arisen about the safety of crude transport by rail, a booming industry. This year, crude train derailments have caused disasters in Quebec and rural Alabama.
The largest U.S. railroads will likely transport about 400,000 carloads of crude oil in 2013, versus just 9,500 in 2008, according to estimates from the Association of American Railroads.
In 2010, Continental and other companies persuaded TransCanada to add a $140 million extension spur to Keystone XL to pick up and transport U.S.-produced Bakken crude beginning in 2014.
Before TransCanada agreed to ship U.S. crude down Keystone XL, Hamm had lobbied in 2009 against the pipeline, arguing that it could flood the U.S. Midwest with a glut of cheap Canadian crude, hurting independent oil producers such as Continental.
Bakken producers have seen growing demand in recent years from U.S. refiners eager to lower their costs by buying the region's attractively priced light, sweet crude. That's made the opportunity cost of waiting for the pipeline even higher.
It isn't clear whether Continental will ship any crude on Keystone XL if it is eventually built. So far, Continental has not sought to back out of its contract as a shipper on the line, Hamm said.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Continental_Resources
Continental Resources is a U.S. petroleum producer and the largest leaseholder in the Bakken Play of North Dakota and Montana. The company also has a large presence in the Anadarko Woodford Play of Oklahoma and the Red River Units Play of North Dakota, South Dakota, and Montana.[1]
The company is based in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, and was founded in 1967. The company's profits have grown with fracking, reporting total revenues of $1.6 billion for 2011. The company said it is on track to triple production and proved reserves from 2009 to 2014.[2]
Contents [hide] |
Personnel
Continental Resources CEO Harold Hamm was acknowledged at a privately held Koch seminar in June 2011 in Vail, Colorado for donating at least $1 million to Koch-related causes.[3]
The Wall Street Journal reported that Hamm generated “almost all” of his $12 billion wealth in Continental from 2010-2012; he ranks at No. 36 on Forbes 2012 list of richest Americans.
In March 2012, the Romney campaign announced that Hamm would lead the candidate’s energy policy, joining a team that already includes coal lobbyist Jim Talent and tar-sands lobbyist David Wilkins.[4]
Contact Information
Continental Resources, Inc.
20 N. Broadway
Oklahoma City, Oklahoma 73102
Telephone: 405-234-9000
Website: http://www.contres.com/about/contact
Articles and Resources
Related SourceWatch resources
Profiles and campaigns
External Articles
References
- ↑ "Continental Resources: About Us," Continental Resources Website, accessed June 2012.
- ↑ "Continental Resources: About Us," Continental Resources Website, accessed June 2012.
- ↑ Gavin Aronsen, Exclusive: The Koch Brothers' Million-Dollar Donor Club, Mother Jones, September 6, 2011
- ↑ Rebecca Leber, "Harold Hamm joins Team Romney," Think Progress, March 2, 2012.