Abandoned oil and gas wells in US bring fears of leak dangers, ABC News investigation finds

Rancher Laura Briggs rises early to care for the livestock scattered across her homestead on the arid plains of West Texas. Briggs and her husband saved up for years to purchase the land and build their family's dream home near the Pecos River.

"It was a lifestyle choice to raise our kids rurally in the hopes that they would appreciate nature and where their food comes from and hard work and the other side of life that's not so easy," Briggs, a mother of four, told ABC News. "It could have been so much better without the fight."

The "fight" that Briggs says has come to dominate her life in recent years centers around the 30-plus abandoned oil and gas wells littered across her ranch and left to rot by their former operators. She knew the inactive wells were on the land when she bought it, but what she didn't expect to find was that some were leaking and no one was taking responsibility for the cleanup.

"I thought the state regulated this stuff. I never thought that this would be allowed to go on," Briggs said.

As a result, Briggs' dream of a bucolic ranch life has instead been marred by animals found covered in oil, concerns for her groundwater and air quality, and even the looming threat of a random explosion.

"My biggest fear is that I have a catastrophe close to my house. We have some wells close to the house and we don't know what's going on underground," she said.

More than 3.5 million abandoned oil and gas wells are littered across the United States and an estimated 14 million Americans live within a mile of one of the wells. Those that leak are known in West Texas as "zombie wells" and can contaminate groundwater and spew carcinogenic chemicals and potent greenhouse gases into the environment, according to the Department of the Interior. In some cases, the wells have been blamed for home explosions.

DiabloWags said:

---

Abandoned oil and gas wells in US bring fears of leak dangers, ABC News investigation finds

Rancher Laura Briggs rises early to care for the livestock scattered across her homestead on the arid plains of West Texas. Briggs and her husband saved up for years to purchase the land and build their family's dream home near the Pecos River.

"It was a lifestyle choice to raise our kids rurally in the hopes that they would appreciate nature and where their food comes from and hard work and the other side of life that's not so easy," Briggs, a mother of four, told ABC News. "It could have been so much better without the fight."

The "fight" that Briggs says has come to dominate her life in recent years centers around the 30-plus abandoned oil and gas wells littered across her ranch and left to rot by their former operators. She knew the inactive wells were on the land when she bought it, but what she didn't expect to find was that some were leaking and no one was taking responsibility for the cleanup.

"I thought the state regulated this stuff. I never thought that this would be allowed to go on," Briggs said.

As a result, Briggs' dream of a bucolic ranch life has instead been marred by animals found covered in oil, concerns for her groundwater and air quality, and even the looming threat of a random explosion.

"My biggest fear is that I have a catastrophe close to my house. We have some wells close to the house and we don't know what's going on underground," she said.

More than 3.5 million abandoned oil and gas wells are littered across the United States and an estimated 14 million Americans live within a mile of one of the wells. Those that leak are known in West Texas as "zombie wells" and can contaminate groundwater and spew carcinogenic chemicals and potent greenhouse gases into the environment, according to the Department of the Interior. In some cases, the wells have been blamed for home explosions.

---

Red states basically ruin themselves and poison their residents.

Disgusting.

VOTE BLUE

SBGold said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Abandoned oil and gas wells in US bring fears of leak dangers, ABC News investigation finds

Rancher Laura Briggs rises early to care for the livestock scattered across her homestead on the arid plains of West Texas. Briggs and her husband saved up for years to purchase the land and build their family's dream home near the Pecos River.

"It was a lifestyle choice to raise our kids rurally in the hopes that they would appreciate nature and where their food comes from and hard work and the other side of life that's not so easy," Briggs, a mother of four, told ABC News. "It could have been so much better without the fight."

The "fight" that Briggs says has come to dominate her life in recent years centers around the 30-plus abandoned oil and gas wells littered across her ranch and left to rot by their former operators. She knew the inactive wells were on the land when she bought it, but what she didn't expect to find was that some were leaking and no one was taking responsibility for the cleanup.

"I thought the state regulated this stuff. I never thought that this would be allowed to go on," Briggs said.

As a result, Briggs' dream of a bucolic ranch life has instead been marred by animals found covered in oil, concerns for her groundwater and air quality, and even the looming threat of a random explosion.

"My biggest fear is that I have a catastrophe close to my house. We have some wells close to the house and we don't know what's going on underground," she said.

More than 3.5 million abandoned oil and gas wells are littered across the United States and an estimated 14 million Americans live within a mile of one of the wells. Those that leak are known in West Texas as "zombie wells" and can contaminate groundwater and spew carcinogenic chemicals and potent greenhouse gases into the environment, according to the Department of the Interior. In some cases, the wells have been blamed for home explosions.

---

Red states basically ruin themselves and poison their residents.

Disgusting.

VOTE BLUE

---

You seem to continually undermine your messaging by not reading stuff and making sheet up.

The problem California wells discussed in the article are just the tip of the iceberg, Sorry, this hits a nerve with me personally.

There remain thousands of idle and orphaned wells in California. In talking with former colleagues the cost for decommissioning wells is about 70K per well in the US and twice that in CA, appreciating various local conditions can change costs. To get an operating license for a well, you need to pay annual fees to be used for decommissioning and post expensive bonds as well. This adds to cost California consumers pay as well as CA utility customers. These bonds are like a decommissioning fund the State is supposed to use to plug each well in connection with decommissioning.. This doesn't mean the State actually does the decommission, that falls on the operator, unless the operator goes BK, in which case the State is supposed to call the bond and decommission the well.

While operators continue to be responsible for paying a fee while the well is an idle wells, those fees may be much less than the cost of decommissioning a single well. But the State has been collecting a fee also while the well operated; thus, there should be sufficient funds to plug and decommission the wells, even without calling the bonds.

And on top of that these wells are owned by Big Oil which should have the money to decommission it's wells right? Well not exactly. Since CA regulators got into it with Big Oil on other stuff, companies like Shell and ExxonMobile have sold their CA subs and left the State, and are off the hook. The only buyers (with limited exceptions) that assume all the obligations have been entities with shaky financial conditions, because no one can raise capital for CA investments in the oil and gas area.

All of which gets us to those thousands of wells. Try being the lawyer representing other government agencies that serve the public who find these wells next to their water or other facilities and demand the Department of Conservation to get the wells decommissioned. You are met with a wall of bureaucratic intransience. My favorite conversations would go something like this: DOC Chief Engineer: "We have no money to do this. Me: "Wait, you collect tons of fees, keep bonds in place and every freaking year there are State bonds that are stupidly approved by the voters, you get a slice of that. Where does the money go? You appreciate that I'm talking about water you and your children will be drinking?" DOC CE: "We have no money". Me: "what about those federal grants I keep reading about?" DOC CE: "We have no money". Me: Why don't you go after the operators? DOC CE: "they have no money and will go BK." And I understand at least this response, because if you put an operator under, you potentially lose existing wells from operating (which means less fees) and you switch liability to the State. Which gets me back to the question: where did all money go?

Now you could join an environmental group who is trying to get the government to do its job, like I and my fellow fed-up attorneys have. Or I suppose you could simply spout some uniformed propagandist BS, thereby losing all credibility, and help in messengering caring about a legit problem in this State out of existance.

BTW: No truth to the rumor I asked Diablo to post on this issue.

WTH, the lower environmental regs and lack of funding to clean up environmental issues in red states is not true? That's crazy

VOTE BLUE

wifeisafurd said:

---

SBGold said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Abandoned oil and gas wells in US bring fears of leak dangers, ABC News investigation finds

Rancher Laura Briggs rises early to care for the livestock scattered across her homestead on the arid plains of West Texas. Briggs and her husband saved up for years to purchase the land and build their family's dream home near the Pecos River.

"It was a lifestyle choice to raise our kids rurally in the hopes that they would appreciate nature and where their food comes from and hard work and the other side of life that's not so easy," Briggs, a mother of four, told ABC News. "It could have been so much better without the fight."

The "fight" that Briggs says has come to dominate her life in recent years centers around the 30-plus abandoned oil and gas wells littered across her ranch and left to rot by their former operators. She knew the inactive wells were on the land when she bought it, but what she didn't expect to find was that some were leaking and no one was taking responsibility for the cleanup.

"I thought the state regulated this stuff. I never thought that this would be allowed to go on," Briggs said.

As a result, Briggs' dream of a bucolic ranch life has instead been marred by animals found covered in oil, concerns for her groundwater and air quality, and even the looming threat of a random explosion.

"My biggest fear is that I have a catastrophe close to my house. We have some wells close to the house and we don't know what's going on underground," she said.

More than 3.5 million abandoned oil and gas wells are littered across the United States and an estimated 14 million Americans live within a mile of one of the wells. Those that leak are known in West Texas as "zombie wells" and can contaminate groundwater and spew carcinogenic chemicals and potent greenhouse gases into the environment, according to the Department of the Interior. In some cases, the wells have been blamed for home explosions.

---

Red states basically ruin themselves and poison their residents.

Disgusting.

VOTE BLUE

---

You seem to continually undermine your messaging by not reading stuff and making sheet up.

The problem California wells discussed in the article are just the tip of the iceberg, Sorry, this hits a nerve with me personally.

There remain thousands of idle and orphaned wells in California. In talking with former colleagues the cost for decommissioning wells is about 70K per well in the US and twice that in CA, appreciating various local conditions can change costs. To get an operating license for a well, you need to pay annual fees to be used for decommissioning and post expensive bonds as well. This adds to cost California consumers pay as well as CA utility customers. These bonds are like a decommissioning fund the State is supposed to use to plug each well in connection with decommissioning.. This doesn't mean the State actually does the decommission, that falls on the operator, unless the operator goes BK, in which case the State is supposed to call the bond and decommission the well.

While operators continue to be responsible for paying a fee while the well is an idle wells, those fees may be much less than the cost of decommissioning a single well. But the State has been collecting a fee also while the well operated; thus, there should be sufficient funds to plug and decommission the wells, even without calling the bonds.

And on top of that these wells are owned by Big Oil which should have the money to decommission it's wells right? Well not exactly. Since CA regulators got into it with Big Oil on other stuff, companies like Shell and ExxonMobile have sold their CA subs and left the State, and are off the hook. The only buyers (with limited exceptions) that assume all the obligations have been entities with shaky financial conditions, because no one can raise capital for CA investments in the oil and gas area.

All of which gets us to those thousands of wells. Try being the lawyer representing other government agencies that serve the public who find these wells next to their water or other facilities and demand the Department of Conservation to get the wells decommissioned. You are met with a wall of bureaucratic intransience. My favorite conversations would go something like this: DOC Chief Engineer: "We have no money to do this. Me: "Wait, you collect tons of fees, keep bonds in place and every freaking year there are State bonds that are stupidly approved by the voters, you get a slice of that. Where does the money go? You appreciate that I'm talking about water you and your children will be drinking?" DOC CE: "We have no money". Me: "what about those federal grants I keep reading about?" DOC CE: "We have no money". Me: Why don't you go after the operators? DOC CE: "they have no money and will go BK." And I understand at least this response, because if you put an operator under, you potentially lose existing wells from operating (which means less fees) and you switch liability to the State. Which gets me back to the question: where did all money go?

Now you could join an environmental group who is trying to get the government to do its job, like I and my fellow fed-up attorneys have. Or I suppose you could simply spout some uniformed propagandist BS, thereby losing all credibility, and help in messengering caring about a legit problem in this State out of existance.

BTW: No truth to the rumor I asked Diablo to post on this issue.

---

Not disagreeing at all.

But the key part of the article:

"She knew the inactive wells were on the land when she bought it, but what she didn't expect to find was that some were leaking and no one was taking responsibility for the cleanup."

No doubt the price she paid reflected the known conditions. Any person buying land with wells should account for the cost of capping and closing out the wells.

BearGoggles said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

SBGold said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

Abandoned oil and gas wells in US bring fears of leak dangers, ABC News investigation finds

Rancher Laura Briggs rises early to care for the livestock scattered across her homestead on the arid plains of West Texas. Briggs and her husband saved up for years to purchase the land and build their family's dream home near the Pecos River.

"It was a lifestyle choice to raise our kids rurally in the hopes that they would appreciate nature and where their food comes from and hard work and the other side of life that's not so easy," Briggs, a mother of four, told ABC News. "It could have been so much better without the fight."

The "fight" that Briggs says has come to dominate her life in recent years centers around the 30-plus abandoned oil and gas wells littered across her ranch and left to rot by their former operators. She knew the inactive wells were on the land when she bought it, but what she didn't expect to find was that some were leaking and no one was taking responsibility for the cleanup.

"I thought the state regulated this stuff. I never thought that this would be allowed to go on," Briggs said.

As a result, Briggs' dream of a bucolic ranch life has instead been marred by animals found covered in oil, concerns for her groundwater and air quality, and even the looming threat of a random explosion.

"My biggest fear is that I have a catastrophe close to my house. We have some wells close to the house and we don't know what's going on underground," she said.

More than 3.5 million abandoned oil and gas wells are littered across the United States and an estimated 14 million Americans live within a mile of one of the wells. Those that leak are known in West Texas as "zombie wells" and can contaminate groundwater and spew carcinogenic chemicals and potent greenhouse gases into the environment, according to the Department of the Interior. In some cases, the wells have been blamed for home explosions.

---

Red states basically ruin themselves and poison their residents.

Disgusting.

VOTE BLUE

---

You seem to continually undermine your messaging by not reading stuff and making sheet up.

The problem California wells discussed in the article are just the tip of the iceberg, Sorry, this hits a nerve with me personally.

There remain thousands of idle and orphaned wells in California. In talking with former colleagues the cost for decommissioning wells is about 70K per well in the US and twice that in CA, appreciating various local conditions can change costs. To get an operating license for a well, you need to pay annual fees to be used for decommissioning and post expensive bonds as well. This adds to cost California consumers pay as well as CA utility customers. These bonds are like a decommissioning fund the State is supposed to use to plug each well in connection with decommissioning.. This doesn't mean the State actually does the decommission, that falls on the operator, unless the operator goes BK, in which case the State is supposed to call the bond and decommission the well.

While operators continue to be responsible for paying a fee while the well is an idle wells, those fees may be much less than the cost of decommissioning a single well. But the State has been collecting a fee also while the well operated; thus, there should be sufficient funds to plug and decommission the wells, even without calling the bonds.

And on top of that these wells are owned by Big Oil which should have the money to decommission it's wells right? Well not exactly. Since CA regulators got into it with Big Oil on other stuff, companies like Shell and ExxonMobile have sold their CA subs and left the State, and are off the hook. The only buyers (with limited exceptions) that assume all the obligations have been entities with shaky financial conditions, because no one can raise capital for CA investments in the oil and gas area.

All of which gets us to those thousands of wells. Try being the lawyer representing other government agencies that serve the public who find these wells next to their water or other facilities and demand the Department of Conservation to get the wells decommissioned. You are met with a wall of bureaucratic intransience. My favorite conversations would go something like this: DOC Chief Engineer: "We have no money to do this. Me: "Wait, you collect tons of fees, keep bonds in place and every freaking year there are State bonds that are stupidly approved by the voters, you get a slice of that. Where does the money go? You appreciate that I'm talking about water you and your children will be drinking?" DOC CE: "We have no money". Me: "what about those federal grants I keep reading about?" DOC CE: "We have no money". Me: Why don't you go after the operators? DOC CE: "they have no money and will go BK." And I understand at least this response, because if you put an operator under, you potentially lose existing wells from operating (which means less fees) and you switch liability to the State. Which gets me back to the question: where did all money go?

Now you could join an environmental group who is trying to get the government to do its job, like I and my fellow fed-up attorneys have. Or I suppose you could simply spout some uniformed propagandist BS, thereby losing all credibility, and help in messengering caring about a legit problem in this State out of existance.

BTW: No truth to the rumor I asked Diablo to post on this issue.

---

Not disagreeing at all.

But the key part of the article:

"She knew the inactive wells were on the land when she bought it, but what she didn't expect to find was that some were leaking and no one was taking responsibility for the cleanup."

No doubt the price she paid reflected the known conditions. Any person buying land with wells should account for the cost of capping and closing out the wells.

---

Well the article is written by a journalist, which means it comes with a bias. So yes, a buyer should have known the condition of the wells before buying the property and would have reflected the condition of the wells in the price. Hard for me to imagine anyone buying land that will be used in a business without obtaining a Phase 1 Report first which would disclose the status of the wells, If "she" was represented by counsel or a broker in the transaction, there likely is a malpractice claim if they didn't tell her to get a Phase 1.

My comments were aimed at the lack of regulatory oversight and action that seems endemic to blue and red states.

SBGold said:

---

WTH, the lower environmental regs and lack of funding to clean up environmental issues in red states is not true? That's crazy

VOTE BLUE

---

You really don't know what you're talking about.

CA has all the regs in the world you can ask for, and rakes in a lot of money and does very little about the problem. You seem to equate what you perceive is an extra level of regulation and taking people's money in blue states, with the problems of abandoned wells somehow being cured.

The article, which you obviously didn't read, looked at wells in five states: Texas, CA, New York, Colorado and Kansas. What is crazy is that you are assuming CA, NY and Colorado must be red states. No where did the article say this was a red versus blue state issue, or discuss any varying level of regulation among states or funds being available for decommissioning wells, or any of the other BS you just make up and assume. For some perspective, the states that regulate oil and gas wells the most tend to be the states that produce the most oil and gas: Texas, CA, New Mexico, Colorado, Alaska and North Dakota. That said, most of the standards that regulate the oil and gas industry tend to be set by the federal government, and enforced by state agencies. Not sure how any of that fits in your bogus regualtory framework.

If you don't think people see what you are doing, you are wrong, and let me suggest that when you do that sort of thing, you undercut what people think. An example is where people like you start politicizing and make overly exaggerated claims regarding global warming, which led to distrust and even the perspective that global warming doesn't exist.

BearGoggles said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

concordtom said:

---

So, what's the solution?
Sit around and take solace from the jokes while he wrecks the place?

---

maybe you missed the part about Trump being ineffective.

---

Trump is not just ineffective, but his policies (as opposed to his behavior/personality) are largely mainstream and in some cases very popular. Not by the standards of this board, but certainly by the standards of 50%+ of the country. Prior to covid, no one felt Trump "wrecked the place".

Part of the dynamic is the left and main stream media (I repeat myself) overreact to everything Trump says, but pay little attention to what he actually does. That is not an accident - it serves their interest to do so. Fires up the base, generates ratings/clicks, etc.

But nobody outside of the far left believes Trump was Hitler or whatever. There may be a chicken little effect at this point - I think that tactic is not nearly as effective as it was before Biden/Harris.

I have no idea what the next 4 years will bring. Trump enters office as a lame duck president with a very narrow margin in the house and the filibuster (which the dems wanted to eliminate!) creating further impediments. Trump has shown no appetite for attacking tough issues like spending, entitlements, etc.

A lot will depend on whether the democrat party returns to the center or continues to promote policies that don't resonate with most people. If they don't, then Vance and others will win greater support and the republicans will do well in 2026/2028.

---

I thought he wrecked the place, prior to Covid. He was changing all sorts of traditional norms of behavior in government, and spreading his negative attitude and example around the country.

There's a reason why millions marched in pink hats the day after his inauguration.

You're too focused on your perceived enemy to find criticism in him.