- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
LA Department of Natural Resources begins charging O&G companies for public information
Posted on 5/8/17 at 1:36 pm
Posted on 5/8/17 at 1:36 pm
I'm not saying this was a move by Edwards, but it stinks of someone trying to scrape up money and handicap the O&G business at the same time.
LINK
This is free public data, that has been available for years. All of a sudden, the state is going to need about $24,000 dollars per O&G company if they want to continue actively exploring for O&G in the state.
Anyone have any insight? I hate to point fingers without confirmation, although I'm 90% sure I'm correct about who is pushing this.
LINK
This is free public data, that has been available for years. All of a sudden, the state is going to need about $24,000 dollars per O&G company if they want to continue actively exploring for O&G in the state.
Anyone have any insight? I hate to point fingers without confirmation, although I'm 90% sure I'm correct about who is pushing this.
This post was edited on 5/8/17 at 1:38 pm
Posted on 5/8/17 at 1:49 pm to Clyde Tipton
If it was free before than it's a chicken shite move by West Point Honor Code Edwards. But companies already pay to import data sets like this from DrillingInfo, IHS, and others. You pay to save your Geologists time by not having to put the data in manually to a mapping software, you just have to import the data. If you don't want to pay for it, then you normally need to hire 1 or 2 Geotechs to do this work.
Again if it wasn't free before this is just another thorn in the side of O&G that are thinking about doing business in LA. Another garbage move by our great Governor.
ETA: After reading, I've had to use SONRIS on mapping oil sands in Cameron for a project before at UL. I had to put everything in manually. Seems to benefit companies if they want to pay for it and not have to cover a salary for a tech.
You can still access all of the data for free that I used.
I think this service provides a lot more in depth material that I did not use.
Again if it wasn't free before this is just another thorn in the side of O&G that are thinking about doing business in LA. Another garbage move by our great Governor.
ETA: After reading, I've had to use SONRIS on mapping oil sands in Cameron for a project before at UL. I had to put everything in manually. Seems to benefit companies if they want to pay for it and not have to cover a salary for a tech.
You can still access all of the data for free that I used.
I think this service provides a lot more in depth material that I did not use.
This post was edited on 5/8/17 at 1:53 pm
Posted on 5/8/17 at 2:05 pm to MadtownTiger
Id the service has value, the State should charge those who use it the market rate. What else should they do?
Why does the O&G industry need the support of the La taxpayer?
Why does the O&G industry need the support of the La taxpayer?
Posted on 5/8/17 at 2:38 pm to MadtownTiger
quote:
companies already pay to import data sets like this from DrillingInfo, IHS, and others
I aware of other companies selling the data sets. When it's the only option, you have to bite the bullet. I can confrim websites like Drillinginfo are way better than the Texas Railroad Commision.
However, it's just that LA's data sets leave a lot to be desired, and now they want to bill for the shitty data they have. LA rarely has any elevation data, thus leaving it up to a geotech as you said to manually enter missing data. LA is also missing bottom hole data on about half of the horizontal wells drilled in the state. Crap in, crap out and now they want to bill us for it.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 2:49 pm to Clyde Tipton
After reading about this earlier today I was under the impression that the public would still be able to view the current information for free, but additional information in easier to use formats is available via subscription. Is that how you read it?
We're a small consulting firm and we use SONRIS on a daily basis. I sure hope they don't expect us to start paying for public data.
We're a small consulting firm and we use SONRIS on a daily basis. I sure hope they don't expect us to start paying for public data.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 3:12 pm to ForeverLSU02
quote:
but additional information in easier to use formats is available via subscription. Is that how you read it?
That's how I read it...no charge for the existing service. I think the state will be disappointed for how few subscribers they'll get.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 3:14 pm to ForeverLSU02
It seems like you can still access data via sonris lite and the gis system. However, those data sets are lacking in a lot of pertinent details.
This seems to apply to ROD, or Reports on Demand, that has a lot more data specific to each well.
This seems to apply to ROD, or Reports on Demand, that has a lot more data specific to each well.
Posted on 5/8/17 at 3:20 pm to Sid in Lakeshore
quote:
Why does the O&G industry need the support of the La taxpayer?
Why does the LA taxpayer need the support of the O&G Industry?
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News