Chesapeake Energy Company

Chesapeake Energy Company Chesapeake Energy Company is a natural gas producer (CSRHUB 1). The corporation incorporates its actions and possesses immense compression, midstream, oilfield and drilling properties. Oklahoma City is where the head office of the company is located. Chesapeake holds principal places in Marcellus, Fayetteville, Barnett, Haynesville, Eagle Ford, Granite Wash and Bossier natural gas shale plays among other oil plays (CSRHUB 2).Advertising We will write a custom report sample on Chesapeake Energy Company specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More In April 2011, the corporation experienced an explosion, which caused deaths of three personnel and made poisonous fracking liquids flow into Pennsylvania farmland, Bradford County, and a close by the stream. The corporation was condemned for its fracking actions, which violated the Clean Water Act, the Recovery Act and the Federal Resource Conservation (Chesapeake Energy 5). Since then, the company has h ad to incorporate the issue of hydraulic fracturing into its overall corporate strategy so as to address the needs of its stakeholders, such as the national Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Regulatory Response Mechanism; Structures and Issues Following this happening, Chesapeake willingly suspended conclusion actions in the Eastern Division to carry out an assessment of the reliability of similar wellheads. Each wellhead in the assessment was disintegrated so that the apparatus could be studied and pressure examined. Currently, Chesapeake has dedicated itself to assessing water sources and the soil, in addition to presenting regular information, to DEP. The corporation has decided to make use of local well-control experts, for future reasons. Chesapeake has planned to work intimately with DEP to devise a plan for re-establishment of the site. For upcoming processes, Chesapeake has employed transformations in its omission of the service providers, who gather and assess well heads. Qualifications of contract workers will be assessed carefully, and broad citations for all stages of pressure assessment and tools calibration will be needed. International Lobbying Chesapeake Energy has lobbied the legislature on hydraulic fracturing (Business week 1). It also used $720,000 in the last quarter to hall the national regime on weather transformation and natural gas concerns (Business week 1). This was a 19% increase from the amount that was used in the third quarter.Advertising Looking for report on business economics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More Hydraulic fracturing entails instilling enormous quantities of sand, water and other compounds in the ground so as to release enormous natural gas stores. By use of this technique, Chesapeake has emerged to be a leading gas producer. It asserts that the practice is secure. In addition, Chesapeake has pressed for larger utilization of natural gas si nce it emits less hazardous substances than coal and other fuels. The multi Stakeholder Environment of Business Chesapeake makes use of social media and magazines to develop trust in societies opposed to hydraulic fracturing actions, and converting masses support into broad community approval. The corporation also employs social media in guaranteeing sustainability of eccentric gas and oil making, in order to design an efficient society, stakeholder, media and communal plan to surmount distress over hydraulic fracturing. Globalization and the Multinational Firm The main office of the company is located in Oklahoma City. Chesapeake operates many oil plays including Marcellus, Mississippi Lime, Fayetteville, Barnett, Haynesville, Pearsall, Eagle Ford, Cleveland, Granite Wash and Bossier natural gas shale plays among other oil plays. These operating regions are typified by long-lasting oil and natural gas reserves, recognized production potential and plentiful growth openings. The life Cycle of Social Issues A life cycle scrutiny denotes the carbon footprint of an exacting production fuel basis over its total manufacture, incineration and dumping cycle, instead of investigating the GHG emissions formed by igniting the fuel to produce electricity. Examining the GHG emissions created to produce electricity, for instance, natural gas is usually said to be about two times cleaner than coal. Corporate Social Responsibility Chesapeake Energy has a well- built Corporate Responsibility Policy, which summarizes its dedication to executing businesses morally, lawfully and in a financial, communal and environmental conscientious style. It also pledges to go on delivering sustainable productions to its members via excellent economic performance. Social Influences; Non-Governmental Organizations and their Effects on Business Operations The US State of Maryland, RepRisk and local groups, are among the non-governmental organizations that influence the business operations of Che sapeake. The US State of Maryland accused the corporation early this year for infringing several environmental Acts. RepRisk argues against the hydraulic fracturing method used by Chesapeake. Local societies argue that the actions of the corporation endanger the fragile ecological equilibrium.Advertising We will write a custom report sample on Chesapeake Energy Company specifically for you for only $16.05 $11/page Learn More Other non-governmental organizations that raised concerns included Union of Concerned Scientists, the Nature Conservancy and the Wilderness Society. As a result, the corporation came up with a code of conduct, which relates to securities, ecological fortification and justice in conducting business. Social Influences; Socially Responsible Investing Socially responsible investing explains an investment approach which attempts to exploit the fiscal profit and communal well being. Chesapeake Energy employs corporate actions that encourage e nvironmental preservation and user fortification through corporate governance. Anatomy of a Corporate Campaign Chesapeake has instigated a campaign called Rescue America. The objective of this campaign is to support transformation in the energy prospect of America, through hastening the move to compressed natural gas (CNG) as a shipping energy (Chesapeake Energy 3). First, the campaign seeks to institute bipartisan backing for liable federal reasons, in order to hasten the production of CNG-powered automobiles. Second, the campaign seeks to institute bipartisan backing for liable national and state reasons, in order to lay CNG dispensing entities at about 20% of the current service centers. Finally, it seeks to institute bipartisan backing for the expansion of the presented $1,000 national tax credit for the fitting of in-home CNG dispensing entities, which are linked to the current home gas lines. Codes of Conduct Chesapeake Energy Company and its subdivisions are dedicated to high values of moral behavior. Managers and workers of the corporation are required to abide by all pertinent rules, and to operate with sincerity and honor when executing duties at the corporation. The Code of conduct is divided into three key parts including accountability to the community; interaction with business cohorts and rivals; as well as securing assets. The corporation is dependent on the necessities, limitations and agreement principles of diverse regulatory groups, which relate to securities, ecological fortification and justice in conducting business among others. In its endeavors to promote excellent corporate citizenship, the corporation expects all its workers to conform to all policies of the company. Governance in the Sustainable Corporation The Board of Directors is liable for the supervision of the company and its dealings (Chesapeake Energy 2). This responsibility is normally executed by a senior administration team, which is entrusted with managing the daily acti ons of the company, in addition to implementing the proposed, business objectives and policies.Advertising Looking for report on business economics? Let's see if we can help you! Get your first paper with 15% OFF Learn More The Board counsels, confers with and supervises the work of the leading management group. The Chief Executive Officer is accountable for instituting efficient infrastructure with stakeholder societies including members, clients, affiliates, the public, creditors, suppliers, states, supervisory bodies and corporate allies. It is the rule of the company that executive communicates for the firm. The corporate has instituted plans to train workers and hearten them to be brand representatives of positive corporation icons. Environmental Issues in the Sustainable Corporation Chesapeake Energy has been condemned for its fracking actions, which violate a number of environmental policies (Chesapeake Energy 5). Early this year, the US State of Maryland litigated the corporation for infringing the Clean Water Act, the Recovery Act and the Federal Resource Conservation (Chesapeake Energy 5). This was in reaction to a massive spill that took place on April 19, 2011 causing many gallons of fracki ng fluid to run into Towanda Creek (Natural Gas Watch 2). Social Issues in the Sustainable Corporation Chesapeake Energy has also been condemned for assumed infringements on occupational wellbeing and protection. Early this year, an explosion at the Chesapeake hurt three personnel. The event apparently happened while they were transmitting water that was employed in the fracking procedure. Lately, Chesapeake was investigated, in South Africa, for its concern in shale discovery, in the Karoo Reserve (Chesapeake Energy 5). Local societies argued that the actions of the corporation would endanger the fragile ecological equilibrium of the reserve. In conclusion, the April 19 explosion at a natural gas well run by Chesapeake Energy has been a significant issue of concern. Since then, the company has had to incorporate the issue of hydraulic fracturing into its overall corporate strategy so as to address the needs of its stakeholders, such as the national Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA). Chesapeake Energy lobbied for the legislature on hydraulic fracturing, in the last quarter of the year. Chesapeake makes use of social media and magazines to develop trust in societies opposed to hydraulic fracturing actions, and converting masses support into broad community approval. The corporation also employs social media in guaranteeing sustainability of eccentric gas and oil making, in order to design an efficient society, stakeholder, media and communal plan to surmount distress over hydraulic fracturing. Chesapeake Energy has a well- built Corporate Responsibility Policy, which summarizes its dedication to executing businesses morally, lawfully and in a financial, communal and environmental conscientious style. Local societies argued that the actions of the corporation endanger the fragile ecological equilibrium. As a result, the corporation came up with a code of conduct, which relates to securities, ecological fortification and justice in conducting business. Chesap eake Energy employs corporate actions that encourage environmental preservation and user fortification through corporate governance. Chesapeake has instigated a campaign called Rescue America, which aims at supporting transformation in the energy prospect of America, through hastening the move to compressed natural gas (CNG) as a shipping energy. The Codes of conduct at Chesapeake Energy are divided into three key parts including accountability to the community; interaction with business cohorts and rivals; as well as securing assets. The corporation is dependent on the necessities, limitations and agreement principles of diverse regulatory groups, which relate to securities, ecological fortification and justice in conducting business among others. Business Week. †Chesapeake Energy spent $720,000 Lobbying in 4Q.† The Associated Press, 26 March 2010. Web. Chesapeake Energy. Chesapeake Energy Corporation Unveils National Campaign to Encourage Switch from Foreign Oil to Am erican Natural Gas in U.S. Transportation Sector. Web.. CSRHUB. Chesapeake Energy Corporation. Web. Natural Gas Watch. What Really Happened at the Chesapeake Blowout? Web.

Base and Superstructure Definition of Marxs Terms

Base and Superstructure Definition of Marxs Terms Base and superstructure are two linked theoretical concepts developed by Karl Marx, one of the founders of sociology. Simply put, base refers to the forces and relations of production- to all the people, relationships between them, the roles that they play, and the materials and resources involved in producing the things needed by society. Thomas Lohnes / Getty Images Superstructure Superstructure, quite simply and expansively, refers to all other aspects of society. It includes culture, ideology (world views, ideas, values, and beliefs), norms and expectations, identities that people inhabit, social institutions (education, religion, media, family, among others), the political structure, and the state (the political apparatus that governs society). Marx argued that the superstructure grows out of the base, and reflects the interests of the ruling class that controls it. As such, the superstructure justifies how the base operates, and in doing so, justifies the power of the ruling class. From a sociological standpoint, it’s important to recognize that neither the base nor the superstructure is naturally occurring, nor are they static. They are both social creations (created by people in a society), and both are the accumulation of social processes and interactions between people that are constantly playing out, shifting, and evolving. Extended Definition Marx theorized that the superstructure effectively grows out of the base and that it reflects the interests of the ruling class that controls the base (called the â€Å"bourgeoisie† in Marx’s time). In The German Ideology, written with Friedrich Engels, Marx offered a critique of Hegel’s theory of how society operates, which was based on principles of Idealism. Hegel asserted that ideology determines social lifethat the reality of the world around us is determined by our mind, by our thoughts. Historical Shifts to a Capitalist Mode of Production Considering historical shifts in relations of production, most importantly, the shift from feudalist to capitalist production, Marx was not content with Hegel’s theory. He believed that the shift to a capitalist mode of production had sweeping implications for the social structure, culture, institutions, and ideology of society- that it reconfigured the superstructure in drastic ways. He posed instead a â€Å"materialist† way of understanding history (â€Å"historical materialism†), which is the idea that the material conditions of our existence, what we produce in order to live and how we go about doing so, determines all else in society. Building on this idea, Marx posed a new way of thinking about the relationship between thought and lived reality with his theory of the relationship between base and superstructure. Importantly, Marx argued that this is not a neutral relationship. There is a lot at stake in the way the superstructure emerges out of the base, because as the place where norms, values, beliefs, and ideology reside, the superstructure serves to legitimate the base. The superstructure creates the conditions in which the relations of production seem right, just, or even natural, though, in reality, they may be deeply unjust, and designed to benefit only the minority ruling class, rather than the majority working class. Marx argued that religious ideology that urged people to obey authority and work hard for salvation in the afterlife was a way in which superstructure justifies the base because it generates an acceptance of one’s conditions as they are. Following Marx, Antonio Gramsci elaborated on the role of education in training people to obediently serve in their designated roles in the division of labor, depending upon into which class they were born. Marx and Gramsci also wrote about the role of the state- the political apparatus- in protecting the interests of the ruling class. In recent history, state bailouts of collapsing private banks is an example of this. Early Writing In his early writing, Marx was very committed to the principles of historical materialism, and the related one-way causal relationship between base and superstructure. However, as his theory evolved and grew more complex over time, Marx reframed the relationship between base and superstructure as dialectical, meaning that each influences what happens in the other. Thus, if something changes in the base, it causes changes in the superstructure, and vice versa. Marx believed in the possibility of a revolution among the working class because he thought that once workers realized the extent to which they were exploited and harmed for the benefit of the ruling class, then they would decide to change things, and a significant change in the base, in terms of how goods are produced, by whom, and on what terms, would follow.