Hydraulic Fracturing

  • |

    ‘Energy in Depth’ Sets the Record Straight on Hydraulic Fracturing

    Below is an “Issue Alert” published by Energy in Depth (EID) on May 4th—reprinted here with permission. EID is an online educational website sponsored by oil and gas producing associations from across the U.S. It’s mission is to respond to half-truths and outright falsehoods with science and facts. They do an excellent job. The piece below is an important read to help set the record straight about hydraulic fracturing. In recent months, “fracking” has been made out to be dangerous and unsafe and the hue and cry is to outlaw it as a method of harvesting natural gas. EID does a great job in responding to the charges being leveled against this important and safe (and 60-year-old) technology.

    Energy in Depth (May 4 Issue Alert) – Evidence is Not the Plural of Anecdote

    EID responds to NRDC’s running list of conjectures and distortions targeting safety, performance of hydraulic fracturing

    Last month, our friends over at the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) started up a running tally on their blog identifying “incidents where drinking water has been contaminated and hydraulic fracturing is a suspected cause.”

    Of course, in a country with more than 470,000 active natural gas wells in operation, providing American consumers with more than 20 trillion cubic feet of natural gas each year, the unfortunate (and inevitable) reality of the situation is that the occasional incident will occur. And since a good number of these wells depend on fracturing to be viable, it’s also inevitable that those who oppose the use of hydraulic fracturing on ideological grounds (as opposed to scientific ones) will continue to blame the heavily regulated, 60-year-old technology for just about everything that may go wrong under the sun.

    In a lot of ways, hydraulic fracturing has become the victim of its own success. Almost universally regarded as the sine-qua-non of energy production in America today, hydraulic fracturing—coupled with horizontal drilling technology—allows operators today to produce more than 10 times the amount of energy by drilling fewer than 1/10th the number of wells.

    That this is great news for the environment is so self-evident as to require no further explanation. But smaller footprints aside, it also allows us to tap an abundance of resources that simply could not be accessed without it. And that’s the thing: NRDC would prefer these resources be kept in the ground—and at least has the courage to say so. But it knows the way to do that isn’t to attack the jobs, revenue or people associated with bringing this extraordinary resource to the surface. It knows it can’t attack the carpenter. So it’s decided to attack his tools instead.

    Read More “‘Energy in Depth’ Sets the Record Straight on Hydraulic Fracturing”

  • | | | |

    NY Congressman Michael Arcuri Talks Out Both Sides of His Mouth on Drilling in the Marcellus

    Upstate New York Congressman Michael Arcuri says the BP oil disaster in the Gulf of Mexico means we should slow down (or perhaps not even start) drilling in the Marcellus Shale. Yes folks, we don’t make this stuff up! An oil drilling accident off-shore now equates with hydraulic fracturing of shale for natural gas. Go figure.

    Mr. Arcuri’s press release below, taken verbatim from his website, is a classic example of a politician talking out of both sides of his mouth:

    WASHINGTON, DC – U.S. Rep. Michael A. Arcuri (NY-24) issued the following statement renewing his call for a cautious approach to natural gas drilling in Upstate New York in light of the BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico:

    “The BP oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico demonstrates how vital it is for us to proceed with the utmost caution when considering natural gas drilling in Upstate New York.  While I support measures to open up energy reserves here at home and create new job opportunities for Upstate families, I also believe that we must carefully examine the potential outcome that natural gas drilling may have on the health of surrounding homes and communities.  Natural gas is a tremendous natural resource with great economic potential, but we must move forward in a way that protects an even more precious natural resource – our abundant supply of clean drinking water.

    “New York’s natural gas reserves are not declining in value as they wait to be developed, and methods become safer and more efficient as companies adapt techniques. But, as we have seen in the Gulf of Mexico, we cannot assume a spill will not happen or become careless in protecting the environment because one mistake could be devastating.

    “With so many residents who live in rural areas relying completely on well water, we cannot afford to sacrifice the purity of our water by rushing to drill.

    “It is my hope that this disaster serves as a reminder to us all just how high the stakes are and that we must take every precaution possible to ensure that a rush to drill the Marcellus Shale does not irreparably contaminate our water.”

    *Press Release (May 4) – Arcuri Renews Call for Cautious Approach to Natural Gas Drilling in Upstate New York in Light of Gulf of Mexico Oil Spill

  • |

    Anti-Driller Lets the Truth Slip Out: “It’s not about the science”

    Don’t look now, but somehow a little bit of truth seeped into the reporting about hydraulic fracturing. And it happened in the Syracuse Post-Standard:

    At a public forum in DeWitt, Syracuse University hydrology professor Don Siegel thought he had presented enough unbiased, scientific information to prove that drilling for natural gas in New York would benefit the state far more than it might hurt.

    Then someone in the audience of more than 75 stood up.

    “With all due respect, Dr. Siegel,” she said, “it’s not about the science.”

    Two months later, Siegel still stews over those words.

    The debate should be about the science, he contends, as do two retired SU professors, Bryce Hand and Joe Robinson — who have defended high-volume hydraulic fracturing as a safe method to capture a huge supply of underground natural gas in the Marcellus Shale formation.

    But opponents of hydrofracking have “dispensed with science and rely on fear” to turn the public against drilling, Siegel said.*

    The article quotes one scientist (a Cornell professor) who is opposed to drilling, but at least the pro-drilling (and scientific) side of the debate is fully explored in this article, and is well worth the read. Kudos to the Post-Standard for some honest reporting.

    *Syracuse Post-Standard (May 2) – Some scientists say hydrofracking benefits outweigh risks

  • | | | | | |

    More Delay Tactics, Elected Officials in NY Actively Oppose Drilling in the Marcellus Shale

    New York State’s future with drilling in the Marcellus Shale continues to be cloudy at best. While MDN believes drilling should start—now—hoping and wishing will not make it happen and New York landowners have to face the cold, hard reality it may not happen until summer 2011 at the very earliest (if indeed it ever happens). Now that the NY Department of Environmental Conservation is proposing two sets of rules for drilling—one for the New York City and Syracuse watershed areas, the other for everyone else—anti-drillers are using it as a wedge issue.

    Must be fun being an anti-drilling person in NY. First, you say over and over and over again that drilling in the Marcellus in the watershed may contaminate New York City’s water supply. And so, when finally the DEC throws up its hands and says, “OK, we’ll take drilling in the watershed off the table,” the new argument becomes, “See! See! If it’s not safe for the watershed, it’s not safe anywhere!” Gotta love that twisted logic. Point of fact: Hydraulic fracturing is safe everywhere, including the watersheds.

    Here’s some of the latest opposition to drilling from New York’s elected leaders:

    Assemblyman Kevin Cahill, D-Kingston, chairman of the Assembly’s Energy Committee, and Assemblywoman Barbara Lifton, D-Ithaca, are preparing legislation that will require the same drilling regulations for all state watersheds, including the Delaware.

    Assemblywoman Aileen Gunther, D-Forestburgh, recently co-sponsored a bill calling for a moratorium on drilling at least until a federal study on the impact of “fracking” on drinking water is complete — in about two years.

    And on Friday, Rep. Maurice Hinchey, D-Hurley, called on the Delaware Basin Commission, which approves withdrawals of Delaware River water used for “fracking,” to conduct an environmental impact study on the cumulative effects of those withdrawals before it considers any applications.*

    So, let’s recite the playbook: Claim it’s not safe. Claim it pollutes water supplies. And when all else fails, call for “let’s go slow and do more studies” and try to delay drilling for at least 2-3 more years to give the anti-drilling forces time to solidify opposition and completely kill it forever.

    And lest PA thinks they’re clear of all this, you’re not. The Delaware River Basic Commission has effectively blocked drilling in the Delaware River watershed for now. And your own U.S. Senator, Bob Casey, is asking the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to get involved in the situation in Dimock, PA.

    *Middletown Times Herald-Record (May 2) – Legislators want drilling rules fairly crafted

  • | | | |

    PA League of Women Voters Comes Out Against Drilling in the Marcellus

    The League of Women Voters of Pennsylvania is anti-drilling. Although they pretend to be a non-partisan group, they are anything but. Not only do they sponsor forums with anti-drilling speakers on a regular basis, they have now issued an official position in favor of an extraction tax on drilling in PA, and they have gone on record favoring strict new regulations for drilling in PA. While they don’t categorically say “don’t drill,” their positions and statements essentially do say it. Here’s the opening (alarmist) paragraph from the press statement announcing their official position on drilling in the Marcellus:

    FRAC is a four-letter word, F, R, A, C. FRAC impacts everyone in Pennsylvania. It requires the immediate attention of all–from young and old, from rich to poor, from Pittsburgh to Easton, and from Philadelphia to Erie. Why? Fracturing is an explosive process that expels natural gas from Marcellus Shale, a rock that lies deep beneath two-thirds of our Commonwealth. Natural gas extraction impacts our water, our land, our air, our communities, our public health, and our economy.*

    Yes, fracturing is an explosive process—small, controlled explosions that happen a mile below solid rock (conveniently left out of the statement). The language used in the press statement is distorting and pejorative about the process of drilling. But hey, it’ll bring in the contributions and it whips up the faithful!

    *Statement by Olivia Thorne, President, PALWV (May 3) – Press Conference on Marcellus Shale Natural Gas Extraction

  • | | | |

    NY DEC Message to Landowners in New York’s Watersheds: Forget About Drilling

    These are the bald facts of life for New York landowners who own land in either the New York City or Syracuse watershed areas and may want to lease their land for Marcellus Shale gas drilling: Forget it. That’s the loud and clear message from NY Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Commissioner Pete Grannis. After the DEC’s announcement of last week, no energy company in their right mind will be willing to drill in New York’s watersheds (although drilling companies currently drill safely in the Susquehanna River watershed in PA, and are trying to drill in the Delaware River watershed in PA).

    Reaction from landowners in New York has been mixed. While some believe watershed landowners are being unfairly penalized, others think this may speed up the process of drilling for everyone else by removing a key objection to drilling—that drilling may contaminate city water supplies.

    From a press release issued by the NY DEC last week:

    April 23 – New York State Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) Commissioner Pete Grannis today announced that due to the unique issues related to the protection of New York City and Syracuse drinking water supplies, these watersheds will be excluded from the pending generic environmental review process for natural gas drilling using high-volume horizontal drilling in the Marcellus shale formation. Instead, applications to drill in these watersheds will require a case-by-case environmental review process to establish whether appropriate measures to mitigate potential impacts can be developed. There are 58 pending applications for horizontal drilling in the Marcellus shale; no applications are located in either the New York City or the Skaneateles Lake watersheds (Syracuse utilizes the Skaneateles watershed).

    Read More “NY DEC Message to Landowners in New York’s Watersheds: Forget About Drilling”

  • | | | | |

    Opinion: How the AP and Other Media Outlets “Wag the Dog” Against Drilling in the Marcellus Shale

    Google News Search "Louis Matoushek" MDN notes with some amusement how news is manufactured—and is thankful blogs are around to help set the story straight. Case in point: A few days ago the Associated Press ran a single story about the “raging debate” over gas drilling in Northeast Pennsylvania. While the drilling debate is certainly ongoing, and there are plenty of people on both sides of the debate, the AP story would have us believe the forces of good (people against drilling) are rising up in overwhelming numbers to oppose the forces of evil (the nasty energy companies who want to rape and pillage the unspoiled landscape, along with the greedy landowners who enable them).

    That single AP anti-drilling story was picked up by no less than 250 media outlets, including large city newspapers, television stations and everything down to small town newspapers—all in the course of two days. One would have to be blind to miss the coverage and not think, “Maybe there are a lot of people opposed to drilling after all!” And all from a single story run again and again and again.

    The AP story starts this way:

    A few hundred yards from Louis Matoushek’s Wayne County farmhouse is a well that could soon produce not only natural gas, but a drilling boom in the wild and scenic Delaware River watershed.

    Energy companies have leased thousands of acres of land in Pennsylvania’s unspoiled northeastern tip, hoping to tap vast stores of gas in a sprawling rock formation—the Marcellus shale—that some experts believe could become the nation’s most productive gas field.*

    But wait, it’s not enough that the villainous drilling companies want to spoil the unspoiled land in PA. While that argument will sway some readers, let’s throw in the thing that works every time, the one thing that will magically turn everyone against drilling: Water.

    Standing in the way is a loose coalition of sporting groups, conservationists and anti-drilling neighbors. They contend that large-scale gas exploration so close to crucial waterways will threaten drinking water, ruin a renowned wild trout fishery, wreck property values, and transform a rural area popular with tourists into an industrial zone with constant noise and truck traffic.

    Both sides are furiously lobbying the Delaware River Basin Commission, the powerful federal-interstate compact agency that monitors water supplies for 15 million people, including half the population of New York City. The commission has jurisdiction because the drilling process will require withdrawing huge amounts of water from the watershed’s streams and rivers and because of the potential for groundwater pollution.*

    PA learns fast. They look over the border at New York where City politicians bleat about the New York City watershed as if drillers are about to poison the water supply of the entire City, and say, “Hey, if it works for them, maybe it will work for us.” And so, the shrill voices in PA have found their argument: Drilling pollutes water. Run the story (i.e. lie) enough times and after a while people will believe it.

    Don’t fall for the lie. And landowners: Make your voices heard!

    *Pittsburgh Tribute-Review/AP (Apr 19) – Gas-drilling foes fear for local water supplies

  • | | |

    Penn State to Monitor 50 Water Wells to Measure Marcellus Drilling Affects on Water Supplies

    Penn State will monitor water wells in Pennsylvania to see if they are affected by drilling activity. MDN applauds this effort:

    Penn State’s School of Forest Resources along with several Penn State Cooperative Extension county offices have received funding from the Center for Rural Pennsylvania and the Pennsylvania Water Resources Research Center to conduct a research study on the potential impacts of Marcellus gas drilling on rural drinking water supplies.

    The data collected from the study is for research purposes, Penn State officials said.

    About 50 private water wells will be selected for free water testing of 15 water quality parameters. Water samples will be collected by trained Penn State researchers both before and after nearby Marcellus gas well drilling has occurred.

    Interested residents of the southwest region of Pennsylvania can take the eligibility survey here, call Dana Rizzo at 724-837-1402 or e-mail.*

    *Fayette Daily Courier (Apr 12) – Ongoing Penn State study planned on impact of gas drilling

  • | | |

    Radiation Testing Shows Marcellus Shale Drill Cuttings are Safe for Chemung County, NY Landfill

    Chemung County, NY officials have released a report they commissioned from an independent certified health physicist that show levels of radiation in the Marcellus Shale drill cuttings coming from Pennsylvania Marcellus drilling operations to the Chemung County landfill are “well below” U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards for radiation.

    The gist of the report is that the soil that the county landfill would accept from Marcellus Shale drilling poses no health threat from radiation, said County Executive Tom Santulli.

    “These people are experts. They made it very clear that this material is less radioactive than the countertops in our houses and soil in our gardens,” Santulli said. “My message is simple—this stuff is not toxic. It’s no more radioactive than the soil in your garden and bricks on your house. All this testing verifies that. This is way below any EPA levels.

    “This would be equivalent to taking dirt from your backyard and using it in landfill,” he said. “It can be used for cover. It’s that safe.”*

    However, the debate still rages. Those opposed to drilling claim there is a significant threat to human health from the drill cuttings. County Executive Santulli says those opposed “have zero credibility” on the matter with no facts to back up their claims.

    For more information on both positions, see the full article in the Star-Gazette.

    *Elmira Star-Gazette (Apr 11) – County study says soil from gas drilling is safe

  • | | | | | |

    Cornell Hydraulic Fracturing Expert Headlines First Meeting of New York Residents Against Drilling (NYRAD) in Vestal, NY

    Ingraffea_Anthony Nearly one week ago, on March 31, MDN attended the kickoff meeting of New York Residents Against Drilling (NYRAD) at the Vestal Public Library in Broome County, NY. No, MDN is not anti-drilling! We attend to listen and learn. The drilling debate is increasingly political in tone. Those of us who support drilling need to listen to those in our communities who oppose it—as a courtesy, to be sure we have not missed important information that informs our own opinions, and so we understand our opponents’ arguments in this debate—to be able to intelligently respond to their (often inaccurate and overhyped) accusations.

    The meeting room at the Vestal Public Library was filled to capacity for the meeting with about 120 people attending. Local news media was there, as well as cameras from (presumably) NYRAD themselves. MDN observation: As was the case when DISH, TX Mayor Calvin Tillman recently visited, there were a number of balding men with gray-haired ponytails in the audience. MDN continues to posit the theory that many 60s hippies have found a new cause célèbre that now energizes them—gas drilling.

    The meeting was opened by a NYRAD official who introduced the evening’s main speaker, Professor Anthony Ingraffea. Dr. Ingraffea is a professor of civil and environmental engineering at Cornell University. His Ph.D. is in rock fracturing mechanics. He has done twenty years of research on hydraulic fracturing for companies like Schlumberger, Exxon and the Gas Research Institute. If anyone knows how rock fracturing works, it is Dr. Ingraffea. I eagerly anticipated what he would say about hydraulic fracturing and whether or not the process contaminates water supplies, a commonly leveled charge by drilling opponents.

    Dr. Ingraffea is an accomplished speaker. He is equal parts comedian and expert, and he knows how to “work a crowd.” I can easily imagine that he’s a favorite professor at Cornell, one whose classes fill quickly. In his opening remarks he admitted he feels passionately about the issue of drilling in New York State, and that he is opposed to it. He opened his talk with a technique often employed by those who are anti-drilling. He mentioned he loves fishing for trout in New York’s streams and he asked the audience a question: “Would you like to keep fishing in New York State?” The implication is that if drilling begins, trout fishing is finished. It’s a non sequitur—a statement that does not follow from the premise. In the course of his presentation he never once connected any dots that drilling activity would lead to poisoning of streams and the end of trout fishing. This was a tip-off that the evening might disappointingly hold more emotional statements rather than factual statements. Unfortunately, that’s exactly how it turned out.

    Read More “Cornell Hydraulic Fracturing Expert Headlines First Meeting of New York Residents Against Drilling (NYRAD) in Vestal, NY”

  • | | |

    T. Boone Pickens Talks About the Marcellus, Natural Gas, and America’s Energy Future

    The Philadelphia Inquirer recently interviewed T. Boone Pickens, the famous Texas oil billionaire and now “energy evangelist,” out to help chart a new course for energy in America. One of the main points in his Picken’s Plan is to use natural gas as a transition fuel to replace the country’s dependence on foreign oil. Mr. Pickens is less than impressed with President Obama’s recent decision to lift a drilling ban in certain areas of the North Atlantic. The problem, according to Pickens, is there are no appreciable oil reserves in the locations where the ban has been lifted.

    In the interview, Mr. Pickens had some interesting comments about drilling in the Marcellus Shale, including:

    Pickens told New York listeners he was mystified by the uproar gas drilling had caused in the Marcellus Shale region, where environmentalists oppose hydraulic fracturing (fracking), an extraction technology involving high-pressure injections of sand and drilling fluids into a well. The EPA recently announced it would study fracking.

    “You’ve been fracking wells in Texas and Oklahoma for 50 years,” Pickens said. “I’ve never heard anybody complain about your damaging the water. We’re just amused that people in Pennsylvania and New York are crying about messing up their water.”

    On the topic of electric vehicles:

    Pickens said he had nothing against electric vehicles and hybrids – he just thinks it will take too much time for them to penetrate the market of 220 million vehicles in America to have much effect on petroleum consumption.

    And electric vehicles don’t enter into the equation when it comes to heavy trucks, the biggest consumers of motor fuel; there is currently no commercial battery-driven vehicle capable of powering a tractor-trailer rig.

    “If you replace eight million 18-wheelers with natural gas, you have cut OPEC in half,” Pickens said.

    Don’t you just love a plain talking, truth-telling Texan! Finally, one of his favorite and now oft-repeated phrases:

    “Natural gas. It’s cleaner, cheaper, and it’s ours.”

    *Philadelphia Inquirer (Apr 4) – Pickens: Drilling isn’t the answer

  • | | |

    Are the Shale Cuttings Being Dumped at the Chemung County Landfill Radioactive?

    Part of the process of drilling a well includes disposing of the material that comes out of the well, including “cuttings” and mud—i.e., leftover dirt and rock. A “controversy” is brewing in Chemung County, NY where the county landfill is accepting cuttings from drillers over the border in the Pennsylvania Marcellus Shale. The problem? Sometimes shale cuttings have elevated levels of radioactivity. Those opposed to drilling are playing on people’s fear of the word “radioactive” hoping it will shut down the shipments of shale cuttings to the landfill. (Those shipments, by the way, are generating a nice revenue stream for Chemung County.)

    Anyone living in New York’s Southern Tier or Northeast Pennsylvania knows when buying a house you have the basement tested for radon—a naturally occurring radioactive gas that exists in high concentrations in some (not all) locations. Radon comes from the ground. Far below the ground radon gas exists, but also radium and even uranium. Radon and radium are both isotopes of decaying uranium. When you drill one to two miles under the earth, the cuttings that come out may have high concentrations of radioactivity (mostly radium). It’s not a good idea to dump highly radioactive material, naturally occurring or not, in a landfill. No argument on that count. But! What is a “high concentration?” Can it be treated if it is high? And, do cuttings usually have high radioactivity as a general rule?

    There is an easy answer here. Determine what levels are safe, and then test incoming loads of cuttings to be sure they don’t violate that standard. That’s just what Chemung County is in the process of doing. The system works—no one wants a health hazard for current and future generations.

    Read about the cuttings “controversy” here: Elmira Star Gazette (Mar 31) – Questions raised as landfill seeks to increase intake of Marcellus drilling waste

  • | | | | | |

    Binghamton Press & Sun-Bulletin Runs Wall-to-Wall Coverage of Marcellus Drilling Debate

    The Sunday, March 28 Binghamton Press & Sun-Bulletin (Broome County, NY) devoted a number of pages to the issue of drilling in the Marcellus Shale. The chief writer for the P&SB on these matters, Tom Wilbur, is anti-drilling, and it shows in his articles. As people on the anti-drilling side of the debate often do, they resort to unsubstantiated “facts” and vague nightmare scenarios. Today’s articles were no exception.

    On the front page we have the following articles:

    Marcellus Shale: Is it safe to drill?
    An abridged (and mostly one-sided) history of the shale gas drilling debate in the Southern Tier region of New York and Northeastern PA. Wilbur identifies some of the issues being debated, with the obligatory mention of Dimock, PA and the the isolated (only?) case of a driller who didn’t follow procedure and methane (not chemicals, but natural gas) migrated into drinking water supplies for 12 families. Dimock is the rallying cry for many who oppose drilling. He ends the article with the vague threat that anti-drillers will tie up the right to drill with legal harassment for as long as they possibly can. I believe him on that one.

    Landowners face fight over NYC watershed
    Politicians in New York City are making political hay out of the prospect of drilling with statements that drilling anywhere in the Catskill watershed area must be prevented at all costs because if the water supply for NYC is contaminated, they would have to install filters costing into the billions. The politicians from NYC want horizontal drilling banned in New York State as a preventative measure. And they’re threatening to tie up drilling with lawsuits. No one wants to pollute the City’s water supply! And no one will. What’s conveniently left out of the story by Wilbur is the fact that there is only one company, Chesapeake Energy, with any leases signed in the watershed, and that’s for 5,000 acres. Oh, and Chesapeake voluntarily said they would not drill in the watershed.

    Read More “Binghamton Press & Sun-Bulletin Runs Wall-to-Wall Coverage of Marcellus Drilling Debate”

  • | | | | | |

    Three Upstate Landowners on New York City Public Radio Discuss Drilling in the Marcellus

    An interesting radio segment from WNYC Public Radio. Leonard Lopate conducted an interview with three Upstate landowners. From the program description:

    We’ll look into the controversy over drilling for natural gas in Marcellus shale in Upstate New York, and discuss the challenges landowners face when deciding whether to lease their land to gas companies, the role of landowners coalitions, and how public officials are managing the drilling already occurring in their towns. We’ll speak with Mark Dunau, organic farmer from Delaware County; Jim Bays, Supervisor of the Town of Smyrna, in Chenango County; and Abby Tamber, steering committee member of the Central New York Landowners Coalition.*

    While Mr. Dunau is clearly anti-drilling and Mr. Bays is somewhat anti-drilling, Ms. Tamber does a good job of representing local landowner groups and the concerns of landowners. The questions by the host are pretty good, and as far as public radio goes, this is about as fair and balanced as it gets. Overall, a B+ from MDN. Worth listening to as it does discuss some very important issues for landowners. Embedded player below—give it a listen! The segment is 34 minutes in length.

    *WNYC (Mar 23) – The Lenoard Lopate Show

  • | | |

    EPA Director of Drinking Water Protection says States are “Doing a Good Job Already” Regulating Hydraulic Fracturing

    Brad Gill, executive director of the Independent Oil & Gas Association of New York, recently responded to an article in The Buffalo News supporting regulation of hydraulic fracturing by the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Marcellus Drilling News considers the EPA proposal way out of line and a federal power grab that is unwarranted and illegal. Seems that Mr. Gill thinks so too. From his letter to the editor:

    All processes related to natural gas exploration and extraction are regulated by the states which, because of their vast geological differences, can do a more thorough job. The U. S. Environmental Protection Agency would never be able to regulate these processes efficiently or cost-effectively. In fact, Steve Heare, director of EPA’s drinking water protection office, recently said states are “doing a good job already” regulating hydraulic fracturing, adding that there is no evidence that suggests the process contaminates water.*

    Be sure to click through and read the rest of the letter. Great summary of why hydraulic fracturing is safe, and why drilling should move forward now.

    *The Buffalo News (Mar 22) – Brad Gill: Hydraulic fracturing issues are already answered

  • | | |

    PA Marcellus Shale Coalition Responds to EPA Plan to “Study” Hydraulic Fracturing

    The following is a press release issued by the Pennsylvania Marcellus Shale Coalition in response to the rogue EPA’s announcement that they will study hydraulic fracturing (again):

    The Marcellus Shale Coalition today issued the following statement regarding a plan by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to study hydraulic fracturing:

    “The members of the Marcellus Shale Coalition develop and drill wells in an environmentally responsible manner, including the use of hydraulic fracturing to complete a well for production. Hydraulic fracturing has been an established and proven practice for 60 years in Pennsylvania and around the country, and has been regulated successfully by state agencies. There have been no identified groundwater contamination incidents due to hydraulic fracturing, as noted by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, other state regulators and the U.S. Groundwater Protection Council.

    “Similarly, there have not been impacts to surface water sources due to the practice. Water withdrawals in Pennsylvania are highly regulated by state agencies and water commissions, with a typical permitted withdrawal amounting to about one-half of one percent of the average flow of a stream or river.

    “The MSC will provide information and participate as appropriate in EPA’s study. Our industry is confident that an objective evaluation of hydraulic fracturing will reach the same conclusion as other studies – that it is a safe and well-regulated process that is essential to the development of natural gas.”*

    *PA Marcellus Shale Coalition (Mar 18) – MSC Statement on EPA Study of Hydraulic Fracturing