DRBC Secretly Deliberating on Rules to Lift Shale Drilling Ban
The Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) held a regularly scheduled business meeting yesterday in Washington Crossing, PA. As predicted, a number of anti-fossil fuel zealots turned up to make noise about the PennEast Pipeline project–and about the prospect of the DRBC allowing shale drilling. As we disclosed yesterday, the zealots all read from the same document prepared by Her Eminence, THE Delaware Riverkeeper, Maya van Rossum (see THE Dela. Riverkeeper Issues Final Orders to Minions re DRBC Mtg). It’s tiresome reporting on the same, predictable behavior by children in adult bodies who never learned manners from their parents. So we’re not going to comment on the circus freak show that was the public comment period yesterday. However, there was an interesting development to report. Lt. Col. Michael Bliss of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Army Corps is one of the standing members of the DRBC Commission) read a statement about the history and possible future of DRBC regulations that may allow shale drilling in the basin. You read that right. According to Bliss, since 2010 the staff of the DRBC has actively been engaged in private (i.e. secret) discussions with various state agencies (we’re assuming the Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection) in an effort to, at some point, release regulations that will allow shale drilling in the Delaware River Basin. He said those discussions are ongoing and that before any kind of regs are released, there will be plenty of notice and public hearings…
Read More “DRBC Secretly Deliberating on Rules to Lift Shale Drilling Ban”
You’ve heard the phrase, “The Emperor has no clothes.” A lawsuit against the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) by a Wayne County, PA landowner over the DRBC’s ongoing moratorium of shale gas drilling, is exposing the DRBC as having “no clothes” when it comes to their authority over shale drilling (see 
Not long after the Pennsylvania legislature passed the Act 13 Marcellus Shale drilling law in 2012, signed into law by then-Gov. Tom Corbett, seven selfish towns sued, claiming they should have the right (via zoning laws) to determine just where an oil and gas well can be located within their borders. The challenge was brought by rabid anti-drillers and appealed all the way to the PA Supreme Court, where unfortunately the antis won (see 
We spotted an article on the Hot Air website about a court challenge in Colorado that may (or may not) have implications for shale drilling in places like New York State. Several years ago the ultra-liberal Boulder County, CO banned fracking. Landowners in the county are unconstitutionally denied the right to use their land as they see fit. So Colorado’s Attorney General, Cynthia Coffman, has just sued Boulder County to have the frack ban declared illegal. IF the case were to get appealed to a federal court and IF the case decided that Boulder County does not have the right to ban fracking, might that not serve as a precedence for New York and a statewide ban? We know, we know. It’s a stretch and a lot of IFs. But it is an intriguing idea–and a case worth watching…
In January MDN told you about an effort in Virginia to ensure new changes in Virginia’s environmental regulations that require “mandatory disclosure of fracking chemicals, baseline water testing and monitoring, and spill prevention and response planning” would still protect trade secrets–the exact combinations of chemicals used by drillers when fracking (see 
It’s always breathtaking, and disturbing, when a small group of individuals decide to take away the Constitutional property rights of their fellow citizens. We always wonder, is this how it started in 1920s Germany? The Augusta County (VA) Board of Supervisors voted 6 to 1 Wednesday night to illegally take away the property rights of every citizen in the county by enacting a total ban on fracking in the county. Is there any shale in the county to frack? No idea, but we doubt it. To be fair, the first county in Virginia to become lawless in this regard was King George County, last summer (see 
For some reason Duke University seems to have a fascination with the Marcellus Shale and seeks to denigrate it with fake research reports. Of course there’s big money in research grants, which is why Duke keeps issuing bogus studies. In fact, last year Duke was exposed for doctoring research data in a scheme to grab $200 million in grant money (see 
We now have a bit more of the back story and reason why anti-frackers turned out in large numbers to attend last Thursday’s meeting of the Delaware Basin River Commission (see 
Maryland’s heavily Democrat legislature is doing its best to slap a permanent ban on fracking in the state (see 
As we warned you earlier this week, a large contingent of anti-fossil fuel 
A bright and enterprising graduate student at Penn State University cooked up an interesting research project for her graduate thesis. With all this talk about “fracked gas” having boatloads of radon in it, would using such radon-laden gas as the source fuel for a gas-fired electric plant pose a risk to those who live near it? In particular, could the gas-fired plants on Penn State’s own campus be posing a danger to students, faculty and staff that live and work on campus? Alison Stidworthy, a former graduate student in the Department of Meteorology at Penn State (and now employed as a site manager for the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection), led the research effort, which was the topic of her master’s degree thesis (copy below). What did Alison find? High levels of radon do not leak from the plants and pose no health issues to those living and working nearby. Which makes perfect sense. How do you get rid of radon in your basement when it’s present? You vent it to the outside, where it quickly dissipates and becomes inert. Alison, along with several of her professors, recently published her work as a study in the Journal of the Air & Waste Management Association...
We caught sight of an interesting new study just published in the journal BMC Microbiology by researchers at the University of Arkansas/Fayetteville. Researchers studied (did in the field studies) of streams both near and far from fracking activities in the Arkansas Fayetteville Shale. No, the research is not directly about the Marcellus/Utica, although our shale plays are mentioned several times in the study. However, the research and its results apply to our region as well as all shale plays. In the study just published titled, “Do biofilm communities respond to the chemical signatures of fracking? A test involving streams in North-central Arkansas” (full copy below), researchers looked to see if the chemistry of streams was altered by nearby fracking activity. They evaluated “benthic biofilm community composition as a proxy for stream chemistry” to see if bacteria and other tiny critters that show up under a microscope display differences between the streams near fracking, and those not near fracking activity. What did they find? No difference. No change. No impacts from fracking on streams and the microbiology of those streams. What they did find is that streams are affected by agriculture and urbanization…
Two weeks ago MDN told you about an effort in Virginia to ensure new changes in Virginia’s environmental regulations that require “mandatory disclosure of fracking chemicals, baseline water testing and monitoring, and spill prevention and response planning” would still protect trade secrets–the exact combinations of chemicals used by drillers when fracking (see 
Make no mistake. When the Heinz Endowments, a left-leaning, big-moneyed nonprofit invests its money via grants into programs that have anything to do with shale drilling, it is for one purpose and one purpose only: to smear the reputation of fracking and to make oil and gas look bad. They fund all sorts of “research” efforts that mysteriously always come to the same conclusion: fracking is bad. Funny how that works. So it was with interest we noted they’ve purchased for themselves another academic researcher rather cheaply–just $48,000–with a mission to test water wells near fracking sites. The aim? To prove that fracking contaminates water wells. Which is the claim made by groups like Heinz for years–and has never been proven. Millions of wells fracked, with a small number where methane has migrated into those wells (a fixable condition). NEVER has there been chemical transmission from fracking into groundwater wells. But that doesn’t stop Heinz from trying to manufacture evidence. Here’s their latest effort…
Here’s a story we admittedly don’t know much about, a story that kind of came out of left field. It may affect some shale drillers in southwest PA. Sometimes drillers want to lease and drill under coal mines. Since coal mines sink large holes in the ground, there are existing guidelines in place for how closely an oil/gas well can be drilled on or under a coal mine–guidelines put in place in 1957. As a result of legislation passed in 2011 called Act 2, a review was conducted to see if the standards for oil/gas drilling near coal mines might be modified–we’re assuming “relaxed,” allowing such drilling to happen in conditions not currently allowed. A column of rock called a pillar needs to be of a certain size/width in order for drilling to take place. An independent study to review the size of pillars, called “Gas Well Pillar Study Update, PO 4300311202 and 4300400813,” was completed in March 2016. The PA Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) recently completed its own review of that study (copy of the DEP review below) and has rejected changing existing 1957 standards for pillar dimensions. Yeah, kind of technical. Short version: DEP is keeping super-strict standards in place claiming it’s safer for coal miners, limiting options for shale drilling under some coal mines…