Drill Cuttings Used to Build New Road in Lycoming County, PA
Imagine this: a backhoe sinks its bucket into the ground, scoops out some dirt, and the dirt is used to build a road. No big deal. Now imagine this, a very long drill goes down into the earth and digs out dirt. Because the dirt comes from deep down, some of it may be mixed with minerals not found near the surface, so a company processes the deep down dirt to remove any extra minerals, and the dirt is then essentially the same chemical composition as the dirt from near the surface–and it’s used to build a road. The dirt from deep down is called drill cuttings. Environmental Nazis repeat the magical incantation, “It’s been fracked!” and therefore they begin to hyperventilate that “fracked waste” is being used to build a road. Our example illustrates antis’ intellectual dishonesty about what drill cuttings are. When we spotted a story that a private hunting club in Lycoming County (Williamsport area) in PA will build a new road using processed drill cuttings, and the spin job done by the anti-drilling shills at the taxpayer-funded PBS StateImpact Pennsylvania, we had to laugh…
Read More “Drill Cuttings Used to Build New Road in Lycoming County, PA”
Chemists at the University of Texas at Arlington published a new study last week that indicates certain activities on top of the ground at shale drilling sites are the cause of nasty emissions–and not the fracking process itself. The study, “Point source attribution of ambient contamination events near unconventional oil and gas development” published last week in Science of the Total Environment, found “highly variable levels of ambient BTEX, or benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylene compounds, in and around fracking gas drilling sites in the Eagle Ford shale region in South Texas.” BTEX compounds are nasty, and in high concentrations can be carcinogenic (cancer causing) and have harmful effects on the nervous system. The good news is that recognizing where BTEX emissions are coming from can lead to fixes. Nobody, the industry included, wants to harm workers or nearby residents’ health. We reckon this study under the category of “real science” that leads to industry improvements…
We’ve commented on the impending election this November a few times. We try to keep our opinions about the disastrous Hillary Clinton out of MDN as much as possible, realizing not everyone agrees with us. (Have we told you lately what a DISASTER she would be as president?) However, energy–in particular fracking and shale–is a key issue in the upcoming election. Nowhere is that more obvious than the official party platforms recently adopted at each national party’s convention (in Cleveland for the Republicans, and in Philadelphia for the Democrats). The National Association of Royalty Owners (NARO) has done us a favor. NARO, a non-partisan organization, has extracted statements from each party platform with respect to energy issues (see it below). IT IS STRIKING. The Republican platform is pro-fossil fuel and the Democrat platform is anti-fossil fuel. There is no other conclusion you can draw. The Democrat platform calls for bizarre policies like requiring energy from so-called renewables to power 50% of our electricity within 10 years–an impossible goal that would destroy our country’s economy. Folks, there is no other way of saying this than to say it: A vote for Hillary is a vote to end your own job (if you work in and around the energy industry). Are you insane? No, we didn’t think so. Prove it by voting for Trump…
Just last week MDN warned that anti-drilling radicals running King George County, VA were contemplating a vote to ban fracking in the county (see 
In May MDN told you that the Penn Township (in Westmoreland County, PA) zoning board voted to refuse to grant a permit to Apex Energy to build a DEP-permitted well pad in the town (see 
Former Pennsylvania Governor Ed “fast Eddie” Rendell made an off-the-cuff remark at a bull session at the Democrat National Convention last month that far-left media types tried to twist. He said, “I made a mistake in the rush to get the economic part of fracking delivered to Pennsylvania. We didn’t regulate well construction and…frack water as well as we should.” So-called reporters at propaganda outlets like StateImpact Pennsylvania immediately jumped on that and declared Rendell admitted to making a mistake, and getting it wrong, with fracking in the Keystone State (see 
The one great, huge, towering problem that anti-drillers have is that there is no scientific evidence that supports their wild claims that fracking contaminates water–which is their favorite lie to spread. When the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) arrived at the same conclusion–that fracking doesn’t pollute water–after four years of studying it, that really took the wind out of the sails of rabid fossil fuel haters (see 
Guess who’s back with a case now before the Pennsylvania Supreme Court? Yep, the odious nutters from Big Green Groups PennFuture, THE (arrogant) Delaware Riverkeeper, and the Peters Township gang. You may recall we reported last September of the humiliating defeat suffered by these groups in the “Gorsline” case (see 
In July MDN told you about exciting new publicly-financed research at West Virginia University that finds waste from Marcellus/Utica drilling (“frack waste”) is not radioactive or hazardous (see 
Last week we pointed out the inconsistency of Donald Trump in his public comments during an interview in Denver on frack bans. Trump said he believes local municipalities and even states should be able to ban fracking if they don’t want it–even though he personally supports fracking (see 
Since we’re taking Donald Trump to task over his wrong-headed thinking on local frack bans, we’d like to be an equal opportunity basher. Hillary Clinton’s position on fracking is far worse than The Donald’s position. If Hill has her way, she’ll end the practice. Oh, not with an Executive Order banning fracking, as Crazy Bernie promised he would do if he got elected. No, Hill is promising to enact new regulations (either via Congress or via Executive Orders) so strict, that “By the time we get through all of my conditions, I do not think there will be many places in America where fracking will continue to take place.” Her words. Although Hillary is a known and proven liar, we happen to believe those words coming from her mouth. First up for Hill, “fix” the so-called “Halliburton loophole.” In 2005 Congress passed new environmental standards for the Safe Drinking Water Act (managed by the out-of-control Environmental Protection Agency) and chose not to include the oil and gas industry in those standards because the EPA has no right to regulate the oil & gas industry–only the states can regulate the o&g industry under the U.S. Constitution. The proper recognition of not expanding the EPA’s authority (illegally) somehow has been twisted into a “loophole” for the industry, and Halliburton’s name was applied to the loophole in an attempt to smear then-Vice President Dick Cheney, who was previously the CEO of Halliburton. Hillary has resurrected the same old Democrat lie and smear campaign from years gone by. She says if she becomes Prez (God forbid), she’ll jam the EPA right up the o&g industry’s….operations….as far as she can…
We will confess it up front: We voted for Donald Trump in the primary. We think he stands the best chance of defeating Hillary Clinton. Clinton would, in our opinion, be very bad for the oil and gas industry (as well as bad for the country in general). To each his own, right? We will not extensively cover the election–that’s already being done everywhere else. Most everyone has a strong opinion one way or the other. Trump has given some bang-up speeches supporting the fossil fuel industry (see 
In November 2014 MDN told you that West Virginia University and Ohio State University received an $11 million grant from the U.S. Dept. of Energy for a joint five-year study of Marcellus/Utica fracking and shale drilling (see