US Circuit Court: NY Landowners Released from Marcellus Leases
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, located in New York State, released a decision yesterday in a case known as Beardslee v. Inflection Energy, LLC (copy of the decision is embedded below) that may create problems for future shale drilling in New York State–should the existing statewide ban ever be lifted. Yesterday’s decision is good news for landowners in one sense–it officially upholds the right of Tioga County, NY landowners party to the lawsuit to be released from old leases made in pre-Marcellus days when landowners signed leases for $3 per acre. Those leases were signed before the words “Marcellus” or “Utica” meant anything other than municipalities in New York State. (Interesting factoid: both shale plays are named after the NY towns where they were first identified. Further interesting factoid: both Marcellus, NY and Utica, NY banned fracking before the statewide ban was official.) The Second Circuit upheld a previous decision which we first wrote about in 2012 (see Judge Rules Against Chesapeake, Inflection in NY Lease Case), a decision appealed to NY’s highest court that upheld it (see NY High Court Decision Creates Toxic Environment for O&G Companies). The energy companies then appealed the decision to U.S. District Court, where they have now lost. The ultimate issue at the core of this case is whether or not New York’s government action in disallowing fracking of shale wells should be considered a “force majeure” event that extends a lease beyond the initial term. It is the one issue the none of the courts ever directly answered, including the Second Circuit…
Read More “US Circuit Court: NY Landowners Released from Marcellus Leases”
The gloves are now off and everything is out in the open: President Barack Hussein Obama wants to destroy the oil and gas industry in the United States of America. Yesterday Obama’s preferred tool of destruction, the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), released a plan that brings the jackboots of the federal government down on the necks of the industry–forcing them to “reduce” methane emissions by 40-45%. Methane, you may recall, is what drillers actually extract from the ground and sell. Methane is what they get paid for–the very thing they are incentivized to capture so they can sell it. Drillers have reduced their methane emissions–the stuff leaking out around the edges–by at least 40-45% over the past few years. In other words, the industry is already doing what the EPA wants them to do. Which means this action is a blatant attempt at stifling drilling in this country. Let us be crystal clear: This action by the EPA is illegal. This is an outright attempt to regulate the oil and gas industry, contrary to the U.S. Constitution which reserves such regulation to the individual states. Just have a look at the so-called “rule” the EPA has published (all 591 pages of it). It is a top to bottom set of unlegislated regulations that will put all oil an gas drilling in the regulatory hands of the EPA.
As for the good guys, the guys in the white hats who support clean-burning natural gas and fossil fuels, they also weighed in on the EPA’s lawless new methane reduction rule, otherwise known as 40 CFR Part. Here’s what the good guys from ANGA, API, Marcellus Shale Coalition, WVONGA and even what three U.S. Senators had to say…
If you wonder whether or not a new regulation is good or bad, you can always tell by who supports it and who doesn’t. In the case of the EPA and their lawless new methane reduction rule, otherwise known as 40 CFR Part 60, national radical environmental groups like Earthjustice and the Sierra Club, along with regional and local radical groups like the Ohio Environmental Council and the Philadelphia-based Clean Air Council, are applauding the action taken by the Obama EPA…
Some more details about the brilliant move by some average farmers in Tioga County, NY who plan to use propane to frack a Utica Shale well, bypassing the existing ban on fracking in New York because the existing ban only disallows high volume water-based fracking…
What could of been a valuable research project by a Stanford University researcher is, instead, just more “fracking maybe/might/could/possibly affect groundwater” headline grabber. Stanford environmental scientist Dr. Rob Jackson, a seasoned researcher, set out to determine at what depths is fracking safe and does not affect groundwater (“The Depths of Hydraulic Fracturing and Accompanying Water Use Across the United States” — abstract below). The press release describing the research attempts to redefine any shale well drilled and fracked at less than one mile down as a “shallow” well. This is an inaccurate characterization. From the release: “The most recent such study, published in Environmental Science & Technology, finds that at least 6,900 oil and gas wells in the U.S. were fracked less than a mile (5,280 feet) from the surface, and at least 2,600 wells were fracked at depths shallower than 3,000 feet, some as shallow as 100 feet. This occurs despite many reports that describe fracking as safe for drinking water only if it occurs at least thousands of feet to a mile underground, according to Jackson.” If a well was drilled at 3,000 feet down, that’s still 2,000-2,500 feet below water aquifers–a quarter of a mile of solid rock between the two! Not to mention that 2,600 wells out of 44,000 wells Dr. Jackson studied is a puny 6% of the total–a very small percentage. In other words, the vast majority of shale wells drilled are a mile or more under the surface. Interestingly, for all of the talk about “shallow” wells and the potential dangers of fracking, Dr. Jackson’s study “has not found evidence that frack water contaminants seep upward to drinking-water aquifers from deep underground”…
This sounds like something out of a Jules Verne novel. You may recall from school that Verne wrote some of the earliest sci-fi adventures ever, like 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea and Journey to the Center of the Earth. In Journey, Verne wrote about strange and mysterious critters that live deep in the earth–in rock caverns. Turns out Verne may not have been so far from the truth after all. And there’s a tie-in with the Marcellus Shale and with fracking. In November West Virginia University and Ohio State University received an $11 million grant by the federal government to study the Marcellus and Utica Shale (see 
In June the federal Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a report detailing the findings of their four-year study that found no harmful effects on water supplies from fracking (see 
An Allegany County, NY attorney quietly filed a lawsuit–two months ago–against the New York Dept. of Environmental Conservation (DEC) over their infamous frack ban. It is the first such lawsuit that we are aware of to be filed against the DEC since the frack ban was officially declared (see 
Just when you’ve think you’ve heard it all when it comes to how evil and nasty fracking and shale drilling are, along comes another story of the horrors of shale drilling. An article in the most recent issue of the journal Invasive Plant Science and Management says shale and pipeline drilling in Colorado’s Piceance Basin (pronounced “pee awns”, located in northwestern Colorado) disturbs the dirt and because the dirt gets disturbed it gives non-native, “invasive” plants a chance to grab hold and choke out all other vegetation–or some such thing. Apparently the housing boom in Colorado that digs up more dirt than all of the drill pads and pipelines combined doesn’t have the same effect on the invaders. Maybe invasive plants don’t like the construction workers and backhoes that dig up dirt for a house foundation like they do construction workers and backhoes that dig up dirt for a drill pad or pipeline. Wait–they’re the same construction workers and backhoes? Shhh. Don’t tell the invasive plant species…