NETL Researchers Find Tiny Earthquakes Help Marcellus Production
We hesitated to use the headline that we did, given the way virulent anti-drillers bastardize the issue of fracking and earthquakes. But we used it to make a point. Quick history: The headline-grabbing “fracking causes swarms of earthquakes” in places like Oklahoma is about frack wastewater that is injected in special saltwater injection wells, deep below the surface. There are, literally, hundreds of thousands of such wells across the country. Unfortunately, when such a well is located directly over or very close to an underground fault (large crack), the fluid getting injected acts like grease, allowing rock layers to slip and slide–in some cases causing low level earthquakes–typically earthquakes under 2.0 on the Richter scale (can’t be felt on the surface). Is fracking itself ever the cause? Statistically, no. But it has been documented to happen in a handful of cases–under 10 times in the entire world, out of millions of fracked wells. And again, it only happened because of fracking directly over an underground fault. However, any time you explode charges underground, which is what fracking is, if you have equipment sensitive enough, you can detect it. Is that an “earthquake”? We’d say no. Perhaps it is considered an “earthquake” according to a technical definition, but those extremely low vibrations are brief–typically 30-60 seconds–and they never cause any kind of harm on the surface. In fact, the vibrations can’t be felt at the surface. So our headline referring to “tiny earthquakes” is somewhat tongue-in-cheek, a way to tweak antis. Researchers at the National Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) have discovered that those vibrations from fracking–what they call “low frequency tremors”–can be measured and used to figure out how to get more production out of Marcellus Shale wells in PA and WV…
Continue reading
MDN has previously chronicled bought-and-paid-for research done by Duke University’s Avner Vengosh, professor of geochemistry and water quality at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment (see 
Last year the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, via their Institute for 21st Century Energy intiative, launched a “What If…?” series to counter the radical “keep it in the ground” movement–a movement that irrationally hates the use of fossil fuels. In August 2016, the Chamber released their first such report, titled “What If…Energy Production was Banned on Federal Lands and Waters?” (see 
Earth Day is the day Big Green has a collective orgasm over Mom Earth and their efforts to keep her clean. We have no issue with responsible stewardship of our natural resources and keeping the environment clean. Everyone (with a brain) aspires to that. We do have a problem with worshiping the creation instead of the Creator. Worshiping the earth is what Earth Day is all about. Each year it gets more nutty than the last. It was with some glee we noticed that our friends at Energy in Depth have done their own bit for Earth Day–by compiling a list of scientific studies that prove fracking has been good for cleaning up the environment. It’s true! We’re not joking. Because of fracking, and because of the growing use of natural gas, our air is cleaner. Fracking and horizontal drilling has resulted in fewer drilling locations dotting the landscape–prettier to look at, and healthier for the environment. There’s a fair amount of fake science floating around out there, funded by anti-drilling organizations. EID has compiled a list of real science studies. Have a look…
Researchers from the Department of Ecosystem Science and Management at Penn State have just published a new study/paper in the Journal of Environmental Management titled, “Linear infrastructure drives habitat conversion and forest fragmentation associated with Marcellus shale gas development in a forested landscape” (abstract below). Their thesis: “Fragmentation of ecologically important core forests within the northern Appalachians — driven by pipeline and access road construction — is the major threat posed by shale-gas development, according to researchers, who recommend a change in infrastructure-siting policies to head off loss of this critical habitat.” This isn’t the first time we’ve heard about the hazards of so-called forest fragmentation. Back in 2013 the U.S. Geological Survey published a meme on it too (see 
A report compiled and written by the U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security (unclassified) has turned up in the public. The report, titled “Potential Domestic Terrorist Threats to Multi-State Diamond Pipeline Construction Project” (full copy below), warns about eco-terrorism and the potential for “mass casualties” from radicalized environmentalists who are now targeting the Diamond Pipeline Construction Project, due to run from Cushing, OK to a refinery in Memphis, TN–most of it located in the state of Arkansas. “Law enforcement are assessing what environmental extremists did to disrupt Dakota Access Pipeline – Molotov cocktails, rocks, arson, roadblocks, chaining themselves to equipment, improvised explosive devices, etc – and seeing many of the same activities potentially happening around Diamond pipeline,” according to a police representative. The report sees potential danger on two fronts: radical environmentalists, and anti-government militias that don’t like eminent domain being used to force landowners to accept the pipeline across their land. We’ve previously reported on numerous instances of vandalism against drilling and pipeline operations. It’s good to see the government taking such acts of crime seriously–to the point of labeling it domestic terrorism. Why mention a report about a pipeline nowhere near the Marcellus/Utica? Because bombs, equipment vandalism, shootings and all of the things mentioned in this report have happened here before. And because the nutjobs who were active in engaging in such acts against the Dakota Access Pipeline (now built and flowing oil), have promised to bring their lawlessness to our area (see 
Yesterday MDN’s favorite government agency, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), issued our favorite monthly report–the Drilling Productivity Report (DPR). The DPR is the EIA’s best guess, based on expert data crunchers, as to how much each of the U.S.’s seven major shale plays will produce for both oil and natural gas in the coming month. This latest report shows that an upswing in production–for both natural gas and oil–will continue over the next 30 days. In fact, get ready to break new records! Output in the Marcellus/Utica region is set to once again reach new highs. In the Marcellus, output will come within striking distance of 19 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d). Astonishing! In the Utica, output will hit 4.2 Bcf/d. Shale oil output across all seven major plays is set to hit 5.2 million barrels per day, with almost all of the increase coming from the Permian and Eagle Ford plays in Texas. Buckle up and get ready for another wild ride in the coming month…
Late last week the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) released its annual “State of the Markets Report” for 2016 (full copy below). Among the choice tidbits we found this statement: “Natural gas production from the Marcellus and Utica shales accounted for 30 percent of the U.S. total in 2016, due to the prolific nature of these formations, relatively low production costs, and proximity to the large Northeast markets. In addition, new pipeline infrastructure reduced bottlenecks allowing additional gas to reach the demand centers.” We also spotted this interesting factoid: “In 2016, 7.1 Bcf of FERC jurisdictional pipeline capacity went into service, with 43 percent designed to move natural gas from Appalachia to markets in the Northeast and Midwest. Staff expects the new natural gas pipeline capacity to continue contributing towards shrinking price differentials between regions throughout the U.S., and help keep natural gas prices relatively low.” Translation: hang in there Marcellus/Utica drillers–prices are going to rise soon because of these new pipelines. Here’s the update from FERC…
Lately we’ve noticed a plethora of stories in mainstream media about the oil and gas industry spending more money this year. That certainly seems to jibe with our own anecdotal observations. In reporting 2016 results and drillers’ comments about what to expect in 2017, almost all of the companies we’ve reported on have said their spending this year will go up. And that’s a good thing. We now have something better than just anecdotal evidence. Energy law firm Haynes and Boone recently completed a survey of oil and gas borrowers and lenders–drillers, service companies, and banks–to gauge their predictions about “borrowing base redeterminations” and spending in 2017. What is a borrowing base? A company’s borrowing base is the value of its assets. In the case of drillers, it is the value of the leases and oil/gas wells they own. Those assets are used as collateral to back up loans and IOUs. A lower borrowing base means they must borrow less money, and they will pay more in interest for the money they do borrow. Lower borrowing base = bad, higher borrowing base = good. Each spring and fall (twice a year) banks take a look and “redetermine” or reevaluate the value of those assets. What did the Haynes and Boone survey find about bankers’ and drillers’ predictions on spring redeterminations of borrowing bases? That the borrowing base for most drillers will either stay the same, or increase slightly. The survey also found a vast majority of drillers plan to spend more money this year (89%). Here’s the encouraging results…
An MDN reader and friend recently forwarded along an email newsletter from the ALLARM Shale Gas Program. ALLARM stands for Alliance for Aquatic Resource Monitoring. With the rapid growth of the Marcellus industry in Pennsylvania shale drilling in neighboring states, “concerned citizens” wanted ways to collect data on water quality impacts from shale gas activities. As a response to requests from communities, ALLARM developed a volunteer-friendly protocol in 2010 to assess small streams for the early detection and reporting of surface water contamination by shale gas extraction activities. Volunteers (i.e. anti-drillers) monitor water quality throughout the year, including conductivity, barium, strontium, and total dissolved solids–and physical parameters, including stream stage and visual observations prior to, during, and after shale gas well development. Monitors also participate in a quality assurance, quality control program which includes in-person trainings, routine meter calibration, and sample testing via split-sample analysis two times a year. Since they began monitoring local streams, nearly 5,000 observations have been logged. And what have we learned from all of this monitoring? That shale gas drilling is safe for local streams…
The main reason anti-drillers are hellbent on preventing any new drilling, and indeed the use of natural gas, is because it’s a “fossil fuel” and when burned, it creates carbon dioxide (CO2). However, what many non-thinking antis often overlook is that the use of natural gas instead of coal, oil and other fossil fuels leads to LESS carbon dioxide emissions. They blather on about limiting natural gas usage when it is because of natgas that CO2 emissions continue to go DOWN, year after year. The U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) has just published an article highlighting the fact that CO2 emissions in the U.S. went down again in 2016–mostly because of a change from using coal to generate electricity to using natural gas, much of it extracted from the Marcellus/Utica…
The Baker Hughes rig count in the U.S. continued to rocket skyward in March. In January the average number of U.S. rigs was 683. In February, the count zoomed to 744, up 61 rigs in just a month. And in March, the U.S. rig count zoomed to 789, up another 45 rigs in a month. Each active rig translates into hundreds of jobs, both directly working at the rig and indirectly in services delivered to the rig and its workers. It also means more landowners will soon have royalty payments heading in their direction. When rigs are active, life is good. What about rig counts in the Marcellus/Utica? Disappointingly our region’s rig count lost a rig in March. PA lost two rigs, OH gained a rig, and WV stayed even. What does it all mean? It means that this zooming up in rig counts is happening in other locations–primarily in the Permian Basin in Texas. That is, oil rigs rushing to take advantage of an increase crude prices to a sustained $50+/barrel. While we’re happy the rig count is up, we’re not happy more it is not happening in the northeast. But honestly, without pipelines to take away an increase in production, can you blame our drillers? Once there is more takeaway capacity, you’ll see rig counts begin to climb again in our neck of the woods…
Pennsylvania’s Independent Fiscal Office (IFO) provides revenue projections for use in the state budget process along with impartial and timely analysis of fiscal, economic and budgetary issues to assist Commonwealth residents and the General Assembly in their evaluation of policy decisions. It’s only been around since 2010 and in the past we’ve wondered if it’s populated with liberal Democrats that don’t hew to the state mission of being objective in their analysis. However, our confidence in the organization has grown over the past year or so. Recent IPO predictions about Marcellus Shale impact fee revenues have been pretty accurate (see 
Let’s play “What if?” What if we followed the advice of the kooks who tell us to “keep it in the ground”–by which they mean we should immediately stop all extraction of fossil fuels–oil, gas, coal, etc. We’re told by the enviro left that renewables are here and ready now to take over the job of providing all of our energy needs. So what would REALLY happen if we stopped using all fossil fuels? The American Petroleum Institute commissioned a study of just that scenario. They released the study two days. Titled “The Impacts of Restricting Fossil Fuel Energy Production” (full copy below), the report reads like apocalyptic book of Revelation in the Bible. What would happen if there were no new private, state, or federal oil and natural gas leases; a complete ban on hydraulic fracturing; no new coal mines or expansion of existing mines; and no new energy infrastructure including pipelines? The U.S. economy would lose 5.9 million jobs. Our gross domestic product (GDP) would lose $11.8 trillion. Your household’s annual energy bill would jump by $4,552, per year! Crude oil prices would jump $40 per barrel, back to the bad old days of $100/barrel prices. (As an aside, because renewables really can’t take over the role of fossil fuels, we would become completely dependent on enemy countries in the Middle East for our oil.) Natural gas would jump from $3/Mcf to $21/Mcf. And your electric bill will go up by 56%. And that’s just for starters…
The nation’s electric grid is a complex system. You don’t ever think twice about–you flip a switch and the electricity flows, powering lights, appliances, etc. But ensuring the power is always there, always on when you need it, keeps a lot of people awake at night. The U.S. “grid” is actually a bunch of smaller grids. In the northeast there are several such organizations. One of them is called the PJM, a regional transmission organization (RTO) coordinating the movement of wholesale electricity in all or parts of 13 states and the District of Columbia (including PA, OH and WV). PJM, like other RTOs, faces challenges with ensuring there will always be enough electricity produced to meet demand. Over the past several years coal-fired electric generating plants have been closing. Natural gas, and in a much smaller sense renewables (wind and solar) have taken up the slack. Wind and solar are notoriously unreliable. The wind doesn’t always blow and the sun doesn’t always shine. Natural gas needs pipelines to get where it’s going. There has been a concern that with coal disappearing from the generation mix, that an “over-reliance” on natgas and renewables will make electricity supplies problematic and unreliable. In an effort to address questions of reliability, PJM just completed and published a 44-page study titled, “PJM’s Evolving Resource Mix and System Reliability” (full copy below). What does the study find? Even with fewer coal plants producing electricity, PJM’s electric supplies, using more and more natgas and renewables, will be just fine…