University of Delaware researchers have discovered a new way to estimate how much natural gas is sitting in shale deposits…
Read More “Univ. of Delaware Pioneers New Way to Estimate Shale Gas Deposits”
Yet another “fracking may cause earthquakes” study has been published in the so-called peer reviewed journal PNAS (Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences). Researchers from the University of Miami (in Ohio) admit the kind of earthquakes they talk about in their paper, potentially caused by Utica Shale drilling, are “rare.” But, they are also “concerning.” Yes, everyone should be concerned that in zero percent of Utica well drilling cases (statistically speaking) there have been NO earthquakes. Actually a couple of cases are thought to be related to fracking over a fault–but it’s still unproven. Statistically speaking, it’s 0%. But, there could be problems! Maybe. If the conditions are “just right.” Ya never know. We note the researchers didn’t address concerns over fans in football stadiums that, when they all stomp their feet at the same time, have caused “earthquakes” that are higher on the Richter scale than the ones they postulate “may, maybe, might” happen in Utica drilling. No mention of football fan earthquakes in this study. Below is the “news” about this latest, breathlessly urgent report that everyone should read…
Read More “Yet Another Fracking-Causes-Earthquakes “Study” – This Time in Utica”
Yesterday our 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. The numbers continue to be AMAZING. Natgas production continues to explode (poor metaphor!)–especially here in the Marcellus/Utica region, which is labeled “Appalachia” in the report. EIA predicts production in the Marcellus/Utica will soar another 321 million cubic feet per day (MMcf/d), roughly one-third of a billion cubic feet (!), between February and March. That’s after M-U production went up a stupendously massive 428 MMcf/d last month, even more than the 377 MMcf/d originally forecast (see EIA Jan ’18 Drilling Report: M-U on Fire, Up 1/3 Billion Cubic Ft). Incredible! Our region isn’t the only prodigious producer. The Permian is primarily an oil play. But because each oil well also produces at least some natural gas along with the oil (called associated gas), and because so many wells are getting drilled in the Permian, it’s natgas production is forecast to jump 216 MMcf/d in the coming month. In a string going back more than a year, the seven major plays in the U.S. will once again hit new record natgas production in March–estimated to be 64.9 billion cubic feet per day. Of that, the M-U region will produce 27.1 Bcf/d–or 42%…
Read More “EIA Feb ’18 Drilling Report: M-U Production Up Another 1/3 Bcf”
This is one of those zany Friday kind of stories. Yet another so-called study on the Marcellus Shale industry recently caught our attention. We’ve often pointed out the “bought and paid for” research that abounds on shale drilling. This one goes to a whole new metaphysical plane. Instead of researching and drawing conclusions from research data, the recently published study “Engaging over data on fracking and water quality” (University of Pittsburgh and Penn State University) talks about talking about the issue of Marcellus Shale drilling. Yeah. How do you *feel* about drilling? Here, lie down on this sofa while we ask you some questions about your childhood and fracking practices. OK, so maybe a study about how people talk about the issues involved with Marcellus Shale drilling isn’t so far-fetched–if such a “study” were to appear in the Journal of Idiosyncratic Sociology. This “study” however, was published in the journal Science. As in hard science–not social science. So now it no longer matters what real science finds–whether or not fracking actually pollutes water and air. Whether or not living near a fracking site will stunt your growth. Whether or not fracking carves up forests or increases automobile accidents or any of a plethora of other issues. What REALLY matters is what you *think* about all that. That’s what now passes for science in Science…
Read More ““Talk About It” Substitutes for Real Science in Marcellus Study”
In 2011, then-Gov. Tom Corbett’s Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission filed a final report with 96 recommendations (see PA Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission Final Report with 96 Recommendations). One of those recommendations is to establish a population-based health registry. The aim would be to collect and evaluate clinical data from health care providers and monitor citizens living near drilling sites. Sounded good to us then, still sounds good now. One of the early attempts at this came from the private sector. Geisinger Health Systems proposed to use data already in the files to begin tracking potential issues related to shale drilling (see PA Marcellus Health Study by Geisinger Turns into Data Warehouse). But as we later learned, Geisinger was in it for the money (can’t blame them). They wanted $24 million and didn’t get it, so that effort flopped. A Republican State legislator from Scranton, PA, Rep. Karen Boback, is attempting to reignite interest in the health registry issue. On Monday, Rep. Boback introduced House Bill (HB) 2055 (full copy below) that would establish a health registry to collect health-related data from those living near shale drilling. The PA Dept. of Health would be the agency tasked with the data collection. Rep. Boback figures it will take $1 million per year to fund the initiative, far less than what Geisinger wanted…
Read More “NEPA Republican Lawmaker Intros Marcellus Health Registry Bill”
How often do we have to repeat the warning that electrical blackouts are coming to New England if the region does not get new sources of natural gas by building more pipelines? This is not some reckless, wild eyed blogger guy saying it–the warning comes from the top, from the people who operate the electric grid! We first raised the warning back in 2014 (see Officials: New England Faces Blackouts Without New Nagas Pipeline). Last May ISO New England–the independent, non-profit Regional Transmission Organization (RTO) that manages the electric grid for Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, and Vermont–released a study that warned of a coming shortage of natural gas to fire electric power plants in wintertime (see Study: New England Electric Shortage from Lack of NatGas by 2025). ISO New England is back with another reporting warning of “dire scenarios in the future” if New England doesn’t wise up and get more natgas pipelines built. “Without additional natural gas pipeline capacity, rolling blackouts or other emergency actions will likely be needed by the winter of 2024-2025 to keep the power system operating reliably.” It’s sad to see New England’s so-called leaders continue to block new pipelines to the region. One or two well-placed pipelines from the Marcellus could help the region avert the completely predictable disaster that’s on the way…
Read More “ISO New England Warns Blackouts Coming If No New Gas Pipelines”
The price of natural gas is a complicated subject. First, “the price” is never just “the price.” Many people look to the NYMEX or Henry Hub spot price as “the price.” Indeed, most of the financial contracts for natural gas are based on the Henry Hub price. However, as we’ve written many times over the years, gas is bought and sold at hundreds of points along major interstate natural gas pipelines. The price at one place on a pipeline, like the Tennessee Gas Pipeline Zone 4 in northeastern Pennsylvania, is vastly different from the Henry Hub. Price is dependent on many factors–supply and demand to be sure. But also weather. Weather is probably the biggest influencer of natgas prices. Why? The warmer (or colder) it is, the more natural gas is used to cool or heat homes and businesses. The more demand, the higher the price. Conversely, the less demand, the lower the price. Henry Hub is a useful yardstick and the most-watched natural gas price in the world. Our favorite government agency, the U.S. Energy Information Administration, recently published their Short-Term Energy Outlook (STEO). In the STEO, EIA predicts the price of natural gas at Henry Hub will remain relatively flat both this year and next year. This year (2018), EIA says the average price of gas at Henry Hub will be $2.88 per thousand cubic feet (Mcf). Next year? EIA says the price will average $2.92/Mcf. The average price of gas at Henry Hub for all of 2017 was $2.99/Mcf. Bottom line: The price of gas is a bit depressing for gas drillers for the foreseeable future. Here’s EIA’s reasoning…
Read More “EIA Predicts Natural Gas Prices in 2018 & 2019 Will be “Flat””
Last year a peer reviewed study published by researchers from the University of Maryland in the American Geological Union’s (AGU) Journal of Geophysical Research Atmospheres claimed methane was leaking from the Marcellus Shale at a rate of 3.9% based on three flight measurements in September and August 2015. That’s a lot. Using that rate of 3.9%, the authors boldly concluded that shale gas development is a “climate detriment.” They actually said, “the use of natural gas rather than coal for combustion will result in a relatively greater climate impact over the next few decades.” Yeah, burning natgas is worse than burning coal for the environment. Just one teeny, tiny problem. The research is wrong. In a huge “oops we screwed up”–the study has now been retracted. Why? Due to an “error in wind measurements” that led to wildly wrong emissions estimates. And will you read about that in mainstream news–the same news that carried the original “shale gas is worse for the environmental than coal” stories? Nope. Crickets. Silence. Here’s the news from our friends at Energy in Depth about the yet another so-called research study exposed as fraudulent…
Read More “Marcellus Methane Emissions Study has Fatal Errors; Retracted”
A graduate student from New York University, majoring in energy policy, as done us all a favor. He has done a deep dive into the world’s biggest and best onshore natural gas field: the Marcellus/Utica (i.e. Appalachia) to plumb the reasons for its incredible success. Did you know that Marcellus/Utica production has grown a massive 85% since 2014? Or that our region produces more natural gas than all other regions in the U.S.–combined?! Our grad student said, “It is worthwhile to have another look into why Appalachia matters today more than ever to the United States energy economy.” And so he did (below). The secret of Marcellus/Utica’s success? It is “the world’s most innovative gas field.” Let’s find out how and why…
Read More “Marcellus/Utica – The World’s Most Innovative Gas Field”
Natural gas has replaced King Coal as the #1 fuel source to generate electricity. According to our favorite government agency, the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), in 2018 natural gas will generate 33% of all electricity generated in the U.S. In 2019 it goes up to 34%. Coal, on the other hand, will generate 30% of all electricity in 2018 (as it did in 2017), and go down to 28% in 2019. Power plant operators will bring 20 gigawatts (GW) of new natural-gas-fired generating capacity online in 2018. That’s the largest increase in natural gas capacity since 2004. Almost 6 GW of this new capacity (30%) will be added in one state: Pennsylvania! That’s another 6 GW powered by Marcellus Shale gas–an important new market for our gas. Here’s the EIA forecast that natgas will remain our primary source of electricity generation for at least the foreseeable future…
Read More “EIA: NatGas to Remain Primary Fuel for Electricity This Yr & Next”
Those evil, nasty frackers just LOVE having sex. Sex, sex, sex, all the time. Everybody knows it. When shale workers arrive in town, the incidence of gonorrhea (i.e. “the clap”) goes up. So says a laughable, totally made up “research study” recently published in the so-called Journal of Public Health Policy. This is not the first time we’ve heard this particular anti-fossil fuel argument–that shale causes sexually transmitted diseases (STDs). We’ve highlighted this anti lie a number of times over the years (see our stories here). Just like all lies pedaled by antis, they recycle this one again and again–it comes around every year or two. If you tell a lie often enough… This most recent permutation uses, in the exact words of the authors themselves, “a quasi-natural experiment within the Marcellus shale region plus panel data estimation techniques to quantify the impact of fracking activity on local gonorrhea incidences.” In other words, they just made it up. Spit-balled. Guessed. Lied. There is no real science here…
Read More “New “Marcellus Workers Cause STDs” So-Called Research Study”
For years now the radical Park Park Foundation has been buying its research from a few select professors at a few select universities. One of the scientists for sale is Avner Vengosh, professor of geochemistry and water quality at Duke University’s Nicholas School of the Environment (see Duke Hit Piece on Shale Water Usage from Same Park-Sponsored Prof and Latest Case of Duke U Bought & Paid “Research” by Park Foundation). Here’s how it works: Park funds Dr. Vengosh’s “research,” and he conveniently “discovers” all sorts of nasty things about shale fracking, publishing his “research” in obscure, peer reviewed journals. Mainstream media picks it up and runs it. Readers who only scan headlines get the impression fracking is evil. Mission accomplished for Park (another hit on fracking) and for Vengosh (another buck in his pocket). That’s how it works in the world of bought-and-paid-for fractivism. We though Vengosh had reformed. In October 2016 he published a fracking wastewater study, funded by the National Science Foundation (NOT the Park Foundation) that found there’s really nothing to worry about after all when it comes to Marcellus Shale wastewater (see Duke U Researcher Tries to Repair Reputation with Wastewater Study). But Vengosh has had a relapse–perhaps he needs more money? Vengosh, with funding from the Park Foundation, has just published a new study that blames conventional (not shale) oil and gas development in Pennsylvania for an increase in radioactivity in streams/rivers where conventional (not shale) wastewater has been treated and released by local sewage treatment plants…
Read More “New Park Foundation “Study” Targets PA Conventional O&G Wastewater”
Once upon a time, it was pretty easy for commodities traders (and others) to predict oil and gas production. You just watch the Baker Hughes rig count. When the number of rigs actively drilling goes up, production will follow X months later. And when active rigs go down, production goes down too. But that is no longer the case! Why? Shale wells are producing more over a longer period of time. And the technology used when drilling today is radically different than tech from just a few years ago. Drillers now drill wells faster–much faster–meaning they can use fewer rigs. And frackers are using “hellish” amounts of sand to frack wells, producing ever-more quantities of oil and gas. What it all means is this: If you’re a trader, you can no longer depend on rig counts as your main metric to calculate production. You need new metrics, such as…
Read More “Rig Counts No Longer Reliable Barometer of Production”
Yesterday our 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. The numbers are AMAZING. Natgas production continues to be on fire (poor metaphor, but the only thing we can think of)–especially here in the Marcellus/Utica region, which is labeled “Appalachia” in the report. EIA predicts production in the Marcellus/Utica will soar another 377 million cubic feet per day (MMcf/d), which is more than one-third of a billion cubic feet (!), between January and February. Incredible! What’s even more incredible: Marcellus/Utica production, predicted to be 26.8 Bcf/d in February, represents 42% of all shale natural gas production in the U.S. Our region is a MONSTER natural gas producer. Here’s the latest DPR with the amazing news…
Read More “EIA Jan ’18 Drilling Report: M-U on Fire, Up 1/3 Billion Cubic Ft”
A new “research study” was recently published that, per the usual routine, is generating false headlines that leave a false impression. The study is called “Sustainability of UK shale gas in comparison with other electricity options: Current situation and future scenarios,” published in the so-called journal, Science of The Total Environment. Here’s an example of a headline it’s generating in fake mainstream news: “Shale gas is one of the least sustainable ways to produce electricity, research finds” (Phys.org). We’ve seen that headline or variations of it in a number of publications. The narrative being spun by anti-fossil fuelers in quoting the study is this: “You know how shale gas has taken over as king of producing electricity–well you should ignore all of its benefits (clean burning, less polluting, cheaper) and instead use renewables because shale gas isn’t really sustainable and all that great after all.” That’s the upshot of the study, and the stories about the study. Just one teeny, tiny problem: The “research” is fake. Fraudulent. A heaping pile of doo-doo. The so-called researcher concocted his own biased set of criteria on which to judge various forms of electricity generation sources, and then declared shale gas flunks the test. Once again, fake research based on a twisted, biased worldview that says all fossil fuels are evil…
Read More “Fake Study Finds Shale Gas Not “Sustainable” for Electric Production”
It never ceases to amaze us at how an unshakable belief in the myth of man-made global warming drives normally sane people to do insane things. Like using millions in taxpayer dollars (“grants”) to figure out a way to convert shale gas into a more “environmental friendly” form of fuel for energy usage–explosive hydrogen. Methane (i.e. natural gas) has one carbon atom along with four hydrogen atoms–CH4. What do you do with that carbon atom when you split methane into its component parts? We can’t have that carbon atom mating with a couple of oxygen atoms and forming CO2 (carbon dioxide)! Perish the thought!! (Even though CO2 is what you exhale every time you breathe, CO2 has been bastardized into being considered a pollutant by the general population thanks to the efforts of Big Green.) West Virginia University, along with Southern California Gas Company and Pacific Northwest National Laboratory, is launching new research this month that aims to convert “methane to CO2-free hydrogen and solid carbon nanotubes”–that is, into hydrogen and “good” carbon, not “bad” CO2 carbon. Whatever…
Read More “WVU Research to Convert Shale Gas into Hydrogen and “Good” Carbon”