Pennsylvania

  • | | | | |

    Fracking Trespass Case (Rule of Capture) Still Reverberating in PA

    Last week MDN brought you the news that the Pennsylvania Superior Court handed down a decision that has the power to greatly restrict, perhaps even stop, Marcellus drilling in PA (see PA Superior Court Overturns “Rule of Capture” for Marcellus Well and PA “Rule of Capture” Case has Power to Limit Marcellus Drilling). The issue, in brief, is that last week’s Superior Court decision disallows using an age-old principle called the “rule of capture” when it comes to shale drilling and fracking. It opens the door to a myriad of frivolous lawsuits claiming that a fracture, a crack created during fracking, is draining gas from a neighbor’s property without justly compensating the neighbor for the gas. Was the court’s decision a big deal? Or was is not such a big deal? We’ve seen stories appear every day since the decision, some indicating the decision is monumental in scope and impact–others saying meh, not so big after all. Which is it? We still believe the issue turns on how far cracks extend out from a wellbore during fracking–and whether you can accurately measure the distance of such fractures. If the cracks extend just a few hundred feet, the court decision is not a big deal. Most drillers stay at least 350 feet from the boundary line when drilling a well–meaning the cracks that drain gas do not extend to neighboring properties. However, if the cracks, the fractures, extend out more than a few hundred feet, say more than 300 feet, that’s a problem. Southwestern Energy responded in the lawsuit that IF their cracks had intruded (trespassed) under the boundary line, it would fall under “rule of capture”–the legal principle of he who gets there first, wins. The court ruled otherwise. We’re still haunted by the definition used (and accepted) in the lawsuit that says fracking fluid and sand can travel up to 3,000 feet…
    Read More “Fracking Trespass Case (Rule of Capture) Still Reverberating in PA”

  • | | | | | | |

    Criminal Antis Vandalize Sunoco ME2 Pipe Construction Equipment

    It’s OK to be a blithering idiot and oppose important pipeline infrastructure projects like the Mariner East 2 Pipeline because you believe in the fairy tale of man-made global warming. It’s OK to march and protest and write and name-call, and yes, it’s even OK to launch frivolous lawsuit after frivolous lawsuit. Knock yourselves out. It’s your right as a citizen in the greatest country on Mom Earth, a country we call America. What is NOT OK is to vandalize construction equipment used to build the pipeline, causing thousands of dollars in damage, simply because you’re demented and delude yourself that you are somehow saving “the environment” with your criminal action. That is precisely what Sunoco is alleging after someone(s) damaged the engines, fuel systems and hydraulic lines of two pieces of heavy equipment on April 2 & 3 in Chester County, PA (near Philadelphia). Sunoco is offering $10,000 for information leading to an arrest. We certainly hope that happens…
    Read More “Criminal Antis Vandalize Sunoco ME2 Pipe Construction Equipment”

  • | | |

    PA House Bill Would Neuter SRBC, DRBC Regulation of Ground Water

    Here’s one we didn’t see coming–a potential way to fix the ongoing disaster that is the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) and their illegal attempt to regulate hydraulic fracturing within the Delaware River Basin under the claim they have the right to regulate anything that impacts groundwater. A Pennsylvania House of Representatives member, Dan Moul (Republican from Gettysburg), is about to introduce a bill that would replace the DRBC’s authority to regulate groundwater by vesting that authority solely in the hands of the state Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP). The problem is, the bill appears to be targeted more at the Susquehanna River Basin Commission (SRBC) than DRBC. The bill will affect both organizations. Last time we checked, the SRBC does a fine job of regulating water withdrawals for fracking AND makes no attempt to regulate fracking, which the DRBC is attempting to do. But then, we don’t think this bill has the DRBC’s frack ban, nor fracking at all, in mind. It likely has more to do with farming and other water uses and some perceived shortcomings at the SRBC…
    Read More “PA House Bill Would Neuter SRBC, DRBC Regulation of Ground Water”

  • | | | | | | |

    More of the Same at Final DEP Hearing for Shell Ethane Pipeline

    Click map for larger version

    For three nights in a row this week the Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) conducted hearings for Shell’s proposed Falcon ethane pipeline–a 97-mile pipeline system with two “legs” that will feed Shell’s mighty ethane cracker plant now under construction in Monaca, PA. We brought you a report from the first session, an eyewitness account from MDN friend Charlie Schliebs (see Shell Ethane Pipeline Hearing Draws Few Supporters, Many Antis). That session was predominantly populated with antis attempting to paint nightmare scenarios if the pipeline (and cracker) gets built. Last night was the third and final session–in Sewickley. Once again we have an eyewitness account, this time from MDN friend Katie Klaber, former president of the Marcellus Shale Coalition and currently managing partner at The Klaber Group and a board member of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (Pittsburgh branch). Katie is a consummate environmental professional–someone with a lifelong career in environment compliance and someone who served on the Air Quality Technical Advisory Committee of the DEP for more than a decade. She knows a thing or two about projects like the Falcon because she’s seen a thing or two (to borrow from the Farmers Insurance commercials). When the audience realized that Katie was supporting the project (the only one of the first 18 speakers to do so), the hissing started. She and the next few speakers who supported the project were hissed by bad-behaving antis in the crowd, with some Mother F…ers thrown in by an especially outspoken attendee. Nice people, those antis…
    Read More “More of the Same at Final DEP Hearing for Shell Ethane Pipeline”

  • | | | | | |

    Monroeville Continues to Block Seismic Testing to Prevent Drilling

    Monroeville, PA (Allegheny County, suburb of Pittsburgh) is hostile toward the shale industry. In September, Monroeville Council voted to enact a super-restrictive seismic testing ordinance (see Monroeville, PA Passes Restrictive Seismic Testing Ordinance). The ordinance is meant to hassle Huntley & Huntley (H&H), which wants to conduct seismic testing in two rural areas of the municipality (for potential drilling in a neighboring municipality). In October, the contractor hired to do the seismic work for H&H, Geokinetics, took Monroeville Council to court over their punitive seismic ordinance (see Monroeville Seismic Testing Ordinance Challenged in Court). Both sides compromised and in November settled the case, which Monroeville Council voted to accept in December (see Monroeville Council Approves Seismic Testing Court Settlement). That should be the end of the story, right? Wrong. Monroeville has continued their harassment by asking a court to immediately suspend the testing because (they claim) Geokinetics did not give proper notification to residents that the testing was happening. This is nothing more than a transparent attempt to prevent future drilling by slowing, or stopping, H&H’s ability to get an accurate picture of the best places are to drill a Marcellus well. Fortunately Geokinetics just finished the testing, so Monroeville’s pathetic attempt to stop it is now moot…
    Read More “Monroeville Continues to Block Seismic Testing to Prevent Drilling”

  • | | | | | | |

    ME1 Pipeline Shutdown in M-U Causing Propane Prices in TX to Drop

    Propane is one of the NGLs (natural gas liquids) that come out of the ground along with natural gas and oil–especially in “wet gas” areas like southwestern PA, eastern OH, and the northern panhandle area of WV. Ethane and propane have been flowing through the converted Mariner East 1 (ME1) pipeline for more than year–hauling propane (and ethane) from southwest PA all the way to the Marcus Hook refinery near Philadelphia. At Marcus Hook, the propane is loaded onto ships and sent around the world. The world is an important market for our propane. However, ME1 was suddenly switched off on March 3 by order of the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) after a sinkhole opened up under the pipeline, exposing some of the bare steel to the open air (see PA PUC Shuts Down Mariner 1 Pipeline Due to Mariner 2 Sinkhole). Sunoco Logistics Partners, the owner of ME1, is building a new set of pipelines called Mariner East 2 (ME2) close to the existing ME1. ME2 will also haul ethane and propane to Marcus Hook, greatly expanding capacity. As part of their construction work in Chester County, several sinkholes developed leading to the shutdown of ME1. You might think if the supply of propane suddenly stops, prices would go up. But that’s not what happened. Because the propane ME1 was hauling to Marcus Hook was exported, that supply is now staying here at home. The effect has been to drive DOWN the cost of propane–in Texas!…
    Read More “ME1 Pipeline Shutdown in M-U Causing Propane Prices in TX to Drop”

  • | | |

    Exposing PA Gov. Wolf’s Lies – He is No Friend of the Marcellus

    The gloves have finally come off. Typically the Marcellus industry, as represented by the Marcellus Shale Coalition, has used restrained language when talking about Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf. Hey, the industry has to work with the guy because the state Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP)–the agency that regulates shale drilling–is part of the executive branch (under Wolf’s thumb). The industry often can’t say what it really thinks. No more. Wolf, who pretends to be a friend of the Marcellus industry and mouths words of support, recently launched a vicious, lying attack against the industry over the severance tax issue (as part of his re-election campaign). The gloves are now off and the MSC is punching back. MSC president Dave Spigelmyer published an editorial in today’s Philadelphia Inquirer pointing out the difference between Wolf’s words and his deeds. In a bout of political schizophrenia (some would say hypocrisy), Wolf says shale gas in PA represents “enormous economic opportunity.” He then turns around and claims high-paid Marcellus lobbyists have spread money around Harrisburg like candy, bribing legislators to block a severance tax. What Wolf doesn’t tell you is that he himself has received millions of dollars from the teacher’s unions he’s promised to give severance tax money to…
    Read More “Exposing PA Gov. Wolf’s Lies – He is No Friend of the Marcellus”

  • | | | | |

    Report: The State of Natural Gas in Pennsylvania

    The Commonwealth Foundation is Pennsylvania’s premier free-market think tank. The aim of the Foundation is to “transform free-market ideas into public policies so all Pennsylvanians can flourish.” We’ve highlighted their excellent work over the years. They’ve just done it again. The Commonwealth Foundation has just published a report called “The State of Natural Gas in Pennsylvania” (full copy below). The opening begins this way: “Pennsylvania’s regulatory and tax environment is stunting job growth and deterring investment. A decade after the Marcellus Shale boom, lawmakers are still debating how to tax the industry instead of fixing the policies contributing to Pennsylvania’s increasingly uncompetitive energy market.” At the end of the report the Foundation shows a severance tax comparison of existing severance taxes in other states that PA competes against, like Ohio, West Virginia, Texas, Colorado, and Oklahoma. The chart shows that the existing impact fee (in essence a severance tax) runs around 1.1%. The severance tax in Ohio is running around 0.7%, and in West Virginia 3.5%. In places like Texas, which increasingly competes against PA with prodigious quantities of natural gas production, the severance tax is 4.2%. However, Gov. Wolf’s proposed severance tax would be 5%–the highest in the nation except for New Mexico’s 7.9% (which doesn’t compete with PA). The report shows how PA is restricting Marcellus activity with over-regulation and a high corporate income tax…
    Read More “Report: The State of Natural Gas in Pennsylvania”

  • | | | | | |

    PA “Rule of Capture” Case has Power to Limit Marcellus Drilling

    As we indicated in our post yesterday, the Pennsylvania Superior Court has handed down a decision that has the power to greatly restrict, even stop, Marcellus drilling in PA (see PA Superior Court Overturns “Rule of Capture” for Marcellus Well). This is a legal issue–and MDN is not written by a lawyer. Hence our earlier misreading of the importance and facts in the Superior Court decision. The issue, in brief, is that Monday’s court decision disallows using an age-old principle called the rule of capture, which we previously described. The rule of capture works for conventional drilling where underground deposits of oil and gas are in pools and the pool may exist underneath multiple surface property owners. Whoever gets there first and sucks the oil/gas out, wins. That’s the rule of capture in a nutshell. And it makes sense. You can’t be held responsible for oil and gas moving from one place to another as it’s extracted. And who knows how much of the pool is located under your property, or your neighbor’s property? The Superior Court justices ruled that the rule of capture doesn’t work for hydraulic fracturing because gas (and oil) trapped in shale rock does not freely move from one place to another as it does in a pool. The judges say the gas would “stay forever” where it is without fracking. In the case of Briggs v. Southwestern Energy, the Briggs family (in Susquehanna County, PA) alleges that when Southwestern drilled and fracked on the Briggs’ neighbor, the fracking was done close enough to their property that some of the gas located under their property (unleased) was released and extracted through the Southwestern well–a “trepass.” Southwestern countered that IF such a “trespass” took place, it falls under the rule of capture. The ultimate issue boils down to this: How far do fractures extend from a lateral well? An expert energy attorney told MDN off the record that Monday’s decision “could change the entire Pennsylvania shale industry” in two important ways…
    Read More “PA “Rule of Capture” Case has Power to Limit Marcellus Drilling”

  • | | | | | | |

    Shell Ethane Pipeline Hearing Draws Few Supporters, Many Antis

    Click for larger version

    Last night the first of three public hearings held by the Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection for the planned Shell Falcon Ethane Pipeline project was held in Monaca (Beaver County), PA. About 100 people turned up for the hearing, which lasted an hour and a half. No signs allowed. The only people who could speak had to register first. Of the 23 who did speak, 16 of them (including out-of-town movement antis) spoke against the project, while 7 people spoke in favor. The 97-mile Falcon Ethane Pipeline system has two “legs” that will feed Shell’s mighty ethane cracker plant. Shell is not using eminent domain for any of its leases for the pipeline. Every lease is negotiated and signed with individual landowners. Antis, in large part being organized and agitated by radical groups like FracTracker Alliance, are making a concerted effort to block the pipeline, hoping they can in turn stop the multi-billion dollar cracker plant currently under construction by blocking the pipeline that feeds it…
    Read More “Shell Ethane Pipeline Hearing Draws Few Supporters, Many Antis”

  • | | |

    Meaningless Poll Questions Yield Meaningless Results re PA Fracking

    This is how it works in biased, fake news land: You make up unspecific, wide-open questions that nobody really understands, and then biased, liberal media outlets interpret the “data” the way they want–to fit the predetermined media narrative. That’s what has just happened with meaningless poll questions from Franklin & Marshall College with respect to natural gas drilling in PA. We read through the questions they asked and thought, “What do some of these questions even mean?” The average citizen being asked these questions will assume and “read into” the questions what they *think* (but aren’t sure) is being asked, and answer the questions accordingly. In the end, it’s nonsensical. Meaningless. Fake. Then the lib machine kicks in to “report” that PA citizens, while still supporting drilling by a razor thin margin, actually think Marcellus drilling is bad for the environment. The latest media narrative is born: PA citizens are turning against gas drilling…
    Read More “Meaningless Poll Questions Yield Meaningless Results re PA Fracking”

  • | | | | |

    PA Superior Court Overturns “Rule of Capture” for Marcellus Well

    STOP PRESS: Shortly after this post was published, a MDN reader (an energy attorney) called us to alert us that our initial take on this case is not right. The case is NOT about a company stretching a lateral too far so that it trespasses under an adjoining property. Instead, the case is about the “zone of fracking”–that is, that fracking, by its nature, creates cracks that may open up and drain some of the gas under a neighboring property–even though the fracking was done properly within the boundaries of the leased property. The case (ominously) says that fracking itself can cause a trespass. Our attorney friend said this case has the potential to negatively affect Marcellus drilling in PA–in a BIG way. We will write another post on this issue tomorrow. In the meantime, just be aware that our initial take below is not correct. – Jim Willis, Editor

    The Pennsylvania Superior Court handed down an important decision yesterday that impacts both Marcellus landowners and drillers. The decision removes “rule of capture” as a way for shale drillers to drill under adjoining neighbors who haven’t specifically leased their property for drilling. The rule of capture came about with conventional (vertical only) drilling, cases in which a pool of oil or natural gas exists that runs underneath the property owned by multiple surface owners (see the image to the left). The rule of capture principle says “the first person to capture a natural resource owns that resource.” If you put a well or two or three on your property to extract the oil/gas, if it flows from the neighbor’s side to your side and up the well, it’s yours. Same for your neighbor. He/she can grab the oil and gas under your property if the pool exists under both. The principle originated in England (it’s a very old principle). However, Southwestern Energy tried to use the rule of capture principle to drill under property not leased for drilling that sits next to property that is leased–claiming the rule of capture. The molecules in shale are a whole other story than molecules sitting in a common pool. That’s what the Superiors ruled. Southwestern (and by extension, other Marcellus drillers) can’t simply extend a lateral well a few hundred feet under an un-leased neighbor, which certainly makes sense to us…
    Read More “PA Superior Court Overturns “Rule of Capture” for Marcellus Well”

  • | | | | | | |

    Offer to Relocate Families Near ME2 Sinkholes; ME1 Down Until May?

    Sinkhole in Chester County, PA

    Sunoco Logistics Partners (aka Energy Transfer Parnters) has had its challenges in constructing the twin Mariner East 2 (ME2) pipelines across Pennsylvania. In March, MDN told you that underground horizontal directional drilling (HDD) work in Chester County had led to a third sinkhole developing in that area (see 3rd Sinkhole Appears Near ME2 Construction in Chester County, PA). For most of its length, ME2 is being built next to the existing ME1 (Mariner East 1), a liquids pipeline originally built in 1931. The third sinkhole in Chester County exposed a portion of ME1, leading to the state Public Utility Commission “temporarily” shutting down ME1 on March 7 (see PA PUC Shuts Down Mariner 1 Pipeline Due to Mariner 2 Sinkhole). ME1 would be, according to Sunoco, out of commission for “10 to 14 days.” Nearly a month later it’s still not running and until the state Dept. of Environmental Protection gets solid answers about the sinkholes, it won’t restart. It now looks like ME1 won’t be operational again until May. ME1’s closure has put several shippers, primarily Range Resources, in a bind (see Range, CNX Look for Alternatives to ME1 Pipe Following Shutdown). Sunoco needs to conduct geotechnical studies near the sinkholes to get answers that will allow it to resume work. So, Sunoco has offered to temporarily relocate five families living near the three sinkholes–for up to six weeks–while it conducts tests of the area…
    Read More “Offer to Relocate Families Near ME2 Sinkholes; ME1 Down Until May?”

  • | | | | | | |

    PA Supreme Court Axes DEP $4.5M Fine in EQT Tioga Wastewater Leak

    EQT had to take their case all the way to the Pennsylvania Supreme Court, but in the end, the company was victorious over a wildly overinflated $4.53 million fine levied by the state Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) for a leaky wastewater impoundment in Tioga County dating back to 2014 (see PA DEP Levies Biggest Fine Ever, $4.5M Against EQT). While EQT did not say there wasn’t a problem with leaks at the site, they did say the way the DEP calculated the fine was unreasonable and arbitrary. In fact, EQT says the DEP levied the fine and took EQT to court because a few weeks prior EQT had sued the DEP over a different, unrelated matter (i.e., sour grapes on the part of the DEP). EQT appealed the fine and the case all the way to the PA Supreme Court, which heard oral arguments last November (see PA Supreme Court Hears Arguments in EQT Wastewater Leak Case). Last Wednesday the PA Supremes ruled (5-2) in favor of EQT, saying that the DEP’s levied fine was excessive and that the DEP misinterpreted language in the 1937 Clean Streams Law…
    Read More “PA Supreme Court Axes DEP $4.5M Fine in EQT Tioga Wastewater Leak”

  • | | | | |

    Marcellus-Fired Panda Hummel Electric Plant Roars to Life in PA

    It takes a long time to build a natural gas-fired electric power plant–especially a big one. We began writing about one of the largest coal-to-gas conversion projects in the country, happening in the heart of PA Marcellus country, back in February 2014 (see Panda Power Building 3rd Marcellus-Fired Electric Plant in PA). Panda Power Funds, a private equity firm located in Dallas, TX announced a partnership with Sunbury Generation to build a whopping 1,124-megawatt Marcellus gas-fired electric plant on the site of a retired coal-fired plant near Shamokin Dam in Snyder County, PA. Final testing is now underway at the facility, which was supposed to go online in February but is now scheduled to begin operations in May. Here’s an inside look at the complicated process of bringing a new power plant online…
    Read More “Marcellus-Fired Panda Hummel Electric Plant Roars to Life in PA”

  • | | | | | |

    PA DEP Releases Draft Final GP-5 & 5A Methane Regulations

    Last December the Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) issued “draft final language” for the proposed General Permit 5A (GP-5A) and the revised General Permit 5 (GP-5)–regulations that supposedly will cut down on fugitive methane from escaping from drill pads and pipelines (see PA DEP Signals Onerous New GP-5 & 5A Methane Regs Coming 1Q18). The onerous regulations, which for now only apply to *new* sources (not existing) were originally prompted by bullying from the Obama Environmental Protection Agency. Even though EPA pressure has disappeared under President Trump, PA Gov. Wolf is still pushing these onerous new regs. GP-5 applies to pipelines and compressor stations, while GP-5A applies to well pads and drilling. Following a flood of new comments, the DEP tweaked the onerous regs once again (for maybe the third or fourth time) and last Friday afternoon, when nobody was working or looking or caring, the DEP published yet another revised final final final final final version of the regs (below). Are they any better than previous versions?…
    Read More “PA DEP Releases Draft Final GP-5 & 5A Methane Regulations”