PA Anti Strategy: Weaponize Recent Court Ruling Against Shale Dev
It’s clear that radical environmentalists who (irrationally) oppose the use of fossil fuels believe the recent decision by Pennsylvania Supreme Court is a gift from Gaia (Mother Earth goddess). As MDN previously reported, last week the Pennsylvania Supreme Court of Appeals, in a sharply divided 3-2 decision, sided with a virulent anti-drilling group, the Pennsylvania Environmental Defense Foundation, against the state in saying that any revenue generated from leasing and drilling on state-owned land MUST be used solely for conservation and the environment (see PA Supreme Court Hands Antis Partial Victory re State Land Drilling). However, denying the state Dept. of Environmental Conservation (DCNR) from funding itself with lease/royalty revenue was inconsequential, a distraction from the real aim. The decision, according to the radicals, further strengthens the state’s so-called Environmental Rights Amendment to the state constitution. What it means, in very practical terms, is that the antis now plan to use a decision ostensibly about how a single state agency gets its funding, to apply the philosophical underpinnings (the right to a clean environment) as a weapon against judges and the Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP), to force them to consider whether or not issuing a given permit for a project “harms” the “rights” of PA citizens to a “clean environment.” In other words, the radicals are weaponizing a court decision to use against the shale industry–and they’re signaling, via their sycophantic mouthpieces at StateImpact Pennsylvania, that’s exactly what they intend to do…
Read More “PA Anti Strategy: Weaponize Recent Court Ruling Against Shale Dev”
As they so often do, radical environmentalists are creating chaos and confusion–this time in Pennsylvania. As MDN reported, earlier this week the Pennsylvania Supreme Court of Appeals, in a sharply divided 3-2 decision, sided with a virulent anti-drilling group, the Pennsylvania Environmental Defense Foundation, against the state in saying that any revenue generated from leasing and drilling on state-owned land MUST be used solely for conservation and the environment (see 
Nearly five years ago, in July 2012, then-PA Gov. Tom Corbett announced that some of the Sunoco Marcus Hook Refinery assets had been purchased by Braskem America (see 
In March of this year, the Team Pennsylvania Foundation released a report called “Prospects to Enhance Pennsylvania’s Opportunities in Petrochemical Manufacturing” (see 
Primoris Services Corporation, a pipeline building company based in Dallas, TX, has built a number of gathering pipelines in the Marcellus region. We’ve been covering some of the projects Primoris has been involved with since 2013 (
In a sharply divided 3-2 decision (full copy below), the Pennsylvania Supreme Court of Appeals has sided with a virulent anti-drilling group, the Pennsylvania Environmental Defense Foundation, against the state in saying that any revenue generated from leasing and drilling on state-owned land MUST be used solely for conservation and the environment. The state cannot treat, as former Gov. Ed “fast Eddie” Rendell did, revenue from oil and gas drilling on state land as money that can be used for any old cockamamie political reason. That is, the money cannot go into the black hole of the “general fund” in Harrisburg. The three justices who rendered the decision say the law is clear on intent–that money must be used for environmental purposes. Fine. Except the foundation on which they decided the case is PA’s so-called environmental rights amendment. Even though this case is about how money from drilling will get used (a fairly narrow ruling), already antis at PA Big Green groups like THE Delaware Riverkeeper claim they will use this decision and the environmental rights amendment to try and block drilling on state lands because it “violates” the state constitution. That’s where they ultimately want to take this. Block it on state lands first, then go for private land next…
As the Pennsylvania budget deadline looms (June 30th), the Democrats and RINO Republicans are out in full force pushing, like a broken record, the dead issue of a severance tax. For the next nine days (or more, if the budget doesn’t pass on time, which is likely), we will have to hear about the Grand Canyon budget gap that exists, and how only soaking drillers (and landowners) to use THEIR money, will fix it. Johnny one tune. Every argument we’ve read always says money from a severance tax is needed to help fund the general budget. So when we spotted an opinion column that argued for the severance tax so the state can use the money to build more pipelines to areas without pipelines, so more residents can use natural gas, we thought that was kind of unique and funny. No, building more pipelines is not a good reason to impose a severance tax. It’s nothing more than yet another way to try and get one passed, and once in place, change the things it funds. In other words, it’s a lie. This particular view was offered by the former president of the Pennsylvania Business Roundtable. He’s also someone who’s “spent four decades in and around state government.” In other words, a swamp dweller. And establishment insider–the establishment in this case located in Harrisburg. So we’re not surprised that he wants a Marcellus-killing tax. It’s just dressed up in pretty platitudes…
The legal beagles of top energy law firm Babst Calland recently released their seventh annual energy industry report called, “The 2017 Babst Calland Report – Upstream, Midstream and Downstream: Resurgence of the Appalachian Shale Industry; Legal and Regulatory Perspective for Producers and Midstream Operators.” This latest annual review chronicles the comeback of the Marcellus/Utica and what challenges lie ahead. In an MDN exclusive, we have the first seven pages of the 74-page report (see below), along with details on how you can request a full copy. Worth the read! Here’s an overview…
The TriState Infrastructure Council (TSIC) was founded in Pittsburgh in late 2016 to “serve a broad-based business community during the critical next few years by attracting and deploying investments in infrastructure projects in Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia.” With infrastructure upgrades, the region will be able to realize economic growth resulting from petrochemical manufacturing and related industries in the Appalachian basin. One of the driving forces behind TSIC is a name you are likely familiar with: Kathryn Klaber. Katie Klaber founded and until a few years ago led the Marcellus Shale Coalition. She opted to focus on her consulting practice following the MSC and is now managing the TSIC. The TSIC organization was founded with a group of A-list companies located in the region. At this week’s Northeast U.S. Petrochemical Construction conference in Pittsburgh, Katie unveiled an exciting new project to map infrastructure in an 82-county region throughout the Ohio River Valley. The aim is to identify missing/key/critical infrastructure components and then work to set up public-private partnerships to get those components built. The TSIC is looking at “electric transmission and distribution, pipelines, natural gas and natural gas liquid storage capacity, reliable locks and dams, rail networks, roads and bridges, water and sewer, building sites, barge loading/unloading facilities, broadband, fiber optics, and air service, among others.” And yes, the Marcellus/Utica shale is the linchpin that holds it all together–makes it all possible–and the raison d’être for the TSIC. Here’s more on the new infrastructure database, the TSIC, and how they are giving the shale industry a big assist…
Yesterday the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC), the agency charged with keeping tabs on impact fee revenue from shale drillers (PA’s version of a severance tax), released the final numbers for impact fee revenues and disbursements in 2016 (see 
Each June, the Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC), the agency charged with keeping tabs on impact fee revenue from shale drillers (PA’s version of a severance tax) releases the final numbers of impact fee revenues and disbursements. Today is the appointed day for 2016 impact fees. The PUC reports impact fees on natural gas producers in 2016 totaled $173,258,900–the lowest annual revenue generated from the fee to date (since the fee began in 2011). However, 2016 was the low point for drillers drilling new wells–the bottom of the valley in the oil and gas industry. Since mid-2016 we’ve been on an upswing in drilling new wells, which will no doubt be reflected in 2017 impact fee revenues. We have the PUC press release below, and screenshots for many of the pretty color pie charts showing topline numbers. What was the #1 county receiving impact fee revenue (meaning the #1 county drilled) in 2016? Washington County. The driller paying the most in impact fees in 2016? Range Resources. The municipality receiving the most revenue from impact fees? Interestingly, that would be Cummings Township–in Lycoming County. Here’s the 411 on impact fees (i.e. taxes) raised and spent in PA for 2016…
An article in the left-leaning Harrisburg Patriot-News has this incendiary opening: “Is it ‘abnormally dangerous’ to drill and frack for oil under a massive oil refinery, particularly if that well is bored beneath a tank filled with 3.6 million gallons of gasoline? A decision issued by a divided Commonwealth Court panel on Monday will give a Pennsylvania community a chance to find out.” In a court decision filed on Monday, the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania will allow a driller to drill and frack a well that is close to (but not directly underneath) the above-ground 3.6 million gallon petroleum tank. At first blush, especially when reading an opening like the one in the Patriot-News story, the average reader would think such a plan is stark raving mad. But when you dig into the details, a far different story emerges. As usual, mainstream media misrepresents many of the facts. We’re here to sort it out for you…
We’re going to take a stab at this, and we are not confident we will get it 100% right. With that as a warning, we recently reported that a case brought by landowners in northeastern PA against Chesapeake Energy over unwarranted royalty deductions suffered a bit of a setback (see 
In December 2016, the Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) unveiled new regulations to clamp down on methane emissions and other other air pollution that allegedly comes from shale drilling sites (see