Statewide PA

  • |

    Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Launches New Website Dedicated to Drilling in the Marcellus Shale

    Pittsburgh is located in the middle of some of the most active drilling in the Marcellus Shale in Pennsylvania. Many drilling and other related companies have located either branch or even headquarters offices in the Pittsburgh area, making it the defacto capital of drilling in the Marcellus Shale. So plenty of news comes out of Western PA to do with drilling in the Marcellus.

    Read More “Pittsburgh Post-Gazette Launches New Website Dedicated to Drilling in the Marcellus Shale”

  • | | | |

    PA Marcellus Gas Drillers Close to Recycling 100 Percent of Wastewater, Now Use Just a Few Chemicals in Fracking

    One of the chief objections of those who oppose drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale is the amount of water used in drilling—an average of 3-4 million gallons per well. Environmentalists raise the alarm of sourcing the water from rivers and streams, and the disposal of what’s left over.

    Here’s how the numbers break down: It takes between 100,000 and 300,000 gallons of water during the drilling process itself, and another 3-4 million gallons of water gets mixed with sand and chemicals and pumped in under pressure to fracture the shale, releasing the gas. Anywhere from 10 to 50 percent of the water comes back out—something called “flowback.”

    Read More “PA Marcellus Gas Drillers Close to Recycling 100 Percent of Wastewater, Now Use Just a Few Chemicals in Fracking”

  • | | | |

    New York Times Publishes Hit Piece on Natural Gas Drilling, Quoted Source Responds to the Article

    New York Times buildingHave no fear, the great New York Times is now on the case of natural gas drilling, and it has “uncovered” some rather disturbing news:

    With hydrofracking, a well can produce over a million gallons of wastewater that is often laced with highly corrosive salts, carcinogens like benzene and radioactive elements like radium, all of which can occur naturally thousands of feet underground. Other carcinogenic materials can be added to the wastewater by the chemicals used in the hydrofracking itself.

    While the existence of the toxic wastes has been reported, thousands of internal documents obtained by The New York Times from the Environmental Protection Agency, state regulators and drillers show that the dangers to the environment and health are greater than previously understood.(1)

    Read More “New York Times Publishes Hit Piece on Natural Gas Drilling, Quoted Source Responds to the Article”

  • | | | | |

    Gas Drilling Supporters Outnumber Those Opposed at Honesdale DRBC Hearings, Roundup of Yesterday’s Hearings in PA and NY

    Yesterday saw the first round of hearings by the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC), four hearings total—two in Honesdale, PA and two in Liberty, NY (afternoon and evening sessions at both locations). The hearings were for public comment on the DRBC’s proposed new extra layer of drilling regulations for Marcellus Shale gas wells drilled within the Delaware River watershed, which includes portions of Pennsylvania and New York where Marcellus drilling occurs.

    Read More “Gas Drilling Supporters Outnumber Those Opposed at Honesdale DRBC Hearings, Roundup of Yesterday’s Hearings in PA and NY”

  • |

    PA State Game Commission Stays Afloat with Revenue from Marcellus Shale Lease & Royalty Payments

    Although not enough to offset the loss of revenue from lower commodity price of timber sales, the Pennsylvania State Game Commission says royalties from leasing state land for drilling in the Marcellus Shale is helping to keep the commission afloat.

    Read More “PA State Game Commission Stays Afloat with Revenue from Marcellus Shale Lease & Royalty Payments”

  • | | |

    Pro-Drilling PA Senator Joe Scarnati Accepts Free Super Bowl Trip from CONSOL Energy

    Joe ScarnatiA bone-headed move by Pennsylvania’s top Senate Republican:

    The state Senate president, a key player in the debate over natural-gas drilling in Pennsylvania, accepted a free trip from one of the state’s largest energy companies to see the Pittsburgh Steelers play in the Super Bowl.

    Senate President Pro Tem Joe Scarnati, R-Brockway, had his ticket, plane ride, and hotel bill paid for by Consol Energy Inc., a major coal producer and one of the companies drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale, according to Mr. Scarnati’s top aide.*

    Read More “Pro-Drilling PA Senator Joe Scarnati Accepts Free Super Bowl Trip from CONSOL Energy”

  • | | |

    PA State Rep. Phyllis Mundy Makes Another Attempt to Stop Drilling in the PA Marcellus Shale

    Pennsylvania State Rep. Phyllis Mundy (Democrat, Kingston) recently reintroduced several pieces of legislation designed to stop drilling in the Marcellus Shale in PA. Not that it will make much of a difference since Republicans now control the governorship, the Senate and the House in PA.

    Read More “PA State Rep. Phyllis Mundy Makes Another Attempt to Stop Drilling in the PA Marcellus Shale”

  • |

    Anti-Drilling PennFuture’s To-Do List for 2011

    Jan JarrettThose opposed to natural gas drilling in Pennsylvania have an uphill battle with a new governor (Tom Corbett) who is pro-drilling, and with pro-drilling majorities in both the Senate and House. So they pick and chose their battles. Some groups want an outright ban or moratorium (a moratorium being nothing more than a prelude to an outright ban). Others opposed to drilling, like Jan Jarrett, the president and CEO of statewide environmental group PennFuture, are concentrating on small victories now, hoping for bigger ones later when the political climate changes. And the political climate will one day change again—that much is certain. So what is on Ms. Jarrett’s to-do list for 2011?

    Read More “Anti-Drilling PennFuture’s To-Do List for 2011”

  • | | | | | | |

    List of 78 Chemicals Used in Hydraulic Fracturing Fluid in Pennsylvania

    UPDATE (July 6): It seems the list below is not completely accurate, as admitted by the PA DEP. The list below includes chemicals and substances stored on site (like diesel fuel and oil) that are not injected into the ground. MDN will furnish an updated list when it becomes available from the DEP.

    An earlier version of the list, provided by DEP to the Associated Press and published in newspapers throughout the state this week, purportedly included all of the chemicals used in Pennsylvania during the gas extraction process called hydraulic fracturing. Instead, it included not just the chemicals pumped deep underground but also those stored or used on a well site, including fuel for vehicles and brake fluid.

    “You can blame it on me,” Scott Perry, the director of DEP’s Bureau of Oil and Gas Management, said on Wednesday.

    The original list was a compilation of the chemicals identified on safety documents called material safety data sheets that hydraulic fracturing contractors must submit to the department, but he did not realize that it included substances the contractors use both above and below ground on a well site, he said. The second list was winnowed by a DEP chemist, who recognized that some of the chemicals on the initial list are not among those injected underground during the fracturing process.

    Of the 83 chemicals on the list published by the AP and the 78 on the list posted by the DEP, only 37 items are in common.

    Three compounds specifically addressed in the AP article because of the risks they can pose to human health – naphthalene, toluene and xylene – are not on the list of hydraulic fracturing chemicals DEP posted on its website on Wednesday.

    Scranton Times Tribune (July 1) – DEP shale chemical lists at odds over inclusion of above ground substances

    Original post from June 30…

    Using Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) from drillers, along with analysis of fracking fluid, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) has released an updated list of 78 chemicals they say are found in fluids used by gas drillers in PA (called “fracking fluids”). MDN has obtained the list of 78 chemicals and reproduced it below. There is also a downloadable version at the end of this posting.

    There are many nasty chemicals in this list, no one disputes that. But here’s a few things to keep in mind:

    1. No one knows how much of these chemicals are being used by any given driller. We do know that fracking fluid is composed of less than one percent of the chemicals in this list, with water and sand making up the other 99 percent.
    2. When fracking fluid is pumped into the ground, the vertical hole down which it’s pumped is lined with concrete to protect surface water supplies from chemicals. The fracking fluid goes down some 5,000 feet to where it’s used to help break rock apart releasing the natural gas, and then most of the fluid is pumped back out again and carted away where it’s treated at a regulated and approved facility. For the fluid that stays behind, it’s down some 5,000 feet. That’s almost a mile of solid rock between where it sits and surface water supplies (which are located at about 300 feet). There’s no way any of that fluid will “seep up” into water supplies. And remember that most fluid is pumped back out again. So less than one percent of the fluid are chemicals from this list, and most of that comes out again, leaving behind a very very small amount of chemicals a mile below the surface and heavily diluted by water and sand.
    3. Compare the list below with the labels on the containers under your kitchen and bathroom sinks. You’ll find some of the same names on the labels.
    4. One last thing to keep in mind: No driller uses all of these chemicals. In fact, Range Resources has openly discussed what they use in their fracking fluid:

    Range Resources, which uses contractor Frac Tech for its fracing work, says its frac fluid additives are chosen from a list of only nine compounds — hydrochloric acid, methanol propargyl, polyacrylamide, glutaraldehyde, ethanol, ethylene glycol, alcohol and sodium hydroxide.*

    Chemicals Used in the Hydraulic Fracturing Process in Pennsylvania
    Prepared by the Department of Environmental Protection
    Bureau of Oil and Gas Management
    Compiled from Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) obtained from Inustry

    Updated June 10, 2010

    Chemical Product Name
    2,2-Dibromo-3-Nitrilopropionamide Bio Clear 1000/Bio Clear 2000/ Bio-Clear 200/BioRid20L/ EC6116A
    2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one X-Cide 207
    5-chloro-2-methyl-4-isothiazolin-3-one X-Cide 207
    Acetic Acid Fe-1A Acidizing Composition/ Packer Inhibitor
    Acetic Anhydride Fe-1A Acidizing Composition
    Acetylene GT&S Inc./ Airco
    Alcohol Ethoxylated C12-16 NE-200
    Alkyl benzene sulfonic acid Tetrolite AW0007/ FR-46
    Ammonia (aqueous) FAW-5
    Ammonium Bifluoride ABF 37%
    Ammonium Persulfate AP Break
    Ammonium Bisulfite Techni-Hib 604/ Fe OXCLEAR/ Packer Inhibitor
    Ammonium chloride Salt Inhibitor
    Ammonium Salt (alkylpolyether sulfate) Tetrolite AW0007
    Amorphous silica TerraProp Plus/ Bituminous Coal Fly Ash ASTM C618
    Benzoic Acid Benzoic Acid
    Boric Acid BC-140/ Unilink 8.5
    Boric Oxide XLW-32
    Calcium Chloride Dowflake
    Calcium Oxide Bituminous Coal Fly Ash ASTM C618
    carboxymethylhydroxypropyl guar blend Unigel CMPHG
    Choline Chloride Clay Treat-2C
    Cinnamaldehyde ENVIROHIB 2001
    Citric Acid Ferrotrol 300L/ IC-100L
    Complex polyamine salt Clay Master-5C
    Crystalline Silica: Cristobalite  
    Crystalline Silica: Quartz Silica Sand/ / Atlas PRC/ Best Sand/ Bituminous Coal Fly Ash ASTM C618
    Cupric chloride dihydrate Ferrotrol 280L
    Cured resin LiteProp 125
    Cyclohexanes CS-2
    Dazomet ICI-3240
    Diethylene Glycol Scaletrol 720/ Scaletrol 7208

    d-Limonene

    MA-844W
    Enzyme GBL-8X
    EO-C7-9-iso-, C8 rich-alcohols NE-940/ NE-90
    EO-C9-11-iso-, C10-rich alcohols NE-940/ NE-90
    Ethoxylated Alcohol FRW-14/ SAS-2/ Flomax 50/ WFR-3B
    Ethyl Acetate Castle Thrust
    Ethyl Alcohol FAW-5/ Castle Shop Solv/ Dallas Morris
    Ethylbenzene NDL-100/ PARANOX/ Uniflo II
    Ethylbenzene NDL-100/ PARANOX/ Uniflo II
    Ethylene Glycol ENVIROHIB 2001/ ICA-2/ LEB 10X/ Scaletrol
    720/ Sceletrol 7208/ CC 300/ Clachek A/ Clachek
    LP/ Ironsta II B/ NCL-100/ BC 140/ NCL-100/
    Flomax 50/ NCL/ Scalehib 100/ Unihib O/ Unilink 8.5
    Formic Acid ENVIROHIB 2001
    Gluconic Acid Interstate ICA-2
    Glutaraldehyde Alpha 114/Alpha 125/ ICI-150
    Glycerol Bio Sealers
    Glycol Ethers ENVIROHIB 2001/AMPHOAM 75/ PARANOX/ Uniflo II/ Unifoam/ WNE-342LN
    Guar Gum PROGUM 19 GUAR PRODUCT/ Unigel 19XL/ Benchmark Polymer 3400/ WGA-15/ Unigel 5F
    Hydrochloric Acid Hydrochloric Acid (HCL)/ TETRAClean 542/ Muriatic Acid
    Hydrochloric Acid 3% – 35% Hydrochloric Acid 3% – 35%
    Isopropanol AFS 30 Blend/ FAC-1W/ FAC-3W/ MA-844W/ NE-23/ NE-940/ Flomax 50/ Tetrolite AW0007/
    FMW25 Foamer/ CS-2
    Isopropyl Alcohol NFS-102/ WFT-9511/ LT-32/ AR-1/ Flomax 50/ NDL-100/ Unibac/ Uniflo II/ Uniflo/ Unihib O/
    WNE-342LN
    Methanol

    AFS 30 Blend/ NE-200/ Activator Superset-W/ CI-14/ FAW-5/ GasFlo/ Inflo-250W/ LT-32/ NE-940/
    XLW-32/ Tetrolite AW0007/ FMW25 Foamer/ 40 HTL Corrosion Inhibitor/ NE 100/ HAI-OS Acid
    Inhibitor/ Unibac/ NE-90/ Packer Inhibitor

    Methyl Alcohol Clearbreak 400/ Super Surf/ Castle Shop Solv
    Methyl Salicylate Bio Sealers
    n-butanol AirFoam 311
    Nitrilotriacetamide Salt Inhibitor
    Phenolic Resin Atlas PRC
    Polyethylene Glycol NE-940/ EC6116A/ NE-90
    Polyethylene Glycol Mixture Bio Clear 2000/ Bio-Clear 200
    Polyoxylalkylene sulfate FMW25 Foamer
    Polysaccharide Blend GW-3LDF
    Potassium Carbonate BF-7L
    Potassium Chloride Dowflake
    Potassium Hydroxide B-9, pH Increase Buffer/ BXL-2
    Propargyl Alcohol CI-14/ HAI-OS Acid Inhibitor
    Propylene Glycol SAS-2/ WFR-3B
    Silica S-8C, Sand, 100 mesh/ Montmorillnonite clay
    Sodium Bicarbonate K-34
    Sodium Bromide BioRid 20L
    Sodium Hydroxide Caustic Soda/ ICI-3240/ BioRid B-71
    Sodium Persulphate High Perm SW-LB
    Sodium Xylene Sulfonate FAC-2/ FAC-3W
    Sulfuric Acid Sulfuric Acid
    Surfactants AFS-30/ GasFlo/ Inflo-250W
    Talc Adomite Aqua
    Tetrakis(hydroxymethyl)phosphonium sulfate Magnacide 575 Microbiocide
    Tetramethyl ammonium Chloride Clay Treat-3C
    Trimethyloctadecylammonium chloride FAC-1W/ FAC-3W

     

    Download Chemicals Used in Hydraulic Fracturing in PA list

    *Pittsburgh Business Times (June 30) – DEP releases new list of frac chemicals; used in Marcellus, other Pa. operations

  • | | | | |

    Forced Pooling – An Issue Coming to the Forefront in Pennsylvania

    Now that a severance tax is coming to Pennsylvania, natural gas drillers will likely push for a provision called “forced pooling” in PA which makes it easier to gather gas from properties that are not leased but sit in-between other leased land.

    The Marcellus Shale natural gas industry wants to see legislation attached to any severance tax adopted by the state that would force property owners who refuse leases to allow drillers to gather the gas beneath their land, an industry coalition leader said Monday.

    Calling it the most economical and conservative land-use approach to drilling for gas, David Spigelmyer, Chesapeake Energy’s regional vice president for government relations, said in a Times-Shamrock newspapers editorial board meeting that “forced pooling” is a key element of any legislation the state’s Marcellus drillers could support and is actively being discussed during budget negotiations in the capital.

    Such a statute would help avoid an unnecessary proliferation of wells, Spigelmyer said, but critics say it is a form of eminent domain.*

    This is an unresolved and complex issue that’s about to become red hot in PA. There are strong arguments on both sides. MDN believes landowners should have the right to allow drilling on and under their land provided it does not harm nearby populations or the environment. It is the constitutional right for citizens of this country to use their land as they see fit. On the other hand, to force a landowner who does not want to lease their land into a pool with their neighbors who have leased, is also unfair. If it means a proliferation of wells and added expense, so be it. The drilling company will have to bear the cost. Citizens should not have to worry that portions of their property will be used against their will—both on the surface and under it. It’s wrong to stop drilling based on irrational fear (as is being done in New York), and it’s equally wrong for drillers to force landowners to allow drilling under their land.

    What do you think about forced pooling? Leave a comment below and let us know.

    *Wilkes-Barre Citizen’s Voice (June 29) – Gas industry wants access to unleased property