Dem Union Members Call Wolf Petchem Veto “Attack on Jobs”
Yesterday MDN brought you news about Democrat trade union members in Pennsylvania turning on one of their own–Gov. Tom Wolf (see Unions Push PA Legislators to Override Wolf Veto of Petchem Bill). Wolf has pledged to veto a bill recently passed by large bipartisan majorities in both the PA House and Senate that would attract new petrochemical investment (and jobs) to the state. In a followup to yesterday’s story, the union members have turned up the heat on Wolf (to boiling hot), including a mobile billboard running up and down the streets of Harrisburg.
Read More “Dem Union Members Call Wolf Petchem Veto “Attack on Jobs””
In December 2018, the Pennsylvania Supreme Court ruled that so-called “stripper wells” (low-producing wells) can be taxed under the 2012 Act 13 law, slapped with an impact tax assessment if those wells produce more than 90 thousand cubic feet per day (Mcf/d) of gas in a single month, any month (see 
Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf flat out, 100% lied when he introduced his latest annual budget on Tuesday, declaring “it doesn’t raise taxes.” B.S. As he has done for the past six budgets, Wolf once again is calling for a new severance tax on the Marcellus. On top of the existing impact tax (the equivalent of a severance tax). Wolf’s plan calls for a new tax that would steal $4.5 billion out of the pockets of drillers and landowners in order to redistribute their hard-earned wealth to a panoply of others.
Pennsylvania State Rep. Daryl Metcalfe, Majority Chair of the House Environmental Resources and Energy Committee, doesn’t put up with the juvenile antics from the Democrats on his committee–like Danielle Friel Otten and Greg Vitali–from those who violate decorum by pretending they want to ask a question when in fact they want to pontificate like the gasbags they are. Wednesday at a hearing on the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative (RGGI), Metcalfe shut down Otten and Vitali when they attempted to violate rules and bloviate instead of asking relevant questions.
The U.S. House of Representatives Subcommittee on Energy (of the Committee on Energy and Commerce) held a hearing yesterday called “Modernizing the Natural Gas Act to Ensure it Works for Everyone.” The Natural Gas Act of 1938 created the Federal Power Commission (FPC), giving the agency control over the regulation of interstate natural gas sales and pipelines. Later on, the FPC was dissolved and became the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC). One of the witnesses at the hearing, there to bash FERC, was (suprise!) THE Delaware Riverkeeper herself, Maya van Rossum.
Pennsylvania House Bill (HB) 1100, aimed at attracting NEW petrochemical investment to the state, is due to be voted on (and passed) by the PA Senate this week. Gov. Tom Wolf (liberal Democrat) has vowed to veto the bill–denying the state billions of economic stimulus it could receive. Why the veto? Your guess is as good as ours. Likely because it will encourage more use of PA’s abundant natural gas supplies, and that doesn’t sit well with radicalized enviro types.
In January the Pennsylvania Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) finally, after more than a year, allowed Energy Transfer to restart the final bits of construction needed to complete the Mariner East 2 (ME2) pipeline project (see 
Last Thursday MDN editor Jim Willis had the pleasure of pre-recording an appearance on the radio program Shale Gas News, co-hosted by Jim’s friend Bill desRosiers (from Cabot Oil & Gas). We have the recorded segment below. In the interview, Jim offers up the main “threats” that he sees for the Marcellus/Utica (indeed all shale drilling) in 2020.
With the big news about Federal Energy Regulatory Commission’s (FERC) support of the PennEast Pipeline project, FERC ruling the pipeline CAN cross New Jersey state-controlled lands using eminent domain (see today’s lead story), another important bit of PennEast news from yesterday seems to have gotten lost in the sauce. PennEast filed a request yesterday with FERC to build the pipeline project in two phases. Break the project in two.
A new Franklin & Marshall College (F&M) poll released today shows a befuddling result. F&M keeps tabs on a variety of political issues in the Keystone State. The latest poll’s findings on the issue of fracking raise some red flags for us. The results are mixed. The poll surveyed 628 registered voters over six days in January. It found 48% of voters support shale gas drilling in Pennsylvania, compared with 44% who oppose it. Pretty thin margin. However, 48% of those same voters favor a ban on all fracking in the state, versus 39% who oppose a ban. Can anyone say schizophrenia?
Little Johnny one-note, Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf, is once again singing a single note–and that note is a call to destroy what’s left of the PA Marcellus industry with a severance tax. He sang his one-note tune yesterday, doing his best Santa Claus routine. Wolf says he can give away $4.5 billion of “everything” PA residents desire most in life–if only the evil Republican leadership in both chambers of the legislature would allow a vote on his plan.
Seems like all we see in mainstream media are articles bashing Energy Transfer’s Mariner East (ME) NGL pipeline projects. Most of the negative press comes from southeastern PA where the pipeline has hit snags in building through Philadelphia suburbs. Imagine our surprise in seeing a guest editorial in a southwestern PA newspaper supporting the ME project, a column that details just how this massive project has benefitted the Keystone State in numerous ways–all across the state.
There is one court case in Pennsylvania that we’ve been concerned about since April 2018. The Briggs v Southwestern Energy case had the power to block most new Marcellus Shale drilling in the state. The case, revolving around the oil and gas “rule of capture” principle, was appealed by Southwestern all the way to the PA Supreme Court. We are elated to report that yesterday the Supremes ruled supreme and found in favor of Southwestern–retaining the rule of capture in the Keystone State. This is seriously good news for both drillers and leased landowners. Below we explain what the rule of capture is, the background of the case, and what the Supremes said in yesterday’s important ruling.