IMG Midstream: Army of Tiny PA Marcellus-Powered Electric Plants
MDN first told you about IMG Midstream in August 2014 (see 7 Small Marcellus-Powered Electric Plants Coming to NEPA). At the time, IMG was proposing to build seven “tiny” natural gas-fired electric plants–each plant producing on the order of 20-22 megawatts of electricity (enough to power 13,000 homes). IMG added a couple of more to their plans in November 2014 (see Details on IMG’s “Tiny” Marcellus-Powered Electric Plants in NEPA). The beauty of IMG’s tiny natgas electric plants is that they are really small–about the size of a basketball court; they produce almost no air pollution; and they are quiet. It’s a really cool concept. IMG’s very first tiny electric plant, in Susquehanna County, PA, went online in October 2015. The second plant, in Bradford County, PA, went online this past June (see IMG’s Tiny NatGas-Fired Electric Plants Take Off in the Marcellus). The former 9 planned plants ballooned with plans for 25 plants operating within the next five years! We spotted a recent article about IMG’s activities in southwestern PA and that got us to thinking. How are they doing with their plan to build 25 plants? So far, they’ve built 11 and are on the prowl for more locations. We have the latest update on IMG and their startegy of zigging (building small power plants) when everyone else is zagging (building large plants)…
Read More “IMG Midstream: Army of Tiny PA Marcellus-Powered Electric Plants”
Big news broke Friday afternoon. Short history lesson for those who are new to MDN: There were 14 families along the Carter Road area of Dimock Township, PA (Susquehanna County) that reportedly experienced turbidity in their water from methane migrating, supposedly from Cabot’s drilling operations nearby. The state Dept. of Environmental Protection (DEP) investigated in 2010 and declared Cabot guilty and imposed stiff fines and requirements, including a requirement to install permanent water treatment systems at each home and even an offer to each of the families to pay twice what their property was worth at the time (see 
Cabot Oil & Gas is one of the premier drillers in the Marcellus Shale. They drill in a single Pennsylvania county–Susquehanna County. They consistently have 15 of the top 20 producing shale wells in PA. By our back-of-the-envelope estimation, Cabot, all by itself, drilling in one county, delivers something like 3% of all the natural gas produced in the entire country! It is an amazing story. What’s even more amazing is the big heart the company has. Woven into the Cabot DNA is giving back to the communities where they drill. It would take several posts to recount all of Cabot’s largess. We’ll mention just two cases. In 2012 Cabot donated $2 million and helped raise another $2.2 million (for a total of $4.2 million) to help build a new physicians clinic/hospital in Montrose, PA (see 
One of the issues that isn’t going away is the demand by landowners in some Pennsylvania counties, like Bradford, for lawmakers in the state to pass a bill that guarantees them what they believe they are already guaranteed–a 12.5% minimum royalty, based on a 1979 law that states they should get such a royalty. We’ve extensively covered what we call a civil war between two parties who are otherwise friendly toward each other–landowners and shale drillers. Last year the issue came to a head with House Bill (HB) 1391 (
Cabot Oil & Gas has a major presence in Susquehanna County, PA, not far from where MDN is written (just across the border). In fact, Susquehanna County, located in the northeastern tip of PA, is the only county in PA where Cabot drills. It is a “dry gas” zone–and extremely productive. By our reckoning, Cabot alone produces something like 3% of the entire natural gas supply for the entire country. One driller, in one county. It is an astonishing feat! Susquehanna County is rural. The entire county has 43,000 residents (11,700 families). The largest “city” in Susquehanna County is the county seat of Montrose, population 1,600 (750 households). Until now, there has been drilling all around the edges of Montrose, but no drilling directly under the city. That may soon change. Cabot has made an offer on 10.76 acres of land located within city limits. Cabot is offering a lowball $1,000 per acre as a signing bonus, plus 15% royalties. Not long ago Cabot cut deals for $3,500 per acre and 18.75% royalties. It appears this is just an opening negotiating tactic…
Canadian driller and midstream company Epsilon Energy had a shareholder rebellion in 2013 and threw out the sitting board of directors (see 
On Friday MDN reported Southwestern Energy’s second quarter 2016 update, with indications that things are turning around for the company and that they intend to re-start their drilling program in the Marcellus (see 
Kinder Morgan’s Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (TGP) is proposing to build a small pipeline near Scranton, PA to service what will be the state’s largest natural gas-fired electric generating plant, in Jessup (see 
MDN first told you about IMG Midstream in August 2014 (see 
Since announcing the project in 2012, the Constitution Pipeline has handed out more than $2 million in community grants to fire departments, police departments and a variety of nonprofit organizations that benefit the community. Recently New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo decided to block the Constitution Pipeline to placate his radical left supporters (see 
A decision by the Middle District Court of Pennsylvania is worth noting–for both drillers AND landowners. A landowner in Susquehanna County, PA sold some land already under lease to a new landowner/rights owner. Neither the new landowner nor the previous landowner informed the driller of the change in ownership. The time came to renew the lease and under the terms of the contract the driller sent payment–but didn’t know about the change in ownership–so the driller sent the payment to the previous owner. The new landowner used that faux pas as a legal excuse to sue the driller to break the contract. The new landowner claimed the paperwork filed (not the full lease but an abstract) didn’t contain mention of informing the driller. In other words, the landowner used the “we didn’t know” excuse. The judge disagreed and said, a) the lease itself clearly outlines the responsibilities of the old/new landowners to inform the driller, b) there is a reasonable expectation for the new landowner to perform due diligence in seeking out a copy of the original lease to know that. Therefore the new landowner is still under lease. Here’s an outline of the case, with names…