Three New York State counties that sit on the border with Pennsylvania will likely be the first, and biggest beneficiaries of Marcellus Shale drilling when it finally begins in New York. Those counties are Broome, Tioga and Chemung. That prediction comes from two of the most prominent geologists in the Marcellus Shale:
With an increase in the number of Marcellus gas wells drilled, comes an increase in the need for pipelines to get that gas to market. Local pipelines that gather the gas and take it to a compressor station where it’s then sent to a larger pipeline, and pipelines that bring water to drilling sites, can be from as small as 4 inches in diameter to as large as 36 inches in diameter. In Marcellus Shale states like West Virginia and Ohio, the mineral rights to drill for gas beneath the ground are often owned by someone different than the landowner who owns the surface rights. A pipeline contract is known as a right-of-way easement with the surface owner.
Since surface owners will not see any royalties from the gas, they understandably want to get as high a price as they can for allowing pipelines to traverse their property, pipelines that once installed, will be there for many years—often longer than the producing gas well. But what’s a fair price?
Read More “How Much Should Landowners be Paid for Marcellus Pipelines on Their Property?”
The Altoona [PA] Water Authority is looking to expand its program to sell treated sewage wastewater to Marcellus drillers in central PA.
Read More “Altoona Water Authority Expands Sale of Treated Wastewater to Marcellus Drillers in PA”
Houston-based Cabot Oil & Gas just released its quarterly operations update. Cabot reports the following about its operations in the Pennsylvania Marcellus Shale region:
A leaked internal document from the New York State Department of Transportation (NYSDOT) expresses concern that the state is not ready for a dramatic increase in heavy truck traffic that will occur when Marcellus Shale drilling begins in the state. The document, titled “DRAFT Discussion Paper: Transportation Impacts of Potential Marcellus Shale Gas Development,” was leaked to the anti-drilling organization Chenango, Delaware and Otsego Gas Drilling Opposition Group. The group’s spokesman, Mike Bernhard, declines to say how the group obtained the document. As the document is now being circulated by media sources, MDN is embedding a full copy below.
This strong language in the opening Executive Summary of the Discussion Paper:
An amazingly balanced and non-partisan article by WNYC News delves into the 13-member Advisory Panel appointed by Joe Martens, Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC), to advise the DEC on issues with implementing the new Marcellus drilling regulations. The article, which MDN highly recommends you read, points out the confusion among the panel members about what, exactly, they are supposed to do.
It also recounts the rushed and last-minute approach Martens took in creating and appointing members to the panel. The article points out how the panel is stacked with members who are largely anti-drilling (MDN’s words, the article refers to them as environmentalists). Even the so-called industry representative on the panel, Mark Boling from Houston-based Southwestern Energy, is colluding working with the Environmental Defense Fund on a new “industry code of conduct.” He admits his views are not mainstream in the energy industry.
Read More “NY DEC Hydraulic Fracturing Advisory Panel Appointed by Joe Martens in Disarray”
NOVA Chemicals continues to seek out Marcellus ethane to feed its Ontario-based Corunna cracker chemical plant. In May of this year, NOVA penned an agreement with Range Resources to buy ethane (see this MDN article). Just yesterday, they signed a second agreement, this time with Statoil:
The Wall Street Journal ran an excellent article in yesterday’s edition comparing Pennsylvania’s approach to drilling in the Marcellus Shale with New York’s approach. It’s a tale of two states: One state embraces economic opportunity, and the other let’s environmental politics strangle development.
The article says this about Pennsylvania:
Read More “WSJ Article Compares PA and NY Approaches to Marcellus Drilling”
Norse Energy Corp, a drilling company headquartered in Norway but with local operations and 180,000 net acres of leases in New York State, filed the state’s first application to drill in the Utica Shale last week. Norse believes that the Utica Shale for New York will be what the Marcellus Shale is for Pennsylvania. Why? It all has to do with depth:
Yet another study is about to be launched looking for a connection between Marcellus Shale gas drilling and elevated methane (natural gas) levels in nearby water wells—this time from a group of researchers at Temple University.
You may recall that Duke University recently released a study which supposedly showed a connection between drilling and high levels of methane in water wells (see MDN story here). However, the Duke study cherry-picked the locations they used—locations where there was already high levels of methane in the water, methane that is naturally occurring (and has been for decades). Hopefully the Temple researchers will employ a more rigorous methodology in their study.
Range Resources, one of the largest drillers in the Marcellus Shale, had a very good second quarter (revenue-wise) because of increased production of natural gas liquids and because of an uptick in the price of natural gas in the commodity markets:
Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett’s Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission filed their final report on Friday, containing some 96 recommendations for Gov. Corbett and the PA legislature to consider that will strengthen regulation of, and further promote, the shale gas industry in the state. The entire report (137 pages, containing a lot of background details) is embedded below. What follows first is a high level summary of the recommendations, to give you the bullet point quick overview.
Read More “PA Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission Final Report with 96 Recommendations”
A number of landowners in Pennsylvania signed gas leases with energy companies more than five years ago for very low amounts—$2 per acre in some cases—as a signing bonus. Landowners, realizing that a contract is a contract, waited patiently for the expiration of the lease—typically five years. But then, at the last possible moment, sometimes just hours before the lease is due to expire, the energy company would clear a few trees or park a bulldozer on the land in order to comply with the terms of lease, thereby extending the lease indefinitely because they had “made an effort” to start drilling.
Case in point: Dave and Karen Beinlich. They signed a lease for $2 an acre, for a grand total of $234 signing bonus on their 117 acre farm.
Read More “Some Drillers Using Questionable Tactics to Hold Land Under Lease Beyond Original Term”
With 180,000 acres of leases in New York State, Norse Energy wants to be first in line for permits when New York finalizes its new drilling regulations.
First, the results of last week’s poll, which asked:
If fueling stations were widely available, which type of vehicle would you PREFER to drive?
Natural Gas (72%, 131 Votes)
Stay w/Gasoline (12%, 22 Votes)
Electric (10%, 18 Votes)
Electric/Gasoline Hybrid (6%, 12 Votes)
Total Voters: 183
Current Poll – MDN Hits a Nerve
This past Wednesday, MDN published a copy of an email we received advertising an upcoming “organizer and action training” session on Keuka Lake, NY (see MDN article here). The stated purpose of the session is to teach participants to engage in non-violent civil disobedience in an attempt to “ban fracking and stand strong against all fossil fuel extraction.” That particular MDN article garnered the most views and the comments of any article this past week. My purpose in publishing the email was to point out the philosophy or ideology that is at the core of the anti-drilling movement: A philosophy that says a select minority of people claim to know better than the rest of us what kind of energy we should have in this country—“sustainable” energy (solar, wind) rather than nasty ol’ fossil fuels that will get used up in a couple of hundred of years.
And it hit a nerve. Out came the usual arguments: I’m not attending because of a philosophy, but because my property values will be destroyed! Drilling causes air pollution! Water will be poisoned! Huge corporations are raping the countryside! That is, all arguments that I maintain these people don’t REALLY believe in their heart of hearts, but use as a way to scare other people into the viewpoint that all drilling should be banned. Because I dare to say such things, I’ve been called a shill for the industry (which I am not), I’ve been called naïve (which I may be), I’ve been called lots of things. No matter. It is what I believe to be true. Yes, some people are concerned about those things, but I believe if we could have a calm and courteous discussion about their specific objections, and pull out some facts, those objections would ultimately not stand up to scrutiny. And so what’s left is the core ideology: sustainable energy vs. fossil fuels. That is what this debate is about.
Many commenters on the article focused on my headline about civil disobedience training camp, saying I’m trying to make out those who attend as dopers and malcontents and not the educated, erudite, smarter-than-the-rest of us crowd they really are. I made no such statements, nor did I even imply it. I know many people on the anti-drilling side that I like and respect. They are smart and savvy and good people. So chill out! I’m not saying you’re bad people—I’m saying your thinking on this topic is incorrect and inaccurate.
For me, the good news about the very existence of this civil disobedience training camp is this: The anti-drilling side has finally accepted that Marcellus Shale drilling is coming to New York, and sooner rather than later. If they didn’t believe that, why this camp? The bad news, for everyone, is that the fight is “going local.” You can expect contentious town board meetings and hard-fought local elections in the coming few years as the vocal minority attempts to persuade local officials to ban or greatly curtail drilling in their communities. It’s just a fact. It’s coming.
In thinking about all of this civil disobedience stuff, which is a proud American tradition (Boston Tea Party anyone?), I thought, let’s put the shoe on the other metaphorical foot with this week’s poll. What if landowners, who want to lease their land for Marcellus Shale drilling and cannot, having suffered economic harm for more than three years now, decided to engage in civil disobedience? And what if the many small businesses that would benefit from the drilling industry but can’t because of moratoriums, zoning ordinances and perhaps civil disobedience decided to engage in civil disobedience themselves? And what if the thousands who are unemployed and could have jobs in this industry (but don’t), decided to engage in civil disobedience? What if all of them joined together and said “enough is enough” and it’s time to retaliate against those who continue to promote the moratorium or who actively try to stop drilling by using civil disobedience to do it?
Seems to me one of the hotbeds of opposition to drilling is Ithaca, NY. Professors and even students from Cornell University are being paid large sums of money by anti-drilling organizations to produce so-called studies, and to go on the speaking lecture tour, predicting the environmental and economic disasters that await us when and if drilling should begin. So what if all of the landowners and others who support drilling were to descend on Cornell University—and shut the place down for a few hours? Non-violent of course. All very “civil.” Maybe even a sit-in at one of Prof. Ingrafea’s classes complete with chant: hey-hey-ho-ho-Ingrafea’s-got-to-go.
Or in Pennsylvania, which is not immune to civil disobedience and where drilling already happens but is now being threatened…should those who support drilling march to the offices of anti-drilling organizations and shut them down for an hour or two, the way anti-drillers have tried to do in Harrisburg with pro-drilling organizations? Carry a bullhorn along and demand to meet with those in charge? Stomp their feet and intimidate the way those who oppose drilling do when they engage in their protests?
But of course, it’s all just a muse—just a daydream. It won’t happen. But, what if it did?
So this week’s poll question asks:
If anti-drillers engage in civil disobedience to prevent drilling, should those who support drilling retaliate and engage in civil disobedience too?
Register your vote along the right side of any page on the site.
Below are the most recent “top 5” lists and the calendar of Marcellus related events for the next few weeks.
Thanks for reading MDN!
Jim Willis, Editor
Read More “MDN Weekly Update – Jul 24, 2011: Civil Disobedience Kerfuffle”
From time to time businesses contact MDN to ask for exposure to their product or service. Most times MDN passes because it wouldn’t be of interest to landowners and industry participants. However, we recently received a request about an intriguing green solution for fracking wastewater.
What if you could use algae to feed on fracking wastewater and convert that wastewater into a harmless (and useful) biofuel? And what if you ramped up the growth rate of the algae by using hydroponics technology? And what if the whole operation, covering just one acre, was enclosed in an inflatable structure that protected the environment around it, and enabled 24/7/365 growth of the algae inside? And what if that one acre super-algae farm could handle 50,000 gallons of fracking wastewater per day? Well then, you’d have something called Algeponics®.