• | | |

    Atlas Energy Figures Out a Way to Increase Marcellus Shale Gas Production an Average 138% Per Well

    Atlas Energy’s Marcellus Shale gas output is up 21% in the second quarter from the first quarter of 2010. At the end of June, their net production rate in the Marcellus region was 59 Mmcfe (million cubic feet of natural gas equivalents) per day. The company brought eight new horizontal Marcellus Shale wells online in southwestern Pennsylvania from April to June with average peak average daily rates of 5.1 Mmcf per day.

    Read More “Atlas Energy Figures Out a Way to Increase Marcellus Shale Gas Production an Average 138% Per Well”

  • |

    Oxford Landowner Coalition Merges with CNY Land Coalition

    Two very active landowner groups in Upstate New York have agreed to merge. Here’s the official letter from CNY Land Coalition President Brian Conover:

    Oxford Coalition Is Merging With The CNY Landowner’s Coalition

    In what promises to be a win-win for both coalitions, the Oxford Coalition, which has been under the leadership of Bryant LaTourette, is merging with our coalition. Serious discussions for this merger began about 7 weeks ago and after a number of very positive conversations, both sides have agreed that we can accomplish more for our common cause if we work as one.

    Read More “Oxford Landowner Coalition Merges with CNY Land Coalition”

  • | | | |

    Broome County, NY May Sign a Deal to Lease County-Owned Land for $15.9M

    Lately it’s not been often MDN has reported on lease deals in New York State, due to the ongoing opposition of New York politicians to drilling in the state. So it’s with some surprise, and pleasure, that we noticed an article in today’s paper that Broome County, New York may soon sign a deal with Inflection Energy:
    Read More “Broome County, NY May Sign a Deal to Lease County-Owned Land for $15.9M”

  • | | | |

    The Burden of Proof that Hydraulic Fracturing Pollutes Water Supplies is with Those Who Oppose Drilling

    Those who oppose drilling for gas in the Marcellus Shale most often use the argument that harmful chemicals are pumped into the ground and therefore will find their way into surface water supplies. In meeting after meeting concerns about water are voiced most often. Those of us who support safe drilling have to patiently, methodically point out that of all the tens of thousands of gas wells that have been drilled in this country using hydraulic fracturing, there are no reported cases of chemicals finding their way from the well into ground water supplies. (Please! If you know of such a case, post the details in the comments.)

    Read More “The Burden of Proof that Hydraulic Fracturing Pollutes Water Supplies is with Those Who Oppose Drilling”

  • The Reason Big Oil is Getting Gassy

    An Economist article republished in the Winnipeg Free Press does a good job of explaining why natural gas is on the ascendancy in the energy universe, and why oil will soon be in decline. Need evidence? Last year, seven of eight Exxon Mobil projects that were completed were natural gas projects. This year two of three scheduled projects are natural gas related. Royal Dutch Shell says by 2012 half (50 percent!) of its energy output will come from natural gas.

    Read More “The Reason Big Oil is Getting Gassy”

  • | | | | |

    Encana’s Big Gamble in Luzerne County, PA

    Will Encana Oil & Gas’ gamble in Luzerne County, Pennsylvania pay off? We’ll know soon. Encana is due to start drilling two exploratory wells in Luzerne County this week. The drilling process itself will last 65-75 days.

    So why is it a gamble for Encana to drill for gas in Luzerne County? Nobody knows for sure if the Marcellus Shale gas deposits are commercially viable that far south.
    Read More “Encana’s Big Gamble in Luzerne County, PA”

  • | | | | | |

    Two-Thirds of Wyoming County, PA Land Now Leased, More Land being Sought by Drillers

    Nearly two-thirds of the land in Wyoming County, Pennsylvania is leased by natural gas drilling companies, and recent strong gas production from wells in the northern part of the county have sparked a competition to lease even more Wyoming County land.
    Read More “Two-Thirds of Wyoming County, PA Land Now Leased, More Land being Sought by Drillers”

  • | | | | | | |

    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

  • | | |

    Chesapeake Energy has 19 Active Drilling Rigs in Northeast PA Alone

    Brian Grove, corporate spokesman for Chesapeake Energy, addressed the Chamber of Business and Industry of Centre County in State College, PA today. Among his comments was this statement showing Chesapeake’s commitment to the Marcellus Shale:

    “In northeastern Pennsylvania, where I’m from … we have 19 drilling rigs right now active in the northern tier. That’s as many, right now, as our company has in the Barnett Shale in Texas.”*

    Grove also warned that a steep severance tax and “overly heavy” regulation will slow drilling growth in PA.

    *The Centre Daily Times (June 30) – Natural Gas Rep: Drilling companies here to stay in Pennsylvania

  • |

    MDN Responds to a Reader’s Questions

    Below is an email MDN recently received from a reader. I thought it would be instructive to share both the reader’s original email and my response so newer readers of MDN have a better understanding of what this blog is about, and the “angle” from which it comes with it’s coverage and commentary. Here is the reader’s email to MDN (the “sic” references below indicate where there are misspellings in the original email to me):

    I have recently read an article on Marcellusdrilling.com, “Marcellus Drilling News,” entitled “Gas well blowout in Clearfield County, PA causes ‘modest’ environmental damage.”  I am currently obtaining my Masters of Science in Environmental Policy, and I have a few questions/ comments/ suggestions for this article in particular.  Although the article is informative to the extent it was intended, there are a few journalistic traps that you have wandered into.

    First, the rhetoric of the “Anti-drillers” and “Mainstream media” is a tired plea for attention.  Those who want to believe the “mainstream media” will believe them, and those who wish to get their news from their uncle Lenny are going to do so as well, regardless of what an article communicates.  News releases, in my opinon [sic], lose strength when the closing statement bashes the media, and establishes apples to oranges comparisons, which leads me to my next point.

    Comparing environmental degredation [sic] and drilling accidents to car accidents is a comparison that has absolutly [sic] no relavence [sic].  This ‘statistic’ (used loosley [sic]) is meaningless.  This is not unlike making the statement, “Hotdogs are one of the leading causes of choking among children, how many children choke on phonebooks, ZERO! Take this as a lesson and feed you child the yellow pages today.”  I know that this is a bit of an exageration [sic], but it is not too far off the comparison that was made in this article.

    Lastly the wording downplaying the fracking fluid’s chemical contents by using a very sneaky “(mostly water)” comment.  Even though chemicals only compose 1% of the fracking fluid in drilling operations, this accident released nearly 350 gallons of pure chemicals, most of which are unknown.

    In closing, in order to be a more reliable source of news for a public that is obtaining more “liberal education” (see how that takes away from the content of the letter), it would behoove Marcellus Drilling News to leave out these quips I have mentioned above.  If you would like to see how a news report should look, I have attached a shortened research report written by me on Marcellus law and policy in New York and Pennsylvania that you could post on your site.

    There is one question that is on my mind and could also be another suggestion.  I would like to know where funding for this site originates.

    Thank you for your time in reading this,

    And here was my response:

    Thanks for your email and research paper. I will take time to read it. I appreciate all comments, even from those who disagree with my own views. MDN is a blog site, I have a point of view, I express it. There is no funding for the site—it is a labor of love on my part. I receive no money from anyone for it. I work in a completely different (non-energy) industry and this is a “hobby” taking only an investment of my time (which I’ve had precious little of recently, hence few updates). As I’ve stated in comments on the site before, I reserve the right to run advertising on the site at some future date—but that in no way affects my opinions or coverage.

    I feel, passionately, that environmental extremism coupled with ignorance is behind most anti-drilling sentiment, and I aim to counter-balance it with MDN. I believe drilling can be done safely. Zero accidents? Nope. We can’t expect it from ANY human endeavor—it’s just not a reasonable viewpoint. Safe enough? A resounding YES. That’s where I “come from” with my reporting and opinions. I’m not a journalist so I don’t worry about falling into journalistic traps. I understand my commentary tends to grate sometimes…I try and keep a balance with what I report and keep snide remarks to a minimum. But blogs do take positions and make no apologies for the positions they take.

    Chances are if we were to meet on the street, in a store or at university, we would quite possibly be friends. I have good friends who are on the other side of the fence on this and many other issues. I’m not an unreasonable person, nor avaricious. I don’t stand to make money from leasing land—I only have 2/3 of an acre in a residential neighborhood! At its very core, the struggle in New York is over private property rights and liberty—the right to do with your land as you see fit, provided it does not harm others. Gas drilling does not harm people nor the environment. Does it affect the environment? Sure—but it’s limited, and believe it or not, clearing some trees and drilling a hole in the ground, and even pumping a few million gallons of water with chemicals, does not irreparably damage Mother Earth and it certainly does not pollute drinking water supplies. I encourage you to dig deeper in your own research and not fall prey to the standard environmentalist party line.

    I hope this helps you understand a bit more about MDN and the writer behind it. Thanks for reading MDN, and thanks for taking the time to write.

    Jim Willis
    Editor, MDN

  • | | | | |

    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

  • | | |

    PA Budget Deal Approved: Marcellus Landowners are the Losers

    Pennsylvania has just reached a new budget agreement for the next fiscal year, weighing in at a staggering $28.05 billion. Those who smoke cigars and use smokeless tobacco can breathe easier (or perhaps not)—your bad habit has escaped the tax man yet again this year. There are no state taxes on cigars and smokeless tobacco. But if you’re a landowner who’s getting royalty payments, you’re about to get soaked. Everyone knew it was only a matter of time before the politicians, who can’t resist taxing everything under the sun, would not be able to resist a severance tax on gas drilling. It’s now happened:

    The [budget] agreement calls for the Legislature to enact a severance tax on natural gas extraction in the Marcellus Shale by Oct. 1, Rendell said, with the tax becoming effective Jan. 1, 2011. He said he would like to see a tax rate close to West Virginia’s, which is roughly 6 percent.*

    It makes no difference if the tax is levied on the drilling company or not—ultimately this tax will come out of the pockets of landowners because expenses are always passed back. Oh well, it was a good run while it lasted. At least they’re drilling in PA!

    *Pittsburgh Business Times (June 29) – Rendell: Pa. reaches budget agreement

  • | | |

    Gas Well Blowout in Clearfield County, PA Causes “Modest” Environmental Damage

    What do we know about the gas well blowout that occurred on June 3rd? EOG Resources had almost completed drilling and fracking a gas well in Clearfield County, Pennsylvania when a blowout (too much pressure too fast) occurred. Here is the chronology of events:

    The month long drilling operation [in Clearfield County] ended on March 3. Contractors returned in May to hydraulically fracture the well over 12 days. The process involves the injection of water, sand and chemicals under high pressure to shatter the gas-bearing rock so that the fuel can be recovered.

    The frack job ended on May 28. The operator [EOG Resources] had begun well-completion operations on June 1. The blowout occurred two days later.

    High pressure in an oil or gas well is both desired and essential – the pressure is what brings the fuel to the surface. Blowouts occur when the pressure surges and overwhelms control mechanisms.

    A device known as a blowout preventer is attached to the wellhead at the surface. It is designed to be triggered by operators to control pressure surges.*

    And this from the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) official press release on the matter:

    The leak began at approximately 8 p.m. on Thursday, June 3, when the well’s operators lost control of it while preparing to extract gas after fracking the shale. As a result, natural gas and flowback frack fluid was released uncontrollably onto the ground and 75 feet into the air. The well was capped at around noon on June 4.

    The EOG well pad is located in a rural area near the Penfield/Route 153 exit of Interstate 80 in northwestern Clearfield County, near Moshannon State Forest.

    The department’s [DEP] Emergency Response and Oil and Gas programs responded to the incident, along with the Pennsylvania State Police, the Pennsylvania Emergency Management Agency, and local fire and police departments.**

    The DEP believes the blowout preventer failed—but they don’t yet know why. Investigations continue. Since the blowout, the DEP has stopped all new drilling by EOG Resources until a cause is found:

    The Department of Environmental Protection today [June 7] ordered EOG Resources Inc. to suspend its natural gas well drilling activities in Pennsylvania after a June 3 blowout at one of the company’s Clearfield County wells sent natural gas and at least 35,000 gallons of drilling wastewater into the sky and over the ground for 16 hours.

    DEP Secretary John Hanger said that while the order bans all drilling and hydrofracturing, or fracking, operations for specified periods of time, the suspension will remain in effect until DEP has completed a comprehensive investigation into the leak and the company has implemented any needed changes.**

    Here’s what else we know: No one was hurt. About 35,000 gallons of drilling fluid (mostly water) was spilled. The well did not explode. According to DEP Secretary John Hanger:

    “Fortunately, the well did not ignite and explode, and there were no injuries to the well crew or emergency responders. Our preliminary assessment is that the environmental damage was modest as the frack fluid was contained and did not appear to reach any streams.”**

    Since the accident, anti-drillers (and mainstream media) have had a field day referring to the “tragedy” and “disaster” in Clearfield County. While MDN does not excuse or minimize the accident and encourages a full investigation, a little perspective is in order: According to the Federal Highway Administration (as of 2005), an average of 115 people die every day in automobile accidents. The average number of people who die every day from gas well accidents? Zero.

    *Philadelphia Inquirer (June 7) – Pa. suspends gas drilling at Marcellus rupture site
    **PR Newswire (June 7) – DEP Orders EOG Resources to Halt All Natural Gas Drilling Activities in PA

  • | | | | |

    Dominion Signs Deal to Transport CONSOL Marcellus Shale Gas for Next 15 Years

    From a Dominion press release issued today:

    Dominion today announced that its natural gas transmission and storage subsidiary, Dominion Transmission, has reached a 15-year agreement with the gas subsidiary of CONSOL Energy Inc. for firm transportation of CONSOL’s Marcellus shale natural gas production.

    The project, capable of transporting 200,000 dekatherms per day, will move supplies from various receipt points in central and southwestern Pennsylvania to a nexus of market pipelines and storage facilities in Leidy, Clinton County, Pa.

    “Dominion is pleased to provide CONSOL with year-round access to growing Northeast markets and to provide another supply alternative for market area customers,” said Gary Sypolt, chief executive officer of Dominion Energy. 

    Earlier this year Dominion sold its natural gas exploration and production business to CONSOL so that the company could concentrate on its regulated businesses, including increased transportation and storage infrastructure opportunities resulting from Marcellus shale discoveries.

    Dominion plans to file for a FERC certificate in December. If the project is approved, construction is planned to begin in March 2012, and it would enter service in November 2012. Construction plans include new compression facilities at three existing compressor stations in central Pennsylvania.

    Dominion Transmission provides gathering, processing, transportation and storage services, operating in the heart of the Marcellus shale production area.

    Dominion is one of the nation’s largest producers and transporters of energy, with a portfolio of more than 27,500 megawatts of generation, 12,000 miles of natural gas transmission, gathering and storage pipeline and 6,000 miles of electric transmission lines. Dominion operates the nation’s largest natural gas storage system with 942 billion cubic feet of storage capacity and serves retail energy customers in 12 states.

    *Dominion Press Release (June 14) – Dominion Announces 15-Year Contract for Marcellus Northeast Natural Gas Project

  • | | | | |

    Delaware River Basin Commission Bans Exploratory Drilling in Marcellus Shale in the Watershed

    Once again the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) is overreaching. There is no doubt the commission is packed with people opposed to shale gas drilling, and they have no regard for private property owners or their property rights. Under the guise of “protecting the water supply,” a single person—the director of the DRBC—has now banned exploratory drilling in the watershed with the stroke of a pen. What does it mean? If you’re a property owner living in the Delaware River watershed (New York or Pennsylvania), drilling for you won’t happen any time soon. Maybe never.

    Today’s DRBC press release:

    Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC) Executive Director Carol R. Collier today announced that she has supplemented her May 19, 2009 determination to include natural gas exploratory wells.

    “My 2009 determination that sponsors of natural gas extraction projects in shale formations must obtain commission approval before commencing such projects expressly did not cover wells intended solely for exploratory purposes,” Collier said.  “Today, I am extending the provisions of my 2009 determination to include exploratory wells, subject to reservations for exploratory well projects already approved by the states on or before June 14, 2010.”

    By this supplemental determination, all natural gas well project sponsors, including the sponsors of natural gas well projects intended solely for exploratory purposes, must first apply for and obtain commission approval before commencing any natural gas well project for the production from or exploration of shale formations within the drainage area of Special Protection Waters in the Delaware River Basin.

    “For the purpose of this determination, any natural gas well drilled in or through shale is assumed to be targeting a shale formation and is subject to this determination, unless the project sponsor proves otherwise,” Collier added. All other aspects of the 2009 determination remain in effect.

    Today’s action recognizes the risks to water resources, including ground and surface water that the land disturbance and drilling activities inherent in any shale gas well pose. “In light of the commission’s May 5, 2010 decision to finalize natural gas regulations before considering project approvals, this supplemental determination removes any regulatory incentive for project sponsors to classify their wells as exploratory wells and install them without  DRBC review before the commission’s natural gas regulations are in place,” Collier said. “It thus supports the commission’s goal that exploratory wells do not serve as a source of degradation of the commission’s Special Protection Waters.”

    “Where entities have invested in exploratory well projects in reliance on my May 2009 determination and information from DRBC staff, there are countervailing considerations that favor allowing these projects to move ahead,” Collier stated in her supplemental determination. “I am informed that since May of 2009, Pennsylvania has issued a limited number of natural gas well drilling permits within the Delaware River Basin targeting shale formations, while New York State has not issued any natural gas well permits targeting shales in the basin since that date. In contrast to the thousands of wells projected to be installed in the basin over the next several years, the risk to basin waters posed by only the wells approved by Pennsylvania since May 2009 are comparatively small. Not only are these wells subject to state regulation as to their construction and operation, but they continue to require commission approval before they can be fractured or otherwise modified for natural gas production. In light of these existing safeguards and the investment-backed expectations of the sponsors of these projects, this supplemental determination does not prohibit any exploratory natural gas well project from proceeding if the applicant has obtained a state natural gas well permit for the project on or before June 14, 2010.”

    Most of the shale formations that may be subject to horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing techniques requiring large volumes of water in the basin are located within the drainage area to DRBC’s designated Special Protection Waters (SPW). The commission’s SPW program is designed to prevent degradation in streams and rivers considered to have exceptionally high scenic, recreational, ecological, and/or water supply values through stricter control of wastewater discharges, non-point pollution control, and reporting requirements. Coverage of the DRBC’s SPW anti-degradation regulations includes the 197-mile non-tidal Delaware River from Hancock, N.Y. south to Trenton, N.J. and the land draining to this stretch.

    Any person adversely affected by this action may request a hearing by submitting a request in writing to the commission secretary within 30 days of the date of this supplemental determination in accordance with the DRBC’s Rules of Practice and Procedure.

    *DRBC Press Release (June 14) – DRBC Executive Director Determination Extended to Include Natural Gas Exploratory Wells

  • | | | |

    New York Landowners Call to Action – Another Sneak Attack Bill in NY Legislature Attempts to Stop Drilling

    MDN received the following email from the Central New York Landowner’s Coalition encouraging New Yorkers who want to see gas drilling to get on the phone and call to express your opposition to (yet another) bill that would kill drilling in New York. MDN encourages those of like mind to call.

    LAST-MINUTE BILL NEEDS YOUR CALL
    SNEAKY “ANTI-GAS” BILL MUST BE STOPPED

    OPPOSITION’S ATTEMPT TO SNEAK A BILL THROUGH: NYS Senator Antoine Thompson has just introduced a bill to the NYS Encon Committee, which he chairs, that would ban any hydraulic fracturing activity in NYS for one year – which is certain to be followed up by subsequent moratoriums in future years. THIS BILL HAS THE SAME LONG-TERM AGENDA AS THE OTHERS AND IS NOT A COMPROMISE!!! If this passes, we can forget about leasing for years to come and we can be certain that any gas company who might be waiting for the DEC to release the SGEIS will give up & head elsewhere.

    WE HAVE BEEN SUCCESSFUL SO FAR: Our rally, emails and phone calls have derailed the bills that would all-out ban or impose a 2-3 year moratorium on gas drilling in NY. We can defeat this bill if we all work together! And with one full week left before the Albany Politicians go to summer recess, this week requires our biggest push ever.

    WE NEED 125 CALLERS FIRST THING MONDAY MORNING:
    Because it’s too late to email or write letters, your coalition committee will be calling and we need 125 additional callers after 9am on Monday to voice your opposition to this moratorium with us. The Encon committee meets Monday afternoon, so it is best if your call reaches them by then. WHEN YOU HAVE CALLED, EMAIL US AT chenangogas@gmail.com and let us know. We’ll keep the website updated with our tally for the day.

    HERE ARE THE NAMES WITH THE “TALKING POINTS” BELOW.

    Name
    Albany Phone

    Thompson, Antoine M.
    Ph: 518-455-3371

    Oppenheimer, Suzi
    Ph: 518-455-2031

    Schneiderman, Eric T.
    Ph: 518-455-2041

    Parker, Kevin S.
    Ph: 518-455-2580

    Serrano, Jose M.
    Ph: 518-455-2795

    Perkins, Bill
    Ph:518-455-2441

    Stewart-Cousins, Andrea
    Ph: 518-455-2585

    Foley, Brian X.
    Ph: 518-455-2303

    Marcellino, Carl L.
    Ph: 518-455-2390

    Leibell, Vincent L.
    Ph: 518-455-3111

    Johnson, Owen H.
    Ph: 518-455-3411

    Little, Elizabeth O’C.
    Ph: 518-455-2811

    Young, Catharine M.
    Ph: 518-455-3563

    Padavan, Frank
    Ph: 518-455-3381

    TALKING POINTS:

    POSSIBLE CONVERSATION: (Not everything below needs to be mentioned. The main thing is the first sentence!)
    “Good Morning (afternoon); I am calling to express my full opposition to the bill being presented by Senator Thompson to the Encon Committee further delaying safe Natural Gas Drilling in NY. Our New York State DEC has successfully monitored, studied and regulated hydraulic fracturing in our state for nearly 2 decades. In additional to this, they have put thousands of man hours into their current SGEIS which will make New York the safest state in our nation for natural gas development. Also, the federal EPA has already studied hydraulic fracturing on numerous occasions and has never found a single instance of underground water contamination by this drilling process. And with the current EPA study, there was never a federal consideration of a ban. This bill appears to be a mere political ploy to create an additional, needless moratorium before the DEC’s latest regulations are even being released. I am asking that you trust the scientists of the DEC who have already created a safe track record for drilling in NY. We have already been forced to wait 2 years so I respectfully ask that this committee not create needless long-term delays to this essential economic push for upstate NY.”

    Many additional talking points are posted on the website of the Joint Landowner’s Coalition (www.jlcny.org). Don’t worry about being eloquent – JUST CALL EVERYONE ON THAT LIST!! We can’t count on anyone else to call for us – you need to pick up the phone and do this for yourself, your family, your community and your state.

    Counting on YOU!

    Brian Conover