Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by owner on January 6, 2012 at 3:00pm

That's true Brain, but I am cautious that Shell just wants to be able to hold the lease by production by only putting one well on the unit property. 

Permalink Reply by Jason Bablak on January 6, 2012 at 3:55pm

If there are more acres in a unit, would that mean that eventually there would be either longer or more laterals and in the end the same amount of gas (and therefore royalties)?  Is this just a matter of getting the money sooner rather than over a longer period of time?  I am OK with larger units if this is the case.  Also, it seems that a company like Shell would be in this for the long haul, and possibly multiple shale plays.  In that case, a stream of income over 30-50 years, which again, would be OK as far as I am concerned.

Permalink Reply by 2s72s0k9mm8gd on January 6, 2012 at 5:39pm

I feel good about being leased to Shell. When they build their cracker plant somewhere in the tristate area they will likely need alot of gas/ngl's to feed it. Rest assured , there must be a method to the madness. A megahuge corporation like Shell does nothing by accident. May we all prosper!

Permalink Reply by Brian on January 6, 2012 at 5:49pm

What have people heard about the plant they propose to build?

Permalink Reply by 2s72s0k9mm8gd on January 7, 2012 at 8:33pm

Shell is supposed to announce location early this year. It converts ethane to ethylene I guess and is to be built in PA , OH , or WVa....Multi-Billion dollar project!

I have a feeling this whole shalegas thing is going to eventually be bigger than any of us realize right now. Keep your fingers crossed!

Permalink Reply by Brian on January 7, 2012 at 8:38pm

I heard encompassing a 250 acre tract of land... That is a bit excessive I think

Permalink Reply by 2s72s0k9mm8gd on January 7, 2012 at 8:54pm

Wish I had the 250 acres they want! Of course I would retain the mineral rights though....LOL.

Permalink Reply by matthew h mcsparren on January 9, 2012 at 5:09pm

I think Shell  will build the new plant in the southwestern part of Pa. close to the 8" product line of Snoco that runs to the port of Philly. Anyone hear of Shell increaseing it's offer to $ 3800/ 18% ? Or just rumor?

Permalink Reply by Jason Bablak on January 9, 2012 at 5:25pm

I spoke to the Shell rep last week and he said it was still $3250/18%.

Permalink Reply by Brian on January 9, 2012 at 10:34pm

Do you think trucking the product from this process facility is an option if built near the I80- I79 interchange? Might eliminate a lot of transportation lines if they are targeting a formation that has a gas composition they might not want to mix with other gas to transport it to the SW corner of the state where this product line is.

Permalink Reply by owner on January 7, 2012 at 2:49pm

I am hoping that Pa gets this plant.  My opinion is that Butler county would be a logical choice because Shell already has the acerage and pipelines in that area from the purchase of Eastern.  They would also want this plant to be reasonably close to a highways leading East and routes 79 and 80 would fit this. 

Permalink Reply by 2s72s0k9mm8gd on January 7, 2012 at 9:12pm

From what we've seen their lips are pretty sealed as to specific sights.....PA could sure use it. I wonder if Horsehead's zinc plant along the Ohio River may be a possible sight. Supposed to be closing and moving down south this year or next. Nova Chemicals is right next door and RT.376 is right there......? Just a wild guess.

Just think how much pipeline infrastructure is going to be required. Lots and lots of ROW will need to be bought. Still many opportunities coming our way. More cash for alot of us! Better get boned up on negotiating these sorts of leases too!

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• 3
• 4
• 5
• …
• 17
• Next ›
• Page