For Anyone Who Might Be Confused...

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Carolyn on January 19, 2010 at 2:13pm

gas is not clean; it is a fossil fuel; and every methane molecule when burned turns into carbon dioxide. to accuse people who are concerned about the environment as being " activists" well what do youcall yourself? You are an activist for the gas industry. Yes we need energy but we need water more. The people on carter road are getting a pittance in royalties. And you say ' Others hate capitalism" this is not capitalism, it is a hugely powerful industry running slipshod over American tax paying citizen's rights to clean air and water. That is called a monopoly. I could care less about the neighbors making more money than I do. What I care about is the noise of the drill rig 24./7, the seismic trucks trespassing on my land, getting out and walking on my land, leaving their electric cords across my land, the helicopters roaring over my head at all hours of the day and the stink of the what used to be clean air. But I guess I am just making this all up because I am an " activist" and " against capitalism" Wow. I wish I had never heard of you or gas drilling, I just want to live in peace, no longer possible thanks to Cabot Oil and Gas. Unless they want to pay me a whole lot of money to move and I would if I could. What planet are you people living on? And what happens when the gas is gone? No one has told me that yet.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rita McConnell on January 19, 2010 at 3:03pm

Carolyn -
I think you read a little too far into my comments. The world needs activism --everyone and everything, including capitalist ventures, needs a check and balance system. I appreciate that your intentions in this debate are pure --but don't think everyone who shares your opinion does so with such intenions.
For the record, I consider myelf something of an environmentalist. I compost, avidly recycle in a community with no curbside pickup. I take paper home from work or my kids to draw on, I use natural cleaners, and beauty poducts. I conserve water and energy to a fault. I recently helped a neighbor shut down a scrap metal "recycling" faclity that was contaminating her water. Most of the people I work with in drilling are avid outdoorsmen and conservationists. More people care than you think.
As far as natural gas goes -- it is indeed cleaner. The cleanest of fossil fuels - the reductions in green house gas emissions we would realize if we used natural gas in place of coal and oil would be phenomenal (somewhere in the 40 percent range). Thats why many environmental groups -- like the NATIONAL Sierra Club -- promote the use of natural gas. When I worked in a government environmental agency, it was a solution we promoted over and over cut air pollution.
Any source of energy, fossil or renewable comes with its own environmental challenges. Most are water related -- look into how much water a solar farm uses sometime. The cold truth is this -- we need better energy now. But we're not ready. Gas is here and it can help. Its cleanER, abundant and reliable for a world demanding more power everyday.
As far as people getting bamboozeled, I feel for the Carter Road people. They're being taken by three law firms looking to make a name for themselves in this sort of litigation. They have taken an unwinnable case and the money of people who feel they've been wronged, just to increase their business. Sounds a lot like what you accuse the industry of - yet we pay people for their inconvenience. Gas leases and prices are a product of the marketplace, no different than any investment.
There are thousands of ways to make money on this play -- don't think its all going into our pockets. Its not.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rita McConnell on November 4, 2009 at 8:00pm

Its important to put all of this in a larger context.

I've been working in community relations and public affairs for over 15 years. Here's what I know. In situations like this, both sides have agendas and both have equally well funded PR machines.

Activist group are often able to claim the high ground because their goal isn't profit. But don't believe its the good of the earth. Some what fossil fuels banned. Some have tremendous support from green energy investors (that doesn't make wind and solar bad -- they are needed). Some have support from off shore drilling interests. Some from international energy interests. Some have allowed NIMBY ideas to run amuck.

Regardless, that energy from shale gas is needed - we'll never satisfy demand and lower emissions without it. There are plenty of good people in the industry who want to do this right. Contrary to popular belief they aren't out to poison water and kill everyone with chemicals.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Carolyn on November 17, 2009 at 3:16pm

This is a paragraph of absolute lies. Twenty wells in Dimock have been poisoned by methane and there was an 8000 gallon spill of fracking waste water that went into the Susquehanna killing fish. The gas got into the water DUE TO FRACKING! There are 201 chemicals used in the fracking process; 90% cause damage to skin, eyes and sensory organs, 50% damage brain and nervous system and 20% cause cancer. These are the chemicals Cabot claims are " propritary " information. The property owners are buying water and their animals sickening. Are you so blinded by greed for money that you refuse to look at reality> ? I dare you to come to Dimock and talk to the people whose drinking water has been ruined and then go back and post such outright lies. Carolyn

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom Copley on November 17, 2009 at 6:16pm

Is it possible that both Rita and Carolyn are correct? The Cabot operation at Dimock has been cited by DEP and the company claims it has remediated the situation. Though, perhaps Carolyn is absolutely right about it that the company is either still in the process of satisfying the residents there or else needs to do a lot more for them. She would probably know far better than I.

At the same time it seems reasonable as a reality check to ask exactly how prevalent these kinds of drilling issues are? There have been hundreds of Marcellus wells drilled in the region, yet for some peculiar reason we mainly only ever hear over and over again about Norma Fiorentino's exploding water well or else the "fish kill" (minnows) caused by the leaking drilling fluid--both at Dimock. Are activists using these occurrences in a small town in Susquehanna Co., PA, as well as various strange pollution issues out west in Colorado, Texas and Wyoming, all of which have very different geologies than Pennsylvania, New York or West Virginia, in order to divert attention from the fact that there have been virtually no other environmental issues with Marcellus shale drilling since it first got started in 2005? I'm not saying that's necessarily what I believe, yet I'm really struggling to find very many other documented examples of water contamination outside of Dimock, PA. That's not to say there have been none, and perhaps they have gone under-reported. Has Dimock become a straw man?--Tom

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom Copley on November 18, 2009 at 8:50pm

Ruby-- I was only commenting upon the disconnect between the reality of what appear to be a few isolated and relatively small accidents or mistakes in the Appalachian region versus the unholy spin that certain film makers, critics and politicians are now placing on these incidents. I know for the people in Dimock, the issues there must seem terrible, yet if this is all there is going to be, it's not really a stain on all Marcellus shale drilling throughout the area, but merely one on the activity in this one locale by one company. It truly makes me wonder if the industry's story is being told as well as it can be and conveyed in an affirmative enough manner. --Tom

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Robin Fehrenbach Scala on November 17, 2009 at 8:23pm

Carolyn,
I have one question for you.
Do you OWN property?
It appears that the only people in Dimock who are crying about Cabot are those who either own NO PROPERTY or else they signed the first bad lease that was shown to them and are now trying to make their bad decision everyone else's problem.
By the way, I do believe you are NOT a property owner. Therefore you are also shooting yourself in the foot by trying to get rid of the ONLY new jobs coming to the area in a very long time.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rita McConnell on November 17, 2009 at 11:38pm

The Dimock situation is one that is continually trotted out to illustrate the evils of fracing. Two problems in over hundreds of Marcellus Wells and thousands of conventional wells drilled around the country annually.

Once again, here are the facts.

Yes, there are wells there contaminated by natural gas. This is not caused by fracing. The gas migrated from a formation other than the Marcellus Shale. It was a case of bad cementing/casing -- this gas escaped from a shallow formation during the drilling phase. (Many companies including mine, have changed their casing strategies for that geological formation to further avoid these issues) This is a phenomenon that is not specific to gas well drilling. This can happen when water wells are drilled, when deep holes are dug in the earth, sometimes when formations are drilled for homes. DEP has studied and determined that this contamination was NOT CASUED BY FRACING and that NO FRACING CHEMICALS ARE PRESENT IN THOSE WELLS. Cabot has been ordered to provide water for these people beacuse of natural gas contamination, not fracing chemical contamination. In the most recent story I read, there was a woman who, although her well had been cleared, was getting water from a neighbor for a few months. Then when her neighbor found gas in hers, they all stopped drinking from it. But in those months, no one seemed to develop any additional problems. As I've noted before, according to the CDC it is not harmful to human health to drink water with nat gas in it. Might not taste good (which should be corrected), but its not toxic.

Yes, there were spills of fracing fluid by Cabot in the Dimock area because of line and equipment failures. And in my opinion, sloppiness. Fished died related to those accidents, but likely from suffocation caused by the gel form of the frac fluid. Even though this was a careless mistake, no groundwater contamination has yet been reported due to this. Dead fish, yes. Impacts on water supply, no. Spills like this happen in many industries -- trucking, heating oil delivery, pesticide application, chemical transportation, train derailment, gas tanker accidents, leaking underground storage tanks-- every day, and are cleaned up properly and cause no long term effects. Cabot deserved its fines for these problems, but there will likely be no long term problems due to these spills.

I've spent the last two days here at PSU at the Natural Gas Summit -- in those days two respected experts, Bob Yowell, North Central DEP Regional Director and an energy analyst both discussed their frustration at the fact that citizens are upset about the wrong things when it comes to gas well drilling. That wrong thing in their opinions? Fracing. Both note that "cumulative effects" on the landscape and proper remediation of sites are the most important factors facing the environment from well drilling. In fact, even the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, an aggressive environmental group, says erosion and sedimentation control issues are the most concerning from their view. Not fracing.

I've explained this issue over and over on this site -- not beacuse I'm blinded by greed (believe me, I'm not getting rich doing this), but because I believe in accurracy. Industry is concerned about Cabot's issues as well -- they cause us all to be grouped unfairly into stereotypes. At the same time, the demand from concerned citizens that we produce gas with a record of absolute perfection is simply unreasonable. Nothing -- no industry, no cause, not even any relationship -- is perfect. There will be an accident from time to time. The important thing in those cases is that our people are well trained and that gov agency people are well trained to minimize the impacts of those. Its the reason agencies like DEP have their own emergency responders and require industry (almost all industry) to have PPC plans in place.

But if you want to stay with the theme of greed, look at it this way. The completions process of a well, paticularly a shale well, is the most expensive part of development. I'm not sure where that 201 chemicals number comes from, but its probably accurrate to say there are hundreds of potential mixtures of frac fluid based on the types of additives we use to complete a well. That said, chemicals are an expense to us -- we want to use the fewest chemical additives and the smallest volume of those per well that are necessary to produce a good well. Adding more and more chemicals simply increases the cost of a well, and if you will, cuts into our profits directly. It also increases the costs of waste water treament and recycling/disposal for us. So if its all about greed, many of the ideas circulating about fracing could simply not be true.

Cabot's behavior is not an industry norm. Its not fair, or accurrate to paint an entire industry with that brush.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Rita McConnell on November 18, 2009 at 9:59pm

Tom makes good points. As much as I hate to say it, I've seen these types of disputes over and over again when I worked for DEP. Its amazing how often the basis of such complaining can be interpersonal. I do not know that is the case in Dimock, but the reporting on these cases follow similar patterns.

As far as Washington goes, the accidents Range has had have been minimal -- more fish are killed from problems related to home heating oil spills at this time of year than from their few operational issues.its also important to remember that dead fish do not confirm groundwater or drinking supply contamination. Range always self reports its problems and goes above what's required in cooperation.

On Dunkard Creek, I have theories, but I feel the industry is a convenient scapegoat there. In fact, one new theory from WV DEP suggests migrant birds may have carried the algae. You're right -- we may never know. But that's no reason to assume guilt.

Back to Range:
The little discussion there is of Range's problems shows them to be of little concern -- note, the properties in question there are county owned parks. There is no one there to think they've been wronged by industry. I'm not sure that's a coincidence when it comes to the small amount of news coverage those have received. Personal opinion there.

Tom has a point when he says industry doesn't tell its story as well as it could. Many folks, like myself try. Others feel so misunderstood and bitter about being painted as evil that they've just stopped trying. Its important to remember that the people working on these sites are human too. The go to work each day to do what they know - not to intentionally harm people.

• ▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Tom Copley on November 19, 2009 at 10:30pm

Rita-- It never hurts to remember how far we've come! Thanks for your efforts to educate us. --Tom

• ▶ Reply

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• 2
• Next ›
• Page