For those, if any, that don't know about the extension Shell was afforded.
Horsehead Corp has extended the timeline for Shell to exercise their option to buy the Horsehead property. Originally the option ran out the end of this year and is now extended for 6 more months.
http://www.timesonline.com/news/local_news/horsehead-extends-shell-...
Views: 1374
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Trapper on
-
Been wondering what was going on with that. Heard through the vine there were environmental concerns about the site being disturbed by the new construction. I know they smelted lead there for a few moons before zinc. I grew up knowing it as St.Joe Lead. Hope it all works out for Shell as this will be an awesome development for the valley and all of us landowners leased up by them.
-
Permalink Reply by craig on
-
About the probable environmental concerns: I agree Glenn, however regardless if Shell buys it or not the concerns will still be there. So maybe the state and federal gov'ts really do want them to buy it so that gov't money doesn't have to be spent.... or at least as much. I would think it would be a win win situation.
-
Permalink Reply by Trapper on
-
Good points , Craig.
As bad as PA wants it here , I would bet the state eats as much of the cost as they can.
-
Permalink Reply by Bluflame on
-
Glenn,
I think this will come down to a matter of economics for Shell. Should be no surprise there. Currently there are several "cracker" projects (both new and expansions) proposed or underway along the Louisiana & Texas gulf coast. Also, there are a few "crackers" proposed for the Vancouver area (Shell is involved in one) for shipment of ethylene to the far east.
Meanwhile, Enterprise Partners are spending Big $$$ to complete the ATEX pipeline to transport Utica ethane to the gulf. They need a build-out across Ohio and a shorter pipeline along to gulf coast. CHK has committed volume to this pipeline. Sunoco's Mariner West and East pipelines will deliver ethane respectively to crackers in Sarnia, Canada (north of Detroit) and to Marcus Hook, PA for trans-shipment of ethane to the Gulf and/or Europe. The first to be ready will be Mariner West in mid-2013, followed by the others in 2014. Until then, producers are faced with "ethane rejection", meaning the ethane stays with the methane at a lower price.
So the question for Shell is whether there is sufficient demand for ethylene in the northeast/midwest to justify spending $$B on a local "cracker". IMHO, I do not believe it will be a "slam dunk" that Shell will move forward. I've also heard of a few other companies testing the waters for a "cracker" in our geography. Having a local "cracker" would definitely benefit landowners and producers. Unfortunately, there are bigger fish to fry in this case.
BluFlame
-
Permalink Reply by Trapper on
-
Bluflame,
It seems the further we get into this shale thing , the more complex (and confusing) it becomes. I would hope for a more localized market for our mineral wealth that , in turn , benefits even those without land through good paying jobs. God knows we could sure use the shot in the arm. I'll keep my fingers crossed! :-)
Glenn
-
Permalink Reply by Bluflame on
-
Glenn,
It is admittedly confusing. I'm learning more every day. But it is also absolutely fascinating. The amount of money spent to date by all participants in the Utica Shale is breathtaking. And it's just starting!
BluFlame
-
Permalink Reply by Samuel J. Orr on
-
Hope Shell locates there but am worried they may not. There could be very extensive environmental problems with the site. Shell might find the "cleanup costs" prohibitive. If so, that fact could queer the deal. Are there other sites nearby that might be appropriate and available? I hope the Governor and his administration are doing their best to see that the plant is built in western Pennsylvania even if it is not at the Horsehead location.
Top Content
Latest Activity
© 2024 Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).
Powered by
