Comment

Comment by CJK on April 22, 2010 at 1:32am

The gas companies are going to be asking for eminent domain in Pennsylvania. This will effect everyone. They should not be granted eminent domain on gathering lines which is what one company is in the process of asking for. Voice your opinions whatever they are. They need to hear from us!

PUC Reminds Interested Parties of April 22 En Banc Hearing on Marcellus Shale Jurisdictional Issues

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



April 21, 2010

http://www.puc.state.pa.us/general/press_releases/press_releases.as...




HARRISBURG – The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission (PUC) today reminded interested parties of a special en banc hearing being held to examine PUC jurisdictional issues related to Marcellus Shale development.

The hearing will be held at 1 p.m. April 22, 2010 , in Hearing Room 1 of the Commonwealth Keystone Building , 400 North Street , Harrisburg , PA. The hearing is open to the public.

The agenda is available on the PUC website. Comments and testimony filed in the proceeding also are available on the PUC’s website.

Marcellus Shale development creates numerous issues and unanswered questions, many of which impact the Commission’s core functions. The en banc hearing is to examine these questions sooner rather than later so that the Commission can fully protect the public while not stifling economic growth. The hearing will not examine issues outside of the Commission’s jurisdiction such as water quality or other environmental issues.

The Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission balances the needs of consumers and utilities to ensure safe and reliable utility service at reasonable rates; protect the public interest; educate consumers to make independent and informed utility choices; further economic development; and foster new technologies and competitive markets in an environmentally sound manner. For recent news releases, audio of select Commission proceedings or more information about the PUC, visit our website at www.puc.state.pa.us.

# # #

Docket No. I-2010-2163461



Contact:
Jennifer Kocher


Press Secretary


717-787-5722


jekocher@state.pa.us




Pennsylvania Public Utility Commission
Press Office
P.O. Box 3265, Harrisburg, PA 17105-3265
(717) 787-5722 FAX (717) 787-4193

The hearing transcript will be available when I get the link I will let you know, but it is not too late to let them know how you feel.

Comment by John Reed on April 19, 2010 at 9:01pm

4/12/2010 PA Environment Digest.



Professional Geologists Issue Position Paper On Marcellus Shale Development

The PA Council of Professional Geologists this week issued a position paper on Marcellus Shale natural gas development saying they hoped it would promote "a balanced review and discussion of Marcellus Shale gas issues."

The paper is also "intended to dispel common misunderstandings, provide comments as to appropriate public and regulatory policy, from a technical and geologic perspective, and identify critical areas where additional information and study are needed."

It says in part--

"PCPG considers Marcellus shale gas exploration and production to be a worthwhile and necessary endeavor that will have a very significant and continuing positive effect on Pennsylvania’s economy. Additional shale gas production in Pennsylvania means more energy independence for the United States. As natural gas is the cleanest burning fossil fuel, there are positive implications for air quality.

'Marcellus shale natural gas exploration, like other energy production endeavors, involves risks that can be successfully managed and controlled, and is a source of significant benefit to the citizens of Pennsylvania. Potential adverse environmental impacts must be recognized and prevented via the use of best industry practices, appropriate regulations and strict enforcement.

"Natural gas well drilling and production can and must be done in an environmentally responsible and scientifically sound manner while minimizing the potential for adverse environmental impacts.

"It is important that state agencies such as the PADEP and the PADCNR (where drilling on state lands) have sufficient resources to enforce existing regulations and/or propose new regulations as appropriate, and to conduct continuing research, data-gathering, and database management to document the environmental effects, or lack thereof, of Marcellus well drilling and development.

"Continued regulatory and economic pressures on drilling waste management and disposal practices are already resulting in rapid advancements and improvements in waste treatment, minimization and beneficial water reuse and recycling."

A copy of the position paper is available online.



PA Council Of Geologists Supports Natural Gas Drilling



The PA Council of Professional Geologists has released the following position paper on natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale.


The Pennsylvania Council of Professional Geologists is a diverse group of licensed Professional Geologists (PGs) and allied scientists with an overriding ideology of advocating the use of sound science in the: (a) formulation of public policy; (b) protection of human health and the environment; (c) establishment and evaluation of regulatory programs; and (d) the dissemination of accurate information. Early participation by Professional Geologists and allied scientists in evaluations and decisions involving natural resources facilitates sound scientific outcomes.


PCPG supports the responsible development of Pennsylvania’s natural resources, including Marcellus shale gas, and has prepared this statement to provide a balanced review and discussion of Marcellus shale gas issues. This statement is also intended to dispel common misunderstandings, provide comments as to appropriate public and regulatory policy, from a technical and geologic perspective, and identify critical areas where additional information and study are needed. PCPG expects to periodically review and amend this statement as Marcellus shale gas exploration and development procedures evolve, and as geologic and technologic advances continue to change the exploration and production landscape across the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the Appalachian Basin.


The elements of PCPG’s position on the Marcellus are as follows:


1. PCPG considers Marcellus shale gas exploration and production to be a worthwhile and necessary endeavor that will have a very significant and continuing positive effect on Pennsylvania’s economy. Additional shale gas production in Pennsylvania means more energy independence for the United States. As natural gas is the cleanest burning fossil fuel, there are positive implications for air quality.


2. Subjective and selective interpretation of Marcellus shale gas exploration and development information, as is sometimes reported in print, broadcast media, and the Internet, often conveys erroneous information to the public and to public officials. This can result in the creation of misinformation, unnecessary confusion, and exaggerated concerns. Such reports should be carefully scrutinized for accuracy and agenda.


3. Natural gas well drilling and production can and must be done in an environmentally responsible and scientifically sound manner while minimizing the potential for adverse environmental impacts. 4. Historically, horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (fracing) technologies have a low incidence of proven adverse impacts to potable water quality. Marcellus natural gas wells typically consist of a vertical bore (drilled with technically sound, time-tested equipment and methods) which is extended downward and then directionally drilled to horizontally tap into the Marcellus target, at depths between 5,000 and 9,000 feet below ground surface. Fracing of such wells occurs at those same depths, with a radius of influence designed to be limited to approximately 500 feet or less around the well bore. It is unlikely that a properly designed and constructed Marcellus gas well will have an adverse affect on the much shallower fresh water aquifer zones, which typically occur within 500 feet or less from the ground surface. Key to the successful installation of Marcellus shale gas wells is a proper well design and detailed permit application, PADEP approval based on a thorough review process, and correct execution and verification of the well drilling, casing and plugging programs, conducted by experienced and competent natural gas drilling operators.


5. Natural gas drilling and production can and must be conducted in accordance with best industry practices and well-established (existing) state oil and gas, and environmental regulations. Spills of drilling-related fluids and improper disposal of drilling wastes are relatively few, but should all be preventable. The natural gas industry bears responsibility for mitigating the effects of any ground surface releases and using lessons learned to continually improve best management practices.


Although rare, stray gas issues can arise from faulty surface and production casing implementation and when this occurs, the natural gas industry bears responsibility for mitigation.


6. It is important that state agencies such as the PADEP and the PADCNR (where drilling on state lands) have sufficient resources to enforce existing regulations and/or propose new regulations as appropriate, and to conduct continuing research, data-gathering, and database management to document the environmental effects, or lack thereof, of Marcellus well drilling and development.


7. PCPG believes that the careful management of effluent (drilling fluids, frac flowback water, and production brines) generated during well installation, treatment and production, is a significant concern. Technical research and innovation by industry, trade associations, stakeholders, and government must continue with regard to: a) drilling waste volume reduction; b) modification/construction of existing/new treatment facilities with advanced treatment technologies; and c) use of on-site treatment and reuse and recycling systems to properly handle remaining water and wastes.


8. Of great concern to Pennsylvania citizens is the withdrawal of surface water and groundwater for use in the drilling and fracing processes. PCPG believes that the Water Management Plan component of the well drilling permit application package, and the additional required approvals from the Susquehanna River Basin Commission and the Delaware River Basin Commission for projects in those respective basins, provides ample protection of Pennsylvania’s groundwater and surface water resources and their inherent ecological values.


9. The majority of the volume of frac fluids currently utilized by industry consists of water and quartz sand. Small quantities of chemical additives are also typically utilized. The likelihood that the low concentrations of man-made chemical components will impact drinking water supplies is very low.


However, public concern over the use of chemical additives remains heightened and should be addressed. The natural gas industry therefore should prioritize continued research and development of frac fluid formulas that reduce and/or exclude the use of hazardous substances, and provide transparent and accessible reporting of frac fluid composition to the public and to regulatory agencies.


Summary of PCPG Marcellus Position Statement:


Bad news often travels faster than good news – much of the information in the news over the last several years regarding Marcellus shale gas exploration in Pennsylvania has contained sensationalized language, inaccurate statements and misrepresentations that have often been devoid of reasoned geologic science.


PCPG believes it is important to maintain perspective and understand that:


-Marcellus shale natural gas exploration, like other energy production endeavors, involves risks that can be successfully managed and controlled, and is a source of significant benefit to the citizens of Pennsylvania. Potential adverse environmental impacts must be recognized and prevented via the use of best industry practices, appropriate regulations and strict enforcement.


- Accidental spills or releases of chemicals or waste materials to soil, surface water bodies, or groundwater unfortunately can and have occurred from most manufacturing, transportation, or industrial activities. However, rather than discouraging manufacturing, transportation or industrial enterprises in Pennsylvania, PCPG strongly advocates environmental stewardship through best management practices and appropriate regulation and enforcement to minimize discharges to the environment and to promptly address discharges when they occur.


Such diligence is good for business and the community, as it helps to create and preserve jobs while protecting the environment. PCPG sees no rational basis to treat Marcellus shale gas development differently from any other industry. The actual drilling and fracing processes, when done prudently and in accordance with regulations and best industry practices, will minimize any adverse affects to the environment.


Existing regulations and enforcement provisions ensure that responsible parties are held accountable for damages and for restoration of environmental impacts; Continued regulatory and economic pressures on drilling waste management and disposal practices are already resulting in rapid advancements and improvements in waste treatment, minimization and beneficial water reuse and recycling.


Shale gas development is a source of widespread benefit to the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania in the form of boosts to our state’s economy, increased energy independence, lowered energy costs, much needed jobs, and a cleaner-burning fossil fuel. With proper management, technological innovation and constant attention to Pennsylvania’s environment, the benefits of shale gas development are likely to persist for decades to come.

Comment by CJK on April 19, 2010 at 11:11am

Must see video



Cornell Professor Anthony Ingraffea speaking in Vestal, NY on March 31, 2010.



http://txsharon.blogspot.com/2010/04/videos-cornell-professor-discu...

You need to watch this very enlightening! Makes reference to Dr. Engelder of Penn State as well.

Comment by CJK on April 17, 2010 at 10:44am

John:

Although the landowners of the "Split Estate" did not own the mineral rights the same type of bullying is going on in this area with regards to the surface. The companies are telling people that they can do whatever they want and they do not have any say in it. In part they are right because the subsurface rights supersede the surface rights in PA, but it is my argument that most leases entered into are leases for the minerals and that the companies still have to arrange for the extraction. That arrangement has to be done by negotiating between the parties. So as long as the surface owner and the gas companies negotiate for the terms in their agreements the gas companies cannot come on to the land to extract. This negotiating has to be reasonable.

The first area of concern with me is appropriate casing of a well. Not only are shortcuts taken, they are not being require to case deep enough. Some water wells in the area are drilled to a greater depth than they are requiring casing of the gas wells. Also there is no inspection being done of the casing of the wells. The gas industry is operating virtually without any inspections. We have regulation in this state but the regulatory agency is so understaffed that there are virtually little to no inspections of a well site. They gas companies know this and corners are cut in the interest of time. Most of the work being performed on a well site is done by independent contractors, so that there is very little conformity from one site to another, there is plenty of room for error when there are no inspections and various people doing the job. So one of my biggest gripes is why did the Governor of PA in a year of unprecedented gas boom choose to decrease the budget in the DEP? This was a strategic choice. He also took control out of the hands of local agencies such as the Conservation District, this was wrong and we should not be allowing it! It was done because he wanted the DEP to have the control because he has control over the DEP. The DEP has received orders from the Governor that no one should get in the way of the gas business. We need to change this; he has no right to risk our lives because he wants the money from the industry at all costs. If the DEP is understaffed then the permitting process should be lengthened to accommodate the DEP, not shortened to accommodate the gas industry this is our health and our lives that will ultimately be affected by the drilling. It should be done right and the appropriate inspections should be part of the procedure.

I will add my other comments about what should be done with regards to the drilling next.
FYI DEP only came down on Cabot because there are law suits pending. If the people had been quieted by Cabot, DEP would not have done anything for them.

WIth regards to the political aspect of "Split Estate" you are correct. That is one of the reasons that I do not like the movie. I believe that the mess that we are in is not a party problem as the movie portrays. When you view the movie you need to understand that. I know that whatever party was in office that the loopholes would have happened. In fact, during the Bush administration it was the Democrats that had control of the Congress and the House. So all parties are equaly to blame. As far as I am concerned it is not a political issue, it is a people issue and all parties are responsible.

Accidents happpen, yes, but more than I am willing to accept and there should be real consequences for those accidents not minimal fines that are nothing more than a cost of doing business for these companies. The consequences that exist presently are not meaningful to create change. This needs to be changed.
.

Comment by Robin Fehrenbach Scala on April 17, 2010 at 6:33am

Excellent points, John Reed.
I agree totally.

Comment by John Reed on April 17, 2010 at 1:39am

CJK, I did watch split Estate. The focus of that documentary was with regard to landowners who owned surface rights but had no oil/gas rights. The companies who leased the acreages had free reign. Within the law, they could perform their drilling activites as they saw fit. Since the landowners had no mineral rights they were at the mercy of the oil/gas companies. We have much more power than the landowners in the documentary. Also, from a geology standpoint our shale is much deeper in the ground than in CO and NM. So we can't assume that what they experienced will happen here. The documentary was very one sided. It did not go into detail as to how many instances of problems vs. the number of wells that currectly exist in those areas. It focused only on the problems. My guess is those involved in creating the documentary were motivated from a political standpoint. Much the same as the news media of today. It seems nobody ever reports both sides of a story. They report what best suits them politically.

Accidents, spills and contamination will occur no matter how diligent any of these companies try to be. Cabot seems to be the only company in the area that may have not been so diligent and didn't do their geology homework prior to drilling. They are paying the price and I am confident those afffected in Dimmock will have their water restored with time. I think DEP cracked down hard on Cabot and sent a message to the entire industry. Whether you want to believe it or not, these gas companies do not want this bad publicity, they want to drill and make money. If they recklessly go into areas and cause contamination over and over again they will be out of business. You tell me, what method of drilling would you have performed to ensure the water contamination didn't take place ? So what are the better ways to conduct business that you mention in your post ? So far I have only read that you would like full disclosure of the chemicals used in the hydrofracking process and that you want the industry to explore other less toxic methods to replace the chemicals. I don't have a problem with this at all. However, this in not relevent to what happened in Dimmock.

Everyone who leases inherits a potential risk. If we all do our homework and limit the risks as much as possible prior to signing we lower the risk factor. Water testing, surface use caluses etc. If the gas company doesn't want to bend and accomodate your requests than don't sign the lease.

In reference to you not wanting to be the next anomoly... Neither do I. However, that potential does exist if and when I sign a lease agreement. So, I intend to to only sign a lease that I feel decreases this risk. That's about all I can do. I realistically understand and accept it. My point is that it is far more likely that my experience with gas drilling will be a positive one, and even more likely if I sign a protective lease. (Something that none of the effected Dimmock residents did) Numbers don't lie. An anomaly is a great exception to a rule.

Comment by Country Bumkin on April 16, 2010 at 1:38pm

LOL!!!

Comment by CJK on April 16, 2010 at 1:21pm

John: With all due respect I do not want to be the next anomoly. There have been other anomolies. At what point do anomolies raise a concern for you. What Carolyn is expressing is not a scare tactic, it is reality for some. Have you watched "Split Estate" Dimock is not the only area experiencing problems, it is just that the gas industry does a very good job of damage control. I am educated and I have visited and seen and experienced what is going on in the area and truth be known contamination is happening and one instance of contamination of someone's water source is one too many. There are better ways to be conducting business and the industry should be required to do them.

Comment by John Reed on April 16, 2010 at 12:13pm

Carolyn, the truth will prevail, you are correct. In fact it probably already has prevailed. I'll post this one more time. Their are more than a half million gas wells currently operating in the US. Over 50,000 in PA alone, second to Texas. A large percentage of these wells are horizintal wells and we hydro-fracked. Without question, well contamination and methane gas migration has been an exception to the rule. Look at it from a statistical standpoint. If we sampled enough currently operating gas wells the instances of contamination and methane migration would be considered an anomoly. That is truth... Please get educated and stop spreading your scare tactics based upon what happened in Dimmock. Dimock is not a true representation of natural gas drilling as a whole.

Comment by Carol on April 16, 2010 at 6:17am

Thanks hunter777. When I joined this site, I thought the purpose was to share news, information, and to promote drilling - responsible drilling. Maybe those who strictly oppose the drilling should start the "stop marcellus shale" website. As for me, I'll stay with GO Marcellus Shale.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 14
• 15
• 16
• 17
• 18
• …
• 46
• Next ›
• Page