Comment

Comment by William Ladd on April 1, 2010 at 1:47am

To John Reed..

I just heard on the NBC news that we are in the worse recession since the 1929 depression. Obviously you have suffered a great deal. Many of us have suffered right along with you. Our present leaders are only trying to correct what the previous leaders have led us into. And the previous leaders are fighting tooth and nail to discredit and wear down the present administration.

Greed is what got us into this mess in the first place.

A lease would help my family immensely right now. But these greedy people locked up the property many years ago because they had information the landowners did not have and could not get so they could make a better choice of lease or not lease those many years ago.

In other words , figuretivily speaking, a noose was put around many land owner's necks by the leaders of many years ago. The greedy folks of today are complaining now because they are afraid of being "called on the carpet" and losing their big bankrolls!

Comment by John Reed on March 31, 2010 at 11:07pm

Marie, let me share my life story over the past three years. My wife, my 11 year old daughter and I own 27.7 acres of land in NEPA. Currently the gas companies are not very interested in us or anyone around us. This may change in the coming months. Do I hope it does ? Yes, no doubt.

I am currently unemployed. I worked for a student loan company for 14 years before being laid off almost three years ago. I received a package from the company and I used the money to open my own general contracting business. I won a few bids and started doing the jobs. All of a sudden gas prices went from just over $2.00/gallon to over $4.00/gallon. I was travelling 104 miles per day roundtrip on these jobs. I was driving a Dodge Ram 1500 to and from the jobs out of necessity. At 12 miles per gallon I ended up spending over $35.00/day in gas costs. I budgeted for about $20.00/day. $15.00 extra per day adds up over a few months. Following suit was the cost of materials. They nearly doubled. Since I was locked into the bids and I couldn't make changes based on these extenuating circumstances with which I had no control, I pretty much went bankrupt in nine months.

We fell behind on all of our bills. I am two years behind on property taxes, and I struggle to keep the mortgage current. I have sold nearly all of my possessions acquired over the last 15 years. ( I worked very hard for this stuff) I applied for Emergency Unemployment Compensation but was informed that due to my self employed status I did not qualify. I have been actively seeking employment for two years. My credit at this point is so bad that I cannot find a job that pays what it will take to meet my financial obligations. Prior to this my credit score was over 700. I get multiple interviews, second interviews and sometimes even three. Since these companies pull credit as part of the hiring process I get disqulaified. I have been doing odd jobs just to get by. My wife went to work. She saved our home.

In February of 2009 she had a nervous breakdown. On her birthday she attempted suicide. She is doing much better now and I am spending most of my time with her, putting the job search on the back burner until I feel comfortble that she is all better.

Signing a gas lease would ease alot of stress for me and my family. If I wanted to, I could sign right now for $500.00/acre. After taxes that would equate to about $9500.00. This money would come in very handy and ease some of the stress, however it would not be a life changing thing. My point is, yes I could really use the money from a good lease agreement. However, if I was truly all about the money (as you state) wouldn't I have already signed ? I beleive in everything I write in these posts. I am trying to have faith that things will get better for my family. I welcome the day the gas companies come calling with a fair offer, but I will never sacrafice my land or water or income potential by signing a boiler plate lease that offers little protection and is not up to par from a $$$ persepective. I would be doing a great injustice to myself , my family and my neighbors by doing so.

I will continue to educate myself in this process and hopefull the time I spend doing this will help my family and I to sign a lease agreement that is fair and protective.

I didn't have to share this story, and I probably should not have done so. However, I thought it might be useful for you and maybe before you go making blanket statements about people and judging them with little or no knowledge of their circumstances you will think twice.

Comment by John Reed on March 31, 2010 at 10:21pm

CJK. One of the things being tossed around is deep well injection. From a common sense standpoint it makes sense. It basically takes untreated waste water and injects it thousands of feet into the ground. To me. I would rather leave all of the waste water as deep underground as possible. Again, I think you limit your risk. You are more likely to have a spill or some sort of contamination the more you handle the waste water. (transporting it etc.) Also, as I have stated before, the other bigger risk is the low level radio active material and brine that naturally exists at extreme depths. Wouldn't you rather have it remain at these depths rather than extracting it and handling it several times? These naturally existing dangers pose a much bigger threat than the chemicals used in the fracking process. All of the chemicals are also used by millions of people every day in every household throughout America. They are routinely dumped down sink drains. Wouldn't these chemicals also potentially find their way into water aquifiers ? Since everything finds a path of least resistance in my mind it is much more likely that we pose a far bigger danger to ourselves than the material left in the ground at 6000 feet as a result of hydro-fracking.

Also, do you really and truly believe that the big big players in the industry (multi billion dollar) players would risk everything ? Do you think they would take risk after risk with each hydro-fracking, knowing that they are causing death and contamination? This would obviously open them up to potential financial suicide. It just doesn't make any sense to me that they would recklessly open themselves up to this kind of liability. I would like to think they would act responsibly for the most part. I think they do make mistakes and accidents and spills do occur, but I do not believe the O/G Co's are intentionally (with each hydro-fracking) contaminating water aquifiers, lakes, streams, wetlands and poisioning people routinely.

Drilling in PA has been going on for a long time yes. I can't answer your question as to how comparable the early drilling was to today's drilling. I can tell you that if the gas CO is targeting impermeable layers of shale deep underground there is a good probability hydro-fracking has taken place. I would suggest going to Texas and visiting the well sites that are similar to the Marcellus from a geology standpoint. Also, if you do, be sure an visit enough of them to be able to make a well educated decision. Talk to the land owners, check out their properties. Don't make the mistake of reading or hearing about the properties who have had a bad experieince with nat gas exploration and limit yourself to visiting or researching those only. That's the same mistake many are making here in PA. They hear about Dimmock and then assume this is the rule rather than the exception.

Comment by Country Bumkin on March 31, 2010 at 3:03pm

Marie won't explain to us how her solar panels are installed or how they are made and with what chemicals the panels are made from. LOL!! She doesn't want to share her PERSONAL experience with us in regards to her panels to help her cause, yet she keeps showing everyone what a radical she is against natural gas b/c it's going to KILL everything and everyone if it doesn't stop! LOL! When you're pumping your gas in the morning if you go to work, ponder for a moment how you are no different than anyone else. LOL!! Some people on this site make me laugh....LOL!!

The TRUTH is you do nothing to help your cause!

Comment by CJK on March 31, 2010 at 2:21pm

John the question I asked was in reference to PA wells, everyone keeps telling me drilling has been going on in PA for a long time. I want to know if the drilling in PA in the past has been the same as what they are doing presently in NEPA. While I agree with you in importance of monitoring the pads for surface spills, there have been no studies as to what is going to happen to all the fracking chemicals that are left in the ground for each fracking. The industry admits that 92% of the fluids used in fracking may not be recovered at the time of fracking. I am not convinced that the fluids will not seek a path at some point into the aquifer or elsewhere and contaminate either drinking water or other waterways. With regards to surface spills the pads being built currently in NEPA are built-up mounds that when flooded will drain into the nearest ditches and then our waterways. There is little to no barriers put up to prevent seepage on these pads. Methane is a whole different issue we are going to see many wells contaminated by methane as a result of drilling and some will be farther than the 1000 feet zone that is regulated. The whole process has so many unknowns, things that should have been researched and thought out before the drill bit hits the ground. Otherwise we will be drilling now and paying dearly later.

Comment by John Reed on March 31, 2010 at 1:28pm

Marie, do you need a couch to lye on ?

Comment by John Reed on March 31, 2010 at 1:13pm

CJK I didn't see your earlier post. I don' know how many of the 450,000+ wells are deep wells. I would venture to say that with the Barnett in TX the vast majority there are horizontal wells comporable to the Marcellus. The same thing with the Haynesville. Actually, I prefer that the Marcellus is a deep shale. It actually reduces the risk factor. The shale is thousands of feet below any aquifier. The bigger danger is surface spills, not hydro fracking itself. None of us can definitively say that waste water does migrate from 6000+feet and into aquifiers. Does it deserve attention ? Yes. Should it be looked into ? Absolutely. Is contamination more likely to occur at the surface via a chemical spill or waste water spill ? I say yes. I think this is where we need to concentrate more, rather than what's happening 6000+ feet under the surface. Also, with regard to methane... PA is loaded with various layers of shale both deep and shallow. Some of the shallow stuff does contain methane. These areas are much more likely to cause methane in water aquifiers than the Marcellus, thus ensuring the casings are adequate are much more of a concern for me than anythng. Not the htdro fracking process in general.

Comment by John Reed on March 31, 2010 at 1:00pm

Marie, I'm a registered democrat. It's people like you that are so radical that make me want to switch parties. You are a bitter woman with nothing better to do than try to scare people into believing half truths.

Comment by John Reed on March 31, 2010 at 12:13pm

blah blah blah

Comment by John Reed on March 31, 2010 at 9:06am

Not 100% sure. I would think the answer is no. If yu ask me though, the bigger the production unit the better. Much less intrusive from a surface disturbance standpoint. I'd rather have a well pad that can drain 1200 acres than multiple well pads with multiple areas of access to cover the same square acreage. Seems to me not only less invasive, but less chance of potential environmental issues. One of the bigger risks in hydro-fracking is surface contamination. If you consoliodate your efforts to one area as opposed to multiple areas I believe you are minimizing risk. Just my opinion.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 27
• 28
• 29
• 30
• 31
• …
• 46
• Next ›
• Page