Comment

Comment by daniel cohen on March 15, 2010 at 2:44am

Dear Molly,
That's wonderful to hear. Sorry about the general quality of your well water though. We've been drinking ours for over 40 years and are satisfied as to the quality & purity. What kinds of water analysis
was done pre & post on your sources, and who did you use to do it? I've seen price estimates from $50-$2,000 for a sample!! May I ask what range you paid?
Thanks.
Dan

Comment by John Reed on March 15, 2010 at 2:29am

If anyone thinks that a reputable gas company is worried about spending a few extra bucks they are wrong. The bad publicuty they receive when something goes wrong is far more of a burden to them than the extra spending they might incur in order to make additional safeguards common practice. If this isn't true of the company you are dealing with than you are dealing with a horrible company. Think about it. If Cabot had to do it all over again they would obviosuly do things differently. They have received terrible publicity and their reputation in the area is forever tarnished. I see other gas companies learning from them as well. Baseline water testing is becoming more common as well as post drilling water testing. It's too bad PA landowners didn't do their homework prior to signing such poor leases with regard to water and land protections. CIK. The operational hazards you list below are true... But, that doesn't mean NG exploration and hydrofracking is any more dangerous to us or the environment than many things we are subject to on a daily basis. We could put a list of hazards together for hundres of things. By and large and by an overwhelming margin the number of environmental detriments we have seen in the state is miniscule compared to the number of wells and the amount of hydro-fracking that has already been completed with no incident. People tend to grasp on to what the media puts out there. It should be heard, yes. But we should make decisions and conclusions regarding anything we do based on big picture thinking. How many car accidents will be on the news tonight ? There will be several and they will involve many serious injuries and deaths. How many people will safely commute to work and back home today ? Hundreds of thousands and not one safe commute will make the news. How many wells have been drilled with no incidents ? How many good reports have we seen showing the details of how succesfull the gas companies have been and how overwhelming safe they have been ? None... It's easy to fall prey to misinformation when all we hear about is the negative. Get smart and think globally and with logic. You will find yourself makeing better decisions in the long run.

Comment by Carol on March 15, 2010 at 2:21am

Daniel Cohen,
The water was tested before and after the drilling - no change. (I don't drink well water anyway.) My animals seem fine - dogs and horses have been drinking the water and they are all healthy. I have absolutely no concern about the gas wells affecting the water supply or the air. Besides, I hadn't really seen any clean water in the area before the gas wells were drilled. I don't know what area you are from, but our creeks and streams have been polluted for years from things other than gas wells.

Comment by BuckinghamGasMan on March 15, 2010 at 2:09am

CJK, you said that "the oil and gas industry is the ONLY industry that is exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act." That is not correct. For example, the fraccing fluids above ground are not exempt and deep well injections are not exempt. When those items were added to the actions covered by the Safe Drinking Water Act, they said it did not cover fraccing underground (because the belief was that it had no effect on drinking water). Fraccing was not taken out, it was never in. Underground fraccing was distinguished from fraccing fluids being handled on the surface -- again because there was no reason to believe that underground fraccing had any effect on drinking water. To date, that position has not been contradicted by any proof that fraccing actually causes drinking water pollution -- only fears that it may.

Comment by daniel cohen on March 15, 2010 at 2:02am

Dear CJK,
You speak well, and have much to share. Thank you for your comments. If you'd like to focus on ways/suggestions to help remedy the potential dangers, perhaps a visit to Aquifer Contamination-Part 2 somewhere on this site might be worthwhile.
All good thoughts,
Dan

Comment by daniel cohen on March 15, 2010 at 1:54am

Dear J & J,
It is possible to disagree without being disagreeable. Your comment to Marie "How do you carry on with such stress and hatred in your life for everyone else's problems?" is unworthy of you and impolite at the very least.

You have points to make-excellent, make them to bring light, not heat, into these deliberations.
Dan

Comment by CJK on March 15, 2010 at 1:52am

I would like to know why if the gas industry is so sure that their procedures are so safe that the industry is so adverse to having their exemption from the Safe Drinking Water Act removed . Currently the oil and gas industry is the ONLY industry that is exempt from the Safe Drinking Water Act.

I am not against gas exploration, but I am against the exploitation of the people of NE Penn. BuckinghamGasMan you are correct that there are many laws and regulations on the books that can be enforced, but there are two problems with that. 1. The laws are antiquated when it pertains to the type of drilling that is going on now in NE Penn. Production units are being increased to 1280 acres, they are drilling out 7,000 or more feet. The scenarios that are happening were never dreamed of when the current laws were enacted. 2. The fine fee schedule is a joke. The cost of a fine is considered a cost of doing business for these gas companies. We need higher fines to make more of an impact.

The DEP is not doing it’s job. Take Dimock, PA there was damage done there at least 6 months ago by a gas company and the problem has not be remedied yet. No definite as to when either. DEP spokesman on Friday night in Dimock said it will be done but when? Some residents of Dimock are being denied a Constitutional right to clean water. You can rest assured that if it was me that caused that damage I would have been prosecuted, fined and sent to jail. Why is the gas industry being treated differently?

Finally I do not like the people of NE Penn, myself included, being forced to assume risks they were not informed of. This information was part of a SEC prospectus for Range Resources in 2006. Range Resources explained to potential investors the risks of hydro-fracturing, something that is not being acknowledged let alone explained to the landowners and residents of Pennsylvania. There statement is as follows:
"Our business is subject to operating hazards and environmental regulations that could result in substantial losses or liabilities. Oil and natural gas operations are subject to many risks, including well blowouts, craterings, explosions, uncontrollable flows of oil, natural gas or well fluids, fires, formations with abnormal pressures, pipeline ruptures or spills, pollution, releases of toxic natural gas and other environmental hazards and risks. If any of these hazards occur, we could sustain substantial losses as a result of:
• Injury or loss of life;
• Severe damage to our destruction of property, natural resources and equipment;
• Pollution or other environmental damage;
• Clean-up responsibilities;
• Regulatory investigations and penalties; or
• Suspension of operations.
As we begin drilling to deeper horizons and in more geologically complex areas, we could experience a greater increase in operating and financial risks due to inherent higher reservoir pressures and unknown downhole risk exposures" (Range Resources "Prospectus" p. S-13 [5/18/06]).

From this statement it is clear that EOG felt compelled to inform the SEC, their shareholders, and potential shareholders of the risks of their business. Why are the people of this region being told a different story?

The industry needs to be MORE responsible, there are safer and cleaner methods that they could be using. Yes they cost more, but in the end the cost will be far less because they will be less likely to damage the environment. If the cost is too prohibitive for the companies then they need to spend more money on Research and Development before they make mistakes that either cannot be fixed or whose remedy is more costly than the safe method would have been to use.

Comment by daniel cohen on March 15, 2010 at 1:47am

Dear Molly,
What protective measures, if any, have you taken to monitor the water/air quality on your property?
Dan

Comment by CJK on March 15, 2010 at 1:22am

xxxxxx

Comment by Carol on March 15, 2010 at 1:10am

Marie,
Four gas wells have been drilled around my property - the noise wasn't bad at all. There are more wells being drilled right now and the noise doesn't seem to be bothering anyone in the area.
Sure, we had to listen to a helicopter all day while they were preparing for the seismic testing, but that wasn't even a big deal.
I agree with James - we are lucky to have so much NG in PA. I welcome the responsible drilling companies.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 35
• 36
• 37
• 38
• 39
• …
• 46
• Next ›
• Page