timing

I heard that it may take 4-5 years for the gas companies to come back to landowners in Sullivan Co due to the fact that they may lease state land 1st. Is this true?

Views: 768

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Robin Fehrenbach Scala on February 13, 2010 at 2:39pm
That is not true at all. There are far bigger issues that will be a problem for you.

In Pennsylvania the state has leased state land and it had no effect on leases for landowners. The things that WILL affect landowners being leased are ...

If and when NY State finishes the SGEIS and resumes fracking (has been on hold 2 years)

If there is gas underneath your property in Sullivan Co, which there probably is

If New York City gets what they want - a ban on drilling and fracking in "their" watershed

RIght now I believe your biggest problem is NYC.
Permalink Reply by Jeff Ferreira on February 14, 2010 at 4:22am
Ok Thanks I hope they can work it out!
Permalink Reply by Paul Butski on March 30, 2010 at 1:15pm
i am in Alleghany county will there be drilling there eventualy? Are they buying leases in this area or in NY at all and what is going rate?
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on March 30, 2010 at 5:31pm
according to all the maps , yes eventually
Attachments:
Permalink Reply by Mmmarkkk on March 31, 2010 at 2:05am
The Gas Drilling attachment above contains one glaring "non-truth". It shows a picture of the Jonah field in the Rockies and declares that Marcellus drilling will be "denser than what is shown". Big lie. The picture depicts a 40-acre spacing of wells. The Marcellus is not going to be developed on 40-acre spacing. The densest you will see is 80-acre spacing, but maybe 160. So take that Jonah Field picture and delete every other well. That gets you to 80-acre. Then delete every other remaining well and that gets you to 160-acre spacing.

The report tries to use the picture of Jonah field to scare land owners. At that point, I stopped reading the report as the author lost all credibility.
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on March 31, 2010 at 4:44am
which one, so I can discard...
Permalink Reply by Nancy Famiola on March 31, 2010 at 8:46am
Jean doesn't actually open up any of her links before he posts them on here. My favorite was her link that took me to a paper that just had a bunch of applications for shale gas development research. About 35 applications into one file, all unrelated to one another, none of them had anything to do directly with the marcellus. Her point there was to show that the core of the Marcellus was in New York.... huh?

Jean, do yourself a favor and open these up before you blindly post them. You should be embarassed about all of these mindless mistakes.
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on March 31, 2010 at 11:11am
thought you died..
Permalink Reply by Nancy Famiola on March 31, 2010 at 12:16pm
Nope, still observing the misinformation being spread on this site. It really is a shame how much misinformation gets thrown around on here. The actual good information gets lost in the junk (your pdf's).
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on April 1, 2010 at 8:03pm
Quote is basically making Nancy a liar we already knew ...

"Many natural gas industry followers are predicting a June release date for the state’s revised hydrofracking regulations. Energy companies and their suppliers have been waiting in the wings for 18 months for the state Department of Environmental Conservation’s Supplemental Generic Environmental Impact Statement to be released.

http://www.evesun.com/news/stories/2010-03-10/9147/Morrisville-read...

The statement of regulations will allow companies to begin developing the abundant Marcellus and Utica formations in the region, and if it’s anything like what happened when the Marcellus Shale action began heating up two years ago in neighboring Pennsylvania, there will be hundreds of jobs available at well sites within the first 18 months. "
Permalink Reply by Nancy Famiola on April 2, 2010 at 1:45am
First of all, this is from a local newspaper. I didn't know they were qualified geologists. This is your main source of information that you quote from? I see now why your views are just wayyy way out there.

Second of all, the point that I was making earlier was that Sullivan county is not the center of drilling activity which you claimed it was. In reality there havent been any marcellus wells drilled there. How does this article prove me wrong? You're comments just confuse people.

I'm not sure how this article from a new york local newspaper makes me a liar (I'm not sure what you are trying to prove), but nice try.

Do yourself a favor and dont ever quote the local newspapers, you're making a fool of yourself.
Permalink Reply by Jean Michel LeTennier on April 2, 2010 at 2:04am
give it up..
http://www.morning-times.com/articles/2010/03/31/local_news/doc4bb3...
one more paper that contradicts you..

RSS

© 2024   Created by Keith Mauck (Site Publisher).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service