Hinchey on shale gas drilling – YNN, Your News Now
June 26, 2011
Gas Drilling Awareness for Cortland County
June 24, 2011
Cornell Expert Says Hydrofacking Already Affecting New York State
June 20, 2011
N.Y. problematic for gas drilling – Times Union.
The article, “Gas drilling pays big benefits,” (June 15), may be misread, since it implies that what works in Texas will work more or less the same in New York.
Gas drilling in New York may indeed pay big benefits to Texas and Oklahoma gas companies. It may not be so rosy for New Yorkers.
The lack of groundwater contamination in the Fort Worth Basin is due to the fact that there are few groundwater wells in the Fort Worth Basin. There are no shallow wells to pollute because the water sources are deep aquifers.
There have been instances of shallow wells polluted in Palo Pinto County by Range Resources, since the wells draw from the Brazos River.
That is not the case in upstate New York, where all the water wells — including the municipal and commercial wells — are tapping groundwater that is uniquely vulnerable to pollution from the surface and from gas wells via methane migration into the water.
As for jobs, almost all of the suppliers and contractors in Texas are either based in Texas or have major manufacturing facilities there. So any drilling activity will be almost 100 percent local hires. That is simply not the case in New York, which has no major oil and gas manufacturing or service companies. Few such companies are likely to relocate to New York from Texas. Nor will many of the crews be local hires. Many of the new jobs associated with increased activity will in fact go to out-of-state residents and contractors.
The economics are different for many reasons. There is a production tax in Texas, but none in New York. The ad valorem tax on wells in New York will be offset in some towns by lower property values. If a town is suburban or has a high tax base, it may see a net decrease in property taxes from shale gas industrialization.
James Northrup
New York City
Read more: http://www.timesunion.com/opinion/article/N-Y-problematic-for-gas-drilling-1431244.php#ixzz1PsCDJbnF
June 16, 2011
COLUMN-Shale revolution hits snag along the Delaware: Kimmerle | Energy & Oil | Reuters.
— Chris Kimmerle is a Reuters market analyst. The views expressed are his own —
By Chris Kimmerle
NEW YORK, June 10 (Reuters) – Shale gas and hydraulic fracturing have transformed the U.S. gas market in less than five years and are now central to the administration’s strategy for reducing emissions, boosting energy security and improving the balance of payments by cutting reliance on imported oil.
But the transformative potential of these technologies is threatened by rapidly escalating political opposition to the environmental impact of drilling and potential chemical contamination from fracking fluids.
The flash point centers on the giant Marcellus Shale in the Northeastern United States, which covers portions of West Virginia, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Ohio and New York. (here)
Development is pitting the gas industry and communities anxious to benefit from jobs and the income from royalties and leases against environmental groups and residents concerned about increased traffic and the risks to the environment from the disposal of a cocktail of chemicals injected into gas wells as part of the fracking process.
DELAWARE RIVER BASIN COMMISSION
While the relatively poor state of West Virginia has welcomed shale development as a way to supplement income and jobs from its troubled coal industry, opposition has mounted in other states.
The New York City Department of Environmental Protection called for a prohibition on drilling within the watershed of the city’s reservoir system in December 2009, and the governor of Pennsylvania banned new wells on state forest lands in 2010.
Last month, the speaker of the New York State Assembly announced the Environmental Conservation Committee had reported out legislation to suspend the issuance of new drilling permits for hydraulic fracturing in the state until June 2012.
But one of the most serious public challenges to drilling in the Marcellus has come from grass roots opposition to regulations being proposed by the Delaware River Basin Commission (DRBC).
The commission regulates water use and quality along the Delaware River under a 1961 compact among the states of Delaware, New Jersey, New York and Pennsylvania and the Federal Government. Its commissioners are the governors of the four riparian states as well as division engineer for the North East Division of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. (here)
In May 2009, the commission notified the natural gas industry that new Marcellus wells cannot be drilled within the river’s drainage area without first applying for and obtaining its approval. At the same time the commission released a set of proposed development rules as part of its water quality regulations.
The regulations are intended to protect the river’s water resources and apply to all gas-development activities including withdrawing water from the river system and the disposal of wastewater (including fracking fluids) from fracking projects.
The public comment period on the proposed regulations, which closed on April 15, drew a heavy response with approximately 58,000 public submissions received, of which more than 36,000 were hostile to the further expansion of Marcellus drilling.
TRANSFORMATIONAL TECHNOLOGY
The combination of shale gas discoveries and the hydraulic fracturing process, which makes it possible to exploit them, has probably been the most important new development in the oil and gas industry in last decade.
The revolution began with exploitation of the Barnett Shale under the Texas city of Fort Worth in the late 1990s. It has since spread to the Greater Green River Basin in Wyoming, the Uinta-Picenance Basin in Colorado and Utah, the Haynesville Shale stretching across the Texas-Louisiana border, the Woodford Shale in Oklahoma, and the Fayetteville Shale in Arkansas. (here)
Production from unconventional shale reservoirs has leapt from 0.39 trillion cubic feet in 2000 to 1.3 trillion in 2007, 3.1 trillion in 2009 and 4.87 trillion in 2010, according to the Energy Information Administration. It now accounts for 23 percent of all gas production in the United States.
Burgeoning shale production has transformed the outlook for the U.S. gas market. In 2005, the Hirsch Report for the U.S. Department of Energy forecast “Gas production in the United States now appears to be in permanent decline” and a period of rising gas prices.
Gas companies built a raft of regasification terminals to import LNG to alleviate predicted shortfalls in domestic production. Now surging output has caused prices to fall sharply and the gas companies are applying for permits to reverse the LNG terminals and use them to export domestic production.
Shale technology is now being deployed around the world and has effectively doubled the global resource base for natural gas. As a result, the International Energy Agency expects gas will play a much greater role in the global energy mix in future, according to a recent report in which it asked “Are we entering a golden age of gas?”
But that technological revolution has now run into an unexpected problem: mounting concerns about the content and disposal of fluids used.
CHEMICAL COCKTAIL
Key to winning natural gas from low permeable shale is hydraulic fracturing, a process that involves the injection of typically 1-4 million gallons of water at high pressure into a well in order to break the rock and allow gas to follow.
The water is combined with sand, chemicals, and gels to lubricate the process and help keep the rock open after it is broken. During the fracking process the fluid is returned to the surface for recirculation and ultimate disposal.
Between 2005 and 2009, the oil and gas industry introduced 780 million gallons of fracking fluid into U.S. wells, according to a staff report issued by the Democratic minority on the Energy and Commerce Committee of the House of Representatives.
According to the report, the fracking fluids used contained a total 750 chemicals and other components. The most widely used chemical, as measured by frequency of use, was methanol – designated by the Environmental Protection Agency as a hazardous air pollutant and candidate for inclusion on the list of regulated substances under the U.S. Safe Water Drinking Act.
Other widely used chemicals included benzene, lead, isopropyl alcohol, 2-butoxyethanol (also used as a paint solvent and in cleaning products) and ethylene glycol (also used in automotive antifreeze).
The report identified 29 chemicals used in fracking that are known or possible carcinogens and regulated under the Safe Water Drinking Act or listed as hazardous pollutants under the Clean Air Act.
It also identified 94 million gallons of fracking fluid that contained at least one chemical or component that its manufacturer deemed proprietary or a trade secret and is not available for public scrutiny.
POLITICAL CONTEXT
The unconventional gas revolution was born in the belt of midcontinental and western states stretching up to Wyoming where there was a favorable political, business and regulatory environment for energy producers. Shale production was welcomed as creating jobs and generating state and local tax revenues.
The political context in the Northeast is very different. The region has a broader economic base so it is less dependent on the energy sector for jobs and tax revenue. It also has poisonous legacy of 250 years of heavy industrial development along some of its rivers, including abandoned oil wells, acid drainage from abandoned coal mines, underground fires in the anthracite field and industrial pollution.
In New York state, the upper Hudson River is contaminated with PCBs (a known carcinogen) and the Monongahela River in western Pennsylvania and West Virginia remains scarred by the legacy of steelmaking and bituminous coal extraction industries.
Unsurprisingly, these states are more divided about shale development. The Delaware is part of the country’s Wild and Scenic Rivers System and provides drinking water for over 15 million people including the New York and Philadelphia metropolitan regions.
Coming from the more benign climate in the south, southwest, and west the industry appears to have been blindsided by the extent of local opposition. In a belated attempt to reverse industry groups have saturated local television and radio with advertisements extolling the virtues of oil and gas.
Even if the commission gives its approval, the lack of an environmental impact assessment is likely to form the basis for a court challenge. Litigation may delay implementation for 2-3 years, and open up fracking practices to greater scrutiny. (Editing by John Kemp and Marguerita Choy)
© Thomson Reuters 2011 All rights reserved
June 14, 2011 1 Comment
Hydrofracking leases may violate fine print on mortgages, title insurance.
Hydrofracking drilling leases may violate fine print on mortgages, title insurance
A group of Tompkins County residents believe they have found a troubling new consequence of “hydrofracking” gas drilling in New York—not environmental but financial.
Reading the fine print on residential mortgage and title insurance requirements, they found many New York properties have tight technical restrictions on the size and location of drilling structures.
That means homeowners who lease their drilling rights to the oil and gas industry for hydrofracking may no longer be covered by their title insurance. They may not be able to take out second mortgages on their properties. In the worst case, they may not even be able to sell their land as long as a drilling lease is in effect.
“Economic development is expected to be the upside of this activity,” said Carol Chock, a Tompkins County legislator who headed a local committee reviewing how gas drilling would affect property assessments.
“The understanding is that if we’re willing to take the risk, the reward will be economic,” Chock said. “But are we sure that’s true?”
Gas drillers say the worry is overblown, but it has made its way to the governor’s office.
Assembly Member Barbara Lifton arranged for Chock, two local mortgage lenders and a real estate agent to meet in Albany last month with three aides to Gov. Andrew Cuomo—Anthony Giardina, Jim Malatras and Tom Congdon—as well as with officials from the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC).
The DEC is scheduled to release a detailed blueprint for gas drilling in New York by July 1, but the Cuomo administration has not said whether land financing will be addressed.
While landowners in economically depressed regions across the state are generally open to leasing their drilling rights, the Assembly recently passed a year-long moratorium on the controversial practice, because they fear hydrofracking will contaminate the water supply.
“Natural gas locked within the Marcellus Shale isn’t going anywhere. We’re not going to lose it,” Speaker Sheldon Silver said last week. “There’s too much at stake not to err on the side of caution.”
Though the shale isn’t going anywhere, cash-strapped New Yorkers in struggling areas of the state are going bankrupt. Some are going into foreclosure. Others are hanging onto their homes a month at a time, waiting for the state to allow drilling.
This friction between upstaters who support and oppose fracking is on vivid display in Tompkins County, home to the city of Ithaca, one of the only growth hubs in a region marked by poverty. Ithaca has insulated itself from its neighbors’ economic problems with the help of its 25,000 college students. Yet like the conservative farming communities that border Tompkins County, Ithaca sits atop 500 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.
Tompkins County discovered the potential mortgage and insurance pitfalls of hydrofracking after it formed a task force last winter to consider the impact of gas drilling.
At Chock’s request, Gregory May, the vice president of residential mortgage lending at Tompkins Trust Company, began digging into the assessment and valuation issues. His four-page report, issued in March, stunned county officials.
One problem he found: New York environmental regulations require a 100-foot setback between a drill and any dwelling. But the secondary mortgage market, including Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the State of New York Mortgage Agency, requires a 200-foot separation.
If a setback falls short of 200 feet, May wrote, a prospective buyer may not be able to get financing, and sellers may find fewer purchasers for their land.
Another problem: To qualify for title insurance, properties with gas leases in New York must not be used for any commercial purpose, have structures taller than 35 feet or store gas-drilling equipment on site.
If a property owner or a gas company that has leased the owner’s drilling rights violates those terms, May wrote, the title insurance on that land could be invalidated—blocking a homeowner from taking out a home-equity line of credit.
“The inability to sell loans to the national secondary market could potentially impact property values because of the lack of competitive mortgage financing available in the marketplace,” he wrote.
The Independent Oil and Gas Association of New York, which represents drillers, calls that fearmongering. Randy Hansen, a spokesperson for the group, said no permanent gas-drilling structures are taller than one story, and he believes 200-foot setbacks are standard on most New York leases.
“I think common sense needs to be brought to bear in interpreting these regulations,” Hansen said.
There is no way to easily check setbacks and other provisions, because drillers aren’t required to file the full terms of a lease publicly. Tompkins Trust Company’s law firm, however, says it has seen plenty of problems caused by lease requirements—and that homeowners affected by them are simply stuck.
“If the gas companies would simply terminate a homeowner’s lease on request, or release the surface rights, this wouldn’t be an issue,” said Randy Marcus, a partner at Barney, Grossman, Dubow, Marcus & Orkin, which specializes in real estate transactions and finance. “The gas companies are absolutely intractable. They want to hang onto these leases.”
The state mortgage agency declined to comment, saying it is reviewing the potential problems. But as lawmakers become aware of the issue, nearby landowners who want to tap into gas-lease revenue are becoming impatient.
Said Bradd Vickers, president of the nearby Chenango County Farm Bureau: “We have faith in the DEC.”
–
Susan Arbetter reports from the Capitol in Albany for Central New York’s PBS station, WCNY in Syracuse. She hosts a daily live radio show, “The Capitol Pressroom,” and produces “The Capitol Report,” broadcast daily on television across New York State.
June 2, 2011
Local landowners, others repeat fracking concerns.\
Horizontal hydraulic fracturing, or fracking for short, involves sinking a vertical well thousands of feet into the ground, and then bending the well horizontally into layers of gas-filled shale. Once the concrete piping is in place, thousands of gallons of chemical-laced water and sand are pumped into the wells, and then exploded into the shale formation. Cracks open in the shale, allowing natural gas to seep out, which is then pumped to the surface along with the wastewater and chemicals.
While the natural-gas boom has revitalized the economies of many rural communities in Pennsylvania and other states, while offering a viable domestic energy alternative, the process also has potential for serious environmental and aesthetic consequences. As the increased use of fracking moves west into Ohio, much of the debate, including in Athens County, involves how serious those hazards are.
Rep. Phillips mentioned House Bill 133, which would allow natural gas and oil drilling and extraction on state lands, including state parks. The bill, opposed by the House minority caucus (Democrats), passed in the House last Wednesday and a similar bill is currently in the state Senate. The House bill would not allow drilling in state preserves.
In other states and increasingly in Ohio, natural gas companies have been offering residents up to several thousand dollars per acre for oil and gas leases. But some who have signed the leases have reported illness due to the chemicals getting into their water supplies. In isolated instances, property owners in other states have reported their tap water catching fire due to chemicals infiltrating their wells.
“If people take what the industry offers when they show up on their doorsteps, they’re not getting (a deal), even if (fracking) is something they want to do,” Phillips said of the leases. “They’re not getting as good a deal, and it’s allowing a lot more profit to the company and less to the landowners.”
Defenders of natural gas fracking have said the criticism is exaggerated or false, and that the chances of chemicals released in shale deposits infecting water supplies thousands of feet closer to the surface are small or none.
In fact, much of the concerns about fracking involve what happens with the wastewater and chemicals after it’s pumped back to the surface. Some municipalities in Pennsylvania, for example, have pumped the tainted water through their sewage systems with little or no treatment.
Democratic House members introduced amendments to H.B. 133, including one that would not allow drilling in state lands (and Lake Erie) where tourism is important. That amendment was tabled, Phillips said.
“(This means) you can frack in places where 5 percent or more of revenue comes from tourism,” she explained, noting that this includes Hocking County, where one out of seven jobs is based on tourism. The county’s Hocking Hills State Park and the Hocking State Forest are popular tourist destinations.
Kip Rondy, a farmer and landowner near Amesville, echoed Phillips concerns, cautioning attendees about the price that comes with leasing out their land.
“First we sold our timber, then we lost our land, washed down the river, and then sold our coal and then we sold our gas,” he said. “Are we any better for those schemes? Those things were not going to make us richer; did they make us rich? I argue not.”
Rondy said he first discovered the perils of fracking when he lived in West Virginia in the 1980s. In his town, he recalled, tap water would light on fire, as a result of underground natural gas extraction, as a result of chemicals getting into the water table.
He said he knew a man who died of stomach cancer two years after the drillers moved to town; it was from drinking the water, he claimed.
Panelist Greg Howard, an engineer, spoke firsthand about his personal experience with drinking well water in areas with natural gas drilling.
“I tasted gas well water. It was way worse than ocean water; the heavy metals really come through,” he said. “You have to wash your mouth (after).”
A few hours later, Howard recalled, he got sick.
“If you drink water with natural gas, it will make you throw up in a few hours,” he said. “At least that’s what it did for me.”
Mary Beth Lohse, conservation chair for the event’s sponsor, the Appalachian Group of the Sierra Club, said during the panel that she is most concerned about the high volume of toxic water that is used to drill and how deep the wells will be.
Gas companies use as much as 4 million gallons of water for one well, she said, but then claim that only 1 percent of it is petro-chemicals.
Doing the math, she added, “40,000 gallons of highly toxic stuff is a lot of stuff.”
Panelists urged local landowners to keep track of fracking-related legislation currently moving through the General Assembly, and to also engage an attorney if natural gas companies come calling with lease proposals.
May 25, 2011
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Glenn Turner, 917]817]3396
May 19, 2011 glenn@ripplestrategies.com
or Shayna Samuels, 718]541]4785
shayna@ripplestrategies.com
Shareholder Advocates Declare eFrackingf
Not Sustainable for Environment or Investment
Upcoming Shareholder Resolutions Examine Failures of Chevron, ExxonMobil,
and Ultra Petroleum to Disclose Environmental and Investment Risks of Fracking;
Urge Transparency and Accountability to Ensure Financial Sustainability
On Wednesday, May 25th resolutions filed by the shareholder advocacy group As You Sow will
be voted on by investors at the annual meetings of three U.S. energy corporations: Chevron,
ExxonMobil, and Ultra Petroleum. The resolutions ask for a report on the environmental and financial
risks of hydraulic fracturing (commonly referred to as gfrackingh) in natural gas drilling. Fracking is a
process of injecting a mixture of water, chemicals, and particles underground to create fractures
through which gas can flow for collection.
The shareholder votes will be taking place on May 25 at Chevron in San Ramon, California;
ExxonMobil in Dallas, Texas; and Ultra Petroleum in Calgary, Alberta. Resolution proponents filed
shareholder rebuttals with the SEC and produced investor fact sheets which are available for
ExxonMobil, Ultra Petroleum, and Chevron.
In the past year, thousands of documents obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) have revealed that the threats of fracking to the environment and public health are greater than
anticipated. The two critical issues.toxic chemicals used in fracking fluid and the disposal of
wastewater.have the most potential to limit expansion of this practice.
gHydraulic fracturing of each well requires moving millions of gallons of water, chemicals, and
wastewater,h says Michael Passoff, Senior Strategist with As You Sow. gFracking poses environmental
and health hazards at every step in its lifecycle and these impacts can result in very substantial business
risks as well. These shareholder resolutions are asking some of the leading energy corporations to report
on the real risks and costs of fracking.h
Shareholders are concerned that these potential environmental and health impacts will result in
regulatory, legal, financial, and reputational risks to the companies and want to know how the
companies intend to mitigate the risks associated with fracking.
In most cases, the EPA regulates chemicals used in underground injection under the Safe
Drinking Water Act. However, the 2005 Energy Policy Act stripped the EPA of its authority to monitor
hydraulic fracturing. It is the only industry to benefit from such an exemption. The New York Times
dubbed this the gHalliburton loophole,h alleging that former Vice President Dick Cheney shepherded this
provision through Congress. Dick Cheney was also formerly CEO of Halliburton, one of the companies
which pioneered fracking.
gFracking fluids typically contain known hazardous chemicals, including benzene and other
carcinogens, which can contaminate nearby water supplies,h says Sister Nora Nash of the Sisters of St.
Francis of Philadelphia, lead filer of the Chevron resolution. gTreatment plants in Pennsylvania have
accepted more than a billion gallons of toxic wastewater over the last few years and most of this went
to sewage plants that were not equipped to handle it.h The Chevron resolution was co]filed by As You
Sow, the Park Foundation, and 16 other members of the Interfaith Center on Corporate Responsibility.
gAs the use of hydraulic fracturing skyrockets, communities, regulators, and investors are
growing increasingly concerned about the environmental impacts of this process,h says Jon Jensen of
the Park Foundation in Ithaca, N.Y. and one of the co]filers of the ExxonMobil resolution. gShareholders
need assurance that companies are candidly disclosing these risks and are adopting best management
practices to minimize them.h The ExxonMobil resolution was co]filed by As You Sow and the Unitarian
Universalist Service Committee.
The shareholder resolutions contend that disclosure by Chevron, ExxonMobil, and Ultra
Petroleum are inadequate to enable investors to determine if the companies are taking the steps
necessary to reduce the financial risks associated with hydraulic fracturing operations. The same
resolution was co]filed by As You Sow and Trillium Asset Management at Anadarko Petroleum, but was
withdrawn when the company agreed to provide investors with the requested information.
gIn the absence of meaningful disclosure, investors have no way of fully assessing the risks and
rewards from investing in various companies in the energy sector, and are concerned about unpleasant
shocks to shareholder value,h says Larisa Ruoff of Green Century Capital Management. The Ultra
Petroleum resolution was co]filed by As You Sow and Green Century Capital Management.
# # #
As You Sow is a nonprofit organization that promotes corporate responsibility through shareholder
advocacy, coalition building, and innovative legal strategies. For more information visit
http://www.asyousow.org.