Drillers sue to operate in Allegheny National Forest
July 19, 2011
Insiders Sound an Alarm Amid a Natural Gas Rush – NYTimes.com
June 26, 2011 1 Comment
Insiders Sound an Alarm Amid a Natural Gas Rush – NYTimes.com.
|
|||||||||||||||
Cornell Expert Says Hydrofacking Already Affecting New York State
June 24, 2011
(((THIS INFORMATION DISTRIBUTED ON BEHALF OF THE TOMPKINS COUNTY COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS)))
(Released June 23, 2011 at 8:03 PM)
Cornell Expert Says Hydrofacking Already Affecting New York State
Reflecting on lessons learned and questions yet to be answered about the hydrofracking and the economy, a Cornell expert today told members of the Tompkins County Council of Governments (TCCOG) that New York State is already being affected by such shale gas drilling, even though wells are not yet permitted here.
Economic Geographer Susan Christopherson, of Cornell’s Department of City and Regional Planning, has been studying the economic effects of hydrofracking, looking at the experience in nearby Pennsylvania and effects in New York. Since there is “no border fence between New York and Pennsylvania,” she said, drilling produces a regional industrial effect, and cautioned there will be “important impacts to Tompkins County”—from such aspects as heavy truck traffic, water resources, and waste disposal— even if a single well is not drilled here. She maintained State officials are showing “willful ignorance and disinterest” in failing to address those issues and, because of that, the state is unprepared.
Based on her own research and review of other studies, Christopherson reported findings including the following:
- The Elmira area is already feeling pressure on its housing stock and is experiencing some increase in sales tax revenue.
- In Pennsylvania, jobs are being created, but impact is inflated since measures are based on new hires, not permanent jobs, with only 70% going to in-state residents. She predicted employment growth here would be “modest,” with several hundred of the best jobs created for functions such as well monitoring when drilling is in process, but a significant decline once it’s completed.
- Other industries will be affected, with tourism and the dairy industry most affected in PA.
Among questions that remain to be answered, according to Christopherson:
- How long the drilling phase will last. Where, when, and how many wells are drilled, she said, will be affected by natural gas prices, currently too low to make much drilling economically viable—the more wells that are drilled, and the faster they’re drilled, the greater the impact.
- How the federal government’s recent approval of export of natural gas will affect gas prices.
- Information on who owns land currently in PA and where proceeds from royalty payments are spent.
Christopherson said a New York State severance tax could help support costs related to shale gas drilling, and that such taxes exist in most states where such extraction takes place. She said the level of such taxes varies widely state-to-state, as does the extent to which that tax is distributed to municipalities. She assessed the 3% severance tax being proposed by some in New York State, however, as inadequate to meet the need.
Media contact: TCCOG Co-Chair: Ithaca Town Supervisor Herb Engman, 607-273-1721.
——
Marcia E. Lynch
Public Information Officer
Tompkins County
125 E. Court Street
Ithaca, NY 14850
Tel: 607-274-5555/Fax: 607-274-5558
Ark. considers ban on injection wells (Wednesday, June 22, 2011)
June 22, 2011
Greenwire <http://www.greenwire.com>
An E&E Publishing Service
OIL AND GAS: Ark. considers ban on injection wells (Wednesday, June 22, 2011)
State regulators recommended yesterday that the Arkansas Oil and Gas Commission implement a permanent ban on deep wells that are used to dispose of natural gas drilling fluids in an area north of Little Rock that has seen a swarm of recent earthquakes.
Two wells were shut down in February under an agreement between the well owners and the commission. Two others will have to stop operating if the commission approves the regulation at a July 26 hearing.
The ban would not stop natural gas drilling in central Arkansas’ Fayetteville Shale. Hydraulic fracturing can continue, but the millions of gallons of fracking fluid used in the 1,150-square-mile region would have to be trucked to injection wells elsewhere in Arkansas, or in Oklahoma or Texas, Commission Deputy Director Shane Khoury said.
Khoury said the commission worked with the Arkansas Geological Survey and the Center for Earthquake Research and Information at the University of Arkansas, Little Rock, before making the recommendation.
“This is similar to pending litigation — I can’t go into a lot of details. But based on our analysis … this is the correct and warranted regulatory response,” Khoury said.
Before the two wells stopped operating this spring, there were 85 earthquakes with a magnitude 2.5 or higher. Since then, there have been fewer quakes — 20 in the 18 days following the shutdown, according to the state Geological Survey.
Mickey Thompson, a partner in Clarita Operating LLC of Little Rock, said yesterday that earthquake swarms are a natural occurrence and that there is no reason to support the ban.
“We feel like the decision has been made and that we’ve been denied our due process,” said Thompson, whose oil and gas service company operates a well in the zone under the proposed ban. “We were believing there was actually going to be a scientific study and a scientific presentation, not a hunt for a political scapegoat.”
The commission will also recommend rules that would require setbacks from fault zones in other areas of the state, spacing between disposal wells, and the installation of seismic instruments near new or existing injection wells in the Fayetteville Shale region (Chuck Bartels, AP/FuelFix <http://fuelfix.com/blog/2011/06/22/arkansas-regulators-seek-ban-on-injection-wells-in-fayetteville-shale/> , June 22). — AS
Industrialization of Agricultural Land From the Marcellus to South Africa June 27, Ithaca 7:30PM
June 21, 2011
Industrialization of Agricultural Land
From the Marcellus to South Africa
Monday, June 27, 7:30 – 9:30 pm
At the Women’s Community Building
100 W. Seneca Street
Ithaca, NY
SPEAKERS from South Africa, fighting a proposal by Shell Oil to extract gas in their agricultural homeland:
– Doug Stern has been farming and ranching for the past 35 years on a 4th generation family farm
– Lukie Strydom has been farming and rancing for 10 years
SPEAKERS from the Finger Lakes, NY:
– Art Hunt, co-owner of Hunt Country Vineyards, producer of an excellent variety of Finger Lakes wines
– Christine Applegate, organic grower and member of Gas Drilling Awareness for Cortland County
Everyone is welcome – free and open to all. Refreshments will be served.
Sponsored by: Shaleshock, Sustainable Tompkins, and Social Ventures, Inc.
………………………………………………………………………
Background Information
A group of folks from South Africa (SA), on a 2-week fact finding tour, are interested to hear NY citizen views on the gas drilling technique known as “fracking”. The South African group is made up of two farmers and a news media person.
The panelists are Doug Stern, a self described 62 year farmer/rancher who has been actively raising cattle for the last 35 years in a region known as the Karoo. Four generations of Sterns have farmed his land. The second farmer is Lukie Strydom, a younger farmer; he has been farming/ranching with livestock for the past 10 years. He has also worked in the corporate world as a group general manager for a Global Retail Company. Freelance journalist, Jolynn Minnaar is the expected third member of the visiting SA delegation.
The SA moratorium is in response to planned shale deposit drilling by multinational oil giant, Shell. Shell has submitted a request to drill in an area of South Africa that is home to hundreds of farmers who are concerned about the safety of hydofracking, a drilling process that requires huge amounts of water mixed with thousands of gallons of chemicals. The chemically treated water is a threat to livestock, food production and human health.
The Shell proposal could possibly affect a 95,000 square kilometer area known as the Karoo, a semi arid part of SA. With small amounts of water available within the region, gas drilling water usage would compete with agricultural use.
The question of whether fracking and farming are compatible is seen by growing numbers of researchers to have tremendous importance for the future of NY agriculture. This importance lies in ensuring that the food growing areas of NY remain adequately protected.
NY ers are not alone in trying to understand the connections between fracking and safe food production. South Africa has recently enacted a nationwide Moratorium on fracking. The government cited potentials for water pollution and other factors that could threaten food production as reasons for the moratorium.
Press Contact: Hilary Acton, 257-4133
Bradford Co. PA Map of Compromised Water & Gas Wells
June 17, 2011 1 Comment
I created an earlier draft of this map in Dec ’10 because when I called the DEP Williamsport office, they said they did not keep systematic records of this data; indeed, at the time (the regs have since been changed, in part due to the story Laura Legere of Scranton TimesTrib did when I explained the situation to her), the gas companies did not even have to report if they could resolve the complaint privately with the landowner. So, as of this date, none of the data is from the DEP.
I suspect that there are many more than I have here whose silence has been bought, who don’t know, or who don’t want to know, in addition to the ones I just don’t yet know about but are known to some, and I would like to ask everyone in Bradford County to help me keep this map as accurate and up-to-date as possible by writing to me at this address with any information they may have.
I will be updating the map approximately every two weeks.
Thank you,
Michael Lebron
NYSESS | DCS
Caroline Council Tables Resolution
June 17, 2011
The Marcellus Effect: Caroline Council Tables Resolution.
Caroline Board tables resolution to ‘ban the ban’
- Posted on 06.16.11
- Forums and Hearings, Video
- 0 Comments
Video by Cris McConkey. CC Attribution/Non-commercial. Playlist duration ~ 3-1/2 hrs: Rally; Privilege of the Floor and Reading of Resolutions; Presentations; Public Hearing; Vote on the resolutions. Downloads.
SUMMARY BY SANDY PODULKA
Brooktondale Community Center, June 14, 2011
Two hundred or more people attended a Caroline Town Board meeting about a resolution to prohibit the Town from taking any action to enact a ban on hydraulic fracturing. Two of the three proponents of this resolution (Toby McDonald and Pete Hoyt) have gas leases and a third (Linda Adams) is the head of the Tompkins County Landowners Coalition. Of the 40 people who spoke, 35 were against the ban and 5 were for it. Since the resolution was apparently in response to the news that local citizens had gathered more than 900 signatures on a petition asking the Town Board to ban high-volume hydraulic fracturing in the Town, many people stated their anger that the board was trying to stifle democracy. Many pointed out the conflict of interest issue, as well, and some asked board members with conflicts to recuse themselves from any vote on this issue. Another theme was the preservation of Caroline as a safe, tranquil community. People asked the Town Attorney, Guy Krogh, and Town Board not to put the avoidance of a lawsuit higher than protecting residents. Guy Krogh indicated that a ban might be possible if crafted carefully and thoughtfully after much analysis of state law. Most of the speakers did a very good job of voicing the concerns of Caroline residents who were dismayed that this resolution popped up on June 7. Local attorney David Slottje, of the Community Environmental Defense Council, spoke eloquently and passionately against the resolution. It was tabled at about 10:45 PM.
PRIVILEDGE OF THE FLOOR and READING OF RESOLUTIONS
Supervisor Barber opens Priviledge of the Floor; Comment on resolution before board in support of New York State Senata and Assembly bills S.3472 and A.3245 “home rule” 0m0s
Comment regarding statement made by town’s attorney at the April 12th board meeting in regard to Adams’ and Hoyt’s resolution. 2m36s
Response by Councillor Hoyt and reading of pertinent parts of the minutes which were not approved in a timely fashion to notify the public. 4m41s
Reading of resolution is support of 90-day public comment period after DEC promulgates new rules upon completion of its review of the SGEIS follwed by discussion and vote. 8m8s
Introductory remarks regarding Public Hearing 12m24s
Reading of resoution “Clarifying the town’s role regarding gas development based on current Environmental Conservation Law” 18m02s
Reading of Resolution in support of A.3245 / S.3472 19m15s
PRESENTATIONS
Linda Adams, Town Councillor 0m0s
Bill Podulka, Resident and Chair, Residents Opposed to Unsafe Shale-Gas Extraction (ROUSE) 3m51s
David Slottje, Attorney with Community Environmental Defense Council 12m49s
Guy Krogh, Attorney for Town of Caroline 26m18s PUBLIC COMMENT
1-9 Public addresses Caroline Town Board
1 Pat Brhel 1m47s
2 Sandy Podulka 4m25s
3 Jim Raponi 7m40s
4 Ann Boehm 9m52s
5 Bendidt Pauli 13m44s
6 Anna Gibson 18m31s
7 Elisa Evett 19m56s
7a Councillor Linda Adams 23m57s
8 Karen L. Allaben 26m06s
9 Rita Rosenberg 28m20s
10-18 Public addresses Caroline Town Board
10 Kim Knight 0m0s
11 Irene Weiser 2m12s
12 Todd Schmit 7m02s
13 Tony Tavelli 9m32s
14 Bruce Murray 14m33s
15 Rebecca Dewit 17m05s
16 Michele Brown 20m42s
17 David Kauber 22m20s representing Steve Kress & Elissa Wolfson
18 Nelly Farnum, former Town Councillor 25m36s
19-27 Public addesses Caroline Town Board
19 Jonathan Comstock 0m0s
20 Bert Cooley 3m37s
21 Mary Alyce Kabler 10m52s
22 Leanne Avery 14m25s
23 James Burlitch 17m46s
24 Elliot Swarthout 20m01s
25 John Reed 21m30s
26 Frank Verret 22m14s
27 John Confer 26m16s
28-39 Public addresses Caroline Board
28 Sue PK 0m0s incomplete
29 Milt Taam 1m51s
30 Cyrus Umrigar 5m12s
31 Glen Robertson 9m13s
32 Picilla Timberlake 10m28s
33 Aaron Snow 13m12s
34 Bob Andeson 14m55s incomplete
35 Barbara Lynch 15m34s
36 Ellen Harrison 16m57s
37 Phillip Shapiro 20m20s
38 Bill Crispell 22m31s
39 Beth Hollier 25m09s
Public Discussion on Resolutions and Vote by Board duration: 18m57s
Six new bills introduced by Assemblywoman Lifton 6/15/2011
June 16, 2011
Six Bills Submitted by Lifton to NYS Assembly on 6/15/2011
1. Require filing within 30 days
2. Require lease filing in entirety
3. Plain language phrases
4. Notice when leases are assigned
5. Establish clearinghouse
6. Require signatures of both parties
1. TITLE OF BILL: Requires oil, gas or mineral land lease to be recorded within thirty days of execution.
PURPOSE: To amend the real property law, in relation to requiring oil, gas or mineral land leases to be recorded within thirty days of execution.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS: The bill amends section 291 of the real property law, requiring that any conveyance of real property within New York State which is an oil, gas, or mineral land lease shall be recorded within thirty days from execution of the lease.
EXISTING LAW: Section 291 of the real property law.
JUSTIFICATION: Faced with increasing amounts of real estate property in New York that is subject to an oil, gas or mineral land lease, the housing and mortgage markets depend more than ever on timely and accurate information about lease agreements. Proper assessment and valuation of property is integral to the mortgage lending process, and for selling one’s home. However, reports from assessors and real estate agents indicate that gas companies which hold a lease interest have been delaying in recording their lease agreements with the relevant county clerk’s offices. Often the delays in filing have been upwards of six months to a year after execution of an agreement. Lack of information about a parcel’s lease terms, and the possibility of a lease on neighboring properties, have already been gravely impacting the mortgage and real estate markets. Establishing a thirty day requirement for recording of such lease agreements provides ample time for a leaseholder to comply without arbitrarily and capriciously impacting the housing market.
2. TITLE OF BILL: Relates to excluding oil, gas or mineral land leases from leases that may be recorded by memorandum of lease.
PURPOSE: To amend the real property law, in relation to excluding oil, land or mineral land leases from leases that may be recorded by memorandum of lease.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS: The bill excludes oil, gas, and mineral leases from the option to record a memorandum of lease at a county clerk’s office, requiring that a lease, in its entirety, be filed and available for public review.
EXISTING LAW: Section 291-c of the real property law.
JUSTIFICATION: Often, after executing an oil, gas, or mineral lease in New York State, the lessee will record a “memorandum of lease” with the relevant county clerk’s office. Such a memorandum provides only the bare minimum of information for public review about each specific lease agreement. Accordingly, the real estate industry in counties that have many oil and gas leases, which have increased exponentially over the past several years due to the possibility of shale gas extraction in the Marcellus play, has been greatly affected. Residential property valuation can be heavily dependent upon the specific terms of an oil, gas, or mineral lease. Notably, the duration of a lease, any easements or surface rights granted to a lessee, among other concerns, can directly impact a property’s value. Also, the existence of a lease on one’s land, or even on neighboring property given the lending institutions’ setback requirements, can impair the viability of a home to be eligible for title insurance or a mortgage. This is critical information for valuation of real property; therefore, the exact terms of a lease must be available to both assessors and lending institutions.
3. TITLE OF BILL: Requires a certain statement to be included in all oil, gas or mineral leases.
PURPOSE: To amend the general obligations law, in relation to requiring a certain statement to be included in all oil, gas or mineral leases.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS: The bill adds subdivision 5-a to section 5-333 of the general obligations law, requiring that a plain language phrase explaining the possible risks to property value and to the ability to obtain a mortgage on a home with an oil or gas lease appear in all oil and gas leases executed on or after January 1, 2012.
EXISTING LAW: Section 5-333 of the general obligations law.
JUSTIFICATION: New York State is experiencing exponential growth in the amount of land that is leased for oil, gas or mineral extraction, due to the possibility of hydrofracking in the Marcellus Shale play. An issue that has recently come to light, with the increasing frequency of leases across upstate NY, is the potential impact of a lease upon one’s property value and upon the ability to obtain a mortgage. Most landowners are unaware at the time they sign a lease that long-term impacts to their property interests could result. This legislation seeks to provide consumer protection for landowners, providing notice of possible adverse impacts.
4. TITLE OF BILL: Relates to notice requirements for assigning oil, gas or mineral land leases.
PURPOSE: To amend the general obligations law, in relation to notice requirements for assigning oil, gas or mineral land leases.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS: The bill amends general obligations law, requiring that after January 1st 2012, the lessee or assignee must provide written notice to the landowner of any such assignment, and provide the names and addresses of such assignees to the current landowner.
EXISTING LAW: Subdivisions 5 and 6 of section 5-333 of the general obligations law.
5. TITLE OF BILL: Relates to establishing an oil, gas or mineral land leases clearinghouse.
PURPOSE: To amend the executive law and the real property law, in relation to establishing an oil, gas or mineral land leases clearinghouse.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS: The bill amends executive and real property law in relation to establishing an oil, gas or mineral land leases clearinghouse within the Department of State, to allow for the collection and maintenance of all such leases in physical and/or electronic form.
EXISTING LAW: Section 291-cc of the real property law; section 100-a of the executive law.
JUSTIFICATION: New York State is experiencing exponential growth in the amount of land that is leased for oil, gas or mineral extraction, due to the possibility of hydrofracking in the Marcellus Shale play. As the number and density of leases increase, the complexity of navigating the implications for real estate assessment, and the effect upon the ability of a landowner to obtain a mortgage, also becomes much more difficult to gauge. Knowing what properties have leases, the specific terms of a lease, and whether New York citizens are able to buy and sell homes in our state is of compelling state and integral to the establishment of a state regulatory program for oil, gas and mineral extraction. Since the state takes the position that it is the sole regulator of natural resource extraction industries they ought to have clear and uniform records with regard to the mortgage lending industy, local assessments, and New Yorkers’ property value.
6. TITLE OF BILL: Requires signatures of both parties to record a modification, extension or renewal of an oil, gas or mineral land lease.
PURPOSE: To amend the real property law, in relation to requiring signatures of both parties to a lease to record a modification, extension or renewal of an oil, gas or mineral land lease.
SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS: The bill adds a new provision to real property law in relation to the recording of a modification, extension or renewal of an oil, gas, or mineral lease, requiring that such modification, extension or renewal be duly acknowledged by both parties to a lease.
EXISTING LAW: Section 291-cc of the real property law.
JUSTIFICATION: County clerks across New York State have increasingly, over the past year or so, been presented with oil, gas and mineral lease extensions which bear only the signature of a representative of the lessee company which has acquired a mineral interest. The unilateral extensions are delivered by couriers who operate on behalf of the lessee company who report that the landowners at issue have been notified of their lease extension. However, without a duly-acknowledged signature of both parties to a lease, there is no way for a county clerk to verify that a landowner has knowledge of the extension. In fact, landowners have reported that they were unaware of lease extension on their property. This legislation will clarify that a valid lease extension or modification must require the signature of both parties.
GDACC 
