Archive for the ‘Pennsylvania Natural Gas Drilling’ Category

Gas Royalties

Although signing bonuses generate an enormous amount of interest because they are guaranteed income, royalties can be significantly higher. A royalty is a share of a well’s income. The customary royalty rate is 12.5 percent of the value of gas produced by a well. Higher royalty rates are sometimes paid by aggressive buyers for highly desirable properties.

The royalties paid to eligible property owners from a well yielding over one million cubic feet of natural gas per day can be hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.

If the Marcellus Shale holds up to the optimistic expectations of some natural gas experts, Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York and West Virginia could temporarily have an enormous boost in income that might be sustained for a few decades.
Copyright: Geology.com

Lawmaker delivers rebuttal

Elected official who held hearing in area last week on natural gas drilling says he was responding to pro-energy group attack.

By Steve Mocarskysmocarsky@timesleader.com
Staff Writer

A state representative says he was unfairly attacked in a press release by a pro-energy group after holding a public hearing in the Back Mountain last week.

State Rep. Camille “Bud” George, majority chair of the House Environmental Resources and Energy Committee, issued a rebuttal Friday, saying that “money and misinformation are the hallmarks of a gas industry attack titled, ‘Rep. George’s Fact-Free Fact-Finding Mission.’”

Energy In Depth sent the press release to media outlets on Thursday, a day after George convened a committee hearing at 1 p.m. in the Lehman Township Municipal Building to hear testimony on the impact of Marcellus Shale drilling and proposed legislation that would put more environmental safeguards in place.

State Rep. Phyllis Mundy, D-Kingston, invited George to have a hearing in her district, where EnCana Gas & Oil USA plans to drill the first natural gas exploratory well in Luzerne County in May or June. The well will be drilled in Lehman Township.

Area residents and lawmakers are concerned for many reasons, including the fact that the drill site would be less than two miles from the Huntsville and Ceaseville reservoirs, which supply drinking water to nearly 100,000 area residents.

Energy In Depth’s press release classified the hearing as a “pep rally staged by anti-energy activists and like-minded public officials in Northeast Pennsylvania.”

“Characterized as a ‘field hearing’ by … George, who held the event as far away as he could from his home in Clearfield County, the forum included representatives from the Sierra Club and Clean Water Action league, as well as testimony from a local podiatrist and someone describing himself as a ‘naturalopathic’ physician. The only thing missing? Anyone in possession of real, genuine facts related to responsible gas exploration in the Commonwealth,” the release stated.

In response, George said the most troubling aspect of “the attack by Energy In Depth, whose members include the Pennsylvania Independent Oil and Gas Association, is its slur of concerned lawmakers and citizens of Northeastern Pennsylvania as anti-energy activists.”

George noted that the committee had a hearing on Feb. 18 in Clearfield County, where the president of the Marcellus Shale Coalition and executives from some of the leading gas companies in Pennsylvania, including Range Resources and Chesapeake Energy, testified. He also participated two weeks ago in a House Democratic Policy Committee hearing in Ebensburg that included testimony from Chief Oil & Gas and Chesapeake. Ebensburg is in the Altoona area.

“The industry has not been an unwanted stranger at hearings,” George said.

Energy In Depth’s press release then listed quotes – pulled from a story in The Times Leader – of people who testified and rebutted them with quotes from gas industry representatives, a state Department of Environmental Protection fact sheet and Gov. Ed Rendell.

Energy In Depth pointed to testimony from Mundy in which she said she supports House Bill 2213 “which would among other things … require full disclosure of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing.”

The organization then pointed to a DEP fact sheet which states that drilling companies “must disclose the names of all chemicals to be used and stored at a drilling site … that must be submitted to DEP as part of the permit application process. These plans contain copies of material safety data sheets for all chemicals … This information is on file with DEP and available to landowners, local governments and emergency responders.”

But George said that “full disclosure of the chemicals – not just the trade names – and how they are used is not (now) required.”

“The precise chemical identities and concentrations and how and when they are employed can be crucial to emergency responders and remediation efforts after spills, and is at the crux of efforts to remove the infamous ‘Halliburton Loophole’ that exempts the industry from oversight by the Environmental Protection Agency,” George said.

“The gas industry can bloat campaign coffers with money, buy discredited and ridiculed studies and poison the debate by taking statements out of context. However, its ‘best management practices’ should never be taken at face value to be the best for Pennsylvania,” George said.

Steve Mocarsky, a Times leader staff writer, may be reached at 970-7311.

Copyright: Times Leader

Energy co. says no to natural gas drilling at Moon Lake

County officials had been negotiating with EnCana Oil & Gas USA Inc. of Denver.

By Steve Mocarskysmocarsky@timesleader.com
Staff Writer

An energy company that plans to drill for natural gas in the Back Mountain has advised Luzerne County officials that the company will not pursue a lease for natural gas drilling at Moon Lake Park.

County officials had been negotiating with EnCana Oil & Gas USA Inc. of Denver to drill at the park and tap lake water needed to help fracture rock to release gas.

“The county informed us of their interest in entering into a lease for the development of natural gas resources on the Moon Lake property,” EnCana spokeswoman Wendy Weidenbeck said in an e-mail.

Weidenbeck said that as with any business opportunity, companies must evaluate multiple factors to help guide their decisions.

“We carefully considered the potential needs of our business and concerns over the development of natural gas resources on recreational property. After careful consideration, we have decided that we will not pursue a lease to drill for natural gas resources on the Moon Lake property,” she said.

Commissioner Chairwoman Maryanne Petrilla said she has been out of the office after knee surgery and had not yet been briefed on the issue.

Commissioner Thomas Cooney said he had not talked with EnCana officials and that Gibbons had alerted him to the news on Friday.

Cooney said other energy companies might be interested in exploration at the county-owned park and the development of a request for proposals was not out of the question. However, “there has been no conversation leading that way right now,” he said.

Cooney said he did not know how far along talks about selling water from the lake at Moon Lake Park have come. But if the county were to negotiate the sale of water, there would have to be appraisals and bidding and permits would have to be secured, he said.

The park’s 48-acre, spring-fed lake holds millions of gallons of water and is 13.5 feet in its deepest spot, county officials have said. All park water drainage pipes also feed into the lake.

Cooney said he thinks the reaction of the Sierra Club to drilling at Moon Lake probably influenced EnCana’s decision.

An official with the Sierra Club’s Northeastern Pennsylvania chapter said in February that county commissioners didn’t have legal authority to allow natural gas drilling at the park, which is located in Plymouth Township.

Frank Muraca, who sits on the organization’s executive committee, had said much of the park land was purchased with state and federal funds in the 1960s through a program known as the Project 70 Land Acquisition and Borrowing Act.

Lands acquired through the act must be used for recreation, conservation and historical purposes unless approval is granted by the General Assembly, the governor and the state Department of Conservation and Natural Resources. Muraca had said he also found other legal and zoning stumbling blocks that would have to be met to allow drilling.

Muraca had initially presented the information to Commissioner Stephen A. Urban, who has said he couldn’t comment on Muraca’s assertions until he did his own research. He has said he is supportive of “responsible” drilling on county property to generate needed revenue.

Urban did not return a message seeking comment for this story.

The park officially closed Jan. 28 because commissioners stripped funding for staff and other expenses from the 2010 budget, saying that they could not justify non-essential expenses with a property tax increase.

Petrilla has said she is willing to consider any offer to generate revenue, as long as the park’s recreational atmosphere is not compromised. She also has said she would not support any offers that would drain or pollute the lake.

Steve Mocarsky, a Times Leader staff writer, may be reached at 970-7311.

Copyright: Times Leader

Gas Leases & Signing Bonuses

Many landowners are being approached with offers to lease their land. The size of the signing bonuses that have been paid in transactions between informed buyers and informed sellers is directly related to two factors: 1) the level of uncertainty in the mind of the buyer, and 2) the number of other buyers competing to make the purchase. These factors have changed significantly in a very short time.

As recently as 2005 there was very little interest in leasing properties for Marcellus Shale gas production. The Marcellus was not considered to be an important gas resource and a technology for tapping it had not been demonstrated. At that time the level of uncertainty in the minds of the buyers was very high and the signing bonuses were a few dollars per acre.

When the potential of the Marcellus was first suspected in 2006 a small number of speculators began leasing land – paying risky signing bonuses that were sometimes as high as $100 per acre. In late 2007 signing bonuses of a few hundred dollars per acre were common. Then, as the technology was demonstrated and publicized signing bonuses began to rise rapidly. By early 2008 several wells with strong production rates were drilled, numerous investors began leasing and the signing bonuses rose from a few hundred dollars per acre up to over $2000 per acre for the most desirable properties.

If the results of current and future drilling activity do not match the expectations of companies paying for leases the amounts that they are willing to pay could drop rapidly.

Copyright: Geology.com

Shale compromise is goal of Sestak

By Steve Mocarskysmocarsky@timesleader.com
Staff Writer

As energy companies and lease holders extol the benefits and safety of natural gas drilling in the state, and environmentalists and people who live near drilling operations point to chemical spills, water pollution and noise, a congressman last week called for an effort from opposing sides in the energy debate to work together for compromise.

U.S. Rep. Joe Sestak, D-Delaware County, who is running for the U.S. Senate, came to The Peace and Justice Center in Wilkes-Barre on Wednesday to host a forum on Marcellus Shale development.

Panelists included James Shallenberger, a Pennsylvania-licensed geologist and senior project manager at consulting firm Princeton Hydro who spoke on behalf of the gas drilling industry; David T. Messersmith, an extension educator with Penn State Cooperative Extension in Wayne County who is an expert on Marcellus Shale; and Dr. Thomas Jiunta, a Lehman Township resident with a podiatry practice in Kingston who founded Luzerne County Citizens for Clean Water.

“There was a lot of passion in that room. … One side is saying one thing, one side is saying another. I want to be a person who brings people together for a principal compromise, not a compromise of principles,” Sestak said last week in a phone interview.

“I personally believe this is a great economic opportunity for our state, particularly if we are able to benefit by a proper excise tax and if we put the proper protections in place,” Sestak said.

Sestak also said a priority should be enabling community and area colleges to train people for gas industry jobs to ensure Pennsylvanians are getting jobs associated with the drilling industry, rather than leaving energy companies with no choice but to hire experienced people from out-of-state.

Sestak said he learned much about the economic benefits as well as the environmental problems associated with natural gas exploration when he visited several counties in which Marcellus Shale drilling has been ongoing while he was on the campaign trail.

He noted that former Sen. Rick Santorum and Sen. Arlen Specter voted for “the Halliburton Loophole,” which exempts the gas and oil industry from complying with the Safe Water Drinking Act. And he said he supports the “FRAC Act” – Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act, which would amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to include the gas and oil industry.

Steve Mocarsky, a Times leader staff writer, may be reached at 970-7311.

Copyright: Times Leader

What Impact Can the Horizontial Fracturing techniques of Marcells Shale Have on the Economy?

The presence of an enormous volume of potentially recoverable gas in the eastern United States has a great economic significance. This will be some of the closest natural gas to the high population areas of New Jersey, New York and New England. This transportation advantage will give Marcellus gas a distinct advantage in the marketplace.

Gas produced from the shallower, western portion of the Marcellus extent might be transported to cities in the central part of the United States. It should have a positive impact on the stability of natural gas supply of the surrounding region for at least several years if the resource estimate quoted above proves accurate.
Copyright: Geology.com

How Much Gas can be Produced Using these Techniques?

Before 2000, many successful natural gas wells had been completed in the Marcellus. The yields of these wells were often unimpressive upon completion. However, many of these older wells in the Marcellus have a sustained production that decreases slowly over time. Many of them continued to produce gas for decades. A patient investor might make a profit from these low yield wells with slowly declining production rates.

For new wells drilled with the new horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing technologies the initial production can be much higher than what was seen in the old wells. Early production rates from some of the new wells has been over one million cubic feet of natural gas per day. The technology is so new that long term production data is not available. As with most gas wells, production rates will decline over time, however, a second hydraulic fracturing treatment could restimulate production.
Copyright: Geology.com

State: Energy firm contaminated well, spring

Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. denies the allegation and said it has evidence to back its position.

By Steve Mocarskysmocarsky@timesleader.com
Staff Writer

DIMOCK TWP. – The state is alleging an energy company is responsible for contamination of a water well, a spring and wetlands after a black fluid was discovered recently near a Marcellus Shale drilling site in Susquehanna County.

The company denies responsibility.

The state Department of Environmental Protection on Thursday sent a notice informing Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. that violations of the state Clean Streams Law, the Oil & Gas Act and the Solid Waste Management Act were documented on site visits near the A&M Hibbard well pad on March 22-24.

The visits were the result of a phone report from Cabot of the presence of a black fluid in a ditch near the site on March 21.

“The investigation revealed that black fluid originating on the … drill pad was not properly contained in a pit or tank (and that the fluid) entered a hand dug well and a spring near the location, as well as a wetland downgradient of the spring,” the notice states.

“We believe it was waste from their drill pit,” DEP spokesman Dan Spadoni said Thursday.

He said he doesn’t think anyone was using the spring for drinking water, and the well was used only as “a back-up” water supply by the property owner.

Cabot has 10 days to provide the cause(s) of the incident, when the violations were or will be corrected, the steps taken to prevent their recurrence and documentation of clean-up activities.

DEP also asked Cabot to investigate the condition of the drill pit and liner and “strongly recommends that the liner and (drill) cuttings be removed from the pit and properly disposed of prior to restoration of the site.” The department also requested notification after all cuttings and fluid are removed from the pit so DEP can inspect the liner.

Cabot spokesman Ken Komoroski said the company has not confirmed the source of the fluid, but has confirmed that “Cabot activities are not the source.”

Komoroski said Cabot checked with its “independent third-party consultant,” which concluded that “the observance of black water in the well did not and could not have occurred as a result of Cabot activities” based on “observation and extensive analytical testing.” He said the well and spring contained “total and fecal coliform, which is indicative of human or animal waste” and that “the materials that exist in the well in high concentrations don’t exist on Cabot locations.”

Asked if any of the materials Cabot uses were found in the well, Komoroski said the company does not yet have all analytical results from lab tests and a final report is still in draft form. DEP continues to investigate the incident and Cabot will continue to cooperate and support the department’s efforts, he said.

The Clean Streams Law and Solid Waste Management Act provide for civil penalties and criminal fines ranging from a maximum of $10,000 per day to a maximum of $25,000 per day for each violation. Each day of continued violation constitutes a separate offense.

Copyright: Times Leader

Hydrofracing a Natural Gas Well

Lawmakers dig in to drilling concerns

House committee members hear testimony on impact of gas drilling, proposed environmental safeguards.

By Steve Mocarskysmocarsky@timesleader.com
Staff Writer

KINGSTON TWP. – Members of the state House of Representatives Environmental Resources and Energy Committee came to the Back Mountain on Wednesday to hear testimony on the impact of Marcellus Shale drilling and proposed legislation that would put additional environmental safeguards in place.

Testifying were representatives of two environmental groups, a local physician active in environmental issues and a resident of Dimock Township, Susquehanna County, where the state Department of Environmental Protection ordered a gas company to provide drinking water to residents after their wells were contaminated by methane.

State Rep. Camille “Bud” George, committee majority chairman, said the committee convened at the township municipal building at the invitation of state Rep. Phyllis Mundy, D-Kingston.

Mundy said she requested the hearing because she and many of her constituents “have serious concerns about the potential impact of Marcellus Shale drilling on our streams, our land and especially our drinking water,” noting that a proposed well site is less than two miles from the Huntsville and Ceasetown reservoirs.

Noting the contamination of drinking water in Dimock Township and a recent drilling-related mud spill in Clinton County, Mundy said there was “still time to put safeguards in place to protect the environment and the public health from the negative impacts” of gas drilling.

“That is why I strongly support Chairman George’s House Bill 2213, the Land and Water Protection Act, which would, among other things, require state inspections of well sites during each drilling phase and require full disclosure of the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing,” she said.

The act would also:

• Extend from 1,000 feet to 2,500 feet the presumed liability of a gas well polluting a water supply.

• Update bonding requirements to cover the costs of decommissioning a well from a $2,500 bond to a $150,000 bond for a Marcellus Shale well and to a $12,000 bond for all other wells.

• Reaffirm that local government may regulate aspects of drilling within traditional powers, such as hours of operation.

Jeff Schmidt, Sierra Club state chapter director, said the club supports the bill and suggested adding some provisions:

• Require a drilling permit applicant to publish in a local newspaper and in the Pennsylvania Bulletin that a permit application was submitted to DEP.

• Require that erosion and sediment control and storm water discharge plans for drill sites be as stringent as requirements for all other earth disturbance activities, and require DEP to offer county conservation districts the opportunity to review those plans and fund the work.

Brady Russell, Eastern Pennsylvania director for Clean Water Action, said the gas industry will “cut corners” if not properly supervised. He made several recommendations, including requiring an inspector – or eco-cop – on each drill site to make sure drillers follow approved plans.

He also suggested requiring drillers to pay for pre- and post-drilling testing of nearby water sources.

Dr. Thomas Jiunta, a podiatrist from Lehman Township, where issuance of a drilling permit is expected to be approved next week, said that since he has been researching Marcellus Shale exploration, he has “gotten a lot of lip service from senators and representatives about how we need to do it right. Before I start, I just want to say that maybe, maybe – and this is the first time I’ve said this word – we need a moratorium to stop it until we get it right.”

Audience members burst into applause and cheers at Jiunta’s suggestion.

After sharing his concerns about an inadequate number of treatment plants capable of removing hazardous chemicals from water used in hydraulic fracturing and risks associated with storing those chemicals underground, Jiunta made several suggestions for the bill.

One is adding a requirement that recovered waste water from the fracturing process be stored in sealed tanks rather than in surface pits that have liners that he said could tear and overflow with heavy rain.

Dimock Township resident Victoria Switzer testified first that a gas company “landman” talked her and her “misinformed, uninformed and na�ve” family into leasing their land for $25 an acre and a 12.5-percent royalty minus transportation cost.

“We now sit in the middle of 63 natural gas wells. In spite of what has gone terribly wrong here, the 2010 plan calls for a doubling of their efforts,” Switzer said.

She said gas drilling has resulted in diminished or contaminated drinking water supplies, destruction of roads and bridges, increased traffic beyond road capacity; decreased air quality, loss of aesthetics and more.

Mundy said she can’t imagine what Switzer is going through.

“How do you like less government – fewer DEP employees, lower taxes, no severance tax? This is what we’ve got; let’s fix it,” Mundy said.

State Rep. Tim Seip, D-Pottsville, said a severance tax on gas extraction is necessary to fund more inspectors and conservation district work. He said the public should lobby their state senators to adopt the bill when it comes before them.

Asked if he thought a moratorium was possible in Pennsylvania, George said he thought, “It’s really going to help Pennsylvania if every place where there’s drilling we get this type of attention.”

Copyright: Times Leader