Judge denies gas driller’s motion to dismiss Dimock lawsuit
http://citizensvoice.com/news/drilling/judge-denies-gas-driller-s-motion-to-dismiss-dimock-lawsuit-1.1070624
Judge denies gas driller’s motion to dismiss Dimock lawsuit
By Laura Legere (Staff Writer)
Published: November 30, 2010
A federal judge has denied a motion by Cabot Oil and Gas Corp. to dismiss a case brought by Dimock Township residents who claim their health and property have been harmed by the company’s natural gas drilling activities.
Cabot sought to have a judge throw out the case brought by 63 residents of the Susquehanna County township, arguing the families failed to establish a legal basis for the suit against the Texas-based driller.
But in an order issued Nov. 15, U.S. District Court Judge John E. Jones III found there is reason to allow the case to go forward on all but part of one count. He also refused Cabot’s request to strike several allegations from the families’ complaint.
In the suit, filed in November 2009, the families claim Cabot’s gas drilling activities allowed methane and other toxins to migrate onto their land and into their drinking water, causing them illness, property damage, fear of future sickness and emotional distress.
Of particular interest in the judge’s order was his decision not to throw out the families’ claim that Cabot is legally responsible for the alleged harm based on the principle of strict liability. The principle holds that some activities are so dangerous that those conducting them are responsible for any damage they cause regardless of the precautions they take to prevent it.
Pennsylvania courts have not directly addressed whether gas drilling is an “abnormally dangerous” activity that fits the strict liability standard. In its motion to dismiss, Cabot argued that state courts have determined that similar activities, such as operating petroleum pipelines or underground storage tanks at gas stations, are not abnormally dangerous.
In his order, Jones said it is too early in the case to extend the standard for pipelines and storage tanks to gas drilling.
“We believe it improvident to automatically extend this reasoning to drilling activities without more thorough consideration,” he wrote, adding that Cabot can raise the issue at a later point when more facts have been presented in the case.
Ross H. Pifer, a professor at Penn State University’s Dickinson School of Law who follows Marcellus Shale-related laws and litigation, said the judge’s choice to put off a decision on the strict liability question means that gas drilling in general, and not just Cabot’s particular activities, is left open to scrutiny in the case.
“It definitely would be significant if a court were to rule that drilling is abnormally dangerous, but we’re not there at this point,” he said.
Jones also denied Cabot’s motion to dismiss the families’ claims under the Hazardous Sites Cleanup Act and for a medical monitoring trust fund. He dismissed the families’ claim of gross negligence as a cause of action, but allowed them to retain the allegations they made under that claim to support their broader claim for punitive damages.
llegere@timesshamrock.com
Expert on hydraulic fracturing will speak at LCCC
http://citizensvoice.com/news/drilling/expert-on-hydraulic-fracturing-will-speak-at-lccc-1.1067623
Expert on hydraulic fracturing will speak at LCCC
Published: November 23, 2010
Dr. Anthony R. Ingraffea, Ph.D., the Dwight C. Baum Professor of Civil and Environmental Engineering at Cornell University, will give a presentation on “Unconventional Gas Plays: Information for an Informed Citizenry” at 7 p.m. Dec. 16 in Luzerne County Community College’s Educational Conference Center in Nanticoke.
Ingraffea is an expert on hydraulic fracturing or “fracking,” which involves cracking underground rocks by means of high-pressure streams of water. A main use of the technique is for horizontal natural gas drilling.
Ingraffea, graduate students and research assistants make up the “Cornell Fracture Group,” which has as its mission “to create, to verify, and to validate computational simulation systems for fracture control in engineered systems,” according to its Web site, www.cfg.cornell.edu.
The group does testing and computer simulations of complex fracturing processes in a variety of materials. Applications include assessing damage tolerance in aircraft, and determining the causes of failure in bridges and dams.
Ingraffea’s presentation is sponsored by the Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition, a group of area residents concerned about potential problems caused by natural gas drilling.
For information, contact the Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition at 570-266-5116, gdacoaltion@gmail.com, or www.gdacoalition.org.
EPA Will Test 134 More Chemicals for Endocrine Disruption
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/nov2010/2010-11-17-092.html
EPA Will Test 134 More Chemicals for Endocrine Disruption
WASHINGTON, DC, November 17, 2010 (ENS) – The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has identified a list of 134 chemicals that will be screened for their potential to disrupt the endocrine system.
Endocrine disruptors are chemicals that interact with and possibly disrupt the hormones produced or secreted by the human or animal endocrine system, which regulates growth, metabolism and reproduction.
“Endocrine disruptors represent a serious health concern for the American people, especially children. Americans today are exposed to more chemicals in our products, our environment and our bodies than ever before, and it is essential that EPA takes every step to gather information and prevent risks,” said EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson.
“We are using the best available science to examine a larger list of chemicals and ensure that they are not contaminating the water we drink and exposing adults and children to potential harm,” she said.
EPA is already screening an initial group of 67 pesticide chemicals. In October 2009, the agency issued orders to companies requiring endocrine disruptor screening program data for these chemicals.
The agency will begin issuing orders requiring data for the second group of 134 chemicals beginning in 2011.
The chemicals listed include those used in products such as solvents, gasoline, plastics, personal care products, pesticides, and pharmaceuticals.
On the list for testing is benzene, a known carcinogen used as an industrial solvent and in the production of drugs, plastics, synthetic rubber, and dyes.
Perchlorate, used in fireworks and rocket fuel, is on the list and so is ethylene glycol, an organic compound widely used as an automotive antifreeze.
The list includes chemicals that have been identified as priorities under the Safe Drinking Water Act and may be found in sources of drinking water where a substantial number of people may be exposed, the EPA said today.
The pharmaceutical chemicals to be screened include two of the best known and most widely used drugs in the United States – erythromycin and nitroglycerin.
Erythromycin is an antibiotic used to treat bronchitis; diphtheria; Legionnaires’ disease; whooping cough; pneumonia; rheumatic fever; and venereal disease; as well as ear, intestine, lung, urinary tract, and skin infections.
Nitroglycerin spray and tablets are used to treat episodes of angina, or chest pain, in people who have coronary artery disease, narrowing of the blood vessels that supply blood to the heart.
The list also includes pesticide active ingredients that are being evaluated under EPA�s registration review program to ensure they meet current scientific and regulatory standards.
The data generated from the screens will provide systematic scientific information to help EPA identify whether additional testing is necessary, or whether other steps are necessary to address potential endocrine disrupting chemicals.
EPA also announced today draft policies and procedures the agency will follow to order testing, minimize duplicative testing, promote equitable cost-sharing, and to address issues that are unique to chemicals regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act.
After public comment and review, EPA will issue test orders to pesticide registrants and the manufacturers of these chemicals to compel them to generate data to determine whether their chemicals may disrupt the estrogen, androgen and thyroid pathways of the endocrine system.
Unanimous Vote for Stronger Well Construction Standards
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/newsroom/14287?id=15270&typeid=1
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
11/18/2010
DEP Secretary Praises Unanimous Vote for Stronger Well Construction Standards to Prevent Gas Migration, Protect Public and Environment
Regulations Move to Attorney General for Approval
HARRISBURG — A set of new standards that will make natural gas wells safer were approved unanimously today on a vote of 5-0 by the state’s Independent Regulatory Review Commission, Environmental Protection Secretary John Hanger said today.
Hanger praised the IRRC vote, saying the new regulations will, among other things, impose more stringent construction standards on gas wells, making them less likely to allow natural gas to escape and contaminate water supplies or cause safety concerns.
The final-form regulations now go to the state Office of Attorney General for final review and approval. The regulations were deemed approved by the House and Senate Environmental Resources and Energy committees.
“When gas migrates from a poorly constructed gas well through the ground, it can contaminate water supplies or build up to explosive levels in water wells or even homes,” said Hanger. “These strong rules will eliminate or significantly reduce the problem of gas migration from poorly designed or constructed gas wells, as long as the rules are followed or enforced.”
Hanger added that the new rules also will require drillers to report production and waste volumes electronically and to submit a detailed report of the chemicals they use in the hydraulic fracturing – or fracking – process. In addition to these important provisions, operators will be required to keep a list of emergency contact phone numbers at the well site and follow a new set of instructions on what steps to take in the event of a gas migration incident.
The regulations also include provisions clarifying how and when blow-out prevention equipment is to be installed and operated.
The Environmental Quality Board approved the regulations on a final vote of 15-1 in October, after receiving nearly 2,000 public comments during the comment period and a series of five public hearings. A majority of the comments supported the new regulations.
In drafting the regulations, DEP also met with numerous oil and gas operators, industry groups and environmental groups to discuss the regulations in detail.
The department used the public’s input to make several important changes to the regulations, which further improved the well-design requirements to prevent gas migration incidents, including:
· A provision that requires operators to have a pressure barrier plan to minimize well control events;
· A provision that requires operators to condition the wellbore to ensure an adequate bond between the cement, casing and the formation;
· Provisions that require the use of centralizers to ensure casings are properly positioned in the wellbore; and
· A provision that improves the quality of the cement placed in the casing that protects fresh groundwater.
Once all reviews and approvals are obtained, the regulations will go into effect upon publication in the PA Bulletin.
For more information, visit www.depweb.state.pa,us, and select “Public Participation.”
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Dept. of Environmental Protection
Commonwealth News Bureau
Room 308, Main Capitol Building
Harrisburg PA., 17120
CONTACT:
John Repetz, Department of Environmental Protection
717-787-1323
Pittsburgh Bans Natural-Gas Drilling
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703628204575619030758449248.html?mod=googlenews_wsj
Pittsburgh Bans Natural-Gas Drilling
By KRIS MAHER
NOVEMBER 16, 2010
Pittsburgh’s city council voted 9-0 Tuesday to ban natural-gas drilling within city limits, citing health and environmental concerns, becoming the first city in Pennsylvania state to do so.
Many rural towns and landowners around the state have embraced gas exploration into the massive Marcellus Shale formation, as an economic boon. But others fear drilling could damage drinking-water supplies and shouldn’t be conducted in highly populated areas because of the risk of accidents and emissions from equipment.
Industry groups said they were disappointed but didn’t expect the ban to have a significant impact on gas exploration in Pennsylvania because there were no imminent plans by companies to drill in the city.
Kathryn Klaber, president of the Marcellus Shale Coalition, a trade group, said companies wouldn’t challenge the ban. “I don’t anticipate that individual companies would step into that fray,” she said. “There are lots of other places where development is welcome.”
The ban, however, could create uncertainty. “While no one is interested in drilling in the city of Pittsburgh, it’s a bad precedent,” said Matt Pitzarella, a spokesman for Range Resources Corp., which operates rigs in southwest Pennsylvania. He said the company worked “to develop ordinances that provide us with predictability and local governments with reasonable regulations.”
Pittsburgh’s move comes as the incoming governor signals changes in the industry’s favor. Republican Gov.-elect Tom Corbett has said he would lift a moratorium on natural-gas drilling on state lands put in place by outgoing Democratic Gov. Ed Rendell. Mr. Corbett also has said he opposed a severance tax on natural-gas extraction.
Write to Kris Maher at kris.maher@wsj.com
Halliburton unveils website with fracking details
http://af.reuters.com/article/energyOilNews/idAFN1526804120101115?sp=true
Halliburton unveils website with fracking details
By Ayesha Rascoe
Mon Nov 15, 2010 8:36pm GMT
* Halliburton outlines chemicals in 3 fracking products
* EPA issued subpoena for Halliburton on fracking fluids
WASHINGTON, Nov 15 (Reuters) – Halliburton (HAL.N: Quote) unveiled a new website on Monday offering some details about the mix of chemicals used in a natural gas drilling technique, as the company attempts to allay public concerns about the impact of the practice on drinking water.
The new website outlines the make-up and concentration of the chemicals contained in three of its products commonly used for hydraulic fracturing in Pennsylvania.
(Website: http://www.halliburton.com/hydraulicfracturing )
“We believe this effort represents an important and substantive contribution to the broader long-term imperative of transparency,” David Adams, a Halliburton vice president, said in a statement.
The move follows the Environmental Protection Agency’s decision last week to subpoena Halliburton to force the company to turn over information about the chemicals it produces for hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. [ID:nN0983184]
But Halliburton said the website is not a response to EPA’s actions or meant to satisfy the agency’s demands.
“That was not the intent. What we’ve done is try to provide information in a way that the public can understand,” a Halliburton spokeswoman said on a conference call.
Fracking is a process that injects a mixture of water, sand and chemicals into rock formations to stimulate oil and natural gas production. [ID:nN18229665]
Although it has been around for decades, use of the drilling practice has exploded in recent years as companies use it to extract unconventional yet abundant reserves of shale gas.
The expansion of shale gas drilling in states such as Pennsylvania has raised ire of some homeowners in areas near gas development, who complain the drilling has contaminated their drinking water.
Environmental groups have called for more federal oversight of the practice and complete disclosure of all the chemicals involved.
Energy companies argue that the practice is safe, pointing out that it is done thousands of feet below ground, much deeper than most water sources.
In response to public concerns, some companies have begun attempting to make information about the chemicals used in fracking more accessible to the public.
Halliburton said its website, which does not list the chemicals used in individual well sites, will expand in the future to include details about fracking fluids for every state where the company’s services are used. (Reporting by Ayesha Rascoe; Editing by Lisa Shumaker)
Fixes: Clean Water at No Cost? Just Add Carbon Credits
Fixes: Clean Water at No Cost? Just Add Carbon Credits
By By TINA ROSENBERG
Published: November 15, 2010
In America, I turn on the faucet and out pours water. In much of the world, no such luck. Nearly a billion people don’t have drinkable water. Lack of water ─ and the associated lack of toilets and proper hygiene ─ kills 3.3 million people a year, most of them children under five.
Lack of access to clean water is one of the world’s biggest health problems. And it is one of the hardest to solve. Lots of different groups dig wells and lay pipes ─ but the biggest challenge comes after the hardware is in.
The villages of Africa and South Asia are littered with the ghosts of water projects past. A traveler winding through the dirt roads and trails of rural India or Ethiopia will find wells, pumps and springs with taps ─ but most of the wells will be contaminated, the pumps broken, the taps rusted away. When the British group WaterAid began its work in the Konso district of southwestern Ethiopia in 2007, the first thing it did was look at what had come before. It found that of 35 water projects built in the area, only nine were functioning.
Pieter Bauermeister Water must be transported by hand when there is an absence of fresh water in villages. These women in rural Kwa-Zulu Natal, South Africa, trek one and a half hours to gather water from Nongoma, a larger town.
People who work on providing clean water in poor countries estimate that about half the projects fall into disrepair soon after their builders move on. Sometimes someone loots the pump. Or it breaks and no one knows how to fix it. Or perhaps spare parts are available only in major cities. Or the needed part costs too much for the village to afford ─ even if it is just a few dollars.
Unlike one-shot vaccines, water systems need to function all day, every day, forever. So sustainability ─ the issue we find so important that it started off the Fixes series ─ is particularly crucial. It’s important to donors, who don’t want to see their money wasted. It’s important to the groups that do the work: no project is successful unless it’s taken over by local people to run. And it’s most crucial to villagers themselves, who grow cynical about promises after they see project after project inaugurated only to fail.
Now there’s a new way to save water projects from an early death: make clean water a for-profit business, charging people an unusual price: zero. Several multinational companies, such as Bechtel and Suez, already run for-profit water systems in cities around the world. These companies have attracted a lot of criticism, especially for the way they treat rural people and slum dwellers. The companies have little incentive to lay pipes to reach people who are far away, and if they do, they charge very high prices. I’m talking about something different: a water business run by a company that has headquarters in Switzerland, Vestergaard Frandsen, that plans to provide clean water to some of the world’s poorest people and charge them nothing.
Where will the profits come from? Polluters.
What will make this work are the global carbon credit markets. These markets were established after the 2007 Kyoto Protocol to limit greenhouse gases that cause climate change. The markets provide a way for wealthy countries and corporations to offset their emissions of these gases by financing other projects that will reduce emissions. Projects can be awarded credits if auditors certify they will cut carbon emissions ─ for example, a new wind energy plant whose output will replace coal energy. These credits can then be purchased by polluters, be they countries, companies or individuals. The system is highly controversial, as it allows wealthy countries to go on polluting as long as they can pay others to cut back for them. But it does provide financial incentives for the creation of green projects.
Most of the projects that have won certification from the carbon markets are big energy plants in India and China. Less than three percent of the credits come from projects in Africa, and none of them help people get clean water. But one of the carbon credit markets does grant credits for cookstoves that use solar energy instead of wood or coal.
Vestergaard Frandsen’s idea is similar. By giving people an alternative to boiling water in order to purify it, it will reduce greenhouse gas emissions in countries where trees are scarce. Boiling water is harmful for many reasons. Burning coal produces greenhouse gases, and certain ways of burning wood can, too. The indoor pollution created by burning wood or coal is a prime cause of respiratory disease. The constant need for wood is deforesting poor countries. Women who are already spending hours collecting water must spend additional hours collecting firewood as well. From the standpoint of the carbon credit markets, however, the key point is that boiling water will eventually create demand for fossil fuel, as many areas are running out of trees. So for many reasons, finding a usable alternative to boiling is good for people and good for the earth.
Now it can be good business as well. If you are a hiker or camper, you may have heard about Vestergaard Frandsen’s LifeStraw. It’s a hollow stick equipped with a series of filtering membranes. You put the end of the stick in a river or puddle ─ or a toilet, for that matter ─ and suck on it. By the time the water hits your lips, it is clean and safe ─ its filters are fine enough to trap virtually all bacteria, viruses and parasites. The product has a bigger cousin called the LifeStraw Family. You hang it on your wall, pour dirty water in the top, open the tap and clean water comes out the bottom. No power or replacement parts are required. Each unit cleans about 18,000 liters of water ─ enough for a family for three years. The market cost of the unit averages out at a penny per ten liters of water purified.
Vestergaard Frandsen will distribute the LifeStraw Family for free. It is helping to sponsor a traveling campaign through the western part of Kenya set for April, 2011, that will reach 4 million families. The campaign bundles various products ─ each family that attends will get insecticide-treated bednets to protect against malaria, AIDS tests and counseling and a free LifeStraw Family.
The company is on the way to getting approval from one of the carbon credit markets for the LifeStraw Family, and expects to win it in February. Approval will provide a way for Vestergaard Frandsen to recoup its $24 million initial investment and to turn the product into a sustainable business ─ at no cost to users. It will earn credits for preventing greenhouse gas emissions, credits that polluters will then buy. The company will open free repair shops across western Kenya. Every three years, at the end of the units’ lifespan, it will replace them at no charge.
Why would a for-profit business do all this? Because the amount of carbon credits it receives depends on how much boiling it prevents ─ and therefore, how much water is purified. (Periodic audits will answer these questions.) The more the product is used, the more credits Vestergaard Frandsen is awarded, and so the more money it makes. So it has a strong financial incentive to maximize the number of families using the purifiers and keep them working properly.
You will notice that this financing method pays for performance. Normally, water projects get financing from donors up front. Whether they end up working or lasting is rarely even measured, because there is no cost for failure. But the carbon credit market penalizes failure. Vestergaard Frandsen also now has a good monetary reason to improve the product ─ to create one, for example, that can be refurbished instead of replaced, or one that lasts longer than three years. This kind of incentive is a rarity with products that are given away.
One problem that the LifeStraw program does not address is water collection: someone still has to fetch water to pour through it. Getting water is staggeringly burdensome — in southwestern Ethiopia, I met women who spend eight hours a day or more each day traveling back and forth to the river with 50-pound yellow plastic jerry cans on their backs. The need to help mom while she fetches water is a primary reason that many girls don’t go to school. Fetching water enslaves women.
But if the LifeStraw Family succeeds as a profitable business, it is possible that the carbon credit markets could also be used to finance many different types of projects. On Saturday, I’ll write about the wider possibilities. For villagers in Africa, however, none would be as important as using them to finance traditional water projects ─ ones like wells with pumps that do bring water closer to its users. After all, a family that used to boil river water is also cutting down on its emissions when its village gets a clean-water well. If running water pumps in rural Africa suddenly becomes good business, pumps will proliferate ─ and they will be maintained.
Tina Rosenberg won a Pulitzer Prize for her book “The Haunted Land: Facing Europe’s Ghosts After Communism.” She is a former editorial writer for The Times and now a contributing writer for the paper’s Sunday magazine. Her new book, “Join the Club: How Peer Pressure Can Transform the World,” is forthcoming from W.W. Norton.
60 Minutes’ segment taking a look at Marcellus Shale
http://www.timesleader.com/news/TV_report__focuses_on__gas_drilling_11-14-2010.html
Posted: November 15, 2010
TV report focuses on gas drilling
Industry supporters, opponent comment on Sunday’s ’60 Minutes’ segment taking a look at Marcellus Shale development.
STEVE MOCARSKY smocarsky@timesleader.com
A primetime network news show’s look at the pros and cons of the natural gas drilling phenomenon in the United States that aired on Sunday left people on both sides of the issue satisfied with fair coverage but concerned that comments from those who were interviewed were misleading or inaccurate.
An approximately 20-minute segment of the Emmy Award winning CBS news program “60 Minutes” titled “Shaleionaires!” featured correspondent Lesley Stahl interviewing a drilling company executive, some farmers who struck it rich by leasing their farms for drilling as well as some Pennsylvania residents who say their water was contaminated by natural gas drilling activities.
Though the segment didn’t cover any ground that hasn’t already been reported in newspapers covering issues surrounding drilling into the shale formations deep beneath parts of Pennsylvania, Texas, Colorado, Louisiana and West Virginia, it certainly increased exposure to those issues.
“Natural gas has been the ugly stepchild of our national energy debate,” Stahl said in her opening remarks, explaining that it never “enjoyed the political muscle” of oil or coal or “(captured) the imagination like solar panels and wind farms.”
Now, she said, that stepchild is being touted as the “hope of the future, the answer to our energy problems” and has been creating “shaleionaires” – land owners who stand to make hundreds of thousands if not millions on royalties for leasing their land to the gas extraction companies.
Chesapeake Energy CEO Aubrey McClendon told Stahl the United States has “the equivalent of two Saudi Arabias of oil in the form of natural gas.” Stahl noted natural gas is a much more clean burning fossil fuel, with nearly half the carbon emissions of coal and no mercury.
Stahl said 10,000 wells will be drilled in northwest Louisiana in some of the poorest communities in the country before interviewing two Louisiana farmers who struck it rich overnight, one having made $400,000 in royalties and a second who made nearly $2 million.
Stahl compared the phenomenon to a “good, old-fashioned gold rush,” having brought more than 57,000 local jobs to the region. She visited with residents of Dimock Township in Susquehanna County, which she likened to a “ghost town.”
She explained the process of hydraulic fracturing, the process of pumping millions of gallons of water with sand and some chemicals into the ground to stimulate the release of gas, and listened to Dimock residents tell how their water wells were contaminated with methane after the process began in their community.
One resident held a lighter to a jug he was filling with water from his well and flames shot out.
Chris Tucker, of EnergyInDepth.org, an organization that promotes the benefits of natural gas drilling, said the segment was “fairly balanced,” although the show didn’t get everything right.
“I think they did a great job of telling the story of real people, everyday people, all across the country whose lives have changed for the better thanks to the development of this clean, American resource,” Tucker said.
“They didn’t quite get it right when they attempted to venture into the regulatory history of hydraulic fracturing. The reality is that fracturing technology is among the most thoroughly regulated procedures that takes place at the wellsite, which is a big reason why it’s been able to compile such a solid record of safety and performance over the past 60 years of commercial use.”
Travis Windle, representing the Marcellus Shale Coalition, said “having ‘60 Minutes’ underscore the enormously positive benefits of this revolution … speaks to how transformational this development is for our nation.”
It’s also important for viewers to understand, Windle said, that Pennsylvania has a long and well-documented history of naturally occurring methane entering private water wells.
“It will take private water well standards and fact-based reporting on pre-existing methane in water wells from shallow sources of contamination to demonstrate how safe shale gas development is,” he said.
Tom Jiunta, founder and president of the Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition, provided a viewpoint from the opposite end of the spectrum.
While McClendon noted that natural gas is a clean burning fuel, scientists, Jiunta said, have estimated that the diesel fumes from the thousands of trucks that transport the water and machinery, the diesel engines from the compressor stations used to pump the gas through the pipelines and the engines used for drilling and hydraulic fracturing, along with the natural leakage involved in methane escaping from the pipelines make the process one of the dirtiest.
And while McClendon said natural gas could free the nation from foreign oil dependence, Jiunta said he “did not mention that they have already sold some of their gas leases to foreign companies, which in effect means we will be dependent upon foreign companies for our own natural gas that we will have to buy back on the open market.”
Jiunta said Chesapeake sold part of the Eagle Ford Shale enterprise in South Texas to China, calling it “the biggest acquisition of a U.S. oil and gas asset by a Chinese company.”
As for the shaleionaires, Jiunta said their neighbors “won’t have the luxury … of moving away if the water supplies become tainted.”
Strengthened oil and gas regulations to be considered by a state review board
http://citizensvoice.com/news/new-rules-to-plumb-water-problems-1.1063833
New rules to plumb water problems
By Laura Legere (Staff Writer)
Published: November 15, 2010
Strengthened oil and gas regulations to be considered by a state review board this week will help answer an increasingly urgent question in the era of Marcellus Shale exploration: how many water supplies have been impacted by drilling activities?
Right now, no one is keeping a complete count.
The Oil and Gas Act does not require drillers to notify state regulators when landowners alert them that drinking water has been harmed by the companies’ operations.
Under current law, the Department of Environmental Protection must look into cases of potential drinking water pollution only when it is asked to investigate a problem by a landowner.
The department also does not track how often gas drillers voluntarily replace drinking water supplies, either temporarily or permanently.
“Often, homeowners and drillers work out agreements without needing the department’s assistance,” DEP spokesman Tom Rathbun said. “We get involved when we are notified of a problem, but we are not made aware of every case.”
A revised Oil and Gas Act will change that. When the new regulations go into effect, likely in January if they pass all reviews, drillers will have to notify the department within 24 hours of receiving a complaint.
An earlier draft of the revisions, which gave drillers 10 days to notify the department of a complaint, was changed after commentators on the regulations argued that was not quick enough.
The change from no notification to nearly instantaneous notification signals an increasing awareness of how often drinking water complaints go uncounted at a time when everyone from farmers to the federal government is looking for more complete information on the short- and long-term impacts of gas drilling on water resources.
Without the mandatory disclosure, critics say, voluntary arrangements can take advantage of the fact that there are disincentives for landowners to ask DEP to intervene: People may feel intimidated about pushing their complaints or fear causing any disruption to the gas companies that pay them royalties.
On some occasions gas companies, even when working side-by-side with regulators to address water complaints, have made clear efforts to keep voluntary water replacement arrangements out of the public eye.
How many problems?
There is a clear gap between the relatively small number of state orders for drillers to provide homes with replacement water and the visible proliferation of water tanks (called buffaloes), well vents, new wells, treatment systems and bottled water being delivered or installed in gas drilling regions.
After a records search in June 2009, DEP reported that there had been fewer than 80 cases of groundwater contamination caused by oil and gas drilling in the state in over 15 years, as measured by the number of official orders the agency sent to drillers to permanently restore or replace damaged water supplies.
With 32,000 oil and gas wells drilled within that time span, that amounts to a 0.25 percent incident rate – a track record the industry frequently touts.
But unofficial counts put the number of disturbed water supplies much higher.
Daniel Farnham, an environmental engineer who has tested more than 2,000 water wells in Northeastern and Northcentral Pennsylvania where Marcellus Shale drilling is under way, estimates as many as 50 homes in Bradford County alone are currently getting replacement water supplies provided by gas companies.
In Susquehanna County, Dimock Township offers a vivid example of the gap between the officially determined size of the problem and the true number of drinking water supplies that have been replaced.
DEP has ordered Cabot Oil and Gas Corp. to replace 18 water supplies – connected to 19 homes – that were tainted with methane the agency traced to faulty Cabot Marcellus Shale gas wells, a claim the company refutes.
But according to Cabot documentation provided to the department as part of the order, at least 36 Dimock residences have at some point had water supplies replaced or remediated by Cabot at least temporarily.
At the time Cabot provided DEP with its water replacement list, in June, the company had drilled 89 natural gas wells in and around Dimock – meaning Cabot remedied or replaced a water supply, on average, for more than one in every three gas well it drilled.
Cabot spokesman George Stark said the numbers reflect Cabot’s policy of investigating all water supply complaints and “when we see the immediate need” providing replacement water during an investigation. Some complaints may turn out to be unfounded, unrelated to gas drilling, or temporary disruptions that clear up on their own, he said.
Cabot, the most active driller in Susquehanna County, has removed nine homes from the list of 36 receiving water, Stark said. The company drilled one replacement water well and reconditioned three others. Five homes accepted filtration systems that are in the process of being installed.
Chesapeake Energy, the most active driller in Bradford County, did not answer a request to disclose the number of water supplies it has replaced or remediated.
‘Waiting to blow me up’
Most drillers and many landowners say voluntary arrangements for solving residential water problems are amicable, even generous.
Gary Lopez, a Dimock resident, wrote grateful letters to area newspapers thanking Cabot “for solving my water problems” by first delivering replacement water then drilling a new well after his old well “tested high for methane and barium.”
In the worst cases, though, homeowners have found gas company representatives bullying even as they appear to be helping to fix the problem.
Sherry Vargson noticed her faucets began to sputter and blow what seemed like air after Chesapeake Energy performed what workers told her was a maintenance procedure on the gas wells yards from her Granville Summit home in June.
A company contractor tested the head space in her water well and found elevated levels of methane. DEP tests a month later found the flammable gas present in her water supply at 56.3 mg/L – twice the level at which water can no longer hold the gas and releases it into the atmosphere or enclosed spaces, creating a risk of explosion.
Because pre-drilling water tests “did not find the presence of the methane gas,” DEP found that the tests indicated that gas well drilling caused the change in the water supply.
Chesapeake has provided the Vargsons with bottled water since the day in June when the company detected the gas, but despite DEP recommendations that the company install a vent stack on the well to help keep the gas from concentrating, the well is still not vented.
Instead, Chesapeake presented Vargson with an agreement in July which required the family to release the company from all claims and liabilities related to the water up until that date in exchange for installing a vent “as a precautionary measure.”
The agreement, which the Vargsons refused to sign in its original form, also included a nondisclosure clause meant to bar the family from discussing the agreement, its terms or Chesapeake’s role in providing a vent.
In a statement, Chesapeake’s senior director for corporate development, Brian Grove, said the company does not believe its activities impacted the Vargson water well, which he said was “equipped with a venting cap predating our operations” because of “pre-existing methane.” The company’s pre- and post-drilling water tests show the water “virtually unchanged,” he said – a position at odds with DEP findings reported Sept. 2.
Whenever a question is raised about any water supply, Grove said, the company “routinely provides a temporary replacement source of water as a courtesy and notifies the DEP immediately while we begin to investigate” – a process that “most often” finds that the problem is not related to drilling activity, he added.
The purpose of the legal agreements is to grant the company permission “to access the property and provide needed equipment or services” in cases where a lot of activity will be required in or near a home.
“Confidentiality clauses are common in these and many other types of agreements,” he said.
Vargson, who now sleeps with three windows open, is frustrated that the DEP has not enforced its finding linking gas drilling to her water problems, which she is not afraid to discuss.
Last week, she held a match to the sputtering water running from her kitchen faucet and a flame ran up the stream to the spout.
“All of that is aerating in here,” she said, “pocketing in the house, waiting to blow me up.”
About 20 miles across Bradford County, near Spring Lake, two Chesapeake-provided water buffaloes sit in the yard behind the over 100-year-old farmhouse owned by Jacqueline Place.
On April 1, nearly two weeks after the water to Place’s home turned cloudy then dark brown and her sister’s cows refused to drink it, a DEP inspector and Chesapeake contractors came to test the water. Chesapeake disconnected the well, filled the water buffaloes and plumbed them into the home – a project that took hours.
At around 10 p.m., the last Chesapeake contractor handed Place a document and told her he would not flip the switch on the system he had just installed unless she signed it. According to her sister, Roslyn Bohlander, the contractor told Place the document was “nothing” important and, when pressed, told her it was a non-disclosure agreement.
Place would not acknowledge the document or release it to Times-Shamrock newspapers.
“It was such a crisis point,” Bohlander said. In the previous days, Place and her son had not used the water to shower, cook or clean dishes or clothes. They took sponge baths, Bohlander said, and the cows, “they were just drinking enough to live.”
DEP and private tests have since shown elevated levels of methane and metals in the water.
“They did all they had done to make it not be a bad situation,” she said, “but then they said you can’t have this water.”
Grove said Chesapeake does not believe its operations have affected the water supply and “have not caused any reduction of quality of the water in the well.
“Repeated analyses have not detected any constituents related to natural gas drilling and production,” he said.
The company continues to provide replacement water to the Places and Bohlanders, like the Vargsons “as a courtesy,” he said, “while we work with the DEP and residents to bring closure to these matters.”
Chesapeake has told the family on three occasions, each with between 24 and 48 hours notice, that it planned to take away the buffaloes and stop the water deliveries. DEP officials have told the family they cannot stop Chesapeake from taking the water because they did not order the company to provide the water in the first place, Place said.
Bohlander said the price of a buffalo and frequent water deliveries for the cows and the home is “unaffordable.”
“We no longer have a plan B,” she said.
llegere@timesshamrock.com
Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition plans public meetings
http://citizensvoice.com/news/gas-drilling-awareness-coalition-plans-public-meetings-1.1063901
Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition plans public meetings
Published: November 15, 2010
The Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition is holding two upcoming meetings, both of which are open to the public.
The first will be at 7 p.m. Thursday in the Exeter Township municipal building on Route 92 in Harding. Activist and business owner Janine Dymond and professional geologist and business owner John Samuel Mellow will speak.
The other meeting will be at 7 p.m. Dec. 9 on the second floor of the Exeter Borough municipal building, 1101 Wyoming Ave. Dr. Thomas Jiunta, co-founder of the Gas Drilling Awareness Coalition, will speak at this meeting.
Space is limited, so reservations are requested: call 570-266-5116 or e-mail gdacoaliton@gmail.com.