Gas Drilling Report Details 100+ Contamination Incidents
http://www.newsinferno.com/archives/24079
Date Published: Friday, September 17th, 2010
Gas Drilling Report Details 100+ Contamination Incidents
An environmental group has compiled a report detailing more than 100 instances of environmental contamination linked to the gas drilling operations around the country. The group, Riverkeeper, is urging the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to examine these incidents as it studies the gas drilling process called hydraulic fracturing, or fracking.
The report, Fractured Communities, highlights case studies where federal and state regulators identified gas drilling operations, including those that utilize hydraulic fracturing, as the known or suspected cause of groundwater, drinking water, and surface water contamination.”
“Despite industry rhetoric to the contrary, the environmental impacts of hydraulic fracturing are real,” Craig Michaels, Watershed Program Director for Riverkeeper and an author of the report, said in a statement. “The case studies highlighted here represent just a sample of problems that regulators, landowners, municipalities, and communities across the country continue to uncover. We trust that EPA will assist state agencies in monitoring and investigating these problems as the agency continues its scientific study of the impacts of hydraulic fracturing.
Specifically, the report documents:
• More than 20 cases of drinking water contamination in Pennsylvania;
• More than 30 cases of groundwater and drinking water contamination in Colorado and Wyoming;
• More than 10 cases of surface water spills of drilling fluid in the Marcellus Shale region;
• More than 30 investigations of stray gas migration from new and abandoned wells in Pennsylvania;
• Dozens of illegal operations and permit violations by gas drilling companies;
• Five explosions that occurred between 2006 and 2010 that contaminated groundwater and/or surface water.
According to Riverkeeper, state regulators have assessed over $3.6 million in penalties against gas companies as a result of these violations.
Riverkeeper’s mission is to protect the ecological integrity of New York State’s Hudson River and its tributaries, and to safeguard the drinking water supply of New York City and the lower Hudson Valley. Gas drillers have been eyeing massive deposits in New York’s Marcellus shale region, which includes the entire Catskills watershed that provides New York City with all of its drinking water. People there are worried that drilling could pollute the watershed. The state’s Department of Environmental Conservation has had gas drilling permit approvals on hold since 2008 while it conducts an environmental review of fracking.
The EPA announced its fracking study in March, following an order from the US Congress. The agency had issued a report on hydraulic fracturing in 2004, but it was criticized as flawed due to heavy industry influence on the panel that reviewed that study. The 2004 study ostensibly found that fracking posed no threat to water quality, but an EPA whistleblower claimed findings that showed benzene and other toxic chemicals in fracking fluid could migrate into ground water had been suppressed in the final report.
It was that report that convinced Congress to exempt fracking from regulation under the Safe Drinking Water Act. As a result, regulation of the industry is left up to the states, and drillers are not required to disclose the chemicals they use in their fracking fluids.
EPA to Hold Public Hearing in Pittsburgh on Proposed Coal Ash Regulations
EPA News Release (Region 3): EPA to Hold Public Hearing in Pittsburgh on Proposed Coal Ash Regulations
Contact: Donna Heron 215-814-5113 / heron.donna@epa.gov
EPA to Hold Public Hearing in Pittsburgh on Proposed Coal Ash Regulations
When: Tuesday, Sept. 21, 2010 – 10 a.m. to 9 p.m.
Where: Omni Hotel, 530 William Penn Place, Pittsburgh, Pa.
What: This is one of eight public hearings on the agency’s proposal to regulate the disposal and management of coal ash from coal-fired power plants. EPA’s proposal is the first-ever national effort to ensure the safe disposal and management of coal ash from coal-fired power plants.
Each hearing will begin at 10 a.m. and continue until 9 p.m. with a break at noon and 5 p.m. The hearing will continue past 9 p.m. if necessary. Walk-in requests to speak will be accommodated as time permits. Written comments will be accepted at the hearing. The agency will consider the public’s comments in its final decision.
The need for national management criteria and regulation was emphasized by the December 2008 spill of coal ash from a surface impoundment near Kingston, Tenn. The proposal will ensure for the first time that protective controls, such as liners and ground water monitoring, are in place at new landfills to protect groundwater and human health. Existing surface impoundments will also require liners, with strong incentives to close these impoundments and transition to safer landfills which store coal ash in dry form. The proposed regulations will ensure stronger oversight of the structural integrity of impoundments and promote environmentally safe and desirable forms of recycling coal ash, known as beneficial uses.
EPA has proposed two main management approaches, one of which phases out surface impoundments and moves all coal ash to landfills; the other allows coal ash to be disposed in surface impoundments, but with stricter safety criteria.
More information about the proposed regulation: http://www.epa.gov/coalashrule
To view the chart comparing the two approaches: http://www.epa.gov/coalashrule/ccr-table.htm
Lab finds toxic chemicals in Dimock Twp. water
http://citizensvoice.com/news/lab-finds-toxic-chemicals-in-dimock-twp-water-1.1014270
Lab finds toxic chemicals in Dimock Twp. water
BY LAURA LEGERE (STAFF WRITER)
Published: September 16, 2010
Michael J. Mullen / times-shamrock
Victoria Switzer of Dimock Township presents an array of photographs depicting environmental problems caused by gas drilling in the area to Scranton Mayor Chris Doherty in March. Water testing by a private environmental engineering firm has found widespread contamination of drinking water by toxic chemicals in an area of Dimock Township already affected by methane contamination from natural gas drilling.
Reports of the positive test results first came Monday when Dimock resident Victoria Switzer testified at an Environmental Protection Agency hearing on hydraulic fracturing in Binghamton, N.Y., that the firm Farnham and Associates Inc. had confirmed ethylene glycol, propylene glycol and toluene were present in her water.
The firm’s president, Daniel Farnham, said this week that the incidence of contamination is not isolated.
Instead, he has found hydrocarbon solvents – including ethylbenzene, toluene and xylene – in the well water of “almost everybody” on and around Carter Road in Dimock where methane traced to deep rock formations has also been found.
The chemicals he found in the water in Dimock generally have industrial uses, including in antifreeze, gasoline and paint – except propylene glycol, which is also used in food products.
All of the constituents are also frequently used as chemical additives mixed with high volumes of water and sand to fracture gas-bearing rock formations – a crucial but controversial part of natural gas exploration commonly called “fracking.”
Farnham’s findings could cast doubt on the safety of the practice, which state regulators and the gas industry say has never been definitively linked to water contamination during the 60 years it has been used.
Critics say compelling anecdotal evidence, like that from Dimock, indicates otherwise.
Farnham stopped short of attributing the contamination to natural gas activity.
“Do I have enough information to say that this stuff came from fracking? I can’t prove that,” he said. “I don’t think anybody can. But it certainly is interesting.”
Residents in Dimock began raising concerns about their water nearly two years ago, when they began to notice changes in odor, color, taste and texture.
The Department of Environmental Protection determined that Cabot Oil and Gas Corp. allowed methane from a deep rock formation to seep into 14 residential drinking water supplies through faulty or overpressured casing in its Marcellus Shale gas wells.
But the department also determined in March 2009 that hydraulic fracturing activities had not impacted the water wells after it tested for indicators of fracturing impacts, including salts, calcium, barium, iron, manganese, potassium and aluminum.
In April of this year, Switzer and two of her neighbors who live at the bottom of a valley along Burdick Creek noticed that their water ran soapy. A DEP specialist came to test the water three days later, she said, but by that time the foam was gone.
DEP results from its April tests for ethylene glycol and propylene glycol found no trace of the chemicals, DEP spokesman Tom Rathbun said.
But over the spring and summer, with routine testing, Farnham noticed a pattern of troubling spikes: “After a heavy rain, certainly these things seem to crop up as the aquifer is disturbed,” he said.
“What I found was hydrocarbons – ethylbenzene, toluene – in almost everybody who was impacted in the area,” he said. “Oddly enough, if I were to go due east or due west of the affected area, I found nothing.”
In August, Farnham shared the results with Cabot during a meeting concerning a lawsuit many of the affected families have filed against the company. During a second meeting that month with the families in Dimock, Farnham told DEP Secretary John Hanger and Oil and Gas Bureau Director Scott Perry what he had found.
Rathbun, the DEP spokesman, said the agency is currently testing for toluene throughout the affected area and will be able to evaluate Farnham’s findings once its own widespread round of testing is done. “To date, DEP’s lab analyses do not support his findings,” he said.
Cabot Oil and Gas Corp. spokesman George Stark said pre-drill testing performed by Farnham when he was contracted by land agents of the company in May 2008 showed the hydrocarbon solvents and glycols pre-existed in some wells.
Farnham said Wednesday he never tested for the constituents in 2008, let alone detected them.
Farnham’s investigation into the contaminants is ongoing: He has more samples to analyze and more spikes in the test results to research and confirm. But he is certain that his findings so far are correct.
“I double- and triple-checked everything to make sure the evidence is irrefutable,” he said.
llegere@timesshamrock.com
Pennsylvania Families Sue Southwestern Energy on Shale Drilling
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2010-09-15/pennsylvania-families-sue-southwestern-energy-on-alleged-shale-pollution.html
Pennsylvania Families Sue Southwestern Energy on Shale Drilling
Thirteen families in northeastern Pennsylvania filed a lawsuit against Southwestern Energy Co. alleging that the company’s drilling for natural gas has contaminated drinking water.
Southwestern spoiled water wells by hydraulic fracturing, a process that uses blasts of water and chemicals to free natural gas from shale rock, according to the complaint filed yesterday in the civil division of the Court of Common Pleas of Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania. The company used fracturing in October 2008 on a gas well in Lenox Township, Pennsylvania, according to Mark Boling, Southwestern’s general counsel.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is studying the drilling technique, known as fracking, to determine its effect on underground water supplies. Gas from shale may produce 50 percent of the U.S. gas supply by 2035, up from 20 percent today, according to IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates.
“We actually had the chemicals associated with fracking fluids leaking into wells,” Peter Cambs, an attorney representing the families, said in an interview. “Something was going on related to the fracking process.”
Southwestern tested water wells in the area, about 27 miles (43 kilometers) north of Scranton, and found no contamination that could be linked to its drilling, Boling said.
“From our testing, we did not find anything that would lead one to believe that it’s from our drilling operations,” Boling said in an interview. “Part of our investigation is going to be trying to find out what prior uses were on the property to see if there was some industrial activity.”
Southwestern, based in Houston, is the largest natural-gas producer in the Fayetteville Shale formation in Arkansas.
To contact the reporter on this story: Jim Efstathiou Jr. in Binghamton, New York at 1647 or jefstathiou@bloomberg.net.
Survey measures residents’ attitudes about Marcellus exploration
http://live.psu.edu/story/48364/nw69
Survey measures residents’ attitudes about Marcellus exploration
Friday, September 10, 2010
While energy companies continue to search beneath Pennsylvania for natural gas, social scientists are looking for ways to tap into the attitudes of residents about the gas-exploration boom in the region.
Residents in 21 Pennsylvania counties and eight New York counties — a region some refer to as “the Marcellus Fairway” — recently completed a survey looking at their level of satisfaction with their home communities, their knowledge about Marcellus Shale drilling and their trust in the process. The results suggest that, overall, the public-opinion jury is still out, according to Kathy Brasier, assistant professor of rural sociology in Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences.
Brasier will be the featured speaker during a free, Web-based seminar titled, “Natural Gas Experiences of Marcellus Residents: Preliminary Results from the Community Satisfaction Survey,” which will air at 1 p.m. on Sept. 16. Sponsored by Penn State Cooperative Extension, the “webinar” will provide an overview of the recent survey of residents in counties where shale-gas exploration has begun.
Information about how to register for the webinar is available at http://extension.psu.edu/naturalgas/webinars. Online participants will have the opportunity to ask the speaker questions during the session.
“The main research objective was to establish baseline data so that, as we repeat the survey over the development of the Marcellus, we can track changes in people’s experiences and thoughts about the shale,” said Brasier. She noted that the main educational objective was to get a better sense of what people living in the region think about Marcellus, to create educational programming that takes into account local views — whether those are commonly held ideas or points of conflict.
Brasier said, based on the responses of nearly 2,000 participants, the survey revealed that significant proportions of people had yet to form opinions or report knowledge about Marcellus development. However, she said that those who have formed opinions were pretty strong in their feelings, responding in the extreme ends of the attitude items.
When asked about overall support for natural-gas extraction in the Marcellus, about 45 percent support it; 33 percent neither support nor oppose it, and 21 percent oppose Marcellus exploration. She said that there was more opposition among New York respondents, with nearly 31 percent opposing Marcellus gas extraction. In contrast, 19 percent of Pennsylvania respondents oppose drilling in the Marcellus.
Brasier conjectured that one possible reason for greater opposition in New York — where Marcellus drilling has not been approved — was the idea that stopping shale-gas extraction is still on the table. “There is still talk that they may be extending the moratorium, and that might be a little bit greater motivation for those who oppose it,” she said. “That’s not going to happen in Pennsylvania. Here, it’s coming, and if people are in the ‘opposed’ camp, it’s more about how to shape it to have the least damage.”
Accordingly, the main issues people felt they knew something about were environmental and water impacts. Environmental issues were also the ones people thought would “get worse,” according to the survey. The only area that people thought would get better was the availability of good jobs, Brasier said.
She said that a relatively small number of respondents (10 percent) had signed a lease for gas rights. Of these, about half are satisfied with the terms of the lease. About half had received lease or royalty payments. A majority of those who had received payments said they were satisfied.
In addition to questions about the respondents’ satisfaction with and attachment to their community, and knowledge of Marcellus Shale activities and impacts, participants also were asked their attitudes about development of the Marcellus and their trust in organizations that are active in Marcellus Shale issues. Brasier said that trust in the natural-gas industry, state agencies and state governments has a great deal to do with attitudes toward Marcellus exploration.
Attitudes might also vary depending on whether respondents had bad previous experiences with other extractive sectors, such as coal or shallow gas, or had experienced other social or environmental problems as a result of that activity.
Brasier said that future work will compare responses on the community satisfaction variables across time. She said she also wants to get a better sense of residents’ feelings about the workers, including those who might have moved recently to the area because of gas drilling. Future surveys also are likely to explore what people do for recreation and how these activities might be affected by drilling.
The “Natural Gas Experiences of Marcellus Residents” webinar is part of an ongoing series of workshops addressing issues related to the state’s Marcellus Shale gas boom. Previous webinars, which covered topics such as water use and quality, zoning, gas-leasing considerations for landowners and implications for local communities, can be viewed at http://extension.psu.edu/naturalgas/webinars online.
For more information, contact John Turack, extension educator in Westmoreland County, at 724-937-1402 or by e-mail at jdt15@psu.edu.
Contact John Dickison jmd16@psu.edu
EPA wants chemical info from 9 service providers
http://www.timesleader.com/news/EPA-wants-chemical-info-from-9-service-providers.html
September 10, 2010
EPA wants chemical info from 9 service providers
MATT HUGHES mhughes@timesleader.com
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced Thursday it has requested information about chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing process from nine leading service providers involved in operations in the Marcellus Shale natural gas region.
The EPA said it is preparing a study of whether a link exists between hydraulic fracturing, also known as “fracking,” and a health hazard from contaminated drinking water.
“This scientifically rigorous study will help us understand the potential impacts of hydraulic fracturing on drinking water – a concern that has been raised by Congress and the American people,” EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson said in a statement Thursday.
The federal agency has requested information about the contents of hydraulic fracturing fluids used by BJ Services, Complete Production Services, Halliburton, Key Energy Services, Patterson-UTI, RPC Inc., Schlumberger, Superior Well Services and Weatherford, all of which are involved in fracking the Marcellus Shale.
The announcement comes as Congress debates two bills, introduced in June 2009, and collectively dubbed the Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals, or FRAC Act, which would amend the Safe Drinking Water Act to require drillers to disclose the contents of hydraulic fracturing fluids and which would subject the hydraulic fracturing process to federal regulation.
The study also follows a November 2009 request by Congress that the EPA undertake a new study of the process. The EPA said it plans to announce initial results of the study in late 2012.
Hydraulic fracturing is a process in which water, sand and additives are pumped into underground geological formations to create fractures, and, in the case of shale gas drilling, unlock natural gas deposits.
A spokesman for the Marcellus Shale Coalition, a group advocating Marcellus Shale gas extraction, said his group is eager to assist the EPA in any way it can with its study, as he believes it will verify the safety of the fracking process.
Coalition spokesman Travis Windle said the fracking process has a more than 60-year record of safe operations and a 2004 EPA study of hydraulic fracturing in much shallower coal bed methane reservoirs found no link between fracking and aquifer contamination.
“We’re confident that a study, which is grounded in facts, and is straightforward and methodical, is going to prove what the EPA said in the past,” Windle said “It’s going to underscore the long and clear record that fracturing does not pose any threat to groundwater contamination.”
However, the coalition strongly opposes the EPA regulation that Congress is considering, Windle said, stating federal regulation “would devastate job production.”
“The 44,000 jobs that our industry has created in Pennsylvania alone in the last four years would be dramatically undercut if this misguided legislation was enacted,” Windle said, explaining that under the proposed FRAC Act legislation, drillers would be required to apply for EPA permits before beginning hydraulic fracturing, which would slow the drilling.
Windle said chemicals used in fracking fluid in Pennsylvania are publicly available information and the industry is monitored by the state Department of Environmental Protection.
A spokesman for gas-extraction company Cabot Oil and Gas, which is active in Susquehanna County, said the company is not involved in the EPA study, but welcomes the opportunity “to partner with the EPA to show them that it’s a safe technology.”
Cabot is involved in a lawsuit brought in 2009 by Dimock residents, who claim Cabot’s drilling operations polluted their drinking water.
Cabot spokesman George Stark would not comment on the subject of an active lawsuit, but said generally of Dimock that “the Department of Environmental Protection has stated that the situation there is not the result of hydraulic fracturing.”
“In the operations that Cabot has been involved with, we have not seen that there has been a threat to drinking water through the hydraulic fracturing process,” Stark said.
DEP Investigating Source of Stray Methane Gas in Bradford County
DEP Investigating Source of Stray Methane Gas in Bradford County
DEP to Require Complete Remediation
HARRISBURG — The Department of Environmental Protection is continuing to investigate the source of stray methane gas detected in the Susquehanna River and at six private water wells in Wilmont Township, Bradford County, late last week.
“Chesapeake Energy has been working at the direction of DEP to determine the source or sources of the stray gas,” said Hanger. “Gas migration is a serious, potentially dangerous problem. Chesapeake must stop the gas from migrating.”
Chesapeake has six Marcellus Shale gas wells located on the Welles well pads one three and four, located two to three miles northwest of the Susquehanna River. These wells are believed to be the source of stray gas that was detected on Aug. 4 at a residence located on Paradise Road in Terry Township. DEP issued a notice of violation to Chesapeake and required it to provide and implement a plan to remediate. Progress has been made, but, to date, this violation has not yet been fully resolved.
While neither DEP nor Chesapeake have been able to conclusively show that the Welles wells are the source, DEP believes that they are the most likely source.
The wells were drilled between Dec. 2009 and March of this year; however the wells have not been fractured or “fracked” and are not producing Marcellus gas. For that reason, DEP believes that any stray gas migrating from these wells is not from the Marcellus Shale formation, but from a more shallow rock formation.
Chesapeake has screened 26 residences within a one-half mile radius of the river and found six water wells to have elevated levels of methane. Chesapeake monitored each of the houses served by an impacted water well and found no indication of methane gas in the homes.
On Sept. 3, high levels of methane were detected in the crawl space under a seasonal residence. Emergency responders were contacted to ventilate below the home and gas and electric utilities were shut off to eliminate any potential for ignition.
Chesapeake has equipped water wells with high levels of methane with ventilation systems and installed five methane monitors in the homes associated with the im-pacted wells. Additionally, Chesapeake has provided potable water to the effected residents.
No residents have been evacuated from their homes.
DEP first received information about water bubbles in the Susquehanna River late on Sept. 2, with additional reports received the next morning of bubbling in two private drinking water wells nearby. In response, DEP sent two teams of inspectors to investigate the source of stray methane gas on Sept. 3.
One team of DEP inspectors went to the Susquehanna River near to Sugar Run where bubbling had been reported. DEP collected samples of the gas for isotopic analysis which is used to identify the source. Analysis of the lab results will be complete within 2 weeks.
Biogenic methane gas is formed at shallow depths from the natural organic decomposition of waste, such as one would find in swamp gas. Thermogenic methane gas is produced in deeper geologic formations and is the gas typically developed for economic purposes.
Both DEP and Chesapeake have taken gas samples from the water well heads and the natural gas wells. The results will help to determine if the source of the stray gas detected at the river and in the water wells is the Welles wells.
Anyone who notices unusual bubbling in surface or well water should notify DEP immediately by calling 570-327-3636.
####
http://www.portal.state.pa.us/portal/server.pt/community/newsroom/14287?id=14034&typeid=1
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA
Dept. of Environmental Protection
Commonwealth News Bureau
Room 308, Main Capitol Building
Harrisburg PA., 17120
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
09/7/2010
CONTACT:
Helen Humphreys, Department of Environmental Protection
717-787-1323
Wading through water-test results subject of webinar
http://live.psu.edu/story/48230/nw69
Friday, September 3, 2010
Wading through water-test results subject of webinar
Well owners may wish to have drinking water tested before and after nearby gas wells are drilled.
When it comes to water-test results, one of the murkiest problems facing homeowners is how to interpret the results, according to an expert in Penn State’s College of Agricultural Sciences. And with the flood of Marcellus shale gas-drilling activity in Pennsylvania, there has been a steadily rising tide of information about water availability, water quality, water-testing procedures and what those tests indicate.
“We’re finding that in a lot of these counties, there is a lot of water testing being done by gas companies or by households — before and after drilling — and these water test reports can be very hard to understand,” said Bryan Swistock, a water resources extension specialist in the college’s School of Forest Resources. “For some, it’s like trying to decipher foreign language.”
To help owners of private water supplies navigate the water-testing maze, Swistock will conduct a free Web-based seminar titled, “How to Interpret Pre- and Post-Gas Drilling Water Test Reports.” Part of a series of online water-related workshops produced by Penn State Cooperative Extension, the webinar will air at noon and again at 7 p.m. Wednesday, Sept. 15.
Participants must pre-register for the webinars, but only one registration is required for the entire series. To register, visit http://extension.psu.edu/water/webinar-series. Once participants have pre-registered, they may visit the webinar site (https://breeze.psu.edu/water1) on the day of the presentation to view the live presentation.
Water-quality experts, gas-company officials and attorneys all agree that if gas-drilling activity is scheduled to take place nearby, homeowners should get pre-drill water testing done, Swistock said. Because gas companies have a presumed responsibility for water quality within 1,000 feet of a gas well, they frequently provide free water testing to homeowners within that radius. Some gas companies may pay to test private water systems even beyond 1,000 feet from a gas well, he added.
Homeowners who live outside that range — or ones who don’t trust free testing — may opt to pay for their own testing. For these consumers, Swistock advises hiring a state-accredited lab to come out to the home. The water sample then becomes a “legally valid” sample, the chain of custody of which is assured, should a case go to court, he said.
Swistock explained that water testing for all possible pollutants associated with gas-well drilling can by very expensive. Homeowners should discuss the costs of the testing with the laboratory or consultant to select a testing package that addresses their concerns while still being affordable.
Some homeowners are distressed to discover pre-existing problems that have nothing to do with gas exploration. It is common to uncover problems such as bacteria, traces of nitrate, or lead, which sometimes can come from the home’s own plumbing system. “Some problems don’t have symptoms, so if the well was never tested previously, and people didn’t experience any symptoms, they’ll think the test result was doctored,” Swistock said.
He noted that more than 1 million Pennsylvania homes and farms have drilled water wells, and about 45 percent of them have never been tested. He said bacteria occurs in about one-third of water wells in the state and is likely to go undetected unless someone had reason to investigate.
Changes in other water conditions may prompt more immediate investigation. Nearby construction or drilling may create changes in water’s appearance, taste or availability. The sudden onset of spurting faucets, foaming or cloudy water, metallic or salty tastes, previously undetected odors, or reduced flow volume may each indicate manmade problems caused by localized disturbances.
In addition to water sources, information also should be carefully evaluated. With the recent deluge of sources disseminating information related to protecting water supplies near gas drilling, Swistock suggests that homeowners with private water systems in the Marcellus region be vigilant and carefully weigh comments and recommendations they receive. He recommends seeking out credible sources of information, trustworthy third-party testing services and state-accredited water labs to conduct the testing.
“It’s our mission to provide unbiased information grounded in research to help people manage and protect the water resources of Pennsylvania,” Swistock said. “None of my current or past research funding has come from the Marcellus gas industry. My only goal is to provide facts that will help homeowners and others make the best decision possible.”
The webinar also will provide viewers with links to useful websites, including a description of various water tests, a list of state-accredited labs and an online Drinking Water Interpretation Tool to help homeowners interpret complex water test reports.
This presentation is part of an overall series targeting the most common water questions and concerns people have about water resources on their own property, whether those are water wells, septic systems or ponds. Other topics in the series include managing septic systems, ponds and lakes, drilling wells and safe drinking water. Recordings of previous webinars can be found at http://extension.psu.edu/water/webinar-series.
Penn State launches new education, research center on Marcellus Shale
http://live.psu.edu/story/47867/nw69
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
University Park, Pa.— Penn State announced today (Aug. 18) the formation of an education and research initiative on the Marcellus Shale to work with state agencies, elected officials, communities, landowners, industry and environmental groups to protect the Commonwealth’s water resources, forests and transportation infrastructure while advocating for a science-based and responsible approach to handling the state’s natural gas deposits.
“With the Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research we are bringing together the University’s considerable expertise in a number of areas to provide fact-based information on the Marcellus Shale, one of the largest gas fields in the world,” said Penn State President Graham Spanier. “It has become apparent that much more research and education is needed on the Marcellus.”
Reports on the development of the natural gas deposits of the Marcellus Shale predict a boost to both Pennsylvania’s economy and the energy reserves of the state and nation. At the same time, there are potential environmental and social impacts that must be researched and considered, Spanier said.
“Penn State has the capabilities and resources to examine all sides of this complex issue—and to do that well,” he said.
Leadership of Penn State’s Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research (MCOR) < http://www.marcellus.psu.edu/ > reflects the need for energy research and public outreach with Michael A. Arthur, professor of geosciences in the College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, and Thomas B. Murphy, extension educator, Penn State Cooperative Extension, serving as co-directors.
In establishing the Marcellus Center, the University aims to coordinate ongoing outreach and research initiatives as well as develop additional resources for stakeholders on Marcellus geology, legal issues, environmentally appropriate technologies, and impacts on infrastructure such as roadways and bridges.
Because water availability and protection are key issues, MCOR has hired a hydrogeologist to lead these related outreach and research efforts. This position will complement ongoing research into water supply and quality issues funded by state and federal agencies.
The University has been a key player in Marcellus development since its beginning. It was Penn State research that first called attention to the potential for tapping this vast energy reserve using horizontal drilling technology. In addition, for the past five years, Penn State extension staff has provided Marcellus-focused programming to landowners, local governments and state legislators, reaching more than 50,000 people in Pennsylvania and surrounding states. Cooperative Extension staff also has collaborated with environmental and business organizations as well as state agencies on issues from gas rights to water impacts.
Workforce development programs to train Pennsylvania residents for jobs within the natural gas industry also are being initiated by the Marcellus Shale Education and Training Center (MSETC) < http://www.msetc.org/ > a separate collaboration between Cooperative Extension and Penn College of Technology.
“This center (MCOR) enables Penn State to further our outreach efforts to counter misinformation and provide reliable knowledge to the residents of Pennsylvania and surrounding states about the opportunities and challenges of natural gas development,” Murphy said.
While the expertise of faculty across the University will be tapped through the center, faculty in the College of Earth and Mineral Sciences are already engaged in research projects to investigate geologic aspects of the Marcellus Shale and to determine more efficient methods for “fracing” the formation to enhance natural gas recovery and minimize the number of wells to be drilled. Fracing is short for hydraulic fracturing, a process that fractures rock formations to extract the gas below. These projects are being funded by the Department of Energy and industry affiliate groups.
“Other key research examines impacts of increased truck traffic on Pennsylvania’s extensive dirt and gravel road network, the effects of well siting and pipeline construction on forest ecology and the spread of invasive species,” Arthur said.
Penn State researchers also are examining the economic and social consequences of rapid development of the communities with significant Marcellus Shale drilling.
Penn State has committed major resources to establish and staff the Marcellus Center (MCOR) with support from the colleges of Agricultural Sciences and Earth and Mineral Sciences, the Penn State Institutes for Energy and the Environment (PSIEE) and Penn State Outreach, Spanier said.
Additional funding from PSIEE and the Social Sciences Research Institute (SSRI) at Penn State is underwriting investigation of human/social impacts and environmental issues related to Marcellus development by teams of cross-disciplinary collaborators. The goal of these research seed grants is to develop proposals for external funding agencies.
Court ruling affirms communities’ ability to limit natural gas drilling
http://citizensvoice.com/news/court-ruling-affirms-communities-ability-to-limit-natural-gas-drilling-1.967942
Court ruling affirms communities’ ability to limit natural gas drilling
BY ELIZABETH SKRAPITS (STAFF WRITER)
Published: August 23, 2010
DALLAS TWP. – Would local officials be powerless to stop a natural gas company from drilling a natural gas well in the middle of a housing development?
Not according to a new state court ruling, which affirms the right of municipal and county officials to limit natural gas drilling to certain districts, such as agricultural, mining or manufacturing, and out of residential neighborhoods.
“Gas drilling is here to stay, and it affects the Back Mountain region very extensively.” Attorney Jeffrey Malak told members of the Back Mountain Community Partnership as he outlined the new court decision.
Thousands of acres in the Back Mountain have been leased by natural gas companies, and Encana Oil & Gas USA Inc. is drilling the second of two exploratory natural gas wells in Lake Township.
Traditionally, local officials have limited say when it comes to natural gas drilling. Technical aspects, such as what kind of materials to use and how the well is drilled, are governed by the state Oil and Gas Act. But local officials are gaining more and more say in where wells can be drilled.
Two previous cases, Huntley & Huntley v. Oakmont Borough and Range Resources v. Salem Township (Westmoreland County) set precedents allowing local officials some leeway in regulating where natural gas companies can drill.
A third, Penneco Oil Co. Inc. v. the County of Fayette, decided in Commonwealth Court on July 22, determined the state Oil & Gas Act does not trump local zoning ordinances, and that local officials can take steps to protect the residential character of neighborhoods.
In the case, Penneco, Range Resources Appalachia LLC and the Independent Oil and Gas Association of Pennsylvania took Fayette County Office of Planning, Zoning and Community Development to court, saying they did not have to follow the county’s zoning ordinance because the state Oil and Gas Act made it invalid. The court ruled in favor of the county.
“This opens up the floodgates and says municipal zoning is not pre-empted,” Malak said.
The Penneco case allows that gas wells cannot be located within the flight path of an airport runway; that they must be at least 200 feet from a residential dwelling; and that officials can require fencing and shrubs around the well site. It also allows zoning hearing boards to impose any other provisions to protect the health, safety and welfare of residents.
Whether the Penneco case will be appealed is anybody’s guess, but it’s the law unless the state Supreme Court changes it, Malak said.
Dallas Borough already has some of the provisions in its zoning ordinance, Malak said. In Jackson Township, where he also serves as solicitor, the supervisors will put similar provisions in the zoning ordinance when it is drafted over the next couple of months, Malak said.
Dallas Township Supervisor Chairman Phil Walter asked Malak if there was a way to protect a municipality against fly-by-night operators who will leave when something goes wrong.
The case does allow for bonds, even large ones, to be put in place to protect the health, safety and welfare of residents, Malak said.
Kingston Township Supervisor Jeffrey Box asked if local officials can require a land development plan from natural gas companies. Malak said they could, and they can require special exceptions, meaning there has to be a hearing in front of the zoning hearing board to grant permission and to impose any standard planning and zoning fees.
But, he said, there are still aspects of natural gas drilling that will have to be decided in court, such as whether there can be restrictions on hours drillers can operate and whether they can be barred from using roads at certain times.
eskrapits@citizensvoice.com, 570-821-2072