Westmoreland Marcellus
Citizens’ Group Updates March 28, 2013
To receive our news updates, please email jan at janjackmil@yahoo.com
* For articles and updates or to just vent, visit us on facebook;
* To view permanent documents, past updates,
reports, general information and meeting information
http://westmorelandmarcellus.blogspot.com/
*
To discuss candidates: http://www.facebook.com/groups/VoteProEarth/
* To contact your state
legislator:
For email
address, click on the envelope under the photo
* For information on the state gas legislation
and local control: http://pajustpowers.org/aboutthebills.html-
* To view see how much PA officials received
in contributions from the gas industry:
Calendar of Events
***County
Commissioners Meeting- 2nd
and 4th Thursday of the month at the county courthouse at 10:00 am
***Film----Triple Divide Showing in Butler
Saturday, March 30,
2013 - 12:30 pm
Butler Public Library
218 N. McKean Street
Butler PA 16001
Free and Open to the Public
Pribanic
and Troutman take audiences on a cradle-to-grave journey to uncover how DEP and industry have handled
violations within Pennsylvania’s highest classified watersheds, what happened
in the 2011 Bradford County Blowout, water contamination complaints, health
issues, and the split-estate landowner dispute
For a full calendar
of area events please see “Marcellus Protest” calendar:
Frack Links
***Dr. David
Brown—Excellent Video on Public Health and Fracking -25 minutes
Seminar held at St. Vincent
College in Latrobe, Pa
Thank you
– St. Vincent College Meeting
In addition to others mentioned last week I forgot to thank:
Gwen and Ed Chute-
For working the information table as they have done for the group many times.
TAKE ACTION!!
***Take Action: Tell
the EPA to Protect Vulnerable Communities from Toxic Air Pollution
The
Environmental Protection Agency is working on a safeguard that closes existing
industry loopholes and holds polluters accountable for bursts of toxic air
pollution that currently go unchecked.
Neighborhoods
adjacent to these types of facilities -- often lower-income families and
communities of color -- are being exposed to dangerously high levels of air
pollution. Unfortunately, but not unexpectedly, polluters are fighting this
commonsense effort.
Tell the
EPA to stand strong and protect vulnerable communities from dangerous air
pollution.
***Past
Action--Good Work On Acid Mine Water Bill !!
Good work everyone on
taking action to ask our representatives to examine the vagueness of the acid
mine drainage bill. As you recall, there are concerns about liability problems
with the acid mine water being used to frack gas wells. We received a message
that we could “hold” from
PennEnvironment-- that our action was working to raise questions.
A Response from Sen. Dinniman-- The
acid mine drainage bill is too vague
“Dear Friend –
Thank
you for writing in opposition Senate Bill 411, legislation that aims to
encourage natural gas drillers and other companies to use acid mine water for
hydraulic fracturing and other industrial uses by providing liability
protection to landowners and companies.
I
appreciate you raising concerns regarding the vagueness of the bill’s language
and the potential for endangerment or contamination of our waterways, lands and
natural resources. Please know that I understand your concerns and I agree that
gas drillers must be held accountable for their activities. That is why I do
not support this legislation.
Thank
you for contacting my office about this important matter, and please do not
hesitate to do so again regarding this or any other issue or concern that may
arise in the future.
Sincerely,
Andrew E. Dinniman
State Senator – 19th District”
Frack News
1.
Senator Leach Tells Gov Corbett-Nominate a Moderate for PA Supreme Court
(This PA Supreme Court appointment is of concern for many reasons, one of
which is that we are still waiting for the ruling on the Act 13 appeal. If Gov.
Corbett appoints a conservative judge, Act 13 zoning regs will be reinstated
and local municipalities will lose the right to protect residential areas via
the zoning gas operations. Jan)
“Sen. Leach tells
Gov. Corbett to nominate a moderate or else, for Supremes. In a new OFF
THE FLOOR column, Capitolwire Bureau Chief Peter L. DeCoursey writes that
Senate Judiciary Committee Minority Chairman Daylin Leach, D-Montgomery, has a
message for Gov. Tom Corbett: “Nominate
a thoughtful, independent moderate for the Supreme Court. Or we won’t confirm
them.” To confirm a appointment to the state Supreme Court, two-thirds of
the Senate must vote in favor of the nominee. When DeCoursey asked Leach if it
was fair for the Democrats to insist that Corbett nominate a moderate to
replace a conservative in Melvin, Leach agreed Melvin was an ideological
conservative and concluded: “We have the
votes. And we are going to insist on a qualified, independent moderate.”
And just a note to the people who would like to see merit selection replace
electing justices: While there are supposed to be deadlines and safeguards
built into the proposed merit selection system, Sen. Leach’s tactic would
appear to raise some questions as to how a merit selection process could be
“gamed” by both political parties – just a thought.”
**********And:
HARRISBURG (March 27) - The top Senate leader in each caucus
said Tuesday that Gov. Tom Corbett needs to sit down and discuss potential
Supreme Court nominees before he floats more names or sends up a nominee.
Once
Justice Joan Orie Melvin, a Republican, convicted of misusing state workers for
her campaign, resigns on May 1, Corbett can nominate a replacement. The Supreme
Court can also name a short-term replacement until a Corbett nominee receives a
two-thirds confirmation vote in the Senate.
But as
long as the court is knotted on major decisions - like Voter ID, shale zoning
and reapportionment - it will be hard to get the seven Senate Democratic votes
needed to confirm anyone, or the Democratic vote on the court for Castille to
pick a temp.
Some believe that the court may have to
uphold the lower court rulings in those three cases and perhaps others by 3-3
votes to get to a point where either the court or Senate can get the votes to
pick a 7th justice.
Once the
court clears those three big cases, though, a real opening exists to meet Costa
and Corbett’s goal of a June 30 appointment.
The
Senate Democrats can sit on a Supreme Court nominee as long as they like. And
the governor can return serve as long as he wishes, holding up appointments the
Senate Democrats have had, either by law or custom, to the Pennsylvania
Turnpike Commission and to two spots on the Public Utilities Commission. Plus
there is a Pennsylvania Liquor Control Board nomination to wrangle over.”
See Capitol Wire http://us.mc1424.mail.yahoo.com/mc/compose?to=//www.capitolwire.com/cwMailForm.asp&recipient=pdecoursey@capitolwire.com
-
2. US Senator Bob Casey
Pushes Gas
“Natural
gas-powered school and public transit buses might be the newest development in
the Pennsylvania’s natural gas sector.
“When
you have an opportunity like natural gas development in Pennsylvania, you have
to be thoughtful in how you put into place a strategy that will lead to job
growth,” Casey said of this transportation-focused bill. “I think the way to do
that is to be more narrowly focused than some other (bills) have been.”
Specifically,
the Natural Gas Energy and Alternative Rewards (NGEAR) Act would establish a
rebate of 30 percent, up to $15,000, for the purchase of natural gas school and
transit buses; extend the Alternative Fuel Tax Credit of $0.50 a gallon for the
retail sale of natural gas fuel for everyone who uses it to power vehicles
through 2016; and extend a tax credit for installing commercial natural gas
refueling infrastructure through 2016, totaling 30 percent of the system, up to
$30,000.
“We know
we have these massive school (and transit) bus fleets and this is a proposal
that allows us to really focus on a huge segment of our transportation sector
and be able to provide some incentive,” Casey said. “It really gives us a
chance to infuse a lot of momentum by way of incentives.”
Casey
also said the bill would also help decrease the country’s dependence on foreign
oil by promoting domestic development and deployment of clean transportation
advancements.
While
Casey is a definite proponent of job creation in the natural gas industry, he
isn’t immune to the environmental issues that come along with the industry. He
spoke out earlier this month regarding the fracking wastewater dumping in
Youngstown, Ohio, and lack of communication between Ohio and Pennsylvania.”
3. From Marcellus Outreach-Terry
Greenwood’s Cattle
“My name
is Terry Greenwood. My farm is losing revenue from sick and dying cattle. I am
calling for a ban on fracking...The wellhead was 285 feet from my pond. There
was a spill on my property a short time later. The frack fluid went into my
field and pond. My animals drank this water. I lost 11 cattle. A two-year-old
cow died, 10 calves were stillborn, and 4 were blind (2 had blue eyes and 2 had
white eyes). This affects the animals something terrible. I had to get rid of
my bull, because he became sterile. I called the DEP, Pennsylvania’s Department
of Environmental Protection. Also, we called the gas company. No one helped me.
The DEP sided with the gas company when I called them. I was told by the DEP,
‘There’s nothing wrong with this. They dump the water.’ The damage was done.”
(To read a
paper documenting animal deaths and stillborns see Bamburger/
Oswald ,“Impacts of gas drilling on human and animal health.” New Solutions: A
Journal of Environmental and Occupational Health Policy. Vol. 22. Iss. 1.
January 2012.” jan)
4.
DEP Secretary Krancer’s Legacy—excerpt from
article by Don Hopey, PPG
Just two months after he was
appointed, he required department field
inspectors and regional directors to get approval from his office before
issuing Marcellus Shale drilling permits, enforcing regulations or issuing
violation notices.
Staffers internally criticized the
policy, and a DEP administrator had to send an apology to regional directors
for the "significant confusion and consternation" it caused.
Also in March 2011, and without public notice, Mr. Krancer gave top
administrators in Harrisburg sole power to approve violation notices and
enforcement actions in cases involving other state or federal agencies.
And in September 2012 -- again
without public notice -- he transferred
decisions from field offices to Harrisburg administrators about when property
owners should be notified of water well contamination related to Marcellus
Shale operations.
Mr. Krancer also has been criticized for the incomplete reporting of
well water test results to property owners, and recently for being evasive at a
state House appropriations committee meeting when questioned about his views on
climate change and its human causes.
Mr. Krancer chaffed at scrutiny by the U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency, which in May 2011 requested that the DEP do a better job of sampling,
monitoring and regulating Marcellus Shale drilling wastewater discharges near
public drinking water sources.
The EPA and Mr. Krancer also
clashed over the federal agency's involvement in assessing water contamination
related to shale gas drilling in Dimock, Susquehanna County, in January 2012. Mr. Krancer wrote that the EPA's
understanding of the well water contamination issues there was
"rudimentary."
"He likes being judge, and
that's how he approached decisions at the agency," Mr. Jugovic said.
"The secretary should be setting policy at the 10,000-foot level, not be
down in the weeds, adjudicating decisions about enforcement in Washington
County."
John Hanger, DEP secretary under
former Gov. Ed Rendell and a candidate for the Democratic nomination for
governor, said Marcellus Shale gas regulation has suffered under the Corbett
administration and the DEP has been demoralized under Mr. Krancer.
"Morale at DEP is at
devastatingly low levels," Mr. Hanger said. "Corbett's DEP has failed
to adequately regulate gas drilling and taken combative stances when citizens
present the agency with legitimate concerns and problems."
Mr. Krancer is the third Cabinet
secretary to resign during the past several months.”
For the article see: http://www.post-gazette.com/stories/local/state/pennsylvania-environmental-secretary-mike-krancer-to-step-down-680517/
Also see: Pa.
State Rep. Jesse White weighs in--- “KRANCER RETREATING IN
DISGRACE”…
http://www.observer-reporter.com/article/20130325/OPINION02/130329498#.UVG8A4LD_cs
5. MIT Study Bias –from Amy Goodman Democracy Now!
“How
MIT’s Influential Study of Fracking Was Authored, Funded, and Released by Oil
and Gas Industry Insiders."
An excerpt:
“AMY GOODMAN: Let’s turn to our guest in
Los Angeles, Kevin Connor, and what you found in your report.
Talk about the report that you did that looks at—well, the title of the report
is "Industry Partner or Industry Puppet? How MIT’s Influential Study of
Fracking Was Authored, Funded, and Released by Oil and Gas Industry
Insiders."
KEVIN
CONNOR: Sure. Moniz’s nomination prompted us at the Public
Accountability Initiative to take a closer look at an influential study
that MIT did on "The Future of Natural Gas," as it was called, in
2011. It was issued by the Energy Initiative, which Moniz was the director of.
And it gave a very pro-gas—put a very pro-gas spin on fracking and shale gas
extraction, said that natural gas was a bridge or will be a bridge to a
low-carbon future, said that the environmental impacts related to fracking are
challenging but manageable, and also endorsed natural gas exports, which is a
very industry-friendly position to take.
It immediately, you know, prompted some criticism from
people who pointed to the fact that the report
was actually industry-funded, much like the initiative itself. But it was extremely influential. It was
designed to influence policymakers. Moniz
testified before Congress on the report. It had immediate impact, as well. And
it came at a critical time for the industry, which was facing significant
questions about the safety of fracking, the relative environmental impacts of
fracking. And we took a closer look at the study and found that beyond just the
industry funding of the study, there were significant conflicts of interest
that went undisclosed in the report itself and in presentations of the report,
and those involved Moniz and several other key authors of the study. So, as it
turns out, it was not only just funded by industry, it was also authored by industry representatives.
AMY GOODMAN: Kevin Connor, I wanted to
turn to a 2011 press conference at the MIT Energy Initiative, where Ernest
Moniz introduced the study now under contention, "The Future of Natural
Gas." In his opening remarks, Professor Moniz emphasized the report’s
independent of its sponsors and advisers.
ERNEST
MONIZ: I do want to emphasize a disclaimer, if you like, that
while their advice was absolutely critical, they are not responsible for the
recommendations and the findings. We have not asked for endorsement. We asked
for their advice; we received it. But the results, then, are our
responsibility.
AMY GOODMAN: Later in the presentation,
co-chair Anthony Meggs introduces the MIT report’s findings, saying
environmental impacts associated with fracking are, quote, "challenging
but manageable." However, Meggs
failed to disclose he had joined the gas company Talisman Energy prior to the
release of the study. ANTHONY MEGGS: ...
messages are very simple. First of all, there’s a lot of gas in the world, at
very modest cost. As you will see, gas is still, globally speaking, a very
young industry with a bright future ahead of it. Secondly, and perhaps
obviously at this stage, although not so obvious when we started three years
ago, shale gas is transformative for the economy of the United States, North
America, for the gas industry, in particular, and potentially on a global
scale. Thirdly, the environmental impacts of shale development, widely
discussed and hotly debated, are—and we use these words carefully—challenging
but manageable.
AMY GOODMAN: Kevin Connor, your response?
KEVIN
CONNOR: It’s absolutely outrageous for the
Energy Initiative, for Moniz and MIT to pretend this is independent of
industry, well, first of all, given the fact that the sponsors of the report
are all, you know, industry organizations and companies like Chesapeake Energy.
Moniz was attempting to say that it was somehow insulated from the influence of
these gas companies, when in fact authors of the study, such as Moniz and
Meggs, were—had industry positions at the time.
Meggs’s quote there is particularly
insidious, the fact that he is saying that fracking is safe for the
environment, when he had actually joined Talisman Energy, a gas company, one of
the most active frackers in the Marcellus Shale, a month before the study was
released. So he is speaking to a roomful of journalists there, presenting a
report designed to influence policy, and not disclosing that he is on the
industry payroll. That is perhaps the last person in that room who should be
presenting that finding or having anything to do with authoring that kind of
report. And yet MIT and Moniz thought it was appropriate to put that
spokesperson forward. So, it just goes to the fact that MIT was really sort of
presenting an industry brochure here with a lot of pro-gas, industry advocacy
talking points, and not revealing that there were significant conflicts of
interest here.”
For
the rest of the interview see: http://www.democracynow.org/2013/3/26/energy_nominee_ernest_moniz_criticized_for
6. On Liberating Communities from Corporate Control and The Unsealing of
Hallowich Court Case
A New Civil Rights Movement:
Liberating Our Communities from Corporate Control
A Pennsylvania Judge Holds That Corporations Are Not
“Persons” under the Pennsylvania Constitution
By Thomas Alan Linzey, Esq., Executive Director
March 28, 2013
“To protect small and family farms
from industrial factory farms, over a decade ago a handful of Pennsylvania
townships picked a fight with some of the country’s largest agribusiness
corporations. Recognizing that the state
and federal government, rather than protecting them from factory farms, were in
fact, forcing them into communities, the townships took the unprecedented step
of banning corporate farming within their borders.
Thus began the journey to spark a
new civil rights movement – one aimed at elevating the right of communities
over the “rights” of corporations to use communities for their own ends.
In a departure from the usual
David and Goliath story, with one tiny community battling a giant corporation,
today there are over 150 “Davids” in eight states that have followed the lead
of those Pennsylvania townships.
Community by community, they’ve banned corporate “fracking” for shale
gas, factory farming, sludge dumping, large-scale water withdrawals, and
industrial-scale energy projects.
But they’re not intent on simply
stopping the immediate threat of fracking or factory farming. Rather, they’re
adopting Community Bills of Rights that
ban such projects as violations of the community’s right to a sustainable energy
and farming future. And to protect those Bills of Rights, they are
legislatively overturning a slew of corporate legal doctrines – like corporate
“personhood” – that have been concocted over the past century to keep
communities from interfering with corporate prerogatives.
These communities believe that if
ten thousand other localities do the same, that those tremors will begin to
shake loose a new system of law – a system in which courts and legislatures
begin to elevate community rights above corporate rights, and thus, begin to
liberate cities and towns to build economically and environmentally sustainable
communities free from corporate interference.
Last week, a Pennsylvania county court gave this new movement a boost –
declaring that corporations are not “persons” under the Pennsylvania
Constitution, and therefore, that corporations cannot elevate their “private
rights” above the rights of people.
The ruling was delivered in a case
brought by several Western Pennsylvania newspapers which sought the release of
a sealed settlement agreement between a family claiming to be affected by water
contamination from gas fracking, and Range Resources – one of the largest gas
extraction corporations in the state.
Range Resources argued that unsealing the settlement
agreement would violate the corporation’s constitutional right to privacy under
the Pennsylvania Constitution.
In a landmark ruling, President Judge Debbie O’Dell-Seneca of the
Washington County Court of Common Pleas denied the corporation’s request on the
basis that the Pennsylvania Constitution only protects the rights of people,
not business entities.
In the ruling, Judge O’Dell-Seneca declared
that “in the absence of state law, business entities are nothing.” If
corporations could claim rights independent from people, she asserted, then
“the chattel would become the co-equal to its owners, the servant on par with
its masters, the agent the peer of its principals, and the legal fabrication
superior to the law that created and sustains it.”
She further found that “the
constitution vests in business entities no special rights that the laws of this
Commonwealth cannot extinguish. In sum, [corporations] cannot assert
[constitutional privacy] protections because they are not mentioned in its
text.”
Judge O’Dell-Seneca cited sections of the 1776
Pennsylvania Constitution in support of her contention that corporations were
never intended to be constitutionally protected “persons.” She declared that
“an even more dubious proposition is that the framers of the Constitution of
1776, given their egalitarian sympathies, would have concerned themselves with vesting,
for the first time in history, indefeasible rights in such entities. . . that
language extends only to natural persons.”
Finally,
she tackled the very nature of corporations by declaring that “it is axiomatic
that corporations, companies, and partnerships have no ‘spiritual nature,’
‘feelings,’ ‘intellect,’ ‘beliefs,’ ‘thoughts,’ ‘emotions,’ or ‘sensations,’
because they do not exist in the manner that humankind exists. . . They cannot
be ‘let alone’ by government, because businesses are but grapes, ripe upon the
vine of the law, that the
people
of this Commonwealth raise, tend, and prune at their pleasure and need.”
The court records unsealed by the ruling
reveal that Range Resources, and the other corporations which were the subject
of the complaint, paid out $750,000 to settle claims of water contamination
caused by fracking.
The
ruling represents the first crack in the judicial armor that has been so meticulously
welded together by major corporations. And it affirms what many communities
already know – that change only occurs when people begin to openly question and
challenge legal doctrines that have been treated as sacred by most lawyers
and judges.
It
is that disobedience – of entire communities sitting at lunch counters demanding
to be served – that is our only hope of salvation in a world increasingly commandeered
by a small handful of corporate decision makers intent on remaking the world as
their own.
A
revolution that subordinates the powers and rights of corporations to the
rights of people and nature now waits in the wings. Perhaps now, we’re ready to
move it to center stage.”
7. Senator Yaw Denies
Conflict of Interest
“State
Senator Gene Yaw of Lycoming County is only in his second term but already has
considerable influence in the state legislature. Now, some question whether the
Republican has a conflict of interest.
Yaw, chair of the senate
environmental Resource and Energy Committee, is pushing for new laws to
expand natural gas line service to more Pennsylvania homes and businesses.
Senator
Yaw owns land in rural Lycoming County that’s proven lucrative. Yaw has leased more than 100 acres to
natural gas company Anadarko Petroleum.
“All
he’s done is sign a piece of paper and millions come his way, so isn’t he going
to think gas development is the most wonderful thing in the world? Who
wouldn’t?” asked Ralph Kisberg of Responsible Drilling Alliance.
Kisberg
took part in a hike Monday to call for saving parts of the Loyalsock State
Forest from natural gas drilling. The
group delivered petitions calling for public hearings on the matter to Senator
Yaw’s office in Williamsport. Kisberg and some other environment groups say Yaw
should be taking himself out of the legislative process when it comes to issues
involving natural gas development.
“It’s a lot easier to buy the arguments of the industry
when, in the back of your mind, there’s millions coming your way,” said
Kisberg.
Yaw says
that’s not so, pointing to the fact he signed the lease with Anadarko before he
was elected to the state senate.”
For
the article:
To read the Guide to PA Public Officials and Employee Ethics Act:
8. Former Governor Rendell, Urges NY to Start
Drilling
Editorial by former Gov Ed Rendell, New York Daily
I know because, as
governor of Pennsylvania from 2003 to 2011, I saw this happen up-close.
That’s
why New York’s consideration of hydraulic fracturing is so essential. We’re at
an energy crossroads as a nation. If we choose to embrace natural gas, it will
help us get past a number of significant economic and environmental challenges.
On the other hand, if we let fear carry the day, we will squander another key
moment to move forward together.
New
York has a healthy band of vocal critics right now who continue to push a false
choice: natural gas versus the environment. But as the former Democratic
governor of a major natural gas-producing state, I know we can enjoy the
benefits of gas production while also protecting the environment.
Pennsylvania
put in place strong oversight while allowing development throughout the
Marcellus Shale — and the economic benefits were significant.
Thousands of solid jobs with good salaries
were created, communities came back to life and investment in the state soared.
The steel, lumber, concrete and construction industries, as well as
manufacturing purchases and retail spending, all benefited from the ensuing
natural gas boom. According to economic research firm IHS, shale gas
contributed about $7 billion to Pennsylvania’s gross domestic product. And, the
study says, that number will double in 2015.”
(EDITOR'S ADDENDUM: Rendell is a paid consultant to Element Partners, a
private equity firm with stake in a number of energy companies, including
hydrofracking/natural gas interests. This information was not disclosed at the
time his op-ed was submitted to the News. )
Read more:
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinion/yes-fracking-n-y-article-1.1299789#ixzz2OsWaeHq7
9. DuBois Council Votes Against Seismic Testing on Watershed
Land
“DuBOIS - After much discussion and feedback from the public, the DuBois City council voted unanimously
against seismic testing on land they own in the watershed that feeds into the
DuBois Reservoir.
a request from Seitel Data Inc. to conduct the testing
on a 3.59-square-mile area owned by the city was denied.
Seitel wants to
conduct testing over a 250-square-mile from St. Marys to Benezette
to Brockway, including the city's property.
The testing is about one-third of the way completed.
Many residents are
concerned that the information obtained by Seitel would be sold to companies
that want to conduct Marcellus Shale gas drilling operations.
Those in favor of
the testing pointed out that while the city could control what happens on the
land it owns, it cannot dictate what the owners of the remainder of the
property do. They say Seitel agreed to 10 stipulations set by the city's
watershed committee and geological consultant. Those stipulations included
items such as developing maps of all water sources on the city's property,
testing of water before and after the seismic tests are completed, locating and
marking all metallic pipes and gas wells on the city's property, providing
copies of the information Seitel gathers as a result of the testing and
allowing a representative of the city to oversee all the testing operations.
Watershed
Committee member Sam Miles said while he commended the council on its decision,
he is concerned about what will happen on the land in the watershed that is not
under the council's control. He suggested the council get together with
surrounding municipalities to formulate a source water protection module to
help protect the watershed.”
To read the article: “
http://www.thecourierexpress.com/courierexpress/courierexpresslocal/998150-349/council-nixes-seismic-testing-on-dubois-watershed.html
10. Waterless Fracking Being
Tried in Texas
by Kate Galbraith
“With water increasingly scarce
and expensive around Texas, a few companies have begun fracking with propane or
other alternatives.
“We
don’t use any water,” said Eric Tudor, a Houston-based official with GasFrac, a
Canadian company that fracks with propane gel and butane. “Zip. None.” At a
GasFrac operation in South Texas last month, a sticker on one worker's hard hat
showed a red slash through the word H2O.
Water-free
fracking is an early-stage technology, with potentially higher initial costs
than conventional fracking methods. But as lawmakers and oil regulators focus
on the large quantity of water used for fracking wells, the concept is getting
a closer look. GasFrac has led the way,
bringing its propane fracking operations to Texas, and there is talk of using
other substances like carbon dioxide or nitrogen.
Academics
see a number of challenges associated with propane fracking, which few if any
companies are experimenting with in Texas, apart from GasFrac. First, according
to David Yoxtheimer, an extension associate with the Marcellus Center for
Outreach & Research at Penn State University. “you’ve got to truck in a lot of propane,”
which can be expensive. He also said the propane “works less effectively in
deeper formations where you need to build up more pressure.” he noted, there is
a reason that companies use water, namely that it is "virtually
incompressible" and thus is very effective in bringing pressure against,
and ultimately breaking up, rock.
Tudor
disagrees that these issues pose problems. He pointed out that the virtually
all the propane — which is a byproduct of natural gas processing and oil
refining — gets reused. Supplies of propane come from Corpus Christi, he said,
and the fuel is "easily available" in South Texas. "We won't
cause any shortages," he said.That is an implicit contrast with the
considerable water needs of conventional fracking, which already accounts for a
double-digit percentage of water use in some rural Texas counties. The water
leftover from fracking operations typically does not get reused. Instead, it
gets discarded into a disposal well. (The Texas Railroad Commission on Tuesday
approved rules to make it easier for companies to recycle water.)
Tudor
also said that his company had fracked at depths well over 10,000 feet.
An advantage of propane fracks, said
Yoxtheimer, is that they avoid the damage to the oil and gas-producing
formation that water can cause.
“If you’re using
water, the water can actually block off or at least impede the flow of
hydrocarbons,” he said.
Tudor agreed, saying that
his company could recover a higher percentage of the oil or gas with propane
than with a traditional water frack job. It was this increased production,
rather than the reduced use of water, that enticed GasFrac's customers, he
said.
David Burnett, research
coordinator at the Department of Petroleum Engineering at Texas A&M
University, said that more study is needed. Evidence that the wells fracked
with propane are more productive is “sort of anecdotal data,” he said.
As for the risks of handling
flammable material like propane, “Our industry is used to handling high-pressure
gas and pumping flammable liquids,” Burnett said. “It’s not an issue if the
equipment is designed properly.” The risks, he added, are “no more worrisome
than a propane tank on the edge of town.”
Marathon Oil has begun using a
new formula, which it describes as a “guar mix commonly used in ice cream and
other food products,” to reduce its water use
Over”
the last 18 months, she said, Marathon has cut its water use by 45 percent per
well.
For
the article see: http://www.texastribune.org/2013/03/27/fracking-without-water-makes-headway-texasslowly/
11.
Spectra Energy Tries to Ignore Problem
“Spectra Energy is a gas
pipeline and storage company with a track record that looks like a police rap
sheet. Despite its actual performance,
it snags merit badges for good citizenship' that it celebrates in press
releases.
Thanks
to the persistence of Property Owner Angel Smith and Associate Editor Elizabeth
Coyle, of the Bedford Gazette, Spectra Energy's denials began to crumble. By the next day, the company was forced
to admit there was an incident involving a valve and a release of methane and
other hydrocarbons. But the company
refuses to say how much methane was released and exactly why the valve
activated and released methane. In
other words, was there an "unexpected event" that occurred? If so, what was the reason?
This
incident was surrounded by other, related problems for Spectra Energy.
*Trillium Asset Management, a large
socially responsible investor group with over $1 BILLION in assets under
management, filed a shareholder
resolution requesting a report from Spectra Energy's Board of Directors on its
fugitive methane emissions.
Trillium's public challenge to Spectra Energy pulled no punches:
"We believe Spectra Energy's social license to operate is at risk and the
company has a responsibility to implement a program of measurement, mitigation,
and disclosure."
*Meanwhile,
the Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), issued Spectra
Energy CEO Greg Ebel a "Final Order" and civil penalty of $134,500
related to various violations across several states. Included in this Order,
the company was cited for failure
regarding valve inspections. As
PHMSA said in its statement: "An
operator that fails to follow its own procedures for valve inspections
increases the risk of preventable pipeline accidents.”
*
Spectra Energy has a long, documented record of problems. It
includes violations, explosions and fines (including a 15 million dollar
federal fine). Further, Spectra
Energy’s history at its Steckman Ridge facility includes an on-the-record
statement filed by the company with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC). In its own document, Spectra
Energy uses Webster’s dictionary definition of “lying” to support the company’s
assertion that, “There is no evidence of willful ‘lying’ by any Project
Representative to landowners.”
In order
to help Spectra Energy with its "Stakeholder Outreach," we review
these details and provide an easy-to-use guide that highlights the company's
track record; and we provide it's original document to FERC which uses the
dictionary definition of lying as a defense of its behavior.”
To read the article: Spectra Energy Flip-Flops:
http://www.spectraenergywatch.com/blog/?p=1807
Westmoreland Marcellus Citizen’s Group—Mission Statement
To raise the public’s general awareness and
understanding of the impacts of Marcellus drilling on the natural environment,
health, and long-term economies of local communities.
Officers:
President-Jan Milburn
Treasurer-Wanda Guthrie
Secretary-Ron Nordstrom
Facebook Coordinator-Elizabeth Nordstrom
Blogsite –April Jackman
Science Subcommittee-Dr. Cynthia Walter
