Sunday, August 24, 2014

fracking news from Ohio, several states and countries

early this past week there was news of two river spills but neither of them involved fracking...the truly large spill was of 10 million gallons of concentrated sulfuric acid from a major copper mining operation in Mexico near Arizona that so far has contaminated a 124 mile stretch of the Sonora River, resulting in the closure of 88 Mexican schools and warnings to the citizenry not to touch the river, which has turned a bright orange...the smaller spill was of 8000 gallons of diesel fuel from a Duke Energy power plant just up the Ohio river from Cincinnati....fortunately, the Cincy water department was warned and quickly shut down their water intakes to allow the river to clear...what's notable about this incident is that the news coverage indicates it's the second time this year that Cincinnati had to shut the intakes, the first being the result of the W Virginia spill of MCHM into the Elk River early this year...if it's just the second time, that would suggest that they did not get the warning to shut their intakes for the Monroe County fracking pad fire & spill of fracking fluid that caused a major fish kill in an Ohio river tributary that ODNR did not investigate until 5 days after the fact...

an odd Ohio story that garnered quite a bit of national coverage first seemed so minor that i skipped over it the first few times i saw it...apparently, a Texas brine disposal company has filed defamation of character suit against Michael Boals of Coshocton, who posted anti-fracking messages on two area billboards, which included supposedly offensive phrases such as "poisoned waters": and "death may come"...what's particularly strange about the suit is that the waste disposal company, "Buckeye Brine", wasn't even named on the billboards, which seems to suggest that they're alleging that Mr Boals was defaming the character of their injection wells....it's hard to figure out what this means legally; we know that in "Citizens United" and other cases, the Supreme Court has ruled that corporations are people when it comes to campaign spending and influencing elections...maybe Buckeye Brine is taking this concept the next step further, alleging that their injection wells have human like characteristics and get their feelings hurt when someone calls them names...we'd better watch out; next thing we know, those injection wells will be asking for the right to vote...

speaking of injection wells, Oklahoma got hit with 20 earthquakes in one day on Tuesday; most were fairly minor, but there was one plaster cracking 4.3...before the oil & gas companies started pumping their liquid wastes into the ground beneath their feet, Oklahomans were seeing just 2 earthquakes a year statewide...

once again, we'll start with the Ohio news...

Buy The Drip: Thousands Of Gallons Of Oil Spill Into Ohio River Upstream Of Cincinnati -- Lately it is not just trains blowing up across the country in the ongoing effort to prove just how safer rail transport is for crude oil transit compared to pipelines: as citizens of Cincinatti found out this morning, their drinking water may come with an added kick after thousands of gallons of diesel fuel spilled out onto the Ohio River after an incident at a power plant early Tuesday. According to WCPO, the Coast Guard said it estimated about 8,000 gallons of fuel spilled out from Duke Energy’s W.C. Beckjord power station outside of Cincinnati. The bad news for Ohians, especially those living in Cincinatti, is that the spill took place upstream, and rather close to the city: The spill was first reported at about 12:20 a.m. Tuesday. The plant is about 20 miles southeast but upstream of Cincinnati. Duke Energy later released a statement saying the spill happened at about 11:15 p.m. Monday. The company said the spill happened during a routine transfer of fuel oil. Duke estimated about 5,000 gallons was discharged into the river. Crews were able to stop the release by 11:30 p.m.  Duke said it notified local, state and environmental agencies promptly to take action.

Duke Energy plant fuel spill: EPA says drinking water safe after diesel spilled into Ohio River - – Cincinnati Mayor John Cranley said Tuesday the region's drinking water is safe despite thousands of gallons of diesel fuel spilling into the Ohio River late Monday.Tony Parrott, head of Greater Cincinnati Water Works, said the department was notified of the spill just after midnight. Parrott said crews shut down the Ohio River intakes quickly so the spill was not taken in. He said the fuel reached Water Works at about 7 a.m. Duke Energy officials expect the fuel to pass the region's intakes by late Tuesday night.  This is the second time this year a foreign substance has invaded the Ohio River, causing local intakes to close. In January, a chemical leak from West Virginia made its way to the Tri-State. Greater Cincinnati Water Works officials identified that chemical as Crude MCHM, or 4-Methylcyclohexanemethanol. The U.S. Coast Guard is also still considering whether it will allow oil and gas companies to ship fracking waste on barges down the Ohio River and other rivers under its jurisdiction. Officials are mining through public comments from supporters who think barges are the most efficient way to move the chemical-and-sand-infused byproduct, and from opponents who fear the waste could spill into drinking water.

Potential oil window is last gasp for Utica Shale - Jim McKinney, senior vice president and general manager from EnerVest, a Houston-based company, said his company believes that with changes in drilling techniques, activity will increase in the oil-rich northern part of the Utica Shale, which includes Trumbull County. “When companies first drilled, they were using the same techniques they were using in the dry- and wet-gas areas of the Utica,” he said. EnerVest has found in Tuscarawas and Guernsey counties that by using more water and sand in the fracking process, there can be success in the oil-rich portions of the Utica, McKinney said. “Oil has different molecules than gas,” he said. Companies were using 200 feet to 250 feet spacing between injections, but for the oil area it needs to be shorter, about 150 feet, McKinney said. “It allows the oil to move more freely toward the well bore,” he said. If the tests for EnerVest are successful, there will be companies interested in leasing land in Trumbull and Stark counties, McKinney said. Trumbull and Stark counties are thought to be areas with oil-rich shale. The sections of the Utica can be divided into the dry-gas area, which is located around Belmont, Harrison and other counties in the southeast part of the state. Then there is the wet-gas area, which includes Carroll County and the sections of Ohio where most of the drilling activity has taken place. Finally, there is expected oil-rich section on the edge of the shale, which no company has successfully exploited at this time.

Study: Ohio could add 16000 jobs, $2.68 billion to the state economy - An update on lawmaker action and other activities at the Ohio Statehouse related to horizontal hydraulic fracturing:

  • • New Study: A report by ICT International and EnSys Energy and touted by the American Petroleum Institute projected that Ohio could add nearly 16,000 jobs and $2.68 billion to the state economy by 2020 “if restrictions on U.S. crude exports were lifted.” “Restrictions on exports only limit our potential as a global energy superpower,”
  • • State Land Frack Plan: A Democratic state lawmaker reiterated his calls for an investigation of Gov. John Kasich’s administration after public records revealed meetings to develop a marketing plan for horizontal drilling on state-owned lands continued after officials said they had abandoned the idea.
  • • Not Enough: Policy Matters Ohio, a liberal think tank, released a report showing that a plan to reform the state’s tax rates on horizontal drilling would reduce related collections by millions of dollars. HB 375 passed the Ohio House but was not moved in the Senate before lawmakers broke for their summer recess.
  • • Frack Penalty Bill Stalled: The severance-tax legislation wasn’t the only oil and gas-related bill to stall.

Lawmakers also have not yet acted on HB 490, which would expand the Ohio Department of Natural Resources’ authority to revoke or suspend drilling and related activities of those who break the state’s environmental regulations.

Protest dismissed, but no drilling in Wayne anyway -- The U.S. Department of the Interior has dismissed a protest against oil and gas drilling in the Wayne National Forrest but also has decided against allowing any such drilling. In 2011, five parcels within the Wayne were listed in a Competitive Lease Sale Notice, drawing 34 letters of protest against the inclusion of this land in lease sales for potential drilling. A month later in 2011, the U.S. Forest Service asked the Bureau of Land Management, within the Department of the Interior, to withdraw those parcels, and just days after that, they were deleted from the sale. This history of events was not relayed to various Athens County officials and area anti-fracking protesters until a letter from the BLM dated July 21, 2014 and noted as received by the city of Athens on Aug. 1. The letter explains that the protest of the leasing of these parcels has been dismissed as moot because the parcels in question were deleted from the sale. "There is no other decision that can be provided," the letter states. Potential leasing of land for drilling in the Wayne National Forrest was opposed by Athens city and county officials, anti-fracking activists, and Ohio University, where President Roderick McDavis sent a letter saying that OU was "unable to support a practice that is not strictly regulated and highly accountable."

Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program for teacher training avoids Radio Disney dustup - Interest in an oil and gas industry-funded program for teachers keeps growing. As Ohio’s Utica shale fuels unprecedented oil and gas drilling in the state, more Ohio teachers are interested in a workshop put on by the organization funded by the state’s oil and natural gas companies. But with the fracking-fueled industry’s growth comes increasing opposition from people worried about the industry’s impact on the environment. The group, the Ohio Oil and Gas Energy Education Program, came under fire earlier this year for its affiliation with Radio Disney. Critics accused OOGEEP of trying to indoctrinate kids with pro-drilling propaganda. But the group’s leader says she’s not had similar pushback with the teachers’ workshop. “There’s no propaganda,” Executive Director Rhonda Reda told me. “They have to learn about porosity and permeability, period. They have to learn about geology, period. These are things that are required.”

Brine firm sues over biblical fracking billboard - (AP) - An Ohio man who uses a biblical reference and a statement against "poisoned waters" on billboards opposing wells for disposal of gas-drilling wastewater is fighting a legal threat from the Texas well owner on free-speech grounds. Austin, Texas-based Buckeye Brine alleges in a July lawsuit that the billboards paid for by Michael Boals, of Coshocton in eastern Ohio, contain false and defamatory attacks against its two wells, which dispose of contaminated wastewater from oil and gas drilling. The complaint by the company and Rodney Adams, who owns the land and operates the well site, contends the wells are safe, legal and meet all state safety standards. The parties object to statements on two billboards along U.S. Route 36, including one that "DEATH may come." "The accusation that the wells will cause 'DEATH' is a baseless and malicious attempt to damage the reputations of the plaintiffs," according to the complaint. "The billboards are also defamatory because they state or imply that Mr. Adams and Buckeye Brine are causing 'poisoned waters' to enter the drinking water supply."

'Poisoned waters' billboard sparks Ohio well fight: – An Ohio man who uses a biblical reference and a statement against "poisoned waters" on billboards opposing a local deep-injection gas well is fighting a legal threat from the Texas well owner on free-speech grounds. Austin, Texas-based Buckeye Brine alleges in a July lawsuit that the billboards paid for by Michael Boals, of Coshocton, contain false and defamatory attacks against its two wells, which dispose of contaminated wastewater from oil and gas drilling. The complaint by the company and Rodney Adams, who owns the land and operates the well site, contends the Coshocton well is safe, legal and meets all state safety standards. The parties object to statements on two billboards along U.S. Route 36, including one that "DEATH may come." "The accusation that the wells will cause 'DEATH' is a baseless and malicious attempt to damage the reputations of the plaintiffs," according to the complaint. "The billboards are also defamatory because they state or imply that Mr. Adams and Buckeye Brine are causing 'poisoned waters' to enter the drinking water supply." Shale oil and gas drilling employing hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, produces millions of gallons of chemical-laced wastewater. The liquid, called brine, is a mix of chemicals, saltwater, naturally occurring radiation and mud. It's considered unsafe for ground water and aquifers, so Ohio regulations require waste liquid to be contained and injected deep underground.

Critics: Ohio case fits wider pattern of quieting fracking foes -- A lawsuit filed by an Ohio company last month seeks to remove two anti-fracking billboards near a wastewater site it operates. While the case is a test of free speech, critics say it also reflects a broader reluctance for businesses and regulatory agencies in the state to adequately inform citizens about shale gas activities and address their concerns. Ohio’s regulatory environment is allowing rapid expansion of the shale gas industry. The state’s natural gas production nearly doubled from 2012 to 2013. And shale wastewater injection for 2013 was up more than 2 million barrels from the previous year. Critics say the system fast-tracks permits for activities related to shale gas at the expense of public comment and citizen input.  Growth in the industry is “happening in a way that communities are not necessarily always well-informed,” said Megan Lovett, a lawyer with Fair Shake Environmental Legal Services in Pittsburgh. Lovett believes that situation makes it even more important to defend concerned citizens’ right to speak out. Her firm is currently consulting with defense counsel in the Ohio lawsuit.

Environmentalists split over green group's fracking industry ties - In 2012, when Ohio’s Senate passed a controversial hydraulic fracturing bill that was supported by the oil and gas industry, environmental groups lined up against it, saying it would endanger public health. But during hearings on the bill, it gained one seemingly unlikely supporter: the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), one of the nation’s largest green groups. The bill supported renewable energy development but it also contained several items other environmental groups said were giveaways to the industry: It allowed fracking companies to keep private the chemicals they used in fracking, changed the required distance for contamination testing around a well from 300 feet to 1,500 feet, and prevented doctors from sharing information that might be considered trade secrets, even if it was in the interest of public health. But a new report suggests that at least in some cases, environmental organizations’ work with the industry may cross ethical lines, and at worst become tacit support of industry-backed positions.  The new report, released by Buffalo-based non-profit Public Accountability Initiative, focuses on one group called the Center for Sustainable Shale Development, which is a partnership between gas drilling companies, environmental groups and other nonprofits. Among the report’s findings: the group’s executive director, Susan Packard LeGros, is a former oil industry lawyer who worked with oil, gas and chemical companies. One of the group’s board members, Jared Cohon, also worked at a similar group called the Center for Indoor Air Research, which was found to have strong ties to tobacco companies. And one of the group’s new supporters, the Claude Worthington Benedum Foundation, was started by a titan of the oil and gas industry.

Environmental Defense Frauds Back Boehner Parrot -- The Rent-a-Green Environmental Defense Frauds who brought us the Sustainable Shale Shamstitute, are now running industry funded green-washing campaign ads in favor pseudo pro-environmental Republicans, including Boehner Parrot Chris Gibson.   The EDF gets donations from the frackers, then run ads in favor of pro-fracking Congressman – that’s how green-washing works. As even a casual political observer knows, the era of the moderate Republican is over, especially in the House of Representatives. The Republican House has made a fetish of attacking the environment. It has passed innumerable bills to strip the EPA of its authority and funding and to handicap the regulatory process. And so it was bewildering on Thursday when the Environmental Defense Action Fund (EDF Action), the Environmental Defense Fund’s campaign arm, began dropping $250,000 on ads supporting Rep. Chris Gibson, a Republican from upstate New York who is facing a self-financing Democratic challenger, Sean Eldridge. (Eldridge is the husband of Facebook cofounder andNew Republic publisher Chris Hughes.)  This is just the beginning of EDF Action’s efforts to help elect Republicans. As Politico notes, “The Environmental Defense Action Fund is rolling out a seven-figure ad campaign to aid green-minded Republicans in the midterm elections, part of a longer-term effort to find GOP partners on priorities like climate change. … The group hasn’t publicly identified other Republicans it plans to support in its 2014 effort, which it says is worth around $1 million so far.”

FEMA halts flood assistance for properties with gas leases - — In fall 2011, about a month after the flooded Meshoppen Creek spilled over its banks and into their basement, Pete and Sharon Morgan applied for federal flood assistance to help them move out of their home. They won’t get it, at least not anytime soon, due to a little-known policy the Federal Emergency Management Agency issued May 5. It’s because of their gas lease with Chief Oil & Gas LLC. FEMA indefinitely banned the use of hazard mitigation assistance money for properties that could eventually host horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, even if the leases don’t allow for development on the surface. Under its hazard mitigation assistance program, FEMA pays to acquire properties in flood zones or reduce flood risks by raising or relocating structures. The agency creates these incentives so it doesn’t have to return with disaster dollars after every flood event. The property title usually goes to local governments, which can use it as open space, allowing floodplains or wetlands to act as natural flood buffers. The Morgans are one of eight households in Pennsylvania — five in Wyoming County and three in Lycoming County, according to the state Emergency Management Agency — whose applications for hazard mitigation assistance won’t yield payouts because of their gas leases.

Doctors Outraged By Claims That Health Officials Ignored Residents Sickened By Drilling - Pennsylvania doctors, nurses, and health policy experts are calling for a statewide investigation into claims that the state Department of Health has a policy of telling its employees never to talk to residents who complain of negative health effects from fracking, according to letter sent to state Gov. Tom Corbett and other elected officials on Tuesday. The letter — spearheaded by the groups Physicians for Social Responsibility, Alliance of Nurses for Health Environments, and PennEnvironment Research & Policy Center, and signed by more than 400 individual health professionals — says doctors and nurses statewide are “very concerned” about a story published in NPR’s StateImpact Pennsylvania this June. In that story, two retired employees of the health department said they were instructed not to return phone calls from citizens who said they may be experiencing sickness from fracking and other natural gas development.  The letter calls for an independent investigation into the claims, and reform of the health department’s response procedures.  “When it comes to fracking, the DOH has done little to prevent exposure or lead policy development,” “The PA DOH does not provide accurate data to address the health needs of fracking communities, thereby hindering research, and permitting poor decisions to be made based on inaccurate information.” According to the groups’ letter, the DOH has not done enough since StateImpact’s revelations that the agency may be mishandling citizen complaints.

Fracking could threaten air quality, workers' health, latest report says - Maryland’s latest report on the impact of proposed natural gas exploration in the western part of the state said drilling could pose a threat to air quality and workers in a region that is ecologically pristine.But the report, presented to a state commission Monday, said the process called hydraulic fracturing would pose little threat of earthquakes, which were triggered recently in central Oklahoma by gas-drilling operations, according to researchers, and are of concern to environmentalists.The report is the second of three called for under Gov. Martin O’Malley’s 2011 executive order to study hydraulic fracturing, an unconventional horizontal drilling process also referred to as fracking. O’Malley (D) said studies of drilling impacts were required before a natural gas well could be built in Maryland. A third and final study funded by the Natural Resources and Environment departments is expected soon.  Several oil and gas companies have sought drilling permits and leased private land in hopes of exploring natural gas opportunities in remote Garrett County, home to the popular Deep Creek Lake. Their aim is to build wells in the Marcellus Shale, a 95,000-square-mile rock formation that stretches from Ohio to Virginia, where gas has been entombed for about 380 million years.

How Fracking In Maryland Would Threaten The Health Of Anyone Who Breathes Nearby - Fracking in Maryland would pose a risk of harmful air pollution and would bring jobs that could be dangerous for workers, a new report has found. The report, published by the University of Maryland and commissioned by a 2011 executive order by Gov. Martin O’Malley, looked at the risks that fracking would bring to Maryland, a state that so far doesn’t have any natural gas wells. The report ranked the likelihood that several risks associated with fracking, including dangers to air quality and occupational health as well as the prospect of worsening noise and the threat of earthquakes, will pose problems in Maryland.  The report is the second of three reports on fracking in the state, with the third, which will be funded by the Department of the Environment and the Department of Natural Resources, expected soon. The reports are part of Gov. O’Malley’s Marcellus Shale Safe Drilling Initiative, which aims to uncover the costs and benefits natural gas drilling would bring to Maryland.  The report singled out worker health a concern for the prospect of fracking in Maryland. Though fracking would bring jobs to Maryland, the report reads, those jobs are more dangerous than others, promising a “greater risk of harmful occupational exposures than many other industries in Maryland.”  “Of particular concern are exposures to crystalline silica, hydrogen sulfide, and diesel particulate matter, as well as fatalities from truck accidents, which accounted for 49% of oil and gas extraction fatalities in 2012,” the report reads. It goes on to cite the social dangers the fracking industry poses, including “mental distress, suicide, stress, and substance abuse.”

Fracking Fluids More Toxic Than Previously Thought - A new study of the fluids used in the controversial practice of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, shows that several of them may not be as safe as the energy industry says they are, and some are downright toxic. A team of researchers at the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of the Pacific looked at more than just the process of fracking – which involves injecting water mixed with chemicals into underground rock formations to extract gas and crude oil. In theirreport, the researchers list the chemicals that are most often used, based on industry reports and databases. Among them were “gelling agents to thicken the fluids, biocides to keep microbes from growing, sand to prop open tiny cracks in the rocks and compounds to prevent pipe corrosion.” The story so far has been that fracking is an environmentally safe way to extract oil and gas from underground deposits trapped in shale. Yet fracking has also been met with opposition because of reports of contaminated well water and increased air pollution around drilling sites. Further, the injection of wastewater into disposal wells at fracking sites has been linked to earthquakes. Stringfellow’s team found that fracking fluid is, in fact, mixed with plenty of food-grade and other non-toxic materials, but some of them may not be safe. At the recent 248th National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society (ACS), the team reported that eight of the compounds are toxic to mammals. “There are a number of chemicals, like corrosion inhibitors and biocides in particular, that are being used in reasonably high concentrations that potentially could have adverse effects,” Stringfellow said. “Biocides, for example, are designed to kill bacteria. It’s not a benign material.”

Study Finds 8 Fracking Chemicals Toxic to Humans -- Fracking is once again in trouble. Scientists have found that what gets pumped into hydrocarbon-rich rock as part of the hydraulic fracture technique to release gas and oil trapped in underground reservoirs may not be entirely healthy. Environmental engineer William Stringfellow and colleagues at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory told the American Chemical Society meeting in San Francisco that they scoured databases and reports to compile a list of the chemicals commonly used in fracking. Such additives, which are necessary for the extraction process, include: acids to dissolve minerals and open up cracks in the rock; biocides to kill bacteria and prevent corrosion; gels and other agents to keep the fluid at the right level of viscosity at different temperatures; substances to prevent clays from swelling or shifting; distillates to reduce friction; acids to limit the precipitation of metal oxides.  Some of these compounds—for example, common salt, acetic acid and sodium carbonate—are routinely used in households worldwide. But the researchers assembled a list of 190 of them, and considered their properties. For around one-third of them, there was very little data about health risks, and eight of them were toxic to mammals.

At Least 10 Percent Of Fracking Fluid Is Toxic -- At least 10 percent of the contents of fracking fluid injected into the earth is toxic. For another third we have no idea. And that’s only from the list of chemicals the fracking industry provided voluntarily. That’s according to an analysis by William Stringfellow of Lawrence Berkley National Laboratory, reported in Chemistry World. Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is the practice of injecting fluid at high pressure into the earth, which breaks up oil- and gas-filled rock formations that is then extracted to the surface. The contents and makeup of that fluid have been a subject of controversy, largely because drilling companies are able to keep what’s in it a secret, and because the fluid has been known to leak and spill on a regular basis.  Stringfellow mostly used FracFocus’ voluntary registry of 250 fracking chemicals provided by the industry to check against existing toxicology information. He found that about 10 percent of the chemicals are known to be hazardous “in terms of mammalian or aquatic toxicology,” Stringfellow said at the a meeting of the American Chemical Society. But for almost a third of those 250 chemicals, there’s no publicly available information on their toxicity to humans or other life. And that’s not even counting the chemicals that the industry can simply choose to keep a secret.  FracFocus was in the news last week when drilling companies came under scrutiny for injecting diesel fuel into the earth to frack oil and gas, something for which they are supposed to have a permit. When that came to light, many companies simply went back and removed past mentions of injecting diesel.

Texas Judge Throws Out Family’s Lawsuit That Blames Nosebleeds, Asthma On Fracking Fumes -- A Texas family claiming they were severely sickened by air pollution from two companies’ hydraulic fracturing operations near their home had their lawsuit against the companies thrown out last week, in the second high-profile decision to come down this year alleging sickness from fracking operations in the state.In a ruling reported by Inside Climate News, District Judge Stella Saxon agreed with Marathon Oil Corp. and Plains Exploration & Production that Mike and Myra Cerny did not have enough scientific or medical proof that emissions of benzene, methane, and 14 other chemicals alleged to be contaminating their air were causing their myriad health problems, which included frequent nosebleeds, bone pain, and rashes. The Cernys’ home sits atop the Eagle Ford Shale in Karnes County, Texas.The ruling comes just a few months after a different family won $2.95 million in a separate Texas court on a lawsuit with similar claims. In that case, a jurydecided that fracking operations near Bob and Lisa Parr’s home, located atop the Barnett Shale in Allison, Texas, were responsible for symptoms such as chronic nose bleeding, irregular heartbeat, muscle spasms, and open sores.

The Fracking Media Circus - A new study from Stanford University scientists finds no direct evidence of water contamination from hydraulic fracturing in Wyoming, but points out concerns that some fracking is being undertaken at very shallow depths, and sometimes through underground sources of drinking water.As generally happens with independent studies—or any ‘significant’ body of literature from the beginning of time—those with black and white polarization tendencies, espoused through the media, can skew the study to one or the other side of the fracking debate, which has taken on circus-like proportions, much like the climate change debate.  Most recently, Colorado state senator Randy Baumgardner, a Republican, told media that based on his knowledge obtained from “a lot of fracking seminars”, methane gas—a potent, highly flammable greenhouse gas released during fracking operations—did not pose a risk to water supplies, as proven by its ancient use by Native American Indians. “They talk about methane in the water and this, that, and the other,” Baumgardner was quoted as saying, “but if you go back in history and look at how the Indians traveled, they traveled to the burning waters. And that was methane in the waters and that was for warmth in the wintertime. So a lot of people, if they just trace back the history, they’ll know how a lot of this is propaganda.” At the same time, environmental watchdogs are hitting back with reports that energy companies are illicitly using thousands of gallons of diesel in fracking processes, skipping the federally required permit process.

Oklahoma Gets Hit With 20 Earthquakes In One Day - Oklahoma’s Geology Survey recorded an unprecedented 20 small earthquakes across the state on Tuesday, highlighting the dramatic increase of seismic activity that has occurred there as the controversial process of hydraulic fracturing — otherwise known as fracking — has spread across the state.  Though 18 out of the 20 earthquakes that occurred Tuesday were below Magnitude 3, rendering them mostly imperceptible, the largest one registered as a 4.3 near Guthrie, a city of more than 10,000 residents. And while U.S. Geological Survey scientists have said that Oklahoma is historically known as “earthquake country,” they also warn that quakes have been steadily on the rise; from 1978 until 2008, the average rate of earthquakes registering a magnitude of 3.0 or more was only two per year. “No documented cases of induced seismicity have ever come close to the current earthquake rates or the area over which the earthquakes are occurring,” the Oklahoma Geology Survey said in a recent presentation addressing the alarming increase in quakes. By “induced seismicity,” the OGS is referring to minor earthquakes that are caused by human activity, whether that be fracking, mass removal mining, reservoir impoundment, or geothermal production — anything that could disrupt existing fault lines.

Earthquakes near deep-earth wells raise concerns - — A series of small but unusual earthquakes near a well being pumped full of liquid drilling waste north of Denver has reignited a debate about the impacts of oil and gas development near homes.Colorado isn't normally earthquake territory, but aggressive drilling and pumping here and across the country may be changing that, contributing to the debate about what costs we're willing to bear to achieve energy independence. "What we have seen since about 2009 has been a steady increase of the rate of earthquake activity in parts of the country that normally are seismically quiet," said Bill Ellsworth, a seismologist with the United States Geological Survey. "This is something very anomalous and we have no natural analogue of what's going on in the rest of the world." The rise of small quakes, most too small to be felt, appears to mirror the country's booming petroleum production. Oklahoma and Texas have both seen unusual "swarms" of quakes that scientists say appear to be linked to oil production efforts, even though most experts are reluctant to draw direct connections.

Despite Compromise, Colorado’s Fracking Fight Rages On  — An 11th-hour compromise brokered by Colorado Gov. John Hickenlooper (D) to keep contentious oil and gas measures off the November election ballot may simply delay the day of reckoning for both sides in the battle over how tightly the booming industry is regulated. That epic battle, pitting the oil and gas industry and Colorado’s mainstream political establishment against activists concerned that drilling and fracking have gotten out of hand in Colorado, had been building for months, with the airwaves awash in pro-industry advertising seeking to characterize the industry as benign and economically valuable. One prominent pollsterpredicted that industry spending on the issue through the November election would be in the range of $30 to $40 million, three times what oil and gas interests spent to defeat a 2008 ballot question that would have raised their taxes. But the electoral clash was averted as Hickenlooper and ballot question backer Rep. Jared Polis (D) declared a truce. Key to the deal is the appointment of an 18-member commission — expected to be named as early as this week — that will have the delicate task of recommending to the legislature ways to resolve conflicts between the oil and gas industry and citizens increasingly alarmed by energy development close to their homes and communities.  But any consensus recommendations that emerge from the commission — composed of six representatives each of the industry, civic leaders, and people directly affected by oil and gas development — will have to be approved by what is likely to be a deeply divided state legislature.

Commentary: BLM selling out ranchers to make way for Big Oil?: Rangeland health, drought, wild horse management and oil exploration are interconnected and inter-dependent on water in Northeastern Nevada, as well as other regions of the U.S. With varying allotments budgeted by BLM, I have grave concerns during these drought times for BLM’ s priorities. Are our permitted grazing allotments being tagged as potential oil exploration allotments? Is BLM seeing $$$ signs for the oil and gas competitive lease sales? Currently competitive BLM lease sales numbered 44 parcels in Elko County and 102 parcels or 174,021.36 acres in Battle Mountain. How many oil exploration allotments will compromise current grazing allotments and natural habitat for sage grouse? From Sunset Magazine, April 2014: “In the Monterrey Shale assessment, the BLM auctioned their mineral rights to Vintage Production California, a subsidiary of Occidental Petroleum.” There is not enough water for the ranchers or the wine growers in the area so where is their priority of water placed? Since quantities of water are needed for both grazing allotments and oil exploration allotments, I wonder if pushing cattle off allotments clears the way for better lease sales to oil companies who will need large quantities of water? They certainly are not going to fence the grazing allotments to keep cattle off their roads. I am told that there is multiple use for our federal lands and that grazing and oil exploration can happen side by side. Sure they can if there is enough water for both and the oil trucks won’ t run down the cattle.

Michigan landfill taking other states' radioactive fracking waste -- As other states ban landfills from accepting low-level radioactive waste, up to 36 tons of the sludge already rejected by two other states was slated to arrive in Michigan late last week. Wayne Disposal landfill located between Willow Run Airport and I-94 near Belleville is one of the few landfills in the eastern and Midwestern U.S. licensed to accept the radioactive waste, which has been collected by a Pennsylvania hydraulic fracking operation. As regulations tighten in other states, companies are turning to Michigan as the radioactive sludge’s dumping ground. It was unclear Monday whether the waste had arrived and multiple messages seeking comment from Wayne landfill officials were not returned. State environmental regulators were not involved with the delivery but said that the companies appeared to be following carefully prescribed regulations. Though the radiation is considered low-level and the landfill licensed by the state to handle it, nearby residents and environmentalists still worry over its potential to leak into rivers, lakes or groundwater over long periods of time.

Michigan Is Taking The Radioactive Fracking Waste That Other States Rejected - Michigan is accepting the radioactive fracking waste that other states’ regulations prevent them from keeping.  Up to 36 tons of low-level radioactive waste from fracking operations in Pennsylvania were scheduled to arrive in Michigan last week. The waste was collected from Range Resources drilling operations, and the waste was already rejected by a landfill in Pennsylvania due to its radiation content. It was then slated to go to a landfill in West Virginia, a state that used to be able to accept unlimited amounts of radioactive fracking waste in its landfills, but the waste wasn’t accepted there either, since West Virginia is in the process of strengthening its rules on radioactive waste disposal.  Pennsylvania landfills have had radiation detectors since 2002, and Ohio has also strengthened its regulations on the acceptance of radioactive fracking waste. That leaves Michigan, a state that doesn’t have strict rules on radioactive fracking waste, and whose Wayne Disposal landfill got the state’s Departnment of Environmental Quality’s approval to accept radioactive fracking waste in 2006.  According to Range Resources, the waste that’s slated to arrive in Wayne Disposal has has shown radioactivity levels of somewhere between 40 and 260 microrems per hour, and that the radioactivity is not detectable a few feet away from the waste. The Detroit Free Press notes that, according to the EPA, continued exposure to radiation of up to 100 microrems over a period of months can result in “changes in blood chemistry, nausea, fatigue, vomiting, hair loss, diarrhea and bleeding.” “This is basically a load of sludge that came from storage tanks that were cleaned out and had accumulated over time,” “It comes from the water used in hydraulic fracturing, and when it’s stored, the solids tend to sink to the bottom and become a sludge.”

EDITORIAL: Override of fracking veto responsible choice: New Jersey’s reputation as a dump preceded Gov. Chris Christie, but he isn’t helping matters. Christie’s administration has long brushed off concerns about landfill emissions and contaminated soil. Now he’s telling us we don’t have to worry about the radioactive waste that’s produced when energy companies pour a toxic mix of chemicals, sand and water deep into the ground in order to fracture the shale and extract natural gas. Although New Jersey isn’t sitting on enough natural gas to make it worthwhile for energy companies to try to extract it at this time, Pennsylvania has more than 6,000 active fracking wells — many in the northeastern part of the state. Most of Pennsylvania’s wastewater has been disposed of in Ohio, but environmentalists there have sought tighter regulations after a pair of earthquakes believed linked to the wells that are used to dispose of fracking waste. Last week, up to 36 tons of waste was set to arrive at a Michigan landfill after being rejected by Pennsylvania and West Virginia. Given New Jersey’s efforts to shake off its bad reputation, the state should be the first to refuse to be the dumping ground for another state’s radioactive refuse. But this month Christie vetoed a bill that would prohibit fracking waste from being dumped here, arguing that such a ban would violate the U.S. Constitution’s Interstate Commerce Clause. That’s just not true. The Office of Legislative Services, a nonpartisan panel, said as much in its analysis of the ban: “It imposes the same restrictions on interstate and intrastate businesses, and the burden on commerce is incidental in relation to the putative local benefits if the legislation were enacted into law.”

Mining Spill Near U.S. Border Closes 88 Schools, Leaves Thousands Of Mexicans Without Water - An acid spill from a large copper mine in northern Mexico is keeping 88 schools closed starting Monday due to uncertainty over the safety of drinking water. The 12-day-old spill, which sent 10 million gallons (40,000 cubic meters) of toxic wastewater into portions of the Bacanuchi and Sonora rivers, may keep schools closed for over a week according to the Associated Press.  The Buenavista copper mine, one of the largest copper mines in the world, is located in Cananea, Sonora, about 25 miles south of the U.S. border near Nogales, Arizona. The mine is operated by Grupo Mexico, one of the world’s largest copper producers. Grupo Mexico’s American subsidiary, Asarco, is nearing a deal to gain full ownership of the Silver Bell copper mine across the U.S. border in Marana, Arizona and has been subject to major environmental misconduct charges in the past relating to its mining operations.  Mine officials have been criticized for not reporting the massive acid spill to authorities for around 24 hours, with residents downstream detecting the spill the next day as it turned dozens of miles of river orange. According to Carlos Arias, director of civil defense for the northern state of Sonora,  the spill was caused by defects in a new holding pond, where overflow from acids used to leach metal out of the crushed rock is stored. Arias said a pipe either blew out or lost its positioning on August 7th, sending the sulfuric acid downstream.

Sulfuric acid spill jeopardizes water supply in Sonora, Mexico --In the Mexican state of Sonora, a mining company recently discharged sulfuric acid into the Sonora River and its tributaries. The occurrence prompted the government to prohibit thousands of local residents from drinking from the rivers. Additionally, the company responsible for the mining operation, Grupo Mexico, is accused of waiting too long before notifying the authorities about the incident. They apparently also lied about the spill’s causes. . According to the company Operadora de Minas e Instalaciones Mineras, owned by Grupo Mexico, massive rains caused one of the mine’s dams to overflow. However, Government inspectors concluded that one of the mine’s pipelines that transports the acid broke. The acid then infiltrated the Bacanuchi River and eventually spread to the Sonora River, which is 261 miles (420 kilometers) long and carries around 171 million cubic meters per year. The inhabitants of the Arizpe municipality, some 31 miles downriver from the spill, observed “an unusual red shade” in the river and commented on its rare smell.  CONAGUA has confirmed that the Sonora River now possesses high levels of contaminants. A week after the incident, the acid and minerals that polluted the water can be found some 124 miles downriver. One article reports that there are now 1.78 milligrams of aluminum per liter, far over the maximum limit of 0.02 milligrams. When the spill was finally reported, local authorities ordered regional citizens not to touch the Sonora River, Bacanuchi River, and some of their tributaries’ waters.

Fracking may be coming to the Chihuahua border, Mexican officials say - Mexico energy officials said Chihuahua and three other northern border states are ripe for fracking, a controversial and widespread method that is used to extract shale gas and oil from the ground. Pemex (Petroleos Mexicanos), the state-owned oil company, previously identified Tamaulipas, Coahuila and Nuevo Leon, in addition to Chihuahua, as the states where fracking could be used to obtain new energy sources. The other Mexican states officials identified are Puebla, Oaxaca and Veracruz. Mexican officials said Pemex has drilled nearly 30 exploratory wells along the border with Texas, near Ojinaga and Presidio. In Texas, fracking is taking place in the Eagle Ford oil field that straddles the border with Mexico.  According to the Texas Railroad Commission, the oil and shale gas field is about 50 miles wide and 400 miles long and has an average thickness of 250 feet.   Critics say the process requires huge amounts of water and may be linked to spikes in small earthquakes.

Fracking the Arctic  -- For hundreds—if not thousands—of years, the Mountain Dene people have been traveling upstream to salt licks that draw caribou, moose and mountain sheep down from the high country in the early fall. For the Dene, it’s the best opportunity to stock up on wild game, fish and berries for the long winter.Many Dene people living in Sahtu and in other parts of the Canadian North are concerned that this way of life may be at risk now that two energy companies have been given the go-ahead to begin horizontal fracking in a region just south of the Arctic Circle. Conoco-Phillips has already fracked two test wells in the Sahtu, and the company has plans to frack several more in the future. With several other companies ready with plans of their own, the stakes are high. No one knows yet exactly how much shale oil and gas there is in the Yukon, Northwest Territories and territory of Nunavut. But the government of the Northwest Territories estimates that the Canol Shale underground deposit, which extends from the mountains along the Yukon border several hundred miles east towards Colville and Great Bear lakes, contains 2 to 3 billion barrels of recoverable oil, as much or more than in the highly productive Bakken formation in North Dakota.

Shale gas in Argentina: Dead-cow bounce - Economist -- Argentina boasts the world’s second-biggest shale-gas reserves, most of them in Vaca Muerta. A survey by the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) suggests that the field holds 16.2 billion barrels of shale oil and 308 trillion cubic feet (TCF) of shale gas. That is more shale oil than Mexico and more shale gas than Brazil. It is enough to satisfy Argentina’s current energy demand for over 150 years, and could make the country an exporter once again. Neuquén is readying itself for a boom. Shopping centres have sprung up; so have clean new hotels that boast English-speaking staff and American-style food. Horacio Quiroga, the city’s mayor, compares its residents to expectant diners who have tied on their bibs. Argentina’s president, Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, is equally hopeful. “I shall no longer call [it] Vaca Muerta,” she said last year. “I shall call it Vaca Viva (‘Living Cow’).” But there are several catches. The EIA can be wrong: it has downgraded its estimates for Chaco-Paraná, another Argentine basin, from 164 TCF to 3 TCF. But initial trials at Vaca Muerta have been encouraging. In May Exxon Mobil announced that 770 barrels a day had begun to flow from an exploratory well there. Chevron and YPF, Argentina’s state oil firm, have formed a $1.4 billion joint venture to develop a concession which currently produces 24,000 barrels of oil equivalent a day. Vaca Muerta’s geology helps. Its shale is thicker than in most formations, which means that companies can produce more from a single site. As firms become familiar with the field, budgets are already dropping: YPF says it has reduced costs from $11m per well in 2011 to $7.5m.

Shale gas revolution stalls in China as projected output halved -- China's National Energy Administration (NEA) in a recent meeting to propose the nation's 13th five-year development plan said that by 2020 national production of shale gas and coalbed methane (also known as coal seam gas) will reach 30 billion cubic meters, only around half of what it proposed in the 12th five-year plan in 2012, Shanghai's China Business News reports, citing NEA director Wu Xinxiong. The new projection indicates the previous forecast was too optimistic, signaling that China's shale gas revolution still has a long way to go. Two years ago, the NEA said the nation's shale gas reserves totaled 2.5 trillion cubic meters, with the agency projecting production to reach 6.5 billion cubic meters a year in 2015, and 60 billion to 100 billion cubic meters by 2020. Why has the projected production been cut by half in just two years? In 2013, actual shale gas production jumped to 200 million cubic meters from only 25 million cubic meters in 2012. In 2014, the government set a production target of 1.5 billion cubic meters, but it lagged far behind the original goal of 60 billion cubic meters set for 2020. "I believe 30 billion cubic meters is a more objective number," said one unnamed expert at the state-run oil giant CNPC, whose production target of shale gas is 2.6 billion cubic meters in 2015. At present, 80% of China's shale gas resources are controlled by four petrochemical giants led by CNPC and Sinopec. Investments in shale gas are huge and take a long time to recover. As of April 2014, China's combined investments in shale gas exceeded 15 billion yuan (US$2.4 billion).

Sunday, August 17, 2014

Utica sees 10 fold growth in fracking production since 2012, 1000 wells just the tip of the iceberg

it appears that what's been happening in Ohio's shale was the major fracking news this week, as the U.S. Energy Information Administration decided it was important enough to include the Utica in their monthly productivity report, along with the better known fracked up areas such as the Bakken, the Marcellus, and the Eagle Ford; this in turn generated a lot of national coverage on eastern Ohio, especially on industry sites, calling the Utica the fastest growing gas producing area in the US, noting a ten-fold increase in production over 2 years as the ODNR reports that we've just fracked our thousandth well the past week, and the American Petroleum Institute claims that those 1000 wells are just the beginning of what we'll see in the future...

in other news, despite the economic sanctions imposed by the US and it's NATO allies against Russia and the Russian embargo of everything, including food, from the US due to the ongoing civil war in the Ukraine, which has the US moving troops & military hardware all over eastern Europe, Exxon began drilling a $700 million well in the Russian Arctic in partnership with Rosneft, Russia’s state-owned oil company on Saturday in clear defiance of the government's economic sanctions, and a report issued by the Environmental Integrity Project found that at least 33 fracking companies in 12 states were illegally using diesel fuel as a component of their fracking fluids, a violation of the Safe Drinking Water Act..

we'll start with a few local stories...first, Gates Mills' profracking Council and mayor are trying to keep a fracking ban off the ballot, and then there's a Youngstown Vindicator editorial calling just such a ballot issue in their area "litter":

Gates Mills residents argue with law director, council over anti-fracking bill of rights — Gates Mills Village Council refused on Tuesday to consider residents' petition for a bill of rights to ban additional fracking in the village. Residents formed the Citizens for the Preservation of Gates Mills when Mayor Shawn Riley announced his plans for villagers to pool their land to prepare for gas wells in the village. The group has gathered more than 130 signatures to have a bill of rights placed on the November ballot that would outlaw all new wells in the village. Council was supposed to vote on Tuesday whether to submit the issue to the Cuyahoga County Board of Elections. Council has until Sept. 6 to do it, but members "need more time to review the issue," Councilman Will Barnes said, refusing to comment further. On Friday, Law Director Margaret Cannon told petitioners they do not have enough valid signatures. She said 10 percent of the total 1,976 registered voters have to sign the petition and that adding more signatures isn't an option since the group has already filed the petition with the board of elections.The group's lawyer, though, argues that they needed 10 percent of the total voters in the last general election.

Anti-fracking charter issue will litter city ballot — again - Youngstown Vindicator  -- Given that Utica shale exploration is virtually nonexistent in Mahoning County, what purpose does the pretentious Community Bill of Rights proposed amendment to the Youngstown charter serve? The proposed charter amendment to ban hydraulic fracturing was unenforceable when it was written, it would have been unenforceable had the voters approved it over the past 15 months, and it will be unenforceable if, by some outside chance, it passes in November. As we’ve argued ad nauseam, the amendment will not give Youngstown city government any of the rights detailed in the 1,300-word tome. On the key issue of hydraulic fracturing — fracking in common parlance — the Ohio General Assembly years ago gave the state Department of Natural Resources sole authority to oversee the process used to extract oil and gas from shale formations deep beneath the earth’s surface. The Ohio Constitution, which supersedes the Youngstown Home Rule Charter, gives the Legislature the authority to act on issues of statewide importance. That authority has been upheld by the Ohio Supreme Court. The Community Bill of Rights would place the city of Youngstown outside the reach of both the Ohio Constitution and the U.S. Constitution.It should also be pointed out that every time the charter amendment issue is on the ballot, it costs money (public dollars). And yet, individuals who claim to be so concerned about the welfare of Youngstown residents have no qualms about taking money out of the public treasury in pursuit of an issue they concede will end up in the courts. If the amendment is adopted in November, city government will be required to enforce it. And the first time it attempts to do that, there will be a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of the Community Bill of Rights. And that means a further drain of the public treasury. As we’ve said before, “Enough’s enough.”

Ohio's Utica Region now included in EIA's monthly Drilling Productivity Report - Today in Energy - U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA) -- The Utica Region in eastern Ohio, one of the fastest growing natural gas production areas in the United States, has been added to the Drilling Productivity Report (DPR). Total natural gas production in the Utica Region, which includes production from the Utica and Point Pleasant formations as well as legacy production from conventional reservoirs, has increased from 155 million cubic feet per day (MMcf/d) in January 2012 to an estimated 1.3 billion cubic feet per day (Bcf/d) in September 2014.  Utica formation drilling activity has been primarily focused in eastern Ohio since mid-2012, although the geologic formation extends into Maryland, New York, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia. Some producers are successfully targeting the Utica formation in northern West Virginia, but these wells fall within the existing DPR Marcellus Region. The DPR analyzes all drilling and production within geographic areas in order to capture total production volumes supplied to the market and is not limited to the formation name used for the region.

ODNR data: Ohio’s Utica shale play home to 1,004 drilled horizontal wells - Looks Like We Made It could be the song du jour Tuesday, when Ohio recorded its 1,000th horizontal well drilled into the ground. To be precise, it was well No. 1,004, according to data from the Ohio Department of Natural Resources.   The Utica play is approaching another milestone, too, with 1,431 drilling permits, just 69 shy of 1,500. Well No. 1,000 is a nice round number, but it’s notable nonetheless for an area that the federal Energy Information Administration recently called “one of the fastest-growing natural gas production areas in the United States.”   The state recorded seven new drilled wells since last week, when the Utica field in Ohio was three short of No. 1,000.

Ohio Shale Production Up Ten Fold Since 2012 » WOSU News: A new federal report says that natural gas production in Ohio’s Utica Shale region is growing rapidly. The report issued Monday found that production from the Utica region in eastern Ohio increased by more than 10 times over the last two years, from 115 million cubic feet per day in 2012 to an estimated 1.3 billion cubic feet per day by September 2014. The U.S. Energy Information Administration says the Utica is one of the fastest growing natural gas production areas in the United States. Utica oil production has also increased to about 40,000 barrels per day. But the Utica production numbers are still far smaller than leading regions such as the Marcellus in Pennsylvania, the Bakken in North Dakota, or the Eagle Ford in Texas.

Second natural gas pipeline planned to cross Stark - The CantonRep - A second interstate pipeline is being planned to ship natural gas from the Utica and Marcellus shale regions across Stark County. Energy Transfer’s planned Rover Pipeline would carry up to 3.25 billion cubic feet of natural gas per day from West Virginia, Pennsylvania and Ohio, according to the project website. The main pipeline would leave the gas-processing plant in Leesville, cut across the northeastern edge of Tuscarawas County, then head west across southern Stark and Wayne counties on its way to the Midwest Hub in Defiance, according to a project map. From there, more pipeline would be built to take natural gas to Michigan and Canada. In total, the Rover mainline will include 380 miles of 36-inch and 42-inch diameter pipe and five compressor stations, plus 197 miles of supply laterals ranging in diameter from 24 to 42 inches, according to the project website. If approved by the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, the mainline from Leesville to Defiance is expected to open by December 2016. The section between Defiance and the Union Gas Hub in Canada would begin serving the Michigan and Ontario markets in June 2017.

API analyst says Ohio just getting started with Utica, - Ohio only has seen the tip of the iceberg when it comes to developing the Utica Shale, said Rayola Dougher, senior economic adviser for the American Petroleum Institute. Across the county, shale oil development is reducing the nation’s dependence on foreign oil and fueling the economy, said Dougher, who is one of several speakers slated for the Utica Summit II program Oct. 14 at University Center on the Kent State University Stark Campus. Utica Shale drilling — currently focused in a half dozen southeastern Ohio counties — should complement Ohio’s existing manufacturing base, especially the steel and chemical industries, Dougher said. “It’s just only the beginning of the journey,” she said. Utica Summit II has been organized by the Canton Regional Chamber of Commerce, Shale Directories and The Repository. Dougher and other speakers will lead discussions on what Utica Shale development can mean for manufacturing, transportation, job creation and more. Shale drilling has been evolving for several years as companies improve techniques for horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing, also called fracking. Horizontal drilling lets companies cut through a shale rock vein. Fracking, is a process where a slurry of water, sand and chemicals are forced into the well to break the rock and release trapped oil and gas. Companies began drilling the Utica Shale in southeastern Ohio late in 2010. Now more than 1,000 horizontal wells have been drilled in shale formations, with more than 500 wells listed as producing. The Utica Shale is one of the newest areas being drilled. Shale formations in Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, North Dakota and Pennsylvania are where horizontal drilling and fracking techniques have been refined.

Project helping Ohio communities avert bust after shale boom -  Boom, then bust. It’s a scenario often played out in local economies heavily reliant on one type of industry, especially in the energy sector. And it’s an underlying concern for Ohio communities experiencing a boom in shale oil and gas development. But the cycle isn’t inescapable, say community development specialists with Ohio State University Extension. They have received funding to help eastern Ohio communities examine how shale development, also known as fracking, is affecting their economies, environmental conditions and social structures and to create plans for long-term viability. With $200,000 in funding for a three-year project from the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economic Development Administration, OSU Extension has joined forces with four regional economic development districts representing 25 eastern Ohio counties. “We are trying to help the communities in the region position themselves for sustainable economic development that leverages the shale play and prevents the bust that inevitably would happen,” said Nancy Bowen-Ellzey, an OSU Extension field specialist in community economics and one of the project’s principal investigators.

Ohio Supreme Court to hear mineral rights cases that affect landowners, drillers - The Ohio Supreme Court will hear two cases next week on a law that has caused mass confusion among Ohio oil and gas landowners and drillers. Ohio’s Dormant Mineral Act has been the focus of many lawsuits since production began a few years ago in the state’s Utica shale play as land and mineral-rights owners dispute ownership of valuable underground minerals. Earlier this month, I wrote about the court approving another mineral-act related case, separate from the two being heard next week.  That case and next Wednesday’s could wind up redirecting tens of millions of exploration dollars to landowners from drillers. It’s been common since the 19th century for mineral rights underneath the ground to be split from surface rights.  But mineral rights can be fragmented on big parcels and mineral rights owners could be heirs who are oblivious to a long-deceased relative’s ownership. It can make determining ownership difficult.  Ohio’s law, adopted in 1989, can be simply described as “use-it-or-lose-it.” If a certain action isn’t made on the minerals in a 20-year period, those rights float to the surface owner. In 2006, the state legislature amended the law demanding a surface owner tell a mineral owner of his intention to declare the mineral interest abandoned. The amendment also clarified the 20-year rule. Now, a surface owner’s claim for mineral surrender starts 20 years before they declare the minerals abandoned. So, if a surface owner today tried to declare mineral rights abandoned, there couldn’t have been mineral activity on the land since 1994. But Utica exploration began in 2010, so that claim likely would lose. Drillers have signed contracts worth millions, so the decisions the court makes can wind up shifting loads of money.

Editorial: EPA, Ohio lawmakers must reconsider self-reporting rules for private companies -  The Canton Repository - The Ohio Environmental Protection Agency and the federal EPA must think twice about allowing private companies to self-report spills and chemical leaks that threaten not only the environment but public health. While the state and federal arms of the agency claim “there are tremendous penalties for incorrect reporting,” we seriously doubt fines of several thousand dollars provide a serious-enough deterrent to multibillion dollar companies and are likely written off as the cost of doing business. When companies, such as Dover Chemical Co., are dealing with probable carcinogens and are located within an arm’s length of Tuscarawas County’s drinking supply, it’s imperative that adequate checks and balances are in place. Meanwhile, residents in both Stark and Tuscarawas counties must worry about waste products from horizontal shale drilling — also known as fracking. And while both communities have benefited from gas and oil exploration and all the ancillary businesses that support this industry, it’s important that laws are in place to provide for timely reporting. After all, these companies are part of our communities, they are our neighbors and like good neighbors we have an expectation they will balance their business interests with the best interests of their communities. Our children attend the same schools, we shop in the same stores and drink the same water — the quality of which could be at risk. In July, The Columbus Dispatch reported a fracking company — Halliburton — waited five days before it released to federal and state EPA officials a list of toxic chemicals that spilled from a drilling site into a tributary of the Ohio River. The spill, which occurred after a fire on a well pad in Monroe County, killed more than 70,000 fish and wildlife, state officials said. Did it affect drinking water? Environmental advocacy groups say the state can’t be sure

Report: Too few safeguards for drinking water near fracking wells - Federal and state governments do not do enough to safeguard drinking water around the nearly 200,000 wells where fracking wastewater is injected deep underground, according to a federal report. The U.S. Government Accountability Office investigation found that existing regulations do not adequately protect against contamination that could occur after earthquakes, which is increasingly a concern at injection wells and fracking sites in Ohio and out west. In some states, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency oversees injection wells. On others, state agencies, such as the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, regulates oil and gas drilling. Julia Ortiz, a spokeswoman for the U.S. EPA, said the agency is reviewing the report, but generally agrees with the findings. Bob Worstall, an oil and gas resources management deputy chief with the Ohio Department of Natural Resources, said that after earthquakes connected with an injection well rolled through Mahoning County in 2011, ODNR started requiring seismic monitoring near injection wells. Additional earthquakes occurred this year in Northeast Ohio near fracking sites. “Our experience has been — and I think the results will bear it out — that if the well is constructed properly, the likelihood of any issues down the road are greatly diminished,” he said.

Fracking's threat to drinking water is getting little EPA scrutiny, studies find - Two new reports on fracking's potential threat to American aquifers suggest that drinking-water contamination is significantly more likely than energy producers, and regulators, have been willing to acknowledge. Neither has gained much attention in the national press — and none locally that I can detect.  A two-year audit by the Government Accountability Office, made public two weeks ago, concluded that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency is doing a poor job of protecting drinking-water supplies from the many fracking-related activities that fall outside the so-called "Halliburton loophole." Since 2006, most injection of hydraulic fracturing fluids done to directly produce oil and natural gas has been exempt from EPA oversight. But other phases of the fracking operations — injection of wastes or returned water for long-term storage — are supposed to be regulated by EPA or state agencies to which it delegates the responsibility.There are now some 172,000 such wells across the U.S., and though at least some of these are known to have contaminated drinking water sources, the GAO found that no long-term monitoring is being done, and short-term oversight is deficient in many respects as well.  The second report was delivered earlier this week to the national conference of the American Chemical Society by Stanford scientist Rob Jackson, of whom I have written before.

EPA must step in after WV's repeated failure to protect drinking water from oil and gas waste -- Today NRDC sent a letter to U.S. EPA calling on them to crack down on the state of West Virginia’s lax oversight of oil and gas and fracking wastewater disposal wells—that is putting drinking water at risk of contamination, and could trigger man-made earthquakes.  The West Virginia Surface Owners’ Rights Organization, which works to protect landowners from abuses by the oil and gas industry, joined us in sending the letter.  The oil and gas industry creates an enormous amount of wastewater – more than 2 billion gallons per day.  This wastewater includes the “flowback” that comes up the wellbore after fracking is completed, as well as “produced water” that was trapped in oil and gas formations.  The wastewater is often toxic and can contain chemicals used in fracking and naturally occurring substances, including heavy metals like arsenic and lead, and radioactive materials.  Over 90% of this wastewater generated by the industry is disposed of by pumping it underground via “injection wells.”  But there is mounting evidence that the underground injection of this waste is risking the safety of drinking water. A recent report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), a federal watchdog agency, found that EPA was not doing enough to ensure state oil and gas waste injection programs are not contaminating underground drinking water supplies, risking earthquakes, or causing  “overpressurization,” in which pressures build up to unsafe levels and waste can spill onto the surface.

New Jersey Governor Vetoes Fracking Waste Ban Despite Bipartisan Support - If New Jersey Governor Chris Christie, whose presidential potential is still being touted by some supporters despite a series of scandals surrounding him, is trying to demonstrate that he’s on the far right fringe of his own party when it comes to the environment, he’s doing a good job of it.  Last week, he vetoed a bill dubbed the Frack Waste Ban Bill which would have barred the disposal, treatment, storage and discharge of fracking waste in the state. It’s the second time he’s done so; he vetoed a similar bill in 2012. And he’s done so despite overwhelming support of the measure in the New Jersey legislature from both parties. The bill had four dozen sponsors, both Republicans and Democrats. The vote in the N.J. Senate was 33-4. In the state Assembly it was 62-16-1. Currently, no fracking is going on in New Jersey, but there’s plenty in neighboring Pennsylvania, which is already bringing some of its waste to New Jersey for disposal. When he previously vetoed the bill, Christie claimed it violated the interstate commerce clause of the U.S. Constitution. However, New Jersey’s nonpartisan legislative Office of Legislative Services,  says it doesn’t because it would treat in-state and out-of-state waste equally.

Pennsylvania Town Votes To Allow 6 Fracking Wells Within 3,000 Feet Of School Buildings - The Geyer farm, where as many as six unconventional gas wells are waiting to be placed by Rex Energy, sits just half a mile from the Mars School District, a campus of 3,200 children. If Rex Energy’s permits for the wells are approved by the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection, residents say the school buildings could be within the radius of a possible explosion.At a township public meeting Wednesday night, Rex Energy came one step closer to having those permits approved. Middlesex supervisors Michael Spreng, Donald P. Marshall, and James Evans voted unanimously to approve changes to the town’s zoning laws that would legally open up residential and agricultural lands for drilling, despite the protests of concerned parents and residents. In essence, the ordinance opens up most of the township to drilling. That zoning law change has wider implications for the town in the long run, but at the moment, it has everything to do with the schools. “In essence, the ordinance opens up most of the township to drilling,” said John Neuhror, communications director at Keystone Progress, who also lives in a development adjacent to the well site. “But it’s pretty clear to an objective observer that the ordinance was written to make it very clear that the Geyer farm’s wells are allowed in the township.”

DEP gets 2nd dour report on gas well oversight - The issuance last week of a second report detailing myriad shortcomings in the state Department of Environmental Protection’s oversight and enforcement of Marcellus Shale gas development might have the agency feeling like a pinata after a party. The latest report, which Earthworks, a Washington, D.C.-based environmental organization, released Thursday, reviewed and analyzed DEP Marcellus Shale gas well drilling files and conducted its own air and water testing to detail how the DEP’s enforcement of shale gas regulations has been less than transparent or effective in controlling the exposure of Pennsylvania residents to unhealthy air and water. Three weeks ago, state Auditor General Eugene DePasquale issued a highly critical performance audit of the DEP’s shale gas industry oversight, including its failure to consistently pursue citizen complaints about drinking water degradation or issue enforcement orders for regulatory violations as the state oil and gas law requires. Among its 25 findings, the 70-page Earthworks report alleges that the DEP’s oil and gas office:

  • ■ has failed to consider the cumulative health impacts from shale gas development;
  • ■ keeps incomplete permitting and enforcement records that make it impossible for residents to assess their exposure to air and water emissions;
  • ■ has increased inspections, but they still don’t meet even the voluntary goals the department set;
  • ■ poorly tracks, records and responds to citizen complaints;
  • ■ puts a higher premium on speedy permitting than enforcement.

Drillers did not report half of spills that led to fines - Half the spills at Marcellus Shale well sites that resulted in fines weren’t spotted by gas companies, which are required by state law to look for and report spills of drilling-related fluids. That is one of the main conclusions of a Pittsburgh Post-Gazette review of hundreds of thousands of state and company documents for every incident at a Marcellus well site that led to a fine against a driller through the end of 2012. The documentation showing that companies often failed to detect spills on their own sites offers a look at self-regulation in the shale gas industry. State regulation of the industry was the subject of a withering state auditor general review of the Department of Environmental Protection’s oversight issued July 22. The audit detailed the agency’s shortcomings, including failing to consistently issue enforcement orders to drilling companies after regulators determined that gas operations had damaged water supplies, even though the state’s oil and gas law requires it. The Post-Gazette investigation using well permit file documents and other DEP data focused on 425 incidents involving 48 companies that resulted in nearly $4.4 million in fines. Of those 425 fines, 137 were due to spills at or near a well site. They ranged from relatively small incidents involving a couple of gallons of diesel fuel on a well pad to larger accidents involving thousands of gallons of hydraulic fracturing flowback fluid that killed vegetation or fish.

Study raises red flags on fracking fluids - - A new study on the contents of the fluids utilized in the gas and oil drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, raises concerns about several ingredients. Scientists presenting the work Wednesday at the 248th National Meeting & Exposition of the American Chemical Society (ACS) say that out of nearly 200 commonly used compounds, there's very little known about the potential health risks of about one-third, and eight are toxic to mammals. William Stringfellow, Ph.D., says he conducted the review of fracking contents to help resolve the public debate over the controversial drilling practice.“The industrial side was saying, ‘We're just using food additives, basically making ice cream here,'” Stringfellow says. “On the other side, there's talk about the injection of thousands of toxic chemicals. As scientists, we looked at the debate and asked, ‘What's the real story?'”  To find out, Stringfellow's team at Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory scoured databases and reports to compile a list of substances commonly used in fracking. What their analysis revealed was a little truth to both sides' stories — with big caveats. Fracking fluids do contain many nontoxic and food-grade materials, as the industry asserts. But if something is edible or biodegradable, it doesn't automatically mean it can be easily disposed of, Stringfellow notes.  “You can't take a truckload of ice cream and dump it down the storm drain,” he says, building on the industry's analogy.

The Science Against Fracking -- Three or four years ago, the chief environmental concern about fracking involved the contamination of drinking water through the fracking process—blasting water, sand, and chemicals underground in vast quantities and at extreme pressures to force open shale layers deep beneath the Earth, and release natural gas. But the science was still pretty ambiguous, and a great deal turned on how “fracking” was defined. The entire mega-process of “unconventional” gas drilling had clearly caused instances of groundwater contamination, due to spills and leaks from improperly cased wells. But technically, “fracking” only refers to the water and chemical blast, not the drilling, the disposal of waste, or the huge industrial operations that accompany it all. Nowadays, explains Cornell University engineering professor Anthony Ingraffea on the latest installment of the Inquiring Minds podcast (stream above), the scientific argument against fracking and unconventional gas drilling is more extensive. It involves not simply groundwater contamination, but also at least two other major problems: earthquake generation and the accidental emissions of methane, a potent greenhouse gas.

EIP investigation finds continued use of diesel in fracking -- The illegal injection of diesel fuel during hydraulic fracturing has continued over the last four years, despite repeated denials by the drilling industry, according to a report by the Environmental Integrity Project (EIP). In its investigation, EIP also found troubling evidence that drilling companies have been changing and eliminating their disclosures of past diesel use from the industry self-disclosure database of chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing, called FracFocus. Injecting diesel fuel into the ground to fracture shale and extract gas or oil is a potential threat to drinking water supplies and public health because diesel contains toxic chemicals, such as benzene, that cause cancer or other serious health problems, even at low doses. EIP’s report, “Fracking Beyond The Law,” uses self-reported data from drilling companies and federal records to document at least 33 companies fracking at least 351 wells across 12 states with fluids containing diesel from 2010 through early August 2014. Diesel fuels were used to frack wells in Texas, Colorado, North Dakota, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Wyoming, New Mexico, Utah, Kansas, Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Montana without required Safe Drinking Water Act permits. “We urge EPA and the states to exercise their legal authority by immediately investigating the compliance status of these 351 wells and taking all necessary steps to make sure they are properly permitted. Companies that inject diesel without permits should be fined for ignoring the law.”  EIP’s investigation also revealed that some oil and gas companies have been changing their disclosures submitted to FracFocus, the privately-run fracking chemical disclosure registry, in a manner that removes any and all indication of past injection of diesel. FracFocus, which was created by industry as an alternative to mandatory disclosure to federal or state governments, allows operators to change or replace previous disclosures, at any time, without leaving any record of or justification for the change.

Diesel Used To Frack Oil And Gas Wells Without Permit, Report Finds - A new report has found that since 2010 fossil fuel companies have used more than 30,000 gallons of diesel fuel across the country to frack for oil and gas without obtaining the required federal permits. The report, called, “Fracking Beyond The Law,” by the Environmental Integrity Project, a D.C. nonprofit established by environmental attorneys, found that at least 33 companies fracked at least 351 wells across 12 states with fluids containing diesel.  The passing of the 2005 Energy Policy Act by Congress established what is commonly known as the “Halliburton Loophole” in which the EPA was stripped of its authority to regulate a number of fracking fluids that could reveal the companies’ trade secrets. However diesel fuels, which contain high levels of benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, or xylene — known carcinogens and neurotoxins — remain under the jurisdiction of the EPA as part of the Safe Drinking Water Act. The industry has repeatedly asserted the the use of diesel fuel in fracking no longer occurs and those denials along with the release of this report. The industry groups say that companies are phasing out diesel, which as of earlier this year was used in around two percent of wells, and that companies were using kerosene, which wasn’t listed as a diesel fuel until February. The industry group Energy in Depth also pointed out that the 351 wells the project cited as using diesel make up less than 0.5 percent of the 77,000 wells registered on FracFocus.  The EIP investigation asserts that the 351 wells they found using diesel is likely an underestimate as some oil and gas companies have been changing their FracFocus disclosures to remove indication of past diesel injections.

North Carolina Frack Study: Don’t Ask Don’t Tell -  North Carolina’s governor has decided he wants the state to get fracked. Whether it’s safe or not.  One thing we know for sure, the shale there is really shallow, so if they hit gas anywhere during the drilling or fracking – up she comes. Turning Tar Heels into Tar Balls. Duke Scientists’ Fracking Warnings Fall on Deaf Ears: Robert Jackson and Avner Vengosh of Duke University’s esteemed Nicholas School are viewed by some in the oil and gas industry as enemies. At Duke, they’ve done studies with compelling evidence that shale gas extraction, fracking, causes drinking water problems in other states. The industry, which got North Carolina to lift its moratorium on fracking with drilling next year, has long made the case that drilling is absolutely safe. Jackson and Vengosh have serious doubts about that, and given that the Nicholas School in the field of environmental science is considered among the elite in the county, it would be logical to assume that state officials developing rules to govern shale gas exploration would want to hear from them. But the N.C. Mining and Energy Commission did not invite either Jackson or Vengosh to offer any views while commission members were in the process of determining the rules.“With all due respect to Avner Vengosh,” said recently resigned commission Chairman James Womack, “he’s not interested in drilling. His studies are all aimed at the downside of oil and gas development.” (Which is normally how you make regulations . . . )Vengosh says instead that he’s all about science. And Vengosh and Jackson, who’s taking a job at Stanford University, have some pretty strong science behind their belief that fracking causes contamination of drinking water, among other problems.

Busting the Bureau of Land Management’s Frackopoly -- BLM-managed land like near Moab Valley, Arches National Park, Canyonlands National Park and so many others in the U.S., may be at risk from nearby fracking. President Obama’s BLM controls access to more than 700 million acres of federally owned mineral rights, some of which sit adjacent to public parks. Some 38 million acres of that land is currently leased, and over the past three years, the oil and gas industry has drilled over three thousand new wells, 90 percent of which have been (or will be) fracked. In fact, existing and proposed drilling and fracking operations overseen by the BLM threaten public lands, nearby watersheds, air quality and the health and safety of surrounding communities in 27 states.  The mission of the BLM, according to its own website, is “to sustain the health, diversity and productivity of America’s lands for the use and enjoyment of present and future generations.” But how can future generations be expected to enjoy lands that sit adjacent to hardcore industrial activity?

Poll Shows Californians Oppose Dumping Fracking Chemicals Into Ocean -- A poll commissioned by the Center for Biological Diversity and conducted by Public Policy Polling (PPP), surveying 500 California voters, found that a majority of Californians opposed fracking in their state and an even larger number support a ban on dumping fracking chemicals in the ocean.  In response to the question “Do you favor or oppose increased use of hydraulic fracturing in California, which is also known as fracking, a drilling method that extracts oil and natural gas from underground using a high-pressure mixture of water, sand and assorted chemicals?,” 36 percent said they favored increased fracking, while 56 percent opposed it and 8 percent were not sure. In response to “The federal government currently allows oil companies to dispose of fracking fluid with wastewater into the ocean. Do you support or oppose a ban on dumping fracking chemicals into the water off California’s coast?,” 65 percent supported such a ban, 25 percent opposed it and 9 percent were not sure. When presented with the choice of two viewpoints—one offering fracking as a danger to the environment which should be banned and the other saying it will create jobs and reduce energy prices and should therefore remain legal,” 55 percent agreed it was a threat to the environment, 35 percent agreed it was a job-creator and 10 percent were not sure.

Fracking Waste Disposal Fuels Opposition in U.S. and Abroad - A poll taken by Public Policy Polling revealed this week that 65 percent of California residents oppose dumpingfracking waste in the ocean. The actions of fracking companies in both the U.S. and England, the eagerness of many government bodies and officials to cater to them, and the obfuscation around the disposal of the waste show they have reason to be concerned. Ban Michigan Fracking reports that 12 tons of radioactive fracking waste is heading for a hazardous waste facility in the Detroit area from Pennsylvania. The facility, Wayne Disposal Inc., is one of only two in the country that accepts this waste (the other is in Idaho), which was already rejected by a West Virginia facility for its high level of radioactivity. The lack of places to dump fracking waste is emerging as one of the industry’s biggest problems. Recently, for the second time, the New Jersey legislature voted by an overwhelming bipartisan majority to prohibit the treatment, storing and disposal of fracking waste water in that state  And last week it was vetoed for the second time by Governor Chris Christie, angering environmentalists, as well as legislators.

Oil and gas company debt soars to danger levels to cover shortfall in cash - The world’s leading oil and gas companies are taking on debt and selling assets on an unprecedented scale to cover a shortfall in cash, calling into question the long-term viability of large parts of the industry. The US Energy Information Administration (EIA) said a review of 127 companies across the globe found that they had increased net debt by $106bn in the year to March, in order to cover the surging costs of machinery and exploration, while still paying generous dividends at the same time. They also sold off a net $73bn of assets. This is a major departure from historical trends. Such a shortfall typically happens only in or just after recessions. For it to occur five years into an economic expansion points to a deep structural malaise. The EIA said revenues from oil and gas sales have reached a plateau since 2011, stagnating at $568bn over the last year as oil hovers near $100 a barrel. Yet costs have continued to rise relentlessly. Companies have exhausted the low-hanging fruit and are being forced to explore fields in ever more difficult regions. The EIA said the shortfall between cash earnings from operations and expenditure -- mostly CAPEX and dividends -- has widened from $18bn in 2010 to $110bn during the past three years. Companies appear to have been borrowing heavily both to keep dividends steady and to buy back their own shares, spending an average of $39bn on repurchases since 2011.

EIA Corroborates the Work of Energy Policy Forum -- Over a year ago, on 19 June, 2013, Energy Policy Forum (EPF) wrote a post exposing the explosion of capital expenditure by shale operators to drill and complete wells and the concomitant lack of free cash flow. Unless operations can produce sufficient cash, the exercise is obviously unsustainable. At some point a company simply hits the proverbial financial wall. http://energypolicyforum.org/2013/06/19/huge-capex-free-cash-flow-not-in-shales/  Now EIA, the forecasting arm of the US Department of Energy has corroborated EPF’s work. EIA states: “Based on data compiled from quarterly reports, for the year ending March 31, 2014, cash from operations for 127 major oil and natural gas companies totaled $568 billion, and major uses of cash totaled $677 billion, a difference of almost $110 billion. This shortfall was filled through a $106 billion net increase in debt and $73 billion from sales of assets, which increased the overall cash balance.” EIA went on to say: “The gap between cash from operations and major uses of cash has widened in recent years from a low of $18 billion in 2010 to $100 billion to $120 billion during the past three years.”


Wall Street's Shale 'Fraud' Exposed - U.S. energy independence, we're told, is at our fingertips thanks to the so-called “shale revolution”. Offsetting declines in conventional oil and gas production, shale gas and tight oil (shale oil) are being heralded as the means by which the U.S. will become energy independent – a net exporter of natural gas and once again the world’s largest oil producing nation. But two new reports by Post Carbon Institute and Energy Policy Forum show that the hype simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

KEY FINDINGS, SHALE GAS

  • High productivity shale gas plays are not ubiquitous: Just six plays account for 88% of total production.
  • Individual well decline rates range from 80-95% after 36 months in the top five U.S. plays.
  • Overall field declines require from 30-50% of production to be replaced annually with more drilling – roughly 7,200 new wells a year simply to maintain production.
  • Dry shale gas plays require $42 billion/year in capital investment to offset declines. This investment is not covered by sales: in 2012, U.S. shale gas generated just $33 billion, although some of the wells also produced liquids, which improved economics.

KEY FINDINGS, TIGHT OIL (SHALE OIL)

  • More than 80 percent of tight oil production is from two unique plays: the Bakken and the Eagle Ford.
  • Well decline rates are steep – between 81 and 90 percent in the first 24 months.
  • Overall field decline rates are such that 40 percent of production must be replaced annually to maintain production.
  • Together the Bakken and Eagle Ford plays may yield a little over 5 billion barrels – less than 10 months of U.S. consumption.

Rail CEOs to Investors: “Bomb Trains” Safe At Almost Any Speed -- Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) recently said it would proceed with plans to increase speeds for oil-by-rail unit trains in Devil’s Lake, N.D. to 60 MPH from 30 MPH, despite opposition from local officials. BNSF’s announcement came merely a week after the Obama Administration announced its proposed regulations for trains carrying oil obtained via hydraulic fracturing (“fracking”) from North Dakota's Bakken Shale basin.  The rail industry’s position on speed limits for “bomb trains” is simple: they continuously claim velocity has nothing to do with oil-by-rail accidents or safety.For example, Big Rail — as revealed by DeSmogBlog — lobbied against all proposed oil train speed reductions in its dozen or so private meetings at the Obama White House before the unveiling of the proposed oil-by-rail regulations.  Recent statements by rail industry CEOs during investor calls put the heads of many companies on record opposing oil-by-rail speed limits for the first time.

New Study Says U.S. Underestimated Keystone XL Emissions - Yves Smith - Yves here. Some advocates greenhouse gas reduction policies argue that the fight against the Keystone XL pipeline is misguided, since it represented a lot of political capital spent against a not-terribly-significant target. However, this post does reveal an important coda: that of the Administration’s characteristic dishonesty, in this case around climate change issues. Other examples, chronicled at length here and here, is Obama’s pro-fracking climate change headfake, which conveniently fails to include methane emissions in his new carbon containment policies. Originally published at Oil Price.A new report says the U.S. government dramatically underestimated the level of greenhouse gas emissions that would result if the controversial proposed Keystone XL pipeline becomes a reality. The study, by the Stockholm Environmental Institute, found that building the pipeline, which would connect Canada’s oil-rich tar sands to refineries in the Gulf of Mexico, would produce greenhouse gas emissions at least four times higher than the U.S. State Department’s official estimate. The study’s authors said that the U.S. officials did not take into account the fact that, by providing an outlet for Canada’s tar sands to reach international buyers, global oil supplies would increase, resulting in a moderate price decline of about $3 per barrel, according to the study. Basic economic theory dictates that lower prices would lead to greater consumption. More specifically, the study estimates that global oil consumption increases by 0.6 barrels for every barrel of oil added to global supply. The study finds that global greenhouse gas emissions would increase by 121 million tons of carbon dioxide a year. The study was published in the journal Nature Climate Change.

Oil Sands are Biggest Losers From Low Crude Prices: Study - ConocoPhillips and Royal Dutch Shell are among global oil companies needing crude prices as high as $150 a barrel to turn a profit from Canada’s oil sands, the costliest petroleum projects in the world, according to a study. The next most-expensive crude projects are in the deep waters off the coasts of Africa and Brazil, with each venture needing prices between $115 and $127 a barrel, said Carbon Tracker Initiative, a London-based think tank and environmental advocacy group, in a report today. As the U.S. shale drilling boom floods the world’s biggest crude market with supply, explorers are at greater risk of a price collapse that would turn some investments into money losers. Energy explorers are willing to invest in high-cost oil-sands developments because once they are up and running, they produce crude for decades longer than other ventures such as deepwater wells, said David McColl, an analyst at Morningstar Inc. in Chicago. “Where else can you get 10 to 30 years of predictable cash flow?” said McColl, who estimated new oil sands projects require $60 to $100 crude to make sense. “The returns may not be stellar compared to some other projects but they are steady.” In May, Carbon Tracker released a report that said the oil industry was at risk of wasting $1.1 trillion of investors’ cash on expensive developments in the Arctic, oil sands and deep oceans. That figure represents the amount explorers may spend on oilfields that need crude prices of $95 a barrel or more, the group said three months ago.  Oil companies face growing pressure from shareholders to rein in costs after two decades of bigger spending have failed to boost production or profitability

Oilprice Intelligence Report: Yes to Mexico, No to Ukraine, Maybe to Offshore Fracking - As Ukraine ushers through tax legislation designed to prop up political-business elite and alienate outside investors, Mexico finally passes secondary legislation to implement sweeping oil sector reforms and open up the sector to foreign investors.  On 6 August, the Mexican Senate voted 90-27 to pass the delayed secondary rules that will make energy sector reform a reality and end the 76-year state monopoly on oil and gas held by Pemex.Now Mexico is looking at a possible $1 trillion in outside investment, which at the end of the day could significantly reshape the oil and gas picture in North America. At the same time, Ukraine moved on 1 August to ensure that new foreign investment is crippled by a tax code that doubles tax rates for private gas producers and benefits certain local political-business elite at the expense of the state and the need to develop more resources, as Oilprice.com reported yesterday.Meanwhile, Reuters reports that wars, unrest, sabotage and sanctions are keeping some 3.3 million barrels of oil per day out of the market. This represents 4% of global supply, with the intensifying conflict in Iraq and the enduring chaos in Libya promising more “offline” oil.Amid the conflict and chaos, however, exports of crude oil from the US in June reached their highest level since the 1950s, putting the US ahead of Ecuador, the smallest member of OPEC. Exports spiked 35% from May to 389,000 barrels per day in June—most of it heading to the Canadian market, media cited the US Census Bureau as saying on 6 August. The figures reflect allowable shipments of US crude oil to Canada and re-exports of foreign oil; however, we could soon seem more light-processed crude, or condensate, added to the export mix as companies find loopholes to get around the ban on crude oil exports. With the good news in Mexico and stellar US production figures, attention is now turning—or returning—to the Gulf of Mexico, where advances in drilling technology are being put to use offshore, in the shallow waters. There has been a lot of news this week about squeezing more out of the older fields of the Gulf of Mexico, piggy-backing on advances in onshore drilling technology that have resulted in the shale boom.

Mexico Opens Oil Fields, Expects Rush Of International Companies Across The Border -- On Wednesday, Mexico outlined long-anticipated updates to its fossil fuel sector that are designed to usher in an energy boom led by the arrival of international companies with extraction expertise and financial savvy. The government made final the announcement that for the first time since 1938 private companies will be allowed to bid on prospective oil and gas resources, thus ending state-run Pemex’s monopoly.  Mexico’s oil production has been declining for the last decade, and has dropped about one million barrels a day to 2.5 million bpd — and even this number might be exaggerated due to water being included in its oil output. Under the new laws, Pemex will maintain 83 percent of Mexico’s proven and probable reserves, around 20 billion barrels of crude oil equivalent, while it will only keep a fifth of prospective resources, including yet-to-be-discovered resources. The rest will be made available to international companies, which are especially keen to start developing offshore resources in the Gulf of Mexico, an area that has yielded serious output from the U.S. side but is yet to be tapped in Mexico. Pemex has become associated with bloated bureaucracy and corrupt practices and the arrival of international companies is meant to bring efficiency, expertise, reduced costs, and deep pockets to the country’s oil sector. The government has identified 109 blocks for the first round of bids and expects investments of around $50 billion over the next four years, including partnerships with Pemex. Officials hope to raise national production to three million barrels a day by 2018.

How much oil do we have left? - - The year 1981 just called and said that we are out of oil. Well, according to estimates from the time, we should be. Back then the world consumed just under 60 million barrels per day, and global proved reserves for oil stood at almost 700 billion barrels. At that rate, the world should have exhausted all its proved reserves sometime in December 2013. But instead of the last drop of oil being squeezed out of the Earth, global production has increased by 46%, and global reserves now stand 1 trillion barrels higher than they did 33 years ago. Did some geological miracle more than double the amount of oil we have produced in the past three-plus decades? No. It's more of a disconnect between how much oil is physically left in the world and how data related to oil reserves is reported. Let's look at why these numbers have been misleading for so long and why today's current projection of 53 years of oil remaining -- based on recent numbers from BP -- is likely wrong as well. There are a multitude of ways to describe the amount of oil remaining, but the most common is known as proved reserves. When you divide proved reserves by total production, you get the reserves-to-production ratio. This is where the 53-year estimate comes from and where that 32-year estimate originated in 1981. While the number is easy to understand, it's a red herring because it assumes production will remain constant forever and that the current proved reserves estimates represent all the oil left. As we all know, this simply isn't the case. The problem with the term "proved reserves" is that many assume it describes a physical limitation on oil, but it is actually a calculated economic limitation. Every country has a slightly different way of calculating the amount, but the basic gist is that proved reserve estimates are what companies assume they can pull from the ground using existing technology while still generating a profit, which is based on the price of oil or gas over the past year.

US oil production keeps surging, so why haven’t oil and gasoline prices fallen? - One question that I hear all the time on this topic is this: With the huge increases in US crude oil output from the shale revolution, why is oil still around $100 per barrel and why is gasoline so expensive? The answer is pretty straightforward: Oil is a global commodity whose market price is largely determined by two important market-based factors: a) global oil supply and b) global oil demand. The chart below helps to explain.  Between 2004 and 2013, the world oil supply has increased only 4.6% from 72.58 million barrels per day to 75.94 million barrels per day last year (EIA data here), while world real GDP has increased by 24.2% from $44.52 trillion to $55.3 trillion (in 2005 dollars, USDA data here) and world nominal GDP increased by almost 64% from $43.1 trillion to $70.6 trillion. Bottom Line: The significant increases in US crude oil output over the last ten years haven’t increased the world supply of oil nearly enough to impact world oil production enough to offset the significant 24.2% increase in global economic activity. World demand for oil and energy is up significantly, while the supply of oil has barely increased. Therefore, oil prices and US gas prices haven’t come down much.

New Tax Threatens to Destroy Gas Production in Ukraine: Independent gas producers in Ukraine are joining forces to pressure the government in Kiev to re-think its new gas tax before everyone makes a run for the border in search of new assets in a more stable environment. Private producers have compiled a draft letter to Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk, criticizing the government’s doubling of taxes for gas producers, which was justified through the use of “wrong and misleading” data about private companies.  They also warn that their time in Ukraine will be over if the tax is extended beyond the end of this year—and there will be no further foreign investment in the country’s beleaguered gas sector. In an open letter to Yatsenyuk--an advance copy of which was obtained by Oilprice.com on August 10--independent gas producers in Ukraine pointed out that the cost of gas production by private companies in Ukraine exceeds the capital costs of public companies, which enjoy the advantage of development well researched and more easily profitable areas. “Therefore, any estimates by the Ministry of Finance as to the cost of gas on the basis of the financial performance of public companies cannot be used to determine the profitability of private company projects, which may be 10 times higher,” the letter said.

Before the fear of war, fear of fracking in Ukraine -- Locals seemed to have consensus on who’s at war: the U.S. and Russia over control of Ukraine, they all agreed. The people of the Donbass, the country’s gritty industrial region in the east, were not naive. They realized that gas pipelines crossing the border with Russia and the shale gas fields near Slovyansk — with a potential reserve of about 3 trillion cubic meters of gas — were the cause of constant tension between Russia and Ukraine. But with pipes in their backyards or running right next to their homes, with their feet firmly on ground that stands over a vast shale deposit, they knew the struggle was not really over Ukraine itself. They were in the middle of a war about energy. Depending on the political winds blowing between Kiev and Moscow, the Russian gas giant Gazprom cut off natural gas to Ukraine or turned it on again. The shale gas is an important potential source for Ukraine and possibly southeastern Europe. If it proves possible to tap, Ukraine hopes this supply would undercut Gazprom’s monopoly, a move that could change Europe’s energy map and its political contours as well. “If you asked me last month, I would tell you right away that gas was the real reason for our hate for Kiev and for this war,’’ said Ivan Vailyevich, a pensioner from the building on Bulvarnaya Avenue when recalled how he participated in mass street protests in February and March. “We’d kill and die but never allow production of shale gas here,” he said. “That would poison our land.” Now he doesn’t know what to say. “After our house was bombed this month, we realized that shale gas was not as scary as shells.”

3rd 'Gas War' Looming Between Russia, Ukraine, EU - Weather forecasters promise 32 degrees Celsius in Kiev on Thursday — which makes the near-citywide absence of hot water due to a shortage of Russian gas more bearable. But things could get much uglier in winter, when a "humanitarian catastrophe" looms, if the confrontation between Moscow and Kiev over Ukraine's rebellious eastern regions remains unresolved and Russia turns off the gas tap, analysts said. While political pundits say the ongoing pro-Russian insurgency in Ukraine is Moscow's last remaining leverage against Kiev, the Kremlin still has a "gas truncheon" at its disposal. Ukraine is entirely dependent on Russian gas supplies, and half of Russia's gas exports to Europe flow through its pipelines. The gas weapon is ineffective in the summer, but a new "gas war" between Russia and Ukraine — which would be the third so far — is waiting to happen this fall, when the energy- and cash-strapped Ukraine will have to provide for its citizens and factories, experts said. The worst case scenario is a season-long halt to Russian gas supplies to Ukraine and the European Union, which, while not leaving populations to freeze, would ground Ukraine's industrial output and cause supply disruptions in the European countries beyond.

Wind farm 'needs 700 times more land than fracking site' -  A wind farm requires 700 times more land to produce the same amount of energy as a fracking site, according to analysis by the energy department’s recently-departed chief scientific advisor. Prof David MacKay, who stood down from the Government role at the end of July, published analysis putting shale gas extraction “in perspective”, showing it was far less intrusive on the landscape than wind or solar energy. His intervention was welcomed by fracking groups, who are battling to win public support amid claims from green groups and other critics that shale gas extraction will require the “industrialisation” of the countryside. Hundreds of anti-fracking protesters on Thursday occupied a field near Blackpool neighbouring a proposed fracking site for energy firm Cuadrilla. Prof MacKay said that a shale gas site uses less land and “creates the least visual intrusion”, compared with a wind farm or solar farm capable of producing the equivalent amount of energy over 25 years.

Exxon Starts ‘Most Controversial Oil Rig in the World” - After years of preparation, on Saturday ExxonMobil began drilling a $700 million well in the Kara Sea in Russia’s Arctic. It is Russia’s most northerly well.  In doing so, the oil giant has ignored growing concerns over Russia’s role in the Ukrainian conflict, and the sanctions imposed on its business partner, Rosneft, which is run by a close associate of Putin, Igor Sechin, who is also personally blacklisted.  Indeed, the go ahead shows just how ineffectual the sanctions against Russia really are. Exxon’s excuse is that the contract to hire the rig was signed before sanctions were announced, but the oil giant is still working with Putin’s blacklisted inner circle.  Exxon has also ignored huge questions over whether an oil spill in the region could be contained. And of course it has totally disregarded the issue of climate change and the need to disinvest from fossil fuels in the most ecologically sensitive areas, such as the Arctic.

Exxon, Rosneft in joint Arctic oil project despite sanctions on Russia | South China Morning Post --  US oil giant Exxon Mobil began drilling for oil in the Russian Arctic yesterday with local partner Rosneft, despite sanctions imposed on the Russian company by Washington over the crisis in Ukraine. Russian President Vladimir Putin praised the US$700 million joint project as an example of cooperation. Although US sanctions are not designed to halt such joint projects, they nevertheless aim to starve Rosneft of dollar financing and stop it accessing modern technology. "Today, commercial success is driven by efficient international cooperation," Putin, speaking from his Black Sea residence, told Rosneft CEO Igor Sechin, who is subject to US sanctions, and Glenn Waller, Exxon Mobil's lead manager in Russia. The European Union imposed a third round of sanctions last month, restricting the export of equipment used for offshore oil production to Russia after its relations with Europe and the US deteriorated to the lowest point since the cold war over the Ukraine conflict. That has not stopped Exxon because the contract to hire the rig was signed before sanctions were announced. "In the area of oil, the sanctions are more symbolic perhaps at this stage, but if they remain in place for a long period then they will have some significant consequences,"

ExxonMobil And Russia Began Drilling For Oil In The Arctic On Saturday - ExxonMobil began drilling in the Russian Arctic on Saturday, defying both the spirit of recent U.S. sanctions and environmental opposition to oil exploration in the region.According to Fuel Fix, the well is a joint $700 million project between ExxonMobil and Rosneft, Russia’s state-owned oil producer. Drilling is anticipated to take about 70 days, and will target the Universitetskaya — a geologic formation under the ocean floor that’s roughly the size of the city of Moscow. Rosneft estimates the formation could contain up to 9 billion barrels of oil, making it a major target for Russian oil exploration. Energy provides half the Russian state’s revenue, and the country has so far maintained its oil production at a post-Soviet high of over 10 million barrels per day.ExxonMobil’s output fell to a five-year low in the second quarter, so discovering new reserves in the Universitetskaya would also be a major boost. . It’s apparently the first of as many as 40 wells Rosneft plans to drill by 2018 to explore the potential of the Arctic Ocean for oil production. Gazprom, another Russian state-owned fossil fuel company, already has active wells in the Arctic Circle off Russia’s northern coast.

Oil and the prospect of a Chinese shale boom - Russia geopolitical risk? Check. Middle East geopolitical risk? Check. But commodity prices, and in particular oil prices, are doing nothing: From the charts it increasingly looks like somebody somewhere is enforcing an unofficial trading band, capped on the top-end by SPR releases or Opec production hikes, and propped up on the bottom-end by monetary policy and strategic supply cuts. But the weirdest thing of all is that the prospect of supply disruption isn’t doing much to prices at all. More than that, our old friend contango is threatening to make a significant come back in the Brent market.The culprit? Plentiful supply amid a surplus of barrels from West Africa and the Atlantic Basin despite all the escalating conflicts in Iraq, Libya and Ukraine.Though, as the analysts at JBC Energy observe, it’s probably significant that China — the key driver for oil markets over the last decade — has begun to implement an energy strategy which foresees greater use of natural gas.  While Beijing expects the new regime to bring positive results in terms of supply, the country’s shale gas ambitions have suffered a major blow. China has just slashed its national target for shale gas output to 30 bcm by 2020 from the previously estimated 60-100 bcm after early exploration efforts for unconventional fuel proved to be challenging. China is believed to hold the world’s largest technically recoverable shale resources, but complex geology, lack of expertise and infrastructure as well as high costs of production are making it difficult to replicate the success story of the US.

Colorado Legislator Defends Fracking By Saying ‘Indians’ Benefited From Methane In Water