Marcellus Shale

From SourceWatch
Revision as of 15:16, 30 June 2010 by Lisa Graves (talk | contribs) (SW: →‎Hydrofracking: fix layout)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

{{#badges: WaterEnergy }}Marcellus Shale is an extensive formation of shale (a type of sedimentary rock that is high in carbon) in New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, West Virginia, and other states in the region. [1] It underlies about 18,700 square miles in southern New York, including New York City's entire 1,585-square-mile watershed west of the Hudson River.[2] This shale has received renewed attention both because of new estimates of the quantity of natural gas believed to be under these rocks[3] and because of the significant environmental concerns that have been raised about the method of extracting the gas from the shale, "hydrofracking," which is discussed in more detail below.

Contents

Environmental Concerns

Hydrofracking

The method for extracting gas from the Marcellus Shale--a process called "horizontal hydraulic fracturing," or hydrofracking, in which a fluid is injected into the rock which then releases the gas along with radioactive toxins and other hazardous substances in the shale--has raised serious environmental and health concerns.[4] In New Mexico, for example, similar processes have leached toxic chemicals into the water table at 800 sites.[5] To force natural gas out of shale, millions of gallons of fresh, drinkable water are forced through a pipe drilled into the shale at extremely high pressure. A variety of chemicals are added to the water to keep the fractures in the shale open and keep the gas flowing to the surface.[6]

Pro Publica has provided two charts, depicting how the "hydro-fracking" (also called hydrofracking or fracking) process works. "What is Hydraulic Fracturing?" can be seen at: http://www.propublica.org/special/hydraulic-fracturing-national and "Anatomy of a Gas Well can be seen at: http://www.propublica.org/feature/anatomy-of-a-gas-well-426. Although no complete list of the cocktail of chemicals used in this process exists, information obtained from environmental clean-up sites demonstrates that known toxins are routinely being used, including hydrochloric acid, diesel fuel (which contains benzene, tuolene, and xylene) as well as formaldehyde, polyacrylimides, arsenic, and chromates.[7][8] These chemicals include known carcinogens and other hazardous substances.[9]

The #evp parser function was deprecated in EmbedVideo 2.0. Please convert your parser function tag to #ev.

Pro Publica reporter Abrahm Lustgarten revealed that as much as 85% of the fluids used during fracking is regularly left underground after wells are drilled in the Marcellus Shale. Translation: "[Over] three million gallons of chemically tainted wastewater could be left in the ground forever. Drilling companies say that chemical make up less than 1% of that fluid...[which] still amount[s] to 34,000 gallons in a typical well." The old school of thought was that only roughly 30% of the fluids stayed in the ground, which has proven false.[10] Toxics Targeting created a video in which they show what they have coined "ignitible water." The video can be seen at right. [11]

Another video of ignitible water can be seen here: http://vimeo.com/4680635

Concerns about Fracking and the New York City Water Supply

Citizen groups have mobilized in New York to oppose hydrofracking. This opposition has deployed several tactics, including a class action lawsuit.[12] New videos have also been produced to educate the public about the dangers of fracking the Marcellus shale. In the following video, Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer calls massive proposed drilling operations in the watershed that provides New York City with its drinking water is the "most alarming environmental news he has heard in a long time, and makes this the number one environmental crisis" they face in the city:

The #evp parser function was deprecated in EmbedVideo 2.0. Please convert your parser function tag to #ev.

In response to these and other concerns, New York City urged the state to ban methane gas drilling in its watershed on Wednesday, December, 23, 2009. Steven Lawitts, the city's top environmental official, called fracking techniques "unacceptable threats to the unfiltered fresh water supply of nine million New Yorkers," putting the City at odds with the methane gas industry, which considers shale drilling completely safe. Marc LaVorgna, spokesman for NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg stated, "Based on all the facts, the risks are too great and drilling simply cannot be permitted in the watershed."[13]

The New York Times noted that the New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, which was tasked with "going through a public review of its new rules on hydraulic fracturing," was looking into reports that "gas companies use at least 260 types of chemicals, many of them toxic, like benzene. These chemicals tend to remain in the ground once the fracturing has been completed, raising fears about long-term contamination."[14]

American Rivers, a Washington, D.C. advocacy group, announced on June 3, 2010, that hydrofracking poses a huge threat to the Delaware River, which is the drinking source for nearly 17 million people across New York, New Jersey, and Pennsylvania. In the America's Most Endangered Rivers Report: 2010 Edition report, the American Rivers advocacy group named the Delaware River the number one most at-risk river, due to the threat of extensive drilling into the Marcellus Shale.[15] Here is a great link to a Factsheet produced by the American Rivers Group on the threat faced to the Delaware River by drilling into the Marcellus Shale: http://www.americanrivers.org/assets/pdfs/mer-2010/upperdelaware_factsheet_2010.pdf

The #evp parser function was deprecated in EmbedVideo 2.0. Please convert your parser function tag to #ev.

Ecological Dangers of Hydrofracking Noted in Other Areas of the U.S.

Catskill Mountainkeeper states that "A number of these [hydrofracking] fluids qualify as hazardous materials and carcinogens, and are toxic enough to contaminate groundwater resources. There are cases in the U.S. where hydraulic fracturing is the suspected source of impaired or polluted drinking water. In Alabama, Colorado, New Mexico, Virginia, West Virginia and Wyoming, incidents have been recorded by people who have gas wells near their homes. They have reported changes in water quality or quantity following fracturing operations." [16]

The #evp parser function was deprecated in EmbedVideo 2.0. Please convert your parser function tag to #ev.



Pennsylvania

In September, 2009, an estimated 8,000 gallons of fracking fluid spilled into a creek near Dimock, Pennsylvania. The spill was blamed on "faulty pipe work" and resulted in a significant fish kill and other fish “swimming erratically,” according to Pennsylvania’s Department of Environmental Protection.[17]

On November 9, 2009, Reuters reported that the owner of 480 acres of land in southwest Pennsylvania claimed Atlas Energy Inc. ruined his land with toxic chemicals used in or released there by hydraulic fracturing and he also claimed to find seven potentially carcinogenic chemicals above permissible levels set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. He performed tests on his well water a year before drilling began and said the water conditions were "perfect." After the drilling began, water tests found arsenic at 2,600 times acceptable levels, benzene at 44 times above limits and naphthalene five times the federal standard. He has decided to sue Atlas Energy Inc for negligence and is seeking an injunction against further drilling, and unspecified financial damages. Jay Hammond, general counsel for Atlas, said Zimmermann's claims are "completely erroneous" and said Atlas will "vigorously" defend itself in court and declined further comment.[18]

Later that month on November 20, 2009, Reuters reported that Residents of a Dimrock, PA sued Cabot Oil & Gas Corp, claiming the company's natural-gas drilling ha[d] contaminated their water wells with toxic chemicals, caused sickness and reduced their property values. The complaint says residents have suffered neurological, gastrointestinal and dermatological symptoms from exposure to tainted water. They also say they have had blood test results consistent with exposure to heavy metals. The lawsuit accuses Cabot of negligence and says it has failed to restore residential water supplies disrupted by gas drilling.[19]

"According to the U.S. Department of Energy produced water from gas operations, such as in Dimock, Pennsylvania, is often ten times more toxic than water produced from petroleum production, and can contain high concentrations of salts, acids, benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, xylene, radioactive materials, and other...chemicals" [20]

On June 4, 2010, a western Pennsylvania natural-gas well owned by EOG Resources Inc. blew out, releasing over one million gallons of gas and drilling fluids before being contained about 16 hours later, as reported by the Wall Street Journal and WCAJTV in Pennsyvania.[21][22] Operators at this site were preparing to extract gas after through [hydrofracking]]. In a press release, the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection stated that it would "aggressively investigate" the Marcellus Shale well blowout and that it would take the "appropriate enforcement action."[23] "As a result, the well released natural gas and flowback (fracturing) fluid onto the ground and 75 feet into the air," the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection said in the press release. It should be noted that EOG Resources is the new namesake for the company formerly known as Enron. Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell stated that the incident should serve as an open for what could unfold in the future if proper regulation methods are not implemented with expedience.[24]

An interview on the blow-up that took place on CNBC with Rendell can be seen here: http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?play=1&video=1517214459

Louisiana

In the April 30, 2009 [Pro Publica]]'s Abrahm Lustgarten wrote about a story he dug up from Louisiana's Shreveport Times. The story revealed that 16 cattle mysteriously and abruptly dropped dead in a "northwestern Louisiana field after apparently drinking from a mysterious fluid adjacent to a natural gas drilling rig, according to Louisiana's Department of Environmental Quality. At least one worker told the newspaper that the fluids...were used for...hydraulic fracturing.[25]

Texas

In late 2007, three families near Grandview, Texas noticed changes in their well water just after a natural gas well within a couple of hundred yards of their properties was hydraulically fractured. Within days, five goats and a llama had died. All three families noticed strong sulfur smells in their water, making it unusable. At first their water ran dry, and then the water returned with extremely high pressure, blowing out pipes. Showering caused skin irritation. The Railroad Commission of Texas acknowledged that testing of well water found toluene and other toxic contaminants.[26]

Wyoming

Reuters also reports that "the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency found 14 "contaminants of concern" in 11 private wells in the central Wyoming farming community of Pavillion, an area with about 250 gas wells.[27]

More Info

For more information on the environmental impact of hydrofracking on U.S. residents, see: http://www.earthworksaction.org/pubs/JointFS_HalliburtonLoophole.pdf

Enforcement Problems

On December 30, 2009, Pro Publica's Abrahm Lustgarten reported that oil and gas regulators are spread too thin to do their jobs, even with the minimal guidelines in place. Doing the math, he reveals that for the state's 17 inspectors to visit West Virginia's 55,222 wells once a year, they would have to inspect nine wells a day, every day of the year, with no weekends off, nor any vacation days. While the number of new oil and gas wells being drilled in the 22 states each year has jumped 45 percent since 2004, most of the states have added only a few regulators.[28]

Texas has it the worst, possessing 273,660 wells and just 106 regulators to oversee them. In late 2007, a Texas state auditor's report found that nearly half of the state's wells hadn't been inspected in the five years between 2001 and 2006, when the data was collected. According to Pro Publica's analysis, the number of new wells drilled each year in Texas has jumped 75 percent since 2003. However, staffing increased just 5 percent during that period and enforcement actions increased only 6 percent. The situation in Texas exemplifies the situation in every state in which wells are dug into for oil.[29]

Maps and charts depicting this problem can be seen here and if it takes place in your state can be seen here: http://projects.propublica.org/gas-drilling-regulatory-staffing/

EPA Hydrofracking Study

On March 18, 2010, the Environmental Protection Agency announced that it would lead a $1.9 million for this comprehensive, peer-reviewed study on the impacts hydrofracking would have on water quality and public health.[30] Despite the study, Rep. Diane DeGette (D-CO) has expressed that it is crucial to continue the push forward for the passing of the Frac Act[31]

The "Halliburton loophole"

In 2005, at the urging of Vice President Dick Cheney, Congress created the so-called "Halliburton loophole" to the Clean Water Drinking Act (CWDA) to prevent the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from regulating this process, despite its demonstrated contamination of drinking water. In 2001, Cheney's "energy task force" had touted the benefits of hydrofracking, while redacting references to human health hazards associated with hydrofracking; Halliburton, which was previously led by Cheney, reportedly earns $1.5 billion a year from its energy operations, which relies substantially on its hydrofracking business.[32]

According to Pro Publica reporter Abrahm Lustgarten, the EPA under Christine Todd Whitman's tenure as Administrator engaged in secret negotiations with industry, while supposedly addressing drinking water issues related to hydro-fracturing.[33] In 2004, the EPA undertook a study on the issue and "the EPA, despite its scientific judgment that there was a potential risk to groundwater supplies, which their report clearly says, then went ahead and very surprisingly concluded that there was no risk to groundwater," Lustgarten said in September 2009. "[P]art of my reporting found that throughout that process the EPA was closer than seemed comfortable with the industry. I filed FOIA requests for some documents and found conversations between Halliburton employees and the EPA researchers, essentially asking for an agreement from Halliburton in exchange for more lax enforcement. The EPA, in these documents, appeared to offer that and agree to that. And it doesn’t appear, by any means, to have been either a thorough or a very objective study." [34]

Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals (FRAC) Act of 2009

In June 2009 Representatives Diana DeGette, DeGette, John Salazar and Maurice Hinchey and Senators Robert P. Casey Jr. and Chuck Schumer introduced the Fracking Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals Act (FRAC ACT).[35] The act is aimed at closing the 'Halliburton loophole' and requiring the oil and gas industry to disclose the chemicals used in drilling projects.

It "amends the Safe Drinking Water Act to: (1) repeal the exemption from restrictions on underground injection of fluids near drinking water sources granted to hydraulic fracturing operations under such Act; and (2) require oil and gas companies to disclose the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing operations." The bill could go a long way in determining the future of the hydro-fracturing national gas excavation process in the United States.[36][37][38]

Misleadingly, in an e-mail to Pro Publica reporter Abrahm Lustgarten, Lee Fuller, vice president of government relations for the Independent Petroleum Association of America said the measures in the FRAC Act "run counter to the nation's energy goals -- increasing the supply of American oil and natural gas -- by making it too costly to produce. Statements that hydraulic fracturing is unregulated are simply not true. It's been regulated assiduously by the states for more than 50 years."[39]

Similarly, Richard Ranger, senior policy analyst at the American Petroleum Institute told Pro Publica in May, "We don't think the system is broke, so we question the value of trying to fix it with a federal solution. So proceed with caution if you are going to proceed with regulating this business because it could make a very significant difference in delivering a fuel that is fundamental to economic health."[40]

More of the same occurred during the Thursday, June 4, 2009 Subcommittee On Energy And Mineral Resources Oversight Hearing On "Unconventional Fuels, Part I: Shale Gas Potential." In the hearing, Lynn Helms, an executive of Chesapeake Energy and Director of the Department of Mineral Resources of the Industrial Commission of the State of North Dakota "told the committee that state regulations of hydraulic fracturing are sufficient and effective and insisted that the fracturing process and the chemicals it uses are safe."[41][42]

But, as Lustgarten notes: "a close reading of the law shows that the Safe Drinking Water Act already defers regulatory authority over oil and gas drilling to the states and that reversing the exemption in question would mainly provide a baseline for best practices and give the federal government authority to investigate contamination cases or disastrous accidents."[43]

Colorado Rep. Diana DeGette, a co-sponsor of the FRAC Act, along with Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) and Jared Polis (D-Co) said “I frankly think the oil and gas companies have been running a scare campaign. I don’t know if the oil and gas industry doesn’t understand the bill or if they are intentionally misrepresenting the bill.”[44]

At times, it appears as if big oil and gas money is driving policy. At that same hearing, Rep. Dan Boren (D-OK) stated, "I am proud that I am supported by the oil and gas industry because they employ a lot of people in my state and I am going to stick up for them. I am sick and tired of a lot of folks in my own caucus coming after the largest employer in my state."[45]

As of July 14, 2009, the bill only had garnered a meek 13 co-sponsors.[46]

Rep. Michele Bachmann's Fast Track Shale Act

Proposed on March 31, 2009 by Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-MN), the measure advocates "to open Federal Bureau of Land Management and National Forest lands to leasing for exploration, development, and production of oil shale resources, and for other purposes."[47] In short, the bill calls for ignoring all of the environmental concerns raised with regards to the drilling and a strong push forward of natural gas drilling.

Emergency Energy Cut the Red Tape Now Act of 2009

In a similar fashion, Bachmann and Rep. Patrick McHenry (R-NC) pushed forward what the coined the "Emergency Energy Cut the Red Tape Now Act of 2009, essentially calling for the suspension of all environmental regulation for the sake of exploiting environmental resources for the monetary gain of big corporations. The bill requests "to terminate or provide for suspension of the application of Federal laws that restrict exploration, development, or production of oil, gas, or oil shale, to facilitate the construction of new crude oil refineries, and for other purposes."[48]

Waxman/Markey Lead an Energy & Commerce Committee Investigation on the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing

On February 19, 2010, Rep. Henry Waxman (D-CA) and Rep. Edward Markey (D-MA) spearheaded an Energy & Commerce Committee Investigation on the Potential Impacts of Hydraulic Fracturing which is still ongoing. They distributed letters seeking additional information from corporations like Halliburton, among numerous others. They also sent a memo to Members of the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment detailing the background on the issue, including EPA's recent work on hydraulic fracturing, including the need for additional oversight and investigation.[49]

The Kerry-Lieberman American Power Act

On May 13, 2010, Sen. Joe Lieberman (I-CT) and Sen. John Kerry (D-MA) unveiled the American Power Act, which was a piece of environmental legislation that called for the curtailment of greenhouse gas emissions at 17 percent below 2005 levels by 2020 and 83 percent by 2050.[50] Beyond that, the bill also calls on oil and gas service companies like Halliburton to divulge chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing of natural gas wells, meaning they must be displayed publicly. This, though, does not mean that the Haliburton loophole would be terminated--it solely means that the cocktail of chemicals it uses when drilling in the Marcellus Shale would no longer be deemed a "proprietary secret."[51]

Wyoming Successfully approves new rules for frack fluid disclosure

On June 8, 2010, the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission unanimously approved new fracking rules that require operators to disclose the “fracking” fluids injected into natural gas wells. According to the Wyoming Casper Star-Tribune, "Industry organizations and individual companies argued against the new rules claiming that the chemical mixtures used in fracking are proprietary. In response, the Wyoming Oil and Gas Conservation Commission included a measure that requires companies to disclose the information and requires state regulators not to share it with the public."[52]

The Marcellus Shale Coalition

While the truth of what natural gas excavation is all about has been hidden under the table and left uncovered by the mainstream media, a trade organization called the Marcellus Shale Coalition has, predictably, arisen. The coalition describes itself in this fashion: "Founded in 2008, the Marcellus Shale Coalition (MSC) is an organization committed to the responsible development of natural gas from the Marcellus Shale geological formation and the enhancement of the region’s economy that can be realized by this clean-burning energy source. The members of the coalition work with our partners across the region to address issues with regulators, local, county, state and federal government officials and communities about all aspects of producing clean-burning, job-creating natural gas from the Marcellus Shale."[53] The coalition consists of over 90 producers, non-profit members, and associate members, including the likes of Halliburton, United States Steel Corporation, American Petroleum Institute, and Chesapeake Energy Corporation. Like most big money-making ventures then, the hydrofracking movement has spread its wings far and wide. Unsurprisingly, the headquarters of the Marcellus Shale Coalition is located in the heart of the Marcellus Shale region, in Canonsburg, PA.

T. Boone Pickens Attempt to Break From Swift-boating Reputation--The PickensPlan

T. Boone Pickens has been a huge proponent of natural gas drilling in the Marcellus Shale, saying that "we need to stop relying on our enemies for gas." In an attempt to break from his reputation as the man who swift-boated John Kerry from the White House, Pickens has marketed himself as a progressive on energy independence. He went so far as to say on Jim Kramer's CNBC show Mad Money on June 4, 2010 that "It's cleaner, it's cheaper, and it's ours."[54] Kramer has also been a big advocate and has been pushing the importance of investing money in stocks relating to the drilling for natural gas in the {{Marcellus Shale]] on his show and website.

His plan can be seen here: http://www.pickensplan.com/theplan/

President Barack Obama's Statements

In an a speech delivered on the economy at Carnegie Mellon University on June 2, 2010, President Barack Obama stated, "I understand that we can’t end our dependence on fossil fuels overnight. That’s why I supported a careful plan of offshore oil production as one part of our overall energy strategy. But we can pursue such production only if it’s safe, and only if it’s used as a short-term solution while we transition to a clean energy economy. And the time has come to aggressively accelerate that transition. The time has come, once and for all, for this nation to fully embrace a clean energy future...It means tapping into our natural gas reserves, and moving ahead with our plan to expand our nation’s fleet of nuclear power plants."[55] Obama did not convey that drilling for natural gas in the United States and doing so in a "clean" manner are anathema to one another.

Estimated Size of the Gas Reserves and Significant Purchases of Land for Extraction

Estimated Amount of Gas Associated with Marcellus Shale

Estimates of the size of the reserves range from 1.9 trillion cubic feet (TCF), by the U.S. Geological Survey in 2003,[56] to nearly 500 TCF (which would be the second largest natural gas reserve in the world),[57] by a college professor who has received numerous grants from the American Chemical Society's Petroleum Research Fund.[58]

Significant Purchases of Land

Ultra Petroleum Corporation Marcellus Shale Land Purchase

On Monday, Dec. 21, 2009, Ultra Petroleum Corporation announced it would acquire about 80,000 acres in the Marcellus Shale region for roughly $400 million, expanding its presence there to about 250,000 net acres, with potential for 1,800 drilling sites.[59]

Exxon-Mobil Land Purchase

On December 21, 2009, "Exxon Mobil finalized terms to buy XTO Energy for $31 billion, which included XTO’s rights to 47,000 acres of a lucrative section of the shale. The buyout of XTO Energy by Exxon Mobil Corp. could be off if Congress makes hydraulic fracturing illegal, according to language in the contract. The contract stipulates that the $31 billion deal could be terminated if Congress finds the practice unlawful. Rep. Ed Markey, D-Mass., chairman of the energy and environment subcommittee of the Energy and Commerce Committee, said that he plans hearings next year to examine industry practices, including "some of these unconventional extraction techniques." [60]

CONSOL Purchases Dominion Exploration and Production

On March 15, 2010, Dominion announced the sale of its Dominion Exploration and Production business to CONSOL Energy for $3.475 billion.[61] The sale is expected to close on April 30, 2010 and will include 193 employees currently working for Dominion. [61][62] CONSOL is looking for $4 billion to fund the purchase and further develop the operations; Bank of America, Merrill Lynch and PNC Bank have committed to providing financial assistance.[62]

According to CONSOL, Dominion Exploration and Production is known as “one of the oldest and most active drillers in Pennsylvania and West Virginia”.[62] The transaction includes 1.46 million acres for oil and gas drilling with over 9,000 already-producing wells.[62] This transaction includes 491,000 acres of land in the Marcellus shale formation of Pennsylvania and West Virginia, and almost triples the amount of land rights CONSOL owns in the Marcellus area.[61][62] CONSOL expects to extract more than 41 billions of cubic feet equvilent (Bcfe) in 2010.[62]According to CONSOL’s press release, this purchase will make the company the largest producer of natural gas in the Appalachian basin and give CONSOL “a leading position” in the Marcellus area.[62]

After the sale of Exploration and Production, Dominion will continue to focus on and expand its gas pipeline and storage businesses.[61] At the sale of Dominion Peoples (a Pennsylvania natural gas distribution company), Dominion CEO Thomas F. Farrell II stated, “We are not leaving Pennsylvania by any means. We are expanding our large natural gas transportation and storage system in the state to handle the influx of gas from the Marcellus Shale and other new sources.”[63]

Take Action!

Toxicstargeting.jpg

Toxics Targeting, Inc., a service that obtains environmental data from local, state and federal government sources and interactively maps toxic sites on a lot-by-lot basis in New York, has identified 270 past oil and gas spills in New York state that have caused fires, explosions, home evacuations, massive pollution releases, contaminated drinking water sources and tainted farmland. Toxics Targeting is urging people to sign a letter to New York Governor David Paterson asking him to protect New York state's overlaying deposits of Marcellus Shale by maintaining a moratorium on drilling in the formation and requiring an effective way to prevent and clean up hazards created by oil and gas drilling. Read and sign the petition here.

New York Common Cause's "Deep Drilling, Deep Pockets" Report

In June, 2010, Common Cause of New York released a report titled "Deep Drilling, Deep Pockets: Expenditures of the Natural Gas Industry in New York to Influence Public Policy." The report demonstrated that as the gas and oil industry has begun pushing forward with its drilling campaign in the Marcellus Shale, so too has the magnitude of their lobbying expenses. In 2009, says the report, over $650,000 were spent on lobbying, while in the first four months of 2010, that amount has already nearly been surpassed, with two-thirds of the year still remaining. The report goes on to show that the most active lobbying efforts in New York were put forth by Exxon, Chesapeake Energy, and Cabot Oil and Gas. These companies have melded together as a collective trade association that goes by the name of Independent Oil and Gas Association, resembling Pennsylvania's Marcellus Shale Coalition.

Compared to the period between the years 2006 through 2009, a period during which lobbying expenditures totaled nearly $110,000, the expenditures jumped six-fold in 2009, totaling nearly $670,000. And, four months into 2010, that total is already about to be surpassed, as the push for drilling into the Marcellus Shale reaches new levels.[64]

Advocacy Groups Working to Protect Americans and the Environment from the Drilling

Leading Media Groups Tracking Marcellus Shale Issues

Industry groups and companies promoting the exploitation of the Marcellus Shale deposits

Industry Companies and Groups Opposing Stonger Environmental Protections

Articles and Resources

Related SourceWatch Articles

References

  1. ↑ Catskill Mountainkeeper, "Marcellus Shale: The Marcellus Shale – America's next super giant", Catskill Mountainkeeper website, accessed March 2009.
  2. ↑ [1] "NYC says Catskill gas drilling risks are too great," Mary Esch, Associate Press, Dec. 23, 2009
  3. ↑ Mary Esch, "Estimated gas yield from Marcellus shale goes up", International Business Times, November 4, 2008. (This is an AP story). "Got gas, lots," Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, November 5, 2008.
  4. ↑ "What Is Hydraulic Fracturing?", Pro Publica, undated, accessed October 2009.
  5. ↑ Abrahm Lustgarten, "New York’s Gas Rush Poses Environmental Threat", Pro Publica, July 22, 2008.
  6. ↑ {http://www.adk.org/pdf/ADK_Comments_on_NYS_Energy_Plan.pdf, "Adirondack Mountain Club Comments on Governor David Paterson’s Draft 2009 Energy Plan,"], August 24, 2009.
  7. ↑ [2] "Q+A: Environmental fears over U.S. shale gas drilling," Reuters, Dec. 23, 2009.
  8. ↑ Weston Wilson, Letter to Senators Allard and Campbell and Representative DeGette, October 8, 2004. This letter, from a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Employee, describes how the Bush Administration's EPA produced a scientifically unsupportable conclusion that hydrofracking should not be regulated under the Clean Water Drinking Act.
  9. ↑ "Gas Drilling Plan Raises Water Contamination Fears in New York City", Voice of America News, Carolyn Weaver, December 24, 2009
  10. ↑ [3], "New gas wells leave more chemicals in ground," Abrahm Lustgarten, Politico.com, December 27, 2009
  11. ↑ [4], "Ignitible Drinking Water From a Well in Candor, New York, Located Above the Marcellus Shale Formation."
  12. ↑ "Marcellus Shale Developments", Pocahantas County Fare Blog, March 9, 2009
  13. ↑ "NYC urges ban on shale gas drilling in watershed", Edith Honan, "Reuters" December 23, 2009].
  14. ↑ [5] "Dark Side of a Natural Gas Boom," Jad Mouawad and Clifford Krauss, New York Times, Dec. 8, 2009
  15. ↑ [6],"America's Most Endangered Rivers Report: 2010 Edition: #1 Upper Delaware River, Pennsylvania and New York Threat: Natural Gas Extraction."
  16. ↑ "The Marcellus Shale – America's next super giant" Catskill Mountainkeeper", 2009
  17. ↑ David O. Williams Fracking fluid kills fish in Pennsylvania stream, state enviro officials say Colorado Independent. September 22, 2009
  18. ↑ [7] "Pennsylvania lawsuit says drilling polluted water," Jon Huddle, Reuters, Nov. 9, 2009.
  19. ↑ [8] "Pennsylvania residents sue over gas drilling," Jon Huddle, Reuters, Nov. 20, 2009.
  20. ↑ [9], "What the Frack? Poisoning our Water in the Name of Energy Profits," Peter Gleick, Pacific Institute, December 8, 2009
  21. ↑ [10], "Blowout Occurs at Pennsylvania Gas Well." Wall Street Journal. June 4, 2010
  22. ↑ [11], "Gas Well Blowout Under Control In Clearfield County." June 4, 2010.
  23. ↑ [12], "DEP Plans Thorough Investigation in to Marcellus Shale Well Blowout in Clearfield County: EOG Resources Well Released Fracking Fluid, Natural Gas for 16 Hours." Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection. June 4, 2010.
  24. ↑ [13], "Rendell: Marcellus Shale Incidents 'A Warning.'" KDKA. June 10, 2010.
  25. ↑ [14], "16 Cattle Drop Dead Near Mysterious Fluid at Gas Drilling Site," Abrahm Lustgarten, Pro Publica, April 30, 2009
  26. ↑ "Congress Should Close the Halliburton Loophole Hydraulic fracturing should be regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act", EarthsWorkAction.org
  27. ↑ [15] "Q+A: Environmental fears over U.S. shale gas drilling," Reuters, Dec. 23, 2009.
  28. ↑ "State Oil and Gas Regulators Are Spread Too Thin to Do Their Jobs", Abrahm Lustgarten, Pro Publica; December 30, 2009
  29. ↑ [16], Abrahm Lustgarten, Pro Publica, December 30, 2009
  30. ↑ [17], "EPA Initiates Hydraulic Fracturing Study: Agency seeks input from Science Advisory Board." Environmental Protection Agency, March 18, 2010.
  31. ↑ [18], "EPA to study hydraulic fracturing, but calls for FRAC Act continue." Colorado Independent. March 18, 2010.
  32. ↑ Tom Hamburger and Allen C. Miller, "Halliburton's Interests Assisted by the White House", Los Angeles Times, October 14, 2004.
  33. ↑ See http://www.democracynow.org/2009/9/3/fracking_and_the_environment_natural_gas.
  34. ↑ Interview with Abrahm Lustgarten, "Fracking and the Environment: Natural Gas Drilling, Hydraulic Fracturing and Water Contamination," Democracy Now!, September 3, 2009.
  35. ↑ "Senators, Representatives act to close Halliburton Loophole in the Safe Drinking Water Act", Media Release, June 9, 2009.
  36. ↑ [19]GovTrack.US, "Fracturing Responsibility and Awareness of Chemicals (FRAC) Act"
  37. ↑ [20], "House Version of the 'Frac Act'"]
  38. ↑ [21], "Senate Version of the 'Frac Act'"
  39. ↑ [22], "FRAC Act—Congress Introduces Twin Bills to Control Drilling and Protect Drinking Water," Pro Publica, Abrahm Lustgarten, June 9, 2009
  40. ↑ "Natural Gas Politics", Abraham Lustgarten, Pro Publica, May 26, 2009
  41. ↑ [23], "Industry Defends Federal Loophole for Drilling Before Packed Congressional Hearing," Abrahm Lustgarten, Pro Publica, June 5, 2009
  42. ↑ [24], "Testimony Submitted to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Subcommittee On Energy and Mineral Resources by Lynn D. Helms, Director of the Department of Mineral Resources of the Industrial Commission of the State of North Dakota," June 4, 2009.
  43. ↑ [25], "Industry Defends Federal Loophole for Drilling Before Packed Congressional Hearing," Abrahm Lustgarten, Pro Publica, June 5, 2009
  44. ↑ [26], "Industry Defends Federal Loophole for Drilling Before Packed Congressional Hearing," Abrahm Lustgarten, Pro Publica, June 5, 2009
  45. ↑ [27], "Industry Defends Federal Loophole for Drilling Before Packed Congressional Hearing," Abrahm Lustgarten, Pro Publica, June 5, 2009
  46. ↑ [28], "The FRAC Act under attack." July 14, 2009.
  47. ↑ [29], "H.R.1810 -- Fast Track Shale Act." March 31, 2009
  48. ↑ [30], "H.R.1813 -- Emergency Energy Cut the Red Tape Now Act of 2009." March 31, 2009.
  49. ↑ [31], Energy Commerce Committee Investigation on Potential Impacts of Hydrofracking; Feb. 19, 2010
  50. ↑ [32], Colorado Independent, "Sportsmen, Colorado conservationists question some aspects of climate bill." May 13, 2010.
  51. ↑ [33], "Kerry-Lieberman climate bill calls for disclosure of fracking chemicals." March 18, 2010.
  52. ↑ [34], "State approves 'fracking' regulations." June 8, 2010.
  53. ↑ [35], "About the Marcellus Shale Coalition," Marcellus Shale Coalition.
  54. ↑ [36], "Boone Pickens: Get Ready for $400 Oil?." Mad Money, CNBC. June 4, 2010
  55. ↑ [37], "Remarks by the President on the Economy at Carnegie Mellon University." The White House. June 2, 2010.
  56. ↑ Robert C. Millici and others, Assessment of Undiscovered Oil and Gas Resources of the Appalachian Basin Province, U.S. Geological Survey, Fact Sheet 009-03, February 2003. (Pdf)
  57. ↑ David Rottman, "Natural Gas Changes the Energy Map", MIT Technology Review, Nov/Dec 2009.
  58. ↑ "Gary G. Lash", accessed October 2009. (This CV reports a $130,991 grant from the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority. The year of the grant is not stated but it was after June 2003.)
  59. ↑ Tess Stynes, "Ultra Petroleum Plans $500M Note Sale To Fund Debt, Shale Buy", Wall Street Journal, December 21, 2009.
  60. ↑ [38] "Local economies look for boost from natural gas exploration in region’s Marcellus shale," Adam Voster, Ocean Times Herald, December 22, 2009
  61. ↑ Jump up to: 61.0 61.1 61.2 61.3 “Dominion agrees to sell its Appalachian E&P business for $3.475 billion”, Dominion press release, March 15, 2010.
  62. ↑ Jump up to: 62.0 62.1 62.2 62.3 62.4 62.5 62.6 “CONSOL Energy to acquire Dominion’s Appalachian E&P business for $3.475 billion in cash”, CONSOL Energy press release, March 15, 2010.
  63. ↑ “Dominion closes on sale of Dominion Peoples for $780 million”, Dominion press release, February 1, 2010.
  64. ↑ [39], "Deep Drilling, Deep Pockets: Expenditures of the Natural Gas Industry in New York to Influence Public Policy - PART I: Lobbying Expenditures," Common Cause of New York. June 2010.

External resources

External Articles

Retrieved from "https://dev.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Marcellus_Shale&oldid=484490"