No to ‘fracking’ doesn’t mean no: Landowner refusal can’t stop drilling

[HiPointDem]

Steve Neeley estimates that he has spent more than $500,000 over the past 12 years to build a country estate in southern Portage County.

When a Chesapeake Energy land man approached him months ago with an offer to lease the Utica shale mineral rights beneath his meticulously landscaped 9.5-acre property in eastern Ohio, Neeley declined. That’s when, Neeley says, the land man told him, “We’ll just take it.”

Neeley and 23 of his neighbors are the first group of Ohio landowners forced to take part in Utica-shale drilling under a seldom-used state law. The law lets companies add properties to large “ drilling units” even if leases with landowners haven’t been obtained, to maximize access to deeply buried oil and gas. Even the state isn’t immune from the law. The Chesapeake Energy drilling unit of 959 acres in Portage and Stark counties includes a 4-acre corner of Quail Hollow State Park northeast of Canton. That makes it the first state park in line for “fracking.”

Ohio Department of Natural Resources officials say the “unitization” law guarantees fair compensation, and that the properties of unwilling landowners won’t be damaged.

“We don’t allow the company to occupy any of the surface of the land,” said Rick Simmers, the chief of ODNR’s Oil and Gas Division.The law also ensures that no drilling activities, access roads or pipelines will damage the properties, Simmers said.

Tom Stewart, vice president of the Ohio Oil and Gas Association, said the law is intended to stop a few holdouts from thwarting a majority of landowners who want to legally exploit their oil and gas interests.

Neeley described the practice as a type of theft. “It’s like (Chesapeake already has) everything sewed up before they even talk to you,” he said. “You were just going to lose, no matter what.”

http://www.dispatch.com/content/stories/local/2012/07/29/no-to-fracking-doesnt-mean-no.html


If this happened to me, I don't know what i'd do. It's wrong.

[redgreenandblue]

1. My question: Where are the Teabaggers and the militias?

Isn't this precisely one of the issues they claim to be about? The confiscation of property?

[KansDem]

2. Good question...

Apparently "Big Government" is evil and needs to be destroyed, yet Teapublicans don't mind "Big Corp."

In their minds, "Big Corp" means "freedom" and we Americans do love our freedom! If "Big Corp" wants your land, it's because "Big Corp" wants you to be free!

Government = "of, for, and by the people"
Corporation = "of, for, and by the stockholders"

I don't understand it, either...

[12ZTR]

3. Anytime..

I hear about these situations I hope the individual is Republican.

[DiverDave]

4. Who cares who they voted for?

They are getting ripped off, we SHOULD help them as much as we can
Some things transcend politics.
Stealing is wrong, and I really could give a shit who someone voted for.
I would help them get their property back, THEN we can talk about who they should vote for.
They probably would see the gop in a different light after something like this.

Oh, and Welcome to D.U.

[leftyohiolib]

9. Some things transcend politics and some people need to lay in the bed they made

[DiverDave]

26. Yes they do, but theft

is theft.
If we dont stop things like this, who will?

[fasttense]

5. You wont give us your mineral rights. We'll take them.

When a corporation can come in and take away your right to the minerals on your land then we have fascism. No longer do you have any rights to anything. It all belongs to a corporation if they want it.

Sounds like a Banana Republic to me.

Soon we will all have to be bowing down every time we see a corporate logo, because we know they are God.

[flobee1]

6. All those tea baggers

running around with "don't tread on me" t-shirts on are clueless! They foam at the mouth about big gov controlling their lives but they willingly roll over to big business. The banks are cheating you out of your money, your news channel lies to your face and censors what you see, big oil can take your land at will, and GOVERNMENT is the problem???

[TwilightGardener]

7. This is true, at least in some states--enough of your neighbors sign on, and you're

going to be forced into it. It's called force-pooling, I think. It keeps you from standing in the way of other entities exercising their right to access their minerals. In the end, most states will do what's good for oil, gas, mining...and you, piddly little landowner of a few acres of dirt, can go pound salt.

[Loudestlib]

8. This guy should form a LLC and sell himself the mineral rights.

bump

[badtoworse]

11. What difference would that make?

[lostnote12]

32. Interesting twist on the subject?.....I guess that just as we do not own the airspace above our prop

....nor do we own the "passage ways" beneath.....

[badtoworse]

35. You own the mineral rights, unless they've been sold, which is common in some parts of the country

You don't have the right to obstruct the project when a certain number of other landowners have agreed to it. You do get compensated for the oil or gas that is taken from your property. It's the same reasoning that applies to a railroad having eminent domain.

[Paladin]

10. Force Pooling Has Been Around For Many, Many Years. (nt)

[badtoworse]

12. They won't be drilling on his property or building roads or pipelines

They'll be drill horizontally into the shale underneath his property from a remote location. The actual drill rig might be a mile away. What is the big deal? Was he planning on extracting the oil and gas himself?

[Chef Eric]

13. Right! Plus, he still has his 2nd amendment rights.

How much more freedom does one man need?

[badtoworse]

14. What an erudite response.

[Chef Eric]

18. Thank you.

By the way, have you seen "Gasland"? Scary stuff. I don't blame the owner for being concerned. I would be too.

[badtoworse]

20. Gasland is a crock, a politically motivated hit piece.

Have you ever heard of biogenic methane? Did you know that until very recently, Pennsylvania had no standards for private well construction and that flaming water in the tap had been observed before fracking started? In any case, the EPA has studied the well water issues and declared the water safe to drink.

Within the investment community, the widely held view is that the concerns about fracking have been wildly exaggerated. That is important because these are the people investing and if there was serious concern that fracking operations would be shut down for safety or environment reasons, they would see that as a risk to their investment and wouldn't do it. Substantial capital is being invested by relatively conservative investors, so take that for what it's worth.

There is a lot of work being done to develop safer fracking fluids and reuse fracking water to reduce the demand on water resources. Techniques for cementing the wells are being improved and more wells are using advanced techniques to capture more of the methane that is released to the atmosphere as the well is being closed up.

Should the owner be concerned? I believe it is unlikely (but not impossible) that there may be impacts in his area. Antone would have concerns, but I do not believe he has the right to obstruct the operation. Forced pooling is not new, not unique to Ohio and there are reasons why it is needed.

Unfortunately, there is no technology currently available that can satisfy our demand for primary energy that does not have environmental impacts associated with it.

[SalviaBlue]

22. Oh please

Let's let the "investment community" decide?

They wouldn't invest in anything that was bad.

[badtoworse]

23. It's not a question of bad. The issue is risk.

Being shut down because of environmental issues would likely result in substantial additional expense and the possible loss of the investment. Investors have a lot of options with investment and would not invest in shale gas if those risks were thought to be significant.

[DiverDave]

28. They say that water is SAFE??

If the gas is so concentrated that it burns out of the spigot, I aint drinking it.
Would you allow you kids to drink it?
I sure wouldn't.
It's ridicules to say that it is safe to drink.

[badtoworse]

34. Actually, it was the EPA that said it was safe to drink.

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/1A6E49D193E1007585257A46005B61AD

[raouldukelives]

40. Some people think exploiting the earth and profiting from climate change is cool.

I call them investors.

[badtoworse]

41. Some people don't care if the lights stay on, people can drive or whether homes stay warm in winter.

Other people just say no to fracking, are oblivious to the numerous benefits and offer nothing as a viable alternative. What would you call them?

[raouldukelives]

42. Speaking of homes staying warm in the winter.

We had a glorious warm & rain free one here. But thankfully fracking will solve that. Just transport water by trucks & crank up the AC if it gets too hot. Who cares what tomorrow has to deal with. Certainly not big oil supporters.

[badtoworse]

43. We don't have the technology to get off fossil fuels anytime soon.

If you have a viable plan let's hear it. If not, your post is irrelevant.

[raouldukelives]

44. And we never will have one at this rate.

I really believe with a concerted effort we could try to salvage a bit of what is left of our forests, wetlands and wild animals through a combination of alternative energy sources and education. It would cost hundreds of billions but money doesn't matter anymore. Not when we are talking about keeping the climate semi-stable.
It's probably a losing battle anyway but at least we can say we didn't help profit from creating mass extinction of animals and misery & famine for millions.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

27. Maybe he was planning on giving the oil and gas to his grandkids?

[Politicalboi]

29. You do realize that

Fracking contaminates drinking water. And the companies won't have to do shit about your tap catching fire, or you or your kids getting sick from the bad water. Fracking may cause earthquakes. And the idea of them saying "we'll just take it" doesn't bother you? It is a big deal. It's a HUGE deal.

[badtoworse]

36. It has happened in a small number of cases,...

but even in Dimock, the EPA has concluded that the water is safe. To say that water will automatically be contaminated if a well is fracked is just not true. Do some research and make up your own mind - everyone has an agenda on this issue, including the environmentalists

[triplepoint]

15. Gasland part deux

Last edited Tue Jul 31, 2012, 06:56 PM - Edit history (1)

I can readily see this going bad like it did in Pennsylvania. People will be igniting their tap water in Ohio soon. Maybe the EPA will then actually do something about it. Ohio is rapidly going the polluted and environmentally-raped way of West Virginia, and it doesn't surprise me in the least. My double question is:


Who pays if there is (and I fully expect there will be) environmental damage due to the fracking, and can federal law trump the state law in this instance?

[badtoworse]

16. The EPA investigated the water in Dimock and has declared it safe

[triplepoint]

21. Nice Try. Thanks for Playing/Trolling Though.

Last edited Fri Aug 17, 2012, 05:20 PM - Edit history (3)

In Dimock, PA, the Environmental Protection Agency just released preliminary test results and confirmed what residents there have been saying for years: the water is contaminated—full of explosive methane and toxic chemicals. Pennsylvania state regulators found Cabot Oil and Gas to be at fault for the contamination in Dimock, but since last November Cabot has refused to provide water deliveries for the 11 affected families, and smeared the victims as greedy liars just for asking for help. In Butler, PA, Rex Energy poisoned at least a dozen families' water and then, in early 2012, cut off water deliveries to them. In Franklin Township, three families have just come forward saying that WPX Energy contaminated their wells. And there are hundreds of other families across the state who are not speaking out publicly for fear of retribution from a powerful industry, or because they have already signed binding gag orders in order to receive clean water shipments.
http://waterdefense.org/campaign/water-crisis-pennsylvania
http://waterdefense.org/content/epa-water-test-results-prove-fracking-contamination-dimock

Fracking Ingredients List:

2634-33-5 1,2-Benzisothiazolin-2-one / 1,2-benzisothiazolin-3-one
95-63-6 1,2,4-trimethylbenzene
123-91-1 1,4-Dioxane
3452-07-1 1-eicosene
629-73-2 1-hexadecene
112-88-9 1-octadecene
1120-36-1 1-tetradecene
10222-01-2 2,2 Dibromo-3-nitrilopropionamide, a biocide
27776-21-2 2,2'-azobis-{2-(imidazlin-2-yl)propane}-dihydrochloride
73003-80-2 2,2-Dibromomalonamide
15214-89-8 2-Acrylamido-2-methylpropane sulphonic acid sodium salt polymer
46830-22-2 2-acryloyloxyethyl(benzyl)dimethylammonium chloride
52-51-7 2-Bromo-2-nitro-1,3-propanediol
111-76-2 2-Butoxy ethanol
1113-55-9 2-Dibromo-3-Nitriloprionamide (2-Monobromo-3-nitriilopropionamide)
104-76-7 2-Ethyl Hexanol
67-63-0 2-Propanol / Isopropyl Alcohol / Isopropanol / Propan-2-ol
26062-79-3 2-Propen-1-aminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-2-propenyl-chloride, homopolymer
9003-03-6 2-propenoic acid, homopolymer, ammonium salt
25987-30-8 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with 2 p-propenamide, sodium salt / Copolymer of acrylamide and sodium acrylate
71050-62-9 2-Propenoic acid, polymer with sodium phosphinate (1:1)
66019-18-9 2-propenoic acid, telomer with sodium hydrogen sulfite
107-19-7 2-Propyn-1-ol / Propargyl alcohol
51229-78-8 3,5,7-Triaza-1-azoniatricyclo[3.3.1.13,7]decane, 1-(3-chloro-2-propenyl)-chloride,
115-19-5 3-methyl-1-butyn-3-ol
127087-87-0 4-Nonylphenol Polyethylene Glycol Ether Branched / Nonylphenol ethoxylated / Oxyalkylated Phenol
64-19-7 Acetic acid
68442-62-6 Acetic acid, hydroxy-, reaction products with triethanolamine
108-24-7 Acetic Anhydride
67-64-1 Acetone
79-06-1 Acrylamide
38193-60-1 Acrylamide - sodium 2-acrylamido-2-methylpropane sulfonate copolymer
25085-02-3 Acrylamide - Sodium Acrylate Copolymer or Anionic Polyacrylamide
69418-26-4 Acrylamide polymer with N,N,N-trimethyl-2[1-oxo-2-propenyl]oxy Ethanaminium chloride
15085 -02-3 Acrylamide-sodium acrylate copolymer
68551-12-2 Alcohols, C12-C16, Ethoxylated (a.k.a. Ethoxylated alcohol)
64742-47-8 Aliphatic Hydrocarbon / Hydrotreated light distillate / Petroleum Distillates / Isoparaffinic Solvent / Paraffin Solvent / Napthenic Solvent
64743-02-8 Alkenes
68439-57-6 Alkyl (C14-C16) olefin sulfonate, sodium salt
9016-45-9 Alkylphenol ethoxylate surfactants
1327-41-9 Aluminum chloride
73138-27-9 Amines, C12-14-tert-alkyl, ethoxylated
71011-04-6 Amines, Ditallow alkyl, ethoxylated
68551-33-7 Amines, tallow alkyl, ethoxylated, acetates
1336-21-6 Ammonia
631-61-8 Ammonium acetate
68037-05-8 Ammonium Alcohol Ether Sulfate
7783-20-2 Ammonium bisulfate
10192-30-0 Ammonium bisulfite
12125-02-9 Ammonium chloride
7632-50-0 Ammonium citrate
37475-88-0 Ammonium Cumene Sulfonate
1341-49-7 Ammonium hydrogen-difluoride
6484-52-2 Ammonium nitrate
7727-54-0 Ammonium Persulfate / Diammonium peroxidisulphate
1762-95-4 Ammonium Thiocyanate
7664-41-7 Aqueous ammonia
121888-68-4 Bentonite, benzyl(hydrogenated tallow alkyl) dimethylammonium stearate complex / organophilic clay
71-43-2 Benzene
119345-04-9 Benzene, 1,1'-oxybis, tetratpropylene derivatives, sulfonated, sodium salts
74153-51-8 Benzenemethanaminium, N,N-dimethyl-N-[2-[(1-oxo-2-propenyl)oxy]ethyl]-, chloride, polymer with 2-propenamide
10043-35-3 Boric acid
1303-86-2 Boric oxide / Boric Anhydride
71-36-3 Butan-1-ol
68002-97-1 C10 - C16 Ethoxylated Alcohol
68131-39-5 C12-15 Alcohol, Ethoxylated
10043-52-4 Calcium chloride
124-38-9 Carbon dioxide
68130-15-4 Carboxymethylhydroxypropyl guar
9012-54-8 Cellulase / Hemicellulase Enzyme
9004-34-6 Cellulose
10049-04-4 Chlorine dioxide
77-92-9 Citric Acid
94266-47-4 Citrus Terpenes
61789-40-0 Cocamidopropyl betaine
68155-09-9 Cocamidopropylamine Oxide
68424-94-2 Coco-betaine
7758-98-7 Copper(II) sulfate
31726-34-8 Crissanol A-55
14808-60-7 Crystalline Silica (Quartz)
7447-39-4 Cupric chloride dihydrate
1120-24-7 Decyldimethyl Amine
2605-79-0 Decyl-dimethyl Amine Oxide
3252-43-5 Dibromoacetonitrile
25340-17-4 Diethylbenzene
111-46-6 Diethylene glycol
22042-96-2 Diethylenetriamine penta (methylenephonic acid) sodium salt
28757-00-8 Diisopropyl naphthalenesulfonic acid
68607-28-3 Dimethylcocoamine, bis(chloroethyl) ether, diquaternary ammonium salt
7398-69-8 Dimethyldiallylammonium chloride
25265-71-8 Dipropylene glycol
139-33-3 Disodium Ethylene Diamine Tetra Acetate
5989-27-5 D-Limonene
123-01-3 Dodecylbenzene
27176-87-0 Dodecylbenzene sulfonic acid
42504-46-1 Dodecylbenzenesulfonate isopropanolamine
50-70-4 D-Sorbitol / Sorbitol
37288-54-3 Endo-1,4-beta-mannanase, or Hemicellulase
149879-98-1 Erucic Amidopropyl Dimethyl Betaine
89-65-6 Erythorbic acid, anhydrous
54076-97-0 Ethanaminium, N,N,N-trimethyl-2-[(1-oxo-2-propenyl)oxy]-, chloride, homopolymer
107-21 -1 Ethane-1,2-diol / Ethylene Glycol
9002-93-1 Ethoxylated 4-tert-octylphenol
68439-50-9 Ethoxylated alcohol
126950-60-5 Ethoxylated alcohol
67254-71-1 Ethoxylated alcohol (C10-12)
68951-67-7 Ethoxylated alcohol (C14-15)
68439-46-3 Ethoxylated alcohol (C9-11)
66455-15-0 Ethoxylated Alcohols
84133-50-6 Ethoxylated Alcohols (C12-14 Secondary)
68439-51-0 Ethoxylated Alcohols (C12-14)
78330-21-9 Ethoxylated branch alcohol
34398-01-1 Ethoxylated C11 alcohol
61791-12-6 Ethoxylated Castor Oil
61791-29-5 Ethoxylated fatty acid, coco
61791-08-0 Ethoxylated fatty acid, coco, reaction product with ethanolamine
68439-45-2 Ethoxylated hexanol
9036-19-5 Ethoxylated octylphenol
9005-67-8 Ethoxylated Sorbitan Monostearate
9004-70-3 Ethoxylated Sorbitan Trioleate
64-17-5 Ethyl alcohol / ethanol
100-41-4 Ethyl Benzene
97-64-3 Ethyl lactate
9003-11-6 Ethylene Glycol-Propylene Glycol Copolymer (Oxirane, methyl-, polymer with oxirane)
75-21-8 Ethylene oxide
5877-42-9 Ethyloctynol
68526-86-3 Exxal 13
61790-12-3 Fatty Acids
68188-40-9 Fatty acids, tall oil reaction products w/ acetophenone, formaldehyde & thiourea
9043-30-5 Fatty alcohol polyglycol ether surfactant
7705-08-0 Ferric chloride
7782-63-0 Ferrous sulfate, heptahydrate
50-00-0 Formaldehyde
29316-47-0 Formaldehyde polymer with 4,1,1-dimethylethyl phenolmethyl oxirane
153795-76-7 Formaldehyde, polymers with branched 4-nonylphenol, ethylene oxide and propylene oxide
75-12-7 Formamide
64-18-6 Formic acid
110-17-8 Fumaric acid
65997-17-3 Glassy calcium magnesium phosphate
111-30-8 Glutaraldehyde
56-81-5 Glycerol / glycerine
9000-30-0 Guar Gum
64742-94-5 Heavy aromatic petroleum naphtha
9025-56-3 Hemicellulase
7647-01-0 Hydrochloric Acid / Hydrogen Chloride / muriatic acid
7722-84-1 Hydrogen peroxide
79-14-1 Hydroxy acetic acid
35249-89-9 Hydroxyacetic acid ammonium salt
9004-62-0 Hydroxyethyl cellulose
5470-11-1 Hydroxylamine hydrochloride
39421-75-5 Hydroxypropyl guar
35674-56-7 Isomeric Aromatic Ammonium Salt
1310-58-3 Potassium Hydroxide
13709-94-9 Potassium metaborate
24634-61-5 Potassium sorbate
112926-00-8 Precipitated silica / silica gel
57-55-6 Propane-1,2-diol, or Propylene glycol
107-98-2 Propylene glycol monomethyl ether
68953-58-2 Quaternary Ammonium Compounds
62763-89-7 Quinoline,2-methyl-, hydrochloride
15619-48-4 Quinolinium, 1-(phenylmethl),chloride
7631-86-9 Silica, Dissolved
5324-84-5 Sodium 1-octanesulfonate
127-09-3 Sodium acetate
95371-16-7 Sodium Alpha-olefin Sulfonate
532-32-1 Sodium benzoate
144-55-8 Sodium bicarbonate
7631-90-5 Sodium bisulfate
7647-15-6 Sodium bromide
497-19-8 Sodium carbonate
7647-14-5 Sodium Chloride
7758-19-2 Sodium chlorite
3926-62-3 Sodium chloroacetate
68-04-2 Sodium citrate
6381-77-7 Sodium erythorbate / isoascorbic acid, sodium salt
2836-32-0 Sodium Glycolate
1310-73-2 Sodium Hydroxide
7681-52-9 Sodium hypochlorite
7775-19-1 Sodium Metaborate .8H2O
10486-00-7 Sodium perborate tetrahydrate
7775-27-1 Sodium persulfate
9003-04-7 Sodium polyacrylate
7757-82-6 Sodium sulfate
1303-96-4 Sodium tetraborate decahydrate
7772-98-7 Sodium thiosulfate
1338-43-8 Sorbitan Monooleate
57-50-1 Sucrose
5329-14-6 Sulfamic acid
112945-52-5 Synthetic Amorphous / Pyrogenic Silica / Amorphous Silica
68155-20-4 Tall Oil Fatty Acid Diethanolamine
8052-48-0 Tallow fatty acids sodium salt
72480-70-7 Tar bases, quinoline derivs., benzyl chloride-quaternized
68647-72-3 Terpene and terpenoids
68956-56-9 Terpene hydrocarbon byproducts
533-74-4 Tetrahydro-3,5-dimethyl-2H-1,3,5-thiadiazine-2-thione (a.k.a. Dazomet)
55566-30-8 Tetrakis(hydroxymethyl)phosphonium sulfate (THPS)
75-57-0 Tetramethyl ammonium chloride
64-02-8 Tetrasodium Ethylenediaminetetraacetate
68-11-1 Thioglycolic acid
62-56-6 Thiourea
68527-49-1 Thiourea, polymer with formaldehyde and 1-phenylethanone
108-88-3 Toluene
81741-28-8 Tributyl tetradecyl phosphonium chloride
68299-02-5 Triethanolamine hydroxyacetate
112-27-6 Triethylene glycol
52624-57-4 Trimethylolpropane, Ethoxylated, Propoxylated
150-38-9 Trisodium Ethylenediaminetetraacetate
5064-31-3 Trisodium Nitrilotriacetate
7601-54-9 Trisodium orthophosphate
57-13-6 Urea
25038-72-6 Vinylidene Chloride/Methylacrylate Copolymer
7732-18-5 Water
1330-20-7 Xylene
Aliphatic acids
Aliphatic alcohol glycol ether
Alkyl Aryl Polyethoxy Ethanol
Alkylaryl Sulfonate
Aromatic hydrocarbons
Aromatic ketones
Oxyalkylated alkylphenol
Petroleum distillate blend
Polyethoxylated alkanol
Polymeric Hydrocarbons
Salt of amine-carbonyl condensate
Salt of fatty acid/polyamine reaction product
Sugar
Surfactant blend
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2011/dec/09/shale-gas-drilling-epa-fracking-water-contamination
http://www.earthworksaction.org/issues/detail/hydraulic_fracturing_101

[badtoworse]

24. That's baloney

The EPA stopped delivering water, not Cabot. See links below for factual information

http://yosemite.epa.gov/opa/admpress.nsf/0/1A6E49D193E1007585257A46005B61AD

http://www.forbes.com/sites/wlf/2012/07/31/epa-deprives-anti-natural-gas-crowd-of-key-demonization-rallying-point/

[HiPointDem]

37. Cabot was providing the water, not the EPA.

Sand­berg says the evi­dence shows frack­ing by Cabot Oil and Gas, con­t­a­m­i­nated Dimock’s water sup­ply. The EPA decided in Jan­u­ary to test 60 pri­vate water wells in Dimock after the state Depart­ment of Envi­ron­men­tal Pro­tec­tion cleared Cabot from pro­vid­ing free water to res­i­dents.

http://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2012/04/09/environmental-group-says-epas-dimock-results-shows-fracking-polluted-water/

As anti-natural gas drilling pro­test­ers con­verged on Dimock, Susque­hanna County this week to protest the Depart­ment of Envi­ron­men­tal Pro­tec­tion grant­ing Cabot Oil and Gas the right to stop deliv­er­ing water to fam­i­lies whose water sup­ply was con­t­a­m­i­nated, many activists on either side of the issue viewed the DEP deci­sion as an endorse­ment of the community’s cur­rent water quality.

In fact, DEP’s deci­sion allow­ing Cabot to stop pro­vid­ing water to Dimock res­i­dents had noth­ing to do with whether or not methane lev­els have increased or decreased at the affected water wells. “The [Con­sent Order and Agree­ment] didn’t require DEP to deem the water safe before per­mit­ting Cabot to stop deliv­er­ing water,” explained depart­ment spokes­woman Katy Gresh via email.

Indeed, a Decem­ber 2010 agree­ment between DEP and Cabot required the com­pany to con­tinue pro­vid­ing potable water to affected Dimock res­i­dents “until Cabot [received] writ­ten notice from the Depart­ment that it has com­plied” with a set list of require­ments. Improved water qual­ity was not among the criteria.

DEP began inves­ti­gat­ing Cabot after a Jan­u­ary 1, 2009 explo­sion at a Dimock resident’s water well. State inspec­tors doc­u­mented mul­ti­ple vio­la­tions at Cabot wells, includ­ing faulty well cas­ings, spilled diesel fuel and spilled drilling mud. DEP also doc­u­mented high methane lev­els and “com­bustible gas” in water wells located near Cabot drilling sites. In the ini­tial Con­sent Order and Agree­ment between DEP and Cabot, dated Novem­ber 4, 2009, the agency deter­mined, “the pres­ence of dis­solved methane and/or com­bustible gas in the 10 Affected Water Sup­plies occurred within six months of com­ple­tion of drilling of one or more of the Cabot Wells. As such, Cabot is pre­sumed to be respon­si­ble for the pol­lu­tion to these 10 Affected Water Supplies.”

Cabot signed onto this doc­u­ment, which ordered the driller to

imme­di­ately stop drilling for nat­ural gas within the “affected area” around Dimock
improve its well cas­ing procedures
pro­vide potable water for impacted residents
sub­mit a plan to per­ma­nently “restore or replace” these res­i­dents’ water sources

http://stateimpact.npr.org/pennsylvania/2011/12/08/deps-dimock-decision-based-on-2010-agreement-not-water-quality/


Cabot oil, branch of *the* cabot family business. the cabots who talk only to god.

[badtoworse]

38. At the end of the day, the EPA (not just the DEP) is on record that Dimock's water is safe to drink

That is a fact and is indisputable. On that basis, there is no reason why Cabot or the EPA (BTW, the EPA's own website said they stopped the deliveries) should have to continue delivering water in Dimock - safe water is safe water.

I'm not going to get into the specifics of what Cabot's drilling practices were because I'm not close enough to the case to know for sure. Let's accept that what you say is true - the fix for that is not to ban fracking everywhere, but rather to improve standards for well casings and to improve enforcement of existing laws that govern drilling. Spilling diesel or drilling mud is already illegal and regulators should take appropriate action. It's noteworthy that Pennsylvania upgraded the requirements for well casings in 2010 - after the events in Dimock took place.

To base energy policy on what happened in Dimock is ludicrous. For one thing, there is not even complete agreement on the facts of the case. Methane seepage from shallow coal seams has been documented for decades and as EPA points out, the contaminants found in Dimocks water are naturally occuring. It is certainly possible that the methane came as a result of a bad cementing job on the well casing, but there are fixes for all of these things. Upgraded well casing design and installation, reuse of fracking water and safer fracking fluids are things the industry has either implemented or is developing. Tens of thousands of wells in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Ohio, Texas, North dakota, Colorado and elsewhere have been fracked with no negative impacts. The truth is that fracking is at least as safe and likely much safer than any other means of primary energy production.

Let's consider some of the positive aspects of fracking. By industry estimates between 50,000 and 80,000 MW of coal fired generating capacity will be retired in the next 5 years and will be replaced by much cleaner natural gas fired generation. That means millions of tons of CO2 not being emitted, along with the mercury, acid gases, NOx and other pollutants associated with coal. It also means less of the damaging environmental impacts of coal mining. That is only possible because fracking has reduced the cost of natural gas to the point where it's as cheap or cheaper than coal. In 2008, the cost of natural gas was in the $8 - $9 per million BTU range. So far in 2012, the range has been in the $2 - $3 range and it's forecasted to stay in the $3 - $5 range for at least 10 years.

Ever get stuck behind a heavy truck spewing diesel exhaust into the air? At current natural gas prices, we could liquify the gas and use it to fuel the heavy trucks and buses on our highways reducing the emissions from the diesel engines. Besides being cleaner, it would be cheaper - natural gas is significantly less expensive than diesel at todays prices.

Fracking has the potential to improve our competitive position in world markets and bring manufacturing jobs back here. Along with natural gas, fracked wells also produce substantial amounts of natural gas liquids or NGL's such as propane, butane and pentane. These are the building blocks for the plastics used in manufacturing. We are developing an abundant, cheap supply of these materials that will attract manufacturers here because these things are substantially more expensive in the countries that have taken away many of our jobs.

What about the national security aspects of our energy supply? Why do you think we sent our military into the Middle-East and why did thousands of our troop have to die over the years? No one will say it publically, but everyone knows we'd be in deep trouble if we lost access to the oil from that part of the world. It is possible, even likely that we will be able to export LNG and in the long run, perhaps even oil from fracked wells. Quite a potential turnaround, don't you think?

I could go on, but I think you get the point. Fracking is our future and I'm 100% for it. It's not without risk, but no form of energy production is. Unfortunately, we have the "just say no" crowd who were probably taken in by Gasland and either can't or won't make a rational decision about fracking that is based on all the facts. I've been in the energy business for most of my career (30 years in electric power generation) and I've yet to hear any alternatives to fracking that are workable and affordable. Thankfully, rational heads seem to be calling the shots on fracking, at least right now.

[Politicalboi]

31. Probably a hand slap like BP

Sure the water is fine. Come to the Gulf. LOL! I wouldn't go swim there for all the money in the world.

[Odin2005]

17. Where are the wingnut defenders of private property?

[Liberal_in_LA]

19. Corporations are people my friend!

[malthaussen]

25. All my life, I have said that no rights were sacred.

That the government can deny any right they wish at pleasure. And I was hooted down, quite a lot.

Welcome to the 21st century.

-- Mal

[lostnote12]

33. " You People Are Victums Of Your Own Ignorance"???...I guess so....

<might need this>