Marcellus Shale: An Environmental Disaster In The Making

[chairrock]

I just read in todays paper that they are going to try to set limits on how much we can pollute the streams and rivers that flow into Cheaspeak Bay.NJ and Pa already have rules in effect. This will effect both treatment plants and farmer/urban runoff.

When they do the hydro-fracturing they have to run the used frac water thru a treatment plant, which are not equiped to handle the waste now, with the current standards. NYS DEC must issue permits if the treatment plant is in compliance.None are currently, not without large cash infusions to upgrade. Will the new regs concernng the Cheaspeak Bay make these upgraded even more expensive for the treatment plants or will the drillers just truck the frac water and salt water from the gas recovery to a different watershed?

[chairrock]

Originally Posted by backwoodsman

http://www.syracuse.com/news/index.s..._gas_lies.html

I was at a friends house a few weeks ago,we were sitting out in the shop talking when this guy comes walking in,he was from the gas company.He talked real fast,said this was his last stop,talked about how much money could be potentially made by letting them on the land,but the paper work would need to be signed that night because that was his last stop and he was heading back to Cleveland.He was politely turned down several times until he finally left.
After he left we talked about it.My friend is a farmer,he said it was kinda like playing the lottery,he wasn't interested in it because he wouldn't have to work for it and he didn't want to be left with the problems they would leave.
I left there feeling lucky to have these folks as my neighbors and friends.

I have heard that is just part of the high pressure tactics used by the "land men" to get you to sign a lease. Don't sign a lease until you do much research.There is no hurry, it will be awhile before they drill....no permits have been issued and the DEC staff is very small without funding .

The link below is from the a Tioga County Group. We got to them speak at the Cornell meeting 2 weeks ago. They were neither pro nor con, just informational. The link below is loaded with info.
http://www.tiogagaslease.org/home.html

[chairrock]

Currently,in NYS, if 60% of your neighbors in your section(1 square mile) sign a lease, THEY can drill horizontally under your land and take your gas. They will still have to pay you the minimum,I believe 12 1/2 % of the royalties.Even if you don't sign,it is a immanent domain type thing. Groups are trying to get that raised up to 20% range.
Drilling will start south towards PA first, the shale is better there for gas extraction. North or the line thru Ithaca, kind of marks where the currently profitable shale exists.
I don't think they are drilling the Marcellus Shale yet in NYS, there are other gas/oil wells not part of that formation, that have been in production for some time now.

[daxs]

Where my family and I own land in Tioga county , all of our neighbors have signed a lease so they will get gas from our property regardless of us signing. A man showed up at my moms house in bethlehem pa with a lease. I guess the company did not due a good job of due diligence because my mom and dad were still listed as the owners (my dad died about 15 years ago). He did come back a second day to talk with my brother and sister. Seemed to answer our questions. agreed to some addendums to the lease. I am having a lawyer look the lease over. We have not signed. Its a tough situation. The cabin on our property needs some work and with the financial situation of our family, coming up with money for improvements is difficult. The lease money would help us with property up keep and the royalties, if any, would just go back into the property. We do not see it as a get rich quick situation. You hate to see drilling but right now its happening in Tioga and there is alot of it happening in the area we have our property.

[chairrock]

Be careful, the leases used to be 1 page documents, now that people have learned more, the leases can run into the dozens of pages.This is all to protect yourself,the landowner.
Checkout the tioga gas lease page I posted earlier, and ASK QUESTIONS And go to workshops.! The leases can run for decades!

[daxs]

The lease that was presented to us was for 5 years. not dozens of pages, 3 i think. legal size

[PA Ridgerunner]

FWIW, I think Chairrock is referring to Tioga County, New York, but Daxs is in Tioga County, PA.

[chairrock]

Originally Posted by daxs

The lease that was presented to us was for 5 years. not dozens of pages, 3 i think. legal size

.

From what I learned at the Cornell Symposium in Owego a few weeks ago, a 3 page lease is not comprehensive enough to protect the landowner or the land. There are too many issues. The less number of pages only benefits the gas company.
It seems that a lease is signed for 5 years,if no drilling or extraction takes place the lease expires. If ,ANY TYPE OF WORK STARTS, then the lease might run for many years longer....there have been cases in PA ,where one piece of heavy equipment unloaded on the land, means the lease is being WORKED, hence the long term extension.

PA is a model ,according to the naysayers, of what can and did go wrong with the whole process. NYS DEC, landowners, and interested parties are trying to not make the same mistakes that were made in PA.

It is not a matter of if, it is when and how the drilling will take place. The amounts of money to made are huge.As are the risks,IMHO.

[daxs]

I agree. Thats why I am having a lawyer review the lease before anything is signed. There are folks in PA who signed leases several years ago and got $25 an acre. All of the companies that have approached us with leases are offering about $1,500 an acre. If you go onto the Williamsport Sun gazette website, there are alot of good links on the Marcellus issue. Found out that the local governments and state representatives really do not have a good handle on the issue and cannot provide any decent information.

Originally Posted by daxs

I agree. Thats why I am having a lawyer review the lease before anything is signed. There are folks in PA who signed leases several years ago and got $25 an acre. All of the companies that have approached us with leases are offering about $1,500 an acre. If you go onto the Williamsport Sun gazette website, there are alot of good links on the Marcellus issue. Found out that the local governments and state representatives really do not have a good handle on the issue and cannot provide any decent information.

Natural Gas+ Natural Wind= Energy conservation[IMO] but how it's done,through political manuvers ,is yet to be seen. Looncry

[sp_nyp]

Originally Posted by looncry

Natural Gas+ Natural Wind= Energy conservation[IMO] but how it's done,through political manuvers ,is yet to be seen. Looncry

Not tying to start an argument, I am just curious what is meant by "Natural Gas + Natural Wind = Energy Conservation"? I am having trouble following that logic.

Also, "Natural Wind"? Are people trying to harness energy from manufactured wind?

[ALGonquin Bob]

New York's Allegany State Park is a major recreation area for people in my region, and our ADK chapter is very active in working to protect our state park from damage similar to that which has already been done just a couple miles south, near Bradford, in Pennsylvania's Allegheny National Forest. The fact that the company that claims to own mining rights there is in the nearby Town of Amherst (close to where I live) puts another personal spin on this. The hydrofracking process would destroy most, if not all, of the recreational opportunities in a large portion of Allegany State Park. In order to obtain that natural gas, deeply forested park lands would be destroyed with a maze of access roads, retention ponds, and large drilling footprints, with an extra bonus of a water table polluted with a variety of chemicals that could render the underground water supply useless for many years to come. It's not worth it, and New York's DEC will hopefully make the mining company not only prove that they actually own the mineral rights, but will prevent this and all future attempts to apply similar invasive mining techniques in New York State parks. Outside the state park, there are public and private forest lands that might be better suited for hydrofracking, and landowners will have to decide if the money they would receive is worth the risk of having their well water permanently polluted. In fact, the Marcellus Shale region is larger in areas east of Allegany park, so other portions of the Southern Tier may more likely see the gas mining take place, where there might be less resistance to the destruction of forest and field. I wish those residents good luck.

Originally Posted by ALGonquin Bob

New York's Allegany State Park is a major recreation area for people in my region, and our ADK chapter is very active in working to protect our state park from damage similar to that which has already been done just a couple miles south, near Bradford, in Pennsylvania's Allegheny National Forest. The fact that the company that claims to own mining rights there is in the nearby Town of Amherst (close to where I live) puts another personal spin on this. The hydrofracking process would destroy most, if not all, of the recreational opportunities in a large portion of Allegany State Park. In order to obtain that natural gas, deeply forested park lands would be destroyed with a maze of access roads, retention ponds, and large drilling footprints, with an extra bonus of a water table polluted with a variety of chemicals that could render the underground water supply useless for many years to come. It's not worth it, and New York's DEC will hopefully make the mining company not only prove that they actually own the mineral rights, but will prevent this and all future attempts to apply similar invasive mining techniques in New York State parks. Outside the state park, there are public and private forest lands that might be better suited for hydrofracking, and landowners will have to decide if the money they would receive is worth the risk of having their well water permanently polluted. In fact, the Marcellus Shale region is larger in areas east of Allegany park, so other portions of the Southern Tier may more likely see the gas mining take place, where there might be less resistance to the destruction of forest and field. I wish those residents good luck.

Very informative information like this can help bring public awareness on this question:Who owns the minerals?'' I will keep reading articles like this and ask myself: What can I do to be proactive against fracking ? hmm... Looncry

[chairrock]

[QUOTE=looncry;137869]Very informative information like this can help bring public awareness on this question:Who owns the minerals?'' I will keep reading articles like this and ask myself: What can I do to be proactive against fracking ? hmm... Looncr/QUOTE]

Everyone can comment to NYS DEC during their comment period which ends soon. Sorry I do not have the info handy now. All comments, which will be read by DEC,should be based on FACTS! Comments made based on Feelings,etc.,, will carry no weight! Do your homework and submit VALID concerns based on the science of the moment. Look at the links in ealrier posts and do it the intelligent way! It wil take some effort,,,,

[QUOTE=chairrock;137885]

Originally Posted by looncry

Very informative information like this can help bring public awareness on this question:Who owns the minerals?'' I will keep reading articles like this and ask myself: What can I do to be proactive against fracking ? hmm... Looncr/QUOTE]

Everyone can comment to NYS DEC during their comment period which ends soon. Sorry I do not have the info handy now. All comments, which will be read by DEC,should be based on FACTS! Comments made based on Feelings,etc.,, will carry no weight! Do your homework and submit VALID concerns based on the science of the moment. Look at the links in ealrier posts and do it the intelligent way! It wil take some effort,,,,

Exactly. Emotional appeals have little persuasive value for these types of issues.

As a member of the FLTC I was disappointed in the board's submission on this matter. It's little more than a statement of emotional and illogical arguments, and when it does address facts it makes overstatements that end up leaving the impression it is nothing more than a chicken litle "the sky is falling" submission.

here are a few of the items that most concerned me:

“Loss of membership – Disruption of normal trail activities and deterioration of the quality of the wilderness experience will reduce active member participation. Any reduction in membership and the pool of active volunteers will affect the overall viability of the organization.”

Bad weather, economic conditions, people having children interested in playing football instead of hiking, and a host of other reason can have the same indirect consequences. This reasoning makes the FLTC sound like an organization on the verge of collapse from disinterest. “Look, there’s a gas well. Guess it is time to resign from the FLTC…”


“Hiker safety – Trail users will be subject to safety hazards due to increased truck traffic at trail head parking lots, trail road crossings, and on road-walk sections of the trail. They may also be exposed to harmful chemicals and emissions.”

Yes, but non-trail users are subjected to increased safety hazards from trail users driving to trial heads. If that were a valid concern then both drilling and use of the trail would be prohibited.

“Landowner relations – Our revocable agreements with private landowners will be subordinate to gas company desires and the appeal of lease payments and royalties.
Likelihood of withdrawal of landowner permission will increase.”

Our revocable agreements with private landowners may be revoked because the private land owners want to do something else with their private land. If the private land owners want to continue making their land available to the FLTC they will do so, whether or not other uses for their land are available. I wonder how many will revoke their arrangement out of anger when they find out that the FLTC was arguing that private land owners should not have any other option simply because the FLTC might be harmed if other options existed.

Submissions like this neither help the cause nor the reputation of the organization submitting them.

[chairrock]

There was a bigwig from DEC at the Owego symposioum, he sail,basically....no emotionally charged coments would be appreciated, they need facts!!!! They will listen to facts...
say 12k heavy truck trips to bring a well on line and thru production.....YES 12K.....on back roads and tru town too.....


IT WILL TAKE ALOT OF FACTS TO MAKE A POINT>>>>




[QUOTE=timetohike;137886]

Originally Posted by chairrock

Exactly. Emotional appeals have little persuasive value for these types of issues.

As a member of the FLTC I was disappointed in the board's submission on this matter. It's little more than a statement of emotional and illogical arguments, and when it does address facts it makes overstatements that end up leaving the impression it is nothing more than a chicken litle "the sky is falling" submission.

here are a few of the items that most concerned me:

“Loss of membership – Disruption of normal trail activities and deterioration of the quality of the wilderness experience will reduce active member participation. Any reduction in membership and the pool of active volunteers will affect the overall viability of the organization.”

Bad weather, economic conditions, people having children interested in playing football instead of hiking, and a host of other reason can have the same indirect consequences. This reasoning makes the FLTC sound like an organization on the verge of collapse from disinterest. “Look, there’s a gas well. Guess it is time to resign from the FLTC…”


“Hiker safety – Trail users will be subject to safety hazards due to increased truck traffic at trail head parking lots, trail road crossings, and on road-walk sections of the trail. They may also be exposed to harmful chemicals and emissions.”

Yes, but non-trail users are subjected to increased safety hazards from trail users driving to trial heads. If that were a valid concern then both drilling and use of the trail would be prohibited.

“Landowner relations – Our revocable agreements with private landowners will be subordinate to gas company desires and the appeal of lease payments and royalties.
Likelihood of withdrawal of landowner permission will increase.”

Our revocable agreements with private landowners may be revoked because the private land owners want to do something else with their private land. If the private land owners want to continue making their land available to the FLTC they will do so, whether or not other uses for their land are available. I wonder how many will revoke their arrangement out of anger when they find out that the FLTC was arguing that private land owners should not have any other option simply because the FLTC might be harmed if other options existed.

Submissions like this neither help the cause nor the reputation of the organization submitting them.

[ALGonquin Bob]

For a peek at the info that one hydro-fracking mining company has provided, look here: http://chk.aitrk1.com/Media/Marcellu...Fact_Sheet.pdf
Main website http://www.askchesapeake.com/Marcell...s/default.aspx

[daxs]

the sungazette.com has lot of links pertaining marcellus info. you can also go to the penn state cooperative ext at naturalgas.psu.edu

[QUOTE=timetohike;137886]

Originally Posted by chairrock

Exactly. Emotional appeals have little persuasive value for these types of issues.

As a member of the FLTC I was disappointed in the board's submission on this matter. It's little more than a statement of emotional and illogical arguments, and when it does address facts it makes overstatements that end up leaving the impression it is nothing more than a chicken litle "the sky is falling" submission.

here are a few of the items that most concerned me:

“Loss of membership – Disruption of normal trail activities and deterioration of the quality of the wilderness experience will reduce active member participation. Any reduction in membership and the pool of active volunteers will affect the overall viability of the organization.”

Bad weather, economic conditions, people having children interested in playing football instead of hiking, and a host of other reason can have the same indirect consequences. This reasoning makes the FLTC sound like an organization on the verge of collapse from disinterest. “Look, there’s a gas well. Guess it is time to resign from the FLTC…”


“Hiker safety – Trail users will be subject to safety hazards due to increased truck traffic at trail head parking lots, trail road crossings, and on road-walk sections of the trail. They may also be exposed to harmful chemicals and emissions.”

Yes, but non-trail users are subjected to increased safety hazards from trail users driving to trial heads. If that were a valid concern then both drilling and use of the trail would be prohibited.

“Landowner relations – Our revocable agreements with private landowners will be subordinate to gas company desires and the appeal of lease payments and royalties.
Likelihood of withdrawal of landowner permission will increase.”

Our revocable agreements with private landowners may be revoked because the private land owners want to do something else with their private land. If the private land owners want to continue making their land available to the FLTC they will do so, whether or not other uses for their land are available. I wonder how many will revoke their arrangement out of anger when they find out that the FLTC was arguing that private land owners should not have any other option simply because the FLTC might be harmed if other options existed.

Submissions like this neither help the cause nor the reputation of the organization submitting them.

Do I get a petition started ? I have connections ya know. Looncry

[chairrock]

[QUOTE=looncry;137891]

Originally Posted by timetohike

Do I get a petition started ? I have connections ya know. Looncry

Here is the link to the DECs comment page on the draft regulations.

Remember to use facts and not emotion in your comments.

http://www.dec.ny.gov/energy/59634.html