In Pennsylvania, one of the country’s major fracking hotspots, more research is being conducted to reduce the amount of water wastage created through fracking.

According to a 2011 report by the Environmental Protection Agency, it can take between 70 billion to 140 billion gallons of water to frack 35,000 wells per year. The desire to find resourceful ways to reduce the amount of water is motivated by both environmental and financial concerns. Securing such massive volumes of water can be difficult and controversial in some states suffering through droughts. At the same time, delivering the water to the fracking site can cost 10 to 14 cents per gallon, or over $400,000 per fracking procedure.

Moreover, even disposal of water can be expensive, with some contractors charging $8 to dispose of each 42-gallon barrel. Disposal can also be time consuming, especially in some remote areas of Pennsylvania, where waste water must be transported via truck to Ohio due to a lack of injection wells in the state.

Given these issues, Pennsylvanian fracking sites have come up with an alternative: recycling. Rather than inject the waste water into the ground, recycled fracking water is cleaned and reused to frack additional wells, minimizing the amount of water usage and costs associated with securing and disposing water. In Pennsylvania, fourteen percent of water used in fracking is now recycled, up from just 1 percent two years ago.

Such measures can reduce the cost of natural gas by $2 per barrel, which is roughly $200,000 worth of savings over the lifetime of a well. Chesapeake Energy Corp. now recycles 100 percent of its waste water in northern Pennsylvania.

Source: Wall Street Journal

In Pennsylvania, the EPA study is focusing on water quality and quantity issues in Washington, Bradford and Susquehanna counties. The results of the study will help scientists and the public identify key issues to focus on. Past studies have already indicated that fracking is safe; however, this study released by the EPA is going to be very comprehensive.

Glen Paulson, the EPA’s science advisor, said that a progress report should be released by the end of the year, and the final report released in 2014. Paulson recently spoke at a University of Pittsburgh conference on the health impacts of hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. Fracking is the process of extracting natural gas from shale rock formations. The largest fracking opportunities in the U.S. lie in shale plays, including: Barnett Shale, Texas; Bakken Shale, North Dakota; Haynesville Shale, Louisiana; Marcellus Shale, Pennsylvania; Raton Basin, Colorado.

Paulson said the study of fracking and drinking water “is one of the most aggressive public outreach programs in EPA history.”

According to Paulson, the Obama administration is providing enough support to study the issue. The EPA says in the project overview that natural gas “plays a key role in our nation’s clean energy future” but that serious concerns have been raised about potential impacts to the environment and human health. Many of those concerns were came from a small fracking community in Dimock, Pennsylvania.

Dan Alfaro, a spokesman for Energy in Depth, said, “There have been numerous studies and a multitude of research on oil and natural gas extraction methods.” Alfaro believes the EPA study will show that gas drilling and fracking are safe. The EPA study, Alfaro continued, “will confirm once again previous findings that current industry practices used in development are safe, responsible and effective means of extracting and producing our natural energy resources.”

Source:

Pennsylvania is one the largest state producers of shale gas.  Marcellus shale stretches across Pennsylvania, New York, Ohio and West Virginia and covers ten times the square miles of Barnett shale. The development of the Marcellus and Barnett Shale natural gas has boosted local economies. The new study, “America’s New Energy Future: The Unconventional Oil and Gas Revolution and the Economy,” suggests increase in domestic production of unconventional oil and natural gas could create more than 3 million jobs by 2020. Today, the industry supports about $1.7 million domestic jobs.

Daniel Yergin with the Wall Street Journal wrote - The number of jobs could rise to three million by 2020. The energy revolution will add an estimated $62 billion to federal and state revenues this year. … The growth of shale gas will save the U.S. from spending $100 billion a year on imported LNG, which was the likely prospect five years ago.

Key highlights from the study include unconventional oil and natural gas economic benefits:

• Nearly $5.1 trillion in capital expenditures ($2.1 trillion in the oil sector, $3 trillion in the gas sector) will take place between 2012 and 2035 across the entire upstream unconventional oil and gas activity sectors.
• Employment in the entire upstream unconventional oil and gas sector on a direct, indirect, and induced basis will support nearly 1.8 million jobs in 2012, 2.5 million jobs in 2015, 3 million jobs in 2020, and nearly 3.5 million jobs in 2035.
• The jobs created tend to be high quality and high paying, given the technologically innovative nature of unconventional oil and gas activity. Workers associated with unconventional oil and gas are currently paid an average of $35.15 per hour—higher than the wages in the general economy ($23.07 per hour) and more than wages paid in manufacturing, wholesale trade and education, among others.
• Unconventional energy activity will contribute $237 billion in value added contributions to GDP in 2012, a figure that will increase to $475 billion annually in 2035.
• Unconventional oil and gas activity will generate more than $61 billion in federal and state government revenues in 2012 and increase to $91 billion in 2015 and $111 billion in 2020. By the last year of the forecast period, in 2035, government revenues will increase to more than $124 billion.

The energy revolution is helping revitalize the economy making the U.S. more competitive in the global marketplace. Pennsylvania’s productions on Marcellus Shale is one of the most important, clean-burning and abundant resources in America.

Source:

According to the Post-Gazette, the Department of Environmental Protection issued a new policy dealing with Marcellus Shale drilling-related water contamination.

[The new pol­icy has] department administration in Harrisburg instead of field offices decide whether residential water users should receive letters noti­fy­ing them about problems.

The month-old policy hasn’t stopped, held up or altered any contaminated-water deter­mi­na­tion letters. And the DEP said in response to questions that it would not result in delays to home­own­ers about water contamination.

However, critics are concerned that the policy allows high-level DEP officials in Harrisburg to decide not to issue, or delay issuing, con­t­a­m­i­na­tion deter­mi­na­tion letters rec­om­mended by a field office. A decision not to make that deter­mi­na­tion could save drilling com­pa­nies millions of dollars in groundwater reme­di­a­tion, water treatment or replacement costs, and lengthen the time it takes to fix the problems.

George Jugovic Jr., chief executive officer of Citizens for Pennsylvania’s Future, said, “Harrisburg is making a decision on the notification before action is taken…But it’s supposed to be a scientific decision based on water test results and the law. What [science] expertise in that does Krancer have?”

Source:

It’s about time we hear some truth about the proposed fracking bans in Pennsylvania. Over time, enacting a fracking ban will hurt business. Most of Pennsylvania has seen nothing but strong economic growth and lower than the average unemployment rates because of the natural gas boom – Just ask the Pittsburgh City Council members. According the to NY Post, Pittsburgh Council members have come to regret the decision to enact a fracking ban about two years ago.

Pittsburgh is now reconsidering the fracking ban. Patrick Dowd, City Councilman has proposed new legislation to eliminate the current ban and replace it with new rules. Dowd proposes replacing the current ban with strict zoning regulations for gas extraction.

Allegheny County Executive Rich Fitzgerald believes the city is sending a negative signal to companies considering Pittsburgh to build headquarters. “The words ‘ban’ or ‘moratorium’ send a signal to companies that might want to build a headquarters in Downtown Pittsburgh. It sends a signal that you’re not wanted here,” Fitzgerald said.

Luke Ravenstahl, Pittsburgh Mayor said, “we don’t believe warding off an industry that is creating hundreds of thousands of jobs is prudent.”

While local Pittsburgh governments reconsider the fracking ban, Gov. Cuomo in New York continues to delay new state fracking regulations. According the the NY Post, Gov. Cuomo has delayed fracking in 135 locations including, Buffalo, Binghamton, Dryden and Ithaca. The post also indicated that the majority of residents in New York support fracking initiatives.

Pennsylvania is reaping the benefits of the energy boom, while New York waits. If Pittsburgh is reconsidering the fracking ‘ban’ or ‘moratorium,’ you start to wonder how many more cities will start to reconsider the fracking bans. Fracking is an example of progress and growth.

Source:

Dimock, Pa is still divided over fracking despite the recent settlement agreement with Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. Allegations regarding drinking water safety and fracking, a method of extracting natural gas, were put to rest following EPA investigation. Some Dimock Pa. residents still blame the polluted water on Fracking. The town stays dived. Residents who support Dimock fracking development think their neighbors are looking for a “quick payday” from drilling royalties or a legal settlement.

“It’s really made some bitter enemies,” said James C. Grimsley, 70, a retired New York City Plumber. Grimsley has a sign in his yard showing his support.

The sign says, “Drill baby drill.”

Another resident, Raymond D. Kemble says, “you got neighbors against neighbors, towns against towns.” Kemble is local a mechanic and one of the residents who sued the Cabot Oil & Gas Corp.

Kemble has over three-dozen anti-fracking signs up in his yard. Kemble refused to sign a settlement with Cabot, even though most litigants have come to terms with the gas driller.

Why did the EPA investigation not link fracking to groundwater contamination?

Groundwater is located a few hundred feet beneath the ground, while fracking takes place 7,000+ feet underground. Fracking regulations force drilling to be a safe distance away from fresh water wells. Water contamination can only occur if fracking waste is not properly stored.

After the EPA studied Dimock and the surrounding area, they found that water contamination was not caused by there nearby drilling company. Since the 1940s, companies have been using methods of fracking to release oil and gas from the ground. In that time, there is no evidence that links fracking to groundwater contamination.

Source:

The EPA study in Dimock, Pennsylvania concluded that fracking had no effect on the town’s drinking water. Cabot Oil & Gas Corp., the driller that occupies the area nearest to Dimock had suspicions that the EPA study was politically motivated.

What Administration and the EPA seem to miss, is the information regarding the new, more effective drilling techniques that have led to the more cost-efficient drilling and a safer production process. White house officials are finalizing the new rule by the end of the year. If the rule is voted and passed, states will be relieved of their fracking responsibilities. Forbes reports, this decision would leave companies with higher taxes and tight regulations that will ultimately do more harm than good.

The new regulations were originally introduced by President Obama to better protect the environment from polluted water and potential earthquakes. Interior Secretary Ken Salazar outlined a series of rules that called for tighter state regulations on everything from full chemical disclosure to well integrity. Salazar maintained that the rules are necessary for the states that are not considered up-to-par when it comes to regulating fracking on federal land. – Forbes

The new fracking legislation will hurt the fracking industry, said industry officials. The regulations will not only slow drilling efforts, but will affect production rates. Environmentalist and regulation officials don’t realize the chemicals in fracking are trademark secrets.

Source:

Michael Krancer, Gov. Corbett’s chief environmental regulator, is pushing for fracking control in his state. Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is a technique for drilling to extract natural gas and has always been regulated by the state until recently. Krancer, a former corporate lawyer and environmental law judge who lives in Bryn Mawr said, “I’m not battling with people…I’m dialoguing with people.”

The EPA recently stepped in to conduct a study regarding fracking and the safety of drinking water. The EPA decided to step in after the residence in Dimock Pa. claimed fracking caused drinking water contamination issues. These residences were located near drill sites, which using fracking techniques to extract natural gas.

“We realize and recognize that EPA is very new to all of this and the EPA understands of the facts and science behind this activity is rudimentary,” Krancer wrote to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson this year.

David Masur, director of PennEnvironment, said Krancer’s approach is polarizing.
“I don’t think if I called the secretary a horse’s ass he would say, ‘Great, we’re starting a dialogue,’ ” said Masur. “He would be irate.”

Kate Sinding, council attorney, said to Krancer in a letter, that the DEP’s responsibility, as spelled out in its mission statement, is to protect Pennsylvania’s air, land and water from pollution and to provide for the health and safety of its citizens through a cleaner environment.

“Despite that obligation, nowhere in your three-page letter . . . did you even once acknowledge the need to further strengthen either federal or state laws and rules governing hydraulic fracturing practices or related gas- and oil-industry wastewater activities,” she wrote.

Krancer argues that Pennsylvania has done much to regulate the oil and gas industry, including upgrades to well construction standards and disposal methods. Shortly after Corett administration entered office a few changes were made to increase efficiency and safety of fracking:

• Stopped sending wastewater to municipal treatment plants, which can only dilute rather than remove pollutants and ended the discharge of inadequately treated wastewater into waterways.
• 90% of wastewater is being recycled
• Fracking sites have plastic-lined pits to capture wastewater for proper disposal

“I think we regulate the natural gas exploration and extraction industry just like we do every other industry in the state,” Krancer said. “I would not agree there is a bias one way or another.”

Source:

To drill or not to drill – In Pennsylvania, the answer is to drill. In fact, despite controversy, Pennsylvania court has struck down a provision of the state law that stops municipalities from controlling where natural gas companies can and can not drill.

According to CNN, in a 4-3 decision, Pennsylvania Commonwealth Court found that a portion of the state’s Act 13 – gas law revisions were passed in February – would require approval for drilling in all zoning district, including limited residential areas.

Jordan Yaeger, an attorney in the case, said Act 13 “was unprecedented regulation. It was a complete overreach.” Yaeger represented the township of Nockamixon and the Borough of Yardley, both in Bucks County near Philadelphia – The two municipalities were among the seven municipalities that filed the petition.

Yaeger said, the ruling is “a great victory.”

The municipalities sit on top of large Marcellus Shale rock formations, one of the largest natural gas deposits in the nation. In order to reach the natural gas, drilling companies undergo a process called hydraulic fracturing. The process releases the natural gas from the ground and into wells. The natural gas is then stored and used in manufacturing facilities and some fleet vehicles.

Hydraulic fracturing is controversial process, but mostly misunderstood. In order to extract natural gas, large amounts of water are mixed with sand and chemicals deep within the ground to fracture the shale rock formations. Once the rock is fractured the sand holds the fractures open while the natural gas is released into the wells.

Yaeger said giving the municipalities the right to have oversight on where companies can drill will help protect communities.

Regulations for fracking have been up in the air since the contaminated water scare in Dimock, Pennsylvania.  Typically states have full control fracking regulations; however, recent events caused the EPA to step in. The future of fracking no lies in the hands of federal and state government combined.

North Carolina’s hydraulic fracturing legislation has been applauded by API. The law allows for hydraulic fracturing to develop the state’s natural gas resources. API Executive Vice President Marty Durbin applauded, Senate President Pro Tempore Phil Berger and House Speaker Tom Tillis for enacting the law. The law states:

“After a commendable state study of shale energy issues, active public input and thorough deliberation, North Carolina has set in motion a process that will lead to the creation of high-paying jobs and a better energy future for the state.”

“Safe and responsible development of natural gas will provide ample supplies of energy for North Carolina families while boosting job growth and generating revenue for the government.”

In North Carolina alone, the oil and natural gas industry supports more than 135,000 jobs.  A recent study indicates the development of natural gas could increase that number by more than 40,000 additional jobs by 2020.

API represents more than 500 oil and natural gas companies, leaders of a technology-driven industry that supplies most of America’s energy, supports 9.2 million U.S. jobs and 7.7 percent of the U.S. economy, delivers $86 million a day in revenue to our government, and, since 2000, has invested over $2 trillion in U.S. capital projects to advance all forms of energy, including alternatives.

Source: