Frack Check WV » shale

Fracking Risks Should Be Transparent to Neighbors & Investors

Duane Nichols — Thu, 30 Apr 2015 08:39:12 +0000

Investors pressure oil companies to disclose climate change risk

From an Article by David Katz, Preserve the Beartooth Front, April 21, 2015

The request was made in a 10-page letter to Mary Jo White, head of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and signed by 62 institutional investors from the United States and Europe. The letter cites a lack of disclosure of “carbon asset risks” in SEC filings by oil and gas companies. The signers contend that these risks constitute “known trends,” which are required to be reported according to SEC rules.

The group argues that carbon assets could become “uneconomic” if climate-related trends permanently undercut prices and demand for fossil fuels.

From the letter:

The economics of the oil and gas industry are changing rapidly as exploration and production costs increase. As conventional oil and gas reserves decline, companies have been forced to increase investments in high cost, carbon intensive “unconventional” exploration projects.

Since 2005, annual upstream investment for oil has increased by 100%, from $220 billion in 2005 to $440 billion in 2012, while crude oil supply has only increased 3%. In 2014 the global oil industry spent $650 billion on exploration and development of new reserves, which is producing diminishing marginal returns in terms of new reserves being added.

Thus, the industry is investing more money to produce less oil and has become less profitable in recent years.

The Carbon Tracker Initiative (CTI) estimates oil and gas companies are likely to spend approximately $1.1 trillion in capex (capital expenditures) from 2014 – 2025 on high cost, carbon-intensive exploration projects that require at least an $80 break-even price.

Due to recent low oil prices, we have seen oil majors cancel or delay billions of dollars worth of projects, and nearly $1 trillion of projects face the risk of cancellation.

BP shareholders pass legally binding disclosure resolution

The letter came a day after 98% of BP shareholders passed a resolution requiring the company to begin reporting on “ongoing operational emissions management; asset portfolio resilience to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA’s) scenarios; low-carbon energy research and development (R&D) and investment strategies; relevant strategic key performance indicators (KPIs) and executive incentives; and public policy positions relating to climate change.”

What is unusual about the resolution for BP, a UK-based corporation, is that it is legally binding under British law. Shareholders have often asked US corporations to disclose similar information, and several requests are included in resolutions to be considered at annual meetings in the near future. But in the US these resolutions are not binding, and corporations do everything they can to avoid them.

A growing movement

The movement for disclosure is now growing rapidly. Last April we wrote about a group of investors who published a report called Disclosing the Facts: Transparency and Risk in Hydraulic Fracturing Operations that documented the lack of transparency of oil and gas companies with regard to the impact of their operations on the environment.

It’s unclear how the SEC will respond to the letters, or how quickly it might act if it agrees that more disclosure is warranted.” The SEC could act quickly here if it wanted to,” said Jim Coburn of Ceres, an advocacy organization for sustainable environmental leadership. “We would love the SEC to really embrace the concept of climate risk, and to acknowledge that, apart from what happens in Paris [on a climate treaty], there’s a trend toward low-carbon economies that’s picking up speed.”

;>>>>>>>>>>>>

Here’s a link to the 2013 report that was published by Richard Liroff’s group at Investors Environmental Health Network……

“Disclosing the Facts: The Transparency and Risks of the Hydraulic Fracturing Operations

http://disclosingthefacts.org/report/DisclosingTheFacts_2013.pdf

Some information and pictures are from the WV Host Farms Program, i.e. pages 15, 22, 25, 26, 27, 30. Some other photos are from Ed Wade /Wetzel Co. Action Group, EcoWatch, Earthworks, etc.

Colorado Films Expose Fracking and Promise of Renewable Energy

Duane Nichols — Tue, 27 May 2014 10:41:24 +0000

Documentary Fracking Films

‘Dear Governor Hickenlooper’ Film Exposes Detriments of Fracking and Promise of Renewable Energy

From Frack Free Colorado & Protect Our Colorado, EcoWatch.com, May 21, 2014

Dear Governor Hickenlooper, a collection of documentary films directed by a variety of Colorado filmmakers provides a new perspectives on fracking and clean energy through the eyes of scientists, entrepreneurs, artists and families. The film, addressed to Colorado’s governor, premiers at Mountainfilm in Telluride on Memorial Day weekend.

Mountainfilm in Telluride, has screened a number of important and memorable environmental documentaries such as Gasland I and Gasland Part II, Bag It, The Cove and Who Killed The Electric Car. Dear Governor Hickenlooper introduces audiences to an ex-gas worker turned whistle blower, Aaron Milton; Cornell’s Professor of Engineering, Anthony Ingraffea, who sheds new light on gas well failures; Dr. Theo Colburn on how fracking affects our children’s health; a family whose dreams are broken when the gas company moves in next door. Shane Davis, AKA “The Fractivist,” is Dear Governor Hickenlooper’s protagonist, taking the audience from one story to the next while elucidating well site visits and statistics from the Colorado Oil and Gas Commission’s own accident data.

“With 52,000 active wells in Colorado and 3,000-4,000 more coming on line every year, the stories of how fracking is impacting real people’s lives across the state are unfolding daily,” Stash Wislocki, the director of Dear Governor Hickenlooper. “We wanted to unleash the creativity of citizens and filmmakers from Denver to Durango and beyond to bring these stories and new science to light.”

Dear Governor Hickenlooper was inspired by Jon Bowermaster’s film, Dear Governor Cuomo, a film about a concert event staged at the New York capital by dozens of celebrities and musicians to keep New York’s moratorium on fracking in place. So far, their efforts have been successful.

Dear Governor Cuomo was screened at Mountainfilm and festival director David Holbrooke was inspired to jumpstart a film in Colorado. “I believe in the power of film and strong storytelling to create change and hope this documentary will have that effect here in Colorado as well as other states,” said Holbrooke.

Fracking, or hydraulic fracturing, uses 1 to 8 million gallons of water and up to 40,000 gallons of toxic chemicals per well. Each well can be fracked up to 16 times. There are 52,000 active wells in Colorado with 3,000-4,000 additional wells permitted each year. The huge volume of water being used and permanently removed from the ecosystem due to chemical and radioactive contamination is pitting the oil and gas industry against farmers and concerned citizens. In addition, fracking is affecting air quality. Recent studies have shown that in rural areas across Colorado and Wyoming, ground level ozone near fracking sites is higher than ozone levels in downtown Los Angeles.

Another study by the Colorado School of Public Health shows that people living within a half mile of a fracking site have an elevated risk of cancer. Further, Cornell’s Dr. Anthony Ingraffea co-authored a study showing how the high methane leakage rates from fracking operations contribute more to global warming than the carbon equivalent emissions from burning coal. The science is out: fracking is detrimental to our health and environment and it needs to stop.

The film also emphasizes on Colorado’s renewable energy potential, and examines the reasons renewable energy development in the state and country isn’t on-par with many countries in Europe that get 50 to 80 percent of their power from renewable sources today.

“When I talk to experts like Stanford’s Dr. Mark Jacobson, who is featured in Dear Governor Hickenlooper, about the fact that it is possible, today, to be powered 100 percent by renewable energy, but we simply lack the political will to do so, I can’t help but ask this question,” said Allison Wolff, producer of Dear Governor Hickenlooper. “Why would we permanently poison our water, our air and our communities for the short-term gain of a handful of oil companies and politicians when it is possible to have clean energy right now?”

The makers of Dear Governor Hickenlooper are closely aligned with grassroots organizations across the state that successfully put initiatives on the ballot in 2012 and 2013 to ban or put moratoria on fracking. These groups will be organizing screenings of Dear Governor Hickenlooper throughout the summer and fall in cities and towns throughout Colorado, leading up to 2014 elections when there are likely to be new fracking- and renewable energy-related state-wide initiatives on the ballot.

Earthquake of Magnitude 4.2 Apparently Due to Injection Well in Kansas

Duane Nichols — Tue, 07 Jan 2014 14:43:52 +0000

Earthquake: 12-16-13

.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Earthquake of 4.2 magnitude in fracking region

From the Posting by Michael Janitch on December 16, 2013

Kansas, which not normally very seismically active, is showing signs of the surrounding pressure building in Oklahoma and Texas.

On December 16th 2013, a 4.2 magnitude event struck directly near a KANSAS injection well. This current earthquake falling across the border from Oklahoma, happening just 0.3 miles away from the nearest well head.

For Kansas (and the midwest USA), this is noteworthy. Now we’ve seen movement across the ENTIRE craton edge. (The “craton” is the border of the bedrock [basement rock] of the major portion of North America, along the west and south.)

The movement began on the West Coast (5.5M off the coast of Oregon on December 2), followed by an earthquake swarm in Oklahoma / Texas (December 5th – 7th), followed by a Yellowstone earthquake swarm (December 9), followed by a fracking earthquake at the Colorado New Mexico border (December 10th) , followed by a Eastern Craton edge earthquake at the Tennessee Georgia border (December 10th), followed by a Northeast Craton edge quake in Southeast Canada (December 11th), finally followed by this Kansas 4.2M event today (December 16th).

Be prepared for additional movement in nearby adjacent areas, near term.

Click to view full size:

http://earthquake.usgs.gov/earthquakes/eventpage/usc000llhu#summary

Location

37.124°N 97.781°W depth=5.0km (3.1mi)

__________

Here are all the past “sincedutch” posts on the topic of fracking induced earthquakes:

http://sincedutch.wordpress.com/?s=frack&submit=Search

__________

This was expected to occur, read this post here (watch the video) to see why it was expected.

Oklahoma / Texas fracking earthquake swarm (December 2013):

http://sincedutch.wordpress.com/2013/12/07/1272013-oklahoma-4-5m-fracking-earthquake-one-well-surrounded-by-several-quakes/

Yellowstone earthquake swarm (December 2013):

http://sincedutch.wordpress.com/2013/12/07/1272013-oklahoma-4-5m-fracking-earthquake-one-well-surrounded-by-several-quakes/
__________

Shell C.E.O. Peter Voser Warns Europe to ‘Stay Competitive’

Duane Nichols — Fri, 14 Jun 2013 12:52:11 +0000

Shell C.E.O. Peter Voser Warns Europe to ‘Stay Competitive’

From Report by John Moylan, UK – BBC, June 6, 2013

The head of oil giant Shell has told the BBC that Europe faces a growing struggle to compete with the US economy. Royal Dutch Shell’s chief executive Peter Voser told the BBC’s John Moylan that the challenge in Europe was “to stay competitive”.

Cheap energy released by the process of fracking has revolutionised the US energy market. Gas and oil discoveries in shale rock have led to a boom in gas and oil production in recent years dramatically reducing gas prices.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

UK Shale Gas Bonanza ‘Not Assured’

From Article By Roger Harrabin, UK – BBC, April 26, 2013

Shale gas possibility: Will the UK’s energy strategy follow the US?

Shale gas in the UK could help secure domestic energy supplies but may not bring down prices, Members of Parliament (MPs) report.

The US boom in shale gas has brought energy prices tumbling and revitalised heavy industry, but the Energy and Climate Change Committee warns conditions are different in Britain.

The MPs say the UK’s shale gas developers will face technological uncertainties with different geology. And public opinion may also be more sceptical, they add. The UK is a more densely populated landscape, and shale gas operations will be closer to settlements as a consequence.

What is more, the extent of recoverable resources in the UK is also unknown, so the report concludes that it is too soon to say whether shale gas will achieve US-style levels of success.

Tony Bosworth, from Friends of the Earth, responded: “This does little to back the case for a UK shale gas revolution.”Fracking is dirty and unnecessary – it’s little wonder so many communities are in opposition. We should be building an affordable power system based on our abundant clean energy from the wind, waves and sun.”

A Government that Owes no Duty of Care to Its Land

S. Tom Bond — Thu, 14 Feb 2013 17:55:21 +0000

Alberta Province

The Canadian Province of Alberta vs. Resident Canadian Jessica Ernst

By S. Thomas Bond, Resident Farmer, Lewis County, WV

Many of the readers of FrackCheckWV will be familiar with the extended legal fight of Canadian Jessica Ernst against the driller Encana and the corporate support from the Energy Resources Conservation Board in Alberta.

It started with a $33,000,000 lawsuit which effectively puts hydraulic fracturing on pubic trial. The suit alleges Encana drilled and fracked shallow wells between 2001 and 2004 near Rosebud, Alberta.

In addition to being a substantial landowner, Ms. Ernst is a petroleum geologist and a long-time employee of the petroleum industry. The claim was originally filed in 2007. Instead of upholding its own policies and investigating the contamination, the ERCB then violated Ernst’s rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms by banishing the landowner from the board’s investigation and complaint process.

The court called for Ernst’s lawyers to rewrite the original claim that Alberta’s two key groundwater regulators, Alberta Environment and the Energy Resources Conservation Board, “failed to follow the investigation and enforcement processes that they had established and publicized.” The judge required Ms. Ernsts lawyers to file a new, briefer claim.

Why the establishment is upset is explained by Murray Klippenstein, her Toronto lawyer. “What the Ernst claim is saying to the Canadian public is that groundwater contamination by shallow hydraulic fracturing happens.” Our readers will understand what that means for the often repeated phrase “There has never been a proven claim that fracking has destroyed well water.”

The current phase of the dispute began January 13. In the course of a conversation Ms. Ernst casually mentioned a terrorist, Lebo Ludwig, so the board marked her a terrorist too, and would not communicate with her over a year. Now the board is saying it owes “no duty of care” to protect groundwater from hydraulic fracturing and that a regulator can violate the basic rights of citizens if it regards them as an “eco-terrorist.” The land and the neighbors are ignored.

Andrew Nikiforuk, in the article here, relates the following about the case “Neither Encana nor the ERCB have yet filed statements of defence on incidents that took place nine years ago. At the time industry drilled and fracked thousands of shallow wells in a coal formation in central Alberta resulting in scores of groundwater complaints, protests and public meetings.

“Encana, whose CEO Randy Eresman abruptly resigned last week, is no stranger to controversy. The company, which is struggling with debt and an over-reliance on controversial shale gas production, remains the subject of a major U.S. government groundwater study in Pavillion, Wyoming, that has linked hydraulic fracturing to aquifer contamination.

“Michigan authorities are also investigating the company for allegedly colluding with Chesapeake Energy to keep land prices low. Encana, the target of a mysterious bombing campaign in northern B.C. in 2008, also received record fines from Colorado’s Oil and Gas Commission for contaminating water in 2004.”

Further, “Several recent court decisions also show that ERCB has a history of not upholding its own laws. “In 2010 the Royal Society of Canada, the nation’s top scientific organization, criticized the board for 2007 incident in which the regulator spied on landowners and damaged ‘its credibility as independent quasi-judicial board.’”

For a decade Ms. Ernst has been an outspoken opponent of fracking, speaking widely in Canada, the U. S. and Europe, and keeping a blog on the internet, even appearing in National Geographic News. She won the UNANIMA International Woman of Courage award October of 2011. It reads in part “one who embodies those qualities which we believe essential for the advancement of women everywhere – solidarity, a passion for human rights, commitment, and courage in the face of power which threatens life.”

For more you can read here as well as her blog here .

And see videos here and here. The later is really good, but runs three-quarters of an hour.

Fracking Centers at Universities Cause More Problems Than They Solve

Duane Nichols — Wed, 29 Aug 2012 09:36:39 +0000

: Penn State University

Let’s look at the “centers on fracking” at SUNY-Buffalo, the University of Texas, Penn State University, Ohio State University, and West Virginia University. While the specific mission for each is somewhat unique, they are intended to (1) bring in money from outside the schools, (2) provide a clearinghouse for accurate information, and (3) bring praise on their schools. Doing university research on the full drilling & fracking process is not really practical but some limited aspects could be studied. The implication in each case is that fracking is good, so let’s spread the good word; that maybe it could be done better, so will someone tell us how. We can get money for this!

State University of New York (SUNY) at Buffalo faculty are seeking more information on industry ties to an institute created to study fracking for natural gas. A group of 83 professors and staff have requested documents on the founding and funding of the school’s Shale Resources and Society Institute, according to an August 23 “open letter” to the university administration.

The institute released a report in May that didn’t acknowledge “long-term” ties by its authors to the gas industry while it seeks more than $1 million in corporate funding.

“A number of questions have been raised about whether the institute was really intended to provide independent academic inquiry,” according to the faculty members’ letter. “Only complete transparency can dispel the shadow now cast over UB.”

In April, the newly formed Shale Resources and Society Institute issued a report that found drillers in Pennsylvania had reduced by half the rate of blowouts, spills and water contamination since 2008. Potential environmental problems could be “entirely avoided or mitigated” under New York’s proposed rules, according to the shale institute’s report. The Public Accountability Initiative, a Buffalo nonprofit that focuses on corruption in business and government, said the report contained errors and didn’t acknowledge “extensive ties” by its authors to the gas industry.

Last month, the University of Texas at Austin announced it would convene a panel of independent experts to review its February study on gas fracking after reports that the professor who led the study is on the board of a gas drilling company.

Charles Groat, associate director of the university’s Energy Institute and former Director of the U.S. Geological Survey, proposed the study, selected the researchers, edited its summary and presented it to the American Association for the Advancement of Science on February 16th.

Groat also sits on the board of Plains Exploration & Production Co., a relationship he didn’t disclose in the report or to his boss. Company filings show that in 2011 he received more than $400,000 in compensation from the Houston-based company, which has fracking operations in Texas.

The university announced August 14 that Norman Augustine, former chief executive officer of defense contractor Lockheed Martin Corp., will lead the review panel. Augustine is also a former board member at the oil and gas producer ConocoPhillips.

Kevin Connor, president of the Public Accountability Initiative, said Augustine’s ties to the oil industry raise questions about the panel’s independence. Augustine over almost 20 years received “millions of dollars” in stock and compensation from ConocoPhillips, according to Connor. “It is extremely troubling that the university chose an energy industry insider to chair the panel.”

Pennsylvania State University now requires faculty research to be submitted to university officials before it is published, according to Michael Arthur, co-director of the school’s Marcellus Center for Outreach and Research (MCOR). A 2009 report on the economic impact of gas drilling in Pennsylvania’s portion of the Marcellus shale was released without disclosing industry funding.

The MCOR is Penn State’s education and research initiative on shale gas recovery and use. MCOR is internally funded by the College of Agricultural Sciences, the College of Earth and Mineral Sciences, Penn State Institutes of Energy and the Environment and Penn State Outreach, according to their web-site. Obviously, this doesn’t reveal the root source of the funding.

Jeff Daniels is Co-director for The Ohio State University Subsurface Energy Resource Center (SERC). SERC was opened in September 2011, to cover all aspects of the industry – geologic, economic, public health, environmental, outreach and education in communities impacted, policy making. But, as a “resource center”, the intention apparently is to provide accurate information to the public, with some 70 affiliated faculty participants. Professor Daniels is a geophysicist doing research on carbon dioxide sequestration.

On February 24^th, a member of the West Virginia University Board of Governors expressed concerns about a plan for a Marcellus shale center at WVU. Charles Vest said that he wanted assurances that conflicts of interest would be avoided in such a center, as proposed by the WV Legislature in Senate Bill 522. Vest was formerly president of M.I.T. and now President of the National Academy of Engineering in Washington, DC.

The Senate Bill 522 would create the WVU Shale Research, Education, Policy and Economic Development Center. It had already cleared the House and Senate education committees and was headed to the finance committees. WVU President James Clements agreed, saying that while he’s proud of the work scientists do and eager to see research grow, firewalls must be created and conflicts avoided.

On July 25^th, the Morgantown Dominion Post reported that the WV Legislature held discussions on the proposed shale center bill. Sen. Ronald Miller, D-Greenbrier: “Are we going to focus on fixing every center in West Virginia or just this one?” Bill Hutchens, WVU’s general counsel said a dream project for the research center was put on hold by the recent dive in natural gas prices — but he’s working to get it going again. WVU wants to work with an operator to drill a horizontal well on WVU land. It would be a working well, generating money for the operator. But it would also be a research well, with every bit of data from the first turn of dirt through drilling and production and on being shared to advance knowledge in the field.

[A dream project indeed. Maybe a Marcellus well could be put on the University farm, within elbow reach for the health professionals of the WVU Medical Center and the Monongahela General Hospital. I understand that some of the drilling/fracking companies will replace the roads after they are torn up. DGN]

Commentary: Fracking is Far Too Important to Foul Up

Duane Nichols — Sat, 25 Aug 2012 16:12:10 +0000

: George Mitchell driller/fracker

By Michael Bloomberg and George Mitchell, Washington Post, August 23, 2012

In Pennsylvania, Ohio, New York and even Texas, there is a fundamental debate over “fracking” — the hydraulic fracturing of shale rock that, together with horizontal drilling, unleashes abundant natural gas. Mostly, it’s the loud voices at the extremes who are dominating the debate: those who want either no fracking or no additional regulation of it. As usual, the voices in the sensible center are getting drowned out — with serious repercussions for our country’s future.

The production of shale gas through fracking is the most significant development in the U.S. energy sector in generations, and it affords four major benefits that people on both sides of the debate should welcome.

First, it’s good for consumers’ pocketbooks by helping to reduce energy costs. In the Northeast alone, fracking has helped stimulate major infrastructure investments that will soon bring the first new interstate natural-gas pipeline to New York City in decades.

Second, fracking spurs economic growth by bringing industrial jobs back to the United States — jobs that left several years ago when domestic natural-gas supplies were considered scarce and expensive.

Third, fracking reduces U.S. dependence on coal, which is one of the best things we can do to improve air quality and fight climate change. Modern gas-fired power plants produce effectively no sulfur dioxide or fine particulates and no mercury or toxic ash pollution. They use less water and generate about half the carbon dioxide pollution of coal. The more natural gas we produce, the more quickly we will be able to close dirty-burning coal plants.

Finally, done right, today’s more nimble natural gas plants even allow more renewable power to be integrated into the electricity grid than coal does.

Thanks to fracking, our national production of natural gas is up 25 percent from 2004-06 levels, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration. That’s a major reason domestic energy prices have stabilized — and why the United States’ annual carbon dioxide emissions are at their lowest level in two decades.

Fracking for natural gas can be as good for our environment as it is for our economy and our wallets, but only if done responsibly. The rapid expansion of fracking has invited legitimate concerns about its impact on water, air and climate — concerns that industry has attempted to gloss over.

With so much at stake for the environment, jobs and energy security, it is critical that we make reasoned decisions about how to manage the use of hydraulic fracturing technology.

Several states, including Colorado, New York and Ohio, are taking the lead in this regard, recognizing the need to establish an appropriate framework for regulatory safeguards. It appears that Texas, as the pioneer of hydraulic fracturing in shale formations, is poised to step forward in developing promising state guidelines as well. More such leadership is needed.

To jump-start this effort, each of our foundations will support organizations that seek to work with states and industries to develop common-sense regulations that will protect the environment — and ensure that the industry can thrive.

We will encourage better state regulation of fracking around five key principles:

>> Disclosing all chemicals used in the hydraulic fracturing process;

>> Optimizing rules for well construction and operation;

>> Minimizing water consumption, protecting groundwater and ensuring proper disposal of wastewater;

>> Improving air pollution controls, including capturing leaking methane, a potent greenhouse gas; and

>> Reducing the impact on roads, ecosystems and communities.

The latest research, including peer-reviewed studies out of Carnegie Mellon University and Argonne National Laboratory, suggests that if properly extracted and distributed, the impact of natural gas on the climate is significantly less than that of coal. Safely fracking natural gas can mean healthier communities, a cleaner environment and a reliable domestic energy supply right now.

Some in the industry accept additional safeguards to promote confidence that shale gas development can proceed in a manner that protects natural resources and powers our future. These early leaders should partner with government officials and environmental organizations to ensure that strong and reasonable state regulations are adopted.

We can frack safely if we frack sensibly. That may not make for a great bumper sticker. It does make for good environmental and economic policy.

Michael R. Bloomberg is the mayor of New York and founder of Bloomberg Philanthropies. George P. Mitchell pioneered hydraulic fracturing technologies as chief executive of what was then Mitchell Energy & Development Corp. He is chairman of the Cynthia and George Mitchell Foundation.

Many Shale Drilling Accidents Involve Death and Serious Injuries

Duane Nichols — Sun, 19 Aug 2012 02:51:44 +0000

: Antero Drilling Operation

From Press Reports

In Northcentral WEST VIRGINIA, a spark from a shale drilling operation ignited methane gas several hundred feet under- ground early Friday, sending up a fireball and triggering a blaze that burned for about an hour on the floor of the rig.

Three workers were injured, two seriously enough to be airlifted to a hospital after the fire at the Antero Resources site near Sycamore in Harrison County. The fire was quickly extinguished, and the well pad was in a rural area, so it posed no danger to the public.

Two victims were flown to Ruby Memorial Hospital in Morgantown, said Sgt. Heather Mick of the Harrison County 911 Center. A third was transported by ambulance to the hospital in Clarksburg.

Their conditions weren’t immediately available, but state Department of Environmental Protection spokesman Tom Aluise said the one had returned to the job site by 9 a.m.

Workers were in the early stages of drilling a Marcellus shale gas well, Aluise said. The drill was about 400 feet deep when they began to withdraw it, creating a spark that ignited the methane. That created more of a fireball than an explosion, he said.

The accident happened at the Cottrill No. 3 well on Antero’s Southern pad, and Aluise said the crew doing the work was with Hall Drilling LLC of Ellenboro.

Aluise said Antero voluntarily shut down the operation, and a DEP investigation is under way. The rig was damaged badly enough that a new one may need to be brought in “if and when they resume drilling.”

In June, another Antero drilling operation triggered several backyard geysers when workers struck an aquifer in the Sardis area and inadvertently re-pressurized a handful of old water wells. Emergency management officials and residents said some were 10- to 12-feet high.

There was no interior damage in the affected homes. The residents’ wells had long been disconnected from indoor plumbing because their homes are on a public water supply.

On July 31, the DEP ordered Antero to provide a detailed incident report, including a chart outlining the pressures involved, a list of the water wells that were affected and the current status of those wells. The DEP also wants pre- and post-water analyses for each of those wells, along with a map showing their locations in relation to the well pad.

In COLORADO this week, one worker was killed and three others were injured following an accident at a Colorado gas well operated by Encana Corp. The four men were bringing the well into production when the “high-pressure gas release” took place, according to Encana spokesman Doug Hock.

There was no explosion or fire, and both internal and external investigations have been launched, Hock said. He said this is the first fatality at an Encana operation. We had a very good record and again that’s why we want to investigate thoroughly and really understand what happened,” he said.

The well, north of Denver, is located in the Niobrara Shale formation. The man who died and two of the men who were injured were contractors with Castle Rock, Colorado based BGH Gas Test Operating Inc. The third injured man was a lease operator for Encana.

US Shale Gas Boom Drives Cracker Plants & Process Improvements

Duane Nichols — Fri, 03 Aug 2012 20:46:46 +0000

: Chevron Phillips Chemical Plant

US Shale Gas Boom Drives Cracker Plants & Process Improvements

LONDON (ICIS) — The US shale gas boom is helping to drive new developments in technology, Dennis Holtermann, vice president for research and technology at Chevron Phillips Chemical (CPChem), said late on Monday.

New petrochemical projects based on ethane derived from US shale gas are providing new opportunities to improve plant design, he said.

“As we build new plants associated with this new resource, we can further leverage the technology we have. When you’re not building anything, it’s hard to advance technology,” Holtermann said.

“Collectively, this is a huge development for our country in terms of a new untapped resource,” he continued. “It’s a game-changer, particularly in natural gas liquids, which the industry, including CPChem, converts into petrochemicals and further derivatives.”

CPChem, a 50:50 joint venture between US companies Chevron and Phillips 66, plans to build a 1.5m tonne/year ethane cracker at its Cedar Bayou site in Baytown, Texas. It will also construct two polyethylene (PE) plants with a combined 500,000 tonne/year capacity at its Sweeny site in Old Ocean, Texas.

Other chemical companies planning to take advantage of the shale gas boom by building new crackers in the US include ExxonMobil, Shell, Dow Chemical and Formosa Plastics.

Holtermann said CPChem is confident that its integrated cracker and PE project will be the first of these projects to come on stream. “The project is proceeding at a very quick pace, we’ve executed FEED [front-end engineering and design] agreements, the environmental filings are in place and we are targeting full funding in 2013 and start-up in 2017,” he said.

CPChem said in April that it has awarded the FEED agreement for the PE facilities to US-based firm Jacobs Engineering and the FEED agreement for the cracker to fellow US company Shaw Energy & Chemicals.

It is important for CPChem to be first so it can establish its position as a shale gas consumer, because resources could be limited, Holtermann said. “Shale gas is a great game-changer. Therefore, you want to establish your position and get all your long-term contracts in place to ensure profitability.”

The project will allow CPChem to advance its loop slurry PE technology, using the company’s latest catalyst technology developments. Process advancements will help improve operational reliability and safety, reduce costs and decrease the environmental footprint, Holtermann said. These improvements can be achieved, for example, through better heat integration and process simplification, he added.

The company’s on-purpose 1-hexene project at Cedar Bayou will also benefit from technology improvements, Holtermann said. The 250,000 tonne/year project will be more than double the size of CPChem’s joint venture Saudi Polymers 1-hexene plant in Al-Jubail, Saudi Arabia, which is currently in start-up, he said. The Saudi Polymers plant is currently the world’s largest on-purpose 1-hexene plant, he noted.

The 1-hexene project at Cedar Bayou is scheduled to start up in the first quarter of 2014, and will incorporate process design improvements that will reduce by-product formation, improve catalyst efficiency and reduce energy consumption, CPChem said.

The company is also studying a petrochemicals project in Iraq. “We have a non-binding [letter of intent] with the Iraqi ministry to look at an integrated petrochemical complex there,” Holtermann said. He declined to provide further details.

Saudi Company to Start-up New Cracker Complex

LONDON (ICIS) — Saudi Polymers will start up its new cracker and polymers project in Al-Jubail, Saudi Arabia, “in the very near future”, Dennis Holtermann, vice president for research and technology at Chevron Phillips Chemical (CPChem), said late on Monday.

“Mechanical completion was achieved late last year and we’re in the process of starting all the units up,” he said, without providing further details on the timing.

Saudi Polymers, which is 35% owned by CPChem subsidiary Arabian Chevron Phillips Petrochemical (ACP) and 65% by Saudi Arabia’s National Petrochemical (Petrochem), had planned for a first quarter start-up.

The project includes capacities for 1.165m tonnes/year of ethylene, 440,000 tonnes/year of propylene, 1.1m tonnes/year of polyethylene (PE), 400,000 tonnes/year of polypropylene (PP), 200,000 tonnes/year of polystyrene (PS) and 100,000 tonnes/year of 1-hexene.

American Water Works Association Statement on Hydrofracking

Duane Nichols — Fri, 06 Jul 2012 20:35:55 +0000

The American Water Works Association has joined with the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies and the National Association of Water Companies in issuing a joint policy statement on the protection of drinking water supplies from hydraulic fracturing and associated oil and gas development.

The policy statement outlines recommendations to the US Environmental Protection Agency and Congress to protect drinking water supplies through proper oversight of these activities, as well as a set of principles regarding oil and gas development supported by the associations.

Read the complete statement.

Hydraulic Fracturing – Protection of Drinking Water Supplies

The American Water Works Association (AWWA), the Association of Metropolitan Water Agencies (AMWA), and the National Association of Water Companies (NAWC) support legislative and regulatory actions to ensure that oil and gas development receives appropriate oversight. Specifically:

1. EPA should use existing Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) authority to regulate oil and gas well construction and operation, including hydraulic fracturing practices, through the Underground Injection Control (UIC) Program.

2. Congress should remove statutory barriers impeding federal regulation and oversight of oil and gas wells under the SDWA UIC program, particularly wells developed using hydraulic fracturing.

3. EPA should also use existing authority under the Clean Water Act (CWA) to regulate discharges to surface water bodies from oil and gas operations, including the expedited preparation of effluent guidelines under the CWA’s National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) program.

4. In addition, Congress should provide adequate resources to EPA and partner federal agencies necessary to support timely research and regulatory oversight under the SDWA, CWA and other appropriate statutes.

AWWA, AMWA, and NAWC support the following principals regarding oil and gas activities:

1. Wells, particularly those developed using hydraulic fracturing, must be appropriately sited, designed, operated, and closed using sound engineering technologies and practices.

2. The impact of site activities on ground water and surface water potentially affecting quality or availability of water supplies should be actively monitored during operations and after the facility is closed.

3. Oil and gas development activities must be protective of critical water supply infrastructure used for collection, conveyance, treatment, and distribution of drinking water sources and supplies.

4. Oil and gas developers must have a financially sound strategy to pay for management of hazards, such as contamination of water supplies that may occur as a result of site activities and be held responsible for associated hazards arising after extraction activity has ended.

5. Federal programs with relevant regulatory oversight bearing on health, safety, and environmental impacts associated with oil and gas development should clearly describe relevant best-practices to the industry and interested public (e.g., surface water runoff, pipeline safety, hazardous material handling, etc.).

6. Additional federal action should ensure complete and timely disclosure of hydraulic fracturing activities to affected local governments. Notification is critical to addressing community impacts, including mitigating potential implications for drinking water supplies. Drinking water systems need information about the chemicals to be injected in conjunction with hydraulic fracturing activities, as well as the amount and sources of water to be used.

AWWA, AMWA, and NAWC support sound federal energy policies. These policies need not and must not harm our nation’s drinking water supplies. Oil and gas development (including development utilizing hydraulic fracturing) must provide appropriate protection of our nation’s ground water and surface water resources. The federal government must assist states and local governments ensure necessary public health and environmental protections are in place.