What we know about the upcoming vote to decide the fate of fracking in the Delaware River

From an Article by Kathryne Rubright, Pocono Record, February 23, 2021

The Delaware River Basin Commission will vote Thursday on a proposal that would ban high volume hydraulic fracturing, a natural gas extraction process also known as fracking, in the watershed.

The regulations proposed in 2017 would not ban the exportation of water for fracking elsewhere, or the importation of fracking wastewater, but the activities would be subject to DRBC review. Additionally, “new conditions, including stringent treatment and discharge requirements” would be imposed on wastewater, the DRBC said in an FAQ document regarding the proposed regulations.

The basin drains 13,539 square miles, about half of which is in Pennsylvania. This includes all of Bucks, Delaware, Lehigh, Monroe, Montgomery, Northampton, Philadelphia and Pike counties and parts of Berks, Carbon, Chester, Lackawanna, Lancaster, Lebanon, Luzerne, Schuylkill and Wayne counties.

The fracking ban would affect the Pocono region and other northeastern counties sitting entirely or partly over Marcellus Shale: Carbon, Monroe, Lackawanna, Luzerne, Pike, Schuylkill and Wayne.

High volume hydraulic fracturing “presents risks, vulnerabilities and impacts to the quality and quantity of surface and ground water resources,” the DRBC says, citing, among other concerns, the amount of water required to fracture shale and the sometimes-unknown nature of chemicals added to that water.

The Marcellus Shale Coalition, a natural gas industry group, has noted its members disclose chemical information via the registry at fracfocus.org.

Where does fracking stand now?

The DRBC does not have an official moratorium on fracking, but it did vote in 2010 to put off considering well pad dockets until regulations were adopted.

“Since then, the Commission has not received any applications for projects to be conducted on a well pad site – a situation that has sometimes been referred to as a ‘de facto moratorium,’” according to the FAQ.

Who decides this issue?

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf has a seat on the commission, along with Gov. John Carney of Delaware, Gov. Phil Murphy of New Jersey and Gov. Andrew Cuomo of New York, all Democrats.

Brigadier General Thomas J. Tickner, commander and division engineer of the North Atlantic Division of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, is the federal representative.

Wolf, Carney and Murphy have previously expressed support for fully banning fracking in the Delaware River basin. New York has already banned fracking.

From 2019: Gov. Wolf says he supports full fracking ban in Delaware River basin

The Delaware River Frack Ban Coalition is expecting a vote to ban fracking in the basin, but would prefer a fuller measure, saying it has “fiercely opposed the halfway measure of banning fracking but allowing frack wastewater to be dumped in the river and water to be exported and consumed to spur fracking.”

Some landowners in the watershed have questioned the DRBC’s authority to prevent them from profiting from natural gas under their property. The proposed rules note that the commission was given authority to control pollution by the compact that established it in 1961.

How to watch or listen to the meeting —

The meeting will be conducted at 10:30 a.m. Thursday on Zoom at this link: bit.ly/3kffleG. The meeting requires an ID (957 5916 5248) and a passcode (528513).

It will also be livestreamed on the DRBC YouTube channel: bit.ly/3qLZGpZ

Several phone numbers are available for dialing in, including 929-205-6099. See the DRBC’s meeting notice at bit.ly/2ZHzdhb

The meeting does not include time for members of the public to make comments. Public input was gathered at six public hearings in 2018 and through an online submission form.

Shale Condensate aka "Natural Gasoline"

Despite Climate Warnings, New Export Rules Open Crude Oil Floodgates

[Significant yields of shale well “condensate,” that is ultra-light crude hydrocarbons, accompany the crude oil and/or natural gas from many shale formations.]

From an Article by Deirdre Fulton, Common Dreams, December 31, 2014

Opening the door to U.S. crude exports is expected to give relief to some domestic drillers who have been forced to sell their shale oil at a discount of as much as $15 a barrel versus global markets as fast-rising domestic supplies overwhelm local demand.

Despite warnings about how such a move could accelerate climate change, the Obama administration has quietly loosened its regulations on crude oil exports, “opening the floodgates” for the shipment of as much as a million barrels per day of ultra-light crude, also known as condensate, to the rest of the world.

The obscure rule change by the Department of Commerce “will likely please domestic oil drillers, foreign trade partners and some Republicans who have urged Obama to loosen the export ban,” Reuters reports. “The latest measures were wrapped in regulatory jargon and couched by some as a basic clarification of existing rules, but analysts said the message was unambiguous: a green light for any company willing and able to process their light condensate crude through a distillation tower, a simple piece of oilfield kit.”

According to Bloomberg: The guidelines could “open the floodgates to substantial increases in exports,” Citigroup Inc. said in a research note. Total U.S. production of light and ultra-light crude oil now exceeds 3.81 million barrels a day, and exports could reach 1 million barrels daily by the end of 2015, Citi Research said.

…In addition to approving applications, the government also allows companies to “self-certify,” that is, to export their products without seeking the permission if they think the law allows for the exchange.

Officials were quick to point out that most untreated crude is still covered by the existing ban.

“It’s a long way from here to a full repeal of the export ban, and they went out of their way to stipulate that this is not, in their view, crude oil,” Jeff Navin, a former deputy chief of staff at the Energy Department, said in an e-mail to Bloomberg. “But it does show how they’re thinking about exporting at least some of our light products.”

But earlier this year, environmental watchdogs warned that any loosening of the decades-old ban on crude oil exports could lead to the release of billions of tons of additional carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

“Allowing U.S. crude oil exports will result in increased profits that will in turn result in increased oil production,” read a report(pdf) by Oil Change International, Lifting the Ban, Cooking the Climate. “In the midst of President Obama’s ‘All of the Above’ energy strategy, the ban on crude oil exports is one of the few policies in place that effectively limits oil and gas extraction and protects our climate. The Obama Administration and the U.S. Congress must take a stand for the climate and resolve to leave the crude oil export ban intact.”

As Andy Rowell, of Oil Change International, pointed out in October, the U.S. Government Accountability Office hasrecommended against lifting the ban, saying greenhouse gas emissions would rise if the ban was lifted—an outcome with serious implications for the climate and environment.

“It is important to remember what the GAO said last week in its report,” Rowell wrote. “It argued that ‘additional crude oil production may pose risks to the quality and quantity of surface groundwater sources; increase greenhouse gas and other emissions; and increase the risk of spills from crude oil transportation’.”

See also:  www.FrackCheckWV.net

Stop Gas Exports at Cove Point

Protesters call upon President Obama and federal regulators to reject proposed Cove Point facility and halt approvals on all pending liquefied natural gas export terminals nationwide

From an Article of the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, July 14, 2014

WASHINGTON – July 14 – Residents impacted by shale gas infrastructure and their supporters blocked the entrances to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) headquarters today in protest of the proposed Cove Point liquefied natural gas (LNG) export facility and others proposed around the country.

This is the second consecutive day of action to demand that the Obama administration take the voices of impacted communities seriously in the federal regulatory process, and that FERC reject Dominion Resources’ proposed LNG export facility in Cove Point, Maryland, just 50 miles south of the White House on the Chesapeake Bay. Over a thousand people rallied on the National Mall and marched to FERC yesterday despite scorching heat and high humidity.

Protesters linked arms and blocked the main entrance and a secondary entrance of FERC as employees came in to work this morning. A total of 24 people were arrested for the shut down, including participants from Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, North Carolina, Connecticut, and Washington, D.C. The protesters were arrested by Homeland Security police and then turned over to the DC Metropolitan Police for processing. They were charged with “incommoding,” or blocking a public passageway, and are being released with a citation and $50 fine.

“People ask what the connection is between Marcellus Shale and Cove Point,” said arrestee Ann Bristow from Garrett County, Maryland. “One connection is the transportation of this product. Compressor stations have been shown to be one of the most toxic sources of air emissions. Pipelines and compressor stations will only increase with more demand from Cove Point.”

If approved, the Cove Point export facility would be the linchpin tying together communities from northern Pennsylvania to central Virginia to southern Maryland that are struggling for a clean and healthy environment free of fracked gas infrastructure.

Alex Lotorto, a resident of Pike County, Pennsylvania, was among the arrestees. “There is a FERC-permitted natural gas pipeline and compressor station about to be constructed in my hometown of Milford, Pennsylvania. The exhaust is equal to over a 100 diesel school buses idling constantly next to homes where children are sleeping,” said Lotorto. “I’m here to let FERC and the company know what’s waiting for them if the permit is issued.”

Michael Bagdes-Canning from Butler County, Pennsylvania was also arrested in front of FERC’s office. “I’m willing to go to jail because my friend Susan wakes up every morning with headaches from the air she breathes from the Bluestone natural gas processing plant,” said Bagdes-Canning. “I’m willing to go to jail for the dozens of battles we are fighting in Butler County, Pennsylvania; battles that will only intensify if the international market is opened up by export facilities like Cove Point.”

Among the arrested people, their supporters, and the 150,000 people who sent in comments to FERC opposing the Cove Point project, the consensus is clear: Now is the time to stop the pollution of communities dealing with the extraction, transportation, processing and potential export of hydraulically fractured—fracked—natural gas. It’s time to get serious about shifting to clean, jobs-producing, renewable energy.

Karen Leu, a resident of Takoma Park, Maryland, was among the arrestees. “The LNG facility at Cove Point does not speak love to rural communities faced with unhealthy drinking water or a world facing a climate catastrophe,” said Leu. “What will we stand up for if not love?”

###

The Chesapeake Climate Action Network (CCAN) is the first grassroots, nonprofit organization dedicated exclusively to fighting global warming in Maryland, Virginia, and Washington, D.C. Our mission is to build and mobilize a powerful grassroots movement in this unique region that surrounds our nation’s capital to call for state, national and international policies that will put us on a path to climate stability. -

See more here on the big rally in DC this past Sunday, July 13th.

SUMMARY: Sunday Editorial, New York Times, December 15, 2012

Sending U.S. Natural Gas Abroad in LNG Tankers

A new and long-awaited report from the Department of Energy has concluded that the government should quickly begin easing restrictions on the export of natural gas to take advantage of the vast new discoveries of a fuel that only a decade ago was in relatively short supply in this country.

Exporting natural gas is a controversial issue, with powerful forces on both sides. But we are persuaded by the report’s core finding that the benefits of selling gas to other countries would more than offset the modestly negative impact of higher prices for domestic users of the fuel.

The main opposition comes from chemical and fertilizer companies that are big users of natural gas, and from consumers who fear higher prices. With more gas headed to foreign shores, domestic supplies of the fuel are expected to fall, driving up its price. But prices would still be well below their 2008 levels, and they would rise only gradually, over the course of several years.

A second objection comes mainly from some environmental groups that regard fracturing, the technique used to extract gas from deep shale formations, as environmentally dangerous. These concerns are best addressed by much tighter regulation of gas production, not by restricting exports.

There is no certainty that the Obama administration will approve more than a few new liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals, which take several years to build. But 15 new terminals have been proposed by the industry. Of these, four are scheduled to receive regulatory decisions in 2013. At the very least the administration should give the green light to the four that are pending and accelerate the review process for the rest.

______________________

COMMENTARY by John Cobb, Resident Of Central WV

From my viewpoint here in Ireland, West Virginia, this is all we need across West Virginia and it certainly will be an opening of the flood gates on Marcellus Drilling if our nation’s natural gas is shipped overseas.

Of course, this would be a good thing. According to the gasologists, the price is now artificially depressed in the US. The gas interests would be able to make more money by selling gas to Europe, etc., where the price is set by the market.
 
I know the effect would be to really juice the gas interests; and of course nothing juices businessmen and investors like higher and bigger profits. Drilling and exporting would skyrocket, and the reality or not of the actual gas resources of the U. S. would be determined by the market.
 
The US economy has been hopping from one bubble to the next. No need to list them again. The impacts of each bubble popping gets bigger from bubble to bubble. The “gas bubble”, however, is right there at the heart of the matter: energy is the bloodstream of the economy. A big bubble in the bloodstream is a distinct no no. The sooner the truth of the gas bubble is out, the better. Let ‘er rip!
 
P. S. For those of us who are worried about the environment, this “open the valve wide” approach should supposedly cause the least overall damage. We all know that the inexorable force of money tends to grind on glacier-like, and works its mayhem (when its effect is mayhem) best with the least attention.
 
The attention given gas these days is sub-critical. The current boosterism is enough to attract capital, and gas does flow. The effect on an actual solution of the energy problem becomes a reprise of that frog in the pan of water on the stove: by the time the amphibian realizes its predicament, it lacks the energy to save itself.
 
Pulling out the stops will get everybody with a backyard involved, hopely before their backyards look like the backyard of the farm that my mother grew up on in SW Pennsylvania’s coal country. I fear that little by little, we will see our environment and our backyards slip away.
 
Our backyards are sadly so far away from the folks that make the decisions. While the greenness of our own personal backyards belie the problem. Now unfortunately, it looks like the Gas Industry is working to pull out all the stops on Marcellus Drilling.
 
John Cobb, Ireland, Lewis County, WV