Pennsylvania

Energy. Environment. Economy.

Pipelines: The new battleground over fracking

Crews from weld a pipeline connecting to a natural gas well in the Loyalsock State Forest.

Lindsay Lazarski / WHYY

Crews weld a pipeline connecting to a natural gas well in the Loyalsock State Forest.

Forget the battles over the Keystone XL. Pipeline wars are now raging in Pennsylvania, where production is high and pipeline capacity is low. Marcellus Shale gas has the potential to alter the landscape of the global energy market. But right now a shortage of pipelines to get gas from the gas fields to consumers has energy companies eager to dig new trenches.  And activists opposed to more drilling see pipeline proposals as the new battleground over fracking.

Pennsylvania’s pipeline building boom could expand the nations’ and perhaps the world’s, supply of natural gas. And this boom includes an estimated 4,600 miles of new interstate pipes, tunneling under Pennsylvania’s farms, wetlands, waterways, and backyards. That’s on top of 6800 miles of existing interstate natural gas pipes, according to the Energy Information Administration.

Drillers eager to reach new markets are frustrated right now, because there’s just not enough room in the current pipeline system to transport their gas beyond regional markets.

That gas languishes and it builds up and now that price will drop,” said Rob Boulware, a spokesman for Seneca Resources.

Today, Marcellus Shale gas sold at less than $2/MMBtu, which is about a dollar lower than gas sold in other parts of the country.

A pipeline construction site in Northeast Pennsylvania.

Kim Paynter / WHYY

A pipeline construction site in Northeast Pennsylvania.

While producers and utilities try to expand their infrastructure, the pipeline construction boom has run up against opposition in small towns and rural areas where environmentalists and residents are pushing back. Some opponents simply don’t want their land disturbed, or taken by eminent domain. But other activists see pipelines as part of a larger mission to end drilling altogether.

“The pipelines are being built in order to induce more drilling and fracking,” said Maya van Rossum with the Delaware Riverkeeper Network. “And of course more drilling and fracking results in the need for more pipelines. So the two are inextricably intertwined and if you oppose one, truthfully, you have to oppose the other.”

Too many molecules, too little pipe

Luke Jackson is an analyst with Bentek Energy, a firm that specializes in natural gas. Jackson says that just 5 years ago, the Marcellus Shale, which is made up primarily of Pennsylvania’s gas fields was producing two billion cubic feet of gas a day. Today that’s jumped to 19 billion cubic feet every day. And he predicts, in just 4 years, there will be 30 billion cubic feet of gas coming out of the region. That’s a 1400 percentage rise in just 10 years.

“There’s so [many] molecules out there, whether its gas, whether its oil, whether it’s natural gas liquids, you just have a ton of supply on the market at the moment,” said Jackson.

A clearing shows the site of a pipeline, one of many running beneath Pennsylvania's farms, forests and waterways.

Kim Paynter / WHYY

A clearing shows the site of a pipeline, one of many running beneath Pennsylvania's farms, forests and waterways.

And that massive supply is too much for the current system of pipelines to carry. There’s a traffic jam of gas molecules in the pipeline system.

Seneca Resources is a natural gas driller, one of the many trying to expand their number of customers by delivering gas to new markets. Their spokesman Rob Boulware says demand for new pipes to carry all that gas, and to ease the traffic jam, are so high, the new routes for that gas is already sold out. And some of those pipelines won’t come online for another couple of years.

“Think of it like a turnpike that no one is driving on but people are lined up at the gate to go through it,” said Boulware.

Seneca Resources is banking on a newly approved pipeline that will carry its gas up through New York, and then further into Canada, where it could fetch a higher price. And this is a complete reversal from five years ago, when the eastern part of the U.S. was importing Canadian gas. Several older pipelines, built decades ago to bring natural gas from the Gulf of Mexico up to the northeast have reversed their flow. Today, instead of flowing from the south, the gas flows from the Marcellus region in Pennsylvania down, as far away as Florida, and west to Chicago. Pennsylvania already has about 6,800 miles of existing pipelines. But these pipes still are not enough to handle all of the state’s gas.

loyalsock20

Lindsay Lazarski / WHYY

“When you look at the [gas production] averages in the southwestern corner and the average daily production in the northeastern part of Pennsylvania, you see these wells are blowing at incredible numbers,” said Seneca’s Boulware. “And if you have ten of those wells on a pad then you’re really sending a lot of gas into the market or have the potential to.”

Some of these Pennsylvania wells are producing 50 times more gas than a conventional well produced in the state only ten years ago. So plans for new pipelines are in the works to ship natural gas from Northeast Pennsylvania down to an export terminal in Maryland. And from there, Pennsylvania’s gas would ship to Japan, where customers are willing to pay four times the current price.

New pipelines will also be taking the gas up to New York and Boston, where residential customers pay more than those in Pennsylvania. Some of that Marcellus gas could get shipped overseas through a planned export facility in Nova Scotia.

Turning Philly into an “energy hub”

There’s also a plan by business leaders to build a pipeline from northeast Pennsylvania down to Philadelphia to supply a potential manufacturing renaissance in the city.

Environmentalists are urging the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to halt a controversial pipeline project in Northeast Pennsylvania. They staged a protest outside of Corps headquarters in Philadelphia on Tuesday.

Susan Phillips / StateImpact Pennsylvania

Environmentalists in downtown Philadelphia urged the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to halt a controversial pipeline project in Northeast Pennsylvania.

The guy behind that plan is Phil Rinaldi. He’s the CEO of Philadelphia Energy Solutions, which took over some refining operations several years ago in the city. Rinaldi sits on an ad hoc committee trying to turn Philadelphia into an energy “hub” – a place where brokers could haggle over the price of natural gas. And Rinaldi has an even grander idea. He wants the city to revive its past industrial might by attracting large factories that would use the state’s cheap gas to churn out products.

But here’s the problem, when Rinaldi called the city’s gas utility, Philadelphia Gas Works, to ask how much cheap Pennsylvania-made shale gas he could rely on, he didn’t get the answer he expected.

“The answer was an unequivocal none,” said Rinaldi. “You understand none. So that’s the status in Philadelphia. All of the delivery systems are absolutely full. The gas is abundant and we can’t get it because the highways are clogged.”

Winners and Losers in the pipeline battle

For the most part, the growth in new natural gas markets is with the kind of commercial clients that Rinaldi is trying to lure to Philadelphia. Those include manufacturers and electric power plants. Prices have been trending down overall. But the average residential consumer of natural gas has not seen a bonanza. Those who have, are those who have switched from oil heat to natural gas.

Dave and Nichole Kang did just that last year and they say it’s made a big difference, especially with a new baby.

Dave and Nichole Kang reduced their heating bills from $2000 a year to $500 after switching from oil to natural gas.

Susan Phillips / StateImpact Pennsylvania

Dave and Nichole Kang reduced their heating bills from $2000 a year to $500 after switching from oil to natural gas.

“It’s a huge burden off,” said Dave Kang. “It’s relatively easier to budget for and we definitely have more money to put elsewhere.”

The Kangs reduced their yearly bill from about $2000 down to about $500, which has changed how they heat their home.

“I don’t think there’s any hesitation now to just be like, oh turn the heat up,” said Kang. “And its ok, its no big deal.”

But environmentalists say residential customers like the Kangs aren’t the ones that will actually benefit. The Delaware Riverkeeper Network’s Maya van Rossum says that’s because some of the new pipelines will ship the gas to more lucrative markets abroad.

“It really is about creating more gas that can be exported overseas to foreign nations because the drilling companies can sell this gas at three or four times the amount in other countries.”

The arbiter in these pipeline disputes is the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, or FERC. The FERC chairman Cheryl LaFleur recently spoke at the National Press Club in Washington in support of pipeline expansion. LaFleur says natural gas is needed to replace coal in order for the U.S. to meet its climate goals. But LaFleur knows that pipelines have become a battle zone.

“Pipelines are facing unprecedented opposition from local and national groups including environmental groups,” said LaFleur.

Comments

  • Tom Servo

    Does anyone remember what the word Luddite means?

  • Joe G

    In pipeline safety
    Fiber Optic cables laid beside the pipeline can be used to mitigate items 2 and 3. They can detect temperature changes which indicate leaks and sense acoustically (seismic) people digging or the hiss of a leak. Why is this technology not being implemented? Thge price is very low especially when compared to the consequences.

  • Al Neuman

    This gas will supply needs here in the US first, no matter what the cost for it is overseas. Shale gas is throughout most of the world from over 100 countries, many who are just beginning the drill horizontal shale wells, we are not the only supplier. Competition from other countries will determine our prices to countries like Japan, with liquefying natural gas to ship it, costs will climb. Shipping LNG will never be as easy and cheap as supplying it to towns here in the USA . Russia already has about 10X more than we do, and they are alot closer to Japan!
    No matter where we ship Natural Gas, don’t these anti-gas/antifossil-fuelers realize natural gas has already helped our environment? They constantly whine about sending gas overseas, helping the WORLD’s environment is really what we would like to see isn’t it?

    • hmontaigne

      Yes, by the use of solar, wind, geothermal and other forms of alternative energy. Not with more fossil fuels. They are what has brought us to this pass, to climate change. It’s past time to move on to cleaner energy.

      • AlSever

        Now that we have successfully “Saved the Whales” , it’s time to start using Whale oil again! Definitely a renewable energy source and every whale removed will make room for the water being produced by melting glaciers in Greenland.

      • Al Neuman

        Your reply is an example of the enviro-activists foolish belief’s. Here are a few pages of many, what shows how mis-informed you people are.
        http://www.treehugger.com/renewable-energy/solar-panel-toxic-manufacturing-byproducts-product-disposal-needs-greater-oversight-report-urges.html

        http://www.kcet.org/news/redefine/rewire/solar/photovoltaic-pv/solar-powers-toxic-footprint.html

        http://cleantechnica.com/2009/01/14/danger-solar-panels-can-be-hazardous-to-your-health/

        Windmills aren’t so good either,

        http://winddturbin.com/destruction-of-wind-turbines/

        http://wind-power-problems.org/

        http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/06/business/energy-environment/06noise.html?_r=0

        These two are pretty much worthless to supply enough power, especially since they only supply when the sun shines and the wind blows. Geothermal is great, but where is enough of it? Iceland? That needs alot of work and will be much longer.

        Natural Gas, = #1 !

        • paulroden

          You forgot to factor in energy conservation, mass transit, hydroelectric, hydrogen fuel cell, biomass fuels, iron chromium flux batteries, pumped storage, tidal, geothermal and the use of smart grid technology. The dirty energy industry is subsidized by the taxpayers. They are blocking the use of roof top solar and wind power, because it will cut into their profits and political power. I thought the energy industry believed in a competitive “free market?” So you don’t want other co-ops, homeowners and small businesses using their roof tops and property to sell electricity? We need energy for transportation, heat, hot water and for electricity. A more dynamic and versatile supply of sources will make the system more resilient, interdependent and more competitive in the market place. As well as more environmentally sustainable. Decentralized production of energy is a threat to the status quo.

          • Al Neuman

            WORTHLESS!

      • 40yeargeologist

        There is no “green energy” that can power this world yet and we were brought to where we are, the greatest, cleanest, most advanced country in the world because of fossil fuels. We are safer, warmer, cooler, healthier, because of fossil fuels.

        • Ann DeLucia

          The US is listed 39th on the list of countries with the cleanest, greenest environment. Get your facts straight. http://www.forbes.com/2009/04/15/worlds-cleanest-countries-business-energy-clean-countries.html

        • paulroden

          Not true. Go to thesoultionsproject.org and rmi.org. Fracking is too dangerous, too expensive and totally unnecessary for our energy needs. The only thing we are lacking is the political will because the dirty energy industry has bought our elected leaders and has brainwashed the public to believe that we need natural gas as a “transition fuel” or “bridge fuel” and that fracking is “safe” “clean.” and the drillers are “environmentally responsible” when that is a lie.

          • Al Neuman

            Did you ever notice that these two pages have ‘DONATE’ links on them, as well as most any you continuously seem to advertise?
            Who’s trying to ‘brainwash’ the public? Who’s really the liar?

  • http://flippetyfloppety.blogspot.com/ karen orlando

    First of all it is entertaining that your headline says that pipelines are a “new” battleground over fracking. That is old news. Everything is a new battleground for this movement. Even an LNG import project can become about fracking as evidenced by NYPIRG apparantly deciding to show a film made by Love NY Don’t Frack it Up that hocks a conspiracy theory that an LNG import project proposed for offshore of long island is actually probably an export project.
    http://oracle.newpaltz.edu/the-fracking-fight-wages-on/ One can learn all kinds of things about pipelines these days from the antifracking movement–one of them being that the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission which oversees the siting procedure for them is a “rogue agency”. Maybe one of these days reporters will be able to cover pipeline infrastructure in a way that actually serves the public. I know you can’t actually cover the activists despite being asked to many times. You might consider how many organizations there are misinforming citizens everywhere about proposed pipelines that might run through their areas and that the process involves multiple agencies, law etc that citizens have to navigate without them having to wade through lots of misinformation from antifracking activists as well.

    • kevinzeese

      What makes it new is the unprecedented rapid expansion of pipelines being approved when science tells us it is time to stop building carbon infrastructure — 11,600 miles of new pipelines, https://www.popularresistance.org/out-of-public-glare-massive-pipeline-network-being-built-across-us/

      • 00TATEXAS

        So what climate fanatics uneducated fools who believe what they read on the internet or from morans like ALGORE

        • dick7828

          typical Repuke idiot climate is warming Ihave watched it for 70 years and the glaciers are disappearing I am not a scientist and can not say why but it is happening , but anyone who says it is not is either a fool or a liar

          • Al Neuman

            Is the ‘idiot’ is in your mirror, dick?

            In the past 100 years our planet has grown by about 5 BILLION people. Many events changed our climate, like world wars, hurricanes, droughts and more.

            Fossil fuels may have raised the carbon dioxide, but not the climate. The climate has only raised by .6°C in the past 100 years. It’s gone much higher & lower since the earth was created over 4 billion years ago.

            Natural Gas has helped stop CO² growth. It creates much less than Coal & Oil, and it will continue lowering that the more it is used.

            http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo/ctl/cliihis100.html

          • 40yeargeologist

            In the millions of years this earth has been here you “know” the climate is warming because you have been here for 70? I have been here for almost that long, a geologist for almost 40 and you “know” that global warming exists because you don’t remember it ever being this warm?

          • Al Neuman

            In the past 100 years our planet has grown by about 5 BILLION people. Many events changed our climate, like world wars, hurricanes, droughts and more.

            Fossil fuels may have raised the carbon dioxide, but not the climate. The climate has only raised by .6°C in the past 100 years. It’s gone much higher & lower since the earth was created over 4 billion years ago.

            Natural Gas has helped stop CO² growth. It creates much less than Coal & Oil, and it will continue lowering that the more it is used.

            http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/paleo

          • dick7828

            to geologist I do remember that it was a lot colder through the years and I also remember that some of the dumbest people I have met were college grads I made my money with my brain not a degree or so called connections

          • 40yeargeologist

            And the snow was a lot deeper 50 years ago, I remember walking to school in it. It is not necessary to have a college degree to be smart or successful. I have 4 years of college education and have worked in this industry for the past 38+ years. That should count for something.

      • http://flippetyfloppety.blogspot.com/ karen orlando

        Kevin– first of all I’m not Cuomo or anyone in power so I’m not sure why you would suddenly feel the need to chase me around the internet. Second of all this article is about pipelines being the “new” battleground over fracking which seems untimely to me as that is not exactly news. Third you referred me to an article about oil pipelines. Fourth your comment says “unprecedented rapid expansion of pipelines approved”, then provides a number of new miles of pipe but provides no context as to whether the expansion is rapid or unprecedented or a ratio– like this is about a 4 percent increase in pipeline infrastructure and again the article you referred me to is about oil pipelines not gas.

    • 40yeargeologist

      Amen.

  • JASON

    TAKE THE DOZERS WHILE RUNNING THE PIPELINE AND RUN THE OPPOSING OVER..FRAC ON AMERICA

    • pipeline mike

      I agree whole heartedly

    • mwamov

      I presume you’ve already donated your land to the pipeline companies? Hundreds of landowners are about to have their land taken under eminent domain and dozens of families will actually lose their homes and have to relocate. But yeah, I guess its all in the name of corporate profits, so frack on.

      • 40yeargeologist

        People will not lose their homes, please stop the hype. Not a huge fan of eminent domain but the people will be able to farm or plant on that property and will be remunerated for the leasing of this land. Yes they will not be able to build over it but they will still have the use of it.

        • mwamov

          You are not familiar with the planned route. There are a number of places where it cannot zig-zag around homes and other structures and those structures will be demolished and families will need to relocate.

  • Tom Coppers

    Fracking
    Fluid has caused poisoned ground water flowing through new man made
    cracks in all directions. Up
    to the surface, down and sideways. Coming up in springs, creeks,
    streams and lakes. Gas coming into families’ homes through the faucets
    from their now poisoned wells. Farms without clean water for
    their animals. Families needing to truck in water to bath, drink and
    use. Flowing hazardous chemicals(fracking fluid) poisoning land
    throughout how many miles of ground and surface water from the Gas Well
    Site? Millions of acres of NEW TOXIC WASTE LAND in AMERICA approved by
    corrupt politicians and bribed EPA workers is being created. Lets see
    them drink the contaminated, poisoned water caused by injecting
    hazardous chemicals into the ground. Where are all the Going Green
    People as these millions of acres are being contaminated forever. It
    cannot be cleaned up. The earth and the water flowing through it in
    contact with these hazardous chemicals from 1 foot to 20000 feet down
    will be poisoned forever. The cost of cleaning earth and minerals in
    this amount would be more than can be imagined. Many of the birds, fish
    and animals that consume this water, depending on the amount of
    hazardous chemicals leaked into the pond or stream they drink from, will
    die
    quickly or slowly. Right now Openly in America clean land is being
    poisoned while the Government Regulators, Politicians and citizens
    watch. The current administration said, regarding the Gulf of Mexico
    spill, that non-enforcement of drilling rules was a problem for decades.
    History seems to be repeating itself in the name of greed. All while
    clean, long existing alternatives for energy are ignored or prevented
    from being used. WHY IS DESTROYING AQUIFERS and CLEAN LAND and WATER and
    AIR OK in AMERICA? Are they horizontally drilling under your family’s
    home now to take the natural gas and poison your well water/ground
    water? They can drill from two miles and further away to directly
    underneath your home to poison your family’s well water if your states’
    politicians have voted to allow it…………..PS.-Is the Fracking
    causing Earthquakes? Pumping billions of barrels of Toxic Fluids UNDER
    MASSIVE PRESSURE INTO the GROUND. Could it be figured this may be
    a problem for geology/earthquakes? Also, once the
    natural
    gas is sold overseas and almost
    all the ground water in North Carolina is poisoned, then the residents
    will be dependent on buying water at any price forever to stay alive. Is
    selling drinkable water the hidden agenda? If you live for another 30
    years, you will see the wasteland NC will become. The toxic soup
    springing up from under our feet could happen with any step we take. The
    Aquifers can flow together for hundreds or thousands of miles. It would
    be too late then. North Carolina is not new to allowing industry to
    destroy former clean natural resources. The COASTAL FISHING INDUSTRY WAS
    KILLED after NC permitted 3800 massive open-pit hog waste lagoons
    contaminating the state’s drinking water, polluting its air and streams
    and causing open sores and deformed fish and crabs. The runoff from 19
    million tons of hog waste produced annually in Eastern North Carolina
    from the hog factories has polluted Albemarle Sound, the largest
    freshwater sound in the country, and adjacent
    Pamlico Sound, the largest enclosed saltwater sound. Would you eat
    seafood with open sores and deformations? Also causing Red Tide and
    Pfiesteria. So, they have polluted the large sounds on the coast for
    decades and now they want to poison the Aquifers in North Carolina and
    water in nearby states that share the same ground water? This can
    be stopped. Please call your representatives. The internet can show you
    how many vast communities have poisoned water from Fracking. It’s
    documented. Now they have no clean water. So again, what price will they be charging citizens for clean water to stay alive?

    • 00TATEXAS

      It has never been shown to contaminate one well. most of the people had bad wells to begin with and are trying to blame fracking so they can get a hand out. The chemicals injected into the ground are very minimal and have been exposed in Texas and it was not even a story adfter the stupid people like you saw they amounted to nothing. You have absolutly no idea what you are talking about and should put your foil hat back on.

      • hmontaigne

        You are the one who is wrong. You are wrong about contamination of water and you are wrong about the chemicals being “minimal”. Research a little and you’[ll find the truth, but you won’t find it on Fox or from any of the fake groups set up to spread fracking propaganda..

        • 40yeargeologist

          Drilling gas wells has as much chance to contaminate an auqifer as drilling a water well does.

          • hmontaigne

            Yeah, because when we drilled our new water well, we totally shattered the earth below us with high pressure sandblasting, and we poured deadly toxins and corrosives down in there for good measure. Yeah! Just exactly the same!

          • 40yeargeologist

            Maybe you did. You may have affected the movement and quantity of methane within your reservoir. You also did not cement your thin walled or PVC pipe to keep the aquifer protected so we don’t know what “toxins” you are allowing and lastly, the earth is not “shattered with high pressure sandblasting” and chemicals and materials used are not toxic either.

          • Ann DeLucia

            That’s correct, they cement the wells with cement for protection. We all know that cement doesn’t crack or crumble does it. In order for a well to not leak the toxic chemicals
            they inject into the earth the well casings (which 20%fail in the first 5 years) would have to last…..forever. Anyone know of cement that lasts forever?

          • 40yeargeologist

            Cement is used to hold the steel casing in the well. Hydro-static pressure of the fluids holds the cement down while it hardens. The cement and steel casing are in an oxygen deficient atmosphere. I have seen 60-70 year old casing look as good as the day it was run. Pulled much casing when plugging old wells. Casing and cement jobs do not fail in the first 5 years. If there is an issue with the cement job, it is seen almost immediately while circulating the cement.

          • Al Neuman

            You have no idea at all about cement in a gas well.
            Cement is between casings, at least 4 steel casings, all around the drill hole, well below the water table.
            If you keep reading the crap you will continue being very foolish. ANY of these anti-groups, that are looking for ‘donations’, are not worth even looking at!

      • Ann DeLucia
        • Al Neuman

          Educate with what? BS ‘studies’ by anti-fossil fuel nut-jobs who make those remarks? Why has no state, not TX, PA, or any of the other 30+, as well as the US, been telling us NO wells have been polluted from HVHF?
          Why would people like you continue to believe this type of BS?

          • hmontaigne

            Seems you pro-frackers are out in force today, spinning the same old BS yourselves. There are indeed cases of water contamination from fracking. Confirmed cases. But the industry keeps claiming there are none. It’s absurd to think such an invasive process would have no bad effects. But keep on spinning….

          • Al Neuman

            There is no proof of contamination of well water from ‘fracking’, that is entirely your anti-gas/fossil-fuel lies. There is NO PROOF of this in any STATE run or FEDERALLY run inspections in our country. Simply repeated lies from groups who’s support comes from others who are against US citizens from purchasing fuels which does not come from their countries at more money than ours!

    • bill

      Tom, You forgot to mention that the drill cuttings coming up are highly radioactive and cancer rates have tripled in drilling areas.

      • dick7828

        what about ash from coal burning power plants MAJOR polluter

      • 40yeargeologist

        Everything has Naturally Ocurring Radioctive Material (NORM) associated with it. Please don’t try that red herring. It is no where near as radioactive as drywall, granite countertops and most if not all of the medical wastes that are used in the world.

        • hmontaigne

          Truckloads of drill waste are turned away from landfills when the radiation levels are too high. It’s not totally harmless.

          • 40yeargeologist

            Not drill cuttings, not enough NORM associated with them. SOMETIMES, small amounts of flowback sand and sludge from tank bottoms must be disposed outside of PA. due to elevated NORM readings. These readings are at background levels 3′ from the material. But this has been known for the past 30 -40 years! Nothing new here! Except the attempt to scare the general public.

        • Ann DeLucia

          Please, educate yourself on the issue before you start spewing more of your outdated, uneducated opinions..

          • 40yeargeologist

            I am educated, trained and experienced in this industry. You?

    • dick7828

      and what do you think coal mines have done to peoples water , poisoned it with sulfur worse and lots of them just lost their water completely .so just dig a hole in the ground like a ground hog to stay warm in the winter . there is no free answer just try to do the least damage to our enviroment

    • 40yeargeologist

      Wow, As a geologist in this industry I can’t tell you how wrong you are! I don’t even know where to start about all of the lies and misinformation that you have just spewed!

      • Ann DeLucia

        I don’t know where you geologist are getting your information? I’ve heard more than one of you say there have been no earthquakes due to injecting fracking waste into injection wells. It’s been proven in ARK. OK and Ohio that injecting this toxic waste has caused many earthquakes. Also geologist who think fracking is safe? Where are you people getting your info? http://www.friendsoftheharmed.com Maybe they should teach you how to read: http://www.psehealthyenergy.org/site/view/1233

    • rockjockpa

      Tom: Nice list of maladies associated with fracking! You forgot to list the tremendous increase in the rate of Unicorn miscarriages that has been documented. If you are going to just make up things without basis, you might as well make them interesting.

  • kev

    Pipeline is the safest way to get oil or gas to market an cheapest… Remember the reason people don’t like pipelines are like warren buffet how owns the railroads an he just wants to make money off you an don’t care if it derails or explodes and kills you family and friends just ask him he has a front door key to the Whit House… If you don’t like oil or gas then why do you drive a car or heat your home or buy food an clothing an many more things… Suggestion maybe you should go back an live in a cave an plant your own food walk ever wear… Just live like a cave man or women… or MAYBE YOUR JUST A HIPOCRITE……

  • kenneth weir

    Al Sever you now have competition for your comedic act from the supposed 40 year geologist. Will your acts ever be in Pittsburgh? I cant wait.

    • 40yeargeologist

      I know of what I speak, and your credentials are?

      • kenneth weir

        I find it hard to reply to an anonymous person who says that he is a 40 year geologist. However , if you want to know my credentials they are…………., a human being who cares about the future of our air and water and the corruption of the government at all levels brought on by the greed and the insatiable desire for more , by corporations whose only stated goal is make as much money at any cost.
        ps. I am also a comedic talent critic and still think you and Al Sever would make a great team. Have a nice day.

        • 40yeargeologist

          Thank you. You also.
          But you must stop listening to the Marcellus Protest folks that have no experience in this industry. Mel Packer and Doug Shields are not experts in the drilling industry, they are Green party socialists that have no need for drilling of fossil fuels, except when driving, heating, cooking or using the myriad of plastics and manufactured goods needed daily in this world. But everyone is entitled to an opinion. Even a wrong one.

          • kenneth weir

            40 yeargeologist, you speak from a covered mouth and face. The fact that you have chosen to hide your identity makes your point , in my eyes , just plain worthless. Maybe you should reveal your identity so that your name can be cast about with ridicule or disdain. You and your industry friends that you blog for, must be awful wary of the two people that you have chosen to throw about for public discussion. If you are really a 40 year geologist and your knowledge of fracking is so superior to the mere mortals who read and write on these pages, maybe you would like to publically debate either one ? Maybe then you can stick a dagger into their obviously confused hearts and then you might be able to lead our grandchildren and theirs forward into the future

          • Al Neuman

            Why is it, your argument now is trying to condemn a geologist who doesn’t wish to use his name on his posts? Do you, and others like you, anti-gas ‘protest’ people, know that the lies your continuously spewing about anything to do with natural gas, will slow down your ‘DONATION’ collection? Perhaps make citizens who don’t know anything about drilling or even using gas, many who have supported your kind, will realize they are wrong condemning Natural Gas when it is the best product our country has been able to supply and can be safely used today?
            Over 30 states, as well as the Federal Government, are giving proof that HVHF is a safe method of attaining fossil fuels. Claims against Gas from your group uses stories from nothing more than other ‘reporters’ and questionable ‘tests’ they claim.
            Any service, school, or agency, that claims gas is safe, it becomes your enemy, which is what your still showing today.
            People are starting to wake up and leave your packs of greedy anti-anything collectors. Bye!

          • kenneth weir

            Are you the geologist? It must be nice to be you. I would love to believe that the industry you defend is just , proper and honest. That the political system and those we elect are not being corrupted by the power and money that they receive from the deep pockets of o/g industry. If you have chosen to ignore that then there can be no hope for a honest and better system than we have now. As far as condemning (you?) or the geologist , I have not. The condemnation , if there even is one, came from the geologist.
            Why are you worried? Don’t you have both political parties in your pocket? Are not the R’s and D’s already in your pocket? Why are so concerned with a group of people who have no funding, no media coverage and nobody who represents us in government?
            As far as being anonymous in posting , all I can tell you is that try calling in a complaint or a 911 call and then tell them that you don’t want to be identified. Let me know how that works out for you?
            Article 1 section 27 of the Pa constitution isn’t that still relevant? We haven’t lost that yet, have we? I amnot embarrassed of who I am ,therefore I donot post

          • Ann DeLucia

            maybe if they would learn how to read they might learn something. it’s not worth arguing with industry. all they care about is the $$ So any science is disregarded because it jeopardizes their profits! http://www.nytimes.com/2015/04/04/us/as-quakes-rattle-oklahoma-fingers-point-to-oil-and-gas-industry.html?emc=edit_th_20150404&nl=todaysheadlines&nlid=66120675&_r=1

          • Al Neuman

            I have never been a geologist, I am just a worker who’s been on all construction of fossil fuels products, from drilling wells, to installing pipelines & compressor stations, all the way to connecting homes for natural gas and stations for refining petroleum products.
            Something we might agree on, the Democrat & Republicans, neither of which do I think we have any use for, since all they do is support the types who support them. No matter which side. Just like I think of your club type.
            People like Rockefeller, Kennedy, people with crooked attitudes against the US fuels, like Putin and OPEC are the breed of scum who donate to groups like yours because the US will have to purchase fuels from them if you can stop it here. We won’t stop using Fossil fuel for quite a long time, not until someone invents something much better & safer than windmills and solar.
            For you being a doctor, I can’t say I think very highly of doctors at all or especially lawyers. Science has changed and will continue to change. How long ago was it when doctors prescribed heroin to ‘help’ people? How about ‘bloodletting’, the way they killed George Washington? How many times have prescriptions or medicines changed? Why is it anyone you start as a patient must sign saying they will never hold you responsible? I have very little faith in doctors, other than setting bones, etc., how many years have they been fighting cancer? Even if they do manage to stop it with chemo and all, won’t these people still die when their time comes? No one lives forever. If we didn’t have to suffer with obamacare and had a fatal disease, we should be allowed to have our life peacefully ended. The D or R doesn’t support that, but I think the Libertarians are the better to have running our country, so we all can make our own choices.
            The PA section 27, A1 looks like the dreams of the Sierra Club. If John Muir had his way when it was founded our country would not have been allowed to grow or change at all. A complete waste of a club.

        • 40yeargeologist

          No, as a member of the over the top Marcellus Protest group out of Pittsburgh, you don’t care to talk to experienced folks that have worked in this industry over a lifetime. You, Doug Shields and Mel Packer want to foment unrest and anti drilling rhetoric hoping to stop all drilling in the commonwealth.

          • kenneth weir

            My new credentials to you will be a 40 year medical doctor, does that impress you? I have told you nothing about me yet you assume that I am a certain way because of what I write. For your information my passion lies in the formation of boards, laws and edicts that represent any special interests, especially those from your industry that violate our rights to clean air and water and the preservation of our land for generations to come.. I believe that the media has been corrupted by the huge sums of money being thrown about by this industry. It has corrupted the two party system more so than it already was. I have been to the shale fields and seen what has been done to the rural way of life yet these people have chosen to do it. The power is ultimately in the hands of the people to make changes in a system that feeds off of the apathy and lack of awareness encouraged by a paid for media. it is a wonder it took your industry that long to get here. I suppose that in hindsight if they had known how easy it would be to get the people to roll over for them just by waving a few dollars in their face it would have happened years earlier. Nice day to you, Happy Easter

  • mwamov

    No eminent domain authority should be issued for these pipeline projects. The gas is not needed in our local market. The investment and financial filings for the companies involved all explicitly state their intentions to export gas to overseas markets where they can make significantly more profit. No landowners should be harmed to advance corporate greed.

  • Hill Walker

    Sooooo,

    Lemme see if I have this right. We need to build out a lot more pipeline capacity to deliver this ‘bridge fuel’ (remember? anyone else remember how this was supposed to be a bridge fuel for us to transition to renewables?) to overseas customers in order to build our national energy independence. Or some such thing. Oh yeah, and to fuel a new urban industrialization, to turn us back to the 50s again, with cheap and plentiful fossil fuels, or , ,

    and all of this of course, without a single mention of the depletion rates of the average marcellus well.

    So, the folks who fracked all this, did it completely indiscriminately, supply far exceeding the ability to deliver,

    Where does it end? Oh yeah, it’s ‘creating jobs’. Right, where have we heard that before.Creating jobs for whom exactly? Uh huh.

    Wake up folks, it’s all a scam, it always was, and it is, and always will be. Got all this supply, and limited delivery ability, but massive demand? Okay, why is the price where it is then? Right, thought so.

  • David Howard
About StateImpact

StateImpact seeks to inform and engage local communities with broadcast and online news focused on how state government decisions affect your lives.
Learn More »

Economy
Education