Jump to content



  • Please log in to reply
177 replies to this topic

#161 Guest__*

  • Guests

Posted 16 December 2009 - 01:42 AM

Ummmm I do live here and if you hav'nt noticed it's a State Park. An area bought up by the state after like minded scum raped all the trees and left destroying the Cats still to this day. You think your gas companies are different. My uncle works the Alaska pipeline and I can tell you they aren't. Apples and Apples,all of it is relavent.People with your mind set is what has been killing the area since the late 1800's. You can't pump crap into the Earth and expect nothing to happen. And yes you are a sell out, why else would you want drilling. A little self centered don't you think to put the welfare of your pocket before the wild of a region. I as well hope you have no kids or grand kids as they will not grow up with the same surroundings as you did, you can hang out and tell them how we used to have fish in the rivers and wildlife walking around as they listen in bewilderment about the way it was before you poked holes in the ground. There is yet another term that I think fits well into this discussion and it's called "a duche"...Use where applicable!!!!!

Glad you like carp fishing cause that's all your going to have left and you can't take the money to hell with you!!!!
You "Stopped the Powerlines" probably cause they would'nt pay enough. I'm shure it wasn't the scientiffic facts that made your decision as I don't think that you accept science as fact. Must be something about powerlines in the bible or something. Your standing alone on your soap box here, don't worry you still have the lottery for a get rich quick scheme....

#162 Ellen


    Site Admin

  • Administrators
  • 94 posts

Posted 16 December 2009 - 02:06 AM

Just heard today on the local radio station that EXXON-MOBIL bought a gas drilling company (apparently a big one) that has the rights to drilling in the Deposit area-lots and lots of acreage involved. If anyone hears anything else, please let us know. Putting a company like EXXON into this mix isn't good for any of us.

#163 Bamboo&Brookies


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 671 posts
  • LocationWestchester, NY

Posted 16 December 2009 - 03:58 AM

Excerpted from 'The Bay Journal'
Alliance for the Chesapeake Bay


"Currently, no wastewater plant in Pennsylvania can adequately treat the mix of chemicals and minerals that come from the drilling operations."

"Further complicating the issue is uranium, which has long been known to occur naturally in the Marcellus Shale. According to ProPublica, a public interest news organization, recent tests in New York showed that levels of radioactivity in the fracking fluids that returned to the surface were 267 times higher than the limit for safe discharge into the environment."

"On New Year's Day, Dimock resident Norma Fiorentino left her trailer to visit her ailing daughter. When she returned, her water well was in pieces, blown apart by methane that had seeped into her well. From her faucets, orange water bubbled."

#164 Kilgour Farms

Kilgour Farms

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 125 posts
  • LocationKilgour Farms, Hancock, NY

Posted 16 December 2009 - 05:20 AM

New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.c... ... 2&emc=eta1

December 15, 2009

In Exxon Deal, Signs of the New Gusher

Over the last decade, a handful of the nation’s small energy companies pulled off a coup. Right under the noses of the industry’s biggest players, they discovered huge amounts of natural gas in fields stretching from Texas to Pennsylvania.

One of these companies, XTO Energy, grew almost unnoticed into the nation’s second-largest gas producer, amassing a substantial portfolio of gas fields, and developing expertise in the complex technology needed to extract the gas from beds of a dark rock called shale.

Now, the biggest energy companies are paying attention.

Exxon Mobil, the world’s largest publicly traded oil and gas producer, said Monday that it had agreed to buy XTO in an all-stock deal valued at $31 billion, the biggest oil and gas deal in four years.

The purchase allows Exxon to expand in shale gas, an area that has seen tremendous growth, and increase its gas resources by 45 trillion cubic feet, roughly equivalent to two years of domestic demand. The transaction is the company’s biggest since the $81 billion merger of Exxon and Mobil in 1999.

The acquisition extends Exxon’s bet that fossil fuels will remain a critical part of the nation’s energy supply for decades. At the same time, Exxon expects the demand for natural gas, which emits half as much carbon dioxide as coal when burned, will rise as the United States looks to pare its global warming emissions and the world seeks greener sources of energy.

“This is not a near-term decision; this is about the next 10, 20, 30 years,” Rex W. Tillerson, the chairman and chief executive of Exxon, said in a conference call on Monday. “We think there will be significant demand for natural gas in the future.”

Shale gas drilling poses some environmental concerns in the communities where it occurs. Yet natural gas holds promise to help slow the growth in global carbon dioxide emissions, if power companies shift toward burning more gas and less coal.

Exxon said this month, in its long-term outlook on energy demand, that it expected natural gas consumption to grow faster than oil or coal consumption over the next two decades.

“These unconventional resources are going to take on an increasing role in our energy needs,” said Daniel Yergin, the chairman of IHS Cambridge Energy Research Associates, a consulting firm, adding that the interest of large oil companies in shale gas was fairly recent. “This demonstrates how important natural gas is now, seen as part of the mix for a low-carbon future.”

After largely ignoring the surge in domestic resources, Washington is starting to pay attention, too, as Congress struggles to come up with an energy and climate bill that will reduce carbon emissions.

J. Larry Nichols, the chairman of Devon Energy and of the American Petroleum Institute, said: “Regardless whether or not Congress passes any legislation regulating carbon, the underlying fact is our nation is going to need a growing amount of electricity, and natural gas is in an excellent position to capture a significant amount of that market.”

Big companies concentrated their efforts in recent years on international bets, leaving domestic exploration to smaller oil and gas companies with limited financial resources. Even as gas production grew in recent years, many companies went deeply into debt to finance their exploration.

Gas prices tumbled when the recession hit, leaving many of the small companies in a weakened financial position. That means more of them could become acquisition targets.

Gas prices have recovered from their lows in recent months, trading at $5.33 per thousand cubic feet in New York on Monday, after falling as low as $2.50 in September. At their highest levels, in 2004 and in 2008, gas prices rose above $14 per thousand cubic feet.

Exxon’s deal is the latest and most significant signal that large companies are moving to make major investments in American shale fields. Over the last year, BP; Statoil, the Norwegian oil company; and Eni, the Italian oil company have bought several billion dollars of shale gas assets in Pennsylvania, Oklahoma, Texas and Arkansas.

What may be emerging, industry analysts say, is a marriage between companies with deep pockets that need to expand their fossil-fuel reserves and companies that have staked out enormous fields but have little financial wherewithal to develop them.

David Rockecharlie, co-head of the energy investment banking group at the Jefferies Group, who was a lead adviser to XTO in its negotiations with Exxon, estimated that it would take more than $1 trillion to develop domestic shale fields. That is an amount that independent producers cannot finance alone.

The purchase could set off a fresh round of mergers and acquisitions in the energy sector, which had been quiet recently. The last major oil and gas deal was the $35 billion takeover of Burlington Resources, another gas company, by ConocoPhillips in 2005, according to data from Thomson Reuters.

For major oil companies like Exxon, Shell, BP or Chevron, who have found it tough to increase their production and reserves on their own, big acquisitions offer a quick way to expand their operations after amassing mountains of cash in recent years. Industry executives and analysts predicted that potential takeover targets could include Chesapeake Energy, Devon Energy, EnCana and EOG Resources.

“This is really a significant event, a paradigm shift for our sector,” said John H. Pinkerton, chairman and chief executive of Range Resources, a major shale gas developer in Fort Worth, and also a possible takeover target. “There are obviously other majors looking at these shale plays. It would not surprise me at all to see these shale assets being bought by the major oil companies.”

Exxon already has substantial gas production in Qatar, Russia and Nigeria. This month, it approved the construction of a $15 billion project in Papua New Guinea to supply gas to Japan and China. The company is also part of a $37 billion deal to deliver Australian gas throughout Asia over the next several decades.

But the company has lagged in the United States, where XTO produces twice as much natural gas than Exxon does. With the help of some acquisitions of its own, XTO reported a 23 percent jump in gas production in the third quarter, to 2.33 billion cubic feet a day, putting it just behind Chesapeake as the top domestic producer.

Founded in 1986, XTO has developed a strong technical knowledge in developing shale gas, which Exxon would like to apply to unconventional gas holdings it has been building up in Poland, Hungary and Argentina, Mr. Tillerson said. Exxon will set up a production unit to manage its global portfolio of unconventional resources that will be based in Fort Worth, in XTO’s current offices.

The term unconventional resources is applied to a broad category of fuels like shale gas, tar sands and other forms of oil and gas that require sophisticated technology to extract and are typically more expensive to develop. Unlike traditional oil and gas supplies, which have been declining, reserves of unconventional resources are growing because of new discoveries.

Exxon will assume XTO’s $10 billion in debt as part of the deal.


#165 dooberhoopa


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 231 posts
  • LocationPine Bush NY

Posted 16 December 2009 - 04:05 PM

I agree with e guy....we as humans feel we can destroy and use this world for whatever we want. I have a son and i hope that in 8 years when i can take him out on the catskill streams that made fly fshing famous there will be a trout left in them. I live here too, im not from from another state or the city....the catskills are my home and i want them to stay the way they are. We've done enough damage to the area already and totally changed the way it looks, just look for the "Formerly the Site" signs around the reservoirs. This is an amzing area, that deserves to be treated that way.

#166 Bamboo&Brookies


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 671 posts
  • LocationWestchester, NY

Posted 17 December 2009 - 04:16 AM

Yes we're all thrilled about E$$on getting into the hydrofracking business.

Now they can create a hundred E$$on Valdez disasters across the width of Pennsylvania and New York.

It's wonderful to see how much you care about the quality of life here.

Again, thanks for selling us out.

As Cactus Ed Abbey says, capitalism has enslaved our souls but it hasn't captured our hearts.

The heart -- your heart -- knows this is wrong, but your greed eclipses your conscience. It's an old story.

Good luck choking down your poisoned drinking water.

#167 Kilgour Farms

Kilgour Farms

    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 125 posts
  • LocationKilgour Farms, Hancock, NY

Posted 17 December 2009 - 02:27 PM

Energy Indepth

http://www.energyind... ... amination/

December 9, 2009

NOT EVEN ONE? Top Brass from Obama Admin Tell Congress They’re “Not Aware” of Even “One Case” of HF-Related Contamination
Tags: Carol Browner, Cynthia Giles, Energy In Depth, Frank Lautenberg, groundwater, Hydraulic fracturing, Matthew Larsen, Peter Silva, Sen. Inhofe, shale gas

Sen. Inhofe: “The Obama Administration has it right: there are no documented cases of ground water contamination from hydraulic fracturing”

Despite the long and abundantly clear record of environmental safety that hydraulic fracturing has maintained for more than a half-century, some who oppose the responsible development of traditional, job-creating American energy forms – including clean-burning natural gas – continue to wage all-out war on the technology. That battle continued in earnest today up on Capitol Hill.

These agenda-driven attacks persist even though independent studies have determined that fracking has never contaminated groundwater. Heck, even Carol Browner – energy czar to President Obama and former EPA chief under President Clinton – has come to the same conclusion on fracturing’s environmental safety.

Today, though, a major blow was delivered to those who are working tirelessly to stop responsible shale gas development here at home, as well as the tens of thousands of good-paying jobs and billions in economic activity that this production is generating.

At a Senate Environment and Public Works Committee hearing earlier today, U.S. Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.) asked senior EPA and USGS officials a pretty simple question:

“Do any one of you know of one case of ground water contamination that has resulted from hydraulic fracturing?”

Crickets. Actually, these folks responded eventually. And what they said may (not) shock you:

Peter Silva (EPA Water Chief): Not that I’m aware of, no.

Sen. Inhofe: Ms. Giles?

Cynthia Giles (EPA Compliance Administrator): I understand there’s some anecdotal evidence, but I don’t know that it’s been firmly established.

Sen. Inhofe: So the answer is no, you don’t know of it.

Cynthia Giles nods.

Sen. Inhofe: Alright, Mr. Larsen?

Matthew Larsen (Assoc. Director for Water, EPA): I’ll have to respond in writing, I don’t, I’m not aware of all of our studies on that topic.

#168 Guest__*

  • Guests

Posted 17 December 2009 - 02:44 PM

Of course they have no record,they want more U.S. based resources so why would they shoot themselves in the foot with bad P.R. And burning coal does'nt produce acid rain either.....Right!!! Keep believing all you read my man, I got a bridge to sell you when you get your blood money. I mean the Gov. has always been up front with civillions about the truth.......Hav'nt they?????? Although there was that whole Vietnam thing and a little tiff in the Mid East, MK Ultra ect ect but I'm shure your down with that too!!!!!!! Karma's a Bitch,enjoy your life.............. !!!

#169 JB


    Site Moderator

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,505 posts
  • LocationTOMS RIVER, N.J.

Posted 20 December 2009 - 03:16 PM

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it." - George Santayana

I'm not sayin', I'm just sayin'. - JB

#170 JB


    Site Moderator

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,505 posts
  • LocationTOMS RIVER, N.J.

Posted 29 December 2009 - 11:12 PM

UPDATE 3-NYC urges ban on shale gas drilling in watershed
Wed Dec 23, 2009 3:46pm EST
By Edith Honan

NEW YORK, Dec 23 (Reuters) - New York City urged the state to ban natural gas drilling in its watershed on Wednesday, becoming the most powerful opponent to date of a process that critics say is poisoning drinking water.

Shale gas trapped deep underground is considered one of the most promising sources of U.S. energy, but environmentalists and small-town neighbors of drilling operations -- and now the biggest city in the United States -- are seeking to limit its exploitation.

The drilling process known as hydraulic fracturing, or "fracking," involves blasting through rock with a mixture of water, sand and a proprietary list of chemicals used to split the shale formation and free trapped gas.

Steven Lawitts, the city's top environmental official, called fracking techniques "unacceptable threats to the unfiltered fresh water supply of nine million New Yorkers," putting the city at odds with the gas industry, which considers shale drilling completely safe.

"Based on all the facts, the risks are too great and drilling simply cannot be permitted in the watershed," said Marc LaVorgna, a spokesman for Mayor Michael Bloomberg.

The 2,000-square-mile (5,200-square-km) watershed is tiny compared to the largest known U.S. shale formation, which extends below the surface in much of Pennsylvania and parts of New York, Ohio and West Virginia.

The opposition from New York City adds heft to the ranks of fracking critics and could embolden state and local authorities elsewhere, though many are strapped for cash and badly need the revenue that comes with drilling.

Geologists say the Marcellus Shale formation could satisfy U.S. natural gas demand for a decade or more, providing a relatively clean form of fossil fuel and helping promote U.S. energy independence.

New York state Governor David Paterson, who will play a major role in deciding the future of drilling next year as he slashes state services to close a $3.2 billion budget deficit, said he was still listening to "all points of view."

"We've actually extended the public comment period because of the grave concern that so many who we trust, like the mayor, are raising in this issue," Paterson told reporters.


Major natural gas producers and oilfield service companies like Schlumberger Ltd (SLB.N) and Halliburton Co (HAL.N) have a stake in shale gas production, and Exxon Mobil (XOM.N) cited the potential for unconventional gas production in its $30 billion bid to take over XTO Energy (XTO.N) this month.

The deal includes a clause that would allow Exxon Mobil to back out if the U.S. Congress bans or severely regulates the process used to extract gas from shale rock.

Some companies like Chesapeake Energy Corp (CHK.N) had announced they would not seek to drill in the New York watershed, which lies about 90 miles (140 km) north of the city.

Terry Engelder, a Penn State University professor of geosciences, said New York City's demand may improve prospects for passage of the "Frack Act," federal legislation that would require gas companies to disclose the chemicals they use.

"It shines a brighter light on the Frack Act because New York is a significant enough fraction of the U.S. population that care will be taken," he said.

Ray Deacon, an analyst with energy-focused Pritchard Capital, acknowledged the reluctance of companies to provide details on the fracking fluid because "it's kind of the secret sauce that makes the rock break apart."

Shale drilling companies say the industry maintains strict safeguards to prevent any danger to water supplies. But neighbors of drilling in several states report fouled water and increased illness since drilling began.

Earlier this year, New York state proposed new rules that would allow drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale formation. New York City is asking the state to exclude the watershed from the areas that can be drilled.


JB, I ain't sayin', I'm just sayin!

#171 Guest_Mski35_*

  • Guests

Posted 21 March 2010 - 02:41 PM

No matter how you look at it and no matter how many safeguards you put in place, they are still pumping toxic fluids into the ground! THIS IS NOT GOOD FOR ANYONE!! Wait let me guess there is no scientific evidence to support my claim. YEAH WHATEVER!!!

#172 Ron`


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 339 posts
  • LocationOrangeville, PA (Fishing Creek)

Posted 15 April 2010 - 10:10 PM

Keep your eyes and ears open. Cabot and Chesapeake have both been fined or charged here in PA as of today. It's all about money and someday we all will pay.

This was off live news and I will try to link to web news if I can going forward.



Plenty of links from there too.

#173 SPINNER78


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 474 posts
  • LocationWoodsburgh, NY and Denning, NY

Posted 23 April 2010 - 08:44 PM

4/23 the DEC and State put the Kabosh on this for the catskill region so the threat seems to be over

#174 woger


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 186 posts

Posted 23 April 2010 - 08:50 PM

Has anyone read Collapse by Jared Diamond? He has a section on Montana where he claims that residents are realising that the cost to clean up mines are higher than the money they brought into the regions, can anyone that has been to Montana back this up?

#175 Andrew


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 43 posts
  • LocationLong Eddy

Posted 24 April 2010 - 01:26 AM

Spinner, I think the ruling only applies to the NYC watershed and anything below the reservoir dams is still open to drilling. It is an end run by NYC—they didn't technically ban drilling in the watershed they just just made the permitting process next to impossible. The rest of us are still subject to the less stringent DEC regulations.

#176 dconthefly



  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 25 April 2010 - 05:51 PM

I am new to this forum but I have been intensely interested in this subject ever since Chesapeake Energy proposed to inject wastewater from horizontal drilling in Pennsylvania into an abandoned conventional gas well 3 miles from my home in Pulteney, NY, less than 1 mile from the pristine Keuka Lake. Currently there is no good way to dispose of the millions of gallons of toxic, radioactive, laced with chemical and heavy metal contamination flowback that each hydrofracked well will produce. The "solution" to this problem, endorsed by the US EPA is to pump it into the ground under enormous pressure. Due to a huge public outcry the permit application was withdrawn by Chesapeake, but, they also left the door open to submitting an application in the future, in their words, "when horizontal drilling is permitted in NY State".

I would also like to respectfully disagree with an earlier post that DEC removed the NYC watershed from horizontal drilling. All they said is that each permit will have to undergo individual review. Go to catskillmountainkeeper. org and look at the press release dated April 23. Believe me when I say that all the gas companies are ready to pounce just as soon as DEC gives the go ahead, and DEC has stated they want the process to start by early summer.

Anyone who is opposed to this should get involved and write letters to David Paterson, DEC Comissioner Pete Grannis, their local and state legislators, the newspapers. In other words, the same kind of public outcry that stopped the debacle here in Pulteney. There is no good reason to drill here/now with the glut of gas on the market and the profound problems associated with this technology. Just ask the good residents of Dimock, PA what they think of the "safety" of massive high volume horizontal drilling and hydrofracking.

Please take a moment and visit www.toxicstargeting.com and look around. Another good site is www.shaleshock.org.

The best and maybe the only way to put a stop to this is to put pressure on the governor, the DEC and state government to withdraw the draft Generic Environmental Impact Statement. It is deeply flawed and does not protect us from the environmental disasters that are almost sure to occur.

#177 titeline


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 31 posts
  • LocationBrooklyn, NY

Posted 30 November 2010 - 07:56 PM

WASHINGTON, D.C. - On Tuesday, November 30, 2010 Secretary of the Interior Ken Salazar will host a forum entitled Natural Gas Hydraulic Fracturing on Public Lands: A Forum Hosted by the Department of the Interior.

As recently as November 3, 2010, President Obama reiterated his commitment to the development of natural gas resources. The Department of the Interior shares that commitment and wants to ensure that natural gas is developed in a safe and environmentally sustainable manner so that the United States can fully realize the economic, security, and environmental benefits of this important energy resource.

All credentialed media are invited to cover the event. The forum is open to the public, but space is limited. Please RSVP to doi_events@ios.doi.gov. The forum also will be streamed live via a link on the department’s homepage at http://www.doi.gov.
Forum on Natural Gas Hydraulic Fracturing on Public Lands
Tuesday, November 30, 1 PM EST
Ken Salazar, Secretary of the Interior
David J. Hayes, Deputy Secretary of Interior
Carol Browner, Assistant to the President for Energy & Climate Change
Marcilynn Burke, Deputy Director, BLM

Panel 1: Current practice of hydraulic fracturing on BLM land and its potential impacts, moderated by Steve Black, Counselor to Secretary Ken Salazar
Fred Toney, Vice President for U.S. Pressure Pumping, Baker Hughes
Sherri Stuewer, Vice President, Environmental Policy & Planning, Exxon Mobil
Jim Kleckner, Vice President, Operations, Anadarko
Peter Lehner, Executive Director, Natural Resources Defense Council
Steve Moyer, Vice President, Government Affairs, Trout Unlimited

Panel 2: Regulatory considerations associated with hydraulic fracturing on BLM land, moderated by David J. Hayes, Deputy Secretary
Steve Salzman, Division Chief, Fluid Minerals, BLM
Douglas Duncan, Associate Coordinator, Energy Resources Program, USGS
Tom Doll, Supervisor, Wyoming Oil & Gas Conservation Commission
Mark Fesmire, Director, New Mexico Oil Conservation District
Department of the Interior
South Interior Building Auditorium
1951 Constitution Avenue, NW
Washington, D.C. 20240
The forum also will be streamed live via http://www.doi.gov.
PUBLIC: The forum is open to the public, but space is limited. Please RSVP to doi_events@ios.doi.gov.

#178 upinjewett


    Advanced Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 808 posts
  • LocationEAST JEWETT NY

Posted 30 November 2010 - 10:02 PM

This is probably old news to most of you -

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users