Shale Gas and a Refining Revival

NPR/State Impact Texas reports on the economic growth that’s being generated by Gulf Coast refineries revitalized with the help of affordable natural gas produced through hydraulic fracturing. It’s a good-news story:

"Along the Texas Gulf coast in cities where the skylines are formed by the stacks of refineries, they’re talking about a perfect storm headed their way. But this storm has nothing to do with the tropics and everything to do with natural gas. 'It’s almost a perfect storm of low energy costs, low financing costs, low construction costs,' said Bob Leiper, the city manager of Baytown."

Here’s what that “perfect storm” looks like:

Exxon Mobil’s announced plan to expand its refinery/petrochemicals complex with construction of an ethane cracker.Shell and Saudi Aramco’s newly expanded Motiva refinery in Port Arthur, which opened last month after a $10 billion upgrade.Chevron Phillips Chemical’s plan to spend $5 billion on its Baytown petrochemical plant.Seven thousand to 15,000 high-paying construction jobs, which Leiper says will produce a positive ripple across Baytown’s housing and retail sectors.

At the heart of it, NPR says, is surging natural gas production via fracking:

"Hydraulic fracturing has dramatically increased the amount of gas extracted from shale plays around Texas and nearby states with much of it sent in pipelines that come right through Baytown. The cheap gas can be used in a variety of processes to make petrochemicals and plastics and make them more cheaply than competitors overseas. 'This has led to a rebirth of the U.S. petrochemical industry,' said A.J. Teague, COO of Enterprise Products which last month announced its plans to build what it said would be one of the world’s biggest facilities to process 'natural gas liquids' into propylene which is used in plastics."

According to NPR, Texas has spent more than $11 million in state economic development funds on companies to encourage expansion of plants or offices over the past few years. In terms of jobs, the oil and natural gas industry has proven to be a sound investment:

"When a watchdog group, Texans for Public Justice, analyzed whether the public money actually promoted new jobs, it found the companies delivered largely as promised, especially compared to other industries. 'I don’t recall much criticism of oil and gas,' said Craig McDonald, the group’s executive director."

View the original article here

American Energy Works: Tanker Safety Officer

Janet DeCastro of Polar Tankers wanted a life at sea, so she entered the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. One of the requirements for cadets was to go to sea for a year on a commercial vessel, and DeCastro’s assignment was aboard an oil tanker.

The experience has become a 24-year professional career – and is one of 9.2 million jobs supported by the oil and natural gas industry. In the video below, DeCastro talks about the ships on which she serves, and the role she plays ensuring safe delivery of oil and protection of the environment:

Visit American Energy Works.org for more videos and more stories from the people of the oil and natural gas industry, who are at work for America.

View the original article here

American Energy Works: Tanker Safety Officer

Janet DeCastro of Polar Tankers wanted a life at sea, so she entered the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy. One of the requirements for cadets was to go to sea for a year on a commercial vessel, and DeCastro’s assignment was aboard an oil tanker.

The experience has become a 24-year professional career – and is one of 9.2 million jobs supported by the oil and natural gas industry. In the video below, DeCastro talks about the ships on which she serves, and the role she plays ensuring safe delivery of oil and protection of the environment:

Visit American Energy Works.org for more videos and more stories from the people of the oil and natural gas industry, who are at work for America.

View the original article here

Cooking With Gas–And Loathing It?

The intersection of a recent anti-natural gas fundraiser at the trendy Brooklyn Winery – featuring fabulous culinary delights prepared by a group of talented chefs – and the natural gas that made the evening possible was, well, simply mouth-watering.

New York Daily News columnist Bill Hammond writes that the “Taste of the Marcellus” event last week was hosted by a group called Chefs for the Marcellus, to showcase the kinds of foods they say could be jeopardized if New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo OKs hydraulic fracturing in that state’s portion of the Marcellus Shale. Hammond:

"Guests were treated to eggplant-stuffed okra, smoked lamb belly with fermented tofu and whipped ricotta jewel on toast — along with wines from the Finger Lakes and beers from Cooperstown’s Ommegang brewery. The only thing more delicious than the menu was the irony, because many if not most of those dishes were cooked over the bright blue flame of natural gas. That’s right, the Chefs for the Marcellus saw nothing wrong with using the very same fuel they portray as a dire threat to the upstate countryside."

He writes that even stuff that wasn’t simmered or seared over a gas flame was chilled in refrigerators running on electricity, much of which no doubt was generated at natural gas-fired power plants. Same thing for the restaurant AC that kept the guests comfortable. Every cubic foot of gas used, he notes, came from a hole in the ground – a quarter of it (based on national averages) from the same hydraulic fracturing process the group opposes.

Then there’s this quote Hammond got from Chefs for the Marcellus organizer Hilary Baum – as tantalizing as the sungold tomato gazpacho with smoked trout that was part of the featured fare:

“We all cook with gas. We all use gas. But we have to be looking at developing alternative energy sources and not be so stuck on fossil fuels.”

To ice the cake, Hammond quotes the Manhattan Institute’s Robert Bryce:

“It’s easy to demonize the oil and gas industry. But getting along without the fuels they provide takes us back to the Stone Age.”

Amen. Pass the trout.

View the original article here

Enter Innovation: Improving the Fracking Process

One of the factors involved in pulling energy from shale through hydraulic fracturing is how much water is needed – typically 2 to 4 million gallons per well. Though that’s not as much water as it sounds (electrical generation for the Susquehanna River Basin requires nearly 150 million gallons per day), it’s a public concern. More on water usage at the FracFocus website.

Water also is an industry concern. It isn’t free, and once the well has been stimulated with fracking, there’s waste water that has to be disposed of or recycled. Enter innovation. A number of companies are tackling the issue.

Schlumberger’s HiWAY flow-channel technology claims to use less water, with greater effectiveness:

“HiWAY technology fundamentally changes the way proppant fractures generate conductivity. The first technique of its kind, HiWAY fracturing creates open pathways inside the fracture, enabling hydrocarbons to flow through the stable channels rather than the proppant. This optimizes connectivity between the reservoir and the wellbore—resulting in infinite fracture conductivity.”

Other companies are marketing waterless alternatives, using other agents to apply pressure to the shale – producing microscopic fractures and introducing sand or other proppants to keep the cracks open so the oil or natural gas can drain from the shale and be collected.

Baker-Hughes has developed VaporFrac, combining a high-pressure nitrogen and/or carbon dioxide gas stream and an ultra-lightweight proppant slurry:

“This method safely creates a flow stream that is more than 90% gas, significantly reducing post-frac cleanup. The high energy of the gas phase makes for easy flowback. There’s a quicker tie into pipelines.”

GASFRAC Energy Services’ liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) gel is primarily propane, which the company says has a number of advantages in fracking:

“Since our gel regains permeability with the hydrocarbons we stimulate, we have the ability to recover 100% of the fracturing fluids within days of stimulation. This creates economic and environmental benefits reducing clean-up, waste disposal and post-job truck traffic, while creating higher initial production levels.”

No doubt, other companies, other energy innovators, are at work on this question. The point here is to show the kind of invention that’s being sparked by necessity surrounding water and fracking. Businesses are taking on this issue and others associated with energy development with the goal of making processes better, safer, more efficient and more environmentally friendly. When we hear about their stories, we’ll pass them along.

View the original article here

Editorially Speaking, New York Times is Behind the Curve on Shale Gas

Here’s what caught our eye in an otherwise relatively benign New York Times editorial on shale natural gas and hydraulic fracturing:

“For their part, the oil and gas companies — both the ExxonMobils and the mom-and-pops that abound in hydrofracturing — need to drop their warfare against necessary regulations.”

And later:

“Stronger federal rules are plainly needed.”

Last things first: Stronger federal rules? Where has the Times’ editorial board been the occasions when EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has downplayed the notion of federal shale gas regulation overlaying existing state regulation? Here’s Jackson last fall:

“We have no data right now that lead us to believe one way or the other that there needs to be specific federal regulation of the fracking process. … So it's not to say that there isn't a federal role, but you can't start to talk about a federal role without acknowledging the very strong state role.”

And a couple of days later, on MSNBC:

“States are stepping up and doing a good job. It doesn’t have to be EPA that regulates the 10,000 wells that might go in.”

It’s likely Jackson knows there’s not much the feds could add to the competent, efficient oversight that state regulators already are providing. And the Times doesn’t explain what it believes federal regulation – probably duplicative, almost certainly unnecessary – would accomplish.

In fact, industry recognizes the need for regulation. We just believe it’s best handled by the states. That’s why we’ve worked with the states through the STRONGER organization to develop regulatory regimes tailored for their specific circumstances. API and its members also have worked hard to develop industry standards that often form the basis for state regulations – on wellbore integrity, water management, community relations and more. Industry supports disclosure through the FracFocus online chemical registry.

All of the above address the editorial’s other assertion – that energy companies need to “drop their warfare” against regulation. Sorry, but the real warfare here has been waged by the Times in its “Drilling Down” series, a collection of inaccuracies, misrepresentations and manipulations that the Council on Foreign Relations’ Michael Levi dubbed a “war on shale gas.” This has included flawed reporting on mortgages, leases and the economic future of shale gas – at one point drawing a penalty flag from the newspaper’s own ombudsman. 

So, while noting the editorial’s positive points about shale gas, we encourage the newspaper’s editorial board to get up to speed on the good work states are doing to regulate industry activity, as well as industry efforts to get shale gas development right.

View the original article here

Editorially Speaking, New York Times is Behind the Curve on Shale Gas

Here’s what caught our eye in an otherwise relatively benign New York Times editorial on shale natural gas and hydraulic fracturing:

“For their part, the oil and gas companies — both the ExxonMobils and the mom-and-pops that abound in hydrofracturing — need to drop their warfare against necessary regulations.”

And later:

“Stronger federal rules are plainly needed.”

Last things first: Stronger federal rules? Where has the Times’ editorial board been the occasions when EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson has downplayed the notion of federal shale gas regulation overlaying existing state regulation? Here’s Jackson last fall:

“We have no data right now that lead us to believe one way or the other that there needs to be specific federal regulation of the fracking process. … So it's not to say that there isn't a federal role, but you can't start to talk about a federal role without acknowledging the very strong state role.”

And a couple of days later, on MSNBC:

“States are stepping up and doing a good job. It doesn’t have to be EPA that regulates the 10,000 wells that might go in.”

It’s likely Jackson knows there’s not much the feds could add to the competent, efficient oversight that state regulators already are providing. And the Times doesn’t explain what it believes federal regulation – probably duplicative, almost certainly unnecessary – would accomplish.

In fact, industry recognizes the need for regulation. We just believe it’s best handled by the states. That’s why we’ve worked with the states through the STRONGER organization to develop regulatory regimes tailored for their specific circumstances. API and its members also have worked hard to develop industry standards that often form the basis for state regulations – on wellbore integrity, water management, community relations and more. Industry supports disclosure through the FracFocus online chemical registry.

All of the above address the editorial’s other assertion – that energy companies need to “drop their warfare” against regulation. Sorry, but the real warfare here has been waged by the Times in its “Drilling Down” series, a collection of inaccuracies, misrepresentations and manipulations that the Council on Foreign Relations’ Michael Levi dubbed a “war on shale gas.” This has included flawed reporting on mortgages, leases and the economic future of shale gas – at one point drawing a penalty flag from the newspaper’s own ombudsman. 

So, while noting the editorial’s positive points about shale gas, we encourage the newspaper’s editorial board to get up to speed on the good work states are doing to regulate industry activity, as well as industry efforts to get shale gas development right.

View the original article here