IPEC, Aug. 31, 2010
Drivers of the Environmental Renaissance
August 31, 2010
John R. Duda
Director, Strategic Center for Natural Gas & Oil

A Tragic, Never-To-Be-Forgotten Disaster
…But not the Genesis
‹#›
Source: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/36880053

‹#›
 Historical context
 Fundamental drivers
 What’s at stake
 What’s to be done
Outline

U.S. Environmental Milestones
Santa Barbara
(200 M gal.)
Love Canal
3 Mile
Island
Exxon Valdez
(11-32 MM gal.)
Macondo
(~200 MM gal.)
1960s 1970s 1980s 1990s 2000s
CA auto emissions
“Silent Spring”
Wilderness Act
First Earth Day
EPA established
Clean Air Act
Superfund Bill
Clean Water Act
Endangered Species Act
Roadless
Rule
Kyoto Protocol
Clean Air Act +
Oil Pollution Act
EPA to regulate CO
2
‹#›

‹#›
1950 to 2010 … from Gushers to Green

Gas Shale Related Legislation
EPAct 2005: Congress excludes hydraulic fracturing from Safe
Drinking Water Act (UIC)
EPA concludes hydraulic fracturing no danger to drinking water
FRAC Act introduced in
Congress to make fractured wells Class II Disposal wells
‹#›
Other: Ohio Shale, Antrim, New Albany

# rigs drlg for gas
Most Active Shale Plays
‹#›
Source: EIA, with data from Smith International

‹#›
Result … Active Opposition to Development

‹#›
Fundamental Driver 1: Fear

Fundamental Driver 2: Distrust
‹#›

‹#›
Fundamental Driver 3: Confusion

“…showed a much higher level of total dissolved solids…”
‹#›
Dominion Post, September 15, 2009

‹#›
Perspective of 51 “Shale” Web Sites
18%
10%
16%
16%
40%
Anti-shale blog/group
Pro-shale industry
State organization
Impartial information
Pro-shale informative

‹#›
Web Site Tag Lines





“New York has the best drinking water in the world.
Let's not frack it up!”
“What the frack?”
“Saving our land, air, & wateryou can't drink gas”
“Your place to speak out on industrial-scale drilling for natural gas”
“Protecting our communities and environment from exploitative gas drilling of the
Marcellus Shale”



“The Marcellus Shale: Energy to fuel our future”
“Your source for information about the benefits of natural gas exploration in the
Marcellus Shale”
“A partnership established to provide the regional community and the natural gas industry with a central resource for workforce development and community education needs related to
Marcellus Shale gas”
Anti-Shale Pro-Shale

New Yorkers Are Not Against All Development
1609
2009
‹#›
Source: National Geographic Magazine, September 2009

Marcellus Shale Drillers in Pennsylvania
Amass 1435 Violations in 2.5 Years
Discharge of
Industrial Waste
154
Improper Erosion &
Sediment Plans
Developed/Implemented
277 Violations of PA
Clean Stream Law
100
Permitting
Violations
38
Improper
Restoration of Extraction Site
Improper Construction of
Wastewater Impoundment
268
Faulty Pollution
Prevention Practices
65
Improper Well
Casing
Construction
10
Improper Waste
Management
7
1 PALTA identified companies that have had violations, according to news reports, but are not included in the data, received on 5/10/2010 and
7/10/2010, from the PA Department of Environmental Protection. The Association has not been able to reconcile this difference.
‹#›
2 Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection News Release (6/23/2010)
For information on methodology, contact Elana RIchman at 717.230.8560 or email erichman@conserveland.org.
Source: Pennsylvania Land Trust Association (August 2, 2010)

Benefits Need to be Recognized
‹#›
Table reflects PA analytical results

Impact of No Shale Gas Development in 2035
‹#›
2035 Henry Hub Spot Price
(2008 $/MMBtu)
2035 Total Onshore Lwr. 48 Gas
Production (Tcf)
Reference
Case
No Gas Shale
Drilling
High Gas Shale
Resource
$8.88
$10.37
$7.62
23.3
19.1
25.9
2035 Total U.S. Net Imports (Tcf) 1.5
3.7
0.8
Sensitivity Cases for AEO2010
Reference: Drilling moves ahead at current pace, unproved shale gas resource 347 Tcf
No Gas Shale Drilling: No new onshore, lower 48 shale drilling after 2009
High Gas Shale Resource: Unproved shale gas resources increased to 652 Tcf
Source: Energy Information Administration, 2010.

‹#›
Public Outreach Challenges
 Finding ways to promote regulations that are sciencebased and reflect true costs and benefits
 How to collect and analyze data needed to develop sciencebased regulations in a competitive, high-cost environment
 How to quantify potential future costs and benefits
 Finding ways to support an informed debate in an environment of misinformation
 How to build public trust in objective assessments of risks
 How to carry out public outreach in a way that reaches the widest possible audience with accurate information
 How to engage constituencies with diametrically opposed viewpoints

‹#›
Standing Still is Not an Option
 Get out the facts … via websites, publications, commercials, community meetings … whatever works
 Promote reasonable, compromise solutions to address community concerns

 Maintain transparency and public accountability

Pursue collaborative research and development (industry, academia, and government) in support of science-based regulations
Participate in joint public/private investment in workforce training to reduce accidents