Wyoming Judge Issues Injunction Against New Federal Fracking Rules -- September 30, 2015

Rigzone/Reuters is reporting:

A Wyoming judge on Wednesday granted a preliminary injunction against the federal government's regulations for hydraulic fracturing on public lands, handing a victory to oil and gas producers who had vehemently opposed the rules.

U.S. District Judge Scott Skavdahl had put the regulations on hold in June as he weighed a request from energy industry groups and four states to stop the rules from being implemented until their lawsuit against the new standards was resolved.

The rules issued by the Interior Department would require companies to provide data on chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, and to take steps to prevent leakage from oil and gas wells on federally owned land.

The Independent Petroleum Association of America and the Western Energy Alliance were joined by Colorado, Wyoming, North Dakota and Utah in seeking to stop the new rules from taking effect. In his order granting the injunction, Judge Skavdahl ruled that federal agencies' only have authority to regulate hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, when the use of diesel fuel is involved.

I remember talking about this years ago, when I first started blogging, about the issue of diesel and the Clean Water Act. It's been a long time since this was brought up. I can't speak for Wyoming, but it's my understanding diesel is no longer used in North Dakota for fracking.

More at the link.

******************************

Update On TransCanada and Keystone XL

Bloomberg/Rigzone is reporting:

TransCanada Corp. is surrendering to an additional review of the Keystone XL oil pipeline and backing off from conflicts with Nebraska landowners as it struggles to win approval for the project.

Instead of waging court battles to cross privately owned land and trying to avoid a review by Nebraska’s Public Service Commission, TransCanada will withdraw lawsuits and seek approval from the regulator, the Calgary-based company said Tuesday. While that’s a development Keystone XL opponents had sought all along, the move promises to bring certainty to its route through the state, according to TransCanada.

Hope springs eternal.

This is a good explanation of what's going on. Note that the pipeline is now being described as an $8 billion pipeline. I think when this all started it was a $6 billion pipeline. 

Another Government Solution In Search Of A Problem

Reuters is reporting through Rigzone:

U.S. oil and gas drillers must get permits to use a range of diesel fuels in hydraulic fracturing, the U.S. environment regulator said on Tuesday, in its first clarification of laws restricting the use of the fuel considered harmful to water supplies. The 2005 Energy Policy Act signed by then-President George W. Bush contained a provision limiting federal regulation of fracking under safe drinking water law unless drillers were using diesel in fracking fluids.

Well, that's good, about time.

Diesel has pretty much been phased out, according to the industry.

An energy industry group said the EPA move does not have much impact because drillers have already slashed use of diesel fuel voluntarily.

"This appears to be a solution in search of a problem: Based on actual industry practices, diesel fuel use has already been effectively phased out of hydraulic fracturing operations," Lee Fuller, a government relations official with the Independent Petroleum Association of America, said in a release.

Meanwhile, slicers and dicers (wind turbines) can still kill golden eagles, bald eagles, whooping cranes, and migratory ducks with impunity and immunity. 

Increasing Interest In Using LNG In Canadian E&P Operations

A nice article with some applicability for the Bakken? Wow, it was a very, very long time when we last talked about using natural gas instead of diesel for fracking operations. This was posted about a year ago, but never seemed to be an issue.

Now today:

Rigzone is reporting:

Advances in hydraulic fracturing that unlocked potential shale gas resources in the United States are being successfully applied to Canadian shale gas resources. With seven shale plays in Alberta estimated to hold resources of 3,424 trillion cubic feet of natural gas – along with shale resources such as the Horn River Basin in British Columbia, Canada's shale gas potential has vaulted the country into a position as a potential LNG exporter. This shale gas play has also created opportunities for exploration and production (E&P) operators in Western Canada to switch from diesel to natural gas in their operations, a trend that is also occurring in the United States with operators such as Apache Corp., which has switched to using natural gas in its hydraulic fracturing operations.

Some data points from the article:

• US oil and gas experience for both fracs and drilling rigs converting to natural gas are experiencing up to 55 to 60 percent substitution
• Encana, Apache, EQT, and Noble are using natural gas to power drill rigs present day
• All of the major diesel engine manufactures are introducing bi-fuel options, third-party bi-fuel systems continue to improve and be a viable option. Caterpillar and GE are also focused on improving their 100-percent Natural Gas engines that are very well suited to the Western Canadian drilling and fracking operations. 

Fracking WITH Natural Gas

Oil & Gas Journal is reporting:

Cabot Oil & Gas Corp. said it is using natural gas from the Marcellus shale in Susquehanna County, Pa., to fracture wells via dual-fuel technology in a process that can displace as much as 70% of the diesel fuel traditionally used to operate hydraulic fracturing equipment.

The dual-fuel technology involves engines operating on a mixture of natural gas and diesel. The effort was a partnership with FTS International (FTSI) and Caterpillar Global Petroleum, Cabot said.

Benefits are said to include:

• Reduced air emissions for a cleaner environment, due to a reduction in diesel usage.
• Reduced truck traffic when field gas at or near the well site is used due to a reduction in the transportation of diesel fuel to site.
• Reduced costs, as natural gas can be a less expensive fuel option than diesel, providing potential cost savings for industry and consumers.

Permitorium in North Dakota? Don't Worry, Be Happy

Updates 

December 9, 2012: fracking is doomed, story posted July 27, 2012, at CNBC.  I don't know if fracking is doomed, but if anyone thinks solar and wind is going to replace oil and gas anytime in the next ten years hasn't followed the news. Or done the math.  We need to follow this up in 2030. 

Later, 9:00 p.m.: this article may help resolve some of the confusion regarding mineral oil, fracking, and several other issues. It's been linked before at this blog, but I had forgotten. A lot of information in this story but it explains a lot, and, to me suggests several options (all with good outcomes). 

Later, 7:40 p.m.:  See first comment. It almost sounds like diesel is no longer an issue. If so, diesel is another Hitchcockian McGuffin, or a "red herring."


Don't Worry, Be Happy, Bobby McFerrin

Original Post

Link here to Bismarck Tribune.

Helms said the permitorium, while better than a moratorium, could delay each oil well permit at least 45 days compared to the 15 days it takes now for a state permit.

“The activity level will be hugely impacted,” Helms said.

All but one well driller in North Dakota use diesel in fracking, where it activates certain chemicals and makes the frack fluid thick and slippery in the formation.

Helms said even 45 days to hold hearings and test water sources is a “best case scenario.

This will tie it up in red tape.”

Tripling the time needed for a federal permit is the "best case scenario." We've seen this movie before. It was the (non)-development of oil in the reservation about then-Senator Dorgan stepped in and got the BLM to streamline the process.

Not good news.

One step forward, two steps back. 

And just the other day someone sent me a comment telling me not to worry about the EPA. I didn't post it; it added nothing to the conversation. Whoever sent it was clearly "out of the loop."

What crazy science! The faux environmentalists are worried about a few bbls of diesel going down a pipe that will eventually produce 900,000 bbls of oil coming up that same pipe.

Two Three Four Five questions:

• if diesel is not used, will that allow the driller to avoid the EPA permitorium?
• how is that one operator that does not use diesel doing?
• can operators use Newman's Own Salad Oil instead of diesel? 
• what about Willie Nelson Biodiesel?  -- if you have not heard of this company, it's not too late
• could sunflower oil be used instead of diesel? This is a great initiative for the man who gave ND, SD, and IA farmers ethanol (then-Senator-turned-lobbyist Daschle). Wow, what an opportunity!

Good News? EPA, Fracking and Diesel

Another top story of the year, if the headline to the story is accurate.

There are only three significant issues when it comes to the EPA and fracking regulations:

• states' rights
• bureaucratic redundancy
• use of diesel in fracking

The first issue is beyond the scope of this blog.

The second issue is ... well, for the moment, uninteresting.

The third issue: the only issue that could have, with a stroke of a pen, shut down fracking as "we" know it in the Bakken. See this post.

The story at the first link: if the headline is accurate, this is great news for the Bakken boom. But the devil is in the details with phrases like "the use of diesel will be considered on a case-by-case" basis.

The draft guidance outlines for EPA permit writers, where EPA is the permitting authority, requirements for diesel fuels used for hydraulic fracturing wells, technical recommendations for permitting those wells, and a description of diesel fuels for EPA underground injection control permitting. The draft guidance describes diesel fuels for these purposes by reference to six chemical abstract services registry numbers. The agency is requesting input on this description.

While the guidance undergoes public notice and comment, decisions about permitting hydraulic fracturing operations that use diesel fuels will be made on a case-by-case basis, considering the facts and circumstances of the specific injection activity and applicable statutes, regulations and case law, and will not cite the draft guidance as a basis for decision.

Very, Very Interesting -- EPA Water Results Won't Hold Water

For "idiom-challenged" folks and foreigners, click here before reading further.

To find out why the EPA's water results won't hold water, click here.

To properly test such water wells, they must be first purged three times to make sure fresh water from the surrounding formation flows in for testing, Clarey said.

“We ‘re not sure they produced out all the water that may have seeped out of the formation during the drilling process or well development,” Clarey said. “So we’re not even sure they’re getting an accurate formation sample.”

The EPA data indicates the agency only flushed the wells one-quarter of the amount needed, he said.

If anyone has trouble interpreting this, let me know.

Oil and Gas Journal has the story also. 

*******************

Meanwhile, four senators from oil states have written the EPA regarding broad definition of diesel:

Four US senators expressed concern about the US Environmental Protection Agency’s possible plans to regulate hydraulic fracturing under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SWDA) when diesel fuel is used.

“From a practical standpoint, a key issue is whether EPA’s actions will cause unnecessary confusion and open the door for states to lose their primacy for [underground injection control (UIC)] permitting programs,” the lawmakers said in a Dec. 21 letter to EPA Administrator Lisa P. Jackson.

James M. Inhofe (R-Okla.), the Environment and Public Works Committee’s ranking minority member; Lisa Murkowski (R-Alas.), the Energy and Natural Resources Committee’s ranking minority member; and E&NR Committee members Mary L. Landrieu (D-La.) and John Hoeven (R-ND) signed the letter.

They said the 2005 Energy Policy Act clarified the SDWA to specifically exclude from the UIC definition’s scope “the underground injection of fluids or propping agents (other than diesel fuels) pursuant to hydraulic fracturing operations related to oil, gas, or geothermal production activities.”

Again, as I've said before, to the EPA, if it has C and H in it and it is used in fracking, it will be considered "diesel." This includes salad oil.