Posts Tagged ‘natural gas’
A pause in Ohio’s gas boom as Chesapeake struggles
>> Cleveland Plain Dealer
In at least one Ohio county, prospectors are waiting to see whether Chesapeake Energy, lord of the local gas fields, survives a crisis now playing out daily in the nation’s financial press.
Ohio fracking disclosure bill could harm wind industry
>> Cleveland Plain Dealer
The public would have a better idea of what chemicals shale gas well developers are using, under legislation approved by the Ohio Senate Tuesday. But the state stands to lose $2 billion in new wind farm development because of that same bill.
As Purdue moves away from coal, green groups cautiously optimistic
>> Lafayette Journal & Courier
Purdue has been a target of local and national criticism for its reliance on coal to power its utility plant. But recent changes are moving the university toward natural gas as a primary fuel.
Waterless fracking technique makes its debut in Ohio
Some 8,000 feet deep and 450 million years old, the Utica Shale has a lot of petroleum — crude oil, natural gas and byproducts like ethane.
Although no one really knows how much there is, oil and gas companies are flocking to eastern Ohio, home to some of the shale’s most amenable portions.
“Right now we’re still in an exploratory phase,” said Brian Hickman, a spokesperson for the Ohio Oil and Gas Association.
It’s also an experimental phase for the technology that makes shale extraction possible, Hickman said. Companies that have used horizontal hydraulic fracturing successfully in the Marcellus, Barnett and other shales are still trying to figure out how to best use it in the Utica.
In Ohio, 65 Utica Shale wells have been drilled so far, each requiring 5 to 6 million gallons of water, said Heidi Hetzel-Evans, a spokesperson for the Ohio Department of Natural Resources.
But as Utica drillers analyze early results, at least one company thinks water might be unnecessary — or even a hindrance — and that using a waterless, propane-based form of fracking called LPG might be more efficient and profitable.
That currently unnamed company has asked GasFrac Energy Services to frack two Utica trial wells in Ohio using LPG, short for liquid petroleum gas. Founded in 2006 and based in Calgary, GasFrac is apparently the world’s only provider of LPG fracking and has used it about 1,200 times, mostly in western Canada and also in Texas and Colorado.
LPG uses a mixture of propane (and occasionally some butane) that’s pressurized to the consistency of a gel. Then, like water-based fracking, it’s injected through pipes at high pressure underground to release oil and gas by cracking open rocks using sand (or another proppant).
Unlike water, though, LPG naturally mixes with petroleum, so it returns to the surface with the oil or gas being extracted. And since LPG is electrically neutral and lacks much friction, it doesn’t dissolve any salts, heavy metals or radioactive compounds — compared to water, in which these things return to the surface and make a typically toxic mixture even more so.
Fracking, of course, is enormously controversial, mostly because of concerns of potential risks to water supplies. LPG fracking eliminates an entire wastestream — the copious amounts of toxic “flowback” water that has to be reused, treated and discharged into waterways, or disposed of in deep injection wells, which have been linked to earthquakes in Ohio.
But why would companies using hydro-fracking — which has proven to be pretty profitable — be interested in using a niche technology like LPG?
“I think the results they’re getting [in the Utica] are sub-par, and they’re looking for an alternative,” said Kyle Ward, GasFrac’s spokesperson.
GasFrac argues that LPG, compared to hydro-fracking, is both more environmentally sustainable and economically efficient in the the long run — a claim that has drawn some skepticism.
Terry Engelder, the Penn State University geologist who’s been dubbed the “Godfather” of the Marcellus Shale for his calculations of the rock layer’s natural gas potential, says water is the “mechanically most efficient fluid for breaking apart rock.”
Anthony Ingraffea, a Cornell University engineer who spent 20 years researching fracking for Schlumberger, one of the largest fracking companies, said: “I’ll give [GasFrac] credit that geochemically, it’s much better to use a hydrocarbon [propane and butane] to stimulate a reservoir…But I’m not sure how well this technique will work in a high volume long lateral shale formation [like the Utica or Marcellus shales] because they haven’t released proprietary data. That’s still unknown.”
Petroleum engineers in the 1960s and 1970s tried using propane fracking, but the potential for explosion — which is still a risk today, if better managed — left the technology uneconomical.
Last year, the petroleum giant Chevron used LPG to frack several natural gas wells in the Piceance Basin, home to several lucrative coal, oil and natural gas deposits in Colorado. The company’s annual report, while not mentioning GasFrac, noted that LPG “significantly increases production while minimizing water usage.”
The company BlackBrush recently announced a two-year contract with GasFrac in Texas’ oil-rich Eagle Ford Shale.
Offering an explanation for the dearth of public data on GasFrac’s work for other companies, Robert Lestz, the company’s chief tech officer, said, “Because our results our so superior to what people have done before, they’re not interested in sharing those results.”
In Ohio, GasFrac’s spokesman said the company hopes to start the Utica wells by the end of the month.
It could be a proving ground for the technology. “It’s no secret we’re going to the Utica,” Zeke Zeringue, GasFrac’s CEO, said in a May conference call. “Obviously we hope that leads to an establishment of some sort of base of operations.”
While GasFrac has been keen to note in its recent marketing efforts that LPG uses no water, the technology’s profitability will ultimately determine its potential, said Michael Mazar, a financial analyst who follows the company for BMO Capital Markets.
“The environmental benefits are secondary.”
CORRECTION: Because of an editor’s error, Robert Lestz was incorrectly identified as GasFrac’s founder in an earlier version of this story.
Portions of this story were originally reported for InsideClimateNews.
Anthony Brino is a Springfield, Illinois-based freelance writer whose work has appeared in The Allegheny Front, InsideClimate News and Illinois Statehouse News.
Despite switch to natural gas, Tenaska plant still faces opposition
>> Springfield State Journal-Register
A coalition that includes Exelon and environmental groups said it will continue to work against a bill in the Illinois General Assembly that the company needs to have passed this spring to allow the plant to go forward.
EPA: Water safe in town made famous for fracking
>> Reuters
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said drinking water is safe to consume in a small Pennsylvania town that has attracted national attention after residents complained about hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, for natural gas.
Obama’s nod to ‘clean coal,’ and a tale of three plants
Today, following pressure from Republicans upset by the omission of coal from President Obama’s “all of the above” energy plan, the Obama campaign has added a section for “clean coal” to its website, The Hill reports.
But in the Midwest, as elsewhere, low-emissions coal projects are having trouble getting off the ground, in large part because of plunging natural gas prices.
In Illinois, Tenaska has been working for five years to gain legislative approval for a power plant that would convert coal to synthetic natural gas and use it to generate electricity. The developer is now offering to build only the natural gas portion of the plant, adding the coal gasification facilities later when market conditions warrant. Jeffrey Tomich of the St. Louis Post-Dispatch has an overview.
The situation is remarkably similar to that of the Mesaba Energy Project in Minnesota, which Midwest Energy News reporter Dan Haugen profiled last year. Mesaba, which has been in development for 10 years and has received $41 million in public money, recently won approval from the state legislature to proceed with a natural gas plant while keeping state funding intended for advanced energy projects.
And yesterday, reporter Kari Lydersen wrote about a proposed coal gasification plant in Indiana that would sell the synthetic gas to consumers via a state agency rather than use it to generate electricity. Under a current proposal, the plant would sell gas at a rate more than double the current market price for natural gas, drawing opposition from environmentalists, consumer advocates and free-market conservatives.
As Lydersen reported last month, natural gas prices (along with pollution rules and other factors) are raising serious questions about the economic viability of existing conventional coal plants, meaning far more expensive “clean coal” projects may be impossible without considerable public subsidies.
And since that dependence on public support is a frequent point of criticism about renewable power, it will be interesting to see where the president’s endorsement of coal will take the subsidy debate.
Editorial: Make fracking safer
>> New York Times
Oil and gas drilling will always be a risky business. The administration cannot let pass this opportunity to make it safer.
Natural gas joins green vehicle options at Kwik Trip stations
>> Milwaukee Journal Sentinel
Kwik Trip Inc. is adding natural gas fueling at a two Wisconsin service stations this month as part of the privately held firm’s broader expansion into alternative fuels.
Ohio to triple number of oil and gas field inspectors
>> Cleveland Plain Dealer
State regulators are scrambling to keep up with Ohio’s latest energy push. They inspected 18 percent of the state’s 64,481 operating wells in 2011, leaving more than 50,000 wells unchecked.


