All Wet on Fair Pooling
Fair Pooling protects the environment, reduces environmental footprints, and generates more revenue for environmental programs – so why do environmentalists oppose it?
CANONSBURG – When is an environmentalist not an environmentalist? How about when he sends a letter to lawmakers in Harrisburg demanding they reject a proposal that would result in greater efficiency in developing clean-burning natural gas from the Marcellus, far less disturbance to land while doing it, and millions in revenue for state programs to protect and preserve the environment?
Unfortunately, that’s precisely the letter that members of the General Assembly received this week – sent by a coalition of more than 30 groups that claim to support all the things that a Fair Pooling statute in Pennsylvania would make possible (smaller footprints and more revenue, especially), but nonetheless stand in opposition to the adoption of the actual plan.
Of course, virtually every energy-producing state in America has fair pooling protection on the books – and for good reason. Fair pooling allows for “equitable and efficient development of [natural gas] while preventing the drilling of unnecessary wells,” according to Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality – “at the same time, it protects an owner from having his or her oil and gas drained without compensation.”
The Harvard Law Review agrees: “Pooling is important in the prevention of drilling of unnecessary and uneconomic wells, which will usually result in physical and economic waste.” That line comes from an article on efforts to conserve oil and natural gas published in the Review back in 1952.
So if these environmental groups can’t defend their opposition to Fair Pooling on environmental grounds, what arguments do they use instead? See below a quick side-by-side of the charges leveled by these groups’ compared with the actual facts of what Fair Pooling is, and what it is not.
Activists search for reasons to oppose Fair Pooling …… Even though Fair Pooling is a clear win for PA’s environment and landowners
“[P]ooling … would force property owners in Pennsylvania to lease their mineral rights to a gas company…”
(Letter from Myron Arnowitt to General Assembly, PA Campaign for Clean Water; co-signed by 30 others; June 29, 2010)
Fair pooling isn’t about forcing anyone to do anything. It’s about creating an equitable system that allows private landowners to exercise their private mineral rights for the benefit of themselves and their families.
Landowners who decide not to lease will not be considered leasees, nor will they see a rig on their property or an inch of their land disturbed. The only thing they will see? A check in their mailbox each month.
“Some landowners have decided they do not want to lease their mineral rights ... The oil and gas industry would like the General Assembly to overturn the landowners' decisions.” (letter)Once again, they have it exactly backwards. Landowners who don’t want to lease their land for Marcellus development will not be forced to lease their land under Fair Pooling. But they also won’t be allowed to deny their neighbors that same choice.
Click Here for MSC’s fact sheet on Fair Pooling.
“It has been argued that … pooling would result in a less disruptive and more environmentally protective approach to drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale. However, there is no evidence that … pooling diminishes environmental impact. … [P]ooling should not result in forced pollution.” (letter)No evidence?
The principle of Fair Pooling as a tool of oil and gas conservation and environmental protection is as old the development of energy itself – and “a vital regulatory tool created to conserve oil and gas, protect correlative rights and prevent waste,” according to Texas Tech University (in case you don’t believe the Harvard Law Review or the state of Michigan).
“[Pooling] essentially extends the concept of eminent domain but instead of using private property for the public good, it takes private property for private gain.” (letter)For the small minority of landowners who have not leased, conservation pooling ensures two important outcomes: (1) a fair share of royalties (whereas, under current law, gas can be extracted from under their property without any compensation); and, (2) a guarantee of no surface interference (i.e., no drill, no pipelines, no roads, etc.).
stdClass Object
(
[nid] => 8285
[type] => feeditem
[language] =>
[uid] => 1
[status] => 1
[created] => 1278436232
[changed] => 1279762218
[comment] => 2
[promote] => 0
[moderate] => 0
[sticky] => 0
[tnid] => 0
[translate] => 0
[vid] => 8290
[revision_uid] => 1
[title] => All Wet on Fair Pooling
[body] => Fair Pooling protects the environment, reduces environmental footprints, and generates more revenue for environmental programs – so why do environmentalists oppose it?
CANONSBURG – When is an environmentalist not an environmentalist? How about when he sends a letter to lawmakers in Harrisburg demanding they reject a proposal that would result in greater efficiency in developing clean-burning natural gas from the Marcellus, far less disturbance to land while doing it, and millions in revenue for state programs to protect and preserve the environment?
Unfortunately, that’s precisely the letter that members of the General Assembly received this week – sent by a coalition of more than 30 groups that claim to support all the things that a Fair Pooling statute in Pennsylvania would make possible (smaller footprints and more revenue, especially), but nonetheless stand in opposition to the adoption of the actual plan.
Of course, virtually every energy-producing state in America has fair pooling protection on the books – and for good reason. Fair pooling allows for “equitable and efficient development of [natural gas] while preventing the drilling of unnecessary wells,” according to Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality – “at the same time, it protects an owner from having his or her oil and gas drained without compensation.”
The Harvard Law Review agrees: “Pooling is important in the prevention of drilling of unnecessary and uneconomic wells, which will usually result in physical and economic waste.” That line comes from an article on efforts to conserve oil and natural gas published in the Review back in 1952.
So if these environmental groups can’t defend their opposition to Fair Pooling on environmental grounds, what arguments do they use instead? See below a quick side-by-side of the charges leveled by these groups’ compared with the actual facts of what Fair Pooling is, and what it is not.
Activists search for reasons to oppose Fair Pooling …… Even though Fair Pooling is a clear win for PA’s environment and landowners
“[P]ooling … would force property owners in Pennsylvania to lease their mineral rights to a gas company…”
(Letter from Myron Arnowitt to General Assembly, PA Campaign for Clean Water; co-signed by 30 others; June 29, 2010)
Fair pooling isn’t about forcing anyone to do anything. It’s about creating an equitable system that allows private landowners to exercise their private mineral rights for the benefit of themselves and their families.
Landowners who decide not to lease will not be considered leasees, nor will they see a rig on their property or an inch of their land disturbed. The only thing they will see? A check in their mailbox each month.
“Some landowners have decided they do not want to lease their mineral rights ... The oil and gas industry would like the General Assembly to overturn the landowners' decisions.” (letter)Once again, they have it exactly backwards. Landowners who don’t want to lease their land for Marcellus development will not be forced to lease their land under Fair Pooling. But they also won’t be allowed to deny their neighbors that same choice.
Click Here for MSC’s fact sheet on Fair Pooling.
“It has been argued that … pooling would result in a less disruptive and more environmentally protective approach to drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale. However, there is no evidence that … pooling diminishes environmental impact. … [P]ooling should not result in forced pollution.” (letter)No evidence?
The principle of Fair Pooling as a tool of oil and gas conservation and environmental protection is as old the development of energy itself – and “a vital regulatory tool created to conserve oil and gas, protect correlative rights and prevent waste,” according to Texas Tech University (in case you don’t believe the Harvard Law Review or the state of Michigan).
“[Pooling] essentially extends the concept of eminent domain but instead of using private property for the public good, it takes private property for private gain.” (letter)For the small minority of landowners who have not leased, conservation pooling ensures two important outcomes: (1) a fair share of royalties (whereas, under current law, gas can be extracted from under their property without any compensation); and, (2) a guarantee of no surface interference (i.e., no drill, no pipelines, no roads, etc.).
[log] =>
[revision_timestamp] => 1279762218
[format] => 1
[name] => northcentralpa.com
[picture] =>
[data] => a:3:{s:13:"form_build_id";s:37:"form-ec2fb4372f4615ee0474af7fbbd82137";s:14:"picture_delete";s:0:"";s:14:"picture_upload";s:0:"";}
[path] => feeditem/2010-07-06_all-wet-fair-pooling
[feedapi_node] => stdClass Object
(
[nid] => 8285
[url] => http://marcelluscoalition.org/2010/07/all-wet-on-fair-pooling/
[timestamp] => 1278436232
[arrived] => 1278448231
[guid] => http://marcelluscoalition.org/?p=925
[feed_nids] => Array
(
[6648] => 6648
)
)
[last_comment_timestamp] => 1278475965
[last_comment_name] => longlivedickcheney
[comment_count] => 2
[taxonomy] => Array
(
[45] => stdClass Object
(
[tid] => 45
[vid] => 3
[name] => Gas Industry
[description] => Marcellus Shale gas industry and drilling updates
[weight] => 13
)
)
[files] => Array
(
)
[0] =>
[build_mode] => 0
[readmore] => 1
[content] => Array
(
[adsense_start] => Array
(
[#weight] => -5
[#value] =>
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#printed] => 1
)
[#pre_render] => Array
(
[0] => content_alter_extra_weights
)
[body] => Array
(
[#weight] => 0
[#value] => Fair Pooling protects the environment, reduces environmental footprints, and generates more revenue for environmental programs – so why do environmentalists oppose it?
CANONSBURG – When is an environmentalist not an environmentalist? How about when he sends a letter to lawmakers in Harrisburg demanding they reject a proposal that would result in greater efficiency in developing clean-burning natural gas from the Marcellus, far less disturbance to land while doing it, and millions in revenue for state programs to protect and preserve the environment?
Unfortunately, that’s precisely the letter that members of the General Assembly received this week – sent by a coalition of more than 30 groups that claim to support all the things that a Fair Pooling statute in Pennsylvania would make possible (smaller footprints and more revenue, especially), but nonetheless stand in opposition to the adoption of the actual plan.
Of course, virtually every energy-producing state in America has fair pooling protection on the books – and for good reason. Fair pooling allows for “equitable and efficient development of [natural gas] while preventing the drilling of unnecessary wells,” according to Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality – “at the same time, it protects an owner from having his or her oil and gas drained without compensation.”
The Harvard Law Review agrees: “Pooling is important in the prevention of drilling of unnecessary and uneconomic wells, which will usually result in physical and economic waste.” That line comes from an article on efforts to conserve oil and natural gas published in the Review back in 1952.
So if these environmental groups can’t defend their opposition to Fair Pooling on environmental grounds, what arguments do they use instead? See below a quick side-by-side of the charges leveled by these groups’ compared with the actual facts of what Fair Pooling is, and what it is not.
Activists search for reasons to oppose Fair Pooling …… Even though Fair Pooling is a clear win for PA’s environment and landowners
“[P]ooling … would force property owners in Pennsylvania to lease their mineral rights to a gas company…”
(Letter from Myron Arnowitt to General Assembly, PA Campaign for Clean Water; co-signed by 30 others; June 29, 2010)
Fair pooling isn’t about forcing anyone to do anything. It’s about creating an equitable system that allows private landowners to exercise their private mineral rights for the benefit of themselves and their families.
Landowners who decide not to lease will not be considered leasees, nor will they see a rig on their property or an inch of their land disturbed. The only thing they will see? A check in their mailbox each month.
“Some landowners have decided they do not want to lease their mineral rights ... The oil and gas industry would like the General Assembly to overturn the landowners' decisions.” (letter)Once again, they have it exactly backwards. Landowners who don’t want to lease their land for Marcellus development will not be forced to lease their land under Fair Pooling. But they also won’t be allowed to deny their neighbors that same choice.
Click Here for MSC’s fact sheet on Fair Pooling.
“It has been argued that … pooling would result in a less disruptive and more environmentally protective approach to drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale. However, there is no evidence that … pooling diminishes environmental impact. … [P]ooling should not result in forced pollution.” (letter)No evidence?
The principle of Fair Pooling as a tool of oil and gas conservation and environmental protection is as old the development of energy itself – and “a vital regulatory tool created to conserve oil and gas, protect correlative rights and prevent waste,” according to Texas Tech University (in case you don’t believe the Harvard Law Review or the state of Michigan).
“[Pooling] essentially extends the concept of eminent domain but instead of using private property for the public good, it takes private property for private gain.” (letter)For the small minority of landowners who have not leased, conservation pooling ensures two important outcomes: (1) a fair share of royalties (whereas, under current law, gas can be extracted from under their property without any compensation); and, (2) a guarantee of no surface interference (i.e., no drill, no pipelines, no roads, etc.).
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#printed] => 1
)
[#content_extra_fields] => Array
(
[title] => Array
(
[label] => Title
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => -5
)
[body_field] => Array
(
[label] => Body
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => 0
[view] => body
)
[revision_information] => Array
(
[label] => Revision information
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => 20
)
[author] => Array
(
[label] => Authoring information
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => 20
)
[options] => Array
(
[label] => Publishing options
[description] => Node module form.
[weight] => 25
)
[comment_settings] => Array
(
[label] => Comment settings
[description] => Comment module form.
[weight] => 30
)
[menu] => Array
(
[label] => Menu settings
[description] => Menu module form.
[weight] => -2
)
[taxonomy] => Array
(
[label] => Taxonomy
[description] => Taxonomy module form.
[weight] => -3
)
[path] => Array
(
[label] => Path settings
[description] => Path module form.
[weight] => 30
)
[attachments] => Array
(
[label] => File attachments
[description] => Upload module form.
[weight] => 30
[view] => files
)
)
[adsense_end] => Array
(
[#weight] => 5
[#value] =>
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#printed] => 1
)
[#title] =>
[#description] =>
[#children] => Fair Pooling protects the environment, reduces environmental footprints, and generates more revenue for environmental programs – so why do environmentalists oppose it?
CANONSBURG – When is an environmentalist not an environmentalist? How about when he sends a letter to lawmakers in Harrisburg demanding they reject a proposal that would result in greater efficiency in developing clean-burning natural gas from the Marcellus, far less disturbance to land while doing it, and millions in revenue for state programs to protect and preserve the environment?
Unfortunately, that’s precisely the letter that members of the General Assembly received this week – sent by a coalition of more than 30 groups that claim to support all the things that a Fair Pooling statute in Pennsylvania would make possible (smaller footprints and more revenue, especially), but nonetheless stand in opposition to the adoption of the actual plan.
Of course, virtually every energy-producing state in America has fair pooling protection on the books – and for good reason. Fair pooling allows for “equitable and efficient development of [natural gas] while preventing the drilling of unnecessary wells,” according to Michigan’s Department of Environmental Quality – “at the same time, it protects an owner from having his or her oil and gas drained without compensation.”
The Harvard Law Review agrees: “Pooling is important in the prevention of drilling of unnecessary and uneconomic wells, which will usually result in physical and economic waste.” That line comes from an article on efforts to conserve oil and natural gas published in the Review back in 1952.
So if these environmental groups can’t defend their opposition to Fair Pooling on environmental grounds, what arguments do they use instead? See below a quick side-by-side of the charges leveled by these groups’ compared with the actual facts of what Fair Pooling is, and what it is not.
Activists search for reasons to oppose Fair Pooling …… Even though Fair Pooling is a clear win for PA’s environment and landowners
“[P]ooling … would force property owners in Pennsylvania to lease their mineral rights to a gas company…”
(Letter from Myron Arnowitt to General Assembly, PA Campaign for Clean Water; co-signed by 30 others; June 29, 2010)
Fair pooling isn’t about forcing anyone to do anything. It’s about creating an equitable system that allows private landowners to exercise their private mineral rights for the benefit of themselves and their families.
Landowners who decide not to lease will not be considered leasees, nor will they see a rig on their property or an inch of their land disturbed. The only thing they will see? A check in their mailbox each month.
“Some landowners have decided they do not want to lease their mineral rights ... The oil and gas industry would like the General Assembly to overturn the landowners' decisions.” (letter)Once again, they have it exactly backwards. Landowners who don’t want to lease their land for Marcellus development will not be forced to lease their land under Fair Pooling. But they also won’t be allowed to deny their neighbors that same choice.
Click Here for MSC’s fact sheet on Fair Pooling.
“It has been argued that … pooling would result in a less disruptive and more environmentally protective approach to drilling for natural gas in the Marcellus Shale. However, there is no evidence that … pooling diminishes environmental impact. … [P]ooling should not result in forced pollution.” (letter)No evidence?
The principle of Fair Pooling as a tool of oil and gas conservation and environmental protection is as old the development of energy itself – and “a vital regulatory tool created to conserve oil and gas, protect correlative rights and prevent waste,” according to Texas Tech University (in case you don’t believe the Harvard Law Review or the state of Michigan).
“[Pooling] essentially extends the concept of eminent domain but instead of using private property for the public good, it takes private property for private gain.” (letter)For the small minority of landowners who have not leased, conservation pooling ensures two important outcomes: (1) a fair share of royalties (whereas, under current law, gas can be extracted from under their property without any compensation); and, (2) a guarantee of no surface interference (i.e., no drill, no pipelines, no roads, etc.).
[#printed] => 1
)
[links] => Array
(
[feedapi_feed] => Array
(
[title] => Feed: Marcellus Shale Coalition
[href] => node/6648
)
[feedapi_original] => Array
(
[title] => Original article
[href] => http://marcelluscoalition.org/2010/07/all-wet-on-fair-pooling/
)
)
)
- Feed: Marcellus Shale Coalition
- Original article
Comments
FORCED POOLING
"Forced" Pooling allows the drilling industry to take your gas and save the expense of the lease signing bonus. The MSC neglects to mention that this law will drastically diminish the value of your land. Another example of the culture of dishonesty from the drilling industry. And the "party of property rights" is proposing to make it law. You who have leased cannot sell your property at this time. The value was paid for in the signing bonus, and apparently banks are not lending to buyers of leased land because of the potential risks. Royalties will be minimal, if at all. The above irrational article is amateur propaganda commissioned by the MSC to confuse us.
"Fair pooling isn’t about
"Fair pooling isn’t about forcing anyone to do anything. "
-of course pooling forces people into doing things they might not want to do. landowners who simply do not want drilling under their property, or who might wish to wait 30 years (for higher prices) before "harvesting" their gas will lose that option when neighboring landowners want to exercise their "rights" sooner.
"Landowners who decide not to lease will not be considered leasees, nor will they see a rig on their property or an inch of their land disturbed."
-of course their land will be disturbed...just not on the surface. Their mineral investment will be sucked from beneath them without any say in the matter. And the potential for water, land and air (including noise) pollution will increase dramatically.
If you want to drill your land, fine, just be sure that you have enough land to form a complete "unit"...if you don't then buy more land, or drill a smaller well. And if you poison my water well, I will sue you for everything you got. shale gas extraction is not like pooled gas extraction...there is no justification for anyone to be drilling under my land unless I give permission. period.
